200 West Baltimore Street • Baltimore, MD 21201 • 410-767-0100 • 410-333-6442 TTY/TDD
MarylandPublicSchools.org
TO: Members of the State Board of Education
FROM: Karen B. Salmon, Ph.D.
DATE: December 4, 2018
SUBJECT: Teacher Certification Assessments: Teaching Reading: Elementary Education (TREE)
TEST APPROVAL AND ESTABLISHMENT OF QUALIFYING SCORES
__________________________________________________________________________________
PURPOSE:
The purpose of this item is to seek State Board approval of the Educational Testing Service (ETS)
Praxis subject assessments for Teaching Reading: Elementary Education (TREE) and to set the
established qualifying scores for this test.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND:
Since 1987, the Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE) has required state certification tests
to assess basic skills, content knowledge, and pedagogy. These tests provide validation that teacher
candidates have entry level skills to begin their professional careers. In an effort to maintain current
practice in various content fields, the ETS revises most tests on a five year schedule and at the same
time works to create new tests based on a demonstrated need.
Currently, Code of Maryland Regulation 13A.12.01.11A(7) states that a teacher is exempt from
submitting the required semester hours in reading course work, defined in the same regulation, if the
teacher presents evidence of a qualifying score, as established by the State Superintendent of Schools,
on the test approved by the State Board of Education. The current version of the TREE (5203) is
approved for this purpose. Current policy allows those teachers of early childhood education,
elementary education, and early childhood and elementary special education to submit a passing score
on the TREE as an alternative to presenting twelve credits in specified reading coursework.
The International Literacy Association (ILA) revised its standards in 2017. The Standards for the
Preparation of Literacy Professionals - 2017 set forth the criteria for developing and evaluating
preparation programs for literacy professionals. The new TREE assessment focuses on the knowledge
and skills a beginning teacher must have to support the reading and writing development of students in
kindergarten through sixth-grade. The new assessment:
Is structured around the five essential components of effective reading instruction as identified
by the National Reading Panel: phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary, fluency, and
comprehension.
Members of the Maryland State Board of Education
December 4, 2018
2 | P a g e
Highlights the confluence and interrelatedness of the essential elements of the big five in the
actual work of teaching students to read
Highlights the knowledge and skill of the candidate in choosing the right materials to promote
student reading proficiency in various situations
Is informed by the most current research and scientifically proven methods of reading
pedagogy
Uses virtual classroom video clips to re-create authentic teaching moments to which the
candidate must respond by answering an array of questions.
The regenerated TREE (5205) is scheduled to be released on July 1, 2019. To support the decision-
making process for state departments of education with regard to establishing a passing score, research
staff from the ETS design and conduct two Multistate Standard Setting Studies (MSSS) for each test.
The two non-overlapping panels represent and provide a replication of the judgment process to
strengthen the technical quality of the recommended passing score. The panelists, selected from states
that will use the test, are recommended by state departments of education to participate as experts for
the Multistate Standard Setting Studies. The MSSS for this test is scheduled for April 2019.
Panelists judge the extent to which knowledge and/or skills reflected by the content specifications are
important for entry-level teachers. The ETS also collects content-related validity evidence to confirm
the importance of the content specifications for entry level teachers. The recommended cut scores from
the two panels are averaged and then converted to a scaled score with a range from 100 to 200. This
score becomes the recommended qualifying score of the study. The ETS advises states to adopt a score
that does not exceed a plus or minus two standard errors of measurement from the recommended
qualifying score. This approach ensures legal defensibility of the score.
Based on the Maryland test research, discussions by members of the SBOE, Professional Standards
and Teacher Education Board, and Commission on Innovation and Education Excellence, as well as,
expressed interest from the members of the General Assembly and reading advocates, the MSDE is
recommending that this test be required for certification in the areas of early childhood education,
elementary education, English as a second language, and generic special education. This test will
complement the content and pedagogy assessments already required of these individuals and will
reflect the practices of other high performing states.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The TREE assessment is designed to measure the knowledge and skills a teacher must have to support
reading development at the elementary level. It reflects the five essential components of effective
reading instruction, as identified by the National Reading Panel, and is informed by the most current
research and scientifically proven methods of reading pedagogy.
The Praxis TREE (5205) will be the newest test available in July 2019. Since the MSSS process is
scheduled for April 2019, qualifying scores have not yet been recommended. The MSDE will
recommend setting the qualifying score once a score recommendation is made by ETS.
ACTION:
I am requesting that the State Board adopt the Teaching Reading: Elementary Education for all early
childhood, elementary, English as a second language, and special education teachers, effective July 1,
2019, with the qualifying score yet to be determined, as recommended by ETS’s MSSS panel.
Members of the Maryland State Board of Education
December 4, 2018
3 | P a g e
As a contingency plan, in the event the TREE (5205) is delayed, I am recommending that the State
Board require the current TREE (5203) for all early childhood, elementary, English as a second
language, and special education teachers, effective July 1, 2019, with the recommended qualifying
score of 162.
