Vertical articulation in the context of states transition to the common core state standards
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 15

Vertical Articulation in the Context of States’ Transition to the Common Core State Standards PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 56 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Vertical Articulation in the Context of States’ Transition to the Common Core State Standards. How did we get here, Where are we now, and How is that working out?. National Conference on Student Assessment June 25-27, 2014.

Download Presentation

Vertical Articulation in the Context of States’ Transition to the Common Core State Standards

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Vertical articulation in the context of states transition to the common core state standards

Vertical Articulation in the Context of States’ Transition to the Common Core State Standards

How did we get here, Where are we now, and How is that working out?

National Conference on Student Assessment

June 25-27, 2014


Vertical articulation in the context of states transition to the common core state standards

How did we get here?Vertical Articulation in the Context of States’ Transition to the Common Core State Standards

Patricia A. Baron

Educational Testing Service

National Conference on Student Assessment

June 25-27, 2014


Where are we

Where are we?

  • The current standards and testing movement is in transition from the multi-state standards to the Common Core State Standards (45 states and DC)

http://www.academicbenchmarks.com/ccss-state-status


How did we get here historical highlights

How did we get here?Historical Highlights

  • U.S. Federal Policy and Initiatives

  • Research – ongoing and results since 1995


Us education policy

US Education Policy

Title I ESEA Launched development of the field of educational evaluation and school accountability

NAEP

Subject-area National Survey, Grades 4,8, and 12; subject area frameworks developed by NAGB

NAEP State Assessments

No Child Left Behind Act

Annual testing for all subjects in grades 3-8; Annual progress objectives; State Standards in reading and mathematics

ED

Invitesstates to include achievement and growth models; vertical scaling not required but promise of greater comparability

RTT

Created to spur innovation & reforms in state & local districts; points for complying with CCSS


Setting the stage

Setting the Stage

Three Related Areas of Research and Practice

  • Defining proficiency

  • Linking tests. Linking scales. Vertical scales and growth.

  • Standard Setting: Content and Performance Standards


Defining proficiency

Defining proficiency

Defining proficiency

The Common Core is designed to promote deep learning through rigorous standards aligned with college and career readiness


Vertical scales growth models

Vertical Scales & Growth Models

  • Vertical scales introduced with ED invitation (2006) to include growth models in state performance reporting.

  • Methods existed for linking different tests, different scales

    • Linking statewide tests to NAEP, accuracy of combining test results across states (Linn and Kiplinger, Ercikan)

    • Linking NAEP to international tests, e.g., TIMMS (Johnson)


Vertical scales growth models1

Vertical Scales & Growth Models

  • Issues for measuring growth & change scores

    • Scales measuring latent variables such as proficiency or achievement are not equal interval scales (e.g., Patz, 2007).

      ____+____+___+__+__+__+

    • Valid vertical scales require a set of content standards that provide continuity across the grade span

      • Learning progressions (e.g., Wilson, 2009)


Vertical scales growth models2

Vertical Scales & Growth Models

  • Issues for measuring growth & change scores

    • Linking tests across grades without an anchor (common items) problematic

    • Standard setting conducted by grade not sufficient


Standard setting content and performance standards

Standard Setting: Content and Performance Standards

Content Standards: Content standards define the knowledge, concepts, and skills that students should acquire at each grade level.

Performance Standards: These standards specify how much understanding of content students need at each level of performance (e.g., basic, proficient, advanced), relative to the content standards.


Standard setting content and performance standards1

Standard Setting: Content and Performance Standards

  • Best practice in standard setting

    • appropriately-informed panelists

    • alignment between test and content standards

  • Cross-grade expectations and learning progressions:

    • Cohesive content standards, e.g., Grades 3 to 4 to 5, …Grade 11.

  • Options for cross-grade alignment of performance standards

    • Vertical scaling and vertical moderation


Good sources for further reading

Good sources for further reading

  • The Future of Test-Based Educational Accountability, Ed. Ryan & Shepard, (2008)

  • Vertical Scaling in Standards-Based Educational Assessment and Accountability Systems, published by CCSSO, Rich Patz (2007)

  • Vertical Scaling

    • in Test Equating, Scaling and Linking: Methods and Practices, Kolen and Brennan (2004)


Research highlights

Research Highlights

  • 2003

    • Vertical equating for state assessments: Issues and solutions in AYP and school accountability (Lissitz and Huynh)

  • 2005

    • Vertically Moderated Standards: Special Issue of Applied Measurement in Education

  • 2009

    • Impact of vertical scaling decisions on growth interpretations (Briggs and Weeks)

  • 2010

    • Post-standard-setting panel considerations for decision-makers (Geisinger and McCormick)

  • 2012

    • Growth, Standards and Accountabiilty (Betebenner) in Cizek, Ed., Setting performance standards


Today

Today

Current Research

  • Priya Kannan, Research Scientist, Educational Testing Service

    Current Practice

  • Deb Lindsey, Director of Assessment, Wyoming Department of Education

    Discussion

  • Marianne Perie, Co-Director at Center for Educational Testing and Evaluation, University of Kansas


  • Login