School Board of Broward County Board Workshop – February 12, Substantive Policy Considerations for Table of Contents SectionItemPages 1.Power Point Presentation Attachment A: Policy Attachment B: Campbell, Attachment C: Carifio & Carey,

2 School Board of Broward County Board Workshop – February 12, 2013 What Did We Learn Today… …AND How Do You Know?

School Board of Broward County Board Workshop – February 12, Substantive Policy Considerations for

Stakeholder Input 4 Committee Meetings & Workgroups October 1, 2012 October 30, 2012 November 5, 2012 November 19, 2012 December 3, 2012 December 10, 2012 January 9, 2013 February 4, 2013 Public Invitation for Review Tuesday, January 29 th 7:00 pm – 8:30 pm KCW Public Invitation for Review Tuesday, January 29 th 7:00 pm – 8:30 pm KCW Public Wiki

The Power of the “F” 5 F F A B C D A B C D

F percentage range F percentage range SUGGESTED BY COMMITTEE See Pages 12, 20, 29 of Policy CURRENT PRACTICE

The Power of the “F” Pros (of Committee Recommendation) The percentage range for “F” will be 10 percentage points (similar to A, B, C, D) Minimizes “no chance for success” grading scenarios in classrooms Grading practice aligns to current research recommendations Discourages use of “grades as punishment” Helps to separate “learning assessment ” from “behavior and attitude” Teachers have the perrogative to assign “incompletes” until the student turns in the work. 7 Cons (of Committee Recommendation) Requires teacher and parent education ETS programming changes required No evidentiary research showing positive impact on student outcome (at this time) Can be perceived as interfering with a teacher’s professional discretion as to determine grades Can be perceived as allowing students to avoid taking responsibility for their learning Can be perceived as “unfair” to students who put forth effort to attain high levels of achievement

The Power of the “F” 8 How’s that workin’ for you? The BCPS dropout rate increased from 1.6 percent in to 2.0 percent in

The Power of the “F” 9 If a 60 is passing, which students are passing? Which students should be passing? Student =58 Student =58 Student =60

Continue to Convert to Points Before Averaging Exams or Eliminate the Point Conversion of Calculating Report Card Grades 10

Continue to Convert to Points Before Averaging Exams or Eliminate the Point Conversion of Calculating Report Card Grades Report card will continue to reflect letter grades calculated by the current method of converting percentages to points and then averaging SUGGESTED BY COMMITTEE 11 Report cards, term grades, and final grades will reflect the average percentage earned in a course CURRENT PRACTICE

Continue to Convert to Points Before Averaging Exams or Eliminate the Point Conversion of Calculating Report Card Grades 12 Calculating with Points Grade before exam: Exam can raise the grade to: Exam can lower the grade to: AAB BBB CBC DCD FDF Calculating with Percentages Grade before exam: Exam can raise the grade to: Exam can lower the grade to: AAD BAD CBF DCF FDF CURRENT PRACTICE

Pros (of Committee Recommendation) Grade reporting will be consistent with past practice of letter grades that translate into a 4-point scale No ETS changes required A shift in grading practices with the shift to competency-based learning is on the horizon – too many changes may be confusing and the current change may be undone Cons (of Committee Recommendation) Exams have little power to help a student’s grades. A “B” student cannot raise his grade to an “A” by scoring well on the exam Reported grades will not be as accurate a reflection of student performance as is possible Incremental improvements or declines in student performance will not be communicated The current reporting of letter grades does not allow for sufficient impact of exam grades Continue to Convert to Points Before Averaging Exams or Eliminate the Point Conversion of Calculating Report Card Grades 13

Impact of High School Courses Taken in Middle Grades on the High School Weighted GPA Before : High School courses taken in middle school impact only the “unweighted gpa” used by the State and Post-secondary Institutions Effective July, 2012 : High School courses taken in middle school impact the “weighted gpa” used locally only to determine class rank 14 Board Member Request: Revisit the “gpa” impact of high school courses taken by students in middle school.

Impact of High School Courses Taken in Middle Grades on the High School Weighted GPA Keep the July 2012 change in place. High school courses taken in the middle grades impact the gpa for all students equally, regardless of grade SUGGESTED BY COMMITTEE 15 Return to “before” where only “unweighted gpa” is impacted for students in middle grades taking high school courses CURRENT PRACTICE

Impact of High School Courses Taken in Middle Grades on the High School Weighted GPA 16 Pros Consistency with previous ruling Equity of impact on students regardless of grade level No ETS changes required Cons For middle grade students who do not want to risk impacting their weighted gpa (class rank), the selection of high school courses available to them may be limited

Clarify ACCEL Language 17 Academically Challenging Curriculum to Enhance Learning (ACCEL) F.S , Effective July, 2012

Clarify ACCEL Language Ensure statutory alignment to ACCEL legislation by providing more specific language with regard to ACCEL opportunities REQUIRED 18 Current policy is too general and primarily addresses virtual-ed acceleration See Pages 11, 17, 27 of Policy

SAMPLE REQUIRED LANGUAGE Clarify ACCEL Language 19 Mid- or full-year promotion may occur within the school at the principal’s discretion in accordance with the procedural guidelines established by the district. When a parent requests such acceleration, the principal may implement an academic contract. Failure of the student to meet the conditions of the contract may result in reassigned of the student to the previous grade level. A student may be mid-year promoted only when the student has …..(varies for elementary and middle school levels) ACCEL options are offered to all students, K-12, to provide academically challenging curriculum or accelerated instruction. Each school offers: Whole-grade and midyear promotion Subject-matter acceleration Virtual instruction in higher-grade level subjects Additional ACCEL options may include, but are not limited to, the following: Enriched science, technology, engineering, and STEM coursework Enrichment programs Flexible grouping Advanced academic courses Combined classes Self-paced instruction Curriculum compacting Advanced-content instruction Telescoping curriculum SAMPLE CURRENT LANGUAGE

20 Pros (of ACCEL Legislation) Language addresses mid-year, whole-grade, subject, and state credit-acceleration-program (CAP) options K-12 Allows for personalization and student acceleration of learning Provides a formalized process for student acceleration Provides student, parent, and school accountability Cons (of ACCEL Legislation) ACCEL options are challenging in light of class-size and budgetary constraints Virtual school acceleration can decrease a school’s FTE ACCEL related processes increase staff work load without additional funding support Clarify ACCEL Language

Broward County Public Schools The School Board of Broward County, Florida Laurie Rich Levinson, Chair Patricia Good, Vice Chair Robin Bartleman Donna P. Korn Ann Murray Katherine M. Leach Abby M. Freedman Dr. Rosalind Osgood Nora Rupert Robert W. Runcie, Superintendent of Schools 21