1. It’s All GrEEk to Me… Accountability for Beginners Kim Gilson Sr Consultant Data and Accountability Kim.gilson@region10.org 972-348-1480

2. Disclaimer All information in this presentation is subject to change as a result of State Legislation, ATAC/APAC recommendations, Commissioner Final Decisions, Federal Legislation, Alien Invasion or Natural Disasters, and might be voided following any TEA session this week. This training does not take the place of reading the manuals.

3. How Did We Get Here?

4. Then… Separate State and Federal Accountability Systems –“Recognized” by State –“Missed AYP” by Feds Federal Targets Rising Beyond Attainable Levels –Performance Standard of each student group rapidly approaching 100% Only measured students who passed

5. A Performance Index Framework Many Components, One Result Now…..

6. Where Did It Come From???

7. Sources of Influence Your Assessment Answer Documents!!! Legislation! –State: In Session! –Feds: Discussing a NCLB Rewrite ATAC/APAC Advisory Committees Commissioner of Education –Commissioner’s Rules Results summarized in the Accountability Manual

8. ATAC and APAC Accountability Technical Advisory Committee Accountability Policy Advisory Committee Real People from Real Districts! They make recommendations to the Commissioner EXPECT CHANGES TO 2015 ACCOUNTABILITY RULES

9. Accountability Development Timeline

10. How Can I Keep Up????

11. For Legislative Action State news sources Notifications through the Texas Legislature website Social Media –#txlege –#txed –#STAAR –#HB___ or #SB___ Service Center Updates

12. For Development Materials and Final Decisions from TEA

14. Some Basic Vocabulary….

15. Raw Score The number of questions the student must pass correctly to meet a goal Who Understands This?

17. Percentage Score The percent of items a student answered correctly, as if it were a chapter test graded by the teacher Who understands this?

19. Vertical Scale Score A vertical scale is a scale score system that allows for direct comparison of student test scores across grade levels within a content area. Vertical scaling refers to the process of placing test scores that measure similar content areas but at different grade levels onto a common scale.---TEA Different for every grade/subject This is what the system is based on! Who understands this?

21. Raw, Percent, and Vertical Scores The number of questions a student must answer correctly OR The percentage of questions a student must answer correctly to meet the standard CAN CHANGE FROM ONE YEAR TO THE NEXT, BUT….. The vertical scale score remains the same (assuming the same passing standard)

22. Target The number that must be attained by the campus or district in each Index –Example: Index 1 Target was 55 in 2014

23. Performance Levels Level I: Unsatisfactory –Did Not Pass Level II: Satisfactory –Passing Level III: Advanced –Demonstrating an extremely high level of performance (“commended” in TAKS)

24. Phase-In Levels The Level II Satisfactory Standard was supposed to be “Phased in” to allow the system to adjust to the new expectations for STAAR We still haven’t adjusted to the new expectations of STAAR –Phase-in Level I was extended –We’re in our 4 th, AND LAST, year of the lowest phase-in Standard

25. The Commissioner announced a new Phase-In Schedule in Fall of 2014 From 3-4 Levels Each new level for 3 years Final Level II standards not changed Advanced Level III not changed

26. Advanced Level III: No Changes New STAAR Phase-In Schedule

27. ELL Progress Measure: A Different Standard Who understands this???

29. ELL Progress Measure in Layman’s Terms In layman’s terms…. Given that it is more difficult for an ELL student to achieve the same passing standard as native English speakers –The ELL progress measure affords those students a measure of “grace” (ie, reduced passing standard) –They are placed on a plan with varying passing standards –The level of grace shown is based on a combination of 2 factors: Years in US Schools Composite Telpas Score It is used in various ways in each Index. See http://goo.gl/dU6vgb (Accountability Manual, Appendix I)http://goo.gl/dU6vgb

32. Performance Index Framework Index 1Index 2Index 3Index 4 Student Achievement Student Progress Closing Performance Gaps Postsecondary Readiness Rating Based on 4 Performance Indexes

33. Index 1 Level II Satisfactory Performance

34. In Layman’s Terms…Who Passed? # of Tests Passed # of Tests Taken All Subjects. All Grades. All Students. One Number.

35. Sample Index 1

36. Index 1 Target 50 in 2013 55 in 2014 Proposal is to keep target of 55

37. New for 2015 New Math TEKS According to Bridge Study –See http://goo.gl/1TD57v for more infohttp://goo.gl/1TD57v –We’ll have bridge “scores” by mid June STAAR A and STAAR Alt 2 –Index Calculated With and Without These Tests If they cause you to miss the target, then they won’t be included “Hold Harmless”

38. Federal Safeguards To satisfy Federal Accountability Concerns, performance by Student Groups is reported in Index 1 –Done to ensure group performance doesn’t mask students being left behind –2015 Federal Safeguard is 83% (R/M Only) –Determined Focus and Priority Schools in 2013 3 year cohort –State Safeguards are same as Index Target (all subjects)

39. Federal Accountability Bills are being developed at the Federal Level to change No Child Left Behind/AYP Requirements Stay Tuned!

40. Index 2 Who Grew???

41. How? This Year’s Vertical Scale Score Minus Previous Year’s Vertical Scale Score In Reading, Math…. and 7 th Grade Writing (NEW!) (7 th Grade Score Minus 4 th Grade Score)

42. Weighted System 1 point for growing enough (“meeting growth measure”) 2 points for growing extra (“exceeding growth measure”) How much is “enough” or “extra?” –Depends on the grade and subject! –See “Calculating STAAR Progress Measure” or “A Parent’s Guide to the STAAR Progress Measure” http://tea.texas.gov/student.assessment/staar/

43. But Not This Year… In 3-8 Math (because of New TEKS) And Never for English I –8 th Grade Test to English I doesn’t compute –So…Index 2 for High Schools is Algebra 1 and English II

44. Groups Contribute Points! All Students (as a group) Each Race/Ethnicity (if they have 25 or more students) Special Ed and ELL’s (if they have 25 or more students)

45. ELL Progress Measure Students have a set Met or Exceeds target that is not based on 2 years of consecutive scale scores –Soooo…..they can have progress measures in grades that other students can’t Example: 3 rd grade Reading and English I AND 4 TH GRADE WRITING! AND 3-8 Math! ATAC is Recommending No Math Index 2 for ELL’s in Grades 3-8 Writing Still Included

46. Target 2014 Bottom 5% 2015 Proposal is Bottom 5% Again

47. Old Calculation Reading Index 2 Points + Math Index 2 Points 2 Each subject contributed 50% of the index Student Groups had to meet 25 tests within that subject

48. But for 2015???? If you take the same approach, Reading = 1/3 Math = 1/3 (even though it’s only Alg 1!) Writing = 1/3 (even though it’s only 7 th grade and 4 th ELL’s!) So………..

49. New Proposed Calculation Reading Progress + Algebra 1 Progress + Writing Progress Total Available Points Student Groups would need 25 TOTAL tests to contribute points! (NOT 25 for a subject!!!) It will be easier for a student group to meet minimum size

50. Special Education and Spanish Tests Proposal is to EXCLUDE STAAR A and Alt 2 from Index 2 Reminder: Anyone who took an M last year CANNOT receive a Progress Measure Students who change languages cannot receive a Progress Measure in Reading Students who took Spanish 4 th Grade Writing cannot receive a 7 th Grade Writing Progress Measure

51. Index 3 Closing Performance Gaps

52. Index 3 Focuses on Economically Disadvantaged Students AND Lowest Performing Race/Ethnicity Groups from Previous Year –Groups Must Meet Minimum Size of 25 Reading Tests AND 25 Math Tests last year AND this year –Campuses could have 0, 1, or 2 Race/Ethnicity groups (see accountability manual for details)

53. Calculation 1 point for Passing 2 points for Advanced Level III All Subjects –Writing, Science, And Social Studies may not have data for some groups because there aren’t enough students to meet minimum size New Math TEKS Included Via Bridge Study

55. Target 2014 Bottom 5% Didn’t Meet the Target 2015 Proposal is to keep same target

56. Index 4 Post-Secondary Readiness

57. Currently…. 4 Indicators –STAAR Component Final Level II on 2 or more tests –(If they take at least 2 tests. If not, they need to achieve that on the one they took) New Math TEKS Included Via Bridge Study Elementary and Middle Schools Stop Here

58. AND 3 Lagging Indicators for High Schools/Districts (Class of 2014 in 2015 Accountability) Graduation Rates Graduation Plans (Add Foundation Plan) Post-Secondary Indicator* *need to be redefined

59. Post-Secondary Indicator Change? Proposal is to add new ways for a student to count in the numerator, but keep the same denominator. TSI on R AND Math from TAKS/SAT/ACT OR Completed One Advanced Course OR Completed Credit CTE Coherent Sequence

60. Changes Are Coming to Index 4 TAKS Grads leave the system after 2015 Legislative requirements for additional indicators Foundation Plan/Endorsements

61. Proposal Keep Index 4 Targets the Same as 2014

62. PROPOSAL TO MEET STANDARD MEET INDEX 1 OR 2 And Index 3 And Index 4

63. Distinctions

64. Each Campus is placed in a comparison group of 40 schools Campuses Evaluated –4 Core Subject Peformance –Index 2 –Index 3 –Post-Secondary Readiness Districts Evaluated in Post-Secondary Readiness only Some indicators are attendance/participation and some are performance You get a Quartile ranking for each indicator –Number of Q1’s determines distinction

65. Comparison Data is Available See how your campus compares to the other schools like you in the Distinction Designation Data Overview Report Improvement Required Schools cannot earn distinctions, but they still have data! –http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/2014/srch.html?srch=C

66. Preview Vocabulary Topics in 2015 Accountability Development Materials

67. Required Improvement Not to be confused with “Improvement Required” –Harkens back to AYP days –Can help a campus or district who misses and index target, but improves enough from previous year –Needs stability in the system before formulas can be created –Possibly added in future cycles

68. The Bright Side? At least we’re never bored!