1.  Implementation of certain STAAR Grades 3-8 indicators, as appropriate and contingent on data availability.  Use of the Met Standard performance standard for TAKS on these STAAR Grades 3-8 indicators.  Students who meet the TAKS Met Standard performance standard on the relevant STAAR assessments will be counted in the indicators’ numerators as performing on the STAAR subject test at the TAKS equivalency performance standard.  Detailed information about the process to identify the Met Standard performance on TAKS for the STAAR assessments is available at http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/reports/. http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/reports/ Copyright © Texas Education Agency 2012. All rights reserved. 1

2. Leaver Records Data Validation Indicator Name20112012 Indicator #1Dropout Rate Trend Analysis  2009-2010 dropout rates compared to 2008-2009 dropout rates And~  2009-2010 dropout rates compared to 2007-2008 dropout rates  Rename the indicator: Leaver Data Analysis  Clarify the more comprehensive analysis that actually occurs with this indicator.  Modify district report format to provide more comprehensive information on this indicator. Copyright © Texas Education Agency 2012 All rights reserved. 2

3.  Traditionally presented as an indicator that simply identifies districts with significant decreases in dropout rates.  “But…aren’t decreases in dropout rates a good thing?” It depends…on what contributed to those decreases. This requires a more detailed understanding of the data that could affect a district’s dropout rate. There are several components that are important to consider. Copyright © Texas Education Agency 2012. All rights reserved. 3

4.  A district’s dropout rate is calculated as follows: Number of students (G 7-12) who dropped out during a school year Number of students (G 7-12 in attendance during a school year  If we start with an example where there were 4,000 students in attendance and 200 dropouts, the calculation yields a 5% dropout rate.  The ways different categories of leaver data change the following year could have a profound effect on the change in rates.  The analysis conducted under Indicator 1 analyzes the different factors that can contribute to decreased dropout rates. Copyright © Texas Education Agency 2012. All rights reserved. 4

5. Year 1Year 2 200 4,000 = 5.0% 100 4,000 = 2.5%  Looks good, but…  There may be other factors that contributed to the reduced numerator.  We know that 100 fewer students were coded as dropouts.  But, what else might have changed from Year 1 to Year 2?  What other leaver data might have changed, thus contributing to a smaller number of dropouts being reported? Copyright © Texas Education Agency 2012. All rights reserved. 5

6. Year 1Year 2 200 4,000 = 5.0% 200 students were reported as dropouts. (NUMERATOR) Here’s how some of the other students who aren’t in the numerator were reported: 600 students were reported as graduates. 100 students reported with other leaver reason codes. 0 students were reported as underreported. 100 4,000 = 2.5% 100 students were reported as dropouts. (NUMERATOR) Here’s how some of the other students who aren’t in the numerator were reported: 500 students were reported as graduates. 220 students were reported with other leaver reason codes. 70 students were reported as underreported. Copyright © Texas Education Agency 2012. All rights reserved. 6 Simplified Example Below is for Illustrative Purposes Only

7.  Under Indicator 1, a comprehensive analysis of leaver data is conducted for all districts with reported decreases in dropout rates.  Districts with dropout rate decreases that are accompanied primarily by increases in other leavers, underreported students, or other anomalous data may be identified by this indicator.  Review of updated manual page and sample report. Copyright © Texas Education Agency 2012. All rights reserved. 7

8. Leaver Records Data Validation Indicator Name20112012 Indicator #2Underreported Students (Grades 7-12)  Implemented with these criteria: Count = fewer than or equal to 150 Percent = less than or equal to 3.0% MSR of at least 5 UR students (count) and at least 1.0% (rate)  2012 criteria: Count = fewer than or equal to 150 Percent = less than or equal to 2.0% MSR of at least 5 UR students (count) and at least 1.0% (rate) Copyright © Texas Education Agency 2012. All rights reserved. 8

9. Leaver Records Data Validation Indicator Name20112012 Indicator #3Use of Leaver Reason Codes by Districts with No Dropouts  An analysis of districts with no dropouts and their use of Leaver Reason Codes 16, 24, 60, 81, and 82 collectively  No changes Copyright © Texas Education Agency 2012. All rights reserved. 9

10. Leaver Records Data Validation Indicator Name20112012 Indicator #4Use of One or More Leaver Reason Codes  An analysis of the use of one or more individual leaver reason codes (03, 16, 24, 60, 66, 78, 81, 82, 83, 85, 86, and 87)  Leaver Reason Code 90 will be added to the analysis. Code 90 = Graduated from another state under provisions of the Interstate Compact on Educational Opportunity for Military Children Copyright © Texas Education Agency 2012. All rights reserved. 10

11. Leaver Records Data Validation Indicator Name20112012 Indicator #5Use of Certain Dropout Reason Codes  N/A  This indicator will analyze districts’ use of two new dropout codes: 88 and 89. Code 88 = Court- ordered to a GED program, has not earned a GED Code 89 = Incarcerated in state jail or federal penitentiary as an adult Copyright © Texas Education Agency 2012. All rights reserved. 11

12. Example 1Example 2  Last year = 200 dropouts (Code 98)  This year = 180 dropouts (Code 98, 88, 89) ◦ 150 dropouts (Code 98) ◦ 15 dropouts (Code 88) ◦ 15 dropouts (Code 89)  Generally, the district’s dropout numbers remained stable between the two years.  The new codes provided a differentiated break-down of the types of dropouts, but significant numbers of additional dropouts weren’t reported.  Last year = 200 dropouts (Code 98)  This year = 300 dropouts (Code 98, 88, 89) ◦ 200 dropouts (Code 98) ◦ 50 dropouts (Code 88) ◦ 50 dropouts (Code 89)  The district’s dropout numbers were not stable between the two years.  The new codes may have been used inappropriately.  Remember, the new codes simply describe in more detail students who have been reported as dropouts.  In and of themselves, they shouldn’t cause districts to report significantly more dropouts. Copyright © Texas Education Agency 2012. All rights reserved. 12 Simplified Example Below is for Illustrative Purposes Only

13.  Under Indicator 5, a comprehensive analysis of dropout reason codes is conducted for all districts.  Districts with dropout rate increases that are primarily attributable to increases in code 88 or 89 may be identified by this indicator.  Other anomalous data trends may cause a district to be identified by this indicator, including overall high use/rate of code 88 or 89 irrespective of any other increases or decreases in dropout numbers. Copyright © Texas Education Agency 2012. All rights reserved. 13

14. Leaver Records Data Validation Indicator Name20112012 Indicator #6Missing PET Submission (Start of School Year)  Identified districts that did not complete at least one PET submission between August 22, 2011 and September 16, 2011.  Date range will be August 20, 2012 through September 21, 2012. Copyright © Texas Education Agency 2012. All rights reserved. 14

15. Leaver Records Data Validation Indicator Name20112012 Indicator #7Missing PET Submission (School Year)  Identified districts that did not complete at least one PET submission between August 23, 2010 and June 30, 2011.  Date range will be August 22, 2011 through June 30, 2012. Copyright © Texas Education Agency 2012. All rights reserved. 15

16. Leaver Records Data Validation Indicator Name20112012 Indicator #8Continuing Students’ Dropout Rate  Implemented as a “live” indicator, identifying districts with a continuing students’ dropout rate of 35% or higher.  Standard may change, based on review of data and rates. Updated information will be provided during September’s TETN session. Copyright © Texas Education Agency 2012. All rights reserved. 16

17.  This year’s PBM Discipline Data Validation will be unique in that districts’ 2011 and 2012 discipline data will be evaluated.  We anticipate that all nine indicators used in 2010 PBM Discipline Data Validation will continue to be used this year.  A district will be identified for 2012 PBM Discipline Data Validation if it triggers: ◦ One or more of the indicators for both 2011 and 2012. ◦ One or more of the indicators for 2012 only. Copyright © Texas Education Agency 2012. All rights reserved. 17

18. Discipline Data Validation Indicator Name20102011/2012 Indicator #1Length of Out-of- School Suspension  Identified districts with one or more students reported as suspended out- of-school (OSS) for more than the 3 school days allowed.  No changes Copyright © Texas Education Agency 2012. All rights reserved. 18

19. Discipline Data Validation Indicator Name20102011/2012 Indicator #2Length of In- School Suspension (ISS)  Report Only indicator that identified districts with one or more students placed in in-school suspension for 30 or more days during the school year.  No changes Copyright © Texas Education Agency 2012. All rights reserved. 19

20. Discipline Data Validation Indicator Name20102011/2012 Indicator #3Unauthorized Expulsion: Students Age 10 and Older  Identified districts with one or more students age 10 or older reported as expelled from their regular education setting based on a disciplinary reason not allowed.  No changes Copyright © Texas Education Agency 2012. All rights reserved. 20

21. Discipline Data Validation Indicator Name20102011/2012 Indicator #4Unauthorized Expulsion: Students Under Age 10  Identified districts with one or more students under age 10 reported as expelled from their regular education setting for anything other than being expelled to a DAEP for bringing a firearm to school, as defined by 18 U.S.C. Section 921.  No changes Copyright © Texas Education Agency 2012. All rights reserved. 21

22. Discipline Data Validation Indicator Name20102011/2012 Indicator #5Unauthorized DAEP Placement: Students Under Age 6  Identified districts with one or more students under age 6 reported as placed in a DAEP for anything other than being expelled to a DAEP for bringing a firearm to school, as defined by 18 U.S.C. Section 921.  No changes Copyright © Texas Education Agency 2012. All rights reserved. 22

23. Discipline Data Validation Indicator Name20102011/2012 Indicator #6High Number of Discretionary DAEP Placements  Identified districts with a discretionary DAEP placement rate (all students) of 5.0 or higher.  Identifies districts with a discretionary DAEP placement rate (all students) of 4.5 or higher. Copyright © Texas Education Agency 2012. All rights reserved. 23

24. Discipline Data Validation Indicator Name20102011/2012 Indicator #7African American Discretionary DAEP Placements  Identified districts with a discretionary DAEP placement rate for African American students that is double (or more) its discretionary DAEP placement rate for all students.  “New” race/ethnicity definitions will apply.  Rename the indicator: African American (Not Hispanic/Latino) Discretionary DAEP Placements. Copyright © Texas Education Agency 2012. All rights reserved. 24

25. 25  African American (Not Hispanic/Latino) Definition: ◦ Any student who does not identify himself/herself as Hispanic but does identify his/her sole race as African American; and ◦ Any student who does not identify himself/herself as Hispanic but does identify African American as one of his/her races. Copyright © Texas Education Agency 2012. All rights reserved.

26. Discipline Data Validation Indicator Name20102011/2012 Indicator #8Hispanic Discretionary DAEP Placements  Second year Report Only indicator  “Live” indicator that will identify districts with a discretionary DAEP placement rate for Hispanic students that is double (or more) its discretionary DAEP placement rate for all students.  “New” race/ethnicity definitions will apply. Copyright © Texas Education Agency 2012. All rights reserved. 26

27. 27  Hispanic Definition: ◦ All students who identify themselves as being of Hispanic ethnicity, regardless of how they subsequently identify their race. Copyright © Texas Education Agency 2012. All rights reserved.

28. Discipline Data Validation Indicator Name20102011/2012 Indicator #9No Mandatory Expellable Incidents Reported for Multiple Years  Identified districts that have one or more campuses with no mandatory expellable incidents reported for three years.  No changes Copyright © Texas Education Agency 2012. All rights reserved. 28