1 / 24

OMELC Fall 2011 Conference

OMELC Fall 2011 Conference. Brian Roget – Assistant Director Assessment Development and Construction Mathematics and Science Office of Curriculum and Assessment October 12, 2011. This presentation brought to you by:. High School – Higher Education Alignment Project

melita
Download Presentation

OMELC Fall 2011 Conference

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. OMELC Fall 2011 Conference Brian Roget – Assistant Director Assessment Development and Construction Mathematics and Science Office of Curriculum and Assessment October 12, 2011

  2. This presentation brought to you by: • High School – Higher Education Alignment Project • Bridging the gaps between high school graduation and postsecondary success

  3. High School – Higher Education Alignment Project • how to get involved • Visit education.ohio.gov and search “High School - Higher Education Alignment” to: • Register on STARS for an informational meeting in your Race to the Top region • Learn more about the opportunity to join a consortium • Learn more about Race to the Top • Investigate the opportunity to begin rethinking High School and College Mathematics and English Language Arts courses and programs

  4. And by: Introduction to the Common Core State Standard and Model Curriculum Revised Standards and Model Curricula Targeted Professional Development For dates and places search : “targeted professional development” in STARS

  5. Ohio Mathematics and Science Partnership (MSP)Grants • ODE has released a new MSP - Request for Proposal • Projects can focus the Professional Development using one of three options

  6. Ohio Mathematics and Science Partnership (MSP)Grants Options • Option 1: Tailor the PD to the needs of the target school. • Option 2: Provide PD focused on the 2010/2011 Standards and Model Curriculum for mathematics and science at the target school. • Option 3: Projects participate in either of the following PD programs. • Science: Modeling Instruction Program in High School Science • Mathematics: INTEL Math Program for K-8 Mathematics • More information will be provide in the Request For Proposals (RFP).

  7. Fewer ODE Staff • Use of External Facilitators Task Force – Focus Groups

  8. Assessment

  9. Information is subject to change based on future legislation or participation in a CCSS consortium

  10. Where are we now? • K-2 Diagnostics • 3-8 OAA • High School OGT

  11. The Transitional Years • K-2 Diagnostics • Realigned to CCSS • Minor modifications to fill gaps • Ready for district to use in 2012-13 • OAA • Continue to be administered through 2013-14 school year • Assessing the 2001 Ohio Academic Content Standards • OGT • Continues after 2014 for additional opportunities for passage

  12. What is on the horizon?

  13. Next generation of Assessments • K-2 – Continue as redesigned • 3-8 – Consortium developed • Online delivery • High School – Consortium Dependent

  14. CCSS Assessment Consortia

  15. Assessment Consortia • SMARTER Balanced (SBAC): • Consortia of 29 States • Attributes: • Computer-Adaptive • Formative Assessments (optional) • Performance Tasks • Rapid reporting system to • inform instruction and • accountability • Partnership for Assessment of Readiness (PARCC): • Consortia of 23 states + D.C. • Attributes: • Computer-Based • Through Course Assessments (might be optional) • Performance Tasks • Rapid reporting system to inform instruction and accountability

  16. Both PARCC & SMARTER Balanced consortia have: On-line testing Interim and summative components Item Types Multiple choice Extended response Technology-enhanced Performance assessments High school tests: End-of-course vs. End-of-year Rapid reporting system to inform instruction Teachers involved in developing and scoring tests Common Assessment Elements

  17. Through-Course Assessments Comparison SBAC PARCC Measure depth of understanding, research skills, interaction with materials and management of ideas. Given last 12 weeks of year Computer-delivered, scored within 2 weeks Tasks for grades 3-8, 11: 1 reading, 1 writing and 2 math tasks per year Assessments will also be available for grades 9 & 10 Performance Tasks • Given at three points in time, near the end of quarters. • Computer-delivered with results within 2 weeks • Tasks for assessments: • 1st and 2nd contain focused tasks taken in one class period • 3rd requires a project-based task over a longer time period • 4th for ELA only, an oral presentation of final task. • Source: the Center for K-12 • Assessment & Performance Management at ETS

  18. Consortia Assessment Timeline PARCC SBAC

  19. CCSS Assessment Consortia Review and provide feedback on the mathematics framework documents

  20. SBAC – PARCC • Review • Each group will review a grade of the SBAC content specifications and the PARCC content framework. • Feedback • Each group will use the Assessment – SWOT to analyze the two documents and provide feedback

  21. Assessment – SWOT • Strengths • What information, sections and components of each document provides clarity, provides additional information, and makes connections between content and assessment? • Weaknesses • What information, sections and components of each document lacks clarity or causes confusion between content and assessment? • Opportunities • What information, sections and components of each document provides opportunities for teachers to understand the connected aspects of content, mathematical practices, assessment and instruction? What opportunities does each provide for improved professional development for teachers? • Threats • Based on what is described in each document, what structures and/or supports could be provided or created to lessen the discomfort of transitioning to the new assessment system?

  22. What Should Districts Do Now? • Deepen your understanding of the CCSSM in Professional Learning Communities through: • the Standards for Mathematical Practice • the Critical Areas • the Model Curriculum • the Standards Progressions • the Comparative Analysis • Begin focusing instruction around: • the Mathematical Practices • The Critical Areas • Develop support structures for reaching all students • Use previous mathematics in service of new ideas • Provide all students access to the regular curriculum; RtI

  23. Closing Thought • “These Standards are not intended to be new names for old ways of doing business. They are a call to take the next step. It is time for states to work together to build on lessons learned from two decades of standards based reforms. It is time to recognize that standards are not just promises to our children, but promises we intend to keep.” • (CCSS, 2010, p. 5)

More Related