ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDELINES

 

PERFORMANCE STANDARDS PROJECT (PSP)

 

English Language Arts, Mathematics, Social Studies, and Science

 

 

Grade 4 Draft

 

The following guidelines will be used during the 2003-04 pilot of the Grade 4 PSP to structure projects in which fourth grade students in gifted and talented programs demonstrate high quality work.

 

Table of Contents:

         I.                        Purpose of the PSP

       II.                        Overview of the Grade 4 PSP

      III.                        Required Submissions for the 2003-04 Pilot

   IV.                        Student Support

     V.                        Project Assessment

   VI.                        Ethical and Legal Considerations

  VII.                        Use of Technological Devices

VIII.                        Technical Qualities of the Assessment

   IX.                        Other Administrative Issues

     X.                        Steps in the Project  2003-04 Pilot Project Teacher Guidelines

   XI.                        Glossary

I. Purpose of the PSP

 

According to Rider 69 enacted in 1999, the Texas Legislature directed the Texas Education Agency to develop an assessment system and statewide standards for gifted and talented students at all grade levels. The work began with the 2000–02 Performance Standards Pilot, an initial effort to develop statewide standards and an accompanying assessment system to capture the high levels of achievement exhibited by exit-level gifted and talented students in the areas of English language arts, mathematics, social studies, and science. In addition to providing information on an individual student’s learning, the results of this assessment could be aggregated to provide data that may be used to improve a campus’s or district’s efforts to serve gifted and talented students. The exit-level PSP is ready for voluntary use.

 

Development of the Grade 8 PSP began in 2001-02 when a working committee of Texas middle school educators drafted performance standards, the guidelines for the development of student projects, and the overall design of the 2001–02 pre-pilot. A committee of national specialists in gifted and talented education reviewed the results of 2001-02 pre-pilot, and a decision was made to continue the pilot with revised projects in the 2002–03 school year. In 2002-03, scoring criteria, scoring guides, and tasks were created. These tasks were piloted during the 2002-03 school year. The scoring system was tested in the summer of 2003. The Grade 8 PSP is ready for limited implementation in 2003-04.

 

During the 2002-03 school year, the PSP was expanded to include Grade 4. Five projects were developed and field tested in schools and districts across the state. A scoring system was also developed and tested during the summer of 2003. In the 2003-04 school year, the original pilot sites will again field test the projects with revisions based on the previous year’s pilot.

 

Texas law mandates all school districts to provide advanced level services for their students. The Texas State Plan for the Education of Gifted/Talented Students stresses that services for gifted students build from and expand on the general school program provided to all students. In doing so, districts provide opportunities for students to create innovative products and performances that reflect individuality and creativity in advanced ways compared to those of their peers. Furthermore, the plan states that high school graduates who have received services for gifted and talented students will create and develop products and presentations of professional quality as part of their program services.

 

These administrative guidelines outline parameters for participation in the 2003-04 fourth grade pilot by providing a structure for the student performance assessment projects that are the core of the PSP. The content standards for the assessments are the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) for English language arts, mathematics, social studies, and science. Students who successfully complete the PSP will demonstrate a deep understanding of complex content in at least one area of study within these disciplines.

 

The pilot is designed to answer a number of questions focusing on feasibility, fairness, reliability, and validity. Participants are encouraged to contribute to the quality of this system by sharing their experiences and suggestions through formal and informal channels.

 

II. Overview of the Grade 4 PSP

 

The Grade 4 project has two components:

  • Phase I is a planned experience, a suggested series of lessons to be used in large groups, small groups, and individually and performances. The planned experiences are designed to teach students advanced content through a discipline-based research model. Phase I is developmental and formative.
  • Phase II is a final product in which students extend their learning from Phase I. The final product provides students with opportunities to synthesize learning, apply knowledge to a novel situation, and provide an advanced, high-quality demonstration of the student’s knowledge and skills. 

 

The Grade 4 PSP will provide performance projects that focus on English language arts, mathematics, social studies, and science, though the projects are interdisciplinary in nature. Attributes of the projects include linkage to content goals (i.e., TEKS), open-ended, authentic, student-centered, guided, and generating excitement for learning.

 

Two primary goals of the 2003-04 pilot are to explore the effectiveness and the feasibility of the projects and scoring. While each campus has the flexibility to determine the best avenue to deliver instruction so that students have the necessary support to complete their projects, each pilot site is encouraged to complete the planned experiences and final product as described in the projects.

 

Two or more students may collaborate in Phase I and/or Phase II. When there is collaboration, each student’s individual learning must be documented.

 

Phase I, the planned experience, consists of TEKS-based curricular and instructional guidance for teachers. Teachers receive projects with suggested activities designed to give students an opportunity to experience discipline-based research. For example, teachers should guide students through a research process that consists of the following steps:

  1. Defining the research problem
  2. Reviewing the evidence
  3. Refining the research question(s)
  4. Developing the research design
  5. Carrying out the research
  6. Analyzing the results
  7. Reporting the findings through a product and/or presentation[1]

 

Upon completion of the instructional segment, each student will develop a final product. Like the planned experiences, the final product is designed to assess each student’s development in the following dimensions, which serve as the basis of the scoring system:

·        Content knowledge and skills (CKS)

·        Analysis and synthesis (AS)

·        Multiple perspectives (MP)

·        Research (R)

·        Communication (C)

·        Presentation of learning (PL)

Each component of the planned experience and the final product is keyed to the above dimensions, adding emphasis to the integrated nature of the projects.

 

Upon completion of the final product, teachers will use the six dimensions on the scoring guide to evaluate the student’s final product. Also, each student will self-assess his/her own final product, and at least two other students will provide peer assessment by evaluating the final product. A spreadsheet will be provided for reporting demographic information and scores. Required submissions are outlined in each project.

 

 

III. Required Submissions for the 2003-04 Pilot

 

Each teacher will provide students with opportunities to learn new content and skills as outlined in the planned experience and submit at least five projects from identified gifted and talented students based on specified projects in English language arts, mathematics, social studies, and science. The five highest rated projects should be submitted by May 3, 2004. Projects that are not received by the due date will not be scored, and the funding will need to be returned to Region XIII ESC.

 

The funding for participating in the pilot should be used for special needs related to their projects. The funding should be used to ensure that equitable conditions exist for all students to perform on this assessment. The money may be used for the following items:

·                    Travel and expenses for the required fall meeting (The project will not offer reimbursements.)

·                    Substitutes

·                    Printing/postage

·                    Student materials

·                    Field trips/speakers

 

Teachers must submit the following for the five highest rated projects:

  1. Cover sheet
  2. Required submissions for the project, appropriately labeled
  3. The completed spreadsheet
  4. Teacher information form

 

Names of all participating students will be due to Region XIII on November 15, 2003, on the electronic spreadsheet that will be provided to each pilot site. By December 15, 2003, each participating student will be assigned a number. Teachers will receive their spreadsheets with the number assigned to each student and a page of printed labels with a unique number for each student. Labels must be applied to every item submitted. 

 

The required submissions will include the student’s final project and records of student learning during the planned experience. This record may vary by project, but should include documentation, such as outlines, logs, journals, weekly progress reports, drafts of previous versions, and/or bibliography. The format of this documentation should enable a reviewer to follow the student’s learning throughout the project. When student performances are captured electronically, VHS videotape, CDs, or DVDs should be used. Each student’s performance should be on a separate, labeled videotape, CD, or DVD. If student performances are captured in other formats, they must be submitted in VHS videotape, CD, or DVD for this year’s pilot.

 

All project components will be due to Region XIII Education Service Center by May 3, 2004. Funding is dependent upon receipt of five complete projects from each participating teacher. Please contact Erin Midgley at 512-919-5489 or erin.midgley@esc13.txed.net if you wish to submit projects prior to late April 2004.

 

 

IV. Student Support

 

The following support will be necessary for student success:

 

1.   The campus contact is the coordinator for the project at each campus. The campus contact has the following responsibilities:

  • Communicating with the pilot project teachers and Region XIII ESC
  • Supporting pilot project teachers on the campus
  • Informing parents and other faculty members about the project
  • Ensuring that student projects and spreadsheets are submitted from all pilot project teachers

 

2.   The person responsible for guiding the student through the project is known as the pilot project teacher. The pilot project teacher will have the required state training in gifted education and will have the following responsibilities:

  • Informing the student of project guidelines, requirements and scoring criteria
  • Providing the instruction necessary to student success on the project
  • Assessing student progress periodically and providing final assessments of student projects
  • Certifying that the project is the student’s own work
  • Submitting the spreadsheet to Region XIII ESC initially by November 15, 2003; assigning student numbers; and submitting the final spreadsheet by May 3, 2004
  • Submitting the five highest rated projects to Region XIII ESC by May 3, 2004

 

3.   Other educators, such as counselors, library/media specialists, campus administrators, and district and regional gifted/talented coordinators, are responsible for securing necessary time, financial, and academic resources.

 

4.   Peers serve as important resources to students. Pilot project teachers should find ways for students to learn from one another and ensure that peers provide final evaluations for one another.

 

 

V. Project Assessment

 

For ongoing formative evaluation, students should be given the scoring guide at the beginning of the planned experience. Students should refer to it frequently for self-assessment. Students and pilot project teachers regularly evaluate the student’s progress and revise plans as necessary.

                                   

After the final project is completed, the pilot project teacher, the student, and two peers should complete a scoring form. Scores are aggregated on the spreadsheet.

 

During the 2003-04 pilot, teachers will send the required submissions to ESC Region XIII by May 3, 2004. These materials will not be returned, so teachers should send copies of original work. Do not send the students’ original work.

 

 

VI. Ethical and Legal Considerations

 

The pilot project teacher is responsible for ensuring that products consist of original work and demonstrate academic integrity. High ethical standards include:

·        Accurate and reliable documentation 

·        Full acknowledgment of the ideas and words of another person

·        Clear and precise references

·        Complete bibliographical listing of all works cited

·        Appropriate releases for copyrighted materials, such as videotape footage, audio recordings, and photographs, if use extends beyond fair use guidelines

·        Appropriate releases for using images of other students

 

The pilot project teacher and the student will be required to sign a cover page certifying that the submitted work is original to the student.

 

 

VII. Use of Technological Devices

 

Unless it is the focus of the project (e.g., writing a software program), the use of media technology will not affect the score given, except in the judgment of its overall contribution to the quality of the product.

    

 

VIII. Technical Qualities of the Assessment

 

A state-level technical advisory committee will help ensure that this assessment demonstrates the following qualities:

·        Criterion-referenced

·        Reliable

·        Valid

·        Practical

·        Feasible

·        Credible

Additionally, the state technical advisory committee will help design standard setting and fairness review processes to ensure that this assessment is fair and sound.

 

 

IX. Other Administrative Issues

 

Feedback to Students. Pilot project teachers are encouraged to provide students with written and oral feedback based on the standards throughout the course of the planned experience. The scoring forms will provide students with feedback from teachers and other students upon completion of the final product.

 

Campus/District Support. Support for the project is required across the campus and district. Allocation of additional resources is necessary for students to benefit from the experience and demonstrate the expected high levels of knowledge and skill. Campuses and districts participating in the project are asked to make every effort to meet student needs and carefully document the use of resources. This information will be used to develop guidelines for statewide implementation.   

 

Parent Notification. It is the district and campus’s responsibility to notify parents about project participation.

 

 

X. Steps in the Project 2002–2003 Pilot Project Teacher Guidelines

 

For each project, the pilot project teacher will:

 

1.      Orient students to the PSP, its purposes, and the scoring guide

 

2.      Established timelines with students for completion of projects

 

3.      Locate all necessary resources for the planned experience

 

4.      Develop a review schedule and establish criteria for interim grades, if needed

 

5.      Monitor carefully each student’s progress

 

6.      Set a due date for the final project

 

7.      Gather all components of the project and send to Region XIII by May 3, 2004

 

 

XI. Glossary

 

Assessment system. The integrated components needed to implement a large-scale, complex performance assessment. Components include guidelines for student project development, scoring guide, exemplars of various levels of performance, professional development for teachers, and training for reviewers. The assessment system is undergirded by documentation of decisions made in the development of the system and evidence of reliability and fairness.

 

Campus contact. The coordinator of the performance standards project at a campus and serves as a conduit between Region 13 ESC and pilot project teachers.

 

Cover sheet. A required submission that specifies the project name, goals, all the components of a student project, and the certification of the student’s original work.

 

Criteria. Statements of the knowledge and skills that are expected of students completing grade four and receiving services for gifted and talented students. (The criteria are currently in draft form.)

 

Dimensions. The basis of the draft criteria; important ideas that are assessed in the PSP.

 

Documentation. A record of the steps undertaken by the student to develop the final product and complete the planned experience. The documentation may consist of items such as field notes, early drafts of literary works, and transcriptions of interviews, highlighting significant insights or turning points in the student’s thinking and subsequent work.

 

Final product. The individual demonstration of mastery of content knowledge and skills. The final product provides students with opportunities to synthesize learning, apply knowledge to a novel situation, and provide an advanced, high-quality demonstration of the student’s knowledge and skills.  

 

Grade 4 PSP. The structure for the assessment, which includes the planned experience and final product.

 

Peer assessment. Evaluation and feedback provided to a student by other students participating in the project.

 

Performance Standards Project (PSP). An assessment system and statewide standards for gifted and talented students at all grade levels.

 

Phase I. The planned experience.                                      

 

Phase II. The final project.

 

Pilot project teacher. The teacher who assigns the student a class grade on the project. The pilot project teacher also has responsibilities of monitoring student work, assigning

interim and final grades, and certifying that the project is the student’s own work. The pilot project teacher has training in the education of gifted and talented students.

 

Planned experience. TEKS-based curricular and instructional guidance for teachers, including suggested activities designed to give students an opportunity to experience discipline-based research.

 

Project. A comprehensive set of planned experiences resulting in a final, student-developed product. Though projects focus on the core areas of reading/language arts, mathematics, social studies, and science, they are interdisciplinary in nature.

 

Required submissions. Specified for each project, required submissions include the final product and documentation of student work.

 

Scoring form. The form completed by each evaluator that gives the student’s scores and rationales for each score.

 

Scoring guide. The criteria for judging the final product. The scoring guide specifies four levels of performance and a zero, or incomplete.

 

Self-assessment. Each student’s final evaluation of his/her project.

 

Spreadsheet. The reporting mechanism for student demographics and scoring.

 

Statewide standards for gifted and talented students. Expectations for student performance articulated in the scoring guide for this project. Though based on the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) in English, mathematics, social studies, and science, the performance standards for this project extend beyond the TEKS. The statewide standards represent high, rigorous levels of knowledge and skill that can be expected of students who receive gifted and talented services. 

 

Student project. The entire process of completing a project, including the documentation and the final product.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

               PERFORMANCE STANDARDS PROJECT

 

DRAFT CRITERIA FOR GRADE 4

 

 

These criteria form the basis of the Scoring Guide that is used to evaluate the student’s final product. The levels of performance shown below reflect the range of student performance that could result from participation in this pilot study, though it is expected that students who receive gifted/talented services will score at the 3 or 4 levels on the final evaluation. During the formative phases of the project, these criteria can be used developmentally to help students identify areas of strength and need. 

 

 

Dimensions

4

3

2

1

Incomplete

 

 

 

 

 

 

A. Content Knowledge and Skills

 

 

 

 

The student extends the knowledge and skills of the discipline* to apply understanding to a variety of new contexts. The student’s understanding of underlying themes and principles of the discipline is well beyond expectations for fourth graders.

The student applies the knowledge and skills of the discipline* to further understand the world around them. The student’s understanding of underlying principles and themes of the discipline is beyond  expectations for fourth graders.

The student relates the knowledge and skills of the discipline* to personal experiences encountered in everyday life. The student’s understanding of underlying principles and themes is reflective of a high-functioning fourth grade student.

The student makes few connections between the knowledge and skills of the discipline* and everyday life. The student’s understanding of the underlying principles and themes reflects a typical fourth grade response.

The student inadequately addresses problems and tasks, providing insufficient evidence to support further review.

 

*See the TEKS introductory statements for appropriate courses for further definition of knowledge and skills.

Dimensions

4

3

2

1

Incomplete

 

 

 

 

 

B. Analysis and synthesis

When presented with new information, the student notes several significant connections, patterns, and trends and identifies relationships among them. The student uses advanced processes to gather, interpret, and synthesize information.

 

When presented with new information, the student notes a few connections, patterns, and trends and identifies at least one relationship among them. The student uses thorough procedures to gather, interpret, and synthesize information.

When presented with new information, the student notes a few connections, patterns, and trends though they may be minor or misidentified. The student uses basic procedures to gather, interpret, and synthesize basic information.

When presented with new information, the student misses  connections, patterns, trends, and relationships among them. The student inconsistently or inadequately gathers, interprets, and synthesizes information.

The student inadequately addresses problems and tasks, providing insufficient evidence to support further review.

 

 

 

C. Multiple perspectives

The student grapples with ambiguous or conflicting data. The student demonstrates an acceptance of others’ rights to their own perspectives and may reevaluate their own viewpoints in light of others’ thinking.

 

The student demonstrates receptivity to ambiguous or conflicting data. The student demonstrates an acceptance of others’ rights to their own perspectives while maintaining his/her own point of view.

 

The student demonstrates confusion when faced ambiguous or conflicting data or personal perspectives. The student minimally considers others’ perspectives in relation to his/her own point of view.

 

The student considers a situation from only one point of view.

 

The student inadequately addresses problems and tasks, providing insufficient evidence to support further review.

 

 

4

3

2

1

Incomplete

 

 

 

 

 

 

D. Research

The student follows discipline-based research models, asking provocative questions, mining data, and generating unique, but plausible solutions.

The student follows discipline-based research models, posing relevant questions, examining data, and generating creative, but workable solutions.

The student attempts to follow discipline-based research models, asking general questions, reading data, and generating routine, but workable solutions

The student inconsistently uses discipline-based research models, failing to ask original questions, missing pertinent data, and often demonstrating some misunderstandings or misconceptions about the content.

 

The student inadequately addresses problems and tasks, providing insufficient evidence to support further review.

 

 

 

 

 

 

E. Communication

The student uses highly effective communication techniques, including supporting assertions with data and using  vocabulary of the discipline. The student communicates a growing awareness of the relationship between the discipline and self.

The student uses effective communication techniques, including supporting some assertions with data and occasionally using the vocabulary of the discipline. The student communicates a beginning awareness of the relationship between the discipline and self.

The student generally uses clear communication techniques, though some assertions may be supported with inconclusive data and vocabulary of the discipline is used only infrequently. The student does not demonstrate an awareness of the relationship between the discipline and self.

The student’s  communication does not let the audience/reader follow the student’s thinking/logic. The student inconsistently supports assertions with data and may misuse or ignore the vocabulary of the discipline. The student does not acknowledge a relationship between the discipline and self.

The student inadequately addresses problems and tasks, providing insufficient evidence to support further review.

 

 

 

4

3

2

1

Incomplete

 

 

 

 

E. Presentation of Learning

The final product is organized and basically sound. Assertions are supported with clear, pertinent examples. The student’s reasoning is easy to follow.

The final product is generally organized and basically sound. Some assertions are supported with pertinent examples, though the connections may not always be clear. There may be some gaps in the student’s reasoning.

The final product is partially organized, though it may be incomplete. Some assertions are supported with examples, though they may not always be relevant. Connections may not always be easy to follow. The student’s reasoning may be difficult to follow at times.

The final product lacks organization. The student makes claims, but does not back them up. The student’s line of reasoning may be difficult to follow.

 

The student inadequately addresses problems and tasks, providing insufficient evidence to support further review.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


[1] Adapted from Tomlinson, C.A., et al. (2002). The Parallel Curriculum: A Design to Develop High Potential and Challenge High-Ability Learners. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc.