subtitle title i federal school accountability office of school improvement and turnaround indiana...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032723/56649d085503460f949da078/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Subtitle
Title I Federal School Accountability
Office of School Improvement and Turnaround
Indiana Department of EducationMarch 2012
![Page 2: Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032723/56649d085503460f949da078/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Agenda
School Placement Category…•Overview•Definitions•Scenarios
![Page 3: Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032723/56649d085503460f949da078/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Terminology AMO: Annual Measurable Objective is the annual target for the percentage of students whose test scores must be proficient or above in English/Language Arts and Mathematics.
TAT: This refers to the Technical Assistance Team visit Priority and Focus schools could receive from IDOE.
Bottom 25%: The bottom 25 percent of student scores in each school, whether or not they belong to a subgroup.
ESEA Subgroup: Groups of at least 30 students that represent Overall, Asian, African American, Hispanic, White, Free or Reduced, Limited English Proficient, and Special Education test takers.
![Page 4: Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032723/56649d085503460f949da078/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
What has changed?
Current Federal Accountability for Title I Schools
• Based on AYP• 4 special designations
– Comprehensive-intensive
– Comprehensive– Comprehensive-support– Focus
• Prescribed interventions
New Federal Accountability for Title I Schools
• Based on A-F model• 4 special designations
– Reward– Priority– Focus– Focus-targeted
• LEA- and school-selected interventions
![Page 5: Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032723/56649d085503460f949da078/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
School Placement Category Overview
Title I Served Schools Only
Reward Schools
Focus-Targeted Schools
Focus Schools
Priority Schools
The state’s Highest Performing Schools and
High-Progress Schools
‘A,’ ‘B, ‘or ‘C’ school which fails to meet the requirements for each subgroup.
Schools which earn a ‘D’ rating that are not Priority or have a graduation rate
<60% for 2 years.
Schools which earn an ‘F’ and/or are classified as persistently low-achieving.
![Page 6: Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032723/56649d085503460f949da078/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Agenda
School Placement Category…•Overview•Definitions•Scenarios
![Page 7: Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032723/56649d085503460f949da078/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Reward SchoolsHighest
Performing Schools
Schools which receive an ‘A’ for two consecutive years
(Begins 2013-2014)
High-Progress Elem. & Middle
SchoolsHigh Growth in bottom 25% and top 75% subgroup for both E/LA & math
(Begins Immediately 2012-2013)
High-Progress High Schools
Significant improvement in its not-proficient population in E/LA & Math
(Begins Immediately 2012-2013)
Reward Schools Receive (at a minimum):•Excellence in Teaching Grant bonus•Best practices highlighted
by IDOE
![Page 8: Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032723/56649d085503460f949da078/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Focus-Targeted Schools
Bottom 25%
Focus-Targeted schools can simultaneously be Priority, Focus or Reward
ESEA Subgroups
- Fails to meet growth requirement from baseline year, or
- Is 2+ grades behind the school overall
1 or more ESEA subgroups…- Do not meet their AMO, or - Earn a ‘D’ or ‘F,’ or
- scores 2+ grades below the school
OR
To exit Focus-Targeted status a school must…•Meet the performance targets from the AMO for each subgroup•Improve grade for each subgroup to a ‘C’ or higher
![Page 9: Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032723/56649d085503460f949da078/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Scenarios
Made-Up Middle School (2011-2012)Performance Rating
Overall the school earned a ‘B.’
ESEA Subgroups
9 of 12 subgroups did not meet
AMOs
Reward School and Focus-Targeted year 1.
Reward status comes from high growth in Bottom 25%
The Focus-Targeted status comes from the 9 of 12 ESEA subgroups failing to meet AMOs.
Bottom 25%
Showed high growth in E/LA
and Math
![Page 10: Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032723/56649d085503460f949da078/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Scenarios
Mock Middle School (2011-2012)Performance Rating
Overall the school earned a ‘A.’
ESEA Subgroups
All subgroups met AMOs and growth
targets.
Focus-Targeted year 1.
Focus-Targeted status comes from the Bottom 25% receiving a ‘C,’ two grades lower than the overall performance grade.
