house bill 3: an overview college readiness=the level of preparation a student must attain in ela...
Post on 25-Dec-2015
216 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Reaching for the
STAAR!
An Inside Look at the House Bill 3 Transition PlanMicki Wesley and Wes Pierce
Region 9 ESC
*Information taken from various TEA resources and meetings
Texas Education…What Lies Ahead
• Overview• Assessment (STAAR)• State Accountability• Federal Accountability• Interventions, Sanctions, Etc.• Q and A
Texas Education…What Lies Ahead
Overview: A History of HB 3 Legislative Requirements
House Bill 3: An Overview
College Readiness=The
level of preparation a
student must attain in
ELA and math to be
successful, without
remediation, in an entry-
level college course in
that content area
New assessments developed at
grades 3–8 linked to EOCs and
college readiness
House Bill 3: An Overview
Performance on
Algebra II and
English III indicate
college readiness
based on
correlated studies
Performance on Algebra I and English II correlate to performance on Algebra II and English III
House Bill 3: An Overview
Performance on grade 8
assessments correlate to performance on Algebra I and English I
Performance on
English I correlates to
performance on
English II
House Bill 3: An Overview
Consideration of Performance standards-setting on certain science and social studies EOC
assessments if a link is established between performance on the assessment and college readiness
Performance on grades
3–7 assessments
correlate to
assessments in the
same content area at
the next grade
House Bill 3: An Overview
Commissioners of
education and higher
education establish
college readiness
performance standards
for Algebra II and
English III
From HB 3…
The STAAR is Born!
Texas Education…What Lies Ahead
Assessment Requirements and
Test Design
Start Date:
Spring 2012:
Grades 3-9
(students
ENTERING
Grade 9)
High School End-Of-Course (EOC) Exams
3-8 Grade-Level Content Area Exams
Assessment Overview
Science: Grades
5 & 8
Social Studies: Grade 8
Math: Grades 3-8
Writing: Grades
4 & 7
Reading: Grades 3-8
Same as TAKS
STAAR 3-8 Grade-Level
Content Area Exams
Science:Biology
ChemistryPhysics
Social Studies: World GeographyWorld HistoryU.S. History
Math:
Algebra I
Geometry
Algebra II
ELA: English I
English II
English III
STAAR EOCHigh School
Exams
TAKS vs. STAAR/EOC
How does the TAKS compare to the STARR/EOC regarding….
ASSESSED CURRICULUM?
A New View of Assessment
“More Focus, More Clarity, More Depth”
RIGOR, RIGOR, RIGOR!
What is meant by More Focus?
“Readiness” and “Supporting” TEKS standards are identified
TEKS FocusReadiness
Knowledge and Skills
Supporting Knowledge and
Skills
• Readiness (Core) Knowledge and Skills: Critical for success in the current grade/course and important for preparedness in the grade/course that follows
• Supporting (Rotational) Knowledge and Skills: TEKS that are important but not deemed critical
Readiness vs. Supporting Standards
TEKS: Assessed Curriculum“More Focus”
• Stable, static TEKS assessed annually
• Essential for preparedness for next grade or course
• Support college and career readiness
• Necessitate in-depth instruction• Address significant content and
concepts• Approximately 2-4 questions per
standard
• Assessed on a rotational basis across years
• Play a supporting role in preparing students for next grade or course
• Introduced in current grade or course but may be emphasized in a subsequent year
• Reinforced in current grade or course but may be emphasized in a previous year
• Address more narrowly defined content and concepts
• Approximately 0-1 question per standard
General CharacteristicsReadiness Standards Supporting Standards
TEKS: Assessed Curriculum
“More Focus”
• Focus on specific reading genres (fiction and expository)
• Focus on writing for particular responses
• May apply to other reading genres (poetry, drama, literary nonfiction, and persuasive)
Content Specific Characteristics:English Language Arts
Readiness Standards Supporting Standards
TEKS: Assessed Curriculum
“More Focus”
• Emphasize the integration and application of mathematical skills
• Focus on skills that underlie more significant mathematical concepts
Content Specific Characteristics:Math
Readiness Standards Supporting Standards
TEKS: Assessed Curriculum
“More Focus”
• Emphasize the integration and application of major scientific concepts
• Focus on content that supports fundamental scientific principles
Content Specific Characteristics:Science
Readiness Standards Supporting Standards
TEKS: Assessed Curriculum
“More Focus”
• Emphasize landmark historical events and foundational geographic concepts
• Focus on discrete historical facts, events, or individual people, as well as more detail-oriented geographical facts and concepts
Content Specific Characteristics:Social Studies
Readiness Standards Supporting Standards
What is meant by More Clarity?
TEA will communicate these differing skills and will communicate the connection between the TEKS and the STAAR
TEKS: Assessed Curriculum
“More Clarity”
Content of STAAR
Grades 3-8• Most assessments will only
address TEKS taught in the current subject and grade
• Science assessments for grades 5 and 8 will assess TEKS from multiple levels
• Emphasis on 5 and 8 content standards
• Will include content standards from two lower grades (i.e., grades 3 & 4 or grades 6 & 7)
EOCs:• Will address only the TEKS for
a given course
What is meant by More Depth?
Inclusion of items measuring higher cognitive complexity as a means of preparedness for student success in subsequent grades and courses, and ultimately in college and/or a career
TEKS: Assessed Curriculum
“More Depth”
Assessment StructureGeneral:
• Will contain a greater number of items that have a higher cognitive complexity level
• Items will be developed to more closely match the cognitive complexity level evident in the TEKS
By Content:• Reading: Greater emphasis on
critical analysis than literal understanding
• Writing: Students required to write two essays rather than one. Prompts support analytical, persuasive, and expository writing, in addition to literary writing
• Social Studies, Science, and Math: Process skills will be assessed in context, not in isolation
• Science and Math: # of open-ended (griddable) items will increase to allow students more opportunity to derive an answer independently
STAAR Blueprints Process TEKS
Total # of Test Items
STAAR Blueprints can be found at http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/staar
3rd – 8th grade test grade level
content only (except 5th & 8th
science)
Tested SEs determined
by Texas teachers
Tested SEs determined by educator committees
SEs grouped by Objectives
SEsgrouped by:
• Readiness• Supporting• Cannot be
assessed
9th – 12th EOCs will test ONLY
course content
5th , 8th Science and 9 – 11 Tests
assessed content from multiple
courses
Blueprints Developed
5th Sci – will include some
3rd/4th
8th Sci – will include some
6th/7thBlueprints
focused on # of items per
objective
Blueprints will focus on
standards that prepare students
for the next grade/course
AssessedCurriculum
TAKS STAAREOC
Thinking Maps Double Bubble Map®
All other 3-8 exams are grade level
specific
IEPs
Prioritization of
standards and
sequencing of
instruction
Pacing and
depth of
instruction
Bundling of Standards
Teacher content
knowledge
Points to Ponder: Assessed Curriculum
(TEKS)
Current
Commended
Performance
Levels
TAKS vs. STAAR/EOC
How does the TAKS compare to the STARR/EOC regarding….
RIGOR OF ASSESSMENT?
Commended Performance
difficult to measure because there are too few rigorous items
Performance Standards were
approved in 2001 by
standard-setting committees
Test difficulty will increase by adding
more rigorous items at greater
depth of cognitive complexity
Performance Measures will be
set using empirical data that links performance
year-to-year
Performance Standards have
remained the same: therefore, students have
“outgrown” the test
Both have Performance
Standards or Measures
Performance Standards will be reviewed every 3 years & adjusted
to maintain a high standard of
rigor
Science & Math = few open-ended
items
Science & Math = more open-
ended items (not multiple choice… derive answer on
your own)
Rigor of Assessment
TAKS STAAREOC
Thinking Maps Double Bubble Map®
Empirical Data = Compare student performance with
nationally normed-referenced tests
Types of Possible Writing
Tasks:• Personal
narrative• Literary• Expository• Persuasive• Analytic
30 – 60 items on each test:1 essay in 4th & 7th
Tests will be longer:
2 essays in 4th & 7th
Closer alignment to
the VERBS in the TEKS SEs
Better able to
measure growth
of high-
achieving
students
Assesses
more than
one student
expectation in
an item
Assesses more focused student expectations
multiple times and in more
complex ways
Bundling of Standards
allows skills to be tested in
more integrated and authentic ways
Points to Ponder: STAAR Rigor
STAAR represents a more unified and comprehensive
assessment system
STAAR 2011-2012
• Grade 3-8 assessments:
– More rigorous, focused tests that link to the EOCs• By law, grades 3-8 reading and math assessments
must be linked from grade to grade to performance expectations for the English III and Algebra II EOCs
English III EOC: Example of Rigor
English III EOC: Example of Rigor
TAKS vs. STAAR/EOC
How does the TAKS compare to the STARR/EOC regarding….
TEST DESIGN and ADMINISTRATION
No time limits on tests
Test Design and Administration
TAKSSTAAR
EOC
Thinking Maps Double Bubble Map®
Online testing offered for exit-level
retests only
All EOCs will be available online and pencil/paper
format
Some tests were and will
continue to be a one-day
testing format
All tests administered in a
one-day time frame
Tied to course, not to grade
level
4th & 7th writing and English I, II, III EOC will be a two-day test with more
embedded field test items Time limits being
considered
3-8: End of school day
EOCs: ½ day
Tied to grade level with content from multiple courses
Calculators MAY be required for 8th grade math
Netbooks may
be used for
EOC online testing
Access to
dictionaries
required for
English I, II, &
III
EOC Retests will be offered at the end of
spring, summer, and
fall Points to Ponder: Test Design and Administration
English I, II, & III EOCs
scheduled for late March…All others for early
May
Test Administration Concerns
Test Administration
Test security will be a concern due to:• Increased number of tests• 2-day exams
TEA is investigating:• Scrambling test items on
different forms during administrations
• Using multiple test forms during administrations
• Assigning testing days versus testing windows for specific administrations
Test Administration Concerns
Test Administration
UIL:
• Testing Calendar will conflict with spring sports and academic meets
• Last week of April will be TAKS; 2nd-3rd week of May will be EOCs
TAKS vs. STAAR/EOC
How does the TAKS compare to the STARR/EOC regarding….
NUMBER OF TESTING DAYS
Total Testing Days
Grades 3–8 with SSI retesting/field testing=
27
Both have Tests, Make-up Days, and Re-
tests
Number of Testing Days
TAKSSTAAR
EOC
Thinking Maps Double Bubble Map®
Total Testing Days for grades
9th – 11th with Exit Level
retesting =
25
Grades 4 & 7 writing now 2-day tests
Total Testing Days for 9th –
12th grade EOCs with retesting =
45
Grades 4 & 7 field testing days almost eliminated
Total Testing Days for
grades 3–8 with SSI
retesting =
27
ELA EOCs are 2-day tests
Grades 4 & 7 writing field
testing
Grades 4 & 7 writing
currently 1-day tests
All TAKS tests are 1-day
All EOCs offer 2 additional
testing opportunities
per year
Testing Days Concerns
Test Days
Transition Years:
• In addition to the 45 days for EOCs, High Schools could have 9+ additional testing days for TAKS
TAKS vs. STAAR/EOC
How does the TAKS compare to the STARR/EOC regarding….
FIELD TESTING?
Stand alone field tests
2003-2007 in many areas
occurred annually
Both will have field
tests
Field Testing
TAKS STAAREOC
Thinking Maps Double Bubble Map®
2008 – stand alone field tests moved to every
other year
Field test items were embedded into operational
assessments in all other grade
level/contentareas
Stand Alone FT:• 4th & 7th writing• 9th reading• 10th & Exit ELA• 5th Spanish,
reading & math
7th Writing will have a one-time stand-
alone field test
All EOCs will have a one-time stand-alone field
test
Once STAAR is up and
running, all field testing
will be embedded
4th Writing will have a stand-
alone Field Test every 3 years
TAKS vs. STAAR/EOC
How does the TAKS compare to the STARR/EOC regarding….
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS?
Set separately for each grade
and subject
Both have Performance
Standards
Performance Standards
TAKS STAAREOC
Thinking Maps Double Bubble Map®
Set based on examination of
test content only
Set as an ALIGNED
SYSTEM across grades within a
content area
Based on data from empirical studies of…• Other state tests• National tests• International tests• Examination of the
STAAR/EOC content
Both consider test
content in setting
standards
Two cut scores:satisfactory
andcommended
EOCs—Several cut scores:
Satisfactory, minimum, and
advanced (advanced course or college-ready)
Example of EOC Potential
Cut Scores
Raw scores ONLY will be available for Grades 3-8 in spring 2012
Performance
Standards for
Grades 3-8 will
be set fall
2012 after test
administration
EOC
performance
standards must
be set in
advance due to
impact on course
grade (15%)
Set for EOCs during the
Spring of 2012 prior to test
administration
College readiness
standard for science &
social studies TBD
Points to Ponder: Performance
Standards
Performance Standards will be backmapped from the capstone courses
Example
Algebra II and
English III are
capstone
courses within
the STAAR
system
Studies will be conducted to determine interchangeability of online and
paper/pencil scores
Horizontal
scale will be
developed for
all other STAAR
assessmentsIf not, a
conversion
table will be
used
Vertical scale will be
developed for grades 3-8
reading and math
Points to Ponder: Test Scoring
Performance Standards Concerns
Performance Standards
Student Success Initiative:• In spring 2012, districts must use raw
scores and other student information to make promotion/retention decisions for grades 5 and 8 reading and math
Districts must consider:• The recommendation of the student’s
teacher(s)• The student’s grade in the subject or
course• The student’s potential for
achievement or proficiency in the subject/course
Be Proactive and set district policies now!
2014—First scheduled release of STAAR
primary test forms
TEA MAY
release small
set of items
during first
three years
2012-2013—
No release of
STAAR
Assessments
August 2011—Selected items that illustrate new approach being used for
STAAR
Points to Ponder: Release of Test Items
Reporting of STAAR Performance
Assessment Reports
• STAAR assessment reports will be provided for parents and students in hard-copy form
• Hard copy District/Campus reports will be streamlined—more available online
Texas Assessment Management System (TAMS)Student Assessment Data Portal
Students, Parents, and Teachers will be able to access results through the data portal
The portal will provide ability to:• View reports• Track student progress• Provide assessment data to institutions of higher
education• Provide assessment information to the general public
Texas Assessment Management System (TAMS)Student Assessment Data Portal
Teacher Portal: Available now
Student Portal: Available spring 2011
Texas Assessment Management System (TAMS)Student Assessment Data Portal
Compare results to aggregated campus,
district, and state performance
Access a report to show historical and current assessment
results
Access a report that will show high
school students’ assessment
progress toward graduation
Parents and Students can:
Texas Assessment Management System (TAMS)Teacher Data Portal
View student assessment results individually or by
group
Compare student results among
groups, campuses, districts, or statewide
Access individual student scale scores and objective scores
Teachers can:
Examine a distribution of
student performance
Reporting Concerns
Reporting
Waivers:
• Coming Soon! Maybe this week
• Districts can use current data systems to provide information
• Must comply with all boxes on the waiver’s checklist
College and Career Readiness and
STAAR
Goal 2019-2020
HB 3 Goal:
Texas will become one of the top ten states for graduating college-ready students by the 2019–2020 school year
Commissioner will:– determine criteria to determine valid comparisons in these
measures among all fifty states – determine criteria used to determine if there are no significant
achievement gaps by 2020
Support logical arguments with evidence
Write
clearly and
effectively
CCRS Test Items Characteristics: Students may be
required to…
Think critically
Solve a broad array of
problems
Analyze and evaluate
informationSupport a
position based
on evidence in
specific
material he or
she has read
Interpret
results
Draw
complex
inferences
Developed by IHE and Public Ed. Vertical Teams
Integrated
into the
TEKS
Points to Ponder: College Readiness
Students will
receive a report
indicating
CCRS
readiness
Algebra II and English III CCRS items embedded in exams and count toward mastery
Students who meet CCRS for Algebra II and/or English III will be exempt from the Texas Success Initiative (TSI)
STAAR Progress Indicators
Indicators will report:• # of students meeting advanced-course readiness
and college/career readiness on STAAR• # of students graduating under the recommended
or advanced high school program• Data from Texas colleges and universities
regarding # of students needing remediation on college entrance-level courses
TAKS vs. STAAR/EOC
How does the TAKS compare to the STARR/EOC regarding….
MEASUREMENT OF STUDENT
PROGRESS?
Growth model developed AFTER TAKS was in place
(Texas Projection Measure)
Both have Progress Measures
Measurement of Student Progress
TAKS STAAREOC
Thinking Maps Double Bubble Map®
Growth measures available for TAKS-M
and TAKS-Alt
Growth model will be
developed AS STAAR /EOCs are developed
Progress measures will be PHASED IN over several years as data becomes
available
Progress measures will provide early
warning indicators for
students who…
Progress measures will be based on the new, more rigorous
standards associated with
STAAR
• May not pass STAAR• May not pass the next
grade or course• May not be ready for
advanced courses in math and English
• May not be college or career ready in math & English
Vertical Scale in reading and
Math for grades 3-8 (English)
and 3-5 (Spanish)
Texas Projection Measure (TPM)
predicts performance on next high-stakes
tests (Grades 5, 8, & 11)
TPM under scrutiny for future use
TAKS vs. STAAR/EOC
How does the TAKS compare to the STARR/EOC regarding….
SPECIAL EDUCATION ASSESSMENT?
4 Options for SPED:
• Regular TAKS• TAKS
Accommodated• TAKS Modified• TAKS Alternate
SPED students
will be assessed
SPED Assessment
TAKSSTAAR
EOC
Thinking Maps Double Bubble Map®
All SPED TAKS Assessments
aligned to TEKS and TAKS
Objectives with modified
BLUEPRINTS
TAKS-Ahas the same Performance Measures as the regular TAKS tests
Modified & alternate
versions of STAAR 3 - 8
WILL be developed
Modified & Alternate STAAR
tests will be aligned to TEKS but will differ in format & design
Separate Performance
Standards were set on TAKS–M and TAKS-Alt Various forms
of the state test will be available
Alternate versions will be developed AT
THE SAME TIME as STAAR
development activities
SPED TAKS tests were developed
AFTER the TAKS program was
well established
9 EOCs (On MHSP) will have
modified & alternate versions
TEA investigating standardized
oral administration using online
format
No modified exams for Algebra II,
chemistry, & physics
Performance standards will be reviewed at least once every 3 years and adjusted to ensure rigor
Students will be
required to
respond to writing
tasks using first-
person essay,
literary,
expository, or
persuasive modes
Field test items embedded in the modified
assessments
Performance
standards will be
set using empirical
data to link
performance
across grades
within a subject
STAAR M will have
approximately 20% items less per reporting
category
Points to Ponder: STAAR Modified
Design
Spring
Assessments
scheduled for
2012 in grades
3-8
Spring Assessments scheduled for 2012 for English I, algebra I, biology, and world geography
Points to Ponder: STAAR Modified Implementation
Course substitutions on the MHSP must now have TEKS aligned to course replaced—Students must take EOC for the course that was substituted
STAAR Modified EOCs will be administered 2 times per year (fall & spring)
Satisfactory
performance on
STAAR M is not
required for
graduation
ARD Committees determine graduation requirements for special education students
Report cumulative scores for general
assessments only—not M or Alt; STAAR M
could be used as 15% of student’s grade
Points to Ponder: STAAR Modified Test
Administrations
Available for Grades 3-8 and 9 EOCs on MHSP
STAAR Alt will be similar to TAKS Alt
Will incorporate
vertical alignment
in assessment
tasks
High School
course-based
assessments
instead of grade
level
TEA does not recommend usage of STAAR Alt score as
15% of student’s course grade or a
cumulative score for graduation
Points to Ponder: STAAR Alt
TAKS vs. STAAR/EOCHow does the TAKS compare to the
STARR/EOC regarding….
ELL ASSESSMENT?
Majority of ELLs take TAKS in
English or TAKS in Spanish
ELL students will be assessed
ELL Assessment
TAKS STAAREOC
Thinking Maps Double Bubble Map®
Grades 3 – 10: Recent
immigrant ELLS may be granted a LEP exemption
for up to 3 years
ALL ELLS must pass exit level TAKS
to graduate… no exemptions, but testing may be
postponed the first 12 months he is in US
schools
Majority of ELLs will take
STAAR in English or Spanish State exemptions
and linguistically accommodated
STAAR assessment methods for ELLs are under review
Exempt LEP students still must be
assessed in the FEDERALLY mandated
subject areas (math & reading, grades 3-8 and 10)
with linguistic accommodations
Most ELLs will take the regular state assessment
Goal = include MORE ELL students in
regular STAAR/ EOC
assessment
ELL Students taking STAAR will
be allowed accommodations
(i.e. bilingual dictionary)
Consider time limits on linguistic accommodations (3-4 years), unless extenuating circumstances exist
TEA will develop some Spanish-version tests (grades 3-5)
TEA is considering
narrowing the
provisions for
exemptions to 1st
year and
unschooled
immigrants
Consider
expanding
linguistic
accommodations
STAAR-L will be an online program that
provides clarification and oral
words/phrases (may be phased in over 2 years)
Points to Ponder: STAAR-L
Assessments linked to ELPS--Districts need to require teachers to be trained in
the ELPS
STAAR Assessment Graduation
Requirements
GRADUATION REQUIREMENTS
TEA Update on EOC Program 2009 Assessment Conference 80
Plan for phase-out HS TAKS and phase-in EOC assessments
*Out-of-school testers and 12th grade re-testers
2010–2011 2011–2012 2012–2013 2013–2014 2014–2015
GR 9 TAKS EOC EOC EOC EOC
GR 10 TAKS TAKS EOC EOC EOC
GR 11 TAKS TAKS TAKS EOC EOC
GR 12 TAKS* TAKS* TAKS* TAKS* EOC or TAKS*
GRADUATION REQUIREMENTS
• To graduate, a student must achieve a cumulative score that is at least equal to the product of the number of EOC assessments taken in that content area and a scale score that indicates satisfactory performance
Example: 3 tests x 70 (passing points) = 210 required cumulative
• A student must achieve a minimum score, as determined by the commissioner, for the score to count toward the student’s cumulative score, or the assessment must be retaken
81
GRADUATION REQUIREMENTS
• A student is not required to retake a course as a condition of retaking an EOC assessment
• A school district shall provide accelerated instruction to each student who fails to perform satisfactorily on an EOC assessment
82
STAAR Considerations…Graduation Plans
Minimum: Cumulative score
requirement is based on # of
courses taken for which an EOC exists
Recommended:Must meet satisfactory
performance standard on
Algebra II and English III EOCs and
cumulative score
Distinguished Achievement Plan
(DAP): Must meet college
readiness standards for Algebra II and
English III and cumulative score
STAAR Considerations…Graduation Requirements
Commissioner will determine method for AP, IB, SAT, etc.
scores to meet cumulative score
requirement
Commissioner may determine method
for PSAT or preliminary ACT (PLAN) to meet
cumulative score requirement
Commissioner will study feasibility of students satisfying EOC requirements
by completing a dual credit course
through an IHE
How Is Texas Doing? EOC 2010
How Is Texas Doing? EOC 2010
How Is Texas Doing? EOC 2010
How Is Texas Doing? EOC 2010
How Is Texas Doing? EOC 2010
How Texas Doing? EOC 2010
How Texas Doing? EOC 2010
EOC Concerns
EOC
MHSP:• If students take courses that are
not part of MHSP requirements (i.e. Algebra II), they must take the assessment and count results toward cumulative score
Districts must consider:• This could discourage students
from taking higher-level courses not required by the MHSP
EOC Concerns
EOC
• ELA EOCs will be split-scored to allow students to re-test on the writing or reading portions only
• Ability to retest on any EOC for any reason
• Costs concerning increased # of tests and potential online testing
EOC Concerns
EOC
Issues to be addressed through local district policy:• EOC must count as 15% of a
student’s final course grade
• How will tight reporting timeline impact GPA calculation for graduation?
• How will substitute assessments impact calculation of a final course grade?
• How will districts that award partial course credit by semester count the 15% EOC portion?
EOC Concerns
EOC
• How many test administrations are needed? Because students can retake EOCs for any reason, a student COULD take more than four assessments in one assessment window
• How should testing accommodations be handled (accommodations for all; oral administration online)?
• Time Limits: Should assessments be timed to mirror national assessments (SAT, ACT, AP, etc.)?
• Should two assessments be administered in the same day?
STAAR 3-8 Concerns
STAAR 3-8
• Do 8th graders taking a High School course still have to take the 8th grade STAAR in that subject area?
• What are the requirements for 5th and 8th grade SSI?
STAAR Eligibility Considerations
Middle School students taking high school
courses currently will not be required to take an EOC for that course—cumulative score will
just be smaller
Beginning in 2011-2012, Middle Schoolers
taking high school courses will take the
EOC for the course and it WILL count
Students enrolling in Texas Public Schools for the first time will
receive credit for courses taken without the student having to
take an EOC
First time Texas Public School students and
this year’s Middle School students CAN
choose to take tests for courses previously
taken
Repeating 9th graders and 10th-11th graders in the 2011-2012 school
year will continue under TAKS
Preview of 2011 State Accountability and
Beyond
TAKS Standards 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Exemplary ≥ 90% ≥ 90% ≥ 90%
No Rating
s
Basic Rating
sRatings will be
“yes/no”
(acceptable/unaccepta
ble; satisfactory/unsatisfac
tory)
Full Rating
s“Yes/No” with
some form of distinct
ion (exemplary/recognized
) for College Readin
ess
Recognized ≥ 75% ≥ 80% ≥ 80%
Academically Acceptable
Reading/ELA ≥ 70% ≥ 70% ≥ 70%
Writing, Social Studies
≥ 70% ≥ 70% ≥ 70%
Mathematics ≥ 55% ≥ 60% ≥ 65%
Science ≥ 50% ≥ 55% ≥ 60%
TAKS (Accommodated) (Same standards
as TAKS)
Sci. (5, 8, 10, 11); Soc. St. (8, 10, 11); ELA (11); Math (11)
All grades and
subjects
All grades and
subjects
TAKS–M/TAKS-ALT
(Same standards as TAKS)
N/A N/AAll grades
and subjects
Standard Accountability 2011 and Beyond
TAKS Standards 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014TAKS—
Commended Performance—Reading/ELA and Math (All
Students regardless of size; Eco. Disadv. if min. size req. met) No RI
or Exceptions
N/A N/A
Exemplary: ≥25%
Recognized: ≥15%
Ac. Accept.: N/A
TBD
TBD
TBD
ELL Progress Indicator—
Reading/ELA (All Students only if
min. size req. met) RI and Exceptions
may be utilized
N/A N/A
Exemplary: ≥60%
Recognized: ≥60%
Ac. Accept.: N/A
TBD
TBD
TBD
Completion Rate I (Gr. 9-12)
Exemplary: ≥ 95.0%
Recognized: ≥85.0%
Ac. Accept.: ≥75.0%
Exemplary: ≥ 95.0%
Recognized: ≥85.0%
Ac. Accept.: ≥75.0%
Exemplary: ≥ 95.0%
Recognized: ≥85.0%
Ac. Accept.: ≥75.0%
TBD TBD TBD
Annual Dropout Rate (Gr. 7-8)
≤ 2.0% ≤ 1.8% ≤ 1.6% TBD TBD TBD
Standard Accountability 2011 and Beyond
Texas Projection Measure
The Texas Projection Measure is under scrutiny. Commissioner Scott will likely do one of the following for state accountability:
– Eliminate the TPM
– Modify the TPM to use a fraction of the eligible students
– Make the TPM optional for districts
TPM may remain in use for federal accountability101
Accountability:2013 and Beyond
The system will be rebuilt, not retooled
102
State Accountability Ratings: 2013 and Beyond
• Overview of Statutory Requirements – On or before August 8th of each year ratings of
Acceptable or Unacceptable will be made available
– If a district was Unacceptable the previous year, and they are unacceptable for the current year, they will receive notice by June 15
Indicators and Features
104
Student
performance on
the STAAR
grades 3–8 and
End-of-Course
(EOC)
assessments
Dropout Rates (including district completion rates) for grades 9-12
Accountability Indicators Required by
Statute
High School Graduation Rates
Measured against both student passing standards and college-readiness standards
Student progress
is also factored in
to allow more
students to be
included as
meeting these
standards
Performance on 85% of the
measures meets the standard
OPTIONAL
Required
improvement
over the prior
year
REQUIRED
Additional Accountability
Features
Average performance of the last three years REQUIRED
Will it apply to
the high
school
graduation
indicator?
Determine how to apply required improvement to the indicators
If district has
acceptable
performance on
85% of
indicators, how
can its ratings be
impacted?
Will it apply to
the high
school
graduation
indicator?
Will it apply to
the high
school
graduation
indicator?
How will it be phased in? 3 years of
comparable results
not available for all
indicators in 1st year
ratings are assigned
Order of Use The sequential priority assigned to the three
additional features is not specified in statute and
will be determined during the accountability
development process
Decisions To Be Made by the Commissioner
Satisfactory
Standard and
Annual
Improvement
Dropout, Completion, and/or Graduation Rate
More Decisions To Be Made by the
Commissioner College-
Ready
Standard and
Annual
Improvement
Determinestandard beginning with 2013
performance ratings
Determine standard beginning with
2014 performance
ratings
Consider
formerly used
indicators as
well as new data
to determine
implementation Who is a dropout? Students
with GEDs, etc.?
Comparison of Indicators
Please see Tables 12-1 and 12-2 regarding statutory requirements for indicators and
features
Performance Results: Indicators and Student
Groups110
Possible
Models
Combining Performance Results
Poss
ible
Sta
te
Acco
unta
bilit
y M
odel
sPossible Student Groups
Possible
Indicator
Combinations
Poss
ible
Sta
te
Acco
unta
bilit
y M
odel
sPossible Student Groups
Possible
Indicator
Combinations
Poss
ible
Sta
te
Acco
unta
bilit
y M
odel
sPossible Student Groups
Possible
Indicator
Combinations
Poss
ible
Sta
te
Acco
unta
bilit
y M
odel
sPossible
Indicator
Combinations
Possible Student Groups
Distinction Designations• District and campus recognized andexemplary in postsecondary readiness• Campus ranked in top 25% annual improvement• Campus ranked in top 25% performance gap
reduction• Campus distinction on criteria developed by
committees for:• Academic achievement in ELA, mathematics,
science, social studies• Fine arts• Physical education• 21st Century Workforce Development program• Second language acquisition program
Student enrollment in fine arts courses beyond the graduation requirements
Number of
opportunities for
extra-curricular
performances or
competitions
Fine Arts Considerations
Portfolio system for compiling and sharing student performances and accomplishments
Number of certified
specialists and
amount of time
instructing
elementary students
in art, music, and/or
theatre
Successful implementation of Coordinated School Health programs (CSHP) in K-8
Specific time
devoted to physical
activity
Physical EducationConsiderations
Student enrollment in physical education courses beyond the graduation requirements
Scheduled recess or
opportunities for
structured play
Fitnessgram results
Successful implementation of middle school career and technical education (CTE) courses to support further study of CTE in high school
Student enrollment
in programs of
study in additional
CTE clusters
beyond minimum
requirements
21st Century Workforce
Development ProgramSuccessful integration of technology applications into all other areas of the curriculum
Completion of
certifications or
licensure
Student enrollment in advanced language classes beyond the required two- or three-year graduation requirement
Performance on
advanced
placement
examinations for
languages
Second Language Acquisition Program
Successful implementation of dual language programs in elementary schools
The number of
different languages
offered
Timeline for Transition December 1, 2010 Transition Plan• 2011 last ratings under current system• 2012 ratings suspended while new accountability system
developed• 2013 phase-in of new accountability system begins
• college-ready performance report-only• No distinction designations• 2011 and 2013 ratings and accreditation statuses
considered consecutive years• 2014 phase-in continues
• based on student proficiency and college-ready standards
• distinction designations issued with performance ratings
Use of Other Assessments to Meet Cumulative Score
Requirements
Student Groups:
Minimum Size
Criteria
Alignment
between State
and Federal
Accountability
Requirements
Points to Ponder: Commissioner’s
Decisions
Determine
whether
substitute
assessment results
will be factored
into state
accountability
Minimum group size is pending
Will explore options to maximize the alignment between state & federal accountability requirements
Report all 7 categories and use any or all of the seven for which minimum size criteria are
met
Report all seven
categories & use 3
largest groups that
meet minimum
size criteria for any
campus or district
Evaluate current
student groups
(African American,
Hispanic/Latino, &
White) if minimum
size criteria are
met
Possible ScenariosStudent Groups: Race/Ethnicity
Accountability system will be based on new federal race/ethnicity
definitions
Scenario 1: Scenario
2:
Scenario
3:Districts & campuses would be evaluated on different race /ethnicity student groups
Collapse all other groups into an “Other” category & evaluate as a fourth group if minimum size criteria are met
Rating Decisions To Be Made • Two Ratings vs. Four Ratings
– Commissioner shall determine whether to assign four ratings or only two primary ratings with the possibility of one of two additional rating distinctions
• Rating Labels – “Acceptable/Unacceptable” or
“Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory” Performance– Commissioner shall determine labels for these two rating
categories
• See Tables 12-3 and 12-4
Early Indicator Reports
• During development of new accountability system, advisory groups will determine whether early indicator reports can be made available to districts & campuses based on 2011–2012 STAAR results
• These reports would allow districts to identify areas of performance that may need strengthening prior to release of ratings under the new system
Assessments Used for State Accountability
Alternative Assessments:• Discrepancy: Current requirements do not
address including alternative assessments (STAAR M & STAAR Alt) for acceptable/unacceptable; however, statute requires their use for recognized/exemplary distinctions
• The commissioner shall determine how the modified and alternate assessments for STAAR will be used to determine all ratings
Assessments Used for State Accountability
Assessments for English Language Learners:• In 2011, the ELL Progress Measure was
incorporated in the state accountability system to evaluate progress towards reading proficiency in English for current and monitored LEP students
• The commissioner shall determine how the STAAR and TELPAS assessment results for ELLs will be used to determine ratings in the new accountability system
Other Accountability Requirements
• Campuses With Additional Campus Improvement Plan (CIP) Requirements – Since there are no ratings assigned in the 2011–2012
school year and the ratings criteria will not be finalized until spring 2013, it will not be possible to identify these campuses for the 2012–2013 school year
– After the initial performance ratings of the new accountability system are finalized in fall 2013, the list of campuses with additional CIP requirements will be released for the 2013–2014 school year
Other Accountability Requirements
Public Education Grant (PEG) Campuses WILL BE IDENTIFIED
– TEA identifies campuses at which 50 percent or more of the students did not pass the state assessments in any two of the preceding three years or did not meet standards for acceptable performance in any of the three preceding years
– Statute requires that notification of eligibility be provided no later than February 1 to each parent of a student in the district assigned to attend a school identified on the PEG list for the upcoming school year
Decisions To Be Made--PEG
• It is anticipated that a large number of campuses will be identified for PEG in the initial years of the STAAR program when the 50 percent passing criteria are applied to the STAAR results
• Other issues include development of a methodology that combines TAKS and STAAR results during the transition years
Performance Reports
• Performance Reports will be similar to current AEIS– Will include College Readiness and Certified
Workforce Training– Reports to Parents, Teachers, and School Report
Cards will be tailored to STAAR• During transition year, an abbreviated school report
card may be issued
• Consolidation of the campus report card and the NCLB report card will be considered
Texas Education…What Lies Ahead
Federal Accountability
Phase ITEA will submit for peer
review the development activities ,
test specifications, accommodations, and
participation requirements for STAAR
Phase IISubmit documentation
for quality, alignment to TEKS, inclusion of all
students in the testing program, and reporting
procedures
Phase IIISpecial Submission for peer review required
when significant changes in standards occur (Performance
Standards review every 3 years)
Federal Accountability: USDE Approval
2012 AYP
• Transition year for AYP just as with state accountability• Possible AYP Transition Options:
– Carry forward of 2011 AYP status for campuses and districts (Maintain SIP intervention stages for 2012-13)
– Conduct 2012 AYP evaluations and update SIP requirements for high school campuses with 2011-2012 Grade 10 TAKS results (Carry forward for others)
– Conduct 2012 AYP evaluations and update SIP requirements for all campuses and districts based on 2010-11 grades 3-8 and 2011-2012 grade 10 TAKS results
– Conduct 2012 AYP evaluations and update SIP requirements for all campuses and districts using 2011-12 test results available in summer 2012 (Grade 10 TAKS and grades 3-8 STAAR)
– Conduct 2012 AYP evaluations for all campuses and districts in February 2013, using 2011-12 TAKS results for grade 10 and 2011-12 STAAR results at the TAKS proficiency standard for grades 3-8
AYP: 2013 and Beyond
?Goal: To have response from USDE and publish 2013 AYP
Guide by summer 2013
Texas Education…What Lies Ahead
PBMAS
2012 PBMAS
• Current PBMAS is comprised of 49 program-specific indicators
• 15 of those are based on TAKS and TAKS A• 4 are based on TAKS, TAKS A, TAKS M, and TAKS Alt
participation
• Most indicators will not be affected by the transition to the HB 3 assessment program
• A PBM focus group will review options for transition year and beyond
Texas Education…What Lies Ahead
Interventions and Sanctions
Interventions and Sanctions
Accreditation Status:• Potential to lower district accreditation
status based on performance of only one or more campuses
• FIRST accreditation status assignment impacted by financial solvency for 2011-12 and beyond
Interventions and SanctionsNew Reasons for Special Investigations:
• Significant pattern of decreased academic performance due to promotion in preceding two school years of students who did not meet minimum assessment requirements
• Excessive numbers of students graduating under MHSP
• Excessive numbers of students not electing to complete higher-level courses (Algebra II, etc.)
• Resource allocation indicates a potential for improvement needed
2011-2013 Interventions and Sanctions
• Commissioner shall continue to implement interventions and sanctions for districts and campuses identified as having unacceptable performance in the 2010-11 school year – May increase or decrease the level of interventions and
sanctions based on an evaluation of the district’s or campus’s performance
• 2010-11 and 2012-13 school years shall be considered consecutive concerning interventions and sanctions
Texas Education…What Lies Ahead
Things To Do
Address district policies regarding:1. 15% grade requirement2. SSI grade placement decisions for 2012
Educate school
board members on
changes in
assessment and
accountability
Things To Do
Educate parents and community members on changes in assessment and accountability
Budget
considerations:
1. Dictionaries
2. Calculators
3. Substitute pay
4. Computers
Resources
Transition Plan: http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/hb3plan/
STAAR Information:http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/staar/?LangType=1033
Texas Education…What Lies Ahead
Questions?
top related