Accountability - Region One ESC...STAAR Performance Met or exceeded the Approaches Grade Level...

2017 © Region One Education Service Center

AccountabilityUpdates

DCSI MeetingSeptember 7, 2017

Region One Education Service CenterOffice of School Improvement, Accountability and Compliance


Outcomes • Describe the Current State Accountability

System– Performance Index Framework– Ratings– Performance Standards – System Safeguards– Distinction Designations

• Priority and Focus School Updates• PEG• Intervention Requirements


R0008


Accountability TimelineAugust 7, 2017 Data used to calculate the 2017

accountability ratings are released to districts and campuses via TEASE

August 14, 2017 Accountability ratings, distinction designations, systems safeguards are released to districts and campuses through TEASE website

August 15, 2017 Public release via TEA Website and schools identified under PEG Criteria for 2018-2019 School Year

September 15, 207 Appeals Deadline

November 2017 TEA notifies districts of accountability appeals decisions (mail and TEASE)

November 2017 Final accountability ratings that reflect the outcome of ratings appeals are released to the public via TEA website


Accountability TimelineNovember 2017 Preliminary longitudinal graduation cohort

lists updated

November 2017 TAPR Reports

December 2017 School Report Card and Federal Report Card (public web)

September 15, 207 Appeals Deadline

November 2017 TEA notifies districts of accountability appeals decisions (mail and TEASE)

November 2017 Final accountability ratings that reflect the outcome of ratings appeals are released to the public via TEA website


State Accountability Rating SystemPerformance Index Framework Construction

1. Each measure of student performance contributes to an index score.

2. Targets set by the commissioner determine the minimum scorerequired for meeting a performance standard for each index.

3. The index score provides an overall performance of the campus or district.

4. No single indicator, by itself, can result in a lower rating.

5. Multiple indexes ensure accountability for every student.

6. Indicators and student groups can be added to the system without creating additional targets.


Accountability Ratings Met Standard: Assigned to districts and campuses that meet the required performance index targets and other accountability rating criteriaMet Alternative Standard: Assigned to charter operators and alternative education campuses evaluated under alternative education accountability (AEA) provisions that meet the required performance index targets and other accountability rating criteria.

Improvement Required: Assigned to districts and campuses (including AEAs) that do not meet the required performance index targets or other accountability rating criteriaNot Rated: Assigned to districts and campuses that – under certain, specific circumstance – do not receive a rating


Accountability Ratings

Not Rated indicates that a district or campus did not receive a rating for one or more reason:

The district or campus serves only students enrolled in early education (EE). The district or campus has no data in the accountability subset. The district or campus has insufficient data to assign a rating. The district operates only residential facilities. The campus is a Juvenile Justice Alternative Education Program (JJAEP) The campus is a Disciplinary Alternative Education Program (DAEP) The campus is a residential facility The test documents for either the district or campus were lost in transit between the

district and the test coordinator


Accountability Ratings

Index 1 or

Index 2

Index 3

Index 4

Met Standard

To attain a Met Standard rating, district and campuses must meet the target on the following indexes for which it has performance data in 2017.


Spring 2017Assessments Evaluated

2016 Index 1 Index 2 Index 3 Index 4

STAAR Grades 3-8

STAAR EOCAssessments (5 Tests)

STAAR EOC Substitute Assessments

N/A N/A

STAAR L (Via the ELL Progress Measure)

N/A N/A N/A N/A

STAAR A N/A N/A N/A N/A

STAAR Alternate 2


2017 TargetsDistrict and Campus

Standard Accountability Targets

District/CampusType

Index 1Student

Achievement

Index 2*Student Progress

Index 3*Closing Performance

Gaps

Index 4 Postsecondary Readiness

Target Target Target TargetAll

Components

Targets STAAR

Components

District

60%

22 28 60% 13%

Elementary School

32 28NA 12%

Middle School 30 26NA 13%

High School/K-12 Campus

17 30 60% 21%


2017 Performance Level DescriptorsDistrict and Campus


2017 Measuring ProficiencyDistrict and Campus


2017 Accountability System School Types

Four Campus Types

1. Elementary

2. Middle

3. K/12 -Elementary/ Secondary

4. High School

Ranked Together


Index 1: Student Achievement

Student Achievement provides an overview of student performance based on satisfactory student achievement across all subjects for all students.


Index 1: Student Achievement

All Student Group

All Subjects Combined

Measures

STAA

R Pe

rfor

man

ce Meet/Exceeds Approaches

Grade Level Standard

Percent M/E ELL Progress Measure Expectation

Achieve Equivalency Standard on End-of-Course Substitute

Assessments


Index 1: Student AchievementCalculations

Percent of students that Met satisfactory academic performance collapsed across grade levels and subject Includes ELL students that met their expected progress measures and Students that met the substitute assessment equivalency standard


Accountability Cycle 2016-2017

Summer2016

Accountability Subset: Snapshot October 2015

Fall2016


Spring 2017


1. Grades 3-8 Spring Administration

2. Grades 5 & 8 Primary Administration & First Retest

3. EOC First Administration and Retests (Fall, Spring and Previous Summer)

Students who took a retest Summer 2017 will count for next year’s

accountability


Index 2: Student Progress

Ensuring the progress of all students toward achieving Advanced Academic Performance


Index 2: Student ProgressST

AAR

Perfo

rman

ce

Percent Met ELL Progress Measure

Expectation

Percent Met STAAR Progress

Reading and Mathematics Only

Note: Reading and Mathematics only

Measures

All Student Group

Hispanic African American

White Asian

ELLAmerican Indian

Pacific Islander

Two or More Races

Special Education


First Year ELL students will be excluded from index 2: student progress (except for STAAR Alt 2).

All subjects other than math and reading are not included

Index 2: STAAR Progress MeasureExclusions


ELL Progress Measure

1. Eligible ELLs are placed into a plan that specifies the expected number of years it should take for the student to reach proficiency, or meet his or her Approaches Academic Performance standards on STAAR content-area assessments.

2. Only composite scores from second grade and higher are used.

3. In the final year of the plan, students are expected to meet the Meets Academic Performance standards.

4. Reported for STAAR and STAAR L.


CRITERIA

Has a valid STAAR score

Is classified as an English Language Learner (LPAC)

Student takes an English version of the assessment– Includes STAAR, STAAR L, and STAAR A – Does not include STAAR Alternate 2 or Spanish versions of STAAR

Number of years in U.S. schools does not exceed the plan (Only after classification as an ELL)

EXCLUSIONS

Student is an ELL with a parent denial for services

Index 2: ELL Progress Measure


Index 2: Student ProgressCalculations


Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps

Closing Performance Gaps emphasizes advanced academic achievement of economically disadvantaged students and the two lowest performing race/ethnic student groups.


Index 3: Closing Achievement GapsST

AAR

Perf

orm

ance

Met or exceeded the Approaches Grade Level Standard (For EOC, the standard when student was first eligible to take EOC)

Met or Exceeded the ELL Progress Measure

Economically Disadvantaged

Group


Measures

Lowest Race/Ethnic Group 1

Lowest Race/Ethnic Group 2


1 points credit for each percentage of students

1 point for each percentage of students

Identified GroupPrior Year Assessment Results

• Economically Disadvantaged

• Lowest 2 Performing Race/Ethnic Groups


MastersPerformance Standard

ApproachesPerformance Standard

Incentive to reach Masters


Index 3: Closing Performance GapsStudent Groups Evaluated

Economically Disadvantaged Group

Lowest Performing (LP) Race/Ethnic (RE)GroupHow many student groups meet the minimum size requirement of 25

for both Reading and Mathematics?

RE3RE2RE1

= Lowest 2 Performing Race/Ethnic Groups

Evaluated

LP LP

Three or More Race/Ethnic Groups

RE2RE1

= Lowest 1 Performing Race/Ethnic Group

Evaluated

LP

Two Race/Ethnic Groups

LP

RE1

= No Race/Ethnic Group Evaluated

One Race/Ethnic Group


Index Construction

Lowest Group


Index 3 Score

2016 Index 3 Targets: E=28 M=26 K/12 & HS=30 D=28



Inclusions

1. STAAR2. STAAR A (all subjects and grades)3. STAAR Alt. 2 (all subjects and

grades)4. Algebra I5. English I6. English II7. Biology8. US History9. ELL Students in US Schools 2-4

Years Included10. Students in US schools years 5+

included

Exclusions

1. Students in US Schools 1 Year2. STAAR L3. ELLs in their first year of enrollment

in US schools in grade 9 or above


Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness

Postsecondary Readiness emphasizes the importance of earning a high school diploma that provides students with the foundation necessary for success in college, the workforce, job training programs, or the military; and the role of elementary and middle schools in preparing students for high school.



All Student


Measures

STAA

R Pe

rfor

man

ce STAAR Meets Grade Level Standard

Graduation Rate or Dropout Rate

Graduation Diploma Plan

Post Secondary Component

Hispanic African American

White Asian

ELLEver identified

Special Education

American Indian

Pacific Islander

Two or More Races



High Schools and Districts


STAAR Postsecondary Performance (Meets Grade Level Standard)

Methodology: the percent of students meeting the Meets Grade level performance standard in two or more subject areas

Exceptions: One subject area, if only one subject area test is taken.

Data Sources: TEA STAAR Performance(summer 2016, fall 2016 and spring 2017)PEIMS Fall 2015 SnapshotPEIMS Fall 2016 Snapshot


Graduation Rate-Longitudinal Class of 2016 (entered in 2012-2013)

Number of Graduates in Class________________________________________

Number of Students in the Class

(Graduates + Continuers + GED Recipients + Dropouts)

Number of Graduates + GED Recipients + Continuing Students__________________________________________________

Number of Students in the Class

(Graduates + Continuers + GED Recipients + Dropouts)

Expand to include dropout recovery schools

Standard AccountabilityFour or Five year Graduation Rate

Alternative Education AccountabilityFour, Five or Six year Graduation Rate

Campuses and Districts

Year 1 Year 5

Graduation Rate Calculated if:

Grade 9 & 11 Grade 9 & 11

Grade 9 & 12 Grade 9 & 12

Grade 12 Grade 12

If not, Annual Dropout Rate Calculated


Longitudinal Cohort

A cohort is defined as:

• Students who begin grade 9 in Texas public schools for the first time in the same school year.

• Students who, in the next three school years, enter the Texas public school system in the grade level expected for the cohort.

• Students who transfer out of the Texas public school system over the four or five years for non-graduate reasons are removed from the class.

Note: Preliminary cohorts are available on the TEA (TEASE) website under the accountability tab.


Graduation Plan Longitudinal Cohort - Class of 2016

Graduation Diploma Plans

DAP

RHSP

MHSP

FHSP-EFHSP-DLA

Number of RHSP/DAP Graduates in the Class___________________________________

Number of Graduates in the Class (Excludes FHSP)

Note:• FHSP not included in the methodology• All student group MSR=10• Each race/ethnic group MSR=25• Campuses or districts that do not have a

longitudinal graduation plan rate will use an annual graduation plan rate.

• Beginning with class of 2018, all students will be required to select the FHSP


College and Career Readiness

1) Meet or exceeded TSI criteria in both reading/English language arts and mathematics on TSI, SAT, or ACT (Does not need to be on the same assessment)

or 2) Completed and received credit for at least two advanced/dual enrollment courses in 14-15 or 15-16

or 3) Enrolling in a coherent sequence of CTE Courses (Including the Tech Prep Program)

__________________________________________________________________

Number of annual Graduates (Class of 2015-2016)

Number of annual graduates reported for the 2015-2016 school year that either:

Data Sources (See Appendix K):ACT, Inc. (tests as of June 2015 administration)College board (tests as of June 2015 administration)PEIMSTEA/Pearson TAKS Performance (Spring 2014)


College and Career Readiness IndicatorPercent of Annual Graduates-2015-2016

• Meets the TSI college readiness standard in both reading/ELA and mathematics (TAKS/ACT/SAT).

College Ready Graduate

• Completed and earned credit for at least two advanced/dual enrollment courses in either 2014-2015 or 2015-2016 school year.

Advanced/Dual Enrollment Completion

• Enrolled and reported in a coherent sequence of CTE courses as part of a four year plan of student to take two or more CTE courses for three or more credits during the 2015-2016 school year.

• A graduate reported as enrolled in a Tech Prep program in 2017 are included.

Career and Technical Education Coherent Sequence

of Courses


Index 4 Calculations



Inclusions

1. Grades 3-8 mathematics2. Expanded Postsecondary

Readiness Component3. STAAR A (all subjects and

grades)4. ELL students in year 2-4

that take a Spanishversion.

Exclusions

1. STAAR Alt. 2 (all subjects and grades)

2. ELL students in year 2-4 that take an English version.


Safeguard Measure State Federal

Performance

Target60 91%

Subjects Reading, writing, science, social studies

and Algebra I

Reading and mathematics(includes grades 3-8 math, STAAR A and STAAR Alt 2)

Student Groups

11 Student groupsELL includes= current, M1 and M2 students

7 Student GroupsELL includes= current, M1

and M2 students

MSR All students=None (SNA)

Student Groups=25

All students=25 (no SNA)Student Groups=25 and 10% or 200 for Student

Groups

Federal Performance Rates


Participation RateParticipation Measures:

1. Based on all students enrolled at the time of testing and defined as the total number of test documents submitted by each school district. (denominator)

2. Not limited to students enrolled for a full academic year.

3. Answer documents coded as absent or other are not counted as participants and therefore, not included in calculating the participation numerator.

