Iowa State Board of Education - Iowa Department of Education

Preparing to load PDF file. please wait...

0 of 0
100%
Iowa State Board of Education - Iowa Department of Education

Transcript Of Iowa State Board of Education - Iowa Department of Education

Iowa State Board of Education
Executive Summary
May 9, 2013

Framework for Board Policy Development and Decision Making

Issue Identification

Board Identifies Priorities

Board Analysis
Study

Board FollowThrough

Board Action

Agenda Item: Iowa Goal: State Board Role/ Authority Presenters:
Attachments: Recommendation: Background:

Work Session: Assessment – A Comprehensive System
All
Iowa Code section 256.7(21) allows the State Board to submit to the general assembly recommendations for modifications of assessments of student progress on core academic indicators.
Dave Tilly, Deputy Director
Tom Deeter, Lead Consultant Bureau of Information and Analysis Services
Colleen Anderson, Consultant Bureau of Standards and Curriculum
Penny Milburn, Consultant Bureau of Educator Quality
Emily Thatcher, Consultant Bureau of Standards and Curriculum
7
It is recommended that the State Board hear and discuss this information.
This is an overview work session on the status of educational assessment in Iowa. A general framework to put the pieces together will be presented. A brief review of the current status of each of the major assessments required by Iowa or federal law will be provided as well as a description of where the Department/State is heading in educational assessment policy. Major emphasis will be placed on Iowa’s role as a governing state in the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium, a coalition of 25 states who are collaborating to design and develop a next-generation accountability assessment. Opportunities for interaction around these topics will be provided throughout.

I. Purposes of Assessment: (sometime problematic when they are used for multiple purposes) A. Institutional Monitoring • to describe the educational health of the system (e.g. national, state, local) • to indicate how effective a unit/ program has been B. Student Learning • to direct students along certain pathways (e.g college placement, gifted and talented program, English Proficiency program, special education program) • to provide feedback to teachers, parents, students and the community about the student’s work and progress in comparison to standards or among groups of people • to encourage and facilitate learning

II. Current and Desired State-wide Assessments for Accountability

Where Are We Now? Iowa Assessments (IA)
• Why? NCLB and Chapter 12 Iowa Admin. Code Accountability
• Who? grades 3-8, 10, and 11 • How? paper and pencil, multiple choice • What?
o reading comprehension o math problem solving o science
Iowa Alternate Assessment (IAA) • Why? NCLB and Chapter 12 Iowa Admin. Code Accountability for 1% of students with significant learning disabilities • Who? grades 3-8, 10, and 11 • How? instructionally embedded rating scales reported into an online data management system • What? o alternate achievement standards (not aligned to the Iowa Core) o reading comprehension o math problem solving o science

Where Could We Go? Smarter Balanced Assessments
• Why? NCLB and Chapter 12 Iowa Admin. Code Accountability
• Who? Grades 3-8, 9,10,and 11 • How? online multiple choice, technology
enhanced items, short and extended constructed response, and performance tasks • What? o Iowa Core standards for English Language
Arts and mathematics  reading, writing, listening & speaking,
and research/inquiry  math concepts & procedures, problem
solving & data analysis, communicating mathematical reasoning Dynamic Learning Maps (DLM) • Why? NCLB and Chapter 12 Iowa Admin. Code Accountability for 1% of students with significant learning disabilities • Who? grades 3-8, 10, and 11 • How? online instructionally embedded tasks • What? o alternate achievement standards of the Iowa Core (Essential Elements)  reading, writing, listening & speaking, and research/inquiry  math concepts & procedures, problem solving & data analysis, communicating mathematical reasoning 

Iowa-English Language Proficiency Assessment

English Language Proficiency Assessment 21

(I-ELDA)

(ELPA21)

• Why? NCLB and Chapter 12 Iowa Admin. Code

• Why? NCLB and Chapter 12 Iowa Admin. Code

Accountability

Accountability

• Who? grades 3-8, 10, and 11

• Who? grades 3-8, 10, and 11

• How? paper and pencil, multiple choice, short

• How? online multiple choice, short and

and extended constructed response,

extended constructed response, performance

performance task

task

• What?

• What?

o Iowa English Language proficiency

o Iowa Core standards for English language

Standards

arts and mathematics

 reading, writing, speaking and listening

o Iowa English Language proficiency

 academic language in math

Standards

 academic language in science

 reading, writing, speaking and listening

 academic language in math

 academic language in science

Early Childhood

GOLD Assessment System

• Why? Birth to three Early ACCESS services and

• Why? Publicly funded programs

pre-school program evaluation

• Who? ages Birth to Kindergarten

• Who? ages Birth to Kindergarten

• How? Selected response/constructed

• How? District or AEA discretion using multiple

response/performance task, rubric

assessments, checklists, screening tools,

• What?

rubrics, teacher-made tests, etc.

o Iowa Early Learning Standards

• What? All developmental and content areas

 All developmental and content areas

including physical, language social-emotional,

including physical, language social-

cognitive, literacy, math, science, social

emotional, cognitive, literacy, Math

studies, arts, and English Language Learners

(Science, Social Studies, Arts, and

English Language Learners are optional)

National Assessment of Educational Progress

• Why? NAEP results serve as a common metric for all states

• Who? Grades 4, 8 and 12

• How? The largest nationally representative and continuing assessment of what America's students know

and can do in various subject areas using multiple choice, short and extended constructed response,

performance tasks.

• What? Assessments are conducted periodically in mathematics, reading, science, writing, the arts, civics,

economics, geography, U.S. history, and beginning in 2014, in Technology and Engineering Literacy (TEL).

Assessment Advisory Committee Purpose of the Committee: Provide advice and recommendations to the Iowa Department of Education and the State Board of Education on policy and practice issues related current and future assessment systems in Iowa. Member Responsibilities:
 Become a standing advisory group at the state level  Meet regularly  Be knowledgeable of current practices  Provide input and feedback on the vision  Give counsel and guidance on this the theory of change and action plan  Help determine and provide guidance on barriers to change  Support implementation and offer counsel to the strategic implementation team/steering committee (or
you could just say to the Iowa Department of Education).  Vet policy recommendations from the Strategic Leadership Team/steering committee

Next Generation Alternate Assessment
The DLM assessment consortium is guided by the core belief that all students should have access to challenging grade-level content which is reflected in the Common Core Essential Elements (Iowa Core Essential Elements). The Essential Elements for students with significant cognitive disabilities were developed at each grade level in the areas of English Language Arts and Math. The DLM assessment will be operational 2014-2015.
Learning Maps
A learning map is a network of sequenced learning targets. Often, we think of learning as one skill building on another single skill. A dynamic learning map, by comparison, shows a learning landscape in which multiple skills are related to many other skills. Dynamic learning maps not only show the relationships between skills but also show multiple learning pathways. Instead of assuming that all children learn a skill in the same way, allowing for multiple pathways recognizes that there are alternate ways to learn the same skill. By using dynamic learning maps as the basis for assessments, the DLM system will give teachers a clearer view of each student's knowledge.
Kinds of Skills Included in Learning Maps
• Tested Subject-Specific Skills. These skills include things like knowing a vocabulary word or being able to solve a multiplication problem.
• Related Precursor Academic Skills. These are the underlying skills necessary to master the tested skill. For example, to solve a multiplication problem, a student first needs to understand what numbers are, be able to order numbers, etc. For each grade-level skill that is tested, there are numerous precursor skills.
• Communication Skills. These are skills that allow students to communicate their answers. Communication skills are not limited to speech, but include a variety of things like pointing or nodding.
• Attention Skills. Before a student can show knowledge of a particular subject, the student must first be able to focus on the task or item presented.
By mapping these and other types of skills, learning maps allow students to show what they do know rather than simply cataloging what they don’t know.
1

Instructionally Embedded Assessment
The Dynamic Learning Map Alternate Assessment System uses items and tasks that are embedded in day-to-day instruction. As these embedded items and tasks are given to a student, the student’s learning is mapped throughout the year. Because of this, testing and teaching happen at the same time. This gives teachers the opportunity to see what students know during the year when teachers still have time to change instruction to better support student learning. An end of the year assessment will be created for states that want to include a summative test in addition to the instructionally embedded system.
Instructionally Relevant Items
Over the last two decades, we have learned that when accountability is determined through testing, teachers will teach to the test. Therefore, it is important to create tests that are worth teaching to. The new DLM assessments will be built using items that model good instruction.
Other Key Features
• Dynamic assessment • Universal design • Evidence-centered design including cognitive labs • Structured scaffolding
Accessibility
The DLM system will be created to be accessible for students with a variety of disabilities including significant cognitive disabilities, students who are deaf or hard of hearing, students who are blind or have low vision, and those who have neuromuscular, orthopedic, or other motor disabilities. Tests will be flexible enough to accept a variety of responses, such as:
• Keyboard-entered responses • Drag-and-drop responses that use the mouse to sort or label • Responses using touch-screen technology (when available)
The system will also be compatible with a variety of assistive technologies commonly used by students. It will also be flexible enough to allow for varying levels of teacher assistance.
For more information regarding the Iowa Core Essential Elements and Dynamic Learning Maps assessment please contact [email protected] or visit http://dynamiclearningmaps.org/
2

English Language Proficiency 21 (ELPA 21) A Summary of Core Components

Iowa, as part of a consortium of 12 states, has been awarded a $6.3 million federal Enhanced Assessment Grant (EAG)

to develop an English Language Proficiency Assessment (ELPA). The new assessment eventually will replace the

member states’ current ELPAs (which in Iowa is the I-ELDA). The consortium, with Oregon as the lead state, is titled

ELPA 21 or English Language Proficiency Assessment 21st

 , tCheentoutrhye.rInmaedmdbiteiorn to Iowa and

states are Arkansas, Florida, Ohio, Kansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, South Carolina, Tennessee, Washington and West

Virginia. The grant timeline states the new assessment is expected to be operational in the 2016-2017 school year.

The grant requires the consortium to develop English Language Proficiency standards before the ELPA development process may begin. All the states, including Iowa, have existing English Language Proficient standards, but they do not correspond to the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), required by the grant. The ELPA21 has begun the process of developing ELP standards that correspond to the CCSS, and has a target of December 2013 as the completion date. To aid in the
development, California has given permission for the ELPA21 to use its recently developed and adopted state English Language Development standards as a basis for developing the new ELP standards. More details will be shared as they are made available.
Partnering in the process to develop ELP standards are the Council of Great City Schools, the New York City Department of Education, the Council of Chief State School Officers, and the National Council of La Raza. The consortium is working closely with the leaders of each of these organizations to build knowledge, foster learning conversations, and vet, create and pilot resources among their networks and communities.

The core components of ELPA21 are:
Diagnostic screener:
An online diagnostic screener will be developed to serve as one indicator for schools in identifying students in need of placement in English language proficiency programs. The screener will closely mirror the summative assessment in content and format. The use of a screener aligned to the ELP standards and summative assessment meets federal guidelines. Summative assessments:
• The English Language Proficiency Assessment for the 21st Century (ELPA21) will serve as the mandatory accountability measure and be capable of measuring growth from year to year.
• It will be an online assessment allowing for immediate feedback to classroom teachers and schools.
• It will assess reading, writing, speaking, and listening proficiency using multiple choice, constructed response, and performance task items.
Interim Assessments: • Optional interim assessments will be developed to
mirror the summative assessment and serve

schools as both monitoring and predictive tools of students' language proficiency development. • These may be administered at locally determined intervals throughout the school year. • They will be grounded in cognitive development theory about how learning progresses. Formative Practices: Classroom teachers will also be supported through resources to include formative assessment practices, ensuring day-to-day monitoring of student learning.
Will Iowa educators be involved?
Yes, teachers and administrators will play a critical role in the development of the ELP standards, the assessments, and supporting resources. The consortium will collaborate with school districts and teachers to support feedback loops and online learning communities where knowledge and resources can be shared. Additionally, Iowa educator may be engaged in writing assessment items, reviewing the items, and identifying classroom resources to support English language learners.

NAEP: A Common Yardstick
The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is the largest nationally representative and continuing assessment of what America's students know and can do in various subject areas. Assessments are conducted periodically in mathematics, reading, science, writing, the arts, civics, economics, geography, U.S. history, and beginning in 2014, in Technology and Engineering Literacy (TEL).
Since NAEP assessments are administered uniformly using the same sets of test booklets across the nation, NAEP results serve as a common metric for all states and selected urban districts. Assessment includes multiple choice, short and extended response, and performance items. The assessment stays essentially the same from year to year, with only carefully documented changes. This permits NAEP to provide a clear picture of student academic progress over time.
What NAEP Does—and Doesn't—Report
NAEP provides results on subject-matter achievement, instructional experiences, and school environment for populations of students (e.g., all fourth-graders) and groups within those populations (e.g., female students, Hispanic students). NAEP does not provide scores for individual students or schools. NAEP results are based on representative samples of students at grades 4, 8, and 12 for the main assessments. State results are available for mathematics, reading, science and writing.
Who Runs NAEP
The Commissioner of Education Statistics, who heads the National Center for Education Statistics in the U.S. Department of Education, is responsible by law for carrying out the NAEP project. The National Assessment Governing Board, appointed by the Secretary of Education but independent of the Department, sets policy for NAEP and is responsible for developing the framework and test specifications that serve as the blueprint for the assessments. The Governing Board is a bipartisan group whose members include governors, state legislators, local and state school officials, educators, business representatives, and members of the general public. Congress created the 26-member Governing Board in 1988. The NAEP assessment operations are carried out with assistance from contractors.
More Information
For recent findings go to http://nationsreportcard.gov/ or the NAEP Results Mobile App is available at http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/about/naep_mobile.aspx.
StudentsAssessmentAssessmentsSkillsStudent