The National Evaluation and Technical Assistance Center for the Education of Children and Youth Who Are Neglected, Delinquent, or At Risk (NDTAC)

The Alternative Schools Accountability Model (ASAM) is an accountability system developed for alternative schools in the state of California. This model provides the tools to assess student and school performance measures. The main goals of the model are to use indicators most suitable to a school’s student population and goals; measure performance through multiple indicators appropriate to high-risk students as well as academic achievement and cognitive growth; and compare a school’s performance over time to itself rather than to other schools.

Audience

Alternative schools within the ASAM model are schools with fewer than 100 pupils; schools under the jurisdiction of a county board of education or a county superintendent of schools; community day schools; and alternative schools, including continuation high schools and independent study schools. Schools are tasked to “meet the challenge of addressing a wide range of personal and social issues that interfere with the students’ abilities to reach grade-level standards.” The ASAM model applies to schools in which a majority of students are:

• at high risk for behavioral or education failure,
• expelled or under disciplinary sanction,
• wards of the court,
• pregnant and/or parenting, or
• recovered dropouts.

Indicators: Readiness-related, Contextual, Academic

The ASAM model includes 15 indicators that measure performance at the school level. These 15 indicators fall under three broad categories. The first category consists of Readiness Indicators, which are indicators of discipline problems and student persistence. The second group comprises Contextual Indicators such as attendance and development in language skills. The third group, Academic and Completion Indicators, includes indicators of achievement and indicators of goal attainment and school completion. The California Department of Education provides extensive detail on these 15 indicators, school and grade-range requirements, conditions, and limitations, and formulas for calculating which indicators may be used in conjunction with others (e.g., “only one of Indicators 3, 4, or 6 may be used”).

How ASAM Works: Flexibility with Accountability

Districts and counties that participate in ASAM are required to choose 2 out of the 15 indicators in addition to reporting STAR testing (California’s statewide assessment) for each school. Local governing boards and superintendents must also approve of the indicators chosen. Students in the schools that participate must be continuously enrolled for a minimum of 90 consecutive days during the reporting year to be included in the school’s performance report.

Once schools become part of ASAM, they are held accountable and must report results on the two indicators they have chosen. Data are reported by means of a password-protected online reporting system. In the first year of ASAM implantation (2001-2002 school year), 1,166 eligible schools registered to participate in ASAM and agreed to be held accountable through its measures. As of May 2003, 1188 eligible schools were registered as participants.

This approach mandates a standardized, uniform evaluation model of data that also gives some flexibility in reporting across diverse institutions. Information regarding the quality of implementation and the effectiveness of the ASAM approach should become available in the coming months.

Further Information

For further information about the ASAM, please contact Robert Bakke at the California Department of Education at 916-445-7746 or at rbakke@cde.ca.gov. For further information about ASAM indicators and reporting, contact Heidi Wackerli at 916-323-2564 or at hwackerl@cde.ca.gov. Inquiries related to data collection systems and indicator development may be addressed to Don Dixon at sra@sonic.net.

Disclaimer: This summary is presented to encourage dialog about evaluation at ND sites. This Web site, the technical assistance center, and the U.S. Department of Education do not necessarily endorse this model. We did not evaluate this model and, therefore, make no conclusions about its effectiveness nor suggest that sites adopt this model absent that information.

 

Published April 2004

See the Spotlight Archives