Massachusetts School Performance Rating Process Cycle II Information Session

1. Massachusetts School Performance Rating ProcessCycle II Information Session Juliane Dow, Associate Commissioner Accountability and Targeted Assistance October 31, 2002

2. ESEA Accountability Provisions“No Child Left Behind” • Single State system for state, district and school performance review -- all schools • Student assessment results as primary indicator • 12 year goal -- All students proficient in ELA and mathematics • Standards set by State for assessing Adequate Yearly Progress (“AYP”) toward achieving 12 year goal. • Performance goals must be met for students in aggregate and for student subgroups; 95% participation required • At least one additional indicator required --graduation rate mandatory for high schools; state to decide for elementary/middle schools

3. Cycle II ELA and Math No “Overall” Ratings Performance categories defined by proficiency index bands Improvement measured using “proficiency index” Improvement target based on 14 years to get all students to scaled score of 240 or higher Improvement ratings: Declined, No Change, Improved Below Target, On Target, Above Target Cycle I ELA, Math & Science Subject and “Overall” Ratings Performance categories defined by % Failing; % Proficient/Advanced Improvement measured using averaged scaled scores Improvement expectation calculated based on 20 years to reach average scaled score of 270 Improvement ratings: Failed to Meet, Approached, Met, or Exceeded improvement expectations Changes to School Performance Rating Process, Cycle II

4. Proficiency Index Measures How Close A School Is To All Students Being Proficient/Advanced Advanced 260 100 points Proficient Target For AllStudents 240 75 points Needs Improvement 50 points 220 25 points Failing/Warning 0 points 200

6. Performance Ratings RatingProficiency Index Very High 90 - 100 High 80 - 89.9 Moderate 70 - 79.9 Low 60 - 69.9 Very Low 40 - 59.9 Critically Low 0 - 39.9

7. Massachusetts Performance Targets for ELA and Mathematics 2002 - 2014

8. Proficiency Index English Language Arts Mathematics 70.7 53.0 Massachusetts State Performance Targets for Cycle II

9. 100 (Goal) - 51 (Baseline PI) 7 (# of cycles, 2001-2014) 7 Points (Improvement Target for Cycle II) = Determining Your Improvement Target for Cycle II Target to be achieved is a two year average. If you improved by 7 points in 2001 you had to sustain that improvement in 2002. If you improved by less than 7 points in 2001, you had to increase by more than 7 in the second year to have an average gain of 7 points over the two year cycle.

10. Calculating Cycle II Improvement Targets(Close gap between Baseline Proficiency Index and 100 by 1/7th) Baseline PI of 51.0 Improvement Target is 7.0 points

11. Improvement Ratings RatingCriteria Above Target Target +2.6 < points On Target Target +/- 2.5 points Improved Below Target Below On Target Above No Change No Change Baseline +/- 2.5 points Declined Baseline -2.6 < points

12. Improved Below Target No Change On Target Above Target -2.5 +2.5 -2.5 +2.5 Declined 51 48.5 53.5 55.5 58 60.5 Baseline Target Determining Improvement RatingsMinimum Sample Size of 50 Students Per Year/Average

13. Improved Below Target No Change On Target Above Target -2.5 +2.5 -2.5 +2.5 Declined 62.5 65 67.5 70 72.5 Baseline Target Where two rating categories overlap, the higher rating is assigned. Determining Improvement RatingsMinimum Sample Size of 50 Students Per Year/Average

14. Improved Below Target Above Target Declined No Change On Target - 4.5 -4.5 +4.5 46.5 48.5 51 53.5 55.5 58 60.5 62.5 Baseline Target Determining Improvement Ratings -- Small SchoolsSchools with fewer than 50 students/year-- Individualized Computation of Standard of Error Up To Maximum Error Band of +/- 4.5

15. Expected Improvement Over Time 2002 2006 2008 2014 2004 2010 2012 100 Very High 90 High 80 Above Target Moderate 70 X On Target Proficiency Index Low X Improved, Below Target X 60 X No Change Very Low 40 X Declined Critically Low B Baseline

16. Criteria for Determining Whether A School Made “AYP” AYP is determined separately for ELA and mathematics. A school is considered to have made AYP for the two years covered by Cycle II if: • Performance is at or above the State Performance Target for Cycle II (PI of 53 or higher for mathematics; 70.7 or higher for ELA) OR • Improvement was rated Improved Below Target, On Target, or Above Target.