Introduction to the NewWashington State Achievement Index

Jack B. Monpas-Huber, Ph.D.Director of Assessment & Student Information

Board of Directors MeetingMarch 7, 2011

Background of the Achievement Index

• Original Legislative mandate: SBE to “adopt objective, systematic criteria” to identify successful schools/districts and those needing more help

• Realize AYP’s shortcomings, need to create a better system

• State provides most of the education funding

• Supports legislative efforts to revise funding system

• 2009 Legislature passed ESHB 2261 – SBE must develop:1. An Accountability Index to identify schools/districts for recognition and

additional state support2. A proposal for voluntary state support and assistance3. A proposal for a system for challenged schools/districts that don’t improve

through the voluntary system (“Required Action” formally authorized by the Legislature this year)

Basic structure of the Achievement Index

Five outcomesResults from 4 assessments (reading, writing, math, science) aggregated together from all grades and all students, extended graduation rate, minimum N=10

Four indicators1.Achievement by non low-income students (proficiency, ext. grad rate)2.Achievement by low-income students (eligible for FRL)3.Achievement vs. peers (Learning Index and ext. grad rate controlling for ELL, low income, SPED, gifted, mobility)4.Improvement (change in Learning Index from previous year)

Creates 5x4 matrix with 20 outcomes

* Index is simple average of the 20 “inner” cells

Recent results for a Shoreline school

Recent results for a Shoreline school

Shoreline at a glance, 2008-2010

Shoreline Award Winners, 2009-2010

Statewide distribution of school Achievement Indices -- 2009

Statewide distribution of school Achievement Indices -- 2010

• We all prefer to have one system

• WA state officials met with staff at US Dept. of Ed. and Congress last spring to seeking waiver and use Index and new rules for AYP purposes (see Final Report for details)

• Waiver not approved, but WA still computed Index for recognition purposes

• We have two sets of results based on different metrics

• AYP will likely change in the next 1-2 years based on ESEA reauthorization

10

Relationship to AYP

AppendixWhat goes in the cells: Benchmarks and ratings

AppendixWhat goes in the cells: Benchmarks and ratings

Appendix: How the Learning Index works

• Calculated by OSPI for many years by grade & subject (see “Scale” option on MSP/HSPE page of Report Card)

• Similar to a GPA (0-4 scale, better grades get more weight)

Percent Multiplier ResultNot Tested 0.7 x 0 = 0.0

Level 1 12.6 x 1 = 12.6Level 2 16.8 x 2 = 33.6Level 3 30.7 x 3 = 92.1Level 4 38.0 x 4 = 152.0Learning Index (Total / 100) 2.90

13

• Achievement Index combines results for all tested grades (easy to compute if only testing in one grade, e.g., writing and science)

Appendix: Achievement vs. peers

• Think “Bubbles on the Windshield”

• Recognizes context affects outcomes

•Makes “apples to apples” comparisons (“statistical neighbors”) using multiple regression to control for 5 student variables—percent ELL, low-income (FRL), special education, mobile, gifted

• Separate analysis for each type of school (e.g., elementary, middle, high, multiple grades)

• Scores based on regression “residual” (i.e., distance above or below the regression line)

• Complexity of statistical model presents a communications challenge