Assessment and Accountability: Making the Connection

Transcription

1 Assessment and Accountability: Making the Connection Texas Assessment Conference February 16, 2015 Hilton Salon F from 8:30 11:30 a.m. Cheri Hendrick Accountability and Assessment Specialist, School Support Education Service Center, Region 20, San Antonio, TX (210) cheri.hendrick@esc20.net

2 Why are we here today? Join us as we walk through the connection of your state assessments to the multiple accountability systems that your campus(es) and districts are evaluated on. We walk through multiple systems including the indexes to assist you and your staff in understanding the report as well as the methodology with each area so that you are prepared to present this information to your schools, community, and other stakeholders.

3 PEIMS Snapshot Last Friday in October 2015 Accountability Friday, October 31, 2014 End of Course results also have the possibility of Friday, October 25, 2013

4 2015 Accountability Subset Enrollment Fall 2013 snapshot October 25, 2013 Fall 2014 snapshot October 31, 2014 STAAR Results Summer 2014 End of Course Fall 2014 End of Course Spring 2015 End of Course Spring 2015 Grades 3 8

5 EOC STAAR Performance Districts and campuses are accountable for three EOC administrations: 1) summer results for students enrolled on the prior-year fall snapshot; 2) fall results for students enrolled on the current-year fall snapshot; and 3) spring results for students enrolled on the fall snapshot (current school year). Enrolled and tested on the same campus or district during the 2015 accountability cycle, calculation of the performance indexes will include the best EOC results Fall 2013 Snapshot Summer 2014 Fall 2014 Snapshot Fall 2014 Spring 2015 Campus CAMPUS CAMPUS CAMPUS Campus The best test result is selected. Each test meets the accountability subset rule.

6 2014 Accountability Manual Appendix K - Data Sources

7 Answer document Accountability

8 Answer documents 2014 Accountability Manual Appendix K Page 134 State Assessments. Student identification, demographic data, and scoring status information as entered on the answer document at the time of testing are used to determine the accountability subset and student groups for campus and district ratings. Districts have multiple opportunities to provide accurate information through their PEIMS submissions, pre-coded data files provided to the test contractor, and updates to the answer documents at the time of testing.

9 2014 Accountability Frequently Asked Questions The accountability results are based on the demographic information from the Consolidated Accountability File (CAF) which includes only one race/ethnicity value. The CAF file provides the most recent demographic information based on the last test administration available for each student. The accountability results are based on the demographic information from the Consolidated Accountability File (CAF) which includes only one Special Education/ELL (Limited English Proficiency) value. The CAF file provides the most recent program information based on the last test administration available for each student. For the LEP field, if the student tested in TELPAS or is identified as a current LEP student (value of 'C') in any current- year test administration, the value on the CAF file will be 'C'.

10 A AR B B CT ED ESL ETH G/T I L MS P PD SE TIA W Get a blank notecard How many do you know? Answer Document

11 Answer Document Indicators A AR B B CT ED ESL ETH G/T I L MS P PD SE TIA W Asian At-Risk Black African American Bilingual Program Career and Technical Ed Economic Disadvantage ESL Program Type Hispanic Latino Code Gift Talented American Indian Alaska Native LEP Migrant Student Native Hawaiian Pacific Islander Parental Denial Special Education Title I, Part A White

12

13 Reports

14 Focus & Priority Schools

15 STAAR Report with possible Interventions Accountability Report District Improvement Plan* Campus Improvement Plan* If required, Targeted Improvement Plan Performance Based Monitoring Analysis System (PBMAS) Data Validation Monitoring (DVM) Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) *TEC & requires each year

16 STAAR Reports with reporting requirements Public Education Grant List (PEG) Notify parents/guardians by Feb 1 Texas Academic Performance Report (TAPR) Public hearing within 90 days of TEA posting (11/21/14) TAPR Guidelines to follow School Report Card (SRC) Distribute a copy to parents within six weeks of 12/11/14 letter Federal Report Card (NCLB/ESEA requirement) Post on website, make hard copies available, notify parents of all students of the availability of the report cards (by March 6, 2015) Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas (FIRST) Public meeting Accreditation Below accredited public notification is required HB 5 Community and Student Engagement Post on website

17 STAAR Reports Download from TAMS Upload to eduphoria, DMAC, SIS

18 STARR Results

19 Summary Reports How do you cross reference snapshot? Education Service Center, Region 20 Spreadsheet to assist in totaling campus summary reports When calculating all tests, for example all Reading tests, make sure you include at the versions of the test. Summary Reports are not consolidated. STAAR Grade 5 Reading Page 1 STAAR Grade 5 Summary Page 13 STAAR Spanish Grade 5 Summary Page 14 STAAR L Grade 5 Summary Page 15 STAAR Modified Grade 5 Summary Page 16 STAAR Alternate will be reported with the May Grades 3-8 and June EOC reports 19

