Joint Meeting of the Commissioner’s and AYP Task Force

November 1, 2010NH DOE

1Joint Task Force Meeting: November 1, 2010

Performance-Achievement• After much deliberation, feedback from the

two Task Forces and others, and trying to maintain consistency with the AYP system, we propose using Index scores for all “status” indicators set to the following rubric values:

• 4= Index value 90-100• 3= Index value 80-89• 2= Index value 60-79• 1= Index value less than 60

Joint Task Force Meeting: November 1, 2010 2

Index Rubric Scores

• These rubric values will be used for all content areas and all school levels– If we believe that these are the criteria

(established through a deliberative standard setting process) then it does not seem defensible to change the values according the distributions

– However, the weighting system for the full performance-based accountability system can address the differences in performance

Joint Task Force Meeting: November 1, 2010 3

Attendance/Truancy

• At the last meeting, we discussed using the percent of students absent 10% of the school days as a more appropriate indicator than simply average daily membership

• While we had known that research supported this 10% threshold, the day after the last meeting, EdWeek reported on a set of recent studies documenting the importance of this as an indicator even for elementary schools

Joint Task Force Meeting: November 1, 2010 4

Elementary--% of students absent “18 days” or more

Joint Task Force Meeting: November 1, 2010 5

Middle--% of students absent “18 days” or more

Joint Task Force Meeting: November 1, 2010 6

HS--% of students absent “18 days” or more

Joint Task Force Meeting: November 1, 2010 7

Proposed Rubric Scores for Truancy (% of students absent “18 days” or more)

• 4 = 5% or less• 3 = 6-10%• 2 = 11-20%• 1 = 21%+

• Minimum n = 20

Joint Task Force Meeting: November 1, 2010 8

Truancy Results-Elementary

Joint Task Force Meeting: November 1, 2010 9

Truancy Results-Middle School

Joint Task Force Meeting: November 1, 2010 10

Truancy Results-High School

Joint Task Force Meeting: November 1, 2010 11

Graduation & Dropout

• Dropout—includes GED and college enrollment

• Graduation rate—new federal cohort-based graduation rate

• Used a minimum n of 20 to include in the calculations

• Clearly, the most, or at least two of the most, important indicators for high schools

Joint Task Force Meeting: November 1, 2010 12

2009 Graduation & Dropout Rates

Joint Task Force Meeting: November 1, 2010 13

Graduation Rate Distribution by School 2009

Joint Task Force Meeting: November 1, 2010 14

Dropout Rate Distribution by School 2009

Joint Task Force Meeting: November 1, 2010 15

Proposed Cutscores for Graduation & Dropout Rates

Graduation Rate• 1 = Less than 70%• 2 = 70-79%• 3 = 80-89%• 4 = 90-100%

Dropout Rate• 1 = 21% or higher• 2 = 11-20%• 3 = 6-10%• 4 = 0-5%

Joint Task Force Meeting: November 1, 2010 16

Graduation Rate Rubric Scores

Joint Task Force Meeting: November 1, 2010 17

Dropout Rate Rubric Scores

Joint Task Force Meeting: November 1, 2010 18

Participation• As noted previously, essentially all schools/subgroups

meet the 95% threshold• We will still include participation as both a signal and

reward• School are awarded one point for each subgroup that

meets the participation target.• Proposal: – For each subgroup meeting 95% criterion = 1 point– For each subgroup not meeting 95%=0 points

• Revised Proposal:– Only compute for Reading and Math– Used minimum n = 40

Joint Task Force Meeting: November 1, 2010 19

Computing HS Composites1. Compute average (across subgroups) index

rubric for each content area (reading, math, science, writing)

2. Compute average (across subgroups) participation rate for reading and math

3. Multiply grad rate and dropout rate rubric scores by 2.

4. Compute Total Score=(Reading Index + Math Index + Science Index + Writing Index + Reading Participation + Math Participation + Truancy + Grad Rate x 2 + Dropout rate x 2).– Limited analyses to schools with valid scores in all 9

indicators

Joint Task Force Meeting: November 1, 2010 20

Distribution of HS Performance Scores

Joint Task Force Meeting: November 1, 2010 21

Distribution of HS Performance

Joint Task Force Meeting: November 1, 2010 22

Computing Elementary-Middle Composites1. Compute average (across subgroups) index

rubric for science and writing.2. Compute average (across subgroups)

participation rate for reading and math3. Compute average (across subgroups) reading

and math growth rubric scores and multiply by 3.

4. Compute Total Score=(Reading x 3) + (Math x 3) + (Science Index + Writing Index + Reading Participation + Math Participation + Truancy).– Limited analyses to schools with valid scores in all 7

indicatorsJoint Task Force Meeting: November 1, 2010 23

Distribution of Elementary-Middle Performance Scores

Joint Task Force Meeting: November 1, 2010 24

Distribution of Elementary-Middle Performance

Joint Task Force Meeting: November 1, 2010 25

Next Steps• Check everything really carefully!• Figure out how to best include ELL• Figure out how to fairly deal with schools when

subgroups are missing• Look at schools in different parts of the

distribution more closely to see if orderings make sense

• “Set standards” for adequacy• Gather feedback from the field• Other….

Joint Task Force Meeting: November 1, 2010 26