Date post: | 27-Mar-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | aiden-flynn |
View: | 213 times |
Download: | 0 times |
State and Federal Accountability Update
2012 Association for Compensatory Educators of Texas (ACET) Conference
April 11, 2012
Shannon HoussonEster Regalado
Division of Performance ReportingTexas Education Agency
1
2012 Accountability
2
2012 Accountability
No State Accountability Ratings
2012 AYP evaluations and 2012-13 SIP statuses will be released in early August 2012.
3
4
2012 AYP
2012 AYP Timeline
May/June
Expected USDE approval of requested amendments to the 2012 Texas AYP Workbook.
Thursday, May 24, 2012
TETN Session on Federal AYP Cap (Event #4851) for ESCs and Districts
May 22 – June 22, 2012
Campus Priority List for the 2% Federal Cap available online
5
2012 AYP
2012 AYP Timeline
June 2012 AYP Guide released
Last Week of July
TEASE release of Preliminary 2012 AYP Data Tables without AYP/SIP labels for all districts and campuses.
First Week of August
Public release of Preliminary 2012 AYP/SIP statuses for all districts and campuses.
6
2012 AYP
2012 AYP Timeline
First Week of September
Appeals and Federal Cap Exceptions Deadline.
November/December
Final 2012 AYP Status released.
Preview of NCLB Report Card (Part I only)
January Public release of the 2011-12 NCLB Report Card.
2012 AYP
2012 AYP Performance Standards increase:
87% in Reading/English language arts
83% in Mathematics
Federal regulations require 2012 AYP graduation rate evaluations of All Students and every student group.
Participation Rate and Attendance Rate Indicator standards remain unchanged.
7
2012 AYP
Summary of Texas Amendment Requests
AYP Texas Workbook for 2012 AYP was submitted on February, 15, 2012.
2012 references to Graduation Rate Goals and Targets (Sections 1.2 and 7.1)
Graduation Rate Goals and Targets will show constant targets for 2011 and 2012 AYP.
8
2012 AYP
Summary of Texas Amendment Requests
Evaluate 2012 AYP and School Improvement Program (SIP) statuses based on:
2011-12 TAKS results for grade 10, and
2011-12 STAAR results for grade 3-8 at the TAKS proficiency standard.
9
2012 AYP
Summary of the Texas Amendment Requests
In order to provide 2012 AYP results on a timely basis, Texas will use bridge studies that identify the existing TAKS performance standards on the new STAAR assessments for tests of grade 3–8 on which STAAR performance standards will not yet be available.
The STAAR Bridge Study for AYP was approved by the USDE on February 17, 2012. The complete study is posted online at http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/reports
10
2012 AYP
Summary of the Texas Amendment Requests
See Summary of Possible 2012 AYP Componentsfor detailed listing of TAKS and STAAR assessment results that will be evaluated for 2012 AYP at
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=2147503684
11
Overview of Accountability System for 2013 and Beyond
12
House Bill (HB) 3 Accountability Provisions
Focus of district and campus performance is postsecondary readiness standards
Rigorous standards ensure that Texas performs among top ten states by 2020
Higher ratings are distinctions based on higher levels of student performance
13
House Bill (HB) 3 Accountability Provisions
Campuses earn distinctions for student growth and closing achievement gaps
Campuses earn distinctions for excellence in areas other than state assessment results
Reports are relevant, meaningful, and easily accessible
State and federal accountability requirements are aligned to the extent possible
14
Accountability System for 2013 and Beyond
Legislation provides new flexibility as well as constraints
Every aspect of accountability system will be reevaluated
New system may look very different from current system, not just variation on former systems used in Texas
Seamless system of ratings – reporting – monitoring – interventions
15
New Accountability Indicators Considered
End-of-Course (EOC) cumulative scores for cohorts of graduates
Four-, five-, and six-year graduation rates
Three-year average performance
16
New Frameworks Considered
Performance Index
Allows more indicators without more hurdles
Rating based on overall performance rather than lowest performing area
Interventions focus on specific problem areas
17
New Frameworks Considered
Alignment of State/Federal Systems
Broad goals in common postsecondary readiness, student progress, closing performance gaps
Range of options Develop state system that meets federal
requirements – replace Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) with new state system
Separate AYP as component of state system
18
New Rating Labels
Statutory labels removed
Separate district ratings from elementary, middle, and high schools are possible
Multiple degrees of acceptable/unacceptable statuses possible
Higher ratings based on postsecondary ready
Separate ratings for status and growth possible
19
New Progress Measures Developed
Multiple measures developed for reporting
Accountability indicators that do not count failing students as passing
Required Improvement based on student growth measure possible
Campus distinction designations for growth to postsecondary ready
Closing performance gaps can be measured across achievement spectrum (scale scores or percentiles)
20
New Student Groups
New race/ethnicity student group definitions produce seven groups
Economically disadvantaged and non-economically disadvantaged in statute
Limited English proficient (LEP) and special education in AYP blueprint
Gap measures to evaluate student group performance
21
New Accountability Standards – New Issues
Phase-in of State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR) assessments
