Greta Bornemann (360) Patty Stephens (360)

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Greta Bornemann (360) Patty Stephens (360)"

Georgiana Quinn
6 years ago
Views:

1 Patty Stephens (360) Greta Bornemann (360)

2 Agenda Goal: Provide information to help educators and students adjust to changes in mathematics assessment Test & Item Specifications EOC Updates Lessons Learned EOC Resources Upcoming Events Graduation Requirements Math Improvement Framework Common Core State Standards SMARTER Balanced Consortium

3 Legislative Action ESSB 5414 amended RCW 28A Section (1)(a) The assessments shall be implemented statewide in the school year. WERA Slide 3

4 Legislative Action ESSB 5414 amended RCW 28A Section (1)(b) The superintendent shall develop end-of-course assessments for the first year of high school mathematics that include the standards common to algebra I and integrated mathematics I and for the second year of high school mathematics that include the standards common to geometry and integrated mathematics II. The assessments under this subsection (1)(b) shall be used to demonstrate that a student meets the state standard on the mathematics content area of the high school Washington assessment of student learning for purposes of RCW 28A WERA Slide 4

5 Legislative Action ESSB 5414 amended RCW 28A Section (1)(c) The superintendent of public instruction shall also develop subtests for the end-of-course assessments that measure standards for the first two years of high school mathematics that are unique to algebra I, integrated mathematics I, geometry, and integrated mathematics II. The results of the subtests shall be reported at the student, teacher, school, and district level. WERA Slide 5

6 Legislative Action ESSB 5414 amended RCW 28A Section (2) For the graduating classes of 2013 and 2014 and for purposes of the certificate of academic achievement under RCW 28A , a student may use: (a) Results from the end-ofcourse assessment for the first year of high school mathematics plus the results from the end-of-course assessment for the second year of high school mathematics; or (b) results from the comprehensive mathematics assessment to demonstrate that a student meets the state standard on the mathematics content area of the high school Washington assessment of student learning. WERA Slide 6

7 In Terms of Standards Algebra 1 Geometry Algebra 2 Integrated Mathematics 1 Algebra EOC Int Math 1 EOC Makeup year 1 Geometry EOC Int Math 1 EOC Not on Makeup Not tested Integrated Mathematics 2 Alegbra EOC Int Math 2 EOC Not on Makeup Geometry EOC Int Math 2 EOC Makeup Year 2 Int Math 2 EOC Not on Makeup Integrated Mathematics 3 Not tested Geometry EOC Not on Makeup Not tested

8 Test & Item Specifications For each course that has an EOC exam: Algebra 1 Geometry Integrated Mathematics 1 Integrated Mathematics 2 WERA Slide 8

9 Test & Item Specifications EOC Exams and Makeup Exams 37 Items used to determine scale score 29 Multiple-Choice (1 point each) 5 Completion (1 point each) 3 Short-Answer (2 points each) Additional Items on EOC Exams 6 Items assessing Course-Specific Content Multiple-Choice and Completion No Short-Answer WERA Slide 9

10 EOC Updates EOC Exams Graph paper Trig tables Calculators Test Administration Timing WERA Slide 10

11 EOC Updates Graph paper printed in test booklets For scratch paper only, not scored Items that require graph as part of a student s score will have a grid provided in the item Trigonometry table Separate resource Must be collected and shredded WERA Slide 11

12 EOC Updates - Calculator Policy Students need access to the following calculator functions: Exponents Square root Cube root (for all EOC exams) Trigonometric functions (Year 2) Scientific calculators are sufficient! Graphing calculators: CAS models are not allowed Non-CAS models are allowed if: Proctor clears calculator memory before and after each test session Proctor invokes Press-To-Test mode before testing and removes calculator from this mode after testing WERA Slide 12

13 EOC Updates - Timing End-of-Course Exams are intended to be administered to intact classrooms over three days. OSPI s recommendations on administering the EOCs are as follows: The EOCs should be given to intact classrooms over three days (30 minutes for directions/distributing materials, 120 minutes of testing time). Students are expected to finish within 120 minutes of testing time. WERA Slide 13

14 2011 Lessons Learned Based on Rangefinding, Scoring and Data Review Pilot Items on 2010 HSPE Aligned to new WA State Mathematics Standards Items were tested to see how they perform Not used to determine a student s score

15 2011 Lessons Learned Multiple-Choice Items Answer every item. There is no penalty for guessing! Completion Items Erase completely answer students want to change. When a scorer cannot read a student s answer because numbers are written over the top of other numbers, the student is not given credit. Short-Answer Items Cross off any work students do not want scored.

16 2011 Lessons Learned Rounding, Truncating and Approximating Do not round values given in the item Do not round or truncate intermediate calculations Variables Define variables using both attributes and units, when appropriate WERA Slide 16

17 2011 Lessons Learned Mathematical Language Use comparative language when asked to compare Use statistical language to describe data Use if and then when writing the inverse, converse or contrapositive When writing the inverse or contrapositive, be careful when writing equivalent not statements Avoid using acronyms that may not be known by the scorer WERA Slide 17

18 End-of-Course Resources Website and Webinar: CourseExams.aspx Topics Updates for 2011 EOC Crosswalks Test and Item Specifications EOC Sample Item Booklet Moodle

19 Updates for 2011 Three documents: Grades 3-5, 6-8, and EOC Information about EOC Exams Manipulatives and Tools Allowed Sample items for each course Released items alignment to standards Common Core State Standards Initiative

20 Updates for 2011 Highlights: Information about EOC Exams Sample items Item types (Completion is new to 2011 operational) New samples for 2011 Proofs Samples from 2010 Released items alignment table

21 End-of-Course Crosswalks at the bottom of the page For each course that has an EOC exam: Algebra 1 Geometry Integrated Mathematics 1 Integrated Mathematics 2

22 EOC Sample Item Booklet mpleitembookletandanswerkey.pdf Currently also in the What s New box

23 Moodle for EOC Supports Mathematics End-of-Course Supports OSPI-hosted Moodle site for teacher-created materials Share materials Collaborate with other teachers Give and receive feedback

25 Upcoming Events in 2011 February-March: Item Writing February 16-17: EOC Math Alignment Study February-April: EOC Performance Level Descriptor (PLD) Training and Contrasting Groups Study (CGS) May: Operational Rangefinding July: Pilot Rangefinding August 2-5: EOC Standard Setting August 15-19: Content Review September: Data Review

26 Item Writing Purpose: Gain more thorough knowledge of the standards Learn how to write an item that measures a performance expectation benchmark tests, unit tests, common assessments, etc. Who: Educators new to and experienced at state-level item writing

27 Item Writing Where: Olympia, Washington When: Grades 3-8: February 8-10, 2011 EOC: March 1-3, 2011 How: Apply online at

28 PLD Training and Contrasting Groups Study for EOC Purpose: Inform the standard setting process for the new EOC exams Who: Teachers who currently teach one or more courses that has an EOC Exam When: February 1 - April 29, 2011 How:

29 Standard Setting for EOC Purpose: Set the performance standard for the new end-of-course exams Who: Educators who teach or have taught EOC course Where: TBD When: August 2-5, 2011

30 Graduation Requirements- Class of 2013 and beyond At the request of the Legislature, the State Board of Education (SBE) amended the graduation requirements rule to add a third credit of math and to prescribe the content of those credits. The rule was adopted in July 2008 and is in effect for the graduating Class of WAC new revision The SBE recently adopted newly revised language for this rule during their September 2010 board meeting. WERA Slide 30

31 Graduation Requirements The three mathematics credits required under this section must include the following mathematics courses: Algebra 1/Integrated Mathematics 1 Geometry/Integrated Mathematics 2 Algebra 2/Integrated Mathematics 3 OR a third mathematics credit elected per the student s educational and career goals as expressed in the High School and Beyond Plan CTE-equivalent courses may be used for any of the math credits.

32 Graduation Requirements The State Board of Education made changes to the math rule at their September 2010 meeting to: Permit students to take two required math courses at the same time (e.g., Algebra 1 and Geometry) Clarify the expected sequence of classes Permit students not to take a required course as long as they earn three math credits in high school AND take Algebra II/Integrated Mathematics 3

33 Math Systems Improvement Framework Website: ment.aspx Goal: Provide clarity and vision for school districts to improve mathematics teaching and learning as well as a state-wide alignment of focused mathematics improvement efforts. WERA Slide 33

35 Mathematics Systems Improvement Framework State-wide coordination of improvement efforts & support OSPI ESDs School Districts Guidance to districts in implementing a coherent K-12 mathematics system Piloted within OSPI- District and School Improvement

36 Fundamental Principles Ensure. High expectations and access to relevant, meaningful mathematics instruction and learning for every student every day. Timely, accurate monitoring of student learning and adjustment of teacher instruction for improved student learning. The PRIME Leadership Framework, National Council of Supervisors of Mathematics (2008)

37 Mathematics Systems Improvement Framework -Components 1. Mathematics Leadership 2. Core Mathematics Program 3. High Quality Mathematics Instruction 4. Mathematics Assessment System 5. Mathematics Intervention System

38 High performing, high poverty schools leave nothing about teaching and learning to chance. Education Trust, 2009

39 OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION The Common Core State Standards Initiative - Background Beginning in the spring of 2009, Governors and state commissioners of education from 48 states, 2 territories and the District of Columbia committed to developing a common core of state K-12 English-language arts (ELA) and mathematics standards. Website: 41

40 Common Core State Standards- Design Building on the strength of current state standards, the CCSS are designed to be: Focused, coherent, clear and rigorous Internationally benchmarked Anchored in college and career readiness* Evidence and research based *Ready for first-year credit-bearing, postsecondary coursework in mathematics and English without the need for remediation.

41 Washington Context Involvement since November 2009 Review and input on drafts of English language arts and mathematics standards 2010 legislation (E2SSB 6696, Section 601) provides for: Provisional adoption by the Superintendent by Aug. 2, 2010 Detailed report due to Legislature in Jan To include: detailed comparison, timeline and costs, recommendations for possible additions Formal adoption and implementation will begin following 2011 session unless otherwise directed by the Legislature

42 Washington Context for Considering, cont. WA participation in SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium

43 Overview of the SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium Website:

44 A 31-State Consortium 17 Governing States 14 Advisory States CT, HI, ID, KS, ME, MI, MO, MT, NC, NM, NV, OR, UT, VT, WA, WI, WV Total Number of States = 31 Fiscal Agent: Washington State AL, CO, DE, GA, IA, KY, ND, NH, NJ, OH, OK, PA, SC, SD

45 The Purpose of the Consortium To develop a set of comprehensive and innovative assessments for grades 3-8 and high school in English language arts and mathematics aligned to the Common Core State Standards. The assessments shall be operational across Consortium states in the school year. Note: States must have formally adopted the Common Core State Standards by January 2012 in order to remain in the Consortium.

46 System Highlights: Summative assessments using online computer adaptive technologies Optional interim / benchmark and formative assessments Online, tailored reporting system Multi-state consortium benefits and efficiencies

47 Draft Implementation Timeline Summer 2010 to the School Year Summer 2010 Summer 2011 School Year School Year School Year School Year Phase 1 Adopt, Align & Plan 1. Provisional adoption (ESSS 6696) 2. Gather input on strategy for implementation Phase 2 Communicate, Develop Process, Resources for Transition &Implementation Phase 3 Transition to Common Core Standards This is the time to consider and plan for transitioning, while continuing to implement our current standards. It is not the time to stop strong, standards-based instruction 49 Phase 4 Implementation 1. Spring 2014 pilot the assessment system 2. September 2014-June 2015 full implementation with state-wide assessment system.

48 Adoption Implementation State Superintendent has authority to adopt States must adopt 100% of the common core standards and may consider adding 15%, if necessary Once adopted, implementation would be phased in over several school years; assessment of the common core would follow in school year Time and resources would be needed to support statewide implementation

49 The promise of standards These Standards are not intended to be new names for old ways of doing business. They are a call to take the next step. It is time for states to work together to build on lessons learned from two decades of standards based reforms. It is time to recognize that standards are not just promises to our children, but promises we intend to keep.

50 Questions?

51 Contact Information Patty Stephens Assessment Specialist: High School / End-of-Course (360) patty.stephens@k12.wa.us Greta Bornemann Mathematics Director: Teaching & Learning (360) greta.bornemann@k12.wa.us

FY year and 3-year Cohort Default Rates by State and Level and Control of Institution

FY year and 3-year Cohort Default Rates by State and Level and Control of Institution Student Aid Policy Analysis FY2007 2-year and 3-year Cohort Default Rates by State and Level and Control of Institution Mark Kantrowitz Publisher of FinAid.org and FastWeb.com January 5, 2010 EXECUTIVE