Montana’s statewide longitudinal data system Project Montana’s Statewide Longitudinal Data System (SLDS)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Alaska Accountability Adequate Yearly Progress January 2008, Updated.
Advertisements

School Accountability Ratings What Are Our District’s Accountability Ratings? What do they mean?
No Child Left Behind Act January 2002 Revision of Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) Education is a state and local responsibility Insure.
‘No Child Left Behind’ Loudoun County Public Schools Department of Instruction.
Elementary/Secondary Education Act (1965) “No Child Left Behind” (2002) Adequacy Committee February 6,2008.
Pitt County Schools Testing & Accountability The ABC’s of Public Education.
ALTERNATE PERFORMANCE BASED ASSESSMENT The Rubric for End of Course Assessments
Lodi Unified School District Accountability Progress Report (APR) & CAHSEE Results Update Prepared for the September 21, 2010 Board of Education.
School Report Cards For 2003–2004
Alaska’s New Accountability System for Schools 1.
Schools in Alert and Schools in Need of Improvement Summary of 2007 Statistics Prepared by NORMES, University of Arkansas Presented to the Joint Adequacy.
1 Prepared by: Research Services and Student Assessment & School Performance School Accountability in Florida: Grading Schools and Measuring Adequate Yearly.
1 Utah Performance Assessment System for Students U-PASS Accountability Plan Judy W. Park Assessment & Accountability Director Utah State Office of Education.
Flexibility in Determining AYP for Students with Disabilities Background Information—Slides 2—4 School Eligibility Criteria—Slide 5 Calculation of the.
Delaware’s Accountability Plan for Schools, Districts and the State Delaware Department of Education 6/23/04.
1 Prepared by: Student Assessment & School Performance School Accountability in Florida: Grading Schools and Measuring Adequate Yearly Progress.
Title III Accountability. Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives How well are English Learners achieving academically? How well are English Learners.
Introduction to Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Michigan Department of Education Office of Psychometrics, Accountability, Research, & Evaluation Summer.
Michigan’s Accountability Scorecards A Brief Introduction.
Arizona’s Federal Accountability System 2011 David McNeil Director of Assessment, Accountability and Research.
District Assessment & Accountability Data Board of Education Report September 6, 2011 Marsha A. Brown, Director III – Student Services State Testing and.
SCHOOL ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT ALBUQUERQUE PUBLIC SCHOOLS RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY DEPARTMENT.
Department of Research and Evaluation Santa Ana Unified School District 2011 CST API and AYP Elementary Presentation Version: Elementary.
Know the Rules Nancy E. Brito, NBCT, Accountability Specialist Department of Educational Data Warehouse, Accountability, and School Improvement
1 Paul Tuss, Ph.D., Program Manager Sacramento Co. Office of Education August 17, 2009 California’s Integrated Accountability System.
1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.
State and Federal Testing Accountability: Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Academic Performance Index (API) SAIT Training September 27, 2007.
CINNAMINSON TOWNSHIP PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 TEST SCORE PRESENTATION.
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) and Accountability Status Determinations.
1 Watertown Public Schools Assessment Reports 2010 Ann Koufman-Frederick and Administrative Council School Committee Meetings Oct, Nov, Dec, 2010 Part.
1 Up-date on Assessment in Connecticut Dr. Barbara Q. Beaudin, Associate Commissioner Division of Assessment and Accountability Chief, Bureau of Student.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Jack O’Connell, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Results of the 2005 National Assessment of Educational Progress.
1 Connecticut Mastery Test (CMT) Steve Martin, CMT Program Manager Bureau of Research, Evaluation, and Student Assessment Connecticut State Department.
Helping EMIS Coordinators prepare for the Local Report Card (LRC) Theresa Reid, EMIS Coordinator HCCA May 2004.
School Accountability in Delaware for the School Year August 3, 2005.
Lodi Unified School District Accountability Progress Report (APR) Results Update Prepared by the LUSD Assessment, Research & Evaluation Department.
Testing Coordinators: October 4, 2007 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) and Academic Performance Index (API)
Santa Ana Unified School District 2011 CST Enter School Name Version: Intermediate.
August 1, 2007 DELAWARE’S GROWTH MODEL FOR AYP DETERMINATIONS.
Adequate Yearly Progress The federal law requires all states to establish standards for accountability for all schools and districts in their states. The.
Michigan School Report Card Update Michigan Department of Education.
Capacity Development and School Reform Accountability The School District Of Palm Beach County Adequate Yearly Progress, Differentiated Accountability.
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for Special Populations Michigan Department of Education Office of Educational Assessment and Accountability Paul Bielawski.
PED School Grade Reports (with thanks to Valley High School) ACE August 3, 2012 Dr. Russ Romans District Accountability Manager.
ADEQUATE YEARLY PROGRESS. Adequate Yearly Progress Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP), – Is part of the federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) – makes schools.
Federal and State Student Accountability Data Update Testing Coordinators Meeting Local District 8 09/29/09 1.
1 Accountability Systems.  Do RFEPs count in the EL subgroup for API?  How many “points” is a proficient score worth?  Does a passing score on the.
No Child Left Behind Impact on Gwinnett County Public Schools’ Students and Schools.
1 Mississippi Statewide Accountability System Adequate Yearly Progress Model Improving Mississippi Schools Conference June 11-13, 2003 Mississippi Department.
MOBERLY PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT’S 2008 TERRA NOVA RESULTS FOR SPECIAL EDUCATION NANCY FLEMING DISTRICT TEST COORDINATOR MOBERLY.
Accountability Scorecards Top to Bottom Ranking February 2016.
School and District Accountability Reports Implementing No Child Left Behind (NCLB) The New York State Education Department March 2004.
University of Colorado at Boulder National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing Challenges for States and Schools in the No.
AYP and Report Card. Big Picture Objectives – Understand the purpose and role of AYP in Oregon Assessments. – Understand the purpose and role of the Report.
Including analysis and self-help tools for coordination with Section 618: Table 6.
Public School Accountability System. Uses multiple indicators for broad picture of overall performance Uses multiple indicators for broad picture of overall.
Updates on Oklahoma’s Accountability System Jennifer Stegman, Assistant Superintendent Karen Robertson, API Director Office of Accountability and Assessments.
Thank you for being willing to change the date of this meeting! Annabelle Low 7lbs 13oz.
NDE State of the Schools Adequate Yearly Progress Persistently Lowest Achieving Schools Nebraska Performance Accountability System Board of Education.
1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation June 2012 PRESENTATION as of 6/14/12.
Adequate Yearly Progress [Our School District]
Determining AYP What’s New Step-by-Step Guide September 29, 2004.
Academic Performance Index (API) and AYP
Metropolitan Nashville Public Schools
Illinois’ Accountability Workbook: Approved Changes in 2005
Adequate Yearly Progress [Our School District]
Specifications Used for School Identification Under ESSA in
Danvers Public Schools: Our Story
Solving the Riddle That Is APR Indicator 3
Starting Community Conversations
Presentation transcript:

Montana’s statewide longitudinal data system Project Montana’s Statewide Longitudinal Data System (SLDS)

Student Achievement Fact Data Available Today MontCAS (Criterion-referenced Test) Results Adequate Yearly Progress Iowa Test of Basic Skills English Language Proficiency Assessment Results National Assessment of Educational Progress General Educational Development

Student Achievement Dimension Data Available Today AYP Factors AYP Indicators AYP Status AYP Subgroup Calendar Collection Content Area ELP Test Enrollment GED Courses Completed GED Examinee GED Examinee History GED Option GED Preparation GED Test GED Testing Reason Grade Level Jurisdiction NAEP Group Percentile Performance Level Reason for Leaving School Scaled Score School Agency School Population Special Education Student Student Career Education Student Characteristics Student Economic Disadvantage Student English Proficiency Student Program Eligibility Student Program Participation Student Title I Participation Test Accommodation Test Form Test Status

Bus Matrix Dimensions o Assessment Grade Level o Calendar o Content Area o Enrollment o Percentile o Performance Level o Scaled Score o School Agency o School Population o Special Education o Student o Student Career Education o Student Characteristics o Student Economic Disadvantaged o Student English Proficiency o Student Grade Level o Student Program Eligibility o Student Program Participation o Student Title I Participation o Test Accommodation o Test Status MontCAS (CRT) Key Indicators (Measures) o CRT Record Count o % At or Above Proficient o Met Count o % Met o Not Met Count o % Not Met o Assessed Count o % Assessed o Not Assessed Count o % Not Assessed o Alternate Assessed Count o % Alternate Assessed o Average Scaled Score o Median Scaled Score by School o Median Scaled Score by Student o Novice # o Novice % o Nearing Proficiency # o Nearing Proficiency % o Proficient # o Proficient % o Advanced # o Advanced % o Accommodation # o Accommodation % o Below Basic %

