_Chapter 3 - The Basics: Additional Features_

As shown in Chapter 2 – The Basics: Base Indicators, districts and campuses can achieve a rating by meeting the absolute standards for the different indicators. However, under certain conditions, a campus or district can achieve a rating:

Additionally, under certain circumstances a district’s rating may be restricted to Academically Acceptable. These additional requirements for districts are explained in the last part of this chapter.

All additional features are applied and calculated automatically by TEA before ratings are released. Districts and campuses do not need to request the use of additional features.

Required Improvement to Academically Acceptable

Campuses or districts initially rated Academically Unacceptable may achieve an Academically Acceptable rating using the Required Improvement feature.

Who is evaluated for Required Improvement: Districts and campuses whose performance is Academically Unacceptable for any TAKS subject, SDAA II, or Completion Rate I measure evaluated. Note that because of the change to the NCES dropout definition, no Required Improvement is possible for the Annual Dropout Rate indicator in 2007.

TAKS

Improvement Standard: In order for Required Improvement to move a campus or district to Academically Acceptable, the campus or district must have shown enough improvement on the deficient TAKS measures since 2006 to be able to meet the current year accountability standard in two years.

There are different standards for the Academically Acceptable rating for TAKS:

Methodology: The actual change must be equal to or greater than the Required Improvement:

Actual Change
Required Improvement
[performance in 2007] - [performance in 2006]
[standard for 2007] - [performance in 2006]

2

Example. For 2007, a high school campus has performance above the Academically Acceptable standard in all areas except for their Economically Disadvantaged student group in TAKS mathematics; only 39% met the standard. Their performance in 2006 for the same group and subject was 29%.

First calculate their actual change:

39 - 29 = 10

Next calculate the Required Improvement:

 
45 - 29

2
=
8

Then compare the two numbers to see if the actual change is greater than or equal to the Required Improvement:

10 ≥ 8

Result: the campus meets Required Improvement, so its rating is Academically Acceptable.

Minimum Size Requirements: In order for Required Improvement to be an option, the district or campus must have test results (for the subject and student group) for at least 10 students in 2006.

Other Information:

SDAA II

Improvement Standard: In order for Required Improvement to move a campus or district to Academically Acceptable, the campus or district must have shown enough improvement on the SDAA II indicator since 2006 to be at a standard of 50% in two years.

Methodology: The actual change must be equal to or greater than the Required Improvement:

Actual Change
Required Improvement
[performance in 2007] - [performance in 2006]
[50] - [performance in 2006]

2

Minimum Size Requirements: In order for Required Improvement to be an option, the district or campus must have SDAA II results for at least 10 tests in 2006.

Other Information:

Completion Rate I

Improvement Standard: In order for Required Improvement to move a campus or district to Academically Acceptable, the campus or district must have shown enough improvement on the deficient Completion Rate I measures between the classes of 2005 and 2006 to be at a standard of 75.0% in two years.

Methodology: The actual change must be equal to or greater than the Required Improvement:

Actual Change
Required Improvement
[completion rate for class of 2006] minus
[completion rate for class of 2005]
[75.0] - [completion rate for class of 2005]

2

Minimum Size Requirements: In order for Required Improvement to be an option, the district or campus must have had at least 10 students (in the same student group) in the class of 2005 completion rate.

Other Information:

Required Improvement to Recognized

Who is evaluated for Required Improvement: Districts and campuses whose performance is at the high end of Academically Acceptable for any TAKS subject, SDAA II, or Completion Rate I, and who also meet the minimum “floor” for prior year performance. Note that because of the change to the NCES dropout definition, no Required Improvement is possible for the Annual Dropout Rate indicator in 2007.

TAKS

Improvement Standard: In order for Required Improvement to move a campus or district from Academically Acceptable to Recognized, the campus or district must have:

Methodology: The actual change must be equal to or greater than the Required Improvement:

Actual Change
Required Improvement
[performance in 2007] - [performance in 2006]
[75] - [performance in 2006]

2

Example. For 2007, a district has performance above the Recognized standard in all areas except for their Economically Disadvantaged student group in TAKS science; only 70% met the standard. Their performance in 2006 for the same group and subject was 66%.

First determine if their current year performance is at or above the floor of 70%:

70 ≥ 70

Next calculate their actual change:

70 - 66 = 4

Then calculate the Required Improvement:

 
75 - 66

2
=
5 (4.5 rounds to 5)

Finally, compare the two numbers to see if the actual change is greater than or equal to the Required Improvement:

4 is not greater than or equal to 5

Result: the district does not meet Required Improvement, so its rating remains Academically Acceptable.

Minimum Size Requirements: For Required Improvement to be an option, the district or campus must have test results (for subject and student group) for at least 10 students in 2006.

