Colorado Springs School District 11 ASSESSMENT PLAN. Colorado Springs School District North El Paso Street Colorado Springs, Colorado 80903

Transcription

1 Colorado Springs School District 11 ASSESSMENT PLAN Colorado Springs School District North El Paso Street Colorado Springs, Colorado 80903

2 With the introduction of the Colorado Academic standards in math, science, reading and writing, as well as the adoption of standards for non-core subjects, it seems prudent to look at the overall system for assessments in the district. This includes state summative, benchmark, common, and formative assessments. This document outlines the work that needs to be done in schools to support a comprehensive assessment plan, building on actual needs rather than the current compliance-driven assessment system. This document includes sections on state mandated, benchmark assessments, and progress monitoring. This document should be considered dynamic, and note that the examples given are not an exhaustive list. A District Assessment Plan should assist schools and teachers with answering the following questions: o What will students know and be able to do? o How will we know if they learned it? o What will we do when they haven t learned it? o What will we do when they already know it? The district assessment plan addresses the collection and use of data to inform instruction regardless of the level of academic need. State assessments, benchmarking and progress monitoring should all take place regardless of the tier of student intervention: universal, strategic, or intensive. 2

3 State-Mandated Assessments Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) In compliance with legislation-(crs ), Colorado joined the PARCC consortia as a governing member in August, PARCC is a multi-state assessment consortium that developed shared English language arts (ELA) and mathematics assessments. Fourteen (14) states and the District of Columbia participate in the consortium. As a governing member, Colorado is committed to relying on the PARCC assessment system. PARCC has ELA assessments in grades 3-11 and mathematics assessments in grades 3-8 plus three high school assessments. PARCC has developed college and career ready determinations that will be based on the assessments given in 11th grade. Colorado Measures of Academic Success (CMAS) Colorado Measures of Academic Success measures Science and Social Studies at grade levels: Social Studies: Grade 4 - Grade 7 - Grade 12 (High School) Science: Grade 5 - Grade 8 - Grade 12 (High School) Colorado English Language Acquisition (ACCESS) The Access test for English Language Learners is required by CRS /106. It assesses the language acquisition progress of students who are learning English (non-english speakers). The District Assessment Coordinator (DAC) is responsible for the administration of this test, and works closely with the Multi-Lingual Administrator to ensure that all qualified students are tested. Colorado Alternate (COAlt) The Colorado Alternate (COAlt) is an assessment developed specifically for students with significant cognitive disabilities. The purpose of the assessment is to determine the level at which a student meets the Expanded Benchmarks (standards for students with significant cognitive disabilities), which are linked to the Colorado Academic Standards. Students who fit the criteria take this test in grades Eleventh grade students who meet these criteria are eligible to take an alternative to the Colorado ACT assessment. Twelfth grade students will take an alternate version of the CMAS. This test is also covered in CRS COLORADO ACT The 11th grade ACT assessment, which is more commonly known as the Colorado ACT (CO ACT), is administered once in April and once in May. This assessment is equivalent to all other ACT 3

4 Assessments administered on national test dates throughout the country. Since this is an actual college entrance exam, results from this assessment can be submitted for college entrance by the student to their college or university of choice. DIBELS Next The Colorado Reading to Ensure Academic Development Act (HB ) was enacted in 2012 by the Colorado General Assembly to ensure that students, by the completion of third grade, can demonstrate a level of competency in reading skills that is necessary to support them in achieving the academic standards and expectations applicable to the fourth grade curriculum. The READ act calls for local school districts to work closely with parents and teachers to identify students who are reading below grade level and give them the necessary reading interventions. To comply with this legislation, District 11 will test all K-3 students using DIBELS Next. NATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF EDUCATIONAL PROGRESS (NAEP) The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), a.k.a. the Nation s Report Card, is the only nationally representative and continuing assessment of what America s students know and can do in different subject areas. Its two major goals are to measure student achievement and to report change in performance over time. The district is annually notified as to which schools 4 th, 8 th and 12 th grade students have been randomly selected to participate in this assessment. Participation of these schools students is required to maintain federal funding eligibility. 4

