Federal Accountability AYP Update

Accountability TETNFebruary 19, 2009

Shannon Housson and Ester Regalado TEA, Performance Reporting Division

2

AYP Topics

Preview of 2009:

– Assessments

– Federal Cap Process

– Texas Projection Measure

– Texas AYP Workbook

Final Regulations related to AYP

Resources

3

2009 AYP Preview

2009 AYP Performance Standards increase to:

67% in Reading/English language arts

58% in Mathematics

No changes in state assessments used for 2009 AYP.

No changes in the AYP Federal Cap process for 2009.

State assessments used for 2009 AYP are outlined in the August 28, 2008 correspondence to districts.

4

2009 Preview: Assessments

* Students in their First Year in U. S. Schools are counted as participants, but excluded from the performance calculation.

2009 Reading/ELA Assessments

Participation95% Standard

Performance / Accountability Subset67% Standard

Total Students

Number Participating

Number Tested Met Standard

TAKS Yes If participant If non-mobile If standard is met

TAKS(Accommodated)

Yes If participant If non-mobile If standard is met

TAKS-M /LAT TAKS-M

Yes If participant If non-mobileIf standard is met

(subject to 2% cap)

TAKS-Alt Yes If participant If non-mobileIf standard is met (subject to 1% cap)

TELPAS Reading* Yes Non-Participant N/A Not Included Not Included

LAT version of TAKS

Yes If participant If non-mobile If standard is met

5

2009 Preview: Assessments (cont.)

* Students in their First Year in U. S. Schools are counted as participants, but excluded from the performance calculation.

2009 Mathematics Assessments

Participation95% Standard

Performance / Accountability Subset58% Standard

Total Students

Number Participating

Number Tested Met Standard

TAKS Yes If participant If non-mobile If standard is met

TAKS(Accommodated)

Yes If participant If non-mobile If standard is met

TAKS-M /LAT TAKS-M*

Yes If participant If non-mobileIf standard is met

(subject to 2% cap)

TAKS-Alt Yes If participant If non-mobileIf standard is met

(subject to 1% cap)

LAT version of TAKS*

Yes If participant If non-mobile If standard is met

6

2009 Preview: AYP Federal Caps

The 2008 AYP Federal Cap process was implemented for the first time with results showing that the strategic process for helping campuses was very effective.

Of those missing 2008 AYP solely due to the 1% and/or 2% caps:

18% (71) of districts and 1% (12) of campuses, compared to 32% of districts and 11% of campuses in 2007.

The federal accountability advisory group, Title I Committee of Practitioners (COP), met on November 18, 2008, and voted to recommend the continuation of the Federal Cap process in 2009, with no modifications.

7

2009 Preview: AYP Federal Caps (cont.)

Review of the 1% and 2% Federal Caps

– Reminder: The federal cap relates to counting students as proficient for AYP purposes only and does not limit the number of students that may take an alternate assessment.

– State policies and procedures related to assessment decision-making are detailed in the TEA publication titled Admission, Review, and Dismissal (ARD) Committee Decision-Making Process for the Texas Assessment Program.

8

2009 Preview: AYP Federal Caps (cont.)

Review of the 1% Federal Cap

Students are selected randomly from TAKS-Alt proficient results.

Exceptions to the 1% cap will be processed prior to the Preliminary AYP Release in August 2009 for:

School districts registered with the TEA Special Education Residential Facilities Tracking System (RF Tracker) for school year 2008-09.

School districts included in the 2008-09 Directory for Services for the Deaf in Texas, Regional Day School Programs for the Deaf (RDSPD).

9

2009 Preview: Exceptions Process same as prior year

School districts registered in the RF Tracker system and school districts with RDSPD that are included in the 2007-2008 Directory for Services for the Deaf in Texas were automatically applied an exception to the 1% cap.

The federal cap applied to proficient TAKS-Alt results was extended to include an additional number of students up to the statewide 1% cap limit.

The statewide 1% cap limit was sufficient to allow every school districts with an exception to include all TAKS-Alt passing students as proficient for AYP (in effect, remove the 1% cap).

10

2009 Preview: Other Circumstance Exceptions same as prior year

Other circumstance exceptions were allowable and were submitted as a regular appeal through the online system.

The approval of school district requests for exceptions to the federal cap is based on the availability of statewide slots within the cap that allow the state to maintain a 1% cap limit on proficient results from TAKS-Alt.

The statewide 1% cap limit was sufficient to allow requests for exceptions based on other circumstances to include all TAKS-Alt passing students as proficient for AYP (in effect, remove the 1% cap).

11

2009 Preview: AYP Federal Caps (cont.)

Review of the 2% Federal Cap

Step 1) TEA prioritizes campuses by grades served and proportion of students with disabilities enrolled. School districts have the opportunity to review and/or modify the campus rankings.

Step 2) Student results are selected in order to maximize the number of campuses that Meet AYP beginning with the campuses assigned the highest priority.

12

2009 Preview: AYP Federal Caps (cont.)

A review of the federal cap process will be provided through a district accessible Texas Education Telecommunications Network (TETN) session on May 21, 2009 from 1pm-4pm (Event # 34920). Contact your school district or ESC for more information.

13

2009 Preview: AYP Growth Proposal

January 8, 2009

USDE announces that Texas can incorporate the Texas Projection Measure in 2009 AYP calculations contingent on:

– meeting the requirements in the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with USDE concerning TAKS-Alt, and

– discontinued use of Confidence Intervals (CI) and Uniform Averaging for determining the AYP status with fewer than 50 assessments (small numbers analysis).

14

2009 Preview: Texas AYP Workbook

On January 30, 2009, TEA submitted requested amendments to the U.S. Department of Education for the 2008-09 AYP evaluation.

The cover letter summarizing the requested may be viewed at http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/ayp/amend2009.pdf

Amendments to the 2009 AYP Workbook:

1) Incorporate the Texas Projection Measure (TPM) in AYP evaluations.

2) Remove references to the use of confidence intervals and uniform averaging in small numbers analysis.

15

2009 Preview: Texas AYP Workbook (cont.)

Amendments to the 2009 AYP Workbook (cont.)

3) Provisions for districts impacted by Hurricane Ike:

A separate Hurricane Ike student group will be created that includes all students enrolled in districts, campuses, and charters who were displaced by Hurricane Ike. This separate student group will be evaluated for participation only.

School districts or campuses that were closed for ten or more days due to Hurricane Ike and are located in a county designated by FEMA as a disaster area that miss AYP will receive a 2009 AYP status of Not Evaluated.

16

2009 Preview: Texas Projection Measure

TPM provides an estimate for how individual students are likely to perform in the next high-stakes grade (grades 5, 8, and 11) after receiving instruction in grade-level content.

For example, students in grades 3 and 4 who take reading and mathematics TAKS, TAKS (Accommodated), or LAT TAKS will be projected to meet the passing standard in grade 5.

17

2009 Preview: Texas Projection Measure (cont.)

Students’ 2009 Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS), TAKS (Accommodated), and LAT scores in both reading/English language arts and mathematics, along with the campus-level mean scores in the projection subject, will be used to predict their performance in next high-stakes testing grade.

For example, a student’s 2009 reading and mathematics TAKS scale score and the mean campus scale score in reading will be used to project the reading scale score for the student in the next high stakes grade level.

18

2009 Preview: TPM in AYP

Who may use TPM in 2009 AYP Calculations?

Student taking both reading/English language arts & mathematics in the same test version language (English or Spanish) of:

TAKS,TAKS (Accommodated), or Linguistically Accommodated Testing (LAT) TAKS

will have data that can be used to predict their performance for 2009.

19

2009 Preview: TPM in AYP (cont.)

How is TPM used in 2009 AYP Calculations?

Students who are predicted to meet proficiency will be counted in the numerator of the AYP percent proficiency calculation along with students meeting the standard, and this new percent would be compared with the AYP targets to determine if the performance standard

for percent proficient is met.

20

2009 Preview: TPM in AYP (cont.)

AYP Performance Rate:

(Students who Met the Passing Standard +Students Projected to meet the Standard)

Total Number of Students Tested

Performance Rate is compared to the 2009 AYP Targets of 67% in Reading/English language Arts and

58% in Mathematics

Participation Rate calculations are not affected.

21

2009 Preview: TPM in AYP (cont.)

AYP Performance Improvement/Safe Harbor

The Growth proposal states “The inclusion of the TPM in AYP calculations will not change the way the performance gains criteria are applied.”

Federal regulations 34 CFR 200.20(b)(1)) require the state to define successfully meeting the AYP safe harbor calculation if:

The percentage of students [in a student group] below the State's proficient achievement level decreased by at least 10 percent from the preceding year.

22

2009 Preview: TPM in AYP (cont.)

AYP Performance Improvement/Safe Harbor.

2009 AYP Proficiency

Rate:

Students who Met the Passing

Standard (subject to the

1% and 2% caps)

MINUS 2008 AYP Pro fic iency

Rate :

S tudents who Met the P ass ing

S tanda rd (subject to the

1% and 2% caps)

= CHANGE :

Mus t mee t the 10 pe rcent

decrease from the prior yea r in pe rcentage of

s tudents counted a s not

proficient .

Tota l Number of S tudents Tes ted

Tota l Number of S tudents Tes ted

23

AYP Preview: Final Title I Regulations

On Oct 28, 2008, final Title I regulations were issued to strengthen the NCLB Act. Four item are directly related to AYP.

1) 2010 AYP: Peer Review of the Texas AYP Workbook.

2) 2010 AYP: Graduation Rate Goals and Targets required.

3) 2012 AYP: Disaggregated Cohort Graduation Rate Data to determine AYP.

4) Extended-Year Adjusted Cohort Graduation Rate allowed for evaluation of AYP when available.

24

AYP Preview: Final Title I Regulations (cont.)

1. Peer Review of the 2010 Texas AYP Workbook

Minimum Subgroup Size and Inclusion of Students in Accountability

Explain the minimum group size and other components of its AYP definition;

Include the number and percentage of students and subgroups excluded from school-level accountability determinations.

Review by the National Technical Advisory Council (National TAC) established by these regulations.

25

AYP Preview: Final Title I Regulations (cont.)

2. Graduation Rate Goals/Targets for 2010 AYP

Set the states’ goals for the high school graduation rate, including annual graduation rate targets that reflect continuous and substantial improvement from the prior year toward those goals.

The states’ intermediate target for graduation rate must be applied to the 2010 AYP evaluations.

Include goals and intermediate targets in the AYP Workbook submitted for Peer Review.

26

AYP Preview: Final Title I Regulations (cont.)

3. Graduation Rate Data Disaggregated Cohort/ Student Groups for 2012 AYP

Regulations require Graduation rate evaluations for each student group in 2012 AYP results.

Texas meets the required reporting of all the graduation rate for student groups.

Currently all seven student groups are used to evaluate the Performance Improvement/Safe Harbor calculation (All Students, African American, Hispanic, White, Economically Disadvantaged, Special Education, Limited English Proficient).

27

AYP Preview: Final Title I Regulations (cont.)

4. Extended-Year Adjusted Cohort Graduation Rate

Regulations allow states to propose one or more extended-year adjusted cohort graduation rates that take into account students who graduate in more than four years.

The extended-year adjusted cohort graduation rate must be used with the four-year adjusted cohort graduation rate in determining AYP.

States may request an extended-year graduation rate as early as the state desires to use such rates.

28

Resources: TEA Security Environment (TEASE) Accountability Website

Each superintendent and charter school executive director may apply for access. They may also designate others in their district (including ESC Region staff) to acquire access.

Multi-District User Access is available for certain charter operators and Education Service Center (ESC) staff that have the unique situation of requiring access to multiple school district or charter operator information.

– Access for Multi-District Users is obtained through the school district superintendent’s authorization on the required access forms.

TEASE access forms are available at: http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/webappaccess/AppRef.htm

29

SIP Resources

Districts and campuses can view their Title I School Improvement Program (SIP) status history reports from 2003 through the present. See the AYP guide for the appropriate year for descriptions of any of the AYP or SIP status labels shown. The SIP history reports are accessible at http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/ayp/index_multi.html.

For more information about the School Improvement Program, please contact the School Improvement Unit in the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Program Coordination at (512) 463-9374.

30

AYP Resources

For more information on 2008 AYP, see the 2008 AYP Guide, 2008 AYP Appeals Guidelines, and 2008 AYP Highlights accessible at http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/ayp/2008/.

Frequently Asked Questions about AYP are available at http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/ayp/faq/faq.html.

U.S. Department of Education information is available at www.ed.gov/nclb/.