1. 11/15/07 1 Career-Technical Education Accountability Ohio Department of Education Sharon Enright Dave Ozvat Erica Cheyney Ohio School Improvement Institute November 15, 2007

2. 11/15/07 2 ac·count·a·bil·i·ty 1.the state of being accountable, liable or answerable 2.Education. a policy of holding schools and teachers accountable for students’ academic progress by linking such progress with funding for salaries, maintenance, etc.

3. 11/15/07 3 Grade levels you work with – High school? Middle school? Other? District type – City? Local? Exempted Village? JVSD?

4. 11/15/07 4 What Federal law guides CTE accountability? What students is CTE accountable for? What indicators of performance is CTE accountable for? What entity is accountable for CTE indicators of performance? How are performance targets determined? Are there sanctions for not meeting performance targets? If so, how does it work?

5. 11/15/07 5 Out with the Old Perkins III…

6. 11/15/07 6 In with the New Perkins IV (under construction)

7. 11/15/07 7 CTE Accountability

8. 11/15/07 8 Student Definitions CTE Participant CTE Concentrator NOTE: In Perkins IV, there is no longer a CTE Completer. When collecting follow-up data in FY2008, must follow up with CTE Concentrators who left secondary education in FY2007.

9. 11/15/07 9 Secondary CTE Participant A secondary student who has earned credit in one (1) or more courses in any career and technical education (CTE) workforce development program area.

10. 11/15/07 10 Secondary CTE Concentrator A secondary student who has completed a minimum of 50% of the high school credits allowed for a single career and technical education (CTE) workforce development program (e.g., health sciences or marketing), and has enrolled for additional credit at the secondary level. NOTE: Guidance provided

11. 11/15/07 11 Secondary Core Indicators of Performance Accountability begins in FY2008 for: Academic Achievement – Ohio’s NCLB assessments (OGT) –Reading (1S1) and –Mathematics (1S2) Cumulative passage – By the time CTE concentrators leave secondary education Graduation Rates (4S1) – NCLB calculations

12. 11/15/07 12 Secondary Core Indicators of Performance Accountability Begins in FY2009 for: Technical Skill Attainment (2S1) – Industry standards when possible Secondary School Completion (3S1) – (I) a diploma, (II) a GED, (III) a proficiency credential in conjunction with a diploma Placement in postsecondary, military or employment (5S1) Nontraditional Participation (6S1) and Completion (6S2)

13. 11/15/07 13 State Secondary Indicators of Performance (17) State Academic Achievement (3) – Reading, Mathematics, Science – State cumulative passage rates (Concentrators) On-time Academic Achievement (3) – Reading, Mathematics, Science – Comparable to State 10 th grade passage rates (Participants) Academic Assessment Retake Passage Rate (3) – Reading, Mathematics, Science – Of students who did not pass in 10 th grade, cumulative passage rate (Concentrators)

14. 11/15/07 14 State Adjusted Levels of Performance (Performance Targets) Academic Achievement – –FY2008 Reading (1S1) – 85.0% Mathematics (1S2) – 80.0% –FY2009 Reading (1S1) – 87.0% Mathematics (1S2) – 83.0% Student Graduation Rates (4S1) – Same as Ohio’s NCLB targets –FY2008 – 73.6% –FY2009 – 73.6%

15. 11/15/07 15 State Secondary Indicators of Performance (17) State Graduation Rate (1) – Calculated same as Core Indicator 4S1, State performance target (Concentrators) Dropout Rates (2) – Calculated on Participants and on Concentrators Technical Skill Assessment Participation Rate (1) – Percent of students assessed when State assessments available (Concentrators)

16. 11/15/07 16 State Secondary Indicators of Performance (17) Placement, Status Known (1) – Same as Perkins III State indicator (Concentrators) Placement, Postsecondary (1) – Same as Perkins III State indicator (Concentrators) Completion of Course Awarding Postsecondary Credit – Same as Tech Prep indicator (Concentrators) – FY2010 Industry Certificate or License – Same as Tech Prep indicator (Concentrators) – FY2010

17. 11/15/07 17 Performance Targets Perkins Core Indicators of Performance – –State must negotiate performance targets with USDE (with input of CTPDs) –CTPDs must negotiate performance targets with the State (ODE) State Indicators of Performance – –State must inform USDE of performance targets (with input of CTPDs) –Will CTPDs negotiate performance targets with the State? TBD Continuous improvement expected

18. 11/15/07 18 SANCTIONS Failure to Meet Performance Targets: Improvement Plans If at least 90% of performance target on any Perkins core indicator is not met: –Improvement plan must be developed Must contain analysis of disaggregated data Must address performance gaps –Improvement plan must be implemented State will provide technical assistance

19. 11/15/07 19 If… –Improvement plan is not implemented OR –Fails to make any improvement within a year after implementing plan OR –Fails to meet 90% of performance target 3 years in a row Then…Perkins funds may be withheld (fully or partially) –Withheld funds must be used to help students achieve higher performance Failure to Meet Performance Targets: Subsequent Action

20. 11/15/07 20 Dave Ozvat Erica Cheyney

21. 11/15/07 21 Questions – Using CTE Data for Improvement 1.Did the district meet the target for each performance indicator? 2.Which indicator will require the district to write an improvement plan? 3.Look at the disaggregated data. Which subgroups are not performing well? 4.What kind of strategies could be used to improve performance of these underperforming subgroups? 5.What are some of the challenges for a CTPD made up of multiple districts? What solutions could be put in place?

22. 11/15/07 22 Discussion & Questions on CTE Accountability