1. 1 Proposed Changes to the Accreditation Process CDE Briefing for the Colorado State Board of Education March 5, 2008

2. 2 Purpose & Timeline Today: Review changes and details of proposed rule February & March: Obtaining input from the field April: Rulemaking hearing April 9 May: State Board adopts accreditation rules at State Board meeting June: State Board approves district accreditation contracts

3. 3 History 1998 Legislature passed Accreditation Act Article 11, 44, 45 of Title 22 Colorado Revised Statues 1999Rules for Accrediting Schools & School Districts 2001School Accountability Reports (SAR) 2001 Accreditation Contracts were submitted 2007 Original Accreditation Contracts expired 2007 Accreditation Contracts were extended for one year (June 2007 - June 2008)

4. 4 Positive Stakeholder Feedback Statewide presentations conducted – Superintendents in every region – CASB Board – Still to come: PTA and CEA Across-the-board support for proposed changes to Accreditation

5. 5 Focus on service and support Preserve district autonomy but maintain commitment to success for all students Ensure decisions are defensible and comparable across the state Emphasize results, focus on student longitudinal growth Link greater achievement to more autonomy Eliminate duplicative paperwork Provide districts with useful and transparent pre- populated data Intent of Changes to Accreditation Process

6. 6 Proposed changes: A) Five Points of Accountability 1. Student Results- Student Achievement Level (Status) and Growth 2. Student Results- Student Achievement Level (Status) and Growth Gaps 3. Student Results- Post-Secondary Readiness 4. Improvement Plan and Progress Monitoring 5. Compliance with assurances, including safety and finance

7. 7 Proposed changes: B) Longitudinal Growth Place greater emphasis on student longitudinal growth Align accreditation growth measure with the work of the Technical Advisory Panel on Longitudinal Growth

8. 8 Proposed changes: C) Pre-populated Data CDE will provide annual pre-populated data for districts – Use for required annual report to patrons required by law

9. 9 Proposed changes: D) Accreditation Review Timing of Accreditation Reviews will change and depend on student outcomes and need for support – Districts with highest student performance will receive an onsite review every three years – Districts with low student performance will receive an annual onsite review and support – Districts on a two or three year Accreditation Review cycle will receive an annual data summary report, including commendations and recommended actions

10. 10 Proposed changes: E) Accreditation Labels Current: Letter of Concern, Watch, Probation, Non- Accredited Labels under consideration: 1. Accredited with Distinction 2. Accredited 3. Accredited, Letter with Support 4. Accredited, Notice with Support 5. Probation, (may lead to loss of Accreditation) 6. Non-Accredited

11. 11 Proposed changes: F) Early Warning System Develop an early warning system based on student outcomes to identify districts needing support prior to steps toward corrective action

12. 12 How Accreditation will Work Accreditation Contract State and district reporting Accreditation review Education Improvement Plan

13. 13 Accreditation Contract Standards, goals, assessments, strategies Periodic review cycle for each school Recognition of high performing schools and intervention for low-performing schools Procedures for placing schools on corrective action cycles Involvement of families, business, local advisory committees, district and school advisory accountability committees

14. 14 Contract Assurances Participation in all state assessments Adequate policies implemented in compliance with state requirements Compliance with budgeting, accounting, and reporting requirements Principal professional development conducted Right to display the flag of the United States Adoption of model content standards

15. 15 Reporting Obligations State provides an annual report to district Data tables that meet or exceed Accreditation and NCLB reporting requirements Districts report to state and public CSAP results (growth and status) disaggregated and trends, including third grade Percentage of students taking AP courses, IB, postsecondary enrolled Numbers of expelled and suspended students Graduation rates & dropout rates Percentage of students not taking CSAP District budget, revenues, and expenditures ACT results Attendance rates Graduation requirements Evidence of a safe, civil learning environment Number and identity of schools in each accreditation category Additional local indicators

16. 16 Accreditation Review Annual review streamlined to focus on student results: growth, status, gaps, and postsecondary readiness Annual review of assurances on finance and safety Subsequent review of other assurances and district improvement plan if warranted by results

17. 17 Education Improvement Plan Best educational practices High goals for student achievement Recognized instructional strategies Standards-based instruction Use of state and local assessments Promote postsecondary readiness Incorporate parent, student and community participation Assurance that policies implemented in compliance with state requirements