Phase-in of student passing standard
Phase-in of graduation requirements
Percentiles or rankings versus accountability standards
22
2013 Accountability
23
Ratings
Based on:
STAAR Level II: Satisfactory Academic Performance (not Level III: Advanced Academic Performance) student passing standard
TAKS grade 11 Met Standard
24
Ratings
Rating labels will be acceptable/satisfactory and unacceptable/unsatisfactory only
Recognized and Exemplary ratings will not be awarded in 2013
25
Data
Growth measures not available for 2013 ratings
Multiple growth measures being developed for reporting
Accountability indicators that incorporate growth will be developed after 2013 results
26
Graduation/Dropout Rate Indicators
Class of 2012 graduation/completion/dropout rates and 2011-2012 annual dropout rates released June 2013
The first cohort to graduate under EOC are the grade 10 students in the 2012-13 school year (most have not taken English III, Algebra II, Physics, U.S. History)
27
Distinction Designations
Campus Academic Distinctions
Developed via committees Reading/ELA and mathematics awarded in 2013
likely based on: Grades 3-8 STAAR advanced performance High school measures of college-readiness
other than EOC Science and Social Studies will be phased in
28
Distinction Designations
New Areas for Recognition
Developed via committees
21st Century Workforce Development Program scheduled to be awarded in 2013
Additional areas that will be phased in:
fine arts,
physical education, and
second language acquisition program
29
Distinction Designations
Additional distinctions for campuses based on top 25% in growth and closing performance gaps will not be awarded in 2013
These distinctions will likely be based on growth measures and the Level III: Advanced Academic Performance student passing standard that will not be evaluated until 2014.
30
Alternative Education Accountability (AEA) Options
No separate system
Same system for all in 2013, separate AEA procedures in 2014
Same system, different standards and/or growth measures
31
2013 and 2014 Accountability – Summary
2013 2014
Acceptable/Unacceptable*
(Campuses & Districts)
STAAR Level II Performance
STAAR Level III Performance TBD
STAAR Growth Measures TBD
Improvement Feature TBD
Release Date Deadline 8/8 8/8
Distinction Designations for Recognized & Exemplary(Campuses & Districts)
STAAR Level III Performance
Not A
warded
STAAR Growth Measures TBD
Release Date Deadline 8/8
* Labels to be determined.
32
2013 and 2014 Accountability – Summary
2013 2014
Distinction Designations for Top 25% in:• Student Growth• Closing Gaps(Campuses Only)
STAAR Level III Performance
Not A
warded
STAAR Growth Measures TBD
Release Date Deadline 8/8
Distinction Designations for Academic Achievement (1 of 5 committees)(Campuses Only)
STAAR Level III Performance (Gr. 3-8)Reading/ELA & Mathematics Only
STAAR Growth Measures TBD
Other College-Readiness HS IndicatorsReading/ELA & Mathematics Only
Release Date Deadline 8/8 8/8
33
Accountability Development Process
34
Development Calendar
Beginning of 18-month accountability system development process
First advisory committee meeting March 5 - 6, 2012
Advisory committees meet about every three months through February/March 2013
Final decisions will be released by the commissioner in March/April 2013
35
Website for Accountability Development
Post status reports, issue documents, presentations, and advisory group recommendations.
Opportunity for structured input from broad constituency
New web pages and FAQ added to Division of Performance Reporting website at:
http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/2013/index.html
36
Advisory Groups
Accountability Technical Advisory Committee (ATAC)
Accountability Policy Advisory Committee (APAC)
37
Advisory Groups – ATAC
Duties Consider complex, technical issues Work with TEA staff and national experts to develop
recommendations including: overall framework, integration of state and federal systems, assessment indicators, progress measures, completion indicators, student groups, minimum size criteria, alternative education accountability (AEA), and distinction designations.
38
Advisory Groups – ATAC
Expectations
Attend up to five meetings at TEA offices in Austin between March 2012 and spring 2013;
Actively and constructively participate during meetings;
Solicit input from peers within their geographic region;
Participate in at least one small work group that will meet between the ATAC meetings with TEA staff.
39
Advisory Groups – ATAC and APAC
Process
The smaller work groups will present their proposals at the main ATAC meetings.
The ATAC committee’s final proposals will be reviewed by the Accountability Policy Advisory Committee (APAC).
The APAC will provide feedback on the ATAC proposals to the commissioner of education. The commissioner will make final accountability decisions in spring 2013.
40
AYP Resources
For more information on AYP, see the 2011 AYP Guide, accessible at http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/ayp
Texas AYP Workbook, as of October 12, 2011, is located athttp://www.tea.state.tx.us/index4.aspx?id=2147497077
FAQs about AYP are located at http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/ayp/faq/faq.html
USDE information is available at www.ed.gov/nclb/
Contact the Division of Performance Reporting by email at [email protected] or phone at (512) 463-9704.
41
Accountability Resources
Division of Performance Reporting email [email protected]
Division of Performance Reporting telephone number (512) 463-9704
ESC Accountability Contacts
Online at http://www.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/
42