Accountability Update Professional Service Provider Update and Network Meeting April 1, 2014 1.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
AIE Annual Conference| September 24, 2013 Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting Shannon Housson,
Advertisements

August 8, 2013 Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting Shannon Housson, Director Overview of.
Accountabil ity System Student Achievement Index I Student Progress Index 2 Closing Performanc e Gaps Index 3 Postsecondary Readiness Index 4 Overview.
Region 10 Accountability and Assessment Updates April 16, 2014 Jana Schreiner, Accountability and State Assessment Consultant.
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.
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.
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.
Kim Gilson Senior Consultant Data and Accountability Region 10 ESC
2015 Accountability Commissioner’s Final Decisions KIM GILSON SENIOR CONSULTANT, DATA AND ACCOUNTABILITY REGION 10 ESC
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
Index Accountability 2014 Created by Accountability and Compliance staff of Region 17 Education Service Center.
Kelly Baehren Waller ISD Administrative Workshop July 28, 2015.
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.
Accountability Update District Testing Coordinator Advisory Committee Meeting March 20,
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.
Overview of 2015 Accountability SUMMER 2015 MICKI WESLEY, DIRECTOR OF ACCOUNTABILITY & COMPLIANCE CINDY TEICHMAN, COORDINATOR OF INSTRUCTIONAL SUPPORT.
March 7, 2013 Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting Accountability Policy Advisory Committee.
2015 Texas Accountability System La Porte Independent School District August 5, 2015.
TETN Videoconference #30120| February 26, 2014 Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting Overview.
LOMA PARK ACCOUNTABILITY PARENT PRESENTATION September 24, 2015.
TETN Session #18319 | November 14, 2013 | 1:00-3:00 p.m. Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting.
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.
Accountability Update Ty
Kingsville ISD Annual Report Public Hearing.
Texas Assessment Conference| February 16, 2016 Shannon Housson, Director, Division of Performance Reporting Department of Assessment and Accountability.
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.
Charter School Summit| June 30, 2015 Christopher Lucas| Texas Education Agency Department of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting.
July 11, 2013 Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting Michael Murphy State and Federal Accountability.
2016 Accountability Texas Education Agency | Department of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting February 25, 2016.
TETN Videoconference #36664| April 21, 2016 Texas Education Agency | Assessment and Accountability Performance Reporting Overview of 2016 Accountability.
Index 4/5 ESC Region Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness emphasizes the role of elementary and middle schools in preparing.
Accountability Overview 2016
Texas Academic Performance Report TAPR)
Accountability Update
Campus Comparison Groups and Distinction Designations
2013 Texas Accountability System
A-F Accountability and Special Education
State and Federal Accountability Overview
2019 Accountability Updates
OVERVIEW OF THE 2019 STATE ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM
Presentation transcript:

Accountability Update Professional Service Provider Update and Network Meeting April 1,

What’s New (Well, since last year) State Accountability ▫Changes to Index System ▫Who Counts and How ▫System Safeguards and other Targets ▫ELL Inclusion and Progress Measure Federal Accountability ▫Priority and Focus Schools ▫Focus School Tool 2

3 Accountability Development Timeline Advisory Group Meeting DatePurpose APACMarch 6, 2014 APAC will make final recommendations on the accountability ratings criteria for 2014, and performance index targets for 2014, 2015, and 2016, subject to commissioner approval. AADDCMarch 7, 2014 The 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. COEEnd 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.

 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 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

5 Index 2: Student Progress  Progress Measures by Subject Area and School Type 2013 Elem. SchoolMiddle SchoolHigh School READING Gr. 4 ReadingGr. 6 ReadingEnglish l Reading Gr. 5 ReadingGr. 7 ReadingEnglish ll Reading _Gr. 8 Reading_ _English l Reading_ MATHEMATICS Gr. 4 MathematicsGr. 6 MathematicsAlgebra l Gr. 5 MathematicsGr. 7 Mathematics_ _Gr. 8 Mathematics_ _Algebra l_ WRITING __English ll Writing Proposed 2014 Elem. SchoolMiddle SchoolHigh School READING Gr. 4 ReadingGr. 6 Reading_ Gr. 5 ReadingGr. 7 Reading_ _Gr. 8 Reading_ ___ MATHEMATICS Gr. 4 MathematicsGr. 6 MathematicsAlgebra l Gr. 5 MathematicsGr. 7 Mathematics_ _Gr. 8 Mathematics_ _Algebra l_ WRITING ___

6 6 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.

7 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  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 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.

8 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

9 Distinction Designations Districts and Campuses Postsecondary Readiness: House Bill 5 (83 rd 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.

