1 / 18

Understanding Massachusetts’ new accountability measures

Understanding Massachusetts’ new accountability measures. November 2012. What are the major changes for 2012?. NCLB goal of 100 percent proficient replaced by new goal of reducing proficiency gaps by half by 2017

patch
Download Presentation

Understanding Massachusetts’ new accountability measures

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Understanding Massachusetts’ new accountability measures November 2012

  2. What are the major changes for 2012? • NCLB goal of 100 percent proficient replaced by new goal of reducing proficiency gaps by half by 2017 • NCLB accountability status labels replaced by state’s accountability & assistance levels (Levels 1-5) • AYP replaced by new performance measure (Progress & Performance Index - PPI) that incorporates student growth, science, & other indicators Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

  3. State performance targets under NCLB Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

  4. What are the major changes for 2012? (continued) • Data reported for new “high needs” subgroup, an unduplicated count of all students belonging to any of these subgroups: low income, students with disabilities, English language learner/former English language learner • School percentile reported, indicating school’s overall performance on PPI indicators relative to other schools in same grade span Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

  5. What are some key PPI concepts? • The PPI is a measure of progress toward a group’s gap-narrowing goals • - Annual PPI indicates progress from one year to the next • - Cumulative PPI represents a trend over time Core Indicators Extra Credit Reduce ELA, math & science Warning/Failing % Increase ELA, math, & science Advanced % • ELA, math, & science proficiency gap narrowing (CPI) • ELA & math growth (SGP) • Annual dropout rate • Cohort graduation rate

  6. What are some key Level concepts? • Schools and districts are classified into a level based on a four-year trend • Districts are classified based on the level of lowest-performing school (exception for Board action) • School percentiles (1-99) represent performance relative to other schools in the grade span, and are used to determine Level 3 schools (lowest-performing 20 percent per state law) Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

  7. AYP vs. PPI AYP System PPI System Differentiated targets for schools and subgroups Uses Student Growth Percentiles Uses four years of data Partial credit model High needs subgroup for classification to avoid double counting Rewards movement beyond proficiency Attendance not included • 100% Proficiency for all students • No measure of student growth • Based on one year of data • “Single No” System • Counted students multiple times for subgroup classification • Proficient and Advanced treated the same • Attendance as an indicator Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

  8. Commendation Schools • Level 1 How are schools classified? Description ESE Engagement • Level 2 High achieving, high growth, gap narrowing schools (subset of Level 1) • Level 3 Meeting proficiency gap narrowing goals (for aggregate & high needs students) Very low • Level 4 Not meeting proficiency gap narrowing goals (for aggregate &/or high needs students) Low • Level 5 Lowest performing 20% of schools (including lowest performing subgroups) High Lowest performing schools (subset of Level 3) Very high Chronically underperforming schools (subset of Level 3 & 4) Extremely high Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

  9. Sample reports

  10. Level 1 school (first layer of report) Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

  11. Level 1 school (second layer of report) Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

  12. Third layer of report Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

  13. Level 2 school (first layer of report) Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

  14. Level 3 school (first layer of report) Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

  15. Level 2 district (first layer of report) Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

  16. Level 2 district (first layer of report) Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

  17. Questions? ESEA@doe.mass.edu | 781-338-3550 http://www.doe.mass.edu/apa/general/ Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

More Related