Presentation by Joseph Martineau, Ph.D., Director of Assessment & Accountability, Michigan Department of Education

1. Implications of the Common Core of State Standards for School Assessment In Michigan Presentation to the Michigan Reading Association March 11, 2011

2. Impacts of CCSS on School Assessment in Michigan Common Assessments Across States (in English Language Arts and Mathematics) Career and College Ready Cut Scores Interim Assessment for K-2 and 9-12

3. Impacts on School Assessment1: Common State Achievement Assessments As part of the larger Race to the Top competition, there was also a competition for consortia of states to propose a system of assessment that is common across all states in the consortium Two consortia funded nationwide Smarter/Balanced Assessment Consortium (31 states) Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Career (25) Only 6 states are not a part of one of the consortia Michigan joined the Smarter/Balanced Assessment Consortium as a Governing state New tests in English Language Arts and Mathematics Grade 3-8 Grade 11 Optional grade 9-10 for growth models (extra cost) Optional end of course assessments (extra cost)

4. The consortia: SBAC 31 states 17 Governing states (including Michigan) Computer Adaptive Testing (CAT) beginning in 2014-15 PARCC 26 states 11 Governing states Computer Based Testing (CBT) beginning in 2014-15 Large difference in CBT and CAT CBT = Existing form by computer (with some enhancements) CAT = Test tailored to individual student achievement level Impacts on School Assessment1: Common State Achievement Assessments

5. Impacts on School Assessment1: Common State Achievement Assessments

6. Impacts on School Assessment1: Common State Achievement Assessments

7. Two Content Areas: English Language Arts Reading, Writing, Listening, Speaking Mathematics Two Content Areas: 3-8 and High School Moving all testing online First operational assessment 2014-15 school year Paper & pencil offered the first few years Hope to be paperless (except for accommodations) by 2017 Challenges! Infrastructure Headlee Amendment Impacts on School Assessment1: Common State Achievement Assessments

8. A Balanced Assessment System Summative Assessments End of year Interim Assessments Throughout the year for tracking student progress Formative Assessment processes and tools For tracking daily student learning An Adaptive Assessment System Adapts the difficulty of the tests to the achievement level of the students Results generally in shorter tests Impacts on School Assessment1: Common State Achievement Assessments

9. A Multi-Mode Assessment System Multiple Choice Short Answer Essay Technology Enhanced Items (e.g. simulations, tools) Performance Events (short projects) Performance Tasks (long projects) An Online Assessment System Results returned quickly (within hours or days depending on the type of task included) Initial Implementation in 2014-15 Impacts on School Assessment1: Common State Achievement Assessments

10. Impacts on School Assessment1: Common State Achievement Assessments SBAC Org Chart

11. Impacts on School Assessment1: Common State Achievement Assessments Michigan on the SBAC Org Chart

12. Impacts on School Assessment1: Common State Achievement Assessments SBAC Workgroups Transition to Common Core Technology Approach Assessment Design: Item Development Assessment Design: Performance Tasks Assessment Design: Test Design Reporting Formative Processes and Tools/Professional Development Accessibility and Accommodations Research & Evaluation

13. Impacts on School Assessment1: Common State Achievement Assessments SBAC Workgroups Transition to Common Core Technology Approach Assessment Design: Item Development Assessment Design: Performance Tasks Assessment Design: Test Design Reporting Formative Processes and Tools/Professional Development Accessibility and Accommodations Research & Evaluation

14. Impacts on School Assessment1: Common State Achievement Assessments SBAC Workgroups Transition to Common Core Technology Approach Assessment Design: Item Development Assessment Design: Performance Tasks Assessment Design: Test Design Reporting Formative Processes and Tools/Professional Development Accessibility and Accommodations Research & Evaluation

15. Impacts on School Assessment1: Common State Achievement Assessments SBAC Workgroups Transition to Common Core Technology Approach Assessment Design: Item Development Assessment Design: Performance Tasks Assessment Design: Test Design Reporting Formative Processes and Tools/Professional Development Accessibility and Accommodations Research & Evaluation

17. Writing

18. MathEND OF YEAR ADAPTIVE ASSESSMENT Scope, sequence, number, and timing of interim assessments locally determined Re-take option Optional Interim assessment system— Summative assessment for accountability * Time windows may be adjusted based on results from the research agenda and final implementation decisions. Source: http://www.ets.org

19. Impacts on School Assessment2: Career & College Ready Performance Expectations Cut Scores Career and College Ready for grade 11 On track in lower grades Represents a considerable change MME cut scores were adopted in 2006 knowing they did not represent college and career readiness, but basic skills Asked to return later to adjust the MME cut scores upward to represent college and career readiness MEAP cut scores will also need to be adjusted upward to maintain consistency of expectations from one tested grade to the next A philosophical shift: Career and college readiness as the ultimate outcome of K-12 education Already there on content expectations Moving there on performance expectations

20. Considerable Change Current Cut Scores (or performance expectations) Students have mastered basic skills Based on federal and state statute New Cut Scores Approved to move forward in defining new cut scores by the State Board of Education in February, 2011 Need to redefine basic high school skills to mean students are ready for success in college and technical career training without remediation by the end of K-12 education Need to redefine basic elementary and middle schools skills to mean students are on track for the next level of education Impacts on School Assessment2: Career & College Ready Performance Expectations

21. Considerable changes Increasing rigor of performance expectations Consistency of performance expectations across all grades Empirically-based cut scores Validated against external criteria Being considered “proficient” in one grade indicates that with learning reflecting what is average means the student would continue to be proficient in the next grade Connects not only K-12 cut scores, but K-12 with post-secondary success Will result in temporary drops in percent proficient measures E.g. New York and Tennessee where some schools saw drops as large as 60% Most schools saw smaller, but still significant, drops Likely to be similar in Michigan A new focus for K-12 education in Michigan: college and career readiness as the ultimate goal of K-12 Michigan education Impacts on School Assessment2: Career & College Ready Performance Expectations

23. Reading and Mathematics only

24. AYP subjects

25. Based on ACT College Readiness Benchmarks

26. 21 in Reading

27. 22 in Mathematics

28. Percent of Michigan 11th grade public school students who met ACT College Readiness Benchmarks in Spring 2010

29. 38 percent in Reading (65 percent “proficient” on MME)

31. What about Career Readiness?

32. National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) study

33. Intend to use NAGB methodology for Smarter/Balanced Assessment Consortium definitions

34. 4-year university readiness tends to also indicate readiness for technical career training or two-year community college readiness

40. Contact Information Joseph Martineau, Ph.D. Director of Assessment & Accountability Michigan Department of Education martineauj@michigan.gov 517-241-4710