Presentation on theme: "Kim Gilson Sr Consultant Data and Accountability Region 10 ESC 972-348-1480 February 5, 2015 Webinar It."— Presentation transcript:
Kim Gilson Sr Consultant Data and Accountability Region 10 ESC February 5, 2015 Webinar It is the policy of Region 10 Education Service Center not to discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender or handicap in its vocational programs, services or activities as required by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended; Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972; and Section 503 and 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended. Region 10 Education Service Center will take steps to ensure that lack of English language skills will not be a barrier to admission and participation in all educational programs and services.
Sound Check Please let me know if you can hear me!
Sound Check Complete! If you cannot here me, please try adjusting the volume on your speakers. If this does not work, you can call the number in your registration and listen through your phone.
Agenda Federal Legislative Update State Legislative Update 2015 Accountability Preview Index 1-4 Things to Think About Misc.
Federal Accountability Reminder: O ur current Accountability System was accepted by the USDE as part of a conditional waiver from AYP requirements Part of the waiver centered on developing a new teacher appraisal system Press Release from January 23 tells us the USDE is not satisfied with the teacher appraisal system we are proposing es/2015/Commissioner_Williams_reaffirms_state_s_interests_as_waiv er_discussions_continue/ es/2015/Commissioner_Williams_reaffirms_state_s_interests_as_waiv er_discussions_continue/ Our Federal Safeguards are set to rise to 83% this year, and reach 100% by
ESEA “NCLB” Reauthorization There are efforts to reauthorize No Child Left Behind, also referred to as the Elementary and Secondary Education Act The House and Senate both have bills Stay tuned……
The 84 th Legislature Is In Session! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFroMQlKiag
2015 Accountability Development: tea.texas.gov
2015 Accountability ATAC met Dec 8 APAC met Jan 21 ATAC meets Feb 5 ELL Working Committee meets this week Materials Posted Online Timeline
A-F Ratings for Districts From HB 5 Implemented in f_options.pdf f_options.pdf
Bridge Study for New Math TEKS Remember “TAKS to STAAR” in 2012?
Bridge Study Process
Levels of the Bridge Study Index 1, 3, and 4!!!!
“State Assessments Evaluated in 2015 Accountability” The STAAR mathematics bridge studies will compare performance on the new STAAR mathematics assessments to performance on the 2012–2014 STAAR mathematics assessments in order to ensure that the performance standards applied for 2015 accountability purposes are equivalent to the original STAAR mathematics performance standards. So, for 2015 accountability, districts will be held to the old performance standards. Information about student performance in relation to the new performance standards will be available in fall 2015, but will not be used for accountability purposes in 2015.
Commissioner Williams Recent Statements See Dallas Morning News Article districts-deal-with-tough-new-math-standards.ece districts-deal-with-tough-new-math-standards.ece From the education commissioner to members of the State Board of Education to staffers at the Texas Education Agency, there was talk of additonal teacher training and chopping the stakes of state-required math tests. As Commissioner Michael Williams told an auditorium packed with superintendents and educators from around the state: “We’ll try to make the best decision we possibly can. But I hear you! I hear you, OK?”
Dallas Morning News Article (cont’d) Alief Superintendent H.D. Chambers is suggesting that the commissioner create a “hold harmless” standard for the math STAAR tests for a couple of years so the scores could only be used to raise accountability ratings. Texas Education Commissioner Michael Williams, who has considerable control over the design of the state accountability standards, mentioned a suggestion that there be “achievement bands” — broad ranges of scores rather than specific passing points — which would create greater flexibility.
ELL Progress Measure and New Math TEKS From “State Assessments Evaluated in 2015 Accountability” ELL Progress Measures. For students tested in grades 3–8 mathematics, the ELL student expectations used to determine the ELL Progress Measure results will be aligned to the STAAR Mathematics Bridge Study equivalent performance standards. ELL Progress Measures will be available for use in accountability for students tested in grades 3–8 mathematics; Over 120,000 ELL students in Years 2 – 4 will continue to be included in 2015 accountability for all subjects. This means: The calculation will exist for ELL’s in Math to receive an Index 2 score. If those scores are included, then that group will comprise the grades 3-8 Math portion of Index 2 (in addition to accelerated students in Algebra 1)
Score Codes from STAAR Alternate 2 and Participation/Performance from “State Assessments Evaluated in 2015 Accountability”
ATAC Documents Which types of tests work in which Indexes? evaluated_p1.pdf evaluated_p1.pdf Which grades and subjects work in which Indexes? evaluated_p2.pdf evaluated_p2.pdf
New (Old) Vocabulary “Required Improvement” Not to be confused with Improvement Required! You don’t meet the standard, but you grow enough (defined by a formula) towards the standard that you are not penalized “Hold Harmless” If the only reason you miss the target in an Index is because of a particular reason (STAAR A or STAAR Alternate 2), you are not penalized Only included if it helps you
Index 1 Things to Think About…
Things to Think About….. Index 1 Target went up last year Passing standard is Level I (for the last time!) Shannon Houssen said in a fall TETN that the target is likely to rise Federal Requirements say we must be accountable for what we test New tests “work” easier in Index 1 Index 1 scores can remain stable even if performance drops, as long as performance doesn’t drop below passing standard Just because 2014 Index 1 rates remain stable doesn’t mean they’ll survive a rising target if student performance is declining Example: 2013 Every student makes a perfect score on their test, Index 1 score is 100 2014 Same students drop by 30%, but are still above the passing standard, Index 1 score is still 100 2015 Same students drop by an additional 30%, and this takes them below the passing standard for their grade/subject: Missed Index 1!
Index 1 Can Be Misleading Region 10 has 2 schools with Index 1 scores in the 90’s who are Improvement Required because of Index 2 Kids scored above the passing standard But did not grow Likely showed decline, but not enough to drop below passing standard
Index 2 Things to Think About…
Index 2 The Commissioner says we will not have Index 2 for Grades 3-8 Math because no growth measure can be calculated for new Math TEKS HOWEVER, the ELL Progress Measure is a fixed target and does not require 2 years of vertical scale scores ELL’s can still have an Index 2 score WILL IT BE USED IN ACCOUNTABIILTY????? Watch for news from the ELL Meeting this week…. Keep watching ATAC/APAC
Things to Think About…. Index 2 Elementaries Reading is only subject left… Except for ELL’s in Math 3 rd Grade ELL’s CAN be included via ELL Progress Measure!!! Middle Schools Reading and Writing…and ELL’s in Math and Algebra 1!!!! Watch ELL committee this week for recommendations What do middle school Algebra 1 Index 2 scores look like??? Writing could be 1/3 of Index 2 (or ½ if no Math and your campus has no Algebra 1)!!!!! High Schools English II for All (very little 2014 data; STAAR Alt students) English I for ELL’s (watch ELL committee for recommendations) Algebra 1 (Look at 2014 data!)
STAAR A If a student took Regular STAAR in 2014, and they take STAAR A in 2015, a Progress Measure CAN be calculated, but the document recommends not USING it
Changing Languages Reading Spanish one year, English the next The test is NOT a direct translation. Vertical scale scores CANNOT be subtracted. No progress measure UNLESS student qualifies for ELL Progress measure English one year, Spanish the next The test is NOT a direct translation. Vertical scale scores CANNOT be subtracted. No progress measure Writing 4 th Grade Spanish, 7 th Grade English The test is NOT a direct translation. Vertical scale scores CANNOT be subtracted. No progress measure UNLESS student qualifies for ELL Progress measure Kids have likely “aged out” of ELL Progress measure Math In a “normal” year, changing versions still enables the student to receive a Progress Measure because the test is a direct translation
Changing Languages…The Exception A small number of students may have taken the STAAR reading Spanish version in 2013, and transition in 2014 to the STAAR reading English version, but do not have a STAAR progress measure or ELL progress measure. For example, a student takes the grade 5 STAAR reading Spanish version during the spring 2013 administration. The following year, the student is tested on the grade 6 STAAR reading English test version. If the student is not eligible for, or exceeds the time frame of their ELL progress measure plan, the ELL progress measure will not be reported. In addition, a STAAR progress measure cannot be calculated because the language versions have changed. Specifically, STAAR progress measures for reading are calculated only for students who test in the same language in the prior year and the current year.
Changing Languages….The Exception Part 2 To address these unique cases in which students have taken the STAAR reading Spanish version in 2013, and transition in 2014 to the STAAR reading English version, but do not have a STAAR progress measure or ELL progress measure, Index 2 is calculated as follows: o Phase-in 1 Level ll (English version): One point for each percentage of tests meeting the STAAR Phase-in 1 Level II or above; and o Final Level ll (English-version): One additional point for each percentage of tests meeting the Final Level II standard. From Appendix I of 2014 Accountability Manual Region 10 does NOT advocate making language test version decisions based on Accountability. Do what’s best for the students!
Things to Think About…. Minimum Size Watch your student group sizes! Look at October 2014 Snapshot Information for a Guide Once a group meets size of 25 tests, they contribute points in the same year! 25 is an easy number to grow above, or decline below Impact depends on how they peform High Schools Look at Quartile Ranking in Distinction Designation Documents for Alg 1 Comparison How do you compare to your Quartile? How does your Quartile compare to others?
Things to Think About… Index 2 could be a leading indicator for Index 1 Going back to Index 1 Example… If student performance declines consistently in Index 2, it could eventually drop below the standard and target in Index 1 Index 2 Predicting Index 2 Student group performances that don’t meet minimum size are not reported on Accountability reports, but they may be on the TAPR (if not masked) If masked, ask for numbers from your unmasked TAPR! Example: 2014 Student group had 22 students and did not contribute points. No data on Accountability Report But, none of the 22 students met or exceeded growth 2015, student group has 26 students The group now contributes points Are they growing????
Index 3 Things to Think About
Things to Think About… Index 3 Groups are based on which ones made minimum size LAST YEAR (and maintain minimum size this year) Example: 2013 Group A has 19 kids Not an eligible group for 2014 Index 3 2014 Group A has 27 kids Not an eligible group for 2014 because it didn’t meet minimum size in 2013 2015 Group has 28 kids This is now an eligible group because it met minimum size in 2014 AND 2015 It could replace a group that was already representing you, or add an additional group to Index 3
Things to Think About…. Index 3 How do ALL Students perform at Advanced Level III? Not on accountability report! IS on TAPR!!!! If Eco Dis, or one of the Index 3 reported groups, is close to 100% of your population, then the Index 3 report is indicative of what is happening to your All Student Group BUT, if your groups do NOT represent most of your student population, then you need to find All Students on TAPR Don’t assume the problem is limited to the students reported in Index 3 Is it really a problem of not meeting SOME students’ needs, or is it a problem that ALL students’ needs are not being met? Continue to focus on unique needs of student groups reported in Index 3, but you may have a widespread curriculum issue
Index 4 Things to Think About
Things to Think About…. Index 4: STAAR Component Student groups contribute if there are 25 tests for the group Like Index 3, a group who meets minimum size for the first time could surprise you ELL’s Not reported as a group, but their scores CAN be EXCLUDED, and CAN impact the number of tests for a race/ethnic group ELL’s in 1 st year excluded ELL’s in year 2-4 Test ANY test in Spanish….INCLUDED If two or more subject-area Spanish test versions are taken, the student must meet the Final Level II standard on at least two subjects; If only one subject-area Spanish test version is taken, the student must meet the Final Level II standard on the single subject-area test. All Tests in English…EXCLUDED ELL’s in year 5+ Follow the same rules as Non-ELL’s
Things to Think About… A student group may be included in Index 2 and 3 because they meet minimum size, but are NOT included in Index 4 because their ELL Status excludes them If they are being less successful than other students, your Index 4 may look better than it would if they were included Example: Hispanic group had 25+ tests in Index 2 last year and contributed points. If they are not being successful, Index 2 is low and you know it. Index 3: Group met minimum size for the first time in 2014 and wasn’t included then, but will be for If the group is not being successful in Index 3, it hasn’t shown up yet….but will this year! Index 4: Group does not meet minimum size this year because ELL exclusions bring it below the minimum size of 25. Index 4 looks strong in However, group meets minimum size in If the group is not achieving Final Level II, you have an Index 4 concern….and don’t know it yet.
Instructional Difference Between Index 2, 3, and 4 Index 2 is about growing, regardless of passing status Index 3 and 4 are about achieving at higher levels than “just passing” A “remediation” mentality may improve Index 2, BUT….. If students are not seeing questions of similar rigor to the hardest 5-10 questions on the test in class on a regular basis, you haven’t addressed root cause of Index 3 and 4. When students see the hardest types of questions on the day of the test, is that the first time they’ve been asked to think at that level? If 1 out of every 10 questions in a class is formatted to that complexity, a student can make an A all year and NEVER ATTEMPT THAT QUESTION
Final Level II Data Accountability Reports do not report by Subject TAPR does, and might include student groups not reported on the Accountability Report (if they’re not masked) LOOK TO THE TAPR IN ALL AREAS FOR DATA THAT MIGHT NOT BE REPORTED IN ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT
Index 4 and Retesters Administration Cycle Includes July, December, and May Retests ONLY count if first attempt and retest is in that cycle, meaning first attempt was in July or December So, retests COULD count, but would be the exception See TEA document for Index 4 High School Scenarios Includes mobility issues and “Which high school gets which administration in Index 4?”
1 Possible Way to Earn a High School Math Distinction Q1 Attendance Q1 SAT/ACT Participation Q1 AP/IB Participation EARNS A DISTINCTION, even though… Q4 Greater than Expected Growth in Math (Index 2 second point) 0 students grew in Index 2 for Algebra 1 Q4 SAT Performance Q4 Act Performance Q4 AP/IB Performance
So if Students Aren’t Growing (at an alarming rate) in High School…. The campus with the gold star for math on their Accountability Report could be in danger for Index 2 this year
2+ Races In CAF file, you may see that 2 or more different races are chosen, but for the accountability field, “2+ races” isn’t the assigned value If a student is Hispanic and any additional races, he/she is reported for accountability purposes as Hispanic. Period. A Hispanic student cannot be part of the 2+ races group 2+ races can only be non-Hispanic students Example: African American and White Native American Indian and African American
Recording Asylee/Refugee Information Information about qualifying unschooled ELL asylees and refugees will be collected as part of the data collection for TELPAS. This information is necessary to exclude eligible students’ STAAR results from state accountability ratings and will NOT be gathered during STAAR data collection. TEA Student Assessment Division50
Testing Q&A Can we put Post-It Notes on the portion of the 5/8 Math/Reading answer document that we’re not using? Per TEA, “No.” Post-it Notes might damage answer documents Active monitoring is best approach Student is Absent for Day 1 of a 2-day writing test. They arrive day 2. What do we do? They take Day 2 with the other students and take Day 1 on the makeup