1. 1 Mississippi Statewide Accountability System Adequate Yearly Progress Model Improving Mississippi Schools Conference June 11-13, 2003 Mississippi Department of Education Innovation and School Improvement

2. 2 Mississippi Statewide Accountability System Steve Hebbler, Director Office of Research and Statistics shebbler@mde.k12.ms.us Kris Kaase, Director Office of Student Assessment kkaase@mde.k12.ms.us

3. 3 Statewide Accountability System School Districts Accreditation Status AYP Model Annual Accountability Designation

4. 4 Statewide Accountability System Schools Achievement Model Growth Model AYP Model Annual Accountability Designation School Performance Classification

5. 5 Which Students Must Be Assessed? l All eligible students are required to be assessed under: l Mississippi Public School Accountability Standards 2001 l MS Code 37-16-3 1972 Annotated l P.L. 107-110 Section 1111(b)(3)(C)(ix)

6. 6 What does assess all students mean? l Students in grades 2-8 in reading, language, and mathematics l Non-graded students ages 7-15 (age on September 1) l Students enrolled in Algebra I and English II l Students required to take the Biology I test, U.S. History test, or FLE for graduation l Students enrolled in vocational programs in which non-disabled students are tested l Exemption for LEP students in their first or second year in a U.S. school without sufficient English language proficiency in effect for Spring 2003 only

7. 7 What about the 95% rule? l 95% is the minimum participation rate in assessments required under AYP. l The rule acknowledges that even with scheduled and make-up test administrations there will be some unusual circumstances in which students are not assessed despite every effort.

8. 8 Which Students Determine the Participation Rate? Denominator l Students enrolled in the grade level or course in the 8th month. l Non-graded students ages 7-15 (age on September 1). Numerator l Students that took a MCT, Instructional Level Test, or Subject Area Test whose score was not excluded. l Students that took an alternate assessment.

9. 9 Which Students Determine the Participation Rate? The appeals process plus a new MSIS ID verification/correction process developed in spring 2003 provide ways for schools and districts to detect data problems resulting from incorrectly coded MSIS ID numbers and to provide corrected information to MDE to insure accurate participation rates.

10. 10 Which Students Determine the Participation Rate? Special Rules for Algebra I l Required because achievement has to be counted at the grades 10-12 level Denominator l Students enrolled in the 10th grade level Numerator l Students that took the Algebra I test in 10th grade that school year l Students that took the Algebra I test at any time prior to their enrollment in 10th grade at any school in the state (first test score will be used for school accountability)

11. 11 Which Students Determine the Participation Rate? Special Rules for Algebra I – 2002-03 Only l Required because testing of all students enrolled in Algebra I for the first time has not been required previously Denominator l Students in the 10th grade enrolled in Algebra I for the first time Numerator l Students that took the Algebra I test at 10th grade

12. 12 Which Students Determine the Participation Rate?

13. 13 Students Included for Accountability (Achievement, Growth, & AYP) l Spring Testing Data (MCT and Traditional Schedule SATP) l If Student’s End of Month 8 School = Same School on 6 of the 7 Earlier End of Month Records (Month 1 through Month 7) the student is included. (Represents 75% of instructional time) l If Student’s End of Month 7 School = Same School on all 6 of the Earlier End of Month Records (Months 1 through 6) the student is included. (Represents 75% of instructional time) l Fall Testing Data (SATP Semester/Block Schedule) l If Student’s End of Month 3 School = Same School on End of Month 1 and End of Month 2 Records the student is included. (Represents 67% of instructional time) l Spring Testing Data (SATP Semester/Block Schedule) l If Student’s End of Month 8 School = Same School on End of Month 5, 6, and 7 Records the student is included. (Represents 75% of instructional time)

14. 14 Students Included in Accountability/Proficiency Determination

15. 15 How Many Students? l Minimum Number of Students (4 definitions for 4 purposes) l Minimum Number for Reporting = 10 l Minimum Number for Achievement Model = No Minimum l Minimum Number for Growth Model = 10 l Minimum Number for AYP Model = 40 in the AYP group summed across the grades represented in the school (determined separately for reading/language and mathematics)

16. 16 AYP Groups l There are nine groups for which Adequate Yearly Progress is measured. l All Students l Students with Disabilities l Economically Disadvantaged Students l Limited English Proficient Students l Asian Students l Black Students l Hispanic Students l Native American Students l White Students

17. 17 AYP Groups

18. 18 AYP Groups l All students will be included in at least one group, and some students could be included in as many as five groups! l Schools will want to make sure that they are aware of Students in Overlapping Categories (SOCs). l The minimum number of students for AYP model must be met for the group to be included (40, separately for reading/language and mathematics).

