2015 Texas Accountability System Overview and Updates August 13, 2015

2015 Texas Accountability System

Overview and Updates

August 13, 2015

RICHARD A. BLAIRSENIOR EDUCATION SPECIALISTREGION 4 ESC

Key Changes for 2015 Accountability

• To receive a Met Standard rating, a district or campus must meet the target on three indices: Index 1 or Index 2 and Index 3 and Index 4.• Mathematics, grades 3-8, is excluded from state accountability.• Algebra I is the only mathematics course included in state

accountability.• STAAR A and STAAR Alternate 2 for all subjects and grade levels are

excluded from state accountability.• Index 2 score combines available STAAR and ELL progress measures

across all subjects and grade levels.• Index 2 includes both current and monitored ELLs in their first and

second years of academic monitoring.• Index 4 includes a new postsecondary component.

Accountability SubsetWho Counts and Where?

Accountability Subset

• For the State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR®) indicators, the performance of only those students enrolled on the PEIMS fall snapshot date (the last Friday in October) is considered for accountability.• Campus Accountability Subset Campuses are accountability for the performance of students reported to be enrolled on the snapshot date and the date of testing.• District Accountability Subset Districts are accountable for the performance of students reported to be enrolled on the snapshot date and on the date of testing.• Example If a student moves from one campus to another campus in the same district, his or her performance is included in the district results but is not included in the results of either campus.


• Accountability subset:

• Grades 3-8 – fall enrollment snapshot date

• EOC – for tests administered in spring and fall, fall enrollment snapshot date;

for tests administered in summer, prior year fall enrollment snapshot date Results from the following administrations included

If the student was enrolled on the campus/district on the following date

2015 State Accountability

Cycle

EOC Summer Administration Prior year fall enrollment snapshot date Fall 2013

EOC Fall Administration Current year fall snapshot date Fall 2014

EOC Spring Administration Current year fall snapshot date Fall 2014

3-8 Spring administration Current year fall snapshot date Fall 2014


A student could count over more than one accountability year.

Sara Beth a Top o Texas ISD student, took and failed Algebra I at Top-o-Texas Middle School in the spring of 2014. Was advanced to Top-o-Texas High School, where she received accelerated instruction in the fall of 2014. The spring 2014 failure is attributed to the middle school campus.

Sara Beth then took the fall 2014 administration of Algebra I and failed. She continued to receive additional supports from the Top-o-Texas High School, but although her score improved, she failed the spring 2015 Algebra I administration. The last failure is attributed to the high school campus for 2015.

So Sara Beth’s Algebra I EOC scores count in both 2014 and 2015!

2015 State Index SystemHigh-level Overview

Accountability Goals

•By the end of the 2019-20 school year, Texas will be among the top ten states in postsecondary readiness by• Improving student achievement at all levels in the core

subject areas of the state curriculum,• Ensuring the progress of all students toward achieving

advanced academic performance,• Closing the performance gaps among student subgroups,

and• Rewarding excellence based on other indicators in

addition to state assessment results.

Performance Index Framework

Performance Index Goals

• Index 1: Student Achievement Provide a snapshot of student performance across subjects

• Index 2: Student Progress Measure year-to-year student progress

• Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps Emphasize academic achievement of economically disadvantaged students and the two lowest-performing racial/ethnic student groups

• Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness Emphasize the importance of a high school diploma as the foundation of success in college, the workforce, job training programs, or the military

Four GroupsCampus Type Chart (p. 18)

Rating Labels

• The state accountability system uses ratings that indicate acceptable and unacceptable performance.

• In 2015, two labels indicate acceptable performance:• Met Standard• Met Alternative Standard (assigned to charter districts and campuses

that are evaluated under alternative education accountability [AEA] provisions)

•The label that indicates unacceptable performance is:• Improvement Required

INDEX 1

• Student Achievement• All Student Level• Student Counts 1 Time per

subject• % of Students Meeting Standard

(Phase 1, Level II)

• Student Progress• 2015 Reading and Math• Groups• All• Race/Ethnicity• Special Ed• ELL

• Progress Measure• Non-ELL: STAAR Progress• ELL: ELL Progress

INDEX 2

State Accountability Index System

INDEX 3

• Closing the Achievement Gap• All Subjects• Econ. Disadvantaged, Up to 2

Lowest Performing Race/Eth Group• Two Components• Phase 1, Level II• Level III Advanced

• Postsecondary Readiness• One or Four Components• STAAR Final Level II 2+• Graduation Rate• Graduation Plan (RHSP/DAP)• College-Readiness Testing

(Read/ELA & Math)• Longitudinal Rates used (Annual

if no Longitudinal)

INDEX 4

State Accountability Index System

State Targets2014 State of Texas Accountability System

Non-AEA Districts and CampusesAccountability Targets

In 2015, to receive a Met Standard or Met Alternative Standard rating, districts and campuses must meet targets on at least three indexes:

Index 1 or Index 2 and Index 3 and Index 4

Alternative Districts and CampusesAccountability Targets (DeWalt)

In 2015, to receive a Met Standard or Met Alternative Standard rating, districts and campuses must meet targets on at least three indexes:

Index 1 or Index 2 and Index 3 and Index 4

2014 State Index SystemIndex Calculations

Index 1: Student Achievement



Index 2: Student Progress




Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps



123




Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness














Distinction Designations


•Distinctions designations are awarded to districts and campuses in recognition of outstanding achievement.•To be eligible for distinction designations, a district

or campus must receive a Met Standard rating.•Districts and campuses rated using AEA provisions

are not eligible.•Campus distinctions are based on indicators of

student performance in comparison to forty similar campuses.

Distinctions AvailableDistinction Designations

• Campuses may be awarded distinction designations for outstanding achievement in the following areas:• English language arts/reading• Mathematics• Science• Social Studies• Student progress• Closing performance gaps• Postsecondary Readiness

• Districts may be awarded distinction designations for outstanding achievement in postsecondary readiness.

•Comparison to Comparable Group• 40 Campuses• Closely “Match” the Target School• Type of School (Elem., Middle, High, Elem./Secondary,

etc.)• Schools with Unique Grade Spans are Grouped with

Most Like• Size, Low/High Grade, % Eco. Dis., Mobility Rate, % ELL

• Must Rate in Top Quartile (Top 25%) of Comparison Group


•To earn a distinction:

• High Schools and combined elementary/secondary schools (K-12) must be in the top quartile (Q1) for 33 percent or more of their total eligible indicators.

•Middle, junior high, and elementary schools must be in the top quartile for 50 percent or more of their total eligible indicators.


System SafeguardsState and Federal Accountability

System Safeguards

System Safeguards

System Safeguards

Accountability ReportsWhat to look for

Accountability Overview

State Accountability Rating

Graphical Summary

Numerical Summary

Distinctions

State Safeguards

Demographic Information

Items of NoteImportant Reminders

A Separate REQUIRED IMPROVEMENT calculation at the INDEX Level for Campuses and Districts that DO NOT MEET the Accountability Target for the Index will be Considered for 2015 and BEYOND.

Required Improvement to Come

NO Required Improvement

•July 30, 2015: • TEASE release of data without Ratings

•August 6, 2015• TEASE release of data with Ratings

•August 7, 2015: • Public Release of Data by TEA; Ratings Assigned

•November 2014: • Finalized Accountability Ratings

Fall 2014Notification of Ratings

•Only appeals that would result in a changed rating will be considered. A campus or district must meet all requirements for a higher rating in order for its appeal to be evaluated.•Appeals are NOT considered for the Accountability

System Safeguard measures that may result in campus or district interventions.•Districts are responsible for providing accurate

information to TEA. Data corrected during correction window will be included in determining accountability ratings.

Not a Data Correction OpportunityAppeals (Due 9/8/2015)

2015-16 Accountability84th Texas Legislative Session

• 5 Domains• Performance on tests• Progress• Closing Gaps• Postsecondary Readiness• Non-testing things

• HB 5 family and community engagement

Not a Data Correction OpportunityDomain System

Federal AccountabilityFocus and Priority Schools

Priority and Focus Schools

Priority 5% of Title I schools with the widest gap in reading and math at the all students level

Focus10% of Title I schools with the widest average gap in reading and math based on all federal student groups

Working on USDE approval for Year 4 workWill use most recent assessment data• Exit Criteria• Must show “significant

progress” to meeting AMOs• Meet 60% graduation rate

• 15-16 data to provide new 3 year list

Priority and Focus

Resources

• Accountability Manual

Accountability System

ESEA Waiver Information

• Performance Monitoring and Interventions

Region 4 Accountability Blog

Richard Blair, Senior Education Specialist713.744.6596, [email protected]

Kelly Ingram, Director713-744.6372, [email protected]

Contact InformationRegion 4 Accountability Contacts

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Documents

2015 Texas Accountability System Overview and Updates August 13, 2015