1% MI-Access Proficiency Cap Exception Application Window

Winter 2015 SLIP Conference
Division of Accountability Services
Office of Evaluation, Strategic Research and Accountability (OESRA)
& Office of Standards and Assessment (OSA)
Overview of Today’s Presentation
• 1% Cap Waiver & Appeal Process
• Accountability Systems in Transition
• WIDA Assessment and Exceptions
(World-Class Instructional Design and Assessment for English Learners)
Important Information for the
2014-15 School Year
What is the 1% Cap for MI-Access?
• In compliance with federal policy, the MDE must cap the
percent of proficient student scores to 1% by content area
for students taking the MI-Access.
• What this means is that only 1% of students who take the
MI-Access and score in the proficient range will actually
be counted as proficient for Scorecard purposes, the rest
are counted as not proficient (again, even though they
scored in the proficient range).
*Please note that this does NOT impact participation rates on Scorecards
and that schools and districts should always select the most appropriate
assessment program for the individual student with an IEP.
What Does the 1% Cap Impact?
• Impacted by 1% Cap:
• Assessment Proficiency Rates on Scorecards
• Only 1% of students who take the MI-Access and score in the proficient range
will actually be counted as proficient for Scorecard purposes, the rest are
counted as not proficient.
• NOT Impacted by 1% Cap:
• Assessment Participation Rates on Scorecards
• All students with valid MI-Access tests will be considered as “tested” for
participation purposes on Scorecard regardless of “cap space.”
• Top-to-Bottom School Ranking
Who Does the1% Proficiency Cap Impact?
• Districts with larger percentages of students taking an
assessment from the MI-Access portfolio, may need to
exceed the 1% cap to count more of their proficient
students as proficient for Scorecard purposes.
• Federal rules require that the MDE provide an
application process for districts to request to exceed the
1% cap for students taking alternate assessments up to
an additional 1%.
• This is called the 1% Cap Exception Application.
How do we Anticipate a Need to Exceed the 1% Cap?
• The 1% cap will be computed by taking no more than one
percent of the district headcount enrollment (Spring 2015
for grades 3-8 and 11) at the grade levels in which
students are assessed by content area.
• Estimate your 1% cap limit! If the number of students
taking the MI-Access exceeds 1% of the all-student
district headcount enrollment in the grades relevant for
the content area, then the district would likely wish to
exceed the 1% MI-Access cap and want to apply to be
able to do so.
Estimating Your 1% Cap
Estimating the ELA 1% Cap for the ELA Content Area:
District has 1000 students enrolled in grades 3 through 8 and 11
(These are ALL STUDENTS in those grades, not just SE/MI-Access)
For the ELA content area proficiency cap:
1% of 1000 students = 10 students
1% Cap is 10 Students!
What does a 1% Cap of 10 students mean in this example?
This means 10 MI-Access students that scored proficient are able to count as proficient toward scorecard districtwide
…But what if that district assesses 20 students with MI-Access and ALL 20 are PROFICIENT?
10 Students will count as proficient and 10 as not proficient on the Scorecard.
…But what if the district has an approved 1% Cap Exception Application?
If the district has an approved application AND appeals during Preliminary Scorecard window (summer, annually) to have
1% cap exception applied and the appeal is relevant, an additional 1% is applied to set cap at 20 students.
1% cap = 10 students, additional 1% = 10 students for a total allowable of 20 students.
Say, all 20 students are proficient on MI-Access: all 20 would then be able to count as proficient on the scorecard.
Visual Example of Capped MI-Access Proficiency:
District has 100 students enrolled in grades 3-8 & 11
and 10 take MI-Access and ALL 10 were proficient…
Outcome: Parents and Schools receive reports
about their proficient students.
The district’s cap is 1 student since the total district
enrollment is 100 in grades 3-8, 11.
Outcome: Only 1 student counts as proficient within the
1% cap for Scorecard purposes. The 9 others count as
not proficient for Scorecard purposes.
(This is an EXTREME example.)
Separate 1% Caps are Computed for Each Content Area
Included in Cap for Content Area
Enrollment #:
1000 students
1000 students
300 students
100 students*
Example Cap
10 students
10 students
3 students
1 student*
*See slide 16 for special note on SS 1% cap.
Applying to Exceed 1% Cap
• The 1% Cap Exception Application process exists in the
Secure Site and is provided to districts annually, however,
approved applications are valid for 3 YEARS so a district
need not apply every year.
• Application Window is Open from Approximately
February - April in the Secure Site at:
• List of districts with currently approved 1% Cap Exception
1% Cap Exception Application Criteria
• Explain circumstances leading to more than 1% of enrolled students
being administered MI-Access
• Center program
• Reputation
• Schools of Choice
• Data supporting higher rate of students taking MI-Access
• xx number of district enrollment (grades 3-8, 11)
• yy number of projected MI-Access test takers
• Districts with Shared Educational Entity (SEE) programs need to
provide additional justification for having a 1% waiver due to
accountability being shifted back to resident districts
1% Cap Appeals for Preliminary Scorecards
• Districts with approved waivers must submit an appeal
during the Preliminary Scorecard window
• Appeals are submitted through the Secure Site
• Advice– keep 1% appeals simple: “Please apply 1% waiver.”
• This second step is necessary because not all buildings
within a district will need an exception to the 1% cap –
therefore the cap is NOT automatic
• 1% cap is only lifted when it will allow for an accountability
status change
How it Works Overall
• STEP 1:
District has near or over 1% percent of the district headcount
enrollment (grades 3-8 and 11 for Spring 2015) at the grade levels in which
students are assessed by content area that take the MI-Access (P, SI, FI).
• STEP 2:
District applies in winter 1% MI-Access Proficiency Cap
• STEP 3:
Application is reviewed by MDE staff and approved or denied.
• STEP 4:
Preliminary scorecard window opens in Secure Site.
• STEP 5:
Students with Disabilities subgroup fails to meet proficiency
target due to 1% cap on preliminary scorecard.
• STEP 6:
District appeals preliminary scorecard requesting that the 1%
cap exception be applied.
• STEP 7:
MDE staff reviews scorecard appeal and verifies that exceeding
cap is necessary for subgroup. If so, 1% cap exception is applied to have
subgroup meet proficiency target.
What about MEAP-Access, M-Step?
• MEAP-Access is no longer being offered as an available
assessment. Students should be administered either a
form of MI-Access or the M-Step according to what is
most appropriate for them.
• The M-Step summative assessments will not be capped
for proficiency since they are not alternate assessments.
1% cap does not apply.
Special Notes on 1% Cap
for Social Studies
• MI-Access FI will be available for the social studies
content area in spring 2015.
• Since the MDE did not previously have an alternate social
studies assessment, addressing alternate social studies
proficiency scores has never been an issue.
• It will now be necessary to cap Spring 2015 MI-Access FI
Social Studies scores at 1% for school districts as is done
already for the other content areas.
Links & Contact Information
• Currently approved applications:
• Secure Site:
• Phone support:
• Email support:
[email protected]
Accountability Systems Transitions
• Top-to-Bottom/Beating the Odds
• Norm-based
• Scorecards/AMAOs
• Criterion-based
• Accountability Miscellany
• Full Academic Year (FAY)
• Growth metric
• All students test in spring starting 2014-15
• Grades 3-9 previously tested in fall
• New tests in 2014-15
• Staggered windows (two grades at a time)
• Increased usage/availability of online testing
• Visit www.michigan.gov/baa.
Implications for Top-to-Bottom/Beating the Odds
• Achievement Component
• Uses a two year average with z-scores
• Achievement Gap Component
• Compares two year average of top 30% and bottom 30% using zscores
• Improvement Component
• Z-score Improvement slopes used for all subjects and grades
except 3-8 reading and math
• Growth metric used for 3-8 reading and math
• Beating the Odds
• Uses Top-to-Bottom in both studies
Accountability Scorecards
• Two “levels” of Accountability Scorecards:
 District Scorecards & School Scorecards
• Scorecards will continue to use a color coding system (green,
lime, yellow, orange, purple, and red) to indicate school
• Combines traditional accountability metrics with Top-to-Bottom
labels and other state/federal requirements.
• Overall color is determined by Top to Bottom status as well as
points earned by meeting traditional AYP requirements.
 Individual “cells” use red/yellow/green coding scheme
 Points-based system where full points earned for meeting a target, half
points earned for meeting safe harbor
Accountability Scorecards Implications
• Scorecards are most affected as they do not use z-scores
• Multi-year proficiency averaging uses proficiency percentages
• Safe Harbor uses improvement slopes or year over year
• Performance level change cannot be used in counting “Growth”
students as proficient
• Proficiency targets were set using 2011-12 test results. MDE is able
to revisit these targets under ESEA Flex
Accountability Miscellany
• Full Academic Year – move to all spring testing requires a
change in the definition for at least grades 3-8.
• Systems Timelines – public release and accountability
• [email protected]
• 877-560-8378
2015 Winter SLIP Conference
Contact Information
• Jennifer Paul
EL Assessment Consultant
Office of Standards & Assessment
[email protected]
Guidance From US Department of Education
• All K-12 students identified as English Learners (ELs)
must be assessed by an annual summative assessment
of their English language proficiency skills
• States must use an appropriate assessment for ELs who
are also Students with Disabilities (SWDs)
• WIDA ACCESS for ELLs – K-12
• WIDA Alternate ACCESS for ELLs – 1st - 12
MDE’s Policy
Students NOT expected to take the ACCESS for ELLs:
• K–2nd grade students who are visually impaired and are in the
process of learning braille (There is no braille version available
for students in grades K–2.)
• 1st –12th grade students who use American Sign Language
(ASL) as their primary method of communication could be
excepted from the Speaking and Listening domains (WIDA
considers the usage of ASL on this assessment a non-standard
• K students who use American Sign Language (ASL) as their
primary method of communication could be excepted from all
MDE’s Policy
Students NOT expected to take the Alternate ACCESS for
• 1st –12th grade students who are both visually impaired
(learning braille) and cognitively impaired (There is no
braille version of the Alternate ACCESS for ELLs.)
• 1st –12th grade students who use American Sign
Language (ASL) as their primary method of
communication could be excepted from the Speaking and
Listening domains (WIDA considers the usage of ASL on
this assessment a non-standard accommodation.)
Frequently Asked Questions
• Why can’t ASL be used by students?
• The WIDA developers believe that to allow ASL for listening and
speaking violates the construct of those domains. In a different
way, allowing students to use ASL tests their knowledge of ASL
and not English listening and speaking skills.
• How do I assess a student with severe multiple
• Current policy dictates that an attempt must be made. In all
likelihood, the Alternate ACCESS for ELLs will most likely be the
most appropriate assessment.
Applying for Exceptions
• All exceptions must be requested through the Secure Site
• All exceptions must be requested annually
For More Information about WIDA
• www.michigan.gov/wida
• Read the FAQ’s, they’re not just FAQ’s but more like administrator
• If you’re a new principal or test administrator, review the New
Principal or New Test Administrator Primer
• Download a copy of the Entrance & Exit Protocol
• E-mail me when you have questions
• Jennifer Paul, [email protected]

similar documents