§ 200.107 Transition to statewide use. ( a ) ( 1 ) After an SEA has scaled its innovative assessment system to operate statewide in all schools and LEAs in the State, the SEA must submit evidence for peer review under section 1111(a)(4) of the Act and § 200.2(d) to determine whether the system may be used for purposes of both academic assessments and the State accountability system under sections 1111(b)(2), (c), and (d) and 1003 of the Act.
( 2 ) An SEA may only use the innovative assessment system for the purposes described in paragraph (a)(1) of this section if the Secretary determines that the system is of high quality consistent with paragraph (b) of this section.
( b ) Through the peer review process of State assessments and accountability systems under section 1111(a)(4) of the Act and § 200.2(d), the Secretary determines that the innovative assessment system is of high quality if— ( 1 ) An innovative assessment developed in any grade or subject under § 200.5(a)(1) and section 1111(b)(2)(B)(v) of the Act— ( i ) Meets all of the requirements under section 1111(b)(2) of the Act and § 200.105(b) and (c);
( ii ) Provides coherent and timely information about student achievement based on the challenging State academic standards under section 1111(b)(1) of the Act;
( iii ) Includes objective measurements of academic achievement, knowledge, and skills; and
( iv ) Is valid, reliable, and consistent with relevant, nationally recognized professional and technical standards;
( 2 ) The SEA provides satisfactory evidence that it has examined the statistical relationship between student performance on the innovative assessment in each subject area and student performance on other measures of success, including the measures used for each relevant grade-span within the remaining indicators (*i.e.,* indicators besides Academic Achievement) in the statewide accountability system under section 1111(c)(4)(B)(ii)-(v) of the Act, and how the inclusion of the innovative assessment in its Academic Achievement indicator under section 1111(c)(4)(B)(i) of the Act affects the annual meaningful differentiation of schools under section 1111(c)(4)(C) of the Act;
( 3 ) The SEA has solicited information, consistent with the requirements under § 200.105(d)(3)(iv), and taken into account feedback from teachers, principals, other school leaders, parents, and other stakeholders under § 200.105(a)(2) about their satisfaction with the innovative assessment system; and
( 4 ) The SEA has demonstrated that the same innovative assessment system was used to measure— ( i ) The achievement of all students and each subgroup of students described in section 1111(c)(2) of the Act, and that appropriate accommodations were provided consistent with § 200.6(b) and (f)(1)(i) under section 1111(b)(2)(B)(vii) of the Act; and
( ii ) For purposes of the State accountability system consistent with section 1111(c)(4)(E) of the Act, progress on the Academic Achievement indicator under section 1111(c)(4)(B)(i) of the Act of at least 95 percent of all students, and 95 percent of students in each subgroup of students described in section 1111(c)(2) of the Act.
( c ) With respect to the evidence submitted to the Secretary to make the determination described in paragraph (b)(2) of this section, the baseline year for any evaluation is the first year that a participating LEA in the State administered the innovative assessment system under the demonstration authority.
( d ) In the case of a consortium of SEAs, evidence may be submitted for the consortium as a whole so long as the evidence demonstrates how each member SEA meets each requirement of paragraph (b) of this section applicable to an SEA.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1221e-3, 3474, 6311(a), 6364, 6571)
[81 FR 88971, Dec. 8, 2016]