Update - nysmsa

Report
Update on Accountability
2014-15
New York State's Evolving Assessment and Accountability System
Presented to the
Statewide Network of Middle Level Liaisons
November 6, 2014
Assistant Commissioner Ira Schwartz
www.engageNY.org
ESEA Flexibility Waiver
In September 2012, President Obama announced an Elementary and
Secondary Education Act (ESEA) regulatory flexibility initiative to revise
No Child Left Behind (NCLB).
States were able to request flexibility only in
the following areas:
 2013-14 Timeline for All Students
Becoming Proficient
 School and District Improvement
Requirements
 Highly Qualified Teacher Improvement
Plans
 Schoolwide Programs
 Transferability of Funds
 Use of School Improvement Grant Funds
 Rewards for Schools
 Rural Schools
 Twenty-First Century Community Learning
Centers program (optional)
 Determining Annual Yearly Progress (AYP)
for each school and district (optional)
 Rank Order Funding Allocation for districts
(optional)
In exchange for flexibility, states with
approved waivers committed to:
www.engageNY.org
 Set College and Career-Ready
Standards for All Students and
Develop and Administer Annual,
Statewide, Aligned, High-Quality
Assessments that Measure
Student Growth.
 Develop Systems of Differentiated
Recognition, Accountability and
Support.
 Support Effective Teaching and
Leadership, including the
implementation of Teacher and
Principal Evaluation in which
student growth is a significant
factor.
 Reduce Duplication and
Unnecessary Burden.
2
Approved Amendments to the
ESEA Waiver for 2014-15
• The following three amendments to New York’s Elementary
and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) Flexibility Request were
approved by the USDE in April 2014.
• Revise the AMOs for Grades 3-8 English language arts (ELA) and
mathematics to reflect the lower percentages of students who scored at or
above Level 2 and at or above Level 3 on the Common Core aligned
assessments which were first administered in 2012-13.
• Make a technical change to the computation of Adequate Yearly Progress
(AYP) for the “all students” group.
• Create an explicit alignment between the DTSDE rubric ratings and the
list of allowable activities that districts and schools can choose from when
creating a District Comprehensive Improvement Plan (DCIP) and/or a
School Comprehensive Education Plan (SCEP) in order to help districts
select activities that best address areas of need.
www.engageNY.org
3
Pending ESEA Waiver Amendments
•
Until adaptive assessments are implemented, seek permission from USDE to
assess students with disabilities who have significant intellectual delays and
substantial difficulties in cognitive areas (who are ineligible for the New York
State Alternate Assessment) based on their instructional level rather than
their chronological age.
•
Request that the Department be allowed to exempt newly arrived English
Language Learners (ELLs) from participating in the ELA assessments for two
years and use the New York State English as a Second Language Achievement
Test (NYSESLAT) for accountability purposes for these students. Create a
Native Language Arts assessment.
•
Request permission to develop a Performance Index for newly arrived ELLs
in their first two years in the United States, beginning in 2014-15. For these
students, growth towards proficiency in language arts will be calculated
based on rigorous expectations on the NYSESLAT assessment.
•
Give students who successfully achieve a technical endorsement approved by
the Regents Blue Ribbon Panel on Assessments full credit on the high school
ELA and mathematics index.
www.engageNY.org
4
The NYS Accountability Building Blocks
www.engageNY.org
5
Performance Index: 3-8 ELA & Mathematics Example
Grade
Count of Students Performing at Level
Level 1
Level 2
Student Level 1 Not on Level 2 Not on
Count on Track Track on Track Track Level 3 Level 4
3
35
2
10
3
4
10
6
4
42
1
3
4
10
14
10
5
30
1
5
3
7
10
4
Total
107
4
18
10
21
34
20
PI = [(4+4+10+10+21+34+34+20+20) ÷ 107] x 100 = 147
www.engageNY.org
6
Performance Index Quiz: 3-8 ELA for School A
Grades
7-8
Count of Students Performing at Level
Level 1
Level 2
Student Level 1 Not on Level 2 Not on
Count on Track Track on Track Track Level 3 Level 4
100
1
13
5
21
35
25
What is the PI for the School?
www.engageNY.org
7
Changes in New York State’s Accountability
System – New AMOs
 In April 2014, New York changed the elementary/middle level
AMOs to reflect the results from the 2012-13 school year
assessments that were based on Common Core Learning
Standards aligned to college- and career-readiness.
