A-F G RADING M ODEL Presented: January 5, 2012 What we know…

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
College and Career Ready Performance Index (CCRPI) The NEW Report Card in Georgia.
Advertisements

Completing the Classroom Teacher and Non-Classroom Teacher Evaluations for Presented by: The Office of Talent Development Employee Evaluations.
A RKANSAS R EPORT C ARD A seven year look into State Performance Office for Education Policy.
Kentucky’s School Report Card and Spreadsheets
Florida Department of Education Value-added Model (VAM) FY2012 Using Student Growth in Teacher and School Based Administrator Evaluations.
2013 State Accountability System Allen ISD. State Accountability under TAKS program:  Four Ratings: Exemplary, Recognized, Academically Acceptable, Academically.
L AFAYETTE R EGIONAL S CHOOL New England Common Assessment Program (NECAP) Test Results.
A-F School Grading Presentation October 2, History of A to F School Grading System Preliminary grades based on data from SY08-09 through SY10-11.
Dallas ISD’s Value-Added Model School Effectiveness Index (SEI) Classroom Effectiveness Index (CEI) Data Analysis, Reporting, and Research Services.
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.
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.
Understanding Wisconsin’s New School Report Card.
99th Percentile 1st Percentile 50th Percentile What Do Percentiles Mean? Percentiles express the percentage of students that fall below a certain score.
Portfolio Mid-Year Accountability Status Report March 3 rd, 2013.
Common Questions What tests are students asked to take? What are students learning? How’s my school doing? Who makes decisions about Wyoming Education?
1. The Process Rubrics (40 or 90) should be open soon. 2. The Data Profile and SI Plan are expected to open in December. 3. The complete CNA will.
Montana’s statewide longitudinal data system Project Montana’s Statewide Longitudinal Data System (SLDS)
Introduction to Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Michigan Department of Education Office of Psychometrics, Accountability, Research, & Evaluation Summer.
A Primer on Growth Percentiles Elementary/Middle School Progress Reports January 29, 2010.
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.
MARSHALL PUBLIC SCHOOLS STATE ACCOUNTABILITY RESULTS Multiple Measurement Rating (MMR) – Initial Designation.
Joint Meeting of the Commissioner’s and AYP Task Force October 14, 2010 NH DOE 1Joint Task Force Meeting: October 14, 2010.
Timmerman Public Hearing September 16, :00-7:00.
1 Paul Tuss, Ph.D., Program Manager Sacramento Co. Office of Education August 17, 2009 California’s Integrated Accountability System.
How Can Teacher Evaluation Be Connected to Student Achievement?
S TATE A CCOUNTABILITY S YSTEM AND N EW S CHOOL R EPORT C ARDS 1.
Understanding How the Ranking is Calculated 2011 TOP TO BOTTOM RANKING.
Florida Department of Education Value-added Model (VAM) FY2012 Using Student Growth in Teacher and School Based Administrator Evaluations.
Timmerman Public Hearing February 4, :00-4:00.
State Charter Schools Commission of Georgia SCSC Academic Accountability Update State Charter School Performance
What are the STAAR Performance Standards? Copyright 2013 by Region 7 Education Service Center. All rights reserved.
1 Watertown Public Schools Assessment Reports 2010 Ann Koufman-Frederick and Administrative Council School Committee Meetings Oct, Nov, Dec, 2010 Part.
CHANGES IN FEDERAL ACCOUNTABILITY FOR SCHOOLS BEGINNING IN
