It's All GrEEk to Me.. Accountability for Beginners

It's All GrEEk to Me.. Accountability for Beginners

Its All GrEEk to Me Accountability for Beginners Kim Gilson Sr Consultant Data and Accountability [email protected] 972-348-1480

Disclaimer All information in this presentation is subject to change as a result of State Legislation, ATAC/APAC recommendations, Commissioner Final Decisions, Federal Legislation, Alien Invasion or Natural Disasters, and might be voided following any

TEA session this week. This training does not take the place of reading the manuals. How Did We Get Here? Then

Separate State and Federal Accountability Systems Recognized by State Missed AYP by Feds Federal Targets Rising Beyond Attainable Levels Performance Standard of each student group rapidly approaching 100%

Only measured students who passed Now.. A Performance Index Framework Many Components, One Result

Where Did It Come From??? Sources of Influence Your Assessment Answer Documents!!! Legislation! State: In Session!

Feds: Discussing a NCLB Rewrite ATAC/APAC Advisory Committees Commissioner of Education Commissioners Rules Results summarized in the Accountability Manual

ATAC and APAC Accountability Technical Advisory Committee Accountability Policy Advisory Committee Real People from Real Districts! They make recommendations to the Commissioner

EXPECT CHANGES TO 2015 ACCOUNTABILITY RULES Accountability Development Timeline How Can I Keep Up????

For Legislative Action State news sources Notifications through the Texas Legislature website Social Media #txlege #txed #STAAR

#HB___ or #SB___ Service Center Updates For Development Materials and Final Decisions from TEA Some Basic

Vocabulary. Raw Score The number of questions the student must pass correctly to meet a goal Who Understands This? Percentage Score

The percent of items a student answered correctly, as if it were a chapter test graded by the teacher Who understands this? Vertical Scale Score A vertical scale is a scale score system that allows for direct comparison of

student test scores across grade levels within a content area. Vertical scaling refers to the process of placing test scores that measure similar content areas but at different grade levels onto a common scale.---TEA Different for every grade/subject

This is what the system is based on! Who understands this? Raw, Percent, and Vertical Scores The number of questions a student must answer correctly OR

The percentage of questions a student must answer correctly to meet the standard CAN CHANGE FROM ONE YEAR TO THE NEXT, BUT.. The vertical scale score remains the same (assuming the same passing standard)

Target The number that must be attained by the campus or district in each Index Example: Index 1 Target was 55 in 2014 Performance Levels Level I: Unsatisfactory

Did Not Pass Level II: Satisfactory Passing Level III: Advanced Demonstrating an extremely high level of performance (commended in TAKS)

Phase-In Levels The Level II Satisfactory Standard was supposed to be Phased in to allow the system to adjust to the new expectations for STAAR We still havent adjusted to the new expectations of STAAR

Phase-in Level I was extended Were in our 4th, AND LAST, year of the lowest phase-in Standard The Commissioner announced a new Phase-In Schedule in Fall of 2014 From 3-4 Levels Each new level for 3 years

Final Level II standards not changed Advanced Level III not changed New STAAR Phase-In Schedule Advanced Level III: No Changes ELL Progress

Measure: A Different Standard Who understands this??? ELL Progress Measure in Laymans Terms In laymans terms. Given that it is more difficult for an ELL student to achieve

the same passing standard as native English speakers The ELL progress measure affords those students a measure of grace (ie, reduced passing standard) They are placed on a plan with varying passing standards The level of grace shown is based on a combination of 2 factors: Years in US Schools

Composite Telpas Score It is used in various ways in each Index. See http://goo.gl/dU6vgb (Accountability Manual, Appendix I) Performance Index Framework Index 1

Index 2 Index 3 Index 4 Student Achievement

Student Progress Closing Performance Gaps

Postsecondar y Readiness Rating Based on 4 Performance Indexes Index 1

Level II Satisfactory Performance In Laymans TermsWho Passed? # of Tests Passed # of Tests Taken All Subjects. All Grades. All Students. One Number.

