This from KSBA:
The Kentucky Board of Education has begun examining its options for two major changes in the state's school accountability system that began with the 2009 passage of Senate Bill 1.
In a study session that began Tuesday afternoon, staff of the state Department of Education presented KBE members with a series of choices that must be made for amending the state's system of measuring student and school progress.
Some of the decisions include how to replace current elements of the state's school accountability system and what timetable for the actions should be adopted.
Two primary factors are pushing the issue.
Currently, Kentucky eighth graders take the EXPLORE high school readiness exam each fall, while 10th-grade students take the PLAN college and career readiness test. Both are purchased by the state from ACT, which has announced it is discontinuing that product after the fall of 2014.
Meanwhile, ACT also supplies the "QualityCore End of Course (EOC)" exams used in Kentucky high schools to assess students' mastery in several course areas. Last year's EOC testing experienced serious problems with online administration.
Another factor the state is facing is that its plan calls for expanding EOC testing, but insufficient funds were allocated by the legislature to allow that to happen. Additionally, the current EOC exams don't cover all of the state's expanding content under the Kentucky Core Academic standards.
In documents released by KDE in advance of Tuesday's discussions, four options were spelled out for the KBE members' consideration:
Option A* Replace the end-of-course assessment model with a summative, end-of-year testing model that provides broader coverage of the Kentucky Core Academic Standards at the high school level; this test would go into effect in 2014-15. The summative assessment would be given at the end of the year to all grade 10 students in the subjects of reading, mathematics, writing, science and social studies.* Require the end-of-year results of the high school assessment mentioned above to provide the information required by the ACT PLAN test. The end-of-year test would, in essence, function as a single test meeting two requirements. • Use the current K-PREP middle school tests to provide the information required as a part of the ACT EXPLORE test. The K-PREP test would in essence function as a single test meeting two requirements. K-PREP grades 3-8 standard setting work used the distribution of students on the ACT scale; therefore, a score of Proficiency or Distinguished at grade 8 on the K-PREP test indicates the student is on track for meeting the ACT benchmarks and is ready for challenging high school courses.
Pros: Creates a better and more thorough alignment of the high school assessment system with the Kentucky Core Academic Standards and college readiness. Eliminates ongoing problems with the current EOC online system and saves an estimated $2 million dollars.
Cons: Accountability trend lines end and must start over; high school curriculum and instruction must be adapted for the new assessment model at the beginning of the 2014-15 school year.
Vendors who will have a product ready by spring 2015 will be limited. Student motivation becomes an issue because EOY test results are usually not available in a timely fashion and the link between an EOY test and a specific course is very difficult to determine.Option B* Adopt Option A above; however, implement it in the 2015-16 school year.
Pros: Same pros listed above and schools continue summer 2014 professional development and 2014-15 instruction/curriculum. Schools have advance notice of upcoming instructional/curriculum changes coming in 2015-16. Trend data stays intact for a fourth year. More vendors would have testing products by 2015-16. The phase-in will meet regulatory timelines.
Cons: Accountability trend lines start over in 2015-16 school year. The delay pushes out changes an extra year. EOC online issues may or may not be solved by spring 2015, the final year of administration of EOC. Student motivation becomes an issue because EOY test results are usually not available in a timely fashion and the link between an EOY test and a specific course is very difficult to determine.Option C* Option C is a hybrid of A and B above. Replace the grade 10 ACT PLAN test with an end-of-year summative test as discussed in Options A and B. The new grade 10 test would go into effect in 2014-15; however, EOC continues one last time in 2014-15.* Use the current K-PREP middle school tests to provide the information required as a part of the ACT EXPLORE test.
* In 2015-16, the grade 10 EOY summative would replace the EOC as described in Options A and B above.
Pros: Allows phase-in of new test; schools can make instructional/curriculum adjustments; and the new test gets a one-year try out to determine its logistical and instructional feasibility. The option would increase savings in 2015-16. This option would provide a fourth year of trend data for accountability. The phase-in will meet regulatory timelines.
Cons: Accountability trend lines start over in 2015-16 school year. The delay pushes out changes an extra year. The option has a slight increase in cost in 2014-15. In 2015-16, student motivation becomes an issue because EOY test results are usually not available in a timely fashion and the link between an EOY test and a specific course is very difficult to determine.
Option D (for end of course tests)* Continue with the EOC testing model; find a replacement for the ACT EXPLORE/PLAN. May need to issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) to address both increased coverage of standards and online issues. Or, KDE may add more EOC courses and associated tests in the existing contract to provide more coverage of standards.* Replace the grade 10 ACT PLAN test with fall testing schedule.* Either use middle school K-PREP tests to provide the information required by the ACT EXPLORE test, or select a replacement test for the ACT EXPLORE.
Pros: Provides for less disruption to the high school work. Continues accountability and keeps current curriculum/instruction intact. If courses are added, it improves content coverage. This option maintains student motivation for state tests. It meets regulatory timelines.
Cons: Increased cost of adding more EOC tests occurs. Alignment to standards may remain a problem due to limited coverage of EOC subjects. May need to move to using another state’s EOC tests or create custom EOC tests.
According to the KDE document, the timing of the state board's decision becomes important to the timetable of making changes in the overall system:
"Three of the options will call for revisions to existing regulations. If there is a decision to adopt a new model of testing in the 2014-15 school year, there are some regulatory concerns related to timing. End-of-course tests and the ACT EXPLORE and ACT PLAN are written into three state regulations: (1) 703 KAR 5:200, Next-Generation Learners, (2) 703 KAR 5:240, Accountability Definitions and Procedures and (3) 703 KAR 3:305, Minimum Requirements for High School Graduation.
"In order to make the new assessment model operational for the 2014-15 school year, an RFP process and selection of the new assessments would need to be completed in the summer of 2014. The regulatory process, with its required timelines, could not be completed prior to the RFP process, thus resulting in the regulation lagging behind the RFP process.
"It is permissible for this to occur, assuming the KBE understands both the intent of the RFP process and the regulation; however, the timing of the regulation under this scenario would result in the regulation not becoming effective until the middle of the 2014-15 school year, at the earliest.
"This scenario gives us very little room for error if the regulation receives numerous comments or if it were to be found deficient. If the new regulations were not approved through the entire regulatory process, then the new testing program would not be approved even though the testing program would have started pursuant to the RFP."
Tuesday's KBE study session also covered discussions of the student "growth" measurement in the state assessment system and development of a statewide teacher and principal evaluation system. The growth measurement has drawn considerable debate among local school leaders, especially at the elementary level.
While the KBE has its regular meeting on Wednesday, study session discussions frequently are slated for actual decisions later in the year.
The KBE meeting and study session were webcast via the KDE website and will be archived for later viewing.
State board to discussing next steps after EXPLORE, PLAN tests go away this fall
Staff report
The Kentucky Board of Education has begun examining its options for two major changes in the state's school accountability system that began with the 2009 passage of Senate Bill 1.
In a study session that began Tuesday afternoon, staff of the state Department of Education presented KBE members with a series of choices that must be made for amending the state's system of measuring student and school progress.
Some of the decisions include how to replace current elements of the state's school accountability system and what timetable for the actions should be adopted.
Two primary factors are pushing the issue.
Currently, Kentucky eighth graders take the EXPLORE high school readiness exam each fall, while 10th-grade students take the PLAN college and career readiness test. Both are purchased by the state from ACT, which has announced it is discontinuing that product after the fall of 2014.
Meanwhile, ACT also supplies the "QualityCore End of Course (EOC)" exams used in Kentucky high schools to assess students' mastery in several course areas. Last year's EOC testing experienced serious problems with online administration.
Another factor the state is facing is that its plan calls for expanding EOC testing, but insufficient funds were allocated by the legislature to allow that to happen. Additionally, the current EOC exams don't cover all of the state's expanding content under the Kentucky Core Academic standards.
In documents released by KDE in advance of Tuesday's discussions, four options were spelled out for the KBE members' consideration:
Option A
* Replace the end-of-course assessment model with a summative, end-of-year testing model that provides broader coverage of the Kentucky Core Academic Standards at the high school level; this test would go into effect in 2014-15. The summative assessment would be given at the end of the year to all grade 10 students in the subjects of reading, mathematics, writing, science and social studies.
* Require the end-of-year results of the high school assessment mentioned above to provide the information required by the ACT PLAN test. The end-of-year test would, in essence, function as a single test meeting two requirements. • Use the current K-PREP middle school tests to provide the information required as a part of the ACT EXPLORE test. The K-PREP test would in essence function as a single test meeting two requirements. K-PREP grades 3-8 standard setting work used the distribution of students on the ACT scale; therefore, a score of Proficiency or Distinguished at grade 8 on the K-PREP test indicates the student is on track for meeting the ACT benchmarks and is ready for challenging high school courses.
