![](media/image1.jpeg){width="2.091666666666667in" height="1.575in"}

![](media/image2.png){width="1.8458333333333334in"
height="1.2368055555555555in"}

**Table of Contents**

Instructions for Completing Consolidated State Application
Accountability Workbook iv

PART I: Summary of Required Elements for State Accountability Systems v

PART II: State Response and Activities for Meeting State Accountability
System Requirements viii

> Introduction viii
>
> Principle 1: All Schools 1
>
> Principle 2: All Students 9
>
> Principle 3: Method of AYP Determinations 12
>
> Principle 4: Annual Decisions 20
>
> Principle 5: Subgroup Accountability 21
>
> Principle 6: Based on Academic Assessments 30
>
> Principle 7: Additional Indicators 31
>
> Principle 8: Separate Decisions for Reading/Language Arts and
> Mathematics 35
>
> Principle 9: System Validity and Reliability 36
>
> Principle 10: Participation Rate 44

Appendixes:

> Appendix A---Decision Making Process for Consolidated State
> Application-Accountability 47
>
> Appendix B---AYP Internal Committee 48
>
> Appendix C---ESEA Coordinating Committee 49
>
> Appendix D---Title I Committee of Practitioners 50
>
> Appendix E---ESEA Testing Advisory Committee 51
>
> Appendix F---Collaborative Council Members 53
>
> Appendix G---State Superintendent Elizabeth Burmaster's Parent
> Leadership Corps 55
>
> Appendix H---Wisconsin Council on Special Education 56
>
> Appendix I---Wisconsin Council of Administrators of Special Services
> 58
>
> Appendix J---Regional Services Network 60
>
> Appendix K---State Superintendent's Cabinet and Council 62

*Instructions for Completing Consolidated State Application
Accountability Workbook*

States that do not have final approval for some of these elements or
that have not finalized a decision on these elements by January 31
should, when completing the Workbook, indicate the status of each
element which is not yet official state policy and provide the
anticipated date by which the proposed policy will become effective. In
each of these cases, states must include a timeline of steps to complete
to ensure that such elements are in place by May 1, 2003, and
implemented during the 2002-2003 school year. By no later than May 1,
2003, states must submit to the Department final information for all
sections of the Consolidated State Application Accountability Workbook.

Transmittal Instructions

To expedite the receipt of this Consolidated State Application
Accountability Workbook, please send your submission via the Internet as
a .doc file, pdf file, rtf or .txt file or provide the URL for the site
where your submission is posted on the Internet. Send electronic
submissions to <mconapp@ed.gov>.

A state that submits only a paper submission should mail the submission
by express courier to:

Celia Sims

U.S. Department of Education

400 Maryland Ave., SW

Room 3W300

Washington, D.C. 20202-6400

\(202\) 401-0113

# PART I: Summary of Required Elements for State Accountability Systems

# Instructions

# The following chart is an overview of states\' implementation of the critical elements required for approval of their state accountability systems. States must provide detailed implementation information for each of these elements in Part II of this Consolidated State Application Accountability Workbook. 

# For each of the elements listed in the following chart, states should indicate the current implementation status in their state using the following legend:

# F: State has a final policy, approved by all the required entities in the state (e.g., State Board of Education, State Legislature), for implementing this element in its accountability system. 

# P: State has a proposed policy for implementing this element in its accountability system, but must still receive approval by required entities in the state (e.g., State Board of Education, State Legislature). 

# W: State is still working on formulating a policy to implement this element in its accountability system. 

# 

# Summary of Implementation Status for Required Elements of

# State Accountability Systems

+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * |    | **State Accountability System Element**                      |
| * |    |                                                              |
| S |    |                                                              |
| t |    |                                                              |
| a |    |                                                              |
| t |    |                                                              |
| u |    |                                                              |
| s |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+===+====+==============================================================+
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| P |    |                                                              |
| r |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| c |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| p |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| 1 |    |                                                              |
| : |    |                                                              |
| A |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| S |    |                                                              |
| c |    |                                                              |
| h |    |                                                              |
| o |    |                                                              |
| o |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| s |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 1  | Accountability system includes *all schools and districts in |
| * | .1 | the state*.                                                  |
| F |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 1  | Accountability system holds *all schools to the same         |
| * | .2 | criteria*.                                                   |
| F |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 1  | Accountability system incorporates the *academic achievement |
| * | .3 | standards*.                                                  |
| F |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 1  | Accountability system provides *information in a timely      |
| * | .4 | manner*.                                                     |
| F |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 1  | Accountability system includes *report cards*.               |
| * | .5 |                                                              |
| F |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 1  | Accountability system includes *rewards and sanctions*.      |
| * | .6 |                                                              |
| P |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| # |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| P |    |                                                              |
| r |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| c |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| p |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| 2 |    |                                                              |
| : |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| A |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| S |    |                                                              |
| t |    |                                                              |
| u |    |                                                              |
| d |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| t |    |                                                              |
| s |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 2  | The accountability system includes *all students*            |
| * | .1 |                                                              |
| F |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 2  | The accountability system has a consistent definition of     |
| * | .2 | *full academic year*.                                        |
| F |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 2  | The accountability system properly includes *mobile          |
| * | .3 | students*.                                                   |
| F |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| # |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| P |    |                                                              |
| r |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| c |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| p |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| 3 |    |                                                              |
| : |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| M |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| t |    |                                                              |
| h |    |                                                              |
| o |    |                                                              |
| d |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| o |    |                                                              |
| f |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| A |    |                                                              |
| Y |    |                                                              |
| P |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| D |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| t |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| r |    |                                                              |
| m |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| a |    |                                                              |
| t |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| o |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| s |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 3  | Accountability system expects *all student subgroups, public |
| * | .1 | schools, and LEAs to reach proficiency by 2013-14*.          |
| F |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 3  | Accountability system has a method for determining whether   |
| * | .2 | *student subgroups, public schools, and LEAs made adequate   |
| F |    | yearly progress.*                                            |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 3. | Accountability system establishes a *starting point*.        |
| * | 2a |                                                              |
| F |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 3. | Accountability system establishes *statewide annual          |
| * | 2b | measurable objectives*.                                      |
| F |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 3. | Accountability system establishes *intermediate goals*.      |
| * | 2c |                                                              |
| F |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| # |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| P |    |                                                              |
| r |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| c |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| p |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| 4 |    |                                                              |
| : |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| A |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| u |    |                                                              |
| a |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| D |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| c |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| s |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| o |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| s |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 4  | The accountability system *determines annually the progress* |
| * | .1 | of schools and districts.                                    |
| F |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| # |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| P |    |                                                              |
| r |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| c |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| p |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| 5 |    |                                                              |
| : |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| S |    |                                                              |
| u |    |                                                              |
| b |    |                                                              |
| g |    |                                                              |
| r |    |                                                              |
| o |    |                                                              |
| u |    |                                                              |
| p |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| A |    |                                                              |
| c |    |                                                              |
| c |    |                                                              |
| o |    |                                                              |
| u |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| t |    |                                                              |
| a |    |                                                              |
| b |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| t |    |                                                              |
| y |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 5  | The accountability system *includes all the required student |
| * | .1 | subgroups*.                                                  |
| F |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 5  | The accountability system holds *schools and LEAs            |
| * | .2 | accountable for the progress of* *student subgroups*.        |
| F |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+

**STATUS Legend:**

**F** -- Final state policy

**P** -- Proposed policy, awaiting state approval

**W** -- Working to formulate policy

+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 5  | The accountability system includes *students with            |
| * | .3 | disabilities*.                                               |
| F |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 5  | The accountability system includes *limited English          |
| * | .4 | proficient students*.                                        |
| F |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 5  | The state has determined the minimum number of students      |
| * | .5 | sufficient to yield statistically reliable information for   |
| F |    | each purpose for which disaggregated data are used.          |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 5  | The state has strategies to protect the privacy of           |
| * | .6 | individual students in reporting achievement results and in  |
| F |    | determining whether schools and LEAs are making adequate     |
| * |    | yearly progress on the basis of disaggregated subgroups.     |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| # |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| P |    |                                                              |
| r |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| c |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| p |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| 6 |    |                                                              |
| : |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| B |    |                                                              |
| a |    |                                                              |
| s |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| d |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| o |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| A |    |                                                              |
| c |    |                                                              |
| a |    |                                                              |
| d |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| m |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| c |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| A |    |                                                              |
| s |    |                                                              |
| s |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| s |    |                                                              |
| s |    |                                                              |
| m |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| t |    |                                                              |
| s |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 6  | Accountability system is based *primarily on academic        |
| * | .1 | assessments*.                                                |
| F |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| # |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| P |    |                                                              |
| r |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| c |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| p |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| 7 |    |                                                              |
| : |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| A |    |                                                              |
| d |    |                                                              |
| d |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| t |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| o |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| a |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| I |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| d |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| c |    |                                                              |
| a |    |                                                              |
| t |    |                                                              |
| o |    |                                                              |
| r |    |                                                              |
| s |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 7  | Accountability system includes *graduation rate for high     |
| * | .1 | school*s.                                                    |
| F |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 7  | Accountability system includes an *additional academic       |
| * | .2 | indicator for elementary and middle school*s.                |
| F |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 7  | Additional indicators are valid and reliable.                |
| * | .3 |                                                              |
| F |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| # |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| P |    |                                                              |
| r |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| c |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| p |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| 8 |    |                                                              |
| : |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| S |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| p |    |                                                              |
| a |    |                                                              |
| r |    |                                                              |
| a |    |                                                              |
| t |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| D |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| c |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| s |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| o |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| s |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| f |    |                                                              |
| o |    |                                                              |
| r |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| R |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| a |    |                                                              |
| d |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| g |    |                                                              |
| / |    |                                                              |
| L |    |                                                              |
| a |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| g |    |                                                              |
| u |    |                                                              |
| a |    |                                                              |
| g |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| A |    |                                                              |
| r |    |                                                              |
| t |    |                                                              |
| s |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| a |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| d |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| M |    |                                                              |
| a |    |                                                              |
| t |    |                                                              |
| h |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| m |    |                                                              |
| a |    |                                                              |
| t |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| c |    |                                                              |
| s |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 8  | Accountability system holds students, schools and districts  |
| * | .1 | separately accountable for *reading/language arts* and       |
| F |    | *mathematics*.                                               |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| # |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| P |    |                                                              |
| r |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| c |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| p |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| 9 |    |                                                              |
| : |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| S |    |                                                              |
| y |    |                                                              |
| s |    |                                                              |
| t |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| m |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| V |    |                                                              |
| a |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| d |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| t |    |                                                              |
| y |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| a |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| d |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| R |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| a |    |                                                              |
| b |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| t |    |                                                              |
| y |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 9  | Accountability system produces *reliable decisions*.         |
| * | .1 |                                                              |
| F |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 9  | Accountability system produces *valid decisions*.            |
| * | .2 |                                                              |
| F |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 9  | State has a plan for addressing *changes in assessment and   |
| * | .3 | student population*.                                         |
| F |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| # |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| P |    |                                                              |
| r |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| c |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| p |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| 1 |    |                                                              |
| 0 |    |                                                              |
| : |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| P |    |                                                              |
| a |    |                                                              |
| r |    |                                                              |
| t |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| c |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| p |    |                                                              |
| a |    |                                                              |
| t |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| o |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| R |    |                                                              |
| a |    |                                                              |
| t |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 10 | Accountability system has a means for calculating the *rate  |
| * | .1 | of participation* in the statewide assessment.               |
| F |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| * | 10 | Accountability system has a means for *applying the 95%      |
| * | .2 | assessment criteria to student subgroups* *and small         |
| F |    | schools.*                                                    |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+

**STATUS Legend:**

F -- Final policy

P -- Proposed Policy, awaiting state approval

W-- Working to formulate policy

# PART II: State Response and Activities for Meeting State Accountability System Requirements

Introduction

Wisconsin has a unified accountability system for all public school
districts and public schools, including charter schools. The Wisconsin
Department of Public Instruction (WDPI) operates two residential
schools, one for the deaf and hard of hearing and one for the blind and
visually impaired. These schools are included in the state
accountability system along with all other public schools.

Under Wis. Stats. *s.*115.01, the definition of a public school results
in a variety of grade-level assignments to schools. In Wisconsin, the
local school board may choose any configuration of grades for a school.
Local school boards also determine grade levels assigned to a defined
public school (Elementary/Secondary, Elementary, Middle, Junior High,
Senior High). Textbook selection, curriculum and other issues are under
local control in each of these 426 independent school districts.

Public school district sizes range from 92 to 97,300 students. The
average public school district enrolls fewer than 1,000 students (median
971, mode 340, mean 1,997). Most public school districts other than
Milwaukee are quite small as shown in the following table.

Number of Public School Districts by Size

  ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------
  Student Enrollment                   Number of Districts

  97,300                               1

  5,000 to 25000                       26

  1,000 to 4,900                       187

  500 to 998                           126

  *Less than* 500                      86

  **Total**                            **426**
  ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------

Most public schools in Wisconsin are also small. While they range in
size from under 10 to 2,300 students, the average school enrolls 390
students. About 300 schools have fewer than 100 students; only 113
schools enroll more than 1,000 students. The following table describes
the numbers of schools and their sizes in Wisconsin (2003):

Wisconsin Public Schools by School Type

+---------------------+---------------+-------------+-----------------+
| **School Type**     | **Number WI   | **Students  | **Average       |
|                     | Public        | Enrolled**  | School Size     |
|                     | Schools**     |             | Enrollment**    |
+---------------------+---------------+-------------+-----------------+
| > Elementary/       | > 67          | > 7,340     | 110             |
| >                   |               |             |                 |
| > Secondary         |               |             |                 |
+---------------------+---------------+-------------+-----------------+
| > Elementary        | > 1256        | > 408,506   | 326             |
| > Schools           |               |             |                 |
+---------------------+---------------+-------------+-----------------+
| > Middle Schools    | > 345         | > 162,398   | 472             |
+---------------------+---------------+-------------+-----------------+
| > Junior High       | > 48          | > 14,406    | 304             |
| > Schools           |               |             |                 |
+---------------------+---------------+-------------+-----------------+
| > Senior High       | > 540         | > 286,711   | 535             |
| > School            |               |             |                 |
+---------------------+---------------+-------------+-----------------+
| > **Total in 2003** | **2256        | >           | **390           |
|                     | schools**     | **879,361** | students**      |
+---------------------+---------------+-------------+-----------------+

Source: WINSS 3-03

Wisconsin's public school population has limited diversity. The largest
racial/ethnic group is White with 80% followed by Black students
comprising the second largest group at 9%. Approximately 22% of
Wisconsin students are identified as economically disadvantaged and
about 13% are students with disabilities. The following percents
describe the public school demographic characteristics as reflected by
Full Academic Year (FAY) students in 4^th^, 8^th^, and 10^th^ grades in
2001-02:

+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| **Demographic Characteristic**  | **Percentage of WI FAY\            |
|                                 | Public School Population**         |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| American Indian/Alaskan Native  | > 1.5%                             |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| Asian/Pacific Islander          | > 3.3%                             |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| Black (Not of Hispanic Origin)  | > 9.3%                             |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| Hispanic                        | > 4.4%                             |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| White (Not of Hispanic Origin)  | > 80.9%                            |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| Race/Ethnicity Missing or       | > 0.6%                             |
| Invalid                         |                                    |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| Limited English Proficient      | > 2.8%                             |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| Students with Disabilities      | > 13.3%                            |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| Economically Disadvantaged      | > 21.8%                            |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------------+

> NOTE: At a grade level, Wisconsin educates from 58,000 to 72,000
> public school students.

Students with disabilities comprise a widely diverse group as evidenced
in the State Prevalence Rates as of December 1, 2001:

> Autism 0.25%
>
> Cognitive Disability 1.29%
>
> Deaf-Blind \<.01%
>
> Emotional Behavioral Disability 1.63%
>
> Hearing Impairment 0.16%
>
> Specific Learning Disability 5.09%
>
> Other Health Impairment 0.79%
>
> Orthopedic Impairment 0.15%
>
> Significant Developmental Delay 0.24%
>
> Speech or Language Impairment 2.73%
>
> Traumatic Brain Injury 0.03%
>
> [Visual Impairment 0.04%]{.underline}
>
> All Disabilities 12.4%
>
> NOTE: These are all percents of *all* students ENROLLED (not just
> percents of students with disabilities).

## Wisconsin Excellence in Academics

In national comparisons of reading and mathematics achievement,
Wisconsin has consistently produced high scores.

-   On the *American College Test* (ACT): Ranked #1 in the seven years

-   On the *Scholastic Achievement Test* (SAT): Ranked above national
    average in the last ten years

-   On the *National Assessment of Educational Progress* (NAEP): Ranked
    #6 overall from 1990 through 1996 in reading and math. Wisconsin
    typically has higher proficiency rates than the central region, most
    other regions, and the nation (within 5 to 7 percentage points "At
    or Above Proficient"). Wisconsin's NAEP Average Scale Scores rank
    within the top 5 or 6 states in Reading and Mathematics.

-   On the *TerraNova* shelf-test (CTB-McGraw-Hill, 1997 ‑ 2002)
    proficiency rates were higher than the national norm group by 14 to
    21 percentage points in Reading and 14 to 23 percentage points in
    Mathematics (grades 4, 8, 10 in the most recent results).

-   Winner of National Academic Decathlon, 2002.

## Wisconsin Student Assessment System

In Wisconsin, one way that students demonstrate their progress toward
achieving the academic standards in reading, English language arts,
mathematics, science, and social studies is through participation in the
Wisconsin Student Assessment System (WSAS). At present the WSAS includes
both regular assessments taken by nearly all students and alternate
assessments taken by certain students with limited English proficiency
or disabilities. WSAS regular assessments include two statewide
standardized testing programs, the Wisconsin Reading Comprehension Test
(WRCT): An Assessment of Primary-Level Reading at Grade 3 and the
Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts Examinations (WKCE) at grades 4, 8, and
10. WSAS regular assessments also include DPI-approved, locally-adopted
and locally-scored supplemental assessments. WSAS alternate assessments
are alternatives to WSAS regular assessments. The alternative
assessments consist of DPI-approved protocols and rubrics for the local
collection and local scoring of student work.

## Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts Examinations

**At Grades 4, 8, and 10**

The Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts Examinations (WKCE) are given
annually to students at grades 4, 8, and 10. These standardized tests
include commercially-developed questions used in schools across the
country and questions developed specifically for Wisconsin to improve
coverage of Wisconsin academic standards. The WKCE measures achievement
in reading, language arts, mathematics, science, and social studies
using multiple-choice and short-answer questions. Students also provide
a rough draft writing sample. Total WKCE test time varies by grade and
may range from 5 to 7.5 hours.

Effective September 1, 2002, WKCE scores are used as one of several
criteria for advancing students from fourth to fifth grade and from
eighth to ninth grade. The other criteria are academic performance,
teacher recommendations based on academic performance, and any other
academic criteria specified by the local school board. Fourth and eighth
graders in the 2002-03 school year will be the first group affected by
this policy.

## WSAS Alternate Assessments

**At Grades 3, 4, 8, and 10**

WSAS Alternate Assessments are standards-based alternatives to WKCE
tests at grades 4, 8, and 10 and consist of DPI-approved protocols and
rubrics for the local collection and local scoring of student work.
Nearly all students at grades 4, 8, and 10, including most students with
disabilities and students with limited English proficiency are expected
to take the WKCE, with allowable accommodations as needed. WSAS
Alternate Assessments are given in lieu of specific WKCE subject area
tests to two student groups: (1) students with more severe disabilities
if the local IEP team determines that the students are not able to
demonstrate at least some of the knowledge and skills WKCE subject area
tests and (2) students whose first language is not English and whose
academic English skills are at a beginning level.

