Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
Student Assessment Inventory
Table of Contents
Elementary Math and Science
Middle School Math and Science
High School Math and Science
Elementary WaKIDS, ELA
Elementary CBAs and CBPAs
Middle School ELA
Middle School CBAs and CBPAs
High School ELA, CBAs and CBPAs
English Learners
Questions? Contact Sarah Rich at [email protected] or 360-412-4465
1 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
Elementary Math and Science
Name of Assessment easyCBM CCSSMath
Measures of Academic Progress
Stepping Stones Check-Ups (with option to use Gauge, an online alternative in grades 3-5)
Origo Math (binder interventions)
Smarter Balanced Math Measurement of Student Progress Science
Entity Requiring assessment (state, district, school)
District District District District State State
Grades tested K – 8 3-8 K-5 2-5 3-8 and HS 5, 8 Course or subject Math ELA/Math Math Math Math Science Which students? All students
except identified highly capable students
Highly Capable students All students Students identified for Tier 2 or 3 math intervention support
All students All students
Type of assessment: summative/outcome, formative, screening, diagnostic, progress monitoring
Screening, progress monitoring
Screener (for highly capable identification) Formative – fall and winter Summative – spring Program evaluation
Formative and summative
Used to place students in the appropriate level materials
Summative Summative
Number of years administered in the district
6 6+ 4 years grades K-2 3 years grade 3 2 years grades 4-5 Gauge option available for 2 years
4+ years 2 Started in 2014-15
7 Started in 2009-10
To which content standards is the assessment aligned?
CCSS Math is aligned to CCSS math standards
CCSS ELA and Math Next Generation Science Standards
CCSS Math
CCSS Math
Common Core State Standards in Math
WA State Science Standards
2 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
Name of Assessment easyCBM CCSSMath
Measures of Academic Progress
Stepping Stones Check-Ups (with option to use Gauge, an online alternative in grades 3-5)
Origo Math (binder interventions)
Smarter Balanced Math Measurement of Student Progress Science
(source of alignment verification)
(easyCBM)
(Northwest Evaluation Assocation)
(district curriculum selection process)
(district curriculum selection process)
(Smarter Balanced Consortium of states)
(OSPI)
Intended purpose(s) of the assessment
Screening for math risk Progress monitoring for students in intervention
Identifying areas of strength/improvement for highly capable students. Program accountability/evaluation.
Measure student learning of targets and progress toward mastery of standards
Placement in Origo materials School and district accountability; To measure student learning of standards
School and district accountability; To measure student learning of standards
Intended use(s) of the assessment
Identifying students in need of intervention Evaluating progress of students in intervention School improvement planning
Identifying areas of strength/improvement for highly capable students. Program accountability/evaluation.
Inform core instruction, determine differentiated support needs
Placement in Origo materials School and district accountability; To measure student learning of standards
School and district accountability; To measure student learning of standards
Users of the assessment
Classroom teachers, building math coaches, intervention teachers and paraeducators
Highly capable teachers; district highly capable steering committee
Classroom teachers
Classroom teachers, building math coaches, intervention teachers and paraeducators
Teachers, administrators, district leadership, state policy makers
Teachers, administrators, district leadership, state policy makers
3 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
Name of Assessment easyCBM CCSSMath
Measures of Academic Progress
Stepping Stones Check-Ups (with option to use Gauge, an online alternative in grades 3-5)
Origo Math (binder interventions)
Smarter Balanced Math Measurement of Student Progress Science
Do users of the assessment use it for its intended use(s)?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes Yes Yes
To what degree do users of the assessment find it useful or not useful? 1 – not useful 2 – somewhat useful 3 – useful 4 – very useful Explain why.
3 Some teachers find it very useful and others find it less useful. Professional development is needed.
1-4 This depends upon the teacher level of experience. We have used it in our elementary TAG program for many years, but it is new to our middle school teachers.
2-4 Most find it useful but many are now using it to determine differentiated support needs making it very useful
4 Places students in support groups accurately
2-4 Users are still learning about this relatively new assessment.
2-4 While this is an established assessment, it measures our old standards and is therefore less useful than the newer, NGSS aligned assessment will be (to begin Spring 2018).
Type of administration
Online or paper/pencil
Online/computer adaptive
Paper (Gauge is online) Paper/pencil Online, computer adaptive Online
Item type(s) Multiple choice Multiple Choice Selected response (multiple choice), short completed response (fill in and short answer)
Selected response (multiple choice), short completed response (fill in and short answer)
Selected and constructed responses, technology-enhanced items
Selected and constructed responses
Accommodations Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504 Test administration time
45 minutes
Fall, Winter, Spring One, 60 minute class period, although not timed.
30-60 minutes 438 minutes as reported from schools in the district (average – see Appendix for school-specific information)
120 minutes as reported from schools in the district (average)
4 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
Name of Assessment easyCBM CCSSMath
Measures of Academic Progress
Stepping Stones Check-Ups (with option to use Gauge, an online alternative in grades 3-5)
Origo Math (binder interventions)
Smarter Balanced Math Measurement of Student Progress Science
Testing window September, January, May
September, January, May End of each module; roughly occurs every 3 weeks
On demand as needed Last 12 weeks of school Last 12 weeks of school
Test frequency 3X per year 3X per year 3x per quarter, 12x per school year
On demand as needed but typically at the beginning of the year and possibly as new students enter and show signs of needing additional support
1X per year 1X year
Time between test administration and results to users
Immediate 1 day Immediately once scored by teacher.
Immediately once scored by teacher.
3 weeks 3 months
Vendor Houghton Mifflin Harcourt
NWEA Origo (Stepping Stones) Origo Education NA NA
Contract expiration dates
June 30, 2017 10/31/2017 Embedded in our K-5 Stepping Stones curriculum package; K-2 contracts to be renewed 2017-2018 with grade 3 renewable 2018-2019 and grades 4/5 renewable 2019-2020.
No contract; we own the materials.
NA NA
Entity that holds contract
North Thurston Public Schools
NTPS North Thurston Public Schools
No contract State State
Annual district cost (total and per student)
$15,190.83
$1.25 per student (includes
Math, Reading and Language = $12.50 per student.
Included in curricular package ($500 per teacher license for 5 years of access)
Each grade level intervention binder (includes assessment) costs $199 as a one-time purchase.
None None
5 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
Name of Assessment easyCBM CCSSMath
Measures of Academic Progress
Stepping Stones Check-Ups (with option to use Gauge, an online alternative in grades 3-5)
Origo Math (binder interventions)
Smarter Balanced Math Measurement of Student Progress Science
reading and math cost)
Science piloted in 2016-17 at $2.50 per student Total district cost: $6,000 (also used for highly capable identification process)
Funding source(s) District General Fund
Highly Capable State Grant
District General Fund District General Fund NA NA
6 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
Middle School Math & Science
Name of Assessment easyCBM CCSSMath
Measures of Academic Progress
Engage NY Math Module Assessments
KEMS Progress Monitoring
KEMS Performance Task
Science Benchmark Assessments
Smarter Balanced Math
Measurement of Student Progress Science
Entity Requiring assessment (state, district, school)
District District District District District District State State
Grades tested K-8 3-8 6-12 6-8 6-8 6-8 3-8 and HS 5, 8 Course or subject Math ELA/Math Math KEMS strategic
support math class
KEMS strategic support math class
Science Math Science
Which students? All students except identified highly capable students
Highly Capable students All students All students enrolled in KEMS
All students enrolled in KEMS
All students All students All students
Type of assessment: summative/outcome, formative, screening, diagnostic, progress monitoring
Screening, progress monitoring
Screener (for highly capable identification) Formative – fall and winter Summative – spring Program evaluation
Formative and summative
Progress monitoring
Formative and summative
Summative Summative Summative
Number of years administered in the district
6 6+ 2 4 1 5+ 2 Started in 2014-15
7 Started in 2009-10
To which content standards is the assessment aligned? (source of alignment verification)
CCSS Math is aligned to CCSS math standards (easyCBM)
CCSS ELA and Math Next Generation Science Standards (Northwest Evaluation Assocation)
CCSS Math (district curriculum selection process)
CCSS Math (district curriculum selection process)
CCSS; focused on Claims 2-4 (district curriculum
Still aligned to WA State 2009 Science Learning Standards for grades 7/8; 6th
Common Core State Standards in Math
WA State Science Standards (OSPI)
7 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
Name of Assessment easyCBM CCSSMath
Measures of Academic Progress
Engage NY Math Module Assessments
KEMS Progress Monitoring
KEMS Performance Task
Science Benchmark Assessments
Smarter Balanced Math
Measurement of Student Progress Science
selection process)
grade now aligned to NGSS
(Smarter Balanced Consortium of states)
Intended purpose(s) of the assessment
Screening for math risk Progress monitoring for students in intervention
Identifying areas of strength/improvement for highly capable students. Program accountability/evaluation.
To inform instruction and grades for reporting
Cross-district program guidance and to inform instructional needs of intervention students
Focused on Claims 2-4; intended to be utilized to inform instructional needs of intervention students
To inform instruction and grades for reporting
School and district accountability; To measure student learning of standards
School and district accountability; To measure student learning of standards
Intended use(s) of the assessment
Identifying students in need of intervention Evaluating progress of students in intervention School improvement planning
Identifying areas of strength/improvement for highly capable students. Program accountability/evaluation.
To inform instruction and grades for reporting
To inform instruction and grades for reporting
To inform instruction and grades for reporting
Inform instruction and grades for reporting
School and district accountability; To measure student learning of standards
School and district accountability; To measure student learning of standards
Users of the assessment Classroom teachers, building math coaches, intervention
Highly capable teachers; district highly capable steering committee
Math teachers KEMS Math teachers
KEMS Math teachers
Science Teachers
Teachers, administrators, district leadership, state policy makers
Teachers, administrators, district leadership, state policy makers
8 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
Name of Assessment easyCBM CCSSMath
Measures of Academic Progress
Engage NY Math Module Assessments
KEMS Progress Monitoring
KEMS Performance Task
Science Benchmark Assessments
Smarter Balanced Math
Measurement of Student Progress Science
teachers and paraeducators
Do users of the assessment use it for its intended use(s)?
Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
To what degree do users of the assessment find it useful or not useful? 1 – not useful 2 – somewhat useful 3 – useful 4 – very useful Explain why.
3 Some teachers find it very useful and others find it less useful. Professional development is needed.
1-4 This depends upon the teacher level of experience. We have used it in our elementary TAG program for many years, but it is new to our middle school teachers.
3-4 Results assist teachers in identifying additional instructional needs of students
4 Results are analyzed by teachers with the assistance of a district instructional specialist
4 Found to be so useful that many KEMS teachers are choosing to use with their core classes as well. Also want to add in a mid-year task.
3-4 Generally the results are analyzed and instructional changes are made based on results
2-4 Users are still learning about this relatively new assessment.
2-4 While this is an established assessment, it measures our old standards and is therefore less useful than the newer, NGSS aligned assessment will be (to begin Spring 2018).
Type of administration Online or paper/pencil
Online/computer adaptive Paper/pencil Paper/pencil, then entered into a Google-Doc
Paper/pencil Paper/pencil Online, computer adaptive
Online
Item type(s) Multiple choice Multiple Choice Selected response, short answer, extended response
Selected response
Selected response, short answer, extended response
Multiple choice, extended response
Selected and constructed responses, technology-enhanced items
Selected and constructed responses
Accommodations Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504 Test administration time
45 minutes
Fall, Winter, Spring Intended to be 1 class session; most teachers extend to 2
1 class period 1 class period 1 class period 270 minutes as reported from schools in the district
120 minutes as reported from schools in the district (average)
9 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
Name of Assessment easyCBM CCSSMath
Measures of Academic Progress
Engage NY Math Module Assessments
KEMS Progress Monitoring
KEMS Performance Task
Science Benchmark Assessments
Smarter Balanced Math
Measurement of Student Progress Science
Testing window September, January, May
September, January, May 1-2 per month End of September, Mid-December, Mid-April, Early June
Baseline in September and again at the end of April; teachers requesting to add in a mid-year check
End of unit Last 12 weeks of school
Last 12 weeks of school year
Test frequency 3X per year 3X per year Every 2-3 weeks
4x per year 2-3 times per year
3x Sixth Grade Yr 3x Physical Science Yr 4x Life Science Yr
1X per year 1X year
Time between test administration and results to users
Immediate 1 day Immediately once scored by teacher
Immediately scored with the Google doc platform
Immediately once scored by teacher
Immediately once scored by teacher.
3 weeks 3 months
Vendor Houghton Mifflin Harcourt
NWEA district-created district-created district-created Mix; some are within curricular materials (FOSS, STEMScopes) while others are designed by our teachers—all are common w/in a building and linked to
NA NA
10 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
Name of Assessment easyCBM CCSSMath
Measures of Academic Progress
Engage NY Math Module Assessments
KEMS Progress Monitoring
KEMS Performance Task
Science Benchmark Assessments
Smarter Balanced Math
Measurement of Student Progress Science
their building goals and instructional focus
Contract expiration dates
6/30/2017 10/31/2017 No contract No contract No contract NA NA NA
Entity that holds contract
NTPS NTPS No contract No contract No contract No contract State State
Annual district cost (total and per student)
$15,190.83
$1.25 per student (includes reading and math cost)
Math, Reading and Language = $12.50 per student. Science piloted in 2016-17 at $2.50 per student Total district cost: $6,000 (also used for highly capable identification process)
Printing costs only
None None None None None
Funding source(s) District General Fund
Highly Capable State Grant District General Fund
NA NA NA NA NA
11 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
High School Math & Science
Name of Assessment Engage NY Math Module Assessments
Mini Math Performance Assessments
Unit Science Assessments End of Course Biology SBA Math
Entity Requiring assessment (state, district, school)
District District District State State
Grades tested 6-12 9-12 9-12 By 10th Grade; earlier if students take Biology in 9th grade
High School (by 11th grade)
Course or subject Math Math Biology, Chemistry, Physics Biology Math Which students? All students enrolled in
Algebra, Geometry and Algebra 2
Students enrolled in Algebra, Geometry and Algebra 2
Students enrolled in Biology, Chemistry, Physics
All students All students
Type of assessment: summative/outcome, formative, screening, diagnostic, progress monitoring
Formative and summative Formative and summative Formative and summative Summative Summative
Number of years administered in the district
2 years for Algebra 1 year for Geometry 0-1 year for Algebra 2
1 Varies; ongoing practice 5 years; started in 2011-12 2 years; started in 2014-15
To which content standards is the assessment aligned? (source of alignment verification)
Common Core State Standards (district curriculum selection process)
Common Core State Standards (district curriculum selection process)
Next Generation Science Standards (district curriculum selection process)
WA State Biology Standards (OSPI)
Common Core State Standards in Math (Smarter Balanced Consortium of states)
Intended purpose(s) of the assessment
Student and teacher feedback
Student and teacher feedback; practice on Smarter Balanced Assessment like performance tasks
To inform instruction and grades
School and district accountability; To measure student learning of standards
School and district accountability; To measure student learning of standards
Intended use(s) of the assessment
To inform instruction and grades for reporting
To inform instruction To inform instruction School and district accountability;
School and district accountability;
12 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
Name of Assessment Engage NY Math Module Assessments
Mini Math Performance Assessments
Unit Science Assessments End of Course Biology SBA Math
To measure student learning of standards
To measure student learning of standards
Users of the assessment Math teachers Math teachers Science Teachers Parents, students, teachers, administrators, district leadership, state policy makers
Teachers, administrators, district leadership, state policy makers
Do users of the assessment use it for its intended use(s)?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
To what degree do users of the assessment find it useful or not useful? 1 – not useful 2 – somewhat useful 3 – useful 4 – very useful Explain why.
2-3 Results assist teachers in identifying additional instructional needs of students. Usefulness depends on whether or not an individual teacher analyzes the results to inform instruction and support needs or just utilizes results for reporting grades.
3-4 Informs instructional needs of students specific to the PT on the SBA and Claims 2-4
3 Aligned to the curriculum instructed. It would be more useful if there was common practice of analyzing results and using to inform instruction and possible differentiation needs of students.
2-4 While this is an established assessment, it measures our old standards and is therefore less useful than the newer, NGSS aligned assessment will be (to begin Spring 2018).
2-4 Users are still learning about this relatively new assessment.
Type of administration Paper/pencil Paper/pencil Paper/pencil and online Paper/pencil Online, computer adaptive Item type(s) Selected response, short
answer, extended response Selected response, short answer, extended response
Selected response, short answer, extended performance task response
Selected and constructed responses
Selected and constructed responses, technology-enhanced items
Accommodations Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504 Test administration time Intended to be 1 class
session; some teachers extend to 2
1 class period 1 class period 73 minutes as reported from schools in the district (average)
283 minutes as reported from schools in the district (average)
13 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
Name of Assessment Engage NY Math Module Assessments
Mini Math Performance Assessments
Unit Science Assessments End of Course Biology SBA Math
Testing window 2-3 per module End of each quarter (November, January, March, June)
End of each unit for content-based assessments and then 2 probes per year for performance tasks
Last 4 weeks of school Last 12 weeks of school
Test frequency Every 2-3 weeks 1 per quarter; every 9 weeks 4-5X per year 1X year 1X year in 11th grade.
Time between test administration and results to users
Immediately once scored by teacher.
Immediately once scored by teacher.
Immediately once scored by teacher.
3 months 3 weeks
Vendor District-created District-created Depends on the unit; some are curricular assessments (ie. STEMscopes) others are district created.
NA NA
Contract expiration dates No contract No contract No contract except for STEMscopes which is an annual subscription
NA NA
Entity that holds contract No contract No contract North Thurston State State Annual district cost (total and per student)
Printing costs only None STEMscopes: ~$5 per student. All others are free or printing costs within buildings
None None
Funding source(s) District General Fund District General Fund District General Fund NA NA
14 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
Elementary WaKIDS, ELA
Name of Assessment
WaKIDS Units of Study Writing
Reach for Reading Comprehension
Reach for Reading Foundational Skills
Reach for Reading Vocabulary
Oral Reading Fluency (easyCBM or Reach for Reading)
easyCBM – Reading
Measures of Academic Progress
Smarter Balanced
Entity Requiring assessment (state, district, school)
State District
District District District District District and State (requires 2nd grade oral reading fluency and data regarding how many students read below grade level in K-4 http://www.k12.wa.us/SSEO/K4LiteracyData.aspx)
District State
Grades tested K only K-5 K-5 K-2 K-5 1-5 K-5 3-8 3-8 and high school
Course or subject 6 Domains:
Social-emotional Physical Cognitive Language Literacy Mathematics
Writing Reading Reading Reading Reading Reading ELA/Math English Language Arts
15 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
Which students? All students All students in core writing instruction
All students in core reading instruction
All students scoring below 50%ile on easyCBM in any sub-skill in reading
All students in core reading instruction
All students scoring below 50%ile
All Students fall, winter, spring Progress monitoring for students below the 50%ile
Highly Capable students
All students
Type of assessment: summative/outcome, formative, screening, diagnostic, progress monitoring
Observational inventory of K readiness.
Formative
Formative and summative
Formative or summative
Formative Summative Formative Interim/benchmark
Screener (for highly capable identification)
Formative – fall and winter
Summative – spring
Program evaluation
Summative
Number of years administered in the district
3: Started in 13-14 with state-funded full day K schools; fully implemented
3 years, starting year 4
1 1 1 1 6 6+ 2 Started in 2015
16 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
in 16-17 with all schools
To which content standards is the assessment aligned? (source of alignment verification)
Early Learning and Development Guidelines (Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction)
Common Core State Standards in English Language Arts (district curriculum selection process)
Common Core State Standards in English Language Arts (district curriculum selection process)
Common Core State Standards in English Language Arts (district curriculum selection process)
Common Core State Standards in English Language Arts (district curriculum selection process)
CCSS Foundational literacy skills; nationally normed
CCSS ELA and Math
Next Generation Science Standards
(Northwest Evaluation Assocation)
Common Core State Standards in ELA and Math Smarter Balanced Consortium of states
Intended purpose(s) of the assessment
Measuring Kindergarten readiness
To understand strengths/needs of students before teaching on progression of skills, and to see strengths/student growth after teaching unit
To understand knowledge of comprehension skills and use of comprehension strategies
To understand students’ sub-skills in phonological awareness, phonics, high frequency word knowledge , decoding
To understand students’ vocabulary strengths/needs and strategies to problem-solve words/phrases
To understand aspects of fluency: automaticity, prosody, accuracy and speed, expression, intonation and phrasing
Screening for reading risk; progress monitoring
Identifying areas of strength/improvement for highly capable students. Program accountability/evaluation.
School and district accountability;
To measure student learning of standards
Intended use(s) of the assessment
Understanding entering Kindergartener’s skills and strengths to
PLC collaboration, data used to inform small group/one-on-
PLC collaboration, inform whole and
PLC collaboration, inform whole and small
PLC collaboration, inform whole and
PLC collaboration, inform whole and small
Identifying students for tier 2 and tier 3 intervention support; ensuring students in intervention are making progress
Identifying areas of strength/improvement for highly capable students. Program
School and district accountability;
17 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
help teachers and parents work together to support student growth
one conferring, identify where to modify whole-group instruction
small group instruction
group instruction
small group instruction
group instruction, identify areas for growth that include intonation, phrasing, automaticity, expression (not just rate).
accountability/evaluation.
To measure student learning of standards
Users of the assessment
Kindergarten teachers, families, early learning providers
K-5 teachers K-5 teachers K-2 teachers
K-5 teachers 1-5 teachers
K-5 teachers Highly capable teachers; district highly capable steering committee
3-5 teachers
Do users of the assessment use it for its intended use(s)?
Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Many. Users still learning about fluency.
Many do, but some users don’t understand percentiles or the purpose of a normed test; more professional development is needed. For progress monitoring, most users are not using it to the full extent possible (e.g. setting goals, aimline)
Yes
Yes
18 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
To what degree do users of the assessment find it useful or not useful? 1 – not useful 2 – somewhat useful 3 – useful 4 – very useful Explain why.
1-4
Varies by the user.
2-4 More professional development is needed.
1 - 2 Many users express that they haven’t connected the assessment to instruction yet.
2 - 3 Some users are informing small group instruction with results.
3 Piloting teachers last year found the district rewrites useful.
3-4 Use of the rubrics increases the usefulness.
1 – 4 This depends upon the teacher level of experience.
1-4
This depends upon the teacher level of experience. We have used it in our elementary TAG program for many years, but it is new to our middle school teachers.
2-3
Type of administration
Observational inventory of developing skills, therefore not a “test” in the typical sense.
Prompt with on-demand one day write (45 mins or less)
Paper/pencil Oral 1:1 (for parts), paper/pencil for others
online or paper/pencil
Oral, 1:1 K-1 each measure is 1:1 administered orally. Grades 2-5 oral reading fluency is 1:1, vocabulary and comprehension are group administered on the computer or paper/pencil.
Online/computer adaptive
Computer based
Item type(s) N/A Writing in different text types
Multiple choice and short answer response
Oral response and choosing items
Yes/no or true/false, multiple choice, short answer response
Reading passage, oral response to questions
Oral response and multiple choice depending upon the test.
Multiple Choice Selected and constructed responses
19 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
(draw, label, write)
Accommodations NA. This is an observational assessment and probably does not require test accommodations.
Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504
Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504
Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504
Test administration time
Start of school – end of October. This is an observation and is collected over the course of a month. There is no ‘test administration time’ per se
Before and after the unit, once a quarter 45 minutes *in grade 4, quarter 3 post is replaced with the social studies CBA “Westward Expansion” and in grade 5 quarter 2 post is replaced with CBA on Opinion writing.
Twice during the unit in week 1,2,3 or 4 20 minutes every 2 weeks
Once or more during unit 15 minutes on average
Twice during the unit Weeks ½, ¾ 10 minutes every 2 weeks
Once a unit K and 1: 3 one-minute tests, 3X per year 2-5: 1 one-minute test, plus untimed vocabulary and comprehension (30 minutes to 1 hour each)
Fall, Winter, Spring 438 minutes as reported from schools in the district (average)
20 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
Testing window Once in Kindergarten
Pre: September, November, February, April. Post: October, January, March, June.
Fridays or Day 5 of the week’s instruction, every other week
After instruction once a month
Fridays or day 5 of week’s instruction biweekly
After instruction once a month
September, January, May September, January, May
Last 12 weeks of school
Test frequency 1X per year 2X per quarter 4X per quarter
Varies 4X per quarter
2X per quarter
3X per year 3X per year 1X per year
Time between test administration and results to users
Immediately once scored by teacher.
Immediately once scored by teacher.
Immediately once scored by teacher.
Immediately once scored by teacher.
Immediately once scored by teacher.
Immediately once scored by teacher.
Immediate 1 day 3 weeks
Vendor TS Gold Came at no extra cost with adoption of curriculum materials.
Cengage Cengage Cengage Cengage and Houghton Mifflin Harcourt
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt NWEA AIR
Contract expiration dates
Unknown NA NA NA NA NA 6/30/2017 10/31/2017 NA
Entity that holds contract
State NA NA NA NA NA NTPS NTPS State
Annual district cost (total and per student)
None NA NA NA NA NA $15,190.83
Math, Reading and Language = $12.50 per student.
