2014-2015 SCSC Academic Accountability

The SCSC evaluates the academic performance of state charter schools as measured by:

  1. State Accountability Metric: College and Career Readiness Performance Index 
    • ​​In 2012, the CCRPI replaced the previously used Adequately Year Progress (AYP) determination in Georgia. The CCRPI includes scores that easily communicate to the public how a school is doing. The overall score is based on a school’s performance in three major categories: academic achievement, student growth and progress, and achievement gap reduction.
  1. SCSC Accountability Metric: Value-Added Impact on Student Achievement 
    • In addition to evaluating CCRPI performance, the SCSC also contracts with the Governor’s Office of Student Achievement (GOSA) to conduct a value-added analysis of state charter school performance.  This analysis uses a value-added model to assess state charter schools based on their ability to positively impact the academic achievement of the unique student populations they serve. The value-added model controls for observable student characteristics and prior academic performance in order to generate an “impact score” for each school and adjusts for the observable characteristics of students so that schools can be equitably compared regardless of their differing student populations.

The following 2014-2015 accountability documents are linked at the bottom of this webpage:

  • 2014-2015 SCSC Accountability Briefing: 
    • This summary document is created by the SCSC to summarize state charter performance on both the CCRPI and the Value-Added Impact measure. 
  • 2014-2015 State Charter School Performance Report:  
    • This report is compiled by the state’s academic accountability agency, the Governor’s Office of Student Achievement (GOSA), to evaluate the performance of all state charter schools during the 2012-13 school year.  GOSA partners with Dr. Tim Sass, Distinguished University Professor in the Department of Economics and the Andrew Young School of Policy Studies at Georgia State University, to conduct this evaluation.  The evaluation examines multiple measures including 1) student performance on state assessments, 2) a “value-added” model (VAM) that includes statistical controls for observable student characteristics and prior academic performance, and 3) the student growth model utilized in the CCRPI.  Because this analysis includes a value-add component that controls for student characteristics, it allows for fairer performance comparisons between state charters and traditional schools.   

Accountability Calculations:

  • CCRPI: 
    • Achievement (50 points) 
      • Graduation rate (Four- and five-year graduation rates with more weight given to the four-year rate) in high school or a “Predictor for High School Graduation” for elementary and middle schools (an additional, different look at CRCT performance).
      • Post School Readiness (eg: career pathways, ACT/SAT/AP/IB exam performance, world language coursework, reading/writing skills, and attendance).
      • Content Mastery on CRCT/EOCT tests in core subjects.
    • Progress (40 points)
      • Measured by the percentage of students earning typical or high growth on state assessments. This percentage is derived from Student Growth Percentiles (SGPs), which compare a student’s growth with other students with similar past achievement.
    • Achievement Gap (10 points)
      • Based upon schools’ achievement gap size and change in that gap. The gap is measured between the schools’ bottom 25% of students and the state average.
    • Challenge Points (10 total points) as a sum of the following:
      • Exceeding the Bar (ETB) Points: Seven to ten items worth 0.5 points each that focus on innovative practices and career-related outcomes. Only the top 5% in each category qualify with the exception of the 0.5 points awarded for innovative practices.
      • ED/EL/SWD Performance Points: Based upon subgroup performance of economically disadvantaged (ED), students with disabilities (SWD), and English Language Learners (ELL) student performance relative to state targets. Possible points is proportional to the percentage of students a school has in each subgroup.
  • Value-Added Impact
    • The value-added method adjusts all student-level test scores to a normalized score so the statewide mean is zero and the standard deviation is one. 
      • Example: A student whose score equals the statewide average would have a normalized score of zero. 
    • Using normalized scores, the value-added method estimates the relationship between current test scores and A) prior test scores and B) observable student characteristics like free/reduced-price lunch status, disability status, gender, etc. 
      • Example: When estimating the effect of student characteristics on 9th-grade Lit. EOCT scores, the impact of being female is 0.114.  This means that all else being equal, girls—on average—have a normalized score that is 0.114 higher than boys. 
    • Using estimated impacts of prior scores and student characteristics, the value-added method enables the construction of a predicted score for each student.  Once determined, this predicted score is compared to the student’s actual score.
      • Example: If a student does as well as one would expect based on his/her observable characteristics and prior scores, the difference between the student’s actual and predicted scores will equal zero. 
    • To obtain an estimate of a school’s effect (or its impact on student achievement), the value-added method averages the difference between actual and predicted scores across all students in a school. 
      • Example: If all of the students in a school were performing as well as one would expect based on their observable characteristics and prior scores, the school effect would equal zero.  These school effects are calibrated so that the average school in the state should have a school effect of zero.