20 How do you cross reference snapshot? Grade 5 & 8 April Reports: Only STAAR Progress Listed --- Not available; 0 did not meet; 1 met; 2 exceeded ELL Progress not available TELPAS was not processed yet 20

21 How do you cross reference snapshot? Confidential Campus Roster Level II Satisfactory Index 1 & 3 Level III Advanced Index 3 STAAR Progress Index 2 ELL Progress Index 1, 2 & 3 Is anything missing? Final Level II for Index 4 If applicable, STAAR Progress OR ELL Progress reported not both --- Not available; 0 did not meet; 1 met; 2 exceeded April Grade 5 & 8 Reports: Only STAAR Progress was reported ELL Progress was not available; TELPAS was not processed yet May Grades 3 8 Reports should have both STAAR Progress 21 Measure and ELL Progress Measure populated where appropriate

22 Card Sort

23 2014 Accountability Card Sort Index 4 3 cards per column

24 Answer document Accountability

25 TELPAS

26 ELL Progress Measure

27 ELL Progress Measure Postings The ELL Progress Measure takes into account the time needed for ELL students to acquire the English language and to fully demonstrate gradelevel academic skills in English. Posted March 18, ) Texas English Language Learner (ELL) Progress Measure Expectations 2) Calculating the Texas English Language Learner (ELL) Progress Measure 3) Texas English Language Learner (ELL) Progress Measure Questions and Answers To be used in Index 1, 2 and 3

28 Student must Which students receive an ELL Progress Measure? be classified as Limited English Proficient (LEP) have a valid STAAR scale score On an English language version of STAAR or STAAR L Student cannot be a parent denial for ELL Services have taken STAAR Spanish, modified or alternate versions have exceeded the number of years in the plan in which he/she qualifies If the student does not meet the criteria to receive an ELL Progress measure, the student may be eligible to receive the STAAR Progress measure. Texas ELL Progress Measure Q&A #5 Calculating the Texas ELL Progress Measure page 1

29 How is ELL Progress Calculated? Information needed: TELPAS numbers of years in U.S. Schools TELPAS composite rating Extenuating circumstances (Reported on TELPAS) Student with interrupted formal education (SIFE) Unschooled asylee/refugee All LEP students taking English I or English II are given an extra year Texas ELL Progress Measure Q&A #6

30 Texas ELL Progress Measure Plans Texas ELL Progress Measure Q&A #6

31 Texas ELL Progress Measure Expectations [Table of each grade/eoc] There is a different table for each grade level. Grade 3 STAAR Phase-in 1 Level II Passing Standard English Reading 1331 English Math 1392

32 2014 Texas Assessment Conference Progress on STAAR Slide 17

33 Where is ELL Progress reported? Summary Reports Data Files Student portal of the Texas Assessment Management system Confidential Student Report (CSR) Met Exceeded No Information Available (missing one or more pieces of information) Texas ELL Progress Measure Q&A #11 & 22 and Calculating ELL Progress pg. 1

34 Where is ELL Plan reported? Student portal of the Texas Assessment Management system Year of a -Year Plan Texas ELL Progress Measure Q&A #11

35 Are retest included? The ELL Progress measure will be available for all retest administrations The best ELL progress measure outcome will be used Texas ELL Progress Measure Q&A #23

36 ELL Progress versus Passing STAAR Meeting ELL Progress Measure does not mean the student has met SSI, graduation requirements or LEP Exit criteria Student must meet the passing standard on STAAR for grade promotion or graduation purposes Texas ELL Progress Measure Q&A #32

37 2014 Accountability Manual Page 123

38 Overview of proposed 2015 Accountability Cheri Hendrick Accountability and Assessment Specialist, School Support (210)

39 2014 Accountability Development Timeline March 28, 2014 APAC/ATAC Recommendations April 4, 2014 April 25, 2014 Commissioner s Final Decisions posted Latest Updates on TEA s website May 16, 2014 Key chapters of the 2014 Accountability Manual (Chapters 2-9) June 5, 2014 June 6, 2014 June 2014 July 11, 2014 August 1, 2014 August 8, 2014 TEASE posting of final graduation information TEASE postings of comparison groups Entire 2014 Accountability Manual (still waiting for Chapter 11 Preview and Appendix L: Index 2 & 3 targets) Consolidated Accountability File 2014 Accountability data posted in TEASE (Page 16 of the 2014 Accountability Manual) 2014 Accountability posted publicly on TEA s website 39

40 Performance Index Framework To receive a Met Standard or Met Alternative Standard rating, all campuses and districts must meet the targets on all indexes for which they have performance results. Student Achievement Index I Postsecondary Readiness Index 4 Accountability System Student Progress Index 2 Closing Performance Gaps Index 3 40

41 2014 Accountability Ratings 2014 Accountability Rating 2014 Distinction Designations (Districts and Campuses) (Districts and Campuses) Postsecondary Readiness Met Standard met performance index targets (acceptable) Met Alternative Standard met modified performance index targets for alternative education campuses and charter districts (acceptable) (Campuses Only) Top 25%: Student Progress and/or Top 25%: Closing Achievement Gaps and/or Academic Achievement: Reading/ELA and/or Academic Achievement: Mathematics and/or Academic Achievement: Science and/or Academic Achievement: Social Studies N/A Improvement Required did not meet one or more performance index targets (unacceptable) N/A 41

42 To receive a Met Standard or Met Alternative Standard rating, all campuses and districts must meet the following targets on all indexes for which they have performance results. Accountability Targets [non-aea Districts and Campuses] Index 1 Index 2 Index 3 Index All 4 STAAR All 4 STAAR District TBD 21* 16* TBD 55 28* TBD TBD TBD Campus: Elementary 30* 33* TBD 28* TBD N/A N/A 12 TBD TBD Middle School TBD 29* 28* TBD 55 27* TBD N/A N/A 13 TBD TBD High School/K-12 17* N/A TBD 31* TBD TBD TBD *5th percentile by campus type - see chart below Accountability Targets [AEA Districts and Campuses] 2014 AEA list of campuses and districts posted at Index 1 Index 2 Index 3 Index AEA Campuses and Charter District Targets All Only Grad All Only Grad TBD 9^ N/A TBD 30 11^ TBD TBD TBD ^5th percentile for both AEA campuses and districts Bonus Points (max 30) RHSP/DAP, College-Ready Graduates and excluded students credit 42

43 2014 Accountability System School Types Targets for non-aea campuses are set at about the fifth percentile of non-aea 2014 campus performance by campus type. Targets for non-aea districts correspond to about the fifth percentile of non-aea 2014 campus performance across all campus types. Targets for both AEA charters and campuses are set at about the fifth percentile of AEA 2014 campus performance Accountability Manual page 15

44 2014 AEA Campuses and Districts 2014 AEA campus registration was April 1-15, 2014, and available through the TEASE Accountability website. Alternative education campuses (AECs) rated under 2013 AEA procedures qualify for automatic re-registration in 2014, subject to certain criteria: Each campus must have at least 75% at-risk student enrollment, as verified by current-year PEIMS fall enrollment data; For campuses with less than 75% at-risk student enrollment, prior-year PEIMS data may be used to qualify; Each campus must have at least 50% of students enrolled in grades AEA registration will be expanded to include dropout recovery schools Accountability Manual page

45 Proposals for 2015 Accountability This presentation contains information that is presently being proposed. The commissioner of education will make final decisions in late March Accountability Development Materials are posted on TEA s website

46 Performance Index Framework To receive a Met Standard or Met Alternative Standard rating, all campuses and districts must meet the targets on all indexes for which they have performance results. Student Achievement Index I Postsecondary Readiness Index 4 Accountability System Student Progress Index Proposal: Must Met: Index 1 or Index 2, Index 3 and Index 4 Closing Performance Gaps Index 3 46

47 Index 1: Student Achievement Index 1: Student Achievement is a snapshot of performance across subjects, on both general and alternative assessments, at the satisfactory performance standard. Student Group: All Students No minimum size; Small number analysis used if less than 10 tests Combined over All Subjects: Reading, Mathematics, Writing, Science and Social Studies Grades 3-8 Math included using a bridge study Student Performance Standards Included: Phase-in 1 Level II (Satisfactory) ELL Students 2 nd, 3 rd and 4 th year in U.S. schools meeting the new ELL Progress Measure Substitute Assessments for STAAR EOC tests are included End of Course: Best result from July 14, Fall 14 and Spring 15 English I & II Combined, Algebra I, Biology & U.S. History Proposed: include STAAR A and STAAR Alternate 2 (Hold harmless) 47

48 Substitute Assessments Included in Index 1 & 4; not included in Index 2 & 3 December 2013 Texas Administrative Code Updates New Figure: 19 TAC (b) (PDF) Answer document instructions 2014 District and Campus Coordinator Manual page S-47

49 Index 2: Student Progress 50

50 Index 2: Student Progress Index 2: Student Progress separates measures of student progress from measures of student achievement to provide an opportunity for diverse campuses to show the improvements they are making independent of overall achievement levels. Ten student groups: All students Seven race/ethnic groups Students served by special education English Language Learners (ELL) By Subject Area: Reading, Math and Writing Minimum Size All students: no minimum size small numbers analysis if less than 10 tests Student Groups: 25 tests Proposed to change the calculation structure Points based on weighted performance: One point given for each percentage of tests at the Met or Exceeded progress level One additional point for each percentage of tests at the Exceeded progress level 51

