2012 Accountability Determinations

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
ESEA Flexibility C hanges to School & District Accountability and Assistance April 2012.
Advertisements

What You Should Know About the State’s Two Year Old Accountability System.
Franklin Public Schools MCAS Presentation November 27, 2012 Joyce Edwards Director of Instructional Services.
Accountability data overview August Topics  Changes to 2014 accountability reporting  Overview of accountability measures  Progress & Performance.
Lodi Unified School District Accountability Progress Report (APR) & CAHSEE Results Update Prepared for the September 21, 2010 Board of Education.
2013 State Accountability System Allen ISD. State Accountability under TAKS program:  Four Ratings: Exemplary, Recognized, Academically Acceptable, Academically.
Data 101 Presented by Janet Downey After School Program Specialist Riverside Unified School District.
Understanding Massachusetts’ new accountability measures November 2012.
Delaware’s Accountability Plan for Schools, Districts and the State Delaware Department of Education 6/23/04.
Understanding Wisconsin’s New School Report Card.
Fontana Unified School District Student Achievement Data September 17, 2008 Instructional Services Assessment & Evaluation.
San Leandro Unified School Board Looking Closely About Our Data September 6, 2006 Presented by Department of Curriculum and Instruction Prepared by Daniel.
District Assessment & Accountability Data Board of Education Report September 6, 2011 Marsha A. Brown, Director III – Student Services State Testing and.
1 Paul Tuss, Ph.D., Program Manager Sacramento Co. Office of Education August 17, 2009 California’s Integrated Accountability System.
MCAS REPORT Spring 2013 Presented to the Hingham School Committee November 18, 2013 by Ellen Keane, Assistant Superintendent.
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) and Accountability Status Determinations.
School & district accountability reporting Title I Technical Assistance & Networking Session October 17, 2013.
ESEA Waiver and Accountability Status School Committee Presentation September 24, 2013.
Ohio’s New Accountability System Ohio’s Response to No Child Left Behind (NCLB) a.k.a. Elementary & Secondary Education Act a.k.a. ESEA January 8, 2002.
School Accountability in Delaware for the School Year August 3, 2005.
Lodi Unified School District Accountability Progress Report (APR) Results Update Prepared by the LUSD Assessment, Research & Evaluation Department.
Accountability Report Dedham Public Schools October 3,
Making Sense of Adequate Yearly Progress. Adequate Yearly Progress Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) is a required activity of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB)
Melrose High School 2014 MCAS Presentation October 6, 2014.
Back to Table of Contents DART for English Language LearnersAnnual SnapshotDART for English Language LearnersAnnual Snapshot DART for English Language.
Adequate Yearly Progress The federal law requires all states to establish standards for accountability for all schools and districts in their states. The.
Michigan School Report Card Update Michigan Department of Education.
ESEA Flexibility NCLB Waiver Discussion October 24, 2011.
1 Mitchell D. Chester Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education Report on Spring 2009 MCAS Results to the Massachusetts Board of Elementary and.
ESEA Federal Accountability System Overview 1. Federal Accountability System Adequate Yearly Progress – AYP defined by the Elementary and Secondary Education.
2015 Accountability Reporting Presentation to the Massachusetts Board of Elementary & Secondary Education December 15, 2015 Update on Overall District.
Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) /22/2010.
1 Accountability Systems.  Do RFEPs count in the EL subgroup for API?  How many “points” is a proficient score worth?  Does a passing score on the.
What You Should Know About the State’s Two Year Old Accountability System.
MCAS Progress and Performance Index Report 2013 Cohasset Public Schools.
Braintree Public Schools Spring 2007 MCAS Tests Braintree High School.
Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) Accountability
Accountability & Assistance Advisory Council Meeting
Where Are We Now? ESSA signed into law December 10, 2015
Spring 2016 PARCC and MCAS Results: Newton Public Schools
Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) State Plan: Update
Accountability in California Before and After NCLB
A Brief History Data-Based School & District Improvement
Spring 2016 MCAS Data Overview
Elementary/Secondary Education Act (1965) “No Child Left Behind” (2002) Adequacy Committee February 6,2008.
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
What is API? The Academic Performance Index (API) is the cornerstone of California's Public Schools Accountability Act of 1999 (PSAA). It is required.
Bridgewater-Raynham Regional School District
Massachusetts’ Next-Generation Accountability System
Accountability Progress Report September 16, 2010
Massachusetts’ Next-Generation Accountability & Assistance System
Kansas Leads the World in the Success of Each Student.
2016 Accountability Reporting
Accountability in ESSA: Setting the Context
Framework for a Next-Generation Accountability System
Massachusetts’ Next-Generation Accountability System
Milton Public Schools 2013 Accountability Status
Specifications Used for School Identification Under ESSA in
ESEA Waiver: Summary of Key Provisions
Framework for a Next-Generation Accountability System
Danvers Public Schools: Our Story
Framework for a Next-Generation Accountability System
Framework for a Next-Generation Accountability System
Madison Elementary / Middle School and the New Accountability System
WAO Elementary School and the New Accountability System
Presented by Joseph P. Stern
AYP and Report Card.
Watertown Public Schools School Committee Meeting November 13, 2017
Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA):
Presentation transcript:

