Differentiated Accountability

1
Differentiated Accountability

• A New Model for Title I School Improvement in
  Indiana

2
Background

• Spring 2008 U.S. Department of Education
  invited eligible states to apply for
  Differentiated Accountability Pilot
• Allows states to use data to vary the intensity
  and type of interventions to schools in
  improvement
• Seventeen states submitted proposals
• Proposals were peer reviewed by individuals from
  universities, civil rights organizations, and
  state departments of education
• Only 6 states were approved, including Indiana

3
Highlights of Proposal

• Within schools identified for improvement
  changes required interventions based on formula
  to calculate schools most in need
• Schools categorized as Comprehensive and Focused
• Comprehensive furthest from AYP targets,
  failing to miss AYP in more cells
• Focused closer to meeting AYP targets, fewer
  cells missing AYP
• Provides Title I school improvement dollars and
  more concentrated support to Comprehensive
  schools
• Switches the order of Choice and SES and reduces
  barriers to SES access
• Changes to student eligibility for Choice and SES
• Eliminates Other option for Restructuring of
  Comprehensive Schools

4
Title I School Improvement Old Model (January
2002 June 2008)
5
Title I School Improvement New Model
Effective July 2008
6
(No Transcript)
7
Comparing the Models

• Old/Traditional Model
• School improvement requirements the same for all
  schools at the same year of improvement,
  regardless of how close to making AYP

• New/Differentiated Model
• School improvement requirements are
  differentiated by school need as determined by
  distance from AYP targets and percentage of cells
  not making AYP

8
Calculating the Index Rating

• Calculate the percentage of cells not making AYP
• Overall
• Available Subgroups
• English/Language Arts and Mathematics
• Convert percentage to number 90 90, etc.
• Calculate the distance from AYP targets
• English Overall and Mathematics Overall
• Used fall 2008 AYP targets
• Targets added together and divided by two to
  create one value
• Index Rating Absolute value of cells not making
  AYP distance from AYP targets
• The higher the Index Rating, the more in need the
  school is determined to be under this model

9
Calculating an Index Rating Example XYZ
Elementary, Year 2 of Improvement

• Missed AYP in 2 out of 6 cells
• 2 6 33.33
• 33.33
• 72.05 (combined fall 08 target) 69.3 (XYZs
  English Overall score) 2.75
• 72.05 (combined fall 08 target) 62.7 (XYZs
  Math Overall score) 9.35
• 2.75 9.35 12.1
• 12.1 2 6.05
• 33.33 6.05 39.38
• This school would be a Focused school according
  to the Index Rating.

10
No ChangeEntering School Improvement

• Two years of not making AYP
• First year flagged/alert
• Second year Year 1 of improvement (Focused or
  Comprehensive)
• Must be in same content area
• Concept of content exclusion

11
No Change Exiting School Improvement

• Two consecutive years of making AYP
• 1 year of making AYP stay at same year of
  improvement

12
Moving Between Categories

• Index Rating will be calculated on an annual
  basis
• Focused schools may be moved to Comprehensive
  after one testing administration based on Index
  Rating
• Comprehensive schools will have to show growth on
  Index Rating for two years before being able to
  move to Focused group

13
Requirements for Focused Schools
14
Requirements for Year 1 Focused

• School Improvement Plan
• 10 for professional development
• Supplemental Educational Services for
  non-proficient poverty students

15
Requirements for Year 2 Focused

• School Improvement Plan
• 10 for Professional Development
• Choice for non-proficient students
• SES for non-proficient poverty students

16
Requirements for Year 3 Focused

• School Improvement Plan
• 10 for professional development
• Choice for non-proficient students
• SES for non-proficient poverty students
• 2008-2009 IDOE training for teacher leaders at
  each grade level
• 2009-2010 IDOE-sponsored on-line courses for
  grade level teachers

17
Requirements for Year 4 Year 7 Focused

• School Improvement Plan
• 10 for professional development
• Choice for non-proficient students
• SES for non-proficient poverty students with open
  enrollment and services offered on-site
• 2008-2009 IDOE training for teacher leaders at
  each grade level
• 2009-2010 IDOE-sponsored on-line courses for
  grade level teachers
• Year 4 - Plan Corrective Action
• Year 5 -7 Implement Corrective Action (see next
  slide for options)

18
Corrective Action Options for Focused Schools
(Choose One Option)

• Replace staff responsible for continued failure
  to make AYP
• Hire full-time Literacy or Math Coach
• Hire English Language Learner Specialist (minimum
  of ½ time/0.5 FTE)
• Sufficiently extend school day or year

19
Requirements for Year 8 and Beyond Focused

• School Improvement Plan
• 10 for professional development
• Choice for non-proficient students
• SES for non-proficient poverty students with open
  enrollment and services offered on-site
• 2008-2009 IDOE training for teacher leaders at
  each grade level
• 2009-2010 IDOE-sponsored on-line courses for
  grade level teachers
• Submit Corrective Action Plan for IDOE review and
  approval
• State Support Teams
• Required participation in whole-school use of
  state Reading and Mathematics diagnostic tools
  (Wireless Generation and Acuity)

20
Requirements for Comprehensive Schools

• Note All Comprehensive Schools Will Receive
  Title I School Improvement Grants from
  IDOE/Office of Title I Academic Support

