STATE BOARD OF

EDUCATION
Tuesday
January 6, 2015

ASSESSMENT SYSTEM AND

ACCOUNTABILITY
WORKSHOP

5:00 8:00 pm
Outlook at the
Duncan Center
Dover, DE

WELCOME
Opening remarks
Starter polls and questions

FIVE MAIN POINTS AND ESSENTIAL

QUESTIONS TO TAKE AWAY FROM TONIGHTS
WORKSHOP
Assessment:
What are the key components of the State assessment system
Name four differences in the Smarter Summative compared to DCAS
Develop a deeper understanding of what is meant by the Assessment
Suite
How are districts and schools utilizing theses assessments to improve
instruction?

Accountability
How will the new Accountability system differ from the existing
system?
How can you be involved in the development of the ESEA Flexibility
Renewal application?
What is the difference between the Accountability system and the
ESEA Flexibility Application?

DELAWARE STATE
ASSESSMENT SYSTEM

DeSSA

Delaware
System of
Student
Assessments
Smarter
ELA/Literacy
DCAS Science
DCAS
Social Studies
PSAT
SAT
End of Course
US History
ACCESS (ELL)

DCAS-Alt1
Smarter
Mathematics

Grade 9/10
Option
Smarter Interim
Assessment Blocks

NAEP
End of Course
Alg II and IM III

Smarter Digital
Library

Smarter Interim Comp

Assessments
5

NEW SMARTER ASSESSMENTS:

MEASURING WHERE STUDENTS ARE ON THEIR PATH TO
SUCCESS

Replace existing tests and are an improvement

Provide an academic checkup by measuring real -world skills

like critical thinking and problem solving
Provide information during the year to give teachers and
parents a better picture of where students are succeeding
and where they need help

A BALANCED ASSESSMENT SYSTEM

SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENTS FOR

ACCOUNTABILIT Y

SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENT
(COMPUTER ADAPTIVE)
Administered within the last 12 weeks (grades 3 8) and 7
weeks (grade 11) of the instructional year
Includes a variety of question types

Selected response
Short constructed response
Extended constructed response
Technology enhanced

A small number of items will require hand-scoring by

professionally trained scorers

SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENT
(COMPUTER ADAPTIVE)
Assesses the full range of Common Core in ELA/Literacy and
mathematics for students in grades 38 and 11

Measures current student achievement and growth across

time, showing progress toward college and career readiness

10

SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENT
(PERFORMANCE TASK)
A Performance Task (PT) is made up of a Classroom Activity
and an individually administered, computer -generated task
The Classroom Activity takes place before the student
engages in the performance task, is not scored, and does
not have special technology requirements
The Classroom Activity is a teacher -led group activity
designed to provide needed context for a particular PT topic

11

SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENT
(PERFORMANCE TASK)
Each student will complete one PT in each content area
There are multiple performance tasks associated with a
particular Classroom Activity and PT topic
PT items require hand -scoringfor summative by
professionally trained scorers

12

SUMMARY OF STATE ASSESSMENT TIME

Total Assessment Time per grade level
TOTAL
TIME

CURRENT
w/ DCAS
PROPOSED
with
SMARTER

10

11

12

12

10.5

10.5

12

13

8.5

0*

7.5

8.5

9.5

13

0*

* NAEP Not given every year and full duration of test not given to any one student, students take different portions of test in designated years in designated
th
th
th
subjects. Included in total for 4 & 8 , 12 grade is a very small sample 240 total in state for 2015
** DCAS Alt-1 students who take DCAS Alt-1 do not also take SMARTER, thus this time is not in addition to SMARTER, but is instead of it
*** ACCESS Language is only taken by ELL students Not included in total, since not all student take it
**** EOC Algebra 2/ IM III is no longer required after the switch to Smarter, it remains an option for LEAs if they choose
th
th
# 9 and 10 grade assessments are optional for LEAs