None
21 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
$1.25 per student
(includes reading and math cost)
Science piloted in 2016-17 at $2.50 per student
Total district cost: $6,000 (also used for highly capable identification process)
Funding source(s) NA NA NA NA NA NA District General Funds Highly Capable State Grant
NA
22 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
Elementary CBAs and CBPAs
Name of Assessment CBPA Music CBPA Visual Art CBA Health and PE CBA Social Studies Entity Requiring assessment (state, district, school)
State State State State
Grades tested 5 5 5 4-5 (Required by state in 4 OR 5)
Course or subject Music Art PE Health as part of PE
Social Studies (Civics)
Which students? All students All students All students All students Type of assessment: summative/outcome, formative, screening, diagnostic, progress monitoring
Summative Summative Summative Summative
Number of years administered in district 6 6 6 6 years; Started in 2010-11
To which content standards is the assessment aligned? (source of alignment verification)
OSPI Arts EALRS, Music
OSPI Arts EALRS, Visual art
OSPI Health and Fitness Standards
OSPI Social Studies EALRS http://www.k12.wa.us/SocialStudies/Assessments/default.aspx
Intended purpose(s) of the assessment OSPI common assessment; OSPI data; teacher data
OSPI common assessment; OSPI data; teacher data
OSPI common assessment; OSPI data; teacher data
State compliance
Intended use(s) of the assessment Assess student knowledge of general music
Assess student knowledge of visual art concepts, vocabulary, and specific skills
Assess student knowledge of fitness; Assess student knowledge of health specific to smoking prevention
Summative - Compliance
Users of the assessment OSPI data collectors, teachers
OSPI data collectors, teachers
OSPI data collectors, teachers
teachers
Do users use it for intended use(s)? Yes Yes Yes for PE PE teachers do not teach health other than for this assessment
Yes
23 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
Name of Assessment CBPA Music CBPA Visual Art CBA Health and PE CBA Social Studies To what degree do users of the assessment find it useful or not useful? 1 – not useful 2 – somewhat useful 3 – useful 4 – very useful Explain why.
3 4—they use this as foundational work for their PLC
3 3 - It is used to prepare for SBA Argumentative writing
Type of administration Given as part of music class
Given as part of art class
Given as part of PE class Given over the course of the unit, notes, organizers, writing
Item type(s) Multiple choice, short answer response, essay
Multiple choice, short answer response, essay; drawing
Multiple choice, short answer response, essay
Multiple choice, short answer response, essay
Accommodations Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504 Test administration time Once per year
1-3 classes Once per year 1-3 classes
Once per year 1-3 classes for each CBA
1X per year
Testing window March-April February-May February-May Anytime, due in June Test frequency 1X per year 1X per year 1X per year 1X per year Time between test administration and results to users
Teacher scored Teacher scored Teacher scored Teacher scored
Vendor NA NA NA NA Contract expiration dates NA NA NA NA Entity that holds contract NA NA NA NA Annual district cost (total & per student) Paper and printing Paper and printing Paper and printing None Funding source(s) District arts
budget District arts budget District HPE budget NA
24 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
Middle School ELA
Name of Assessment Easy CBM Measures of Academic Progress Smarter Balanced Units of Study
Entity Requiring assessment (state, district, school)
District District State District
Grades tested 6-8 3-8 3-8 and HS 6-8
Course or subject ELA/Math ELA/Math English Language Arts, Math
ELA
Which students? All Except Highly Capable Highly Capable students All students All except highly capable
Type of assessment:
summative/outcome, formative, screening, diagnostic, progress monitoring
Diagnostic Risk Assessment (instructional specialist response)
Screener (for highly capable identification)
Formative – fall and winter
Summative – spring
Program evaluation
Summative Summative - Per Unit
Number of years administered in the district
6 6+ 2 Started in 2014-15
3
To which content standards is the assessment aligned? (source of alignment verification)
Not necessarily aligned, but correlated with SBA results.
CCSS ELA and Math
Next Generation Science Standards
(Northwest Evaluation Assocation)
Common Core State Standards in ELA and Math (Smarter Balanced Consortium of states)
CCSS ELA Writing
Intended purpose(s) of the assessment
Screener
Identifying areas of strength/improvement for highly capable students. Program accountability/evaluation.
Group 2: accountability
Assess students’ writing performance as compared to the CCSS Group 2: summative and formative in writing
25 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
Name of Assessment Easy CBM Measures of Academic Progress Smarter Balanced Units of Study
Intended use(s) of the assessment Identifying struggling students, factor in intervention placement Group 2: identifying at-risk students Group 4: not sure of intent - used for new stu. + beg of year + predictor of SBA. Get support they need.
Identifying areas of strength/improvement for highly capable students. Program accountability/evaluation.
Group 2: accountability Group 2: summative and formative in writing
Users of the assessment Group 2: 6-8 ELA teachers
Highly capable teachers; district highly capable steering committee
Group 2: everyone Group 2: 6-8 ELA teachers
Do users of the assessment use it for its intended use(s)?
Varies from school-to-school Group 2: Yes – bldgs. Use as diagnostic; progress monitoring in some schools
Yes
Group 2: Yes Group 2: depends upon building
26 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
Name of Assessment Easy CBM Measures of Academic Progress Smarter Balanced Units of Study
To what degree do users of the assessment find it useful or not useful? 1 – not useful 2 – somewhat useful 3 – useful 4 – very useful Explain why.
2 - Lack of understanding of purpose has made some teachers believe it is not useful Group 2: dependent on bldg.. Score 1 – 4. Those who understand find it useful. Group 4: 2
1-4
This depends upon the teacher level of experience. We have used it in our elementary TAG program for many years, but it is new to our middle school teachers.
Group 2: 2-3 Group 2: those who do it 3
Type of administration Online or paper/pencil Passage Reading Fluency is 1-on-1 administration for 1 minute
Online/computer adaptive Online/computer adaptive Paper/pencil
Item type(s) Multiple choice Multiple Choice Selected and constructed responses
Essay prompts
Accommodations Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504 Per 504/IEP
Test administration time Fall, Winter, Spring Fall, Winter, Spring
Per Unit Plan
Testing window First month, January, May September, January, May Last 12 weeks of school Per Unit Plan
Test frequency 3x per year 3X per year Once per year in ELA and Math
3X per year
Time between test administration and results to users
immediate 1 day 3 weeks for preliminary results; up to 4 months for final results
Per teacher’s grading schedule
Vendor Houghton Mifflin Harcourt NWEA AIR Teacher’s College
Contract expiration dates June 30, 2017 10/31/2017 NA n/a
Entity that holds contract NTPS NTPS NA n/a
27 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
Name of Assessment Easy CBM Measures of Academic Progress Smarter Balanced Units of Study
Annual district cost (total and per student)
$15,190.83
$1.25 per student (includes reading and math cost)
Math, Reading and Language = $12.50 per student.
Science piloted in 2016-17 at $2.50 per student
Total district cost: $6,000 (also used for highly capable identification process)
None NA
Funding source(s) District General Fund Highly Capable State Grant State District General Fund
28 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
Middle School CBAs and CBPAs
Middle School CBA CBPA Band, Orchestra, Choir CBPA Art CBPA Theatre Entity Requiring assessment (state, district, school)
State State State State
Grades tested 6-8 8, sometimes also 6 and/or 7 8, sometimes also 6 and/or 7
8, sometimes also 6 and/or 7
Course or subject SS Music Art, CTE Art Theatre, Drama Which students? All Social Studies Students All students in class All students in class All students in class Type of assessment: summative/outcome, formative, screening, diagnostic, progress monitoring
Formative or summative, depending on teacher
Summative Summative Summative, designed by classroom teacher
Number of years administered in district 10+ 6 6 6 To which content standards is the assessment aligned? (source of alignment verification)
SS Grade Level Expectations OSPI Arts EALRS, Music OSPI Arts EALRS, Visual art
OSPI Arts EALRS, Theatre
Intended purpose(s) of the assessment Accountability OSPI common assessment; OSPI data; teacher data
OSPI common assessment; OSPI data; teacher data
OSPI common assessment; OSPI data; teacher data
Intended use(s) of the assessment Accountability Assess student knowledge of general music
Assess student knowledge of visual art concepts, vocabulary, and specific skills
Assess student knowledge of theatre and specific skills
Users of the assessment Social Studies teachers OSPI data collectors, teachers OSPI data collectors, teachers
OSPI data collectors, teachers
Do users use it for intended use(s)? Yes Yes Yes Yes To what degree do users of the assessment find it useful or not useful? 1 – not useful 2 – somewhat useful 3 – useful 4 – very useful Explain why.
1-2 3 3 2
Type of administration Paper/pencil or Computer based Given as part of music class Given as part of art class
Given as part of theatre class
29 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
Middle School CBA CBPA Band, Orchestra, Choir CBPA Art CBPA Theatre Item type(s) Essay - Research Multiple choice, short answer
response, essay Multiple choice, short answer response, essay; drawing
Multiple choice, short answer response, essay; speaking/acting
Accommodations Per IEP / 504 Regular classroom accommodations Test administration time End of 1st Semester Once per year
1-3 classes Once per year 1-3 classes
Once per course (semester or annually for year-long courses) 1 class period
Testing window None March-April February-May Each semester Test frequency Depending on school 1X per year 1X per year 1X semester Time between test administration and results to users
Depending on teachers Teacher scored Teacher scored Teacher scored
Vendor None NA NA NA Contract expiration dates None NA NA NA Entity that holds contract None NA NA NA Annual district cost (total & per student) None Paper and printing Paper and printing Paper and printing Funding source(s) District General Fund District arts budget District arts budget Aspire school budget if printed
30 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
High School ELA, CBAs and CBPAs
Name of Assessment ELA Interims CBA Social Studies CBPA Band, Orchestra, Choir CBPA Art CBPA Theatre Smarter Balanced Entity Requiring assessment (state, district, school)
District State State State State State
Grades tested 9-11
11-12 Beginning classes, typically grades 9-10
Beginning classes, include 9-12
Beginning classes, include 9-12
3-8 and high school
Course or subject ELA SS Music Art, CTE Art Theatre, Drama English Language Arts, Math
Which students? All standard ELA students
All Social Studies Students
All students in class All students in class All students in class All except students whose IEP teams determine WA-AIM is more appropriate
Type of assessment:
summative/outcome, formative, screening, diagnostic, progress monitoring
interim/benchmark Formative or summative, depending on teacher
Summative Summative Summative Summative
Number of years administered in the district
1st year, some piloted last year
10+ 6 6 6 2 Began in 2015
To which content standards is the assessment aligned? (source of alignment verification)
ELA CCSS SS GLEs OSPI Arts EALRS, Music OSPI Arts EALRS, Visual art OSPI Arts EALRS, Theatre
Common Core State Standards in ELA and Math
Intended purpose(s) of the assessment
Identifying areas of strength/weakness for instructional planning
Accountability OSPI common assessment; OSPI data; teacher data
OSPI common assessment; OSPI data; teacher data
OSPI common assessment; OSPI data; teacher data
Accountability
Intended use(s) of the assessment
Instructional planning Group 2: planning
Accountability Assess student knowledge of music and specific skills
Assess student knowledge of visual art concepts, vocabulary, and specific skills
Assess student knowledge of theatre and specific skills
Accountability
31 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
Name of Assessment ELA Interims CBA Social Studies CBPA Band, Orchestra, Choir CBPA Art CBPA Theatre Smarter Balanced Users of the assessment ELA Teachers,
administrators Social Studies teachers Teachers Teachers Teachers Graduation requirement.
