ACCOUNTABILITY: WHAT’S IT REALLYWHAT S IT REALLY ALL ABOUT?

MAY 6, 2010

Permission is required for citation and distribution

U.S. PERFORMANCE ON PISA EXAMINATION

U.S. RANK2000 PISA (27 countries

2003 PISA (29 countries

2006 PISA (30 countriescountries

compared)countries compared)

countries compared)

READING 15th 20th N/A*

MATH 18th 23rd 25th

SCIENCE 14th 19th 21st

*Due to a printing error on the PISA 2006 reading booklets in the U.S., reading performance data for the U.S. were excluded from the PISA database.

2Source: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2007

3

NAEP READING: NATIONAL GRADE 8 RESULTS 1992-2009Average Scale ScoreAverage Scale Score

26 pts.29

pts.p

4

BlackWhite Hispanic

Note: Accommodations were not permitted for this assessment in 1992 and 1994. Source: NCES NAEP Data Explorer

NAEP MATH: NATIONAL GRADE 8 RESULTS 1990-2009Average Scale Score

30

Average Scale Score

30 pts.

33 pts.

5

BlackWhite Hispanic

Note: Accommodations were not permitted for this assessment in 1990 and 1992. Source: NCES NAEP Data Explorer

GRADE 4 NAEP MATH 2009: There are significant differences in achievement among low-income black students across districts

Average score for black students eligible for federally subsidized lunchAverage score for black students eligible for federally subsidized lunch

6

33 pts

Source: NCES NAEP Data Explorer

GRADE 8 NAEP MATH 2009: There are significant differences in achievement among low-income black students across districts

Average score for black students eligible for federally subsidized lunchAverage score for black students eligible for federally subsidized lunch

36 pts

7

36 pts

Source: NCES NAEP Data Explorer

THE HEART OF THE CHALLENGE

The quality of an education system cannot exceed the quality of its teachers The top-performing school systems [internationally] attract

1. More Effective Teachers

teachers. The top performing school systems [internationally] attract more able people into the teaching profession, leading to better outcomes. The top-performing systems we studied recruittheir teachers from the top third of each cohort that graduate from their

h l t C l l f i h l t lschool system. Conversely, low-performing schools systems rarely attract the right people into teaching. The New Commission on the Skills of the American Workforce observes that, “We are now recruiting our teachers from the bottom third of high-school students going to college.”g g g gMcKinsey & Company, How The World’s Best-Performing School Systems Come Out On Top (2007)

2. More Equitably DistributedResearch also shows that teacher quality is unevenly distributed in schools, and the students with the greatest needs tend to have access to the least qualified and least effective teachers

8

access to the least qualified and least effective teachers.The Aspen Commission on No Child Left Behind

THE BACKBONE OF THE SOLUTION1. The key is that unless there is accountability, we will never get the right

system. As long as there are no consequences if kids or adults don’t perform, as long as the discussion is not about education and student outcomes then we’re playing a game as to who has theoutcomes, then we re playing a game as to who has the power….Unless you start with a very heavy emphasis on accountability, you’ll never get a system with all the other pieces falling into place.Al Sh k P F (1993)Al Shanker, Pew Forum (1993)

2. To throw up our hands and say “But we cannot measure performance in social sectors the way we do in business” is simply lack of discipline. All indicators are flawed, whether qualitative or quantitative. Test scores are flawed, mammograms are flawed, crime data are flawed, customer service data are flawed, patient-outcome data are flawed. What matters is not finding the perfect indicator but settling upon aWhat matters is not finding the perfect indicator, but settling upon a consistent and intelligent method of assessing your output results, and then tracking your trajectory with rigor.Jim Collins, Good to Great And The Social Sectors (2005)

ACCOUNTABILITY & ACHIEVEMENT

W

EVALUATE ENABLE

WH

AT EVALUATE ENABLE

Progress Reports Periodic Assessments g pGrades based on student outcomes

Quality Reviews

Diagnose and track progress

Teacher Data ReportsAssess teacher performance

H

yScores based on performance management criteria

School Surveys

p

Achievement Reporting and Innovation System (ARIS)Knowledge and data O

W

yParent, teacher, and student surveys about school environment

gmanagement

Children First IntensiveHands-on data training through

State and Federal Evaluation (NCLB)Measures of schools’ Adequate Yearly Progress and

g gInquiry Teams

Knowledge SharingSupport structures and tools for

10

y gaccountability standing

ppcollaboration and knowledge sharing

EVALUATE: PROGRESS REPORT

11

8th GRADE PROFICIENCY RATINGS ARE VERY PREDICTIVE OF HIGH SCHOOL REGENTS DIPLOMAS

93.2%

PREDICTIVE OF HIGH SCHOOL REGENTS DIPLOMAS

81.1%

54.7%

12

ENABLE: ACHIEVEMENT REPORTING AND INNOVATION SYSTEM (ARIS)INNOVATION SYSTEM (ARIS)

