STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION – ADMINISTRATIVE RULE SUMMARY
Title/OAR #: School and District Performance Reports Criteria, OAR 581-022-1060 Date: 6/18/2009
Staff/Office: Doug Kosty, Tony Alpert, Jon Wiens, OAIS
New Rule Amend Existing Rule Repeal Rule
Hearing Date: __April 22, 2009______Hearings Officer Report Attached
Action Requested:
First Reading/Second Reading Adoption Adoption/Consent Agenda
WHAT THE PROPOSED/AMENDED RULE DOES:
The amendment to OAR 581-022-1060 does the following:
- Reduces the number of overall school rating categories from five to three. The new categories are:
o Outstanding
o Satisfactory
o In Need of Improvement
- Graduation rate will replace dropout rate as a required data element.
- Eliminates the rating requirement for School Performance, School Characteristics, School Behavior, and Improvement in Student Performance and Student Behavior categories.
The proposed amendments will align the OAR with the revised statute.
ISSUES RAISED:
· A request was submitted to change the date for districts to notify parents from December 15th to February 15th. The request was based on the potential to reduce mailing costs.
(Retained the date as December 15 to ensure compliance with the federal requirement to provide information to parents in a timely manner.)
· A request was submitted to provide districts with the option of posting on district websites and notifying parents of how to view the on-line reports. The request was based on the potential to reduce mailing costs.
(Posting on the district website as an additional option is allowed by Oregon law; however, posting exclusively on the website in not likely to be consistent with federal or state law. State law requires that districts send a copy of the reports to parents. State law would need to be amended to allow notification of the reports rather than a copy of the reports to be sent.)
BACKGROUND:
HB 2263 (2007) amended ORS 329.105 and changed the requirements for the school rating system in school and district performance reports for 2008-09 and beyond. This amendment brings the OAR in line with the revised statute.
OAR 581-022-1060 specifies only the required data elements and ratings categories. It does not provide details on the report card rating system. These details are communicated to stakeholders through Report Card Technical and Policy manuals. While the rating formula is not part of the OAR, we feel that it is important for the Board to review the proposed rating system. Development of the formula, which incorporates a Growth Model, has occurred from August 2008 to March 2009. The following groups were involved in review of the Growth Model and/or review of the proposed school rating system:
- The internal cross-office ODE Growth Model Team
- ODE School Improvement and Accountability Team
- The Accountability Advisory Committee
- The Assessment Advisory Committee
- American Institutes for Research
- Confederation of Oregon School Administrators (COSA)
- The ESD Instructional Leadership Council
- Region 1 Assessment Committee
The growth model and report card rating system have been presented at a number of public events, including:
- Oregon Law Conference
- Professional Educators Advisory Team (PEAT)
- COSA conference at Salishan
- Annual Charter School Conference
- Oregon DATA project trainings (multiple sites statewide)
- Salem Keizer School District
- Willamette ESD Curriculum Coalition
- ODE EII All-Staff
- WebEx presentations that, to date, have involved over 120 district personnel
ODE researched a wide range of growth models from January 2008 to October 2008. These models were tested against historic Oregon assessment data, and the results were presented to our advisory groups. The consensus model for school accountability is referred to as the “Student Centered” growth model. In this model, each student who did not meet standard in the previous school year is given a “growth target” for the current year. These targets vary by student and are chosen to represent significant progress toward meeting standard.
The “Student Centered” model has a number of positive features:
- Growth Targets are based on each individual student’s prior testing history;
- Growth Targets will be known prior to testing, so students can have immediate feedback on whether or not they met their individual target;
- The targets provide a realistic and attainable achievement goal for all students;
- The growth model can have a positive effect on closing the Achievement Gap by recognizing the growth of lower performing students; and
- The model is easily replicable and districts can track their school’s progress during the school year.
Once ODE achieved consensus with its stakeholder groups on a growth model, we moved on to development of the report card school rating system. Discussions around this part of the project were spirited. While some parties advocated for closer alignment of the Report Card and AYP, the majority favored a more independent report with a holistic view of schools. By collaborating with districts we have developed a formula that meets both needs. The proposed rating formula:
- Will be based on the same disaggregated student data as the AYP report; and
- Provides a more holistic view of the school rather than penalizing a school for lower performance by a single sub-group in a single content area.
The model provides incentives for schools to move their students toward higher achievement levels by recognizing/rewarding schools for:
- Students that are meeting on statewide assessments in reading and mathematics;
- Students that are exceeding;
- Students meeting their growth targets; and
- Closing the Achievement Gap.
The main feature of the new ratings system is an Achievement Index that assigns 133 points to each student exceeding, 100 points to each student meeting, and 100 points to each student who meets his or her growth target. We compute an average achievement for each subgroup and then compute the overall achievement index for the school as a (weighted) average of the achievement indices of the following groups:
- All Students;
- Students with Distabilities;
- Limited English Proficient;
- Economically Disadvantaged;
- Black (not of Hispanic origin);
- Hispanic Origin; and
- American Indian/Alaskan Native.
