Testimony House Education Committee History

Transcription

1 Testimony House Education Committee Matt Stem, Deputy Secretary David Volkman, Ed.D., Executive Deputy Secretary Richard Maraschiello, Ph.D., Consultant July 29, 2015 Chairman Saylor, Chairman Roebuck, and members of the House Education Committee, my name is Matt Stem and I am the Deputy Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education at the Pennsylvania Department of Education (PDE). I am also joined by David Volkman, Ed.D., Executive Deputy Secretary, and Rich Maraschiello, Ph.D., PDE s resident expert on assessment issues. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to submit comments regarding state assessments. Secretary Rivera sends his regards and apologies for not being able to be here. History Our topic today is an important one and one that has resulted in significant practical and political impacts over the past two decades. The broad purpose of assessment is to document student mastery of skills and content and to use assessment outcomes to inform ongoing instruction. Assessments take varied forms some measure point in time skills and competencies, while others highlight ongoing progress. Assessments are designed for specific purposes, and each must be designed, implemented, and evaluated with careful consideration for the purpose of the test and the goal to be achieved. Standardized assessments refer to the same test being given to a particular group of students which is then be scored and analyzed the same way. PSSAs are standardized tests, as are the SAT and ACT. Standardized tests allow for comparisons across students, schools, and school districts. A high stakes test refers to an assessment, usually standardized, where the result is tied to an important consequence, such as qualification for a diploma. We have all experienced the alignment of standards and assessment. For example, when my son was preparing to get his driver s license, he was given a booklet which included the standards he had to meet, that is the things he needed to know and be able to do. His driver s education course used curriculum aligned to those standards. Then he was required to demonstrate mastery, first on the written test at the DMV office and then on the road test with a big and imposing state trooper in the passenger seat. My son failed parallel parking the first time. It didn t do any good to argue to the examiner that parallel parking was not a skill anyone really needed, and in fact, many people don t parallel park much. The skill of parallel parking is included in the standards, the training, and in the assessment. An applicant either demonstrates mastery of the skill and earns his/her credential, or goes home and practices until he or she masters the skill. While testing has always played a role in students classroom experiences, the use of annual standardized tests especially assessments tied to federally-prescribed accountability standards is a fairly new phenomenon. In 2002, President George Bush signed a reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). This included No Child Left Behind (NCLB), which promised accountability, transparency, and equity, especially for the nation s most vulnerable children. 1

2 It was a goal that echoed President Lyndon B. Johnson s intent behind the creation of the original ESEA in As President Johnson noted in signing the landmark ESEA on a spring day in 1965, From our very beginnings as a nation, we have felt a fierce commitment to the ideal of education for everyone. It fixed itself into our democratic creed By passing this bill, we bridge the gap between helplessness and hope for more than 5 million educationally deprived children We reduce the terrible time lag in bringing new teaching techniques into the Nation s classrooms And we rekindle the revolution the revolution of the spirit against the tyranny of ignorance. As a son of a tenant farmer, I know that education is the only valid passport from poverty. While the original ESEA did much to change the landscape and language of elementary and secondary education in this country and here in Pennsylvania in the decades since President Johnson put his signature to the page, significant gaps between rich and poor, minority and white students remained. Educators, families, and community leaders knew the promise of ESEA was not being fulfilled when historically underserved students those experiencing deep poverty, students with disabilities, and children of color were falling through the cracks. Without consistent data, however, these gaps were difficult to quantify and, more importantly, challenging to address meaningfully at local, state, and national levels. In part to address this problem, a hallmark feature of NCLB was the assessment mandated at the state level, through new annual testing requirements in math and reading for students in grades 3 through 8 and 11. Outcomes of the newly mandated standardized tests were linked to the other NCLB requirements, including annual progress in student achievement, publicly-available state report cards, and other accountability measures. In more recent years, experts and stakeholders have come together to evaluate the assessment system developed in the wake of NCLB. In 2015, the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) released a report of recommendations and principles to guide the development, selection, and implementation of assessments. 1 These principles state that assessments should be: 1) high-quality; 2) part of a comprehensive and coherent system of metrics; and 3) timely, transparent, disaggregated, and easily accessible to stakeholders. Pennsylvania s Assessment System Pennsylvania has responded to the call for more frequent and better evaluations of student performance through the development of a statewide assessment framework. As the nation s most inequitable state, Pennsylvania is particularly bound to consider the role assessments play in closing longstanding gaps in student achievement. The Pennsylvania Standards Aligned System (SAS) includes assessment as a key component of a system of student learning. 2 The assessment system is comprised of several components, including the Pennsylvania System of School Assessment (PSSA), the Pennsylvania Alternate System of Assessment (PASA), the Keystone Exams (subject matter, end-of-course), Classroom Diagnostic Tools (CDT) and the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). As described in Chapter 4 of the School Code, Pennsylvania s Assessment System is designed to: 1 Comprehensive Statewide Assessment Systems: A Framework for the Role of the State Education Agency in Improving Quality and Reducing Burden, The Council of Chief State School Officers (Washington, D.C.: 2015), _of_the_state_education_agency_in_improving_quality_and_reducing_burden.html. 2 Please see Appendix A for more information regarding SAS. 2

3 Provide information to students, parents, educators, state policymakers, and the State Board of Education, on how effective schools are in promoting and demonstrating student proficiency of academic standards in conjunction with school performance required by federal law; Determine the degree to which school programs enable students to attain proficiency in academic standards; Provide results to schools and districts based upon the aggregate performance of all students, subgroups, students with an Individualized Education Program (IEP) and English Language Learners; and Assess student proficiency in the Academic Standards for English Language Arts, Mathematics, Science and Technology, Environment and Ecology, and Civics and Government for the purpose of determining, in part, student eligibility for high school graduation. In addition, the assessment system provides the opportunity to compare academic achievement of Pennsylvania students with achievement of students in other states through participation in NAEP. For the purpose of today s conversation, we will focus our remarks on the PSSA tests and the Keystone Exams. Attached to our testimony is a document which provides additional information on the state assessment system. It is important to note that all of Pennsylvania s assessments are driven by the needs of children and are designed to fulfill those diverse needs. Pennsylvania System of School Assessment (PSSA). The PSSA is a standards-based, criterionreferenced assessment which provides students, parents, educators, and members of the general public with an overview of student and school performance related to student proficiency in the Pennsylvania Core Standards. These standards in English Language Arts, Mathematics, and Science and Technology identify what a student should know and be able to do at varying grade levels in those subject areas. Every commonwealth student in grades 3 through 8 is assessed in English Language Arts and Math. Every student in grades 4 and 8 is assessed in science. While third grade may seem early to start assessments, research tells us it is crucial to ensure students have mastered reading by the end of third grade. A report on literacy achievement published in 2012 by the Annie E. Casey Foundation notes, Students who fail to reach this critical milestone often falter in the later grades and drop out before entering high schools. 3 Although PSSAs are an important tool to measure reading skill at this important transition point, we recognize that, as educators, we have to take extra care not to convey adult anxiety about test scores to students. For many younger learners, these assessments are only as stressful as they are portrayed by adults in the classroom. On the one hand, individual student scores, provided only to their respective schools, can be used to help teachers identify students who may need additional educational support. School scores, on the other hand, provide information to schools and districts on how to improve curriculum, instruction, and planning. Earlier this month, the State Board of Education approved cut scores for the new 2015 PSSA tests, with test content fully aligned for the first time with the increased academic rigor of the Pennsylvania Core Standards adopted in Essentially, cut scores are the line of demarcation on the scaled scores that identifies performance levels. For example, the cut score between Basic and Proficient is These cut scores will serve as the baseline for performance levels for future years of the PSSA tests. While levels of performance appear to have dropped from previous years, it is important to note that PSSA test results and the newly adopted cut scores are not comparable to performance levels of previous years. This year s PSSAs are different tests assessing mastery of different content in every 3 Hernandez, Donald, J. Double Jeopardy: How Third Grade Reading Skills and Poverty Influence High School Graduation, The Annie E. Casey Foundation (Baltimore: 2012), 3

4 grade level. This is the first round of assessing the more rigorous content of the PA Core Standards. The standards define what students should know and be able to do so that they will graduate high school ready to succeed in college and career. We expect that these new standards and assessments aligned to more rigorous academic expectations will create an adjustment period for students and educators. The cut scores approved by the State Board of Education reflect this adjustment. While the tests have been reset to meet these new standards, our confidence in our teachers and students remains the same. We should not look at this year s scores and think our student performance has decreased. Our students and teachers haven't changed; the assessment has. Keystone Exams. Keystone Exams are end-of-course assessments in specific content areas, and serve two distinct and important purposes: (1) high school accountability assessments to meet federal and state requirements; and (2) high school graduation requirements for students beginning with the class of Keystone Exams were developed to replace the PSSA in 11 th grade, the only high school assessment required by ESEA. As end of course, subject matter assessments, they were intended to be a better and more pedagogically valid assessment of student mastery of subject matter content at the high school level. Keystone Exams were developed and field tested during 2009 and Pennsylvania educators participated in every stage of development, including identifying the content to be assessed, reviewing and approving each test question, and setting cut scores. Keystone Exams cover three core subject areas: Algebra I, Literature, and Biology. The exams were first administered statewide in the spring of 2011 for the purpose of establishing cut scores. Due to budget constraints, the Keystones were not administered during the school year. In the school year, the Keystone Exams were administered, and they replaced the Grade 11 PSSA for federal accountability purposes. Accountability & Assessment: Continuing the Conversation Accountability and assessment go hand in hand, and both are critical to ensuring that all students have the educational experience they deserve. As the CCSSO noted in its 2015 report, 4 assessments must be timely, transparent, and easily accessible for students, families, teachers, and the general public. When designed and implemented appropriately, assessments can help foster data-informed classrooms and districts where educators and administrators use accurate, timely student performance and progress data to make important decisions. Under federal and state law, scores for PSSAs and Keystone Exams have been linked with teacher evaluations and school performance evaluations. Academic assessments are not primarily designed for these purposes, however, which may result in unintended consequences. In the past few weeks, lawmakers, educators, and activists have gathered in Washington, D.C., to discuss and debate the future of ESEA. At the center of these discussions are the proper role assessments should play in the evaluation of students, teachers, schools and districts and, critically, whether a reimagined, more flexible assessment system could help students reach their highest potential. Here in Pennsylvania, PDE and stakeholders have come together to examine similar issues of the most appropriate way to measure performance. In particular, these experts are working to revise the School Performance Profile (SPP), which currently weights up to 90 percent of building scores from summative assessments like the PSSAs and Keystone Exams. 4 Comprehensive Statewide Assessment Systems, CCSSO (2015). 4

5 We ve left the table wide open for suggestions from experts in the field to determine what other metrics should be included that would provide a more accurate portrait of student and school performance for parents, families, community members, and policymakers. We know firsthand that what gets measured matters but that what matters is often difficult to measure. Recognizing that the metrics we choose to weigh in the SPP and other statewide systems impacts day-to-day decision-making in districts across Pennsylvania, we take seriously the opportunity to get this right. Appropriate assessments hold significant potential to empower educators, administrators, policymakers, and most importantly students in the educational process. But it s not a catch-all solution, or something that can be transformed overnight. We welcome the opportunity to engage in critical dialogue such as today s hearing, and to continue the conversation with those in the field and in our communities to ensure that we are measuring more of what matters in a way that doesn t detract from authentic, quality learning experiences every day. Thank you for your attention, and we will be happy to address any questions you may have. 5

6 Appendix A: Pennsylvania Standards Aligned System (SAS) Standards Safe & Supportive Schools Assessment Student Success Materials & Resources Curriculum Framework Instruction Standards Pennsylvania s academic standards define what students should know and be able to do as a result of instruction. Assessment Curriculum Framework Instruction Materials & Resources Safe & Supportive Schools Assessment offers tools and resources to support the process of assessing, evaluating, and documenting student learning in order to improve professional practice and increase student achievement. Drawn from the academic standards, the Curriculum Framework is a set of teaching topics by subject and grade level, further defined via Big Ideas, Concepts, Competencies, Essential Questions, and Vocabulary. Pennsylvania has adopted Charlotte Danielson s Framework for Teaching as the overarching vision for instruction in the commonwealth. The model focuses on the complex activity of teaching by defining four domains: 1) Planning and preparation, 2) Classroom environment, 3) Instruction, and 4) Professional responsibilities. Materials and Resources support standards aligned instruction and include Voluntary Model Curriculum, learning progressions 5, units, lesson plans, and multimedia content examples for use in planning and delivering instruction. Safe and supportive schools supplies resources and exemplars to promote active student engagement in a safe and positive learning environment. Areas within the element include: 1) Engagement, 2) Safety, and 3) Environment. 5 Learning progressions span grades K-12 and include what students should know and be able to do as a result of successfully moving through grades K-8 and by taking specific courses in grades