5 Benchmark Assessments Definition of Benchmark Assessment Benchmark Assessments are short tests administered throughout the school year that give teachers immediate feedback on how students are meeting academic standards. Regular use of benchmark assessments is seen by many as a tool to measure student growth and design curriculum to meet individual learning needs. State Requirement: The only state requirement is to utilize DIBELS Next for grades K-3, three times a year based on Read Act. District Requirement: Schools choose their Benchmark Assessments, to include the measure and frequency of the measurement. Examples of Benchmark Tools School or district wide benchmark assessments are a supplement to classroom assessments and provide consistency across classrooms and grade levels. Benchmark assessments sometimes call for performance tasks but more commonly use standardized administration and scoring procedures to help maintain validity, reliability, and fairness. Schools choose the benchmark assessment they will use. Below is a list of potential choices for schools. Schools may choose beyond the list. For a list of additional resources go to: 1. Summative Assessments Summative assessment is commonly referred to as assessment of learning, in which the focus is on determining what the student has learned at the end of a unit of instruction or at the end of a grade level (e.g., through grade-level, standardized assessments). Examples of summative assessments include: End of unit tests or projects. When assessments reflect the stated learning objectives, a well-designed end of unit test provides teachers with information about individual students, as well as provides an overall indication of classroom instruction. Course grades. If end of course grades are based on specified criteria, course grades provide information on how well a student has met the overall expectations for the course. 5

6 Standardized assessments. Tests that accurately reflect state performance and content standards provide an indication of how many students are achieving to established grade-level expectations. This could include nationally normed and referenced tests like MAP. Portfolios. When used as part of an evaluation of student learning, portfolios provide evidence to support attainment of stated learning objectives. 2. Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) MAP is one method or tool for benchmarking, however, the district supports school-based decision making when looking at a benchmarking system. If MAP is chosen by a school, they may choose to benchmark all or some of their students each testing period. The determination is made by the school and is tied to the questions they are trying to answer. Schools may also choose to use other benchmarking data to monitor individual student progress. By school choice, MAP can be administered three times a year to all students in grades K-10 as the benchmark assessment in reading, language usage, and math. Note: For the final year of the TIF grant, TAP schools must give the MAP test to align with outcome measures for the grant. Alternative Education Campus schools will also be required to administer MAP if the metrics on file with Colorado Department of Education include MAP scores and/or growth in their School Performance Framework calculations. 3. DIBELS Next The DIBELS assessments are another benchmarking tool associated with the READ Act and the AMPLIFY partnership through a grant. As a result, there is a state requirement to utilize this benchmark test for grades K-3, three times a year. The test can be used for selected students in grades 4 and 5 on a limited basis. 4. STAR Certain schools have chosen to invest in the STAR testing structure. This is a school-supported choice for benchmarking and is not mandated by the District or State. 5. DIBELS Deep DIBELS Deep is another benchmarking assessment than can be used by schools to test students in K-3 with significant reading deficiencies. It is district supported. 6. CORE Reading CORE reading is another school-supported choice for benchmarking students that are considered intensive or strategic levels in grades K-5. There are no district or state requirements for this testing. 6

7 7. SIPPS The SIPPS program is based on the premise that beginning literacy is best taught through two distinct strands, one focusing on decoding and the other on comprehension. Within the program, benchmarking is also possible. Again, there is not a district or state requirement for this testing. 7

8 Progress Monitoring Progress Monitoring is a scientifically based practice of assessing students' performance on a regular basis. Progress monitoring helps school teams make decisions about instruction. State Requirement: There are specific requirements from the State, listed below, that must be adhered to for the identification of students for special education, and for progress monitoring the goals set out in an Individualized Education Plan (IEP). Progress Monitoring for Response to Intervention (RTI) also now known as Multi-Tiered Support Systems (MTSS) RTI is addressed through federal and state law and refers to a tiered approach to identifying instruction and support of a student s academic and behavioral needs. Students who do not make adequate academic or behavioral progress and who may need support receive increasingly intensive instructional and behavioral interventions. Progress monitoring is necessary to track the effectiveness of the planned intervention, its frequency, and its duration. Note that RTI is for the benefit of any student that has an academic or behavioral concern to be addressed, and is not solely for special education identification. Progress Monitoring for Special Education Identification/IEP goals as defined by Colorado Law The eligibility criteria that must be met in order to determine that a student has a Specific Learning Disability (SLD) are: (1) The child does not achieve adequately for the child s age or to meet state-approved gradelevel standards in one or more of the following areas, when provided with learning experiences and instruction appropriate for the child s age or state-approved grade-level standards: oral expression; listening comprehension; written expression; basic reading skill; reading fluency skills; reading comprehension; mathematical calculation; mathematics problem solving; AND (2) The child does not make sufficient progress to meet age or state-approved grade-level standards in one or more of the areas identified when using a process based on the child s response to scientific, research-based intervention as determined by a body of evidence demonstrating: (1) Academic skill deficit(s); and (2) Insufficient progress in response to scientific, research-based intervention. Colorado ECEA Rules Section 2.08(6)(b)(ii)(A)and(B); 8

9 It is important to note that a variety of assessment tools and strategies must be used to gather relevant information about the student, including information provided by the parent. The team may not use any single measure for making a disability determination and for determining educational programming. Even though a student s response to scientific, research-based intervention is crucial to Specific Learning Disability (SLD) determination and educational planning, other types of information or assessment data must be collected during the Response to Intervention (RtI) problem-solving process and/or evaluation process. For determination of an SLD, Colorado Rules specifically state that the two major criteria must be demonstrated by a body of evidence. It is important that one assessment instrument not be the sole or primary determiner of both an academic skill deficit and insufficient progress. For example, if a Curriculum Based Measure (CBM) is being used as a progress monitoring tool, the student s results over time on this measure would probably be the primary indicator of insufficient progress. This measure, even though nationally normed, should not also be used as the only norm-referenced assessment required for determining an academic skill deficit. A standardized, normed and focused assessment in the specific area of suspected disability should also be administered. Parameters given for determining the significance of a deficit are not intended to be hard and fast cut-points and the convergence of multiple sources of data needs to be considered by the eligibility team. At least one measure needs to be norm-referenced in order to provide some consistency across schools and districts in the interpretation of significance. A score at or below the 12th percentile or 1 ½ standard deviations below the mean may be considered to represent a significant deficit. The results of a focused and norm-referenced, diagnostic/prescriptive assessment will not only assist with the identification of a specific learning disability, but would provide valuable information for developing IEP goals and determining appropriate instruction/intervention. [One example of a locally-developed guidance document that provides a list of standardized, norm-referenced, diagnostic assessments to identify specific skill deficits for each area of SLD can be found posted on the CDE/SLD website ( This posted document is not intended to be a CDE approved or endorsed list of assessments, but is just provided as an example of some commonly used instruments. 9

10 District Requirement: Schools choose their Progress Monitoring tools to include a measure and the frequency of measurement and in order to address state law when monitoring students progress with an individualized education plan (IEP), the district requires the following: Assessment Students with IEP s General Assessment - Required Students with IEP s General Assessment - Optional Students with IEP s Extended Evidence Outcomes - Required PARCC Yes No No PARRC Alt No No Yes Progress monitoring Behavior, Communication, Academics Yes (AIMSWeb if Reading, Writing Yes Yes or Math) Progress Monitoring AIMSweb Yes No No Reading, Writing & Math Individual Eligibility Assessment Yes Yes Yes READ Act Assessment Yes No No Other Large Group General Yes No Alternate Assessments (i.e., MAP, DIBELS) Also identified in the ECEA legislation is a requirement for screening gifted and talented. Cognitive Abilities Test CogAT District 11 administers the Cognitive Abilities Test (CogAT) as a screening instrument for all second graders district-wide. The CogAT has three subsections: verbal, quantitative, and nonverbal. The verbal subsection refers to flexibility, fluency, and adaptability in reasoning with verbal materials and in solving verbal problems. The quantitative section refers to reasoning skills; flexibility and fluency in working with quantitative symbols and concepts; and the ability to organize, structure, and give meaning to an unordered set of numerals and mathematical symbols. Nonverbal refers to reasoning, using geometric shapes and figures. To perform successfully, students must invent strategies for solving novel problems. 10

11 Examples of Progress Monitoring Tools School or district wide progress monitoring tools are typically administered in the classroom setting and provide consistency in monitoring student progress toward mastery. Progress monitoring tools are commonly used to gauge student progress with teacher intervention or with school-supported interventions. Schools choose the progress monitoring tool they will use. 1. Common Assessments Common assessments are developed within a district using teacher-created items or by purchasing an item bank. These can be powerful tools because they are aligned to standards, district curriculum, and district pacing guides. Generally, these assessments are administered to all students within a grade and/or course during prescribed intervals. These assessments can create a common ground for Professional Learning Communities discussions about student performance. A number of schools in District 11 have begun writing common assessments for use in their school. Some district quarterly writing prompts for grades K-5 have been written, which are given sporadically among the elementary schools (not mandatory). The science facilitator and Educational Data and Support Services (EDSS) have coordinated the writing of common science assessments for middle school. TAP schools have also purchased ExamView in order to begin crafting common assessments for their buildings. 2. Formative Assessments Formative assessment is commonly referred to as assessment for learning, in which the focus is on monitoring student response to and progress with instruction. Formative assessment provides immediate feedback to both the teacher and student regarding the learning process, and then follows up with corrective enrichment towards instructional standards. The most common procedures of formative assessment include the following: Feedback, both oral and written, to student discussion or work, followed by corrective enrichment. Curriculum-based measurements (CBMs) which are a set of standardized measures used to determine student progress and performance. An example is the use of oral reading fluency as indicator of student reading ability. CBMs are followed up with correction and enrichment. Self-assessment students reflect on and monitor their own progress. The instructor provides corrective enrichment towards instructional standards. This may be performed in conjunction with a CBM, predetermined academic or behavioral goals. 11

12 Observation A teacher observes and records a student s level of engagement, academic, and/or affective behavior, develops a plan of support, implements the plan, and continues to record to document the plan s effectiveness. Portfolios A growth portfolio can be used to create a record of student growth in area. The portfolio is a joint effort between the student and the instructor that includes continuous feedback, correction, and enrichment. 12

13 Colorado Springs School District 11 ASSESSMENT PLAN The chart below highlights the district s assessment protocol that informs the teaching and learning cycle.

14 The table below defines the assessment work ahead in best meeting the needs of our students through assessment of learning and reflection on how we modify our instructional planning to address identified needs. The determination of the benchmarking and progress monitoring tools and frequency by which they are administered is made collaboratively by teachers and principals. District 11 ASSESSMENT PLANNING AND REFLECTION Progress Monitoring Definition State Assessments Benchmark Assessments Common Assessments State-mandated assessment given each year to all students and or selected students such as PARCC, CMAS, ACT, WIDA, ACCESS. Assessments given two to three times per year to measure student growth to standards. Assessments given across grade levels/subjects within a school or across the district to measure progress toward learning specific targets. Formative Assessments A planned process in which assessment-elicited evidence of students status is used by teachers to adjust their ongoing instructional procedures or by students to adjust their current learning tactics. Who creates these? Requirements What is the frequency of the assessment? State of Colorado or vendor Required by state law Tests are determined by the state Annual Outside assessment vendor and/or schools Measure Dependent on school/subject with the exception of DIBELS Two or three times per year as universal screening tool (can be selective) Team of teachers responsible for the same grade level/content/course Optional and dependent on school/subject Short cycle monthly or quarterly Classroom teachers Required as part of the District 11 Playbook: teaching/learning continuum and current evaluation system Decisions on tools and frequency are made collaboratively by teachers and principals. Occurring within and between lessons as part of instruction intentionally designed as part of daily instruction. 14

15 Progress Monitoring What questions should I ask about these assessment results? Who will use the information? State Assessments Benchmark Assessments Common Assessments How well are we serving our students? Are some grades/groups performing substantially better or worse than others? What are the relative strengths and weaknesses? Are we improving from year to year?? Does the evidence meet our expectations? Primary Users Schools/Districts State Federal Secondary Users Students Teachers Parents How are students progressing toward state standards? How well is a program working? Which students, in particular, need help? Are we improving from benchmark period to benchmark period? Primary Users Students Teachers/Teams Parents Schools/District How are students progressing toward specific standardsbased learning targets? Are all students learning? Were the results expect Primary Users Students Teachers Teachers/ teams Parents Schools/ Districts Formative Assessments What do we do when students don t learn or reach proficiency before expectation? What are the strengths and weaknesses for as student related to the standards-based learning target? What progress is the student making toward the standardsbased learning target? What learning comes next for this student? What adjustments to instruction are needed based on student responses? Primary Users Students Teachers 15

16 Progress Monitoring What action will be taken with the results? What is the connection to Colorado Academic Standards? Examples State Assessments Benchmark Assessments Common Assessments Strategic long term evaluation of curriculum/ Programming Determination of district/ school accreditation status Determine if the district needs to change focus in instruction or curriculum Professional Learning communities use data to identify strengths and gaps in instruction and curriculum Grade-level standards are linked to the framework PARCC, CMAS, CO-ALT, ACT, ACCESS Professional learning communities use data to identify strengths and gaps in instruction and curriculum Curriculum may be changed/refined Teachers may modify instruction for individuals and groups of students based on their progression towards outcome goals (selected targeted options) Curriculum is linked to grade-level standards MAP, End of unit tests, DIBELS, TOWRE Professional learning communities use data to identify strengths and gaps in instruction and curriculum Within the instructional activity, information is used to change or adjust teaching Curriculum is linked to grade level standards K-5 writing prompt, common assessments Formative Assessments Within the instructional activity, information is used to change or adjust teaching Students receive frequent and meaningful feedback on their performance Teachers engage students in the monitoring of their own learning Lessons are connected to the state content standards Teacher driven (exit tickets, etc.) 16

17 Appendix A Support SLD DETERMINATION PROCESS Exposure to high quality core curriculum that is differentiated to meet the needs of all learners in Tier 1. At least 80% of students should be successful in the core curriculum. All students who are struggling (either academically or behaviorally) are referred to the Building Problem Solving Process which should contain a standard protocol Research based Targeted intervention is implemented - targeted to specific skill deficit Interventions and data collection are implemented with fidelity throughout the RtI process Progress monitoring data is gathered (at least 4-7 data points) for each intervention If student is making progress continue intervention...if data indicates insufficient progress change the intervention If the problem solving Team begins to suspect a student may have an educational disability, possible Sp.Ed referral is discussed with building Staffing Coordinator Regular Education data required for SLD eligibility consideration - Two (2) interventions at Tier 2 Sp.Ed. Data required for SLD eligibility consideration 1.) Insufficient Progress: a gap of 2.0 or greater over time on grade level CBM, and 2.) Academic Skill Deficit: a score at or below the 12 th percentile in one of the eight SLD areas on an individually administered, nationally normed targeted academic achievement test. 17

18 Appendix B: Pyramid of intervention: Elementary 18

19 Appendix C: Pyramid of Intervention: Middle School 19

20 Appendix D: Pyramid of Intervention: High School 20