April 26, 2005 - The Texas Education Agency
Download
Report
Transcript April 26, 2005 - The Texas Education Agency
Federal Accountability/
AYP Update
Special Education TETN
January 6, 2010
Shannon Housson and Ester Regalado
TEA, Performance Reporting Division
AYP Topics
Preview of 2010
Use of TPM in AYP
Review of the Federal Cap
Title I Final Regulations/Graduation Rate
2
2010 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 2010.
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.
3
2010 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
4
2010 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 2009-2010 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.
5
2010 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.
6
2010 Preview: Assessments
2010 Reading/ELA Assessments
Participation
Performance ( Accountability Subset)
95% Standard
73% Standard
Total
Students
Number
Participating
Number
Tested
TAKS
Yes
If participant
If in the
Accountability
subset
If standard is met or if projected to meet
standard by TPM
TAKS
(Accommodated)
Yes
If participant
If in the
Accountability
subset
If standard is met or if projected to meet
standard by TPM
If in the
Accountability
subset
If standard is met or if projected to meet
standard by TPM
(subject to 2% cap)
If standard is met or if projected to meet
standard by growth
(subject to 1% cap)
TAKS-M /
LAT TAKS-M *
Yes
If participant
TAKS-Alt
Yes
If participant
If in the
Accountability
subset
TELPAS
Reading*
Yes
NonParticipant
N/A
Not Included
Met Standard or TPM
Not included
N/A
If in the
If standard is met or if projected to meet
LAT version of
Yes
If participant
Accountability
TAKS*
standard
by TPM
* Students
in their First Year in U. S. Schools are counted as participants, but excluded from the performance
calculation.
subset
7
2010 Preview: Assessments
(cont.)
2010 Mathematics Assessments
Participation
95% Standard
Total
Students
Number
Participating
Performance (Accountability Subset)
67% Standard
Number
Tested
If standard is met or if projected to meet
standard by TPM
Met Standard or TPM
TAKS
Yes
If participant
If in the
Accountability
subset
TAKS
(Accommodated)
Yes
If participant
If in the
Accountability
subset
If standard is met or if projected to meet
standard by TPM
TAKS-M /
LAT TAKS-M *
Yes
If participant
If in the
Accountability
subset
If standard is met or if projected to meet
standard by TPM
(subject to 2% cap)
TAKS-Alt
Yes
If 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*
Yes
If participant
If in the
Accountability
subset
If standard is met or if projected to meet
standard by TPM
* Students in their First Year in U. S. Schools are counted as participants, but excluded from the performance calculation.
8
2010 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 2009-10.
School districts included in the 2009-10 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.
9
2010 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.
10
2010 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.
11
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
2010.
The proposed amendments include:
The state’s definition of graduation rate,
A description of the state’s reporting plans,
The state’s goal and targets, and
Possible use of the Extended-Year Graduation Rate.
12
2010 Preview: Texas AYP Workbook
(cont.)
Proposed Amendments:
Graduation Rates: Regulations require a four-year
graduation rate for the AYP 2010 calculations; an extendedyear (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
13
2010 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, NonRegulatory Guidance, December 22, 2008.
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
14
2010 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%
15
2010 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.
16
2010 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%.
17
2010 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.
18
2010 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.
19
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.
20
AYP Resources
For more information on AYP, see the 2009 AYP Guide,
accessible at http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/ayp.
U.S. Department of Education information is available at
www.ed.gov/nclb/.
The current Texas AYP Workbook of June 12, 2009 is
accessible at
http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/ayp/txworkbook09.pdf.
Frequently Asked Questions about AYP are available at
http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/ayp/faq/faq.html.
21
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
http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/ayp/index_multi.html.
Contact the Division of Performance Reporting by email at
[email protected], or phone at (512)
463-9704.
22