Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Special Education Assessments TETN January 5, 2011 State and Federal Accountability Systems Update Shannon Housson Ester Regalado TEA Performance Reporting.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Special Education Assessments TETN January 5, 2011 State and Federal Accountability Systems Update Shannon Housson Ester Regalado TEA Performance Reporting."— Presentation transcript:

1 Special Education Assessments TETN January 5, 2011 State and Federal Accountability Systems Update Shannon Housson Ester Regalado TEA Performance Reporting Division

2 Session Topics 2 Preview of 2011 State Accountability Procedures Preview of 2011 AEA Accountability Procedures Update of 2011 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Update on HB 3 Implementation Accountability Resources

3 Preview of 2011 Standard Accountability Procedures and Indicators

4 2011 State Accountability Calendar 4 Jan - Feb Accountability System Development – 2010 Review / 2011 Development March 3 - 4Educator Focus Group Meeting Late March Commissioners Accountability Advisory Committee Early AprilFinal decisions for 2011 announced by Commissioner Late May2011 Accountability Manual posted online July Accountability Ratings release

5 Standard Accountability Decisions for 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

6 Standard Accountability Decisions for 2011 (cont.) 6 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 Learners (ELL) Progress All Students OnlyReportUse

7 Standard Accountability Decisions for 2011 (cont.) * 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% *Numbers in bold indicate a change from the prior year. Completion Rate I, Annual Dropout Rate, and Underreported Students 7

8 Standard Accountability Decisions for 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, and 15% commended on mathematics Exemplary Standard. 25% commended on reading/ELA, and 25% commended on mathematics

9 Standard Accountability Decisions for Commended Performance Indicator Requirements (cont.) 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.

10 Standard Accountability Decisions for Use of Texas Projection Measure (TPM) in 2011 As stated in the 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.

11 Standard Accountability Decisions for Use of Texas Projection Measure (TPM) in 2011 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.

12 English Language Learners (ELL) Progress Indicator 12 Standard Procedures for 2011 The ELL Progress indicator standard is 60%. It is evaluated only for Recognized and Exemplary ratings. Only All Students are evaluated if meets minimum size of 30 students. Required Improvement (RI) and the Exception Provision will be applied

13 English Language Learners (ELL) Progress Indicator 13 AEA Procedures 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.

14 English Language Learners (ELL) Progress Indicator 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). For further information, the ELL Progress Indicator FAQ and Appendix H of the AEIS Glossary are available online at the Resource link on the Performance Reporting website.

15 Preview of 2011 AEA Procedures and Indicators

16 TAKS Progress Indicator 16 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. The TAKS Progress indicator sums performance results across grades (3-12) and subjects to determine ratings under AEA procedures. This indicator is based on the number of tests taken, not on the number of students tested.

17 Completion Rate II and Annual Dropout Rate (Grades 7-12) Standards 17 The Annual Dropout Rate indicator standard remains 20.0%. The Completion Rate II indicator standard remains 60.0%.

18 Update on 2011 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)

19 Preview 2011 AYP performance standards increase to: 80% in Reading/English language arts 75% in Mathematics Graduate Rate annual targets may not change; Participation/Attendance Rate Indicator standards remain unchanged. Texas Projection Measure (TPM) will continue to be used; TPM for TAKS-Modified (TAKS-M) grades 3 and 6 will be phased in. The 2% Federal Cap on TAKS-Modified (TAKS-M) will continue to include TAKS-M TPM values projected to meet the passing standard. 19

20 AYP Preview: Assessments * Students in their First Year in U. S. Schools are counted as participants, but excluded from the performance calculation Reading/ELA Assessments Participation 95% Standard Performance ( Accountability Subset) 80% Standard Total Students Number Participating Number Tested Met Standard or TPM/Growth TAKSYesIf participant If in the Accountability subset If standard is met or if projected to meet standard by TPM TAKS (Accommodated) YesIf participant If in the Accountability subset If standard is met or if projected to meet standard by TPM TAKS-M / LAT TAKS-M * YesIf participant If in the Accountability subset If standard is met or if projected to meet standard by TPM (subject to 2% cap) TAKS-AltYesIf participant If in the Accountability subset If standard is met or if on track to meet standard by growth (subject to 1% cap) TELPAS Reading* Yes Non- Participant N/ANot IncludedNot includedN/A LAT version of TAKS* YesIf participant If in the Accountability subset If standard is met or if projected to meet standard by TPM 20

21 AYP Preview: Assessments (cont.) * Students in their First Year in U.S. Schools are counted as participants, but excluded from the performance calculation Mathematics Assessments Participation 95% Standard Performance (Accountability Subset) 75% Standard Total Students Number Participating Number Tested Met Standard or TPM/Growth TAKSYesIf participant If in the Accountability subset If standard is met or if projected to meet standard by TPM TAKS (Accommodated) YesIf participant If in the Accountability subset If standard is met or if projected to meet standard by TPM TAKS-M / LAT TAKS-M * YesIf participant If in the Accountability subset If standard is met or if projected to meet standard by TPM (subject to 2% cap) TAKS-AltYesIf participant If in the Accountability subset If standard is met or if on track to meet standard by growth (subject to 1% cap) LAT version of TAKS* YesIf participant If in the Accountability subset If standard is met or if projected to meet standard by TPM 21

22 Texas AYP Workbook 22 On January 15, 2010, TEA submitted a Graduation Rate information template for peer review containing proposed changes in the AYP graduation rate calculations, as required by the U.S. Department of Education. On October 29, 2010, the U.S. Department of Education (USDE) provided final decisions in response to Texas workbook amendments On November 15, 2010, the Title I Committee of Practitioners (COP) reviewed the recommended changes to the 2011 AYP Workbook. TEA submitted 2011 amendment requests on December 21,

23 Texas AYP Workbook Requested Amendments to 2011 AYP Phase-in for the TAKS–M projection equations (TPM) TPM projections are expected to be reported for TAKS–M reading and mathematics tests in school year for grades 3 and 6. The 2011 Federal Cap process will remain the same as 2010 AYP, with the addition of the TAKS-M TPM for grades 3 and 6. Graduation Rate Annual Target Request to hold the 2010 graduation rate targets constant for 2011 and 2012 AYP, since student group evaluations are required beginning in

24 Texas AYP Workbook Requested Amendments for 2012 AYP and Beyond Carry forward 2011 AYP status for all campuses and districts and maintain School Improvement Program (SIP) intervention stages. TEA will submit a larger proposal for AYP determinations for 2013 and beyond under the new STAAR assessment program. 24

25 Update on HB 3 Implementation

26 HB 3 Implementation 26 House Bill 3 Transition Plan Posted online on Wednesday, December 1 at the following URL:

27 HB 3 Implementation 27 Transition Plan Timelines through 2013 December 1, 2010Transition plan to the new assessment and accountability/accreditation system is submitted to the governor, lieutenant governor, other key legislative members and staff, and the Legislative Budget Board (LBB). By August 1, ratings are the last ratings issued under the current accountability system Assignment of performance ratings are suspended for this school year. New academic accountability system is developed with input from advisory groups on the timelines specified in the transition plan.

28 HB 3 Transition Plan 28 August 8, 2013District and campus performance ratings are issued for the first time under new system. Ratings will be based on the percent proficient indicators. The percent college- ready indicators will be report only. Distinction designations will be issued to districts and campuses with acceptable performance concurrent with the release of performance ratings. Performance ratings issued in and school years will be considered consecutive.

29 HB 3 Implementation 29 Transition Plans for 2014 August 8, 2014District and campus performance ratings will be issued for second time. Ratings will be based on both percent proficient and percent college-ready indicators. Distinction designations will be issued to districts and campuses with acceptable performance concurrent with the release of performance ratings.

30 Features of the New Accountability System 30 Based on STAAR EOC and grades 3 – 8 assessments Evaluation of college-ready performance as well as student proficiency 2020 accountability goals: Top 10 states in terms of college readiness No significant achievement gaps among student groups

31 Features of the New Accountability System 31 Graduation/completion/dropout rates with new exclusions Two rating levels – acceptable and unacceptable performance Distinction designations Higher ratings of Recognized and Exemplary for postsecondary/college readiness Campus growth Campus closing performance gaps Five additional campus distinctions determined by committees

32 Features of the New Accountability System 32 The following additional features can be used to elevate the performance rating: Required Improvement over the prior year; Average performance of the last 3 years; or, Performance on 85% of the measures meets the standard.

33 Campus Distinction Designations 33 Campus distinction on criteria developed by five committees for: Academic achievement in ELA, mathematics, science, or social studies Fine arts Physical education 21 st century workforce development program Second language acquisition program

34 Campus Distinction Designations 34 Timelines January Selection of distinction committee members finalized Four separate meetings of each distinction committee will occur. Internal and external reviews of distinction designation committee recommendations will also occur. May Release of Commissioners Final Decisions on Distinction Designations Collection of data June Determination of list of campuses that earned distinction designations. August Release of distinction designations.

35 State Accountability Resources 35 ESC Accountability Staff Division of Performance Reporting Phone: (512) AEA Accountability Accountability Resources

36 36 AYP Resources SIP History Website Districts and campuses can view their Title I School Improvement Program (SIP) status history reports from 2003 through the present. See the AYP Guide for the appropriate year for descriptions of any of the AYP or SIP status labels shown. The SIP history reports are accessible at TEA Security Environment (TEASE) Accountability Website access forms are available at: 36

37 37 AYP Resources (cont.) For more information on AYP, see the 2010 AYP Guide, accessible at Texas AYP Workbook is accessible at Frequently Asked Questions about AYP are available at U.S. Department of Education information is available at Contact the Division of Performance Reporting by at or phone at (512)


Download ppt "Special Education Assessments TETN January 5, 2011 State and Federal Accountability Systems Update Shannon Housson Ester Regalado TEA Performance Reporting."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google