1 / 20

Enhanced Assessment Grant: English Language Proficiency Assessment System

Enhanced Assessment Grant: English Language Proficiency Assessment System. Assessment and Accountability Division Curriculum, Learning, and Accountability Branch California Department of Education May 2011. Background.

silvio
Download Presentation

Enhanced Assessment Grant: English Language Proficiency Assessment System

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Enhanced Assessment Grant: English Language Proficiency Assessment System Assessment and Accountability DivisionCurriculum, Learning, and Accountability BranchCalifornia Department of Education May 2011

  2. Background June 2010: U.S. Department of Education (ED) awarded funds to two assessment consortia to develop assessments in English-language arts (ELA) and mathematics in grades three through eight and once in grades ten to twelve August 2010: State Board of Education (SBE) adopted the Common Core State Standards

  3. New Enhanced Assessment Grant January 2011: ED earmarked $10.7 million for up to two English language proficiency (ELP) assessment system grants April 19, 2011: ED released applications for the Enhanced Assessment Instruments Grant (EAIG) (see http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2011/2011-9484.htm) Frequently Asked Questions are available at http://www2.ed.gov/programs/eag/faq.html May 19, 2001: Intent to apply deadline June 3, 2011: Applications due September 2011: Grants awarded

  4. New Enhanced Assessment Grant Purpose Develop an ELP assessment system collaboratively with other states to enhance the quality of assessment instruments and systems Build upon the national academic content assessments by aligning the ELP assessment to college and career ready academic standards Align ELP assessment to English language development (ELD) standards

  5. California is the Lead State Superintendent Torlakson announced on May 10, 2011 Partnering with the Council of Chief State School Officers or CCSSO Working with national experts to develop the application Working title: English Language Acquisition Assessment System (ELAAS)

  6. Rationale and Benefits for California as Lead State Significant English Learner (EL) population 30 percent of the nation’s ELs reside in CA (1.5 million students) Significant investment and long history in the assessments of ELs Significant technical expertise within the state in the assessment of ELs

  7. Lead State’s Responsibilities The lead state must: Serve as the applicant and fiscal agent Conduct all communication with ED, including: Submission of annual progress reports Submission of financial reports

  8. Lead State’s Responsibilities (cont.) The lead state must: Coordinate project activities in conjunction with a project management partner to: Handle logistical and financial tasks Coordinate meeting locations for member states Coordinate with member states to ensure project progresses on schedule Disseminate project findings and reports

  9. Priorities for the EAG Collaborations to enhance quality, validity, and reliability of the assessment Use multiple measures to assess academic achievement Chart student progress over time Develop comprehensive assessment instruments, using performance or technology-based academic assessments Establish an English language proficiency assessment system

  10. Priorities for the EAG (cont.) The application must address Priority 5 and at least one of the first four priorities In addition, the EAG application identifies one Competitive Preference Priority to foster collaborative efforts among states. ED will award 15 additional points to applicants that meet the competitive preference priority

  11. ELP System Requirements: Design The ELP assessment system must: • Be implemented in multiple states • Use a common definition of EL • Include both diagnostic and summative assessments • Be aligned to ELP standards that correspond to college- and career-readiness standards in ELA and mathematics • Assess kindergarten through grade 12 students to determine progress in learning English

  12. ELP System Requirements: Design (cont.) The ELP assessment system must: • Include assessments that cover ELP standards across four domains of listening, speaking, reading, and writing • Include assessments that measure the linguistic components of language (e.g., phonology, morphology, syntax) • Use common assessment exit criteria from EL status

  13. ELP System Requirements: Technical Quality The ELP system must: Meet national professional and technical standards for test development Elicit complex student demonstrations of comprehension and production of academic English (e.g., performance tasks, selected responses, or brief or extended constructed responses)

  14. ELP System Requirements: Data The ELP system must produce data that: Allows for identification of English Learners Provides valid and reliable measure of students’ abilities in all four domains Includes student attainment of English proficiency and progress in learning English

  15. ELP System Requirements: Data (cont.) The ELP system must produce data that can be used: To determine whether a student should exit from English language instruction educational programs For Title I and Title III accountability As one of multiple measures to inform evaluations of principal and teacher effectiveness, determine professional development needs, and provide strategies to improve teaching, learning, and language instruction educational programs

  16. ELP System Requirements: Compatibility and Accessibility The ELP system must: • Use approaches to technology, test administration, scoring, and reporting that facilitate coherent inclusion of these assessments within states’ assessment systems • Provide assessment of all ELs, including strategies for assessing EL students with severe cognitive disabilities

  17. ELAAS Consortium Member States Arkansas Connecticut Idaho Indiana Iowa Louisiana Massachusetts Michigan Nebraska New Hampshire Oregon South Carolina Tennessee Washington West Virginia Possible AdditionalMember States Arizona Florida Kansas Minnesota Ohio As of May 18, 2011

  18. Member States’ Responsibilities All member states must agree to: Adopt a common definition of an EL and a common assessment exit criteria Use or adopt any assessments developed by the end of the project period (up to 48 months) Adopt a common set of: ELD standards; performance level descriptors; achievement standards; assessment procedures; item release and test security policies; and policies and procedures for accommodations and student participation

  19. Benefits for Member States Cost effective Common assessment exit criteria would allow for reciprocity of reclassification decisions among states Provide access to and learn from national experts in the field of assessment of ELs

  20. For More Information Lily Roberts, Ph.D., Administrator, CELDT and Title III Accountability Office Assessment and Accountability Division Phone: 916-319-0569 E-mail: LRoberts@cde.ca.gov

More Related