Denver Public Schools
1860 Lincoln Street
Denver, CO 80203
April 17, 2015
Dear Denver Board of Education members and the Chief Academic and Innovation Officer at Denver Public Schools:
A+ Denver and our coalition partners received your letter, dated April 9th, outlining the proposed changes to the School Performance Framework (SPF) and responding to the questions raised by A+ Denver and a coalition of co-signers in October of 2014.
In the initial letter from A+ and partners, the following points were made in regard to the SPF:
- The district should send a strong signal about what constitutes a quality school by defining Green or Blue schools as places most students are at grade level or on a clear trajectory to get there.
- The SPF should be understandable for parents. Specifically, we recommended descriptors, such as “accredited on probation,” were changed to straightforward terms.
- A more rigorous rating system is necessary to establish the bar set by the Denver Plan 2020.
- Achievement gaps ought to be taken into account when determining school performance.
- Growth is weighted too heavily compared to status because, ultimately, status is a better measure for college-readiness than growth.
- It will become more difficult to become a Green or Blue school: “DPS will not lower the cut points for status measures for next year; this will result in higher expectations for school performance on the 2015 SPF due to the increased rigor associated with the CMAS.”
- DPS will incorporate college-readiness more substantially into the SPF by including remediation measures in the SPF: “College remediation measures will also formally count for high schools. DPS will show achievement gap data in the SPF: “We will also continue to highlight the performance of various subgroups on the SPF reports (see the attached sample report of a school’s 2015 SPF).
-
DPS will weigh status more heavily, compared to growth, than in the past: “DPS will increase the relative weight of the status indicator (e.g., shift the status-to-growth ratio in elementary schools from 3:1 to 3:2), apply conditions to ensure schools earning an overall rating of Green or Blue are performing well on both status and growth, and review the expectations set through cut points across measures to ensure alignment to Denver Plan 2020 goals.
- DPS is determining how to hold schools accountable for closing achievement gaps: “The district is also exploring ways to better emphasize the importance of equity and closing opportunity and achievement gaps. This could be accomplished through raising individual cut points on a variety of measures, adding equity conditions that ensure that all Green or Blue schools meet certain thresholds for closing gaps, or adding specific equity indicators to the SPF.
- DPS is committed to continuous improvement: “Finally, a small working group of the Board and senior leadership team is reviewing the SPF through the lens of the accountability and performance principles developed by the Board this year. This review will allow us to reassess the SPF's alignment to Denver Plan goals, as well as its ability to communicate transparently and simply to families and the community the quality and health of a given school. Our goal is to communicate specific changes for the 2016 SPF prior to the start of the 2015-16 school year.
- A+ Denver and our partners believe that the SPF changes you’ve outlined will mean better outcomes for students. We are particularly encouraged by the proposed 2016 shift toward more heavily weighing status over growth; inclusion of equity measures in the SPF; and effectively higher expectations to become a Green or Blue school.
However, we have a few remaining questions. These include:
- Despite the technical challenges of determining growth scores from new test data, how will the district ensure families have access to proficiency data and a revised SPF ahead of the first choice window for the 2016-17 school year?
- How can communication about school quality be improved for parents so they can easily understand a school’s rating, and, simultaneously, are able to find information about how that rating was calculated?
- What are the specific goals and strategies proposed for clarifying school performance information for parents?
- Are the growth targets incorporated into the SPF sufficient to result in proficiency targets as outlined in the strategic plan?
- How will equity measures be incorporated into the school’s actual rating?
- How can we ensure equity measures will appropriately incentivize schools to improve the performance of all students?
- What is meant by “your commitment to reviewing the SPF through performance principles”? What are the performance principles, and who is being held accountable for them?
- Regarding the inclusion of college readiness, how will remediation information be included and weighted?
- What timeline should be expected for these improvements?
A+ Denver and our partners applaud DPS’s responsiveness to this coalition’s input. We understand both the need to maintain clear, consistent expectations for schools and to build a responsive evaluation tool. DPS’ willingness to reshape the tool to better align with the vision outlined in the new Denver Plan is commendable. Ultimately, the changes you have put forward will go a long way toward accurately communicating school performance, and setting appropriate standards for schools.
Thank you for your partnership, and we look forward to continuing this dialogue.
Sincerely,
A+ Denver
Colorado Succeeds
Denver Alliance for Public Education
DSST Public Schools
Donnell-Kay Foundation
Dr. Sharon Bailey, Former DPS Board Member
Gates Family Foundation
Jeannie Kaplan, Former DPS Board Member
Latinos for Education Reform
Michelle Moss, Former DPS Board Member
Padres & Jóvenes Unidos
Rocky Mountain Preparatory
Stand for Children Colorado
Teach for America Colorado
Together Colorado
University Preparatory School