1. Exploring the Purpose, Design, and Promise of Alternative School Accountability Models Erika Hall, Ph.D. Center for Assessment Presentation at the National Conference on Student Assessment Philadelphia, PA June 20, 2016

2. Overview What is an alternative school? Why might a state consider using a unique accountability model for its alternative schools? What are the ways in which alternative school accountability systems tend to differ across states? How might a state go about developing an accountability system for its alternative schools? Hall, Erika; NCSA 2016

3. What is an alternative school? A school developed to support students who have unique instructional needs that are not adequately addressed in a traditional classroom and/or who are considered at-risk to not complete high school. – Students having behavioral, disciplinary, or academic problems – Students contending with significant barriers to learning: language and cultural differences, poverty, high mobility, learning and/or developmental disabilities – High risk factors include: pregnancy, homeless-ness, prior dropout status, history of academic failure, absenteeism or truancy, drug or alcohol abuse/addiction, and physical or sexual abuse. Traditionally serve students in secondary and middle grades. Hall, Erika; NCSA 2016

4. Key Features Characterizing Alternative Schools Flexible Individual-focused Provide a wide range of program offerings Supportive, safe and non-judgmental Focus on academic and non-curricular skills necessary for success Provide for support services/outreach Hall, Erika; NCSA 2016

5. Why consider a different/modified accountability model for alternative schools? The established model does not support the intended purpose(s) of the state accountability system when applied to alternative schools, such as:  accurately assessing how successful a school has been in meeting the state’s achievement goals  incentivizing behaviors and activities (in teachers, student and schools), that lead to improved student achievement  providing information to help schools evaluate and improve the effectiveness of their programs Hall, Erika; NCSA 2016

6. Why might the traditional school model not be effective? Indicators highlighted in traditional school accountability systems often do not reflect the goals, priorities and unique populations of students served by alternative schools Indicators that are mutually prioritized across schools traditional and alternative schools (e.g., achievement) are often not operationalized/defined/calculated in a manner that makes sense for alternative schools – Minimum N-counts are often not met – Benchmarks and targets do not account for factors unique to the alternative school population Hall, Erika; NCSA 2016

7. Implications Most alternative schools are categorized as needs improvement, failing or some other category representing the lowest level of performance. Accomplishments or gains a school makes in providing for its students are not highlighted or rewarded in light of accountability system results Little useful information is provided back to alternative schools that would support them in improving their teachers, schools or practices. Perpetuates misconceptions about the quality of alternative schools and the ability of the students within to make progress and be successful. Result in unintended negative consequences: – Educators do not want to teach at these schools – Students do not want to attend these schools Hall, Erika; NCSA 2016

8. State-Developed Alternative School Models MI, AK, WY, UT, CO, TX, AZ, CA, NC Great variability across states in terms of: – The manner in which alternative schools are defined – How alternative school status is obtained – Flexibility afforded to the alternative school in selecting the accountability model (or model parameters) used – Difference between accountability models applied to alternative and traditional schools in terms of degree and composition Indicators used, how they are weighted, and the standards associated with performance on each indicator or the overall composite Overall performance designations assigned to schools Consequences/supports and how they are determined Hall, Erika; NCSA 2016

9. Developing an Alternative School Accountability Model 1.Establish a Theory of Action that Supports Design, Implementation, and Validation – Outline the goals of the accountability system and manner in which results are intended to be used. – Describe design priorities and constraints (Comparability between schools, flexibility, transparency, etc…). – Identify components or indicators that should be represented in the system to support the intended goals (Achievement, growth, school climate, etc…). – Identify measures/observations that will be used to provide information relative to each indicator. – Establish business rules and make design decisions. 2.Piloting Phase 3.Operational Implementation 4.Ongoing evaluation and validation Hall, Erika; NCSA 2016

10. Design Considerations Restricted sample sizes Availability of desired data Resources to collect/manage data Appropriateness of traditional full-academic-year (FAY) designations for determining data inclusion in a particular indicator. ESSA requirements and need to aggregate results with that of other schools in the state Hall, Erika; NCSA 2016

11. Presenters: Margaret MacKinnon -- Director of Assessment & Accountability, Alaska Department of Education & Early Development Julie Magee -- Director of Accountability, Wyoming Department of Education Alexander Schwartz -- Accountability and Research Specialist, Michigan Department of Education, Division of Accountability Services Hall, Erika; NCSA 2016