State Accountability Update May 4, 2017 Texas Education

State Accountability Update May 4, 2017 Texas Education

State Accountability Update May 4, 2017 Texas Education Agency | Academics | Performance Reporting Changes to Assessments in 2017 2 Beginning with the spring 2017 administration, students who would have taken STAAR A or STAAR L will take the STAAR exam with a platform of online accommodations. Beginning with the spring 2017 administration, new performance level descriptors will be used as shown in the table below. The student performance standards have not changed, only the December 2016 Spring 2017 labels. Level I: Unsatisfactory = Does Not Meet Phase-in Level II = Approaches Grade Level Final Level II = Meets Grade Level Level III: Advanced =

Masters Grade Level The performance level descriptors for STAAR Alt 2 have not been changed. Changes to Assessments in 2017 3 Reference in Manual Approaches Grade Level (grades 38) Approaches Grade Level (EOCs) Approaches Grade Level Meets Grade Level (grades 38) State Assessments STAAR, STAAR (Spanish), STAAR L1, STAAR A1 STAAR, STAAR L1, STAAR A1, substitute assessments STAAR Alternate 2 Masters Grade Level (grades 3 8) STAAR, STAAR (Spanish), STAAR L1, STAAR A1 STAAR, STAAR L1, STAAR A1, substitute assessments STAAR, STAAR (Spanish), STAAR L1, STAAR A1 Masters Grade Level (EOCs) STAAR, STAAR L1, STAAR A1

Meets Grade Level (EOCs) Summer 2016 Fall 2016 Spring 2017 N/A N/A Approaches Grade Level Level II: Satisfactory Academic Performance Level II: Satisfactory Academic Performance Approaches Grade Level N/A N/A Level II: Satisfactory Academic Performance N/A N/A Meets Grade Level Final Level II: Satisfactory Academic Performance Final Level II: Satisfactory Academic Performance

Meets Grade Level N/A N/A Masters Grade Level Level III: Advanced Academic Performance Level III: Advanced Academic Performance Masters Grade Level N/A N/A Accomplished Academic 1) Beginning in spring 2017, STAAR L and STAAR A versions of assessments are replaced with an online platform of Level III: accommodations. See Appendix I regarding inclusion of ELL students in accountability Masters Grade Level STAAR Alternate 2 Changes to Assessments in 2017 4 Beginning with the spring 2017 administration, new STAAR progress level descriptors will be used: Limited Progress, Expected Progress, and Accelerated Progress. The progress expectations themselves have not changed, only the labels.

December 2016 Did Not Meet Progress = Spring 2017 Limited Progress Met Progress = Expected Progress Exceeded Progress = Accelerated Progress The ELL progress measure descriptors remain Did Not Meet Progress, Met Progress, and Exceeded Progress. Changes to Assessments in 2017 5 The 2017 manual will continue to use Did Not Meet, Met, or Exceeded Progress. Reference in Manual Progress Measure Summer 2016 Fall 2016 Spring 2017 Did Not Meet Progress STAAR Progress Measure Did Not Meet Progress Did Not Meet

Progress Limited Progress Did Not Meet Expectation ELL Progress Measure Did Not Meet Expectation Did Not Meet Expectation Did Not Meet Expectation Met Progress STAAR Progress Measure Met Progress Met Progress Expected Progress Met Expectation ELL Progress Measure Met Expectation Met Expectation Met Expectation Exceeded Progress STAAR Progress Measure Exceeded Progress Exceeded Progress

Accelerated Progress Exceeded Expectation ELL Progress Measure Exceeded Expectation Exceeded Expectation Exceeded Expectation Key Changes for 2017 Accountability 6 The commissioner announced final decisions for 2017 accountability on February 14, 2017: STAAR results of students who took STAAR L (July 2016, December 2016) or received linguistic accommodations (spring 2017) will be included in Index 3 and Index 4. STAAR Alternate 2 results will be included in Index 4. Key Changes for 2017 Accountability 7 The commissioner announced final decisions for 2017 distinction designations on February 14, 2017: Two additional indicators will be used to determine campus comparison groups: The percentage of students served by special education

The percentage of students enrolled in an Early College High School program The percentage of a districts campuses that must have postsecondary indicators in the top quartile in order for the district to earn the postsecondary readiness distinction designation is reduced from 70 to 55. Assessments Evaluated in 2017 Accountability 8 Index 1 Index 2 Index 3 Index 4 STAAR Grades 38 (all subjects) STAAR EOC (5 tests) STAAR EOC Substitute Assessments n/a

n/a STAAR (online with accommodations) STAAR Alternate 2 2017 Accountability Assessments Evaluated in 2016 vs. 2017 STAAR Grades 38 (all subjects)* STAAR Grades 38 (all subjects)* STAAR EOC (5 tests)

