Download
accountability essentials for california 2010 n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Accountability Essentials for California 2010 PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Accountability Essentials for California 2010

Accountability Essentials for California 2010

117 Views Download Presentation
Download Presentation

Accountability Essentials for California 2010

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. New Coordinator Trainingon Accountability Accountability Essentialsfor California2010

  2. California and Federal Accountability Systems • Two systems that convert test results into different measures of academic performance • California measure: the Academic Performance Index (API) looks at growth in school performance • Federal measure: Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) looks at the percentage of students proficient or above

  3. Accountability Progress Reporting System • Integrated system of reporting results for state and federal accountability requirements • Includes • Base API Report • Growth API Report • AYP Report • Program Improvement (PI) Status

  4. Accountability Progress Reporting System • Provides data for • State • Local educational agencies (LEAs are school districts, county offices of education, direct funded charters, and statewide benefit charter agencies) • Schools (including charter schools) • Numerically significant subgroups

  5. Numerically Significant Subgroups • Defined in the same manner for both the state and federal accountability systems • Definition • 100 students or more or • 50 students that make up at least 15 percent of the total number of students tested

  6. Numerically Significant Subgroups • Participation rate • Based on enrollment on the first day of testing • Percent proficient • Based on the number of valid test scores • Schools or LEAs with fewer than 100 students will not have any numerically significant subgroups

  7. Numerically Significant Subgroups • All major racial/ethnic groups • Socioeconomically disadvantaged (SED) • Defined as eligible for the Free or Reduced Price Lunch Program or neither parent has a high school diploma • English learners (ELs) • Students with Disabilities (SWDs)

  8. English Learners Defined for Accountability • A student who is marked as EL on the Student Answer Document or • A reclassified fluent-English-proficient (RFEP) student who has not scored proficient or above on the California Standards Test (CST) in English-language arts (ELA) for three years after being reclassified

  9. Students With Disabilities Defined for Accountability • A student who receives special education services and has a valid disability code or • A student who was previously identified as special education, but who is no longer receiving special education services for up to two years after exiting • These students will not count in determining whether or not the group is numerically significant

  10. Academic Performance Index (API)

  11. What Is the API? • Created by the Public Schools Accountability Act (PSAA) of 1999 • Single number ranges from 200 - 1000 • Based on student performance on statewide assessments across multiple subject areas

  12. What Is the API? • Cross-sectional look at student achievement - does not track individual student progress • Based on the performance of the students at the school who were enrolled for a “full academic year” • The API from one year is compared to the API from the prior year to measure growth

  13. API Reporting Cycle • Each year’s testing results in a • Base API • Growth API • 2010 test results will be used to calculate • 2010 Growth (compared to 2009 Base) • 2010 Base (compared to 2011 Growth)

  14. 2007 2008 2009 2010 2008 Growth API 2007 Base API 2008 Base API 2009 Growth API 2009 Base API 2010 Growth API API Reporting Cycles

  15. API Reporting Cycle • New tests are added or new weights are given to the tests with the Base API • Within one reporting cycle, the Base and Growth APIs must have the same tests with the same weights – only valid way to compare results

  16. API Reporting Cycle • 2009 Base API • Schoolwide/Subgroup APIs • STAR Indicators • CSTs: ELA & math (2-11), science (5, 8-11), history-social science (8-11) • CMA in ELA (3-8), math (3-7), and science (5) • CAPA • CAHSEE (10-12) • Statewide Rank • Similar Schools Rank • 2010 Growth API • Schoolwide/Subgroup APIs • STAR Indicators • CSTs: ELA, math (2-11), science (5, 8-11), history-social science (8-11) • CMA in ELA (3-8), math (3-7), and science (5) • CAPA • CAHSEE (10-12) Same indicators for base and growth

  17. The only valid API comparison is between one year’s Growth API and the prior year’s Base API.

  18. API Comparisons • Inappropriate Comparisons • 2008 Base API and 2009 Base API • 2009 Base API and 2009 Growth API • 2003 Base API and 2009 Growth API • Appropriate Comparisons • 2009 Base API and 2010 Growth API • Actual API growth from 2008-09 and actual API growth from 2009-10

  19. What Assessments Are Used in the API? • California Standards Tests (CSTs) • ELA (grades 2-11) • Mathematics (grades 2-11) • Science (grades 5, 8-11) • History/Social Science (grades 8-11) • California High School Exit Examination (CAHSEE) • ELA and mathematics Grades 10-12

  20. What Assessments Are Used in the API? • California Modified Assessment (CMA) • ELA (grades 3-8) • Mathematics (grades 3-7) • Science (grade 5) • California Alternate Performance Assessment (CAPA) • Alternate assessment for the CSTs • For the most cognitively disabled • ELA and mathematics Grades 2-11

  21. How to Calculate the API:The Simple Version • Convert each test result into a score on the API scale (200 to 1000) Advanced = 1000 points Proficient = 875 points Basic = 700 points Below Basic = 500 points Far below Basic = 200 points • Calculate a weighted average of the scores

  22. API Calculation Spreadsheet Part I—2009 Base API or 2010 Growth API

  23. API Calculation Spreadsheet Part II—2009 Base API or 2010 Growth API

  24. API Calculation Spreadsheet Seven Basic Steps The user completes the following two steps in Part I: • Apply inclusion/exclusion rules to student test results • Enter total number of valid scores into Part I by content area and performance level The remaining five steps are calculated automatically in Part II

  25. API Spreadsheets • The API Calculation Spreadsheets can be accessed on the California Department of Education (CDE) API Web page at: http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/ap/

  26. Statewide APIPerformance Target 800 adopted by State Board as statewide target

  27. Annual API Growth Targets • 5 percent of the distance to 800 for the school overall and all numerically significant subgroups • Minimum of 5 points until the API target of 800 is reached (schoolwide and for significant subgroups) • A school or subgroup at or above 800 needs to stay at or above 800 to make their target

  28. Maximum 1000 800 700 Minimum 200 0 Example School 800-700 = 100 5% x 100 = 5 Growth Target 5% Distance to Statewide Performance Target

  29. ExampleSchool API Growth Targets

  30. API Ranks • Required by the PSAA of 1999 • Statewide Rank • Establishes a ranking of schools from highest to lowestby school type • Similar Schools Rank • Compares a school to 100 other schools that are similar on key variables

  31. Statewide Rank • Ranks are established by deciles • Range from 1 to 10 • 1 is low • 10 is high • Ranks improve when the API score increases • Dependent upon API increases of other schools statewide

  32. Statewide Rank • Rank API scores from highest to lowest separately by school type • Divide the distribution into 10 equal ranks (i.e., deciles)

  33. Similar Schools Rank • Compares a school to 100 similar schools • Rank 1 means the school performed below at least 90 of its 100 similar schools • Rank 10 means the school performed above at least 90 of its 100 similar schools

  34. Similar Schools Rank • Calculate a School Characteristics Index (SCI) for each school based on more than 20 variables including: • Mobility • Ethnicity • Percent of teachers who are fully credentialed • Percent of teachers that hold emergency credentials • Percent of English learners • Average class size per grade level • Percent of GATE students • Percent of migrant students

  35. Similar Schools Ranks(continued) • Rank SCIs from high to low separately by school type • Identify 50 schools with SCIs just above and 50 schools with SCIs just below the “target” school • Order the 100 schools by their actual Base API • Divide the schools into ten decile ranks and determine the target school’s rank

  36. Selecting and Ranking the 100 Similar Schools API SCI API SCI 50 50 50 50

  37. Similar Schools Ranks • Schools often do not “look” like my school • Based on similar levels of challenges • Useful communication tool for low and high-performing schools

  38. Use, Interpretation,and Presentationof API Data

  39. What Our API Score Tells Us • Students did or did not perform better than last year • Certain subgroups did or did not improve • Certain subgroups met or did not meet their growth targets • The school is at or above the statewide target of 800

  40. What Our API Score Tells Us • Where our school ranks compared to schools of our same school type • Where our school ranks compared to schools with similar challenges • Whether the achievement gap between subgroups is narrowing

  41. DisplayingAPI Results

  42. Growth API For Student Groups in 2009

  43. What Our APIScore Does Not Tell Us • Which content areas showed improvement • How many students are scoring at each performance level in each content area • What percent of students are proficient or above, by content area

  44. What Our API Score Does Not Tell Us • Where to focus instructional resources • Whether specific instructional intervention programs are effective

  45. API Reports • Reports and data files from 1999 to present are on the CDE API Web page at: http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/ap/

  46. AdequateYearly Progress(AYP)

  47. What Is AYP? • Federal accountability requirement enacted by No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 • Methodology must be annually approved by the U.S. Department of Education (ED)

  48. AYP Requirements • Must meet annual targets that increase over time • Goal is 100 percent of students proficient in ELA and mathematics by 2013-14 • Annual determination for schools and LEAs

  49. AYP Components • Participation rate • ELA and mathematics • Percent proficient • ELA and mathematics • API • Graduation rate • High schools only

  50. Participation Rate • Must be 95 percent or greater • In ELA and mathematics • For the school or LEA and all numerically significant subgroups • Numerically significant subgroups based on enrollment on the first day of testing