Public Comment on Setting Achievement Levels in Writing, 9004-9005 [2011-3438]
Download as PDF
9004
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 32 / Wednesday, February 16, 2011 / Notices
response to this notice will be
considered public records.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section
3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires
that the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) provide interested
Federal agencies and the public an early
opportunity to comment on information
collection requests. The OMB is
particularly interested in comments
which: (1) Evaluate whether the
proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including
whether the information will have
practical utility; (2) Evaluate the
accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the
burden of the proposed collection of
information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and (4) Minimize the burden
of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through
the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
Dated: February 10, 2011.
Darrin A. King,
Director, Information Collection Clearance
Division, Regulatory Information
Management Services, Office of Management.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
Office of Planning, Evaluation and
Policy Development
Type of Review: NEW.
Title of Collection: Equitable
Distribution of Effective Teachers.
OMB Control Number: Pending.
Agency Form Number(s): N/A.
Frequency of Responses: Once.
Affected Public: State, Local, or Tribal
Government, State Education Agencies
or Local Education Agencies.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Responses: 42.
Total Estimated Annual Burden
Hours: 135.
Abstract: The most recent
reauthorization of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act in 2002
required that states provide assurances
and develop plans to ‘‘ensure that poor
and minority children are not taught at
higher rates than other children by
inexperienced, unqualified, or out of
field teachers’’ (Section 1111 (b)(8)(C)).
In 2009, American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act (ARRA) requirements
reinforced the focus on equitable
distribution of teachers by requiring
states applying for education stimulus
funds to provide updated assurances
and to publicize their most recent
‘‘equity plans.’’ ARRA also establishes
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:10 Feb 15, 2011
Jkt 223001
competitive grants to help states build
their pool of effective teachers and
address inequities in the distribution of
teachers. In addition to their focus on
the equitable distribution of teacher
quality, federal programs also have been
promoting shifts in how teacher quality
is measured, away from teacher
qualifications and toward measures of
instructional practice and effectiveness
at raising student achievement. Federal
programs such as the Teacher Incentive
Fund and Race to the Top have
provided incentives for states and
districts to move in this direction,
including funds to support some of the
technical aspects of development.
Federal policymakers need to know
whether the policies and programs they
sponsor under these laws contribute to
teacher quality for disadvantaged
students. Hence, the U.S. Department of
Education requires a study documenting
the state and local actions to (a) develop
new measures of teacher quality, (b)
analyze the distribution of teacher
quality, and (c) develop and implement
plans to ensure teacher quality for
disadvantaged students. To inform
federal policymakers, the study will
examine the implementation of these
activities with attention to
implementation challenges, the role of
state and local context, and the roles of
the federal programs designed to foster
these activities.
The planned data collections will
serve four objectives:
1. To examine how states and districts
analyze the distribution of teacher
quality, plan actions to address
inequities, and monitor progress.
2. To examine how states and districts
are changing their measures of teacher
quality, and to understand their
experiences in doing so.
3. To examine state and local actions
to improve teacher quality for
disadvantaged students (i.e., students in
high-poverty or high-minority schools).
4. To describe the perceived
contributions of federal programs to
state and local actions aimed at
improving the quality of teachers for
disadvantaged students, and how state
and local contexts mediate these
contributions.
To address these objectives, our
design includes telephone interviews
with state education agencies and local
education agencies.
Requests for copies of the information
collection submission for OMB review
may be accessed from the RegInfo.gov
Web site at https://www.reginfo.gov/
public/do/PRAMain or from the
Department’s Web site at https://
edicsweb.ed.gov, by selecting the
‘‘Browse Pending Collections’’ link and
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
by clicking on link number 4426. When
you access the information collection,
click on ‘‘Download Attachments ’’ to
view. Written requests for information
should be addressed to U.S. Department
of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue,
SW., LBJ, Washington, DC 20202–4537.
Requests may also be electronically
mailed to the Internet address
ICDocketMgr@ed.gov or faxed to 202–
401–0920. Please specify the complete
title of the information collection and
OMB Control Number when making
your request.
Individuals who use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD) may call the Federal Information
Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–
8339.
[FR Doc. 2011–3489 Filed 2–15–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Public Comment on Setting
Achievement Levels in Writing
U.S. Department of Education,
National Assessment Governing Board.
ACTION: Notice, Public Comment on
Setting Achievement Levels in Writing.
AGENCY:
The National Assessment
Governing Board (Governing Board) is
soliciting public comments and
recommendations to improve the design
proposed for setting achievement levels
for NAEP in writing. This notice
provides opportunity for public
comment and submitting
recommendations for improving the
design proposed for setting achievement
levels for the 2011 National Assessment
of Educational Progress (NAEP) in
Writing.
The proposed Design Document,
available at https://www.wested.org/cs/
naep/print/docs/naep/welcome.html,
describes the process that will produce
cutscores to represent the lower
boundary of each of three NAEP
achievement levels: Basic, Proficient,
and Advanced. The Governing Board
has contracted with WestEd to assist in
gathering feedback on the design
document. Additional information on
the Governing Board’s work and NAEP
achievement levels can be found at
https://www.nagb.org
Public and private individuals and
organizations are invited to provide
written comments and
recommendations. Voluntary
participation by all interested parties is
urged. This notice sets forth the review
schedule, identifies the kinds of
information that the Governing Board is
seeking to obtain regarding the Design
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\16FEN1.SGM
16FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 32 / Wednesday, February 16, 2011 / Notices
Document, and provides information for
accessing additional materials that will
be useful for this review. This document
is intended to notify members of the
general public of their opportunity to
provide comments and/or make
recommendations.
Background
Under Public Law 107–279, the
Governing Board is authorized to
formulate policy guidelines for NAEP.
The legislation specifies that the
Governing Board is to develop
appropriate student achievement levels
for each subject and grade tested, as
provided in section 303(e).
Achievement levels are determined by
identifying the knowledge that can be
measured and verified objectively using
widely accepted professional
assessment standards. Achievement
levels are to be consistent with relevant
widely accepted professional
assessment standards, and based on the
appropriate level of subject matter
knowledge for grade levels to be
assessed, or on the age of the students
In preparation for setting achievement
levels for the new assessment of writing
at grades 4, 8, and 12, the Governing
Board seeks comment on the draft
Design Document intended to guide this
process. This is the first wholly
computer-based NAEP, and the design
calls for this to be the first computerized
NAEP achievement levels-setting
process. Comments are invited,
particularly on the computerization of
the achievement levels setting process.
All responses received will be taken
into consideration before finalizing the
Design Document.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
Materials for Review and Comment
Policymakers, teachers, researchers,
State and local writing specialists,
members of professional writing and
teacher organizations, and members of
the public are invited to provide
feedback. Comments will provide
valuable feedback that is designed to
improve the first computerized
achievement levels setting process.
To assist with the review and
comment, the following materials are
posted at https://www.wested.org/cs/
naep/print/docs/naep/welcome.html.
(1) Design Document: The draft
Design Document presents a
preliminary design approach to guide
all aspects of the process.
(2) Focus Questions: Focus questions
related to certain aspects of the Design
Document are provided as potential
areas of interest for your feedback.
While all comments and
recommendations are appreciated,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:10 Feb 15, 2011
Jkt 223001
specific issues that you might wish to
address include the following:
1. The objective of this study is to set
achievement levels for the 2011 and
2013 NAEP writing assessments. Does
the study design as presented in the
Design Document seem reasonable for
accomplishing this overall objective?
2. What improvements can be made to
the design to more fully accomplish the
objectives of this study?
3. The proposed design calls for the
computerization of many aspects of the
study. Are there aspects of this
computerization that will be
particularly effective or ineffective in
meeting the objective of this study?
4. Is the field trial as described a
reasonable method for testing the
logistics of the computerized
methodology?
5. Is the special study as described a
reasonable method for comparing
performance relative to the achievement
levels on the 2007 writing NAEP
assessment with performance relative to
the achievement levels for the new
writing NAEP assessment?
