It’s old news by now that the State Board of Education adopted rules to adopt the Smarter Balanced assessments as the accountability assessments for Iowa.
- The Gazette: Iowa State Board of Education adopts new state assessment for math and reading [Compare to DE press release.]
- Omaha World-Herald: New math and reading tests win Iowa Board of Education’s approval
From Diane Ravitch: Iowa Goes Backward
Rules as proposed and rules as adopted. Note that the rules as adopted show an effective date of January 13, 2016. It’s not clear why this date was chosen, but apparently the DE is still looking at spring 2017 as the first administration of the Smarter Balanced assessments in Iowa.
Here’s the summary of the comments on the proposed rules provided to the State Board of Education:
A public hearing on the revisions to Chapter 12 was held on November 3, 2015. Seventeen persons attended the public hearing, and nine spoke at the hearing. Of those persons speaking, six supported the adoption of this rule, and three opposed its adoption.
Public comments were allowed until 4:30 p.m. on November 3, 2015. Twenty written public comments were received regarding this rule. Of those written comments, 13 supported the adoption of this rule, and six opposed its adoption. One individual expressed some concerns about the assessment developed by the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium, but did not articulate opposition to the Noticed rule.
In many cases, individuals spoke or wrote on their own behalf. In many other cases, individuals spoke or wrote on behalf of an organization. Those organizations formally expressing support for the adoption of this rule include the following: The School Administrators of Iowa; the Iowa Association of School Boards; the Urban Education Network of Iowa; the Rural School Advocates of Iowa; Reaching Higher Iowa; the Cedar Rapids Community School District; and the Cedar Rapids Metro Economic Alliance. The only organization expressing opposition to adoption during the public comment period was the Iowa City Community School District.
Did you notice that the comment summary focused on numbers and not at all on the substance of comments in either opposition–or support, for that matter–of the proposed rules?