Desarrollo de la innovación

GCS 1 – Recommended Final Academic Achievement Standards (Cut Scores) and Achievement Level Descriptors for the End-of-Course (EOC) Tests in Biology, English II, and Math I; the North Carolina End-of-Grade (EOG) Tests in English Language Arts/Reading and Mathematics at Grades 3–8 and Science at Grades 5 and 8; the NCEXTEND2 EOC Alternate Assessments in Biology, English II, and Math I; the NCEXTEND2EOG

Alternate Assessments in English Language Arts/Reading and Mathematics at Grades 3– 8 and Science at grades 5 and 8; and the NCEXTEND1Alternate Assessments at Grades 3–8, 10,and 11

Policy Implications: General Statute § 115C.174.11; Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001

Presenter(s): Dr. Angela H. Quick (Deputy Chief Academic Officer, Academic Services and

Instructional Support) and Dr. Tammy L. Howard (Director of Accountability Services) Description:

The final academic achievement standards (cut scores) and the final achievement level descriptors (ALDs)for the following general and alternate assessments are being provided for Action on First Reading at the September 2013 meeting of the State Board of Education (SBE): the End-of-Course (EOC) tests in Biology, English II, and Math I; the End-of-Grade (EOG) tests in English Language Arts/Reading and Mathematics at grades 3–8 and Science at grades 5 and 8; the NCEXTEND2 EOC alternate assessments in Biology, English II, and Math I; the NCEXTEND2 EOG alternate assessments in English Language Arts/Reading and Mathematics at grades 3–8 and Science at grades 5 and 8; the NCEXTEND1alternate assessments at Grades 3–8, 10 and 11. The test data used to set the standards for the statewide assessments were generated from the 2012–13 administrations of the tests. The test-based standard setting methodology of item mapping was used to establish the cut scores. This method uses the judgments of content experts (i.e., teachers from across North Carolina) and item analysis. In making their determinations, the content experts were provided for consideration external data from teacher judgments of student performance and external criterion measures. Following item mapping standard setting procedure, staff from various divisions within the department evaluated the data before making recommendation for the final standards and the final ALDs.

Education Building, Raleigh Thursday, September 5, 2013 Board Room, 9:00 AM

41

The department recommends that the standards adopted for the assessments be applicable to student performance effective with the 2012–13 school year.

Recommendations:

The department recommends that the State Board approve as provided the final academic achievement standards (cut scores) and final achievement level descriptors for the new assessments and their alternates.

Discussion/Comments:

 After noting much discussion during the GCS Committee meeting, GCS Committee Chair Marcella Savage made the motion below.

 Noting extensive discussion on Thursday concerning this issue, Chairman Cobey stated that the motion reflects the thinking and comments.

 State Superintendent Atkinson shared that as we think about reporting the results in 2014-15 of the year 2013-14, it will allow LEAs to have a transition period, and, in the past, the State Board has allowed a transition period for new assessments. She provided an example with the new Social Studies tests from several years ago. She stated that staff will move forward with the notion that the Board wants the Department to come back with the cut scores presented on Wednesday, and will work out the details necessary for the Department to meet the ESEA reporting requirements. She added that this should be a win-win for teachers and students across the state. It sends the message that the Board is concerned about having higher standards and to ensure that students know where they are as it relates to being career and college ready.

 Superintendent Edwards applauded the thoughtful introspection and team effort. He stated that this is an example of working together for the benefit of all children, and that this effort will resonate with a sensible, reasonable and developmental approach.

 Vice Chairman Collins stated that he believes the scores represent a tremendous amount of disparity between what he would expect to see based upon new standards. He suggested that the scores need to be carefully vetted for an accurate representation of what they mean.

 Dr. Atkinson thanked staff for their work in ensuring that North Carolina has reliable and valid tests. She stressed that she is comfortable with the process used over the years because the Department has involved some of the most well-known and renowned people as well as quality psychometricians on staff, and that the Department will bring recommendations about how we report our ESEA

information in October.

 In response to Ms. Taylor’s question about a projected timeline for sharing the scores with families, Dr. Atkinson shared that one of the benefits of having Action on First Reading was to be able to provide timely information. At this time, the Department will prepare letters that all districts can use for parents with greater explanation about raising the bar. As it relates to the communication efforts, Dr. Atkinson referenced Mr. Alcorn’s analogy of moving from minor league baseball to the major league, and noted that the Department may use this comparison to explain raising the bar with higher standards for our students.

 Board member Oxendine suggested that the data needs to be reviewed immediately to pull out the strengths and weaknesses in order to fine tune professional development to ensure that teachers are teaching lessons that are as rigorous as the standards are. Dr. Atkinson agreed that it is important that school districts take responsibility for using the data as a way to make improvements going forward.

42

 After reviewing the motion, Chairman Cobey asked Dr. Atkinson to review the implications, which are 1) that the assessments (end-of-grade and end-of-course tests) that will take place this school year will be a part of the accountability system that rolls out 2014-15. With that recommendation, when the General Assembly’s grading system of A-F, we will also roll out the new standard setting cut scores. 2) It also means that this past year, 2012-13, will be the year of transition whereby we share with people across the state the individual scores of students so that parents and students will know. 3) The motion also requires the Department to go back to the table to determine how the NCLB/ESEA Annual Measurable Objectives. The recommendations will come back to the Board in October.

 There was no further discussion.

Upon motion by Ms. Marcella Savage, and seconded by Dr. Olivia Oxendine, the State Board of Education voted unanimously to move GCS 1 from an Action on First Reading item to a Discussion item, and further asked DPI to bring to the State Board in October a recommendation that the new standard scores go into effect for the 2014-15 school year, and that the 2012-13 results be considered as a part of a transition from the old ABC’s accountability system to the new A-F system. (See

Attachment GCS 1)

21ST CENTURY PROFESSIONALS COMMITTEE CHAIR REPORT