Under NCLB, states were required to set targets for proficiency, graduation rates, participation rates, and at least one other academic indicator. ESSA eliminates participation rates as an explicit target but effectively embeds a 95% target within the proficiency calculation (see section III.C.). ESSA eliminates targets for the other academic indicator and moves the ELP progress target from Title III to Title I. NCLB required ambitious long-term proficiency targets of 100% by the year 2013–14 and intermediate targets that increased at least once every 3 years. ESSA requires that targets be ambitious but does not prescribe a timeline or a target-setting methodology for long-term or interim goals. Additional Resources Getting It Right: Crafting Federal Accountability for Higher Student Performance and a Stronger America (The Education Trust, 2011) III. C. Accountability Indicators The statewide accountability system must annually measure, for all students and for each subgroup in all public schools, the following indicators: Proficiency in mathematics and reading/ELA on statewide tests calculated by including in the denominator the greater of: The number of students participating in the assessments, or Ninety-five percent of all students or students in a subgroup. Four-year adjusted cohort graduation rate, with the option also to include an extended-year graduation rate (high schools); Student growth or another academic indicator (elementary and middle schools); Percentage of students making progress in attaining proficiency on statewide ELP assessment within a state-determined timeline, in each of Grades 3–8 and once in high school (measure for EL subgroup only); An additional indicator of school quality or student success that is valid and reliable, is comparable statewide (by grade span), and allows for meaningful differentiation in school performance, which may include: Student engagement; Educator engagement; Student access to and completion of advanced coursework; Postsecondary readiness; School climate and safety; and Any other indicator that meets technical requirements. Technical Requirements Each of the required indicators must be valid, reliable, and comparable statewide across all LEAs and calculated the same way in all schools (except that the additional indicator of school quality or success may vary by grade span). All indicators except ELP progress must be disaggregated by each subgroup. The additional indicator of school quality or student success also must aid in the meaningful differentiation of schools. Sec. 1111(c)(4)(B) Shifts From NCLB
Under NCLB, states were required to set targets for proficiency, graduation rates, participation rates, and at least one other academic indicator. ESSA eliminates participation rates as an explicit target but effectively embeds a 95% target within the proficiency calculation (see section III.C.). ESSA eliminates targets for the other academic indicator and moves the ELP progress target from Title III to Title I. NCLB required ambitious long-term proficiency targets of 100% by the year 2013–14 and intermediate targets that increased at least once every 3 years. ESSA requires that targets be ambitious but does not prescribe a timeline or a target-setting methodology for long-term or interim goals. Additional Resources Getting It Right: Crafting Federal Accountability for Higher Student Performance and a Stronger America (The Education Trust, 2011) III. C. Accountability Indicators The statewide accountability system must annually measure, for all students and for each subgroup in all public schools, the following indicators: Proficiency in mathematics and reading/ELA on statewide tests calculated by including in the denominator the greater of: The number of students participating in the assessments, or Ninety-five percent of all students or students in a subgroup. Four-year adjusted cohort graduation rate, with the option also to include an extended-year graduation rate (high schools); Student growth or another academic indicator (elementary and middle schools); Percentage of students making progress in attaining proficiency on statewide ELP assessment within a state-determined timeline, in each of Grades 3–8 and once in high school (measure for EL subgroup only); An additional indicator of school quality or student success that is valid and reliable, is comparable statewide (by grade span), and allows for meaningful differentiation in school performance, which may include: Student engagement; Educator engagement; Student access to and completion of advanced coursework; Postsecondary readiness; School climate and safety; and Any other indicator that meets technical requirements. Technical Requirements Each of the required indicators must be valid, reliable, and comparable statewide across all LEAs and calculated the same way in all schools (except that the additional indicator of school quality or success may vary by grade span). All indicators except ELP progress must be disaggregated by each subgroup. The additional indicator of school quality or student success also must aid in the meaningful differentiation of schools. Sec. 1111(c)(4)(B) Shifts From NCLB
ESSA_Accountability_Tool.docx