Parcc update. may 2013
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Parcc update. may 2013

on

  • 486 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
486
Views on SlideShare
486
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • October 25, 2012 – Final approval by GB of CCRD and PLD policies in ELA and MathematicsDecember 13, 2012 – the CCRD in mathematics will be based on an enhanced Alg 11/math 3 assessment that will include two additional PBAs. December 13, 2013 - PARCC will offer retests three times per year for each high school end-of-course assessment.January 7, 2013 – Maximum testing time will be 9-9.5 hours for grades 4-11-Maximum cost per test will be $15March 20, 2013 –Grade/subject specific content descriptors for high school assessments released for public commentMarch 20, 2013 - Affirm number and length of each testing windowJune 26, 2013 – Finalize grade/subject level content descriptors for high school assessments–Grade/subject specific content descriptors for high school assessments released for public comment on March 20, 2013 June 26, 2013 – Finalize accommodations policy for ELA and SWD. Draft accommodations policy was released for public review on January 16, 2013. June 26, 2013 - Determine weighting system for PBA and EOY portions of the summative assessment in determining the CCRDMarch 24, 2014 - 2014-2015 and beyond
  • October 25, 2012 – Final approval by GB of CCRD and PLD policies in ELA and MathematicsDecember 13, 2012 – the CCRD in mathematics will be based on an enhanced Alg 11/math 3 assessment that will include two additional PBAs. December 13, 2013 - PARCC will offer retests three times per year for each high school end-of-course assessment.January 7, 2013 – Maximum testing time will be 9-9.5 hours for grades 4-11-Maximum cost per test will be $15March 20, 2013 –Grade/subject specific content descriptors for high school assessments released for public commentMarch 20, 2013 - Affirm number and length of each testing windowJune 26, 2013 – Finalize grade/subject level content descriptors for high school assessments–Grade/subject specific content descriptors for high school assessments released for public comment on March 20, 2013 June 26, 2013 – Finalize accommodations policy for ELA and SWD. Draft accommodations policy was released for public review on January 16, 2013. June 26, 2013 - Determine weighting system for PBA and EOY portions of the summative assessment in determining the CCRDMarch 24, 2014 - 2014-2015 and beyond
  • October 25, 2012 – Final approval by GB of CCRD and PLD policies in ELA and MathematicsDecember 13, 2012 – the CCRD in mathematics will be based on an enhanced Alg 11/math 3 assessment that will include two additional PBAs. December 13, 2013 - PARCC will offer retests three times per year for each high school end-of-course assessment.January 7, 2013 – Maximum testing time will be 9-9.5 hours for grades 4-11-Maximum cost per test will be $15March 20, 2013 –Grade/subject specific content descriptors for high school assessments released for public commentMarch 20, 2013 - Affirm number and length of each testing windowJune 26, 2013 – Finalize grade/subject level content descriptors for high school assessments–Grade/subject specific content descriptors for high school assessments released for public comment on March 20, 2013 June 26, 2013 – Finalize accommodations policy for ELA and SWD. Draft accommodations policy was released for public review on January 16, 2013. June 26, 2013 - Determine weighting system for PBA and EOY portions of the summative assessment in determining the CCRDMarch 24, 2014 - 2014-2015 and beyond
  • October 25, 2012 – Final approval by GB of CCRD and PLD policies in ELA and MathematicsDecember 13, 2012 – the CCRD in mathematics will be based on an enhanced Alg 11/math 3 assessment that will include two additional PBAs. December 13, 2013 - PARCC will offer retests three times per year for each high school end-of-course assessment.January 7, 2013 – Maximum testing time will be 9-9.5 hours for grades 4-11-Maximum cost per test will be $15March 20, 2013 –Grade/subject specific content descriptors for high school assessments released for public commentMarch 20, 2013 - Affirm number and length of each testing windowJune 26, 2013 – Finalize grade/subject level content descriptors for high school assessments–Grade/subject specific content descriptors for high school assessments released for public comment on March 20, 2013 June 26, 2013 – Finalize accommodations policy for ELA and SWD. Draft accommodations policy was released for public review on January 16, 2013. June 26, 2013 - Determine weighting system for PBA and EOY portions of the summative assessment in determining the CCRDMarch 24, 2014 - 2014-2015 and beyond
  • October 25, 2012 – Final approval by GB of CCRD and PLD policies in ELA and MathematicsDecember 13, 2012 – the CCRD in mathematics will be based on an enhanced Alg 11/math 3 assessment that will include two additional PBAs. December 13, 2013 - PARCC will offer retests three times per year for each high school end-of-course assessment.January 7, 2013 – Maximum testing time will be 9-9.5 hours for grades 4-11-Maximum cost per test will be $15March 20, 2013 –Grade/subject specific content descriptors for high school assessments released for public commentMarch 20, 2013 - Affirm number and length of each testing windowJune 26, 2013 – Finalize grade/subject level content descriptors for high school assessments–Grade/subject specific content descriptors for high school assessments released for public comment on March 20, 2013 June 26, 2013 – Finalize accommodations policy for ELA and SWD. Draft accommodations policy was released for public review on January 16, 2013. June 26, 2013 - Determine weighting system for PBA and EOY portions of the summative assessment in determining the CCRDMarch 24, 2014 - 2014-2015 and beyond
  • PARCC is using Evidence-Centered Design to drive the development of its summative assessments In the ECD framework, assessment is considered a process of reasoning from imperfect evidence, and as such, is a part of a practical argument using claims and evidence to support the inferences we are making about student proficiency. In other words, an argument is made from what we observe students say, do, or produce (the evidence) in a few particular circumstances (the tasks or items) to support our inferences (or claims) about what they know, can do, or have accomplished more generally. Using ECD for design and development helps one clearly articulate assessment arguments. The ECD process includes identifying potential claims about what constitutes student proficiency; identifying evidence (what students might say, do or produce that will constitute evidence for the claims), and identifying the kinds of situations – the tasks or items -- that give students the optimal opportunity to produce the desired evidence.
  • Here is the proposed revised claims structure for Mathematics. As the blueprints were being developed, it became clear that the previous claims structure needed to be revised based on more current thinking from the PARCC states. The form specification documents are designed based on these claims.What has changed: Each sub-claim now has its own bubble instead of sub-claim C and E being embedded in the Sub-claim A bubble.
  • The PARCC assessments for mathematics will involve three primary types of tasks: Type I, II, and III. Each task type is described on the basis of several factors, principally the purpose of the task in generating evidence for certain sub-claims.
  • The PARCC assessments for mathematics will involve three primary types of tasks: Type I, II, and III. Each task type is described on the basis of several factors, principally the purpose of the task in generating evidence for certain sub-claims.

Parcc update. may 2013 Presentation Transcript

  • 1. What’s New in PARCCApril 2013Cory Shinkle and Mona ToncheffAZ PARCC ELC
  • 2. 2That’s me…
  • 3. Recent Major Developments3December 2011  Item Development RFPJune 2012  Minimum Technology Specifications, version 1.0July 2012  Calculator PolicyAugust 2012  Item and Task PrototypesSeptember 2012 Principles for Comparability with SBAC Mathematics Reference Sheets for Grades 3-8 and HSOctober 2012  College- and Career-Ready Determination PolicyNovember 2012 Item Tryout and Field Testing RFP High School Mathematics Model Content FrameworksDecember 2012 College- and Career-Ready Assessments in Mathematics Retest Policy Minimum Technology Specifications, version 2.0
  • 4. Recent Major Developments4September 2012  Principles for Comparability with SBAC Mathematics Reference Sheets for Grades 3-8 and HS• One key decision was to approve a set of principles forestablishing comparable assessment results with the SmarterBalanced Assessment Consortium.• Mobile student populations – students will move from PARCC statesto SBAC states and vice versa. These principles will allow PARCCstates to use data from new students’ prior assessments in an SBACstate.• Comparing performance state-to-state – governors, state chiefs,business leaders, higher education leaders and other policymakerswant to know how well their students and school systems stack up toother states.• These principles will inform the development work of bothconsortia over the next two years to help ensure that results onboth tests can be compared.
