Smarter Assessment Interim and Summative Connection? Katia.foret@doe.k12.de.us NCSA - June 26, 2019 1
A Balanced Assessment System NCSA - June 26, 2019 2
The Role of Interim Assessments in a Comprehensive Assessment System By Marianne Perie, Scott Marion, Brian Gong (National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment) and Judy Wurtzel (The Aspen Institute) ) Interim assessment: Falls between formative and summative assessment - (1) evaluate students’ knowledge and skills relative to a specific set of academic goals, typically within a limited time frame, and (2) are designed to inform decisions at both the classroom and beyond the classroom level, such as the school or district level. NCSA - June 26, 2019 3
Smarter Interims Overview • Same as summative - all items were developed together - assess Common Core State Standards - use Universal Design principles - same accessibility resources - provide evidence to support claims in mathematics and English language arts/literacy • Different from summative - Not secure, but not public • Summative and Interim are assessed online NCSA - June 26, 2019 4
Two Types of Interims NCSA - June 26, 2019 5
Purpose of Assessment 1 . What do we want to learn from this assessment? 2. Who will use the information gathered from this assessment? 3. What action steps will be taken as a result of this assessment? 4. What professional development or support structures should be in place to ensure the action steps are taken and are successful? 5. How will student learning improve as a result of using this interim assessment system and will it improve more than if the assessment system was not used? NCSA - June 26, 2019 6
Delaware Smarter In Interims Snapshot Total Smarter Interims Completed 2015-16 vs 2018-19 IAB Assessments ELA Math Total AY 2015-16 779 882 1661 2016-17 29192 25035 54227 2017-18 47806 61226 109032 2018-19* 61273 70743 132016 ICA Assessments ELA Math Total AY 2015-16 203 133 336 2016-17 2007 2001 4008 2017-18 3057 3810 6867 2018-19* 2613 2964 5577 * Period August 26, 2018-May 31, 2019 NCSA - June 26, 2019 7
Smarter Mathematics Interim – Summative by Dis In istricts Great LAAS Laurel Milford Red Clay Capital Smyrna Cape Caesar Indian Oaks Rodney River 2018 416 437 1256 1987 7915 2944 2706 2572 3799 5063 NCSA - June 26, 2019 8 2017 326 389 1167 1969 8085 2879 2629 2505 3735 4837
Smarter Mathematics Interim – Summative by Schools In Total Student Total Interim % Students who Summative Smarter Math by Schools School Year Counts Counts completed interim at Proficiency Average by School Completed least once (Meet and Above) 2018 211 537 >95% 46% Marbrook ES - 256 2017 215 425 93% 39% 2018 253 489 95% 27% Baltz (Austin D.) ES - 252 2017 267 464 93% 22% 2018 210 321 48% 60% Clayton ES - 680 2017 182 203 44% 58% 2018 285 767 >95% 68% Linden Hill Elementary School - 250 2017 297 656 >95% 61% 2018 322 839 73% 57% Mispillion Elementary - 673 2017 327 249 29% 57% 2018 331 1259 >95% 65% Love Creek Elementary School - 718 2017 N/A N/A N/A N/A 2018 287 40 8% 49% W. Reily Brown Elementary School - 622 2017 251 187 57% 51% 2018 456 228 30% 67% Allen Frear Elementary School - 610 2017 442 621 69% 72% 2018 344 849 >95% 77% *North Star Elementary School - 270 2017 352 19 5% 70% NCSA - June 26, 2019 9
Smarter Mathematics Interim & Summative for Focus schools In ls Total Student Total Interim Summative % Students who Smarter Math by Schools School Year Counts Counts Proficiency completed at least by School Completed Average (Meet one interim and Above) Banneker (Benjamin) Elementary 2018 318 510 80% 47% School - 668 2017 327 40 <5% 55% Brandywine Springs Elementary 2018 675 1157 82% 62% School - 261 2017 667 695 49% 67% 2018 808 2604 91% 40% Laurel MS - 782 2017 709 3393 >95% 38% 2018 438 658 94% 12% Warner Elementary School - 266 2017 433 0 <5% 13% NCSA - June 26, 2019 10
Smarter ELA Interim – Summative by Dis In istricts Great LAAS Laurel Milford Red Clay Capital Smyrna Cape Caesar Indian Oaks Rodney River 2018 416 429 1252 1980 7864 2927 2712 2562 3803 5019 NCSA - June 26, 2019 11 2017 324 390 1161 1950 8048 2859 2629 2496 3730 4784
