1 / 30

Utah ESEA Flexibility for No Child Left Behind 2012 and beyond

Utah ESEA Flexibility for No Child Left Behind 2012 and beyond. Implications for Salt Lake City School District August 7 th 2012. Utah Comprehensive Accountability System (UCAS). Flexibility Highlights. One accountability system (Utah Comprehensive Assessment System) No more AYP

danyl
Download Presentation

Utah ESEA Flexibility for No Child Left Behind 2012 and beyond

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. Utah ESEA Flexibilityfor No Child Left Behind 2012 and beyond Implications for Salt Lake City School District August 7th 2012 Utah Comprehensive Accountability System (UCAS)

  2. Flexibility Highlights • One accountability system (Utah Comprehensive Assessment System) • No more AYP - No requirement for 100% proficiency 2014 • No Schools/Districts in program improvement (Priority or Focus) All NCLB requirements not addressed in the 2012 waiver are still in place • More flexibility in use of Title I School Improvement funds • New Utah Comprehensive Assessment System meets federal and state requirements: - Growth and proficiency - Focus on below proficient students

  3. College- and Career-Ready Expectations for All Students • Adoption of the new Utah Core Standards for English language arts and mathematics • Adoption of a new comprehensive assessment system which will measure the full breadth and depth of the Utah Core Standards using computer based adaptive testing • Focused student performance outcomes targeted at ensuring all students are college, career, and citizenship ready • Adoption of the WIDA English language proficiency standards to assist educators to ensure that instruction supports English language learners in the acquisition of English

  4. Utah Comprehensive Accountability System(UCAS) • Incorporates both student achievement and growth toward improvement in a composite score for each school • Annual public reports will provide summary data for the entire school, as well as disaggregated results by ethnicity, and for economically disadvantaged, English language learners, and students with disabilities

  5. UCAS Principles • Meeting standards (proficiency) and improving academic achievement (growth) are BOTH valued • All schools, including those that serve traditionally low performing students, should have an opportunity to demonstrate success • The system should include strong incentives for schools to improve achievement for the lowest performing students • Growth expectations for below proficient students should be linked to attaining proficiency • Growth expectations for all students, including students above proficiency, should be appropriately challenging and meaningful • Clear and understandable to stakeholders

  6. Point Structure for Elementary/Middle Schools

  7. Point Structure for High Schools

  8. Achievement Calculations

  9. Achievement Calculations for Elementary School Northview Park School 2012 Achievement

  10. Achievement Measures all students who passed the assessment (proficiency) Growth Measures how much students progressed from one year to the next

  11. Growth Calculations

  12. Student Growth Percentile • Compute an SGP for each year a student has an assessment scale score: • Identify a student scale score for all past years where a score exists for that student • Determine the academic peer group (all students in the state with the “same” scale scores for all of the same years) for each student • Determine how performance in the current year compares with that of the student’s peer group to produce a growth percentile

  13. To measure growth, students are only compared to their academic peer group 164 164 164 164 162 162 162 162 159 159 159 159 154 154 154 154

  14. 2011 Performance 2012 Score Distribution 162 • Student growth is determined by comparing the performance of a student with all other students in the state with the same past performance 161 This value is the 50th Percentile 161 159 165 161 The 50th percentile is the value below which 50% of the scores lie 155 161 Far below average growth Below average growth Average and above growth High Growth

  15. Mean vs. MedianThe median score is used for the school calculations Why Use SGP ? Recognizes growth for the low and the high achieving student Growth percentiles are calculated for every student, but can be aggregated to the classroom, subgroup, school, district, and state

  16. Growth Calculation Average Average

  17. Northview Park 2012 UCAS The long term goal is for schools to earn a minimum of 480 points for elementary schools and 470 for high schools which is approximately the 75th percentile for schools across the state. Accordingly, the targets would be set on reducing the gap between a schools current score and the target score by half in six years: Northview 2012 score = 405 480-405= 75 (1/2 of 75=37.5) 405+ 37.5= 442.5 by 2017 School Goal

  18. 395

  19. Subgroup Reporting:Annual Measureable Objectives Federal Requirement to establish and report AMOs Utah’s Minimum Compliance Plan • AMOs are not used in any UCAS calculation • AMO trajectory will reduce in half the percent of non-proficient over six years • AMOs will be established separately for each subgroup at each school • UCAS reporting will list the AMO and performance of each school subgroup • AMO reporting page will be a drill down page in the UCAS report • AMOs will be used in identifying and exiting Focus/Priority schools

  20. Establishing AMOs • AMOs will be based on the percent of students achieving proficiency on the states Criterion-Referenced Tests (CRTs) separately in English language arts and mathematics • ELA: CRT results in grades 3-8 and 10 are used to determine the percent of students proficient • Mathematics: results are based on CRTs in grades 3-6 and in the course appropriate CRT thereafter which includes 7th grade math or 8th grade math. High schools will be determined by calculating the percent of 10th grade students who scored proficient on the secondary math 1 in 10th grade year or a prior year • Results from the Utah Alternative Assessment (UAA) are included for students with significant cognitive disabilities approved to participate in this assessment

  21. AMO: to set annual equal goals of reducing by half the percentage of students in each group who are not proficient within six years

  22. 63% proficient 2011 100-63 =37 ½ of 37 =18.5 18.5/6=3 % per year Year 1 63 + 3 =66 Year 2 66 + 3 =69…

  23. Reporting • UCAS reporting through the Public School Data Gateway on the USOE Website • Salt Lake City School District will also report this data. • SLCSD will also be creating school reports focusing on school and subgroup growth targets • Drillable school reports that will include achievement gap data that could be used in school improvement plans • Individual student growth reports with trajectory to proficiency • Subgroup disaggregated data

  24. 600 pts. Reward Schools: Highest performing Title I schools: Reward Schools: High progress Title I schools: 405 Northview Park 2012 High/High All Utah Schools Achievement Low/Low Growth Focus Schools: USOE will identify a minimum of 28 focus schools,10% of lowest scoring Title I schools not already identified as a priority. Two year average UCAS score, or not achieving AMOs for two years. These schools will be considered in improvement and receive $100,000 to fulfill Title I improvement requirements. Priority Schools: already identified using previous 4 years of data through the School Improvement Grant (SIG schools) 15 schools statewide 0 pts.

  25. Implications for Title I Schools Old Title I Accountability System • Utah will no longer use AYP determinations for Title I accountability • Current Title I school and district improvement requirements have been eliminated through the approved ESEA Flexibility Waiver • Title I schools identified in need of improvement for 2011-2012 will: • Retain current Title I school improvement grants through 2012-13 • Be evaluated for Focus School eligibility New Title I Accountability System • Utah will use the new UCAS accountability system to identify: • Priority Schools • Focus Schools • Reward Schools • The Title I requirements of setting aside Title I funds for school improvement sanctions are removed: • Transportation associated with public school choice • Supplemental Educational Services (SES)

  26. Priority/Focus Schools NOTE: This is allowed under the ESEA Flexibility Waiver Request Guidance and will allow Utah to maintain continuity in funding and service to those schools. All of these schools have already initiated one of the federally-mandated, rigorous, turnaround strategies that are required of Priority Schools. Exit Criteria Priority Schools: To exit Priority School status, the school must achieve • a two year composite CAS score of at least 320 or • a two year composite CAS score that is at least the 15th percentile of Title I schools (Priority) 25th percentile (focus) or • two year meeting of AMOs and/or significant decreases in achievement gaps Depending on what the school was identified for-

  27. Reward Schools The USOE will annually recognize two categories of Title I Reward Schools, High-performing and High-progress. These schools will be recognized through: • a press release • certificate of achievement • letter to the LEA superintendent or charter leader • letter to the building principal to be shared with the school community High-performing Title I Schools Schools will be identified based on highest levels of achievement and above average performance on growth High-progress Title I Schools Schools will be identified based on highest levels of growth and above average performance on achievement

  28. Additional Calculations • Full academic year (FAY) unchanged • Minimum N • Achievement/Growth =10 • Participation =40 • Schools must have data for all components to receive a report (no growth scores = no report) November 1 (estimated) Accountability Information Report posted on USOE webpage UCAS/UPASS reports posted on USOE Gateway

  29. FAQs 1. Will schools/districts get an AYP report? No. There will be no Yes or No designation for schools or districts. The UCAS report will show total school points. 2. How will AMAO #3 be calculated? It is anticipated AMAO #3 will be calculated based on the LEA EL subgroup AMO score. We are awaiting clarification from the department of education on this issue. 3. Is there an appeal process? See 2012 Accountability Timeline for detailed explanation 4. When will Priority, Focus and Reward schools be announced? It is anticipated that the USOE will announce Title I Focus and Reward Schools 30 days after CAS results are made available to LEAs. 5. What specific waivers of ESEA requirements did Utah receive from the U.S. Department of Education? For a full listing of the waivers granted, please see pages 5-6 of Utah’s approved ESEA Flexibility Waiver Request http://www.schools.utah.gov/data/Educational-Data/Accountability-School-Performance/Utah-ESEA-Flexibility-Request.aspx

More Related