1 impact data mississippi accountability task force november 16, 2012
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
1
Impact Data
Mississippi Accountability Task ForceNovember 16, 2012
![Page 2: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
2
Agenda
• Mississippi impact data using components of Florida school grades
• Comparison to current Mississippi model• Decisions and impact policymakers consider
when selecting to implement school grading– Ways of measuring student growth– Criteria for determining student growth– Points needed for earning each letter grade
![Page 3: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
3
Agenda
Establish five performance bands - A, B, C, D, and F – for the accountability system based on:
– Student Achievement: the percent of students proficient and above on the state assessments
– Individual Student Growth: the percent of students making one’s years progress in one year’s time on the state assessments
• With a focus on the growth of the lowest 25 of students– Four Year Graduation Rate: the percent of students
graduating with a standard high school diploma in 4 years
![Page 4: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
4
School Grades: A - F
• School Grade is based primarily on students’ outcomes.
• Proficiency / Achievement– Percent of all students performing on grade level
• Progress / Learning Gains– Percent of students learning a year’s worth of knowledge,
regardless of whether they are on grade level– Percent of lowest performing 25 percent students who are
making a year’s worth of progress
• Graduation Rates for High Schools– Percent of students graduating with a standard high school
diploma in four years – Used the gradation rate provided by MDE
![Page 5: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
5
Grading High Schools Next Generation of Education Reform
Options for high school grades calculation to include: • Graduation rates for all students• Graduation rates for at-risk students
• Graduation rates for 8th grade students entering high school below grade level in reading and math
• Acceleration rates (both performance and participation)• Number of students taking and passing Advanced Placement,
International Baccalaureate, dual credit or industry certification courses
• College readiness rates • Based upon SAT or ACT and the common placement test for college
![Page 6: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
6
Adjustments• Growth was calculated only for moving up one level or maintaining Proficient
or Advanced– Impact, growth within Minimal and Basic was not calculated because
statewide data was not available to make reasonable determinations• Elementary and middle schools have seven school grading components,
therefore a 700 point scale, since there is no longer a writing test– Impact, growth is weighted more heavily and the points need to earn an
A-F are adjusted• High schools include graduation rates as the eighth component , therefore
have an 800 point grading scale• Science scores were not available for a school so the district average
proficiency was estimated and used – Impact, Science calculation is based on district level results to maintain a consistent point
scale for all schools
• Assumed 95 percent tested in all schools
![Page 7: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
7
Measuring Student Proficiency
• Mississippi Curriculum Test Edition 2 (MCT2)– Language Arts and Mathematics– Grades 3-8
• Mississippi Science Test (MST2) – Grades 5 and 8
• Subject Area Testing Program, 2nd Edition (SATP2) – Algebra I, Biology I, U.S. History, and English II
• Mississippi Alternate Assessment of Extended Curriculum Frameworks (MAAECF)
Achievement Levels1 2 3 4
Minimal Basic Proficient Advanced
![Page 8: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
8
Defining Progress
Progress is when a student:
– Increases an Achievement Level • Moving from Achievement Level 3 to 4
– Stays at the same Proficient Achievement Level – Achievement Levels 3 or 4 – from one year to the next
• Stays in Achievement Level 3 from 4th and 5th grades
– Moves up sufficiently within the lowest two Achievement Levels
Achievement Levels
1 2 3 4Minimal Basic Proficient Advanced
![Page 9: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
9
Elementary and Middle School GradesEach category has 100 possible points (percent of students)