Adequate Yearly Progress in Wisconsin, At-a-Glance

+---------------------+------------------------------------------------+
| **Critical          | **Overview of Wisconsin's AYP Plan**           |
| Element**           |                                                |
+=====================+================================================+
| 1.  All Schools     | An AYP determination is made for all public    |
|                     | school districts, all public schools, and all  |
|                     | required student subgroups. The targets and    |
|                     | criteria will be the same for the public       |
|                     | school districts and public schools, and all   |
|                     | required student subgroups.                    |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | Approximately 136 Wisconsin public schools do  |
|                     | not have a grade in which state assessment is  |
|                     | conducted. Several accountability paths are    |
|                     | available, depending on their grade            |
|                     | configuration.                                 |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | Wisconsin's performance levels determined by   |
|                     | the WSAS:                                      |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | -   Advanced                                   |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | -   Proficient                                 |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | -   Basic                                      |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | -   Minimal                                    |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | Wisconsin's performance for all students       |
|                     | remains high in comparison to most states.     |
|                     | Typically 14 to 25% more WI students are       |
|                     | proficient than in the national norm groups.   |
|                     | WI generally scores 1^st^ in the nation on     |
|                     | ACT.                                           |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | WKCE administrations occur in November and the |
|                     | results are available to students in February, |
|                     | districts and school-level in March, and state |
|                     | level in April. AYP determinations will be     |
|                     | made during May with final notifications in    |
|                     | June, allowing time for notification to        |
|                     | parents of school choice and supplemental      |
|                     | educational service options.                   |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | The state already makes most of the State      |
|                     | Report Card information available through      |
|                     | Accountability Reports. Additional elements    |
|                     | will be added for 2003-04. WI is developing a  |
|                     | student record system to ensure that all of    |
|                     | the required data elements are included and    |
|                     | will present information consistent with the   |
|                     | regulations.                                   |
+---------------------+------------------------------------------------+
| 2.  All Students    | All students are included in Wisconsin's       |
|                     | accountability system. Total enrolled and      |
|                     | tested for a full academic year (FAY) is the   |
|                     | denominator for accountability purposes,       |
|                     | except for 95% rate where total enrollment at  |
|                     | the time of testing is the denominator.        |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | Student enrollment information is collected as |
|                     | part of the WSAS testing information and       |
|                     | compared with the annual fall school census    |
|                     | data collection that occurs just prior to the  |
|                     | Pre-Id data collection for WKCE. Since 1997,   |
|                     | full academic year (FAY) has been defined for  |
|                     | state and federal accountability purposes as   |
|                     | follows:                                       |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | -   School -- students continuously enrolled   |
|                     |     in a school during the annual fall census  |
|                     |     of the prior year to the current year (12  |
|                     |     months). For students that move together   |
|                     |     from one school to the next at             |
|                     |     transitional grades (often 3, 5, 9), they  |
|                     |     are enrolled for a full academic year if   |
|                     |     they have been in the district FAY.        |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | -   District -- Students continuously enrolled |
|                     |     in the district from the fall census of    |
|                     |     the prior year to the current year (12     |
|                     |     months).                                   |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | -   Students will be accounted for as part of  |
|                     |     the school's AYP in the whole FAY group    |
|                     |     and any subgroups that meet the cell size  |
|                     |     limitation. Students not captured as part  |
|                     |     of the school's AYP will be accounted for  |
|                     |     as part of the district's AYP              |
|                     |     determination.                             |
+---------------------+------------------------------------------------+
| 3.  Method of AYP   | Measurable objectives and targets have been    |
|     Determinations  | established to yield 100% proficiency for      |
|                     | public school districts, public schools, and   |
|                     | required subgroups by 2013-14. Using the       |
|                     | starting points for each content area, the     |
|                     | annual goals and intermediate objectives       |
|                     | necessary to reach 100% within the 12 year     |
|                     | period were determined. Separate targets were  |
|                     | set in reading and math.                       |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | All public school districts and public schools |
|                     | that fail to achieve identified objectives and |
|                     | goals for two consecutive years will be        |
|                     | identified for improvement.                    |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | To make AYP, each must:                        |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | 1.  Achieve a 95% participation rate in WSAS   |
|                     |     for all students and for each student      |
|                     |     subgroup.                                  |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | 2.  Reach AYP targets in reading and math as a |
|                     |     whole and for each subgroup.               |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | 3.  Meet or exceed other academic indicator    |
|                     |     for all students.                          |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | If AYP targets are not met, a school or        |
|                     | district could make AYP if the group not       |
|                     | making AYP reduces the percentage of           |
|                     | non-proficient students by 10% from the        |
|                     | previous years' percentage and reaches         |
|                     | performance targets for the other indicators.  |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | AYP starting point was calculated by listing   |
|                     | the performance of all schools at or above     |
|                     | proficient (separately for reading and math).  |
|                     | Beginning with the lowest performing school    |
|                     | and moving up, enrollments were added together |
|                     | until 20 percent of WI's enrollment was        |
|                     | captured. The proficiency level of the school  |
|                     | at the 20^th^ enrollment percentile is the     |
|                     | starting point. Starting points were           |
|                     | calculated separately for reading and math.    |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | In each case the proficiency percentage based  |
|                     | on all students enrolled for the school at the |
|                     | 20^th^ percentile was higher than the          |
|                     | percentage of the lowest performing subgroup.  |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | Starting points are as follows:                |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | > Reading 61%                                  |
|                     | >                                              |
|                     | > Mathematics 37%                              |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | Annual objectives are consistent with          |
|                     | intermediate goals. Intermediate goals are     |
|                     | consistent with WI's starting points. Annual   |
|                     | objectives were set to ensure 100% proficiency |
|                     | within the timeline. Objectives and goals are  |
|                     | the same for every public school district and  |
|                     | public school and all required subgroups of    |
|                     | students.                                      |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | The first incremental increase occurs during   |
|                     | the 2004-05 school year. Each incremental      |
|                     | increase occurs not more than three years      |
|                     | after that point.                              |
+---------------------+------------------------------------------------+
|                     |                                                |
+---------------------+------------------------------------------------+
| 4.  Annual          | AYP determinations are made annually for each  |
|     Decisions       | WI public school and school district. WI's     |
|                     | single accountability system applies to all    |
|                     | public schools and LEAs. All NCLB reporting    |
|                     | requirements have been incorporated into       |
|                     | annual determinations.                         |
+---------------------+------------------------------------------------+
| 5.  Subgroup        | Information used to disaggregate students into |
|     Accountability  | the required subgroups is collected as part of |
|                     | the WSAS administration process. All required  |
|                     | subgroup assessment data is currently          |
|                     | available:                                     |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | -   The racial/ethnic groups are the same as   |
|                     |     the groups used on the Enrollment Report   |
|                     |     (PI-1290), and the IDEA Federal Student    |
|                     |     Data Report (PI-2197) Wisconsin            |
|                     |     Administrative Code, and are as follows:   |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | > Asian/Pacific Islander,                      |
|                     | >                                              |
|                     | > Black, Not of Hispanic Origin,               |
|                     | >                                              |
|                     | > Hispanic,                                    |
|                     | >                                              |
|                     | > American Indian/Alaskan Native,              |
|                     | >                                              |
|                     | > White, Not of Hispanic Origin.               |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | -   An \"economically disadvantaged\" student  |
|                     |     is a student who is a member of a          |
|                     |     household that meets the income            |
|                     |     eligibility guidelines for free or         |
|                     |     reduced-price meals (less than or equal to |
|                     |     185% of Federal Poverty Guidelines) under  |
|                     |     the National School Lunch Program.         |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | -   A \"student with a disability,\" *i.e.,*   |
|                     |     SwD, is a student who is considered        |
|                     |     eligible for the December 1 federal child  |
|                     |     count as reported by the district to the   |
|                     |     WDPI on the IDEA Federal Student Data      |
|                     |     Report (PI-2197) Wisconsin Administrative  |
|                     |     Code.                                      |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | -   A student with limited English proficiency |
|                     |     is a student who scores at one of five     |
|                     |     limited proficiency levels on a WDPI       |
|                     |     approved English proficiency assessment    |
|                     |     instrument, as defined in Wisconsin        |
|                     |     Administrative Rule PI 13. See             |
|                     |     <http:                                     |
|                     | //www.legis.state.wi.us/rsb/code/pi/pi013.pdf> |
|                     |     .                                          |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | WDPI has been reporting disaggregated subgroup |
|                     | results since 1997 on the WSAS tests. Each     |
|                     | public school district as a whole and all of   |
|                     | its required subgroups must reach annual       |
|                     | performance targets in reading and math in     |
|                     | order for the LEA to make AYP.                 |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | Each school as a whole and all of its required |
|                     | subgroups must reach annual performance        |
|                     | targets in reading and math in order for the   |
|                     | school to make AYP.                            |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | All students with disabilities participate in  |
|                     | the WSAS, either through WKCE or the Wisconsin |
|                     | Alternate Assessment for Students with         |
|                     | Disabilities (WAA-SwD). All the WKCE and WAA   |
|                     | results for students with disabilities are     |
|                     | included as part of the AYP equation.          |
|                     | Currently, less than 2.5% of Wisconsin         |
|                     | students take the WAA-SwD. WAA-SwD performance |
|                     | levels are designed to report achievement      |
|                     | below the range tested on WKCE as              |
|                     | Pre-Requisite Skill levels 1--4.               |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | Provision for counting the few students with   |
|                     | most significant cognitive disabilities using  |
|                     | alternate academic achievement standards per   |
|                     | §200.1(d) for students with the most           |
|                     | significant cognitive disabilities (up to 1%,  |
|                     | pending final regulations of the all students  |
|                     | enrolled in the grades assessed may be         |
|                     | evaluated against the alternate academic       |
|                     | achievement standards) and included as         |
|                     | proficient in the AYP calculation.             |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | All WSAS results for limited English           |
|                     | proficient students are included as part of    |
|                     | the AYP equation, including the results for    |
|                     | the students taking the WKCE or Wisconsin      |
|                     | Alternate Assessment for Limited English       |
|                     | Proficient Students (WAA-LEP).                 |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | Limited English proficient students may take   |
|                     | WKCE at any proficiency level if the           |
|                     | determination is made that the assessment will |
|                     | be valid and reliable with accommodations as   |
|                     | needed. LEP students must take the alternate   |
|                     | assessment at beginner English proficiency     |
|                     | levels (Levels 1 and 2), however, if they also |
|                     | participate in WKCE, the WKCE score is used    |
|                     | for school accountability. LEP students who    |
|                     | are intermediate or higher (Level 3 and above) |
|                     | must take WKCE, with accommodations as needed. |
|                     | In 2001-02, approximately 40% of the LEP       |
|                     | students participated in the WAA--LEP.         |
+---------------------+------------------------------------------------+
|                     | For privacy purposes, the minimum number of    |
|                     | students in a group required for WKCE          |
|                     | reporting is six. See section 5.6 for          |
|                     | additional information about direct and        |
|                     | indirect disclosure. The AYP determination     |
|                     | does not reveal personally identifiable        |
|                     | information.                                   |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | For the purpose of accountability, the minimum |
|                     | number of students will be 40, with the        |
|                     | exception of the students with disabilities    |
|                     | subgroup that has a minimum cell size of 50.   |
|                     | If a school or district has the minimum number |
|                     | of students in a required subgroup, then that  |
|                     | school or district must meet Wisconsin annual  |
|                     | performance targets. Schools and districts     |
|                     | must meet the annual objectives and            |
|                     | intermediate goals set by the state. If the    |
|                     | minimum cell size has not been met, the        |
|                     | proficiency rates will be aggregated across    |
|                     | two or more years until the minimum cell size  |
|                     | has been met.                                  |
+---------------------+------------------------------------------------+
| 6.  Based on        | Wisconsin's Student Assessment System includes |
|     Academic        | reading and math assessments for students in   |
|     Assessments     | grades 4, 8, and 10. In 2005-06, assessments   |
|                     | will be added for grades 3, and 5 -- 7.        |
|                     | Results of all reading and math assessments    |
|                     | will be used in making AYP determinations.     |
+---------------------+------------------------------------------------+
| 7.  Additional      | Under Wisconsin law, local school boards are   |
|     Indicators      | responsible for establishing the requirements  |
|                     | for high school graduation. Requirements vary  |
|                     | from district to district. However, WI         |
|                     | calculates graduation rates in a uniform       |
|                     | manner for all school districts. The           |
|                     | graduation rate does not include students who  |
|                     | obtain a GED or certificate of completion.     |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | The graduation rate is a cumulative or         |
|                     | longitudinal rate that considers the number of |
|                     | students who actually graduate as a percent of |
|                     | those who were in membership over grades 9     |
|                     | through 12. The number of dropouts is included |
|                     | in the denominator of the membership. High     |
|                     | schools will be required to meet the target of |
|                     | 90% of the average statewide graduation rate,  |
|                     | or growth.                                     |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | The indicator that will be used in determining |
|                     | AYP for elementary and middle schools will be  |
|                     | attendance. This data element is collected for |
|                     | all schools and LEAs and reported on the       |
|                     | School Performance Report. It is measured in   |
|                     | the same way for all districts and schools.    |
|                     | Elementary and middle schools will be required |
|                     | to meet the target of 90% of the average       |
|                     | statewide attendance rate, or growth.          |
+---------------------+------------------------------------------------+
| 8.  Separate        | A separate determination is made annually in   |
|     Decisions for   | reading and math. A public school district or  |
|                     | public school must reach performance targets   |
| Reading/Mathematics | in both content areas in order to make AYP.    |
+---------------------+------------------------------------------------+
| 9.  System Validity | To increase the reliability of AYP             |
|     and Reliability | determinations at the district, school, and    |
|                     | subgroup level for accountability decisions,   |
|                     | WDPI will use a confidence interval.           |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | Wisconsin's review process is consistent with  |
|                     | the requirements of NCLB with regard to        |
|                     | submission of evidence and timelines. Schools  |
|                     | may appeal AYP determinations, submit          |
|                     | evidence, and expect a final determination     |
|                     | within the 30-day timeline prescribed by NCLB  |
|                     | legislation.                                   |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | Wisconsin will add new reading and mathematics |
|                     | assessments at grades 3, 5, 6, and 7 by        |
|                     | 2005‑06. Wisconsin will set new proficiency    |
|                     | standards for these examinations. Wisconsin    |
|                     | will evaluate the baselines/annual objectives  |
|                     | at the time of implementing the new tests.     |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | The technical quality of the examinations used |
|                     | for the current WKCE meets all nationally      |
|                     | recognized standards for validity and          |
|                     | reliability.                                   |
+---------------------+------------------------------------------------+
| 10. Participation   | Public school districts currently supply a     |
|     Rate            | test booklet with demographic data for all     |
|                     | students enrolled at the time of testing       |
|                     | whether or not they complete the WKCE.         |
|                     | Students who take the test and those who do    |
|                     | not are included in the Wisconsin              |
|                     | accountability system.                         |
|                     |                                                |
|                     | To make AYP, a minimum of 95% of all students  |
|                     | and subgroups must participate in the          |
|                     | assessments.                                   |
+---------------------+------------------------------------------------+

PRINCIPLE 1. A single statewide Accountability System applied to all
public schools and LEAs.

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **CRITICAL ELEMENT 1.1**                                              |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1.  How does the State Accountability System include every public     |
|     school and LEA in the state?                                      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Sections 118.30(1m) and 118.30(1r) Wis. Stats., require each school   |
| board of a public school district and operator of a public charter    |
| school to administer the statewide assessments to all enrolled        |
| pupils. These results are used for statewide accountability purposes  |
| including determining the adequate yearly progress of each public     |
| school district and public school.                                    |
|                                                                       |
| Under s.115.01 Wis. Stats, the definition of a public school results  |
| in a variety of grade-level assignments to schools. Local school      |
| boards determine grades assigned to a defined public school.          |
| Currently, Wisconsin has approximately 136 elementary and secondary   |
| public schools with grade-level definitions that do not include       |
| grades 4, 8, or 10, thus confounding the accountability for every     |
| public school.                                                        |
|                                                                       |
| Wisconsin establishes an accountability process and procedures that   |
| will hold all public schools accountable for student performance.     |
| Multi-district charter schools will be evaluated at the full academic |
| year (FAY) school-level; district FAY will be calculated at the       |
| student's district of residence.                                      |
|                                                                       |
| For the 136 schools that do not have a grade(s) in which fall         |
| statewide assessment occurs, several accountability paths beginning   |
| in the 2005-06 will be available. First, those schools that include a |
| grade 3, 5, 6, or 7, will be part of statewide assessment with the    |
| expansion to testing in grades 3-8, as required in No Child Left      |
| Behind. Second, for those schools that have a direct connection       |
| through a feeder or paired system, the "sending" school will link.    |
| There are 63 or fewer schools that do not link, and, therefore,       |
| accountability will be determined through a standardized              |
| self-evaluation and performance on the respective other academic      |
| indicator for the level.                                              |
|                                                                       |
| During the interim, beginning with 2002-03 testing schools falling    |
| into these categories will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis using |
| the state's identified other academic indicator (graduation or        |
| attendance rates) and the school's identified academic performance    |
| indicators. Progress will be determined using Wisconsin's annual      |
| measurable objectives for reading and mathematics.                    |
|                                                                       |
| A system for this standardized self-evaluation will be developed and  |
| periodically evaluated by the DPI Internal AYP Committee with input   |
| from state stakeholders.                                              |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **CRITICAL ELEMENT 1.2**                                              |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 2.  How are all public schools and LEAs held to the same criteria     |
|     when making an AYP determination?                                 |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Wisconsin has a unified accountability system for all public school   |
| districts and schools within districts, including charter schools.    |
| The Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (WDPI) operates two    |
| residential schools, one for the deaf and hard of hearing and one for |
| the blind and visually impaired. These schools are included in the    |
| state accountability system.                                          |
|                                                                       |
| Wis. Stats. s.118.30, states that all Wisconsin public schools        |
| including charter schools are part of the Wisconsin accountability    |
| system. Wisconsin has a single, uniform test administration window    |
| for all schools.                                                      |
|                                                                       |
| Under state law, school boards are required to test all students (s.  |
| 118.30, Wis. Stats.). Also, pursuant to state law \[s. 115.38 and s.  |
| 13.172(2)\], the state superintendent is required to annually         |
| identify those schools and districts that are low in performance on   |
| the statewide examinations administered under s. 118.30. The federal  |
| No Child Left Behind Act further requires public notice of low        |
| performance schools that receive Title I funding.                     |
|                                                                       |
| Under both state and federal law, the state superintendent makes      |
| achievement information available by public school and public school  |
| district. Assessment data are published on the agency website under   |
| an agency-developed program described as the Wisconsin Informational  |
| Network for Successful Schools                                        |
| (<http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/sig/index.html>). Achievement            |
| information is also provided in electronic form to required state     |
| record depositories, the legislature, and local public school         |
| districts.                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| Wisconsin has a rigorous accountability system that includes tests in |
| reading, mathematics, language arts, science, and social studies. The |
| content tested reflects the Wisconsin Model Academic Standards.       |
| Currently, Wisconsin holds all public schools accountable. Title I    |
| schools are held accountable consistent with NCLB and non-Title I     |
| public schools are held accountable by state plan as articulated in   |
| Wisconsin Public Schools -- Levels of Accountability (Chart 1.6). The |
| Wisconsin AYP definition has been integrated into the state's single  |
| accountability system known as Wisconsin Student Assessment System.   |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **CRITICAL ELEMENT 1.3**                                              |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 2.  Does the state have, at a minimum, a definition of *basic*,       |
|     *proficient*, and *advanced* student achievement levels in        |
|     reading/language arts and mathematics?                            |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Wisconsin has defined four levels of student achievement: Minimal,    |
| Basic, Proficient, and Advanced for each subject area tested. The     |
| definitions for each are listed below:                                |
|                                                                       |
| > Advanced: Demonstrates in-depth understanding of academic knowledge |
| > and skills tested.                                                  |
| >                                                                     |
| > Proficient: Demonstrates competency in the academic knowledge and   |
| > skills tested.                                                      |
| >                                                                     |
| > Basic: Demonstrates some academic knowledge and skills tested.      |
| >                                                                     |
| > Minimal: Demonstrates very limited academic knowledge and skills    |
| > tested.                                                             |
|                                                                       |
| Under a timeline waiver agreement with the U.S. Department of         |
| Education, WDPI enhanced its statewide testing program and expanded   |
| its assessment design to assure full participation by all public      |
| school students in grades 4, 8, and 10 as required by current law.    |
| The contract testing services vendor conducted a standard-setting     |
| process to establish student achievement standards with cut-scores    |
| for the state's four proficiency categories: minimal, basic,          |
| proficient, and advanced on the enhanced Wisconsin Knowledge and      |
| Concepts Examinations (WKCE).                                         |
|                                                                       |
| In February 2003, the state's testing services vendor used the        |
| Bookmark Process (see                                                 |
| <http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/oea/ctbbkmrk03.html>) to generate         |
| recommended cut-scores for the four proficiency categories. After     |
| review by a national expert technical panel and final approval by the |
| state superintendent, the new cut-scores will be applied to the       |
| student, public school, public school district, and state proficiency |
| reports. The school, district, and state-level reports will be the    |
| foundation for applying new accountability requirements to all        |
| schools in the state as required by NCLB by June 30, 2003.            |
|                                                                       |
| As assessment instruments change over time (e.g., new grade 3-8       |
| testing) and new proficiency score standards are set, the definitions |
| of achievement levels are expected to remain constant. As a result of |
| standard-setting, grade-level proficiency category descriptors are    |
| generated for each grade level tested. A validation study of the      |
| proficiency score cut-points will be conducted to ensure that actual  |
| student performance matches definitions of student performance when   |
| performance level cut-points are set on new state assessments in      |
| 2005-06 (to be developed under RFP) and empirical data are available. |
|                                                                       |
| WDPI has revised its accountability model and will design the         |
| software to further facilitate reporting requirements described in    |
| NCLB. The accountability model has been developed by the Internal AYP |
| Committee and then reviewed by external groups such as but not        |
| limited to the ESEA Advisory Committee and the Collaborative Council. |
| The outcome of the application of new cut-scores to establish         |
| proficiency categories will be posted on the WINSS website            |
| (<http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/sig/index.html>) and published as        |
| required by federal law.                                              |
|                                                                       |
| Training and standardization for the collection of Wisconsin          |
| Alternate Assessment*--*Students with Disabilities (WAA*--*SwD) and   |
| proficiency data was completed in Fall 2002. This was the result of a |
| lengthy process in evaluating achievement standards for the WAA--SwD  |
| required for IEP students not able to participate in the Wisconsin    |
| Knowledge and Concepts Examinations with or without accommodations.   |
| The Pre-skill levels for WAA--SwD measure achievement below the range |
| tested on WKCE.                                                       |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **CRITICAL ELEMENT 1.4**                                              |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 4.  How does the state provide accountability and adequate yearly     |
|     progress decisions and information in a timely manner?            |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| In prior years, Wisconsin public schools received individual student  |
| and school test results about 10 weeks after the test window. See:    |
| <http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/dpi/oea/dates.html>. A web-based,         |
| informal calculator was made available on the web for districts to    |
| determine their own progress prior to notification. See:              |
| <http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/dpi/oea/acct_sch.html#graph00>.           |
|                                                                       |
| Wisconsin provided public schools and public school districts with    |
| AYP decisions based on the 2001-02 test administration prior to the   |
| 2002-03 school year. For annual press release of student performance, |
| see <http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/dltcl/eis/pdf/dpi2002_67.pdf>.        |
|                                                                       |
| In school year 2002-03, Wisconsin changed its testing window to       |
| provide timely results to public school districts and public schools  |
| consistent with the requirements of NCLB. The new November testing    |
| window allows time for initial identification of schools identified   |
| for improvement and the review process. If a public school is         |
| designated as a school identified for improvement, time exists to     |
| implement the Title I sanctions under the law.                        |
|                                                                       |
| Because of the changes in assessment measures required under          |
| Wisconsin's timeline waiver, a standards-setting process was          |
| conducted in February 2003 on the Enhanced WKCE. For school year      |
| 2002-03, the score reporting for statewide testing will roll-out in   |
| phases that begin in April 2003. Notification to public schools and   |
| public school districts of preliminary identification as a school     |
| identified for improvement will occur no later than June 30, 2003.    |
| Final notification is scheduled for August 30, 2003.                  |
|                                                                       |
| In subsequent years, the November testing window will allow the       |
| return of test data to public schools and public school districts     |
| early in the second semester of each school year to make timely use   |
| of statewide assessment data for accountability purposes described in |
| both federal and state law.                                           |
|                                                                       |
| With a possible shortened turnaround of AYP notifications anticipated |
| as systems are put in place, the testing program timeline will be as  |
| follows:                                                              |
|                                                                       |
| +--------+--------------------------------------------------------+   |
| | O      | -   Pre-Id diskettes due to contractor from districts  |   |
| | ctober |     for November test administration.                  |   |
| +--------+--------------------------------------------------------+   |
| | No     | -   Test Administration of WKCE (3 week window). WAA - |   |
| | vember |     (September-end of WKCE).                           |   |
| +--------+--------------------------------------------------------+   |
| | Fe     | -   Phase 1: Individual Student Reports shipped to     |   |
| | bruary |     districts.                                         |   |
| +--------+--------------------------------------------------------+   |
| | March  | -   Phase 2 School and District Reports shipped to     |   |
| |        |     districts.                                         |   |
| +--------+--------------------------------------------------------+   |
| | April  | -   State receives eDISA data files to review for      |   |
| |        |     logic, suppression; check potential counts,        |   |
| |        |     multi-district charter issues, valid codes, etc.   |   |
| |        |     Fields are arranged, missing data added, file      |   |
| |        |     cleaned-up. Two different layouts are required for |   |
| |        |     web reporting.                                     |   |
| |        |                                                        |   |
| |        | -   Contractor sends Phase 3 State Report of WKCE      |   |
| |        |     results.                                           |   |
| +--------+--------------------------------------------------------+   |
| | May\   | -   WKCE State Report and School Performance Report    |   |
| | \      |     are posted on the web site                         |   |
| | \      |                                                        |   |
| | \      | -   School and district Adequate Yearly Progress are   |   |
| | June   |     calculated. Schools and LEAs will receive          |   |
| |        |     *preliminary* notification in May.                 |   |
| |        |                                                        |   |
| |        | -   School districts and schools examine AYP and       |   |
| |        |     schools/LEAs identified for improvement Status and |   |
| |        |     notify WDPI of any possible errors by June 30^th^. |   |
| +--------+--------------------------------------------------------+   |
| | July   | -   DPI Press Release of WKCE data and final Title I   |   |
| |        |     sanctioned schools and districts identified for    |   |
| |        |     improvement by July 31^st^ .                       |   |
| +--------+--------------------------------------------------------+   |
|                                                                       |
| The WI established timelines meet the requirements of the law.        |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **CRITICAL ELEMENT 1.5**                                              |
+=======================================================================+
| 5.  Does the State Accountability System produce an annual State      |
|     Report Card?                                                      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| The current State Accountability System does produce an annual state  |
| report card called the "school performance report." The data that     |
| must be included in the state's school performance report are listed  |
| in s. 115.38, Wis. Stats, and are reported on the department's WINSS  |
| website,                                                              |
| [http://www.dpi.s                                                     |
| tate.wi.us/sig/index.html](http://sss.dpi.state.wi.us/sig/index.html) |
| (click on "Data Analysis").                                           |
|                                                                       |
| Wisconsin is working to enhance the WINSS website to include as much  |
| of the NCLB report card data as feasible this academic year.          |
| Wisconsin has been providing the information required by s.           |
| 1111(h)(1)(C)(i), (iii), (iv), (v), and (vi) on WINSS since fall      |
| 2000. Changes will be made in reporting 2002-03 assessment data on    |
| WINSS to comply with (ii) and (vii) and to include more information   |
| about alternate and supplemental assessment results.                  |
|                                                                       |
| Wisconsin will further enhance existing data collections to fully     |
| comply with the remaining NCLB report card requirements at the        |
| earliest possible date. For Wisconsin, unlike many other states with  |
| a history of a more centralized educational system, these remaining   |
| report card requirements will require significant change from past    |
| practice. See <http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/dpi/esea/bul_0210.html>.    |
|                                                                       |
| Because Wisconsin teacher data for 2002-03 was collected prior to     |
| release of the final regulations in December 2002, the data required  |
| to report percentages of teachers who are highly qualified will not   |
| be available until 2003-04 data are collected. When these 2003-04     |
| data are available, they will be posted on WINSS along with           |
| information about the percentages in high poverty vs. low poverty     |
| schools to more fully comply with (viii). Our existing data           |
| collection is currently being revised for 2003-04 so this timeline    |
| can be met. See <http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/dpi/esea/bul_0204.html>   |
| for information about the relationship between the definition of      |
| "highly qualified" and our state teacher licensing system.            |
|                                                                       |
| Complete data required for disaggregation of other academic           |
| indicators will be available in 2004‑05 for attendance rates and      |
| 2007‑08 for graduation rates. Attendance and graduation rates are     |
| part of a summary data collection, and are currently disaggregated by |
| race/ethnicity but not by other demographic characteristics. Since    |
| cohort dropouts are used in the calculation of graduation rates, and  |
| since dropouts are currently collected only by race/ethnicity and by  |
| disability status, more complete disaggregated data will need to be   |
| collected over a period of several years. To collect the data         |
| required for complete disaggregation of attendance, graduation, and   |
| cohort dropouts, WDPI plans to move to a statewide student record     |
| system. This is a major change that will be possible to implement in  |
| 2004-05.                                                              |
|                                                                       |
| Wisconsin plans to include the data required to meet **both** the     |
| state and LEA Report Card requirements on the department\'s WINSS     |
| website. A concise Wisconsin-at-a-Glance report will be included on   |
| WINSS in addition to the more detailed data required by ESEA. LEAs    |
| will have several options for complying with LEA Report Card          |
| requirements.                                                         |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Under state law, LEAs are currently required to publish and           |
| distribute to all parents a school performance report. This school    |
| performance report is a paper report and already includes extensive   |
| NCLB-required district and school information such as state           |
| assessment results, dropouts, graduation, attendance, staff data, and |
| other pertinent information. Given these requirements under state     |
| law, LEAs will have several choices:                                  |
|                                                                       |
| > \(1\) supplement the preexisting 115.38 school performance report   |
| > as necessary with data required by NCLB,                            |
| >                                                                     |
| > \(2\) include the URL for a website (e.g. WINSS or district         |
| > website) on the preexisting 115.38 school performance report (or    |
| > some other document that is distributed to all parents) with        |
| > information about how to access the website for parents without     |
| > home web access (local public library, school) and what data are    |
| > included on the website,                                            |
| >                                                                     |
| > \(3\) submit an alternative plan to DPI for the collection and      |
| > reporting of local report card data under s. 1111(h)(2).            |
|                                                                       |
| Public school districts choosing option #1 can use the local data     |
| collected by the state after edits, calculations, rollups, and        |
| privacy rules have been applied which will reduce the local           |
| programming burden and provide uniform and consistent data statewide. |
|                                                                       |
| Wisconsin will ensure that each LEA complies with the LEA Report Card |
| requirements by reviewing evidence of compliance provided by a sample |
| of school districts every year. Reporting content and timeframes for  |
| LEAs will be the same as the timeframe described above for Wisconsin  |
| to promote consistency, avoid duplication of effort, and protect      |
| student privacy.                                                      |
|                                                                       |
| To the extent practicable, Wisconsin will ensure that report card     |
| information is in languages of significant populations in Wisconsin;  |
| e.g., Spanish, by annually monitoring such practices in districts     |
| with various populations and sharing model practices provided by      |
| districts.                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| The NCLB Report Card Steering Committee is coordinating further       |
| research of this element. Once researched, several                    |
| possibilities/options for more specific guidance and technical        |
| assistance for LEAs and monitoring plans will be presented to the     |
| Internal AYP Committee for review. Additionally, feedback will be     |
| sought from the external ESEA Testing Advisory Committee, the         |
| Collaborative Council (the major education stakeholders), and other   |
| external advisory groups to the state superintendent.                 |
|                                                                       |
| See attached timeline provided in "Task Order for Data Improvement -- |
| Deliverable 1."                                                       |
|                                                                       |
| See sample reports -- District report cards.                          |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **CRITICAL ELEMENT 1.6**                                              |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 6.  How does the State Accountability System include rewards and      |
|     sanctions for public schools and LEAs?[^1]                        |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| The Wisconsin State Superintendent of Public Instruction is required  |
| by Wis. Stats. 115.38 (2) and 115.38 (4) to annually identify         |
| low-performing schools.                                               |
|                                                                       |
| WDPI holds all public schools and public school districts to the same |
| level of accountability (see attachment). WDPI has adopted the        |
| sanctions for Title I schools to come into compliance with NCLB.      |
| Starting in school year 2002-03, WDPI implemented the choice and      |
| supplemental educational services provisions required under NCLB.     |
| Wisconsin will continue to assess the progress of all public schools  |
| and districts in the state toward the goal of 100% proficiency in     |
| reading and mathematics by the end of the 2013-14 school year. WDPI   |
| is awaiting guidance on sanctions for LEAs and will modify            |
| accountability requirements as information becomes available.         |
|                                                                       |
| Wisconsin will annually, beginning in the 2003-04 school year, reward |
| schools who have made the greatest gains in closing the achievement   |
| gap or have high poverty and have consistently exceeded their Annual  |
| Measurable Progress objectives. Schools will be designated as         |
| distinguished schools by the state superintendent and rewards may     |
| include monetary or staff development incentives.                     |
|                                                                       |
| See <http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/dpi/esea/index.html>.                 |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

