Skip to main content

Home/ 7-12 Math Common Core Resources/ Group items tagged assessments

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
anonymous

Education Week: New Details Surface About Common Assessments - 0 views

www.edweek.org/...15assess.h31.html

education assessments CCSS common core PARRC

shared by anonymous on 23 Jan 12 - No Cached
  • they seek to harness the power of computers in new ways and assess skills that multiple-choice tests cannot.
  • early documents offer glimpses of the groups' thinking.
  • A Dec. 30 solicitation by PARCC, seeking vendors to write test items, describes the consortium's vision of its testing system in more detail than did previous documents. It expects to award that contract in April to "multiple" vendors to design half the test items, and renew the contract to some of those vendors to craft the rest.
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • covers the development of the two pieces of the test that will yield students' summative scores in mathematics and English/language arts and be used for accountability purposes: a computer-based end-of-year test and a performance-based assessment given toward the end of the year. The scope of work also includes developing midyear formative assessments that are part of PARCC's system but are optional for states.
  • A preliminary blueprint of PARCC's English/language arts exam shows that the performance-based assessment, spread over two days, would involve a "research simulation" that asks students to read a suite of texts, including an "anchor" text such as a speech by a prominent historical figure. They would have to answer questions that require them to cite evidence from the text for their answers and write an essay. Another aspect of the performance-based test would require students to "engage" with literature (grades 3-5) or conduct literary analysis (grades 6-11) using a combination of shorter and longer texts. The end-of-year exam would employ six literary and informational texts and ask students to respond to machine-scorable questions, including ones that demand comparison and synthesis of the readings. The end-of-year test in English/language arts would yield at least half of a student's points in that topic. One-third to one-half would come from the performance-based test, according to the preliminary blueprint.
  • ARCC's math test will include three types of questions: "innovative," machine-scorable, computer-based items; items that call for written arguments or justifications; critiques of mathematical reasoning, or proof that students "attended to precision" in math; and items involving real-world scenarios. The performance-based assessment in math will count for 40 percent to 50 percent of a student's points in that subject, and the end-of-course exam will yield 50 percent to 60 percent of the points. The math exams will focus on solving problems in the "major content areas" at each grade level, as well as demonstrating conceptual understanding, fluency and mathematical reasoning, and applying knowledge to real-world problems. At the high school level, PARCC will develop two series of end-of-course math tests: a traditional one—Algebra 1, geometry, and Algebra 2—and one that integrates those topics. Those parallel pathways reflect choices educators can make about how to design math courses from the common standards. The solicitation document answers a question that had been circulating among some educators of young children. PARCC said that its tests will be given by computer to students in grades 6-11, but those in grades 3-5 will answer questions with pencil and paper because of concerns about younger children's keyboarding skills.
  • PARCC has contracted with the Dana Center at the University of Texas at Austin to build prototype assessment tasks in math, and with the University of Pittsburgh's Institute for Learning to generate such items in literacy. Those items are slated for release this summer.
anonymous

Math Formative Assessment Lessons (beta)- MP2 - 0 views

map.mathshell.org/...lessons.php

formative assessment mathematical practices problem solving

shared by anonymous on 27 Mar 13 - No Cached
  • anonymous on 27 Mar 13
     
    formative assessment task aligned to MP2 for High School
anonymous

CCSSTOOLBOX.COM - 1 views

www.ccsstoolbox.com/...PARCCPrototype_main.html

common CCSSI standards item task assessments CCSS

shared by anonymous on 06 Nov 12 - No Cached
  • anonymous on 06 Nov 12
     
    preparing for implementation of the CCSS/PARCC assessments and tasks
anonymous

Final College-Readiness Definition Guides Test Consortium - Curriculum Matters - Educat... - 1 views

blogs.edweek.org/..._college_readiness_defini.html

shared by anonymous on 08 Nov 12 - No Cached
  • 28997 28997 « Election Brings Changes to Polarized Texas School Board | Main Final College-Readiness Definition Guides Test Consortium By Catherine Gewertz on November 7, 2012 4:16 PM What does it mean to be college-ready? Half the states in the country have agreed on a definition. And that definition will shape the way student performance is judged in those states in a couple years. The Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers, or PARCC, has approved a set of descriptors for the tests it's designing for the Common Core State Standards. They lay out how many levels of achievement there will be on the test, specify what level a student has to reach to be considered "college ready," and describe the level of expertise students must show to merit that title. The development of these descriptors is a key step in designing the tests that students in the 23 PARCC states will take in 2014-15. The other group of states working on similar tests, the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium, is working on descriptors of its own. To get a sense of the discussions that go into these decisions, read my report on a PARCC board meeting in June, when K-12 and higher education members of the consortium hashed out their differences. Then read the blog post I wrote in July, which discusses how they blended those differences into a new version of the descriptors. They opened that one up for more feedback, and the result is the final ones, which can be found on PARCC's website. A summary of public feedback shows how K-12 and higher ed. folks weighed in on a variety of topics. One was whether to assign names or numbers to the five levels of achievement on the test. Another was how to distinguish nuances in the meaning of the descriptions of students' skills at the various levels. At exactly what point, for instance, does a student's command of the subject move from "superior" to "solid," from "solid" to "partial," from "partial" to "limited," and from "limited" to "very limited?" These are the kinds of discussions that characterize the work on this stuff. As you can see from the final documents, PARCC's policy will be that students earn the "college readiness" determination by performing at level 4 on a 5-level test. Reaching that level on the language arts part of the exam will mean that students have "demonstrated the academic knowledge, skills, and practices necessary" to skip remedial classes and go directly into entry-level, credit-bearing courses in "college English composition, literature, and technical courses requiring college-level reading and writing." Scoring at level 4 in math allows students to enroll directly in entry-level, credit-bearing courses in algebra, introductory statistics, and "technical courses requiring an equivalent level" of math. The PARCC policy says that college-readiness scores on the test will be set in such a way that students who score at that
  • The PARCC policy says that college-readiness scores on the test will be set in such a way that students who score at that level—level 4—will have a 75 percent chance of earning a grade of C or better in those college courses.
  • Acknowledging a sensitive area in the discussion of college readiness, the policy notes that the skills sought in the tests are only the "academic" ones necessary for college success, not the entire spectrum of skills necessary, such as persistence or motivation.
anonymous

Education Week: Seizing the Moment for Mathematics - 0 views

www.edweek.org/...36schmidt.h31.html

shared by anonymous on 24 Jul 12 - No Cached
  • Published Online: July 17, 2012 Published in Print: July 18, 2012, as Seizing the Moment for Mathematics Commentary Seizing the Moment for Mathematics By William Schmidt Premium article access courtesy of Edweek.org. Read more FREE content! Printer-Friendly Email Article Reprints Comments Like Liked </sp
  • As part of our ongoing research, Richard Houang and I recently concluded a study of the math standards and their relation to existing state standards and the standards of other nations. Drawing from our work on the 1995 TIMSS, we developed a measure of the congruence of the common core to all 50 state standards in effect in 2008-09, as well as to an international benchmark. We also examined the relationship of each state's math standards to the common standards and how each state performed on the 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress. Although, we can't project the success of the common math standards with certainty, it would give us reason for optimism if states whose standards more closely resembled those of the common core performed better on NAEP.
  • What did our research uncover? The common-core math standards closely mirror those of the world's highest-achieving nations.
  • ...9 more annotations...
  • Based on the 1995 TIMSS, we identified common standards from the best-performing countries, which we call "A+ standards." We found an overlap of roughly 90 percent between the common math standards and the A+ standards. If the standards of the world's top achievers in 8th grade mathematics are any guide, then the common standards represent high-quality standards.
  • we find three key characteristics in the curricula of the highest-performing countries: coherence (the logical structure that guides students from basic to more advanced material in a systematic way); focus (the push for mastery of a few key concepts at each grade rather than shallow repetition of the same material); and rigor (the level of difficulty at each grade level). The common core adheres to each of these three principles.
  • Unfortunately, when one hears that a state's existing standards are better than the common core, it usually means that those standards include more—and more advanced—topics at earlier grades. But this is exactly the problem the common math standards are designed to correct. It is a waste of time to expose children to content they are not prepared for, and it is counterproductive to skim over dozens of disconnected topics every year with no regard for student mastery.
  • The disappointing reality is that, while improved from a decade ago, most state math standards fall below the common standards in both coherence and focus.
  • In debating the utility of the common core, it is very important to recognize that standards are not self-executing.
  • After including both cut points and how far away a state's standards are from the common core (controlling for poverty and socioeconomic status), we found that the two in combination are related to higher mathematics achievement—an even stronger relationship than was the case when only the measure of similarity was included. In the final analysis, however, the key ingredient in the implementation of standards is whether districts, schools, and, most importantly, teachers, deliver the content to students in a way that is consistent with those standards.
  • As it stands in many classrooms, teachers are forced to pick and choose among the topics as laid out in the textbook, items on state assessments, and the content articulated in state and district standards—expressions of the curriculum that frequently clash with one another. In our recently completed Promoting Rigorous Outcomes in Mathematics and Science Education, or PROM/SE project—a research and development initiative to improve math and science teaching and learning at Michigan State University—we found tremendous variation in the topics covered in mathematics classes within states, within districts, and even within schools. In fact, the content coverage in low-income districts had more in common with the content delivered in low-income districts in other states than with that of the more affluent districts in their own states. Given how haphazardly standards are implemented, it shouldn't be much of a surprise if the relationship between state standards and student achievement is modest. What's remarkable is that the relationship is as strong as it is.
  • The essential question is not whether the common core can improve mathematics learning in the United States, but whether we, as a nation, have the commitment to ensure that it does.
  • It remains to be seen whether the right kind of common assessments and supporting instructional materials will be developed.
anonymous

