8.15 principal seminar final

558 views

Published on

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
558
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
14
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • The Dynamic Learning Maps Alternate Assessment System Consortium (DLM) is a group of 13 states dedicated to the development of an alternative assessment system. The consortium includes the states of Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, New Jersey, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.DLM is led by the Center for Educational Testing and Evaluation (CETE) and includes experts from a wide range of assessment fields as well as key partners.
  • 8.15 principal seminar final

    1. 1. Management Time Clock Hours Information State of School Address District Leadership Team Contract Overview(9/4 Building Administrators & 9/18 Building Teams)
    2. 2. I can now relate to Miss South Carolina 2007
    3. 3. Assessment & Accountability Updates Principal Seminar 8/15/2012
    4. 4. ESEA Flexibility Waiver AYP Sanctions Uniform Bar Achievement (Accountability) Index
    5. 5. Flexibility Waiver of ESEA Requirements From:Current annual measurable goals for determiningadequate yearly progress (AYP) and associatedsanctions To:New “ambitious but achievable” AMOs to guideimprovement efforts for reading, mathematics, andgraduation rates
    6. 6. What does this mean for the Puyallup School District? Elimination of AYP determinations & associated sanctions (i.e. Choice/Supplemental Education Services (SES)/Professional Development set- asides) New ways of measuring & identifying schools (Reward/Priority/Focus/Emerging Schools) Continued work with Common Core State Standards to ensure all students are college and career ready Continued work with our Teacher & Principal
    7. 7. Accountability Evolution with ESEA Waiver Up to 2011-12 2012-13 and 2013-14 2014-15 and beyondAYP Determinations AMO CalculationsSanctions No Sanctions (letters, transportation, etc.)Set-asides Up to 20% Set-asides for Priority, Focus, and Emerging SchoolsSchool ImprovementUses AYP calculations to identifyschools and districts in a step ofimprovement (Title I)Uses PLA Methodology based onAYP calculations to generate list ofPersistently Lowest Achieving ESEA Waiver Application ESEA New AccountabilitySchools Accountability System System Used to identify Reward, Focus and Priority Used to identify Reward, Focus andSBE/OSPI Achievement and Emerging schools Priority and Emerging schoolsIndexUsed to identify Award Schools
    8. 8. Accountability Evolution with ESEA Waiver Up to 2011-12 2012-13 and 2013-14 2014-15 and beyondAYP Determinations AMO CalculationsDeterminations based Annual targets to close proficiency gaps by ½ by 2017;on current status of % uses 2011 as baseline and adds equal annualmeeting standardcompared to Uniform increments (1/6 of proficiency gap) to get to 2017Bar (100% by 2014) target; each subgroup, school, district, and state, have unique annual targets.AYP determinationsreported on Report Calculations reported on Report CardCard No sanctionsNot making AYPresults in sanctionsfor Title 1 schools Up to 20% Set-asides for Priority, Focus, and Emerging Schools$$$ set-asides
    9. 9. Accountability Evolution with ESEA Waiver Up to 2011-12 2012-13 and 2013-14 2014-15 and beyondSchool Improvement ESEA Waiver Application ESEA New Accountability SystemUses AYP calculations to identify Priority and Focus Schools: Based on To be developed by SBE in collaborationschools and districts in a step of calculations used to identify Persistently with OSPI and external stakeholders andimprovement (Title I) Lowest Achieving Schools (3 years of R/M informed by Joint Select Committee on or Grad Rate data) Educational AccountabilityUses PLA Methodology based onAYP calculations to generate list of Reward Schools: Uses 3-year average for Likely to incorporate aggregated yearPersistently Lowest Achieving R/M or Grad Rate data to identify Highest to year individual student growth butSchools Performing Schools; uses status and how/how much not yet determined growth (1:1) over 3 years to identify High-Support and turn around principles Progress Schools Requirements: Priority must implementoptional turnaround principles and Focus must Requirements: Priority must implement implement meaningful interventions; turnaround principles and Focus must both receive added support/services implement meaningful interventions; bothSBE/OSPI Achievement receive added support/services Don’t yet know what the balance ofIndex current status, year to year change, and Year to Year change in % meeting standard aggregated individual student growth willUsed to identify Award Schools counts as much as current status of % be meeting standardCurrent status emphasized (3:1)over year to year change No year to year individual student growth is incorporated
    10. 10. Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs) WA has opted to establish AMOs as equal increments set toward the goal of reducing by half the percent of students who are not proficient in all AYP sub categories by fall 2017 (within six years)
    11. 11. Based on 4 PrinciplesPrinciple 1: Principle 3:College and Career Supporting effectiveReady expectations for instruction and leadershipall students via CommonCore State Standards(CCSS)Principle 2: Principle 4:State-developed Reduce duplication anddifferentiated recognition, unnecessary burden onaccountability, and school districts by the statesupport
    12. 12. NCLB Flexibility Waiver Reward 10% Focus 10% 913 Title I Schools Emerging Priority 15% 5%
    13. 13. NCLB Flexibility Waiver Reward Extremely Low Reading and Math Performance for all Students Focus Emerging Priority
    14. 14. NCLB Flexibility Waiver Low Reading and Math Reward Performance for Specific Subgroups Focus Emerging Priority
    15. 15. NCLB Flexibility Waiver Next 5% of Priority and 10% of Reward Focus Focus Emerging Priority
    16. 16. NCLB Flexibility Waiver High Reading and Math Reward Performance for all Students Focus Emerging Priority
    17. 17. Smarter Balanced Assessments Consortium Summative, Interim and Formative Online 2014 -15
    18. 18. Waves of change….. 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14Reading MSP MSP MSP MSP MSP MSP HSPE HSPE HSPE HSPE HSPE HSPE Portfolio Portfolio Portfolio Portfolio Portfolio PortfolioWriting MSP MSP MSP MSP MSP MSP HSPE HSPE HSPE HSPE HSPE HSPE Portfolio Portfolio Portfolio Portfolio Portfolio PortfolioMath MSP MSP MSP MSP MSP MSP HSPE HSPE EOC EOC EOC EOC Portfolio Portfolio Portfolio Portfolio Portfolio PortfolioScience MSP MSP MSP MSP MSP MSP HSPE HSPE HSPE EOC EOC EOC Portfolio Portfolio Portfolio Portfolio Portfolio PortfolioSecondLanguage WLPT WLPT WLPT WELPA WELPA WELPAKindergarten WaKIDS WaKIDS WaKIDS
    19. 19. Current Statewide Summative (Student) Assessments Reading Mathematics Science WritingGrade 3 MSP MSPGrade 4 MSP MSP MSPGrade 5 MSP MSP MSPGrade 6 MSP MSPGrade 7 MSP MSP MSPGrade 8 MSP MSP MSPHigh School HSPE EOC EOC HSPE MSP= Measurements of Student Progress; HSPE = High School Proficiency Exams; EOC= End of Course exams
    20. 20. Proposed Summative Assessments in 2014–15 English/LA Mathematics ScienceGrade 3 SBAC SBACGrade 4 SBAC SBACGrade 5 SBAC SBAC MSPGrade 6 SBAC SBACGrade 7 SBAC SBACGrade 8 SBAC SBAC MSPGrades 9-10 HSPE EOC EOC Reading & Writing Algebra/Geometry ??? ???Grade 11 SBAC SBAC SBAC=SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium MSP= Measurements of Student Progress HSPE = High School Proficiency Exams EOC= End of Course exams
    21. 21. 2011-12 MSP HSPE & EOC Preliminary Results Think, Pair Share…Take a minute to reflect Which subject areas and grade level do you expect to see the most improvement and why? Do you anticipate a decline in scores in any area or grade level and why?
    22. 22. Change in Overall Performance 2010-11 to 2011-12Grade Reading Math Writing Science EOC Year 1 EOC Year 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 N/A - is less than 3% change from previous year - is a 3% or more increase from previous year - is a 3% or more decrease from previous year
    23. 23. Change in Overall Performance 2010-11 to 2011-12 Reading Math Writing Science EOC Year 1 EOC Year 2Grade 2010-11 2011-12 Diff 2010-11 2011-12 Diff 2010-11 2011-12 Diff 2010-11 2011-12 Diff 2010-11 *2011-12 Diff 2010-11 *2011-12 Diff3rd 78.3 72.2 -6.1 65.2 66.6 1.4 4th 75.1 78.2 3.1 66.3 64.1 -2.2 64.6 65.4 0.8 5th 75.9 81.0 5.1 70.1 73.0 2.9 63.8 77.5 13.7 6th 78.6 79.0 0.4 71.5 74.6 3.1 7th 60.7 75.7 15.0 68.1 67.0 -1.1 76.3 77.1 0.8 100.0 100.0 0.0 8th 70.4 69.4 -1.0 60.8 65.5 4.7 64.0 71.4 7.4 95.6 93.9 -1.7 100.0 97.9 -2.1 9th 55.7 70.3 14.6 95.5 97.7 2.210th 88.7 87.1 -1.6 93.6 90.6 -3.0 56.9 N/A 68.3 79.9 11.6 69.6 79.6 10.0 Purple = change of less than 3% from previous year, Blue=increase of 3% or more, Yellow = decrease of 3% or more *2011-12 – includes Previously Passed
    24. 24. Percent of Grade 8 Students Meeting Standard in Science 100.0 90.0 80.0 70.0% Met Standard 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Science 32.7 41.9 41.9 46.4 56.6 60.0 64.0 71.4
    25. 25. Students Meeting Standards in Reading 100.0 90.0 80.0 70.0% Met Standard 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 2006 75.1 82.6 81.4 69.1 2007 78.4 81.9 77.2 74.0 2008 79.6 76.7 81.0 71.4 2009 80.6 76.5 79.2 75.8 2010 79.5 73.6 79.3 74.8 2011 78.3 75.1 75.9 78.6 2012 72.2 78.2 81.0 79.0
    26. 26. Students Meeting Standards in Reading 100.0 90.0 80.0% Met Standard 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grade 10 2007 78.4 81.9 77.2 74.0 68.3 68.2 87.8 2008 79.6 76.7 81.0 71.4 65.7 68.8 87.0 2009 80.6 76.5 79.2 75.8 60.9 74.4 89.8 2010 79.5 73.6 79.3 74.8 69.1 74.7 83.6 2011 78.3 75.1 75.9 78.6 60.7 70.4 88.7 2012 72.2 78.2 81.0 79.0 75.7 69.4 87.1
    27. 27. Students Meeting Standards in Writing 100.0 90.0 80.0% Met Standard 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0 Grade 4 Grade 7 Grade 10 2005 60.5 66.1 69.7 2006 56.6 76.4 86.2 2007 63.2 74.1 91.5 2008 61.3 76.2 96.0 2009 58.7 74.8 96.6 2010 62.3 73.4 92.5 2011 64.6 76.3 93.6 2012 65.4 77.1 90.6
    28. 28. 100.0 Students Meeting Standards in Mathematics 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0% Met Standard 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grade 10 2007 73.7 65.4 64.2 56.3 57.8 51.3 54.2 2008 74.3 58.6 66.4 53.2 56.9 50.3 54.0 2009 69.2 54.2 65.6 59.7 56.5 53.0 51.4 2010 66.5 59.8 63.9 60.4 63.4 57.4 43.2 2011 65.2 66.3 70.1 71.5 68.1 60.8 69.0 2012 66.6 64.1 73.0 74.6 67.0 65.5
    29. 29. Students Meeting Standards in Science 100.0 90.0 80.0% Met Standard 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0 Grade 5 Grade 8 Grade 10 2005 38.8 32.7 32.9 2006 38.2 41.9 32.2 2007 36.6 41.9 35.3 2008 44.8 46.4 46.9 2009 52.2 56.6 44.8 2010 42.2 60.0 48.1 2011 63.8 64.0 56.9 2012 77.5 71.4
    30. 30. Percent of Grade 4 Students Meeting Standards 100.0 90.0 80.0% Met Standard 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0 Reading Mathematics Writing 2005 84.4 61.9 60.5 2006 82.6 61.2 56.6 2007 81.9 65.4 63.2 2008 76.7 58.6 61.3 2009 76.5 54.2 58.7 2010 73.6 59.8 62.3 2011 75.1 66.3 64.6 2012 78.2 64.1 65.4
    31. 31. Percent of Grade 7 Students Meeting Standards 100.0 90.0 80.0% Met Standard 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0 Reading Mathematics Writing 2005 71.9 53.5 66.1 2006 60.2 49.6 76.4 2007 68.3 57.8 74.1 2008 65.7 56.9 76.2 2009 60.9 56.5 74.8 2010 69.1 63.4 73.4 2011 60.7 68.1 76.3 2012 75.7 67.0 77.1
    32. 32. Percent of Grade 10 Students Meeting Standard 100.0 90.0 80.0% Met Standard 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0 Reading Mathematics Writing Science 2005 77.8 45.8 69.7 32.9 2006 86.8 52.8 86.2 32.2 2007 87.1 54.2 91.5 35.3 2008 87.0 54.0 96.0 46.9 2009 89.8 51.4 96.6 44.8 2010 83.6 43.2 92.5 48.1 2011 88.7 69.0 93.6 56.9 2012 87.1 90.6
    33. 33. Preliminary School Data August 23: EOC Biology and WAAS-Portfolio scores are included. August 28: Round 2 of Record Reconciliation (RR) opens August 29: State assessment general test score release August 31: Districts preview preliminary AMO site September 11: Round 2 of Record Reconciliation (RR) closes September 14: AMO appeals received by this date will be reviewed, decisions made and reflected in the AMO press release September 26: AMO press release (tentative)
    34. 34. Next Steps Reflection  Today’s Learning?  Takeaways?  Evidence?  Next Best Step?  Help?
    35. 35. Hopes & Dreams Turn to your elbow partner and share one hope and one dream for the year. Be ready to share one hope or dream from your table with the large group. Thank you!

    ×