Sample Index 1 Index 1 Target 50 in 2013 55 in 2014 Proposal is to keep target of 55

New for 2015 New Math TEKS According to Bridge Study See http://goo.gl/1TD57v for more info Well have bridge scores by mid June STAAR A and STAAR Alt 2 Index Calculated With and Without

These Tests If they cause you to miss the target, then they wont be included Hold Harmless Federal Safeguards To satisfy Federal Accountability Concerns, performance by Student Groups is

reported in Index 1 Done to ensure group performance doesnt mask students being left behind 2015 Federal Safeguard is 83% (R/M Only) Determined Focus and Priority Schools in 2013 3 year cohort State Safeguards are same as Index Target (all subjects)

Federal Accountability Bills are being developed at the Federal Level to change No Child Left Behind/AYP Requirements Stay Tuned! Index 2

Who Grew??? How? This Years Vertical Scale Score Minus Previous Years Vertical Scale Score In Reading, Math. and 7th Grade Writing (NEW!)

(7th Grade Score Minus 4th Grade Score) Weighted System 1 point for growing enough (meeting growth measure) 2 points for growing extra (exceeding growth measure) How much is enough or extra?

Depends on the grade and subject! See Calculating STAAR Progress Measure or A Parents Guide to the STAAR Progress Measure http://tea.texas.gov/student.assessment/staar/ But Not This Year In 3-8 Math (because of New TEKS) And Never for English I

8th Grade Test to English I doesnt compute SoIndex 2 for High Schools is Algebra 1 and English II Groups Contribute Points! All Students (as a group) Each Race/Ethnicity (if they have 25

or more students) Special Ed and ELLs (if they have 25 or more students) ELL Progress Measure Students have a set Met or Exceeds target that is not based on 2 years of consecutive scale scores

Soooo..they can have progress measures in grades that other students cant

Example: 3rd grade Reading and English I AND 4TH GRADE WRITING! AND 3-8 Math! ATAC is Recommending No Math Index 2 for ELLs in Grades 3-8 Writing Still Included Target

2014 Bottom 5% 2015 Proposal is Bottom 5% Again Old Calculation Reading Index 2 Points + Math Index 2 Points

2 Each subject contributed 50% of the index Student Groups had to meet 25 tests within that subject But for 2015???? If you take the same approach, Reading = 1/3

Math = 1/3 (even though its only Alg 1!) Writing = 1/3 (even though its only 7th grade and 4th ELLs!) So.. New Proposed Calculation Reading Progress + Algebra 1 Progress + Writing

Progress Total Available Points Student Groups would need 25 TOTAL tests to contribute points! (NOT 25 for a subject!!!) It will be easier for a student group to meet minimum size Special Education and Spanish

Tests Proposal is to EXCLUDE STAAR A and Alt 2 from Index 2 Reminder: Anyone who took an M last year CANNOT receive a Progress Measure Students who change languages cannot receive a Progress Measure in

Reading Students who took Spanish 4th Grade Writing cannot receive a 7th Grade Writing Progress Measure Index 3 Closing Performance Gaps

Index 3 Focuses on Economically Disadvantaged Students AND Lowest Performing Race/Ethnicity Groups from Previous Year Groups Must Meet Minimum Size of 25 Reading Tests AND 25 Math Tests last

year AND this year Campuses could have 0, 1, or 2 Race/Ethnicity groups (see accountability manual for details) Calculation 1 point for Passing 2 points for Advanced Level III

All Subjects Writing, Science, And Social Studies may not have data for some groups because there arent enough students to meet minimum size New Math TEKS Included Via Bridge Study

Target 2014 Bottom 5% Didnt Meet the Target 2015 Proposal is to keep same target Index 4 Post-Secondary Readiness

Currently. 4 Indicators STAAR Component Final Level II on 2 or more tests (If they take at least 2 tests. If not, they need to achieve that on the one they took)

New Math TEKS Included Via Bridge Study Elementary and Middle Schools Stop Here AND 3 Lagging Indicators for High Schools/Districts (Class of 2014 in 2015 Accountability)

Graduation Rates Graduation Plans (Add Foundation Plan) Post-Secondary Indicator* *need to be redefined Post-Secondary Indicator Change?

