for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers …ci.education.nmsu.edu/files/2014/01/PARCC-New-Mexico-HED-PPT-3r… · The Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College

The Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC)

New Mexico Institutions of Higher Education

Allison G. Jones, Vice President, Postsecondary CollaborationAchieve

1

Overview of Common Core State Standards

(CCSS)

“CCSS 101”

2

The Common Core State Standards lay the foundation toward ensuring that students are

ready for college and career.

3

46 States + DC Have Adopted the Common Core State Standards

*Minnesota adopted the CCSS in ELA/literacy only

4

The Common Core State Standards –• Provide a consistent, clear understanding of what students

are expected to learn, so teachers and parents know what they need to do to help them.

• Designed to be robust and relevant to the real world, reflecting the knowledge and skills that our young people need for success in college and careers.

• With American students fully prepared for the future, our communities will be best positioned to compete successfully in the global economy.

Common Core Initiative Mission

Source: The National Governors Association Center for Best Practices (NGA Center) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO)

5

Key Advances of the Common Core

MATHEMATICS

Focus, coherence and clarity: emphasis on key topics at each grade level and coherent

progression across grades

Balance between procedural fluency and understanding of concepts and skills

Promote rigor through mathematicalproficiencies that foster reasoning and

understanding across discipline

ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS/LITERACY

Balance of literature and informational texts; focus on text complexity

Emphasis on argument, informative/ explanatory writing, and research

Literacy standards for history, science and technical subjects

ANCHORED IN COLLEGE AND CAREER READINESS6

What do students need to know to be successful in college?

7

• Colleges and universities require students ‐‐– To conduct research and apply that research to solve problems or address a

particular issue – To identify areas for research, narrow those topics and adjust research

methodology as necessary, and evaluate and synthesize primary and secondary resources as they develop and defend their own conclusions

• Standards require students –– To conduct short, focused projects and longer term in‐depth research – To gather relevant, credible information from multiple print and digital sources – To know how to sift through evidence and assess the credibility and accuracy of

each source – To present an account of their research, demonstrating their understanding of

or defending a position on the subject under investigation– To produce clear and coherent writing whatever the selected format – To communicate research finding (speaking and listening skills)

Important to Higher Education Faculty:Ability to Conduct Research

8

• Ability to read and comprehend a range of complex textscommonly found in college and careers independently

• Ability to draw evidence from texts and write effectively about them

• Ability to conduct research and apply that research to solve problems or address a particular issue***

• Ability to evaluate and write arguments based on substantive claims, sound reasoning, and relevant evidence

• Ability to discuss and debate findings and evidence with peers, demonstrating a command of standard English as appropriate

English Language Arts and Literacy:Key College Ready Competencies

9

10

Claims Driving Design: ELA/Literacy

Students are on‐track or ready for college and careers

Students read and comprehend a range of sufficiently complex texts

independently

Reading Literature

Reading Informational

Text

Vocabulary Interpretation

and Use

Students write effectively when using

and/or analyzing sources.

Written Expression

Conventions and

Knowledge of Language

Students build and present

knowledge through

research and the

integration, comparison, and synthesis

of ideas.

The high school mathematics standards:

– Call on students to practice applying mathematical ways of thinking to real world issues and challenges

– Require students to develop a depth of understanding and ability to apply mathematics to novel situations, as college students and employees regularly are called to do

– Emphasize mathematical modeling, the use of mathematics and statistics to analyze empirical situations, understand them better, and improve decisions

– Identify the mathematics that all students should study in order to be college and career ready

Overview of High School Mathematics Standards

11

12

Claims Driving Design: Mathematics

Students solve problems involving the major

content for their grade level with connections to

practices

Students solve problems involving the additional and supporting content for their grade level with connections to practices

Students express mathematical reasoning

by constructing mathematical arguments

and critiques

Students solve real world problems

engaging particularly in the modeling practice

Student demonstrate fluency in areas set forth

in the Standards for Content in grades 3‐6

Students are on‐track or ready for college and careers

College Readiness

• Mastery of core competencies in Common Core State Standards identified by postsecondary education faculty as key to success in entry‐level, credit‐bearing courses in English and mathematics

• Placement into “General Education types” of English (101) and College Algebra or Statistics

• Not intended to determine admission to college or university

• Does not replace college/university tests to place students into higher level mathematics and English courses

• Does not address non‐traditional students who delay enrollment

College Readiness: Placement NOT Admission

13

How will states resolve discrepancy between:• Current graduation requirements in mathematics

And• Full implementation of the CCSS, which is necessary for College and Career Readiness;• Implementation of the PARCC CCD Assessment(s);• Both require high school mathematics through Algebra II/Mathematics III to be CCR

Critical Policy Implications

14

Overview of PARCC

“PARCC 101”

15

ADP Research Documents Expectations Gap

In many states, students can earn a high school diploma without the skills necessary for success in college and careers.

