Student Score Reporting

Smarter Balanced for ELA and Mathematics

Final student scale scores represent the ability estimates for students. For Smarter Balanced Summative assessments, once the responses from the PT and CAT portions are merged for final scoring, the resulting ability estimates are based on the responses to the specific test items that a student answered, not the total number of items answered correctly. Higher ability estimates are associated with students who correctly answer more difficult and more discriminating items; lower ability estimates are associated with students who correctly answer easier and less discriminating items. Two students can arrive at the same scale score by very different paths. This type of scoring is called “item pattern scoring.”

Reporting Achievement

CAASPP Smarter Balanced assessments in ELA and mathematics were scaled vertically, which means that scores between adjacent grade levels were linked through certain items that were common. This makes it possible to monitor students’ year-to-year progress in relation to the CCSS.

Overall Achievement Levels

Overall achievement levels are categorical labels given to particular scale score ranges. The minimum and maximum scale scores for each achievement level vary for grade level and content area; these are presented in Appendix A: Scale Score Ranges. Achievement levels were set during a process called standard setting, which established the association between scores and their category of achievement.

Student test results are reported in the following overall achievement levels:

• Level 4—Standard Exceeded
• Level 3—Standard Met
• Level 2—Standard Nearly Met
• Level 1—Standard Not Met

The establishment of achievement levels through the standard setting process ensures alignment with the CCSS. Information on the process can be found on the Reporting Scores web page on the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium website.

Claims and Assessment Targets for Smarter Balanced Assessments

The Smarter Balanced content areas of ELA and mathematics are broken down into claims and assessment targets. The claims and targets for each assessment provide a framework for test development (as outlined in the assessment blueprints) as well as in results reporting.

Claims

Claims are evidence-based statements about what students know and can do in relation to the state academic contents standards, as demonstrated by their performance on the assessment.

The four claims for ELA, as taken from the Smarter Balanced Grade Level Tables for All Claims and Assessment Targets and Item Types web document, are as follows:

• Claim 1: Reading—Students can read closely and analytically to comprehend a range of increasingly complex literary and informational texts.
• Claim 2: Writing—Students can produce effective and well-grounded writing for a range of purposes and audiences.
• Claim 3: Speaking and Listening—Students can employ effective speaking and listening skills for a range of purposes and audiences.
• Claim 4: Research/Inquiry—Students can engage in research and inquiry to investigate topics, and to analyze, integrate, and present information.

The four claims for mathematics, as taken from the Smarter Balanced Grade Level Tables for All Claims and Assessment Targets and Item Types web document, are as follows:

• Claim 1: Concepts & Procedures—Students can explain and apply mathematical concepts and interpret and carry out mathematical procedures with precision and fluency.
• Claim 2: Problem Solving—Students can solve a range of complex well-posed problems in pure and applied mathematics, making productive use of knowledge and problem solving strategies.
• Claim 3: Communicating Reasoning—Students can clearly and precisely construct viable arguments to support their own reasoning and to critique the reasoning of others.
• Claim 4: Modeling and Data Analysis—Students can analyze complex, real-world scenarios and can construct and use mathematical models to interpret and solve problems.

Targets are the bridge between the content standards and the assessment evidence that supports the claim. Targets insure sufficiency of evidence to justify each claim. An assessment target defines the grade level–specific knowledge, skill, or ability that students should know or be able to demonstrate within the claim area. For example, the overall claim “Reading” has an assessment target at grade five called “Reasoning and Evidence” that states “Students can read closely and analytically to comprehend a range of increasingly complex literary and informational texts.”

Claims and their assessment targets are found on the Smarter Balanced Content Explorer website. Please note that not all assessment targets are tested for all students given the adaptive nature of the CAT portion of the assessment.

Area (Claim) Performance Levels

Performance on claims and composite claims is reported as one of three levels:

1. Above Standard
2. Near Standard
3. Below Standard

Performance levels for claims provide supplemental information regarding a student’s strengths or weaknesses. Only three performance levels for claims were developed since there are fewer items within each claim. Levels, rather than scores, are reported because of the small number of items in each claim—the levels provide a more accurate measurement than the scores would.

A student’s ability, along with the corresponding standard error, are estimated for each claim; this is illustrated in figure 1. Performance levels for claims are based on the distance a student’s performance on the claim is from the Level 3 Standard Met achievement level. An interval estimate corresponding to the student’s true performance on the claim is constructed. The interval is defined as being from 1.5 times the standard error below the student’s ability to 1.5 times the standard error above the student’s ability. If the interval contains the Level 3 Standard Met criterion value for a particular claim, it indicates the student’s results are near the standard for this claim. If the interval is above the Level 3 Standard Met criterion, it would indicate that the student’s results are above the standard. If the interval is below the Level 3 standard, it would indicate that the student’s results are below the standard.