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 Index targets will be based on recommendations from accountability advisory groups and finalized by the commissioner in spring Performance Index Non-AEA Campuses Non-AEA Districts Index 1: Student Achievement50TBD50TBD Index 2: Student Progress High School 17 TBD 21TBD Middle School 29 Elem School 30 Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps55TBD55TBD Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness75TBD75TBD

11 Performance Index AEA Campuses AEA Charter Districts Index 1: Student Achievement25TBD25TBD Index 2: Student Progress 9TBD 9 Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps30TBD30TBD Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness45TBD45TBD 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 Index targets will be based on recommendations from accountability advisory groups and finalized by the commissioner in spring and 2014 Index Targets for AEA Campuses and Charters

12 * Targets for 2013 correspond to the performance target for Index 1: Student Achievement. IndicatorEntity All Students African Amer. Amer. Indian AsianHispanic Pacific Islander White Two or More Races Eco. Disadv. ELLSpecial Ed. Performance Rates* Reading State50% Federal75% n/a 75%n/a75%n/a75% Mathematics State50% Federal75% n/a 75%n/a75%n/a75% Writing50% Science50% Social Studies50% Participation Rates Reading95% Mathematics95% Federal Graduation Rates (including improvement targets) 4-year78% 5-year83% District Limits on Use of Alternative Assessment Results Reading Modified2%Not Applicable Alternate1%Not Applicable Mathematics Modified2%Not Applicable Alternate1%Not Applicable 2013 Accountability System Safeguard Measures and Targets

13 IndicatorEntity All Students African Amer. Amer. Indian AsianHispanic Pacific Islander White Two or More Races Eco. Disadv. ELLSpecial Ed. Performance Rates* Reading StateTBD Federal79% n/a 79%n/a79%n/a79% Mathematics StateTBD Federal79% n/a 79%n/a79%n/a79% WritingTBD ScienceTBD Social StudiesTBD Participation Rates Reading95% Mathematics95% Federal Graduation Rates (including improvement targets) 4-year80% 5-year85% District Limits on Use of Alternative Assessment Results Reading Modified2%Not Applicable Alternate1%Not Applicable Mathematics Modified2%Not Applicable Alternate1%Not Applicable 2014 Accountability System Safeguard Measures and Targets * Targets for 2014 correspond to the performance target for Index 1: Student Achievement.

No April Fools Joke! 14

2014 Recommendations 15

2014 Recommendations 16

Let’s Take a Short Break 17

Inclusion of ELL Students in Accountability ELL Progress Measure ▫Included in Index 1, 2, 3 ▫First Year Excluded ▫Better Representation of all Students RECOMMENDED 18

ELL – Index 1 Student Achievement RECOMMENDED Include ELL Students in Years 2 and 3 (and beyond) Change from 2013 (Only Yrs 4 and more) Spanish Testers Included in Calculations Meet Standard if meet Phase 1, Level II English Testers Included in Calculations Meet Standard if meet ELL Progress Measure 19

ELL – Index 2 Student Growth RECOMMENDED Include ELL Students in Years 2 and 3 (and beyond) Change from 2013 Spanish Testers Included in Calculations Meet Standard if meet STAAR Growth Measure English Testers Included in Calculations Meet Standard if meet ELL Progress Measure 2013 Spanish/2014 English Students Student meet Phase 1, Level II – EXCEEDS Student does not meet Phase 1, Level II Does NOT MEET Growth Measure 20

ELL – Index 3 Closing the Gaps RECOMMENDED Include ELL Students in Years 2 and 3 (and beyond) Change from 2013 Spanish Testers Included in Calculations Credit for Phase 1, Level II Performance English Testers Included in Calculations Credit if meet ELL Progress Measure Separate Indicators – Level II and Level III Spanish: Included in both calculations English: Included in Level II, Excluded in Level III 21

ELL – Index 4 Postsecondary Readiness RECOMMENDED First Year Immigrants Excluded Spanish Testers Years 2 and Beyond Included in STAAR Component of Index Credit if meet Final Level II Standard English Testers Years 2, 3, 4 Excluded from Calculations Years 5 and Beyond Credit if meet Final Level II Standard 22

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 23

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) 24

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 25

26

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 27

28

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% Schools with a graduation rate less than 60% 73schools 36 schools 188 schools 29

Attend required trainings 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 Evaluate current campus staff Create a plan which addresses the ESEA Turnaround Principles Priority School Interventions 30

Title I schools ranked by the widest gaps between reading/math performance of the federal student groups (7) and safeguard targets of 75%. 31

Focus School Gap Tool Calculates Focus School Gap ▫Region 4 Website ▫Click on Services ▫Click on Accountability ▫Click on Visit our Accountability PortalVisit our Accountability Portal ▫Click on Focus Schools Folder ▫Select Tool 32

Questions??? 33