Designing a Comprehensive Assessment System DEBORAH SIGMAN • MARIE MANCUSO States and districts face unprecedented challenges today in navigating an assessment landscape that is characterized by controversy, competing priorities, and increased demands for innovation as well as accountability (Hill & Barber, 2014). Assessments are expected to be fair and technically sound measures of rigorous college- and career-readiness standards that call for students to demonstrate complex, analytical thinking skills and deep content knowledge. As a result, stakeholders are demanding new delivery platforms and item types for these assessments. New technologies have spurred innovations in next-generation assessments that have the potential to maximize accessibility for all students, promote test security, and accommodate the incorporation of performance-based activities on a large scale (Laitusis, 2016). As part of the current assessment that over-testing takes valuable time environment, many have questioned away from teaching and learning. As a the emphasis placed on summative consequence, “opt-out” movements have assessments in federal and state gained momentum in some communities. accountability systems. Local districts and Meanwhile, policymakers at the state and schools have also developed or selected federal levels are likely unaware of local their own assessments in addition to assessment practices that may add to the those required by the state. With this assessment burden. These concerns are abundance of assessments, educators are amplified when tests are used for purposes faced with balancing the need to collect other than those for which they were information for accountability purposes designed or when one assessment is used and the need for student performance for multiple purposes (Newton, 2007). data that are more closely linked to classroom instruction. Many educators, As these various pushes and pulls on parents, and students have raised concerns state and local assessment systems have Designing a Comprehensive Assessment System increased, it is little wonder that frustration engaged in creating a comprehensive has emerged among policymakers, K–12 assessment system. educators, parents, faculty in institutions of higher education, and workforce leaders. However, the need for equitable measures SECTION I that inform and support student learning remains paramount. Therefore, it is time to The Federal Response PAGE revisit and reevaluate current assessment practices in light of these critical needs and The Testing Action Plan 2 competing priorities. In October 2015, the U.S. Department of Education (ED) released the Testing Assessments, as tools, are used to collect or Action Plan (TAP) fact sheet, a document elicit evidence, and through the assessment to guide the development, selection, and process, practitioners and policymakers use of “fewer and smarter assessments.” reason from that evidence to make informed Included in the TAP is a set of seven decisions. What is needed is an assessment principles to ensure a thoughtful approach system that provides decision-makers at to testing by SEAs and local education all levels with sound information on which agencies (LEAs). These seven principles, they can base their decisions in support excerpted below, are intended to provide of student learning. In a comprehensive SEAs and LEAs with a clear statement system, there is a place for different types of purpose and strategies for ensuring of assessment tools and processes, used for that all assessments administered in their different purposes at different levels of the jurisdictions are rigorous, fair, and yield system: national, state, district, school, and unique (i.e., non-redundant) information classroom. But designing this kind of system about what students know and can do in is more difficult than it might appear. relation to academic content standards. In short, assessments must be: The purpose of this paper is to conceptualize what a comprehensive 1. Worth taking system that is balanced and aligned might 2. High quality comprise, as well as identify what actions 3. Time-limited states, districts, and schools can take 4. Fair — and supportive of fairness — to create a comprehensive assessment in equity in educational opportunity system. Section I describes the federal 5. Fully transparent to students and response to recent testing concerns. parents Section II describes the purposes and 6. Just one of multiple measures characteristics of a comprehensive 7. Tied to improved learning assessment system. Section III outlines The TAP reaffirms the importance of concrete steps that policymakers and assessment and it clearly articulates state stakeholders might consider in developing and district responsibilities in selecting or a comprehensive assessment system. developing assessment tools: The final section provides examples from three state education agencies (SEAs) Designing a Comprehensive Assessment System One essential part of educating students and responsibility for assessment and successfully is assessing their progress accountability systems to SEAs and LEAs, in learning to high standards. Done thereby allowing for increased flexibility in well and thoughtfully, assessments are design of these systems. Both the TAP and tools for learning and promoting equity. ESSA set the stage for states and districts to They provide necessary information examine their current assessments and make for educators, families, the public, needed changes. PAGE and students themselves to measure progress and improve outcomes for 3 all learners. Done poorly, in excess, SECTION II or without clear purpose, they take valuable time away from teaching and A Comprehensive learning, draining creative approaches Assessment System from our classrooms. In the vital effort to ensure that all students in Shifting more authority and flexibility America are achieving at high levels, to SEAs and LEAs will not necessarily it is essential to ensure that tests are ensure the effective selection and use of fair, are of high quality, take up the assessments. Much work must be done minimum necessary time, and reflect at the state and local levels to achieve the expectation that students will be these outcomes. That work begins with prepared for success in college and developing a shared understanding careers. (2015, Fact Sheet, para. 1) of the characteristics or elements of a comprehensive system. The TAP also outlines the actions the federal government planned to take to minimize A 2001 report from the National Research testing redundancies. In addition, in early Council, Knowing What Students Know: 2016, the department began releasing case The Science and Design of Educational studies that highlight exemplary practices Assessment, defines a comprehensive from states and districts across the country system as comprising a range of as they started to review and revise their measurement approaches used to provide assessment systems (https://www2.ed.gov/ a variety of evidence to support education documents/press-releases/testing-action- decision-making. In such a system, multiple plan-profiles.pdf). measures enhance the validity of inferences drawn from assessment. These multiple Every Student Succeeds Act measures may include four broad categories In December 2015, new federal policies of assessment: formative, diagnostic, related to assessment and accountability interim/benchmark, and summative were enacted through the reauthorization (Center on Standards and Assessment of the Elementary and Secondary Education Implementation, 2016). The information Act, termed the Every Student Succeeds Act each type of assessment provides is (ESSA). ESSA shifted much of the authority summarized on page 4. Designing a Comprehensive Assessment System Type of Description of Assessment Assessment Formative Formative assessment is a process used by teachers and students during Assessment instruction that provides feedback to adjust ongoing teaching and learning to improve students’ achievement of intended instructional outcomes (Council of Chief State School Officers, 2008). The information collected is finely grained, providing a level of detail about the current status of student PAGE learning in relation to lesson goals. Its purpose is to inform real-time teaching 4 and learning. Diagnostic While many assessments may be considered diagnostic, traditionally Assessments and formally, diagnostic tests are generally used when students are demonstrating difficulties in learning, and results may assist in diagnosing strengths and needs. Because of the diagnostic nature of these assessments, they are often administered by specially trained education personnel. Interim/ Interim or benchmark assessments are generally administered by teachers Benchmark at key points in time for one or both of two purposes: 1) to evaluate what Assessments students have learned in relation to mid-term goals; 2) to predict students’ performance on particular standards assessed by the state’s end-of-year summative assessment. Interim assessments may be administered under standardized or non-standardized conditions depending on purpose. Results may provide teachers with an early warning signal about those students who are falling behind in their learning and may benefit from targeted assistance to help them learn content prior to end-of-year testing. For leaders, results indicate whether students are on track in meeting learning goals and can inform decisions about curricular adjustments and professional learning