A New School Accountability Model. Draft – March 2012. Check for Updates to this Presentation

A New School Accountability Model

• A New School Accountability Model

Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation

• No retests

• No results until October 2013

• New Accountability Model

• AMO is the new AYP

• Subgroup N count changes

Updates for 2012-13


• All ELA, Math, and Science EOG are new for 2012-13

• ELA and Math EOG will be paper / pencil

• Math 3-7 will be a one day administration

• Science grades 5 and 8 will be online

• All EOCs (English II, Biology, Integrated Math I) will be online

Common Core


Current EOG schedule May 20 – 24

Options for ELA and Math

• May 28 – 31 (Answer Sheets due 4 PM May 31)

• May 29 – June 4 (Answer Sheets due 4 PM June 4)Note: New date chosen by principals

• June 3 – 6 (Answer Sheets due 4 PM June 6)

Options for Science Online• Leave at current schedule (May 20 – 24)

Note: recommended by principals

• Above options

New Testing Window?


AccountabilityPurpose – Indicators – Key Ideas

Provide incentives and supports to

• Improve Student Learning Outcomes

• Raise Graduation Rates

• Close Achievement Gaps

▲


3 Types of IndicatorsPurpose – Indicators – Key Ideas

▲

Performance Indicators•How well are students doing this year?

•Lets parents know the overall performance of school

•Examples: Performance Composite, Graduation Rates



▲

Progress Indicators•How much progress are cohorts making from one year to the next on the performance indicators?

•Examples: Change in graduation rate over time; Annual Measurable Objectives from NCLB



▲

Growth Indicators•Given where students start, how much was the school able to help them grow?

•Not applied to cohort measures like graduation rate

•Examples: EVAAS; Longitudinal Growth Models


Elementary and Middle School AccountabilityPurpose – Indicators – Key Ideas

End of Grade 3-8 Math

End of Grade 3-8 ELA

End of Grade 5 & 8 Science

▲

EOG3-8 Math

Δ End of Grade 3-8 Math

Δ End of Grade 3-8 ELA

Δ End of Grade 5 & 8 Science

EVAAS Growth

School-wide

PerformanceIndicators

ProgressIndicators

Growth Indicators


High SchoolSchool AccountabilityPurpose – Indicators – Key Ideas

▲

PerformanceIndicators

EOG3-8 Math

ProgressIndicators

Δ End of Grade 3-8 Math

Growth Indicators

End of Course

ACT

Graduation Rates

Math Course Rigor

WorkKeys

Graduation Project

Δ End of Course

Δ ACT

Δ Graduation Rates

Δ Math Course Rigor

Δ WorkKeys

EVAAS Growth

School-wide


ESEA Flexibility Waiver

The NCDPI will no longer designate each school as having met or not met Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP).

For each school, the NCDPI will report the number of Annual Measureable Objectives (AMOs) and the number of those targets met as well as the percentage of targets met.

To meet the criteria for an Honor School of Excellence per the ABCs of Public Education, a school will have to meet all of its designated targets.



The ESEA waiver specified AMO targets will be used for reporting. These targets are (1) based on 2010-11 data and (2) identified for each federally reported subgroup.

Per the flexibility waiver, the AMO targets were set with the goal of reducing the percentage of non-proficient students by one-half within six years.

The attached charts provide the targets for English language arts and for mathematics.



2011-2012 Accountability 2012-2013 Accountability

Adequate Yearly Progress(AYP) Status

Not reported or sanctioned Not reported or sanctioned

Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs)

Set on 2010-11 performance data and reported by different subgroup targets

Set on 2010-11 performance data and reported by different subgroup targets

Minimum Subgroup Size Minimum N = 40 (No change) Minimum N = 30

Participation Rate Included as component of AMO reporting with no specific consequences (No change)

Included as component of AMO reporting with specific consequences over three years


Measures of Student Learning

The Measures of Student Learning (MSL) are common assessments that measure student learning in subjects and grades that are not part of the State testing program.

Results from the MSLs will be used in the teacher evaluation process.


Measures of Student Learning

Because of the magnitude of subjects/courses that will require an MSL, there will be 3 phases of implementation. The attached tables list each phase and the MSLs that will be administered during the phase.


Testing & Accountability Web Site

New Features

• Mission Statement

• Updated Contact Information

• ISS Data Resources Symbaloo Webmix

• Testing Calendar Revised 8/16/2012


Educator Effectiveness

• For more information regarding Educator Effectiveness, click on the ISS Data Resources Symbaloo Webmix and select the “Educator Effectiveness” tile.

Documents

A New School Accountability Model. Draft – March 2012. Check for Updates to this Presentation