1 / 66

The New York State Accountability System: Simplified

The New York State Accountability System: Simplified. Emma Klimek April 16, 2009. Agenda. 8:30-9:30: Participation and Performance 9:30-10:30: Effective Measureable Objective, State Standards, Safe Harbor 10:30-10:45: Break 10:45-11:30-Secondary School Accountability.

crystal
Download Presentation

The New York State Accountability System: Simplified

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. The New York State Accountability System:Simplified Emma Klimek April 16, 2009

  2. Agenda • 8:30-9:30: Participation and Performance • 9:30-10:30: Effective Measureable Objective, State Standards, Safe Harbor • 10:30-10:45: Break • 10:45-11:30-Secondary School Accountability Emma Kimek 2009

  3. Why Learn About Accountability? • You are the mentor for the high school, middle school and elementary schools which have not made AYP for participation, performance and graduation rate. What would you do next to help the principals? Emma Kimek 2009

  4. Adequate Yearly Progress • Participation • ELA, Math, Third Indicator • Performance • ELA, Math, Third Indicator • 2 Year Rule Emma Kimek 2009

  5. ParticipationCriterion Emma Kimek 2009

  6. Participation CriterionElementary/Middle Level • 40 or more students • 95% participation • 80% for science Emma Kimek 2009

  7. Participation CriterionSecondary Level • 40 or more 12th grade students with valid Regents score or alternative, RCT or NYSAA Emma Kimek 2009

  8. “Safety Net” for Participation • If less than 40 students in one year, weighted calculation for 2 years • If less than 95%, then weighted calculation for 2 years Emma Kimek 2009

  9. Medically Excused • 3-8 students • Absent entire testing period • Documentation required Emma Kimek 2009

  10. Activity Calculating participation for small groups Or Didn’t make 95% Emma Kimek 2009

  11. Performance Criterion:Performance Indices Emma Kimek 2009

  12. Levels of Student Achievement Performance Index (PI) Level 1 = Basic Level 2 = Basic Proficient Level 3 = Proficient Level 4 = Advanced Emma Kimek 2009

  13. Calculation of the Performance Index (PI) 3-8 • Value from 0-200 • Number of continuously enrolled tested students scoring at Levels 2, 3, and 4 + the number scoring at Levels 3 and 4 ÷ number of continuously enrolled tested students  100 PI = [(Level 2+Level 3+Level 4+Level 3+Level 4) ÷ number of cont. enrolled]  100 Emma Kimek 2009

  14. Activity Calculating Performance Index in Grades 3-8 Emma Kimek 2009

  15. Number of Test Number Students at Levels Gradeof Students 1 2 3 4 3 35 12 7 10 6 4 43 3 6 20 14 5 30 6 10 10 4 Emma Kimek 2009

  16. Answer PI = [(23+40+24+40+24) ÷ 108]  100 = 140 Note: The methodology is the same regardless of how many grade levels (3-8) a school serves. Emma Kimek 2009

  17. Assessments for Performance 3-8 Emma Kimek 2009

  18. Assessments at the Secondary Level Emma Kimek 2009

  19. Highest score is counted; if no score then counted as level 1 Emma Kimek 2009

  20. Performance Criteria • Effective AMOs • State Standards • Safe Harbor • Progress Targets Emma Kimek 2009

  21. Performance CriterionELA MATH SCIENCE For ELA and Math: Performance Index of group =>Effective Annual Measurable Objective OR Make Safe Harbor (group must qualify on third indicator) For Science and Graduation: Performance Index of group => State Standard OR Meet Progress Target Emma Kimek 2009

  22. Effective AMOs An Effective AMO is the lowest PI not to be considered significantly different from the AMO Refer to chart Emma Kimek 2009

  23. Confidence Intervals Were Used toDetermine Effective AMOs Annual Measurable Objective Emma Kimek 2009

  24. Safe Harbor for ELA and Math Safe Harbor Target = {Previous Year’s PI} + [(200 – {Previous Year’s PI})  0.10] Emma Kimek 2009

  25. Activity • In the green section, enter “previous year’s PI” Emma Kimek 2009

  26. Qualifying for Safe Harborin ELA and Math (for the group) • Grades 3-8 • Must equal or exceed the state standard in Science or the progress target • Secondary • Must equal or exceed state standard for graduation rate or progress target • Local or Regents diploma by August 31 of the 4th year after entering grade nine Emma Kimek 2009

  27. 34-Point Rule forStudents with Disabilities All schools: if only SWD, then 34 points added and must equal AMO not the Effective AMO Emma Kimek 2009

  28. Former Limited English Proficient (LEP) Students LEP <= 30 then former LEP Emma Kimek 2009

  29. Graduation Rate Calculation Number of graduation-rate cohort members who graduated with a local or Regents diploma _________________________________________ Number of graduation-rate cohort members Then, multiplying the result by 100. For example: Graduation-rate cohort members = 178 Graduation-rate cohort members with local or Regents diplomas = 146 Graduation rate = (146  178)  100 = 82.02247 or 82% Emma Kimek 2009

  30. Making Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Emma Kimek 2009

  31. Emma Kimek 2009

  32. Emma Kimek 2009

  33. Emma Kimek 2009

  34. Determining State and Federal Accountability Status General Rules

  35. School-Level Accountability • Fail to make AYP for two years • Third year failure to make AYP, move to next level • If achieving AYP for one year, then remains at present status • To be removed from status the school must make AYP for two consecutive years Emma Kimek 2009

  36. District-Level Accountability • All students • Two year rule • District can be identified even if no school is identified Emma Kimek 2009

  37. Determining School State Status *A school must fail to make AYP for two consecutive years to be placed in improvement status. A school that makes AYP for two consecutive years is removed from improvement status for the subject and grade in which it was identified. Emma Kimek 2009

  38. Determining District State Status *A district must fail to make AYP for two consecutive years to be placed in improvement status. A district that makes AYP for two consecutive years is removed from improvement status for the measure in which it was identified. Emma Kimek 2009

  39. Determining School Federal Status *A school must fail to make AYP for two consecutive years to be placed in improvement status. A school that makes AYP for two consecutive years is removed from improvement status for the subject and grade in which it was identified. Emma Kimek 2009

  40. Determining District Federal Status *A district must fail to make AYP for two consecutive years to be placed in improvement status. A district that makes AYP for two consecutive years is removed from improvement status for the measure in which it was identified. Emma Kimek 2009

  41. Secondary-Level Accountability and Graduation-Rate (Total) Cohorts Emma Kimek 2009

  42. Guide to Accountability Cohorts High schools are accountable for three areas: • English and mathematics performance; • English and mathematics participation; and • graduation rate. A different group of students is measured in each of these areas. The cohort used to measure English and mathematics performance was redefined beginning with the 2002 cohort (class of 2006); the cohort used to measure graduation rate was redefined beginning with the 2003 (class of 2007) cohort. Emma Kimek 2009

  43. 2007-08 High School Accountability *Twelfth graders are students whose last reported grade between July 1 and June 30 of the academic reporting year (e.g., between July 1, 2007 and June 30, 2008 for the 2007-08 academic reporting year) in the Student Information Repository System is grade 12. Emma Kimek 2009

  44. 2004 Accountability Cohort Definition • The 2004 accountability cohort consists of all students, regardless of their current grade status, who were enrolled in the school on October 3, 2007 (BEDS day) and met one of the following conditions: • first entered grade 9 (anywhere) during the 2004–05 school year (July 1, 2004 through June 30, 2005); or • in the case of ungraded students with disabilities, reached their seventeenth birthday during the 2004–05 school year. Emma Kimek 2009

  45. 2004 Accountability Cohort Definition (continued) The State will exclude the following students when reporting data on the 2004 accountability cohort: • Left district • Enrolled GED Emma Kimek 2009

  46. Transfers to GED • In the Student Information Repository System, districts must provide the following information for students who transfer to approved GEDprograms during the 2005-06 and later school years (as defined in CR 100.7): • The ending reason on the enrollment record for the high school must be transferred to an AHSEP or HSEPprogram. • There must be a subsequent ASEPP/HSEPP enrollment that includes a service provider code for an NYSED-approved AHSEP or HSEP program. Emma Kimek 2009

  47. Transfers to GED (continued) • If the student is not enrolled in the AHSEP or HSEP program on June 30, 2008, the ending date and reason must be provided. • To be considered still enrolled, the student must have been in attendance at least once during the last 20 days of the program or have excused absences for that period. Emma Kimek 2009

  48. 2003 Graduation-Rate (Total) Cohort Definition • The 2003 graduation-rate (total) cohort consists of all students as of June 30, 2007, regardless of their current grade status, who: • first entered grade 9 (anywhere) during the 2003–04 school year (July 1, 2003 through June 30, 2004); or • in the case of ungraded students with disabilities, reached their seventeenth birthday during the 2003–04 school year AND whose last enrollment in the school was 5 months or longer (excluding July and August) or, whose last enrollment was less than 5 months but who had a prior enrollment in this school or district between July 1, 2003 and June 30, 2007 that was 5 months or more. Emma Kimek 2009

  49. 2003 Graduation-Rate (Total)Cohort Definition (continued) • When reporting data on the 2003 total cohort, the State will exclude students whose last enrollment record indicated that they: • transferred to another district or nonpublic school (excluded from the district graduation-rate cohort) or criminal justice facility; or • left the U.S. and its territories; or • died. Emma Kimek 2009

  50. 2003 Graduation-Rate Activity 1 Student 1 Is student 1 included in School A’s graduation rate? Emma Kimek 2009

More Related