Attachment 1 Proposed Status and Change Cut Scores for the Chronic Absenteeism Indicator Background California’s new multiple measures accountability and continuous improvement system was developed to align with the priorities of the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) and to meet the requirements under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). Chronic absenteeism is a metric identified as part of Pupil Engagement (LCFF Priority 5).The ESSA requires states to collect data to identify students who are chronically absent and report chronic absenteeism rates for schools in the ESSA State Report Card (Section 1111[h][1][C][viii]). For purposes of the Local Control and Accountability Plan, a student who is absent 10 percent or more of the instructional days they were enrolled to attend is defined as “chronically absent.” Chronic absenteeism data is collected through the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS) and is used to calculate this indicator. This data was collected for the first time at the end of the 2016–17 school year and released publicly in December 2017. It is currently reported on the California School Dashboard (Dashboard) through a direct link to the California Department of Education’s (CDE’s) reporting website, DataQuest. The 2016–17 Chronic Absenteeism Rate Statewide Report is available at the following web page: . Implementation of the Chronic Absenteeism Indicator on the Dashboard Chronic absenteeism will serve as an additional academic indicator for kindergarten through grade eight (K–8), given its strong correlation with future academic attainment (). The methodology used to calculate this indicator was approved at the September 2018 State Board of Education meeting. It is based on a minimum enrollment of 31 instructional days where students attend at least one day and assigns the same weight to all students who meet this criterion. Proposed Status and Change Cut Scores for the Chronic Absenteeism Indicator Beginning with the 2018 Dashboard, schools and local educational agencies (LEAs) will receive a performance level (color) for this indicator, based on 2017 and 2018 data. In order to propose Status and Change cut scores for this indicator, the CDE conducted several data analyses, which were shared with the Technical Design Group (TDG) at its October 2018 meeting.
75 1.6 Increased 80 2.1 Increased 85 2.8 Increased 86.0 3.0 Increased Significantly 90 4.2 Increased Significantly 95 6.8 Increased Significantly Table 5 is the five-by-five colored table produced using the proposed Status and Change cut scores. Table 5: Chronic Absenteeism Performance Levels (Colors) Performance Level Increased Significantly from Prior Year (by 3.0% or more) Increased from Year (by 0.5% to less than 3.0%) Maintained from Prior Year (declined or increased by less than 0.5%) Declined from Prior Year (by 0.5% to less than 3.0%) Declined Significantly from Year (by 3.0% or more) Very Low 2.5% or less in Current Year 0 (0.0%) Yellow 62 (0.8%) Green 168 (2.2%) Blue 185 (2.4%) Blue 53 (0.7%) Blue Low More than 2.5% to 5.0% in Current Year 18 (0.2%) Orange 361 (4.7%) Yellow 311 (4.1%) Green 386 (5.1%) Green 61 (0.8%) Blue Medium More than 5.0% to 10.0% in Current Year 139 (1.8%) Orange 1,106 (14.5%) Orange 520 (6.8%) Yellow 856 (11.2%) Green 214 (2.8%) Green High More than 10.0% to 20.0% in Current Year 459 (6.0%) Red 960 (12.6%) Orange 311 (4.1%) Orange 587 (7.7%) Yellow 245 (3.2%) Yellow Very High 182 (2.4%) 227 (3.0%) 36 (0.5%) 138 (1.8%) 47 (0.6%)
