1. 2012 MASSP SPRING CONFERENCE Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 1 March 27, 2012

2. Today’s Updates  MSIP Standards  Performance Scoring Guide  Process and Resource Revision  ESEA Flexibility  Transition to Revised Academic Standards and Assessments  Educator Standards and Evaluation Systems  Questions

3.  Promote Continuous Improvement and Innovation  Establish the State's Expectations  Distinguish Performance of Schools and Districts  Empower All Stakeholders MSIP 5 Policy Goals

4. 1. Academic Achievement – The district administers assessments required by the Missouri Assessment Program (MAP) to measure academic achievement and demonstrates improvement in the performance of its students over time. 2. Subgroup Achievement – The district demonstrates required improvement in student performance for its subgroups. 3. College and Career Readiness (K-12 only) – The district provides adequate post-secondary preparation for all students. 3. High School Readiness (K-8 only) – The district provides adequate post-elementary preparation for all students. 4. Attendance Rate – The district ensures all students regularly attend school. 5. Graduation Rate (K-12 only) – The district ensures all students successfully complete high school. MSIP 5 Performance Standards

5. Regional Meetings – Intended Outcome of Missouri’s Accountability System Identify Lowest 5% and Provide Drastic Intervention and Assistance Ensure EVERY school is “Good Enough” Ensure EVERY school Gets Better 0-1 9-2 Second Priority 8-3 Third Priority 3-1 7-2 8-3 Third Priority 18-1 Highest Priority 0-2 1-3

6. Regional Meetings – Design Decisions DecisionSpread< 50%50/50> 50% Status0-70863 Growth30-100368 DecisionSpread< 50%50/50> 50% Differentiated5-1007010 Standardized0-951007 DecisionSpread< 50%50/50> 50% Simple/Transparent0-751251 Complex/Precise25-1001512 DecisionSpread< 50%50/50> 50% Focused Dept Resources 0-95727 Dept Resources for All 5-100727

7. Aligned System of Accountability Federal Mathematics/Communication Arts Graduation Rate State Additional EOCs; additional CCR indicators Local Formative Assessments

8. Academic Achievement  Multiple Measures  Apply Full Academic Year (FAY) for accountability; report all students  Eliminate “grade span” and report at school/LEA configuration ExceedingMeetingApproachingFloor Status15960 Progress9630 Growth9630

9. Academic Achievement - Status  Set Standardized Status Expectation for all districts  Use 3 most recent years to calculate status  Use an Index to calculate and add percent proficient for reporting Achievement LevelPoint Value Below Basic1 Basic3 Proficient4 Advanced5

10. MAP Performance Index Prof Rate MPI B Basic25%25 Basic25%75 Prof25%100 Adv25%125 325 Prof Rate MPI B Basic0%0 Basic50%150 Prof25%100 Adv25%125 375 Prof Rate MPI B Basic13%13 Basic12%36 Prof50%200 Adv25%125 374

11. Academic Achievement - Progress  Promote continuous improvement  Allow for differentiated improvement targets  Use percentage gap reduction

12. Academic Achievement - Progress Baseline MPI2011 School MPIMPI gap 450-347.8=102.2 12 1.The MPI from the prior year is subtracted from 450 to determine a gap. Prior Year MPI GAP MPI Increase Needed 2011 MPI2012 Progress AMO Exceeds 102.2*5% = 5.11347.8352.9-500 Meets 102.2*3% = 3.07347.8350.9-352.8 Approaching 102.2*1% = 1.03347.8348.8-350.8 2.Multiply the MPI gap by the associated percentage.

13. Academic Achievement - Progress

14. Academic Achievement - Growth  Continue with Student Growth Pilot  Establish Growth Targets  Similar process as 2011 APR but use quartiles

15. Reinstatement of Performance Events and Writing Prompts  Beginning fall 2012 administration  Grade 3 – Communication Arts: writing prompt  Grade 4 – Mathematics: performance event  Grade 5 – Science: performance event  Grade 7 – Communication Arts: writing prompt  Grade 8 – Mathematics AND Science: performance event  Algebra I – Performance event  English II – Writing prompt  Biology – Performance event

16. Item Benchmark Descriptor (IBD)  Summer 2013  Item-level data aligned to both GLEs/CLEs and new core academic standards

17. Class of 2016  Required Additional End-of-Course Assessments  English I  American History  Administered online  No cost to LEAs/districts  Sample tests and achievement level descriptors may be found at http://dese.mo.gov/divimprove/assess/eoc_resources.html.http://dese.mo.gov/divimprove/assess/eoc_resources.html

18. Subgroup Achievement  Challenges Associated with NCLB Implementation  “All or nothing” approach  Distribution of subgroups among LEAs Number of subgroups vary LEA to LEA Minimum “n”  Duplicated Count

19. Subgroup Achievement  Report all subgroups individually  Maintains focus on the performance of each child  Apply accountability to a super subgroup  Allows for inclusion of students otherwise missed due to small “n” size  Eliminates duplicated count  Levels playing field among districts – accountability measured using one subgroup in each district

20. Subgroup % Of State Population CA 2009 CA 2010 CA 2011 Math 2009 Math 2010 Math 2011 Total 100% 51.253.654.647.652.754.2 Asian/Pacific Is 1.9% 61.765.665.064.870.572.0 Black 16.3% 29.732.032.721.223.029.0 Hispanic 4.3% 37.740.641.634.435.841.4 American In 0.5% 51.1 51.241.844.048.6 White 75.6% 56.659.060.152.853.658.3 Multi-Racial 1.3% 60.353.753.558.965.153.1 FRL 46.6% 36.339.440.531.833.338.9 IEP 12.5% 23.626.227.022.725.829.2 LEP 2.6% 24.725.223.228.428.631.4 Proficiency Rates by Subgroup

21. Subgroup Achievement  Multiple Measures  Status  Progress  Growth  Goal  Cut Gap in Half by 2020

22. Academic Achievement CA Mathematics ScienceSocial Studies Additional EOCs Risk FactorsExemplars Status Exceeds = 15 Meets =9 Approach =6 Floor =0 Exceeds = 15 Meets =9 Approach =6 Floor =0 Exceeds = 15 Meets =9 Approach =6 Floor =0 Exceeds = 7.5 Meets =4.5 Approach =3 Floor =0 Exceeds = 7.5 Meets =4.5 Approach =3 Floor =0 Progress Exceeds = 9 Meets =6 Approach =3 Floor =0 Exceeds = 9 Meets =6 Approach =3 Floor =0 Exceeds = 9 Meets =6 Approach =3 Floor =0 Exceeds = 4.5 Meets =3 Approach =1.5 Floor =0 Exceeds = 4.5 Meets =3 Approach =1.5 Floor =0 Growth Exceeds = 9 Meets =6 Approach =3 Floor =0 Exceeds = 9 Meets =6 Approach=3 Floor =0 Points Possible 15 7.5 Subgroup Achievement CA Mathematics ScienceSocial Studies Additional EOCs Risk FactorsExemplars Status Exceeds = 5 Meets =3 Approach =2 Floor =0 Exceeds = 5 Meets =3 Approach =2 Floor =0 Exceeds = 5 Meets =3 Approach =2 Floor =0 Exceeds = 2.5 Meets =1.5 Approach =1 Floor =0 Exceeds = 2.5 Meets =1.5 Approach =1 Floor =0 Progress Exceeds = 3 Meets =2 Approach =1 Floor =0 Exceeds = 3 Meets =2 Approach =1 Floor =0 Exceeds = 3 Meets =2 Approach =1 Floor =0 Exceeds = 1.5 Meets =1 Approach =.5 Floor =0 Exceeds = 1.5 Meets =1 Approach =.5 Floor =0 Growth Exceeds = 3 Meets =2 Approach =1 Floor =0 Exceeds = 3 Meets =2 Approach =1 Floor =0 Points Possible 5552.5

23. CCR*1-3 *4 *5-6Risk FactorsExemplars Status Exceeds = 10 Meets = 6 Approach = 4 Floor = 0 Exceeds = 10 Meets =6 Approach =4 Floor =0 Exceeds = 10 Meets =6 Approach =4 Floor =0 Progress Exceeds = 6 Meets = 4 Approach = 2 Floor = 0 Exceeds = 6 Meets = 4 Approach =2 Floor =0 Exceeds = 6 Meets = 4 Approach =2 Floor =0 Points Possible 10 AttendanceRisk FactorsExemplars Status Exceeds = 10 Meets = 6 Approach =4 Floor = 0 Progress Exceeds = 6 Meets =4 Approach = 2 Floor = 0 Points Possible 10 Graduation4-5 Year RateStateRisk FactorsExemplars Status Exceeds = 20 Meets = 12 Approach = 8 Floor = 0 Exceeds = 10 Meets = 6 Approach = 4 Floor = 0 Progress Exceeds = 12 Meets = 8 Approach = 4 Floor = 0 Exceeds = 6 Meets = 4 Approach = 2 Floor = 0 2010

24. Sample Annual Performance Report (K-12) StandardPoints POSSIBLEDistrict ScoreRisk Factors Exemplar Flags Academic Achievement 60 Subgroup Achievement 20 College and Career Readiness 30 Attendance 10 Graduation Rate 30 Total Points Possible 150

25. Sample Annual Performance Report (K-8) StandardPoints POSSIBLEDistrict ScoreRisk Factors Exemplar Flags Academic Achievement 45 Subgroup Achievement 15 High School Readiness 10 Attendance 10 Total Points Possible 80

26. Aligned System of Accountability Federal Mathematics/Communication Arts Graduation Rate State Additional EOCs; additional CCR indicators Local Formative Assessments

27. Academic Achievement CA Mathematics ScienceSocial Studies Additional EOCs Risk FactorsExemplars Status Exceeds = 15 Meets =9 Approach =6 Floor =0 Exceeds = 15 Meets =9 Approach =6 Floor =0 Exceeds = 15 Meets =9 Approach =6 Floor =0 Exceeds = 7.5 Meets =4.5 Approach =3 Floor =0 Exceeds = 7.5 Meets =4.5 Approach =3 Floor =0 Progress Exceeds = 9 Meets =6 Approach =3 Floor =0 Exceeds = 9 Meets =6 Approach =3 Floor =0 Exceeds = 9 Meets =6 Approach =3 Floor =0 Exceeds = 4.5 Meets =3 Approach =1.5 Floor =0 Exceeds = 4.5 Meets =3 Approach =1.5 Floor =0 Growth Exceeds = 9 Meets =6 Approach =3 Floor =0 Exceeds = 9 Meets =6 Approach=3 Floor =0 Points Possible 15 7.5 Subgroup Achievement CA Mathematics ScienceSocial Studies Additional EOCs Risk FactorsExemplars Status Exceeds = 5 Meets =3 Approach =2 Floor =0 Exceeds = 5 Meets =3 Approach =2 Floor =0 Exceeds = 5 Meets =3 Approach =2 Floor =0 Exceeds = 2.5 Meets =1.5 Approach =1 Floor =0 Exceeds = 2.5 Meets =1.5 Approach =1 Floor =0 Progress Exceeds = 3 Meets =2 Approach =1 Floor =0 Exceeds = 3 Meets =2 Approach =1 Floor =0 Exceeds = 3 Meets =2 Approach =1 Floor =0 Exceeds = 1.5 Meets =1 Approach =.5 Floor =0 Exceeds = 1.5 Meets =1 Approach =.5 Floor =0 Growth Exceeds = 3 Meets =2 Approach =1 Floor =0 Exceeds = 3 Meets =2 Approach =1 Floor =0 Points Possible 5552.5

28. CCR*1-3 *4 *5-6Risk FactorsExemplars Status Exceeds = 10 Meets = 6 Approach = 4 Floor = 0 Exceeds = 10 Meets =6 Approach =4 Floor =0 Exceeds = 10 Meets =6 Approach =4 Floor =0 Progress Exceeds = 6 Meets = 4 Approach = 2 Floor = 0 Exceeds = 6 Meets = 4 Approach =2 Floor =0 Exceeds = 6 Meets = 4 Approach =2 Floor =0 Points Possible 10 AttendanceRisk FactorsExemplars Status Exceeds = 10 Meets = 6 Approach =4 Floor = 0 Progress Exceeds = 6 Meets =4 Approach = 2 Floor = 0 Points Possible 10 Graduation4-5 Year RateStateRisk FactorsExemplars Status Exceeds = 20 Meets = 12 Approach = 8 Floor = 0 Exceeds = 10 Meets = 6 Approach = 4 Floor = 0 Progress Exceeds = 12 Meets = 8 Approach = 4 Floor = 0 Exceeds = 6 Meets = 4 Approach = 2 Floor = 0 2010

29. K-12 sample Core Score Points POSSIBLE Additional State Indicators Points POSSIBLE Total Points POSSIBLE Academic Achievement 30 60 Subgroup Achievement 10 20 College and Career Readiness _30 Attendance Rate _10 Graduation Rate 201030 Total 6090150

30. K-8 sample Core Score Points POSSIBLE Additional State Indicators Points POSSIBLE Total Points POSSIBLE Academic Achievement 301545 Subgroup Achievement 10515 High School Readiness _10 Attendance Rate _10 Total 40 80

31. Goal 1: All Missouri students will graduate college and career ready. STRATEGY 2: Promote quality teaching, leading, and learning by supporting a continuous improvement process and disseminating effective instructional practices.  ACTION 1: Establish and apply appropriate measures of accountability to guide timely intervention strategies and improvement efforts based on best practices.  ACTION 2: Identify, disseminate and support research-based models to guide school and district improvement.  ACTION 3: Identify, disseminate and promote best practices.  ACTION 4: Provide access to user-friendly data tools to make informed decisions.

32. Goal 1: All Missouri students will graduate college and career ready. STRATEGY 2: Promote quality teaching, leading, and learning by supporting a continuous improvement process and disseminating effective instructional practices.  ACTION 1: Establish and apply appropriate measures of accountability to guide timely intervention strategies and improvement efforts based on best practices.  ACTION 2: Identify, disseminate and support research-based models to guide school and district improvement.  ACTION 3: Identify, disseminate and promote best practices.  ACTION 4: Provide access to user-friendly data tools to make informed decisions.

33. Marzano’s premise:  “ If we follow the research, we can enter an era of unprecedented effectiveness for schools– one in which the vast majority of schools can be highly effective in promoting student achievement.”

34. So, what’s the bottom line?  Creating the “effective schools process” requires educators…  to use the best available research  to create a plan of action that would have a chance of success.

35. Continued Research First published in 2009

36. The school  A reliance on schools and teachers to make learning  Exciting  Engaging  Enduring

37. Great Schools  Create a climate that all are responsible for the progress of the students  Use information openly and intelligently  Use research-based evidence  Collaborate to improve learning  Develop expert teachers Building Teacher Quality – John Hattie, University of Auckland 2003

38. Ignored need for support of school leaders Focus on supporting and improving leaders States and districts develop teacher and principal evaluation and support systems focused on improving teacher and leader effectiveness Focused exclusively on a teacher’s entering qualifications Must take into account multiple measures, including student growth and measures of professional practice Divorced from student achievement and instructional practice Principle 3: Supporting Effective Instruction and Leadership NCLBESEA Flexibility Static; no emphasis on improvement Evaluation and support systems must provide useful feedback and guide professional development

39. Principle 3: supporting effective instruction & leadership Teacher and principal evaluation and support systems that: – Will be used for continual improvement of instruction – Meaningfully differentiate performance – Use multiple valid measures, including student growth – Evaluate teachers and principals on a regular basis – Provide clear, timely, and useful feedback – Will be used to inform personnel decisions 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Adopt state guidelines Implement local systems Develop local systems Pilot local systems

40. Essential Components of Effective Evaluation Systems  Is aligned to research-based performance targets  Includes a minimum of 3 performance levels (ideally 4 or maybe 5)  Highlights the importance of probationary period  Includes multiple observations/evaluations and deliberate feedback  Uses student performance measures and evidence of student learning  As a “preponderant” criterion, it “significantly” informs evaluation  Provides ongoing, regular, timely and meaningful feedback for all  Theory of Action: Everyone at every level grows every year  Includes ongoing training for evaluators to ensure rating reliability  Use results/data to inform personnel decisions, determinations and policy  Identifies who is in need of targeted interventions (includes timeframes)  Identifies who has earned recognition, tenure and/or compensation

41. 41

42. 42

43. 43

44. 44

45. On the Web: dese.mo.gov/qs/esea-waiver.html Email: esea@dese.mo.gov Review and Feedback

46. Next Steps  USED Peer Review  Resource/Process meeting  April Board meeting  Scoring Guide Meetings  APR release