1 / 57

WELCOME

WELCOME. School Grades, Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Reporting, and Alternative School Improvement Ratings Florida DOE Database Workshop 2009 Presenter: Edward (Ed) Croft Director of Evaluation and Reporting Bureau of Research and Evaluation, Florida Dept. of Education. Topics.

arleen
Download Presentation

WELCOME

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. WELCOME School Grades, Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Reporting, and Alternative School Improvement Ratings Florida DOE Database Workshop 2009 Presenter: Edward (Ed) Croft Director of Evaluation and Reporting Bureau of Research and Evaluation, Florida Dept. of Education

  2. Topics Accountability Systems: • School Grading Overview • Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Overview • Data Processes for School Accountability • Alternative School Ratings Overview Accountability Update: Changes for 2008-09 and 2009-10 -- (Including Revised High School Grading Criteria)

  3. Overview of School Grading

  4. Components and Measures Eight Components Four components based on current-year FCAT performance in four subjects: Reading, Math, Writing, and Science Four components based on learning gains (LG): - LG in Math for all students - LG in Reading for all students - LG in Math for the lowest quartile - LG in Reading for the lowest quartile

  5. Components and Measures

  6. Performance Components (50% of Grade) How is performance measured?

  7. Performance Components How is performance measured? For each of the four subjects, a school receives one grade point for each percent of students scoring proficient on FCAT in the subject.

  8. Performance Components Which Students Are Included? “Eligible students” for performance components are full-year-enrolled, standard-curriculum students as well as hospital-homebound, speech-impaired, and gifted students, plus English-language-learners with more than 2 years in an ESOL program.

  9. Performance Components How is proficiency determined? FCAT reading, math, and science = score at FCAT Level 3 or higher. FCAT Writing = a score of 3.5 or higher on the essay component.

  10. Learning Gains Components (50% of Grade)

  11. Measuring Learning Gains For each of the four learning gains components, schools are awarded one point for each percent of students making learning gains.

  12. Learning Gains Components Which Students Are Included? Eligible students for learning gains components include all full-year students (including English language learners and students with disabilities) who have current and prior-year FCAT scores.

  13. Defining Learning Gains(Based on Current Year vs. Prior Year FCAT Results) Three Ways to Make Learning Gains: 1) Move up by one or more FCAT achievement levels. 2) Maintain an FCAT achievement level of 3 or higher. 3) For students who remain at FCAT level 1 or 2, demonstrate more than one year’s worth of growth on the FCAT developmental scale. The FCAT developmental scale is a continuous scale score applied across grade levels.

  14. Learning Gains of the Lowest Performing 25% of Students Of students included in the learning gains calculation, the count of the lowest 25% is based on prior-year FCAT developmental scale scores.

  15. Learning Gains of the Lowest Performing 25% of Students The count of the lowest performing 25% is restricted to students at FCAT achievement levels 1, 2, and 3. If there are fewer than 30 students in the lowest performing 25%, the next-lowest ranked students are added to reach 30 students. If there are fewer than 30 students with scores at level 3 or lower, the school’s overall learning gains results are used for the “low 25” learning gains.

  16. Bonus Points for High Schools FCAT Retakes in Grade 11 and 12 • High schools earn ten (10) bonus points when half of all 11th and 12th graders retaking the FCAT meet the graduation requirement.

  17. Components and Measures:Additional Requirements Adequate Progress Requirement for Lowest Performing 25% in Reading and Math • At least 50% of the low performers must show learning gains in reading or math, or the school must show adequate annual improvement in that percentage. “Percent Tested” Requirement • 90% must be tested to receive a regular grade in lieu of an “I”. 95% must be tested for a school to be eligible for an “A.”

  18. Grading Scale • Based on 800 possible points (810 with bonus points): A = ≥ 525 points B = 495-524 points C = 435-494 points D = 395-434 points F = < 395 points

  19. High-Performing Schools (A and B Schools) as a Percentage of All Graded Schools Count of Schools by Grade, 2002-03 through 2007-08

  20. School Grade Resources Online reports, downloadable files, and a link to the School Grade Technical Assistance Paper: http://schoolgrades.fldoe.org/

  21. Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Overview • 39 Components: 4 measures (percent-tested math; percent tested reading; proficiency in math; proficiency in reading) x 9 subgroups = 36 subgroup-based components Plus 3 school-wide components: * graduation rate * writing proficiency * school grade For a “Yes” on AYP, a school must not fail to meet the AYP criteria for any component.

  22. AYP Overview 36 Components by Subgroup

  23. Percent Tested (AYP) = percent of students enrolled during Survey 3 who were tested (not counting students who withdrew after Survey 3 but before testing) Proficiency for AYP determined via 3 possible ways: • Percent scoring at or above proficient level on assessments in the current year • Safe Harbor (requires 10% or greater annual reduction in the percent of non-proficient students – for example, if percent non-proficient = 80% in prior year, required reduction is 10% of 80% = 8%; so percent non-proficient in current year must be 72% or less) • Growth Model(determines percent of students “on track” to be proficient on a 3-year trajectory, based on comparison of baseline-year test scores and succeeding year scores)

  24. AYP Overview 3 school-wide components & criteria: - Graduation rate  85%, or shows at least 1% annual improvement. - Writing percent proficient (3.0 and higher)  90%, or shows at least 1% annual improvement. - School grade  D or F.

  25. No Child Left BehindAdequate Yearly Progress Florida Schools Making AYP

  26. Students Included in AYP Proficiency Calculations • Full-year-enrolled students (Survey 2 and 3 match) • Subgroup classifications: - Racial/Ethnic category (Survey 3) - ELL status (Survey 3) - SWD status (Survey 3) - Economically Disadvantaged (FRPL status, Survey 3)

  27. Data Processing for School Accountability(School Grades, AYP, Alt. School Ratings) • School Types for Accountability Reporting • Identifying Alternative Schools for Alt. School Ratings • DOE Matching of Survey 2 (October survey) and Survey 3 (February survey) Records to Establish Full-Year Membership • DOE Matching of Assessment Records to Membership Records (Assessment-to-Student Matching for Current Year and for Prior-Year Data) • Web-based Applications -- Maximizing Accuracy of Matching Processes and Accounting for Changes in Student Status After Survey 3 and Prior to Testing

  28. Data Processing for School Accountability(School Grades, AYP, Alt. School Ratings) Basic Types of Data Processing for Accountability: • (a) Accountability School Types file (b)Alternative School Types file 2) Data from regular database submissions 3) Web-based Applications (for accountability reporting uses only)

  29. Data Processing for School Accountability(School Grades, AYP, Alt. School Ratings) • (a) Accountability School Types file for review/updating (access via web application; notification sent to accountability coordinators). (b)Alternative School Types file emailed to district accountability contacts for review and revision, as applicable: -- Responses via email/fax.

  30. Data Processing for School Accountability(School Grades, AYP, Alt. School Ratings) 2) Data from regular database submissions (e.g., Survey 2 and Survey 3 data) for elements used in compiling student-level data (e.g., membership, race/ethnicity/demographics, special program enrollment, eligibility for FRPL, etc.). Coordinated by district MIS departments/offices; transmitted to NWRDC. Cutoff dates for accountability reporting announced via memo* to MIS contacts and accountability contacts. * A key memo was sent to MIS contacts via FDOE paperless communication on February 2, 2009, and forwarded to accountability coordinators by “EVALNRPT” on February 3, 2009.

  31. Data Processing for School Accountability(School Grades, AYP, Alt. School Ratings) 3) Web-based Applications (for accountability reporting uses only; these processes are separate from regular database submissions): “Prior Year Data”; “Retakes”; “Student Data Updates”; “Assessment Corrections”. District accountability coordinators are provided with logon credentials to a secure web portal:https://app2.fldoe.org/arm_applications/arm_login

  32. Data Processing for School Accountability(Things to Keep in Mind) District accountability coordinators receive notice of each process through e-mail notices and memoranda from EVALNRPT@fldoe.org (Evaluation and Reporting) and EVALNRPT_WebApps@fldoe.org. District MIS contacts are copied on e-mails for processes that involve submission of records to the DOE database (for example, processes that use Survey 3 data).

  33. Data Processing for School Accountability(Things to Keep in Mind) Survey 3 records that are used for School Grades and AYP are extracted from Northwest Regional Data Center (NWRDC) well before the close of the period for updating Survey 3 data on the DOE database. District accountability coordinators and MIS contacts are notified of the “lockdown” date for submitting or amending Survey 3 data for use in accountability reporting.

  34. Data Processing for School Accountability(Things to Keep in Mind) • The Web Applications processes (with which district accountability coordinators should be familiar) provide for updates/corrections that are separate from regular database reporting. • Workshops (regional workshops) are conducted annually in the winter to provide technical assistance for district staff in the use of these resources.

  35. Web Applications • Retakes Data (for high school bonus points) • Prior-Year Data • Student Data Updates • Assessment Corrections

  36. Web Applications • Prior Year Data: Used in the calculation of the gains components of school grades, AYP (growth model), and alternative school improvement ratings. Based on matching students in the current year to prior-year assessment data. Provides tool for additional student-to-assessment matching through corrected records. Data entered into the application is processed daily during the open application period and is available the following morning. -- This application closes on May 13, 2009.

  37. Web Applications • Retakes Data: Provides districts with tool to verify/correct 11th and 12th grade student data used in the Retakes Bonus Points component for high schools in school grading. Data entered into the application is processed each evening during the open application period and is available the following morning. – This application closes on May 13, 2009.

  38. Web Applications • Student Data Updates: Provides a tool through which districts/schools are able to update records in the Membership File for students whose status has changed after the Survey 3 reporting week in February and the beginning of FCAT testing. These updates affect the eligibility status of students for school grades, AYP, and alternative school improvement ratings. Data entered into the application is processed daily during the open application period and is available the following morning. -- This application closes on May 13, 2009.

  39. Web Applications • Assessment Corrections: Provides a tool through which districts are able to verify assessment-to-student matches made by the DOE, make additional prior-year data matches, correct problems with assessment records, and complete the final process in preparing student data. These processes aid in determining student inclusion for school grades, AYP, and school improvement ratings. Data entered into the application is processed daily during the open application period and is available the following morning. –This application is expected to be open from June 1 to June 19, 2009.

  40. Web Applications: Resources • For MIS/data processing staff, note that your district’s accountability director/coordinator should already be familiar with the web applications and is the local point person for your district’s activities in this area. • Secure web applications portal: https://app2.fldoe.org/ARM_Applications/ARM_Login/ • Instruction manuals for each application are available via the website (after login). • DOE email contact for technical assistance: EVALNRPT_WebApps@fldoe.org • Evaluation and Reporting phone number: (850) 245-0411

  41. School Improvement Ratings for Alternative Schools (s. 1008.341, F.S.) • Part of the A++ Legislation passed during the 2006 Legislative Session. • Implemented with passage of FAC Rule 6A-1.099822 in 2008. • Provides Alternative Schools the option of receiving a traditional school grade or a school improvement rating. • If an alternative school chooses to receive a school improvement rating, the performance of the alternative school’s students will be included in the calculation of the rating and the school grade of the students’ home school.

  42. School Improvement Ratings for Alternative Schools: Provisions • Alternative schools are identified (for accountability reporting purposes) using the DOE’s MSID file (via “Primary Service Type”) with input from school districts. In February of each year, the DOE provides a preliminary file of alternative schools for each district to review. The procedure calls for districts to be given at least 30 days to review the list and to request changes (contingent on supporting documentation) before the alternative school file is finalized.

  43. “Crediting Back” FCAT Scores for Students in Alternative Schools • Per Rule 6A-1.099822 (6): If an alternative school chooses to be evaluated through a school improvement rating rather than a school grade, the student performance of eligible students (identified in Section 1008.34(3)(b)3., F.S.) shall be included in the students’ home school’s grade as well as the alternative school’s school improvement rating. Eligible students include those who were enrolled at the alternative school during either Survey 2 or Survey 3, or both, and were tested at the alternative school.

  44. “Crediting Back” FCAT Scores to Students’ Home Schools • Identifying “home schools”: Home schools are reported on Student Demographic Information records (Survey 3) using the following data elements: “School Number, Zoned School” http://www.fldoe.org/eias/dataweb/database_0809/st246_25.pdf “District Number, Zoned School” http://www.fldoe.org/eias/dataweb/database_0809/st87_35.pdf New definition of “home school” = The state assigned four-digit school number for the school to which the student would be assigned if he/she were not assigned to the alternative school.

  45. Students at Alternative Schools Who Are NOT Eligible for FCAT Scores to be Credited Back • Students in dropout retrieval programs, reported in Survey 3 on the Federal/State Indicator Status records via the “Dropout Prevention/Juvenile Justice Programs” data element, code R. • Students in alternative-to-expulsion programs, reported in Survey 3 on the Federal/State Indicator Status records via the “Dropout Prevention/Juvenile Justice Programs” data element, code E. • Link to record format: http://www.fldoe.org/eias/dataweb/database_0809/0809fsis.asp • Link to data element: http://www.fldoe.org/eias/dataweb/database_0809/st91_1.pdf FCAT scores for these students are not included either in the alternative school’s improvement rating or the school grade of the home school.

  46. School Improvement Ratings for Alternative Schools: Provisions • The alternative school rating will include scores for students assigned to and enrolled in the October (Survey 2) and/or February (Survey 3) counts (note: students do not need to be enrolled for both surveys to be included in the alternative school rating). • Students in DJJ schools are not included in the school grading or rating process.

  47. School Improvement Ratings for Alternative Schools: Provisions • The crediting back of FCAT scores to home schools is limited by the grade configurations of schools. For example, if a student was referred to a 9-12 alternative school after completing a middle school in which the highest grade taught was grade 8, the student’s grade 9 scores would not be credited back to the middle school.

  48. School Improvement Ratings for Alternative Schools: Provisions • The alternative school improvement rating is based on learning gains comparisons between the current and prior year in reading and math (FCAT). The percentage of students making learning gains at the alternative school will be compared to the percentage of students (from the same population) making learning gains in the prior year.

  49. School Improvement Ratings for Alternative Schools: Provisions • The school improvement rating consists of one of the following ratings: “improving,” “maintaining,” “declining.” • For each subject in which learning gains are evaluated (reading, math), the following criteria apply: “Improving” means at least a 5% increase in the percent making gains. “Maintaining” means less than a 5% increase or decrease in the percent making gains. “Declining” means at least a 5% decrease in the percent making gains. A school’s rating can be no higher than the status of its lowest performing subject.

  50. Accountability Update • Revised High School Grading Criteria for 2009-10

More Related