Bus Matrix Dimensions o Assessment Grade Level o AYP Factors o AYP Indicators o AYP Status o AYP Subgroup o Calendar o Content Area o School Agency o Student Grade Level Accountability (AYP) Key Indicators (Measures) o Met Math o Met Reading o Overall Met Count # o Overall Met % o Overall Met w/ Safe Harbor # o Overall Met w/ Confidence Interval # o Not Met Math o Not Met Reading o Overall Not Met # o Overall Not Met % o Watch List # o Improvement # o Corrective Action # o Restructuring # o Holding # o Participation Rate o Percent Advanced o Percent At or Above Proficient o Percent Below Proficient o Percent Nearing Proficient o Percent Novice o Percent Proficient o Rate to Use o Average Used o Count Advanced o Count At or Above Proficient

Bus Matrix Dimensions Accountability (AYP) (continued) Key Indicators (Measures) o State Accountability Record Count o School Accountability Record Count o District Accountability Record Count o Count Below Proficient o Count Nearing Proficient o Count Novice o Count Proficient o Count Total o Enrollment Count o Participant Count o Participant Total Count o 3 Year At or Above Proficient Count o Three Year Average o Three Year Total Count o Two Year At or Above Proficient Count o Two Year Average o Two Year Total Count o Upper Confidence Interval Bound o With 99% Confidence Interval o Count Absent o Count Present o Dropout Rate o Graduation Rate o Count Grade 9, 10, 11, 12 Dropouts o Count Graduates o Count Non Standard Graduates o Count Other High School Completers o Total Dropouts Plus Graduates o Assessment Grade Level o AYP Factors o AYP Indicators o AYP Status o AYP Subgroup o Calendar o Content Area o School Agency o Student Grade Level

Bus Matrix Dimensions o Assessment Grade Level o Calendar o Content Area o ELP Test o Enrollment o Percentile o Performance Level o Scaled Score o School Agency o Special Education o Student o Student Career Education o Student Characteristics o Student Economic Disadvantaged o Student English Proficiency o Student Grade Level o Student Program Eligibility o Student Program Participation o Student Title I Participation o Test Accommodation o Test Form o Test Status English Language Proficiency Assessment Key Indicators (Measures) o Average Raw Score o Average Scaled Score o Montana Proficient o Proficiency Level o ELP Assessment Count o Raw Item Responses o Confidence High Score o Confidence Low Score o Raw Score o Scaled Score o Novice # o Novice % o Nearing Proficiency # o Nearing Proficiency % o Proficient # o Proficient % o Advanced # o Advanced % o Accommodation # o Accommodation % o Below Basic %

Bus Matrix Dimensions o Calendar o Courses Completed o GED Examinee o GED Examinee History o GED Option o GED Preparation o GED Test o GED Testing Reason o Reason for Leaving School o Student Characteristics GED Assessment Key Indicators (Measures) o Average Essay Score o Average Raw Score o Average Reading Score 1 o Average Reading Score 2 o Average Reading Score 3 o Average Standard Score o Percentile Rank o GED Assessment Count o Essay Score o Raw Score o Reading Score 1 o Reading Score 2 o Reading Score 3 o Standard Score

Bus Matrix Dimensions o Calendar o Content Area o Scaled Score o School Agency o Special Education o Student Career Education o Student Characteristics o Student Economic Disadvantaged o Student English Proficiency o Student Grade Level o Student Program Participation o Student Title I Participation o Test Status Iowa Test of Basic Skills Assessment Key Indicators (Measures) o Average Standard Score o Scaled Score o ITBS Count

Bus Matrix Dimensions o Assessment Grade Level o Calendar o Content Area o Jurisdiction o NAEP Group o Performance Level o Percentile o Scaled Score National Assessment of Educational Progress Key Indicators (Measures) o Average Scaled Score o Percent Tested o Percent Tested Standard Error o Scaled Score Confidence Interval Unit o Scaled Score Percentile o Scaled Score Standard Error o Standard Error Percentile o NAEP Percentile Count o Scaled Score o Performance Level Percentage o Performance Level Standard Error o NAEP Performance Count

FURTHER QUESTIONS? CONTACT THE OPI HELP DESK: DOWNLOAD THE SLIDES HERE: Thank You!