1 / 19

Accountability in California Before and After NCLB

Accountability in California Before and After NCLB. Rachel Perry Policy and Evaluation Division California Department of Education AERA – San Diego April 2004. California’s Educational Landscape. Over 6 million students Nearly 9,000 public schools Over 1,000 school districts

sancha
Download Presentation

Accountability in California Before and After NCLB

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. Accountability in California Before and After NCLB Rachel Perry Policy and Evaluation Division California Department of Education AERA – San Diego April 2004

  2. California’s Educational Landscape • Over 6 million students • Nearly 9,000 public schools • Over 1,000 school districts • Ethnically diverse: • 44% Hispanic • 35% White • 11% Asian/Filipino/PI • 8% African American

  3. Accountability Before NCLB

  4. Standards and Assessments • Content standards for K-12 were established • English-language arts in 1997 • Mathematics in 1997 • Science in 1998 • Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) program established in 1997 • Norm-referenced assessment (CAT/6) • Criterion-referenced assessments (CSTs) • Alternate assessment (CAPA)

  5. Public Schools Accountability Act • Signed into law in 1999 • Required three components: • Academic Performance Index or API • Awards programs • Intervention programs

  6. Academic Performance Index (API) • Composite based on assessment results across subject areas and grade levels • Range: 200-1000, interim target = 800 • Progressively weighted • School and subgroup growth targets • School target = 5% of distance to 800 • Subgroup target = 80% of school target

  7. Accountability Before NCLB • Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) based on whether a school met its Academic Performance Index (API) growth targets • AYP applied only to Title I schools • AYP did not apply to districts • Eligibility for statewide awards and interventions was based on growth

  8. Accountability Before NCLB • Schools were making progress • In 2002 • 69% showed improvement in their API • 53% met their API targets

  9. Accountability After NCLB

  10. Components of AYP • Achievement of the Annual Measurable Objectives (percent proficient or above) in both English language arts (ELA) and math • ELA: 13.6% for E,M; 11.2% for H in 2003 • Math: 16.0% for E, M; 9.6% for H in 2003 • Achievement of a 95% participation rate on all applicable assessments • Achievement on the “additional” indicators • API for all schools (560 in 2003) • Graduation rate for high schools (82.8% in 2003)

  11. AMO’s: English language arts

  12. Projections – Single-Year Not Making AYP

  13. Accountability After NCLB • 2003 AYP Results: • 55% of schools made AYP (52% projected) • 41% of districts made AYP • 2003 Program Improvement Results: • 593 new schools were identified for PI • 1,200 schools overall are participating in PI

  14. 2003 Results: AYP vs. API

  15. Were AYP Results For 2003 As Bad As Were Predicted?

  16. Answer: Yes • Multi-pronged definition of AYP hurt schools • 46 potential ways to fail AYP • Nearly 600 new schools entered PI; over 500 schools advanced • Strain on available resources • Disproportionate number of middle and high schools did not meet AYP • Inconsistent with results of our statewide accountability system

  17. More Bad News is Lurking Around the Corner • In 2004-05 projections indicate that over 2/3 of schools will not make AYP • Districts will enter PI for the first time in 2004-05 • Additional strain on limited resources

  18. Looking Ahead • Submitted several amendments to the Accountability Workbook on 4/1/04 • Looking to take advantage of all flexibility offered in NCLB • Alignment of API and AYP • 2004 AYP release will include all components

  19. For More Information No Child Left Behind: http://www.cde.ca.gov/pr/nclb/ Adequate Yearly Progress: http://www.cde.ca.gov/ayp/ Rachel Perry Policy and Evaluation Division California Department of Education Rperry@cde.ca.gov

More Related