Skip to content

Michigan TAC Corpus — Index

The knowledge base for the Michigan OEAA/OEE Technical Advisory Committee. One meeting is currently ingested: April 23–24, 2026 TAC Meeting.

Page conventions, frontmatter, and link style: Wiki Schema — Michigan TAC corpus. Operating manual for agents: AGENTS.md. Acronyms: Glossary.

Start here

• Open Recommendations from April 2026 — the register. What the committee advised, to whom, and where each item stands. This is the page a working meeting should be run against.
• April 23–24, 2026 TAC Meeting — the meeting itself: roster, sessions, and the thread running through them.
• Glossary — AGP, NGA, CT-PO, QWK, MTTC, and the rest.

The through-line

Three of April’s five sessions asked the same question in different vocabularies: when a measurement system is asked to carry more weight than its precision can bear, what should the state do? High school growth targets, licensure form security, and subscore reporting are all instances. The committee’s answers rhymed — define the inference you are defending, then choose the instrument.

Between meetings

The corpus’s reason to exist. Member work developed from the record rather than waiting for the next convening — see Wiki Schema — Michigan TAC corpus on the analyses/ type.

• copula-approach-to-subtest-indicators — Betebenner to Zeng, September 2026: what the subscore study’s research question actually is, and whether a copula helps answer it

Standing topics

These outlive any single meeting and are the unit of institutional memory.

Growth and accountability

• Adequate Growth Targets — why Michigan’s index over-identifies high schools, and what to do
• Nearest Grade Average Method — the proposed remedy, endorsed but blocked
• Michigan Growth Model — background: SGP, AGP, the two current methods, and what the hidden slides said
• DRC Grade 12 Projection Explorations — a negative result, kept because successors need it
• ESSA Plan Constraints — the federal plan amendment that gates everything

Assessment reporting

• M-STEP Subscore Reporting — the hardest open problem in the corpus
• M-STEP / Smarter Balanced Concordance — a communication artifact under revision
• Smarter Balanced Interim Adoption — flat participation and an unfinished barrier study

Educator licensure

• MTTC Meaningfully Different Forms — a rejected definition and the committee’s replacement
• MTTC Constructed-Response Endorsements — a proposal advised against, with four alternatives

Operations

• MDE Assessment Operations — budget, an unfunded reporting mandate, a new superintendent
• WIDA Assessment Operations — the alternate screener and the extended testing window

Sessions, April 2026

• Session 1 — Using the Smarter Balanced Interim Assessment — Jennifer Paul: interim adoption, the concordance table, WIDA
• Session 2 — Michigan Department of Education Update — Andrew Middlestead: department context
• Session 3 — Accountability Growth Methodology Targets — Chad Bailey and Jessalyn Smith: the growth problem
• Session 4 — Michigan Test for Teacher Certification — Bridgett McDowell and Pearson: licensure forms
• Session 5 — Simulation Studies on Subtest Indicators — Ji Zeng: CT-PO vs SBAC

Source documents

Each summarises one file in raw/, with provenance and known defects.

• TAC Meeting Notes, April 2026 — the official minutes, and a catalogue of what they lose
• April 2026 TAC Agenda — the schedule, and where it disagrees with the minutes
• CT-PO vs SBAC Simulation Results Deck — 52 pages whose findings live in chart images, recovered here
• TAC Growth Update Deck, April 2026 — eight hidden slides and two speaker notes found nowhere else
• Interim and Smarter Concordance Table Examples — the two draft layouts the committee reviewed
• Smarter Balanced Interim Participation Trend Data — the table whose headline is not printed on it
• April 2026 TAC Interim Deck — three slides framing one question

Open questions

Posed and unresolved. See also the register.

• How many educators are actually using the interim assessments? — how many educators actually use the interims?
• How would OEAA communicate a standard change and break in trend? — how would a trend break be announced?
• Is the impact of NGA on index values desirable? — is NGA’s effect on index values the one Michigan wants?
• How long does it take to accumulate enough examinees to equate? — how fast do fields reach 100 examinees?
• Can equating data be too old? — can equating data get too old to use?
• What would a score report using the new method look like? — what would the new score report look like?
• Would varying the inter-subtest correlations change the result? — would asymmetric correlations change the finding?
• WIN Work Readiness Assessments at the fall meeting — WIN at the fall meeting

People

Committee — Mark Reckase, Jennifer Randall, Gregory Cizek, Damian Betebenner, Martha Thurlow

Presenters — Jennifer Paul, Andrew Middlestead, Chad Bailey, Jessalyn Smith, Bridgett McDowell, Ji Zeng

Also — Jessica Fenby, who wrote the minutes this corpus is built from

Organizations

OEAA/OEE Technical Advisory Committee · Michigan Department of Education (MDE) · Office of Educational Assessment and Accountability (OEAA) · Office of Educator Excellence (OEE) · Data Recognition Corporation (DRC) · Pearson / Evaluation Systems · Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium · Michigan Assessment Consortium (MAC) · Michigan Education Research Association (MERA) · WIDA · WIN Work Readiness Assessments

A note on what is missing

The corpus can tell you what the committee advised. It cannot tell you which member advised it, because the source minutes attribute to bodies rather than people. Five members with distinct areas of expertise were in the room and the record flattens them into one voice. That gap is not a defect of this wiki — it is the defect this wiki was built to demonstrate. See documents/ai-native-tac.qmd.