1. State Accountability Update
Accountability TETN
April 19, 2011
Shannon Housson, Cathy Long, Nancy Rinehart
TEA, Performance Reporting Division

2. 2011 Standard Accountability Procedures

3. Significant Changes Compared to 2010
Use of the Texas Projection Measure (TPM) for both state and federal accountability--TBD
Additional tests included in TAKS indicators
Increased rigor of standards
Addition of two new base indicators
Change in race/ethnicity definitions
Use of Federal Race/Ethnicity Provision
Changes in the Completion Rate definition and changes to planned use of District Substituted Values (DSV)

4. Significant Changes Compared to 2010
TAKS % Met Standard Indicator Definition
The results on TAKS, TAKS (Accommodated), TAKS-Modified (TAKS-M), and TAKS-Alternate (TAKS-Alt) will be combined into a single TAKS indicator.
The 2011 TAKS student groups will be based on new federal race/ethnicity definitions. (See Race/Ethnicity slides for more information.)
RI will compare 2011 results using new race/ethnicity student groups to 2010 groups defined using the former definitions. The 2010 data will be rebuilt to include the TAKS-M and TAKS-Alt test results, as shown on the 2011 Preview Indicator on the 2010 AEIS reports.

5. Significant Changes Compared to 2010
New Indicators
Commended Performance (CP) Indicator will be evaluated.
English Language Learners (ELL) Progress Indicator will be evaluated.
Both new indicators affect Exemplary and Recognized ratings only.

6. Commended Performance Indicator
Will be defined as the percent of students achieving the commended level.
Will include the same test results as the TAKS % Met Standard indicator: TAKS, TAKS (Accommodated), TAKS-Modified (TAKS-M) and TAKS-Alternate (TAKS-Alt).
Additional Features will not be used for CP Indicator:
Required Improvement (RI)—not used
Exceptions Provision—not used

7. Commended Performance Indicator
Two subjects evaluated:
Reading/English Language Arts (ELA)
Mathematics
Two student groups evaluated:
All Students (regardless of size)
Economically Disadvantaged (if minimum size requirement is met)
Evaluated for Recognized and Exemplary ratings only:
15% standard for Recognized
25% standard for Exemplary

8. ELL Progress Indicator
Combines:
TAKS Reading/ELA in grades 3-11 in English (TAKS/TAKS (Accommodated)/TAKS-M)
TELPAS Reading component in grades 3-11
If a student takes any combination of these tests, the best result is evaluated.
See: Appendix H of the AEIS Glossary at
See: ELL FAQ at

9. ELL Progress Indicator
Campuses and districts must meet a 60% standard to attain a Recognized or Exemplary rating.
Requires 30 current and monitored limited English proficient (LEP) students tested to be evaluated. Individual race/ethnicity student groups and the Economically Disadvantaged student group are not evaluated.
Additional Features:
ELL RI will be used
Exceptions Provision will be used (with a floor of 55%)

10. 2011 Standards for Assessment Indicators (TAKS % Met, Commended Performance, ELL Progress Indicator)AA RE EX
TAKS Indicator
% Met Std. CP
Reading/ELA
≥ 70%
≥ 80%
≥ 15%
≥ 90%
≥ 25%
Writing
Social Studies
n/a
Mathematics
≥ 65%
Science
≥ 60%
ELL Progress Indicator
Bold numbers indicate changes from the prior year.

11. Required Improvement (RI)
Additional Features
Required Improvement (RI)
In 2011, RI will continue to be a feature of the system.
RI is available for four of the five base indicators:
TAKS % Met Standard
ELL Progress Indicator
Completion Rate I
Annual Dropout Rate (grades 7-8)
RI is not available for Commended Performance (CP).

12. Additional Features Exceptions Provision
In 2011, the Exceptions Provision will continue to be a feature of the system.
Use will be expanded to include the ELL Progress Indicator.
Will not be used for Commended Performance (CP), Annual Dropout Rate, and Completion Rate Indicators.
TAKS Met Standard indicator still determines the number of exceptions allowed. (ELL Progress Indicator does not add 1.)
The “look-up” table is unchanged.

13. Exceptions Provision Floors
Additional Features
Exceptions Provision Floors
TAKS % Met Standard
Academically Acceptable floors will increase:
55% for science
60% for mathematics
Floors remain at 75% for Recognized and 85% for Exemplary.
ELL Progress
Floor is 55%

14. Texas Projection Measure (TPM)
Additional Features
Texas Projection Measure (TPM)
Final decisions on the use of TPM in 2011 are expected later this week.

15. Additional Features Safeguards
Combinations of additional features cannot be used together for one measure to elevate a rating more than one level.
Exceptions cannot be used for same measure for two consecutive years.
A campus or district using one or more exceptions must address performance on those measures in its campus or district improvement plan.

16. ELL Progress Indicator
Additional Features
Summary of Additional Features by Indicator
TAKS %
Passing
TAKS % Commended
ELL Progress Indicator
Completion
Rate I
Gr. 7-8 Annual
Dropout Rate
Absolute Standards
EX 90%
RE 80%
AA 70%/65%/60%
EX 25%
RE 15%
RE/EX %
EX %
RE %
AA %
AA/RE/EX %
Required Improvement
Used
For RE & AA only No
Yes
Restrictions
Floor for RE
n/a
Texas Projection Measure
To Be Determined
Exceptions Provision
For EX, RE, & AA
Floors for EX, RE, AA
No reuse
Limits on # used
Floor (55%)

17. Annual Dropout Rate Standards
Grades 7-8
2010
(Used)
2011
(Adopted )
Academically Acceptable
Recognized
Exemplary
< 1.8%
< 1.6%
Dropout Definition
Full Use of NCES Definition
Bold number indicates increased rigor from the prior year.

18. Annual Dropout Rate Changes
The 2011 Annual Dropout Rate indicator ( dropouts) will be created using the federal race/ethnicity definitions.
Students categorized as Two or More Races will not be part of any student group. Their dropout status will be evaluated as part of the All Students results only.

19. Completion Rate I Standards
Grades 9-12
2010
2011
Class of 2009
Class of 2010
Academically Acceptable
≥ 75.0%
Recognized
≥ 85.0%
Exemplary
≥ 95.0%
Completion Rate I Definition of a ‘Completer’
Graduates and Continued HS

20. Completion Rate I Changes
The class of 2010 Completion Rates will continue to use race/ethnicity based on former definitions.
Will not resume using district substitution values (DSV) for secondary campuses without completion data in 2011.
Change in the completion rate calculation methodology means more campuses will have their own rates, lessening the need for DSV.
Consistent with the treatment of similar situation under AYP procedures.

21. Underreported Students
Accountability Year
Underreported Students Data Year
Underreported Students Cannot Exceed
Minimum Size
Number %
2010
150
4.0
< 5
< 1.0
2011
(Adopted)
3.0
2012*
2.0
Bold numbers indicate changes from the prior year.
* Ratings will not be issued in the school year. However, the Performance-Based Monitoring (PBM) Leaver Data Validation system will continue to evaluate this indicator in

22. Gold Performance Acknowledgments (GPA)
Ten GPA indicators use TAKS performance: five TAKS Commended, two Texas Success Initiative (TSI), two Comparable Improvement (CI), & College-Ready Graduates.
These ten indicators will use the same definitional changes made to the TAKS % Met Standard with two exceptions:
The two TSI indicators will not include TAKS-M or TAKS-Alt because there is no HERC standard since students are not required to pass these tests to graduate.
The CI indicators will be based on TAKS, TAKS (Accommodated), and TAKS-M performance only. (TAKS-Alt will not be included.)

23. Gold Performance Acknowledgments (GPA)
Standards remain stable for 14 of the 15 GPA indicators. Only the College-Ready Graduates standard will increase from 35% to 40%.
The GPA standard for each of the five commended performance subjects remains at 30%.
Unlike the CP base indicator, the GPA commended indicators evaluate all subjects and all student groups.
Can be acknowledged for CP yet not rated Exemplary or Recognized and vice versa.

