Fall Regional Curriculum and Instruction Meeting September 2015

Alabama’s ESEA Flexibility Waiver Was Approved—June 2013 Implementation of Alabama’s ESEA Waiver and the New Accountability Model—June 2013 Alabama’s ESEA Waiver Was Due to Expire—June 2015

June 30, 2015, Alabama’s Waiver Was Due to Expire; A renewal was needed… The Alabama State Department of Education (ALSDE) Solicited and Reviewed Feedback from Stakeholders Across the State – March to May 2015

The ESEA Waiver Draft Renewal Was Submitted – April 2015

The Final Redlined Renewal Was Submitted – July 2015 The Renewal Was Approved August 2015

Changes From the ESEA Waiver to the ESEA Renewal Removed College- and Career-Readiness as an AMO Indicator Removed School Performance Index Expounded on Support for Schools with EL and Special Populations Modified Priority Support and Focus Support Exit Criteria and Incorporated a Process for Evaluating Support for Schools Modified Reward School Criteria Modified Annual Measurable Objective Calculations Modified Assessment Timeline Modified Accountability Model to Put Emphasis on Alabama 2020 Learners and Alabama 2020 Support Systems

Modified Educator Effectiveness System Changes From the ESEA Waiver to the ESEA Renewal Removed A-F Law from Waiver Removed Designation of Priority Districts Removed Five-Year Cohort from Graduation Rate Measurement Removed Program Reviews and Local Indicators as AMO Indicators Removed Gap as an AMO Indicator Removed Educator Effectiveness as an AMO Indicator Removed Learning Gains as an AMO Indicator

Changes will have a positive impact towards Alabama’s PLAN 2020 goal to ensure every child graduates college- and career-ready.

Alabama’s ESEA Accountability Model Alabama’s PLAN 2020 Accountability Model AMO ReportsA-F Report Cards

Overview of Alabama’s ESEA Accountability Model Alabama 2020 Learners Achievement (Reading/English Language Arts and Mathematics) Alabama 2020 Support Systems Graduation Rate (Schools With a Grade 12 and Districts) Attendance Rate (Schools Without a Grade 12 and Districts)

Overview of Alabama’s ESEA Accountability Model The two priorities of the Alabama ESEA Accountability Model, Alabama 2020 Learners and Alabama 2020 Support Systems, are anchored in college-and career-readiness for all students. This model will continue annual reporting of disaggregated student outcome measures for all ESEA subgroups in required content areas.

Achievement Attendance Rate (Schools Without a Grade 12 and Districts) Graduation Rate (Schools With a Grade 12 and Districts) START Alabama’s ESEA Accountability Model

Indicators and Data Sources Alabama’s ESEA Accountability Model Grade Range Achievement Attendance Graduation Rate Elementary ACT Aspire (reading and mathematics) Alabama Alternate Assessment (reading and mathematics) Attendance Rate Secondary ACT Plan ( and ) (English and mathematics) ACT Aspire 10 (beginning ) (reading and mathematics) Alabama Alternate Assessment (reading and mathematics) 4-Year Cohort

Indicator Descriptors Achievement will be determined based on the percentage of proficient students in the areas of reading/English language arts and mathematics. The Attendance Rate is the Average Daily Attendance for the entire school year for schools without a grade 12 and districts. The Graduation Rate is the 4-year graduation rate cohort for schools with a grade 12 and districts. Graduation rate data is reported one year in arrears.

Annual Measurable Objectives Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs) are annual targets set to show increases in school/district performance over time.

Alabama’s ESEA Accountability Model Indicators and Baseline Years IndicatorBaseline Achievement Attendance Rate Graduation Rate

Achievement Annual Measurable Objective Achievement AMOs were established using the state average proficiency rate for each subgroup. Schools and districts were required to meet or exceed the state average in order to meet its AMO for each subgroup in reading/English language arts and mathematics. Data sources for achievement included the ACT Aspire, ACT Plan, and Alabama Alternate Assessment.

Achievement Annual Measurable Objective Reading/English Language Arts Example State Average ( ) Reading/Language Arts School ABC Percent Proficient Reading/English Language Arts 55%49% School ABC did NOT meet its Reading/English Language Arts AMO because it did not meet or exceed the state average.

Beginning

(AMOs) are calculated based on the goal of reducing by half the difference between the baseline year and the Performance Proficiency Goal (PPG). o Performance Proficiency Goal (PPG) represents the 90 th percentile proficiency score plus the average growth of the “all students” subgroup. (AMOs) are calculated based on the goal of reducing by half the difference between the baseline year and the Performance Proficiency Goal (PPG). o Performance Proficiency Goal (PPG) represents the 90 th percentile proficiency score plus the average growth of the “all students” subgroup. Achievement Annual Measurable Objectives

State Achievement PPGs for AMO Goal Establishment Determine the proficiency score at the 90 th percentile for the “all students” subgroup. Add the average increase for the subject area. This will establish the performance proficiency goal utilized for all applicable subgroups. (Subgroups have an n-count of 20 students or more.)

ELA and Mathematics Performance Proficiency Goals 3-8 Mathematics 70% 3-8 English Language Arts 62% High School Mathematics 35% High School English Language Arts 80% PPG

State Achievement AMO Establishment 1.Establish actual percent proficiency of the identified subgroups. 2.Subtract actual percent proficiency from the appropriate PPG. 3.Divide the answer from step #2 by two. 4.Divide the answer from step #3 by six. 5.The answer from step #4 is the annual improvement target. 6.Add the annual improvement target to the baseline to establish the year one ( ) AMO goal. 7.Add the annual improvement target to the year one AMO to establish the year two AMO. 8.Continue to add annual improvement target to each AMO until six years of AMOs have been established.

Subgroup Baseline All Students American Indian Asian/Pacific Islander Black Hispanic LEP Multi-Race Poverty Special Education White

Subgroup Baseline All Students American Indian Asian/Pacific Islander Black Hispanic LEP Multi-Race Poverty Special Education White

Subgroup Baseline All Students AMO targets to be reset using data from new assessments in American Indian Asian/Pacific Islander Black Hispanic LEP Multi-Race Poverty Special Education White

Subgroup Baseline All Students AMO targets to be reset using data from new assessments in American Indian Asian/Pacific Islander Black Hispanic LEP Multi-Race Poverty Special Education White

When calculating Achievement AMOs for schools and districts, use the previously stated PPG for the appropriate grade span and subject area instead of 100 then apply the reducing by half the difference between the baseline year and the Performance Proficiency Goal (PPG) methodology.

Calculating Achievement AMOs for Schools/Districts 1.Determine number of proficient students. 2.Divide number of proficient students by number of students assessed. 3.Convert answer from #2 to a percent. 4.Subtract answer from #3 from the PPG. 5.Divide the answer from #4 by Divide the answer from #5 by The answer from #6 is your annual improvement target. 8. Add the annual improvement target to the baseline to establish year one AMO. 9. Add the annual improvement target to year one AMO to establish year two AMO. 10. Continue to add annual improvement target to each AMO until six years of AMOs have been established. *This will be applicable only for subgroups with an n-count of 20 or more students.

School ABC has 250 students assessed on the mathematics assessment. 138 students were proficient (Levels 3 and 4) 138 / 250 = X 100 = 55% Percent of Proficient Students for The PPG for 3-8 mathematics is 70% = / 2 = 7.50 Growth needed over six year period 7.5 / 6 = 1.25 School ABC’s Annual Improvement Target = Year One AMO = Year Two AMO Continue to add until six years of AMOs are established

Mathematics Achievement AMO Calculation (Example) Subgroup Baseline All Students 55.00%56.25%57.50%58.75%60.00%61.25%62.50%

A school/district can earn a “met” status for its Achievement AMO in one of two manners. Meet the established Achievement AMO. Meet the improvement measure.

Meet the established Achievement AMO. Subgroup Performance Proficiency Goal Baseline All Students For this example, this school had 41.02% of its students score proficient or higher on state administered exams in reading/language arts. This school did NOT meet the established Achievement AMO goal for reading/English language arts.

Meet the improvement measure Reading/English Language Arts AMO Goal41.63% Reading/English Language Arts Improvement Measure40.00% Reading/English Language Arts Actual Percent Proficient41.02% For this example, this school had 41.02% of its students score proficient or higher on state administered exams in reading/English language arts. This school earned a “MET” status for Achievement in reading/language arts because it met the improvement measure.

