Federal Accountability/ AYP Update Special Education TETN January 6, 2010 Shannon Housson and Ester Regalado TEA, Performance Reporting Division

2 AYP Topics Preview of 2010 Use of TPM in AYP Review of the Federal Cap Title I Final Regulations/Graduation Rate

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 Annual review of the 2% Federal Cap on TAKS-M: Application of the cap for TAKS-M TPM values projected to meet the passing standard.

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

Preview: Use of TPM in AYP (cont.) Phase-in for the TAKS–M projection equations (TPM) TPM projections are expected to be reported for TAKS–M tests in school year for grades 4, 7, and 10. If a student is tested on TAKS-M in one predictor subject (reading or mathematics) and tested in TAKS, TAKS (Accommodated), or LAT TAKS in the other subject, the student will not receive a TPM projection.

Preview: Use of TPM in AYP (cont.) Phase-in for the TAKS–M projection equations (TPM) The Federal Cap process will include student results that are projected to meet the passing standard based on the TPM. Priority will be given to students meeting the passing standard (will likely be included in the 2% federal cap first), followed by students projected to meet the passing standard by TPM.

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) 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 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 projected 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

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) 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 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 projected 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

Preview: AYP Federal Caps 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 School districts included in the Directory for Services for the Deaf in Texas, Regional Day School Programs for the Deaf (RDSPD). The Federal Cap process will include student results that are projected to meet the passing standard based on growth in TAKS-Alt.

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.) 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.

Preview: Texas AYP Workbook Final Title I regulations were implemented to provide a Uniform, Comparable Graduation Rate. On November 19, 2009, the Title I Committee of Practitioners (COP) reviewed the recommended changes to the 2010 AYP Workbook and Federal Cap process for The proposed amendments include: The states definition of graduation rate, A description of the states reporting plans, The states goal and targets, and Possible use of the Extended-Year Graduation Rate.

Preview: Texas AYP Workbook (cont.) Proposed Amendments: Graduation Rates: Regulations require a four-year graduation rate for the AYP 2010 calculations; an extended- year (5 or 6 year) rate is optional. Decision to be made Texas will use a 4-year rate alone, or Texas will use 4-year and 5-year graduation rates

Preview: Texas AYP Workbook (cont.) Proposed Amendments: Graduation Rate calculation for AYP: Examples for use of 4-year and 5-year rates can be found in US Department of Education, NCLB High School Graduation Rate, Non- Regulatory Guidance, December 22, Decision to be made Districts and campuses must meet either: annual target for the 4-year rate, or annual target for the 5-year rate

Preview: Texas AYP Workbook (cont.) Proposed Amendments: State Goal: a State must set a single graduation rate goal that represents the rate the State expects all high schools in the State to meet. Decision to be made Graduation rate goal of either: 80% / 85% / 90% / 95% / 100%

Preview: Texas AYP Workbook (cont.) Proposed Amendments: Annual Graduation Rate Targets: a State must set annual graduation rate targets. Decision to be made Calculation for the 4-year rate could include three alternatives: Absolute standard of 70.0% or 75.0%, or Improvement standard, similar to safe harbor calculation (10% decline in the difference between the prior year rate and the goal), or 1.0 percentage point increase in rate.

Preview: Texas AYP Workbook (cont.) Proposed Amendments: Annual Graduation Rate Targets: Federal regulations specify if an extended-year rate is used, the target must be higher than the target for the 4-year rate. Decision to be made Calculation for the 5-year rate could require meeting: An absolute standard of 75.0% or 80%.

Preview: Texas AYP Workbook (cont.) Proposed Amendments: Targets for 2011 and beyond: Decision to be made Propose that absolute standards for 2011 and beyond not be included in this proposal, although the improvement standard would apply to 2011 and beyond. Plan for the submission of proposed amendments to the 2011 Texas AYP Workbook that could include a transition plan for new End of Course assessments with annual graduation rate targets submitted as part of the transition plan.

Preview: Texas AYP Workbook (cont.) Proposed Amendments: Student group definition changes: Federal regulations allow states to develop business rules for the definition of student groups used for AYP. Decision to be made Apply the current definition of LEP student group, defined as students in the LEP program during their final (4th) year in the longitudinal cohort.

20 AYP Preview: Final Title I Regulations Regulations also require: 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.

21 AYP Resources For more information on AYP, see the 2009 AYP Guide, accessible at U.S. Department of Education information is available at The current Texas AYP Workbook of June 12, 2009 is accessible at Frequently Asked Questions about AYP are available at

22 SIP 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 Contact the Division of Performance Reporting by at or phone at (512)