21
Requirements for Year 1 Comprehensive

• School Improvement Plan
• 10 for professional development
• SES for non-proficient poverty students
• Open Enrollment
• Opportunity for on-site services
• Transportation
• Whole-school use of State Reading and Mathematics
  diagnostic assessments
• Wireless Generation
• Acuity
• Full-time Literacy or Math Coach in school and
  receiving required training from IDOE

22
Requirements for Year 2 Comprehensive

• School Improvement Plan
• 10 for professional development
• Choice for non-proficient students
• SES for non-proficient poverty students
• Open Enrollment
• Opportunity for on-site services
• Transportation
• Whole-school use of State Reading and Mathematics
  diagnostic assessments
• Wireless Generation
• Acuity
• Full-time Literacy or Math Coach in school and
  receiving required training from IDOE

23
Requirements for Year 3 Comprehensive

• School Improvement Plan
• 10 for professional development
• Choice for non-proficient students
• SES for non-proficient poverty students
• Open Enrollment
• Opportunity for on-site services
• Transportation
• Whole-school use of State Reading and Mathematics
  diagnostic assessments
• Wireless Generation
• Acuity
• Full-time Literacy or Math Coach in school and
  receiving required training from IDOE

24
Year 3 Comprehensive - Continued

• Indiana Reading Academy Training All K-3
  teachers and principals
• Implement Corrective Action (one action required)
• Replace staff responsible for continued failure
  to make AYP
• Replace principal or appoint outside mentor (0.5
  FTE minimum)
• Hire ELL Specialist (0.5 FTE minimum)
• Sufficiently extend school day or year
• The corrective action plan must be submitted to
  IDOE and reviewed by a multidisciplinary panel
• Indiana Algebra Initiative Math teachers and
  administrators in middle schools not making AYP
  in mathematics

25
Requirements for Year 4 7 Comprehensive

• School Improvement Plan
• 10 for professional development
• Choice for non-proficient students
• SES for non-proficient poverty students
• Open Enrollment
• Opportunity for on-site services
• Transportation
• Whole-school use of State Reading and Mathematics
  diagnostic assessments
• Wireless Generation
• Acuity
• Full-time Literacy or Math Coach in school and
  receiving required training from IDOE

26
Requirements for Year 4 7 continued

• Indiana Reading Academy Training All K-3
  teachers and principals
• As appropriate, sustain Corrective Action
• Indiana Algebra Initiative Math teachers and
  administrators in middle schools not making AYP
  in mathematics
• Year 4 Plan for Restructuring (see next slide
  for options)
• Year 5 - 7 Implement Restructuring

27
Comprehensive Schools Restructuring Options

• Replace principal if leader has remained the same
  during sustained failure to make AYP and replace
  all staff responsible for failure to make AYP
• Close the school
• Reopen school as a charter school
• Contract with a private management company with
  demonstrated effectiveness to run the school
• Note The other category of restructuring is
  eliminated.

28
Requirements for Year 8 Comprehensive

• School Improvement Plan
• 10 for professional development
• Choice for non-proficient students
• SES for non-proficient poverty students
• Open Enrollment
• Opportunity for on-site services
• Transportation
• Whole-school use of State Reading and Mathematics
  diagnostic assessments
• Wireless Generation
• Acuity
• Full-time Literacy or Math Coach in school and
  receiving required training from IDOE

29
Year 8 Comprehensive - Continued

• Indiana Reading Academy Training All K-3
  teachers and principals
• Indiana Algebra Initiative Math teachers and
  administrators in middle schools not making AYP
  in mathematics
• The superintendent of a school currently
  identified as Year 8 or higher must resubmit and
  publicly defend their restructuring plan before
  an IDOE panel.

30
Intensive Support

• A subset of schools will be identified for
  receiving Intensive support in addition to
  previously described requirements
• Comprehensive-Intensive 10 highest Index Rating
  (most in need) Comprehensive schools
• Focused-Intensive Focused schools in Year 8 and
  beyond
• State Support Teams Required
• Comprehensive-Intensive Spring 2009
  participation in the Institute for School
  Leadership Teams
• Focused-Intensive Required whole-school use of
  state reading and mathematics diagnostic tools
  (Wireless Generation and Acuity)

31
Transitioning from the Old Model to the New
Differentiated Model

• Most actions will have to be implemented
  immediately
• Exceptions
• Choice/SES
• Restructuring

32
Choice and SES

• 2008-2009 Choice and SES must be implemented as
  required under previous model
• Choice All students eligible in schools Year 1
  and beyond
• SES All poverty students eligible in schools
  Year 2 and beyond
• 2009-2010 Implement Choice and SES as outlined
  in Differentiated Model

33
Restructuring

• Districts with schools in Year 5 -7 Comprehensive
  in 2008-2009 allowed to implement previously
  approved restructuring plans
• Districts with schools in Year 8 Comprehensive
  must resubmit and defend restructuring plan for
  IDOE approval
• Districts with schools in Year 4 Comprehensive in
  2008-2009 must plan for restructuring using the
  options approved under Differentiated
  Accountability

34
In Summary

• Differentiated accountability recognizes that not
  all schools identified for improvement have the
  same degree of need.
• IDOE is committed to ensuring meaningful reform,
  options for parents, and resources for all
  schools to make academic progress with all
  students.

35
Questions

• 317-232-0540 or Toll Free 877-418-7240
• lkwiat_at_doe.in.gov
• jmiller_at_doe.in.gov
• http//www.doe.state.in.us/TitleI/differentiated_a
  ccountability.html