This information is preliminary. January 19, 2005 1 2005 Alternative Education Accountability (AEA) Developed by the Texas Education Agency Performance

This information is preliminary. January 19, 2005

1

2005Alternative EducationAccountability (AEA)

Developed by the

Texas Education Agency

Performance Reporting Division


2

This Information is in Draft Form

The information in this slide presentation is preliminary and is provided to solicit feedback on AEA procedures as they are being developed.


3

Developing 2005 Alternative Education Accountability ProceduresSeptember 2004 – March 2005

TEA Staff Research Accountability Development

September 2004 – March 2005

TA

SA

Ca

bin

et

of

Sup

erin

tend

ents

Mo

nth

ly U

pd

ate

sJa

nua

ry –

Marc

h 2

00

5E

SC

Exe

cutive

Dire

ctors M

onth

ly Upda

tes

Jan

ua

ry–

March

200

5

Commissioner of Education’s FinalAccountability Decisions

Late March 2005

Up

date

d 1

1/1

6/0

4

Stakeholder FeedbackJanuary - February 2005

• Electronic stakeholder group*• Commissioner’s Steering Committee of Superintendents• Commissioner’s Charter Cabinet: January 19, 2005• Education Service Center Accountability Contacts (via TETN):

January 26, 2005• Midwinter Conference: January 31-February 2, 2005• Texas Association for Alternative Education (TAAE) Conference:

February 10-12, 2005

Focus Group of EducatorsFebruary 28-March 1, 2005

Commissioner’s Accountability Advisory Committee

March 21, 2005

* An email group created to communicate with individuals who have expressed an interest in providing feedback as the AEA procedures are developed, including Focus Group of Educators, Commissioner’s TASA Cabinet of Superintendents, and ESC Executive Directors.


4

2005 AEA Development Process

• Stakeholder feedback solicited earlier in the process

• Electronic stakeholder group for ongoing communication

• 2005 AEA procedures are scheduled to be finalized in late March

• 2005 state accountability ratings, including AECs, will be issued by August 1, 2005.


5

AEA Website

• An AEA website has been created at http://www.tea.state.tx.us/aea.

• Monitor this site for the latest AEA information.

http://www.tea.state.tx.us/aea

http://www.tea.state.tx.us/aea


6

Comments

The Performance Reporting Division welcomes your comments and suggestions on the AEA information provided in this slide presentation. Please email us at [email protected].

mailto:[email protected]


7

Components of 2005 AEA• Alternative education campus (AEC)

identification criteria• AEC registration requirements• Attribution of AEC data (the 85-day rule)• Completion and Dropout Rates• Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills

(TAKS) and the Texas Growth Index (TGI)• State-Developed Alternative Assessment II

(SDAA II)


8

Guidelines for AEA

• Statutory indicators TAKS SDAA II Completion/dropouts

• Standard data sources Public Education Information Management

System (PEIMS) State test contractor

• Appropriate indicators with rigorous standards


9

AEC Identification


10

AEC Groupings Used for2005 AEA Development

• 2004 Accountability Universe

• Registered AECs

• Residential Facilities

• At-Risk Campuses

Data for the above groupings can be disaggregated based on other campus characteristics such as charter campus versus non-charter campus.


11

2004 Accountability Universe

• Universe of campuses that are included in the state accountability rating system

• Regular campuses and AECs

• 7,813 campuses


12

Registered AECs

• Campuses that registered for AEA for 2005 excluding Residential Facilities

• 357 campuses


13

Residential Facilities• Campuses that are:

Texas Youth Commission (TYC) Texas Juvenile Probation Commission (TJPC) Private Residential Treatment Centers

(PRTC)• Regardless of whether they are registered for

AEA or identified as alternative campuses in AskTED

• 77 campuses


14

TYC Residential Facilities

Campuses serving students in residential programs and facilities operated by or under contract with TYC (contracted facilities and halfway houses with separate county-district-campus numbers)


15

TJPC Residential Facilities

Campuses serving students in pre-adjudication detention centers and post-adjudication correctional facilities registered with TJPC (facilities with separate county-district-campus numbers)


16

PRTC Residential Facilities

Campuses serving students in privately operated residential treatment centers (facilities with separate county-district-campus numbers that were identified as PRTC when they registered as AECs)


17

At-Risk Campuses

• Campuses with at least 75% of students identified as at risk

• Not AECs or Residential Facilities

• 800 campuses


18

AEC Registration Requirements and Criteria


19

AEC Registration• AECs have been registering for

evaluation under AEA procedures since 1995-96.

• Since 1999-00, AEC registration governs the campus of accountability processing in PEIMS and the attribution of AEC student data.


20

AEC Registration CriteriaTo be registered for AEA, the AEC must:

1) have its own county-district-campus number that is used for submitting PEIMS data and coding test answer documents;

2) be identified in AskTED as an alternative campus;

3) be dedicated to serving “students at risk of dropping out of school” as defined in Texas Education Code (TEC) §29.081(d);


21

AEC Registration Criteria (cont.)

