# The New York State Accountability System: Simplified Emma Klimek April 16, 2009.

## Presentation on theme: "The New York State Accountability System: Simplified Emma Klimek April 16, 2009."— Presentation transcript:

The New York State Accountability System: Simplified Emma Klimek April 16, 2009

Emma Kimek 20092 Agenda 8:30-9:30: Participation and Performance 9:30-10:30: Effective Measureable Objective, State Standards, Safe Harbor 10:30-10:45: Break 10:45-11:30-Secondary School Accountability

Emma Kimek 20093 Why Learn About Accountability? You are the mentor for the high school, middle school and elementary schools which have not made AYP for participation, performance and graduation rate. What would you do next to help the principals?

Emma Kimek 20094 Adequate Yearly Progress Participation ELA, Math, Third Indicator Performance ELA, Math, Third Indicator 2 Year Rule

Emma Kimek 20095 Participation Criterion

Emma Kimek 20096 Participation Criterion Elementary/Middle Level 40 or more students 95% participation 80% for science

Emma Kimek 20097 Participation Criterion Secondary Level 40 or more 12 th grade students with valid Regents score or alternative, RCT or NYSAA

Emma Kimek 20098 “Safety Net” for Participation YearEnrollmentTestedRate Current605693% Previous757397% Weighted Average Calculation13512996% If less than 40 students in one year, weighted calculation for 2 years If less than 95%, then weighted calculation for 2 years

Emma Kimek 20099 Medically Excused 3-8 students Absent entire testing period Documentation required

Emma Kimek 200910 Activity Calculating participation for small groups Or Didn’t make 95%

Emma Kimek 200911 Performance Criterion: Performance Indices

Emma Kimek 200912 Levels of Student Achievement Performance Index (PI) Level 1 = Basic Level 2 = Basic Proficient Level 3 = Proficient Level 4 = Advanced

Emma Kimek 200913 Calculation of the Performance Index (PI) 3-8 Value from 0-200 Number of continuously enrolled tested students scoring at Levels 2, 3, and 4 + the number scoring at Levels 3 and 4 ÷ number of continuously enrolled tested students  100 PI = [(Level 2+Level 3+Level 4+Level 3+Level 4) ÷ number of cont. enrolled]  100

Emma Kimek 200914 Activity Calculating Performance Index in Grades 3-8

Emma Kimek 200915 Number of Test Number Students at Levels Grade of Students 1 2 3 4 33512 710 6 443 3 62014 530 61010 4

Emma Kimek 200916 Answer PI = [(23+40+24+40+24) ÷ 108]  100 = 140 Note: The methodology is the same regardless of how many grade levels (3-8) a school serves.

Emma Kimek 200917 Assessments for Performance 3-8 AssessmentStudents Eligible NYSTP ELA, Math, Science All Students NYSAASeverely disabled students

Emma Kimek 200918 Assessments at the Secondary Level AssessmentEligibleScore rangesPerformance Levels Regents Exams All students0-54 55-64 65-84 85-100 12341234 RCTStudents with Disabilities Fail Pass 1212

Emma Kimek 200919 AssessmentEligibleScore Ranges Performance Levels Approved Alternatives All StudentsPass3 NYSAAStudents with Severe Disabilities 1-4 Highest score is counted; if no score then counted as level 1

Emma Kimek 200920  Effective AMOs  State Standards  Safe Harbor  Progress Targets Performance Criteria

Emma Kimek 200921 Performance Criterion ELA MATH SCIENCE For ELA and Math: Performance Index of group =>Effective Annual Measurable Objective OR Make Safe Harbor (group must qualify on third indicator) For Science and Graduation: Performance Index of group => State Standard OR Meet Progress Target

Emma Kimek 200922 An Effective AMO is the lowest PI not to be considered significantly different from the AMO Effective AMOs Refer to chart

Emma Kimek 200923 Confidence Intervals Were Used to Determine Effective AMOs Annual Measurable Objective

Emma Kimek 200924 Safe Harbor for ELA and Math Safe Harbor Target = {Previous Year’s PI} + [(200 – {Previous Year’s PI})  0.10]

Emma Kimek 200925 Activity In the green section, enter “previous year’s PI”

Emma Kimek 200926 Qualifying for Safe Harbor in ELA and Math (for the group) Grades 3-8 Must equal or exceed the state standard in Science or the progress target Secondary Must equal or exceed state standard for graduation rate or progress target Local or Regents diploma by August 31 of the 4th year after entering grade nine

Emma Kimek 200927 34-Point Rule for Students with Disabilities All schools: if only SWD, then 34 points added and must equal AMO not the Effective AMO

Emma Kimek 200928 Former Limited English Proficient (LEP) Students LEP <= 30 then former LEP

Emma Kimek 200929 Graduation Rate Calculation Number of graduation-rate cohort members who graduated with a local or Regents diploma _________________________________________ Number of graduation-rate cohort members Then, multiplying the result by 100. For example: Graduation-rate cohort members = 178 Graduation-rate cohort members with local or Regents diplomas = 146 Graduation rate = (146  178)  100 = 82.02247 or 82%

Emma Kimek 200930 Making Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)

Emma Kimek 200931 Participation Rate Made Participation Rate Didn’t make Participation Rate but average with Previous year qualifies

Emma Kimek 200932 Performance Must Make AYP for ELA or Math For each NCLB group Must Make AYP for Science or Graduation Rate (all students only)

Emma Kimek 200933 Safe Harbor PI must be equal to Or greater than The Safe Harbor Target Must qualify for the specific group on the science or graduation rate measure

Determining State and Federal Accountability Status General Rules

Emma Kimek 200935 School-Level Accountability  Fail to make AYP for two years  Third year failure to make AYP, move to next level  If achieving AYP for one year, then remains at present status  To be removed from status the school must make AYP for two consecutive years

Emma Kimek 200936  All students  Two year rule  District can be identified even if no school is identified District-Level Accountability

Emma Kimek 200937 Determining School State Status Years of Failure to Make AYP in a Subject and Grade Status 1Good Standing 2*School Requiring Academic Progress (SRAP) — Year 1 3SRAP — Year 2 4SRAP — Year 3 5SRAP — Year 4 6SRAP — Year 5 *A school must fail to make AYP for two consecutive years to be placed in improvement status. A school that makes AYP for two consecutive years is removed from improvement status for the subject and grade in which it was identified.

Emma Kimek 200938 Determining District State Status Years of Failure to Make AYP in a Subject and Grade Status 1Good Standing 2*District Requiring Academic Progress (DRAP) — Year 1 3DRAP — Year 2 4DRAP — Year 3 5DRAP — Year 4 6DRAP — Year 5 *A district must fail to make AYP for two consecutive years to be placed in improvement status. A district that makes AYP for two consecutive years is removed from improvement status for the measure in which it was identified.

Emma Kimek 200939 Determining School Federal Status Years of Failure Under Title I to Make AYP in a Subject and Grade Status 1Good Standing 2*School in Need of Improvement (SINI) — Year 1 3School in Need of Improvement (SINI) — Year 2 4Corrective Action 5Planning for Restructuring 6Restructuring *A school must fail to make AYP for two consecutive years to be placed in improvement status. A school that makes AYP for two consecutive years is removed from improvement status for the subject and grade in which it was identified.

Emma Kimek 200940 Determining District Federal Status Years of Failure Under Title I to Make AYP in a Subject and Grade Status 1Good Standing 2*District in Need of Improvement (DINI) — Year 1 3DINI — Year 2 4DINI — Year 3 5DINI — Year 4 6 *A district must fail to make AYP for two consecutive years to be placed in improvement status. A district that makes AYP for two consecutive years is removed from improvement status for the measure in which it was identified.

Emma Kimek 200941 Secondary-Level Accountability and Graduation-Rate (Total) Cohorts

Emma Kimek 200942 Guide to Accountability Cohorts High schools are accountable for three areas:  English and mathematics performance;  English and mathematics participation; and  graduation rate. A different group of students is measured in each of these areas. The cohort used to measure English and mathematics performance was redefined beginning with the 2002 cohort (class of 2006); the cohort used to measure graduation rate was redefined beginning with the 2003 (class of 2007) cohort.

Emma Kimek 200943 2007-08 High School Accountability *Twelfth graders are students whose last reported grade between July 1 and June 30 of the academic reporting year (e.g., between July 1, 2007 and June 30, 2008 for the 2007-08 academic reporting year) in the Student Information Repository System is grade 12.

Emma Kimek 200944 2004 Accountability Cohort Definition The 2004 accountability cohort consists of all students, regardless of their current grade status, who were enrolled in the school on October 3, 2007 (BEDS day) and met one of the following conditions:  first entered grade 9 (anywhere) during the 2004–05 school year (July 1, 2004 through June 30, 2005); or  in the case of ungraded students with disabilities, reached their seventeenth birthday during the 2004–05 school year.

Emma Kimek 200945 2004 Accountability Cohort Definition (continued) The State will exclude the following students when reporting data on the 2004 accountability cohort: Left district Enrolled GED

Emma Kimek 200946 In the Student Information Repository System, districts must provide the following information for students who transfer to approved GED programs during the 2005-06 and later school years (as defined in CR 100.7):  The ending reason on the enrollment record for the high school must be transferred to an AHSEP or HSEP program.  There must be a subsequent ASEPP/HSEPP enrollment that includes a service provider code for an NYSED-approved AHSEP or HSEP program. Transfers to GED

Emma Kimek 200947  If the student is not enrolled in the AHSEP or HSEP program on June 30, 2008, the ending date and reason must be provided.  To be considered still enrolled, the student must have been in attendance at least once during the last 20 days of the program or have excused absences for that period. Transfers to GED (continued)

Emma Kimek 200948 2003 Graduation-Rate (Total) Cohort Definition The 2003 graduation-rate (total) cohort consists of all students as of June 30, 2007, regardless of their current grade status, who:  first entered grade 9 (anywhere) during the 2003–04 school year (July 1, 2003 through June 30, 2004); or  in the case of ungraded students with disabilities, reached their seventeenth birthday during the 2003–04 school year AND whose last enrollment in the school was 5 months or longer (excluding July and August) or, whose last enrollment was less than 5 months but who had a prior enrollment in this school or district between July 1, 2003 and June 30, 2007 that was 5 months or more.

Emma Kimek 200949 When reporting data on the 2003 total cohort, the State will exclude students whose last enrollment record indicated that they:  transferred to another district or nonpublic school (excluded from the district graduation-rate cohort) or criminal justice facility; or  left the U.S. and its territories; or  died. 2003 Graduation-Rate (Total) Cohort Definition (continued)

Emma Kimek 200950 2003 Graduation-Rate Activity 1 SchoolBeginning Enrollment Date Ending Enrollment Date School A9/1/036/30/07 Student 1 Is student 1 included in School A’s graduation rate?

Emma Kimek 200951 2003 Graduation-Rate Activity 2 Student 2 SchoolBeginning Enrollment Date Ending Enrollment Date School A9/1/0311/30/03 School B12/1/036/30/07 Which school is this student a graduation rate cohort member?

Emma Kimek 200952 2003 Graduation-Rate Activity 3 SchoolBeginning Enrollment Date Ending Enrollment Date School A9/1/036/30/04 School B7/1/049/30/05 School A10/1/055/30/07 School B5/31/076/30/07 Student 3 Which school is this student a member of the graduation rate cohort?

Emma Kimek 200953 2003 Graduation-Rate Activity 4 SchoolBeginning Enrollment Date Ending Enrollment Date School A9/1/036/30/04 School B7/1/049/30/04 School A10/1/045/30/07 School B5/31/076/30/07 School A and School B are in different districts. Student 4 Which cohort does this student belong to?

Discuss What is the implication of having students attend GED for Performance and Graduation rate?

Emma Kimek 200955 Accountability for Limited English Proficient Students

Emma Kimek 200956 Limited English Proficient (LEP) Students  All LEP students :NYSESLAT  LEP students in 3 - 8 enrolled in U.S. schools (not including Puerto Rico) < than 1 year use NYSESLAT for participation.  NYSESLAT not used for performance  All students in US> 1 year, must take NYSTP in ELA

Emma Kimek 200957 Accountability for Students with Disabilities

Emma Kimek 200958 New York State Alternate Assessment (NYSAA) NYSSA students’ performance same as NYSTP Cannot exceed 1 percent; except by petition

Emma Kimek 200959 Accountability for Schools with Special Circumstances

Emma Kimek 200960 Small schools and districts Unusual grade configurations (9,10,11 and no 12) Schools with grades below grade 3 Unique schools Special Circumstances

Emma Kimek 200961 Activity You are the mentor for the high school, middle school and elementary schools which have not made AYP for participation, performance and graduation rate. What would you do next to help the principals?

What’s Next?

Emma Kimek 200963 Proposed Phases and Categories of School Improvement 2009-2010 Intensity of Interventions FOCUSED More than one accountability measures OR more than one student group within an accountability measure but not the ALL student group BASIC One accountability measure and one student group but not the ALL student group COMPREHENSIVE One or more accountability measures AND the ALL student group or all subgroups Improvement Corrective Action Restructuring FOCUSED One or more accountability measures OR more than one student group within an accountability measure but not the ALL student group COMPREHENSIVE One or more accountability measures AND the ALL student group FOCUSED One or more accountability measures OR more than one student group within an accountability measure but not the ALL student group COMPREHENSIVE One or more accountability measures AND the ALL student group SURR Identified based on the ALL student group and farthest from State Standards and most in need of improvement The intensity of interventions increases as the categories progress through the phases.

Emma Kimek 200964 Phase Diagnostic Differentiated Accountability Model Category CORRECTIVE ACTIONIMPROVEMENTRESTRUCTURING CURRICULUM AUDITSCHOOL QUALITY REVIEW ASSIGNMENT OF Joint Intervention Team and Distinguished Educator FOCUSEDCOMPBASICFOCUSEDCOMPREHENSIVEFOCUSEDCOMP SURR Intensity of Intervention FAILED AYP 2 YEARS Plan/Intervention CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN & IMPLEMENTATION OF CURRICULUM AUDIT IMPROVEMENT PLAN CREATE AND IMPLEMENT External personnel to revise and assist school implement the most rigorous plan or, as necessary, PHASE-OUT /CLOSURE Oversight & Support SED provides TA to districts: sustaining greater latitude and more responsibility for addressing schools SED empowers districts: gives them the support and assistance necessary to take primary responsibility for developing and implementing improvement strategies SED & its agents work in direct partnership with the district

School Report Cards

Emma Kimek 200966  The New York State Report Card, contact the School Report Card Coordinator at rptcard@mail.nysed.gov  New York State assessments, go to the Office of State Assessment web site at www.emsc.nysed.gov/osa  Federal No Child Left Behind legislation, go to the United States Department of Education web site at www.ed.gov  Data collection and reporting for New York State, go to the Information and Reporting Services web site at www.emsc.nysed.gov/irts or contact the office at (518) 474- 7965  Accountability, contact Ira Schwartz at ischwart@mail.nysed.gov or (718) 722-2796 Whom to Contact for Further Information

Download ppt "The New York State Accountability System: Simplified Emma Klimek April 16, 2009."

Similar presentations