2012 Accountability Determinations Old: AYP (Annual Yearly Progress) New: PPI (Progress & Performance Index) September 2012 Information Provided by: Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

New Accountability Requirements Beginning in 2012-13, federal & state will unify accountability requirements: One classification system for all schools, using same indicators and measures Flexibility & opportunity to direct additional resources to schools with lowest achieving students Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

What are the major changes? NCLB goal of 100 percent proficient replaced with new goal of reducing proficiency gaps by half by 2017 NCLB accountability status labels eliminated (identified for improvement, corrective action, restructuring); now using accountability & assistance levels (1-5) AYP replaced with (PPI) new “Progress and Performance Index” that incorporates student growth & other indicators Enhanced focus on subgroups, including new ‘high needs’ group (ELL, former ELL, low income, disabled) Supplemental educational services (SES) & choice requirements replaced by supports & interventions Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

The revised goal: Reduce proficiency gap by half by 2016–17 Proficiency versus achievement gaps Ambitious but achievable Requires greater progress for students furthest behind Focus on English language arts, mathematics, & science Goal is same for all, but targets are differentiated Applies to state, districts, schools, & groups In this construct, the proficiency gap represents how far all students are from Proficiency. We use the Composite Performance Index (CPI) to measure progress of all students toward Proficiency. The CPI gives schools & districts credit for students who are far from proficiency but move at least one step toward proficiency, thus narrowing the proficiency gap. Rob. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

PPI report Progress & Performance Index (PPI) Annual PPI: measure of district, school, & group progress Four-year PPI: comprehensive measure of progress, updated annually More recent years weighted the most (40%-30%-20%-10%) Reported at state, district, school, & subgroup level Accountability & assistance levels (1-5) for schools and districts Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

What does the PPI measure? For elementary & middle schools Participation on MCAS Progress on CPI gap-closing in ELA, math, science Growth in ELA and math Improved performance at Advanced & Warning/Failing levels For high schools Above, plus graduation & annual dropout rates These results feed into accountability designations for Levels 1 and 2. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

How is the PPI calculated? Points awarded for each PPI indicator Full credit for meeting goal, extra credit for exceeding target, partial credit for progress Exceed target Meet target Improve below target No change Decline 100 point index, full credit = 75 points. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

High needs subgroup Eliminates multiple counting of students who are in more than one subgroup Holds over 300 additional schools accountable for low income, special education, & English language learner students Most schools will be placed in levels based on the performance of all students & high needs group Exception: schools with lowest performing subgroups statewide Using high needs group with a minimum n of 30 holds over 300 more schools accountable for low income, special education, and ELL students than by using traditional groups alone. In addition, approximately 82% of African-American/Black students and 88% of Hispanic students are included in the high needs group. Due to n sizes at the school level, using the high needs group allows us to hold more schools accountable for African-American/Black and Hispanic students than using the traditional racial/ethnic subgroups alone. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

Classifying schools Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 -Cumulative PPI for both the “all students” group and high needs students must be 75 or higher. -minimum of 95% belonging to each group were assessed on ELA, math, and science MCAS Level 2 -If either of the above criteria in level 1 are not met Level 3 -Lowest 20% relative to other schools in grade span -One or more subgroups are lowest 20% -Persistently low graduation rates -Low participation rate in MCAS Level 4 - Lowest performing schools (subset of Level 3) Level 5 -Chronically underperforming schools Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

Classifying schools & districts Charter schools will be assigned levels Districts will be classified based on their lowest-performing school Exception for certain Level 4 and 5 districts designated based on Board action Better alignment between levels & district accountability determinations for special education Beginning in 2011-12 a district’s accountability and assistance level will determine its special education accountability designation in most cases. A Level 1 district will be considered to “meet requirements” for special education, a Level 2 district will be considered to be a district that “meets requirements – at risk”, a Level 3 district will be classified as “needs technical assistance” for special education, and a Level 4 or 5 district will be considered to “need intervention” or “need substantial intervention”. Exceptions may occur for districts with compliance issues for special education, with the district being placed in a more serious designation for special education. District special education designations will appear on district accountability reports. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

ACCOUNTABILITY School Accountability: Dighton Elementary Level 1 Palmer River Level 1 Dighton Middle School Level 2 Dorothy L Beckwith Level 1 Dighton-Rehoboth Regional High School Under Review