SLT Training 2 PowerPoint

Report
The Smarter Balanced Assessment
Consortium
Formative Assessment Initiatives
The Digital Library
Transforming Educational Practice
Slide 2
Our Successes So Far
Formative Assessment
Advisory Panel Developed
Quality Criteria
Over 100 Resources
Submitted to the Digital
Library
State Leadership Teams and
State Networks of Educators
Established, Involving Around
2,000 K-16 Educators Across
the Country
Blueprints for Exemplar
Instructional Modules and
Assessment Literacy
Modules Blueprints Drafted
Digital Library Software
Versions 1.0 and 1.1
Released
SLT Training 1 and SNE
Training 1 Completed
Matrices for the Exemplar
Instructional Modules for
ELA and Math and for the
Assessment Literacy
Modules Drafted
What’s Coming Next
Short-Term
Long-Term
Milestone
• SLT Training 2 in November and December 2013
• Software Version 1.15 in February 2014
• SLT Trainings 3 (March 2014), 4 (May 2014), and 5 (August
2014)
• Software Version 1.2 in April 2014
• First set of 23 Exemplar Instructional Modules and
Assessment Literacy Modules in March 2014
• Second set of Modules in May 2014 and third set of
Modules by September 2014
• Digital Library Open to Consortium Members in
April 2014
A Balanced Assessment System
Common
Core State
Standards
specify
K-12
expectations
for college
and career
readiness
Summative
assessments
Benchmarked to
college and career
readiness
Teachers and
schools have
information and
tools they need
to improve
teaching and
learning
Educator resources
for
formative
assessment
practices
to improve instruction
All students
leave
high school
college
and career
ready
Interim assessments
Flexible, open, used
for actionable
feedback
Slide 5
Definition of Formative
Assessment Process
•
Formative Assessment is a deliberate process
used by teachers and students during instruction
that provides actionable feedback that is used to
adjust ongoing teaching and learning strategies to
improve students’ attainment of curricular
learning targets/goals.
Four Attributes of the
Formative Assessment Process
Clarify
Intended
Learning
Elicit
Evidence
Act on
Evidence
Interpret
Evidence
Page 7
State Leadership Teams (SLT)
Composition
• 8 – 12 members per state
• Comprised of K-12 educators and higher
educational faculty in positions of
leadership in the state
Expectations
• Recruit, identify, and train the State Network of
Educators (SNE)
• Participate in 5 regional trainings
• Train SNE members to contribute, review, and
post resources
• Monitor and support SNE review of resources
and make final posting decisions
• Provide feedback on posting process, Quality
Criteria, and usability of software
Page 8
State Network of Educators (SNE)
Composition
• 60 – 150 K-12 educators and higher educational
faculty per state
• Each network has diverse expertise in:
• CCSS Mathematics, CCSS ELA, Science and
Social Studies
• General Education; Gifted and Talented; English
Language Learners, and Students with Disabilities
Expectations
• Participate in 5 trainings
• Help populate the Digital Library in advance of the
April 2014 launch
• Submit and review resources using Quality
Criteria
• Use resources and collaboration tools for own
professional learning and instruction
• Provide feedback on the resources in the library, the
review and posting process, the Quality Criteria, and
the usability of the Library
Slide 9
Resource Posting Work Flow
Step 1:
Resource
Submitted
Step 2:
Gatekeeping
Criteria
Applied
Step 3:
Quality
Criteria
Applied
Step 4:
Decision
Posted
Cover
Profile
SNE
1
SNE
1
Sent to SLT
SNE
2
Returned to Submitter
SNE
3
Page 10
Formative Assessment Advisory Panel
•
Convened the Formative Assessment Advisory Panel to
develop the Quality Criteria during three two-day meetings
Meeting 1
April 17 – 18
• Brainstormed initial
Quality Criteria
Synthesized
feedback
Meeting 2
Developed
first draft of
Quality
Criteria
May 8 – 9
Meeting 3
Developed 2nd draft;
received feedback
from panelists;
developed present
draft
May 22 – 23
• Determined structure of
Quality Criteria
• Developed comprehensive
list of potential criteria
• Discussed merits of
checklist vs. rubric-based
approach
• Tested criteria using
sample resources
• Refined criteria
Slide 11
Page 11
Members of the Formative Assessment
Advisory Panel
Twelve experts in the CCSS for ELA, the CCSS for Mathematics, the
formative assessment process, adult learning, online professional learning,
diverse learners, and urban and rural education comprised the Formative
Assessment Advisory Panel.
1) Dr. Lynne Anderson-Inman (University of Oregon)
2) Dr. Robert Calfee (Stanford University, UC Riverside)
3) Dr. Bridget Dalton (University of Colorado)
4) Dr. Diane Heacox (St. Catherine University)
5) Dr. Joan Herman (UCLA – CRESST)
6) Dr. John Hill (Purdue University)
7) Dr. Yvette Jackson (National Urban Alliance for Effective Education)
8) Dr. Henry Kepner (University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee)
9) Dr. Katherine McKnight (National Louis University)
10) Valerie L. Mills (National Council of Supervisors of Mathematics)
11) Dr. James Popham (UCLA)
12) Dr. Lucinda Soltero-Gonzalez (University
of Colorado-Boulder
Page 12
Slide 12
Structure of the Quality Criteria
Cover Profile
Gatekeeping Criteria
Quality Criteria for Professional Learning Resources and
Quality Criteria for Instructional Resources
Governance Criteria
Slide 13
Purposes of the Quality Criteria
Ensure that the
resources in the Digital
Library reflect the intent
of the CCSS
Ensure that all resources
reflect the Smarter
Balanced vision of
effective formative
assessment practices
Ensure that all resources
in the Digital Library are
of the highest quality,
regardless of source
Provide consistency in
the review process for all
resources
Page 14
Digital Library Resources
Assessment
Literacy Modules
Exemplar
Instructional
Modules
Education
Resources
• Commissioned Professional Learning Modules
• Resources for educators, students and families
• Frame Formative Assessment within a Balanced Assessment System
• Articulate the Formative Assessment Process
• Highlight Formative Assessment Practices and Tools
• Commissioned Professional Learning Modules
• Instructional coaching for educators
• Instructional materials for students
• Demonstrate/support effective implementation of the formative
assessment process
• Focus on key content and practice from the Common Core State
Standards for Mathematics and English Language Arts
• High-quality vetted instructional resources and tools for educators
• High-quality vetted resources and tools for students and families
• Reflect and support the formative assessment process
• Reflect and support the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics
and English Language Arts
• Create Professional Learning Communities
Slide 15
SLT 2 Training
Learning
Goal
• SLT members will understand the Quality
Criteria ratings and how to apply them
consistently.
Success
Criterion
• SLT members will provide evidence of
inter-rater reliability among the state SLT
members and with other state SLT
members in cross-state teams.
Slide 16
Accessing the Digital Library
in the Training Environment
1. Open your Internet browser
(Google Chrome typically works best, though Safari, Firefox,
and Internet Explorer 9+ are also options).
2. Type the web address:
http://training.smarterbalancedlibrary.org
3. Type your assigned email address:
[email protected]
4. Type the password:
password
5. Click “Log into the Digital Library”
Page 17
SLT
Common Resource
Review Group
Examples
CA 1
CA 2
CA 3
CA 4…
MO 1
MO 2
MO 3
MO 4…
NC 1
NC 2
NC 3
NC 4…
Digital Library Resources in the
Training Environment
Common
Instructional
Resource
Common
Professional
Learning
Resource
ELA
Resource
Expl 1
ELA
Resource
Expl 3
ELA
Resource
Expl 2
ELA
Resource
NonExpl 1
Math
Resource
Expl 1
Math
Resource
NonExpl 1
Math
Resource
NonExpl 2
Combo
Resource 1
PL
Resource
Expl 1
PL
Resource
Expl 2
PL
Resource
Expl 3
PL
Resource
NonExpl 1
Page 18
Cross-State
Resource Review
Group Examples
ELA1- CA
ELA 2- WY
ELA 3- NV
Digital Library Resources in the
Training Environment
ELA
Resource
Expl 1
ELA
Resource
Expl 2
ELA
Resource
Expl 3
ELA
Resource
NonExpl 1
Combo
Resource 1
MATH1MATH2MATH3MATH4-
MT
SD
WA
ND
Math
Resource
Expl 1
Math
Resource
NonExpl 1
Math
Resource
NonExpl 2
Common
Professional
Learning
Resource
Common
Instructional
Resource
PL1- CA
PL2- MT
PL
Resource
Expl 1
PL
Resource
Expl 2
PL
Resource
Expl 3
PL
Resource
NonExpl 1
Page 19

similar documents