Accountability Rating System

H I S D Becoming #GreatAllOver1

Accountability Rating System

H I S D Becoming #GreatAllOver 2

Performance Index Framework Overview

Accountability System


CHANGES FOR 2013-2014 and BEYONDAccountability

System

Commissioner to set index cut scores and ratings labels by end of March 2014.

The number of EOC assessments required for graduation reduced from 15 to 5.

New Academic Achievement Designations (AAD): Top 25% Closing Achievement Gaps based on performance

on Index 3. AAD in Science. AAD in Social Studies. Additional indicators for Academic Achievement in

Reading/ELA and Mathematics based on PSAT and ACT Plan test results.

Postsecondary Readiness Designations: TEA currently working to determine methodology.


CHANGES FOR 2013-2014 and BEYOND


Community/Student Engagement and Compliance Self Assessment Campus and district self-assessment on 8 locally-developed

criteria of community/student engagement and one indicator on compliance will be reported along with the accountability ratings for 2014. (Specific training forthcoming.) Fine arts Wellness & physical education Community & parental involvement 21st Century workforce development program Second language acquisition Digital learning environment Dropout prevention strategies Educational program for G/T students



Utilization of the ELL Progress Measure The Texas English Language Learner (ELL) Progress Measure

provides year-to-year performance expectations on the State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR) content-area assessments for Texas ELL students.

The year-to-year STAAR expectations take into account the level of English language proficiency ELL students possess, thus providing a more meaningful gauge of annual improvement or progress for these students than the general STAAR Progress Measure.



To be eligible for the ELL Progress Measure, a student must: be classified as limited English proficient (LEP), take the English language versions of STAAR, and not have a parent denial requested for ELL services.

(The ELL Progress Measure documentation is still recommended by TEA and has not been approved by the Commissioner.)


System


How does the Texas ELL Progress Measure work? 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 Level II: Satisfactory Academic Performance standards on STAAR content-area assessments.

Students’ plans are determined by the number of years they have been enrolled in U.S. schools and the TELPAS composite proficiency level they obtain the first time they take TELPAS, beginning in 2014 and with second grade.


System


Student Achievement

Index I

Minimum Size RequirementsIndicator All Students Student Groups

Index 1 STAAR Percent Met Level II None; Special Analysis (SA) < 10 students

N/A

Accountability Target: TBD (was 50)

Reading Math Writing Science SocialStudies Total % Met

Level II

Students Met Level II

50 + 38 + 19 + 10 + 19 = 13645% 45

Students Tested 100 + 100 + 42 + 40 + 23 = 305

Index Score 45



Deleted - TAKS not included (TAKS, grade 11 results at Met Standard performance standard in 2013 only).

New ELL Exclusions: Students in U.S. schools Year 1 excluded Students in U.S. schools Year 2 through Year 4 included based

on test version: • English test version using STAAR ELL Progress Measure; • Spanish test version using phase-in Level II performance

standard Students in U.S. schools Year 5 and beyond included at phase-in

Level II performance standard Exceptions: asylees/refugees in U.S. schools Year 1 through

Year 5 excluded; immigrants entering at Grade 9 or above excluded

Student Achievement

Index I


Student Progress

Index 2

STAAR Weighted Growth Rate for Reading

All African Amer.

Amer. Indian Asian Hispanic Pacific

Island. White Two or More ELL Special

Ed.Total

PointsMax.

Points

Number of Tests 100 50 40 30Did Not Meet Expectation 20 10 0 10

Met Expectation 60 20 10 15Exceeded Expectation 20 20 30 5Percent of Students: Met or Exceeded Expectation

80% 80% 100% 67%

Exceeded Expectation 20% 40% 75% 17%

Reading Weighted Growth Rate

100 120 175 84 479 800


Student Progress

Index 2

Accountability Target: TBD (was 5th Percentile of Campus Performance)

Indicator All African Amer.



Ed.Total

PointsMax.

Points

STAAR ReadingWeighted Growth Rate 100 120 175 84 479 800STAAR Mathematics Weighted Growth Rate 85 98 150 160 493 800STAAR WritingWeighted Growth Rate 140 170 310 400Total 1282 2000Index Score (total points divided by maximum points) 64


Index 2 STAAR Percent Met Progress 2013>= 25 students 2014 = None, SA <10

>= 25 students



Exclusions: ELL students in U.S. schools Year 1 excluded Exception: asylees/refugees in U.S. schools Year 1 through

Year 5 excluded Students from Grade 8 Reading to English I EOC, or from

Grade 7 Writing to English I EOC New Inclusions:

ELL students in U.S. schools Year 2 and beyond included using ELL Progress measure for students tested in English

Students tested on the STAAR Modified and Alternate Students who skip grades, e.g., from 5th to 7th grade

mathematics. Students who transition from Spanish to English STAAR in

mathematics.

Student Progress

Index 2


STAAR Weighted Performance Rate for

Reading

Econ. Disadv. Lowest Performing Group - 1

Lowest Performing Group - 2

Total Points

Maximum Points

Number of Tests 80 40 25

Performance Results: Phase-in Level II and above Number Percent

80 100%

20 50%

25 100%

Level III Advanced (2014 and beyond) Number Percent

40 50%

0 0%

25 100%

Reading Weighted Performance

150 50 200 400 600


Index 3 STAAR Performance NA gap group: >= 25 students


Closing Performance

Gaps

Index 3


Accountability Target: TBD (was 55)

STAAR Weighted

Performance Rate

Economically Disadvantaged

Lowest Performing Race/Ethnic Group - 1

Lowest Performing Race/Ethnic Group - 2

Total Points Maximum Points

Reading 150 50 200 400 600 Math 125 100 90 315 600 Writing 80 90 125 295 600 Science 120 40 90 250 600 Social Studies

50 40 80 170 600

Total 1430 3000 Index Score (total points divided by maximum points) 48

SCORING TABLE

Closing Performance

Gaps

Index 3



Added - Credit based on weighted performance: Two points credit given for each percentage of students at the

Level III Advanced performance standard. New ELL Exclusions:

Students in U.S. schools Year 1 excluded Students in U.S. schools Year 2 through Year 4 included based

on test version: • English test version using STAAR ELL Progress Measure; • Spanish test version using phase-in Level II performance

standard Students in U.S. schools Year 5 and beyond included at phase-

in Level II performance standard Exceptions: asylees/refugees in U.S. schools Year 1 through

Year 5 excluded; immigrants entering at Grade 9 or above excluded

Closing Performance

Gaps

Index 3



Index 4 Graduation Rates (4-year and 5-year) None, SA < 10 >= 25 students

RHSP/AHSP Rates (4-year) None, SA < 10 >= 25 students

STAAR Percent Met Level II None, SA < 10 >= 25 students

Accountability Target: TBDIndicator All African

Amer.Amer. Indian Asian Hispanic Pacific

Island. White Two or More ELL Specia

l Ed.Total

PointsMax.

Points4-year grad. rate 84.3% 78.8% 78.8% 91.6% 86.0% 44.2% 69.8% 533.5 700

5-year grad. rate 85.1% 78.8% 80.0% 92.1% 84.0% 48.9% 77.5% 546.4 700

RHSP/AHSP 82.7% 76.4% 83.6% 83.0% 325.7 400Graduation Total 872.1 1100Graduation Score (graduation total points divided by maximum points) 79STAAR At least one test% Met Level II Final

29% 16% 40% 23% 38% 36% 182 600

STAAR Score (STAAR total points divided by maximum points): 30Index Score (average of Graduation Score and STAAR Score): ( 79 + 30 / 2 = 55) 55


Postsecondary Readiness

Index 4

H I S D Becoming #GreatAllOver

Accountability Target: TBDIndicator All African

Amer.Amer. Indian Asian Hispanic Pacific


Ed.Total

PointsMax.

PointsGrade 9-12 Annual Dropout Rate

76(2.4%)

61(3.9%)

69(3.1%)

89(1.1%)

87(1.3%)

53(4.7%)

68(3.2%) 503 700

Graduation Score (dropout rate total points divided by maximum points) 72STAAR At least one test% Met Level II Final

29% 16% 40% 23% 38% 36% 182 600

STAAR Scores 30

Index Score (average if Graduation Score and STAAR Score): (72 + 30 )/ 2 = 51 51

17

Annual Dropout Rate Conversion Formula: 100 – (Gr. 9-12 Annual Dropout Rate x 10), with a floor of zero


Index 4 Annual Dropout Rates Gr. 9-12 >= 10 Gr. 9-12 students >= 25

STAAR Percent Met Level II none; special analysis if < 10 students

>= 25



Index 4


Accountability Target: TBD (for elementary and middle schools)

Indicator All African Amer.



Ed.Total

PointsMax.

PointsSTAAR At least one test% Met Level II Final

29% 16% 40% 23% 38% 36% 182 600

STAAR Score (STAAR total points divided by maximum points): 30

Minimum Size Requirements

Indicator All Students Student Groups Index 4 STAAR Percent Met Level II None; SA < 10 students >= 25



Index 4


New ELL Exclusions: English test version results

Students in U.S. schools Year 1 through Year 4 excluded Students in U.S. schools Year 5 and beyond included at final

Level II performance standard Exceptions: Asylees/refugees excluded; immigrants entering at

Grade 9 or above excluded

Spanish test version results: Students in U.S. schools Year 1 excluded Students in U.S. schools Year 2 and beyond included at final

Level II performance standard Exception: Asylees/refugees in U.S. schools Year 1 through

Year 5 excluded



Index 4



20

Added - STAAR postsecondary readiness standard (final Level II recommended standard) Credit given for meeting postsecondary readiness standard

(final Level II) on one or more tests. New indicators and differential weights (TBD)

Texas Success Initiative (TSI) benchmark rate? Dual credit course completions?


Index 4


State Accountability Ratings & DistinctionsAccountability

System

Accountability Rating: 2014 (TBD*) Distinctions: 2014

Met Standard Top 25% Student Progress

Top 25% Closing Achievement Gaps

Academic Achievement in:Reading/ELA Mathematics

Science Social Studies

Additional indicators in Reading/ELA and Mathematics based on PSAT/ACT Plan test results

Met Alternative Standard

Improvement Required N/AExemplary, Recognized, Acceptable, Unacceptable

Community/Student Engagement

*Rating labels have not been approved by the Commissioner for 2014


Accountability Ratings

System Safeguard

Targets

Texas Accountability

Intervention System (TAIS)

Additional Designation

in Lieu of AYPMet Standard or Met Alternative

Standard

Met All System Safeguard

Targets

No Interventions Required

Possible Reward School

Met Standard or Met Alternative

StandardMissed One or More System

Safeguard Targets

Intervention Required

Focus School

orPriority School

Improvement Required

Intervention Designations Accountability

System


Priority TTIPS grantees Title I high schools with

graduation rates less than 60%; and/or

Title I schools with lowest achievement on reading/math system safeguards at the All Students level

Focus Title I schools ranked by the

widest gaps between reading/math performance of the federal student groups (7) and safeguard targets of 75%

Intervention Designations Accountability

System



24

Performance RatesYear 12-13 13-14 14-15 15-16 16-17 17-18 18-19 19-20

Math 75% 79% 83% 87% 91% 95% 95% 100%

Reading/ELA 75% 79% 83% 87% 91% 95% 98% 100%

Participation RatesYear 12-13 13-14 14-15 15-16 16-17 17-18 18-19 19-20

Math 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95%Reading/ELA 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95%

Federal Graduation Rates for previous year cohortsYear 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015

4-year Rate 78.0% 80.0% 83.0%5-year Rate 83.0%

Federal Limits on Proficient Results on Alternative AssessmentsModified 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 2% for the All Students Group

Alternate 2013 through 2020 1% for the All Students Group

Safeguard Measures and Targets

Source: TEA waiver application


Campuses must address each safeguard target that was missed in their school improvement plans.

Interventions for Not Meeting SafeguardsAccountability

System


The state plans to release the Commissioner’s Final Rules for the 2014 Accountability System in late March. There remains discussion regarding:

Size requirements 2014 targets for the indexes Specific changes to calculations for each of the indexes

(changing weights, expanding indicators, etc.) Specific calculations for the new designations 2014 appeals process

MORE TO COME………………..

TEA Commissioner’s Rules for 2014Accountability

System

Documents

Accountability Rating System