Accountability Update Ty Duncan Coordinator of Accountability and Compliance, ESC

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.
Accountability 2013 and Beyond! Tori Shauna Ty
Data Analysis State Accountability. Data Analysis (What) Needs Assessment (Why ) Improvement Plan (How) Implement and Monitor.
1 Accountability System Overview of the Accountability Rating System for Texas Public Schools and Districts.
Accountability preview Major Mindshift Out with the Old – In with the New TEPSA - May 2013 (Part 2) Ervin Knezek John Fessenden
Accountability Updates Testing & Evaluation Department May 21, 2014 Mission High School MISSION CISD DEIC MEETING.
Review of Performance Index Framework and Accountability Ratings RICHARDSON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT To serve and prepare all students for their global.
January 22, /25/ STAAR: A New Assessment Model STAAR is a clearly articulated assessment program. Assessments are vertically aligned within.
Texas State Accountability 2013 and Beyond Current T.E.A. Framework as of March 22, 2013 Austin Independent School District Bill Caritj, Chief Performance.
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.
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.
Burton Secondary EOC/STAAR Data INDEX 1 STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT STARR SATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE All Students=3-8 grades spring administration.
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.
Kim Gilson Senior Consultant Data and Accountability Region 10 ESC
Accountability Update Professional Service Provider Update and Network Meeting April 1,
Data Revolution: Instruction and Index 4 Region 4 ESC.
State Accountability Overview 1 Performance Index Framework: For 2013 and beyond, an accountability framework of four Performance Indexes includes a broad.
2013 Texas Accountability System. Features of the System No single indicator can lower a rating Focuses on overall campus/district performance rather.
Accountability to Responsibility in a STAAR World! TEPSA Summer Conference 2014 Ty Duncan, ESC 17 on Twitter.
2014 Accountability System 2014 Accountability System Jana Schreiner Senior Consultant Accountability State Assessment
STAAR State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness 3 rd Grade Parent Information Night.
The best and most sought-after school district where every student is future ready: ready for college, ready for the global workplace, ready for personal.
2015 Goals and Targets for State Accountability Date: 10/01/2014 Presenter: Carla Stevens Assistant Superintendent, Research and Accountability.
2014 Accountability System 2014 Accountability System Overview Kim Gilson Senior Consultant Data 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.
Timmerman Public Hearing February 4, :00-4:00.
1 Accountability System Overview of the PROPOSED Accountability Rating System for Texas Public Schools and Districts.
1 August 8, 2014 Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting Overview of 2014 Accountability.
2015 Texas Accountability System Overview and Updates August 13, 2015.
Accountability: Current Issues Friday, April Region 4 ESC Accountability Update Richard Blair Sr. Education Specialist Federal/State Accountability.
HISD Becoming #GreatAllOver 1 Accountability Rating System Commissioner’s Final Rules 2014.
1.Welcome (10 minutes) 2.Federal Focus School Update (20 minutes) 3.Upcoming Sessions (30 Minutes) 4.Break (15 minutes) 5.Accountability Update (75 minutes)
What are the STAAR Performance Standards? Copyright 2013 by Region 7 Education Service Center. All rights reserved.
Accountability to Responsibility in a STAAR World! Shauna Lane, ESC Specialist Ty Duncan, ESC 17 Coordinator
Accountability 2014!! Tori Mitchell, ESC 17 Shauna Lane, ESC 17 Ty.
Timmerman Public Hearing September 16, :00-4:00.
March 7, 2013 Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting Accountability Policy Advisory Committee.
2015 Texas Accountability System La Porte Independent School District August 5, 2015.
LOMA PARK ACCOUNTABILITY PARENT PRESENTATION September 24, 2015.
Welcome to Abbett Elementary! Curriculum Night 2015.
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 Academic Performance Report (TAPR) Lockhart Independent School District December
Accountability Update Ty
Kingsville ISD Annual Report Public Hearing.
June 5, 2014 Accountability Update. Accountability Updates 110% for At-Risk, Criterion #4 Accountability Manual Updates.
HISD Becoming #GreatAllOver 1 Accountability Rating System Commissioner’s Final Rules 2014.
July 11, 2013 Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting Michael Murphy State and Federal Accountability.
Index 4/5 ESC Region Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness emphasizes the role of elementary and middle schools in preparing.
Accountability 2016 Shauna Lane, Educational Specialist
Accountability Overview 2016
Texas Academic Performance Report TAPR)
Accountability Update
Texas State Accountability
2013 Texas Accountability System
A-F Accountability and Special Education
State and Federal Accountability Overview
Accountability Updates
OVERVIEW OF THE 2019 STATE ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM
Presentation transcript:

Accountability Update Ty Duncan Coordinator of Accountability and Compliance, ESC

Blog for Handouts!!

Performance Index Framework 3 For 2013 and beyond, a framework of four Performance Indexes will include a broad set of measures that provide a comprehensive evaluation of the entire campus or district. Student Achievement Index I Student Progress Index 2 Closing Performance Gaps Index 3 Postsecondary Readiness Index 4

4

5 Overview of Proposed Performance Index Framework (Old Version)

Overview of Proposed Performance Index Framework (As of Feb. 28 th, 2013)

7 Index 1: Student Achievement Sample Campus STAAR Performance Results STAAR Performance Results% Met Level II or III STAAR Reading50% STAAR Mathematics38% STAAR Writing45% STAAR Science25% STAAR Social Studies83%

Index 1: Student Achievement 8 STAAR Percent Met Level II Standard (2013 and Beyond)  STAAR Grades 3-8 English and Spanish at final Level II performance standard for assessments administered in the spring;  EOC at final Level II performance standard for assessments administered in the spring and the previous fall and summer;  STAAR Grades 3-8 and EOC Modified and Alternate at final Level II performance standard;  TAKS 2013: Grade 11 results at Met Standard performance 2014 and beyond: None

9 STAAR Percent Met Level II Standard (2013 and Beyond)  Combined over all subject areas: Reading, Mathematics, Writing, Science, and Social Studies  Student groups: All Students only  Students below Grade 9 taking EOC courses: Administrative rules for the assessment program will require that students be administered the EOC test rather than the STAAR grade level assessment for the subject. Index 1: Student Achievement

10 Index 1: Student Achievement Example Reading Mathematic s WritingScience Social Studies Total % Met Level II Students Met Level II =136 45%45 Students Tested =305 Index Score45 Index 1 Construction Since Index 1 has only one indicator, the Total Index Points and Index Score are the same: Index Score = Total Index Points. Total Index Points is the percentage of assessments that met the final Level II Standard. Each percent of students meeting the final Level II performance standard contributes one point to the index. Index scores range from 0 to 100 for all campuses and districts.

Index 2: Student Progress 11 STAAR Percent Met Growth Standard (2014 and Beyond)  The STAAR growth measure will not available in time for use in the 2013 accountability ratings. Since the growth measure must be finalized based on the spring 2013 STAAR results, it is not possible to set the 2013 accountability targets for Index 2 prior to the release date of the 2013 ratings.  This graphic is an example of a transition table that divides the three STAAR performance levels (Level I, Level II, and Level III) into performance bands. The number of bands within a performance level may differ for the final growth measure adopted.

12

13

14 Index 2 Construction  Ten Student Groups Evaluated: 1. All Students 2. English language learners (ELLs) 3. Students with Disabilities Race/Ethnicity: 4. African American 5. American Indian 6. Asian 7. Hispanic 8. Pacific Islander 9. White 10. Two or More Races Index 2: Student Progress

15 Index 2: Student Progress

17  Two approaches to evaluating progress toward closing performance gaps:  Compare the performance of the lower performing student group to the performance of a higher performing student group over time, or  Compare the performance of the lower performing student group to an external target, the performance target that is tied to the statutory and accountability goal that Texas will be among the top ten states in postsecondary readiness by 2020 with no significant achievement gaps by race, ethnicity, or socioeconomic status.  Index 3 takes the second approach through a weighted performance index. Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps STAAR Weighted Performance (2013 and beyond)

18  Index 3 ensures that individual student groups are not ignored within the performance index framework.  Credit based on weighted performance:  Level II satisfactory performance (2013 and beyond) One point for each percent of students at the final Level II satisfactory performance standard.  Level II Final Performance(2014 and beyond) Two points for each percent of students at the final Level III advanced performance standard. Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps STAAR Weighted Performance (2013 and beyond)

Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps 19 Index 3 Construction  Assessment results include all assessments that are included in the Index 1 student achievement indicator.  By Subject Area: Reading, Mathematics, Writing, Science, and Social Studies.  Student Groups  Socioeconomic: Economically Disadvantaged  Lowest Performing Race/Ethnicity: The two lowest performing race/ ethnicity student groups on the campus or district (based on prior-year assessment results).  The STAAR weighted performance rate calculation must be modified for 2013 because STAAR Level III advanced performance cannot be included in the indicator until 2014.

20 Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps 20 Index 3 Construction

Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps

Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness 22

Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness 23

24 Graduation Rates  High School Graduation  Four-year Graduation Rate or Five-year Graduation Rate (or Annual Dropout Rate if no graduation rate)  Ten Student Groups Evaluated: 1. All Students 2. English language learners (ELLs) 3. Students with Disabilities Race/Ethnicity: 4. African American 5. American Indian 6. Asian 7. Hispanic 8. Pacific Islander 9. White 10. Two or More Races Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness

25 Recommended High School Program/Advanced High School Program  RHSP/AHSP indicators are calculated for campuses and districts for which a graduation rate is calculated.  Eight Student Groups Evaluated: 1. All Students Race/Ethnicity: 2. African American 3. American Indian 4. Asian 5. Hispanic 6. Pacific Islander 7. White 8. Two or More Races Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness

26 Index 4 Construction  Graduation Score: Combined performance across the graduation and dropout rates for  Grade 9-12 Four-Year Graduation Rate for All Students and all student groups OR  Grade 9-12 Five-Year Graduation Rate for All Students and all student groups, whichever contributes the higher number of points to the index. One of the two rates is used, not a mix of Four-Year Graduation Rate for one student group and Five-Year Graduation Rate for another student group.  RHSP/AHSP Graduates for All Students and race/ethnicity student groups  STAAR Score: STAAR Percent Met Level III for All Students and race/ethnicity student groups (2014 and beyond)  For high schools that do not have a graduation rate, the annual dropout rate and STAAR Level III performance contribute points to the index. For elementary and middle schools, only STAAR Level III performance contributes points to the index. Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness

27 Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness Index 4 Construction

28 Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness Index 4 Construction

Overview of Proposed Performance Index Framework (As of Feb. 28 th, 2013)

Rating Labels?

Implications A focus on every kid and perhaps a renewed emphasis on SLR. Growth mindset at the secondary level? A renewed emphasis on serving the brightest and high achieving students. Not easy for stakeholders to understand

Bibliography Lead4ward -- TEA Accountability 013/index.html