A. The Commission for Educational Quality and Accountability shall determine and adopt a series of student performance levels and the corresponding cut scores pursuant to the Oklahoma School Testing Program Act.
B. The Commission for Educational Quality and Accountability shall have the authority to set cut scores using any method which the State Board of Education was authorized to use in setting cut scores prior to July 1, 2013.
C. The performance levels shall be set by a method that indicates students are ready for the next grade, course, or level of education, as applicable. The Commission for Educational Quality and Accountability shall establish panels to review and revise the performance level descriptors for each subject and grade level. The Commission shall ensure that the assessments developed and administered by the State Board of Education pursuant to the Oklahoma School Testing Program Act in grades three through eight and at the secondary level are vertically aligned by content across grade levels to ensure consistency, continuity, alignment and clarity. The Commission shall adopt performance levels that are labeled and defined as follows:
1. Advanced, which shall indicate that students demonstrate superior performance on challenging subject matter;
2. Proficient, which shall indicate that students demonstrate mastery over challenging grade-level subject matter, can analyze and apply such knowledge to real-world situations, that students are ready for the next grade, course, or level of education and that students are on track to be ready for college or career;
3. Basic, which shall indicate that students demonstrate partial mastery of the essential knowledge and skills that are foundational for proficient work at their grade level or course and that students are not on track to be ready for college or career; and
4. Below basic, which shall indicate that students have not performed at least at the basic level.
D. The State Board of Education shall develop and implement in accordance with the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), as reauthorized and amended by P.L. No. 114-95, also known as the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), an accountability system as provided for in 20 U.S.C., 6311 and any related federal regulations. The accountability system shall be implemented beginning with the 2002-2003 school year and shall be based on the data as established pursuant to Section 1210.545 of this title and as modified to meet the mandates of the ESEA. For the 2002-2003 school year and every year thereafter the State Board of Education shall publish and ensure that each local education agency is provided with data annually by site so that the local education agency can make determinations to identify schools for rewards, and supports and interventions. The State Board of Education shall establish a system of recognition, rewards, interventions and technical assistance, as required by state law and the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) as reauthorized and amended by P.L. No. 114-95, also known as the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA).
E. A school that is identified as in need of improvement by the State Board of Education pursuant to this section, because of failure to meet either an academic performance target or an attendance or graduation performance target, or both, and is identified as in need of improvement pursuant to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), as reauthorized and amended by P.L. No. 114-95, also known as the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), shall utilize the assistance of a school support team or other similar team formed by the State Department of Education to provide support for schools in need of improvement, subject to school support team capacity. The school support team shall review and analyze all facets of operation of the school including the design and operation of the instructional program. The school support team shall assist the school in:
1. Incorporating strategies based on scientifically based research that will strengthen the core academic subjects in the school and address the specific academic issues that caused the school to be identified for school improvement;
2. Incorporating strategies to promote high quality professional development; and
3. Training teachers to analyze classroom and school-level data and use the data to inform instruction.
Added by Laws 1989, c. 335, § 14, eff. July 1, 1989. Amended by Laws 1992, c. 248, § 2, eff. July 1, 1992; Laws 1993, c. 257, § 13, emerg. eff. May 26, 1993; Laws 1996, c. 343, § 4, eff. July 1, 1996; Laws 1999, c. 356, § 4, eff. July 1, 1999; Laws 2000, c. 306, § 2, eff. July 1, 2000; Laws 2001, c. 413, § 5, eff. July 1, 2001; Laws 2003, c. 428, § 3, eff. July 1, 2003; Laws 2009, c. 26, § 1, eff. July 1, 2009; Laws 2009, c. 456, § 12, eff. July 1, 2009; Laws 2012, c. 223, § 15, eff. July 1, 2013; Laws 2013, c. 83, § 16, eff. July 1, 2013; Laws 2014, c. 163, § 1; Laws 2016, c. 360, § 9, eff. July 1, 2016; Laws 2017, c. 131, § 1, eff. July 1, 2017; Laws 2018, c. 200, § 1.
NOTE: Laws 1992, c. 281, § 3 repealed by Laws 1992, c. 373, § 22, eff. July 1, 1992.