Reading Math Science
Proficiency Proficiency Proficiency
GrowthAll Students
GrowthAll Students
GrowthLowest 25%
GrowthLowest 25%
![Page 10: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
1010
Elementary and Middle School Grades A B C D F
Points 460 or more 433 – 459 381 – 459 346 – 381
Less than 346
Percent ofEligible
StudentsTested
At least 95%
At least 90%
At least 90%
At least 90%
Less than 90%
AdequateProgress with
Lowestperformingstudents
In Reading and Math
Within one year
Within two years
Within two years
![Page 11: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
1111
Sunshine Middle School
Reading Math Writing Science
Proficiency63%
Proficiency59%
Proficiency90%
Proficiency51%
GrowthAll Students
66%
GrowthAll Students
68%
508 points = B
Growth Lowest 25%
57%
Growth
Lowest 25%54%
![Page 12: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
High School GradesEach category has 100 possible points (percent of students)
Reading Math Science Graduation
Proficiency Proficiency Proficiency Rate
GrowthAll Students
GrowthAll Students
GrowthLowest 25%
GrowthLowest 25%
![Page 13: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
13
High School Grades A B C D F
Points 525 or more 495 – 524 435 – 494 395 – 434
Less than 395
Percent ofEligible
StudentsTested
At least 95%
At least 90%
At least 90%
At least 90%
Less than 90%
AdequateProgress with
Lowestperformingstudents
In Reading and Math
Within one year
Within two years
Within two years
![Page 14: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
14
Elementary School 12011-12 Data
Achievement and Growth ModelsAccountability Status B - HIGH PERFORMING
Quality of Distribution Index(QDI) 194Growth Status MET
![Page 15: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
15
Elementary School 1MS Grade B
Reading Math Science
Proficiency267 / 378
71%
Proficiency285 / 376
76%
ProficiencyDistrict Percent
Substitution58%
GrowthAll Students
138 / 20069%
GrowthAll Students
140 / 20070%
434 points = B
School Grade = C
Growth Lowest 25%
26 / 5646%
Growth
Lowest 25%24 / 54
44%
![Page 16: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
16
Elementary School 2 2011-12 Data
Achievement and Growth ModelsAccountability Status F - LOW PERFORMING
Quality of Distribution Index(QDI) 126Growth Status NOT MET
![Page 17: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
17
Elementary School 2 MS Grade F/Low Performing
Reading Math Science
Proficiency49 / 165
30%
Proficiency87 / 165
53%
Proficiency13 / 56
23%
GrowthAll Students
42 / 10939%
GrowthAll Students
52 / 10948% 255 points =
FGrowth
Lowest 25%10 / 30
33%
Growth
Lowest 25%9 / 3129%
![Page 18: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
18
Middle School 3 2011-12 Data
Achievement and Growth ModelsAccountability Status A – STAR SCHOOL
Quality of Distribution Index(QDI) 202Growth Status MET
![Page 19: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
19
Middle School 3 MS Grade A
Reading Math Science
Proficiency482 / 623
77%
Proficiency511 / 622
82%
Proficiency227 / 301
75%
GrowthAll Students
439 / 59973%
GrowthAll Students
478 / 59880%
487 points = A
School Grade = B
Growth Lowest 25%
74 / 16046%
Growth
Lowest 25%82 / 152
54%
![Page 20: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
20
Middle School 42011-12 Data
Achievement and Growth ModelsAccountability Status D – ACADEMIC WATCH
Quality of Distribution Index(QDI) 159Growth Status NOT MET
![Page 21: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
21
Middle School 4MS Grade D
Reading Math Science
Proficiency310 / 595
52%
Proficiency358 / 595
60%
Proficiency138 / 204
68%
GrowthAll Students
299 / 57352%
GrowthAll Students
341 / 57360% 346 points =
DGrowth
Lowest 25%35 / 155
23%
Growth
Lowest 25%50 / 160
31%
![Page 22: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
22
Grade 7-12 School 5 2011-12 Data
Achievement and Growth ModelsAccountability Status F – FAILING
Quality of Distribution Index(QDI) 94Growth Status NOT MET
5-Year Graduation Rate 60.9HSCI 2012 102
![Page 23: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
23
Grade 7-12 School 5 MS Grade F/Failing
Reading Math Science Graduation*
Proficiency35 / 117
30%
Proficiency37 / 136
27%
Proficiency17 / 68
25%
Rate73%
GrowthAll Students
40 / 11036%
GrowthAll Students
42 / 10540%
314 points = F
Growth Lowest 25%
13 / 3339%
Growth
Lowest 25%16 / 36
44%
*Four Year Graduation Rate with a Diploma
![Page 24: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
24
High School 6 2011-12 Data
Achievement and Growth ModelsAccountability Status F – LOW PERFORMING
Quality of Distribution Index(QDI) 127Growth Status NOT MET
5-Year Graduation Rate 58.3HSCI 2012 108
![Page 25: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
25
High School 6MS Grade F/Low Performing
Reading Math Science Graduation*
Proficiency61 / 191
32%
Proficiency102 / 156
65%
Proficiency73 / 183
40%
Rate62%
GrowthAll Students
50 / 15233%
GrowthAll Students
94 / 13172%
383 points = F
Growth Lowest 25%
8 / 3921%
Growth
Lowest 25%22 / 38
58%
*Four Year Graduation Rate with a Diploma
![Page 26: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
26
Grade 7-12 School 7 2011-12 Data
Achievement and Growth ModelsAccountability Status C – SUCCESSFUL
Quality of Distribution Index(QDI) 157Growth Status MET
5-Year Graduation Rate 68.8HSCI 2012 161
![Page 27: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
27
Grade 7-12 School 7MS Grade C
Reading Math Science Graduation*
Proficiency146 / 266
55%
Proficiency168 / 261
64%
Proficiency100 / 168
60%
Rate80%
GrowthAll Students
147 / 25857%
GrowthAll Students
178 / 24274%
474 points = C
School Grade = D
Growth Lowest 25%
16 / 4436%
Growth
Lowest 25%24 / 50
48%
*Four Year Graduation Rate with a Diploma
![Page 28: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
28
Other considerations
• Criteria for awarding points for growth• Points needed to earn letter grades
![Page 29: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
29
Results of Florida A+ Plan
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 20110
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
515
845
1004
1447
1809 1802 1844
2077
1952
2127
2317
2044
2310
677
401307
249173
233308
143
299
200 217 181 179
Florida School Grades 1999 – 2011Number of A & B versus D & F schools
A and B schools D and F schools
Nu
mb
er o
f S
cho
ols
Arrows indicate years when school grading standards were increased.
![Page 30: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
NAEP
1992 1994 1998 2002 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011185
190
195
200
205
210
215
220
225
230
199202
204 203205 204
208211
209208
205207
214
218 219
224226 225
Average NAEP 4th Grade Reading Scores, Mississippi and Florida 1992-2011
Mississippi Florida
![Page 31: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
NAEPAverage NAEP 4th Grade Reading Scores
All Mississippi Students vs. Florida Free and Reduced Lunch Students1998-2011
![Page 32: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
32
Foundation for Excellence in EducationP.O. Box 10691
Tallahassee, FL 32302850-391-4090
www.ExcelinEd.org
Christy Hovanetz, [email protected] – 850-212-0243
![Page 33: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
33
• Calculated separately for reading and math, the count of on-time graduates scoring “ready” or higher on ACT, SAT, or Common Placement Test (CPT) examinations divided by the total count of on-time graduates.
• Cut scores for readiness are provided in rule 6A-10.0315, FAC.
Numerator DenominatorNumber of on-time graduates scoring “ready” on SAT, ACT, and/or CPT any time during their high school careers
All on-time graduates
School Grading Postsecondary Readiness Components
![Page 34: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
34
School Grading Postsecondary Readiness Cut Scores
CPT Math 72Reading 83SAT Verbal 440Math 440ACT Reading 18Math 19P.E.R.T.Reading 104Math 113
![Page 35: 1 Impact Data Mississippi Accountability Task Force November 16, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b299d550346cf5a8b5ce6/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
35
High School Grading
Graduation Acceleration Readiness Growth/Decline
Overall Rate = 200100 for 4-Yr Federal100 for 5-Yr Modified
Participation150
Reading100
For each component schools may earn up to 10 additional
points for GROWTH(20 points for a factor worth
200 points)
At-Risk Rate = 10050 for 4-Yr Federal50 for 5-Yr Modified
Performance150
Mathematics100
For each component schools may lose
5 additional points for DECLINE
(10 points for a factor worth 200 points)
Total Graduation Points = 300
Total Acceleration Points =300
Total Readiness
Points = 200
Total Non-Assessment Points Possible = 800