Pros: Creates a better and more thorough alignment of the high school assessment system with the Kentucky Core Academic Standards and college readiness. Eliminates ongoing problems with the current EOC online system and saves an estimated $2 million dollars.
Cons: Accountability trend lines end and must start over; high school curriculum and instruction must be adapted for the new assessment model at the beginning of the 2014-15 school year.
Vendors who will have a product ready by spring 2015 will be limited. Student motivation becomes an issue because EOY test results are usually not available in a timely fashion and the link between an EOY test and a specific course is very difficult to determine.
Option B
* Adopt Option A above; however, implement it in the 2015-16 school year.
Pros: Same pros listed above and schools continue summer 2014 professional development and 2014-15 instruction/curriculum. Schools have advance notice of upcoming instructional/curriculum changes coming in 2015-16. Trend data stays intact for a fourth year. More vendors would have testing products by 2015-16. The phase-in will meet regulatory timelines.
Cons: Accountability trend lines start over in 2015-16 school year. The delay pushes out changes an extra year. EOC online issues may or may not be solved by spring 2015, the final year of administration of EOC. Student motivation becomes an issue because EOY test results are usually not available in a timely fashion and the link between an EOY test and a specific course is very difficult to determine.
Option C
* Option C is a hybrid of A and B above. Replace the grade 10 ACT PLAN test with an end-of-year summative test as discussed in Options A and B. The new grade 10 test would go into effect in 2014-15; however, EOC continues one last time in 2014-15.
* Use the current K-PREP middle school tests to provide the information required as a part of the ACT EXPLORE test.
* In 2015-16, the grade 10 EOY summative would replace the EOC as described in Options A and B above.
Pros: Allows phase-in of new test; schools can make instructional/curriculum adjustments; and the new test gets a one-year try out to determine its logistical and instructional feasibility. The option would increase savings in 2015-16. This option would provide a fourth year of trend data for accountability. The phase-in will meet regulatory timelines.
Cons: Accountability trend lines start over in 2015-16 school year. The delay pushes out changes an extra year. The option has a slight increase in cost in 2014-15. In 2015-16, student motivation becomes an issue because EOY test results are usually not available in a timely fashion and the link between an EOY test and a specific course is very difficult to determine.
Option D (for end of course tests)
* Continue with the EOC testing model; find a replacement for the ACT EXPLORE/PLAN. May need to issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) to address both increased coverage of standards and online issues. Or, KDE may add more EOC courses and associated tests in the existing contract to provide more coverage of standards.
* Replace the grade 10 ACT PLAN test with fall testing schedule.
*
Either use middle school K-PREP tests to provide the information
required by the ACT EXPLORE test, or select a replacement test for the
ACT EXPLORE.
Pros: Provides for less disruption to the high school work. Continues accountability and keeps current curriculum/instruction intact. If courses are added, it improves content coverage. This option maintains student motivation for state tests. It meets regulatory timelines.
Cons: Increased cost of adding more EOC tests occurs. Alignment to standards may remain a problem due to limited coverage of EOC subjects. May need to move to using another state’s EOC tests or create custom EOC tests.
According to the KDE document, the timing of the state board's decision becomes important to the timetable of making changes in the overall system:
"Three of the options will call for revisions to existing regulations. If there is a decision to adopt a new model of testing in the 2014-15 school year, there are some regulatory concerns related to timing. End-of-course tests and the ACT EXPLORE and ACT PLAN are written into three state regulations: (1) 703 KAR 5:200, Next-Generation Learners, (2) 703 KAR 5:240, Accountability Definitions and Procedures and (3) 703 KAR 3:305, Minimum Requirements for High School Graduation.
"In order to make the new assessment model operational for the 2014-15 school year, an RFP process and selection of the new assessments would need to be completed in the summer of 2014. The regulatory process, with its required timelines, could not be completed prior to the RFP process, thus resulting in the regulation lagging behind the RFP process.
"It is permissible for this to occur, assuming the KBE understands both the intent of the RFP process and the regulation; however, the timing of the regulation under this scenario would result in the regulation not becoming effective until the middle of the 2014-15 school year, at the earliest.
"This scenario gives us very little room for error if the regulation receives numerous comments or if it were to be found deficient. If the new regulations were not approved through the entire regulatory process, then the new testing program would not be approved even though the testing program would have started pursuant to the RFP."
