ACCOUNTABILITY UPDATE State and Federal Systems

ACCOUNTABILITY UPDATEACCOUNTABILITY UPDATEState and Federal SystemsState and Federal Systems

TSNAP Not-So-New TSNAP Not-So-New Coordinator’s AcademyCoordinator’s Academy

September 24, 2008September 24, 2008Sandra Poth, Northside ISDSandra Poth, Northside ISD

STATE ACCOUNTABILITY STATE ACCOUNTABILITY

UPDATEUPDATE

FUNDAMENTALSFUNDAMENTALS

State system evaluates all TAKS State system evaluates all TAKS subjects x all grades tested x all subjects x all grades tested x all ‘significant’ student groups‘significant’ student groups

““Significant”Significant” means that means that a student group has a student group has

30 or30 ormore students across a more students across a

campus grade span campus grade span such such as elementary, as elementary, middle, middle, high.high.

FUNDAMENTALSFUNDAMENTALSPEIMS subset used for TAKS analysisPEIMS subset used for TAKS analysisMany ‘twists’ to the “WHO COUNTS?” Many ‘twists’ to the “WHO COUNTS?” question (refer to Manual)question (refer to Manual)

DiscussionDiscussion: Student is : Student is ‘‘here’ on PEIMS day athere’ on PEIMS day atthe end of October, leavesthe end of October, leavesdistrict at Winter Break, anddistrict at Winter Break, andreturns Monday prior to TAKSreturns Monday prior to TAKStesting in March. testing in March.

???DOES HE “COUNT”??????DOES HE “COUNT”???

DISTRICT RATINGS IN 2008DISTRICT RATINGS IN 2008Includes Charter Schools

ACCOUNTABILITY RATINGACCOUNTABILITY RATING20082008

CountCount PercentPercent

ExemplaryExemplary 4343 3.5%3.5%

RecognizedRecognized 328328 26.7%26.7%

Academically AcceptableAcademically Acceptable 818818 66.6%66.6%

Standard ProceduresStandard Procedures 753753 61.3%61.3%

AEA ProceduresAEA Procedures 6565 5.3%5.3%

Academically Unacceptable Academically Unacceptable 3737 3.0%3.0%



Not Rated: OtherNot Rated: Other 33 0.2%0.2%

TotalTotal 1,2291,229 100%100%

CAMPUS RATINGS IN 2008CAMPUS RATINGS IN 2008

ACCOUNTABILITY RATINGACCOUNTABILITY RATING20082008

CounCountt

PercentPercent

ExemplaryExemplary 996996 12.2%12.2%

RecognizedRecognized 2,8152,815 34.4%34.4%

Academically AcceptableAcademically Acceptable 3,5093,509 42.8%42.8%

Standard ProceduresStandard Procedures 3,1123,112 38.0%38.0%


Academically Unacceptable Academically Unacceptable 217217 2.6%2.6%



Not Rated: OtherNot Rated: Other 657657 8.0%8.0%

Not Rated: Data Integrity IssuesNot Rated: Data Integrity Issues 11 0.0%0.0%

TotalTotal 8,1958,195 100%100%

Includes Charter Schools

2008 RATINGS HIGHLIGHTS2008 RATINGS HIGHLIGHTSREQUIRED IMPROVEMENT (RI)

521 CAMPUSES used RI to achieve a higher rating. 374 campuses moved to Recognized

(13.3% of all Recognized campuses). 147 campuses moved to Academically

Acceptable (AA) (4.7% of all AA campuses).

106 DISTRICTS used RI to gain a higher rating.86 districts used RI to move to Recognized (26.2% of all Recognized districts ).20 districts used RI to move to Academically Acceptable

(2.7% of all AA districts).

2008 RATINGS HIGHLIGHTS2008 RATINGS HIGHLIGHTSEXCEPTIONS used at CAMPUS Level

832 CAMPUSES increased their rating due to the Exceptions Provision, mostly in Math and Science. 11 could not use this

provision because of using the same measure in 2007 638 campuses used 1 117 campuses used 2 69 campuses used 3 8 campuses used 4 Of the 832 campuses that used the Exceptions Provision:

313 used one or more exceptions to achieve a rating of Academically Acceptable

342 used one or more exceptions to gain a rating of Recognized

177 used one exception to gain a rating of Exemplary.

???? WHAT DOES THIS MEAN TO YOU????

2008 RATINGS HIGHLIGHTS2008 RATINGS HIGHLIGHTSEXCEPTIONS used at DISTRICT Level

90 DISTRICTS increased their rating using Exceptions with Science and Math used most. One district could not use this

provision again in 2008 76 districts used 1 11 districts used 2 2 districts used 3 1 district used 4

Historical look2007: 2 districts with a student population of 100,000+ were Recognized status while in 2008, this number was 19. Only one (1) used an exception to get there!

NOTE: The exceptions provision is NOT a ‘given’. It will be discussed in spring 2009 to decide if it will be used and how it

will be used.

2008 RATINGS HIGHLIGHTS2008 RATINGS HIGHLIGHTS

COMPLETION RATE TRENDS IN TEXAS

Completion Rate I, used for Standard Procedures, DECLINED for all students and for each student group between the class of 2007 and the class of 2006!!!

All Students rate declined by 2.2% African American rate declined by 3.8% Hispanic rate declined by 3.0% White rate declined by 0.9% Economically Disadvantaged rate declined by 3.4%

???WHAT DOES THIS MEAN TO YOU???

2008 RATINGS HIGHLIGHTS2008 RATINGS HIGHLIGHTSSCHOOL LEAVER PROVISION (SLP) at the DISTRICT Level

3 districts used the SLP for Dropout Rate only. 80 districts used the SLP for Completion rate only. 6 districts used the SLP for both Dropout AND Completion Rates. 6 districts used the SLP for excessive underreported students By using SLP 95 districts were able to achieve a higher rating:

76 districts went from Academically Unacceptable to Academically Acceptable.3 districts went from Academically Unacceptable to Recognized.15 districts went from Academically Acceptable to Recognized.1 district went from Academically Acceptable to Exemplary

2008 RATINGS HIGHLIGHTS2008 RATINGS HIGHLIGHTSSCHOOL LEAVER PROVISIONS at the CAMPUS Level

27 campuses used the SLP for Dropout Rate only. 115 campuses used the SLP for Completion rate only. 0 campuses used the SLP for both Dropout and Completion

Rates. By using SLP 142 campuses were able to gain a higher rating:

133 campuses went from Academically Unacceptable to Academically Acceptable.4 campuses went from Academically Unacceptable to Recognized.4 campuses went from Academically Acceptable to Recognized.1 campus went from Recognized to Exemplary.

2008 RATINGS HIGHLIGHTS2008 RATINGS HIGHLIGHTS

SCHOOL LEAVER PROVISIONS for CHARTERS and AEA

9 charters used the SLP for Dropout Rate only. 6 charters used the SLP for Completion Rate II only. 15 charters used the SLP for both Dropout and Completion

Rates.

19 AECs used the SLP for Dropout Rate only. 26 AECs used the SLP for Completion Rate II only. 20 AECs used the SLP for both Dropout and

Completion Rates.

SCHOOL LEAVER PROVISIONSCHOOL LEAVER PROVISIONin 2009in 2009

This provision will no longer apply in 2009 and may be the This provision will no longer apply in 2009 and may be the cause for lower district and campus ratings for:cause for lower district and campus ratings for:– Completion Rate I Completion Rate I – Annual Dropout Rate (Gr. 7-8) (Standard Procedures) Annual Dropout Rate (Gr. 7-8) (Standard Procedures) – Completion Rate IICompletion Rate II– Underreported students Underreported students

Based on final decisions released in April 2008, this provision Based on final decisions released in April 2008, this provision will apply to the Annual Dropout Rate will apply to the Annual Dropout Rate (Gr. 7-12) indicator under AEA Procedures, but will be (Gr. 7-12) indicator under AEA Procedures, but will be reviewed in spring 2009 by the advisory groups. reviewed in spring 2009 by the advisory groups.

NOTE: Districts that used the School Leaver Provision NOTE: Districts that used the School Leaver Provision need to pay special attention to the quality of leaver need to pay special attention to the quality of leaver data that will be submitted in fall 2008. This data that will be submitted in fall 2008. This information will be the basis for dropout and completer information will be the basis for dropout and completer indicators used in 2009 ratings.indicators used in 2009 ratings.

SCHOOL LEAVER PROVISION SCHOOL LEAVER PROVISION Technical Advisory Team (TAT)Technical Advisory Team (TAT)

Campuses that avoid being rated Campuses that avoid being rated Academically Academically UnacceptableUnacceptable in 2008 due to the application of in 2008 due to the application of the School Leaver Provision will be subject to the School Leaver Provision will be subject to technical assistance team (TAT) intervention technical assistance team (TAT) intervention requirements in the 2008-09 school year.requirements in the 2008-09 school year.

This is becauseThis is because c campuses rated ampuses rated Academically Academically AcceptableAcceptable in 2008 are identified for technical in 2008 are identified for technical assistance teams (TATs) if their 2008 assistance teams (TATs) if their 2008 accountability results do not meet the 2009 accountability results do not meet the 2009 accountability standards. accountability standards.

Thursday, July 31 (1 p.m.) - TEASE site updated withfinal data tables.

Friday, August 1 (10 a.m.) – Secure email sent to eachESC director with ratings lists for each district andcampus in the region.

Friday, August 1 (1 p.m.) – Press Briefing and public release on TEA website.

Tuesday, August 19 – List of districts and campusesrated as AU for one or more consecutive years will

beposted on the 2008 accountability ratings website.

August 15, 2008 is appeals postmark deadline. Ratings changed due to granted appeals published

in late October. No appeals necessary for annual dropout rate, completion

rate, or underreported students indicators. 2007-08 AEIS Reports issued (TEASE) – early November

20082008 RATINGSRATINGS CALENDARCALENDAR

ACCOUNTABILITY DECISIONSACCOUNTABILITY DECISIONS2009 and BEYOND2009 and BEYOND

TAKS INDICATORSTAKS INDICATORS 20092009Final DecisionFinal Decision

2010

ExemplaryExemplary ≥ ≥ 90%90% ≥ ≥ 90%90%

RecognizedRecognized ≥ ≥ 75%75% ≥ ≥ 80%80%

Academically AcceptableAcademically Acceptable

Reading/ELAReading/ELA ≥ ≥ 7070%% ≥ ≥ 70%70%

Writing, Social StudiesWriting, Social Studies ≥ ≥ 70%70% ≥ ≥ 70%70%

MathematicsMathematics ≥ ≥ 55%55% ≥ ≥ 60%60%

ScienceScience ≥ ≥ 50%50% ≥ ≥ 55%55%

* Standards for 2010 will be reviewed in spring 2009 and are subject to change.

ACCOUNTABILITY DECISIONS ACCOUNTABILITY DECISIONS for 2009 and BEYONDfor 2009 and BEYOND

TAKS (Accommodated)

20092009 20102010 20112011

Science (grades 5/8/10/11)Science (grades 5/8/10/11)

Science (grade 5 Span)Science (grade 5 Span)

Social Studies (grades 8/10/11)Social Studies (grades 8/10/11)

English Language Arts (grade 11)English Language Arts (grade 11)

Mathematics (grade 11)Mathematics (grade 11)

UseUse UseUse UseUse

Reading/ELA (grades 3– 0)Reading/ELA (grades 3– 0)

Reading (grades 3–6 Spanish)Reading (grades 3–6 Spanish)

Mathematics (grades 3–10)Mathematics (grades 3–10)

Mathematics (grades 3–6 Span)Mathematics (grades 3–6 Span)

Writing (grades 4 & 7)Writing (grades 4 & 7)

Writing (grade 4 Spanish)Writing (grade 4 Spanish)

Report Report in AEIS in AEIS OnlyOnly

UseUse UseUse

ACCOUNTABILITY DECISIONS ACCOUNTABILITY DECISIONS for 2009 and BEYONDfor 2009 and BEYOND

In spring 2009, the accountability advisory groups will review various options and make recommendations

to the commissioner about the leaver indicators evaluated under standard accountability procedures

for 2009 and beyond.

Annual Dropout Rate (Grades 7-8) and Completion Rate I

???WHAT DOES THIS MEAN TO YOU???

FEDERAL FEDERAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACCOUNTABILITY

UPDATEUPDATE

2008 AYP TIMELINE2008 AYP TIMELINELate SummerLate Summer TAKS-M Standard-Setting process is completedTAKS-M Standard-Setting process is completed

AugustAugust Texas districts retain all SIP evaluations from Texas districts retain all SIP evaluations from the prior year (based on 2007 AYP results) and the prior year (based on 2007 AYP results) and continue implementation of SIP requirements.continue implementation of SIP requirements.

By late By late SeptemberSeptember

School districts receive TAKS-M student results.School districts receive TAKS-M student results.

October 2October 2ndnd Release of 2008 Preliminary Data Tables andRelease of 2008 Preliminary Data Tables and

Student Lists to Campuses/Districts via TEASE.Student Lists to Campuses/Districts via TEASE.

Confidential unmasked preliminary data tablesConfidential unmasked preliminary data tables

available on the TEASE site will not include theavailable on the TEASE site will not include the

preliminary AYP and SIP status labels. The AYPpreliminary AYP and SIP status labels. The AYP

Explanation Table will be included on tables.Explanation Table will be included on tables.

October 8October 8thth Public release of Preliminary 2008 AYP/SIP withPublic release of Preliminary 2008 AYP/SIP with

updated SIP statuses for all districts/campuses. updated SIP statuses for all districts/campuses.

2008 AYP TIMELINE2008 AYP TIMELINE

October 17October 17thth AYP Appeal DeadlineAYP Appeal Deadline

No later than No later than October 20October 20thth

Parental Notification by all Texas Districts Parental Notification by all Texas Districts of School Improvement Requirements.of School Improvement Requirements.

November – November – DecemberDecember

Process AYP AppealsProcess AYP Appeals

Mid-DecemberMid-December Issue Final AYP and SIP ResultsIssue Final AYP and SIP Results

2008 AYP GUIDE CHANGES2008 AYP GUIDE CHANGESAYP Guide Table of Contents will be used to cover AYP Guide Table of Contents will be used to cover

items that have changed in 2008.items that have changed in 2008.

Section III Section III INDICATORS, COMPONENTS, MEASURES, &INDICATORS, COMPONENTS, MEASURES, & STANDARDSSTANDARDS Components of Reading and Mathematics IndicatorsComponents of Reading and Mathematics Indicators Participation Participation ReorganizedReorganized PerformancePerformance Federal Caps Federal Caps NewNew

Section IV Section IV EXCEPTIONSEXCEPTIONS Exception to the 1% Federal Cap on TAKS-AltException to the 1% Federal Cap on TAKS-Alt

New PolicyNew Policy

CHANGES TO 2008 AYP GUIDECHANGES TO 2008 AYP GUIDESection V APPEALS Section V APPEALS ExpandedExpanded– Title I School Improvement Requirements Title I School Improvement Requirements

(Refer to Appendix B)(Refer to Appendix B) Limitations on 2008 AYP Appeals Limitations on 2008 AYP Appeals NewNew Guidelines by Indicator for AppealsGuidelines by Indicator for Appeals Special Circumstance AppealsSpecial Circumstance Appeals

Section VIII APPENDICES Section VIII APPENDICES ExpandedExpanded

Appendix B: Title I School Improvement Appendix B: Title I School Improvement New PolicyNew Policy

Appendix C: Sample AYP Products Appendix C: Sample AYP Products New Items:New Items:o Federal Regulation Reporting RequirementFederal Regulation Reporting Requiremento AYP Source Data TableAYP Source Data Tableo Sample District and Federal Cap CalculationSample District and Federal Cap Calculationo AYP Student Data ListingsAYP Student Data Listings

CHANGES TO 2008 AYP GUIDECHANGES TO 2008 AYP GUIDE

Section VIII APPENDICES (continued)Section VIII APPENDICES (continued)

Appendix D: Appendix D: Calculating 2008 AYP Results for Sample SchoolCalculating 2008 AYP Results for Sample School

New Items:New Items:

o AYP Explanation TableAYP Explanation Tableo Reconciling Student Level DataReconciling Student Level Datao How to Calculate the 1% and 2% Federal Cap How to Calculate the 1% and 2% Federal Cap

LimitLimit

???HOW DOES THIS IMPACT YOUR POSITION???

LOOKING AT 2008-2009 AYPLOOKING AT 2008-2009 AYP

2008-2009 Performance standards 2008-2009 Performance standards increase:increase:– 60%60%67% for Reading/ELA67% for Reading/ELA– 50%50%58% for Mathematics58% for Mathematics

NOTE: AYP performance standards will NOTE: AYP performance standards will increase each year in order to meet increase each year in order to meet the 100% proficiency target required the 100% proficiency target required by 2013-14.by 2013-14.

ASSESSMENTS IN 2009 AYPASSESSMENTS IN 2009 AYPReading/ELA Assessments

Participation95% Standard

Performance/Accountability Subset 67% Standard

Total Students

Number Participating Number Number

TestedTested Met StandardMet Standard

TAKSTAKS YesYes If participantIf participant If non-If non-mobilemobile If standard is metIf standard is met

TAKS (Accommodated) Yes If participant If non-

mobileIf standard is met

TAKS-M / LAT TAKS-M

Yes If participant If non-mobile

If standard is met (subject to 2% cap)

TAKS-Alt Yes If participant If non-mobile

If standard is met subject to 1%

TELPAS Reading* YesNon-Participant

N/A

Not Included

Not Included

LAT version of TAKS

Yes If participant If non-mobile

If standard is met

ASSESSMENTS in 2009 AYPASSESSMENTS in 2009 AYP

Mathematics Assessments

Participation95% Standard

Performance/Accountability Subset

58% Standard

Total Total StudeStude

ntsnts

Number Number ParticipatingParticipating Number Number

TestedTested Met StandardMet Standard

TAKSTAKS YesYes If participantIf participant If non-mobileIf non-mobile If standard is metIf standard is met

TAKS (Accommodated)

Yes If participant If non-mobile If standard is met

TAKS-M / LAT TAKS-M*

Yes If participant If non-mobileIf standard is met

(subject to 2% cap)

TAKS-Alt Yes If participant If non-mobileIf standard is met (subject to1% cap)

LAT version of TAKS*

Yes If participant If non-mobile If standard is met

2009 ASSESSMENTS USED IN 2009 ASSESSMENTS USED IN STATE AND FEDERAL STATE AND FEDERAL

ACCOUNTABILITYACCOUNTABILITY

An attachment to the September 19, 2007, To The An attachment to the September 19, 2007, To The Administrator Addressed letter outlined the use of Administrator Addressed letter outlined the use of TAKS (Accommodated), TAKS-M, and TAKS-Alt in state TAKS (Accommodated), TAKS-M, and TAKS-Alt in state and federal accountability for the 2007-08 school year.and federal accountability for the 2007-08 school year.

The attached document outlines the use of TAKS, TAKS The attached document outlines the use of TAKS, TAKS (Accommodated), TAKS-M, TAKS-Alt, LAT versions, and (Accommodated), TAKS-M, TAKS-Alt, LAT versions, and TELPAS assessments that will be used for state/federal TELPAS assessments that will be used for state/federal

accountability in 2008-09.accountability in 2008-09.

ACCOUNTABILITY TETN SESSIONSACCOUNTABILITY TETN SESSIONSfor 2008-2009for 2008-2009

November 13 Accountability Ratings Update Gold Performance Acknowledgments

TAT ListAEIS ReportsSchool Report CardsPEG List

February 19 Update on Accountability DevelopmentUpdate on Accountability Development

April 23April 23 Accountability Decisions for 2009 & Accountability Decisions for 2009 & BeyondBeyond

June 18June 18 Accountability Manuals – State and AYPAccountability Manuals – State and AYP

August 20August 20 Accountability Results for 2009Accountability Results for 2009

RESOURCES for ACCOUNTABILITYRESOURCES for ACCOUNTABILITYEmail the Division of Performance Reporting at Email the Division of Performance Reporting at [email protected]@tea.state.tx.us..

TEA Division of Performance Reporting 512-463-9704TEA Division of Performance Reporting 512-463-9704

ESC Accountability ContactsESC Accountability Contacts

Online Resources:Online Resources:– ACCT: ACCT: http://www.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/http://www.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/

– AEA: AEA: http://www.tea.state.tx.us/aea/http://www.tea.state.tx.us/aea/

– AYP: AYP: http://www.tea.state.tx.us/ayp/http://www.tea.state.tx.us/ayp/

FUTURE DEVELOPMENTSFUTURE DEVELOPMENTSIN ACCOUNTABILITYIN ACCOUNTABILITY

Part of law requiring review of Part of law requiring review of existing accountability systemexisting accountability system

Joint Committee on Accountability Joint Committee on Accountability held hearings all around Stateheld hearings all around State

Groups making proposals for newGroups making proposals for new

system that makes significant system that makes significant changes to the existing systemchanges to the existing system

Legislative action in 2009 sessionLegislative action in 2009 session

TEXAS STAR SYSTEMTEXAS STAR SYSTEMProportionalityProportionalityGrowth measureGrowth measureComparable group comparisonComparable group comparisonDiagnostic in natureDiagnostic in natureTransparent in methodologyTransparent in methodologyTiered priority of indicatorsTiered priority of indicatorsFlexible for adding future indicatorsFlexible for adding future indicatorsRewards and Consequences have Rewards and Consequences have different time framesdifferent time frames

ACCOUNTABILITY and YOUACCOUNTABILITY and YOU

Testing only? Still affects you!Testing only? Still affects you!

Testing AND Evaluation? It IS you!Testing AND Evaluation? It IS you!

Curriculum too! You are IT!Curriculum too! You are IT!

Keys to success:Keys to success:– KNOWLEDGEKNOWLEDGE– AWARENESSAWARENESS– COMMUNICAITONCOMMUNICAITON– ADVOCACYADVOCACY

THE RACE IS ON!!THE RACE IS ON!!

Documents

ACCOUNTABILITY UPDATE State and Federal Systems