11 a new accountability model march 31, 2010 gcs 2 discussion session
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
11
A New Accountability ModelMarch 31, 2010
GCS 2 Discussion Session
![Page 2: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
2
Objectives Come to consensus on:• The indicators to be used in
the new model and a non-technical definition of how we will measure them
• The assessments to be used to measure post-secondary readiness
• The use of growth and absolute performance in an indexing system
• The general weighting of indicators within the model
![Page 3: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
3
Additional Discussion Topics • Revised reporting
• Gateways and 25% policy
• ESEA reauthorization
• Timeline, formal feedback and next steps
![Page 4: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
4
Process for Today
• Brief framing followed by more lengthy discussion
We hope to….
• Make significant progress on key topics
• Keep a parking lot for input and next steps
![Page 5: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
5
Agenda
10:00 – 12:00• A New ABCs Model (20 min)
• Discussion and Consensus-Building on Indicators (90 min) Post-Secondary Readiness Absolute Achievement and Student Growth Future-Ready Core and Graduation Rate
• Indexing System and Bonus Points (10 min)
![Page 6: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
6
A New ABCs Model
![Page 7: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
7
What’s New and Better in the New Model?
• Inclusion of Post-Secondary Readiness Measure
• Robust Growth Measures
• Increased Academic Course Rigor (Future-Ready Core)
• Graduation Rate Replaces Dropout Rate
• Incorporation of Index System
• Inclusion of LEA Accountability
• Revised Reporting
• Revised Student Accountability System
• Alignment with ESEA Reauthorization
![Page 8: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
8
Growth and Performance We will use an absolute performance index and a growth index. Each will have a separate formula.
Absolute Performance Index Growth Index
School
![Page 9: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
9
Elementary/Middle School Indicators
End-of-Grade and (where appropriate) End-of-Course assessments built on new standards
Current includes: 3 – 8 Reading, 3 – 8 Math, 5 & 8 Science
Student Achievement
Absolute Performance Index
![Page 10: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
10
Student Growth
Student growth as measured by value-added system using EOGs and (where applicable) EOCs
Current includes: 4 – 8 Reading, 4 – 8 Math
Elementary/Middle School Indicators
Growth Index
![Page 11: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
11
Student Achievement
End-of-Course Assessments (English II, Math A, Math BC, US History, Civics + Econ, Biology and Physical Science)
Post-Secondary Readiness
National Assessment(s) (ACT, SAT, WorkKeys, Compass, Accuplacer)
Academic Course Rigor
Graduation Rate 5-Year Cohort Graduation Rate
Participation in the Future-Ready Core as evidenced by taking and scoring proficient in Algebra II (Math BC)
High School Indicators
Absolute Performance Index
![Page 12: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
Student GrowthStudent Growth as measured by value-added system
Post-Secondary Readiness
Change in National Assessments (ACT, SAT, WorkKeys, Compass, Accuplacer)
Academic Course Rigor
Graduation Rate Change in 5-Year Cohort Graduation Rate
Change in Participation in the Future-Ready Core as evidenced by taking and scoring proficient in Algebra II (Math BC)
High School Indicators
Δ
Δ
Δ
Growth Index
![Page 13: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
13
• 95% of respondents agree with the components in the elementary model
• Some superintendents expressed a desire for expansion of accountability into K-3 and for inclusion of science and social studies
Initial Superintendents’ Feedback on Elementary/Middle School
Indicators
![Page 14: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
14
• 91% of respondents agreed with the components in the high school model
• One concern about perceived loss of career-focus
• One concern about FRC and high-income bias
Initial Superintendents’ Feedback on High School Indicators
![Page 15: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
15
Post-Secondary Readiness
![Page 16: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
16
Overview of Other States
Post-Secondary Readiness
• 8 states currently use a nationally recognized post-secondary readiness test
• 5 states currently administer the ACT to all their public high school students
• 6 states measure the college and career readiness of students using a high school assessment developed in state or by the ADP Assessment Consortium
![Page 17: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
17
Post-Secondary Readiness
![Page 18: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
18
Assessments
ACTSAT
WorkKeysAccuplacer
Compass
Post-Secondary Readiness
![Page 19: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
19
ACTCollege Admissions Exam; Mandatory for 11th graders in five states
SATCollege Admissions Exam; Mandatory for 11th graders in one state
WorkKeysCareer Preparedness Exam; Includes three sections: 1) Applied Mathematics 2) Locating Information and 3) Reading for Information
COMPASSComputer-Adaptive College Placement Test; COMPASS offers tests in reading, writing, math, writing essay, and English as a Second Language (ESL)
AccuplacerCollege Placement Test; Includes Sentence Skills, Reading Comprehension, Arithmetic, Elementary Algebra, College-Level Math, Written Essay
![Page 20: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
20
Governor’s Ready, Set,
Go! and a Continuum of
Diagnostic Assessments
![Page 21: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
21
Post-Secondary Readiness
Initial Superintendents’ Feedback
• 96% agreed generally with the proposed measures of post-secondary readiness
• More to come after April 25th
![Page 22: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
22
Discussion
Post-Secondary Readiness
![Page 23: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
23
Achievement and Growth
![Page 24: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
24
Student Achievement
• Maintain the Performance Composite of EOC and EOG assessments as the measure of school achievement
