MSIP 5 Becky Odneal October 27, 2011

Education Link Consulting2 Background on MSIP 5 Rule  , first MSIP 5  March 2011, MSIP 5 rule approved by the SBE  April 15, 2011 public comment period began  Substantial concerns were raised by educators across the state  May 2011, rule withdrawn by DESE  MSIP 5 Steering Committee  MSIP 5 Regional Advisory Committees  August 16, 2011, MSIP 5 Rule approved by SBE  October 3-November 2, Public Comment Period

Education Link Consulting3 RAC - Draft Consensus Points  Continue career/technical education opportunities  Reduce number of summative assessments  Recognize the importance of formative assessments  Use ACT instead of EOC/EOHS assessments  Maintain resource and process standards  Eliminate “report only” measures from APR  Ensure that the system acknowledges the needs of the exceptional pupil  Establish benchmarks along the pre‐K through 12 continuum

Education Link Consulting4 MSIP 5 Recommendations 1. Direct the Department to bring to the State Board of Education a new rule to update process and resource standards by August The process should: Start with the recommendations previously developed by the committee convened in ; Consider current research and best practices; and Include stakeholders. 2. Direct the Department to work with stakeholders and technical experts to develop state standards and a scoring guide for calculating proficiency on the revised MSIP 5 standards.

Education Link Consulting5 MSIP 5 Recommendations 3. Approve the revised assessment plan as recommended, with the understanding that full implementation will be dependent on state funding and the work of the SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium. 4. Authorize the publication of a notice of proposed rulemaking to adopt Rule 5 CSR , relating to Missouri School Improvement Program 5 in the Missouri Register and that the State Board of Education finds this proposed rule necessary to carry out the purposes of Sections , , and RSMo.

Education Link Consulting6 Recommendation 3. Assessment Plan  Pre-K through Grade 2 Assessments  Developed in 11-12, piloted in 12-13, operational in  EOC Assessments  Phase-in plan  EOHS Assessments  SMARTER Balanced Consortium  Social Studies, Fine Arts and PE Assessments

Education Link Consulting7 Assessment Plan

Education Link Consulting8 Assessment Plan Concerns  Pre-K through Grade 2, lack of information  EOC and EOHS assessments still require students to take the same courses as previous plan in order to be proficient in competencies  Additional assessments still require additional technological resources for school districts  Required course-taking patterns limit opportunities for students to participate in more beneficial programs, such as career ed  Potential for EOHS assessments to become exit exams and career and college placement tools

Education Link Consulting9 Recommendation 4. Rule (1) Pursuant to section , RSMo, this rule is to be effective two (2) years from the date of adoption of the proposed rule by the State Board of Education (board). The Missouri School Improvement Program (MSIP) – 5 Performance Standards and Indicators, Appendix A, included herein, is comprised of quantitative standards for school districts. MSIP–5 Process Standards and Indicators will include evidence of adequate instruction in physical education and fine arts to be included in standards used to determine classification.

Education Link Consulting10 Recommendation 4. Rule (3) The board will assign classification designations of unaccredited, provisionally accredited, accredited, and accredited with distinction based on the standards of the MSIP.

Education Link Consulting11 Recommendation 4. Rule APPENDIX A 3. College and Career Readiness 2.The district’s average composite score(s) on any department-approved measure(s) of college and career readiness, for example, the ACT ®, SAT ®, COMPASS ®, or ASVAB, meet(s) or exceed(s) the state standard or demonstrate(s) required improvement. 3. The percent of graduates who participated in any department-approved measure(s) of college and career readiness, for example, the ACT ®, SAT ®, COMPASS ®, or ASVAB, meets or exceeds the state standard or demonstrates required improvement.

Education Link Consulting12 Recommendation 4. Rule 3. College and Career Readiness 6. The percent of graduates who complete career education programs approved by the department and are placed in occupations directly related to their training, continue their education, or are in the military within six (6) months of graduating meets the state standard or demonstrates required improvement.

Education Link Consulting13 Potential Implications…  Emphasis is entirely on “college graduation” and does not recognize programs for which students receive training in high school and enter higher wage-earning careers  Assessments change course-taking patterns and eliminate the opportunity for students to take career education courses which are proven to help prevent at-risk students from dropping out of school and prepare all students for higher wage-earning careers

Education Link Consulting14  Competencies cannot be embedded into career education programs, as suggested by DESE  Districts may be forced to replace career education teachers with additional CORE teachers in order for students to be taught the competencies needed to score Proficient on state assessments Potential Implications…

Education Link Consulting15 Potential Implications for Students  Students will lose the opportunity to explore careers before entering college  Students will lose the opportunity to become trained in skills that will allow them to earn higher wages in career after high school and/or during college  Students will lose the opportunity to learn essential skills that will help them in many facets of life  Many students will drop out of high school because they will not have the opportunity to participate in programs that keep them engaged in high school and teach them hands-on skills that will help them succeed after graduation

Education Link Consulting16 Overall Issues  Alignment with federal accountability initiatives Top 10 by 2020 = NCLB’s 100% Proficiency by 2014  Scoring Guide methodology “state standard” and growth model (75% Proficiency, 100% Grad Rate)  Potential NCLB Waiver

Education Link Consulting17 Scoring Guide/NCLB Waiver  October-December, Steering Committee  October 25-26, Public Input/Regional Advisory Committee Meetings  November, Indicator/Model Selection Committee (30 member advisory committee)  November-December, Standard Setting Methodology (10-member TAC)  January, scoring guide to State Board  January-June, pilot scoring guide  February, NCLB Waiver application due

Education Link Consulting18 Scoring Guide  Goals  Identify and work with lowest 5%  Ensure all schools are “good enough”  Ensure all schools get better  Design Decisions  Status vs. Growth  Differentiated vs. Standardized Accountability  Simple/Transparent vs. Complex/Precise  Resources - Focused vs. “Spread Across All Districts”

Education Link Consulting19 Waiver Concerns  MSIP 5 goes into effect immediately  Conditions of waiver  School-level implementation  Loss of state flexibility  Potential reauthorization  Unknown “sticks”

Education Link Consulting20 Next Steps  October 3 – November 2, public comment period  Rule goes in to effect in 2013  Inform other stakeholders  Respond during public comment period  Actively participate in Regional Advisory Committees  Scoring Guide  Resource and Process Standards  NCLB Waiver

Education Link Consulting21 Questions?