What is the SQRP?  The School Quality Rating Policy (SQRP) is the Board of Education’s policy for evaluating school performance.  It establishes the.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
January 10, 2013 Report on the Virginia Early Warning System (VEWS) Education Commission of the States June 27, 2013 Virginia Department of Education.
Advertisements

ESEA FLEXIBILITY WAIVER Overview of Federal Requirements August 2, 2012 Alaska Department of Education & Early Development.
School Performance Framework (SPF). Purpose of SPF The School Performance Framework (SPF) is a comprehensive system to help schools focus on strengths.
1 Wisconsin Alternate Accountability Webinar Agenda: What schools participate in the Alternate Accountability process? Completing the Alternate Accountability.
Understanding the Pennsylvania School Performance Profile Introduction.
Understanding Wisconsin’s New School Report Card.
Portfolio Mid-Year Accountability Status Report March 3 rd, 2013.
JUNE 26, 2012 BOARD MEETING Measures of Academic Progress (MAP)
ILLUMINATING COLLEGE AND CAREER READINESS State Report Cards for Districts and Schools.
MEGA 2015 ACCOUNTABILITY. MEGA Conference 2015 ACCOUNTABILITY MODEL INFORMATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE The Metamorphosis of Accountability in Alabama.
Introduction to Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Michigan Department of Education Office of Psychometrics, Accountability, Research, & Evaluation Summer.
Educator Evaluations: Growth Models Presentation to Sand Creek Schools June 13, 2011.
PA School Performance Profile January 13, 2013 Superintendent Advisory Council 1.
Federal Program Monitoring and Support Division Charlotte Hughes, Director Donna Brown, Section Chief.
School Performance Index School Performance Index (SPI): A Comprehensive Measurement System for All Schools Student Achievement (e.g. PSSA) Student Progress.
Graham School “State of the School” Address 0 December 11, 2014.
Measuring Charter Quality Eric Paisner, NAPCS Anna Nicotera, NAPCS Lyria Boast, Public Impact.
A Parent’s Guide to Understanding the State Accountability Workbook.
MEASURES OF COLLEGE AND CAREER READINESS AND SUCCESS July 16, 2013.
Accountability SY Divisions of Assessment, Accountability and School Improvement.
September 9, 2015 Framework for Evaluation and Oversight of Charter Schools in Philadelphia School District of Philadelphia, Charter Schools Office.
End of Course Assessments School Year English Language Arts, Math, Biology, and Government.
Highlights of Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) Waiver Renewal Application.
State Charter Schools Commission of Georgia SCSC Academic Accountability Update State Charter School Performance
Academic Progress Plan Results. Two Topics to be Covered ASD DCAS results relative to other Delaware school districts SY Performance.
Mechanisms for Determining Progress and Grant Renewals Mechanisms for Determining Progress and Grant Renewals National Network of State School Improvement.
Module 3 CIWP Planning: An Overview
1 Watertown Public Schools Assessment Reports 2010 Ann Koufman-Frederick and Administrative Council School Committee Meetings Oct, Nov, Dec, 2010 Part.
MI-SAAS: Michigan School Accreditation and Accountability System Overview of Key Features School Year.
Woodland Park School District Educator Effectiveness 101 September 2015.
Hastings Public Schools PLC Staff Development Planning & Reporting Guide.
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.
BEN RARICK, STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR House Education Committee: ESSB 5491 Indicators of Educational Health.
Michigan School Report Card Update Michigan Department of Education.
Public School Accountability System. Background One year ago One year ago –100 percent proficiency required in –AMOs set to increase 7-12 points.
Iowa School Report Card (Attendance Center Rankings) December 3, 2015.
William Haft, Vice President of Authorizer Development March XX, 2012 New Jersey Charter Schools Performance Frameworks.
CPS School Quality Rating Policy Updated September 25, Office of Accountability.
Graham School “State of the School” Address 0 November 12, 2015.
ISAT AND MAP ASSESSMENTS THORP SCHOLASTIC ACADEMY SESSION 2: 2/27/2013.
Module 3 SIPAAA PLANNING: An Overview Office of Local School Council Relations 125 S. Clark Street, 5th Floor Chicago, IL P F
Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) & Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP) School Board Meeting, March 20,
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.
Measuring Turnaround Success October 29 th, 2015 Jeanette P. Cornier, Ph.D.
Tift County High School ANNUAL TITLE I MEETING SY16 Tap Knowledge – Capture Wisdom - Harness Talents -Sculpt Minds.
Overview Plan Input Outcome and Objective Measures Summary of Changes Board Feedback Finalization Next Steps.
Accountability & Program Assessment Governing Board Online Training Module.
HAWTHORNE SCHOLASTIC ACADEMY STATE OF THE SCHOOL
Our State. Our Students. Our Success. DRAFT. Nevada Department of Education Goals Goal 1 All students are proficient in reading by the end of 3 rd grade.
Kansas Association of School Boards ESEA Flexibility Waiver KASB Briefing August 10, 2012.
Note: In 2009, this survey replaced the NCA/Baldrige Quality Standards Assessment that was administered from Also, 2010 was the first time.
Legislative Requirement 2013 House File 215. Category Cut Scores Based on a Normal Distribution across Measures.
+ Delivering an uncommon educational experience for OUR KIDS 1.
Legislative Requirement 2013
What will we be discussing today?
Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) State Plan: Update
TESTING, RESEARCH & ACCOUNTABILITY
Bennett County School District
Chopin Elementary School
Academic Report 2007/2008 AYP.
AYP and Report Card Last updated: 08/20/09.
Massachusetts’ Next-Generation Accountability System
Specifications Used for School Identification Under ESSA in
Framework for a Next-Generation Accountability System
Framework for a Next-Generation Accountability System
Northside Learning Center State of School
Starting Community Conversations
Driving Through the California Dashboard
Presentation transcript:

What is the SQRP?  The School Quality Rating Policy (SQRP) is the Board of Education’s policy for evaluating school performance.  It establishes the indicators of school performance and growth and the benchmarks against which a school’s success will be evaluated on an annual basis.  Through this policy, each school will receive a School Quality Rating and an Accountability Status. 1 Office of Accountability

Purpose  The School Quality Rating and Accountability Status serve the following purposes:  Communicating to parents and community members about the academic success of individual schools and the district as a whole;  Recognizing high achieving and high growth schools and identifying best practices;  Providing a framework for goal-setting for schools;  Identifying schools in need of targeted or intensive support; and  Guiding the Board’s decision-making processes around school actions and turnarounds. Office of Accountability 2

Key changes in new policy 3 Metrics centered on assessments, attendance, and progress towards graduation Three levels of school performance Evaluates Option schools using traditional high school metrics ISAT is the main elementary assessment Uses CPS historical benchmarks Does not account for test participation Metrics better aligned to district’s strategic action plan, e.g., college enrollment, persistence, priority student group growth, 5Essentials Five-tier rating to more effectively differentiate schools New Option School model more targeted to the students served Significant changes to ISAT in next few years makes it unstable for year to year comparisons; replace with NWEA MAP Performance benchmarks are tied to national standards where possible Target test participation rate of 95% “Old” Performance PolicySY14-15 School Quality Rating Policy Office of Accountability

School Quality Rating Policy: Metric Weights MetricWeight Student Growth on NWEA MAP 25% Student Attendance20% Growth of Priority Groups on NWEA MAP 10% Percentage of Students Making National Average Growth on NWEA 10% 5Essentials Survey10% Student Attainment on NWEA MAP (Grades 3-8) 10% Student Attainment on NWEA MAP (Grade 2) 5% ELL Language Development Growth on ACCESS 5% Data Quality5% MetricWeight Student Growth on EPAS20% Growth of Priority Groups on EPAS 10% Student Attainment on EPAS10% Student Attendance10% Freshman On-Track Rate10% 4-Year Cohort Graduation Rate 10% Early College / Career Credentials 5% 1-Year Dropout Rate5% College Enrollment5% College Persistence5% 5Essentials Survey5% Data Quality5% MetricWeight Percentage of Students Meeting / Exceeding National Growth on STAR 30% Average Student Growth Percentile on STAR 20% 1-Year Graduation Rate15% Stabilization Rate10% Student Attendance10% Growth in Attendance10% Credit Attainment5% Elementary SchoolsHigh Schools Option Schools 4 Office of Accountability

HUGE DIFFERENCE ….. LOOK BELOW 9 th, 10 th, and 11 th GRADE SCORES ARE INCLUDED

What Does the School’s Status Mean? 6 Office of Accountability Good Standing Tiers 1-3 Provisional Support* Tier 4 Intensive Support** Tier 5 These schools are meeting or exceeding the minimum performance expectations for CPS schools. While these schools are still bound by federal and state law and CPS policies, they have some autonomy around school improvement planning and budgets. LSCs approve CIWPs in these schools. These schools are in need of targeted support to keep them moving in the right direction. The CEO may require the following: Drafting a new CIWP Directing the implementation of the CIWP Providing additional training for the LSC Mediating disputes or other obstacles to improvement If the CEO determines the problems are not able to be remediated by the above methods, the CEO may place the school in Intensive Support. These schools are in need of intensive support to quickly improve the quality of education for students. In addition to the types of support provided under “Provisional Support”, the following actions may be taken*: Replacing the principal School turnaround Ordering new LSC elections Closure *These actions are allowable under Illinois School Code, but will not necessarily happen in all “Intensive Support” schools. A hearing and a Board vote are required for these actions. * Listed in state code as “Remediation” ** Listed in state code as “Probation”