SMARTER
ACCESSIBILITY

SMARTER ASSESSMENTS
provide more accommodations/supports than any one state
could develop individually
are some of the most accessible tests available
American Sign Language (ASL) (video)
Refreshable Braille
Text to Speech (TTS)
Various language glossaries available
External devices/software
Supports available to general education students

15

UNIVERSAL TOOLS, DESIGNATED

SUPPORTS, AND ACCOMMODATIONS

16

SMARTER FIELD TEST FEEDBACK

Site visits were conducted by 14 DDOE staff during the field test
sessions and included:
Observation (26 visits)
Discussions with building/district administrators, test
coordinators, teachers, and students
Follow -up:
Debrief sessions at DDOE
Share out of information with districts, assessment department, and
Smarter Balanced

An announcement at the monthly Teaching and Learning Cadre

meeting was made requesting feedback
Smarter Balanced Help Desk reports were also considered in the
DDOE feedback gathering and review process.

17

POSITIVES DURING FIELD TEST

Print on demand worked well
Classroom activity/PT process
Students were very diligent
Liked the online dictionary, notepad, and the classroom
activity
Teachers stated Performance Tasks created a better testing
situation
Some students felt the test was better than a multiple choice
test it was a better test of what they knew

18

SUGGESTIONS/COMMENTS ABOUT FIELD

TEST
Need practice with listening portions develop additional tools
for field
Training should require taking the practice test
Hold meetings with test coordinators, especially this first
operational year
Stress importance of preparing prior to session time, training,
reading the Test Administration Manual (TAM), and ensuring
accommodations are addressed in preparation
Share technology concerns with Smarter hard stops, initial
set-up, streamlining TAM, clarifying directions for PT
Develop/share practice activities
Many students reported the test was much harder than DCAS
19

ALGORITHM AND
FLEXIBLE ITEM POOL

FLEXIBLE ITEM POOL

DESIGN PRINCIPLES
The item selection algorithm will be designed to administer
out-of-grade-level items
All tests will adhere to on -grade blueprint content
requirements
Testing out of grade level will not increase test length.

21

CONDITIONS FOR STUDENTS RECEIVING

ITEMS FROM ADJACENT GRADE LEVELS

On-grade content
criteria minimum
met

Performance is
clearly in Level 4
or Level 1

Off grade level item

better meets
measurement and
content
requirements than
on-grade items

22

FINAL SCORES AND

ACHIEVEMENT CATEGORIES
The final score is based on responses to items from both the
PT and CAT components
All PTs are delivered on grade level
Smarter Balanced will report final overall scores, achievement
levels, and claim information from the whole test.
Score reports will display student performance relative to
enrolled grade; there will not be of f-grade score reports.

26

PREPARING FOR NEW TEST SCORES

Smar ter Balanced assessments measure the full range of the
Common Core State Standards. They are designed to let teachers and
parents know whether students are on t rack to be college - and
career-ready by the time they graduate.
Because the new standards set higher ex pectations for students --and
the new tests are designed to assess student per formance against
these higher expectations --our definition of grade level per formance
is higher than it used to be.
As a result, it means that fewer students will m eet g rade level
standards, especially for the fir st few year s. Results should improve
as students have additional year s of instruction aligned to the new
standards and become better equipped to meet the challenges they
present.
This does not mean that our students are doing wor se than they did
last year. Rather, the scores represent a new baseline that provides
a more accurate indicator for educators, students, and parents as
they work to meet the rigorous demands of college and career
readiness.
27

LEARN MORE ABOUT ACHIEVEMENT

LEVEL SETTING
Video explanation of process
https://www.youtube.com/watc h? v=bW_ yGf4BB1E

Interpretation and Use of Scores

h t t p: / / w w w.sma r te rbalanc ed. org /wordpress/w p c o n te n t/uploads/2014/11/Interpret a t ion - and - Use - of- Sc ores. pdf

Easy to follow flow char t

h t t p : / / w w w.sma r te rbalanc ed. org /wordpress/w p c o n te n t /uploads/2 014/09 /Smar te r - B alanc ed - Ac hievement - Level - Set t ing Ove r view -. pdf