# of LEAs Red Orange Yellow Green Blue 872 100 (11.5%) 301 (34.5%) 259 (29.7%) 171 (19.6%) 41 (4.7%) Statewide Schools’ Performance for Chronic Absenteeism Table 8: 3X5 Colored Grid Applied to Schools # of Schools Red Orange Yellow Green Blue 7,632 900 (11.8%) 2,680 (35.1%) 1,756 (23.0%) 1,829 (24.0%) 467 (6.1%) Table 9: 5X5 Colored Grid Applied to Schools # of Schools Red Orange Yellow Green Blue 7,632 946 (12.4%) 2,578 (33.8%) 1,812 (23.7%) 1,818 (23.8%) 478 (6.3%) Statewide Performance on Chronic Absenteeism by School Type 10: 3X5 Grid Results by School Type School Type # of Schools Red Orange Yellow Green Blue Charter 912 132 (14.5%) 230 (25.2%) 188 (20.6%) 222 (24.3%) 140 (15.4%) Non Charter 6,720 768 (11.4%) 2,450 (36.5%) 1,568 (23.3%) 1,607 (23.9%) 327 (4.9%) Small Schools* 485 118 (24.3%) 172 (35.5%) 78 (16.1%) 75 (15.5%) 42 (8.7%) Non Small Schools 7,147 782 (10.9%) 2,508 (35.1%) 1,678 (23.5%) 1,754 (24.5%) 425 (6.0%) DASS 150 62 (41.3%) 59 (39.3%) 17 (11.3%) 7 (4.7%) 5 (3.3%) Non DASS 7,482 838 (11.2%) 2,621 (35.0%) 1,739 (23.2%) 1,822 (24.4%) 462 (6.2%) Table 11: 5X5 Colored Grid Result by School Type
English Learners 6,225 490 (6.4%) 2,401 (31.5%) 1,119 (14.7%) 1,689 (22.1%) 526 (6.9%) Foster 66 19 (0.2%) 19 (0.2%) 17 (0.2%) 9 (0.1%) 2 (0.0%) Homeless 1,532 414 (5.4%) 576 (7.5%) 282 (3.7%) 215 (2.8%) 45 (0.6%) Socioeconomically Disadvantaged 7,280 1,109 (14.5%) 2,789 (36.5%) 1,718 (22.5%) 1,400 (18.3%) 264 (3.5%) Students with Disabilities 6,406 1,125 (14.7%) 2,585 (33.9%) 1,405 (18.4%) 1,062 (13.9%) 229 (3.0%) *Total = Based on cumulative enrollment for students that met the eligibility criteria. Recommendation The CDE recommends that the SBE approve the proposed cut scores and performance levels for the Chronic Absenteeism Indicator. The CDE also recommends that the grid be applied to the Chronic Absenteeism Indicator for both the all students and student group levels, whenever there are fewer than 150 students.
Table 5: Graduation Rate Performance Levels (Colors) (With Proposed Cut Scores) Performance Level Declined Significantly From Prior Year (by 5.1% or greater) Declined From Prior Year (by 1.0% to 5.0%) Maintained From Year (declined or increased by less than 1.0%) Increased From Year (by 1.0% to 4.9%) Increased Significantly From Prior Year (by 5.0% or greater) Very High 95.0% or greater in Current Year N/A 72 (5.3%) Blue 251 (18.4%) Blue 186 (13.6%) Blue 8 (0.6%) Blue High 90.0% to less than 95.0% in Current Year 2 (0.2%) Orange 142 (10.4%) Yellow 126 (9.2%) Green 120 (8.8%) Green 7 (0.5%) Blue Medium 80.0% to less than 90.0% in Current Year 13 (1%) Orange 109 (8.0%) Orange 58 (4.2%) Yellow 86 (6.3%) Green 12 (0.9%) Low 67.0% to less than 80.0% in Current Year 7 (0.5%) Red 44 (3.2%) Orange 11 (0.8%) Orange 32 (2.3%) Yellow 5 (0.4%) Yellow Very Low Less than 67.0% in Current Year 2 (0.2%) Red 29 (2.1%) Red 6 (0.4%) Red 37 (2.7%) Red 2 (0.2%) Red
15 -4.6 Declined 20 -3.1 Declined 25 -2.2 Declined 27 -2.0 Declined 30 -1.3 Maintained 35 -0.6 Maintained 40 0 Maintained 45 0.4 Maintained 50 1.1 Maintained 55 1.5 Maintained 58 2.0 Increased 60 2.3 Increased 65 3.2 Increased 70 4.2 Increased 75 5.2 Increased 80 6.5 Increased 85 8.4 Increased 86.3 9.0 Increased Significantly 90 10.9 Increased Significantly 95 15 Increased Significantly Combining the current Status cut scores and the recommended Change cut scores yields the five-by-five colored grid shown in Table 5: 5: Five-by-Five Colored Table for the CCI Performance Level Declined Significantly From Prior Year (by 9.1% or more) Declined From Prior Year (by 2.0% to 9.0%) Maintained From Prior Year (declined or increased by 1.9%) Increased From Year (by 2.0% to 8.9%) Increased Significantly From Prior Year (by 9.0% or more) Very High 70.0% or greater in Current Year 6 (0.3%) Yellow 35 (1.9%) Green 62 (3.4%) Blue 71 (3.9%) Blue 40 (2.2%) Blue
High 55.0% to less than 70.0% in Current Year 11 (0.6%) Orange 53 (2.9%) Yellow 70 (3.9%) Green 89 (4.9%) Green 69 (3.8%) Blue Medium 35.0% to less than 55.0% in Current Year 36 (2.0%) Orange 136 (7.6%) Orange 114 (6.3%) Yellow 147 (8.2%) Green 92 (5.1%) Green Low 10.0% to less than 35.0 in Current Year% 42 (2.3%) Red 85 (4.7%) Orange 59 (3.3%) Orange 72 (4.0%) Yellow 30 (1.7%) Yellow Very Low Less than 10.0% in Current Year 5 (0.3%) Red 74 (4.1%) Red 321 (17.8%) Red 82 (4.6%) Orange 0 (0.0%) Yellow Tables 6 and 7 provide the number of high school districts and high schools, respectively, would receive each performance color after the proposed cut scores are applied. 6: Statewide Districts’ Performance # of LEAs Red Orange Yellow Green Blue 443 64 (14.4%) 107 (24.2%) 95 (21.4%) 137 (30.9%) 40 (9%) Table 7: Statewide Schools’ Performance # of Schools Red Orange Yellow Green Blue 1,801 442 (24.5%) 409 (22.7%) 275 (15.3%) 433 (24%) 242 (13.4%) Table 8 provides a breakdown of the results by school type.
10: ELA – High School District Performance Levels (Colors) Performance Level Declined Significantly from Prior Year (by 15.1 points or more) Declined from Year (by 3.0 to 15 points) Maintained from Prior Year (declined or increased by 2.9 points or less) Increased from Prior Year (by 3 points to 14.9 points) Increased Significantly from Prior Year (by 15 points or more) Very High +75 points or higher in Current Year 26 (1.9%) Green 42 (3.1%) Green 23 (1.7%) Blue 23 (1.7%) Blue 20 (1.4%) Blue High +30 to +74.9 points in Current Year 106 (7.9%) Green 94 (7.0%) Green 37 (2.8%) Green 54 (4.0%) Green 32 (2.4%) Blue Medium 0 to +29.9 points in Current Year 110 (8.2%) Yellow 72 (5.4%) Yellow 39 (2.9%) Yellow 40 (3.0%) Green 30 (2.2%) Green Low -0.1 to -45 points in Current Year 166 (12.3%) Orange 83 (6.2%) Orange 29 (2.2%) Orange 37 (2.8%) Yellow 28 (2.1%) Yellow Very Low -45.1 points or lower in Current Year 115 (8.5%) Red 54 (4.0%) Red 17 (1.3%) Red 33 (2.5%) Orange 30 (2.2%) Orange Tables 11 and 12 show the number of districts and schools, respectively that would receive each performance color after the proposed cut scores are applied. Table 11: ELA – Statewide Districts’ Performance
High 0 to +24.9 points in Current Year 14 (1.1%) Green 19 (1.4%) Green 11 (0.8%) Green 23 (1.7%) Green 8 (0.6%) Blue Medium -0.1 to -59.9 points in Current Year 74 (5.5%) Yellow 99 (7.4%) Yellow 52 (3.9%) Yellow 82 (6.2%) Green 62 (4.7%) Green Low -60.1 to -115 points in Current Year 118 (8.8%) Orange 121 (9.0%) Orange 68 (5.1%) Orange 79 (5.9%) Yellow 59 (4.4%) Yellow Very Low -115.1 points or lower in Current Year 116 (8.7%) Red 95 (7.1%) Red 36 (2.7%) Red 55 (4.1%) Orange 33 (2.4%) Orange Tables 25 and 26 show the number of districts and schools, respectively, that receive each performance color after the proposed cut scores are applied. Tables 25: Math—Statewide Districts’ Performance # of LEAs Red Orange Yellow Green Blue 72 5 (6.9%) 26 (36.1%) 28 (38.9%) 10 (13.9%) 3 (4.2%) Table 26: Math –Statewide Schools’ Performance # of Schools Red Orange Yellow Green Blue
Priority 2: Implementation of State Academic Standards N/A Annually report on progress in Implementing the standards for all content areas Priority 3: Parent Engagement N/A Annually report progress toward: (1) seeking input from parents/guardians in decision making; and (2) promoting parental participation in programs Priority 4: Student Achievement Academic Indicator (3-8, 11) English Learner Progress Indicator (1-12) N/A Priority 5: Student Engagement Chronic Absence Indicator (K-8) Graduation Rate Indicator (9-12) N/A Priority 6: School Climate Suspension Rate Indicator (K-12) Administer a Climate Survey every other year Priority 7: Access to a Broad Course of Study College/Career Indicator (9-12) (Requesting SBE remove this indicator from this priority area.) Annually report progress on the extent students have access to, and are enrolled in, a broad course of study Priority 8: Outcomes in a Broad Course of Study College/Career Indicator (9-12) N/A Priority 9 (COE Only) Services for Expelled Students N/A Annually report on the coordination of Services for Expelled Students Priority 10 (COE Only) Services for Foster Youth N/A Annually report on the coordination of Services for Foster Youth Recommendation The CDE recommends that the SBE update the criteria for differentiated assistance to incorporate the new indicator for Access to a Broad Course of Study.
Rating Scale (lowest to highest): 1 – Exploration and Research Phase; 2 – Beginning Development; 3 – Initial Implementation; 4 – Full Implementation; 5 – Full Implementation and Sustainability Activities 1 2 3 4 5 Identifying the professional learning needs of groups of teachers or staff as a whole [Enter 1, if applicable] [Enter 2, if applicable] [Enter 3, if applicable] [Enter 4, if applicable] [Enter 5, if applicable] Identifying the professional learning needs of individual teachers [Enter 1, if applicable] [Enter 2, if applicable] [Enter 3, if applicable] [Enter 4, if applicable] [Enter 5, if applicable] Providing support for teachers on the standards they have not yet mastered [Enter 1, if applicable] [Enter 2, if applicable] [Enter 3, if applicable] [Enter 4, if applicable] [Enter 5, if applicable] Recommendation The CDE recommends that the SBE approve the proposed technical revisions to the self-reflection tool for Implementation of State Academic Standards, and allow the CDE, in collaboration with SBE staff, to make any necessary technical amendments to the local indicator self-reflection tools to improve readability and adhere to Section 508 requirements.
September 21, 2018 Special Education Administrators of County Offices of Education 45 State and Local Indicators Reported in 2018 Dashboard DASS New Look and Feel of 2018 Dashboard Rollout of 2018 Dashboard September 27, 2018 South Assessment and Accountability Information Meeting (Ontario and Virtual) 1,030 State and Local Indicators Reported in 2018 Dashboard DASS Identification of LEAs for LCFF Support Identification of Schools for Comprehensive and Targeted Support and Improvement New Look and Feel of 2018 Dashboard Rollout of 2018 Dashboard October 4, 2018 El Dorado County Office of Education Superintendent’s Council 20 New State Indicators Reported in 2018 Dashboard DASS Incorporation of Participation Rate in Academic Indicator Identification of LEAs for LCFF Support Identification of Schools for Comprehensive and Targeted Support and Improvement New Look and Feel of the 2018 Dashboard Rollout of the 2018 Dashboard
October 5, 2018 ESSA Stakeholder Input Session 300 Differentiated Assistance and School Identification California School Dashboard Educational Agency and Local Educational Agency Report Cards October 9, 2018 I Conference 200 Overview of the Dashboard DASS State Indicators Reported in 2018 Dashboard Incorporation of Participation Rate in Academic Indicator Identification of Schools for Comprehensive and Targeted Support and Improvement New Look and Feel of the 2018 Dashboard Rollout of 2018 Dashboard October 16, 2018 California Student Data Day Hosted by the Santa Clara County Office of Education 50 Overview of the Dashboard and Accountability System Demographic Data for Student Groups Deep Dive into the State Indicators Rollout of the 2018 Dashboard October 18, 2018 LCFF Stakeholders Meeting 25 State Indicators in the 2018 Dashboard Special Education Certificate of Completion Criteria for the one-year graduation rate