Transitioning to the Future: Common Core State Standards, New Assessments and ESEA Reauthorization

1. Transitioning to the Future: Common Core State Standards, New Assessments and ESEA Reauthorization California Educational Research AssociationNovember 18, 2010Deborah V.H. SigmanDeputy State SuperintendentCurriculum, Learning and Accountability Branch

2. Changing Landscape • New State Superintendent of Public Instruction • New Governor • New Legislature • Office of the Secretary of Education • Potential changes in State Board of Education • California Office to Reform Education (CORE) • Role of local educational agencies • Role of the U.S. Department of Education

3. California and the Common Core State Standards • August 2010 – State Board of Education (SBE) adopted: • Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts & Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects • Common Core State Standards for Mathematics • CCSS and specific additional standards

4. Common Core Resources • CDE Web page: http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/cc/ • Informational flyers • Overview • ELA • Math • Algebra I • Presentations • Frequently asked questions

5. Common Core Next Steps • Frameworks and instructional materials • Professional development • Assessments The California Department of Education presented implementation timelines to a joint meeting between SBE and the Commission on Teacher Credentialing in November, 2010.

6. Common Core Implementation • Timelines dependent on actions by the Legislature to authorize and fund implementation-related activities • Current law restricts the SBE from taking actions on curriculum frameworks and instructional materials until July 2013 • Without Race to the Top funding, activities will need to be supported by Legislature • Professional development focused on the CCSS is needed • New assessments based on the CCSS are needed

7. Implementation Timeline 1 • Assumes legislation to lift suspension under Education Code Section 60200.7 • Assumes the Curriculum Commission is funded for 2011 and subsequent years

8. Implementation Timeline 1

9. Implementation Timeline 2 • Assumes no legislative action to lift suspension under EC Section 60200.7 • Assumes the activities of the Curriculum Commission are funded

10. Implementation Timeline 2

11. Race to the Top Assessment Program Competition • Reading/language arts in grades 3–8 and at least once in grades 10–12 • Mathematics in grades 3–8 and at least once in grades 10–12 • Science at least once during each of three specified grade spans: grades 3–5, 6–9, and 10–12

12. Two Consortia Awarded Funds • Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) • On September 2, 2010, SBAC awarded 160 million • Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Career (PARCC) • On September 2, 2010, PARCC awarded 170 million • An additional 15.9 million awarded to each consortium for the purpose to help all participating states with the transition to common core and common assessments

13. RTTT Assessment Requirements for Comprehensive Systems Requirements within the RTTT Assessment Program: • Build upon shared standards for college- and career-readiness; • Measure individual growth as well as proficiency; • Measure the extent to which each student is on track, at each grade level tested, toward college or career readiness by the time of high school completion and; • Provide information that is useful in informing: • Teaching, learning, and program improvement; • Determinations of school effectiveness; • Determinations of principal and teacher effectiveness for use in evaluations and the provision of support to teachers and principals; and • Determinations of individual student college and career readiness, such as determinations made for high school exit decisions, college course placement to credit-bearing classes, or college entrance (US Department of Education, 2009) 1-Dec-14

14. SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium • Consortium of 30 states • California is currently not participating with this consortium • Washington is fiscal agent • WestEd is Project Manager • Assess grades 3 through 8 and grade 11

15. Governing Connecticut Hawaii Idaho Kansas Maine Michigan Missouri Montana North Carolina New Mexico Nevada Oregon Utah Vermont Washington Wisconsin West Virginia Advisory Alabama Colorado Delaware Iowa Kentucky North Dakota New Hampshire New Jersey Ohio Oklahoma Pennsylvania South Carolina South Dakota SBAC States

16. SBAC Theory of Action Adaptive summative assessments benchmarked to college & career readiness Common Core State Standards specify K-12 expectations for college and career readiness Teachers can access formative tools and practices to improve instruction All students leave high school college and career ready Interim assessments that are flexible and open

17. SBAC Summative Assessments Using online computer adaptive technologies: • Efficiently provide accurate measurement of all students, across the spectrum of knowledge and skills, with shorter tests • Incorporate adaptive precision into performance tasks and events • Will assess full range of CCSS in English language arts and mathematics; will include a variety of item types • Describe both current achievement and growth across time, showing progress toward college- and career-readiness • Scores can be reliably used for state-to-state comparability, with standards set against research-based benchmarks

18. SBAC Interim Assessments Optional interim assessments • Are aligned to and reported on the same scale as the summative assessments • Help identify specific needs of each student, so teachers can provide appropriate, targeted instructional assistance • Incorporate significant involvement of teachers in item and task design and scoring • Are non-secure and fully accessible for use in instruction and professional development activities • Provide students and teachers with clear examples of the expected performance on common standards.

19. SBAC Formative Tools and Practices Optional web-based formative assessment resources • Online resources on assessment literacy, aligning assessments to CCSS, and formative assessment guides • Training for local development of item and tasks and design and use of scoring guides • Support of best practices through online learning modules

20. Partnership for the Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers(PARCC) • Consortium of 26 states • California is currently a participating state • Governor, State Superintendent of Public Instruction and State Board of Education President required to sign MOU • Florida is fiscal agent • ACHIEVE is Project Manager • Assess grades 3 through 8 and once in grades 10-12 • Possible high school end-of-course

21. Governing Arizona Arkansas District of Columbia Florida Illinois Indiana Louisiana Maryland Massachusetts New York Rhode Island Tennessee Participating Alabama California Colorado Delaware Georgia Kentucky Mississippi New Hampshire New Jersey North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Pennsylvania South Carolina PARCC States

22. PARCC Theory of Action • More Meaningful Standards: The Partnership’s assessment system will be anchored in the Common Core State Standards which are consistent across states, clear to the public, and provide an on-ramp to college and careers. • Higher Quality Tests: PARCC assessments will include sophisticated items and performance tasks to measure critical thinking, strategic problem solving, research and writing. • Through-Course Testing: Students will take parts of the assessment at key times during the school year, closer to when they learn the material. • Maximize Technology: PARCC assessments in most grades will be computer based. • Cross-State Comparability: States in PARCC will adopt common assessments and common performance standards.

23. PARCC Intended Purposes • Report achievement results based on a clear definition of college and career readiness, so students will know if they are on track early enough to make adjustments. • Compare results against a common high standard because readiness shouldn’t differ across states or income levels. • Help make accountability policies better drivers of improvement by basing them on more sophisticated and meaningful assessments. • Promote good instruction by providing teachers useful, meaningful and timely information, which will help them adjust instruction, individualize interventions, and fine-tune lessons throughout the school year.

24. PARCC Distributed Summative Assessment System Overall assessment system will include a mix of constructed response items, performance tasks, and computer-enhanced, computer-scored items ELA/literacy • 3 “through-course” components • administered after 25%, 50%, and 75% of instruction • Speaking & listening components • administered after 75% of instruction (not part of summative score) • End-of-year component • administered after 90% of instruction Mathematics • 3 “through-course” components • administered after 25%, 50%, and 75% of instruction • End-of-year component • administered after 90% of instruction

25. Distributed Assessment Advantages • Through-course approach will focus instruction throughout the year and nearer to the assessment • The sum of the components address the full range of the common core • Allows for multiple measures across the full range of performance • Allows for in-depth assessment of writing and mathematics problem-solving • Both through-course and end-of-year components provide data that teachers can use to adjust instruction

26. PARCC Formative Tools • Partnership Resource Center (PRC): an online, digital resource that includes two supports – • Released items with item data, student work, rubrics. • Model curriculum frameworks. • Text Complexity Diagnostic Tool: a computer-adaptive tool to identify students’ proximate zone of development and supply suggestions for appropriate texts for students to read. • K-2 Assessments in ELA/Literacy and Mathematics.

27. Consortium Implementation Milestones SBAC PARCC

28. California Context Readiness for Computer-Based Testing • California’s assessment vendor conducted a survey and in-person site visits • Conclusions: • Feasible but expensive • Need multi-year rollout • District/school environment difficult for administering fair, standard & secure test • Budget commitment • Education Week • CA ranked lowest quintile in overall technology leadership among states • Average of 3.8 students to one computer in U.S. • Average of 5 students to one computer in CA

29. ESEA Reauthorization Blueprint 29

30. ESEA Reauthorization John Kline, R-MN 30 “[Republicans] are wary of too much power coming out of the federal government. The longstanding Republican position is to hold back the federal government. There isn’t universal agreement on how to fix it.” It was irresponsible of Congress to give [Duncan] $5B with no strings attached. [RTT] did some pretty bold things and some were in line with the Republican agenda like expanding charter schools. Other parts can be problematic. http://dropoutnation.net/category/eight-questions/

31. ESEA Reauthorization Lamar Alexander, R-TN 31 • Sen. Alexander upon introducing the State Student Achievement Contract Act in 2007:“In other words, instead of saying: ‘Do it exactly this way’ to the States, the federal government would be saying: ‘Give us results, and we will give you more flexibility.’” • S.2312 – A bill to amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to provide for State student achievement contracts. http://www.opencongress.org/bill/110-s2312/show

32. ESEA Reauthorization • Schools identified for improvement • More accountability with fewer schools • Recognize school realities – one size does not fit all • Lessons learned from NCLB • Sustainability & consistency • Focus on lowest performing • Biggest achievement gaps • Look at levels and rates of growth • Discussion on intervention models • Additional models • Look at research • More flexibility

33. Reflections • Our role • Our expertise • Our responsibility • Our commitment

34. Resources • Full text of the Common Core California Standards: http://www.scoe.net/castandards/index.html (Outside Source) • Information about the common core: http://www.corestandards.org/ (Outside Source) • Information about the common core including implementation timelines: http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/cc/ • PARCC information: http://www.fldoe.org/parcc/ (Outside Source) • SBAC information: www.k12.wa.us/SMARTER (Outside Source) • Center for K-12 and Performance Management at ETS: http://www.k12center.org/publications.html (Outside Source) • ESEA reauthorization: http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/blueprint/blueprint.pdf (Outside Source)