51 Reading Grade Scale Score English I Index 2: Student Progress How is Growth Defined? Reading Final Recommended Level II English I

52 Expected Growth Index 2: Student Progress How is Growth Defined? Scale Score Level 2 Recommended Level 2 Recommended Previous Year Current Year

53 Index 2: Student Progress Let s look at an example STAAR Progress Measure posted on TEA s website Calculating Progress Measure page 4 (PDF updated 05/12/14) 55

54 Index 2: Student Progress How did the come up with 32 points? STAAR Reading English = 32 Expected Growth: 32 Points Level 2 Recommended Level 2 Recommended Grade 4 Grade 5

55 Index 2: Student Progress STAAR Reading English Example Expected Growth: 32 Points Level III Met Growth Phase-In 1 Level II Not Met Met Growth Met Growth Grade 4 Grade 5

56 Index 2: Student Progress A Level III student has to stay at Level III 58

57 Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps emphasizes advanced academic achievement of the economically disadvantaged student group and the lowest performing race/ethnicity student groups at each campus and district. By Subject Area: Reading, Mathematics, Writing, Science, and Social Studies Grades 3-8 Math included using a bridge study Student Groups: Economically Disadvantaged No minimum size; small numbers analysis is less than 10 tests Two Lowest Performing Race/Ethnicity Groups Based on 2014 Index 1 All Subjects Minimum size: 25 tests in Reading and Math If only two ethnic groups meet minimum size; evaluated on one ethnic group. If only one ethnic group meets minimum size; evaluated only on Economically Disadvantaged 59

58 Index 3: 2015 Construction - Student Groups (based on 2014 assessment results by Race/Ethnicity) Make sure you review the unmasked report on TEASE 2014 Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps AND 60

59 Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps By Subject Area: Reading, Mathematics, Writing, Science, and Social Studies Grades 3-8 Math included using a bridge study Student Groups: Economically Disadvantaged - No minimum size; small number analysis if less than 10 tests Two Lowest Performing Race/Ethnicity Groups Based on 2014 Index 1 All Subjects Minimum size: 25 tests in Reading and Math No Proposed changes Points based on STAAR performance: Phase-in 1 Level II satisfactory performance: One point for each percentage of tests at Phase-in 1 Level II (Satisfactory) Level III advanced performance: One additional point for each percentage of tests at the Level III Advanced 61

60 Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness includes measures of high school completion and STAAR performance at the postsecondary readiness standard. This index emphasizes the importance of attaining a high school diploma that prepares students with the foundation necessary for success in college, the workforce, job training programs, or the military. *Non-AEA Targets 1) STAAR Final Level II, 2) Graduation Rate, 3) Graduation Plan, and 4) College-Ready Graduates If all four components are not available for schools or districts, evaluate only the STAAR Final Level II performance 63

61 Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness STAAR Score: STAAR Percent Met Final Level ll on two or more tests for All Students and race/ethnicity student groups Eight student groups: All students Seven race/ethnicity groups Includes STAAR, STAAR Spanish STAAR A, STAAR Alternate 2 and STAAR L not included All Subjects: Reading, Mathematics, Writing, Science and Social Studies Students tested on one subject area only must meet the final Level II performance standard for that subject area. Students tested on only two subject areas must meet the final Level II performance standard for both subject areas. 64

62 Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness STAAR Score: STAAR Percent Met Final Level ll on two or more tests for All Students and race/ethnicity student groups Only include EOC tests for students that tested for the FIRST time in 2015 accountability cycle Summer 2014, Fall 2014 and Spring 2015 Student EOC results for students that tested for the first time prior to the accountability cycle are not included in Index 4 Substitute Assessments for STAAR EOC tests are included Minimum Size: All Students 10 students; no small numbers analysis Student Groups 25 students 65

63 Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness Number of students meeting the STAAR Postsecondary Readiness Standard on at least two subject area tests + Number of students with test results in two or more subject areas Number of students meeting the STAAR Postsecondary Readiness Standard on the subject area test Number of students with test results on only one subject area Rounded to nearest whole number (for example, 59.87% is rounded to 60%) 67

64 2015 Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness Graduation Rate (or Annual Dropout Rate): Combined performance across graduation/dropout rates for: Grade 9-12 Class of 2014 Four-Year Graduation Rate or Grade 9-12 Class of 2013 Five-Year Graduation Rate whichever contributes the most points to the index If a campus/district has no Graduation Rate, then the Grade 9-12 annual dropout rate will be used. Ten student groups: All students Seven race/ethnic groups Students served by special education English Language Learners (ELL) - Students identified as LEP since entering 9 th grade Minimum Size: All students: no minimum size; small numbers analysis if less that 10 students Student groups: 25 students Proposed: Foundation graduates will be included 68

