Using Local Flexibility in School Accreditation and SB-163 Updates - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Using Local Flexibility in School Accreditation and SB-163 Updates PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 79f9b9-Y2ZhZ



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Using Local Flexibility in School Accreditation and SB-163 Updates

Description:

Using Local Flexibility in School Accreditation and SB-163 Updates Sponsored by The Colorado Department of Education July 21, 2010 Agenda Accreditation: CDE s role ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:27
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 14
Provided by: johnst271
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Using Local Flexibility in School Accreditation and SB-163 Updates


1
Using Local Flexibility in School Accreditation
and SB-163 Updates Sponsored by The Colorado
Department of Education July 21, 2010
2
Agenda
  • Accreditation
  • CDEs role
  • Districts role
  • Local flexibility
  • Revisions to the School Performance Framework
  • District Performance Framework
  • Timelines

3
Accreditation Planning
  • CDE accredits districts
  • Accredited with Distinction
  • Accredited
  • Accredited with Improvement Plan
  • Accredited with Priority Improvement Plan
  • Accredited with Turnaround Plan
  • CDE assigns school plan types
  • Performance Plan
  • Improvement Plan
  • Priority Improvement Plan
  • Turnaround Plan
  • Unified Planning Template

4
Accreditation Big Ideas
  • Districts are responsible for accrediting
    schools.
  • The state provides a framework for evaluating
    school performance (the school performance
    frameworks).
  • Districts can add to the state framework.
  • State involvement is only with the lowest
    performing schools Priority Improvement and
    Turnaround.
  • Explicit links between school accreditation and
    improvement planning.

5
CDE Role
  • Major components of the CDE role
  • Accredit districts
  • Assign school plan types
  • Evaluate district and school performance using
    common indicators
  • Review and approve Priority Improvement and
    Turnaround plans
  • Provide high quality information
  • Provide as much support to districts as possible
    within fiscal constraints

6
District Role
  • Major components of the district role
  • Accredit schools
  • Evaluate school performance using a more
    exhaustive or stringent framework than CDE
  • Write and implement district improvement plans
    review school plans
  • Provide as much support to schools as possible
    within fiscal constraints

7
Local Flexibility
  • Discuss
  • How do you plan to accredit your schools?
  • How can CDE support you?

8
Revisions to the SPF (1)
Item Previous Revised /Current
Participation rate Districts and schools that do not meet 95 participation rate requirement in one or more subjects drop one plan type assignment Districts and schools that do not meet 95 participation rate requirement in two or more subjects drop one plan type assignment
Minimum N for graduation and dropout rate Minimum N of 1 Minimum N of 16
ACT inclusion/ exclusion rules Non-testers count towards the district/schools average ACT composite score as a score of 0 Non-testers do not count towards the district/schools average ACT composite score and are excluded from the calculation
9
Revisions to the SPF (2)
Item Previous Revised /Current
Comparison data for proficient/ advanced on CSAP Includes AECs and schools closed before Oct. 1 of the year prior to the report Excludes AECs and schools closed before Oct. 1 of the year prior to the report
Comparison data for dropout rate Exclude 7th and 8th grade dropouts from dropout rate Include 7th and 8th grade dropouts in dropout rate to match officially reported Colorado data
Reference tables for comparison data Reference tables for comparison data to determine the values and cut-points for percentiles for Academic Achievement and averages for dropout rate and ACT composite scores are listed in the SPF Technical Guide Reference tables for comparison data to determine the values and cut-points for percentiles for Academic Achievement and averages for dropout rate and ACT composite scores are listed on page 4 of the SPF (page 7 of the DPF)
10
District Performance Framework
  • Mirrors the School Performance Framework
  • Distribution of district accreditation categories
    similar to school plan type distribution
  • 10 Accredited with Distinction
  • 50 Accredited
  • 25 Accredited with Improvement Plan
  • 10 Accredited with Priority Improvement Plan
  • 5 Accredited with Turnaround Plan
  • Safety and Finance assurances
  • Districts not meeting either their Safety or
    Finance assurances will default to Accredited
    with Priority Improvement (or stay in Priority
    Improvement or Turnaround if they are already
    there) until they meet requirements.

11
Timeline
  • July 23, 2010 CDE releases draft SPF with
    refreshed 2007-09 data and draft DPF with 2007-09
    data.
  • August 15, 2010 CDE releases SPF and DPF with
    initial school plans and accreditation
    categories.
  • October 15, 2010 District submits accreditation
    category for schools and any additional evidence.
  • January 15, 2011 District submits Priority
    Improvement and Turnaround Plans, and any
    required for federal review.
  • April 15, 2011 District submits Improvement and
    Performance Plans.

12
Timelines for District Accreditation and Plan
Submission
13
Timelines for School Accreditation and Plan
Submission
About PowerShow.com