1. SCHOOL ACCOUNTABILITY UPDATE 15/16 Calculations & Changes under ESSA
Steve Baker, Principal, Bluffton High School
Cynthia Roach, Sr. Director of Accountability & Assessment, State Board of Education
Maggie Paino, Director of School Accountability, Department of Education

2. OVERVIEW OF CURRENT A-F SYSTEM FOR 15/16 CALCULATIONS

3. OVERVIEW OF A-F SYSTEM Performance 50% Growth 50% STEVE
Currently for Grades 3-8:
Two domains/indicators make up overall grade—Performance & Growth
Performance = 50% of overall grade
Growth = 50% of overall grade
Currently for Grades 9-12:
Three domains/indicators make up overall grade—Performance, Growth, Multiple Measures
Performance = 20% of overall grade
Growth = 20% of overall grade
Multiple Measures = 60% of overall grade
Graduation Rate = 30%
CCR Achievement Rate = 30%

4. OVERVIEW OF A-F SYSTEM PERFORMANCE DOMAIN
STEVE
PERFORMANCE DOMAIN
Made up of pass rate & participation rate for E/LA & Math
Pass Rate=# students proficient / # students taking test (students enrolled for 162 days only)
Participation Rate = # students taking test / # students required to take test (all students enrolled at the time of testing)
Points awarded for the performance domain shall equal the pass rate if the participation rate is at least 95%, or t
he product of the pass rate & participation rate if participation rate is less than 95%
E/La & Math scores are weighted equally to yield the final performance domain score

5. OVERVIEW OF A-F SYSTEM GROWTH DOMAIN
CYNTHIA
GROWTH DOMAIN
Made up of growth scores for E/LA & Math
E/LA & Math weighted equally to get final growth domain score
Points awarded to grades 4-10 based on the average of the scores of students in the high performing (top 75%) and low performing (bottom 25%)
Points awarded based on growth to proficiency table
Considers prior year status on ISTEP+ and current year observed growth

6. OVERVIEW OF A-F SYSTEM GROWTH DOMAIN
CYNTHIA
Growth table with target ranges that apply for 15/16 calculations
REMINDER ABOUT GROWTH: takes 3-4 years on same assessment for target ranges to stabilize. Target ranges will be reviewed annually until stable to consider new year of test data.

7. OVERVIEW OF A-F SYSTEM MULTIPLE MEASURES DOMAIN
STEVE
MULTIPLE MEASURES DOMAIN
Currently only applies to grade 12
Made up of 2 rates that are weighted equally to determine overall domain score
CCR Achievement Rate
How many graduates passed AP or IB exam, earned IC or earned DC (this year will be 2015 cohort)
State goal is 25% of graduates earn at least one indicator—defined by SBOE
CCR points equal the product of the CCR achievement rate and the state goal factor—maximum of 100 points
Graduation Rate
Four year grad rate points equal 100 if the rate is at least 90%. Otherwise, points equal the actual four year rate (this will be based on 2015 cohort)
PLUS
Five year grad rate improvement score equals the difference in the 5 year rate and the 4 year rate for the same cohort (this will be based on 2014 cohort)

8. OVERVIEW OF A-F SYSTEM FINAL GRADE: Gr 3-8 Building
STEVE
OVERALL SUMMARY
Scores of each domain are weighted accordingly to yield the final overall grade
Grading scale = 0-100

9. OVERVIEW OF A-F SYSTEM FINAL GRADE: Gr 9-12 Building
STEVE
OVERALL SUMMARY
Scores of each domain are weighted accordingly to yield the final overall grade
Grading scale = 0-100

10. ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM INDICATORS UNDER ESSA

11. ACCOUNTABILITY INDICATORS PERFORMANCE DOMAIN
Proficiency Rate
Must equally weight English/language arts & Math proficiency on annual statewide assessment
Must apply to all tested grades
Participation Rate
Must measure the achievement of at least 95% of all students for English/language arts & Math assessment separately
Must do one of the following if 95% participation not met:
Lower summative performance rating
Identify school for targeted support & improvement
Assign the lowest performance level to the school’s performance domain score
Apply a state-determined action that is rigorous and approved by USEd
CYNTHIA
Not many changes to this domain, but is required to be included
Proficiency/pass rate
Still only required to look at E/LA & Math proficiency on statewide assessment
Participation rate
Sanctions required if school does not meet 95% participation on assessment (outlined on screen)—our system does include sanction by awarding less than full points for participation rate in the performance domain, which will ultimately lower the overall performance domain score
In addition to sanctions on screen, schools that miss 95% participation for one or more subgroups will have to develop and implement improvement plans that address the reason/s for low participation in the school and include interventions to improve participation rates in subsequent years—must be developed in partnership with stakeholders
Participation rate: denominator must include all students enrolled in the school at the time of testing

