Current T.E.A. Framework as of March 22, 2013
Austin Independent School District
Bill Caritj, Chief Performance Officer
Carolyn Hanschen, Director of Campus and District
Accountability

•
District and Campus Accountability
•
Monitoring and Support Compliance for AU/AYP schools
•
Performance Management
•
Planning
•
System-wide Testing
•
TELPAS, EOC, STAAR, ITBS, CogAT, NAEP, credit-by-exam
• Online testing (TELPAS, STAAR, EOC)
•
Research and Evaluation
• Survey Research
• Growth Modeling (REACH)
• Program evaluation
• External data and research requests
•
Public Education Information Management System (PEIMS)
• Manages AISD data for mandatory Texas Public School database
• Formative Assessment
2

• Bills passed by the Texas State Legislature in past sessions required the implementation of the new State of Texas
Assessments of Academic Readiness, or STAAR , and the development of a new state accountability system.
• Technical and policy advisory committees have met with TEA staff over the past year to consider the complex issues related to the development of a new accountability system and make recommendations for solutions.
• The current proposal includes a complex set of rules to calculate and evaluate campus and district performance results on four indices.
• Commissioner will release his final decisions on 2013 accountability rules in April 2013
3

•
Improve student achievement at all levels in the core subjects.*
•
Ensure the progress of all students toward achieving
Advanced Academic Performance.*
•
Close Advanced Academic Performance level gaps among groups.*
•
Close gaps among groups in the % of students graduating under the recommended and advanced high school program.*
• Identify acceptable and unacceptable campuses and districts*
•
Reward excellence based on other indicators in addition to state assessment results.
* These goals are specified in Chapter 39.053(f) of the Texas Education Code.
4

5

• An index score between zero and 100 will be calculated for each of the four indices.
• Multiple measures may be included within each index o Each measure contributes points to the index score
• The four index scores will be considered collectively to determine the campus and district ratings
• Resulting rating will reflect overall performance rather than highlighting areas of weakest performance.
Note: Decisions are final until TEA Rules are released in April, 2013.
6

7

• STAAR Level II passing standards will be phased-in
• Phase 1 2012 and 2013
• Phase 2
• Final
2014 and 2015
2016 and beyond (final panel-recommended standards)
• For most tests, final standards are significantly higher than Phase-1 and
Phase-2 standards.
8

9

10

11

Growth on STAAR
This is an example of a transition table that divides the three STAAR performance levels
(Level I, Level II, and Level III) into six performance bands.
•
Two points given for students who exceed the growth expectation from one year to the next; one point given for students who meet the growth expectation
•
Subjects evaluated: math, reading and writing for available grades.
•
10 student groups evaluated:
•
All students
•
Each race/ethnicity group
•
Students with disabilities
•
English Language Learners
Note: The final growth measure has not been developed and may differ from this example.
12

•
Goal – Improve the performance of historically low-performing student groups
•
Index includes results at both Level 2 and Level 3 – “Satisfactory” and “Advanced” levels. (Level 3 will not be used until 2014.)
•
Each subject area will be evaluated: reading, math, writing, science and social studies
•
Includes performance for up to three student groups –
•
Economically Disadvantaged student group (always evaluated)
•
Two lowest performing race/ethnicity student groups (based on prior year Index 1 results)
Note: This index does not measure changes in gaps across years or compare performance among student groups; but rather, evaluates the performance of historically low performing groups against an external standard.
13

Credit based on average of two postsecondary indicators:
1) graduation rates and diploma plans
• 4-Year or 5-Year Graduation Rate* (whichever is higher)
• Percentages of graduates receiving Recommended or
Advanced diploma
• 10 student groups: All students, seven race/ethnicity groups, students with disabilities, Engish language learners
2) STAAR postsecondary readiness *
• Credit given for meeting postsecondary readiness standard
(final Level II) on one or more tests
• Eight student groups evaluated: All students, seven race/ethnicity groups
*Not evaluated in 2013
14

Proposed Index Framework – Sample Campus
While some information is known about the individual indices, little has been communicated about how the indices will be used to rate districts and schools.
15

• Report performance by student group, performance level, subject, and grade (i.e., transparency of results)
• Implement interventions based on specific areas of low performance
• Implement interventions based on minimum participation rate targets
• Implement interventions for excessive use of STAAR-
Modified or STAAR-Alternate
16

• Student-level passing standards for STAAR and STAAR
End-of-Course will be phased in over several years
• Campus Accountability – 2013
• Only “Met Standard” and “Needs Improvement” or similar labels will be awarded
• No “Recognized” or “Exemplary”
• Academic Achievement designations for campuses and districts will be awarded in math, reading or both
• No use of Level III performance for accountability purposes (Index
3 & 4)
• Campus Accountability – 2014 and Beyond
• English language learners will be included based on the ELL development measure
• All four indices will be fully in place
17

• Determine how index evaluation will result in campus and district ratings
• Finalize minimum size requirements for student groups
• Determine system safeguards
• Campus Rating Distinctions
• Alternative Education Accountability
• STAAR ELL Development Model (2014 and beyond)
18

19
January 29, 2013
April 2013
Late Spring 2013
August 8, 2013
Student results from the spring of 2012 Grades 3-8
STAAR were available from test contractor.
Commissioner releases final decisions on the state accountability system.
2012 STAAR performance results released as a supplement to 2012 AEIS campus and district reports.
Campus and district accountability ratings for 2013 released.

20
• House and Senate bills under consideration may result in significant changes to state assessment and accountability. Possible changes include:
• Elimination of the requirement to include STAAR Endof-Course results as 15% of a student’s course grade.
• Reduction in the number of End-of-Course tests administered in high school and/or required for graduation.
• Changes to graduation requirements and the establishment of a “foundation” graduation plan with more flexibility for substitution of Career and
Technology Education courses in math and science.