Template+-+Consequences

__**﻿ CONSEQUENCES OF THE ASSESSMENT**__ Template for Formative and Interim Assessment Subcommittee Recommendations  //If you make edits to this document, please use a different font color and include your initials after each edit.//  Identify the impact of this assessment on various entities. Articulate the positive and negative consequences of the assessment itself as well as the positive and negative consequences of the guidelines. Indicate the entity or individuals affected and possible solutions to avoid the negative consequences.

** FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT **
 * Positive Consequences || Who is affected? ||
 * Assessment becomes a tool for learning and evaluating instructional practice with immediate results/information || learners and teachers (KN ||
 * Potential for education partners (nonformal educators, parents) to provide performance task in formative assessment || learners, teachers, community, parents (KN) ||
 * Aligns formative assessments to current initiatives, i.e., RtI and CBLA. (from 8/28 mtg in Grand Junction) || learners, teachers, administrators, parents, community, policymakers (from 8/28 mtg in Grand Junction) ||
 * Promotes positive cultural/learning environment (from 8/28 mtg in Grand Junction) ||  ||
 * Informs teaching and learning (from 8/28 mtg in Grand Junction) ||  ||
 * Significantly improves student learning at all levels (from 8/28 mtg in Grand Junction) || Students and teachers (LL) ||
 * Motivates students and teachers, and creates buy-in (from 8/28 mtg in Grand Junction) ||  ||
 * Authentic – most closely aligned with classroom practice (from 8/28 mtg in Grand Junction) ||  ||
 * Provides immediate feedback (from 8/28 mtg in Grand Junction) ||  ||


 * Negative Consequences || Who is affected? || Possible Solutions ||
 * Difficult for CDE to determine if formative assessment is being implemented throughout the state or if PD is effective || State and maybe districts (KN) ||  ||
 * Management of item banks/exemplar formative tasks could be a challenge || all users, State as manager || Create new positions, share banks with consortia members (KL) ||
 * Poor Implementation (from 8/28 mtg in Grand Junction) ||  ||   ||
 * Grading Policies (from 8/28 mtg in Grand Junction) ||  ||   ||

**INTERIM ASSESSMENT**
 * Positive Consequences || Who is affected? ||


 * Negative Consequences || Who is affected? || Possible Solutions ||
 * Could potentially be costly and time intensive for districts? || districts, state? || provide item bank, encourage collaboration to share costs for smaller districts, provide PD to ensure is part of instruction????? (KN) ||
 * An increase in frequency of standardized tests could narrow conceptions of subject matter and limit transfer of knowledge (Shepard paper) || learners || Ensure various opportunities (possibly through formative assessment) to express learning in different ways, use performance tasks (KN) ||
 * Poor Implementation (from 8/28 mtg in Grand Junction) ||  ||   ||
 * Small districts may not have the capacity to select/design effective interim assessments || districts, teachers, learners || state could provide consulting services for districts needing assistance? (KN) ||