November 09, 2012 Suzanne M. Wright Joe Prather

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Presented to the State Board of Education August 22, 2012 Jonathan Wiens, PhD Office of Assessment and Information Services Oregon Department of Education.
Advertisements

Pennsylvania’s Continuous Improvement Process. Understanding AYP How much do you know about AYP?
IMPLICATIONS FOR KENTUCKY’S SCHOOLS AND DISTRICTS SUPERINTENDENTS’ WEBCAST MARCH 6, 2012 NCLB Waiver Flexibility 1.
1 The Ewing Public Schools Overview of NCLB Results presented by Dr. Danita Ishibashi Assistant Superintendent.
Franklin Public Schools MCAS Presentation November 27, 2012 Joyce Edwards Director of Instructional Services.
Data Analysis State Accountability. Data Analysis (What) Needs Assessment (Why ) Improvement Plan (How) Implement and Monitor.
Simpson County Schools Accountability Results, Fall of 2013 Franklin-Simpson High School 97 th Percentile* DISTINGUISHED *percentile rank based on 2012.
Kentucky Association for Assessment Coordinators (KAAC) Office of Assessment and Accountability 10/23/12 1 Assessment and Accountability Update.
Kentucky’s School Report Card and Spreadsheets
Lodi Unified School District Accountability Progress Report (APR) & CAHSEE Results Update Prepared for the September 21, 2010 Board of Education.
Understanding Massachusetts’ new accountability measures November 2012.
New DC OSSE ESEA Accountability. DC OSSE ESEA Accountability Classification Overview I. DC OSSE Accountability System II. Classification of Schools III.
DAC Back-to-School Training Overview Presented By: Jennifer Stafford 1 OAA:DSR:js:07/22/2015.
San Leandro Unified School Board Looking Closely About Our Data September 6, 2006 Presented by Department of Curriculum and Instruction Prepared by Daniel.
Kentucky’s New Assessment and Accountability Model June 2011.
SIP Training Harnett County Schools Thursday, March 29, 2012.
July,  Congress hasn’t reauthorized Elementary & Secondary Education Act (ESEA), currently known as No Child Left Behind (NCLB)  U.S. Department.
CHANGES IN FEDERAL ACCOUNTABILITY FOR SCHOOLS BEGINNING IN
1 Requirements for Focus Schools Contractors’ Meeting March 4, 2013 Presenter: Yvonne A. Holloman, Ph.D.
Collecting data & information Talking with teachers, administrators, service providers Progress Monitoring Consolidated Planning /Use of Data Alternative.
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.
Public School Accountability System. Background One year ago One year ago –100 percent proficiency required in –AMOs set to increase 7-12 points.
 SYSTEM - an assemblage or combination of things or parts forming a complex or unitary whole  KPREP testing is one measure of our school system.
ESEA Federal Accountability System Overview 1. Federal Accountability System Adequate Yearly Progress – AYP defined by the Elementary and Secondary Education.
2012 MOASBO SPRING CONFERENCE Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 1 April 26, 2012.
MCC MCA Data Discoveries. What does Minnesota think is important? What do we want kids to do?  Pass important tests “Be Proficient”  Grow.
School Improvement Plan Central Elementary Vanessa S. McAllister, Principal Margaret Lewis, Assistant Principal RaeAnn Whiteside, Literacy Coach.
PED School Grade Reports (with thanks to Valley High School) ACE August 3, 2012 Dr. Russ Romans District Accountability Manager.
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.
703 KAR 5:225 Next-Generation Learners Accountability System Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Support & Research KDE:OAA:DSR:cw,ko.
Kentucky’s New Assessment and Accountability System What to Expect for the First Release of Data.
Novice Reduction & Non-Duplicated Gap Group
Public School Accountability System. Uses multiple indicators for broad picture of overall performance Uses multiple indicators for broad picture of overall.
Student Growth Percentile & Categorical Growth Presented by Pamela Powers Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Support & Research KDE:OAA:DSR:pp:
Tift County High School ANNUAL TITLE I MEETING SY16 Tap Knowledge – Capture Wisdom - Harness Talents -Sculpt Minds.
Unbridled Learning: CSIP Development and Delivery Targets November/December 2014 Middle School Kristi Miller, Principal.
Erlanger-Elsmere Independent Schools Assessment Results.
Accountability Overview Presented by Jennifer Stafford Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Support & Research KDE:OAA:DSR:pp: 12/11/2015.
Gallatin County High School Accountability & Assessment Data.
Unbridled Learning: CSIP Development and Delivery Targets November/December 2014 Intermediate School Brian Futrell, Principal.
Assessment and Accountability Update Longbranch Elementary School September 27,
CHANGES IN FEDERAL ACCOUNTABILITY FOR SCHOOLS BEGINNING IN Central Susquehanna Intermediate Unit.
Kentucky Board of Education OCTOBER 9, 2012 College/Career Readiness, Proficiency and Achievement Gap Update.
NORTH CAROLINA ESEA Flexibility Request Globally Competitive Students (GCS 1) 1Wednesday, February 1, 2012.
Assessment & Accountability Session 3: Content and School Scores.
CSIP Guidance November 2016 DRAFT 11/10/2016.
Conversation about State Report Card November 28, 2016
Where Are We Now? ESSA signed into law December 10, 2015
Accountability Overview Measures and Results
LIVINGSTON COUNTY MIDDLE SCHOOL
College/Career Ready for All
Rio Rancho Public Schools
ACE August 3, 2012 Dr. Russ Romans District Accountability Manager
Accountability Progress Report September 16, 2010
KAESP 2012 Spring Retreat April 2, /15/2018.
Next Generation Learners
Kansas Elementary and Secondary Education Act Advisory Council (ESEA)
Flemingsburg Elementary March 9, 2016
Danvers Public Schools: Our Story
Kentucky’s New Assessment and Accountability System
HOGSETT Elementary School
College/Career Ready for All
Starting Community Conversations
Central City Elementary School
Maryland State Board of Education October 25, 2011
Neptune Township School District ESEA/Title I Presentation
Neptune Township School District ESEA/Title I Presentation
Support for Effective Schools and Districts Persistently Low-Achieving
Presentation transcript:

November 09, 2012 Suzanne M. Wright Joe Prather

Next Generation Learners Elementary schools 53.2 Achievement (30%) For each content area, 1 point awarded for each percent of students scoring proficient or distinguished, ½ point awarded for each percent of students scoring apprentice, no points for novice students, ½ bonus point for distinguished that doesn’t overcompensate for novice Growth (40%) For each content area, 1 point awarded for each percent of students showing typical or high growth Gap (30%) For each content area, 1 point awarded for each percent of students scoring proficient or distinguished Gap Group – unduplicated aggregate count of students in the following groups: African-American, Hispanic, Native American, Special Education, Free/Reduced Lunch, Limited English Proficient

Achievement Calculation All Content Areas For each content area, 1 point awarded for each percent of students scoring proficient or distinguished ½ point awarded for each percent of students scoring apprentice No points for novice students Distinguished Bonus – of ½ if there are more distinguished than novice DD

Previous Gap Calculations Current Gap Calculations Limited English Proficient African American Free/Reduced Lunch Free/Reduced Lunch Julian Special Education Stephen Current Gap Calculations Gap Student Gap Student Julian Stephen

Gap Calculation All Content Areas Gap Group – aggregate count of students in the following groups: African-American, Hispanic, Native American, Special Education, Free/Reduced Lunch, Limited English Proficient who score Proficient or higher Student 1: Donatello – African American, Free/Reduced Lunch (P) Student 2: Ricky – White, Free/Reduced Lunch, Special Education Student 3: Enrique – Limited English Proficient, Free/Reduced Lunch Student 4: Michelle – Free/Reduced Lunch (P) Student 5: Marco – Limited English Proficient, Free/Reduced Lunch, Special Education DD 3/10=30% 2/5=40%

Growth score Growth point totals come from the average of reading percent and mathematics percent of students making typical annual growth (at or above the 40th Student Growth Percentile) Focuses on the relative standing of a student from year to year compared to the student’s academic peers. The academic peers are students who perform very similarly on the test to the student. The student is only compared to students who start at the same place. In year two, the question is: Did the student outpace his peer group?

Classifications Distinguished: schools/districts scoring at the 90th percentile or higher Proficient: schools/districts scoring at the 70th percentile or higher Needs Improvement: schools/districts falling below the 70th percentile not making their AMO goals Progressing: all schools/districts making their AMO goals, the 95% student participation goals and the individual graduation goals.

Rewards categories Schools of Distinction: the highest performing elementary, middle and high schools or district with overall scores at the 95th percentile or higher. High-Performing Schools: elementary, middle, and high schools or districts with overall scores at the 90th percentile or higher. High-Progress Schools: are Title I and non Title I schools showing the highest progress, as compared to their peers, and districts showing the highest progress, as compared to their peers (NOT USED UNTIL 2013)

Assistance categories Priority Schools: schools currently identified as Persistently Low- Achieving (PLA) schools Focus Schools: Super Gap Score: Non-duplicated gap is in the lowest 10 percent of the student group gap scores by level. All schools with individual gap groups underperforming in the third standard deviation below the state mean (ANY sub group/ANY content area) Any high school having a graduation rate below 60 percent for two years in a row.

Annual Growth Targets If a school is a “focus” school, then determine if the ECE population is one of the determining factors. If so, it would help schools if you can offer very specific strategies to assist ECE students. This will be a mandatory part of the CSIP.

Annual Growth Targets CSIPs for Focus Schools must contain: curriculum alignment to ensure the instructional program is rigorous, research-based, based on student needs and aligned with the Common Core Standards provision of time for collaboration on the use of data to inform assessment strategies, monitor and modify instruction, and support proficient student work specific strategies to address the within-school gaps in achievement and/or graduation rates between the highest-achieving subgroup and the lowest- achieving subgroup professional development on the goals of the plan parent and community engagement attendance improvement/dropout prevention strategies

Annual Growth Targets CSIPs for Focus Schools must contain (continued): activities to target the underperforming areas in achievement, gap, growth, college/career readiness and gap activities to target weaknesses in Program Reviews activities to target areas of need identified through teacher and leader evaluation school safety, discipline and non-academic factors such as student social, emotional and health needs design of the school day to maximize learning time technical assistance that will be accessed