Q&A Document
http://www.smar terbalanced.org/wordpress/wp content/upl oads/2014/11/Smar ter -Balanced - Ac hievement -Level s-QA .pdf

www.DelExcels.org
28

NEW SMARTER ASSESSMENTS:

MEASURING WHERE STUDENTS ARE ON THEIR PATH TO
SUCCESS
Replace existing tests and are an improvement
Provide an academic checkup by measuring real -world skills
like critical thinking and problem solving
Provide information during the year to give teachers and
parents a better picture of where students are succeeding and
where they need help

29

A BALANCED ASSESSMENT SYSTEM

30

DIGITAL LIBRARY
FORMATIVE
ASSESSMENT TOOLS
AND PROFESSIONAL
RESOURCES

DIGITAL LIBRARY RESOURCES

Assessment
Literacy Modules

Exemplar
Instructional
Modules

Education
Resources

Commissioned Professional Learning Modules

Resources for educators, students and families
Frame Formative Assessment within a Balanced Assessment System
Articulate the Formative Assessment Process
Highlight Formative Assessment Practices and Tools
Commissioned Professional Learning Modules
Instructional coaching for educators
Instructional materials for students
Demonstrate/support effective implementation of the formative
assessment process
Focus on key content and practice from the Common Core State
Standards for Mathematics and English Language Arts

High-quality vetted instructional resources and tools for educators

High-quality vetted resources and tools for students and families
Reflect and support the formative assessment process
Reflect and support the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics
and English Language Arts
Create Professional Learning Communities

32

SUPPORTS FOR FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT

PRACTICES
Digital Library
State Network Educators
State Leadership Team

Additional Formative Assessment Supports

Common Ground 2.0
Literacy and Math Cadre
Literacy and Math Coalition

33

INTERIM
ASSESSMENTS

34

INTERIM ASSESSMENT COMPONENTS

35

THREE PHASE APPROACH

P HASE I P RE -H AND S CORING (D ECEMBER )
Focuses on developing background knowledge and preparing for the
administration of the Smarter Interim Assessments to be released
in January

P HASE II H AND -S CORING T RAINING (J ANUARY )

Focuses on the hand-scoring process to promote integrity, validity,
and reliability of scoring and alignment with summative scoring

P HASE III P OST -H AND S CORING (J ANUARY S UMMER )

Focuses on the entry, interpretation, and usage of scores while
planning forward to enhance the process.

36

Brian Touchette
Office of Assessment
Brian.Touchette@doe.k12.de.us
(302) 735-4090
Renee Parsley
Curriculum, Instruction, and Professional Development
Renee.Parsley@doe.k12.de.us
(302) 735-4180
Carolyn Lazar
Office of Assessment
Carolyn.Lazar@doe.k12.de.us
(302) 735-4090
E-mail any additional questions or comments
37

DISTRICT AND SCHOOL

IMPLEMENTATION

Interim and
Formative
Assessment

ASSESSMENT
Audience Q&A
Break/Transition

DEVELOPMENT OF A
NEW STATE
ACCOUNTABILITY
SYSTEM

Assessment
System and
Accountability
Workshop
Tuesday,
January 6,
2015
Outlook at the
Duncan Center
Dover, DE

Standards and
Assessments

High
Performing
Schools

Educators as
Catalysts

21st
Century
Skills

High Standards and Rigorous Expectations for Students, Teachers, and Leaders

Communication of initiatives and goals

Collaboration between Board, Community Stakeholders, Educators, Parents, and
Students

State Board of Education Strategic Framework

41

High Performing Schools

Building models for systemic and sustainable reform
SBE STRATEGY
RATIONALE
High performing schools reflect a
microcosm of an integrated system that
works high student achievement
underpinned by great teachers and
leaders working collaboratively to deliver
rigorous and diverse curriculum, high
quality instruction, relevant experiences,
strong accountability for student outcomes
and overall well being.

