2018-2019 School Accountability Reporting
School Accountability Report in WISEdash
Dear Parents, Guardians, Community Members and Taxpayers,
District and School “Report Cards”
In the State of Wisconsin every district and each school in the district are identified in one of five areas for an overall accountability rating. Districts and schools target is to minimally demonstrate measurements that place them in the “Meets Expectations”, “Exceeds Expectations”, or “Significantly Exceeds Expectations” categories. The overall accountability rating is based on scores in up to 4 priority areas combined with the ability to meet three student engagement indicators. The priority areas for districts or schools can be compared to the state average in each area.
This year each proficiency category is also designated in the upper left hand corner with a multiple-starred rating as well. The more stars noted the better the level of proficiency achieved. As with previous state report cards the following scores are designated for each proficiency category:
- Significantly Exceeds Expectations 83 – 100 5 stars *****
- Exceeds Expectations 73 – 82.9 4 stars ****
- Meets Expectations 63 – 72.9 3 stars ***
- Meets Few Expectations 53 – 62.9 2 stars **
- Fails to Meet Expectations 0 – 52.9 1 star *
Determination of Accountability Rating
The first priority area is Student Achievement in the areas of English Language Arts and Mathematics according to Wisconsin Forward test results. Districts/schools receive .5 points for every student who scores in the basic range, 1.0 points for every student scoring in the proficient range and 1.5 points for every student scoring in the advanced range. No points are given for each student scoring in the Below Basic Performance Level category.
The second priority area reports Student Growth in English Language Arts and Mathematics. This score is used to measure whether students are on target to move to higher levels of proficiency each year they are tested. This score is not calculated for high schools as students are not tested consecutive years.
The third priority area is Closing Gaps. The goal is for all groups of students to be achieving and, eventually, graduating from high school. This area looks at the performance of racial/ethnic groups, students with disabilities, students from low income and students who are English Language Learners and compares their score to statewide comparison groups. Points are earned for closing gaps between the scores of the two groups. The score is based upon closing gaps for achievement, based on test scores in English Language Arts and Mathematics, and high school graduation rates.
Priority area four is On-Track and Postsecondary Readiness. When applicable, points are assigned in this area for graduation rate, attendance rate, third grade reading achievement, eighth grade math achievement and ACT participation and performance. The goal of this area is to measure post-secondary readiness. Third grade reading is important to measure literacy readiness and eighth grade math for algebra readiness, both essential for post-secondary success.
Student Engagement Indicators are for test participation, based upon the lowest group rate, absenteeism rate, and dropout rate. Points are deducted from the overall score if a school or district does not meet the goal in any of those three areas.
Review and Summary:
A few points of interest about the results for the PEASD:
- The District is identified as “Exceeds Expectations” with an overall district score of 70.7.
- Eagle Elementary is identified as “Significantly Exceeds Expectations” with an overall score of 77.3.
- Palmyra Elementary is identified as “Exceeds Expectations” with an overall score of 71.8.
- Palmyra-Eagle Middle School is identified as “Meets Few Expectations” with an overall score of 60.7.
- Palmyra-Eagle High School is identified as “Meets Expectations” with an overall score of 77.2.
Overall, the district has several challenges in meeting performance expectations as detailed on the report cards. The impact of various sub-groups, such as students with disabilities, students in poverty (economically disadvantaged learners), and English Learners (EL students) present certain challenges to the calculation of scores in each building and level. Additionally, when student groups are relatively small in number significant discrepancies may create “adverse volatility” to the performance ratings as computed. The overall goal is to reduce the number of pupils that contribute no points to the calculation that fall into the “Below Basic” category.
An example of this impact is the overall rating for Palmyra-Eagle Middle School this past year. By way of example, of the 129 total students tested in grades 7 and 8 in English Language Arts 25 (nearly 20% of those tested) contributed no points to the total score. Similarly, in Mathematics 35 - 7th and 8th graders (slightly more than 27%) contributed no points to the total score. Clearly, this is an area to be examined further and with a dedicated effort to improve the overall rating for our Middle School.
While no excuses are given as the scores are measuring what they are designed to measure there is certainly a larger context around why the assessment results are what they are. Given a number of factors such as continued changes in classroom teaching positions, a large and growing preponderance of students with unique learning challenges, increasing shifts in student demographics (particularly around poverty and race) and reductions in support positions in the PEASD over time it is not surprising to see the results we have. In spite of the challenges presented to us all district staff continue to seek positive ways to impact student achievement, growth and learning in every district classroom, department and school location. Such work is in keeping with our mission statement “to ensure students excel with intellect and virtue inspired by innovative educators who engage and challenge each individual.”
WISEdash Public Portal