Tuesday's KBE study session also covered discussions of the student "growth" measurement in the state assessment system and development of a statewide teacher and principal evaluation system. The growth measurement has drawn considerable debate among local school leaders, especially at the elementary level.
While the KBE has its regular meeting on Wednesday, study session discussions frequently are slated for actual decisions later in the year.
The KBE meeting and study session were webcast via the KDE website and will be archived for later viewing.
State board to discussing next steps after EXPLORE, PLAN tests go away this fall
Staff report
The Kentucky Board of Education has begun examining its options for two major changes in the state's school accountability system that began with the 2009 passage of Senate Bill 1.
In a study session that began Tuesday afternoon, staff of the state Department of Education presented KBE members with a series of choices that must be made for amending the state's system of measuring student and school progress.
Some of the decisions include how to replace current elements of the state's school accountability system and what timetable for the actions should be adopted.
Two primary factors are pushing the issue.
Currently, Kentucky eighth graders take the EXPLORE high school readiness exam each fall, while 10th-grade students take the PLAN college and career readiness test. Both are purchased by the state from ACT, which has announced it is discontinuing that product after the fall of 2014.
Meanwhile, ACT also supplies the "QualityCore End of Course (EOC)" exams used in Kentucky high schools to assess students' mastery in several course areas. Last year's EOC testing experienced serious problems with online administration.
Another factor the state is facing is that its plan calls for expanding EOC testing, but insufficient funds were allocated by the legislature to allow that to happen. Additionally, the current EOC exams don't cover all of the state's expanding content under the Kentucky Core Academic standards.
In documents released by KDE in advance of Tuesday's discussions, four options were spelled out for the KBE members' consideration:
Option A
* Replace the end-of-course assessment model with a summative, end-of-year testing model that provides broader coverage of the Kentucky Core Academic Standards at the high school level; this test would go into effect in 2014-15. The summative assessment would be given at the end of the year to all grade 10 students in the subjects of reading, mathematics, writing, science and social studies.
* Require the end-of-year results of the high school assessment mentioned above to provide the information required by the ACT PLAN test. The end-of-year test would, in essence, function as a single test meeting two requirements. • Use the current K-PREP middle school tests to provide the information required as a part of the ACT EXPLORE test. The K-PREP test would in essence function as a single test meeting two requirements. K-PREP grades 3-8 standard setting work used the distribution of students on the ACT scale; therefore, a score of Proficiency or Distinguished at grade 8 on the K-PREP test indicates the student is on track for meeting the ACT benchmarks and is ready for challenging high school courses.
Pros: Creates a better and more thorough alignment of the high school assessment system with the Kentucky Core Academic Standards and college readiness. Eliminates ongoing problems with the current EOC online system and saves an estimated $2 million dollars.
Cons: Accountability trend lines end and must start over; high school curriculum and instruction must be adapted for the new assessment model at the beginning of the 2014-15 school year.
Vendors who will have a product ready by spring 2015 will be limited. Student motivation becomes an issue because EOY test results are usually not available in a timely fashion and the link between an EOY test and a specific course is very difficult to determine.
Option B
* Adopt Option A above; however, implement it in the 2015-16 school year.
Pros: Same pros listed above and schools continue summer 2014 professional development and 2014-15 instruction/curriculum. Schools have advance notice of upcoming instructional/curriculum changes coming in 2015-16. Trend data stays intact for a fourth year. More vendors would have testing products by 2015-16. The phase-in will meet regulatory timelines.
Cons: Accountability trend lines start over in 2015-16 school year. The delay pushes out changes an extra year. EOC online issues may or may not be solved by spring 2015, the final year of administration of EOC. Student motivation becomes an issue because EOY test results are usually not available in a timely fashion and the link between an EOY test and a specific course is very difficult to determine.
Option C
* Option C is a hybrid of A and B above. Replace the grade 10 ACT PLAN test with an end-of-year summative test as discussed in Options A and B. The new grade 10 test would go into effect in 2014-15; however, EOC continues one last time in 2014-15.
* Use the current K-PREP middle school tests to provide the information required as a part of the ACT EXPLORE test.
* In 2015-16, the grade 10 EOY summative would replace the EOC as described in Options A and B above.
Pros: Allows phase-in of new test; schools can make instructional/curriculum adjustments; and the new test gets a one-year try out to determine its logistical and instructional feasibility. The option would increase savings in 2015-16. This option would provide a fourth year of trend data for accountability. The phase-in will meet regulatory timelines.