Develop and Implement an

Accountability system of
growth and achievement that
is fair and consistent for all
public schools

Strengthen authorizing
process to result in more
high performing charter
schools

Highlight the best practices

and support their replication
across schools/districts

Outreach more with schools,

learning environments, and
stakeholders

EXPECTED OUTCOMES
More high performing public schools
available to all Delaware students
Improvements in student learning and
proficiency
Narrowing of achievement gaps
Increase graduation rate and decrease
high school drop outs

High
Performing
Schools

ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM:
WHAT IS IT?
A school accountability system is
Process to help all education stakeholders parents, teachers,
administrators, policymakers, and the public understand the
performance of a school
Includes multiple measures and tools to measure multiple
facets of school performance

Way to help all schools improve their own levels of

performance
Applied at all levels school, district and state
Transparent and actionable

ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM
To provide a stronger system to communicate school
performance beyond the current single measure of Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP)
We wanted the public to help drive the next accountability
system, so that it would be meaningful for all stakeholders
DOE created a survey in multiple languages
Established an email address to collect all public comments and held town
halls throughout the state

We wanted the process to gather input and develop the system

to be transparent
Want the resulting Framework model to be based on multiple
measures, be easily understood and interpreted, provide
useful information, and be a fair representation of overall
school performance

ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM:
OVERVIEW OF PART A
Process
Aligned to the baseline expectations of a state accountability system
Performance areas set by the DDOE to align with ESEA guidance
Measures developed by the Accountability Framework W orking Group
Comprised of district representatives such as Superintendents, district
administrators, school administrators, charter school leaders and the State
Board of Education

Work began in June and will continue through early 2015

Performance Areas
1. Academic Achievement
2. College and Career Readiness
3. Chronic Absenteeism
4. On-Track to Graduation

ACCOUNTABILITY
FRAMEWORK WORKING
GROUP

AFWG

AFWG MEMBERSHIP

Theodore Boyer
Heath Chasanov, Woodbridge
Sharon Digirolamo, PolyTech
Ed Emmett, Positive Outcomes Charter School
Kevin Fitzgerald, Caesar Rodney
Ken Hutchins, Capital
Jason Conway, Lake Forest
Donna Johnson, SBE
Joe Jones, NCCV T
Jeff Klein, Appoquinimick
Sally Maldonado, Kuumba Academy
Gerri Marshall, RCCSD
Jay Owens, Indian River
David Ring, Delmar

WORK OF THE AFWG

Finalize components and methodology for measures in Part A
Assist with development of Community Planning Process for
development of Part B
Assist with development of Community Survey
Develop methodology for measures in Part B
Develop overall metrics and rating methodology for school
accountability

Assist with methodology for accountability system components in

ESEA Flexibility renewal

COMMUNITY PLANNING PROCESS:

OVERVIEW OF PART B
Sought community feedback through a statewide
accountability survey through December 31 st
Potential measures:

Industry recognized credentials

School climate surveys
Student literacy
Staff attendance
Closing the achievement gap

FEEDBACK FROM TOWN HALLS

Town Halls were held in each county:

November
November
November
November

5, Wilmington
12, Dover
13, Middletown
19, Georgetown

Common themes:
Simplicity of data
Clear consequences for lack of performance
Ability for school to tell its story

SURVEY RESPONDENT RESULTS AS OF

JANUARY 5, 2015

COMMUNITY PLANNING PROCESS:

OVERVIEW OF SURVEY
Accountability Framework Working Group will
analyze the data this month and make
recommendations to the Secretary
Survey respondent results by county as of January
5, 2015:
New Castle = 65.6% (Statewide = 59.4%)
Kent = 17.4% (18.3%)
Sussex = 17.0% (22.3%)
Public release of results in February to share the
results with the community

ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM: SCHOOL

REPORT CARDS
The goal is to create a user -friendly, accessible school
report card
Not all metrics included on a report card are included in the
classification calculation
Additional metrics are reported to provide context for school
performance
State asked the public to tell us what they want reported

STATE ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM

TIMELINE
January February (2015)
Survey data analysis conducted

February (2015)
Public release of survey results
January April (2015)
Final metrics developed by AFWG with DDOE