  • 5. Recent Major Developments5October 2012  College- and Career-Ready Determination PolicyThe CCR Determination policy also included important informationabout the performance levels on the PARCC assessment for everygrade level:• The PARCC assessments will have 5 performance levels – 1,2, 3, 4 and 5• PARCC approved “policy-level performance leveldescriptors” that describe (at a high level) what studentsscoring at each level know and can do relative to the CCSS.• The PLDs are an important tool for the PARCC assessmentdevelopment process and will be used to set performancelevels on the assessments in summer 2015.
  • 6. Recent Major Developments6November 2012 Item Tryout and Field Testing RFP High School Mathematics Model ContentFrameworks• The HS Math MCF lay out how the HS math CCSS might bearticulated over two different course pathways (traditional– Alg I, Geometry, Alg II; or integrated – Math I, II, III).• This was an important step for finalizing the testspecifications for the end-of-course HS math assessments,which will be offered for both course sequences.November 2012 Model Content Frameworks for Mathematics
  • 7. Recent Major Developments7December 2012 College- and Career-Ready Assessments inMathematics Retest Policy Minimum Technology Specifications, version 2.0• Algebra II is very important to student success after highschool, postsecondary clearly said it is also important thatstudents have command of content from earliergrades/courses.• PARCC’s approach will include on the final assessment ineach sequence (Alg II or Math III) some performance taskson those tests that draw on content from previousgrades/courses. This is NOT a comprehensive math exam;rather, students will be asked to draw on that content andapply it in the context of Algebra II or Math III.
  • 8. Recent Major Developments8December 2012 College- and Career-Ready Assessments in Mathematics Retest Policy Minimum Technology Specifications, version 2.0• PARCC will make available retests to member states• In grades 3-8, PARCC will offer 1 retest opportunity peryear• In high school, PARCC will offer a max of 3 retestopportunities per year• Individual states will determine whether to offerretests. If they do offer them, the state will determinehow many times per year and at what grade levels theyare provided.
  • 9. Looking Ahead: The Next Six Months9March 2013 • Assessment Scheduling GuidanceApril 2013• Draft English Language Learner (ELL) policies and participationguidelines for public review• Draft Accommodations Manual for public review• Draft Subject- and Grade-Level Performance Level Descriptors forpublic reviewSpring 2013• Guidance on Participation in Item Tryouts, Field Test, and PracticeTests• Design of Diagnostic and K-1 Tools• Design of Speaking and Listening AssessmentJune 2013• Final Subject- and Grade-Level Performance Level Descriptors• Final Accommodations Manual for Students with Disabilities• Final Accommodations Policies and Participation Guidelines forELL
  • 10. Looking Ahead: 6 – 18 Months10Summer 2013• Design of Assessment Professional DevelopmentModulesFall 2013• Design of Student Score Reports• Minimum Technology Specifications, version 3.0Spring 2014• Field Testing Administration and Practice Test• Methodologies for Standard SettingFall 2014 • Operational Assessment Administration ManualThroughout2013-14• Release of Additional Sample Items, ItemTryouts/Cognitive Labs, and Additional Guidanceto Districts on Assessment Administration
  • 11. ECD is a deliberate and systematic approach to assessment development thatwill help to establish the validity of the assessments, increase thecomparability of year-to year results, and increase efficiencies/reduce costs.Evidence-Centered Design (ECD)ClaimsDesign begins withthe inferences(claims) we want tomake aboutstudentsEvidenceIn order to supportclaims, we mustgather evidenceTask ModelsTasks are designedto elicit specificevidence fromstudents in supportof claims
