PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 1 Review of the ABCs Standards SBE Issues Session March 2, 2005.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Future Ready Schools ABCs/AYP Background Briefing August 23, 2007 Lou Fabrizio, Ph.D. Director of Accountability Services NC Department of Public.
Advertisements

Pitt County Schools Testing & Accountability The ABC’s of Public Education.
1 Transition to FCAT 2.0, End-of-Course Assessments, and School Accountability and Beyond Dr. Karen Schafer October, 2010 Secondary Curriculum.
TEKS Revisions and the End of Course Exams Tom Wurst March 25, 2010.
Texas State Accountability 2013 and Beyond Current T.E.A. Framework as of March 22, 2013 Austin Independent School District Bill Caritj, Chief Performance.
VALUE – ADDED 101 Ken Bernacki and Denise Brewster.
Haywood County Schools February 20,2013
Educator Evaluations Education Accountability Summit August 26-28,
NYS Assessment Updates & Processes for New Social Studies Regents Exams September 18, 2014 Candace Shyer Assistant Commissioner for Assessment, Standards.
Accountability Services North Carolina Department of Public Instruction January 14, 2015 School Performance Grades.
What Every Parent Needs To Know About the Transition to STAAR.
PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 1 Superintendents’ Quarterly Meeting: October 16, 2003 Testing,
Philomath School District Board of Directors Work Session May 10, 2012.
Including a detailed description of the Colorado Growth Model 1.
New York State Education Department Understanding The Process: Science Assessments and the New York State Learning Standards.
Graduation Conversation Doug Kosty Assistant Superintendent, Office of Learning Derek Brown Manager, Assessment of Essential Skills Cristen McLean Operations.
Kentucky’s New Assessment and Accountability Model June 2011.
Move On When Ready Standard Diploma Provision May 8, 2014.
Understanding the New ABC’s Formulas Slide show originally created by Caswell County Schools Revised by Cathy Williams - Greene County Schools.
The Use of Trajectory-Modeled Growth as Part of Adequate Yearly Progress: One State's Results Christopher I Cobitz, Ph.D. Reporting Section Chief North.
North Carolina Department of Public Instruction Scott Beaudry, Accountability Services Claire Greer, Exceptional Children NCAASE Coordinating Meeting #1.
Update on Virginia’s Growth Measure Deborah L. Jonas, Ph.D. Executive Director for Research and Strategic Planning Virginia Department of Education July-August.
 Closing the loop: Providing test developers with performance level descriptors so standard setters can do their job Amanda A. Wolkowitz Alpine Testing.
1 Community Accountability Summit April History of Accountability Changes.
Accountability Updates NCAEE Region 1 May 2, 2014 M. E. (Butch) Hudson, Jr. Regional Accountability Coordinator Accountability Region 4.
Diagnostics Mathematics Assessments: Main Ideas  Now typically assess the knowledge and skill on the subsets of the 10 standards specified by the National.
Comprehensive Educator Effectiveness: New Guidance and Models Presentation for the Special Education Advisory Committee Virginia Department of Education.
Comprehensive Educator Effectiveness: New Guidance and Models Presentation for the Virginia Association of School Superintendents Annual Conference Patty.
1 Watertown Public Schools Assessment Reports 2010 Ann Koufman-Frederick and Administrative Council School Committee Meetings Oct, Nov, Dec, 2010 Part.
PREPARING [DISTRICT NAME] STUDENTS FOR COLLEGE & CAREER Setting a New Baseline for Success.
1 Superintendents’ Quarterly Meeting A Next Generation Accountability Model March 25, 2010.
Standard Setting Results for the Oklahoma Alternate Assessment Program Dr. Michael Clark Research Scientist Psychometric & Research Services Pearson State.
Preliminary Data: Not a Final Accountability Document1 SAISD TAKS Performance Board Work Session June 2004 Office of Research, Evaluation,
Copyright © 2010, SAS Institute Inc. All rights reserved. How Do They Do That? EVAAS and the New Tests October 2013 SAS ® EVAAS ® for K-12.
Release of Preliminary Value-Added Data Webinar August 13, 2012 Florida Department of Education.
EVAAS Proactive and Teacher Reports: Assessing Students’ Academic Needs and Using Teacher Reports to Improve Student Progress Cherokee County Schools February.
New Jersey DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Amendments to N.J.A.C. 6A:8 Standards and Assessments Monday, January 11, 2016.
Copyright © 2010, SAS Institute Inc. All rights reserved. How Do They Do That? EVAAS and the New Tests October 2013 SAS ® EVAAS ® for K-12.
EVAAS and Expectations. Answers the question of how effective a schooling experience is for learners Produces reports that –Predict student success –Show.
2009 Report Card and TVAAS Update Recalibration 2009 October 26, 2009.
EVAAS Proactive and Teacher Reports: Assessing Students’ Academic Needs and Using Teacher Reports to Improve Student Progress Becky Pearson and Joyce Gardner.
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.
1 Mississippi Statewide Accountability System Adequate Yearly Progress Model Improving Mississippi Schools Conference June 11-13, 2003 Mississippi Department.
PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 1 ABCs/AYP Background Briefing Lou Fabrizio Director.
The READY Accountability Report: Growth and Performance of North Carolina Public Schools State Board of Education November 7, 2013.
INSTRUCTIONAL SURVIVAL TOOLKIT HARNETT COUNTY SCHOOLS 1.
Proposed End-of-Course (EOC) Cut Scores for the Spring 2015 Test Administration Presentation to the Nevada State Board of Education March 17, 2016.
Presentation to the Nevada Council to Establish Academic Standards Proposed Math I and Math II End of Course Cut Scores December 22, 2015 Carson City,
Value Added Model Value Added Model. New Standard for Teacher EvaluationsNew Standard for Teacher Evaluations Performance of Students. At least 50% of.
TAKS Release Plan  In 2007 SB 1031 changed the release of tests to every three years  In 2009 HB 3 changed the release of tests to exclude retests 2.
Globalization. Innovation. Graduation.  Transition to Five Achievement Levels  School Performance Grades (A–F)  EVAAS as a Tool NC READY ACCOUNTABILITY.
School Accountability and Grades Division of Teaching and Learning January 20, 2016.
© 2014, Florida Department of Education. All Rights Reserved. Accountability Update School Grades Technical Assistance Meeting.
PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 1 Superintendents’ Quarterly Meeting: March 15, 2005 Testing.
High School Proficiency Exam Nevada Department of Education.
WorkKeys February 19 – 21, 2013 Online
Understanding the Next-Generation MCAS
Understanding the Next-Generation MCAS
ABCs/AYP Background Briefing
The Research Experience for Teachers Program
2015 PARCC Results for R.I: Work to do, focus on teaching and learning
EVAAS Overview.
Updates on the Next-Generation MCAS
Interpreting Effectiveness
Understanding the Next-Generation MCAS
Understanding the Next-Generation MCAS
Framework for a Next-Generation Accountability System
Framework for a Next-Generation Accountability System
EOCT BACKGROUND SPRING 2012
Split-Block Class Schedule at Yorktown High School
Presentation transcript:

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 1 Review of the ABCs Standards SBE Issues Session March 2, 2005

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 2 ABCs Accountability Basic skills with high education standards Control (at the local level)

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 3 ABCs Accountability first year for grades K first year for high school

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 4 Why Review Now? A provision in HB 1414 requires a comprehensive review of ABCs standards This same provision requires that the modified standards be in place for the school year

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 5 Objectives of the Testing Program Consistent with 3 purposes in G.S. 115C Assure all HS graduates possess essential skills and knowledge Provide a means of identifying strengths and weaknesses in education process in order to improve instruction Make system accountable to the public for results

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 6 1.Public and understandable 2.Multiple sources 3.Interpretations at student, school and LEA level 4.All students and groups 5.Explicit weighting 6.Avoids erroneous judgments CRESST Standards (Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing)

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 7 Related Issues Achievement levels Need clearer definitions Teachers still code same percent as Level I as in the past Teachers anticipate students’ successes regardless of previous achievement levels Process issues Various business process issues NC WISE will help Resolutions already in process

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 8 ABCs Current Formulas Only at school level Statewide average scale score growth, index of true proficiency, index of regression to the mean More complex at the HS level Links multiple subjects State of the art for its time

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 9 Recommendations Reviewed Technical Advisory Committee Standing group of recognized experts Supported proposal with suggestions for additional analyses Helped define high growth Provided input for minor adjustments

