ESEA Federal Accountability System

Overview

1

Federal Accountability System Adequate Yearly Progress – AYP

defined by theElementary and Secondary Education Act,

No Child Left Behind, in 2001

2

AYP, as defined by ESEA:• Measured the proficiency of students in ELA and mathematics in grades 3-8 and

once in high school grades.

• Included Annual Measurable Objectives (AMO) for student performance (ELA and mathematics), student participation, and Graduation rate for high schools (attendance rate used for elementary and middle schools)

• Ensured that by the end of the 2013-14 school year all students will meet or exceed the State’s proficient level of academic achievement on State assessments.

• Determined if the student performance objectives were met in ELA and mathematics by the following:– All Students Group,

– Racial/Ethnic Group (White, African American, Asian/Pacific Islander, Hispanic, and American Indian/Alaskan),

– Disability Status Group,– English Proficiency Group, and– Socio-Economic Status Group. 3

17.6

38.2

58.8

79.4

100

15.5

36.7

57.8

79.0

100

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05 05-06 06-07 07-08 08-09 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14

Per

cen

t M

eeti

ng

Sta

nd

ard

Year

Adequate Yearly Progress Objectives for S.C. Elementary/Middle Schools

ELA Math

Adequate Yearly Progress Objectives for S.C. High Schools

100

33.3

52.3

71.3

90.3

50

70

90

30

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

School Year

Pe

rce

nt

Me

eti

ng

Sta

nd

ard

ELA Math

Adequate Yearly Progress Objectives for S.C. School Districts

100.0

24.0

45.8

67.6

89.4

42.7

65.5

88.3

19.9

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

School Year

Pe

rce

nt

Me

eti

ng

Sta

nd

ard

ELA Math

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)

PopulationELA Student Performance

Objective

ELAParticipation

Objective

Math Student Performance

Objective

Math Participation

ObjectiveOther Indicator

All Students Objective Objective Objective Objective Objective*

White Objective Objective Objective Objective

*The other indicator for high

schools is the graduation rate.

The other indicator for elementary and middle schools is

the attendance rate.

The other indicator applies to the whole

school or the All Students

Group.      

African American Objective Objective Objective Objective

Asian/Pacific Islander Objective Objective Objective Objective

Hispanic Objective Objective Objective Objective

American Indian/Alaskan Objective Objective Objective Objective

Disability StatusDisabled Objective Objective Objective Objective

English ProficiencyLimited English

ProficiencyObjective Objective Objective Objective

Socio-Economic Status

Subsidized mealsObjective Objective Objective Objective

PopulationELA Student Performance Objective Met

ELAParticipation Objective Met

Math Student Performance Objective Met

Math Participation Objective Met

Other Indicator Met

All Students No Yes No Yes Yes*

White No Yes No Yes

*The other indicator for high

schools is the graduation rate.

The other indicator for

elementary and middle schools

is the attendance rate.

The other indicator applies

to the whole school or

All Students Group.

      

African American No Yes No Yes

Asian/Pacific Islander No Yes No Yes

Hispanic No Yes No Yes

American Indian/Alaskan No No No No

Disability StatusDisabled No No No No

English Proficiency

Limited English Proficiency

No Yes No Yes

Socio-Economic Status

Subsidized mealsNo Yes No Yes

This school missed 22 of 37 objectives and did not make AYP.

PopulationELA Student Performance

Objective Met

ELAParticipation Objective Met

Math Student Performance

Objective Met

Math Participation Objective Met

Other Indicator Met

All Students Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes*

White Yes Yes Yes Yes

*The other indicator for high

schools is the graduation rate.

The other indicator for elementary and

middle schools is the attendance

rate.

The other indicator applies to the

whole school or All Students

Group.      

African American Yes Yes Yes Yes

Asian/Pacific Islander Yes Yes Yes Yes

Hispanic Yes Yes Yes Yes

American Indian/Alaskan Yes No Yes Yes

Disability StatusDisabled Yes Yes Yes Yes

English ProficiencyLimited English

ProficiencyYes Yes Yes Yes

Socio-Economic Status

Subsidized mealsYes Yes Yes Yes

This school missed 1 of 37 objectives and did not make AYP.

2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12

(Spring 04 Data)

(Spring 05 Data)

(Spring 06 Data)

(Spring 07 Data)

(Spring 08 Data)

(Spring 09 Data)

(Spring 10 Data)

(Spring 11 Data)

% Schools That Did Make AYP75.7% 49.8% 39.2% 38.2% 20.9% 50.0% 53.5% 23.5%

% Schools That Did Not Make AYP24.3% 50.2% 60.8% 61.8% 79.1% 50.0% 46.5% 76.5%

% Elementary/Middle Schools That Made AYP81.9% 53.9% 42.8% 40.1% 18.6% 59.5% 62.5% 26.8%

% Elem/Middle Schools That Did Not Make AYP18.1% 46.1% 57.2% 59.9% 81.4% 40.5% 37.5% 73.2%

% High Schools That Made AYP47.5% 30.5% 23.2% 29.5% 31.3% 6.9% 7.1% 7.2%

% High Schools That Did Not Make AYP52.5% 69.5% 76.8% 70.5% 68.7% 93.1% 92.9% 92.8%

AYP Results in South Carolina

The USED extended to States an opportunity to design an alternative to AYP

• Last fall, the U.S. Department of Education (Department) offered States the opportunity to request flexibility from certain requirements of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.

• These waivers could be granted in exchange for rigorous and comprehensive plans designed to improve educational outcomes for all students, close achievement gaps, increase equity, and improve the quality of instruction.

• South Carolina’s State Superintendent of Education accepted that opportunity.

11

Required Components of the ESEA Waiverfor the State-based System of Accountability

The State’s Accountability System must:• Apply to all districts and all schools,• Include ELA and Math and graduation rate for all students and

all subgroups (subjects other than ELA and Math may be included),

• Include school performance and progress over time for all students and all subgroups,

• Include student growth following implementation of College- and Career-Ready Assessments (scheduled for Spring 2015),

• Include ambitious but achievable AMOs in at least ELA and Math.

12

South Carolina’s Goals in Developing an Alternative to Current AYP

A system that is:• Simple and easy to understand.• Transparent. • Not an “all or nothing” system.• Ambitious, but achievable. • A system that identifies Title 1 schools most in need

of assistance.• A modernized state-based accountability system that

unifies state and federal accountability elements to provide transparent, accurate, and meaningful data to students, parents, educators, and the public.

13

District and School Grading Scale

Weighted Composite

Index Score

Grade Description

90-100 A Performance substantially exceeds the state’s expectations

80-89 B Performance exceeds the state’s expectations

70-79 C Performance meets the state’s expectations.

60-69 D Performance does not meet the state’s expectations.

Below 60 F Performance is substantially below the state’s expectations.

14

2012 Annual Measureable Objectives(based on the State mean)

• Elementary School AMO for all subjects = 630• Middle School AMO for all subjects = 624• High School

– ELA = 223– Math = 220– Science = 76– Social Studies = 71– Graduation Rate = 73.1

15

English/LA Math Science Social Studies English/LA MathPerformance Performance Performance Performance Percent Tested Percent Tested

Met/Improved Met/Improved Met/Improved Met/Improved 95 % Tested 95 % Tested

All Students 1 0.2 1 1 1 1

Male 0.3 0.8 0.6 0 1 1

Female 1 1 1 0.3 1 1

White 1 1 0 1 1 1

African-American 1 0.7 1 1 0 1

Asian/Pacific Is I/S I/S I/S I/S I/S I/S

Hispanic 0 0 0 0 1 1

Am Indian/Alaskan I/S I/S I/S I/S I/S I/S

Disabled 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.9 1 1

Limited Eng. Prof 1 1 1 1 1 1

Subsidized Meals 0.1 0.6 0.3 0.5 1 1

Total # of Points 5.9 5.8 5.3 5.7 8 9Total # of Objectives 9 9 9 9 9 9

Percent of Above 65.6% 64.4% 58.9% 63.3% 88.9% 100.0%

Weight 35 35 5 5 10 10

Weighted Points Subtotal 22.96 22.54 2.94 3.17 8.89 10.0

Weighted Points Total 70.50

Grade: 90 to 100 = A, 80 to 89.9 = B, 70 to 79.9 = C, 60 to 69.9 = D, < 60 = F Grade Conversion CKey: Met=1, Improved= .1 to .9, Not Met & Not Improved=0 (Note: Percent Tested may only be Met or Not Met)

Sample Elementary / Middle School Matrix

English/LA Math Biology History English/LA Math Graduation

Performance Performance Performance Performance Percent Tested Percent Tested Rate-73.1%

Met/Improved Met/Improved Met/Improved Met/Improved 95 % Tested 95 % Tested Met/Improved

All Students 1 0.8 0.3 1 1 0 0.6

Male 0.4 1 0 0 1 1 1

Female 1 1 0 0.2 1 1 1

White 1 1 0 1 1 1 1

African-American 1 0.5 0 1 1 1 1

Asian/Pacific Is I/S I/S I/S I/S I/S I/S 1

Hispanic 1/S I/S I/S I/S I/S I/S 1

Am Indian/Alaskan I/S I/S I/S I/S I/S I/S 1

Disabled 0.4 0.2 1 0.6 1 1 0.8

Limited Eng. Prof 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Subsidized Meals 0.2 0.8 0.4 0.8 1 1 1

Total # of Points 6 6.3 2.7 5.6 8 7 10.4

Total # of Objectives 8 8 8 8 8 8 8

Percent of Above 75.0% 78.8% 33.8% 70.0% 100.0% 87.5% 94.5%

Weight 22.5 22.5 5 5 7.5 7.5 30

Weighted Subtotal 16.88 17.73 1.69 3.50 7.50 6.56 28.36

Weighted Points Total 82.22

Grade: 90 to 100 = A, 80 to 89.9 = B, 70 to 79.9 = C, 60 to 69.9 = D, < 60 = F Grade Conversion B

Key: Met=1, Improved= .1 to .9, Not Met & Not Improved=0 (Note: Percent Tested may only be Met or Not Met)