 Grades 4&8 Science AMOs will remain the same.
 Secondary level ELA and mathematics AMOs may be revised
in the future as Common Core Regents exams aligned to
college- and career-ready standards replace the Regents
exam, which was based on 2005 Learning Standards.
www.engageNY.org
8
Elementary/Middle Level AMO Changes - ELA
Grades 3-8 E/M Level ELA (Common Core based
AMOs)
2012-13
Avg PI 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17
106
82
89
97
104
111
45
35
48
60
73
85
75
60
69
79
89
99
Subgroup
All Students
Students with Disabilities
American Indian/Alaska Native
Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific
Islander
Black or African American
Hispanic or Latino
White
Limited English Proficient
Economically Disadvantaged
Mixed Race
139
74
78
124
48
80
105
116
59
65
105
39
66
83
120
69
74
109
51
75
90
123
78
83
114
63
84
97
127
88
92
119
75
93
104
130
98
102
124
87
102
112
Grades 3-8 E/M Level ELA based on 2005 Learning Standards
Subgroup
All Students
Students with Disabilities
American Indian/Alaska Native
Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander
Black or African American
Hispanic or Latino
White
Limited English Proficient
Economically Disadvantaged
Mixed Race
2012-13
155
110
143
169
136
138
167
118
140
162
2013-14
159
119
149
172
143
144
170
126
146
166
www.engageNY.org
2014-15
164
128
154
175
149
151
174
134
152
170
2015-16
168
137
160
178
155
157
177
143
158
173
2016-17
173
146
166
181
162
163
180
151
164
177
9
Elementary/Middle Level AMO Changes - Math
Grades 3-8 E/M Level Math (Common Core based
AMOs)
2012-13
Avg PI 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17
103
79
86
94
101
109
49
37
49
62
74
86
74
60
69
79
89
99
Subgroup
All Students
Students with Disabilities
American Indian/Alaska Native
Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific
Islander
Black or African American
Hispanic or Latino
White
Limited English Proficient
Economically Disadvantaged
Mixed Race
153
68
77
119
60
80
96
134
51
62
99
43
62
72
135
61
72
105
54
72
81
137
72
81
110
66
81
89
138
83
91
115
77
91
97
140
94
100
121
89
100
106
Grades 3-8 E/M Level Math based on 2005 Learning Standards
Subgroup
All Students
Students with Disabilities
American Indian/Alaska Native
Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander
Black or African American
Hispanic or Latino
White
Limited English Proficient
Economically Disadvantaged
Mixed Race
2012-13
167
129
156
186
147
154
177
145
155
169
2013-14
170
136
161
187
152
159
179
151
160
172
www.engageNY.org
2014-15
174
143
165
189
158
163
181
156
164
175
2015-16
177
150
169
190
163
168
184
162
169
178
2016-17
180
157
174
192
168
173
186
167
173
181
10
Changes in New York State’s Accountability System
– New Subgroup Determination
Beginning with the 2013-14 results, the “all students” group in a
district or school will be reported as making AYP if all the
accountable subgroups within a measure in the school or district
makes AYP by meeting their respective Effective Annual
Measureable Objective (EAMO) or Safe Harbor.
School A
Made AYP
Student Group
2012-13
2013-14
All Students
Black or African
American
✘
✔†
✔
✔
Hispanic or Latino
✔
✔
White
✔
✔
† The All Students group is deemed to have
made AYP, even if the PI is less than the EAMO or
safe harbor.
www.engageNY.org
11
Changes in New York State’s Accountability System
– Double Testing Waiver
Under the extended double testing waiver for 2014-15, schools may have accelerated
7th or 8th grade students do the following to meet the mathematics examination
requirement:
Assessments Taken in Grade
7 or 8 in the 2014-15
School Year
Institutional Accountability Use in 2014-15 School Year
Grades 3-8 Accountability
Student takes a Regents Exam in
math and the NYS Grade 7 or 8
Common Core Mathematics Test.
Results from the NYS Grade 7 or 8 Common
Core Mathematics Test will be used for
institutional accountability purposes.
Student takes a Regents Exam in
mathematics. Student does not
take his or her grade-level test.
Student has not taken a Regents
Exam prior to 2014-15.
A score of 65 or higher will be considered as a
Level 4 performance (on an assessment scale
of 1 to 5) and the school and the district will
receive “full credit” for institutional
accountability for the school and the district
in which the student is enrolled. A score
below 65 receives no credit. Score will count
towards the participation requirement.
www.engageNY.org
High School Accountability
Results from the Regents Exam will be
“banked” for high school accountability
purposes and will be incorporated in the same
way as results for other high school students
(assessment scale of 1 to 5 will be used).
For high school institutional accountability,
the school and the district will only get credit
if the student takes (for participation rate
purposes) and passes (for academic
accountability purposes) an additional
Regents Exam in mathematics. A Level 4 or
higher on this additional math Regents Exam
will earn the school and the district “full
credit” in the Performance Index. If the
student does not take another math Regents
Exam (or approved alternative) in high school
the student will be recorded as Level 1 for
high school institutional accountability
purposes.
12
Changes in New York State’s Accountability System Double Testing Waiver: Examples
Here are two examples of how the Double Testing Waiver can be useful to students and
schools.
Institutional Accountability
Example
Student A takes the Regents Exam in
Math and the 8th grade Common Core
Mathematics Test
Student B takes the Regents Exam in
Math and DOES NOT take the gradelevel math Test
Secondary
Secondary
E/M Level
E/M Level
Level
Level
Performance Participation Performance Participation
8th grade
Test
Regents
Exam
8th grade
Test
Regents
Exam
www.engageNY.org
The Regents The Regents
Exam results Exam results
will be banked will be banked
Need to take
another
Regents
Exam
Need to take
another
Regents
Exam
13
Participation Rate
Elementary-Middle Level ELA & Mathematics
For an accountability group with 40 or more students
enrolled during the test administration period to meet
the participation criterion in English language arts
(ELA) or mathematics, 95 percent of these students
must have valid scores on an appropriate assessment.
Secondary Level ELA & Mathematics
For an accountability group with 40 or more 12th
graders to meet the participation criterion in English
language arts (ELA) or mathematics, 95 percent of the
12th graders must have valid scores on Regents
examinations (or approved alternatives), Regents
competency tests (or approved alternatives), or New
York State Alternate Assessments.
www.engageNY.org
14
Failing Participation Rate: Consequences
 A school that has failed to make Adequate Yearly Progress
(AYP) for the same subgroup(s) for the same accountability
measure for three years in a row will be identified as a Local
Assistance Plan (LAP) school.
 Accountability measures are elementary and middle level
ELA, elementary and middle level mathematics, grades 4
and 8 Science, High School ELA, High School mathematics,
and graduation rate.
 An existing Priority School, Focus District or Focus School
cannot be removed from status if it does not make the ELA
and mathematics participation rate for either of the two
years.
 The school is not eligible to become a Reward school.
www.engageNY.org
15
“Safety Net” for Groups That Fail the
Participation Criterion
If the participation rate of an accountability group with 40 or more
students falls below the required rate, the Department calculates a
weighted average of the current year’s and the previous year’s
participation rates. If the average participation rate equals or
exceeds the required rate, the group fulfills the participation
criterion.
Sample calculation for group below 95 percent participation
criterion:
Year
Current
Previous
Weighted Average
Calculation
Enrollment
Tested
Rate
60
75
56
73
93%
97%
135
129
96%
www.engageNY.org
16
NYS Priority, Focus, and Reward Schools
Priority
Focus
Reward
Middle Schools
60
111
61
ROS
172
432
255
State Total
178
446
354
www.engageNY.org
17
Local Assistance Plan Schools – Who is Getting
Identified and Why?
 Local Assistance Plan Schools were identified for meeting one of the following
criteria:
 Failing to make AYP for three years in a row for the same subgroup and measure.
 Having gaps of 100 points or more between members of a subgroup and non members for PI,
or gaps of 50 points or more for the four year graduation rate. The gap increased from the
prior year.
 Having subgroups with combined ELA and mathematics PI, or four year graduation rate that
is at or below the Focus District cut points.
Criteria identified for*
# of LAP
Cut
Schools AYP
Gap
Point
Big 4
NYC
ROS
Total
8
67
236
311
4
61
107
172
4
4
62
72
0
3
111
114
Subgroups identified for*
SWD
3
37
143
183
Black Hisp LEP
2
16
18
36
0
26
17
43
0
14
13
27
ED
5
30
101
136
*a school could be identified for multiple criteria/subgroups
www.engageNY.org
18
LAP Identification Criteria for 2014-15
Schools that met one of the following criteria were identified as LAP:
1. Schools that have failed to make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
for the same subgroup(s) for the same accountability measure
based on 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13 school year results.
2. Schools whose largest gap on an accountability measure
between subgroup and non-subgroup students within a measure
is 100 or more points for the 2012-13 Performance Index (PI) or
50 percent or more for the 2008 4-Year graduation rate and the
gap is greater than the largest gap between any subgroup and
non-subgroup of students on that accountability measure in
2011-12.
3. Schools in non-Focus Districts that have accountability groups
with a 2012-13 combined ELA and math Performance Index or a
2008 4-Year graduation rate at or below the cut points used to
identify Focus Districts.
www.engageNY.org
19
Requirements of Local Assistance Plan Schools
Focus District with LAP Schools
Focus District with LAP Schools are required to:
• Work with the identified school(s) to complete the applicable sections of the Self-Review
Document and Report Template.
• Incorporate the supports and interventions for the identified school(s) into its DCIP.
• Clearly identify in the DCIP the supports and interventions that are to be implemented in
identified LAP Schools.
Please note: These supports and interventions do not count towards satisfying the improvement
set-aside or parent engagement set-aside requirements.
Districts in Good Standing with LAP Schools
A district in Good Standing that has LAP Schools will be required to:
• Work with the identified school(s) to complete the Diagnostic Self- Review Document and
Report Template for each identified LAP School.
• Have the Diagnostic Self-Review Document and Report Template approved by the local
board of education for the district and posted to the district’s website by November 21,
2014.
Please Note: Once approved by SED, any significant modification of an approved plan requires
the prior approval of the Commissioner.
www.engageNY.org
20
Changes in New York State’s Accountability System
– New Common Core Regents Exam Levels
The Common Core based Regents exams will have five performance levels
instead of the four levels used with the Regents exams based on the 2005
Learning Standards.
Common Core Regents Exam
Regents
Scores for
ELA
85 – 100
79 – 84
65 – 78
55 – 64
0 – 54
Regents
Scores for Performance
Algebra I
Levels
85 – 100
Level 5
74 – 84
Level 4
65 – 73
Level 3
55 – 64
Level 2
0 – 54
Level 1
Regents Exam based on 2005 Learning Standards
Credit
Full
Full
Partial
None
None
Regents
Scores for
ELA
90 – 100
75 – 89
65 – 74
55 – 64
0 – 54
Regents
Performance
Scores for
Levels
Math
90 – 100
Level 4
80 – 89
Level 3
65 – 79
Level 2
55 – 64
Level 1
0 – 54
Level 1
Credit
Full
Full
Partial
None
None
Note: The five performance levels in Common Core Regents Exam will be converted to four levels
for Performance Index calculation.
www.engageNY.org
21
State-provided Growth Ratings are Stable across Years for
Teachers: New York State
85% of teachers with grades 4-8 scores over 2 years*
received the same or better growth rating in 2013-14
Count of grades 4-8 Teachers with each Stateprovided growth rating category in 2012-13
and 2013-14
Stability in State-provided growth rating
categories from 2012-13 to 2013-14 of grades
4-8 Teachers
2013-14
2012-13
H
E
D
I
Total
*Analysis
Movement
N
%
H
E
D
I Total
Moved up 3 rating
25 0.1%
635
1,307
34
11 1,987
Moved up 2 rating
1,058 3.7%
1,573 17,709 1,790
906 21,978
Moved up 1 rating
4,090 14.2%
67
2,187
548
382 3,184
No movement
25
991
330
370 1,716
Moved down 1 rating
3,479 12.1%
2,300 22,194 2,702 1,669 28,865
Moved down 2 rating
940 3.3%
Moved down 3 rating
11 0.0%
19,262 66.7%
only includes teachers who received grades 4-8 State-provided growth HEDI in 2012-13 and in 2013-14. Data as of 8/20/2014.
www.engageNY.org
22
Changes Made to the Regents Reform Agenda
In the 2013-14 School Year
• Graduation Standards Aligned to the Common Core
• Prohibition on “Traditional Standardized Tests” in Pre K-2
• Limitation on Time Spent on Test Preparation
• Use of Grade 3-8 ELA and Math Assessments for Promotion and
Placement Determinations
• Option to Eliminate Math Double Testing
• Postponement of the Value Added Model until at least 2015-16
www.engageNY.org
23
Key Accountability Issues Being Discussed by
the Regents in the 2014 – 15 School Year
• Pathways to Graduation
• Phase in of College and Career Readiness Standards
• PARCC
• Chronic Absenteeism
• Graduation Standards for Late Arriving English Language
Learners
• Common Core ELA Regents Exam Flexibility
• Part 154
www.engageNY.org
24
Pathways to Graduation
All students earning a Regents Diploma will:
• Take a balanced curriculum including: English language arts, Math,
US History and Government, Global History and Geography,
Science, a Language other than English, Art, Physical Education
and Health;
• Earn a minimum of 22 High School Credits; and
• Meet required elements of their assessment pathway.
In September 2014, the Board of Regents instructed the
Department to draft regulatory amendments to implement a 4 + 1
pathway to graduation, whereby students may take four Regents
exams and a comparably rigorous technical or other assessment for
the fifth required examination.
Under the proposed amendment change, the 4 + 1 pathway
option would apply beginning with students who are eligible to
receive a high school diploma in June 2015 and thereafter.
www.engageNY.org
25
4 + 1 Assessment Pathway Requirements
Students may take four Regents exams (ELA, Math, Science, and Social
Studies) and a comparably rigorous assessment for the fifth required
examination to graduate. The fifth assessment required for graduation may
include any one of the following assessments:
• One additional social studies Regents examination or Department-approved
•
•
•
•
•
alternative (Humanities Pathway); or
One additional Regents examination in a different course in mathematics or
science or a Department-approved alternative (STEM Pathway); or
A pathway assessment approved by the Commissioner in accordance with
§100.2(f)(2) of the Commissioner’s Regulations (which could include a Biliteracy
[LOTE] Pathway); or
A career and technical education (CTE) pathway assessment, approved by the
Commissioner in accordance with proposed §100.2(mm), following successful
completion of a CTE program approved pursuant to §100.5(d)(6) of the
regulations (CTE Pathway); or
A CTE assessment that meets the approved alternative requirements for Science
could be substituted for the required Science Regents exam (CTE Pathway); or
An arts pathway assessment approved by the Commissioner in accordance with
proposed §100.2(mm) (Arts Pathway).
www.engageNY.org
26
Changes to Part 154
After nearly three years of public engagement, the Board of Regents
at its September 2014 meeting adopted amendments to Part 154 of
the Regulations of the Commissioner of Education intended to
strengthen instruction, programming, and outcomes for English
language learner (ELL) students.
