Continuous Improvement and Data Transparency

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER RECOMMENDS:

The Board amends Board Report 23-0426-PO4, District Policy for Continuous Improvement and Data Transparency effective for the 2024-2025 school year and subsequent school years. This policy was posted for public comment from April 26, 2024 until May 30, 2024.

POLICY TEXT:

I. PURPOSE AND GOALS

This policy shall establish the guidelines for providing stakeholders information about school and district performance against district and state-defined standards. This policy will take effect beginning with the release of performance information to each school for the 2024-2025 school year based on school performance data gathered during the prior school year. This policy will also apply to subsequent school years unless amended or rescinded by the Board.

This policy sets out a systematic means for measuring a school's performance and identifying schools in need of support based on a demonstrated pattern of not meeting district standards of practice, and/or insufficient levels of achievement and growth based on the key indicators as defined by the Board herein. The district's provision of information to stakeholders about these standards of practice and performance is intended to help communities identify points of celebration and growth as well as to signal where there is need for additional and targeted supports by the district for school communities. The information the district provides should also empower school communities to engage in meaningful conversations about local continuous improvement cycles and more effectively advocate for their schools' needs. We recognize opportunity differences situate achievement differences and the district must marshal resources to support schools with greater need or that serve historically disadvantaged communities.

The District recognizes that an effective and fair approach to improving school quality considers a broad range of indicators of success, including, but not limited to student academic progress; student postsecondary success; student connectedness and well-being; student daily learning experiences; adult capacity and continuous learning; and inclusive and collaborative school and community. Therefore, this policy establishes a comprehensive system to assess school performance in order to identify, monitor, and assist schools in need of support in these areas. This policy does not rank schools either through summative ratings (e.g. Level 1, Level 2, etc) or by any other means. Rather, this policy articulates the district's expectation for practice in key areas necessary to improve student performance over time, as well as defining the district's approach to accountability with respect to the supports school communities require in order to implement these key practices effectively.

Finally, this policy must be implemented in alignment with the CPS Equity Framework and the principle of Targeted Universalism, both of which are documented at length in publicly available district resources. Therefore, this policy goes beyond solely focusing on school-level outputs and outcomes by adding greater consideration to, and accountability for, inputs. These inputs include the set of resources (e.g., funding to schools) and conditions (e.g., safe and inclusive learning environments) that impact a high-quality educational experience in schools.

II. SCOPE OF THE POLICY

All CPS managed schools are subject to this policy, including, but not limited to, neighborhood schools, magnet schools, selective enrollment schools, district-managed Options Schools, and schools with non-traditional grade structures. CPS charter schools and contract schools are subject to the performance standards set out in this policy by and through the accountability provisions in their agreement with the Board. Charter and contract school stakeholders shall annually receive the same information about charter and contract school performance against district standards of practice as those in non-charter / contract school communities, once this policy is fully implemented. The extent to which the below standards shall apply to charter and contract school governance issues such as renewal, revocation, and modification will be addressed in each individual charter school's Accountability Plan incorporated into their agreements.

• Applicability to Non-Standard School Models

  Where appropriate, the indicators listed below will be applied to and reported for non-standard school models, such as district-managed Options schools, programs and schools serving students who participate in alternate assessments, and schools in detention centers. However the District recognizes that some of the indicators below may not apply to those models, and that there are additional indicators necessary to accurately represent both practice and evidence of student learning in those settings. As such, additional indicators for those models, as well as modifications to general education indicators, are noted throughout the policy. The proceeding language in this section offers additional context for each non-standard model as context for the additional indicators described further below.

• Options School Context

  Research shows that students attending Options Schools are more likely to be students of color and more likely to face higher rates of challenges related to special education, housing instability, involvement in the justice system, and victimization. In turn, these students are more likely to have disengaged or dropped out of their previous school. Options Schools serve as non-traditional learning environments that specialize in engaging older, off-track students. The Options Schools indicators have been adapted to promote the equitable application of this policy, given the unique school models and student populations served.

  All indicators listed below in support of the components "Daily Learning Experience", "Adult Capacity and Continuous Learning", and "Inclusive and Collaborative School and Community" are important aspects of the District's and its stakeholders' shared vision for Options Schools quality and will be implemented in an appropriate manner and in consultation with stakeholders for those schools. Additional Options-only indicators for "Academic Progress," "Connectedness and Well-Being," and "Postsecondary Success" are articulated in each appropriate section below.

• Schools in Detention Centers Context

  Students attending school in detention centers are often enrolled for a short period of time and may have been inactive prior to enrollment. Additionally some of these students previously attended school in other school districts, which is where they return to after detainment. The restrictions placed on these schools due to the location paired with the specific needs of the unique student population requires an adaptation of the indicators applied to traditional schools. The detention center school indicators have been adapted to promote the equitable application of this policy and to more accurately reflect school and student performance.

  All indicators listed in the Continuous Improvement and Data Transparency policy (CIDT) in support of the components "Daily Learning Experience;" "Adult Capacity and Continuous Learning;" and "Inclusive and Collaborative School and Community" are important aspects of the District's and its stakeholders' shared vision for the quality of schools in detention centers and will be implemented in an appropriate manner and in consultation with stakeholders for those schools.

• For Students with Alternate Assessments

  Students who have significant cognitive disabilities are eligible to participate in alternate assessments. Often, these students are enrolled in instructional programs that utilize a significantly modified curriculum. Instruction within these programs includes, but is not limited to, the areas of academic, linguistic, behavioral, adaptive, life skills, and post-secondary success. Teachers utilize these foci through the lens of Specially Designed Instruction within the significantly modified curriculum to meet the needs of learners.

  All indicators listed in the CIDT in support of the components "Daily Learning Experience", "Adult Capacity and Continuous Learning", and "Inclusive and Collaborative School and Community" are important aspects of the District's and its stakeholders' shared vision for the quality of education available to students who participate in the alternate assessments and will be implemented in an appropriate manner and in consultation with stakeholders for the schools and programs serving these students.

• For Early Childhood Grades

  Research demonstrates an aligned early grades experience begins with high quality preschool and builds a strong foundation for academic and social-emotional skills in Pre-K through Second Grade, leading to transformative lifelong outcomes. The district is deeply invested in the experience of its youngest learners.

  The district will explore the indicators listed below in support of the components "Daily Learning Experience", "Adult Capacity and Continuous Learning", "Inclusive and Collaborative School and Community", and "Evidence of Student Learning & Wellbeing" as important aspects of the District's and its stakeholders' shared vision for Early Childhood Centers & the Early Grades and will be implemented if appropriate and in consultation with stakeholders in alignment with the release of metrics by Fall 2025.

  • The work is guided by the principles and values articulated in the CIDT.
  • Any indicators the District develops to articulate expectations for the Early Childhood Centers and the Early Grades are both coherent with and supportive of the standards for school practice in the 3-12 grade continuum; while also supporting the unique needs of the District's youngest learners.
  • The District builds and provides systemic supports for school communities to help them meet District standards for practice in the early grades.

III. ACCOUNTABILITY COMPONENTS, INDICATORS AND STANDARDS

• Context and Values

  In keeping with prior Board action and district collaboration with stakeholders, it is critical that the below description of components, indicators, and standards be understood in the following context:

  • Between June 2019 and March 2023, the district collaborated with stakeholders to define the framework for this policy's approach to accountability.
  • The district's approach to accountability must articulate the required elements of a high-quality educational experience for all students in Pre-Kindergarten through 12th grade (inclusive of transition programming for Students with Disabilities through the age of 22) that is grounded in and supportive of the district's Instructional Core Vision (ICV), sets high expectations, and requires ambitious instruction for all CPS students; and reflects the essential qualities of a CPS educational experience that aligns with the values held by the district, students, teachers, school administrators, parents, and other community stakeholders.
  • The district's approach to accountability must align with the CPS Equity Framework and the principle of Targeted Universalism by articulating the inputs and practices at the school and district level, which support the universal goal of every CPS student achieving the high-quality educational experience as outlined in both the ICV and stakeholder feedback. It must also go beyond solely focusing on school-level outputs and outcomes and adding greater consideration to, and accountability for, inputs such as the set of resources (e.g., funding to schools) and conditions (e.g., safe and inclusive professional and student learning environments) that impact a high-quality educational experience in schools.
  • The district's approach to accountability must establish greater accountability for the district, grounded in the shared responsibility of promoting the structural supports necessary to create school environments that support equitable outcomes for all students while recognizing that district-level accountability also does not exist in isolation and is influenced by many factors outside of the district's purview. To align with the CPS Equity Framework, the district will provide stakeholders with information on how the district is establishing and meeting commitments to school communities regarding equitable access to supports and resources.

• Goals and Core Uses

  The primary goals and core uses of the information provided by this policy are to:

  • Support the whole child by enabling improved teaching and learning in schools; and
  • Inform families about all the characteristics that comprise the high-quality educational experience referenced above; and
  • Leverage internal information about these characteristics to diagnose where and how to direct school resources and supports equitably.

  Ultimately, the information the district provides to stakeholders in accordance with this policy should be designed to drive continuous improvement efforts at both the school and district level and meet stakeholder needs.

  Where available and appropriate, all metrics will be disaggregated by student race, ethnicity, nationality, gender, Student with Disability status, English Language Learner status, socio-economic status, Students in Temporary Living Situations, and postsecondary pathway type (Options schools only). The reporting of student groups will be implemented to support targeted universalist initiatives in the school district with a focus on the most impacted students and schools rather than to highlight achievement differences or uphold a deficit-based approach.

• District Accountability

  In order to ensure reciprocal accountability between the district and its constituent schools, it is imperative that the district articulate the resources and support schools need to meet district expectations reasonably. To satisfy this imperative, the district shall provide stakeholders with information regarding the extent to which it is prioritizing support and resources to schools in the following areas:

  1. Daily Learning Experience

     The foundation for our academic progress is our Instructional Core. Students must experience daily core instruction that is responsive to and sustaining who they are and what they bring and empowers them to connect, imagine, and act as ethical, critical actors that shape the world.

  2. Adult Capacity and Continuous Learning

     The success of our schools is built on talented and empowered educators. To that end, the district commits to providing support to develop the capacity of all educators (inclusive of non-teaching staff like paraprofessionals, related service providers, etc.), provide leadership development trajectories, and nurture the school-based adult cultures and structures that lead to academic progress.

  3. Inclusive and Collaborative School and Community

     We abide by our Core Value of the "Whole Child" to support our students so they are healthy, safe, engaged, and academically challenged.

  4. Targeted Universalism

     The district's approach to accountability will account for opportunity differences in order to situate achievement differences. Reflecting the guiding principle of targeted universalism in the CPS Equity Framework, a set of indexed socioeconomic indicators will be utilized with discretion to contextualize school quality measures in Section III.D and any related reporting measures. For SY24-25, based on data from SY23-24, CPS will use the CPS Opportunity Index indicators included below to guide the approach to targeted universalism. The CPS Opportunity Index is an analytical tool to align how we measure opportunity differences at CPS so we can most equitably support communities most impacted by inequity and structural disinvestment with the resources and decision-making power in our locus of control.

     The Opportunity Index includes socioeconomic indicators related to race, socioeconomic status, education, health, and community factors. Beyond closing opportunity gaps, the Opportunity Index will allow the school district to Inclusively Partner and create transparency, from how we allocate resources to how we factor opportunity differences into targeted universalist considerations to support most impacted schools and communities. Below we outline the current CPS Opportunity Index with the understanding that the Opportunity Index may change in the future based on validation and evolving district priorities:

     School Factors	Community Factors	Resourcing Factors
     Percent of students... with disabilities who are English learners experiencing temporary living situations eligible for free and reduced lunch eligible for but not enrolled in Medicaid who identify as Black or Latinx Percent of staff... who are employed one year and continue to be employed with CPS the following year	Average student hardship score based on home address Community area life expectancy Percent of students living in prioritized South/West communities	Historical change in school budget and student-based funding Historical Capital investment and Tax Increment Finance Investment

• Indicators - Evidence of Student Learning and Well-Being (Student Outcomes)

  As noted above, past Board action and stakeholder feedback have clearly articulated the need for the district's approach to accountability to be inclusive of practice and supports (inputs) as well as information about student performance (outputs). Discussions about continuous improvement, equity, or other strategic priorities must be driven by data, and the following section outlines the key performance indicators the district identifies as critical to those discussions.

  The indicators described here are all lagging (i.e., reported after the conclusion of a given school year) but can and should be complemented by the use of aligned leading indicators by school or district staff. While those leading indicators are not listed as part of this policy, the policy does acknowledge their critical role in driving effective cycles of continuous improvement. Each of the indicator descriptions listed here includes a definition, guidance for interpretation and use, and a broad description of a "standard" for that indicator. This information is included as guidance for eventual implementation, during which work decisions about final measurement and reporting must be made in accordance with the ultimate goal of this policy as described in III.B above (i.e., to provide information in support of continuous improvement and stakeholder needs).

  The prioritized lagging indicators (and metrics to measure them) are as follows:

  1. Academic Progress:

     • Student Growth to Proficiency^{1, 2}
       1. Definition: The district will develop a summative measure of growth that uses shifts in standardized achievement over time to measure the rate of student progress toward meeting proficiency standards over multiple years and with multiple cohorts of students. Growth will be based on the appropriate state-required assessment for each applicable grade band.
       2. Interpretation and Use: This measure is not intended to be a measure of school quality. More appropriately, it is a strong indicator of where students and schools are showing accelerated learning trajectories (or not) over time as compared to their statewide peers. Identifying schools where students are showing below-average growth should be the first step in a root cause analysis to determine what kinds of additional support are needed. Student Growth to Proficiency should also be used to identify schools where exemplary practices can be studied for potential replication at scale.
       3. Standard: The goal for CPS schools will be to show a rate of progress to proficiency that is at or above the statewide average. This target should be reviewed annually as this measure's implementation progresses.
     • Student Proficiency ^{1, 2}
       1. Definition: The district will report school-level point-in-time and trend data for student proficiency as measured by the appropriate state-required assessment for each applicable grade band.
       2. Interpretation and Use: Standardized assessments provide stakeholders with information about how students are performing relative to Illinois Learning Standards as measured by state-required assessments. Trend data will provide a sense of how overall proficiency has changed over time. It is important to note that student proficiency on standardized assessments is highly correlated with student socio-economic status, and thus proficiency rates alone should not be misconstrued as an indicator of school quality.
       3. Standard: The district will report school-level proficiency data along with district and state averages (where available and comparable) for context.
     • Growth of Students who Participate in Alternate Assessments ²
       1. Definition: The district will report school-level data for year over year student growth as measured by the alternate assessment for students who are in programs with a significantly modified curriculum. This data will be available for all students with disabilities who participate in alternate assessment, typically students with the most significant cognitive disabilities.
       2. Interpretation and Use: This measure is not intended to measure school quality. It is intended to share the progress of students requiring significantly modified curriculum who are administered alternate assessment. Research shows that students with disabilities, when provided with a comprehensive and individualized education plan, see greater success in their post secondary endeavors inclusive of life skills.
       3. Standard: The district will report progress data results for students who receive significantly modified curriculum and are administered the required alternate assessments.
     • English Learner Progress to Proficiency ²
       1. Definition: The district will report school-level data on the percentage of English Learners (ELs) making adequate annual progress on English proficiency. "Adequate" is defined as the amount of growth needed on the ACCESS for ELLs from one year to the next to ensure ELs achieve English proficiency within five years of being identified as an English Learner.
       2. Interpretation and Use: Research shows that EL students who don't attain English proficiency within five years of being identified as ELs have a greatly reduced chance of ever doing so. This measure is not a direct measure of school quality, but does indicate where students are making progress towards English proficiency and identifies schools where additional support for English language instruction may be needed.
       3. Standard: The district will report school-level proficiency data along with district and state averages (where available and comparable) for context.
     • On-Track ²
       1. Definition: The student On-Track indicator for grades 3-8 identifies students who are on track (or not) for success in high schools. Freshmen and Sophomore On-Track indicators use credit and grade data to identify students who are on track (or not) to graduate high school in four years.
       2. Interpretation and Use: Research strongly suggests that whether a student graduates high school after 12th grade can be reliably predicted by their performance in earlier years. Research suggests that students who are identified as "on-track" are much more likely to graduate from high school in four years than off-track students. Freshmen "On-track" specifically has been found to be a more accurate predictor of graduation than students' previous achievement on standardized assessments. Research further suggests that school climate and structures play a significant role in whether or not students are on-track, more so than students' previous academic performance or student socioeconomic status.
       3. Standard: The district will report school-level on-track data along with district and state averages (where available and comparable) for context.
     • Student Growth in Math and Reading (Options and Detention Centers Only)
       1. Definition: The district will use the STAR 360 assessment to measure the percentage of students who have met their expected growth target.
       2. Interpretation and Use: This measure is not intended to be a measure of school quality. More appropriately, it is a strong indicator of where students and schools are showing accelerated learning trajectories (or not) over time as compared to their nation-wide peers. The STAR 360 is a nationally normed assessment that shows growth between a minimum of two testing windows during a school year. This assessment is more appropriate for measuring growth of students in Options Schools or schools located in detention centers due to high mobility rates and shorter enrollment periods. Identifying schools where students are showing below-average growth should be the first step in a root cause analysis to determine what kinds of additional support are needed. Student Growth to expected growth targets should also be used to identify schools where exemplary practices can be studied for potential replication at scale.
       3. Standard: The goal for Options schools will be to show a rate of progress toward expected growth targets that is normed based on national data.
     • Credit Attainment (Options and Detention Centers Only)
       1. Definition: The credit attainment indicator identifies the average number of credits that students earn during the time they are enrolled.
       2. Interpretation and Use: Options students are more likely to be older and off track for graduation. Options schools are designed to provide a unique learning environment that engages these students and offers accelerated credit attainment opportunities. Students attending school in detention centers are often enrolled for a short period of time, may have been inactive prior to enrollment, and may have previously attended school in another school district. This indicator will calculate the number of credits that a student has earned divided by the expected number of credits that the student could have earned in a given amount of time. Higher credit attainment rates are associated with older, off track students' ability to graduate sooner and contribute to a more successful matriculation back into a traditional school from a detention center school.
       3. Standard: The district will report school-level credit attainment data based on an expected credit attainment at each school.

  2. Connectedness and Well-Being:

     • Chronic Absence ³
       1. Definition: Chronic absence is defined as students who have missed 10% or more of enrolled attendance days. The district will report school-level point-in-time and trend data on the percentage of students who are chronically absent.
       2. Interpretation and Use: Research shows that students experiencing chronic absenteeism are much less likely to receive high grades, graduate high school, or succeed in college or other post-secondary education settings. Student-level chronic absence data should be used to identify which students are in need of additional support and engagement from school communities. School-level chronic absence data should be used to identify which schools need additional district resources and supports to better meet the needs of chronically absent students.
       3. Standard: The district will report school-level chronic absence data along with district and state averages (where available and comparable) for context.
     • One-Year Dropout Rate ³
       1. Definition: The one-year dropout rate is defined as the percentage of students in grades 9-12 who are enrolled CPS at any point in the school year but are not enrolled at the end of the school year.
       2. Interpretation and Use: Schools' ability to engage and retain students, particularly in high schools, is critical to student success. Research clearly indicates that students who drop out of school are much less likely to graduate from high school or otherwise succeed. Higher than average dropout rates should be interpreted as a need for additional support at the student and school level.
       3. Standard: The district will report school-level dropout data along with district and state averages (where available and comparable) for context.
     • Average Daily Attendance (Options Only)
       1. Definition: The average daily student attendance is defined as the percentage of the total number of days in which students during the school year were marked present at a school, divided by the total number of days that those students were expected to be in attendance. The district will report school-level point-in-time and trend data on the year-to-date attendance rate of students.
       2. Interpretation and Use: Research shows that students with low attendance are much less likely to receive high grades, graduate high school, or succeed in college. Student-level attendance data should be used to identify which students are in need of additional support and engagement from school communities. School-level attendance data should be used to identify which schools need additional district resources and supports to better meet the needs of students on the verge of disengagement.
       3. Standard: The district will report school-level attendance data along with district and state averages (where available and comparable) for context.
     • Growth in Attendance (Options and Detention Centers Only)
       1. Definition: Growth in student attendance is defined as the percentage of students who showed an improvement of at least 3 percentage points in their individual daily attendance rates at an Options school compared to their daily attendance rates from the prior school year.
       2. Interpretation and Use: Options students and students attending schools located in Detention Centers are more likely to have disengaged, have low attendance, or have dropped out of their previous school for a variety of reasons. Due to the challenges related to engaging this population, the focus is on growth. Student-level attendance growth data should be used to identify which students are in need of additional support and engagement from school communities. School-level attendance growth data should be used to identify which schools need additional district resources and support to better meet the needs of students with low attendance growth rates.
       3. Standard: The district will report school-level attendance growth data along with district and state averages (where available and comparable) for context.
     • Stabilization (Options Only)
       1. Definition: The stabilization rate is defined as the percentage of students who enroll in an Options school that remain enrolled in any CPS school at the close of the school year or who graduate.
       2. Interpretation and Use: Continuous school engagement is critical to student success. Research clearly indicates that students who drop out of school are much less likely to graduate from high school or otherwise succeed even after re-engagement into school. Due to the increased challenges that Options Students experience as compared to their traditional school counterparts, they are often highly mobile. In the event that an Options School is not able to meet a student's specific needs, it is critical for the school to help the student identify a good fit school if they decide to transfer. Lower than average stabilization rates should be interpreted as a need for additional support at the student and school level.
       3. Standard: The district will report school-level stabilization data along with Options school averages (where available and comparable) for context.
     • Student Portfolio (Schools in Detention Centers Only)
       1. Definition: The student portfolio indicator is defined as the percentage of students who have successfully completed a portfolio of lessons during the period of enrollment.
       2. Interpretation and Use: Student portfolios consist of a range of lessons designed to promote self-reflection, improve skills such as decision making and self-advocacy, and incorporate future-planning activities. Completion of the portfolio will equip students with a set of skills that will lead to a successful matriculation back into a traditional or Options school and the community.
       3. Standard: The district will report school-level student portfolio completion rates for students enrolled long enough to qualify.
     • Transition Plan (School in Juvenile Temporary Detention Center Only)
       1. Definition: The transition plan indicator is defined as the percentage of students who matriculate back into a traditional school with a complete and comprehensive transition plan.
       2. Interpretation and Use: Transition plans will contain key information that will help the student successfully transition into a traditional school including but not limited to behavior, attendance, grades, credits earned, strengths, challenges and applicable justice system-related information. Transition plans will aid in the smooth transition of grades and credits, but will also support the development of a re-entry plan at the receiving school.
       3. Standard: The district will report school-level transition plan completion rates for students enrolled long enough to qualify.
     • Transition Rate - Enrollment (School in Juvenile Temporary Detention Center Only)
       1. Definition: The transition rate - enrollment indicator is defined as the percentage of students who enroll in school after leaving the detention center.
       2. Interpretation and Use: This metric measures the success rate of transitioning students back into a traditional school setting. Student retention is critical to student success and graduation. Given that students are automatically withdrawn from the schools located in Detention Centers, it is critical to ensure that the student is immediately enrolled at another school. Low transition rates should be interpreted as a need for additional support at the student level as well as both the sending and receiving school levels.
       3. Standard: The district will report school-level rates for student who have successfully matriculated back into a traditional school setting.
     • Transition Rate - Persistence (School in Juvenile Temporary Detention Centers Only)
       1. Definition: The transition rate - persistence indicator is defined as the percentage of students who exit a detention center school, re-enroll in a CPS school, and remain enrolled until the end of the school year.
       2. Interpretation and Use: This metric measures the success rate of stabilization in a traditional school setting. Student retention is critical to student success and graduation. It is critical to equip students with the skills and support needed to remain engaged and enrolled in a traditional school setting leading to overall success and graduation. Low persistence rates should be interpreted as a need for additional support at the student level as well as both the sending and receiving school levels.
       3. Standard: The district will report school-level rates for students who have remained enrolled in a CPS school until the end of the school year.

  3. Postsecondary Success:

     • Four-Year Cohort Graduation Rate ⁴
       1. Definition: The district and school-level graduation rates are calculated based on the percentage of students who enroll in the district as first-time freshmen and then graduate high school four years later.
       2. Interpretation and Use: Students who graduate are much more likely to be successful in their chosen postsecondary path (college, career, etc.). The extent to which the district and individual schools are retaining incoming high school students and supporting their path to graduation is an important indicator of school and district efficacy.
       3. Standard: The district will report school-level graduation data along with district and state averages (where available and comparable) for context.
     • Early College and Career Credentials
       1. Definition: This metric reports the percentage of students who are graduating high schools with one or more qualifying credentials or certifications, tied to high school coursework, that prepare them for postsecondary success.
       2. Interpretation and Use: Students should have access to a variety of postsecondary opportunities during their high school years. Schools and the district should be offering equitable access to postsecondary opportunities that reflect the needs and interests of students. The Early College and Career Credentials (ECCC) metric should be interpreted as describing the extent to which schools are providing said access (as well as intentional or equitable support for attainment) and the district is providing schools the resources and support needed to do so.
       3. Standard: The district will report school-level ECCC data along with district and state averages (where available and comparable) for context.
     • College Enrollment and Persistence ⁵
       1. Definition: College Enrollment measures the percentage of students graduating from CPS in the previous year who enrolled in a 2-year or 4-year college in the fall or spring after graduation from high school. College Persistence measures the percentage of students enrolled in college in the fall or spring after graduation from high school that remain enrolled in college the following fall or spring.
       2. Interpretation and Use: Alumni enrollment and persistence relies heavily on two major school supports: Postsecondary Preparation and Alumni Support Initiative programming. Schools and the district use these postsecondary enrollment and persistence metrics to measure the success of our schools at preparing students for life beyond high school. Schools should leverage multiple layers of support for postsecondary preparation including rigorous course selections, providing college and career instruction, and linking students to high quality advising through school counselors, college & career coaches, and the many college access partners throughout the district.
       3. Standard: The district will report school-level college enrollment and persistence data along with district averages and state or national data when available.
     • One-Year Graduation Rate (Options and Detention Centers Only)
       1. Definition: The one-year graduation rate is defined as the percentage of students that graduate by the close of the school year who are within range of graduation upon enrollment. For schools located in detention centers, this rate only applies to students who are still enrolled at the school at the time of graduation.
       2. Interpretation and Use: Students who graduate are much more likely to be successful in their chosen postsecondary path (college, career, etc.). Options students and students attending schools located in detention centers are more likely to be older, off-track and to have already dropped out. The extent to which schools are retaining and graduating students in range of graduation is an important indicator of school efficacy.
       3. Standard: The district will report school-level one-year graduation rate data along with Options school and detention center school averages (where available and comparable) for context.
     • PostSecondary Pathway & Transition Enrollment (Options Schools and Students who participate in Alternate Assessment Only)
       1. Definition: The postsecondary pathway & transition enrollment indicator is defined as the percentage of graduating students who enroll in transition centers and/or matriculate into any of the following postsecondary pathways: college, military, apprenticeship program, job training program, employment, or service learning or gap year program.
       2. Interpretation and Use: The postsecondary trajectory of students relies heavily on the school's implementation of appropriate postsecondary and transition supports. Schools and the district use postsecondary enrollment metrics to measure the success of our schools at preparing students for life beyond CPS. Schools should leverage multiple layers of support for the postsecondary success of students including providing college and career instruction, exposure to potential pathways for careers and trades, credential and certification opportunities, and linking students to high quality postsecondary advising and/or transition supports.
       3. Standard: The district will report school-level postsecondary pathway enrollment data along with applicable school averages when available for context.

• Indicators - Daily Learning Experience

  Per Board and stakeholder guidance outlined above, the district's approach to accountability must also articulate standards for the conditions and practices that facilitate a high-quality educational experience in schools. The following are the key indicators of quality practice in support of students' daily learning experience that the district is prioritizing as most likely to positively impact the student outcomes listed above over time.

  1. High Quality Curriculum

     • Definition: The district shall provide school-level information on the extent to which all students, across all grade levels and subject areas, have access to high-quality curriculum as defined by the district's standards.
     • Standard: High-quality curriculum should: be standards aligned, reflect student's identities and lived experiences, engage students in topics, problems, and people that impact them and their communities and drive instruction that is responsive to all students' needs. The district will evaluate schools' curricula for different subjects and grade levels according to its internal curriculum quality rubric. At a minimum, this rubric will measure the extent to which a curriculum (i) aligns with grade-level standards, (ii) provides continuity across instructional and assessment resources and grade bands, (iii) aligns with standards for social-emotional learning, cultural responsiveness, and differentiation support, (iv) addresses the needs of Students with Disabilities and English learners, and (v) meets additional requirements as may be reflected by content-specific, research-based practices.
     • Theory of Action: If the district ensures that all schools have access to a high-quality curriculum, conditions for effective instruction and student learning will improve.
     • District Accountability: Provide access to a universally-available high-quality rigorous, and culturally responsive curriculum for all schools.

  2. Rigorous Instruction

     • Definition: The district shall provide school-level information on the degree to which a school's instructional practices meet district standards.
     • Standard: Instruction should: be designed with the student at the center, use learning acceleration practices that give students access to grade-level standards, align to content specific research-based practices, foster positive classroom community and nurture students' strengths, and use varied assessments in order to be responsive to the needs of students. The district will evaluate and report on instructional practices using available data as appropriate. This may include observational data from classroom observations, student and teacher responses on surveys, and other data sources.
     • Theory of Action: If instruction is rigorous and includes high expectations coupled with a supportive learning environment, student learning will improve.
     • District Accountability: Provide professional learning at the district and Network levels to improve learning acceleration practices.

  3. Conditions for Learning and the Student Experience

     • Definition: The district shall provide school-level information on the degree to which the student experience of classroom instruction meets the conditions that are needed in order for students to learn.
     • Standard: The student experience in the learning environment should be one that: empowers students; fosters positive and collaborative classroom community; nurtures, explores, and affirms identity; provides supportive systems and structures that nurtures students' social, emotional, growth, and leadership; allows meaningful access to appropriate curriculum and instruction across all grade levels in all educational environments (especially for Students with Disabilities); and fosters creativity, empathy, curiosity, and confident self-expression that leads to inventive artistic practice and fulfillment. The district will report on all students' experience of the learning environment using available data as appropriate. This may include district wide measurement surveys, network rigor walks, and other data sources.
     • Theory of Action: Students' daily experience of their classroom learning conditions drives their engagement, perseverance, and learning; it also shapes longer term academic outcomes, identity development, and well-being.
     • District Accountability: Provide training, resources, and data to engage in student experience data gathering. Provide a clean, warm, safe, and dry facility with adequate space and modernized amenities and infrastructure to ensure equitable access to a 21 st century learning environment for all students.

  4. Balanced Assessment System:

     • Definition: The district shall provide school-level information on the degree to which a school has an assessment plan that meets the district's standard for a balanced assessment system.
     • Standard: The district will evaluate schools' assessment plans across grades, content areas, and assessment types according to its standard for a balanced assessment system.
     • Theory of Action: If schools implement a balanced assessment system the district will be able to measure the depth and breadth of student learning and monitor student progress towards college and career readiness as well as provide actionable data to inform planning for instruction, academic supports, and resource allocation. A balanced assessment system includes multiple measures and is responsive to the needs of all students, inclusive of Students with Disabilities and English Learners.
     • District Accountability: Provide universally-available meaningful assessments and assessment data tools to inform instruction.

  5. Access to Postsecondary Opportunities

     • Definition: This metric describes the extent to which schools are implementing the systems and structures necessary to support students in preparing for their postsecondary pathways culminating in the Learn.Plan.Succeed (LPS) and FAFSA graduation requirements and is ultimately measured by ECCC. While the ECCC metric described above measures actual student outcomes in this area, this metric measures the extent to which a school is meeting district standards on the practices necessary to support students' postsecondary access and success by providing college and career readiness instruction and ensuring completion of the postsecondary individualized learning plan tasks.
     • Standard: The district shall provide school-level information on the extent to which school practice meets district standards in areas such as the percentage of students participating in college and career readiness instruction, advanced coursework and career and technical education (as opposed to credits earned as measured in ECCC); grades earned in ECCC courses (as opposed to the achievement of a credential); training in college finance, expectations and systems; and exposure to career options.
     • Theory of Action: If schools and the district establish systems of support that allow students to explore their college and career interests and create a meaningful postsecondary plan (LPS) upon completion of access steps, students are much more likely to experience postsecondary success, regardless of their actual chosen path.
     • District Accountability: Provide staffing support and training to evaluate and improve ECCC programs in schools, as well as invest in a postsecondary goal-setting curriculum for High School upperclassmen.

