Upload
beatrice-hicks
View
219
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Our Successes So Far
Formative Assessment Advisory Panel Developed
Quality Criteria
State Leadership Teams and State Networks of Educators
Established, Involving Around 2,000 K-16 Educators Across
the Country
SLT Training 1 and SNE Training 1 Completed
Over 100 Resources Submitted to the Digital
Library
Blueprints for Exemplar Instructional Modules and
Assessment Literacy Modules Blueprints Drafted
Matrices for the Exemplar Instructional Modules for ELA and Math and for the
Assessment Literacy Modules Drafted
Digital Library Software Versions 1.0 and 1.1
Released
What’s Coming Next
• SLT Training 2 in November and December 2013• Software Version 1.15 in February 2014Short-Term
• SLT Trainings 3 (March 2014), 4 (May 2014), and 5 (August 2014)
• Software Version 1.2 in April 2014• First set of 23 Exemplar Instructional Modules and
Assessment Literacy Modules in March 2014• Second set of Modules in May 2014 and third set of
Modules by September 2014
Long-Term
• Digital Library Open to Consortium Members in April 2014
Milestone
A Balanced Assessment System
Common Core State Standards
specify K-12
expectations for college and career readiness
All students leave
high school college
and career ready
Teachers and schools have
information and tools they need
to improve teaching and
learningInterim assessments
Flexible, open, used for actionable
feedback
Summative assessments
Benchmarked to college and career
readiness
Educator resources for
formative assessment
practicesto improve instruction
Slide 5
Definition of Formative Assessment Process
• Formative Assessment is a deliberate process used by teachers and students during instruction that provides actionable feedback that is used to adjust ongoing teaching and learning strategies to improve students’ attainment of curricular learning targets/goals.
Four Attributes of the Formative Assessment
Process
Page 7
Clarify IntendedLearning
Elicit Evidence
Act onEvidence
Interpret Evidence
•8 – 12 members per state
•Comprised of K-12 educators and higher educational faculty in positions of leadership in the state
Composition
•Recruit, identify, and train the State Network of Educators (SNE)
•Participate in 5 regional trainings
•Train SNE members to contribute, review, and post resources
•Monitor and support SNE review of resources and make final posting decisions
•Provide feedback on posting process, Quality Criteria, and usability of software
Expectations
State Leadership Teams (SLT)
Page 8
•60 – 150 K-12 educators and higher educational faculty per state
•Each network has diverse expertise in: •CCSS
Mathematics, CCSS ELA, Science and Social Studies
•General Education; Gifted and Talented; English Language Learners, and Students with Disabilities
Composition
•Participate in 5 trainings
•Help populate the Digital Library in advance of the April 2014 launch•Submit and
review resources using Quality Criteria
•Use resources and collaboration tools for own professional learning and instruction
•Provide feedback on the resources in the library, the review and posting process, the Quality Criteria, and the usability of the Library
Expectations
State Network of Educators (SNE)
Slide 9
Resource Posting Work Flow
Page 10
Step 1:Resource Submitted
Step 3:Quality Criteria Applied
Step 4:Decision
Step 2:Gatekeeping
Criteria Applied
SNE1
SNE2
SNE3
SNE1
Posted
Sent to SLT
Returned to Submitter
Cover Profile
Formative Assessment Advisory Panel
• Convened the Formative Assessment Advisory Panel to develop the Quality Criteria during three two-day meetings
Page 11
Meeting 1April 17 – 18
Meeting 2May 8 – 9
Meeting 3May 22 – 23
• Brainstormed initial Quality Criteria
• Determined structure of Quality Criteria
• Developed comprehensive list of potential criteria
• Discussed merits of checklist vs. rubric-based approach
• Tested criteria using sample resources
• Refined criteria
Synthesized feedback
Developed first draft of
Quality Criteria
Developed 2nd draft; received feedback
from panelists; developed present
draft
Slide 11
Members of the Formative Assessment Advisory Panel
1) Dr. Lynne Anderson-Inman (University of Oregon)
2) Dr. Robert Calfee (Stanford University, UC Riverside)
3) Dr. Bridget Dalton (University of Colorado)
4) Dr. Diane Heacox (St. Catherine University)
5) Dr. Joan Herman (UCLA – CRESST)
6) Dr. John Hill (Purdue University)
7) Dr. Yvette Jackson (National Urban Alliance for Effective Education)
8) Dr. Henry Kepner (University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee)
9) Dr. Katherine McKnight (National Louis University)
10) Valerie L. Mills (National Council of Supervisors of Mathematics)
11) Dr. James Popham (UCLA)
12) Dr. Lucinda Soltero-Gonzalez (University of Colorado-Boulder
Page 12
Twelve experts in the CCSS for ELA, the CCSS for Mathematics, the formative assessment process, adult learning, online professional learning, diverse learners, and urban and rural education comprised the Formative Assessment Advisory Panel.
Slide 12
Structure of the Quality Criteria
Cover Profile
Gatekeeping Criteria
Quality Criteria for Professional Learning Resources and Quality Criteria for Instructional Resources
Governance Criteria
Slide 13
Purposes of the Quality Criteria
Page 14
Ensure that all resources in the Digital Library are
of the highest quality, regardless of source
Ensure that all resources reflect the Smarter Balanced vision of effective formative
assessment practices
Provide consistency in the review process for all
resources
Ensure that the resources in the Digital Library reflect the intent
of the CCSS
Digital Library Resources
Slide 15
• Commissioned Professional Learning Modules• Resources for educators, students and families
• Frame Formative Assessment within a Balanced Assessment System• Articulate the Formative Assessment Process• Highlight Formative Assessment Practices and Tools
Assessment Literacy Modules
• Commissioned Professional Learning Modules• Instructional coaching for educators • Instructional materials for students
• Demonstrate/support effective implementation of the formative assessment process
• Focus on key content and practice from the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics and English Language Arts
Exemplar Instructional
Modules
• High-quality vetted instructional resources and tools for educators• High-quality vetted resources and tools for students and families
• Reflect and support the formative assessment process• Reflect and support the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics
and English Language Arts• Create Professional Learning Communities
Education Resources
SLT 2 Training
Learning Goal
•SLT members will understand the Quality Criteria ratings and how to apply them consistently.
Success
Criterion
•SLT members will provide evidence of inter-rater reliability among the state SLT members and with other state SLT members in cross-state teams.
Slide 16
Accessing the Digital Library in the Training Environment
Page 17
1. Open your Internet browser (Google Chrome typically works best, though Safari, Firefox, and Internet Explorer 9+ are also options).
2. Type the web address: http://training.smarterbalancedlibrary.org
3. Type your assigned email address: slt#@smarterbalancedlibrary.com
4. Type the password: password
5. Click “Log into the Digital Library”
Page 18
CA 1CA 2CA 3CA 4…
MO 1MO 2MO 3MO 4…
NC 1NC 2NC 3NC 4…
ELA Resource
Expl 1
ELA Resource
Expl 2
ELA Resource
Expl 3
ELA ResourceNonExpl 1
Combo Resource 1
CommonProfessional
LearningResource
Common Instructional
Resource
SLTCommon Resource
Review Group Examples
Digital Library Resources in the Training Environment
MathResource
Expl 1
Math Resource NonExpl 1
MathResourceNonExpl 2
PLResource
Expl 1
PLResource
Expl 2
PLResource
Expl 3
PLResourceNonExpl 1
Page 19
ELA1- CAELA 2- WYELA 3- NV
MATH1- MTMATH2- SDMATH3- WAMATH4- ND
PL1- CAPL2- MT
ELA Resource
Expl 1
ELA Resource
Expl 2
ELA Resource
Expl 3
ELA ResourceNonExpl 1
Combo Resource 1
CommonProfessional
LearningResource
Common Instructional
Resource
Digital Library Resources in the Training Environment
MathResource
Expl 1
Math Resource NonExpl 1
MathResourceNonExpl 2
PLResource
Expl 1
PLResource
Expl 2
PLResource
Expl 3
PLResourceNonExpl 1
Cross-StateResource
Review Group Examples