A-F Labeling of Schools
Move On When Reading
Move On When Ready
Performance Evaluation For Teachers
Performance Evaluation For Principals
Common Core Standards Implementation
STEM

MANDATE #1
GRADING SYSTEM FOR ARIZONA SCHOOLS: BY DR. NANCY
ALEXANDER
ADAPTED FROM ADE PRESENTATION

AZ LEARNS Legacy
AZ LEARNS components
Changes for 2011
AZ LEARNS A-F

1.
Percent of students passing in 2011 – Status points
2.
Improving percent of students passing – Growth points
3.
Individual student growth – MAP
4.
Percent of students exceeding – Highly Performing and Excelling.

Additional components of AZ LEARNS
• English language learners reclassification rate
• Graduation rate for high schools
• Drop out rate for high schools

New Growth cut points.
Status
AIMS
Points
School
Improvement
(Growth)
+
MAP
Grad/Dropout
ELL Point
% Exceeding
=
School Profile
Underperforming
Performing
Performing Plus
Highly
Performing
Excelling

TH
Percent pass
AIMS 2011 = 65%
= 4 status points
1 2 3 4 5
33% 45% 59% 71% 81%
6

Status, Growth,
Percent-Exceeding (Zscore)
MAP
AZELLA (percent reclassified)
OUT: Non-FAY students, ELLS < 4 years in program, alternate mods.
IN: All students in grades 4-8 with a score from the previous year.
IN: All students in program for 150 calendar days.
OUT: All students who leave program for special reason (parent withdrawal, SPED)

A-F AZ LEARNS Evaluation Current AZ LEARNS Evaluation
LEAs evaluated (no consequences) LEAs not evaluated
50% of evaluation based on student-level growth
50% of student-level growth component based growth of students in bottom 25% at school
Grades: A, B, C, D, & F
30% of evaluation base on studentlevel growth
Extra credit for moving students out of lowest performance level, and for moving students into highest performance level
Profiles: Excelling, highly performing, performing +, performing, underperforming, and failing

Release Date
July 2010
August 2011
August 2012
August 2013
Evaluation Used
Current
Evaluation*
Current
Evaluation*
Current
Evaluation*
Tests Used
Notable
Events
Test scores
2009-10
New math test
Future
Evaluation
Test scores
2010-11
New writing test
Future
Evaluation
Future
Evaluation
*
Test scores
2011-12
Test scores
2012-13
* Used for school improvement.

Growth Score 50% Composite Score 50%

Student level data is used
Calculates percentile ranks
Students are compared to other students who scored the same across multiple years.

Add Points for Each Measure
Percent Passing AIMS
Made ELL Target
Made Graduation Rate Target
Made Dropout Rate Target
Total
0 to100
0 or 3
0 or 3
0 or 3
109 points possible (HS)
103 points (ELM/MS)

A. Median growth percentile of all students
B. Median growth percentile of bottom 25%
Average of A and B
0 to 100
0 to 100
0 to 100

A B C
Total Score 140-200 120-139 100-119
Percentage of Schools 16% 25% 32%
D
0-99
27%
A school’s Composite and Growth Scores are added together to determine the grade earned.

A
B
C
D
“A” schools earn points equal to a school that has 90% of students passing AIMS and achieves typical or greater growth with its population of students.
“B” schools earn points equal to a school that has 70% of students passing AIMS and achieves typical or greater growth with its population of students.
“C” schools earn points equal to a school that has 50% of students passing AIMS and achieves typical or greater growth with its population of students.
“D” schools earn less points than a school that has 50% of students passing AIMS and achieves typical or greater growth with its population of students.

Mandate #2
Move on When Reading: By Dr. Nancy Alexander
Adapted from State Legislation

Move on When Reading: HB 2732
A requirement that a pupil not be promoted from the thrid grade if the pupil obtains a score on the reading portion of the Arizona Instrument to measure standards test, or a successor test, that demonstrate that the pupil’s reading falls far below the third grade level.

A mechanism to allow a school district governing board or the governing body of a charter school to promote a pupil from the third grade who obtains the score on the reading portion of the Arizona Instrument to Measure Standards test, or a successor test, that demonstrates that the pupil’s reading falls far belw the thried grade level for any of the following good cause exemptions:

• The pupil is a child with a disability as defined in section 15-
761 and did not take the AIMS or a successor test.
•
The pupil is a child with a disability as defined in section 15-
761 and has taken the AIMS or a successor test, and has been previously retained in a grade.
• The pupil is an English learner or a limited English proficient student as defined in section 15-751 and has had fewer than two years of English language instruction.
• The pupil has a reading deficiency and has been previously retained twice in a grade.
•
The pupil has demonstrated reading proficiency on an alternate assessment approved by the state board of education.

CONTINUED
•
The school district governing board or the charter school governing body accepts a parent's request for an exemption for a pupil who does not meet any of the good cause exemptions prescribed in the previous 5 items of this subdivision. within thirty days after receipt of notification that the pupil will not be promoted from the third grade, a parent may submit a written request to the school district governing board or the charter school governing body for an exemption pursuant to this item.
The written request shall include documentation showing that the promotion of the pupil is appropriate based on the pupil's academic record and shall include academic progress reports, the pupil's individualized education plan, if applicable, and letters from the pupil's teacher and the principal of the school recommending that the pupil be promoted from the third grade.
•
The school district governing board or the charter school governing body shall issue a written acceptance or rejection of the parent's exemption request pursuant to this item within thirty days after receipt of the parent's request.

CONTINUED
Intervention and remedial strategies developed by the State Board of Education for pupils who are not promoted from the third grade.
A school district governing board or the governing body of a charter school shall offer at least one of the intervention and remedial strategies developed by the State Board of Education.
The parent or guardian of a pupil who is not promoted from the third grade and the pupil's teacher and principal may choose the most appropriate intervention and remedial strategies that will be provided to that pupil. The intervention and remedial strategies developed by the State Board of Education shall include:
•
A requirement that the pupil be assigned to a different teacher for reading instruction.
• Summer school reading instruction.
• In the next academic year, intensive reading instruction that occurs before, during or after the regular school day, or any combination of before, during and after the regular school day.
• Online reading instruction.

CONTINUED
•
Provide for universal screening of pupils in preschool programs, kindergarten programs and grades one through three that is designed to identify pupils who have reading deficiencies pursuant to section 15-704.
• Distribute guidelines for the school districts to follow in prescribing criteria for the promotion of pupils from grade to grade in the common schools. These guidelines shall include recommended procedures for ensuring that the cultural background of a pupil is taken into consideration when criteria for promotion are being applied.

CONTINUED
Beginning in the 2010-2011 school year, school districts and charter schools shall provide annual written notification to parents of pupils in kindergarten programs and first, second and third grades that a pupil who obtains a score on the reading portion of the AIMS, or a successor test, that demonstrates the pupil is reading far below the third grade level will not be promoted from the third grade. If the school has determined that the pupil is substantially deficient in reading before the end of grade three, the school district or charter school shall provide to the parent of that pupil a separate written notification of the reading deficiency that includes the following information:

CONTINUED
• A description of the current reading services provided to the pupil.
• A description of the available supplemental instructional services and supporting programs that are designed to remediate reading deficiencies.
• Parental strategies to assist the pupil to attain reading proficiency.
• A statement that the pupil will not be promoted from the third grade if the pupil obtains a score on the reading portion of the AIMS, or a successor test, that demonstrates the pupil is reading far below the third grade level, unless the pupil is exempt from mandatory retention in grade three or the pupil qualifies for a good cause exemption pursuant to subsection a of this section.
• A description of the school district or charter school policies on midyear promotion to a higher grade.

Mandate #3
Grading System for Arizona Schools: By Supt. Tim Carter
Adapted from Center for the Future of Arizona

Current Reality:
• 62% of jobs will require college education by 2018, and more than half of those will require at least a bachelor’s degree. 1
• Nationally, only 75% of high school freshmen graduate with a diploma in four years. Half of all minority students never graduate from high school. 2
• 42% of students who start college aren’t ready for credit bearing college level work. 3
• Only 31% of Arizona's young adults (ages 25-34) have a college degree – associate’s degree or higher.4
In Arizona, for every 100 children in ninth grade; 68 graduate from high school four years later; 19 enter a 4-year program within one year; only 9 complete their bachelor's degree within 6 years.
Postsecondary Education Opportunity; www.postsecondary.org
2
Sources:
1Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce, 2009
2National Center for Educational Statistics, 2003
3U.S. National Center for Education Statistics, 2004
4U.S. Census Bureau, 2008 American Community Survey

The Move On When Ready Strategy provides a new performance-based pathway to high school graduation through the Grand Canyon High School
Diploma. (Arizona Revised Statues Title 15, Chapter 7, Article 6) and is designed to:
• Clearly identify for all students what we want them to know and provide a way for them to get there, with less worry about how long it takes.
• Move away from a “one-size-fits-all” industrial-era system to one that is adaptive to individual student interests and needs.
• Bring proven complete instructional systems aligned to national and internationally benchmarked standards to Arizona high schools, moving us towards outcomes-based learning and away from time-based learning.
• Greatly increase the number of high school students who leave high school ready to do college-level work without remediation, opening up multiple pathways for them.

• Implementation of a Board Examination System, such as
Cambridge International Examinations or ACT Quality Core, in ninth and tenth grades.
• Offering multiple pathway options, including the Grand Canyon
High School Diploma approved by the Legislature in 2010.
• A commitment to an outcomes-based education model that is designed to improve educational success for all students.

• Not intended to pack four years of high school into two years; offers instead a rigorous curriculum to prepare students for success in postsecondary educational pursuits.
• High expectations academic program accessible to all students. Move On
When Ready is not an elite program.
• Emphasis is on the “ READY ” aspect of Move On When Ready.
• Voluntary program for interested schools. No present options open to students for high school study are closed by the passage of the Move On
When Ready legislation.
• Students become “diploma eligible” –are not required to graduate early.
• Requires collaboration across the P-20 educational pipeline.

• Achievement of a Grand Canyon High School Diploma will signify that students are college and career ready
–defined as having the English and mathematics skills and knowledge needed to succeed in college level courses at open admissions postsecondary institutions that count toward a degree or certificate without taking remedial or developmental coursework.
(Arizona Revised Statues Title 15, Chapter 7, Article 6)
• Schools offering a Grand Canyon High School Diploma must implement an approved Board Examination System, such as Cambridge International
Examinations or ACT Quality Core, in ninth and tenth grades.
• Students become eligible for the Grand Canyon High School Diploma by passing a series of Board Examinations.

• Two BES** credits of English
• Two BES credits of mathematics
• Two BES credits of science, including lab-based science, engineering or information technologies
• One BES credit of World History
• One BES credit of American History
• One BES credit of fine arts or career and technical education and vocational education; and
• One half-credit of economics (may be a local offering)
*Adopted in Rule by the Arizona State Board of Education on 1/24/2011
**BES stands for Board Examination System

• Partnering States: Connecticut, Kentucky, Maine, New Mexico, Mississippi and New York.
• National Partner: National Center on Education and the Economy (NCEE).
• Benefits to Arizona: Technical assistance, negotiated rates with Board
Examination System Providers, and the NCEE longitudinal study on Board
Examination Systems led by the University of Michigan Institute for Social
Research.

Mandates #4 and #5
Performance Evaluation for Teachers and Principals by Dr. Nancy Alexander
Adapted from Arizona Department of Education

The State Board of Education shall… ”on or before December
15, 2011 adopt and maintain a model framework for a teacher and principal evaluation instrument that includes quantitative data on student academic progress that accounts for between thirty-three percent and fifty per cent of the evaluation outcomes and best practices for professional development and evaluator training. School districts and charter schools shall use an instrument that meets the data requirements established by the State Board of Education to annually evaluate individual teachers and principals beginning in school year 2012
–2013.”

Mandates #6 and #7
Common Core Standards and STEM by Supt. Tim Carter
Adapted from Arizona Department of Education and Science Foundation Arizona

Initiative led by Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) and
National Governors Association for Best Practices (NGA Center), in partnership with ACT, College Board, and Achieve to develop common core standards in mathematics and English language arts.
• Voluntary for states; requirement of RTTT
• July 2009: Release draft of College and Career Ready Standards
• March 10, 2010: Release of draft Common Core State Standards for K-12

• June 2, 2010: Release of final documents
• June 28, 2010: AZ State Board of Education approved Common Core
Standards
• June 2-July 25, 2010: Survey to collect feedback regarding AZ-specific additions to Common Core Standards
• July 7, 8, 14, 21: ADE hosts public webinars to disseminate information
• August 23, 2010: AZ State Board of Education adopted state-specific additions
• January 2011: Mathematics Standards are officially released with timeline for implementation and Assessment
• Spring 2011: English Language Arts Standards are released

• Current reality: each state has its own set of academic standards
• Lots of duplication and repetition
• Mastery vs. exposure
• This degree of inconsistency breeds incoherence
• Incoherence undermines sensible instructional materials, common high quality assessments, and focused professional development

• Fewer, clearer, and higher (focused)
• Alignment with college and work expectations
• Inclusion of rigorous content and application of knowledge through high-order thinking
• Consideration of strengths of and lessons learned from current state standards
• Internationally benchmarked, so that all students are prepared to succeed in our global economy and society
• Evidence and/or research-based

• Eligible to participate in RTTT funding opportunity; possibly more prepared to comply with new ESEA requirements
• Emphasis on both concepts and skills (learning progressions)
• Able to benchmark across states and compare internationally
• Access to common tools and professional development strategies
• Eligible to apply for $350 million grant for assessments to align with Common Core; Common Assessment System

Initiated upon release of 2010 Standards in Mathematics and
English Language Arts in January 2011 and Spring 2011
• Posted on ADE webpage at http://www.ade.az.gov/standards/Common
CoreStandards/default.asp
• Assessment transition details will be released in
November
• AIMS 2011 will be based on current standards