House Bill 3: An Overview College Readiness=The level of preparation a student must attain in ELA and math to be successful, without remediation,

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


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


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


Performance on grade 8

assessments correlate to performance on Algebra I and English I

Performance on

English I correlates to

performance on

English II


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


Commissioners of

education and higher

education establish

college readiness

performance standards

for Algebra II and

English III

From HB 3…

The STAAR is Born!


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


“More Focus”

• Emphasize the integration and application of mathematical skills

• Focus on skills that underlie more significant mathematical concepts

Content Specific Characteristics:Math



“More Focus”

• Emphasize the integration and application of major scientific concepts

• Focus on content that supports fundamental scientific principles

Content Specific Characteristics:Science



“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


What is meant by More Clarity?

TEA will communicate these differing skills and will communicate the connection between the TEKS and the STAAR


“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


“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

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


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


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


TEST DESIGN and ADMINISTRATION

No time limits on tests

Test Design and Administration

TAKSSTAAR

EOC


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


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


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


FIELD TESTING?

Stand alone field tests

2003-2007 in many areas

occurred annually

Both will have field

tests

Field Testing

TAKS STAAREOC


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


PERFORMANCE STANDARDS?

Set separately for each grade

and subject

Both have Performance

Standards

Performance Standards

TAKS STAAREOC


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


Teacher Portal: Available now

Student Portal: Available spring 2011


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


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


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


SPECIAL EDUCATION ASSESSMENT?

4 Options for SPED:

• Regular TAKS• TAKS

Accommodated• TAKS Modified• TAKS Alternate

SPED students

will be assessed

SPED Assessment

TAKSSTAAR

EOC


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


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*


• 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


• 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 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%







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


Possible

Indicator

Combinations

Poss

ible

Sta

te

Acco

unta

bilit

y M

odel


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


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


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


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


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

http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/hb3plan/

http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/staar/?LangType=1033

http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/staar/?LangType=1033


Questions?

Documents

House Bill 3: An Overview College Readiness=The level of preparation a student must attain in ELA and math to be successful, without remediation,