Scored Answer Documents_____________________________

Total Number of Answer Documents Submitted


Safeguard Measure Federal

Participation

Target 95%

Subjects Reading and Mathematics

Student Groups

7 Student GroupsELL’s include only current ELLs

MSR All Students=25 (no SNA)Student Groups=25 and 10% or

200

Other No Authentic Academic Response (NAAR):included as

participants.Medical Exception: not

included, no impactSTAAR A: Only students

receiving special education services are included in the

special education student group results

Participation Rate


Graduation RateTexas is required to use the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) dropout definition and federal graduation rate calculation.


Graduation Rate

Target4 year= 88.5% 5 year=91% 4 year= 88.5% 5 year=91%

Student Groups

11 student GroupsELL’s include Ever ELL

7 Student GroupsELL’s include Ever ELL

MSR All Students=none (SNA)Student Groups=25

All Students=10 (no SNA)Student Groups=25 and 10% or 200



Limit on Use of Alternative Assessments

STAAR Alt 2 1% Limit on Use of Alternative Assessment STAAR Alt 2 included

1% Limit on Use of Alternative AssessmentSTAAR Alt 2 included

Federal Limits Use of Alternative Assessments

Number of scores that meet STAAR Alternate 2 Satisfactory standard may not exceed 1% of the district’s total participation.

Measures are reported separately for Reading and Mathematics


Disaggregated performance results that serve as safeguards for the accountability rating system to ensure that substandard performance in one or more areas or by one or more student groups is not disguised by higher performance in other areas or by other student groups.

1. Performance

2. Participation

3. Graduation Rates

4. Limits on the use of Alternative Assessments (federal accountability)

System Safeguards


2017 State System Safeguards

2017 Target


Only included in participation rate


Focus School Updates

• Lowest Ten Percent of Title I Schools in Texas• Based on system safeguard performance

gaps in reading and mathematics for each student group compared to the AMO.

• Roughly 598 Statewide• 92 in the Region ONE area (6.5%) in 2013

• 3 Focus Schools for 2016-2017• Priority Schools lowest 5%

Focus Schools

Priority SchoolsTi

tle I

Scho

ols R

ank

Ord

er


Methodology


System Safeguards:– Areas of performance, participation, graduation, alternative

assessments limits– Seven student groups only – All students, African American,

Hispanic, White, Economically Disadvantaged, Special Education, ELLs

– Reading/English and Math only– Performance rate targets:

• 2012-2013: 75%• 2013-2014: 79%• 2014-2015: 83%• 2015-2016: 87% Accountability Year for Current List• 2016-2017: 91% Next Year’s List Targets and Data• 2017-2018: 95%


TEA Correspondence


What Was Evaluated for 2017 Identification

Reading Math

Graduation Rate

2016 Accountability

Report Data


Student Groups Evaluated

All Student Group Economically Disadvantaged

Hispanic

African AmericanWhite Special Education ELL


2017 PFS Methodology


2017 PFS Intervention Requirements

DCSI

Data Analysis

Needs Assessment

Plan for Improvement, Intervention in Ch. 11 Plan

Additional Requirements, Trainings,Etc. TBADistricts

CLT

PSPs not Required for PFS Schools


Texas Accountability Intervention System


TAIS


TAIS

Critical Success Factors1.Academic Performance2.Use of quality data to drive

instruction3.Leadership Effectiveness4.Increased Learning Time5.Family/Community

Engagement6.School Climate7.Teacher Quality


Intervention Requirements

http://tea.texas.gov/Student_Testing_and_Accountability/Monitoring_and_Interventions/Program_Monitoring_and_Interventions/Accountability_Monitoring_Intervention_Guidance_and_Resources/



Improvement Required Intervention Requirements

TAIS


Intervention Requirements TAIS

Received an IR Rating

Failed to meet performanceTarget for one or more System safeguards

Has a 2017 Appeal Pending

Staged in PBMAS


TAIS Intervention RequirementsSuperintendent

DCSI


Intervention Requirements Improvement Required

Campus Intervention TeamDCSI PSP


Intervention Requirements Professional Service Provider

is a required member of the Campus Intervention Team (CIT);

serves as a leadership coach and as a mentor for principals;

builds leadership capacity across the campus;

keeps leaders focused on effective instructional practices that drive school improvement effort;

supports implementation of all campus intervention requirements; and

monitors implementation of the targeted improvement plan and reports progress to the agency

PSP


Intervention Requirements District Coordinator of School Improvement

oversees the work of school improvement as a required member of the Campus Intervention Team (CIT);

facilitates learning of the Texas Accountability Intervention System (TAIS) continuous improvement process and ensures the participation of all relevant staff in intervention requirements;

participates in the needs assessment, improvement planning and monitoring process using the Texas Accountability Intervention System (TAIS);

assures that requirements and submission are completed on time; and

serves as an advocate for the campus, communicates high expectations, a clear vision and focus on learning, a sense of urgency, assures operational flexibility and coordinates district support.

