Introduction to the New Washington State Achievement Index Jack B. Monpas-Huber, Ph.D. Director of Assessment & Student Information Board of Directors.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
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.
Advertisements

College and Career Ready Performance Index (CCRPI) The NEW Report Card in Georgia.
Presented to the State Board of Education August 22, 2012 Jonathan Wiens, PhD Office of Assessment and Information Services Oregon Department of Education.
AMOs 101 Understanding Annual Measurable Objectives Office of Educational Accountability Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction November 2012.
Changes To Florida’s School Grades Calculations Adopted By The State Board Of Education On February 28, 2012 Prepared by Research, Evaluation & Accountability.
2013 State Accountability System Allen ISD. State Accountability under TAKS program:  Four Ratings: Exemplary, Recognized, Academically Acceptable, Academically.
Update: Proposal to Reset MEAP Cut Scores Report to the Superintendent Roundtable February 23, 2011.
Development of a Revised Accountability Framework.
The best and most sought-after school district where every student is future ready: ready for college, ready for the global workplace, ready for personal.
2015 Goals and Targets for State Accountability Date: 10/01/2014 Presenter: Carla Stevens Assistant Superintendent, Research and Accountability.
Delaware’s Accountability Plan for Schools, Districts and the State Delaware Department of Education 6/23/04.
AZ Learns and A-F Letter Grades Arizona Department of Education Presentation to the NCAASE Committee ASU Washington Center, Washington D.C. March 7, 2012.
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.
Including a detailed description of the Colorado Growth Model 1.
Questions & Answers About AYP & PI answered on the video by: Rae Belisle, Dave Meaney Bill Padia & Maria Reyes July 2003.
Arizona’s Federal Accountability System 2011 David McNeil Director of Assessment, Accountability and Research.
2012 Traditional SPF Background & Measures September 17, 2012.
Kentucky’s New Assessment and Accountability Model June 2011.
1 Paul Tuss, Ph.D., Program Manager Sacramento Co. Office of Education August 17, 2009 California’s Integrated Accountability System.
Understanding How the Ranking is Calculated 2011 TOP TO BOTTOM RANKING.
School Performance Framework Sponsored by The Colorado Department of Education Summer 2010 Version 1.3.
1 Watertown Public Schools Assessment Reports 2010 Ann Koufman-Frederick and Administrative Council School Committee Meetings Oct, Nov, Dec, 2010 Part.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Tom Torlakson, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Curriculum and Instruction Steering Committee Meeting 1 Implementation.
ACCOUNTABILITY UPDATE Accountability Services.
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.
MI-SAAS: Michigan School Accreditation and Accountability System Overview of Key Features School Year.
1 Michigan School Accreditation and Accountability System pending legislative approval Venessa A. Keesler, Ph.D. March 16, 2011.
System Performance Accountability Policy Framework State Board of Education Meeting THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION Accountability | World-Class Math and.
ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE INDEX (API) ADEQUATE YEARLY PROGRESS (AYP) PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT (PI) SEPTEMBER 18, 2014 Accountability Progress Reporting Update.
MEAP / MME New Cut Scores Gill Elementary February 2012.
Future Ready Schools National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in North Carolina Wednesday, February 13, 2008 Auditorium III 8:30 – 9:30 a.m.
Overview “School Grading Rule” 6A Proposed CS/SB 1522 ESEA Waiver CAO March 2012.
Michigan School Report Card Update Michigan Department of Education.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Tom Torlakson, State Superintendent of Public Instruction January 2015 Jenny Singh, Administrator Academic Accountability.
Public School Accountability System. Background One year ago One year ago –100 percent proficiency required in –AMOs set to increase 7-12 points.
Proposed Accountability Index Pete Bylsma, EdD, MPA Consultant to the State Board of Education February 25, 2009
DISTRICT NAME HERE Using Student Growth Percentiles (Option A)
ESEA Federal Accountability System Overview 1. Federal Accountability System Adequate Yearly Progress – AYP defined by the Elementary and Secondary Education.
1 Getting Up to Speed on Value-Added - An Accountability Perspective Presentation by the Ohio Department of Education.
ELL Program Advisory Group December 1, TWO PHASES of WORK ELL Program Advisory Group PHASE ONE 1/1/2016As Specified in HB Criteria Determine.
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.
School and District Accountability Reports Implementing No Child Left Behind (NCLB) The New York State Education Department March 2004.
AMOs 101 Understanding Annual Measurable Objectives Office of Educational Accountability Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction November 2012.
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.
Public School Accountability System. Uses multiple indicators for broad picture of overall performance Uses multiple indicators for broad picture of overall.
Minnesota’s Proposed Accountability System “Leading for educational excellence and equity. Every day for every one.”
Accountability Update Chun-Wu Li, Ph.D. Assessment and Accountability Services Division of Educational Services August 15, 2014.
School Accountability and Grades Division of Teaching and Learning January 20, 2016.
American Education Research Association April 2004 Pete Bylsma, Director Research/Evaluation/Accountability Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction.
Diane Mugford – Federal Accountability, ADAM Russ Keglovits – Measurement and Accountability, ADAM Renewing Nevada’s ESEA Waiver Flexibility Request.
Operationalizing the General Assembly’s School Performance Grades (Senate Bill 795, Excellent Public Schools Act) October 2012 Superintendents’ Feedback.
Legislative Requirement 2013 House File 215. Category Cut Scores Based on a Normal Distribution across Measures.
Determining AYP What’s New Step-by-Step Guide September 29, 2004.
Legislative Requirement 2013
Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) Accountability
Accountability for Alternative Schools
February 2012 State Board Ruling: School Grade Calculations
Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) State Plan: Update
2012 Accountability Determinations
January 2015 Jenny Singh, Administrator Academic Accountability Unit
A-F Rating and State Accountability System
Massachusetts’ Next-Generation Accountability System
Participation in State Assessments State and Federal Policy
Every Student Succeeds Act Update
Presented by Joseph P. Stern
AYP and Report Card.
Understanding How the Ranking is Calculated
Presentation transcript:

Introduction to the New Washington State Achievement Index Jack B. Monpas-Huber, Ph.D. Director of Assessment & Student Information Board of Directors Meeting March 7, 2011

Background of the Achievement Index Original Legislative mandate: SBE to “adopt objective, systematic criteria” to identify successful schools/districts and those needing more help Realize AYP’s shortcomings, need to create a better system State provides most of the education funding Supports legislative efforts to revise funding system 2009 Legislature passed ESHB 2261 – SBE must develop: 1.An Accountability Index to identify schools/districts for recognition and additional state support 2.A proposal for voluntary state support and assistance 3.A proposal for a system for challenged schools/districts that don’t improve through the voluntary system (“Required Action” formally authorized by the Legislature this year)

Basic structure of the Achievement Index Five outcomes Results from 4 assessments (reading, writing, math, science) aggregated together from all grades and all students, extended graduation rate, minimum N=10 Four indicators 1.Achievement by non low-income students (proficiency, ext. grad rate) 2.Achievement by low-income students (eligible for FRL) 3.Achievement vs. peers (Learning Index and ext. grad rate controlling for ELL, low income, SPED, gifted, mobility) 4.Improvement (change in Learning Index from previous year) Creates 5x4 matrix with 20 outcomes * Index is simple average of the 20 “inner” cells

Recent results for a Shoreline school

Shoreline at a glance,

Shoreline Award Winners,

Statewide distribution of school Achievement Indices

Statewide distribution of school Achievement Indices

We all prefer to have one system WA state officials met with staff at US Dept. of Ed. and Congress last spring to seeking waiver and use Index and new rules for AYP purposes (see Final Report for details) Waiver not approved, but WA still computed Index for recognition purposes We have two sets of results based on different metrics AYP will likely change in the next 1-2 years based on ESEA reauthorization 10 Relationship to AYP

Appendix What goes in the cells: Benchmarks and ratings

Appendix What goes in the cells: Benchmarks and ratings

Appendix: How the Learning Index works Calculated by OSPI for many years by grade & subject (see “Scale” option on MSP/HSPE page of Report Card) Similar to a GPA (0-4 scale, better grades get more weight) PercentMultiplierResult Not Tested0.7x 0 =0.0 Level 112.6x 1 =12.6 Level 216.8x 2 =33.6 Level 330.7x 3 =92.1 Level 438.0x 4 =152.0 Learning Index (Total / 100) Achievement Index combines results for all tested grades (easy to compute if only testing in one grade, e.g., writing and science)

Appendix: Achievement vs. peers Think “Bubbles on the Windshield” Recognizes context affects outcomes Makes “apples to apples” comparisons (“statistical neighbors”) using multiple regression to control for 5 student variables— percent ELL, low-income (FRL), special education, mobile, gifted Separate analysis for each type of school (e.g., elementary, middle, high, multiple grades) Scores based on regression “residual” (i.e., distance above or below the regression line) Complexity of statistical model presents a communications challenge