STAAR EOC (5 tests) STAAR EOC including substitute assessments n/a n/a (1) (1) STAAR EOC including substitute assessments STAAR L (evaluated in the ELL progress measure) STAAR A STAAR Alternate 2 : Used in accountability n/a n/a (1) (1) X X (2) (2)

X STAAR L EOC (evaluated in the ELL progress measure)** STAAR A EOC** STAAR Alternate 2 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Index 4 Index 3 Index 2 Spring 2017 Index 1 Index 4 Index 3

Index 2 Summer and Fall 2016 Index 1 Index 4 Index 3 Index 2 2016 Index 1 9 STAAR Grades 38 (all subjects*, with and without accommodations) STAAR EOC (5 tests, with and without accommodations) STAAR EOC including n/a n/a (1) (1) substitute assessments STAAR L (evaluated in n/a n/a n/a n/a the ELL progress measure)** STAAR A** STAAR Alternate 2 n/a n/a n/a n/a

X: Available but not used in accountability n/a: Not available (1) Substitute assessments apply to the Meets Grade Level performance standard only and progress measures are not calculated. (2) ELL students in their first four years in U.S. schools who took STAAR L were excluded from Index 3 and Index 4. * Index 2 is evaluated using ELA/reading and mathematics only. ** Beginning with the spring 2017 administration, STAAR L and STAAR A assessments will be replaced with online versions of STAAR with accommodations. 2017 System Safeguards 10 Reporting for 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. Targets for the disaggregated system safeguard results are as follows: STAAR performance target required by state accountability: 60% STAAR performance target required by federal accountability (where applicable): 91% STAAR participation target required by federal accountability: 95% Federal graduation rate targets and improvement calculations for four-year rate: 88.5% 2017 System Safeguards 11

Accountability System Safeguard Measures and Targets (Non-AEAs and AEAs) Both current and monitored ELLs are included in the Pacific Two or African Hispan Amer. Econ. Special All White Asian Islande More ELLs* performance rates, current ELLs only are included in Amer. ic Indian Disadv. Ed r Races the participation rates, and ever ELLs in high school Performance Rate TargetsState are included in the federal graduation rates60% 60% 60% Reading 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% Mathematics 60%

60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% Writing 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% Science 60% 60% 60%

60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% Social Studies 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% Performance Rate TargetsFederal Reading 91% 91% 91% 91% n/a

n/a n/a n/a 91% 91% 91% Mathematics 91% 91% 91% 91% n/a n/a n/a n/a 91% 91% 91% * Both current and monitored ELLs are included in the performance rates, current ELLs only are included in the participation rates, and ever ELLs in high school are included in the federal graduation rates. 2017 System Safeguards 12 Accountability System Safeguard Measures and Targets (Non-AEAs and AEAs Both current and monitored ELLs are included in the [continued]) Pacific Two or African Hispancurrent Amer.

Econ. Special in performance rates, ELLs only are included All White Asian Islande More ELLs* Amer. ic Indian Disadv. Ed r Races the participation rates, and ever ELLs in high school Participation Rate TargetsFederal are included in the graduation rates95% 95% 95% Reading 95% 95% 95%federal 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% Mathematics 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% Graduation Rate TargetsFederal ** 4-year 88.5% 88.5% 88.5% 88.5% 88.5% 88.5% 88.5% 88.5% 88.5% 88.5% 88.5% 91% 91% 5-year 91% 91% 91% 91%

91% 91% 91% 91% 91% District Limits on Use of Alternative Assessment Results Reading1% Not Applicable STAAR Alt 2 Mathematics1% Not Applicable STAAR Alt 2 * Both current and monitored ELLs are included in the performance rates, current ELLs only are included in the participation rates, and ever ELLs in high school are included in the federal graduation rates. ** Federal graduation rate targets are applied to system safeguards and include an improvement target. 2017 Campus Pairing Registration 13 The 201617 campus pairing registration opened Monday, May 1 and will close at 5:00 p.m. CDT on Friday, May 12, 2017. Campuses that are paired should have a feeder relationship and serve contiguous grades. If a campus has no clear relationship with another campus in its district, the campus may pair with the district instead. Districts may use the prior-year pairing relationship or select a new relationship. If a district does not indicate a pairing preference, pairing decisions will be made by TEA. Districts may change pairings from year to year. Any changes should be based on establishing the most appropriate pairing relationship. 2017 Accountability Manual 14 Chapters 29 of the 2017 Accountability Manual are currently posted on the TEA website and the Texas Register and are open for public comment. Because of the required administrative rule-making process, these chapters are not yet final.

The public comment period will close Monday, May 15, 2017. Chapter 1, Chapter 10, and appendices AJ are scheduled to be posted May 12, 2017. Appendix K is scheduled to be posted by the end of May. 2017 Accountability Calendar 15 Date Tuesday, February 14 March 27April 7 April 14 April 14May 15 May 1May 12 May 12 End of May June 8 June 15 Activity Release of final 2017 accountability decisions (public web) AEA campus registration process (TEASE) 2017 Accountability Manual, Chapters 29 released (public web) Public comment period for the 2017 Accountability Manual (public web) Campus pairing process (TEASE) 2017 Accountability Manual, Chapter 1, Chapter 10, and appendices AJ released (public web) Appendix K of the 2017 Accountability Manual released (public web) List of 2017 campus comparison groups released (TEASE and public web) Confidential lists of college and career ready graduates for 2017 state accountability released (TEASE) 2017 Accountability Calendar 16 Date Monday, August 7 Monday, August 14

Tuesday, August 15 August 14September 15 Activity 2017 performance index tables without rating labels released (TEASE) 2017 accountability tables with rating labels, distinction designations, and system safeguards released (TEASE) Campuses identified under PEG criteria for 201819 school year released (TEASE) 2017 accountability tables with rating labels, distinction designations, and system safeguards released (public web) Campuses identified under PEG criteria for 201819 school year released (public web) 2017 appeals application available to districts (TEASE) 2017 Accountability Calendar 17 Date Friday, September 15 By October 1 November November November November November December December Activity 2017 appeals deadline 2017 Consolidated School Rating Report (state-assigned academic and financial ratings and locally-assigned community and student engagement ratings) released (public web) TEA notifies districts of accountability appeal decisions (mail and TEASE) Preliminary longitudinal cohort reports for 2018 accountability released (TEASE) 2017 final ratings released after resolution of appeals (TEASE and public web) Final PEG List published following the resolution of all appeals (public web) 201617 Texas Academic Performance Reports released (TEASE and public web) 2017 Texas School Accountability Dashboard released (public web)

201617 School Report Card released (public web) Collection of CaSE Ratings and Letter Grades 18 Information 2017 CaSE Ratings (Exemplary, Recognized, Acceptable, or Unacceptable) for all eight categories for districts and campuses Three CaSE categories for academic accountability along with the evaluation criteria for each 2018 CaSE Ratings (Exemplary, Recognized, Acceptable, or Unacceptable) for all eight categories for districts and campuses Letter grades (A, B, C, D, or F) for three CaSE programs reported in June 2017 Three CaSE categories for academic accountability along with the evaluation criteria for each 2019 CaSE Ratings (Exemplary, Recognized, Acceptable, or Unacceptable) for all eight categories for districts and campuses Letter grades (A, B, C, D, or F) for three CaSE programs selected in June 2018 Three CaSE categories for academic accountability along with the evaluation criteria for each PEIMS Collection Accountability Year 2017 Three (June 2017) 2018 CaSE Collection (May 2018) 2018 2018 Three (June 2018) CaSE Collection (May 2019) 2019 2019

2019 Three (June 2019) 2020 * Ratings criteria for the three CaSE programs to be used in Domain V will be collected in PEIMS; districts and campuses will report the internet website link, which will provide the CaSE ratings criteria used to determine the ratings. The 85th Texas Legislature 19 Multiple bills were filed thatif passedwould change the future AF accountability system. The regular legislative session concludes Monday, May 29th. The following bills are currently on our radar: House Bill (HB) 22 House Bill (HB) 2132 Senate Bill (SB) 2051 Key Features of House Bill 22 20 Significantly more indicators than the current system and HB 2804: Current index system13 indicators HB 280419 indicators HB 2234 indicators AF letter grades for three domains: Student Achievement

School Progress School Climate No overall AF letter grade Delays implementation until 2020 and requires two additional provisional reports Ratings in 2018 and 2019 based on 2016 Accountability Manual Key Features of House Bill 2132 21 More indicators than the current system but fewer than HB 2804: Current index system13 indicators HB 280419 indicators HB 213217 indicators AF letter grades for at least three domains: Student Achievement School Performance School Climate No overall AF letter grade Maintains 201718 implementation Key Features of Senate Bill 2051 22

More indicators than the current system but fewer than HB 2804: Current index system13 indicators HB 280419 indicators SB 205116 indicators AF letter grades for at least three domains: Student Achievement School Progress School Climate Overall AF letter grade Maintains 201718 implementation From Here to August 2018 23 Continuing advisory group meetingsthroughout 2017 Staff from Office of Academics visits to each ESCApril through June 2017 Commissioner visits to ESCsthroughout 2017 Commissioner meets with superintendentsthroughout 2017 Administrative rule adoption (including a public comment period) spring 2018 Districts report Domain V ratingssummer 2018 Recent Frequently Asked Questions 24 How is a TSIA result attributed to a high school? For the college-ready graduates indicator, we match the TSIA result from the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board to the student on our annual graduates list using an algorithm

which includes SSN, first name, last name, and DOB. Then we attribute the result to the campus at which the student is identified as an annual graduate in PEIMS/TSDS. Recent Frequently Asked Questions 25 How will we report U.S. armed forces enlistment data for 2016 17 graduates for Domain IV? U.S. armed forces enlistment data for 201617 graduates should be reported in TSDS during the first submission of 201718. Specifically, this data source is Element ID E1589 in the 40203 School Leaver Sub-Category. What documentation do we need to identify a graduate as enlisted in the U.S. armed forces? Districts are responsible for keeping local documentation supporting this identification. Recent Frequently Asked Questions 26 I dont see the Accountability application when I login to TEASE. How do I obtain access? 1. 2. 3. 4. Visit tea.texas.gov. Click TEA Secure Applications at the top of the home page. Click Request Access Form for Accountability. Complete the form, obtain the necessary signatures, and fax it in. Requests are generally processed within two business days. Performance Reporting Resources and Contacts 27 2017 Accountability

http://tea.texas.gov/2017accountability.aspx AF Resources http://tea.texas.gov/A-F/ HB 2804 Implementation Page http://tea.texas.gov/2804Implementation.aspx Performance Reporting Home Page http://tea.texas.gov/accountability/ Performance Reporting Email [email protected] Performance Reporting Telephone (512) 463-9704

Recently Viewed Presentations

  • Diapositive 1

    Diapositive 1

    The detection instrument for the quantitative determinationvaryfrom a single Petridish to different dilutions and MPN system of diverse complexity. Intrinsicvariablity of microbiologicaldeterminations ... Every technical step of the method adds to the total variability of the measurement: Sub ...
  • Finding Your Focus - Freshman English

    Finding Your Focus - Freshman English

    MLA no longer requires the use of URLs in MLA citations. Because Web addresses are not static (i.e. they change often) and because documents sometimes appear in multiple places on the Web (e.g. on multiple databases), MLA explains that most...
  • EECE 360 Matlab Tutorial - PhoneOximeter

    EECE 360 Matlab Tutorial - PhoneOximeter

    Language for technical computing Supports mathematical computation, visualization, and programming Composed using high-level programming language similar to syntax of C For EECE 360 Use Matlab in the assignments Matlab Interface Command Window Workspace Command History Change the current directory to...
  • An Introduction to Keeping Chickens www.Food4Macc.org Food4Macc Choice

    An Introduction to Keeping Chickens www.Food4Macc.org Food4Macc Choice

    An Introduction to Keeping Chickens www.Food4Macc.org Food4Macc www.Food4Macc.org Tel:- 07824 860 566 Leave your e-mail address if you would like to keep up to date with developments.
  • Browser-based Web Developer Tools - Webmasters

    Browser-based Web Developer Tools - Webmasters

    Firebug—unique in that it has 175+ add-ons to enhance it. Yslow (requires Firebug) - page performance. LinkChecker. Total Validator (toolbar, local client applet) HTML Validator. SeoQuake& Website Analysis. WAVE (external site with local client applet) Page analysis—looking behind the scenes
  • Add Your Title Here - tigerliteracy / FrontPage

    Add Your Title Here - tigerliteracy / FrontPage

    When the ruft was polting, the dodlings grented hust then yotted pudge. The preeden dodlings only tiljed muft so that the ruft was krettile. At the end of cupa, the dodlings nutted sos then ported crist. This was done to...
  • From Classical to Contemporary

    From Classical to Contemporary

    Virgil's day is celebrating that rule Aeneas's shield—rearmored—but Rome prophesized; hindsight because Virgil knows what is happening Greek versus Roman sensibility Aeneas's son kept out of battle, aside, as if King Aeneas is only beginning for Virgil, prepares for Augustus,...
  • BTEC 2016 - Weebly

    BTEC 2016 - Weebly

    Some businesses have opted to offer customers free-of-charge paper bags, while others have not. Legal: Businesses are often constrained by laws and regulations governing how they market their products, for example by the ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) or the Data...