Figure 1. Illustrative diagram for claim performance level classification

No standard setting occurred for claims.

Claim performance levels are based on a smaller collection of items than the overall achievement levels. However, as a result of the adjusted-form test blueprint used for Smarter Balanced Online Summative Assessments for ELA and mathematics, the number of items for each claim is fewer than were on the previous full-form blueprint, increasing the amount of classification error and making it difficult to provide reliable information about a student’s claim achievement levels. Therefore, beginning with 2020–21 results, individual claim performance levels are not reported for the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments for ELA and mathematics for individual students. Instead, aggregate claim performance levels are reported for student groups of 30 or more on the Test Results for California’s Assessments website.

Beginning with the 2023–24 administration, composite claim results are reported for individual students on the SSR, in the LEA Student Score Data File, and in CERS, as well as for student groups of 11 or more on the Test Results for California’s Assessments website.

For ELA, the claim Reading is combined with the claim Speaking & Listening to report the composite claim of Reading and Listening. The Writing and Research/Inquiry claims are also combined into a Writing and research composite claim.

The composite claim statements for ELA are as follows:

• Composite Claim 1: Reading and Listening—Students can comprehend, by reading or listening closely and analytically, a range of increasingly complex literary and informational texts.
• Composite Claim 2: Writing and Research—Students can produce organized and focused written texts for a range of purposes and audiences, and can apply research and inquiry skills to investigate topics and analyze, integrate, and present information.

For mathematics, the Concepts and Procedures claim is reported as-is. The Problem Solving, Communicating Reasoning and Modeling, and Data Analysis claims are combined into the Mathematical Practices composite.

The composite claim statements for mathematics are as follows:

• Composite Claim 1: Concepts and Procedures—Students can explain and apply mathematical concepts and interpret and carry out mathematical procedures with precision and fluency.
• Composite Claim 2: Mathematical Practices (Problem Solving, Communicating Reasoning, and Modeling and Data Analysis)—Students can use problem solving strategies and mathematical models to represent, analyze, and solve complex, well‐formed or not yet fully formed problems that are presented in mathematical or real‐world contexts; make productive use of mathematical concepts, procedures, and tools; interpret results; and communicate clearly and precisely about their own reasoning and the reasoning of others.

Assessment Targets

Assessment targets describe what is to be assessed within a claim and are used to develop test items (questions). Assessment target reports are available in CERS and show target scores for groups of students; these are reported as Performance Relative to the Entire Test and Performance Relative to Level 3 (Met Standard). Target reports are not available for individual students.

Assessment targets provide information regarding a group’s strengths and weaknesses relative to its achievement on the assessment as a whole and where students’ performance indicates Standard Met. For non-WER targets, only those targets with more than 10 items in the pool are included for reporting. To get a score, students must answer at least 10 CAT items and 1 PT. Students who log on to both the CAT and the PT but do not meet this scoring threshold will receive the LOSS and will not be included in the aggregation of target reports. Scores are sent to CERS, which only displays target results for 30 students or more.

While the claims do not vary among grade levels, assessment targets for ELA Claims 1–4 and mathematics Claim 1 are unique to each grade level. Note that assessment targets are reported for mathematics Claim 1 only. For claims 2, 3, and 4, items are intended to emphasize the mathematical practices, and therefore, items may align with the content included in several mathematics assessment targets. The best common descriptors of the items included in these claims are the claim labels themselves. More information about target reports can be found in the Assessment Target Reports Frequently Asked Questions web document.

Writing Extended Response

WER scores for ELA performance tasks provide additional information about writing performance for a student. These scores will be available on SSRs and in CERS, as well as the LEA Student Score Data File available for download in TOMS.

The WER scores in the LEA Student Score Data File provide information on how a student scored on the three writing traits—organization/purpose, evidence/elaboration, and conventions—for an essay. The range of WER writing trait scores is from 1 to 4 for organization/purpose; 1 to 4 for evidence/elaboration; and 0 (zero) to 2 for conventions.

In addition, CERS and the LEA Student Score Data File provide explanations for a 0 score on the ELA WER items, when applicable, such as that the response was off topic, off purpose, or insufficient. Information on the specifications and rubrics for WER items can be found in the Guidelines and Resources section of the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium Test Development & Design web page.

WER condition codes are presented in table 1 and defined in the Condition Codes for the ELA Writing Extended Response web document.

Because of differing levels of item difficulty, WER raw scores should not be compared between students, grade levels, and test administration years.

CAST

The CAST process converts each possible raw score to an ability estimate and then equates the score to the number-right score on a base test form so that scores from different forms of the CAST are comparable. The number-right scores are then transformed to scale scores, to facilitate score interpretation. If two students take the same form of the CAST, the higher scale score is given to whomever provides more correct responses.

Reporting Achievement

Overall Achievement Levels

Overall achievement levels are categorical labels given to particular scale score ranges. The minimum and maximum scale scores for each achievement level vary for grade level; these are presented in Appendix A: Scale Score Ranges. Achievement levels were set during a process called standard setting, which established the association between scores and their category of achievement.

Student test results are reported in the following overall achievement levels:

• Level 4—Standard Exceeded
• Level 3—Standard Met
• Level 2—Standard Nearly Met
• Level 1—Standard Not Met

Achievement level setting ensures that the achievement levels align to the CA NGSS. Information about achievement level descriptors and scale score ranges can be found in the “Scores and Results Reporting” section of the CDE California Science Test web page.

Domain (Area) Performance Levels

In addition to achievement levels for the total assessment, domain performance levels for the Earth and Space Sciences, Life Sciences, and Physical Sciences domains are also reported for students who answered enough items in the domain. Students can demonstrate performances associated with the expectations of the CA NGSS through the integration of science and engineering practices, disciplinary core ideas, and crosscutting concepts across the three domains, which are as follows:

• Earth and Space Sciences—Students focus on Earth’s place in the universe, Earth’s systems, and Earth and human activity.
• Life Sciences—Students focus on structures and processes in living things, ecosystems, heredity, and biological evolution.
• Physical Sciences—Students focus on matter and its interactions, motion and stability, energy, and waves and their applications.

Students might receive science domain performance levels for some domain(s) but not the others depending on the number of items they completed for different domains. Science domain performance levels are not reported for students who answered fewer than 10 items for the total assessment.

Domain performance levels are based on a smaller collection of items. This makes it more difficult to provide information about a student’s domain performance level without increasing the amount of classification error. A larger classification error increases the chance that a student could be misclassified as belonging to one performance level when the student actually belongs to another. For this reason, there are only three domain performance levels. While the actual domain scores are not reported, the domain performance level indicates that the score for a domain is one of the following:

• If the scale score of a domain is above the interval that was estimated using the scale score of the “Standard Met” achievement level on the total assessment and the standard error of the domain scale score, the performance level for the domain is “Above Standard.”
• If the scale score of a domain is within the interval that was estimated using the scale score of the “Standard Met” achievement level on the total assessment and the standard error of the domain score, the performance level for the domain is “Near Standard.”
• If the scale score of a domain is below the interval that was estimated using the scale score of the “Standard Met” achievement level on the total assessment and the standard error of the domain scale score, the performance level for the domain is “Below Standard.”

CAAs for ELA, Mathematics, and Science

Reporting Achievement

For the CAAs for ELA and mathematics, scale scores reflect estimates of student ability that are based on which items a student correctly answers in a multistage adaptive test setting. A two-stage testing approach adapts the difficulty of an assessment to each student’s ability in order to achieve a more precise measurement. The first stage consists of a routing test that provides an initial student ability estimate. The second stage consists of an assessment that varies in difficulty depending on that initial ability estimate. A student whose initial ability estimate is high will respond to a second-stage module consisting of difficult items that will help to determine just how high the student’s ability is. A student whose initial ability estimate is low will respond to a second-stage module consisting of less difficult items. In certain cases where a student does not answer enough items correctly, the student’s assessment will be stopped at the end of Stage 1, in accordance with the DFAs.

For the CAA for Science, once the responses to each embedded PT are merged for the final scoring, the CAA for Science process first converts each possible raw score to an ability estimate so that scores from different forms of the CAA for Science are comparable. The ability estimates are then transformed to scale scores, to facilitate score interpretation. If two students take the same form of the CAA for Science, the higher scale score is given to whomever provides more correct responses.

Overall Achievement Levels

CAA overall achievement levels are categorical labels given to particular scale score ranges. The minimum and maximum scale scores for each achievement level vary for grade level and content area; these are presented in Appendix A: Scale Score Ranges. Achievement levels were set during a process called standard setting, which established the association between scores and their category of achievement.

Student test results for the CAAs for ELA, mathematics, and science are reported in the following overall achievement levels:

• Understanding (Level 3)
• Foundational Understanding (Level 2)
• Limited Understanding (Level 1)

Regardless of the grade level—which is indicated by the first digit of the scale score—the minimum and maximum scale scores for each achievement level are the same within each content area. Standard setting also ensures that the performance levels align to the CCSS and CA NGSS Connectors achievement level descriptors.

CSA

Reporting Achievement

CSA score reporting levels are categorical labels given to particular scale score ranges. The minimum and maximum scale scores for each reporting level vary for grade level and content area; these are presented in Appendix A: Scale Score Ranges. Reporting levels were set during a process called standard setting, which established the association between scores and their reporting category.

Overall Reporting Levels

Student test results for the CSA are reported in the following overall reporting levels, where the first digit is presented as “x” to indicate the student’s grade level and the high school grade band would be indicated with “9”:

• Score Reporting Range 3 (x60–x99)
• Score Reporting Range 2 (x46–x59)
• Score Reporting Range 1 (x00–x45)

This should be taken into consideration when interpreting the student score history, which appears on the SSR. The student scale scores are not comparable from one grade to the next, while the reporting ranges are standards-based and can be compared across grades. Therefore, it is helpful to compare the student’s reporting range rather than the student’s scale score.

Summative ELPAC

The SSR shows the student’s results on the Summative ELPAC, the state assessment of ELP. The Summative ELPAC provides information about the student’s annual progress toward ELP. For example, the student’s 2023–24 Summative ELPAC results can be compared to Summative ELPAC results from as far back as the 2018–19 administration, when available, because the threshold scores and reporting levels are the same.

Reporting Proficiency

Assessments were scaled vertically after the 2017–18 test administration, which means that scores for certain items that were common between adjacent grade levels were linked. This makes it possible to monitor students’ year-to-year progress in ELP and to describe student progress over time across grade levels.

ELPAC overall reporting levels are designations given to particular scale score ranges. The minimum and maximum scale scores for each level vary by grade level and grade span. Performance levels for domains are also reported for Listening, Speaking, Reading, and Writing.

Threshold scores—the maximum scores at Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3 by grade level or grade span—determine scale score ranges for each performance level. These were set based on a standard setting and validation study that used the 2017–‍18 operational data for the Summative ELPAC. The results allow meaningful comparisons between individual students and group comparisons between schools and LEAs across grade levels.

Overall Performance Levels

Summative ELPAC overall performance levels are categorical labels given to particular scale score ranges. The minimum and maximum scale scores for each performance level typically vary for grade level or grade span; these are presented in Appendix A: Scale Score Ranges. Performance levels for domains are also reported for Listening, Speaking, Reading, and Writing and were set during a process called standard setting, which established the association between scale scores and their category of performance.

Table 2 lists the four Summative ELPAC reporting levels and describes what students at each level can typically do.

Performance level–setting ensures that the performance levels align to the 2012 ELD Standards. Information about performance level descriptors and scale score ranges can be found on the CDE Summative ELPAC General PLDs web page.

Composite and Domain Reporting Levels

The student’s overall score is a combination of two other scores: an oral language composite score that is comprised of the Listening and Speaking domains; and a written language composite score that is comprised of the Reading and Writing domains. The overall-level performance is reported as four levels:

• Beginning to Develop
• Somewhat Developed
• Moderately Developed
• Well Developed

Domain-level performance is reported as Beginning to Develop, Somewhat to Moderately Developed, and Well Developed on the Summative ELPAC SSR.

In rare cases where a domain exemption was requested for a student with a disability that precludes the student from testing in one or more domains, the student received a score or scores based on the remaining domain in that composite and all other domains assessed.

If a student is not exempted but did not log on to a particular domain assessment, the student received zero points for that domain.

Summative Alternate ELPAC

The SSR shows the student’s results on the Summative Alternate ELPAC, the state assessment of ELP for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities. The Summative Alternate ELPAC provides information about the student’s annual progress toward ELP.

Reporting Proficiency

Summative Alternate ELPAC overall reporting levels are designations given to particular scale score ranges. The minimum and maximum scale scores for each level vary by grade level and grade span.

Threshold scores—the maximum scores at Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3 by grade level or grade span—determine scale score ranges for each performance level. These were set based on a standard setting and validation study that used the 2021–22 operational field test data for the Summative Alternate ELPAC. The results allow meaningful comparisons between individual students and group comparisons between schools and LEAs across grade levels.

Overall Performance Levels

Summative Alternate ELPAC overall performance levels are categorical labels given to particular scale score ranges. The minimum and maximum scale scores for each level typically vary for grade level or grade span; these are presented in Appendix A: Scale Score Ranges. Performance levels were set during a process called standard setting, which established the association between scale scores and their category of performance.

Table 3 lists the three Summative Alternate ELPAC performance levels and describes what students at each level can typically do.