Smarter ELA Interim – Summative by Schools In Total Student Total Interim % Students who Summative Smarter ELA by Schools School Year Counts Counts completed interim at Proficiency Average by School Completed least once (Meet and Above) 2018 208 351 78% 55% *Marbrook ES 2017 209 113 45% 47% 2018 252 127 27% 41% Baltz (Austin D.) ES - 252 2017 267 85 26% 35% 2018 212 284 46% 63% Clayton ES - 680 2017 184 270 42% 61% 2018 804 2194 >95% 55% Laurel MS - 782 2017 725 2406 81% 48% 2018 779 7 <5% 44% Seafordl MS - 764 2017 781 0 <5% 40% 2018 914 593 51% 44% William Henry MS - 646 2017 925 991 51% 40% 2018 74% 52% 376 480 *Ross (Lulu M.) Elementary School - 672 2017 25% 48% 381 110 2018 81% 60% 320 552 *Mispillion Elementary - 673 2017 32% 57% 330 125 NCSA - June 26, 2019 12
Smarter ELA Interim – Summative by Schools In Total Student Total Interim % Students who Summative Smarter ELA by Schools School Year Counts Counts completed interim at Proficiency Average by School Completed least once (Meet and Above) 2018 76% 50% 604 770 Phillis Wheatley Elementary School - 779 2017 <5% 50% 638 0 2018 5% 59% 288 14 W. Reily Brown Elementary School - 622 2017 37% 62% 252 126 2018 47% 62% 864 1028 F. Niel Postlethwait Middle School - 621 2017 62% 65% 800 797 2018 79% 83% 343 514 North Star Elementary School - 270 2017 12% 79% 350 43 2018 69% 24% 442 317 Warner Elementary School - 266 2017 <5% 21% 431 0 2018 >95% 67% 274 675 Linden Hill Elementary School - 250 2017 39% 67% 292 130 2018 86% 52% 428 921 Moore (John Bassett) School - 686 2017 40% 51% 402 455 NCSA - June 26, 2019 13
In Interim-Summative Cohort Study by Dis istrict and School NCSA - June 26, 2019 14
Smarter In Interim – Summative Study • Cohorts of students across 3 years • Focus on Grades 3-5 districts/schools who saw improvement (Red Clay, Laurel, Caesar Rodney, North Star Elem., Marbrook Elem.) • Focus on Grades 6-8 for Laurel Middle School (ELA & Math) 2016 Grade X students 2017 • Below Proficiency (1&2) 2018 • Meet/Above Proficiency (3&4) Grade X+1 same students • Below Proficiency (1&2) Grade X+2 same students • Meet/Above Proficiency (3&4) • Below Proficiency (1&2) • Growth scale score from previous year • Meet/Above Proficiency (3&4) • Interims use • Growth in scale score from 2016 • Interims use NCSA - June 26, 2019 15
Interim-Summative Cohort In for North Laurel l Ele lementary ry Students w/ Students with % Students who Cohort Students Scale Score scale score showed Scale Score Cohorts from Grade 3-5 and Growth who Students showed Growth growth and who Content District School Grade who completed all took at least Proficiency Growth >= 50 completed at least 2016-2018 Summative from one Interim in between 2016 and 2018 between 2016 one IAB in 2016, 2016-2018 2016, 2017, and 2018 2017, and 2018 and 2018 North Math Laurel Laurel 3 – 5 159 93 77 83% 14 ES North ELA Laurel Laurel 3 – 5 158 126 126 100% 62 ES Average Interims taken by Year 2016 : No interims were taken for both Math and ELA 2017 : No interims were taken for both Math and ELA 2018 : Average number of interims taken for ELA = 6, Math = 2 NCSA - June 26, 2019 16
In Interim-Summative Cohort for Laurel Mid iddle School Students w/ Students with % Students who Cohort Students Scale Score scale score showed Scale Score Cohorts from Grade 6-8 and Growth who Students showed Growth growth and who Content District School Grade who completed all took at least Proficiency Growth >= 50 completed at least 2016-2018 Summative from one Interim in between 2016 and 2018 between 2016 one IAB in 2016, 2016-2018 2016, 2017, and 2018 2017, and 2018 and 2018 Laurel Math Laurel 6 – 8 166 142 142 100% 111 MS Laurel ELA Laurel 6 – 8 164 146 146 100% 94 MS Average Interims taken by Year 2016 : No interims were taken for both Math and ELA 2017 : Average number of interims taken for ELA = 2, Math = 4 2018 : Average number of interims taken for ELA = 2, Math = 4 NCSA - June 26, 2019 17
Smarter In Interim – Summative Study Laurel Middle School Laurel MS has been a Focus school because of low performance in last three years They have shown improvement in many fronts. (i.e., Change in school culture and Content area coaching for all staff) Looking at groups of students moving( or not) from one category to another and their use of Interims Looking at the type of interims, content, and count of interims DOE Module about Target/Claims study chart was shared with ELA and Math Cadre and Coalitions for them to use data at their district or school levels Digital Library (DL) Resources (Connection Playlists to support IABs). Volunteered to create a video about use of DL resources to support instruction (future interviews of teachers and students). NCSA - June 26, 2019 18
Recommend
More recommend
