Kim Gilson Senior Consultant Data and Accountability Region 10 ESC 972-348-1480

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
August 8, 2013 Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting Shannon Housson, Director Overview of.
Advertisements

Accountabil ity System Student Achievement Index I Student Progress Index 2 Closing Performanc e Gaps Index 3 Postsecondary Readiness Index 4 Overview.
Data Analysis State Accountability. Data Analysis (What) Needs Assessment (Why ) Improvement Plan (How) Implement and Monitor.
1 Accountability System Overview of the Accountability Rating System for Texas Public Schools and Districts.
Accountability preview Major Mindshift Out with the Old – In with the New TEPSA - May 2013 (Part 2) Ervin Knezek John Fessenden
Accountability Updates Testing & Evaluation Department May 21, 2014 Mission High School MISSION CISD DEIC MEETING.
Review of Performance Index Framework and Accountability Ratings RICHARDSON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT To serve and prepare all students for their global.
Texas State Accountability 2013 and Beyond Current T.E.A. Framework as of March 22, 2013 Austin Independent School District Bill Caritj, Chief Performance.
State Accountability Overview 2014 Strozeski – best guess.
Action Items For Accountability 2015 URGENT and INTENSE.
APAC Meeting | January 22, 2014 Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting Overview of Performance.
Accountability Update Ty Duncan Coordinator of Accountability and Compliance, ESC
2013 ACCOUNTABILITY OVERVIEW Linda Jolly Region 18 ESC.
PSP Summer Institute| July 29 – August 2, 2013 Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting Shannon.
Burton Secondary EOC/STAAR Data INDEX 1 STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT STARR SATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE All Students=3-8 grades spring administration.
Index 4 Description: Postsecondary Readiness Index 4 is : the Post-secondary Readiness index, which is used to show the readiness of students on campus.
Oct 1 Accountability Webinar Kim Gilson Senior Consultant Data and Accountability Region 10 ESC
HISD Becoming #GreatAllOver Accountability Development What do we know? What do we want to know? March 4, 2014.
2013 State Accountability System Allen ISD. State Accountability under TAKS program:  Four Ratings: Exemplary, Recognized, Academically Acceptable, Academically.
2015 Accountability Commissioner’s Final Decisions KIM GILSON SENIOR CONSULTANT, DATA AND ACCOUNTABILITY REGION 10 ESC
Accountability Update Professional Service Provider Update and Network Meeting April 1,
State Accountability Overview 1 Performance Index Framework: For 2013 and beyond, an accountability framework of four Performance Indexes includes a broad.
2013 Texas Accountability System. Features of the System No single indicator can lower a rating Focuses on overall campus/district performance rather.
2014 Accountability System 2014 Accountability System Jana Schreiner Senior Consultant Accountability State Assessment
The best and most sought-after school district where every student is future ready: ready for college, ready for the global workplace, ready for personal.
2015 Goals and Targets for State Accountability Date: 10/01/2014 Presenter: Carla Stevens Assistant Superintendent, Research and Accountability.
2014 Accountability System 2014 Accountability System Overview Kim Gilson Senior Consultant Data and Accountability
It’s All GrEEk to Me… Accountability for Beginners Kim Gilson Sr Consultant Data and Accountability
Accountability: Are You Aware? Kim Gilson Senior Consultant Data and Accountability Region 10 ESC
Index Accountability 2014 Created by Accountability and Compliance staff of Region 17 Education Service Center.
Kelly Baehren Waller ISD Administrative Workshop July 28, 2015.
2013 Accountability Ratings for NISD September 9, 2013.
Instructional Leaders Advisory Tuesday, April 8, 2014 Region 4 ESC Accountability Update Richard Blair Sr. Education Specialist Federal/State Accountability.
STATE ACCOUNTABILITY OVERVIEW Back To School| August 19-22, 2013 Dean Munn Education Specialist Region 15 ESC.
Timmerman Public Hearing September 16, :00-7:00.
TASSP Spring 2014 Tori Mitchell, ESC 17 Specialist Ty Duncan, ESC 17 Coordinator Overview of 2014 Accountability
2013 Accountability System Design Assessment & Accountability, Plano ISD.
Timmerman Public Hearing February 4, :00-4:00.
1 Accountability System Overview of the PROPOSED Accountability Rating System for Texas Public Schools and Districts.
1 August 8, 2014 Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting Overview of 2014 Accountability.
2015 Texas Accountability System Overview and Updates August 13, 2015.
Accountability: Current Issues Friday, April Region 4 ESC Accountability Update Richard Blair Sr. Education Specialist Federal/State Accountability.
HISD Becoming #GreatAllOver 1 Accountability Rating System Commissioner’s Final Rules 2014.
What are the STAAR Performance Standards? Copyright 2013 by Region 7 Education Service Center. All rights reserved.
Accountability 2014!! Tori Mitchell, ESC 17 Shauna Lane, ESC 17 Ty.
Timmerman Public Hearing September 16, :00-4:00.
March 7, 2013 Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting Accountability Policy Advisory Committee.
LOMA PARK ACCOUNTABILITY PARENT PRESENTATION September 24, 2015.
Welcome to Abbett Elementary! Curriculum Night 2015.
Assigns one of three ratings:  Met Standard – indicates campus/district met the targets in all required indexes. All campuses must meet Index 1 or 2.
Texas Academic Performance Report (TAPR) Lockhart Independent School District December
November 19 Accountability Webinar Kim Gilson
Accountability 2013 Interpreting Your 2013 Accountability Report It’s Like Learning To Read All Over Again Ervin Knezek John Fessenden.
Kingsville ISD Annual Report Public Hearing.
June 5, 2014 Accountability Update. Accountability Updates 110% for At-Risk, Criterion #4 Accountability Manual Updates.
Charter School Summit| June 16, 2014 Diane J. Hernandez | Texas Education Agency Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting.
HISD Becoming #GreatAllOver 1 Accountability Rating System Commissioner’s Final Rules 2014.
July 11, 2013 Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting Michael Murphy State and Federal Accountability.
TETN Videoconference #36664| April 21, 2016 Texas Education Agency | Assessment and Accountability Performance Reporting Overview of 2016 Accountability.
Every Student Matters Understanding the Indexes, the Tests, and Targeted Goal for STAAR 2016.
Index 4/5 ESC Region Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness emphasizes the role of elementary and middle schools in preparing.
Accountability 2016 Shauna Lane, Educational Specialist
Accountability Overview 2016
Texas Academic Performance Report TAPR)
Accountability Update
Campus Comparison Groups and Distinction Designations
Texas State Accountability
2013 Texas Accountability System
State and Federal Accountability Overview
Presentation transcript:

Kim Gilson Senior Consultant Data and Accountability Region 10 ESC

Sound Check! Type in and let me know if you can hear me!

Sound Check Complete! Things are working on our end! If you can’t hear me, check your speakers and system. If you still can’t hear, call in to the phone number in the link you received for the webinar and you can listen through your phone.

Performance Index Framework Index 1: Student Performance Index 2: Student Growth Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness

Index 1 Measures achieved Level II Phase 1 “Who Passed” This is the most familiar to us! Most like the old system The questions it raises are crucial to improvement! TARGET 55%

Index 1 What Does the Data Tell You? The rating tells you an overall average for all students The calculation shows the number of passers and tests per subject The Safeguards (Page 2) tell you the percentage score for each subject The Safeguards also tell you how each student group performed

Index 1 What Questions Need to Be Answered? How did each grade level within the subject perform? Where more than one teacher was teaching that course/subject, were their scores comparable? How does the performance of your student groups compare to the All Students performance? How does the membership in the student groups change for ?

Index 1 What Questions Need to Be Answered? Part 2 Do the scores indicate systematic issues within each subject? within a grade level? within a course? What staff development is needed for individuals or all teachers in a subject/grade/course?

Index 1 What Questions Need to Be Answered? Part 3 What does the SE level data tell you? Compare Readiness/Supporting/Process Scores Does longitudinal data indicate ongoing SE concerns? Within an SE with multiple questions, is there variation in performance? Which SE’s were challenging for special education students? ELL students? Advanced Students? How well are kids passing?

Interventions What interventions were in place last year? Did they improve student performance? What interventions are in place this year? Do they meet the needs identified in your data study? How do student group memberships change from last year?

Index 1: Looking Forward How will Index 1 be impacted by a passing standard that will rise in ? Target will rise in !

Index 2: Who Grew? Student Groups Contribute Points to Index 2 One Point for Meeting Growth Two Points for Exceeding Growth For , Growth was available for Math and Reading at 3-8 and Math only at high school For , 7 th grade Writing will receive a growth measure

Growth Calculation The Student Progress Measure is calculated by subtracting 2 years of vertical scale scores. The number of points needed to meet or exceed growth varies by grade/subject Example: 2014 math vertical score MINUS 2013 math vertical score Calculations are available here:

Who is Supposed to Grow? Low Students Middle Students High Achieving Students Special Education Students ELL Students Students in each Race/Ethnicity

Who is Supposed to Grow? EVERYONE!!!

Side Notes: 3 rd Grade and English Students at the high school can have Progress Measure Data ELL Progress Measure STAAR Alternate (Eng 1 and Eng 2) 2 Districts in Region 10 missed Index 2, but had Index 1 scores of 92 and 95

What Does Your Data Tell You? Reading and Math are Reported Separately Then combined into one rating Each indicator can earn up to 200 points Compare to 200!

Index 2: Student Progress Index 2: 2014 Construction – Page 21 Acct. Manual

Index 2: Student Progress

Index 2 Target: Targets (released July 29): District 16 Elementary 33 Middle 28 High School/K-12 NA Groups: Race/Ethnicity, Sped, ELL Minimum Size: 25

Index 2: What Questions Need to Be Answered? How does each grade level/subject/course/teacher contribute to the Index? Which kids grew more than others? Which groups not represented on the chart grew/didn’t grow? How did our interventions impact growth? How do we ensure high performing students continue to grow?

Index 2: The Big Question How do we measure, monitor, and foster growth??? (Hint: They can’t grow if we don’t teach the TEKS. We have to teach ALL of EVERY TEK! That’s the FIRST STEP).

Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps Looking at the student groups with the lowest performance from 2013 on your campus, AND Economically Disadvantaged students, how many passed (1 point) OR earned Advanced Level III (2 points?)

Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps: Group Selection Economically Disadvantaged Students (no minimum size) AND…. From 2013 Data, any race/ethnicity group with at least 25 tests in Reading AND Math is eligible. The lowest performing are chosen for 2014 analysis If 3+ groups meet minimum size, then lowest 2 are chosen If 2 groups meet minimum size, then lowest is chosen If 1 group meets minimum size, then no race/ethnicity group is used

Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps Index 3: 2014 Construction – Page STAAR Weighted Performance Rate Economically Disadvantaged Lowest Performing Race/Ethnic Group - 1 Lowest Performing Race/Ethnic Group - 2 Total Points Maximum Points Example Calculation for Reading Weighted Performance Number of Tests Performance Results: Phase-in 1 Level II Satisfactory and above Number Percent % 20 50% % Level III Advanced Number Percent 40 50% 0 0% % Reading Weighted Performance Rate READING

STAAR Weighted Performance Rate Economically Disadvantaged Lowest Performing Race/Ethnic Group - 1 Lowest Performing Race/Ethnic Group - 2 Total Points Maximum Points Reading Weighted Performance Mathematics Weighted Performance Writing Weighted Performance Science Weighted Performance Social Studies Weighted Performance Total Index 3 Score (total points divided by maximum points)48 Index 3: 2014 Construction – Table 2 (based on 2014 assessment results by subject area) Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps

1 Pointers and 2 Pointers The students who earn 1 point for passing in this index are the same students who counted in Index 1. Raising Index 1 will raise Index 3. If your Index 1 is good, then your best chance to raise Index 3 is to increase the number of students earning Advanced Level III.

Index 3: Rethinking Terminology What Does Final Level III Mean Instructionally? Students can only miss 5 (approximately!) questions! This means they have to answer the hardest questions on the test….correctly! Students who score in the top 3 raw scores get 2 points automatically!

Do your students have experience answering the 5-6 hardest questions on the test? Have they been challenged to that level consistently in your class? Are ALL students expected to try those problems INDEPENDENTLY???

Performance Level Descriptors Posted by Subject at

Index 3 Targets Targets (released July 29): Districts 28 Elementary 28 Middle 27 High School/K AEC’s: 11

Index 4: Post Secondary Readiness Final Level II on 2+ Tests This component applies to all grades! High Schools: Grad/Dropout Rates Diploma Plans Post Secondary Indicators TAKS, SAT/ACT

Final Level II on 2+ Tests* Questions to Ask: What is the Final Level II breakdown by Subject? What is the Final Level II breakdown by Grade? What is the Final Level II breakdown by Teacher? How does the All Students Final Level II compare to each student group? Are all students low in this area, or just certain groups? THIS WILL EVENTUALLY BE INDEX 1! *if they only take 1 test, they must meet it on that test

Indicator All Students Afric an Amer. Amer. Indian Asian Hispani c Pacific Islande r White Two or More Races ELL Special Ed. Total Points Max. Point s STAAR Score STAAR % Met Final Level ll on Two or More Tests 29%16%40%23%38%36% STAAR Score (STAAR total points divided by maximum points)30 Graduation Score (Gr. 9-12) 4-yr. graduation rate84.3%78.8% 91.6%86.0%44.2%69.8% yr. graduation rate85.1%78.8%80.0%92.1%84.0%48.9%77.5% Highest Graduation Total Graduation Score (best of total graduation points divided by maximum points)78.0 RHSP/DAP Score 4-yr. graduation Percent RHSP/DAP 82.7%76.4%83.6%83.0% RHSP/DAP Score (best of total RHSP/DAP points divided by maximum points)81.4 Postsecondary/College-Ready Graduates Score College-Ready Graduates subject (ELA & Math) 82.0%72.0%78.0%89.0% College-Ready Score (total points divided by maximum points)80.2 Overall Index Score STAAR Score30.0 Multipl y by Weight Graduation Score78.0 RHSP/DAP Score81.4 College-Ready Score 80.2 Index Score (sum of weighted index scores) Minimum Size is 25 STAAR Component: All Grade Levels Minimum Size = 25 This IS Index 4 for Elementary and Middle Schools

High School Graduation/Dropout Rates Review procedures for leavers and coding Graduation Plans Will continue to be refined for Foundation Plan students Post-Secondary Indicators TAKS kids are through system Will need refining What are we doing to help students be successful on SAT/ACT?

Index 4 Targets Targets are based on your campus configuration. (P. 15 of the Accountability Manual) Elementary is 12 Middle School is 13 High Schools who only have one component is 21 High Schools With All is 57 Districts who ONLY have the STAAR Component is 13.

In the end…. What it really comes down to is HIGH expectations for ALL students Are we teaching the TEKS to their depth and complexity? Are we challenging ALL students?