From jordan.heide at state.or.us Wed Mar 2 12:50:27 2016 From: jordan.heide at state.or.us (HEIDE Jordan - ODE) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 20:50:27 +0000 Subject: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Change in May Meeting Date In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi everyone, Thank you for responding to the Doodle Poll. Based on feedback from the group on the poll and ODE employees' schedules, we will hold the in-person meeting on May 6th. Please let me know if you have any questions. I will send out the details about location and call-in information as we get closer. Jordan Heide 503-947-5905 _____________________________________________ From: HEIDE Jordan - ODE Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 3:05 PM To: 'assessment_advisory_committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us' Subject: RE: Change in May Meeting Date Hi all, In regards to the message below, we would like you to fill out the Doodle poll located here to decide between the two dates listed. We apologize for the late notice and appreciate your flexibility and time during this busy part of the school year. Please let me know if you have any further questions. Jordan Heide 503-947-5905 _____________________________________________ From: HEIDE Jordan - ODE Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 8:24 AM To: assessment_advisory_committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us Subject: Change in May Meeting Date Importance: High Good Morning, After reviewing the schedule of deadlines for posting our 2016-17 Preliminary Test Administration Manual, we have determined that in order to meaningfully engage with the Assessment Advisory Committee prior to publication, we will need to move the May meeting currently scheduled for May 27th up to May 6th. This will be an all-day in-person meeting held here at ODE. We hope this date will work for everyone and apologize for any inconvenience this change presents. If you will not be able to attend on the 6th or will need to participate remotely, please contact Jordan Heide. Thank you for your understanding! Jordan Heide Administrative Specialist Office of Assessment & Accountability 255 Capitol St NE | Salem, OR 97310 | *503-947-5905 Want to stay informed? The Assessment & Accountability Update is a weekly newsletter highlighting news, updates, and changes to the state's assessment efforts. To subscribe to this newsletter, go to http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/ayprcupdates. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jordan.heide at state.or.us Thu Mar 10 13:28:03 2016 From: jordan.heide at state.or.us (HEIDE Jordan - ODE) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 21:28:03 +0000 Subject: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold Message-ID: Good afternoon, ODE has received a few reports of students testing before the 66% instructional day threshold has been met. This testing impropriety is outlined in Section 5.2 of the Test Administration Manual where it states, "ODE may invalidate tests if school-level test windows do not meet each of the following criteria..." For those cases reported to us to date (reflecting testing four weeks, three weeks, and one week before the threshold), ODE has so far determined to treat these improprieties as "no impact," meaning the tests stand as valid and the students are allowed to continue testing. However, we wanted to engage with you to help inform ODE's policy to ensure a systematic, coherent, and consistent approach. Specifically, we'd like your input on the following questions: * Should there be a cutoff point at which tests should be invalidated (i.e. tests administered more than 4 weeks before the threshold is met)? * If a cutoff is appropriate, what is the appropriate cutoff? Please reply with your input by the end of the day this Monday, March 14. Thank you as always for your consideration! Jordan Heide Administrative Specialist Office of Assessment & Accountability 255 Capitol St NE | Salem, OR 97310 | *503-947-5905 Want to stay informed? The Assessment & Accountability Update is a weekly newsletter highlighting news, updates, and changes to the state's assessment efforts. To subscribe to this newsletter, go to http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/ayprcupdates. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bbain at ttsd.k12.or.us Thu Mar 10 13:36:44 2016 From: bbain at ttsd.k12.or.us (Bain, Brian) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 21:36:44 +0000 Subject: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <016B0BFF1DF04E44B5C8ED9AACF3243AA858BDA2@EX3.ttsd.ttsd.k12.or.us> I'm not certain the best method by which to have a conversation about this, so I'm going to start the conversation here. 1) We now have a resource to prevent this from happening. I went in and set school test windows that will not allow anyone to administer SBAC tests until after Spring break. I think this should be a strong(er) recommendation if not a requirement of DTCs 2) Setting a secondary cut-off for "when it's REALLY (and this time we mean REAAAAALLY) not ok" seems a little strange. That said, I have a number in mind, but I want to hear conversation first. :) Brian Bain District Assessment Coordinator Tigard-Tualatin School District 6960 SW Sandburg St, Tigard, OR 97223 503-431-4120 - bbain at ttsd.k12.or.us From: Assessment_Advisory_Committee [mailto:assessment_advisory_committee-bounces at listsmart.osl.state.or.us] On Behalf Of HEIDE Jordan - ODE Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 1:28 PM To: assessment_advisory_committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us Subject: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold Good afternoon, ODE has received a few reports of students testing before the 66% instructional day threshold has been met. This testing impropriety is outlined in Section 5.2 of the Test Administration Manual where it states, "ODE may invalidate tests if school-level test windows do not meet each of the following criteria..." For those cases reported to us to date (reflecting testing four weeks, three weeks, and one week before the threshold), ODE has so far determined to treat these improprieties as "no impact," meaning the tests stand as valid and the students are allowed to continue testing. However, we wanted to engage with you to help inform ODE's policy to ensure a systematic, coherent, and consistent approach. Specifically, we'd like your input on the following questions: ? Should there be a cutoff point at which tests should be invalidated (i.e. tests administered more than 4 weeks before the threshold is met)? ? If a cutoff is appropriate, what is the appropriate cutoff? Please reply with your input by the end of the day this Monday, March 14. Thank you as always for your consideration! Jordan Heide Administrative Specialist Office of Assessment & Accountability 255 Capitol St NE | Salem, OR 97310 | ?503-947-5905 Want to stay informed? The Assessment & Accountability Update is a weekly newsletter highlighting news, updates, and changes to the state's assessment efforts. To subscribe to this newsletter, go to http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/ayprcupdates. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From TSchild at nwresd.k12.or.us Thu Mar 10 13:42:05 2016 From: TSchild at nwresd.k12.or.us (Tami Schild) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 21:42:05 +0000 Subject: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold In-Reply-To: <016B0BFF1DF04E44B5C8ED9AACF3243AA858BDA2@EX3.ttsd.ttsd.k12.or.us> References: , <016B0BFF1DF04E44B5C8ED9AACF3243AA858BDA2@EX3.ttsd.ttsd.k12.or.us> Message-ID: <1457646125280.51103@nwresd.k12.or.us> ?I agree with Brian. But I also don't think student tests should be invalidated because of this particular adult error -- especially since SB is only one opportunity. Some high schools that set their window early so 12th graders can test. I don't think there is a way to set a different window, one for 12th grade, one for 11th grade. ________________________________ From: Assessment_Advisory_Committee on behalf of Bain, Brian Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 1:36 PM To: HEIDE Jordan - ODE; assessment_advisory_committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us Subject: Re: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold I'm not certain the best method by which to have a conversation about this, so I'm going to start the conversation here. 1) We now have a resource to prevent this from happening. I went in and set school test windows that will not allow anyone to administer SBAC tests until after Spring break. I think this should be a strong(er) recommendation if not a requirement of DTCs 2) Setting a secondary cut-off for "when it's REALLY (and this time we mean REAAAAALLY) not ok" seems a little strange. That said, I have a number in mind, but I want to hear conversation first. :) Brian Bain District Assessment Coordinator Tigard-Tualatin School District 6960 SW Sandburg St, Tigard, OR 97223 503-431-4120 - bbain at ttsd.k12.or.us From: Assessment_Advisory_Committee [mailto:assessment_advisory_committee-bounces at listsmart.osl.state.or.us] On Behalf Of HEIDE Jordan - ODE Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 1:28 PM To: assessment_advisory_committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us Subject: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold Good afternoon, ODE has received a few reports of students testing before the 66% instructional day threshold has been met. This testing impropriety is outlined in Section 5.2 of the Test Administration Manual where it states, "ODE may invalidate tests if school-level test windows do not meet each of the following criteria..." For those cases reported to us to date (reflecting testing four weeks, three weeks, and one week before the threshold), ODE has so far determined to treat these improprieties as "no impact," meaning the tests stand as valid and the students are allowed to continue testing. However, we wanted to engage with you to help inform ODE's policy to ensure a systematic, coherent, and consistent approach. Specifically, we'd like your input on the following questions: ? Should there be a cutoff point at which tests should be invalidated (i.e. tests administered more than 4 weeks before the threshold is met)? ? If a cutoff is appropriate, what is the appropriate cutoff? Please reply with your input by the end of the day this Monday, March 14. Thank you as always for your consideration! Jordan Heide Administrative Specialist Office of Assessment & Accountability 255 Capitol St NE | Salem, OR 97310 | ?503-947-5905 Want to stay informed? The Assessment & Accountability Update is a weekly newsletter highlighting news, updates, and changes to the state's assessment efforts. To subscribe to this newsletter, go to http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/ayprcupdates. From stewartw at gladstone.k12.or.us Thu Mar 10 13:51:17 2016 From: stewartw at gladstone.k12.or.us (Bill Stewart) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 13:51:17 -0800 Subject: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Jordan, The problem with the current criteria (though better than last year) is that it is interpreted locally, based on perceptions about what constitutes appropriate instructional days, especially in schools / districts with creative schedules & calendars. It's not a surprise that some folks miss the mark on this, in some cases it would be easy to do without intention. On the other hand, I've got to assume that something like the 4 week examples might be a case of 'operator error'...failure to attend trainings or read the manuals or, worse, doing it intentionally. Accordingly (I KNOW I will get flak for this), may I suggest an *actual start date* for SBAC test window in 2017. It should be set on the lenient side (a date that works for most schools that start 'early'). I'm guessing that it might be something like the start of the first full week in March. That would have been March 7th this year. My suggestion would mean that ANY test given before the 7th would be invalidated and that there would be no 'guessing' based on the school calendar, schedule or phase of the moon. Re a cutoff for invalidation.... Yes, there probably should be, though 4 weeks leeway seems like a lot...2 weeks seems more appropriate to me. Either way, the trick will be that it will have to be 'proven' what that particular school's start date should really have been, given their calendar and type of schedule. It could easily vary within a district. Does ODE have the capacity / interest to do that? Who have the reports come from? Are they from sources that really know how to calculate the 66% date? I can imagine some sources that might have an agenda in making such a report. This might not be what you needed...if so, my apologies. Bill On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 1:28 PM, HEIDE Jordan - ODE < jordan.heide at state.or.us> wrote: > Good afternoon, > > ODE has received a few reports of students testing before the 66% > instructional day threshold has been met. This testing impropriety is > outlined in Section 5.2 of the Test Administration Manual where it states, > ?ODE may invalidate tests if school-level test windows do not meet each of > the following criteria?? For those cases reported to us to date (reflecting > testing four weeks, three weeks, and one week before the threshold), ODE > has so far determined to treat these improprieties as ?no impact,? meaning > the tests stand as valid and the students are allowed to continue testing. > However, we wanted to engage with you to help inform ODE?s policy to ensure > a systematic, coherent, and consistent approach. Specifically, we?d like > your input on the following questions: > > > - Should there be a cutoff point at which tests should be invalidated > (i.e. tests administered more than 4 weeks before the threshold is met)? > - If a cutoff is appropriate, what is the appropriate cutoff? > > > Please reply with your input by the end of the day this Monday, March 14. > Thank you as always for your consideration! > > > *Jordan Heide* > Administrative Specialist > Office of Assessment & Accountability > 255 Capitol St NE | Salem, OR 97310 | ?503-947-5905 > > *Want to stay informed?* The *Assessment & Accountability Update* is a > weekly newsletter highlighting news, updates, and changes to the state's > assessment efforts. To subscribe to this newsletter, go to > *http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/ayprcupdates* > . > > > > > _____________________________________________________ > Assessment_Advisory_Committee mailing list > Assessment_Advisory_Committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us > > http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/assessment_advisory_committee > Hosted by the Oregon State Library. The Library is not responsible for > content. > Questions related to message content should be directed to list owner(s) > or the sender of the message, by phone or email. > Technical questions? Call 503-378-8800. > > -- Bill Stewart Special Projects Gladstone SD stewartw at gladstone.k12.or.us 503-805-8680 - cell -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stewartw at bctonline.com Thu Mar 10 13:54:11 2016 From: stewartw at bctonline.