Prairie State Wire

Illinois State Board of Education, State Assessment Review Committee met July 22.

Here are the minutes provided by the committee:

SARC Members Present:

1. Dr. Marcus Belin — Huntley High School

2. Dr. Scott Bloomquist — Boone/Winnebago County Regional Office of Education

3. Dr. Kay Dugan — Bensenville District 2

4. Kristin Fitzgerald – Naperville 203

5. Dr. Jennifer Gill – Springfield 186

6. Dr. Daniel Krause — Willowbrook High School

7. Peter Leonard — Chicago Public Schools

SARC Members Absent:

1. Raymond Albin — Libertyville High School

2. Paula Barajas — Chicago Public Schools

3. Michael Murguia — Berwyn North School District 98

4. Kiwana Sanders — Cook County School District 130

5. Zondra Moore — East St. Louis School District 189

6. Ann Laura Narro — Southwest Organizing Project

7. Dr. Yoon Pak — University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign

8. Ryan Schilb — St. Charles Community School District 303

9. Annette Hartlieb — Regional Office of Education 3

10. Dr. Antoinette Jones — Northern Illinois University

ISBE Support Staff:

1. Dr. Rae Clementz – Executive Director of Data, Accountability, and Assessment

2. Angela Foxall – Director of Assessment

3. Victoria Henderson — IAR Principal Consultant

4. Sarah Leonard – ELA Content Specialist, Principal Consultant

I. Welcome and Roll Call

K. Dugan welcomed members. Roll was taken, but a quorum was not reached.

II. Approval of April 2, 2024, Meeting Minutes (roll call vote)

The minutes could not be approved due to a lack of quorum. This will be revisited at the August 27, 2024, meeting.

III. School Year 2024-25 Assessment Updates and Discussion

A. Foxall discussed updates on the assessment administrative platforms, specifically to the Illinois Assessment of Readiness (IAR) and Illinois Science Assessment (ISA).

R. Clementz explained that the ACT will replace the ISA Grade 11 test to avoid double testing in science. The standards alignment of these tests differs, but the science section on the ACT will be a good fit as the high school level.

A. Foxall discussed embedding text-to-speech more fully across math and science on all summative assessments utilized in the field. ISBE would like to ensure that students utilizing this feature would not be redirected to another form that may not be used for data purposes.

R. Clementz explained that KIDS (the Kindergarten Individual Development Survey (KIDS) will not be included in the accountability system for schools. The focus in assessment and accountability is on better reporting and unified standards-setting. Additionally, we need to consider procurements for ISA and the Dynamic Learning Maps (DLM). Alignment across content and grade levels is the ultimate goal.

K. Fitzgerald asked if the assessment window will be affected since a contract has not yet been executed for ACT. R. Clementz showed a survey for superintendents to ascertain which testing windows are preferred. R. Clementz confirmed that schools will have three options.

P. Leonard noted the rationale for avoiding double-testing in science but said that this high-stakes decision may have a larger impact on science accountability at the high school level. He also questioned whether the State Assessment Review Committee (SARC) is the correct group for consultation regarding this decision.

R. Clementz noted that the role of SARC has evolved since it was formed, and its purview has changed over time. ISBE is open to changing other aspects of the committee, such as hosting in-person meetings and lengthening the times to accomplish more.

J. Gill inquired if the ACT is online, and R. Clementz confirmed this. J. Gill also questioned if there is a purchasing option for high school placements. R. Clementz advised reaching out to ACT to get more information on this. A. Foxall stated that ACT offers assessments at levels 8-10. She added that students will have more continuity across assessment platforms with TestNav being the IAR and ACT platform.

IV. Preview of Assessment Policy Definitions Report

R. Clementz summarized the work happening with the Policy Level Descriptors working group. This group has been tasked to define the number and names of student performance categories on summative assessments and provide feedback. This information can be found on the ISBE Better Systems for Better Outcomes webpage.

This report will be presented to the Performance Level Descriptor content teams to ensure alignment and to help establish criteria to determine whether these updates are on track. The Policy Level Descriptor work group recommended transitioning from five performance levels to either three or four. The majority seemed to agree upon four levels, but there were compelling reasons for instituting three levels as well. This is out for public comment as of July 29.

The group advocated for clarity and utility, avoiding deficit language in defining the performance levels and focusing performance, not individual students. Many factors are being considered as the work continues to provide language that is understandable to educators, parents, and students and that the emphasis of student performance is not solely on their summative test score. Finding the correct wording for descriptors so that they align to the distinct levels of rigor within each content is the primary goal.

Recruitment for the Performance Level Descriptor content teams is happening now. The deadline to apply is August 16. Qualifications for selection have been set based on previous feedback from SARC. A resume and letter of recommendation are required.

V. Preview of Draft of SARC Recommendations

K. Dugan presented the SARC recommendations in collaboration with P. Leonard. They expressed the desire to pursue smaller working groups to narrow down specific recommendations and guidance.

Recommendation 1: Communication

Provide timely context and background information to SARC regarding important assessment topics. Currently, decisions have been made without SARC feedback or upfront notice.

When warranted, SARC members schedule additional meetings to discuss important assessment topics. Currently, the 90-minute quarterly meetings do not allow for deeper discussions.

SARC holds work group meetings between quarterly meetings, as warranted, to engage in deeper discussions.

Recommendation 2: Standard-Setting

ISBE provides explicit connections between the standard-setting process and the expectations of the contracted assessments (e.g., how Illinois’ definition of proficient for each standard is aligned to, for example, ACT’s expectations within test design). Make this a standing agenda item.

ISBE provides status updates on the standard-setting process at every meeting for SARC to provide input and advice, and to inform SARC’s future reports to the General Assembly and the state superintendent. Make this a standing agenda item.

ISBE establishes an updated webpage addressing the standard-setting process work so that it is public and transparent, especially since these workgroups are not subject to Open Meetings Act.

Recommendation 3: High School Assessment Procurement Award: Lessons Learned

More transparency is needed in making state assessment contract information available to the public (contract content, timelines, costs, renewal options). Currently, this information is publicly available but not easily accessible.

ISBE work with SARC to align and balance procurement law with authentic stakeholder input.

ISBE provides reports to SARC on the status of all state assessment contracts each meeting. Make this a standing agenda item for SARC.

Strengthen connections and communication between the Illinois Balanced Accountability Measure Committee and SARC because the work of each group informs and supports the other.

Recommendation 4: Grade 3-8 RFSP

Before creating the Request for Sealed Proposals (RFSP), ISBE should -- through SARC address the recommendations made by the 2022 Center for Assessment to reconcile the stated needs of practitioners and families for state tests to be both shorter and provide meaningful reporting. While these two needs on their face appear mutually exclusive, establishing a shared purpose and use-case for the Grades 3-8 assessments can help to address these needs.

VI. Future Meeting Dates

1st Quarterly Meeting: Tuesday, August 27, 3:30-5 p.m.

2nd Quarterly Meeting: Tuesday, October 29, 3:30-5 p.m.

3rd Quarterly Meeting: Tuesday, January 28, 3:30-5 p.m.

4th Quarterly Meeting: Tuesday, April 1, 3:30-5 p.m.

VII. Public Comment

No public comment was made.

VIII. Adjourn

M. Belin motioned to adjourn. D. Krause seconded and the meeting adjourned.

https://www.isbe.net/Documents_SARC/20240722-Minutes.pdf