Presentation on theme: "1 TETN Accountability Update Session November 18, 2010."— Presentation transcript:
1 TETN Accountability Update Session November 18, 2010
2 State Accountability Update
3 Recent and Upcoming Events Nov 17 CIP (formerly TAT) list release (TEASE) Nov 17AEIS release (TEASE) Nov 19 CIP list release (TEA Correspondence site) Dec 2AEIS release (TEA public website) Week of Dec 6 th PEG list release (TEASE) School Report Cards (SRCs) release (TEA public website) Mid December Pocket Edition (public web) Dec 16 th PEG list release (TEA Correspondence site)
2010 State Appeals There were 203 appeals (234 in 2009) Overall grant rate was 32%. Campus grant rate was 37%. District grant rate was 24%. 4
2010 State Appeals (cont.) Grant rates vary by indicator appealed. For example: Completion – 27.0% granted TAKS – 39.7% granted Dropout – 57.1% granted Other/Underreported – 12.5% granted 5
2010 State Appeals (cont.) The most common rating change for campuses was AA to RE 17 of the 46 granted campus appeals The most common rating change for districts was AA to RE 10 of the 19 granted district appeals. 6
9 GPA Indicators & Standards (cont.) GPA Indicators Recommended High School Program (RHSP)/ Distinguished Achievement Program (DAP) > 85.0% 11 SAT/ACT Results (College Admissions Tests) > 70.0% and > 40.0% (new SAT reading & mathematics only) 12 Texas Success Initiative: Higher Education Readiness Component- English Language Arts > 65% 13 Texas Success Initiative: Higher Education Readiness Component- Mathematics > 65% Comparable Improvement (campus level only) Reading/ELA Mathematics Top Quartile (top 25%)
10 GPA Acknowledgments Of the 1,227 districts evaluated for GPA, approximately 82% earned one or more, compared to 78% in Two districts earned all 13 district acknowledgments, two districts earned 12, four earned 11, and another 14 districts earned 10. Of the 7,780 campuses evaluated for GPA, approximately 79% earned one or more, compared to 79% in No campuses earned 15 or 14 acknowledgments. Two campuses earned 13, eight earned 12, and eleven earned 11.
11 AEA GPA 2010 is the third year for evaluating AEA campuses and charters on GPA indicators. Only the All Students group is evaluated; student groups are not evaluated separately. There are 13 AEA GPA indicators. The two Comparable Improvement indicators are not evaluated for AEA GPA. An Attendance Rate standard of 95.0% is applied to all AECs and charters under AEA GPA. Among the 68 charter operators, 29 earned one or more acknowledgments. Among the 460 AECs, 240 earned one or more acknowledgments.
Academic Excellence Indicator System (AEIS)
13 November 17 TEASE release District and campus AEIS reports were posted to TEASE on November 17, notifications were sent to district superintendents and ESC directors. The TEASE release provides the materials districts need to fulfill publishing and notification requirements for the AEIS. The AEIS Guidelines (available on TEASE) provide details about district responsibilities.
14 District Responsibilities PUBLISHING MUST publish: performance and profile sections of district and campus AEIS reports MAY publish: Glossary (English Glossary will be available December 2, Spanish translation will be available in January 2011.) MUST ADD and publish: o Campus performance objectives o Report of violent or criminal incidents o Information from THECB about performance of students in postsecondary institutions
15 District Responsibilities (cont.) HEARING FOR PUBLIC DISCUSSION Must be held within 90 calendar days after the November 17th TEASE release. District winter break days do not count towards the 90 days. Within 2 weeks after the hearing, the AEIS report must be disseminated.
16 District Responsibilities (cont.) AEIS AND THE DISTRICT WEBSITE TEC requires districts with websites to post the most current accountability ratings, AEIS reports, and School Report Cards (SRC) not later than the 10th day after the first day of instruction of each school year. There is no requirement in this statute that district websites must be updated with new AEIS reports after the 10th instructional day. However, districts are encouraged to do so. See our FAQ about this requirement at:
18 Changes to AEIS (cont.) TAKS (Accommodated): The 2010 accountability system includes performance on TAKS (Accommodated) assessments for all grades and subjects. The prior year (2009) results were recalculated to include all TAKS (Accommodated) performance. This affects all TAKS indicators, for most subjects and grades. TAKS by grade: Reading/ELA (English and Spanish) grades 3-10 Mathematics (English and Spanish) grades 3-10 Writing (English, grades 4 & 7 and Spanish, grade 4) TAKS Met 2010 Standard with TPM (Sum of All Grades Tested) TAKS Commended Performance (Sum of All Grades Tested) Progress of Prior-Year TAKS Failers Student Success Initiative English Language Learners Progress Indicator Texas Success Initiative
19 Changes to AEIS (cont.) Vertical Scale Growth: TGI continues to be used with the TAKS Progress Indicator, but for both CI and the Progress of Prior Year Failers, the TGI has been replaced with Vertical Scale Growth (VSG). The vertical scale is only available for reading and mathematics in grades 3-8, so both CI and the Progress of Prior Year Failers can only represent average growth for these grades and subjects. This means that CI calculations and CI acknowledgment under the GPA system only apply to campuses that serve grades 4-8. Most high schools are no longer eligible for CI acknowledgment due to this change from TGI to VSG.
20 Changes to AEIS (cont.) Student Success Initiative: Beginning in 2010, students are no longer required to pass grade 3 TAKS reading to be promoted to the next grade. Only grades 5 and 8 (reading and mathematics) are shown under the student success initiative on the AEIS reports. TAKS 2011 Preview: This indicator presents 2010 and 2009 performance built to reflect the changes that will be implemented for the TAKS base indicator in These are: a) the inclusion of all TAKS- M results; b) the inclusion of all TAKS-Alt results; and c) use of TAKS- M and TAKS-Alt results for the second administration of reading and mathematics in grades 5 and 8.
21 Changes to AEIS (cont.) TAKS Commended 2011 Preview: This new indicator presents 2010 and 2009 performance of students who met the commended performance on reading/ELA and mathematics. It includes all TAKS-M and TAKS-Alt results. It has been added because commended performance on TAKS reading and mathematics will be evaluated in 2011 as a requirement for a Recognized or Exemplary rating. 4-Year Completion Rate: This indicator, formerly known as Completion/Student Status Rate was renamed in the 2010 AEIS reports. Values are shown for the class of 2009 and No other change was made to this indicator.
22 Changes to AEIS (cont.) 5-Year Completion Rate: This is a new indicator. The 5-year completion rate for the class of 2008 is the percentage of students from a class of beginning 9th graders (from ) who graduated, received a GED, continued in high school, or dropped out within 5 years or by August 31, The methodology used to calculate 5-year rates is similar to the methodology used to calculate 4-year rates, with the exception that students are tracked for an additional year. Thus, whereas the 4-year rates for the class of 2008 are based on the tracking of students into the fall of 2008, the 5-year rates are based on tracking those students into the fall of 2009.
23 December 2 nd Public Release Includes TEASE products such as district and campus AEIS reports, Comparable Improvement (CI) reports, and Guidelines. ADDS: Region reports State report A separate report of how mobile students performed (state- level only) Data download (includes a masking explanation) Additional CI information Multi-Year data Links to prior-year reports Links to grade level Progress of Prior Year Failers Glossary
School Report Cards
25 Overview The School Report Card (SRC) contains a subset of the performance, staff, and financial data in the AEIS reports. SRCs are accessible through the AEIS public website. There is no separate TEASE release of the SRCs. Target release date is December 7 th. Superintendents and principals will be notified of availability via .
