1. CTPD Report Card Update Marianne Mottley – Director Report Card Project

2. Overview of Ohio’s Career-Technical Planning District Report Card

3. Ohio Revised Code Section 302.033
The state board of education, in consultation with the chancellor of the Ohio board of regents, any office within the office of the governor concerning workforce development, the Ohio association of career and technical education, the Ohio association of city career-technical schools, and the Ohio association of career-technical superintendents, shall approve a report card for joint vocational school districts and for other career-technical planning districts that are not joint vocational school districts, which may contain disaggregated data for each joint vocational school district, if applicable.

4. CTE Report Card Timeline
Department worked with stakeholders to build report card proposal and timelines The report card now is under review by a new work group that meets weekly
CTE Report Card Timeline

5. CTE Report Card Overview

6. Summative Grade (Delayed)4
Component Grades 5
Measure Grades 1
Summative Grade (Delayed)

7. CTE Report Card Components
Component Grades
Prepared for Success
Achievement
Post Program Outcomes
Graduation Rate
Report Only – Not Graded
Federal Accountability Results

8. Prepared for Success Component

9. Prepared for Success
Measures how ready students are for the path they choose after high school.

10. Prepared for Success Component
Cohort = CTE Concentrators in the 4-year and 5-year graduation rate (Concentrators from classes of 2016 and 2017 for the 2018 report card) Numerator = number who are prepared for success; identical to the definition used for traditional schools and districts

11. Prepared for Success Primary (1 point)
College Entrance Exam Remediation-free Score
Honors Diploma
Industry-Recognized Credential
Bonus (0.3 point)
Advanced Placement Tests
International Baccalaureate Tests
College Credit Plus

12. Prepared for Success Grade Scale
Range
Grade
93% - 100% A
75% % B
60% % C
40% % D
0.0% % F
Prepared for Success Grade Scale

13. Work Group Discussions
Should other things be included in the list that deems a student “prepared”? If so, what should be included?
Should employment count, and if so, should a student be deemed prepared only if he’s in a full-time job in his field of study and is earning a living wage with benefits?
Should military enlistment count?
Work Group Discussions

14. Achievement Component

15. Achievement Component
The Achievement Component includes two graded measures: the proportion of students passing technical assessments, and academic indicators using End-of-Course tests.
Component Weighting:
Technical Skill Attainment – 75%
Academic Indicators – 25%

16. Technical Skill Attainment
Cohort: CTE Concentrators Who Left Secondary Education in the prior year who had a technical assessment reported that aligns to their program of concentration Numerator: Students who earn a score of Proficient on their WebXam Composite or who obtain an aligned Industry Credential

17. Technical Skill Attainment
This measure has a grade demotion for failing to test students with required assessments
No demotion is made for testing at least 90% of the students whose programs have an aligned test
A one grade demotion occurs for testing at least 80%, but less than 90% of the students
A two grade demotion occurs for testing fewer than 80% of the students

18. Technical Skill Attainment Grade Scale
Range A
90% - 100% B
80% % C
70% % D
60% % F
<60%

19. Work Group Discussions
Are there ways to provide “credit” for attainment for students who are in fields with no credentials or exams?
Should participation be included in the letter grade and if so, are the percentages ‘correct’?
Is the final grade scale ‘calibrated fairly’?
Work Group Discussions

20. Indicators Met
Reports the percent of students passing each state test regardless of who taught the course and where the test was taken Cohort = CTE participants in the current school year ( for the 2018 report card) Numerator = Students who score Proficient or higher on their test; 80% must pass to ‘meet’ each indicator

21. Possible CTE Indicators
Exam
Indicators 2017 and Beyond
Grade 7 Math
80%
Grade 7 English Language Arts
Grade 8 Math
Grade 8 English Language Arts
Grade 8 Science
Biology
American History
American Government
Algebra 1
Geometry
Integrated Math I
Integrated Math II
English Language Arts I
English Language Arts II
EOC Improvement Indicator
25%

22. Indicators Grade Scale
Range A
90% - 100% B
80% % C
70% % D
50% % F
<50%
Indicators Grade Scale

23. Work Group Discussions
Should a CTPD have OST/EOC indicators? And if yes, is the grade scale calibrated correctly?
If yes, should the denominator continue to be participants, or should it be concentrators or concentrators who left school?
If yes, should the indicators be more limiting to only include cases where the academic course is taken by a district employed by the CTPD?
Work Group Discussions

24. Post Program Outcomes

25. Post Program Outcomes Component Weighting:
Post-Program Placement measures the proportion of students who are employed, in an apprenticeship, join the military, or are enrolled in postsecondary education or advanced training in the six months after leaving school.
Information on industry credentials is reported under post program outcomes, but it is not used when calculating the grade
Component Weighting:
Post Program Placement – 100%
Industry Credentials – Reported only

26. Post Program Outcomes
Cohort: CTE Concentrators Who Left Secondary Education in the prior year
Numerator: Number of students who have some type of placement in the six months after leaving school
Status known rate affects
the final letter grade

27. Post Program Outcomes Districts get credit if the student is:
In an apprenticeship
Employed
In the military
In a post-secondary educational program

28. Post Program Outcomes Status Known Rate Affects the Final Letter Grade
The grade increases by one level for reporting the status of at least 95% of the students
No grade change for reporting the status of 85% to 94.9% of the students
The grade decreases by one level for reporting the status of at fewer than 85% of the students

29. No change to final grade
Placement Grade Scale
Status Known Rate
Effect on Final Grade
95% - 100%
One grade increase
85% %
No change to final grade
<85%
One grade decrease
Grade
Range A
93% - 100% B
89% % C
84% % D
79% % F
<79%

30. Work Group Discussions
Should there be other criteria that consider the student to be placed (like being placed as an unpaid ‘staffer’ in a community service role)?
Should there be a bonus weight for students who are in an optimal placement like being employed in their field earning a living wage?
Work Group Discussions

31. Industry Recognized Credentials
Data reported but does not contribute to the Post Programs Outcomes letter grade
Measures the proportion of students earning industry credentials or certificates before they leave high school, or in the first six months
after leaving school
Same cohort as Post Program
Placement

32. Industry Recognized Credentials
Agriculture & Environmental Systems
Arts & Communications
Business & Finance
Construction
Education & Training
Engineering
Health
Hospitality & Tourism
Human Services
Information Technology
Law & Public Safety
Manufacturing
Transportation
Industry Recognized Credentials

33. Industry Recognized Credentials
2018 Report Card will include two elements:
The percent of students earning at least 12 points in a single credential or bundle of credentials
The percent of students earning ANY credential

34. Graduation Rate Component

35. Graduation Rate Component
The Graduation Rate Component looks at the percent of students who are successfully finishing high school with a diploma in four or five years.
Component Weighting:
4-year Graduation Rate – 60%
5-year Graduation Rate – 40%

36. Graduation Rate Grade Scale
Letter Grade
Grad Rate – Four Year Percentage
Grad Rate – Five Year Percentage A
93% - 100% **
95% - 100% ** B
89% %
90% % C
84% %
85% % D
79% %
80% % F
< 79%
< 80%
** Specified in legislation

37. Work Group Discsussion
Are 4-year and 5-year graduation rates the ones to include or should we also report a 6-year, 7-year, and 8-year rate to capture students with disabilities who stay to gain further training?
Should a separate rate be reported which includes GED students (mimicking Perkins)?
Should the weights be 60/40 or some other percent
Work Group Discsussion

38. Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act

39. Federal Accountability Results
Career-Technical Planning Districts are accountable to the U.S. Department of Education for 8 measures as required by the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act. Perkins targets are locally negotiated between the Department and CTPD to encourage continuous improvement

40. Reauthorization of Perkins
Perkins Act was reauthorized earlier this spring.
Outreach will be done later this fall on these Perkins measures
CTPDs will weigh in on new goals for the coming years.
Reauthorization of Perkins

41. Overall Grade

42. Delayed to provide time for a CTE work group to meet
Overall Grade
Delayed to provide time for a CTE work group to meet
Discussions are ongoing on all aspects of the report card

43. Work Group Discussions
Should there be an overall or summative rating?
If so, how should each component be weighted?
Should some components be reported only?
Should the grade more closely align to Perkins than to the traditional report card?

44. Report Card Resources Report Card Resources
Many resources exist for readers to understand the new measures and the existing pieces of Ohio’s accountability system
Visit education.ohio.gov and search keywords:
Report Card Resources

45. Marianne Mottley Director 614-995-9944

46. Questions