4) operate on its own campus budget;

5) offer nontraditional methods of instructional delivery designed to meet the needs of the students served on the campus;

6) have an appropriately certified, full-time administrator whose primary duty is the administration of the AEC;


22


7) have appropriately certified teachers assigned in all areas including special education, bilingual education, and/or English as a second language (ESL) to serve students eligible for such services;

8) provide each student the opportunity to attend a 7-hour school day; and


23

AEC Registration Criteria (cont.)9) Special education students must be

placed at the AEC by their admission, review, and dismissal (ARD) committee; they must receive all services outlined in their current individualized education programs (IEPs); limited English proficient (LEP) students must receive all services outlined by the language proficiency assessment committee (LPAC); and both types of students must be served by appropriately certified teachers.


24


All requirements in criteria 7-9 above may not apply to charter campuses (depending upon the terms of the charter) or to community-based dropout recovery campuses established in accordance with TEC §29.081(e), but are required for all other campuses to be registered for AEA.


25

AEC Registration Criteria Options

• Continue to use existing eligibility criteria

• Implement a 75% or higher at-risk criterion for AECs that is verified through current year PEIMS fall enrollment data

• Limit AEA registration to those AECs that serve students in Grade 7 and higher

• Limit AEA registration to those AECs that have data for the AEA indicators


26

AEA Charters• Charter campuses are rated under campus

accountability procedures.• Charters are rated under district accountability

procedures.• Charters that operate only registered AECs will

be evaluated under AEA procedures.• Charters that operate both regular campuses

and registered AECs may need to meet additional criteria for AEA registration of the charter.


27

Attribution of AEC Data(The 85-day Rule)


28

Attribution of AEC Data• Beginning in the 1999-00 school year,

attendance, dropout/completion, and performance data is attributed to registered AECs only when a student attends the registered AEC for 85 days or more.

• As required in statute, JJAEP and DAEP student data will continue to be attributed back to a student’s regular campus.


29

Attribution of AEC Data

For data collected through PEIMS:

• attribution of most attendance and leaver data are based on student attendance data, and

• campus of accountability (COA) is collected when a student’s only campus of enrollment is a registered AEC the student attended for less than 85 days, and/or a DAEP, and/or a JJAEP.


30

Attribution of AEC Data (cont.)Test answer documents are:

• physically submitted with the answer documents for the student’s regular campus, and

• coded to show the student was tested at an AEC but does not identify the AEC.


31

85-Day Rule Options

• Continue the 85-day rule – attribute student data back to a student’s regular campus when the student attends the registered AEC for less than 85 days.

• Discontinue the 85-day rule – do not attribute student data. The data on which AECs will be evaluated is determined by other policy (for example, accountability subset).


32

Completion andDropout Rates


33

Completion Rate

• Completion rate has been part of the Academic Excellence Indicator System (AEIS) since 1995.

• Completion rate is a base indicator for ratings in the standard evaluation process beginning in 2004.


34

Dropout Rate

• Annual dropout rate (Gr 7-12) was a base indicator in the standard evaluation process from 1994-2002 and a component of AEA from 1996-2002.

• Annual dropout rate (Gr 7-8) is a base indicator for ratings in the standard evaluation process beginning in 2004.


35

Completion/Dropout Rate Issues

• AECs by definition provide programs for students at risk of dropping out of school.

• The completion and/or dropout rate(s) may be the most important indicator in the AEA procedures.

• GED preparation is an alternative program offered on many AECs.

• Many AECs do not have a longitudinal completion/student status rate due to grade span or years of operation.


36

Completion Rate

A grade 9-12 completion rate that includes graduates, continuing students, and GED recipients would acknowledge that AECs offer programs designed to serve students who take longer than 4 years to graduate or who earn a GED certificate.


37

Dropout Rate

• The dropout component of the longitudinal completion/student status rate or annual dropout rate focuses on the dropout prevention mission of AECs

• Over 90% of AECs have a grade 7-12 annual dropout rate


38

Determining Completion andDropout Rate Standards

• Identify equivalent standard to that for similar indicators in the standard evaluation process or

• Use model results to compare performance of registered AECs and non-registered AECs and also to compare performance on different measures for campuses that have sufficient data to evaluate all measures


39

Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills

(TAKS)


40

TAKS Decisions Applicable to AEA• Student Passing Standard - % Met Standard adopted by

SBOE• Reading/English Language Arts (ELA) – Grade 3-9

Reading and Grade 10-11 ELA are combined• Grade 3 Reading/Grade 5 Reading and Mathematics –

results from 1st and 2nd administrations are combined• TAKS Spanish – performance on TAKS Spanish is

combined with performance on the English-language TAKS

• Testing Window – test results for students given a make-up test within the testing window are included

• Special Education – TAKS results of special education students are included


41

TAKS Decisions Applicable to AEA• Sum Across Grades – TAKS results are summed

across grades• Rounding of Performance – calculations are

expressed as a percent, rounded to whole numbers

• Rounding of Student Group Percent – calculations are expressed as a percent, rounded to whole numbers

• Student Groups – African American, Hispanic, White, and Economically Disadvantaged

• Minimum size criteria for student groups – 30/10%/50


42

Small Numbers ofTest Takers on AECs


43

Addressing Small Numbers ofTest Takers at AECs

• AECs are smaller on average and have much higher mobility rates than regular campuses.