65 Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness Graduation Rate Calculation Number of Graduates in the Class Number of Students in the Class (Graduates + Continuers + GED Recipients + Dropouts) Dropout Rate Calculation Number of students who dropped out during the school year Number of Students enrolled during the school year 100 (Grades 9-12 Annual Dropout Rate x 10) with a floor of zero Rounded to nearest decimal place(for example, 59.87% is rounded to 59.9%) 69

66 2015 Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness Graduation Plan Component Class of 2014 Four-year Recommended High School Program/Distinguished Achievement Program (RHSP/DAP) Rate Four-year Longitudinal Graduation Cohort - began 9 th grade in No four-year longitudinal graduation cohort use annual percent of RHSP/DAP graduates Student groups: All students Seven race/ethnicity groups Minimum size: All students: no minimum size; small numbers analysis if less that 10 graduates Student groups: 25 graduates Proposed: Foundations graduates are excluded 70

67 2014 Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness 2014 Targets: Elem 12, MS 13, HS/K-12 & Districts 57* (*based on 4 components) Graduation Plan Calculation Number of RHSP/DAP graduates in the Class Number of graduates in the Class Rounded to nearest decimal place(for example, 59.87% is rounded to 59.9%) 71

68 Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness Postsecondary Component: College-Ready Graduates High school graduates from the school year who met the college-ready criteria in both ELA and mathematics based on: TAKS exit-level test*, or the SAT test, or the ACT test Reported on AEIS and TAPR since 2007 * graduates are TAKS graduates Student groups: All students Seven race/ethnicity groups Minimum size: All students: no minimum size; small numbers analysis if less that 10 graduates Student groups: 25 graduates Proposed Additions for 2015: Enrolled &Completed Advanced Course/Dual Enrollment Courses Completed Career & Technical Education (CTE) coherent sequence Enrolled in TX Institute of Higher Education (IHE) 72

69 Overall Index Score Example 4.6: Index 4 Calculation Overall Performance Component Score Multiply by Weight of Total Points STAAR Postsecondary Readiness Score 30.3 X 25% 7.6 Graduation Rate Score 78.1 X 25% 19.5 Graduation Plan Score 81.4 X 25% 20.4 Postsecondary Indicator Score 80.3 X 25% 20.1 Index 4: Score 68 Indicator All Students African Amer. Amer. Indian Asian Hispanic Pacific Islander White Two or More Races ELL Special Ed. Total Points Max. Points STAAR Postsecondary Readiness Standard [Eight groups: All students and Seven Race/Ethnicities] % Meeting Postsecondary Readiness 29% 16% 40% 23% 38% 36% Standard STAAR Postsecondary Readiness Standard: Score (total points divided by maximum points) 182/600 = 30.3 Graduation Rate [Ten Groups: All Students, Seven Race/Ethnities, English Language Learners and Special Education] 4-yr. Graduation Rate 5-yr. Graduation Rate 84.30% 78.80% 78.80% 91.60% 86.00% 44.20% 69.80% % 78.80% 80.00% 92.10% 84.00% 48.90% 77.50% Highest Graduation Rate: Score Graduation Rate: Score (best of total graduation points divided by maximum points) 546.4/700 = 78.1 Graduation Plan [Eight groups: All students and Seven Race/Ethnicities] Longitudinal 82.70% 76.40% 83.60% 83.00% RHSP/DAP Rate / 400 RHSP/DAP: Score (total RHSP/DAP points divided by maximum points) 81.4 = Postsecondary Indicator [Eight groups: All students and Seven Race/Ethnicities] College-Ready 82% 72% 78% 89% Graduates Postsecondary Indicator: Score (total points divided by maximum points) 321 / 400 = 80.3

70 Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness Index 4: AEA Campuses and Charters 2015 AEA Index 4 4-, 5-, and 6-year Graduation, Continuing Students, and GED Score; If no Graduation, Continuing, and GED Rates, use Grade 9-12 Annual Dropout Rate: Points given for rates lower than 20.0 Contrib. to Points 75% STAAR Score: STAAR Percent Met Final Level ll on one or more tests 25% AEA Graduation Rate Calculation Expand AEA Registration to include Dropout Recovery centers Number of Graduates + Continuers + GED Recipients in the Class Number of Students in the Class (Graduates + Continuers + GED Recipients + Dropouts) 74

71 Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness AEA Bonus Points Index 4: AEA Campuses and Charters Bonus Points 2014 AEA Bonus Points Maximum of 30 points Bonus Points: RHSP/DAP Longitudinal Rate Annual if Longitudinal not available College-Ready Graduates Indicator Excluded Students Count Students statutorily excluded from graduation and dropout calculations 75

72 Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness 2014 AEA Bonus Points Maximum 30 points Index 4: AEA Excluded Students Credit Calculation Graduates, continuers, and GED recipients from 4-year graduation cohort without exclusions (federal rate) of most current cohort (Class of 2013) - Graduates, continuers, and GED recipients from 4-year graduation cohort with exclusions (state rate) of most current cohort (Class of 2013) With a floor of zero State graduation excludes (88)court ordered GED and (89)incarcerated students that have not graduated Federal graduation includes them 76

73 System Safeguards

74 Index 1: Student Achievement All Students, All Subjects All Students American Indian Special Education Two or More Races Hispanic ELL Pacific Islander Economically Disadvantaged African American Asian White Index 1 System Safeguards All Students African Amer. Amer. Indian Asian Hispanic Pacific Islander White Two or More Races Eco. Disadv. ELL (Current & monitored) Special Ed. 78

75 2014 Accountability System Safeguards 2015 Federal performance rate is 83% (ESEA waiver) 2015 no 2% cap only the 1% cap for Alternate Accountability Manual page

76 Distinction Designations

77 2014 Distinction Designations Campuses only: Top 25 %: Student Progress (based on Index 2) Top 25%: Closing Performance Gaps (based on Index 3) Academic Achievement in: Reading/English Language Arts Mathematics Science Social Studies Campuses and Districts: Postsecondary Readiness Per Texas Education Code (TEC) , alternative education campuses (AECs) evaluated under AEA provisions are not eligible for distinction designations Accountability Manual page 53 81

78 Index 2 & Index 3 82Distinction Designations

79 Other Areas of Accountability

80 Legislative Changes - 83rd Texas Legislature Community and Student Engagement HB 5 Section 46 Beginning with the school year, districts will be required to evaluate community and student engagement for the district and each of their campuses and assign a rating. The ratings are required to be reported to TEA by August 8, Accountability Ratings HB 5 Section 44 Beginning with the school year, TEA is required to assign ratings of A, B, C, D, or F to districts, and ratings of exemplary, recognized, acceptable, or unacceptable to campuses. Districts will be required to assign a performance rating of exemplary, recognized, acceptable, or unacceptable based on locally determined criteria. These performance ratings must be based on criteria developed by a local committee. The agency is not permitted to determine the criteria that can be used for these evaluations. For the school year, TEA will collect the locally-determined ratings in the summer 2014 PEIMS Submission 3 for the district and each campus in the district. TEA will report these ratings publicly by October 1, HB 5 Section 46 Posted for Public Comment ended May 5 The due date to Education Service Center, Region 20 was June 19,

81 Other areas of Accountability PBM** DVM AMAOs 2014 Performance Based Monitoring: Bilingual (BE)/English as s Second Language (ESL) [10 indicators*] Career and Technology (CTE) [9 indicators*] No Child Left Behind (NCLB - Title I and Migrant) [10 indicators*] Special Education (SPED) [22 indicators*] Data Validation Monitoring: Leaver Discipline Student Assessment Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives AMAO 1: Progress AMAO 2: Attainment AMAO 3: Federal Accountability Public Release of Data Staging Not Public Not Public Not Public SPP State Performance Plan Public Release FIRST Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas Public Release Accredited Accredited - Warned Accreditation Accredited - Probation Public Release Not Accredited - Revoked *Proposed for 2014 **Triggers On Site Visits

82 2014 Performance Based Monitoring [PBM] Bilingual (BE)/English as a Second Language (ESL) 1) BE STAAR 3-8 Passing Rate (M, R, S, SS, W) 2) ESL STAAR 3-8 Passing Rate (M, R, S, SS, W) 3) LEP (Not Served in BE/ESL) STAAR 3-8 Passing Rate (M, R, S, SS, W) 4) LEP Year-After-Exit (YAE) STAAR 3-8 Passing Rate (M, R, S, SS, W) 5) LEP STAAR EOC Passing Rate (M, R, S, SS, W) 6) LEP Annual Dropout Rate (Grades 7-12) 7) LEP RHSP/DAP Diploma Rate 8) LEP Graduation Rate 9) TELPAS Reading Beginning Proficiency Level 10) TELPAS Composite Ratings for Students in U.S. Schools Multiple Years Limited English Proficient (LEP) Recommended High School Plan/Distinguished Achievement Plan (RHSP/DAP) 86

83 2014 Performance Based Monitoring [PBM] Career and Technology [CTE] 1) CTE STAAR EOC Passing Rate (M, R, S, SS, W) 2) CTE LEP STAAR EOC Passing Rate (M,R, S, SS, W) 3) CTE Economically Disadvantaged STAAR EOC Passing Rate (M,R, S, SS, W) 4) CTE SPED STAAR EOC Passing Rate (M,R, S, SS, W) 5) CTE Annual Dropout Rate (Grades 9-12) 6) CTE RHSP/DAP Diploma Rate 7) CTE Graduation Rate 8) CTE Nontraditional Course Completion Rate Males 9) CTE Nontraditional Course Completion Rate Females Limited English Proficient (LEP) Special Education (SPED) Recommended High School Plan/Distinguished Achievement Plan (RHSP/DAP) 87

84 2014 Performance Based Monitoring [PBM] No Child Left Behind [NCLB] 1) Title I, Part A STAAR 3-8 Passing Rate (M, R, S, SS, W) 2) Title I, Part A STAAR EOC Passing Rate (M, R, S, SS, W) 3) Title I, Part A Annual Dropout Rate (Grades 7 12) 4) Title I, Part A RHSP/DAP Diploma Rate 5) Title I, Part A Graduation Rate 6) Migrant STAAR 3-8 Passing Rate (M, R, S, SS, W) 7) Migrant STAAR EOC Passing Rate (M, R, S, SS, W) 8) Migrant Annual Dropout Rate (Grades 7 12) 9) Migrant RHSP/DAP Diploma Rate 10) Migrant Graduation Rate Recommended High School Plan/Distinguished Achievement Plan (RHSP/DAP) 88

85 2014 Performance Based Monitoring [PBM] Special Education [SPED] 1) SPED STAAR 3-8 Passing Rate (M, R, S, SS, W) 2) SPED YAE STAAR 3-8 Passing Rate (M, R, S, SS, W) 3) SPED STAAR EOC Passing Rate (M, R, S, SS, W) 4) SPED STAAR Participation Rate 5) SPED STAAR Modified Participation Rate 6) SPED STAAR Alternate Participation Rate 7) SPED Placements in Instructional Settings 40/41 (Ages 3-5) 8) SPED Regular Early Childhood Program Rate (Ages 3-5)(Report Only) 9) SPED Regular Class > 80% Rate (Ages 6 11) 10) Regular Class < 40% Rate (Ages 6 11) 11) Regular Class > 80% Rate (Ages 12 21) 12) Regular Class < 40% Rate (Ages 12 21) 13) SPED Annual Dropout Rate (Grades 7 12) 14) SPED RHSP/DAP Diploma Rate 15) SPED Graduation Rate 16) SPED Representation 17) SPED African American (Non-Hispanic/Latino) Representation 18) SPED Hispanic Representation 19) SPED LEP Representation 20) SPED Discretionary DAEP Placements 21) SPED Discretionary ISS Placements 22) SPED Discretionary OSS Placements Special Education (SPED) Year-After-Exit (YAE) Recommended High School Plan/Distinguished Achievement Plan (RHSP/DAP) Limited English Proficient (LEP) 89

86 Data Validation Monitoring [DVM]

87 Data Validation Monitoring [DVM] 2014 District Leaver Data Validation posted on TEASE Indicators: 1) Leaver Data Analysis 2) Underreported Students (Grades 7 12) 3) Use of Leaver Codes by Districts with No Dropouts codes 16, 24, 60, 81 and 82 collectively 4) Use of One or More Leaver Reason Codes Codes 03, 16, 24, 60, 66, 78, 81, 82, 83, 85, 86, 87 and 90 5) Use of Certain Dropout Reason Codes Codes 88 and 89 6) Missing PET Submission (Start of School Year) between August 18, 2014 and September 19, ) Missing PET Submission ( Reporting Year) Date range August 19, 2013 through June 30, ) Continuing Students Dropout Rate (Class of 2012), as of Fall

88 Data Validation Monitoring [DVM] District 2014 Discipline Data Validation posted on TEASE Indicators: 1) Length of Out-of-School Suspension (OSS) 2) Length of In-School Suspension (ISS)(Report Only) 3) Unauthorized Expulsion: Students Age 10 and older 4) Unauthorized Expulsion: Students Under Age 10 5) Unauthorized DAEP Placement: Students Under Age 6 6) High Number of Discretionary DAEP Placements 7) African American (not Hispanic/Latino) Discretionary DAEP Placements 8) Hispanic Discretionary DAEP Placements 9) No Mandatory Expellable Incidents Reported for Multiple Years 92

89 Data Validation Monitoring [DVM] 2014 District Student Assessment Data Validation posting on TEASE December Indicators were: 1) STAAR 3-8 Absent Rate (Mathematics) 2) STAAR 3-8 Absent Rate (Reading) 3) STAAR 3-8 Absent Rate (Science) 4) STAAR 3-8 Absent Rate (Social Studies) 5) STAAR 3-8 Absent Rate (Writing) 6) STAAR 3-8 Other Rate (Mathematics) 7) STAAR 3-8 Other Rate (Reading) 8) STAAR 3-8 Other Rate (Science) 9) STAAR 3-8 Other Rate (Social Studies) 10) STAAR 3-8 Other Rate (Writing) 11) TELPAS Reading Absent Rate 12) TELPAS Reading Other Rate 13) STAAR EOC Test Participation Rate Indicator #13 evaluates discrepancies between course completion data and STAAR EOC test participation 14) Discrepancy between PEIMS Career and Technical Education (CTE) Status and STAAR EOC Answer Documents Submitted 93

90 Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives [AMAOs]

91 AMAOs 2013 AMAO Guide November 2013 To the Administrator Addressed Letter December 17, 2013 AMAO 1: Progress AMAO 2: Attainment AMAO 3: Federal Accountability (System Safeguards) 95

92 State Performance Plan (SPP)

93 State Performance Plan (SPP) In alignment with The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 2004 (IDEA 2004), Section 616(b), the US Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) has identified five monitoring priorities within the SPP: 1) Free Appropriate Public Education in the Least Restrictive Environment 2) Disproportionality 3) Child Find 4) Effective Transition 5) General Supervision 97

94 Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas (FIRST)

95 FIRST The purpose of the financial accountability rating system (Texas Administrative Code (TAC), Title 19, ) is to ensure that school districts and open-enrollment schools are held accountable for the quality of their financial management practices and achieve improved performance in the management of their financial resources. 99

96 ACCREDITATION

97 Accreditation Statuses Accreditation Matrix 101 Page 39-47

98 Assessment & Accountability

99 Answer document Accountability 103

100 What is your role? Ensure testing environment Irregularities Answer documents drive accountability Principal checklist for testing 104

101 It s the law! Test Security Supplement

102 Test Security Supplement It s the law! Page 4 The superintendent and campus principal of each school district and chief administrative officer of each charter school and any private school administering the tests as allowed under TEC , must develop procedures to ensure the security and confidentiality of the tests specified in the TEC, Chapter 39, Subchapter B. These administrators will be responsible for notifying TEA in writing of conduct that violates the security or confidentiality of a test administered under the TEC, Chapter 39, Subchapter B. Failure to report can subject the person responsible to the applicable penalties. Principals and campus test coordinators are responsible for security and confidentiality of test materials on their campus.

103 Test Administrator Manuals Testing runs January December New manuals will arrive by February 20, 2015

104 Accommodations Allowable Accommodations Accommodations Triangle Linguistic Accommodations

105 STAAR Data Sources

106 STAAR Data Files: April Grades 5 & 8 Reading Grades 3 8 May Grades 5 & 8 Reading Retest EOC results STAAR Results Summer 2014, Fall 2014 and Spring 2015 TELPAS Consolidated Accountability File (CAF) July? (only a data file) What arrives? Confidential Student Reports (CSRs) Summary Reports Data file eduphoria DMAC Other software Calendar of Events parent notification

107 Grades 3-8 including STAAR, STAAR L, STAAR A and STAAR Alternate 2 Spring 2015 Grades 3 8 Spring 2015 Grades 3 5 STAAR Spanish Grades 5 & 8 April and May results included Grades 3-8 Math will only be raw scores EOC including STAAR, STAAR L, STAAR A and STAAR Alternate 2 (First time testers and re-testers) Fall 2014 Summer 2014 Spring 2015 STAAR Results

108 Performance Standards State Assessments and Benchmarks

109 Pass/Fail Culture

110 Performance Indexes Phase-in 1 Level II Final (Recommended) Level II Level III Advanced STAAR Progress Measure ELL Progress Measure New Phase-in letter August 21, 2014

111 Performance Indexes Index 1 Student Achievement (R/W/M/S/SS) Index 2 Student Progress (R/M/W) Index 3 Closing Performance Gaps (R/W/M/S/SS) Index 4 Final Level II on two or more tests (R/W/M/S/SS) Phase in 1 Level II X X Final Recommended Level II ELLs English STAAR YIS = nd point X Advanced Level III X STAAR Progress Measure X ELL Progress Measure ELLs English STAAR YIS = 2-4 ELLs English STAAR YIS = 2-4 ELLs English STAAR YIS = point YIS - Years in U.S. Schools as reported on 2014 TELPAS Exclusion T ELLs YIS = 1 ELLs YIS = 1 ELLs YIS = 1 ELLs YIS = 1 ELL English STAAR YIS = 2-4

112 Index Index Index Index Index Index Index Index

113 Raw Score changes with each test administration Scale Score remains the same across test administrations Raw Score Conversions Phase-in 1, Level II Index 1 & 3 Final Level II (2022) Index 4 (on 2 or more tests) Level III Advanced Index 3

114

115

116 Assessment and Accountability: Making the Connection Texas Assessment Conference February 16, 2015 from 8:30 11:30 a.m. Cheri Hendrick Accountability and Assessment Specialist, School Support Education Service Center, Region 20, San Antonio, TX (210)