STAAR TREK

ILT

January 18, 2011

Desired outcomes

Increase understanding of changes to the state accountability system for 2011 and beyond

Raise level of awareness of changes to the state assessment system for 2012 and beyond

Consider steps to address these changes

State testing and accountability systems overview

Current system2004-2011

TAKS

New systemNew system2013-????2013-????

STAARSTAAR

2012STAAR

2003TAKS

Old system1994-2002

TAAS

BISD Campus State Accountability Ratings1994-2010

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010

Year

Per

cen

tag

e o

f C

amp

use

s

Unacceptable/Low Perf

Acceptable

Recognized

Exemplary

Standards, schmandards

Learning standards What students should know and be able to do e.g. TEKS

Performance (testing) standards Cut scores used to define performance ranges for individual

students e.g. Panel Recommended Standard, Commended Performance

Accountability standards Cut points of aggregate student performance used to assign

ratings to educational organizations e.g. 70% met standard = Academically Acceptable

Key state accountability changes for 2011

TAKS-M and TAKS-Alt included Increased AA standard for math (65) and

science (60) New commended performance indicator

Recognized 15%, Exemplary 25%

New ELL Progress indicator Recognized or Exemplary 60%

TPM??? Student race/ethnicity subgroups???

Key state accountability changes for 2011

New race/ethnicity categories TBD

All students

Hispanic

African American

White

Economically Disadvantaged

Select One

Native American

Asian/PI

African American

Hispanic

White

Is the student Hispanic? Y/N

Select one or more races

Native American

Hawaiian/PI

Asian

African American

White

Prior to 10-11 10-11 and beyond

PEIMS Student Demographics

Prior to 2011 2011 and beyond

Accountability Groups

All students

Hispanic

African American

White

Economically Disadvantaged

Multiracial????

Accountability beyond 2011

2012 (first year for STAAR) No campus/district accountability ratings

2011 ratings will stand for 2 years Kudos and sanctions

No SSI retest opportunities STAAR results (3-8) not released until fall 2012

(performance standards set over the summer) Aggregate STAAR results will be available at

district, campus and classroom levels through new data portal

Performance schmandards

Did not meet standard Met Standard Commended

Unsatisfactory? Satisfactory Advanced

Panel Recommended

Commended Performance

ReadinessSatisfactory Performance

TAKS

STAAR 3-8

Unsatisfactory? Satisfactory Advanced

ReadinessSatisfactory PerformanceSTAAR EOC

Minimum Performance

Gray area

Accountability beyond 2011 2013 - new accountability system

Based on new performance standards Satisfactory performance

Will likely be phased in (e.g. 2 SEM, 1 SEM)

Readiness standards Will NOT be phased in

Student progress indicator

Rating categories for districts / campuses Unacceptable / Acceptable

Based on satisfactory performance

Accountability beyond 2011

2014 - Distinction designations Categories - Recognized / Exemplary

Based on readiness performance standards Other Measures (campus only)

Top quartile in annual improvementTop quartile in closing performance gapsFour other areas of distinction

Fine arts Physical education 21st century workforce development Second language acquisition

Accountability schmandards

Unacceptable Acceptable Exemplary

70% met standardCurrent system

Recognized

80% met standard

90% met standard

Unacceptable Acceptable

??% met satisfactory performance

New basic rating (starts 2013)

??% met readiness standard

Readiness distinction (starts 2014)

ExemplaryRecognizedNo distinction awarded

??% met readiness standard

Financial Allocation Study for Texas (FAST)

How will we respond to these new accountability challenges?

BISD Campus Exemplary Ratings1994-2010

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010

Year

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of

Ca

mp

us

es

Know the assessment

What do students need to know or be able to do to be successful on the items?

For which grade level is the item most appropriate?

Enrollment in Britton Pre-School

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1970 1980 1990 2000

Year

Nu

mb

er o

f P

up

ils

In 1990, tuition at Britton Pre-School was $300 per pupil. According to this graph, how much money was collected in 1990?A $9000B $900C $600D $6000

1. Read graph (30 pupils in 1990)2. Multiply (30 pupils x $300/pupil)

What central angle should the sponsor use for the section representing the votes for the student who finished in third place?A 54ºB 72 ºC 90 ºD 126 º

1. Read table and compare numbers to determine who finished in third place

2. Add to find the total number of votes3. Set up and solve proportion

The student council sponsor is planning to make a circle graph showing the number of votes for each of the candidates for student council president. The table below indicates the name and the vote count for each candidate.

Bridget’s votes (240)

Total votes (1200)

X degrees

360 degrees=

Which state exports the least amount of crude oil monthly?A LouisianaB TexasC AlaskaD Pennsylvania

1. Read pictograph to find state with fewest barrels

What percent of the total solid waste was paper?A 33 1/3%B 40%C 66 2/3%D 72%

1. Read table and find the number of tons of paper waste2. Divide the tons of paper waste by the total waste given3. Convert decimal to percent

The graph shows the types and amounts of solid waste produced in the United States in 1998.

Know the assessment

With which exit-level assessment is each item associated?TABS Grade 10 (1982)TEAMS Grade 10 (1986)TAAS Grade 10 (1999)TAKS Grade 11 (2002 field test)STAAR Algebra II (2012?)

Enrollment in Britton Pre-School

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1970 1980 1990 2000

Year

Nu

mb

er o

f P

up

ils

In 1990, tuition at Britton Pre-School was $300 per pupil. According to this graph, how much money was collected in 1990?A $9000B $900C $600D $6000

1. Read graph (30 pupils in 1990)2. Multiply (30 pupils x $300/pupil)

TEAMS Grade 10

(1986)

What central angle should the sponsor use for the section representing the votes for the student who finished in third place?A 54ºB 72 ºC 90 ºD 126 º

1. Read table and compare numbers to determine who finished in third place

2. Add to find the total number of votes3. Set up and solve proportion

The student council sponsor is planning to make a circle graph showing the number of votes for each of the candidates for student council president. The table below indicates the name and the vote count for each candidate.

Bridget’s votes (240)

Total votes (1200)

X degrees

360 degrees=

TAKS Grade 11

(2002)

STAAR Algebra II (2012??)

Which state exports the least amount of crude oil monthly?A LouisianaB TexasC AlaskaD Pennsylvania

1. Read pictograph to find state with fewest barrels

TABS Grade 10

(1982)

TAKS Grade 3 (2009)

What percent of the total solid waste was paper?A 33 1/3%B 40%C 66 2/3%D 72%

1. Read table and find the number of tons of paper waste2. Divide the tons of paper waste by the total waste given3. Convert decimal to percent

The graph shows the types and amounts of solid waste produced in the United States in 1998.

TAAS Grade 10

(1999)

STAAR overview Assessments

Grades 3-8 Same subjects as TAKS R & M vertically linked to English III and Algebra II

Grades 9-12 12 end-of-course assessments Minimum performance required on all EOCs for

graduation English III and Algebra II performance will determine

diploma status (e.g. DAP, RHSP)

STAAR administration details

STAAR Accommodated not a separate form STAAR Modified

Not available for Algebra II, chemistry, physics Will have embedded field test items

STAAR Alternate will be available STAAR L for ELLs administered online Online oral administration

Other STAAR details

STAAR items will be field tested on TAKS in 2011 Phase-in of satisfactory performance standard

(e.g. 2 SEM, 1 SEM), but not readiness standard May adopt a time limit (but still not a timed test) Remediation required for any student failing a

STAAR assessment (3-8 and EOC) Some items released over next 3 years, but no full

test release until 2014 Reporting categories replacing objectives

STAAR v. TAKS Increased rigor and depth

Greater number of more difficult items Greater level of cognitive complexity Rigor validated against nationally-normed exams and

reviewed every 3 years

Increased number of items Higher performance standards Increased number of gridable items in math and

science Process skills embedded in Math, Sci, Soc St

State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR)

Increased focus, clarity, depth Changes in assessed curriculum

Readiness standards

Supporting standards

Standards not assessed

Vertical alignment ofreadiness standards

Gr 3

Gr 4

Gr 5

Gr 6

Gr 7

Gr 8

Alg I

Geom

Alg II

Gr 3Gr 3

Gr 4Gr 4

Gr 5Gr 5

Gr 6Gr 6

Gr 7Gr 7

Gr 8Gr 8

Eng IEng I

Eng IIEng II

Eng IIIEng III

Readiness for success at the next level

College and careerreadiness

STAAR and the TEKS

30%

70%35%

65%

Supporting Standards

Readiness Standards

Readiness Standards

Supporting Standards

Assessed curriculumwww.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/staar

Blueprintswww.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/staar

Readiness standards alignmenthttp://lead4ward.com/resources/

No minimum score (e.g. 2) required on composition for satisfactory performance

The challenge ahead

Increasing accountability standards New accountability indicators Increased assessment rigor

What can we do now? Look at TAKS commended performance as

indicator of success with STAAR Download Assessed Curriculum and Blueprint

documents Get to know readiness standards

How and when are these taught in your grade level? How are they aligned vertically before and after your

grade level?

Desired outcomes

Increase understanding of changes to the state accountability system for 2011 and beyond

Raise level of awareness of changes to the state assessment system for 2012 and beyond

Consider steps to address these changes