Accountability Update District Testing Coordinator Advisory Committee Meeting March 20, 2014 1.
-
Upload
joanna-mosley -
Category
Documents
-
view
213 -
download
0
Transcript of Accountability Update District Testing Coordinator Advisory Committee Meeting March 20, 2014 1.
Accountability UpdateDistrict Testing CoordinatorAdvisory Committee Meeting
March 20, 2014
1
What’s New (Well, since last year)•State Accountability
▫Changes to Index System▫Who Counts and How▫System Safeguards and other Targets
•Federal Accountability▫Priority and Focus Schools▫System Safeguards▫Focus School Tool
•Data Validation – Student Assessment
2
3Accountability Development Timeline
Advisory Group
Meeting Date Purpose
ATAC December 5-6, 2013
The Accountability Technical Advisory Committee (ATAC) addressed a variety of technical issues related to 2014 accountability. Preliminary recommendations and meeting materials are posted online under 2014 Accountability Development.
APAC January 22, 2014
Newly designated members of the Accountability Policy Advisory Committee (APAC) reviewed the 2013 development process for the performance index framework, indicators, and distinction designations. Meeting materials are posted online under 2014 Accountability Development.
ATAC February 11, 2014
The ATAC recommended preliminary 2014 ratings criteria and targets, which are scheduled for review by the APAC in March 2014.
4Accountability Development Timeline
Advisory Group
Meeting Date Purpose
APAC March 6, 2014APAC will make final recommendations on the accountability ratings criteria for 2014, and performance index targets for 2014, 2015, and 2016, subject to commissioner approval.
AADDC March 7, 2014The Academic Achievement Distinction Designation Committee (AADDC) for science and social studies will convene to develop preliminary recommendations on the 2014 criteria for science and social studies distinction designations.
AADDC Mid March 2014
The AADDC will finalize recommendations on the 2014 science and social studies distinction designation criteria.
COE End of March 2014
Commissioner will announce accountability ratings and distinction designation criteria for 2014 and final 2014 targets, preliminary 2015 targets, and preview 2016 targets.
5
2013
Combined over All Subjects: Reading, Mathematics, Writing, Science, and Social Studies.
Student Groups: All Students.
Performance Standards: Phase-in 1 Level II (Satisfactory).
STAAR End-of-Course (EOC) Assessments (15 total):
English l – Reading; English ll – Reading; English lll – Reading
English l – Writing; English ll – Writing; English lll – Writing
Algebra l; Geometry; Algebra ll
Biology; Chemistry; Physics
World Geography; World History; US History
English Language Learners (English and Spanish tests):
Students in US schools Year 1 - Year 3 excluded Students in US schools Year 4 and beyond included
Index 1: Student Achievement
Index 1: 2013 vs. 2014 Comparison
Proposed 2014
Combined over All Subjects: Reading, Mathematics, Writing, Science, and Social Studies.
Student Groups: All Students.
Performance Standards: Phase-in 1 Level II (Satisfactory).
English Language Learners (English and Spanish tests):
Students in US schools Year 1 excluded
STAAR EOC Assessments (5 total):
English l (combined tests); English ll (combined tests) beginning in spring 2014
Algebra l
Biology
US History
Students in US schools Year 2 and beyond included
Shaded areas are new for 2014
ELL Progress Measure included for those tested in English
6
Index 2: Student Progress Progress Measures by Subject Area and School Type
2013
Elem. School Middle School High School
READING
Gr. 4 Reading Gr. 6 Reading English l Reading
Gr. 5 Reading Gr. 7 Reading English ll Reading
_ Gr. 8 Reading _
_ English l Reading _
MATHEMATICS
Gr. 4 Mathematics Gr. 6 Mathematics Algebra l
Gr. 5 Mathematics Gr. 7 Mathematics _
_ Gr. 8 Mathematics _
_ Algebra l _
WRITING
_ _ English ll Writing
Proposed 2014
Elem. School Middle School High School
READING
Gr. 4 Reading Gr. 6 Reading _
Gr. 5 Reading Gr. 7 Reading _
_ Gr. 8 Reading _
_ _ _
MATHEMATICS
Gr. 4 Mathematics Gr. 6 Mathematics Algebra l
Gr. 5 Mathematics Gr. 7 Mathematics _
_ Gr. 8 Mathematics _
_ Algebra l _
WRITING
_ _ _
7
7
Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps
2013
Student Groups:
Economically Disadvantaged Lowest Performing Race/Ethnicity:
The two lowest performing race/ethnicity student groups on the campus or within the district, based on 2012 assessment results.
