achieve | 2012 closing the expectations gap1. the college- and career-ready policy agenda align high...

Achieve | 2012 Closing the Expectations Gap 1

The College- and Career-Ready Policy Agenda

Align high school standards with the demands of college and careers.

Require students to take a college- and career-ready curriculum to earn a high school diploma.

Develop statewide high school assessment systems anchored to college- and career-ready expectations.

Develop reporting and accountability systems that promote college and career readiness.

2Achieve | 2012 Closing the Expectations Gap


• These CCR policies are not discreet but rather are a coherent set of policies that reinforce and support one another. When one policy changes – as has been the case with the universal adoption of standards anchoring all CCR efforts in states – the other policies must be reexamined.

• When K-12 and postsecondary policies are in alignment, students receive clear signals as to what they should know and be able to do to succeed in postsecondary – and the field receives clear signals about the shared commitment to higher expectations.

• With policy adoption nearly universal in many of these critical areas ((all states have CCR standards, nearly half have adopted CCR graduation requirements, and nearly all are working on aligned assessments), for the first time this year’s survey and report also address issues regarding the implementation of these policies.

• State-level leadership is critically important to sustain the policies that have already been adopted.

Advancing the Agenda

The ADP Network Educates 85% of U.S. Public School Students


College- and Career-Ready Standards


In the survey, Achieve asked states whether they have developed and adopted high school academic content standards in English and mathematics aligned to college- and career-ready expectations.

All 50 States and DC Have Aligned College- and Career-Ready Standards


Adopted CCSS Adopted CCSS in (ELA) only

Developed by state

State Efforts to Support CCSS/CCR Standards Implementation


• 46 states reported guiding/supporting district and school use by providing high-quality processes, protocols and exemplars, including rubrics or tools that the state provides, which are often used by district leaders, principals and curriculum directors (e.g., alignment tools).

• 39 states reported they are developing curricular and supplemental materials for voluntary use by districts and schools to align the state’s required courses to the CCSS/CCR standards. These materials include those the state provides or makes available for direct use in classrooms, often by teachers (e.g., model units, lessons, curricular maps, graphic organizers).

• 16 states responded that they are approving/certifying a list of curricular and supplemental materials aligned to the new CCSS/CCR standards.

• 5 states reported they are requiring district and school use of curricular materials aligned to the state’s required courses and the CCSS/CCR standards.

**Types of efforts listed above are not mutually exclusive

State-provided Professional Development to Teachers and Principals is Changing in Light of the CCSS/CCR Standards


• 39 states have developed a coordinated agency-wide plan and calendar for professional development aligned to the CCSS/CCR standards;

• 20 states have or will identify high-quality or promising providers for districts/schools to access;

• 14 states have or will audit existing professional development offerings for alignment to the CCSS/CCR standards; and

• 3 states do not directly deliver professional development to teachers and principals.

Regardless of the role the state plays, it is critical that states make certain that the professional development teachers and building leaders receive is aligned to the CCSS/CCR standards, high quality and capable of affecting changes in instruction.

**Types of efforts listed above are not mutually exclusive

College- and Career-Ready Graduation Requirements


In the survey, Achieve asked states whether they require all students to complete a college- and career-ready curriculum in order to earn a high school diploma.

Achieve also asked states how they ensure that the courses students take are aligned with the state’s academic content standards and that the content of courses is consistent and equally rigorous across schools and districts.

As of 2012, 23 States and DC Adopted Policies that Require Students to Default Into a College- and Career-Ready Course of Study


Mandatory Requirements

Default Requirements

DC

Improving Access and Opportunity with CCR Graduation Requirement


• In 2011, three new states – Hawaii, Iowa, and Washington – raised their graduation requirements to the CCR level.

• Four additional states – Colorado, Maine, New Jersey, and West Virginia – have proposals or legislation under consideration that, if adopted, would require all students to meet the full set of expectations defined in the CCSS – either through a traditional course-based requirement or through a competency-based approach.

• That leaves 23 states with CCR standards that have not aligned their graduation requirements to ensure that all students meet the college-and career-ready expectations found in their standards.

• States send mixed signals about their commitment to CCR when the courses — or competency-based demonstrations — required for students to earn a diploma in the state encompass only a subset of the academic knowledge and skills in literacy and mathematics needed to qualify for and succeed in entry-level, credit-bearing postsecondary coursework and/or job training.

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 20160%

25%

50%

75%

100%

0.109819452255546

0.171678273125896

0.25

0.49

% of Public Students in States with CCR Graduation Requirements

11 Statesand DC

23Statesand DC

First Cohorts of Students to Graduate Under the New CCR Requirements


High School Assessments Anchored to College- and Career-Ready Expectations


In the survey, Achieve asked states whether they administer to all students an assessment of college- and career-ready knowledge and skills capable of producing a readiness score used by postsecondary institutions and employers.

In 2012, 18 States Administer Tests Aligned with College and Career Expectations


National College Admissions Test

State-Developed Assessment

Consortia Working to Create Next-Generation Assessment Systems


PARCC member SBAC member PARCC and SBAC member* Governing state

State Assessment Transition Actions


*These actions are not mutually exclusive, with the exception of “No changes planned to state assessments at this time”. For most states, the transition actions apply to both ELA and Mathematics for grades 3-8 and high school. However, in a few cases states made changes to one subject or grade band.** Minnesota and Texas have developed/are developing new state-specific CCR assessments; the assessment transition actions included in the table are not relevant.

Assessment Transition Action* States** Totals

Removing items from state assessments that do not align to the CCSS/CCR standards

AZ, CT, DE, DC, GA, HI, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MA, MI, MO, NV, NH, NM, NY, NC, ND, PA, TN, UT, VT, VA, WA, WY

28

Adding new items to state assessments that align to the CCSS/CCR standards

AK, AZ, CT, DE, DC, GA, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, MA, MO, NV, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, SD, UT, VA, WA, WY

25

Expanding or creating new constructed-response or performance-based assessments

AK, CT, DC, KY, LA, MO, NM, NY, NC, OH, PA , RI, TN, VA, WA

15

Raising standard for “proficiency” on state assessments

DC, FL, IL, KY, MI, NE, NY, NC, OR, PA, VA, WI

12

No changes planned to state assessments at this time

AL, AR, CA, CO, ID, MD, MS, OK, SC, WV

10

State Assessment Transition Actions


• Several states are taking multiple steps to strengthen the alignment between their state assessments and the CCSS/CCR standards. Connecticut, Louisiana, Missouri, New Mexico, and Washington are removing items that are not aligned to their state standards, adding new items that are aligned, and expanding or creating new constructed-response or performance-based assessments.

• Kentucky, New York, North Carolina, Virginia and the District of Columbia are going one step further in demonstrating their commitment to preparing educators and students for the transition to higher expectations. In addition to taking the series of comprehensive actions described above they are also raising the standard for “proficiency” on their respective state assessments.

Goals of CCR Assessments


• Be well aligned to the standards that students are taught and that drive teachers’ instruction;

• Provide information to all students about whether they are on track to be or are academically prepared by the end of high school for success in college and career;

• Reflect good teaching and become a tool for instructional improvement;

• Be valued by states’ accountability systems; and

• Be recognized by the postsecondary community as a signal of students’ readiness to enter into credit-bearing courses without the need for remediation.

Reporting and Accountability Systems that Promote College and Career Readiness


In the survey, Achieve asked states whether they have incorporated a select set of college- and career-ready indicators into their data, reporting and accountability systems.

Key College- and Career-Ready Accountability Indicators and Uses


INDICATORS: the percentage of students who...

Earn a college- and career-ready diploma

Score college-ready on high school assessments

Earn college credit while in high school

Are required to take remedial courses in college

USES:

Annual school-level public reporting

Set statewide

performance goals

Provide school-level incentives to improve

Factor into accountability formula

Percentage of High School Graduates Who Earn a College- And Career-Ready Diploma

StateAnnual School-level

Public ReportingStatewide

Performance GoalsSchool-level Incentives

Accountability Formula

Alabama ü California üDelaware ü üDistrict of Columbia ü ü üFlorida üGeorgia ü üHawaii ü ü Indiana ü ü üKentucky ü üLouisiana ü ü ü üMassachusetts ü üNew York ü Ohio ü Oklahoma üTennessee üTexas ü ü ü üVirginia ü ü üTOTAL 16 9 4 6


Percentage of High School Graduates Who Obtain a Readiness Score on a College- & Career-Ready High School Assessment





Alabama üCalifornia üFlorida ü ü ü üGeorgia ü üIllinois üKentucky ü üLouisiana üMaine üMichigan üMinnesota üNew York ü ü üTexas ü ü üWisconsin üTOTAL 10 7 2 3


Percentage of High School Graduates WhoEarn College Credit While Still in High School





Colorado üFlorida ü ü ü üIndiana ü ü ü üKentucky üLouisiana üMinnesota üNew Mexico üOhio üOklahoma üTexas ü ü üUtah üTOTAL 6 6 3 4


Percentage of Incoming First-Year College Students Who Require Remediation





Alabama ü üColorado üFlorida ü üGeorgia ü ü üHawaii üIndiana ü üKentucky ü üLouisiana üMaryland üMissouri ü üMontana üNevada üNew Mexico üNorth Carolina üOhio üOklahoma ü üTexas ü ü üWest Virginia üWyoming üTOTAL 17 9 1 2


State Accountability System Indicators and Their Uses


College- and Career-Ready Indicators

College- and Career-Ready Uses

In 2012, Only Texas Meets Accountability Criteria – But Four States Receive Partial Credit


Full CCR Accountability System

Partial CCR Accountability System

Emerging Best Practices: Expanded Use of CCR Indicators in Accountability Formulas


Indiana will incorporate the percentage of graduates who earn a passing score on an AP or IB, earn 3 college credits in an approved course, or receive an industry certification. These will count as 10% of a high school’s grade in the state’s A-F grading system. Schools will get full credit if 25% or more of students fall into one of these categories.

New Mexico will include the percentage of a 9th grade cohort who scores at a CCR benchmark. (including college entrance exams, AP, dual credit, and vocational certification coursework) as 10% of the total score for high schools (participation of the graduation cohort is another 5%) in the state’s A-F accountability system.

New York will raise the definition of proficiency for its high school Regents Exams to the CCR level and give greatest weight in its accountability formula Performance Index to students who meet or exceed this threshold.

Feedback Reports: Building Understanding of Student Performance Patterns and Trends


Texas reports the number as well as percentages of students, makingthe data more real and increasing the sense of urgency. See the TexasCampus Graduation Summary here.

Indiana uses “vertical” comparisons between different levels in the education system, such as comparing a school’s performance to the averageperformance of its school district and state. Indiana also highlightsperformance disparities among student groups by diploma type. Thisinformation is critical for parents and the public. See the Indiana CompassReports.

Illinois uses “horizontal” comparisons between the same level in theeducation system, such as comparing a school’s performance to otherschools through school rankings or showing where the school’sperformance lies along a spectrum of school performance. See the IllinoisInteractive Report Card here.

http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/acctres/completion/script/2011/campus.html

http://compass.doe.in.gov/dashboard/collegereadiness.aspx?type=state

http://compass.doe.in.gov/dashboard/collegereadiness.aspx?type=state

http://iirc.niu.edu/

achieve | 2012 closing the expectations gap1. the college- and career-ready policy agenda align high...

Documents