1 / 18

Workgroup 1: College and Career Readiness Outcomes State Outcomes Subgroup

Workgroup 1: College and Career Readiness Outcomes State Outcomes Subgroup. COSA Winter Conference 2012. Charge:. Develop a system by which we can differentiate and report on the performance of individual schools. 2 Tasks:.

lucius
Télécharger la présentation

Workgroup 1: College and Career Readiness Outcomes State Outcomes Subgroup

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. Workgroup 1: College and Career Readiness OutcomesState Outcomes Subgroup COSA Winter Conference 2012

  2. Charge: Develop a system by which we can differentiate and report on the performance of individual schools.

  3. 2 Tasks: • Identify measures for the accountability system beyond those required in the waiver (to identify priority, focus, and reward schools) • Formulate recommendations for redesigning report cards.

  4. Context: • Subgroup identifying priority, focus, and reward schools • HB 2289 Task Force on School Accountability

  5. Guiding Principles: 1)  Measures must promote achievement of 40-40-20 goal that represents the diversity of the State's population 2)  Measures define key aspects of college and career readiness

  6. LearnWorks Key Outcomes Outcome 1:  By about age 5, learners have the cognitive, social, emotional, and behavioral skills necessary for kindergarten. Outcome 2:  By about age 9, learners are proficient in literacy and numeracy and can apply those skills in a variety of contexts.

  7. LearnWorks Key Outcomes Outcome 3:By their mid-teens all learners are establishing academic behaviors; acquiring reading, writing, math, and thinking skills; and developing core knowledge. . . Outcome 4:  By their late teens, learners earn a full-option diploma. . .

  8. LearnWorks Key Outcomes Outcome 5:  The majority of learners obtain a post-secondary degree or certificate that attests to their ability to think and learn

  9. Full Option Graduate Profile

  10. Task 1:  Accountability System Measures Design considerations: • Assessment out of grade level • More fine grained assessments - student proficiency on specific content • Fair accountability for mobile students • Provide data on cohort grad rate progress • System allows classroom judgments of proficiency or collections of assessments in lieu of state assessment • Classroom assessments - calibration, task quality • Essential skills development support and phase-in • Growth of all students, not just non-proficient students

  11. Identification of focus, priority, reward schools MUST USE: Standardized test (OAKS followed by SMARTER) for reading/language arts and math at grades 3-8, 11; 4-year cohort graduation rates Task 1:  Accountability System Measures

  12. Cross levels Growth on content assessments Growth on ELPA (AMAOs) Task 1:  Accountability System MeasuresIdentification of focus, priority, reward schools MAY USE:

  13. Task 1:  Accountability System Measures:Full Option Graduate

  14. Task 1:  Accountability System Measures:Ready for Critical Thinking

  15. Task 1:  Accountability System Measures:Ready to Apply Literacy and Numeracy

  16. Task 2:  Report Card Recommendations Design questions: • How can targets be set in a way that allows us to differentiate between the performance of various schools, for the purpose of celebrating the success of high performing schools (or those who are “beating the odds”) and provides support and incentives for growth to the lower performing schools? • Could a formula be developed that allows for different growth based on what is ambitious but achievable given the schools population? • What factors should be taken into account to determine targets (past performance, mobility, SES, how far they have to go (status),etc.)

  17. Task 2:  Report Card Recommendations Design questions: • What are the categories given to schools (i.e. Outstanding, Satisfactory, In Needs of Improvement) • Can the rating be given in different areas (i.e. Growth, Status, Achievement Gap, Other)?   • How should the report card balance simplicity (for purposes of public and school understanding) with complexity (for fairness and accuracy of ratings) • What “inputs” should be reported on the report card (i.e. attendance, safety, HQT)

  18. Task 2:  Report Card Recommendations Recommendations: • No overall rating, instead, based on methodology for identification of priority, focus, and reward schools, four areas for ratings: proficiency, growth, college and career readiness, graduation & beyond. • Include exited ELL students as a student group • Remove dropouts, student safety measures from report card.

More Related