Overview of State and Federal Accountability Systems

1

• Overview of State and Federal Accountability
  Systems
• AISD Office of Accountability
• September 25th, 2009

2
How Are Texas Schools Held Accountable?

• State Accountability Ratings
• Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
• Performance Based Monitoring Assessment System
  (PBMAS)
• Public Education Grant (PEG)

3
State Accountability Ratings

• Districts and campuses are rated based on
• Performance on state-mandated tests (TAKS)
• Completion Rate (high school)
• Annual Dropout Rate (middle school)
• The possible ratings are
• Exemplary
• Recognized
• Academically Acceptable
• Academically Unacceptable

4
State AccountabilitySubjects and Student Groups

• Subjects
• Reading/ELA (grades 3-11)
• Mathematics (grades 3-11)
• Writing (grades 4 7)
• Science (grades 5, 8, 10, and 11)
• Social Studies (grades 8, 10, and 11)
• Subgroups
• All students
• Hispanic
• African American
• White
• Economically Disadvantaged

Scores are summed across grade levels and all
groups must perform at minimum standard in
order for school to be rated acceptable
5
State Accountability Assessments Used

• TAKS
• TAKS Accommodated
• 2008
• Sci. (5, 8, 10, 11) Soc.St. (8, 10, 11) ELA
  (11) Math (11)
• 2009
• Sci. (5, 8, 10, 11) Soc.St. (8, 10, 11) ELA
  (11) Math (11
• 2010
• All grades and subjects

6
State AccountabilityTAKS Performance Standards
7
Completion and Dropout Rates

• Completion Rate (grades 9-12)
• Establish a 9th grade cohort
• Track over 4-years
• Completers receive a high-school diploma with
  their class or re-enroll in the fall after their
  senior year
• 75 85 95
• Dropout Rate (grades 7-8)
• A dropout is a student who was enrolled in a
  public school but did not return the following
  fall prior to the last Friday in Sept. (some
  exceptions)
• lt 2.0 (1.8 in 2010)

8
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)

• AYP Ratings are based on
• Performance on federally-mandated tests
• Participation in federally-mandated testing
• Graduation (high school)
• Attendance (middle and elementary school)
• The ratings are
• Met AYP
• Missed AYP
• Year X of School Improvement (if campus or
  district does not meet AYP two or more
  consecutive years in the same subject)

9
AYP Subjects and Subgroups
10
AYP Assessments Used
Subject to 3 Cap
11
AYP Increasing Standards
12
Graduation and Attendance Rates (AYP)

• Graduation Rate
• Percentage of 9th grade cohort who complete their
  high school education by the anticipated
  graduation date (same as completion rate except
  students who re-enroll the fall after their
  senior year are not counted)
• Cohort-driven
• 70 or any improvement
• Attendance Rates
• Total number of days present divided by total
  number of days enrolled
• 90

13
Results of Receiving an Unacceptable State Rating
14
Results of Missing AYP
15
State Accountability

• Number of Measures (2009)
• TAKS
• 25
• 5 Subjects
• 5 Student Populations
• Completion Rate (HS)
• 5 Student Populations
• Annual Drop Out Rate (MS)
• 5 Student Populations
• Minimum group size 30

16
Impact of Diverse Student Population
17
AYP

• Number of Accountability Measures (2009)
• Reading
• 14
• 7 Performance groups
• 7 Participation
• Math
• 14
• 7 Performance groups
• 7 Participation
• Graduation/Attendance
• 1
• Minimum group size 50

18
Impact of State vs. Federal Rating Criteria
19
Public Education Grant (PEG List)

• Students attending schools on the PEG list may
  transfer to other districts. Schools are on the
  list if
• 50 percent or more of the students failed any of
  the TAKS subjects in any two of the preceding
  three years or
• the school was rated Academically Unacceptable in
  any two of the previous three years.
• A school can remain on the PEG list for up to
  three years, even if their subsequent ratings are
  Recognized or Exemplary

20
Gold Performance Acknowledgement

• Acknowledgement for reaching standards beyond
  those established for the state accountability
  system
• Advanced Course/Dual Enrollment
• AP/IB Results
• Attendance
• Commended Performance
• Comparable Improvement ELA/Math
• Recommended High School or Distinguished
  Achievement Program
• SAT/ACT Results
• Higher Education Readiness

21
Challenges under the current systems

• Conflicts between Federal and State systems
• Differing performance standards
• Overlapping sanctions
• Mixed messages
• Higher number of measures must be met by diverse
  campuses/districts
• Increasing standards

22
Texas Projection Measure

• New Feature for 2008-2009
• Method for Measuring Student Improvement
• Predicts student performance in the next
  high-stakes grade level (5, 8, 11 7 for
  writing)
• Provides an estimate of whether or not a student
  will pass that next high stakes grade level

23
TPM in Accountability Ratings

• Met Passing Standard Met Improvement
  Standard TAKS Met Standard with TPM
• Beginning in 2009, TPM can elevate a campus to
  next higher rating if,
• Base indicator not met, and,
• Required improvement insufficient to gate-up
• A campus with that would be AU due to 50 math
  passing rate
• 56 TAKS Met Standard with TPM
• Academically Acceptable Rating

24
Additional Legislative Changes

• New requirements for grade level advancement
• Grade 3
• Campus must specify interventions
• Proportionality model (85 of cells)
• Post-secondary readiness standards
• Financial accountability measure
• Vertical Scaling
• Revised Sanctions
• End of Course

25
Want to Know More?

• http//www.austinisd.org/
• Inside AISD
• Accountability
• http//www.tea.state.tx.us/
• Accountability, or
• Assessment and Testing