DCSI


Intervention Requirements Principal

leads the work of school improvement as a required member of the Campus Leadership Team (CLT);

conducts the needs assessment, develops and monitors the Targeted Improvement Planning, in coordination with the CIT and CLT, using the Texas Accountability Intervention System (TAIS);

provides leadership to make bold changes that lead to improved instruction and student learning;

implements the daily activities, based on the Critical Success Factors, as outlined in the Targeted Improvement Plan (TIP);

collects evidence of effectiveness of implemented interventions; and

adjusts increase student academic performance outcomes.

Principal


Intervention Requirements Superintendent

Superintendent communicates the sense of urgency based

on the accountability rating and assures that appropriate district support addresses the needs of the campus in improvement and that requirements and submissions are completed;

selects the District Coordinator of School Improvement (DCSI), who is a district employee, who works with the campus in improvement to support the needed changes that will result in meeting standard;

selects an approved Professional Service Provider (PSP) to provide external support and technical assistance for the campus in improvement.


Intervention Requirements Education Service Center

ESC

assists in the selection of a PSP to meet the campus/district needs, at the request of the district;

assists with the work of school improvement as an optional member of the Campus Leadership Team (CLT);

meets with the DCSI, Principal, and PSP to determine the appropriate level of support needed;

participates in the needs assessment and development and monitoring of the Targeted Improvement Plan (TIP) using the Texas Accountability Intervention System (TAIS) framework; and

provides support through ESC resources and training opportunities tailored to the needs of the campus.


Intervention Requirements TEA Consultant

TEA Consultant coordinates the support of partners

providing support to IR campuses; serves as a partner in the identification of

campus needs and as a resource for identifying appropriate strategies for improvement;

reviews and provides feedback on required submissions to further drive school improvement efforts;

monitors progress of the targeted improvement plan and provides support in identifying necessary adjustments; and

requests additional information or poses questions to assist the CIT and CLT.


Intervention Requirements TEAMS

Campus Intervention

Team

Campus Leadership

Team

DistrictIntervention

Team


PUBLIC MEETINGS AND BOARD APPROVAL

Questions: slido com


Public Meetings & Board Approval

1 TEC 11.253(g) 2 TEC 39.106(a)(4) 3 TAC 97.1061(a)(3)(A)(ii) 4 TEC 39.106 (a-1) 5 TEC 39.106(d) 6 TEC 39.107 (a-2) (1) 7 TAC 97.1064(d) 8 TEC 39.107(b) 9 TAC 97.1064(d)(1) 10 TEC 39.107(b-1)(3) 11 TEC 39.107(b-3)

1st Year IR

Hold one or more public meeting(s) to:-Discuss the performance of the campus and the campus performance objectives1

-Solicit input on the targeted elements of the Ch. 11 plan to be implemented in 2017-18*2

-Solicit input on the Targeted Improvement Plan to be implemented 2018-19*2

Required board approvals:-Targeted elements of the Ch. 11 plan5

2nd Year IR

Hold one or more public meeting(s) to:-Discuss the performance of the campus and the campus performance objectives1

-Solicit input on the updated Targeted Improvement Plan*2

Turnaround Plan Requirements (do not have to happen in a public meeting):-Solicit input on the development of the turnaround plan6:

• At a minimum, post to district website within 60 days of receiving preliminary rating7

-Provide stakeholders the opportunity to review and give written feedback on the completed turnaround plan8:

• Districts must notify all stakeholders of their ability to review the completed plan on the district website at least 30 days before the plan is submitted to the board of trustees9 (submit comments to agency with turnaround plan)10

Required board approvals:-Updated targeted improvement plan5

-Turnaround Plan11

3rd Year IR+

Hold one or more public meeting(s) to:•Discuss the performance of the campus and the campus performance objectives1

•Solicit input on the turnaround implementation plan*2

Required board approvals:•Turnaround implementation plan5

Meetings marked with an asterisk (*) must take place at the campus.2 Parents and students of the campus must be provided written notice of this meeting and notice must be posted 15 days prior to the meeting3 on the campus website4.

Purpose: This guide lists minimum requirements for engaging stakeholders in the continuous improvement process. All documentation is maintained locally unless otherwise specified.