Timeline
It is anticipated that the finalized
Design Document will be presented for
approval to the Governing Board on
March 4, 2011. Comments must be
received by February 22, 2011, and sent
to:
WestEd, 730 Harrison Street, San
Francisco, CA 94107, Attention: Jennae
Bulat: Public Comment, Fax: (415) 615–
3200, E-mail: jbulat@wested.org.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jennae Bulat, WestEd, 730 Harrison
Street, San Francisco, CA 94107,
Telephone: (415) 615–3260, FAX: (415)
615–3200, E-mail: JBulat@Wested.org.
Electronic Access to This Document:
You may view this document, as well as
all other documents of this Department
published in the Federal Register, in
text or Adobe Portable Document
Format (PDF) on the Internet at the
following site: https://www.ed.gov/news/
fedregister/. To use PDF you
must have Adobe Acrobat Reader,
which is available free at this site. If you
have questions about using PDF, call the
U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO),
toll free at 1–866–512–0000; or in the
Washington, DC area at (202) 512–1800.
Note: The official version of this document
is the document published in the Federal
Register. Free Internet access to the official
edition of the Federal Register and the Code
of Federal Regulations is available on GPO
Access at: https://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/
index.html.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
9005
Dated: February 10, 2011.
Munira Mwalimu,
Operations Officer, National Assessment
Governing Board, U.S. Department of
Education.
[FR Doc. 2011–3438 Filed 2–15–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
[Project No. 13829–001]
David Creasey; Notice of Application
Tendered for Filing With the
Commission; Notice of Application
Tendered for Filing With the
Commission, Accepted for Filing With
the Commission, Soliciting Motions To
Intervene and Protests, Ready for
Environmental Analysis, Intent To
Waive Solicitation of Additional Study
Requests, Intent To Waive Scoping,
Intent To Waive Three Stage
Consultation, Soliciting Comments,
Terms and Conditions,
Recommendations, and Prescriptions,
and Establishing an Expedited
Schedule for Processing
Take notice that the following
hydroelectric application has been filed
with the Commission and is available
for public inspection.
a. Type of Application: Original
Minor License.
b. Project No.: 13829–001.
c. Date filed: February 4, 2011.
d. Applicant: David Creasey.
e. Name of Project: Creasey
Hydropower Project.
f. Project Description: The Creasey
Hydropower Project would consist of
the following: (1) A 21-foot-wide, 6.5foot-high concrete check structure
which would back up water in Lincoln
Creek; (2) a 1,650-foot-long, 21-inchdiamter PVC penstock with an intake
structure and trashrack; (3) one turbine/
generator unit with a total installed
capacity of 14–20 kilowatts; (4) a 12-foot
long, 14-foot wide concrete slab on
which the turbine/generator unit would
sit; (5) an approximately 75-foot-long,
12-inch-diamater PVC pipe which
would return flows to the Lincoln Creek
Drainage Ditch; and (6) an
approximately 900-foot-long buried
transmission line from the turbine/
generator unit to the Creasey residence.
The project would have an annual
generation of 122.4 megawatt-hours. All
project facilities would be located on
private land owned by the applicant.
The applicant proposes to operate the
project as run-of-river.
E:\FR\FM\16FEN1.SGM
16FEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 32 (Wednesday, February 16, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9004-9005]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-3438]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Public Comment on Setting Achievement Levels in Writing
AGENCY: U.S. Department of Education, National Assessment Governing
Board.
ACTION: Notice, Public Comment on Setting Achievement Levels in
Writing.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The National Assessment Governing Board (Governing Board) is
soliciting public comments and recommendations to improve the design
proposed for setting achievement levels for NAEP in writing. This
notice provides opportunity for public comment and submitting
recommendations for improving the design proposed for setting
achievement levels for the 2011 National Assessment of Educational
Progress (NAEP) in Writing.
The proposed Design Document, available at https://www.wested.org/cs/naep/print/docs/naep/welcome.html, describes the process that will
produce cutscores to represent the lower boundary of each of three NAEP
achievement levels: Basic, Proficient, and Advanced. The Governing
Board has contracted with WestEd to assist in gathering feedback on the
design document. Additional information on the Governing Board's work
and NAEP achievement levels can be found at https://www.nagb.org
Public and private individuals and organizations are invited to
provide written comments and recommendations. Voluntary participation
by all interested parties is urged. This notice sets forth the review
schedule, identifies the kinds of information that the Governing Board
is seeking to obtain regarding the Design
[[Page 9005]]
Document, and provides information for accessing additional materials
that will be useful for this review. This document is intended to
notify members of the general public of their opportunity to provide
comments and/or make recommendations.
Background
Under Public Law 107-279, the Governing Board is authorized to
formulate policy guidelines for NAEP. The legislation specifies that
the Governing Board is to develop appropriate student achievement
levels for each subject and grade tested, as provided in section
303(e). Achievement levels are determined by identifying the knowledge
that can be measured and verified objectively using widely accepted
professional assessment standards. Achievement levels are to be
consistent with relevant widely accepted professional assessment
standards, and based on the appropriate level of subject matter
knowledge for grade levels to be assessed, or on the age of the
students
In preparation for setting achievement levels for the new
assessment of writing at grades 4, 8, and 12, the Governing Board seeks
comment on the draft Design Document intended to guide this process.
This is the first wholly computer-based NAEP, and the design calls for
this to be the first computerized NAEP achievement levels-setting
process. Comments are invited, particularly on the computerization of
the achievement levels setting process. All responses received will be
taken into consideration before finalizing the Design Document.
Materials for Review and Comment
Policymakers, teachers, researchers, State and local writing
specialists, members of professional writing and teacher organizations,
and members of the public are invited to provide feedback. Comments
will provide valuable feedback that is designed to improve the first
computerized achievement levels setting process.
To assist with the review and comment, the following materials are
posted at https://www.wested.org/cs/naep/print/docs/naep/welcome.html.
(1) Design Document: The draft Design Document presents a
preliminary design approach to guide all aspects of the process.
(2) Focus Questions: Focus questions related to certain aspects of
the Design Document are provided as potential areas of interest for
your feedback. While all comments and recommendations are appreciated,
specific issues that you might wish to address include the following:
1. The objective of this study is to set achievement levels for the
2011 and 2013 NAEP writing assessments. Does the study design as
presented in the Design Document seem reasonable for accomplishing this
overall objective?
2. What improvements can be made to the design to more fully
accomplish the objectives of this study?
3. The proposed design calls for the computerization of many
aspects of the study. Are there aspects of this computerization that
will be particularly effective or ineffective in meeting the objective
of this study?
4. Is the field trial as described a reasonable method for testing
the logistics of the computerized methodology?
5. Is the special study as described a reasonable method for
comparing performance relative to the achievement levels on the 2007
writing NAEP assessment with performance relative to the achievement
levels for the new writing NAEP assessment?
Timeline
It is anticipated that the finalized Design Document will be
presented for approval to the Governing Board on March 4, 2011.
Comments must be received by February 22, 2011, and sent to:
WestEd, 730 Harrison Street, San Francisco, CA 94107, Attention:
Jennae Bulat: Public Comment, Fax: (415) 615-3200, E-mail:
jbulat@wested.org.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennae Bulat, WestEd, 730 Harrison
Street, San Francisco, CA 94107, Telephone: (415) 615-3260, FAX: (415)
615-3200, E-mail: JBulat@Wested.org.
Electronic Access to This Document: You may view this document, as
well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal
Register, in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) on the
Internet at the following site: https://www.ed.gov/news/fedregister/. To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is
available free at this site. If you have questions about using PDF,
call the U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO), toll free at 1-866-512-
0000; or in the Washington, DC area at (202) 512-1800.
Note: The official version of this document is the document
published in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the
official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal
Regulations is available on GPO Access at: https://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/.
Dated: February 10, 2011.
Munira Mwalimu,
Operations Officer, National Assessment Governing Board, U.S.
Department of Education.
[FR Doc. 2011-3438 Filed 2-15-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P