Maryland Judgment Interest Calculator by gea13046

VIEWS: 57 PAGES: 12

More Info
									 Common Standards
       and
Common Assessments



 American Diploma Project Network Annual Meeting:
                                  September 2009
   ADP Assessment Consortium
 In summer 2006, nine states issued RFP for the
 development of an Algebra II EOC Exam:


• Arkansas, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland,
  Massachusetts, New Jersey, Ohio,
  Pennsylvania, Rhode Island

• Ohio acted as “lead state” in
  unprecedented multi-state procurement
  arrangement

• Pearson awarded contract in 2007 with
  addition of Algebra I in 2008
                                             More states are expressing
                                            interest in the exam and
• Since the consortium began, six
                                            joining the consortium…
  additional states have joined: Arizona,
  Florida, Hawaii, Minnesota, North
  Carolina, and Washington.

  AMERICAN DIPLOMA PROJECT NETWORK
   2                                                                      2
 The Creation of the ADP Exams

     State-led initiative—led by K-12 chiefs and Governors seeking a
      common measure at the upper end of high school
     States worked together to agree on test content and design
      specifications based on ADP benchmarks, state standards
          Mix of item types (30% of points from extended response items)
          Mix of calculator/non-calculator
          Core test with modules to extend content, allow variation
          Common cut scores
     Achieve: convening, quality control, leadership on standard setting,
      reporting cross-state results
     Pearson: test development and administration, critical research,
      innovative standard setting design3
AMERICAN DIPLOMA PROJECT NETWORK
 3                                                                           3
    Multiple purposes


       Improve curriculum and instruction and
        ensure consistency of content and rigor
       Enable states to compare results (and pool
        resources) across and within states
       Indicate readiness for college credit bearing
        mathematics
           All design and development activities involved two-
            and four-year post-secondary mathematics faculty
            and high school teachers



AMERICAN DIPLOMA PROJECT NETWORK                                  4
  State Uses of the Algebra II Exam

        Most states are still in the process of developing
         and adopting policies for use of exam
         Some states require students completing
          Algebra II course to take the exam
            Arkansas
            Hawaii
            Indiana
        No state is using the exam as high stakes
         graduation test
        Many states are hoping exam will be used by
         postsecondary faculty as an indicator of
         readiness for credit bearing mathematics

AMERICAN DIPLOMA PROJECT NETWORK
 5                             5                              5
    Example of College Ready HS Exam:
    CSU Early Assessment Program


       Augments 11th grade standards based
        Algebra II exam with additional items to
        ensure alignment with CSU readiness
        standards
       Students who score ―ready‖ are exempt
        from taking placement exam as freshman if
        they enroll in CSU institution
       Students with lower scores
          Receive additional assistance in senior
           year
          Take required placement exam as
           freshman
AMERICAN DIPLOMA PROJECT NETWORK
 6                                                   6
    Unique approach to setting cut scores


     Purpose: To set common performance levels
        based on evidence
     Three types of validity studies:
         Concurrent studies—how does student
          performance on the Algebra II exam compare
          with other exams given in the high school to
          college transition?
         Cross-sectional studies—what is the
          relationship between college students’
          performance on the exam and their course
          grades?
         Judgment studies—what kind of performance
          on the exam do college faculty expect?
        Content alignment studies (international and
         state comparisons)

AMERICAN DIPLOMA PROJECT NETWORK
 7                                                       7
  Benefits of a Consortium

        Quality
        Efficiency /Cost Sharing
        Interstate and Intrastate Comparison
        Possibility of common tools/supports




AMERICAN DIPLOMA PROJECT NETWORK
 8                             8                8
    Challenges


       Agreement on content and design
       State differences:
           Testing windows, Testing modes, Test
            security, Test guidelines, Calculator policy
            for mathematics, Accommodations, Special
            forms required by law (Braille, large print,
            Spanish, etc.), Legal requirements
            (Procurement), etc
       Meeting the various policy
        goals/multiple purposes
       Gaining credibility with higher ed
AMERICAN DIPLOMA PROJECT NETWORK                           9
    Lessons learned


       Common need not mean ―lowest
        common denominator‖
       Opportunity for innovation – but
        tension about how far to stretch
       Compromise is critical
       Purpose of the exam is important to
        design/implementation
       Leadership/political will/clear policy
        goals are key

AMERICAN DIPLOMA PROJECT NETWORK                 10
    Considerations – moving forward


       Purposes need to drive test design
       Balance between summative and
        interim assessments
       Anchored in college and career
        readiness
       Opportunity for Innovation
       International benchmarking
       Assessment as part of broader
        system of instructional tools/supports
       Ownership & Governance
AMERICAN DIPLOMA PROJECT NETWORK                 11
 Common Standards
       and
Common Assessments



 American Diploma Project Network Annual Meeting:
                                  September 2009

								
To top