North Santiam School District State Report Cards 2009-10.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
No Child Left Behind Adequate Yearly Progress Report July 22, 2009.
Advertisements

Alaska Accountability Adequate Yearly Progress January 2008, Updated.
Alaska Accountability Adequate Yearly Progress February 2007, Updated.
1 Adequate Yearly Progress 2005 Status Report Research, Assessment & Accountability November 2, 2005 Oakland Unified School District.
1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA September 2003.
MUIR FUNDAMENTAL SCHOOL May 2012 CST Data Presentation.
SPRING CREEK ELEMENTARY Title I For additional information contact the school at
School Performance Framework Sponsored by The Colorado Department of Education Summer 2010 Version 1.3.
School and District Report Cards Validation WebEx Jon Wiens Office of Assessment Oregon Department of Education
Jamesville-DeWitt School Report Card Presented to the Board of Education May 10, 2010.
. Information from “Countdown to Accountability” Summer Leadership Institute July 2002 Arizona School Boards Association from presentations by Chris Thomas.
High School School Performance Framework (SPF)
SCHOOL PERFORMANCE FRAMEWORK (SPF) Clark County School District.
MT. PLEASANT A CLOSER LOOK AT ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE.
Bureau of Indian Education
School Accountability Ratings What Are Our District’s Accountability Ratings? What do they mean?
Presented to the State Board of Education August 22, 2012 Jonathan Wiens, PhD Office of Assessment and Information Services Oregon Department of Education.
‘No Child Left Behind’ Loudoun County Public Schools Department of Instruction.
Lodi Unified School District Accountability Progress Report (APR) & CAHSEE Results Update Prepared for the September 21, 2010 Board of Education.
2013 Accountability Report Jurupa Unified School District Board of Education Meeting.
1 Prepared by: Research Services and Student Assessment & School Performance School Accountability in Florida: Grading Schools and Measuring Adequate Yearly.
Delaware’s Accountability Plan for Schools, Districts and the State Delaware Department of Education 6/23/04.
Michigan’s Accountability Scorecards A Brief Introduction.
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.
A Parent’s Guide to Understanding the State Accountability Workbook.
Florida’s Implementation of NCLB John L. Winn Deputy Commissioner Florida Department of Education.
Program Improvement/ Title I Parent Involvement Meeting October 9, :00 p.m. Redwood City School District.
1 Watertown Public Schools Assessment Reports 2010 Ann Koufman-Frederick and Administrative Council School Committee Meetings Oct, Nov, Dec, 2010 Part.
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.
Department of Research and Planning November 14, 2011.
1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA Modified by Dr. Teresa Cortez September 10, 2007.
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.
Testing Coordinators: October 4, 2007 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) and Academic Performance Index (API)
AYP and Report Card. AYP/RC –Understand the purpose and role of AYP in Oregon Assessments. –Understand the purpose and role of the Report Card in Oregon.
Connecticut’s Performance on Title III Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives, Presentation to Connecticut Administrators of Programs for English.
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.
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.
ESEA Federal Accountability System Overview 1. Federal Accountability System Adequate Yearly Progress – AYP defined by the Elementary and Secondary Education.
1 Getting Up to Speed on Value-Added - An Accountability Perspective Presentation by the Ohio Department of Education.
On the horizon: State Accountability Systems U.S. Department of Education Office of Elementary and Secondary Education October 2002 Archived Information.
Federal and State Student Accountability Data Update Testing Coordinators Meeting Local District 8 09/29/09 1.
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.
No Child Left Behind California’s Definition of Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) July 2003.
1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA Modified by Dr. Teresa Cortez January 2010.
School and District Accountability Reports Implementing No Child Left Behind (NCLB) The New York State Education Department March 2004.
AYP and Report Card. Big Picture Objectives – Understand the purpose and role of AYP in Oregon Assessments. – Understand the purpose and role of the Report.
C R E S S T / CU University of Colorado at Boulder National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing Measuring Adequate Yearly.
Public School Accountability System. Uses multiple indicators for broad picture of overall performance Uses multiple indicators for broad picture of overall.
1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA Modified by Dr. Teresa Cortez September 1, 2008.
1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA May 2003 Modified by Dr. Teresa Cortez for Riverside Feeder Data Days February.
MCAS Progress and Performance Index Report 2013 Cohasset Public Schools.
NDE State of the Schools Adequate Yearly Progress Persistently Lowest Achieving Schools Nebraska Performance Accountability System Board of Education.
Academic Performance Index (API) and AYP
Academic Performance Index (API) and AYP
Accountability in California Before and After NCLB
Metropolitan Nashville Public Schools
2012 Accountability Determinations
AYP and Report Card Last updated: 08/20/09.
AYP and Report Card.
Milton Public Schools 2013 Accountability Status
Wade Hayashida Local District 8
Madison Elementary / Middle School and the New Accountability System
WAO Elementary School and the New Accountability System
Presented by Joseph P. Stern
5/16/2017 Inspiring excellence!
AYP and Report Card.
Presentation transcript:

North Santiam School District State Report Cards

History 1999 Oregon Legislature enacted ORS requiring that the Oregon Department of Education produce and issue annual report cards for all schools and districts. 2001Oregon SB 811 mandated additional requirements for the school and district report cards. In January 2002, Federal “No Child Left Behind” legislated specific requirements for schools and districts that led to changes in Oregon HB 2263 made additional changes to the requirements for the school and district report cards.

State Purpose providing an opportunity to communicate and celebrate initiating discussions about areas targeted for improvement demonstrating that schools are accountable, directly to parents and community members

Goals Tonight Communicate District and School Report Card results Understand how the State reaches the overall school rating Have a greater understanding of the danger of comparing schools in the same District

Frequently Asked Questions Who: – All schools that meet the definition of public How is it different from Adequate Yearly Progress? – Report Card is primarily based on performance and improvement over time – Subgroups are combined as a whole – Doing well in one area can compensate for challenges in another – The District does not receive a rating

Frequently Asked Questions Extended Assessments: – Counted as not meeting standards Who is tested? – All Students (except first year Limited English Proficient Students) – English / Language Arts and Math: Grades 3 through 8 and High School – Writing Grade 4,7 and High School

Reporting Released: – October 7, 2010 To parents by: – January 15, 2011

District Results

Strength Indicator Areas highlighted in green are strengths. – At or above state or comparison school scores

District Results

The Sample Report Card School At A Glance – Student Population – Staffing – Class Size – Attendance – Expulsion for weapons – Test Participation

The Sample Report Card Achievement Data – Academic Achievement Last two school years shown District, state and comparison schools are displayed – Improvement in Student Performance Student who exceeded, met or reached growth target are compared

The Sample Report Card Statewide Assessment Results – Student Achievement Statewide Assessment results are displayed for the student groups required by the No Child Left Behind Act. – Student Participation Percentages of students in the school who participated in Assessments in Reading, Math, and Science. Students who were absent, refused to be tested or had a written refusal are included in the percentage not tested.

The School Rating Calculation Combination of: – Achievement Index (In need of Improvement, Satisfactory, Outstanding) O-50 / / 80 or higher – Attendance Rate – Participation Rate – Graduation Rate / Improvement High School – Adequate Yearly Progress status *The overall rating is based on the Achievement Index. It is reduced to the lowest rating of (Attendance, Graduation, Participation) *If Adequate Yearly Progress is Met, the Rating cannot be lower than Satisfactory

The School Rating Calculation Achievement Index (Weighted Counts) – Weighted formula: More weight is given for students who exceed vs. meets or meets growth – For Example (Exceeds is multiplied by 133 and Meets or Growth by 100) Extra weight is given for students in disadvantaged subgroups. – (This is how the State holds schools accountable to focus on these students)

The School Rating Calculation Achievement Index (Calculation) – Two year total of Reading index / 2 = (RI) – Two year total of Math index / 2 = (MI) – Added together then / 2 – ((RIp+RIc)/2 + (MIp+MIc)/2) / 2

Example

The School Rating Calculation Attendance Rate (will lower rating) – Two year average Participation Rate (will lower rating) – One year total Graduation Rate (will lower rating) – Two year average Improvement High School Only – Increasing Performance Index by 5 or higher raises the Achievement index one category (explains how the High School received an Outstanding Rating) Adequate Yearly Progress

School Results Index Score Index Breakdown (results over time) Assessment Results (last 3 or 4 years) – Exceed and Met % compared to Comparison Schools and State

Stayton Elementary

Mari-Linn

Sublimity

A Point to Make

Stayton Middle School

Stayton High School

End Questions Report Card Link –