2019 Summa*ve Designa*ons The new version of the Illinois State - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

2019 Summa*ve Designa*ons

The new version of the Illinois State Report Card November 19, 2019

Steps to the designa*on

Indicators

– ELA Proficiency: % of students proficient in ELA on SAT or DLM-AA – Math Proficiency: % of students proficient in math on SAT or DLM-AA – ELA Growth: Average individual student growth percen*les (SGP) in ELA – Math Growth: Average individual student growth percen*les (SGP) in Math

– Science Proficiency: Average individual student growth percen*les

(SGP) in Science

– English Language Progress toward Proficiency: % of

English Learners on track to aQain language proficiency within 5 years of iden*fica*on.

– Chronic Absenteeism: % of students missing 10% or more of the prior

academic year (excused or unexcused absences)

– Climate Survey

STEPS

• Step 1: Performance is determined on each

indicator presented on the previous slide

• Step 2: Performance on each indicator is scored.

– This step uses the data from step 1 and converts it to an indicator score. Scores range from 0 - 100.

• Step 3: Mul*ply your indicator score by the

weights of the indicators

Indicator Weight (if all indicators present) ELA Proficiency 7.5% Math Proficiency 7.5% ELA Growth 25% Math Growth 25% English Language Progress to Proficiency 5% Chronic Absenteeism 20% Addi6onal Indicators 2019 Weight (2019) Science Proficiency 5% Climate Survey 5%

Growth is measured by Mean Student Growth

Percentile (Mean SGP)

Average of individual student growth percentiles (SPGs)

Key criteria for selecting a growth measure was that

different student groups have full access to the range of growth scores

Works because students’ progress is compared to

students who started out in the same place the year prior

38 Scoring Rules- Growth

Scale Score Gain ÷ Gain Target If Scale Score Gain ÷ Gain Target ≥ 1 100 points If Scale Score Gain ÷ Gain Target < 1 Ratio * 100 points

Calculating Gain Targets

1.

Identify expected year of proficiency (Baseline year + 5)

2.

Find Composite Scale Score equal to 4.8 Proficiency Level

Timeline Target: Proficiency Scale Score – Initial Score / 5

• Does not change for 5 years

Revised Target: Proficiency Scale Score – Current Score / # of years left

• Updated yearly starting in year 2

Always use the smaller of Revised or Timeline Target as Gain Target Targets after timeline:

Current Grade Proficiency Scale Score – Previous Score

29

Scoring Rules: English Learner Progress to Proficiency (ELPtP)

Average the individual scores to get the “all student”

group score, or a demographic group’s score

The “all” and EL group indicator scores will be the

same, but other groups’ scores may differ.

33 ELPtP: School Aggregation

Name Score Millie 8 Bernard 100 Yaxuan 80.8 School 62.933

• Schools are rank ordered

by their “all students” group index score to find the boQom 5% and top 10% (54.61 from Step 3)

• Index scores of the

subgroups are compared to the “all student” group index score of the school just below the lowest 5% threshold

Interac*ve School Report Card

EJH Index Score Calcula*ons Summa*ve Designa*on 2018: Commendable 2019: Commendable

2018 EJH 2019 Difference TOTAL 5 points Total added to total score 54.61 for Climate All 60.1 5.49 Survey 56.65 White 61.06 4.41 44.28 Black or African American 43.96

• 0.32

57.40 Hispanic or Latino 58.87 1.47 49.56 Asian 65.27 15.71 62.06 IEP/CWD 47.55

• 14.51

55.91 EL 60.97 5.06 63.84 Former-EL 70.02 6.18 48.17 Low Income 54.76 6.59

Lace Index Score Calcula*ons Summa*ve Designa*on 2018: Commendable 2019: Exemplary

2018 LACE 2019 Difference TOTAL 5 points added to 69.89 total score All 81.6 11.71 71.91 for Climate White 83.09 11.18 48.46 Survey Black or African American 67.79 19.33 70.38 Hispanic or Latino 78.42 8.04 64.14 IEP/CWD 85.47 21.33 58.99 EL 79.97 20.98 68.18 Low Income 80.86 12.68 Asian 87.13 87.13

Second grade enrollments from the prior year, *ed to unique student ID numbers, are used to map to current year third grade achievement scores. Schools are only held accountable for students who were actually taught at their schools in years prior, but who are now old enough to have indicator data. Mark DeLay Index Score Calcula*ons

2018 MARK DeLAY 2019 Difference TOTAL 5 points added to 62.94 total score All 78.32 15.38 60.04 for Climate White 80.23 20.19 67.62 Survey Hispanic or Latino 69.82 2.20 58.57 EL 83.36 24.79 61.84 Low Income 80.38 18.54

Summa*ve Designa*on 2018: Commendable 2019: Commendable