Colorado+District+Information


 * __ Questionnaire Released to Colorado School Districts Regarding the Use of Formative and Interim Assessments __**

//Feedback as of Thursday, August 26, 2010//

** District Formative and Interim Assessment Survey **  ** Interim Assessments   ** __ Who is creating district interim assessments? Is it the district? __ //  Harrison School District:  // // Yes, the District is creating interim assessments. // //  Jefferson County:  // // The district uses a vendor for math and English language arts tests in grade 3 through 10. A science pilot test has been developed by the district. Additionally, kindergarten through third grade students are assessed with vendor-developed literacy skills tests. Also, some schools have developed their own common assessments as collaborative department teams. // //   Strasburg School District 31-J:   // // No, the district in not creating interim assessments district-wide. Some work is being done at the elementary level through Professional Learning Communities based upon CSAP results, but nothing systemically. // //  Fountain-Fort Carson District 8  // // Scantron creates customized interim assessments (Achievement Series) for us based on our teacher created curriculum maps. These assessments allow us to measure progress on the taught curriculum. We also use the Scantron Performance Series tests three times a year. These are aligned to state standards and computer adaptive. // //  Boulder Valley School District  // // The district with teachers and content specialists on a committee, (led by Director of Math and Literacy, technical support by Assessment office). // __ Within the district are there assessment specialists, coaches, or teachers devising these tools? Or, is the district using a vendor? __ //  Harrison School District:  // // The creation of district assessments is done by the Curriculum and Assessment Department. We have two Assessment Coordinators and three Teachers on Special Assignment who develop the assessments. We use items from various vendors including Assess 2 Know and various item banks from textbook publishers. We also had teachers develop item banks for their particular grade level and content area using the curriculum as a base for each question written. We provided training on question development for teachers who helped write items. No assessment uses teacher developed items only but there is a combination of places we draw questions. // //  Jefferson County:  // // The district is using a vendor for the English language arts and math assessments. The science pilot test has been developed by teachers, curriculum specialists, and // // Assessment Dept. personnel. //  //   Strasburg School District 31-J:   // The district does not have the resources to provide specialists, coaches, or a vendor to provide any assessment tools. The district depends upon the textbook vendor to provide tools for interim assessments. // Fountain-Fort Carson District 8  // // Answered above. // //  Boulder Valley School District  // // We are using a tool called Galileo by ATI. We are part of a 3 year interim / formative assessment grant funded by CDE. This is the 2nd year of the grant and our financial source to use a vendor!!! // __ How are districts checking for the reliability and validity of their measures and what are they doing to ensure increased reliability and validity with each reuse? __ //  Harrison School District:  // // Curriculum and Assessment Department checks each assessment through an editing/revising process within the department. We revise each assessment after this editing process. Every question on each assessment is aligned to standards. After each assessment is given to students we run a number of data analyses on each assessment and adjust assessments according to these results. // //  Jefferson County:  // // Reliability and validity checks for the English language arts and math assessments are conducted by the vendor and shared with the district in the form of a technical report. The district has conducted reliability checks for the science pilot assessment using IRT models. To assess validity, content area specialists and assessment staff review the items for alignment to curriculum. The district has not validated common assessments at school sites. // //   Strasburg School District 31-J:   // // We do not have the resources to check the reliability and validity. // //  Fountain-Fort Carson District 8  // // Good question. Scantron is creating the assessments for us because of a grant. They will be the ones ensuring reliability and validity with reuse the following year. I don’t know how this will work once the grant runs out. // //  Boulder Valley School District  // // The benchmark building process usually takes 6 weeks. Based on guidelines provided by ATI, district coordinators first submit an assessment blueprint that outlines how many questions per standard/objective they would like assessed. Based on this, ATI develops a test that is then reviewed by district staff. ATI then incorporates changes and posts final assessments that are reliable and valid. Teachers can also create their own assessments using questions in the item bank that are also tested to be reliable and valid. However, these teacher created assessments are not tested as a whole to measure how well the items hang together. // __ How often are districts administering the assessments? __ //  Harrison School District:  // // Our curriculum is paced in “Instructional Blocks”. Each block is approximately four weeks long and after each block we give a district assessment. // //  Jefferson County:  // // Three times a year for the district benchmarks…schools decide for their common assessments  // //  Strasburg School District 31-J:   // // Generally, unit or standard based timing. // //  Fountain-Fort Carson District 8  // // Performance Series is Aug – Jan – May and Achievement Series happens at the end of each quarter. // //  Boulder Valley School District  // // 4 to 6 times a year  // __ How are the assessments broken up? Are they testing the same standards each time or are they testing different groups of standards? __ //  Harrison School District:  // // Our Curriculum Maps define instructional blocks. After each block a district assessment is given that informs teachers about the proficiency of their students on that particular part of the curriculum. We also develop Curriculum Based Measures (CBMs) that are given at the end of each semester and are cumulative for the semester. CBMs also inform teachers on their student’s proficiency for that semester as aligned to the curriculum. // //  Yes, the standards could be assessed each time. It is dependent on the pacing of the curriculum map—we do align the frameworks to CSAP and our curriculum is paced according to the importance of the framework on CSAP. // //  Jefferson County:  // // The district tests measure the same standards each time although the test content changes from the beginning of the year to the end. At the beginning of the year the tests measure standards and expectations from the previous and current grade level; by the end of the year only standards for the current grade level are measured. Again, common assessments are school-based and determined. // //   Strasburg School District 31-J:   // // N/A  // // Fountain-Fort Carson District 8  // // Achievement Series tests the taught curriculum based on maps so these really help with day to day instruction. Performance Series assesses each student where they are at on a variety of math and reading skills. These skills are aligned to Colorado standards. // //  Boulder Valley School District  // // assessment. In **math,** grade levels chose different strategies. I believe, most are comprehensive (one test measures most standards) at the beginning and at the end of the school year. There are other tests throughout the year that compliment what they are teaching at the time. One grade level has a pre and post version (measuring the exact standards) of each their assessments throughout the year. //**// Literacy //**// has many options open to the teachers and these assessments are focused for students not at reading grade level standards. Two of the tests are comprehensive (one reading – one writing) that the teachers can offer 4 times a year. Two others measure different sets of standards using different types of texts. The literature one (again offered 4 times a year) measures standards 4.1 and 4.6 (for example) while the non-fiction one measures 4.4 and 4.5. //// [Please note that last year was the first year we developed and implemented math interim assessments and literacy is new this year with a target for students on Individual Literacy Plans.] // __ How are districts using or encouraging the use of interims as tools for instruction? __ //  Harrison School District:  // // Teachers have access to item analysis reports and student performance reports that are aligned to the curriculum. Teachers can analyze this data to know the level of proficiency for their students. District Assessments are part of our continuing PLC discussions around data. // //  Jefferson County:  // // There is a district wide initiative that uses and emphasizes the district benchmark assessments as the primary tool for informing instruction in the areas of math and English language arts. We have teams of central staff developers who work with schools on how to use this data. These district assessments also will no doubt be interim measures for the schools new Unified Improvement Plan this year. // //  Strasburg School District 31-J:  // // Teachers are encouraged to use it as supplementary information, and current events. // //  Fountain-Fort Carson District 8  // // The Achievement Series quarterly tests will tell us what students have not yet mastered and what skills need to be rewoven back into the curriculum. The Performance Series tests tell us which skills (not course specific) students have already mastered and identifies deficits and steps for future learnin //g. // Boulder Valley School District  // // In a “formative” way; to help identify individual student needs to adjust instruction or differentiate accordingly; to reflect on the instruction just taught (example – one unit) and adjust instruction / practice as necessary. // **  Formative Assessments  ** __ What are district's expectations for their teachers' use and implementation of formative assessments? __ //  Harrison School District:  // // Teachers are expected to have aligned a Demonstration of Learning (DOL) for each lesson they teach. Each lesson is crafted from the Curriculum Map and begins with a lesson objective. A DOL is then developed to make sure students know what teachers wanted their lesson to teach. The DOL then informs teachers on their next steps for instruction and further lesson planning. Lesson objectives and DOLs are posted for each lesson taught. // //  Jefferson County:  // // The district encourages teachers to consistently review student data and make adjustments in their instruction. More tools and strategies to formatively assess students are being developed by the district. // //  Strasburg School District 31-J:  // // This is in progress. Most formative assessments are textbook driven. //  // Fountain-Fort Carson District 8  // // Formative assessments should be happening on a daily basis and weekly basis. We view these as quick checks to see if students have mastered skills and concepts or not. Waiting until the end of the quarter or chapter is too long. // //  Boulder Valley School District  // // Our district does not have district-wide formative assessments. This is classroom based, things teachers are doing daily or weekly and may be informal. The language of “formative” in our district refers to the use of data rather than the type of assessment. I hope your subcommittee is articulating how “formative” will be used / what it will mean. // __ How are districts using formative assessments as an accountability measure? __ //  Harrison School District:  // // DOLs and Lesson Objectives are monitored by principals as they do their required “spot” observations of teachers. District level staff, including the superintendent, also visit and observe teachers and their curriculum alignment with DOL development. // //  HSD2 incorporates the use of formative assessments in our evaluation process. There is a standard in the Teacher Performance Rubric, our teacher evaluation measure, that addresses formative assessment. This rubric in turn helps to identify the proficiency level of teachers. This becomes data used to place teachers on their salary scale. // //  Jefferson County:  // // We are not using formative assessments as an accountability measure per se but schools are encouraged to use data to inform classroom instruction throughout the year. // //  Strasburg School District 31-J:  // // Strasburg does not use formative assessments as an accountability measure. // //  Fountain-Fort Carson District 8  // // We are not using these for accountability measures. // //  Boulder Valley School District  // // N/A  // ** Additional  ** __ Are there any districts that have incorporated formative and interim assessments as a component to their teacher evaluation measure? __ //  Harrison School District:  // // See above. //// The Concept Paper that outlines our E and R Process is on our website if that would help you. //  // Jefferson County:  // // <span style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif';">Article 16 in our teacher contract states: Student assessment data may be utilized during the evaluation process, but should not be the sole data point for an unsatisfactory evaluation of the teacher. We did not specify the data to be used but our district benchmark assessments will likely be used. // <span style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif';"> // Strasburg School District 31-J:  // // <span style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif';">Strasburg does not use these assessments for teacher evaluations. // <span style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif';"> // Fountain-Fort Carson District 8  // // <span style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif';">They have not been formerly incorporated but the results are used as part of the evaluation discussion. // <span style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif';"> // Boulder Valley School District  // // <span style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif';">BVSD does not use these assessments for teacher evaluations. // <span style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif';"> <span style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif';"> ** From Bill Esterbrook, Former Superintendent of the Archuleta School District. Now with the San Juan BOCES: ** Previously, at Pagosa Springs, we required all teacher teams to develop formative assessments (common assessments) as grade level and/or content area teams after reviewing all CSAP data. Depending on the grade level and content area, some content areas (high school reading and writing) assessed the same standards and increased the expectations during the year, and others assessed different standards (math) to get students to grade-level proficiencies. The assessments took place at different intervals throughout the year. Each team developed the assessments based on any indication there was a need to determine the effectiveness of the instruction based on student needs and strengths during any grading period. We did not want specific dates, except each team had to develop exit assessments given the last three weeks of a course. All of the results were used to determine student growth and curriculum alignment and passed on to next year’s teachers to help guide instructional planning. The assessments were developed by teacher teams. Of course, there are issues with validity that cannot be answered, but the assessments used correctly help guide instruction to ensure all students are receiving the same curriculum and instruction. We stressed using not only the assessments, but a body of evidence to determine instructional planning. This process mirrors collaborative inquiry: (1) What are the student group's needs and/or have they already learned?, (2) Based on the data, what are the contributing factors, (3) Develop a plan to address the student needs and/or strengths, (4), Implement the plan with fidelity, (5) Use common assessments and NWEA to determine the effectiveness of the plan in regard to CSAP proficiency levels.. Because each of the 8 districts are at different levels with common assessments, San Juan BOCES pursues the use of common assessments, but also pays the cost of NWEA for each of the districts. We ask that each district use NWEA three times each year to guide instruction and determine the effectiveness of instruction to determine needed support. We use the correlation between NWEA RIT scores and CSAP proficiency levels for growth goals and standard deviations on NWEA assessments that do not have a correlation with CSAP. We provide CSAP actual growth tables for each district and detailed CSAP item maps to allow districts and teams to determine student needs for the upcoming year. We also provide detailed NWEA growth tables to help teachers and administrators to determine if the plan is producing the predicted results before CSAP and the end of the school year. The NWEA subscription for each district provides Des Cartes. This allows teachers to look at specific and detailed levels of learning for each student and allow teams to focus their instruction by groups of students and/or individual students. However, all of the work with curriculum, providing data, and analysis tools will not provide our students with the best growth unless teachers collaborate. The districts that seem to have the best growth adhere to the philosophy of Professional Learning Communities. With that statement, comes the need of changing teacher evaluation tools to reflect how educators need to collaborate. The only district I am aware of that has changed their teacher evaluation form is Pagosa Springs. This was completed last year and I have not seen a completed document. However, it was based on the idea that specific collaborative behaviors will allow educators to develop formative assessments to guide instruction. <span style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif';">