Functional Requirements
for the
Minnesota
Multiple Measurement System
2012
August 20, 2012
The Minnesota Department of Education has developed a system to rate schools based on multiple measurements. The system combines existing measures for each school (like Proficiency) with additional measures computed by the system (like Achievement Gap Reduction). Using the measurements, it ranks similar types of schools from highest to lowest. It then assigns points based on the ranking - higher ranking schools receive more points than lower ranking schools. Based on the combination of points computed and points available, two ratings are assigned. Using these two ratings, Title I schools receive a Multiple Measurement Designation.
Currently, there are three Multiple Measurement Designations:
· Reward
· Focus
· Priority
In 2012, two new designations were added:
· Celebration Eligible
· Continuous Improvement
These designations are based on two ratings:
· Multiple Measurement Rating (MMR)
· Focus Rating (FR)
These two ratings are derived from five measurements (called domains):
· Proficiency Domain
· Growth Domain
· Achievement Gap Reduction Domain
· Graduation Domain
· Focused Proficiency Domain
Each school may earn up to 25 points per domain based on how their measurement ranks against similar schools.
The MMR uses four of the domains if available: Proficiency, Growth, Achievement Gap Reduction and Graduation. The FR uses two of the domains if available, Achievement Gap Reduction and Focused Proficiency.
The five domains are all based on the AYP computation and the Minnesota Growth computation. The Proficiency, Graduation and Focused Proficiency domains use the number of AYP cells (groups) reaching their respective AYP targets. The Growth and Achievement Gap Reduction domains use the AYP students included in the AYP Proficiency measure with their assigned Growth Z Score.
Schools are placed into four school types when computing the MMR or FR:
· H: High School (classifications 32, 33, 40 and 46)
· M: Middle School (classifications 20 and 31)
· E: Elementary School (classification 10)
· O: Other School (all other school classifications).
Unless otherwise specified, all interim computations and proportions are held as values with floating decimal points. For readability, numbers shown in the examples in this document may not display the full value.
Year references are made using the fiscal year. For example, the year 2010 means the 2009/2010 school year. The year 2011 means the 2010/2011 school year. The year 2012 means the 2011/2012 school year.
The following sections describe how the domains and ratings are computed and how the designations are assigned.
Normally, the Proficiency Domain uses the existing Proficiency AYP Marks. These have been previously computed during the AYP computation and may have administrative overrides applied when appeals are granted. However, when computing the initial Multiple Measurement designations, new targets were established for each AYP subgroup using the statewide averages for 2011. The AYP proficiency calculation for 2011 was rerun using these new targets and the resulting Proficiency AYP Marks were used in the 2011 Proficiency Domain. In 2012, the new targets were incorporated into the general AYP process.
The Proficiency Domain does not consider safe harbor to be a passing mark so the summary procedure only looks an AYP Marks of A as passing, Marks B and S are not passing. Only schools are included in this measure; the district and state results are not used. Each school is given a weighted proportion of cells reaching the AYP target on proficiency for the cells large enough to be measured.
For example: Here is a sample of what the AYP proficiency summary marks might look like for a school showing the AYP cells:
Category |
Subject |
Proficiency Document Count |
AYP Mark |
Include in Numerator |
Include in Denominator |
SQRT Document Count x Numerator |
SQRT Document Count x Denominator |
All |
M |
91 |
S |
0 |
1 |
0 |
9.539392014 |
All |
R |
85 |
B |
0 |
1 |
0 |
9.219544457 |
Am Indian |
M |
14 |
Z |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Am Indian |
R |
15 |
Z |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Black |
M |
1 |
Z |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Black |
R |
1 |
Z |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
White |
M |
76 |
A |
1 |
1 |
8.7177978 |
8.717797887 |
White |
R |
69 |
A |
1 |
1 |
8.3066238 |
8.306623862 |
Special |
M |
23 |
S |
0 |
1 |
0 |
4.795831523 |
Special |
R |
19 |
Z |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
FRP |
M |
50 |
A |
1 |
1 |
7.0710678 |
7.071067811 |
FRP |
R |
50 |
A |
1 |
1 |
7.0710678 |
7.071067811 |
Total |
31.166557 |
54.72132536 |
The AYP cells are evaluated. The marks of A are included in the numerator, the marks of A, B and S are included in the denominator. The weighted proportion of cells reaching their AYP targets (WPC_ReachingTarget) is computed. The weighted proportion uses the square root of the proficiency document count – not the cell count as percent of the total – when determining the weighting. The computed figures are added together and the numerator is divided by the denominator to arrive at the WPC_ReachingTarget. That result is rounded to 8 decimal points.
WPC_ReachingTarget =
SUM(SQRT(DocumentCount)*Numerator) / SUM(SQRT(DocumentCount)*Denominator)
In the example above, the total for the numerator is divided by the total for the denominator and then rounded to 8 decimal points. 31.1667 / 54.7213 = 0.56955456433 = 0.56955456.
Once the WPC_ReachingTarget is computed for each school, the schools are ranked according to their school type. To receive a ranking, schools must have at least 20 students in any one of the cells measured for the AYP Proficiency measurement.
Rank the schools using the WPC_ReachingTarget – from highest to lowest – by school type. If there are 891 elementary schools, they are ranked in order from 1 (highest WPC_ReachingTarget) through 891 (lowest WPC_ReachingTarget).
When ties are encountered (when the schools in question each have the same WPC_ReachingTarget), set the ranking to the highest ranking of the schools in question.
For example, the table below shows 8 schools with ties for rank 1 and rank 5:
WPC_ReachingTarget |
Original ranking |
Final ranking after ties resolved. |
Percentile |
Proficiency Domain Points |
1.00 |
1 |
1 |
0.999438832772166 |
24.98597 |
1.00 |
2 |
1 |
0.999438832772166 |
24.98597 |
1.00 |
3 |
1 |
0.999438832772166 |
24.98597 |
.9876 |
4 |
4 |
0.996071829405163 |
24.90180 |
.9874 |
5 |
5 |
0.994949494949495 |
24.87374 |
.9874 |
6 |
5 |
0.994949494949495 |
24.87374 |
.9872 |
7 |
7 |
0.992704826038159 |
24.81762 |
.9870 |
8 |
8 |
0.991582491582492 |
24.78956 |
Once the final ranking has been established, assign the percentile based on the number of schools with the same school type. If there are 891 elementary schools, the percentile is computed by taking the group size and subtracting the final ranking of the school plus 0.5. That figure is then divided by the group size. To receive a percentile, schools must have at least 20 students in any one of the cells measured for the AYP Proficiency measurement.
Percentile = (groupsize-rankNumber+0.5)/groupsize
In our example above, school with a final ranking of 1 are assigned the percentile of
(891 – 1) + 0.5 = 890.5 divided by 891 = 0.999438832772166
The final step is to assign the Proficiency Domain Points. Each domain is allocated 25 points. It is computed by taking the percentile and multiplying it by 25. To receive Proficiency Domain Points, schools must have at least 20 students in any one of the cells measured for the AYP Proficiency measurement.
Domain_Points = percentile*25.0
Growth Z Scores are assigned to most students used in the AYP Proficiency calculation. The Growth Z Score is computed by taking the actual score and subtracting the expected score and then dividing by the standard deviation. The result is rounded to 4 decimal points.
growthZScore = (ActualScore- ExpectedScore)/StandardDeviation
Since there may be large fluctuations in scores between years for a student, the Growth Z Score is capped. All Growth Z Scores fall between +3.0000 and -3.0000.
Some students are not used in the MMR Growth measurement. Students without a prior score or for whom there is no matching test in the prior applicable year are not included in the MMR Growth measurement. Also, students without a normal grade progression are excluded from the MMR Growth Measurement. Students taking the MTAS in both applicable years are included in the MMR Growth Measurement.
Further details on how the Growth Z Score was assigned as well as the MMR inclusion criteria can be found in the functional documentation for the Minnesota Growth calculation. https://education.state.mn.us/MDEAnalytics/Data.jsp Select Assessment and Growth Files, in the first dropdown select Growth, then list files, then select one of the help files.
The Growth Domain process then averages each school’s Growth Z Score regardless of subject. Only those students who are included in the school’s AYP Proficiency calculation are included in the averages and only those records designated as ‘Include in the MMR’ are used. For example, the following table illustrates eight students with their corresponding growth information and whether it should be used (Include in MMR = ‘Y’):
ID |
Grade |
Test |
Subject |
Score |
Prior Grade |
Prior Test |
Prior Score |
Growth Z Score |
Include in MMR |
298856 |
03 |
MCA-II |
R |
370.0 |
N | ||||
298856 |
03 |
MCA-III |
M |
362.0 |
N | ||||
298910 |
05 |
MCA-II |
R |
541.0 |
04 |
MCA-II |
444 |
-0.7075 |
Y |
298910 |
05 |
MCA-III |
M |
544.0 |
04 |
MTELL |
447 |
0.4175 |
Y |
298916 |
04 |
MCA-III |
M |
459.0 |
04 |
MCA-II |
444 |
N | |
298916 |
04 |
MCA-II |
R |
465.0 |
04 |
MCA-II |
436 |
N | |
298919 |
05 |
MCA-III |
M |
554.0 |
04 |
MCA-II |
451 |
1.3132 |
Y |
298919 |
05 |
MCA-II |
R |
541.0 |
04 |
MCA-II |
436 |
0.1316 |
Y |
299218 |
04 |
MCA-III |
M |
465.0 |
03 |
MCA-II |
360 |
0.7625 |
Y |
299218 |
04 |
MCA-II |
R |
478.0 |
03 |
MCA-II |
367 |
2.1118 |
Y |
299244 |
06 |
MCA-II |
R |
667.0 |
05 |
MTAS |
200 |
N | |
299244 |
06 |
MCA-III |
M |
667.0 |
05 |
MTAS |
201 |
N | |
299245 |
04 |
MCA-III |
M |
487.0 |
03 |
MCA-II |
370 |
1.6832 |
Y |
299245 |
04 |
MCA-II |
R |
467.0 |
03 |
MCA-II |
390 |
-0.4686 |
Y |
299293 |
05 |
MTAS |
R |
190.0 |
04 |
MTAS |
200 |
-0.8154 |
Y |
299293 |
05 |
MTAS-III |
M |
200.0 |
04 |
MTAS |
201 |
0.2561 |
Y |
The resulting Growth Z Score averages are used to rank each school and assign the percentile and Growth Domain Points. For example, the following table illustrates 5 schools with their Average Growth Z Score:
School |
Include in MMR Growth Count |
Unique Student Count |
Average Growth Z Score |
150 |
371 |
186 |
0.065906 |
315 |
592 |
592 |
0.022053 |
316 |
3 |
3 |
-0.7481 |
325 |
1854 |
932 |
0.082692 |
306 |
85 |
60 |
-0.83582 |
Once the Average Growth Z Score is computed for each school, the schools are ranked according to their school type. To receive a ranking, schools must have at least 20 unique students included in the average.
Rank the schools using the Average Growth Z Score – from highest to lowest – by school type. If there are 830 elementary schools eligible, they are ranked in order from 1 (highest Average Growth Z Score) through 830 (lowest Average Growth Z Score).
When ties are encountered (the schools in question each have the same Average Growth Z Score), set the ranking to the highest ranking of the schools in question. For example:
Average Growth Z Score |
Original ranking |
Final ranking after ties resolved. |
Percentile |
Growth Domain Points |
0.065906 |
549 |
549 |
0.33915662 |
8.4789156 |
0.065906 |
550 |
549 |
0.33915662 |
8.4789156 |
0.065906 |
551 |
549 |
0.33915662 |
8.4789156 |
0.064846 |
552 |
552 |
0.33554216 |
8.3885542 |
0.063561 |
553 |
553 |
0.33433734 |
8.3584333 |
0.061323 |
554 |
554 |
0.33313253 |
8.3283132 |
Once the final ranking has been established, assign the percentile based on the number of schools with the same school type. If there are 830 elementary schools, the percentile is computed by taking the group size and subtracting the final ranking of the schools +0.5. That figure is then divided by the group size. To receive a percentile, schools must have at least 20 unique students included in the average.
Percentile = (groupsize-rankNumber+0.5)/groupsize
In our example above, school with a final ranking of 549 are assigned the percentile of
(830 – 549) +0.5 = 281.5 divided by 830 = 0.339156626506024
The final step is to assign the Growth Domain Points. Each domain is allocated 25 points. It is computed by taking the percentile and multiplying it by 25. To receive Growth Domain Points, schools must have at least 20 unique students included in the average.
Domain_Points = percentile*25.0
Similar to the summary for average Growth Z Scores, each school is assigned an Achievement Gap Reduction Score (AGR Score). This is the difference between a group’s average growth Z score compared to the statewide targets (the statewide average growth Z scores for the comparison groups).
The targets are the statewide average for the White group, the Non-LEP group, the Non-SPE group and the Non-FRP group. The targets are normally the statewide averages from the previous year. But for 2010 and 2011, the averages from the matching year were used. The averages are rounded to 8 decimal points.
Only those students who are included in the statewide AYP Proficiency calculation are included in the averages and only those records designated as ‘Include in the MMR’ are used.
The following table shows the Achievement gap reduction targets for 2010 and 2011:
Subject |
Group |
2010 Gap Reduction Target (Statewide Average Growth Z Score) |
2011 Gap Reduction Target (Statewide Average Growth Z Score) |
M |
White |
0.100917 |
0.084791 |
M |
Not LEP |
0.076298 |
0.056210 |
M |
Not SPE |
0.109655 |
0.081633 |
M |
Not FRP |
0.137938 |
0.131457 |
R |
White |
0.155419 |
0.160917 |
R |
Not LEP |
0.134419 |
0.145836 |
R |
Not SPE |
0.145441 |
0.175626 |
R |
Not FRP |
0.195370 |
0.207400 |
If the targets go down in a year, the previous year’s targets are used. If the targets go up in a year, the current year targets are used.
· When computing gaps for 2010, the statewide averages for 2010 are used.
· When computing gaps for 2011, the statewide averages for 2011 are used.
· When computing gaps for 2012, the statewide averages for 2011 will be used.
· When computing gaps for 2013, the higher average between the two most recent years will be used.
The Achievement Gap Reduction Domain process averages the Growth Z Score for each group in a school by subject. Only those students who are included in the school’s AYP Proficiency calculation are included in the averages and only those records designated as ‘Include in the MMR’ are used.
Additionally, only students from the Achievement Gap groups are included. The ALL student category and the WHITE student category are not used in the school’s averages. For example, here are the results of a single school’s Achievement Gap populations showing the average Z score by subject:
Subject |
Achievement Gap Category |
Include in MMR Growth Count |
Average Growth Z Score |
Statewide Average Growth Z Score for Comparison Group |
Achievement Gap Reduction Score |
M |
Asian |
35 |
-0.116174 |
0.084791 |
0.200965 |
M |
Hispanic |
9 |
-0.118922 |
0.084791 |
0.203713 |
M |
Black |
36 |
-0.458611 |
0.084791 |
0.543402 |
M |
LEP |
25 |
-0.401172 |
0.056210 |
0.457382 |
M |
Special |
34 |
-0.345476 |
0.081633 |
0.427109 |
M |
FRP |
79 |
-0.243622 |
0.131457 |
0.375079 |
R |
Indian |
1 |
-1.2604 |
0.160917 |
1.421317 |
R |
Asian |
40 |
0.064622 |
0.160917 |
0.096295 |
R |
Hispanic |
10 |
-0.20233 |
0.160917 |
0.363247 |
R |
Black |
30 |
-0.061583 |
0.160917 |
0.2225 |
R |
LEP |
30 |
-0.11188 |
0.145836 |
0.257716 |
R |
Special |
30 |
-0.258063 |
0.175626 |
0.433689 |
R |
FRP |
80 |
-0.085885 |
0.207400 |
0.293285 |
The average growth Z score for each group is compared to the statewide target and the difference is the Achievement Gap Reduction Score (AGR Score).
AGR_Score = StatewideGrowthZScoreAverage – GrowthZScoreAverage
The comparisons use the following:
· Indian average compared to statewide White average
· Asian average compared to statewide White average
· Hispanic average compared to statewide White average
· Black average compared to statewide White average
· LEP average compared to statewide non-LEP average
· Special Education average compared to statewide non-Special Education average
· FRP average compared to statewide non-FRP average
In these cases, the smaller the number, the smaller the achievement gap.
The AGR scores for the groups are merged together using the weighted average by subject, and then again for the two subjects to arrive at a single AGR score for the school. That result is rounded to 8 decimal points.
SUM(SQRT(NCount) * AGR_Score) )/( SUM(SQRT(NCount))) AS AGR_Score
Using our previous example, each subject has its own weighted average for the Growth Z Score and the AGR Score. Then the school has a single weighted average for the Growth Z Score and the AGR score. The following table illustrates these weighted averages.
Subject |
Achievement Gap Category |
Include in MMR Growth Count |
Average Growth Z Score |
Achievement Gap Reduction Score |
M |
Asian |
35 |
-0.116174 |
0.200965 |
M |
Hispanic |
9 |
-0.118922 |
0.203713 |
M |
Black |
36 |
-0.458611 |
0.543402 |
M |
LEP |
25 |
-0.401172 |
0.457382 |
M |
Special |
34 |
-0.345476 |
0.427109 |
M |
FRP |
79 |
-0.243622 |
0.375079 |
Math |
Weighted Average |
218 |
-0.2881863756 |
0.380295282152 |
R |
Indian |
1 |
-1.2604 |
1.421317 |
R |
Asian |
40 |
0.064622 |
0.096295 |
R |
Hispanic |
10 |
-0.20233 |
0.363247 |
R |
Black |
30 |
-0.061583 |
0.2225 |
R |
LEP |
30 |
-0.11188 |
0.257716 |
R |
Special |
30 |
-0.258063 |
0.433689 |
R |
FRP |
80 |
-0.085885 |
0.293285 |
Reading |
Weighted Average |
221 |
-0.1289153281 |
0.301368495894 |
School |
Overall Weighted Average |
439 |
-0.2082787457 |
0.340697046698 |
Once the overall AGR Score is computed for each school, the schools are ranked according to their school type. To receive a ranking, schools must have at least 20 unique students included in the average.
Rank the schools using the AGR Score – from highest to lowest – by school type. If there are 424 high schools, they are ranked in order from 1 (highest AGR Score) through 424 (lowest AGR Score).
When ties are encountered (the schools in question each have the same AGR Score), set the ranking to the highest ranking of the schools in question. For example:
AGR Score |
Original ranking |
Final ranking after ties resolved. |
Percentile |
Achievement Gap Reduction Domain Points |
0.34069705 |
282 |
282 |
0.336084905660377 |
8.40212264150943 |
0.34139387 |
283 |
283 |
0.33372641509434 |
8.34316037735849 |
0.34139387 |
284 |
283 |
0.33372641509434 |
8.34316037735849 |
0.34293124 |
285 |
285 |
0.329009433962264 |
8.2252358490566 |
0.34459632 |
286 |
286 |
0.326650943396226 |
8.16627358490566 |
0.34471607 |
287 |
287 |
0.324292452830189 |
8.10731132075472 |
Once the final ranking has been established, assign the percentile based on the number of schools with the same school type. If there are 424 high schools, the percentile is computed by taking the group size and subtracting the final ranking of the schools +0.5. That figure is then divided by the group size. To receive a percentile, schools must have at least 20 unique students included in the average.
Percentile = (groupsize-rankNumber+0.5)/groupsize
In our example above, the school with a final ranking of 282 is assigned the percentile of
(424 – 282) +0.5 = 142.5 divided by 424 = 0. 336084905660377
The final step is to assign the Achievement Gap Reduction Domain Points. Each domain is allocated 25 points. It is computed by taking the percentile and multiplying it by 25. To receive Achievement Gap Reduction Domain Points, schools must have at least 20 students unique students included in the average.
Domain_Points = percentile*25.0
The Graduation Domain uses the existing Graduation AYP Marks. These have been previously computed during the AYP computation and may have administrative overrides applied when appeals are granted.
The Graduation Domain considers any AYP Mark of A to be a passing mark. Beginning in 2012, this includes those schools showing marked improvement over the prior 4-year, 5-year or 6-year rates as long as the respective targets of 3%, 4%, or 5% improvement were met. The summary procedure considers Marks of B as not passing. Each school is given a weighted proportion of cells reaching the AYP goal on graduation for the cells large enough to be measured.
Only schools are included in this measure; the district and state results are not used. Furthermore, only schools classified as high schools are eligible to receive a graduation rate.
For example: Here is a sample of what the AYP graduation marks might look like for a school showing the categories (AYP cells):
Category |
Graduation Cohort Count |
AYP Mark |
Include in Numerator |
Include in Denominator |
SQRT x Numerator |
SQRT x Denominator |
All |
1224 |
A |
1 |
1 |
34.985711 |
34.985711 |
Am Indian |
5 |
Z |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Asian |
100 |
A |
1 |
1 |
10.000000 |
10.000000 |
Hispanic |
48 |
B |
0 |
1 |
0 |
6.9282032 |
Black |
109 |
B |
0 |
1 |
0 |
10.440306 |
White |
962 |
A |
1 |
1 |
31.016124 |
31.016124 |
LEP |
64 |
B |
0 |
1 |
0 |
8.0000000 |
Special |
94 |
A |
1 |
1 |
9.6953597 |
9.6953597 |
FRP |
233 |
A |
1 |
1 |
15.264337 |
15.264337 |
Total |
100.96153 |
126.33004 |
The cells are evaluated and the weighted proportion of cells reaching their respective AYP targets (WPC_ReachingTarget) is computed. The weighted proportion uses the square root of the Graduation Cohort Count – not the cell count as a percent of the total – when determining the weighting. The computed figures are added together and the numerator is divided by the denominator to arrive at the WPC_ReachingTarget. That result is rounded to 8 decimal points.
WPC_ReachingTarget =
SUM(SQRT(CohortCount)*Numerator) / SUM(SQRT(CohortCount)*Denominator)
In the example above, the total for the numerator is divided by the total for the denominator. 100.9615 / 126.3300 = 0.799188624 = 0.79918862
Once the WPC_ReachingTarget is computed for each school, the schools are ranked according to their school type. To receive a ranking, schools must have at least 40 students in any one of the cells measured for the AYP Graduation measurement.
Rank the schools using the WPC_ReachingTarget – from highest to lowest – by school type. If there are 294 high schools eligible, they are ranked in order from 1 (highest WPC_ReachingTarget) through 294 (lowest WPC_ReachingTarget).
When ties are encountered (the schools in question each have the same WPC_ReachingTarget), set the ranking to the highest ranking of the schools in question. For example:
WPC_ReachingTarget |
Original ranking |
Final ranking after ties resolved. |
Percentile |
Graduation Domain Points |
1.00 |
1 |
1 |
0.998299319727891 |
24.95748 |
1.00 |
2 |
1 |
0.998299319727891 |
24.95748 |
1.00 |
3 |
1 |
0.998299319727891 |
24.95748 |
.9876 |
4 |
4 |
0.988095238095238 |
24.70238 |
.9874 |
5 |
5 |
0.98469387755102 |
24.61735 |
.9874 |
6 |
5 |
0.98469387755102 |
24.61735 |
.9872 |
7 |
7 |
0.977891156462585 |
24.44728 |
.9870 |
8 |
8 |
0.974489795918367 |
24.36224 |
Once the final ranking has been established, assign the percentile based on the number of schools with the same school type. If there are 294 high schools, the percentile is computed by taking the group size and subtracting the final ranking of the schools + 0.5. That figure is then divided by the group size. To receive a percentile, schools must have at least 40 students in any one of the cells measured for the AYP Graduation measurement.
Percentile = (groupsize-rankNumber+0.5)/groupsize
In our example above, school with a final ranking of 1 are assigned the percentile of
(294 – 1) +0.5 = 293.5 divided by 294 = 0.998299319727891
The final step is to assign the Graduation Domain Points. Each domain is allocated 25 points. It is computed by taking the percentile and multiplying it by 25. To receive Graduation Domain points, schools must have at least 40 students in any one of the cells measured for the AYP Graduation measurement.
Domain_Points = percentile*25.0
The Focused Proficiency Domain is similar to the Proficiency Domain and uses the existing Proficiency AYP Marks. These have been previously computed during the AYP computation and may have administrative overrides applied when appeals are granted. However, when computing the initial Multiple Measurement designations, new targets were established for each AYP subgroup using the statewide averages for 2011. The AYP proficiency calculation for 2011 was rerun using these new targets and the resulting Proficiency AYP Marks were used in the Focused Proficiency Domain. In 2012, the new targets were incorporated into the general AYP process.
The Focused Proficiency Domain excludes the ALL category and the WHITE category. Otherwise the process is the same as the Proficiency Domain.
The Focused Proficiency Domain does not consider safe harbor to be a passing mark so the summary procedure only considers AYP Marks of A as passing, Marks B and S are not passing. Only schools are included in this measure, the district and state results are not used. Each school is given a weighted proportion of cells reaching the AYP target on proficiency for the cells large enough to be measured.
For example: Here is a sample of what the AYP proficiency summary marks might look like for a school showing the AYP cells used for the Focused Proficiency Domain. The ALL and WHITE categories are excluded when looking at the Focused Proficiency Domain:
Category |
Subject |
Proficiency Document Count |
AYP Mark |
Include in Numerator |
Include in Denominator |
SQRT x Numerator |
SQRT x Denominator |
All |
M |
excluded |
|||||
All |
R |
excluded |
|||||
Am Indian |
M |
14 |
Z |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Am Indian |
R |
15 |
Z |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Black |
M |
1 |
Z |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Black |
R |
1 |
Z |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
White |
M |
excluded |
|||||
White |
R |
excluded |
|||||
Special |
M |
23 |
S |
0 |
1 |
0 |
4.795831523 |
Special |
R |
19 |
Z |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
FRP |
M |
50 |
A |
1 |
1 |
7.0710678 |
7.071067811 |
FRP |
R |
50 |
A |
1 |
1 |
7.0710678 |
7.071067811 |
Total |
14.142135 |
18.93796715 |
The AYP cells are evaluated. The marks of A are included in the numerator, the marks of A, B and S are included in the denominator. The weighted proportion of cells reaching their respective AYP targets (WPC_ReachingTarget) is computed. The weighted proportion uses the square root of the proficiency document count – not the cell count as percent of the total – when determining the weighting. The computed figures are added together and the numerator is divided by the denominator to arrive at the WPC_ReachingTarget. That result is rounded to 8 decimal points.
WPC_ReachingTarget =
SUM(SQRT(DocumentCount)*Numerator) / SUM(SQRT(DocumentCount)*Denominator)
In the example above, the total for the numerator is divided by the total for the denominator. 14.142135 / 18.93796715= 0.746761017 = 0.74676102.
Once the WPC_ReachingTarget is computed for each school, the schools are ranked according to their school type. To receive a ranking, schools must have at least 20 students in any one of the cells measured for the AYP Proficiency measurement (other than the ALL and WHITE categories).
Rank the schools using the WPC_ReachingTarget – from highest to lowest – by school type. If there are 891 elementary schools, they are ranked in order from 1 (highest WPC_ReachingTarget) through 891 (lowest WPC_ReachingTarget).
When ties are encountered (when the schools in question each have the same WPC_ReachingTarget), set the ranking to the highest ranking of the schools in question.
For example, the table below shows 8 schools with ties for rank 1 and rank 5:
WPC_ReachingTarget |
Original ranking |
Final ranking after ties resolved. |
Percentile |
Focused Proficiency Domain Points |
1.00 |
1 |
1 |
0.999438832772166 |
24.98597 |
1.00 |
2 |
1 |
0.999438832772166 |
24.98597 |
1.00 |
3 |
1 |
0.999438832772166 |
24.98597 |
.9876 |
4 |
4 |
0.996071829405163 |
24.90180 |
.9874 |
5 |
5 |
0.994949494949495 |
24.87374 |
.9874 |
6 |
5 |
0.994949494949495 |
24.87374 |
.9872 |
7 |
7 |
0.992704826038159 |
24.81762 |
.9870 |
8 |
8 |
0.991582491582492 |
24.78956 |
Once the final ranking has been established, assign the percentile based on the number of schools with the same school type. If there are 891 elementary schools, the percentile is computed by taking the group size and subtracting the final ranking of the school plus 0.5. That figure is then divided by the group size. To receive a percentile, schools must have at least 20 students in any one of the cells measured for the AYP Proficiency measurement (other than the ALL and WHITE categories).
Percentile = (groupsize-rankNumber+0.5)/groupsize
In our example above, school with a final ranking of 1 are assigned the percentile of
(891 – 1) + 0.5 = 890.5 divided by 891 = 0.999438832772166
The final step is to assign the Focused Proficiency Domain Points. Each domain is allocated 25 points. It is computed by taking the percentile and multiplying it by 25. To receive Focused Proficiency Domain points, schools must have at least 20 students in any one of the cells measured for the AYP Proficiency measurement (other than the ALL and WHITE categories).
Domain_Points = percentile*25.0
The four MMR Domains (Proficiency, Growth, Achievement Gap Reduction and Graduation) are grouped together to provide an overall Multiple Measurement Rating (MMR) for each school. For an individual year, the points are added together and divided by the total points possible to arrive at a proportion. The resulting proportion is rounded to 4 decimal points and converted to a percent.
For Example:
AYP Year |
Domain |
MMR Points Earned |
MMR Points Possible |
MMR Proportion |
MMR |
2012 |
Proficiency |
24.9710648148148 |
25 |
||
2012 |
Growth |
9.8546511627907 |
25 |
||
2012 |
Gap Reduction |
10.5247641509434 |
25 |
||
2012 |
Graduation |
24.9574829931973 |
25 |
||
2012 |
TOTAL |
70.3079631217462 |
100 |
0.7031 |
70.31% |
The two FR Domains (Focus and Achievement Gap Reduction) are grouped together to provide an overall Focus Rating (FR) for each school For an individual year, the points are added together and divided by the total points possible to arrive at a proportion. The resulting proportion is rounded to 4 decimal points and converted to a percent.
For Example:
AYP Year |
Domain |
FR Points Earned |
FR Points Possible |
FR Proportion |
FR |
2012 |
Focused Proficiency |
24.967277486911 |
25 |
||
2012 |
Gap Reduction |
10.5247641509434 |
25 |
||
2012 |
TOTAL |
35.4920416378544 |
50 |
0.7098 |
70.98% |
In both cases, the school must have more than one measurement available in the year. Those schools without a measure or with only one measure in the year are not eligible to receive an annual rating.
In 2012, the annual MMR and FR (from a single year of data) will be used to assign the annual Multiple Measurement Designations. The initial Multiple Measurement Designation used two years of data (2010 and 2011 combined).
The initial designations of Priority and Focus remain with a school for multiple years. The other designations are done annually in the following order:
· Continuous Improvement
· Reward
· Celebration Eligible
To receive an annual Multiple Measurement Designation:
· The school must exist in in the measured year (2012).
· The school must have two or more measurements (domains) available in the year evaluated (2012).
· The school must be designated as Title I in the measured year (2012).
The annual Multiple Measurement Designations are based on the total number of public schools who have applied for Title I funding in the measured year (2012).
Schools classified as care, treatment or correctional facilities are not eligible to receive an annual Multiple Measurement Designation. These are schools with classifications of:
· 70 – Correctional School
· 71 – Miscellaneous Program or Center
· 72 – Neglected/Delinquent School
· 73 – Homeless School/Program
· 74 – Hospital/Medical Program
· 76 – Provides Oversight – Private Residential Care/Treatment
· 77 – Provides Oversight – Public Residential Care/Treatment
· 78 – Provides Oversight – Private Day Treatment
· 79 – Provides Oversight – Public Day Treatment
Those schools previously designated as Priority retain the Priority designation in 2012.
Those schools previously designated as Focus retain the Focus designation in 2012.
The Continuous Improvement designation evaluates the annual MMR from the 2012 measurements. The Title I schools are ranked – from highest to lowest – using the annual MMR according to their school type. When ties are encountered (when the schools in question each have the same annual MMR), set the ranking to the highest ranking of the schools in question.
A. Percentage allocated
A minimum of twenty-five percent of the Title I schools in 2012 are needed to allocate to the Continuous Improvement designation. The twenty-five percent includes the schools previously designated as Priority or Focus – but these schools retain their earlier designations. When computing the twenty-five percent, a fractional result is rounded up the next highest integer.
Twenty-FivePercent = CEILING(Title1SchoolCount * .25)
For example: 849 * .25 = 212.25 = 213 schools
The ranking assists in determining which schools receive the Multiple Measurement Designation of Continuous Improvement. Since there are four school types (High School, Middle School, Elementary School, and Other School), they are proportionally represented in the twenty-five percent allocation.
B. Priority and Focus Schools
In 2011, 42 schools were designated as Priority and 85 were designated as Focus. In 2012, these schools retained their designations and are counted in the twenty-five percent allocation but will retain their initial designations of Priority and Focus.
D. Determining number of schools by school type
The four school types are represented in the twenty-five percent allocation by their proportion represented in the ranking. The Title I schools (including the Priority and Focus schools) are totaled by school type and each proportion is computed. That proportion is used to determine the group’s contribution to the twenty-five percent allocation. For example: If 213 schools are needed, 127 of which are the Priority and Focus schools, 86 additional schools are needed to complete the allocation. The following table illustrates this computation:
School Type |
Title I schools in Continuous Improvement ranking |
Proportion in Ranking |
Additional Schools Needed |
School Type Contribution |
Elementary |
630 |
0.838881491344874 |
86 |
72 |
High |
74 |
0.0985352862849534 |
86 |
8 |
Middle |
43 |
0.0572569906790945 |
86 |
5 |
Other |
4 |
0.00532623169107856 |
86 |
1 |
Total |
751 |
1 |
86 |
86 |
Each school type must contribute at least one previously undesignated school to the twenty-five percent allocation. In some instances, more schools will be included in the Multiple Measurement Designation of Continuous Improvement to meet the minimum twenty-five percent allocation.
E. Determining the Continuous Improvement schools
The ranking is used to designate the required contribution by school type. The 86 schools are derived from the lowest ranked schools that have not already been designated as Priority or Focus. In our example above, 72 lowest ranked elementary schools, 8 lowest ranked high schools, 5 lowest ranked middle schools and 1 lowest ranked other school are selected.
The Reward designation process evaluates the annual MMR from the 2012 measurements. The Title I schools are ranked – from highest to lowest – using the annual MMR according to their school type. When ties are encountered (when the schools in question each have the same annual MMR), set the ranking to the highest ranking of the schools in question.
A. Percentage allocated
A minimum of fifteen percent of the Title I schools in 2012 are allocated to the Reward designation. When computing the fifteen percent, a fractional result is rounded up the next highest integer.
FifteenPercent = CEILING(Title1SchoolCount * .15)
For example: 849 * .15 = 127.35 = 128 schools
The ranking assists in determining which schools receive the Multiple Measurement Designation of Reward. Since there are four school types (High School, Middle School, Elementary School, and Other School), they are proportionally represented in the fifteen percent allocation.
B. Determining number of schools by school type
The four school types are represented in the fifteen percent allocation by their proportion represented in the ranking. The Title I schools are totaled by school type and each proportion is computed. The following table illustrates this computation:
School Type |
Title I schools in Reward ranking |
Proportion in Ranking |
Schools Needed |
School Type Contribution |
E |
630 |
0.838881491344874 |
128 |
107 |
H |
74 |
0.0985352862849534 |
128 |
13 |
M |
43 |
0.0572569906790945 |
128 |
7 |
O |
4 |
0.00532623169107856 |
128 |
1 |
Total |
751 |
1 |
128 |
128 |
Each school type must contribute at least one previously undesignated school to the fifteen percent allocation. In some instances, more schools will be included in the Multiple Measurement Designation to meet the minimum fifteen percent allocation.
C. Determining the Reward schools
The ranking is used to designate the required contribution by school type. The Reward schools are derived from the highest ranked schools that are not already designated as Priority or Focus. In our example above, 107 highest ranked elementary schools, 13 highest ranked high schools, 7 highest ranked middle schools and 1 highest ranked other school are selected.
The Celebration Eligible designation process evaluates the annual MMR from the 2012 measurements. The Title I schools are ranked – from highest to lowest – using the annual MMR according to their school type. When ties are encountered (when the schools in question each have the same annual MMR), set the ranking to the highest ranking of the schools in question.
A. Percentage allocated
A minimum of forty percent of the Title I schools in 2012 are needed to allocate to the Celebration Eligible designation. The forty percent includes the schools previously designated as Reward – but these schools retain their earlier designation. When computing the forty percent, a fractional result is rounded up the next highest integer.
FortyPercent = CEILING(Title1SchoolCount * .40)
For example: 849 * .40 = 339.6 = 340 schools
The ranking assists in determining which schools receive the Multiple Measurement Designation of Celebration Eligible. Since there are four school types (High School, Middle School, Elementary School, and Other School), they are proportionally represented in the forty percent allocation. The Reward designations are set just before the Celebration Eligible designations. The Reward designations take fifteen percent of the allocated forty percent. The remaining twenty-five percent are designated as Celebration Eligible.
B. Determining number of schools by school type
The four school types are represented in the forty percent allocation by their proportion represented in the ranking. The Title I schools are totaled by school type and each proportion is computed. The following table illustrates this computation:
School Type |
Title I schools in Celebration Eligible ranking |
Proportion in Ranking |
Additional Schools Needed |
School Type Contribution |
E |
630 |
0.838881491344874 |
212 |
178 |
H |
74 |
0.0985352862849534 |
212 |
21 |
M |
43 |
0.0572569906790945 |
212 |
12 |
O |
4 |
0.00532623169107856 |
212 |
1 |
Total |
751 |
1 |
212 |
212 |
Each school type must contribute at least one previously undesignated school to the forty percent allocation. In some instances, more schools will be included in the Multiple Measurement Designation to meet the minimum fifteen percent allocation.
C. Determining the Celebration Eligible schools
The ranking is used to designate the required contribution by school type. The Celebration Eligible schools are derived from the highest ranked schools that are not already designated as Priority or Focus or Continuous Improvement or Reward. In our example above, 179 highest ranked elementary schools, 21 highest ranked high schools, 12 highest ranked middle schools and 1 highest ranked other school are selected.