1. August 20061 Accountability Gateway Training

2. August 20062 Who we are Greg Marcus  MDE  (651) 582-8454 John Lindner  Rosemount-Apple Valley-Eagan  (952) 423-7732

3. August 20063 Outline of the Presentation Timeline Consequences  Consequences of delayed publication AYP  Participation  Proficiency  Attendance  Graduation Report Card  Academic Stars Appeals Data Validation

4. August 20064 Handouts Agenda PP Presentation Timeline Graphic Definition of Terms Consequence Tree Sample Report Appeal and Waiver Forms Business Rules Error Descriptors Suspicious Conditions Report USDE Letter Login Help

5. August 20065 Timeline January: Test Ordering March: Standard setting begins April-May: Test Window June Accountability Gateway sign up begins June-July: Standard setting continues and other psychometric events take place July: Commissioner approves scale scores August: Quality Control Procedures August: Data validation trainings August 22 nd : Data Suppression Appeal Due August 15- September 15: Data validation and publication of preliminary results September 1 st : Preliminary Report Card published September 15 th : Appeals and Waivers Due November 15: Publication of final data

6. August 20066 Timeline Delay Traditionally results are published towards the end of August Due to the following factors timelines have been pushed back.  New tests (MCA-II)  New Standards  New Processes (TEAE reading substituting for the MCA-II reading)

7. August 20067

8. 8 The Goal of NCLB? “…to ensure that all children have a fair, equal, and significant opportunity to obtain a high-quality education and reach, at a minimum, proficiency on challenging State academic achievement standards and state academic assessments”

9. August 20069 How NCLB Achieves its Goal Through AYP Standards: Same for all students Identifying what students should know and be able to do Encourage higher order thinking & problem solving Assessments: For all students

10. August 200610 Consequences

11. August 200611 Identification Identification = not making AYP in a given area  Identified in math  Identified in reading  Identified in the Other category (Attendance and/or Graduation)

12. August 200612

13. August 200613 Bucky’s Elementary mathreadingattendance

14. August 200614 Consequences at the School Level Stage 0: Warning List Stage 1.1: School Choice Notify the parents in the district Create a school improvement plan Provide school choice

15. August 200615 Consequences at the School Level Stage 2.1: Supplemental services Notify the parents in the district Update school improvement plan Provide school choice Provide supplemental services

16. August 200616 Consequences at the School Level Stage 3.1: Corrective Action Notify the parents in the district Update school improvement plan Provide school choice Provide supplemental services District takes some corrective action

17. August 200617 Consequences at the School Level Stage 4.1: Planning for Restructuring Notify the parents in the district Update school improvement plan Provide school choice Provide supplemental services School and district plan for some restructuring that will improve school performance

18. August 200618 Consequences at the School Level Stage 5.1: Restructuring Notify the parents in the district Update school improvement plan Provide school choice Provide supplemental services Executing Restructuring the school

19. August 200619 Consequences for Districts

20. August 200620 Consequences at the District Level Stage 0: Warning List Stage 1.1: Needs Improvement  Write a District Improvement Plan Stage 2.1:  Update District Improvement Plan (Set-aside of $2500 from Administrative funds)  Corrective Action

21. August 200621 Consequences at the District Level Stage 3.1:  Update District Improvement Plan (Set-aside of $2500 from Administrative funds) Stage 4.1:  Update District Improvement Plan (same as above) Stage 5.1:  Update District Improvement Plan (same as above)

22. August 200622 Consequences of delayed Publication June 20 th memo from USDE  Consequences continue through: The entire year for School Choice The first semester for SES  Schools and districts should act on preliminary data. It is very important to get data validated as soon as possible.  Parents must be notified of the identification and their options before school starts.

23. August 200623 General AYP Info

24. August 200624 AYP Summary Academic Performance  Reading and Mathematics Participation 95%  All students tested  40 minimum group 9 groups reading 9 groups math Proficiency  October 1 students  20 minimum group  40 for LEP and special education 9 groups reading 9 groups math Attendance  Elementary, Middle Schools, State Approved Alternative Programs, and school districts  90% average rate  Growth from previous year  All students in the school  40 minimum group All group only AND/OR Graduation  High Schools awarding diplomas and school districts  80% average rate  Growth from previous year  Students grades 9-12  40 minimum group All group only

25. August 200625 AYP Groups All Student Racial/Ethnic Categories LEP (This includes the expanded LEP sometimes called LEP +2) Special Ed (This includes the expanded Special Ed sometimes called Special Ed +2) Free and Reduced Price Lunch

26. August 200626 Grades Included Elementary and Middle School  Math and Reading 3-8 High School  Reading 10  Math 11

27. August 200627 AYP Participation

28. August 200628 Data Report Participation # of Students Tested  This column indicates 386 students took an MCA or an Alternate Assessment in math and had a valid score # of Answer Docs Returned  This column indicates 395 students were enrolled on test day  Includes all documents EXCEPT those marked NE or ME. Please refer to the sample Current Verification and Correction Summary

29. August 200629 Data Report - Participation % of Students Participating  This column shows a participation rate of 97.72. This rate is calculated by dividing the number of students participating by the number of tests returned and multiplying the result by 100. AYP Marker  This shows if the group made the required 95% participation rate. A – Above the target B – Below the Target Z- Cell size limitation X – No data

30. August 200630 AYP Proficiency Targets Calculation Safe harbor

31. August 200631

32. August 200632

33. August 200633 2006 Math Targets (pre-validation) GradeTarget (Index Rate) 378.95 469.64 559.79 659.89 758.80 859.39 1128.13

34. August 200634 2006 Reading Targets (pre-validation) GradeTarget (Index Rate) 372.22 469.48 571.93 670.27 765.63 864.04 1064.77

35. August 200635 Proficiency The goal is for all students (100%) to be proficient in reading and mathematics by 2013-14. A score of x50 on the MCA-II indicates proficiency. Proficiency for schools and districts will be determined by an “AYP Index Rate” in each subject.

36. August 200636 Proficiency The index rate is used to provide a single rating that combines scores from students at or above x50 and scores from students who “Partially Meets the Standards.”  1 point is awarded for students who score at or above x50.  1/2 index point is awarded for students who score between x40 and x49 or in the “Partially Meets the Standards” level.  0 points are given for students whose score “Does Not Meet the Standards”.

37. August 200637 Data Report Proficiency 2006 Index Rate  The report for the sample school shows the 2006 index rate is 75.41  The index rate is calculated by dividing the number of total index points (276) by the number of October 1 documents (362). (276/362)*100 = 75.41

38. August 200638

39. August 200639 Data Report Proficiency Index Target  This column shows the AYP target of 69.43 for the all group that has been adjusted using a confidence interval.  This target is a blend of the target for each grade level based on the number of students at the grade level.  The confidence interval has the most impact on small groups.

40. August 200640 Data Report Proficiency Compare the 2006 Index Rate and the Index Target:  The 2006 index rate of 75.41 is equal to or greater than the index target of 69.43 the school has met AYP for proficiency. AYP status is A - for above the target

41. August 200641 Data Report Proficiency Sample District Proficiency – Group A – All Students Math Column Titles Total Index Points in math #of Oct 1 Ans. Docs. Returned 2006 Index Rate Index Target in math AYP Marker in math Value Shown in Sample Report 27636275.4169.43A Description of Calculation Total number of index points earned by students 1 point – Level M or E.5 point – Level P 0 point – Level D Total number of students tested and also enrolled on October 1 Total Index Points earned - divided by the number of October 1 Documents - multiplied by 100 Based on the number of students in each grade tested multiplied by the state targets and adjusted with a confidence interval Made AYP - 2006 Index Rate is greater than the CI Index Target Actual Calculation 2006 Index Rate: (276  362)*100 = 75.41

42. August 200642 Safe Harbor If a school/district does not make AYP and they made AYP in the “Other” indicator that school/district is eligible for safe harbor Safe harbor is a 10% decrease in the number of non-proficient scores.