12. ACCOUNTABILITY INDICATORS GROWTH DOMAIN
Growth to Proficiency
Must measure academic progress in English/language arts & Math on annual statewide assessment separately
Required indicator for schools with grades 4-8
May be an indicator for schools with grades 9-12
CYNTHIA
Anticipate no changes here (we will likely have to adjust the points awarded to ensure and satisfy the requirement of meaningful differentiation)

13. ACCOUNTABILITY INDICATORS MULTIPLE MEASURES DOMAIN FOR HIGH SCHOOLS
Graduation Rate
Must be based on the four-year adjusted cohort graduation rate
May include extended-year cohort graduation rate
CYNTHIA
Accountability calculations will have to base graduation rate calculations on the federal calculation (see table above for what this includes/excludes)
Major difference between state & federal grad rate is the mobility
State includes the following mobility codes, which will not be permitted under federal calculation:
Withdrawal because of long term medical condition
Placement by court order or DCS
Student missing/location of student cannot be determined

14. ACCOUNTABILITY INDICATORS MULTIPLE MEASURES DOMAIN FOR HIGH SCHOOLS
College- and Career-Readiness Achievement Rate
Current Indicators
Passed an AP exam with a score of 3, 4, or 5
Passed an IB exam with a score of 4, 5, 6, or 7
Earned at least 3 college credits
Obtained an industry-recognized credential
Proposed Additional Indicators
Participation in ASVAB assessment
Performance on SAT
Performance on ACT
Performance on PSAT
Completion of 21st Century Scholars Program
CYNTHIA
Committee looking to expand the CCR indicators to include those under “proposed additional indicators”

15. ACCOUNTABILITY INDICATORS MULTIPLE MEASURES DOMAIN FOR ELEMENTARY & MIDDLE SCHOOLS
Requirements:
Measure must be valid, reliable, and comparable across all schools
Progress on measure must be likely to increase student achievement
Examples of Measures:
Access to and completion of advanced coursework
Postsecondary readiness
School climate & safety
Student engagement
Educator Engagement
CYNTHIA
NEW REQUIRED DOMAIN FOR E/MS: This domain has yet to be determined for elementary/middle school grades
Considered as a “non-academic” indicator in accountability system
Committee is looking at current data collections, and considering what can be done in the short term for this indicator, versus what the state could do in the long-term

16. ACCOUNTABILITY INDICATORS ENGLISH LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY PROGRESS DOMAIN
Requirements:
Applies to all schools
Must consider English language proficiency level of students
Must be based on English learner performance on the annual English language proficiency assessment
Must use objective & valid measures of growth/progress
What does this domain look at:
Students in the English language learner subgroup
Performance on WIDA Access 2.0 assessment
MAGGIE
NEW REQUIRED DOMAIN FOR ALL SCHOOLS
Looks only at the English Learner subgroup
Utilizes the English language proficiency assessment to measure progress toward English language attainment—WIDA assessment
This is a measure of growth/progress versus performance

17. ACCOUNTABILITY INDICATORS ENGLISH LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY PROGRESS DOMAIN
Calculation for Domain Indicator
1. Determine total # of students with a valid WIDA Access score in both current and prior year
Step 1 = 50 eligible students
2. Determine # of students who attained or exceeded their individual interim growth target.
Step 2 = 38 students
3. Determine # of students who scored at least a 5.0 on the current year WIDA Access exam (attained proficiency).
Step 3 = 3 students
4. Add Step 2 and Step 3 total # of students that met the standard
Step 4 = = 41 students
5. Divide Step 4 by Step 1 to determine a percentage that met the standard.
Step 5 = 41 / 50 = 82.0%
6. Convert Step 5 into points on a 0 – 100 point scale for the final EL progress indicator score.
Step 6 = 82.0% = 82.0 points
7. Goal Factor = 70% of ELs attaining or exceeding their individual interim growth target or attaining proficiency
Step 7 = 82.0% > 70.0% = points (A)
MAGGIE
Outline of proposed calculation for EL progress domain
Calculation
DENOMINATOR: looks at entire EL subgroup at school
NUMERATOR: considers those students who have either attained or exceeded their individual interim growth target, or scored at least a 5.0 on WIDA (attained proficiency)
Note: state goal is for 70% of EL students to either meet their individual annual goal or attain proficiency—the domain is aligned to this goal. Example: if school hits 70% goal, then receives full 100 points. If not, multiplied by goal factor to determine final score

18. ACCOUNTABILITY INDICATORS ESSA BREAKDOWN
Grades 3-8
Performance
Growth
English Learner Progress
School Quality Student Success
Grades 9-12
Graduation Rate
College & Career Readiness Achievement
MAGGIE
Breakdown of all required domains—NOTE: these charts do not reflect actual weights of each domain in the overall calculation
Weightings are yet to be determined

19. DIGGING DEEPER INTO ESSA

20. DIGGING DEEPER SUBGROUPS
Subgroups Included:
Economically disadvantaged students
Students from each major racial & ethnic group
Children with disabilities
English learners
Super Subgroups are not permitted in place of individual subgroups, but may supplement them
N-Size
Must be no more than 30, and must not personally identify students
Same n-size must be applied to all indicators in accountability system
May have different n-sizes for accountability and for reporting
ALL (MAGGIE LEADS)
Performance on all domains must be disaggregated and reported out by subgroup
Cannot substitute super subgroup for individual subgroups when reporting out
N-Size
Cannot exceed 30
Cannot personally identify students (FERPA)
Cannot have different n-sizes for different domain calculations
Currently have different n-sizes based on domain—this will have to be adjusted to comply with ESSA

21. DIGGING DEEPER SUBGROUPS
English Learners
English learners that attain proficiency (exit EL status) remain in the EL subgroup for 4 years after exiting for academic proficiency purposes only
Flexibility for recently arrived English learners for ISTEP+ English/Language arts assessment
Option 1: Exempt first year/don’t take ISTEP+
Year One: Participation Only based on WIDA Access Participation
Year Two: Performance & Participation on ISTEP+
Year Three: Performance, Participation & Growth on ISTEP+
Option 2: Phase-In
Year One: Participation Only based on ISTEP+ Participation
Year Two: Participation & Growth on ISTEP+
ALL (MAGGIE LEADS)
English Learner Subgroup considerations
EL Subgroup definition
Can keep students in EL subgroup that have attained English proficiency for 4 years
This applies only to academic achievement (performance domain) calculations—does not apply to grad rate, multiple measures, growth (these students will count as non-ELLs when calculating these domains)
Flexibility for ELs that are “recently arrived”
Recently arrived = enrolled in schools in the US for less than 1 year
Applies only to E/LA assessment, NOT Math (this was clarified in regs for ELs)
Committee preference is Option 2

22. DIGGING DEEPER DATA PROCEDURES
Partial Enrollment
Must include all students enrolled in the same school within an LEA for at least half of the academic year when calculating academic indicator scores
Graduation Rate
must include student enrolled in the same school for less than half of the academic year
If student exited high school without receiving a diploma and without transferring to another high school that grants diplomas during the school year, the LEA must assign the student to either:
The high school in which the student was enrolled for the greatest proportion of school days while enrolled in grades 9-12
The high school in which the student was most recently enrolled
ALL (MAGGIE LEADS)
When calculating domains, must include students enrolled for at least 90 days (50% of school year)
Current practice is to include students enrolled for at least 162 days (90% of school year)
Comment submitted by SBOE/DOE and IASP to change this regulatory requirement-won’t know until final regs get published if this will be upheld
Impact on graduation rate calculation
Students count regardless of enrollment, but students who drop out may be assigned either to the high school where the student spent majority of his/her high school career or the school where the student was most recently enrolled—determination to be made

23. DIGGING DEEPER DATA PROCEDURES
Averaging Data for Purposes of Annual Meaningful Differentiation
Averaging data across schools years
May average data across up to 3 years (year of identification + two school years immediately preceding)
Must use same uniform procedures for averaging data & apply to all schools
Must report data for a single school year without averaging on SEA & LEA report cards
Combining data across grades
May combine data across grades in a school
Must use same uniform procedures for combining data & apply to all schools
Must report data for each grade in the school on SEA & LEA report cards
ALL (MAGGIE LEADS)
Currently, accountability based on annual results; do not average data for up to three years—this option will be considered by committee
Currently, system does combine data across grades—this option will be considered by committee, but likely to remain the same
One difference—won’t see aggregation practice over multiple years when calculating individual domains regardless of whether the approach is taken to assess annually or average data over 3 years

24. QUESTIONS?