Points based on STAAR performance:
Phase-in 1 Level II satisfactory performance: One point for each percent of tests at the Phase-in 1 Level II satisfactory performance standard.
By Subject Area: Reading, Mathematics, Writing, Science, and Social Studies.
Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps emphasizes advanced academic achievement of economically disadvantaged students and the two lowest performing race/ethnicity student groups.
Proposed 2014
Student Groups:
Economically Disadvantaged Lowest Performing Race/Ethnicity:
Points based on STAAR performance:
Phase-in 1 Level II satisfactory performance: One point for each percent of tests at the Phase-in 1 Level II satisfactory performance standard.
Level III advanced performance:Two points for each percent of tests at the Level III advanced performance standard.
By Subject Area: Reading, Mathematics, Writing, Science, and Social Studies.
Level III advanced performance:Two points for each percent of tests at the Level III advanced performance standard.
Shaded areas are new for 2014
Select the two lowest performing student groups if both the prior year reading and mathematics subject area test results each have at least 25 tests.
8
Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness
2013 Graduation Score: Combined performance across the
graduation and dropout rates for:
Grade 9-12 Four-Year Graduation Rate for All Students and all student groups; or
Grade 9-12 Five-Year Graduation Rate for All Students and all student groups, whichever contributes the higher number of points to the index.
RHSP/DAP Annual Graduates: All Students and race/ethnicity student groups.
2014 Graduation Score: Combined performance across the
graduation and dropout rates for:
Grade 9-12 Four-Year Graduation Rate for All Students and all student groups; or
Grade 9-12 Five-Year Graduation Rate for All Students and all student groups, whichever contributes the higher number of points to the index.
RHSP/DAP Graduates Based on Longitudinal Cohort: All Students and race/ethnicity student groups.
STAAR Score: STAAR Percent Met Final Level ll on one or more tests for All Students and race/ethnicity student groups.
Additional Indicators Required by House Bill 5 (83rd Texas Legislature, 2013)
Texas Success Initiative college readiness benchmarks.
Number of students who earn postsecondary credit required for a foundation high school program, an associate’s degree, or an industry certification.
Index 4: 2013 vs. 2014
Shaded areas are new for 2014
STAAR Score: STAAR Percent Met Final Level ll on one or more tests for All Students and race/ethnicity student groups.
Additional Indicators Required by House Bill 5 (83rd Texas Legislature, 2013)
Texas Success Initiative college readiness benchmarks.
Number of students who earn postsecondary credit required for a foundation high school program, an associate’s degree, or an industry certification.
9
2013 and 2014 Index Targets for Non-AEA Campuses and Districts
To receive a Met Standard rating, non-AEA campuses and districts met the following accountability targets on all indexes for which they had performance data in 2013.
2014 Index targets will be based on recommendations from accountability advisory groups and finalized by the commissioner in spring 2014.
Performance Index Non-AEA Campuses2013 2014
Non-AEA Districts2013 2014
Index 1: Student Achievement 50 TBD 50 TBD
Index 2: Student Progress
High School 17
TBD 21 TBDMiddle School 29
Elem School 30
Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps 55 TBD 55 TBD
Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness 75 TBD 75 TBD
10
Performance Index AEA Campuses2013 2014
AEA Charter Districts2013 2014
Index 1: Student Achievement 25 TBD 25 TBD
Index 2: Student Progress 9 TBD 9 TBD
Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps 30 TBD 30 TBD
Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness 45 TBD 45 TBD
To receive a Met Alternative Standard rating, AEA campuses and charters met the following accountability targets on all indexes for which they had performance data in 2013.