13

ENABLE: ARIS REPORTS

1414

WE HAVE CREATED MORE TOP-NOTCH CHOICES FOR STUDENTS

We created options for New York City students and families,We created options for New York City students and families, including:

> 335 new schools> 82 new charter schools> 82 new charter schools> 22 new transfer schools for students who have fallen

behind > 10 new GED programs> 10 new GED programs> 21 Young Adult Borough Centers for students who are

over-age and under-credited> 53 Learning to Work programs to help students get back on> 53 Learning to Work programs to help students get back on

track and learn useful career skills> High school choice for all students

15

INNOVATION ZONEThe Innovation Zone will employ a centralized, portfolio management approach to oversee and coordinate an innovation pipeline – using rigorous standards to design, test, and assess each innovation’s impact on student achievement

Project Overviewinnovation s impact on student achievement

For the 2010-11 school year, the iZone will focus on three categories of innovation rethinking time andthree categories of innovation—rethinking time and staffing in schools, introducing new technologies to personalize instruction and assessment, and expanding student access to world-class instruction through virtual learning

Design

Our Research & Policy Support Group will design customized evaluations to assess the effectiveness Success Metrics of each innovation pilot to include:

• Increased student achievement outcomes –including greater credit accumulation, on-time graduation, and increased performance on state test scores

Success Metrics

16

state test scores• Increased teacher collaboration through differentiated teacher roles

THE FIRST PHASE OF THE I-ZONE INCLUDES 80+ SCHOOLS SERVING 13,000 STUDENTSSCHOOLS SERVING 13,000 STUDENTS

NYC Innovation Zone:Pilot cutting-edge approaches to personalize instructionPilot cutting edge approaches to personalize instruction

Vi t l L iAdaptive Time and

Virtual Learning

40 schools piloting online

pLearning

Technologies30 schools using customized data

Staffing9 schools testing

creative scheduling andinstruction customized, data-

based instructionscheduling and

staffing

PROJECTED IMPACT

• More learning time leads to greater academic gains

• Greater personalization leads to greater student engagementp g g g

• Optimizing teacher roles will lead to more effective instruction

A LEADING INNOVATION: SCHOOL OF ONE IS TRANSFORMING THE CLASSROOM LEARNING EXPERIENCE FOR MIDDLE SCHOOL MATH STUDENTS

Pilot: Test SO1’s scalability and capacity through a 3 school after-school program that serves nearly 300 students. The pilot moved to an in-school operating model at one middle school in May 2010.

ENABLE TEACHERS TO BETTER PERSONALIZE INSTRUCTION USING INTERACTIVE TECHNOLOGY TOOLSE

• Interactive online curriculum that

Adaptive Learning

Interactive, online curriculum that has the potential to replace static textbooks

Technologies • Real-time assessments enable teachers to customize instruction to student academic needs

Pilot: Compare the effectiveness of three adaptive technology solutionsPilot: Compare the effectiveness of three adaptive technology solutions across 30 elementary schools.

EXTEND THE SCHOOL YEAR AND DAY THROUGH CREATIVE SCHEDULING

• Increases instructional time for t d t f 180 t 200 dstudents from 180 to 200 days

• Increases teacher collaboration time from 45 minutes per week to 10time from 45 minutes per week to 10 hours a week

• Proven impact with strugglingProven impact with struggling students

Pilot: Expand the Generation Schools model to one school and one school network. Conduct time and staffing pilots programs at 7 additional schools

BLEND ONLINE LEARNING WITH FACE-TO-FACE INSTRUCTION

• Address teacher quality gap in q y g pschools – students receive expert instruction outside school’s walls through virtual learning

• Offers meaningful supports to high performing and low performing t d t (Ad d Pl t &students (Advanced Placement &

Credit Recovery)

Pilot: Pilot blended learning models across 12 schools and online Advanced Placement and Credit Recovery pilots at 30 schools.