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 10 Findings from Analyzing Results of Original Formulas Saw-toothed pattern: As a cohort moved through grades, % of schools making growth peaked and dipped Not necessarily tied to curriculum implementation

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 11 More Findings EOC formulas: Drop some students from calculations Complex Curriculum changes can be problematic

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 12 Fundamental Issues Change in curriculum prompts new test edition Change in one subject impacted other Change in curriculum expectations not mirrored in growth expectation Required conversions to old scale Saw-toothed effect

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 13 Proposed Solutions Issue: Saw-toothed effect Solution: Averaging test performance across years increases stability

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 14 How It Works Look at two previous years when possible Average, to find the “typical” performance of the student Use 3 years of actual student data for decisions

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 15 Proposed Solutions Issue: Effects of curricula revisions Tie to curriculum (The relative difficulty of the grade level curricula may have shifted) Current method relies on equating study to “link” to old scale Solution: Use a scale that adjusts to difficulty of curriculum (base expectation on actual curriculum)

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 16 How It Works Use students’ actual performance as the basis of the Change Scale (in the standard-setting year) Convert all scores to the Change Scale Calculate expectations using the Change Scale

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 17 Proposed Solutions Issue: EOC Formula issues EOC sequence not coupled in the same manner as EOGs Solution: Simplify the formulas Fewer predictors – keep more students in the analyses Use of Change Scale allows smoother transitions between test editions

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 18 How It Works Find the previous test(s) with the highest correlations to the current year’s tests Examples: Algebra I based on 8 th grade math Biology based on English I and 8 th grade reading Physics based on Chemistry and Geometry

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 19 Proposed Solutions Issue: Changes in curricula and test editions Solution: Uncouple reading and math Predict reading using only reading Correlations are similar

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 20 How It Works Original formulas used average of math and reading to provide additional information for prediction Instead, use 2 years of reading for reading prediction Correlations are better Outliers have less effect

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 21 Proposed Solutions Issue: Conversions to old scales Multiple levels of issues Approaching third edition of math tests Solution: Use a scale-neutral system Allows true spanning of test editions No need to reset growth standards

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 22 How It Works Based on the standard setting year of the new test edition Use the actual student performance on the test; convert to the Change Scale Use the actual state standard deviation to form the points on the Change Scale Maintain these conversion tables until curriculum and test edition change

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 23 The Proposed Formulas Based on groups of students spanning 8 years of ABCs data Includes over 500,000 students per grade and subject (grades 3-8) Use a consistent scale Simplified to allow easier understanding Reviewed by outside experts

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 24 AC = CS – (0.9 ATPA) Academic Change = the difference between the student’s actual performance on the curriculum-based test for this grade and his/her typical performance CS = current year score ATPA = average of two previous assessments

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 25 AC = CS – (0.9 ATPA) The 0.9 accounts for regression to the mean All analyses point to this formula being fair Works for all grades and subjects Use 0.8 when only one previous score is available (there is more regression to the mean when using one previous test rather than the average of two)

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 26 Anticipated Impact Results are different, especially in years with a test edition change Different formulas, different standards, different results

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 27 How It Works – Expected Growth Calculate student level AC per subject and grade Average AC across grades and subjects within a school Grades 3-8: positive or “0” meets expected growth HS: include weighted dropout change, competency pass rate change and CTP/CUP change Consistent with original model Positive or “0” meets expected growth

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 28 How It Works – High Growth TAC recommended use of a ratio Ratio of students with positive AC to those with negative AC (called c-ratio) HS: include dropouts in denominator; CTP/CUP graduates and competency pass rate change in numerator 1.50 or higher met high growth (if met expected growth)

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 29 Advantages More stability Fewer fluctuations between years Clear indication of change in curriculum implementation Adjusts expectations to the curriculum Simpler formulas

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 30 Advantages: What the Technical Experts Said More resilient due to two years’ prior performance Different results in test edition change years than previous Equitable Regression coefficients appropriate for the test relationships

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 31 Advantages: Student Information Provides information on student performance C-ratio allows insight into how well schools or grades are implementing curriculum

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 32 Relationship to (CRESST) Standards 1.Public and understandable  2.Multiple sources  3.Interpretations at student, school and LEA level  4.All students and groups  5.Explicit weighting  6.Avoids erroneous judgments 

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 33 Review of the ABCs Standards SBE Issues Session March 2, 2005