Common-Core Writers Issue Math 'Publishers' Criteria' - Curriculum Matters - Education ... - 0 views

blogs.edweek.org/...writers_of_math_common_co.html

shared by anonymous on 24 Jul 12 - No Cached
  • The lead writers of the Common Core State Standards in mathematics have finalized a set of guidelines for curricular materials
  • The so-called "publishers' criteria" document homes in on the issues of focus, coherence, and rigor, and gets pretty specific at times. It suggests, for instance, that elementary math textbooks should be fewer than 200 pages in length, and that at any given grade level, approximately three-fourths of instructional time should be devoted to the "major work of each grade."
  • In addition, the criteria spell out when it is appropriate for certain topics to be assessed in
  • ...12 more annotations...
  • Probability should not be assessed until grade 7, for instance, the document says, and statistical distributions should not be assessed by materials until grade 6.
  • In a sign that the new math document will be taken seriously, it has the endorsement of several prominent organizations in the education sphere, including the National Governors Association, the Council of Chief State School Officers, the Council of the Great City Schools, the National Association of State Boards of Education, and Achieve, a national nonprofit that managed the process to develop the common standards. Both the NGA and CCSSO spearheaded that undertaking.
  • In fact, a group of 20 big-city districts, led by the Council of the Great City Schools, served notice to publishers last month that any materials they purchase must reflect the priorities of the publishers' criteria.
  • Jason Zimba, a co-author of the document and one of the three lead writers of the math standards, said he anticipates some disagreement.
  • The other two co-authors of the criteria (and lead writers of the math standards) are William McCallum, a math professor at the University of Arizona, and Philip Daro, an education consultant to states and districts. Both McCallum and Daro also are advisers to Student Achievement Partners.
  • To be clear, this is not the final word from the standards writers. An "updated" version of the publishers' criteria for math, taking into account feedback, is expected out early next year. In addition, a separate document for high school math will be issued around the same time.
  • Zimba argues that the single most important element to ensuring the common core's success in improving math education is the emphasis on focus—essentially the idea of covering fewer math topics, but in greater depth.
  • The criteria document acknowledges upfront that it may be hard for math educators and experts to let go of some topics. "During the writing of the standards, the writing team often received feedback along these lines: 'I love the focus of these standards! Now if we could just add one or two more things,' " it says. "But focus compromised is no longer focus at all. ... 'Teaching less, learning more' can seem like hard medicine for an educational system addicted to coverage."
  • the new criteria are also aimed at helping to shape professional development pegged to the common-core standards.
  • The goal of the criteria, the authors say, is not to dictate acceptable forms of instructional resources, suggesting that "materials and tools of very different forms" can be deemed acceptable, including digital and online media.
  • the guidelines are not binding.
  • "Ultimately, it's still up to people at the local level. We think it's better to have something to react to than to have nothing out there, ... with people guessing on what they're supposed to do."
anonymous

Mathematics: ISBE Recommended Resources for Common Core State - 3 views

www.google.com/url

shared by anonymous on 20 Sep 12 - No Cached
  • anonymous on 20 Sep 12
     
    OUTSTANDING list of CCSS-Math resources including a link to FORMATIVE assessments aligned with CCSS.
anonymous

