Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Developing a Framework for Ensuring the Validity of State
Accountability Systems
Council of Chief State School Officers
AERA San Diego
April 15, 2004
Council of Chief State School Officers Non-profit organization representing
state superintendents of public K-12 education
Through Leadership, Advocacy and Service assist chief state school officers and their organizations in achieving the vision of an American education system in which all children succeed in school, work, and life.
Support for State Accountability Communication among states to identify
solutions and challenges Targeted technical assistance through
group problem-solving On-going analysis:
January:Workshop on accountability plan submission
Summer: On going analysis of state plans, challenges, and solutions
September: Workshop on implementing AYP in state accountability systems
State Strategies for Reliability Minimum student
group size (4/9/04)
Variation: 0 to 200, under
certain circumstances
Differentiation• By subgroup:3• By students with
disabilities: 5• By LEP students: 1
0
5
10
15
20
25
State Strategies for Reliability Statistical Tests
Confidence Intervals, Standard error of measurement
Applications Other Academic
Indicator Safe Harbor Participation Rate
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
90%
95%
99%
Oth
er
Full Academic Year Full Academic Year
Fall date: enrollment count, start of school, etc.
One test administration to the next
Snapshot of one day
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Test
to
Test
Fall
Date
to
Test Fall
Date
Set
nu
mber
of
days
State Strategies with AYP “Two Look System”
Includes an NCLB accountability system as the primary method of identifying schools; a secondary, more rigorous, state system then takes a second look at the schools.
Weighting Assessments Writing (10%) and English/Language Arts (90%)
Uniform averaging Comparing a school’s current year results to the
most recent two- and three-year average
State Strategies with AYP Same indicator for two consecutive years
(1) Reading percent proficient and participation; (2) Math percent proficient and participation; (3) Other Academic Indicator
Use of Index systems Accounting for students who move from below
basic to basic
Proxy indicators for graduation rate disaggregation Used for the disaggregation of the graduation
rate for purposes of safe harbor
Recent Changes to State Plans Use of Confidence Intervals Uniform Averaging Standard number of years for
graduation determined by a student’s IEP
New flexibility on participation rate, LEP issues
Current Issues for States in AYP Forming a single statewide accountability
system-blending AYP with state systems Balancing Type I and Type II error Evaluating consequences of
accountability systems What data to collect and how to
determine the validity of AYP/Accountability system.
Resources for States
Additional Information ROLF BLANK, [email protected] CCSSO NCLB Website: www.ccsso.org
Areas of State Creativity
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