43. August 200643 Safe Harbor

44. August 200644

45. August 200645 Multi-Year Averaging If a school/district does not make AYP using safe harbor additional calculations are done. Data is added across years and then compared with updated Index Targets and safe harbor targets. Up to 3 years of data may be combined.

46. August 200646 Appeals Data Suppression Appeal due August 22 nd Student and status level Appeals and Waivers due September 15 th Appeal and Waiver results will apply to final data.

47. August 200647 Data Suppression Appeal Due August 22  Appeal forms are included in your handouts  Appeals may be faxed or mailed to Greg Marcus  These appeals will prevent any academic data from being published until November 15 th

48. August 200648 Appeal vs. Waiver An appeal overrides the AYP status of a cell (in the white students math proficiency change the B to an A) A waiver removes the cap on the number of index points that come from the alternate assessment  a waiver can cause a number of different things including more/different schools being identified

49. August 200649 Appeal Types SAAP District/School AYP District AMAO Student level

50. August 200650 School Report Cards 2006-07 School Year

51. August 200651 What is the same? The “Report to Taxpayers” section is unchanged from the 2005 report card.  Information has been updated based on data collected during the 2004-05 school year.  Check with Dick Guevremont in MDE Program Finance or your school district business officer for questions. Dick.geuvermont@state.mn.us

52. August 200652 What is new for 2006? New information in many sections:  Enrollment  District Mobility  Advanced Academic Opportunities  2006 MCA – II  School Opportunities  Highly Qualified Teacher Information  Professional Staff Development  Q Comp

53. August 200653 What is new 2006? (continued) Schools that serve both elementary and middle school grades or middle school and high school grades will only get one report card.  The grade specific sections will be repeated, for example: Both high school and middle school advanced academic opportunities will be shown on the same report card for a 7-12 school.

54. August 200654 Data Sources Where does the information on the School Report come from?  Much of the information comes from MDE 2005- 06 school year data collections including: MARRS  Enrollment and student demographic data STAR  Teacher and administrator data MCA – II  Test Scores and AYP data

55. August 200655 Data Sources  Report to Taxpayers data comes from the 2004-05 UFARS data.  AYP Attendance AYP Graduation and the High School Drop Rate and District mobility rates come from 2004-05 MARRS enrollment data.

56. August 200656 Data Sources Some of the data is entered directly by schools though the Accountability Gateway  This data can be updated on a daily basis and includes: Advanced Academic Opportunities Stars School Safety Policies and Programs Stars School Opportunities Administrative and Teacher Salaries Professional Development for Staff

57. August 200657 Highlights The District Mobility section is expanded. The Advanced Academic Opportunities Stars have been revamped to be more similar across elementary, middle and high school report cards. The School Opportunities section now showcases EPAS assessments and CLEP tests at the high school level and IB courses for all schools.

58. August 200658 Highlights There are three new sections under School and District Staffing:  Core Academic Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers Statewide  Professional Development for Staff  Q Comp The School Staff section now includes information on Highly Qualified Teachers and Paraprofessionals.

59. August 200659 Questions about the School Report Card? MDE Communications: Doug Grey MARSS Enrollment: Marilyn Loehr STAR Teacher information: Linda Alberg MCA – II: AYP Data: Greg Marcus Report to Taxpayers: Dick Guevrement

60. August 200660 Data Validation One data validation window  hybrid window Data validation AYP results Report Card data collection Academic star ratings Help Desk  They can answer AYP/Report Card and Accountability Gateway Questions Local (651) 582-8585 Long Distance 1-888-487-9453