Maine schools experimenting with Web-based math homework - Education - Bangor Daily New... - 0 views

bangordailynews.com/...g-with-web-based-math-homework

shared by anonymous on 26 Dec 12 - No Cached
  • a computer program that gives students automatic feedback on homework answers by telling them whether they’re right or wrong and updates the teachers on their progress.
  • ASSISTments
  • ASSISTments hatched as an idea to help students practice math skills but has grown into an immense database of textbook questions used by students across the nation and in countries such as the United Kingdom and Japan.
  • ...8 more annotations...
  • Using ASSISTments, the student goes through assigned questions in sequence, working out the solutions on a sheet of paper and entering the answers into the computer. If the student gets the right answer, the program moves to the next question. If the answer is wrong, the program tells the student to try again. If the student struggles with the question or gets stuck, he or she can ask for a series of hints that will lead to the right answer.
  • Before students come to class the next day, teachers can look at a table, which shows whether the students got the answer correct and whether they requested hints to get to the answer. The table also breaks the statistics down into percentages. If 95 percent of the class gets a question right, there’s little need to spend time on it in class, but if only 25 percent get it right, the teacher might decide to review that topic. The program also tells teachers how long it’s taking students to complete their assignments.
  • “We don’t shop the same way we did 30 years ago. We don’t communicate the same way we did. So why do we teach students the same way?” Heffernan said
  • Heffernan said his goal is to evolve ASSISTments into something like Wikipedia,
  • ASSISTments users will help build an expansive bank of textbook questions, which teachers will dip into to select assignments. Only teachers and educational institutions, such as textbook producer Pearson, will have access to add to or alter ASSISTments entries.
  • There are similar homework and tutoring programs available, but ASSISTments is unique in that Heffernan provides it for free.
  • ASSISTments is a prime example of “formative assessment,” which allows teachers to observe student performance and adjust their teaching plan or techniques to help students better retain the material.
  • ASSISTments doesn’t restrict the role of the teacher, but rather it crunches numbers and presents statistics so teachers can do what they’re trained to do — teach
anonymous

Education Week: Timed Tests and the Development of Math Anxiety - 0 views

www.edweek.org/...36boaler.h31.html

mathematics fluency timed tests math anxiety

shared by anonymous on 09 Jul 12 - No Cached
  • Many test writers, teachers, and administrators erroneously equate fluency with timed testing.
  • It is critical that we take a moment to review the emerging evidence on the impact of timed testing and the ways in which it transforms children’s brains, leading to an inevitable path of math anxiety and low math achievement.
  • Researchers know that math anxiety starts early.
  • ...10 more annotations...
  • Researchers also know that it is not related to overall intelligence.
  • the introduction of brain-imaging research has given us new and important evidence.
  • has found that when children are put under math stress, they are unable to execute math problems successfully. The stress impedes their working memory—the area of the brain where we hold math facts. Beilock found that stressful math situations cause worries that compete for the working memory, causing it to be blocked. She also found that math anxiety has an impact on those with high, rather than low amounts of working memory—the very students who have the potential to take mathematics to higher levels.
  • found that levels of math anxiety did not correlate with grade level, reading level, or parental income. For the most capable students, the research confirms, stress impedes the functioning of their working memory and reduces achievement. Research conducted at Stanford revealed that math anxiety changes the structure and workings of the brain.
  • some of the students with the highest levels of success were those who indicated the greatest anxiety and made comments such as “I feel nervous. I know my facts, but this just scares me.”
  • It should not come as a surprise that the highest achievers displayed the greatest anxiety; in fact, neuroscience tells us that these students experience the greatest degree of cognitive dysfunction. But this anxiety does not only affect high-achieving students.
  • The brain research that has emerged recently could be the impetus for shifting the momentum. But the inclusion of the word “fluency” in the common standards may mean that educators will continue to use these tests, and that they will even be included as part of the new common-core assessments.
  • There are many good teaching strategies for encouraging fluency in math, but the ones that are effective are those that simultaneously develop number sense—the flexible use and understanding of numbers and quantities—without instilling fear and anxiety. Strategies that involve reasoning about numbers and operations, such as the pedagogical approach called “number talks,” are ideal for developing fluency with understanding.
  • timed tests also convey strong and negative messages about math, suggesting that math ability is measured by working quickly, rather than thinking deeply and carefully—the hallmark of high-level mathematical thinking.
  • Educators and policymakers share an important goal: to create math classrooms where students are excited to learn the subject, rather than being stressed and worried about their performance under pressure.
1 - 19 of 19
Showing 20▼ items per page