Reporting college and career readiness results to the public DQC Public Reporting Task Force | January 9, 2014
Objectives
Today’s webinar is designed to address several questions: What are college- and career-ready indicators (CCR) and to what extent do states report them to the public? What considerations should states use when reporting CCR indicators? What are trends across states as well as emerging issues?
2
Categories of CCR indicators and reporting across states
CCR indicators fall along a continuum of readiness Progressing Toward CCR
Meeting CCR
Exceeding CCR
Achievement
Students with “On-track to CCR” performance on assessments in middle and early in high school
Students in a graduating cohort with “CCR” level of performance on state anchor or college readiness assessments
Graduates with college-level performance on AP or IB exams
Course Completion and Success
High school students, by grade, with timely credit accumulation along a CCR course of study
Students in a graduating cohort who complete a CCR course of study
Graduates who have completed AP, IB, or dual enrollment courses
Attainment
9th grade students with “ontrack” to graduation status based on grades and attendance in core courses in first grading period
Students in a graduating cohort who receive a college and career ready diploma Students in a graduating cohort who receive industry certification
Graduates who enroll into postsecondary education with no need for remediation Graduates who successfully complete at least one year of postsecondary education
Source: Adapted from Measures that Matter: Making College and Career Readiness the Mission of High Schools, Achieve and the Education Trust, 2008
4
States that use multiple CCR indicators in a variety of ways signal a commitment to readiness
INDICATORS the percentage of students who...
USES
Earn a college- and career-ready diploma
Report school-level data to the public
Score college-ready on high school assessments
Set statewide performance goals
Earn college credit while in high school
Provide school-level incentives to improve
Are required to take remedial courses in college
Factor into accountability formula
5
Only one state, Florida, reports all categories of CCR indicators to the public
Data Source: Achieve, Closing the Expectations Gap 2013, www.achieve.org/ClosingtheExpectationsGap2013
6
Guidance for states
Achieve has published several resources to provide guidance to states
Source: www.achieve.org/public-reporting
8
Some guidance for calculating CCR indicators
The way states calculate CCR indicators matters for results Indicators should be criterion-referenced where possible (e.g. “percent of students meeting the CCR benchmark� rather than average score) to better capture changes in readiness Denominators should include all students, preferably all students in a graduating cohort (e.g. the 2012-13 graduating cohort rather than just students taking an assessment) to improve the stability of the indicator and its ability to portray the full picture of readiness for students in the school
This may mean that states will need to work with data providers to refine the way they receive data.
9
EXAMPLE: North Carolina reports the percent of all 11th grade students meeting benchmarks
Source: North Carolina ACT and WorkKeys Data Sets, http:// www.dpi.state.nc.us/docs/accountability/reporting/act-results1213.pdf
ACT
10
Reporting techniques can build understanding and raise the sense of urgency
States can use a number of strong techniques Reporting the number of students as well as percentages Building in comparisons - vertical comparisons such as school to district to state, horizontal comparisons such as school rankings or showing where the school’s performance lies upon a spectrum, or trends over time Highlighting disparities among student groups
Some data and functionality may need to live online (along a spectrum of static to interactive reports) while others can translate to a paper report that might be given to parents 11
EXAMPLE: Illinois reports the percent of students meeting ACT benchmarks with vertical comparisons to the district and state
Source: http://illinoisreportcard.com
12
EXAMPLE: Indiana compares CCR outcomes across student groups
Source: Indiana COMPASS reports, http://compass.doe.in.gov/dashboard/graduates.aspx?type=state
13
EXAMPLE: Indiana compares school to state and district performance and trends
Source: Indiana COMPASS reports, http://compass.doe.in.gov/dashboard/collegereadiness.aspx?type=state
14
EXAMPLE: Michigan displays remediation data over time – and by student subgroup
Source: Michigan School Data, https:// www.mischooldata.org/DistrictSchoolProfiles/PostsecondaryOutcomes/IheEnrollmentByHighScho ol.aspx
15
EXAMPLE: Maryland includes both percent and number of students graduating with CCR courses of study
Source: 2013 Maryland Report Card, http:// www.mdreportcard.org/HighSchoolCompletionOther.aspx?PV=38:12:30:0338:3:N:0:13:1:2:1:1:1:2 :3
16
EXAMPLE: Massachusetts DART shows the number and percent of students graduating with MassCore requirements over time
Source: Massachusetts DART system, http://www.doe.mass.edu/apa/dart/
17
EXAMPLE: Texas uses student numbers to explain graduation rates
Source: Texas 2012 Campus Graduation Summary, http:// ritter.tea.state.tx.us/acctres/completion/script/2012/campus.html
18
EXAMPLE: Australia’s MySchool shows student performance along a spectrum of similar schools’ results
Source: Australian Curriculum, Assessment, and Reporting Authority http ://www.myschool.edu.au/
19
States can also use other techniques to better present the data in context
Adding “judgments” can enhance understanding of performance patterns Traffic-lighting – color-coding in categories such as red, yellow, green Presenting performance data against goals and benchmarks Ratings or classifications – these may include those used in the state accountability system, or be defined separately for measures used only in the report card
20
EXAMPLE: Kentucky shows actual scores against performance targets
Source: 2013 Kentucky School Report Cards, http:// applications.education.ky.gov/src/DeliveryTargetGraph.aspx
21
Trends and issues
There are a few trends across states
Far better visibility and functionality Enhanced engagement with stakeholders, focus groups Greater influence from accountability on public reporting than in previous years – district/school report cards are becoming the primary way SEAs report data to the public Less top-level reporting of student subgroup-level results More states are using “combined” indicators More transitions “coming in 2015”
23
Emerging issues
How will states leverage reporting from new assessments aligned to CCR standards to answer critical questions from parents, policymakers and the public? How will states collaborate across agencies and sectors to get the right data to the right people at the right time? How might states use public reporting as a strategy to meet goals for students?
24
Reporting college and career readiness results to the public