mississippi professional educators mississippi department of education updates april 9, 2011 lynn j....

Mississippi Professional Educators

Mississippi Department of EducationUpdates

April 9, 2011

Lynn J. House Daphne Buckley Deputy State Superintendent Deputy State Superintendent

1

2

Statewide Accountability Model

Changes - 2011-12

 Recommendations to the State Board of Education by the MS Assessment Technical Advisory Committee

1. Retain the current QDI cut scores.2. Update the Growth Component to periodically

use a consistent measure for movement, such as 75 % threshold for reaching successful or above.

3. Incorporate stability and planned change into the system.

Approved by the State Board at its March 2011 meeting.

Update on the Mississippi Assessment System

3

1. Seniors ONLY Re-testers will have 2 days for English II (pilot)

2. Calculators will be free of any stored formulas, applications and/or programs for MCT2 Math 7-8 and Alg. I

3. Biology is in its first operational year (2010-11) and will NOT be used in the Accountability Model until 2011-12.

4. US History will be operational in 2011-12, but will not be usedin the Accountability Model until the following year, 2012-13

5. MDE is exploring options for how we will identify and incorporate K-2 Assessments into our state assessment system

4

Common Core State Standards and Assessments

5

Common Core State Standards (CCSS)

• Developed through CCSSO and the National Governor’s Association (NGA) using professional organizations and other constituencies

• Currently available in English Language Arts (ELA) and Mathematics

• Aligned with college and work expectations AND the SBE Vision/Mission

• Rigorous content requiring higher-order thinking and application of knowledge

• Internationally benchmarked • Evidence-and/or research-based

5

RttT Assessment ProposalsThe Process:

• Proposals were due from multi-state consortia on June 23, 2010

• Awards were made in September, 2010

• New Consortia tests to replace current state NCLB tests in 2014-2015

Two Comprehensive Assessment Proposals Funded: Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC)

26 states, 31 million students K-12 SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC)

31 states, 21 million students K-12

Note: 12 states currently in both and 6 states in neither

6Center for K – 12 Assessment & Performance Management at ETS

RTTT Assessment Program Requirements

• Build upon shared standards for college/career readiness;

• Measure individual growth as well as proficiency;

• Measure the extent each student is on track, at each grade level tested, toward college/career readiness by high school completion, and provide information that is useful in informing:

– Teaching, learning, and program improvement;– Determinations of school effectiveness;– Determinations of educator effectiveness for use in evaluations and

provision of support to teachers/principals; – Determinations of individual student college/career readiness, through

high school exit decisions, college course placement to credit-bearing classes, and/or college entrance.

7Center for K – 12 Assessment & Performance Management at ETS

Basic PARCC Timeline

2010-2011 Development/approval of common policies/procedures

2011-2012 Initial item /task development, piloting of components

2011-2012 Development of P. D. resources & online platform

2012-2013 Field testing

2013-2014 Field testing

2014-2015 New summative assessments in use

Summer 2015 Setting of common achievement standards

8Center for K – 12 Assessment & Performance Management at ETS

PARCC – Two Types of Summative Assessments

9

FOCUSEDASSESSMENTS

END OF YEARCOMPREHENSIVE

ASSESSMENT

• One to three tasks that assess a few “keystone” standards/topics

• Given at three points during the school year, near the end of quarters

• Results within 2 weeks to inform instruction and intervention

•Taken on computer, with mixed item types

•Scored entirely by computer for fast results

Scores from both focused & end-of-yr. assessments will be

combined for annual accountability score.

Center for K – 12 Assessment & Performance Management at ETS

25%

FocusedASSESSMENT 1• ELA• Math

50%

FocusedASSESSMENT 2• ELA• Math

PARCC: Focused Assessments 1 and 2

In a single session/class period, students in grades 3 - 11 will:• ELA: Read texts, draw evidence to form conclusions, and prepare a

written analysis• Math: For each of 1 or 2 essential topics (standards or clusters of standards), complete 1 to 3 constructed response tasks

Center for K – 12 Assessment & Performance Management at ETS 10

FocusedASSESSMENT 4• Speaking• Listening

75%

FocusedASSESSMENT 3• ELA• Math

PARCC: Focused Assessment 3

Over several sessions/class periods, students will complete a project-like task that draws on a range of skills. Examples:

• ELA: Locate digital information, evaluate and select sources, and compose an essay or research paper

• Math: Perform a multi-step performance task that requires application of mathematical skills and reasoning and may require technological tools

• Speaking/Listening task: Conducted in classroom, not used for accountability, scored by teacher.

Center for K – 12 Assessment & Performance Management at ETS 11

90%

END OF YEARCOMPREHENSIVE

ASSESSMENT

PARCC: End-of-Year Assessment

• Composed of 40 to 65 questions of a range of item types including innovative technology-enhanced items to sample the full year of standards

• Scored by computer

• Will make major investment in enhanced item types

Center for K – 12 Assessment & Performance Management at ETS 12

PARTNERSHIP RESOURCE CENTER: Digital library of released items, formative assessments, model curriculum frameworks, curriculum resources, student and educator tutorials and practice tests, scoring training modules, and professional development materials

PARCC: Resources, Tools, Supports

Partnership Resource Center:

• Interactive Data Tool for accessing data and creating customized reports• Exemplar lesson plans• Formative assessment items and tasks• Professional development materials regarding test administration, scoring, and use of data• Online practice tests• Item development portal• Tools and resources developed by Partner states• Optional “ready-to-use” performance tasks for K-2

Center for K – 12 Assessment & Performance Management at ETS 13

FocusedASSESSMENT 4• Speaking• Listening

25%

FocusedASSESSMENT 1• ELA• Math

50%

FocusedASSESSMENT 2• ELA• Math

90%

END OF YEARCOMPREHENSIVE

ASSESSMENT

75%

FocusedASSESSMENT 3• ELA• Math

PARTNERSHIP RESOURCE CENTER: Digital library of released items, formative assessments, model curriculum frameworks, curriculum resources, student and educator tutorials and practice tests, scoring training modules, and professional development materials

Summative assessment for accountability

Required, but not used for accountability

The PARCC SystemEnglish Language Arts and Mathematics, Grades 3 - 11

Center for K – 12 Assessment & Performance Management at ETS 14

15

Next Steps for MDE Continue to meet with stakeholder groups (K-12 and IHL) to:

Review findings of the alignment study (DONE) Develop a crosswalk (IN PROGRESS) Determine 9-12 courses (IN PROGRESS) Make resources known to stakeholders (IN PROGRESS) Align/Revise PK3 and PK4 guidelines

Conduct regional awareness sessions /webinars through RESAs (DONE) Plan work with the regional laboratories, technical assistance providers,

and other groups (IN PROGRESS) Format the CCSS to reflect current curriculum structure.(TO BE DONE -TBD) Revise/develop instructional materials (suggested teaching strategies,

resources, and assessment aids) and offer training (IN PROGRESS) Determine which policies/procedures need adjustment (TBD) Plan transition to new assessments (IN PROGRESS) Continue working with PARCC to implement assessments (IN PROGRESS)

16

State Board Examination System

Dr. House

®

17

1818

Profile of Successful U.S. Firms in the Future

19

Pillars of Board Exam Systems

A sound core programof courses defining what it means to be an educated person

High quality exams derived from the curriculum using

multiple assessment methods

Thoughtfully constructed course

designs capturedin a syllabus

Quality teacher training

matched to the course syllabi

20

Why Board Exams?

• Best global research shows that board exam systems key to success of many of world’s best performing systems for ALL students

• Why? Because they provide the support teachers need to teach well and students must have to succeed

• Crucially important for low-performing schools and students

21

Profile of Successful Workers

• Top academic performance in all five core areas: English, Mathematics, Science, Social Studies, and the Arts

• Creative and innovative• Able to learn very quickly

22

How the State Board Examination System Would Work

Upper Div’n(AP, IB, ACT,

CTE, A Levels)

Upper Div’n(AP, IB, ACT,

CTE, A Levels)

Add’l time to meetComps.

Add’l time to meetComps.

2 Yr Open Admissions Institutions (OAI)

2 Yr Open Admissions Institutions (OAI)

WorkWork

14

16

18

Lower Division Exam SystemCore Curriculum, Syllabi, Exams,

Teacher Training, All Set to Int’l Standards

4 Year Selective Institutions

22

4 YrOAI4 YrOAI

Graduate EducationGraduate Education

ApproximateStudent

Age

Educational Pathway

23

Move U

p When Ready

Move U

p When Ready

State Consortium on Board Examination Systems Options

Public Open Admission Colleges2-year4-year

Public Open Admission Colleges2-year4-year

Lower Division Board Examination System

High School Diploma Program

(exams can be taken/diplomas awarded as early as end of 10th grade)

Lower Division Board Examination System

High School Diploma Program

(exams can be taken/diplomas awarded as early as end of 10th grade)

Move on W

hen ReadyM

ove on When Ready

Accredited Career and Technical Programs

Accredited Career and Technical Programs

Upper Division Board Examination System

High School Diploma ProgramSTEM focusedCTE focused

Purely College Prep Focused

(exams can be taken/diplomas awarded as early as end of 12th

grade)

Upper Division Board Examination System

High School Diploma ProgramSTEM focusedCTE focused

Purely College Prep Focused

(exams can be taken/diplomas awarded as early as end of 12th

grade)

Public Open Admission 4-year

CollegeSelective 4-year

College

Public Open Admission 4-year

CollegeSelective 4-year

College

Public Open Admission 4-year

CollegeSelective 4-year

College

Public Open Admission 4-year

CollegeSelective 4-year

College

WorkplaceWorkplace

WorkplaceWorkplace

WorkplaceWorkplace

Public Open Admission

2-year College4-year College

Public Open Admission

2-year College4-year College

Age 14 - 17 (approx) Age 16 – 19 (approx) Age 17 – 23 (approx) Age 14 - 17 (approx) Age 16 – 19 (approx) Age 17 – 23 (approx)24

Board Exam Systems: The Best

College Board APs

Cambridge International Exams

ACT QualityCore

International Baccalaureate

25

Key Benefits• Students motivated to take tough courses and study hard

• A very strong curriculum and teachers trained to teach it for schools and students with weak instructional resources

• A strong system for preparing the most able students for selective colleges

• A way to identify students not college-ready by the end of their sophomore year and to provide focused instruction on the things they must do to succeed

• Trading a time-in-the-seat system for one that rewards performance

• College entrants ready to do college-level work 26

Suggested Implementation

• Start with small number of representative pilot site

• Set up feeder systems to include 2 and 4 year post-secondary institutions

• Consider Volunteer schools, volunteer teachers, volunteer students

• Set up a specific diploma based on the lower-division exams

• Expand as system proves itself

27

Accountability and Assessment• After 2 years of data collection, will be able to

compare MS with other states

• Nine other states involved: Arizona, Connecticut, Kentucky, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, Vermont

• State Board Exams will be utilized in the MS Accountability Model as data become available.

• State Board Exam Systems mesh well with Common Core State Standards & Assessments.

28

Next Steps

• State Board of Education approved implementation of pilot sites – Jan. 21, 2011

• Hold information session for other interested districts

• Help arrange assistance to districts from NCEE

• Identify policies which need discussion to allow full implementation of the pilots

• Provide venue for district dialogue about successes and obstacles.

29

30

Educator Code of Ethics

31

Standards of ConductStandard 1: Professional ConductStandard 2: TrustworthinessStandard 3: Unlawful ActsStandard 4. Educator /Student RelationshipsStandard 5. Educator Collegial RelationshipsStandard 6. Alcohol, Drug and Tobacco Use or PossessionStandard 7: Public Funds and PropertyStandard 8: Remunerative ConductStandard 9: Maintenance of ConfidentialityStandard 10: Breach of Contract or Abandonment of Employment

32

Recommendations from Teacher Shortage Task Force

House Bill 1047

• House Bill 1047 created a task force to study strategies for solving Mississippi’s teacher shortage.

• Final recommendations will be reported to the Governor and the Legislature regarding teacher attrition, retention and growth in our state.

33

Task Force Focus Areas

• Teacher salaries;• Future educators;• Working conditions of educators;• Relevant professional development for

educators;• Safety and respect in the schools; and• Parental and community involvement in

schools34

Recommendations

1) Implement Project Clear Voice (teacher working conditions survey) bi-annually

2) Commission a teacher supply and demand study.

3) Increase the focus on future educator initiatives in high schools, and create a leadership training program at our universities for junior and senior education majors.

35

4) Revise the process to review Teacher Education Programs.

5) Increase the entrance and exit program requirements for prospective teachers.

6) Revise current Alternate Route Teacher Preparation Programs, and establish a new elementary preparation pathway.

Recommendations

36

7) Evaluate the Critical Teacher Shortage Act of 1998.

8) Create a comprehensive program that aligns all teacher recruitment, retention, and enhancement activities.

9) Commission a study to evaluate various compensation models and national initiatives.

10) Report findings to the Task Force by December 31, 2011.

Recommendations

37

38

Review of Teacher Evaluation Model

Establish a Teacher and Principal Evaluation System

The educator evaluation system will provide a comprehensive process that will focus on improving the practice of teachers through targeted professional development.

39

• The purpose of the evaluation must be determined and then matched with measures.

• Evaluations should consider multiple measures of performance, primarily the teacher’s impact on student academic growth.

Multiple Measures

40

Design Standards

41

Proposed Changes

• Incorporate student growth measures• Reconsider the current teacher standards• Consider including a “teacher self-reflection

instrument• Maintain multiple rating levels, but consider

outcomes-based scale• Include clear descriptors for each rating level

42

• Classroom observations• Instructional artifacts• Portfolios• Teacher self-report• Student surveys• Student performance measures• Combination models

Teacher Evaluation Instruments

43

• Prepare and Engage• Plan and Develop• Construct and Connect• Implement and Support• Assess and Revise

Redesign Approach: Phase II

44

• Revision of Evaluation Instrument–Stakeholder meetings (February)

–Revise instrument (February to June)

–District meetings (February to June)

–Communicate plan (March – July)

Teacher Evaluation Project: Prepare and Engage

45

• Report progress of development (March)

• Finalize new instruments (May)

• Present new system to the State Board (June)

• Instrument Validation– District participation– Conduct validation study (October - November)

Teacher Evaluation Project:Construct and Connect

46

• Create training materials (June)

• Train a cadre of 30 Appraisal Coaches (June)– Work with 35 administrators

• Launch the new Teacher Appraisal System Pilot (August)

Teacher Evaluation Project:Implement and Support

47

• Implement statewide communication system (July – December)

• Forum (August)

• Bimonthly meetings with Appraisal Coach Cadre (September – December)

• Reality Checkpoint (December)

• Assessment of Appraisal Instrument based on implementation and feedback (December)

Teacher Evaluation Project:Assess and Revise

48

Teacher Evaluation Implementation Time Line

• Year One: October 2010 – June 2011 Research and develop educator evaluation system• Year Two: July 2011 – June 2012 Pilot the educator evaluation system in 10 selected schools• Year Three: July 2012 – June 2013 Field test the educator evaluation system in all school districts• Year Four: July 2013 – June 2014 Implement the educator evaluation system in all school districts Field test the administrator evaluation program in all school districts• Year Five: July 2014 – June 2015 Implement the teacher and administrator evaluation system and

report results

49

50

Closing Comments and QuestionsContact Info:

Dr. Daphne Buckleydbuckley@mde.k12.ms.us.

Dr. Lynn Houselhouse@mde.k12.ms.us