• Campus size and mobility have implications for evaluation of TAKS results.

• Performance rates based on small numbers of tests may not be reliable indicators of campus performance.


44

Addressing Small Numbers ofTest Takers at AECs (cont.)

To address small numbers of test takers, these options will be discussed:

• Special analysis

• Accountability subset

• TAKS subjects

• Minimum size criteria


45

Special Analysis

• Used for very small campuses in the standard evaluation process

• Combine current and prior year data

• Professional judgment

• Staff intensive process

• Less transparent than regular analysis


46

Accountability Subset Options

Campus accountability

• currently used in the standard evaluation process

• holds campus accountable for performance of students they have had all year


47

Accountability Subset Options (cont.)

District accountability

• holds campus accountable for performance of students tested on the campus who are enrolled on any campus within the same district on the fall PEIMS enrollment snapshot

• AEC is district-wide program

• More students in AEC evaluation


48

TAKS Subject Options• Evaluate each TAKS subject separately as

currently done in the standard evaluation process accountability for performance in each subject

• Sum TAKS results across subjects as well as grades increases the number of tests allows more AECs to be evaluated on current

year results


49

Minimum Size Criteria Option

Rate AECs solely on Completion/Dropout Rate (no special analysis or pairing) when the AEC has TAKS results for a small number of total students or no TAKS results


50

Texas Growth Index(TGI)


51

TGI

• Measures individual student growth from one year to the next on the TAKS

• TGI has been developed for:Reading/ELA: grades 4 – 11Mathematics: grades 4 – 11Social Studies: grade 11Science: grade 11

• TGI compares how students taking a TAKS subject test in one year perform on the same TAKS subject test in the next higher grade the following year


52

TGI (cont.)• An individual student TGI score indicates

the amount of growth for each student in relation to growth made by all students who performed at the same level in the prior year.

• TGI is calculated only for students who have test results in the same subject for two consecutive years in consecutive grades.


53

TGI (cont.)

• There is particular interest in using student growth for evaluation of AECs because many students come to AECs performing 2 or more grade levels below their enrolled grade level.

• TGI provides a measurement of growth for students who do not pass TAKS.


54

TAKS Indicator Optionsfor AEA


55

TAKS Indicator Options

Three TAKS indicators have been developed for AEA, all incorporating TGI scores:

• Growth Measure

• Progress Measure

• Exit-Level Measure


56

TAKS Growth Measure

• Campus average TGI score (the sum of individual student TGI scores divided by the number of TGI scores)

• Focuses on student growth rather than absolute performance


57

TAKS Growth Measure (cont.)

• AEC evaluation is limited to performance of students with a TGI score (those tested in the same subject in consecutive years and grades)

• Students who pass TAKS could lower the AEC performance rate if they do not show sufficient growth


58

TAKS Progress Measure• Percentage of students who either pass

the TAKS or have a TGI score that meets a student growth standard

• Combines student growth and absolute performance

• All current year TAKS results are included and the AEC is credited for all students who pass

• Students who fail TAKS and do not have a TGI score lower the AEC performance rate


59

TAKS Exit-Level Measure• Based on performance on the exit-level TAKS

only• The AEC is credited for students who either pass

the exit-level TAKS in Grade 11 at the spring administration or have a TGI score that meets a student growth standard

• The AEC is also credited for Grade 12 students who pass the exit-level TAKS at the spring administration and for any student who passes the exit-level TAKS in the previous fall or summer


60

TAKS Exit-Level Measure (cont.)

• All subjects are tested at the exit-level

• TGI is calculated for all exit-level subjects

• Students who fail an exit-level TAKS test have an opportunity to re-test

• Student growth and absolute performance are combined

• AEC evaluations are limited to performance of exit-level testers


61

SDAA II Options

• Use same indicator as in standard evaluation process – single measure of SDAA II performance in all subjects and grades

• Combine SDAA II results with TAKS results in a TAKS/SDAA II indicator


62

Comments

Please email your comments and suggestions on the AEA information provided in this slide presentation to the Performance Reporting Division at [email protected].

mailto:[email protected]

Documents

This information is preliminary. January 19, 2005 1 2005 Alternative Education Accountability (AEA) Developed by the Texas Education Agency Performance