A r c h i v e d  I n f o r m a t i o n

April 6, 2000

Dear Chief State School Officer:

I would like to share with you some of the lessons we learned from February's pilot peer review of four State assessment systems based on the Title I requirements for final assessments. These States volunteered to be part of this pilot peer review to get feedback on the degree to which their systems meet the Title I requirements and to help us fine tune the peer review process. We agreed to keep the States' identity confidential, and the States agreed to our sharing what we learned to improve our process as well as future submissions.

The review process itself was quite straightforward. It included a pre-screening by Department staff to make sure that each submission contained the relevant documentation. A team of peer reviewers, composed of experts in state and local assessments, then examined each assessment system based on the Peer Review Guidance for Evaluating Evidence of Final Assessments under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (1999) (in MS Word [386K] or PDF [316K]). At the conclusion of the review, the reviewers documented the specific issues for each assessment system. Those findings are being shared with the State.

While each State approached its assessment system from its own unique perspective, some common issues emerged that I would like to bring to your attention. Those issues are:

• Inclusion of All Students: Three out of the four pilot states did not fully meet the requirement to include all students in the assessment system, particularly LEP students. While we recognize the challenge this may present, our review indicated that meeting this very clear inclusion requirement is not beyond the capacity of state assessment systems. For your information, I am enclosing a brief summary of the Title I requirements for inclusion that describes the types of policies and practices available to states to meet those requirements. This document should help you determine what, if any, adjustments to current practice will be required.

• Alignment of Standards and Assessments: The peer reviewers also noted the need to have a full description of the process used by the state to ensure alignment, including the criteria that were used to make those decisions. The peer reviewers also commented on the usefulness of two-way analyses that show the alignment of the assessments with the standards and the degree to which the standards are addressed by the assessment system. Recognizing the difficulty of aligning standards and assessments, the reviewers were also looking for documentation of how a state was addressing any gaps that were found in the assessment system.

• Collaboration and Format: While it might seem obvious that a State's submission should be a collaborative effort between the Title I office and the State assessment office, one State's pilot submission was not and consequently did not address important aspects of the Title I requirements. It is important to remember that both offices bring an important perspective and knowledge to the development of a State's submission that result in a complete and cohesive package. In addition, the organization of a State's submission helps the peer reviewers better understand the State's assessment system. Ideally, a submission will direct the reviewer to information on each requirement. Enclosed with this letter is a guide (MS Word [43K] or PDF [41K]) to help your State organize documents that are necessary for the final assessment review.

You might also be interested to know that the Department has received numerous inquiries regarding the Ed-Flex Partnership program from Governors' offices. As a reminder, States that wish to participate in the Ed-Flex Partnership program must meet the Title I assessment requirements - or demonstrate that they are making substantial progress toward meeting them by the 2000-2001 school year - to be eligible for Ed-Flex. States can apply for Ed-Flex at any time, and are encouraged to do so.

In closing, we encourage States to submit evidence of assessments aligned with State standards early. We are extending the deadline for the second quarter review to May 1 to enable States to use this letter and the accompanying materials in preparing their submissions. All States reviewed during the second quarter will receive notice of the results by June 30, 2000.

If you, or your staff, would like to discuss this further, please contact Maggie McNeely on my staff at 202-260-1335.

Sincerely,

Michael Cohen
Assistant Secretary

Enclosures

Return to OESE Archived Information

This page last modified July 20, 2000 (edg)