Colleges and universities Do users of the assessment use it for its intended use(s)?
Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
To what degree do users of the assessment find it useful or not useful? 1 – not useful 2 – somewhat useful 3 – useful 4 – very useful Explain why.
4 3 3 3 2 3
Type of administration In class google or online in Smarter Balanced platform
Paper/pencil or Computer based
Given as part of music class Given as part of art class Given as part of theatre class
Computer based
Item type(s) SBA-Aligned questions and Brief Writes
Essay - Research Multiple choice, short answer response, playing/singing
Multiple choice, short answer response, essay; drawing
Multiple choice, short answer response, essay; speaking/acting
Selected and constructed responses
Accommodations Per IEP/504 Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504
Test administration time 1 Day End of 1st Semester Once per year
1-3 classes
Once per year
1-3 classes
Once per course (semester or annually for year-long courses)
1-3 class periods
Untimed; average 4 hours
Testing window One in fall / one in spring
None March-April February-May Each semester Last 12 weeks of school
32 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
Name of Assessment ELA Interims CBA Social Studies CBPA Band, Orchestra, Choir CBPA Art CBPA Theatre Smarter Balanced Test frequency twice/year Depending on school 1X per year 1X per year 1X semester Once per year in ELA and
Math Time between test administration and results to users
Multiple choice - instant Open Response - 2-3 weeks (per common scoring schedule)
Depending on teachers
Teacher scored Teacher scored Teacher scored 3 weeks for preliminary results; up to 4 months for final results
Vendor N/A None NA NA NA AIR
Contract expiration dates N/A None NA NA NA N/A
Entity that holds contract N/A None NA NA NA State
Annual district cost (total and per student)
None None Paper and printing Paper and printing Paper and printing None
Funding source(s) N/A None District arts budget District arts budget Aspire school budget if printed
State
33 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
English Learners
Name of Assessment WELPA Placement (Transitioning to ELPA placement in 2017-18)
ELPA21
Entity Requiring assessment (state, district, school) State State
Grades tested K - 12 K - 12
Course or subject English Language Proficiency English Language Acquisition
Which students? Speak another language other than English at home All identified English Learners
Type of assessment:
summative/outcome, formative, screening, diagnostic, progress monitoring
Screener Summative
Number of years administered in the district 5+ 1
To which content standards is the assessment aligned? (source of alignment verification)
Listening, Speaking, Reading and Writing Listening, Speaking, Reading and Writing
Intended purpose(s) of the assessment Placement into ESL program
State/Federal compliance
State/Federal
Compliance and exiting students
Intended use(s) of the assessment Placement into ESL program
State/Federal compliance
Exiting students
Tracking student progress
Users of the assessment OSPI, ESL department OSPI, State, ESL department and general education teachers
Do users of the assessment use it for its intended use(s)? Yes Yes
To what degree do users of the assessment find it useful or not useful? 1 – not useful 2 – somewhat useful
4 Somewhat
34 3/1/2016
Final Assessment Inventory: 2016-17 School Year
Name of Assessment WELPA Placement (Transitioning to ELPA placement in 2017-18)
ELPA21
3 – useful 4 – very useful Explain why. Type of administration Paper and Pencil by ESL staff Via computer by ESL staff
Item type(s) Multiple choice and speaking and writing portions Multiple choice, speaking and writing samples
Accommodations Per IEP / 504 Per IEP / 504
Test administration time 30 – 45 mins 1 – 2 hours
Testing window All year February- March
Test frequency 1X per qualifying student 1X a year
Time between test administration and results to users Teacher scored Score usually available in June
Vendor McGraw-Hill Chosen by OSPI
Contract expiration dates June 2017 NA
Entity that holds contract OSPI ELPA 21 Consortium
Annual district cost (total and per student) Any booklet above allotted amount None
Funding source(s) State and district funds State funded
35 3/1/2016
Top Related