Wisconsin Public Schools -- Levels of Accountability

<table>
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 9%" />
<col style="width: 10%" />
<col style="width: 9%" />
<col style="width: 6%" />
<col style="width: 9%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 10%" />
<col style="width: 12%" />
<col style="width: 15%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="2"><strong>Accountability Levels</strong></td>
<td><strong>AYP</strong></td>
<td colspan="5"><strong>Federal Title I Sanctions</strong></td>
<td colspan="2"><strong>State Requirements</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>Non-Title I Schools</strong></td>
<td><p><strong>Title I</strong></p>
<p><strong>Schools</strong></p></td>
<td><strong>Participation, Reading, Math, Graduation/Attendance
Indicators</strong></td>
<td><strong>2-Year School Improvement Plan</strong></td>
<td><strong>School Choice</strong></td>
<td><strong>Supplemental Educational Services</strong></td>
<td><strong>Corrective Action</strong></td>
<td><strong>Restructuring</strong></td>
<td><strong>All Schools</strong></td>
<td><strong>Additional Title I Requirements</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>Excellent</strong></td>
<td><strong>Excellent</strong></td>
<td>Met AYP for two consecutive years.</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td colspan="2">Recognition will be provided to the schools that have
made the greatest gains in closing the achievement gap or those with
high poverty that have consistently exceeded their AYP objectives.</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>Effective</strong></td>
<td><strong>Effective</strong></td>
<td>Met AYP for one of last two years.</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td rowspan="6"><p><strong>Continuous</strong></p>
<p><strong>Improvement</strong></p></td>
<td rowspan="2"><strong>Continuous Improvement</strong></td>
<td><p><strong>Level 1 SIFI:</strong></p>
<p>Missed AYP for 2 consecutive years.</p></td>
<td>2-year plan in place at start of next school year <sup>1</sup></td>
<td>Implement at start of next school year <sup>2</sup></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td rowspan="2">Keep a <em>2-year school improvement plan</em> on file
in the district.</td>
<td>Also submit documentation of <em>school choice</em> provisions to
DPI.</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><p><strong>Level 2 SIFI:</strong></p>
<p>Missed AYP for 3 consecutive years.</p></td>
<td>Updated 2-year plan in place at start of next school year
<sup>1</sup></td>
<td>2<sup>nd</sup> year of school choice<sup>2</sup></td>
<td>Implement at start of next school year <sup>3</sup></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>Also submit documentation of <em>school choice</em> and
<em>supplemental educational service</em> provisions to DPI.</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td rowspan="2"><strong>Corrective Action</strong></td>
<td rowspan="2"><p><strong>Level 3 SIFI:</strong></p>
<p>Missed AYP for 4 consecutive years.</p></td>
<td rowspan="2">Updated 2-year plan in place at start of next school
year <sup>1</sup></td>
<td rowspan="2">3<sup>rd</sup> year of school choice<sup>2</sup></td>
<td rowspan="2">2<sup>nd</sup> year of supplemental educational
services<sup>3</sup></td>
<td rowspan="2">Take corrective action. <sup>4</sup></td>
<td rowspan="2"></td>
<td>May request consultation and review of <em>2-year school improvement
plan</em>.</td>
<td>Also submit documentation of <em>corrective action</em>, <em>school
choice,</em> and <em>supplemental educational service</em> provisions to
DPI.</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="2">Work collaboratively with <em>DPI School Support
Teams</em> assigned to assist schools/districts with greatest
need.<sup>6</sup></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td rowspan="2"><strong>Restructuring</strong></td>
<td rowspan="2"><p><strong>Level 4 SIFI:</strong></p>
<p>Missed AYP for 5 or more consecutive years.</p></td>
<td rowspan="2">Updated 2-year plan in place at start of next school
year <sup>1</sup></td>
<td rowspan="2">4<sup>th</sup> year of school choice<sup>2</sup></td>
<td rowspan="2">3<sup>rd</sup> year of supplemental educational
services<sup>3</sup></td>
<td rowspan="2">2<sup>nd</sup> year of corrective
action<sup>4</sup></td>
<td rowspan="2">Restructuring plan with alternative governance in place
by next year. <sup>5</sup></td>
<td>Submit <em>2-year school improvement plan</em> for review,
consultation, and/or intervention.</td>
<td>Also submit documentation of <em>restructuring plan</em>,
<em>corrective action, school choice,</em> and <em>supplemental
educational service</em> provisions to DPI.</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="2">Work collaboratively with <em>DPI School Support
Teams</em> assigned to assist schools/districts with greatest
need.<sup>6</sup></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

SIFI: School Identified for Improvement

^1^Use existing district/school improvement plan format, or access the
*DPI School Improvement Planning Tool* on the WINSS website.

^2^Districts provide a choice of at least two schools that are not in
SIFI status, if two such schools exist in the district. Transportation
must be provided until AYP has been met for two consecutive years.

^3^ Districts/schools select from the list of DPI-approved supplemental
service providers.

^4^ Corrective action includes at least one of the following: replace
relevant school staff, institute new curricular program, decrease
school-level management, appoint an outside expert to advise the school
on its progress, extend the school year or school day, or restructure
the internal organization of the school.

^5^Alternative governance may include any of the following: reopen as a
charter school, replace all/most of the school staff relevant to the
failure to make AYP, enter into a contract with a private management
company, or other major restructuring that makes fundamental reform to
the school's staffing and governance.

^6^ Assistance from School Support Teams will be prioritized to the
neediest schools as resources and funding allow. The neediest schools
will be identified through a combination of factors including: number of
years in SIFI status, percentage of students who have not met
proficiency, level of poverty, and recent trends in achievement data
showing degree of growth.

PRINCIPLE 2. All students are included in the State Accountability
System.

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **CRITICAL ELEMENT 2.1**                                              |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1.  How does the State Accountability System include all students in  |
|     Wisconsin?                                                        |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Wis. Stats. s. 118.30 (1m) requires the participation of all public   |
| and charter schools in the Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts           |
| Examination (WKCE), the statewide assessment used for state           |
| accountability at grades 4, 8, and 10 in Wisconsin. See Wis. Stats.   |
| s. 115.01 for definition of public schools.                           |
|                                                                       |
| All students enrolled in public schools are required to participate   |
| in the Wisconsin Student Assessment System. Most students participate |
| by taking the *Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts Examinations* (WKCE). |
| For accountability purposes, the scores of students with disabilities |
| who are educated outside of their home district are included in the   |
| accountability measure in the district of their residence. See state  |
| laws: <http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/dpi/oea/wsaslaw.html>.              |
|                                                                       |
| All students enrolled in a school for a full academic year (FAY) are  |
| accounted for in the Wisconsin accountability system. See             |
| <http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/oea/lawsrule.html>.                       |
|                                                                       |
| Appropriate accommodations are available to permit most students with |
| disabilities to participate in the WKCE. Students with severe and     |
| complex disabilities for whom participation in the WKCE is not        |
| feasible or educationally appropriate participate in the Wisconsin    |
| Alternate Assessment-Students with Disabilities (WAA-SwD). Students   |
| with limited English proficiency (LEP) participate in the Wisconsin   |
| Alternate Assessment-Limited English Proficient (WAA-LEP) at levels 1 |
| and 2 (beginners) and may also participate in WKCE at those levels as |
| deemed valid and reliable. By LEP level 3 (intermediate), these       |
| students must participate in WKCE with accommodations as needed.      |
| After three consecutive years in the United States, students with LEP |
| must take WKCE, with accommodations as needed, irrespective of LEP    |
| level attained. Students with disabilities participate in WAA-SwD and |
| students with limited English participate in WAA-LEP. See             |
| <http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/dpi/oea/specneed.html>.                   |
|                                                                       |
| Overall participation rates in WI state assessments are very high.    |
| While current state law provides for a parent opt-out of statewide    |
| testing, past experience indicates that a combined total less than    |
| 0.1% of all students in grades 4, 8, and 10 are excused from testing  |
| by parents. WDPI plans to monitor the number of non-participating     |
| students as a result of parent opt-out, and will work with the state  |
| legislature on this issue if needed.                                  |
|                                                                       |
| In summary, under current state law s.118.30 Wis. Stats*.*, all local |
| school boards are required to test all students, including those      |
| enrolled in charter schools, using tests provided by the state        |
| superintendent \[s. 118.30 (1r)\]. This testing requirement covers    |
| the Wisconsin Model Academic Standards and under a contract with the  |
| WDPI testing vendor covers all students in grades 4, 8, and 10. To    |
| the extent possible, accommodations are allowed on these statewide    |
| assessments for students with disabilities and limited English        |
| language proficiency. For special needs students for whom             |
| accommodations on a written assessment are not feasible, the state    |
| provides alternate assessments which are reported in the statewide    |
| accountability system effective in school year 2002-03.               |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **CRITICAL ELEMENT 2.2**                                              |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 2.  How does Wisconsin define "full academic year" for identifying    |
|     students in AYP decisions?                                        |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| For reporting purposes, the Wisconsin assessment results are provided |
| for all students, regardless of length of time in the district. For   |
| accountability purposes, Wisconsin defines a \"full academic year"    |
| (FAY) as the time period for a student who, at the time of test       |
| administration, has been continuously enrolled since the third Friday |
| of the September enrollment report of the previous academic year.     |
| This definition is applied to all students enrolled in Wisconsin      |
| public schools and has been in use since 1996-97 for accountability   |
| determinations. Since 1996-97, public release of student performance  |
| has been in two dimensions, reporting on all students and holding     |
| accountability for FAY students using the Wisconsin definition. The   |
| third Friday count is used for its accuracy in that school funding is |
| based on the numbers generated. It has been the only annual,          |
| student-level school census conducted statewide for over 25 years.    |
| See <http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/oea/demodfhd03.html>.                 |
|                                                                       |
| A student is considered to be in \"enrollment status in the           |
| district\" from the date the student begins to attend any school(s)   |
| in the district. Enrollment status is considered \"continuous\" if it |
| is not interrupted by enrollment status in another district. Movement |
| between schools in a district does not interrupt \"enrollment status  |
| in the district.\" Some districts that have only one school for each  |
| grade span have schools where the lowest grade is at the tested       |
| grade. Those students are considered to be FAY if they were also in   |
| the district for at least one full academic year. See:                |
| <http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/dpi/oea/demodfhd03.html#SFAY>             |
|                                                                       |
| A student is considered to be in \"enrollment status in the school\"  |
| from the date the student begins to attend that school. Enrollment    |
| status is considered \"continuous\" if it is not interrupted by       |
| enrollment status in another school.                                  |
|                                                                       |
| The Wisconsin definition for FAY provides WDPI with its primary       |
| mechanism to ensure the accuracy of the FAY data determination and    |
| accounting for all students. In addition, the Wisconsin definition    |
| allows for sufficient time for schools to administer the various      |
| components of the assessment system. For example, the test window     |
| opens the first day of the school year for students participating in  |
| the WAA-SwD and WAA-LEP along with other state measures administered  |
| at the local level.                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| Maintaining the current system of FAY definitions has been supported  |
| by the Internal AYP Committee, the external ESEA Testing Advisory     |
| Committee, the Collaborative Council (the major education             |
| stakeholders), and other external advisory groups to the state        |
| superintendent.                                                       |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **CRITICAL ELEMENT 2.3**                                              |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 3.  How does the State Accountability System determine which students |
|     have attended the same public school and/or LEA for a full        |
|     academic year?                                                    |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| The Wisconsin Student Assessment System (WSAS) reports are provided   |
| for all students who were enrolled at the time of testing, regardless |
| of length of time in the district. These definitions and procedures   |
| apply to all Wisconsin public school districts and schools.           |
|                                                                       |
| Wisconsin does not have an individual student record system at the    |
| present time. The responsibility for determining which students have  |
| attended the same public school and/or public school district for a   |
| full academic year rests with the public school district, thus        |
| efficient, accurate collection of student information is essential    |
| for the production of accurate reports for the Wisconsin Student      |
| Assessment System.                                                    |
|                                                                       |
| WDPI verifies demographic data each year to identify discrepancies in |
| enrollment and follows up with individual districts to ensure that    |
| all students have been accounted for in the assessment process.       |
| Districts receive state funding based on the number of students       |
| enrolled in their school district at the time of the student-level    |
| school census; therefore, the incentive to provide accurate student   |
| enrollment information to the WDPI is fiscally important to each      |
| district.                                                             |
|                                                                       |
| The WDPI encourages districts to submit unique, permanent ID numbers  |
| to the test vendors for each of their students. This will enable      |
| districts to link student test results this year with student test    |
| results in future years, and also with locally maintained files       |
| containing demographic, program participation, and other data.        |
| Electronically linking these files will improve the quality of        |
| information available for local program evaluation purposes, and will |
| enable districts to more efficiently produce summary statistics which |
| may be required under NCLB and other educational programs. In         |
| addition, student Pre-Id software is provided to each district for    |
| the development of labels. These Pre-Id labels assist in ensuring     |
| that all students are accounted for in the assessment process.        |
|                                                                       |
| Wisconsin employs a migrant student recruiter who works with          |
| districts, schools, families, and students to identify and            |
| appropriately assess and place migrant students in academic programs. |
| The New Generation System (NGS) provides demographic data to identify |
| migrant students enrolled in Wisconsin public schools and those that  |
| have left the state. WDPI cooperates with other states to ensure that |
| all migrant student records are provided to schools wherever the      |
| student resides to ensure appropriate academic placement. Each        |
| migrant student is accounted for in the assessment system through     |
| Pre-Id test labels which are designed to identify migrant students as |
| a discrete category. Upon implementation of an individual student     |
| record system, electronic comparisons between NGS and Pre-Id labels   |
| will improve confidence that all migrant students are accounted for   |
| in the assessment system.                                             |
|                                                                       |
| In the future, the WDPI will issue a Request For Proposal (RFP) for a |
| statewide student record system that offers the potential to create   |
| more precise identification. This system will allow Wisconsin to      |
| identify students who have been enrolled for a full academic year     |
| within a single school, multiple schools within the same district, or |
| across multiple districts statewide. It is anticipated that a         |
| statewide student record system will be implemented by the 2004-05    |
| school year.                                                          |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

PRINCIPLE 3. State definition of AYP is based on expectations for growth
in student achievement that is continuous and substantial, such that all
students are proficient in reading and mathematics no later than
2013‑14.

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| ## CRITICAL ELEMENT 3.1                                               |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1.  How does the state's definition of adequate yearly progress       |
|     require all students to be proficient in reading/language arts    |
|     and mathematics by the 2013-14 academic year?                     |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Closing the achievement gap is the *New Wisconsin Promise* made by    |
| State Superintendent, Elizabeth Burmaster. The annual measurable      |
| objectives and intermediate goals will be determined based on the     |
| 2001-02 starting points and the ultimate goal of 100% proficient by   |
| 2013-14.                                                              |
|                                                                       |
| Wisconsin's timeline for meeting the requirement that all students    |
| will meet or exceed the state's proficiency goal of 100% academic     |
| achievement in reading and mathematics not later than 2013-14 is as   |
| follows:                                                              |
|                                                                       |
| -   Using WKCE assessment data from the 2001-02 school year for the   |
|     starting point, Wisconsin has established a separate starting     |
|     point in reading and in mathematics for the percentage of         |
|     students meeting or exceeding the state's proficient level of     |
|     academic achievement.                                             |
|                                                                       |
| -   The baseline data will be used for the 2002-03 and 2003-04 school |
|     years. Intermediate goals will be incremental and take effect     |
|     with the 2004-05, 2007-08, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, and 2013-14 |
|     school years. (See Figure 3.2c, page 18.)                         |
|                                                                       |
| The WDPI Internal AYP Committee has researched this element and       |
| considered several possibilities/options. Support was received from   |
| the external ESEA Testing Advisory Committee, the Collaborative       |
| Council (the major education stakeholders), and other external        |
| advisory groups to the state superintendent.                          |
|                                                                       |
| NCLB requires definitions of accountability, sanctions, and rewards   |
| at the school level; therefore, Wisconsin will combine all            |
| proficiency performance at a school-level. Consequently, those        |
| Wisconsin schools that currently house 4^th^ and 8^th^ grades, 8^th^  |
| and 10^th^ grades, or 4^th^, 8^th^, and 10^th^ grades will be         |
| considered one unit. Although the number of schools affected at the   |
| current time is small, the number will substantially increase in      |
| 2005-06 with implementation of testing at grades 3-8.                 |
|                                                                       |
| Districts will be identified for improvement when they do not make    |
| AYP in the same subject and all grade spans for two consecutive       |
| years---elementary (grades 3-5), middle (grades 6-8), and high school |
| (grade 10).                                                           |
|                                                                       |
| Districts will be identified for improvement when they do not meet    |
| the other indicator objective in all grade spans for two consecutive  |
| years---elementary (grades 3-5), middle (grades 6-8), and high school |
| (grade 10). The other indicator at elementary and middle schools is   |
| attendance, and at high school is graduation.                         |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| ## CRITICAL ELEMENT 3.2a                                              |
+=======================================================================+
| 3.2a What is the Wisconsin's starting point for calculating Adequate  |
| Yearly Progress?                                                      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Per §200.16(a), WDPI will use baseline data from the 2001-02 school   |
| year to establish separate starting points in reading and             |
| mathematics. The starting points serve as a baseline for measuring    |
| the percentage of students meeting or exceeding the state's           |
| proficient level of academic achievement. Each starting point is      |
| based on the percentage of proficient students in the public school   |
| at the 20^th^ percentile of the state's student enrollment among all  |
| schools ranked by the percentage of students at or above the          |
| proficient level. This method yields a higher starting point than     |
| using the statewide percentage of proficient students in the          |
| lowest-achieving student subgroup, and therefore is the starting      |
| point that Wisconsin will use to comply with NCLB.                    |
|                                                                       |
| The primary instrument used for accountability purposes since 1996-97 |
| to assess the achievement of students in grades 4, 8, and 10 is the   |
| Wisconsin Knowledge & Concepts Examinations (WKCE) published by       |
| CTB/McGraw-Hill as *TerraNova* Multiple Assessments edition. The data |
| from this instrument has proven to be reliable and valid over a       |
| number of test administrations, and therefore is the most appropriate |
| data for determining the starting point. Substantial documentation    |
| exists in favor of the validity of using *TerraNova* test scores for  |
| assessing both individual student achievement and program             |
| effectiveness. In particular, there are strong arguments for the      |
| content and construct validity of the *TerraNova* test.               |
|                                                                       |
| Over the next 12 years, there will be many transitions to new exams   |
| and/or grade levels tested (e.g., 2005-06). WDPI will evaluate        |
| student performance on each change in assessment instruments over     |
| time before making any adjustments to the accountability system.      |
| Schools have based improvement plans over the past five years on      |
| their WSAS results. These data have proven very stable and reliable.  |
| Additionally, some Wisconsin schools already have been identified for |
| improvement under federal guidelines and are required to provide      |
| supplemental educational services and school choice based on these    |
| data.                                                                 |
|                                                                       |
| Wisconsin has reviewed state assessment results for the 2001-02       |
| school year data to determine starting points for reading and         |
| mathematics. These starting points are 61% for Reading and            |
| Mathematics for 37%. All students in tested grades (4, 8, 10),        |
| including those with limited English proficiency and students with    |
| disabilities, are included in establishing the starting points.       |
|                                                                       |
| The reading and mathematics starting points will be applied to each   |
| public school and public school district as well as to each subgroup  |
| at the public school and public school district to determine adequate |
| yearly progress (AYP) status. Charter schools in Wisconsin are        |
| defined as public schools under state statute s. 118.40 Wis. Stats*.* |
| As such, charter schools are required to participate in the Wisconsin |
| accountability system.                                                |
|                                                                       |
| Schools (districts) are deemed as "schools identified for             |
| improvement" (SIFI) status when a school (district) fails to meet AYP |
| for two consecutive years in the same content area.                   |
|                                                                       |
| Districts will be identified for improvement when they do not make    |
| AYP in the same subject and all grade spans for two consecutive       |
| years---elementary (grades 3-5), middle (grades 6-8), and high school |
| (grade 10).                                                           |
|                                                                       |
| To determine whether or not a school (subgroup, district) makes       |
| Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP), Wisconsin will use the following      |
| steps:                                                                |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Wisconsin AYP Calculation Steps**                                   |
|                                                                       |
| 1.  Calculate the 95% participation in statewide assessment rate for  |
|     all-students and each appropriate subgroup with sufficient cell   |
|     size.                                                             |
|                                                                       |
| 2.  Determine whether all students and subgroups within each school   |
|     meet the minimum "cell size" number for reliable AYP decisions.   |
|                                                                       |
| 3.  Verify the number of students who meet the definition of being in |
|     the school (or district) for a full academic year (FAY).          |
|                                                                       |
| 4.  Calculate the high school graduation rate and/or attendance rate  |
|     for high schools, elementary, and middle schools; compare to 90%  |
|     of state rate and/or calculate improvement from the previous      |
|     year.                                                             |
|                                                                       |
| 5.  Calculate separately for reading and mathematics the proficiency  |
|     index of students at a school (in tested grades). The proficiency |
|     index is calculated by awarding one index point for each          |
|     proficient/advanced student and one-half index point for each     |
|     basic student. Index points are then summed and divided by the    |
|     number of FAY tested students.                                    |
|                                                                       |
| 6.  Compare the two year average proficiency index with the current   |
|     year's proficiency index (in step 5 above) and use the higher     |
|     proficiency index for AYP for those schools with all-student cell |
|     size of 40 or greater. In 2005-06 only, the two-year average will |
|     be calculated based on grades that were tested in both the        |
|     current and prior years (i.e., 4, 8, and 10).                     |
|                                                                       |
| 7.  Calculate the proficiency index for each appropriate subgroup.    |
|                                                                       |
| 8.  Compare the proficiency indices of all students and each subgroup |
|     against annual measurable objectives, e.g.*,* starting point (for |
|     the school, district, state).                                     |
|                                                                       |
| 9.  Compute safe harbor calculations using a 75% confidence interval  |
|     at the (p=.25 level) for those groups that do not meet or exceed  |
|     the annual measurable objectives for positive gains only. A       |
|     school or district will need to have made progress in order for   |
|     the Safe Harbor confidence to be applied.                         |
|                                                                       |
| 10. Apply a 99% confidence interval (p=.01 level) for AYP decisions   |
|     regarding reading and mathematics proficiency indices.            |
|                                                                       |
| Subgroups not considered in the AYP steps above will be rolled up to  |
| the district level, per §200.7(d) where subgroups too small to be     |
| reported or identified at one level must be included at the next      |
| level, assuming the subgroup reaches the appropriate size. Schools    |
| too small for any subgroup evaluation will be evaluated using         |
| criteria consistent with any supplementary non-regulatory guidance to |
| be issued by the USED. The very small schools (about 75 after 2005)   |
| with fewer than 10 students enrolled in grades 3-8, and grade 10 will |
| be evaluated annually for their progress over three or more years.    |
| Since the very small schools' progress cannot be reliably calculated, |
| the WDPI in consultation with the LEA will take a closer look at      |
| their achievement data and evaluate progress on a case-by-case basis. |
|                                                                       |
| **Safe Harbor Provision**                                             |
|                                                                       |
| If any group of students in a school or district does not meet the    |
| annual measurable objectives, the school (or district) makes AYP if:  |
|                                                                       |
| (1) 95% participation                                                 |
|                                                                       |
| (2) \(a\) The percentage of students in that group below the          |
|     proficient achievement level decreased by at least 10 percent     |
|     from the preceding year; or (b) the percentage of proficient      |
|     students increased and the not-proficient index (100 --           |
|     proficient index) decreased by at least 10 percent from the       |
|     preceding year, and                                               |
|                                                                       |
| (3) That group made progress on the other academic indicator.         |
|                                                                       |
| A 75% confidence interval at the (p=.25 level) for positive gains     |
| only will be used for Safe Harbor decisions.                          |
|                                                                       |
| Any public school or public school district that meets or exceeds the |
| annual measurable objectives for all students and appropriate         |
| subgroups (or makes safe harbor provision as prescribed under NCLB),  |
| has 95% WSAS participation rate, and meets the all student other      |
| academic indicator is classified as making AYP. Public schools or     |
| public school districts that do not meet any one of these annual      |
| progress requirements are considered as not making AYP.               |
|                                                                       |
| A proxy indicator will be required for subgroup safe harbor           |
| calculations during a phase-in process. Complete data required for    |
| disaggregation of other academic indicators will be available in      |
| 2004‑05 for attendance rates and 2007‑08 for graduation rates. Until  |
| these other academic indicators are fully disaggregated, science      |
| proficiency will be used for the subgroup safe harbor provision.      |
|                                                                       |
| The WDPI Internal AYP Committee has researched this element and after |
| considering several options has recommended this action. Support was  |
| received from the external ESEA Testing Advisory Committee, the       |
| Collaborative Council (the major education stakeholders), and other   |
| external advisory groups to the state superintendent.                 |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

*N*

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+---+
| ## CRITICAL ELEMENT 3.2b                                             |   |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+---+
| 2.  What are Wisconsin's annual measurable objectives for            |   |
|     determining adequate yearly progress?                            |   |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+---+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**     |   |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+---+
| WDPI will use separate starting points for reading and mathematics   |   |
| that define the baseline for the minimum percentage of students who  |   |
| are required to meet or exceed the proficient level on academic      |   |
| assessments. The annual measurable objectives and intermediate goals |   |
| will be applied to all student groups outlined in NCLB sec.          |   |
| 1111(b)(2)(C)(v).                                                    |   |
|                                                                      |   |
| WDPI's annual measurable objectives use the same percent             |   |
| proficient/advanced as the most recent intermediate goal to          |   |
| determine AYP status. The reading and mathematics annual measurable  |   |
| objectives will be applied to each public school and public school   |   |
| district, as well as to each subgroup at the public school and       |   |
| public school district.                                              |   |
|                                                                      |   |
| Measurable objectives are consistent with intermediate goals, which  |   |
| are consistent with the WI accountability starting points.           |   |
| Measurable objectives are set to ensure 100% proficiency within the  |   |
| timeline (See Figure 1 in 3.2c). Measurable objectives and goals are |   |
| the same for public schools and public school districts, and for all |   |
| required subgroups of students at all levels (elementary, middle,    |   |
| and high school). WKCE is administered only once a year in the fall. |   |
| Therefore, students have a single opportunity to take the test each  |   |
| year.                                                                |   |
|                                                                      |   |
| Percent of WI Students Who Need to Score at Proficient/Advanced      |   |
|                                                                      |   |
| +----------------+---------+-----------------+------------------+    |   |
| |                |         | **Annual        |                  |    |   |
| |                |         | Measurable      |                  |    |   |
| |                |         | Objectives**    |                  |    |   |
| |                |         | (AMO)           |                  |    |   |
| +----------------+---------+-----------------+------------------+    |   |
| |                |         | **[Reading      | **[Mathematic    |    |   |
| |                |         | ]{.smallcaps}** | s]{.smallcaps}** |    |   |
| +----------------+---------+-----------------+------------------+    |   |
| | *Starting      | **20    | > **61%**       | > **37%**        |    |   |
| | Point*         | 01-02** |                 |                  |    |   |
| +----------------+---------+-----------------+------------------+    |   |
| |                | 2002-03 | > 61%           | > 37%            |    |   |
| +----------------+---------+-----------------+------------------+    |   |
| |                | 2003-04 | > 61%           | > 37%            |    |   |
| +----------------+---------+-----------------+------------------+    |   |
| | *Intermediate  | **20    | > **67.5%**     | > **47.5%**      |    |   |
| | Goal*          | 04-05** |                 |                  |    |   |
| +----------------+---------+-----------------+------------------+    |   |
| | (Begin new 3-8 | 2005-06 | > 67.5%         | > 47.5%          |    |   |
| | tests)         |         |                 |                  |    |   |
| +----------------+---------+-----------------+------------------+    |   |
| |                | 2006-07 | > 67.5%         | > 47.5%          |    |   |
| +----------------+---------+-----------------+------------------+    |   |
| | *Intermediate  | **20    | > **74%**       | > **58%**        |    |   |
| | Goal*          | 07-08** |                 |                  |    |   |
| +----------------+---------+-----------------+------------------+    |   |
| |                | 2008-09 | > 74%           | > 58%            |    |   |
| +----------------+---------+-----------------+------------------+    |   |
| |                | 2009-10 | > 74%           | > 58%            |    |   |
| +----------------+---------+-----------------+------------------+    |   |
| | *Intermediate  | **20    | > **80.5%**     | > **68.5%**      |    |   |
| | Goal*          | 10-11** |                 |                  |    |   |
| +----------------+---------+-----------------+------------------+    |   |
| | *Intermediate  | **20    | > **87%**       | > **79%**        |    |   |
| | Goal*          | 11-12** |                 |                  |    |   |
| +----------------+---------+-----------------+------------------+    |   |
| | *Intermediate  | **20    | > **93.5%**     | > **89.5%**      |    |   |
| | Goal*          | 12-13** |                 |                  |    |   |
| +----------------+---------+-----------------+------------------+    |   |
| | *Goal: All     | 2013-14 | > **100%**      | > **100%**       |    |   |
| | Proficient*    |         |                 |                  |    |   |
| +----------------+---------+-----------------+------------------+    |   |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+---+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| ## CRITICAL ELEMENT 3.2c                                              |
+=======================================================================+
| 3.2c What are Wisconsin's intermediate goals for determining adequate |
| yearly progress?                                                      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| WDPI has proposed a timeline by which all students will reach the     |
| proficient level of achievement on the Wisconsin Student Assessment   |
| System by the year 2014. The goal is for all students to meet or      |
| exceed the state's proficient level of academic achievement within    |
| each established timeline leading to all students being proficient in |
| reading and mathematics by the year 2014.                             |
|                                                                       |
| Using data from the 2001-02 school year, Wisconsin has proposed       |
| starting points in reading and in mathematics for measuring the       |
| percentage of students meeting or exceeding the state's proficient    |
| level of academic achievement.                                        |
|                                                                       |
| The proposed model (Figure 3.2c, page 18), illustrates Wisconsin's    |
| baseline and intermediate goals. The baseline goals will be used for  |
| the 2002-03 and 2003-04 school years. Equal interval increases        |
| ("Intermediate Goals") are proposed to take effect with the 2004-05,  |
| 2007-08, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, and 2013-14 school years. The     |
| 2013-14 goal is 100% proficient or advanced.                          |
|                                                                       |
| Wisconsin Intermediate Goals for Reading and Mathematics              |
|                                                                       |
| +-------------------+----------+----------------+----------------+    |
| |                   |          | **[Reading]    | *              |    |
| |                   |          | {.smallcaps}** | *[Mathematics] |    |
| |                   |          |                | {.smallcaps}** |    |
| +-------------------+----------+----------------+----------------+    |
| | Starting Point    | 2001-02  | > 61%          | > 37%          |    |
| +-------------------+----------+----------------+----------------+    |
| |                   | 2004-05  | > **67.5%**    | > **47.5%**    |    |
| +-------------------+----------+----------------+----------------+    |
| |                   | 2007-08  | > **74%**      | > **58%**      |    |
| +-------------------+----------+----------------+----------------+    |
| |                   | 2010-11  | > **80.5%**    | > **68.5%**    |    |
| +-------------------+----------+----------------+----------------+    |
| |                   | 2011-12  | > **87%**      | > **79%**      |    |
| +-------------------+----------+----------------+----------------+    |
| |                   | 2012-13  | > **93.5%**    | > **89.5%**    |    |
| +-------------------+----------+----------------+----------------+    |
| | Goal: All         | 2013-14  | > 100%         | > 100%         |    |
| | Proficient        |          |                |                |    |
| +-------------------+----------+----------------+----------------+    |
|                                                                       |
| These goals will be applied to all public schools and all districts   |
| in the state, including all students and appropriate subgroups.       |
|                                                                       |
| The annual intermediate goals are structured to account for the       |
| inclusion of additional assessments at grades 3, 5, 6, and 7 in 2005  |
| with a reconsideration of annual goals in 2008. Confidence in the new |
| assessments, the focus on subgroup achievement, the increased number  |
| of highly qualified teachers and the inclusion of research-based      |
| academic programs will result in all students poised to accomplish    |
| annual equal interval increases each year beginning in 2011.          |
|                                                                       |
| The WDPI Internal AYP Committee has researched this element and       |
| considered several possibilities/options. Support was received from   |
| the external ESEA Testing Advisory Committee, the Collaborative       |
| Council (the major education stakeholders), and other external        |
| advisory groups to the state superintendent.                          |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

**PRINCIPLE 4. State makes annual decisions about the achievement of all
public schools and LEAs.**

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| ## CRITICAL ELEMENT 4.1                                               |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1.  How does the state Accountability System make an annual           |
|     determination of whether each public school and LEA in the state  |
|     made AYP?                                                         |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| The Wisconsin accountability system, as required by law, annually     |
| determines the progress of schools and districts. Wisconsin law       |
| requires the State Superintendent under Wis. Stats. s. 115.38 (4), to |
| annually identify low performing schools based on the accountability  |
| tests administered under Wis. Stats. s. 118.30. Adequate yearly       |
| progress (AYP) decisions are made annually for each WI public school. |
| Beginning in 2002-03, AYP determinations will also be made per NCLB   |
| for each public school district in Wisconsin.                         |
|                                                                       |
| The WDPI will annually review assessment data and other academic      |
| indicators for each public school and each public school district to  |
| determine if the public school, public school district, and state of  |
| Wisconsin meet the necessary AYP criteria. These determinations will  |
| be provided in a timely manner to each public school district for     |
| their review and comment.                                             |
|                                                                       |
| Designation of schools identified for improvement will be predicated  |
| upon failing to make AYP requirements in the same content area for    |
| two consecutive years. This approach is consistent with the NCLB goal |
| of successfully remediating subject performance deficiencies and will |
| mitigate the potential for falsely inferring that a public school or  |
| public school district is not meeting AYP standards.                  |
|                                                                       |
| Designation of districts identified for improvement will be           |
| predicated upon failing to make AYP in the same subject and all grade |
| spans for two consecutive years---elementary (grades 3-5), middle     |
| (grades 6-8), and high school (grade 10). This approach is consistent |
| with the NCLB goal of successfully remediating academic performance   |
| deficiencies and will mitigate the potential for falsely inferring    |
| that a school district needs technical assistance to improve          |
| performance. If a district meets AYP in at least one of the grade     |
| spans, it will not enter into or advance in improvement status in an  |
| area.                                                                 |
|                                                                       |
| To increase the reliability of AYP decisions, Wisconsin will combine  |
| two years' data for accountability purposes. Both the current year's  |
| data and the two year combined rate will be calculated. The higher of |
| the two will be compared to the annual measurable goal in the AYP     |
| determination. See the WI AYP Calculation steps in workbook section   |
| 3.2a.                                                                 |
|                                                                       |
| The WDPI Internal AYP Committee has researched this element and       |
| considered several possibilities/options. Support was received from   |
| the external ESEA Testing Advisory Committee, the Collaborative       |
| Council (the major education stakeholders), and other external        |
| advisory groups to the state superintendent.                          |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

PRINCIPLE 5. All public schools and LEAs are held accountable for the
achievement of individual subgroups.

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| ## CRITICAL ELEMENT 5.1                                               |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1.  How does the definition of adequate yearly progress include all   |
|     the required student subgroups?                                   |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Wisconsin has disaggregated results on state assessments since        |
| 1996-97. Assessment proficiency and participation results used for    |
| accountability purposes are disaggregated to determine AYP. The       |
| performance of all students enrolled for a full academic year, as     |
| well as the following subgroups, outlined in NCLB sec.                |
| 1111(b)(2)(C)(v), are measured against established annual proficiency |
| objectives and participation goals.                                   |
|                                                                       |
| -   The racial/ethnic groups are the same as the groups used on the   |
|     Enrollment Report (PI-1290), and on the IDEA Federal Student Data |
|     Report (PI-2197) *Wisconsin Administrative Code*, and are as      |
|     follows:                                                          |
|                                                                       |
| > Asian/Pacific Islander,                                             |
| >                                                                     |
| > Black, Not of Hispanic Origin,                                      |
| >                                                                     |
| > Hispanic,                                                           |
| >                                                                     |
| > American Indian/Alaskan Native,                                     |
| >                                                                     |
| > White, Not of Hispanic Origin                                       |
|                                                                       |
| -   An \"economically disadvantaged\" student is a student who is a   |
|     member of a household that meets the income eligibility           |
|     guidelines for free or reduced-price meals (less than or equal to |
|     185% of Federal Poverty Guidelines) under the National School     |
|     Lunch Program.                                                    |
|                                                                       |
| -   A \"student with a disability,\" i.e., SwD, is a student who is   |
|     considered eligible for the December 1 federal child count as     |
|     reported by the district to the WDPI on the IDEA Federal Student  |
|     Data Report (PI-2197) Wisconsin Administrative Code.              |
|                                                                       |
| -   A student with limited English proficiency is a student who       |
|     scores at one of five limited proficiency levels on a WDPI        |
|     approved English proficiency assessment instrument, as defined in |
|     Wisconsin Administrative Rule PI 13. See                          |
|     <http://www.legis.state.wi.us/rsb/code/pi/pi013.pdf>              |
|                                                                       |
| All public schools and public school districts will be accountable    |
| for the performance of student subgroups---including major            |
| racial/ethnic subgroups, students with disabilities, limited English  |
| proficient students, and economically disadvantaged                   |
| students---through the AYP determination.                             |
|                                                                       |
| The test contractor aggregates these data for the state and provides  |
| an electronic file on the web. This file includes state, public       |
| school district, and public school data that are disaggregated by     |
| these groups. Graduation and attendance rates are currently           |
| disaggregated by all categories except Economic Disadvantage,         |
| Students with Disabilities, and Limited English Proficiency. A        |
| statewide student record system is being planned and when             |
| implemented, accuracy of subgroup and other indicator identification  |
| will increase. Implementation is planned in 2004-05.                  |
|                                                                       |
| The WDPI Internal AYP Committee has researched this element and       |
| considered several possibilities/options. Support was received from   |
| the external ESEA Testing Advisory Committee, the Collaborative       |
| Council (the major education stakeholders), and other external group  |
| recommendations to the state superintendent.                          |
|                                                                       |
| The on-line report is at <http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/sig/index/html>  |
| WSAS data collection system definitions and instruments in use are    |
| located at <http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/oea/wsasdata.html>.            |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| ## CRITICAL ELEMENT 5.2                                               |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1.  How are public schools and LEAs held accountable for the progress |
|     of student subgroups in the determination of adequate yearly      |
|     progress?                                                         |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| All student subgroups of 40 or more must meet Wisconsin's established |
| annual, measurable performance objectives in order for a school or    |
| district to make AYP, with the exception of students with             |
| disabilities who must meet a subgroup size of 50.                     |
|                                                                       |
| If a student subgroup, as outlined in NCLB sec. 1111(b)(2)(C)(v),     |
| contains the minimum number of students required to yield             |
| statistically reliable information about a public school or public    |
| school district population, then that subgroup is required to meet    |
| the proficiency target and the 95% participation target to make       |
| adequate yearly progress (AYP). Annual assessment results are "rolled |
| up" to the public school district to hold public school districts     |
| accountable. For each public school and public school district,       |
| subgroup proficiency levels and AYP determinations will be made       |
| following the same reporting rules used to determine proficiency      |
| levels and AYP determinations for students in the aggregate. A 99%    |
| confidence interval (p=.01 level) will be applied to AYP decisions    |
| regarding reading and mathematics proficiency rates.                  |
|                                                                       |
| Performance of students not enrolled for a full academic year is      |
| reported in the state report card, the *School Performance Report*,   |
| but it is not included in the AYP determination.                      |
|                                                                       |
| In determining whether each public school or public school district   |
| meets the annual measurable objectives, Wisconsin will calculate, for |
| each subgroup, the percent of the students enrolled for a full        |
| academic year who achieve the proficient/advanced levels. If one or   |
| more subgroups fail to meet the annual measurable objective, then the |
| school or district makes AYP if both following conditions are met (a  |
| confidence interval of 75% (p=.25 level) will be applied to all Safe  |
| Harbor decisions):                                                    |
|                                                                       |
| -   The percentage of tested students in that subgroup below the      |
|     proficient achievement level decreases by at least ten (10)       |
|     percent from the preceding year.                                  |
|                                                                       |
| -   The students in that subgroup meet the threshold or make progress |
|     on the other academic indicator.                                  |
|                                                                       |
| The WDPI Internal AYP Committee has researched this element and       |
| considered several possibilities/options. Support was received from   |
| the external ESEA Testing Advisory Committee, the Collaborative       |
| Council (the major education stakeholders), and other external        |
| advisory groups to the state superintendent.                          |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| ## CRITICAL ELEMENT 5.3                                               |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1.  How are students with disabilities included in the state's        |
|     definition of adequate yearly progress?                           |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| All students must take either WKCE assessments (with or without       |
| appropriate accommodations) or WSAS alternate assessments in each of  |
| the content areas covered by WSAS. Only the most severely cognitively |
| disabled students, those students who cannot meaningfully participate |
| in the WKCE assessment even with accommodations, participate in       |
| alternate assessments. Students participating in the WAA-SwD          |
| alternate assessment produce scores reported as Pre-Skill levels 1-4  |
| (pre-minimal). Results for WSAS alternate assessments are reported in |
| the state accountability system and included in AYP calculations.     |
| Wisconsin's alternate assessment for students with disabilities is    |
| aligned with the *Wisconsin Model Academic Standards* and the state   |
| accountability system.                                                |
|                                                                       |
| All students with disabilities in Wisconsin must participate in       |
| statewide assessments, either WKCE or the WSAS-Alternate Assessment   |
| (WAA for Students with Disabilities), with or without testing         |
| accommodations. The Individualized Education Program (IEP) Team makes |
| the case-by-case determination as to what assessment each student     |
| with a disability will participate in and identifies the testing      |
| accommodations that are needed in order for the student to            |
| participate in the assessment in accordance with Section 300.347 of   |
| the *Code of Federal Regulations.* See related state laws at:         |
| [[http://fol                                                          |
| io.legis.state.wi.us/cgi-bin/om_isapi.dll?clientID=408562&infobase=st |
| ats.nfo&jump=ch.%20115]{.underline}](http://folio.legis.state.wi.us/c |
| gi-bin/om_isapi.dll?clientID=408562&infobase=stats.nfo&jump=ch. 115), |
|                                                                       |
| <http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/dpi/dlsea/een/assessmt.html>, and s.      |
| 115.76 *Wis. Stats*. Children with Disabilities.                      |
|                                                                       |
| All students with disabilities are included in the accountability     |
| system. No distinction is made according to whether students with     |
| disabilities taking the WKCE used or did not use accommo­dations. The  |
| determination of adequate yearly progress is based on the performance |
| of all students who take the WKCE and the alternate assessments as    |
| well as on the performance of each required disaggregated group. See: |
| [http://www.dpi.s                                                     |
| tate.wi.us/sig/index/html](http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/sig/index/htm). |
|                                                                       |
| See the \"DPI Guidelines to Facilitate the Participation of Students  |
| with Special Needs in State Assessments\" at                          |
| <http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/oea/specneed.html>. See also, "Wisconsin  |
| Alternate Assessment for Children with Disabilities" at:              |
| <http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/dpi/dlsea/een/assmt-waa.html>.            |
|                                                                       |
| When measuring adequate yearly progress, schools and school districts |
| may count the "proficient" scores of students who participated in     |
| WSAS - Alternate Assessment. However, the number of students cannot   |
| exceed one percent of the total population in the grades tested.      |
| School districts may apply for a higher limit if they can demonstrate |
| that they have a larger population of students with significant       |
| cognitive disabilities. The Wisconsin Department of Public            |
| Instruction may request a waiver from the one percent provision if    |
| the percentage overall in the state exceeds one percent.              |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| ## CRITICAL ELEMENT 5.4                                               |
+=======================================================================+
| 2.  How are students with limited English proficiency included in the |
|     state's definition of adequate yearly progress?                   |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| All LEP students in Wisconsin participate in the Wisconsin Student    |
| Assessment System (WSAS) and all scores are counted for AYP purposes. |
| When a student who speaks another language enters a Wisconsin school, |
| that student's English proficiency is assessed on a six-point scale   |
| with Level 1 being a student who speaks almost no English, and Level  |
| 6 being a student who has reached native-like, age-appropriate        |
| proficiency. This assessment of English proficiency is conducted with |
| a WDPI approved instrument. WDPI has begun the process of developing  |
| its own standards-based English proficiency instrument. During this   |
| interim period, we allow the use of one of four commercially          |
| available instruments for which clear, comparable standards have been |
| set through a standard setting process involving measurement experts  |
| and LEP educators and educational leaders. (The report on English     |
| proficiency standard-setting process is available upon request).      |
| Wisconsin's annual measurable goals for attaining full English        |
| language proficiency are based on these standards as measured by the  |
| approved instruments mentioned in this paragraph.                     |
|                                                                       |
| WDPI has developed an alternative form of our academic assessment.    |
| This parallels the tested content standards and is now (2003-04)      |
| scaled to the same academic proficiency categories as the statewide   |
| standardized assessments. (During the 2002-03 test administration,    |
| the reading assessment was scored in two separate categories,         |
| pre-production and early production, with both corresponding to the   |
| minimal category. WDPI has remedied this issue of scale for the       |
| 2003-04 testing cycle.) The alternative form is called the Wisconsin  |
| Alternate Assessment for Students with Limited English Proficiency    |
| (WAA-LEP) and is used with beginner LEP students (Levels 1 and 2) for |
| whom participation on the WKCE, even with allowable accommodations,   |
| would not be valid or reliable.                                       |
|                                                                       |
| All students must take either WKCE assessments (with or without       |
| appropriate accommodations) or WAA-LEP in each of the content areas   |
| covered by the Wisconsin Student Assessment System (WSAS). Students   |
| with limited English proficiency at Levels 1 or 2 (beginners) are     |
| required to take a WAA-LEP, but may also participate in the WKCE with |
| allowable accommodations as needed. Students at Level 3               |
| (intermediate) or higher are required to take the WKCE assessment,    |
| with allowable accommodations as needed. Students at Level 6          |
| (formerly LEP) are fully English proficient and take WKCE without     |
| accommodations.                                                       |
|                                                                       |
| Wisconsin will allow schools and districts to count former LEP        |
| students in the LEP subgroup for up to two years for those students   |
| who are no longer considered to be LEP under state rules. LEP         |
| students in Level 6 under Wisconsin's rules (formerly LEP) will be    |
| allowed to be counted in AYP determinations for up to two years in    |
| the LEP subgroup.                                                     |
|                                                                       |
| Beginning in 2003-04, results for WAA-LEP will be reported in the     |
| state accountability system on the same academic proficiency scale in |
| all tested subject areas. The reading alternate test forms are being  |
| scaled to the regular performance categories to meet full compliance  |
| with NCLB.                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| The WAA-LEP has undergone a formal alignment process to ensure        |
| content validity (depth and scope). Currently, the WDPI has           |
| commissioned a validation study of Wisconsin's Alternate Assessment   |
| for Students with Limited English Proficiency with the Wisconsin      |
| Model Academic Standards and the state accountability system          |
| (conducted using the 2002-03 administration). This study will further |
| examine content and predictive validity of the two systems as well as |
| reliability of the alternate assessment. Results of the study will be |
| available by June 2003. Future studies are being planned as           |
| enhancements to the system are implemented.                           |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| See following evidence regarding Wisconsin Alternate Assessment for   |
| Limited English Proficient Students (WAA-LEP).                        |
|                                                                       |
| For more information about LEP levels and the assessment of limited   |
| English proficient students see Wisconsin State Administrative Rule   |
| PI 13: <http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/dlsea/equity/pdf/emergncy.pdf>,    |
| \"DPI Guidelines to Facilitate the Participation of Students with     |
| Special Needs in State Assessments.\"                                 |
| <http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/oea/specneed.html> and                    |
| <http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/dpi/dlsea/equity/biling.html> Information |
| about of state-approved English proficiency tests is located at       |
| <http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/dpi/dlsea/equity/eqtests.html>. See       |
| related state laws at:                                                |
| <http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/dpi/oea/wsaslaw.html> . For performance   |
| of students with limited English proficiency, see:                    |
| <http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/sig/index.html>.                          |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| ## CRITICAL ELEMENT 5.5                                               |
+=======================================================================+
| 5.  What is the state\'s definition of the minimum number of students |
|     in a subgroup required for reporting purposes? For accountability |
|     purposes?                                                         |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| For purposes of reporting, Wisconsin requires that all subgroups have |
| at least six students. WDPI provides the enrollment counts for the    |
| student group (e.g., gender, race/ethnicity, economic status, etc.)   |
| but suppresses the summary WSAS performance/participation data about  |
| these students if the number of students enrolled in the group is     |
| five or fewer.                                                        |
|                                                                       |
| For purposes of accountability, a cell size of 40 has been selected.  |
| Analyses suggest that substantial improvement in measurement          |
| precision due to reductions in cohort effects are achieved as the     |
| sample size increases to 40.                                          |
|                                                                       |
| For calculations of adequate yearly progress, including               |
| participation, annual measurable objectives, safe harbor              |
| calculations, and other academic indicators, a group size of 40 will  |
| be used (except for students with disabilities). This cell size will  |
| be applied to all FAY students and subgroups across the state. A cell |
| size of 40 has been evaluated to maximize valid and reliable          |
| decisions and include all schools in the AYP decision process.        |
|                                                                       |
| In instances in which there are fewer students than the minimum cell  |
| size in the all student group within a school and/or district, the    |
| AYP calculation for FAY students will be accumulated over two or      |
| three years; for subgroups they will roll-up to the next level--the   |
| district calculations. Results from very small schools where the      |
| aggregate FAY group of students is less than 40 (with three years'    |
| data), will be reviewed on an individual basis to ensure that annual  |
| movement toward 100% proficiency is occurring.                        |
|                                                                       |
| Unique among the subgroups required for accountability in NCLB,       |
| students with disabilities present measurement issues that Wisconsin  |
| has determined to address through a larger cell size. A larger cell   |
| size supports valid and reliable decisions about this subgroup. After |
| careful analysis of the variability of the Wisconsin student          |
| population with disabilities, it has been determined that for valid   |
| and reliable decisions the minimum cell size for accountability       |
| purposes is set at 50. (Reference students with disabilities paper in |
| evidence 5.3).                                                        |
|                                                                       |
| Support and research from special education stakeholder groups for    |
| this larger cell size:                                                |
|                                                                       |
| -   The State Superintendent's Special Education Advisory Council     |
|                                                                       |
| -   Wisconsin's Parent Training and Information Center (FACETS)       |
|                                                                       |
| -   The Executive Board of the Wisconsin Council of Administrators of |
|     Special Services                                                  |
|                                                                       |
| -   The Regional Services Network                                     |
|                                                                       |
| -   Other groups and individuals including teachers, school boards    |
|     members and parents                                               |
|                                                                       |
| Rationale for larger cell size for students with disabilities:        |
|                                                                       |
| -   Criteria in IDEA require that disability must "adversely affect a |
|     child's educational performance."                                 |
|                                                                       |
| -   IEP teams must consider how the disability affects child's        |
|     "involvement and progress in general curriculum."                 |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| -   Up to ^1^/~3~ of students with disabilities are not able to       |
|     achieve or demonstrate proficiency even with accommodations, due  |
|     to their disability.                                              |
|                                                                       |
| -   Of the 12.4% of students in WI who have disabilities, almost 1/6  |
|     do not have the potential for average intellectual functioning.   |
|                                                                       |
| -   Even with time, highly qualified teachers and research-based      |
|     practice, these students do not have the ability to achieve at    |
|     the proficient level.                                             |
|                                                                       |
| -   Other students, who otherwise have the potential for average      |
|     intellectual functioning, may not be able to demonstrate          |
|     proficiency, due to the interference of the disability.           |
|                                                                       |
| -   Students with emotional/behavioral disabilities may manifest      |
|     their disability through refusal to participate in statewide      |
|     assessment or purposeful entry of erroneous answers.              |
|                                                                       |
| -   Children who are deaf or hard of hearing are set apart from those |
|     with other disabilities due to lack of access to communication    |
|     which in turn profoundly affects most aspects of the educational  |
|     process.                                                          |
|                                                                       |
| -   Children who are blind or visually impaired are uniquely affected |
|     by limitations on incidental learning in natural environments and |
|     structured learning in educational settings that depend largely   |
|     on vision.                                                        |
|                                                                       |
| ```{=html}                                                            |
| <!-- -->                                                              |
| ```                                                                   |
| -   Accommodations, used extensively for students with disabilities,  |
|     may influence scores in unknown ways.                             |
|                                                                       |
| -   With the single exception of this subgroup, assignment to a       |
|     subgroup is generally clearly defined. There is significant       |
|     variance in identification rates of students with disabilities    |
|     among districts in WI (6%-27%).                                   |
|                                                                       |
| The WDPI Internal AYP Committee has researched this element and       |
| considered several possibilities/options. Support was received from   |
| the external ESEA Testing Advisory Committee, the Collaborative       |
| Council (the major education stakeholders), and other external        |
| advisory groups to the state superintendent.                          |
|                                                                       |
| See the following, Information about "Students with Disabilities in   |
| Wisconsin."                                                           |
|                                                                       |
| See discussion of indirect disclosure rules section 5.6               |
|                                                                       |
| See Impact Evidence                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| See 9.1 for reliability information                                   |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| ## CRITICAL ELEMENT 5.6                                               |
+=======================================================================+
| 6.  How does the State Accountability System protect the privacy of   |
|     students when reporting results and when determining AYP?         |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| For local use, Wisconsin reports the enrollment counts for the        |
| student subgroup (e.g., gender, race/ethnicity, economic status,      |
| etc.), but suppresses the summary WSAS performance/participation data |
| about these students if the number of students enrolled in the group  |
| is five or fewer for public reporting purposes.                       |
|                                                                       |
| WDPI is concerned about both direct and indirect disclosure. Indirect |
| disclosure occurs when data are reported both for all Full Academic   |
| Year (FAY) students in a group (e.g., FAY students enrolled in grade  |
| 4) and for a large subset of this group (e.g., FAY students           |
| **without** disabilities in grade 4) leaving only a small subset      |
| (e.g., FAY students **with** disabilities in grade 4) not reported.   |
|                                                                       |
| In order to make reliable decisions as to which schools are           |
| identified for improvement, the Wisconsin Department of Public        |
| Instruction suppresses assessment data for small groups of students.  |
| The minimum accountability student group size is 40 students enrolled |
| for a full academic year, and 40 students enrolled in a subgroup (50  |
| for students with disabilities) for a full academic year. When        |
| reporting results, if it is possible to determine personally          |
| identifiable information about an individual, the WDPI suppresses     |
| those student group assessment results.                               |
|                                                                       |
| When small student group sizes allow an audience to discern           |
| personally identifiable information about an individual, that         |
| individual's Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) rights   |
| may be violated. However, public education agencies must balance the  |
| public's right to know how their tax-supported institution is         |
| functioning with the privacy rights of individuals. Within this       |
| context, a school can release summary data about the students it      |
| enrolls. On the other hand, personally identifiable data are          |
| considered confidential and must be protected (e.g., individual       |
| state-wide assessment performance).                                   |
|                                                                       |
| The Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction has developed          |
| customized policies and procedures to delicately balance the public's |
| right to know, educators' need to know, and the individual's right to |
| privacy.                                                              |
|                                                                       |
| **Protection Against Disclosure of Confidential Information:**        |
|                                                                       |
| Ensuring that the value for an individual is not disclosed in         |
| violation of that individual's confidentiality rights and privileges  |
|                                                                       |
| > **Small Count Disclosure** occurs when a cell frequency is small    |
| > enough for every individual in that cell to be personally           |
| > identifiable. With three individuals, one individual is unlikely to |
| > discern the values of either of the others. With five individuals,  |
| > it becomes extremely unlikely that a single individual (or a very   |
| > small group, such as twins in the same grade and school) will be    |
| > able to discern the values of the other students.                   |
| >                                                                     |
| > **Direct Disclosure** occurs when small count assessment data are   |
| > provided without any suppression. When cell frequencies are five or |
| > fewer, assessment results data are suppressed.                      |
| >                                                                     |
| > **Indirect Disclosure** occurs when data are reported both for all  |
| > students in a group and for a large subset of this group leaving    |
| > only a small subset not reported. In these cases assessment results |
| > for the large subset must be suppressed in order to protect the     |
| > confidentiality of individuals in the original (small count)        |
| > suppressed cell.                                                    |
| >                                                                     |
| > **Separate Sources Disclosure** occurs when the related information |
| > is available from a source other than the one in which values are   |
| > being suppressed (e.g., a suppressed school report and an           |
| > unsuppressed district report). To avoid separate sources disclosure |
| > only unsuppressed school data are aggregated and reported at the    |
| > district level, and a column (called "Number included in %'s" is    |
| > added to the district level report indicating that a subset of the  |
| > district level data are reported.                                   |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| When addressing indirect disclosure issues, the highest priority is   |
| given to publicly reporting data in the "Students in Single School    |
| FAY" row of the report. In all cases, if the number of students       |
| enrolled FAY is more than five, then WSAS performance/participation   |
| data is reported for accountability purposes.                         |
|                                                                       |
| See the "Data Analysis" section of WINSS:                             |
| <http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/data/questions.asp> or                    |
| <http://www2.dpi.state.wi.us/wsas/default.asp> for examples of        |
| suppressed and reported assessment data. See:                         |
| <http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/oea/priv_more.html> for more information  |
| about the protection of student privacy rights.                       |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

PRINCIPLE 6. State definition of AYP is based primarily on the state's
academic assessments.

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| ## CRITICAL ELEMENT 6.1                                               |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1.  How is the state's definition of adequate yearly progress based   |
|     primarily on academic assessments?                                |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Reading and mathematics assessment scores are the primary determinant |
| of AYP. The following assessments have been administered or are       |
| planned as the basis of the accountability system:                    |
|                                                                       |
|   ------                                                              |
| ------ ------------------------------------ ------------ ------------ |
|                                                                       |
|           **Instrument**                       **Grades**   **Content |
|                                                                       |
|                                                               Areas** |
|                                                                       |
|   19                                                                  |
| 97--2002   Wisconsin Knowledge & Concepts       4, 8, 10     Reading, |
|                Examinations (WKCE): *TerraNova*                  Math |
|                Multiple Assessments (shelf-test)                      |
|                                                                       |
|   20                                                                  |
| 02--2005   WI Student Assessment System (WSAS): 4, 8, 10     Reading, |
|                WKCE (Enhanced *TerraNova*) plus WI               Math |
|                Alternate Assessments (WAA-SwD)                        |
|                (WAA-LEP)                                              |
|                                                                       |
|   20                                                                  |
| 05--2014   WSAS: Customized WKCE plus WAA‑LEP & 3--8, 10     Reading, |
|                SwD                                               Math |
|   ------                                                              |
| ------ ------------------------------------ ------------ ------------ |
|                                                                       |
| WKCE assessments also include science administered at grades 4, 8,    |
| and 10. Wisconsin is moving from enhanced shelf tests to customized   |
| instruments. The alternate assessments, WAA-LEP and WAA-SwD, will     |
| follow the same schedule of implementation as the WKCE.               |
|                                                                       |
| The required additional academic indicators (NCLB sec.                |
| 1111(b)(2)(C)(vi)) are part of the AYP calculation to determine       |
| whether each subgroup, public school, and public school district      |
| meets the annual measurable objectives. WDPI will calculate the       |
| percent of the students enrolled for a full academic year who achieve |
| the proficient/advanced, examine participation rates, and employ the  |
| safe harbor provision as prescribed under NCLB. Each of these         |
| calculations is based on reading and mathematics assessments          |
| administered under s. 118.30 Wis. Stats.                              |
|                                                                       |
| A "Starting Point" proficiency level has been proposed using the      |
| 2001-02 WKCE. The "Starting Point" proficiency level will be raised   |
| in equal intervals over 12 years, requiring 100% proficiency by       |
| 2013-14. These intermediate goals will be used as the annual          |
| measurable objectives upon which AYP will be based.                   |
|                                                                       |
| WDPI will annually review WSAS assessment data for each public school |
| and public school district to determine if the public school and      |
| public school district have met the annual measurable objectives.     |
| WSAS participation data will be reviewed annually, to ensure that at  |
| least 95% of students in each subgroup in every public school and in  |
| every public school district participate in the WSAS.                 |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

PRINCIPLE 7. State definition of AYP includes graduation rates for
public High schools and an additional indicator selected by the state
for public middle and public elementary schools (such as attendance
rates).

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| ## CRITICAL ELEMENT 7.1                                               |
+=======================================================================+
| 1.  What is the state definition for the public high school           |
|     graduation rate?                                                  |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| The definitions for the following terms provide guidance to Wisconsin |
| in defining graduation rate:                                          |
|                                                                       |
| **Graduation rate:** The number of "graduates" divided by the number  |
| of "graduates" plus "cohort dropouts" over four years, expressed as a |
| percentage.                                                           |
|                                                                       |
| **Graduate:** A student who met graduation requirements for a regular |
| diploma during a school year prior to the beginning of the fall       |
| semester of the next school year. This would include any student who  |
| graduated at mid-year, who transferred into or re-entered the high    |
| school during the year (even if the student was not included in the   |
| third Friday in September school enrollment count), who graduated in  |
| the spring of the school year, or who accumulated required credits    |
| during summer school. Students who receive an alternative diploma     |
| such as a HSED, GED, or "certificate of attendance" are not counted   |
| as graduates.                                                         |
|                                                                       |
| **Dropout:** A student who was enrolled in the school at some time    |
| during a school year; was not enrolled at the beginning of the next   |
| school year (third Friday in September); has not graduated from high  |
| school or completed a state or district-approved educational program; |
| and does not meet any of the following exclusionary conditions:       |
|                                                                       |
| 1.  Has not transferred to another public school district, private    |
|     school, or state- or district-approved educational program;       |
|                                                                       |
| 2.  Is temporarily absent due to expulsion, suspension, or            |
|     school-approved illness; or                                       |
|                                                                       |
| 3.  Has died.                                                         |
|                                                                       |
| **Cohort dropout:** Any student who was a 12th grade dropout for the  |
| year reported, an 11th grade dropout for the prior year, a 10th grade |
| dropout for 2 years prior, or a 9th grade dropout for 3 years prior.  |
|                                                                       |
| WDPI believes this definition is consistent with the requirements of  |
| 34 C.F.R. §200.19, NCLB.                                              |
|                                                                       |
| WDPI currently has a summary data collection and no statewide student |
| record system. Prior to NCLB, WDPI did not collect data about         |
| graduates or dropouts by English proficiency or students with         |
| disabilities or economic status. Dropout data for students with       |
| disabilities at the public school level was not initiated until       |
| 2001-02. WDPI is proposing to move to a statewide student record      |
| system that will include demographic data needed for full             |
| disaggregation. This anticipated move in 2004-05 will provide for     |
| complete disaggregation and additional edit checks to ensure          |
| accuracy. For example, the student identification system will be      |
| used, in part, to ensure WDPI is not counting any dropouts as         |
| transfers or vice versa. Wisconsin's current definition of dropout    |
| already incorporates this requirement. Wisconsin has chosen a vendor  |
| for constructing a statewide student record system and Wisconsin      |
| expects to incorporate the reporting mechanism as soon as the data    |
| becomes available.                                                    |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| The graduation rate objective will be 90% of the statewide average    |
| for 2001-02, or growth. In 2001-02 the statewide average graduation   |
| rate was 90.83%. A 99% confidence interval (p=.01 level) will be      |
| applied to AYP decisions regarding reading and mathematics            |
| proficiency rates.                                                    |
|                                                                       |
| Fully disaggregated graduation data will be available in 2008-09      |
| (based on the 2004-05 cohort).                                        |
|                                                                       |
| A proxy indicator will be required for subgroup safe harbor           |
| calculations during the phase-in process. Until these other academic  |
| indicators are fully disaggregated, science proficiency will be used  |
| for the subgroup safe harbor provision.                               |
|                                                                       |
| The WDPI Internal AYP Committee has researched this element and       |
| considered several possibilities/options. Support was received from   |
| the external ESEA Testing Advisory Committee, the Collaborative       |
| Council (the major education stakeholders), and other external        |
| advisory groups to the state superintendent.                          |
|                                                                       |
| See: <http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/spr/spr_docs.html>.                  |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+---+
| ## CRITICAL ELEMENT 7.2                                              |   |
+======================================================================+===+
| 1.  What is the state's additional academic indicator for public     |   |
|     elementary schools for the definition of AYP? For public middle  |   |
|     schools for the definition of AYP?                               |   |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+---+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**     |   |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+---+
| Wisconsin's additional academic indicator for public schools         |   |
| containing elementary and middle grades (and no high school) is      |   |
| attendance. These data are currently part of a summary data          |   |
| collection and are available by gender and by race, but not by       |   |
| disability, economic status, or English proficiency status. WDPI     |   |
| proposes to move to a statewide student record system that will      |   |
| include demographic data needed for full disaggregation. Fully       |   |
| disaggregated data will be available in ~~2004-05~~ 2006-07. The     |   |
| attendance indicator will be 90% of the statewide average for        |   |
| 2001-02, or growth.                                                  |   |
|                                                                      |   |
| A proxy indicator will be required for subgroup safe harbor          |   |
| calculations during a phase-in process. Until these other academic   |   |
| indicators are fully disaggregated, science proficiency will be used |   |
| for the subgroup safe harbor provision.                              |   |
|                                                                      |   |
| The WDPI Internal AYP Committee has researched this element and      |   |
| considered several possibilities/options. Support was received from  |   |
| the external ESEA Testing Advisory Committee, the Collaborative      |   |
| Council (the major education stakeholders), and other external       |   |
| advisory groups to the state superintendent.                         |   |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+---+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| ## CRITICAL ELEMENT 7.3                                               |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 2.  Are the state's other academic indicators valid and reliable?     |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| The graduation rates calculated for schools and districts/LEAs are    |
| valid and reliable. The formula used to calculate graduation rates    |
| are computed according to a nationally recognized definition, and are |
| consistent with procedures specified under NCLB.                      |
|                                                                       |
| For both graduation rate and average daily attendance, data for these |
| comparisons is based on information collected in state and school     |
| district student information systems. WDPI will incorporate spot      |
| audits into on-site services to check accuracy of data. Graduation    |
| rates and average daily attendance calculated using individual        |
| student records in Wisconsin (to be implemented in ~~2004-05~~        |
| 2008-09 for graduation and 2006-07 for attendance) will increase      |
| validity and reliability.                                             |
|                                                                       |
| WDPI's current summary data collection includes edit and logic checks |
| to increase the accuracy of the reporting. Districts are given the    |
| opportunity to check summaries of raw data reported for               |
| reasonableness prior to publication. The state data collection and    |
| verification process includes both automated and manual edit and      |
| logic checks. The number and types of data checks will increase as    |
| Wisconsin moves to a proposed student level data collection.          |
|                                                                       |
| **Data Auditing and Correction Procedures**                           |
|                                                                       |
| Data collection software is provided to the LEA for major data        |
| submissions including but not limited to student enrollment, staff    |
| assignment, and the State School Performance Report data. These       |
| automated data collection systems contain extensive editing, data     |
| cross checking, data reasonability checking, and error reporting at   |
| the source of the collection -- the LEA. Files of data are not        |
| considered finally submitted to the WDPI until errors are corrected.  |
|                                                                       |
| Once the data is submitted to the WDPI, additional editing and        |
| checking are done:                                                    |
|                                                                       |
| 1.  Data are run through software for reasonability and logic errors. |
|     The results are reviewed by DPI staff.                            |
|                                                                       |
| 2.  When discrepancies are discovered, the LEA is contacted to verify |
|     data and make corrections if necessary.                           |
|                                                                       |
| 3.  As an additional reasonability check on the State School          |
|     Performance Report data, two-year comparisons are run; this data  |
|     includes graduation and attendance. Discrepancies are resolved    |
|     through the review of source data.                                |
|                                                                       |
| 4.  Data are then placed in standard, production reports on a         |
|     "private" password protected web site for review by LEA. This     |
|     allows them to see their data in context and review it for        |
|     accuracy against state totals, etc.                               |
|                                                                       |
| See: <http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/spr/spr_docs.html>.                  |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

PRINCIPLE 8 AYP is based on reading/language arts and mathematics
achievement objectives.

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| ## CRITICAL ELEMENT 8.1                                               |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1.  Does the state measure achievement in reading/language arts and   |
|     mathematics separately for determining AYP?                       |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Since 1997, adequate yearly progress has been calculated separately   |
| for each academic content area tested. WDPI's AYP under NCLB will     |
| retain separate calculations for reading and mathematics for each     |
| public school, subgroup, and public school district based on the      |
| academic proficiency standards for the Wisconsin Student Assessment   |
| System: Wisconsin Knowledge & Concepts Examinations.                  |
|                                                                       |
| The Wisconsin adequate yearly progress (AYP) calculations will        |
| examine separately the percent of students proficient and advanced in |
| reading and mathematics, as well as their rates of participation in   |
| reading and mathematics examinations. In determining whether each     |
| subgroup, public school, and public school district meets the annual  |
| measurable objectives, WDPI will calculate -- separately for reading  |
| and for mathematics -- a proficiency index based on the number of     |
| tested students enrolled for a full academic year (FAY), examine      |
| participation rates, and employ a safe harbor provision as prescribed |
| under NCLB.                                                           |
|                                                                       |
| WDPI has separately defined for reading and mathematics the statewide |
| annual measurable objectives that identify a minimum proficiency      |
| index. The annual measurable objectives for reading and mathematics   |
| will be applied to each public school and public school district as   |
| well as to each subgroup at the public school and public school       |
| district to determine AYP status. Data from school year 2001-02 were  |
| used to establish annual measurable objectives (see 3.2b).            |
|                                                                       |
| Determination of schools identified for improvement status will be    |
| predicated upon failing to make AYP requirements in the same content  |
| area for at least two consecutive years.                              |
|                                                                       |
| Districts will be identified for improvement when they do not make    |
| AYP in the same subject and all grade spans for two consecutive       |
| years---elementary (grades 3-5), middle (grades 6-8), and high school |
| (grade 10).                                                           |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

PRINCIPLE 9 State Accountability System is statistically valid and
reliable.

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| ## CRITICAL ELEMENT 9.1                                               |
+=======================================================================+
| 1.  How do AYP determinations meet the state's standard for           |
|     acceptable reliability?                                           |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| The incorporation of procedures to reduce error in the AYP process    |
| begins with valid and reliable assessments and other indicators. It   |
| continues with procedures to ensure data comparability, and controls  |
| for decision errors related to fluctuations unrelated to student      |
| academic achievement. There is no single "statistical" test that can  |
| be applied to accurately estimate the reliability of the state's AYP  |
| decisions.                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| The Wisconsin AYP decision model (see 3.2) includes the following     |
| error reduction procedures:                                           |
|                                                                       |
| -   Use of the same criteria for all public schools and districts     |
|     (see Critical Element 1.2)                                        |
|                                                                       |
| -   Inclusion of all students (see Critical Elements 2.1, 5.3, and    |
|     5.4)                                                              |
|                                                                       |
| -   Valid and reliable assessments and other academic indicators (see |
|     Critical Element 7.3)                                             |
|                                                                       |
| -   A confidence interval of 99% (p=.01 level) will be applied for    |
|     AYP decisions regarding reading and mathematics proficiency       |
|     rates.                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| -   A confidence interval of 75% (p=.25 level) will be applied to all |
|     Safe Harbor decisions.                                            |
|                                                                       |
| WDPI's assessment system instruments (WKCE, WAA-LEP, WAA-SwD) have    |
| been designed to ensure measurement reliability. WDPI refined the     |
| statewide assessment through contract with its testing services       |
| vendor and enhanced alignment with the Wisconsin Model Academic       |
| Standards. The WDPI monitors the testing system accuracy at each      |
| stage of the assessment process.                                      |
|                                                                       |
| Determining the minimum subgroup size for calculating AYP requires    |
| the WDPI to use statistically reliable data to avoid misidentifying   |
| schools identified for improvement. As the minimum subgroup size      |
| increases, confidence that we are making "correct" decisions          |
| increases.                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| WDPI examined the number of schools that would be excluded at         |
| different grade levels and subgroup sizes (Table 9.1, Part A). WDPI   |
| used the one-tailed z-test process outlined on pages 66 and 67 of the |
| CCSSO document, Making Valid and Reliable Decisions in Determining    |
| AYP, as a measure of variability given different subgroup sizes,      |
| target scores, and grade levels (Table 9.1, Parts B and C).           |
|                                                                       |
| By examining the data in Table 9.1, it is possible to maximize the    |
| percent of schools included, while minimizing the error in making AYP |
| decisions. By looking at the vertical line through Table 9.1, Parts B |
| and C, implications of various cell sizes become clear. By using a    |
| cell size of 40, WDPI includes two-thirds of schools at 4th, 8th and  |
| 10th grade (shaded in Table 9.1, Part A), while maintaining an error  |
| of less than 10 percentage points (shaded in Table 9.1, Parts B       |
| and C).                                                               |
|                                                                       |
| The cell size of 40 includes over 66% of all schools. These schools   |
| enroll over 95% of all students statewide. After consideration of     |
| two-year's proficiency data, more than 85% of the schools are         |
| included. In 2005-06 with implementation of additional testing in     |
| grades 3, 5, 6, and 7, virtually all schools will be included within  |
| the AYP model.                                                        |
|                                                                       |
| For those schools not included at this cell size, data from previous  |
| years (no earlier than 2001-02) will be accumulated for up to three   |
| years until the minimum cell size was met for the calculation. In     |
| 2005-06, when additional grade level assessments are brought online,  |
| the number of students assessed in schools will increase dramatically |
| further increasing the number of schools and students included in     |
| this calculation. Evaluating those schools with average annual FAY    |
| enrollment of less than 10 students would take over three years and   |
| would not adequately reflect changes over time in the school. These   |
| schools will be evaluated on an individual basis.                     |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Tables of the probability (based on one-tailed z-test) of making an   |
| incorrect decision based on number of students, actual percent        |
| proficient/advanced, and the target score have been developed to      |
| insure the reliability of this process as well as the process the     |
| state will follow in considering requests for further review under    |
| section 1116. (See Exhibit 9.1A and 9.1B).                            |
|                                                                       |
| To maximize reliable and valid decisions, Wisconsin has chosen a      |
| student-level, data-based approach -- a proficiency index for each    |
| content area will be used in calculating AYP decisions only (not for  |
| reporting). Allowing the averaging of two years data, outlined in     |
| process for calculating AYP, will stabilize the data. This will       |
| diminish the effect of a single uncharacteristic result, thus         |
| increasing reliability.                                               |
|                                                                       |
| As the new accountability system is implemented, WDPI will continue   |
| to examine data related to the reliability and validity of the        |
| decisions made about public schools and public school districts. This |
| information will be shared with public schools and public school      |
| districts and used to refine the system as appropriate.               |
|                                                                       |
| Change in the proportion of students who are proficient or advanced   |
| on the Wisconsin statewide examinations is related to size of the     |
| cohort enrolled in the school at the tested grades. (See the scatter  |
| plot (Exhibit 9.1c) for changes in statewide reading proficiency      |
| between the most recent two years' reading achievement.) Clearly,     |
| there is greater volatility in the changes in achievement in smaller  |
| populations. Mathematics AYP proficiency decisions have similar       |
| variability in size of tested grade enrollments. These changes are    |
| not supported by trend data.                                          |
|                                                                       |
| The desired inference in AYP decisions is about the school or         |
| district, not the specific cohort of students on whom achievement     |
| data were obtained. Therefore, the construction of a "confidence      |
| interval" around the observed *p* (proportion) is necessary. The      |
| confidence interval clearly shows the relationship between (a) the    |
| degree of uncertainty accompanying a proportion and (b) the number of |
| students enrolled. Each AYP decision regarding reading and            |
| mathematics proficiency rates will be compared with a 99% confidence  |
| interval (75% for Safe Harbor). Wisconsin plans to use the formula    |
| (Exhibit 9.1c) for calculating the confidence interval based on the   |
| binomial distribution and attributed to Ghosh (1979).                 |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

**Table 9.1** Maximizing Inclusion while Minimizing Error

<table>
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 1%" />
<col style="width: 0%" />
<col style="width: 3%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 6%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 6%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 6%" />
<col style="width: 6%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 6%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="4"></td>
<td colspan="16" rowspan="2"><strong>Initial Percentage of Schools
Included with Various Cell Sizes by Grade Level (2001-02
FAY)</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="4" rowspan="2"><strong>Part A</strong></td>
<td colspan="16"><strong>Cell Size</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>&gt;0</strong></td>
<td><strong>&gt;=2</strong></td>
<td><strong>&gt;=3</strong></td>
<td><strong>&gt;=6</strong></td>
<td><strong>&gt;=10</strong></td>
<td><strong>&gt;=15</strong></td>
<td><strong>&gt;=20</strong></td>
<td><strong>&gt;=25</strong></td>
<td><strong>&gt;=30</strong></td>
<td><strong>&gt;=35</strong></td>
<td><strong>&gt;=40</strong></td>
<td><strong>&gt;=45</strong></td>
<td><strong>&gt;=50</strong></td>
<td><strong>&gt;=100</strong></td>
<td><strong>&gt;=200</strong></td>
<td><strong>&gt;=500</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="2" rowspan="3"><strong>Grade</strong></td>
<td colspan="2"><strong>4th</strong></td>
<td>100.0%</td>
<td>99.7%</td>
<td>99.4%</td>
<td>98.8%</td>
<td>97.7%</td>
<td>93.8%</td>
<td>86.2%</td>
<td>81.3%</td>
<td>75.1%</td>
<td>67.7%</td>
<td>58.8%</td>
<td>49.5%</td>
<td>41.6%</td>
<td>3.9%</td>
<td>0.1%</td>
<td>0.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="2"><strong>8th</strong></td>
<td>100.0%</td>
<td>98.6%</td>
<td>97.7%</td>
<td>96.5%</td>
<td>94.6%</td>
<td>91.6%</td>
<td>86.9%</td>
<td>82.5%</td>
<td>79.0%</td>
<td>75.3%</td>
<td><table>
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 100%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td>73.1%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table></td>
<td>67.8%</td>
<td>64.2%</td>
<td>40.4%</td>
<td>18.5%</td>
<td>0.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="2"><strong>10th</strong></td>
<td>100.0%</td>
<td>97.2%</td>
<td>95.6%</td>
<td>92.2%</td>
<td>89.5%</td>
<td>87.7%</td>
<td>84.5%</td>
<td>83.3%</td>
<td>81.5%</td>
<td>77.7%</td>
<td>74.2%</td>
<td>71.6%</td>
<td>66.4%</td>
<td>43.9%</td>
<td>26.8%</td>
<td>1.8%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="16" rowspan="2"><strong>Points to add to schools % advanced
and proficient to be 95% sure that decision is correct (based on
sampling)</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="4"></td>
<td colspan="16"><strong>Number of Students Tested in School/District
(Cell Size)</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="4"><strong>Part B</strong></td>
<td><strong>1</strong></td>
<td><strong>2</strong></td>
<td><strong>3</strong></td>
<td><strong>6</strong></td>
<td><strong>10</strong></td>
<td><strong>15</strong></td>
<td><strong>20</strong></td>
<td><strong>25</strong></td>
<td><strong>30</strong></td>
<td><strong>35</strong></td>
<td><strong>40</strong></td>
<td><strong>45</strong></td>
<td><strong>50</strong></td>
<td><strong>100</strong></td>
<td><strong>200</strong></td>
<td><strong>500</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>2002</strong></td>
<td colspan="3"><strong>37.0%</strong></td>
<td>79%</td>
<td>56%</td>
<td>46%</td>
<td>32%</td>
<td>25%</td>
<td>21%</td>
<td>18%</td>
<td>16%</td>
<td>15%</td>
<td>13%</td>
<td>13%</td>
<td>12%</td>
<td>11%</td>
<td>8%</td>
<td>6%</td>
<td>4%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>2005</strong></td>
<td colspan="3"><strong>47.5%</strong></td>
<td>82%</td>
<td>58%</td>
<td>47%</td>
<td>34%</td>
<td>26%</td>
<td>21%</td>
<td>18%</td>
<td>16%</td>
<td>15%</td>
<td>14%</td>
<td>13%</td>
<td>12%</td>
<td>12%</td>
<td>8%</td>
<td>6%</td>
<td>4%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>2008</strong></td>
<td colspan="3"><strong>58.0%</strong></td>
<td>81%</td>
<td>57%</td>
<td>47%</td>
<td>33%</td>
<td>26%</td>
<td>21%</td>
<td>18%</td>
<td>16%</td>
<td>15%</td>
<td>14%</td>
<td>13%</td>
<td>12%</td>
<td>11%</td>
<td>8%</td>
<td>6%</td>
<td>4%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>2011</strong></td>
<td colspan="3"><strong>68.5%</strong></td>
<td>76%</td>
<td>54%</td>
<td>44%</td>
<td>31%</td>
<td>24%</td>
<td>20%</td>
<td>17%</td>
<td>15%</td>
<td>14%</td>
<td>13%</td>
<td>12%</td>
<td>11%</td>
<td>11%</td>
<td>8%</td>
<td>5%</td>
<td>3%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>2012</strong></td>
<td colspan="3"><strong>79.0%</strong></td>
<td>67%</td>
<td>47%</td>
<td>39%</td>
<td>27%</td>
<td>21%</td>
<td>17%</td>
<td>15%</td>
<td>13%</td>
<td>12%</td>
<td>11%</td>
<td>11%</td>
<td>10%</td>
<td>9%</td>
<td>7%</td>
<td>5%</td>
<td>3%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>2013</strong></td>
<td colspan="3"><strong>89.5%</strong></td>
<td>50%</td>
<td>36%</td>
<td>29%</td>
<td>21%</td>
<td>16%</td>
<td>13%</td>
<td>11%</td>
<td>10%</td>
<td>9%</td>
<td>9%</td>
<td>8%</td>
<td>8%</td>
<td>7%</td>
<td>5%</td>
<td>4%</td>
<td>2%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>2014</strong></td>
<td colspan="3"><strong>100.0%</strong></td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="4"></td>
<td colspan="16"><strong>Number of Students Tested in School/District
(Cell Size)</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="4"><strong>Part C</strong></td>
<td><strong>1</strong></td>
<td><strong>2</strong></td>
<td><strong>3</strong></td>
<td><strong>6</strong></td>
<td><strong>10</strong></td>
<td><strong>15</strong></td>
<td><strong>20</strong></td>
<td><strong>25</strong></td>
<td><strong>30</strong></td>
<td><strong>35</strong></td>
<td><strong>40</strong></td>
<td><strong>45</strong></td>
<td><strong>50</strong></td>
<td><strong>100</strong></td>
<td><strong>200</strong></td>
<td><strong>500</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>2002</strong></td>
<td colspan="3"><strong>61.0%</strong></td>
<td>80%</td>
<td>56%</td>
<td>46%</td>
<td>33%</td>
<td>25%</td>
<td>21%</td>
<td>18%</td>
<td>16%</td>
<td>15%</td>
<td>13%</td>
<td>13%</td>
<td>12%</td>
<td>11%</td>
<td>8%</td>
<td>6%</td>
<td>4%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>2005</strong></td>
<td colspan="3"><strong>67.5%</strong></td>
<td>77%</td>
<td>54%</td>
<td>44%</td>
<td>31%</td>
<td>24%</td>
<td>20%</td>
<td>17%</td>
<td>15%</td>
<td>14%</td>
<td>13%</td>
<td>12%</td>
<td>11%</td>
<td>11%</td>
<td>8%</td>
<td>5%</td>
<td>3%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>2008</strong></td>
<td colspan="3"><strong>74.0%</strong></td>
<td>72%</td>
<td>51%</td>
<td>41%</td>
<td>29%</td>
<td>23%</td>
<td>18%</td>
<td>16%</td>
<td>14%</td>
<td>13%</td>
<td>12%</td>
<td>11%</td>
<td>11%</td>
<td>10%</td>
<td>7%</td>
<td>5%</td>
<td>3%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>2011</strong></td>
<td colspan="3"><strong>80.5%</strong></td>
<td>65%</td>
<td>46%</td>
<td>37%</td>
<td>26%</td>
<td>20%</td>
<td>17%</td>
<td>14%</td>
<td>13%</td>
<td>12%</td>
<td>11%</td>
<td>10%</td>
<td>10%</td>
<td>9%</td>
<td>6%</td>
<td>5%</td>
<td>3%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>2012</strong></td>
<td colspan="3"><strong>87.0%</strong></td>
<td>55%</td>
<td>39%</td>
<td>32%</td>
<td>22%</td>
<td>17%</td>
<td>14%</td>
<td>12%</td>
<td>11%</td>
<td>10%</td>
<td>9%</td>
<td>9%</td>
<td>8%</td>
<td>8%</td>
<td>5%</td>
<td>4%</td>
<td>2%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>2013</strong></td>
<td colspan="3"><strong>93.5%</strong></td>
<td>40%</td>
<td>28%</td>
<td>23%</td>
<td>16%</td>
<td>13%</td>
<td>10%</td>
<td>9%</td>
<td>8%</td>
<td>7%</td>
<td>7%</td>
<td>6%</td>
<td>6%</td>
<td>6%</td>
<td>4%</td>
<td>3%</td>
<td>2%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>2014</strong></td>
<td colspan="3"><strong>100.0%</strong></td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

**Exhibit 9.1A**

Examination of confidence at various achievement levels with the Reading
starting point target.

  -------------- --------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------
  **Percent                                                                                                                                              
  chance**                                                                                                                                               
  (rounded to                                                                                                                                            
  the nearest                                                                                                                                            
  percent) **of                                                                                                                                          
  wrong decision                                                                                                                                         
  based on                                                                                                                                               
  sampling                                                                                                                                               
  error\                                                                                                                                                 
  with a target                                                                                                                                          
  percent                                                                                                                                                
  proficient of                                                                                                                                          
  : 61%**                                                                                                                                                

                           **Cell                                                                                                                        
                           Size**                                                                                                                        

                           **5**    **10**   **15**   **20**   **25**   **30**   **35**   **40**   **45**   **50**   **55**   **60**   **65**   **70**   **75**

  **Observed %   **60%**   48%      48%      47%      46%      46%      46%      45%      45%      45%      44%      44%      44%      44%      43%      43%
  Proficient**                                                                                                                                           

                 **59%**   46%      45%      44%      43%      42%      41%      41%      40%      39%      39%      38%      38%      37%      37%      36%

                 **58%**   45%      42%      41%      39%      38%      37%      36%      35%      34%      33%      33%      32%      31%      31%      30%

                 **57%**   43%      40%      38%      36%      34%      33%      32%      31%      29%      28%      27%      26%      25%      25%      24%

                 **56%**   41%      37%      35%      33%      31%      29%      27%      26%      25%      24%      22%      21%      21%      20%      19%

                 **55%**   39%      35%      32%      29%      27%      25%      24%      22%      21%      19%      18%      17%      16%      15%      14%

                 **54%**   37%      33%      29%      26%      24%      22%      20%      18%      17%      16%      14%      13%      13%      12%      11%

                 **53%**   36%      31%      26%      23%      21%      19%      17%      15%      14%      13%      11%      10%      9%       9%       8%

                 **52%**   34%      28%      24%      21%      18%      16%      14%      12%      11%      10%      9%       8%       7%       6%       6%

                 **51%**   33%      26%      21%      18%      15%      13%      11%      10%      9%       7%       6%       6%       5%       4%       4%

                 **50%**   31%      24%      19%      16%      13%      11%      9%       8%       7%       6%       5%       4%       4%       3%       3%

                 **49%**   29%      22%      17%      14%      11%      9%       7%       6%       5%       4%       3%       3%       2%       2%       2%

                 **48%**   28%      20%      15%      12%      9%       7%       6%       5%       4%       3%       2%       2%       2%       1%       1%

                 **47%**   26%      18%      13%      10%      8%       6%       5%       4%       3%       2%       2%       1%       1%       1%       1%

                 **46%**   25%      17%      12%      9%       6%       5%       4%       3%       2%       2%       1%       1%       1%       1%       0%

                 **45%**   23%      15%      10%      7%       5%       4%       3%       2%       1%       1%       1%       1%       0%       0%       0%

                 **44%**   22%      14%      9%       6%       4%       3%       2%       1%       1%       1%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%

                 **43%**   21%      12%      8%       5%       3%       2%       1%       1%       1%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%

                 **42%**   19%      11%      7%       4%       3%       2%       1%       1%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%

                 **41%**   18%      10%      6%       3%       2%       1%       1%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%

                 **40%**   17%      9%       5%       3%       2%       1%       1%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%

                 **39%**   16%      8%       4%       2%       1%       1%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%

                 **38%**   15%      7%       3%       2%       1%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%

                 **37%**   14%      6%       3%       1%       1%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%

                 **36%**   13%      5%       2%       1%       1%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%

                 **35%**   12%      5%       2%       1%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%

                 **34%**   11%      4%       2%       1%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%

                 **33%**   10%      4%       1%       1%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%

                 **32%**   9%       3%       1%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%

                 **31%**   9%       3%       1%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%

                 **30%**   8%       2%       1%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%

                 **29%**   7%       2%       1%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%

                 **28%**   7%       2%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%

                 **27%**   6%       1%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%

                 **26%**   5%       1%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%

                 **25%**   5%       1%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%

                 **24%**   5%       1%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%       0%
  -------------- --------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------

**Exhibit 9.1B**

Examination of confidence at various achievement levels with the
Mathematics starting point target.

<table style="width:100%;">
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 16%" />
<col style="width: 6%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="16"><blockquote>
<p><strong>Percent chance</strong> (rounded to nearest percent)
<strong>of wrong decision based on sampling error<br />
with a target percentage proficient of: 37%</strong></p>
</blockquote></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td colspan="14"><strong>Cell Size</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td><strong>3</strong></td>
<td><strong>6</strong></td>
<td><strong>10</strong></td>
<td><strong>15</strong></td>
<td><strong>20</strong></td>
<td><strong>25</strong></td>
<td><strong>30</strong></td>
<td><strong>35</strong></td>
<td><strong>40</strong></td>
<td><strong>45</strong></td>
<td><strong>50</strong></td>
<td><strong>55</strong></td>
<td><strong>60</strong></td>
<td><strong>65</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td rowspan="37"><strong>Observed % Proficient</strong></td>
<td><strong>36%</strong></td>
<td>49%</td>
<td>48%</td>
<td>48%</td>
<td>47%</td>
<td>46%</td>
<td>46%</td>
<td>46%</td>
<td>45%</td>
<td>45%</td>
<td>45%</td>
<td>44%</td>
<td>44%</td>
<td>44%</td>
<td>44%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>35%</strong></td>
<td>47%</td>
<td>46%</td>
<td>45%</td>
<td>44%</td>
<td>43%</td>
<td>42%</td>
<td>41%</td>
<td>41%</td>
<td>40%</td>
<td>39%</td>
<td>39%</td>
<td>38%</td>
<td>37%</td>
<td>37%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>34%</strong></td>
<td>46%</td>
<td>44%</td>
<td>42%</td>
<td>41%</td>
<td>39%</td>
<td>38%</td>
<td>37%</td>
<td>36%</td>
<td>35%</td>
<td>34%</td>
<td>33%</td>
<td>32%</td>
<td>32%</td>
<td>31%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>33%</strong></td>
<td>44%</td>
<td>42%</td>
<td>40%</td>
<td>37%</td>
<td>36%</td>
<td>34%</td>
<td>33%</td>
<td>31%</td>
<td>30%</td>
<td>29%</td>
<td>28%</td>
<td>27%</td>
<td>26%</td>
<td>25%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>32%</strong></td>
<td>43%</td>
<td>40%</td>
<td>37%</td>
<td>34%</td>
<td>32%</td>
<td>31%</td>
<td>29%</td>
<td>27%</td>
<td>26%</td>
<td>25%</td>
<td>23%</td>
<td>22%</td>
<td>21%</td>
<td>20%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>31%</strong></td>
<td>42%</td>
<td>38%</td>
<td>35%</td>
<td>32%</td>
<td>29%</td>
<td>27%</td>
<td>25%</td>
<td>23%</td>
<td>22%</td>
<td>20%</td>
<td>19%</td>
<td>18%</td>
<td>17%</td>
<td>16%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>30%</strong></td>
<td>40%</td>
<td>36%</td>
<td>33%</td>
<td>29%</td>
<td>26%</td>
<td>24%</td>
<td>21%</td>
<td>20%</td>
<td>18%</td>
<td>17%</td>
<td>15%</td>
<td>14%</td>
<td>13%</td>
<td>12%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>29%</strong></td>
<td>39%</td>
<td>34%</td>
<td>30%</td>
<td>26%</td>
<td>23%</td>
<td>21%</td>
<td>18%</td>
<td>16%</td>
<td>15%</td>
<td>13%</td>
<td>12%</td>
<td>11%</td>
<td>10%</td>
<td>9%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>28%</strong></td>
<td>37%</td>
<td>33%</td>
<td>28%</td>
<td>24%</td>
<td>20%</td>
<td>18%</td>
<td>15%</td>
<td>14%</td>
<td>12%</td>
<td>11%</td>
<td>10%</td>
<td>8%</td>
<td>7%</td>
<td>7%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>27%</strong></td>
<td>36%</td>
<td>31%</td>
<td>26%</td>
<td>21%</td>
<td>18%</td>
<td>15%</td>
<td>13%</td>
<td>11%</td>
<td>10%</td>
<td>8%</td>
<td>7%</td>
<td>6%</td>
<td>5%</td>
<td>5%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>26%</strong></td>
<td>35%</td>
<td>29%</td>
<td>24%</td>
<td>19%</td>
<td>16%</td>
<td>13%</td>
<td>11%</td>
<td>9%</td>
<td>7%</td>
<td>6%</td>
<td>5%</td>
<td>5%</td>
<td>4%</td>
<td>3%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>25%</strong></td>
<td>33%</td>
<td>27%</td>
<td>22%</td>
<td>17%</td>
<td>13%</td>
<td>11%</td>
<td>9%</td>
<td>7%</td>
<td>6%</td>
<td>5%</td>
<td>4%</td>
<td>3%</td>
<td>3%</td>
<td>2%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>24%</strong></td>
<td>32%</td>
<td>26%</td>
<td>20%</td>
<td>15%</td>
<td>12%</td>
<td>9%</td>
<td>7%</td>
<td>6%</td>
<td>4%</td>
<td>4%</td>
<td>3%</td>
<td>2%</td>
<td>2%</td>
<td>2%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>23%</strong></td>
<td>31%</td>
<td>24%</td>
<td>18%</td>
<td>13%</td>
<td>10%</td>
<td>7%</td>
<td>6%</td>
<td>4%</td>
<td>3%</td>
<td>3%</td>
<td>2%</td>
<td>2%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>1%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>22%</strong></td>
<td>30%</td>
<td>22%</td>
<td>16%</td>
<td>12%</td>
<td>8%</td>
<td>6%</td>
<td>4%</td>
<td>3%</td>
<td>2%</td>
<td>2%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>1%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>21%</strong></td>
<td>28%</td>
<td>21%</td>
<td>15%</td>
<td>10%</td>
<td>7%</td>
<td>5%</td>
<td>4%</td>
<td>2%</td>
<td>2%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>20%</strong></td>
<td>27%</td>
<td>19%</td>
<td>13%</td>
<td>9%</td>
<td>6%</td>
<td>4%</td>
<td>3%</td>
<td>2%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>19%</strong></td>
<td>26%</td>
<td>18%</td>
<td>12%</td>
<td>7%</td>
<td>5%</td>
<td>3%</td>
<td>2%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>18%</strong></td>
<td>25%</td>
<td>17%</td>
<td>11%</td>
<td>6%</td>
<td>4%</td>
<td>2%</td>
<td>2%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>17%</strong></td>
<td>24%</td>
<td>16%</td>
<td>10%</td>
<td>5%</td>
<td>3%</td>
<td>2%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>16%</strong></td>
<td>23%</td>
<td>14%</td>
<td>9%</td>
<td>5%</td>
<td>3%</td>
<td>2%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>15%</strong></td>
<td>22%</td>
<td>13%</td>
<td>7%</td>
<td>4%</td>
<td>2%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>14%</strong></td>
<td>21%</td>
<td>12%</td>
<td>7%</td>
<td>3%</td>
<td>2%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>13%</strong></td>
<td>19%</td>
<td>11%</td>
<td>6%</td>
<td>3%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>12%</strong></td>
<td>19%</td>
<td>10%</td>
<td>5%</td>
<td>2%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>11%</strong></td>
<td>18%</td>
<td>10%</td>
<td>4%</td>
<td>2%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>10%</strong></td>
<td>17%</td>
<td>9%</td>
<td>4%</td>
<td>2%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>9%</strong></td>
<td>16%</td>
<td>8%</td>
<td>3%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>8%</strong></td>
<td>15%</td>
<td>7%</td>
<td>3%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>7%</strong></td>
<td>14%</td>
<td>6%</td>
<td>2%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>6%</strong></td>
<td>13%</td>
<td>6%</td>
<td>2%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>5%</strong></td>
<td>13%</td>
<td>5%</td>
<td>2%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>4%</strong></td>
<td>12%</td>
<td>5%</td>
<td>2%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>3%</strong></td>
<td>11%</td>
<td>4%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>2%</strong></td>
<td>11%</td>
<td>4%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>1%</strong></td>
<td>10%</td>
<td>3%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>0%</strong></td>
<td>9%</td>
<td>3%</td>
<td>1%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>0%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

**Exhibit 9.1C**

**Rationale for Confidence Interval**

**Preferred Formula for Calculating the Confidence Interval\
**Based on the Binomial Distribution and Attributed to Ghosh (1979)

> *P*~U~ = [n]{.underline} p+ [*z*^2^]{.underline} + *z* [p(1‑
> p)]{.underline} + [*z*^2^]{.underline}
>
> n + *z*^2^ 2n n 4n^2^...
>
> where

-   *P*~U~ upper limits of the 1- CI (where is .01, .25 Safe Harbor)

-   *p* is the sample observed proportion

-   *N* is the sample enrollment size

-   *z* is the two-tailed critical value *(z*=2.58 where = .01

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| ## CRITICAL ELEMENT 9.2                                               |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1.  What is the state\'s process for making valid AYP determinations? |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| WDPI has quality control checks built into each stage of the WSAS     |
| program. WDPI's data collection process provides software for         |
| collecting Pre-Id label demographic data for WSAS testing purposes.   |
| Schools have several opportunities to verify the accuracy of coding   |
| prior to the test window. In addition, demographic data can be        |
| verified by the schools at the time of testing.                       |
|                                                                       |
| The WSAS examination results are produced in two phases to ensure the |
| accuracy of the data. At each phase, the test vendor has quality      |
| control procedures specified by contract. In addition, the WDPI       |
| monitors the quality of the testing contractor's products. Schools    |
| are provided a seven-day period during Phase 1 reporting to verify    |
| the individual student results and the aggregate school reports.      |
| Phase 2 reporting provides public school and public school district   |
| results, as well as statewide data.                                   |
|                                                                       |
| Based on annual student WSAS assessment data, preliminary AYP         |
| determinations are made. WDPI uses a 30-day review period for AYP     |
| determination, consistent with NCLB. During this period, schools have |
| the opportunity to examine progress and verify that the calculations  |
| are correct (e.g., rounding), and that the progress of students with  |
| disabilities and/or progress of limited English proficient students   |
| has been correctly documented. WDPI also conducts analyses of AYP     |
| decisions to ensure that the probability of error associated with     |
| each subgroup decision is minimized.                                  |
|                                                                       |
| Public schools or public school districts (or as required by NCLB, a  |
| majority of parents) may appeal decisions made regarding failure to   |
| make AYP to the state and/or public school district. A final decision |
| is made within 30 days after the review period. The WDPI determines   |
| the preliminary AYP designations for public schools and public school |
| districts. Operationally, public schools submit their appeal evidence |
| to the public school district; if the public school district agrees   |
| that there is merit in the review, it brings it to the WDPI for final |
| determination based on the merit of the evidence.                     |
|                                                                       |
| **Review Process**                                                    |
|                                                                       |
| Wisconsin plans to continue its existing process to support appeals   |
| by schools, districts, and, as required, by a majority of parents.    |
| Currently, annual appeals of the AYP decision can be made on          |
| statistical or other substantive reasons per Title I, Part A,         |
| sec.1116(b)(2). Review requests are required to be submitted to the   |
| department 30 days after initial determination is made based on the   |
| scoring and reporting cycle of annual statewide assessments in        |
| reading and mathematics. The department reviews each request on a     |
| case-by-case basis.                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| The review process required for NCLB is described below. The review   |
| process will, to the extent possible, be implemented within the       |
| following timeline (dates in right column are for 2002-03):           |
|                                                                       |
| +                                                                     |
| ---------+-----------------------------------------+---+------------+ |
| |                                                                     |
|  F       | Phase 1 student and school data reports |   | (April     | |
| |                                                                     |
|  ebruary | to schools and districts                |   | 15-30,     | |
| |                                                                     |
|  1       |                                         |   | 2003)      | |
| +                                                                     |
| ---------+-----------------------------------------+---+------------+ |
| |                                                                     |
|  March   | Phase 2 summary reports sent to         |   | (May       | |
| |                                                                     |
|  1--14   | schools, districts, and WDPI            |   | 16-27,     | |
| |                                                                     |
|          |                                         |   | 2003)      | |
| +                                                                     |
| ---------+-----------------------------------------+---+------------+ |
| |                                                                     |
|  March   | AYP Analyses: Schools/Districts         |   | (May       | |
| |                                                                     |
|  15      | Identified for Improvement (SIFI)       |   | 27-June    | |
| |                                                                     |
|  --April |                                         |   | 27, 2003)  | |
| |                                                                     |
|  30      |                                         |   |            | |
| +                                                                     |
| ---------+-----------------------------------------+---+------------+ |
| |                                                                     |
|  May 1   | -   WDPI provides preliminary AYP       |   | (June 30,  | |
| |                                                                     |
|          |     notification of schools/districts   |   | 2003)      | |
| |                                                                     |
|          |     identified for improvement to       |   |            | |
| |                                                                     |
|          |     schools/districts                   |   |            | |
| |                                                                     |
|          |                                         |   |            | |
| |                                                                     |
|          | -   WKCE Press Release of annual        |   |            | |
| |                                                                     |
|          |     statewide results                   |   |            | |
| +                                                                     |
| ---------+-----------------------------------------+---+------------+ |
| |                                                                     |
|  June 1  | Review due                              |   | (July 31,  | |
| |                                                                     |
|          |                                         |   | 2003)      | |
| +                                                                     |
| ---------+-----------------------------------------+---+------------+ |
| |                                                                     |
|  July 1  | Finalize list of SIFI                   | ( |            | |
| |                                                                     |
|          |                                         | A |            | |
| |                                                                     |
|          |                                         | u |            | |
| |                                                                     |
|          |                                         | g |            | |
| |                                                                     |
|          |                                         | u |            | |
| |                                                                     |
|          |                                         | s |            | |
| |                                                                     |
|          |                                         | t |            | |
| |                                                                     |
|          |                                         | 2 |            | |
| |                                                                     |
|          |                                         | 9 |            | |
| |                                                                     |
|          |                                         | , |            | |
| |                                                                     |
|          |                                         | 2 |            | |
| |                                                                     |
|          |                                         | 0 |            | |
| |                                                                     |
|          |                                         | 0 |            | |
| |                                                                     |
|          |                                         | 3 |            | |
| |                                                                     |
|          |                                         | ) |            | |
| +                                                                     |
| ---------+-----------------------------------------+---+------------+ |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| ## CRITICAL ELEMENT 9.2                                               |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Case-by-case appeals depend on both the WDPI and the school or        |
| district finding errors for statistical or substantive reasons        |
| described but not limited to:                                         |
|                                                                       |
| 1.  Student information or their scores are mis-coded in full         |
|     academic year.                                                    |
|                                                                       |
| 2.  Student information or their scores are mis-coded by subgroup.    |
|                                                                       |
| 3.  Students scores are appealed to test vendor and re-scoring        |
|     produces new performance results.                                 |
|                                                                       |
| 4.  There is a high probability that a decision error was made based  |
|     on statistical evidence, so the school/LEA provides evidence      |
|     documenting proficiency of a sufficient number of students to     |
|     reconsider the AYP decision.                                      |
|                                                                       |
| 5.  The cell-size required for reporting has been inappropriately     |
|     ascribed to a school based on errors in enrollment data.          |
|                                                                       |
| 6.  Provisions for counting the few students with most significant    |
|     cognitive disabilities (generally defined as covering students    |
|     with intellectual functioning and adaptive behavior three or more |
|     standard deviations below the mean). Alternate academic           |
|     achievement standards in §200.1(d) may be used for these students |
|     to demonstrate proficiency. Provision of proficiency documented   |
|     by alternate assessments of students with the most significant    |
|     cognitive disabilities for up to 1% (pending final regulations)   |
|     of all students enrolled in the grades assessed may be evaluated  |
|     against the alternate academic achievement standards and included |
|     as proficient in the AYP calculation.                             |
|                                                                       |
| 7.  Student scores represent a significant reduction in reported      |
|     enrollment tested because of exceptional circumstances beyond     |
|     control of the school or district, such as weather-related        |
|     events, public health events, national, regional or state         |
|     security alerts, failures associated with the state's test vendor |
|     services contractor, etc.                                         |
|                                                                       |
| The state's procedures for handling accountability decisions for      |
| districts and schools will be as follows:                             |
|                                                                       |
| -   Notification that a district suspects that its preliminary AYP    |
|     identification is in error will be provided to the WDPI by the    |
|     specified date under signature of the district administrator.     |
|     Supporting evidence must be submitted with the notification       |
|     letter.                                                           |
|                                                                       |
| -   Notification that a school principal (or a majority of parents)   |
|     suspects that the identification is in error will be provided to  |
|     the WDPI by the date specified under the signature of the         |
|     district administrator. Supporting evidence must be submitted     |
|     with the notification letter.                                     |
|                                                                       |
| -   WDPI will consider all notifications and the supporting evidence  |
|     and make a final determination.                                   |
|                                                                       |
| -   The accountability results will be made public immediately        |
|     following final determination by the state superintendent and     |
|     within the 30-day window required under NCLB.                     |
|                                                                       |
| For 2001-02 WKCE, see Information for Schools Preliminarily           |
| Identified for Improvement which can be found on the department's web |
| site at                                                               |
| [[http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/oea/annrv                                |
| w02.html]{.underline}](http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/oea/annrvw02.html). |
|                                                                       |
| Wisconsin plans to use a technical advisory panel to assist in the    |
| evaluation and validation of Wisconsin's AYP system. A timeline and   |
| written implementation plan will be developed for long-term data      |
| collection, studies of the improvement of student performance, and    |
| identification of unintended consequences of the accountability       |
| system.                                                               |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| ## CRITICAL ELEMENT 9.3                                               |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 3.  How has the state planned for incorporating into its definition   |
|     of AYP anticipated changes in assessments?                        |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| To ensure an accurate accountability system for anticipated changes   |
| in assessment, WDPI is developing a set of decision rules to be       |
| incorporated into the AYP definitions. To ensure continuity between   |
| the transition and customized assessment instruments, decision rules  |
| will address issues such as:                                          |
|                                                                       |
| -   Adequacy of equating studies to support reliability of            |
|     performance measures between current or new assessments and       |
|     previous instruments.                                             |
|                                                                       |
| -   Review of alignment of measured standards between assessment      |
|     instruments to equate teaching and learning expectations when     |
|     assessments change.                                               |
|                                                                       |
| -   Publication of interpolating tables to support development of     |
|     longitudinal data analysis.                                       |
|                                                                       |
| -   Standard-setting for new assessments will be adjusted to support  |
|     alignment analysis and equate scales across instrument changes    |
|     and adjustments will be made as appropriate to annual measurable  |
|     goals.                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| Review and counsel from USED staff will be sought prior to the        |
| implementation of these types of changes.                             |
|                                                                       |
| The following assessments have been administered or are planned as    |
| the basis AYP determination for the accountability system:            |
|                                                                       |
|   -------                                                             |
| ----- ------------------------------------- ------------ ------------ |
|                                                                       |
|          **Instrument**                        **Grades**   **Content |
|                                                                       |
|                                                               Areas** |
|                                                                       |
|   199                                                                 |
| 7--2002   Wisconsin Knowledge & Concepts        4, 8, 10     Reading, |
|                                                                       |
|               Examinations (WKCE): *TerraNova*                   Math |
|                Multiple Assessments (shelf-test)                      |
|                                                                       |
|   200                                                                 |
| 2--2005   WI Student Assessment System (WSAS):  4, 8, 10     Reading, |
|                                                                       |
|               WKCE (Enhanced *TerraNova*) plus WI                Math |
|                Alternate Assessments (WAA-LEP,                        |
|                WAA-SwD)                                               |
|                                                                       |
|   200                                                                 |
| 5--2014   WSAS: Customized WKCE plus WAA ‑ LEP  3--8, 10     Reading, |
|                                                                       |
|               & SwD                                              Math |
|   -------                                                             |
| ----- ------------------------------------- ------------ ------------ |
|                                                                       |
| WKCE assessments also include science administered at grades 4, 8,    |
| and 10. Annual measurable goals will be re-evaluated and adjusted as  |
| appropriate after the new assessments have been implemented in        |
| 2005-06, but will not change the timeline for reaching 100%           |
| proficiency by 2013-14.                                               |
|                                                                       |
| To address changes in school and district boundaries (including new   |
| schools and re-configurations), WDPI considers accountability         |
| decisions when school and district consolidations and expansions      |
| occur.                                                                |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

PRINCIPLE 10. In order for a public school or LEA to make AYP, the state
ensures that it assessed at least 95% of the students enrolled in each
subgroup.

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| ## CRITICAL ELEMENT10.1                                               |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1.  What is Wisconsin\'s method for calculating participation rates   |
|     in the state assessments for use in AYP determinations?           |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Wisconsin requires districts to report demographic data for all       |
| students enrolled in the tested grades at the time of testing. This   |
| ensures that reports made by the state will account for all students  |
| enrolled in a tested grade level in each public school and public     |
| school district. WDPI uses a Pre-Id label procedure to increase the   |
| accuracy of the student level test data files. However, about 15% of  |
| the test booklets currently have demographic data hand gridded.       |
|                                                                       |
| The total number of students enrolled in the tested grade(s) at time  |
| of testing, as reported by the public school district, is the         |
| participation-rate denominator. The number of students ~~who          |
| participated in~~ with valid WSAS ~~testing~~ scores (including the   |
| WKCE, WAA-LEP, and WAA-SwD) is the numerator for calculating          |
| participation rate. All students enrolled, as well as all of the      |
| subgroups outlined in NCLB *sec.* 1111(b)(2)(C)(v) will be held       |
| accountable for reaching the 95% participation goal at the public     |
| school and public district level.                                     |
|                                                                       |
| Wisconsin will calculate participation rates based on total           |
| enrollments at the time of testing.                                   |
|                                                                       |
| Little difference exists between the total number of students         |
| enrolled and total number FAY students in public school and public    |
| school district data in Wisconsin. Data suppression rules are based   |
| on the FAY enrollment counts for student groups. WSAS participation   |
| is considered confidential data in Wisconsin, therefore, reporting    |
| disaggregated participation rates for the total number of students    |
| enrolled will create new suppression issues. Disaggregated            |
| participation rates for FAY students are already reported. There will |
| be an indirect disclosure issue if the difference between the FAY     |
| students and the total enrolled students in any given group is small. |
| Because of the size of Wisconsin school districts, this will be an    |
| issue in all but the 14 largest districts, and even then may impact   |
| individual schools depending upon subgroup population sizes.          |
|                                                                       |
| Wisconsin will use data from the previous one or two years to average |
| the participation rate data for a school and/or subgroup as needed.   |
| If this two- or three-year average meets or exceeds 95 percent, the   |
| school will meet this AYP requirement. In addition, schools may omit  |
| from participation rate calculations those students who cannot take   |
| an assessment during the entire testing window, including make-up     |
| dates, due to a significant medical emergency. A significant medical  |
| emergency is a significant health impairment that renders the student |
| incapable of participating in any academic activities, including      |
| state assessments, for the entire testing window. School districts    |
| may request students with a significant medical emergency be exempted |
| from the test participation calculation through the reconsideration   |
| process. Districts will need written documentation from a physician   |
| of the medical emergency, including evidence that the condition will  |
| prevent the student from participation in any academic activities,    |
| including testing, for the entire testing window. Examples might      |
| include hospitalization for a life-threatening condition or a serious |
| accident involving extensive rehabilitation.                          |
|                                                                       |
| A confidence interval of 99% (p=.01 level) will be applied for AYP    |
| decisions regarding reading and mathematics proficiency rates.        |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| ## CRITICAL ELEMENT 10.2                                              |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 2.  What is the state\'s policy for determining when the 95% assessed |
|     requirement should be applied?                                    |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS**      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Public schools and public school districts are required to administer |
| the statewide test under s. 118.30 Wis. Stats. to all students        |
| enrolled at the time of testing. Once assessment results are          |
| received, the process for determining adequate yearly progress (AYP)  |
| begins. To determine whether or not a school (subgroup, district)     |
| makes AYP, Wisconsin will use the following steps:                    |
|                                                                       |
| **Wisconsin AYP Calculation Steps**                                   |
|                                                                       |
| 1.  Calculate the 95% participation in statewide assessment rate for  |
|     all-students and each appropriate subgroup with sufficient cell   |
|     size.                                                             |
|                                                                       |
| 2.  Determine whether all students and subgroups within each school   |
|     meet the minimum "cell size" number for reliable AYP decisions.   |
|                                                                       |
| 3.  Verify the number of students who meet the definition of being in |
|     the school (or district) for a full academic year (FAY).          |
|                                                                       |
| 4.  Calculate the high school graduation rate and/or attendance rate  |
|     for high schools, elementary, and middle schools; compare to 90%  |
|     of state rate and/or calculate improvement from the previous      |
|     year.                                                             |
|                                                                       |
| 5.  Calculate separately for reading and mathematics the proficiency  |
|     index of students at a school (in tested grades). The proficiency |
|     index is calculated by awarding one index point for each          |
|     proficient/advanced student and one-half index point for each     |
|     basic student. Index points are then summed and divided by the    |
|     number of FAY tested students.                                    |
|                                                                       |
| 6.  Compare the two year average proficiency index with the current   |
|     year's proficiency index (in step 5 above) and use the higher     |
|     proficiency index for AYP for those schools with all-student cell |
|     size of 40 or greater. In 2005-06 only, the two-year average will |
|     be calculated based on grades that were tested in both the        |
|     current and prior years (i.e., 4, 8, and 10).                     |
|                                                                       |
| 7.  Calculate the percent proficiency index for each appropriate      |
|     subgroup.                                                         |
|                                                                       |
| 8.  Compare the proficiency indices of all students and each subgroup |
|     against annual measurable objectives, e.g.*,* starting point (for |
|     the school, district, state).                                     |
|                                                                       |
| 9.  Compute safe harbor calculations using a 75% confidence interval  |
|     at the (p=.25 level) for those groups that do not meet or exceed  |
|     the annual measurable objectives for positive gains only. A       |
|     school or district will need to have made progress in order for   |
|     the Safe Harbor confidence to be applied.                         |
|                                                                       |
| 10. Apply a 99% confidence interval (p=.01 level) for AYP decisions   |
|     regarding reading and mathematics proficiency indices.            |
|                                                                       |
| If a student subgroup, as outlined in NCLB sec. 1111(b)(2)(C)(v),     |
| contains the minimum number of students required to yield             |
| statistically reliable information about a school population, then    |
| that subgroup is required to meet the 95% participation target to     |
| make AYP. Assessment participation results are "rolled up" to the     |
| public school district and state to hold public school districts and  |
| the WDPI accountable. Per §200.20(e)(1), students who were not        |
| enrolled for a full academic year may not be included in the AYP      |
| determination. Students not enrolled for a full academic year are     |
| reported in the accountability system even though they are not        |
| included in the AYP determination.                                    |
|                                                                       |
| Because Wisconsin places the highest priority on public school and    |
| public school district participation, meeting or exceeding the 95%    |
| rate serves as the first checkpoint once the minimum cell size is     |
| met. If the 95% benchmark is not met, a public school and/or public   |
| school district is deemed as not making AYP, even though performance  |
| on mathematics, reading, and/or the other academic indicator may be   |
| strong.                                                               |
|                                                                       |
| The policy will be applied to any required student accountability     |
| group with the minimum number of students enrolled for a full         |
| academic year during the testing window.                              |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

**Appendix A**

Decision Making Process for

Consolidated State Application - Accountability

**Appendix B**

AYP Internal Committee

**William J. Erpenbach**, Lead

Independent Consultant

**Marsha Behnke**

WKCE Program Manager

Office of Educational Accountability

608-267-9283

**Barbara Bitters**

Director

Equity Mission Team

608-266-9609

**Timothy Boals**

Consultant, Bilingual/ESL Education

608-267-1290

**Maggie Burke**

Assistant Director

Office of Educational Accountability

608-267-3164

**Philip Cranley**

Education Program Specialist

Office of Educational Accountability

608-266-9798

**Sue Grady**

Director

Content and Learning Team

608-266-2364

**Jack Kean**

Assistant State Superintendent

Division for Academic Excellence

608-266-3361

**Susan Ketchum**

Accountability Consultant

Successful Schools Team

608-267-0425

**Dara Martinovich**

Assessment Literacy Consultant

Office of Educational Accountability

608-266-0890

**Stephanie Petska**

Director

Special Education Team

608-266-1781

**Margaret Planner**

Assistant State Superintendent

Division for Reading and Student Achievement

608-266-5450

**Lynette Russell**

Assistant Director

School Support Programs

Successful Schools Team

608-267-3163

**Stephen Sanders**

Instructional Technology Consultant

Division for Libraries, Technology, and Community Learning

608-266-7112

**Christine Selk**

Director

Information Technology

Division for Libraries, Technology, and Community Learning

608-266-7049

**Mike Thompson**

Federal Policy Initiatives Advisor

Office of the State Superintendent

608-266-3584

**James Wall**

Director

Successful Schools Team

608-267-1072

**Jean Whitcomb**

Education Data Consultant

Office of Educational Accountability

608-266-2937

**Appendix C**

ESEA Coordinating Committee

**Sue Grady**, Director

Content and Learning

608-266-2364

**Jane Grinde**, Director

Bright Beginnings/Family-School-Community Partnerships

608-266-9356

**Maxine Hough**, Assistant Director

Successful Schools Team

608-267-9146

**Kathryn Lind**, Director

Teacher Education/Professional Development

608-266-1788

**Neah Lohr**, Director

Instructional Media and Technology

608-266-3856

Office of Legal Services

608-266-9353

**Stephanie Petska**, Director

Special Education

608-266-1781

**Lynette Russell**, Assistant Director

School Support Programs

Successful Schools Team

608-267-3163

**Robert Sainsbury**, Grants Supervisor

School Management Services

608-266-2428

**Lori Slauson**, Administrative Rules Coordinator

Policy and Budget

608-267-9127

**Mike Thompson**, Federal Policy Initiatives Advisor (Committee Chair)

608-266-3584

**James Wall**, Director

Successful Schools Team

608-267-1072

**Doug White**, Director

Student Services/Prevention and Wellness

608-266-5198

+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| **Appendix D**                    |                                   |
|                                   |                                   |
| Title I Committee of              |                                   |
| Practitioners                     |                                   |
|                                   |                                   |
| Present COP Membership            |                                   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| > **Eduardo Arangua**             | > **Jeff Hinds, President**       |
| >                                 | >                                 |
| > Administrative Dean             | > Title I Coordinator             |
| >                                 | >                                 |
| > Madison Area Technical College  | > CESA #6                         |
| >                                 | >                                 |
| > Alternative Learning Division   | > P.O. Box 2568                   |
| >                                 | >                                 |
| > 211 North Carroll Street        | > Oshkosh, WI 54903               |
| >                                 | >                                 |
| > Madison, WI 53703-2285          | > \(920\) 236-0562/work           |
| >                                 | >                                 |
| > \(608\) 258-2448/work           | > FAX: (920) 424-3478             |
| >                                 | >                                 |
| > FAX: (608) 258-2464             | > E-mail:                         |
| >                                 | > <jhinds@cesa6.k12.wi.us>        |
| > E-mail:                         |                                   |
| > <erangua@matcmadison.educ>      |                                   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| > **Paul Bierman**                | > **Donna Hodges**                |
| >                                 | >                                 |
| > Principal                       | > Coordinator Title I/Even Start  |
| >                                 | > Family Literacy                 |
| > South Elementary School         | >                                 |
| >                                 | > AASD Alliance Center            |
| > 420 Plum Street                 | >                                 |
| >                                 | > 3310 North Durkee               |
| > Reedsburg, WI 53959             | >                                 |
| >                                 | > Appleton, WI 54911              |
| > \(608\) 524-4306                | >                                 |
| >                                 | > \(920\) 832-6321                |
| > FAX: (608) 524-3421             | >                                 |
| >                                 | > FAX: (920) 832-6359             |
| > E-mail:                         | >                                 |
| > <pbierman@rsd.k12.wi.us>        | > E-mail:                         |
|                                   | > <hodgesdonna@aasd.k12.wi.us>    |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| # Lowell Gillette                 | > **Mary Mroczenski**             |
|                                   | >                                 |
| > 1525 Neal Avenue Court North    | > Title I Coordinator             |
| >                                 | >                                 |
| > Lake Elmo, MN 55042             | > Cushing Elementary School       |
| >                                 | >                                 |
| > \(651\) 436-2614/home           | > 227 North Genesee Street        |
| >                                 | >                                 |
| > E-mail:                         | > Delafield, WI 53018             |
| > <Lgillett@pressenter.com.Sent>  | >                                 |
|                                   | > \(262\) 646-6731 -- ext. 231    |
|                                   | >                                 |
|                                   | > FAX: (262) 646-6730             |
|                                   | >                                 |
|                                   | > E-mail: <marymro@kmsd.edu>      |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| > **Barb Grabow**                 | > **John Pfaff**                  |
| >                                 | >                                 |
| > Teacher                         | > Coordinator of Interventions    |
| >                                 | >                                 |
| > Abraham Lincoln Elementary      | > Sheboygan Area School District  |
| > School                          | >                                 |
| >                                 | > 830 Virginia Avenue             |
| > Monroe School District          | >                                 |
| >                                 | > Sheboygan, WI 53081             |
| > 2700 13th Avenue                | >                                 |
| >                                 | > \(920\) 459-6718                |
| > Monroe, WI 53566                | >                                 |
| >                                 | > FAX: (920) 803-7760             |
| > \(608\) 325-3449/home           | >                                 |
| >                                 | > E-mail:                         |
| > \(608\) 328-7857/work           | > <jpfaff@sheboygan.k12.wi.us>    |
| >                                 |                                   |
| > FAX: (608) 328-7228             |                                   |
| >                                 |                                   |
| > E-mail:                         |                                   |
| > <barb.grabow@monroe.k12.wi.us>  |                                   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| > **Richard Savolainen**          | > **Richard Thwaits**             |
| >                                 | >                                 |
| > Title I Coordinator             | > Title I Coordinator             |
| >                                 | >                                 |
| > Eau Claire Area School          | > Merrill Area Public Schools     |
| >                                 | >                                 |
| > 500 Main Street                 | > 1111 North Sales Street         |
| >                                 | >                                 |
| > Eau Claire, WI 54701            | > Merrill, WI 54452               |
| >                                 | >                                 |
| > \(715\) 833-3460 ext. 460       | > \(715\) 536-9421                |
| >                                 | >                                 |
| > FAX: (715) 833-3481             | > FAX: (715) 536-1788             |
| >                                 | >                                 |
| > E-mail:                         | > E-mail:                         |
| > <rsavolainen@ecasd.k12.wi.us>   | > <thwaits@maps.k12.wi.us>        |
|                                   | >                                 |
|                                   | > E-mail:                         |
|                                   | > <rich.thwaits@maps.K12.wi.us>   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| > **Maggie Smith**                | > **Margaret Wamugi**             |
| >                                 | >                                 |
| > Parent Representative           | > Even Start Coordinator          |
| >                                 | >                                 |
| > Milwaukee Public Schools - Room | > c/o Head Start                  |
| > 250                             | >                                 |
| >                                 | > 2096 Red Arrow Trail            |
| > 5225 West Vliet Street          | >                                 |
| >                                 | > Madison, WI 53711               |
| > Milwaukee, WI 53208             | >                                 |
| >                                 | > \(608\) 275-6740                |
| > \(414\) 475-8150 - ext.         | >                                 |
| > 8150/work                       | > FAX: (608) 275-6756             |
| >                                 |                                   |
| > FAX: (414) 475-8513             |                                   |
| >                                 |                                   |
| > E-mail:                         |                                   |
| >                                 |                                   |
| smithmm1(a)mail.milwaukeeK1:WI.US |                                   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| > **Booker Street**               | > **Sharon Wimer**                |
| >                                 | >                                 |
| > Principal                       | > Teacher/Administrator           |
| >                                 | >                                 |
| > Wright Elementary School        | > St. Joseph School               |
| >                                 | >                                 |
| > 1033 Woodward Avenue            | > 305 Walnut Street               |
| >                                 | >                                 |
| > Beloit, WI 53511                | > Dodgeville, WI 53533            |
| >                                 | >                                 |
| > \(608\) 364-6110/work           | > \(608\) 935-3392/work           |
|                                   | >                                 |
|                                   | > FAX: (608) 935-1722             |
|                                   | >                                 |
|                                   | > E-mail: <stjoseph@charter.net>  |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+

**Appendix E**

ESEA Testing Advisory Committee

**Russ Allen**

**Research & Professional Development Consultant**

WEAC

608-276-7711, ext. 293

AllenR@WEAC.org

**Gary Besaw**

**College of the Menominee Nation**

715-799-5600

<gbesaw@menominee.edu>

**Linda Christensen**

**Director of Instruction**

Verona Area School District

608-845-4311

<christel@verona.k12.wi.us>

**Allan Cohen, Director**

**Testing and Evaluation Services**

UW-Madison

608-262-5863

<ascohen@facstaff.wisc.edu>

**Ivy Covert, Director**

**Bilingual-Multicultural Education**

Milwaukee Public Schools

414-475-8091

<covertix@mail.milwaukee.k12.wi.us>

**Jim Hickey**

**Principal**

McFarland High School

608-838-4565

jg_hickey@mcfarland.k12.wi.us

**Anthony Hinden**

**Consultant**

Tomah Area School District

608-374-7210

<vpf_f@yahoo.com>

**Laurie Hittman**

**Director, Curric. & Instruction**

Eau Claire Area School District

715-833-3464

<lhittman@ecasd.k12.wi.us>

**Jim Jirsa**

**Research and Evaluation Services**

Madison Metropolitan School District

608-663-4945

<jjirsa@madison.k12.wi.us>

**Rosalynn A. Kiefer**

**Director, Curric. & Instruction**

Fox Point-Bayside School District

414-247-4162

kieferra@foxbay.k12.wi.us

**Deb Lindsey**

**Director, Office of Research and Assessment**

Milwaukee Public Schools

414-475-8751

[lindsedl@mail.milwaukee.k12.wi.us](mailto:lindseyd@mail.milwauke.k12.wi.us)

**Diane Messer**

**District Administrator**

Dodgeville School District

608-935-3307

<dmesser@dsd.k12.wi.us>

**Berland Meyer**

**Ass't. District Administrator**

Wausau School District

715-261-2515

bmeyer@wausau.k12.wi.us

**Bill Reis**

**District Administrator**

Middleton -- Cross Plains School District

608-828-1500, ext. 1119

BillR@mcpasd.k12.wi.us

**Judy Sargent**

**Standards and Assessment Director**

CESA #7

920-492-5960, ext 631

<jsargent@cesa7.k12.wi.us>

**Frances Smith**

**District Administrator**

Glendale-River Hills School District

414-351-7170, ext 2103 or

frances_smith@glendale.k12.wi.us

**Sonya Stephens**

**Director of Educational Accountability**

Kenosha Unified School District

262-653-6259

sstephen@kusd.edu

**Fred Wollenburg**

**Director of Special Education**

CESA #5

608-742-8814, ext 224

<wollenburgf@cesa5.k12.wi.us>

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **DPI Staff**

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

**Maggie Burke, Assistant Director**

**Office of Educational Accountability**

Department of Public Instruction

608-267-3164

maggie.burke@dpi.state.wi.us

**Anthony Evers**

**Deputy State Superintendent**

Department of Public Instruction

608-266-1771

anthony.evers@dpi.state.wi.us

**Sue Grady, Director, Content and Learning**

**Division for Academic Excellence**

Department of Public Instruction

608-266-2364

<susan.grady@dpi.state.wi.us>

**Maxine Hough, Assistant Director**

**Successful Schools Team**

Department of Public Instruction

608-267-9146

<maxine.hough@dpi.state.wi.us>

**Jack Kean, Assistant State Superintendent**

**Division for Academic Excellence**

Department of Public Instruction

608-266-3361

john.kean@dpi.state.wi.us

**Bob Kohl, NAEP Coordinator**

**Successful Schools Team**

Department of Public Instruction

608-267-1281

<robert.kohl@dpi.state.wi.us>

**Margaret Planner, Chair**

**Assistant State Superintendent**

**Division for Reading & Student Achievement**

Department of Public Instruction

608-266-5450

margaret.planner@dpi.state.wi.us

**Lynette Russell, Assistant Director**

**School Support Prorams**

Department of Public Instruction

608-267-2273

<lynette.russell@dpi.state.wi.us>

**James Wall, Director**

**Successful Schools Team**

Department of Public Instruction

608-267-1072

james.wall@dpi.state.wi.us

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **ESEA Consultant**

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

**William J. Erpenbach**

<erpenwj@chorus.net>

**Appendix F**

Collaborative Council Members

**Appendix G**

State Superintendent Elizabeth Burmaster's

Parent Leadership Corps

**Tom Cogger**

28745 S. Maple Hill Drive

Washburn, WI 54891

715/373-2108

**Roxanne Starks**

6614 N. 84^th^ Street

Milwaukee, WI 53224

414/358-1865; rstarks@mmsd.com

**Ginny Lukken**

9541 Hwy S

Mount Horeb, WI 53572

608/437-8954; <arcw@itis.com>

**Thomas Thompson**

4540 Mormon Coulee Road

La Crosse, WI 54601

608/788-8820; <docjht@aol.com>

**Sharon Lee**

2469 N. 22^nd^ Street

Milwaukee, WI 53206

414/263-7078

**Mary Pelton**

4360 Hilton Head Court

Oneida, WI 54155

920/405-1931; <peltz9@aol.com>

**Nancy A. Allen**

2077 Uphoff Road

Cottage Grove, WI 53527

608/839-5173; <nancycgallen@netscape.net>

**Peg Conrad**

203 Canterbury Ct.

Cambridge, WI 53523

608/423-7063

608/277-7700. ext. 240; <conrad@wft.org>

**Katie Ploch**

4010 Naheda Trail

Madison, WI 53711

608/661-0445; <sapkt2@charter.net>

**Patty Ruth**

1501 Meadow Court

Port Washington, WI 53074

262/284-4762; <go2ruth@pwsb.com>

**Andrew Gokee**

UWSP Native American Center

205 Student Services Center

Stevens Point, WI 54481

715/346-4147; agokee@uwsp.edu

**Derrick Smith**

7533 Sawmill Road

Madison, WI 53717

608/831-0525; <DLS831@aol.com>

**Diane Johnson**

2946 Turbot Drive

Madison, WI 53713

<dsjohnson@madison.k12.wi.us>

**Jeff Smith**

S7747 Norrish Road

Eau Claire, WI 54701

715/835-9294; <smithpane@netzero.net>

**Rick Rolfsmeyer**

7087 State Hwy 39

Hollandale, WI 53544

608/967-2322; <ricky-r@mhtc.net>

**Karen Paulzine**

P. O. Box 443

81 W. Main St

Milltown, WI 54858

715/825-4690; <ori6899@yahoo.com>

**Marco Ortega and Claudia Alvarez**

5162 Anton Drive #313

Madison, WI 53719

\(608\) 273-3312

**Yolanda O'Quinn**

GEF 3

125 S. Webster

Madison, WI 53702

608/267-9153; yolanda.o'quinn@dpi.state.wi.us

**Touane Baccam**

2405 Apache Drive

Madison, WI 53711

\(608\) 276-7461

**Appendix H**

Wisconsin Council on Special Education

**Jodi Becker**

307 East Park

Neshkoro, WI 54960

920-293-4709

<en_bckrj@berlin.k12.wi.us>

**Sally Carlson**

N10694 State Hwy 79

Boyceville, WI 54725

715-643-7777

**Winnie Doxsie**

1708 North Hall Street

Appleton, WI 54911

608-244-1455

<doxsie@athenet.net>

**Marty Fields**

129 North Prospect Avenue

Madison, WI 53705

608-271-3600 x 118

<MARTYFIELDS@CHARTERMI.NET>

**Scott Gray**

7826 Parkside Court

Minocqua, WI 54548

715-453-2141

<grayritz@newnorth.net>

**Sandra Hall**

Disabled Student Services

Roseman Hall

University of WI-Whitewater

800 West Main Street

Whitewater, WI 53190

262-472-4711

<halls@uww.edu>

**Eric Hartwig**

Marathon Co CDEB

1200 Lakeview Dr, #350

Wausau, WI 54403-6707

715-848-5440 x 382

<ehartwig@dwave.net>

**Julie Lidbury**

Department of Corrections

3099 East Washington Avenue (53704)

P. O. Box 7925

Madison, WI 53707-7925

608-240-5148

**Carolyn Madsen**

201 Huth Street, Apt. C

Green Bay, WI 54302

920-448-2107

**Julie Maurer**

3808 Ravine Drive

Racine, WI 53405

262-632-6939

<djjmaurer@aol.com>

**Pat Patterson**

6463 North 104th Street

Milwaukee, WI 53224

414-374-4645

**Charlotte Price**

17725 W. Observatory Rd.

New Berlin, WI 54146

262-549-6680

<caprice@wi.rr.com>

**Georgette Rodriguez**

Milwaukee Public Schools

Office of Parent Services

5225 West Vliet Street

Milwaukee, WI 53208

414-475-8467

**Beth Wroblewski**

595 S.Jackson Street

Waterloo, WI 53594

608-266-7469

<WROBLBM@dhfs.state.wi.us>

**Pat Yahle**

Milwaukee Public Schools

P.O.Box 2181

Milwaukee, WI 53201-2181

414-475-8067

<yahlepa@mail.milwaukee.k12.wi.us>

**Sam Milesky**

Parliamentarian

530 Hilltop Drive

Madison, WI 53711

608-274-1785

**DPI Division for Learning Support: Equity and Advocacy Contact
Persons**

**Carolyn Stanford Taylor**

Assistant State Superintendent

608-266-1649

**Stephanie Petska**

Director

Special Education

608-266-1781

**Brent Odell**

Special Education Team

608-267-9183

**Marge Schenk**

Council Secretary

608-267-9176

**Appendix I**

Wisconsin Council of Administrators of Special Services

+-------------+------------------------+---------------+--------------+
| > **Title** | > **Name & E-mail**    | > **Address** | > *          |
|             |                        |               | *Phone/Fax** |
+=============+========================+===============+==============+
| >           | > **Philip Knobel**\   | > 4797 Hayes  | >            |
| **Executive | > <director@wcass.org> | > Road\       | 608.245.2511 |
| >           |                        | > Suite 101\  | > (P)\       |
|  Director** |                        | > Madison, WI | >            |
|             |                        | > 53704       | 608.249.3163 |
|             |                        |               | > (F)        |
+-------------+------------------------+---------------+--------------+
| > **        | > **Steve Frank**\     | > 143 West    | >            |
| President** | >                      | > Green Bay   | 920.822.6020 |
|             | <president@wcass.org>\ | > Street\     | > (P)\       |
|             | > Pulaski Community    | > P.O. Box    | >            |
|             | > School District      | > 36\         | 920.822.6023 |
|             |                        | > Pulaski, WI | > (F)        |
|             |                        | > 54162-0036  |              |
+-------------+------------------------+---------------+--------------+
| > **Past    | > **Don Zander**\      | > 1055        | >            |
| >           | > <pas                 | > Griffiths   | 920.492.2905 |
| President** | tpresident@wcass.org>\ | > Lane\       | > (P)\       |
|             | > Ashwaubenon School   | > Green Bay,  | >            |
|             | > District             | > WI 54304    | 920.492.2911 |
|             |                        |               | > (F)        |
+-------------+------------------------+---------------+--------------+
| > **Presid  | > **Nissan Bar-Lev**\  | > 421 Court   | >            |
| ent-Elect** | > <pres                | > Street\     | 920.849.9384 |
|             | identelect@wcass.org>\ | > Chilton, WI | > (P)\       |
|             | > CESA #7              | > 53014       | >            |
|             |                        |               | 920.849.9385 |
|             |                        |               | > (F)        |
+-------------+------------------------+---------------+--------------+
| > **        | > **Ann Wicklund**\    | > 415 Seymour | >            |
| Secretary** | >                      | > Street\     | 715.261.2547 |
|             | <secretary@wcass.org>\ | > Wausau, WI  | > (P)        |
|             | > Wausau School        | > 54402-0359  |              |
|             | > District             |               |              |
+-------------+------------------------+---------------+--------------+
| > **        | > **Sue Dannemiller**\ | > 1900        | >            |
| Treasurer** | >                      | > Washington  | 262.376.5403 |
|             | <treasurer@wcass.org>\ | > Street\     | > (P)\       |
|             | > Grafton School       | > Grafton, WI | >            |
|             | > District             | > 53024-2198  | 262.376.5414 |
|             |                        |               | > (F)        |
+-------------+------------------------+---------------+--------------+
| > **Le      | > **Jerry Bohren**\    | > 1900 Polk   | >            |
| gislation** | > <l                   | > Street\     | 715.345.5454 |
|             | egislation@wcass.org>\ | > Stevens     | > (P)\       |
|             | > Stevens Point Area   | > Point, WI   | >            |
|             | > School District      | > 54481       | 715.345.7370 |
|             |                        |               | > (F)        |
+-------------+------------------------+---------------+--------------+
| > **M       | > **Stephen            | > 500 South   | >            |
| embership** | > Fasching**\          | > Section     | 715.886.8091 |
|             | > <                    | > Street\     | > (P)\       |
|             | membership@wcass.org>\ | > Nekoosa, WI | >            |
|             | > Nekoosa/Port Edwards | > 54457       | 715.886.8039 |
|             | > School Districts     |               | > (F)\       |
|             |                        |               | >            |
|             |                        |               | 715.886.8012 |
|             |                        |               | > (F)        |
+-------------+------------------------+---------------+--------------+
| > **N       | > **Susan Curtis**\    | > 701 East    | >            |
| ewsletter** | > <                    | > 11th        | 715.243.8423 |
|             | newsletter@wcass.org>\ | > Street\     | > (P)\       |
|             | > New Richmond School  | > New         | >            |
|             | > District             | > Richmond,   | 715.243.7474 |
|             |                        | > WI 54017    | > (F)        |
+-------------+------------------------+---------------+--------------+
| > *         | > **Gary Myrah**\      | > 100 West    | >            |
| *Programs** | >                      | > Monroe      | 262.268.6079 |
|             |  <programs@wcass.org>\ | > Street\     | > (P)\       |
|             | > Port                 | > Port        | >            |
|             | > Washington-Saukville | > Washington, | 262.268.6020 |
|             | > School District      | > WI 53074    | > (F)        |
+-------------+------------------------+---------------+--------------+
| > **C       | > **Ron Krueger**\     | > 1345        | >            |
| onstitution | > <co                  | > Ridgewood   | 715.726.2414 |
| > &\        | nstitution@wcass.org>\ | > Drive\      | > (P)\       |
| >           | > Chippewa Falls Area  | > Chippewa    | >            |
|  Policies** | > School District      | > Falls, WI   | 715.726.2781 |
|             |                        | > 54729       | > (F)        |
+-------------+------------------------+---------------+--------------+
| >           | > **Barbara Van        | > 800 Algoma  | >            |
|  **Research | > Haren**\             | > Boulevard\  | 920.424.7227 |
| > &\        | >                      | > Oshkosh, WI | > (P)        |
| > Special   |  <research@wcass.org>\ | > 53901       |              |
| >           | > UW Oshkosk           |               |              |
|  Projects** |                        |               |              |
+-------------+------------------------+---------------+--------------+
| > **Social  | > **Bonnie LeMense**\  | > 1050 South  | >            |
| > &\        | > <social@wcass.org>\  | > Union       | 715.524.4616 |
| > Awards**  | > Shawano-Gresham      | > Street\     | > (P)\       |
|             | > School District      | > Shawano, WI | >            |
|             |                        | > 54166       | 715.524.7016 |
|             |                        |               | > (F)        |
+-------------+------------------------+---------------+--------------+
| ## Re       |                        |               |              |
| gion Chairs |                        |               |              |
+-------------+------------------------+---------------+--------------+
| > **Region  | > **Mary Cimbalnik**\  | > 510 Lake    | >            |
| > 1 Chair** | > <region1@wcass.org>\ | > Street\     | 262.691.2100 |
|             | > Pewaukee School      | > Pewaukee,   | > (P)\       |
|             | > District             | > WI          | >            |
|             |                        | > 53072-2698  | 262.695.5044 |
|             |                        |               | > (F)        |
+-------------+------------------------+---------------+--------------+
| > **Region  | > **Dave               | > 223 West    | >            |
| > 2 Chair** | > Kwiatkowski**\       | > Park        | 920.855.2114 |
|             | > <region2@wcass.org>\ | > Street\     | > (P)\       |
|             | > CESA #8              | > Gillett, WI | >            |
|             |                        | > 54124       | 920.855.2299 |
|             |                        |               | > (F)        |
+-------------+------------------------+---------------+--------------+
| > **Region  | > **Ruth Hammiller**\  | > 701 Maple   | >            |
| > 3 Chair** | > <region3@wcass.org>\ | > Street\     | 262.495.7116 |
|             | > Palmyra-Eagle Area   | > Palmyra, WI | > (P)\       |
|             | > School District      | > 53156       | >            |
|             |                        |               | 262.495.7134 |
|             |                        |               | > (F)        |
+-------------+------------------------+---------------+--------------+
| > **Region  | > **Donna Hill**\      | > 1220 St.    | >            |
| > 4 Chair** | > <region4@wcass.org>\ | > Croix       | 715.262.5059 |
|             | > Prescott School      | > Street\     | > x158 (P)\  |
|             | > District             | > Prescott,   | >            |
|             |                        | > WI 54021    | 715.262.4888 |
|             |                        |               | > (F)        |
+-------------+------------------------+---------------+--------------+

**Appendix J**

Regional Services Network

+--------------------+--------------------------+----------------------+
| **CESA**           | **RSN Director**         | **CSPD Coordinator** |
+====================+==========================+======================+
| **CESA 1**         | **Therese Kwiatkowski**  | **Eileen Dagen**     |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Suite 200          | 262-787-9535             | 262-787-9550         |
|                    |                          |                      |
| 9601 W. Bluemound  | <t                       | <meda                |
| Road               | kwiatko@cesa1.k12.wi.us> | gen@cesa1.k12.wi.us> |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Brookfield, WI     |                          |                      |
| 53045              |                          |                      |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Phone:             |                          |                      |
| 262-787-9500       |                          |                      |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Fax: 262-787-9501  |                          |                      |
+--------------------+--------------------------+----------------------+
| **CESA 2**         | **Karen Sanders**        | **Kathy Larson**     |
|                    |                          |                      |
| 448 E High Street  | 608-758-6232 x 316       | 608-758-6232         |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Milton WI 53563    | <k                       | <lar                 |
|                    | sander1@cesa2.k12.wi.us> | son@cesa2.k12.wi.us> |
| Phone:             |                          |                      |
| 608-758-6263       |                          |                      |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Fax: 608-868-6891  |                          |                      |
+--------------------+--------------------------+----------------------+
| **CESA 3**         | **Tom Stuckey**          | **Jim Nelson**       |
|                    |                          |                      |
| 1300 Industrial    | 608-822-3276             | 608-822-3276         |
| Drive              |                          |                      |
|                    | <t                       | <jnel                |
| Fennimore WI 53809 | stuckey@cesa3.k12.wi.us> | son@cesa3.k12.wi.us> |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Phone:             |                          |                      |
| 608-822-3276       |                          |                      |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Fax: 608-822-3828  |                          |                      |
+--------------------+--------------------------+----------------------+
| **CESA 4**         | **Mark Dyar**            | **Mary McKee**       |
|                    |                          |                      |
| 923 East Garland   | 608-786-4842             | 608-786-4806         |
| St                 |                          |                      |
|                    | <mdyar@cesa4.k12.wi.us>  | [mmckee@cesa4.k      |
| PO Box 157         |                          | 12.wi.us](mailto:mmc |
|                    |                          | kee@cesa4.K12.wi.us) |
| West Salem WI      |                          |                      |
| 54669              |                          |                      |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Phone:             |                          |                      |
| 608-786-4800       |                          |                      |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Fax: 608-786-4801  |                          |                      |
+--------------------+--------------------------+----------------------+
| **CESA 5**         | **Sue Wellnitz**         | **Fred Wollenburg**  |
|                    |                          |                      |
| PO Box 564         | 608-742-8814 ext. 286    | 608-742-8814 ext.    |
|                    |                          | 224                  |
| 626 East Slifer    | <we                      |                      |
| Street             | llnitzs@cesa5.k12.wi.us> | <wollebu             |
|                    |                          | rgf@cesa5.k12.wi.us> |
| Portage WI 53901   |                          |                      |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Phone:             |                          |                      |
| 608-742-8811       |                          |                      |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Fax: 608-742-2384  |                          |                      |
+--------------------+--------------------------+----------------------+
| **CESA 6**         | **Barbara Behlen**       |                      |
|                    |                          |                      |
| PO Box 2568        | 920-236-0551             |                      |
|                    |                          |                      |
| 2300 State Road 44 | <                        |                      |
|                    | bbehlen@cesa6.k12.wi.us> |                      |
| Oshkosh WI 54903   |                          |                      |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Phone:             |                          |                      |
| 920-233-2372       |                          |                      |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Fax: 920-424-3478  |                          |                      |
+--------------------+--------------------------+----------------------+
| **CESA 7**         | **Dorie Pagel**          |                      |
|                    |                          |                      |
| 595 Baeten Drive   | 920-492-5960 ext. 627    |                      |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Green Bay WI 54304 | <dpagel@cesa7.k12.wi.us> |                      |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Phone:             |                          |                      |
| 920-492-5960       |                          |                      |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Fax: 920-492-5965  |                          |                      |
+--------------------+--------------------------+----------------------+
| **CESA 8**         | **Chuck Hastert**        | **Joanne Laurich**   |
|                    |                          |                      |
| PO Box 320         | 920-855-2114 x 236       | 920-855-2114 ext.    |
|                    |                          | 231                  |
| 223 West Park St   | <c                       |                      |
| Gillett WI         | hastert@cesa8.k12.wi.us> | Voice Mail ext. 418  |
|                    |                          |                      |
| 4124-0320          |                          | <jlaur               |
|                    |                          | ich@cesa8.k12.wi.us> |
| Phone:             |                          |                      |
| 920-855-2114       |                          |                      |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Fax: 920-855-2299  |                          |                      |
+--------------------+--------------------------+----------------------+
| **CESA 9**         | **Kathy                  |                      |
|                    | Bertolino-Jolin**        |                      |
| PO Box 449         |                          |                      |
|                    | 715-453-2141 x 248       |                      |
| 304 Kaphaem Road   |                          |                      |
|                    | <k                       |                      |
| Tomahawk WI 54487  | bertoli@cesa9.k12.wi.us> |                      |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Phone:             |                          |                      |
| 715-453-2141       |                          |                      |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Fax: 715-453-7519  |                          |                      |
+--------------------+--------------------------+----------------------+
| **CESA 10**        | **Dan Burns**            | **Shelly Elkin**     |
|                    |                          |                      |
| 725 West Park      | 715-720-2043             | 715-720-2056         |
| Avenue             |                          |                      |
|                    | <                        | <selk                |
| Chippewa Falls WI  | dburns@cesa10.k12.wi.us> | in@cesa10.k12.wi.us> |
| 54729              |                          |                      |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Phone:             |                          |                      |
| 715-723-0341       |                          |                      |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Fax: 715-720-2070  |                          |                      |
+--------------------+--------------------------+----------------------+
| **CESA 11**        | **Kathy Laffin**         |                      |
|                    |                          |                      |
| 225 Ostermann      | 715-986-2020x 2169       |                      |
| Drive              |                          |                      |
|                    | <                        |                      |
| Turtle Lake WI     | kathyl@cesa11.k12.wi.us> |                      |
| 54889-9191         |                          |                      |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Phone:             |                          |                      |
| 715-986-2020       |                          |                      |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Fax: 715-986-2040  |                          |                      |
+--------------------+--------------------------+----------------------+
| **CESA #12**       | **Tom Potterton**        | **Sue Kovach**       |
|                    |                          |                      |
| 618 Beaser Avenue  | 715-682-2363 x 113       | 715-682-2363 x 135   |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Ashland WI         | <tomp@cesa12.k12.wi.us>  | <su                  |
| 54806-2751         |                          | ek@cesa12.k12.wi.us> |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Phone:             |                          |                      |
| 715-682-2363       |                          |                      |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Fax: 715-682-7244  |                          |                      |
+--------------------+--------------------------+----------------------+
| **CESA             | **Don Stevens**          |                      |
| Administrator\'s   |                          |                      |
| Rep. CESA 5**      | 608-742-8814             |                      |
|                    |                          |                      |
| PO Box 564         | [stevensd@c              |                      |
|                    | esa5.k12.wi.us](mailto:j |                      |
| 626 East Slifer    | laurich@cesa8.k12.wi.us) |                      |
| Street             |                          |                      |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Portage WI 53901   |                          |                      |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Phone:             |                          |                      |
| 608-742-8811       |                          |                      |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Fax: 608-742-2384  |                          |                      |
+--------------------+--------------------------+----------------------+
| **DPI**            | **Steve Gilles**         | **Ellen Cook**       |
|                    |                          |                      |
| P.O. Box 7841      | 608-266-1146             | 608-267-3749         |
|                    |                          |                      |
| Madison, WI        | <steve                   | [elle                |
| 53707-7841         | .gilles@dpi.state.wi.us> | n.cook@dpi.state.wi. |
|                    |                          | us](mailto:d.ellen.c |
| Fax: 608-267-3746  |                          | ook@dpi.state.wi.us) |
+--------------------+--------------------------+----------------------+

**Appendix K**

State Superintendent's Cabinet\*

State Superintendent's Council

**\*Elizabeth Burmaster**

State Superintendent

**\*Tony Evers**

Deputy State Superintendent

**Michael Bormett**

Director

Policy and Budget

**Joseph Donovan**

Communications Officer

Office of the State Superintendent

**\*Rick Grobschmidt**

Assistant State Superintendent

Division for Libraries, Technology, and Community Learning

**Thomas Grogan**

Legislative Liaison

Office of the State Superintendent

**Jennifer Kammerud**

Education Community Liaison

Office of the State Superintendent

**\*Jack Kean**

Assistant State Superintendent

Division for Academic Excellence

**\*John Kraus**

Special Assistant

Office of the State Superintendent

**Merle McDonald**

Policy Initiatives Advisor

Policy and Budget

**\*Brian Pahnke**

Assistant State Superintendent

Division for Finance and Management

**Robert Paul**

Chief Legal Counsel

Office of Legal Services

**\*Margaret Planner**

Assistant State Superintendent

Division for Reading and Student Achievement

**\*Carolyn Stanford Taylor**

Assistant State Superintendent

Division for Learning Support:\
Equity and Advocacy

**\*Mike Thompson**

Federal Policy Advisor

Office of the State Superintendent

**\*Tricia Yates**

Chief of Staff to State Superintendent Elizabeth Burmaster

[^1]: The state must provide rewards and sanctions for all public
    schools and LEAs for making adequate yearly progress, except that
    the State is not required to hold schools and LEAs not receiving
    Title I funds to the requirements of section 1116 of NCLB
    \[§200.12(b)(40)\].