Bottom 25%
Rating of a ‘C’
![Page 11: Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032723/56649d085503460f949da078/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Focus-Targeted School RequirementsFocus-
TargetedYr 1 & 2
•Modify School Improvement Plan to target deficient subgroups.•LEA must notify families the school did not meet requirements for this/these subgroups.
Focus-TargetedYr 3 & 4
•Same as Year 1 & 2•LEA must modify relevant federal grant applications to include specific intervention strategies for this/these subgroup(s)•IDOE will offer technical assistance to LEAs to made the appropriate modifications to the school’s School Improvement Plan and federal grant application
Focus-Targeted
Yr 5 & beyond
• Same as 1-4• LEA must complete quarterly monitoring reports with evidence of progress towards goals tied to the specific intervention strategies
![Page 12: Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032723/56649d085503460f949da078/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Focus SchoolsSchool Performance
Rating
Schools that receive a ‘D’ and had a C or higher the
previous year.
Consistently Low Graduation Rate
High schools with a graduation rate <60% for 2+ consecutive years (n ≥
30)
To exit Focus status a school must…•Improve performance rating to a ‘C’ or higher for consecutive years
or•Earn reward school status just one year
and•Improve graduation rate to 60+% for consecutive years (if needed)
![Page 13: Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032723/56649d085503460f949da078/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Focus School RequirementsUniversal
Requirements
All interventions must align to Mass Insight’s High Quality, High Poverty Framework and the Turnaround Principles, and are subject to review by IDOE.
Focus Yr 1
•Identify and implement THREE interventions based on a school-based root cause analysis.
Focus Yr 2-4
•Revise school improvement plan based on previous year’s data•Option to focus resources on 1 strategically selected intervention.
Focus Yr 5
•Revise school improvement plan based on previous year’s data•Participate in IDOE School Quality Review
Focus Yr 6
•Implement interventions identified in previous year’s IDOE report.•SIG funding will not be provided to LEAs that do not comply.
![Page 14: Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032723/56649d085503460f949da078/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Priority SchoolsSchool Performance
Rating
Schools that receive a ‘F’ rating
Persistently Low-Achieving Schools
Schools which earn a ‘D’ and/or an ‘F’ for two or more consecutive years
To exit Focus status a school must…•Improve performance rating to a ‘C’ or higher for consecutive years
or•Earn Reward school status just one year
![Page 15: Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032723/56649d085503460f949da078/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Priority School RequirementsUniversal
Requirements
All interventions must align to Mass Insight’s High Quality, High Poverty Framework and the Turnaround Principles, and are subject to review by IDOE.
Priority Yr 1
•Identify and implement 3 interventions based on a school-based root cause analysis.
Priority Yr 2-3
•Revise school improvement plan based on previous year’s data•Flexibility to focus resources on 1 strategically selected intervention.Priority
Yr 4
•Revise school improvement plan based on previous year’s data•IDOE Technical Assistance Team Quality Review
Priority Yr 5
•Implement interventions identified in previous year’s IDOE report.•SIG funding will not be provided to LEAs that do not comply.Priority
Yr 6•Schools will be subject to state intervention pursuant to PL 221.
![Page 16: Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032723/56649d085503460f949da078/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Agenda
School Placement Category…•Overview•Definitions•Scenarios
![Page 17: Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032723/56649d085503460f949da078/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Scenarios
Bayside High School (2011-
2012)Performance Rating
Graduation Rate
Not-Proficient
Overall the school earned a ‘C.’
58% Grad Rate
Did not show high growth.
ESEA Subgroups
2 of 14 subgroups did not meet
AMOs
Focus-Targeted year 1.
The Focus-Targeted status comes from the 2 of 14 ESEA subgroups failing to meet AMOs.
![Page 18: Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032723/56649d085503460f949da078/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Scenarios
Bayside High School (2012-2013)
Performance Rating
Not-Proficient
Overall the school earned a ‘C.’
High growth in Math
Graduation Rate
59% Grad Rate
2011-2012
Focus-Targeted School
58% Graduation Rate
Focus School year 1Focus Target year 2
Despite the ‘C’ rating, the graduation rate is below 60% for the second straight year.
High growth in math alone does not increase the school status.
![Page 19: Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032723/56649d085503460f949da078/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Scenarios
Glenbrook North Middle School (2011-
2012)Performance Rating
Overall the school earned a ‘C.’
ESEA Subgroups
9 of 12 subgroups did not meet
AMOs
Reward School and Focus-Targeted year 1.
Reward status comes from high growth in Bottom 25%
The Focus-Targeted status comes from the 9 of 12 ESEA subgroups failing to meet AMOs.
Bottom 25%
Showed high growth in E/LA
and Math
![Page 20: Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032723/56649d085503460f949da078/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Scenarios
Glenbrook North Middle School (2012-
2013)2011-2012
Bottom 25%
Reward School and
Focus Targeted
Showed high growth in Math
ESEA Subgroups
4 of 12 subgroups did not meet
AMOs
Focus-Targeted year 2.
Lost Reward School due to Bottom 25% only showing high growth in Math.
The Focus-Targeted status comes from the 4 of 12 ESEA subgroups failing to meet AMOs.
Performance Rating
Overall the school earned a ‘C’
![Page 21: Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032723/56649d085503460f949da078/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Scenarios
Happiness Elementary School (2011-
2012)Performance Rating
Bottom 25%
Overall the school earned a ‘D.’
Did not show high growth.
ESEA Subgroups
7 of 14 subgroups did not meet
AMOs
Focus School year 1Focus Targeted year1Focus status is due to the ‘D’ performance rating .
![Page 22: Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032723/56649d085503460f949da078/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Scenarios
Happiness Elementary School (2012-
2013)
Performance Rating
Bottom 25%
Overall the school earned a ‘C.’
High growth in Math
ESEA Subgroups
4 of 14 subgroups did not meet
AMOs
2011-2012
Happiness was a Focus School
Holding year for a Focus School and Focus Targeted year 2.
Holding because they need another year of ‘C’ or higher to remove from Focus status.
High growth in math alone does not increase the school status.
![Page 23: Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032723/56649d085503460f949da078/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Scenarios
Happiness Elementary School (2013-
2014)
Performance Rating
Bottom 25%
Overall the school earned a ‘D.’
Bottom 25% did not show high
growth
ESEA Subgroups
6 of 14 subgroups did not meet
AMOs
2012-2013
Happiness was in a holding year.
Focus School year 2Focus-Targeted year 3
Year 2 because the count does not reset in a holding year.
![Page 24: Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032723/56649d085503460f949da078/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Scenarios
Joyful Elementary School (2011-2012)Performance Rating
Bottom 25%
Overall the school earned a ‘D.’
Did not show high growth.
ESEA Subgroups
5 of 12 subgroups did not meet
AMOs
Focus School year 1Focus Targeted year 1
Focus status is due to the ‘D’ performance rating .
![Page 25: Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032723/56649d085503460f949da078/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Scenarios
Joyful Elementary School (2012-2013)
Performance Rating
Bottom 25%
Overall the school earned a ‘D.’
High growth in Math
ESEA Subgroups
6 of 14 subgroups did not meet
AMOs
2011-2012
Joyful was a ‘D’Focus School year
1 Priority SchoolFocus Targeted year 2
Priority comes from being a persistently low-achieving school.
![Page 26: Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032723/56649d085503460f949da078/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Upcoming Trainings• March 29
– Intervention Criteria WebEx: Mass Insight, Turnaround Principles, Rigor Tiers and Funding
• April 10– Intervention Selection WebEx: Root Cause
Analysis, Data–Driven Intervention Selection, Logic Model to Guide Implementation
• April 24– Intervention Monitoring WebEx: Protocols
and Documentation Requirements
![Page 27: Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032723/56649d085503460f949da078/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Reminders
• Join School Improvement Learning Connection Community
• FAQ will be posted and updated weekly• All WebEx’s are recorded and posted in
the Learning Connection Community
![Page 28: Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032723/56649d085503460f949da078/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Contact InformationAccountability Questions
http://www.doe.in.gov/improvement/accountability/f-accountability
Laura [email protected]
![Page 29: Subtitle Title I Federal School Accountability Office of School Improvement and Turnaround Indiana Department of Education March 2012](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032723/56649d085503460f949da078/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)