Transcript Overview of 2015 Accountability

Overview of
2015 Accountability
S U MMER 2 0 1 5
MI CKI WES L EY, DI R EC TOR OF ACCOUN TABI LITY & COMP LI ANCE
CI N DY T E I CHMAN, COOR DI N ATOR OF I N STR U CTI ONAL S U P PORT
Today’s Agenda
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Accountability Ratings
Index Targets
Common Elements
• Targets
• Performance Levels
• Accountability Subsets
• Retests
• Student Groups Evaluated
• Inclusion of ELLs
• School Type
• Accountability Reports
• Summary Reports
Accountability Framework
 Index 1
 Index 2
 Index 3
 Index 4
Distinction Designations
System Safeguards
Statutory Compliance
Resources
Questions
Today’s Objectives
Explore in detail the Performance Index Framework
Examine district and campus accountability reports to process and
understand how ratings were determined
Understand how Campus and District Distinction Designations were
determined
Analyze district and campus System Safeguard measures
Return to your school able to explain your ratings to staff, parents,
and media
2015 Accountability Rating Labels
Accountability Ratings
(Campuses and Districts)
Met Standard
Met Alternative Standard
(assigned to charter operators and alternative education
campuses (ACEs) evaluated under alternative education
accountability (AEA) provisions)
Improvement Required
Accountability Framework
Index 1
Student
Achievement
Index 2
Student
Progress
Index 3
Closing
Performance Gaps
Index 4
Postsecondary
Readiness
OR
Closing
Gaps
AND
Index 4
Student
Achievement
Student
Progress
Index 3
Index 2
Index 1
Rating Labels
NEW FOR 2015:
Ratings are based on meeting Index 1 OR Index 2 and
Index 3 and Index 4
Postsecondary
Achievement
Common Elements
Slides 8-22 address elements common to all 4 indexes of the
Accountability Framework
Index Targets for Non-AEA Districts & Campuses
8
Non-AEA Campuses
Performance Index
Index 1: Student Achievement
Index 2: Student Progress*
Index 3: Closing Performance
Gaps
Non-AEA Districts
2014
2015
2014
2015
55
60
55
60
16
TBD
28
28
HS/K-12:
n/a
HS/K-12: TBD
MS:
28
MS:
TBD
EL:
33
EL:
TBD
HS/K-12:
31
HS/K-12: 31
MS:
27
MS:
27
EL:
28
EL:
28
*Targets for non-AEA campuses are set about the fifth percentile of non-AEA 2015 campus performance by campus type.
Targets for non-AEA districts corresponds to about the fifth percentile of non-AEA 2015 campus performance across all
campus types.
Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting
Index Targets for Non-AEA Districts & Campuses
9
Non-AEA Campuses
Performance Index
2014
Non-AEA Districts
2015
2014
All Components
HS/K-12:
Index 4: Postsecondary
Readiness
57 HS/K-12:
All Components
57
MS:
n/a MS:
n/a
EL:
n/a EL:
n/a
57
STAAR Only
HS/K-12:
2015
57
STAAR Only
HS/K-12:
21
21
MS:
13 MS:
13
EL:
12 EL:
12
Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting
13
13
Index Targets for AEA Charter Districts & Campuses
10
Performance Index
AEA Charter Districts and Campuses
2014
2015
Index 1: Student Achievement
30
35
Index 2: Student Progress*
n/a
TBD
Index 3: Closing Performance
Gaps
11
11
Both Components
Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness
33
33
Graduation/Dropout Rate Only
45
45
*Targets for both AEA campuses and charter districts correspond to approximately the fifth percentile of AEA campus
performance in 2015.
Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting
Performance Levels on STAAR
Level I:
Level II:
Level III:
Unsatisfactory
Satisfactory
Advance
Academic
Academic
Academic
Performance
Performance
Performance
Phase-in for Level II: Satisfactory Performance
Level II:
PERFORMANCE
Satisfactory
Academic
Performance
2021-22
2015-16 thru
2017-18
2014-15
1st Phase-in
Level II
2nd Phase-in
Level II
2018-19 thru
2020-21
3rd Phase-in
Level II
Final Level II
Performance
Accountability Subset
STAAR 3-8 Accountability Cycle
STAAR Grades 3-8 results included
• Grades 3-8 spring administrations- first two administrations
IF student enrolled on this date:
• October 24, 2014 (Fall 2014 snapshot) AND on testing date
EOC Accountability Cycle
EOC Subset Example: Do they Count
Student
Test Administration
Enrollment Date
Joe
Spring 2015
November 2, 2014
Sue
Fall 2014
August 30, 2014
Sam
Summer 2014
January 8, 2014
Mike
Summer 2014
September 10, 2013
STAAR Grades 5 & 8 Retests
• Grades 5 & 8
– Best result from first 2 test administrations (Reading ONLY 2015)
– IF student is in Accountability Subset
Other Questions for 2015 Accountability
Question
A student takes STAAR for the first administration and does not pass. The student
then takes STAAR A for the second administration based on an ARD committee
recommendation.
Answer
The best result in each subject is selected and applied to district and campus
performance. The best result is based on the highest performance level
or progress measure. If the best result cannot be determined, then the most
recent assessment is used.
Therefore, in 2015, if a student takes STAAR A in the second administration, the
STAAR A results will be excluded for 2015 state accountability whether pass or
fail. Conversely, if a student takes STAAR A in the first administration and STAAR
on the second administration, the STAAR test results will be evaluated for state
accountability whether pass or fail.
16
Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting
It is common practice for ARD committees to require special education students to attempt the
STAAR EOC Test at least two times prior to exempting them from the requirement to pass the
EOC for graduation purposes.
We strongly recommend this be considered very carefully. The accountability subset for EOC’s
begins the prior summer.
Example: Student takes first EOC attempt in Spring 2015 and fails, ARD committees often
requires summer retest. Caution, this student will now go into the next year’s (2016)
accountability subset. Do you really want this to be the requirement?
BEST PRACTICE: Look at each student individually. Make the best decision for the student.
Student Groups
Postsecondary Component
Check this
slide
New
Key Issues for 2015 Accountability
Issue
Inclusion of English language learners (ELLs) with parental denials who
are in their second, third, or fourth years in U.S. schools.
Final Decision
ELLs with parental denials for services will be included in the
performance indexes as shown below.
Years in
U.S. Schools
Index 1
Index 2
Index 3
Index 4
First Year
Not Included
Not Included
Not Included
Not Included
2-4 Years
STAAR Phase-in 1
Level II
STAAR Progress
Measure
STAAR Phase-in 1
Level II and Level III
Not Included
5th Year & Beyond
STAAR Phase-in 1
Level II
STAAR Progress
Measure
STAAR Phase-in 1
Level II and Level III
STAAR Final
Level II
20
Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting
Inclusion of ELLs
School Types
Page 18 in 2015
Accountability Manual
Accountability Framework
STAAR 3-8 Reading, Writing, Science, SS, All EOCs
(2015 Excludes Math 3-8, STAAR A, STAAR Alt.)
60 Points
New for
2015
Index 1: Student Achievement
27
2014 and 2015 Comparison




2014
Combined across All Subjects: Reading, Mathematics, Writing,
Science, and Social Studies
Student Groups: All Students
Performance Standards: Phase-in 1 Level II (Satisfactory)
or achieved the equivalency standard on EOC substitute
assessments
STAAR EOC Assessments (5 total):








English l (combined tests); English ll (combined tests)
beginning in spring 2014
Algebra l
Biology
US History
English Language Learners (English and Spanish tests):



Students in US schools Year 1 excluded
Students in US schools Year 2 and beyond included based
on ELL Progress Measure for those tested in English
2015
Combined across All Subjects: reading, mathematics
(Algebra I only), writing, science, and social studies
Student Groups: All Students
Performance Standards: Phase-in 1 Level II (Satisfactory)
or achieved the equivalency standard on EOC substitute
assessments
STAAR EOC Assessments (5 total):
English l
English ll
Algebra l
Biology
U.S. History






STAAR A and STAAR Alt 2 results are excluded

English Language Learners (English and Spanish tests):



Students in US schools Year 1 excluded
Students in US schools Year 2 and beyond included
based on ELL Progress Measure for those tested in
English
STAAR Phase-in 1 Level II for ELLs with parental denials
Shaded items are new for 2015
Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting
Target:
60
ELLs with
Parental Denials
will be included
this year
Sample of ELL Plan
Index 1: Student Achievement
Index 2: Student Progress
Measure
Tests Included
Performance
Standard
% of tests that Met Progress and Exceeded Progress
• 1 pt for % Met + 2 pts for % Exceeded
Calculated for Math and ELA
• STAAR 3-8 Reading , 7th Writing, Alg. I EOC, Eng. II EOC
Met or Exceeded Progress Measure
All Students – 0 MSR
Student Groups
7 Race/ Ethnicity (25 tests)
SpEd and ELL – (25 tests)
Target
Above the 5th Percentile
Index 2: Student Progress
36
2014 and 2015 Comparison
STAAR Progress Measures by Subject Area and School Type
2014*
Elementary School
READING
Gr. 4 Reading
Gr. 5 Reading
Middle School
Gr. 6 Reading
Gr. 7 Reading
Gr. 8 Reading
MATHEMATICS
Gr. 4 Mathematics
Gr. 5 Mathematics
2015*
High School
_____________
_
_
_
Gr. 6 Mathematics
Gr. 7 Mathematics
Gr. 8 Mathematics
Algebra l
_
Algebra l
WRITING
-
-
* STAAR Modified and STAAR Alternate progress measures
included in Index 2.
Elementary School
READING
Gr. 4 Reading
Gr. 5 Reading
Middle School
Gr. 6 Reading
Gr. 7 Reading
Gr. 8 Reading
MATHEMATICS
-
Algebra I
WRITING
-
Gr. 7 Writing
High School
Eng. I to Eng. II
Algebra l
-_____
* STAAR A progress measures excluded from Index 2.
STAAR Alt 2 progress measures will not be reported in 2015.
Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting
Index 2: Student Progress
37
New for 2015, the calculation of Index 2 will change from a weighted score that
measures student improvement in each subject to an aggregate weighted score across
subjects. The weighted performance rate combines STAAR and ELL Progress Measures
in reading, writing, and mathematics (Algebra I only for 2014-15).
The percent met or exceeded progress and percent exceeded progress will be
calculated from the combined results.
Scores will continue to be weighted based on students’ level of performance:
o One point for each percent of assessment results that meet or exceed progress,
o One additional point for each percent of results that exceed progress
Also, the ELL student group will be expanded to include both current ELLs and
monitored ELLs in their first and second years of academic monitoring after
exiting ELL status.
Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting
Index 2: Student Progress
•ELL Progress Measure based on:
•Number of years in U.S. schools
•TELPAS *composite proficiency level
•Whether of not student has extenuating
circumstances
Find Handout * “Calculating the ELL
Progress Measure”
Index 2: Student Progress
How is growth defined?
Index 2: Student Progress
Index 2: Student Progress
Index 2: Student Progress
44
2015 Construction – Table 1
STAAR Weighted
Progress Rate
Example Calculation for
Reading/Math/Writing
Number of Tests
Performance Results:
Met or Exceeded
Progress
Number
Percent
Exceeded Progress
Number
Percent
Reading/Math/Writing
Weighted Progress Rate
All
African Amer.
Students Amer. Indian
Pacific
Two or
Asian Hispanic Islande White More
r
Races
ELL
100
50
40
30
80
80%
40
80%
40
100%
20
67%
20
20%
20
40%
30
75%
5
17%
100
120
175
84
Results for grades 3-8 mathematics, STAAR A, and STAAR Alternate 2 are excluded.
Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting
Special Total
Ed.
Points
479
Max.
Points
800
Index 2: Student Progress
Calculation:
685 / 931 = 74%
Calculation:
186 / 931= 20%
74% + 20%=94%
Index 2: Student Progress
46
2015 Construction – Table 2
STAAR Weighted
Progress Rate
Reading/Math/Writing
Weighted Progress
All
Students
100
Africa
Amer.
n
Indian
Amer.
120
Pacific
Two or
Asian Hispanic Islande White More
r
Races
175
ELL
Special Total Max.
Ed.
Points Points
84
479
800
479
800
Total
Index 2 Score (total points divided by maximum points)
Results for grades 3-8 mathematics, STAAR A, and STAAR Alternate 2 are excluded.
Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting
60
5th Grade Reading Progress Example
Student
2014 Score
Grade 4 Rdg
2015 Score
Grade 5 Rdg
Difference
1. Met Growth
2. Exceeded
0. No
Student A
1502
1533
+31
No (0)
Student B
1442
1486
+44
Yes (1)
Student C
1440
1632
+192
Yes (2)
Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps
Measure
Tests Included
Performance
Standard
Student Groups
Target
% of tests at Phase-In 1, Level II and % at Level III
All subject areas (excluding Math 3-8, STAAR A, STAAR Alt.) All EOCs
1 pt for % at Phase-in 1, Level II + 2 pts for % at Level III
ECD + 2 lowest performing Race / Ethnicity groups > 25 tests
Elementary 28
District 28
Middle School 27
AEA 11
High School / K-12 31
Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps
50
50
Closing Performance Gaps emphasizes advanced academic achievement of economically
disadvantaged students and the two lowest performing racial/ethnic student groups.
2014




Points based on STAAR performance:


Phase-in Satisfactory performance:
One point for each percent of tests at the Phase-in
Satisfactory performance standard.
 Level III Advanced performance:
Two points for each percent of tests at the Level III
advanced performance standard.
By Subject Area:
Reading, Mathematics, Writing, Science, and Social
Studies.
Student Groups:

Phase-in Satisfactory performance:
One point for each percent of tests at the Phase-in
Satisfactory performance standard.






Economically Disadvantaged
Lowest Performing Racial/Ethnic Student Groups:
The two lowest performing racial/ethnic student
groups on the campus or within the district, based on
2013 assessment results.
Select the two lowest performing student groups if both
the prior year reading and mathematics subject area test
results each have at least 25 tests.
2015 *
Points based on STAAR performance:


Level III Advanced performance:
Two points for each percent of tests at the Level III
advanced performance standard
By Subject Area: reading, mathematics (Algebra I only),
writing, science, and social studies
STAAR A and STAAR Alt 2 results are excluded
Student Groups:


Economically Disadvantaged
Lowest Performing Racial/Ethnic Student Group:
The two lowest performing racial/ethnic student
groups on the campus or within the district, based on
2014 assessment results.
Select the two lowest performing student groups if both
the prior year reading and mathematics subject area test
results each have at least 25 tests.
STAAR Phase-in Level II and Level III for ELLs with parental
denials
Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting
(based on 2014 assessment results by racial/ethnic group)
52
2014 Index 1: Student Achievement Data Table
All
Students
African
American
Hispanic
44%
10%
2%
52%
8%
3%
49%
10%
2%
77%
19%
0%
1,342
289
54
3,035
188
30
10
359
1,265
250
50
2,597
20
5
0
26
56%
13%
2%
57%
0%
5%
56%
12%
2%
55%
9%
0%
551
124
21
984
47
0
4
82
490
107
17
878
6
1
0
11
54%
11%
3%
44%
0%
0%
55%
10%
3%
90%
40%
0%
534
105
26
988
36
0
0
82
483
92
26
882
9
4
0
10
White
2014 STAAR Performance
All Subjects
Percent of Tests
% at Phase-in 1 Level II or above
% at Final Level II or above
% at Level III Advanced
Number of Tests
# at Phase-in 1 Level II or above
# at Final Level II or above
# at Level III Advanced
Total Tests
Reading
Percent of Tests
% at Phase-in 1 Level II or above
% at Final Level II or above
% at Level III Advanced
Number of Tests
# at Phase-in or above
# at Final Level II or above
# at Level III Advanced
Total Tests
Mathematics
Percent of Tests
% at Phase-in 1 Level II or above
% at Final Level II or above
% at Level III Advanced
Number of Tests
# at Phase-in 1 Level II or above
# at Final Level II or above
# at Level III Advanced
Total Tests
Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting
Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps
Index 3: 2015 Construction - Student Groups
Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps
Taken from 2014 Index 1
Must have
25 tests in
BOTH
reading and
math
Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps
Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness
Non AEA
• 1. STAAR Postsecondary Readiness (Final Level II)
Measure
• 2. Graduation Rate – 4 yr (2014) OR 5 yr (2013) whichever is higher
• 3. RHSP / DAP Rate (Cohort class of 2014)
• 4. Additional Postsecondary Indicators
All 4 Components: Target = 57
TARGET
• Each Component = 25% of Index 4
• STAAR Component only: (STAAR FINAL LEVEL II is 100% of Index 4 score)
• Elementary = 12
• MS = 13
• HS = 21
• District = 13
Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness
57
2014 and 2015 Comparison

2014
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.
RHSP/DAP Graduates Based on Longitudinal Cohort: All
Students and racial/ethnic student groups.
STAAR Score: STAAR Percent Met Final Level ll on two or
more tests for All Students and racial/ethnic student
groups.
College-Ready Graduates indicator based on meeting TSI
criteria on TAKS, SAT, or ACT in both ELA and math.
Additional Indicators Required by House Bill 5 (83rd Texas
Legislature, 2013)



Texas Success Initiative college readiness benchmarks.
Number of students who earn postsecondary credit
required for a foundation high school program, an
associate’s degree, or an industry certification.
2015
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.
RHSP/DAP Graduates Based on Longitudinal Cohort: All
Students and racial/ethnic student groups.
STAAR Score: STAAR Percent Met Final Level ll on two or
more tests for All Students and racial/ethnic student
groups.
New expanded Postsecondary Indicator includes:



College-Ready Graduates indicator based on meeting
TSI criteria on TAKS, SAT, or ACT in both ELA and math;
Advanced/dual enrollment course completion; and
CTE coherent sequence.
Shaded items are new for 2015
Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting
Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness
58
2015 Postsecondary Readiness Indicator
The 2015 Postsecondary Indicator is expanded to include credit for College-Ready
Graduates and additional postsecondary readiness activities.
This indicator is defined as the percent of annual graduates that meet any one of the
following three criteria.
1) meet TSI criteria in both reading/ELA and mathematics on TAKS, SAT, or ACT
or
2) completed and received credit for at least two advanced/dual enrollment courses
or
3) enrolled and reported in a coherent sequence of CTE courses
Number of annual graduates reported for school year 2013–14
Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting
Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness
59
Index 4: AEA Campuses and Charter Districts
2014
 4-, 5-, and 6-year Graduation,
Continuing Students, and General
Education Development (GED)
Score;
2015 Same as 2014
 4-, 5-, and 6-year Graduation,
Continuing Students, and GED
Score;
Contrib.
to Points
75%
If Graduation and GED Rates are
unavailable, use Grade 9-12 Annual
Dropout Rate: Points given for lower
than 20.0
 STAAR Percent Met Final Level ll on
two or more tests
 AEA Registration includes Dropout
Recovery Schools
If Graduation and GED Rates are
unavailable, use Grade 9-12
Annual Dropout Rate: Points
given for rates lower than 20.0
 STAAR Percent Met Final Level ll
25%
on two or more tests
 AEA Registration includes Dropout Recovery
Schools
Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting
Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness
60
Index 4: AEA Campuses and Charter Districts Bonus Points
2014
Bonus Points (maximum of 30):
 RHSP/DAP Rate: All Students.
 Excluded Students Count: All

Students.
College-ready Graduates.
2015
Bonus Points (maximum of 30):
 RHSP/DAP Rate: All Students
 Excluded Students Count: All

Students
Postsecondary component College and Career Readiness
Shaded item is new for 2015
Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting
Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness
Non AEA
Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness
Non AEA
1.
The STAAR Postsecondary Readiness Standard (Final Level II) is determined by the
percentage of students who meet postsecondary readiness standards on two or more
subject area tests. Students tested in only one subject area are required to meet the
postsecondary readiness standard on that test for credit in Index 4.
Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness
Non AEA
2013-2014
Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness
Non AEA
2. The Graduation Rate Score reflects the rate of the 4 year cohort OR 5 year cohort, whichever
is highest. A class consists of all members of a cohort, minus students who leave the Texas public
school system for reasons other than graduation, earning a General Educational Development
(GED) certificate, or dropping out. All students and all students grouped by race/ethnicity, ELL,
and special education. If a graduation rate is not available, then the annual dropout rate is used.
Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness
Non AEA
3. The Graduation Plan Score is calculated from the 2014 class of students graduating under the
Recommended High School Program or Distinguished Achievement Program (RHSP/DAP). If no
longitudinal rate is available, the graduation plan score is based on an annual rate of students
graduating under the Recommended High School Program or Distinguished Achievement
Program (RHSP/DAP).
Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness
Non AEA
4. The Postsecondary Component: College and Career Readiness Indicator Score
◦ 1) met or exceeded the Texas Success Initiative (TSI) criteria in both English language arts (ELA) and
mathematics on the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) exit-level test, SAT, or ACT
◦ OR
◦ 2) completed and earned credit on at least two advanced/dual credit enrollment course
◦ OR
◦ 3) enrolled in a CTE-Coherent Sequence of courses (including the Tech Prep program).
Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness
Non AEA
Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness
Non AEA
Overall Index 4 Score Calculation:
Distinction Designations
Distinction designations are awarded in recognition
of outstanding achievement in academic areas in
addition to those evaluated under state
accountability. Campus distinctions are based on
indicators of student performance in comparison to
40 similar campuses (Texas Education Code
[TEC] §§39.201–203).
Distinction Designations
71
Districts and Campuses Postsecondary Readiness
Distinction designation criteria for campuses:
 Elementary and middle schools must show performance in the top 25
percent of similar schools in their campus comparison group.

High schools and K-12 campuses must have at least 33 percent of the
indicators in the top quartile.
Same as 2014, rigorous criteria are applied to school districts in order to attain
a Postsecondary Readiness Distinction Designation:

Districts must have at least 70 percent of its campus-level indicators in
the top quartile.
Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting
Distinction Designations
Distinction Designations
For 2015, distinction designations are awarded in the following areas:
1)
Academic Achievement in English Language Arts/Reading (campus only)
2)
Academic Achievement in Mathematics (campus only)
3)
Academic Achievement in Science (campus only)
4)
Academic Achievement in Social Studies (campus only)
5)
Top 25 Percent: Student Progress (campus only)
6)
Top 25 Percent: Closing Performance Gaps (campus only)
7)
Postsecondary Readiness (district and campus)
Distinction Designations
ELA Reading
Distinction Designations
ELA / Reading, cont.
High School
MS / JH
Elem.
K - 12
Distinction Designations
Mathematics
Distinction Designations
Mathematics
Other Information:
Exclusion of Grade 3–8 Mathematics
Algebra I by Grade 8 Participation. Beginning in 2015, the Algebra I by Grade 8 Participation
indicator limits the denominator to 8th grade students based on 2014 PEIMS fall enrollment,
using Algebra I tests taken in either the current or any prior school year as reported on the
Consolidated Accountability File (CAF), cumulative history section.
Advanced/Dual Enrollment Course Completion: Mathematics. Beginning in 2015, the
Advanced/Dual Enrollment Course Completion rate for mathematics for students enrolled in
grades 11 and 12 has been added to the list of available indicators for the AADD in Mathematics.
Assessments. A complete list of AP and IB assessments used in determining this distinction is
available in Appendix K – Data Sources.
Distinction Designations
Science
Distinction Designations
Social Studies
Distinction Designations
Top 25%: Student Progress
Top 25 Percent: Student Progress
A distinction designation is awarded to a campus for outstanding student progress if it is ranked
in the top 25 percent (Q1) of campuses in its campus comparison group for Index 2.
Who is eligible: Campuses that are evaluated for Index 2 and received a Met Standard rating.
Methodology: Campuses are assigned a numeric value for Index 2. Those values are arranged in
descending order for the campuses in the campus comparison group. If the Index 2 value for a
campus is within the top quartile for its comparison group, it receives a distinction for student
progress.
Distinction Designations
Top 25%: Closing Performance Gaps
Top 25 Percent: Closing Performance Gaps
A distinction designation is awarded to a campus for outstanding performance in closing student
achievement gaps if it is ranked in the top 25 percent (Q1) of campuses in its campus
comparison group for Index 3.
Who is eligible: Campuses that are evaluated for Index 3 and receive a Met Standard rating.
Methodology: Campuses are assigned a numeric value for Index 3. Those values are arranged in
descending order for the campuses in the campus comparison group. If the Index 3 value for a
campus is within the top quartile for its comparison group, it receives a distinction for Closing
Performance Gaps.
Distinction Designations
Postsecondary Readiness
Postsecondary Readiness
A distinction designation is awarded to districts and campuses for outstanding academic performance in
attainment of postsecondary readiness. Elementary and middle schools must show performance in the top 25
percent of similar schools in their campus comparison group. High schools and K–12 campuses must have at least
33 percent of the indicators in the top quartile. Districts must have at least 70 percent of its campus-level
indicators in the top quartile.
Who is eligible: Districts and campuses that receive a Met Standard rating, except for districts or charters
comprised of only one campus that share the same 2015 performance data as the campus. For these singlecampus districts and charters, the campus is eligible to earn the campus postsecondary readiness distinction
designation; however, the district or charter is not eligible to earn the district postsecondary readiness distinction
designation.
Student Groups: Indicators 1–9 use the All Students group only. Values used for indicators 1– 3 are determined
through the calculations for Index 4.
Minimum Size: Indicators 4–9 must have a minimum size of 10 in the denominator. Values used for indicators 1–3
are determined through the calculations for Index 4. See those descriptions for information on minimum size.
Distinction Designations
Postsecondary Readiness Indicators
Two System Safeguards
State
Federal
Two separate system safeguard reports are provided to school districts for the 2015
accountability results:
1. State system safeguards aligned with 2015 state accountability Index 1 results
2.
Federal system safeguards aligned with 2015 federal assessment and
accountability requirements
State system Safeguards:
As announced by the commissioner of education, the 2015 state accountability ratings and
distinction designations exclude the results of STAAR A and STAAR Alternate 2 for all subjects
and grade levels and all STAAR assessments in mathematics, grades 3–8. The state system
safeguard performance and participation measures are based on the 2015 state accountability
Index 1 results and, therefore, also exclude these assessments.
 The system safeguard reports for state accountability are planned for release by August 7,
2015.
Federal System Safeguards
 Assessment results that are used to meet federal accountability requirements must be based
on performance and participation data that include the results of STAAR A and STAAR Alternate
2 for all subjects and grade levels and all STAAR assessments in mathematics, grades 3–8.
•The student performance standards for grades 3–8 mathematics that will be set by the
commissioner of education in summer 2015 will be applied to the federal accountability
performance rate calculations. For this reason, separate system safeguard reports aligned with
2015 federal assessment and accountability requirements are planned for release in late fall
2015.
•The next time you will receive a federal rating will be 2016.
State System Safeguards
87
State Safeguard Measures and Targets



Reporting for state 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.
2015 targets for the disaggregated system safeguard results:



STAAR performance target corresponds to Index 1 (60%);
STAAR participation target required by federal accountability (95%);
Federal graduation rate targets and improvement calculations for 4-year rate
(83%) and 5-year rate (88%).
Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting
State System Safeguards
88
2015 State Accountability System Safeguard Measures and Targets
Indicator
All African Amer.
Pacific
Asian Hispanic
White
Students Amer. Indian
Islander
Performance – State Targets *
Reading
60%
Mathematics(Alg. I only) 60%
Writing
60%
Science
60%
Social Studies
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
Two or
Curr &
Eco.
Special
More
Mon
Disadv.
Ed.
Races
ELL
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
60%
Federal System Safeguard TARGET: 83 (Reading and Math
ONLY)
Participation Rates
Reading
95%
95%
95%
95%
Mathematics (Alg. I Only) 95%
95%
95%
95%
Federal Graduation Rates (including improvement targets)
4-year
83%
83%
83%
83%
5-year
88%
88%
88%
88%
District Limits on Use of Alternative Assessment Results
Reading: STAAR Alt 2
Not Applicable
Math:
STAAR Alt 2
Not Applicable
95%
95%
95%
95%
95%
95%
95%
95%
95%
95%
95%
95%
95%
95%
83%
88%
83%
88%
83%
88%
83%
88%
83%
88%
83%
88%
83%
88%
Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting
* 2015 State Performance Targets will
correspond to the performance target for
2015 Index 1: Student Achievement.
State System Safeguards
90




Results will be reported for any group that meets accountability
minimum size criteria.
Failure to meet the state 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:
http://tea.texas.gov/pmi/
Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting
Locally-Determined Accountability Ratings
94
Community and Student Engagement




Districts must evaluate community and student engagement for the district and
each of its campuses for the 2014-15 school year.
Districts are required to post the community and student engagement ratings and
compliance statuses for the district and each campus on the school district’s
website by August 8, 2015.
Districts must assign a performance rating of Exemplary, Recognized, Acceptable,
or Unacceptable based on locally-determined criteria. The performance ratings
must be based on criteria developed by a local committee. The agency is not
permitted to determine criteria that can be used for these evaluations.
Districts must submit their locally-determined ratings for the 2014-15 school year
in the summer 2015 PEIMS Submission 3 for the district and each campus in the
district. TEA will report these ratings publicly by October 1, 2015.
Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting
Improvement Required
95
Improvement Required
96
Improvement Required
97
Future Accountability Ratings
98
House Bill 2804 Requirements for A – F Accountability Ratings
Date
Activity
September 1, 2016
Texas Commission on Next Generation Assessments and
Accountability prepares and delivers report to governor
and legislature that recommends statutory changes to
improve systems of student assessment and public
school accountability.
December 1, 2016
TEA must adopt a set of indicators to measure and
evaluate school districts and campuses with A–F ratings.
January 1, 2017
TEA must provide a report that shows the rating that
each district and campus would have received for the
2015-16 school year for each for the first four domains if
the A–F ratings had been in place that year.
August 15, 2018
Districts and campuses are assigned A–F ratings
beginning with the 2017-18 school year.
Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting
Resources
101





2015 Accountability Development
http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/2015/index.html
Accountability Rating System
http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/
Performance Reporting Home Page
http://tea.texas.gov/perfreport
Performance Reporting Email
[email protected]
Performance Reporting Main Desk
(512) 463-9704
Thank you!
Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting
Micki Wesley
Director of Accountability & Compliance
940-322-6928 ext.8268 office
940-631-0602 cell
Cindy Teichman
Coordinator Instructional Support
940-322-6928 ext. 8293 office
[email protected]