Skip to main content
Colorado General AssemblyToggle Main Menu
Agency NameToggle Agency Menu

I_COESSAComm_2016A 08/31/2016 Committee Summary

Final

STAFF SUMMARY OF MEETING



INTERIM COMMITTEE TO STUDY THE EVERY STUDENT SUCCEEDS ACT

Date: 08/31/2016
ATTENDANCE
Time: 09:12 AM to 03:21 PM
Buckner
X
Merrifield
X
Place: LSB B
Neville T.
X
Wilson
X
This Meeting was called to order by
Sonnenberg
*
Representative Pettersen
Pettersen
X
This Report was prepared by
Rachel Kurtz-Phelan
X = Present, E = Excused, A = Absent, * = Present after roll call
Bills Addressed: Action Taken:
Accountability

Assessments

Non-Academic Accountability Indicator

Update from the Colorado Department of Education
Witness Testimony and/or Committee Discussion Only

Witness Testimony and/or Committee Discussion Only

Witness Testimony and/or Committee Discussion Only

Witness Testimony and/or Committee Discussion Only





09:12 AM -- Accountability



Representative Pettersen, chair, welcomed the committee and audience. She discussed the committee's schedule and welcomed the presenters. Phillip Lovell, representing the Alliance for Excellent Education, distributed copies of his presentation (Attachment A). He discussed growth and gaps, opportunities for equity, and state approaches to addressing these problems. He spoke about the Every Student Succeeds Act's (ESSA) requirements for intervention in low-performing schools, and targeted intervention. He told the committee about requirements to include subgroup performance in each indicator, and the state's ability to determine its own long-term goals. He also discussed assessment participation rates. Mr. Lovell responded to questions from the committee. He continued his presentation, speaking about school improvement which will now be determined by states, districts, and schools. He told the committee about how ESSA changes funding for school improvement and student services. He discussed Colorado's use of data and the requirements of ESSA. He said that in Colorado, disaggregated subgroups are only present in one indicator, and all minority students are lumped together. Mr. Lovell responded to questions from the committee. They discussed graduation rates, remediation rates, and low-performing high schools. He spoke about the percentage of minority students who take advanced placement courses and responded to questions about evidence-based approaches to supporting low-performing high schools. He also responded to questions about school choice. He continued his presentation, speaking about school quality and student success indicators. He said these indicators must be measurable, actionable, and meaningful. Mr. Lovell responded to questions from the committee.



Attachment A.pdfAttachment A.pdf





09:54 AM



Paige Kowalski, representing the Data Quality Campaign, distributed her presentation to the group (Attachment B). She described her organization and spoke about the importance of quality data in making policy decisions. She described her child's experiences in District of Columbia public schools. She spoke about why data matters and the questions it can answer. She responded to questions from the committee. Ms. Kowalski continued her presentation, speaking about how data empowers parents. She described policy priorities around data, saying that data must measure what matters, that data must be easy to use, that the collection and retention of data must be transparent, and that policy makers must guarantee access and protect privacy. Ms. Kowalski responded to questions from the committee. She spoke about data privacy and how to make accountability work for students. She praised Colorado's growth model. She spoke about the requirement for a 95 percent participation rate in statewide assessments and why the participation rate matters. She stated that below 95 percent, test results do not comprise a valid and reliable data set. She described the impact of opt-outs and how schools and districts can encourage 95 percent participation, including timely results, high-quality reports, establishing data governance bodies, and engaging stakeholders. Ms. Kowalski responded to questions from the committee about methods for increasing participation. She continued her presentation, speaking about continuous improvement measures and legislation in other states.



Attachment B.pdfAttachment B.pdf







10:40 AM -- Assessments



Andrew Latham, Director of Standards, Assessments, and Accountability Services for WestEd and representing the Center on Standards and Assessment Implementation, distributed his presentation to the committee (Attachment C). He spoke about ESSA's areas of assessment flexibility: administration of a single summative assessment or multiple statewide interim assessments, use of a nationally recognized high school assessment in lieu of the statewide assessment, and participation in an innovative assessment demonstration pilot. He spoke about the timeline of ESSA implementation, and the requirement for an annual summative assessment. Mr. Latham responded to questions from the committee about whether the multiple interim assessments must be statewide or not, answering affirmatively. He stated that no vendor yet has a working model of this type of assessment. Dr. Latham responded to questions about subgroups, which carry over from the previous No Child Left Behind legislation. He described new subgroups included in ESSA, such as students in foster care and homeless youth. He spoke about tiers of assessment and the methods and uses of various types. He described proposed federal regulations and responded to questions from the committee. He continued his presentation, speaking about the use of nationally recognized high school assessments in lieu of statewide assessments and responded to questions from the committee. He spoke about ESSA's provisions for innovative assessment pilot programs in some states and responded to additional questions from the committee.



Attachment C.pdfAttachment C.pdf



11:14 AM



Victoria Sears, Research Manager at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, distributed her presentation to the committee (Attachment D). She spoke about a study her organization completed in February to review the content and quality of next generation assessments in grades 5 and 8. Her organization studied content, thinking skills, overall strengths and weaknesses, and accessibility. She went over the criteria and methodology used in the study, and the timeline. She went over the study's results. She concluded by highlighting key findings of the study, including those relating to accessibility, and responded to questions from the committee. She described changes to the Partnership for the Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) assessments and responded to additional questions from the committee.



Attachment D.pdfAttachment D.pdf



11:46 AM



Dr. Latham responded to questions from the committee.



11:52 AM



The committee recessed.



01:08 PM -- Non-Academic Accountability Indicator



Representative Pettersen called the committee back to order. Julie Woods, representing the Education Commission of the States (ECS), introduced herself and her organization. She spoke about ECS's ESSA Quick Guides (Attachment E). She went over the handout (Attachment F) on the school quality or student success indicator. She discussed the requirements for the indicator, the weighting of indicators, and how this indicator might vary by grade span. She discussed proposed regulations surrounding the indicator. She listed several suggestions in ESSA for this indicator, including student engagement, educator engagement, access to/completion of advanced coursework, postsecondary readiness, or school climate and safety. Ms. Woods responded to questions from the committee and continued discussing other possibilities for the non-academic indicator. She described examples from Connecticut and California and discussed key considerations for selecting a non-academic indicator, such as measurement, data collection, comparisons, differentiation, equity, weight, unintended consequences, and research on soft skills indicators. Ms. Woods responded to questions from the committee.



Attachment E.pdfAttachment E.pdfAttachment F.pdfAttachment F.pdf





01:22 PM



Elliott Asp, Senior Fellow at Achieve, introduced himself and his organization. He spoke about ESSA in general, the state's goals for its students, and the new law's themes of equity and innovation. He described the goals of the non-academic indicator, how it could support the goals of the broader accountability system and provide more information about the quality of individual schools. He pointed out certain considerations when choosing a non-academic indicator for the state. Dr. Asp responded to questions from the committee and continued discussing considerations when choosing a non-academic indicator. He described Colorado examples, such as measuring opportunities to learn by measuring participation in concurrent enrollment, advanced placement, and career and technical education (CTE) certificates; teacher surveys; school climate surveys; parent satisfaction surveys; student engagement indexes; postsecondary success via matriculation and remediation reports; and school quality reviews. Dr. Asp responded to questions and offered suggestions to the committee. He described the Student-Centered Accountability Project, which measures meaningful learning, professional capacity and culture, and resources. He responded to additional questions from the committee.





01:54 PM -- Update from the Colorado Department of Education



Alyssa Pearson, representing the Colorado Department of Education (CDE), distributed the department's presentation (Attachment G) and spoke about the Colorado accountability system. She described Colorado's performance indicators and how they are weighted for elementary schools, middle schools, high schools, and school districts. She responded to questions from the committee and described the department's accreditation and improvement plan types. She responded to questions about reports for subgroups that the department creates on behalf of districts. She spoke about accountability as both a flashlight and a hammer in Colorado. She responded to questions from the committee about the state's five-year accountability clock.



Attachment G.pdfAttachment G.pdf



02:15 PM



Joyce Zurkowski, Director of Assessment, CDE, spoke about participation in statewide assessments and responded to questions from the committee.



02:16 PM



Ms. Pearson continued her presentation, discussing components of ESSA's accountability requirements and how they relate to Colorado law, as well as the timeline for implementation of ESSA. She spoke about items to consider when choosing a non-academic indicator. She gave examples from other states and spoke about the department's listening tour. Ms. Pearson and Ms. Zurkowski responded to questions from the committee. Ms. Pearson continued her presentation, discussing the department's next steps in creating the state plan required under ESSA.



02:33 PM



Ms. Zurkowski spoke about ESSA's impact on statewide assessments in Colorado. She described ESSA's requirements for assessments and how Colorado's requirements differ. She described participation trends in statewide assessments. She described an exception for advanced eighth grade math students and spoke about adaptive assessments. She described the use of nationally recognized high school assessments in place of statewide standardized assessments. She described the pilot program, or innovative assessment demonstration authority. Ms. Zurkowski responded to questions from the committee regarding assessments outside grade level.



03:16 PM



Representative Pettersen thanked the participants and asked for public comment.



03:17 PM --
Senator Evie Hudak, representing herself, spoke about parent engagement and early childhood provisions of ESSA. She distributed two handouts to the committee (Attachments H and I).



Attachment H.pdfAttachment H.pdfAttachment I.pdfAttachment I.pdf



03:21 PM



The committee adjourned.


Colorado legislature email addresses ending in @state.co.us are no longer active. Please replace @state.co.us with @coleg.gov for Colorado legislature email addresses.  Details