KBS:ss/kem
200 West Baltimore Street • Baltimore, MD 21201 • 410-767-0100 • 410-333-6442 TTY/TDD
MarylandPublicSchools.org
TO: Members of the State Board of Education
FROM: Karen B. Salmon, Ph.D.
DATE: December 4, 2018
SUBJECT: Teacher Certification Assessments: Braille Proficiency
TEST APPROVAL
__________________________________________________________________________________
PURPOSE:
The purpose of this item is twofold: (1) to provide information on two certification subject assessments, the
National Certification in Unified English Braille (NCUEB) and the Praxis 0633 Braille Proficiency for teachers
of the Blind and Visually Impaired; and (2) for the Maryland State Board of Education (SBOE) to determine
next steps for approving the assessment that best meets Maryland’s needs.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND:
Since 1987, the Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE) has required state certification tests to assess
basic skills, content knowledge, and pedagogy. These tests provide validation that teacher candidates have entry
level skills to begin their professional careers. However, the assessment requirement for teachers of the Blind
and Visually Impaired is quite different. The regulations, adopted in 2014, require a teacher who holds a
professional certificate in the area of Blind/Visually Impaired to pass a braille competency test prior to the first
renewal. At the time of that regulatory change, an assessment was not adopted to satisfy this regulatory
requirement.
In October 2017, the MSDE formed a workgroup to review the history of the regulation and to recommend an
assessment to be used to satisfy the renewal requirement outlined in Code of Maryland Regulation (COMAR)
13A.12.02.23D for those individuals who hold a Blind/Visually Impaired Maryland Educator Certificate. The
workgroup, facilitated by the MSDE’s Division of Educator Certification and Program Approval, met on
November 28, 2017, January 24, 2018, February 20, 2018, and March 26, 2018, and was comprised of
representatives/designees from the following constituent organizations:
Sharon Maneki, National Federation of the Blind of Maryland
Melissa Ann Riccobono, National Federation of the Blind of Maryland
Rob Hair, Maryland School for the Blind
Joshua Irzyk, Maryland School for the Blind
Lisa Wright, Prince George’s County Public Schools
Joyce Burwell, Maryland State Department of Education, Division of Special Education/
Early Intervention Services
To facilitate the work, the initial meeting focused on the historical background of the regulation and the test
options currently available for consideration; the NCUEB and the Praxis 0633. Subsequent meetings focused
on gaining additional information about the two tests, which included speaking with representatives of both
Members of the State Board of Education
December 4, 2018
Page 2
organizations responsible for the development of the assessments, reviewing available literature, and reviewing
actual test items. During the process, workgroup members and the MSDE staff expressed concerns regarding
cost, availability of test sites, and specific content. The MSDE staff also expressed concern regarding the
regulatory timing of the assessment requirements. Workgroup responses to those concerns can be found the on
the comparison chart, which has been provided for your reference (Attachment 1).
The workgroup recommended the adoption of the NCEUB. The MSDE does not support the workgroup
recommendation. Specifically, the purpose of certification assessments is to determine if a candidate has the
requisite skills prior to receiving a certificate to teach. The current regulation states that a braille competency
assessment is required only in the first five years. Furthermore, the MSDE continues to be concerned that there
are no test sites for the NCUEB available in Maryland.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
In July, 2014, the SBOE and the Professional Standards and Teacher Education Board adopted new regulations
pertaining to the certification requirements for teachers of the Blind and Visually Impaired. Those regulations
require an individual who holds a professional certificate in the area of Blind/Visually Impaired to pass a Braille
competency test at the time of the first renewal. At the time of that regulatory change, an assessment was not
adopted to meet this regulatory requirement.
ACTION:
I am requesting that the SBOE take the following actions regarding the assessment requirements pertaining to
teachers of the Blind/Visually Impaired:
1. Amend the current regulations to align the assessment requirement with all certification regulations; to be
taken prior to the issuance of a certificate
AND
Adopt an assessment for initial certification assessment for Blind/Visually Impaired to align with all other
certification assessments to be considered during the assessment overview presentation
OR
2. Adopt the workgroup recommendation to approve the National Certification in Unified English Braille
(NCUEB) as the required test for braille competency for teachers of the Blind/Visually Impaired to be used for
the first renewal and approve the recommended implementation date and qualifying score as follows:
Effective: March 1, 2019
Qualifying Score: Pass with a minimum score of 75 on each subtest
Attachment: Comparison Chart
KBS:sds/kem
Attachment I
1 | P a g e
Blind and Visually Impaired (B/VI) Assessment Comparison
National Certification in Unified English Braille (NCUEB) and Praxis Braille Proficiency (0633)
Topics
Praxis 0633
Braille Proficiency
Workgroup Comments and MSDE Clarification
COST
$146
Practice Materials: Free and
online.
Potential Issue: Cost of the NCUEB is significantly higher than the Praxis.
Workgroup Response:
B/VI educators do not need to present a content or pedagogy test to be
issued the initial certificate; therefore, the cost of the chosen test will not be
in addition to a content/pedagogy assessment but will be incurred at year five
during the time of renewal.
MSDE Clarification:
B/VI teachers must submit passing scores on an approved basic skills
assessment at the time of initial certification. When the regulation was
amended in 2014, the test requirement was identified at the first renewal.
The MSDE continues to express concern regarding the cost of the NCUEB and
practice materials, as well as the regulations which require the test to be
taken at the 1
st
renewal. As the SBOE and PSTEB review all certification
requirements, testing for all educators may change resulting in additional test
requirements.
TEST SITE
Test can be taken at any ETS
test center and proctors are
provided at test site.
Potential Issues:
Teachers do not have control/flexibility as to when they can take the NCUEB
test. Individual organizations must volunteer to serve as a test site and
provide proctors.
Workgroup Response: Some members felt that there are enough B/VI
stakeholder agencies in Maryland that the site location will not be an issue.
Some members felt that the Maryland State Steering Committee for the B/VI
could coordinate this effort. In the event that the test wasn’t available
individuals could ask for an extension.
MSDE Clarification: The MSDE continues to express concern regarding the
frequency that this test will be offered to those needing to meet the
requirement. The MSDE has been clear that the regulations do not allow for a
waiver (extension) of certification test requirements.
Attachment I
2 | P a g e
Topics
Braille Proficiency 0633
Workgroup Comments and MSDE Clarification
TIME
4 hours
No discernable difference
CONTENT
Multiple choice
UEB Literary (30 question
on proofreading, rules,
and reading passages)
UEB Math (5 questions)
Nemeth Code (Math) (5
questions)
Writing
1 assignment (3
components) on the Slate
and stylus 27/28 cell, 4
lines
AND
3 assignments on
braillewriter including
UEB (80-100 word
passage), UEB Math (6
problems), and Nemeth
Math (6 problems)
(operations, fractions, pi,
grouping omissions,
super and subscripts,
algebra, geometry
Potential Issues:
Is slate a stylus a skill that must be on the test and is it a necessary skill?
Praxis is the only test that offers a math component but assesses a
candidate’s ability to use both versions of braille math (UEB/Nemeth).
Maryland adopted Nemeth math for use in classrooms and therefore MD
teachers are not required to know UEB math. Should we be testing math
(Nemeth)?
Workgroup Responses: While the workgroup liked that the Praxis assessment
has Nemeth math, some members of the workgroup felt it is unfair to have
MD teachers test in UEB math when it is not used in this state. Given that this
test is taken at the 1
st
renewal, potentially 5 years after graduation,
individuals may not have the skillset to successfully complete the UEB math
questions.
Furthermore, the members felt that the most important Braille code to be
maintained in MD is UEB Literary. The UEB Literary is the foundation and
teachers draw off of this code to learn other rules and use other codes, such
as math codes. If a teacher is proficient in UEB Literary, they should have the
skills to teach math using Braille.
MSDE Clarification: The workgroup did ask Praxis if the test could be
customized to eliminate the UEB math. ETS indicated that the removal will
reduce reliability and for the small numbers of individual taking this test that
it would not be advisable to customize the assessment.
The workgroup also asked representative from NCEUB if math would be
included in the future. NCEUB indicated that math was not included because
they felt that test should be focused on literary code. Considered adding math
but chose not to for reasons of validity (concerned that a test taker may not
recognize math code because they are not a math teacher- not in the normal
repertoire).
NCEUB indicated that the test no longer has slate and stylus section because
many are never taught to use the slate. High correlation between using
braille writer and using slate/stylus when determining if the individual can
produce Braille.
Attachment I
3 | P a g e
Topics
Braille Proficiency 0633
Workgroup Comments and MSDE Clarification
Allowed
References
Practice Guide contains a
Reference Guide that will be
used during the test.
Accommodations
Accommodations
identified on website
Must apply for
preapproval
Standard protocol (on
website)- requires
documentation
(testimonial from expert);
external experts review
application if required
and decide whether to
grant; this approval
process takes a few
weeks
Potential Issues:
Anecdotal information suggests that the ETS test was not available in Braille
and required the use of a human reader as accommodations. Does ETS
provide the test in Braille?
Are there additional accommodations for the NCUEB?
Workgroup Response:
ETS provided the following clarification: 2 methods- braille reader script;
embossed braille version in uncontracted braille for knowledge of contracted
braille
NCUEB provided the following response: Does not require medical
documentation for accommodations; if requested would invalidate the test,
would not approve; not a rigorous process for vetting accommodations
Attachment I
4 | P a g e
Topics
Braille Proficiency 0633
Workgroup Comments and MSDE Clarification
Scoring
Recommended cut score: 169
VA: 157
MS: 167
WV: 169
RI: 169
3 week response time for
results
Audience
“just qualified candidate”
Potential Issues: Concerns include that testing for “just qualified” is not
enough based on opinion of some workgroup members that Praxis
proofreading is not rigorous enough and there is not enough writing on the
Praxis. Some workgroup members were concerned that NCUEB does not have
math.
Workgroup Response: While the workgroup liked that Praxis assessment has
math, some members of the workgroup felt it is unfair to have MD educators
test in UEB math when it is not used in this state. Given that this test is taken
at the 1
st
renewal, potentially 5 years after graduation, individuals may not
have the skillset to successfully complete the UEB math questions.
Furthermore the members felt that the most important Braille code to be
maintained in MD is UEB Literary. The UEB Literary is the foundation and
teachers draw off of this code to learn others rules and use other codes, such
as math codes. If a teacher is proficient in UEB Literary, they should have the
skills to teach math using Braille.
MSDE Clarification: The MSDE continues to express concern that the purpose
of certification assessments is to determine if a candidate has the requisite
skills prior to receiving a certificate to teach in specific subject areas.
Certification tests have not been used to determine if an individual still has
the skills necessary to teach at the 5 year renewal mark; that continues to be
an employment decision. The MSDE continues to be concerned with the
current regulations which require the test to be taken at the 1
st
renewal.
Guide to the 2018
ACT
®
/SAT
®
Concordance
-
What Is Concordance?
The term “concordance” refers to establishing a relationship between scores on assessments that measure
similar (but not identical) constructs. A technically sound concordance allows students and professionals to
compare scores from similar assessments to inform decisions. A concorded score is not a perfect prediction
of how a student would perform on the other test.
How Were the ACT/SAT Concordance Tables Developed?
ACT and the College Board periodically produce ACT®/SAT® concordance tables to show how scores on
each test compare. With the redesign of the SAT in 2016, researchers from the College Board and ACT, in
collaboration with the NCAA Technical Advisory Board, developed updated, technically sound concordance
tables that will serve the needs of students and institutions going forward. The 2018 ACT/SAT concordance
tables in this document are now the only official concordance tables and should be the single source of
reference moving forward when comparing SAT scores to ACT scores for students applying for terms after
fall 2018. These tables replace the concordance tables released in 2016.
The concordance tables show ACT and SAT scores with the same percentile rank for a group of students
who took both tests. The sample of students used to develop the concordance tables took the ACT test and
the new SAT test. For students who took the ACT and/or the SAT more than once, their ACT and SAT scores
with the closest test dates were used. The tables were produced using data from 589,753 students who were
graduating seniors in 2017 and who took both the ACT and the new SAT tests between February 2016 (for
the ACT) or March 2016 (for the SAT) and June 2017. The sample was statistically weighted to reflect the
demographics, school attributes, and high school grade point average (GPA) of all students who are likely to
take the ACT, SAT, or both tests.
Which Concordance Tables Are Provided?
The concordance tables are based on ACT and SAT tests that cover similar content and show a strong
statistical relationship between scores. A description of the content measured by the new SAT and the ACT is
provided in the Appendix. The table below lists the three sets of concordances.
ACT score SAT score
Tables
ACT-to-SAT
ACT Composite SAT Total Table A1 Table A2
ACT Mathematics SAT Math Table B1 Table B2
ACT English + Reading SAT ERW Table C1 Table C2
Note: Concordance tables for the ACT Composite were derived from concordances of the ACT sum score.
Note: ERW = Evidence-Based Reading and Writing.
Tables are provided in both directions (ACT-to-SAT and SAT-to-ACT). Each ACT score is related to a range of
SAT scores (or vice versa). For users who want to concord an ACT score to a single SAT score point (or vice
versa), the most appropriate score point within the range is also provided.
© 2018 The College Board, ACT, Inc.
1
SAT-to-ACT
2018 Concordance Tables
Table A1: SAT Total to ACT Composite Table A2 : ACT Composite to SAT Total
SAT ACT
36
36
36
36
35
35
35
35
34
34
34
34
33
33
33
33
32
32
32
31
31
31
30
30
30
29
29
29
28
28
28
27
27
27
27
SAT ACT SAT ACT
1250 26
*1240 26
1230 26
1220 25
*1210 25
1200 25
1190 24
*1180 24
1170 24
1160 24
1150 23
*1140 23
1130 23
1120 22
*1110 22
1100 22
1090 21
*1080 21
1070 21
1060 21
1050 20
*1040 20
1030 20
1020 19
*1010 19
1000 19
990 19
980 18
*970 18
960 18
950 17
940 17
*930 17
920 17
910
900
*890
880
870 15
860 15
*850 15
840 15
830 15
820
810
*800
790
780
770 13
*760
750 13
740 13
730 13
720
*710
700
690
680 11
*670 11
660 11
650 11
640
*630
620
610 9
600 9
*590
ACT SAT SAT Range
36 1590 1570–1600
35 1540 1530–1560
34 1500 1490–1520
33 1460 1450–1480
32 1430 1420–1440
31 1400 1390–1410
30 1370 1360–1380
29 1340 1330–1350
28 1310 1300–1320
27 1280 1260–1290
26 1240 1230–1250
25 1210 1200–1220
24 1180 1160–1190
23 1140 1130–1150
22 1110 1100–1120
21 1080 1060–1090
20 1040 1030–1050
19 1010 990–1020
18 970 960–980
17 930 920–950
16 890 880–910
15 850 830–870
14 800 780–820
13 760 730–770
12 710 690–720
11 670 650–680
10 630 620–640
9 590 590–610
*Use this SAT score when a single score point comparison is needed.
Note: Concordance tables for the ACT Composite were derived from concordances of the ACT sum score.
© 2018 The College Board, ACT, Inc.
2
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1590
1580
1570
1560
1550
1540
1530
1520
1510
1500
1490
1480
1470
1460
1450
1440
1430
1420
1410
1400
1390
1380
1370
1360
1350
1340
1330
1320
1310
1300
1290
1280
1270
1260
1600 16
16
16
14
14
13
12
12
10
10
9
10
12
12
14
14
14
16
Table B1: SAT Math to ACT Math Table B2 : ACT Math to SAT Math
SAT ACT SAT ACT
800 36
35
35
35
34
33
33
32
32
31
30
30
29
28
28
27
27
27
26
26
25
25
24
24
23
23
22
21
20
*500 18
490 18
480
*470
460
450 16
440 16
*430 16
420 16
410
*400
390
380
370 14
*360 14
350 14
340
*330
320
*310 12
300 12
290
*280
270 10
*260 10
ACT S AT
36 800
35 780
34 760
33 740
32 720
31 710
30 700
29 680
28 660
27 640
26 610
25 590
24 580
23 560
22 540
21 530
20 520
19 510
18 500
17 470
16 430
15 400
14 360
13 330
12 310
11 280
10 260
*Use this SAT score when a single score point comparison is needed.
© 2018 The College Board, ACT, Inc.
3
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
780
770
760
750
740
730
720
710
700
690
680
670
660
650
640
630
620
610
600
590
580
570
560
550
540
530
520
510
790
19
17
17
17
15
15
15
15
13
13
13
11
11
Table C1: SAT ERW to ACT English+Reading
Table C2 : ACT English+Reading to SAT ERW
SAT ACT SAT ACT S AT ACT
800 72
72
71
71
70
70
69
68
67
66
64
63
61
60
58
57
55
54
52
51
49
48
46
45
44
43
42
40
39
500 37
490
480 34
470
460 32
450
440 30
430
420 28
410
400 26
390
380 24
370
360 22
350
340 20
330
320 18
310
300 16
290
280 14
72 790
770
70 750
740
68 730
720
66 710
700
700
690
680
680
670
660
660
650
640
640
630
630
620
610
610
600
590
580
580
570
560
550
*42 540
41 540
40
39 520
38
*37 500
36 500
35
34 480
33
32 460
31
30 440
29
28 420
27
26 400
25
24 380
23
22 360
21
20 340
19
18 320
17
16 300
15
14
Note: ERW = Evidence-Based Reading and Writing. Note: ERW = Evidence-Based Reading and Writing.
ACT English + Reading scores range from 2 to 72. ACT English + Reading scores range from 2 to 72.
*Use this SAT score when a single score point comparison is needed. *Use this ACT score when a single score point comparison is needed.
© 2018 The College Board, ACT, Inc.
4
*
*
*
790
780
770
760
750
740
730
720
710
700
690
680
670
660
650
640
630
620
610
600
590
580
570
560
550
540
530
520
510 38
35
33
31
29
27
25
23
21
19
17
15
71
69
67
65
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
64
63
62
61
60
59
58
57
56
55
54
53
52
51
50
49
48
47
46
45
44
43
530
510
490
470
450
280
430
410
390
370
350
330
310
290
SAT ACT
What Are the Potential Uses of Concordance Tables?
A variety of stakeholders use concordance tables to compare scores across the ACT and the SAT to inform
policies, processes, and decisions. College counselors, students, and their families use concordance tables to
inform college searches and explorations. Policymakers, researchers, and K–12 educators use concordance
tables to aggregate scores across tests to measure college readiness for groups of students. Colleges,
universities, scholarship organizations, and athletic conferences also use concordances in a variety of ways,
including determining eligibility for a program or scholarship.
§ Comparing SAT and ACT scores across different students. When scores from either test are accepted,
concordance tables can help institutions or other stakeholders who need to compare scores.
§ Establishing a policy using comparable scores from both tests. An institution, scholarship, or
program may use a specific test score as one factor to establish eligibility.
§ Converting scores for use in a predictive model or index. Many colleges and universities have
built indices or models to predict the likelihood that individual students will apply, enroll, or succeed
academically. These models typically include a variety of factors, including test scores, high school GPA,
and course rigor. Institutions can apply the concordance tables in these prediction models.
What Are the Key Considerations and Limitations When Using the
Concordance Tables?
Using SAT and ACT scores in a consistent, psychometrically appropriate way as one component of a holistic
admission process will help ensure all students are treated fairly in the admission process. While the
concordance tables can be used for a variety of purposes, higher education professionals should keep the
following considerations and limitations in mind:
§ The ACT and the SAT are different tests. The ACT and the SAT measure similar, but not identical,
content and skills. A concorded score is not a perfect prediction of how a student would perform on the
other test. Concorded scores should be interpreted as the scores with the same rank within a group of
students who take the tests at approximately the same time.
§ Concordances are used to compare individual scores, not aggregate scores. Users should avoid
converting aggregate scores (e.g., mean, median, ranges) using concordance tables, as this could
introduce additional sources of error.
§ Users should avoid making decisions based solely on a concorded score. Admission and enrollment
professionals should use multiple reliable and valid measures when making decisions to account for the
many factors that impact academic performance in college.
§ Note the prediction error (more details below). Users should consider this when using the
concordance tables to predict how a student would have performed on the ACT or the SAT.
§ Concordances are sample-dependent. While concordance results can vary by sample, the ACT/SAT
concordance sample was statistically weighted to more closely reflect the demographics, school attributes,
and high school GPA of the population of students who take the ACT, SAT, or both tests.
§ Institutions should not superscore across the SAT and ACT tests. Superscoring across 2 different
tests is an imprecise way of understanding whether a student meets a certain academic threshold.
Combining scores from the ACT and the SAT in a single superscore is strongly discouraged.
© 2018 The College Board, ACT, Inc.
5
Additional Notes and Technical Specifications
Like all concordance tables, the ACT/SAT concordance tables are somewhat dependent on the sample
of students who took both tests. The concordance tables reported here were produced using data from
589,753 students who were graduating seniors in 2017 and who took the ACT and the new SAT test between
February 2016 (for the ACT) or March 2016 (for the SAT) and June 2017. International students, students with
disabilities who tested with special accommodations, and students who took the ACT or SAT under state
or district testing programs were included. For students who took the ACT and/or the SAT more than once,
their ACT and SAT scores from the closest test dates were used.
To produce the concordance, statistical weighting procedures were used to accomplish two goals. The
first goal was to reflect the demographics, school attributes (size, locale, geographic region, public/private
affiliation, and percentage eligible for free or reduced-price lunch), and high school GPA of the students
taking the ACT only, the SAT only, or both tests (i.e., the entire population of test takers). The second goal
was to minimize the time between students’ ACT and SAT testing and also ensure the students who took
the ACT before the SAT and the students who took the SAT before the ACT were counterbalanced. The ACT
and SAT scores were linked using equipercentile methods on the weighted ACT and SAT score distributions.
To the extent that the goals for the statistical weighting were accomplished, the concordance tables are
representative of graduating seniors who took either test or both tests.
As mentioned above, concordance tables should not be expected to provide perfect predictions of a
student’s SAT score from their ACT score, or their ACT score from their SAT score. To convey the uncertainties
associated with use of the table for predicting SAT or ACT scores that are close in time, we provide error
intervals for the SAT and ACT scales. These error intervals reflect the variability of students’ ACT scores from
the SAT-to-ACT concordance, and the variability of students’ SAT scores from the ACT-to-SAT concordance.
The size of these error intervals depends on the correlation of the ACT and SAT scores and the reporting
scale ranges of the ACT and the SAT.
§ When using the SAT Total and ACT Composite concordance table to estimate a student’s proximal
ACT Composite score from their SAT Total score, the estimates in the table have a standard error of
approximately ± 2.26 (2) ACT Composite score points on its 1–36 point scale. When using this table to
estimate a student’s proximal SAT Total score from their ACT Composite score, the estimates have a
standard error of approximately ± 79.57 (80) SAT Total score points on its 400–1600 point scale.
§ When using the SAT Math and ACT Mathematics concordance table to estimate a student’s proximal
ACT Mathematics score from their SAT Math score, the estimates in the table have a standard error of
approximately ± 2.65 (3) ACT Mathematics score points on its 1–36 point scale. When using this table to
estimate a student’s proximal SAT Math score from their ACT Mathematics score, the estimates have a
standard error of approximately ± 50.33 (50) SAT Math score points on its 200–800 point scale.
§ When using the SAT ERW and ACT English+Reading concordance table to estimate a student’s proximal
ACT English+Reading score from their SAT ERW score, the estimates in the table have a standard error
of approximately ± 5.93 (6) ACT English+Reading score points on its 2–72 point scale. When using
this table to estimate a student’s proximal SAT ERW score from their ACT English+Reading score, the
estimates have a standard error of approximately ± 46.66 (50) SAT ERW score points on its 200–800
point scale.
© 2018 The College Board, ACT, Inc.
6
SAT and ACT Item Counts and Test
Content Descriptions
Content experts at ACT and the College Board jointly agreed that the SAT Math Test and the ACT
Mathematics Test are sufficiently similar in what they are measuring to justify a concordance. An additional
criterion for concordance is the strength of the relationship between two such measures: our research
demonstrates that the correlation between ACT and SAT math scores for the concordance sample was 0.885,
which met this criterion (i.e., a correlation of 0.866 or higher). The content similarity and score correlations
provide sufficient evidence to support a concordance between the math tests.
The experts at the two organizations also jointly agreed that the SAT Reading Test and SAT Writing
and Language Test are sufficiently similar to the ACT Reading Test and the ACT English Test to justify a
concordance. The correlations between the combined tests, SAT Evidence-Based Reading and Writing and
ACT Reading and English, was 0.884.
The table below provides the item counts for each of the concorded tests. Additional descriptions of the
test content for the SAT can be found at collegeboard.org/SATtestcontent. Additional descriptions of test
content for the ACT can be found at act.org/theACTcontent.
Concorded Components
Item Counts
ACT SAT
Total/Composite*
Reading and Writing**
Math
ACT Composite Score is the
average of the four ACT test scores
(215 items total):
SAT Total Score is based
on the three SAT test scores
(154 items total):
§ English Test
§ Reading Test
§ Reading Test
§ Writing and Language Test
§ Mathematics Test
§ Math Test
§ Science Test
ACT English Test (75 items) SAT Evidence-Based Reading
ACT Reading Test (40 items) and Writing
§ Reading Test (52 items)
§ Writing and Language Test
(44 items)
ACT Mathematics Test (60 items) SAT Math Test (58 items)
*Concordance tables for the ACT Composite were derived from concordances of the ACT sum score (i.e., the sum of the English, Reading,
Mathematics and Science Tests).
**Does not include the optional ACT Writing Test or the optional SAT Essay
© 2018 The College Board, ACT, Inc. 00989-006
7
200 West Baltimore Street • Baltimore, MD 21201 • 410-767-0100 • 410-333-6442 TTY/TDD
MarylandPublicSchools.org
TO: Members of the State Board of Education
FROM: Karen B. Salmon, Ph.D.
DATE: December 4, 2018
SUBJECT: Basic Academic Skills Assessment: Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT)
TEST POLICY APPROVAL
__________________________________________________________________________________
PURPOSE:
The purpose of this item is to request the approval of an updated qualifying score on the redesigned
Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) for those candidates who present this assessment to satisfy the basic
academic skills assessment requirement.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND:
Since 1987, the Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE) has required state certification tests
to assess basic skills, content knowledge, and pedagogy. These tests provide validation that teacher
candidates have entry level skills to begin their professional careers. Currently, Maryland certification
candidates must present passing scores on the Praxis Core Academic Skills for Educations (CORE)
battery; however, if a candidate has met the established minimum score requirement on the SAT,
American College Testing (ACT), or Graduate Record Exam (GRE), the CORE is not required.
In 2016, the College Board published a redesigned version of the SAT, which included content,
format, and scoring changes to the assessment. The new SAT structure includes two components:
Evidence-Based Reading and Writing and Math, whereas the old version had three components:
Critical Reading, Writing, and Math. Currently, candidates in Maryland must present a minimum
combined score of 1100 in the Critical Reading and Math subtests to be exempt from taking the Praxis
CORE. Given the new structure of the 2016 SAT, and subsequent scoring changes, Maryland must
adopt a new minimum required score, should the SAT continue to be an approved basic academic
skills option for Maryland candidates.
To establish a minimum required score on the 2016 SAT, the MSDE used the ACT/SAT concordance
table, published by College Board and ACT in 2018, as the required Maryland minimum score for the
ACT assessment remains current. The concordance tables are based on ACT and SAT tests that cover
similar content and show a strong statistical relationship between scores.
According to the ACT Composite to SAT Total concordance table, a SAT range of 1160-1190 is
aligned with an ACT score of 24. A score of 1180 is recommended as the most appropriate score when
choosing to concord an ACT score to a single SAT score point.
Members of the State Board of Education
December 4, 2018
Page 2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Given the 2016 redesign of the SAT, the current qualifying score required to exempt a certification
candidate from taking the Praxis CORE is no longer appropriate. The purpose of this item is to request
the approval of an updated qualifying score on the redesigned SAT for those candidates who present
this assessment to satisfy the basic academic skills assessment requirement.
ACTION:
I am requesting that the State Board of Education approve an updated qualifying score on the 2016
redesigned SAT, as well as, determine the recommended implementation date.
Test Name Qualifying Score Range Effective Date
SAT 1180 1160-1190 1/1/2019
Attachment: Guide to the 2018 ACT/SAT Concordance
KBS:sds/kem
Certification Tests:
Establishment of Qualifying
Scores
STATE BOARD MEETING
December 4, 2018
State Board Meeting
2
December 4, 2018
Purpose
Requirements for Reading/Literacy Assessment
Approve the Teaching Reading: Elementary Education assessment for all early
childhood, elementary, English as a second language, and special education
teachers.
Requirements for Blind/Visually Impaired Certification Assessment
Provide the State Board of Education (SBOE) members information on two certification
assessments for braille proficiency and to determine the next steps for approving the
assessment that best meets Maryland’s needs.
Requirements for Basic Academic Skills Assessment
Request approval of an updated qualifying score on the redesigned Scholastic Aptitude
Test (SAT).
State Board Meeting
3
December 4, 2018
Background
The Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE) requires
certification tests to assess basic academic skills, content
knowledge, and pedagogy
• Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) American College Testing Program (ACT), or
Graduate Record Examination (GRE) may be used to fulfill this
requirement
There are two primary test providers for certification tests;
Education Testing Services (ETS) and Pearson
Maryland currently uses the ETS Praxis series for certification and
supplements with the American Council on the Teaching of
Foreign Languages (ACTFL) for certification of foreign language
teachers
State Board Meeting
4
December 4, 2018
Multistate Standard Setting Process
ETS conducts two Multistate Standard Setting Studies for each
test
• The cut scores from the two panels are averaged and converted to a
scaled score which becomes the recommended qualifying score
published by ETS
• ETS advises states to adopt a score that does not exceed a plus or minus
two standard errors of measurement (SEM) from the recommended
qualifying score
The use of two non-overlapping panels strengthens the technical
quality of the recommended cut scores and provides validity
evidence to assist states with making certification test decisions
Reading
State Board Meeting
6
December 4, 2018
Teaching Reading: Elementary
Education
Purpose: Recommend that a separate reading test be required for the initial
certification of Early Childhood, Elementary Education, ESOL, and Special
Education Teachers (birth – grade 3, grades 1-8, and grades 6-12).
Issue: Maryland does not currently require a separate foundations of reading
test; instead it is an option to be used in lieu of the literacy/reading coursework.
Teaching Reading: Elementary Education (5205 available July 1, 2019):
• Focuses on the knowledge and skills a beginning teacher must have to support
reading and writing development.
• Uses the five essential components of effective reading instruction as identified
by the National Reading Panel: phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary,
fluency, and comprehension.
• Assesses understanding of the science of teaching reading, and the relationship
between reading skills and writing instruction since receptive and productive
literacy are interrelated.
• Acknowledges multiple approaches to pedagogy used in tandem with content.
State Board Meeting
7
December 4, 2018
Action
Require: A separate reading test for the initial certification for all Early
Childhood, Elementary Education, ESOL, and Special Education Teachers (birth –
grade 3, grades 1-8, and grades 6-12)
Adopt: New Teaching Reading: Elementary Education (5205) Assessment
• Effective: July 1, 2019
• Qualifying Score: To Be Determined after April 2019 Multistate
Standard Setting Study
Require (if #5205 is not available): Current Teaching Reading: Elementary
Education (5203)
• Effective: July 1, 2019
• Qualifying Score: 162
Blind and Visually Impaired
State Board Meeting
9
December 4, 2018
Current Test Options
Purpose: Provide the State Board of Education (SBOE) members information
on two certification assessments for braille proficiency and to determine the
next steps for approving the assessment that meets Maryland’s needs.
Background: In 2014, the SBOE and PSTEB adopted certification regulations
that require a teacher who holds a professional certificate in the area of
Blind/Visually Impaired to pass a braille competency test prior to the first
renewal. At the time of that regulatory change, an assessment was not adopted
to satisfy this regulatory requirement.
Current Test Options:
• National Certification in Unified English Braille (NCUEB): Intended primarily
for teachers, future teachers and other professionals whose responsibilities
include teaching or producing braille.
• Praxis: Braille Proficiency: Measures the requisite braille knowledge and skills
that the entry level teacher of visually impaired students or braille must
possess.
Workgroup Recommendation: Adopt the (NCUEB)
State Board Meeting
10
December 4, 2018
Action
Decision 1: Amend the current regulations to align the assessment requirement
with all certification regulations; to be taken prior to the issuance of a certificate.
-AND-
Adopt an assessment for initial certification assessment for Blind/Visually
Impaired to align with all other certification assessments to be considered during
the assessment overview presentation.
-OR-
Decision 2: Adopt the workgroup recommendation to approve the National
Certification in Unified English Braille (NCUEB) as the required test for braille
competency for teachers of the Blind/Visually Impaired to be used for the first
renewal and approve the recommended implementation date and qualifying
score as follows:
• Effective: March 1, 2019
• Qualifying Score: Pass with a minimum score of 75 on each subtest
Basic Academic Skills
Assessment Policy Approval
State Board Meeting
12
December 4, 2018
SAT Qualifying Score
Purpose: Approve an updated qualifying score on the redesigned SAT for those
candidates who present this assessment to satisfy the basic academic skills
assessment requirement.
Background: In 2016, the College Board published a redesigned version of the
SAT, which included content, format, and scoring changes to the assessment. To
establish a minimum required score, the MSDE used the ACT/SAT concordance
table, published by College Board and ACT in 2018. The concordance tables are
based on ACT and SAT tests that cover similar content and show a strong statistical
relationship between scores.
Action: Approve an updated qualifying score on the redesigned SAT, to include the
recommended implementation date.
Test Name Qualifying Score Qualifying Score Range Effective Date
SAT 1180 1160-1190 1/1/2019