Download
1 / 25
250 likes | 261 Views
State Board of Education Meeting May 10-11, 2-17 Summary of Assessment and Accountability Items. Riverside County Office of Education June 2, 2017. Item 1: Accountability.
E N D
State Board of Education MeetingMay 10-11, 2-17Summary ofAssessment and Accountability Items Riverside County Office of Education June 2, 2017
Item 1: Accountability “Developing an Integrated Local, State, and Federal Accountability and Continuous Improvement System: Approval of the Application Process for Alternative Schools; Update on the California School Dashboard, the English Learner Progress Indicator, and Continued Developmental Work of Evaluation Rubrics.” ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- • CDE reviewed past actions made by the SBE. • CDE presented a timeline for future activities (see the next slide). • CDE referred to the attachment 4 of item 1. (Please see the attachment titled “Accountability Development Timeline March 2017 - Nov 2018” to view the information referred to.)
Item 1: Accountability (Cont.) Other points made during CDE’s presentation to the SBE. • Data used in the Fall 2017 Dashboard will be different than the data used for the field test Spring 2017 Dashboard. (See attachment titled “Differences in Spring and Fall 2017 State Accountability Dashboard Data” to review the differences. • Although the local indicators are optional at this point, they will be required for the Fall 2017 Dashboard. CDE encourages LEAs to upload their local indicator information sooner rather than later. LEAs that upload their local indicator information now will have that same information appear in their Fall 2017 Dashboard automatically. • CDE is working on improving the Spanish translation of the Dashboard, especially for areas like “Two or More Races.”
Item 1: Accountability (Cont.) Other points made during CDE’s presentation to the SBE. • Fall 2017 Graduation Indicator will use 2015–16 four-year cohort graduation rate minus the three-year weighted average (i.e., 2014–15, 2013–14, and 2012–13). • If all goes as planned, the Fall 2018 Dashboard will use the 2017-2018 graduation information (numerator) in the Graduation Indicator calculation. • California Collaborative for Educational Excellence resource were mentioned (e.g., resources at http://ccee-ca.org/ and http://ccee-ca.org/workshops-trainings-spring2017.asp).
Item 1: Accountability (Cont.) Alternative Schools • California’s former state accountability system (i.e., Academic Performance Index) required that all schools be included in the state’s accountability system. However, some schools served high-risk students, including continuation high schools and opportunity schools, and the nature of their work required the development of the Alternative Schools Accountability Model (ASAM) back in 2000. • “In October 2010, the Governor signed the state budget and in doing so vetoed funding for the data collection and reporting of the ASAM program” (CDE web site). • Schools serving high-risk students needs to be included in California’s new accountability and continuous improvement system.
Item 1: Accountability (Cont.) Alternative Schools • The CDE recommended and the SBE approved … The following school types explicitly identified in EC Section 52052(g) be automatically included as alternative schools in the accountability system and have performance reported using the alternative indicators, when developed. (Tentatively scheduled for the Fall 2018 Dashboard.) - Continuation - County or District Community Day - Opportunity - County Community - Juvenile Court - California Education Authority, Division of Juvenile Justice - Nonpublic, nonsectarian schools - County Run Special Education Schools
Item 1: Accountability (Cont.) Alternative Schools • The CDE also recommended and the SBE approved that alternative schools not explicitly identified in EC Section 52052(g) be required to reapply and demonstrate that they continue to meet the SBE adopted alternative school eligibility criteria for consideration as an alternative school for the Fall 2017 Dashboard. • Criteria to be identified as an alternative school remains the same as approved by the SBE back in 2003. • Schools serving at least 70% of the school’s total enrollment comprised of the high-risk student groups would qualify as alternative schools. High-risk student groups include (a) expelled students, (b) students suspended more than 10 days in a school year, (c) wards of the Court, (d) pregnant and/or parenting students, (e) schools serving dropouts, (f) habitually truant or habitually insubordinate and disorderly whose attendance at the school is directed by a school attendance review board or probation officer, and g) retained more than once in kindergarten through grade eight.
Item 1: Accountability (Cont.) Alternative Schools • “Based on feedback from stakeholders, certain types of alternative schools of choice and charter schools serving high-risk students are not included in the current alternative schools definition because their students do not meet the eligibility criteria adopted by the SBE in 2003.” • “The CDE will obtain feedback from the Statewide Advisory Task Force on Alternative Education Accountability and other stakeholder groups on proposed revisions to the eligibility criteria.” • “Based on the feedback, the CDE will provide a recommendation on revisions to the eligibility criteria for action at the July 2017 SBE meeting.” • For example, schools serving a high percentage students who are credit deficient may be included in the alternative schools identification criteria.
Item 1: Accountability (Cont.) ELPI Indicator
Item 1: Accountability (Cont.) Support for the “extra credit” for LTEL Data in the ELPI Indicator
Item 2: Assessment SBE approved a nearly 1.5 million CAASPP contract with ETS. “Some of the key enhancements to the proposed SOW include: • ETS will deliver the interim assessment data on a daily basis to Smarter Balanced to provide item-level student response information in the interim assessment reporting system. • ETS will revise the data file format and delivery process to capture the scores for each of the four [ELA] writing extended response dimensions and report the extended response dimension scores (rubric scores) in the 2018 online summative assessment reporting system. • ETS and WestEd will develop a CAASPP Science Academy that will provide professional development and support activities for the implementation of the California Next Generation Science Standards and understanding of how the new science assessment item types can inform teaching and learning.
Item 2: Assessment (Cont.) • ETS is to employ a method of creating new assessment items without increasing the summative testing time for students. • ETS will conduct simulations for three growth models under consideration for California’s accountability system. • Side Note 1: It is important to note that LEAs extended their infrastructures over the past few years to administer online assessments and there are more online state mandated assessment coming (e.g., CA NGSS assessments). It would be helpful if the state came up with resources for LEAs to be able to refresh and improve their online assessment infrastructure. In any case, LEA’s should consider their own infrastructure needs and take any necessary steps they feel are needed in case the state does not provide additional support. • Side Note 2: In early May, nearly 500,000 students took SBAC assessments on one day.
Item 3: ESSA • CDE and SBE are making every effort to make a unified accountability system that meets both California and Federal Government requirements. • CDE recommended and the SBE approved a draft ESSA State Plan for the statutorily required 30-day public comment period. It is important to note that CDE and SBE are actively seeking insights from various sources (Please see the attached flyer titled “ESSA CDE Flyer - Be Heard” for opportunities to provide your insights concerning an ESSA State Plan.) • The CDE will bring back a report that summarizes the insights they gather from the various input sessions to the SBE in July 2017. • A final draft of the State Plan is scheduled to be presented to the SBE, for their potential approval, in September 2017.
Item 3: ESSA (Cont.) Draft State ESSA Plan Elements Discussed CDE and the SBE’s discussed revolved around four general topics: 1. Identification of School for comprehensive and targeted assistance. 2. Annual Measurement of Achievement (95% participation rate) 3. Establishment of Long-term Goals 4. Native Language Assessments
Item 3: ESSA (Cont.) 1. Identification of School for comprehensive and targeted assistance.
Item 3: ESSA (Cont.) 1. Identification of School for comprehensive and targeted assistance. Important Note: California already has a method of identifying LEAs that qualify for support.
Item 3: ESSA (Cont.) 1. Identification of School for comprehensive and targeted assistance. • SBE members had an lively discussion on this topic. • ESSA documentation emphasizes the identification of low performing schools at the school level without considering that real change comes from a LEA’s systematic effort and support. • The SBE asked the CDE to explore alternatives that correspond to the way California views accountability and continuous improvement.
Item 3: ESSA (Cont.) 2. Annual Measurement of Achievement (95% participation rate) • States are required to address the 95% participation rate in their ESSA State Plans. However, states can select how to include it in its accountability system. • CDE and SBE are seeking the public’s insights on best to include this measure in California’s ESSA State Plan.
Item 3: ESSA (Cont.) 3. Establishment of Long-term Goals ESSA requires states to establish ambitious long-term goals, which include measurements of interim progress toward meeting the goals for all students and separately for each student group. Goals are required for: • Academic achievement, as measured by the statewide assessments in English language arts (ELA) and mathematics; • The four-year cohort graduation rate; and • Progress Toward Achieving English language proficiency for English learners. _____ Important Note: The SBE will establish a policy on how often (e.g., 5 to 7 years) the criteria used within the various 5x5 cells is re-examined for appropriateness.
Item 3: ESSA (Cont.) 3. Establishment of Long-term Goals One Potential Option
Item 3: ESSA (Cont.) 4. Native Language Assessments (Spanish) • California Spanish Assessments (CSA) measure CCSS in ELA and they are optionally administered assessments. • CSA’s are under development. First administration is scheduled for the 2018-2019 academic year. Hence, there is no data on how these assessment function. • Someday LEAs and/or the state could use CSA’s for the Seal of Biliteracy. • For accountability purposes, the U. S. Department of Education wants a state’s Native Language Assessments to measure the same constructs as the state’s English language-based ELA assessments (e.g., CSA measures the same constructs as SBAC ELA tests). California is not designing the CSA to measure the same constructs as SBAC ELA tests. If California ever wanted to insert the CSA into its accountability system, California would need another assessment or request a waiver.)
Item 3: ESSA (Cont.) 4. Native Language Assessments (Spanish) • If at some point California decided that it wanted to insert the CSA into its accountability system, there are a number of alternative ways it could do so. Examples include, it could reported as a local indicator and/or it could be used in local LCAPs. • CDE reported that other states were not including Native Language Assessments in their State ESSA Plans. • With no data on how the CSA functions, the SBE is not including it in the draft State ESSA Plan going out for feedback.
