# data[].attributes.body
What are common assessments? What is the purpose of teachers giving them? Read one of these web[ages and you will find put exactly why

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The adoption of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) is arguably the biggest educational shift in the history of the United States. Having a set of national standards that most states have chosen to adopt is unprecedented. However, the bigger shift in traditional educational philosophy will come in the form of the Common Core assessment.

While the national adoption of the standards themselves is immense, the potential impact of having a shared national assessment system is even bigger.

Most states would argue that the standards they already had in place align pretty well to the Common Core State Standards. However, the rigor and presentation of the new assessments will even challenge your top tier students.

Many school administrators and teachers will need to totally revamp their approach in order for their students to succeed on these assessments. What has been the norm when it comes to test prep will no longer be enough. In an age where a premium has been placed on high stakes testing, those stakes will have never been higher than they will be with the Common Core assessments.
Impact of a Shared Assessment System
There are several potential ramifications of having a shared assessment system. Many of these ramifications will be positive for education and many will no doubt be negative. First of all the pressure placed on students, teachers, and school administrators will be greater than ever.

For the first time in educational history states will be able to accurately compare their students' achievement to students in neighboring states. This factor alone will cause the pressures of high stakes testing to go through the roof.

Politicians will be forced to pay more attention and increase funding in education.

They will not want to be a low performing state. The unfortunate reality is that many excellent teachers will lose their jobs and others will choose to enter another field simply because the pressure of getting students to perform well on these assessments will be too large.

The microscope for which teachers and school administrators will be under will be massive. The truth is that even the best teachers can have students perform poorly on an assessment. There are so many external factors that attribute to student performance that many would argue that basing the worth of a teacher on a single assessment is simply not valid. However, with the Common Core assessments, this will most likely be overlooked.

Most teachers will have to increase rigor in the classroom by challenging their students to think critically. This will be a challenge for both students and teachers. In an age where parents are less involved, and students have information readily given to them at the click of a mouse, developing critical thinking skills will be even more of a challenge. This has been arguably one of the most neglected areas of education, and it will no longer be an option to omit it. Students must excel in critical thinking if they are to perform well on these assessments.

Teachers will have to restructure how they teach to develop these skills. This will be such as massive shift in teaching and learning philosophies that it may take a generation of students to cycle through before we see a large group truly start to develop these skills.

In the end, this shift in educational philosophy will better prepare our students to succeed. More students will be ready to transition to college or will be work ready when they graduate high school. In addition, the skills associated with the Common Core State Standards will prepare students to compete on the global level.

Another benefit of a shared assessment system will be that costs to individual states will be reduced dramatically. With each state having its own set of standards, they have had to pay to have tests developed specifically to meet those standards.

This is an expensive endeavor and testing has become a multimillion dollar industry. Now with a common set of assessments, states will be able to share in the cost of test development, production, scoring, etc. This could potentially free up more money allowing it to be spent in other areas of education.
Who is developing these assessments?
There are currently two consortia responsible for developing these new assessment systems. These two consortia have been awarded funding through a competition to design new assessment systems. All states who have adopted the Common Core State Standards have selected a consortium in which they are a partner with other states. These assessments are currently in the development stage. The two consortia responsible for developing these assessments are:

1. SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) - Alabama, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

2. Partnership for Assessment of Readiness of College and Careers (PARCC) - Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Mississippi, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, and Tennessee.

Within each consortia, there are states that have been selected to be a governing state and others who are a participating/advisory state.

Those that are governing states have a representative that gives direct input and feedback into the development of the assessment that will accurately measure student progress toward college and career readiness.
What will these assessments look like?
The assessments are currently being developed by the SBAC and PARCC consortia, but a general description of what these assessments will look like has been released. There are a few released assessment and performance items available. You can find some sample performance tasks for English Language Art (ELA) in Appendix B of the Common Core State Standards.

The assessments will be through course assessments. This means that students will take a benchmark assessment at the beginning of the year, with the option of ongoing progress monitoring throughout the year, and then a final summative assessment towards the end of the school year. This type of assessment system will allow teachers to see where their students are at all times during the school year. It will allow a teacher to more readily cater to a particular students strengths and weaknesses to prepare them better for the summative assessment.