26 District Responsibilities As required by statute, these report cards must be disseminated to the parent, guardian, conservator, or other person having lawful control of each student at the campus. Must be disseminated to parents within six weeks after districts are notified by TEA. (Winter break does not count.) There are various ways to achieve the distribution requirements (see TAC ). Supplemental materials are provided by TEA o Sample cover letters to parents (English and Spanish) o Definitions (English and, as soon as available, Spanish)
Campuses With Additional Campus Improvement Plan (CIP) Requirements
28 Additional CIP Requirements (formerly known as Technical Assistance Teams) A campus is included on the list of campuses with Additional CIP requirements if the following conditions occur: o The campus was rated Academically Acceptable (under standard procedures) or AEA: Academically Acceptable (under AEA procedures); and o The performance does not meet the 2011 AA or AEA: AA accountability standards.
29 Additional CIP Requirements Analyses use and TAKS results; Class of 2008 and Class of 2009 completion rates, and and annual dropout rates. TAKS performance for both years is built to reflect the changes that will be implemented for the TAKS base indicator in These are: a) the inclusion of all TAKS-M results; and b) the inclusion of all TAKS-ALT results.
30 Additional CIP Requirements Campuses that meet the 2011 accountability standards using the Exceptions Provision, or Required Improvement are not included on the CIP list. (Campuses that used exceptions in 2010 cannot use the same exceptions to avoid identification for ) The Texas Projection Measure (TPM) equations used for 2010 accountability are not applied to the CIP identification process.
31 Additional CIP Requirements Annual dropout rates and completion rates are evaluated as they were reported in the 2009 and 2010 accountability cycles. No substitution of district completion rates for secondary campuses without their own completion data was done. English Language Learners (ELL) Progress Indicator is not evaluated under standard procedures for CIP campus determinations, because in 2011 this indicator is a requirement for earning Recognized or Exemplary ratings; it is not a requirement for achieving an Academically Acceptable rating. Under 2011 AEA procedures, the ELL Progress Indicator is used in the determination of AEA: Academically Acceptable ratings, however, it cannot be the sole reason for an AEA: Academically Unacceptable rating.
32 Additional CIP Requirements Districts with identified campuses were notified on November 17 th through TEASE following the posting of AEIS reports are on TEASE. Links are provided from the CIP Campus list to the AEIS reports. If the campus was rated by the Standard Accountability System, the campus name will link the user to the 2010 AEIS Report for that campus. The 2011 Preview of the TAKS base indicator, "TAKS Met 2010 Standard including TAKS-M and TAKS-Alt," is the data that was used to determine if the campus was placed on the List of Campuses with Additional Campus Improvement Plan (CIP) Requirements.
33 Contacts Contact Performance Reporting at (512) or for questions regarding methodology for identifying campuses with additional CIP requirements. Contact Program Monitoring and Interventions (PMI) at (512) or for questions regarding intervention requirements for these
Public Education Grant (PEG) Program
35 Overview A statutorily-mandated program of school choice (TEC Ch. 29, Subchapter G, ) Partially aligned with accountability ratings, but not fully aligned with the state system, AYP, or the Campuses with Additional CIP requirements. Statute requires districts to notify parents of the list by February 1, The PEG list is based on performance, but is effective for the school year.
36 Criteria Schools are included on the list if: (1)50 percent or fewer of students* passed: (a)Any TAKS reading/English language arts, writing, mathematics, science, or social studies test, summed across the grades tested at the school; (b) In any two of the three years: 2008, 2009, or 2010 OR (2) The school was rated Academically Unacceptable in 2008, 2009, or *Student groups are not evaluated.
37 Calendar and Notification Planned release date is December 9 via TEASE to all districts with one or more campuses on the list. List will be posted to agency correspondence website on December 16. An online FAQ is available through the Division of Performance Reporting Resources link
AEA Campus Registration Process and Registered AEC List The 2011 AEA campus registration process was conducted September 8-22, 2010, via the TEASE Accountability website. By September 24, 2010, response s were sent to campuses that submitted rescission and/or registration forms. All 2011 AEA campus registration forms submitted were approved. The 2011 Registered AEC List is available on the AEA website at
AEA At-Risk Registration Criterion Each registered AEC must have at least 75% at-risk student enrollment or be eligible to use either the Prior-Year PEIMS At-Risk Data or New Campus safeguard to be evaluated under 2011 AEA procedures and receive an AEA rating on July 29, At-risk enrollment is verified through PEIMS fall enrollment data. In April after the at-risk registration criterion is applied, the Final 2011 Registered AEC List will be developed and posted on the AEA website in May This list will contain the AECs that will receive a 2011 AEA rating. After the Final 2011 Registered AEC List is developed, the list of charter operators that will be rated under 2011 AEA procedures will be posted on the AEA website in May 2011.
2011 AEA At-Risk Registration Criterion (cont.) The PEIMS Edit+ reports below may be helpful when analyzing at-risk student enrollment data. These reports may be run at the district and campus levels. PRF5D003 – Student Roster. Lists all students enrolled by grade. The AT RS column indicates whether a student is at-risk. PRF5D018 – At-Risk Students by Sex, Ethnicity, and Grade. One-page report of at-risk students by sex, ethnicity, and grade. PRF5D025 – At-Risk Roster by Grade. Lists at-risk students by grade. Other student demographics are included on this report. 41
42 Preview of 2011 State Accountability
43 Standard Accountability Decisions for 2010 and * Exemplary 90% Recognized 80% Academically Acceptable Reading/ELA 70% Writing, Social Studies 70% Mathematics 60% 65% Science 55% 60% *Numbers in bold indicate a change from the prior year. TAKS Indicator
44 Standard Accountability Decisions for 2010 and 2011 (cont.) TAKS (Accommodated) Science (grades 5, 8, 10, & 11, incl. gr. 5 Spanish) Social Studies (grades 8, 10, & 11) English Language Arts (grade 11) Mathematics (grade 11) Use Reading/ELA (grades 3 – 10, incl. gr. 3 – 5 Spanish) Mathematics (grades 3 – 10, incl. gr. 3 – 5 Spanish) Writing (grades 4 & 7, incl. gr. 4 Spanish) Use TAKS-Modified All Subjects and Grades, combined w/ TAKSReportUse TAKS-Alternate All Subjects and Grades, combined w/ TAKSReportUse English Language Learner (ELL) Progress All Students OnlyReportUse
*Numbers in bold indicate a change from the prior year. Standard Accountability Decisions for 2010 and 2011 (cont.) Completion Rate I, Annual Dropout Rate, and Underreported Students * Completion Rate I Exemplary Recognized Academically Acceptable 95.0% 85.0% 75.0% 95.0% 85.0% 75.0% Gr. 7-8 Annual Dropout Rate (All categories) 1.8% 1.6% Underreported Students (District only) 150 and 4.0% 150 and 3.0%
46 Standard Accountability Decisions for 2010 and 2011 (cont.) Commended Performance Indicator Requirements In 2011, Commended Performance on TAKS reading/ELA and mathematics will be an additional indicator. Recognized Standard. 15% commended on Reading/ELA 15% commended on mathematics Exemplary Standard. 25% commended on Reading/ELA 25% commended on mathematics Student Groups. All Students (regardless of size) Economically Disadvantaged (if minimum size criteria met) RI and Exceptions.Neither RI nor Exceptions can be used with Commended Performance to attain a higher rating.
47 Standard Accountability Decisions for 2010 and 2011 (cont.) Use of TPM in 2011 As stated in a July 8, 2010 letter from the commissioner to all district superintendents, proposals to be considered regarding the use of TPM in 2011 accountability include: Suspension of the use of TPM for accountability ratings. Continued use of TPM in state accountability, but only for districts that elect to use it. Modifications to the calculation of TPM and/or its use to include additional safeguards, such as: applying performance floors, counting each student who fails but is projected to pass as a fraction of a passer, prohibiting TPM to be used for the same measure in a subsequent year, limiting the number of measures for which TPM can be used in a given year, and limiting which rating categories can use it.
48 AEA Decisions for 2011 TAKS Progress Indicator The TAKS Progress indicator standard increases from 50% to 55%. TAKS-Modified and TAKS-Alternate results are combined with TAKS and TAKS (Accommodated) results to determine AEA ratings. Annual Dropout Rate (Grades 7-12) and Completion Rate II Indicators The Annual Dropout Rate indicator standard remains 20.0%. The Completion Rate II indicator standard remains 60.0%.
49 English Language Learners (ELL) Progress Indicator
Standard Decision for 2011 The ELL Progress Indicator standard is 60%. It is evaluated only for Recognized and Exemplary ratings. Only All students are evaluated with a minimum size of 30. Required Improvement (RI) and the Exception Provision will be applied. 50
51 English Language Learners (ELL) Progress Indicator AEA Decisions for 2011 The ELL Progress indicator standard is 55%. Required Improvement (RI) is calculated. The All Students group is evaluated if the minimum size requirement is met. The ELL Progress indicator cannot be the sole reason for an AEA: Academically Unacceptable rating.
English Language Learners (ELL) Progress Indicator 2011 Preview of ELL Progress Indicator shown on AEIS Reports. Campus column correlates to All Students data to be evaluated if minimum size criteria are met (30 students). An FAQ on this indicator will be published online by December 2, See AEIS Glossary, including Appendix H until Glossary and FAQ are available. 52
54 Ethnicity/Race Data Collection and Reporting For the 2009–10 school yearFor the school year TEA implemented the new federal standard for the collection of ethnicity and race information beginning with PEIMS data collected for the 2009–10 school year. Beginning with the data collection, race / ethnicity data will be collected using the new definitions only. 2009–10 school year only, PEIMS collected race and ethnicity information using both the old definitions and the new federal definitions , PEIMS will collect race / ethnicity information using the new definitions only. State accountability, federal accountability, and the AEIS and its related reports (such as the School Report Card and Snapshot) will use the old race / ethnicity definitions for the reporting cycle and for 2010 accountability. The assessment answer documents will collect race / ethnicity information using the new definitions only (pre-coded from PEIMS). State accountability, federal accountability, and AEIS and related reports will use the new definitions for all the current year ( ) indicators for the 2011 cycle. Final recommendations for the selection of the race / ethnicity student groups to be evaluated for state accountability ratings for 2011 will be made by 2011 accountability advisory groups. How student groups will be evaluated for Accountability under the Federal Race/Ethnicity coding
House Bill (HB) 3 Update
HB 3 Implementation Transition Plan - Next Steps December 1, 2010Transition plan for the new assessment and accountability/accreditation system is submitted to the governor, lieutenant governor, other key legislative staff and the Legislative Budget Board (LBB). July 29, ratings are the last issued under the current accountability system Assignment of performance ratings are suspended. New academic accountability system is developed with input from the educator advisory groups on the timelines specified in the transition plan. 56
HB 3 Implementation (cont.) Exclusions to the NCES Dropout Definition HB3 defined certain exclusions that the TEA must make when evaluating dropout and completion rates for accreditation and performance ratings. The exclusions can be grouped into five categories: Previous dropouts; ADA ineligible dropouts; Court-ordered GEDs, not earned; Incarcerated in facilities not served by Texas public schools; and Refugees and asylees. 57
HB 3 Implementation (cont.) Exclusions to the NCES Dropout Definition HB3 explicitly requires use of the current NCES dropout definition until TEA is interpreting the effective date to mean the dropouts collected in the year. The dropouts collected in the year (2011 ratings) will be processed using current definitions with no new exclusions applied. 58
59 TETN Accountability Update Sessions 2011 Schedule and Tentative Agenda Topics February 17Update on 2011 Accountability Development April 14Accountability Decisions for 2011 and Update on House Bill 3 Implementation Mid-May AYP Federal Cap June 16Accountability Manuals – State and AYP August 18Accountability Results for 2011 November 17Accountability Ratings Update Gold Performance Acknowledgments AEIS Reports School Report Cards PEG List The above dates are for 1 p.m. to 3 p.m.
60 Accountability Resources the Division of Performance Reporting at Phone the Division of Performance Reporting at (512) ESC Accountability Contacts. Online: ACCT: AEA: AYP: