Accountability Systems and Counting Students with Disabilities


NCEO Technical Report 29

Appendix B

Accountability Formulas

These states indicated on their State Department of Education Web sites the following formulas to used to determine which schools or districts were to receive consequences based upon the indicators.

Louisiana

A School Performance Score will be calculated for each school based upon its performance on 4 indicators. These scores can range from 0 to beyond 100. The 10-Year Goal is set at a score of 100. The 20-Year Goal is set at a score of 150. Each indicator will be given the following weights as follows:

K-6 Schools

 

7-12 Schools

Indicator

Weight

 

Indicator

Weight

LEAP 21 Tests

60%

 

LEAP 21 Tests

60%

The Iowa Tests

30%

 

The Iowa Tests

30%

Student Attendance

10%

 

Student Attendance

  5%

 

 

 

Drop Out Rate

  5%

Data for these three/four indicators will be converted using various formulas (that were not provided) to form a single School Performance Score. During the summer of 1999, the state will calculate the initial baseline School Performance Scores Grades K-8. In the summer of 2001, the School Performance Scores will be calculated for Grades 9-12.

Subsequent School Performance Scores will be the average of two year’s worth of data. For example, in 2001, 60% of the School Performance Score for a K-6 school will be the average of their spring 2000 and spring 2001 LEAP 21 test scores.

The School Performance Score is used in the calculation of a school’s Growth Target. Schools will receive consequences based on whether they meet or exceed their Growth Target. The current formula for the Growth Target, to be used for the first 10 years of implementation, is:

[PropRE x (100-SPS) ¸ N] + [Prop SE x (100-SPS) ¸ 2N], or 5 points, whichever is greater

PropRE:  proportion of regular education students (including gifted/talented, speech impaired only, & students with 504 plans);

SPS: School’s Performance Score;

N: number of remaining accountability cycles in 10-year period;

PropSE:  proportion of special education students eligible to participate in LEAP 21 and The Iowa Tests

 

Mississippi

The Accreditation System in Mississippi uses a two-phase process to assign performance levels to schools and districts. In the first phase schools and districts are compared to 37 Level 3 Performance Standards. Schools and districts that meet or exceed 90% of these standards are compared to 38 Level 5 Performance Standards.

Level 3 Performance Standards

The first 36 Level 3 Standards are based on test scores derived from Functional Literacy Exam (FLE) subtests; the Iowa Tests of Basic Skills/Tests of Achievement and Proficiency (ITBS/ TAP) Survey Battery subtests for grades 4-9; the Algebra I, U.S. History, and Biology I subject area tests; and the ITBS/TAP Performance Assessments for grades 4-9. The following formulas are used to determine the criteria against which school and district scores are measured:

 

AMV = State MS – ½ SD (for FLE, ITBS/TAP, Algebra I, U.S. History, and Biology I tests)

AMV = State MS – SD (for the ITBS/TAP Performance Assessments)

 

AMV: Annual minimum value that districts test scores must meet or exceed

State MS: State Mean Score for that test

SD: Standard Deviation of the student level scores

 

 

[NOTE: If the calculated AMV falls between the absolute minimum value and the maximum value as set by the State, this value is used for the year. If the calculated AMV falls short of the absolute minimum, the AMV is set at the absolute minimum value. If the calculated AMV exceeds the maximum value, the AMV is set at the maximum value.]

 

The 37th Level 3 Standard is the percentage of students with scores below the 25th percentile on 7 of the 10 tests (ITBS/TAP Survey Battery Total for grades 4-9; FLE Composite; Algebra I, U.S. History, and Biology I subject area tests). For the Level 3 Performance Standards this value is set at 30% for 7 of the 10 tests.

Level 5 Performance Standards

The first 36 Level 5 Standards are again based on test scores derived from FLE subtests; the ITBS/TAP Survey Battery subtests for grades 4-9; the Algebra I, U.S. History, and Biology I subject area tests; and the ITBS/TAP Performance Assessments for grades 4-9. The school’s and district’s actual scores on these standards are compared to a criterion value set as the mean of all Level 3 Districts.

The 37th Level 5 Standard is the percentage of students with scores below the 25th percentile on 7 of the 10 tests (ITBS/TAP Survey Battery Total, grades 4-9; FLE Composite; and Algebra I, U.S. History, and Biology I subject area tests). For the Level 5 Performance Standards this value is set at 25% for 7 of the 10 tests.

The 38th Level 5 Standard is the graduation rate for students in the district. For Level 5 Performance Standards this value is set at 75%.

In addition, schools and districts must meet all of the 61 Process Standards that focus on District Leadership, Instructional Focus, Effective Instruction, Professional Development, and School Climate.

 

North Carolina

Schools and districts receive consequences dependent upon their performance and growth/gain composite scores.

A Performance Composite Score is calculated for each school by determining the total number of scores at or above Level III (i.e., at or above grade level) in each subject divided by the total number of valid scores. This performance composite score is reported as a percentage.

§          For schools that have any grade 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, or 10 students, the performance composite is the total number of students at or above Level III “in reading and mathematics including the North Carolina High School Comprehensive Test (NCHSCT), writing, and any course with an EOC test that may be offered at the school.”

§          For schools that offer only high school courses, the performance composite is the percent of students at or above Level III in Algebra I & II, Biology, Chemistry, ELPS, English I & II, Geometry, Physical Science, Physics, U.S. History, and the NCHSCT.

 

A Growth/Gain Composite Score is calculated for each school by summing the following:

§          End-of-Grade growth (EOG) in reading and math for grades 3-8 and growth in reading and math from 8th grade to 10th grade (see formula below);

§          Writing Index gain over baselines from 4th and 7th grades using three years of data;

§          End-of-Course (EOC) Indexes gain determined by comparing current performance to an average of the previous two years performance;

§          The gain in percentage of current graduates who completed a College Prep/College Tech Prep course compared to the baseline average of 1998 and 1999 percentages; and

§          Gains in the percentage of students meeting the North Carolina Competency Standards over the baseline of those who scored at Level III on the grade 8 EOG tests in reading and math.

The total composite score must be greater than zero to meet the expected and exemplary growth/gain standards.

This formula is used to calculate the school’s two expected growth scores—one for reading and one for math:

Expected growth = b0 + (b1 x ITP) + (b2 x IRM)

 

b0 = North Carolina average rate of growth in the respective grade and subject

b1 = value used to estimate “true proficiency”

b2 = value used to estimate “regression to the mean”

ITP =Index for “true proficiency” which is equal to (Local Reading Scale Scores + Local Math Scale Scores) – (NCavg Reading Scale Scores + NCavg Math Scale Scores)

IRM(reading) = Index for Regression to the mean which is equal to (Local Reading Scale Scores – NCavg Reading Scale Scores)

 

IRM(math) = Index for Regression to the mean which is equal to (Local Math Scale Scores – NCavg Math Scale Scores)

 

NCavg Scale Scores (1994-95 SY) are used as the b0 value.

 

Grade

Reading

Mathematics

3

143.4

141.2

4

147.6

147.9

5

152.4

154.4

6

154.5

160.2

7

158.1

166.0

8

160.1

170.3

Values used to Estimate

Value

Reading

Mathematics

b1

0.22

0.26

b2

-0.60

-0.58

New York

The accountability measures used examine test performance for each of the following subjects as indicated: 

 

§          English Language Arts [for grades 4 and 8] = (B+D)/(A+C)

 

A = number of all students tested on the State English/Language Arts Exam

B = number of students at or above Level 2 on the State English/Language Arts Exam

C = number of ELL students using alternative methods who’s English proficiency is below the participation level

D = number of ELL students using alternative methods who are making satisfactory progress

 

§          Mathematics [for grades 4 and 8] = B/A

 

A = number of all students tested on the State Math Exam

B = number of students at or above Level 2 on the State Math Exam

 

§          Demonstrated Competency [for grade 11] = (B+C)/A

 

A = Grade 11 enrollment in June

B = Regents Level (higher)

C = RCT level (lower)

 

The criterion value for each of these measures is 90%.

 

 

Ohio

The performance accountability system includes: performance scores, performance standards, designations, the report card, continuous improvement process, technical assistance, intervention, performance incentives and rewards, and fiscal accountability. District report cards will be distributed to provide information based on performance on specific indicators and designate school districts as:

§          Effective = 26 or more indicators

§          Continuous Improvement = 14-25 indicators

§          Academic Watch = 9-13 indicators

§          Academic Emergency = 8 or less indicators

The first 15 indicators are if 75% of 4th, 6th, and 9th grade students pass the Proficiency tests for the five subjects. Indicators 16-20 are if 85% of students are passing the 9th grade Proficiency test by the 10th grade. Indicators 21-25 are if 60% of the 12th grade students pass the 12th grade Proficiency tests. The 26th and 27th indicators are if the school maintains a 93% minimum attendance rate and 90% graduation rate [revised from a max 3% dropout rate] respectively.

 

Return to Technical Report 29