The assessments will be computer-based. This will allow for quicker, more accurate results and feedback on the computer scored portion of the assessments. There will be portions of the assessments that will be human scored.

One of the biggest challenges for school districts will be preparing for the computer-based assessments. Many districts across the United States do not have enough technology to test their entire district via computer at this time.

During the transition period, this will be a priority that districts must prepare for.

All students grades K-12 will participate in some level of testing. Grades K-2 tests will be designed to set the foundation for students and also give information to teachers that will help them better prepare those students for the rigorous testing that begins in the 3rd grade. Grades 3-12 testing will be much more tied directly to the Common Core State Standards and will consist of a variety of item types.

Students will see a variety of item types including innovative constructed response, extended performance tasks, and selected response (all of which will be computer based). These are much more difficult than simple multiple choice questions as students will be assessed on multiple standards within one question. Students will often be expected to defend their work through a constructed essay response. This means that they simply won't be able to come up with an answer, but will additionally need to defend the answer and explain the process through written response.

With these Common Core assessments, students must also be able to write coherently in the narrative, argumentative, and informative/explanatory forms. An emphasis on balance between traditional literature and informational text is expected within the framework of the Common Core State Standards. Students will be given a passage of text and will have to construct a response based on questions over that passage in a specific form of writing that the question asks for.

The transition to these types of assessments will be difficult. Many students will struggle initially. This will not be due to a lack of effort on teachers but will be based more on the overwhelming task at hand. This transition will take time. Understanding what the Common Core Standards are all about and what to expect from the assessments are the first steps in a long process of being successful.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
An Overview of the Common Core Assessments

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The adoption of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) is arguably the biggest educational shift in the history of the United States. Having a set of national standards that most states have chosen to adopt is unprecedented. However, the bigger shift in traditional educational philosophy will come in the form of the Common Core assessment.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Share this newsletter on

An emphasis on assessment practices in education is all around us. It seems almost daily that I receive in an e-mail or a letter a new brochure or flyer advertising the latest conferences that will promote new assessment ideas or the latest strategies educators should implement to improve student learning. The ideas all sound promising but there are so many that one wonders how teachers can keep all the ideas straight. New terminology is flooding the articles, books, and workshops giving fresh (and potentially overwhelming) ways to look at how students are assessed. Assessments are described as transformative, in-the-moment, formative, summative, and balanced. There are power assessments, system-level assessments, and benchmark assessments. Even the most dedicated and open-minded individual might find it impossible to keep all of the ideas straight or to know where and how to start using the information.

There is, however, one practice that I have found to be sensible, reliable, and most promising to positively impact student learning. The practice I am referring to is the consistent development and use of common assessments among teams of teachers. When teachers take the time to clearly investigate and understand how common assessments can augment student achievement, they become excited and motivated to continue their collaborative work. I have also spoken with interested educators who have a lot of good questions about common assessment but do not know exactly how to get started. To that end, this month's Just for the ASKing! is devoted to addressing the questions surrounding this exciting approach to teaching and learning. Below are the FAQ's along with some suggestions as to how to bring the concept alive and sustain its use.

What is a common assessment?
A common assessment is a uniform tool developed and administered in a given time frame by all teachers in a grade level or course. The assessment includes various types of questions to measure students' understanding of essential knowledge. After administering the assessment, the teachers score the students' work and compile the results. Data from the assessments are shared at a team or department meeting in order to determine how teachers should respond to the assessment data. Ultimately, the goal is to use assessment data to provide immediate feedback and support to students in order to ensure student learning and academic progress.

What is the purpose of using common assessments?
The goal of using common assessments is to ensure that the continual focus is on higher levels of achievement for all students. When teachers develop and use common assessments, they must provide all students with access to the same essential knowledge and skills regardless of who their teacher is. When teachers openly talk about the content they teach, there is a greater likelihood that all students will have a common educational experience. After there is concurrence on the content that must be taught, teachers create assessments that accurately measure student learning. The professional dialogue which occurs while the results of the assessments are analyzed is an important payoff from this collaborative process.