≠What students are typically expected to know at the end of high school, as defined by state standards, required curriculum and assessments

The knowledge and skills demanded by postsecondary and employers for successful first‐year students and new employees.

RESULT

16

Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC)

17

Understanding the PARCC Assessment System

18

PARCC Assessment Priorities

1. Determine whether students are college‐ and career‐ready or on track

2. Compare performance across states and internationally

3. Assess the full range of the Common Core Standards, including standards that are difficult to measure

4. Measure the full range of student performance, including the performance of high and low performing students

5. Provide data during the academic year to inform instruction, interventions and professional development

6. Provide data for accountability, including measures of growth

7. Incorporate innovative approaches throughout the system

19

Non‐Summative Assessment Components

Summative assessment for accountability

Non‐Summative assessment

Early Assessment• Early indicator of student knowledge and skills to inform instruction, supports, and PD

Flexible

Mid‐Year Assessment• Performance‐based• Emphasis on hard to measure standards• Potentially summative

– Diagnostic Assessment designed to be an indicator of student knowledge and skills so that instruction, supports and professional development can be tailored to meet student needs

– Mid‐Year Assessment comprised of performance‐based items and tasks, with an emphasis on hard‐to‐measure standards. After study, individual states may consider including as a summative component

20

Summative Assessment Components

End‐of‐Year Assessment

• Innovative, computer‐based items

Performance‐BasedAssessment (PBA)

• Extended tasks• Applications of concepts and skills

Summative assessment for accountability

Non‐Summative assessment

21

• Performance‐Based Assessment (PBA) administered as close to the end of the school year as possible. The ELA/literacy PBA will focus on writing effectively when analyzing text. The mathematics PBA will focus on applying skills, concepts, and understandings to solve multi‐step problems requiring abstract reasoning, precision, perseverance, and strategic use of tools

• End‐of‐Year Assessment (EOY) administered after approx. 90% of the school year. The ELA/literacy EOY will focus on reading comprehension. The math EOY will be comprised of innovative, machine‐scorable items

ELA/Literacy Performance‐Based Assessment

Research Simulation Task

•A research question is posed, with students told they will gather information to answer this research question

• Students read a non‐fiction text , answer questions to help gather information from the text to solve the research problem and write a summary of that text.

• Students read one or more additional nonfiction texts, answer questions to help gather additional information to solve the research problem posed, and then write an analytical essay to present their solution to the research question posed.

Literary Analysis Task

• Students read two literary texts, answer questions that demonstrate the ability to do both close analytic reading and comparison and synthesis of ideas. Students write a literary analysis of both texts.

Narrative Writing Task

• Students read one or two brief texts and answer a few questions to help clarify understandings of the text(s).

• Students write either a narrative story or a narrative description. (Critical element for the writing prompt is that it elicits student demonstration of ability to write sequences well).

22

Timeline Through First PARCC Administration in 2014‐2015

PARCC Tools & Resources

College‐ready tools released

Partnership Resource Center launched

Professional development modules released

Diagnostic assessments released

Pilot/field testing begins

Expanded field testing of diagnostic

assessment

Optional Diagnostic and Midyear PARCC

Assessments

Spring2013

Summer 2013

Winter 2014

Spring2014

Summer 2014

Fall2013

Fall2014

PARCC Assessment Implementation

Expanded field testing

K‐2 Formative Tools Released

Winter 2015

Spring2015

Summative PARCC Assessments (2014‐15 SY)

Standard Setting in

Summer 2015

23

Relationship of the CCSSto Learning Outcomes

24

Common Core Anchor Standards for WRITING Include the following (Grades 6 – 12):

Research to Build and Present Knowledge

7. Conduct short as well as more sustained research projectsbased on focused questions, demonstrating understanding of the subject under investigation.

8. Gather relevant information from relevant print and digitalsources, assess the credibility and accuracy of each source,and integrate the information while avoiding plagiarism.

9. Draw evidence from literary or informational texts to supportanalysis, reflection, and research

Connecting CCSS Implementation with the Learning Students Need for Success

Source: Connecting Common Core Implementation with the Learning Students Need for Success, Carol Geary Schneider, President, AAC&U25

Common Core Anchor Standards for WRITING Include the following (Grades 6 – 12):

Range of Writing

10. Write routinely over extended time frames (timefor research, reflection, and revision) and shortertime frames (a single sitting or a day or two) for arange of tasks, purposes, and audiences.



Common Core Anchor Standards for READING Include the following (Grades 6 – 12):

Key Ideas and Details

3. Analyze how and why individuals, events, or ideasdevelop and interact over the course of the text.

8. Delineate and evaluate the argument and specificclaims in a text, including the validity of thereasoning as well as the relevance and sufficiencyof the evidence.


27

Common Core Anchor Standards for LANGUAGE Include the following (Grades 6 – 12):Range and content of student language use:• Ability to choose words, syntax, and punctuation to express themselves for rhetorical effects

• Develop extensive vocabularies, built through reading and study, enabling them to comprehend complex texts and engage in purposeful writing


28

Common Core Anchor Standards for SPEAKING AND LISTENING Include the following (Grades 6 – 12):

Comprehension and Collaboration

3. Evaluate speaker’s point of view, reasoning, and use of evidence and rhetoric.

Presentation of Knowledge and Ideas

4. Present information, findings, and supporting evidencesuch that listeners can follow the line of reasoning and the organization, development, and style are appropriate to task, purpose, and audience.


29

1. Set clear expectations for writing and researchThrough admission requirements and placement practices, send a strong signal that US students need to practice writing and research constantly – every week, every semester, every year, through pre‐collegiate involvement in high impact practices:

Writing intensive coursesGuided research experiencesCollaborative research‐based productsInternships and/or service projects with analytic and reflective essays.

NOTE: These expectations should become basic for high school courses, e.g., AP courses and dual enrollment courses.

Connecting CCSS Implementation with the Learning Students Need for Success: How Higher Education Can Assist


Draft College‐ and Career‐Ready Determination Policy and Policy‐

Level Performance Level Descriptors

31

• Two proposed determinations:– English language art/literacy– Mathematics

• In each content area, the CCRD describes the academic knowledge, skills, and practices students must demonstrate to show they are able to enter directly into and succeed in entry‐level, credit‐bearing courses in those content areas in programs leading to a credential or degree (aligned to the student’s career aspirations), from two‐and four‐year public institutions of higher education without the need for remediation.

• CR Determinations will be awarded to students who achieve Level 4(out of 5 levels) on the designated PARCC high school assessments– To achieve Level 4, students need to demonstrate a solid command of

the knowledge and skills embodied by the Common Core State Standards assessed on the designated assessments

Background: Draft College‐ and Career‐Ready Determination Policy

32

The following statement was proposed for use to inform standard‐setting (determining cut scores for PARCC performance levels) and to conduct future studies to validate the efficacy of the CR Determinations.

– Students who earn a PARCC College‐ and Career‐Ready Determination by performing at a Level 4 in Mathematics have about a 0.75 probability of earning college credit by attaining at least a grade of C or its equivalent in College Algebra, Introductory Statistics, or a technical subject requiring an equivalent level of mathematics.

– Students who earn a PARCC College‐ and Career‐Ready Determination by performing at a Level 4 in ELA/literacy have about a 0.75 probability of earning college credit by attaining at least a grade of C or its equivalent in College English Composition, Literature, or technical subjects require college‐level reading and writing.

Standard‐Setting/Validation Studies of the CRD

33

• PARCC states proposing 5 achievement levels for grades 3‐8 and HS in ELA/literacy and mathematics– Level 4 pitched to rigor of NAEP’s proficient level– Level 4 proposed as threshold for earning CRD on the designated

high school assessments

• Each of the proposed performance levels includes:– Policy claims, which describe educational implications for students

at a particular performance level.– General content claims, which describe academic knowledge and

skills students across grade levels performing at a given performance level are able to demonstrate.

Background: Policy‐Level Performance Level Descriptors

34

• More than 1300 unique comments were recorded during the Summer 2012 public review of the draft CCRD Policy and PLDs:– Responses include stakeholders from all PARCC states– Results were also received and states provided additional

recommendations

• PARCC has adjusted subsequent drafts to reflect the feedback, including clarity around the validation criteria, applicable courses for the CCRDs and clarification around descriptors language– The PARCC Governing Board and ACCR will take a final vote on

these policies during a special October 25, 2012 session

Feedback from the States

35

Engagement of Higher Education

36

Effect of CCSS on 2‐ and 4‐Colleges and Universities

• Align first‐year courses with CCSS— Analyze consistency in the definition of 1st‐year, credit bearing courses

in mathematics courses across colleges and states (range is from intermediate algebra to calculus)

• Review how classes are taught and how students are assessed— Lecture class assessments

— Multiple test choice test

• Opportunities to partner with K‐12— Dual enrollment

— Intervention programs

— Student mentoring programs

— Non‐cognitive college level skills

37

Teacher Preparation

38

Aligning Expectations with Teacher Preparation Programs

• Not just limited to colleges of education• Alignment between teacher preparation programs and

professional development for in‐service teachers is integral to create continuity of student and teacher expectations.— Faculty need to equip new teachers to be able to teach the CCSS— Higher education faculty who provide in‐service training of veteran

teachers will need a deep understanding of the CCSS

• The advent of the CCSS provides new opportunities for collaboration between –— colleges of arts and sciences,— schools of education, and — faculty who provide in‐service professional development on the

CCSS.39

• Teacher educators should look to the Common Core State Standards to signal what their own students should know and be able to do to succeed as effective teachers:

— How are the state’s current K‐12 standards currently embedded in teacher preparation programs?

— How might this need to change?

— How can faculty ensure that their aspiring teachers know how to analyze and interpret standards to guide their teaching?

• Higher education institutions might consider encouraging faculty participation in professional development activities through a stipend, course release time, or other positive incentives and recognition.

Professional Development for College of Education Faculty

40Implementing Common Core State Standards and Assessments: A Workbook for State and District Leaderswww.parcconline.org/CommonCoreImplementationWorkbook

• Possible “revamping” or “re‐approval” of existing programs

— The current process for approving teacher preparation programs have been in place for 19 years.

• Like other PARCC states, New Mexico might leverage this opportunity to re‐evalute current programs, raise the standards for program approval, and increase the quality of future educators in the process.

Professional Development for College of Education Faculty:Suggestions for New Mexico

41

• To strengthen alignment between pre‐service and in‐service training, higher education and K‐12 can collaborate to create professional development around the standards by:

— Involving higher education faculty members at varying types of institutions and in the fields of both education and arts and sciences, in the development of professional development modules

— Designing modules might include tasks, lesson plans and standards mapping exercises

— Coordinating development of these modules allows for the possibility of faculty at partner institutions of higher education to administer or teach the modules to their K‐12 peers

Professional Development for In‐Service Teachers


• New Mexico can leverage its existing MC2 and the Institute for Professional Development at UNM—currently proving professional development to K‐12 and working with LEAs on the Common Core State Standards and PARCC—to allow for increased partnership development and collaboration between K‐12 and postsecondary educators and administration.

Professional Development for In‐Service Teachers:Suggestions for New Mexico


• Investigate implications of the CCSS on current teacher licensure/relicensing policies

• Integrate teacher evaluation into pre‐service training for teachers and principals

• Align teacher and principal observation measures and formative assessment tools to align with the CCSS

• Revise alternative certification programs to align to content/pedagogy of CCSS

Other Alignments to Consider


Building In‐State Networks

45

• Each PARCC state has been charged with building in‐state networks to facilitate broad communication of the CCSS and PARCC, with a focus on the key decisions in which higher education has a vote in building and adopting the assessments.

• To date, 10 of the PARCC states have formal plans in place—these states are able to utilize their networks to receive feedback on policies and practices expeditiously, arming their postsecondary (ACCR) representatives with the information to make decisions on behalf of their postsecondary communities.

The Charge

46

• Louisiana – System of state, campus and regional teams that bring together K‐12 and postsecondary educators (and third party advocates) to discuss broad issues of college and career readiness, with an emphasis on development of PARCC and implementation of the CCSS (State Planning Team, Blue Ribbon Commission, Implementation Team, Educator Leader Cadre, Campus Leadership Teams, and Research Team)

• Tennessee – State planning team consisting of leading content faculty from all four‐year universities that convene bi‐weekly to plan large state engagement strategies; Conducting campus visits to have active dialogues with faculty from arts and sciences and education on the CCSS and PARCC

What States are Doing…

47

• Indiana – Recently awarded grants to campus‐level teams responsible for convening neighboring institutions around the CCSS and PARCC; Monthly listserv emails to update stakeholders; Conducting regular statewide convenings to discuss issues of importance, e.g., first‐year course alignment, use of assessment data

• Maryland – State‐wide Mathematics, English and Teacher Preparation Work Groups consisting of one person from each institution of higher education within the state, serving as liaisons between institutions and work groups; Review and provide feedback on work done by content steering committee and collaborate with PARCC/P‐20 work groups

What States are Doing…

48

Recommended Structure

49

• Create campus teams that will be partners in the process of developing the assessments

• Participants on these teams may…

• Serve as reviewers of policies

• Sit on PARCC committees as content experts

• Conduct research that is pertinent to the PARCC and CCSS agendas

• Review current practices for opportunities to align to the CCSS or utilize PARCC assessment data produced

The Goal

50

Allison G. JonesVice President, Postsecondary Collaboration

AchieveWashington, D.C.202.578.2917

[email protected]

Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careerswww.parcconline.org

www.achieve.org/PARCC

51