Developing a Framework for Ensuring the Validity of State Accountability Systems Council of Chief State School Officers AERA San Diego April 15, 2004

Council of Chief State School Officers Non-profit organization representing state superintendents of public K-12 education Through Leadership, Advocacy and Service assist chief state school officers and their organizations in achieving the vision of an American education system in which all children succeed in school, work, and life.

Support for State Accountability Communication among states to identify solutions and challenges Targeted technical assistance through group problem-solving On-going analysis: January:Workshop on accountability plan submission Summer: On going analysis of state plans, challenges, and solutions September: Workshop on implementing AYP in state accountability systems

State Strategies for Reliability Minimum student group size (4/9/04) Variation: 0 to 200, under certain circumstances Differentiation By subgroup:3 By students with disabilities: 5 By LEP students: 1

State Strategies for Reliability Statistical Tests Confidence Intervals, Standard error of measurement Applications Other Academic Indicator Safe Harbor Participation Rate

Full Academic Year Fall date: enrollment count, start of school, etc. One test administration to the next Snapshot of one day

State Strategies with AYP  “Two Look System”  Includes an NCLB accountability system as the primary method of identifying schools; a secondary, more rigorous, state system then takes a second look at the schools.  Weighting Assessments  Writing (10%) and English/Language Arts (90%)  Uniform averaging  Comparing a school’s current year results to the most recent two- and three-year average

State Strategies with AYP  Same indicator for two consecutive years  (1) Reading percent proficient and participation; (2) Math percent proficient and participation; (3) Other Academic Indicator  Use of Index systems  Accounting for students who move from below basic to basic  Proxy indicators for graduation rate disaggregation  Used for the disaggregation of the graduation rate for purposes of safe harbor

Recent Changes to State Plans Use of Confidence Intervals Uniform Averaging Standard number of years for graduation determined by a student’s IEP New flexibility on participation rate, LEP issues

Current Issues for States in AYP Forming a single statewide accountability system-blending AYP with state systems Balancing Type I and Type II error Evaluating consequences of accountability systems What data to collect and how to determine the validity of AYP/Accountability system.

Resources for States

Additional Information ROLF BLANK, CCSSO NCLB Website:

Areas of State Creativity