How are common assessments developed?
Common assessments may be developed in a variety of ways. Some teachers create assessments by having each team member bring possible assessment questions to a planning meeting. Others provide questions from previous assessments they have used to determine if previous questions accurately and adequately measure student learning. Still others review possible assessment items from released questions from former statewide assessments. Finally, some districts create common assessments centrally and schools are required to use district-wide common assessments. Regardless of how the assessment is developed, what is most important is that all teachers teach the same knowledge and skills, and that all teachers teaching the same content work together to create assessments which are clearly matched to standards.

What forms can common assessments take?
Common assessments may take a variety of forms depending on the standards, the curriculum being taught, the make-up of the student population, and the desired outcomes. Assessments may include multiple choice questions, require students to respond to essay questions or writing prompts, or be performance-based in nature. However, common assessments should not be excessively long, unnecessarily complicated, or hard to analyze. Regardless of what form the assessment may take, the main purpose of the assessment is to determine if the students are mastering the required standards.

What are some misconceptions about common assessments?
Some teachers who are just learning about common assessments have misunderstandings about what they are and how they should be used. Misconceptions include the following:

Common assessments are used to "grade" the teacher. Some teachers feel that they become vulnerable when the results from the common assessment are publicly presented and discussed with fellow teachers. They feel that the data from the assessments may be used to evaluate their effectiveness as a teacher. This practice by leaders would be a step backward. The purpose of common assessments is to encourage honest, open dialogue among practitioners and the sharing of best practices. The misuse of data from those discussions as part of a teacher's evaluation will only lead to distrust among the teaching staff and cause teachers to be more isolated.

Every assessment must be a common assessment. Teachers who develop and utilize common assessments still maintain individual autonomy to develop and use additional assessments that will help them measure student learning.

Common assessments require lockstep pacing and uniform instruction on the parts of teachers. When teachers agree to devise and administer common assessments, it is important for the assessment to be given to students within a certain window of time. However, teaching is not a mechanical process and students are not all the same. Thus, a teacher must pace instruction to meet the needs of his or her students. While it is true that the teachers must teach the same standards, teachers do not have to deliver their lessons in the same exact manner as their peers. Just as students learn differently, individual teachers have different skills, different stories and examples, and different methods of teaching their content.

Common assessments will require an inordinate amount of extra work. Some teachers believe that common assessments are extra assessments above and beyond the assessments they already use. Teachers should not be required or feel the necessity to develop more or different assessments. Teachers who have worked with their peers over time in the development of common assessments actually have found that the practice is a time saver. When teachers jointly develop an assessment, the questions are often clearer, they accurately measure student learning, and they may be used when the content or unit is taught again.

How should teachers analyze the data from common assessments?
Collaborative teams can analyze the results from common assessments in several ways:

Some teams compile data question-by-question and look at student responses to each question. The ensuing conversations can help teachers identify the instructional methods that were most effective in leading to student understanding.

Some teams bring samples of student work to team meetings and sort the work into different categories based on whether student work was above standard, met the standard, or was below standard. Once again, the close examination of the work and agreement on levels of achievement can result in a more consistent evaluation of student learning.

The truly important part of the analysis of assessment data is the accompanying discussions to determine which specific teaching methods elicited the greatest results.

What should teachers do with the results from common assessments?
Thomas Guskey, who writes extensively about assessment practices, has noted that assessments by themselves do little to improve student learning. He stresses that "what really counts happens after the assessments." Some grade level or curriculum teams develop what Rick DuFour calls a "pyramid of interventions" of student support strategies. These responses provide timely assistance so every student can move toward higher achievement. Possible interventions include:

Small group or one-on-one instruction by an individual teacher

Small group or one-on-one instruction by a student or students

Use of all time during the school day - before school tutoring, instruction during a designated support period in the school day, or after school support sessions

Feedback to students and the opportunity to be reassessed to determine if a higher level of achievement has been reached

What are some unique practices related to common assessments that schools are using?
Some creative and potentially effective strategies are being carried out in schools across the country. Here are some options schools may wish to explore:

One practice that has shown some positive results is advanced planning. As teachers teach their current unit, they meet to collaborate on a future unit. They discuss the standards all teachers must address and create common assessments prior to the beginning of the next unit. When teachers know well in advance how students' learning will be assessed, they can plan instruction that is more likely to lead to improved student learning and success on assessments.

While some teachers develop common assessments that are more in line with state-required multiple choice tests, other teachers have developed rubrics to measure success rates on common assessments.

Some schools have found success in having short, weekly common assessments (five questions) so that teachers are able to respond to student misunderstandings more quickly.

Successful collaborative teams have made an adjustment in their way of thinking in that they focus on results and not intentions.

When teachers "begin with the end in mind," they complete a task analysis during the planning process and create their assessment(s) at the beginning of the planning process. As they instruct, they frame their learning so that students can be successful when they complete their assessment(s). The result is that remediation, intervention, and follow-up are minimized or non-existent because students are successful the first time around.

When teachers meet together to develop common assessments, it is essential that there be explicit trust among the participating members. Confidentiality is paramount if teachers are willing to share their thoughts, and perhaps doubts, with their peers. The work to develop these assessments may be rocky or frustrating. But with persistence, the collaborative efforts can lead to powerful and exciting learning on the parts of determined professionals. Rick DuFour has stated, "Hosts of researchers have concluded that substantive change inevitably creates discomfort and dissonance as people are asked to act in new ways." No important change can occur without some frustration and hard work. I believe that the subsequent learning that can occur from the development and use of common assessments can transform the way teachers teach and assess, and lead to unforeseen results previously unattained.

Permission is granted for reprinting and distribution of this newsletter for non-commercial use only. Please include the following citation on all copies:
Oliver, Bruce. "Common Assessments: Uncommon Results." Just for the ASKing! November 2008. Reproduced with permission of Just ASK Publications & Professional Development (Just ASK). © 2008 Just ASK. All rights reserved. Available at www.justaskpublications.com.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Share this newsletter on An emphasis on assessment practices in education is all around us. It seems almost daily that I receive in an e-mail or a letter a new brochure or flyer advertising the latest conferences that will promote new assessment ideas or the latest strategies educators should implement to improve student learning.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Chris Jakicic, EdD, an author and a consultant, was principal of Woodlawn Middle School in Illinois from 1999 to 2007. She began her career teaching middle school science.

One thing I've learned as I work with schools across the country is that there are a lot of different definitions collaborative teams are using for common formative assessments, and what these teams think common formative assessments are influences how they write and use these assessments with their students. In our book, Collaborating for Success in the Common Core, we offer the following definition to help teams make sure they're able to use their results to improve student learning:

"Common formative assessments are team-designed, intentional measures used for the purpose of monitoring student attainment of essential learning targets throughout the instructional process. In addition to providing information about which students need additional support or extension, common formative assessments allow teams to examine the effects of their practice, and gain insight as to which instructional strategies yield high levels of learning. Furthermore, the data can be used to provide frequent feedback to students that they can use to adjust their own learning strategies."

In our definition, we look at three important concepts that we know help students achieve at high levels through the use of these assessments: they are formative (and thus occur during the learning process), they are team-designed, and they assess essential learning targets.

Formative

The first idea we included in our definition is the importance of the word formative. In working with teams, we've found that some teams focus on common assessments rather than common formative assessments. When teams write and use common summative assessments (think, for example, end of the unit tests), they are able to use essential standards and common pacing in their work. While this is a valuable step, we now know that it is formative assessment that truly impacts student learning. In 1998, Black and Wiliam published their revolutionary research concluding that formative assessment has a .9 standard deviation impact on student learning. This caused educators at all levels to focus on how to use formative assessment in their work. If student learning is the ultimate goal, then, high performing teams must use formative assessment throughout the learning process. High-performing teams understand that the purpose of formative assessments is different than summative assessments.

Sometimes teams will ask whether they can use their benchmark assessments as common formative assessments as long as they use them in a formative way. Here's why we recommend that they not do this. Formative questions are intentionally written in a different manner than summative assessment items.

The first thing is that formative items are written around learning targets rather than standards. Learning targets are the smaller skills and concepts students have to learn to become proficient on the standard. When questions are written around these smaller skills and concepts, the information they provide is much more diagnostic than when written around a standard.

Additionally, most benchmark assessments are not tightly linked to concepts that students are currently learning. Sometimes items assess content that was taught in earlier units of instruction and sometimes items assess content that hasn't yet been taught. We included the phrase "throughout the learning process" in our definition to emphasize how important we believe it is for formative assessment to occur shortly after students are taught new essential content.

When teams design their own common formative assessments, they write items to specifically match the learning targets they want to measure while they are still teaching that content. That means that before teachers move on to new content in the unit, they are able to correct misconceptions students might have that could impede them learning related concepts. This also means that teams are able to move from reporting the percentage correct each student earned to being able to report-for each student-which targets have been mastered and which still need response.

Getting their data back at this level of specificity also allows teams to examine which instructional practices are most effective either for all students or even for certain types of students. In a PLC, we start with the premise that teachers will use the instructional strategies that they believe will be most effective for their students, and that there is no expectation that all teachers will use the same strategies. High-performing teams, however, examine their results to see if a particular strategy is more effective. They also realize that, for students who need additional response, using the same instructional strategy they used the first time won't be very effective. When teams analyze the results of a common formative assessment, they can discuss these issues and learn from each other and from the results.

Team-Designed

The second idea we included in our definition is that these assessments are team-designed to assure that the items are aligned with the learning targets teams are teaching as well as the expected rigor teams have for results. We've seen some examples where teams use an assessment designed by curriculum writers or from a test bank of questions and though these items might be aligned with the content taught, they aren't always aligned to the rigor that it was taught at. This results in information that isn't helpful to teams in planning the response. Teams can effectively use items they've found in curriculum materials or online, but it's vital that they make sure the item matches the learning target they taught in both content and rigor.

Essential learning targets

The third important concept we included in our definition is that these assessments are used to monitor essential learning targets. Some teams write their CFAs around all of the content they've taught. When they do this, they lose the idea of a guaranteed and viable curriculum. We know that it's impossible to guarantee that all students learn everything we teach. When a team identifies its essential standards, they are agreeing that all students will learn these standards. We expect that they will learn more than these standards, but at least these standards. Agreeing about what is the most essential content assures that students are commonly prepared as they move from grade level to grade level and course to course. This common preparation means that less time is spent on review for previous grade level standards and more time to assure student learning of the essentials. If we know with specificity what students have or have not yet learned, responding is much more precise and, therefore, effective.

In this case, vocabulary matters because your definition of common formative assessment impacts your practice. Consider whether your own work around CFAs aligns with this definition.
References:
Bailey, K., Jakicic, C., & Spiller, J. (2013). Collaborating for Success With the Common Core: A Toolkit for Professional Learning Communities at Work™. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

Black, Paul & Dylan Wiliam. (1998) Assessment and Classroom Learning.
Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice Vol. 5 , Iss. 1, 1998.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What are Common Formative Assessments Anyway?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Chris Jakicic, EdD, an author and a consultant, was principal of Woodlawn Middle School in Illinois from 1999 to 2007. She began her career teaching middle school science.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Written by Illuminate Education on December 01, 2015

Where do I even begin?

If you've been tasked with establishing a system of common student assessments within your school or district, it's a question that's likely racing through your mind.

It's difficult enough to get 10 people to cooperate on a shared goal, much less several hundred or more. Yet, as a district assessment leader, that's the essence of the challenge confronting you. Your objective involves organizing an assessment system by which teachers in similar classrooms administer consistent tests, enabling you to measure student progress and compare results to reveal the most effective instruction strategies within your district.

That student assessment is paramount is not lost on you as an educator. As our knowledge-based world places increasing demands on mastering high-level workforce skills, the qualifications for college and career readiness continue to magnify. Student achievement must be evaluated early and often to ensure cultivation of real-world skill sets like critical thinking and complex problem-solving.

Daunting though the task may seem, there's never been a more appropriate time to embark on an honest review of your student assessment system, or to establish a comprehensive system of assessment for the first time. Here are nine steps (each linked to a more detailed lesson on the step) to guide you along your road to common assessments:

When embarking upon this journey, it's important to be aware of common pitfalls and obstacles in the assessment implementation process so you can create a strong foundation with your students' best interests in mind. For example, there are bound to be dissenters to your plan at the start. By seeking involvement from teachers and other key constituents, integrating your assessment system into existing instructional endeavors and establishing continuity with your system to avoid the back-and-forth that plagues many districts, you can silence the critics early and foster widespread buy-in.

