Mississippi Statewide Accountability System

1
Mississippi Statewide Accountability System

• School Level Accountability Model
• Based on Achievement and Growth
• Approved by the Mississippi State Board
• of Education for Use in Fall 2003
• October 25, 2002

2
Students Included for Accountability

• Spring Testing Data (MCT and Traditional Schedule
  SATP)
• End of Month 8 School Same School on 6 of the 7
  Earlier End of Month Records (Month 1 through
  Month 7) -- 75
• End of Month 7 School Same School on all 6 of
  the Earlier End of Month Records (Months 1
  through 6) -- 75
• Fall Testing Data (SATP Semester/Block Schedule)
• End of Month 3 School Same School on End of
  Month 1 and End of Month 2 Records -- 67
• Spring Testing Data (SATP Semester/Block
  Schedule)
• End of Month 8 School Same School on End of
  Month 5, 6, and 7 Records -- 75

3
Achievement Model Calculations (1/2)

• Calculate Basic and Above and Proficient and
  Above at each grade (3-8) and content area for
  MCT administered at grade level.
• Calculate Basic and Above and Proficient and
  Above at each test level (13-18) and content area
  for MCT instructional level tests.
• Calculate Pass and above an established
  higher cut point at each grade level (8-12) for
  students taking Algebra I and Biology I.
• Calculate Approaching Proficiency and Above and
  Proficient for all students participating in a
  low stakes alternate assessment.
• Convert the schools values on the (up to 46)
  variables above to z-score equivalents using
  state mean and standard deviation from the base
  year. This standardizes the variables.
• Weight each variable based on the student n-count
  on that variable compared to the total
  accountability n-count for the school.

4
Achievement Model Calculations (2/2)

• Calculate the Basic Achievement Index (BAI)
• Sum all the weighted z-scores based on the basic
  achievement measures ( Basic and Above on MCT,
  Pass on SATP, Approaching
  Proficiency or above on alternate assessments).
• Apply the two established index cut scores to
  determine whether basic achievement will place
  the school in achievement level 1 or 2.
• Calculate the Higher Achievement Index (HAI)
• Sum all the weighted z-scores based on the higher
  achievement measures ( Proficient and Above on
  MCT, meeting higher criterion on SATP,
  Proficient on alternate assessments).
• Apply the two established index cut scores to
  determine whether higher achievement will place
  the school in achievement level 4 or 5.
• Assign school to an achievement level based on
  BAI and HAI. The achievement level is NOT the
  School Performance Classification!

5
Growth Model Calculations (1/7)

• Apply additional criteria for student inclusion
  -- MCT.
• Must have MCT (on grade) data in at least one
  content area for the school year just ended (call
  this Year 2).
• Must have MCT (on grade) data in all three
  content areas for school year before that (call
  this Year 1).
• MCT scale scores in all three content areas for
  Year 1 must not fall into the chance score
  range.
• MCT level in Year 2 must be one level greater
  than the level in Year 1.
• Apply additional criteria for student inclusion
  -- SATP.
• SATP for Year 2 must be Grade 8 Algebra I, Grade
  9 Algebra I, or Grade 9 Biology I.
• Must have MCT (on grade) data in all three
  content areas at next lower grade level for Year
  1.
• MCT scale scores in all three content areas for
  Year 1 must not fall into the chance score
  range.

6
Growth Model Calculations (2/7)

• Assumptions Underlying the MCT Growth Model
• A student with a higher overall achievement level
  might make more gain than a student with lower
  overall achievement.
• A student whose score in one content area was
  high at the beginning of the school year might
  gain less than a student whose initial score was
  lower (due to regression to the mean).
• A students gain on the MCT can be predicted
  given that students initial achievement on the
  MCT.
• Assumptions Underlying the SATP Growth Model
• A student with a higher overall MCT achievement
  level might score higher on the SATP than a
  student with lower overall achievement.
• A students score on the SATP (Algebra I and
  Biology I) can be predicted given that students
  previous year MCT achievement.

