About Charter
Schools
E-Mail CER
CER Publications
March 1999
District of Columbia Public Charter School Board
April 6, 1998
Some Expectations Regarding the Contents of Charter School Accountability Plans
Purpose:
A Charter School Accountability Plan should be designed to provide information needed to measure and track the school’s progress toward its goals, make program adjustments when needed, and report to parents, the community, and the chartering authority on performance and progress. The Accountability Plan is the mechanism through which the school indicates the goals (outcomes) and performance levels it elects to be held accountable for attaining. However, it is important to recognize that the performance of charter schools also will be compared by the public and the media to that of traditional public schools and with other public charter schools. The design of your Accountability Plan needs to acknowledge and prepare for this inevitable comparison.
Duration:
Although the Accountability Plan should provide information needed to assure strong performance and continuous improvement over the foreseeable future of the school, the Plan should place a particular emphasis on documenting performance and progress over a five-year period from receipt of the charter. By law, a charter review that examines the progress of the school in meeting the academic achievement expectations set forth in the charter (Accountability Plan) must be held once every five years, beginning on the fifth anniversary of the charter.
Organizing Framework:
An Accountability Plan needs an organizing framework. Below is an example of one organizing framework that includes the areas in which a charter school is expected to be accountable. However, the group may wish to organize the same concerns into a somewhat different set of categories.
Is there evidence of significantly improved or persistently strong student performance?
Is the school making satisfactory progress meeting both its academic and non-academic goals?
Are the distinctive programs of the school fully implemented and operating as intended? Do teachers and other staff have the training and resources they need, and are they performing effectively?
Is the school maintaining effective leadership by its Board of Trustees, competent management of its operations, and responsible use of the public funds under its stewardship?
Is the school meeting the requirements of applicable laws and regulations?
Is the school meeting the terms of the charter agreement and faithfully implementing the plans contained in the application?
Essential Elements:
If an Accountability Plan is to be conceptually sound and useful to the school, there are certain essential elements or components that must be present. And these elements are related to one another in certain rational ways that are generally understood, but not always agreed upon in the technical fields of evaluation and assessment. We are interested in sound, though not necessarily elaborate design. We don’t believe there is a single best way to design an accountability plan. And we are particularly aware that each school is different with different goals and different strategies. Nevertheless, there are certain elements—give them different names if you like—that the Board would like to see incorporated into each Accountability Plan. Each of these elements is listed below, along with statements of the kinds of information that should be included in the development of each element.
An Accountability Plan should contain:
An Accountability Plan should be keyed to a comprehensive statement of academic standards that specifies for each subject or content area and for each grade, age, or other grouping level what students should know and be able to do. Although the student academic standards need only to be referenced in the Plan, they represent the foundation on which the school’s academic program is based. These standards should be challenging, clear, and measurable. Some schools already have developed or adapted a set of standards against which they have designed (or intend to design) their instructional and assessment programs, other schools have adopted an existing instructional program that is standards based, and others have a planning schedule that call for the adoption, adaptation, or creation of academic content and performance standards over the coming months.
Whatever the process may be, the Board expects that every school will in the near future have in place a systematic, comprehensive statement of student academic standards that provides a solid foundation for its educational program and an anchor for its Accountability Plan.
An Accountability Plan should contain:
An Accountability Plan should contain:
An Accountability Plan should contain:
-- will provide credible evidence of academic progress,
-- use corresponding assessment tools annually so as to produce longitudinal data over the term of the charter,
-- employ multiple tools for assessing student performance (which must include any required district-wide assessments, but may also include other norm referenced tests, criterion referenced tests, authentic or performance assessments such as student portfolios, tests that measure the mastery of academic standards, etc.);
An Accountability Plan should contain:
-- the management of the school;
-- the policymaking processes of the Board of Trustees;
-- plans for teacher professional development activities; and
-- the design of program and management adjustments that are intended to improve the future performance of particular programs, and of the charter school.
An Accountability Plan should contain:
ACADEMY OF THE PACIFIC RIM: STANDARDS
"
Americans clamor for standards in nearly every part of their lives. They expect strict standards to govern construction of buildings, bridges, highways, and tunnels, shoddy work would put lives at risk... They expect stronger standards to protect their drinking water, the food they eat, and the air they breathe . . . When they fly, they count on the enforcement of security standards, rely on the airlines to observe strict maintenance standards, and expect the pilots to have passed the appropriate tests...Even the most ordinary transactions of daily life reflect the omnipresence of standards. US coins and bills have a standard value, allowing them to be spent anywhere in the country. . . Standards are created and perfected because they improve the quality of life. Without them, life would be chaotic, unpredictable, arid dangerous."
Standards-Setting: Why it is important
Accountability is the linchpin of the charter school movement. And while schools are held accountable to many constituents— parents, the community, their board, the state, etc.—none are as important as the student. By writing standards, a school defines what it expects students to know and theways in which students can demonstrate the knowledge and skills they acquire. Standards are critical yardsticks for teachers. While most schools use a variety of teaching methods and resources to help students reach standards, knowing from the outset where schools expect students to be helps keep schools accountable for student learning.
Standards-Setting: Big Picture Questions
What kind of standards should you set?
There are two kinds of standards in the education world: content standards and performance standards.
Content standards describe skills or knowledge we expect schools to teach and students to acquire. An example of an English content standard would be, "given an unfamiliar passage to read, each student can identify and explain the type of information conveyed, the main ideas, the way the text is organized, and the relationship of the parts to the whole." In math, a content standard might be "by the end of eighth grade, each student can do two-digit multiplication problems."
Performance standards make content standards operational by answering the question: How good is good enough? The purpose of performance standards is two-fold: performance standards hold students accountable for their academic responsibilities, and hold teachers accountable for their teaching responsibilities. An example of a performance standard that corresponds with the above math example would be "given ten multiplication problems with two-digit numbers, each student can compute the correct answer for seven of those ten problems in less than 12 minutes." Another example of a kind of performance standard would be the Advanced Placement exam, where a student must get a three or above. In other words, performance standards are gradeable, objective demarcations that make it clear to students and teachers alike how good is good enough.
The Academy's Decision:
The Academy of the Pacific Rim focused its initial standards setting phase on content standards. We are currently developing our performance standards.
What years should you set standards for and what subject areas should you start with?
Don't think narrowly about your first year when setting your school's standards. Consider the grade level students will be when they leave your school. Even though your school may be just starting with elementary schoolers, the vision could be to grow those students through junior high and high school. If so, you might want to consider doing initial drafts of your middle and high school standards in addition to elementary school standards. Also, think carefully about what span of time you want your standards to cover. If you are a middle school, do you want middle school exit standards? Or do you want standards set in one-year increments at 6th, 7th, and 8th grade? Finally, think about which standards are central to your mission and work on those standards first. Standards setting is a critical but time-consuming process.
|
Good Sources for an Overview on Standards 1)Designing Satndards-Based Districts, Schools and Classrooms by Robert Marzano and John S. Kendall is an excellent practical step-by-step guide to setting academic standards. It was the Academy’s bible last year. 2) Raising the Standards by Denis P. Doyle and Susan Pimentel is an excellent source for helping school districts become standards-based. E-mail: oder@corwin.sagepub.com or call 805-499-9774 for a copy. 3) Diane Ravitch’s book, National Standards in American Education, is an excellent analysis of the standards movement in education and articulates why it matters. |
The Academy’s Decision:
The Academy of the Pacific Rim drafted content standards for four disciplines at the exit level for middle school and the exit level for high school. Although we are only teaching middle school students this year we believed it w as important to develop standards for high school as u ell. K-5 knowing where we want students to be at the end of twelfth grade means we have a better sense of what seeds to plant in our students' earlier years in the Academy to ensure they graduate having mastered complex concepts and ideas.
Based on the Academy's mission to educate the "whole" child, the Academy's program spans five domains— academics; practical and work skills; health and physical fitness; culture, art and music; and character. Within those five domains, there are 13 subjects—English, math, science, history, civics, geography, international business and politics, Asian language, practical and work skills, health, physical education, arts, music and drama. We DID NOT develop standards for all of those areas. We focused our initial months on content standards in four disciplines: English and the language arts, math, science, and social studies (history, civics and geography.) Think about what subjects are central to your mission and work on those standards first.
What should you use as your baseline standards?
Think carefully about how you are going to 'prove' you are doing a stellar job with students. Unfortunately, the t world of accountability and schools is muddled, save for standardized tests. Regardless of how you feel about standardized testing, they will be used to determine how well your school is performing particularly as you get. closer to having your charter renewed. And, for now, standardized tests are the only 'objective' measures out there. Note that more and more states are developing tests 'in-house' to evaluate whether schools are meeting the state frameworks. While you don't want your standards to be 'dumbed-down' to the state level or worse yet, to the standardized test level, you do want to be absolutely positive that AT A MINIMUM your standards incorporate the state frameworks and the material evaluated through standardized tests. Using the state standards as a baseline then, as a surefire way to make sure your school covers those important bases.
The Academy's decision:
The Academy used the Massachusetts frameworks in math, science, history/civics/geography, and English as our baseline. We also looked at the content and skill areas the Stanford-9 covered since that is the test that all Boston Public Schools take each Spring.
Should you draft standards from scratch?
There has been much good work done on standards-setting so unless you have a whole lot of extra time and resources on your hands, it probably makes more sense to build on the work already done. Synthesizing is a whole lot easier than creating from scratch. The challenge, truth be told, is to find quality standards that mirror your academic values as a school in the morass of standards out there, many of which are mediocre. Some of the best studies on quality standards are included in the sidebar.
|
Best Web-Sites for Locating Sample Standards **<www.edexcellence.net> has the best analysis on the quality of state standards--state-by-state and subject-by-subject. The site is maintained by the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation .**<putwest.boces.org/Standards.html> is an outstanding annotated list of Internet sites with K-12 educational standards and curriculum frameworks - from all sources, national and local - maintained by the Putnam Valley Schools, Putnam, New York. **<www.mcrel.org> is a regional educational labrotory sponsered by the U.S. Department of Education that offers a search-able database of standards. |
The Academy's decision:
We used Modern Red School House's standards as our template for what our end product should look like and then we gathered standards and frameworks from the following sources: International Baccalaureate, advanced Placement, Taiwan and Japan (translated for math and science), and the Colorado, Virginia and California Departments of Education (for select subjects).
Who should draft and review your standards?
Standards-setting is a terrific way to begin building community and ownership around the program, around the aspirations you have for students. It is a great relief from facility woes and other minutiae that seem to be light years from why the school was started. Teachers, parents, universities, business leaders and others can really start to feel a part of the school through this process. The danger in getting a lot of folks involved and invested is creating a process that gives participants too much of a say thereby muddying and confusing the standards being set. Casting your net wide is a great way to get more people involved in the school early on but make sure that you set clear parameters on input and feedback. Also, please note comments on the last page arguing for accountability, clearly articulating who is responsible for what.
Standards-Setting: The Process
Think about the right grain size.
The content standards below give two examples of content standards. The first example is an English standard, "given an unfamiliar passage to read, each student can identify and explain the type of information conveyed, the main ideas, the way the text is organized, and the relationship of the parts to the whole." The second example is a math one. "By the end of eighth grade, each student can do two-digit multiplication problems." As these two examples demonstrate, content standards can come in many different "grain" sizes.Standards for any discipline could consist of five very general content standards, could be broken down into five hundred terribly explicit content standards, or could fall anywhere in between. One of the greatest challenges in setting the standards properly is to determine a grain size and to make the grain size of content standards across disciplines consistent. Despite sending out lengthy examples and talking through the grain size during the kickoff retreat, making the grain size consistent was our biggest challenge.
Articulate the criteria.
Be clear about what the end product is. The Academy used the following ten criteria developed by Susan Pimmentel, a national standards consultant, to determine a 'worthy' standard. These criteria were shared not only with our drafters, but the reviewers as well.1. Rigorous. Are standards sufficiently rigorous to be labeled world class? Do they reflect Advanced. Placement and International Baccalaureate standards? Do they reflect the aims of other countries?
2. Measurable. Are standards demonstrable and subject to assessment?
3. Specific Enough. Are standards overly prescriptive? Overly general? Are the standards specific enough to guide teachers, curriculum and assessment developers and others in their work?
4. Valuable. In response to the question, "so what?," can you defend the knowledge and skills included in the standard statements? t
5. Intelligible. Are standards clear enough for teachers to understand what is required of them? Clear enough for parents to keep an eye on their children's progress? What about the students themselves? And how about employers and colleges? Do the standards tell them precisely what students will know and be able to do as they take them on as workers and students?
6. Focus on academics. Do standards focus on reading, writing, math and science and learning or about history, geography, literature, health and the arts? Or do standards focus overwhelmingly on social and behavioral issues?
7. Right mix of skills and knowledge. Do standards speak of skills in the abstract or are they tied to important content? Do higher level thinking skills direct what students are supposed to know and able to do?
8. Absent of red flags and flash points. Are there words that are likely to inflame the public?
9. Manageable given constraints of time.
10. Proper pattern of cumulative learning. Are standards developmentally sound? Do the standards include a natural progression of learning? Is a proper foundation set at the earlier levels to properly prepare students for more rigorous study at later levels?
Outline the Process.
There are a tremendous number of moving parts in standards-setting. It is important that everyone is clear on the process from the get-go. Below you will find the Academy's process.| Stage 1. Drafting
done by you. We have collected many resources to aid you in creation of
exemplar standards and curriculum. At the February 8th meeting we will be
giving to you myriad standards and frameworks from all parts of the world:
New Standards Project, Advanced Placement, International Baccalaureate,
California, Virginia, Modern Red Schoolhouse standards, and if/when ready,
the translated Japanese and Taiwanese standards. Each of these
"sources" is touted to be among the best in the world. Your task
will be to use your expertise and knowledge of what works in the classroom
with sixth t rough twelfth graders to synthesize the world's most rigorous
and high-quality standards into unique standards for the Academy of the
Pacific Rim. The product at the end of Stage I will be a draft of exit
standards in your discipline for middle school and for high school.
|
Stage II. Circulating your draft for comment. During stage two we will be getting feedback from experts. We believe it is essential to understand what our constituents—employers, colleges and universities, the community—need students to be able to do. Once we have your first draft, we will be asking those constituents for their input. A number of companies have expressed a keen interest in reviewing our standards, particularly in the practical and work skills domain. And here in Boston, the mecca of higher education, professors who teach first year courses at Tufts, MIT, Boston College, Boston University, Harvard, Wellesley, etc. will evaluate whether our standards reflect what they believe entering college students must know, both in terms of content and analytical skills, to succeed in their ambitious academic programs. |
Stage III. Editing and polishing. Once you get their feedback and incorporate it, we will then give the newly revised drafts to Susan Pimmentel, a nationally-renowned standards consultant. She will be the Academy's fruit-of-the-loom inspector 13! She will walk t rough each standard in each discipline and ma e sure it meets each of the ten criteria (see below) of a good standard. After an iterative process, we should have the Academy's exit content standards for middle school and high school. |
Stage IV. Develop curriculum and standards setting. Once we have content exit standards for both middle and high school, we the founding teachers will take what we, professors and employers believe students need to succeed in the postsecondary world and develop a map of how to get students to those levels for the sixth through eighth grade. With the founding team solidly in place, from the middle of April to late July we will sequentially and comprehensively develop our curriculum and performance standards (i.e. assessments) that make our content standards operational. |
** Excerpt of information sent to standard-setters prior to kick-off meeting.**
Choose a team and delegate responsibility.
Think carefully about who you put on your standards-setting team. The Academy selected a combination of middle school and high school teachers and organized teachers around their areas of expertise. While grade-level and content expertise matters, so do personalities in this process. Really think about building 'teams' and how the people you have recruited will work together and what you need to do to make them a well-functioning team. Also, choose a team leader for each discipline. Standards are such an unwieldy product that although input from a committee is essential, if the committee decides on each and every standard, you will never finish the process. And if you do, you will likely end up with a product that is very muddled. Allow the team leader to be able to make the final decisions based on input from the committee. Finally, appoint one more person to be the overall coordinator of the standard setting process. Make sure this person is a taskmaster and skilled at letting team members know exactly what is expected and when.
For more information about the Academy's Standards contact
Stacey Boyd at
(617)361-0050 or send email to sboyd@pacrim.org
1286 Hyde Park Avenue, Hyde Park, MA 02136
Accountability Agreement
WHEREAS, the Chicago School Reform Board of Trustees (the "Board") and the _______________ Charter School (the "Charter School") have entered into a Charter School Agreement dated ________________, 199___, (the "Charter School Agreement"); and
WHEREAS, Section 27A-9 of the Charter Schools Law, 105 ILCS 5/27A-9, provides that charter schools shall be held accountable for their performance in each of the following areas, which, under this Agreement, shall be referred to as "Compliance Categories":
WHEREAS, under Section 9 (a) of the Charter School Agreement, the Board and the Charter School have agreed to enter into an Accountability Agreement setting forth the performance goals, standards, objectives, and assessments for the Charter School; and
WHEREAS, the Board and the Charter School have determined that it is in the best interests of the Board, the Charter School, its students, parents and the public, to articulate clear standards for the Charter School and to annually publish the level of achievement of the Charter School with respect to those standards;
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:
1. Accountability Components
The Board and the Charter School hereby agree that the Charter School shall be evaluated annually in accordance with this Agreement and with respect to each of the Compliance Categories. Further, this Accountability Agreement shall satisfy all requirements of Section 9 of the Charter School Agreement, and, thereby, relieve the charter school of its requirement to provide an Annual Report under Section 9.
2. Annual Performance Reports
Annually the Board shall publish a Performance Report indicating the Charter School’s performance on each of the Indicators in the three categories provided herein. A Preliminary Performance Report for the preceding school year shall be issued by September 1 of each year based on available information. A final Performance Report for the preceding school year shall be issued by December 1 of each year. The Performance Report will include three categories: Pupil Performance, Fiscal Management, and Compliance.
Each category will have multiple Indicators and the charter school’s performance on each Indicator will be rated as:
This Agreement establishes the performance levels, listed below, which generate High, Middle, and Low ratings for each Indicator. However, additional information or extenuating circumstances may lead the Board to rate a category higher or lower than when performance level criteria are strictly applied. The Board shall consider classifying a pupil performance Indicator as "High" if the Charter School’s performance, without attaining the level specified for "High" performance by this Agreement, nonetheless greatly exceeds the performance of other comparable public schools.
A. Pupil Performance
The intent of the Pupil Performance section is to provide a multi-faceted understanding of student performance at the Charter School upon which the Charter School’s academic performance will be evaluated.
The Charter School shall participate fully in the Illinois Goals Assessment Program (IGAP) or the Illinois Standards Achievement Test (ISAT), the Iowa Tests of Basic Skills (ITBS) for grades 3 through 8, and the Test of Academic Proficiency (TAP) for grades 9 through 12, and the Prairies State Achievement Examination for grade 12. Data from these assessments will be compiled and evaluated as described below.
In addition to standardized tests, the Charter School has the voluntary opportunity to include Unique Standards and Assessments in its Accountability Agreement. The school may choose to implement alternative assessments to measure student achievement of existing Illinois Learning Standards. In addition, the charter school may choose to implement unique learning or performance standards that are not part of the Illinois Learning Standards and to implement assessments for those unique standards. In either case, the standards must be measurable and assessed annually and the assessment results must indicate if a student Meets or Does Not Meet the standard. In addition, the Charter School may document the growth and trend data for student performance as related to the standard. The Charter School’s decision to implement unique standards and assessments shall not affect the Charter School’s obligation to comply with the IGAP, ISAT, ITBS and TAP assessments set forth in this section. Only those Unique Standards and Assessments agreed to by the Charter School and the Board by January 15 of each year may be included in the Performance Report.
The Charter School’s attendance rate and percentage of students transferring out of the school will also be assessed.
In general and when appropriate, when determining a classification, consideration shall be given to the relative performance of the charter school in comparison to other nearby public schools. Growth on the ITBS and TAP assessments shall be measured based on students who have been in attendance at the charter school before October 1 of each school year. Classifications for IGAP Indicators shall be re-evaluated when the Illinois State Board of Education replaces IGAP with ISAT. Unless otherwise indicated as a "multi-year trend," each of the following Indicators are single year results from the immediately prior school year.
|
Indicator |
High |
Middle |
Low |
| ITBS and TAP: Reading
Percent at or above national norms |
More than 50% | 15% - 50% | Less than 15% |
| ITBS and TAP: Math:
Percent at or above national norms |
More than 50% | 15% - 50% | Less than 15% |
| ITBS and TAP: Reading
Growth above prior year |
1.0 years or more | 0.7, 0.8 or 0.9 years | 0.6 or fewer years |
| ITBS and TAP: Math:
Growth above prior year |
1.0 years or more | 0.7, 0.8 or 0.9 years | 0.6 or fewer years |
| ITBS and TAP: Reading
Multi-year trend (Learning Gain Index) |
Up | Flat | Down |
| ITBS and TAP: Math
Multi-year trend (Learning Gain Index) |
Up | Flat | Down |
| IGAP/ISAT: ISBE
Classification Levels
(criteria applied only to most recent year’s results) |
"Level 3 – Schools That Exceed State Goals" and "High Level 2 – Schools That Meet State Goals" | "Middle" and "Low" Level 2 – "Schools that Meet State Goals" | "Level 1" – School Does Not Meet Goals |
| IGAP/ISAT Percent Meet and Exceed State Standards – multi-year trend | Up | Flat | Down |
| Prairie State Achievement
Exam
(12th grade students only): Percent of students with a satisfactory composite score |
More than 1.0 standard deviation above CPS average | Within 1.0 standard deviation of CPS average | More than 1.0 standard deviation below CPS average |
| Transfer Out Rate:
(percent of students who transfer out of the school during the year) |
More than 1.0 standard deviation above CPS average | Within 1.0 standard deviation of CPS average | More than 1.0 standard deviation below CPS average |
| Attendance Rate:
(evaluated by type of school -elementary or high school) |
More than 1.0 standard deviation above CPS average | Within 1.0 standard deviation of CPS average | More than 1.0 standard deviation below CPS average |
| Unique Standards and Assessments: Percent of students who meet standard at levels to be determined by the Charter School and Board | To be determined for each Indicator | To be determined for each Indicator | To be determined for each Indicator |
The ITBS multi-year trend data shall be compiled and reported in the manner developed by the Consortium on Chicago School Research in its March, 1998 report, "Academic Productivity of Chicago Public Elementary Schools." The TAP multi-year trend data shall be compiled and reported in a similar manner developed by the Consortium on Chicago School Research.
While Attendance Rate and Transfer Out Rate data will be collected, classified and reported annually, Low performance on these indicators alone and no others shall not be grounds for non-renewal or revocation. However, the Board may use Low performance on these measures as the basis for further inquiries about any Charter School practices which may be the cause of the Low performance. The Charter School shall cooperate with all reasonable inquiries by the Board in this regard.
B. Fiscal Management
The parties acknowledge that the Illinois Charter Schools Law requires a charter school to meet generally accepted standards of fiscal management. This requirement has two underlying purposes: to ensure the successful operation of the school into the future and to ensure the proper use of public funds.
The following fiscal management Indicators will be included in each Performance Report.
|
Indicator |
High |
Middle |
Low |
| Balanced Budget:
|
Both elements present | Current-year budget balanced. Prior-year budget not balanced. | Current-year budget not balanced |
| Financial Audit Findings | No findings | Any Minor finding(s) | Any repeated finding; any Major finding |
| Financial Obligations: pension payments, payroll taxes, insurance coverage, loan payments and terms | All in good standing | Non-payment with realistic plan to make payment; non-compliance with loan terms, | Non-payment without realistic plan to make payment: non-compliance with loan terms. |
In lieu of the provisions of Section 6.b of the Charter School Agreement which require the Charter School to provide the Board with a copy of its annual budget and quarterly cash flow projections for each fiscal year by April 1 immediately preceding such fiscal year, the Charter School shall provide the Board with a copy of its annual budget and quarterly cash flow projections for each fiscal year by July 1 of each fiscal year. The Board shall use such budget and cash flow statements, along with any other relevant information, to determine if the Charter School has a realistic current year balanced budget plan. The Board shall use the financial statements presented in the Charter School’s annual financial audit, required under Section 6.l of the Charter School Agreement, along with any other relevant information, to determine if the Charter School maintained a balanced budget during the prior-year.
The Charter School shall cause each of the components of the Financial Obligations Indicator to be tested as part of its annual financial audit.
An audit finding shall be considered Minor unless the Board determines a finding is Major. If the Board believes an audit finding may be Major, it shall obtain an opinion from a qualified, third-party professional regarding the importance of the finding. The Board shall also ask the charter school to respond to the finding.
In general, a finding will be considered Major if it indicates a deliberate act of wrongdoing, reckless conduct or causes a loss of confidence in the abilities or integrity of the school or seriously jeopardizes the continued operation of the school. Classification of a finding as Major shall be the sole discretion of the Board.
C. Compliance
Each annual Performance Report shall specifically state the school’s performance in relation to the Compliance requirements listed below and shall state the school’s performance in relation to other requirements if such performance is Middle or Low. The Performance Report is not limited to these Indicators and the Board may consider other Indicators, as warranted.
In each case, "High" shall be complete compliance with the law and the Charter School Agreement, "Middle" shall be a Minor violation of the law or the Agreement, and "Low" shall be a Major violation of the law or the Agreement .
|
Indicator |
High |
Middle |
Low |
|
Statute |
|||
| Criminal background
investigations under
105 ILCS 5/34-18.5 and Charter Agreement Sec. 5e |
|||
| Open Meetings Act (5 ILCS 120/1.01 et. seq.) | |||
| Teacher qualifications, 105 ILCS 5/27A-10(c), and Charter Agreement Sec. 5d | |||
| Fire Drill Act (105 ILCS 120) | |||
| Tornado Protection Program
(105 ILCS 5/10-20.23) |
|||
| Abused and Neglected Child
Reporting Act
(325 ILCS 5/1 et. seq.) |
|
Charter Agreement |
|||
| Enrollment procedures (Sec. 4c) | |||
| Governance and Operation (Sec. 4i) | |||
| Corporate Status (Sec. 5c) | |||
| Building, including presence of any outstanding Chicago Building Code violations (Sec. 5g) | |||
| Management and Financial Controls (Sec. 5k) | |||
| Quarterly Financial Statements (Sec. 5m) | |||
| Third Party Contracts (Sec. 11) | |||
| Charter Proposal (Exhibit A) |
The Charter School shall cause each of the above Indicators be tested annually as part of the Charter School’s audit.
When determining how to classify a Compliance Indicator, the Board may consider information from various sources, including, but not limited to, audits, site visits, and information provided by parents or employees. If the Board believes a violation has occurred which would lead to the classification of Indicator as Middle or Low, it shall first ask the Charter School to respond to the information upon which the classification would be based. If the Board believes a violation has occurred which may be material, it shall also obtain an opinion from a qualified third-party professional(s) regarding the importance of the violation.
In general, a violation will be considered Major if it indicates a deliberate act of wrongdoing, reckless conduct or causes a loss of confidence in the abilities or integrity of the school or seriously jeopardizes the continued operation of the school. Classification of a finding as material shall be the sole discretion of the Board.
3. Charter School Participation in the Accountability Process
The Charter School shall take all necessary actions to collect and report the information required by this Accountability Agreement, including, without limitation:
4. Non-Renewal and Revocation
The Board shall hold the Charter School accountable in these and only these Compliance Categories through the Indicators contained in the annual Performance Reports. The Board shall give fair consideration to all Indicators when acting to renew, not renew, or revoke the Charter School’s charter.
The Board may act to revoke a charter during the term of the Charter School Agreement if the Board clearly demonstrates that the Charter School:
in a manner which endangers the interests of students or the public. The Board may act to revoke a charter at any time, including prior to the issuance of the final or preliminary draft of the annual Performance Report, only if a charter school’s performance is Low for at least one Indicator. However, the decision to act to revoke a charter shall be at the discretion of the Board and shall not be automatic if one or more than one Indicator is Low.
The Board may act to not renew a charter if the Board, through the Charter School’s Performance Report clearly demonstrates that the Charter School :
in a manner which endangers the interests of students or the public or in a manner which fails to merit the continued investment of public funds. The Board shall not act to renew or to not renew a charter until the issuance of the final annual Performance Report after the fourth year of operation of the Charter School. The Board shall not act to not renew the charter if the Performance Report contains no serious Low Indicators.
In all circumstances, the Board shall follow the requirements of the Illinois Charter Schools Law and its Charter School Agreements, including all due process requirements, regarding the processes required for revocation, renewal, and non-renewal.
5. Superceder.
This Agreement shall, to the extent practicable, be interpreted in conformity with the provisions of the Charter School Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, to the extent of any express conflict between this Agreement and the Charter School Agreement, the provisions of
this Agreement shall govern.
6. Effective Date
This Agreement shall be effective upon approval by the Illinois State Board of Education. The Board shall promptly upon receipt of this Agreement in fully executed form submit it to the State Board for final review and approval.
7. Compliance with Charter Schools Law; Severability
The parties hereby agree and certify that this Agreement has been entered into voluntarily and in full compliance with the Charter Schools Law. To the extent that any portion of this Agreement is found to be in violation of the Charter Schools Law or of any other applicable state or federal law or regulation, such invalid portion shall be deemed severable, and the remaining portions of this Agreement will remain in full force and effect as far as is practicable.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have made and entered into this Agreement as of ___________________, 1998.
CHICAGO SCHOOL REFORM ________________ CHARTER SCHOOL
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
By: _________________________ By: ________________________________
Gery J. Chico, President
ATTEST: ATTEST:
_____________________________ By: _______________________________
Sharon Revello, Secretary Name: _____________________________
Its: ________________________________
Approved as to legal form:
______________________________
Marilyn F. Johnson, Board Attorney
Colorado League of Charter Schools
Overview of Accountability and Evaluation Proposal
September 1998
The accountability plan we propose has two stages—stage one prior to the school’s opening and stage two focusing on a plan for the first five years of the charter school.
|
Stage I |
Stage II Five Year Accountability Plan |
||||
|
Application & Contract |
Year 1: Step 1 |
Year 2: Step 2 |
Year 3: Step 3 |
Year 4: Step 4 |
Year 5: Step 5 |
|
Find right balance: stating clear goals without becoming too specific before school opens. |
Financial, governance, and compliance or administrative reviews. Prepare school improvement plan for year 2. |
Data gathering; self study; and prepare report for visiting team. |
External site visit by a group of peers. Report by site visitors to school and district. |
Study year 3 report, act on suggestions, and prepare for year 5-charter renewal application. |
Renewal application; high stakes external visit; report to school and district. |
|
Charter School Annual Report General Guidelines |
These guidelines are intended to provide charter school leaders with general suggestions for completing the school’s annual report for the 1996-97 school year. The annual report, which is due to the Department of Education’s Boston Office by August 1st, sums up the preceding school year. A school’s annual report will be used by the Board of Education to gauge the school’s success for the preceding school year. It is also a document that, according to state law, must be provided to parents and made available to other members of the community. The annual report provides the state, the parents of current and prospective charter school students, and the general public with information on the charter school’s preceding school year.
Because each charter school is unique, the Department of Education does not require a uniform reporting style or format. Each annual report’s "look," or presentation style, should reflect a school’s uniqueness.
Nevertheless, below are some general rules that must be adhered to in assembling the annual report, several brief recommendations for stylistic presentation to keep in mind, and a comprehensive list of categories and specific data elements that must be provided in the report.
An Annual Report should:
1) Contain a table of contents
2) Have all pages numbered
3) Contain an Executive Summary of no more than two pages
4) Contain a letter from the Chairperson of the Board of Trustees
5) Contain the school’s mission statement somewhere at the beginning of the report
General Recommendations
Anticipate your audience -- Along with the Department of Education’s reviewers, state policy-makers, and other local, state, and federal officials, readers of the report will include parents of current and prospective students, foundations to whom you’ll apply for funding, job applicants, education and public policy researchers, banks and lending institutions, and residents in your school’s district.
"Less is More" -- Don’t over-write. Keep your summaries brief and free of jargon or terminology that’s understood by only a few. The length of each response is up to you, however, an effort should be made to keep summaries short and to the point.
Keep it simple -- In general, if it can’t be summarized in the body of the report, do not attach it in an appendices at the end. The annual report itself doesn’t need to be flashy, but it should visually convey an image of the school’s unique character and educational philosophy.
Below are data elements that must be included in the annual report. Those categories marked by an asterisks (*) denote that the Department has already collected that information from your school via other reports. Though this may seem redundant, it is important that the school present this information in its annual report.
Annual Report Contents
I. School Performance
The top three sections checked-off should be found in your school’s accountability plan as defined in Technical Advisory 97-1.
Description of measurable school and student performance objectives.
Description of student assessment tools and process (type of tests or performance-based assessments, schedule for administering these assessments, and by grade level).
Documentation of progress toward meeting those objectives.
Summary of student standardized assessment results (by grade and subject, including baseline test data for incoming students). The testing data should be clearly presented using tables, charts or graphs, and interpreted for the reader in narrative form. The aggregate test scores found in the "school summary" section received from the test publisher should be presented in the report’s appendices.
Summary of state student assessment results, if available, (e.g., MCAS, IOWA).
Summary of alumni placements (if applicable).
Description of school accomplishments: These can detail both academic and non-academic accomplishments. Again, these accomplishments should refer to the goals and objectives outlined in the school’s accountability plan.
Summary of official complaints received by the Board of Trustees: Official complaints are those received by the Board of Trustees in writing pursuant to the state’s charter school regulations, 601 CMR 1.08. This regulation states that the Board must reply within thirty days to a written complaint. The summary should describe the complaint(s) in general terms, without mentioning specific names or information that may be deemed confidential, and should describe how the complaint(s) have been resolved. Complaints received by telephone or in person are not considered official complaints.
Total number of student applications received (by grade level and residence): This section can be simply presented in a table format. This figure is an aggregate for the year.
Number of students on waiting list (by grade level and residence): This can also be presented in a table format. This figure is an aggregate for the year.
Student turnover data: Total number of students who left the school during the year; total number of students admitted from the school’s waiting list. If possible, provide reasons for why students left the school during the year.
II. Factual Information
A. School Program
Grades and age levels served.*
Description of eligibility requirements for enrollment (include deadline for submitting applications and methods for obtaining information by interested parents/ students).
Brief summary of curriculum design and teaching methods (include the school’s approach to special and bilingual education).
Summary of the charter school’s graduation/promotion requirements.
Student/teacher ratio. Use full-time equivalents (FTE) for determining the number of teachers (e.g., 5 full-time teachers and 1 part-time teacher represent 5.5 FTE teachers).
School calendar, hours of operation, and number of instruction days (for the 1996-97 school year and for the 1997-98 school year, if different).
B. School Finance
Financial statement setting forth by appropriate categories the revenue and expenditures for the year just ended. If the school has raised funds privately, please indicate amounts and use of funds. Note: An independent audit for the year ending June 30, 1997, will be required by January 1, 1998.
Balance sheet setting forth the charter school’s assets, liabilities, and fund balances or equities.
Projections of income and expenses for the upcoming school year.
C. Governance
Board of Trustees (names and affiliations).
Board committees and members.
Advisory committees and members (names and affiliations).
Board of Trustees’ Meeting schedule for the 1996-97 and 1997-98 school year.
Summary of major policies decisions established by the Board of Trustees in 1996-97.
D. Staff
Name of headmaster/principal.*
Name of business manager (if applicable).
Number of full-time equivalent (FTE) teachers and aides (by category, if applicable).
Summary of teacher qualifications (years of teaching experience, degrees, certification, etc.).
Staff turnover data (i.e., number of professional staff by position/category that left or gained employment with the school in 1996-97).
E. Student Characteristics
Number of students enrolled (refer to your school’s February 18, 1998, enrollment report, also called the FY97 Charter School Claim Form).*
Student Demographics: (number and percentage of students by race, ethnicity, gender and residence).*
Student Demographics: (number and percentage of students by race, ethnicity, gender and residence).*
Number and percentage of students classified as limited English proficient (LEP), and percentage of students who are linguistic minorities. Definitions: a limited English proficient student is one whose first language is not English and who is incapable of performing ordinary classwork in English. Linguistic minority includes (1) children born outside the United States whose native tongue is not English, and (2) children born within the United States of non-English speaking parents and who reside in a home where the commonly used language is not English.
Percentage of special needs students (those with formal IEPs),* and percentage of students who receive special services, but are not on IEPs.
Percentage of students qualifying for the free or reduced school-lunch program.
Average daily attendance rate. This rate is calculated by taking the cumulative number of students present in your school over the course of the entire school year divided by the total number of days in session. (Example: average present = students present on day 1 + students present on day 2 + students present on day 3 ... students present on the last day divided by total days is session.)
Average membership rate. This is the cumulative number of students present and absent in your school over the course of the entire school year divided by the number of days in session on each school day by the total number enrolled. This rate is then averaged out over the school year. (Example: Average membership = students present and absent on day 1 + students present and absent on day 2 + students present and absent on day 3... students present and absent on the last day divided by total days is session.)
Number of students placed on in-school suspension, out-of-school suspension, or expelled. Please provide a brief summary describing the general reasons for the suspensions and expulsions.
III. Recommended but not required
A Proposal to Create the
DC CLAS of 98
Introduction
Ten new charter schools have been approved to open in the District of Columbia under a process developed and managed by the appointed District of Columbia Public Charter School Board. The application and review process resulted in the approval of a cohort of new schools that are well conceived, with good prospects for success.
Attention has now turned to making sure that as the schools gear up to serve students, they all have in place the accountability mechanisms needed for their long term success. Out of a common recognition that a carefully designed and well functioning accountability system is essential to an effective public charter school, the ten schools and the D.C. Public Charter School Board have agreed to tackle jointly this challenge through a partnership of the charter schools called The District of Columbia Charter League for Accountable Schools—DC CLAS of 98.
Background
An accountability planning and implementation activity for newly chartered D.C. schools has already begun using financial support provided by the D.C Public Charter School Board. This proposal builds on that effort. The first step made in producing this proposal involved the creation of a proposal planning committee by the ten schools—acting on behalf of the DC CLAS of 98. They worked with staff from the D.C. Public Charter School Board to develop this proposal. All the newly chartered schools were invited to review and comment on the proposal drafts. Their comments have been taken into account in the development of this proposal. Those working on the proposal were assisted in this effort by a consultant who is a national expert on charter school issues, particularly the accountability dilemmas and opportunities that charter schools face.
The early concerted attention by the schools themselves working in partnership with their chartering authority—the D.C. Public Charter School Board—to develop strong accountability mechanisms is unusual, if not unique, among a cohort of charter schools. Both the process and the outcomes and products of this venture should be of interest—and value—to future charters schools in D.C. as well as beyond D.C.
Proposal Summary
In short, this proposal aims to expand the scope of the accountability planning that is already underway by providing financial, technical, and consulting assistance to the schools during the development and implementation of individual school accountability plans and then to disseminate information produced by the process along with the lessons learned in this process to both local and national audiences.
More specifically, through this proposal, the DC CLAS of 98 seeks to enchase and extend their accountability effort by:
The proposed framework for which support is sought from this Foundation will be accomplished in three phases:
Phase 1: Developing and refining individual charter school accountability plans.
Phase 2: Implementing accountability processes and procedures in public charter schools and creating a culture of accountability among charter school leaders and staff.
Phase 3: Documenting and disseminating locally and nationally—through products, publications, and an invitational forum—what the schools and the public charter schools board have learned about charter school accountability.
This proposal would establish a process through which the ten charter schools acting under a joint partnership called the DC CLAS of 98 will provide focus and add depth to the accountability planning activities that are included in this proposal. D.C. Public Carter School Board staff will manage the collaborative process with the assistance of consultants. These consultants possess a thorough understanding of accountability issues in charter schools nationwide, excellent skills in managing working groups, and the ability to attract the interest of experts in related fields. A Technical Review Group, consisting of individuals experienced in several fields related to local school accountability (e.g., standards development, assessment and testing issues, etc.) will provide advice throughout the process, offer feedback to the schools on their accountability plans and implementation efforts, and assure the quality of all products and publications.
CER Home Page
About Charter
Schools
E-Mail CER
CER Publications