Regional Assessment Network Meeting

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Butte County Leaders in Education Briefing May 22, 2015.
Advertisements

Highlights of Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) Waiver Renewal Application.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Tom Torlakson, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Curriculum and Instruction Steering Committee Meeting 1 Implementation.
1 Student Assessment Update Research, Evaluation & Accountability Angela Marino Coordinator Research, Evaluation & Accountability.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Tom Torlakson, State Superintendent of Public Instruction May 2015 Jenny Singh, Interim Director Analysis, Measurement,
Regional Assessment Network (RAN) Update Chun-Wu Li, Ph.D. Assessment and Accountability Services Riverside County Office of Education November 22, 2013.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Jack O’Connell, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Update on the California English Language Development Test.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Tom Torlakson, State Superintendent of Public Instruction January 2015 Jenny Singh, Administrator Academic Accountability.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Jack O’Connell, State Superintendent of Public Instruction California English Language Development Test and Title III.
No Child Left Behind California’s Definition of Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) July 2003.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Jack O’Connell, State Superintendent of Public Instruction California English Language Development Test (CELDT) Program.
South Carolina Succeeds
Regional Assessment Network (RAN) Update Chun-Wu Li, Ph.D. Assessment and Accountability Services Division of Educational Services November 21, 2014.
State Board of Education Meeting Update May 11-12, 2016 Riverside County Regional Assessment Network May 27, 2016.
Communication Webinar:
Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) Accountability
Accountability for Alternative Schools
The California Model: Academic Indicator
California’s New LCFF Accountability Rubrics and School DAshboard
Regional Assessment Network (RAN)
Riverside County Office of Education June 2, 2017
Where Are We Now? ESSA signed into law December 10, 2015
Future ready PA Index Update 5/23/17.
Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) State Plan: Update
Overview of the new State Accountability System
California Educational Research Association
Regional Assessment Network Meeting
Driving Through the California Dashboard
Riverside Assessment Network Meeting August 18, 2018
Regional Assessment Network (RAN) Update
January 2015 Jenny Singh, Administrator Academic Accountability Unit
Accountability in Virginia: Revisions to the Standards of Accreditation and Virginia’s Federal Programs Application under ESSA Virginia Department of Education.
Regional Assessment Network (RAN) Meeting
Accountability and the Fall 2017 California School Dashboard Release
Assessment and Accountability Update
Accountability in ESSA: Setting the Context
Regional Assessment Network Meeting
Webinar: ESSA Improvement Planning Requirements
Massachusetts’ Next-Generation Accountability System
California's Accountability System
Local Control and Accountability Plan Committee
California School Dashboard
Specifications Used for School Identification Under ESSA in
Assessment and Accountability Update
Assessment and Accountability Update
Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP) Committee
Old (API State/AYP Federal) to New
Summative: Formative resources: Interim Assessments:
Academic Growth Model Indicator Update
Pennsylvania’s ESSA Submitted Plan Review
Assessment and Accountability Update
Summary of Final Regulations: Accountability and State Plans
State Board of Education Meeting Update May 11-12, 2016
Assessment & Accountability
An INTRODUCTION TO THE California School Dashboard
Every Student Succeeds Act Update
Starting Community Conversations
Madison Elementary / Middle School and the New Accountability System
WAO Elementary School and the New Accountability System
Presented by Joseph P. Stern
Dashboard 101 Toolkit Resource
Driving Through the California Dashboard
DELAC Meeting March 14, 2017.
Lodi USD LCAP Data Review
Lodi USD LCAP Data Review
Phillipsburg Middle School Identification as a School in Need of  Comprehensive Support and Improvement: Starting Community Conversations March.
Old (API State/AYP Federal) to New
CA Dashboard 2018 Overview Presentation to the Governing Board
Cindy Kazanis, Director Jenny Singh, Administrator
Presentation transcript:

Regional Assessment Network Meeting Analysis, Measurement, and Accountability Reporting Division May 2018

Topics Growth Model Dashboard Reports versus Data Reported to the U.S. Department of Education (ED) Changes to 2018 California School Dashboard (Dashboard) Incorporation of participation rate into Academic Indicator We have a lot of ground to cover today. We’ll look at: Some of the new features and reports in the Fall 2017 Dashbaord Actions taken by the Board last week, which included revisions to the ESSA plan (in response to feedback from the US. Department of ED) and criteria used to identify the lowest performing schools

Student Level Growth Model On February 22, 2018, CDE and SBE staff met with U.S. Department of Education (ED) staff in Washington, DC to discuss ED interim feedback to the ESSA Plan. Based on ED guidance from this meeting, several changes to California’s Plan were proposed to the SBE at its March 2018 meeting.

SBE Action Approved Residual Gain for further exploration. Requested further information at July SBE meeting: What are the benefits of the residual gain model over the distance from level 3 already included in the Dashboard? Should parent education level be included as a variable in the model? How should the model be used (i.e., in the Dashboard for accountability, reporting only, etc.)

RG = Student’s current year score – predicted score Residual Gain (RG) Represents difference between student’s predicted and actual test score Predicts student’s current-year score in either mathematics or ELA using the student’s prior-year mathematics and ELA scores. RG = Student’s current year score – predicted score Provides a relative measure of student growth on the current test scale.

Next Steps (May – July) May 30 2018 Webinar: Obtain feedback on the growth model interest June 2018: Obtain feedback on growth model from LCFF stakeholder group Review RG model for needed technical refinements at the TDG meeting July 2018 SBE Meeting: Present growth model simulation results and any recommended refinements and discussion around expected metrics and indicator placement.

Next Steps (September) September 2018 SBE Meeting: SBE approval of final model and methodology for possible inclusion in the 2018 Dashboard. California Department of Education

Feedback and Questions Is there still interest in a student growth model? If so, how would districts and county offices use the information in growth model to improve classroom instruction? What is the best option for reporting the growth model results? The Change component for DF3 Separate Indicator Detailed Reports Only Other

One-Year Graduation Rate

SBE Action and Next Steps At the May 2018 meeting, the SBE approved a one-year graduation rate for DASS schools for implementation beginning with the 2018 Dashboard. Next Steps: Work with the Alternative Schools Task Force, the LCFF Stakeholder Group, and the Technical Design Group (TDG) to determine: How to include the one-year graduation rate in the district’s Dashboard. If other indicators need to have modified methods If indicators for DASS schools need their own cut scores.

Data Reported in 2018 Dashboard Reports versus Data Reported to U. S Data Reported in 2018 Dashboard Reports versus Data Reported to U.S. Department of Education On February 22, 2018, CDE and SBE staff met with U.S. Department of Education (ED) staff in Washington, DC to discuss ED interim feedback to the ESSA Plan. Based on ED guidance from this meeting, several changes to California’s Plan were proposed to the SBE at its March 2018 meeting.

Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) Requirements Three required indicators for which states must set goals: Academic Achievement (ELA and Math assessments) Graduation Rate English Language Proficiency ED’s statutory interpretation is that these indicators must be based only on current year data (Status)

Revisions to ESSA Plan to Meet Federal Requirements Treat “Status” and “Change” components of the Dashboard Indicators as separate indicators for federal purposes Status is the required indicator Change is an additional indicator Set goal relative to Status

ESSA Long-Term Goals For federal purposes, only Status will be used to set long-term goal: Graduation rate = 90 percent ELA (grades 3-8) = +10 Distance From Level 3 (DF3) Math (grades 3-8) = zero DF3 English Learner Proficiency = 75 percent of students make progress Technical work must be completed before determining ELA and math goals for grade 11

Elements of ESSA Plan that Remain Intact Calculate Dashboard indicators using both status and change No changes to the five-by-five color-coded grids that the SBE approved for the Dashboard Indicators Use color-coded performance levels to identify the lowest performing five-percent of Title I schools Based on both Status and Change The goals for these indicators are not materially different in practice

Changes to the 2018 Dashboard On February 22, 2018, CDE and SBE staff met with U.S. Department of Education (ED) staff in Washington, DC to discuss ED interim feedback to the ESSA Plan. Based on ED guidance from this meeting, several changes to California’s Plan were proposed to the SBE at its March 2018 meeting.

Chronic Absenteeism Cut scores for both Status and Change will be recommended to the SBE in fall 2018 2018 Dashboard will report for the first time: Status, Change, and Performance levels (colors) Cut scores will be determined at the November SBE meeting

New Data Reported for CCI 2018 Dashboard will report: Status (Class of 2018) and Change Performance levels (colors) Possible new career measures for the Class of 2017 State Seal of Biliteracy Articulated Career Technical Education (CTE) courses Golden State Seal Merit Diploma Leadership/Military Science (formerly ROTC) Change cut scores will be determined at the November SBE meeting

Graduation Rate Indicator Calculation for Change based on one-year rate (rather than the three-year average). Note: New federal requirements necessitate changes to the calculation of the four-year cohort rate. See Flash 136 at https://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/sp/cl/calpadsupdflash136.asp Incorporation of five-year cohort rate: To be determined Scheduled for consideration at the September SBE meeting

Safety Net Methodology Applied at Student Group Level (n ≥ 150) For two state indicators: Graduation Rate Indicator: If student group has fewer than 150 students in graduating cohort Suspension Rate Indicator: If student group has fewer than 150 students who are cumulatively enrolled. SBE will consider at the July SBE meeting

Incorporation of Participation Rate into Academic Indicator

Incorporation of Participation Rate into Academic Indicator In accordance with ED direction: Use of icons not sufficient to meet ESSA requirements Participation rate must be factored into Academic Indicator Specifically, for schools and student groups that did not test 95 percent, the number of students needed to bring the school and/or student group up to 95 percent shall be included in the Academic Indicator.

Proposed Option Calculate the percentage points the school or student group is below the 95 percent participation rate target and reduce the DF3 by a fraction of the number of points short (i.e., ¼ the number of points short of participation rate)

ELA Example Emerald Elementary School (K-6) Number of students enrolled during testing window: 357 Number of students tested: 281 Calculated participation rate (rounded): 79% Number of additional students needed for 95% participation: 55 (281+55) / 357 = 94.1% Number of tested and continuously enrolled students (valid): 258 DF3 sum of 258 valid tests 4355

ELA Example Calculated Current DF3 𝐷𝐹3 𝑠𝑢𝑚 𝑜𝑓 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑑 𝑡𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑠 # 𝑜𝑓 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑑 𝑡𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑠 = 4,355 258 =16.9 (𝐻𝑖𝑔ℎ) Proposed DF3 4,355+55(𝐿𝑂𝑆𝑆) 258+55 = 4,355+(−15,555∗) 313 = −12,200 313 =−39.0 (𝐿𝑜𝑤) *-301 (LOSS Score) multiplied by 55

Example: Calculation of the Adjusted DF3 For this example, the DF3 is being reduced by ¼ point for each percentage point the school is below the 95 percent participation rate target. Adjusted DF3 Calculation 16 points shortage X .25 = 4 points 16.9 Current DF3 – 4 points reduction = 12.9 (High)

Pros and Cons—Using Adjusted DF3 All entities receive equal penalty for missing the 95 percent participation rate. The further away an entity is from the 95 percent participation rate, the greater the penalty. Simple to calculate. Minimizes the impact of the of incorporating the participation rate into the Academic Indicator. May be more complicated to explain.

Discussion Questions Do RAN members have any concerns with the proposed methodology for incorporating the participation rate? Are there other methodologies that should be explored?

RAN Request School climate surveys A slide deck and flyer that explain Residual Gains—do the slides used at the SBE meeting work? A slide deck to use when talking to parents about the dashboard—Does the slide deck posted on the Web page meet your needs? Communication talking points for residual gain and student growth Federal LCAP Addendum training materials and Timeline Crosswalk of changes to the Dashboard & accountability in general—More information needed. More clarification for the specific indicators—More information needed. A tool to help school sites determine their DF3(LEAs)—Excel spreadsheet? There should be a key that lists definitions for indicators for each year How are districts developing metrics to check state indicator progress—More information needed

Growth Slides Discussion Reference Only

How Does RG Work: Scatter Plot of Scores

How Does RG Work: Line of Best Fit

How Does RG Work: Calculate RG for Each Student

How Does RG Work: Results for One Student