Department of Research and Planning November 14, 2011.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Understanding Accountability Reports. Where Do I Find These Reports? Counselor Principal School Improvement Specialist System Testing Coordinator State.
Advertisements

‘No Child Left Behind’ Loudoun County Public Schools Department of Instruction.
The Evolution of the Virginia School Report Card Board of Education School & Division Accountability Committee February 25, 2015.
Franklin Public Schools MCAS Presentation November 27, 2012 Joyce Edwards Director of Instructional Services.
Data Analysis State Accountability. Data Analysis (What) Needs Assessment (Why ) Improvement Plan (How) Implement and Monitor.
2013 State Accountability System Allen ISD. State Accountability under TAKS program:  Four Ratings: Exemplary, Recognized, Academically Acceptable, Academically.
District Accountability Update May February 2007.
1 Prepared by: Research Services and Student Assessment & School Performance School Accountability in Florida: Grading Schools and Measuring Adequate Yearly.
N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND Testing Requirements of NCLB test annually in reading and mathematics in grades 3-8 test at least once in reading and mathematics.
Nevada Transitioning from measuring status and reporting AYP, to measuring growth and reporting on School Performance.
MINNEAPOLIS PUBLIC SCHOOLS. Instructional Core Adapted from Harvard University PELP Framework.
Delaware’s Accountability Plan for Schools, Districts and the State Delaware Department of Education 6/23/04.
Djole Hinic Danielle Stokes Achievement and Behavior Data for Elementary Schools.
School Progress Index 2012 Results Mary Gable- Assistant State Superintendent Division of Academic Policy Carolyn Wood - Assistant State Superintendent.
Introduction to Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Michigan Department of Education Office of Psychometrics, Accountability, Research, & Evaluation Summer.
KCCT Kentucky’s Commonwealth Accountability Testing System Overview of 2008 Regional KPR.
Springfield Public Schools Adequate Yearly Progress 2010 Overview.
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.
MARSHALL PUBLIC SCHOOLS STATE ACCOUNTABILITY RESULTS Multiple Measurement Rating (MMR) – Initial Designation.
Suffolk Public Schools School Board August 9, 2012.
1 Paul Tuss, Ph.D., Program Manager Sacramento Co. Office of Education August 17, 2009 California’s Integrated Accountability System.
Florida’s Implementation of NCLB John L. Winn Deputy Commissioner Florida Department of Education.
State and Federal Testing Accountability: Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Academic Performance Index (API) SAIT Training September 27, 2007.
A Closer Look at Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Michigan Department of Education Office of Educational Assessment and Accountability Paul Bielawski Conference.
School Performance Framework Sponsored by The Colorado Department of Education Summer 2010 Version 1.3.
1 Strategic Plan Baseline Data September 2004 Prince William County School Board October 6, 2004.
ESEA Flexibility: School Progress Index Overview Maryland Accountability Program Presentation 3 of 8.
Goal Setting Measures of Academic Progress, MAP, DesCartes: A Continuum of Learning, Partnering to help all kids learn, Power of Instructional Design,
What are the STAAR Performance Standards? Copyright 2013 by Region 7 Education Service Center. All rights reserved.
1 Watertown Public Schools Assessment Reports 2010 Ann Koufman-Frederick and Administrative Council School Committee Meetings Oct, Nov, Dec, 2010 Part.
1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA Modified by Dr. Teresa Cortez September 10, 2007.
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.
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.
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.
ESEA Federal Accountability System Overview 1. Federal Accountability System Adequate Yearly Progress – AYP defined by the Elementary and Secondary Education.
1 Getting Up to Speed on Value-Added - An Accountability Perspective Presentation by the Ohio Department of Education.
ADEQUATE YEARLY PROGRESS. Adequate Yearly Progress Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP), – Is part of the federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) – makes schools.
Montgomery County Public SchoolsWoodlin Elementary SchoolMontgomery County Public SchoolsWoodlin Elementary SchoolMontgomery County Public SchoolsWoodlin.
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 California’s Definition of Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) July 2003.
1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA Modified by Dr. Teresa Cortez January 2010.
School and District Accountability Reports Implementing No Child Left Behind (NCLB) The New York State Education Department March 2004.
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.
Kentucky’s New Assessment and Accountability System What to Expect for the First Release of Data.
Standardized Testing EDUC 307. Standardized test a test in which all the questions, format, instructions, scoring, and reporting of scores are the same.
Department of Accountability: “Anyone can measure the rain; we build arks.” Assessment Update: Preliminary Results Department of Accountability.
Public School Accountability System. Uses multiple indicators for broad picture of overall performance Uses multiple indicators for broad picture of overall.
Arizona LEARNS: Overview of the Achievement Profiles.
1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA Modified by Dr. Teresa Cortez September 1, 2008.
1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA May 2003 Modified by Dr. Teresa Cortez for Riverside Feeder Data Days February.
Anderson School Accreditation We commit to continuous growth and improvement by  Creating a culture for learning by working together  Providing.
NDE State of the Schools Adequate Yearly Progress Persistently Lowest Achieving Schools Nebraska Performance Accountability System Board of Education.
Adequate Yearly Progress [Our School District]
Determining AYP What’s New Step-by-Step Guide September 29, 2004.
Metropolitan Nashville Public Schools
Student Growth Measurements and Accountability
IT’S ALL ABOUT GROWTH!. Hemet Unified School District’s Use of Measures of Academic Progress (MAP)
Adequate Yearly Progress [Our School District]
Framework for a Next-Generation Accountability System
Specifications Used for School Identification Under ESSA in
Framework for a Next-Generation Accountability System
Framework for a Next-Generation Accountability System
Framework for a Next-Generation Accountability System
Dixon Elementary # Dixonscholars
History of No Child Left Behind (NCLB)
Presentation transcript:

