Overview of Minimum Group Size Business Rules for State Accreditation

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
IMPLEMENTING EABS MODERNIZATION Patrick J. Sweeney School Administration Consultant Educational Approval Board November 15, 2007.
Advertisements

Introduction to Assessment – Support Services Andrea Brown Director of Program Assessment and Institutional Research Dr. Debra Bryant Accreditation Liaison.
Kansas Educator Evaluation Bill Bagshaw Asst. Director Kansas State Department of Education February 13, 2015.
Texas State Accountability 2013 and Beyond Current T.E.A. Framework as of March 22, 2013 Austin Independent School District Bill Caritj, Chief Performance.
APAC Meeting | January 22, 2014 Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting Overview of Performance.
11/15/07 1 Career-Technical Education Accountability Ohio Department of Education Sharon Enright Dave Ozvat Erica Cheyney Ohio School Improvement Institute.
National Institute of Standards and Technology 1 NIST Guidance and Standards on System Level Information Security Management Dr. Alicia Clay Deputy Chief.
Delaware’s Accountability Plan for Schools, Districts and the State Delaware Department of Education 6/23/04.
1 Growth strategy in Mexico Tokyo Japan, May 2014.
Instructional Leaders Advisory Tuesday, April 8, 2014 Region 4 ESC Accountability Update Richard Blair Sr. Education Specialist Federal/State Accountability.
STATE ACCOUNTABILITY OVERVIEW Back To School| August 19-22, 2013 Dean Munn Education Specialist Region 15 ESC.
Jennifer Faerberg Director Health Care Affairs Medicare Hospital Value-Based Purchasing (VBP) Program – Proposed Rule Published January.
Timmerman Public Hearing February 4, :00-4:00.
What’s going on in Richmond? Items of Interest to VESIS March 21, 2012 Bethann H. Canada Director of Educational Information Management Virginia Department.
HILLPOINT ELEMENTARY Dr. Ron M. Leigh Principal “Every Child, Every Chance, Every Day” 2.
National Commission for Academic Accreditation & Assessment Developmental Reviews at King Saud University and King Faisal University.
March 7, 2013 Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting Accountability Policy Advisory Committee.
Focused Monitoring November 10, 2010 Bureau of Special Education 1.
Examples of New Partially Accredited School Ratings Division of Student Assessment & School Improvement Virginia Department of Education.
LOMA PARK ACCOUNTABILITY PARENT PRESENTATION September 24, 2015.
CCSF Strategic Planning Update September 23, 2010 General Presentation for the CCSF Community and Board of Trustees.
Secondary WOLT Grading Committee Recommendations to Support District Benchmarking Initiative.
Tom Corbett, Governor ▪ Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Acting Secretary of Educationwww.education.state.pa.us Measuring Educator Effectiveness Educator Effectiveness:
Kansas Educator Evaluation Bill Bagshaw Asst. Director Kansas State Department of Education February 25, 2015.
Assigns one of three ratings:  Met Standard – indicates campus/district met the targets in all required indexes. All campuses must meet Index 1 or 2.
School Monitoring and OEPA Greg Miller MEL – 540 School Resource Management Spring 2015.
2012 MOASBO SPRING CONFERENCE Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 1 April 26, 2012.
Gabie Frazier Dr. Lynn Sodat Office of Program Administration and Accountability Virginia Department of Education National Title I Distinguished Schools.
March 2013 Presenter: Nancy Webster Director of Instructional Measurement and Accountability.
CCSSO Task Force Recommendations on Educator Preparation Idaho State Department of Education December 14, 2013 Webinar.
Department of Accountability: “Anyone can measure the rain; we build arks.” Assessment Update: Preliminary Results Department of Accountability.
South Carolina Succeeds
Phoenix Convention Center Phoenix, Arizona Case Studies of Institutional Change at the Campus Level Track 9: Institutional Change August 13, 2015.
Diane Mugford – Federal Accountability, ADAM Russ Keglovits – Measurement and Accountability, ADAM Renewing Nevada’s ESEA Waiver Flexibility Request.
Accreditation, Strategic Planning, SPOL Implementation Sigrid Davison Associate Director, Analytics & Research, Office of Institutional Effectiveness Audrey.
Indiana Area School District
Closing the Assessment Loop
Selecting Title I schools and allocating funds
Accountability System
School Accreditation and Requests to Reconsider
Accountability System
Mark Baxter Texas Education Agency
Research Program Strategic Plan
Kansas Educator Evaluation
VASS Legislative Conference
2016 Accountability Reporting
Contractor Assurance Systems (CAS) Summit August 23, 2016
Massachusetts’ Next-Generation Accountability System
Middle States Update to President’s Cabinet October 8, 2018
Student Success Initiative 2013
Academic Growth Model Indicator Update
Selecting Title I schools and allocating funds
For Excellence in Accreditation… “Moorpark it”
Summary of Final Regulations: Accountability and State Plans
Selecting Title I schools and allocating funds
BSRT Program Schedules for Starts from January 2012 – May 2013
BSRT Program Schedules for Starts from January 2011 – May 2012
Using Local Flexibility in School Accreditation and SB-163 Updates
National PTA ESSA Update
Update on School Accreditation Ratings under the Revised Standards of Accreditation October 2018.
Every Student Succeeds Act Update
Presented to the Octorara Area School Board on December 3, 2018
Massachusetts’ Next-Generation Accountability & Assistance System
Director of ESEA Programs
Task Force API Accounting Process Implementation
Growth Measure Pilot: Update
Discussion on Virginia’s State Assessment Program
ESSA State Plan Amendment
Selecting Title I schools and allocating funds
Presentation transcript:

Overview of Minimum Group Size Business Rules for State Accreditation April 23, 2019 Dr. Jennifer Piver-Renna Director of Research

Minimum Group Size Defined Institute of Education Sciences (IES) defines minimum group size as the “lowest statistically defensible subgroup size that can be reported in an accountability system with protections for personally identifiable information”1 Also referred to as minimum n size or small n Important for understanding and holding schools accountable for the underperformance of disadvantaged groups that may otherwise be hidden in aggregate data IES publishes a best practice guide for determining minimum group size, but is prohibited from defining a specific number of students in a subgroup (1) Institute of Education Sciences. (2017). Best Practices for Determining Subgroup Size in Accountability Systems While Protecting Personally Identifiable Student Information. https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2017/2017147.pdf

Minimum Group Size in State Accreditation Inclusion of achievement gap indicators prompted the Department to re-examine minimum group size rules for state accreditation In January through August 2018, the Department modeled and solicited feedback on multiple minimum group size scenarios Influenced by decisions in federal accountability: 16 states/territories have a minimum group size of 10 28 states/territories have a minimum group size between 11 and 25 8 states/territories have a minimum group size of 30, including Virginia

Minimum Group Size Business Rules for State Accreditation Student groups are evaluated in state accreditation when: The student group includes 30 or more students in the current year OR The student group includes 30 or more students across three years The student group includes less than 30 students and is rated Level One or Level Two Final business rules determined by Department’s SOA Implementation Committee and are documented in the Calculating Accreditation document available to school divisions

Justification for Business Rules The current year minimum group size threshold is the same for federal accountability, but pooling across three years allows the Department to include the performance of more students in state accreditation Small groups of well-performing students are considered in state accreditation Schools where student groups have not met state benchmarks based on the combined rate or have not meaningfully reduced the failure rate will be identified for support