Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Mass drive in_PARCC_presentation_10.31.13

269

Published on

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
269
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. PARCC MASS Drive-in Conference October 31, 2013 Bob Bickerton, Senior Associate Commissioner Maureen LaCroix, Special Assistant to Deputy Commissioner
  • 2. AGENDA 1. A brief history of MCAS and the high school graduation “Competency Determination” 2. An overview of PARCC 3. A summary of our two-year transition plan from MCAS to PARCC a) b) c) d) e) Impact on Accountability System Special Education accommodations Board decision timeline Considerations for Educator Evaluation Technology questions and needs 4. Questions and concerns Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 2
  • 3. Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) State law specifies the adoption of a testing program that:  tests all students who are educated with Massachusetts public funds, including students with disabilities and limited English proficient students;  measures performance based on the Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks; and  reports individual student, school, and district performance. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 3
  • 4. Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks Curriculum Framework First Adopted Revised / Updated Mathematics 1995 2000, 2004*, 2011 English Language Arts 1997 2001, 2004*, 2011 Science and Technology / Engineering 1995 2006 History / Social Science 1997 2003 Comprehensive Health 1995 1999 Arts 1995 1999 Foreign Language 1995 1999 Vocational Technical Education 2006 Pending * Updates in 2004 to support NCLB requirement to test all grades from 3 through 8 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
  • 5. Transition to New, More Rigorous Standards  Common Core State Standards: 2011 MA Curriculum Frameworks for ELA/Literacy and Mathematics incorporate the CCSS.  Public school districts, public charter schools, and educator preparation programs in colleges and universities are implementing the new standards • SY 2012: Introduction of 2010 standards • SY 2013: Near full implementation of 2010 standards • SY 2014: Full implementation of 2010 standards Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 5
  • 6. Key Shifts in the ELA/Literacy Standards 1. Equal emphasis on literary and informational texts 2. Reading, writing, and speaking grounded in evidence from text 3. Writing in response to one or more texts 4. Regular practice reading complex texts and academic language 6 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
  • 7. Key Shifts in the Mathematics Standards 1. Each grade focuses on fewer standards: a) each standard addressed more deeply b) coherent progression across grades 2. Conceptual understanding of topics is foundational 3. Students are expected to extend their knowledge to real-life modeling and application Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 7
  • 8. Why PARCC? Why Now?
  • 9. Origins of PARCC: The Massachusetts Vision Next Generation Assessment: Massachusetts was one of three states (with Louisiana and Florida) to conceptualize a next generation assessment system focused on the new college and career ready standards. Those early discussions and planning evolved into the state-driven PARCC initiative and partnering with other states. 9 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
  • 10. PARCC in Massachusetts 2010 Memorandum of Agreement (Signed by Governor Patrick, Secretary Reville and Commissioner Chester) Massachusetts signs memorandum of agreement (MOA) making a commitment to adopt PARCC assessments “…provided they are at least as comprehensive and rigorous as our current MCAS assessments, if not more so.” Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 10
  • 11. PARCC Partnership In Massachusetts, PARCC has provided a vehicle for creating a new, extraordinary partnership with higher education. That partnership includes: 1. Higher education faculty involved in the development of PARCC. 2. A commitment from higher education that the PARCC “college and career ready” standard wil qualify students for placement into credit-bearing coursework. 11 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
  • 12. Why Do We Need A New Assessment? Common Core State Standards: MA 2010 ELA & Math Standards incorporate the Common Core. 1. The new standards include significant changes and shifts from the prior standards. 2. MA must implement an assessment aligned to the new standards 3. MCAS would require significant changes to be fully aligned with the MA 2010 Standards 12 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
  • 13. Why Now? When our state accepted RttT and additional stimulus funding, we committed to administer an assessment aligned to the CCSS by 2014-2015. Why Are We Field Testing in the spring 2014? 1. When we signed onto PARCC, we agreed to a 4year development plan. ***This is the fourth year – all states in the consortium are field-testing items. 2. We should not adopt a test built without Massachusetts student data. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 13
  • 14. Why PARCC? The PARCC consortium received $186M to design a new assessment system ***Significant quality and cost benefits. 1. Massachusetts has played and continues to play key leadership and “hands on” roles in the design and development of the PARCC assessments 2. All indications to date are that PARCC will provide a better assessment system than MCAS 14 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
