Transcript It’s All GrEEk to Me.. Accountability for Beginners

It’s All GrEEk to Me…
Accountability for
Beginners
Kim Gilson
Sr Consultant
Data and Accountability
[email protected]
972-348-1480
Disclaimer
• All information in this presentation is
subject to change as a result of State
Legislation, ATAC/APAC recommendations,
Commissioner Final Decisions, Federal
Legislation, Alien Invasion or Natural
Disasters, and might be voided following
any TEA session this week.
• This training does not take the place of
reading the manuals. 
How Did We Get Here?
Then…
• Separate State and Federal Accountability
Systems
– “Recognized” by State
– “Missed AYP” by Feds
• Federal Targets Rising Beyond Attainable Levels
– Performance Standard of each student group
rapidly approaching 100%
• Only measured students who passed
Now…..
A Performance
Index Framework
Many Components, One Result
Where Did It Come
From???
Sources of Influence
• Your Assessment Answer Documents!!!
• Legislation!
– State: In Session!
– Feds: Discussing a NCLB Rewrite
• ATAC/APAC Advisory Committees
• Commissioner of Education
– Commissioner’s Rules
• Results summarized in the Accountability
Manual
ATAC and APAC
• Accountability Technical Advisory
Committee
• Accountability Policy Advisory Committee
Real People from Real Districts!
They make recommendations to the
Commissioner
EXPECT CHANGES TO 2015
ACCOUNTABILITY RULES
Accountability Development Timeline
How Can I Keep Up????
For Legislative Action
• State news sources
• Notifications through the Texas Legislature
website
• Social Media
– #txlege
– #txed
– #STAAR
– #HB___ or #SB___
• Service Center Updates
For Development Materials and Final Decisions from
TEA
Some Basic
Vocabulary….
Raw Score
• The number of questions the student
must pass correctly to meet a goal
• Who Understands This?
Percentage Score
• The percent of items a student answered
correctly, as if it were a chapter test
graded by the teacher
• Who understands this?
Vertical Scale Score
• A vertical scale is a scale score system that
allows for direct comparison of student test
scores across grade levels within a content area.
Vertical scaling refers to the process of placing
test scores that measure similar content areas
but at different grade levels onto a common
scale.---TEA
• Different for every grade/subject
• This is what the system is based on!
• Who understands this?
Raw, Percent, and Vertical Scores
• The number of questions a student must
answer correctly OR
• The percentage of questions a student
must answer correctly to meet the
standard
• CAN CHANGE FROM ONE YEAR TO THE
NEXT, BUT…..
• The vertical scale score remains the same
(assuming the same passing standard)
Target
• The number that must be attained by the
campus or district in each Index
– Example: Index 1 Target was 55 in 2014
Performance Levels
• Level I: Unsatisfactory
– Did Not Pass
• Level II: Satisfactory
– Passing
• Level III: Advanced
– Demonstrating an extremely high level of
performance (“commended” in TAKS)
Phase-In Levels
• The Level II Satisfactory Standard was
supposed to be “Phased in” to allow the
system to adjust to the new expectations
for STAAR
• We still haven’t adjusted to the new
expectations of STAAR
– Phase-in Level I was extended
– We’re in our 4th, AND LAST, year of the lowest
phase-in Standard
• The Commissioner announced a new
Phase-In Schedule in Fall of 2014
• From 3-4 Levels
• Each new level for 3 years
• Final Level II standards not changed
• Advanced Level III not changed
New STAAR Phase-In Schedule
Advanced Level III: No Changes
ELL Progress
Measure: A
Different Standard
Who understands this???
ELL Progress Measure in Layman’s Terms
• In layman’s terms….
Given that it is more difficult for an ELL student to achieve the
same passing standard as native English speakers
– The ELL progress measure affords those students a measure of
“grace” (ie, reduced passing standard)
– They are placed on a plan with varying passing standards
– The level of grace shown is based on a combination of 2 factors:
• Years in US Schools
• Composite Telpas Score
• It is used in various ways in each Index. See http://goo.gl/dU6vgb
(Accountability Manual, Appendix I)
Performance Index Framework
Index 1
Index 2
Index 3
Index 4
Student
Achievement
Student
Progress
Closing
Performance
Gaps
Postsecondary
Readiness
Rating Based on 4
Performance Indexes
Index 1
Level II Satisfactory Performance
In Layman’s Terms…Who Passed?
# of Tests Passed
# of Tests Taken
All Subjects. All Grades. All Students.
One Number.
Sample Index 1
Index 1 Target
• 50 in 2013
• 55 in 2014
• Proposal is to keep target of 55
New for 2015
• New Math TEKS According to Bridge Study
– See http://goo.gl/1TD57v for more info
– We’ll have bridge “scores” by mid June
• STAAR A and STAAR Alt 2
– Index Calculated With and Without These
Tests
• If they cause you to miss the target, then they
won’t be included
• “Hold Harmless”
Federal Safeguards
• To satisfy Federal Accountability Concerns,
performance by Student Groups is reported in
Index 1
– Done to ensure group performance doesn’t mask
students being left behind
– 2015 Federal Safeguard is 83% (R/M Only)
– Determined Focus and Priority Schools in 2013
• 3 year cohort
– State Safeguards are same as Index Target (all
subjects)
Federal Accountability
• Bills are being developed at the Federal
Level to change No Child Left Behind/AYP
Requirements
• Stay Tuned!
Index 2
Who Grew???
How?
This Year’s Vertical Scale Score
Minus
Previous Year’s Vertical Scale Score
In Reading, Math….
and 7th Grade Writing (NEW!)
(7th Grade Score Minus 4th Grade Score)
Weighted System
• 1 point for growing enough (“meeting
growth measure”)
• 2 points for growing extra (“exceeding
growth measure”)
• How much is “enough” or “extra?”
– Depends on the grade and subject!
– See “Calculating STAAR Progress Measure” or “A Parent’s Guide to the
STAAR Progress Measure”
http://tea.texas.gov/student.assessment/staar/
But Not This Year…
• In 3-8 Math (because of New TEKS)
• And Never for English I
– 8th Grade Test to English I doesn’t compute
– So…Index 2 for High Schools is Algebra 1 and
English II
Groups Contribute Points!
• All Students (as a group)
• Each Race/Ethnicity (if they have 25 or
more students)
• Special Ed and ELL’s (if they have 25 or
more students)
ELL Progress Measure
• Students have a set Met or Exceeds target that
is not based on 2 years of consecutive scale
scores
– Soooo…..they can have progress measures in
grades that other students can’t
•
•
•
•
• Example: 3rd grade Reading and English I
AND 4TH GRADE WRITING!
AND 3-8 Math!
ATAC is Recommending No Math Index 2 for ELL’s in
Grades 3-8
Writing Still Included
Target
2014 Bottom 5%
2015 Proposal is Bottom 5%
Again
Old Calculation
Reading Index 2 Points + Math Index 2 Points
2
Each subject contributed 50% of the index
Student Groups had to meet 25 tests within that subject
But for 2015????
If you take the same approach,
Reading = 1/3
Math = 1/3 (even though it’s only Alg 1!)
Writing = 1/3 (even though it’s only 7th
grade and 4th ELL’s!)
So………..
New Proposed Calculation
Reading Progress + Algebra 1 Progress + Writing Progress
Total Available Points
Student Groups would need 25 TOTAL tests to contribute
points! (NOT 25 for a subject!!!)
It will be easier for a student group to meet minimum size
Special Education and Spanish Tests
• Proposal is to EXCLUDE STAAR A and Alt 2
from Index 2
• Reminder: Anyone who took an M last
year CANNOT receive a Progress Measure
• Students who change languages cannot
receive a Progress Measure in Reading
• Students who took Spanish 4th Grade
Writing cannot receive a 7th Grade Writing
Progress Measure
Index 3
Closing Performance Gaps
Index 3
• Focuses on Economically Disadvantaged
Students
• AND Lowest Performing Race/Ethnicity
Groups from Previous Year
– Groups Must Meet Minimum Size of 25
Reading Tests AND 25 Math Tests last year
AND this year
– Campuses could have 0, 1, or 2
Race/Ethnicity groups
• (see accountability manual for details)
Calculation
• 1 point for Passing
• 2 points for Advanced Level III
• All Subjects
– Writing, Science, And Social Studies may not
have data for some groups because there
aren’t enough students to meet minimum size
• New Math TEKS Included Via Bridge
Study
Target
• 2014 Bottom 5% Didn’t Meet the Target
• 2015 Proposal is to keep same target
Index 4
Post-Secondary Readiness
Currently….
• 4 Indicators
– STAAR Component
• Final Level II on 2 or more tests
– (If they take at least 2 tests. If not, they need
to achieve that on the one they took)
• New Math TEKS Included Via Bridge Study
• Elementary and Middle Schools Stop Here
AND
3 Lagging Indicators for High Schools/Districts
(Class of 2014 in 2015 Accountability)
• Graduation Rates
• Graduation Plans (Add Foundation Plan)
• Post-Secondary Indicator*
• *need to be redefined
Post-Secondary Indicator Change?
• Proposal is to add new ways for a student
to count in the numerator, but keep the
same denominator.
TSI on R AND Math from TAKS/SAT/ACT
OR
Completed One Advanced Course
OR
Completed Credit CTE Coherent Sequence
Changes Are Coming to Index 4
• TAKS Grads leave the system after 2015
• Legislative requirements for additional
indicators
• Foundation Plan/Endorsements
Proposal
• Keep Index 4 Targets the Same as 2014
PROPOSAL TO MEET STANDARD
MEET
INDEX 1 OR 2
And Index 3
And Index 4
Distinctions
• Each Campus is placed in a comparison group of 40
schools
• Campuses Evaluated
–
–
–
–
4 Core Subject Peformance
Index 2
Index 3
Post-Secondary Readiness
• Districts Evaluated in Post-Secondary Readiness only
• Some indicators are attendance/participation and some
are performance
• You get a Quartile ranking for each indicator
– Number of Q1’s determines distinction
Comparison Data is Available
• See how your campus compares to the
other schools like you in the Distinction
Designation Data Overview Report
• Improvement Required Schools cannot
earn distinctions, but they still have data!
–
http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/2014/srch.html?srch=C
Preview Vocabulary
Topics in 2015 Accountability Development Materials
Required Improvement
• Not to be confused with “Improvement
Required”
– Harkens back to AYP days
– Can help a campus or district who misses and
index target, but improves enough from
previous year
– Needs stability in the system before formulas
can be created
– Possibly added in future cycles
The Bright Side?
At least we’re never bored!