OVERVIEW OF THE 2019 STATE ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
August 8, 2013 Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting Shannon Housson, Director Overview of.
Advertisements

Accountabil ity System Student Achievement Index I Student Progress Index 2 Closing Performanc e Gaps Index 3 Postsecondary Readiness Index 4 Overview.
Data Analysis State Accountability. Data Analysis (What) Needs Assessment (Why ) Improvement Plan (How) Implement and Monitor.
State Accountability Overview 2014 Strozeski – best guess.
APAC Meeting | January 22, 2014 Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting Overview of Performance.
Accountability Update Ty Duncan Coordinator of Accountability and Compliance, ESC
2013 ACCOUNTABILITY OVERVIEW Linda Jolly Region 18 ESC.
PSP Summer Institute| July 29 – August 2, 2013 Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting Shannon.
2014 Accountability Commissioner’s Decisions – April 4, 2014.
HISD Becoming #GreatAllOver Accountability Development What do we know? What do we want to know? March 4, 2014.
2013 State Accountability System Allen ISD. State Accountability under TAKS program:  Four Ratings: Exemplary, Recognized, Academically Acceptable, Academically.
State Accountability Overview 1 Performance Index Framework: For 2013 and beyond, an accountability framework of four Performance Indexes includes a broad.
2014 Accountability System 2014 Accountability System Jana Schreiner Senior Consultant Accountability State Assessment
2015 Goals and Targets for State Accountability Date: 10/01/2014 Presenter: Carla Stevens Assistant Superintendent, Research and Accountability.
Index Accountability 2014 Created by Accountability and Compliance staff of Region 17 Education Service Center.
Kelly Baehren Waller ISD Administrative Workshop July 28, 2015.
2013 Accountability Ratings for NISD September 9, 2013.
Instructional Leaders Advisory Tuesday, April 8, 2014 Region 4 ESC Accountability Update Richard Blair Sr. Education Specialist Federal/State Accountability.
STATE ACCOUNTABILITY OVERVIEW Back To School| August 19-22, 2013 Dean Munn Education Specialist Region 15 ESC.
Timmerman Public Hearing September 16, :00-7:00.
TASSP Spring 2014 Tori Mitchell, ESC 17 Specialist Ty Duncan, ESC 17 Coordinator Overview of 2014 Accountability
2013 Accountability System Design Assessment & Accountability, Plano ISD.
1 Accountability System Overview of the PROPOSED Accountability Rating System for Texas Public Schools and Districts.
What are the STAAR Performance Standards? Copyright 2013 by Region 7 Education Service Center. All rights reserved.
March 7, 2013 Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting Accountability Policy Advisory Committee.
Assigns one of three ratings:  Met Standard – indicates campus/district met the targets in all required indexes. All campuses must meet Index 1 or 2.
Texas Assessment Conference| February 16, 2016 Shannon Housson, Director, Division of Performance Reporting Department of Assessment and Accountability.
HISD Becoming #GreatAllOver 1 Accountability Rating System Commissioner’s Final Rules 2014.
MARCH 2, 2016 ACCOUNTABILITY WEBINAR Kim Gilson, Doni CashRegion 10 ESC 1.
2016 Accountability Texas Education Agency | Department of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting February 25, 2016.
TETN Videoconference #36664| April 21, 2016 Texas Education Agency | Assessment and Accountability Performance Reporting Overview of 2016 Accountability.
Index 4/5 ESC Region Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness emphasizes the role of elementary and middle schools in preparing.
The Implementation of House Bill 22
The Implementation of House Bill 22
HB 2804: A-F Accountability
Accountability 2016 Shauna Lane, Educational Specialist
Accountability Overview 2016
State Academic Accountability: A View to the Future
House Bill 22 Overview ESC PEIMS Coordinator Summer Training | August 1, 2017 Texas Education Agency | Academics | Performance Reporting.
The Implementation of House Bill 22
Texas Academic Performance Report TAPR)
A-F Rating and State Accountability System
Introduction to the A-F Accountability System
TETN Videoconference #386|April 5, 2018
Guidance and Counseling
Comprehending the new accountability system for district success.
Accountability Update
Advancing ELL Progress
A-F Accountability Andress High School August 6, 2018.
A-F Accountability and Data Driven Decision Making
Specifications Used for School Identification Under ESSA in
Campus Comparison Groups and Distinction Designations
Introduction to the A-F Accountability System
Texas State Accountability
Reflection and Data Mining
A-F Accountability and Special Education
[insert district logo above]
State and Federal Accountability Overview
Every Student Succeeds Act Update
CTE and Accountability: July 2018
WAO Elementary School and the New Accountability System
Tom Bean High School Targeted Improvement Plan Summary
Accountability Update
ELL Leadership Academy
Spencer County Public Schools
Texas Education Agency Standards and Engagement Performance Reporting
Texas Education Agency Standards and Engagement Performance Reporting
2019 Accountability Updates
Impact of EL Students and TELPAS Performance on State Accountability
Presentation transcript:

OVERVIEW OF THE 2019 STATE ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM All Students Part A: STAAR Combined over all subject areas evaluated (reading, mathematics, writing, science, and social studies) Credit awarded for Approaches Grade Level or Above, Meets Grade Level or Above, and Masters Grade Level on: STAAR* (with and without accommodations) in grades 3–8 (including Spanish versions where applicable); EOC assessments (with and without accommodations); and STAAR Alternate 2 at Level II Satisfactory and Level III Accomplished standards. Part B: College, Career, and Military Readiness Percentage of annual graduates that accomplish any one of the following: Meet TSI criteria in ELA/reading and mathematics on assessments or college prep courses Meet AP/IB criteria Earn dual-course credits Enlist in the U.S. Armed Forces Earn an approved industry-based certification Earn an associate’s degree while in high school Graduate with completed IEP and workforce readiness Complete CTE coherent sequence coursework and earn credit aligned with approved industry-based certifications (one-half point credit) On Ramps (NEW) Credit for SPED graduates graduating under RHSP, DAP, FHSP-E, or FHSP-DLA plans (NEW) Credit for graduates earning Level I or Level II certificates (NEW) Part C: Graduation Rate Four-year, five-year, or six-year graduation rate (or annual dropout rate if no graduation rate) Domain Score For elementary and middle schools, the Student Achievement domain score is based solely on the STAAR component. For districts and high schools, the three components are weighted 40%-40%-20%, respectively. STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT All Students Part A: Academic Growth Credit awarded for students who improve performance year over year as measured by STAAR progress measures and performance levels on STAAR* reading and mathematics. Part B: Relative Performance Credit awarded based on performance relative to similar districts or campuses. Domain Score The School Progress domain score is the better of Part A: Academic Growth or Part B: Relative Performance. There are no indicator or methodology adjustments specific to Part A: Academic Growth or Part B: Relative Performance for 2019. All Students & Disaggregated Student Groups Student performance disaggregated by the following: All students Race/ethnicity Economically disadvantaged status Current special education Former special education Current and monitored English learners Continuously enrolled Non-continuously enrolled Components Part A: Academic Achievement Meets Grade Level or Above in reading & mathematics Part B: Growth/Graduation School Progress Domain: Part A (ES and MS) Four Year Federal Graduation Rate (HS) Part C: English Language Proficiency Will evaluate two years of TELPAS data. Composite scores will be compared. (NEW) Part D: School Quality or Student Success STAAR component of Student Achievement Domain (ES and MS) College, Career, and Military Readiness (HS) Domain Score Credit awarded based on weighted performance of student groups against annual targets set by subject area. The Closing the Gaps domain score is based on the four components weighted by district or campus type. SCHOOL PROGRESS CLOSING THE GAPS Relative Performance Academic Growth Better of either Student Achievement or School Progress = 70% of overall rating 30% of overall rating Better of either Student Achievement or School Progress = 70% of overall rating 30% of overall rating *STAAR results from EL students in their first year in U.S. schools are excluded from accountability calculations. STAAR Alternate 2 results are included without regard to number of years in U.S. schools. English Learners (ELs) in their second year in U.S. schools will be included in the STAAR performance components of the 2019 accountability system using the EL performance measure (NEW). Those in their second year in U.S. schools who have a parental denial for EL services will not receive an EL performance measure (NEW). ELs will continue to be evaluated for growth using the STAAR progress measure. Accountability Rating Labels: Districts and Campuses will receive A-F ratings for overall performance, as well as a rating for performance in each domain (NEW). The cut points for letter grades are unchanged. April 2019 Dept. of Performance and Planning

Identification of Schools for Improvement Qualifying Criteria Exit Criteria CSI Comprehensive Support and Improvement Lowest 5%, Graduation <67% Starting in 2021: Consistently Underperforming (3-yrs at TSI Level for SAME 3 indicators) Do not rank at the bottom 5% and/or >67% graduation for two years Increase one letter grade in the Closing the Gaps Domain Extensive Monitoring & Documentation TSI Targeted Support and Improvement Consistently Underperforming Student Group (3 consecutive years in the SAME 3 indicators) TEA has not shared the exit criteria TEA has not shared the expectations ATS Additional Targeted Support Meet the targets for Academic Achievement component in both reading and math in the triggering student group. Meet at least 50% of the indicators for that student group. Student Group Falling below the 5% cutoff Must address in CIIP NO GAPS! STUDENT & SCHOOL SUCCESS Closing the Gaps Dept. of Performance and Planning April 2019 RED: Proposed Commissioner Changes for 2019