1. Iowa Department of Education Differentiated Accountability Healthy Indicators STATEWIDE DATA CONFERENCE AUGUST 10, 2015

2. Assessment and Data- Based Decision- Making Targeted and Intensive Services Leadership Universal Instruction Infrastructure Healthy Indicators Continuous Improvement Process 2015-2016: PK-6 Literacy Only

3. Healthy Indicators 2015-2016 District A Assessment and Data Based Decision Making 1. Percent of students assessed with a valid and reliable universal screener 2. Percent of students not meeting benchmark assessed with a valid and reliable progress monitoring assessment Universal Instruction1. Percent of students meeting benchmark on universal screening assessment 2. Percent of students beginning the year at benchmark who remain at benchmark 2015-2016: PK-6 Literacy Only

4. Healthy Indicators Where do the cut points come from? Research on system capacity (public health) Research on MTSS implementation Our team’s thoughts on what is best for Iowa’s kids 80  We are hypothesis testing during the pilot year  These cut points reflect the ideal state  The result of the healthy indicators analysis is support 15 5

5. Healthy Indicators Percent of students assessed with a valid and reliable universal screener SupportPercent of students screened Intensive0-79% Targeted80-94% Universal95-100%

6. Healthy Indicators Percent of students not meeting benchmark assessed with a valid and reliable progress monitoring assessment SupportPercent of non-proficient students progress monitored more than 90% of weeks Intensive0-69% Targeted70-89% Universal90-100% If there were 13 weeks from fall to winter screening, PM would be required 12 of 13 weeks.

7. Healthy Indicators Percent of students meeting benchmark on universal screening assessment SupportPercent of students meeting benchmark on universal screening Intensive0-59% Targeted60-79% Universal80-100%

8. Healthy Indicators Percent of students beginning the year at benchmark who remain at benchmark SupportPercent of students at or above benchmark in fall remaining at or above benchmark on universal screening in spring Intensive0-69% Targeted70-89% Universal90-100%

9. Healthy Indicators Important points: The cut points you have seen so far are the ideal state Actual cut points for support will be determined based on Spring 2015 data and capacity Important to balance desired state and capacity to serve the system well Data for initial determination of differentiated accountability and support will be based on district level data Building data and other disaggregations will be considered at the local level Reports will be available in TIER in end of Sept.

10. Healthy Indicators  If a district, school or AEA is identified for universal support on one or more healthy indicators? DE will not schedule any further time with you, but you will be provided with tools to explore your data further if you choose.  If a district, school or AEA is identified for targeted support on one or more healthy indicators? DE will schedule a remote interview with you to explore your data further.  If a district, school or AEA is identified for intensive support on one or more healthy indicators? DE will schedule a focused, on-site visit to explore your data further.

11. What’s Next  We will make adjustments to the process and cut points as we learning during the pilot year  Differentiated accountability and use of healthy indicator data will expand to additional districts in 2016-17  Healthy indicators will be calculated and monitored for remaining conceptual areas

12. Questions?