September Board of Ed: MCAS update

backups here and here
Wulfson: eighteen months ago that Board voted to do new MCAS

Michol Stapel:
participation rates: topping 97 percent in all categories (lowest grade 10 ELA, 97.9%)
"really high rates across the board"

4 and 8 required to take on computer; had a waiver process
about 60% of students taking test on computer (3-8); some isolated local issues
more than 93% in grades 4 to 8
Wulfson: one thing we've learned about computer based testing is there's a learning curve
used same platform as PARCC
Stapel: we've heard the more they've used it the easier it's become
continued phase in of computer based testing
process to adjust computer and paper against each other to ensure fairness across testing form
"it really should be an interim step until we're giving the test" to all students on the computer
District results week of the 16; parent/guardian reports received by district October 24

Standard setting: setting standards for each achievement level
high school MCAS was designed to measure readiness to graduate from high school (not college or career)
elementary were against state standards
Now looking to measure against college and career ready and walk backwards
Standard setting policy committee
considered what new levels should be
need for : Clear communication to parents and students about readiness for academics at the next grade level
Shared responsibility for student success

Bob Lee: Standard setting in grades 3-8 in August, 126 educators on six panels, ELA and math, 3-4, 5-6, 7-8
look at test items and say "how many points would a kid meeting expectations get" and so on
a relationship between 4 and 5 and 6 and so forth
"coherence across the grades, expectations that flow into one another"

Craven: did we solve for the laddered question problem (where if you get the first one wrong, you get the ones after that wrong)?
Stapel: had control over all questions in the test, we selected
so yeah, they probably still have them

Here's what they expect the results to look like (that's exceeding/meeting/partially meeting/not meeting expectations) #MAEdu #MCAS pic.twitter.com/zlge1Dgt6g

— Tracy Novick (@TracyNovick) September 26, 2017

results do not mean that students learned less; new test measures in a different way
reflect progression of learning from grade to grade
and consistent application of standards on student achievement

And Bob Lee notes alignment with #MAEdu NAEP results pic.twitter.com/9kUFGyfDFi

— Tracy Novick (@TracyNovick) September 26, 2017

Doherty notes that we'll have reports "in the Globe and the Herald that half of students don't reach proficiency" and it's the kids "in Chelsea and Worcester"
Fernandez asks what supporting documentation is coming out
Wulfson agrees on the issue: FAQs, sample PowerPoints to use with School Committees and parents to put this in context
Wulfson: have to be real clear on our message on this
Moriarty: whether this actual an objective measure of one child's progress
remember the impact on the child if that measure is met, particularly in the early grades
"that's why I think other data points, particularly chronic absenteeism" are important

Trimarchi: need for discussion with students, as could be disheartening
and the shift we've undergone from this projecting what students will do in the future
Stapel: materials for students, parents, and families
Wulfson: that's the core question

High school competency
Lucy Wall joining presentation
Competency determination came in with 1993; was required of class of 2003
2006 added science
current requirements through class of 2020

1. Recommending at 2021 and 2022 be held to an interim competency standard
place on the new test that corresponds to 220 on current test
"range of scores that are most like the 220"
"reflects the same knowledge, skills, and ability" as what a current 220

Wulfson notes that class of 2021 is current freshman class; not fair to have them get to sophomore year without their knowing


2. Recommending a letter to students in grade 9 on assessments they'll take and standards they'll need to meet.
3. Recommending updating competency determination to establish a similar transition plan for science
4. Recommending reviewing and revised other regulations and policies as needed (retest, scholarships)

Stewart: discussion on social emotional learning, range of issues
what if we asked a range of questions that spanned a range of subject area: coping with unexpected tasks
knowledge and skills
what we might learn from that
"helps us to maintain an approach that's a living document and it's a living assessment"
Wulfson: corollary to that is skills we want students to have that aren't easily tested
how do you work together
emerging area on performance based assessments
Following discussion in New Hampshire, work of districts being done local
"we're the last ones to say that the current model of assessment "measured it all