Accountability Standard Setting ANN-MICHELLE NEAL, ED.S - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

accountability standard setting
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Accountability Standard Setting ANN-MICHELLE NEAL, ED.S - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Utah School Accountability Standard Setting ANN-MICHELLE NEAL, ED.S ACCOUNTABILITY SPECIALIST UTAH STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION History of Accountability in Utah School Grading School Grading Accountability Accountability Accountability


slide-1
SLIDE 1

Utah School Accountability Standard Setting

ANN-MICHELLE NEAL, ED.S ACCOUNTABILITY SPECIALIST UTAH STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION

slide-2
SLIDE 2

History of Accountability in Utah

Accountability reporting requirement enacted Reporting expanded to school level School Grading Accountability System established School Grading Accountability System implemented Governor’s PACE report cards published

1990 2000 2004 2011 2013 2014

Adequate Yearly Progress reports published

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Accountability System - NCLB

Achievement Growth Graduation The previous accountability system was primarily focused

  • n statewide

assessment. ESSA provided an

  • pportunity to change

that by adding additional indicators.

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Accountability Design

slide-5
SLIDE 5

What’s New?

Increased Focus on Equity

  • English Learner Progress
  • Access to advanced and career coursework
  • ACT performance
  • opportunity for ALL students to take the ACT in 11th grade.

Increased Focus on our Lowest Performing Students

  • Growth of the lowest performing 25% of students in a school
  • A portion of points awarded for Graduation will be allotted to students

who graduate in 5 years.

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Legislative Requirements

UTAH SENATE BILL 220

The board shall engage in a criteria setting process to establish performance thresholds for overall ratings:

  • A system for assigning a school an overall rating

based on evaluating the school's performance against specific criteria. (Section 53A-1-1113.5)

ESSA

slide-7
SLIDE 7

From Normative to Criterion

Normative

  • 2011-2016
  • Limited the % of schools earning an A or B; cut scores for

school grades could adjust in any given year

  • Created unpredictability for schools

Criterion

  • 2018 and on
  • Performance thresholds established through a standard

setting process

  • Cut scores for school grades are fixed; do not shift based
  • n schools’ performance
slide-8
SLIDE 8

Letter grades are still in place (legislative requirement), but score thresholds are fixed

School Letter Grades: No More Moving Targets

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Legislative Requirements

Labels for the performance levels are defined in statute:

  • “A” represents an exemplary school
  • “B” represents a commendable school
  • “C” represents a typical school
  • “D” represents a developing school
  • “F” represents a critical needs school

(Section 53A-1-1105)

However, the statute does not specify what the threshold scores are for each performance level. In other words, what does it mean to be an “A” or “B” school?

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Utah School Letter Grades

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Legislative Requirements

Standard setting process to arrive at overall determinations.

The board shall engage in a criteria setting process to establish performance thresholds for overall ratings:

  • A system for assigning a school an overall rating based on evaluating the school's performance against specific

criteria.

  • In establishing the performance thresholds the board shall solicit and consider input from:
  • legislators;
  • the governor;
  • representatives from local school boards;
  • other representatives from school districts, including superintendents;
  • other representatives from charter school governing boards;
  • teachers; and,
  • parents.
slide-12
SLIDE 12

Accountability Standard Setting

Standard Setting Meeting

Legislative Requirements School Performance Level Descriptors School Profiles and Empirical Data Stakeholder Expertise

Threshold Scores That Assign Schools to Performance Levels

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Procedure

Develop policy descriptors for each level Develop school performance level descriptors Convene panel or other group (e.g. task force, advisory group) to:

  • Evaluate school profiles with respect to descriptors
  • Review data on achievement patterns
  • Set Indicator thresholds and overall thresholds

Evaluate Document Produce material to support interpretation and use

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Setting Policy Descriptors

On May 16, a committee of key legislators and state board members and school leaders convened to review and revise the Policy Descriptors (PDs) for Utah’s school accountability system. PDs are high-level statements about each performance level. They should be linked to Utah’s goals and policy priorities and identify the most critical outcomes that are valued and considered non- negotiable. PDs were passed on to School-Level Performance Descriptor Development Group

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Setting School Level Performance Desc.

On May 17, members of the Assessment and Accountability Policy Advisory Committee (AAPAC) convened to work on the school performance level descriptors (SPLDs) for Utah’s school accountability system. SPLDs are more detailed descriptions of the characteristics of schools in each performance level. PDs and SPLDs were passed on to Standard Setting Committee

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Policy and School Performance Desc.

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Setting Performance Levels

On May 18, a committee of AAPAC members, policymakers, parents, educators, association representatives, and technical experts met to recommend performance level threshold scores for school ratings in Utah’s school accountability system. The threshold scores were developed to assign overall letter grades to schools based on their performance on various indicators specified in SB 220.

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Role of Threshold Scores

School Performance Expectations

Threshold Scores

F School D School C School B School A School “Top” C School “Just barely” B School

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Method

Two key tools used in performance level setting

  • Ordered school profiles (OSP): list of all schools in Utah, ordered by the % of

total points earned on the legislatively-mandated accountability indicators in 2016.

  • Detailed school profiles: a report that includes additional empirical data

about a given school, including test participation rates, detailed breakdowns

  • f each accountability indicator by subject area, and historical demographic

and performance data, for all students and by subgroups.

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Ordered School Profile Lists

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Detailed School Profiles

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Rounds to Establish Consensus

  • 1. Range

Finding

  • Locate probable ranges
  • Independent review of

the data

2. Judgements

  • Pinpoint threshold scores

within each probable range

  • Discussion groups
slide-23
SLIDE 23

Summary of Outcomes

GRADES 3-8 HIGH SCHOOL

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Summary of Outcomes

5% 4% 15% 13% 49% 36% 24% 34% 7% 13%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Grades 3-8 High School A Schools B Schools C Schools D Schools F Schools

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Thank You

Ann-Michelle Neal ann-michelle.neal@schools.utah.gov