Presentation on theme: "Federal Accountability/ AYP Update Accountability TETN August 20, 2009 Shannon Housson and Ester Regalado TEA, Performance Reporting Division."— Presentation transcript:
Federal Accountability/ AYP Update Accountability TETN August 20, 2009 Shannon Housson and Ester Regalado TEA, Performance Reporting Division
2 AYP Topics 2009 AYP Preliminary Results 2009 Final Release Schedule Appeal and Exceptions Process Preview of 2010: Increasing Standards Review of the Federal Cap Title I Final Regulations/Graduation Rate
3 2009 AYP State Summary Results District Results AYP Status Final 2008 Results Preliminary 2009 Results Meets AYP82467%99280% Missed AYP39132%21818% Not Evaluated141%252% TOTAL1,229100%1,235100%
4 2009 AYP State Summary Results (cont.) Campus Results (Regular and Charter) AYP Status Final 2008 Results Preliminary 2009 Results Meets AYP6,17075%6,69680% Missed AYP1,10914%3915% Not Evaluated91611%1,23515% TOTAL8,195100%8,322100%
5 2009-10 SIP Results based on 2009 AYP District Results SIP Stage Identification Final 2008 Results Preliminary 2009 Results Stage 15053%14073% Stage 22729%2312% Stage 31718%3016% TOTAL94100%193100%
6 2009-10 SIP Results based on 2009 AYP (cont.) Campus Results (Regular and Charter) SIP Stage Identification Final 2008 Results Preliminary 2009 Results Stage 114542%16045% Stage 27822%6719% Stage 36920%5917% Stage 43610%3911% Stage 5216%308% TOTAL349100%355100%
7 2009 AYP State Summary Results (cont.) Of those missing AYP, 52% (113) of districts and 6% (22) of campuses missed AYP solely due to the 1% and/or 2% federal caps in 2009. compared to 18% of districts and 1% of campuses in 2008. A total of 154 campuses missed the Mathematics Performance indicator, the largest category that failed to Meet AYP standards. The Texas Projection Measure (TPM) was used for 2009 AYP evaluations, and allowed 10% (126) of districts to Meet AYP that would have otherwise missed AYP; and 6% (528) of campuses.
8 2009 AYP Final Release Schedule July 30 th August 6 th District and campus AYP results available on TEASE Accountability web application. Public release of Preliminary AYP results. September 4 th Appeals and Federal Cap Exceptions Deadline. Early December Final 2009 AYP Status released. Preview of NCLB School Report Card (SRC) data, Part I only. January, 2010Public release of NCLB SRC.
9 General Considerations for AYP Appeals Appeals are not a data correction opportunity. Appeals are not considered for areas where a district/campus Meets 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. However, appeals for only one component (Performance or Participation) of an subject area indicator (Reading or Math) that would continue to miss AYP for that indicator are not considered. Appeals are considered for data relevant to the 2009 AYP result, and are not considered for data reported in the prior year for Performance, Participation, Graduation Rate measures.
10 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 are not favorable for appeal. Appeals related to the Federal Cap, Campus Rankings, or to the performance results due to the federal caps are not considered. Graduation Rate Appeals based on the use of the National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES) dropout definition cannot be considered.
11 General Considerations for AYP Appeals (cont.) Appeals to the AYP Graduation Rate indicator include those: Based on recent immigrant students in U.S. schools for one year or less with limited English proficiency (LEP), or Based on students served by special education with individualized education programs (IEPs) indicating 5-year (or longer) graduation plans. Appeal packet must include sufficient documentation for students developed in their earliest years of inclusion in the Class of 2008 cohort. Students served in special education programs with IEPs developed during their fourth year (or Grade 12) of the longitudinal cohort will not be favorable for appeal.
12 General Considerations for AYP Appeals (cont.) New Items in 2009 AYP Guide Special Circumstance: Data quality of first time PEIMS collections. (Page 69) Texas Projection Measure (TPM). (Page 70) Students Ineligible for the Linguistically Accommodated Testing (LAT) of TAKS Reading/English Language Arts. (Page 71)
13 General Considerations for AYP Appeals (cont.) New Items in 2009 AYP Guide Appeals Related to Hurricane Ike. (Page 75) Hurricane Ike Displaced Students. Districts and Campuses Closed by Hurricane Ike. Appeals Related to the H1N1 Flu Outbreak. (Page 76) Participation Results Performance Results
14 2009 AYP Exceptions Process School districts registered in the RF Tracker system and school districts with RDSPD that are included in the 2008- 2009 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).
15 2009 AYP Exceptions Process AYP 1% Exception and 2% Spill Over 1% Cap Limit on TAKS–Alt passing results… 1% Exception?2% Spill Over? Exceeds (Greater than) 1% Limit Exceptions applied to increase 1% cap No spill over is possible Does Not Exceed (Less than) the 1% Limit Exception is not necessary Spill over beyond the 2% limit may occur Is Equal to the 1% Limit Exception is not necessary No spill over is possible
16 2009 AYP Other Circumstance Exceptions Other circumstance exceptions are allowable and can be 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. Based on 2009 statewide participation data, the statewide 1% cap limit can 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).
17 2010 AYP Preview 2010 AYP Performance Standards increase to: 73% in Reading/English language arts 67% in Mathematics Participation Rate and Other Indicator standards remain unchanged. No changes in state assessments used for 2010 AYP. TPM will continue to be used for AYP 2010. Annual review of the 2% Federal Cap on TAKS-M.
18 2010 Preview: Assessments * Students in their First Year in U. S. Schools are counted as participants, but excluded from the performance calculation. 2010 Reading/ELA Assessments Participation 95% Standard Performance ( Accountability Subset) 73% Standard Total Students Number Participating Number Tested Met Standard or TPM 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 (subject to 2% cap) T B D TAKS-AltYesIf participant If in the Accountability subset If standard is met (subject to 1% cap) No TPM available 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
19 2010 Preview: Assessments (cont.) * Students in their First Year in U. S. Schools are counted as participants, but excluded from the performance calculation. 2010 Mathematics Assessments Participation 95% Standard Performance (Accountability Subset) 67% Standard Total Students Number Participating Number Tested Met Standard or TPM 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 (subject to 2% cap) TBD TAKS-AltYesIf participant If in the Accountability subset If standard is met (subject to 1% cap) No TPM available LAT version of TAKS* YesIf participant If in the Accountability subset If standard is met or if projected to meet standard by TPM
20 2010 Preview: Use of TPM in AYP Review of AYP Performance Calculation Three steps for AYP Performance calculation: 1.AYP Proficiency Rate (without Growth) 2.Performance Improvement/Safe Harbor (without Growth) 3.AYP Performance Rate with Growth. AYP Performance Rate with Growth: (Students who Met the Passing Standard + Students predicted to meet the Standard) Total Number of Students Tested
21 2010 Preview: Use of TPM in AYP Phase-in for the TAKS–M projection equations (TPM) TPM projections are expected to be reported for TAKS–M tests in school year 2009-2010 for Grade 4, 7, and 10 The Federal Cap process will be reviewed to determine the application of 2% Federal Cap on student results that are projected to meet the passing standard based on the TPM.
22 2010 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 2010 for: School districts registered with the TEA Special Education Residential Facilities Tracking System (RF Tracker) for school year 2009-10. School districts included in the 2009-10 Directory for Services for the Deaf in Texas, Regional Day School Programs for the Deaf (RDSPD).
23 2010 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.
24 2010 Preview: AYP Federal Caps (cont.) 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. A review of the federal cap process will be provided through a Texas Education Telecommunications Network (TETN) session accessible by ESC and school district staff in spring 2010.
25 On Oct 28, 2008, final Title I regulations were issued to strengthen the NCLB Act. The regulations were subsequently reviewed by US Department of Education Secretary Arne Duncan. On April 1, 2009, the Secretary announced his intent to repeal the requirement that a State revise its Accountability Workbook with respect to its definition of adequate yearly progress (AYP) and submit those revisions for peer review. The Secretary supports the provisions in the October 2008 Title I regulations regarding graduation rate. No other information has been provided by the USDE at this time. AYP Preview: Final Title I Regulations
26 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 Report the Four-year Adjusted Cohort Graduation Rate by 2011 AYP; Use for AYP decisions in 2012 AYP. 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.
27 AYP Preview: Final Title I Regulations (cont.) Regulations directly related to AYP: A Uniform, Comparable Graduation Rate 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, i.e. annual targets. Use for AYP decisions in 2010 AYP.
28 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.
29 AYP Preview: 2010 Texas AYP Workbook As required by federal regulation, Texas will develop a graduation rate goal and requirements for continuous improvement, i.e. annual targets, for the 2010 AYP Workbook. Texas does not plan to request any further changes to the AYP calculation. The Federal Cap process will be reviewed to determine the application of 2% Federal Cap on student results that are projected to meet the passing standard based on the TPM. Any additional changes related to the Federal Cap process will be detailed in the 2010 AYP Guide.
30 AYP Preview: 2010 Texas AYP Workbook (cont.) The federal accountability advisory group, Title I Committee of Practitioners (COP), will review recommended changes to the 2010 AYP Workbook and Federal Cap process for 2010. See the current Texas AYP Workbook of June 12, 2009 at http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/ayp/txworkbook09.pdfhttp://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/ayp/txworkbook09.pdf
31 TEA Security Environment (TEASE) Accountability Website Each superintendent and charter school executive director may apply for access or may designate others in their district (including ESC Region staff) to also have 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: http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/webappaccess/AppRef.htm http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/webappaccess/AppRef.htm
32 SIP Resources SIP Delay Provision For more information about the School Improvement Program or the implementation of SIP delay provisions, please contact the School Improvement Unit in the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Program Coordination at (512) 463-9374. 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
33 TETN Resources Federal Cap Process A review of the federal cap process was provided through a district accessible Texas Education Telecommunications Network (TETN) session on May 21, 2009 from 1pm-4pm (Event # 34920).
34 AYP Resources For more information on AYP, see the 2009 AYP Guide, accessible at http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/ayp.http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/ayp The current Texas AYP Workbook of June 12, 2009 is accessible at http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/ayp/txworkbook09.pdf. http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/ayp/txworkbook09.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 firstname.lastname@example.org, or phone at (512) 463-9704. email@example.com
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.