![Page 25: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
25
Student Growth
School
• Replace current growth model with value-added system using EOCs and EOGs data to determine school growth
LEA
• Systematic reporting of longitudinal growth on reading and math scales
Educational Value-Added
Longitudinal Growth
![Page 26: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
26
LEA
Extrapolated Growth Curve for Readingwith Median Postsecondary Text Measures
UndergraduateAdmissionsand Military
Citizenship
Workplace
Community College
University
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Grades
Lexil
eLongitudinal GrowthStudent Growth
*Text measures taken from national sources
![Page 27: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
27
Measurement of Growth
![Page 28: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
28
• Allows use of more than two data points in calculating growth
• Federal measures may encourage use of a similar model to determine growth of students
LEA Value-AddedStudent Growth
![Page 29: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
29
Achievement and Growth
Discussion
![Page 30: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
30
Future-Ready Core and
Graduation Rate
![Page 31: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
31
Future-Ready Core
Superintendents’ Feedback
• 47% agreed with the Future-Ready Core measured by Algebra II
• Some requested more than Algebra II (“should include English, Social Studies, Math, Science…”)
• Some expressed concern about whether Algebra II needs to be the standard for all students
![Page 32: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
32
Future-Ready Core
Recommendation
• Calculate as the % Algebra II (Math BC) completion and proficiency
Graduation Rate
Recommendation
• 5-Year Cohort Graduation Rate
![Page 33: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
33
Future-Ready Core and
Graduation Rate
Discussion
![Page 34: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
34
Indicator
Student Achievement: The School Performance Composite
Indicator
Student Growth as measured by Value-Added System
School Elementary/Middle School Absolute Performance Index Growth Index
![Page 35: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
35
IndicatorIndex Points
Student Achievement: The School Performance Composite
Post-Secondary Readiness as measured by ACT etc.
Future-Ready Core Participation (a measure of the rigor of courses that students take)
5-Year Cohort Graduation Rate
IndicatorIndex Points
Student Growth as measured by Value-Added System
Change in Post-Secondary Readiness as measured by ACT etc.
Change in Future-Ready Core Participation
Change in 5-Year Cohort Graduation Rate
School High School Absolute Performance Index Growth Index
![Page 36: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
36
An Index Model will allow us to keep the
core model simple and focus on key outcomes
![Page 37: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
37
• Bonus Points may be awarded for additional indicators like the graduation project
• Simulations will be conducted to ensure the contribution of bonus points is done carefully to maintain focus on achievement and growth
![Page 38: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
38
Agenda 1:00 – 2:30• Weighting of Indicators (30 min)
• Updated Reporting System (10 min)
• Gateways (30 min)
• ESEA Reauthorization and School Classification (10 min)
• Next Steps (10 min)
![Page 39: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
39
Lunch Break
![Page 40: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
40
Weighting of Indicators
![Page 41: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
41
IndicatorIndex Points
Student Achievement: The School Performance Composite
Post-Secondary Readiness as measured by ACT etc.
Future-Ready Core Participation
5-year Cohort Graduation Rate
IndicatorIndex Points
Student Growth as measured by Value-Added System
Change in Post-Secondary Readiness as measured by ACT etc.
Change in Future-Ready Core Participation
Change in 5-Year Cohort Graduation Rate
We asked the North Carolina Superintendents to fill out the two charts.
Absolute Performance Index Growth Index
![Page 42: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
42
Weighting of Indicators
Superintendents’ Feedback
• ¾ of the Superintendents recommended an identical weighting structure in both the Absolute Performance Index and the Growth Index
• The variance was small for those Superintendents who did suggest weighting differently between performance and growth
• We conclude that the Superintendents generally support using the same weighting within each index system
![Page 43: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
43
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
% o
f P
erfo
rmance
Index
Weighting of Student Achievementin the Performance Index
Superintendents' Feedback
AVERAGE ≈ 44%Most Frequently Occurring was 50% (23 out of 47)
![Page 44: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
44
Weighting of Post-Secondary Readiness in the Performance Index
Superintendents' Feedback
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
% o
f P
erfo
rmance
Index
AVERAGE ≈ 17%Most Frequently Occurring was 10% (31 of 47)
![Page 45: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
45
Weighting of Future-Ready Core Participation in the Performance Index
Superintendents' Feedback
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
% o
f P
erfo
rmance
Index
AVERAGE ≈ 13%Most Frequently Occurring was 10% (26 of 47)
![Page 46: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
46
Weighting of Graduation Rate in the Performance IndexSuperintendents' Feedback
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
% o
f P
erfo
rmance
Index
AVERAGE ≈ 26%Most Frequently Occurring was 20% and 30% (both 11 out of 47)
![Page 47: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
47
Weighting of Indicators
Possible Superintendent Recommendation
IndicatorIndex Points
Student Achievement: The School Performance Composite
50
Post-Secondary Readiness as measured by ACT etc. 15
Future-Ready Core Participation 10
5-year cohort Graduation Rate 25
IndicatorIndex Points
Student Growth as measured by Value-Added System 50
Change in Post-Secondary Readiness as measured by ACT etc.
