Education Funding

Testing Group Scales Back Performance Items

Fewer Performance Items on Common-Core Exams
By Catherine Gewertz — November 29, 2012 6 min read
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

Includes updates and/or revisions.

A group that is developing tests for half the states in the nation has dramatically reduced the length of its assessment in a bid to balance the desire for a more meaningful and useful exam with concerns about the amount of time spent on testing.

The decision by the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium reflects months of conversation among its 25 state members and technical experts and carries heavy freight for millions of students, who will be tested in two years. The group is one of two state consortia crafting tests for the Common Core State Standards with $360 million in federal Race to the Top money.

From an original design that included multiple, lengthy performance tasks, the test has been revised to include only one such task in each subject—mathematics and English/language arts—and has been tightened in other ways, reducing its length by several hours.

The final blueprint of the assessment, approved by the consortium last month now estimates it will take seven hours in grades 3-5, 7½ hours in grades 6-8, and 8½ hours in grade 11.

Earlier this fall, states’ worries about too much testing time had prompted the group to offer a choice: a “standard” version of the assessment—6½ to 8 hours—or an “extended” one, which would run 10½ to 13 hours, with more items to facilitate more-detailed feedback on student performance. (“Two Versions of ‘Common’ Test Eyed by State Consortium,” Sept. 19, 2012.)

Persistent doubts about that plan, however, led to further discussions and a decision to expand the shorter version by about 30 minutes and make it the only one offered, consortium officials said.

The computer-adaptive test will include multiple-choice, constructed-response, and technology-enhanced items. The performance tasks are far lengthier and more complex, requiring students to do things like write several short essays based on their readings from multiple articles and videos, or perform a host of calculations to figure out how to build and plant a community garden.

While many states saw value in having more performance tasks on the test, the amount of information they could yield didn’t justify the additional testing hours, said Carissa Miller, the deputy superintendent for assessment, content, and school choice in Idaho, and the co-chairwoman of the SBAC executive committee. Including even one such task—which requires students to tackle longer, more complex math problems and write essays based on reading multiple texts—represents a major improvement in most states’ assessment systems, she said.

“It’s a precarious balance between having a test that we get all the measurement pieces we need, and having it be so long that it becomes impractical,” she said. “Having even one very authentic performance task, [with] how much that will change instruction in states that have not had those kinds of things in the past. I think we really came to a sweet spot.”

Drilling Down

A key push in the latest redesign was to ensure that the test yields enough detailed information to enable reports on student performance in specific areas of math and English/language arts, Smarter Balanced officials said. The U.S. Department of Education, in particular, pressed for that, said Joe Willhoft, SBAC’s executive director. And the consortium’s technical-advisory committee had persistent concerns about a pared-down test’s ability to report meaningfully on student, as opposed to classroom- or district-level, performance, SBAC leaders said.

The final version will yield overall student scores in math and in English/language arts, by four levels of performance and on a yet-to-be-designed scale, Mr. Willhoft said. It will also produce student-level scores in three areas of math—concepts and procedures, communicating reasoning, and problem-solving/modeling/data analysis—and in four areas of literacy—reading, writing, listening, and research, he said.

In the earlier, “standard” version of the test, some of those areas were combined, making it hard to judge those aspects of students’ performance. Adding more items and shifting their distribution allows the test to gauge students’ skills in each area, Mr. Willhoft said, while time was managed by scaling back performance tasks and reducing the length of some reading passages.

Still, some experts see the resulting reports as being of disappointingly little instructional value.

W. James Popham, an assessment expert who serves on the Smarter Balanced technical-advisory committee, said tests can provide meaningful information only if teachers and students get more fine-grained feedback than an overall score in writing or in math “concepts and procedures.”

“It’s still too broad,” he said. “No one can ferret out what students need help with. For Smarter Balanced to make a real contribution, it has to make certain that its other two pieces, the interim and formative assessments, are instructionally focused, so educators can do something with the results.”

The Right Balance

The evolution of the Smarter Balanced assessment showcases a persistent tension at the heart of the purpose of student testing, some experts say.

“Is it about getting data for instruction? Or is it about measuring the results of instruction? In a nutshell, that’s what this is all about,” said Douglas J. McRae, a retired test designer who helped shape California’s assessment system. “You cannot adequately serve both purposes with one test.”

That’s because the more-complex, nuanced items and tasks that make assessment a more valuable educational experience for students, and yield information detailed and meaningful enough to help educators adjust instruction to students’ needs, also make tests longer and more expensive, Mr. McRae and other experts said.

What Smarter Balanced did, he said, was to compromise on obtaining data to guide instruction in order to produce a test that measures the results of instruction. As a strong supporter of accountability, that’s an approach Mr. McRae supports. It’s also crucial to have data that guide day-to-day instruction, he said, but that should come from separate formative and interim tests.

That’s what SBAC has in mind, said Mr. Willhoft. Its end-of-year, summative tests will measure results for accountability, and those can shape what schools and districts do long term, he said.

“I’m not convinced that the end-of-year summative assessment used for accountability could be imagined to be extremely instructionally useful,” Mr. Willhoft said. It’s the interim and formative pieces of its system, he said, that have the potential to affect day-to-day instruction in profound ways.

The plan is to have thousands of test items and tasks in an online “bank” teachers can draw from to custom-design interim tests on specific standards. Also available will be a bank of “formative” tools and strategies to help them judge and monitor students’ learning as they go along, Mr. Willhoft said. That three-pronged approach—summative, interim, formative—makes up the “balanced” suite of tests many have sought, he said.

The final test design, with a mix of multiple-choice, constructed-response, technology-enhanced, and performance items, is a big improvement over the exams most states have now, said Deborah V.H. Sigman, California’s deputy superintendent of public instruction and a member of SBAC’s executive committee.

“We have a summative assessment that signals to the world that there are different ways to measure what students are learning and can do,” she said. “That’s a huge benefit.”

Coverage of implementation of college- and career-ready standards is supported in part by a grant from the GE Foundation, at www.ge.com/foundation.
A version of this article appeared in the December 05, 2012 edition of Education Week as Test Group Rethinks Questions

Events

This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Assessment Webinar
Rethinking STEM Assessment: Strategies for Administrators
School and district leaders will explore strategies to enhance STEM assessment practices across their district, within schools and classrooms.
Content provided by Project Lead The Way
Federal Webinar Keeping Up with the Trump Administration's Latest K-12 Moves: Subscriber-Exclusive Quick Hit
EdWeek subscribers, join this 30-minute webinar to find out what the latest federal policy changes mean for K-12 education.
Artificial Intelligence Live Online Discussion A Seat at the Table: Math & Technology: Finding the Recipe for Student Success
How should we balance AI & math instruction? Join our discussion on preparing future-ready students.

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
View Jobs
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
View Jobs
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
View Jobs
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.
View Jobs

Read Next

Education Funding Trump Admin. Says California’s K-12 Funding Is at Risk. What Would It Mean?
Title I and IDEA funding could be caught up in the battle between the White House and the largest state, which is led by Democrats.
10 min read
President Donald Trump takes a question from a reporter during an event signing a bill blocking California's rule banning the sale of new gas-powered cars by 2035, in the East Room of the White House on June 12, 2025, in Washington.
President Donald Trump takes a question from a reporter during an event where he signed a resolution blocking California's rule banning the sale of new gas-powered cars by 2035 in the East Room of the White House on June 12, 2025. Trump's administration has reportedly discussed halting "formula funds" to the state's education department.
Alex Brandon/AP
Education Funding The Trump Budget for K-12 Schools: 5 Key Takeaways
The administration wants to cut roughly $7 billion in annual K-12 funding. Much of it supports vulnerable students.
6 min read
A kindergarten student raises her hand in a dual-language immersion class.
A kindergarten student raises her hand in a dual-language immersion class. Among other changes, President Donald Trump's fiscal 2026 budget would end dedicated federal funding for supplemental services for English learners.
Allison Shelley for All4Ed
Education Funding Trump Wants to Cut More Than 40 Federal K-12 Programs. See Which Ones
The president's detailed budget, released Friday, proposes eliminating dozens of programs as part of a nearly $13 billion cut.
2 min read
Illustration of a budget sheet, pencil, and calculator.
Maxim Basinski/iStock/Getty
Education Funding Trump's Education Budget Calls for Billions in Cuts, Major Policy Changes
The proposal includes a plan to eliminate 18 existing grant programs and replace them with one funding stream.
7 min read
President Donald Trump holds up a signed executive order alongside Secretary of Education Linda McMahon in the East Room of the White House in Washington, Thursday, March 20, 2025.
President Donald Trump holds up a signed executive order alongside Secretary of Education Linda McMahon in the East Room of the White House in Washington on March 20, 2025. The president's budget proposes a 15% cut for the U.S. Department of Education.
Ben Curtis/AP