Resources

 

Content and Instruction in Focus

The Surveys of Enacted Curriculum will pinpoint how instruction aligns with content by to guide users to answer critical questions.

 

Addressing Two Commonly Unrecognized Sources of Score Instability in Annual State Assessments

The work reported in this paper reflects a collaborative effort of many individuals representing multiple organizations. It began during a session at the October 2008 meeting of TILSA when a representative of a member state asked the group if any of their programs had experienced unexpected fluctuations in the annual state assessment scores, and if so, whether they have a reasonable explanation for such instability in the scores. Gary Phillips, representing AIR, offered that he had been investigating what he called “score drift” and did have a hypothesis about this phenomenon and offered a brief explanation regarding what he characterized as two unrecognized sources of error that underlie such fluctuations. Dr. Phillips was invited to make a much longer presentation on his hypothesis and findings at the June 2009 meeting of TILSA.

 

Educating for Global Competence: Preparing Our Youth to Engage the World

This publication of CCSSO and the Asia Society Partnership for Global Learning puts forward a new definition for global competence and explores how to infuse the capacities of global competence into the classroom and into policy.

 

The Future of Career Technical Education (CTE) Assessment Executive Summary

On behalf of the states that participated in the 2009–10 State Collaborative on Assessment and Student Standards (SCASS) on Technical Skills Assessment, this paper addresses two significant issues facing our nation: ensuring that more students are both college and career ready and addressing the need for better and more quality data to evaluate the effectiveness of career technical education (CTE) programs. Global competition, declining student achievement, and the skills gap bring a sense of urgency to address these issues. We believe a major focus and investment in building large-scale CTE assessments that result in nationally portable credentials is an important part of the solution. We also believe that we need better accountability data to evaluate the effectiveness of CTE and to compete better internationally. The use of multiple measures is preferred when we need both to evaluate the effectiveness of programs and student achievement. This white paper is a call to action for states, the federal government, and testing companies.

 

Formative Assessment and Next-Generation Assessment Systems: Are We Losing an Opportunity?

With this publication, CCSSO seeks to illuminate and enrich the discussions around student assessment and help lead the development of more effective ways to assess student learning. These discussions focus on using the principles and best practices found in current educational research and effective educational systems in the U.S. and high achieving nations around the world.

 

Evaluating the Comparability of Scores from Achievement Test Variations

In 2006, a consortium of state departments of education, led by the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction and the Council of Chief State School Officers, was awarded a grant from the U.S. Department of Education1 to investigate methods of determining comparability of variations of states’ assessments used to meet the requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB). NCLB peer review guidelines includes a requirement that states using variations of their assessments based on grade level academic achievement standards must provide evidence of comparability of proficiency from these variations to proficiency on the general assessment2 (U.S. Department of Education, July 2007, revised January 2009). The consortium of states focused on two types of K–12 achievement test variations: computer-based tests that are built to mirror the state’s paper-based tests and test formats that are designed to be more accessible to specific student populations than the general test is. In addition, the studies conducted included a study of the comparability of an alternate assessment based on modified achievement standards; the comparability issues related to those assessments are different from the ones discussed here.

 

Validation of Uses and Interpretations of State Assessments

This paper focuses on consequential validity, an area of validity that states have not directly addressed as part of the NCLB peer review process. Primary attention is given to evidence regarding the consequences of uses and interpretations of state assessments, particularly the use of student assessment results to make inferences about school quality.

 

Vertical Scaling in Standards-Based Educational Assessment and Accountability Systems

This paper describes vertical scaling as a method for linking a set of test forms of increasing difficulty, and explores the applicability of these methods for standards-based educational achievement tests under status-based and growth-based accountability priorities. The purpose of the paper is to inform state policy-makers and assessment and accountability specialists about vertical scaling methods, and the potential advantages and limitations of vertical scaling in standards-based educational accountability programs. The possible application of vertical scales to support growth models is discussed, as well as alternatives to vertical scaling that meet accountability system needs.

 

Roadmap for Next-Generation State Accountability Principles

The Roadmap for Developing Next-Generation Accountability Systems (Roadmap) starts to operationalize the principles. It presents a vision for next-generation accountability systems to support college and career readiness for all students. It is written by and for states, building on our leadership toward college and career readiness.

 

Principles and Processes for State Leadership on Next-Generation Accountability Systems

These principles serve as the framework for the design of new accountability systems and each state will build upon these principles to develop its own unique system that best fits its specific needs.