Download Academic Portfolio Performance Data Report

Charter School Authorizer
Academic Portfolio Performance Data Report
Purpose
The state academic portfolio performance data report is designed to report annual information
about the academic performance of an authorizer’s portfolio of charter schools. Unlike the
Multiple Measurements Rating (MMR), the report does not aim to compare relative overall
school performance, but rather to inform authorizers and the public about multiple indicators of
academic portfolio performance relative to state averages. Data is averaged over three years to
account for anomalous occurrences. The data contained in this report supplements data
provided in the Data Center on MDE’s website.
Overview
In all measures, raw data from all state accountability tests are normed within each tested grade
and subject to a center of 0, meaning 0 represents the state average or “expected” value of
each measure within each tested grade and subject before being averaged first to a charter
school local educational agency (LEA) and then to an authorizer portfolio level. Because
averages are not always representative of the spread of data on which they are based,
percentages of charter school LEAs within the portfolio at or above expectations are included in
the report. Only LEAs generating state accountability data (those serving grades 3-8, 10 and 11)
are included in the report.
Method/Process
Academic Proficiency
Guiding Question: Have the LEAs in the authorizer’s portfolio achieved expected proficiency in
math/reading over the last 3 years?

Absolute proficiency was calculated for each grade within each subject and school using
the formula:
Number of students proficient
Number of students tested

Within each grade, regardless of number of students served, the mean and standard
deviation of school proficiency were used to calculate a Z-score for absolute proficiency.
This was done to account for known statewide differences in proficiency across grade
levels.

The grade-level proficiency Z-scores were aggregated to the LEA level using weighted
averages of the grade-level proficiency Z-scores across all grades served for each
subject. These scores were categorized as either “less than 0” or “greater than or equal
to 0”, where a score of greater than or equal to zero indicates the LEA is performing at or
above the statewide school-level average for the grades served.

For portfolios consisting of more than one LEA, average proficiency Z-scores were
aggregated to the portfolio level to produce an overall Z-score for each subject.

The resulting mean portfolio proficiency Z-scores were averaged within subject across
three years.
Focus Academic Proficiency
Guiding Question: Have the LEAs in the authorizer’s portfolio achieved expected proficiency in
math/reading over the last 3 years for focus students?

Focus students are those identified as belonging to any of the following groups:
American Indian/Alaskan Native (AMI), Asian/Pacific Islander (API), Hispanic (HIS),
Black not of Hispanic Origin (BLK), Free/reduced Priced Lunch (FRP), Limited English
Proficiency (LEP), Special Education (SPED).

Absolute proficiency was calculated for each grade within each subject and school using
the formula:
Number of focus students proficient
Number of focus students tested

Within each grade, regardless of number of students served, the mean and standard
deviation of school proficiency were used to calculate a Z-score for absolute proficiency.
This was done to account for known statewide differences in proficiency across grade
levels.

The grade-level proficiency Z-scores were aggregated to the LEA level using weighted
averages of the grade-level proficiency Z-scores across all grades served for each
subject. These scores were categorized as either “less than 0” or “greater than or equal
to 0”, where a score of greater than or equal to zero indicates the LEA is performing at or
above the statewide school-level average for the grades served.

For portfolios consisting of more than one LEA, average focus proficiency Z-scores were
aggregated to the portfolio level to produce an overall Z-score for each subject.

The resulting mean portfolio focus proficiency Z-scores were averaged within subject
across three years.
Academic Growth
Guiding Question: Have the LEAs in the authorizer’s portfolio met growth expectations in
math/reading over the last three years?

For three years of data, individual student growth Z-scores in math and reading were renormed within grade within each subject to put them all on the same scale.

The individual re-normed growth Z-scores were aggregated within subject and year to
the LEA level. These scores were categorized as either “less than 0” or “greater than or
equal to 0”, where a score of greater than or equal to zero indicates the LEA is
performing at or above the state average for the grades served.

For portfolios consisting of more than one LEA, LEA average growth Z-scores were
aggregated to the portfolio level to produce an overall Z-score for each subject.

The resulting mean portfolio growth Z-scores were averaged within subject across three
years.
Focus Academic Growth
Guiding Question: Have the LEAs in the authorizer’s portfolio met growth expectations in
math/reading over the last three years for focus students?

Focus students are those identified as belonging to any of the following groups:
American Indian/Alaskan Native (AMI), Asian/Pacific Islander (API), Hispanic (HIS),
Black not of Hispanic Origin (BLK), Free/reduced Priced Lunch (FRP), Limited English
Proficiency (LEP), Special Education (SPED).

For three years of data, individual focus student growth Z-scores in math and reading
were re-normed within grade within each subject to put them all on the same scale.

The individual re-normed growth Z-scores were aggregated within subject and year to
the LEA level. These scores were categorized as either “less than 0” or “greater than or
equal to 0”, where a score of greater than or equal to zero indicates the LEA is
performing at or above the state average for the grades served.

For portfolios consisting of more than one LEA, LEA average focus growth Z-scores
were aggregated to the portfolio level to produce an overall Z-score for each subject.

The resulting mean portfolio focus growth Z-scores were averaged within subject across
three years.
Graduation Rates
Guiding Question: Have the LEAs in the authorizer’s portfolio achieved expected cohort
graduation rates over the last three years?
o
LEA-level 4-year, 5-year and 6-year cohort graduation rates for the “All Students”
group were normed within year. These scores were categorized as either “less than
0” or “greater than or equal to 0”, where a score of greater than or equal to zero
indicates the LEA has a graduation rate equal to or greater than the average school.
o
For portfolios consisting of more than one LEA, graduation Z-scores were
aggregated to the portfolio level to produce an average Z-score for each portfolio.