CONNECTICUT STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

1. CONNECTICUT STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Connecticut’s New Accountability System: Metrics and School Classification

2. No Child Left Behind Waiver(Approved by USDE on May 29th) The waiver enables the CSDE and districts to: • Use Title I funding more flexibly • Replace annual yearly progress (AYP) under NCLB with CT-designed annual performance targets • Replace NCLB sanctions for schools and districts with more effective interventions

3. NCLB Sanctions no longer in effect: • Schools will not be identified as “in need of improvement” based on this year’s data • Schools that have already been “in need of improvement” will not be required to implement certain NCLB sanctions: • Supplemental Education Services • Public School Choice • Corrective Action measures • Restructuring measures

4. NCLB Requirements Waived: • No longer required to offer SES/NCLB Public School Choice(eliminated 20 percent reservation) • District and school improvement 10% reservations for professional development no longer required • For more detailed description of provisions waived, please see “Summary of NCLB Waiver Flexibilities document

5. Timeline

6. NCLB Waiver: First Step in Improving School Accountability

7. Elements of school performance to capture in future years: • Cohort Growth • College and Career Readiness • Civics • Arts • Fitness/Wellness • School Climate If interested in partnering with the CSDE to develop metrics in any of these areas, please contact: Renee Savoie, renee.savoie@ct.gov.

8. Elements of Accountability System • Measurement • Classification • Intervention • Recognition

9. Why Connecticut needs a new system of accountability: • We should value improvement at all levels. • We should use metrics that give us a fuller picture of performance. • We should set meaningful goals for schools. • We should set the bar higher: the goal is ‘Goal’.

10. Major shifts:

11. NCLB Connecticut’s New Indicators

12. Performance Index • Index between 0 and 100 • Counts performance in all tested grade levels • Captures performance across performance bands • Includes all tested subjects: reading, writing, math, and science • Incorporates all tested students, including students who take the MAS and the Skills Checklist • Provides subject-specific indices and overall index • Calculated for “all students” group and subgroups: ELL, SWD, Black, Hispanic, F/R lunch

13. What’s the difference between the results released last week and the performance metrics?

14. Performance Index Students who take CMT/CAPT

15. Performance IndexStudents who take MAS or Skills Checklist *3% cap remains in place at the district-level. Standard raised from Proficient to Goal.

16. Calculating District/School/Subgroup Performance Index • Step 1: Calculate an Individual Performance Index (IPI) for each student. • Example: 5th grader • Reading – G: 1.0 • Writing – P: .67 • Science – B: .33 • Math–P: .67 • Average these values (x100) to get Individual Performance Index: 67 • Example: 4th grader • Reading – B: .33 Writing – P: .67 Math–BB: 0.0 • Average these values (x100) to get Individual Performance Index: 33 • Step 2: Calculate the District/School/Subgroup Performance Index. • Example: • 5th grader IPI = 67 • 4th grader IPI = 33 • Average all students IPIs (in the relevant group) to get the Performance Index = 50

17. Calculating Subject Performance Index • 97 students take CMT • 17 score A: 17 students x 1.00 = 17 SPI points • 20 score G: 20 students x 1.00 = 20 SPI points • 30 score P: 30 students x 0.67 = 20 SPI points • 15 score B: 15 students x 0.33 = 5 SPI points • 15 score BB: 15 students x 0.00 = 0 SPI points • 2 students take MAS • 1 scores G: 1 student x 1.00 = 1 SPI point • 1 scores B: 1 student x 0.00 = 0 SPI points • 1 student takes Skills Checklist • 1 scores I: 1 student x 1.00 = 1 SPI point Subject Performance Index = 64 % at or above Proficient = 69%

18. How can a school increase its SPI? For a school with 100 students…. Increasing % Proficiency by 9% requires moving 9 students who were not Proficient to Proficient. Increasing the SPI by 3 points requires moving 9 students across any performance threshold (.33 for each student) 0.33 0.33 1.0 0.33

