California ESSA State Plan Glossary The following acronyms and terms are used throughout the State Plan. Readers of the State Plan are encouraged to refer to this glossary as needed. Acronym/Term Definition CalEDFacts CalEDFacts is a compilation of statistics and information on a variety of issues concerning education in California. California School Dashboard The California School Dashboard (Dashboard) is a Web site released in 2017 that parents/guardians, educators, and the public can use to see how districts and schools are meeting the needs of California's diverse student population based on the concise set of measures included in the new accountability system, including test scores, graduation rates, English learner progress, and suspension rates. Additionally, the Dashboard includes reporting and evaluation of local indicators. The Dashboard is part of California's new school accountability system based on the Local Control Funding Formula, enacted in 2013. As provisioned in California Education Code, the Dashboard will be used to support local educational agencies (LEAs) in identifying strengths, weaknesses, and areas for improvement; to assist in determining whether LEAs and schools are eligible for technical assistance; and to assist the state in determining whether LEAs and schools are eligible for more intensive support/intervention. CAASPP The California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (CAASPP) System was established on January 1, 2014. The CAASPP System replaced the Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) Program, which became inoperative on July 1, 2013. The CAASPP system includes the Smarter Balanced summative assessments for English language arts/literacy and mathematics, the California Science Tests, the reading/language arts standards-based Tests in Spanish, and the California Alternative Assessments. CCEE The California Collaborative for Educational Excellence (CCEE) was established pursuant to California Education Code Section 52074, which states that “[t]he purpose of the California Collaborative for Educational Excellence is to advise and assist school districts, county superintendents of schools, and charter schools in achieving the goals set forth in a local control and accountability plan.” The CCEE is a public agency that is governed by a five-member governing board composed of the
introduced by the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) represent a major shift in how the state funds local educational agencies (LEAs), eliminating revenue limits and most state categorical programs. LEAs receive funding based on the demographic profile of the students they serve and gain greater flexibility to use these funds to improve student outcomes. More information regarding the LCFF is available on the California Department of Education (CDE) LCFF Overview Web page at . LEAs receive a base grant based upon average daily attendance with additional funds for students in certain grade spans. In addition, they receive a supplemental grant equal to 20 percent of the base grant based on the number of students eligible to receive free or reduced-price meals, English learners, and foster youth students, and a concentration grant equal to 50 percent of the adjusted base grant for these same students when exceeding 55 percent of an LEA’s enrollment. LEAs have broad discretion regarding use of the base grants but are required to develop, adopt, and annually update a three-year Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) which describes how they intend to meet annual goals for all pupils, with specific activities to address state and local priorities identified in LCFF statute. The law requires LEAs to increase or improve services for high-need students in proportion to the additional funding apportioned on the basis of the target student enrollment in the district. LEA In California, local educational agencies (LEAs) include county offices of education, school districts, and direct-funded charter schools. SBE The California State Board of Education (SBE) is the state’s 11 member K–12 policy-making body for academic standards, curriculum, instructional materials, assessments, and accountability. California Education Code 12032 officially designates the SBE as the state educational agency (SEA) for federally funded education programs, including the Every Student Succeeds Act. The SEA has the primary responsibility for overseeing the state’s full compliance with provisions of federal law including school accountability. SEA The state educational agency (SEA) is defined in ESSA as the agency primarily responsible for the state supervision of public elementary schools and secondary schools. California Education Code 12032 officially designates the State Board of
For all percentages calculated above, the total number of schools (7,155) was used for the denominator. <end delete> <begin add> The statewide baseline data for all students and each student group are provided below. The tables display the performance gaps among student groups at the state level, and show that many student groups would need to make significantly more progress than higher performing student groups to reach the statewide goal within 7 years. Table 4: State Level ELA Data by Student Group
enrolled. The calculation formula for Change is the current year suspension rate minus the prior year suspension rate. are the three five-by-five colored tables that will be used to determine performance levels for elementary, middle, and high schools. Table 16. Suspension Indicator (Elementary School) Level Increased Significantly by greater than 2.0% Increased by 0.3% to 2.0% Maintained Declined or increased by less than 0.3% Declined by 0.3% to less than 1.0% Declined Significantly by 1.0% or greater Very Low 0.5% or less N/A Blue Blue Blue Low Greater than 0.5% to 1.0% N/A Yellow Green Green Blue Medium Greater than 1.0% to 3.0% Orange Orange Yellow Green High Greater than 3.0% to 6.0% Red Orange Orange Yellow Yellow Very High Greater than 6.0% Red Red Red Orange Yellow <begin add> <end add> Table 17. Suspension Indicator (Middle School)
Level Increased Significantly by greater than 4.0% Increased by 0.3% to 4.0% Maintained Declined or increased by less than 0.3% Declined by 0.3% to less than 3.0% Declined Significantly by 3.0% or greater Very Low 0.5% or less N/A Green Blue Blue Blue Low Greater than 0.5% to 2.0% N/A Yellow Green Blue Medium Greater than 2.0% to 8.0% Orange Orange Yellow Green Green High Greater than 8.0% to 12.0% Red Orange Orange Yellow Yellow Very High Greater than 12.0% Red Red Red Orange Yellow Table 18. Suspension Indicator (High School) Level Increased Significantly by greater than 3.0% Increased by 0.3% to 3.0% Maintained Declined or increased by less than 0.3% Declined by 0.3% to less than 2.0% Declined Significantly by 2.0% or greater Very Low 0.5% or less N/A Blue Blue Blue Low Greater than 0.5% to 1.5% N/A Yellow Green Green Blue Medium Greater than 1.5% to 6.0% Orange Orange Yellow Green Green
High Greater than 6.0% to 10.0% Red Orange Orange Yellow Yellow Very High Greater than 10.0% Red Red Red Orange Yellow <end add> Annual Meaningful Differentiation (ESEA section 1111(c)(4)(C)) Describe the system of annual meaningful differentiation of all public schools in the State, consistent with the requirements of section 1111(c)(4)(C) of the ESEA, including a description of (i) how the system is based on all indicators in the State’s accountability system, (ii) for all students and for each subgroup of students. Note that each state must comply with the requirements in 1111(c)(5) of the ESEA with respect to accountability for charter schools. California has developed a multiple measures accountability system that uses percentile distributions to create a five-by-five grid. This by five grid provides 25 results that combine “Status” and “Change” to make an overall determination for each of the indicators. The accountability system provides equal weight to both “Status” and “Change.” “Status” is determined using the current year performance (i.e., current year graduation rate), and “Change” is the difference between performance from the current year and the prior year, or between the current year and a multi-year weighted average. To determine the percentile cut scores for “Status,” LEAs and schools were ordered from highest to lowest and four cut points were selected based on the distribution. These cut points created five “Status” levels: Very High High Medium Low Very Low For “Change” cut scores, LEAs and schools were ordered separately from highest to lowest for positive change and lowest to highest for negative change. cuts points created five “Change” levels: Increased significantly Increased Maintained
(2) An applicant that proposes to develop instructional materials for classroom use might describe how it will make the materials available on audio tape or in braille for students who are blind. (3) An applicant that proposes to carry out a model science program for secondary students and is concerned that girls may be less likely than boys to enroll in the course, might indicate how it intends to conduct "outreach" efforts to girls, to encourage their enrollment. (4) An applicant that proposes a project to increase school safety might describe the special efforts it will take to address concern of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender students, and efforts to reach out to and involve the families of LGBT students We recognize that many applicants may already be implementing effective steps to ensure equity of access and participation in their grant programs, and we appreciate your cooperation in responding to the requirements of this provision.