15
Change in Future-Ready Core Participation 10
Change in 5-year cohort Graduation Rate 25
1) The weighting is identical in absolute performance and growth
2) The weighting is as below…Absolute Performance Index Growth Index
![Page 48: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
48
Weighting of Indicators
Discussion
![Page 49: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
49
IndicatorIndex Points
Student Achievement: The School Performance Composite
Post-Secondary Readiness as measured by ACT etc.
Future-Ready Core Participation
5-Year Cohort Graduation Rate
IndicatorIndex Points
Student Growth as measured by Value-Added System
Change in Post-Secondary Readiness as measured by ACT etc.
Change in Future-Ready Core Participation
Change in 5-Year Cohort Graduation Rate
Absolute Performance Index Growth Index
![Page 50: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
50
Updated Reporting
![Page 51: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
51
Suggestions for Reported Indicators not in High-Stakes
Model
Reporting
• Graduation Project
• Advanced Placement Courses (# and % of participants and scores)
• International Baccalaureate (# and % of participants and scores)
• Credentialing Programs (# and % credentials)
• Online Courses Taken (# and %)
• Higher-Level Foreign Language Courses Taken (# and %)
• Concentrations (# and %)
• Attendance of Teachers and Students
![Page 52: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
52
New and Better
• Report measures that matter
• 2012-13: Updated School Report Card
• Align major reporting functions (ABCs, Report Cards, AYP)
• Make reporting easy to understand; Show comparable results
• Allow customization
Reporting
![Page 53: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
53
Student Accountabilit
yGateways
![Page 54: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
54
Data
% of Students Retained
Grade
1999-00 (pre-
SAS)
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
3 3.5 3.2 2.8 2.4 3.4 3.3
5 1.4 1.5 1.4 1.4 3.7 3.2
8 2.6 2.7 2.2 2.5 3.3 3.2
![Page 55: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/55.jpg)
55
Data
% of Students Who Scored Below Proficient on the EOC or EOG and Passed the Course/Grade (2008-09)*
Algebra I 10.4%
Biology 11.4%
Civics & Economics 11.0%
English I 10.5%
US History 12.2%
Grade 3 Math 10.1%
Grade 5 Math 12.2%
Grade 8 Math 11.0%
Grade 3 Reading 22.6%
Grade 5 Reading 21.1%
Grade 8 Reading 21.7%
*These Results Reflect the Use of 1 SEM. No Retesting Included for EOC Assessments
![Page 56: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/56.jpg)
56
Superintendent Feedback
• Variability in responses
• Strong advocates to eliminate Gateways and strong advocates to keep
• More to come after April 25th
![Page 57: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/57.jpg)
57
Superintendent Feedback
• ~80% said the End-of-Course policy should remain in place, most suggesting that it remain 20 or 25% of final grade
• No consensus on suggestion that 20% of the final grade come from EOGs
![Page 58: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/58.jpg)
58
One Possible Proposal
•Retain 25% of final grade from the EOCs
•20% of final grade from the EOGs (Operational with new assessments)
![Page 59: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/59.jpg)
59
Student Accountabilit
yGatewaysDiscussion
![Page 60: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/60.jpg)
6060
Impact of ESEA Reauthorization
http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/blueprint/index.html
![Page 61: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/61.jpg)
6161Draft; For discussion purposes only – March 17, 2010
Low-Performing School*Less than 600
School of Progress600 - 799
School of Distinction800 - 899
School of Excellence No Recognition900 - 1000
Making Less than Expected Growth
Making Expected or High Growth
Growth IndexPerformance Index
First Classification Example(Similar Format; Fewer Categories)
*Will require statutory change.
The categories and scales are not finalized. The performance index is differentthan the performance composite and therefore a new scale has been used.
DRAFT
![Page 62: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/62.jpg)
6218
Second Classification Example (Four-Quadrant)
Lower PerformanceHigher Growth
Higher Performance Higher Growth
Lower PerformanceLower Growth
Higher PerformanceLower Growth
Gro
wth
Inde
x
Performance IndexScale to be determined
Sca
le to
be
dete
rmin
ed
DRAFT
![Page 63: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/63.jpg)
63
Points of Consensus
andParking Lot
Issues
![Page 64: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/64.jpg)
64
Timeline• Phase-in parts of new model (e.g.
Future-Ready Core in 2012-13)
• Fully operational target of 2013-14
• K-12 Math and Eng II standards suggested to be delayed one year
![Page 65: 11 A New Accountability Model March 31, 2010 GCS 2 Discussion Session](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081518/5514c400550346b0338b4a25/html5/thumbnails/65.jpg)
65
Key Next Steps•Legislative Engagement
•Formal Field Feedback
•Cost Estimates