Performance Management Framework Guidelines and Technical Guide

Transcription

1 Performance Management Framework Guidelines and Technical Guide November 2011

2 About the DC Public Charter School Board The DC Public Charter School Board (PCSB) currently oversees 53 schools on 99 campuses, which serve nearly 30,000 students from every ward of the city. The organization s mission is to provide high quality public school options for District of Columbia students, families, and community through four functions: A comprehensive review application process ensures that the PCSB only approves charter school applications that will prepare and train students for post secondary experiences and individual career paths; Effective oversight holds schools to high standards for results, with extensive reviews and data collection, and makes oversight decisions with the best interests of students in mind; Meaningful support provides clear feedback and increased oversight to low performing schools, and rewards consistently high-performing schools with more autonomy; and Active engagement of stakeholders solicits community input and strives to be responsive to and transparent with all who are impacted by and impact the PCSB and public charter schools. The PCSB s vision is to lead the transformation of public education in DC and to serve as a national model for charter school authorizing and accountability. At the heart of the organization s core values is the belief that every child is entitled to a high quality education that will enable him or her to leave high school well-prepared for college and career. A mayor-appointed governing board of seven with a professional staff of 24 is responsible for the oversight and management of the organization s mission and vision.

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK OVERVIEW... 4 SECTION 1: ACADEMIC EVALUATION - COMMON ACADEMIC INDICATORS, MEASURES, AND METRICS... 5 Overview of academic framework... 5 Common Indicators... 5 Standard schools serving students within grades Elementary school and Middle school framework... 6 High school framework... 6 Summary of academic evaluation frameworks - common academic indicators and measures... 7 Common Metrics... 9 Performance bar metrics... 9 Missing data SECTION 2: ACADEMIC EVALUATION FOR NON-STANDARD SCHOOLS AND PROGRAMS Non-standard schools Early childhood and elementary schools under third grade (PS-2) framework Elementary schools under fourth grade (K-3) Adult education Special education New schools SECTION 3: MONITORING CHARTER SCHOOLS ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE PMF Performance tiers PCSB responses Tier I Tier II Tier III Candidates for Charter Revocation SECTION 4: STRUCTURE OF NON-ACADEMIC EVALUATION FRAMEWORK - COMPLIANCE Overview of framework Compliance SECTION 5: STRUCTURE OF NON-ACADEMIC EVALUATION FRAMEWORK - FINANCE Overview of framework Reporting Assessing Fiscal Management APPENDIX Median Growth Percentile Overview Accountability Plan Guidance Compliance Review TECHNICAL GUIDE Glossary of Measures Metrics and data sources for academic performance measures... 28

4 Performance Management Framework Overview The School Reform Act ( SRA ) grants the D.C. Public Charter School Board authority to hold D.C. public charter schools accountable for fulfilling their duties and obligations under the Act. The PCSB has developed these Guidelines to outline the process by which it will evaluate the performance of the charter schools, including how the PCSB will ensure that each school complies with its charter agreement and applicable law and how the PCSB will track the progress of each school in meeting its student academic achievement expectations. The PCSB s performance management framework is divided into the academic elements of school performance directly related to student outcomes and the non-academic elements of school performance, which include finance and compliance. Each year, pursuant to (a)(3) of the SRA, the PCSB will evaluate the academic performance of each public charter school. The overall assessment will determine whether a school is designated a high-performer, mid-performer, or low-performer. Closer scrutiny will be directed to those charter schools that are failing to meet the goals and student academic achievement expectations set forth in their charters. Schools that are persistently or significantly low performers may be candidates for charter revocation pursuant to the PCSB s authority under (a) of the SRA. The framework also includes an evaluation of a school s performance in non-academic areas, such as financial health and compliance. Each year, pursuant to (a)(3) of the SRA, each school will receive an evaluation of its performance in these areas. As a result of these reviews, schools that show signs of fiscal mismanagement and/or have violated applicable law or the terms of their charter agreement may receive closer scrutiny, including the possibility of recommendations to improve their performance. Schools that continually violate material terms of their charter agreement or applicable law, including violations relating to the education of children with disabilities, may be candidates for charter revocation pursuant to the PCSB s authority under (a) of the SRA. Schools that engage in a pattern of non-adherence to generally accepted accounting principles, engage in a pattern of fiscal mismanagement, or are no longer economically viable will be candidates for charter revocation pursuant to the PCSB s authority under (b) of the SRA. 4

5 Section 1 Academic evaluation - common academic indicators, measures, and metrics Overview of academic framework To assess a charter school s academic performance, the PCSB has developed an academic evaluation framework comprised of indicators, measures, and metrics. This structure has been adapted from a report by the National Consensus Panel on Charter School Academic Quality. 1 Indicators are defined as general dimensions of academic quality or achievement. Measures are defined as general instruments or means to assess performance in each area defined by an indicator. Metrics are defined as the calculation method or formula for a given measure. As an example, a common indicator of student performance is academic achievement level, a common measure of achievement is performance on statewide assessments like the DC-CAS, and a related performance metric is the percentage of students in a school who score at least Proficient on the assessment. This section of the Guidelines focuses on indicators, measures, and metrics common across all schools within each grade-span. Common Indicators For the school year the PCSB used four indicators to measure academic performance: (1) student progress, (2) student achievement, (3) gateway measures, and (4) leading indicators. Figure 1. Academic indicators Student Progress Student Achievement Gateway Measures Leading Indicators The four core indicators of academic achievement apply to every school; however, different weights will be assigned to the indicators depending on the grade span of the school. 1 See A Framework for Academic Quality, National Consensus Panel on Charter School Academic Quality, June 2008, available at 5

6 Standard schools serving students within grades 3-12 Elementary and middle school (3-8) framework Figure 2. Elementary and middle schools Student Progress Student Achievement Gateway Measures Leading Indicators 40% 25% 15% 20% The elementary school framework applies to schools with all or part of the 3-5 grade-span and that include both 3rd and 4th grades. Schools that have only fifth grade in the elementary school span and that span into the middle school range will be considered part of the middle school framework. The middle school framework applies to schools with all or part of the 6-8 grade-span and that include both 6th and 7th grades. Schools where 8th grade is the only middle school year and with all or part of the 9-12 grade-span are included in the high school scoring framework. The elementary and middle school frameworks are designed to place an additional emphasis on student progress and student achievement. Gateway measures are designed to capture key subject area mastery, literacy at the elementary school level, and mathematics at the middle school level. High school (9-12) framework Figure 3. High schools Student Progress Student Achievement Gateway/Post Secondary Measures Leading Indicators 15% 30% 30% 25% This framework applies to all schools with any grades in the 9th through 12th grade-span. The high school framework places less emphasis on student progress. This is largely due to the fact that this indicator is comprised of a measure based on the DC-CAS, and at the high school level, only 10th grade students are tested. The balance is more heavily weighted on achievement than progress, which reflects the fact that, at the high school level, students have neared the end of their public school tenure and the rate of progress is less important than the overall level that has been reached. Similarly, the high school framework places more emphasis on gateway and post-secondary measures that are indicators of overall preparation for college and work-force readiness. For a list of all common measures and metrics please see the Glossary of Measures in the Technical Guide. 6

7 Summary of academic evaluation frameworks - common academic indicators and measures Table 1 Elementary and Middle School Framework Student Progress Median Growth Percentile 1 Reading 20% Median Growth Percentile 1 Math 20% Student Achievement 2 DC-CAS Proficient + Advanced Reading 10% 3rd-5th grades 5% 3 6th-8th grades 5% 3 DC-CAS Proficient + Advanced Math 10% 3rd-5th grades 5% 3 6th-8th grades 5% 3 DC-CAS Advanced Reading 2.5% 3rd-5th grades 1.25% 3 6th-8th grades 1.25% 3 DC-CAS Advanced Math 2.5% 3rd-5th grades 1.25% 3 6th-8th grades 1.25% 3 Gateway 4 DC-CAS 3rd grade reading proficiency 7.5% DC-CAS 8th grade math proficiency 7.5% Leading Indicators Attendance 10% Re-enrollment 10% 40% 25% 15% 20% 1 For more information about Median Growth Percentile please see Appendix A. 2 Elementary and middle grades will be shown separately if at least two grades within the 3 rd -5 th grade range and the 6 th -8 th grade range are represented. If a school does not have two grades within both ranges, the available grades will be combined, i.e., a school with 3-7 th grade would include both 3-5 th and 6-7 th separately; a school with 3-6 th would combine 3-6 th into one score. 3 If elementary and middle grades are shown separately the points available will also be separated so that schools can earn up to 5% of the total points for reaching proficiency for each subject and grade range and up to 1.25% of the total points for advanced. If a school has ES/MS combined, the maximum points for proficiency in each subject will be 10% of the total points for proficiency and 2.5% of the total points for advanced. 4 If a school has both a 3 rd and 8 th grade that school will have two gateways, each worth 7.5% of the total points. If a school has only 3 rd or 8 th that school will have one gateway worth 15% of the total points. 7

8 Table 2 High School Framework Student Progress Median Growth Percentile Reading 7.5% Median Growth Percentile Math 7.5% Student Achievement DC-CAS Proficient + Advanced Reading 10% DC-CAS Proficient + Advanced Math 10% DC-CAS Advanced Reading 2.5% DC-CAS Advanced Math 2.5% Advanced Placement or International Baccalaureate 5% Gateway Graduation Rate 7.5% PSAT (11th grade performance) 7.5% SAT/ACT (12th grade performance) 7.5% College Acceptance rate 7.5% Leading Indicators Attendance 10% Re-enrollment 10% 9th grade credits on track 5% 15% 30% 30% 25% If a charter school does not contain the grade for which a common measure applies, the points associated with that measure will be removed and the total possible points available will be adjusted. For example, a school that terminates in the 11th grade will not have graduation, SAT, AP, or College acceptance data. In this case, the school will be evaluated against the remaining 72.5 points. 8

9 Common Metrics To assess charter schools progress in meeting their goals and academic achievement expectations, the PCSB will use various metrics to assign points to each common measure. The overall percentage of possible points each school receives will determine whether a school is designated as a high-performer, mid-performer, or low-performer. Closer scrutiny will be directed to those charter schools that are failing to meet or in danger of failing to meet the goals and student academic achievement expectations set forth in their charters. Schools that are persistently low performers may be candidates for charter revocation pursuant to the PCSB s authority under (a) of the SRA. Performance bar metrics Most common measures are based on the percentage of students that meet or exceed a certain performance bar. For example, with DC-CAS proficiency, schools are scored based on the percentage of students that meet or exceed the performance bar of Proficient on the DC-CAS. Each student either meets or does not meet the common measure; the metric is based on the percentage of all students that meet the standard. The floor determines the minimum value for which any points will be awarded. Charter schools will receive no points for values that are at or below the floor. For example, the floor for re-enrollment is 55%. A school where 50% of its students re-enroll would not receive any points for the measure even though half of its eligible students re-enrolled in the school. The target determines the value at which the maximum points for a common measure will be awarded. For example, the target for re-enrollment is 90%. A school where 92% of its students re-enroll would receive the full amount of points available for the measure even though all eligible students had not returned to the school. The tables below summarize the performance bar metrics for the common measures. Table 3 Elementary and Middle School Framework Indicator Progress Achievement Gateway PMF Metric Elementary (3-5) Floor Middle (6-8) Floor Target (ES and MS) MGP-Reading MGP-Math DC CAS Reading % proficient + advanced DC CAS Math % proficient +advanced Reading % advanced Math % advanced DC CAS 3rd Reading % proficient DC CAS 8th Math % proficient Leading Indicators Attendance Re-Enrollment

10 Table 4 High School Framework Indicator PMF Metric High School Floor High School Target Progress MGP-Reading MGP-Math DC CAS Reading % proficient + advanced DC CAS Math % proficient + advanced Achievement DC CAS Reading % advanced 0 25 DC CAS Math % advanced 0 25 Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate 0 15 Gateway Graduation Rate PSAT Performance (11 th grade) SAT/ACT Performance (12th grade) College Acceptance Rate Leading Indicators Attendance Re-Enrollment th grade on track to graduate Missing data Most data required to calculate the score for each charter school s common measures will be collected from third party data sources. The PCSB will rely on charter schools to provide data that are not available through third parties. When data for a common measure are not available due to issues beyond a school s control, such as small sample sizes for growth measures that require statistical calculations, then the points associated with that measure will be removed and the total possible points available will be adjusted. When data for a common measure is missing because a charter school has not provided it to the PCSB in a timely manner, zero points will be awarded for the relevant measure. 10

11 Section 2 Academic Evaluation for Non-Standard Schools and Programs Non-standard schools Non-standard schools include ones that do not fall into the 3-12 grade range or are elementary schools without at least two years of DC-CAS testing data. Non-standard schools will not receive a PMF Annual Performance Review for the or school years and will instead be evaluated with accountability plans. Schools that span the preschool through elementary or middle grades will receive both an accountability plan for any grades served below 3, as well as a PMF for the 3 rd -8 th grades. The accountability plan system is designed to measure and report the academic performance for students at either end of the educational spectrum, while allowing schools the autonomy to identify appropriate measures based on their unique populations. Each school s accountability plan was developed in concert with PCSB staff and the school s leadership. Schools were provided guidance on the minimum and maximum number of targets to include in the accountability plan as well as criteria in the identification of assessments and measures to determine performance (see Accountability Plan Guidance charts in Appendix B). With the exception of schools undergoing charter review, schools and programs using accountability plans were not rated or tiered for the school year. Accountability plan results are determined and reported based on whether the school met or missed its established targets. The accountability plan system is used for the following types of schools and programs. Early childhood and elementary schools under third grade (PS-2) framework Preschools and early years of elementary schools are in the non-standard framework because DC does not mandate a standardized assessment for students in these grades. Schools with both early childhood and elementary school grades but that do not exceed 2nd grade will be considered in the early childhood framework and be evaluated using an accountability plan for the and school years. Elementary schools under fourth grade (PS-3) Schools that end in the third grade are separated from other elementary schools because they do not have at least two years of DC-CAS data to measure student growth in mathematics and reading sufficiently. Adult education Schools offering adult education and G.E.D. coursework are included in the non-standard framework because DC does not mandate a standardized assessment for students in these programs. Special Education For the school year, the PCSB recognizes one charter school as a stand-alone special education entity as 100% o of the school s population is identified with significant physical and cognitive disabilities. All eligible students taking the state-wide assessment at this school are administered the DC 11

12 CAS Alternative Assessment Portfolio to measure their academic and developmental progress and performance. New schools In their first year of operation, charter schools will be held to a modified academic review. Data will be collected on all measures, where available. For schools administering the DC-CAS, student achievement will be measured by the common measures of Proficient and Advanced in reading and mathematics. Beginning in their second year, new charter schools will be held to the same performance framework as existing schools. The growth measure will be based upon two years of data only, and the graduation rate will be modified according to OSSE guidelines. Accountability Plan Guidelines For more information about Accountability Plans please see the PCSB s Accountability Plan Guidelines. 12

13 Section 3 Monitoring Charter Schools Academic Performance Pursuant to the SRA (a), the PCSB has the discretion to revoke the charter of a school that is failing to meet its goals and student academic expectations. Based on the data collected and the metrics applied to a school s academic performance measures as outlined in the previous sections, the PCSB will make an overall assessment of a school s academic performance on an annual basis. The PCSB assesses academic performance using PMF results for standard schools and accountability plan results for non-standard schools. Using the PMF, the PCSB will designate a school as a highperformer, mid-performer, or low-performer. Under the accountability plan system, a non-standard school was not tiered or rated for the school year. Closer scrutiny will be directed to those charter schools that fail to meet student academic achievement expectations set forth in their charters. Standard and non-standard schools that are low performers may be candidates for charter revocation pursuant to the PCSB s authority under the SRA. PMF Performance tiers Using a 100-point scale and based on the scores for the academic scoring screen, standard schools will be identified as Tier I (high-performers), Tier II (mid-performers), or Tier III (low-performers). Tier I schools earn at least 65% of the possible points. Tier II schools earn between 35% and 64% of the possible points. Tier III schools earn less than 35% of the possible points. A school must meet the threshold for points for each tier; points are not rounded up to the next whole number. The threshold points for identifying each tier will be set every few years and identified through an assessment of past overall school performance across all public charter schools. PCSB responses Tier I High performing schools will be publically recognized as such by the PCSB and will be exempt from Program Development Reviews (PDRs) unless conducted as part of the charter review or renewal cycle. Tier II Mid-performing schools will be exempt from PDRs unless conducted as part of the charter review or renewal cycle. Tier III The PCSB will commence a full PDR for low-performing schools during the school year following the academic performance evaluation. The PCSB will suggest that low-performing schools develop a plan to target areas in need of improvement. Charter schools that are low performers may be candidates for charter revocation pursuant to the PCSB s authority under the SRA. Program Development Reviews are conducted at the campus level; multi-campus charter schools will receive a PDR for a Tier III campus, but would not undergo a PDR for a Tier I campus. 13

14 Candidates for Charter Revocation Charter school may become candidates for revocation due to academic or non-academic issues. Under the PMF, candidacy for revocation due to academics will be based on severity, trajectory, or duration of low performance at one or more schools within an LEA. Based on PMF results, standard schools scoring below 20 percentage points in the most recent year, showing 5 percentage point decrease within Tier III from one year to the next, or performing in Tier III for three consecutive years will become candidates for revocation. Under the accountability plan system, non-standard schools that fail to attain the majority of the academic performance goals listed in its accountability plan or come within 90% of all missed academic performance goals on its accountability plan, perform within a minimum of 90% of its accountability plan attendance targets, or maintain sufficient enrollment levels to sustain the economic viability of the school will become candidates for revocation. Any public charter school may be a candidate for revocation of its charter if it commits a violation of applicable law or a material violation of the conditions, terms, standards, or procedures set forth in the charter, including violations relating to the education of children with disabilities. The PCSB retains the right to revoke a school s charter at any time pursuant to its authority under the Act and the terms outlined in of the Act. 1 Poor academic performers are standard schools that 1) score 20% or below on applicable frameworks in the most recent year; 2) decrease in academic score within Tier III by 5 or more percentage points between two consecutive years, or 3) remain in Tier III for three consecutive years. 14

15 Section 4 Structure of non-academic evaluation framework - compliance Overview of framework Schools that continually violate material terms of their charter agreement or applicable law, including the SRA, may be candidates for charter revocation pursuant to the PCSB s authority under (a) of the SRA. The PCSB may use its oversight authority under the SRA (a)(2) to request documents and information from charter schools when it determines it is necessary to carry out its duties under the SRA. Compliance SRA outlines the duties and other requirements of public charter schools. As part of its oversight responsibilities, the PCSB will determine on an annual basis, in coordination with the charter schools, whether sufficient documentation is on file with the PCSB to ensure the charter schools are satisfying these duties and requirements. Further, the PCSB may require schools to provide documents supporting charter schools compliance with applicable law, including the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. These documents include, but are not limited to: Background check reports conducted on employees to ensure the charter school is maintaining the safety of all students attending the school. A report that documents that the charter school s facilities comply with the applicable health and safety laws and regulations of the federal government and the District of Columbia, including the D.C. Fire Prevention Code. The school s informal complaint resolution process and student handbook. Compliance with No Child Left Behind notifications and Highly Qualified Teacher requirements. To ensure charter schools are governed by a Board of Trustees in a manner consistent with the charter granted to them and in accordance with the requirements of the School Reform Act, the PCSB requests charter schools submit board meeting minutes on a quarterly basis and written notification of any board or key personnel changes as these changes occur. PCSB staff will verify that these documents are on file from the previous school year and request a copy of the current Board of Trustees roster. Pursuant to the School Reform Act (a), the PCSB has the duty to ensure public charter schools comply with the annual reporting requirement of SRA (c)(11). The PCSB may use the contents of the annual report to assess a charter school s academic achievement and the extent to which the school is meeting its mission and goals as stated in its charter agreement. Certain events may trigger the PCSB to request additional information from a charter school pursuant to its non-academic evaluation of the school. These events include turnover of key personnel identified in the charter agreement and changes in school enrollment and daily attendance rates as reported in the charter school s annual report. See Appendix C for more a list of documents required for the compliance review. 15

16 Section 5 Structure of non-academic evaluation framework - finance Overview of framework The PCSB must revoke the charter of a school when it determines that the charter school has engaged in a pattern of non-adherence to generally accepted accounting principles or a pattern of fiscal mismanagement or is no longer economically viable. See SRA (b). Accordingly, the PCSB conducts an annual review under the PMF of a charter school s financial performance. Pursuant to this mandate, the PCSB also routinely collects financial statements from schools including interim and audited financial statements and annual budgets. Reporting Charter schools submit financial reports to the PCSB through the Authorizers Oversight Information System (AOIS). The PCSB has established a schedule for the submission of financial reports, and schools initially will be evaluated based on the submission of requested documents by the designated due date. If a charter school does not submit requested financial documents on time and no extension has been granted by the PCSB, the charter school will be subject to a more extensive inquiry by the PCSB. When a public charter school has failed to submit its financial reports in a timely matter, the PCSB may initiate a site-based diagnostic review conducted by a certified public accountant (CPA). The purpose of the review will be to determine the general adequacy of a school s financial management systems and record keeping mechanisms. The emphasis of the review will be on: 1. Verifying budget and cash flow projections and processes are in place. 2. Checking for evidence that the school regularly monitors actual revenues and expenditures against its budget and cash flow projections. 3. Verifying that the school is current in its payment of employee retirement, health insurance costs, and employee withholding taxes. 4. Verifying that there is a long term financial planning process that appropriately considers the impact of expanding facilities and increasing enrollment on cash flow. 5. Verifying that the school s books and records are up to date. 6. Verifying that checking accounts are reconciled in a timely fashion. 7. Verifying that there are appropriate internal controls, particularly with regard to segregation of duties among employees. 8. Verifying that financial reports are provided to the school s Board of Trustees at least quarterly. 9. Verifying that major financial commitments and decisions are approved by the school s Board. 10. Verifying that operating account balances are sufficient to carry the school throughout the year. 11. Verifying that there is a demonstrated technology software package in place to keep accurate financial records and generate reports. 12. Verifying that the accounting system is set up to track revenues and expenditures by funding streams, where required. 13. Verifying that the school maintains proper documentation of grants and donations. Assessing Fiscal Management To track a school s fiscal management, the PCSB uses a General Performance Assessment (GPA). Through the GPA, schools receive a score between 0 (low) and 4 (high) based on eight financial ratios calculated using school-provided financial data. After the ratios have been tabulated, the PCSB will 16

17 apply a weight to each score, sum the products, and calculate the GPA. The school rubric for the eight ratios, and an explanation of each ratio, is contained in the PCSB s Fiscal Policy Handbook. The PCSB Business Oversight Manager will follow-up with school leadership to inquire about a school s unsatisfactory financial performance. Schools may be allowed additional time to comply and provide information to enhance the school s financial picture. If charter schools do not provide adequate supplemental financial data to show that the school is fiscally managed, the PCSB may initiate a sitebased diagnostic review conducted by a PCSB approved auditor or the DC Office of Integrity and Oversight. The purpose of the review will be to determine the general adequacy of a school s financial management systems, record keeping mechanisms, and to ascertain the school s short and long-term sustainability. The emphasis of the review will be the same as the initial diagnostic review performed by a CPA as described above. Schools that engage in a pattern of non-adherence to generally accepted accounting principles, engage in a pattern of fiscal mismanagement, or are no longer economically viable will be candidates for charter revocation pursuant to the PCSB s authority under (b) of the SRA. 17

18 Appendix 18

19 Appendix A: Median Growth Percentile Overview Student Growth Percentiles Individual Student Growth Traditional presentations of students DC CAS scores reflect absolute achievement. These snapshots are useful for describing the performance level of students within a school for any given year but do little to explain the progress students are making. In order to paint a more comprehensive picture of student and school performance, the PCSB, in conjunction with The Office of the State Superintendent, implemented a measure of student progress that compares changes in a student s DC CAS scores to changes made by other students with similar score histories. A student growth percentile measures student progress by comparing one student s progress from year to year to the progress of other students with similar DC CAS score histories. In this way, students are only compared based on their previous DC CAS score, not on demographic metrics (like race, gender, or socioeconomic status). This metric uses scores from all District students (including those at DCPS schools) to determine an academic peer group and calculate individual student growth percentiles. Percentiles are commonly understood values that express the percentage of cases that fall below a certain score. For example: A student with a growth percentile of 77 in 6 th grade mathematics grew as much or more than 77 percent of her academic peers (students with similar score histories) from the 5 th grade DC CAS Mathematics to the 6 th grade DC CAS Mathematics. Only 23 percent of her academic peers grew more in mathematics than she did. or A student with a growth percentile of 34 in 8 th grade reading grew as well or better than 34 percent of her academic peers (students with similar score histories) from the 7 th grade DC CAS reading to the 8 th grade DC CAS reading. This student grew less in reading than 66 percent of her academic peers. Since this growth measure is assessing change in performance, it is possible for students to have performed below the proficiency mark but to have shown a considerable amount of growth. This sort of occurrence could indicate that elements within a school s program are working to help this student advance. Conversely, it is possible for students to be performing well above the proficiency mark but to have shown little growth. In this way, this growth measure serves to put DC CAS scores into greater context. Student Growth Percentiles in the Aggregate Median Growth Percentile To represent the growth of a school, individual student growth percentiles can be aggregated. After significant research and consultation, the PCSB chose the Median Growth Percentile model as the most appropriate measure for reporting the growth of a school. This model finds the median (the middle number for scores arranged in order from least to greatest) of each school s individual student growth percentiles. This is known as the median growth percentile for a school. The DC PCSB will report student growth for DC CAS reading and mathematics for grades 4 through 8, and grade 10. Because the model requires data from at least two grade levels, students in grade 3 (the first testing grade) will not be included in the calculation. 19

20 Appendix B: Accountability Plan Guidance Adult Education/GED Programs Schools using the Adult Education/GED Framework must choose at least 5 targets (ideally no more than 9) from the Academic Indicators. Should a school choose to include more than 9 targets, the total number of targets must be odd. GRADE STUDENT PROGRESS Min/Max Targets Criteria No minimum/ No maximum Can be curriculum based or standardized; PCSB preference is measures be standardized Measures are chosen from what schools already have in place from the school year Targets must assess a cross section of students in programs STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT Min/Max Targets Criteria No minimum/ No maximum Can be curriculum based or standardized; PCSB preference is measures be standardized measures Measures are chosen from what schools already have in place from the school year Targets must assess a cross section of students in programs GATEWAY Min/Max Targets No minimum/ No maximum Optional Criteria LEADING INDICATORS Min/Max Targets No minimum/ No maximum Re-enrollment: Optional Attendance: Optional Criteria 20