ACT’s Graduating Class of 2012 Data

Every year ACT presents the Graduating Class data to the Michigan Department of Education and the State Board. The data includes ACT scores the students have taken after the MME so they are a true measurement of where the Class of 2012 ended up. I’ve assembled the key slides for you to share with your staff and parent community as well as some talking points to emphasize with each slide.

Here are some key pieces of additional information and narrative to assist you with explaining the slides:

• Slide 2: The slide shows the percentage of students in the Class of 2012 who met the College Readiness Benchmark per subject area as compared to the National norm. (Remember, Michigan is one of only 8 states that give the ACT test to 100% of their students- the other States have college bound testers only). You may want to create and insert your own slide with your school’s graduating class results.
• Slide 3: This is a list of the 8 States that test 100% of their Juniors as part of their State assessment. Note that although Michigan ranks 6th out of 8 the composite scores for the entire list are pretty tight.
• Slide 4: This slide shows the percentage of students meeting the college readiness benchmarks from 2007 to 2011. Note that 2007 was the year that only college bound students in Michigan took the ACT—2008 was the first year for the Michigan Merit Exam causing the dip in scores. Since then the Michigan Merit Curriculum, an increased use of Explore and Plan testing, and building based RTI programs have combined to contribute to an uptick in scores each year from 2010-2012.
• Slide 5: This is the same as the previous, but includes 2012 (where Michigan saw a point gain in each area, with the exception of Science).
• Slide 6: When the media claim that “only 20% of Michigan Students are College Ready” this slide is the basis for their assertion. Rather than focusing exclusively on the 20% of students who meet all 4 benchmarks, the more appropriate question is: does a student have to hit the college readiness benchmark in all 4 categories to be college ready? Can students hit the target in 2-3 benchmarks and still be successful? The most concerning number of the slide is that 36% did not meet any benchmarks. You may want to recreate this pie chart with your school’s 2012 data for comparison.
• Slide 7: This graphic allows us to look at the percentage of students in the Class of 2012 who met the benchmark, those within 2 points and those who missed it by 3 or more points. What would the pie graph look like if all of the “yellow” students had hit the benchmark? This is a good graphic to recreate with your school’s data.
• Slide 8-11: These slides breakdown the Class of 2012 Results for each content area by Race/Ethnicity. Another slide you may want to recreate with your school’s data (you may want to consider adding your ELL and Special Ed populations).
• Slide 13: This just shows the increase in the use of Explore and Plan testing since 2007 (before the MME). Michigan is 2nd only to Illinois in the Mid-West. The ACT has been part of Illinois’ state assessment since 2006.
• Slide 14: 104,437 Michigan 8th Graders took the Explore test during the 2011-12 school year. The good news is that the percentage of students not meeting any benchmarks is an improvement from the Class of 2012. The bad news is that the percentage meeting all 4 benchmarks is reduced from 21% to 14%. Recreate this pie graph with your Explore results and compare.
• Slide 15: A side by side of the Class of 2012 and this year’s 9th graders.
• Slide 16: The good news here is the significant yellow area in each content area. There are high percentages of current 9th graders within 2 points of meeting the benchmark. Recreate this graphic and give the staff a list of the student’s names in your yellow zone for each content area. Ask the staff: “What remediation will you be doing to help the “bubble students” hit the target?”
• Slide 17: 118,703 Michigan 10th Graders took the Plan test during the 2011-12 school year. This slide is all good news. The percentage of students not meeting any benchmarks is an improvement from the Class of 2012. The same is true of the percentage meeting all 4 benchmarks. Recreate this pie graph with your Plan results and compare.
• Slide 18: A side-by-side of the Class of 2012 and this year’s 11th graders.
• Slide 19: Once again, this slide provides a clear target, which is that we need the 11th graders in the yellow zone to score 2 points higher and hit the target. If this happens, the Grad Class pie graph for the Class of 2013 will be a significant improvement. Recreate this graphic and give the staff a list of the student’s names in your yellow zone for each content area. Ask the staff: “What remediation will you be doing to help the “bubble students” hit the target?”
• Slides 21-29: Follow this link to the ACT website and print the article for your staff: http://www.act.org/research/policymakers/briefs.html. The article will help you to think about different ways to use Explore and Plan results to measure student growth and, potentially, teacher effectiveness. ACT provides expected growth from the 8th grade Explore to the 12th grade ACT in each content area. It also breaks down projected growth for students who are below, at and above the college readiness benchmark (rather than just looking at overall cohort growth). Interesting food for thought.
• Slide 30: Wrap up with ways your school will be working on raising student scores.

If you do not have a systemic approach for breaking down your Explore and Plan results with staff, students and parents join us for EPAS session being offered Regionally around the State in collaboration with the Michigan Association for College Admissions Counseling (MACAC). The session will include an AM session with John Carroll from ACT Mid-West and an afternoon session on how to use EPAS data for School Improvement by MASSP. Check the MASSP website for dates/locations: http://mymassp.com/EPAS_at_ACT/MACAC. MASSP has developed a step-by-step approach to assist schools with looking at specific items of strength and weakness to target for ongoing school improvement as well as individual student remediation. You will leave the workshop with clear professional development plans and all the materials you will need to facilitate the data activities.