0% found this document useful (0 votes)
479 views23 pagesEducation Accountability and Performance Updates
The presentation provided an update on priority schools, the state's accountability system, and student growth models to the State Board of Education. Regarding priority schools, Red Clay and Christina districts were behind in signing memorandums of understanding and developing improvement plans. The accountability system framework included measures of achievement, college/career readiness, absenteeism, and on-track progress. Feedback was being gathered through community meetings on potential additional measures. Options for measuring student growth included value tables, projections, and student growth percentiles. A request for proposals would be issued for selecting a growth methodology.
Uploaded by
KevinOhlandtCopyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
479 views23 pagesEducation Accountability and Performance Updates
The presentation provided an update on priority schools, the state's accountability system, and student growth models to the State Board of Education. Regarding priority schools, Red Clay and Christina districts were behind in signing memorandums of understanding and developing improvement plans. The accountability system framework included measures of achievement, college/career readiness, absenteeism, and on-track progress. Feedback was being gathered through community meetings on potential additional measures. Options for measuring student growth included value tables, projections, and student growth percentiles. A request for proposals would be issued for selecting a growth methodology.
Uploaded by
KevinOhlandtCopyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
State Board of Education Retreat:
Assessment, Accountability, Performance, and
Evaluation Presentation
Penny Schwinn, Chief Accountability and Performance Officer
Chantel Janiszewski, Branch Officer
Topics for Discussion
Priority Schools Update
Accountability System Update
Smarter Balanced
Other Branch Work and Updates
Priority Schools: Fast Facts
Schools were named on September 4th (71 days into the
process)
120-day planning period is what is currently listed in
the regulation and ESEA
Also provides time to ensure implementation of planning
for the start of the year
Two City Council meetings, multiple Red Clay and
Christina community meetings, multiple DOE
engagement
Red Clay began engaging with DOE immediately
Christina would not engage with DOE until mid-October
(40 days into the process)
2
Priority Schools: Update on the MOU
Red Clay and DOE have been in ongoing
negotiations for the last 6 weeks
Christina is still in the process of determining what
they want included in the MOU
Benchmark 1 for On Track would be that an MOU
is signed with collective bargaining units and the
LEAs within 75 days
Benchmark 2 for On Track would be that an MOU
is signed with the DOE and the LEA by November
17th in order to ensure sufficient time for planning
in alignment with the MOU
Priority Schools: Update on the Plans
Planning money is being processed by OMB ($40,000
per school in advance of the MOU being signed)
Red Clay is planning to use for teacher stipends, but
currently has no plans to bring-in experts to support
research or drafting of the plans
Christina is not sure if board will allow use of the
planning money and has no plans on how to spend it
Neither district has provided any plans or partial plans
for feedback in any of the 3 open windows that have
passed
DOE has expanded planning review opportunities to
include every week, in addition to office hours on
Mondays, and weekly meetings on Fridays (two per
week with CSD)
4
Priority Schools: LEA Landscape
Both districts are significantly behind where one
would expect them to be given that 10 weeks have
passed
Red Clay is partnering with UVA, and has included
DOE, which will allow for ongoing collaboration
Christina appears to be dealing with internal
politics that is preventing significant forward
movement in the process
Priority Schools: Next Steps
We have provided minor extensions to the planning
process: new submission date is January 7th
Developing plans based on approvable plans
Developing systems to monitor planning year
activities to ensure the schools are first-day ready
Accountability System: Brief Review
What We are Developing:
Accountability system with Parts A and B (both are
reported; the AFWG will provide guidance on any
rating system)
A School and District Performance Framework (1pager) that clearly and efficiently communicates the
information
An interim-level system that will provide you with
the information in real-time and not just EOY data
Links to supports and tools that align with what is
being measured (long-term)
Accountability System - Part A Review
Academic Achievement
1.
2.
College and Career Readiness
3.
High School - As measured by % of students who have demonstrated CCR
by senior year as measured by SBAC proficiency or the new SAT
(school/district choice)
Middle School As measured by % of students on track to be proficient in
3 years
Elementary School As measured by % of students on track to be
proficient in 3 years
Chronic Absenteeism
4.
Proficiency and Growth in Math, ELA, Science, Social Studies
As measured by the reduction in the average days missed of the bottom
10% attendance (cutoff at X days)
On-Track
% of students on-track to graduate as measured by the reduction in the rate
of off-track by cohort
Accountability System - Part B Review
Nothing has been decided we will take
community feedback on this through the
Community Planning Process
The AFWG will analyze the data and make
recommendations to the Secretary
Districts will receive the information on the
results, as well as the analytics on participation
Accountability System Part B Review
Ideas on what Part B could include:
Academic Achievement
Post-secondary enrollment (including military)
% of high school graduates with college credit upon graduation
Dual enrollment, AP, IB
% of high school students who graduate with industry-recognized credential
Graduation rates
Culture and Climate
Surveys (staff, families, students)
Suspensions and expulsions (not recommended)
Social-emotional learning
Other Measures
Parent attendance at conferences
Similar schools comparison
Input measures (HQT, staff to student ratios, etc.)
Space to indicate school-specific programs and narrative
Community Planning Process
The AFWG decided to remove capacity restraints on districts
The State will sponsor 25 State Survey Representatives, allocated
proportionally throughout the state, to solicit feedback
Chiefs will receive an email to designate a primary contact person for
survey reps to call (to learn about any district or school events for
survey purposes)
Chiefs memo will include information on participation
Survey can be emailed and should be sent to all school stakeholders
Press release, publicity in the newspaper, etc.
Town Halls are scheduled in each county
November 5, 2014 (6:00 -7:30) Carvel Building, Wilmington
November 12, 2014 (6:00 -7:30) John Collette Education Resource
Center, Dover
November 13, 2014 (6:30 8:00) Waters Middle School,
Middletown
November 19, 2014 (6:00 -7:30) Sussex County Council Chamber
Auditorium, Georgetown
Current Metrics
In first two weeks: 2,168 survey responses
Results by county
NCC 65.5% (59.4%)
Kent 14.1% (18.3%)
Sussex 20.4% (22.3%)
Results by school type
District public school 37%
Public charter school 10%
Private school 6%
No children in school 50%
Results by grade band
Elementary 28%
Middle 19%
High 20%
Children graduated 9%
NA 45%
12
Current Metrics
Type
Percent of
Respondents
Race/Ethnicity
Parent
26.8%
White/Caucasian
83.9%
64.1%
Teacher
39.6%
Black/African-American
5.3%
22.1%
Principal/Assistant Principal
3.6%
Hispanic/Latino
3.4%
8.7%
Other School Staff
10.7%
Asian
0.9%
3.6%
District
Administrator/Superintendent
2.4%
Multi-racial
1.9%
2.4%
Community Member
10.8%
Native-American
0.5%
0.7%
Other
6.1%
Other
4.1%
13
Percent of
Respondents
State Census
Demographics
Current Metrics
Initial results show:
Name: School Success Framework (59%)
Reasons to use accountability system:
Strengths and challenges of my school (76.5%)
Choice (58%)
Professional Development (40%)
Other (9%)
How to reflect performance:
Performance ratings (73.74% ranked as #1 or #2)
Letter grades (73.26% ranked as #1 or #2)
Priorities (that had 85% or greater positive rankings)
Graduation rate
Closing the achievement gap
Industry recognized credential
Literacy
Drop out rate
14
Current Metrics
Initial results show:
Culture Priorities (that had 85% or greater positive
rankings)
School surveys
Parent attendance at conferences
Social Emotional Learning
Staff attendance
15
Timeline
October December (2014):
Community Planning Process
AFWG meets to finalize Part A methodology
Initial technology work is completed for online system
December (2014):
Community Planning Process ends
Data analysis conducted
Final metrics are produced with methodology
January March (2015):
Online platform is developed and tested
April May (2015):
Beta versions are tested by users, districts, etc.
Edits are made
Resources linked
June (2015):
Soft launch
July August (2015):
Hard launch
Community Input:
Process and How the SBE Can Help
Publicize survey broadly
Public events
Op-Eds
Connect with Community Leaders
CBOs
Faith groups
Political organizations
Business leaders
Take the Survey individually
17
Growth Overview
Growth is student performance over 2+ points in time
Measured for individual students and/or groups
Interpretations that Growth Models can support:
Growth Description How much growth?
Growth Prediction Growth to where?
Value-added: What caused growth?
Models in greatest use in accountability under ESEA
waivers:
Value Table
Projection
Student Growth Percentile
18
Summary of Options
Characteristics
Value Table
Projection
SGP
Ease of explanation of model
Easy
Hard
Medium
Ease of explanation of growth results
Medium
Hard
Easy
Provide detailed information about
growth across performance spectrum
No
Yes
Yes
Incorporate past student performance No
Yes
Yes
Can be aligned to Proficiency
Yes
Yes
Yes
Can be used to measure growth
Yes
through transition to SBAC in 2014-15
Yes
Yes
Can be used to measure growth-toNo
proficiency through transition to SBAC
in 2014-15
No
No
Data burden
Hard
Medium
Easy
19
RFP - Growth Methodology
Timeline
Public Notice
11/10/14
Deadline for Questions 11/17/14
Response to Questions Posted by 11/18/14
Deadline for Receipt of Proposals 11/25/14 at 3:00 PM
(Local Time)
Estimated Notification of Award 12/30/14
20
SBAC
Update on where we are
Questions
21
Questions?
22
