School Monitoring and OEPA Greg Miller MEL – 540 School Resource Management Spring 2015.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
WV High Quality Standards for Schools
Advertisements

WASC Review: Whats happened so far. May 19, 2008 In-service.
‘No Child Left Behind’ Loudoun County Public Schools Department of Instruction.
Pennsylvania’s Continuous Improvement Process. Understanding AYP How much do you know about AYP?
Program Improvement Unit Collaborating to increase student achievement and fundamentally improve the interaction between the teacher and the students to.
OEPA West Virginia Board of Education Section 2: Historical Perspective of Policy 2320 Dr. Donna Davis Deputy Director, OEPA.
ESEA FLEXIBILITY WAIVER RENEWAL Overview of Proposed Renewal March 6, 2015 Alaska Department of Education & Early Development.
Louisiana School Turnaround Specialist Program
N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND Testing Requirements of NCLB test annually in reading and mathematics in grades 3-8 test at least once in reading and mathematics.
TUSCALOOSA COUNTY SCHOOLS Where Students Learn, Grow, and Achieve.
Forsyth County Schools Overview of the Proposed IE 2 Partnership Contract.
WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT TITLE I PARENT MEETING PRESENTATION.
School Leadership Evaluation System Orientation SY13-14 Evaluation Systems Office, HR Dr. Michael Shanahan, CHRO.
Common Questions What tests are students asked to take? What are students learning? How’s my school doing? Who makes decisions about Wyoming Education?
Preparing for an oepa audit
Today’s website:
1 Title I Faculty Presentation Department of Federal and State Programs or PX
Oregon Department of Education Agency Overview Susan Castillo, Superintendent of Public Instruction Patrick Burk, Deputy Superintendent Mike Greenfield,
Torrance Unified School District Annual Student Achievement Dr. George W. Mannon, Superintendent Dr. E Don Kim, Senior Director of Elementary Education.
Education in Delaware: ESEA Flexibility Renewal Community Town Hall Ryan Reyna, Office of Accountability.
A Parent’s Guide to Understanding the State Accountability Workbook.
C.O.R.E Creating Opportunities that Result in Excellence.
Charles Pack Jr. WorkKeys and KeyTrain Help Make The Academy of Careers and Technology A West Virginia Exemplary School.
Assessment in Early Childhood Legislation. Legislation for Young Children The need for measurement strategies and tests to evaluate federal programs led.
Principal Professional Learning Team August 2012.
School Improvement Planning Today’s Session Review the purpose of SI planning Review the components of SI plans Discuss changes to SI planning.
Educator Evaluation Spring Convening Connecting Policy, Practice and Practitioners May 28-29, 2014 Marlborough, Massachusetts.
Mechanisms for Determining Progress and Grant Renewals Mechanisms for Determining Progress and Grant Renewals National Network of State School Improvement.
Cambrian School District Board of Education Presentation April 3, 2014 Local Educational Agency Plan (LEAP)
1 Watertown Public Schools Assessment Reports 2010 Ann Koufman-Frederick and Administrative Council School Committee Meetings Oct, Nov, Dec, 2010 Part.
Title I and Families. Purpose of Meeting According to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, schools are required to host an Annual Meeting to explain.
Quality Assurance Review Team Oral Exit Report District Accreditation Bibb County Schools February 5-8, 2012.
SACS-CASI Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Council on Accreditation and School Improvement FAMU DRS – QAR Quality Assurance Review April 27-28,
1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA Modified by Dr. Teresa Cortez September 10, 2007.
Title I and Families. Purpose of Meeting According to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, schools are required to host an Annual Meeting to explain.
1 Title I Faculty Presentation Department of Federal and State Programs or PX
1 Title I Faculty Presentation Department of Federal and State Programs or PX
Program Improvement Unit Collaborating to increase student achievement and fundamentally improve the interaction between the teacher and the students to.
West Central Community School District Performance Document: Formative Evaluation Tool By John Johnson ortheast Iowa Charter School Northeast Charter School.
No Child Left Behind. HISTORY President Lyndon B. Johnson signs Elementary and Secondary Education Act, 1965 Title I and ESEA coordinated through Improving.
The Conceptual Framework: What It Is and How It Works Linda Bradley, James Madison University Monica Minor, NCATE April 2008.
Local Educational Agency Plan (LEA Plan) Cambrian School District Board Presentation March 22, 2012.
1 Title I Faculty Presentation Department of Federal and State Programs or PX
Michigan School Report Card Update Michigan Department of Education.
What is Title I and How Can I be Involved? Annual Parent Meeting Pierce Elementary
Systems Accreditation Berkeley County School District School Facilitator Training October 7, 2014 Dr. Rodney Thompson Superintendent.
No Child Left Behind Application NCLB Application – Common Elements Virginia Department of Education.
OEPA West Virginia Board of Education Policy 2320: A Process for Improving Education: Performance- Based Accreditation System RESA 6 – October, 2014 Office.
Understanding AMAOs Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives for Title III Districts School Year Results.
District Accreditation Completing the Standards Assessment Report July 20, 2010.
DRAFT Title I Annual Parent Meeting Sandpiper Elementary School Mrs. Camille LaChance.
Turning Around Chronically Low- Performing Schools Nelson Colbert, Science Instructional Specialist Richmond Public Schools Richmond, VA.
1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA Modified by Dr. Teresa Cortez January 2010.
1 Welcome to the Title I Annual Meeting for Parents Highland Renaissance Academy.
Berkeley County Schools
1 Restructuring Webinar Dr. Zollie Stevenson, Jr., Ph.D. Director Student Achievement and School Accountability Programs Office of Elementary and Secondary.
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.
Education.state.mn.us Principal Evaluation Components in Legislation Work Plan for Meeting Rose Assistant Commissioner Minnesota Department of Education.
A GUIDE FOR CANTON PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT’S PARENTS AND STAKEHOLDERS The Mississippi Literacy-Based Promotion Act
Kansas Association of School Boards ESEA Flexibility Waiver KASB Briefing August 10, 2012.
School Leadership Evaluation System Orientation SY12-13 Evaluation Systems Office, HR Dr. Michael Shanahan, CHRO.
Conversation about State Report Card November 28, 2016
Academic Performance Index (API) and AYP
Accountability Overview Measures and Results
Overview Page Report Card Updates Marianne Mottley – Director Office of Accountability.
What you need to know About Title I
OEPA STUDENT INTERVIEWS
N.J.A.C. 6A:30, Evaluation of the Performance of School Districts: New Jersey Quality Single Accountability Continuum (NJQSAC) Adoption Level Robert.
School Leadership Evaluation System Orientation SY12-13
Presentation transcript:

School Monitoring and OEPA Greg Miller MEL – 540 School Resource Management Spring 2015

OEPA The Office of Education Performance Audits (OEPA) is charged with assisting the WV Board of Education and the state government in establishing and maintaining a system of performance audits to measure the quality of education and preparation of students based on standards, school and school system performance, and progress in providing a thorough system of education in West Virginia.

Policy 2320  The OEPA is guided by State Board of Education Policy The current version of the policy came into effect on 1 July  The current version of the policy establishes an accountability system for West Virginia public schools and an approval process for school systems based on (1) measures of student performance and (2) a system of reviews through which school and school system quality is examined and publicly reported.

Goals of the OEPA 1. Determine school accreditation and school system approval status for each school and each school district in the state. 2. Assure that each school and each school system is accountable for the efficient use of existing resources to meet or exceed standards. 3. Require each school and each school system to annually target resources to improve student, school, and school system performance. 4. Provide accreditation information to the Legislature, Governor, the general public, and any individual who requests such information. 5. Establish early detection and intervention programs to assist underachieving schools and systems in improving performance. 6. Assure that all statewide assessments of student performance are secure. 7. Establish as part of the process for improving education the development of the capacity of schools and school systems to meet or exceed standards. 8. Train/retrain a cadre of people for on-site reviews. 9. Identify exemplary schools and school systems. 10. Monitor and evaluate the components of the Office of Education Performance Audits. Source: Mission. (2015, May 1). Retrieved from OEPA:

OEPA and AYP  The main responsibility of OEPA is to determine if a school or school district meets adequate yearly progress (AYP) based on West Virginia’s No Child Left Behind statutes.  The measures include:  Measurable objectives that identify a minimum percentage of students who must meet or exceed the proficient level of academic achievement on the state standardized test.  The participation rate of the students taking the standardized test. This is set at 95% of current students or an average of all students.  Attendance rates of 90% or higher in elementary and middle schools and a graduation rate of 80% for high schools.

OEPA and School Accreditation  A point system is in place to determine school accreditation.  The point system is based on the following criteria  Student proficiency in Reading/Language Arts, Math, Social Studies, and Science on the state standardized test.  Writing assessment proficiency.  Attendance Rates  Technology Proficiency  Percentage of classes taught by highly qualified teachers.  Percentage of students scoring at benchmarks on the ACT EXPLORE and ACT PLAN assessments  (cont.)

OEPA and School Accreditation ( cont. )  Graduation rates  Job placement rates for vocational programs  Percent of students passing end-of-course career/technical tests.  ACT/SAT scores  Percentage of students nor requiring college remediation classes.  Bonus points for subgroup improvement, AP percentages, dual credit completers, and international baccalaureate completers.

School Monitoring Report  The School Monitoring Report(SMR) is the instrument developed by OEPA to measure High Quality Standards outlined in Section of Policy  The SMR is a reflective document to be used by the schools to help define and correct areas for improvement.  Each school rates its performance on a set of standards.  The rating system has five levels, and the schools are required to show evidence for each rating.  Not rated  Unsatisfactory  Emerging  Accomplished  Distinguished

Areas Addressed in the SMR  Curriculum and instruction  High expectations  Library and educational technology access  Guidance and advisement  Multicultural activities  Instructional Day  Alignment with the job market  Student and school performance  Strategic improvement plans  Counseling services  Lesson Plans  Data Analysis  Alternative Education  Codes of Conduct  Statewide Assessment  Physical Assessment  Hiring/Licensure/Evaluation  Teacher/Principal Internship  Safe and drug free schools  School rules  Policy implementation  Leadership

SMR Reporting in WVEIS

Process for Rating  The SMR is a reflective document for the entire school, the OEPA expects input from all of the stakeholders in the school. When preparing for our OEPA visit we began the rating process by having each teacher and each administrator rate each category. Upon completion of the rating process, each teacher met with their department and completed a joint rating. Once each department completed their ratings the school leadership team (which includes the head of each department) met with the administrators to compile a final ratings report.

Process for Rating  Since the SMR is a living reflective document, it was revisited at regular intervals throughout the year to determine any potential changes based upon administrator or teacher input. Changes were made accordingly.

OEPA and the SMR  The focus of the OEPA visit at the school is to determine if the school is accurately portraying itself through the SMR, and to look for evidence of the accuracy and efforts to improve areas considered unsatisfactory or emerging.  Interviews of administrators, teachers, service personnel, and students focused on parts of the SMR and the resulting report gives the OEPA’s impression of the accuracy of the report.  The OEPA will report any corrections it feels need to be made on the SMR

OEPA Report on SMR

OEPA Report  The OEPA report also provides feedback on the SMR and explains why it feels ratings need to be changed.

OEPA Reporting  The OEPA also reports on compliance with state policy.

OEPA Reporting  OEPA also provides findings directly impacting school performance.

Summary  For schools the newest version of the OEPA audit is a greatly improved, more inclusive look at a school’s performance. In the past the audit was a quick snapshot of a school and little effort was made to look at a larger picture and period of time. It gives the school community an opportunity to reflect on its own performance and address needs prior to the visit. This creates less of an adversarial visit and provides more support for the schools.