19. Graduation Metrics for High Schools • Federally defined • The percentage of incoming 9th graders who graduate from 12th grade within 4 years with a standard diploma • Counts students who stay enrolled in high school for longer than 4 years • Counts students who receive certificate of completion • Does not count students who dropped out or transferred to another school district but never enrolled or have an unknown status 4-year cohort graduation rate Extended graduation rate

20. Connecticut State Targets: following 2018

21. School Performance Index Performance Targets: Ambitious yet Achievable School Performance Index 88

22. Subgroup Performance Index Performance Targets: Ambitious yet Achievable Subgroup Performance Index 88

23. 4-year Cohort Graduation Rate Performance Targets: Ambitious yet Achievable 94% 4-year graduation rate

24. Extended Graduation Rate Performance Targets: Ambitious yet Achievable Extended graduation rate 96%

25. School Classification: • Excelling • Progressing • Transition • Review (inc. Focus) • Turnaround Met all state targets Meeting annual targets Not meeting annual targets Need the most support: eligible for Commissioner’s Network; otherwise, district-led interventions and redesign

26. Sample Schools with Subject Performance Index = 88

27. Sample Schools with Subject Performance Index = 64

28. Excelling Schools Performance Targets Meet state targets: • SPI > 88 • 4yr grad > 94% • Ext. grad > 96% • Maj. of subgp. gaps < 10 and • > 25% Adv. In three of four subjects • Maintain SPI > 88 • Maintain 4yr grad > 94% • Maintain Ext. grad > 96% • If subgp. SPI < 88, increase so that ½ way to 88 by 2018 • Drive own improvement Interventions Description

29. Progressing Schools Performance Targets • Increase SPI so ½ way to 88 by 2018 • Increase subgroup SPIs so ½ way to 88 by 2018 • Increase 4yr grad so ½ way to 94% by 2018 • Increase Ext grad so ½ way to 96% by 2018 • SPI >88 and miss one of: • Maj. of subgp. gaps < 10 • 4yr grad > 94% • Ext. grad > 96% OR • 64 < SPI < 88 and meet all of: • Performance target for SPI • 4yr grad > 90% • Ext. grad > 93% • Maj. of subgp. gaps < 10 • Self-review Interventions Description

30. Transition Schools Performance Targets • Increase SPI so ½ way to 88 by 2018 • Increase subgroup SPIs so ½ way to 88 by 2018 • Increase 4yr grad so ½ way to 94% by 2018 • Increase Ext grad so ½ way to 96% by 2018 • 64 < SPI < 88 and miss one of: • Performance target for SPI • 4yr grad > 90% • Ext. grad > 93% • Maj. of subgp. gaps < 10 • District-led review Interventions Description

31. Schools in need of the greatest support Performance Targets • Increase SPI so ½ way to 88 by 2018 or 3 pts. • Increase subgroup SPIs so ½ way to 88 by 2018 • Increase 4yr grad so ½ way to 94% by 2018 • Increase Ext grad so ½ way to 96% by 2018 • SPI < 64 OR • 4yr grad < 60 OR • Part. rate < 95% OR • Subgroups among lowest performing in state (Focus Schools) • Eligible for Commissioner’s Network • Otherwise, district-led focused and/or comprehensive School Redesign Plans and interventions Interventions Description

32. Schools in need of the greatest support Focus • Lowest performing subgroups: eligible for F/R lunch, SWD, ELL, Black, Hispanic • 4-yr grad rate < 60% • Interventions must occur in 2012-13; identified based on 2011 data • SIG Schools • Lowest 5% of Title I Schools • CSDE will be involved in interventions in these schools • School Performance Index lower than 64 for “all students” • Interventions occur in 2013-14 and 2014-15 Review Turnaround

33. Schools of Distinction

34. Schools of DistinctionSustained high performance for subgroups or sustained progress for the “all students group” • Recognition Other ideas for consideration: • Option for teacher or administrator to take sabbatical to join Turnaround Team for one year • Monetary grants

35. Please contact the SDE if you have further questions: New performance indicators: Gil Andrada: gilbert.andrada@ct.gov Incorporation of future performance metrics: Renee Savoie: renee.savoie@ct.gov Waiver flexibilities: Marlene Padernacht: marlene.padernacht@ct.gov