Mississippi s Differentiated Accountability Model. How the Flexibility Request impacts School Accountability September 2012

Transcription

1 Mississippi s Differentiated Accountability Model How the Flexibility Request impacts School Accountability September

2 ESEA Flexibility: What is waived? No longer will schools be required to meet 100% Proficiency by 2014, labeled in Title I School Improvement for not meeting AYP, required to provide Supplemental Educational Services (SES) and Public School Choice if in improvement, or limited to spending 21st CCLC funds for extended day/year programs. Specifics 2

3 ESEA Flexibility: What is NOT waived? Mississippi s School Performance Classification System is not impacted by the Request. (The A-F scale is mandated by state law.) The Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Model (or federal component of statewide accountability) is impacted. However, schools must still Meet proficiency expectations called Annual Measureable Objectives (AMOs), at differentiated rates, Receive federal designations (now Priority and Focus ), Address all subgroups AND implement focused interventions for low performance, and Assess at least 95% of students. Any ESEA statutory provision not addressed in the Waivers section of the Request is not waived. Specifics 3

4 ESEA Flexibility: Specific Provisions Waived Old New 1111(b)(2)(E-H) scripted requirements for statewide AMOs Waiver 1. Differentiated school targets by subgroup 1116(b), except (b)(13), required school improvement identification and sanctions 1116(c)(3, 5-11) & (e) required district improvement identification and support of SES Waiver 2. No requirements for choice, SES, parent notifications associated EXCEPT previous choice-opted students Waiver 3. No district identification; SES responsibilities removed Specifics 4

5 ESEA Flexibility: Specific Provisions Waived Old New 6213(b) & 6224(e) required use of Rural funds for school improvement 1114(a)(1) required 40% poverty threshold for schoolwide program Waiver 4. Spend funds flexibly, still focus on AMO targets Waiver 5. Operate schoolwide in a Priority or Focus school below 40% poverty 1003(a) limited to school improvement schools Waiver 6. Fund Priority and Focus, if available Specifics 5

6 ESEA Flexibility: Specific Provisions Waived Old New 1117(b)(1)(B) & (c)(2)(a) limited awards to schools closing gaps or meeting AYP 2141(a-c) requires restrictions for schools not making progress toward goals related to highly qualified teachers 6123(a), (b)(1), (d), (e)(1) limited transferability from Title II to Title I at 50% or 30% if in improvement Waiver 7. Funds for any Title I schools receiving Reward designations Waiver 8. Focus on developing more meaningful teacher evaluation and support systems Waiver 9. Transfer 100%; transferred funds optional for set-asides (parental involvement, professional development) Specifics 6

7 ESEA Flexibility: Specific Provisions Waived Old New 1003(g)(4) limited to LEAs with school improvement schools 4201(b) required 21 st CCLC activities during non-school hours 1116(a)(1)(A-B) & (c)(1)(a) required school and district AYP determinations 1113(a)(3-4) & (c)(1) required rank order serving of schools Waiver 10. Funds for Priority (if funding is available) Waiver 11. Activities can be during expanded learning time available to all students Waiver 12. All schools have AMO targets; receive designations based on modified QDI measures Waiver 13. Serve school out of order IF a Priority high school with less than 60% graduation Specifics 7

8 ESEA Flexibility Waiver: Principles Principle 1: College- and Career-Ready Expectations for All Students Principle 2: State-Developed Differentiated Recognition, Accountability, and Support Principle 3: Supporting Effective Instruction and Leadership Principle 4: Reducing Duplication and Unnecessary Burden Overview of Principles 8

9 Differentiated Recognition, Accountability, and Support Principle 2: By , implement a statewide system of differentiated accountability that includes new goals for student performance and identification and action in three specific school types (Priority, Focus, and Reward). Mississippi s Response: New school designations and support systems for federal accountability component New Annual Measureable Objectives (AMOs) Principle 2 9

10 New Federal Differentiated Accountability (DA) Model School Improvement status replaced by Differentiated Accountability (DA) Status (Priority, Focus, Approaching Target, On Target, and Reward) DA Status for Priority, Focus, and Reward based on modified Quality Distribution Index (QDI) QDI-Overall QDI-High (Top 25% of Students) QDI-Low (Bottom 25% of Students) Achievement Gap Component (or QDI-Gap) Individual Student Growth Percentiles Model (to be added later) 10

11 Differentiated Recognition, Accountability, and Support New Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs) Cut in half the difference between current (2011) proficiency rates and 100% in six years (2017), overall and for each subgroup, individualized for each school in ELA and math Measure schoolwide graduation and/or attendance rates as a third AMO category Impacts Differentiated Accountability Status of Approaching Target, On Target, Reward-Highest Performance Principle 2 11

12 Differentiated Accountability: QDI compared to AMO QDI AMO Priority, Focus, Reward Reward-High Performing Approaching Target Exit from Priority/Focus ELA, Math, Science ELA, Math 95% Participation Grad Rate/SIG for Priority only 95% Participation N=30 Attendance for K-11 Grad Rate for 12 th Principle 2 12

13 Differentiated Recognition, Accountability, and Support New school designations for federal Differentiated Accountability (DA) Priority Lowestperforming 5% of Title I schools (QDI-Overall), Title I high schools with grad rates below 60%, or Current SIG schools Focus 10% of Title I schools with the biggest achievement gaps (QDI-Gap) and/or Lowest subgroup achievement (QDI-Low) Approaching Target Schools that miss AMO targets for a category for two years On Target Schools that meet AMO targets but do not meet requirements for Reward Reward High performers (QDI-Overall, QDI-Low, QDI- Gap, AMO, and grad rate) and Big improvers (QDI-Overall, QDI-Gap, and grad rate) Principle 2 13

14 Sample DA Report Principle 2 14

15 Priority Schools MDE must identify at least 36 schools, or 5% of Title I Schools. Criteria to be named Priority: The current year QDI-Overall is in the lowest 5% of QDI-Overall for all schools in the State, AND The difference between the QDI-Overall for the current year and the QDI-Overall for the previous two years is in the lowest 25% of the differences for all schools in the State, OR The school s 4-year cohort graduation rate is less than 60% for each of three years, OR The school is a current SIG School. 15

16 Sample DA Report: Priority Criteria Principle 2 16

17 Example Priority QDI-Overall Lowest 5% not actual data QDI-Overall Rank QDI-Overall %-Percentile *** *** *** schools skipped for sample purposes 17

18 Example Priority QDI-Overall Lack of Progress not actual data Difference Rank QDI-Overall Difference QDI-Overall Difference %- Percentile *** *** *** schools skipped for sample purposes 18

19 Focus Schools MDE must identify at least 72 schools, or 10% of Title I Schools, as Focus. Criteria to be named Focus: The QDI-Gap for each of three years is in the highest 20% of the QDI-Gaps for all the schools in the State, OR The QDI-Low for each of three years is in the lowest 20% of the QDI-Low for all the schools in the State. 19

20 Sample DA Report Focus Criteria QDI-Gap is the difference between the QDI-High and QDI-Low (QDI-L): 1. QDI-High: The federal QDI for the top 25 th percentile of a school s scores [not reflected on report] 2. QDI-Low: The federal QDI for the bottom 25 th percentile of a school s scores Principle 2 20

21 Example Focus QDI-Gap not actual data QDI-Gap Rank QDI-High minus QDI-Low 2012 QDI-Gap 2012 %- Percentile *** *** *** schools skipped for sample purposes 21

22 Example Focus QDI-Low not actual data QDI-Low 2012 Rank QDI-Low 2012 %-Percentile *** *** *** schools skipped for sample purposes 22

23 Reward Schools MDE must identify Reward Schools based on Highest Performing or High Progress Criteria. Criteria to be named Reward-Highest Performing: The QDI-Overall for each of three years must be in the highest 20% of the QDI-Overall for all schools in the State, AND The QDI-Low for each of three years must be in the highest 20% of the QDI-Low for all schools in the State, AND The graduation rate for the current school year must be in the highest 20% of the graduation rates for all schools in the State, AND The school must have met AYP for the current school year for all students and all subgroups, AND The schools QDI-Gap for the current year must be in the lowest 25% of QDI-Gap for all the schools in the State. 23

24 Sample DA Report Page 2 High Performing All five criteria must be YES for a school to be named Highest-Performing. 24

25 Reward Schools-High Progress Criteria to be named Reward-High Progress: The difference between the QDI-Overall for the current year and the QDI-Overall from two years previous is in the highest 10% of the differences for all schools in the State, AND The difference between the 4-year cohort graduation rate for the current year and the 4-year cohort graduation rate from two years previous is in the highest 25% of the differences for all schools in the State, AND The school s QDI-Gap for the current year must be in the lowest 25% of QDI-Gap for all the schools in the State or the difference between the current QDI-Gap and the QDI-Gap from two years previous is in the lowest 25% of the differences for all schools in the State. (Note: The more negative the better.) 25

26 Sample DA Report Page 2 High Progress All three criteria must be YES for a school to be named High-Progress. Third criterion has OR: either the school has no significant gap OR the gap is closing. Both criterion have the less than (not equal to) indicator. 26

27 New Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs) NCLB Required one objective for the state: 100% proficient by New AMOs: Reduce by half the percentage of students in the all students category and each subgroup who are not proficient within six years (by 2017) Use school year data as baseline Increase performance in equal annual increments Set goals for each school, by subject area and ESEA subgroup, for differentiated interventions 27

28 New Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs): Example State of Mississippi Reading/Language: All Students Assessment results Minimal = 14.1 percent Basic = 32.3 percent Proficient = 42.8 percent Advanced = 10.8 percent ESEA Achievement index calculation: (14.1*0.0) + (32.3*0.5) + (42.8*1.0) + (10.8*1.0) = 70 (round to whole number) Baseline = 70 Subtract from 100 = 30 Divide by 2 = 15 Divide by 6 =

29 New Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs): Example Proposed Statewide Reading/Language AMOs (Proficiency Index) 2011 Annual (Baseline) Increase Subgroup ALL IEP LEP ED Asian Black His Nat Am White

30 Sample DA Report Approaching Target (AMOs) Approaching Target Principle 2 Two columns of data: AYP for the category in 2011 (N: Did not meet AYP in 2011) AMO for the category in 2012 (N: Did not meet AMO in 2012) Remember that this information presents two years of data. If your school is On Target, it still may have a no in the second column and has work to be done to stay On Target. 30

31 Sample AMO Report School 31

32 Sample AMO Report School 32

33 Sample AMO Report District (bottom only) Remember: No label associated, but district must report information publicly. 33

34 Specifics for Designated Schools Priority (Request, Pages 73-84) Notify parents within 30 days of notification September 20, 2012, is the last day to notify, or 30 working days beyond the August 9, 2012, preliminary notification. Set aside up to 20% of District Title I Allocation for implementation of Transformation Plan The following waived provisions apply to Priority Schools and Title I funding: Waiver 5: Operate schoolwide below 40% poverty Waiver 13: Serve school out of rank order Specifics 34

35 Specifics for Designated Schools Priority, continued Implement online planning, monitoring, and reporting (Mississippi SOARS, formerly Indistar /Mississippi STAR) Conduct comprehensive needs assessment Develop and implement Transformation Plan, following turnaround principles, approved by school board Establish annual goals for leading and lagging indicators Specifics 35

36 Specifics for Designated Schools Priority, continued Establish community-based council MS Code (4) Prekindergarten through high education representation Advises school on the design, implementation, and monitoring of the Transformation Plan Develop educator evaluation system Establish district staff to provide oversight and monitoring of Transformation Plan Specifics 36

37 Specifics for Designated Schools Focus (Request, Page 85-90) Notify parents within 30 days (September 20, 2012) Set aside 10% of School Title I Allocation for interventions Implement online planning, monitoring, and reporting (Mississippi SOARS, formerly Indistar /Mississippi STAR) Conduct comprehensive needs assessment Develop and implement Action Plan, approved by school board Establish community-based council Implement statewide educator evaluation system Specifics 37

38 Specifics for Designated Schools Approaching Target (Other Schools not meeting AMOs, Request, Pages ) Implement online planning, monitoring, and reporting (Mississippi SOARS, formerly Indistar / Mississippi STAR) Conduct comprehensive needs assessment Develop and implement Action Plan, based on the target areas Establish data team and attend semiannual training Attend training targeted to subgroups not meeting AMOs Specifics 38

39 What s the District s Role? While districts will not receive separate designations for federal accountability component, each district has a responsibility to the schools. (Request, Page 105) Ensure schools are planning and implementing interventions that will make positive impacts on school success Reserve, budget, and expend funds and resources necessary to increase school success Attend training with school staff to ensure implementation Intervene in school implementation when necessary Specifics 39

40 Upcoming Events September 14: SBE-approval of school designations September 19-20: Data Training for Priority Schools [Note: not required for SIG/1003g schools] (location and registration information forthcoming) September 20: Deadline for Parent Notification for Priority and Focus Schools (30 working days after preliminary approval given) [Note: not required for Approaching Target schools] September 24-27: Regional training on plan development using MS SOARS platform for Priority, Focus, and Approaching Target schools (location and registration information forthcoming; 24-25: South; 25-26: Central; 26-27: North) October: Self-assessments conducted November 2: Action plans due November/December: 1003(a) grant applications released/due, if funds are available Specifics 40

41 Resources Resources What Every Family Should Know about Mississippi s ESEA Flexibility Request What Every Educator Should Know about Mississippi s ESEA Flexibility Request Template Letter for Schools: Sharing Results with Families Others Needed? Let us know. Resources found on ESEA Waiver webpage, linked on MDE Home Page under Hot Topics Specifics 41

42 Contact Information Assessments: James Mason 601/ Student Assessment Curriculum/Common Core: Nathan Oakley 601/ Curriculum Differentiated Accountability: Pat Ross or Jo Ann Malone Accountability Priority Schools: Dr. Laura Jones 601/ School Recovery Focus Schools: Staci Curry 601/ Federal Programs Approaching Target and On Target: Trecina Green 601/ Instructional Enhancement Specifics Principal Evaluation: Debbie Murphy 601/ Federal Programs Teacher Evaluation: Dr. Daphne Buckley 601/ Quality Professionals Other Questions: Dr. Kim Benton 601/ Instructional Enhancement & Internal Operations 42