Cons: Accountability trend lines start over in 2015-16 school year. The delay pushes out changes an extra year. The option has a slight increase in cost in 2014-15. In 2015-16, student motivation becomes an issue because EOY test results are usually not available in a timely fashion and the link between an EOY test and a specific course is very difficult to determine.
Option D (for end of course tests)
* Continue with the EOC testing model; find a replacement for the ACT EXPLORE/PLAN. May need to issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) to address both increased coverage of standards and online issues. Or, KDE may add more EOC courses and associated tests in the existing contract to provide more coverage of standards.
* Replace the grade 10 ACT PLAN test with fall testing schedule.
*
Either use middle school K-PREP tests to provide the information
required by the ACT EXPLORE test, or select a replacement test for the
ACT EXPLORE.
Pros: Provides for less disruption to the high school work. Continues accountability and keeps current curriculum/instruction intact. If courses are added, it improves content coverage. This option maintains student motivation for state tests. It meets regulatory timelines.
Cons: Increased cost of adding more EOC tests occurs. Alignment to standards may remain a problem due to limited coverage of EOC subjects. May need to move to using another state’s EOC tests or create custom EOC tests.
According to the KDE document, the timing of the state board's decision becomes important to the timetable of making changes in the overall system:
"Three of the options will call for revisions to existing regulations. If there is a decision to adopt a new model of testing in the 2014-15 school year, there are some regulatory concerns related to timing. End-of-course tests and the ACT EXPLORE and ACT PLAN are written into three state regulations: (1) 703 KAR 5:200, Next-Generation Learners, (2) 703 KAR 5:240, Accountability Definitions and Procedures and (3) 703 KAR 3:305, Minimum Requirements for High School Graduation.
"In order to make the new assessment model operational for the 2014-15 school year, an RFP process and selection of the new assessments would need to be completed in the summer of 2014. The regulatory process, with its required timelines, could not be completed prior to the RFP process, thus resulting in the regulation lagging behind the RFP process.
"It is permissible for this to occur, assuming the KBE understands both the intent of the RFP process and the regulation; however, the timing of the regulation under this scenario would result in the regulation not becoming effective until the middle of the 2014-15 school year, at the earliest.
"This scenario gives us very little room for error if the regulation receives numerous comments or if it were to be found deficient. If the new regulations were not approved through the entire regulatory process, then the new testing program would not be approved even though the testing program would have started pursuant to the RFP."
Tuesday's KBE study session also covered discussions of the student "growth" measurement in the state assessment system and development of a statewide teacher and principal evaluation system. The growth measurement has drawn considerable debate among local school leaders, especially at the elementary level.
While the KBE has its regular meeting on Wednesday, study session discussions frequently are slated for actual decisions later in the year.
The KBE meeting and study session were webcast via the KDE website and will be archived for later viewing.
State board to discussing next steps after EXPLORE, PLAN tests go away this fall
Staff report
The Kentucky Board of Education has begun examining its options for two major changes in the state's school accountability system that began with the 2009 passage of Senate Bill 1.
In a study session that began Tuesday afternoon, staff of the state Department of Education presented KBE members with a series of choices that must be made for amending the state's system of measuring student and school progress.
Some of the decisions include how to replace current elements of the state's school accountability system and what timetable for the actions should be adopted.
Two primary factors are pushing the issue.
Currently, Kentucky eighth graders take the EXPLORE high school readiness exam each fall, while 10th-grade students take the PLAN college and career readiness test. Both are purchased by the state from ACT, which has announced it is discontinuing that product after the fall of 2014.
Meanwhile, ACT also supplies the "QualityCore End of Course (EOC)" exams used in Kentucky high schools to assess students' mastery in several course areas. Last year's EOC testing experienced serious problems with online administration.
Another factor the state is facing is that its plan calls for expanding EOC testing, but insufficient funds were allocated by the legislature to allow that to happen. Additionally, the current EOC exams don't cover all of the state's expanding content under the Kentucky Core Academic standards.
In documents released by KDE in advance of Tuesday's discussions, four options were spelled out for the KBE members' consideration:
Option A
* Replace the end-of-course assessment model with a summative, end-of-year testing model that provides broader coverage of the Kentucky Core Academic Standards at the high school level; this test would go into effect in 2014-15. The summative assessment would be given at the end of the year to all grade 10 students in the subjects of reading, mathematics, writing, science and social studies.