Department of Research and Planning November 14, 2011

Performance Assessment Measures

Each year public schools earn accountability ratings for:  State Accreditation  NCLB-Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)

Standards of Accreditation  Student performance in one year provides the basis for a school’s state accreditation rating the following year.  All tests within a content area are combined to create a pass rate for each of four core content areas—language arts, math, social studies, science. A three year calculation will be used if needed.

Accreditation calculation example  Pass rates are not an average, but are based upon a sum of those who passed the tests divided by the sum of those who took the tests. English Grade 3 Reading Grade 4 Reading Grade 5 Reading Grade 5 Writing English Subtotal Remed. Recov. English Sub-Total w/RRVGLAVAAP English Total Pass Rate Percent Passing %73.08%91.49%75.00% 77.23% %77.93% %78.59% # Passing # Taking the Test

AYP Performance Framework  Multiple targets must be met for divisions and schools to make AYP. Targets are based upon Reading (required performance measure) Math (required performance measure) Other academic indicator (selected by the elementary and middle school) ○ Writing, history, science, attendance Other academic indicator (required for high schools) ○ Graduation rate Participation in the assessment program

AYP Targets Test Year Reading % Prof. Math % Prof. Other Ind.Part.Attend.Grad. Rate

AYP Performance Framework  Schools and seven groups must meet performance and participation AYP targets in reading and math. The school as a whole must meet the target for the other academic indicator.  If there are less than 50 in a group, the participation and performance requirements do not apply.

AYP Performance Framework  NCLB – Safe Harbor If schools or groups do not meet performance targets and do meet participation targets, safe harbor calculations can be used. If schools or groups do not meet performance targets and do meet participation targets, safe harbor calculations can be used. Safe harbor applies to the group that does not meet the minimum performance target but has a 10% or greater reduction in the failure rate. When applied, Safe Harbor considers the values for the “other academic indicator” for that group. Safe harbor applies to the group that does not meet the minimum performance target but has a 10% or greater reduction in the failure rate. When applied, Safe Harbor considers the values for the “other academic indicator” for that group. Schools using writing, history or science must achieve a 70% pass rate for the group in question. Schools using writing, history or science must achieve a 70% pass rate for the group in question. Schools using attendance must have at least a 94% attendance rate for the group in question. Schools using attendance must have at least a 94% attendance rate for the group in question. High Schools must show an increase in graduation rate for the group in question. High Schools must show an increase in graduation rate for the group in question.

AYP Participation Example

AYP Performance Example SAFE HARBOR

AYP Performance Example

Analyzing SOL Data School Level Data Grade Level Data Teacher Data Student Data

Reporting Category Scores  The scaled score for a reporting category uses a different scale from the one used to report the total test score. Ranges from 0 – 50.  Reporting category data is provided to schools in the 34 report. Both test and teacher information is provided.

34 Report The 34 Report must be used in conjunction with the SOL Blueprints! 23%77%

SPBQ Report  The Student Performance by Question Report is available for each test and student.  Use these reports to identify SOL strands where: At least 70% or fewer students responded correctly, or The school’s performance is 10 percentage points below the division.

SPBQ Report

SOL Data Analysis Activity

Teacher Report Achievement Status and Growth (ASG) Summary

2011 Normative Data Reference Status Norms of RIT Scores

Cut Scores for Remediation -Reading

Cut Scores for Remediation - Math

1. Draw a star beside all RIT scores that are within 3 points of the grade-level mean. (Mean = 207, ) On grade level 2. Go to percentile (%ile) column, draw a line at the 96 th percentile. Gifted and talented 3. Draw a line at the RTI cut scores to identify remediation students (<193) 4. In the summary data, highlight the highest standard deviation. Largest academic diversity 5. Draw a box around the highest and lowest median RIT. Area of strength, area of weakness

FALL ASG REPORT 1. What are some possible reasons that the projections are different for the students? 2. How might you begin to talk with your students about the differences? 3. What impact might this have on the teachers? 4. How can teachers help parents understand the concept of academic growth? Spring ASG REPORT 1. Which students exceeded the growth projection by the highest value? 2. Which student was the furthest from meeting his/her growth projection? 3. Did any student exactly meet their growth projection? 4. What is the percentage of students who met or exceeded their Target RIT? 5. How might you use this report?