  6. Research-based Academic Interventions within a Multi-tiered System of Supports (MTSS) Framework

     • Definition: The metric seeks to measure the extent to which schools are implementing an equity based MTSS framework, which includes providing research-based academic interventions in response to students' demonstrated needs.
     • Standard: The district shall report information on the degree to which an effective Multi-Tiered System of Support (MTSS) framework exists as defined by district standards.
     • Theory of Action: If a school implements an effective MTSS framework, which includes the implementation of research-based academic interventions that meet students' targeted skill needs, then all students will accelerate in their learning and increase academic achievement.
     • District Accountability: Provide universally-available research-based academic interventions, along with an intervention platform to support schools in progress monitoring student growth.

  7. Specially Designed Instruction

     • Definition: Specially designed instruction is adapted content, methodology, and/or delivery of instruction by a special education teacher or related service provider that address the unique needs (i.e., academic, behavioral, adaptive) of a student as identified and outlined on a student's individualized educational plan (IEP). Specially designed instruction is not to be confused with differentiation, which is accessible to all students regardless of eligibility for specialized services.
     • Standard: To ensure access to the general education curriculum and in some cases advanced curriculum or significantly modified curriculum, special education teachers and related service providers utilize students' individualized educational plans to develop specially designed instruction that meets each student's needs.This plan for specially designed instruction will be utilized across classroom settings.
     • Theory of Action: If school staff engage in high quality specially designed instruction, using general education curriculum as a foundation for all students, then Students with Disabilities will demonstrate significant growth in the areas targeted through their individualized educational plan and increase access to the appropriate curriculum.
     • District Accountability: Provide professional learning and, coaching, and consultation at the district, network, and school level to the adoption, implementation, and monitoring of specially designed instruction.

• Adult Capacity and Continuous Learning

  Stakeholder feedback and extensive research have highlighted the importance of a school's organizational conditions (adult capacity, culture, and systems for continuous improvement) and their significant impact on student outcomes. When inclusive and learning-oriented conditions are present, individuals are more motivated to learn and share their knowledge, and they are more dedicated to making changes in their school and their own practices. The willingness and commitment to change are essential for creating optimal school cultures that support student well-being, belonging, identity development, and achievement. The following indicators are the key points of information the district must provide stakeholders moving forward to articulate the extent to which schools and the district are putting these adult support systems and culture in place.

  1. Leadership Context

     • Definition: This indicator captures the context of current school leadership as reflected by the tenure of the current school leadership, relationships with staff and other adults in the school community, and other data points as appropriate.
     • Standard: The district shall report information on leadership capacity such as the tenure of the current leadership; the stability of school leadership (e.g., the number of principals at a school over a certain time period); the current status of principal contracting; and information from student and staff surveys. The district must also provide district-level data as context where appropriate, as well as information about district response and support in cases where the data indicates a need.
     • Theory of Action: If we invest in development opportunities and leadership supports for school leaders and aspiring school leaders, then will we see increased stability in strong school leadership, leading to sustained continuous improvement and growth in student outcomes.
     • District Accountability: Provide new principal and new assistant principal induction programs, competency-aligned professional development opportunities for school leaders of all tenure, mentorship roles that elevate experienced, high-performing principals and support novice principals, differentiated pathways for development for aspiring school leaders, and resources for cultivating staff leadership in schools in support of best practices in succession and transition planning.

  2. School Vision and Continuous Improvement Practice

     • Definition: This indicator measures and reports on the extent to which schools have systems in place to support continuous improvement in supporting the daily learning experiences of students.
     • Standard: The district shall provide stakeholders with information regarding the effectiveness of school continuous improvement practices. Said information shall include indicators like the presence of a full Continuous Improvement Work Plan (CIWP) team; effective CIWP monitoring practices; and progress toward CIWP milestones and goals.
     • Theory of Action: If the district defines processes and provides supports for schools on improvement science and measures and reports on those practices, then schools will improve their continuous improvement practices, which will increase the likelihood of school improvement across the district. Improvement science clearly indicates that for schools to improve their practice over time, there are clear processes and supports that need to be in place. If the district measures and reports on these practices, the likelihood of school improvement occurring at scale will greatly increase.
     • District Accountability: Provide robust training for school teams to create strong continuous improvement plans, and tailor supports in response to needs identified across school-based plans.

  3. Distributed Leadership and Teacher Leader Development

     • Definition: This indicator measures and reports on the extent to which schools (as supported by the district), show high levels of trust, collegial relationships, engage and empower teachers, teachers leaders, and staff to perform their roles effectively; Have systems in place to distribute leadership and build adult capacity in leadership, to effectively support the continuous improvement of staff and teacher practice, thereby, improving the daily learning experiences of students.
     • Standard: The district shall provide stakeholders with information regarding the effectiveness of teacher leadership teams such as Instructional Leadership Teams MTSS Teams, or Behavior Health Teams (BHT) the extent to which a school is properly implementing the district's high quality distributed leadership as defined by the district; the presence, quality, and implementationof professional development plans; and the existence of a culture of trust, collaboration, transparency, and professional growth, particularly as measured by culture and climate surveys.
     • Theory of Action: If the district measures the extent to which schools implement a culture with effective systems to cultivate distributed leadership in service of continuous learning and effective professional development (and are equitably supported by the district in doing so), then school staff are much more likely to improve their instructional practices and the daily learning experiences of students over time.
     • District Accountability: Increase teacher professional learning, collaboration, and coaching opportunities through investing professional learning funds to provide teacher leaders with additional time and opportunities for professional development.

  4. Teachers and Staff Capacity

     • Definition: This indicator captures the context of current school teachers and staff as reflected by the position vacancy rates, teacher qualifications, tenure, turnover.
     • Standard: The district shall provide stakeholders with information on the extent to which teachers and other staff members are experienced and certified for their current roles and are engaged in their work, as measured by metrics such as National Board Certification, staff attendance, and responses to climate and culture surveys. Identify and track teacher mobility in order to develop strategies to retain a high quality and diverse educator workforce.
     • Theory of Action: If schools are staffed with skillful teachers who consistently provide high quality instruction as defined by the CPS Framework for Teaching, then there will be numerous benefits for students, families, and communities.
     • District Accountability: Recruit, develop, and retain a high quality and diverse educator workforce, with an emphasis on supporting the hardest-to-staff schools and educators in high-needs subject areas. Invest in our teacher pathways initiatives to ensure that we're supporting current CPS students to become the next generation of CPS teachers and that current educational support personnel have equitable opportunities to become teachers of record. Provide support for educators in CPS english learner programs. Provide support for teachers in special education programs. Provide universally available professional development aligned to district priorities and educator role, including centrally funded and supported mentoring and professional development for new teachers.

• Inclusive and Collaborative School and Community

  Themes regarding support for the whole child, school inclusivity for students, families, and communities, and the importance of partnership as key aspects of school community building were common in stakeholder feedback. More specifically for our Students with Disabilities, the District commits to advancing the principle of "Rightful Presence" in every school. In essence, students with disabilities experience their ‘rightful presence' when general education and special education educators work together to create learning environments that are intentionally designed to allow meaningful access to appropriate curriculum and instruction across all grade levels in all educational environments. In order to support conversations and improvement in practice with respect to these topics, the district shall provide stakeholders with information about the following indicators.

  1. Healing Centered Culture, Supports and Social-Emotional Interventions

     • Definition: This indicator measures the level of school capacity and quality of practices in support of student physical, social, and emotional health to the extent to which schools are implementing an equity based MTSS framework, which includes providing research valid Social Emotional Learning (SEL) interventions in response to students' demonstrated needs.
     • Standard: The district shall report information on the presence and efficacy of school systems and support for student connectedness, wellbeing, and health. This may include indicators like effective BHTs; processes for identifying and providing student interventions in support of a safe climate; a menu of evidence based tiered interventions and supports; effective community partnerships; established positive culture and climate practices as measured by culture and climate surveys, SEL skills instruction; select Healthy CPS metrics; and staff training (both participation and completion) on student physical and mental health supports.
     • Theory of Action: Student health, connectedness and well-being is a clear precondition to student learning. If a school has an effective MTSS framework in place, which includes the implementation of research-valid SEL interventions that meet students' targeted skill needs, and supports to create healthy, healing-centered school cultures, student learning and academic success will be much more likely to improve over time.
     • District Accountability: Ensure that we meet the needs of the whole child by making SEL curriculum, professional development and resources universally available, as well as building partnerships with local Mental Health providers. Expand resources for students in temporary living situations, school counselor support for communities in need, and coaching for staff on restorative practices.

  2. Inclusive and Collaborative Structures and Involved and Engaged Youth

     • Definition: This indicator measures the extent to which schools increase student perspective, participation, and agency in the systems and processes of decision-making that impacts them the most.
     • Standard: The district shall report information on the engagement and involvement of students in school decision making through indicators such as the school's methods of collecting and leveraging broad and targeted student perspectives on timely topics (surveys, polls, focus groups, interviews, voting, public deliberations); the dedicated roles student representatives have to participate or lead in decision-making spaces (e.g. Rigor Walks, Student Voice Committees, Participatory Budgeting, student representatives on ILT's or other teams); the methods of reporting to students that communicate the impact of student perspectives collected, and how and why decisions were made (e.g. newsletters, town halls); the instructional opportunities students have to learn about and engage in solution-design of community-based issues (service learning, problem-based learning, civic action projects); the level of student voice in out-of-school time and other enrichment opportunities.
     • Theory of Action: When students are involved in school-level decision making, they are much more likely to feel valued by teachers and staff and to value their school in turn, leading to better student outcomes. In addition, school-level decisions will be more informed and more likely to lead to positive change if they include the perspectives of those experiencing the problem and impacted by the decision. By reporting this information, the district hopes to improve these practices and outcomes over time.
     • District Accountability: Ensure policies and resources are in place to support the whole child so that all students are healthy, safe, engaged in diverse experiences and programming, and academically challenged. Provide tools and resources to schools to support increasing student voice and engagement in decision-making.

  3. Out of School Time and Enrichment Opportunities

     • Definition: This indicator provides stakeholders information on the extent to which schools are providing opportunities for students to engage in academic, athletic and arts based enrichment within their school community and beyond the classroom.These opportunities include, but are not limited to, the visual and performing arts, athletics, extracurricular activities, and other areas that are a quintessential part of the CPS education experience beyond the Instructional Core in the classroom. Enrichment activities should supplement the classroom experience, not seek to replace sequential learning in each content area.
     • Standard: The district shall report school-level information on the types of enrichment opportunities each school provides students including total number of available student seats; the percentage of available programs that meet district standards of quality; level of actual student participation in enrichment activities; and equity of access to enrichment programming.
     • Theory of Action: If the district measures and reports on the types of enrichment opportunities each school provides its students, then schools will be intentional in providing access with the goal of improving targeted student outcomes.
     • District Accountability: Fund and support expanded Out of School time programming to give students year-round opportunities for advanced coursework, academic supports, and extracurricular activities.

  4. School and Community Partnerships and Engagement

     • Definition: This indicator measures the extent to which schools engage and partner with families and communities to increase the quantity and quality of student daily learning experiences. The goal is to operationalize Inclusive Partnerships as defined in the CPS Equity Framework.
     • Standard: The district shall report information on the number and types of partnerships each school has with community organizations; the level of engagement with stakeholder groups (Community Action Councils, Parent Advisory Councils, Bilingual Advisory Committees, Local School Councils, etc.); and the level of supportive culture engendered by the school as measured by data sources like climate and culture surveys. Additionally, it is expected that schools include parents of Students with Disabilities in stakeholder groups.
     • Theory of Action: If the district measures and reports on these kinds of school-level activities, then schools will be incentivized to increase family and community engagement and the district will be better able to equitably provide the needed resources to ensure quality engagement district-wide.
     • District Accountability: Advance funding equity by increasing targeted investments and partnerships to support our highest-need students. Leverage Local School Council members, Community Action Councils, Parent Advisory Councils, and more affinity and parent groups to help us better understand what families and partners think about our District's policies. From public community meetings and town halls, to focus groups, to one-on-one outreach, we will work to ensure we have diverse perspectives at the table to help inform future planning and build a universal support strategy that is responsive to local needs.

IV. ONGOING EVALUATION OF THIS POLICY

The district shall develop the business rules (i.e., how metrics are actually calculated) and reporting mechanisms for each of the indicators listed above consistent with all available research and information regarding best practice in terms of psychometrics, effective reporting, and other technical considerations. Additionally, said business rules and reporting mechanisms should incorporate the ideas and practices outlined in the CPS Equity Framework. Specifically, decisions about how publicly reported metrics are calculated and reported will be made based (at least in part) on the extent to which said decisions support CPS decision makers' ability to implement the CPS Equity Framework.

In addition to discussions that consider these qualitative factors, the district shall also quantitatively assess proposed business rules and reporting mechanisms for their equity impact. Specifically, the district shall evaluate metrics and flag potential bias across the following factors:

• Student Characteristics: Race; Gender; Race and Gender; Current English Learner Status (EL); Prior and Current English Learner Status (Ever EL); Economically Disadvantaged; Students with Disabilities (i.e., students with an Individualized Education Plan and/or a 504 plan); Students in Temporary Living Situations (STLS)
• School Characteristics: School size; School type (Specialty, Traditional, Options, etc.); Governance/Network; Geographic Location/Region; Community; Opportunity Index Score ( selected components of); Selective Enrollment; Attendance Boundary; Space Utilization; Program Density; Historic Funding (Both Capital and Operational); High Churn; Majority 1 race

In acknowledgement of the fact that there are cases where statistical bias signals a potential calculation problem and others where it signals useful information about systemic bias that decision makers should consider, the district will formulate a clear methodology of distinguishing between the two and incorporate these considerations into final decisions about metrics. The district will also develop and document for public consumption clear rationale for decisions regarding metric business rules that incorporate all of the considerations listed here in Section V.

In addition to incorporating all of the above considerations listed here in Section V for the initial design of metric business rules and reporting mechanisms, the district shall also re-evaluate metric business rules at least once every three years to ensure that metrics are continuing to meet the district's standards of equity and data integrity. In addition to equity and data integrity, this regular re-evaluation shall also consider:

• The effectiveness of district reporting of information about the indicators listed in Section III above (i.e., whether the information is presented in a manner that is easily accessed and understood by stakeholders).
• The effectiveness of district efforts to meet stakeholder learning demands regarding publicly available information about school and district quality (i.e., whether stakeholders have the requisite understanding they need to use the information the district provides).
• Whether the information the district provides is being used in the manner intended by stakeholders, including students; families; community members; school leaders; teachers; and other practitioners.

In accordance with Board resolution 22-0427-RS1, the district shall submit a report to the Board before the end of the calendar year at least once every three years inclusive of district findings of all of the above analyses, as well any recommendations for improving the policy based on said findings. The first iteration of this report will be due to the Board by December 31, 2027, and at least every three years thereafter.

V. GUIDANCE FOR IMPLEMENTATION

• Timeline for Reporting

  The Board's selection of the indicators outlined above is driven by a desire to align district practice with stakeholder priorities and needs to the extent possible and is not limited to information currently available to district leadership. As such, the Board acknowledges that information on some of the indicators described above will not be available when the district first releases updates to stakeholders in the Fall of 2024. Therefore, the deadlines for providing information to stakeholders about each of the indicators listed above are as follows:

  • Indicator D.1.a: Student Growth to Proficiency : Fall 2024
  • Indicator D.1.b: Student Proficiency : Fall 2024
  • Indicator D.1.c: Growth of Students who Participate in Alternate Assessments : Fall 2025
  • Indicator D.1.d: English Learner Progress to Proficiency: Fall 2024
  • Indicator D.1.e: On-Track: Fall 2024
  • Indicator D.1.f: Student Growth in Math and Reading (Options and Detention Centers Only) : Summer 2025
  • Indicator D.1.g: Credit Attainment (Options and Detention Centers Only) : Summer 2025
  • Indicator D.2.a: Chronic Absence: Fall 2024
  • Indicator D.2.b: One-Year Dropout Rate: Fall 2024
  • Indicator D.2.c: Average Daily Attendance (Options Only) : Summer 2025
  • Indicator D.2.d: Growth in Attendance (Options and Detention Centers Only) : Summer 2025
  • Indicator D.2.e: Stabilization (Options Only) : Summer 2025
  • Indicator D.2.f: Student Portfolio (Schools in Detention Centers Only) : Summer 2025
  • Indicator D.2.g: Transition Plan (School in Juvenile Temporary Detention Center Only) : Fall 2025
  • Indicator D.2.h: Transition Rate - Enrollment (School in Juvenile Temporary Detention Center Only) : Summer 2025
  • Indicator D.2.i: Transition Rate - Persistence (School in Juvenile Temporary Detention Centers Only) : Summer 2025
  • Indicator D.3.a: Four-Year Cohort Graduation Rate: Fall 2024
  • Indicator D.3.b: Early College and Career Credentials: Fall 2025
  • Indicator D.3.c: College Enrollment and Persistence: Fall 2024
  • Indicator D.3.d: One-Year Graduation Rate (Options and Detention Centers Only) : Summer 2025
  • Indicator D.3.e: PostSecondary Pathway & Transition Enrollment (Options Schools and Students who participate in Alternate Assessment Only) : Summer 2025
  • Indicator E.1: High Quality Curriculum: Fall 2024
  • Indicator E.2: Rigorous Instruction:Fall 2025
  • Indicator E.3: Conditions for Learning and the Student Experience: Fall 2025
  • Indicator E.4: Balanced Assessment System: Fall 2025
  • Indicator E.5: Access to Postsecondary Opportunities: Fall 2025
  • Indicator E.6: Research-based Academic Interventions within a Multi-tiered System of Supports (MTSS) Framework: Fall 2025
  • Indicator E.7: Specially Designed Instruction: Fall 2025
  • Indicator F.1: Leadership Context: Fall 2025
  • Indicator F.2: School Vision and Continuous Improvement Practice: Fall 2025
  • Indicator F.3: Distributed Leadership and Teacher Leader Development: Fall 2025
  • Indicator F.4: Teachers and Staff Capacity: Fall 2025
  • Indicator G.1: Healing Centered Culture, Supports and Social-Emotional Interventions: Fall 2025
  • Indicator G.2: Inclusive and Collaborative Structures and Involved and Engaged Youth: Fall 2025
  • Indicator G.3 Fall: Out of School Time and Enrichment Opportunities: Fall 2025
  • Indicator G.4: School and Community Partnerships and Engagement: Fall 2025

  Final reporting for each of the indicators should, wherever possible, take place after field testing and feedback from stakeholders have informed the design, and include guidance for interpretation and use.

• System Coherence

  The principles outlined in this policy applicable to evaluating and reporting on school and district quality and effectiveness should also be applied to the extent possible to other district continuous improvement and evaluation practices. This coherence includes the content and process for the Continuous Improvement Work Plan (CIWP); Central Office and Network strategic plans; Central Office and Network staff evaluations; principal and assistant principal evaluations; and teacher evaluations. The application of these principles to these and other key aspects of district operations will align incentives, simplify activities, and increase overall system effectiveness and coherence for practitioners and stakeholders alike.

• Progress Monitoring and Oversight

  The CEO shall provide an annual progress report on the implementation V (A) and (B) above. This report shall be provided prior to the deadlines for reporting indicators listed V (A), include defined standards and rules for those indicators, progress updates on how said indicators are being incorporated into district continuous improvement and evaluation practices in V (B) above, and other information as requested by the Board.

1. Neither of these indicators (III.D.1.a and III.D.1.b) are applicable to students who participate in alternate assessments.
2. None of these indicators (III,D,1,a., III.D.1.b., III.D.1.c., III.D.1.d. and III.D.1.e.) are applicable to Options Schools or schools located in Detention Centers.
3. Neither of these indicators (III.D.2.a. and III.D.2.b.) are applicable to Options Schools or schools located in Detention Centers.
4. Neither of these indicators (III.D.3.a. and III.D.3.c.) are applicable to Options Schools or schools located in Detention Centers.
5. This indicator is not applicable to students with alternate assessments.