Presentation on theme: "1 TETN Accountability Update Session April 23, 2009."— Presentation transcript:
1 TETN Accountability Update Session April 23, 2009
2 State Accountability
3 Standard Accountability Decisions for 2009
4 Factors Affecting 2009 Accountability Significant Changes Compared to 2008 Removal of the School Leaver Provision from the completion/dropout/underreported indicators. Continued impact of the phase-in of the NCES dropout definition through The TAKS standards for Academically Acceptable increase for writing/social studies, mathematics, and science by five points each. Changes to floor requirements for the Exceptions Provision for mathematics and science. Underreported Students indicator standards increasing. GPA standards going up for 9 of the previous 14 indicators.
5 Factors Affecting 2009 Accountability (continued) Significant Changes Compared to 2008 Inclusion of the Texas Projection Measure (TPM). Hurricane Ike provisions.
6 TAKS Indicator Standards 2008 AA/Re/Ex 2009 AA/Re/Ex Reading/ELA70/75/90 Writing, Social Studies65/75/9070/75/90 Mathematics50/75/9055/75/90 Science45/75/9050/75/90 Numbers in bold indicate a change from the prior year
7 TAKS Indicator Texas Projection Measure (TPM) Estimation of whether a student is predicted to pass the TAKS test at the next high-stakes grade level. TPM is based on (1) a students current performance on TAKS and (2) the TAKS scores from all students in the campus that a students attends. Projection equations are developed the year before they are applied and are shared with districts before they are used in state accountability or federal AYP.
8 TAKS Indicator Usage of TPM Beginning in 2009, TPM will be used to determine state accountability ratings. Used as a means of elevating a campus or district rating in cases when neither the TAKS base indicator nor Required Improvement (RI) are sufficient to allow for the next higher rating. The TAKS Met Standard with TPM is a new percentage that will count students who either met the standard or are projected to meet the standard at the next high-stakes grade as passers.
9 TAKS Indicator Relationship to Required Improvement (RI) and Exceptions Provision (EP) The % Met Standard for each measure is compared to the accountability standard first, then RI is applied, then % Met Standard with TPM is evaluated. After the best outcome is determined for all measures, the Exceptions Provision will be used, if applicable.
10 TAKS Indicator Relationship to Required Improvement (RI) and Exceptions Provision (EP) (continued) Combinations of RI, TPM, and the EP cannot be used together for one measure to elevate a rating more than one level.
11 TAKS Indicator About Required Improvement (RI) RI evaluates gain demonstrated by an entire campus or district for a given measure, rather than individual student growth. RI is calculated as the amount of gain in percent Met Standard required to reach the current year accountability standard in two years. In 2009, Required Improvement will continue to be a feature of the system along with TPM.
12 TAKS Indicator About the Exceptions Provision The Exceptions Provision will continue to be applied to only the 25 TAKS measures (5 subjects multiplied by 5 groups: All Students, African American, Hispanic, White, and Economically Disadvantaged). The Exceptions Provision will not be applicable to either Completion Rate I or Annual Dropout Rate indicators. The Exception Provision cannot elevate a rating more than one rating category. An exception cannot be used for the same measure for two consecutive years.
13 TAKS Indicator About the Exceptions Provision (continued) The campus or district must meet a minimum performance floor to be eligible to use this provision. In 2009 the floors are the same for every subject and rating category, namely 5 points below the standard. In 2009, the floors for math and science have changed to be 5 points below, rather than 10 points below, the standard. The evaluation of minimum performance floors will continue to be based on the percent of students passing the test. Performance on TPM is not included in this calculation.
14 TAKS Indicator About the Exceptions Provision (continued) Exceptions Provision Table (for Academically Acceptable or Recognized) Exceptions Provision Table (for Exemplary) Number of Assessment Measures Evaluated Maximum Number of Exceptions Allowed Number of Assessment Measures Evaluated Maximum Number of Exceptions Allowed 1 – 40 exceptions1 – 90 exceptions 5 – 81 exception10 or more1 exception 9 – 112 exceptionsn/a 12 – 153 exceptionsn/a 16 or more4 exceptionsn/a
15 School Leaver Provision For , the School Leaver Provision is not available for any of the 3 indicators that previously used this provision: Grade 7-8 Annual Dropout Rate Completion Rate I Underreported Students Indicator
16 Annual Dropout Rate (Grades 7-8) Indicator No changes to this indicator in 2009 compared to Academically Acceptable< 2.0% Recognized< 2.0% Exemplary< 2.0% Dropout DefinitionNCES Definition Standards
17 Completion Rate I (Grade 9-12) Indicator Standards are scheduled to remain constant through In 2009 this indicator will include three years under the NCES dropout definition. Standards 2009 Academically Acceptable 75.0% Recognized 85.0% Exemplary 95.0% Completion Rate I Definition of a Completer Graduates + Continued HS Dropout Definition (used in denominator)Phase-in NCES Definition
18 Underreported Students Data Quality Indicator Standards Accountability Year Underreported students data year Underreported students cannot exceed NumberPercent Numbers in bold indicate a change from the prior year
19 Hurricane Ike Exclusion of Performance of Displaced Students Assessment results of all displaced students will be removed from TAKS indicator before determining 2009 accountability ratings. PEIMS crisis code will be used to identify displaced students.
20 Hurricane Ike Districts Directly Affected by Hurricane Ike Districts and campuses directly impacted will be eligible for a Not Rated: Other rating if: a) Located in one of 29 counties; and b) Closed for 10 or more instructional days Not Rated: Other issued if rating is Academically Unacceptable or lower than 2008 rating. Districts and campuses with ratings governed by dropout or completion indicators not eligible.
21 Gold Performance Acknowledgments College-Ready Graduates Add the college-ready graduates indicator that has been reported in the AEIS reports since to the GPA indicators. Evaluate readiness on both ELA and mathematics combined. College-ready is the count of graduates who scored at or above the college-ready criteria on both subjects, divided by the count of graduates with results in both subjects.
22 Gold Performance Acknowledgments Standards For 2009, standards increase by 5 points each for nine of the 14 previous indicators: The five commended indicators; The two TSI indicators; Advanced Course / Dual Enrollment; and RHSP / DAP The new college-ready graduates indicator is implemented in 2009 with a standard of 35%.
23 Standard Accountability for 2010 and Beyond
24 TAKS Indicator Summary of 2010 Changes Use of all TAKS (Accommodated) results Use of Vertical Scale Increasing Standards for the TAKS indicator
25 TAKS Indicator Summary of 2011 Changes Use of TAKS-M Use of TAKS-Alt Use of English Language Learners Progress Measure Increasing Standards for TAKS indicator
26 TAKS Indicator Exemplary 90% Recognized 75% 80% Academically Acceptable Reading/ELA 70% Writing, Social Studies 70% Mathematics 55% 60% 65% Science 50% 55% 60% Numbers in bold indicate a change from the prior year. Standards 2009 and Beyond Standards for 2011 will be reviewed in 2010 and are subject to change.
27 TAKS (Accommodated) and Beyond Science (grades 5, 8, 10, & 11) Science (grade 5 Spanish) Social Studies (grades 8, 10, & 11) English Language Arts (grade 11) Mathematics (grade 11) Use Reading/ELA (grades 3 – 10) Reading (grades 3 – 6 Spanish) Mathematics (grades 3 – 10) Mathematics (grades 3 – 6 Spanish) Writing (grades 4 & 7) Writing (grade 4 Spanish) Report Only Use Use of TAKS (Accommodated) in 2009 and Beyond Tex in bold indicate a change from the prior year
28 Vertical Scale To meet new statutory requirements, a vertical scale will be implemented in grades 3-8 for TAKS mathematics and reading starting with the school year. A vertical scale is a scale score system that allows comparison of student test scores across grade levels within a subject. Performance using the vertical scale will be report-only in and will be first used for student passing standards and state accountability in
TAKS-M and TAKS-Alt Add TAKS-Modified (TAKS-M) results to the TAKS base indicator, combining results on TAKS, TAKS (Accommodated), and TAKS-M. Evaluate TAKS-Alternate (TAKS-Alt) as a separate base indicator with test scores summed across grades and subjects and evaluated at the All Students level only. Use the TPM as soon as it becomes available for each TAKS-M grade rather than waiting until the TPM for TAKS-M is available for all grades.
TAKS-M and TAKS-Alt (continued) Begin using TAKS-M and TAKS-Alt results for accountability ratings with the 2011 ratings. This schedule follows the established report, report, use phase-in policy recommended for integration of new assessment results into the accountability ratings. Preview indicators for both TAKS-M and TAKS-Alt will be reported in the and AEIS reports. Remaining implementation details to be determined during the 2010 development cycle.
31 Annual Dropout Rate (Grades 7-8) Indicator * Dropout Year Academically Acceptable < 2.0%< 1.8%< 1.6% Recognized< 2.0%< 1.8%< 1.6% Exemplary< 2.0%< 1.8%< 1.6% Standards for 2009 and Beyond * Standards for 2011 will be reviewed in 2010 and are subject to change. Numbers in bold indicate a change from the prior year.
32 Completion Rate I (Grade 9-12) Indicator Standards for 2009 and Beyond * Class of 2008Class of 2009Class of 2010 Academically Acceptable => 75.0% Recognized => 85.0% Exemplary => 95.0% Completion Rate I Definition of a Completer Graduates and Continued HS Dropout Definition (used in denominator) Phase-in NCES Definition NCES Definition * Standards for 2011 will be reviewed in 2010 and are subject to change.
33 Underreported Students Data Quality Indicator Standards for 2009 and Beyond Accountability Year Underreported students data year Underreported students cannot exceed NumberPercent * *Standards for 2011 will be reviewed annually and are subject to change. Numbers in bold indicate a change from the prior year.
34 English Language Learners (ELL) Progress Measure Indicator Incorporate ELL progress measure in the ratings as a separate indicator evaluated at the All Students level only, beginning with the 2011 ratings. For state accountability purposes, progress on the ELL measure will be based on comparisons of two years of Texas English Language Proficiency Assessment System (TELPAS) Reading results. Based on the ELL progress measure, the 2010 focus group will set accountability standards on this new indicator for The ELL progress measure will be reported on the 2008 – 09 AEIS report.
35 Alternative Education Accountability (AEA) Decisions for 2009 and Beyond
37 TAKS Progress Indicator The TAKS Progress indicator standard is 50% for 2009 and 2010 AEA ratings. Beginning in 2009, the Texas Projection Measure (TPM) replaces the Texas Growth Index (TGI) in the growth component of the TAKS Progress indicator. For 2009 AEA ratings, Required Improvement will be calculated using 2008 performance results with TGI and 2009 performance results with TPM. For 2010 AEA ratings, all TAKS (Accommodated) results are used. Hurricane Ike provisions will be applied as described earlier in these slides.
38 Annual Dropout Rate (Grades 7-12) Indicator Due to the impact of increased rigor in this indicator, the Annual Dropout Rate indicator standard is increased from 10.0% to 20.0% for 2009 and 2010 AEA ratings. Revising the Annual Dropout Rate standard to 20.0% eliminates use of the School Leaver Provision (SLP) in 2009 and beyond.
39 Completion Rate II (Grades 9-12) Indicator Due to the ongoing increase in rigor as additional years of NCES dropout data are included, the Completion Rate II indicator standard is decreased from 70.0% to 60.0% for 2009 and 2010 AEA ratings. The SLP will not be used in 2009 and beyond.
40 AEA Gold Performance Acknowledgments (AEA GPA) 2008 was the first year for GPA indicators to be evaluated for AEA campuses and charters. To the extent possible, the AEA GPA system is aligned with the GPA system that acknowledges campuses and district evaluated under standard accountability procedures. Only the All Students group is evaluated. Student groups are not evaluated separately. An Attendance Rate standard of 95% is applied to all AEA campuses and charters. The Comparable Improvement indicators are inappropriate for AEA campuses and are not evaluated for AEA GPA purposes. In 2009, the College-Ready Graduates indicator will be evaluated for the first time at a standard of 35%.
42 AEA GPA (continued) 2009 AEA GPA IndicatorsStandard 9 Recommended High School Program/ Distinguished Achievement Program (RHSP/DAP) 85% 10 SAT/ACT Results (College Admissions Tests) 70% of graduates and 40% at or above criterion Texas Success Initiative: Higher Education Readiness Component – ELA and Mathematics 60% 13College-Ready Graduates (new) 35%
At-Risk Registration Criterion and Charters Evaluated under AEA Procedures
At-Risk Registration Criterion Each registered AEC must have at least 75% at-risk student enrollment verified through PEIMS fall enrollment data in order to be evaluated under 2009 AEA procedures and receive an AEA rating on July 31, Two safeguards have been incorporated for those AECs that are below the at- risk requirement. 1. Prior-Year PEIMS At-Risk Data Safeguard: If a registered AEC does not meet the at-risk criterion in 2009, then it remains under AEA if the AEC had at least 75% at-risk enrollment in New Campus Safeguard: If a new campus is registered for evaluation under AEA procedures, then the AEC is not required to meet the at-risk criterion in its first year of operation. This safeguard provides an accommodation for new campuses with no prior-year data.
At-Risk Registration Criterion (continued) In late April/early May, letters will be mailed to the AECs that do not meet the 2009 at-risk registration criterion informing them that AEA registration is rescinded and that the AEC will be evaluated under 2009 standard accountability procedures. The Final 2009 Registered AEC list will be posted on the AEA website in May. This list will contain the AECs that will receive a 2009 AEA rating.
46 Charters Evaluated under AEA Procedures A list of the charter operators that will be rated under 2009 AEA procedures will be posted on the AEA website in May. Charters that operate only standard campuses are evaluated automatically under standard accountability procedures. Charters that operate only registered AECs are evaluated automatically under AEA procedures.
47 Charters evaluated under AEA Procedures (continued) Charters that operate both standard campuses and registered AECs have the option to be evaluated under AEA procedures if at least 50% of the charters students are enrolled at registered AECs. TEA contacts the charter to obtain its preference. Charters submit preference via TEASE Accountability website from May 5–15, If a preference cannot be obtained, then the charter is evaluated under standard accountability procedures. If fewer than 50% of the charters students are enrolled at registered AECs, then the charter is evaluated under standard accountability procedures.
48 TETN Accountability Update Sessions 2009 Dates and Tentative Agenda Topics June 18 Accountability Manuals – State and AYP August 20 Accountability Results for 2009 November 19Accountability Ratings Update Gold Performance Acknowledgments AEIS Reports School Report Cards PEG List The above dates are for 1 p.m. to 3 p.m.
49 Accountability Resources the Division of Performance Reporting at Phone the Division of Performance Reporting at (512) ESC Accountability Contacts. Online: ACCT: AEA: AYP: