delaware’s accountability plan for schools, districts and the state delaware department of...
TRANSCRIPT
Delaware’sAccountability Plan for Schools,Districts and the State
Delaware Department of Education
6/23/04
Why Did We Start Over?
Federal legislation signed January 2002 (NCLB)
Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1965
Delaware merged the existing state accountability processes with federal requirements for 2003-04
What Our System Allows
Ensure more valid and reliable accountability determinations
Monitor various subgroups progress at the school, district and state level
Support our value of continuous improvement
Accountability
Based on the performance of students taught in the school/district/state
DSTP – assessments used at grades 3,5,8, and 10 in reading, writing and math
Grades 4,6,8 and 11 science and social studies included in state progress determination
Calculations
System compares the % of students that meet/exceed DE content standards each year to previous years for ELA and math
Nine possible subgroups reviewed
Subgroup included for accountability decisions if there are 40 or more students
Subgroups
All students (the school as a whole) American Indian Asian American African American Hispanic White Economically Disadvantaged Special Education Limited English Proficient
Performance Target
% of students meeting the standards is compared to a State target of 57% in ELA, 33% in math (explained on the next slide)
Beginning in 2004, if performance target for subgroup is not met, a confidence interval is calculated
How do you determine Progress for the Performance Target? Current year’s test data OR
Average of the current year and the previous year of test scores
**use the higher of the two measures**
Safe Harbor To see if some change in lowest
achieving students
Cell shows a 10% decrease in the % of students not meeting the standards not meeting the standards as compared to the previous year, AND
Cell shows progress on the Other Academic Indicator
Other Academic Indicators Beginning in 2004, the Other Academic Indicator
for elementary and middle schools is determined by improvement of the average scale scores of the students performing at PL1&2 in reading and math combined
OR
A decrease in the % of students performing at PL1 in reading and math
A confidence interval is used in the comparisons is used here also
AYP: a school, district or the state must meet -- Participation Targets in ELA and math
Performance Targets in ELA and math, or attaining Safe Harbor
Maintain or show progress toward the Other Academic Indicator
AYP Status
Beginning in 2004, AYP status is expressed in terms of—
Above Target Meets Target Below Target
State Progress Determination
Calculated by formula
Reading, math, science, social studies included equally
Compares current year to last year
State Progress Determination
Beginning in 2004, State Progress status is expressed in terms of –
Above Target Meets Target Below Target
State Progress Determinations
Above-- growth of 6 points OR-- composite score of 75 or higher
Meets-- composite score of :
61-74 1 point growth45-60 2 points growth
Below-- composite score of less than 45 OR--did not meet growth target
Ratings
Beginning in 2004, the overall rating in determined by a combination of AYP and State Progress determination
Various combinations or Above, Meets, and Below Target (for State and AYP) yield the overall rating
Ratings
SuperiorCommendableAcademic ReviewAcademic Progress
--Under ImprovementAcademic Watch – Under
Improvement
How to be Classified as Under Improvement
Two consecutive years not meeting AYP in same content area
--ELA
--Math
--Other Academic Indicator
How to Move Out of Under Improvement
Must meet two conditions:--All targets must be met for two consecutive years in the content area(s) or other indicator that placed under improvement--Can fall below target in other content area(s) or other indicator for two consecutive years
Questions/Comments
www.doe.state.de.us/aab