CAA Options: Reading Collection of Evidence

1
CAA Options Reading Collection of Evidence

• Lesley Klenk, CAA Options Administrator
• Fall Workshop
• October 2007

2
What is a Reading COE?

• Reading is the process of making meaning of text.
  Students must be able to demonstrate their
  comprehension, their ability to analyze, and
  their critical thinking related to text in
  written responses.
• The Reading COE is a set of classroom work
  samples created by a student that show what the
  student knows and can do in reading. They must
  demonstrate the same skills measured on the
  Reading WASL.

3
What is a Reading Collection of Evidence?

• It demonstrates a breadth and depth of the WASL
  skills and knowledge in reading.
• A collection must include 8 12 work samples
  that address all six strands. Each work sample
  must address at least two strands. Two work
  samples must be short papers, one literary and
  one informational.
• Work samples may be on-demand or extended time.
• On demand work is done in one sitting with
  teacher supervision.
• Extended time work samples are student generated
  with limited teacher assistance.

4
What Does Breadth and Depth Look Like in a
Reading COE?

• The Reading COE demonstrates a breadth and depth
  of the WASL skills and knowledge in reading.
• A collection is composed of written responses to
  a wide variety of texts. Those texts should be of
  high school rigor and may come from various
  content areas i.e. biology, U.S. History,
  business law, language arts.
• The work sample will clearly state the strand
  being addressed (ie. literary comprehension) and
  include text based evidence that explains and
  supports the demonstration of that skill.

5
(No Transcript)
6
Scoring the Reading COE

• 239 Registered 18 submitted 15 met standard
• 71 points out of 96 points was judged to be
  proficient
• 65 points-70 points is the augmentation band
• 90 was the highest score and 54 was the lowest
  score
• Too few collections to set standard. Instead, a
  Proficiency Committee studied Performance Level
  Descriptors for WASL and judged which collections
  were proficient.

7
Reading COE Sufficiency Issues

• Work Samples that included the text the student
  read were insufficient and were not scored.
• Work Samples that had grades on them were
  insufficient and were not scored.
• Work Samples that did not state the texts name
  in the assignment or the student response were
  insufficient and were not scored.

8
Reading COE Scoring Rules

• Only sufficient collections are scored.
• Each strand in each work sample is scored.
• Each collection (all work samples) are scored
  twice.
• The top two scores for each strand counts towards
  the total score.
• 96 points possible and 71 points judged
  sufficient.

9
How do the Reading COE scores add up?
10
Strong Reading COEs

• had excellent assignments that explicitly asked
  students to demonstrate a specific reading skill.
• featured texts that were interesting and timely
  to students.
• demonstrated that students know how to cite text
  evidence to show understanding.
• gave students meaty assignments that required
  more than just a few sentences to answer.
• showed confident readers who werent perfect but
  showed definite strengths

11
Weak Reading COEs

• had hard to understand assignments with
  fact-oriented questions as opposed to
  skill-oriented ones.
• featured texts that were technical without
  context historical without background or lean
  and lacking details.
• used little to no textual evidence for support of
  claims about text.
• had a preponderance of research papers where it
  was almost impossible to find the text much less
  the comprehension, analysis, or evaluation.
• showed readers uncomfortable with manipulating
  text.

12
Lessons Learned

• If students dont know the skill going into a
  work sample, they dont magically learn it in the
  process.
• Students with weak COEs dont know how to use
  textual evidence for support. In fact, they dont
  include much support at all.
• Personal responses did not lend themselves to
  target questions.
• Several work samples attached to one text lost
  steam. Kids got tired of dredging up the same
  evidence.
• Summer module assessments were moderately
  successful. However, they were rarely 4-point
  answers because the number of details limited
  their responses.

13
Scoring Notes

• While scoring student work, it was easier to
  identify 3 or 4 from the rubric than 1 or 2 from
  the rubric.
• Often, the Work Sample Documentation form was
  incorrectly filled out the student lost points
  because the scorer had to score what was
  indicated.
• Students did better when they turned in the
  maximum number of work samples only the top two
  scores for a strand were reported.
• Using OSPI generated tasks were easier to
  scorejust because the tasks used the language of
  the targets.

14
Recommendations for February 08 and June 08
Scoring Windows

• Schools and districts that were most
  successful dedicated an elective class to working
  on COEs.
• Schools and districts that met regularly as
  a staff about the COE had more students meet
  standard.
• Schools and districts that created a calendar,
  a list of deliverables, and a set of goals had
  more students who met standard.
• Teachers who used OSPI tasks as samples
  created excellent tasks of their own.
• Educators who believed that students could meet
  standard saw it happen.

15
(No Transcript)