Calculations only include full academic year students. Students are considered a FAY student if they appear on the current year 9 th month attendance extract without a break in enrollment and the enrollment date is on or before the current year’s end of date fall attendance extract. FAY status for current year 10 th graders taking the PLAN: Previous year 9 th month attendance extract without a break in enrollment and enrollment date is on or before the previous year’s end of date fall attendance extract. Current year’s end of date fall attendance extract. Any 10 th grade student, who appears on both extracts from either the administering school, the feeder school, or new school, will be considered a FAY student.

Accountability Exclusion Rule For Proficiency Foreign Exchange Students (FES): All FES will be excluded. FES should be flagged in Chalkable. Limited English Proficiency (LEP): For proficiency determination, the scores of LEP1 students are excluded.

One Percent Overage with the Alabama Alternate Assessment The regulations do not put a limit on how many special education students may participate in alternate achievement standards. The regulations do stipulate that the number of proficient and advanced scores based on the alternate achievement standards cannot exceed 1.0 percent of all students enrolled in the grades tested at the state or school system level for accountability.

Exceeding the PPG If the proficiency rate is above the performance proficiency goal the expectation is to improve by 2% of the performance proficiency goal from the previous year’s proficiency rate. This increase will be expected on an annual basis for the six years. 3-8 Mathematics 3-8 ELAHigh School Mathematics High School ELA

Example of Improvement Targets for subgroups that Exceed the ppg Subgroup Performance Proficiency Goal Baseline Asian/Pacific Islander

When calculating Achievement AMOs for schools that contain both 3-8 grade spans and high school grade spans, targets must be met for each grade span.

Graduation Rate AMOs

Graduation Rate AMO’s In , Graduation Rate AMOs were established requiring each school and district to meet or exceed its graduation rate target in order to meet its AMO goal for each subgroup. Graduation rate from was the baseline data used.

Graduation Rate AMO Establishment 1.Use the graduation rate as the baseline. 2.Subtract graduation rate from Divide the answer from step #2 by two. 4.Divide the answer from step #3 by six. 5.The answer from step #4 is the annual graduation rate improvement needed. 6.Add the annual improvement needed to the baseline to establish year one graduation rate AMO. 7.Add annual improvement needed to the year one AMO to establish year two graduation rate AMO. 8.Continue to add annual improvement needed to each AMO until six years of AMOs have been established. *This will be applicable only for subgroups with an n-count of 20 or more students.

State Graduation Rate AMOs for Federal Reporting Subgroup Baseline All Students American Indian Asian/Pacific Islander Black Hispanic LEP Multi-Race Poverty Special Education White

Graduation Rate Annual Measurable Objective Example Graduation Rate Target School ABC Graduation Rate 79.1%80% School ABC MET its Graduation Rate AMO because it met or exceeded the Graduation Rate Target.

Calculating Graduation Rate AMOs for Schools and Districts 1.Retrieve the graduation rate from the Cohort Application Portal. 2.Subtract graduation rate from Divide the answer from #2 by 2. 4.Divide the answer from #3 by 6. 5.The answer from #4 is your annual improvement target. 6.Add the annual improvement target to the baseline to establish year one AMO. 7.Add the annual improvement target to year one AMO to establish year two AMO. 8.Continue to add annual improvement target to each AMO until six years of AMOs have been established.

Graduation Rate Annual Measurable Objective A school/district can earn a “met” status for its Graduation Rate AMO in one of two manners. Meet the established Graduation Rate AMO. Meet the improvement measure.

Graduation Rate Annual Measurable Objective Meet the established Graduation Rate AMO. Subgroup Baseline All Students English Learners For this example, this school had 80% of the “all students” group graduate within four years of becoming a first time ninth grader. This school MET the Graduation Rate AMO goal for the “all students” group. For this example, this school had 45.5% of the “English Learners” group graduate within four years of becoming a first time ninth grader. This school did NOT meet the Graduation Rate AMO goal for the “English Learners” group.

Graduation Rate Measurable Objective Example Meet the improvement measure Graduation Rate for English Learners AMO Goal46.5% Graduation Rate for English Learners Improvement Measure43.2% Graduation Rate for English Learners45.5% For this example, this school had 45.5% of its “English Learners” students graduate within four years of becoming a first time ninth grader. This school earned a “MET” status for “English Learners” graduation rate because it met the improvement measure.

Attendance Rate

The annual Attendance Rate goal is 90%. The Attendance Rate will come from the 9 th month attendance report for the entire school year.

Attendance Rate AMOs In , the Attendance Rate goal required each school/district to meet or exceed 90% for each applicable subgroup.

Attendance Rate Annual Measurable Objective Example Attendance Rate GoalSchool ABC Attendance Rate 90%94% School ABC MET its Attendance Rate AMO because it exceeded the Attendance Rate Goal.

Attendance Rate AMOs Each school and district will be required to meet Attendance Rate AMO goals in one of three ways: Meet or exceed the goal of 90%. Meet or exceed the goal of 90% based on data from the two most recent years’ average for the school/district. Show improvement from the previous year.

Attendance Rate Annual Measurable Objective Example Attendance Rate GoalSchool ABC Attendance Rate 90%86% School ABC did NOT meet its Attendance Rate AMO because it did not meet or exceed the goal of 90%. Meet or exceed the goal of 90%.

Attendance Rate Annual Measurable Objective Example School ABC did NOT meet its Attendance Rate AMO because it did not show improvement from the previous year. Show improvement from the previous year. School ABC Attendance Rate94% School ABC Attendance Rate86% Improvement-8%

Attendance Rate Annual Measurable Objective Example School ABC MET its Attendance Rate AMO because it met or exceeded the goal of 90% based on data from the two most recent years’ average for the school. School ABC Attendance Rate9494% School ABC Attendance Rate+8686% 180 School ABC 2-Year Attendance Rate Average180 ÷ 2 =90% Meet or exceed the goal of 90% based on data from the two most recent years’ average for the school/district.

Attendance Rate AMOs Beginning Each school and district will be required to meet Attendance Rate AMO goals in one of three ways: Meet or exceed the goal of 90%. Meet or exceed the goal of 90% based on data from the three most recent years’ average for the school/district. Show improvement from the previous year.

Alabama’s ESEA Accountability Model Indicators and Data Points Achievement Grades 3-8 (ACT Aspire, Alabama Alternate Assessment) High School (ACT Plan— and , Alabama Alternate Assessment, ACT Aspire 10—Beginning ) Graduation Rate (Four-Year Cohort) Schools With a Grade 12 and Districts Attendance Rate (9 th Month Attendance Report for the entire school year) Schools Without a Grade 12 and Districts

AMO Reports

AMO REPORT

Alabama’s ESEA Accountability Model Reporting Years for fall 2015 amo reports IndicatorSchool Year Data Achievement Attendance Rate Graduation Rate

Process for Measuring AMOs School Year Baselines established and each school and district measured against the state average School Year Use the Performance Proficiency Goal (PPG) to calculate targets for the state and each school and district. Beginning School Year Measure the state, school, and district performances against established AMO targets.

Improvement Measures The improvement measure may be met by reducing the percentage of non-proficient students by ten percent from the previous year’s data for each subgroup that does not meet its AMO target. (Beginning ) Achievement Show improvement from the previous year. (Beginning ) or Meet or exceed the goal of 90% based on data from the 2 most recent years’ average for the school/district. ( ) Meet or exceed the goal of 90% based on data from the 3 most recent years’ average for the school/district. ( ) The improvement measure may be met by improving the graduation rate by two points from the previous year’s data. (Beginning ) Graduation Rate Attendance Rate If the state, a district, or a school does not meet the established targets and/or goals, an improvement measure rule will be invoked.

Feeder Schools Schools Without Tested Grades (Feeder Schools) Schools with no tested grades will be linked with the school into which the students feed since the school has no assessment data of its own. For example, schools with ninth grade only will be linked with the secondary school into which the students feed.

Reward Schools Priority Support Schools Focus Support Schools

Reward School Modification Beginning in Fall 2015, Reward Schools Shall Be: High Performing Schools High Progress Schools

Recap of Cohort 1 Priority Support School Definition Priority Schools Priority Schools will be those schools that are the lowest performing schools in the state. The following will be used to identify Priority Schools: 1.Currently served Tier I and II SIG schools. 2.All schools with a Graduation Rate of less than 60% (using 2012 data). 3.Schools with the lowest ranking achievement that have not shown progress (2010 to 2012). 4.Schools will be selected until at least 5% of Title I schools are named.

Recap of Cohort 1 Focus Support Schools Definition Focus Schools: Focus Schools are schools with large gaps between subgroups. The following will be used to identify Focus Schools: 1.A gap index score that falls within the lowest 10% of the Title I schools 2.Any school with a within-school achievement gap that is among the largest gap between the highest and lowest performing subgroup index scores within a subject. 3.Schools are selected from this list until at least 10% of Title I schools in the state have been identified. The data sources are 2011 and 2012 ARMT, AAA, and graduation rate A school cannot be both Priority and Focus Priority Schools will be excluded from the focus list

Priority Support Exit Criteria Modifications To exit Priority Support Status, a school must: 1.Implement intervention services for a minimum of three consecutive years; 2.Rank higher than the lowest 5% of Title I schools; 3.Maintain a participation rate of 95% or more on administered assessments; and 4.Meet or exceed the AMO goals for the “all students” subgroup for two consecutive years.

Priority Support Exit Criteria Modifications (Continued ) To exit Priority Support status, high schools with a graduation rate less than 60% must: 1.Show improvement by increasing the graduation rate to 65% or above for two consecutive years; 2.Implement intervention services for a minimum of three consecutive years; and 3.Maintain a participation rate of 95% or more on the administered assessments.

Meet or exceed the AMO goals for the applicable gap subgroup(s) performance for two consecutive years. Rank higher than the lowest of 10% of the Title I schools in the state. Maintain a participation rate of 95% or more on administered assessments. Implement intervention services for a minimum of three consecutive years. Focus Support Exit Criteria In order to exit Focus School status, the school must:

Eligibility to Exit Cohort 1 Priority and Focus Support Schools will be eligible to exit cohort 1 Priority and Focus Support in the fall 2016.

Cohort 2 Priority and Focus Support Schools Cohort 2 Priority Support Schools and Cohort 2 Focus Support Schools will be named January 2017.

Cohort 2 Priority Support Schools In January 2017 Priority Support Schools will be the classification for: 1.Any school that is a currently served Tier I or Tier II School Improvement Grant (SIG) school as of September 30, 2012, if applicable. 2.Any school with a graduation rate of less than 60% for two or more consecutive years. OR 3.Schools with the lowest ranking achievement. Schools are selected from this list until at least 5% of the Title I schools are classified as Priority.

Cohort 2 Focus Support Schools Determination of Focus Schools January 2017: Use the reading and math proficiency of the two lowest performing subgroups in each school on new assessments from 2013 through Average proficiency of the two lowest performing subgroups from 2013 through Rank order until at least 10% of Title I schools are named. Schools that have been named priority will be removed from the list. Schools are selected from this list until at least 10% of the Title I schools in the state have been identified as Focus.

Annual Measurable Objective Reports (AMO Reports) An Annual Measurable Objective (AMO) Report will be developed for each school, district, and the state. The results of the school or district AMO Report will be the trigger for recognition and support for schools and districts. The AMO report will indicate if a school, district, and the state met or not met the target or goal for each indicator.

Alabama’s PLAN 2020 Accountability Model

Alabama currently has an A-F Law (ACT ). The ALSDE is currently working with the Accountability Taskforce on the development of the A-F grading system. A-F Law was removed from Alabama’s ESEA Waiver Renewal Request. Each school and school district will receive an A-F Report Card annually. ACCOUNTABILITY MODEL INFORMATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE

Proposed Indicators Measured on A-F Report Card Learning Gains Alabama PLAN 2020 Program Reviews Student Achievement Local Indicators Graduation Rate (4-Year Cohort and 5-Year Cohort) College- and Career-Readiness ACCOUNTABILITY MODEL INFORMATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE Achievement Gap

Indicator Descriptors Learning Gains Determined based on individual students who demonstrate improvement from one test administration to the next using multiple years of data for reading and mathematics. Student Achievement Determined based on the proficiency level of students in reading and mathematics. Alabama PLAN 2020 Program Reviews Determined based on a review of multiple data points used to measure district/school programs. ACCOUNTABILITY MODEL INFORMATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE

Indicator Descriptors Local Indicators Each School/LEA will be required to declare one local indicator that is unique to that school/LEA with a measurable goal that is aligned to Alabama PLAN Graduation Rate Determined based on the percentage of high school students who graduate within four or five years of first entering the ninth grade. Achievement Gap Determined based on improvement of the bottom 25% of students in reading and math from one year to the next. ACCOUNTABILITY MODEL INFORMATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE

Indicator Descriptors College- and Career-Readiness Indicators Determined based on the percentage of graduating seniors who meet at least one of the college- and career-ready indicators Benchmark on Any ACT Subtest (Math—22, English—18, Reading—22, Science—23) Qualifying Score on AP or IB Exam Military Enlistment Approved Transcript College or Postsecondary Credit While in High School Silver Level or Higher on the ACT WorkKeys Approved Industry Credentials ACCOUNTABILITY MODEL INFORMATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE

Alabama’s PLAN 2020 Accountability Model Indicators (A-F Report Cards) Two Phases Phase I December 2016 Phase II December 2017 ACCOUNTABILITY MODEL INFORMATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE

P2A—Data Reporting Mechanism Beginning fall 2015, a web-based data system will be available for districts and schools. ACCOUNTABILITY MODEL INFORMATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE

A-F Report Card Indicators K-8 Schools

Phase I A-F Report Cards Learning Gains Student Achievement Local Indicators Proposed Phase I Indicators of A-F Report Cards (K-8) December 2016 ACCOUNTABILITY MODEL INFORMATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE

Proposed Phase II Indicators of A-F Report Cards (K-8) December 2017 ACCOUNTABILITY MODEL INFORMATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE Phase II A-F Report Cards (Total Points 600) Learning Gains (180 Points) Student Achievement (60 Points) Local Indicators (150 Points) Achievement Gap (60 Points) Alabama PLAN 2020 Program Reviews (150 Points)

A-F Report Card Indicators 9-12 Schools and K-12 Schools

Phase I A-F Report Cards Graduation Rate Student Achievement Local Indicators Proposed Phase I Indicators of A-F Report Cards (9-12 and K-12) December 2016 ACCOUNTABILITY MODEL INFORMATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE

Proposed Phase II Indicators of A-F Report Cards (9-12 and K-12) December 2017 ACCOUNTABILITY MODEL INFORMATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE Phase II A-F Report Cards (Total Points 600) Graduation Rate (60 Points) Student Achievement (60 Points) Local Indicators (150 Points) Learning Gains (60 Points) College- & Career-Ready (120 Points) Alabama PLAN 2020 Program Reviews (150 Points)

A-F Report Card Indicators Districts

Phase I A-F Report Cards Local Indicators Student Achievement Graduation Rate Learning Gains (Grades 4-8) Proposed Phase I Indicators of A-F Report Cards (District) December 2016 ACCOUNTABILITY MODEL INFORMATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE

Proposed Phase II Indicators of A-F Report Cards (District) December 2017 ACCOUNTABILITY MODEL INFORMATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE Phase II A-F Report Cards (Total Points 600) Local Indicators (150 Points) Graduation Rate (60 Points) Student Achievement (30 Points) Learning Gains (60 Points) Achievement Gap (30 Points) College- & Career- Ready (120 Points) Alabama PLAN 2020 Program Reviews (150 Points)

ACCOUNTABILITY MODEL INFORMATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE A-F Report Card

ACCOUNTABILITY MODEL INFORMATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE Actions to Help Schools Master Accountability Indicators Schools should complete and follow individualized Student Four Year Plans. (Achievement, Graduation Rate, Learning Gains) Teach the Alabama College- and Career-Ready Standards (Achievement, Achievement Gap, Graduation Rate, College- and Career-Ready) Schools should also utilize the Early Warning System to assist students who are at risk or in danger of becoming at-risk students. (Graduation Rate, Attendance, Achievement, Learning Gains) Helping Schools Master Accountability Indicators

Alabama’s Accountability Act

Purpose (a)Innovative schools and school systems may be established in Alabama in accordance with this chapter. (b) The purpose of this chapter is to advance the benefits of local school and school system autonomy in innovation and creativity by allowing flexibility from state laws, regulations, and policies. (Act 2013 ‐ 64, p. 112, §2.) A Failing School is a public K-12 school that is either of the following: (a) Is designated as a failing school by the State Superintendent of Education. (b) Does not exclusively serve a special population of students and is listed in the lowest six percent of public K- 12 schools based on the state standardized assessment in reading and math. *Note: A list of failing schools is produced annually in accordance with the law.

Questions Contact the ALSDE Accountability Office Angela Martin Julie Turner Paul Bonner ACCOUNTABILITY MODEL INFORMATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE