High School School Performance Framework (SPF)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION UPDATE DECEMBER 7, 2011 AYP DETERMINATIONS ESEA WAIVER.
Advertisements

Mt. Diablo Unified School District
Career and College Readiness Kentucky Core Academic Standards Characteristics of Highly Effective Teaching and Learning Assessment Literacy MODULE 1.
Assessment Literacy Kentucky Core Academic Standards Characteristics of Highly Effective Teaching and Learning Career and College Readiness MODULE 1.
Guidance Meeting Introductions Articulation Agreement College Readiness Legislative Update.
Alaska Accountability Adequate Yearly Progress January 2008, Updated.
Alaska Accountability Adequate Yearly Progress February 2007, Updated.
Southern Regional Education Board 1 Preparing Students for Success in High School.
1 Career Pathways for All Students PreK-14 2 Compiled by Sue Updegraff Keystone AEA Information from –Iowa Career Pathways –Iowa School-to-Work –Iowa.
1 Adequate Yearly Progress 2005 Status Report Research, Assessment & Accountability November 2, 2005 Oakland Unified School District.
1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA September 2003.
August 8, 2013 Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting Shannon Housson, Director Overview of.
MUIR FUNDAMENTAL SCHOOL May 2012 CST Data Presentation.
School Performance Framework Sponsored by The Colorado Department of Education Summer 2010 Version 1.3.
The SCPS Professional Growth System
School Report Card A Focus on Academic Performance West Hempstead UFSD Board of Education Presentation June 21, 2011.
* Princeton Public Schools State School Performance Report Interpretive Guide *Based upon data.
2013 RCAS Summative Assessment Report Preliminary Dakota State Test of Educational Progress (D-STEP) Information August 6,2013.
Management Plans: A Roadmap to Successful Implementation
ExCEL August Institute ExCEL After School High School Credit Recovery
Teacher Evaluation and Pay for Performance Michigan Education Association Spring 2011.
P-16 Council Overall Goals Regional change agents for “Closing the Gaps” Engaging community stakeholders Parents K-12 teachers K-12 administrators College.
Wethersfield Teacher Evaluation and Support Plan
SCHOOL PERFORMANCE FRAMEWORK (SPF) Clark County School District.
Progress Reports for New York City Public Schools
Paulding County School District Stakeholder’s Meeting
EDUCATIONAL PROFICIENCY PLAN
Student Growth Measures in Teacher Evaluation Module 3: Using Data to Inform Growth Targets and Submitting Your SLO 1.
Florida School Accountability Dr. Karen Schafer Accountability and Testing Adapted from Presentation June, 2014 by Ed Croft Bureau Chief, Accountability.
Grinnell High School Student Achievement Data.
11 th Grade Parent Meeting – ACT Plus Writing and ACT WorkKeys Wausau East High School October 8, 2014.
AYP to AMO – 2012 ESEA Update January 20, 2013 Thank you to Nancy Katims- Edmonds School District for much of the content of this presentation Ben Gauyan.
School Grades Model and Historical Background
1 Requirements for Focus Schools Focus Schools Conference Presenter: Yvonne A. Holloman, Ph.D. September 17-18, 2012.
North Santiam School District State Report Cards
Teacher Practice in  In 2012, the New Jersey Legislature unanimously passed the TEACHNJ Act, which mandates implementation of a new teacher.
ESEA Title III AMAOs Ensuring Academic Success for English Learners Dr. Shereen Tabrizi, Manager Special Populations Unit Maria Silva, EL Consultant Office.
Superintendent Melinda J. Boone Alumni Auditorium, North High School October 21, 2013 Worcester Public Schools State of the Schools Address.
Franklin Public Schools MCAS Presentation November 27, 2012 Joyce Edwards Director of Instructional Services.
Texas State Accountability 2013 and Beyond Current T.E.A. Framework as of March 22, 2013 Austin Independent School District Bill Caritj, Chief Performance.
Monthly Conference Call With Superintendents and Charter School Administrators.
School Performance Framework (SPF). Purpose of SPF The School Performance Framework (SPF) is a comprehensive system to help schools focus on strengths.
Shelda Hale, Title III, ELL and Immigrant Education Kentucky Department of Education.
Overview of Wyoming Accountability in Education Act (WAEA)
Nevada Transitioning from measuring status and reporting AYP, to measuring growth and reporting on School Performance.
1 Prepared by: Student Assessment & School Performance School Accountability in Florida: Grading Schools and Measuring Adequate Yearly Progress.
OCTORARA AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT ANNUAL REPORT “CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES - MORE THAN PSSA AND AYP”
PA School Performance Profile January 13, 2013 Superintendent Advisory Council 1.
LOUISIANA STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION JOHN WHITE Tracking Readiness: Measuring High School Effectiveness in Louisiana National Conference on Student.
School Performance Index School Performance Index (SPI): A Comprehensive Measurement System for All Schools Student Achievement (e.g. PSSA) Student Progress.
Arizona’s Federal Accountability System 2011 David McNeil Director of Assessment, Accountability and Research.
Charles Pack Jr. WorkKeys and KeyTrain Help Make The Academy of Careers and Technology A West Virginia Exemplary School.
Program Improvement/ Title I Parent Involvement Meeting October 9, :00 p.m. Redwood City School District.
Academic Progress Plan Results. Two Topics to be Covered ASD DCAS results relative to other Delaware school districts SY Performance.
Public School Accountability System. Background One year ago One year ago –100 percent proficiency required in –AMOs set to increase 7-12 points.
Assigns one of three ratings:  Met Standard – indicates campus/district met the targets in all required indexes. All campuses must meet Index 1 or 2.
Public School Accountability System. Uses multiple indicators for broad picture of overall performance Uses multiple indicators for broad picture of overall.
South Carolina Succeeds
Education 2018: Excellence for Every Student Presented to the Board of Education August 27,
Our State. Our Students. Our Success. DRAFT. Nevada Department of Education Goals Goal 1 All students are proficient in reading by the end of 3 rd grade.
Diane Mugford – Federal Accountability, ADAM Russ Keglovits – Measurement and Accountability, ADAM Renewing Nevada’s ESEA Waiver Flexibility Request.
Driving Through the California Dashboard
FY 11 School Grade Calculation
Accountability in ESSA: Setting the Context
A-F Accountability and Special Education
Madison Elementary / Middle School and the New Accountability System
WAO Elementary School and the New Accountability System
Driving Through the California Dashboard
Phillipsburg Middle School Identification as a School in Need of  Comprehensive Support and Improvement: Starting Community Conversations March.
OVERVIEW OF THE 2019 STATE ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM
Presentation transcript:

High School School Performance Framework (SPF) Clark County School District

Presentation Objectives Understand what and so what? Understand how the School Performance Framework (SPF) works Understand how pieces fit: Nevada Growth Model, SPF, Autonomous Schools

SPF Introduction http://tv.ccsd.net/watch?v=FJiWm9w6HUKR

Purpose of School Performance Framework (SPF) The School Performance Framework (SPF) helps us be accountable for success of every student. While initially holding schools harmless, CCSD will celebrate schools achieving uncommon results. The aim is to identify what works so we can learn and get better faster. The SPF will be an important addition to the accountability picture. The SPF is an improvement because it takes into account student growth and annual improvements while recognizing highest performing schools. It helps us focus support on schools that need it most.

Background While status matters—especially at the high school level—academic growth to a standard and annual improvements in achievement is important. In the SPF, where a student starts is taken into account (whether they are approaching, meeting, or exceeding standards) and schools receive credit for annual improvements in achievement. Under AYP, schools only received credit if students reached proficiency on the state assessment. The high school SPF uses Graduation, College & Career Readiness, Nevada Growth Model, and School Climate results to measure the achievement of schools.

Development May 2011: SPF introduced and described in Superintendent’s “A Look Ahead” September 2011: Superintendent appoints a 36 member Technical Advisory Panel on Academic Growth Phase 2 (TAP2) including 2 superintendents from rural districts, 2 Nevada Department of Education staff, 2 UNLV Professors, 2 parents, 7 teachers, 6 principals, and central office support staff to advise the Superintendent on the development of a SPF October 2011 – February 2012 Over 5,000 people including staff, community members, and parents surveyed on SPF weights and elements Multiple frameworks created, shared, and revised based on feedback from the field Final ES/MS version released for trial year and a half Principal focus group convened: unanimous decision to create a high school SPF March 2012 – May 2012 Approximately 800 staff, community members, and parents surveyed on high school SPF Principal focus group met 3 times to give advice on HS SPF 21 high schools participated in focus groups (approximately 12 teachers a school) in order to give advice on the HS SPF Final HS version released for trial year

HS SPF Factors & Measurements Graduation: 35% College & Career Readiness: 35% Growth: 20% School Climate: 10% Graduation Rate, 40% (14 points) CSN articulated Career & Technical Education course participation and course completion, 25% (8.75 points) Median Growth Percentile (MGP) from 8th to 10th grade Attendance: 20% (2 points) Credit Sufficiency, 40% (7 points) 4 years of math/3 years of lab science course completion, 25% IEP Student Equity: state target of students in Least Restrictive Environment: 20% High School Proficiency Exam, 20% AP/IB/Dual Credit: Participation, 25% (8.75 points) Performance, 25% LEP Student Equity: state target of student performance on ELPA: 20% (2points) Parent Engagement Plan: 20% Student & Teacher Climate Survey: 10% each

Steps to a High School’s Score: Step One Step One: Academics matter most The CCSD is accountable for ALL students being Ready By Exit. Academics is 90 percent of a school’s SPF score. *If schools do not meet or exceed established targets, schools earn full points for a 10 percent annual reduction in students not meeting or exceeding the established target. (1) Graduation: 35 points Graduation Rate High School Proficiency Exam first time pass rates Credit Sufficiency: 10th, 11th, and 12th graders (2) College & Career Readiness (CCR): 35 points AP/IB/Dual Enrollment Participation & Performance Career & Technical Education: participation and course credit in CSN articulated courses 4 years math/3 years science course completion of 12th graders (3) Academic Growth to a Standard (Growth): 20 points Median Growth Percentile 8th to 10th grade

Steps to a High School’s Score: Step Two Step Two: An excellent school is more than just a test score The CCSD values a positive learning environment for all students. School Climate is 10 percent of a school’s SPF score. Attendance: Do 90 percent or more of students attend school daily? 2 points (full points if 92% or higher of students attend daily; half points if 90-91.99%) Limited English Proficient student equity: Did Limited English Proficient students meet state targets on the English Language Proficiency Assessment (ELPA)? 2 points Special Education student equity: Did the percent of Special Education students in their Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) meet the state target OR the time students spend in their LRE increase? 2 points Engaging staff: Did 80 percent or higher of staff members respond positively on the climate survey? 1 point Engaging students: Did 80 percent or higher of students respond positively on the climate survey? 1 point Engaging parents: Did the school create a Parent Engagement plan? 2 points

Steps to a High School’s Score: Step Three Step Three: The system must be fair The CCSD must use a framework that evaluates all schools fairly. An Open Access multiplier is included for schools that do not require students to apply in order to attend: Comprehensive schools earn a 10 percent multiplier to their total points as they are open access schools, which all students can enroll. Magnet schools earn a 5 percent multiplier to their total points as they are both open access and selective of students in their specialized programs.

Steps to a High School’s Score: Step Four Step 1: Academics 90 + Step 2: School Climate 10 = 100 percent of a school’s SPF score Step Four: All schools are unique The CCSD recognizes different schools may have different goals. A met Focus Goal is a 5 percent bonus added to the school’s overall SPF score (added from steps 1 - 3). In partnership with Academic Managers, schools choose the annual focus goal their particular school wants to work on. Schools choose how to measure this goal. A school does not lose percentage points for not accomplishing their focus goal.

Steps to a High School’s Score: Step Five Step Five: All systems must be aligned The CCSD must align with the federal and state accountability systems. Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) is a gatekeeper to the highest ratings and from the lowest rating. If a school did not make AYP or AYP Watch, the highest rating that school can earn is 3 stars. If a school made AYP, the lowest rating that school can earn is 2 stars.

Steps to an Elementary & Middle School’s Score: Step Six Step Five: Transparency plus support equal success. Every school earns a score based on steps 1-6. However, a school’s designation is based on 2 years of scores. Example: 2010-2011 data (framework released May 2012)3 stars 2011-2012 data (framework released August 2012)4 stars This school’s 2012 SPF score during the hold harmless year (released August 2012) is 4 stars Different ratings earn differential supports or autonomies. Through transparency, schools will be able to know and learn from schools succeeding with similar populations. *A school that makes AYP and earns 30-0 points will be classified as a 2 star school AYP 105-80 points, 5 stars 79-65 points, 4 stars 64-51 points, 3 stars 50-30 points, 2 stars 29-0 points, 1 star* AYP Watch 105-65 points, 4 stars 64-51 points, 3 stars 50-30 points, 2 stars 29-0 points, 1 star No 105-51 points, 3 stars 50-30 points, 2 stars 29-0 points, 1 star

Other Schools Charter schools will be included on the HS SPF when valid data is available. A School Performance Framework for alternative and special education schools are currently in development.

Uses Schools that earn 5 stars will be Autonomous Schools. Schools that earn 1 star will receive differentiated supports. High Schools will attend School Improvement Planning professional development in order that SPF results can be used to increase achievement for all students. The main purpose of the SPF is for schools to learn who is earning uncommon results with similar student populations in order to learn from one another and increase achievement of all students.

Conclusion The School Performance Framework will help ensure all students in the Clark County School District are Ready By Exit. Q&A following “Understanding the School Performance Framework” presentation