Validating the Needfor Systemic Change

Leaders of LearnersMarch 27-28, 2013

Phase 1 Level II (2012 & 2013)

Level III (Advanced)

STAAR Performance Standards

Final Level II (2016 and beyond)

Phase 2 Level II (2014 & 2015)

1575 52%

1637 65%

1700 75%

1783 87%

Scale Score

Percent CorrectGrade 8 Reading

Level II (Satisfactory)Sufficiently prepared

for the next grade level or course

Level III (Advanced)Well prepared

for the next grade level or course

Level I (Unsatisfactory)Inadequately prepared

for the next grade level or course

Phase 1 Level II (2012 & 2013)

Level III (Advanced)

STAAR Performance Standards

Final Level II (2016 and beyond)

Phase 2 Level II (2014 & 2015)

3500 37%

3750 50%

4000 63%

4333 78%

Scale Score

Percent CorrectAlgebra I

Level II (Satisfactory)Sufficiently prepared

for the next grade level or course

Level III (Advanced)Well prepared

for the next grade level or course

Level I (Unsatisfactory)Inadequately prepared

for the next grade level or course

94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 1230

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

State Assessment Performance - Reading(source: AEIS)

BISD

State

Year

Pe

rce

nt

Me

t S

tan

da

rd

STAAR

TAKSTAAS

All tests, grades3 – 8 and Reading 1 at Level II Final

94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 1230

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

State Assessment Performance - Mathematics(source: AEIS)

BISD

State

Year

Pe

rce

nt

Me

t S

tan

da

rd

STAAR

TAKSTAAS

All tests, grades3 – 8 and Algebra 1 at Level II Final

Africa

n American

Hispanic

White

American In

dianAsia

n

Pacific I

slander

Two or More Race

s

Econ Disa

dvLE

P

At-Risk

BL/ESL

CTE GT

Special E

d0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Student Demographics and Program Participation2011-12

BISDHEB ISD

Perc

enta

ge o

f Stu

dent

s

BISD HEB ISD0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000 2362921540

2011-12 Enrollment

Source: 2011-12 AEIS

Students/teacher Yrs Experience Yrs w District0

5

10

15

20

25

Teacher Profile

BISDHEB ISD

Teacher Salary (x10) Tot Expend / Student Instruction / Student$0

$2,000

$4,000

$6,000

$8,000

$10,000

Instruction-Related Expenditure

BISDHEB ISD

Source: 2011-12 AEIS

Grad Rate RHSP/DAP Adv Course College Ready 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

85.3

70.9

26.8

53

85.980.1

30.3

52

96.3

82.8

30.1

65

College Readiness Measures

BISDStateHEB ISD

Perc

enta

ge o

f Stu

dent

s

Source: 2011-12 AEIS

4- or 5-Year Grad Rate RHSP/DAP Index 4 - Part 1 Overall

District Name Total Pts Max Pts Total Pts Max Pts Total Pts Max Pts Score

Denton 669.7 700 628.9 700 1298.6 1400 93Grapevine-Colleyville 817.8 900 603.8 700 1421.6 1600 89Hurst-Euless-Bedford 668.5 700 666.1 800 1334.6 1500 89Eagle Mountain-Saginaw 800.1 900 562.7 700 1362.8 1600 85Grand Prairie 627.9 700 560.1 700 1188.0 1400 85Keller 827.0 900 523.3 700 1350.3 1600 84Northwest 579.8 700 505.3 600 1085.1 1300 83Pflugerville 763.9 900 568.4 700 1332.3 1600 83Irving 510.7 600 464.1 600 974.8 1200 81Mansfield 875.5 1000 589.7 800 1465.2 1800 81Arlington 733.0 900 540.4 700 1273.4 1600 80Carrollton-Farmers Branch 609.2 700 511.8 700 1121.0 1400 80Fort Worth 519.6 700 668.9 800 1188.5 1500 79Birdville 804.7 1000 562.1 800 1366.8 1800 76

Source: Moak Casey, based on 2012 AEIS

Projected 2013 District Performance, Accountability Index 4

3 4 5 6 7 850

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

78 7780

7881

83

76 77 7775 76

80

8486 86

8885

90

2012 STAAR Performance - Reading (English)Phase-in Level II Satisfactory

BISD TX HEB

Grade Level

Perc

ent M

et S

tand

ard

3 4 5 6 7 850

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

71

62

76

81

73

79

68 68

77 77

71

7678 78

8789

85

89

2012 STAAR Performance - Math (English)Phase-in Level II Satisfactory

BISD TX HEB

Grade Level

Perc

ent M

et S

tand

ard

4 7 5 8 850

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

70

7476

71

63

71 71

76

70

59

8179

8688

79

2012 STAAR Performance (English)Phase-in Level II Satisfactory

BISD TX HEB

Perc

ent M

et S

tand

ard

Writing Science Social Studies

Reading 1 Writing 1 Algebra 1 Biology W Geog50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

75

60

87

91

85

68

55

83

87

8182

68

95 9694

2012 STAAR EOC PerformancePhase-in Level II Satisfactory

BISD TX HEB

Subject

Perc

ent M

et S

tand

ard

# tests below

minimum

# tests met minimum but not passing

0 1 2 3 4 Total

0 127 33 6 1 1671 90 44 12 5 1512 30 21 4 1 563 22 18 4 444 9 11 205 6 6

Total 157 221 53 12 1 444 students

2015 Cohort EOC Retesting (Number of students remaining after December testing)

277 students must take one or more tests

Failing scores on one or more tests

Phase 1 Level II (2012 & 2013)

Level III (Advanced)

STAAR Performance StandardsPhase-in

Final Level II (2016 and beyond)

Phase 2 Level II (2014 & 2015)

3500 37%

3750 50%

4000 63%

4333 78%

Scale Score

Percent CorrectAlgebra I

Continuous improvement timelineFeb 2003 BISD enters ESC XI Continuous Improvement

Consortium with Weatherford and Burleson ISDsJul 2003 Jim Shipley CI overview training for principalsMar 2004 BISD Board OrientationApr 2004 Board approves new goals/objectives, Graduate ProfileApr 2004 HEB and Decatur join consortiumJun 2004 District Department Team trainingJun 2004 Campus Leadership Team training (Level I)Oct 2004 Teacher/Student Partnership TrainingNov 2004 Campus Leadership Training (Level II)Jan 2005 Campus and Department Systems Checks

Eng III

Eng II

Eng I

8th

7th

6th

5th

4th

2nd

1st

Kinder

Phase 1

2012 & 2013Phase 2

2014 & 2015Final

2016 & beyond

Level II Phase-in

20162015

20142013

3rd

How will we ensure that our current 6th graders are well prepared for success at the next level?

How do we determine whether our kindergarten through grade 2 students are well prepared for success at the next level?

Vertical/longitudinal thinking

SSI in 2016

1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 22001200

1400

1600

1800

2000

2200

2400

2600

2800

f(x) = − 1.89602323808488 x + 4128.10731371742R² = 0.046541261557702

STAAR Reading / ISIP Correlation

2012 STAAR Reading Grade 5

ISIP

Per

form

ance

Feb

ruar

y 20

13

Tier 2: 1959383 of 592 = 65%

Level 2 (final): 1582Unsatisfactory408 of 592 = 69%

K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 All U.S.0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

5542 42

50 45 43 4356 58

47

75

21

2515

23 28 27 25

24 20

23

202433

4228 27 30 32

20 2230

5

BISD ISIP Performance by Tiers - January 2013

tier 3

tier 2

tier 1

Grade Level

1

2

3

1

2

3

Recommended ISIP Grades K-8January 2013

75%

20%

5%

47%

23%

30%

EOC

The moral imperativeEnsure that all students are well prepared for success at the next level of learning

This can only be accomplished by changing the learning system