1. Accountability 2016 Shauna Lane, Educational Specialist
February 26, 2014
Accountability 2016
Shauna Lane, Educational Specialist
@instructionalle on Twitter

2. Show what you know…

3. Performance Index Framework
Student Achievement
Index I OR
For 2013 and beyond, an accountability framework of four performance indices includes a broad set of measures that provide a comprehensive evaluation of the campus or district.
Accountability System
Postsecondary Readiness
Index 4
Student Progress
Index 2
AND
Closing Performance Gaps
Index 3
Texas Education Agency | Assessment and Accountability | Performance Reporting

4. Non-AEA Index Targets

5. AEA Targets

6. Index
Index 1
Index 4
Index 3

7. Index 2 is Growth! Lead4ward cheat sheets to accountability system
Resources, Quicklooks and Performance Standards

8. Key Topics for 2016 Accountability
Issue
Changes affecting all four performance indices
Final Decision
The phase-in passing standards have been replaced with a standard progression approach, which will begin in 2015–16 and continue until 2021–22, the year final Level II standards are scheduled to be in place.
The 2016 accountability system will include the performance results for grades 3–8 mathematics, including progress measure results for grades 3–8 where applicable. The student performance standard for grades 3–8 mathematics will be the 2015–16 standard.
Texas Education Agency | Assessment and Accountability | Performance Reporting

9. Key Topics for 2016 Accountability
Issue
The inclusion of the STAAR Accommodated and STAAR Alternate 2 results
Final Decision
The inclusion of STAAR A and STAAR Alt 2 results encourages districts to administer the appropriate assessments to students with disabilities regardless of the impact on state accountability ratings.
Texas Education Agency | Assessment and Accountability | Performance Reporting

10. Key Topics for 2016 Accountability
Issue
Inclusion of ELLs in Index 1
Final Decision
Years in U.S. Schools
STAAR and STAAR A Testers
STAAR-L Testers
STAAR Alternate 2 Testers
ELLs receiving Bilingual Education or ESL Instructional Services
ELL Parental Denials or ELL progress measure plan exceeders
First year of enrollment in U.S. schools
Not Included
STAAR Level II Standard
Second through fourth year of enrollment in U.S. schools
Spanish
STAAR 2016 Level II Standard
English
ELL Progress Measure
Fifth year or more of enrollment in U.S. schools
Texas Education Agency | Assessment and Accountability | Performance Reporting

11. Key Topics for 2016 Accountability
Issue
Inclusion of ELLs in Index 2
Final Decision
Years in U.S. Schools
STAAR and STAAR A Testers
STAAR-L Testers
STAAR Alternate 2 Testers
ELLs receiving Bilingual Education or ESL Instructional Services
ELL Parental Denials or ELL progress measure plan exceeders
First year of enrollment in U.S. schools
Not Included
Student Progress Measure
Second through fourth year of enrollment in U.S. schools
Fifth year or more of enrollment in U.S. schools
* Index 2 includes the appropriate student progress measure for which the ELL student was eligible, either the STAAR progress measure, ELL progress measure, or Spanish to English transition proxy calculation, where applicable.
Texas Education Agency | Assessment and Accountability | Performance Reporting

12. Key Topics for 2016 Accountability
Issue
Inclusion of ELLs in Index 3
Final Decision
Years in U.S. Schools
STAAR and STAAR A Testers
STAAR-L Testers
STAAR Alternate 2 Testers
ELLs receiving Bilingual Education or ESL Instructional Services
ELL Parental Denials or ELL progress measure plan exceeders
First year of enrollment in U.S. schools
Not Included
STAAR Level II Standard and Level III
Second through fourth year of enrollment in U.S. schools
Spanish
STAAR 2016 Level II standard and Level III
English
ELL Progress Measure and STAAR 2016 Level II Standard
STAAR 2016 Level II Standard and Level III
Fifth year or more of enrollment in U.S. schools
Texas Education Agency | Assessment and Accountability | Performance Reporting

13. Key Topics for 2016 Accountability
Issue
Inclusion of ELLs in Index 4
Final Decision
Years in U.S. Schools
STAAR and STAAR A Testers
STAAR-L Testers
STAAR Alternate 2 Testers
ELLs receiving Bilingual Education or ESL Instructional Services
ELL Parental Denials or ELL progress measure plan exceeders
First year of enrollment in U.S. schools
Not Included
Second through fourth year of enrollment in U.S. schools
Spanish
STAAR Final Level II
(Spanish test versions on any subject)
English
(Not tested on any Spanish versions)
Fifth year or more of enrollment in U.S. schools
Texas Education Agency | Assessment and Accountability | Performance Reporting

14. Key Topics for 2016 Accountability
Issue
Graduation Plan Component and Foundation High School Plan Transition
Final Decision
For 2016 accountability, two diploma-plan rates will be calculated as shown below; the one that gives the district or campus the most points for the graduation plan component of Index 4 will be used.
Calculation that Excludes FHSP Students:
(RHSP + DAP)
_____________________________
(MHSP + RHSP + DAP)
Calculation that Includes FHSP Students:
(RHSP + DAP) + (FHSP-E + FHSP-DLA)
(MHSP + RHSP + DAP) + (FHSP + FHSP-E + FHSP-DLA)
Notes: FHSP: Foundation High School Program (FHSP) without endorsement FHSP-E: FHSP with endorsement and no Distinguished Level of Achievement FHSP-DLA: FHSP with endorsement and Distinguished Level of Achievement
Texas Education Agency | Assessment and Accountability | Performance Reporting

15. Key Topics for 2016 Accountability
Issue
TSI portion of postsecondary component
Final Decision
It will include the results of the Texas Success Initiative (TSI) assessment in the postsecondary component and give credit for every student who
Meets the TSI requirement in reading on the TSI assessment, SAT, or ACT
and
Meets the TSI requirement in mathematics on the TSI assessment, SAT, or ACT
A student must meet the TSI requirement for both reading and mathematics but does not necessarily need to meet them on the same assessment.
Meeting the TSI requirement in writing on the TSI assessment or ACT will not be used for accountability in 2016 but will be reported.
Texas Education Agency | Assessment and Accountability | Performance Reporting

16. Key Topics for 2016 Accountability
Issue
TSI portion of postsecondary component continued
Final Decision
With the inclusion of the TSI results, the postsecondary component evaluated in 2016 accountability for the 2014–15 graduates is as shown below:
graduates who completed and earned credit for at least two advanced/dual-credit courses in the current or prior school year
graduates who were enrolled in a coherent sequence of CTE courses as part of a four-year plan of study to take two or more CTE courses for three or more credits
graduates meeting TSI
criteria in both ELA/reading
and mathematics (TSI, SAT, or ACT) or or
Number of annual graduates
Texas Education Agency | Assessment and Accountability | Performance Reporting

17. Index 1: Student Achievement
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 meet the Level II Satisfactory Standard.
Each percentage of students meeting the Level II Satisfactory Standard contributes one point to the index. Index scores range from 0 to 100 for all campuses and districts.
Example Calculation:
STAAR Performance
Reading
Math
Writing
Science
Social
Studies
Total
% Met
Phase-in Satisfactory Standard
Index Points
# Phase-in Satisfactory Standard
551 +
534 27
143 87 =
1,342
44% 44
Total Tests
984
988
353
354
356
3,035
Index 1: Score
Texas Education Agency | Assessment and Accountability | Performance Reporting

18. Index 2: Student Progress
Index 2: Construction
Example Calculation:   
Weighted Progress Rate: All Subjects
All
African Amer.
Hispanic
White
American Indian
Asian
Pacific Islander
Two or More Races
Special Ed
ELL
Total Points
Max.
Points
Number of Tests:
989 64
828 39 75
819
# Met or Exceeded Progress
732 51
621 28 49
614
# Exceeded Progress
198 16
124 4
164
Percent of Tests:
% Met or Exceeded Progress
74%
80%
75%
72%
65%
% Exceeded Progress
20%
25%
15%
10% 5%
All Subjects Weighted Progress Rate 94
105 90 82 70 95
536
1200
Total
Index 2: Score (total points divided by maximum points) 45
Texas Education Agency | Assessment and Accountability | Performance Reporting

19. Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps19
Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps emphasizes advanced academic achievement of economically disadvantaged students and the two lowest performing racial/ethnic student groups from the prior year.
Construction: One point is given for each percentage of tests meeting or exceeding the Level II Satisfactory Standard. One point is given for each percentage of tests meeting the Level III Advanced Standard on the STAAR assessment.
Example Index 3 calculation for reading weighted performance
STAAR Weighted Performance Rate
Economically Disadvantaged
Lowest Performing Racial/Ethnic Group - 1
Lowest Performing Racial/Ethnic Group - 2
Total Points
Maximum
Points
Number of Tests 80 40 25
# Level II Satisfactory Standard and above 20
# Advanced Standard
% Level II Satisfactory Standard and above
100%
50%
% Advanced Standard 0%
Reading Weighted Performance Rate
150 50
200
400
600
Texas Education Agency | Assessment and Accountability | Performance Reporting

20. Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps
Example Index 3 calculations for overall score
STAAR Weighted Performance Rate
Economically Disadvantaged
Lowest Performing Racial/Ethnic Group - 1
Lowest Performing Racial/Ethnic Group - 2
Total Points
Maximum
Points
Reading
150 50
200
400
600
Mathematics
125
100 90
315
Writing 80
295
Science
120 40
250
Social Studies
170
Total
1430
3000
Index 3: Score (total points divided by maximum points) 48
Texas Education Agency | Assessment and Accountability | Performance Reporting

21. Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness
Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness emphasizes the role of elementary and middle schools in preparing students for the rigors of high school and earning a high school diploma that provides the foundation necessary for success in college, the workforce, job training programs, or the military.
Construction: For non-AEA districts and campuses, Index 4 is based on four components with one exception: when data are missing for any of the three non-STAAR components, it is based solely on the STAAR component.
Index 4 Components
Weight
1. STAAR at Postsecondary Readiness Standard
25%
2. Graduation Rate (or Dropout Rate)
3. Graduation Diploma Plan
4. Postsecondary Component: College and Career Readiness
Texas Education Agency | Assessment and Accountability | Performance Reporting

22. Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness
Indicator
All Students
African Amer.
Amer. Indian
Asian
Hispanic
Pacific Islander
White
Two or More Races
ELL
Special Ed.
Total Points
Max. Points
STAAR Postsecondary Readiness Standard
% Meeting Postsecondary Readiness Standard
29%
16%
40%
23%
38%
36%
182
600
STAAR Postsecondary Readiness Standard: Score (total points divided by maximum points)
30.3
Graduation Rate
4-yr. Graduation Rate
84.3%
78.8%
91.6%
86.0%
44.2%
69.8%
533.5
700
5-yr. Graduation Rate
85.1%
80.0%
92.1%
84.0%
48.9%
77.5%
546.4
Highest Graduation Rate: Score
Graduation Rate: Score (best of total graduation points divided by maximum points)
78.1
Graduation Plan
Longitudinal RHSP/DAP Rate
72.7%
76.4%
83.6%
83.0%
315.7
400
Longitudinal RHSP/DAP/FHSP E/DLA
70.5%
75.4%%
81.5%
82.0%
309.4
RHSP/DAP: Score (total RHSP/DAP points divided by maximum points)
78.9
Postsecondary Component
College and Career Readiness
82.1%
71.1%
78.2%
89.9%
321.3
Postsecondary Component: Score (total points divided by maximum points)
80.3
Texas Education Agency | Assessment and Accountability | Performance Reporting

23. One Child

24. This form can be found on the
ESC-20 Accountability website
Index 1 & 3
2013, 2014, 2015 & 2016
Index , 2015 & 2016
Index , 2015 & 2016

26. Where is Final Level II for Index 4? Index 1 & 3 Index 3 Index 2
Reading Final Level II is 1674, so the student did not meet Final Level II for Index 4, however is VERY close!
Which Index?
Index 1: Student Achievement
Index 2: Student Progress
Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps
Index4: Postsecondary Readiness
The student did not pass Math so we will not look at Final Level II
Writing Final Level II is 4000, so the student did meet Final Level II for Index 4! However, the student needs to meet two subjects Final Level II for Index 4

27. 19 2016 Accountability One 4th grader takes math, reading and writing
All Students
Seven Race/Ethnicity^
Special Education
English Language Learners
Economically Disadvantaged Students
Index 1 Student Achievement (R/W/M/S/SS) X
Index 2 Student Progress (R/M) X~
Index 3 Closing Performance Gaps (R/W/M/S/SS) X*
Index 4
STAAR Final Level II on two or more assessments (R/W/M/S/SS)
Index 4 Graduation Rate
Index 4 Graduation Plan
Index 4 Postsecondary Readiness
~No minimum size requirement
^Seven Race/Ethnicity: White, Hispanic, African American, Asian, American Indian, Pacific Islander and Two or More Races
*Two lowest Race/ethnicity groups based on 2015 Federal System Safeguards 19
3 tests x 1 sub-group = 3
2 tests x 4 sub-groups = 8
3 tests x 2 sub-groups = 6
Final Level II on two or more tests 1 child X 2 sub-groups = 2
Lets look at one child that is a 4th grader – child on side and description on bottom appear
How many sub-groups does this one child fit into? 9 – 9 red circles appear
Now let’s look at each index:
Index 1 uses all five subjects, this child tests in 3 and in one sub-group so 3x1=3
Index 2 uses only two subjects, this child tests in both and is in 4 sib-groups so 2x4=8
Index 3 uses all five subjects, this child tests in 3 subjects and two sub-groups so 3x2=6
Index 4 requires final level ii on 2 subjects so it is per child and two sub-groups so 1x2=2
Overall = 19 sub-groups this one child is included in
One 4th grader takes math, reading and writing
Coded as white, qualifies for free lunch, receives special education services and receives ELL services.

28. System Safeguards Safeguard Measures and Targets
Reporting for system safeguards disaggregates performance by student group, performance level, and subject area.
Performance rates are calculated from the assessment results used to calculate Index 1: Student Achievement.
2016 targets for the disaggregated system-safeguard results:
STAAR performance target corresponds to Index 1;
STAAR participation target required by federal accountability (95%);
Federal graduation rate targets and improvement calculations for 4-year rate (88%) and 5-year rate (90%); and
Federal limit on use of the STAAR Alternate 2 assessments (1%).
Texas Education Agency | Assessment and Accountability | Performance Reporting

29. System Safeguards
Texas Education Agency | Assessment and Accountability | Performance Reporting

30. System Safeguards
Results will be reported for any group that meets accountability minimum size criteria.
Failure to meet the safeguard target for any reported group must be addressed in the campus or district improvement plan.
Performance on the safeguard measures will be incorporated into the Texas Accountability Intervention System (TAIS).
See Accountability Monitoring website for further information:   
Texas Education Agency | Assessment and Accountability | Performance Reporting

31. Campus Comparison Group Tool

33. Moving to an A-F World

36. Conceptual Example of A-F
Cut Points
Weights1­­ A B C D F
Example 1*
Example 2**
15%
Domain I 68 56 37 32 58 89
100
25%
Domain II 60 50 40 30 20 55
Domain III 35 25 33 79
35%
Domain IV 80 70
10%
Domain V
District assigns letter grade
A–F Scores2 69 59
 Weighted average=
Overall 90
<60
88.6
90.3
1. Weights for Domains I through III can be any combination that sums to 55.
Overall Rating: B
Overall Rating: A
2. In this example, A–F Scores are assigned the highest numerical score possible to quantify the domain letter grades.
* No letter grade bump applied.
** Letter grade for Domain I resolved to an A as a result of a Q1 bump.

37. Fusing Accountability and TTESS

38. Moving the Curve
Very rare practitioners
98%
TINA

39. Moving the Curve No TINA; just growth! Everybody grows! Very rare
practitioners
Very rare
practitioners
No TINA; just growth!
Everybody grows!

40. Linking TTESS to CSFs!
This is the four domains with correlated dimensions.

41. Drivers of the Old and New System
Growth – Progress before performance! This applies to everyone in the system!
Level III Performance crucial to success in the system! Keep them at Level III for Index 2 and ensure those economically disadvantaged students are Level III for Index 3.
Post-secondary readiness
Closing Achievement Gaps

43. 1) Strategy to Systems
Planning for student leadership; student data/standard awareness; teaching learning
Instruction determined by students and their needs; instillation of concern
Learning environment that hinges on student competency; creating culture (CONTAGIOUS)
Professional practices and responsibilities that contribute to vision and mission focus

44. 2) More Than Just A Passing!
Growth as a cultural value!
What data do you publish first?
What language do you use to ensure a growth mindset?
What do you celebrate?
What language in TTESS drives growth?

45. 3) Grit!
"If you're a leader & you want your organization (team) to be grittier, create a gritty culture.” – Angela Duckworth, Grit
There are some parts of TTESS and Index Accountability that are hard and require a grind!
Teachers need to see leaders grind!

46. What Can You Do to Maximize Results!

47. Resources
2016 Accountability Development
Accountability Rating System
Performance Reporting Home Page
Performance Reporting
Division of Performance Reporting Telephone (512)
Texas Education Agency | Assessment and Accountability | Performance Reporting