Upload
timothy-halman
View
214
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Impact of NCLB Adequate Yearly Progress on District Accountability
in Colorado
Carolyn Haug, Measured Progress
Jonathan Dings, Boulder Valley School District
AERA Annual Meeting 4/12/04
Presentation Overview
Evaluation FrameworkAYP Impact in Boulder Valley School DistrictColorado Context of Multiple Accountability
SystemsToward an Improved Accountability System
AERA Annual Meeting 4/12/04
Accountability System Evaluation Framework (Baker & Linn, 2004)
builds staff capacity; affects resource allocations; supports high-quality instruction; promotes student equity access to education; minimizes corruption; affects teacher quality, recruitment, and
retention; and produces unanticipated outcomes.
AERA Annual Meeting 4/12/04
Consequences
Of AYP Test-Score Driven AccountabilityApart from Consequences of
Comprehensive Federal Title Funding Changes
Apart from Consequences of Colorado’s 3rd-10th Grade State Testing Program, which predates NCLB’s AYP
AERA Annual Meeting 4/12/04
Results of Incentives
Slight Increase in Attention to Student Groups in Improvement Planning, Testing All; District, Schools Already Engaged
Bookkeeping for Disaggregation and AYP Status Calculation (350 person-hours)
Morale(?)
AERA Annual Meeting 4/12/04
AYP-Triggered Funding Impact
Apart from Broader NCLB/Title Funding Changes, Professional Development, Parent Engagement, Homeless Services
Expected Net Decrease in Discretionary $ Further Professional DevelopmentDollars Reserved for Transportation, A
Doubtfully Effective Use Fewer Schools and Students Served
AERA Annual Meeting 4/12/04
District Groups Not Making AYP in 2003
% of Targets Missed
Overall 0
Asian 0
White 0
Black 0
American Indian 0
Hispanic 33
English Language Learners 83
Students With Disabilities 33
Free/Reduced Lunch* (not in AYP) 17
Effects of Publicizing AYP Results
Schools Fail Targets
Banner Headline from Boulder Daily Camera Newspaper, 11/19/03
AERA Annual Meeting 4/12/04
Impact of AYP Ratings on the Media, Public, and Parents
Schools Fail Targets; Excellent Failures; Excellence Fails to Impress Feds (Boulder Daily Camera articles)
AYP status created dissonance about previously-held beliefs about some BVSD schools
Statewide, similar confusion prevailed: “The great power of AYP is that it doesn’t let Colorado’s best schools cover up with overall good scores those students being left behind.” (emphasis added)
AERA Annual Meeting 4/12/04
AYP Competes with Other Colorado Accountability Systems: School Accountability Reports (SAR) and AccreditationAs a result of three separately-enacted laws,
Colorado schools are subject to three different school accountability mechanisms:
AYP: federal law, enacted January 2002 SAR: state school reform legislation, enacted July 2000 Accreditation: state school reform legislation, enacted
July 1998
Subsequently, schools face potentially three different school ratings
AERA Annual Meeting 4/12/04
Attributes of System AYP SAR
Performance Model Achievement: status & growth; non-cohort
Achievement: status & growth; non-cohort
Decision-making Model
Conjunctive model using up to potentially numerous, depending on school size, indicators per school
Single composite score computed
Important CSAP Performance Cut-Scores
Partially Proficient All CSAP cut-scores
Methodology Partially Proficient, Proficient, Advanced performance contributes to making AYP
Standardized weighted index awards differential "credit" for each CSAP performance level
Sub-groups of Students Held Accountable For
Gender, Racial/Ethnic, Economically Disadvantaged, Students with Disabilities, English Language Learners
No subgroup reporting or analyses
Non-test Data Considered
None for elementary and middle schools, graduation rate for high schools
None for rating determination; other data is reported, including staff characteristics, safety indicators and budget information
BVSD School Accreditation
Effectiveness: status & growth; cohortCompensatory model using a wide variety of student and school performance indicators
All CSAP cut-scores
Weighted index from SAR, not standardized
Gender, Racial/Ethnic, Economically Disadvantaged, Students with Disabilities, English Language Learners, Talented and GiftedSeveral elements, including parent & community satisfaction, evidence of a safe & civil learning environment, and professional development for staff.
Complementary or Contradictory Systems?
AERA Annual Meeting 4/12/04
SAR and Accreditation Ratings for Schools Failing AYP
SAR Rating Based
on Spring 2003School Accreditation Status,
2002-2003 School Year
School A Average Fully Accredited
School B High Fully Accredited
School C High Fully Accredited
School D Low Academic Watch
School E High Fully Accredited
School F Average Fully Accredited
School G Excellent Fully Accredited
School H Low Fully Accredited
School I Low Fully Accredited
AERA Annual Meeting 4/12/04
Size Mattered: Most Large Schools Failed AYP
SAR Rating Based
on Spring 2003School Accreditation Status,
2002-2003 School Year
School A Average Fully Accredited
School B High Fully Accredited
School C High Fully Accredited
School D Low Academic Watch
School E High Fully Accredited
School F Average Fully Accredited
School G Excellent Fully Accredited
School H Low Fully Accredited
School I Low Fully Accredited
AERA Annual Meeting 4/12/04
Conclusion: Toward an Improved Accountability SystemAccountability is good when it accurately
identifies schools and when consequences are reasonable
Results from 3 systems are not synthesized, which leads to serious confusion
Multiple systems yield multiple measures that could be combined to form one contextual, cohesive synopsis of school performance
AERA Annual Meeting 4/12/04
Next Steps
The next task is to design a useful, valid methodology for integrating data from AYP, SAR and accreditation that meets the intended purposes of each of the 3 systems:
providing schools with useful feedback about performance in order to improve the school, and
school accountability. Rather than solely a school-shopping device, a
school’s rating would provide information, and therefore opportunities for improvement.