The missouri school improvement program
1 / 43

The Missouri School Improvement program - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

The Missouri School Improvement program. Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. September 28, 2012. Overview. MSIP 5 Resource and Process Standards MSIP 5 Performance Standards and Scoring Guide Question and Answer. Why we’re here!. MSIP 5 Policy Goals.

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'The Missouri School Improvement program' - beth

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
The missouri school improvement program

The Missouri School Improvement program

Missouri Departmentof Elementary and Secondary Education

September 28, 2012


  • MSIP 5 Resource and Process Standards

  • MSIP 5 Performance Standards and Scoring Guide

  • Question and Answer

Msip 5 policy goals
MSIP 5 Policy Goals

  • Promote Continuous Improvement and Innovation

  • Establish the State's Expectations

  • Distinguish Performance of Schools and Districts

  • Empower All Stakeholders

School district classification
School District Classification

Third Cycle

Fourth Cycle

Annual Performance Report


Determines Review Types



Review (resource and process)


School Improvement Team

Process (review)






School district classification1
School District Classification

Fourth Cycle


Annual Performance Report

Annual Performance Report

Determines Review Type

Determines Interventions and Supports

Review (resource and process)

Review (resource and process)

School Improvement Team

School Improvement Team







Resource standards
Resource Standards

  • Elementary

  • High School

  • Class Size and Assigned Enrollments

  • Guidance and Counseling Staff

  • Certification and Licensure

  • Principals/Building Administrators

Process standards
Process Standards

  • Teacher/Leader Standards (2)

  • Instruction Standards (11)

  • Governance Standards (11)

Performance standards
Performance Standards

  • Academic Achievement

  • Subgroup Achievement

  • College and Career Readiness (K-12 only)

  • High School Readiness (K-8 only)

  • Attendance Rate

  • Graduation Rate (K-12 only)

Percent districts meeting 4 th cycle standard
Percent Districts Meeting 4th Cycle Standard

Msip 5 targets
MSIP 5 Targets

  • Exceeds – represents a level of performance approximately equivalent to the projected 2020 performance of the top 10 states on the corresponding NAEP exam OR, in subjects for which state-by-state NAEP data are unavailable, an equally rigorous target.

  • On Target —represents a level of performance about equal to 75% proficient by year 2020. Current performance is compared to this target, then a linear trajectory is created that requires equal annual progress increments to reach the 2020 target.

  • Approaching—represents a level of performance about equal to 100% Basic if each

  • Floor—represents a level of performance less than 100% Basic

Academic achievement
Academic Achievement

  • Multiple Measures

  • Status + Progress OR Growth (where applicable)

  • Apply Full Academic Year (FAY) for accountability; report all students

  • Eliminate “grade span” and report at school/LEA configuration

Academic achievement status
Academic Achievement - Status

  • Set Standardized Status Expectation for all districts

  • Use 3 most recent years to calculate status

  • Use an Index to calculate and add percent proficient for reporting

Academic achievement progress
Academic Achievement - Progress

  • Promote continuous improvement

  • Allow for differentiated improvement targets

    • Use percentage gap reduction

Academic achievement growth
Academic Achievement - Growth

  • Student Growth Pilot Concluded

    • Missouri Growth Model

  • Statistical Significance

    • Exceeding

    • On Target

    • Below Target

Subgroup achievement
Subgroup Achievement

  • Challenges Associated with NCLB Implementation

    • “All or nothing” approach

    • Distribution of subgroups among LEAs

      • Number of subgroups vary LEA to LEA

      • Minimum “n”

    • Duplicated Count

Subgroup achievement1
Subgroup Achievement

  • Report all subgroups individually

    • Maintains focus on the performance of each child

  • Apply accountability to a super subgroup

    • Allows for inclusion of students otherwise missed due to small “n” size

    • Eliminates duplicated count

    • Levels playing field among districts – accountability measured using one subgroup in each district

Subgroup achievement2
Subgroup Achievement

  • Multiple Measures

    • Status

    • Progress

    • Growth

  • Goal

    • Cut Gap in Half by 2020

Super subgroup example
Super Subgroup Example

Sample of population. Minimum n must meet 30 for accountability determinations.

Algebra i eoc grade level
Algebra I EOC / Grade Level

  • Choose one test for middle school student EOC or grade level

  • Proficient Algebra I in middle school + Algebra II in high school

  • Proficient Algebra I and Geometry in middle school + Algebra II in high school

  • Proficient Algebra I, Geometry, and Algebra II in middle school + plan from district

Attendance status
Attendance Status

  • STEP 1- Determine the number of students with qualifying attendance and multiply by associated point value.

  • STEP 2- Divide the number of points earned by the number of students and multiply by 100.

Graduation rate
Graduation Rate

  • Five Year Adjusted Cohort Rate for accountability

  • Four Year Adjusted Cohort for reporting

  • Will run both and use best

Accreditation levels
Accreditation Levels

  • Accredited With Distinction >90% of points + other criteria as determined

  • Accredited >70% of points

  • Provisional >50% to 69.9% of points

  • Unaccredited < 50% of points

Data corrections
Data Corrections

  • Historical and current data clean up through 6/30/2013

  • Historical Supporting APR data frozen 7/1/2013

Class of 2016
Class of 2016

  • Required Additional End-of-Course Assessments

    • English I

    • American History

  • Administered online

  • No cost to LEAs/districts

  • Sample tests and achievement level descriptors may be found at

Next steps
Next Steps

  • Terminology

  • Public Relations

  • Scoring Guide Webinars/Tutorials

  • APR release - schedule