Sample High School / District Matrix

2012 Resultsfor

ESEA / Federal Accountability Methodology

18

Comparison of 2012 ESEA/Federal Accountability to 2011 NCLB/AYP Results

Elementary Middle High Combination0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%90%

86%

68%

78%

35%

8% 7%

27%

Percent of Schools That Meet or Exceed State’s Expectations by Type of School

2012 ESEA Federal Accountability

2011 NCLB/AYP

Legend

ESEA Grades = A, B, C and AYP = MET

N Count for schools with no available 2011 AYP results = 15

Total % Total %Elementary 479 90% 188 35%Middle 191 86% 18 8%High 121 68% 13 7%Combination 105 78% 36 27%Total 896 84% 255 24%

2011 AYP METSchool Type

2012 ESEA Grades A, B or C

Grade/School Type

Elementary Middle High Combination All Schools

A 318 98 25 59 500

B 136 75 52 31 294

C 30 23 44 17 114

D 13 12 25 10 60

F 41 20 31 22 114

Total 538 228 177 139 1,082

Grade/School Type

Elementary Middle High Combination All Schools

A 59% 43% 14% 43% 45%

B 25% 33% 29% 22% 27%

C 6% 10% 25% 12% 11%

D 2% 5% 14% 7% 6%

F 8% 9% 18% 16% 11%

Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

ESEA 2012 Grade Distribution

20

Grade/Rating

Excellent Good AverageBelow

AverageAt-Risk

A 184 119 168 14 7

B 31 55 141 12 2

C 3 4 40 18 4

D 0 0 18 11 5

F 0 1 10 48 29

Elementary and Middle Schools 2012 ESEA Grade compared to 2011 Absolute Rating

21

High Schools 2012 ESEA Grade compared to 2011 Absolute Rating

Grade/Rating

Excellent Good AverageBelow

AverageAt-Risk

A 24 4 2 0 0

B 29 10 14 2 0

C 15 10 22 1 0

D 3 2 19 1 1

F 1 1 16 7 11

Included in this release of the ESEA / Federal Accountability System are the following lists of Title I schools:• Reward for Performance Schools• Reward for Progress Schools• Priority Schools• Focus Schools

The ESEA Waiver required the identification and the reporting of these schools.

23

Reward Schools for Performance are the highest performing Title I schools in a given year.

 

To determine a Reward School based on performance a Title I school must:

– attain an “A” or “B” in the two most recent school years.– have a free/reduced lunch count that is greater than 50

percent.– not have significant achievement gaps. – not be a Primary school.

Title I funds will be used to provide a monetary award to the top schools in this category.

Reward Schools for Performance

24

Reward Schools for Progress are Title I schools that demonstrate the most substantial progress in either the “all students” group or in subgroups from one school year to the next.

 

To determine a Reward School based on progress a Title I school must:

– attain an “A”, “B”, or “C” in the two most recent school years.– have a free/reduced lunch count that is greater than 50

percent.– Be in the top 10% of qualifying Title I schools that

demonstrate progress in the performance of all students or in subgroups on statewide assessments or make substantial progress increasing the graduation rate.

– not be a Primary school. 

Reward Schools for Progress

Title I funds will be used to provide a monetary award to the top schools in this category. 25

Priority Schools are the lowest performing Title I schools. • Priority schools are determined by ranking each Title I

school’s total weighted composite index score (which determines the school’s letter grade) from lowest to highest.

• Twenty-seven schools are designated as Priority Schools, which is equal to at least five percent of the total Title I schools served by the State.

• Primary schools (which do not have grades tested by the state assessments) are not included in the ranking for Priority Schools.

Priority Schools

Title I and/or State funds will be used to provide a supplemental allocation to schools in this category to support interventions. 26

Focus Schools are Title I schools with the highest average performance gap between subgroups. • To determine performance gaps, each subgroup’s performance

is compared with the corresponding non-subgroup comparison group.

• Each subgroup achievement gap difference will be calculated, averaged, and ranked to determine the Title I schools with the highest average achievement gap.

• Fifty-five schools are designated as Focus Schools, which is equal to at least ten percent of the total number of Title I schools served by the State.

• Primary schools, which do not have grades tested by the state assessments, are not included.

Focus Schools

Title I funds will be used to provide a supplemental allocation to schools in this category to support interventions. 27

School Choice and SES in Priority and Focus Schools

Type of School School Choice SES

Priority The offer to transfer to another school is extended to the parent of each student in the school. The district will offer at least two schools of choice – if the option exists.

SES will be offered to all students in the school.

Focus The offer to transfer to another school is extended to the parent of each student in the school. The district will offer at least two schools of choice – if the option exists.

SES will be offered to students who did not score proficient or above on one of the state assessments and will be offered to students in the lowest performing subgroup(s).

School Choice – the school district allows the student to transfer to a school that is not a Priority or Focus School and the district provides transportation to this school of choice.

SES – Supplemental Educational Services is tutoring provided to students outside the school day by either the school or by an outside provider. SES is provided at no cost to the student. 28

Questions?

29