1 / 92

a ccountability 2013

a ccountability 2013. Interpreting Your 2013 Accountability Report It’s Like Learning To Read All Over Again. TEPSA Webinar | September 5, 2013. Welcome!. goals 2013 accountability. Construction. TEPSA Webinars (May 10 and 17). Of indexes What measures/data are included?. Today.

wayne
Télécharger la présentation

a ccountability 2013

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. accountability 2013 Interpreting Your 2013 Accountability Report It’s Like Learning To Read All Over Again TEPSA Webinar | September 5, 2013

  2. Welcome!

  3. goals2013 accountability • Construction TEPSA Webinars (May 10 and 17) • Of indexes • What measures/data are included? Today • Clarity • Of calculation . . . and application Ongoing • Connection • To instructional processes and systems

  4. the vibe

  5. YourQuestions

  6. accountability 2013 the BIG picture

  7. p. 21 p. 22

  8. Accountability| Overall Design p. 22 • Four Performance Indexes • Designed to meet 4 statutory goals • Improving student achievement at all levels in core subjects • Ensuring progress of all students toward Advanced Academic Performance (STAAR Level III) • Closing Performance Gaps among groups in Advanced Academic Performance (STAAR Level III) • Closing gaps among groups in % of students graduating under Recommended or Advanced high school programs Index 1 Index 2 Index 3 Index 4

  9. Progress • 10 student groups • All Students • 7 Race/Ethnicity • SpEd • ELL • Minimum size • 10 for All Students • 25 for other groups • By Subject Area • Rdg & Math in 2013* • Based on PROGRESS • 1 point for % Met • 2 points for % Exceeded p. 21 2013 Accountability Index 2 Student Progress Index 1 Student Achievement Achievement • All Students Only • Single percentage combined over ALL Subject Areas • ≥ Level II (Phase 1) STAAR • ≥ Met Std Grade 11 TAKS Target = Target = 50 Target = ≈ 5th %ile Postsecondary • 4-year or 5-year Graduation Rate (or Annual Dropout Rate) • 10 student groups • % RHSP/DAP • 8 student groups (not SpEd or ELL) • STAAR Postsecondary Readiness – Level II Final (2014) Closing Gaps • 3 student groups • Eco Dis and • 2 lowest Race/Ethnicity groups from prior year • By Subject Area (all subjects) • 1 point for % Level II (Phase 1) • Level III to be added (2014) Index 4 Postsecondary Readiness Index 3 Closing Performance Gaps Target = 75 Target = 55

  10. accountability 2013 Interpreting our Reports It’s like learning to read all over again!

  11. 2013 accountability . . . p. 1 . . . a report in 4 parts p. 2-13 p. 14-17 p. 18-20

  12. Index 1

  13. p. 3-4 p. 2 Index 1 Student Achievement Index 1 Student Achievement

  14. p. 22 Index 1: Student Achievement Index 1 Student Achievement 10 Additional Student Groups reported • 7 Race/ Ethnicity • SpEd • Eco Dis • ELL Used for System Safeguards

  15. p. 2 • Calculate Overall Pass Rate For All Students • Add # Passed (≥ Phase-in 1 Level II) each subject area (R + M + W + S + SS) • 277 + 284 + 65 + 60 + 34 = 720 • Add # Tests taken each subject area (R + M + W + S + SS) • 485 + 473 + 174 + 127 + 127 = 1,386 • Divide # Passed by # Tests to determine % Passed • 720 ÷ 1,386 = 51.9%, which ROUNDS to 52% • Assign 1 point for each % Passed = Index 1 Score • 52% = 52 POINTS • Overall pass rate IS NOT average pass rate • Average pass rate would equal: (57% + 60% + 37% + 47% + 27%) ÷ 5 = 47% Index 1 Score 57% 60% 37% 47% 27%

  16. % at Final Level II (13%) % at Level III (3%) [Instructional Planning] p. 3-4 p. 2 • Where did these numbers come from? • Pages 3-4!

  17. Disaggregated Data • There are a LOT of numbers on pages 3 and 4! • “I thought Index 1 ONLY evaluated the All Students group!” • True! • BUT . . . the data are included for System Safeguards

  18. p. 3 p. 13 • System Safeguard • Low Performance in a single cell for a particular student group does NOT automatically cause the district/campus to miss Index 1 • However, ANY student group meeting MSC with a pass rate below 50% MUST be addressed in the district/campus improvement plan • MSC = 0 for All Students | 25 for all other Student Groups

  19. p. 3 p. 13 • So how do we “find” System Safeguards? • In each subjectarea, determine which studentgroupsmeetMSC • MSC = 0 for ALL Students | 25 for all other student groups • Then determine if %Passing<50% (at Phase-in Level II or above) for any group meeting MSC • If % Passing < 50% ANDStudent Group meets MSC, then Student Group’s Performance MUST be addressed in improvement plan      

  20. p. 3 p. 13 Others? 17 8 9                 

  21. p. 4     Science? Social Studies?     17 8 9 0 8 8 25 16 9

  22. p. 3 p. 4       System Safeguards • 25 student groups met MSC (across 5 subject areas) • ONLY 9Met Safeguard target of 50% • 16 Missed Safeguard target (including EVERY group in Writing, Science, Social Studies) • BUT campus MET Index 1 Target!            All 16 Student Groups that Missed Safeguard target of 50% must be addressed in CIP     v    

  23. p. 3 p. 18 System Safeguards • Are summarized with Y/N indicators in Part 4 of the Campus’ 2013 Accountability Report (p. 18)

  24. p. 19 System Safeguards • Performance Rate data from p. 3-4 are duplicated on p. 19 (slightly reorganized)

  25. p. 19 System Safeguards • Performance Rate data from p. 3-4 are duplicated on p. 19 (slightly reorganized) • Participation Rate data are also provided

  26. p. 1 2013 Accountability Summary Index 1 is summarized in the campus’ 2013 Accountability Summary (p. 1)

  27. Index 1 Student Groups? MSC? Safeguards? Your Questions

  28. Index 2

  29. Index 2 Student Progress Index 2 Student Progress p. 5 p. 6-7

  30. p. 22 Index 2: Student Progress Index 2 Student Progress

  31. Index 2: Student Progress Index 2 Student Progress Based on actual student progress (2012 to 2013) focuses on progress toward . . . STAAR Level III

  32. Index 2: Student Progress Index 2 Student Progress Each student is assigned a progress category based on his/her change in scale score in relation to progress expectations • Did Not Meet • Met • Exceeded

  33. Index 2: Student Progress Index 2 Student Progress • Subject areas evaluated for 2013 • Reading • Grade 4 through English II • Math • Grade 4 through Algebra I • Writing • English I to English II

  34. Index 2: Student Progress Index 2 Student Progress • Performance Standard • Met Progress • Exceeded Progress • Index 2 is based on a fraction where • Numerator = # of points based on % of students who Met or Exceeded Progress • 1 point for % Met • 2 points for % Exceeded • Denominator = Maximum Points Possible based on number of student groups meeting minimum size criteria (MSC) • Maximum Points Possible = 200 points for each student group meeting MSC

  35. Index 2: Student Progress Index 2 Student Progress What is “progress”? • With exceptionsfor high-performing (“almost perfect”) and low-performing (“lower than guessing”) students, the generalruleis Met Progress = Level II Final (Higher Grade) – Level II Final (Lower Grade) Exceeded Progress = Level III (Higher Grade) – Level II Final (Lower Grade)

  36. p. 23 Met Progress? Level II 5th Grade – Level II 4th Grade 1627 – 1599 = 28

  37. p. 23

  38. p. 23 Exceeded Progress? Level III 5th Grade – Level II 4th Grade 1710 – 1599 = 111

  39. p. 23

  40. Index 2Simple Example

  41. Index 2 Data Reports • Build “back to front” • Start with page 7 • Then page 6 • Then page 5

  42. For each student group meeting MSC in each subject, determine: • % Met or ExceededProgress • % Exceeded Progress p. 7 From Index 1 (p. 2) • REMINDERS (Why Index 2 numbers will not match Index 1): • Only students with 2 years of “matched” data are included • Progress starts at 4th grade (no 3rd graders receive a Progress Measure) • ELL students are “mostly excluded” from Index 2 in 2013 • STAAR Modified and STAAR Alternate are not included in Index 2 in 2013 • Writing is ONLY evaluated for English I to English II • MSC = 10 tests for All Students | 25 tests for other Student Groups

  43. p. 6 • Data from page 7 are reproduced on page 6 • In each subject area, for each Student Group meeting MSC • Assign 1 point for each % Met OR Exceeded • Assign another 1 point for each % Exceeded • Total = Weighted Progress Rate for each Student Group meeting MSC • Effectively 1 point for each % Met and 2 points for each % Exceeded • Add Weighted Progress Rate in each subject for each student group meeting MSC • Maximum Points = # Student Groups meeting MSC x 200 + + + +

  44. p. 5 • Data from page 6 are summarized on page 5 (remember: read back to front!) • Weighted Progress Rate for each Student Group meeting MSC in each subject area is reported and summed • Reading: 75 + 64 + 77 = 216 points • Math: 70 + 67 + 72 = 209 points • Sum the Total Points in Reading and the Total Points in Math • 216 + 209 = 425 • Sum the Maximum Points in Reading and the Maximum Points in Math • 600 + 600 = 1200 • 425 ÷ 1200 = 35.4, which rounds to 35 . . . SO Index 2 Score = 35 points + + + + + + Index 2 Score

  45. p. 1 2013 Accountability Summary Index 2 is summarized in the campus’ 2013 Accountability Summary (p. 1)

  46. Index 2 Progress Categories Points Data Your Questions

  47. Index 3

  48. p. 8 Index 3 Closing Performance Gaps p. 9-11

  49. p. 24 Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps Index 3 Closing Performance Gaps • Impacts every student group of which the ELL student is a member

  50. Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps • Index 3 emphasizes Level III (Advanced Academic Performance) for “Performance Gap Groups” • BUT . . . STAAR Level III cannot be included in accountability until 2014, so for 2013 . . . • Measure = % of students in Performance Gap Groups “passing” state assessment • Evaluated in EACH subject area (Reading, Math, Writing, Science, Social Studies) • Then cumulated to a single score Index 3 Closing Performance Gaps

More Related