* Require the end-of-year results of the high school assessment mentioned above to provide the information required by the ACT PLAN test. The end-of-year test would, in essence, function as a single test meeting two requirements. • Use the current K-PREP middle school tests to provide the information required as a part of the ACT EXPLORE test. The K-PREP test would in essence function as a single test meeting two requirements. K-PREP grades 3-8 standard setting work used the distribution of students on the ACT scale; therefore, a score of Proficiency or Distinguished at grade 8 on the K-PREP test indicates the student is on track for meeting the ACT benchmarks and is ready for challenging high school courses.
Pros: Creates a better and more thorough alignment of the high school assessment system with the Kentucky Core Academic Standards and college readiness. Eliminates ongoing problems with the current EOC online system and saves an estimated $2 million dollars.
Cons: Accountability trend lines end and must start over; high school curriculum and instruction must be adapted for the new assessment model at the beginning of the 2014-15 school year.
Vendors who will have a product ready by spring 2015 will be limited. Student motivation becomes an issue because EOY test results are usually not available in a timely fashion and the link between an EOY test and a specific course is very difficult to determine.
Option B
* Adopt Option A above; however, implement it in the 2015-16 school year.
Pros: Same pros listed above and schools continue summer 2014 professional development and 2014-15 instruction/curriculum. Schools have advance notice of upcoming instructional/curriculum changes coming in 2015-16. Trend data stays intact for a fourth year. More vendors would have testing products by 2015-16. The phase-in will meet regulatory timelines.
Cons: Accountability trend lines start over in 2015-16 school year. The delay pushes out changes an extra year. EOC online issues may or may not be solved by spring 2015, the final year of administration of EOC. Student motivation becomes an issue because EOY test results are usually not available in a timely fashion and the link between an EOY test and a specific course is very difficult to determine.
Option C
* Option C is a hybrid of A and B above. Replace the grade 10 ACT PLAN test with an end-of-year summative test as discussed in Options A and B. The new grade 10 test would go into effect in 2014-15; however, EOC continues one last time in 2014-15.
* Use the current K-PREP middle school tests to provide the information required as a part of the ACT EXPLORE test.
* In 2015-16, the grade 10 EOY summative would replace the EOC as described in Options A and B above.
Pros: Allows phase-in of new test; schools can make instructional/curriculum adjustments; and the new test gets a one-year try out to determine its logistical and instructional feasibility. The option would increase savings in 2015-16. This option would provide a fourth year of trend data for accountability. The phase-in will meet regulatory timelines.
Cons: Accountability trend lines start over in 2015-16 school year. The delay pushes out changes an extra year. The option has a slight increase in cost in 2014-15. In 2015-16, student motivation becomes an issue because EOY test results are usually not available in a timely fashion and the link between an EOY test and a specific course is very difficult to determine.
Option D (for end of course tests)
* Continue with the EOC testing model; find a replacement for the ACT EXPLORE/PLAN. May need to issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) to address both increased coverage of standards and online issues. Or, KDE may add more EOC courses and associated tests in the existing contract to provide more coverage of standards.
* Replace the grade 10 ACT PLAN test with fall testing schedule.
*
Either use middle school K-PREP tests to provide the information
required by the ACT EXPLORE test, or select a replacement test for the
ACT EXPLORE.
Pros: Provides for less disruption to the high school work. Continues accountability and keeps current curriculum/instruction intact. If courses are added, it improves content coverage. This option maintains student motivation for state tests. It meets regulatory timelines.
Cons: Increased cost of adding more EOC tests occurs. Alignment to standards may remain a problem due to limited coverage of EOC subjects. May need to move to using another state’s EOC tests or create custom EOC tests.
According to the KDE document, the timing of the state board's decision becomes important to the timetable of making changes in the overall system:
"Three of the options will call for revisions to existing regulations. If there is a decision to adopt a new model of testing in the 2014-15 school year, there are some regulatory concerns related to timing. End-of-course tests and the ACT EXPLORE and ACT PLAN are written into three state regulations: (1) 703 KAR 5:200, Next-Generation Learners, (2) 703 KAR 5:240, Accountability Definitions and Procedures and (3) 703 KAR 3:305, Minimum Requirements for High School Graduation.
"In order to make the new assessment model operational for the 2014-15 school year, an RFP process and selection of the new assessments would need to be completed in the summer of 2014. The regulatory process, with its required timelines, could not be completed prior to the RFP process, thus resulting in the regulation lagging behind the RFP process.
"It is permissible for this to occur, assuming the KBE understands both the intent of the RFP process and the regulation; however, the timing of the regulation under this scenario would result in the regulation not becoming effective until the middle of the 2014-15 school year, at the earliest.