Spring/Summer(2015):
Online school report card platform is developed and tested
Early Fall (2015):
Online report card portal available

ADDITIONAL STATE ACCOUNTABILITY

SYSTEM INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE

http://www.doe.k12.de.us/domain/234

55

ESEA FLEXIBILITY RENEWAL

APPLICATION

Ryan Reyna,
DDOE
Director of
Accountability

ESEA FLEXIBILITY PRINCIPLES

1. College- and career-ready expectations for all
students
2. Differentiated recognition, accountability and
support systems for schools and districts
3. Supporting effective instruction and leadership
4. Reducing duplication and unnecessary burden

ESEA FLEXIBILITY HISTORICAL OVERVIEW

DDOE approved for ESEA Flexibility May 2012
Amendments to align RTTT/ESEA routines and targets in Oct 2012
For SY 2012-13 and SY 2013-14

USED Monitoring of DDOE (Fall 2012 and Aug 2013)

Part B Monitoring Report received November 2013
Process and protocol for Focus Schools
How LEAs addressed other Title I Schools that were missing state AMOs

ESEA Flexibility extension approved by USED July 2014

Amendments to address issues in monitoring report, Smarter Balanced assessments, Priority
Schools and LEA performance reviews
For SY 2014-15

ESEA Flexibility renewal guidance released by USED November 2014

FAQ released by USED December 2014
Applications due by March 31, 2015
Renewal for 3 years through SY 2017-18

ESEA FLEXIBILITY RENEWAL

REQUIREMENTS
Amend current plans
Describe continuous improvement process across all
principles
Demonstrate continued commitment to
implementing principles

Describe public engagement efforts

Important Note: If the Extension is not approved, then DDOE will
be required to implement full NCLB requirements in SY 2015 -16

ESEA FLEXIBILITY RENEWAL PUBLIC

ENGAGEMENT

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
To access ESEA Flexibility renewal materials visit:
http://www.doe.k12.de.us/Page/1942
To submit public comments:
DOEAccountability@state.k12.de.us

Public comments will be accepted through 3/13/15

LOCAL POLICY LEVERS AND KEY QUESTIONS

TO ASK AS WE MOVE FORWARD
What changes are being made to your school calendar?
Professional development schedule? Or wraparound support
services to align with the new assessments?
Have you had recent presentations from your assessment and curriculum
coordinators about the ongoing work with respect to formative and
interim assessments?

What additional flexibilities may be afforded schools and

districts through the ESEA Flexibility?

How will you communicate the changes in assessment as well as

the changes in accountability to parents and your neighboring
community?
What local policy changes need to be considered now? What
changes should be considered within the next 6 months?

AUDIENCE Q & A

CLOSING COMMENTS AND SUMMARY

ACTIVIT Y

Delaware State Board of Education

Dr. Teri Quinn Gray,

VISION:
All Delaware students are prepared to lead full and productive
lives in the 21st century global society

President

Mr. Jorge L.
Melendez,
Vice President

Mr. Gregory B.
Coverdale, Jr.
Mr. G. Patrick
Heffernan
Mr. Randall L.
Hughes II
Mrs. Barbara B.
Rutt
Dr. Terry M.
Whittaker

Mission:
In collaboration with community and stakeholders, the
Delaware State Board of Education serves as the primary voice
for Delaware citizens on education policy to create a world
class education system for every student.
Guiding Principles
1) Further our thriving democratic society with opportunities for an
excellent and equitable education for all students.
2) Enrich education policymaking with the inclusion of diverse
perspectives that represent the breadth and depth of Delawares
citizens.
3) Utilize research-based viewpoints to inform decisions in the best
interest of all students.
4) Advocate for the development of the whole child through learning,
teaching, and community engagement.

~DRAFT~
65

THANK YOU
You will find all slides and resources posted on the State
Board website:
www.destateboarded.k12.de.us under the Meetings Tab,
select Workshops, and the Date of the Workshop
If you have additional questions or comments please contact
the State Board of Education at
Donna.johnson@doe.k12.de.us
302-735-4010