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 13:54:11 -0800 Subject: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold In-Reply-To: <1457646125280.51103@nwresd.k12.or.us> References: <016B0BFF1DF04E44B5C8ED9AACF3243AA858BDA2@EX3.ttsd.ttsd.k12.or.us> <1457646125280.51103@nwresd.k12.or.us> Message-ID: <74F19B89-20AA-43DF-98D5-48A633ED42BA@bctonline.com> I have a different understanding about 12th graders than Tami?.and I?m never right! Bill Stewart 503-805-8680 - c > On Mar 10, 2016, at 1:42 PM, Tami Schild wrote: > > ?I agree with Brian. But I also don't think student tests should be invalidated because of this particular adult error -- especially since SB is only one opportunity. > > > Some high schools that set their window early so 12th graders can test. I don't think there is a way to set a different window, one for 12th grade, one for 11th grade. > > ________________________________ > From: Assessment_Advisory_Committee on behalf of Bain, Brian > Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 1:36 PM > To: HEIDE Jordan - ODE; assessment_advisory_committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us > Subject: Re: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold > > I'm not certain the best method by which to have a conversation about this, so I'm going to start the conversation here. > > 1) We now have a resource to prevent this from happening. I went in and set school test windows that will not allow anyone to administer SBAC tests until after Spring break. I think this should be a strong(er) recommendation if not a requirement of DTCs > > 2) Setting a secondary cut-off for "when it's REALLY (and this time we mean REAAAAALLY) not ok" seems a little strange. That said, I have a number in mind, but I want to hear conversation first. :) > > > Brian Bain > District Assessment Coordinator > Tigard-Tualatin School District > 6960 SW Sandburg St, Tigard, OR 97223 > 503-431-4120 - bbain at ttsd.k12.or.us > > From: Assessment_Advisory_Committee [mailto:assessment_advisory_committee-bounces at listsmart.osl.state.or.us] On Behalf Of HEIDE Jordan - ODE > Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 1:28 PM > To: assessment_advisory_committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us > Subject: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold > > Good afternoon, > > ODE has received a few reports of students testing before the 66% instructional day threshold has been met. This testing impropriety is outlined in Section 5.2 of the Test Administration Manual where it states, "ODE may invalidate tests if school-level test windows do not meet each of the following criteria..." For those cases reported to us to date (reflecting testing four weeks, three weeks, and one week before the threshold), ODE has so far determined to treat these improprieties as "no impact," meaning the tests stand as valid and the students are allowed to continue testing. However, we wanted to engage with you to help inform ODE's policy to ensure a systematic, coherent, and consistent approach. Specifically, we'd like your input on the following questions: > > ? Should there be a cutoff point at which tests should be invalidated (i.e. tests administered more than 4 weeks before the threshold is met)? > ? If a cutoff is appropriate, what is the appropriate cutoff? > > Please reply with your input by the end of the day this Monday, March 14. Thank you as always for your consideration! > > > Jordan Heide > Administrative Specialist > Office of Assessment & Accountability > 255 Capitol St NE | Salem, OR 97310 | ?503-947-5905 > > Want to stay informed? The Assessment & Accountability Update is a weekly newsletter highlighting news, updates, and changes to the state's assessment efforts. To subscribe to this newsletter, go to http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/ayprcupdates. > > > > _____________________________________________________ > Assessment_Advisory_Committee mailing list > Assessment_Advisory_Committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us > http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/assessment_advisory_committee > Hosted by the Oregon State Library. The Library is not responsible for content. > Questions related to message content should be directed to list owner(s) or the sender of the message, by phone or email. > Technical questions? Call 503-378-8800. > From bbain at ttsd.k12.or.us Thu Mar 10 14:00:01 2016 From: bbain at ttsd.k12.or.us (Bain, Brian) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 22:00:01 +0000 Subject: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <016B0BFF1DF04E44B5C8ED9AACF3243AA858BE60@EX3.ttsd.ttsd.k12.or.us> I agree with Bill that more clarity/simplicity would be a great thing. As would being able to set windows for 11th grade versus 12th grade students to address Tami's concerns. 2 weeks was my number too. It represents about 60% of instruction rather than 66%. But again, saying that the rule is 66%, but we'll excuse as long as you have 60% of instruction isn't a strong message to send. Brian Bain District Assessment Coordinator Tigard-Tualatin School District 6960 SW Sandburg St, Tigard, OR 97223 503-431-4120 - bbain at ttsd.k12.or.us From: Assessment_Advisory_Committee [mailto:assessment_advisory_committee-bounces at listsmart.osl.state.or.us] On Behalf Of Bill Stewart Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 1:51 PM To: HEIDE Jordan - ODE Cc: assessment_advisory_committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us Subject: Re: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold Jordan, The problem with the current criteria (though better than last year) is that it is interpreted locally, based on perceptions about what constitutes appropriate instructional days, especially in schools / districts with creative schedules & calendars. It's not a surprise that some folks miss the mark on this, in some cases it would be easy to do without intention. On the other hand, I've got to assume that something like the 4 week examples might be a case of 'operator error'...failure to attend trainings or read the manuals or, worse, doing it intentionally. Accordingly (I KNOW I will get flak for this), may I suggest an actual start date for SBAC test window in 2017. It should be set on the lenient side (a date that works for most schools that start 'early'). I'm guessing that it might be something like the start of the first full week in March. That would have been March 7th this year. My suggestion would mean that ANY test given before the 7th would be invalidated and that there would be no 'guessing' based on the school calendar, schedule or phase of the moon. Re a cutoff for invalidation.... Yes, there probably should be, though 4 weeks leeway seems like a lot...2 weeks seems more appropriate to me. Either way, the trick will be that it will have to be 'proven' what that particular school's start date should really have been, given their calendar and type of schedule. It could easily vary within a district. Does ODE have the capacity / interest to do that? Who have the reports come from? Are they from sources that really know how to calculate the 66% date? I can imagine some sources that might have an agenda in making such a report. This might not be what you needed...if so, my apologies. Bill On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 1:28 PM, HEIDE Jordan - ODE > wrote: Good afternoon, ODE has received a few reports of students testing before the 66% instructional day threshold has been met. This testing impropriety is outlined in Section 5.2 of the Test Administration Manual where it states, ?ODE may invalidate tests if school-level test windows do not meet each of the following criteria?? For those cases reported to us to date (reflecting testing four weeks, three weeks, and one week before the threshold), ODE has so far determined to treat these improprieties as ?no impact,? meaning the tests stand as valid and the students are allowed to continue testing. However, we wanted to engage with you to help inform ODE?s policy to ensure a systematic, coherent, and consistent approach. Specifically, we?d like your input on the following questions: ? Should there be a cutoff point at which tests should be invalidated (i.e. tests administered more than 4 weeks before the threshold is met)? ? If a cutoff is appropriate, what is the appropriate cutoff? Please reply with your input by the end of the day this Monday, March 14. Thank you as always for your consideration! Jordan Heide Administrative Specialist Office of Assessment & Accountability 255 Capitol St NE | Salem, OR 97310 | ?503-947-5905 Want to stay informed? The Assessment & Accountability Update is a weekly newsletter highlighting news, updates, and changes to the state's assessment efforts. To subscribe to this newsletter, go to http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/ayprcupdates. _____________________________________________________ Assessment_Advisory_Committee mailing list Assessment_Advisory_Committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/assessment_advisory_committee Hosted by the Oregon State Library. The Library is not responsible for content. Questions related to message content should be directed to list owner(s) or the sender of the message, by phone or email. Technical questions? Call 503-378-8800. -- Bill Stewart Special Projects Gladstone SD stewartw at gladstone.k12.or.us 503-805-8680 - cell -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jordan.heide at state.or.us Thu Mar 10 14:06:29 2016 From: jordan.heide at state.or.us (HEIDE Jordan - ODE) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 22:06:29 +0000 Subject: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold In-Reply-To: <1457646125280.51103@nwresd.k12.or.us> References: , <016B0BFF1DF04E44B5C8ED9AACF3243AA858BDA2@EX3.ttsd.ttsd.k12.or.us> <1457646125280.51103@nwresd.k12.or.us> Message-ID: Thank you, Tami. The distinction by grade should be available next year in TIDE to separate 11th vs. 12th graders for Smarter Balanced, so DTCs will be able to set two different windows. Jordan Heide 503-947-5905 -----Original Message----- From: Tami Schild [mailto:TSchild at nwresd.k12.or.us] Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 1:42 PM To: Bain, Brian; HEIDE Jordan - ODE; assessment_advisory_committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us Subject: Re: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold ?I agree with Brian. But I also don't think student tests should be invalidated because of this particular adult error -- especially since SB is only one opportunity. Some high schools that set their window early so 12th graders can test. I don't think there is a way to set a different window, one for 12th grade, one for 11th grade. ________________________________ From: Assessment_Advisory_Committee on behalf of Bain, Brian Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 1:36 PM To: HEIDE Jordan - ODE; assessment_advisory_committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us Subject: Re: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold I'm not certain the best method by which to have a conversation about this, so I'm going to start the conversation here. 1) We now have a resource to prevent this from happening. I went in and set school test windows that will not allow anyone to administer SBAC tests until after Spring break. I think this should be a strong(er) recommendation if not a requirement of DTCs 2) Setting a secondary cut-off for "when it's REALLY (and this time we mean REAAAAALLY) not ok" seems a little strange. That said, I have a number in mind, but I want to hear conversation first. :) Brian Bain District Assessment Coordinator Tigard-Tualatin School District 6960 SW Sandburg St, Tigard, OR 97223 503-431-4120 - bbain at ttsd.k12.or.us From: Assessment_Advisory_Committee [mailto:assessment_advisory_committee-bounces at listsmart.osl.state.or.us] On Behalf Of HEIDE Jordan - ODE Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 1:28 PM To: assessment_advisory_committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us Subject: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold Good afternoon, ODE has received a few reports of students testing before the 66% instructional day threshold has been met. This testing impropriety is outlined in Section 5.2 of the Test Administration Manual where it states, "ODE may invalidate tests if school-level test windows do not meet each of the following criteria..." For those cases reported to us to date (reflecting testing four weeks, three weeks, and one week before the threshold), ODE has so far determined to treat these improprieties as "no impact," meaning the tests stand as valid and the students are allowed to continue testing. However, we wanted to engage with you to help inform ODE's policy to ensure a systematic, coherent, and consistent approach. Specifically, we'd like your input on the following questions: ? Should there be a cutoff point at which tests should be invalidated (i.e. tests administered more than 4 weeks before the threshold is met)? ? If a cutoff is appropriate, what is the appropriate cutoff? Please reply with your input by the end of the day this Monday, March 14. Thank you as always for your consideration! Jordan Heide Administrative Specialist Office of Assessment & Accountability 255 Capitol St NE | Salem, OR 97310 | ?503-947-5905 Want to stay informed? The Assessment & Accountability Update is a weekly newsletter highlighting news, updates, and changes to the state's assessment efforts. To subscribe to this newsletter, go to http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/ayprcupdates. From jordan.heide at state.or.us Thu Mar 10 14:10:41 2016 From: jordan.heide at state.or.us (HEIDE Jordan - ODE) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 22:10:41 +0000 Subject: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Bill, Great questions. To clarify, the reports we received were all from DTCs that ran participation reports and found that tests had been administered before their district?s testing window began. Jordan Heide 503-947-5905 From: Bill Stewart [mailto:stewartw at gladstone.k12.or.us] Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 1:51 PM To: HEIDE Jordan - ODE Cc: assessment_advisory_committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us Subject: Re: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold Jordan, The problem with the current criteria (though better than last year) is that it is interpreted locally, based on perceptions about what constitutes appropriate instructional days, especially in schools / districts with creative schedules & calendars. It's not a surprise that some folks miss the mark on this, in some cases it would be easy to do without intention. On the other hand, I've got to assume that something like the 4 week examples might be a case of 'operator error'...failure to attend trainings or read the manuals or, worse, doing it intentionally. Accordingly (I KNOW I will get flak for this), may I suggest an actual start date for SBAC test window in 2017. It should be set on the lenient side (a date that works for most schools that start 'early'). I'm guessing that it might be something like the start of the first full week in March. That would have been March 7th this year. My suggestion would mean that ANY test given before the 7th would be invalidated and that there would be no 'guessing' based on the school calendar, schedule or phase of the moon. Re a cutoff for invalidation.... Yes, there probably should be, though 4 weeks leeway seems like a lot...2 weeks seems more appropriate to me. Either way, the trick will be that it will have to be 'proven' what that particular school's start date should really have been, given their calendar and type of schedule. It could easily vary within a district. Does ODE have the capacity / interest to do that? Who have the reports come from? Are they from sources that really know how to calculate the 66% date? I can imagine some sources that might have an agenda in making such a report. This might not be what you needed...if so, my apologies. Bill On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 1:28 PM, HEIDE Jordan - ODE > wrote: Good afternoon, ODE has received a few reports of students testing before the 66% instructional day threshold has been met. This testing impropriety is outlined in Section 5.2 of the Test Administration Manual where it states, ?ODE may invalidate tests if school-level test windows do not meet each of the following criteria?? For those cases reported to us to date (reflecting testing four weeks, three weeks, and one week before the threshold), ODE has so far determined to treat these improprieties as ?no impact,? meaning the tests stand as valid and the students are allowed to continue testing. However, we wanted to engage with you to help inform ODE?s policy to ensure a systematic, coherent, and consistent approach. Specifically, we?d