Washington State Charter School CommissionACADEMIC PERFORMANCE FRAMEWORK

The Academic Performance Framework (APF) includes measures that allow the Washington State Charter School Commission (“the Commission”) to evaluate charter school academic performance. This section answers the evaluative question:  Is the academic program a success?  A charter school that meets the standards in this area is implementing its academic program effectively, and student learning—the central purpose of every school—is taking place. 

For each measure in the framework, a charter school receives one of four ratings:  “Exceeds Standard”, “Meets Standard”, “Does Not Meet Standard”, or “Falls Far Below Standard”. 

Indicator Measure1.State and Federal Accountability

1a. Washington State Achievement Index1b. Federal Accountability Designation

2. Student Achievement (Proficiency)

Reading Math Writing Science

2a. All students

2a.1. Proficiency (component of AI)

2a.2. Advanced proficiency

2a.3. Comparison to schools of origin

2a.4. Comparison to schools serving similar students

2b. Disaggregated by subgroup

2b.1. Subgroup proficiency (component of AI)

2b.2. Comparison to schools of origin

2b.3. Comparison to schools serving similar students

3. Student Progress (Growth)

Reading Math

3a. All students (component of AI)

3b. Disaggregated by subgroup (component of AI)

4. Postsecondary

4a. ACT or SAT (performance and participation)

4a.1. All students

4a.2. Disaggregated by subgroup

4b. Graduation rate

4b.1. All students (component of AI)

4b.2. Disaggregated by subgroup (component of AI)

4b.3. Comparison to schools of origin

4b.4. Comparison to schools serving similar students

4c. Postsecondary enrollment

4c.1. All students

4c.2. Disaggregated by subgroup

5. Optional Mission-Specific Goals 5a. Mission-Specific Academic Goals

NOTE: Subgroups include gender, race and ethnicity, current and former ELL, special education, low income, and “highly capable status.”

15/20/2023

ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE FRAMEWORK (APF)

1. STATE AND FEDERAL ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEMThe Washington State Board of Education (SBE) and the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) developed the Washington State Achievement Index. The Achievement Index has three components that are evaluated for all students and for targeted subgroups (see Appendix A for detail):

Proficiency Growth Career and College Readiness

Schools receive an annual index score and performance designation and a composite based on the school’s three-year average results. Schools also receive an AYP rating as part of federal accountability requirements. The APF uses the annual index score and performance designation, as well as the AYP results and performance designations.

1a. State Accountability: Achievement IndexIs the charter school meeting performance expectations based on the Washington State Achievement Index?Exceeds Standard: Charter school received a performance designation of “Exemplary” or “Very Good.”Meets Standard: Charter school received a performance designation of “Good.”Does Not Meet Standard: Charter school received a performance designation of “Fair.”Falls Far Below Standard: Charter school received a performance designation of “Underperforming” or “Lowest 5 Percent.”Additional Information/Considerations:

The framework uses the annual AI results, as opposed to the 3 year composite.

1b. Federal Accountability: AYP and Performance ClassificationsExceeds Standard: Charter school met AYP and received the “Reward” classification.Meets Standard: Charter school met AYP.Does Not Meet Standard: Charter school did not meet AYP.Falls Far Below Standard: Charter school received a “Focus” or “Priority” classification.Additional Information/Considerations:

AYP and the performance classifications could be evaluated in two separate measures.

2. STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT (PROFICIENCY)2a.1 Proficiency {COMPONENT OF THE ACHIEVEMENT INDEX}

25/20/2023

Are students meeting performance expectations on state assessments?Note: Reading, Math, Writing, and Science are evaluated separately.Exceeds Standard: Charter school proficiency rate met or exceeded the 75th percentile of statewide performance.Meets Standard: Charter school proficiency rate was between the 50th and 74th percentile of statewide performance.Does Not Meet Standard: Charter school proficiency rate was between the 25th and 49th percentile of statewide performance.Falls Far Below Standard: Charter school proficiency rate fell below the 25th percentile of statewide performance.Additional Information/Considerations:

Targets are aligned with Measure 1a targets.

2a.2 Advanced ProficiencyAre students meeting performance expectations for advanced proficiency on state

assessments?Note: Reading, Math, Writing, and Science are evaluated separately.Exceeds Standard: Charter school advanced proficiency rate met or exceeded the 75th percentile of statewide performance.Meets Standard: Charter school advanced proficiency rate was between the 50th and 74th percentile of statewide performance.Does Not Meet Standard: Charter school advanced proficiency rate was between the 25th and 49th percentile of statewide performance.Falls Far Below Standard: Charter school advanced proficiency rate fell below the 25th percentile of statewide performance.Additional Information/Considerations:

Targets are aligned with Measure 1a targets.

2a.3 Proficiency – Comparison to Schools of OriginHow are charter school students performing on state assessments compared to the schools or

origin?Note: Reading, Math, Writing, and Science are evaluated separately.Exceeds Standard: School proficiency rate exceeds the schools of origin by xx or more percentage points and meets or exceeds the state

average proficiency rate for schools serving the same grades.Meets Standard: School proficiency rate met or exceed the schools of origin by up to xx percentage points.Does Not Meet Standard: School proficiency rate is below the schools of origin by up to xx percentage points.Falls Far Below Standard: School proficiency rate is below the schools of origin by xx or more percentage points.Additional Information/Considerations:

Specific targets must be set during a trial run of charter school performance. See Appendix C for suggested comparison methodology.

2a.4 Proficiency – Comparison to Schools Serving Similar StudentsHow are charter school students performing on state assessments compared to schools

serving similar student populations?Note: Reading, Math, Writing, and Science are evaluated separately.Exceeds Standard: TBD

35/20/2023

Meets Standard: TBDDoes Not Meet Standard: TBDFalls Far Below Standard: TBDAdditional Information/Considerations:

Specific targets must be set during a trial run of charter school performance. See Appendix D for selection methodology options.

2b.1 Subgroup Proficiency {COMPONENT OF THE ACHIEVEMENT INDEX}Are students in subgroups performing well on state assessments compared to subgroup

performance statewide?Note: Reading, Math, Writing, and Science are evaluated separately for each eligible subgroup.Exceeds Standard: Charter school subgroup proficiency rate met or exceeded the 75th percentile of statewide subgroup performance.Meets Standard: Charter school subgroup proficiency rate was between the 50th and 74th percentile of statewide subgroup performance.Does Not Meet Standard: Charter school subgroup proficiency rate was between the 25th and 49th percentile of statewide subgroup performance.Falls Far Below Standard: Charter school subgroup proficiency rate fell below the 25th percentile of statewide subgroup performance.Additional Information/Considerations:

Targets are aligned with Measure 1a targets. Subgroups include gender, race and ethnicity, current and former ELL, special education, low income,

and “highly capable status.” Eligible subgroups meet OSPI minimum reporting threshold.

2b.2 Subgroup proficiency – Comparison to Schools of OriginHow are charter school students in subgroups performing on state assessments compared to the

schools of origin?Note: Reading, Math, Writing, and Science are evaluated separately for each eligible subgroup.Exceeds Standard: School subgroup proficiency rate exceeded the schools of origin by xx or more percentage points and met or exceeded the

state average subgroup proficiency rate for schools serving the same grades.Meets Standard: School subgroup proficiency rate met or exceeded the schools of origin by up to xx percentage points.Does Not Meet Standard: School subgroup proficiency rate is below the schools of origin by up to xx percentage points.Falls Far Below Standard: School subgroup proficiency rate is below the schools of origin by xx or more percentage points.Additional Information/Considerations:

Specific targets must be set during a trial run of charter school performance. See Appendix C for suggested comparison methodology. Subgroups include gender, race and ethnicity, current and former ELL, special education, low income,

and “highly capable status.” Eligible subgroups meet OSPI minimum reporting threshold.

2b.3 Subgroup proficiency – Comparison to Schools Serving Similar StudentsHow are charter school students in subgroups performing on state assessments compared to schools

serving similar student populations?Note: Reading, Math, Writing, and Science are evaluated separately for each eligible subgroup.Exceeds Standard: TBDMeets Standard: TBD

45/20/2023

Does Not Meet Standard: TBDFalls Far Below Standard: TBDAdditional Information/Considerations:

Specific targets must be set during a trial run of charter school performance. See Appendix D for selection methodology options. Subgroups include gender, race and ethnicity, current and former ELL, special education, low income,

and “highly capable status.” Eligible subgroups meet OSPI minimum reporting threshold.

55/20/2023

3. STUDENT PROGRESS (GROWTH)

3a Student Progress (Growth) {COMPONENT OF THE ACHIEVEMENT INDEX}Are students meeting growth expectations based on subgroup median growth percentiles

(MGPs)?Note: Reading and Math are evaluated separately.Exceeds Standard: School MGP is greater than 65.Meets Standard: School MGP is between 50 and 64.Does Not Meet Standard: School MGP is between 35 and 49.Falls Far Below Standard: School MGP is less than 35.Additional Information/Considerations:

Targets are aligned with Measure 1a targets and the Achievement Index growth point assignment formula (See Appendices A and B).

3b Student Progress (Growth) – Subgroups {COMPONENT OF THE ACHIEVEMENT INDEX}Are students in subgroups meeting growth expectations based on subgroup median growth

percentiles (MGPs)?Note: Reading and Math are evaluated separately. Each eligible subgroup is evaluated separately.Exceeds Standard: Subgroup MGP is greater than 65.Meets Standard: Subgroup MGP is between 50 and 64.Does Not Meet Standard: Subgroup MGP is between 35 and 49.Falls Far Below Standard: Subgroup MGP is less than 35.Additional Information/Considerations:

Targets are aligned with Measure 1a targets and the Achievement Index growth point assignment formula (See Appendices A and B).

Subgroups include gender, race and ethnicity, current and former ELL, special education, low income, and “highly capable status.” Eligible subgroups meet OSPI minimum reporting threshold.

65/20/2023

4. POSTSECONDARY READINESS AND SUCCESS (HIGH SCHOOLS)4a.1a ACT or SAT PerformanceAre students prepared for college based on performance on the ACT or SAT?Exceeds Standard: At least xx percent of students scored a composite ACT score of 21 or combined SAT score of 1550.Meets Standard: At least xx percent and less than xx percent of students scored a composite ACT score of 21 or combined SAT score of 1550.Does Not Meet Standard: At least xx percent and less than xx percent of students scored a composite ACT score of 21 or combined SAT score of 1550.Falls Far Below Standard: Less than xx percent of students scored a composite ACT score of 21 or combined SAT score of 1550.Additional Information/Considerations:

Specific targets must be set during a trial run of charter school performance. The benchmark scores of 21 and 1550 were identified by ACT and the College Board as scores

associated with college readiness.1

Requires access to student records with ACT and SAT results.

4a.1b ACT or SAT ParticipationAre students participating in the ACT or SAT?Exceeds Standard: At least xx percent of students participated in the ACT or SAT.Meets Standard: At least xx percent and less than xx percent of students participated in the ACT or SAT.Does Not Meet Standard: At least xx percent and less than xx percent of students participated in the ACT or SAT.Falls Far Below Standard: Less than xx percent of students participated in the ACT or SAT.Additional Information/Considerations:

Specific targets must be set during a trial run of charter school performance. Requires access to student records with ACT and SAT results.

4a.2a ACT or SAT Performance – Disaggregated by subgroupAre students prepared for college based on performance on the ACT or SAT?Exceeds Standard: At least xx percent of students in subgroup scored a composite ACT score of 21 or combined SAT score of 1550.Meets Standard: At least xx percent and less than xx percent of students in subgroup scored a composite ACT score of 21 or combined SAT

score of 1550.Does Not Meet Standard: At least xx percent and less than xx percent of students in subgroup scored a composite ACT score of 21 or combined SAT

score of 1550.Falls Far Below Standard: Less than xx percent of students in subgroup scored a composite ACT score of 21 or combined SAT score of 1550.Additional Information/Considerations:

Specific targets must be set during a trial run of charter school performance.

