MSIP 5 Becky Odneal October 27, 2011. Education Link Consulting2 Background on MSIP 5 Rule 2007-2009, first MSIP 5 March 2011, MSIP 5 rule approved

MSIP 5

Becky OdnealOctober 27, 2011

Education Link Consulting 2

Background on MSIP 5 Rule2007-2009, first MSIP 5March 2011, MSIP 5 rule approved by the SBEApril 15, 2011 public comment period began

Substantial concerns were raised by educators across the state

May 2011, rule withdrawn by DESE MSIP 5 Steering Committee MSIP 5 Regional Advisory Committees

August 16, 2011, MSIP 5 Rule approved by SBEOctober 3-November 2, Public Comment Period


RAC - Draft Consensus PointsContinue career/technical education opportunitiesReduce number of summative assessmentsRecognize the importance of formative assessmentsUse ACT instead of EOC/EOHS assessmentsMaintain resource and process standardsEliminate “report only” measures from APREnsure that the system acknowledges the needs of

the exceptional pupilEstablish benchmarks along the pre K through 12 ‐

continuum


MSIP 5 Recommendations1. Direct the Department to bring to the State Board of Education a new rule to update process and resource standards by August 2012. The process should: • Start with the recommendations previously

developed by the committee convened in 2008-09; • Consider current research and best practices; and • Include stakeholders. 2. Direct the Department to work with stakeholders and technical experts to develop state standards and a scoring guide for calculating proficiency on the revised MSIP 5 standards.


MSIP 5 Recommendations3. Approve the revised assessment plan as recommended, with the understanding that full implementation will be dependent on state funding and the work of the SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium.

4. Authorize the publication of a notice of proposed rulemaking to adopt Rule 5 CSR 50-345.1054, relating to Missouri School Improvement Program 5 in the Missouri Register and that the State Board of Education finds this proposed rule necessary to carry out the purposes of Sections 161.092, 162.081. 167.131, and 168.081 RSMo.


Recommendation 3. Assessment Plan

Pre-K through Grade 2 Assessments Developed in 11-12, piloted in 12-13,

operational in 13-14EOC Assessments

Phase-in planEOHS Assessments

SMARTER Balanced ConsortiumSocial Studies, Fine Arts and PE Assessments


Assessment Plan


Assessment Plan ConcernsPre-K through Grade 2, lack of informationEOC and EOHS assessments still require

students to take the same courses as previous plan in order to be proficient in competencies

Additional assessments still require additional technological resources for school districts

Required course-taking patterns limit opportunities for students to participate in more beneficial programs, such as career ed

Potential for EOHS assessments to become exit exams and career and college placement tools


Recommendation 4. Rule(1) Pursuant to section 161.092, RSMo, this rule is to be effective two (2) years from the date of adoption of the proposed rule by the State Board of Education (board). The Missouri School Improvement Program (MSIP) – 5 Performance Standards and Indicators, Appendix A, included herein, is comprised of quantitative standards for school districts. MSIP–5 Process Standards and Indicators will include evidence of adequate instruction in physical education and fine arts to be included in standards used to determine classification.


Recommendation 4. Rule(3) The board will assign classification designations of unaccredited, provisionally accredited, accredited, and accredited with distinction based on the standards of the MSIP.


Recommendation 4. RuleAPPENDIX A3. College and Career Readiness 2.The district’s average composite score(s) on any department-approved measure(s) of college and career readiness, for example, the ACT®, SAT®, COMPASS®, or ASVAB, meet(s) or exceed(s) the state standard or demonstrate(s) required improvement. 3. The percent of graduates who participated in any department-approved measure(s) of college and career readiness, for example, the ACT®, SAT®, COMPASS®, or ASVAB, meets or exceeds the state standard or demonstrates required improvement.


Recommendation 4. Rule3. College and Career Readiness6. The percent of graduates who complete career education programs approved by the department and are placed in occupations directly related to their training, continue their education, or are in the military within six (6) months of graduating meets the state standard or demonstrates required improvement.


Potential Implications…Emphasis is entirely on “college graduation”

and does not recognize programs for which students receive training in high school and enter higher wage-earning careers

Assessments change course-taking patterns and eliminate the opportunity for students to take career education courses which are proven to help prevent at-risk students from dropping out of school and prepare all students for higher wage-earning careers


Competencies cannot be embedded into career education programs, as suggested by DESE

Districts may be forced to replace career education teachers with additional CORE teachers in order for students to be taught the competencies needed to score Proficient on state assessments

Potential Implications…


Potential Implications for StudentsStudents will lose the opportunity to explore careers

before entering collegeStudents will lose the opportunity to become trained

in skills that will allow them to earn higher wages in career after high school and/or during college

Students will lose the opportunity to learn essential skills that will help them in many facets of life

Many students will drop out of high school because they will not have the opportunity to participate in programs that keep them engaged in high school and teach them hands-on skills that will help them succeed after graduation


Overall IssuesAlignment with federal accountability initiativesTop 10 by 2020 = NCLB’s 100% Proficiency by 2014Scoring Guide methodology “state standard” and

growth model (75% Proficiency, 100% Grad Rate)Potential NCLB Waiver


Scoring Guide/NCLB WaiverOctober-December, Steering CommitteeOctober 25-26, Public Input/Regional Advisory

Committee MeetingsNovember, Indicator/Model Selection

Committee (30 member advisory committee)

November-December, Standard Setting Methodology (10-member TAC)

January, scoring guide to State BoardJanuary-June, pilot scoring guideFebruary, NCLB Waiver application due


Scoring GuideGoals

Identify and work with lowest 5% Ensure all schools are “good enough” Ensure all schools get better

Design Decisions Status vs. Growth Differentiated vs. Standardized Accountability Simple/Transparent vs. Complex/Precise Resources - Focused vs. “Spread Across All

Districts”


Waiver ConcernsMSIP 5 goes into effect immediatelyConditions of waiverSchool-level implementationLoss of state flexibilityPotential reauthorizationUnknown “sticks”


Next StepsOctober 3 – November 2, public comment

periodRule goes in to effect in 2013Inform other stakeholdersRespond during public comment periodActively participate in Regional Advisory

Committees Scoring Guide Resource and Process Standards

NCLB Waiver


Questions?

Documents

MSIP 5 Becky Odneal October 27, 2011. Education Link Consulting2 Background on MSIP 5 Rule 2007-2009, first MSIP 5 March 2011, MSIP 5 rule approved