Presentation on theme: "Federal Accountability/ AYP Update TASA Midwinter Conference January 27, 2009 Shannon Housson and Ester Regalado TEA, Performance Reporting Division."— Presentation transcript:
Federal Accountability/ AYP Update TASA Midwinter Conference January 27, 2009 Shannon Housson and Ester Regalado TEA, Performance Reporting Division
2 AYP Topics 2008 AYP Final Results 2008 Appeal and Exceptions Process Preview of 2009: Assessments Federal Cap Process Texas Projection Measure Texas AYP Workbook AYP Preview of Final Title I Regulations Resources SIP / TEASE / AYP
AYP State Summary Results District Results AYP Status Final 2007 Results Final 2008 Results Meets AYP1,06987%82467% Missed AYP13611%39132% Not Evaluated171%141% TOTAL1,222100%1,229100%
AYP State Summary Results (cont.) Campus Results (Regular and Charter) AYP Status Final 2007 Results Final 2008 Results Meets AYP6,44780%6,17075% Missed AYP6648%1,10914% Not Evaluated95012%91611% TOTAL8,061100%8,195100%
AYP State Summary Results (cont.) Of those missing AYP, 18% (71) of districts and 1% (12) of campuses missed AYP solely due to the 1% and/or 2% caps in 2008, compared to 32% of districts and 11% of campuses in A total of 482 campuses missed the Mathematics Performance indicator, the largest category that failed to Meet AYP standards.
AYP Appeals 127 school districts submitted a total of 274 AYP appeals: 94 (34%) of the 274 appeal requests for either districts or campuses were granted. Of the 78 district appeals, 8 (10%) changed the district AYP status to Meets AYP. Of the 196 campus appeals, 48 (24%) changed the campus AYP status to Meets AYP.
7 General Considerations for AYP Appeals Appeals are not a data correction opportunity. Appeals are not considered for areas where a district/campus Met AYP or was Not Evaluated. Appeals are considered for areas where AYP was missed, even if the result would mean the district/campus still misses AYP overall. Appeals are considered for data relevant to the 2008 AYP result, and are not considered for data reported in the prior year for Performance, Participation, Graduation Rate measures.
8 General Considerations for AYP Appeals (cont.) Appeal of the USDE approved Texas AYP Workbook requirements, including the performance or participation indicators based on the results of TAKS-Modified (TAKS- M), TAKS-Alternate (TAKS-Alt), or TELPAS Reading were not favorable for appeal. Appeals related to the Federal Cap, Campus Rankings, or to the performance results due to the federal caps were not considered. Graduation Rate Appeals based on the State Accountability School Leaver Provision or the use of the National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES) dropout definition could not be considered.
AYP Exceptions Process School districts registered in the RF Tracker system and school districts with RDSPD that are included in the Directory for Services for the Deaf in Texas were automatically applied an exception to the 1% cap. The federal cap applied to proficient TAKS-Alt results was extended to include an additional number of students up to the statewide 1% cap limit. The statewide 1% cap limit was sufficient to allow every school districts with an exception to include all TAKS-Alt passing students as proficient for AYP (in effect, remove the 1% cap).
AYP Other Circumstance Exceptions Other circumstance exceptions were allowable and were submitted as a regular appeal through the online system. The approval of school district requests for exceptions to the federal cap is based on the availability of statewide slots within the cap that allow the state to maintain a 1% cap limit on proficient results from TAKS-Alt. The statewide 1% cap limit was sufficient to allow requests for exceptions based on other circumstances to include all TAKS-Alt passing students as proficient for AYP (in effect, remove the 1% cap).
AYP Preview 2009 AYP Performance Standards increase to: 67% in Reading/English language arts 58% in Mathematics No changes in state assessments used for 2009 AYP. No changes in the AYP Federal Cap process for State assessments used for 2009 AYP are outlined in the August 28, 2008 correspondence to districts.
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 67% Standard Total Students Number Participating Number TestedMet Standard TAKSYesIf participant If non-mobileIf standard is met TAKS (Accommodated) YesIf participant If non-mobileIf standard is met TAKS-M / LAT TAKS-M YesIf participant If non-mobile If standard is met (subject to 2% cap) TAKS-AltYesIf participant If non-mobile If standard is met (subject to 1% cap) TELPAS Reading*YesNon-ParticipantN/ANot Included LAT version of TAKS YesIf participant If non-mobileIf standard is met
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 58% Standard Total Students Number Participating Number TestedMet Standard TAKSYesIf participant If non-mobileIf standard is met TAKS (Accommodated) YesIf participant If non-mobileIf standard is met TAKS-M / LAT TAKS-M* YesIf participant If non-mobile If standard is met (subject to 2% cap) TAKS-AltYesIf participant If non-mobile If standard is met (subject to 1% cap) LAT version of TAKS* YesIf participant If non-mobileIf standard is met
Preview: AYP Federal Caps The 2008 AYP Federal Cap process was implemented for the first time with results showing that the strategic process for helping campuses was very effective. The federal accountability advisory group, Title I Committee of Practitioners (COP), met on November 18, 2008, and voted to recommend the continuation of the Federal Cap process in 2009, with no modifications. A review of the federal cap process will be provided through a district accessible Texas Education Telecommunications Network (TETN) session on May 21, 2009 from 1pm-4pm (Event # 34920). Contact your school district or ESC for more information.
Preview: AYP Federal Caps (cont.) Review of the 1% Federal Cap Students are selected randomly from TAKS-Alt proficient results. Exceptions to the 1% cap will be processed prior to the Preliminary AYP Release in August 2009 for: School districts registered with the TEA Special Education Residential Facilities Tracking System (RF Tracker) for school year School districts included in the Directory for Services for the Deaf in Texas, Regional Day School Programs for the Deaf (RDSPD).
Preview: AYP Federal Caps (cont.) Review of the 2% Federal Cap Step 1) TEA prioritizes campuses by grades served and proportion of students with disabilities enrolled. School districts have the opportunity to review and/or modify the campus rankings. Step 2) Student results are selected in order to maximize the number of campuses that Meet AYP beginning with the campuses assigned the highest priority.
Preview: AYP Federal Caps (cont.) Review of the 1% and 2% Federal Caps Reminder: The federal cap relates to counting students as proficient for AYP purposes only and does not limit the number of students that may take an alternate assessment. State policies and procedures related to assessment decision-making are detailed in the TEA publication titled Admission, Review, and Dismissal (ARD) Committee Decision-Making Process for the Texas Assessment Program.
Preview: AYP Growth Proposal October 15, 2008 Texas submits a proposal to use a growth model for determining whether schools, school districts, and the state Meet AYP for the school year. The proposal may be accessed at the TEA Student Assessment website: December 2 – 3, 2008 USDE Peer reviewers met in Washington, DC to discuss each proposal. Information related to the completed peer review process may be found at the USDE website:
Preview: AYP Growth Proposal (cont.) January 8, 2009 USDE announces that Texas can incorporate the Texas Projection Measure in 2009 AYP calculations contingent on: meeting the requirements in the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with USDE concerning TAKS-Alt, and discontinued use of Confidence Intervals (CI) and Uniform Averaging for determining the AYP status with fewer than 50 assessments (small numbers analysis).
Preview: Texas AYP Workbook On December 5, 2008, the U.S. Department of Education announced that requests for amendments to the AYP evaluation are due on January 15, Texas received approval to submit amendments by January 31, Amendments to the 2009 AYP Workbook: 1)Incorporate the Texas Projection Measure (TPM) in AYP evaluations. 2)Remove references to the use of confidence intervals and uniform averaging in small numbers analysis.
Preview: Texas AYP Workbook (cont.) Amendments to the 2009 AYP Workbook (cont.) 3)Provisions for districts impacted by Hurricane Ike: A separate Hurricane Ike student group will be created that includes all students enrolled in districts, campuses, and charters who were displaced by Hurricane Ike. This separate student group will be evaluated for participation only. School districts or campuses that were closed for ten or more days due to Hurricane Ike and are located in a county designated by FEMA as a disaster area that miss AYP will receive a 2009 AYP status of Not Evaluated. See the current Texas AYP Workbook of May 9, 2008 at
Preview: Texas Projection Measure TPM provides an estimate for how individual students are likely to perform in the next high-stakes grade ( grades 5, 8, and 11) after receiving instruction in grade-level content. For example, students in grades 3 and 4 who take reading and mathematics TAKS, TAKS (Accommodated), or LAT TAKS will be projected to meet the passing standard in grade 5.
Preview: Texas Projection Measure (cont.) Students 2009 Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS), TAKS (Accommodated), and LAT scores in both reading/English language arts and mathematics, along with the campus-level mean scores in the projection subject, will be used to predict their performance in next high-stakes testing grade. For example, a students 2009 reading and mathematics TAKS scale score and the mean campus scale score in reading will be used to project the reading scale score for the student in the next high stakes grade level.
Preview: TPM in AYP Who may use TPM in 2009 AYP Calculations? Student taking both reading/English language arts & mathematics in the same test version language (English or Spanish) of: TAKS, TAKS (Accommodated), or Linguistically Accommodated Testing (LAT) TAKS will have data that can be used to predict their performance for 2009.
Preview: TPM in AYP (cont.) How is TPM used in 2009 AYP Calculations? Students who are predicted to meet proficiency will be counted in the numerator of the AYP percent proficiency calculation along with students meeting the standard, and this new percent would be compared with the AYP targets to determine if the performance standard for percent proficient is met.
Preview: TPM in AYP (cont.) How is TPM used in 2009 AYP Calculations? AYP Performance Rate: (Students who Met the Passing Standard + Students Projected to meet the Standard) Total Number of Students Tested Performance Rate is compared to the 2009 AYP Targets of 67% in Reading/English language Arts and 58% in Mathematics Participation Rate calculations are not affected.
Preview: TPM in AYP (cont.) USDE Growth Model Proposal: 2008 AYP Impact Data
Preview: TPM in AYP (cont.) USDE Growth Model Proposal: 2008 AYP Impact Data
29 AYP Preview: Final Title I Regulations On Oct 28, 2008, final Title I regulations were issued to strengthen the NCLB Act, and the following are directly related to AYP. See Final Regulations for Title I Fact Sheets and Summary at Regulations directly related to AYP: National Technical Advisory Council (National TAC) established for peer review of state assessment and accountability systems. National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Data reported on State and District NCLB Report Cards.
30 AYP Preview: Final Title I Regulations (cont.) Regulations directly related to AYP: Minimum Subgroup Size and Inclusion of Students in Accountability Peer Review and Requirements of the Title I Accountability Workbook Submit for approval in time for 2010 AYP (TBD); Explain the minimum group size and other components of its AYP definition; Include the number and percentage of students and subgroups excluded from school-level accountability determinations.
31 AYP Preview: Final Title I Regulations (cont.) Regulations directly related to AYP: A Uniform, Comparable Graduation Rate Timeline to Implement the Four-year Adjusted Cohort Graduation Rate set for Option to Use an Extended-Year Adjusted Cohort Graduation Rate or Rates Permit states to propose one or more extended-year adjusted cohort graduation rates. Graduation Rate Goal, Targets, and AYP Set a state graduation rate goal and requirement for continuous improvement from the prior year toward meeting that goal; Submit for Peer Review and approval.
32 AYP Preview: Final Title I Regulations (cont.) Regulations directly related to AYP: A Uniform, Comparable Graduation Rate Disaggregating Graduation Rate Data Report the four-year adjusted cohort graduation rate or a transitional graduation rate reported for school, district, and state levels by student groups prior to school year 2010–11; States report the four-year adjusted cohort graduation rate by the 2010–11 school year; and Use the cohort graduation rate by student group in 2012 AYP results.
33 Resources: TEA Security Environment (TEASE) Accountability Website Each superintendent and charter school executive director may apply for access. They may also designate others in their district (including ESC Region staff) to acquire access. Multi-District User Access is available for certain charter operators and Education Service Center (ESC) staff that have the unique situation of requiring access to multiple school district or charter operator information. Access for Multi-District Users is obtained through the school district superintendents authorization on the required access forms. TEASE access forms are available at:
34 SIP Resources 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 For more information about the School Improvement Program, please contact the School Improvement Unit in the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Program Coordination at (512)
35 AYP Resources For more information on 2008 AYP, see the 2008 AYP Guide, 2008 AYP Appeals Guidelines, and 2008 AYP Highlights 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)