"This scenario gives us very little room for error if the regulation receives numerous comments or if it were to be found deficient. If the new regulations were not approved through the entire regulatory process, then the new testing program would not be approved even though the testing program would have started pursuant to the RFP."
Tuesday's KBE study session also covered discussions of the student "growth" measurement in the state assessment system and development of a statewide teacher and principal evaluation system. The growth measurement has drawn considerable debate among local school leaders, especially at the elementary level.
While the KBE has its regular meeting on Wednesday, study session discussions frequently are slated for actual decisions later in the year.
The KBE meeting and study session were webcast via the KDE website and will be archived for later viewing.
State board to discussing next steps after EXPLORE, PLAN tests go away this fall
Staff report
The Kentucky Board of Education has begun examining its options for two major changes in the state's school accountability system that began with the 2009 passage of Senate Bill 1.
In a study session that began Tuesday afternoon, staff of the state Department of Education presented KBE members with a series of choices that must be made for amending the state's system of measuring student and school progress.
Some of the decisions include how to replace current elements of the state's school accountability system and what timetable for the actions should be adopted.
Two primary factors are pushing the issue.
Currently, Kentucky eighth graders take the EXPLORE high school readiness exam each fall, while 10th-grade students take the PLAN college and career readiness test. Both are purchased by the state from ACT, which has announced it is discontinuing that product after the fall of 2014.
Meanwhile, ACT also supplies the "QualityCore End of Course (EOC)" exams used in Kentucky high schools to assess students' mastery in several course areas. Last year's EOC testing experienced serious problems with online administration.
Another factor the state is facing is that its plan calls for expanding EOC testing, but insufficient funds were allocated by the legislature to allow that to happen. Additionally, the current EOC exams don't cover all of the state's expanding content under the Kentucky Core Academic standards.
In documents released by KDE in advance of Tuesday's discussions, four options were spelled out for the KBE members' consideration:
Option A
* Replace the end-of-course assessment model with a summative, end-of-year testing model that provides broader coverage of the Kentucky Core Academic Standards at the high school level; this test would go into effect in 2014-15. The summative assessment would be given at the end of the year to all grade 10 students in the subjects of reading, mathematics, writing, science and social studies.
* Require the end-of-year results of the high school assessment mentioned above to provide the information required by the ACT PLAN test. The end-of-year test would, in essence, function as a single test meeting two requirements. • Use the current K-PREP middle school tests to provide the information required as a part of the ACT EXPLORE test. The K-PREP test would in essence function as a single test meeting two requirements. K-PREP grades 3-8 standard setting work used the distribution of students on the ACT scale; therefore, a score of Proficiency or Distinguished at grade 8 on the K-PREP test indicates the student is on track for meeting the ACT benchmarks and is ready for challenging high school courses.
Pros: Creates a better and more thorough alignment of the high school assessment system with the Kentucky Core Academic Standards and college readiness. Eliminates ongoing problems with the current EOC online system and saves an estimated $2 million dollars.
Cons: Accountability trend lines end and must start over; high school curriculum and instruction must be adapted for the new assessment model at the beginning of the 2014-15 school year.
Vendors who will have a product ready by spring 2015 will be limited. Student motivation becomes an issue because EOY test results are usually not available in a timely fashion and the link between an EOY test and a specific course is very difficult to determine.
Option B
* Adopt Option A above; however, implement it in the 2015-16 school year.
Pros: Same pros listed above and schools continue summer 2014 professional development and 2014-15 instruction/curriculum. Schools have advance notice of upcoming instructional/curriculum changes coming in 2015-16. Trend data stays intact for a fourth year. More vendors would have testing products by 2015-16. The phase-in will meet regulatory timelines.
Cons: Accountability trend lines start over in 2015-16 school year. The delay pushes out changes an extra year. EOC online issues may or may not be solved by spring 2015, the final year of administration of EOC. Student motivation becomes an issue because EOY test results are usually not available in a timely fashion and the link between an EOY test and a specific course is very difficult to determine.
Option C
* Option C is a hybrid of A and B above. Replace the grade 10 ACT PLAN test with an end-of-year summative test as discussed in Options A and B. The new grade 10 test would go into effect in 2014-15; however, EOC continues one last time in 2014-15.
* Use the current K-PREP middle school tests to provide the information required as a part of the ACT EXPLORE test.
* In 2015-16, the grade 10 EOY summative would replace the EOC as described in Options A and B above.
Pros: Allows phase-in of new test; schools can make instructional/curriculum adjustments; and the new test gets a one-year try out to determine its logistical and instructional feasibility. The option would increase savings in 2015-16. This option would provide a fourth year of trend data for accountability. The phase-in will meet regulatory timelines.
Cons: Accountability trend lines start over in 2015-16 school year. The delay pushes out changes an extra year. The option has a slight increase in cost in 2014-15. In 2015-16, student motivation becomes an issue because EOY test results are usually not available in a timely fashion and the link between an EOY test and a specific course is very difficult to determine.
Option D (for end of course tests)
* Continue with the EOC testing model; find a replacement for the ACT EXPLORE/PLAN. May need to issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) to address both increased coverage of standards and online issues. Or, KDE may add more EOC courses and associated tests in the existing contract to provide more coverage of standards.
* Replace the grade 10 ACT PLAN test with fall testing schedule.
*
Either use middle school K-PREP tests to provide the information
required by the ACT EXPLORE test, or select a replacement test for the
ACT EXPLORE.
Pros: Provides for less disruption to the high school work. Continues accountability and keeps current curriculum/instruction intact. If courses are added, it improves content coverage. This option maintains student motivation for state tests. It meets regulatory timelines.
Cons: Increased cost of adding more EOC tests occurs. Alignment to standards may remain a problem due to limited coverage of EOC subjects. May need to move to using another state’s EOC tests or create custom EOC tests.
According to the KDE document, the timing of the state board's decision becomes important to the timetable of making changes in the overall system:
"Three of the options will call for revisions to existing regulations. If there is a decision to adopt a new model of testing in the 2014-15 school year, there are some regulatory concerns related to timing. End-of-course tests and the ACT EXPLORE and ACT PLAN are written into three state regulations: (1) 703 KAR 5:200, Next-Generation Learners, (2) 703 KAR 5:240, Accountability Definitions and Procedures and (3) 703 KAR 3:305, Minimum Requirements for High School Graduation.
"In order to make the new assessment model operational for the 2014-15 school year, an RFP process and selection of the new assessments would need to be completed in the summer of 2014. The regulatory process, with its required timelines, could not be completed prior to the RFP process, thus resulting in the regulation lagging behind the RFP process.
"It is permissible for this to occur, assuming the KBE understands both the intent of the RFP process and the regulation; however, the timing of the regulation under this scenario would result in the regulation not becoming effective until the middle of the 2014-15 school year, at the earliest.
"This scenario gives us very little room for error if the regulation receives numerous comments or if it were to be found deficient. If the new regulations were not approved through the entire regulatory process, then the new testing program would not be approved even though the testing program would have started pursuant to the RFP."
Tuesday's KBE study session also covered discussions of the student "growth" measurement in the state assessment system and development of a statewide teacher and principal evaluation system. The growth measurement has drawn considerable debate among local school leaders, especially at the elementary level.
While the KBE has its regular meeting on Wednesday, study session discussions frequently are slated for actual decisions later in the year.
The KBE meeting and study session were webcast via the KDE website and will be archived for later viewing.
1 comment:
This just makes me so disturbed that I could hardly finish the article. How many years are we out from SB 1 and how much do we actually have in place? Whoa, hold on a minute, we don't have it in place because we are going to change it again after everyone has spent all this time retooling for what was prescribed three years ago. Talk about a lack of credibility. Why would any administer or or educator even take the time to try to understand the curriculum or assessment of the day when it will only be changed yet again and any comparison with student performance in the past will not align with the next KDE flavor of the month. Sorry but there just isn't any credibility anymore in KDE leadership.
Doc H. did all of his school visits to try to create credibility, then he had us chase our tales by creating a plan that didn't win the Fed RTTT grand prize. Scares us with the sky is falling educational fear mongering. Take a couple of years of throwing lowest performing schools under the bus. Spend tons of money on outside vendor contracts only to have the not fulfill their obligations and then quit providing the assessments. Churn out version after version of operating proceedures that can't be implemented completely much less monitored, still no social studies or science standards in place for assessment, throw teachers under the bus as being the main problem with KY education, now we have PGES to look forward to and hardly anyone knows how it is going to work on a large scale but our jobs are all going to be on the line with it (goodbye tenure - hello annual student learning goals). Hey at least after five years I am going to get a 1% raise ...if my district doesn't have to cut me first.
Post a Comment