Perusing your Responsibility Reports U-PASS AYP AMAO.


35 views
Uploaded on:
Description
2. Perusing your Accountability Reports U-PASS, AMAO, AYP. August 18
Transcripts
Slide 1

Perusing your Accountability Reports U-PASS AYP AMAO Judy Park, Assessment & Accountability Director Russell Klein, Results Coordinator Utah State Office of Education August 2006

Slide 2

Reading your Accountability Reports U-PASS, AMAO, AYP August 18 – Sevier D.O., 180 E 600 N, Richfield August 22 – Granite D.O., 2500 S. State St., Salt Lake August 23 – Weber D.O., 5320 S. Adams Ave. Pkwy, Ogden August 25 – Nebo Learning Center, 570 S. Principle St., Springville

Slide 3

Utah Performance Assessment System for Students U-PASS Accountability Plan

Slide 4

U-PASS State Accountability Required by State Law School level report Based on different evaluations Includes participation & graduation rate 2006 – schools without a 12 th grade just 2007 – all schools

Slide 5

U-PASS Accountability Plan Student Participation on Assessments Status Scores Percentage of understudies capable on the gathering of appraisals and different pointers Progress Scores Longitudinal measure in view of looking at the accomplishment levels of the same understudy starting with one year then onto the next

Slide 6

Achieved State Level of Performance

Slide 7

U-PASS Accountability Plan Student Participation 95% Acceptable Status Score 80% Progress Score Low 0 – 189 Medium 190 - 214 High 215 - 400

Slide 8

Progress Value Table

Slide 9

Schools will be recognized as: Achieved State Level of Performance Participation is 95% and Total School AND Subgroup Status is worthy (80%) or advancement is medium (190) or high Needs help Participation is under 95% or Total School or Subgroup Status is not satisfactory and advancement is low

Slide 10

Language Arts (35%) ELA CRT (35%) Or ELA CRT (30%) & DWA 5% Math (35%) Math CRT Science (20%) Science CRT Attendance (10%) Schools without a 12 th grade Status and Progress Score

Slide 11

U-PASS Accountability Plan Aggregate Subgroup Accountability Every understudy who has a place with a subgroup other than white Individual understudy proficiencies are included and isolated by the quantity of understudies to decide the subgroup capability level Any individual subgroup not meeting capability will show up on the front page of the report

Slide 12

U-PASS Accountability Plan Subgroup Status Accountability. Permits more noteworthy responsibility. Understudies in a subgroup with under 10 are currently incorporated into the total computation. Understudies are all the more genuinely spoken to. Every understudy just tallies once, paying little heed to the quantity of subgroups in which the understudy qualifies. Expanded unwavering quality. We are assessing a bigger gathering. More understudies and more schools are spoken to. Expanded legitimacy. We don\'t overweight little populaces. This lifts the weight of one subgroup being the sole determinant of unsatisfactory status of the school.

Slide 13

The 2006 U-PASS Report Web-based report design An expanded measure of data accessible on every school Allows for "drill-down" data

Slide 15

1

Slide 16

2

Slide 17

3

Slide 18

Must accomplish both criteria Final Result

Slide 19

Subgroups Needing Assistance

Slide 20

Status "Drill Down"

Slide 21

Click on Grade Name for Instant Graph

Slide 22

Click on Grade Score for Further Drill Down Second Level "Drill Down"

Slide 23

Third Level "Drill Down" Boxes develop "mouseover"

Slide 24

Progress "Drill Down" coming in October

Slide 25

Additional Reports

Slide 26

U-PASS Additional Information: NRT ACT/SAT AP Concurrent Enrollment School Summary Information Student Summary Information Percent of understudy perusing on evaluation level (reported for evaluations 1-10) Dropout Rate (disaggregated by \'08) Disciplinary Action Course Taking Patterns and Trends

Slide 30

AYP Reports

Slide 31

Schools with a 12 th Grade Assessment Drill Downs Additional Information

Slide 32

Questions?

Slide 33

AYP School Reports For 2006

Slide 34

AYP Federal Accountability Required by Federal NCLB Title I Law School, District & State level Reports Based on Language Arts CRT & Math CRT Includes participation & graduation rate

Slide 35

AYP 2006 Level 1 Three sections: Participation in testing Academic accomplishment School participation/graduation All-or-nothing idea

Slide 36

1 3 2

Slide 37

AYP 2006 Level 1 Did the school make AYP? Math versus Dialect Arts? AMO (Annual Measurable Objectives) same as a year ago Consequences just for Title I schools

Slide 38

4 1 3 2

Slide 40

AYP 2006 Level 1 WHICH STUDENTS ARE IN THE AYP SCHOOL REPORTS?

Slide 41

Students in AYP & U-PASS School Reports Two vast information accumulations 1) End-of-Year Clearinghouse 2) Core CRT Files These Two Files Need To Match To Be On AYP & U-PASS School Reports! 6 Fields for Matching: District#, School#, Last Name, First Name, Date of Birth, Gender As of Spring \'06 – SSID!

Slide 42

Full Academic Year

Slide 43

Math Core CRTs

Slide 44

Language Arts Core CRTs

Slide 45

AYP 2006 Level 1 Questions?

Slide 46

AYP 2006 Level 2 Status versus Safe Harbor (Improvement) Safe Harbor 10% diminishment in % of understudies not capable

Slide 47

AYP 2006 Safe Harbor (Improvement) Not Proficient Status

Slide 48

AYP 2006 Safe Harbor (Improvement) Not Proficient Status

Slide 49

AYP 2006 Safe Harbor (Improvement) Improvement

Slide 50

AYP 2006 Safe Harbor (Improvement) Improvement

Slide 51

AYP 2006 Safe Harbor (Improvement) Good for Improvement Shows Improvement Good for Status Improvement Does not demonstrate change Not Proficient Status

Slide 52

AYP 2006 Safe Harbor (Improvement) Made AYP Made AYP Shows Improvement Made AYP Does not indicate change Not Proficient Status

Slide 53

Status

Slide 54

Safe Harbor

Slide 55

AYP 2006 Level 2 Safe Harbor Additional Indicator is just utilized when Safe Harbor count is required

Slide 56

AYP 2005 Level 2 Confidence Interval on Status 99% Confidence Interval on Safe Harbor 75% Participation & Additional Indicator N/A

Slide 57

Confidence Interval Voting – exit surveys

Slide 58

Confidence Interval on Status

Slide 59

Confidence Interval on Safe Harbor

Slide 60

AYP 2006 Level 2 N size – 10 versus 40 Small N = Automatic YES

Slide 61

AYP 2006 Level 2 N=40 investment, participation, and graduation N=10 scholarly accomplishment

Slide 65

AYP 2006 Graduation rate – 85.7% One year postponed (have until Sep 1) 05 information from distribution center 04, 03 information from USOE factual documents Quality of information has enhanced 40 approaches to make (or not make) AYP

Slide 67

Times 10 40 approaches to make (or not make) AYP

Slide 68

"Rudimentary"

Slide 69

"Basic"

Slide 70

"Locale"

Slide 71

Available on the protected FTP site

Slide 72

AYP 2006 Level 2 Questions?

Slide 73

AYP 2006 Level 3 Definition of "safe harbor" Definition of "support" Definition "certainty interims" Definition of "graduation rate" UAA

Slide 74

AYP 2006 Level 3 Questions?

Slide 75

AYP 2006 Did your school "make it"? Interest – DID YOU MEET IT? Investment – Is the N estimate under 40? Did they have 95% interest? Did they normal 95% support in the course of the last three (or two) years?

Slide 76

AYP 2006 Did your school "make it"? Status – Is the subgroup estimate under 10? Status – Is the % sufficiently capable? Status – If the % capable is insufficient – does the certainty interim change it?

Slide 77

AYP 2006 Did your school "make it"? Safe Harbor – Is there a 10% lessening in understudies not capable? Safe Harbor – Is the % diminishment of understudies not capable inside the certainty interim?

Slide 78

AYP 2006 Did your school "make it"? Participation/Graduation Rate – Is the subgroup under 40? Participation/Graduation Rate – Did the school meet 93% participation rate or 85.7 graduation rate Attendance/Graduation Rate – has there been an expansion from the earlier year?

Slide 79

Level Three Clarifications

Slide 80

AYP 2006 Level 3 Participation Category – Students selected on test date. Support inside tests – Students you\'ve had for the full scholastic year. (subset of "classification" set) Participation – graduate/go to. Is ALL understudies…

Slide 81

95% Participation

Slide 82

LEP Subgroup Definition

Slide 83

Additional Indicator AYP Attendance 93%

Slide 84

Additional Indicator AYP Graduation Rate 85.7%

Slide 85

UAA Testing Special Ed Alternate Assessment Grade level is determined in light of birthdate. Center Test Id and grade level will be utilized to figure out which Actual Test ID to relegate an understudy to. LA and grade level will compare to an Actual Language (Reading) class for that understudy. Mama and grade level will compare to a math course. UAA understudies whose birthdate is in 9-twelfth grades will be added to GE0812R Geometry. They are a piece of High School Math AYP! UAA in 7-eighth grade will be added to seventh grade math.

Slide 86

Out-of-Level Testing Not permitted No for interest No for scholastic accomplishment Math Levels: 6 th – Math 6; 7 th – Math 7; 8 th – Pre-Alg. Anything lower for the evaluations is Out-of-Level and considered Not Proficient.

Slide 87

District AYP Reports Previous District AYP Report Grades 3 – 8 just

Slide 88

District AYP Reports 2006 District AYP Report Grades 3 – 8 Grades 10 – 12 Business Rule An LEA will get a report taking into account both 3-eighth and 10-twelfth grade AMO\'s.  A LEA must fizzle at both the 3-8 AND the 10-12 grade levels to come up short AYP.  (Either subject)

Slide 89

District AYP Reports 2006 District AYP Report Grades

Recommended
View more...