2014 Index targets will be based on recommendations from accountability advisory groups and finalized by the commissioner in spring 2014.
2013 and 2014 Index Targets for AEA Campuses and Charters
11
Distinction Designations
2013 Distinction Designations
Student Progress (based on Index 2)
Academic Achievement in: Reading/English Language Arts Mathematics
2014 Distinction Designations
Student Progress (based on Index 2)
Closing Performance Gaps (based on Index 3)
Academic Achievement in: Reading/English Language Arts Mathematics Science Social Studies
Postsecondary Readiness for campuses and districts
Per Texas Education Code (TEC) §39.201, alternative education campuses (AECs)evaluated under AEA provisions are not eligible for distinction designations.
Shaded areas are new for 2014
12
Distinction Designations
Districts and Campuses Postsecondary Readiness: House Bill 5 (83rd Texas Legislature, 2013) expanded distinction designations to both districts and campuses for outstanding performance in attainment of postsecondary readiness.
Criteria must include indicators based on percentages of students who:
Achieve college-readiness standards on STAAR; Earn nationally or internationally recognized business/industry
certification; Complete a coherent sequence of CTE courses; Complete dual credit courses or a postsecondary course for local credit; Achieve college readiness standards on SAT, ACT, PSAT, or ACT-PLAN
examinations; and Earn college credit based on AP/IB performance.
13
* Targets for 2013 correspond to the performance target for Index 1: Student Achievement.
Indicator Entity All Students
African Amer.
Amer. Indian Asian Hispanic Pacific
Islander White Two or More Races
Eco.Disadv. ELL Special Ed.
Performance Rates*
ReadingState 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%
Federal 75% 75% n/a n/a 75% n/a 75% n/a 75% 75% 75%
MathematicsState 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%
Federal 75% 75% n/a n/a 75% n/a 75% n/a 75% 75% 75%
Writing 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%
Science 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%
Social Studies 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%
Participation Rates
Reading 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95%
Mathematics 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95%
Federal Graduation Rates (including improvement targets)
4-year 78% 78% 78% 78% 78% 78% 78% 78% 78% 78% 78%
5-year 83% 83% 83% 83% 83% 83% 83% 83% 83% 83% 83%
District Limits on Use of Alternative Assessment Results
Reading
Modified 2% Not Applicable
Alternate 1% Not Applicable
Mathematics
Modified 2% Not Applicable
Alternate 1% Not Applicable
20
13 A
ccou
nta
bility
Syste
m S
afe
gu
ard
Measu
res a
nd
Targ
ets
Designation Criteria
Current Tier I & Tier II TTIPS
Lowest performing schools based on combined “All Student” reading and
math performance
Schools with a graduation rate less than 60%
73 schools
36 schools
188 schools
14
Attend required trainings
Engage in the Texas Accountability
Intervention System (TAIS) continuous
improvement process
Assign a District Coordinator of School Improvement (DCSI)
Evaluate current campus staff
Create a plan which addresses the ESEA
Turnaround Principles
Priority School Interventions
15
Why am I a Focus School?
Title I schools ranked by the widest gaps between reading/math performance of the federal student groups (7) and safeguard targets of 75%.
Focus School Gap Tool
•Calculates Focus School Gap▫Region 4 Website▫Click on Services▫Click on Accountability▫Click on Visit our Accountability Portal
CDC #:
District:State:Title I: #N/A
Index 1 Index 2 Index 3 Index 4
#N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A
CDC Campus Name Subj. All Stu. Af.Am. Hisp. White Eco.Dis SWD ELL
Math #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A
Reading #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A
CDC Campus Name Subj. All Stu. Af.Am. Hisp. White Eco.Dis SWD ELL
Math #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A
Reading #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A
CDC Campus Name Subj. All Stu. Af.Am. Hisp. White Eco.Dis SWD ELL
Math #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A
Reading #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A
CDC Campus Name Math Reading Total
0 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A
CDC Campus Name Subj. All Stu. Af.Am. Hisp. White Eco.Dis SWD ELL
Math #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A
Reading #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A
CDC Campus Name Math Reading Total
CDC Campus Name #N/A #N/A #N/A
#N/A
3. Calculate the gap between the performance rate and the 75% AMO target for each student group. Gaps are not calculated where the performance meets or exceeds the AMO target or minimum size was not met.
0 #N/A
Fed. Acct.: #N/A
1. The performance rates for Reading and math are collected for the federally required student groups (Percentages below the AMO Target of 75% are highlighted).
2. The number of tests take by each student group is analyzed to determine if the minimum size requirements were met. Student groups not meeting the minimum size requirements are marked in red below (25 tests AND 10% of total or 200 tests).
0 #N/A
#N/A0
#N/A
State Stage:
Campus: #N/A
#N/A
Number of Groups Focus Gap
0 #N/A
State Index System #
Met Index Standard
Enrollment
#N/A
0 #N/A
5. Focus Gaps at PROPOSED 2014-15 Standards (79% System Safeguards) if no change from 2013 data.
4. Focus gaps were calculated by totalling the reading and math performance gaps and dividing by the number of student groups meeting the size requirements (up to 14 groups total).
Number of Groups
0
Focus Gap
#N/A
19Indicator Entity All
StudentsAfrican Amer.
Amer. Indian Asian Hispanic Pacific
Islander White Two or More Races
Eco.Disadv. ELL Special Ed.
Performance Rates*
ReadingState TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
Federal 79% 79% n/a n/a 79% n/a 79% n/a 79% 79% 79%
MathematicsState TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
Federal 79% 79% n/a n/a 79% n/a 79% n/a 79% 79% 79%
Writing TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
Science TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
Social Studies TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
Participation Rates
Reading 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95%
Mathematics 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95%
Federal Graduation Rates (including improvement targets)
4-year 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80%
5-year 85% 85% 85% 85% 85% 85% 85% 85% 85% 85% 85%
District Limits on Use of Alternative Assessment Results
Reading
Modified 2% Not Applicable
Alternate 1% Not Applicable
Mathematics
Modified 2% Not Applicable
Alternate 1% Not Applicable
20
14 A
ccou
nta
bility
Syste
m S
afe
gu
ard
Measu
res a
nd
Targ
ets
* Targets for 2014 correspond to the performance target for Index 1: Student Achievement.
Data Validation – Student Assessment•Staging information not released.•DVM Manual available on TEA website
▫http://www.tea.state.tx.us/pbm/DVManuals.aspx
•Posted to ISAM when available
Questions???
ELL Progress Measure Calculation•Step 1 – Determine eligibility for ELL
Progress Measure
•Step 2 – Determine Plan for Student
•Step 3 – Determine Progress Measure for student▫Did not Meet Standard▫Met Standard▫Exceeded the Standard
Step 1 – Determine Eligibility
•Must have valid STAAR Score•Student is classified as LEP•No Parental Denial•Took English-language version of STAAR
▫Includes STAAR and STAAR-L▫No Modified, Alternate, or Spanish
•Student not exceeded the number of years in plan (determined after Step 2)
Step 2 – Determine Plan
•From SAME Administration▫# Years in US Schools▫TELPAS Composite Rating▫Extenuating Circumstances
Unschooled asylee/refugee Student with interrupted formal education
•Plan determined by chart
Step 3 – Determine ELL Progress•Use Plan and Appropriate table to
detemine•Compare Scale Score with appropriate
score in table▫< Met - Did Not Meet Standard▫Met <score<Exceeded - Met Standard▫>=Exceeded - Exceeded the standard
Questions???