Chief Research Officer Ohio Department of Education 4/1/2017 New Local Report Card May 8, 2012 Matt Cohen Chief Research Officer Ohio Department of Education

No Child Left Behind (2001) Yet to be reauthorized 4/1/2017 Yet to be reauthorized States encouraged to present innovative reforms Waiver offers flexibility on rules in exchange for: Higher student achievement, and Greater school accountability 11 States already approved, 26 applied Approval expected in May

Key Elements of Waiver AYP Replacement Reforming SES 4/1/2017 Key Elements of Waiver AYP Replacement Reforming SES Targeted assistance for low-performing schools Cut red tape Letter grade report cards

Accountability Elements of Waiver 4/1/2017 Accountability Elements of Waiver AYP Replacement Reforming SES Targeted assistance for low-performing schools Cut red tape Letter grade report cards

4/1/2017 AYP Replacement AYP calls for 100% proficiency for everyone by 2014-2015: not realistic New goals: Implement more rigorous learning standards Cut achievement gaps by half over six years

Estimated that 90% of Ohio’s LEAs will not meet AYP Without the Waiver Estimated that 90% of Ohio’s LEAs will not meet AYP

AYP Goals for Reading Reading Goals

Raising Performance For All Students Reading Goals Progress We want to reduce the achievement gap and expect continual improvement from ALL student subgroups, no matter where they start Top: State Goals Bottom: Progress

AYP Replacement Rigorous and Punitive Rigorous and Fair AYP 4/1/2017 AYP Replacement AYP Gap Closing Rigorous and Punitive Rigorous and Fair

Excellent With Distinction Continuous Improvement 4/1/2017 Letter Grade Ratings Current Rating New Letter Grade Excellent With Distinction A Excellent Effective B Continuous Improvement C Academic Watch D Academic Emergency F

Report Card Components School/District Performance Current Components New Components Performance Index Student Performance Value-Added Student Progress Percent of Indicators Met School/District Performance AYP Gap Closing

4/1/2017 Student Performance Performance Index Student Performance

Student Performance Points Component Letter Grade 90% - 100% (108 – 120) A 80% - 89.9% (96 – 107.9) B 70% - 79.9% (84 – 95.9) C 60% - 69.9% (72 – 83.9) D Below 60.0% (Below 72) F

Applies to District & School 4/1/2017 District Performance State Indicators Met District Performance Applies to District & School

Component Letter Grade District Performance Percent of Indicators Met Component Letter Grade 90% - 100% A 80% - 89.9% B 70% - 79.9% C 60% - 69.9% D Below 60.0% F

Other Possible Indicators 4/1/2017 Other Possible Indicators ACT Rates Remediation Rates Kindergarten Readiness Gifted Indicator

District Contribution to Student Performance 4/1/2017 District Contribution to Student Performance Applies to District & School

District Contribution to Student Performance 4/1/2017 District Contribution to Student Performance Value-Added Student Progress Uses Two Years of Data

District Contribution to Student Performance Last Year Current Year Letter Grade Above A Met None Below B C D F

Applies to District & School 4/1/2017 District Gap Closing AYP Performance Gap Applies to District & School

(Reading and Mathematics) District Gap Closing Proficiency Gap (Reading and Mathematics) Letter Grade Exceeded AMO target A Met AMO target outright, by two-year average B Met AMO through Safe Harbor or Growth Measure C Below AMO, current year proficiency ≥ ½ AMO D Below AMO, current year proficiency < ½ AMO F

Overall Grade Many Options Being Considered Which Components? How to “Weight” Components? How to Assign Points? What Point Ranges Equate to Grades?

Value-Added = 40% of Overall Grade ONE EXAMPLE Value-Added = 40% of Overall Grade

Overall Grade Component Letter Grade Points Achievement 4/1/2017 Overall Grade Component Letter Grade Points Achievement Student Standards of Performance A 4 Student Performance B 3 Gap Closing Progress Student Progress 3 x 2 = 6 Overall Grade B+ 17/5 = 3.4

Overall Grade Average Points Earned Letter Grade 3.50 - 4.00 A-, A 4/1/2017 Overall Grade Average Points Earned Letter Grade 3.50 - 4.00 A-, A 2.50 - 3.49 B-, B, B+ 1.50 - 2.49 C-, C, C+ 0.50 - 1.49 D-, D, D+ 0.00 - 0.49 F

Simulated 2011 Letter Grade Ratings Updated waiver request Not this year’s data, not a prediction Business rules may change

Simulated 2011 Letter Grade Ratings – 609 School Districts 4/1/2017 Simulated 2011 Letter Grade Ratings – 609 School Districts Current Rating Actual 2011 Distribution of SD Ratings New Overall Grade Simulated 2011 Distribution of SD Grades Excellent With Distinction 86 A 81 A = 13 A- = 68 Excellent 266 Effective 215 B 333 B+ = 31 B = 264 B- = 38 Continuous Improvement 36 C 149 C+ = 45 C = 89 C- = 15 Academic Watch 6 D 44 D+ = 15 D = 28 D- = 1 Academic Emergency F 2 F = 2

Are You Ready? 4/1/2017 Ready for Results Challenges for schools as they prepare students to reach new levels

Are You Ready? Estimate of performance with new rigor 4/1/2017 Are You Ready? Estimate of performance with new rigor Temporary section Percentage of students scoring “Accelerated” or “Advanced” on math and reading assessments Ready for Results Challenges for schools as they prepare students to reach new levels

4/1/2017 Questions?