1. Developing System Incentives: Rewarding Schools and Districts June 18, 2010 Daria Hall Alissa Peltzman

2. The Contrast Between Current Accountability Systems and a College-and Career-Ready Vision

3. What Do Current High School Accountability Systems Value? 3 “Proficiency” on high school tests, which typically measure the knowledge and skills students should learn by early in high school Graduation rates, increasingly cohort graduation rates Other measures, such as attendance After-the-fact judgments, rather than indicators or progress Consequences, rather than incentives So what’s missing? Indicators of college and career readiness

4. The Problems with Today’s Systems 4 INDICATORS Stakeholders do not have access to critical information about college & career readiness. Accountability systems are not based on what it means to be college & career ready, nor are they based on what happens throughout high school. Accountability systems do not establish expectations for performance that reflect where we need our schools and students to be. Accountability goals are perceived as something to meet to avoid state interference rather than something meaningful to work toward.

5. Evolving Accountability Systems 5 Current Systems College and career readiness is peripheral Dominated by assessmentsRaise floor Same label to all low performing schools Drivenby consequences for failure Next Generation Systems College and career readiness is central Assessments part of broader array of indicators Raise floor & ceiling Low- performing schools differentiated & diagnosed Combines conse- quences with positive incentives & support

6. Accountability systems need to reflect the goal of college- and career readiness for all students. Readiness must become the central driver. Readiness should not be viewed as a fixed state. Indicators should measure whether students are on a path toward, are meeting, and are exceeding college & career readiness. Accountability should provide actionable information to that can help improve teaching and learning. Indicators should help schools now how they are progressing and suggest where they need to focus attention. A New Vision of Accountability 6

7. Indicators that Value College & Career Readiness 7 Along the way toward college and career readiness Meeting college and career readiness Exceeding college- and career readiness Course completion and success Timely credit accumulation Credit recovery Completion of college & career ready course of study Participation in AP, IB and dual enrollment Achievement Performance on aligned assessments early in high school Grades Meeting standards on anchor assessment Postsecondary remediation rates College-level performance on AP and/or IB exams Attainment Graduation Earning a college- and career-ready diploma Earning dual enrollment credits Application to and enrollment in postsecondary

8. Range of Uses for College & Career Ready Indicators 8 Core school and district accountability determinations: Reflect and value college and career readiness Statewide performance goals: Connection between goals and accountability determinations & Consistent and coherent signals about what is important Public reporting: Report cards provide one potentially meaningful mechanism Positive incentives and rewards: Recognize progress at all ends of the spectrum

9. The Baseline of a College- & Career-Ready High School Accountability System 9 INDICATORS Earning a college- and career-ready diploma Scoring college-ready on high school assessments Earning college credit while in high school Requiring remedial courses in college USES Publicly report Set performance goals Provide incentives to improve Factor into accountability formula

10. What about Federal Accountability? 10 Administration Priorities: “ Commitment to raising achievement and closing gaps Emphasis on college and career ready standards and assessments Additional high school indicators: graduation rates, college enrollment rates, college enrollment without remediation Incentives for high achievement, including financial rewards, participation in “communities of practice”, flexibility in use of funds, and competitive preference for funds Dramatic intervention in the lowest-performing schools

11. Big Questions for Federal Accountability Policies 11 What to do “in the meantime” until college-and career-ready standards and assessments are available and implemented How to support states and districts in the work of adopting these new tools

12. State Use of College- and Career- Ready Indicators Today

13. Percentage of High School Graduates Who Earn a College- And Career-Ready Diploma 13Source: State Annual School- level Public Reporting Statewide Performance Goals School-level Incentives Accountability Formula Alabama Arkansas Hawaii Indiana Louisiana Mississippi New York Ohio Texas Virginia

14. Percentage of High School Graduates Who Obtain a Readiness Score on a College & Career Ready High School Assessment 14Source: State Annual School- level Public Reporting Statewide Performance Goals School-level Incentives Accountability Formula California Florida Louisiana Michigan Minnesota New York Oklahoma Texas

15. Percentage of High School Graduates Who Earn College Credit While Still in High School 15Source: State Annual School- level Public Reporting Statewide Performance Goals School-level Incentives Accountability Formula Connecticut Florida Hawaii Indiana Kentucky Minnesota Ohio Oklahoma Texas Utah

16. Percentage of Incoming First-Year College Students Who Require Remediation 16Source: State Annual School- level Public Reporting Statewide Performance Goals School-level Incentives Accountability Formula Georgia Hawaii Indiana Kentucky Louisiana Missouri New Mexico Oklahoma Texas Wyoming

17. State Example: Louisiana Setting Statewide Performance Goals 17 Louisiana’s Board of Education adopted four college & career ready goals Example: Goal #2 / Increase Readiness for Post-Secondary Education Measure 2005-2006 Baseline 2009-2010 Target 2013-2014 Target % of students graduating with LA Core-4 Diploma 58.562.572.5 % of graduating class with ACT score of 18 or higher in English and 19 or higher in Math 46.151.158.1

18. State Example: Hawaii Meaningful Public Reporting 18For more information: http://www.p20hawaii.org/indicators_report.html Hawaii’s College & Career Indicators Report School-level data Organized by indicators to reflect exceeding, meeting and approaching college & career readiness Includes percentage of students: Earning the college- and career-ready diploma Enrolling in 2- and 4-year colleges Last year’s graduates enrolled in remedial courses at the state’s 2-year community colleges First report cards in 2009; state didn’t wait for all the data to get started, and continues to improve format

19. State Example: Hawaii Meaningful Public Reporting 19For more information: http://www.p20hawaii.org/indicators_report.html

20. State Example: Arkansas Creating Incentives 20For more information: see Act 1481, signed into law April 2009 Arkansas Smart Core Incentive Fund Provide financial rewards to schools in which 90% of students have completed the Smart Core curriculum Schools must have maintained an overall graduation rate above the state average for the previous three years Monetary incentives range between $50 and $125 per Smart Core graduate, depending on percentage of graduating students who complete the Smart Core curriculum and earn the Smart Core diploma in the preceding year

21. State Example: Florida Accountability Determinations 21For more information: see http://www.fldoe.org/board/meetings/2009_09_15/109981presentation.pdf Florida State Board of Education approved changes in September 2009 Accountability formula now incorporates: High school cohort graduation rate, advanced-high school course- taking and success, and performance on measures of college readiness Schools will earn weighted credits for: Number of students scoring “ready” on SAT, ACT and/or the state’s College Entry-Level Placement Test (CPT) Number of exams students take and the number of successful student outcomes (e.g., earning college credit, passing industry certification)

22. Putting the Pieces Together

23. Setting Statewide Performance Goals 23 Who is responsible for the goal setting process? Who owns these goals? Who needs to support these goals? How can you ground the goals with existing needs (e.g. statewide workforce and civic demands)? How do you set goals that balance reality with ambition? How do you make these goals real? How can the goals become integrated into your public reporting and accountability systems?

24. Public Reporting 24 What information do parents, policymakers and the public need to know about how schools are progressing towards the goal of college and career readiness? Who ought to report this information (state, district, school) and how often?

25. Creating Incentives 25 What are the positive incentives for students and schools to work hard to reach the college-and career-ready goals?

26. Accountability Determinations 26 What matters the most if you are trying to hold schools accountable for graduating all students college-and career- ready? How should the state measure those things we identified as most important? How do you set expectations for performance on these important indicators? What does the state do when the expectations are not met/met/exceeded?