Proposal is to add new ways for a student to count in the numerator, but keep the same denominator. TSI on R AND Math from TAKS/SAT/ACT OR Completed One Advanced Course OR Completed Credit CTE Coherent

Sequence Changes Are Coming to Index 4 TAKS Grads leave the system after 2015 Legislative requirements for additional indicators

Foundation Plan/Endorsements Proposal Keep Index 4 Targets the Same as 2014 PROPOSAL TO MEET STANDARD

MEET INDEX 1 OR 2 And Index 3 And Index 4 Distinctions

Each Campus is placed in a comparison group of 40 schools Campuses Evaluated

4 Core Subject Peformance Index 2 Index 3 Post-Secondary Readiness Districts Evaluated in Post-Secondary Readiness only Some indicators are attendance/participation and

some are performance You get a Quartile ranking for each indicator Number of Q1s determines distinction Comparison Data is Available See how your campus compares to the other schools like you in the Distinction Designation Data

Overview Report Improvement Required Schools cannot earn distinctions, but they still have data! http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/2014/srch.html?srch=C

Preview Vocabulary Topics in 2015 Accountability Development Materials Required Improvement Not to be confused with Improvement Required

Harkens back to AYP days Can help a campus or district who misses and index target, but improves enough from previous year Needs stability in the system before formulas can be created Possibly added in future cycles

The Bright Side? At least were never bored!

Recently Viewed Presentations

  • Input and Output in C - vitscse

    Input and Output in C - vitscse

    I/O in C Lecture 6 Engineering H192 Lecture 06 Winter 2005 Input/Output in C C has no built-in statements for input or output. A library of functions is supplied to perform these operations.
  • Multiple Learners - Job Corps

    Multiple Learners - Job Corps

    Managing the Needs . of Multiple Learners . in a . Multi-Level. Learning Environment. Universal Design for Learning. Reasonable Accommodation. Strategies. This webinar focuses on definitions and strategies for accommodating and managing multiple-leveled learners in the Job Corps setting.
  • T H E I PA D ATA B

    T H E I PA D ATA B

    In this analysis only 'very large' effects are included - previous analysis by Les Binet and Peter Field for IPA Datamine 2 showed there was a high correlation between very large business effects and ROI: Campaigns reporting any very large...
  • スライド 1 - pref.osaka.lg.jp

    スライド 1 - pref.osaka.lg.jp

    産業振興分野 留学生等高度外国人人材活用推進事業 【大阪府商工労働部人材育成課】 チームメンバーが一致団結し、大阪府内の中小企業に対して、外国籍人材採用促進に貢献しました!
  • Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) - IN.gov

    Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) - IN.gov

    The long definition is found in the Fair Labor Standards Act in the section here. Instead of looking at the definition, it's probably more useful to look at who is not an employee. Independent contractors are not employees, but don't...
  • Literary Analysis Notes - Pearland Independent School District

    Literary Analysis Notes - Pearland Independent School District

    DO use parts of quotes and weave them into your writing. Example - Elie feels like his past childlike self has been "consumed in the flames" of the crematoriums of Auschwitz (Wiesel 37). He is no longer "the student of...
  • A Brief Overview of Divorce Education and Its Value

    A Brief Overview of Divorce Education and Its Value

    Sean Brotherson, PhD ... -session 4-hour version of the course has been offered in ND since October 2007 N = 164 participants Counties Cass -25.2% Grand Forks - 11.7% McIntosh - 2.5% Morton- 12.3% Ramsey - 9.8% Stark - 17.2%...
  • Pencegahan Kegagalan Perawatan Ortodontik dengan Plat aktif

    Pencegahan Kegagalan Perawatan Ortodontik dengan Plat aktif

    Memberi nasihat untuk menghilangkan bad habit Pasien diminta menghilangkan bad habit yang menjadi etiologi primer maloklusi Koreksi Maloklusi: Rahang Atas: Menggunakan plat aktif ortodontik lepasan dengan posterior bite plane di regio gigi posterior Adam klamer Ф 0,7 di 6 Long...