Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Assessment Accountability topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee considers bill to stop counting MCA opt‑outs as nonproficient in district reports
Summary
Senate File 1899 would require the Minnesota Department of Education to stop including students who exercise their legal right to opt out of MCAs as zeros in North Star proficiency calculations. Bloomington and Minneapolis witnesses told the committee that counting opt‑outs as nonproficient depresses reported scores and harms staff morale.
Senate File 1899, presented to the Minnesota Senate Education Committee, would direct the Commissioner of Education to amend statewide accountability calculations so that students who opt out of the Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments (MCAs) are not treated as nonproficient in North Star academic achievement calculations.
Proponent testimony focused on three themes: staff morale, misleading public reporting and unfair penalties for districts with high opt‑out rates. The committee laid the bill over for possible inclusion in an omnibus measure.
Bloomington Public Schools Superintendent Dr. Eric Melby told the committee that counting opt‑outs as nonparticipating or nonproficient undermines staff morale and creates a misleading picture of school performance. “No Minnesota school district should be held accountable for results influenced by choices beyond their control, such as parental opt outs,” Melby said.
Dr. Julio Caesar, Bloomington’s executive director for research, evaluation and assessment, presented data the district uses to illustrate the effect of nonparticipation. He said that in one Bloomington high school, 57% of students who took the math MCA achieved proficiency while the statewide high‑school math proficiency rate was 35%; the reported North Star rate for that high school was 32%, a difference he characterized as substantial and tied to nonparticipation.
A written statement read on behalf of a Minneapolis parent, Laura Bergman, argued the current practice produces inaccurate public data. Bergman’s statement said the statute that created an opt‑out form and process “requires that every student who has opted out…is still counted in the denominator of the proficiency rate and counts as a fail or non proficient. So think about that, numbers. That's bad math, which is ironic since these tests measure math proficiency.”
Supporters asked the department to propose alternatives that would meet federal ESSA requirements while avoiding what they described as an artificial penalty on districts with significant opt‑out rates. Testimony cited Minnesota statute language requiring districts to publish opt‑out forms and the state’s responsibility to the federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) when designing accountability options.
Questions from committee members highlighted tensions: some members said universal participation is the better way to obtain needed data for instruction, while others pointed to test fatigue and the timing and utility of MCA results as reasons families decline participation. Testifiers told the committee that MCA results are often delivered late in the year and that participation decisions are driven in part by overlapping spring assessments and student stress.
Committee action: The committee laid Senate File 1899 over for possible inclusion in the omnibus bill. No final rule change was adopted at the hearing.
