a ccountability 2013 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

slide1 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
a ccountability 2013 PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
a ccountability 2013

play fullscreen
1 / 92
a ccountability 2013
91 Views
Download Presentation
wayne
Download Presentation

a ccountability 2013

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. accountability 2013 Interpreting Your 2013 Accountability Report It’s Like Learning To Read All Over Again TEPSA Webinar | September 5, 2013

  2. Welcome!

  3. goals2013 accountability • Construction TEPSA Webinars (May 10 and 17) • Of indexes • What measures/data are included? Today • Clarity • Of calculation . . . and application Ongoing • Connection • To instructional processes and systems

  4. the vibe

  5. YourQuestions

  6. accountability 2013 the BIG picture

  7. p. 21 p. 22

  8. Accountability| Overall Design p. 22 • Four Performance Indexes • Designed to meet 4 statutory goals • Improving student achievement at all levels in core subjects • Ensuring progress of all students toward Advanced Academic Performance (STAAR Level III) • Closing Performance Gaps among groups in Advanced Academic Performance (STAAR Level III) • Closing gaps among groups in % of students graduating under Recommended or Advanced high school programs Index 1 Index 2 Index 3 Index 4

  9. Progress • 10 student groups • All Students • 7 Race/Ethnicity • SpEd • ELL • Minimum size • 10 for All Students • 25 for other groups • By Subject Area • Rdg & Math in 2013* • Based on PROGRESS • 1 point for % Met • 2 points for % Exceeded p. 21 2013 Accountability Index 2 Student Progress Index 1 Student Achievement Achievement • All Students Only • Single percentage combined over ALL Subject Areas • ≥ Level II (Phase 1) STAAR • ≥ Met Std Grade 11 TAKS Target = Target = 50 Target = ≈ 5th %ile Postsecondary • 4-year or 5-year Graduation Rate (or Annual Dropout Rate) • 10 student groups • % RHSP/DAP • 8 student groups (not SpEd or ELL) • STAAR Postsecondary Readiness – Level II Final (2014) Closing Gaps • 3 student groups • Eco Dis and • 2 lowest Race/Ethnicity groups from prior year • By Subject Area (all subjects) • 1 point for % Level II (Phase 1) • Level III to be added (2014) Index 4 Postsecondary Readiness Index 3 Closing Performance Gaps Target = 75 Target = 55

  10. accountability 2013 Interpreting our Reports It’s like learning to read all over again!

  11. 2013 accountability . . . p. 1 . . . a report in 4 parts p. 2-13 p. 14-17 p. 18-20

  12. Index 1

  13. p. 3-4 p. 2 Index 1 Student Achievement Index 1 Student Achievement

  14. p. 22 Index 1: Student Achievement Index 1 Student Achievement 10 Additional Student Groups reported • 7 Race/ Ethnicity • SpEd • Eco Dis • ELL Used for System Safeguards

  15. p. 2 • Calculate Overall Pass Rate For All Students • Add # Passed (≥ Phase-in 1 Level II) each subject area (R + M + W + S + SS) • 277 + 284 + 65 + 60 + 34 = 720 • Add # Tests taken each subject area (R + M + W + S + SS) • 485 + 473 + 174 + 127 + 127 = 1,386 • Divide # Passed by # Tests to determine % Passed • 720 ÷ 1,386 = 51.9%, which ROUNDS to 52% • Assign 1 point for each % Passed = Index 1 Score • 52% = 52 POINTS • Overall pass rate IS NOT average pass rate • Average pass rate would equal: (57% + 60% + 37% + 47% + 27%) ÷ 5 = 47% Index 1 Score 57% 60% 37% 47% 27%

  16. % at Final Level II (13%) % at Level III (3%) [Instructional Planning] p. 3-4 p. 2 • Where did these numbers come from? • Pages 3-4!

  17. Disaggregated Data • There are a LOT of numbers on pages 3 and 4! • “I thought Index 1 ONLY evaluated the All Students group!” • True! • BUT . . . the data are included for System Safeguards

  18. p. 3 p. 13 • System Safeguard • Low Performance in a single cell for a particular student group does NOT automatically cause the district/campus to miss Index 1 • However, ANY student group meeting MSC with a pass rate below 50% MUST be addressed in the district/campus improvement plan • MSC = 0 for All Students | 25 for all other Student Groups

  19. p. 3 p. 13 • So how do we “find” System Safeguards? • In each subjectarea, determine which studentgroupsmeetMSC • MSC = 0 for ALL Students | 25 for all other student groups • Then determine if %Passing<50% (at Phase-in Level II or above) for any group meeting MSC • If % Passing < 50% ANDStudent Group meets MSC, then Student Group’s Performance MUST be addressed in improvement plan      

  20. p. 3 p. 13 Others? 17 8 9                 

  21. p. 4     Science? Social Studies?     17 8 9 0 8 8 25 16 9

  22. p. 3 p. 4       System Safeguards • 25 student groups met MSC (across 5 subject areas) • ONLY 9Met Safeguard target of 50% • 16 Missed Safeguard target (including EVERY group in Writing, Science, Social Studies) • BUT campus MET Index 1 Target!            All 16 Student Groups that Missed Safeguard target of 50% must be addressed in CIP     v    

  23. p. 3 p. 18 System Safeguards • Are summarized with Y/N indicators in Part 4 of the Campus’ 2013 Accountability Report (p. 18)

  24. p. 19 System Safeguards • Performance Rate data from p. 3-4 are duplicated on p. 19 (slightly reorganized)

  25. p. 19 System Safeguards • Performance Rate data from p. 3-4 are duplicated on p. 19 (slightly reorganized) • Participation Rate data are also provided

  26. p. 1 2013 Accountability Summary Index 1 is summarized in the campus’ 2013 Accountability Summary (p. 1)

  27. Index 1 Student Groups? MSC? Safeguards? Your Questions

  28. Index 2

  29. Index 2 Student Progress Index 2 Student Progress p. 5 p. 6-7

  30. p. 22 Index 2: Student Progress Index 2 Student Progress

  31. Index 2: Student Progress Index 2 Student Progress Based on actual student progress (2012 to 2013) focuses on progress toward . . . STAAR Level III

  32. Index 2: Student Progress Index 2 Student Progress Each student is assigned a progress category based on his/her change in scale score in relation to progress expectations • Did Not Meet • Met • Exceeded

  33. Index 2: Student Progress Index 2 Student Progress • Subject areas evaluated for 2013 • Reading • Grade 4 through English II • Math • Grade 4 through Algebra I • Writing • English I to English II

  34. Index 2: Student Progress Index 2 Student Progress • Performance Standard • Met Progress • Exceeded Progress • Index 2 is based on a fraction where • Numerator = # of points based on % of students who Met or Exceeded Progress • 1 point for % Met • 2 points for % Exceeded • Denominator = Maximum Points Possible based on number of student groups meeting minimum size criteria (MSC) • Maximum Points Possible = 200 points for each student group meeting MSC

  35. Index 2: Student Progress Index 2 Student Progress What is “progress”? • With exceptionsfor high-performing (“almost perfect”) and low-performing (“lower than guessing”) students, the generalruleis Met Progress = Level II Final (Higher Grade) – Level II Final (Lower Grade) Exceeded Progress = Level III (Higher Grade) – Level II Final (Lower Grade)

  36. p. 23 Met Progress? Level II 5th Grade – Level II 4th Grade 1627 – 1599 = 28

  37. p. 23

  38. p. 23 Exceeded Progress? Level III 5th Grade – Level II 4th Grade 1710 – 1599 = 111

  39. p. 23

  40. Index 2Simple Example

  41. Index 2 Data Reports • Build “back to front” • Start with page 7 • Then page 6 • Then page 5

  42. For each student group meeting MSC in each subject, determine: • % Met or ExceededProgress • % Exceeded Progress p. 7 From Index 1 (p. 2) • REMINDERS (Why Index 2 numbers will not match Index 1): • Only students with 2 years of “matched” data are included • Progress starts at 4th grade (no 3rd graders receive a Progress Measure) • ELL students are “mostly excluded” from Index 2 in 2013 • STAAR Modified and STAAR Alternate are not included in Index 2 in 2013 • Writing is ONLY evaluated for English I to English II • MSC = 10 tests for All Students | 25 tests for other Student Groups

  43. p. 6 • Data from page 7 are reproduced on page 6 • In each subject area, for each Student Group meeting MSC • Assign 1 point for each % Met OR Exceeded • Assign another 1 point for each % Exceeded • Total = Weighted Progress Rate for each Student Group meeting MSC • Effectively 1 point for each % Met and 2 points for each % Exceeded • Add Weighted Progress Rate in each subject for each student group meeting MSC • Maximum Points = # Student Groups meeting MSC x 200 + + + +

  44. p. 5 • Data from page 6 are summarized on page 5 (remember: read back to front!) • Weighted Progress Rate for each Student Group meeting MSC in each subject area is reported and summed • Reading: 75 + 64 + 77 = 216 points • Math: 70 + 67 + 72 = 209 points • Sum the Total Points in Reading and the Total Points in Math • 216 + 209 = 425 • Sum the Maximum Points in Reading and the Maximum Points in Math • 600 + 600 = 1200 • 425 ÷ 1200 = 35.4, which rounds to 35 . . . SO Index 2 Score = 35 points + + + + + + Index 2 Score

  45. p. 1 2013 Accountability Summary Index 2 is summarized in the campus’ 2013 Accountability Summary (p. 1)

  46. Index 2 Progress Categories Points Data Your Questions

  47. Index 3

  48. p. 8 Index 3 Closing Performance Gaps p. 9-11

  49. p. 24 Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps Index 3 Closing Performance Gaps • Impacts every student group of which the ELL student is a member

  50. Index 3: Closing Performance Gaps • Index 3 emphasizes Level III (Advanced Academic Performance) for “Performance Gap Groups” • BUT . . . STAAR Level III cannot be included in accountability until 2014, so for 2013 . . . • Measure = % of students in Performance Gap Groups “passing” state assessment • Evaluated in EACH subject area (Reading, Math, Writing, Science, Social Studies) • Then cumulated to a single score Index 3 Closing Performance Gaps