Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012."— Presentation transcript:

1 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012

2 2 Agenda Mississippi impact data using components of Florida school grades Comparison to current Mississippi model Decisions and impact policymakers consider when selecting to implement school grading – Ways of measuring student growth – Criteria for determining student growth – Points needed for earning each letter grade

3 3 Agenda Establish five performance bands - A, B, C, D, and F – for the accountability system based on: – Student Achievement: the percent of students proficient and above on the state assessments – Individual Student Growth: the percent of students making one’s years progress in one year’s time on the state assessments With a focus on the growth of the lowest 25 of students – Four Year Graduation Rate: the percent of students graduating with a standard high school diploma in 4 years

4 4 School Grades: A - F School Grade is based primarily on students’ outcomes. Proficiency / Achievement – Percent of all students performing on grade level Progress / Learning Gains – Percent of students learning a year’s worth of knowledge, regardless of whether they are on grade level – Percent of lowest performing 25 percent students who are making a year’s worth of progress Graduation Rates for High Schools – Percent of students graduating with a standard high school diploma in four years – Used the gradation rate provided by MDE

5 5 Grading High Schools Next Generation of Education Reform Options for high school grades calculation to include: Graduation rates for all students Graduation rates for at-risk students Graduation rates for 8 th grade students entering high school below grade level in reading and math Acceleration rates (both performance and participation) Number of students taking and passing Advanced Placement, International Baccalaureate, dual credit or industry certification courses College readiness rates Based upon SAT or ACT and the common placement test for college

6 Adjustments Growth was calculated only for moving up one level or maintaining Proficient or Advanced – Impact, growth within Minimal and Basic was not calculated because statewide data was not available to make reasonable determinations Elementary and middle schools have seven school grading components, therefore a 700 point scale, since there is no longer a writing test – Impact, growth is weighted more heavily and the points need to earn an A-F are adjusted High schools include graduation rates as the eighth component, therefore have an 800 point grading scale Science scores were not available for a school so the district average proficiency was estimated and used – Impact, Science calculation is based on district level results to maintain a consistent point scale for all schools Assumed 95 percent tested in all schools 6

7 7 Measuring Student Proficiency Mississippi Curriculum Test Edition 2 (MCT2) – Language Arts and Mathematics – Grades 3-8 Mississippi Science Test (MST2) – Grades 5 and 8 Subject Area Testing Program, 2nd Edition (SATP2) – Algebra I, Biology I, U.S. History, and English II Mississippi Alternate Assessment of Extended Curriculum Frameworks (MAAECF) Achievement Levels 1234 MinimalBasicProficientAdvanced

8 8 Defining Progress Progress is when a student: – Increases an Achievement Level Moving from Achievement Level 3 to 4 – Stays at the same Proficient Achievement Level – Achievement Levels 3 or 4 – from one year to the next Stays in Achievement Level 3 from 4 th and 5 th grades – Moves up sufficiently within the lowest two Achievement Levels Achievement Levels 1234 MinimalBasicProficientAdvanced

9 9 Elementary and Middle School Grades Each category has 100 possible points (percent of students) ReadingMathScience Proficiency Growth All Students Growth All Students Growth Lowest 25% Growth Lowest 25%

10 10 Elementary and Middle School Grades ABCDF Points460 or more433 – – – 381 Less than 346 Percent of Eligible Students Tested At least 95% At least 90% At least 90% At least 90% Less than 90% Adequate Progress with Lowest performing students In Reading and Math Within one year Within two years Within two years 10

11 11 Sunshine Middle School ReadingMathWritingScience Proficiency 63% Proficiency 59% Proficiency 90% Proficiency 51% Growth All Students 66% Growth All Students 68% 508 points = B Growth Lowest 25% 57% Growth Lowest 25% 54% 11

12 12 High School Grades Each category has 100 possible points (percent of students) ReadingMathScienceGraduation Proficiency Rate Growth All Students Growth All Students Growth Lowest 25% Growth Lowest 25%

13 High School Grades ABCDF Points525 or more495 – – – 434 Less than 395 Percent of Eligible Students Tested At least 95% At least 90% At least 90% At least 90% Less than 90% Adequate Progress with Lowest performing students In Reading and Math Within one year Within two years Within two years 13

14 14 Elementary School Data Achievement and Growth Models Accountability StatusB - HIGH PERFORMING Quality of Distribution Index(QDI)194 Growth StatusMET

15 15 Elementary School 1 MS Grade B ReadingMathScience Proficiency 267 / % Proficiency 285 / % Proficiency District Percent Substitution 58% Growth All Students 138 / % Growth All Students 140 / % 434 points = B School Grade = C Growth Lowest 25% 26 / 56 46% Growth Lowest 25% 24 / 54 44%

16 16 Elementary School Data Achievement and Growth Models Accountability StatusF - LOW PERFORMING Quality of Distribution Index(QDI)126 Growth StatusNOT MET

17 17 Elementary School 2 MS Grade F/Low Performing ReadingMathScience Proficiency 49 / % Proficiency 87 / % Proficiency 13 / 56 23% Growth All Students 42 / % Growth All Students 52 / % 255 points = F Growth Lowest 25% 10 / 30 33% Growth Lowest 25% 9 / 31 29%

18 Middle School Data 18 Achievement and Growth Models Accountability StatusA – STAR SCHOOL Quality of Distribution Index(QDI)202 Growth StatusMET

19 Middle School 3 MS Grade A ReadingMathScience Proficiency 482 / % Proficiency 511 / % Proficiency 227 / % Growth All Students 439 / % Growth All Students 478 / % 487 points = A School Grade = B Growth Lowest 25% 74 / % Growth Lowest 25% 82 / % 19

20 20 Middle School Data Achievement and Growth Models Accountability StatusD – ACADEMIC WATCH Quality of Distribution Index(QDI)159 Growth StatusNOT MET

21 21 Middle School 4 MS Grade D ReadingMathScience Proficiency 310 / % Proficiency 358 / % Proficiency 138 / % Growth All Students 299 / % Growth All Students 341 / % 346 points = D Growth Lowest 25% 35 / % Growth Lowest 25% 50 / %

22 22 Grade 7-12 School Data Achievement and Growth Models Accountability StatusF – FAILING Quality of Distribution Index(QDI)94 Growth StatusNOT MET 5-Year Graduation Rate60.9 HSCI

23 23 Grade 7-12 School 5 MS Grade F/Failing ReadingMath ScienceGraduation* Proficiency 35 / % Proficiency 37 / % Proficiency 17 / 68 25% Rate 73% Growth All Students 40 / % Growth All Students 42 / % 314 points = F Growth Lowest 25% 13 / 33 39% Growth Lowest 25% 16 / 36 44% *Four Year Graduation Rate with a Diploma

24 24 High School Data Achievement and Growth Models Accountability StatusF – LOW PERFORMING Quality of Distribution Index(QDI)127 Growth StatusNOT MET 5-Year Graduation Rate58.3 HSCI

25 25 High School 6 MS Grade F/Low Performing ReadingMathScienceGraduation* Proficiency 61 / % Proficiency 102 / % Proficiency 73 / % Rate 62% Growth All Students 50 / % Growth All Students 94 / % 383 points = F Growth Lowest 25% 8 / 39 21% Growth Lowest 25% 22 / 38 58% *Four Year Graduation Rate with a Diploma

26 Grade 7-12 School Data 26 Achievement and Growth Models Accountability StatusC – SUCCESSFUL Quality of Distribution Index(QDI)157 Growth StatusMET 5-Year Graduation Rate68.8 HSCI

27 Grade 7-12 School 7 MS Grade C ReadingMath ScienceGraduation* Proficiency 146 / % Proficiency 168 / % Proficiency 100 / % Rate 80% Growth All Students 147 / % Growth All Students 178 / % 474 points = C School Grade = D Growth Lowest 25% 16 / 44 36% Growth Lowest 25% 24 / 50 48% 27 *Four Year Graduation Rate with a Diploma

28 Other considerations Criteria for awarding points for growth Points needed to earn letter grades 28

29 29 Results of Florida A+ Plan Arrows indicate years when school grading standards were increased.

30 NAEP

31 Average NAEP 4th Grade Reading Scores All Mississippi Students vs. Florida Free and Reduced Lunch Students

32 32 Foundation for Excellence in Education P.O. Box Tallahassee, FL Christy Hovanetz, Ph.D. –

33 33 Calculated separately for reading and math, the count of on- time graduates scoring “ready” or higher on ACT, SAT, or Common Placement Test (CPT) examinations divided by the total count of on-time graduates. Cut scores for readiness are provided in rule 6A , FAC. NumeratorDenominator Number of on-time graduates scoring “ready” on SAT, ACT, and/or CPT any time during their high school careers All on-time graduates School Grading Postsecondary Readiness Components

34 34 School Grading Postsecondary Readiness Cut Scores CPT Math72 Reading83 SAT Verbal440 Math440 ACT Reading18 Math19 P.E.R.T. Reading104 Math113

35 35 High School Grading GraduationAccelerationReadinessGrowth/Decline Overall Rate = for 4-Yr Federal 100 for 5-Yr Modified Participation 150 Reading 100 For each component schools may earn up to 10 additional points for GROWTH (20 points for a factor worth 200 points) At-Risk Rate = for 4-Yr Federal 50 for 5-Yr Modified Performance 150 Mathematics 100 For each component schools may lose 5 additional points for DECLINE (10 points for a factor worth 200 points) Total Graduation Points = 300 Total Acceleration Points =300 Total Readiness Points = 200 Total Non-Assessment Points Possible = 800


Download ppt "1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google