Minnesota’s New A ccountability System

1. Minnesota’s New Accountability System

2. What stays the same • Academic Standards • Assessments • Public Reporting • Calculating AYP • Disaggregating data into sub groups

3. Changes • New AYP targets • Eliminate sanctions for not making AYP • Eliminate financial set-asides for AYP

4. What’s the new accountability system? • Focused on closing the achievement and promoting high growth for all students • Built around multiple measurements • ALL schools will be given an annual multiple measurement rating

5. Multiple Measures Rating (MMR) • Proficiency (25 points) • AYP index model used • Schools earn points based on a weighted % of subgroups making AYP • Weighting is based on the size of the subgroup • Unlike AYP calculation, groups can’t make AYP through Safe Harbor • Every school’s weighted percentage is given a percentile rank within their school classification (elementary, MS, HS, other) which is multiplied by 25 possible points. • Student growth (25 points) • Schools earn points based on their ability to get students to exceed predicted growth • Growth predictions are based on students’ last assessment result • Predictions are generated by looking at two cohorts of students, where they scored one year and where they scored the next year • Growth score based on being above or below prediction • School growth score is average of student growth scores

6. Multiple Measures Rating (MMR) • Achievement gap reduction (25 points) • Schools earn points based on their ability to get higher levels of growth from lower-performing subgroups compared to statewide average growth fro higher-performing subgroups • Growth of individual subgroups of students of color compared to growth of white students, ELs compared to non-Els, FRPs to non-FRPs, Sped to non Sped • Schools want to out score statewide growth in each area • Every school’s score is given a percentile rank within their school classification (elementary, MS, HS, other) which is multiplied by 25 possible points • And for high schools, graduation rates (25 points) • Schools earn points based on the weighted percentage subgroups meeting the AYP graduation rate of 85%. • This target will change for next year and will be based on a new federally mandated cohort-adjusted graduation rate • Every high school’s weighted percentage is given a percentile rank and then multiplied by 25. • ALCs will not be measured on graduation rates due to the nature of their populations.

7. Subgroups must be 20+ for proficiency, growth, and achievement gap reduction • Subgroups must be 40+ for participation, attendance and graduation • All schools will still be given an AYP determination each year- index rate is still figured .5 for partial and 1.0 for meets/exceeds • AYP and MMR ratings are based on students enrolled in the school for a full academic year.

8. Halverson 2010 & 2011

9. Halverson initial MMR= 51.19 76.78 total points out of 150 possible points = 51.19%

10. Hawthorne 2010 & 2011

11. Hawthorne initial MMR= 50.88 MMR: 76.31 total points out of 150 possible points = 50.88%

12. Lakeview 2010 & 2011

13. Lakeview initial MMR= 50.20 MMR: 75.30 total points out of 150 possible points = 50.20%

14. Sibley 2010 & 2011

15. Sibley initial MMR= 74.03 MMR: 111.04 total points out of 150 possible points = 74.03%

16. Southwest 2010 & 2011

17. Southwest initial MMR= 28.41 42.61 total points out of 150 possible points = 28.41%

18. ALHS initial MMR= 58.36 116.72 total points out of 200 possible points = 58.36%

19. Focus Rating Minnesota’s new measurement for identifying Focus Schools. The rating is generated by combining the proficiency and growth of the seven subgroups for which there is an achievement gap (Black, Hispanic, Asian, American Indian, Free/Reduced Price Lunch, Special Education, and English Learners).

20. Focus RatingMN new measurement for identifying Focus Schools • Proficiency (25 points) • Schools earn points based on a weighted percentage of 7 subgroups making AYP (excluding the all and white subgroups) • Achievement Gap Reduction (25 points) • Schools earn points based on their ability to reduce the achievement gap for each of the 7 subgroups

21. Halverson 2010 & 2011

22. Halverson’s initial focus rating =66.53 66.53 total points out of 100 possible points = 66.53%

23. Hawthorne 2010 & 2011

24. Hawthorne’s initial focus rating =63.76% 6.76 total points out of 100 possible points =

25. Lakeview 2010 & 2011

26. Lakeview’s initial focus rating=50.90% FR: 50.90 total points out of 100 possible points

27. Sibley 2010 & 2011

28. Sibley’s initial focus rating= 70.08% 70.08 total points out of 100 possible points =

29. Southwest 2010 & 2011

30. Southwest’s initial focus rating= 38.23% FR: 38.23 total points out of 100 possible points =

31. ALHS 2010 & 2011

32. ALHS’s initial focus rating= 35.39% 35.39 total points out of 100 possible points =

33. Labels used based on Focus rating • Priority Schools- the lowest performing schools in the state (Bottom 5% of schools in state) • Focus schools- Title I schools making the biggest contribution to the achievement gap and high schools with graduation rates below 60%. (Bottom 10% of Title Schools) • Reward schools- The highest-performing Title I schools in the state. (Top 15% of Title Schools)

34. Current rating Priority schools Reward schools (#s will be different each year)(about 45 in state) (about 135 in state) Elementary MMR 33.81 & FFR 42.55 Lowest MMR 73.30% Middle MMR 18.68% & FR 42.96% Lowest MMR 76.15% High school MMR 22.05% & FR 31.99% Lowest MMR 76.15%

35. Embargoed • This information is EMBARGOED until release to the public on May 22nd. • Media will have access to the information May 21st .

36. 2012 MMR and Focus Ratings • Released later this summer