The subgroups included are those that have a historic achievement gap in the state. In effect, students in these subgroups have an extra weight in the school’s overall rating, so any achievement gap in a school will have an effect on the overall rating. However, this also means that schools that make progress in reducing the achievement gap will see multiple rewards in the school rating system.
The overall school rating is based primarily on the Achievement Index, which determines where a school falls in the continuum of In Need of Improvement through Outstanding. However, this determination may be modified in two ways:
1. Low results in the following areas can reduce the overall rating:
a. Elementary and middle schools – Attendance and Participation
b. High Schools – Graduation and Participation.
2. Notwithstanding the above modification, schools that meet AYP will receive at least a Satisfactory rating and will be kept out of school improvement status.
Board History:
The Board’s first reading of this proposed revision to OAR 581-022-1060 occurred on April 16, 2009.
Statutory Authority:
ORS 329.105
Fiscal Impact:
The test administration and security requirements described in the revised rule are based on existing policies, procedures, and infrastructure. Therefore, the rule should not represent a material increase in cost for districts.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The Superintendent and ODE Staff recommend adoption of the OAR.
BEFORE THE OREGON DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
RULE HEARING: OAR 581-022-1060, School District Performance Reports
HEARING OFFICER’S REPORT
The Department held a public hearing on April 22, 2009, to receive public comment on the proposed rule amendments. Notice of hearing was published in a timely manner in the Secretary of State’s bulletin and was sent to interested parties and persons who requested notice pursuant to ORS 183.335 (7). The hearing was held at the Department’s offices in Salem, Oregon before Cindy Hunt, Hearing Officer.
No one testified during the hearing.
Respectfully submitted this 27th day of April
Cindy Hunt
Hearing Officer
Draft
Updated by CH on 6/4/09
581-022-1060
School and District Performance Report Criteria
(1) The Superintendent of Public Instruction will annually collect data from schools and school districts on student performance, student behavior and school characteristics and will annually produce a performance report for each school and school district.
(2) The Superintendent will notify the public and the media by January 30 December 15 of each year that school and district performance reports are available at each school and school district and at the Department of Education website and office. The Superintendent will include in the notice that Consolidated District Improvement Plans and School Improvement Plans as required in ORS 329.095 are available form from the school and school district offices.
(3) By December 15 of each year, school districts shall send a copy of the state provided school and school district performance report to the parent(s) or guardian(s) of each child enrolled in a public school in the school district. Each school and school district report shall contain the information required by ORS 329.105.
(4) School performance reports will include gradesratings assigned by the Superintendent, based on valid scoring scales., in each of the following categories:
(a) Student Performance;
(b) Student Behavior; and
(c) School Characteristics.
(5) School gradesratings shall be reported as:
(a) Exceptional Outstanding;
(b) StrongSatisfactory; or
(c) SatisfactoryIn Need of Improvement;
(d) Low; or
(e) Unacceptable.
(6) Criteria for a school graderating in Student Performance will include
(a) Student pperformance as measured by : Sstatewide assessments;.
(b) Improvement in student performance;
(c) Percentage of students participating in statewide assessment; and
(d) Student attendance rate and/or
(e) sStudent graduation rate.
(7) Criteria for a school grade in Student Behavior will include performance as measured by:
(a) Student dropout rate; and
(b) Student attendance rate.
(8) Criteria for a school grade in School Characteristics will include performance as measured by: Percentage of students participating in statewide assessment.
(9) The school performance report will also include an overall grade based on a composite of the three categorical grades listed in section (4) of this rule and on improvement in Student Performance and Student Behavior over time and will be explained on the performance reports.
(7) A school that receives a rating of “Met” on its annual Adequate Yearly Progress report shall receive a rating of no lower than “Satisfactory” for that same school year.
(10) (8) A school receiving any graderating of "Low" or "Unacceptable" “In Need of Improvement” shall file its revised school improvement plan with the Superintendent, the school board and the 21st Century Schools Council for the school by March 31 following the report.
(11)(9) School performance reports may include information other than that listed in ORS 329.105 or sections (4), (56) and (7) of this rule and (7). Such information will not be part of the calculation of the school grade in individual categories or of the overall graderating.
(12)(10) School district performance reports will be developed and must include the overall rating of each school in the district. The district performance report may include information other than that listed in ORS 329.105 or section (4) or this rule.
(13)(11) School and school districts may include information in addition to that listed in ORS 329.105 or sections (4) and (5) of this rule in their locally prepared and distributed school and school district performance reports.
(14)(12) School and school district performance reports, in conjunction with electronic supplements of the performance reports, will serve as the means by which the state meets the report card requirements of section 1111 of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.
Stat. Auth.: ORS 326.051
Stats. Implemented: ORS 329.105
Hist.: ODE 36-1999, f. 12-13-99, cert. ef. 12-14-99; ODE 5-2007, f. & cert. ef. 2-21-07; ODE 25-2008, f. & cert. ef. 9-26-08
1