1 / 16

Two Accountability Systems This Year

Understand the changes and interpretation of AZ Learns, the state's accountability system for schools, including the inclusion criteria for student performance and the revised model for determining school points.

justinirwin
Télécharger la présentation

Two Accountability Systems This Year

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. Two Accountability Systems This Year AZ Learns NCLB Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Yes / No Excelling, Highly-Performing, Performing, Underperforming

  2. Student Inclusion Criteria * AYP aggregates these students into larger totals ** Students in an ELL program for less than 4 years starting in 1st grade

  3. Total Baseline /Growth Points Adequate Yearly Progress MAP/Ext Writing Elem/Middle Dropout/ Grad Rates H. S. 1 to 6 Points for Each Subject/ Grade Level Up to 40% of Max Points 0 - 2 Points + 0 or 1 Points + = OR AZ LEARNS Revised Model Total School Points 3 S/G = 0-27 6 S/G = 0-52 9 S/G = 0-77

  4. Changes to AZ LEARNS from 2002Positive Changes • Two-year baseline: will help school with a very high or low initial year • 70/30 weighting: the higher of your baseline or growth is weighted 70% • Mobile students excluded • Added evidence (MAP/Ext. Writ) theoretically given more weight for elementary / middle schools • Statutory language rewritten to allow for more excelling schools

  5. Changes to AZ LEARNS from 2002Negative Changes • 70/30 weighting tends to flatten school differences, resulting in narrow cut score ranges • “Added” evidence is in fact an integral part of cuts • AYP—only 1 point regardless of # of Subject/Grades • Exceeding threshold criteria needed to keep a “Highly Performing” or “Excelling” label are perhaps too rigorous

  6. Interpreting Your Schools AZ-Learns Reports

  7. Over All School Designation AIMS Baseline /Growth Points for Each Subject/Grade School Designation Added Evidence Total Points Exceeds Average Needed to Keep Highly Performing or Excelling Designations Total Points Needed for Each Designation

  8. 3rd Grade Reading 2 yr Baseline Mastery Rate 2yr Baseline FFB Rate Last 3yr Mastery Rate Last 3yr FFB Rate 70% / 30% Weighting Total Growth Points Baseline Grouping Cuts Growth Grouping Cuts

  9. 3rd Grade Math Total Points

  10. 3rd Grade Writing Total Points

  11. Added Evidence 3-yrs of OYG (Stanford 9) for Reading and Math 3-yrs of AIMS Extended Writing Scores 24 or Greater Weighted Percentage Added Evidence Point Table Total Added Evidence Points = 75% OYG + 25% Extended Writing

  12. Over All School Designation AIMS Baseline /Growth Points for Each Subject/Grade School Designation Added Evidence Total Points Exceeds Average Needed to Keep Highly Performing or Excelling Designations Total Points Needed for Each Designation

  13. Tucson Unified School District--Overall • Excelling 10 • Highly Performing 11 • Performing 61 • Underperforming 12

  14. AZ LEARNS—2 Year Comparison *Due to changes in the model, several smaller TUSD elementary schools did not receive ratings in 2003

  15. AZ LEARNS—TUSD Talking Points • 2/3 (14/21) of Underperforming schools in 2002 Performing in 2003 • 43% decrease in Underperforming Schools • 900% increase in Excelling Schools • Only 2 schools which did not make AYP are Underperforming • 7 Schools have two straight years of Underperforming

  16. AZ-LEARNS Leading Education through Accountability and Results Notification System

More Related