New for 2017-2018


Changes for 1st Year IR Campuses

Last Year: 16-17 This year 17-18• Identified a DCSI• Assigned a CIT• Attended full one-day TAIS training in

Aug/Sept at local ESC with CLT and DCSI• CIT conducted DA and NA after training • Prepared 16-17 Targeted Improvement Plan

(TIP) and was submitted by Oct• Board approved TIP• Implemented TIP• Submitted quarterly progress of TIP• PSP submitted quarterly progress report• TEA Provided quarterly feedback via TEA

consultant and TCDSS support specialist• PSP, DCSI, & principal lead quarterly check ins• Attended AIE

• Big picture shift: TIP will be drafted while targeted elements of CIP will be implemented

• Identify a DCSI• Assign a CIT• Submit targeted elements of CIP• Set up coordinated call with TEA/CIT/ESC to address questions and

determine campus readiness to engage in continuous improvement• A pacing guide will be provided for teams to support the development of

the 18-19 TIP and implementation and monitoring of CIP targeted elements plan

• Obtain board approval of targeted elements• Training will be delivered through online modules led by DCSI• Face to Face training on root cause analysis for DCSI and Principal• Paced out development of Targeted Improvement Plan with a systemic

lens• DCSI leads visioning and data analysis modules• PSP and DCSI will lead the check ins• Attend AIE only if a TTIPS campus• Submit 18-19 TIP by June 2018

Intervention Calender1st Year IR

Improvement Required Intervention Guidance




Pacing Guide

Board Approval andPublic Meeting

Intervention Overview

Resources

Targeted ElementsGuidance

TAIS Resources

Support Network: TEA,DCSI, ESC, PSP


Distinction DesignationsRecognition of Outstanding Achievement

Academic Achievement in English Language Arts/Reading

Academic Achievement in Mathematics

Academic Achievement in Science

Academic Achievement in Social Studies

Top 25 Percent: Student Progress

Top 25 Percent: Closing Performance Gaps

Postsecondary Readiness

Campus O

nly


Distinction Designation Labels

• The campus or district is rated met standard and has met the criteria for the distinction designation.

Distinction Earned

• The campus did not meet the distinction designation criteria or was rated Improvement Required.

No Distinction Earned

• The campus or district does not have results to evaluate for the distinction designation, is evaluated by AEA provisions, is labeled Not Rated or Not Rated: Data Integrity Issues or is Paired.

Not Eligible


Distinction DesignationsCampus Comparison Groups

Campus distinction designations will be based on campus performance in relation to unique campus comparable groups (40 per group - See Appendix H)

Campus Comparable Group Criteria1. Campus Type2. Grade Span3. Campus Size4. Percent Economically Disadvantaged Students5. Percent of English Language Learners6. Mobility Rate (based on Cumulative Attendance)7. Percent of students receiving special education services8. Percent of students enrolled in an Early College High School

program


Campus Comparison Groups

Campus A Campus B Campus C

Based on Linear Distance

Group based on the smallest distance from the target campus


Academic Achievement Distinction Designation

Elementary Middle/Junior High School High SchoolTop quartile of campus comparable group for at least 50% of the percent indicators

Top quartile of campus comparable group for at least 50% of the percent indicators

Top quartile of campus comparable group for at least 33% of the indicators

Reading/ELA Mathematics Science Social Studies

Methodology

See Appendix K for Data Sources


Academic Achievement Distinction Designation Elementary Indicators

English Language Arts (6) Mathematics (6) Science (2) Attendance Rate Greater than Expected Growth in

Reading/ELA Masters Grade Level Performance in

Grade 3 Reading Masters Grade Level Performance in



Grade 4 Writing

Attendance Rate Greater than Expected Growth

in MathematicsMasters Grade Level

Performance in Grade 3 Mathematics

Masters Grade Level Performance in Grade 4 Mathematics


Attendance RateMasters Level Performance in

Grade 5 Science

Rule: Campuses in the top 25% of the campus comparable group in at least 50% of the indicators qualify to earn a distinction. Attendance rate can not be the sole attained measure.


