1 / 24

August 8, 2013

Overview of 2013 State Accountability. August 8, 2013. Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting Shannon Housson, Director. 2013 Accountability System. 2013 Accountability Ratings.

nuncio
Download Presentation

August 8, 2013

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Overview of 2013 State Accountability August 8, 2013 Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting Shannon Housson, Director

  2. 2013 Accountability System

  3. 2013 Accountability Ratings The following table outlines the accountability ratings and distinction designations that will be assigned on August 8, 2013.

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

  5. Performance Index Framework • What is a Performance Index? • Each measure contributes points to an index score. • Districts and campuses are required to meet one accountability target—the total index score. • With a Performance Index, the resulting rating reflects overall performance for the campus or district rather than the weakest performance of one student group/subject area. • Multiple indexes can be used in the framework to ensure accountability for every student. • Any number of indicators and student groups can be added to the system without creating additional targets for campuses and districts to meet.

  6. Index 1: Student Achievement 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)

  7. Index 2: Student Progress 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. • Detailed information about the STAAR progress measure is online at • http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/staar/.

  8. 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. • Credit based on weighted performance: • Phase-in Level II satisfactory performance (2013 and beyond) One point for each percent of students at the phase-in Level II satisfactory performance standard. • Level III advanced performance (2014 and beyond) Two points for each percent of students at the Level III advanced performance standard. • The STAAR weighted performance rate calculation must be modified for 2013 because STAAR Level III advanced performance cannot be included in the indicator until 2014.

  9. Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps • 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 (based on prior-year assessment results).

  10. Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness 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 (2014 and beyond)

  11. Summary of AEA Provisions • Eligibility Criteria • Same eligibility criteria in prior rating system • AEC of choice must primarily serve secondary students in Grades 6-12 • Residential facilities not evaluated in 2013 • Modified Indicator Definitions and Index Construction • Index 4: Postsecondary Readiness • Graduation Rate • Credit for GED recipients • Four-year, five-year, and six-year rates • Bonus Points for RHSP/AHSP graduates • Bonus Points for Recovered Dropouts who Graduate or Earn GED • Bonus Points for Continuing Students who Graduate or Earn GED • Graduation and GED Rates = 75%, Final STAAR Level II Rates = 25% • Modified Ratings Targets

  12. 2013 Performance Index Targets • 2013 Index Targets for Non-AEA Campuses and Districts • To receive a Met Standard rating, non-AEA campuses and districts must meet the following accountability targets on all indexes for which they have performance data in 2013.

  13. 2013 Performance Index Targets • 2013 Index Targets for AEA Campuses and Charters • To receive a Met Alternative Standard rating, alternative education campuses and charter operators evaluated under AEA provisions must meet the following accountability targets on all indexes for which they have performance data in 2013.

  14. System Safeguards Apply Safeguards to Specific Performance Indexes: • Reporting system will disaggregate performance by student group and subject area. • Performance rates are calculated from the assessment results used to calculate performance rates in the performance index (Index 1). • Target 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%).

  15. Top 25% Student Progress Distinction

  16. Top 25% Student Progress Distinction • Top 25% Student Progress Distinction • Campuses in the top 25% (top quartile) of their campus comparison groupon Index 2: Student Progress score are eligible for a distinction designation for student progress. • Campuses only [statutory requirement] • Eligibility criteria – Met Standard rating [statutory requirement] • Campuses in the top 25% (top quartile) in student progress [statutory requirement] • Campus comparison groups from Academic Achievement Distinction Designations

  17. Academic Achievement Distinction Designations

  18. Academic Achievement Distinction Designations • Distinction Designation Indicators • Academic achievement distinction designations recognize outstanding academic achievement in reading/English language arts and mathematics. • Indicators evaluated include performance at the STAAR Level III (Advanced) standard for selected grades and subject areas in elementary and middle schools, and indicators including SAT/ACT and AP/IB participation and performance for high schools. • For details, refer to Chapter 6 of the 2013 Accountability Manual at http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/2013/manual/ch06.pdf

  19. Academic Achievement Distinction Designations • Distinction Designation Indicators – Reading/English Language Arts • Attendance Rate • Greater than Expected Progress: Reading/ELA • Grade 3 Reading Performance (Level III - Advanced) • Grade 4 Writing Performance (Level III - Advanced) • Grade 7 Writing Performance (Level III - Advanced) • Grade 8 Reading Performance (Level III - Advanced) • AP/IB and Advanced/Dual Enrollment Course Completion • AP/IB Examination Performance: ELA • SAT/ACT Participation • SAT Performance: ELA • ACT Performance: ELA

  20. Academic Achievement Distinction Designations • Distinction Designation Indicators – Mathematics • Attendance Rate • Greater than Expected Progress: Mathematics • Grade 5 Mathematics Performance (Level III - Advanced) • Algebra I by Grade 8 – Participation • Algebra I by Grade 8 – Performance (Level III - Advanced) • AP/IB and Advanced/Dual Enrollment Course Completion • AP/IB Examination Performance: Mathematics • SAT/ACT Participation • SAT Performance: Mathematics • ACT Performance: Mathematics

  21. Academic Achievement Distinction Designations • Distinction Designation Framework Steps • The framework for distinction designations uses four steps to determine a campus distinction. • Step 1: Determine Campus Comparison GroupA campus comparison group of 40 campuses is selected for each campus. Campus performance on each distinction indicator, by subject, is reported. Comparison groups were provided to districts in June, 2013. • Step 2: Identify Top 25% By Indicator Relative to Comparison GroupFor each indicator, compare the performance of the target campus to the performance of the campuses in the comparison group. For example, Campus A is in the top 25% of campuses in the comparison group on a particular distinction indicator.

  22. Academic Achievement Distinction Designations • Distinction Designation Framework Steps (continued) • Step 3: Evaluate Campus Outcomes by SubjectDetermine the percent of indicators in the top quartile by subject for each campus. For example, Campus A achieved the top 25% in three of the six (50%) mathematics distinction indicators that were evaluated for the campus. • Step 4: Apply Distinction Designations TargetIdentify the campuses that meet or exceed the distinction designations targets by subject. For example, elementary campuses that outperformed their peers on 50% or more of the mathematics distinction indicators evaluated are qualified to receive an academic distinction in mathematics.

  23. Academic Achievement Distinction Designations • Distinction Designation Targets • Distinction Designation Targets are designated by type of campus: • Elementary and middle school campuses in the top quartile on at least 50% of their eligible measures are qualified to receive a distinction designation for that subject area. • High schools and K-12 Campuses in the top quartile on at least 33% of their eligible measures are qualified to receive a distinction designation for that subject area.

  24. Resources • 2013 Accountability Manualhttp://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/2013/index.html • Frequently Asked Questionshttp://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/2013/faq.html • STAAR Progress Measure Documentshttp://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/staar/ • Performance Reporting Home Pagehttp://www.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport

More Related