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:
Special Education Assessments TETN January 5, 2011 State and Federal Accountability Systems Update Shannon Housson Ester Regalado TEA Performance Reporting Division
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
Preview of 2011 Standard Accountability Procedures and Indicators
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 292011 Accountability Ratings release
Standard Accountability Decisions for 2011 5 20102011 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
Standard Accountability Decisions for 2011 (cont.) 6 TAKS (Accommodated)20102011 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
Standard Accountability Decisions for 2011 (cont.) 20102011* 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
Standard Accountability Decisions for 2011 8 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
Standard Accountability Decisions for 2011 9 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.
Standard Accountability Decisions for 2011 10 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.
Standard Accountability Decisions for 2011 11 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.
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
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.
English Language Learners (ELL) Progress Indicator 14 2011 Preview of ELL Progress Indicator shown on 2009-10 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 2009-10 AEIS Glossary are available online at the Resource link on the Performance Reporting website. http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/resources/index.html
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.
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%.
19 2011 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 2011 AYP Preview: Assessments * Students in their First Year in U. S. Schools are counted as participants, but excluded from the performance calculation. 2011 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 2011 AYP Preview: Assessments (cont.) * Students in their First Year in U.S. Schools are counted as participants, but excluded from the performance calculation. 2011 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
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 http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/ayp/usde102910.pdf. http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/ayp/usde102910.pdf 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, 2010. 22
23 2011 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 2010-2011 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 2012. 23
24 2012 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
HB 3 Implementation 26 House Bill 3 Transition Plan Posted online on Wednesday, December 1 at the following URL: http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/hb3plan/
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, 20112011 ratings are the last ratings issued under the current accountability system. 2011-2012Assignment 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.
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 2010-2011 and 2012-2013 school years will be considered consecutive.
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.
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
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
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.
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
Campus Distinction Designations 34 Timelines January 2011- Selection of distinction committee members finalized 2011- 2012 - Four separate meetings of each distinction committee will occur. Internal and external reviews of distinction designation committee recommendations will also occur. May 2012 - Release of Commissioners Final Decisions on Distinction Designations 2012-2013 - Collection of data June 2013 - Determination of list of campuses that earned distinction designations. August 2013 - Release of distinction designations.
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 http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/ayp/index_multi.html.http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/ayp/index_multi.html TEA Security Environment (TEASE) Accountability Website access forms are available at: http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/webappaccess/AppRef.htm http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/webappaccess/AppRef.htm 36
37 AYP Resources (cont.) For more information on AYP, see the 2010 AYP Guide, accessible at http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/ayp. http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/ayp 2010 Texas AYP Workbook is accessible at http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/ayp/txworkbook10.pdf. http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/ayp/txworkbook10.pdf Frequently Asked Questions about AYP are available at http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/ayp/faq/faq.html. http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/ayp/faq/faq.html U.S. Department of Education information is available at www.ed.gov/nclb/. www.ed.gov/nclb/ Contact the Division of Performance Reporting by email at email@example.com, or phone at (512) 463-9704. firstname.lastname@example.org 37