Skip Navigation | About | Contact      Ph: (800) 593-9146   
CEN is a Mandated Activities Project of the Michigan Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Early Intervention Services
  HOME | Publications | Events | News | Services | Glossary | Links
     


Leading Change Banner

The School Improvement Framework Plays a Key Role in Michigan's School Accreditation System

by Paul Bielawski, Special Assistant, Office of Educational Assessment and Accountability, Michigan Department of Education

Related Resources

The Gateway to Educational Materials (GEM)

More...

In a nutshell, the Michigan School Improvement Framework will provide a new basis for measuring student achievement in the state’s school accreditation system. The 26 benchmarks are proposed to replace the current performance indicators.

History of Michigan’s Accreditation System

In 2001, in order to comply with Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) under the federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), the Michigan State Board of Education (SBE) undertook revision of the school accreditation system that resulted in Education YES!A Yardstick for Excellent Schools. Education YES! includes a broad set of measures that looks at school performance and student achievement in multiple ways. Under the current Education YES!, each school is graded on its student achievement based on several interlinked components to present a complete picture of performance at the school level. The measures of student achievement in Michigan’s current school accreditation system include:

  • Achievement status to measure how well a school is doing in educating its students.
  • Achievement change to measure whether student achievement is improving or declining.
  • Achievement growth (delayed until 2006-2007) to measure whether students are demonstrating sufficient academic growth for each year of instruction.

In addition, the SBE developed Indicators of School Performance to meet the Michigan School Code requirement that accreditation standards “not be based solely on pupil performance on Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) tests.” The achievement and indicator components are blended to calculate a preliminary score and letter grade for the school. A school’s preliminary letter grade is adjusted based on the school’s AYP status. Visit www.michigan.gov/mde to learn more about Education YES!

Indicators of School Performance

Eleven measures make up the Indicators of School Performance. These measures represent the investments schools make in improved student achievement. Michigan schools have reported their self-assessed ratings, including evidence to support these ratings, since 2002-03. The scoring and grading for the Indicators of School Performance have been based on the school’s self-rating of each component for each indicator. However, the Michigan School Improvement Framework will provide new Indicators of School Performance in Michigan’s school accreditation system. Thus, the accreditation measures will now be based on research.

School Improvement Framework to Guide School Accreditation

What is AYP?

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) is one of the cornerstones of the federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). In Michigan, AYP is a measure of year-to-year student achievement based on the Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP).
To comply with NCLB, Michigan and other states must have developed target starting goals for AYP and must “raise the bar” in gradual increments until 100 percent of the students in the state are proficient on state assessments by the 2013-2014 school year.

NCLB also requires other indicators to be used in determining AYP. For example, attendance rates are used in Michigan elementary and middle schools. For high school, graduate rates are used. All schools must have at least 95 percent of its students take the MEAP.

No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB)
This law redefines the federal role in K-12 education and aims at closing the achievement gap between disadvantaged and minority students and their peers. NCLB is based on four basic principals: stronger accountability for results, increased flexibility and local control, expanded options for parents, and an emphasis on teaching methods that have proven to work. Visit www.nochildleftbehind.gov.

When the Framework is included in the accreditation system, schools will continue to annually update their self-assessments and evidence of success data. The Framework will now provide the basis for schools’ self-assessment measurement through the collecting of data based on the 26 benchmarks.

The MDE has begun development of rubrics (rules) for each of the characteristics in the 26 benchmarks contained in the Framework. The rubrics will offer a structure for schools to make self-assessments (see MDE Creates a Framework for Continuous School Improvement). Schools will continue to report evidence in support of their self-assessment ratings. The MDE recommends that school improvement teams be convened to collectively carry out the self-assessment and to organize and submit the evidence. School district superintendents will have the opportunity to review and approve the self-assessment and evidence for each school in the district.

There is much work to be done before the Framework can be used for school accreditation. Once the rubrics have been developed, the following activities will need to occur:

  • Editing the rubrics.
  • Field testing of the self-assessment.
  • Design of a data collection system.
  • Testing of the data collection software.
  • Development and dissemination of training materials.
  • Conducting data collection.
  • Development of a scoring scale for the self-assessment.
  • Setting standards for the self-assessment.
  • Reviewing Report Card appeals submitted by school districts.
  • Reporting of the accreditation system to the public.

The Office of Educational Assessment and Accountability looks forward to measuring and reporting on the Framework as part of Michigan’s system of school accreditation. Use of the Framework for accreditation will reinforce the research-based foundation of the Framework.

For more information, contact: Paul Bielawski, Special Assistant, Office of Educational Assessment and Accountability, Michigan Department of Education, P.O. Box 30008, Lansing, MI 48909, (517) 335-5784, bielawp@michigan.gov.

School Improvement Framework Tools

Without the right tools to build it, even the world’s best conceptual design will stay just that: conceptual. The Michigan Department of Education (MDE) has used feedback from educators from around the state to develop tools to help districts transform the newly introduced Michigan School Improvement Framework from concept to viable school improvement processes.

Initial tools to support the Framework were developed from feedback on the document from more than 1,300 educators. These tools include:

  • A glossary that defines words used in the Framework and how they apply to the Framework.
  • Current research available to improvement teams to model as they develop their own school improvement
    process.
  • A nationally recognized MI-Map tool kit to provide practical strategies and materials to help shape, support, and sustain system-wide innovation and school improvement.
  • A comprehensive set of rubrics to provide educators with a self-assessment tool, including sample criteria, that
    allows schools and districts to take inventory of their practices and systems.
  • A school improvement template to assist schools in completing their school improvement plan (currently under
    development).

For more information about the tools or the School Improvement Framework, contact: Linda Forward, forwardl@michigan.gov.

 

 

 

Top of Page

 

 


School Improvement

Summer 2006

Michigan Department of Education Logo with link to MDE Web site

Related Resources

Leading Change Home

TABLE OF CONTENTS

MDE Creates a Framework for Continuous School Improvement

MDE Provides Assistance to High Priority Schools
From the State Board

From the Superintendent's Office

MDE's Office of School Improvement (OSI) Drives School Improvement Efforts

Potential Educators Learn the Unique Aspects of Urban School Teaching
Michigan's School Code Master Turns Data Into Useful School Evaluation Tool
Take a Closer Look at the Michigan School Improvement Framework
Michigan School Improvement Framework Strands
The School Improvement Framework Plays a Key Role in Michigan's School Accreditation System
Michigan's School Leaders Sign Up for a Courageous Journey Toward Excellence
Oakland Schools Creates a School Improvement Network
bullet point MASA Superintendent of the Year— Paula Dawning
Muskegon Public Schools Promotes Connections for School Success
Michigan Recognizes School Excellence
Grade Level Content Expectations Parent Guides Now Available
A Michigan Parent Shares Help for Breakthrough Parenting
MASB Highlights Excellent Michigan School Programs
Michigan Association of School Boards Zeroes in on Nine Building Blocks of High Performing Schools
Changing Culture Begins With Strong Leadership
Michigan Partners Work to Support IDEA Implementation and Enhance Student Achievement
Glossary
Resources
Students Say Teaching Counts
RtI Provides Specialized Attention
 


State Board of Education

Kathleen N. Straus, President
John C. Austin, Vice President
Carolyn L. Curtin, Secretary
Marianne Yared McGuire, Treasurer
Nancy Danhof, NASBE Delegate
Elizabeth W. Bauer
Reginald M. Turner
Casandra E. Ulbrich

Ex-Officio

Jennifer M. Granholm, Governor
Michael P. Flanagan,
Superintendent of Public Instruction


Direct all editorial
inquiries to:

Holly Spence Sasso
Project Director
Center for Educational Networking
Eaton ISD
224 S. Cochran
Charlotte, MI 48813
(800) 593-9146 ext. 6
(517) 321-6101 ext. 6
hsasso@eaton.k12.mi.us

Accessibility and
Compliance Information