like your input on the following questions: ? Should there be a cutoff point at which tests should be invalidated (i.e. tests administered more than 4 weeks before the threshold is met)? ? If a cutoff is appropriate, what is the appropriate cutoff? Please reply with your input by the end of the day this Monday, March 14. Thank you as always for your consideration! Jordan Heide Administrative Specialist Office of Assessment & Accountability 255 Capitol St NE | Salem, OR 97310 | ?503-947-5905 Want to stay informed? The Assessment & Accountability Update is a weekly newsletter highlighting news, updates, and changes to the state's assessment efforts. To subscribe to this newsletter, go to http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/ayprcupdates. _____________________________________________________ Assessment_Advisory_Committee mailing list Assessment_Advisory_Committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/assessment_advisory_committee Hosted by the Oregon State Library. The Library is not responsible for content. Questions related to message content should be directed to list owner(s) or the sender of the message, by phone or email. Technical questions? Call 503-378-8800. -- Bill Stewart Special Projects Gladstone SD stewartw at gladstone.k12.or.us 503-805-8680 - cell -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From CARLSON_CATHERINE at salkeiz.k12.or.us Thu Mar 10 14:23:37 2016 From: CARLSON_CATHERINE at salkeiz.k12.or.us (Catherine Carlson) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 22:23:37 +0000 Subject: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: This happened to us. We had one teacher/STC who just didn?t pay attention to the fact that there are different start dates for Smarter Balanced and just continued on after his students took science. It didn?t occur to me to set windows for each school in TIDE since we have been very clear about when the window opens, and setting a separate window for each school would be time-consuming. However, that?s certainly a feature we can consider using in the future. I?m all for the idea of the same start date for everyone, but that?s assuming it would be allowable to start a bit earlier than 66%, which is a consortium rule. If we need a cutoff rule, I think four weeks is too wide. Catherine Carlson Coordinator Testing & Evaluation/Student Records Department Salem-Keizer School District 503-399-5590 FAX 503-391-4088 Supporting student achievement through information, professional development, and assessment services From: Assessment_Advisory_Committee [mailto:assessment_advisory_committee-bounces at listsmart.osl.state.or.us] On Behalf Of HEIDE Jordan - ODE Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 2:11 PM To: assessment_advisory_committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us Subject: Re: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold Hi Bill, Great questions. To clarify, the reports we received were all from DTCs that ran participation reports and found that tests had been administered before their district?s testing window began. Jordan Heide 503-947-5905 From: Bill Stewart [mailto:stewartw at gladstone.k12.or.us] Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 1:51 PM To: HEIDE Jordan - ODE Cc: assessment_advisory_committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us Subject: Re: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold Jordan, The problem with the current criteria (though better than last year) is that it is interpreted locally, based on perceptions about what constitutes appropriate instructional days, especially in schools / districts with creative schedules & calendars. It's not a surprise that some folks miss the mark on this, in some cases it would be easy to do without intention. On the other hand, I've got to assume that something like the 4 week examples might be a case of 'operator error'...failure to attend trainings or read the manuals or, worse, doing it intentionally. Accordingly (I KNOW I will get flak for this), may I suggest an actual start date for SBAC test window in 2017. It should be set on the lenient side (a date that works for most schools that start 'early'). I'm guessing that it might be something like the start of the first full week in March. That would have been March 7th this year. My suggestion would mean that ANY test given before the 7th would be invalidated and that there would be no 'guessing' based on the school calendar, schedule or phase of the moon. Re a cutoff for invalidation.... Yes, there probably should be, though 4 weeks leeway seems like a lot...2 weeks seems more appropriate to me. Either way, the trick will be that it will have to be 'proven' what that particular school's start date should really have been, given their calendar and type of schedule. It could easily vary within a district. Does ODE have the capacity / interest to do that? Who have the reports come from? Are they from sources that really know how to calculate the 66% date? I can imagine some sources that might have an agenda in making such a report. This might not be what you needed...if so, my apologies. Bill On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 1:28 PM, HEIDE Jordan - ODE > wrote: Good afternoon, ODE has received a few reports of students testing before the 66% instructional day threshold has been met. This testing impropriety is outlined in Section 5.2 of the Test Administration Manual where it states, ?ODE may invalidate tests if school-level test windows do not meet each of the following criteria?? For those cases reported to us to date (reflecting testing four weeks, three weeks, and one week before the threshold), ODE has so far determined to treat these improprieties as ?no impact,? meaning the tests stand as valid and the students are allowed to continue testing. However, we wanted to engage with you to help inform ODE?s policy to ensure a systematic, coherent, and consistent approach. Specifically, we?d like your input on the following questions: ? Should there be a cutoff point at which tests should be invalidated (i.e. tests administered more than 4 weeks before the threshold is met)? ? If a cutoff is appropriate, what is the appropriate cutoff? Please reply with your input by the end of the day this Monday, March 14. Thank you as always for your consideration! Jordan Heide Administrative Specialist Office of Assessment & Accountability 255 Capitol St NE | Salem, OR 97310 | ?503-947-5905 Want to stay informed? The Assessment & Accountability Update is a weekly newsletter highlighting news, updates, and changes to the state's assessment efforts. To subscribe to this newsletter, go to http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/ayprcupdates. _____________________________________________________ Assessment_Advisory_Committee mailing list Assessment_Advisory_Committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/assessment_advisory_committee Hosted by the Oregon State Library. The Library is not responsible for content. Questions related to message content should be directed to list owner(s) or the sender of the message, by phone or email. Technical questions? Call 503-378-8800. -- Bill Stewart Special Projects Gladstone SD stewartw at gladstone.k12.or.us 503-805-8680 - cell -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From staplesd at newberg.k12.or.us Fri Mar 11 11:51:15 2016 From: staplesd at newberg.k12.or.us (Don Staples) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 11:51:15 -0800 Subject: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Adult improprieties are a challenge as I am reluctant to penalize the student, but I don't have an answer as to how to penalize the school without penalizing the student. I could live with a 2-week grace window, but not ideal. In future years, would it be helpful to have a pop-up alert when the TA logs in that exists only until Spring Break? Alert Message: WARNING! Any tests taken by juniors in ELA or math prior to the completion of 66% of the school year will be invalidated! Please check with your STC or DTC if you are unsure of the allowable start date for your district. Don Staples Newberg On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 1:28 PM, HEIDE Jordan - ODE < jordan.heide at state.or.us> wrote: > Good afternoon, > > ODE has received a few reports of students testing before the 66% > instructional day threshold has been met. This testing impropriety is > outlined in Section 5.2 of the Test Administration Manual where it states, > ?ODE may invalidate tests if school-level test windows do not meet each of > the following criteria?? For those cases reported to us to date (reflecting > testing four weeks, three weeks, and one week before the threshold), ODE > has so far determined to treat these improprieties as ?no impact,? meaning > the tests stand as valid and the students are allowed to continue testing. > However, we wanted to engage with you to help inform ODE?s policy to ensure > a systematic, coherent, and consistent approach. Specifically, we?d like > your input on the following questions: > > > - Should there be a cutoff point at which tests should be invalidated > (i.e. tests administered more than 4 weeks before the threshold is met)? > - If a cutoff is appropriate, what is the appropriate cutoff? > > > Please reply with your input by the end of the day this Monday, March 14. > Thank you as always for your consideration! > > > *Jordan Heide* > Administrative Specialist > Office of Assessment & Accountability > 255 Capitol St NE | Salem, OR 97310 | ?503-947-5905 > > *Want to stay informed?* The *Assessment & Accountability Update* is a > weekly newsletter highlighting news, updates, and changes to the state's > assessment efforts. To subscribe to this newsletter, go to > *http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/ayprcupdates* > . > > > > > _____________________________________________________ > Assessment_Advisory_Committee mailing list > Assessment_Advisory_Committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us > > http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/assessment_advisory_committee > Hosted by the Oregon State Library. The Library is not responsible for > content. > Questions related to message content should be directed to list owner(s) > or the sender of the message, by phone or email. > Technical questions? Call 503-378-8800. > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From David.Marshall at miltfree.k12.or.us Fri Mar 11 18:33:14 2016 From: David.Marshall at miltfree.k12.or.us (Marshall, David) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2016 02:33:14 +0000 Subject: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0369B33F-C03E-4A75-A6E4-4F5B52C4D85C@miltfree.k12.or.us> Great discussion. While a cutoff window is not perfect, it seems reasonable for this year. As we move forward to next year we'd want to clearly and repeatedly make it clear that there will not be a cutoff window for invalidating tests other than the test window. We are still very much growing into the administration of SBAC and the additional consideration of being a part of a consortium. Meaning it is no longer just Oregon's call alone. I am intrigued by the recommendation that the state just set a start date. That does have the potential to clean up a lot of this. If there is a process for districts to apply for a, dare I say it, waiver window, that would make it easier to train and track as part the approval process. You could even use the Wonder Woman logo on the application if Marvel Comics doesn't mind :-) David On Mar 10, 2016, at 2:28 PM, HEIDE Jordan - ODE > wrote: Good afternoon, ODE has received a few reports of students testing before the 66% instructional day threshold has been met. This testing impropriety is outlined in Section 5.2 of the Test Administration Manual where it states, ?ODE may invalidate tests if school-level test windows do not meet each of the following criteria?? For those cases reported to us to date (reflecting testing four weeks, three weeks, and one week before the threshold), ODE has so far determined to treat these improprieties as ?no impact,? meaning the tests stand as valid and the students are allowed to continue testing. However, we wanted to engage with you to help inform ODE?s policy to ensure a systematic, coherent, and consistent approach. Specifically, we?d like your input on the following questions: * Should there be a cutoff point at which tests should be invalidated (i.e. tests administered more than 4 weeks before the threshold is met)? * If a cutoff is appropriate, what is the appropriate cutoff? Please reply with your input by the end of the day this Monday, March 14. Thank you as always for your consideration! Jordan Heide Administrative Specialist Office of Assessment & Accountability 255 Capitol St NE | Salem, OR 97310 | ?503-947-5905 Want to stay informed? The Assessment & Accountability Update is a weekly newsletter highlighting news, updates, and changes to the state's assessment efforts. To subscribe to this newsletter, go to http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/ayprcupdates. _____________________________________________________ Assessment_Advisory_Committee mailing list Assessment_Advisory_Committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/assessment_advisory_committee Hosted by the Oregon State Library. The Library is not responsible for content. Questions related to message content should be directed to list owner(s) or the sender of the message, by phone or email. Technical questions? Call 503-378-8800. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tbloomquist at grantspass.k12.or.us Sun Mar 13 12:17:27 2016 From: tbloomquist at grantspass.k12.or.us (Todd Bloomquist) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2016 19:17:27 +0000 Subject: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold In-Reply-To: References: , <016B0BFF1DF04E44B5C8ED9AACF3243AA858BDA2@EX3.ttsd.ttsd.k12.or.us> <1457646125280.51103@nwresd.k12.or.us>, Message-ID: My two cents are that if the 66% is critical to the point of invalidation, then we should use the system in such a way that adult issues don?t harm students. It makes sense to me that each district set the testing windows to match the minimum requirement of 66% (and I am assuming this variability is only to accommodate schools who are starting either earlier or later than most others?). It would seem that as part of the training at the start of the school year, we could all do the math on when our district?s 66% window begins so that there isn?t even a concern that some classroom started too early. To Brian?s second point, if there was a situation that required a slightly different window for a student, there would be a formal request process to be approved by ODE (or, at least pre-approve parameters for the DTC to approve). I am thinking of the student who will be counted in the district?s N but who might be moving or having a major medical procedure done before the window opens, or something like that. Generally, we all try to pick up the student who moves into our schools, but like with any transition, it is when we statistically lose students. Thanks, Todd Todd Bloomquist Grants Pass School District Director of Special Services (541) 474-5706 www.grantspass.k12.or.us From: HEIDE Jordan - ODE Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 2:06 PM To: assessment_advisory_committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us Subject: Re: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold Thank you, Tami. The distinction by grade should be available next year in TIDE to separate 11th vs. 12th graders for Smarter Balanced, so DTCs will be able to set two different windows. Jordan Heide 503-947-5905 -----Original Message----- From: Tami Schild [mailto:TSchild at nwresd.k12.or.us] Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 1:42 PM To: Bain, Brian; HEIDE Jordan - ODE; assessment_advisory_committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us Subject: Re: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold ?I agree with Brian. But I also don't think student tests should be invalidated because of this particular adult error -- especially since SB is only one opportunity. Some high schools that set their window early so 12th graders can test. I don't think there is a way to set a different window, one for 12th grade, one for 11th grade. ________________________________ From: Assessment_Advisory_Committee on behalf of Bain, Brian Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 1:36 PM To: HEIDE Jordan - ODE; assessment_advisory_committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us Subject: Re: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold I'm not certain the best method by which to have a conversation about this, so I'm going to start the conversation here. 1) We now have a resource to prevent this from happening. I went in and set school test windows that will not allow anyone to administer SBAC tests until after Spring break. I think this should be a strong(er) recommendation if not a requirement of DTCs 2) Setting a secondary cut-off for "when it's REALLY (and this time we mean REAAAAALLY) not ok" seems a little strange. That said, I have a number in mind, but I want to hear conversation first. :) Brian Bain District Assessment Coordinator Tigard-Tualatin School District 6960 SW Sandburg St, Tigard, OR 97223 503-431-4120 - bbain at ttsd.k12.or.us From: Assessment_Advisory_Committee [mailto:assessment_advisory_committee-bounces at listsmart.osl.state.or.us] On Behalf Of HEIDE Jordan - ODE Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 1:28 PM To: assessment_advisory_committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us Subject: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold Good afternoon, ODE has received a few reports of students testing before the 66% instructional day threshold has been met. This testing impropriety is outlined in Section 5.2 of the Test Administration Manual where it states, "ODE may invalidate tests if school-level test windows do not meet each of the following criteria..." For those cases reported to us to date (reflecting testing four weeks, three weeks, and one week before the threshold), ODE has so far determined to treat these improprieties as "no impact," meaning the tests stand as valid and the students are allowed to continue testing. However, we wanted to engage with you to help inform ODE's policy to ensure a systematic, coherent, and consistent approach. Specifically, we'd like your input on the following questions: ? Should there be a cutoff point at which tests should be invalidated (i.e. tests administered more than 4 weeks before the threshold is met)? ? If a cutoff is appropriate, what is the appropriate cutoff? Please reply with your input by the end of the day this Monday, March 14. Thank you as always for your consideration! Jordan Heide Administrative Specialist Office of Assessment & Accountability 255 Capitol St NE | Salem, OR 97310 | ?503-947-5905 Want to stay informed? The Assessment & Accountability Update is a weekly newsletter highlighting news, updates, and changes to the state's assessment efforts. To subscribe to this newsletter, go to http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/ayprcupdates. _____________________________________________________ Assessment_Advisory_Committee mailing list Assessment_Advisory_Committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/assessment_advisory_committee Hosted by the Oregon State Library. The Library is not responsible for content. Questions related to message content should be directed to list owner(s) or the sender of the message, by phone or email. Technical questions? Call 503-378-8800. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bbain at ttsd.k12.or.us Mon Mar 14 08:39:36 2016 From: bbain at ttsd.k12.or.us (Bain, Brian) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 15:39:36 +0000 Subject: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold In-Reply-To: <0369B33F-C03E-4A75-A6E4-4F5B52C4D85C@miltfree.k12.or.us> References: <0369B33F-C03E-4A75-A6E4-4F5B52C4D85C@miltfree.k12.or.us> Message-ID: <016B0BFF1DF04E44B5C8ED9AACF3243AA858D2F1@EX3.ttsd.ttsd.k12.or.us> I'm totally missing the Wonder Woman connection, but I know Marvel wouldn't mind, as she's a DC character. ;) Brian Bain District Assessment Coordinator Tigard-Tualatin School District 6960 SW Sandburg St, Tigard, OR 97223 503-431-4120 - bbain at ttsd.k12.or.us From: Assessment_Advisory_Committee [mailto:assessment_advisory_committee-bounces at listsmart.osl.state.or.us] On Behalf Of Marshall, David Sent: Friday, March 11, 2016 6:33 PM To: HEIDE Jordan - ODE Cc: assessment_advisory_committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us Subject: Re: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold Great discussion. While a cutoff window is not perfect, it seems reasonable for this year. As we move forward to next year we'd want to clearly and repeatedly make it clear that there will not be a cutoff window for invalidating tests other than the test window. We are still very much growing into the administration of SBAC and the additional consideration of being a part of a consortium. Meaning it is no longer just Oregon's call alone. I am intrigued by the recommendation that the state just set a start date. That does have the potential to clean up a lot of this. If there is a process for districts to apply for a, dare I say it, waiver window, that would make it easier to train and track as part the approval process. You could even use the Wonder Woman logo on the application if Marvel Comics doesn't mind :-) David On Mar 10, 2016, at 2:28 PM, HEIDE Jordan - ODE > wrote: Good afternoon, ODE has received a few reports of students testing before the 66% instructional day threshold has been met. This testing impropriety is outlined in Section 5.2 of the Test Administration Manual where it states, "ODE may invalidate tests if school-level test windows do not meet each of the following criteria..." For those cases reported to us to date (reflecting testing four weeks, three weeks, and one week before the threshold), ODE has so far determined to treat these improprieties as "no impact," meaning the tests stand as valid and the students are allowed to continue testing. However, we wanted to engage with you to help inform ODE's policy to ensure a systematic, coherent, and consistent approach. Specifically, we'd like your input on the following questions: ? Should there be a cutoff point at which tests should be invalidated (i.e. tests administered more than 4 weeks before the threshold is met)? ? If a cutoff is appropriate, what is the appropriate cutoff? Please reply with your input by the end of the day this Monday, March 14. Thank you as always for your consideration! Jordan Heide Administrative Specialist Office of Assessment & Accountability 255 Capitol St NE | Salem, OR 97310 | ?503-947-5905 Want to stay informed? The Assessment & Accountability Update is a weekly newsletter highlighting news, updates, and changes to the state's assessment efforts. To subscribe to this newsletter, go to http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/ayprcupdates. _____________________________________________________ Assessment_Advisory_Committee mailing list Assessment_Advisory_Committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/assessment_advisory_committee Hosted by the Oregon State Library. The Library is not responsible for content. Questions related to message content should be directed to list owner(s) or the sender of the message, by phone or email. Technical questions? Call 503-378-8800. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From David.Marshall at miltfree.k12.or.us Mon Mar 14 08:57:44 2016 From: David.Marshall at miltfree.k12.or.us (Marshall, David) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 15:57:44 +0000 Subject: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold In-Reply-To: <016B0BFF1DF04E44B5C8ED9AACF3243AA858D2F1@EX3.ttsd.ttsd.k12.or.us> References: <0369B33F-C03E-4A75-A6E4-4F5B52C4D85C@miltfree.k12.or.us>, <016B0BFF1DF04E44B5C8ED9AACF3243AA858D2F1@EX3.ttsd.ttsd.k12.or.us> Message-ID: Waiver Window (WW) --could use logo. My wife was quick to point out the DC Comics error. I should probably tender my resignation now :-) On Mar 14, 2016, at 8:39 AM, Bain, Brian > wrote: I'm totally missing the Wonder Woman connection, but I know Marvel wouldn't mind, as she's a DC character. ;) Brian Bain District Assessment Coordinator Tigard-Tualatin School District 6960 SW Sandburg St, Tigard, OR 97223 503-431-4120 - bbain at ttsd.k12.or.us From: Assessment_Advisory_Committee [mailto:assessment_advisory_committee-bounces at listsmart.osl.state.or.us] On Behalf Of Marshall, David Sent: Friday, March 11, 2016 6:33 PM To: HEIDE Jordan - ODE Cc: assessment_advisory_committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us Subject: Re: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold Great discussion. While a cutoff window is not perfect, it seems reasonable for this year. As we move forward to next year we'd want to clearly and repeatedly make it clear that there will not be a cutoff window for invalidating tests other than the test window. We are still very much growing into the administration of SBAC and the additional consideration of being a part of a consortium. Meaning it is no longer just Oregon's call alone. I am intrigued by the recommendation that the state just set a start date. That does have the potential to clean up a lot of this. If there is a process for districts to apply for a, dare I say it, waiver window, that would make it easier to train and track as part the approval process. You could even use the Wonder Woman logo on the application if Marvel Comics doesn't mind :-) David On Mar 10, 2016, at 2:28 PM, HEIDE Jordan - ODE > wrote: Good afternoon, ODE has received a few reports of students testing before the 66% instructional day threshold has been met. This testing impropriety is outlined in Section 5.2 of the Test Administration Manual where it states, ?ODE may invalidate tests if school-level test windows do not meet each of the following criteria?? For those cases reported to us to date (reflecting testing four weeks, three weeks, and one week before the threshold), ODE has so far determined to treat these improprieties as ?no impact,? meaning the tests stand as valid and the students are allowed to continue testing. However, we wanted to engage with you to help inform ODE?s policy to ensure a systematic, coherent, and consistent approach. Specifically, we?d like your input on the following questions: ? Should there be a cutoff point at which tests should be invalidated (i.e. tests administered more than 4 weeks before the threshold is met)? ? If a cutoff is appropriate, what is the appropriate cutoff? Please reply with your input by the end of the day this Monday, March 14. Thank you as always for your consideration! Jordan Heide Administrative Specialist Office of Assessment & Accountability 255 Capitol St NE | Salem, OR 97310 | ?503-947-5905 Want to stay informed? The Assessment & Accountability Update is a weekly newsletter highlighting news, updates, and changes to the state's assessment efforts. To subscribe to this newsletter, go to http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/ayprcupdates. _____________________________________________________ Assessment_Advisory_Committee mailing list Assessment_Advisory_Committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/assessment_advisory_committee Hosted by the Oregon State Library. The Library is not responsible for content. Questions related to message content should be directed to list owner(s) or the sender of the message, by phone or email. Technical questions? Call 503-378-8800. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Karen.Brown at imesd.k12.or.us Mon Mar 14 11:55:02 2016 From: Karen.Brown at imesd.k12.or.us (Karen Brown Smith) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 18:55:02 +0000 Subject: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold Message-ID: Good Morning, Thank you for asking for input. I think my input bounces around a bit because I need more information, but here goes. I don't recall if the 66% of the instructional calendar rule was first initiated by Smarter Balanced or by Oregon, but either way, it is part of Oregon's assessment system, and this is its 2nd year in place. If ODE and/or the committee is considering changing the 66% rule because it no longer makes sense, then I think we should allow some flexibility with the schools that started too early. I tend to agree that it doesn't seem fair for a student's test to be invalidated because of an adult initiated test impropriety. However, I believe ODE has invalidated tests in the past for adult initiated improprieties. If we have invalidated tests in the past due to an adult initiated test impropriety, when the student only had one opportunity, i.e. ELPA or Smarter Balanced, and we still agree that the 66% rule makes sense, then I think the tests should be invalidated. If not, then I agree with others who have noted that we should allow flexibility, and I think it should be allowed for all of them rather than set a timeline for now. For next year, if we still believe 66% is a key factor to instruction and student success, then no flexibility should be allowed except for the schools on trimesters where the instruction has already been delivered, and we should advertise the repercussions clearly and repeatedly. To assist schools, if possible, we need to enhance the tools to help them do a better job blocking students from testing too early. To improve functionality of the Test Window setting application it would be helpful to add grade and subject, and the ability to select multiples or all. We already have the ability to block individual tests and the file upload for it doesn't need simplified, it may just need advertising. If we could add a test valid code which would allow the test to be valid for the student only for essential skills and for a college and career readiness score, and invalid for the school and district, I would go for that. Karen ________________________________ [IMESD] Karen Brown Smith | ESD Partner, Data Specialist & Accountability Support Karen.Brown at imesd.k12.or.us InterMountain ESD | www.imesd.k12.or.us 541.966.3124 or 800.706.4447 x3124 From: Assessment_Advisory_Committee [mailto:assessment_advisory_committee-bounces at listsmart.osl.state.or.us] On Behalf Of HEIDE Jordan - ODE Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 1:28 PM To: assessment_advisory_committee at listsmart.osl.state.or.us Subject: [Assessment_Advisory_Committee] Testing Before the 66% Instructional Threshold Good afternoon, ODE has received a few reports of students testing before the 66% instructional day threshold has been met. This testing impropriety is outlined in Section 5.2 of the Test Administration Manual where it states, "ODE may invalidate tests if school-level test windows do not meet each of the following criteria..." For those cases reported to us to date (reflecting testing four weeks, three weeks, and one week before the threshold), ODE has so far determined to treat these improprieties as "no impact," meaning the tests stand as valid and the students are allowed to continue testing. However, we wanted to engage with you to help inform ODE's policy to ensure a systematic, coherent, and consistent approach. Specifically, we'd like your input on the following questions: * Should there be a cutoff point at which tests should be invalidated (i.e. tests administered more than 4 weeks before the threshold is met)? * If a cutoff is appropriate, what is the appropriate cutoff? Please reply with your input by the end of the day this Monday, March 14. Thank you as always for your consideration! Jordan Heide Administrative Specialist Office of Assessment & Accountability 255 Capitol St NE | Salem, OR 97310 | ?503-947-5905 Want to stay informed? The Assessment & Accountability Update is a weekly newsletter highlighting news, updates, and changes to the state's assessment efforts. To subscribe to this newsletter, go to http://listsmart.osl.state.or.us/mailman/listinfo/ayprcupdates. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 4553 bytes Desc: image001.jpg URL: