2007 Accountability Information


Accountability Results: Based on 2006-2007 School Year

District and School-Level Results

Summary of Statewide Accountability Results

Subgroup Level AYP Determinations (comma-delimited ASCII file)

Testing Participation Rates (comma-delimited ASCII file)

Graduation Data for 2005 and 2006 seniors: Subgroup level AYP determinations, testing participation rates, and graduation data (2005/2006 seniors) are posted with the NCLB Report Cards.


General Information and Guidance

2007 Statewide Accountability Timeline: (IMPORTANT -- READ THIS!!)

2007 Data Release Table

2007 Request for Review Process (Achievement, Growth and AYP Models)

2007 Appeals Process under NCLB (only for districts and schools identified for improvement)

Importance of MSIS Data for Assessment Reporting and Accountability (PowerPoint - 2004 version)

Importance of MSIS Data for Assessment Reporting and Accountability (Microsoft Word - 2004 version )

School Reconfiguration Policy (Effect on Accountability)

Special Education Student Assessment Data Reassignment Policy

How to use the 2006 SLAIF Spreadsheet (Student Level Accountability Information File)

File Layout for the 2006 SLAIF Spreadsheets


State Achievement and Growth Models

Sample 2006 School Performance (Achievement and Growth) Report: There are no changes for 2007.

Interpretation Guide for the 2006 School Performance Report: A new guide will be posted, but there are no changes to the report.

What is an Achievement Level Index, anyway?

School Achievement Level Index (ALI) Values

District Average Achievement Level Index (AVGALI) Values

Summary of the Approved Achievement and Growth Models for Use in 2005: This document is applicable for 2007 since the only change to the model was the addition of the MAAECF for SCD students in 2006.

Understanding the School Level Models for Achievement and Growth and Using the School Accountability Model Reports: The third edition (July 20, 2006) of this 44-page document presents comprehensive information about the Achievement and Growth Models.


NCLB Title I Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Model

Sample 2005 AYP Overall Report: Two small changes for 2006 are explained in the Interpretation Guide. There are no changes in the report for 2007.

Interpretation Guide for the 2006 AYP Overall Report: A new guide will be posted, but there are no changes to the reports.

Sample 2005 AYP Subgroup Report: A new 2007 sample will be posted when available.

Interpretation Guide for the 2006 AYP Subgroup Report

Sample 2005 AYP Overall Report with 2% Flexibility: This feature was the same for 2006 and, if approved by USDE, will be the same in 2007.

Examples of Proficiency Index and Confidence Interval Calculations for 2005: These examples can be used for the 2007 AYP Model.

Explanation of the Split Grade Spans Model for Tracking Title I Improvement Status

Proposed Changes in 2007 High School Participation Rate Calculations: Figure illustrating the AYP workbook amendment below -- mandated by USDE.

U.S. Department of Education Accountability Workbook: Mississippi: This 59-page document presents the state's plan for meeting the accountability requirements in NCLB 2001 and in the USDE final regulations for Title I. The initial plan was approved by the Mississippi State Board of Education in January, 2003, and approved by the USDE in March, 2003. There were subsequent revisions on October 10, 2003; March 25, 2004; May 28, 2004; May 9, 2005; June 22, 2005; June 27, 2006; and February 14, 2007.


NCLB Title III Accountability Model

Title III Accountability Plan (Revised November 30, 2006)

Sample 2006 Title III Accountability Report

Mississippi AMAO Development Chronology: This document shows the development of Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) for ELL/LEP students (see also the document linked below).

Revision to Consolidated State Application -- September 2003 submission: The U.S. Department of Education required each state to submit a consolidated application for programs funded under NCLB. The application components were submitted in stages. The September, 2003, submission required each state to determine baseline and target values for ELL/LEP students making progress toward and attaining proficiency in English. The AMAOs in this revised document were based on the English language assessment adopted for use in Mississippi.