+ All Categories
Home > Documents > Accountability Scorecards

Accountability Scorecards

Date post: 03-Jan-2016
Category:
Upload: risa-king
View: 16 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
Description:
Accountability Scorecards. Okemos Board of Education September 2013. Background Information. “Michigan Accountability Scorecards” replace Michigan’s AYP report cards that were required under the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
22
Accountability Scorecards Okemos Board of Education September 2013
Transcript
Page 1: Accountability Scorecards

Accountability ScorecardsOkemos Board of EducationSeptember 2013

Page 2: Accountability Scorecards

Background Information• “Michigan Accountability Scorecards” replace Michigan’s AYP

report cards that were required under the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001

• Michigan received a waiver from the U. S. Department of Education to develop a new accountability system for school performance

Page 3: Accountability Scorecards

Overview• Two “levels” of Accountability Scorecards:• District Scorecards & School Scorecards

• Scorecards will use a color coding system to indicate school performance• Green (85% or greater of possible points)• Lime (70% to 85% of possible points)• Yellow (60% to 70% of possible points)• Orange (50% to 60% of possible points)• Red (less than 50% of possible points)

• Combines traditional accountability metrics with Top-to-Bottom labels and other state/federal requirements.

Page 4: Accountability Scorecards

Color-Coded Scorecards• Colors are given to schools and districts for each “scorecard

component” and an overall color.

• Overall status color is determined using a point-based system from the number of target areas the school/district has met and the school ranking.

Decreasing # points received and increasing # targets not met…

Page 5: Accountability Scorecards

What Changed?

Page 6: Accountability Scorecards

What Stayed the Same?• Participation requirement = 95% for school/district overall and

all valid subgroups

• Graduation requirement = 80% for school/district overall and all valid subgroups

• Use of provisional and growth scores for accountable proficiency rates

Page 7: Accountability Scorecards

School and District Scorecard Subgroups

Previously ONE group!

Page 8: Accountability Scorecards

Participation Target• Two options for school/district color status for this target area.

95% Assessed Met 95% Assessed Not Met

• These colors are given ONLY on the participation target portion of the scorecard. This does not change your entire school/district status, however, it can impact your overall color.

Page 9: Accountability Scorecards

Proficiency Targets

Targets are based on 2011-12 proficiency rates:

• (85 – current percent proficient) / 10 = annual increment

• Increments do not reset

• Proficiency targets are set using PLs 1 & 2 only (not Provisional or Growth Proficient)

• Provisional and/or Growth Proficient will help you meet targets

Page 10: Accountability Scorecards

Proficiency Targets Example

Example school starts from 65% proficient in subject

Example school ends at (at least) 85% proficient in subject

Example School has +2% Annual Target

Page 11: Accountability Scorecards

Proficiency “Cell” Basics• All valid subgroups (30 students or more) will have a

proficiency cell with possible points

• Schools and districts will always have an “All Students” group

• All assessed content areas will have cells (Reading, Mathematics, Writing, Science, and Social Studies)

Page 12: Accountability Scorecards

Proficiency Cell Colors and Points• Green cells are worth two points and are earned by meeting

the school’s or district’s proficiency target

• Yellow cells are worth one point and are earned by meeting the Safe Harbor target (multi-year averaging of proficiency target)

• Red cells are worth zero points and are earned by not meeting proficiency or Safe Harbor targets

• The Bottom 30% subgroup will earn a green cell and two points by meeting the Safe Harbor target

Page 13: Accountability Scorecards

Students considered proficient are…

vs.

“Accountable Proficient” versus Proficient

For ‘True Proficiency’ purposes:•Performance Level 1 or 2

For ‘Accountable Proficiency’ purposes:•Students must attain a performance level of 1 or 2 –OR– •Students must attain a scale score that is within 2 standard errors of the proficient cut score (provisionally proficient). –OR– •Students must demonstrate growth at a rate that will allow them to reach proficiency in three years (growth proficient).

Page 14: Accountability Scorecards

Full Academic Year (FAY)• Students that were present in the building for the last:

• 2 count days + student in end-of-year collection (Elem./M.S.)

• 3 count days + student in end-of-year collection (H.S.)

• Only FAY students can count toward a school or district’s proficiency rates for accountability purposes.

• Limits the impact of student transiency on accountability.

• Ensures that only students that have been educated by the school/district count for proficiency.

Page 15: Accountability Scorecards

Graduation Rates

Page 16: Accountability Scorecards

Attendance Rates

Page 17: Accountability Scorecards

Okemos School’s DataColor(total proficiency points)

School Designation Overall School Percentile Rank (top-to-bottom list)

BW Yellow (86.8%) 93

CO Yellow (86.8%) 93

HI Yellow (78.9%) 85

OPM Yellow (91.7%) Reward 99

Kin Yellow (80%) Reward 96

CMS Yellow (66.7%) Reward 96

OHS Yellow (64.5%) Focus 94

Page 18: Accountability Scorecards

Okemos District DataStudent Group Reading Proficiency Mathematics Proficiency

All Students 94.29% 86.39%

Bottom 30% 83.27% 56.58%

Black/African American 81.56% 62.14%

Economically Disadvantaged 85.34% 66.57%

English Language Learners 70.00% 56.67%

Students with Disabilities 73.40% 52.22%

Page 19: Accountability Scorecards

Where to Find the Data• MI School Data (open to the public)• https://www.mischooldata.org/DistrictSchoolProfiles/ReportCard

/AccountabilityScorecard/AccountabilityScorecard.aspx

• Button on Okemos Schools website- home page

• BAA Secure Site (need login and password)• https://baa.state.mi.us/BAASecure/Accountability/EntityScorecar

dStatus.aspx

Page 20: Accountability Scorecards

District-Wide Improvement Strategies• Analyze district and building data to determine needs (top-to-

bottom student data file, universal screeners, and common assessments)

• Focus on “high expectations for all students”

• Increase awareness for creating “culturally responsive environments” in our schools • Strategic Plan- Diversity goals

• Study special education service delivery through “Special Education Program Review Committee”

Page 21: Accountability Scorecards

District-Wide Improvement Strategies• Continue building a Multi-Tiered System of Support (MTSS) • instructional coaches (expanded to OHS, CMS)• improved core and supplemental instruction• data analysis/ data meetings• professional development• PLCs

• Attend ISD sessions with building administrators and teacher leaders to increase skills in delivering MTSS

Page 22: Accountability Scorecards

Questions?


Recommended