Academic Achievement Distinction Designation Middle School Indicators

English Language Arts (6)

Mathematics (7) Science (2) Social Studies (2)

Attendance Rate Greater than Expected

Growth in Reading/ELA Masters Grade Level

Performance in Grade 6 Reading

Masters Grade Level Performance in Grade 7 Reading

Masters Grade Level Performance in Grade 8 Reading

Masters Grade Level Performance in Grade 7 Writing

Attendance Rate Greater than Expected

Growth in Mathematics




Algebra I by Grade 8 Participation

Algebra I Performance (Masters Grade Level)

Attendance RateMasters Level

Performance in Grade 5 Science

Attendance Rate Masters Grade Level

Performance in Grade 8 Social Studies



Academic Achievement Distinction Designation High School Indicators

English Language Arts (10) Mathematics (9) Science (6) Social Studies (5)

Attendance Rate Greater than expected growth in

Reading/ELA Masters Grade Level Performance

in English I Masters Grade Level Performance

in English II AP/IB Examination Performance:

ELA AP/IB Examination Participation:

ELA SAT/ACT Participation SAT Performance: Reading and

Writing ACT Performance: ELA Advanced/Dual Enrollment

Course Completion Rate: ELA/Reading

Attendance Rate Greater Than Expected

Student Growth in Mathematics

Masters Level Performance in Algebra I

AP/IB Examination Participation: Mathematics

AP/IB Examination Performance: Mathematics

SAT/ACT Participation SAT Performance:

Mathematics ACT Performance:

Mathematics Advanced/Dual-Credit

Course Completion Rate: Mathematics


Performance in EOC Biology ACT Performance: Science AP/IB Examination

Participation: Science AP/IB Examination

Performance: Science Advanced/Dual-Credit Course

Completion Rate: Science


Performance in U.S. History EOC

AP/IB Examination Participation: Social Studies

AP/IB Examination Performance: Social Studies

Advanced/Dual-Credit Course Completion Rate: Social Studies



Campus Top 25%: Student Progress

A distinction is awarded for outstanding improvement in student progress to a campus if:

Campus evaluated on Index 2 and earned a Met Standard label; and Index 2 value must be in the top quartile for its comparison group.


Campus Top 25%: Closing Performance Gaps

A distinction is awarded for outstanding improvement in closing performance gaps to a campus if:

Campus evaluated on Index 3 and earned a Met Standard label and; Index 3 value must be in the top quartile for its comparison group.


Postsecondary Readiness Distinction Designation

Outstanding Academic Achievementin Postsecondary Readiness

Elementary and Middle Schools

Met Standard

Top 25% of Campus Comparable Group for

Index 4 Score

High Schools & K-12 Campuses

Met Standard

Top 25% of the Campus Comparable Group for at

least 33% of the Indicators

Districts

Met Standard

Top 25% of Campus Comparable Groups for at least 55% of the indicators

Exceptions: Single campus districts and charter are eligible to earn a distinction; however, the district or charter is not eligible. Districts with less than five campus-level postsecondary indicators are not eligible for the postsecondary readiness distinctions


Postsecondary Readiness Distinction Designation

Postsecondary Readiness Indicators

1. Index 4 STAAR Performance; Percent at STAAR Meets Grade Level Standard

2. Four Year Longitudinal Graduation Rate (2016 Cohort)3. Four Year Longitudinal Graduation Rate (2015 Cohort)4. College Ready Graduates: TSIA/SAT/ACT in both ELA and Mathematics5. Advanced /Dual Enrollment Course Completion Rate: Any Subject6. SAT/ACT Performance (at or above the criterion, 2015-2016)7. SAT/ACT Participation (2015-2016)8. AP/IB Examination Performance: Any Subject (school year 2015-2016

percent of examinees meeting the criterion score)9. CTE-Coherent Sequence Graduates


Postsecondary Readiness DistinctionDistrict Methodology

STEP 1• Sum the number of district-wide postsecondary distinction indicators across all eligible campus-level indicators

Step 2• Determine the number of indicators that each campus attains in the top 25% of their campus comparison group.


Postsecondary Readiness DistinctionDistrict Methodology

Step 3• Compare the percent of district-wide top quartile postsecondary distinction indicator to

the state target of 70 percent.

Step 4• Districts that attain the top quartile on 55 percent of their district-wide postsecondary

readiness indicator receive the postsecondary readiness distinction designation


Appealing the Ratings

Limited to rare cases where a data or calculation error is attributed to the test contractor or the Texas

Education Agency


Dates for Appealing Ratings

August 14, 2017 Ratings ReleaseNo appeals resolved before the ratings release

August 15, 2017 Ratings Release on TEA Public Website

August 14 – September 15, 2017

2017 Appeals Window. Appeals may be submitted by the superintendent once ratings are released. Districts register their intent to appeal using the TEASE Accountability application and mail their appeal letter with supporting documentation. Appeals not signed by the district superintendent are denied. See the “How to Appeal” section later in this chapter.

September 15, 2017 Appeals DeadlineAppeal must be postmarked or hand-delivered no later than September 15, 2017, 5:00 PM CDT, to be considered.

November 2017 Decisions Released Commissioner’s decisions are mailed in the form of a response letters to each school district and charter that filed an appeal by September 15 deadline and letters are posted to TEASE site

November 2017 Ratings UpdateOutcomes of all appeals are scheduled a ratings update scheduled in December 2016. TEASE and public websites are updated


AppealsKey Considerations

May appeal for any reason, the accountability system requires that the rules be applied uniformly.

• Only appeals that would result in changed rating would be considered

• Districts are responsible for providing TEA with accurate information, i.e. student answer documents or information submitted via online testing systems

• Not a permissible method to correct data • Decisions regarding distinction designations cannot be

appealed


PEG List

Inclusion Criteria

In 1995, the Texas Legislature created the Public Education Grant (PEG) program (TEC §§29.201– 29.205). The PEG

program permits a parent whose child attends a school on the PEG List to request a transfer to another school within

their home district or to a school in a different district.


PEG List

Inclusion Criteria

The passing rate on STAAR (Index I) are less than or equal to 50% for any subject in any two of

the preceding years (2014,2015,2016)

The campus was rated Improvement Required

in 2014, 2015, 2016


PEG List

Inclusion Criteria

The passing rate on STAAR (Index I) are less than or equal to 50% for any subject in any two of

the preceding years (2014, 2015, 2016)

The campus was rated Improvement Required

in 2014, 2015, 2016

Based on All Student Group

Only

Schools can remain on the list for up to 3 Years


PEG List

Example Identification

Example 1School that

was Improvement Required in 2015

Example 2School with fewer

than 50 percent of its students passing

reading in 2016 and 2015

Example 3School with fewer than 50

percent of its students passing science in 2015

and fewer than 50 percent passing ELA in 2017.


PEG List

http://tea.texas.gov/perfreport/peg_faq.html.aspx


183 Texas Education Code (TEC),§39.361 and§39.362 require districts to do the following:

Publish whether each campus has been awarded a distinction designation or is currently rated Improvement Required and explain the significance of the information.

By the 10th day of the new school year, post on its website the current accreditation status and accountability ratings, Texas Academic Performance Reports (TAPR), and School Report Cards (SRC).

Define and explain each accreditation status under TEC §39.051.

More information is available at https://rptsvr1.tea.texas.gov/perfreport/3297_faq.html.

Public Notification Requirements for Districts

https://rptsvr1.tea.texas.gov/perfreport/3297_faq.html


Instructional Leaders

Testing Coordinators

Federal Programs Directors

District Coordinators of

School Improvement

PrincipalsDistrict

Department Coordinators

Assistant Principals

Superintendents


Systems of Support

District Systems Review

Learning ProgressMeasure Reports

AccountabilityAcademy

TurnaroundPrincipal Institute


Accountability Academy

State Accountability

Student Outcomes

Systems

IndicatorsLevers

2 Day AcademyOpen to all Campus and

District Leaders

SuperintendentsAssistant Superintendents

Curriculum DirectorsDeans of InstructionTesting Coordinators


Turnaround Principal Institute

Inter-District Cohort Option:

3 Days of Personalized Professional development In Turnaround Principal Competencies

2 On-site Coaching Visits Year-long, personalized

support

Customizable District Cohort Options Available:

Year-Long Support with Accountability and Turnaround Competencies with support

2-3 Day Cohort with support

School DistrictDates TBA


Interviews

Focus Groups

Document Review


Turnaround Leaders’ Academy

PEIMS Coding

Schoolwide Discipline

Master Scheduling

Preparing our next generation of Principals for Turnaround Leadership

Team Protocols

Assessment Planning

3 Day Academy Coaching Teachers

DrivingFor

Results

Influencing For

Results

ShowingConfidence

To Lead

Problem Solving


Impact and Influence• Team Leadership

Engaging the Team• Developing Others

Turnaround Leader Competencies

DrivingFor

Results

Influencing For

Results

ShowingConfidence

To Lead

Problem Solving

• Self-Confidence / Commitment to Student Learning

• Belief in Learning Potential

Achievement /Focus on Sustainable Results• Monitoring & Directiveness

/Holding People Accountable

• Initiative & Persistence• Planning Ahead

• Analytical Thinking• Conceptual Thinking


Belinda S. Gorena, Administrator956-984-6173

[email protected]

Ruben Degollado, Coordinator956-984-6185

[email protected]

Benjamin Macias, Specialist 956-984-6234

[email protected]

Barbara Gonzales, Specialist986-984-6145

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]




Accountability - Region One ESC...STAAR Performance Met or exceeded the Approaches Grade Level...

Documents

Transcript of Accountability - Region One ESC...STAAR Performance Met or exceeded the Approaches Grade Level...