School Quality Improvement Index!

Transcription

1 School Quality Improvement Index Committee of the Whole November 17, 2015

2 Objectives Review Accountability Model School Quality Improvement Index Introduce the School Index Results Understand Use of the Index Results for Action Share School Index Reports to be Publically Released Request Stakeholder Input for Social Emotional/Culture Climate Survey Metrics and Weights

3 The Accountability Model School Quality Improvement Index

4 CORE is a collaboration among 10 California school districts. We re working together to significantly improve student outcomes. Sanger Unified Clovis Unified Garden Grove Unified Sacramento City Unified Oakland Unified Santa Ana Unified San Francisco Unified Fresno Unified Other districts in CA Long Beach Unified Los Angeles Unified Over 1.1 million students in CORE Participating CORE districts

5 Our School Quality Improvement Index Making all students visible: N size of 20 resulting in over 150,000 additional students counted College & Career Ready Graduates Academic Domain Social-Emotional & Culture-Climate Domain Elimination of Disparity and Disproportionality Achievement and Growth* Graduation Rate High School Readiness Rate (Gr. 8) All Students Group & Subgroups Chronic Absenteeism Student/Staff/Parent Culture- Climate Surveys* Suspension/Expulsion Rate Social Emotional Skills* ELL Re-Designation Rate* Special Education Disproportionality** Guiding principles: q Information as flashlight (and not a hammer ) q From a narrow focus to a holistic approach q Making all students visible q From just achievement to achievement and growth * Not counted in this Fall 2015 SQII ** Reported at District Level only

6 Providing academic and social emotional/culture-climate factors creates a more holistic and actionable picture of schools. For instance, schools with the same academic performance on the Index often have markedly different performance on other Index indicators. (1 of 2) An AYP/API approach to accountability would have examined all of these schools on a limited set of dimensions. SFUSD schools ranked with just academic performance in ELA & math.

7 Providing academic and social emotional/culture-climate factors creates a more holistic and actionable picture of schools. For instance, schools with the same academic performance on the Index often have markedly different performance on other Index indicators. (2 of 2) But Grad rates, HS Readiness, Chronic Absence, Suspension Rates & EL Re-Designation Rates add key information SFUSD schools with comparable Academic performance, but markedly different performance in SEL/CC factors.

8 School Index Results

9 The School Quality Improvement Index ( ) Accountability Score 100% Academic Domain 60% Social-Emotional & Culture-Climate Factors 40% Chronic Absenteeism 13.3%* High Middle Performance 30% Performance 30% Growth Growth Grad Rate (HS) 30% High School Readiness Rate* (Of 8 th Grade Students) 30% All School Levels Student/Staff/Parent Culture-Climate Surveys Suspension/Expulsion Rate 13.3%* Social Emotional Skills Elem. Performance 60% Growth ELL Re-designation Rate 13.3%* Special Ed Identification (information only)* 0%*

10 The School Quality Improvement Index ( ) Accountability Score 100% Academic Domain 60% Social-Emotional & Culture-Climate Factors 40% Chronic Absenteeism 8%* High Middle Elem. Performance 20% Performance 20% Performance 30% Growth 20% Growth 20% Growth 30% Grad Rate (HS) 20% High School Readiness Rate* (Of 8 th Grade Students) 20% All School Levels Student/Staff/Parent Culture-Climate Surveys 8%* Suspension/Expulsion Rate 8%* Social Emotional Skills 8%* ELL Re-designation Rate 8%* Special Ed Identification (information only)* 0%*

11 SQII for an Elementary School " (Domains, Metrics, Subgroups, Weights)" " Academic Domain" School Quality Improvement Index" 100% Social-Emotional & Culture- Climate Domain" 60% 40% SBAC ELA" SBAC Math" " 30% 30% All Students" Lowest Performing Ethnic group" 3.75% Subgroups" 15% 15% English Learners" 3.75% Chronic Absentee Rate" 13.33% Student Suspended Rate" 13.33% EL Re-Designation Rate" 13.33% Students with Disabilities" 3.75% Socio-Econo. Disadvantaged" 3.75%

