1. Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) Accountability
Overview of Michigan’s Proposed System
SLIP 1/20/2017

2. Introduction

3. Clarification on Timelines
accountability (Fall 2016) will still be governed by Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) Federal Flexibility. That is it will have the last running of Scorecard and Top-to-Bottom.
accountability (Fall 2017) will be a pilot run of the new proposed system but will NOT include federal designations.
accountability (Fall 2018) will be an operational run of the new system including the first naming of new federal designations.

4. Clarification on Status of Proposed System
As stated above, this is a PROPOSED system, it is not yet finalized.
Many elements are required by law and therefore cannot change
Some elements are more open to interpretation and therefore are still being discussed and are still subject to change

5. ESSA Title I Purpose
ESSA SEC STATEMENT OF PURPOSE. The purpose of this title [Title I] is to provide all children significant opportunity to receive a fair, equitable, and high-quality education, and to close educational achievement gaps.

6. NCLB Requirements Continued Under ESSA
Annual assessment of all students grades 3-8 & 11 in math & ELA
Annual accountability reporting
Disaggregation of data by student groups
Minimum size of student group before data is disaggregated
Minimum time of enrollment before students’ results can be included

7. Summary of Major Changes
Unification of tasks previously accomplished by separate systems
Frequency of federal designations
Addition of School Quality/ Student Success indicator
Scorecard
Top-to-Bottom (TTB)
Greater flexibility in how states and district support designated schools
Gap Ranking
English Learner (EL) accountability (i.e., NCLB Title III AMAOs)
Increases local control of, and local responsibility for, the improvement of designated schools
Partial points based on the degree to which goals are met
1% cap moves to participation
Only building-level accountability

8. Goals & Measures of Interim Progress

9. Long-Term Goals ESSA requires states to establish long-term goals
MDE proposes to set long-term goals for each indicator at the value equal to the 80th percentile of that indicator as observed in
Set using normative methods (80th percentile) to ensure goals are ambitious but achievable
Become criterion referenced (i.e., would be locked) after the initial year. This will allow schools to make progress against stable goals.

10. Measure of Interim Progress
ESSA also requires states to measure interim progress against their long-term goals
MDE proposes to measure interim progress by the proportion of schools meeting the long-term goal each year
Improvement of any degree and at any point on the scale is captured and credited to schools

11. ESSA Accountability Indicators

12. Indicators Explicitly Required in ESSA
Proficiency
Student growth
Graduation rate
English Learners’ (ELs’) progress in Acquiring English
At least one indicator of school quality or student success

13. Indicator of School Quality
Measures for this indicator are still being selected by another group
That group is currently considering including three measures:
Teacher/School Administrator Longevity
Chronic Absenteeism
Advanced Coursework (AP, IB, CTE, and Dual Enrollment)

14. Indicators Implicitly Required in ESSA
Participation (on content area assessments)
English Leaner (EL) Participation (on EL assessment; WIDA)

15. Indicator Indices
Within individual indicators results are aggregated for each student group having the minimum n-count to get an Indicator Value
The Indicator Value is then divided by the Indicator Goal to get a percent of goal met which is called the Indicator Index
This process is done for each indicator so that each indicator has an Indicator Index on a scale of 0-100

16. Indicator Index Example
School A
Has an EL Progress Indicator Value of 35% (i.e., 35% of its EL students meet EL Progress)
Statewide EL Progress Goal: 55%
35 / 55 = 63.64%
Indicator Index = 63.64
School B
Has an EL Progress Indicator Value of 60% (i.e., 60% of its EL students meet EL Progress)
Statewide EL Progress Goal: 55%
60 / 55 = Greater than 100%
Indicator Index = 100

17. Indicator Labels Indicator Label Definition (Percent of Goal Met)
Near or Above
90% to 100%
Approaching
75% to less than 90%
Considerably Below
50% to less than 75%
Critically Below
Less than 50%
Indicators are given an Indicator Label using the Indicator Index and the definitions in the table to the left.

18. Overall Indices & Labels

19. Weighting of Indicators in Overall Index
Proficiency
29%
Growth
Graduation Rate
15%
English Learner (EL) Progress
14%
School Quality
10%
Participation 2%
English Learner (EL) Participation 1%
Weights show the proportion of the overall label determined by an individual indicator
Missing indicators will have their weights distributed proportionally to the remaining indicators

20. Overall Indices & Labels
Individual Indicator Indices will be combined using the indicator weights to calculate an Overall Index for each building and each student group.
Overall Index values will be used to give each building and each student group an Overall Label.

21. Overall Student Group Labels
Definition
(Percent of Goal Met)
Near or Above
90% to 100%
Approaching
75% to less than 90%
Considerably Below
50% to less than 75%
Critically Below
Less than 50%
Student groups having data for at least one indicator will receive a Student Group Label

22. Overall Building Labels
Schools having Proficiency, Growth, Graduation Rate, or EL Progress indicator data will receive a Letter Grade
Schools having only some combination of Participation, EL Participation, and/or School Quality indicator data will receive a Pass/Fail overall label
Overall Label
Definition
(Percent of Goal Met) A
90% to 100% B
80% to less than 90% C
70% to less than 80% D
60% to less than 70% F
Less than 60%
Pass
75% to 100%
Fail
Less than 75%

23. MI-Access 1% Cap – New Requirements
1% cap changes from a proficiency cap to a participation cap
State may not exceed 1%
State must:
Require districts going over 1% cap to submit information justifying the need of the district to assess more that 1% of its students on an alternate assessment
Provide appropriate oversight of a district that exceeding the 1% cap
Make district justifications public providing information does not reveal individual student information
States are allowed to submit waivers good for one year
Requires timeline for falling below the cap and other additional reporting

24. MI-Access 1% Cap – What Do the Changes Mean?
Accountability will not be collecting waivers from districts
Starting now
Accountability will not be processing 1% cap appeals for accountability
All MI-Access students with valid scores will be included in proficiency calculations
MDE is still working out what districts will need to submit for justifying exceeding the 1% cap
This will most likely not flow through the accountability office

25. Federal Designations

26. Overview of ESSA Designations of Support
ESSA moves away from designating schools for sanctions to designating schools for additional supports
ESSA increases local control, but also local responsibility, by moving away from federal-/state-determined plans/models of improvement to locally-developed plans for improvement
ESSA introduces designations of Comprehensive Support, Targeted Support, and Additional Targeted Support

27. Quick Refresher on Acronyms
Definition
SEA
State Educational Agency
(i.e., MDE – Michigan Department of Education; SRO – School Reform Office, etc.)
LEA
Local Educational Agency (i.e., districts)

28. Comprehensive Support Designation
What is it?
Bottom 5% of schools
OR Graduation rate below 67%
OR an Additional Targeted Support School that did not exit that status in a State- determined timeframe
How often is it given?
At least once every 3 years, beginning with

29. Comprehensive Support Designation (cont.)
Who determines supports?
LEA must develop and implement a plan for improvement that includes:
evidence-based interventions based on a school-level needs assessment
identification of resource inequities
Approved by school, LEA, & SEA
Monitored by SEA
Who sets exit criteria & timeline?
SEA sets exit criteria and timeline
More rigorous SEA-determined action required if not exited in a SEA-determined number of years (not to exceed 4 years)

30. Targeted Support Designation
What is it?
Schools in which any student group is consistently underperforming
How often is it given?
Annually, beginning with

31. Targeted Support Designation (continued)
Who determines supports?
School must develop and implement an improvement plan for identified student group(s) that includes evidence- based interventions
Approved by LEA
Monitored by LEA
Who sets exit criteria & timeline?
LEA sets exit criteria and timeline
Results in additional action following unsuccessful implementation of such plan after an LEA-determined number of years

32. Additional Targeted Support Designation
What is it?
Schools having a student group performing like the bottom 5% of schools (i.e., like a Comprehensive Support school)
How often is it given?
At least once every three years, beginning with

33. Additional Targeted Support Designation (cont.)
Who determines supports?
School must develop and implement an improvement plan for identified student group(s) that includes evidence- based interventions
Approved by LEA
Monitored by LEA
Who sets exit criteria & timeline?
SEA sets exit criteria & timeline
The school becomes designated Comprehensive Support if not exited in SEA-determined number of years

34. Supports for LEAs with Significant Number of Support Schools

35. Required Supports for LEA with Significant Number of Support Schools
For LEAs serving a significant number of Comprehensive Support, Targeted Support, or Additional Targeted Support schools SEAs are required to:
Periodically review resource allocation to support improvement in these LEAs
Provide technical assistance to each of these LEAs

36. Allowed Supports for LEA with Significant Number of Support Schools
For LEAs serving a significant number of Comprehensive Support, Targeted Support, or Additional Targeted Support schools SEAs are allowed to:
Take action to initiate additional improvement in these LEAs
Consistent with State law, establish alternative evidence-based State determined strategies that can be used by LEAs to assist designated schools

37. Questions? Comments? Ask us today or contact:
-OR- (877)