Updates on ESSA Rulemaking and Implications of Repeal

COPS Webinar on Regional ESSA Meeting Questions March 3, 2017

Greetings and Introductions Purpose of the Meeting Give update on status of ESSA. Give update of the development of New York State s ESSA Plan. Review with Title I COPS the questions being discussed at the Winter Regional Meetings. Presentation of Questions ESSA State Plan Timeline Questions

During this Presentation Questions will be taken at the end of each segment. To ask a question: Please send it to ESSA@NYSED.GOV, or Raise your hand to be unmuted. 3

ESSA Updates The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) remains in effect. Rulemaking pertaining to the Assessment provisions of ESSA are now final and in effect. Draft rulemaking regarding the supplement not supplant provisions of ESSA were withdrawn in January by the Obama administration The final rule pertaining to accountability and data reporting provisions in Title I and consolidated state plan requirements of ESSA was to became effective on January 28, 2017. However, President Trump signed an Executive Order on January 22, 2017 pausing implementation of any federal regulations that have been in place less than 60 days. Previously planned USDE technical assistance webinars on ESSA state plans have been canceled. On February 7, 2017, the House of Representatives voted to repeal the rule making pertaining accountability, data reporting, and state plans. If Congress repeals the regulations, they are barred from issuing similar regulations to replace those repealed. The US Senate is expected to take action on the repeal of rule making as early as the week of March 6, 2017 4

Implications of Repeal of Rulemaking The Law: (i) beginning with school year 2017 2018, and at least once every three school years thereafter, one statewide category of schools for comprehensive support and improvement, which shall include (I) (II) all public high schools in the State failing to graduate one third or more of their students; The Rulemaking: Identify: (2) Low high school graduation rate. Any public high school in the State with a four-year adjusted cohort graduation rate, as calculated under 200.34(a), at or below 67 percent, or below a higher percentage selected by the State. 5

Implications of Repeal of Rulemaking The Law: (ii) For the purpose of measuring, calculating, and reporting include in the denominator the greater of (I) 95 percent of all such students, or 95 percent of all such students in the subgroup, as the case may be; or (II) the number of students participating in the assessments. The Rulemaking: (1) Annually calculate so that the denominator of such measure, for all students and for all students in each subgroup, includes the greater of-- (i) 95 percent of all such students in the grades assessed who are enrolled in the school; or (ii) The number of all such students enrolled in the school who participated in the assessments 6

Stakeholder Outreach on ESSA Continuing engagement with the Title I Committee of Practitioners Continuing engagement with ESSA Think Tank Issuance of Survey on Measures of School Quality and Student Success Winter Regional Meetings: February 27 March 17 (excluding NYC) Focus Groups of Parents and Staff from Priority Schools: April 7

Stakeholder Outreach on ESSA Survey on Possible Indicators of School Quality and/or Student Success In order to make survey accessible to all stakeholders, survey was translated into Spanish, Arabic, and Chinese. Survey will be released this week. The public will have until approximately March 10th to respond. Staff will update the Board of Regents on results at March meeting. Winter Regional Meetings Open to all Hosted by District Superintendents and Superintendents of Large Five School Districts One or more meetings: at least one in the evening or on weekends Focus Group Meetings with Priority School Leaders, Parents, Teachers, and Students Priority Schools are those that are most effected by changes to the state s school improvement strategies. Conducting meetings with Priority School stakeholders will ensure that their perspective is heard and responded to in development of the ESSA state plan. 8

To access the Winter Regional Meeting Participant Survey, please visit: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/ESSA_Winter_Re gional_Meeting_Participant_Survey

ESSA State Plan Development Questions

Challenging Academic Standards & Assessments 1. Should NY consider applying for the Innovative Assessment Demonstration Authority (assuming the program moves forward)? Yes or No? If yes, why should NY apply? Please rank order your reasons: ___ To pilot classroom-based performance assessments (e.g., performance tasks, or portfolios)? ___ To pilot project-based assessments? ___ To use interim assessments to incorporate multiple measures of student achievement into annual, summative determinations (classifications) of performance? ___ To take advantage of technological advances in educational assessment, such as computer adaptive assessments? 11

Supporting Excellent Educators 3. Pre-Service/Preparation a. What do you see as the most critical areas of need regarding the preparation of new educators (both teachers and school leaders)? i. Identifying and recruiting promising candidates into educator preparation programs. Improving communication between districts/BOCES and IHEs/preparatory programs, so that candidates are taking courses and pursuing certification in shortage areas. iii. Increasing the minimum field experience requirement of 100 hours prior to the student teaching placement. iv. Requiring the student teaching placement to include a full-time workload for an extended period (e.g., one semester). v. Requiring IHEs/preparatory programs to align program completion to a candidate s demonstration of positive impact on student outcomes. vi. Expanding programs that provide greater opportunities for candidates to apply the knowledge and skills they acquire in authentic settings. vii. Other (please specify). ii. 12

Supporting Excellent Educators 4. Supports for Early Career Educators a.What do you see as the most critical areas of need regarding mentoring, induction, and other supports for early career educators (both teachers and school leaders)? i. Revising the current requirement that educators receive a mentoring experience in their first year to explicitly require that the mentoring experience span an educator s first 180 school days of employment. Encouraging districts/BOCES to develop mentoring programs that provide educators with differentiated supports aligned to areas of need. Encouraging districts/BOCES to adopt induction models that provide differentiated supports to educators during the first three years of their careers. Other (please specify). ii. iii. iv. 13

Supporting Excellent Educators 5. Professional Support for Educators a. What do you see as the most critical areas of need regarding ongoing professional support for educators (both teachers and school leaders), including opportunities for advancement (e.g., career ladders)? i. Developing programs focused on promoting effective educational leadership (aligned to the State s leadership standards) and that address emerging needs. Providing better professional learning and support for current and aspiring school building leaders. Encouraging districts/BOCES to adopt systems of professional development and supports that are tailored to specific needs of educators, particularly for those educators who are experiencing a change in their role or assignment. Assisting districts/BOCES to develop or refine career ladders that enable educators with a demonstrated record of effectiveness to take on additional roles and responsibilities and expand their reach. Other (please specify). ii. iii. iv. v. 14

Accountability Measurements & Methodologies 6. The Department recently issued a Survey on Possible Indicators for School Quality and Student Success. The following indicators are those that survey respondents, up to the this point, are supporting for inclusion in the state s school accountability system: a. Chronic Absenteeism b. High School Credit Accumulation c. High School Success Index d. Student Access to Highly Qualified Teachers e. Student Completion of Required Credits By Year f. Student Successful Completion of Required Courses for Graduation g. Student Successful Participation in Advanced Coursework (i.e., AP, IB, dual college credit, and CTE courses) h. Teacher Attendance i. Teacher Certification/Effectiveness Please choose four of the indicators that you most support. Then rank order your 4 choices based on your level of support, from 1 (most strongly support) to 4 (support) for inclusion in the state s accountability system. 15

Accountability Measurements & Methodologies Note: The numbers in the following example (on slides 18 21) are for illustrative purposes only. The actual long-term goals, measures of interim progress, and number of years to obtain the long-term goals are still to be determined. 7. ESSA requires that New York establish long-terms goals for, at the minimum, indicators in the areas of language arts, mathematics, acquisition of English proficiency, and graduation rate for all students and for all accountability subgroups (i.e., English language learners, low-income students, racial/ethnic groups, and students with disabilities). In establishing these long-term goals, should New York: 16

Accountability Measurements & Methodologies Option 1: Set a single common statewide long-term goal on an indicator that applies to all schools in the state and all subgroups within the school, regardless of the baseline performance of the school for a subgroup? Subgroup School A Baseline Baseline School B State Baseline Long Term Goal 95 60 80 90 All Students 90 55 70 90 Subgroup 1 80 50 85 90 Subgroup 2 60 40 50 90 Subgroup 3 In this example, there is a statewide, common, long-term goal of 90 for all subgroups in all schools on this indicator, even though in the two example schools baseline performance ranges from a low of 40 for subgroup 3 in School B to a high of 95 for All Students in School A. 17

Accountability Measurements & Methodologies Option 2: Set a single, common, statewide, long-term goal on an indicator that is different for each subgroup based on the subgroup s baseline performance, regardless of the baseline performance of the school for that subgroup? Subgroup School A Baseline School B Baseline State Baseline Long Term Goal 95 90 80 60 60 55 50 40 80 70 85 50 90 85 93 75 All Students Subgroup 1 Subgroup 2 Subgroup 3 In this example, there is a statewide, common, long-term goal for each subgroup on this indicator. Thus, while the long-term goal is 93 for Subgroup 2, it is 75 for Subgroup 3. These long-term goals are applied to all schools subgroups in the state, so even though School A has a baseline performance for Subgroup 2 of 80 and School B has a baseline performance of 50 for Subgroup 2, they both have a common long-term goal of 93. 18

Accountability Measurements & Methodologies Option 3: Set individualized long-term goals on an indicator for each subgroup within a school based on the subgroup s baseline performance in a way that ensures that the long-term goals for the school will result in reducing any gaps in the performance among subgroups in the school? Subgroup School A Baseline School B Baseline State Baseline Long Term Goal School A Long Term Goal School B 95 90 80 60 60 55 50 40 80 70 85 50 98 95 90 80 80 78 75 70 All Students Subgroup 1 Subgroup 2 Subgroup 3 In this example, each subgroup within each school has an individualized, long-term goal based upon the baseline performance of the subgroup at the school. Thus, while the long-term goal for Subgroup 1 is 95 in School A, Subgroup 1 has a long- term goal of 78 in School B. 19

Accountability Measurements & Methodologies Option 4: Combine either Option 1 and Option 2 with Option 3 such that there is a statewide, long-term goal for each school, as well as an individual, long-term goal for each subgroup in the school. 20

Accountability Measurements & Methodologies ESSA also requires that interim measures of progress be set for each indicator. If you choose Option 1, which method of setting interim goals do you prefer: A. Set common, statewide, interim measures of progress each year, regardless of a school s baseline performance. School School Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5: Long- Term Goal 95 82 84 86 88 90 A (All Students) 60 82 84 86 88 90 B (All Students) 90 74 78 82 86 90 A (Subgroup 1) 55 74 78 82 86 90 B (Subgroup 1) 21

Accountability Measurements & Methodologies B. Use the school s baseline performance for a subgroup to set the interim measures or progress. School School Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 95 90 90 90 90 90 A (All Students) 60 66 72 78 84 90 B (All Students) 90 90 90 90 90 90 A (Subgroup 1) 55 62 69 76 82 90 B (Subgroup 1) 22

Accountability Measurements & Methodologies If you choose Option 2, which method of setting interim measures of progress do you prefer: A. Set common, statewide, interim measures of progress for a subgroup each year, regardless of a school s baseline performance. School School Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 95 82 84 86 88 90 A (All Students) 60 82 84 86 88 90 B (All Students) 90 73 76 79 82 85 A (Subgroup 1) 55 73 76 79 82 85 B (Subgroup 1) 23

Accountability Measurements & Methodologies B. Use the school s baseline performance for a subgroup to set the interim measures or progress. School School Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 95 90 90 90 90 90 A (All Students) 60 66 72 78 84 90 B (All Students) 90 90 90 90 90 85 A (Subgroup 1) 55 61 67 73 79 85 B (Subgroup 1) 24

Accountability Measurements & Methodologies If you choose, Option 3, the measures of interim progress would be based on the baseline performance of a subgroup within a school. School School Baseline A (All Students) 95 96 96 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 97 97 98 60 64 68 72 76 80 B (All Students) 90 91 92 93 94 95 A (Subgroup 1) 55 60 64 69 74 78 B (Subgroup 1) If you choose Option 4, a school will be considered to have made progress, if it achieves either the statewide measure of interim progress for a subgroup or the individualized school measure of interim progress for the subgroup. 25

Accountability Measurements & Methodologies Important terms to understand in this area: Achievement means the percentage of students who score partially proficient or proficient on state tests, as measured by a Performance Index. When a school reduces the percentage of students scoring at Level 1 and/or increases the percentage of students who score proficient or above, the school will improve on this metric. Growth means the change in a student s performance, as measured at two points in time. Currently New York compares a student s growth to that of similar students based on the students prior test history and sometimes other factors. This is expressed as a student growth percentile (SGP), so that, for example, a student with an SGP of 60% on the grade 4 math assessment performed better than 60% of similar students statewide on this assessment. Progress means the change in the achievement level of students in a school over time. For example, if a school has a graduation rate of 75% in the base line time period and 85% in the current year, the school has shown 10% progress in graduation rate. 26

Accountability Measurements & Methodologies 8. Please list in rank order the following measures, as part of the process of differentiating school performance. Place a one next to the measure you believe should be given the most weight. If you wish to weight measure(s) equally, give them the same number. Elementary/Middle Level: Rank #__ Rank #__ Rank #__ Rank #__ Rank #__ High School: Rank #__ Rank #__ Rank #__ Rank #__ Rank #__ Achievement in ELA and math Growth in ELA and math Progress in ELA and math Achievement in Grades 4 and 8 Science Acquisition of Proficiency by English language learners Achievement in ELA and math Progress in ELA and math Achievement in Social Studies and Science Graduation Rates Acquisition of Proficiency by English language learners 27

Accountability Measurements & Methodologies 9. How should the Department use the results from indicators to differentiate among schools? a. Create a summative score based on individual indicator results and use the summative score to differentiate among schools. b. Create decision rules based on individual indicator results and use these rules to differentiate among schools. c. Other. 28

Accountability Measurements & Methodologies Summative Index vs. Decision Rule Approach Note: The following examples are for illustrative purposes only to show how a summative score approach compares to a decision rule approach. The actual indicators to be used, their weightings, and any decision rules to be applied are still to be determined. Summative Index Approach Indicator A B C D E F G Total Performance 50 60 40 30 70 80 90 Weighting 20 20 20 10 10 10 10 Score 100 120 80 30 70 80 90 570 Schools in the bottom five percent for total score are identified for Comprehensive Support and Improvement. Schools in the bottom five percent for English language learners, low- income students, racial/ethnic groups, or students with disabilities are identified for Targeted Support and Improvement. 29

Accountability Measurements & Methodologies Decision Rule Approach Indicator A B Subtotal 1 C D E Subtotal 2 F G Performance 50 60 Percentile Rank 70 80 75 70 25 60 40 90 90 40 30 70 80 90 Sample Decision Rules: A school will be identified for comprehensive support and improvement if: (1) the school s Subtotal 1 is below 10% and (2) the school s Subtotal 2 is also below 10%; or (1) The school s Subtotal 1 is below 20%, (2) the school s Subtotal 2 Is below 50%, and (3) the school s performance on Indicator F or Indicator G is below 10%. 30

Accountability Measurements & Methodologies 10.In addition to identification of Comprehensive Support and Improvement Schools and Targeted Support and Improvement Schools, as required by ESSA, NYSED should identify: a. Schools for local support that are performing below specific levels on one or more indicators, but are not identified for Targeted or Comprehensive Support and Improvement. b. Schools that exceed specified standards for recognition. c. Other categories of schools. d. No other schools. 31

Accountability Measurements & Methodologies 11. Who should be held accountable for students who are educated outside of the school district? a. The results for these students should be assigned to students home district, rather than their home school. In order to make sure these students are part of the accountability system, NYSED should continue identifying low-performing school districts. b. The results for these students should be assigned to a school within the students home district. As a result, NYSED would not need to identify low-performing school districts in order to ensure these students are included in the accountability system. c. Other. 32

Accountability Measurements & Methodologies 12. What should New York do with information regarding such things as class sizes, ratio of school counselors to students, availability of certified librarians, and percentage of students receiving instruction in music and arts? (Rank the choices in the order that best applies. Rank only those choices that should apply.) a. __# Report the information to the school along with data on similar schools and schools statewide. b. __# Make this data publicly available along with data on similar schools and schools statewide. c. __# Create recommended state standards and make this data publicly available along with data on similar schools statewide. d. __# Use metrics, such as this, as part of the state system to differentiate school performance for accountability purposes. e. __# Require schools identified for improvement to review these metrics and address them, as appropriate, in their improvement plans. f. __# Require schools identified for improvement to take actions to meet minimum standards on these benchmarks established by the state. g. __# Nothing. h. __# Other. 33

Supporting English Language Learners Background - Accountability Options States have two accountability options for recently arrived ELLs/MLLs: Option 1 Year 1: Exempt ELLs/MLLs from English Language Arts (ELA) assessment. Test ELLs/MLLs in Math but use only for reporting purposes (not accountability). Year 2: Test ELLs/MLLs in ELA and Math and use to measure achievement, with the option to use Math score to measure growth (compared to score from Year 1). Year 3 and thereafter: Test ELLs/MLLs in ELA and Math and use to measure achievement, with the option to use both scores to also measure growth (from the previous year s score). Option 2 Year 1: Test ELLs/MLLs in ELA and Math but use only for reporting purposes (not accountability). Year 2: Test ELLs/MLLs in ELA and Math and use to measure growth (from Year 1). Year 3 and thereafter: Test ELLs/MLLs in ELA and Math and use to measure both growth (compared to the previous year s score) and achievement. Section 200.16 of the U.S. Department of Education s state plan regulations under ESSA permits states to use a uniform statewide procedure in which some recently arrived ELLs/MLLs are held accountable under Option 1 and others by Option 2, using student specific factors such as prior schooling, level of English proficiency, and age to determine whether to follow Option 1 or Option 2 for a particular ELL/MLL. 34

Supporting English Language Learners To ensure that accountability for ELLs/MLLs beginning in their first year of enrollment is equitable and reliable, New York State will use student specific factors (like prior schooling, level of English proficiency, and age) to determine whether a student is first tested on state language arts accountability tests in their first or second year here. 35

Supporting English Language Learners 2. If regulations prevent NY from using its preferred option, which of the following options would you recommend?: Option 1: All recently arrived English language learners (ELLs)/multi lingual learners (MLLs) within the first year of enrollment would be exempted from taking the ELA in year 1, and take the ELA in year 2 and onward to measure achievement and possibly growth. Option 2: All ELLs/MLLs, including recently arrived ELL/MLL within the first year of enrollment, will take the ELA in year 1 to set a baseline for future growth, in year 2 to measure growth, and in years 3 and after to measure both achievement and growth. 36

Supports and Improvements for Identified Schools 13. If the Districts with Comprehensive Supports and Improvement Schools offer Public School Choice for students in schools in the bottom 5 percent, should the districts: a. Only offer the option for students to transfer to a School in Good Standing? b. Be permitted to offer the option to transfer to EITHER a School in Good Standing OR a Targeted Support and Improvement School? c. Be permitted to offer the option to transfer to a Targeted Support and Improvement School only in instances when there are no schools in Good Standing serving students in that grade in the district? 37

Supports and Improvements for Identified Schools 14. Should the state pursue any of the following strategies to ensure that districts hire highly skilled principals for schools in the bottom five percent of the state? (select all that apply): a. The state should develop a High-Needs/Turnaround School Leader extension/endorsement for the School Building Leader license that requires additional experience and coursework pertaining to high-needs schools beyond what is expected of the current School Building Leader license. b. Principals of schools in the bottom five percent will not automatically be replaced; however, if a principal vacancy exists at the school, the newly hired principal must have prior experience as a principal. c. Principals of schools in the bottom five percent will not automatically be replaced; however, if a principal vacancy exists at the school, the newly hired principal must have prior experience as a principal or assistant principal. 38

Supports and Improvements for Identified Schools 14. Should the state pursue any of the following strategies to ensure that districts hire highly skilled principals for schools in the bottom five percent of the state? (select all that apply): (Continued) d. Principals of schools in the bottom five percent will not automatically be replaced; however, if a principal vacancy exists at the school, the newly hired principal must have been rated Effective or Highly Effective in his/her two most recent annual evaluations. e. Principals of schools in the bottom five percent will not automatically be replaced; however, if a principal vacancy exists at the school, the newly hired principal must have a minimum of five years experience in education. f. Principals of schools in the bottom five percent will not automatically be replaced; however, if a principal vacancy exists at the school, the district must assert that the newly hired principal has recent statistical evidence of successful improvement. 39

Supports and Improvements for Identified Schools 14. Should the state pursue any of the following strategies to ensure that districts hire highly skilled principals for schools in the bottom five percent of the state? (select all that apply): (Continued) g. Principals of schools in the bottom five percent will not automatically be replaced; however, if a principal vacancy exists at the school, the newly hired principal must have previous experience as a teacher or leader at a School in Good Standing OR as a district employee in a District in Good Standing. h. I am in favor of combining the options from B to G above to create a criteria in which the newly hired principal must meet one OR another one of the conditions. I would support a requirement that the newly hired principal must ____________ OR ___________ (please specify what this would be). i. I am not in favor of any additional conditions for principals of schools in the bottom 5 percent. 40

ESSA State Plan Timeline February 2017 June 2017 Timeline for Submission of ESSA Plan to USDE in September 2017 Activity Public Engagement Survey and Regional Meetings Conducted. March and April Board of Regents Meetings Continued discussion of ESSA plan. State must submit fiscal year 2017 ESSA Assurances. Date February/March 2017 (TBD) March and April 2017 April 3, 2017 May 2017 Board of Regents Meeting Staff will present draft plan and seek permission to release for public comment. The Department will release the draft plan for public comment. May 8 - 9, 2017 May 10 June 9, 2017 Proposed weeks for Public Hearings on Draft Plan. Regional staff will gather public comments on the draft plan. May 10 June 9, 2017 Please note: Timeline may change based on new presidential administration. 41

ESSA State Plan Timeline July 2017 September 2017 Timeline for Submission of ESSA Plan to USDE in September 2017 Activity July 2017 Board of Regents Meeting Staff will present any changes to the draft plan based on public comment, and request permission to send revised draft state plan to Governor. Application with Governor for 30 days. Date July 11 - 12, 2017 July 19 August 18, 2017 September 2017 Board of Regents Meeting Staff will seek approval to submit final state plan to USDE. September 11 - 12, 2017 Deadline to submit ESSA State Plan to USDE. September 18, 2017 (subject to Board discussion and agreement) Please note: Timeline may change based on new presidential administration. 42

Next Steps To participate in the surveys listed below, please visit the New York State ESSA website at: http://www.p12.nysed.gov/accountability/es sa.html Possible Indicators of School Quality and/or Student Success web survey. ESSA State Plan Development Questions web survey. ESSA Winter Regional Meeting Participant Survey https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/ESSA_Winter_Reg ional_Meeting_Participant_Survey 43

Communicating with the General Public Regarding ESSA NYSED has created a public website on ESSA, which includes: Board of Regents Items related to ESSA ESSA Law USDE Proposed Regulations on ESSA Resources Upcoming Webinars Survey Links The website is located at http://www.p12.nysed.gov/accountability/essa.html 44

Contact Information Please send questions/concerns regarding ESSA to ESSA@NYSED.GOV. 45