  • 12. Master Claim: On-Track for college and career readiness. The degree to which a student is college and career ready(or “on-track” to being ready) in mathematics. The student solves grade-level /course-level problems inmathematics as set forth in the Standards for Mathematical Content with connections to the Standards forMathematical Practice.Sub-Claim A: Major Content1 withConnections to PracticesThe student solves problemsinvolving the Major Content1 for hergrade/course with connections tothe Standards for MathematicalPractice.Sub-Claim B: Additional & SupportingContent2 with Connections toPracticesThe student solves problems involvingthe Additional and SupportingContent2 for her grade/course withconnections to the Standards forMathematical Practice.Sub-Claim E: Fluency in applicablegrades (3-6)The student demonstrates fluency as setforth in the Standards for MathematicalContent in her grade.Claims Structure: MathematicsSub-Claim C: Highlighted PracticesMP.3,6 with Connections to Content3(expressing mathematical reasoning)The student expresses grade/course-level appropriate mathematicalreasoning by constructing viablearguments, critiquing the reasoning ofothers, and/or attending to precisionwhen making mathematical statements.Sub-Claim D: Highlighted Practice MP.4 with Connections to Content(modeling/application)The student solves real-world problems with a degree of difficulty appropriate to thegrade/course by applying knowledge and skills articulated in the standards for thecurrent grade/course (or for more complex problems, knowledge and skills articulatedin the standards for previous grades/courses), engaging particularly in the Modelingpractice, and where helpful making sense of problems and persevering to solve them(MP. 1),reasoning abstractly and quantitatively (MP. 2), using appropriate toolsstrategically (MP.5), looking for and making use of structure (MP.7), and/or looking forand expressing regularity in repeated reasoning (MP.8).Total Exam score – 107 points (PBA and EOY)50 pts25 pts14 pts PBA only18 pts PBA only
  • 13. PARCC High Level Blueprints
  • 14. Overview of PARCC Mathematics TaskTypes14Task Type Description of Task TypeI. Tasks assessingconcepts, skills andprocedures• Balance of conceptual understanding, fluency, and application• Can involve any or all mathematical practice standards• Machine scoreable including innovative, computer-based formats• Will appear on the End of Year and Performance Based Assessment components• Sub-claims A, B and EII. Tasks assessingexpressingmathematicalreasoning• Each task calls for written arguments / justifications, critique of reasoning, or precision inmathematical statements (MP.3, 6).• Can involve other mathematical practice standards• May include a mix of machine scored and hand scored responses• Included on the Performance Based Assessment component• Sub-claim CIII. Tasks assessingmodeling /applications• Each task calls for modeling/application in a real-world context or scenario (MP.4)• Can involve other mathematical practice standards• May include a mix of machine scored and hand scored responses• Included on the Performance Based Assessment component• Sub-claim DFor more information see PARCC Task Development ITN Appendix D.
  • 15. Assessment DesignEnglish Language Arts/Literacy and Mathematics, Grades 3-112 Optional Assessments/Flexible AdministrationDiagnostic AssessmentEarly indicator ofstudent knowledge andskills to informinstruction, supports,and PDNon-summativeMid-Year AssessmentPerformance-basedEmphasis on hard-to-measure standardsPotentiallysummativePerformance-Based Assessment(PBA)Extended tasksApplications ofconcepts and skillsRequiredEnd-of-YearAssessmentInnovative,computer-baseditemsRequiredSpeaking And Listening AssessmentLocally scoredNon-summative, required13
  • 16. Arizona Department of Education
  • 17. Arizona Department of Education
  • 18. Assessment Evidence Tables RELEASED19 For more information see PARCC Task Development ITN Appendix D.
  • 19. Instructional Uses20• To see ways to combine standards naturallywhen designing instructional tasks• To determine and create instructionalscaffolding (to think through whichindividual, simpler skills can be taught firstto build to more complex skills)• To develop rubrics and scoring tools forinstructional tasks
  • 20. Performance Level Descriptors:Mathematics (DRAFT)21http://www.parcconline.org/math-plds
  • 21. Factors that determine the performancelevels (Cognitive Complexity)CognitiveComplexityMathematicalContentMathematicalPracticesStimulusMaterialResponseModeProcessingDemand1. Mathematical Content2. Mathematical Practices3. Stimulus Material4. Response Mode5. Processing Demand22
  • 22. 23Questions?AZ PARCC to AIMS transitionhttp://www.azed.gov/standards-development-assessment/aimsparcctransition/AZ Latest News with PARCChttp://www.azed.gov/standards-development-assessment/2013/01/18/parcc-whats-new/Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careerswww.parcconline.org