24. Race / Ethnicity Race/Ethnicity and Student Groups
The TAKS %Met Standard indicator, the Annual Dropout Rate indicator, and all GPA indicators will use the new definitions in 2011.
The Completion Rate indicator will continue to use the former definitions.
The student groups will continue to be:
All Students
African American (new, federal definition)
Hispanic (new, federal definition)
White (new, federal definition)
Economically Disadvantaged

25. Race / Ethnicity Federal Race/Ethnicity Provision
Students who are Two or More Races will be evaluated in “All Students” and not among any of the individual racial student groups.
However, a new provision, the Federal Race/Ethnicity Provision, will be employed. The provision applies to:
TAKS Met Standard indicator only
2011 only

26. Race / Ethnicity Federal Race/Ethnicity Provision
Selected students who are Two or More Races will be distributed into either the African American or White groups based on the information submitted on the TAKS answer documents for these same students under the former definitions.
Selected students are those multiracial students reporting both Black/African American and White racial categories.
If the recalculated African American and White student group performance rates allow the district or campus to achieve a higher rating, the higher rating will be assigned.

27. Race / Ethnicity Federal Race/Ethnicity Provision
A message will appear on any campus or district accountability data table indicating the Federal Race/Ethnicity Provision was used.
Assessment results will not be changed. The official accountability data for the TAKS Met Standard indicator will be the data that does not include the multiracial students in the separate student groups.
Further details about the Federal Race/Ethnicity Provision will be outlined in the 2011 Accountability Manual.

28. Race / Ethnicity Federal Race/Ethnicity Provision
In order to monitor possible manipulation of the race/ethnicity data for accountability purposes, the agency plans to conduct analyses to identify districts and campuses with significant discrepancies between the percent of students who are classified as Two or More Races on the spring 2011 assessment documents and the fall 2010 PEIMS enrollment files.
Because districts and campuses will have the benefit of rating evaluations calculated under two student group options, no appeals related to the new race and ethnicity definitions will be considered for any indicator in 2011.

29. 2011 Campus Pairing
New 2011 requirement for PK-K campuses to be paired for federal accountability.
322 campuses need pairing (174 in 2010)
229 districts required to pair (154 in 2010)
157 campuses and 78 districts require pairing solely due to new PK-K requirement
Pairing application open on TEASE April 11 – 29

30. 2011 Alternative Education Accountability (AEA) Procedures

31. AEA Indicator Standards
2010
2011
TAKS Progress Indicator
50%
55%
Annual Dropout Rate
20.0%
Completion Rate II
60.0%
ELL Progress
Not evaluated
Bold number indicates a change from the prior year.

32. 2011 TAKS Progress Indicator
TAKS Progress indicator standard increases to 55% for AEA ratings.
Results for all TAKS (Accommodated), TAKS-Modified (TAKS-M), and TAKS-Alternate (TAKS-Alt) tests are combined with TAKS results for AEA ratings in 2011.
Final decisions on the use of TPM and TGI in 2011 are expected later this week.
TAKS Progress Required Improvement (RI) is calculated in using rebuilt 2010 data.
The Federal Race/Ethnicity Provision applies to AEA campuses and charters in 2011.

33. 2011 Annual Dropout Rate (Grades 7-12)
The Annual Dropout Rate indicator standard remains 20.0% for 2011 AEA ratings.
Annual Dropout Rate RI is calculated in 2011.

34. 2011 Completion Rate II (Grades 9-12)
The Completion Rate II indicator standard remains 60.0% for 2011 AEA ratings.
Completion Rate RI is calculated in 2011.

35. 2011 English Language Learners (ELL) Progress Indicator
Beginning in 2011, districts and campuses are evaluated on a new ELL Progress indicator.
The AEA ELL Progress indicator standard is 55%.
Evaluated for "All Students" group. Student groups are not evaluated separately.
Under AEA procedures, if the ELL Progress indicator is the only reason for an AEA: Academically Unacceptable rating, then the AEC or charter is assigned an AEA: Academically Acceptable rating.

36. AEA Gold Performance Acknowledgments (AEA GPA)
Only the "All Students" group is evaluated. Student groups are not evaluated separately.
The Comparable Improvement indicators are inappropriate for AEA campuses and are not evaluated for AEA GPA .

37. AEA GPA cont.
AEA GPA Indicators
2010
Standard
2011 1
Advanced Course/Dual Enrollment Completion
≥ 30% 2
Advanced Placement/International Baccalaureate (AP/IB) Results
≥ 15%
and
≥ 50% 3
Attendance Rate (all AEA campuses & charters)
95%
4-8
Commended Performance:
Reading/ELA
Mathematics
Writing
Science
Social Studies

38. ≥ 40% at or above criterion
AEA GPA cont.
AEA GPA Indicators
2010
Standard
2011 9
Recommended High School Program/ Distinguished Achievement Program (RHSP/DAP)
≥ 85% 10
SAT/ACT Results
(College Admissions Tests)
≥ 70% of graduates and
≥ 40% at or above criterion
11-12
Texas Success Initiative: Higher Education Readiness Component – ELA and Mathematics
≥ 65% 13
College-Ready Graduates
≥ 35%
≥ 40%
Bold number indicates a five percentage point increase from the prior year.

39. 2011 AEA At-Risk Registration Criterion and Charters Evaluated under AEA Procedures

40. 2011 At-Risk Registration Criterion
Each registered AEC must have at least 75% at-risk student enrollment verified through PEIMS fall enrollment data in order to be evaluated under 2011 AEA procedures and receive an AEA rating on July 29. Two safeguards are incorporated for those AECs below the at-risk criterion.
Prior-Year PEIMS At-Risk Data Safeguard: If a registered AEC does not meet the at-risk criterion in 2011, then it remains under AEA if the AEC had at least 75% at-risk enrollment in 2010.
New Campus Safeguard: If a new campus is registered for evaluation under AEA procedures, then the AEC is not required to meet the at-risk criterion in its first year of operation. This safeguard provides an accommodation for new campuses with no prior-year data.

41. 2011 At-Risk Registration Criterion (cont.)
On April 12, 2011, letters were mailed to the 8 AECs that did not meet the 2011 at-risk registration criterion informing them that their AEA registration is rescinded and the AEC will be evaluated under 2011 standard accountability procedures.
The Final 2011 Registered AEC list will be posted on the AEA website in early May. This list will contain the AECs that will receive a 2011 AEA rating.

42. Charters Evaluated under AEA Procedures
A list of the charter operators that will be rated under 2011 AEA procedures will be posted on the AEA website in early May.
Charters that operate only standard campuses are evaluated automatically under standard accountability procedures.
Charters that operate only registered AECs are evaluated automatically under AEA procedures.

43. Charters evaluated under AEA Procedures (cont.)
Charters that operate both standard campuses and registered AECs have the option to be evaluated under AEA procedures if at least 50% of the charter’s students are enrolled at registered AECs.
TEA contacted the 6 charters on April 11, 2011.
Charters must submit their preference via the TEASE Accountability website by April 25, 2011.
If a preference cannot be obtained, the charter will be evaluated under standard accountability procedures.
If fewer than 50% of the charter’s students are enrolled at registered AECs, then the charter will be evaluated under standard accountability procedures.

44. All presentations will be from 1:00–3:00 p.m.
TETN Accountability Update Sessions 2011 Schedule and Tentative Agenda Topics
June 16 State and AYP Accountability Manuals
August 18 Accountability Results for 2011
November 17 Accountability Ratings Update
Gold Performance Acknowledgments
AEIS Reports
School Report Cards
PEG List
All presentations will be from 1:00–3:00 p.m.

45. Accountability Resources
Division of Performance Reporting (512)
ESC Accountability Contacts
Online:
ACCT:
AEA:
AYP: