1. 2013 Texas Accountability System

2. Timeline: August 1, 2013 August 8, 2013
Preview Data Tables. Superintendents are given access to confidential preview accountability data tables for their district and campuses showing all accountability indicator data. Principals and superintendents can use these data tables to anticipate their campus and district accountability ratings.
August 8, 2013
Ratings Release. Data tables and ratings are publically available.
August 9 through September 9, 2013
2013 Appeals Window. Appeals may be submitted by the superintendent after receipt of the preview data tables.
Districts register their district and campus appeals using the TEASE Accountability website then submit the appeal with supporting documentation via the mail.
November 2013
Decisions Released and Ratings Updated. Commissioner’s decisions are mailed in the form of response letters to each appellant. Letters are posted to the TEASE site.
For rating labels in 2013, there are no more Exemplary, Recognized, AA, AU.
Met Standard means that you met all performance targets. For 2013 for grades 9 and above is all index targets. We have some components of the system that wont be in place until If you’re grade 8 and below, just 3 index labels.

3. 2013 Rating Labels: Met Standard – met all performance index targets
Met Alternative Standard – met all modified performance index targets for alternative education campuses and districts
Improvement Required – did not meet one or more performance index targets
2013 Transition Year: The 2013 ratings criteria and targets will stand alone because the performance index framework cannot be fully implemented in 2013.
For rating labels in 2013, there are no more Exemplary, Recognized, AA, AU.
Met Standard means that you met all performance targets. For 2013 for grades 9 and above is all index targets. We have some components of the system that wont be in place until If you’re grade 8 and below, just 3 index labels.

4. Sample Campus Accountability Report
You will receive a report from TEA that lists your performance on each index that will look similar to this.

5. A detailed view of the 2013 Accountability Index System
A detailed view of the 2013 Accountability Index System. Notice that the shaded areas are not evaluated in 2013 and will be made available in 2014 ratings.

6. -STAAR Reading, Math, & Writing
WHO:
-All Students
-All Test Versions
-All Subject Areas
WHAT:
Credit given for students reaching Level II (satisfactory) performance.
WHO:
-10 Student Groups
-STAAR Reading, Math, & Writing
WHAT:
Credit based on growth expectations:
1 credit for Meeting Expectations
2 credits for Exceeding Expectations
WHO:
-Only the Eco. Dis. group and the two lowest performing race/ethnicity groups from last year.
-All subject areas
WHAT:
Credit given for students reaching Level II (satisfactory) performance.
WHO:
-10 Student Groups
WHAT:
4-year or 5-year Graduation rate (whichever is higher)
AND
Percentage of Recommended and Distinguished Grad Plans
A detailed view of the 2013 Accountability Index System. Notice that the shaded areas are not evaluated in 2013 and will be made available in 2014 ratings.

7. Performance Index Criteria
To receive a Met Standard rating, all campuses and districts must meet the following accountability targets on all indexes for which they have performance data in 2013.
For 2013 for grades 9 and above is all index targets.
If you’re grade 8 and below, just 3 index labels (no graduation/diploma plan data).
* Target will be set at about the fifth percentile of campus performance and will be applied to both campuses and districts.

8. System Safeguards
Disaggregated performance rates based on the target for student achievement in Index 1
Participation, graduation rates, and limits on use of STAAR Alternate and STAAR Modified are calculated to meet federal requirements.
Results reported for any cell that meets minimum size requirements
If a campus or district does not meet the safeguard target on any measure, this must be incorporated into the Campus and/or District Improvement Plan(s) and the Texas Accountability Intervention System (TAIS).
These missed measures will not automatically result in an unsatisfactory accountability rating
Underlying base of the entire system. Based on Index 1.

9. System Safeguards Targets Indicator All African Amer. Amer. Indian
Asian
Hispanic
Pacific Islander
White
Two or More
Eco.
Disadv.
ELL
Special Ed.
Performance Rates
Reading
50%
Mathematics
Writing
Science
Social Studies
Participation Rates
95%
Federal Graduation Rates (including improvement targets)
4-year
78%
5-year
83%
District Limits on Use of Alternative Assessment Results
Modified 2%
Not Applicable
Alternate 1%

10. Underlying base of the entire system. Based on Index 1.

11. System Safeguards Sample Report Indicator All African Amer.
Amer. Indian
Asian
Hispanic
Pacific Islander
White
Two or More
Eco.
Disadv.
ELL
Special Ed.
Indicators Missed
Performance Rates*
Reading
50%
100%
n/a
36%
1 of 5
Mathematics
0 of 5
Writing
48%
1 of 3
Science
Social Studies

12. Distinction Designations
Campuses must have “Met Standard” rating
AEA campuses not eligible
Utilization of comparison group (40)
2013 Designations:
Top 25% Student Progress (Index #2)
Academic Achievement in Reading/ELA
Academic Achievement in Math

13. Data Currently Available:
2012 Indicators Report
Identifies the two race/ethnicity student groups that will be evaluated in Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps in 2013
2012 results that will be used for small numbers analyses in 2013
Understand how each of the performance indexes (good practice)
Includes Graduation and Dropout Rates for Index 4
Currently available on TEASE

17. Have Questions? Jonathan Delgado Jennifer Womack System Support
Region XIII
Jennifer Womack
System Support
Region XIII