1. CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION State Board of Education Update Transitioning to a New Accountability System Nancy S. Brownell, Senior Fellow, State Board of Education Staff Local Control and Accountability Team CISC – September 18, 2015

2. CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION Defining Accountability Defining accountability has become more complex as our understanding of it has grown beyond goals, indicators, decision rules, and consequences. The above components are still central to an accountability model, but the focus has expanded to include capacity building and providing appropriate technical assistance and support. The purpose of accountability is not simply to identify and punish ineffective schools and districts, but to provide appropriate supports to increase effectiveness. 2

3. CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION Accountability Goals Strengthen teaching and learning Increase the individual capacity of teachers and school leaders Increase the institutional capacity of schools, districts, and state agencies to continuously improve Carefully phase in policy changes as state and local capacity grows Consider federal accountability requirements relative to the new state system once established. 3

4. CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION Keep the Following in Mind Board President Michael Kirst A change of state policy is relatively simple compared to the enormous transformation required to implement a new funding and accountability system in each district and charter school. The goal moving forward is to determine how all of the recent changes best lead to improved programs and services for students at the local level. 4

5. CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION Keep the Following in Mind Board President Michael Kirst LCFF oversight is multidimensional, with many new components. Local plans should provide easy to understand information that articulates strategic thinking, planning and implementation. We want to learn more about how local plans and other components help promote continuous improvement and allow for coordinated, high quality assistance to improve student outcomes as we develop a new accountability system. 5

6. CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION State Priorities Student Achievement School Climate Student Engagement Parent Involvement Course Access Standards Implementation Basic Services Other Student Outcomes Coordinated instruction and services for expelled and foster youth (COEs) 6

7. CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION SBE Guiding Principles Articulate the state’s expectations for districts, charter schools and county offices of education. Foster equity. Provide useful information that helps parents, districts, charter schools, county offices of education and policymakers make important decisions. Build capacity and increase support for districts, charter schools and county offices. Encourage continuous improvement focused on student-level outcomes, using multiple measures for state and local priorities. Promote system-wide integration and innovation. 7

8. CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION Local and State Accountability With LEAs now responsible for more local accountability components (LCAP, annual update, rubrics), purposes and roles within the new accountability system must be redefined. For state accountability purposes, many system components are already in place. A review of these components shows how they support the current overall goal of continuous system improvement. Some components will need to be modified and/or eliminated. 8

9. CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION Developing and Transitioning to a New, Coherent Accountability System Classroom and School Practices Local Accountability Processes State Accountability Processes Classroom and school practices grounded in state standards and curricular frameworks. Local accountability processes and elements, based on the state priorities, LCAPs, and evaluation rubrics. Statewide accountability processes and elements that support fairness, comparability, and trend analysis across multiple measures of progress. 9

10. CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION Existing Foundation for Accountability System California’s new accountability system will build on the foundation of the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), including: The Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) and Annual Update Evaluation rubrics The roles of the State Superintendent, County Superintendents, and the California Collaborative for Educational Excellence 10

11. CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION Formative Progress – Continuous Improvement Define Measure Learn Improve 11 Goals, actions and services each year, and how to achieve them Collect information, verify and make inferences about progress, add to data systems Analyze, examine and communicate progress, adjust Agree on and implement/fine tune changes.

12. CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION California’s Existing State Academic and Fiscal Accountability Components Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) Annual Update Evaluation Rubrics COE and CDE Technical Assistance CA Collaborative for Educational Excellence (CCEE) Williams Settlement Components High School Grad Requirements 12

13. CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION California’s Existing State Academic and Fiscal Accountability Components High School Graduation Requirements Charter Petitions Annual Independent Audits School Accountability Report Cards Alternative Schools Accountability* Academic Performance Index* 13 * Not aligned to Guiding Principles or New Accountability System Goals

14. CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION Crosswalk: Existing Accountability Components and LCFF Priorities Majority of the existing state academic and fiscal accountability components should be retained, reflect LCFF state priorities. The School Accountability Report Card (SARC) is the primary academic and fiscal accountability component in need of modification. The Academic Performance Index (API) should be formally eliminated. All the metrics used to calculate the currently- suspended API (e.g., statewide assessments, graduation rates, dropout rates, and college and career readiness indicators) are now included under the state priorities. 14

15. CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION Accountability Phase 1 – LCFF Evaluation Rubrics Statutory Requirements To assist local education agencies to identify strengths, weaknesses, and areas that require improvement To assist County Superintendents to identify school districts and charter schools in need of technical assistance To assist the State Superintendent in identifying school districts for which intervention is warranted To reflect a holistic, multidimensional assessment of school district and individual school site performance and include all of the state priorities To include standards for school district and individual school site performance and expectation for improvement in regard to each of the state priorities 15

16. CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION Revised LCFF Major Tasks and Milestones June 2015 February 2016 OctoberJuneOctober 2 nd LCAP with Annual Update Completed Original Evaluation Rubrics Adoption Original Evaluation Rubrics Adoption Revised Evaluation Rubrics Adoption Revised Evaluation Rubrics Adoption Research & Prototype Testing Alignment with Accountability Development Stakeholder Engagement 16

17. CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION Evaluation Rubric Features The evaluation rubric will: –Include all state priorities –Include data and information related to local educational agencies, schools, and subgroups as appropriate and to the extent practical –Offer clear statements and descriptors of standards that indicate practice and expectations for local educational agencies, schools, and subgroups as appropriate and to the extent practical –Provide a tool to complement planning and process monitoring and technical assistance processes –Support analysis and feedback by facilitating deeper reflections of data through customized narratives based on consideration of data trends and relationships –Further develop the emerging accountability system by serving as a resource for data analysis, reflection, and resource alignment inquiry

18. CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION Evaluation Rubrics Glossary LCFF State Priorities Provide Focus Metrics Provide Measurement Indicators Capture Expectations Areas of focus for LCFF that include conditions for learning, pupil achievement, and engagement as specified in Education Code Sections 52060and 52066 Metrics are the detailed measures used to evaluate performance for the LCFF State Priorities Indicators provide evidence that a certain condition exists or certain results have or have not been achieved based on consideration of one or more metric(s) related to the LCFF State Priorities

19. CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION Rubric Design Overview 19 Conditions for Learning Access and Opportunit y Engagement Graduation Pupil Achievement College and Career Readiness 1.Create Practice Standard for each “key” and “associated” indicator. 2.Identify 1-2 key indicators that provide a focus and reflect state priorities. 3.Identify “associated” indicators that relate to the “key” indicators, including local selection measures that relate to the key indicator. 4.Quality standard for each “key” and possibly “associated” indicator.

20. Example: Graduation, Data Displays and Narratives Following is an example of how data may be described and organized for the graduation policy statement area: Students that graduate: Complete high school  High school graduation rate at the cohort level Regularly attend school  Attendance rate by grade span (elementary, middle, and high school) Early and related indicators of students that graduate: Attention to High Risk Factors  Middle school and high school dropout rates, chronic absenteeism Productive and Supportive Behavior and Discipline  Suspensions and expulsion rates Locally identified measures related to graduation* * The evaluation rubrics will include a local indicator selection tool to help with local metric identification and use.

21. Overview of Proposed Evaluation Rubric Content  Policy statements provide statements for the rubric  Description of expectation and practice  Data displays with narratives to support reflection and analysis Policy Statement Key Indicator Associated/Related Indicator Research + &  Key Indicator: All Students Graduate Metrics: Graduation Rate and Attendance Rate EXAMPLE Associated Indicators: Proactive attention to risk factors Metrics: Drop-out rates, suspension, expulsion, chronic absenteeism, parent engagement, and other local measures The figure shows the relationship between the SBE’s Policy Statements and Research to identify Key and Associated/Related Indicators, which is followed by an example based on graduation.

22. Example: Graduation, Defining and Approaching Standards  Practice Standards  Describe research-supported practices related to areas within the policy frame inclusive of all state priorities  Convey characteristics and example of high functioning practices  Quality Standards  Complement practice standards by providing a measurement-based system against which to assess local progress for all state priorities  Establish specific expectations for performance based on consideration of improvement and outcomes at the LEA, school, and subgroup levels in regards to each of the state priorities

23. Example: Graduation, Quality Standards Definitions Practice Standards Quality Standards State Priorities and Policy Statements Example of Quality Practice Measurement of Quality OutcomeImprovement The figure shows the relationship between the State Priorities and Policy Statements as overarching organizers for Practice Standards, which provide examples of quality practice, and Quality Standards, which provide measurement of quality based on outcome and improvement.

24. Example: Graduation, Quality Standards Definitions ResultsImprovement Outcome Level of performance at the LEA, school, and subgroups levels for indicators as measures by specific metrics Based on change in three-year average, classifying improvement results in one of five ways – Improved, Significantly Improvement, Maintained, Declined, and Significantly Declined Based on three- year averages, classifying outcome results in one of five ways – Very High, High, Intermediate, Low, and Very Low Overall Composite analysis of Improvement and Outcome classification for all metrics related to the a specific indicator using the following classifications – Excellent, Good, Acceptable, Issue, and Concern

25. Example : Graduation, Quality Standards Classification Improvement Outcome Very HighHighIntermediateLowVery Low Improved Significantly ExcellentGood Acceptable Improved ExcellentGood AcceptableIssue Maintained ExcellentGoodAcceptableIssueConcern Declined GoodAcceptableIssue Concern Declined Significantly AcceptableIssue Concern

26. CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION Resources Nancy Brownell – nbrownell@cde.ca.gov State Board of Education Agendas http://www.cde.ca.gov/be/ag/ag/index.asp http://www.cde.ca.gov/be/ag/ag/index.asp State Board of Education Information Memos http://www.cde.ca.gov/be/pn/im/infomemoaug2015.asp http://www.cde.ca.gov/be/pn/im/infomemoaug2015.asp LCFF – WestEd Channel http://lcff.wested.org/http://lcff.wested.org/ CDE LCFF http://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/aa/lc/http://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/aa/lc/ CDE Common Core http://www.cde.ca.gov/re/cc/http://www.cde.ca.gov/re/cc/ CAASPP http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/ca/http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/ca/ 26