The revised regulations contain amendments pertaining to:
• The process for identification of ELLs
• Parent Notification and Information
• Retention of Identification and Review of Records
• Placement Program Requirements and Provision of Programs
• Grade Span and Program Continuity
• Exit Criteria, Support Services and Transitional Services
• Professional Development
• District Planning and Reporting Requirements
The amendments to Part 154 took effect on October 1, 2014 for
implementation beginning with the 2015-16 school year.
www.engageNY.org
27
Graduation Standards for Late Arriving
English Language Learners
English language learners who entered the United States in 9th grade or
above in the 2010-11 school year and thereafter, and who score between 5561 on the Regents Exam in English after two attempts at attaining a score of
65 or above, are also eligible to receive the Local Diploma via appeal if they:
• Successfully appeal the Regents Exam in English AND score at least 65
on each of the four remaining required Regents exams; OR
• Successfully appeal the Regents Exam in English AND score at least 65
on three other required Regents exams AND score between 62 to 64 on
one other required Regents exam and successfully appeal that exam.
Please note that: Students who score between 62-64 on a Regents exam
already are eligible under current regulations to appeal that result.
www.engageNY.org
28
Graduation Standards for Late Arriving
English Language Learners
To be eligible to appeal a score on the Regents Exam in English,
ELLs would also have to meet these conditions:
• The student has received academic intervention services in
English language arts; AND
• The student has an attendance rate of at least 95 percent for the
school year during which the student last took the Regents
examination in English; AND
• The student has attained a course average in English language
arts that meets or exceeds the required passing grade by the
school and is recorded on the student's official transcript with
grades achieved by the student in each quarter of the school year;
AND
• The student is recommended for an exemption to the passing
score on the Regents examination by his or her teacher or
department chairperson.
www.engageNY.org
29
Update on ELA and Social Studies Regents Exams
Students who started grade 9 in 2013-14 or later are to be
provided with Common Core instruction in ELA and take the
Common Core ELA Regents Exam, unless the district applies for a
waiver that some of its students who entered grade 9 in 2013-14
began an accelerated high school course of study in the 2005
learning standards in grade 8. If the waiver is approved, these
students would take the 2005 tests.
Students who started grade 9 before 2013-14 and are enrolled in
Common Core classes are eligible, at district discretion, to take
the old test in addition to the new test in January, June, or August
2015 and have the higher score count.
The updated Global II exam will be first administered in June
2018. The updated US History exam will be first administered in
June 2019.
www.engageNY.org
30
About the Diagnostic Tool for School and
District Review (DTSDE)
• Section 100.18 of Commissioner's Regulations requires that each Focus District
participate annually in a diagnostic review using a diagnostic tool of quality
indicators. Based on this requirement, the Diagnostic Tool for School and District
Review (DTSDE) was created.
• Each DTSDE review focuses on the accountability group(s) for each accountability
performance criterion for which the school district and its schools have been
identified as Priority and/or Focus.
• Using the DTSDE, each year, an Integrated Intervention Team (IIT) conducts an onsite diagnostic district review and school reviews of selected Priority and/or Focus
Schools within the district to inform the development of the District
Comprehensive Improvement Plan and school Comprehensive Education Plan.
•
The process of conducting the reviews will focus on collecting and assessing lowinference data, (data of what is actually observed and heard, absent of added
meaning, assumptions, conclusions and beliefs) to evaluate school and district
practices based on six tenets.
Tenet 1: District Leadership and Capacity
Tenet 2: School Leader Practices and Decisions
Tenet 3: Curriculum Development and Support
Tenet 4: Teacher Practices and Decisions
Tenet 5: Student Social and Emotional Developmental Health
Tenet 6: Family and Community Engagement
www.engageNY.org
31
Evolution of the DTSDE
Refinements were made to the DTSDE report template to improve the
ability to provide high-quality reports on a timely basis.
• Review protocols have been adjusted to allow principals to be
more engaged in the review process.
• DTSDE professional development was provided to all principals
of schools scheduled to be reviewed, and statewide training has
focused on improving reviewer capacity.
In 2015-16, districts and schools that are not part of the 3-Year
Pilot group (see below) will continue to receive DTSDE reviews
and reports. Those reports will continue to inform one-year DCIPs
and SCEPs consistent with the 2014-15 process.
www.engageNY.org
32
Moving Forward with DCIP and SCEP Forms
Based on the feedback received from districts, the 2015-16 DCIP and SCEP templates
will be updated.
• The update will provide more clarification to districts and schools on how to
complete the plans.
• The update will also address some of the challenges districts and schools faced
with the fiscal portion of the plans.
The Department is currently working collectively with a cohort of 13 districts and
schools to pilot 3 a year plan: the Strategic Plan for School Excellence (SP4SE).
• The pilot cohort is currently engaged in a series of professional development
sessions sponsored by NYSED.
• The intended end result of these sessions is for the schools to create a sound 3
year SP4SE that will guide their work with implementing interventions and
strategies that address their identified needs.
The most effective districts, schools, and teachers are those that spend time planning
based on the needs identified from data analysis.
www.engageNY.org
33
ESEA Think Tank Discussions for 2015-16
•
Revise the methodologies for determining progress and removal from
identification of Focus Districts, Priority Schools and Focus Schools.
•
Revise the methodology for identifying Focus Districts. For example:
Begin by identifying Focus Schools and Priority Schools to determine
Focus Districts.
•
Revise the methodologies for the identification of Reward Schools.
•
Incentivize participation in Career and Technical Education (CTE)
Programs.
•
Use data on chronic absenteeism as a factor in accountability
designations and report these statistics publicly.
•
Interventions in Priority Schools that have completed their whole school
reform models.
www.engageNY.org
34
Looking Forward:
What Happens after the 2014-15 Results?
The current Priority School, Focus District, and Focus School
identification cycle sunsets at the end of the 2014-15 school year.
 Districts and schools will be removed from status based on
making progress and meeting the minimum requirements on
the 2013-14 and 2014-15 results.
 New lists will be created based on the 2014-15 results.
 It is being proposed that districts/schools that make progress
with the 2014-15 results will get credit whenever the new list is
created.
www.engageNY.org
35
What Happens After Race to the Top?
Will there be continued Professional Development after Race to the
Top (RTTT) funding has been exhausted?
The Department is still working on possible models for sustaining
statewide PD following the end of RTTT. This model will most
likely involve regional PD in coordination with NY.
www.engageNY.org
36
“Not everything that can be measured is
important and not everything that is important
can be measured”
-Albert Einstein
“That which is measured, improves”
-Unknown
“Goals worth pursuing are ones that are difficult
to obtain but possible to achieve”
-Ira Schwartz
www.engageNY.org
37
KISS vs. RAGU
KISS
RAGU
“Not everything that can be
measured is important and not
everything that is important can
be measured”
“That which is measured,
improves”
-Unknown
-Albert Einstein
Use of a minimum number
of specific accountability
measures in an attempt to
tell the whole
accountability story
Use of a multitude of
accountability measures
in an attempt to gather
information to tell the
whole accountability story
www.engageNY.org
38
What Gets Measured:
New York vs. New Mexico Accountability
New York
•
Grade 3-8 Math and ELA
•
Graduation Rates
•
Science
New Mexico
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Assessment Scores
College-and Career-Readiness
Achievement Gap Closure
Dual/Concurrent Enrollment
Growth/Academic Progress
Attendance Rate – Secondary
AMO or AYP
Attendance Rate – Elementary/Middle
Academic Progress of Lowest Quartile
Graduation Rate
ACT/SAT Participation
Student Surveys
ACT/SAT Scores
Parental/Community Involvement
AP Participation Rate
Academic Trend Data
AP Scores
School Climate
Int'l Baccalaureate Participation Rate
CTE Certifications/Competencies
Growth of Highest-Achievers
http://ecs.force.com/mbdata/mbstprofexcL?Rep=arst&st=New%20Mexico
www.engageNY.org
39
For further information about
Accountability,
Please Contact:
[email protected]
www.engageNY.org

similar documents