1 ACT. (2011). The Condition of College & Career Readiness 2011. Available: www.act.org/research/policymakers/cccr11/notes.htmlCollege Board. (2011). SAT Benchmarks: Development of a College Readiness Benchmark and its Relationship to Secondary and Postsecondary School Performance. Available: http://professionals.collegeboard.com/ profdownload/RR2011-5.pdf

75/20/2023

Subgroups include gender, race and ethnicity, current and former ELL, special education, low income, and “highly capable status.”

Eligible subgroups meet OSPI minimum reporting threshold. Requires access to student records with ACT and SAT results.

4a.2b ACT or SAT Participation – Disaggregated by subgroupAre students participating in the ACT or SAT?Exceeds Standard: At least xx percent of students in subgroup participated in the ACT or SAT.Meets Standard: At least xx percent and less than xx percent of students in subgroup participated in the ACT or SAT.Does Not Meet Standard: At least xx percent and less than xx percent of students in subgroup participated in the ACT or SAT.Falls Far Below Standard: Less than xx percent of students in subgroup participated in the ACT or SAT.Additional Information/Considerations:

Specific targets must be set during a trial run of charter school performance. Subgroups include gender, race and ethnicity, current and former ELL, special education, low income,

and “highly capable status.” Eligible subgroups meet OSPI minimum reporting threshold. Requires access to student records with ACT and SAT results.

4b.1 Graduation Rate {COMPONENT OF THE ACHIEVEMENT INDEX}Exceeds Standard: At least xx percent of students graduated from high school in the current school year.Meets Standard: At least xx percent and less than xx percent of students graduated from high school in the current school year.Does Not Meet Standard: At least xx percent and less than xx percent of students graduated from high school in the current school year.Falls Far Below Standard: Less than xx percent of students graduated from high school in the current school year.Additional Information/Considerations:

Specific targets must be set during a trial run of charter school performance. OSPI reported a 77.2% four-year cohort graduation rate for the class of 2012. Based on 4-year cohort graduation rate.

85/20/2023

4b.2 Graduation Rate - Disaggregated by subgroup {COMPONENT OF THE ACHIEVEMENT INDEX}

Exceeds Standard: At least xx percent of students in subgroup graduated from high school in the current school year.Meets Standard: At least xx percent and less than xx percent of students in subgroup graduated from high school in the current school year.Does Not Meet Standard: At least xx percent and less than xx percent of students in subgroup graduated from high school in the current school year.Falls Far Below Standard: Less than xx percent of students in subgroup graduated from high school in the current school year.Additional Information/Considerations:

Specific targets must be set during a trial run of charter school performance. Subgroups include gender, race and ethnicity, current and former ELL, special education, low income,

and “highly capable status.” Eligible subgroups meet OSPI minimum reporting threshold. Based on 4-year cohort graduation rate.

4b.3 Graduation Rate – Comparison to Schools of OriginHow are charter school students in subgroups performing on state assessments compared to the

schools of origin?Exceeds Standard: Graduation rate exceeds the schools of origin by xx or more percentage points and meets or exceeds the state average

graduation rate for schools serving the same grades.Meets Standard: Graduation rate meets or exceeds the schools of origin by up to xx percentage points.Does Not Meet Standard: Graduation rates is below the schools of origin by up to xx percentage points.Falls Far Below Standard: Graduation rate is below the schools of origin by xx or more percentage points.Additional Information/Considerations:

Specific targets must be set during a trial run of charter school performance. See Appendix C for suggested comparison methodology. Subgroups include gender, race and ethnicity, current and former ELL, special education, low income,

and “highly capable status.” Based on 4-year cohort graduation rate.

4b.4 Graduation Rate – Comparison to Schools Serving Similar StudentsHow did the charter school graduation rate compare to schools serving similar student populations?Exceeds Standard: TBDMeets Standard: TBDDoes Not Meet Standard: TBDFalls Far Below Standard: TBDAdditional Information/Considerations:

Specific targets must be set during a trial run of charter school performance. See Appendix D for selection methodology options.

4c.1 Postsecondary Enrollment

95/20/2023

Are charter school graduates enrolling in college?Exceeds Standard:At least xx% of charter school graduates were enrolled in college in the fall after high school graduation.Meets Standard: xx% to xx% of charter school graduates were enrolled in college in the fall after high school graduation.Does Not Meet Standard: xx% to xx% of charter school graduates were enrolled in college in the fall after high school graduation.Falls Far Below Standard:Less than xx% of charter school graduates were enrolled in college in the fall after high school graduation.Additional Information/Considerations:

Specific targets must be set during a trial run of charter school performance. OSPI reports that 60% of the class of 2012 enrolled in college.2

4c.2 Postsecondary Enrollment – Disaggregated by SubgroupAre charter school graduates in subgroups enrolling in college?Exceeds Standard: TBDMeets Standard: TBDDoes Not Meet Standard: TBDFalls Far Below Standard: TBDAdditional Information/Considerations:

Specific targets must be set during a trial run of charter school performance. Subgroups include gender, race and ethnicity, current and former ELL, special education, low income,

and “highly capable status.” Eligible subgroups meet OSPI minimum reporting threshold.

2 http://www.erdcdata.wa.gov/hsfb.aspx10

5/20/2023

5. OPTIONAL MISSION-SPECIFIC ACADEMIC GOALS

5a. Did the charter school meet its mission-specific academic goals?Note: Specific metric(s) and target(s) must be developed and agreed upon by the charter school and the

authorizer.Exceeds Standard: The charter school exceeded its mission-specific academic goal(s).

Meets Standard: The charter school met its mission-specific academic goal(s).

Does Not Meet Standard: The charter school did not meet its mission-specific academic goal(s).

Falls Far Below Standard: The charter school fell far below its mission-specific academic goal(s).

115/20/2023

Appendix A – Detail of Achievement Index

Source: OSPI

125/20/2023

135/20/2023

Though detail for each student group is presented in the state school reports, schools receive points toward the Achievement Index score for only the all students group and the average of the targeted subgroups, based on the point chart to the right.

Source: OSPISource: OSPI

145/20/2023

Though detail for each student group is presented in the state school reports, schools receive points toward the Achievement Index score for only the all students group and the average of the targeted subgroups, based on the point chart to the right.

Though detail for each student group is presented in the state school reports, schools receive points toward the Achievement Index score only for the all students group and the average of the targeted subgroups, based on the point chart to the right.

Appendix B Distribution of Achievement Index Scores and Designations 2011 through 2013

DesignationAchievement Index Value

Range2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 3 year Composite

Exemplary 7.85 10 112 6% 131 7% 145 8% 91 5%

Very Good 6.81 <7.85 281 15% 320 17% 347 18% 272 15%

Good 5.86 <6.81 453 25% 508 27% 496 26% 539 30%

Fair 4.84 <5.86 494 27% 491 26% 455 24% 536 30%

Underperforming 3.77 <4.84 305 17% 277 15% 296 16% 273 15%

Lowest 5 Percent 1 <3.77 172 9% 134 7% 147 8% 90 5%

1817 100% 1861 100% 1886 100% 1801 100%

Source: OSPI and SBE 2013IndexData downloaded from https://eds.ospi.k12.wa.us/WAI/IndexReport

155/20/2023

Appendix C – Comparison to Schools of Origin

Step 1: Identify the schools of origin (using student address) that charter school students would otherwise attend. Calculate the percentage of charter school students assigned to each school of origin by grade.

School of OriginPercentage of Charter School’s Students Assigned to School by

Grade3 4 5 6 7 8

School 1 5.6% 4.0% 2.8% - - -

School 2 - - - 3.6% 3.6% 0.8%

School 3 12.0% - - - - -

School 4 13.1% 14.3% - - - -

School 5 - - - 12.0% 13.5% 14.7%

Step 2: Calculate the average proficiency rate of the schools of origin, weighted by the percentage of charter school students assigned to each school of origin by grade.

Assigned School

Percentage of Charter School’s Students Assigned to School by Grade Proficiency Rate of Assigned School by Grade

3 4 5 6 7 8 3 4 5 6 7 8School 1 5.6% 4.0% 2.8% 0% 0% 0% 54% 58% 59% - - -School 2 0% 0% 0% 3.6% 3.6% 0.8% - - - 55% 58% 60%School 3 12.0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 68% - - - - -School 4 13.1% 14.3% 0% 0% 0% 0% 57% 59% - - - -School 5 0% 0% 0% 12.0% 13.5% 14.7% - - - 67% 68% 70%

165/20/2023

The Assigned School Comparison is the weighted average of the proficiency rates of the assigned schools*:(5.6% x 54%) + (4.0% x 58%) + (2.8% x 59%) + (3.6% x 55%) + (3.6% x 58%) + (0.8% x 60%) + (12.0% x 68%) +

(13.1% x 57%) + (14.3% x 59%) + (12.0% x 67%) + (13.5% x 68%) + (14.7% x 70%) = 63%

Charter School

Assigned School 1

Assigned School 2

Assigned School 3

Assigned School 4

Assigned School 5

Appendix D – Options for Comparison of Schools Serving Similar Student Populations

Option 1: Ranking within Peer CohortThe Commission could select a cohort of schools for each charter school and base performance targets on the charter school’s percentile rank within the group.

Pros: Clear methodology and targetsCons: Schools may be matched with peers in different geographic areas.

In order to create a peer group large enough to allow percentile ranking, the peer group may contain schools with a wide range of match criteria.

Example:The New Jersey Department of Education conducts an annual peer school analysis for all public schools in the state, comparing the performance of each school to a group of approximately 30 “peer schools” drawn from across New Jersey. The peer group shares similar grade configurations and percentages of students eligible for free/reduced lunch, special education and limited English proficiency programs. 3

Sample Section of NJ School Performance Report:

Source: NJ DOE http://www.state.nj.us/education/pr/1213/80/807730970.pdf

3 New Jersey Department of Education (2013). Peer School Methodology White Paper. Retrieved from http://education.state.nj.us/pr/PeerMethodologyWhitePaper.pdf

175/20/2023

Option 2: Comparison to Small Group of Selected Similar Schools

Pros: Clear methodology for school selectionCharter school has a small group of schools for comparison

Cons: Schools may be matched with peers in different geographic areas.Given the small number of comparison schools, targets must be based on simple difference between charter school and matched school assessment results.

Example:The Illinois State Charter School Commission selects four schools based on geography and the closest match of student characteristics using the following methodology:

Step 1. Select comparison schools serving similar student populations based on the following criteria:

1. Serves the same grade levels as the charter school

2. Located within 50 miles of the charter school and has the same urban/rural designation as the charter school

3. Subgroup enrollment is within 10 percentage points of the charter school for each of the following student groups:

Black students Asian-American students Hispanic students White students English-Language Learners (ELL) Students with disabilities

4. The comparison school is not another charter school.

Charter schools that serve several grade levels (K-8, K-12) may need to be matched to comparison schools at multiple grade levels. For example, it may not be possible to identify K-8 non-charter schools to compare to a K-8 charter school. In this case, the different grade levels tested by the charter school (3-5, 6-8) would be separated and matched to schools serving the same subset of grades. Similar schools would be selected for grades 3-5, using the criteria outlined above and then the process would be repeated for grades 6-8. Any exceptions to the matching criteria should be clearly noted in the evaluation documentation.

Step 2. If more than four matches are found, select the four best matches for comparison schools, based on the difference in ethnicity and low-income enrollment between the charter school and potential comparison schools. If less than two matches are found, relax the +/-10 percentage point requirement for similar subgroup populations until two match schools are identified. Note any exceptions to the match process.

Step 3. Calculate an average of the comparison schools. 1. If the comparison schools enroll students in the same grades as the charter school, average the overall

school proficiency rates of all comparison schools (no weighting is applied).2. If the selected comparison schools represent multiple grade levels (e.g. elementary 3-5 and middle school

6-8), calculate the average proficiency rates of the comparison schools, weighted by the charter school 3-5 and 6-8 number tested.

Step 4. Compare the charter school’s overall proficiency rates in math and ELA to the average proficiency rates in math and ELA of the comparison schools.

185/20/2023