CHANGES IN FEDERAL ACCOUNTABILITY FOR SCHOOLS BEGINNING IN 2013-14.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
PA School Performance Profile 1 WHITEHALL-COPLAY SCHOOL DISTRICT.
Advertisements

AYP to AMO – 2012 ESEA Update January 20, 2013 Thank you to Nancy Katims- Edmonds School District for much of the content of this presentation Ben Gauyan.
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 Act © No Child Left Behind Act ©Kristina Krampe, 2005 EDS 513: Legal Issues in Special Education.
‘No Child Left Behind’ Loudoun County Public Schools Department of Instruction.
Elementary/Secondary Education Act (1965) “No Child Left Behind” (2002) Adequacy Committee February 6,2008.
ESEA FLEXIBILITY WAIVER Overview of Federal Requirements August 2, 2012 Alaska Department of Education & Early Development.
Hickory Ridge Elementary School Annual Title One Parent Meeting
Essential Questions: What are the components of the (SPP)? How is PVAAS used as part of the calculation for the School Performance Profile (SPP)?
Rhode Island Accountability Process Revisions for School Years 2015 and 2016 A Presentation to the Accountability 3.0 Statewide Webinar March 27, 2015.
> Tom Corbett, Governor Ron Tomalis, Secretary of Education Title of Presentation > Tom Corbett, Governor Ron Tomalis, Secretary of Education Pennsylvania’s.
Data for Student Success Comprehensive Needs Assessment Report “It is about focusing on building a culture of quality data through professional development.
Understanding Massachusetts’ new accountability measures November 2012.
New DC OSSE ESEA Accountability. DC OSSE ESEA Accountability Classification Overview I. DC OSSE Accountability System II. Classification of Schools III.
4 Principles of ESEA Flexibility 1 January College-and-Career-Ready Expectations for All Students ( ) 2.State-Developed Differentiated Recognition,
Chapter 4 Changes Graduation Requirements Keystone Exams Upper Merion Area School District Presentation by Jane Callaghan 6/21/10.
ESEA FLEXIBILITY: QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS October 5, 2011.
PSSA & Keystone Exams Pa School Performance Profile
School Performance Index School Performance Index (SPI): A Comprehensive Measurement System for All Schools Student Achievement (e.g. PSSA) Student Progress.
Arizona’s Federal Accountability System 2011 David McNeil Director of Assessment, Accountability and Research.
School Performance Profile and PVAAS.  Federal accountability and PA law dictate that school effectiveness must be measured looking at multiple.
DLT September 28, State Indicators and Rating for OFCS (have) Key Factors and Points to Keep in Mind (have) This power point presentation (will.
Florida’s Implementation of NCLB John L. Winn Deputy Commissioner Florida Department of Education.
State and Federal Testing Accountability: Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Academic Performance Index (API) SAIT Training September 27, 2007.
September 13, Title I is a federal program which provides financial assistance to Local Education Agencies (LEAs) and schools with high numbers.
ESEA Waiver and Accountability Status School Committee Presentation September 24, 2013.
Program Improvement/ Title I Parent Involvement Meeting October 9, :00 p.m. Redwood City School District.
Understanding the SPP September 26, > Purpose The PA School Performance Profile is designed to:  Provide a building.
Pennsylvania’s ESEA Flexibility Proposal PAFPC Conference Summary of comments made by Amy Morton, Executive Deputy Secretary Pennsylvania Department of.
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING OVERVIEW IU 5. CHAPTER 4 - STANDARDS Effective March 1, 2014 PA Core Standards English Language Arts (ELA) Mathematics Reading.
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.
Helping EMIS Coordinators prepare for the Local Report Card (LRC) Theresa Reid, EMIS Coordinator HCCA May 2004.
ESEA Renewal What does it Mean for Title I? Program Improvement and Family Support Branch Title I Administrative Meeting September 17, 2015.
1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA Modified by Dr. Teresa Cortez September 10, 2007.
Pennsylvania’s ESEA Flexibility Proposal May 23, >
SCHOOL AND DISTRICT ACCOUNTABILITY/ESEA Ann M. Renker, Ph.D. Sequim School District August 17, 2015.
School Accountability in Delaware for the School Year August 3, 2005.
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.
Annual Student Performance Report September
No Child Left Behind. HISTORY President Lyndon B. Johnson signs Elementary and Secondary Education Act, 1965 Title I and ESEA coordinated through Improving.
Public School Accountability System. Background One year ago One year ago –100 percent proficiency required in –AMOs set to increase 7-12 points.
ESEA Flexibility NCLB Waiver Discussion October 24, 2011.
Parents as Partners: How Parents and Schools Work Together to Close the Achievement Gap.
ESEA Federal Accountability System Overview 1. Federal Accountability System Adequate Yearly Progress – AYP defined by the Elementary and Secondary Education.
Governor Edward G. Rendell GERALD L. ZAHORCHAK, D.ED., ACTING SECRETARY PSSA and AYP Results STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT IN PENNSYLVANIA.
PA School Performance Profile 1 Tamaqua Area Middle School.
ADEQUATE YEARLY PROGRESS. Adequate Yearly Progress Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP), – Is part of the federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) – makes schools.
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.
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.
Updates on Oklahoma’s Accountability System Jennifer Stegman, Assistant Superintendent Karen Robertson, API Director Office of Accountability and Assessments.
What just happened and what’s next? Presenters: Steve Dibb, MDE Debra Landvik, MDE AYP 2011.
Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) Stakeholder Input Title I Administrative Meeting: May 19, 2016.
CHANGES IN FEDERAL ACCOUNTABILITY FOR SCHOOLS BEGINNING IN Central Susquehanna Intermediate Unit.
Kansas Association of School Boards ESEA Flexibility Waiver KASB Briefing August 10, 2012.
1. Every Student Succeeds Act ESSA December
Where Are We Now? ESSA signed into law December 10, 2015
Academic Performance Index (API) and AYP
PA School Performance Profile
Academic Performance Index (API) and AYP
A Brief History Data-Based School & District Improvement
Indiana Area School District
Mark Baxter Texas Education Agency
Accountability Progress Report September 16, 2010
Kansas Leads the World in the Success of Each Student.
Maryland State Board of Education October 25, 2011
Presentation transcript:

CHANGES IN FEDERAL ACCOUNTABILITY FOR SCHOOLS BEGINNING IN

Federal  New school accountability system based on PA’s approved NCLB waiver State  School performance profiles  Academic standards  Teacher effectiveness law KEY CHANGES

OLD  All public schools in PA  100% proficiency on state tests by 2014  “Adequate Yearly Progress” (AYP)  Disaggregated subgroups: N=40  Each school receives a designation based on AYP status NEW  Only Title I schools  Close “achievement gap” by half in 6 years  Annual Measureable Objectives (AMOs)  Two student groups: N=11  Only highest and lowest Title I schools receive designations FEDERAL ACCOUNTABILITY - DIFFERENCES

Schools must achieve a 90% attendance rate OR improvement in attendance from the previous year if less than 90%. Attendance rate data is always one year behind data will be used for accountability. AMO: ATTENDANCE

AMO: TEST PARTICIPATION 2013 At least 95% of the students eligible to participate in state testing must take the PSSA/Keystone Exams if given in their grade level/course.

For Accountability  N = 11  Two groups:  All students  Historically underperforming students  Unduplicated count of students with IEPs, students classified as ELL and economically disadvantaged students For Reporting Purposes  N = 10  Traditional disaggregated subgroups  By race/ethnicity  IEP  ELL  Economic disadvantage  Duplicate count RECOMMENDATION UNDERSTANDING STUDENT GROUPS

FEDERAL TITLE I SCHOOL DESIGNATIONS

High Achievement  Highest 5% Title I Schools (based on aggregate math and reading PSSA or Keystone scores) AND  Meets all Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs) High Progress  Highest 5% Title I schools (based on aggregate PVAAS growth score in reading and math) AND  Meets all AMOs AND  Not a Reward: High Achievement School TITLE I REWARD SCHOOLS

 Lowest 10% of Title I schools (based on highest achievement gap for the Historically Low Performing students AMO) OR  Title I school with a Graduation Rate below 60% AND  Not a Priority School TITLE I FOCUS SCHOOLS

 Lowest 5% of Title I schools (based on aggregate math and reading PSSA or Keystone scores) OR  Title I school receiving School Improvement Grant (SIG) funds TITLE I PRIORITY SCHOOLS

 To date: School districts have verified data used to make determinations  September 23: PDE to allow districts to see their federal designations and state accountability information prior to PDE accountability website going public  September 30: PDE to make accountability website public TIMELINE