Jessica Giles
Executive Director
Education Reform Now Advocacy D.C.
Public Comment on the Annual School Performance Index Report and Evaluation (ASPIRE)
Good evening, Executive Director Dr. Michelle J. Walker-Davis, Members, and Staff of the DC Public Charter School Board. My name is Jessica Giles. I am a ward seven resident and the Executive Director of the D.C. Chapter of Education Reform Now Advocacy (ERNA D.C). ERNA D.C. is an organization fighting for a just and equitable public education system for all D.C. students. At ERNA D.C., we believe that all students can learn and reach their full potential. In order for this to happen, D.C. needs a bold vision for educational excellence. The District must set high standards for students, educators, and schools; provide equitable funding; equip families with timely, relevant, easily understandable, and actionable information; and hold our public schools accountable for ensuring every student receives a high-quality education.
After nearly five years of no accountability, we are pleased to see D.C.’s only public charter school authorizer, the DC Public Charter School Board (DC PCSB), begin to launch the Annual School Performance Index Report and Evaluation (ASPIRE). ASPIRE has many strengths, including the following: five main ASPIRE frameworks to adequately elevate school performance for each grade band (PK Only, PK-8, High School, Adult, and Althernative); a real distinction between the four main categories (School Progress, School Achievement, School Environment, and School-Specific Performance); changing the measure from in-seat attendance to chronic absenteeism; and having floors and targets by specific grade bands, allowing for more tailored measurement of school quality. We are also happy to see DC PCSB set the bar high for academic excellence at 4 or higher in ELA or Math on PARCC/DC CAPE in proficiency and growth.
While most of the changes are positive, we believe there are certain aspects of ASPIRE that may, inadvertently, negatively impact students if not implemented correctly. For example, schools are able to opt-in to nationally normed growth assessments in addition to PARCC/DC CAPE. The inclusion of these assessments is considered bonus points and cannot hurt a school rating. While schools should be encouraged to use interim and diagnostic assessments, having multiple tests included in the accountability system might mask lower student achievement scores. Additionally, this might make it harder to compare school performance between schools, since schools will likely be picking different assessments, presumably the ones that make them look better.
Further, in the school achievement framework for high schools, students enrolled in dual enrollment (DE) courses should earn a minimum of a C in order for their scores to be considered the equivalent of a 3 on the Advanced Placement exam[1] or a 4 on the International Baccalaureate (IB) exam. We are concerned that lowering the score to a C- may lower expectations for DE students. Additionally, under ASPIRE, Adult-serving schools will now earn points for students earning Industry- and Mid-Level Certification, which is laudable, but if this is not implemented well over time with proper guardrails, adults in this section might be incentivized to earn credentials that may be automated or low-growth in the future.
Overall, the changes from the Performance Management Framework to ASPIRE have the potential to improve the public charter school sector. However, we urge the Board to address the issues we’re bringing to light and make sure there are no unintended consequences of this new policy shift, and to ensure our students are set up for success in life, school, and career. Thank you for allowing me to provide public comment and testimony.
[1] AP. AP Score Scale Table. Source: https://apstudents.collegeboard.org/about-ap-scores/ap-score-scale-table