Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 Page 27 Page 28 Page 29 Page 30 Page 31 Page 32 Page 33 Page 34 Page 35 Page 36 Page 37 Page 38 Page 39 Page 40 Page 41 Page 42 Page 43 Page 44 Page 45 Page 46 Page 47 Page 48 Page 49 Page 50 Page 51 Page 52 Page 53 Page 54 Page 55 Page 56SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS | 18 For specific recommendations on Retool Assessment and Accountability see Appendix pages 43-44. Current Status The new accountability system includes five categories. As part of this reform, the state test is computer- based and partially adaptive, allowing some adjustments to determine grade level. In 2016, when the state has several years of data, Connecticut’s accountability system will hold schools accountable for improving student achievement over time, rather than just taking into account static measures of achievement. A revised accountability system is in the process of implementation with multiple data sources, not just test scores. In addition, the new accountability system has a major emphasis on growth of student learning. ACTION STEPS 4 To continue toward implementation of mastery of competencies as an alternative to the Carnegie unit. The Carnegie unit, based on the time spent in a class, should be replaced by a system based on mastery of content and skills. To support a mastery-based system of learning, schools will be able to assess and give credit for content and skills learned outside of school. 4 Connecticut will continue to develop the multiple measures in the accountability system to incorporate local assessments. 4 Statewide assessments should take place at times in a student’s schooling that represent critical developmental points (end of elementary school, end of middle school, mastery of graduation requirements). Students should be assessed when they have mastered content and skills rather than according to an arbitrary annual testing schedule. If the goal for students is mastery, students should be able to retake state and local assessments until mastery levels are reached. Retaking assessments should be allowed whenever a student invests in continuing to learn the assessed standards. In the case of a retest, only the best scores should be reported in state, local and individual reporting. 4 The state should offer districts an effective and easy-to-use assessment data system that would provide teachers with timely access to assessment results, assistance in analyzing data, and the ability to share data with students and parents. The system offered by the state will establish basic, uniform data elements and allow districts to enhance the system. ◆ Technology-based assessments Technology-based classroom assessments provide quicker, if not immediate, feedback on learning. Technology helps students self-monitor learning and with teacher guidance, recognize and respond to their strengths and weaknesses. It also provides teachers with ongoing data for immediate and targeted adjustments to instruction. ◆ Professional opportunities to build assessment expertise Teachers know how to create and implement a variety of assessments and are provided the time to work with colleagues to calibrate common understandings of measuring mastery. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | 18