**Minnesota**

**Consolidated State Application**

**Accountability Workbook**

**for State Grants under Title IX, Part C, Section 9302 of the
Elementary and**

> **Secondary Education Act (Public Law 107-110)**

**DUE: JANUARY 31, 2003**

**Updated: February 14, 2008**

![](media/image1.png)

### 

**U. S. Department of Education**

**Office of Elementary and Secondary Education**

**Washington, D.C. 20202**

# 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 |    |                                                              |
| ] |    |                                                              |
| { |    |                                                              |
| . |    |                                                              |
| u |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| d |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| r |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| } |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
| * |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| F | 1  | Accountability system includes *all schools and districts in |
|   | .1 | the state*.                                                  |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| # | 1  | Accountability system holds *all schools to the same         |
| # | .2 | criteria*.                                                   |
| # |    |                                                              |
| # |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| F |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| 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 |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| W | 1  | Accountability system includes *rewards and sanctions*.      |
|   | .6 |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| # |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| [ |    |                                                              |
| P |    |                                                              |
| r |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| c |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| p |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| 2 |    |                                                              |
| : |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| A |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| S |    |                                                              |
| t |    |                                                              |
| u |    |                                                              |
| d |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| t |    |                                                              |
| s |    |                                                              |
| ] |    |                                                              |
| { |    |                                                              |
| . |    |                                                              |
| u |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| d |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| r |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| } |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| F | 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*.                                                   |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| # |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| [ |    |                                                              |
| 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 |    |                                                              |
| ] |    |                                                              |
| { |    |                                                              |
| . |    |                                                              |
| u |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| d |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| r |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| } |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| F | 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   |
|   |    | yearly progress.*                                            |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| F | 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 |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| # |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| [ |    |                                                              |
| 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 |    |                                                              |
| ] |    |                                                              |
| { |    |                                                              |
| . |    |                                                              |
| u |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| d |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| r |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| } |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| F | 4  | The accountability system *determines annually the progress* |
|   | .1 | of schools and districts.                                    |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+

**STATUS Legend:**

**F** -- Final state policy

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

**W** -- Working to formulate policy

+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| # |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| [ |    |                                                              |
| 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 |    |                                                              |
| ] |    |                                                              |
| { |    |                                                              |
| . |    |                                                              |
| u |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| d |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| r |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| } |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| F | 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 | 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   |
|   |    | each purpose for which disaggregated data are used.          |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| F | 5  | The State has strategies to protect the privacy of           |
|   | .6 | individual students in reporting achievement results and in  |
|   |    | 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 |    |                                                              |
| ] |    |                                                              |
| { |    |                                                              |
| . |    |                                                              |
| u |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| d |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| r |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| } |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| F | 6  | Accountability system is based *primarily on academic        |
|   | .1 | assessments*.                                                |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| # |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| [ |    |                                                              |
| 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 |    |                                                              |
| ] |    |                                                              |
| { |    |                                                              |
| . |    |                                                              |
| u |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| d |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| r |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| } |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| F | 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 |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| # |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| [ |    |                                                              |
| 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 |    |                                                              |
| ] |    |                                                              |
| { |    |                                                              |
| . |    |                                                              |
| u |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| d |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| r |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| } |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| F | 8  | Accountability system holds students, schools and districts  |
|   | .1 | separately accountable for *reading/language arts* and       |
|   |    | *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 |    |                                                              |
| ] |    |                                                              |
| { |    |                                                              |
| . |    |                                                              |
| u |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| d |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| r |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| } |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| F | 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*.                                         |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| # |    |                                                              |
|   |    |                                                              |
| [ |    |                                                              |
| 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 |    |                                                              |
| ] |    |                                                              |
| { |    |                                                              |
| . |    |                                                              |
| u |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| d |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| r |    |                                                              |
| l |    |                                                              |
| i |    |                                                              |
| n |    |                                                              |
| e |    |                                                              |
| } |    |                                                              |
+---+----+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| F | 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         |
|   |    | 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**

Principle I: A single statewide accountability system applied to all
schools and LEAs.

1.  How does the state accountability system include every public school
    and LEA in the state?

Minnesota is in a period of transition with respect to the adoption of a
new and more rigorous set of standards and accountability system. The
processes outlined in this document reflect such a transition;
components will be phased out as the new system is implemented. Even
during this transition period, Minnesota will have a single statewide
accountability system that will meet the intent of both state and
federal statutes. This system will report the performance of all public
schools and districts based on test scores from assessments aligned to
state standards.

# All Schools and Districts

Minnesota statute defines public schools as any school with building,
equipment, courses of study, class schedules, enrollment of pupils
ordinarily in pre-kindergarten through grade 12 or any portion thereof,
and staff meeting the standards established by the Commissioner of the
Minnesota Department of Education.

Elementary school enrollment of pupils ordinarily is in pre-kindergarten
through grade 6 or any portion thereof. Middle school enrollment is
defined as any school other than a secondary school giving an approved
course of study in a minimum of three consecutive grades above 4^th^ but
below 10^th^. Secondary school is any school with enrollment of pupils
ordinarily in grades 7 through 12 or any portion thereof.

Minnesota has numerous school configurations to accommodate the needs
and choices of students and their parents. Schools are classified
according to type of program delivered and the specific student
population served. Test results are reported for all students enrolled
during the testing window. In the case where students come from a
variety of resident districts because of a specialized program, the
results for those students are included in the host school also in the
district that hosts the program.

All public schools are included in the accountability system. This
includes:

-   Schools in independent districts

-   Special districts and schools

-   Charter schools

-   Secondary facilities coops

-   State schools for the blind and deaf/hard hearing, school for the
    arts

-   Secondary vocational schools

-   Area learning centers

Schools with grade configurations not including grade levels that are
tested with the state assessment system will be included by assigning
AYP status to and from feeder schools. In the case of schools with only
grades K-2, AYP determinations made for the grades three and above
buildings will also apply to the feeder school building.

When such assignment is not possible, schools' AYP status will be
"Pending" until the school has or has not proven its adequate yearly
progress by means of curriculum alignment and standardized test results

For Accountability purposes, School District (or LEA) is under the
authority of the commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Education
per 127A.05, Subd. 3 and as defined in Minnesota Statute 120A.05
(Subdivision 8, 10, 14): District. \"District\" means a school district.

Independent district. \"Independent district\" means any school district
validly created and existing as an independent, consolidated, joint
independent, county or a ten or more township district as of July 1,
1957, or pursuant to the Education Code.

Special district. \"Special district\" means a district established by a
charter granted by the legislature or by a home rule charter including
any district designated a special independent school district by the
legislature.

AYP results are based on all students enrolled in all of the schools
served by a district.

The district types are listed below:

> 01 - Independent
>
> 03 - Special (Minneapolis #1 and South St. Paul #6)
>
> 06 - Intermediate (Hennepin Technical #287, Northeast Metropolitan
> #916 and Dakota County #917)
>
> 07 - Charter/Outcome-Based School
>
> 34 - Tribal Contract/Grant
>
> 35 - Private Alternative District
>
> 50 - Miscellaneous Cooperative
>
> 51 - Secondary Vocational Cooperative
>
> 52 - Special Education Cooperative
>
> 53 - Vocational and Special Education Cooperative
>
> 61 - Education District
>
> 62 - Cooperative Secondary Facilities District, Deseg School Districts
>
> 70 - State Academies for the Deaf/Blind, School for the Arts

# [Documentation]{.underline}

12\. Definition of a Public School and District for Accountability
Purposes

15\. MARSS Minnesota Automatic Reporting System

19\. Minnesota Statute 120B.30 Statewide Testing and Reporting System

33\. C4- State Evidence and State Activities for Meeting Requirements

2.  **How are all public schools and LEAs held to the same criteria when
    making AYP Determinations?**

Minnesota will adopt a single statewide accountability system for all
public schools and districts based on results from the Minnesota
Comprehensive Assessments-Series II (MCA-II). The MCA-II are state
developed criterion referenced assessments aligned to the new state
academic content standards. These tests replace the MCAs which were
aligned to the previous set of standards. Results on the MCA-II are
reported in four different achievement levels:

Level 1- Does Not Meet the Standards

Level 2- Partially Meets the Standards

Level 3- Meets the Standards

Level 4- Exceeds the Standards

The goal of the AYP system is to have all students scoring at or above
Level 3 by 2013-14. Level 3 represents solid grade level work on all
assessments.

Performance baselines will be set for grades 3-8 and high school using
data from the 2005-06 assessments.

AYP progress determinations will be made on the basis of performance
index scores and annual measurable objectives for student achievement as
defined in federal statute. All schools are expected to show improvement
at a rate that will result in 100 percent of the students meeting state
expectations in reading and mathematics by 2013-14.

The performance index will be used to determine whether schools,
districts and the state are meeting annual measurable objectives.
Schools are awarded one full index point for each student who scores at
or above Level 3. One-half index point is awarded for students who score
within level 2. No index points are awarded for students who score
within Level 1. Annual measurable objectives are expressed as index
targets. Students took the MCA-II for the first time in school year
2005-2006. Therefore, new index targets will be generated in 2006 and
then held constant for the 2005-06 and 2006-07 school years. Index
targets will be increased annually in equal increments beginning in
2007-08. All schools must reach the goal of 100 index points by the year
2013-14.

Minnesota will incorporate an additional growth calculation, subject to
approval by the USDOE, once grades three through eight reading and
mathematics assessments have been implemented for at least two years.

# [Documentation]{.underline}

6\. AYP Performance Index Overview

10\. AYP Technical Paper Number 4: Index Basis for Measuring AYP Goals

16\. Minnesota Comprehensive Assessment Achievement Level Descriptors

33\. C4- State Evidence and State Activities for Meeting Requirements

1.3 Does the state have at a minimum a definition of basic, proficient
and advanced student achievement levels in reading and mathematics?

Prior to the 2005-2006 school year, Minnesota's statewide assessments
were aligned to the previous reading and mathematics standards. In 2003,
the State Legislature approved new academic content standards in reading
and mathematics. The Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments (MCA-II) given
for the first time in 2005-2006, are aligned to these new set of
standards. At the present time, the Minnesota assessment system includes
the following: The Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments (MCA-II) in
reading and mathematics, the Test of Emerging Academic English (TEAE)
for LEP students and the Alternate Assessment for students with
disabilities.

# MCA Achievement Levels

Results on the MCAs were reported in five achievement levels.

Results on the MCA-II are currently reported in four achievement levels:
Level 1, Level 2, Level 3, and Level 4 as described below. These are
generic descriptions that define achievement relative to the appropriate
grade level. Note: these descriptions may change as the assessment
system is enhanced to reflect new more rigorous grade specific
standards.

-   Level 1 scores indicate that the student has significant gaps in the
    knowledge and skills necessary for satisfactory grade level work.
    This level corresponds to "below basic" level work for NCLB
    requirements.

-   Scores in Level 2 represent partial knowledge and skills required
    for successful grade level achievement. This level corresponds to a
    "basic" level of achievement for NCLB.

-   A score at or above Level 3 (scale score 1420-1499) represents state
    expectations for achievement of all students. Students who score at
    Level 3 are working successfully on grade-level material. This level
    corresponds to a "proficient" level of achievement for NCLB.

-   Scores in Level 4 represent successful work with challenging, above
    grade level material. This level corresponds to an "advanced" level
    of achievement for NCLB.

\* New level descriptions will be available July 25, 2006.

# TEAE Achievement Levels

For state accountability purposes, all LEP students currently take the
MCA-II with language accommodations. Results from the reading section of
the Test of Emerging Academic English (TEAE) will be used in the state
accountability system. This alignment study is fully described in
appendix 34. (See sections 2.1 and 5.4 for a further discussion of the
TEAE)

The TEAE is a standards-based assessment aligned to the Minnesota's
grade level expectations in reading that provides information about LEP
students' progress towards those grade level expectations. This test is
given annually to LEP students in grades three through twelve. Scores
are reported in five achievement levels.

The state is conducted a formal alignment study to validate the
relationship between the TEAE and the new English/reading standards. The
goal of this study was to determine the feasibility of relying on the
TEAE so LEP students do not have to take the reading MCA-II in addition
to the reading TEAE since both measure the same grade specific
expectations.

Minnesota uses the reading TEAE to measure the reading achievement of
LEP students for school accountability purposes. These scores will
generate index points and be included in the AYP calculations.

# Alternate Assessment Achievement Levels

The Minnesota Alternate Assessments are provided for special education
students who are severely cognitively impaired. IEP teams may direct
schools to administer an alternate academic assessment or an alternate
functional assessment based on the overlap of student\'s daily
curriculum with the assessment tool. The academic assessment evaluates
academic skills for students who have goals in the content area but are
not able to participate in the MCA-II. The functional assessment
evaluates daily living skills. Both forms of the alternate assessment
are observational checklists completed by the student\'s teacher.

A standard setting process using Modified Angof methodology will be used
this spring to set four achievement levels corresponding to the
achievement levels on the MCA-II. These scores will generate index
points and be included in the AYP calculations.

Alternate assessments are scored on a seven-point scale. The chart below
illustrates the proposal for how alternate assessment scores will be
used to generate index points. Minnesota will limit the percentage of
students who are allowed to generate index points counting as proficient
in the state accountability system based on results from the alternate
assessment to one percent of the total test taking population at the
district or state level as outlined in the December 9, 2003 final
regulations.

  ----------------------------- ----------- ------- --------------- ------- ----- ------------- ------
                                Awareness           Understanding                 Application   

  Alternate Assessment Scores   1           2       3               4       5     6             7

  MCA-II Achievement Levels     Level 1     Level 2                 Level 3       Level 4       
  ----------------------------- ----------- ------- --------------- ------- ----- ------------- ------

This proposal will be evaluated this spring during the standard setting
process.

Minnesota is planning to develop student centered alternate assessments
to provide more reliable information regarding student performance.

# [Documentation]{.underline}

16\. Minnesota Comprehensive Achievement Level Descriptors

20\. Minnesota Test of Emerging Academic English Test Specifications

21\. Minnesota Test of Emerging Academic English Alignment Study

32\. The 2003 Alternate Assessment Process

34\. Proposed Alignment Study of Minnesota's Grade Specific Expectations
for Reading       with the TEAE and the MCA-II

1.4 How does the State provide accountability and adequate yearly
progress decisions and information in a timely manner?

# Timing of Accountability and Assessment Reporting

Minnesota recognizes the need to release AYP results in time for LEAs to
implement required provisions before the beginning of the next academic
school year. As such, testing dates will be scheduled in early May.
Minnesota assessment contracts require that results be ready no later
than 42 days following the administration of assessments.

**Review of Results**

Minnesota has a system for districts to review and correct student
information prior to the release of final AYP status. This system
includes two key components.

First, schools and districts are allowed to review the demographics and
test participation information 20 days after the close of the test
administration window. Corrections to student identification
information, demographic information or test participation information
are permitted within this first review window. Superintendents are
required to signoff on the accuracy of this data. Once this signoff is
received the state proceeds to preliminary AYP calculations. This
preliminary review does not include student scores.

The second key review component occurs at the same time as the release
of the test scores. Preliminary, confidential AYP results are scheduled
for annual release on June 30. This review includes student test scores
and preliminary AYP calculations. Schools have thirty days to appeal
their preliminary status based on statistical error or substantive
reasons such as a one-time significant change in the student population,
a natural disaster or other circumstances that render the assessments
invalid.

**Annual School and District Identification**

Final AYP results are scheduled for annual release on July 30 following
the thirty-day appeal window. July 30 results are final for all schools
unless there is a pending appeal. Schools and districts then have thirty
days to notify parents about their options for school choice and
supplemental services before the start of school on September 1.

Due to the creation of new academic standards and assessments the annual
school and district identification for the 2006 AYP determination will
be slightly different. On August 15, 2006 a preliminary release of AYP
and assessment data will be made to schools and districts; at this time
schools and districts will have the ability to verify data. On September
1, 2006 preliminary AYP and report card data will be released to the
public. Schools and districts will have an additional 15 days to verify
data and file appeals. Final AYP data will be released to the public on
November 15, 2006.

Schools and districts that are currently in any of the AYP consequence
stages must continue being in that stage until the final publication of
data on November 15, 2006. Schools and districts that move into or
further along the AYP consequences must act on preliminary data and
begin the improvement process including: parent notification, mandated
set-asides, and the appropriate consequence. Please refer to document 32
for specific details on the levels of consequence that schools and
districts will need to implement using preliminary data.

**Capacity to Implement the AYP System**

The Minnesota Department of Education (MDE) is responsible for the
creation of the review process for verification of student demographics
and test participation results. MDE has created a secure web
application, which is updated annually, to allow schools and districts
to review preliminary results and develop a process to post final AYP
information.

**School Choice and Supplemental Services**

During school year 2002-2003, Minnesota did not have any low performing
schools in Year 2 consequences. All low performing schools offered
school choice during this current school year and based on the results
from the 2002-03 MCA-II some will be required to offer supplemental
services in the 2003-04 school. An application packet for supplemental
service providers is being developed for release to potential vendors.
Interested vendors may apply for inclusion on a state list of approved
providers. Based on state developed criteria, Minnesota will approve a
list of providers for supplemental services. The state will update this
list annually and may open additional windows for submissions based upon
the needs of students and districts.

The state approved list of supplemental service providers will be
available by June 1 each year. This will allow schools to begin making
arrangements for supplemental services during the thirty-day appeal
window if based on preliminary results they suspect that they may be
required to provide these options for students.

Minnesota has championed parental choice through the Postsecondary
Enrollment Options Act enacted in 1985 and the Open Enrollment Act
enacted in 1986. Open enrollment enables students and their parents the
choice to enroll in any district throughout the state with approval from
the resident and non-resident districts. In addition, the State's two
largest districts, Minneapolis and St. Paul, have a history of providing
parents of resident students with numerous choices through magnet
schools. Each spring, both districts host fairs for the purpose of
enabling schools in the districts, as well as charter schools within the
district boundaries, the opportunity to share information with parents
and students about the numerous choices available to them. Choice is not
a new concept to Minnesota. Therefore, the provisions under NCLB
allowing parents the choice of transferring to a school that made AYP
have not had the impact in Minnesota that it has in other states.

Because Minnesota has had a long standing practice of offering choice to
parents and students, MDE encourages schools identified for School
Improvement after not making AYP for two consecutive years to not only
offer choice but to also offer supplemental services.

# [Documentation]{.underline}

1.  Appeals Process

2.  Application Form for Supplemental Services

23\. No Child Left Behind Process Model

31\. Testing Schedules

32\. Timelines for Reporting Decision for 2005-2006 Only

1.5 Does the state accountability system produce an annual state report
card?

# Public Information

Currently, Minnesota has a school improvement web site that provides
sophisticated data analysis options for all schools and districts in the
state. A report card component has been added to this site that includes
all of the required data elements in a single section.

**Information in the Aggregate**

The report card will contain two-year trend scores in each grade and
subject for all of the required elements that are currently supported by
state collection systems at the school, district and state levels
including: the five categories of race/ethnicity, gender, disability
status, migrant status, English proficiency, status as economically
disadvantaged, economically disadvantaged versus non-disadvantaged and
disability status versus non-disability status. Aggregate results are
based on all students at the school, district and state level.

**Achievement Comparisons**

Scores for all groups will be reported to provide a comparison between
the actual achievement level and the state's annual measurable
objectives.

**Test Participation**

Participation will be reported for all groups, and the numbers of
students who are not tested will be reported in disaggregated
categories.

**Additional Indicators**

Additionally, aggregate information will be included on the graduation
rate and attendance. Both attendance and graduation rates will be
disaggregated for use in the safe harbor calculations as well as for
reporting on the state report card.

**Professional Qualifications of Teachers**

Professional qualifications of teachers, the percentage of such teachers
teaching with emergency credentials, and the percentage of classes not
taught by highly qualified teachers, in the aggregate, and disaggregated
by high-poverty compared to low-poverty schools.

# Report Card

During the past two years, Minnesota has issued its report card in
conjunction with the State Fair. Parents and the public have the
opportunity to visit the Education Building and access the report card
for the school their child attends. Staff from the Department is
available during the entire time to answer questions. On opening day,
the Governor and Commissioner hold a press conference to announce the
availability of the report card.

1.6 How does the state accountability system include rewards and
sanctions for public schools and LEAs?

# Statewide Accountability System

Minnesota is currently developing a statewide accountability system that
is consistent with state and federal legislative requirements to
identify both high and low performing schools and districts. This system
will apply to all public schools and districts in the state regardless
of their Title I status.

All schools in the state will be rated in five different areas using a
four star system.

-   **Academic Achievement**

Schools will be rated on academic achievement in the following areas:

The percent of students who are proficient at each grade level in
reading and mathematics as compared to the state averages; academic
growth based on improvements in state test scores and the NCLB
definition of adequate yearly progress. Results will be shown for
disaggregated groups. To be awarded the top rating schools must show
progress over time with all groups of students.

• **Academic Opportunity**

> Schools will be evaluated based on the depth and breadth of academic
> opportunity offered to students including the number of advanced
> courses offered such as AP and IB and gifted and talented
> opportunities.
>
> • **School Safety\
> **The four-star system will be used to rate all schools in the state
> on safety. This rating will be based on the number and type of
> disciplinary incidents reported each year, the persistently dangerous
> school rating defined in Title IV and the number of suspensions and
> expulsions.

-   **Student Participation**

> Student participation will be evaluated based on the attendance and
> graduation rates as well as the number of dropouts. All components
> will be evaluated over time.

-   **Teacher Quality**

> The quality of the teaching staff will be reported based on the number
> of teachers, the years of experience, level of preparation and
> advanced degrees earned and the number of paraprofessionals and their
> level of preparation

-   **Tax Payers Report**

> School financial situations will be reported based on the sources of
> district general operating revenues, the district us of general
> operating funds, amount of long term debt the current year's revenues
> and expenditures, and, the tax rates and amounts paid.

**Rewards and Sanctions**

This five star rating system will be incorporated into the information
displayed on the State report card that outlines the performance of all
schools and districts in the state. Schools with high ratings will be
rewarded with public commendations.

The federally required sanctions will apply only to Title I schools. The
state process will require schools to create a school improvement plan
that addresses eight key areas: curriculum, instruction, assessment,
professional development, financial resources, leadership, and,
governance. School improvement plans will include strengths and
weaknesses in each of the eight areas, and an outline of how the school
will address specific issues critical to the improvement of student
achievement.

# [Documentation]{.underline}

19\. Minnesota Statute 120B.30 Statewide Testing and Reporting System

Principle 2: All students are included in the state accountability
system.

2.1 How does the state accountability system include all students in the
state?

**Definition of Public Schools and Districts**

Schools are defined as any school with a building, equipment, courses of
study, class schedules, enrollment of pupils ordinarily in
pre-kindergarten through grade 12 or any portion thereof, and staff
meeting the standards established by the Commissioner of the Department
of Education.

Elementary school enrollment of pupils ordinarily is in kindergarten
through grade 6 or any portion thereof. Middle school enrollment is
defined as any school other than a secondary school giving an approved
course of study in a minimum of three consecutive grades above 4^th^ but
below 10^th^. Secondary school is any school with enrollment of pupils
ordinarily in grades 7 through 12 or any portion thereof.

For Accountability purposes, School District (or LEA) is under the
authority of the commissioner of children, families and learning per
127A.05, Subd. 3 and as defined in Minnesota Statute 120A.05
(Subdivision 8, 10, 14): District. \"District\" means a school district.
Further information on this definition is provided in section 1.1.

**Inclusion of All Students**

All students enrolled on the day of the test must participate in the
testing and count toward the ninety-five percent participation
requirements. Schools are required to return an answer document for all
students enrolled.

Students are considered absent and not counted towards meeting the
ninety-five percent tested requirement if they are unable to make up the
test during the testing window or if they have been withdrawn based on
parental request.

Students are identified and their enrollment and attendance is verified
through the Minnesota Automated Reporting System for Students (MARSS).
MARSS is a state level student identification system that assigns each
student a unique identification number. This number associates each
student with his/her full demographic information including ethnicity,
LEP status, SES status, disability status, migrant status, gender, age
and date of birth. Districts receive state aid based on the number of
students enrolled with a MARSS number. This student identification
number is used in an edit check to verify that all students enrolled are
also included in the testing.

# Inclusion of Student with Disabilities

Approximately twelve percent of the student population receives special
education services. The majority of special education students
participate in the MCA-II appropriate for their grade level and may have
accommodations as determined by their IEP team. Minnesota does not allow
out of level testing.

Approximately two percent of the special education population, severely
cognitively disabled students, takes an alternate assessment. These
numbers are included in the participation rates for schools, districts
and the state.

Alternate achievement levels have been set that align to the achievement
levels on the MCA-II. Students who take the alternate assessments earn
index points used in the school, district and state AYP performance
index ratings. (See sections 1.3 and 5.3 for further information about
the alternate assessments for severely cognitively disabled students.)
Minnesota will limit the number of students that can contribute index
scores indicating proficiency based on the proposed federal limits of
one percent at the district and state level.

Minnesota will adopt the flexibility for defining membership in the
special education subgroup outlined in the December, 15 2005 proposed
regulations. The special education subgroup in 2006 will include all
current special education students as well as any former special
education students who were reclassified as non- special education
students in one of the previous two years.

[Minnesota adopted the 2% special education proxy that ED proposed in
May 2005 for use in AYP 2007. We request authority to use the proxy in
our 2008 calculations.]{.mark} This new flexibility addresses the 2% of
the nation's students are neither appropriately assessed with a general
education assessment nor appropriately assessed with the alternative
assessment for the most significantly cognitively disabled (students
discussed previously under the 1% cap).

# Inclusion of Students with Limited English Proficiency

During the 2002-04 school years, LEP students were required to take the
MCAs appropriate to their grade level. In its January 31, 2003
submission, MDE indicated that it was undertaking an alignment study of
the reading section of the Minnesota Comprehensive Assessment (MCA) and
the reading section of the Test of Emerging Academic English (TEAE). MDE
has finished its work on this alignment study.

The alignment study MDE conducted show that the two assessments are
aligned, MDE will submitted to USED proper documentation so that the
department may determine whether or not Minnesota can use the TEAE
Reading for LEP students in lieu of the MCA Reading.

In 2004-2005 and beyond, following USED policy decisions as outlined in
the February 20, 2004 "Dear Colleague" letter, LEP students in their
first year in school will be included in the accountability system with
either the TEAE Reading or the MCA Reading.

# 

# *Implementing the federal flexibility for the LEP group when calculating AYP proficiency and participation*

Minnesota had already amended the June 2003 workbook submission to
include English Language Learners (ELL) and Transitional Language
Learners (TLL) in the LEP subgroup for AYP purposes. TLL are former ELL
who have not yet scored in the proficient category on the MCA.

Minnesota will adopt the flexibility for defining membership in the LEP
subgroup outlined in the February 20, 2004 Dear Colleague letter. The
LEP subgroup in 2004 will include all current LEP as well as any former
LEP who were reclassified as non-LEP in one of the previous two years.
This federal flexibility will co-exist with the Minnesota plan to
include ELL and TLL in the LEP subgroup.

Minnesota will also make use of the flexibility provision for immigrants
new to the country. LEP students who have been in the U.S. less than one
year (defined per the joint CCSSO/ Title I/ Title III conference call on
March 5, 2004 as LEP students who were not enrolled in school 1 or more
days during the previous academic year) will not be included in AYP
proficiency calculations at the school, district, or state level. These
students will be included in the participation calculation in 2004 on
the MCA and in 2005 and beyond on either the MCA-II or Minnesota's
measure of English language proficiency in reading, the TEAE. LEP
students however, will continue to take the MCA-II in math with
appropriate accommodations.

# [Documentation]{.underline}

1\. Accommodations and Modifications for Students with Special Needs on
Minnesota Statewide Assessments

25\. Participation Calculation Rules

2.2 How does the state define "full academic year" for identifying
students in AYP decisions?

# 

**Definition of a Full Academic Year**

The current testing window is March-April depending on the grade and
subject being tested. By school year 2005-06 all testing will occur in a
single window in early May. Students are considered enrolled for a full
academic year if they are enrolled on October 1 of the current school
year and also enrolled at the time of testing. This definition of full
academic year is applied to students for the MCA-II, the Alternate
Assessments and the Test of Emerging Academic English.

This definition of full academic year is also applied consistently to
all students in all schools and districts in the state (see section
1.1).

# [Documentation]{.underline}

15\. MARSS: Minnesota Automated Reporting Student System 2002-03

2.3 How does the state accountability system determine which students
have attended the same public school and/or LEA for a full academic
year?

**Accurate Student Information**

The Minnesota Automated Reporting Student Systems (MARSS) is a statewide
student identification system that is used to track students to ensure
that they are not left out of the accountability system. Each student is
assigned a unique identification number. Test documents are returned
with the student's name, MARSS identification number and date of birth.
The early roster AYP verification system, combined with data edits, is
used to verify student identify based on name, date of birth and MARSS
number. The MARSS system includes enrollment and withdrawal information
about students for each school and district of attendance within the
academic year.

An edit is done through the MARSS system to verify enrollment on test
day based on state funding received for students during that same time
period. The October 1 status is also verified through the MARSS system
which links student identification information to both dates.

**Include All Students in School, District and/or State Results**

Results for students who are not in attendance at a single site for a
full academic year are not excluded from the accountability system.
Students who transfer between buildings within districts are included in
district and state calculations even though their scores are not
assigned to a particular building. Students who transfer among districts
in the state are included in the state calculations.

# [Documentation]{.underline}

15\. MARSS: Minnesota Automated Reporting Student System 2002-03

Principle 3: State definition of AYP is based on an expectation for
growth in student achievement that is continuous and substantial, such
that all students are proficient in reading/language arts and
mathematics no later than 2013-14.

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 2013-2014 academic years?**

# Separate Measurements for Reading and Mathematics

AYP determinations will be made separately for each subject tested.
Starting points, intermediate goals and annual measurable objectives
will be determined separately for reading and mathematics.

**AYP Performance Index**

School and district performance is assessed by determining the
proportion of students scoring at or above grade level expectations in
reading and mathematics.

Minnesota has chosen to use a performance index to calculate AYP to
increase the reliability and validity to the accountability system. The
proportion of students scoring in achievement levels is used to assign
index points. Points are awarded for students at two decision points:

-   One half point for each student in Level 2

-   One full point for each student in Level 3

The performance index increases the number of data points used to make
decisions about schools thereby increasing the stability and consistency
of the decision. The performance index also increases the validity of
the system since it gives schools credit for moving students from the
lowest achievement level into higher levels. Schools receive credit for
growth but are also held to achievement status requirements.

As some schools are very far away from reaching state expectations for
student achievement, the performance index will allow schools to
demonstrate success in the beginning of the new system while still
allowing them to retain a focus on the ultimate state expectation of
having 100% of all students score at or above Level 3 by school year
2013-14.

**Combining Data Across Grades**

Minnesota will use a uniform averaging procedure to identify the annual
measurable objective required of all groups within each school and
district to determine AYP status. Annual measurable objectives or the
number of required index points will be based on the total number of
students in each grade for each school and district. For example, annual
measurable objectives for K-5 schools will be calculated on the basis of
the grades three, four, and five assessments. Annual objectives for K-12
schools will be calculated using data from all tests administered in the
school.

This methodology ensures that information about schools and districts is
based on precise information about their students.

# [Documentation]{.underline}

8\. AYP Technical Paper Number 2: Statewide Accountability
System-Technical Features

10\. AYP Technical Paper Number 4: Index Basis for Measuring AYP Codes

22\. NCLB Data Base Component: AYP 2001-02 Starting Points

1.  **How does the state accountability system determine whether each
    student subgroup, public school and LEA makes AYP?**

In determining whether each subgroup, each school and each district, as
well as the state as a whole, meets the annual measurable objectives,
Minnesota will use three categories of indicators: participation, AYP
performance index and attendance or graduation rate.

**Participation Requirements**

To ensure high levels of reliability and consistency of decisions any
group with at least forty students across tested grades will be included
in the participation rate calculations. This cell size ensures that even
with the smallest groups in the state no more than two students may be
absent on test day. A participation rate of at least ninety-five percent
is required to make AYP. Any group that has fewer than forty students
will not be included in these calculations (see section 10.2 for further
details).

Based on recent flexibility from USED which allowed states flexibility
in the participation calculation, Minnesota amended its accountability
system to allow for uniform averaging of participation across three
years. In addition, students who are medially unable to test during the
testing window may be excluded from the test participation calculation
if the district has appropriate documentation.

If any group that meets the minimum group size of 40 does not meet the
95% requirement on the current year's data, the data for that group will
be combined and averaged across two years to determine if the 95%
participation rate can be met. If the group still does not meet the 95%
requirement, data will be combined across three years and averaged.

AYP Performance Index

Student achievement will be evaluated on the basis of performance index
scores and annual measurable objectives as defined in federal statute.
All schools are expected to improve achievement at a rate that will
result in 100 percent of the students meeting state expectations in
reading and mathematics by 2013-14.

The performance index will be used to determine whether schools,
districts and the state are meeting annual measurable objectives.
Performance index scores are calculated at the school and district level
if there is a minimum of twenty students across tested grades.

Schools are awarded one full index point for each student who scores at
or above Level 3. One-half index point is awarded for students who score
within level 2. No index points are awarded for students who score
within Level 1. Annual measurable objectives are expressed as index
targets. New index targets will be generated in 2006 and then held
constant for the 2005-06 and 2006-07 school years. Index targets will be
increased annually in equal increments beginning in 2007-08

**Additional Indicators**

Minnesota has identified attendance and graduation rate as the two
additional indicators to be used for AYP determinations for schools,
districts and the state. Minnesota will require grade K-8 schools to
have a ninety percent attendance rate and high schools to have an eighty
percent graduation rate to be considered making adequate yearly
progress. In the case of K-12 schools attendance rate will be used as
the additional indicator.

**AYP Determinations**

Schools and districts will not make AYP if they do not meet annual
measurable objectives in any area including test participation, the AYP
proficiency index rating, attendance and/or graduation.

Title I schools will be subject to federal consequences if they fail to
meet AYP requirements within any cell in the academic category
(participation and proficiency index) for two consecutive years or if
they fail to meet AYP requirements for the other academic indicator
(attendance for elementary and middle schools or graduation for high
schools) for two consecutive years.

Title I districts will be subject to federal consequences if they fail
to meet AYP requirements within any cell in the academic category
(participation and proficiency index) for two consecutive years or if
they fail to meet AYP requirements for attendance and/or graduation for
two consecutive years.

**Safe Harbor**

Any group that does not meet the annual measurable objectives by
generating the required number of index points may still make AYP if the
number of non-proficient students is reduced by ten percent compared to
the previous year. The number of additional index points the school or
district needs to reach the goal of one-hundred (all students
proficient) represents the non-proficient students.

Schools and districts must reduce the number additional number of index
points needed to make the goal of one-hundred index points by ten
percent. This number is added to the index rate earned the previous
year. If the current year's index rate meets or exceeds this figure
(last year's rate plus 10% of the number needed to meet the goal of one
hundred index points) the school or district can make AYP if the group
is also making AYP in attendance and/or graduation. Attendance and
graduation rates are disaggregated for use with the safe harbor
calculation.

# [Documentation]{.underline}

14\. Index Calculation Rules

23\. NCLB Data Base Component: Confidence Interval Tables

25\. Participation Calculation Rules

30\. Steering Committee Recommendations

35\. AYP Framework -- Relationship Between the Performance Index and the
Percentage       Proficient

**3.2a What is the state's starting point for calculating adequate
yearly progress?\
**

# Same Starting Point for All- Based on the 20^th^ Percentile of Enrollment

Minnesota has established separate starting points for each grade and
subject tested. Starting points are the same for all subgroups and
schools. Starting points are based on data from MCA-II, 2006. The
starting points were generated using NCLB methodology that requires all
schools in the state to be ranked from lowest to highest performing
based on their test scores. Index points were calculated for the school
at the 20^th^ percentile of enrollment as identified for each grade and
subject. Based on the AYP performance index, schools at the 20^th^
percentile were higher performing in both reading and mathematics than
the lowest performing subgroup in all cases.

Starting Points 2006

The table below shows starting points expressed in AYP proficiency
rating index points***.*** Minnesota re-established its starting points
based on new academic standards. Starting points are based on data from
the MCA-II the 2005-06 school year.

  ---------------------------- ------------------------------------------
  **Reading Starting Point**   **Starting Points Expressed in Index
                               Ratings**

  Grade                        **2006**

  3                            0.7222

  4                            0.6948

  5                            0.7193

  6                            0.7027

  7                            0.6563

  8                            0.6404

  10                           0.6477
  ---------------------------- ------------------------------------------

  ---------------------------- ------------------------------------------
  **Math Starting Point**      **Starting Points Expressed in Index
                               Ratings**

  Grade                        **2006**

  3                            0.7895

  4                            0.6964

  5                            0.5979

  6                            0.5989

  7                            0.5880

  8                            0.5839

  11                           0.2813
  ---------------------------- ------------------------------------------

Documentation

8\. AYP Technical Paper Number 2: Statewide Accountability
System-Technical Features

22\. NCLB Data Base Component: Starting Points

26\. Preliminary 3-Year Average of Percent Proficient Starting Points
with Index

3.2 b What are the state's annual measurable objectives for determining
adequate yearly progress?

**Annual AYP Decisions**

In Minnesota annual measurable objectives are expressed as target index
points. (See section 3.2c for projected annual target index point
requirements**.)** Annual measurable objectives will remain the same for
the first two years and then be increased in equal increments beginning
in 2007-08 to ensure that all students are proficient as required in the
federal timelines. As additional assessments are developed and used to
make AYP decisions pursuant to the federal timelines, annual measurable
objectives will be established based on requirements outlined in federal
statute.

**Proficiency by 2013-14**

Each year AYP decisions are made for schools, districts and the state.
To have all students proficient by school year 2013-14 100 percent of
students must score at or above achievement Level 3; thus the final
index target is 100. This target index requirement will apply to all
reading and mathematics assessments grades 3-8 and high school.

Minnesota has received approval to exercise it authority under NCLB,
section 1111 (2) Accountability (J)(i). Therefore, beginning with school
year 2004-2005 schools and districts that do not make adequate yearly
progress towards their index target nor qualify under the safe harbor
provision, will have their student's test scores averaged for up to
three years. An example of how this works is provided below:

Lake Woobegone School does not make AYP for school year 2004-2005.

Lake Woobegone School does not make AYP using the safe harbor provisions

Scores from the 2004-2005 school year will be averaged with the scores
from the 2003-2004 school year to determine AYP. If the school still
does not make AYP, scores from the 2002-2003 school year will be added.

Using this provision will eliminate the anomalies created by having
small cell sizes and will ensure that those schools that are truly in
need of improvement are identified.

# [Documentation]{.underline}

8\. AYP Technical Paper Number 2: Statewide Accountability
System-Technical Features

22\. NCLB Data Base Component: Starting Points

26\. Preliminary 3-Year Average of Percent Proficient Starting Points
with Index

3.2.c What are the state's intermediate goals for determining adequate
yearly progress?

During the 2005-06 and 2006-07 school years Annual Measurable Objectives
(AMO's) will be held constant. Beginning in school year 2007-08 the
target index points will increase annually in equal increments until
school year 2013-14 when the target index is 100. A performance index of
100 can only be generated if all students meet or exceed the statewide
expectations for AYP by scoring at or above Level 3 on the MCA-II. The
table below shows the annual measurable objectives for the assessments
in grades three thru eight, ten and eleven.

  ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
  **Math**   1          2          3          4          5          6          7          8          9

  Grade      **2006**   **2007**   **2008**   **2009**   **2010**   **2011**   **2012**   **2013**   **2014**

  3          0.7895     0.7895     0.8196     0.8496     0.8797     0.9098     0.9399     0.9699     1.0000

  4          0.6964     0.6964     0.7398     0.7831     0.8265     0.8699     0.9133     0.9566     1.0000

  5          0.5979     0.5979     0.6553     0.7128     0.7702     0.8277     0.8851     0.9426     1.0000

  6          0.5989     0.5989     0.6562     0.7135     0.7708     0.8281     0.8854     0.9427     1.0000

  7          0.5880     0.5880     0.6469     0.7057     0.7646     0.8234     0.8823     0.9411     1.0000

  8          0.5839     0.5839     0.6433     0.7028     0.7622     0.8217     0.8811     0.9406     1.0000

  11         0.2813     0.2813     0.3840     0.4866     0.5893     0.6920     0.7947     0.8973     1.0000
  ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------

  ------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
  **Reading**                                                                                           

  Grade         **2006**   **2007**   **2008**   **2009**   **2010**   **2011**   **2012**   **2013**   **2014**

  3             0.7222     0.7222     0.7619     0.8016     0.8413     0.8809     0.9206     0.9603     1.0000

  4             0.6948     0.6948     0.7384     0.7820     0.8256     0.8692     0.9128     0.9564     1.0000

  5             0.7193     0.7193     0.7594     0.7995     0.8396     0.8797     0.9198     0.9599     1.0000

  6             0.7027     0.7027     0.7452     0.7876     0.8301     0.8726     0.9151     0.9575     1.0000

  7             0.6563     0.6563     0.7054     0.7545     0.8036     0.8527     0.9018     0.9509     1.0000

  8             0.6404     0.6404     0.6918     0.7431     0.7945     0.8459     0.8973     0.9486     1.0000

  10            0.6477     0.6477     0.6980     0.7484     0.7987     0.8490     0.8993     0.9497     1.0000
  ------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------

AYP determinations will be made annually for all subgroups, schools and
districts based on the starting points and annual measurable objectives
outlined above.

# [Documentation]{.underline}

8\. AYP Technical Paper Number 2: Statewide Accountability
System-Technical Features

22\. NCLB Data Base Component: Starting Points

27\. Preliminary 3-Year Average of Percent Proficient Starting Points
with Index

Principle 4: State makes annual decisions about the achievement of all
public schools and LEAs.

4.1 How does the state accountability system make an annual
determination of whether each public school and LEA in the state made
AYP?

Annual AYP decisions will be based on whether or not each school and
district is on track to meet the goal of 100 percent of the students
meeting state expectations for high academic achievement by 2013-14 by
scoring at or above Level 3 on the MCA-II.

Schools and districts will not make AYP if any group does not meet the
annual measurable objective within the academic category or the other
indicator category. Federal consequences will apply to Title I schools
and districts in which any group does not make AYP for two consecutive
years within a subject area or other academic indicator. This approach
is consistent with NCLB's goal of targeting remediation to specific
performance deficiencies.

# [Documentation]{.underline}

6\. AYP Performance Index Overview

10\. AYP Technical Paper Number 4: Index Basis for Measuring AYP Goals

14\. Index Calculation Rules

29\. Recommendations from Stakeholder Committee

30\. Steering Committee Recommendations

Principle 5: All schools and LEAs are held accountable for the
achievement of individual subgroups.

5.1 How does the definition of adequate yearly progress include all of
the required subgroups?

Definitions of Subgroups Included in AYP Calculations

The state definition of AYP requires students in the following groups to
meet annual state achievement objectives: LEP, Special Ed, low income,
African American, American Indian, White, Hispanic, Asian, all students
combined.

Student demographic characteristics and ethnic designations are tracked
via the MARSS identification system. Student characteristics are flagged
and attached to the student identification number. Characteristics used
to define each of the subgroups are defined and collected in the
following manner:

-   Student ethnicity is collected from parents or guardians at the time
    the student enrolls in school and is based on the five categories
    currently required by the National Center on Educational Statistics.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Eligibility for free and reduced price lunch is determined through
    the completion of an eligibility form indicating family household
    income level and subsequently reported for each school and district
    in the state. While this indicator is problematic at the high
    school, it is the only measure of low-income data available that is
    consistent and reliable.

-   LEP designation is determined by schools reporting that the student
    speaks a language other than English at home and the student is
    below the cut on any of the four areas in the Test of Emerging
    Academic English: reading, writing, listening and speaking. The cut
    scores on these assessments indicate that the student has a
    sufficient skill level to no longer require language support in a
    classroom where English is the language of instruction. Students
    whose scores on the TEAE exceed the cut scores in all four areas are
    no longer identified as LEP - but may be included in the expanded
    LEP category for up to two years after testing proficient on the
    TEAE for AYP purposes.

-   Special education status is reported by districts based on
    requirements outlined in the Individuals with Disabilities Education
    Act.

# [Documentation]{.underline}

15\. MARSS: Minnesota Automated Student Reporting System 2002-03

5.2 How are public schools and LEAs held accountable for the progress of
student subgroups in the determination of Adequate Yearly Progress?

Beginning school year 2002-03, Minnesota will transition into the new
NCLB system and begin identifying schools as not making AYP if any
subgroup does not meet annual measurable objectives within a subject or
other indicator category. Federally mandated consequences will apply to
Title I schools and districts that do not make AYP for two consecutive
years within a subject or other indicator category.

Subgroup Inclusion at the School Level

About half of the schools and districts in Minnesota are located outside
the boundaries of the seven-county metro-area. Since most of greater
Minnesota schools are relatively small, the minimum cell size for
required for AYP performance index calculations is set at twenty with a
.95 confidence interval. A cell size of twenty used in combination with
a confidence interval permits the inclusion of a maximum number of
students across cells while maintaining a high level of statistical
reliability and validity. If a higher minimum cell were used many of the
schools in the state would not be held accountable for subgroup
performance.

# Participation Calculations

# Subgroups at both the school and district level must meet a minimum cell size of forty to be included in the participation calculation. Since the participation rate is essentially a \"head count\" no confidence interval will be used.

# [Documentation]{.underline}

9\. AYP Technical Paper Number 3: Notes on Multiple Comparisons

5.3 How are students with disabilities included in the state's
definition of adequate yearly progress?

Students with disabilities

Students with disabilities as defined in section 5.1 are included in the
special education subgroup based on MARSS identification. Results for
special education students who take the regular MCA-II with or without
accommodations are included in school, district and state totals.

Special education students may take the MCA-II with or without test
accommodations. Severely cognitively disabled students may take an
Alternate Assessment. Currently approximately two percent of the
students in the special education population take alternate assessments
each year. Students who take an alternate assessment are counted in the
ninety-five percent participation requirement and are able to earn index
points using the alternate achievement levels described in section 2.1.
Minnesota will allow districts and the state to evaluate the performance
of one percent of the tested students with alternate achievement
standards based on their performance on the alternate assessment.

Minnesota will adopt the flexibility for defining membership in the
special education subgroup outlined in the December, 15 2005 proposed
regulations. The special education subgroup in 2006 will include all
current special education students as well as any former special
education students who were reclassified as non- special education
students in one of the previous two years.

[Minnesota adopted the 2% special education proxy that ED proposed in
May 2005 for use in AYP 2007. We request authority to use the proxy in
our 2008 calculations.]{.mark} This new flexibility addresses the 2% of
the nation's students are neither appropriately assessed with a general
education assessment nor appropriately assessed with the alternative
assessment for the most significantly cognitively disabled (students
discussed previously under the 1% cap).

# [Documentation]{.underline}

1\. Accommodations and Modifications for Students with Special Needs on
Minnesota Statewide Assessments

5.4 How are students with limited English proficiency included in the
state's definition of adequate yearly progress?

All LEP students, as defined in section 5.1, are included in the
accountability system. Their scores are included in the AYP performance
index calculations in the all group and in disaggregated subgroups.

Minnesota adopted the flexibility for defining membership in the LEP
subgroup outlined in the February 20, 2004 Dear Colleague letter. The
LEP subgroup in 2004 included all current LEP as well as any former LEP
who were reclassified as non-LEP in one of the previous two years. This
federal flexibility will co-exist with the Minnesota plan to include ELL
and TLL in the LEP subgroup. For the mathematics assessments, students
must take the MCA-II but may have translations or other language
accommodations

Test of Emerging Academic English

Minnesota state statute requires students to be assessed in reading in
English. Thus translations of reading tests are not permitted. In order
to better assess the reading skills of students with minimal skill in
English, the state has developed the Minnesota Test of Emerging Academic
English (TEAE), a contextually based standards-based reading assessment
designed for English language learners. The test begins with pre-reading
items and presents passages that become progressively more difficult as
they reach grade level. The TEAE is aligned to grade level expectations
in reading. See section 1.3 for further discussion of the achievement
levels.

# [Documentation]{.underline}

1\. Accommodations and Modifications for Students with Special Needs on
Minnesota Statewide Assessments

5.5 What is the state's definition of the minimum number of students in
a subgroup required for reporting purposes?

Privacy Filters

All data in Minnesota is suppressed on the public web site when there
are less than ten students in any cell or all students in a single cell.
In the case of AYP, unfiltered information will be provided to schools
and districts in confidential reports. When any reportable cell contains
information based on less than ten students, the designation NA appears
with an explanation at the bottom of the page. If more than ninety-five
percent of the students appear in any single cell an indication of
greater than ninety-five percent will be used to indicate the number of
students.

Rational for Cell Sizes - Participation

To achieve reliability and validity in accountability decisions, the
minimum sample size for calculating the participation rate of students
is forty across tested grades. The minimum subgroup size of forty
provides schools with a cushion against failing the participation
requirement for students due to reasons beyond their control. With a
cell size of forty no more than two students in any group may be absent.

Since the participation rate is essentially a head count measurement
error is not an issue. Data are presumed to be accurate since schools
and districts will have had several chances to \"cleanse\" these data.
Since a confidence interval is not used with this calculation the
decision stands to keep this cell size higher than the cell size used to
calculate academic performance.

Rational for Cell Sizes - AYP at the School Level

Minnesota will require a minimum cell size of twenty across tested
grades in the school or district in order to calculate an AYP
performance index. This minimum cell size will be applied to all
subgroup categories.

Minnesota has many small schools outside of the seven-county metro-area.
If the cell size is larger than twenty, many students will not be
included in the subgroups. A small cell size combined with a confidence
interval allows for maximum with a high level of measurement accuracy in
AYP decisions.

In order to ensure that AYP status is published for all schools and
districts regardless of size, data will be combined across years if
schools or districts do not have at least twenty students across tested
grades in the all category. If schools or districts still do not have
enough students to meet the minimum cell size requirement, the
calculation will still be completed but will be marked with an asterisk
indicating that the AYP rating is not statistically reliable due to the
small cell size. Schools may use the small cell size as the basis for an
appeal.

Statistical Reliability

A confidence interval is needed to ensure statistical reliability of the
index system. AYP decisions should be based on student achievement
rather than size or diversity. The high stakes nature of these decisions
requires that decisions have a very small likelihood of
misclassification in terms of false positives or false negatives. This
requires a very stringent confidence level to be sure that the schools
are failing because students did not meet the required target because of
lack of achievement and not due to measurement error.

Minnesota's proposal to use confidence intervals on a sliding scale from
.95 to .99 depending on the total number of decisions to be made for a
school or district was approved by the USDOE. There are potentially
eighteen decision points per subject area and a total of thirty-seven
decisions for the school and thirty-eight decisions at district this
level. The proposal of this proposal will help in avoiding high rates of
misclassification for schools or districts with many groups.

The base confidence interval of .95 was chosen because it minimizes the
false negatives. Minimizing the false negatives is especially important
in this conjunctive model that includes as many as eighteen decision
points per subject in the annual AYP calculation. The misclassification
rate for decisions is .5 percent. A bootstrap methodology has been used
to select a z-value corresponding to the desired confidence level. See
AYP Technical Paper 4 for a complete discussion of this process.

# [Documentation]{.underline}

9\. AYP Technical Paper Number 3: Notes on Multiple Comparisons

10\. AYP Technical Paper Number 4: Index Basis for Measuring AYP

6.  How does the state accountability system protect the privacy of
    students when reporting results and when determining AYP?

Minnesota has a public reporting policy requiring that data in cells of
nine or less to be suppressed and cells with greater than ninety-five
percent of the total population be indicated as including greater than
ninety-five percent rather than the exact number. This policy will
continue to be applied to NCLB public reporting requirements.

# [Documentation]{.underline}

11\. Data Display Privacy Filter Policy

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

1.  How is the state's definition of adequate yearly progress based
    primarily on academic assessments?

# Minnesota's New Academic Standards and Adjustments to Existing Statewide Assessments 

Minnesota schools are in a state of transition with respect to academic
standards. During the 2003 Legislative session, the Profile of Learning,
which constituted the State's academic standards in 11 learning areas,
was repealed. In its place, the Legislature passed grade level standards
in reading/language arts and mathematics. During the 2004 Legislative
session, the legislature passed grade level standards in the areas of
science and social studies.

In developing the new academic standards, the Commissioner established a
committee of teachers, parents, community members and representatives of
high education to develop a draft of the standards in each content area.
These standards were then reviewed and feedback provided by a national
expert in the respective field. A total of 16 hearings were also held
throughout the state for the purpose of obtaining feedback on the draft.
The feedback from the national experts and the hearings was used to
create a final draft that went to the Minnesota Legislature.

To assist teachers in transitioning towards new standards, staff from
the Division of Standards and Professional Development has been
conducting regional training to help teachers understand the differences
between the new standards and those under the Profile of Learning, as
well as the benchmarks contained in the standards. The Profile of
Learning was very broad and not grade level specific. The new academic
standards are grade level specific and also contain benchmarks.

Educators have been given the following timelines with respect to the
implementation of the new academic standards and the transition to the
new math and reading statewide assessments:

-   All Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments (MCA-II) will remain aligned
    to the Profile of Learning until 2005-2006 as schools and districts
    transition to the new Academic Standards.

-   New test specifications for all MCA-II aligned to the new Academic
    Standards for math and language arts/reading will be released in the
    summer of 2004.

-   All tests will shift to the new specifications beginning in the
    2005-2006 school year with the implementation of the MCAII.

-   Summary timeline:

> 2003 Math and Language Arts/Reading Standards approved by the
> Legislature
>
> 2003-2004 Transition to new standards
>
> 2004-2005 Transition to new standards
>
> 2005-2006 Full implementation of new standards and statewide
> assessments

**Modified Timeline for New Assessments Required by NCLB for 2005-2006**

The Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments (MCA-II) are state developed
criterion-referenced tests aligned to state standards. MCA tests have
been implemented at all grade level clusters in reading and mathematics
as required by NCLB. With the implementation of new academic standards
and the addition of Grades 4,6, and 8 reading and math assessments to
the system, Minnesota will implement the MCAII in 2005-2006.

The timeline for the development of additional assessments is shown
below in Table 6. Alterations in the assessment timeline from the June
2002 workbook submission are shown in italics.

TABLE 6:

+-------------------------+-----------------------+--------------------+
| # Assessment Timeline   |                       |                    |
+=========================+=======================+====================+
| **Activity**            | **Proposed Date**     | **Federal Timeline |
|                         |                       | Requirement for    |
|                         |                       | Evidence**         |
+-------------------------+-----------------------+--------------------+
| Develop grade level     | June 2002 -- March    | May 2003           |
| benchmarks for reading  | 2003                  |                    |
| and math standards      |                       |                    |
+-------------------------+-----------------------+--------------------+
| Disseminate grade level | April 2003            |                    |
| benchmarks              |                       |                    |
+-------------------------+-----------------------+--------------------+
| Identify core science   | Summer 2002 -- Spring |                    |
| requirements for high   | 2003                  |                    |
| school                  |                       |                    |
+-------------------------+-----------------------+--------------------+
| Develop test            | *September 2003 --    | Milestones - June  |
| specifications for new  | June 2004 (Draft      | 2002               |
| reading and math tests  | specifications        |                    |
| in Grades 4, 6, and 8   | currently posted for  | Detailed           |
|                         | public comment.)*     | Timeline - May     |
|                         |                       | 2003               |
+-------------------------+-----------------------+--------------------+
| Issue RFP for test      | April 2003            | Milestones - June  |
| contractor to develop   |                       | 2002               |
| new reading and math    |                       |                    |
| tests in Grades 4, 6, 8 |                       | Detailed           |
|                         |                       | Timeline - May     |
|                         |                       | 2003               |
+-------------------------+-----------------------+--------------------+
| Award RFP through       | August 2003           | Milestones - June  |
| competitive bid process |                       | 2002               |
| for development of new  |                       |                    |
| reading and math        |                       | Detailed           |
| assessments             |                       | Timeline - May     |
|                         |                       | 2003               |
+-------------------------+-----------------------+--------------------+
| Develop items for new   | June 2003 -- December | Milestones - June  |
| reading and math tests  | 2003                  | 2002               |
| in Grades 4, 6, and 8   |                       |                    |
|                         |                       | Detailed           |
|                         |                       | Timeline - May     |
|                         |                       | 2003               |
+-------------------------+-----------------------+--------------------+
| Develop test            | June 2004 -- Spring   |                    |
| specifications for      | 2005                  |                    |
| science assessments     |                       |                    |
| based upon identified   |                       |                    |
| core requirements       |                       |                    |
+-------------------------+-----------------------+--------------------+
| Field test items for    | April 2004            | Evidence January   |
| new reading and math    |                       | 2006               |
| tests in grades 4, 6,   |                       |                    |
| and 8                   |                       |                    |
+-------------------------+-----------------------+--------------------+
| Issue RFP for test      | *October 2004*        |                    |
| contractor to develop   |                       |                    |
| science assessments in  |                       |                    |
| required grade spans of |                       |                    |
| 3-5, 6-9, 10-12         |                       |                    |
+-------------------------+-----------------------+--------------------+
| Award RFP through       | *January 2005*        |                    |
| competitive bid process |                       |                    |
| for development of      |                       |                    |
| science assessments     |                       |                    |
+-------------------------+-----------------------+--------------------+
| Develop items for new   | *January 2005 --      |                    |
| science assessments     | December 2005*        |                    |
+-------------------------+-----------------------+--------------------+
| Pilot test new test     | Spring 2005           | Evidence January   |
| forms in reading and    |                       | 2006               |
| math for grades 4, 6,   |                       |                    |
| and 8                   |                       |                    |
+-------------------------+-----------------------+--------------------+
| First operational       | *Spring 2006*         | Evidence January   |
| administration of new   |                       | 2006               |
| reading and math tests  |                       |                    |
| in grades 4, 6, and 8   |                       |                    |
+-------------------------+-----------------------+--------------------+
| Field test items for    | *Spring 2006*         |                    |
| new science assessments |                       |                    |
| in required grade spans |                       |                    |
+-------------------------+-----------------------+--------------------+
| Pilot test new test     | *Spring 2007*         |                    |
| forms in science for    |                       |                    |
| required grade spans    |                       |                    |
+-------------------------+-----------------------+--------------------+
| First operational       | School Year 2007-2008 | December 2008      |
| administration of       |                       |                    |
| science assessments in  |                       |                    |
| required grade spans    |                       |                    |
+-------------------------+-----------------------+--------------------+

# [Documentation]{.underline}

17\. Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments Mathematics Test Specifications

18\. Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments Reading Test Specifications

Principle 7: State definition of AYP includes graduation rates for
public high schools and an additional factor selected by the state for
middle and public elementary schools (such as attendance rate).

7.1 What is the state definition for the public high school graduation
rate?

High School Indicator

Minnesota will use the definition of graduation rate recommended by the
National Center for Education Statistics. It is a cohort emulation
formula that uses a four-year standard for graduation. In the few cases
where the high school only contains three grades, a three-year
graduation rate will be used. K-12 schools will also use graduation rate
as the additional indicator since they give students diplomas. Data are
collected for student subgroups and disaggregated for use when applying
the 'safe harbor clause' to make AYP. The graduation rate will be
calculated in the aggregate in order to make AYP \"status decisions\".

Calculation Formula

This calculation does not include students who graduate with GEDs or any
other diploma not aligned to the states academic standards. Minnesota is
not currently able to collect GED data.

Students are counted as dropped if they are reported as a drop and do
not re-enroll in another school during the four year period. Minnesota
is not currently able to control for students who finish high school
within four years from their start date.

This methodology allows for a consistent computation for all schools and
districts in the state, and includes students who change schools part
way through their high school career. This computation is based on
students who receive diplomas in year four of the emulated cohort.

\# of graduates year 4 .

Dropouts (Grade 9 Year 1 + Grade 10 Year 2+ Grade 11 Year 3 + Grade 12
Year 4) + Completers Year 4

Based on this calculation the state expectations will be an eighty
percent graduation rate or growth towards eighty percent.

Minnesota will work towards a system that is able to identify the number
of years that students have been in high school and adjust the
graduation rate accordingly.

Documentation

5\. AYP 2001-2002 Graduation Rate Computation

13\. Graduation Rates Working Group -- Recap of December 3, 2002 Meeting
Discussion

30\. Steering Committee Recommendations

7.2 What is the state's additional academic indicator for public
elementary schools for the definition of AYP? For middle schools?

Elementary and Middle Schools

Minnesota will use attendance as the additional indicator for elementary
and middle schools. The attendance rate for the total school or district
will used to determine AYP \"status decisions\". Data are collected for
student subgroups and disaggregated (as necessary) for use when applying
the 'safe harbor clause' to make AYP.

Schools will be required to have a ninety percent attendance rate or
show growth towards 90 percent.

Calculation Formula

The formula for attendance rate is the Average Daily Attendance (ADA)

divided by the Average Daily Membership (ADM). The ADA and ADM for each

grade, school, or district, are added together and the resulting figures
are used for each grade, school, or district summary. (Grade level
ADA/Grade Level ADM) multiplied by 100 = Attendance Rate for that grade.
This will be used to calculate an average attendance rate for the school
or district.

ADA is normally computed by taking the number of days a student was
marked in attendance and dividing by the number of instructional days
reported for that grade and school. ADM is normally computed by taking
the number of days the student was reported as enrolled and dividing by
the number of instructional days reported for that grade and school.
Slight variations in the ADA and ADM computations are made for students
whose membership and attendance is reported in terms of hours.

When the assessment system is fully operational, the state will include
a growth factor as a secondary indicator for AYP calculations pending
the approval of the USDOE.

Documentation

4\. AYP 2001-2002 Attendance Rate Computation

30\. Steering Committee Recommendations

3.  Are the States academic indicators valid and reliable?

Minnesota's graduation rate and attendance rate calculations comply with
national standards and the data used to calculate both graduation and
attendance rates are subject to audit and verification at the state
level. The calculation of graduation rate is consistent with the
methodology recommended by the National Center for Education Statistics
and used in the Common Core of Data.

Documentation

26\. Public High School Dropouts and Completers from the Common Core of
Data

The Condition of Education 2002

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

1.  Does the state measure achievement in reading/language arts and
    mathematics separately for determining AYP?

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) calculations will be done separately for
reading and mathematics at all grades tested. To determine whether
schools, districts and the state as a whole meet AYP requirements,
Minnesota will calculate annual measurable objectives in reading and
mathematics using the AYP performance index. Schools and districts are
identified as not making AYP if any group fails to meet annual
measurable objectives as in either reading or mathematics. Title I
schools and districts are subject to federal consequences if any group
fails to make AYP for two consecutive years within a subject area.

Documentation

6\. AYP Performance Index Overview

10\. AYP Technical Paper Number 4: Index Basis for Measuring AYP Goals

14\. Index Calculation Rules

Principle 9: State accountability system is statistically valid and
reliable.

9.1 How do AYP determinations meet the state's standard for acceptable
reliability?

Minnesota has done much research in the various options for ensuring
maximum validity and reliability of the AYP system. This research is
outlined in the technical papers included in the appendices including:
\"Notes on validity and reliability for a definition on AYP\", \"Notes
on Multiple Comparisons Under AYP\" and "Index Basis for Measuring AYP
Goals\".

This extensive research has resulted in the decision to use an AYP
performance index as the basis for the decisions regarding student
achievement as described in section 1.2, the cell sizes for schools and
districts as noted in sections 5.2 and 5.4.

Timeline for Evaluating Validity of the Accountably System

Minnesota will release an RFP to solicit proposals from outside
evaluators to propose a study to evaluate the validity of the
accountability system. While the state is very confident that the
selected statistical methodologies will yield accurate determinations
with high levels of psychometric validity and reliability, it is
important to determine if this highly sophisticated system meets the
criteria required for face validity and consequential validity as well.
Does the community at large concur with the results? Are schools
identified through the Federal AYP system and the information provided
by the additional state indicators accurate in describing the quality of
education being provide to students in Minnesota schools?

An RFP will be issued in September 2003 with the award scheduled for
late fall. The RFP will require the successful respondent to propose an
evaluation study that triangulates data from both qualitative and
quantitative sources to determine the validity of the state
accountability system.

Appeals Process

Minnesota has a three-step appeals process that includes the
verification of student demographic data, test participation and final
AYP calculations. Schools and districts have an opportunity to review
and correct the student level data, including demographics, prior to
preliminary calculations of AYP status being sent to the schools.
Preliminary calculations are sent to schools along with the release of
the test results. Schools have thirty days to file an appeal from the
time they receive the calculation.

Appeals may be made on the basis of federal requirement including:
statistical or other substantive reason such as a one-time significant
change in the student population, a natural disaster or other
circumstances which render the assessment invalid. Schools must first
submit their appeals to the district, which has the responsibility to
determine the validity of the appeals based on the above criteria. The
commissioner will establish an appeal process to review decisions made
by districts. The commissioner reserves the right to make final
decisions regarding appeals.

Documentation

2\. Appeals Process

7\. AYP Technical Paper Number 1: Notes on Validity and Reliability for
a Definition of AYP

2.  What is the state's process for making valid AYP determinations?

Rationale for Decision Consistency

Minnesota has a unique distribution of minority students. Although more
than sixty percent of districts report minority and LEP students,
disproportionate numbers are concentrated in a relatively few districts
and schools. As a result high minimum cell requirements will only
include students in urban districts and a small number of out-state
districts with high concentrations of these students. In order to focus
on the achievement of all minority students Minnesota must have a cell
sizes small enough to be inclusive across all districts.

In light of this demographic distribution, and the number of conjunctive
decisions required by NCLB, Minnesota has proposed a model for making
AYP decisions that are based primarily on student achievement and not an
artifact of sampling error associated with small sample sizes or the
sampling error associated with the number of decisions made for each
school or district. This model includes relatively small cell sizes at
the school, increased cell sizes at the district level with a high
confidence level applied to all calculations.

The minimum cell size for AYP calculations is twenty for all groups.
This allows Minnesota to incorporate information as many groups of
students as possible. Higher cell sizes result in significant drops in
the number of groups of minority students included in the AYP
calculation.

Based on approval from the USDOE Minnesota will apply confidence
interval on a sliding scale from .95 to .99 depending on the total
number of AYP decisions to be made at the school or district. This
confidence interval provides a high degree of certainty regarding the
potentially 37 AYP decisions to be made and provides an acceptable level
of consistency.

Stability of data

Minnesota has conducted extensive analysis of the reliability of AYP
decisions and incorporated the following statistical corrections into
the AYP model. First, to ensure maximum stability of initial starting
points and minimize the effect of random score fluctuations that can
occur from year to year across groups within a school, three years of
data have been used to calculate baseline scores in reading and
mathematics for AYP for the existing assessments. This allows the state
to include as much information as possible about past performance into
the new NCLB system.

Documentation

9\. AYP Technical Paper Number 3: Notes on Multiple Comparisons Under
AYP

3.  How has the state planned for incorporating into its definition of
    AYP anticipated changes in assessments?

Plan for Incorporating Changes

Minnesota's accountability system has an overall goal of improving
education for all students. Decisions about the components of the system
are based on the specific principles below:

1.  Academic proficiency is the primary factor in identifying successful
    schools.

2.  The achievement of all students must be included in the decision
    regarding school performance.

3.  Decisions regarding school performance must be statistically valid
    and reliable.

Consistency of Decisions Across Time

The system has been designed to accommodate the addition of new tests by
the following measures:

-   Statewide starting points will be calculated for each subject and
    grade level. A unique starting point will be determined for each
    school and each subject based on the grade configuration.

-   Annual measurable objectives will be adjusted to incorporate
    additional tests while maintaining the timeline for all students to
    reach proficiency by 2013-14.

-   The process of identifying the baseline requirements will parallel
    the process used to establish the 2001-02 baseline data and will be
    based on the methodology outlined in federal statue. This
    methodology requires baselines to be set on either a level of
    performance equal to that of the 20^th^ percentile of enrollment or
    the lowest performing sub-group. The process that produces the
    highest starting point will be used to establish starting points for
    newly developed assessments.

-   New cut scores will be established through a statistically valid and
    reliable standard setting process consistent with nationally
    accepted practices.

As noted earlier, new standards were developed in the spring of 2003 for
reading and mathematics and science and social studies in the spring of
2004. All assessments will be realigned to the new standards. The new
system will be fully operational by 2005-06 for reading and mathematics
and by 2007-08 for science.

Documentation

14\. Index Calculation Rules

22\. NCLB Data Base Component: AYP 2001-2002 Starting Points

23\. NCLB Data Base Component: Confidence Interval Tables

30\. Steering Committee Recommendations

Principle 10: In order for a public school or LEA to make AYP, the state
ensures that it assessed at least ninety-five percent of the students
enrolled in each subgroup.

1.  What is the state's method for calculating participation rates in
    the state assessments for use in the AYP determinations?

All students enrolled on the date of the test must be included in the
calculation for the participation rate. Schools are required to return
an answer document for all students enrolled on the date of testing as
verified by a MARSS identification number. An independent MARSS edit is
used to ascertain per-pupil funding and will also be used to verify the
enrollment count on the test day.

Students will be counted as tested if they have been provided with an
opportunity to test. Students will be considered as not tested if they
are:

-   absent and have not made up the test during the official testing
    window

-   withdrawn from the testing at the written request of a parent or
    guardian

Students who do not test will be reported in the aggregate and by
subgroups on the state report card. Schools that do not test at least
ninety-five percent of their students enrolled on test day will not be
eligible for further AYP calculations and will be considered as not
having met their annual achievement objective for that year. Only those
student who have medical problems that prevent them from testing within
the testing window will be exempted provided the district has
documentation of the medical condition that prevented the student from
taking the test.

For School Year 2002-2003, students who did not participate in the
statewide assessments not only counted against a school's assessment
participation calculation for Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) but also
counted as a zero in the proficiency calculation, which created a double
penalty for schools. Minnesota requested and got approval to amend our
policy. Students who do not participate in the assessment will only be
included in the calculation for participation and will be excluded from
the proficiency calculation.

For the 2003-2004 calculation of participation, Minnesota used the
flexibility given to states in the March 29, 2004 dear Colleague letter
from Secretary Rod Paige. In cases where the number of students was
small and one student placed the school in AYP, Minnesota averaged the
participation rate over a three-year period.

The state continues to be particularly concerned about parents who
refuse to let their children participate in statewide testing. Schools
have no control over this situation and this information is already
being recorded in the AYP participation calculations. These schools
should be able to clearly identify the source of identification rather
than having it exacerbated by phantom zeros lowering their proficiency
calculation.

Documentation

9\. AYP Technical Paper Number 3: Notes on Multiple Comparisons

25\. Participation Calculation Rules

29\. Recommendations from ESEA Stakeholder Committee

30\. Steering Committee Recommendations

1.  What is the state's policy for determining when the ninety-five
    percent assessed requirement should be applied?

Only schools that meet the minimum cell size of 40 for the total group
are eligible for AYP participation calculations. If a school does not
meet the minimum cell size for participation their AYP will be based
only on the achievement of their annual measurable objective and either
attendance or graduation rate. Schools that do not have enough students
in the "all" group for proficiency (20) will have data combined over two
years. If schools still do not have enough students to meet the minimum
cell size requirement, the calculation will still be completed but will
be marked with an asterisk indicating that the AYP rating is not
statistically reliable due to the small cell size. Schools may use the
small cell size as the basis for an appeal.

Documentation

9\. AYP Technical Paper Number 3: Notes on Multiple Comparisons

25\. Participation Calculation Rules

29\. Recommendations from ESEA Stakeholder Committee

30\. Steering Committee Recommendations