To succeed with a common assessment system, you'll require teamwork right from the start. While it may seem tempting to assemble a large committee, begin by forming a small "Core Assessment Team" comprised of a handful of your key stakeholders to ensure manageability. You can always expand involvement later. By determining both your starting goal and your year-ahead meeting times now, you can instill direction and a sense of routine within your team members early on in the process.

Although a timeline and milestones may be tentative at this stage, it's important to begin charting a framework for successful implementation of your common assessment system. Early meetings centered around research and preparation can transition to meetings focused on action items and, finally, evaluation of your progress toward achieving formative assessment. Outline the objectives of each meeting in advance so each participant can prepare accordingly.

Everyone from your assessment team must be on the same page before significant progress can be made. By compiling a glossary of common assessment terms ahead of time, you can prevent misunderstandings amongst team members. In addition to terminology, have your team discuss the relevant research topics. Most educators are well-aware of the benefits (and necessity) of testing students, but collectively reviewing research on topics like using multiple measures and varying assessment formats helps unify each participant's ideologies. This is also the right time to formulate a plan for surveying staff in order to determine what assessment components are already in use.

It's time to consolidate and analyze your data. Review your staff survey results as well as the samples of common assessment components you've acquired, discussing what might work best for your district. As possible assessment structures start to emerge, complete an Assessment Recommendation Overview Form. Upon analyzing what assessment components are already utilized within your district, you'll be able to determine if any of these fit with your revamped structure. It's also worthwhile at this time to begin considering the source from which you intend to obtain your assessments - whether developing these materials in-house, purchasing pre-made tests, or using tests that come with textbooks (knowing you would need to double-check these tests' alignment to standards).

With your preparation nearing completion, it's now time to convert a general framework into more specific plans. View presentations by prospective vendors to assist with finalizing the source of your assessments. The importance of putting an effective assessment management system in place cannot be overlooked. By revisiting your Assessment Recommendation Overview Form, you can now address specifics such as labeling conventions, test length and performance bands, among others. Evaluate possible assessment components more closely, determining who will complete the necessary details on forms prior to the next meeting.

Your long-held assessment goal is nearing fruition. Utilizing all the data you've gathered up to this point, complete an Action Plan Form for each applicable grade level and course requiring assessments. Compile and review these items as an assessment team, relying on your completed forms to steer the final details of your assessment components. Determine how participation in assessment component creation sessions will be established and communicated, keeping in mind the objectives and timeline associated with each Assessment Component Team.

Your Assessment Component Teams are primed to go forth and craft their respective components. But in order to assist them, you should furnish and review materials ranging from completed forms (Action Plan and Assessment Recommendation Overview) to research topics previously covered. While the remaining tasks will vary based on each team's customized action plan, you should occupy a supportive role and plan to provide assistance pertaining to pacing guides, question selection and the overall creation of quality assessments.

The end is in sight but your commitment to your cause must not diminish. After tying up any loose ends brought forward by your Assessment Component Teams, divert your attention towards staff communication. Make a plan for communicating with all staff members impacted by the assessments, and follow it. Acquire feedback from teachers before your assessment components are put into use. When materials are finalized, be sure everyone who needs access to them has it. Ultimately, you should plan for post-administration evaluation of assessments and be prepared to schedule revision meetings as necessary. Assessments can be perfected more over time, as data from your assessment management system reveals which items (e.g., questions) might be misleading, or which assessments' difficulty might be out of sync with other grade levels' or subjects' assessments.

At Illuminate Education we intend to be your school district's comprehensive provider of cloud-based products and services offering innovative data solutions. Serving the K-12 education market, our turnkey data-focused software and services currently assist more than 1,300 school districts across the United States.

If you'd like some help in creating a standards pacing schedule and a set common formative assessments for your district or charter, let us know. We're here to talk.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
9 Steps to an Effective Common Assessment Framework - Illuminate Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Where do I even begin? If you've been tasked with establishing a system of common student assessments within your school or district, it's a question that's likely racing through your mind. It's difficult enough to get 10 people to cooperate on a shared goal, much less several hundred or more.