Changes to the ESEA Waiver

1. Changes to the ESEA Waiver Prepared for Network 609 Principals by Erin E. Gehant Sr. School Improvement Liaison

2. Agenda: • Overview of ESEA and Rationale for Changes • Highlighting Significant Changes • Changes to EAMO targets • Changes to Performance Index calculations • Classifying schools under the new waiver • Conducting Interventions and actions for Improvement • Resources Available to Inform your Next Steps • Summary and Next Steps for Planning

3. About the Waiver: • Allows New York State to be exempt from provisions within NCLB, such as the requirement of proficiency for all students by 2013-2014 • Approved May 29, 2012 • New policies are already in effect • It is anticipated that fewer schools will be identified as “low performing” • Resources will be concentrated in supporting schools that are identified as “low performing”

4. Significant Changes • This includes adjusting EAMO targets, as well as how Performance Index will be calculated • Focus on reducing gaps between subgroups and the All Student group

5. Rationale for Adjusted AMO Targets: • “New York State will set AMOs in annual equal increments toward the goal of reducing by half, within six years, the gap between the Performance Index for the “all students” group and each subgroup in 2010-11 and a Performance Index of 200, which would represent all students achieving Level 3, meeting proficiency standards, or better. Credit is awarded equally for students meeting or exceeding proficiency standards.” 1 1. New York State Education Department, ESEA Flexibility Request, 2012,p. 73

6. Significant Changes • PI of All Students group used in determination of Priority and Focus Schools and Focus Districts • Subgroup participation AYP, ELA and Math Performance Indices will be used in determining which schools will be removed from these categories • Meeting or Exceeding AYP will be determining factors in identifying Reward and Recognition Schools, as well as Local Assistance Plan schools

7. New EAMO Tables AMOs and EAMOs set for each subgroup

8. New EAMO Tables

9. New EAMO Tables

10. Significant Changes • Elementary and Middle schools will be evaluated on both proficiency and growth

11. New Approach to Defining Performance Index • “Students who perform at Level 1 or Level 2 on a grade 4-8 ELA or mathematics assessment but are determined to be on track to proficiency within three years, or by grade 8, whichever is earlier, based on their student growth percentile will be weighted in the Performance Index in the same way as are students who meet or exceed proficiency standards. • Student Growth Percentiles will be assigned based on how a student achieved compared to all students with similar test histories in New York State. • As discussed in New York Technical Overview and Impact Report, the incorporation of growth changes on average the Performance Index for ELA by three index points and for mathematics by four index points. • Thus, the percentage of students who meet or exceed proficiency standards will be the overwhelming factor in determining the Performance Index for the groups of students for which a school or district is accountable.” 2 2. New York State Education Department, ESEA Flexibility Request, 2012,p. 73

12. How including student growth helps your PI: from: http://www.p12.nysed.gov/accountability/documents/ESEAWebinarJuly92012.pdf, slide 16

13. How will the state measure growth? from: http://www.p12.nysed.gov/accountability/documents/ESEAWebinarJuly92012.pdf, slide 14

14. Two types of Growth: from: http://www.p12.nysed.gov/accountability/documents/ESEAWebinarJuly92012.pdf, slide 15

15. How are they determining growth? Normative Growth Absolute Growth from: http://www.p12.nysed.gov/accountability/documents/ESEAWebinarJuly92012.pdf, slide 17

16. Pause for Reflection: • With an increasing emphasis on accountability for all subgroups and adjusted expectations for performance, what systems and structures do you have in place to support lower achieving subgroups? • Can you think of any changes that you will make in systems and structures to prepare for the adjustments ahead? • How do the changes covered so far benefit your school?

17. Significant Changes • Continuum of Improvement/Corrective Action/Restructuring ends at the end of 2011-2012 • Now, schools will be identified as “Focused” or “Priority” or “Local Assistance Plan” schools

18. Focused Districts • Focused Districts are identified if • They have at least one priority school • -Or- • Subgroup performance is among the lowest 5% in the state • Districts then determine Focus Schools based on number or percent of non-proficient students or non-graduating students

19. Focused vs. Priority Schools • “The Priority School category is intended to capture • the lowest performing schools statewide based on the • 2010-11 performance of the All Students group. The • number of Priority Schools will be approximately 5% • of the total number of schools statewide.”* • “The Focus Districts and Schools category is intended to capture the lowest performing schools statewide by 2010-11 subgroup performance. The number of Focus Schools is approximately 10% of the total number of schools statewide. Initial Focus identification will be at the district level. Focus Districts will then identify their Focus Schools based upon NYSED criteria. NYSED is treating each of New York City’s 32 community school districts as a • separate district for Focus identification.” * * From: http://intranet.nycboe.net/NR/rdonlyres/85246328-7837-4086-87D1-4FB83C3B2E76/0/042012NCLBWaiver_OnePagerv1.pdf

20. Local Assistance Plan Schools • Schools not identified as Priority or Focus and have: • Unacceptably large gaps in performance among subgroups OR • Failed to make AYP for three consecutive years for a specific subgroup

21. Reward Schools • At the elementary and middle level, New York will use the following criteria to designate a school as highest performing: • the school’s combined ELA and mathematics Performance Index places it among the top twenty percent of public schools in the State for each of the past two years; • the school has made AYP with all groups and all measures for which it is accountable for each of the past two years; • the school’s student growth percentile for the past two years in ELA and mathematics exceeds fifty percent; • the school’s student growth percentile for ELA and mathematics in the most recent year for its bottom quartile of students, as measured by their student growth percentile in the previous year, exceeds fifty percent in the current year; and, • the school does not have a gap in performance larger in 2010-11 than it did three years prior for all subgroups of students and students who are not members of the subgroup. footnote

22. Reward Schools • At the elementary and middle levels, a school will be considered a high progress school, if all of the following conditions are met: • the school’s combined ELA and mathematics Performance Index places it among the top ten percent of public schools in the State in terms of gains between the most recent assessment data and the data from the previous year; • the school has made AYP with all groups and all measures for which it is held accountable for each of the past two years ; • the school’s student growth percentile for the past two years in ELA and mathematics exceeds 50 percent; • the school’s student growth percentile for ELA and mathematics in the most recent year for its bottom quartile of students, as measured by their student growth percentile in the previous year, exceeds fifty percent in the current year; and, • the school does not have a gap in performance larger in 2010-11 than it did three years prior for all subgroups of students and students who are not members of the subgroup. footnote

23. Which data will be used to make identifications of schools? • 2012-2013 Priority/Focus determinations will be based on 2010-11 data • 2012-2013 LAP and Reward/Recognition schools will incorporate 2011-2012 data

24. Future Identifications: • No new Priority School identifications after 2012-2013 • No new Focus District determinations after 2012-2013 • Designation of Focus Schools within Focus Districts will be determined annually • LAP school designation and Reward/Recognition schools will be identified annually • In Good Standing will be identified annually

25. Significant Changes • SQRs, SCRAs and JITs will be different – streamlined using a single diagnostic tool

26. Unified Diagnostic Tool Will examine the following six areas: • School Leadership Practices and Decisions • Teacher Practices and Decisions • Implementation of the Common Core Standards • Students’ Social and Emotional Development and Health • Parent and Community Engagement • District Capacity to Support Change

27. Next Steps in Supporting Improvement • Focused Districts must develop a District Comprehensive Improvement Plan (DCIP) • Priority Schools must implement SIG model Or • Comprehensive Education Plan based on ESEA turnaround principles • Unidentified schools missing AYP or persistent achievement gaps must create a Local Assistance Plan (LAP)

28. Next Steps for School Leaders • Await identification • NYSED stated Priority and Focused schools would be released in July • Reward/Recognition Schools and LAP schools will be released in the fall • NYSED and NYCDOE will provide information as it becomes available • Look to SFE webinars for next steps

29. Next Steps for Planning: • How do you plan for the changes? • Subgroup identification and support • What systems and structures are currently in place? • To analyze current data • Monitor student progress • Target students for early intervention • Are there changes that you should consider making in instructional practices?

30. Resources Available: • See “Waiver Resources” Handout with webinars and other important links • Keep an eye out for forthcoming information from Central and NYSED

31. Presented by: Erin E. Gehant Senior School Improvement Liaison egehant2@schools.nyc.gov