12 In case a subgroup is missing, the weights are readjusted" School Quality Improvement Index (ES)" 100% Academic Domain" 60% Social-Emotional & Culture- Climate Domain" 40% SBAC ELA" " All Students" Lowest Performing Ethnic group" 3.75% 5% Students with Disabilities 3.75% Subgroups" SBAC Math" 30% 30% 15% 15% English Learners" 3.75% 5% Socio-Econo. Socio- Econo. Disadvantaged" 3.75% 5% Chronic Absentee Rate" 13.33% Student Suspended Rate" 13.33% EL Re-Designation Rate" 13.33%

13 In case a metric is missing, the weights are readjusted" School Quality Improvement Index (ES)" 100% Academic Domain" 60% Social-Emotional & Culture- Climate Domain" 40% SBAC ELA" " All Students" Subgroups 15% 15% Lowest Performing Ethnic group" 3.75% SBAC Math" 30% 30% English Learners" 3.75% Chronic Absentee Rate Rate" 13.33% 20% Student Suspended Rate Rate" 13.33% 20% EL Re-Designation Rate" 13.33% Students with Disabilities" 3.75% Socio-Econo. Disadvantaged" 3.75%

14 Definitions, Thresholds and Weights Used to Calculate the Elementary School Index

15 How was your SQII Index level determined" Elementary Level Performance Thresholds - School Quality Improvement Index (Fall 2015) Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Level 6 Level 7 Level 8 Level 9 Level 10 Metric Low High Low High Low High Low High Low High Low High Low High Low High Low High Low High ELA (ES) Math (ES) Chronic Absence (ES) Percent of Students Suspended (ES) EL Re- Designation (ES) For example:# Step 1: An elementary school with SBAC ELA percent meeting/exceeding standard: 30% # Step 2: Find corresponding Index Level for SBAC ELA: 7# Step 3: Is your performance below average, average or above average relative to others: AVERAGE

16 SQII for a Middle School " (Domains, Metrics, Subgroups, Weights)" School Quality Improvement Index 100% Social-Emotional & Academic Domain" Culture-Climate Domain" 60% 40% SBAC ELA" " All Students Lowest Performing Ethnic group" 1.88% SBAC Math" Subgroups English Learners" 1.88% HS Readiness 15% 15% 30% 7.5% 7.5% Chronic Absentee Rate" 13.33% Student Suspended Rate" 13.33% EL Re-Designation Rate" 13.33% Students with Disabilities" 1.88% Socio-Econo. Disadvantaged" 1.88%

17 SQII for a High School " (Domains, Metrics, Subgroups, Weights)" School Quality Improvement Index" 100% Social-Emotional & Academic Domain" Culture-Climate Domain" 60% 40% SBAC ELA" " All Students" SBAC Math" Lowest Performing Ethnic group" 1.88% Subgroups English Learners" 1.88% 5 Yr Cohort Grad 15% 15% 20% 5% 7.5% 7.5% 4 Yr Cohort Grad 6 Yr Cohort Grad 5% Chronic Absentee Rate" 13.33% Student Suspended Rate" 13.33% EL Re-Designation Rate" 13.33% Students with Disabilities" 1.88% Socio-Econo. Disadvantaged" 1.88%

18 Use of Index Results for Action

19 Elementary School Compare the score in the academic domain " v/s " the social-emotional/culture-climate domain.#

20 Elementary School Compare the INDEX LEVELS for each metric. Is there a metric that stands out as a success or as a challenge?"

21 Elementary School Compare the INDEX LEVELS for each group. Is there a group that stands out as a success or as a challenge?"

22 Elementary Level Performance Thresholds - School Quality Improvement Index (Fall 2015) Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Level 6 Level 7 Level 8 Level 9 Level 10 Metric Low High Low High Low High Low High Low High Low High Low High Low High Low High Low High ELA (ES) Math (ES) Chronic Absence (ES) Percent of Students Suspended (ES) EL Re- Designation (ES) For example:# How to use SQII Index Table to Determine Targets" Step 1: An elementary school with SBAC ELA percent meeting/exceeding standard: 30% # Step 2: Find corresponding Index Level for SBAC ELA: 7# Step 3: Find range of Index Level for SBAC ELA: 29% to 33% Step 4: Determine targets: if Mid/High orange -> Target is green 30% -> 34% SFUSD Suggested Criteria:" If Red -> Target is Orange# If Low Orange -> Target is High Orange # If Mid/High Orange -> Target is Green# If Low Green -> Target is High Green# If Mid/High Green -> Target is Maintain & Increase Percentages#

23 School Index Reports (will be publically released on February 4, 2016)

24 The cover page speaks to the what and why of this work.

25 CORE Districts will release the 1 st version of the School Quality Improvement Index in December 2015 Reports support continual improvement for school leaders and teachers. SAMPLE HIGH SCHOOL 1 Public 3,175 students Principal Gerald Greenbriar 1234 Main St Valley Hill, CA CDS code: Sunny Valley Hillside District Metric result 2014 ACADEMIC DOMAIN (see pages 14 & 15 for metric descriptions) Metric result 2015 Academic Performance English Language Arts 40 % SD: 100% EL: 19% SWD: 9% Change in Metric Performance from 2014 to 2015 AA: 8% AI/AN: 0% AS: 24% HI: 63% Index Level 2015 FI: 0% PI: 0% WH: 4% Level from 2014 to / 10 Growth English Language Arts Coming Fall 2016 Academic Performance Math 44 % 5 / 10 Growth Math Coming Fall 2016 Four Year Cohort Graduation Rate (2014 Cohort) Five Year Cohort Graduation Rate (2013 Cohort) Cohort) 84 % 81 % 90 % SOCIAL-EMOTIONAL/CULTURE CLIMATE DOMAIN (see pages 14 & 15 for metric descriptions) Chronic Absenteeism 24 % 8 % SUSPENDED/EXPELLED 10 % 84 % 0 % 6 / % 5 % 7 / % % 7 / % % 5 / % SUSPENDED/EXPELLED 0 % 6 / 10 0 Coming in Fall 2016 Culture and Climate Coming in Fall % % 8/ 10 2 Green = above average (Index Levels 8, 9 and 10) = average (Index Levels 4, 5, 6, 7) Red = below average (Index Levels 1, 2, 3) Demographics and key information about the school are included on the page with all students results. The first three columns look at metric performance in 2014 and 2015, and the change between those years. For SBAC results, we do not have 2014 results. Growth measures, social-emotional skills and culture-climate surveys will be part of the Index in Fall Using baseline data, we have set performance thresholds for level 1, 2, 3 4, 5, 9, 10 performance. We apply weights to the Index levels to determine Index points earned for the overall Index score.

26 Amount of Improvement Needed to Advance Index Levels 2015 ACADEMIC DOMAIN (see pages 14 & 15 for metric descriptions) Academic Performance English Language Arts 5 / 10 Metric Result in 2015 Change needed to improve 1 Growth English Language Arts Coming Fall 2016 Academic Performance Math 5 / 10 Growth Math Coming Fall 2016 Four Year Cohort Graduation Rate (2014 Cohort) 6 / 10 Five Year Cohort Graduation Rate (2013 Cohort) 7 / 10 Cohort) 7 / 10 SOCIAL-EMOTIONAL/CULTURE CLIMATE DOMAIN (see pages 14 & 15 for metric descriptions) Change needed to improve 2 Change needed to improve 3 40 % % % % 44 % % % % 84 % % % % 86 % % % % % % % % The next page lets stakeholders know what level of improvement is needed to advance 1, 2 or 3 Index levels based upon current performance at the school. We include the 2015 Index Level and metric result as a reminder. Chronic Absenteeism / 10 / % % % % 8 % % % % SUSPENDED/EXPELLED / % % % Coming in Fall 2016 A 1% reduction would yield a one level improvement. Culture and Climate Coming in Fall 2016 A 4% reduction would yield a two level improvement. Green = above average (Index Levels 8, 9 and 10) = average (Index Levels 4, 5, 6, 7) Red = below average (Index Levels 1, 2, 3) A 6% reduction would yield a three level improvement.

27 2015 Performance on the Index Metrics for All Students and Each Subgroup performance is divided evenly into the four categories below. All Students Lowest Performing Racial/Ethnic Subgroup ACADEMIC DOMAIN (see pages 14 & 15 for metric descriptions) Academic Performance English Language Arts Growth English Language Arts Academic Performance Math 40 % 44 % 34 % (AA) 29 % (AA) English Learners 11 % Coming Fall % Growth Math Coming Fall 2016 Four Year Cohort Graduation Rate (2014 Cohort) Five Year Cohort Graduation Rate (2013 Cohort) Rate (2012 Cohort) 84 % 86 % 87 % 83 % (AA) 86 % (AA/HI) 85 % (AA) 74 % 77 % 79 % SOCIAL-EMOTIONAL/CULTURE CLIMATE DOMAIN (see pages 14 & 15 for metric descriptions) Chronic Absenteeism 21 % Rates English Learner 8 % SUSPENDED/EXPELLED 14 % 35 % (WH) 14 % (AA) SUSPENDED/EXPELLED 18 % 6 % SUSPENDED/EXPELLED Coming in Fall 2016 Students with Disabilities 10 % 6 % 45 % 54 % 49 % 38 % 14 % SUSPENDED/EXPELLED Economoically Disadvantaged Students 40 % 44 % 84 % 87 % 88 % 21 % 8 % SUSPENDED/EXPELLED (N/A) (N/A) (N/A) (N/A) The next page provides results for each of the subgroup categories in the Index. Note that for the racial/ ethnic subgroup category, we look at the lowest performing racial/ethnic subgroup. We include the all students results as a benchmark. Results are displayed for any case with 20 or more students in the denominator. Culture and Climate Coming in Fall 2016 Green = above average (Index Levels 8, 9 and 10) = average (Index Levels 4, 5, 6, 7) Red = below average (Index Levels 1, 2, 3)

28 2015 Performance on the Index Metrics for Each Racial/Ethnic American (AA) American Indian/ Alaskan Native (AI/AN) Asian (AS) Hispanic/ Latino (HI) Filipino (FI) Islander (PI) White (WH) Races (Two+) ACADEMIC DOMAIN (see pages 14 & 15 for metric descriptions) Academic Performance English Language Arts 34 % 41 % 38 % 68 % Growth English Language Arts Coming Fall 2016 Academic Performance Math 29 % 59 % 39 % 50 % Growth Math Coming Fall 2016 Four Year Cohort Graduation Rate (2014 Cohort) Five Year Cohort Graduation Rate (2013 Cohort) Graduation Rate (2012 Cohort) 83 % 86 % 85 % 84 % 87 % 90 % 84 % 86 % 87 % SOCIAL-EMOTIONAL/CULTURE CLIMATE DOMAIN (see pages 14 & 15 for metric descriptions) 83 % The next page provides results for each racial/ ethnic subgroup Chronic Absenteeism 30 % CHRONICALLY 11 % CHRONICALLY 22 % CHRONICALLY 35 % CHRONICALLY Rates 14 % SUSPENDED/ EXPELLED 3 % SUSPENDED/ EXPELLED 8 % SUSPENDED/ EXPELLED 8 % SUSPENDED/ EXPELLED English Learner (N/A) (N/A) (N/A) (N/A) (N/A) (N/A) (N/A) (N/A) Coming in Fall 2016 Culture and Climate Coming in Fall 2016 Green = above average (Index Levels 8, 9 and 10) = average (Index Levels 4, 5, 6, 7) Red = below average (Index Levels 1, 2, 3)

29 Summary of School Quality Improvement Index points /100 Overall Index rating (3,175 Students) /100 Elementary School Index Rating (0 Students) /100 Middle School Index Rating (0 Students) /100 High School Index Rating (3,175 Students) All Students Lowest Performing Racial/Ethnic Subgroup ACADEMIC DOMAIN (see pages 14 & 15 for metric descriptions) English Learners Students with Disabilities Economoically Disadvantaged Students The Overall Index Score out of 100 is provided at the top of the page. Points earned are calculated by the following formula: Index Level X Weight X 10 Academic Performance English Language Arts 3.75 out of out of 1.88 (AA) 0.19 out of out of out of out of 15 Growth English Language Arts Academic Performance Math 3.75 out of out of 1.88 (AA) Coming Fall 2016 Growth Math Coming Fall 2016 Four Year Cohort Graduation Rate (2014 Cohort) 6.00 out of out of 2.50 (AA) 0.56 out of out of out of out of out of out of out of out of 20 Total points possible in the Academic Domain equal 60 to reflect the 60% weight. Five Year Cohort Graduation Rate (2013 Cohort) 1.75 out of out of 0.63 (AA/HI) 0.32 out of out of out of out of 5 Graduation Rate (2012 Cohort) 1.75 out of out of 0.63 (AA) 0.32 out of out of out of out of 5 SOCIAL-EMOTIONAL/CULTURE CLIMATE DOMAIN (see pages 14 & 15 for metric descriptions) Chronic Absenteeism. out of 6.67 Rates English Learner out of out of out of 1.67 (WH) 0.17 out of 1.67 (AA). out of out of out of out of out of out of 1.67 (N/A) (N/A) (N/A) (N/A) Coming in Fall out of out of out of Total points possible in the Social- Emotional & Culture- Climate Domain equals 40 to reflect the 40% weight. Culture and Climate Coming in Fall 2016 Green = above average (Index Levels 8, 9 and 10) = average (Index Levels 4, 5, 6, 7) Red = below average (Index Levels 1, 2, 3)

30 Stakeholder Input for Social Emotional Learning / Culture Climate SURVEY Metrics and Weights

31 Survey Categories (each category is made up of 5-8 questions) Social Emotional Learning (SEL) Students in grades 4-12 Culture Climate (CC) Students in grades 4-12 Staff Families 1 - Growth Mindset 1 - Climate of Support for Academic Learning 2 - Self-Efficacy 2 - Knowledge and Fairness of Discipline, Rules, and Norms 3 - Self-Management 3 - Safety 4 - Social Awareness 4 - Sense of Belonging (School Connectedness)

32 QUESTION 1 - What are our minimum participation expectations for students, staff and families on the survey instruments? A - CORE Recommendations for Minimum Participation Rate Thresholds Ø Students (all levels): 75% Ø Staff (all levels): 75% Ø Families: Elementary 40%, Middle 30%, High 25% B SFUSD Data Ø Youth Risk Behavior Survey requires 60% Ø SFUSD Satisfaction Survey Participation Rates Ø Student: Elementary 83%, Middle 80%, High 75% Ø Staff: Elementary 65%, Middle 61%, High 50% Ø Families: Elementary 37%, Middle 30%, High 14%

33 QUESTION 2: Is it more helpful to have information based on each social-emotional (SEL) skill or Culture-climate (CC) topic separately or for that information to be reported as a composite? OPTION A: Composites for both SEL and Culture-Climate OPTION B (CORE Recommended): Skill by skill for SEL; composites for Culture-Climate OPTION C: Skill by skill for SEL, and topic by topic for Culture-Climate

34 OPTION A: Composites for both SEL and Culture-Climate * This mirrors how SBAC scores are included in the Index

35 OPTION B (CORE Recommended): Skill by skill for SEL; composites for Culture-Climate

36 OPTION C: Skill by skill for SEL, and topic by topic for Culture-Climate

37 QUESTION 3: How should we distribute the weights for the indicators? Initial Recommendation: Even distribution Indicator SEL: Growth Mindset 2% SEL: Self-Management 2% SEL: Self-Efficacy 2% SEL: Social Awareness 2% SEL: Total 8% Weight Culture-Climate: Student Survey 2.67% Culture-Climate: Staff Survey 2.67% Culture-Climate: Family Survey 2.67% Culture Climate: Total 8%

38 To Provide Input on Survey Measures forms/d/1_nlu3-z- XN3FHgpVHm5nfJFg9fUhANs -umq1ayofmxc/viewform? c=0&w=1 Thank you Learn more at core-index