(a)
The review performed by the California Learning Resource Network shall identify new and existing electronic learning assessment resources capable of assisting schools and school districts to analyze assessment information for the purpose of designing instructional plans to improve pupil achievement and shall include a descriptive model for use by administrators and teachers that differentiates and compares the capabilities of the different types of identified electronic learning assessment resources.
(b)
The descriptive model shall include, but not be limited to, all of the following criteria:
(1)
The ability to report the results of the statewide pupil assessment programs in aggregate and disaggregate forms for analysis by administrators and teachers to plan for improved pupil achievement.
(2)
The ability to quickly identify achievement gaps.
(3)
The ability to link results of assessment to instructional strategies that are aligned to state adopted content standards and the curriculum frameworks.
(4)
The extent to which information can be tailored to individual pupil level, classroom level, school level, school district level, and state level data.
(5)
The ability to reduce the overhead and additional cost of assisting teachers and school administrators to plan and align instruction to address academic deficiencies identified by both standardized and criterion referenced academic assessments.
(c)
In performing its review, the California Learning Resource Network may not make subjective evaluations of the electronic learning assessment resources under review and shall limit its review to the factual capabilities of those resources.
(d)
The existing external evaluation of the California Learning Resource Network will determine the overall cost and benefits of providing statewide assessment information resources as described in this chapter and the extent to which school administrators and teachers access and use the information provided to accomplish all of the following:
(1)
Make use of state assessment information to inform instructional planning.
(2)
Link instruction to the state-adopted content standards.
(3)
Save time and financial resources related to instructional planning.
(4)
Target instruction to the academic needs of pupils.
(e)
The Superintendent of Public Instruction shall provide a written report of the results of the external evaluation of the ongoing review process to the Director of Finance, the Legislative Analyst, the State Board of Education, and the appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature by January 1, 2006.