New York State Scores 2011—2012 School Year. Growth Ratings and Score Ranges Growth RatingDescriptionGrowth Score Range (2011–12) Highly EffectiveWell.
Department of Research and Planning November 14, 2011.
DRE FLDOE “Value-Added Model” School District of Palm Beach County Performance Accountability.
NH Commissioner’s Task Force Meeting September 21, 2010 NH DOE 1 Commissioner's Task Force Meeting: September 21, 2010.
Copyright © 2010, SAS Institute Inc. All rights reserved. How Do They Do That? EVAAS and the New Tests October 2013 SAS ® EVAAS ® for K-12.
NH Commissioner’s Task Force Meeting August 10, 2010 NH DOE 1 Commissioner's Force Meeting: August 10, 2010.
ELL AMAO and Grad Rate Data ELL Outcome Improvement Group Oregon Department of Education July 21, 2015.
Iowa School Report Card (Attendance Center Rankings) December 3, 2015.
Value Added Model and Evaluations: Keeping It Simple Polk County Schools – November 2015.
PED School Grade Reports (with thanks to Valley High School) ACE August 3, 2012 Dr. Russ Romans District Accountability Manager.
Copyright © 2010, SAS Institute Inc. All rights reserved. How Do They Do That? EVAAS and the New Tests October 2013 SAS ® EVAAS ® for K-12.
EVAAS Proactive and Teacher Reports: Assessing Students’ Academic Needs and Using Teacher Reports to Improve Student Progress Becky Pearson and Joyce Gardner.
Understanding Your Top from Your Bottom: A Guide to Michigan’s Accountability System September 2013 Mitch Fowler
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.
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.
CINS Community Meeting: Data Dig January 2016 APS Research & Evaluation John Keltz & Rubye Sullivan.
Top to Bottom and Persistently Lowest Achieving Schools Lists Federally Approved Requirements for Identifying Persistently Lowest Achieving Schools August.
Public School Accountability System. Uses multiple indicators for broad picture of overall performance Uses multiple indicators for broad picture of overall.
Measuring Turnaround Success October 29 th, 2015 Jeanette P. Cornier, Ph.D.
Assessment Assessment is the collection, recording and analysis of data about students as they work over a period of time. This should include, teacher,
Accountability Training Review Agenda for Today: Review of calculation changes and what’s new In depth review of Closing Gaps calculations Graduation Rates.
Minnesota’s Proposed Accountability System “Leading for educational excellence and equity. Every day for every one.”
Value Added Model Value Added Model. New Standard for Teacher EvaluationsNew Standard for Teacher Evaluations Performance of Students. At least 50% of.
NDE State of the Schools Adequate Yearly Progress Persistently Lowest Achieving Schools Nebraska Performance Accountability System Board of Education.
Assessment & Accountability Session 3: Content and School Scores.
CINS Data Presentation
Welcome to the BT Super Conference
ACE August 3, 2012 Dr. Russ Romans District Accountability Manager
CORE Academic Growth Model: Results Interpretation
Specifications Used for School Identification Under ESSA in
Framework for a Next-Generation Accountability System
Framework for a Next-Generation Accountability System
ESSA for AFESC Schools 2018 Under the reauthorization of ESEA, the federal government required each state to design an accountability system that met.
CORE Academic Growth Model: Step-By-Step
CORE Academic Growth Model: Step-By-Step
Presentation transcript:

A-F G RADING M ODEL Presented: January 5, 2012 What we know…

R EMEMBER : Schools are held accountable every day using a lot of different tools. There is something to be learned from every accountability system. This is only one tool of many and we will continue to ask questions and evaluate this system so we better understand what it means and how it can improve academic achievement. However, we never make all our decisions based on one indicator, and will continue to evaluate the entire school on a regular basis just like we always have. There are some things we know and some things we do not. Here’s what we know: 2

3

4

C URRENT S TANDING – S TATUS % P ROFICIENT (25 POINTS ) 5 Two components: Status % proficient25 points % proficient using VAM15 points Status % proficient % of students proficient reading x % of students proficient math x 12.5 = total out of 25

% P ROFICIENT USING VAM (15 POINTS ) % proficient using VAM This is calculated similar to how RDA calculates your statistical peers for AYP This means your school is compared to other schools that are like it in the state Gender, Race/Ethnicity, FRP, SPED, ELL, FAY Considering these characteristics, PED predicts how well your school and schools similar to you should perform If you meet or exceed the predicted target, you receive a higher percentile ranking… 6

% P ROFICIENT USING VAM (15 POINTS ) 7 School A and School B are similar schools Prediction = 75% proficient in Reading, 75% proficient in Math School ASchool B 65% in Reading85% in Reading 65% in Math85% in Math *perform below prediction*perform above prediction School ASchool B (30 th percentile in rank) (70 th percentile in rank) Reading points x.30 +Reading points x.70 + Math points x..30 = total Math points x.70 = total **Reading points = 7.5**Math points = 7.5 All schools in the state

W HY IS IT F AIR TO C OMPARE ME TO THE R EST OF THE S TATE ? The target for your school is based on your school’s characteristics All schools that are similar in demographics get the same targets Therefore, PED can rank all the schools in the state on the same scale You then get ranked on how well you met your target 8

S CHOOL G ROWTH (10 POINTS ) Again, this uses a VAM so it compares you to other schools that are similar to your school PED predicts how much your school should improve year over year If your school met or exceeded that prediction, you receive a higher percentile ranking 9

S CHOOL G ROWTH 10 School A and School B are similar schools Prediction = growth should be 2% points every year for the last 3 years School ASchool B2009 = 75% R, 75% M 2010 = 76% R, 76% M2010 = 78% R, 78% M 2011 = 76% R, 76% M2010 = 81% R, 81% M *perform below prediction*perform above prediction School ASchool B (30 th percentile in rank) (70 th percentile in rank) Reading points x.30 +Reading points x.70 + Math points x..30 = total Math points x.70 = total **Reading points = 5**Math points = 5 All schools in the state

G ROWTH OF H IGHEST P ERFORMING S TUDENTS (20 P OINTS ) Highest 75% of students at your school Again, this uses a VAM so it compares one student to a similar student in the state PED predicts how well these students should perform and grow every year over the last 3 years That prediction is 0 because the average across the state would be that you learned one year of knowledge in one year, no more, no less If the score is positive, the students met or exceeded that prediction and you receive more points If the score is negative, the students did not meet the prediction and the fewer points you receive 11

G ROWTH OF L OWEST P ERFORMING S TUDENTS (20 P OINTS ) 12 Lowest 25% of students at your school Again, this uses a VAM so it compares one student to a similar student in the state Important: These students carry more weight than your highest 75% 100 students at a school – High 75 students = 20 points Low 25 students = 20 points (*the individual student in the lowest 25 has a bigger impact in your grade than the higher 75) PED predicts how well these students should perform and grow every year over the last 3 years That prediction is 0 because the average across the state would be that you learned one year of knowledge in one year, no more, no less The more students that met or exceeded that prediction, you receive a higher percentile ranking The further the student group is from zero, the less points you receive

O THER A CADEMIC I NDICATORS (10 POINTS ) Attendance based on unexcused absences = 5 points Opportunity to Learn Survey = 5 points Survey is not available in this grade, so all 10 points is derived from attendance PED sets a 95% attendance target for all schools in the state (Your school attendance rate /.95) x 10 = total If your school exceeds 95% attendance, you will receive more than 10 points 13

B ONUS P OINTS (+5 P OINTS ) Not awarded Available in

G RADUATION R ATE (9 POINTS ) PED sets target of 95% for 4 year cohort (four-year cohort graduation rate /.95) x 8 = total PED sets target of 95% for 5 & 6 year cohort (five-year & six-year cohort graduation rate /.95) x 4 = total 15

G RADUATION G ROWTH (5 POINTS ) Again, this uses a VAM so it compares one school to a similar school in the state based on demographics PED predicts what your school’s graduation rate growth should be from year to year This calculation is done exactly the same as school growth was done 16

C AREER AND C OLLEGE R EADINESS (15 POINTS ) Participation (5 points) (number of students who participate in any one of the qualified classes or activities / number of eligible students) x points available = total points Success (10 points) (number of students who participated and who met the benchmark / number of total students who participated) x points available = total points 17