1 / 26

Incentivizing College- and Career-Readiness: Building Indicators into State Reporting and Accountability Systems

Incentivizing College- and Career-Readiness: Building Indicators into State Reporting and Accountability Systems. Wes Bruce, Indiana Dept. of Education Scott Norton, Louisiana Dept. of Education Chris Domaleski & Brian Gong, Center for Assessment Concurrent Session at the Annual ADP Network

owena
Télécharger la présentation

Incentivizing College- and Career-Readiness: Building Indicators into State Reporting and Accountability Systems

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. Incentivizing College- and Career-Readiness:Building Indicators into State Reporting and Accountability Systems Wes Bruce, Indiana Dept. of Education Scott Norton, Louisiana Dept. of Education Chris Domaleski & Brian Gong, Center for Assessment Concurrent Session at the Annual ADP Network State Leadership Team Meeting Sept. 10, 2009 Washington, DC

  2. Overview of Session • Setting the Context – Brian Gong • Indiana’s Experience – Wes Bruce • Louisiana’s Experience – Scott Norton • Discussion of “Lessons Learned” – Chris Domaleski • Discussion/Q&A with audience Incentivizing / Building State Systems - 9/10/09

  3. Setting the Context • Every state has a state system that complies with federal NCLB • but most states are working on making their K-12 systems more strongly connected with college- and career-readiness Incentivizing / Building State Systems - 9/10/09

  4. The Challenge • What to focus on? • How to make coherent? • How to make it happen? Incentivizing / Building State Systems - 9/10/09

  5. What to Focus On? • Achieve’s Measures that Matter provides a good framework • Establish clear and appropriate Goals • Establish appropriate Measures, Metrics, and Processes for Continuous Improvement (including accountability systems) • Ensure that state policy informs and drives appropriate Supports, Interventions, and Models Incentivizing / Building State Systems - 9/10/09

  6. What to Measure? • Achieve’s Measures that Matter provides a good framework • Course of Study • Achievement • Attainment • Monitored as Progressing toward, Achieving, or Exceeding college- and career-readiness Incentivizing / Building State Systems - 9/10/09

  7. ________ __ _________ A Framework of CRR Indicators Incentivizing / Building State Systems - 9/10/09

  8. ___ ____ ___ _____ A View from two States • What to focus on? • How to make coherent? • How to make it happen? • Real-world advice • Wes Bruce, Indiana Dept. of Ed • Scott Norton, Louisiana Dept. of Ed Incentivizing / Building State Systems - 9/10/09

  9. Indiana – Core 40 Expectations, Achievement, Attainment and Raising the Bar

  10. College and Career Readiness Incentivizing / Building State Systems - 9/10/09 In 1994 just over 10% of Indiana high school diplomas went beyond the minimum That year the optional Core 40 diploma was passed into law Core 40 – a 40 credit course of study (with some options) that would meet college entrance requirements and prepare students for the workplace Agreement between K-12 and Higher Ed (IDOE & CHE)

  11. Great on Paper Incentivizing / Building State Systems - 9/10/09 Coupled with HS Graduation test (beginning with the Class of 2000) Getting the Colleges and Universities to agree was easier said than done 2004 (ten years later) all state supported H.E. institutions recognized Core 40 as meeting their general entrance requirements

  12. Indiana Results 98 - 08 Incentivizing / Building State Systems - 9/10/09

  13. Core 40 - Year 1 Incentivizing / Building State Systems - 9/10/09

  14. Core 40 - Year 10 Incentivizing / Building State Systems - 9/10/09

  15. Raising the Bar Incentivizing / Building State Systems - 9/10/09 2005 Core 40 became the required (minimum) high school diploma for the Class of 2011 (entering Grade 9 2007) 2006 IB diploma added to state reporting 2006 Cohort graduation rate 2007 Graduation test changed from Grade 9 achievement test to End of Course Assessments in Algebra I and English 10 2009 Incentives for improving graduation rate

  16. Next Steps Incentivizing / Building State Systems - 9/10/09 • Longitudinal Data Systems grant • Link K-12 with Higher Ed, Postsecondary, Workforce • Goal to provide a two-way path for information • Transcripts, larger educational history ▲ • Student success, college graduation ▼ • Performance of teachers, persistence in area ▲ • Type of jobs, salary range ▼

  17. Louisiana – Moving Beyond AYP Incentivizing / Building State Systems - 9/10/09

  18. Louisiana Big Picture • High School accountability since 2001 • 2001-2006: Primarily assessment based • 2007-2009: Addition of graduation index • 2010 and beyond: TBA – new indicators being explored

  19. Accountability “1.0” (2001 – 2006) • Emphasis on state assessment • Assessment scores: 90% • Attendance: 5% • Dropout: 5% Incentivizing / Building State Systems - 9/10/09

  20. Accountability “2.0” (2007 – 2009) • New emphasis on outcomes • Assessment lowered to 70% • Addition of graduation index at 30% • An “outcome” indicator for high school accountability • Graduated scale • Value judgments made about different outcomes Incentivizing / Building State Systems - 9/10/09

  21. Graduation Index Point Values Incentivizing / Building State Systems - 9/10/09

  22. Accountability “3.0” (2010 – beyond) • Emphasis on college and career readiness • Possible indicators • End-of-Course assessments • Targeted to six specific key courses • College readiness assessment (e.g., ACT) • Graduation rate (NCLB, state statute) • Completion of college and career ready curriculum • Other – AP, growth indicators Incentivizing / Building State Systems - 9/10/09

  23. Challenges • How to combine various indicators into a meaningful, coherent system that emphasizes achievement as well as readiness • How to link this system to higher education • How to overcome transition challenges–from the current system to the proposed system • How to fold in new requirements when reauthorization occurs Incentivizing / Building State Systems - 9/10/09

  24. Putting It All Together Incentivizing / Building State Systems - 9/10/09 • Indiana and Louisiana’s experience illustrate the importance of addressing some essential steps • Identifying valued outcomes • Creating mechanisms to support these outcomes (e.g. curricula, courses, diploma requirements) • Establishing indicators to track outcomes – the “What” (e.g. assessments, course completion, graduation rate) • Putting the indicators together to incentivize valued outcomes – the “So What?” (accountability systems)

  25. Key Considerations Incentivizing / Building State Systems - 9/10/09 What are strategies for promoting coherent accountability systems? What are the right incentives and supports at the student, school, and system level? What should be prioritized in public reporting? Are the right policy supports in place to advance CCR goals? How to establish/ maintain cross-agency collaboration? How does one manage operational burdens and remain “nimble” with respect to changes?

  26. Questions? Incentivizing / Building State Systems - 9/10/09 Brian Gong – Center for Assessment Wes Bruce – Indiana Department of Education Scott Norton – Louisiana Department of Education Chris Domaleski – Center for Assessment

More Related