Educators face a dilemma of staying up-to-date with evidence-based practices while dealing with superficial ideas. Continuous improvement methods can help in testing new ideas but if seen as add-ons, they may not yield sustained improvement. This brief describes the CORE Districts’ five-driver model that deepens educators’ ownership and sustains improvement over time.

ESSA allows states to design accountability systems and measures to meet new college and career readiness goals. With the lack of adequate measures, states will need to develop new measures and structures. The CORE Districts in CA, with its innovative accountability system and waivers from No Child Left Behind, is a model for other states. Reports from CORE-PACE highlight the impact of decisions such as subgroup sizes and test score growth on identifying low-performing schools. States can use the district waiver provision to help develop and refine their accountability systems under ESSA.

California's CORE districts have been collecting data since 2014 on social and emotional learning (SEL) and school climate and culture to improve K-12 schools' holistic approach to student development. Advocates argue that a focus on SEL and school culture will lead to higher academic achievement and better well-being for students. The CORE districts developed survey instruments for SEL competencies and school climate perceptions involving students, staff, and parents. Many states and districts have adopted SEL-specific curricula and disciplinary reforms.

The shift towards multiple-measure dashboard accountability has potential for promoting more meaningful learning, but also comes with challenges. Lessons learned from research on CORE Districts show that a shift to flexibility and capacity building efforts has challenges. Oakland Unified School District's approach suggests that districts have agency to modify mindsets by modeling inquiry, openness, and flexibility, giving stakeholders space and authority to manage accountability and improvement.

The Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) in California and the federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) encourage local control in school accountability. The CORE waiver districts have implemented an innovative measurement system and supports for school and district improvement, providing an opportunity to learn from the enactment of a system supported by accountability policy in this new era. This report examines the early implementation and effects of the CORE reform and seeks to inform the ongoing efforts within CORE and future accountability policy in other states and districts.

The CORE Districts in California conducted a survey to measure K-12 students’ social-emotional well-being during the pandemic. Results indicate that students’ personal and interpersonal well-being rated lower than their learning environments. Interpersonal well-being was most correlated with academic achievement. Home/online learning environment improved, but Grades 5-12 students reported not liking school as much in winter 2020-21. Stakeholders should focus on meeting the pressing needs of each group of students.

At the first anniversary of school closures due to COVID-19, nearly half of the K–12 students in the U.S. were attending schools that were either fully remote or offering hybrid instruction, with more than 70 percent of California students attending schools remotely. For this reason, continued efforts to unpack the effects of COVID-19 on student outcomes are especially important for California students, who may be experiencing larger-than-average effects of continued school closures relative to the nation overall.

California's Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) aims to improve educational equity by providing additional funds to districts with disadvantaged students. Districts are required to engage with their communities and develop Local Control Accountability Plans (LCAPs) to identify priorities and allocate funds. However, there are concerns about the quality of LCAPs, lack of stakeholder involvement, and limited transparency. To improve the effectiveness of LCFF, districts must ensure meaningful stakeholder engagement and use data to guide decision-making.

This report examines the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) and how schools can be identified for support and improvement using a multiple measures framework. The authors find that different academic indicators measure different aspects of school performance and suggest that states should be allowed to use multiple measures instead of a summative rating. They also find that non-academic indicators are not given enough weight and suggest a clarification in federal policy.

This policy brief analyzes the implications of using various subgroup sizes for school-level reporting under the ESSA. Data from the CORE Districts shows that a subgroup size of 20+ offers clear advantages in representing historically underserved student populations. The authors also produced a supplementary report comparing subgroup sizes of 20+ and 30+ in response to new ESSA regulations.

The use of social-emotional learning (SEL) and school culture/climate (CC) measures is a promising way to understand school performance. SEL and CC measures are reliable, distinguish between schools, and relate to academic and non-academic measures. They can identify areas for improvement within schools, such as subgroup gaps. Incorporating these measures into higher stakes accountability systems requires further research.

California and the US are undergoing a cultural shift in school accountability policies towards locally-determined measures of school performance. Lessons can be learned from the CORE districts, which developed an innovative accountability system, emphasizing support over sanctions, and utilizing multiple measures of school quality. The CORE districts' measurement system and collaboration hold promise for improving local systems, but efforts to build capacity remain a work in progress.

To support policymaker discussions on including chronic absenteeism data in California's accountability system, PACE analyzed the CORE Districts' student chronic absenteeism data. It is feasible to include chronic absence as a measurement using the state's approach for rating school achievement based on outcome and improvement or by simply looking at performance in a given school year.

Given the importance of a college degree for both individual and societal economic prosperity, policymakers and educators are focused on strengthening the path to college beyond college entry. In this report, we synthesize the existing literature on four factors key to educational attainment—aspirations and beliefs, academic preparation, knowledge and information, and fortitude and resilience—and the implications of each.

This study explores ten "outlier schools" in California's CORE districts that have strong social-emotional learning outcomes. The brief and infographic summarize the various practices found in these schools and the common implementation challenges faced. The findings offer lessons that can help other schools and districts implement social-emotional learning at scale.

This study examines the impact of target setting for non-academic indicators on school quality ratings in CORE districts' elementary schools. The authors found that non-academic measures of school quality vary over time, are not consistently associated with demographics, and are sensitive to small changes in rating thresholds. The results suggest a need for more research on target setting for non-academic indicators in school quality systems.

This study examines the properties of California's CORE Districts' SEL survey, which measures social-emotional learning in students. The survey was given to over 400,000 students in grades 3-12. The study uses both classical test theory and item response theory frameworks to analyze the data and make recommendations for modeling and scaling SEL survey data. Policy implications are discussed for educators, administrators, policy makers, and other stakeholders.

The increase in students opting out of standardized tests is a threat to accurately measuring student achievement. This brief examines the effects of opting out in the CORE districts and models how it could affect accountability measures. More opt-outs could significantly impact some metrics, but the growth measure is largely unaffected. Metrics tracking achievement by cohort are at risk of bias, even with low levels of opting out. Adjusting for characteristics of students who take the tests could be a solution.

Effective data use is crucial for continuous improvement, but there is confusion about how it differs from data use for other purposes. This report explains what data are most useful for continuous improvement and presents a case study of how the CORE data collaborative uses a multiple-measures approach to support decision-making.