  • 15. Why PARCC? Focus on Standards The PARCC summative assessments: 1. Focus on grade-level or course-specific standards leading to college & career readiness. 2. Include performance-based assessments (PBAs) that provide opportunities for students to demonstrate their mastery of skills and abilities where current assessments fall short. a) ELA: literary analysis, narrative writing, research simulations. b) Math: real-life modeling and applications. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 15
  • 16. PARCC Field Test Spring 2014
  • 17. Spring 2014 PARCC Field Test  Approximately 15% of MA students in grades 3-11 • randomly selected, by grade and classroom • students will take portions of ELA/Lit –OR– Math  Computer-based or paper-and-pencil  Testing windows: • March 24-April 11 Performance-based assessment (PBA) in ELA & Math. • May 5-June 6 End-of-year assessment (EOY) in ELA & Math.  Grade 10 students will be selected for end-of-year (EOY) only. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 17
  • 18. Special Education and the Spring 2014 Field Test What if the field test doesn’t provide the full suite of access tools? You may exempt students whose accommodation is not yet available. 18 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
  • 19. Considerations for Accountability Making a Recommendation to the Commissioner
  • 20. Accountability in 2013/14 By far your most articulated concern: Tens of thousands of students will take a PARCC field test and opt out of MCAS in that subject area. This leaves ESE and districts with less MCAS data with which to make all sorts of decisions. As a result, what policy shifts, particularly related to accountability, will ESE have to make? Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 20
  • 21. Accountability options The options we will present today are not exhaustive: Do you like a particular option over the others? Would you tweak an option? Do you have new ideas entirely? There are pros and cons to every option Options only apply to those schools that participate in the field test Your input will inform the Commissioner’s decisions
  • 22. Goal: find a happy medium The extremes are off the table. Extreme #1: Despite the missing data, ESE makes accountability determinations as usual.  May not provide an accurate reflection of your schools performance  Wouldn’t be fair to you. Extreme #2: Shut down the accountability system.  ESE has responsibility to make determinations on behalf of students.  Limited number of classes, grades and students will be field tested; we will have data for the vast majority of students  State and federal laws won’t allow it. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 22
  • 23. Option 1: Grade Level Exception School is given the highest score (CPI, Percent Proficient, SGP) of: Calculations including the field-tested grade(s) Calculations excluding the field-tested grade(s) 23 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
  • 24. Option 1: Grade Level Exception Pro Con Keeps accountability system Scores may not be entirely going as per state and accurate federal law If we exclude an atypically high performing grade, the school is harmed by having participated in the field test Won’t work for schools with only 1 tested grade (e.g., a K-3 school) Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 24
  • 25. Option 2: Use if Representative We determine whether the achievement of students who are opted out of MCAS is representative of the overall achievement in that school: 1. If student sample is skewed (high proportion of higher or lower achieving students), then school’s scores and level cannot move down (“held harmless.”) 2. If student sample was representative, then accountability determinations are made as usual. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 25
  • 26. Option 2: Use if Representative Pro Con Keeps accountability system Requires additional data going as per state and collection and is based on a federal law judgment made by the Department 26 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
  • 27. How would we determine whether the sample is representative? We would first find out who was selected for the PARCC field test and opting out of MCAS, and compare their “predicted” 2013-14 scores to the non-selected student “predicted” 2013-14 scores. If the school is projected to be negatively impacted, they would receive a hold harmless accountability determination. It is important to note that this would be withinschool comparison and not like SGPs which are statewide comparison groups. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 27
  • 28. PARCC Transition Plan Timelines and Considerations
  • 29. Transition Plan Timeline November 2013: Recommendation to Board of Education to approve PARCC Transition Plan which includes the following: District Choice: Massachusetts led the way to enable districts to choose whether to administer MCAS or PARCC in 2014/15. MCAS only for Grade 10 in 2014/15 and 2015/16 MCAS for Competency Determination through Class of 2018 Budget will determine extent to which we can make PARCC end-of-course assessments available for grades 9 and 11 PARCC Test: for grades 3-8 in 2015/16 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 29
  • 30. Spring 2015 Administration 1. Dual administration of PARCC and MCAS, but no double-testing of students 2. Districts/schools choose PARCC or MCAS 3. PARCC will offer computer-based and paperand-pencil tests 4. For accountability, ESE is recommending a “hold harmless” policy for districts/schools that choose PARCC 30 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
  • 31. The PARCC Decision 1. Rigor: We will use the results of the field test to evaluate the rigor of PARCC items in Fall 2014 2. Quality: We are conducting comprehensive, independent reviews to evaluate PARCC’s readiness to deliver a quality assessment 3. Opportunity: We will evaluate the ability of PARCC to assess standards and measure skills and abilities we cannot assess with MCAS. 31 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
  • 32. Recommendation to the Board Before the final Board Decision, we will analyze:: 1. Results of 2014/15 test administration and the 2. Summer 2015 Standard Setting to inform the Board’s decision on whether or not to adopt PARCC in the Fall 2015. 32 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
  • 33. Transition to PARCC: Competency Determination  At least through Class of 2018: Grade 10 students will take MCAS tests/retests in ELA, Mathematics, and Science and Tech/Engineering  In spring 2015 and spring 2016, grade 10 students will take MCAS (not PARCC) for CD  MCAS retests continue through at least spring 2018  Science and Tech/Engineering tests will continue during PARCC implementation  This fall: ESE will provide updates for classes of 2019 and beyond Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 33
  • 34. Implications for Educator Evaluation System Student Impact Rating
  • 35. Educator Evaluation: Student Impact Rating Requirement: By the 2014/15 school year, educators must be matched with at least two measures, drawing from the following sources: Statewide growth measures (median SGPs), must be used where available, and District-Determined Measures (DDMs) District Expectations: ESE will compute SGPs for educators who teach ELA and Math in grades 4-8 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 35
  • 36. Impact of PARCC on Educator Evaluation 2013-14 PARCC Field Test and 2014/15 MCAS or PARCC Option Year:  Issue: Educators whose students field test the PARCC performance based assessment in 2013/14 may be exempted from MCAS; these students will not have SGPs in 2013/14 or 2014-15  Issue: The Department will need to provide growth scores for students whose new assessment score is36 based upon PARCC after one or more prior years of scores based upon MCAS Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
  • 37. Impact on Ed Eval (continued) Why this Matters: 2013/14: some districts intend to begin impact ratings this SY and may not have MCAS SGPs available for some classes of students 2014-15 is Year 1 of Student Impact Rating data collection. Districts may have to identify an additional DDM for these educators, BUT will be required to use SGPs in future years. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 37
  • 38. Impact on Ed Eval (continued) Potential Solutions:  Districts may consider dispersing students who participate in the 2013/14 PARCC field test as they assign students to classes in 2014/15 to ensure there are enough students with SGPs in each class to support computing a median SGP  The Department is working with national experts who are confident that we can provide a reliable growth score when students switch from MCAS to PARCC. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 38
  • 39. We need your feedback on these Educator Evaluation options 39
  • 40. Communications Parent Letter: The Department will provide a sample letter for parents regarding non-participation in MCAS (and therefore no scores in a subject.) Working with MASC: The Department is working with MASC to provide resources for use with school committee members. Regional Presentations: The Department is scheduling meetings with all associations and will make multiple targeted and open regional presentations over the coming months.
  • 41. Technology Questions 1. Will districts be able to access the test across multiple technology platforms? • PARCC has adopted minimum requirements that are close to being “device agnostic” 2. How long will there be a paper/pencil option? • At least through 2015-2016 and possibly beyond 3. What if we don’t have the technology or bandwidth? a) FCC is committed to expanded eRate options and funding b) The Department is working with the Administration and the Treasurer’s Office to help districts meet the matching requirement
  • 42. SPED Accommodations What are the universal accommodations embedded in PARCC? 1. Massachusetts’ portfolio of accommodations has largely been adopted by PARCC 2. APIP (a new way of attaching the accommodation directly to each item) 3. Accommodations automatically activate as appropriate depending on the student’s disability and instructional/testing requirements 42 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
  • 43. Quick Reminders Level 4 Schools may choose to opt out of PARCC Field Test: 1. No justification required. 2. May exercise MCAS opt out; many implications (+/-) to consider. Grade 10 Students through the Class of 2018 will do MCAS (for competency determination.) MCAS Science testing continues (including for the Science competency determination.) Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 43
  • 44. PARCC Timeline in MA SYs 2011-12, 2012-13 SY 2012-13 SY 2013-14 Phase I Design & Development  Content Phase II Development • State-led item BESE Votes on Transition Plan frameworks & test specifications reviews • Item tryouts and analysis Field Testing  Spring Administration SY 2014-15 MCAS + Initial administration of PARCC assessments 2015 Summer: Set 5 achievement & CCR performance levels Fall: BESE Vote on adoption SY 2015-16 PARCC [except grade 10] 44 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
  • 45. For More Information For more information regarding PARCC and the 2014 Field Test, please visit the PARCC website at http://www.parcconline.org/field-test. If you have questions regarding the PARCC Field Test, please contact Pearson’s PARCC Support Center: 1-888-493-9888 (open Monday through Friday, 6:00am to 8:00pm CST) or PARCC@support.pearson.com. If you have questions regarding state policies, 45 Additional guidance is available at www.parcconline.org/field-test
  • 46. Let's talk! 46

×