7
Growth Model Calculations (3/7)

• Predict MCT gain from Year 1 MCT in each content
  area for each student in each cohort (e.g.,
  Cohort Grade 2 to Grade 3).
• Apply regression coefficient for overall
  achievement (i.e., sum of the students Year 1
  scale scores in reading, language, and
  mathematics).
• Apply regression coefficient for regression to
  the mean (i.e., the students Year 1 scale score
  in the content area being predicted).
• Add the constant (y-intercept) value from the
  regression equation.
• The result is the expected scale score gain from
  Year 1 to Year 2.
• Subtract the predicted gain from the students
  actual scale score gain from Year 1 to Year 2.
• The result is the degree to which the student met
  expected gain, stated in scale score points. This
  value is called the students raw growth
  residual.

8
Growth Model Calculations (4/7)

• Predict Algebra I and Biology I Year 2 Scale
  Score from Year 1 MCT.
• Apply regression coefficient to the students MCT
  reading scale score.
• Apply regression coefficient to the students MCT
  language scale score.
• Apply regression coefficient to the students MCT
  math scale score.
• Add the constant (y-intercept) value from the
  regression equation.
• The result is the expected scale score in Algebra
  I or Biology I.
• Subtract the predicted score from the students
  actual score.
• The result is the degree to which the student met
  the expected score, stated in scale score points.
  This value is called the students raw growth
  residual.

9
Growth Model Calculations (5/7)

• Sum the student level raw growth residuals within
  each prediction cohort (i.e., MCT Reading Grade 2
  to Grade 3, Biology Grade 9). This produces a
  set of mean raw residual values for the school.
• Convert the schools mean raw residual value for
  each prediction cohort to a z-score equivalent
  using state mean and standard deviation from the
  base year. This step standardizes the residual
  means.
• Calculate a total student n-count by summing the
  n-counts for each prediction cohort containing at
  least 10 students.
• Weight each standardized growth residual based on
  the student n-count in that prediction cohort
  compared to the total accountability n-count for
  the school.

10
Growth Model Calculations (6/7)

• Sum all the weighted z-scores for prediction
  cohorts containing at least 10 students. This is
  the school level standardized/weighted growth
  composite.
• Apply an appropriate confidence interval to the
  schools growth composite. The confidence
  interval is one standard error of the mean for
  the distribution of over 800 school growth
  composites.
• Determine whether the schools growth composite
  falls below the lower bound of the confidence
  interval.
• If the growth composite is at or above the lower
  bound value, the school met its growth
  expectation.
• If the growth composite falls below the lower
  bound value, the school failed to meet its growth
  expectation.

11
Growth Model Calculations (7/7)

• Determine whether the school exceeded its growth
  expectation by at least 10. The procedure is the
  same as that used to determine whether the school
  met its growth expectation (Growth Model
  Calculation slides 3 through 6), except that the
  constant/y-intercept value in each prediction
  equation is increased by 10 before using the
  equation to predict a students MCT gain or SATP
  score.
• Apply an appropriate confidence interval to the
  schools exceeded growth composite.
• Determine whether the schools growth composite
  falls below the lower bound of the confidence
  interval.
• If the growth composite is at or above the lower
  bound value, the school exceeded its growth
  expectation.
• If the growth composite falls below the lower
  bound value, the school failed to exceed its
  growth expectation.

12
School Performance Classification

• A schools achievement level (1-5) and growth
  status (failed to meet, met, or exceeded) are
  combined to determine the School Performance
  Classification. No school meeting its growth
  expectation will be assigned a classification
  below 3 (Successful).
• School Performance Classifications
• Level 5 (Superior-Performing) School is in
  achievement level 5.
• Level 4 (Exemplary) School is in achievement
  level 4 -OR- school exceeded its growth
  expectation and is in achievement level 3.
• Level 3 (Successful) School met its growth
  expectation -OR- school failed to meet its growth
  expectation and is in achievement level 3.
• Level 2 (Under-Performing) School failed to
  meet its growth expectation and is in achievement
  level 2.
• Level 1 (Low-Performing) School failed to meet
  its growth expectation and is in achievement
  level 1. Some of the schools in this School
  Performance Classification may be designated
  Priority Schools.

13
Schools that Cannot be Included in the
Achievement and/or Growth Models

• Only schools that can be included in the
  achievement and growth models are assigned a
  School Performance Classification.
• Schools that cannot be assigned a School
  Performance Classification include
• 10-15 schools that can be included in the
  achievement model, but do not meet the
  requirements for inclusion in the growth model
  and
• 35-40 regular public schools that cannot be
  included in either the achievement model based on
  the MCT at grades 3-8 and the SATP -OR- the
  growth model.

14
End