AAPS Updates

Ann Arbor Public Schools 2014 Michigan School Accountability Scorecards Progress

Ann Arbor Public Schools is pleased to report improvements for a number of schools in the Scorecard status and “Focus School” designation as measured on the Michigan School Accountability ratings, released on Wednesday, August 13, 2014.

We also want to share that Michigan Merit Exam (MME) scores are solidly improved across a significant number of areas while Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) scores are consistent with the previous year.

In addition, AAPS (4-year) graduation rates have improved over two years from 84% in 2011 to 87% in 2013. Five-year graduation rates for the 2012 AAPS cohort class are above 90%.

On the ACT, student performance places AAPS among top tier districts, nationally, with 38% of 11th grade students testing in spring, 2014 scoring at or above 27. AAPS spring, ACT 2014 performance includes:

8       students achieved a perfect score

64       students achieved a 34 or 35

98       students achieved a 32 or 33

121      students achieved a 30 or 31

179      students achieved a 27 to 29

A total of 470 students (38%) had a score at or above 27.

While our Ann Arbor Public Schools team continues ongoing work focused in areas where improvement is still needed – particularly with students from poverty, second language students, minority students, and those with special education needs – we are pleased to share the significant progress and the exceptional achievement that our students and staff continue to make. Across a wide number of student achievement measures, student achievement results place Ann Arbor Public Schools among top-tier school districts in the state and across the nation.

More about the 2013-2014 Ann Arbor Public Schools Michigan School Accountability Scorecard Progress:

Three schools improved their Scorecard Designation from 2012-13 to 2013-14.

Carpenter      Focus to Reward,

Lawton           Non-designated to Reward, and

Mitchell         Focus to non-designated

Nine schools improved their Scorecard Status from 2012-13 to 2013-14

Allen, Angell, Bryant, Carpenter, King, Pittsfield, Forsythe, Community, and Huron.

The total number of AAPS schools designated as Reward schools increased from eight to nine.

Carpenter and Lawton moved to Reward designation, and

Burns Park moved from Reward to non-designated

The Red Status for Pioneer & Skyline is a result of not achieving the required 95% participation rate in one or more subgroup areas; in all cases, this change involves 2-3 students in each school.

The less than 95% participation rating at two high schools (Pioneer and Skyline) was due to a very small number of students who were not successfully tested, which can be the result of any of a variety of possible circumstances (students took 4 of 5 assessments, etc).

Orange Status for the overall District 2013-14 scorecard rating is consistent with 2012-13 Orange status, and is the result of some subgroups not meeting the proficiency target on the MEAP and MME assessments.

The subgroups where AAPS did not meet proficiency targets will be the focus of continuing work to improve student achievement.

Ann Arbor Public Schools is held accountable in 10 of 13 possible subgroup areas (where there are more than 30 students enrolled in the district in this subgroup) across five different subject areas, resulting in 50 components that are evaluated to obtain an overall accountability score. While this large number of measures is consistent with larger, more diverse school districts in the state, it represents many more indicators than would be measured in smaller, less diverse school district settings. In fact, some school districts have only one majority subgroup and so the number of measures is dramatically smaller than the number of subgroups in a large, diverse district setting.

The Michigan School Accountability Scorecards are a replacement to the Michigan School Report Cards that were required under the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act to report Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). Michigan received an Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) Flexibility Waiver from the U.S. Department of Education in July 2012 that allows the use of the Scorecards in place of the formal NCLB (No Child Left Behind) AYP Report Cards. The Scorecards also include School Designations for each public school across the State.

Due to the change in Michigan assessments for the coming year (MEAP will not be given this fall and a new version of MEAP is expected for spring, 2015), it is anticipated that this school accountability rating system will not be adjusted for some period of time while the Michigan assessment plan in refined.

School Designations

School designations are determined by the Statewide Top-to-Bottom ranking. Schools can be designated as:

  • Priority Schools – those whose rankings are in the bottom 5% of the Top-to-Bottom School Rankings;
  • Focus Schools – those whose achievement gaps are among the 10% largest in the State;
  • Rewards Schools – those whose high achievement, high improvement or “Beating the Odds” performance qualifies them for recognition.
  • If the school doesn’t fall into any of these categories, they are listed with NO designation.

The purpose of these designations are to assist in efforts to close achievement gaps, promote rigorous accountability, and ensure that all students are on track to graduate career- and college-ready.

Scorecards

All schools and the district are given a scorecard similar to the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) required under the NCLB Act.

The Michigan School Accountability Scorecards will include indicators for:

  • Assessment participation and proficiency on MEAP, MEAP-Access, MI-Access, and MME
  • Attendance or graduation rates (for High Schools),
  • Educator effectiveness label-reporting completion rates,
  • Teacher-student data link collection completion rates,
  • School Process Rubrics (SPR 40/90) or Self-Assessment (SA) report completion,
  • School Improvement Plan (SIP) report completion.

Targets for participation, proficiency, graduation, and attendance must be met for the school or district as a whole and for any valid subgroup. There are 12 potential subgroups for a school and 13 potential subgroups for a district. The minimum size for a subgroup is 30 students. The “All Students” group will display even if the entire school or district has fewer than 30 students.

Proficiency targets or Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs) for the new scorecards are individual to every school entity in the State of Michigan. These targets are based on school-wide proficiency percentage by subject from the 2011-2012 (baseline) school year and incrementally increase each year until the 2021-2022 school year. Schools and districts are expected to attain 85% proficiency rates in all assessed content areas by the end of the 2021-2022 school year. Proficiency targets are also unique by subject for each school. All students with a valid subject-level assessment will contribute to the school’s baseline and incremental targets. The proficiency targets will be applied equally across all student subgroups applicable within a school entity.

The Scorecards replace the binary Meets AYP/Did Not Meet AYP with a five-color scale: green, lime, yellow, orange, and red. This scale is used to report a school or district’s overall color. The colors are tied to certain amounts of points earned in the different components:

  • Green – attain 85% or greater of possible points
  • Lime – attain at least 70% but less than 85% of possible points
  • Yellow – attain at least 60% but less than 70% of possible points
  • Orange – attain at least 50% but less than 60% of possible points
  • Red – attain less than 50% of possible points

Ann Arbor Public School Scorecards and Designations by School/district are as follows:

 

School

 

Title I

School Designation

Scorecard Status

 

School

 

Title I

School Designation

Scorecard Status

Abbot

Yes

Focus

Yellow

Clague

No

Focus

Yellow

Allen

Yes

Focus

Lime

Forsythe

No

Reward

Lime

Angell

No

Reward

Green

Scarlett

Yes

Focus

Yellow

AA Open

No

Reward

Yellow

Slauson

No

Focus

Yellow

Bach

No

Reward

Yellow

Tappan

No

Focus

Yellow

Bryant

Yes

Focus

Lime

Burns Park

No

Yellow

A2Tech

No

*Red

Carpenter

Yes

Reward

Lime

Clemente

No

Orange

Dicken

No

Focus

Yellow

Community

No

Reward

Lime

Eberwhite

No

Yellow

Huron

No

Focus

Yellow

Haisley

No

Focus

Yellow

Pioneer

No

Focus

*Red

King

No

Reward

Lime

Skyline

No

Focus

*Red

Lakewood

No

Focus

Yellow

Lawton

No

Reward

Yellow

Logan

No

Focus

Yellow

District

**Orange

Mitchell

Yes

Yellow

Northside

Yes

Focus

Yellow

Pattengill

Yes

Focus

Yellow

Pittsfield

Yes

Focus

Lime

Thurston

No

Focus

Yellow

Wines

No

Reward

Yellow

The AAPS News welcomes thoughtful comments,
questions and feedback.

All comments will be screened and moderated. In order for your comment to be approved:
  • + You must use your full name
  • + You must not use profane or offensive language
  • + Your comment must be on topic and relevant to the story
Please note: any comment that appears to be spam or attacks an individual will not be approved.

3 Comments to Ann Arbor Public Schools 2014 Michigan School Accountability Scorecards Progress

  1. Diana Bowman // August 13, 2014 at 8:42 pm //

    It seems like this math game is stacked against the most diverse schools. The more subgroups you have the harder it is to have a good score.

  2. AAPS News Editor // August 14, 2014 at 12:43 pm //

    Yes Diana, Districts with more diversity do have larger subgroups which then are counted towards the District’s final color score. Districts which are homogenous tend to not have any or very few subgroups which generally contain less then 30 students thus are not included in the final assessment for the District’s color score. So the more subgroups you have, which in Ann Arbor we believe strengthens our district, the harder it is to get out of the focus school status or the negative color coded status.

  3. The system is stacked to score a district with consistently mediocre scores above a high achieving district which presents a normal bell curve. The public needs to know that the system’s purported goal (100% of everyone achieves equally) is ridiculous.

    Get the word out. The districts with highest achieving kids can only get a good score if there aren’t a significant number of students with average achievement in the district as well. People who don’t understand this will just look at the simple color-coding and fear that their child’s school isn’t a good school, when it simply shows that not everyone achieves equally in the same time frame. (This is something every parent understands, but clearly lawmakers do not.)

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


*