1 / 39

TETN | September 21, 2012

State and Federal Accountability Update. TETN | September 21, 2012 . Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting. 2012 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). 2012 AYP Timeline. 2013 AYP Waiver Request.

kyna
Télécharger la présentation

TETN | September 21, 2012

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. State and Federal Accountability Update TETN | September 21, 2012 Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting

  2. 2012 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)

  3. 2012 AYP Timeline

  4. 2013 AYP Waiver Request • Notice of intent to request a waiver was posted in a September 6, 2012, letter to LEAs on the TEA web site and posted on the “To the Administrator Addressed” listserv.  LEAs and the public may submit comments regarding this waiver application until 5:00 p.m. CST, Thursday, September 27, 2012, to nclb@tea.state.tx.us. • For questions regarding the waiver requests, contact the Division of Federal and State Education Policy via e-mail at nclb@tea.state.tx.us or at (512) 463-9414. 

  5. 2012 Academic Excellence Indicator System (AEIS)

  6. 2012 AEIS Release • District and campus AEIS reports will be posted to the TEA secure environment (TEASE) and the TEA public website in mid-November. • Email notifications will be sent to district superintendents and ESC directors. • The TEASE release provides the information that districts need to fulfill publishing and notification requirements for the AEIS. • The AEIS Guidelines will provide details about district responsibilities.

  7. 2012 AEIS Release PUBLISHING • MUST publish: Performance and profile sections of district and campus AEIS reports • MAY publish: Glossary(English Glossary will be available mid-November. Spanish translation will be available in January 2013.) • MUST ADD and publish: • Campus performance objectives • Report of violent or criminal incidents • Information from THECB about performance of students in postsecondary institutions

  8. District Responsibilities HEARING FOR PUBLIC DISCUSSION • Must be held within 90 calendar days after the November TEASE release. District winter break days do not count towards the 90 days. • Within 2 weeks after the hearing, the AEIS report must be disseminated.

  9. District Responsibilities AEIS AND THE DISTRICT WEBSITE • TEC §39.362 requires districts with websites to post the most current accountability ratings, AEIS reports, and School Report Cards (SRC) not later than the 10th day after the first day of instruction of each school year. There is no requirement in this statute that district websites must be updated with new AEIS reports after the 10th instructional day. However, districts are encouraged to do so. • Refer to our FAQ web page about this requirement athttp://www.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/3297_faq.html

  10. Changes to the 2011-12 AEIS • Assessment results include TAKS, TAKS (Accommodated), and TAKS-M for grades 10-11 only • STAAR EOC results will not be included • TAKS data are shown only for the 2011-12 school year • ELL Progress Measure will not be reported for 2012 • Campus-level variables for the at-risk student group added to data download • Non-Educationally Disadvantaged Student Group percentage added to Student Profile section

  11. Changes to the 2011-12 AEIS • TEC §39.053 (g-1) requires the reporting of longitudinal graduation rates with exclusions for state accountability purposes. The following graduation/completion rates will be reported in 2012: • Four-year Completion Rate for Class of 2011 with exclusions applied • Four-year and Five-year Graduation Rates without exclusions that match the graduation rates used for federal AYP evaluations. • District Instructional Staff Percent added to Campus AEIS • District Instructional Expenditure Ratio added to Campus AEIS

  12. November Public Release • Includes TEASE products such as district and campus AEIS reports and Guidelines. • Other available information: • Region reports • State report • Report of mobile student performance (state-level only) • Data download (includes a masking explanation) • Multi-year data • Links to prior-year reports • Links to grade level Progress of Prior Year Failers • Glossary

  13. School Report Cards • Since state accountability ratings were not assigned to Texas public schools and districts in 2012, the requirements under TEC§39.361 Notice in Student Grade Report (formerly§39.251) and§39.362 Notice on District Website (formerly§39.252) are modified for fall 2012 reporting requirements. • For fall 2012 only, the reporting requirements for the School Report Card are suspended, and the most current campus performance rating is not required to be sent home with the first written notice of a student's performance that a school district gives during a school year.

  14. Campuses With Additional Campus Improvement Plan (CIP) Requirements

  15. Campuses With Additional Campus Improvement Plan (CIP) Requirements • Statute requires identification of campuses meeting current year standards for acceptable performance that do not meet accountability standards for the subsequent year. These campuses are subject to additional campus improvement plan (CIP) requirements. • Since ratings were not assigned in the 2011–12 school year, and the ratings criteria will not be final until spring 2013, it is not possible to identify these campuses for the 2012–13 school year. • After the initial performance ratings of the new accountability system are final in fall 2013, the list of campuses with additional CIP requirements will be released for the 2013–14 school year.

  16. Public Education Grant (PEG)

  17. PEG Overview • A statutorily-mandated program of school choice (TEC Ch. 29, Subchapter G, § §29.201-29.205) that was not affected by changes made by the Texas Legislature in HB 3 in 2009. • Partially aligned with accountability ratings, but not fully aligned with the state system or AYP. • Statute requires districts to notify parents of the 2013-14 list by February 1, 2013. However, The PEG list for 2013-14 may be delayed until STAAR standards for grades 3-8 are final. • Since accountability ratings will not be released in 2012 and a new accountability system will be implemented in 2013, the following table shows the anticipated criteria for the 2013-14 PEG list.

  18. Criteria * The PEG list for 2013-14 may be delayed until STAAR standards for grades 3-8 are final.

  19. Calendar and Notification • Planned release date to affected districts is early December 2012 via TEASE to all districts with one or more campuses on the list. • Planned release date to public is mid-December 2012 via the agency correspondence website. • An online FAQ page is available athttp://www.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/resources/index.html

  20. 2013 State Accountability Development

  21. 2013: Advisory Committees • Accountability Policy Advisory Committee (APAC) and Accountability Technical Advisory Committee (ATAC) Meeting Outcomes • A summary of meeting outcomes for the APAC and ATAC meetings are posted online at: http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/2013/materials.html

  22. 2013 State Accountability Development • Recent postings to the 2013 development website include: • Overview of Proposed Performance Index Framework that provides a brief description of the features and safeguards of the proposed four performance indexes in the new accountability system. • Overview of Assessment Indicators in the Previous State Accountability System provides a visual overview of the previous system. • http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/2013/index.html

  23. Overview of Proposed Performance Index Framework • Features of Index 1: Student Achievement • STAAR Satisfactory Performance • All Students only • Combination of all subject areas • Credit is given for satisfactory performance (Level II) on: • STAAR Grades 3-8 English and Spanish at final Level II performance standard for assessments administered in the spring, • EOC at final Level II performance standard for assessments administered in the spring and the previous fall and summer, • STAAR grades 3-8 and EOC Modified and Alternate at final Level II performance standard, • STAAR L (linguistically accommodated) based on the ATAC ELL Workgroup recommendations in progress, and • TAKS grade 11 results at the Met Standard performance standard (included in 2013 only).

  24. Overview of Proposed Performance Index Framework • Features of Index 2: Student Progress • Student Progress to Satisfactory or Advanced Performance Levels • All Students and each race/ethnicity • African American, American Indian, Asian, Hispanic, Pacific Islander, White, Two or More Races • By subject area (Reading and Mathematics; Writing for EOC only; Science and Social Studies for EOC only, if growth measures are available) • Same assessments used in Index 1 where student progress measures are available • Credit is given for meeting the student progress measure requirements for: • Progress to Satisfactory performance (Level II), or • Progress to Advanced performance (Level III).

  25. Overview of Proposed Performance Index Framework • Features of Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps • Achievement Gaps Measured for Satisfactory and Advanced Performance Levels • All Economically Disadvantaged and lowest performing racial/ethnic group(s) based on Index 1 performance • By subject area (Reading, Mathematics, Writing, Science, and Social Studies) • Same assessments used in Index 1 • Credit given for meeting the gap measure requirements

  26. Overview of Proposed Performance Index Framework • Features of Index 4: Measures of Postsecondary Readiness • All Students and each race/ethnicity group evaluated in Index 2 • Credit based on average of two postsecondary indicators: (1) high school graduation rates (HS) and diploma plans; and (2) STAAR advanced performance (Level III) • STAAR Advanced Performance • Combination of all subject areas • Credit given for Advanced performance (Level III) on same assessments used in Index 1 at final Level III performance standard

  27. Overview of Proposed Performance Index Framework • Features of Index 4: Measures of Postsecondary Readiness (cont.) • High School Graduation • Four-year or Five-year Graduation Rate • Percent of Recommended or Advanced HS Program Plan graduates • Credit given for percent of HS graduates and percent of graduates in the four-year graduation rate who satisfied requirements for RHSP or AHSP • Annual Dropout Rate (if no Graduation Rate)

  28. Input on Advisory Committee Proposals • Educators are invited to comment on proposals made by the advisory groups. • Proposals are posted online for educator review and comment at the 2013 Accountability Development page:http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/2013/index.html • Click on the Recommendations link, scroll to the bottom of the page, and click on the Comments link.

  29. 2013: HB 3 Transition Summary • Transition Plan Charts and Tables • Details about the transition plans for the new accountability systemfor 2013, 2014, and 2015 are available from the March 2012 meeting materials.http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/2013/materials.html • A summary of the HB 3 legislative requirements are also availablein the Reference Materials at the 2013 Accountability Developmentpage.http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/2013/reference/lege_interpretation.html

  30. 2013: Calendar • The Comprehensive Meeting Calendar posted at the link below outlines the timeline for the various topics to be considered by the APAC and ATAC groups. http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/2013/materials.html

  31. 2013 and 2014 Accountability - Summary * Labels to be determined.

  32. 2013 and 2014 Accountability - Summary

  33. Academic Achievement Distinction Designations

  34. Academic Achievement Distinction Designations • Distinction Designation Indicators • Completion of Algebra I by end of grade 8 (Level III). • Greater than expected student growth on the state assessment • Participation and performance on ELA/Mathematics sections • grade 10 (PSAT, PLAN) • grade 11 (PSAT) and • Participation and performance on college readiness assessments

  35. Academic Achievement Distinction Designations • Distinction Designation Indicators (cont.) • Participation and performance on AP/IB ELA or Mathematics • and • Percentage of students completing and receiving credit for at least one ELA or Mathematics advanced course/dual enrollment course • Performance on grade 3 Reading (Level III) • 6) Performance on grade 5 Mathematics (Level III) • 7) Attendance Rate

  36. Academic Achievement Distinction Designations • Distinction Designation Framework • The proposed framework for distinction designations uses four stages to determine a campus distinction. • The first stage identifies a campus comparison group for each campus and calculates campus performance for each distinction indicator by subject. • The second stage compares the performance of the target campus to the performance of the campuses in the comparison group for each indicator. For example, Campus A is in the top 10% of campuses among a 40 campus comparison group on a particular distinction indicator.

  37. Academic Achievement Distinction Designations • Distinction Designation Framework • The third stage generates a single outcome by subject for each campus. For example, Campus A achieved the top 10% in three of the six distinction indicators that were evaluated for the campus. • The fourth and final stage is a statewide evaluation of campus outcomes in order to identify the top campus distinction designations by subject. For example, campuses that outperformed their peers on 50% or more of the mathematics distinction indicators evaluated receive an academic distinction in mathematics.

  38. Academic Achievement Distinction Designations • Distinction Designation Framework • For details, refer to the AADDC framework document athttp://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/2013/20120625mtg/frame.pdf

  39. Resources • 2013 Development Sitehttp://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/2013/index.html • Frequently Asked Questions About Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/ayp/faq/faq.html • Performance Reporting Home Pagehttp://www.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport • Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Home Pagehttp://www.tea.state.tx.us/ayp • Performance Reporting Emailperformance.reporting@tea.state.tx.us • Division of Performance Reporting Telephone (512) 463-9704

More Related