Proposed Changes to the Accreditation Process

1. Proposed Changes to the Accreditation Process CDE Briefing for the Colorado State Board of Education March 5, 2008

2. Purpose & Timeline • Today: Review changes and details of proposed rule • February & March: Obtaining input from the field • April: Rulemaking hearing April 9 • May: State Board adopts accreditation rules at State Board meeting • June: State Board approves district accreditation contracts

3. History 1998 Legislature passed Accreditation Act Article 11, 44, 45 of Title 22 Colorado Revised Statues 1999 Rules for Accrediting Schools & School Districts 2001 School Accountability Reports (SAR) 2001 Accreditation Contracts were submitted 2007 Original Accreditation Contracts expired 2007 Accreditation Contracts were extended for one year (June 2007 - June 2008)

4. Positive Stakeholder Feedback • Statewide presentations conducted • Superintendents in every region • CASB Board • Still to come: PTA and CEA • Across-the-board support for proposed changes to Accreditation

5. Intent of Changes to Accreditation Process • Focus on service and support • Preserve district autonomy but maintain commitment to success for all students • Ensure decisions are defensible and comparable across the state • Emphasize results, focus on student longitudinal growth • Link greater achievement to more autonomy • Eliminate duplicative paperwork • Provide districts with useful and transparent pre-populated data

6. Proposed changes: A) Five Points of Accountability • Student Results- Student Achievement Level (Status) and Growth • Student Results- Student Achievement Level (Status) and Growth Gaps • Student Results- Post-Secondary Readiness • Improvement Plan and Progress Monitoring • Compliance with assurances, including safety and finance

7. Proposed changes: B) Longitudinal Growth • Place greater emphasis on student longitudinal growth • Align accreditation growth measure with the work of the Technical Advisory Panel on Longitudinal Growth

8. Proposed changes: C) Pre-populated Data • CDE will provide annual pre-populated data for districts • Use for required annual report to patrons required by law

9. Proposed changes: D) Accreditation Review • Timing of Accreditation Reviews will change and depend on student outcomes and need for support • Districts with highest student performance will receive an onsite review every three years • Districts with low student performance will receive an annual onsite review and support • Districts on a two or three year Accreditation Review cycle will receive an annual data summary report, including commendations and recommended actions

10. Proposed changes: E) Accreditation Labels • Current: Letter of Concern, Watch, Probation, Non-Accredited • Labels under consideration: • Accredited with Distinction • Accredited • Accredited, Letter with Support • Accredited, Notice with Support • Probation, (may lead to loss of Accreditation) • Non-Accredited

11. Proposed changes: F) Early Warning System • Develop an early warning system based on student outcomes to identify districts needing support prior to steps toward corrective action

12. How Accreditation will Work • Accreditation Contract • State and district reporting • Accreditation review • Education Improvement Plan

13. Accreditation Contract • Standards, goals, assessments, strategies • Periodic review cycle for each school • Recognition of high performing schools and intervention for low-performing schools • Procedures for placing schools on corrective action cycles • Involvement of families, business, local advisory committees, district and school advisory accountability committees

14. Contract Assurances • Participation in all state assessments • Adequate policies implemented in compliance with state requirements • Compliance with budgeting, accounting, and reporting requirements • Principal professional development conducted • Right to display the flag of the United States • Adoption of model content standards

15. Reporting Obligations State provides an annual report to district • Data tables that meet or exceed Accreditation and NCLB reporting requirements Districts report to state and public • CSAP results (growth and status) disaggregated and trends, including third grade • Percentage of students taking AP courses, IB, postsecondary enrolled • Numbers of expelled and suspended students • Graduation rates & dropout rates • Percentage of students not taking CSAP • District budget, revenues, and expenditures • ACT results • Attendance rates • Graduation requirements • Evidence of a safe, civil learning environment • Number and identity of schools in each accreditation category • Additional local indicators

16. Accreditation Review • Annual review streamlined to focus on student results: growth, status, gaps, and postsecondary readiness • Annual review of assurances on finance and safety • Subsequent review of other assurances and district improvement plan if warranted by results

17. Education Improvement Plan • Best educational practices • High goals for student achievement • Recognized instructional strategies • Standards-based instruction • Use of state and local assessments • Promote postsecondary readiness • Incorporate parent, student and community participation • Assurance that policies implemented in compliance with state requirements