1. Overview of 2015 Accountability SUMMER 2015 MICKI WESLEY, DIRECTOR OF ACCOUNTABILITY & COMPLIANCE CINDY TEICHMAN, COORDINATOR OF INSTRUCTIONAL SUPPORT

2. Today’s Agenda Accountability Ratings Index Targets Common Elements Targets Performance Levels Accountability Subsets Retests Student Groups Evaluated Inclusion of ELLs School Type Accountability Reports Summary Reports Accountability Framework  Index 1  Index 2  Index 3  Index 4 Distinction Designations System Safeguards Statutory Compliance Resources Questions

3. Today’s Objectives  Explore in detail the Performance Index Framework  Examine district and campus accountability reports to process and understand how ratings were determined  Understand how Campus and District Distinction Designations were determined  Analyze district and campus System Safeguard measures  Return to your school able to explain your ratings to staff, parents, and media

4. 2015 Accountability Rating Labels Accountability Ratings (Campuses and Districts) Met Standard Met Alternative Standard (assigned to charter operators and alternative education campuses (ACEs) evaluated under alternative education accountability (AEA) provisions) Improvement Required

5. Accountability Framework Index 1 Index 2 Index 3 Index 4 Student Achievement Student Progress Closing Performance Gaps Postsecondary Readiness

6. Rating Labels Index 1Index 2 Student Progress Index 3 Closing Gaps Index 4 NEW FOR 2015: Ratings are based on meeting Index 1 OR Index 2 and Index 3 and Index 4 Student Achievement OR AND Postsecondary Achievement

7. Common Elements Slides 8-22 address elements common to all 4 indexes of the Accountability Framework

8. 8 Index Targets for Non-AEA Districts & Campuses Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting Performance Index Non-AEA CampusesNon-AEA Districts 2014201520142015 Index 1: Student Achievement55605560 Index 2: Student Progress* HS/K-12: n/aHS/K-12: 15 1620 MS: 28 EL: 33 EL: 30 Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps HS/K-12: 31 28 MS: 27 EL: 28 *Targets for non-AEA campuses are set about the fifth percentile of non-AEA 2015 campus performance by campus type. Targets for non-AEA districts corresponds to about the fifth percentile of non-AEA 2015 campus performance across all campus types.

9. 9 Index Targets for Non-AEA Districts & Campuses Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting Performance Index Non-AEA CampusesNon-AEA Districts 2014201520142015 Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness All Components HS/K-12: 57 57 MS: n/a EL: n/a STAAR Only HS/K-12: 21 13 MS: 13 EL: 12

10. 10 Performance Index AEA Charter Districts and Campuses 20142015 Index 1: Student Achievement3035 Index 2: Student Progress*n/a7 Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps 11 Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness Both Components 33 Graduation/Dropout Rate Only 45 Index Targets for AEA Charter Districts & Campuses Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting *Targets for both AEA campuses and charter districts correspond to approximately the fifth percentile of AEA campus performance in 2015.

11. Performance Levels on STAAR Level I: Unsatisfactory Academic Performance Level II: Satisfactory Academic Performance Level III: Advance Academic Performance

12. Phase-in for Level II: Satisfactory Performance Level II: Satisfactory Academic Performance PERFORMANCE 1 st Phase-in Level II 2 nd Phase-in Level II Final Level II Performance 2014-15 2015-16 thru 2017-18 2018-19 thru 2020-21 3 rd Phase-in Level II 2021-22

13. Accountability Subset STAAR Grades 3-8 results included Grades 3-8 spring administrations- first two administrations IF student enrolled on this date: October 24, 2014 (Fall 2014 snapshot) AND on testing date EOC Accountability Cycle STAAR 3-8 Accountability Cycle

14. Subset Example: Do they Count StudentTest AdministrationEnrollment Date JoeSpring 2015November 2, 2014 SueFall 2014August 30, 2014 SamSummer 2014January 8, 2014 MikeSummer 2014September 10, 2013

15. STAAR Grades 5 & 8 Retests Grades 5 & 8 – Best result from first 2 test administrations (Reading ONLY 2015) – IF student is in Accountability Subset

16. 16 Other Questions for 2015 Accountability Question A student takes STAAR for the first administration and does not pass. The student then takes STAAR A for the second administration based on an ARD committee recommendation. Answer The best result in each subject is selected and applied to district and campus performance. The best result is based on the highest performance level or progress measure. If the best result cannot be determined, then the most recent assessment is used. Therefore, in 2015, if a student takes STAAR A in the second administration, the STAAR A results will be excluded for 2015 state accountability whether pass or fail. Conversely, if a student takes STAAR A in the first administration and STAAR on the second administration, the STAAR test results will be evaluated for state accountability whether pass or fail. Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting

17.  It is common practice for ARD committees to require special education students to attempt the STAAR EOC Test at least two times prior to exempting them from the requirement to pass the EOC for graduation purposes.  We strongly recommend this be considered very carefully. The accountability subset for EOC’s begins the prior summer.  Example: Student takes first EOC attempt in Spring 2015 and fails, ARD committees often requires summer retest. Caution, this student will now go into the next year’s (2016) accountability subset. Do you really want this to be the requirement?  BEST PRACTICE: Look at each student individually. Make the best decision for the student.

18. Student Groups

19. Postsecondary Component New

20. 20 Key Issues for 2015 Accountability Issue Inclusion of English language learners (ELLs) with parental denials who are in their second, third, or fourth years in U.S. schools. Final Decision ELLs with parental denials for services will be included in the performance indexes as shown below. Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting Years in U.S. Schools Index 1Index 2Index 3Index 4 First YearNot Included 2-4 Years STAAR Phase-in 1 Level II STAAR Progress Measure STAAR Phase-in 1 Level II and Level III Not Included 5 th Year & Beyond STAAR Phase-in 1 Level II STAAR Progress Measure STAAR Phase-in 1 Level II and Level III STAAR Final Level II

21. Inclusion of ELLs

22. School Types Page 18 in 2015 Accountability Manual

26. 60 Points STAAR 3-8 Reading, Writing, Science, SS, All EOCs (2015 Excludes Math 3-8, STAAR A, STAAR Alt.) New for 2015

27. 2015  Combined across All Subjects: reading, mathematics (Algebra I only), writing, science, and social studies  Student Groups: All Students  Performance Standards: Phase-in 1 Level II (Satisfactory) or achieved the equivalency standard on EOC substitute assessments  STAAR EOC Assessments (5 total):  English l  English ll  Algebra l  Biology  U.S. History  STAAR A and STAAR Alt 2 results are excluded  English Language Learners (English and Spanish tests):  Students in US schools Year 1 excluded  Students in US schools Year 2 and beyond included based on ELL Progress Measure for those tested in English 27 Index 1: Student Achievement Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting 2014  Combined across All Subjects: Reading, Mathematics, Writing, Science, and Social Studies  Student Groups: All Students  Performance Standards: Phase-in 1 Level II (Satisfactory) or achieved the equivalency standard on EOC substitute assessments  STAAR EOC Assessments (5 total):  English l (combined tests); English ll (combined tests) beginning in spring 2014  Algebra l  Biology  US History  English Language Learners (English and Spanish tests):  Students in US schools Year 1 excluded  Students in US schools Year 2 and beyond included based on ELL Progress Measure for those tested in English 2014 and 2015 Comparison  STAAR Phase-in 1 Level II for ELLs with parental denials Shaded items are new for 2015

28. ELLs with Parental Denials will be included this year Target: 60

29. Sample of ELL Plan

30. Index 1: Student Achievement

35. Index 2: Student Progress % of tests that Met Progress and Exceeded Progress 1 pt for % Met + 2 pts for % Exceeded Calculated for Math and ELA STAAR 3-8 Reading, 7 th Writing, Alg. I EOC, Eng. II EOC Met or Exceeded Progress Measure All Students – 0 MSR 7 Race/ Ethnicity (25 tests) SpEd and ELL – (25 tests) Above the 5 th Percentile Measure Tests Included Performance Standard Student Groups Target

36. 36 Index 2: Student Progress Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting STAAR Progress Measures by Subject Area and School Type 2014* Elementary School Middle School High School READING _____________ Gr. 4 Reading Gr. 6 Reading -_ Gr. 5 Reading Gr. 7 Reading_ Gr. 8 Reading_ MATHEMATICS _ Gr. 4 Mathematics Gr. 6 Mathematics Algebra l Gr. 5 Mathematics Gr. 7 Mathematics Gr. 8 Mathematics Algebra l WRITING - - * STAAR Modified and STAAR Alternate progress measures included in Index 2. 2015* Elementary SchoolMiddle School High School READING Gr. 4 Reading Gr. 6 Reading Eng. I to Eng. II Gr. 5 ReadingGr. 7 Reading Gr. 8 Reading MATHEMATICS - Algebra IAlgebra l WRITING - Gr. 7 Writing -_____ * STAAR A progress measures excluded from Index 2. STAAR Alt 2 progress measures will not be reported in 2015. 2014 and 2015 Comparison

37. 37 Index 2: Student Progress Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting New for 2015, the calculation of Index 2 will change from a weighted score that measures student improvement in each subject to an aggregate weighted score across subjects. The weighted performance rate combines STAAR and ELL Progress Measures in reading, writing, and mathematics (Algebra I only for 2014-15). The percent met or exceeded progress and percent exceeded progress will be calculated from the combined results. Scores will continue to be weighted based on students’ level of performance: o One point for each percent of assessment results that meet or exceed progress, o One additional point for each percent of results that exceed progress Also, the ELL student group will be expanded to include both current ELLs and monitored ELLs in their first and second years of academic monitoring after exiting ELL status.

38. Index 2: Student Progress ELL Progress Measure based on: Number of years in U.S. schools TELPAS *composite proficiency level Whether of not student has extenuating circumstances

39. Find Handout * “Calculating the ELL Progress Measure”

40. Index 2: Student Progress How is growth defined?

41. Index 2: Student Progress

44. 44 Index 2: Student Progress Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting STAAR Weighted Progress Rate All Students African Amer. Amer. Indian AsianHispanic Pacific Islande r White Two or More Races ELL Special Ed. Total Points Max. Points Example Calculation for Reading/Math/Writing Number of Tests 100504030 Performance Results: Met or Exceeded Progress Number Percent 80 80% 40 80% 40 100% 20 67% Exceeded Progress Number Percent 20 20% 20 40% 30 75% 5 17% Reading/Math/Writing Weighted Progress Rate 10012017584479800 2015 Construction – Table 1 Results for grades 3-8 mathematics, STAAR A, and STAAR Alternate 2 are excluded.

45. Index 2: Student Progress Calculation: 685 / 931 = 74% Calculation: 186 / 931= 20% 74% + 20%=94%

46. 46 Index 2: Student Progress Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting STAAR Weighted Progress Rate All Students Africa n Amer. Amer. Indian AsianHispanic Pacific Islande r White Two or More Races ELL Special Ed. Total Points Max. Points Reading/Math/Writing Weighted Progress 10012017584479800 Total479800 Index 2 Score (total points divided by maximum points)60 2015 Construction – Table 2 Results for grades 3-8 mathematics, STAAR A, and STAAR Alternate 2 are excluded.

48. 5 th Grade Reading Progress Example Student2014 Score Grade 4 Rdg 2015 Score Grade 5 Rdg Difference1.Met Growth 2.Exceeded 0. No Student A15021533+31 Student B14421486+44 Student C14401632+192 No (0) Yes (1) Yes (2)

49. Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps % of tests at Phase-In 1, Level II and % at Level III All subject areas (excluding Math 3-8, STAAR A, STAAR Alt.) All EOCs 1 pt for % at Phase-in 1, Level II + 2 pts for % at Level III ECD + 2 lowest performing Race / Ethnicity groups > 25 tests Elementary 28District 28 Middle School 27AEA 11 High School / K-12 31 Measure Tests Included Performance Standard Student Groups Target

50. 50 Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting 2014  Points based on STAAR performance:  Phase-in Satisfactory performance: One point for each percent of tests at the Phase-in 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.  Student Groups:  Economically Disadvantaged  Lowest Performing Racial/Ethnic Student Groups: The two lowest performing racial/ethnic student groups on the campus or within the district, based on 2013 assessment results.  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. Closing Performance Gaps emphasizes advanced academic achievement of economically disadvantaged students and the two lowest performing racial/ethnic student groups. 2015 *  Points based on STAAR performance:  Phase-in Satisfactory performance: One point for each percent of tests at the Phase-in 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 (Algebra I only), writing, science, and social studies  STAAR A and STAAR Alt 2 results are excluded  Student Groups:  Economically Disadvantaged  Lowest Performing Racial/Ethnic Student Group: The two lowest performing racial/ethnic student groups on the campus or within the district, based on 2014 assessment results.  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.  STAAR Phase-in Level II and Level III for ELLs with parental denials

52. 2014 Index 1: Student Achievement Data Table All Students African American Hispanic White 2014STAAR Performance All Subjects Percent of Tests % at Phase-in1Level II or above 44% 52% 49% 77% % atFinalLevel II or above 10% 8% 10% 19% %at Level III Advanced 2% 3% 2% 0% Number of Tests # at Phase-in1Level II or above 1,342 188 1,265 20 # atFinalLevel II or above 289 30 250 5 #at Level III Advanced 54 10 50 0 Total Tests 3,035 359 2,597 26 Reading Percent of Tests % at Phase-in 1 Level II or above 56% 57% 56% 55% % atFinalLevel II or above 13% 0% 12% 9% %at Level III Advanced 2% 5% 2% 0% Number of Tests # at Phase-in or above 551 47 490 6 # atFinalLevel II or above 124 0 107 1 #at Level III Advanced 21 4 17 0 Total Tests 984 82 878 11 Mathematics Percent of Tests % at Phase-in 1 Level II or above 54% 44% 55% 90% % atFinalLevel II or above 11% 0% 10% 40% % at Level III Advanced 3% 0% 3% 0% Number of Tests # at Phase-in1 Level IIor above 534 36 483 9 # atFinalLevel II or above 105 0 92 4 #at Level III Advanced 26 0 0 Total Tests 988 82 882 10 Index 3: 2015 Construction - Student Groups (based on 2014 assessment results by racial/ethnic group) 52 Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting

53. Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps Taken from 2014 Index 1 Must have 25 tests in BOTH reading and math

54. Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps

56. Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness Non AEA 1. STAAR Postsecondary Readiness (Final Level II) 2. Graduation Rate – 4 yr (2014) OR 5 yr (2013) whichever is higher 3. RHSP / DAP Rate (Cohort class of 2014) 4. Additional Postsecondary Indicators All 4 Components: Target = 57 Each Component = 25% of Index 4 STAAR Component only: (STAAR FINAL LEVEL II is 100% of Index 4 score) Elementary = 12 MS = 13 HS = 21 District = 13 Measure TARGET

57. 57 Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting 2015  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 racial/ethnic student groups.  STAAR Score: STAAR Percent Met Final Level ll on two or more tests for All Students and racial/ethnic student groups.  New expanded Postsecondary Indicator includes:  College-Ready Graduates indicator based on meeting TSI criteria on TAKS, SAT, or ACT in both ELA and math;  Advanced/dual enrollment course completion; and  CTE coherent sequence. 2014  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 racial/ethnic student groups.  STAAR Score: STAAR Percent Met Final Level ll on two or more tests for All Students and racial/ethnic student groups.  College-Ready Graduates indicator based on meeting TSI criteria on TAKS, SAT, or ACT in both ELA and math. 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. 2014 and 2015 Comparison Shaded items are new for 2015

58. 58 Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting 2015 Postsecondary Readiness Indicator The 2015 Postsecondary Indicator is expanded to include credit for College-Ready Graduates and additional postsecondary readiness activities. This indicator is defined as the percent of annual graduates that meet any one of the following three criteria. 1) meet TSI criteria in both reading/ELA and mathematics on TAKS, SAT, or ACT or 2) completed and received credit for at least two advanced/dual enrollment courses or 3) enrolled and reported in a coherent sequence of CTE courses Number of annual graduates reported for school year 2013–14

59. Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness 59 Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting  4-, 5-, and 6-year Graduation, Continuing Students, and General Education Development (GED) Score; If Graduation and GED Rates are unavailable, use Grade 9-12 Annual Dropout Rate: Points given for lower than 20.0  STAAR Percent Met Final Level ll on two or more tests  AEA Registration includes Dropout Recovery Schools  4-, 5-, and 6-year Graduation, Continuing Students, and GED Score; If Graduation and GED Rates are unavailable, use Grade 9-12 Annual Dropout Rate: Points given for rates lower than 20.0  STAAR Percent Met Final Level ll on two or more tests 2015 Same as 2014 Index 4: AEA Campuses and Charter Districts Contrib. to Points 75% 25%  AEA Registration includes Dropout Recovery Schools 2014

60. 60 Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting Bonus Points (maximum of 30):  RHSP/DAP Rate: All Students  Excluded Students Count: All Students  Postsecondary component - College and Career Readiness Bonus Points (maximum of 30):  RHSP/DAP Rate: All Students.  Excluded Students Count: All Students.  College-ready Graduates. 20142015 Index 4: AEA Campuses and Charter Districts Bonus Points Shaded item is new for 2015

61. Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness Non AEA

62. 1.The STAAR Postsecondary Readiness Standard (Final Level II) is determined by the percentage of students who meet postsecondary readiness standards on two or more subject area tests. Students tested in only one subject area are required to meet the postsecondary readiness standard on that test for credit in Index 4. Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness Non AEA

63. 2013-2014

64. 2. The Graduation Rate Score reflects the rate of the 4 year cohort OR 5 year cohort, whichever is highest. A class consists of all members of a cohort, minus students who leave the Texas public school system for reasons other than graduation, earning a General Educational Development (GED) certificate, or dropping out. All students and all students grouped by race/ethnicity, ELL, and special education. If a graduation rate is not available, then the annual dropout rate is used. Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness Non AEA

65. 3. The Graduation Plan Score is calculated from the 2014 class of students graduating under the Recommended High School Program or Distinguished Achievement Program (RHSP/DAP). If no longitudinal rate is available, the graduation plan score is based on an annual rate of students graduating under the Recommended High School Program or Distinguished Achievement Program (RHSP/DAP). Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness Non AEA

66. 4. The Postsecondary Component: College and Career Readiness Indicator Score ◦1) met or exceeded the Texas Success Initiative (TSI) criteria in both English language arts (ELA) and mathematics on the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) exit-level test, SAT, or ACT ◦OR ◦ 2) completed and earned credit on at least two advanced/dual credit enrollment course ◦OR ◦3) enrolled in a CTE-Coherent Sequence of courses (including the Tech Prep program). Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness Non AEA

68. Overall Index 4 Score Calculation: Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness Non AEA

70. Distinction Designations Distinction designations are awarded in recognition of outstanding achievement in academic areas in addition to those evaluated under state accountability. Campus distinctions are based on indicators of student performance in comparison to 40 similar campuses (Texas Education Code [TEC] §§39.201–203).

71. 71 Distinction Designations Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting Districts and Campuses Postsecondary Readiness Distinction designation criteria for campuses:  Elementary and middle schools must show performance in the top 25 percent of similar schools in their campus comparison group.  High schools and K-12 campuses must have at least 33 percent of the indicators in the top quartile. Same as 2014, rigorous criteria are applied to school districts in order to attain a Postsecondary Readiness Distinction Designation:  Districts must have at least 70 percent of its campus-level indicators in the top quartile.

72. Distinction Designations For 2015, distinction designations are awarded in the following areas: 1)Academic Achievement in English Language Arts/Reading (campus only) 2)Academic Achievement in Mathematics (campus only) 3)Academic Achievement in Science (campus only) 4)Academic Achievement in Social Studies (campus only) 5)Top 25 Percent: Student Progress (campus only) 6)Top 25 Percent: Closing Performance Gaps (campus only) 7) Postsecondary Readiness (district and campus) Distinction Designations

73. Distinction Designations ELA Reading

74. Distinction Designations ELA / Reading, cont. High School MS / JH Elem. K - 12

75. Distinction Designations Mathematics

76. Other Information: Exclusion of Grade 3–8 Mathematics Algebra I by Grade 8 Participation. Beginning in 2015, the Algebra I by Grade 8 Participation indicator limits the denominator to 8th grade students based on 2014 PEIMS fall enrollment, using Algebra I tests taken in either the current or any prior school year as reported on the Consolidated Accountability File (CAF), cumulative history section. Advanced/Dual Enrollment Course Completion: Mathematics. Beginning in 2015, the Advanced/Dual Enrollment Course Completion rate for mathematics for students enrolled in grades 11 and 12 has been added to the list of available indicators for the AADD in Mathematics. Assessments. A complete list of AP and IB assessments used in determining this distinction is available in Appendix K – Data Sources. Distinction Designations Mathematics

77. Distinction Designations Science

78. Distinction Designations Social Studies

79. Top 25 Percent: Student Progress A distinction designation is awarded to a campus for outstanding student progress if it is ranked in the top 25 percent (Q1) of campuses in its campus comparison group for Index 2. Who is eligible: Campuses that are evaluated for Index 2 and received a Met Standard rating. Methodology: Campuses are assigned a numeric value for Index 2. Those values are arranged in descending order for the campuses in the campus comparison group. If the Index 2 value for a campus is within the top quartile for its comparison group, it receives a distinction for student progress. Distinction Designations Top 25%: Student Progress

80. Top 25 Percent: Closing Performance Gaps A distinction designation is awarded to a campus for outstanding performance in closing student achievement gaps if it is ranked in the top 25 percent (Q1) of campuses in its campus comparison group for Index 3. Who is eligible: Campuses that are evaluated for Index 3 and receive a Met Standard rating. Methodology: Campuses are assigned a numeric value for Index 3. Those values are arranged in descending order for the campuses in the campus comparison group. If the Index 3 value for a campus is within the top quartile for its comparison group, it receives a distinction for Closing Performance Gaps. Distinction Designations Top 25%: Closing Performance Gaps

81. Postsecondary Readiness A distinction designation is awarded to districts and campuses for outstanding academic performance in attainment of postsecondary readiness. Elementary and middle schools must show performance in the top 25 percent of similar schools in their campus comparison group. High schools and K–12 campuses must have at least 33 percent of the indicators in the top quartile. Districts must have at least 70 percent of its campus-level indicators in the top quartile. Who is eligible: Districts and campuses that receive a Met Standard rating, except for districts or charters comprised of only one campus that share the same 2015 performance data as the campus. For these single- campus districts and charters, the campus is eligible to earn the campus postsecondary readiness distinction designation; however, the district or charter is not eligible to earn the district postsecondary readiness distinction designation. Student Groups: Indicators 1–9 use the All Students group only. Values used for indicators 1– 3 are determined through the calculations for Index 4. Minimum Size: Indicators 4–9 must have a minimum size of 10 in the denominator. Values used for indicators 1–3 are determined through the calculations for Index 4. See those descriptions for information on minimum size. Distinction Designations Postsecondary Readiness

82. Distinction Designations Postsecondary Readiness Indicators

84. Two System Safeguards  State  Federal Two separate system safeguard reports are provided to school districts for the 2015 accountability results: 1.State system safeguards aligned with 2015 state accountability Index 1 results 2. Federal system safeguards aligned with 2015 federal assessment and accountability requirements

85. State system Safeguards:  As announced by the commissioner of education, the 2015 state accountability ratings and distinction designations exclude the results of STAAR A and STAAR Alternate 2 for all subjects and grade levels and all STAAR assessments in mathematics, grades 3–8. The state system safeguard performance and participation measures are based on the 2015 state accountability Index 1 results and, therefore, also exclude these assessments.  The system safeguard reports for state accountability are planned for release by August 7, 2015.

86. Federal System Safeguards  Assessment results that are used to meet federal accountability requirements must be based on performance and participation data that include the results of STAAR A and STAAR Alternate 2 for all subjects and grade levels and all STAAR assessments in mathematics, grades 3–8. The student performance standards for grades 3–8 mathematics that will be set by the commissioner of education in summer 2015 will be applied to the federal accountability performance rate calculations. For this reason, separate system safeguard reports aligned with 2015 federal assessment and accountability requirements are planned for release in late fall 2015. The next time you will receive a federal rating will be 2016.

87. State System Safeguards 87 State Safeguard Measures and Targets  Reporting for state system safeguards disaggregates performance by student group, performance level, and subject area.  Performance rates are calculated from the assessment results used to calculate Index 1: Student Achievement.  2015 targets for the disaggregated system safeguard results:  STAAR performance target corresponds to Index 1 (60%);  STAAR participation target required by federal accountability (95%);  Federal graduation rate targets and improvement calculations for 4-year rate (83%) and 5-year rate (88%). Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting

88. 88 2015 State Accountability System Safeguard Measures and Targets State System Safeguards Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting * 2015 State Performance Targets will correspond to the performance target for 2015 Index 1: Student Achievement. Federal System Safeguard TARGET: 83 (Reading and Math ONLY)

90. State System Safeguards 90  Results will be reported for any group that meets accountability minimum size criteria.  Failure to meet the state safeguard target for any reported group must be addressed in the campus or district improvement plan.  Performance on the safeguard measures will be incorporated into the Texas Accountability Intervention System (TAIS).  See Accountability Monitoring website for further information: http://tea.texas.gov/pmi/ http://tea.texas.gov/pmi/ Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting

94. 94 Community and Student Engagement  Districts must evaluate community and student engagement for the district and each of its campuses for the 2014-15 school year.  Districts are required to post the community and student engagement ratings and compliance statuses for the district and each campus on the school district’s website by August 8, 2015.  Districts must assign a performance rating of Exemplary, Recognized, Acceptable, or Unacceptable based on locally-determined criteria. The performance ratings must be based on criteria developed by a local committee. The agency is not permitted to determine criteria that can be used for these evaluations.  Districts must submit their locally-determined ratings for the 2014-15 school year in the summer 2015 PEIMS Submission 3 for the district and each campus in the district. TEA will report these ratings publicly by October 1, 2015. Locally-Determined Accountability Ratings Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting

95. Improvement Required 95

96. Improvement Required 96

97. Improvement Required 97

98. 98 Future Accountability Ratings Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting House Bill 2804 Requirements for A – F Accountability Ratings DateActivity September 1, 2016Texas Commission on Next Generation Assessments and Accountability prepares and delivers report to governor and legislature that recommends statutory changes to improve systems of student assessment and public school accountability. December 1, 2016TEA must adopt a set of indicators to measure and evaluate school districts and campuses with A–F ratings. January 1, 2017TEA must provide a report that shows the rating that each district and campus would have received for the 2015-16 school year for each for the first four domains if the A–F ratings had been in place that year. August 15, 2018Districts and campuses are assigned A–F ratings beginning with the 2017-18 school year.

101. Resources  2015 Accountability Development http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/2015/index.htmlhttp://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/2015/index.html  Accountability Rating System http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/  Performance Reporting Home Page http://tea.texas.gov/perfreport http://tea.texas.gov/perfreport  Performance Reporting Email performance.reporting@tea.texas.gov performance.reporting@tea.texas.gov  Performance Reporting Main Desk (512) 463-9704 Thank you! 101 Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability | Division of Performance Reporting

102. Micki Wesley Director of Accountability & Compliance 940-322-6928 ext.8268 office 940-631-0602 cell Cindy Teichman Coordinator Instructional Support 940-322-6928 ext. 8293 office Cindy.Teichman@esc9.net