State Accountability System Update Charter School Conference December 7 – 8, 2007 Presented by Nancy Rinehart Texas Education Agency Division of Performance Reporting

2 Todays Discussion will cover… Accountability Calendars – 2007 and Alternative Education Accountability (AEA) and Charter Ratings Overview Preview of 2008 and Beyond AEA Procedures 2008 AEA Indicators Preview of 2008 Standard Accountability Procedures TEASE Accountability Accountability Resources

3 Recent and Upcoming Events August Ratings release on TEA public website Sept and Nov 2008 AEA Campus Registration October 22Final 2007 Ratings and GPA release on TEASE October 24Final 2007 Ratings and GPA release on TEA public website November AEIS release on TEASE November AEIS release on TEA public website December School Report Cards (SRCs) released Pocket Edition published (web and print)

Accountability Timeline January and Development of 2008 State Accountability February 2008 System March 3 - 4Educator Focus Group Meeting March 26Commissioners Accountability Advisory Committee Meeting Mid AprilFinal Decisions announced by Commissioner May/June2008 Accountability Manual posted online August 1Release of 2008 Accountability Ratings September2009 AEA Campus Registration

2007 AEA and Charter Ratings Overview

AEA Ratings Overview Accountability RatingAEC Of ChoiceResidential FacilityTotal AEA: Academically Acceptable AEA: Academically Unacceptable819 AEA: Not Rated – Other134 Total A total of 399 alternative education campuses (AECs) and 63 charter operators were evaluated under AEA procedures in The AEA ratings distributions follow.

AEA Ratings Overview (continued) 2007 AEA Ratings – AECs Charter Campuses Standard Campuses Total AEA Campuses AEA: Academically Acceptable AEA: Academically Unacceptable459 AEA: Not Rated – Other404 Total AEA Ratings – Charter OperatorsTotal AEA Enrollment AEA: Academically Acceptable6126,177 AEA: Academically Unacceptable2656 Total6326,833

Charter Operator Ratings Accountability Ratings for Charter OperatorsCountPercent Exemplary84.2% Recognized2714.1% Academically Acceptable % Standard Procedures5830.4% AEA Procedures6131.9% Academically Unacceptable3518.3% Standard Procedures3317.3% AEA Procedures21.0% Not Rated: Other21.0% AEA: Not Rated - Other00.0% Total %

Charter Campus Ratings Accountability Ratings for Charter CampusesCountPercent Exemplary154.5% Recognized3711.1% Academically Acceptable % Standard Procedures8024.1% AEA Procedures % Academically Unacceptable4413.3% Standard Procedures4012.0% AEA Procedures41.2% Not Rated: Other154.5% AEA: Not Rated - Other41.2% Total %

10 School Leaver Provision In 2007, a School Leaver Provision (SLP) was included in the state accountability system, such that the leaver indicators (either alone or in combination) did not cause a lowered campus or district rating. This provision was created primarily to accommodate the change in the definition of a dropout. For 2007 AEA ratings, if the Completion Rate II and/or Annual Dropout Rate indicator(s) were the only cause for an AEA: Academically Unacceptable rating, then the AEC or charter was assigned the AEA: Academically Acceptable label. For 2008 AEA ratings, the SLP will apply only to the Annual Dropout Rate indicator under AEA procedures.

11 School Leaver Provision (continued) As a result of the SLP, a total of 181 AECs achieved the AEA: Academically Acceptable rating in o 132 AECs used the SLP for Annual Dropout Rate o 7 AECs used the SLP for the Completion Rate II o 42 AECs used the SLP for both the Annual Dropout Rate and Completion Rate II indicators

12 School Leaver Provision (continued) A total of 32 charter operators used the SLP to achieve the AEA: Academically Acceptable rating in o 10 charters used the SLP for Annual Dropout Rate o 3 charters used the SLP for the Completion Rate II o 19 charters used the SLP for both the Annual Dropout Rate and Completion Rate II indicators

Preview of 2008 and Beyond AEA Procedures

14 Principles of AEA Procedures AEA procedures evaluate the performance of AECs including charters and charter campuses and are based on these principles: o AEA procedures apply to AECs, not programs. o AEA procedures apply to AECs and charters that are dedicated to serving students at risk of dropping out. o AEA procedures apply only to those AECs that qualify and register annually for evaluation under AEA procedures. o AEA procedures do not apply to standard campuses, even if the campus primarily serves at-risk students.

15 AEA Acknowledgments The 2008 accountability development process will consider Gold Performance Acknowledgments (GPA) for AEA campuses and charters. The performance results for registered AECs and charters will be evaluated against the 2008 standards for the existing GPA indicators. A GPA-type commendation that would recognize the efforts taken to recover dropouts including the identification and accountability for recovered dropouts will be examined.

16 Charters Evaluated under AEA Charter ratings are based on aggregate performance of the campuses operated by the charter. Performance results of all students in the charter are included in the charters performance and used in determining the charters rating. Charters rated under AEA procedures are evaluated on the same indicators as registered AECs.

17 Charters Evaluated under AEA (continued) Charters that operate only registered AECs are evaluated automatically under AEA procedures. Charters that operate both standard campuses and registered AECs have the option to be evaluated under AEA procedures if at least 50% of the charters students are enrolled at registered AECs. TEA contacts the charter to obtain its preference. If a preference cannot be obtained, then the charter is evaluated under standard accountability procedures. If fewer than 50% of the charters students are enrolled at registered AECs, then the charter is evaluated under standard accountability procedures.

18 AEA Campus Types Two types of campuses have the option to register for evaluation under AEA procedures: o AECs of Choice – at-risk students enroll at AECs of Choice to expedite progress toward performing at grade level and high school completion. o Residential Facilities – education services are provided to students in residential programs and facilities operated under contract with the TYC, students in detention centers and correctional facilities registered with the TJPC, and students in private residential treatment centers. AECs that choose not to register under AEA are evaluated under the standard accountability procedures.

19 AEA Registration Criteria Ten criteria are required for campuses to be registered for evaluation under AEA procedures. The requirements in criteria 6-10 may not apply to charter campuses (depending on the terms of the charter) or for community-based dropout recovery campuses established in accordance with TEC §29.081(e). The requirements in criterion 9 apply to Residential Facilities only if students are placed in the facility by the school district.

20 AEA Registration Criteria (continued) 1. The AEC must have its own campus number to which PEIMS data are reported and test answer documents are coded. 2. The AEC must be identified in AskTED as an alternative campus. 3. The AEC must be dedicated to serving students at risk of dropping out of school as defined in TEC §29.081(d). 4. The AEC must operate on its own budget.

21 AEA Registration Criteria (continued) 5. The AEC must offer nontraditional settings and methods of instructional delivery designed to meet the needs of the students served on the AEC. 6. The AEC must have an appropriately certified, full-time administrator whose primary duty is the administration of the AEC. 7. The AEC must have appropriately certified teachers assigned in all areas including special education, bilingual education, and/or ESL to serve students eligible for such services.

22 AEA Registration Criteria (continued) 8. The AEC must provide each student the opportunity to attend a 7-hour school day according to the needs of the student. 9. If the campus serves students with disabilities, the students must be placed at the AEC by their ARD committee. 10. Students with disabilities must receive all services outlined in their IEPs. LEP students must receive all services outlined by their LPAC. Students with disabilities and LEP students must be served by appropriately certified teachers.

Registered AECs The list of 2008 Registered AECs will be posted on the AEA website at in December. Each registered AEC must meet the 75% at-risk registration criterion in order to receive an AEA rating on August 1, 2008.

24 At-Risk Registration Criterion An AEA at-risk registration criterion was implemented in An at-risk registration criterion: o restricts use of AEA procedures to AECs that are dedicated to serving at-risk students, o recognizes that by definition students served at Residential Facilities are at-risk of dropping out of school, and o enhances at-risk data quality.

25 At-Risk Registration Criterion (continued) Each registered AEC must have a minimum percentage of at-risk students enrolled on the AEC verified through current year PEIMS fall enrollment data in order to be evaluated under AEA procedures. The at-risk criterion was 65% in 2006, 70% in 2007, and will be 75% in 2008 where it is expected to remain.

26 At-Risk Registration Criterion (continued) Two safeguards have been incorporated for those AECs that are below the at-risk requirement. 1. Prior-Year PEIMS At-Risk Data Safeguard: If a registered AEC does not meet the at-risk criterion in the current year, then it remains under AEA if the AEC meets the at-risk criterion in the prior year. For example, an AEC with an at-risk enrollment below 75% in 2008 and at least 75% in 2007 remains registered in 2008.

27 At-Risk Registration Criterion (continued) 2. New Campus Safeguard: If a new campus is registered for evaluation under AEA procedures, then the AEC is not required to meet the at-risk criterion in its first year of operation. This safeguard provides an accommodation for new campuses with no prior-year data.

28 At-Risk Registration Criterion (continued) In April 2008, letters will be mailed to the AECs that do not meet the 2008 at-risk registration criterion informing them that the AEC will shift from AEA to standard accountability and that the AEC will be evaluated under 2008 standard accountability procedures. The Final 2008 Registered AEC list will be posted on the AEA website in May This list will contain the AECs that will receive an AEA rating on August 1, A list of the charter operators that will be rated under 2008 AEA procedures will also be posted on the AEA website in May 2008.

29 At-Risk Registration Criterion (continued) A State Compensatory Education Questions and Answers (Q and A) document that addresses proper coding of at-risk students is on the TEA website at: 07_sce_presentation.pdf ESC Compensatory Education contacts can assist with at-risk questions.

AEA Registration Like in 2008, the 2009 AEA campus registration process will be conducted electronically using TEASE Accountability. Details will be included in the 2008 Accountability Manual. The 2009 AEA campus registration process will occur in September 2008.

31 Attribution of Data to Registered AECs For 2008 accountability: Campus accountability subset determines attribution of AEC test data. Only test results for students enrolled on the same campus on the PEIMS enrollment snapshot date (the last Friday in October) and on the testing data are included in the campus performance measure. Accountability subset does not apply to exit-level retests leaver data are attributed to the last campus of attendance.

32 Attribution of Data to Charter Operators For 2008 accountability: For the district accountability subset, only test results for students enrolled in the same charter on the PEIMS enrollment snapshot date (the last Friday in October) and on the testing data are included in the charter performance measure. Accountability subset does not apply to exit-level retests.

2008 AEA Indicators

34 AEA Indicators and Standards The AEA procedures use the following three base indicators. Performance on the TAKS. Completion Rate II (including GED recipients). Annual Dropout Rate for grades 7 through 12. The AEA indicator standards do not change for TAKS Progress indicator remains 45%. Completion Rate II indicator remains 75.0%. Annual Dropout Rate indicator remains 10.0%.

35 TAKS Progress Indicator The TAKS Progress indicator sums performance results across grades (3-12) and subjects to determine ratings under AEA procedures. This indicator is based on the number of tests taken, not on the number of students tested. In 2007, 24,105 test takers at registered AECs took a total of 57,605 TAKS tests.

36 TAKS Progress Indicator (continued) The TAKS Progress numerator is calculated as the number of tests meeting the student passing standard or having a Texas Growth Index (TGI) score that meets the student growth standard of 0 (zero) or higher and TAKS exit-level retests meeting the student passing standard at the February and April administrations or in the previous October or July. The denominator is the number of TAKS tests taken and the number of TAKS exit-level retests meeting the student passing standard at the February and April administrations or in the previous October or July.

37 TAKS Progress Indicator (continued) Grade 8 Science results will be included in state accountability ratings beginning in TAKS-Accommodated results will be included in state accountability ratings beginning in Slides 48 and 49 contain additional information on the use of TAKS- Accommodated results.

38 TAKS Progress Indicator (continued) Student groups evaluated and minimum size requirements: All Students performance is always evaluated. Students groups (African American, Hispanic, White, and Economically Disadvantaged) are evaluated if there are: o 30 – 49 tests for the student group and the student group represents at least 10% of All Students tests; or o at least 50 tests for the student group even if these tests represent less than 10% of All Students tests (30/10%/50).

39 Use of District At-Risk TAKS Data Applies to AECs only – performance results of all students in the charter are included in the charters performance and used in determining the charters rating. If the AEC does not meet the TAKS Progress standard or demonstrate Required Improvement based on results for fewer than 10 TAKS tests, or if there are no TAKS results for the AEC, then the AEC is evaluated on the district performance of at-risk students. In 2007, district at-risk TAKS data were used to evaluate 47 AECs.

40 Completion Rate II Indicator This longitudinal rate shows the percent of students who completed or who are continuing their education four years after first attending grade 9 in Texas. Completion Rate II counts graduates, continuing students (students who return to school for a fifth year), and GED recipients in the definition of Completion Rate II for AECs of Choice and charters evaluated under AEA procedures. Residential Facilities are not evaluated on the Completion Rate II indicator. Charters that operate only Residential Facilities are not evaluated on the Completion Rate II indicator.

41 Completion Rate II Indicator (continued) Student groups evaluated and minimum size requirements: All Students are evaluated if there are: o at least 5 dropouts; and o at least 10 students in the Completion Rate II class. Students groups (African American, Hispanic, White, and Economically Disadvantaged) are evaluated if there are: o at least 5 dropouts in the student group, and; o 30 – 49 students in the student group and they represent at least 10% of All Students in the class; or o at least 50 students in the student group even if they represent less than 10% of All Students in the class.

42 Use of District At-Risk Completion Rate II Data Applies to AECs of Choice only – performance results of all students in the charter are included in the charters performance and used in determining the charters rating. If the AEC of Choice does not meet the accountability standard or demonstrate Required Improvement, or if the AEC of Choice has students in grades 9, 10, 11, and/or 12 but does not have a Completion Rate II, then the AEC of Choice is evaluated on Completion Rate II (including GED recipients) of at-risk students in the district. In 2007, district at-risk Completion Rate II data were used to evaluate 181 AECs of Choice.

43 Annual Dropout Rate Indicator The Annual Dropout Rate indicator is grade 7-12 dropouts as a percent of total students enrolled at the registered AEC or charter in grades 7-12 in a single school year. The dropout definition transitioned from the state definition to the NCES definition in Students dropping out of school during the school year are reported in in accordance with the NCES dropout definition. The School Leaver Provision (SLP) will be utilized in 2008 and will apply only to the Annual Dropout Rate indicator under AEA procedures.

44 Annual Dropout Rate Indicator (continued) Student groups evaluated and minimum size requirements: All Students are evaluated if there are: o at least 5 dropouts; and o at least 10 students in grades Students groups (African American, Hispanic, White, and Economically Disadvantaged) are evaluated if there are: o at least 5 dropouts in the student group, and; o 30 – 49 students in the student group and they represent at least 10% of All Students in grades 7-12; or o at least 50 students in the student group even if they represent less than 10% of All Students in grades 7-12.

Preview of 2008 Standard Accountability Procedures

46 Preview of 2008 Standard Accountability TAKS Standards For 2008, the Academically Acceptable standards increase by 5 percentage points for some subjectsto 70% for Reading/ELA; to 50% for Mathematics; and to 45% for Science. The standard for Writing and Social Studies remains 65%.

47 Preview of 2008 Standard Accountability (continued) Commended Performance on TAKS A label of commended will be appended to campus and district ratings if the campus or district also earns a GPA for at least 50% of the commended indicators on which the campus or district is evaluated. A minimum of three of the five commended indicators must be evaluated; or if only two are evaluated, both must be acknowledged (2 out of 2). Only campuses and districts rated Academically Acceptable or higher are eligible to receive this additional label. Campuses and districts evaluated under AEA procedures are not eligible to receive this additional label.

48 Preview of 2008 Standard Accountability (continued) TAKS-Accommodated TAKS-Accommodated results will be used in the state accountability system for the first time in This follows the report, report, use mechanism for phasing in new assessment results into the accountability system. This phase-in schedule means that only a portion of the TAKS-Accommodated results will be used for accountability in All TAKS-Accommodated grades and subjects will be used beginning in 2010.

49 Preview of 2008 Standard Accountability (continued) Science (grades 5, 8, 10, & 11) Science (grade 5 Spanish) Social Studies (grades 8, 10, & 11) English Language Arts (grade 11) Mathematics (grade 11) Use Reading/ELA (grades 3 – 10) Reading (grades 3 – 6 Spanish) Mathematics (grades 3 – 10) Mathematics (grades 3 – 6 Spanish) Writing (grades 4 & 7) Writing (grade 4 Spanish) Report Only Use Use of TAKS-Accommodated in Accountability Ratings

50 Preview of 2008 Standard Accountability (continued) Incorporating TAKS Alternative (TAKS-Alt) TAKS-Alt results will be reported for two years beginning in First possible use in the accountability system will be Incorporating the 2% Assessment The 2% test results will be reported for two years beginning in First possible use in the accountability system will be 2010.

51 TEASE Accountability The TEASE Accountability secure website provides school districts and charters with performance-based monitoring analysis system (PBMAS) reports, and confidential unmasked data tables, summary tables, confidential student listings, data files, and other helpful state and federal accountability information. Each superintendent and charter school executive director should apply for access and may designate others in their district (and at the ESC) to also have access.

52 Accountability Resources ESC Accountability Contacts TEA Division of Performance Reporting Phone: (512) AEA website - Accountability Ratings System website Accountability Resources website - AYP website -