View
23
Download
0
Category
Tags:
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Utah ESEA Flexibility for No Child Left Behind 2012 and beyond. Implications for Salt Lake City School District August 7 th 2012. Utah Comprehensive Accountability System (UCAS). Flexibility Highlights. One accountability system (Utah Comprehensive Assessment System) No more AYP - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Utah ESEA Flexibilityfor No Child Left Behind 2012 and
beyond
Implications for Salt Lake City School DistrictAugust 7th 2012
Utah Comprehensive Accountability System (UCAS)
2
Flexibility Highlights• One accountability system (Utah Comprehensive
Assessment System)• No more AYP
- No requirement for 100% proficiency 2014• No Schools/Districts in program improvement
(Priority or Focus)All NCLB requirements not addressed in the 2012 waiver are still in place• More flexibility in use of Title I School Improvement
funds• New Utah Comprehensive Assessment System meets
federal and state requirements:- Growth and proficiency- Focus on below proficient students
College- and Career-Ready Expectations for All Students
• Adoption of the new Utah Core Standards for English language arts and mathematics
• Adoption of a new comprehensive assessment system which will measure the full breadth and depth of the Utah Core Standards using computer based adaptive testing
• Focused student performance outcomes targeted at ensuring all students are college, career, and citizenship ready
• Adoption of the WIDA English language proficiency standards to assist educators to ensure that instruction supports English language learners in the acquisition of English
Utah Comprehensive Accountability System (UCAS)
• Incorporates both student achievement and growth toward improvement in a composite score for each school
• Annual public reports will provide summary data for the entire school, as well as disaggregated results by ethnicity, and for economically disadvantaged, English language learners, and students with disabilities
UCAS Principles• Meeting standards (proficiency) and improving academic achievement
(growth) are BOTH valued
• All schools, including those that serve traditionally low performing students, should have an opportunity to demonstrate success
• The system should include strong incentives for schools to improve achievement for the lowest performing students
• Growth expectations for below proficient students should be linked to attaining proficiency
• Growth expectations for all students, including students above proficiency, should be appropriately challenging and meaningful
• Clear and understandable to stakeholders
5
6
Overall School
600 Total Points
Growth 300 total
points
All Students200 total
pointsBelow
Proficient students 100 total
points
Achievement
300 total points
Percent at or above
proficient 300 total
points
Point Structure for Elementary/Middle Schools
Overall School
600 total points
Growth300 total
points
All students 200 total
pointsBelow
Proficient Students 100 total
points
Achievement 300 total points
Percent at or above
proficient 150 total
pointsReadiness Graduation
rate150 total
points
Point Structure for High Schools
Achievement Calculations
TestsTotal Points
Possible
Percent Proficient
Achievement Calculation
Language Arts 86 80% 80% of 86 = 69 pointsMathematics 86 70% 70% of 86 = 60 pointsScience 86 60% 60% of 86 = 51 pointsDWA 42 80% 80% of 42= 34 pointsTotal Points Possible 300 71% 69 + 60 + 51+ 34= 214 214/300
Example Achievement for 5th Grade
Northview Park Elementary School 5th Grade 2012 Achievement
Achievement Score 214/300
Achievement Calculations for Elementary School
Lan-guage Arts (86
pts.)28.5%
Math (86 pts.)
28.5%Science (86 pts.)28.5%
DWA (42
pts.)14.5%
Northview Park School 2012 Achievement
Percent Proficient 150 ptsGraduation Rate 150 ptsTotal Possible 300 pts
High School Achievement
Total Points
Possible2012 graduation rate
Readiness calculation
150 70% 70% of 150 =105 105/150
Example Readiness for High School
North High School
LanguageArts
(50 pts.)33.3%
Math(50 pts.)33.3%
Science (50 pts.)33.3%
TestsTotal Points
Possible
Percent Proficient
Achievement Calculation
Language Arts 50 80% 80% of 50 = 40 points
Mathematics 50 30% 30% of 50 = 15 points
Science 50 40% 40% of 50 = 20 points
Total Points Possible
150 71% 40+15+20=75 75/150
North High School Achievement
Example Achievement
for North High School
Achievement Score 180/300
Achievement
Measures all students who passed the assessment (proficiency)
Growth
Measures how much students progressed from one year to the next
Growth Calculations
Student Growth Percentile• Compute an SGP for each year a student has an
assessment scale score: • Identify a student scale score for all past years where a score exists for that student• Determine the academic peer group (all students in the state with the “same” scale scores for all of the same years) for each student
• Determine how performance in the current year compares with that of the student’s peer group to produce a growth percentile
13
162 162 162 162
164 164 164 164
159159159 159
154
154
154
154
To measure growth, students are only compared to their academic peer group
• Student growth is determined by comparing the performance of a student with all other students in the state with the same past performance
161
161
161
161
2012 Score
Distribution
2011Performan
ce
Far below average growth
Below average growth
Average and above growth High Growth
This value is the 50th
Percentile
The 50th percentile is the value below which 50% of the
scores lie
165
159
155
162
Mean vs. MedianThe median score is used for the school calculations
Why Use SGP ?
• Recognizes growth for the low and the high achieving student
• Growth percentiles are calculated for every student, but can be aggregated to the classroom, subgroup, school, district, and state
Growth Calculation
Growth DescriptionMedian Percentile
Point Value for All Students
Point Value for Non- Proficient Students
High growth60 + 200 100
Average and above growth
50-59 150 75
Below average growth
35-49 100 50
Far below average growth
0-34 50 25
Growth Rubric
Median Growth Percentile (2012)
Point Value (rubric)
Median Growth Percentile (2012)
Point Value (rubric)
Language Arts 56 150 35 50Math 45 100 55 75Science 50 150 40 50
Point Total (mean) 133 Point Total (mean) 58
Northview Park Elementary 2012 Growth All Students Non Proficient Students
Subject
133+58=191 (total point mean added)
Growth Score 191/300
Average Average
Northview Park 2012 UCAS
The long term goal is for schools to earn a minimum of 480 points for elementary schools and 470 for high schools which is approximately the 75th percentile for schools across the state. Accordingly, the targets would be set on reducing the gap between a schools current score and the target score by half in six years: Northview 2012 score = 405 480-405= 75 (1/2 of 75=37.5) 405+ 37.5= 442.5 by 2017
Overall School405/600Total
Points
Growth300 total points
All Students133/200total
points
Below Proficient students
58/100total points
Achievement300 total points
Percent at or above proficient 214/300total
points
School Goal
395
Subgroup Reporting:Annual Measureable Objectives
Federal Requirement to establish and report AMOs
Utah’s Minimum Compliance Plan
• AMOs are not used in any UCAS calculation
• AMO trajectory will reduce in half the percent of non-proficient over six years
• AMOs will be established separately for each subgroup at each school
• UCAS reporting will list the AMO and performance of each school subgroup
• AMO reporting page will be a drill down page in the UCAS report
• AMOs will be used in identifying and exiting Focus/Priority schools
Establishing AMOs• AMOs will be based on the percent of students achieving proficiency on
the states Criterion-Referenced Tests (CRTs) separately in English language arts and mathematics
• ELA: CRT results in grades 3-8 and 10 are used to determine the percent of students proficient
• Mathematics: results are based on CRTs in grades 3-6 and in the course appropriate CRT thereafter which includes 7th grade math or 8th grade math. High schools will be determined by calculating the percent of 10th grade students who scored proficient on the secondary math 1 in 10th grade year or a prior year
• Results from the Utah Alternative Assessment (UAA) are included for students with significant cognitive disabilities approved to participate in this assessment
AMO: to set annual equal goals of reducing by half the percentage of students in each group who are not proficient within six years
All Students Asian African
AmericanAmerican Indian Hispanic Pacific
Islander Eco Dis LEP SWD
2011 81 82 64 60 63 73 70 51 542012 83 84 67 63 66 75 73 55 582013 84 85 70 67 69 78 75 59 622014 86 87 73 70 72 80 78 63 662015 87 88 76 73 75 82 80 67 692016 89 90 79 77 78 84 83 71 732017 91 91 82 80 82 87 85 76 77Goal: 91 91 82 80 82 87 85 76 77
63% proficient 2011
Hispanic
2011 632012 662013 692014 722015 752016 782017 82Goal: 82
100-63 =37
½ of 37 =18.5
18.5/6=3 % per year
Year 1 63 + 3 =66
Year 2 66 + 3 =69…
Reporting • UCAS reporting through the Public School Data Gateway on the USOE Website• Salt Lake City School District will also report this data. • SLCSD will also be creating school reports focusing on school and subgroup growth targets
• Drillable school reports that will include achievement gap data that could be used in school improvement plans
• Individual student growth reports with trajectory to proficiency• Subgroup disaggregated data
All U
tah
Scho
ols
Reward Schools: Highest performing Title I schools:Reward Schools: High progress Title I schools:
High/High
Low/Low
Growth
Achi
evem
ent
Priority Schools: already identified using previous 4 years of data through the School Improvement Grant (SIG schools) 15 schools statewide
Focus Schools: USOE will identify a minimum of 28 focus schools,10% of lowest scoring Title I schools not already identified as a priority. Two year average UCAS score, or not achieving AMOs for two years. These schools will be considered in improvement and receive $100,000 to fulfill Title I improvement requirements.
600 pts.
0 pts.
405 Northview Park 2012
Implications for Title I Schools
Old Title I Accountability System• Utah will no longer use AYP
determinations for Title I accountability
• Current Title I school and district improvement requirements have been eliminated through the approved ESEA Flexibility Waiver
• Title I schools identified in need of improvement for 2011-2012 will:• Retain current Title I school
improvement grants through 2012-13
• Be evaluated for Focus School eligibility
New Title I Accountability System• Utah will use the new UCAS
accountability system to identify: • Priority Schools• Focus Schools• Reward Schools
• The Title I requirements of setting aside Title I funds for school improvement sanctions are removed:• Transportation associated with
public school choice• Supplemental Educational
Services (SES)
Priority/Focus SchoolsNOTE: This is allowed under the ESEA Flexibility Waiver Request Guidance and will allow Utah to maintain continuity in funding and service to those schools. All of these schools have already initiated one of the federally-mandated, rigorous, turnaround strategies that are required of Priority Schools.
Exit Criteria Priority Schools:To exit Priority School status, the school must achieve
• a two year composite CAS score of at least 320 or• a two year composite CAS score that is at least the 15th percentile of
Title I schools (Priority) 25th percentile (focus) or• two year meeting of AMOs and/or significant decreases in achievement
gaps
Depending on what the school was identified for-
Reward SchoolsThe USOE will annually recognize two categories of Title I Reward Schools, High-performing and High-progress. These schools will be recognized through: • a press release• certificate of achievement• letter to the LEA superintendent or charter leader• letter to the building principal to be shared with the school
community
High-performing Title I Schools
Schools will be identified based on highest levels of achievement and above average performance on growth
High-progress Title I Schools
Schools will be identified based on highest levels of growth and above average performance on achievement
Additional Calculations• Full academic year (FAY) unchanged
• Minimum N • Achievement/Growth =10• Participation =40
• Schools must have data for all components to receive a report
(no growth scores = no report)
November 1 (estimated)Accountability Information Report posted on USOE webpage
UCAS/UPASS reports posted on USOE Gateway
FAQs1. Will schools/districts get an AYP report? No. There will be no Yes or No designation for schools or districts. The UCAS report will show total school points.
2. How will AMAO #3 be calculated? It is anticipated AMAO #3 will be calculated based on the LEA EL subgroup AMO score. We are awaiting clarification from the department of education on this issue.
3. Is there an appeal process? See 2012 Accountability Timeline for detailed explanation
4. When will Priority, Focus and Reward schools be announced?It is anticipated that the USOE will announce Title I Focus and Reward Schools 30 days after CAS results are made available to LEAs.
5. What specific waivers of ESEA requirements did Utah receive from the U.S. Department of Education?For a full listing of the waivers granted, please see pages 5-6 of Utah’s approved ESEA Flexibility Waiver Request http://www.schools.utah.gov/data/Educational-Data/Accountability-School-Performance/Utah-ESEA-Flexibility-Request.aspx
Recommended