Accountability Update

1. Accountability Update By: Cheri Hendrick Curriculum Forum February 6, 2013

3. Overview of Proposed Performance Index Framework

4. Framework Development Process Primary Factors Considered for Performance Index Framework • Accountability System Goals and Guiding Principles • Statutory Requirements of House Bill 3 (2009) • Focus on Postsecondary Readiness • Inclusion of Student Progress • Emphasis on Closing Achievement Gaps • New STAAR program with EOC-based assessments for middle schools and high schools • Lessons learned from previous state accountability rating systems • (1994-2002 and 2004 – 2011) • Successful models used by other states, e.g. • CA, CO, FL, GA, KY, LA, OH, OK, NC, SC

5. Index 1: Student Achievement STAAR Satisfactory Performance • All Students Only • Combined over All Subject Areas • Credit given for Satisfactory performance level (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;

6. Index 1: Student Achievement STAAR Satisfactory Performance (continued) Credit given for Satisfactory performance level (Level II) on: • STAAR Grades 3-8 and EOC Modified and Alternate at final Level II performance standard; • STAAR L (linguistically accommodated) are included based on a new ELL progress measure; • TAKS included in 2013 only: Grade 11 results at Met Standard performance standard.

7. Index 2: Student Progress [Not evaluated in 2013] Student Progress toward Satisfactory or Advanced Performance Levels (2014 and beyond) • Ten Student Groups Evaluated: • All Students • Each Race/Ethnicity: • African American • American Indian • Asian • Hispanic • Pacific Islander • White • Two or More Races • Students with Disabilities • English Language Learners (ELLs) Graphic depicts sample transition table. The number of bands within a performance level may differ for the final growth measure adopted.

8. Index 2: Student Progress [Not evaluated in 2013] Student Progress toward Satisfactory or Advanced Performance Levels (2014 and beyond) continued • By Subject Area (Reading, Mathematics, and Writing) • Same assessments used in Index 1 where student progress measures are available • Credit given for meeting the student progress measure requirements for: • Progress toward Satisfactory performance (Level II), Or • Progress toward Advanced performance (Level III)

9. Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps Achievement Gaps Measured for Satisfactory and Advanced Levels • All Economically Disadvantaged Students and Two Lowest Performing Racial/Ethnic Groups based on the Index 1 student achievement indicator reported in the prior year • By Subject Area (Reading/ELA, Mathematics, Writing, Science, and Social Studies)

10. Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps Achievement Gaps Measured for Satisfactory and Advanced Levels (continued) • Same Assessments Used in Index 1 • Credit based on weighted performance: • One point credit given for each percentage of students at the final Level II Satisfactory performance standard • Two point credit given for each percentage of students at the final Level III Advanced performance standard (2014 and beyond)

11. Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness Measures of Postsecondary Readiness Credit based on average of two postsecondary indicators: 1) STAAR Advanced performance level (Level III)for grades 3 – 8 and EOC (2014 and beyond) and 2) high school graduation rates and diploma plan graduates

12. Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness Measures of Postsecondary Readiness (continued) • STAAR Advanced Performance (2014 and beyond) • Combined over All Subject Areas • Credit given for Advanced performance level (Level III) on one or more tests at final Level III performance standard • Eight Student Groups Evaluated: • All Students and each Race/Ethnicity

13. Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness Measures of Postsecondary Readiness (continued) • Four-year Graduation Rate or Five-year Graduation Rate (or Annual Dropout Rate if no graduation rate) • Ten Student Groups Evaluated: • All Students, • each Race/Ethnicity, • Students with Disabilities, and • ELLs • Percent Recommended or Advanced High School Program Plan (RHSP/AHSP) Graduates • Eight Student Groups Evaluated: • All Students and each Race/Ethnicity 2013 Accountability based on: 4 yr - Class of 2012 5 yr – Class of 2011 Reported on AEIS

15. Overview of Proposed 2014 Performance Index Framework (Sample Campus)

16. State Accountability Ratings and Distinctions in 2014 TEC §39.202 requires the commissioner to establish two additional categories of distinctions for districts and campuses based on the following criteria: 1) percentages of students who meet the college-ready standard or annual improvement standard, and 2) other factors for determining sufficient student attainment of postsecondary readiness. • Given 2013 ratings cannot include the STAAR Level III (Advanced) standard, the use of additional categories of distinctions would not be applied until 2014 ratings. • Current advisory committee proposals for these labels include: • Commended and Distinguished • Exceeds Standards and Superior • Superior and Exceptional • Silver and Gold

17. Public Comment Period Over 1600 comments submitted Next ATAC meeting Feb 11-12 • TEA • A-Z Index • 2013 Accountability • To The Administrator Addressed Letter Dated November 30, 2012 “Please provide any comments or feedback about this proposal by January 18, 2013, so that the Commissioner of Education can consider your comments before making final decisions.”

18. 2012 AYP • Waiver • 2012 AYP Guide Preview of 2013 [Page 93-94]

19. Accreditation • 97% earned full accreditation • 14 school districts or charter schools that would have received a lower accreditation status (based on a FIRST rating of Substandard Achievement)

20. Accountability and Answer Documents • Student assessment answer documents link directly to accountability

21. Above Grade Level • Public comment period ended February 4 • If a student is taking an above grade level course, they take the assessment for the course they are enrolled in only.

22. Additional Data Collection for TELPAS • Appendix B of the 2013 District and Campus Coordinator Manual • Required additional data collection for ELLs with extenuating needs: • Unschooled ELL asylees/refugees • Other immigrant ELLs who enter U.S. with little prior schooling • First-year immigrant ELLs who enter U.S. schools late in the school year • ELLs who go back and forth between U.S. and another country within and across school years • ELLs with a disability that significantly affects growth in second language acquisition • This information will be collected through the Agency Use fields on the TELPAS Student Registration Details page in the Assessment Management System

23. Additional Data Collection for TELPAS links to Accountability

24. Foreign Exchange Students • Required to test • No bubble on the Spring 2013 answer documents • Gridding of Agency Use field • We will get instructions just prior to testing

25. Let’s look at the 3-8 Spring 2012 Summary Reports • 3-8 Phase in • STAAR Standard Setting Questions and Answers(PDF updated 01/29/13) • Question #3 • “The STAAR 3–8 phase-in standards for Level II performance began with the 2012 test administration. Phase-in 1 standards for Level II will be in effect for the 2011–2012 and 2012–2013 school years, while phase-in 2 standards will be in effect for the 2013–2014 and 2014–2015 school years. The final recommended Level II standards will be in place for STAAR 3–8 assessments beginning in the 2015–2016 school year. There is no phase-in for Level III performance for STAAR 3–8. “

26. STAAR Resources http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/staar/

27. 2012 Raw Score conversions http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/staar/convtables/yr12/

28. 2012 Results Just Received • 2012 March STAAR 4 & 7 Writing/5 & 8 Math & Reading • 2012 April STAAR 3-8 • 2012 May STAAR EOC • January 18 Email: • Confidential Student Reports (CSRs) and Confidential Student Labels will be sent to the campus of record on the 2012–2013 PEIMS file. • Confidential Student Rosters, Summary Reports, and Administration Student Data Files, however, will contain results for students who tested within your campuses/district in spring 2012.

33. Cheri Hendrick • (210) 370-5451 • cheri.hendrick@esc20.net • Resources [links are embedded] • TEA’s 2013 Accountability Page • Statewide Summary Reports for 2011-12 • Additional Information about Appendix B for TELPAS Additional Data Collection[Click OK when the message comes up] • Foreign exchange coding mentioned in the 2013 DTC training PowerPoint, more information to come • 3-8 Phase Time Frame Question #3 in STAAR Standard Setting Questions and Answers[Click OK when the message comes up] • STAAR 3-8 Performance Standards Chart[Click OK when the message comes up] • STAAR Raw Score Conversion Tables [Click OK when the message comes up] • Testing Calendars, no current public comment period open