common core state standards n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Download Presentation

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 47


  • Uploaded on

COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS. Assessments based on the Common Core State Standards Vince Dean, Ph.D. Office of Educational Assessment & Accountability . Race to the Top Assessment Competition. Assessments based on the Common Core State Standards RTTT Assessment Competition

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS' - paige

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
common core state standards


Assessments based on the Common Core State Standards

Vince Dean, Ph.D.

Office of Educational Assessment & Accountability

race to the top assessment competition
Race to the Top Assessment Competition

Assessments based on the Common Core State Standards

  • RTTT Assessment Competition
    • 350 million total
    • 320 million for at least 3-8 and one H.S. grade
    • 30 million for H.S. solution, likely end-of-course
  • Alternate Assessments based on Alternate Achievement Standards Grant Competition
  • English Language Proficiency Grant Competition (next federal fiscal year)
race to the top assessment competition1
Race to the Top Assessment Competition

Assessment Consortia

  • Development of an infrastructure and content for a common assessment in measuring CCSS in English Language Arts and Mathematics

Two consortia

  • SMARTER/Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC)
  • Partnership for the Assessment of Readiness for College and Career (PARCC)
race to the top assessment competition2
Race to the Top Assessment Competition

U.S. Education Department Requirements

Measure the full breadth of the Common Core State Standards

Extend the range of high quality measurement in both directions

Assessments operational by 2014-15

Consortia must offer an online version

Must take advantage of technology for reporting speed and be instructionally relevant

race to the top assessment competition3
Race to the Top Assessment Competition

The consortia:

  • SMARTER/Balanced
    • 31 states
    • 17 governing states
    • CAT beginning in 2014-2015
    • 26 states
    • 11 governing states
    • CBT beginning in 2014-15
theory of action goal
Theory of ActionGoal

To ensure that all students leave high school prepared for postsecondary success in college or a career through increased student learning and improved teaching

theory of action
Theory of Action

SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium shaped by the following principles:

1. Integrated system

2. Evidence of student performance

3. Teachers integrally involved

4. State-led, transparent and inclusive

governance structure

theory of action1
Theory of Action

SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium shaped by the following principles:

5. Continuously improve teaching and learning

6. Useful information on multiple measures

7. Design and implementation adhere to established professional standards

theory of action2
Theory of Action

Creating a policy environment that supports:

  • innovation systems,
  • high expectations and
  • increased opportunities for students

Aligned to the Common Core Standards:

  • clearly defined college and career expectations,
  • learning progressions
  • content/curricular frameworks,
  • test maps, and
  • instructional processes
theory of action3
Theory of Action

SBAC policies and standards are effectively communicated to districts and schools:

Multi-media communications plan

Score reports

sbac specific priorities
SBAC Specific Priorities

Ensure all students have access to the technology needed to participate in each component (summative, interim/benchmark, formative)

Support research on how to use technology to increase access for all students, in particular those needing accommodations

sbac specific priorities1
SBAC Specific Priorities

Use technology to efficiently deliver training, resources, reports and data; social networks for teachers to develop and disseminate effective CCSS curriculum and instructional tools

Create innovative item types that utilize technology and represent real-world contexts

sbac specific priorities2
SBAC Specific Priorities

Use Computer Adaptive Testing engine to maximize accuracy for individual students across the CCSS

Standardized accommodations policy and administration practices across states to ensure comparability

sbac assessment design proposal1
SBAC Assessment Design Proposal

Summative Assessment

Measure full range of CCSS

Computer Adaptive Testing for precision

Timely results

Engage Institutions of Higher Education to ensure achievement standards reflect college and career readiness

Scale scores help inform growth model

sbac assessment design proposal2
SBAC Assessment Design Proposal

Interim Benchmark Assessment

Allow for finer grain of measurement (e.g., end of unit)

Inform teachers if students on track to be proficient on summative assessments

Multiple opportunities for students to participate

Scale scores help inform growth model

sbac assessment design proposal3
SBAC Assessment Design Proposal

Formative Assessment

Repository of tools available to teachers to support quick adjustment and differentiated instruction

Help define student performance along the CCSS learning progressions

Concrete strategies for immediate feedback loops

sbac assessment design proposal4
SBAC Assessment Design Proposal

Teacher Engagement

Integral role in developing test maps for each grade and content area

Item writing, specifications, reviewing, and range-finding for all test types

Teacher-moderated scoring of performance events to inform professional development

technology enhanced item
Technology Enhanced Item

Prototype items courtesy of the Minnesota and Utah Departments of Education

technology enhanced item1
Technology Enhanced Item

Minnesota Science Item

sbac assessment design proposal5
SBAC Assessment Design Proposal

Assessment window vs. single day administration

Multiple opportunities to assess

Quick results available to support instruction

Emphasis on problem-solving and critical thinking

dynamic learning maps alternate assessment consortium

Dynamic Learning Maps Alternate Assessment Consortium

Alternate Assessments Based on the Common Core State Standards

state participants
State Participants






New Jersey

North Carolina



West Virginia


other participants
Other Participants

University of Kansas

  • Center for Educational Testing and Evaluation
  • Center for Research Methods and Data Analysis
  • Center for Research on Learning
  • Special Education Department

AbleLink Technologies


The Center for Literacy and Disability Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill


feature overview
Feature Overview

Learning maps

Dynamic assessment

Inclusion of instructionally relevant tasks

Instructionally embedded and stand-alone versions

Advanced feedback and reporting systems (including growth modeling)

Technology platform

Universal design

Evidence centered design including cognitive labs


Development of over 14,000 tasks/items

Professional development

major changes
Major Changes


Moving Online



moving to online assessment
Moving to Online Assessment

Survey of state testing directors (+D.C.)

  • 41 responses
  • 5 of 41 states have no CBT initiatives
  • 36 of 41 states have current CBT initiatives, including:
    • Operational online assessment
    • Pilot online assessment
    • Plans for moving online
moving to online assessment1
Moving to Online Assessment

Survey of state testing directors (+D.C.)

  • Of 36 states with some initiative
    • 21 states currently administer large-scale general populations assessments online
    • 9 states have plans to begin (or expand) online administration of large-scale general populations assessments
    • 8 states currently administer special populations assessments online
    • 2 states have plans to begin (or expand) online administration of special populations assessments
moving to online assessment2
Moving to Online Assessment

Survey of state testing directors (+D.C.)

  • Of 36 states with some initiative
    • 5 states currently use Artificial Intelligence (AI) scoring of constructed response items
    • 4 states currently use Computer Adaptive Testing (CAT) technology for general populations assessment
    • 0 states currently use CAT technology for special populations assessment
    • 7 states offer online interim/benchmark assessments
    • 7 states offer online item banks accessible to teachers for creating “formative”/interim/benchmark assessments tailored to unique curricular units
online assessment the michigan stage
Online Assessment -The Michigan Stage

Michigan’s online initiatives

  • Pilot in 2006
  • Pilot in 2011 (English Language Proficiency)
  • Pilot in 2012 (Alternate Assessments)
  • Pilots leading up to operational adoption of SMARTER/Balanced Assessment Consortium products in 2014/15
  • Constitutional amendment barring unfunded mandates

Maximize objective scoring by

  • Automated scoring of objective items
  • AI scoring of extended written response items, technology enhanced items, and performance tasks wherever possible
  • Distributed hand-scoring of tasks not scorable using AI
scoring as professional development
Scoring as Professional Development

Human scorers taken from ranks of teachers

  • Online training on hand-scoring
  • Online certification as a hand-scorer
  • Online monitoring of rater performance
  • Validation hand-scoring of samples of AI-scored tasks

Our experience with teacher-led scoring and rangefinding indicates that it is some of the best professional development that we provide to educators


Current reports can be difficult to read and poorly used

Need online reporting of all scores for all stakeholders, including:

  • Policymakers (aggregate)
  • Administrators (aggregate and individual)
  • Teachers (aggregate and individual)
  • Parents (aggregate and individual)
  • Students (individual)
reporting portal
Reporting Portal

Reporting portal needs to be able to integrate reports from classroom metrics all the way to large-scale secure assessment metrics


LEA capacity for online assessment

Bandwidth issues, especially in rural areas

Minnesota challenge

Utah example

USED working with FCC on National Broadband Initiative


Item development for computer-adaptive testing


Item types

Demographic coverage

AI Scoring validation



Comparability across years and student populations

Equating from year to year

Accommodated versions for SWD and ELL

Contrast, read aloud, enlarged print


All challenges will be resolved by 2014-15

timeline for transition
Timeline for Transition


Getting to know the CCSS/Alignment work

2010 MEAP/2011MME remain the same

State focus will be on technical assistance


Implementation of CCSS in classrooms

2011 MEAP/2012 MME remain the same

State focus will be on instruction/professional development

timeline for transition1
Timeline for Transition


2012 MEAP minimally modified as necessary to reflect the CCSS

2013 MME remains the same

State focus will be on student learning


2013 MEAP based on 2012 model

2014 MME remains the same

State focus will be on preparing for new assessments from SMARTER Consortium


Full implementation - Instruction and assessment based on CCSS

contact information
Contact Information
  • Office of Educational Assessment & Accountability
  • SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium