So last time I was after Kerrick.
Now I'm after cute kids, so awesome.
So let's talk about science, and let's get us back on schedule 'cause I bet you want
to go to lunch.
So I'm gonna highlight our new California science test, the CAST.
So let's start off with just a few fun facts about the test.
First, it is part of the CAASPP system.
The other thing to remember is that we tested 1.4 million students in the field test, thank
you very much.
The other thing is its grade levels that it's given in, which is five, eight, and once in
high school.
That could either be 10, 11, or 12, and the last thing, which many of you sent me emails
on, is that it does take, on average, two hours.
Some of you, I needed to remind you what it meant to be on average.
That does mean that some students do take longer than two hours, so we did get those
emails.
But it did actually take--we looked at the data--on average, two hours, but as a reminder,
it is untimed.
So thank you.
It wasn't easy, I know particularly for our high schools, as we asked you to start really
thinking about what test to gi--what grade level to give the test in.
That was new for you.
The test is new, so thank you very much for all that you did, and it was a success.
1.4 million students tested.
It was a success.
So let's all--as we prepare ourself for this year's operational assessment, let's remind
ourselves what the goals were and why we took on the challenge of developing such an innovative
assessment which CAST is.
One, we wanted to make sure that our assessment promoted improvements in teaching and learning.
We wanted to incentivize science instruction in every grade, and we wanted to do that even
though we were not building a test in every grade.
And so that was a challenge, and that is why you will see performance expectations assessed
in grades even if that is actually a performance expectation at a lower grade.
We wanted to make sure that we were measuring both the range of the performance expectations
as well as providing depth in terms of the California Next Generation Science Standards.
We wanted to make sure that we were reflecting what you all were doing in terms of implementation
of those standards, which is also range and depth.
We wanted to provide you with high-quality items that reflect fidelity to the standards.
We know that there is still struggle in terms of the implementation of these standards.
There's still struggle in terms of what does it mean to be multidimensional, and so we
thought there was value in providing all of you with samples of how we interpreted what
it meant to be multidimensional.
And we wanted to do all that while not testing too long, not spending too much money, and
also ensuring accessibility for all students, right?
That was a pretty tall order, and it goes to show you why the design of the test actually
is so innovative and also so complex.
Now let's talk about where we are in the development, and the timeline's--I mean, it looks so--it's
a line.
It looks so easy, you know?
One step after another, and that really hasn't been the experience.
It's been quite challenging, but we started in 2016.
That is when the board adopted our high-level test design.
That is when we went to the board and said, "We need an assessment that truly reflects
these standards, and in doing so, it's not gonna look like any other test we've done,"
and they did approve that design.
Then in 2017 we went on, and you all helped us conduct a pilot test.
In 2018 we did our field test, and now we're going operational.
I don't care what anyone else tells you.
We are ready to go, and we will have an operational test this year.
It will launch on January 8th, and we're tired, but it's gonna happen.
Thank you, ETS.
Thank you, AIR.
We will be ready to go.
So now let's take a little bit of time to just check in on the blueprint and also the
achievement level descriptors.
So as a reminder, our state board approved a blueprint, a reporting structure as well
as general achievement level descriptors for this new test.
The blueprint probably doesn't look like any other blueprint you've ever seen because the
performance expectations and those standards don't look like anything you've ever seen,
right?
We all needed to go to a class to learn how to read just the standards, didn't we?
Like, what are the orange and blue boxes?
Didn't we all need lessons on that?
So that will explain why those--that blueprint looks a little different, but you will notice
that it does represent depth and breadth as well as rigor of those standards.
You will also notice that the blueprint is alto--also multidimensional.
We--it's intended to assess the performance expectations, but doing so with the integration
of the disciplinary core ideas, or the DCIs, the science and engineering practices, or
we call them SEPs, and the cross-cutting concepts, or the CCCs for all of you science geeks out
there who--how many knew all those acronyms already?
It's a whole new world of acronyms with this set of standards.
So we will assess these three domains on the science test, physical science, life science,
and earth and space science.
Each of those is approximately 1/3 of the test, each of those three domains.
We will also be assessing the engineering technology and application of science domain,
but we will be doing so integrated within those other three domains.
Depending on the context of the item, they will fit within that.
That is the same for our environmental principles and concepts.
They will also be represented on our statewide assessment, but they will be within the context
of one of those three domains that you see there.
So our blueprints are posted on our website, so please do check those out.
The favorite part of the blueprint, there is the last page of the blueprint, which is
not part of that slide, but the last part of the blueprint does show how the three dimension
actually intersect within the performance expectations, and we know that our educators
find that chart very easy to use and helpful.
So please do check out the blueprint.
Next is the general achievement level descriptors.
This was adopted by the state board, and it is very long.
It's probably not like any achievement level descriptor that you've seen us approve here
in California before, but it represents the four levels, exceeded, met, nearly met, or
not met.
It refers to the performance expectations of the Next Generation Science Standards,
but what is so important about it is it is multidimensional.
You do not see us breaking apart the performance expectation and providing you individual information
about how are students doing on the SEPs, how did students do on the DCIs, and how did
students do on the cross-cutting concepts separately.
We are being very true to the standards, which emphasize that those should be integrated,
and so our test is integrated.
Our reporting is integrated, and the descriptors that go along with that are integrated.
We are currently in the process of writing grade level achievement level descriptors.
Those have also been a challenge to make sure that those are multidimensional, and we will
post those when they become available.
So as a reminder, the board did approve the reporting structure for the new science test.
The reporting structure consists of one overall score for science that has four achievement
levels you see represented here.
Oh, I'm going off-script again.
So while the board did approve that, we also do intend to report at the three domains that
I mentioned before.
We'll be running some analysis to ensure that we can do so
What we have not determined yet is whether or not those three domains will be reported
as levels or scores.
We're still in the early stages of making that determination.
So now let's talk about reporting, and I'm gonna talk about reporting for both '17-'18
as well as '18-'19.
I think you probably want information on both of those, and so let's try and keep them separate
because they're very different.
So first let's start with '17-'18.
In '17-'18 we did not have an operational assessment.
That was our field test year, and that is the year for which you will receive preliminary
indicators.
Preliminary indicators will be used for this test only for the field test year.
They will only be used once for this particular assessment.
They will include both a percent correct as well as one of these three levels, limited,
moderate, or considerable.
You will notice that there are three levels, which is very unlike what we will give you
when you go operational.
That was intentional.
We did not want anyone to assume that there was a match between these two, what is in
the field test and what is in the operational, so it was intentional.
Please also remember, just like Mau described when she was talking about preliminary indicators
for the CAA for science test, the--this information is based on the field test.
We do not believe that you should be using this information standalone.
Highly encourage you to only use this information in conjunction with other information that
you may have.
It is not precise enough to stand on its own.
We--let's see.
You can use it.
I mean, you have other information about how your implementation of your science standards
are going in you school.
If you use it in conjunction with that, I think there's value.
So for '18-'19--I switched years, just in case you're falling asleep and hungry and
waiting to go to lunch--that will be our operational year.
So in that year students will receive a student score report.
This is our official year.
It'll have a scale score on it.
It'll have those four levels on it, and it'll have something related to the domains.
Like I said, we're still determining what that will be.
We will be conducting a standard [inaudible] in July of 2019.
I'm sure many of you are gonna want to volunteer for that.
Happy to have you.
Don't all rush the stage.
And then we plan on taking to the state board approval of those standards in September 2019.
Yeah, yeah.
It is possible that when we go to the state board and we have our conversation of how
to report these domains that we may end up with three levels and not four, which is similar
to what we do for Smarter Balanced.
As a reminder, there are fewer items within each of those domains, less information, less
precision, so it is very possible that we will have a reporting structure similar to
Smarter Balanced, similar to something you're already used to, but again, we need to ensure
that the data supports that type of decision.
So we just created this new slide, brand-new slide, which I hope you find really useful.
So it really goes back to making sure we understand the difference between '17-'18 and '18-'19
and what you all will be getting for each of those years.
So for '17-'18 you will see that we must provide you with student information.
We will be doing so via a downloadable student level data file.
In that file you will know the percent correct, and you will have one of those three preliminary
indicator levels in that file.
You can use that to provide information to your parents, as I'm sure you will all do,
because I told the U.S. Department of Education I would provide this data to you and that
you would be reporting to all of your parents the preliminary indicator information.
We have provided you with a sample letter template that you could merge if that is how
you choose and elect to communicate the preliminary indicator information to parents.
You may choose to convey that information different than that.
That is a local decision.
Some of you may want to do that via a parent-teacher conference or some other means, and you have
the right to do so.
We will not be putting it on a student score report in '17-'18 because that would convey
that it is more precise than what it is, so we will not be doing that.
We also will not be putting it on a data display on our website.
The data is publicly available, as required by federal law, so federal law does require
that we have information available to the public, so we will have a research file similar
to the research files that I'm sure you are all familiar with for their other tests.
Our research files are available for schools, districts, the county, the state by subgroup.
That information will be publicly available.
What we will not do is the display of that information.
You know, the pretty charts will not be done.
You will see when we transition to our operational assessment in '18-'19 the preliminary indicators
go away, and now you will see your student score reports coming, and you will see that
we have added the data displays on our website of that information.
We of course keep the research files, as we have also for our other tests.
I went through that re--I think each of those points maybe twice, so I'm pretty sure maybe
we won't get as many yellow cards as we did up north, but.
So now let's go on a little bit and talk about some additional resources that we have coming
up.
So we'll have updated training tests coming out in November of 2018.
We will also have new practice tests that will have three domain-specific performance
tasks in them.
Again, that's in November 2018.
We also highly encourage you to have your educators and students take those practice
and training tests.
We want them to be familiar with the system.
We want them to be familiar with the types of items they're going to encounter.
This is particularly important for any grades that may be testing in science that did not
participate in your Smarter Balanced, so think about those--some of those high school grade
levels that you may be testing in science that are not part of.
You want to make sure that those students are prepared to interact and know the functionality
of the system.
I do believe I�m gonna ask AIR, who's sitting right there.
Will, we want to change that little thing to say "RAD accessibility tools," so if we
could make that change to be consistent with our video, that would be nice, but we want
them to know how to get to the tools and use the tools, so please do encourage their use.
As a reminder, CAST operational begins January 8th.
Not for all of you, it's dependent on your window, but it'll be there ready for you.
So now let's look at the test design.
This design is specifically have--has the year on it for '18-'19.
That was very intentional because we do have some changes that will happen in the future.
We talked last time we were here about how there are three segments on the CAST test.
There are three segments in '18-'19.
Segment A is mostly machine score-able items.
That really gets at the breadth of the performance expectations.
Segment ba--B has two performance tasks.
That's where we measure things deeply.
Segment C for '18-'19 will be used solely for field testing of new items.
We need to take time to build up our bank and also have some additional data available
to us before we move forward to implementing the full design of the CAST test.
Students will not know and recognize when they go into segment C, so they will not know
and recognize that they are entering field test items and not items that contribute to
their score.
Accessibility resources will be available.
We're very proud of the fact that we have been able to develop a test like our science
test with so many accessibility resources as a state.
It's--it's easier to do so when you're part of a consortium and you have so many resources,
and Smarter Balanced is able to do so, but we have been able to mirror that with our
science test, and we're very proud of that.
Do make sure that your students know how to access those tools though.
We are using the same type of terminology, so you'll see universal tools, designated
supports, and accommodations.
An important thing to remember is some changes that we have.
One is test streamlining.
Does anyone--not familiar with the term "streamlining?"
Streamline, it's--it is something that not everyone is familiar with 'cause the name
really doesn't explain what it is, but it's no longer considered an accommodation.
It is going to be a designated support.
I would highly recommend that you consider this type of resource for students that may
have in the past taken your CMA assessment, the modified assessment.
It makes the screen easier and less complex for a student to navigate.
Also wanted to let you know that expandable items has been changed to on as the default,
so this is gonna minimize the scrolling that is involved and the toggling between the full
and split screens.
Also want to let you know that Hmong glossary is now gonna be available.
Text-to-speech, enlarged mouse pointers, line readers, masking, those are all, just to name
some additional supports that are in the operational assessment.
Also note that when I mentioned the practice and training tests earlier that are coming
out in November, those will include all of those new accessibility supports that will
be on the operational assessment.
Another thing to keep in mind, that unlike the Smarter Balanced tests where a calculator
can only be used on some items, for our science test a calculator can be used for all items.
We use the Desmos calculator just like you see on the Smarter Balanced tests.
If you have not asked your instructors to start using the Desmos calculator every day
in the classroom, I highly suggest that you do.
That will get your students familiar with the calculator, and it's free, and it's fully
accessible.
You cannot say that about very many calculators, now, can you?
So please do encourage the use.
We don't want students to stumble because they're not familiar with the calculator.
We are also in the process of updating our periodic table because we do want to make
sure that the periodic table is also fully accessible to students.
What we are doing right now is ensuring that our periodic table will work with JAWS, so
we're in the process of making that revision.
We will be posting that.
That will be something that your teachers can use in the classroom.
So in this accessible version, for example, if a student uses JAWS to access the periodic
table, it will read to them the atomic number, the element symbol and name, as well as the
average atomic weight.
All of that will be available using JAWS to access the accessible periodic table.
And again, we'll post that on our website.
It'll also be part of the practice and training tests, but we also want to make sure that
you have access to it throughout the year, so please do encourage use of that.
And we will announce when that's posted via our weekly assessment spotlight, so I'm sure
you're on that list because I don't think I give coordinators an option.
I think you automatically get posted on that list.
So for the first operational year students are gonna be randomly assigned a fixed form
in segment A and then randomly assigned a segment B and then randomly assigned either
additional segment A-like items or additional segment B-like items in that segment C. So
that's a little different than maybe what you heard me say last time I was here because
again, we need some additional data before we implement the first--the full o--high-level
test design for this test.
So now that we know in the first year--and I'll say it again, students will get randomly
assigned a fixed form in segment A, randomly assigned performance tasks in segment B, and
then also randomly assigned additional field test [inaudible].
We know that's gonna happen this year for our first operational year.
But now let's take a look at what happens as we move forward.
So again, as we have told you and as we have communicated to stakeholders, including our
State Board of Education, we are innovating in this test, and so we do want to make sure
that we always take time to review our data, reflect on what the data is telling us before
we implement very unique aspects to our assessment, so that's what we'll be doing.
But let's talk about what are those features that we will be looking at.
One of those is the multi-stage portion of the test.
So you may recall, 'cause I'm sure you have it all memorized, that when we talked about
segment A before, I indicated that that would be multi-stage adaptive.
So what we mean by that, different than item adaptive, what we mean by multi-stage adaptive
is that a student would get a set block of items, and then depending on how they perform
on that first block of items, the next block of items will be either easy, medium, or hard.
This allows us to have more precision in the measurement without having to have the real
high expense of having a fully item adaptive test.
So we will be testing out that feature in hopes of rolling that out in the future.
The next feature that we will be testing out is the screener.
You may recall that we talked about the--implementing a screener for the performance task for this
portion.
It was--it's one of those that takes a little time to think about.
So what we talked about was we want--when we talk about performance tasks, we're measuring
something deeply.
We want to make sure that the content area that we're measuring deeply is something that
the student is familiar with, so the screener would take students that performed relatively
low in certain domains and not give them a performance task in that particular domain.
That is the function of the screener.
The screener is also under investigation.
We'll be using the data from that first operational to determine whether or not to implement the
screener, so in year one, no screener yet.
But again, none of this is off the table.
We just want to look at the data.
The other portion of the design that we need additional data to analyze is this idea of
group scores.
In the future, segment C is designed to provide us additional information so that we can have
robust group scores.
Think of a group score potentially as a school, as a district.
At this point in time we need segment C to build up our banks, so we're using it for
field tests this first year, but in the future the purpose is to provide us additional information
and to be able to assess additional performance expectations in segment C.
So now let's go ahead and talk about some resources and upcoming opportunities that
we have for you all.
So some of the resources that we have, and I hope that you are all already very familiar
with these, are things like our assessment fact sheets.
We have one for every single test that we have.
They have a nice similar look and feel for them, and so we hope we--you find them useful.
For CAST, though, we also have quick reference guides for things like how to start a training
test.
We have, of course, our practice and training tests.
We have a document called understanding the CAST, and that's a document for parents.
We hope that you find all of those useful.
The other document that I think you're going to find useful are the item specifications.
So I don't know how many of you were able to attend the CAST academy.
How many?
Not too many.
'Cause it's mostly science, okay.
So--so the item specifications for our CAST test, I think, are gonna be very useful for
you and your educators.
They will provide you with samples of how you can take a phenomena and--a scientific
phenomena and integrate the three dimensions, the SEPs, the DCIs, and the cross-cutting
concepts, so they will provide samples of that.
While the main purpose of the item specification is for us to build an assessment, we do believe
that there is useful information in there for our educators, so we will notify you when
we post those, and we'll do that via our assessment spotlight.
So now opportunities, opportunities for you to help us.
So hopefully you want to do so.
So we also have opportunities for professional development, the CAST academies, like I said.
We really spend some time in those academies digging into those item specifications, digging
into the PEs of the standards and really how you can deconstruct those, so if you--if that
is of interest to you and you are implementing those Next Generation Science Standards, I
would encourage you to sign up for those.
You also will see us all over the state because, you know, wherever they will take us, we go,
so we're at the STEAM Symposium.
We're gonna be at CERA.
We're gonna be at the California Science Teachers Association, and I have to do a special thank
you to them because they are hosting a CAST academy at their conference in Pasadena.
So here is where you can go ahead and use the QR code to get some additional information.
We need you.
We need you for item writing.
We need you for standard setting, and there's additional information on here about other
opportunities that are going to happen, so if you do have knowledge of the Next Generation
Science Standards, we encourage you to sign up.
We believe that not only does it help us, but we do believe it is an opportunity for
professional development and networking, so we hope you feel the same.
Information on here for contact information in case you have questions, and our manager
over our science office is here today, so I'll give all the hard ones to Linda Hooper.
And look, I might have even gotten us back on track on time.
'Kay, thank you.
For more infomation >> Las lluvias complican la búsqueda y los rescates en California | Noticiero | Telemundo - Duration: 0:36. 
For more infomation >> A Humanitarian Crisis Unfolds In California | All In | MSNBC - Duration: 6:28. 
For more infomation >> Emiten alerta por lluvias en California | Al Rojo Vivo | Telemundo - Duration: 0:47. 
For more infomation >> Those Who Serve: Fighting fires in California - Duration: 4:37. 
For more infomation >> Rain coming to California, could bring mud slides - Duration: 0:33. 
For more infomation >> California wildfires: Crews making progress in fight - Duration: 1:52. 
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét