ESEA Flex Addendum

STATE: Accountability Addendum to ESEA Flexibility Request DATE

[State]

ESEA Flexibility

Accountability Addendum

U.S. Department of Education

Washington, DC 20202

In order to move forward with State and local reforms designed to improve academic achievement and increase the quality of instruction for all students in a manner that was not originally contemplated by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), a State educational agency (SEA) may request flexibility, on its own behalf and on behalf of its local educational agencies (LEAs), through waivers of certain provisions of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) and their associated regulatory, administrative, and reporting requirements (ESEA flexibility). However, an SEA that receives ESEA flexibility must comply with all statutory and regulatory provisions that are not waived. For example, an SEA must calculate a four-year adjusted cohort graduation rate, as set forth in 34 C.F.R. § 200.19(b), and disaggregate that rate for reporting. Similarly, an SEA must use an “n-size” that ensures, to the maximum extent practicable, that all student subgroups are included in accountability determinations, in accordance with 34 C.F.R. § 200.7(a)(2)(i)(B). Furthermore, an SEA may continue to use technical measures, such as confidence intervals, to the extent they are relevant to the SEA’s ESEA flexibility request. This accountability addendum replaces a State’s accountability workbook under NCLB and, together, an SEA’s approved ESEA flexibility request and this accountability addendum contain the elements of the State’s system of differentiated recognition, accountability and support.

Contents

Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs) 2

Annual Measurable Achievement Objective 3 (AMAO 3) under Title III 2

Subgroup Accountability 3

State Accountability System Includes All Schools and Districts 4

State Accountability System Includes All Students 6

Assessments 11

Statistical Reliability 12

Other Academic Indicators 13

Graduation Rate 13

Participation Rate 14

Instructions to the SEA: Please provide the requested information in the “State Response” column in the table below. Please provide the information in sufficient detail to fully explain your response. Also, please indicate whether the information provided is the same as that in your State accountability workbook under NCLB or reflects a change. Note that these instructions, the “change” column, and the “ED Comments” column of the table will be removed in the version of this document that is posted on ED’s website.

Subject and Question		State Response	Change from NCLB accountability workbook	ED Comments
Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs)
Please attach the State’s AMOs for reading/language arts and mathematics for the all students group and each individual subgroup. If the State has different AMOs for each school or LEA, attach the State-level AMOs and provide a link to a page on the SEA’s web site where the LEA and school level AMOs are available.			
	Annual Measurable Achievement Objective 3 (AMAO 3) under Title III
Please affirm that the SEA determines whether an LEA that receives funds under Title III of the ESEA meets AMAO 3 (ESEA section 3122(a)(3)(A)(iii)) based on each of the following: The subgroup of English Learners meets or exceeds its AMOs in reading/language arts and mathematics; At least 95 percent of English Learners participate on the State’s assessments in reading/language arts and mathematics; and The subgroup of English Learners meets or exceeds the State’s goal or annual targets for the other academic indicator, including graduation rate for high schools.
Subgroup Accountability
What subgroups, including any combined subgroups, as applicable, does the State use for accountability purposes, including measuring performance against AMOs, identifying priority, focus, and reward schools, and differentiating among other Title I schools? If using one or more combined subgroups, the State should identify what students comprise each combined subgroup.
State Accountability System Includes All Schools and Districts
What is the State’s definition of a local educational agency (LEA)?
What is the State’s definition of a public school? Please provide definitions for elementary school, middle school, and secondary school, as applicable.
How does the State define a small school?
How does the State include small schools in its accountability system?
How does the State define a new school?
How does the State include new schools, schools that split or merge grades (e.g., because of overpopulation or court rulings), and schools that otherwise change configuration in its accountability system?
How does the State include schools that have no grades assessed (e.g., K-2 schools) in its accountability system?
How does the State include alternative schools in its accountability system? Consistent with State law, alternative schools include, but are not limited to: State schools for deaf and blind, Juvenile institutions, Alternative high schools, and Alternative schools for special education students. If the State includes categories of alternative schools in its accountability system in different ways, please provide a separate explanation for each category of school.
How does the State include charter schools, including charter schools that are part of an LEA and charter schools that are their own LEA, in its accountability system?
State Accountability System Includes All Students
What are the State’s policies and procedures to ensure that all students are included in its assessment and accountability systems?
How does the State define “full academic year”?
How does the State determine which students have attended the same public school and/or LEA for a full academic year?
To which accountability indicators does the State apply the definition of full academic year?
What are the procedures the State uses to ensure that mobile students, including students who transfer within an LEA or between LEAs, are included at the appropriate level (school, LEA, and State) of the accountability system?
Does the State include in accountability determinations the proficient and advanced scores of students with the most significant cognitive disabilities on assessments based on alternate academic achievement standards? If so, does the State limit the number of those scores at the LEA and State levels, separately, so that the number of proficient and advanced scores included in the determinations does not exceed 1.0 percent of all students in the grades assessed?
If the State provides an alternate assessment based on modified academic achievement standards, does the State include in accountability determinations the proficient and advanced scores of students with disabilities who take that assessment? If so, does the State limit the number of those scores at the LEA and State levels, separately, so that the number of proficient and advanced scores included in the determinations does not exceed 2.0 percent of all students in the grades assessed?
What is the State process if an LEA or the State exceeds either the 1.0 or 2.0 percent proficiency cap?
What are the State’s policies and procedures to ensure that students with disabilities and English Learners are provided appropriate accommodations? In addition, please provide a link to a page on the SEA’s web site where the State’s accommodations manuals or test administration manuals may be found.
Does the State include, for up to two accountability determination cycles, the scores of former students with disabilities in making accountability determinations for the subgroup of students with disabilities? If so, how?
Does the State count recently arrived English Learners as having participated in the State assessments for purposes of meeting the 95 percent participation requirement if they take (a) either an English language proficiency assessment or the State’s reading/language arts assessment; and (b) the State’s mathematics assessments?
Does the State exempt a recently arrived English Learner from one administration of the State’s reading/language arts assessment?
Does the State exclude from accountability determinations the scores of recently arrived English Learners on the mathematics assessment, the reading/language arts assessment (if administered to these students), or both, even if these students have been enrolled in the same school or LEA for a full academic year?
Does the State include, for up to two accountability determination cycles, the scores of former English Learners in making accountability determinations for the subgroup of English Learners? If so, how?
What are the State’s criteria for exiting students from the English Learner subgroup?
Assessments
Which assessments, including alternate assessments, is the SEA using for reporting achievement under ESEA section 1111(h)(1)(C)(i) (i.e., reading/language arts, mathematics, and science assessments)?
What additional assessments, if any, does the State include in its accountability system and for what purpose is each assessment included?
Statistical Reliability and Protection of Students’ Privacy
What is the State’s minimum “n-size” for determining each of the following? Participation rate Performance against AMOs Graduation rate Other (as applicable, please specify use)
What is the State’s minimum “n-size” for protecting students’ privacy when reporting?
What confidence intervals, if any, does the State use in its accountability system to ensure the statistical reliability of school classifications, and for which calculations are these confidence intervals applied?				.
Does the State base accountability determinations on multiple years of data? If so, which years, and how, if at all, are the years weighted?
Other Academic Indicators
What are the other academic indicators for elementary and middle schools that the State uses for annual reporting? What are the State’s goal and/or annual targets for these indicators?
Graduation Rate
What are the State’s graduation rate goal and annual graduation rate targets? Please provide a table with State-level goal and annual targets for all students and by subgroup beginning with the 2012–2013 school year. If graduation rate annual targets vary by school, provide a link to the page on the SEA’s web site where the LEA and school targets are available.
If the State has received a timeline extension and is not using a four-year adjusted cohort graduation rate for accountability determinations, please specify what rate the State is using and when the State will begin using a four-year adjusted cohort rate.
What, if any, extended-year graduation rate(s) does the State use? How does the State use its extended-year graduation rate(s) in its accountability system?
Participation Rate
How does the State calculate participation rates?
How does the State use participation rates within its differentiated accountability system (i.e., index)?

Public Burden Statement

According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless such collection displays a valid OMB control number. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 80 hours per response, including time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. The obligation to respond to this collection is required to obtain or retain benefit under Title IX, Part C, Sections 9301-9306, of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), as amended. Send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to the U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Ave., SW, Washington, DC 20202-4536 or email [email protected] and reference the OMB Control Number 1810-0576. Note: Please do not return the completed Consolidated State Application to this address.

0