1. Understanding Your Top from Your Bottom: A Guide to Michigan’s Accountability System September 2013 Mitch Fowler fowlerm@calhounisd.org

2. Agenda Scorecard Overview Scorecard Components Top to Bottom Overview Understanding Z-Scores Z-Score Components

3. Outcomes Participants will: Identify Scorecard Components and Scoring Guidelines Complete an Audit to Identify Areas of Concern Understand Top to Bottom Components and Scoring Guidelines Complete a Top to Bottom Audit to Identify Areas of Concern Identify Resources from BAA (TTB Lookup Tool, BTO Look Up Tool, Focus Achievement Gap Tool)

4. Accountability Pre Assessment

5. Two Sides to Accountability AYP ScorecardTop to Bottom Ranking (Priority/Focus/Reward/No Label) Criterion – Referenced: New Target with New Cut Scores, 85% Proficient by 2022. Normative – Ranking relative to the state average if at least 30 FAY students. Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs) based on linear trajectory from 2011/12 Focuses attention on smaller subset of schools; designates Priority, Focus, & Rewards Given to all schools; acts as an “early warning” system; looks at subgroups, set targets The primary mechanism for sanctions and supports for Priority and Focus Schools. All Schools (Approx. 3,400 buildings) Fewer Schools (2,866 buildings)

6. Scorecard Availability Available on BAA Secure Site Available on MI School Data (Public or Secure)

7. Scorecard

8. Scorecard Components Proficiency – Based on Annual Measurable Objectives – Must be at 85% Proficient by 2022 in ALL Areas and Subgroups Participation – Must Test 95% of Students Completion Rate – Graduation / Attendance Rate Other Factors – SIP / DIP – Educator Evaluations

9. Scorecard Components - Proficiency

10. Activity: Identifying AMOs

11. Scorecard Components - Proficiency AMO Example Content Area Annual Increment 2011-12 Base Target 2012-13 Target 2013-14 Target Mathematics5.4930.1035.5941.08 Reading2.3561.5463.8966.23 Science7.1213.8220.9428.06 Social Studies5.5129.8735.3840.90 Writing3.8746.2650.1354.01

12. Scorecard Components - Proficiency Content Area Annual Increment 2011-12 Base Target 2012-13 Target 2013-14 Target Science7.1213.8220.9428.06 All Students made the 20.94% proficiency mark… 2 points. The Bottom 30% of students did not meet the 20.94% proficiency mark… 0 points.

13. Scorecard Components - Proficiency This is awesome!

14. Scorecard Components - Proficiency

15. Activity: Who are the Bottom 30%?

16. Scorecard Components - Proficiency Of the 33 proficient students, 18 were provisional… they received a 3.

17. Activity: Revealing Proficiency

18. Activity: Proficiency Audit

19. Scorecard Components - Participation 95% Tested!

20. Scorecard Components - Participation

21. Activity: Participation Audit

22. Scorecard Components – Completion Rate Completion Rate OR Attendance Rate

23. Activity: Completion Rate Audit

24. Scorecard Components – Other Factors

25. Activity: Other Factors Audit

26. Scorecard Decision Tree http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mde/ScorecardOverallColorDecisionTree_433459_7.pdf

27. Activity: Overall Color

28. Top to Bottom Availability Available via the BAA Look Up Tool – (On the BAA Website Here)Here Available on MI School Data (Public or Secure)

29. Top to Bottom Ranking Schools are compared to other schools in the state by utilizing z-scores (a statistical measure that describes how far you are from the middle of the pack). Z-scores that are positive, show that you are above the 50th percentile when compared to the state. Z-scores that are negative, show that you are below the 50th percentile when compared to the state.

30. Z-scores are centered around zero or the “state average” Positive is ABOVE the state avg. Negative is BELOW the state avg. Z-scores (Standard Deviations) State Average Z-score = Zero -2-3123 50% 68% 84% 98% 0.5 -0.5 32% 16% 2% Percentile State Average Top 1/3> +0.5 Middle 1/3 Between -0.5 & 0.5 Bottom 1/3 < -0.5 Slide courtesy of Doug Greer, Ottawa ISD

31. Z-Score Structure Weight Subject Area Sub Z- Scores Subject Area Z- scores Overall Ranking 33rd Science Achievement50% Improvement25% Achievement Gap 25%Math Reading Writing Social Studies Graduation

32. Top to Bottom Report (MI School Data) Overall Rank Subject Area Z-Scores Subject Area Sub Z-Scores

33. Accountability Labels (Priority, Focus, Reward) Overall Rank (Priority or Reward) Top or Bottom 5% Achievement Gap z-score (Focus)

34. Activity: Z Score Review

35. How Close to Focus Are We? http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mde/2013_Individual_School_Gap_Lookup_Tool_431296_7.xls Focus Cut Off School’s Location Achievement Gap Z-Scores

36. TTB Resources and Look Up Tools http://www.michigan.gov/mde/0,4615,7-140-22709_59490---,00.html

37. Accountability Post Assessment

38. Thank You Questions? Mitch Fowler School Data Consultant fowlerm@calhounisd.org