Update on State and Federal Accountability Systems TASA Midwinter Conference January 30, 2007 Shannon Housson TEA, Performance Reporting Division

Update on State and Federal Accountability Systems

TASA Midwinter ConferenceJanuary 30, 2007

Shannon HoussonTEA, Performance Reporting Division

2

Session Topics

2007 Standard Accountability Procedures

2007 AEA Procedures

Technical Assistance Team Campuses

Overview of AYP

TEASE Accountability

Accountability Resources

2007 Standard Accountability Procedures

4

2007 Standard Accountability

TAKS

For 2007, the Academically Acceptable standards increase by 5 percentage points for all subjects—to 65% for Reading/ELA, Writing, and Social Studies; to 45% for Mathematics; and to 40% for Science. That same year, the standards for Recognized increase to 75% for all subjects.

5

2007 Standard Accountability (cont.)

Commended Performance on TAKS

Beginning with ratings released in 2007, a label of “commended” will be appended to campus and district ratings if the campus or district also earns a GPA for at least 50% of the commended indicators on which the campus or district is evaluated.

A minimum of three of the five commended indicators must be evaluated; or if only two are evaluated, both must be acknowledged (2 out of 2).

6


Commended Performance on TAKS (cont’d)

Only campuses and districts rated Academically Acceptable or higher are eligible to receive this additional label. Campuses and districts evaluated under AEA procedures are not eligible to receive this additional label.

7



The cover page of the 2006 AEIS reports lists the GPA indicators earned in 2005-06 for each district and campus. On the AEIS cover page for the sample district on the next slide, the district met GPA standards in three of the five TAKS Commended Indicators.

8



2005-06 Academic Excellence Indicator System

District Name: SAMPLE ISDDistrict #: 9999992006 Accountability Rating: RecognizedGold Performance Acknowledgments:

Texas Success Initiative (TSI) ELACommended on Reading/ELACommended on WritingCommended on Social Studies

9


SDAA II

The standard for meeting ARD expectations will continue to be set locally, consistent with state statute.

SDAA II indicators will remain the same in 2007 as will their

performance standards.

10


TAKS-I

TAKS-I results will be used in the state accountability system for the first time in 2008. This follows the ‘report, report, use’ mechanism for phasing in new assessment results into the accountability system. This phase-in schedule means that only a portion of the TAKS-I results will be used for accountability in 2008. All TAKS-I grades and subjects will be used beginning in 2010.

11


Incorporating TAKS Alternative (TAKS-Alt)

TAKS-Alt results will be reported but not used in the accountability system for two years beginning in 2008.

Incorporating the 2% Assessment

The 2% test results will be reported but not used in the accountability system for two years beginning in 2008.

12


Annual Dropout Rate

For 2007 only, a ‘hold harmless provision’ is added to the system, such that if the grade 7-8 annual dropout rate is the only indicator causing a district or campus to be Academically Unacceptable, then the campus or district is rated Academically Acceptable instead.

13


Completion Rate (Grade 9 - 12) Indicator

The 2007 accountability year (class of 2006) is the first year the NCES dropout definition is used in the denominator of the completion rate calculation. Also, because of the definitional change to the denominator, Required Improvement cannot be used. Both these factors (the definitional change and the lack of an Required Improvement feature) increase the rigor of the completion rate in 2007.

2007 AEA Procedures

15

2007 Registered AECs

A total of 472 AECs are registered for evaluation under 2007 AEA procedures.

A list of these campuses is on the AEA website at http://www.tea.state.tx.us/aea/.

Each registered AEC must meet the 70% at-risk registration criterion in order to receive an AEA rating on August 1, 2007.

16

At-Risk Registration Criterion

Each registered AEC must have a minimum percentage of at-risk students enrolled on the AEC verified through current year PEIMS fall enrollment data in order to be evaluated under AEA procedures.

The at-risk criterion is 70% in 2007 and 75% in 2008 where it is expected to remain.

17

At-Risk Registration Criterion (cont.)

Two safeguards have been incorporated for those AECs that are below the at-risk requirement.

1. Prior-Year PEIMS At-Risk Data Safeguard: If a registered AEC does not meet the at-risk criterion in the current year, then it remains under AEA if the AEC meets the at-risk criterion in the prior year.

For example, an AEC with an at-risk enrollment of 65% in 2007 and 70% in 2006 remains registered in 2007.

18


2. New Campus Safeguard: If a new campus is registered for evaluation under AEA procedures, then the AEC is not required to meet the at-risk criterion in its first year of operation. This safeguard provides an accommodation

for new campuses with no prior-year data.

19


In April 2007, letters will be mailed to the AECs that did not meet the 2007 at-risk registration criterion informing them that the AEC will shift from AEA to standard accountability and that the AEC will be evaluated under 2007 standard accountability procedures.

The Final 2007 Registered AEC list will be posted on the AEA website in May 2007. This list will contain the AECs that will receive a 2007 AEA rating.

A list of the charter operators that will be rated under 2007 AEA procedures will also be posted on the AEA website in May 2007.

20


A State Compensatory Education Questions and Answers (Q and A) document is on the TEA website at:

http://www.tea.state.tx.us/school.finance/audit/sce_presentation.html

This Q and A addresses proper coding of at-risk students. Also, ESC Compensatory Education contacts can assist with at-risk questions.

21

2007 AEA Standards

TAKS Progress indicator increases to 45%.

SDAA II indicator increases to 45%.

Completion Rate II (includes GED recipients) indicator remains 75.0%.

Annual Dropout Rate (Grades 7-12) indicator remains 10.0%.

22

TAKS Progress Indicator

The TAKS Progress indicator sums performance results across grades (3-12) and across subjects to determine ratings under AEA procedures.

This indicator is based on the number of tests taken, not on the number of students tested.

In 2006, 24,728 test takers at registered AECs took a total of 59,649 TAKS tests.

23

SDAA II Indicator

The SDAA II indicator sums performance results across grades (3-10) and across subjects.

Like the TAKS Progress indicator, the SDAA II indicator is based on the number of tests taken, not on the number of students tested.

In 2006, 2,035 test takers at registered AECs took a total of 3,836 SDAA II tests.

24

Completion Rate II Indicator

This longitudinal rate shows the percent of students who completed or who are continuing their education four years after first attending grade 9 in Texas.

Completion Rate II counts graduates, continuing students (students who return to school for a fifth year), and GED recipients in the definition of Completion Rate II for AECs of Choice and charters evaluated under AEA procedures.

Residential Facilities are not evaluated on the Completion Rate II indicator.

Charters that operate only Residential Facilities are not evaluated on the Completion Rate II indicator.

25

Completion Rate II Indicator (cont.)

Required Improvement for the Completion Rate II indicator cannot be calculated and will not be applied in 2007. The changes to the dropout definition will prevent comparisons of rates used in 2006 and 2007.

26

Annual Dropout Rate Indicator

The Annual Dropout Rate indicator is grade 7-12 dropouts as a percent of total students enrolled at the registered AEC or charter in grades 7-12 in a single school year.

27

Annual Dropout Rate Indicator (cont.)

The dropout definition transitions from the current state definition to the NCES definition in 2007. Students dropping out of school during the 2005-06 school year are reported in 2006-07 in accordance with the NCES dropout definition.

Required Improvement for the Annual Dropout Rate indicator cannot be calculated and will not be applied in 2007. The changes to the dropout definition will prevent comparisons of rates used in 2006 and 2007.

28

Annual Dropout Rate Indicator (cont.)

Due to the definitional and Required Improvement changes described above, if the Annual Dropout Rate is the only indicator causing a registered AEC or charter to be AEA: Academically Unacceptable, then a ‘hold harmless’ provision will be applied and a rating of AEA: Academically Acceptable will be assigned. This provision will be in place for 2007 only.

Technical Assistance Team Campuses

30

Background

Section 39.1322 of HB 1 provides for technical assistance teams (TAT) to be selected and assigned to campuses rated Academically Acceptable in the current year, but that would be rated Academically Unacceptable if the following year’s criteria were in effect. The commissioner has the authority to waive the requirement to assign the TAT based on specific improvement criteria.

31

Identification of TAT Campuses

In 2006, the Academically Acceptable standards were 60% for Reading/ELA, Writing, and Social Studies; 40% for Mathematics; and 35% for Science.

In 2007, the Academically Acceptable standards increase by 5 percentage points for all subjects—to 65% for Reading/ELA, Writing, and Social Studies; to 45% for

Mathematics; and to 40% for Science.

32

Identification of TAT Campuses (cont.)

Campuses rated Academically Acceptable in the state accountability rating system are identified for technical assistance teams if that campus would be rated Academically Unacceptable using the accountability standards for the subsequent year for each base indicator.

o All students and each student group evaluated in the state accountability system that meets minimum size requirements in the current school year must meet the standards established for the subsequent school year.

33

Identification of TAT Campuses (cont.)

o A technical assistance team will be assigned to a campus evaluated under either standard or alternative education accountability procedures.

o The commissioner will annually identify campuses assigned technical assistance teams following the resolution of appeals related to the state accountability ratings, as defined in the Texas Education Code, §39.301.

34

Identification of TAT Campuses Demonstrating Improvement

Campuses identified for technical assistance teams that do not meet the subsequent year standards but demonstrate improvement over the preceding three years may be eligible to receive a waiver from the commissioner.

o A campus must be evaluated under the same accountability procedures, either standard or alternative education accountability, in each of the preceding three years in order to be eligible for the waiver.

35

Identification of TAT Campuses Demonstrating Improvement (cont.)

Campuses meet the TAT required improvement if the sum of actual change averaged across the three prior years is equal to or greater than the improvement needed to achieve each standard established for the subsequent school year. The improvement needed is the difference between the standard established for the subsequent school year and actual performance in the current school year, as shown below.

Required Improvement Actual Change

[(2006 – 2005) + (2005 – 2004) + (2004 – 2003)]

3

≥ [standard for 2007] – [performance in 2006]

36

Results (based on final 2006 ratings)

Under the standard accountability procedures, approximately 8% of the 3,190 campuses rated Academically Acceptable in 2006 would be rated Academically Unacceptable in 2007 based on their 2006 TAKS performance.

o Of the identified TAT campuses, approximately 17% are eligible for a waiver based on Improvement over the preceding three years. The remaining campuses are identified for technical assistance teams.

37

Results (based on final 2006 ratings)

Under the alternative education accountability (AEA) procedures, approximately 2% of the 396 AEA campuses rated AEA: Academically Acceptable in 2006 would be rated AEA: Academically Unacceptable at the 2007 standard of 45% for the TAKS Progress measure and the SDAA II measure.

o Improvement over the prior three years cannot be calculated under the AEA procedures, since the AEA procedures were first applied in 2005.

38

Status of Adoption of Commissioner’s Rules

The proposed commissioner’s rules for the identification of the technical assistance team campuses were filed with the Texas Register on Monday, December 11, 2006 and were published in the Texas Register on December 22, 2006.

The official 30-day public comment period was December 22, 2006 – January 21, 2007. No public comments were received, so the effective date is scheduled for February 25, 2007.

39

Schedule for District Notification and Public Release

Letters will be mailed no later than Friday, February 16 to districts with one or more TAT campuses. The letter will include the list of TAT campuses in the district and will provide information regarding any required interventions.

The TAT notification letter and statewide list of TAT campuses will be released publicly on Monday, February 26, one day after the effective date of February 25.

AYP Overview

41

Assessments included in 2007 AYP Calculations

Reading/ELA Assessments

Participation95% Standard

Performance/Accountability Subset60% Standard

Total Students

Number Participating Number Tested Met Standard

TAKS Yes If participant If non-mobile If standard is met

TAKS-I Not Offered in AYP Subjects and Grades (Reading/Math 3-8 & 10)

SDAA II Yes If participant If non-mobileIf standard is met

(subject to 3% cap)

TAKS-Alt YesIf participant in 2007

field test If non-mobile Non-Proficient

LDAA Yes Non-Participant N/A Not Included Not Included

RPTE Yes Non-Participant N/A Not Included Not Included

LAT version of TAKS*

Yes If participant If non-mobile If standard is met

* Students in their First Year in U. S. Schools are counted as participants, but excluded from the performance calculation.

42

Assessments included in 2007 AYP Calculations (cont.)

Mathematics Assessments



Total StudentsNumber

Participating Number Tested Met Standard


TAKS-I Not Offered in AYP Subjects and Grades (Reading/Math 3-8 & 10)

SDAA II Yes If participant If non-mobileIf standard is met

(subject to 3% cap)

TAKS-Alt YesIf participant in 2007 field test

If non-mobile Non-Proficient

LDAA Yes Non-Participant N/A Not Included Not Included

LAT version

of TAKS*Yes If participant If non-mobile If standard is met


43

Assessments included in 2008 AYP Calculations

Reading/ELA Assessments



Total Students

Number Participating Number Tested Met Standard


TAKS-IYes If participant If non-mobile If standard is met

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 to 1% cap)

RPTE* Yes Non-Participant N/A Not Included Not Included

LAT version of TAKS



44

Assessments included in 2008 AYP Calculations (cont.)

Mathematics Assessments



Total StudentsNumber

Participating Number Tested Met Standard


TAKS-I Yes If participant If non-mobile If standard is met

TAKS-M Yes If participant If non-mobileIf standard is met

(subject to2% cap)

TAKS-Alt Yes If participant If non-mobileIf standard is met

(subject to1% cap)

LAT version of TAKS


45

Latest on NCLB Reauthorization

In his State of the Union Address, President Bush discussed his plans for the law’s reauthorization. Building On Results: A Blueprint for Strengthening the No Child Left Behind Act is designed to provide additional tools to our schools and educators to help America’s students read and do math at grade level by 2014.

The “BluePrint” report can be found on USDE website at

www.ed.gov.

46

TEASE Accountability

The TEASE Accountability secure website provides school districts and charters with performance-based monitoring analysis system (PBMAS) reports, and confidential unmasked data tables, summary tables, confidential student listings, data files, and other helpful state and federal accountability information.

Each superintendent and charter school executive director should apply for access and may designate others in their district (and at the ESC) to also have access.

http://www.tea.state.tx.us/webappaccess/AppsRefSht-TS2.htm

47

Accountability Resources

ESC Accountability Contacts

TEA Division of Performance Reporting(512) [email protected]

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

Accountability ratings system website http://www.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/

Accountability Resources website http://www.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/resources/index.html

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

Documents

Update on State and Federal Accountability Systems TASA Midwinter Conference January 30, 2007 Shannon Housson TEA, Performance Reporting Division