Michigan’s AccountabilityScorecardsA Brief Introduction

District/School Accountability History

Pre-2001 School accountability looked at overall proficiency rates in

Reading and Mathematics

2001 No Child Left Behind Legislation was passed Schools continue to be held accountable for overall proficiency

rates in Reading and Mathematics Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) was introduced which added

State level proficiency rates and increases to 100% proficient for all students

Student group proficiency rates were also introduced into the accountability system.

2013 State Waiver adopted by Federal Government

New Scorecard introduced Overall and student groups continued School AMO’s introduced Added bottom 30% of students as a new student group Writing, Science and Social Studies scores added

New Accountability System

Adoption of the state’s new waiver to the Elementary Secondary Education Act (No Child Left Behind 2001)

Schools and districts are expected to have 85% of all students and student groups proficient on state assessment by 2021-2022

Student groups are defined as any group of 30 or more students who share economic, ethnic, limited English proficient, students with disabilities, or other characteristics.

New Accountability System

Schools and districts have been assigned by the state an individual yearly Annual Measureable Objective (AMO)

This objective replaces an annual statewide target of achievement for all schools and districts

AMO was calculated using the proficiency rate from the 2011-2012 school year to create annual targets that increment to an end proficiency rate of 85% by 2021-2022

Proficiency Targets Example

Example school starts from 65% proficient in subject

Example school ends at (at least) 85% proficient in subject

Example School has +2% Annual Target

The Michigan Department of Education has now developed a five color system for districts and schools called

Accountability Scorecards

Accountability Scorecard Components

The system is partially a point based system

Each school or district earns an overall proficiency percentage which corresponds to one of the colors in the five color system

The colors can change based upon Student participation/proficiency on state

assessments Educator Evaluation (Effectiveness Labels and Teacher Student Data Link)

Compliance Factors (School Improvement Plan and School Performance Indicators Report)

Student attendance/graduation rates

Accountability Scorecard Components

Proficiency, participation and student groups have the most

impact on the overall color.

Accountability Scorecards

This is due to the number of additional factors that prevent a school from receiving a Green or Lime designation

As a common example, if a single student group is not on track to reach 85 percent proficiency or did not test over 95 percent of the population, then that one single subset of students will prevent a school or district from receiving a color higher than yellow.

Yellow scorecards are extremely common STATEWIDE

2012-13 Statewide Scorecards

*Excludes educational entities that do not have proficiency points

Accountability Scorecards While this system is somewhat

complicated, some educators involved with the creation of the system believe it is a better representation than assigning a simple letter grade to schools and districts.

At the time of public release, nearly all Macomb County schools and districts received yellow, orange or red designations, while three schools received green designations.

Significant Changes to the New System

1. The new bottom 30% student group for proficiency. This group is held to the same AMO as all students

2. Audit checks (which can significantly affect the final color - see next slide)

3. Achievement and participation of small groups of students often impact the overall color

4. Some schools and districts may have high overall achievement on state assessments but this may not be apparent in the color designation in the accountability system

Overall Proficiency Percentage and Color for the District and Schools

Proficiency Percent

Proficiency Percent Color Designation

Overall Scorecard Color

If the overall color changed, WHY?

District Sample 87.42% GREENGREEN REDRED

More than 2 student group areas did NOT meet the 95% participation requirement

Sample A High 63.65% YELLOWYELLOW YELLOWYELLOW Same

Sample B Middle

95.41%GREENGREEN ORANGEORANGE

2 student group areas did NOT meet the 95% participation requirement

Sample C Elementary 84.98% LIMELIME YELLOWYELLOW

At least one student group didn’t meet AMO (Bottom 30%)

Sample D Elementary 92.14% GREENGREEN ORANGEORANGE

2 student group areas did NOT meet the 95% participation requirement

How the elements are assembled to calculate the

final COLOR

Sample

District

Overall

Status

A Little More On “Bottom 30%”This subgroup behaves differently than the others…

Suppose we ranked our students by test scale score:

If we have 20% Proficient (2 students) they would be from the highest scoring students…

If we had 50% Proficient, they would be from the highest scoring students….

Lowest Score

Highest Score

Bottom 30%

In fact, the “Bottom 30” subgroup will have 0% proficient until our overall proficiency rate >70%.How does this impact our AMOs?

Suppose our AMO is 33%

In our example, that would be 1 student in the Bottom 30% subgroup.

Since all non-Bottom 30% students would have to be proficient before we can get to that student, 33% translates into 80% overall!

Lowest Score

Highest Score

Bottom 30%

How does this relate to schools? The percentage of Michigan schools that

have AMOs for 2013-14 below 70% are: 58% in Reading 89% in Writing 95% in Math 98% in Social Studies 99.8% in Science

For those schools, they can meet their AMOs for all students and the other subgroups and still not be able to meet it for Bottom 30%.

More Questions?Jim Gullenjgullen@misd.net586.228.3459