REVISE STATE ASSESSMENT PROGRAMS AND ACCREDITATION STANDARDS

House Bill 6333

Sponsor:  Rep. Brian Palmer 

House Bill 6334

Sponsor:  Rep. Joanne Voorhees

Committee:  Education

Complete to 11-30-04

A SUMMARY OF HOUSE BILLS 6333 - 6334 AS INTRODUCED 11-10-04

The bills would:

** revise the state assessment program (including elimination of social studies testing);

** require the creation of grade-level content expectations and benchmarks to determine adequate yearly progress (AYP);

** provide for electronic administration of assessments in grades 3 through 8 by 2007;

**establish a 12-member assessment advisory board; and

**change school accreditation standards. 

House Bill 6333 is tie-barred to House Bill 6334, meaning that it could not become law unless House Bill 6334 were also enacted.  A more complete description of each bill follows.

House Bill 6333 would amend Public Act 38 of 1970 (MCL 388.1082), the original Michigan Education Assessment Program (MEAP) authorizing statute, to revise the manner in which the state assessment program is administered. 

Beginning with the 2005-2006 school year, the superintendent of public instruction would be required to ensure that all of the following applied to the assessment program.

            -Scorers of assessments would be required to supply individual reports for each student that would identify for parents and teachers whether the student met expectations or failed to meet them for each standard, to allow the student's parents and teachers to assess and remedy problems before the student moved to the next grade.

            -Those who develop or score assessments would be required to meet quality management standards commonly used in the assessment industry, including at least meeting level two of the capability maturity model developed by the software engineering institute of Carnegie Mellon University for the 2005-2006 school year assessments, and improving to at least level three of that model for subsequent assessments.

            -Contracts with scorers or developers of assessment instruments would have to include specific deadlines for all steps of the assessment process (including deadlines for the correct testing materials to be supplied to schools, and for the correct results to be returned to schools), including penalties for noncompliance with the deadlines.

            -All assessment instruments would be required to 1) be designed to test students on grade level content expectations in all subjects tested, for each grade level tested; 2) include no more than two written response portions for English language arts, and not include any written response portions for mathematics or science; and 3) comply with requirements of the federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.

The bill requires that the superintendent of public instruction work with the assessment advisory board, and comply with the guidelines and procedures established by that board.

Under the bill, officials working in public schools would be required to identify both students needing assistance to improve their competence in the basic skills, and also students who have demonstrated extraordinary competence in multiple subject areas, and who should be advanced.

House Bill 6334 would amend the Revised School Code (MCL 380.1279 et al) to change the state's assessment and accreditation programs.

High School Testing.  The bill requires that the board of a school district or public school academy administer state assessments to high school students in the subject areas of English language arts, mathematics, and science, and based on grade level content expectations.  Currently under the law, tests are given in communication skills, mathematics, science, and social studies.  All of the tests are based on the model core academic content standards objectives.  Under the bill, the term "communications skills" would be eliminated, and the term "English language arts" would be used instead.  "English language arts" would be defined to mean reading and writing.

The bill also would include all the provisions contained in House Bill 6333, so that the state superintendent's responsibilities concerning the state assessment program would also be included in the Revised School Code.

Assessment Advisory Board.  Further, the bill would eliminate provisions in the current law that create an 11-member assessment administration advisory committee to advise the state board on MEAP, as well as on assessments used for state endorsements.  Instead, the bill would require that an assessment advisory board be created as an independent board within the Department of Education.  The assessment advisory board would exercise its authority independently of the superintendent of public instruction and the department; however, the department would be required to provide staff for the board. All 12 members of the assessment board would be appointed by the governor, and would include the state superintendent (non-voting); three academic subject area experts (in math, science, and English language arts); two experts in academic testing and assessment; two teachers (one working, one retired, with one representing grades K-8 and the other high school); two public school parents (non-voting); and two students (also non-voting).  Generally, the members of the board would serve four years, unless they no longer met the qualifications of their appointments.  They would not receive compensation, but could be reimbursed for expenses.

Duties of the Assessment Advisory Board.  Under the bill, the Assessment Advisory Board would be required to:

            -establish grade level content expectations in mathematics and English language arts for all grades to be tested, not later than 120 days after the effective date of this legislation;

            -establish grade level content expectations in science and civics for grades 3 to 8, not later than 2012, with "civics" defined to mean American government, geography, and economics;

                       

            -each year, not later than 120 days after completing the assessment period, submit a comprehensive report to the legislature on the status of all student assessments that were part of the state assessment program, including but not limited to MEAP, the high school assessments, and assessments for special education students, and English language learners.  That report would have to include 1) the annual student assessment data; 2) a description of the feedback provided to students, parents, and schools; 3) a description of any alterations made in the program during the period covered by the report; and 4) any recommendations by the state assessment governing board for changes to the program.**

            -develop or select the grades 3 – 8 assessment instruments, with the assessments required 1) to comply with grade level content expectations and benchmarks established by the department for the purpose of determining adequate yearly progress under the federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, and 2) to be objective-oriented and not inconsistent with the state board model core academic curriculum content standard objectives;

            -establish policies and guidelines to administer the grade 3-8 assessments, with those policies and guidelines to specify the testing period, and ensure that all of the following were met:  1) the correct testing materials were provided to teachers at least seven days before the beginning of the testing period; 2) the testing period consisted of at least three full weeks; 3) the testing materials were returned to the Department of Education by the schools not later than seven days after the end of the testing period; and 4) that scores were returned to the schools and to the parents of students within 30 days;

            -not later than 2007, establish ways to administer the grade 3-8 assessments electronically through the Internet or other interactive connection;

            -oversee the grade 11 testing, and designate a writing test for the purposes of that section; and,

           

                        -perform other functions as provided by law.

The bill requires the superintendent of public instruction and the Department of Education to implement the policies, guidelines, and other decisions made by the assessment advisory board under this section of the legislation.

Finally, the bill would eliminate a provision that allows a person who graduated from high school after 1996 to take an assessment without charge, at the school district from which he or she graduated from high school, and then have that score included on his or her high school transcript.

School Accreditation.   Currently under the law, a school is certified "accredited" when it has met or exceeded standards for six areas of school operation:  administration and school organization, curricula, staff, school plant and facilities, school and community relations, and school improvement plans and student performance.  House Bill 6334 would retain these six areas, but expand "school and community relations" to say, instead, "school, parent, and community relations."

Currently the law describes the protocols the Department of Education must use when developing and distributing proposed accreditation standards.  House Bill 6334 would retain these provisions, but add that the process prescribed also would apply to all revisions made to the accreditation standards.

Currently under the law, the standards for accreditation must include student performance on MEAP tests, and the percentage of students achieving state endorsement, as well as multiple year change in student performance on MEAP tests, and multiple year change in the percentage of students achieving state endorsement.  Under House Bill 6334, these provisions would be retained.  However, the bill requires that beginning in the 2004-2005 school year, the Department of Education ensure that student performance and change in student performance criteria constitute no more than 50 percent of the criteria used to determine a public school's accreditation status, or a school's adequate yearly progress under the federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.  The bill specifies that the balance of the criteria would be determined by department officials in consultation with the assessment advisory board.

Currently under the law, if at least five percent of a public school's MEAP answer sheets are lost by the department or the state contractor, and school officials can verify that the answer sheets were collected and forwarded to the department, then department officials cannot assign an accreditation score or school report card grade to that public school for the particular subject area.  House Bill 6334 would retain these provisions, and also prohibit the department from subjecting the school to any adverse fiscal effect, or other adverse effect, as a result of the lost answer sheets.

Under current law the superintendent of public instruction must evaluate the school accreditation program, as well as the status of schools, and submit an annual report to the Senate and House committees whose members are responsible for education legislation.  The report must address the reasons each unaccredited school is not accredited, and recommend legislative actions that would result in the accreditation of all schools.  House Bill 6334 would retain this provision, but expand it to say that the report about unaccredited schools must include information about each of the six areas of school operation specified under the law, as well as recommended legislative action that would result in improvements to elementary and secondary education in the state, in alignment of curriculum to assessment and testing, and in the assessment and testing process that will result in unaccredited schools achieving accreditation.

Finally, the bill will repeal Section 104a of the State School Aid Act which concerns the high school assessment test.

                                                                                           Legislative Analyst:   J. Hunault

                                                                                                                          

■ This analysis was prepared by nonpartisan House staff for use by House members in their deliberations, and does not constitute an official statement of legislative intent.