1. AIE Annual Conference| September 24, 2013 Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting Shannon Housson, Director State Accountability Overview

2. 2013 Accountability System

3. Performance Index Framework 3 For 2013 and beyond, a framework of four Performance Indexes includes a broad set of measures that provide a comprehensive evaluation of the entire campus or district. Accountability System Student Achievement Index I Student Progress Index 2 Closing Performance Gaps Index 3 Postsecondary Readiness Index 4 Student Achievement Index I Student Progress Index 2 Closing Performance Gaps Index 3 Postsecondary Readiness Index 4

4. 2013 Index 1: Student Achievement 4 Index 1 Student Achievement provides an overview of student performance based on satisfactory student achievement across all subjects for all students. Subjects: Combined over Reading, Mathematics, Writing, Science, and Social Studies. Student Groups: All Students only Performance Standards: Phase-in 1 Level II (Satisfactory)

5. 2014 Index 1: Student Achievement 5 Index 1 Student Achievement provides an overview of student performance based on satisfactory student achievement across all subjects for all students. Subjects: Combined over Reading, Mathematics, Writing, Science, and Social Studies. Student Groups: All Students only Performance Standards: Phase-in 1 Level II (Satisfactory) STAAR EOC Assessments: Algebra I, Biology, English I, English II, U.S. History

6. 6 Index 2: Student Progress focuses on actual student growth independent of overall achievement levels for each race/ethnicity student group, students with disabilities, and English language learners. By Subject Area: Reading, Mathematics, and Writing for available grades. Credit based on weighted performance: One point credit given for each percentage of students at the Met growth expectations level. Two point credit given for each percentage of students at the Exceeded growth expectations level. 2013 Index 2: Student Progress

7. 7 Index 2: Student Progress focuses on actual student growth independent of overall achievement levels for each race/ethnicity student group, students with disabilities, and English language learners. By Subject Area: Reading, Mathematics, and Writing for available grades. Credit based on weighted performance: One point credit given for each percentage of students at the Met growth expectations level. Two point credit given for each percentage of students at the Exceeded growth expectations level. Additional Progress Measures Included in 2014: STAAR-M, STAAR-Alt, ELL Progress Measure, and other enhancements to be announced. 2014 Index 2: Student Progress

8. 8 Credit based on STAAR performance: Phase-in 1 Level II satisfactory performance One point for each percent of students at the phase-in 1 Level II satisfactory performance standard. 2013 Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps emphasizes advanced academic achievement of economically disadvantaged students and the two lowest performing race/ethnicity student groups.

9. 9 Credit based on STAAR weighted performance: Phase-in 1 Level II satisfactory performance One point for each percent of students at the phase-in 1 Level II satisfactory performance standard. Level III advanced performance Two points for each percent of students at the Level III advanced performance standard. 2014 Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps emphasizes advanced academic achievement of economically disadvantaged students and the two lowest performing race/ethnicity student groups.

10. 2013 Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps 10 By Subject Area: Reading, Mathematics, Writing, Science, and Social Studies. Student Groups Socioeconomic: Economically Disadvantaged Lowest Performing Race/Ethnicity: The two lowest performing race/ ethnicity student groups on the campus or district o Based on 2012 assessment results that were reported on 2012 Indicators Report released in May 2013.

11. 2014 Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps 11 By Subject Area: Reading, Mathematics, Writing, Science, and Social Studies. Student Groups Socioeconomic: Economically Disadvantaged Lowest Performing Race/Ethnicity: The two lowest performing race/ ethnicity student groups on the campus or district o Based on 2013 assessment results that were reported on 2013 Index 1: Student Achievement Data Table released on August 8, 2013

12. 2013 Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness 12 Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness emphasizes the importance for students to receive a high school diploma that provides them with the foundation necessary for success in college, the workforce, job training programs, or the military; and the role of elementary and middle schools in preparing students for high school. 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 for All Students and race/ethnicity student groups

13. 2014 Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness 13 Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness emphasizes the importance for students to receive a high school diploma that provides them with the foundation necessary for success in college, the workforce, job training programs, or the military; and the role of elementary and middle schools in preparing students for high school. 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 for All Students and race/ethnicity student groups STAAR Score: STAAR Percent Met Final Level II on One or More Tests for All Students and race/ethnicity student groups

14. 2014 Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness 14 Additional Indicators Required by House Bill 5 (83rd Texas Legislature, 2013) Texas Success Initiative (TSI) college readiness benchmarks Number of students who earn postsecondary credit required for the foundation high school program, an associates degree, or an industry certification.

15. 2013 System Safeguards 15 Systems safeguards are designed to evaluate the disaggregated performance results of the state accountability system to ensure that poor performance in one area or one student group is not masked in the performance index. Performance rates for system safeguards are calculated from the assessment results used to calculate performance rates in Index 1. Targets for the disaggregated results are: STAAR performance target corresponds to Index 1 (50%), STAAR participation target required by federal accountability (95%), Federal graduation rate targets and improvement calculations for 4-year rate (78%) and 5-year rate (83%), Federal limit on use of alternate assessments (1% and 2%).

16. 2014 System Safeguards 16 Systems safeguards are designed to evaluate the disaggregated performance results of the state accountability system to ensure that poor performance in one area or one student group is not masked in the performance index. Performance rates for system safeguards are calculated from the assessment results used to calculate performance rates in Index 1. Targets for the disaggregated results are: STAAR performance target corresponds to Index 1 (TBD), STAAR participation target required by federal accountability (95%), Federal graduation rate targets and improvement calculations for 4-year rate (TBD) and 5-year rate (TBD), Federal limit on use of alternate assessments (1% and 2%).

17. 2013 Accountability Reports 17 A new system of accountability, distinction designations, and system safeguard reports allows for comprehensive data analysis of aggregate and student-level results. Accountability Reports – Districts and Campuses Accountability Summary Report Calculation Reports (one for each performance index) Data Tables (one for each performance index) Distinction Designation Summary Reports – Campuses Only Academic Achievement – Reading/ELA Academic Achievement – Mathematics Top 25% Student Progress

18. 2013 Accountability Reports (continued) 18 System Safeguard Reports – Districts and Campuses Three-page summary includes numerators, denominators, and rates for each of the subjects and student groups used in the calculation of System Safeguards: Performance Rates; Participation Rates; Graduation Rates; and Federal Limits on Alternative Assessments. Confidential Accountability Student Listings Student listings provided on TEASE that show each student and the number of tests in each subject that were used to build Index 1. Additional information is available through the data download of the students test results in each subject area. Confidential Consolidated Accountability File (CAF) Single consolidated data file provided by Pearson in mid-July 2013 includes student test results for the Summer 2012, Fall 2012, and Spring 2013 test administrations.

19. Distinction Designations

20. 20 2013 Distinction Designations Campus Top Twenty-Five Percent Distinction Designations Top 25% Student Progress. Based on performance on Index 2: Student Progress. Campuses in the top quartile of their campus comparison group in performance on Index 2 earn this distinction designation. Academic Achievement Distinction Designations Reading/ELA Mathematics

21. 21 2014 Distinction Designations Campus Top Twenty-Five Percent Distinction Designations Top 25% Student Progress. Based on performance on Index 2: Student Progress. Campuses in the top quartile of their campus comparison group in performance on Index 2 earn this distinction designation. Top 25% Closing Achievement Gaps. Based on performance on Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps. Campuses in the top quartile of their campus comparison group in performance on Index 3 earn this distinction designation. Academic Achievement Distinction Designations Reading/ELA Mathematics Science Social Studies

22. 22 2014 Distinction Designations New Academic Achievement Distinction Designations (AADD) Indicators in Reading/ELA and Mathematics Grade 10 (PSAT and PLAN) and Grade 11 (PSAT) Participation. PSAT Grade 10 and Grade 11 Performance Indicators: ELA and Mathematics. PLAN Grade 10 Performance Indicators: English and Mathematics.

23. 23 2014 Distinction Designations New Districts and Campus Postsecondary Readiness Distinction Designations 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 for this distinction must include indicators based on percentages of students who: Achieve college-readiness standards on STAAR Earn nationally or internationally recognized business or 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 Earn college credit based on performance on AP/IB examinations.

24. Anticipated 2014 Accountability System

25. 25 2013 Accountability Ratings and Designations Accountability Rating (Districts and Campuses) Distinction Designations (Campuses Only) Met Standard Top 25%: Student Progress and/or Academic Achievement: Reading/ELA and/or Academic Achievement: Mathematics Met Alternative Standard (assigned to charter operators and alternative education campuses (AECs) evaluated under alternative education provisions) N/A Improvement RequiredN/A

26. 26 2014 Accountability Ratings and Designations Accountability Rating (Districts and Campuses) Distinction Designations (Districts and Campuses) Met Standard Postsecondary Readiness Distinction Designations (Campuses Only) Top 25%: Student Progress and/or Top 25%: Closing Achievement Gaps and/or Academic Achievement: Reading/ELA and/or Academic Achievement: Mathematics and/or Academic Achievement: Science and/or Academic Achievement: Social Studies Met Alternative Standard (assigned to charter operators and alternative education campuses (AECs) evaluated under alternative education provisions) N/A Improvement RequiredN/A

27. 2013 Performance Index Targets 27 2013 Index Targets for Non-AEA Campuses and Districts To receive a Met Standard rating, non-AEA campuses and districts had to meet the following accountability targets on all indexes for which they had performance data in 2013. Performance Index CampusesDistricts Index 1: Student Achievement50 Index 2: Student Progress High Schools: 17 21 Middle Schools: 29 Elementary Schools: 30 Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps55 Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness75

28. 2014 Performance Index Targets 28 2014 Index Targets for Non-AEA Campuses and Districts The 2014 Index targets will be finalized in spring 2014 by the commissioner based on the recommendations from accountability advisory groups that will be convened in late fall 2013. Performance Index CampusesDistricts Index 1: Student AchievementTBD Index 2: Student Progress High Schools: TBD TBD Middle Schools:TBD Elem. Schools: TBD Index 3: Closing Performance GapsTBD Index 4: Postsecondary ReadinessTBD

29. 29 Accountability Advisory Committees Accountability advisory groups will convene in fall 2013 to finalize recommendations for accountability ratings criteria and labels for 2014 and beyond and performance index targets for 20142016. Early December 2013 – Accountability advisory groups convene to develop recommendations to Commissioner for accountability ratings criteria and labels for 2014 and beyond and performance index targets for 2014, 2015, and 2016 accountability ratings. Spring 2014 – Commissioner announces accountability ratings criteria for 2014 and beyond and final 2014 targets, preliminary 2015 targets, and preview 2016 targets.

30. House Bill 5 Expands the postsecondary readiness indicators evaluated for state accountability to include Texas Success Initiative (TSI) college readiness benchmarks and the number of students who earn postsecondary credit required for the foundation high school program, an associates degree, or an industry certification. Expands distinction designations to districts and campuses for outstanding performance in attainment of postsecondary readiness. Beginning in the 2016-17 school year, requires TEA to assign ratings of A, B, C, D, or F to districts, and ratings of exemplary, recognized, acceptable, or unacceptable to campuses. Legislative Changes - 83rd Texas Legislature, 2013 30

31. House Bill 5 - Community and Student Engagement Beginning with the 2013-14 school year, districts will be required to evaluate community and student engagement compliance for the district and each of their campuses and assign a rating. The ratings are required to be reported to TEA by August 8, 2014. The statute requires that districts assign a performance rating of exemplary, recognized, acceptable, or unacceptable based on locally- determined criteria. These performance ratings must be based on criteria developed by a local committee. Statute does not permit the Agency to determine the criteria that can be used for these evaluations. TEA is required to develop a data collection system that allows districts to submit their locally-determined performance ratings for each campus in the district. TEA is also required to report these ratings publicly by October 1, 2014. Legislative Changes - 83rd Texas Legislature, 2013 31

32. Senate Bill 1538 Requires the evaluation of dropout recovery schools that are defined as: o serves students in grades 9-12; o has enrollment of which at least 50 percent of the students are 17 years of age or older as of September 1 of the school year; and o meets the eligibility requirements for and is registered under alternative education accountability procedures adopted by the commissioner. Further modifications to the applicable indexes will be reviewed with the accountability advisory groups in fall 2013 to ensure all of the requirements of Senate Bill 1538 are met. Legislative Changes - 83rd Texas Legislature, 2013 32

33. Calendar 33 DateActivity Early November 2013Final accountability ratings released based on outcomes of 2013 appeals Mid November 2013 2013 Texas Academic Performance Reports released on TEASE (formerly known as Academic Excellence Indicator System (AEIS) reports) December 2013 2013 Texas Academic Performance Reports released on TEA website Public Education Grant (PEG) list posted on public website 2013 School Report Cards posted on public website January 2014 2013 Federal Report Cards for Texas Public Schools posted on public website (formerly known as NCLB Report Cards) Spring 2014 List of schools with Campus Improvement Plans (CIP) requirements released once 2014 accountability targets and criteria are determined

34. Resources 2013 Accountability Manual http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/2013/index.html http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/2013/index.html Performance Reporting Home Page http://www.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport http://www.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport Performance Reporting Email performance.reporting@tea.state.tx.us performance.reporting@tea.state.tx.us Division of Performance Reporting Telephone (512) 463-9704 34