19. 19 AYP Goals (Example) The 2002-03 AYP goal for all nine student groups in all schools, districts, and the state is to have 61% of students or more scoring at or above Proficient on the grade 3 Reading MCT. This goal is also called the annual measurable objective.

20. 20 AYP Goals (Example) Setting the starting point for AYP Goals as required by NCLB 83 74 27  16 39 54 61.4 61.2  31.3 30.8 29.6 6,677 6,751 6,834  109 93 54 Percent Proficient Number of Students Cumulative Number 20th percentile of state total in the grade and subject

21. 21 AYP Goals (Example) The percent of students scoring at or above Proficient for each grade is compared to the goal. The comparisons for each grade are then combined for all grades across the school (or district) using a weighted index.

22. 22 AYP Goals (Example) For the first two years of implementation, the AYP goal is the same. Beginning in 2004-05 the goal increases to a new level for three years. The goal increases again in 2007-08, 2010-11, and 2013-14.

23. 23 AYP Goals (Example)

24. 24 How Do You Calculate Proficiency? Example – Mathematics l K-5 School l Hispanic/Latino Students - Number of Students Tested and Percent Proficient in Mathematics

25. 25 How Do You Calculate Proficiency? Step 1. Compare the actual percent of students proficient or above to the AYP goal.

26. 26 How Do You Calculate Proficiency? Step 2. Calculate the weight of each grade level group (so that groups are counted equitably toward the calculation of the proficiency index).

27. 27 How Do You Calculate Proficiency? Step 3. Calculate the proficiency index by multiplying the difference between the actual percent of students proficient or above and the AYP goal times the weight, and then sum. In this example, the group met the proficiency goal, also called the annual measurable objective.

28. 28 How Do You Calculate Proficiency? Example - Reading/Language l K-5 School l Hispanic/Latino Students - Number of Students Tested and Percent Proficient in Reading and Language

29. 29 How Do You Calculate Proficiency? Step 1. Compare the actual percent of students proficient or above to the AYP goal for Reading.

30. 30 How Do You Calculate Proficiency? Step 1. Compare the actual percent of students proficient or above to the AYP goal for Language.

31. 31 How Do You Calculate Proficiency? Step 2. Calculate the weight of each grade level group (so that groups are counted equitably toward the calculation of the proficiency index).

32. 32 How Do You Calculate Proficiency? Step 3. Calculate the proficiency index by multiplying the difference between the actual percent of students proficient or above and the AYP goal times the weight, calculate the weighted average of Reading and Language, and then sum. Reading

33. 33 How Do You Calculate Proficiency? Step 3. Calculate the proficiency index by multiplying the difference between the actual percent of students proficient or above and the AYP goal times the weight, calculate the weighted average of Reading and Language, and then sum. Language

34. How Do You Calculate Proficiency? Step 3. Calculate the proficiency index by multiplying the difference between the actual percent of students proficient or above and the AYP goal times the weight, calculate the weighted average of Reading and Language, and then sum. In this example, the group did not meet the proficiency goal, also called the annual measurable objective.

35. 35 How Do You Calculate Proficiency? Step 3. Calculate the proficiency index by multiplying the difference between the actual percent of students proficient or above and the AYP goal times the weight, calculate the weighted average of Reading and Language, and then sum. Example of Calculating a Weighted Average for Reading and Language Grade 4 Example (18 X -1.15) + (17 X -0.44) (18+17) =-0.81

36. 36 AYP Model The following decisions must be made separately in reading/language arts and mathematics for each of the AYP groups represented in the school and school district. 1.Does the AYP group meet the minimum number of students? A. If No, then group is not included in AYP. B. If Yes, go to step 2. 2. Were at least 95% of the students in the AYP group tested? A. If No, then group did not meet AYP standard. B. If Yes, then go to step 3.

37. 37 AYP Model (continued) 3. Is the percent of students proficient in the AYP group at or above the annual measurable objective? A. If No, go to step 4. B. If Yes, is the group “All Students?” 1) If No, the group met AYP. 2) If Yes, go to step 5.

38. 38 Step 3. Was the Annual Measurable Objective Met for the Group?

39. 39 AYP Model (continued) 4. Did the proficiency index increase by 10% compared to the proficiency index value for the previous year? A. If No, the group did not meet AYP. B. If Yes, go to step 5.

40. 40 Step 4. Did the Proficiency Index Increase Compared to the Previous Year?

41. 41 AYP Model (continued) 5. Did the group improve on the other academic indicator(s)? l For schools with grades 3-8, the other academic indicator is the growth index (met level). l For high schools, the other academic indicator is the graduation rate (required by NCLB; beginning in 2004-05). A. If No, the group did not meet AYP. B. If Yes, the group met AYP.

42. 42 Step 5. Other Academic Indicators

43. 43 AYP Model (continued) 6. Did all the AYP groups that met the criterion for inclusion in the model meet the AYP standard? A. If No, then the school or school district did not meet AYP. B. If Yes, then the school or school district met AYP.

44. 44 Step 6. Did the School/District Meet AYP?

45. 45 Graduation Rate Indicator l Graduation Rate Indicator = 4-Year Graduation Rate l The graduation rate goal has not been set. l Graduation Rate Indicator will be lagged one year (e.g., 2002-03 results will use 2001-02 graduation rate) l Graduation Rate will be used for the All Students group only, until individual students can be tracked and graduation rates for each of the other groups can be calculated (tentatively 2004-05). l For the disaggregated groups in high schools, the growth index will be used as the other academic indicator until graduation rates are available OR a one year graduation rate will be used. MDE will select one of these to implement (the one that is most beneficial).

46. 46 AYP Model for Schools with No Data l For (approximately 38) public schools with no accountability assessment data, the AYP decision will be based on feeder patterns. l The AYP decision will be derived using assessment data from the lowest accountability grade level in the school receiving the students. l For a K-1 or K-2 school, for example, AYP will be determined using the grade 3 assessment data at the receiving school.

47. 47 Tentative Dates for Statewide Accountability Model

48. 48 Tentative Dates for Statewide Accountability Model (continued)

49. 49 Assessment of Students with Disabilities Fall 2002 l Districts informed that NCLB may require assessing all students with disabilities using an assessment based on students’ grade classification rather than instructional level l Districts told to continue assessment of students with disabilities under existing guidelines until MDE received further clarification from the USDE (regional administrators meetings)

50. 50 Assessment of Students with Disabilities December 2002 l Preliminary review of state accountability plan with USDE; USDE says MDE cannot count instructional level or alternate assessments as proficient. January 2003 l Formal review of state accountability plan with USDE l Plan allows for continued use of instructional level and alternate assessments

51. 51 January 2003 (continued) l Students taking instructional level or alternate assessments will be counted as “Not Proficient” for purposes of determining Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) (see January 31 memo from Offices of Special Education and Student Assessment) Assessment of Students with Disabilities

52. 52 March 2003 l MDE requests permission to count students taking instructional level assessments according to their proficiency level for two years to allow school districts time to adjust to requirements of NCLB. After two years, students assessed on instructional level would be counted as “not proficient.” Assessment of Students with Disabilities

53. 53 March 2003 l USDE issues proposed rule to allow the use of an alternate achievement standard for severe/profound cognitively disabled students (students three standard deviations below in IQ and adaptive behavior). Assessment of Students with Disabilities

54. 54 Assessment of Students with Disabilities l Do not confuse rules for students with disabilities under AYP model with achievement and growth models. l Achievement model - students assessed with instructional level test or alternate assessment are included. l Growth model - only students taking a standard test (with or without accommodations) are included.