Transcript MSIP 5 Becky Odneal October 27, 2011 Background on MSIP 5 Rule 2007-2009, first MSIP 5 March 2011, MSIP 5 rule approved by the.

MSIP 5
Becky Odneal
October 27, 2011
Background on MSIP 5 Rule
2007-2009, first MSIP 5
March 2011, MSIP 5 rule approved by the SBE
April 15, 2011 public comment period began
 Substantial concerns were raised by educators
across the state
May 2011, rule withdrawn by DESE
 MSIP 5 Steering Committee
 MSIP 5 Regional Advisory Committees
August 16, 2011, MSIP 5 Rule approved by SBE
October 3-November 2, Public Comment Period
Education Link Consulting
2
RAC - Draft Consensus Points
Continue career/technical education opportunities
Reduce number of summative assessments
Recognize the importance of formative assessments
Use ACT instead of EOC/EOHS assessments
Maintain resource and process standards
Eliminate “report only” measures from APR
Ensure that the system acknowledges the needs of
the exceptional pupil
Establish benchmarks along the pre‐K through 12
continuum
Education Link Consulting
3
MSIP 5 Recommendations
1. Direct the Department to bring to the State Board of
Education a new rule to update process and resource
standards by August 2012. The process should:
• Start with the recommendations previously
developed by the committee convened in 2008-09;
• Consider current research and best practices; and
• Include stakeholders.
2. Direct the Department to work with stakeholders
and technical experts to develop state standards and a
scoring guide for calculating proficiency on the revised
MSIP 5 standards.
Education Link Consulting
4
MSIP 5 Recommendations
3. Approve the revised assessment plan as
recommended, with the understanding that full
implementation will be dependent on state funding
and the work of the SMARTER Balanced Assessment
Consortium.
4. Authorize the publication of a notice of proposed
rulemaking to adopt Rule 5 CSR 50-345.1054, relating
to Missouri School Improvement Program 5 in the
Missouri Register and that the State Board of Education
finds this proposed rule necessary to carry out the
purposes of Sections 161.092, 162.081. 167.131, and
168.081 RSMo.
Education Link Consulting
5
Recommendation 3.
Assessment Plan
Pre-K through Grade 2 Assessments
 Developed in 11-12, piloted in 12-13,
operational in 13-14
EOC Assessments
 Phase-in plan
EOHS Assessments
 SMARTER Balanced Consortium
Social Studies, Fine Arts and PE Assessments
Education Link Consulting
6
Assessment Plan
Education Link Consulting
7
Assessment Plan Concerns
Pre-K through Grade 2, lack of information
EOC and EOHS assessments still require
students to take the same courses as previous
plan in order to be proficient in competencies
Additional assessments still require additional
technological resources for school districts
Required course-taking patterns limit
opportunities for students to participate in
more beneficial programs, such as career ed
Potential for EOHS assessments to become exit
exams and career and college placement tools
Education Link Consulting
8
Recommendation 4. Rule
(1) Pursuant to section 161.092, RSMo, this rule is
to be effective two (2) years from the date of
adoption of the proposed rule by the State Board of
Education (board). The Missouri School
Improvement Program (MSIP) – 5 Performance
Standards and Indicators, Appendix A, included
herein, is comprised of quantitative standards for
school districts. MSIP–5 Process Standards and
Indicators will include evidence of adequate
instruction in physical education and fine arts to
be included in standards used to determine
classification.
Education Link Consulting
9
Recommendation 4. Rule
(3) The board will assign classification
designations of unaccredited, provisionally
accredited, accredited, and accredited with
distinction based on the standards of the MSIP.
Education Link Consulting
10
Recommendation 4. Rule
APPENDIX A
3. College and Career Readiness
2.The district’s average composite score(s) on any
department-approved measure(s) of college and
career readiness, for example, the ACT®, SAT®,
COMPASS®, or ASVAB, meet(s) or exceed(s) the state
standard or demonstrate(s) required improvement.
3. The percent of graduates who participated in any
department-approved measure(s) of college and
career readiness, for example, the ACT®, SAT®,
COMPASS®, or ASVAB, meets or exceeds the state
standard or demonstrates required improvement.
Education Link Consulting
11
Recommendation 4. Rule
3. College and Career Readiness
6. The percent of graduates who complete
career education programs approved by the
department and are placed in occupations
directly related to their training, continue their
education, or are in the military within six (6)
months of graduating meets the state standard
or demonstrates required improvement.
Education Link Consulting
12
Potential Implications…
Emphasis is entirely on “college graduation”
and does not recognize programs for which
students receive training in high school and
enter higher wage-earning careers
Assessments change course-taking patterns
and eliminate the opportunity for students to
take career education courses which are
proven to help prevent at-risk students from
dropping out of school and prepare all
students for higher wage-earning careers
Education Link Consulting
13
Potential Implications…
Competencies cannot be embedded into
career education programs, as suggested by
DESE
Districts may be forced to replace career
education teachers with additional CORE
teachers in order for students to be taught the
competencies needed to score Proficient on
state assessments
Education Link Consulting
14
Potential Implications for Students
Students will lose the opportunity to explore careers
before entering college
Students will lose the opportunity to become trained
in skills that will allow them to earn higher wages in
career after high school and/or during college
Students will lose the opportunity to learn essential
skills that will help them in many facets of life
Many students will drop out of high school because
they will not have the opportunity to participate in
programs that keep them engaged in high school and
teach them hands-on skills that will help them
succeed after graduation
Education Link Consulting
15
Overall Issues
Alignment with federal accountability initiatives
Top 10 by 2020 = NCLB’s 100% Proficiency by 2014
Scoring Guide methodology “state standard” and
growth model (75% Proficiency, 100% Grad Rate)
Potential NCLB Waiver
Education Link Consulting
16
Scoring Guide/NCLB Waiver
October-December, Steering Committee
October 25-26, Public Input/Regional Advisory
Committee Meetings
November, Indicator/Model Selection
Committee
(30 member advisory committee)
November-December, Standard Setting
Methodology (10-member TAC)
January, scoring guide to State Board
January-June, pilot scoring guide
February, NCLB Waiver application due
Education Link Consulting
17
Scoring Guide
Goals
 Identify and work with lowest 5%
 Ensure all schools are “good enough”
 Ensure all schools get better
Design Decisions




Status vs. Growth
Differentiated vs. Standardized Accountability
Simple/Transparent vs. Complex/Precise
Resources - Focused vs. “Spread Across All
Districts”
Education Link Consulting
18
Waiver Concerns
MSIP 5 goes into effect immediately
Conditions of waiver
School-level implementation
Loss of state flexibility
Potential reauthorization
Unknown “sticks”
Education Link Consulting
19
Next Steps
October 3 – November 2, public comment
period
Rule goes in to effect in 2013
Inform other stakeholders
Respond during public comment period
Actively participate in Regional Advisory
Committees
 Scoring Guide
 Resource and Process Standards
NCLB Waiver
Education Link Consulting
20
Questions?
Education Link Consulting
21