1. Accountability Programs MICHIGAN SCHOOL TESTING CONFERENCE FEBRUARY 19, 2014

2. Outline Scorecard Summary and Overview 1% & 2% Cap Information for MI-Access and MEAP-Access, Respectively Full Academic Year and Feeder File Information

3. Getting to Know Scorecards

4. Accountability Scorecard Overview Individual proficiency, graduation/attendance cells use three colors: Differentiated proficiency targets by content area (all five) for each school and district Attendance for schools that do not graduate students – whole school only. Target is 90% or improvement target Graduation cohort uses 4, 5, 6 year rate with 80% target or improvement target 210 Target was MetSafe HarborTarget not Met

5. Details… Individual participation, educator evaluations, compliance factors use two colors: No points are earned for participation – red cells (<95%) directly affect the overall scorecard color as “audits” Educator Evaluations and Compliance Factors are worth an additional 5% each of proficiency points

6. Attain 85% or greater of possible points Attain at least 70% but less than 85% of possible points Attain at least 60% but less than 70% of possible points Attain at least 50% but less than 60% of possible points Attain less than 50% of possible points Scorecard Color Ranges

7. Danger Zone – Audit Checks Ahead Red cells present on the Scorecards will lower the overall Scorecard color Red overall grad/attend/ed evals/compliance factors = overall scorecard no higher than yellow At least two content areas with less than 95% participation rate = red overall scorecard

8. Scorecards and Top-to-Bottom Each system can affect the other: Top to Bottom  Scorecard –Priority = Red Scorecard Scorecard -> Top to Bottom –Red Scorecard will take away Reward label –Red Scorecard two consecutive years or three out of last five years for participation = Priority label –Green Scorecard with at least 85% proficiency in each subject and showing continuous improvement = Reward label –Green Bottom 30% cells in all subjects and 75 th percentile or higher on TTB = no Focus label

9. 2012-13 School Scorecard Results Overall Color Counts for Building-Level: Green = 93 Lime = 0 Yellow = 2598 Orange = 184 Red = 481

10. 2012-13 Subgroup Results Analysis - Math SubgroupTotalMetMet % Safe HarborSafe Harbor % Total MetTotal Met % Am. Indian/AK Nat. 272281.513.72385.2 Asian17317098.30017098.3 Black/Af. Am. 89351958.1323.655161.7 Hispanic3272688251.527383.5 Two or More534584.9004584.9 White256125109810251198 SE133344333.2107855041.3 ED2683215480.3501.9220482.1 EL24312551.462.513153.9 Bottom 3029501093.73011394.7 All Subgroups 11243636556.62322.1659758.7

11. 2012-13 Subgroup Results Analysis - Reading SubgroupTotalMetMet % Safe HarborSafe Harbor % Total MetTotal Met % Am. Indian/AK Nat. 272592.613.72696.3 Asian17316897.10016897.1 Black/Af. Am. 89380990.6101.191891.7 Hispanic32731596.30031596.3 Two or More545398.1005398.1 White2560251398.220.1251598.2 SE13442291723717.646634.7 ED2685253294.3180.7255095 EL24315764.6229.117973.7 Bottom 30295156419.12548.681827.7 All Subgroups 11257736565.45444.8790970.3

12. Proficiency Students that are Full Academic Year (FAY) and “feed” to your school and district count toward proficiency. Scorecard proficiency includes proficient students (PL 1 & 2), provisionally proficient students (within 2 std. devs. of the std. error, and growth proficient students (PL change of I or SI)

13. Averaging & Safe Harbor Multiple years of data are averaged to help meet targets: 1, 2, or 3 years proficiency and participation data are considered Safe Harbor is currently met when meeting the state’s rate of improvement at the 80 th percentile –350 buildings made Safe Harbor in at least one content area and subgroup

14. Participation All students included in the fall 2013 MSDS General Collection and Student Record Maintenance (SRM) files with an “as of date” on or before October 25, 2013 will count toward participation rates for the school/district.

15. Changes to Scorecard MDE and stakeholders are currently reviewing changes/proposals to scorecard policy revisions. Changes will be in ESEA Flex update to the USED late winter.

16. 1% and 2% Caps MI-ACCESS & MEAP-ACCESS FOR SCORECARD USE

17. 1% Cap and MI-Access MEAP-Access has a 2% district cap for proficiency. MI-Access (all levels combined - FI, SI, P) has a separate 1% cap for proficiency with an additional 1% allowed if you have the 1% cap exception and appeal during the preliminary report cards window that it be applied. The % cap is calculated by the district’s total headcount enrollment in applicable tested grades, for each subject (each subject has a “separate” cap). Proficient tests scores above the cap are considered “not proficient” instead of being truly proficient as they otherwise would be. 1% Cap also DOES NOT impact Top-to-Bottom Ranking. All assessments contribute to the participation requirement– the cap DOES NOT impact participation.

18. 2% Cap and MEAP-Access MEAP-Access has a 2% district cap for proficiency. The % cap is calculated by the district’s total headcount enrollment in applicable tested grades, for each subject (each subject has a “separate” cap). Proficient tests scores above the cap are considered “not proficient” instead of being truly proficient as they otherwise would be. All assessments contribute to the participation requirement– the cap DOES NOT impact participation.

19. 2% Cap and MEAP-Access 2% Cap for MEAP-Access also DOES NOT impact Top-to-Bottom Ranking. 2% Cap for MEAP-Access is automatic and does not require a waiver application to use the full 2% like the 1% MI-Access cap. This should be the last year for the 2% cap since MEAP-Access will no longer be an assessment option.

20. 1% Cap Exception Approved Districts List of Currently Approved Districts: –www.michigan.gov/baa-accountabilitywww.michigan.gov/baa-accountability –Under “Resources for Educators” section –Approved apps are good for 3 years –Districts must still appeal during summer preliminary scorecard window for cap exception to be applied Within the next week, MDE will begin accepting 1% cap exception applications on the Secure Site. –Process used to be a paper application –Now fully electronic at: https://baa.state.mi.us/BAASecure/ https://baa.state.mi.us/BAASecure/

21. Full Academic Year and Feeder Schools

22. Feeder File Available Soon Within the next week, the “Student Feeder File” downloadable student data files on the Secure Site. –Available under the “Student Test Scores” section where users download their other data files. Feeder files provide fall assessment information alongside fall MSDS collection data.

23. FAY & Feeder Full Academic Year (FAY) students are those that were present in the… –For Fall 2013 Assessment results: Fall 2012, Spring 2013, EOY 2013 Collections Feeder schools are the schools where the student was for those collections.

24. Feeder Student Files Provide FAY information for Fall 2013 students enrolled in your school. Provide Feeder School information for the Fall 2013 FAY students. Provide assessment results, like the other student data files.

25. Feeder Student Files Allow schools/districts to see FAY-Feeder student proficiency. –“True” Proficiency PLs 1 & 2 –Growth Proficiency Improved and Signif. Improved Students Math and Reading ONLY –Provisional Proficiency Students who scored within 2 standard errors of the cut score for the grade level and content.

26. Contact Information Matt Gleason & Alex Schwarz 877-560-8378 mde-accountability@michigan.gov