Other Information:

SDAA II

Improvement Standard: In order for Required Improvement to move a campus or district from Academically Acceptable to Recognized, the campus or district must have:

Methodology: The actual change must be equal to or greater than the Required Improvement:

Actual Change
Required Improvement
[performance in 2007] - [performance in 2006]
[70] - [performance in 2006]

2

Minimum Size Requirements: In order for Required Improvement to be an option, the district or campus must have at least 10 test results for SDAA II in 2006.

Other Information:

Completion Rate I

Improvement Standard: In order for Required Improvement to move a campus or district from Academically Acceptable to Recognized, the campus or district must have:

Methodology: The actual change must be equal to or greater than the Required Improvement:

Actual Change
Required Improvement
[completion rate for class of 2006] minus
[completion rate for class of 2005]
[85.0] - [completion rate for class of 2005]

2

Minimum Size Requirements: In order for Required Improvement to be an option, the district or campus must have had at least 10 students (in the same student group) in the class of 2005 completion rate.

Other Information:

Exceptions

Campuses or districts evaluated as Academically Unacceptable after application of Required Improvement may be able to “gate up” to Academically Acceptable using up to three exceptions for TAKS and/or SDAA II measures.

The Exceptions Provision provides relief to larger campuses and districts with more diverse student populations who are evaluated on more measures.

The number of exceptions available for a campus or district is dependent on the number of assessment measures on which the campus or district is evaluated, as shown in the following table.

Number of Assessment Measures Evaluated

Maximum Number of Exceptions Allowed

1 – 5

0 exceptions

6 – 10

1 exception

11 – 15

2 exceptions

16 or more

3 exceptions

The Exceptions Provision applies to any of the 25 TAKS measures (5 subjects multiplied by 5 groups: All Students, African American, Hispanic, White, and Economically Disadvantaged), and the SDAA II measure. The Exceptions Provision does not apply to either Completion Rate I or Annual Dropout Rate indicators.

Other Information:

Example. A large high school with a diverse population is evaluated on all student groups for reading/ELA, mathematics, science, and social studies, for a total of 20 measures. Their performance on all indicators meets the Academically Acceptable standards except for the performance of their economically disadvantaged students in mathematics (41%) and science (38%), and they did not demonstrate Required Improvement for either of these measures.

Performance on mathematics and science are within five points of the standards (45% and 40%, respectively). Because they are evaluated on 16 or more assessment measures, (20) they are eligible to use up to three exceptions. Therefore they are eligible to use up to three exceptions. Therefore, their performance in these two areas meets the Exceptions Provision requirements.

Result: the campus rating is Academically Acceptable. The two exception areas must be addressed in their campus improvement plan.

Note: Because of the one-time exception rule, the campus will not be eligible to use exceptions for either of these measures (economically disadvantaged students in mathematics and economically disadvantaged students in science) in 2008.

Additional Issues for Districts

Districts with Academically Unacceptable Campuses

Any district that has one or more campuses rated Academically Unacceptable cannot receive a rating of Exemplary or Recognized. However, the AEA: Academically Unacceptable rating does not prevent an Exemplary or Recognized district rating.

Underreported Students

Beginning with the 2006-07 PEIMS data collection, there are significant differences to the procedures for collecting leaver data. Now a leaver is defined to be a student who is enrolled in Texas public school in grades 7-12 in the prior year and does not return to Texas public school during the school-start window in the following fall. A student who moves or officially transfers from one Texas public school district to another is no longer reported as a leaver, meaning districts are no longer required to report leaver reason codes for these students. This is a significant change from previous reporting requirements. The determination of whether students are movers is made by TEA by checking other districts’ enrollment and attendance records.

Students without leaver records who cannot be confirmed by TEA to be returning students, movers, previous Texas graduates, or GED recipients become underreported students. See Appendix I for more information.

In order to maintain a rating of Exemplary or Recognized, districts must not exceed the accountability standards for underreporting students.

Standard: Because key features of the leaver reporting system are new, the underreported standards for 2007 have been changed from the standards published in the 2006 Accountability Manual. Districts must meet the standard for both of the following measures in order to maintain a rating of Exemplary or Recognized:

Count of Underreported Students: Must be fewer than or equal to 200 (compared to 100 previously published).

Percent of Underreported Students: Must be less than or equal to 5.0% (compared to 1.5% previously published for 2007).

Methodology:

number of underreported students

number of returning students + leavers + underreported students
5.0%

Numerator: Underreported students are those 2005-06 students in grades 7–12 who are not accounted for by TEA as returning students, movers, previous Texas graduates or GED recipients, and for whom no school leaver record can be found.

Denominator: The denominator is an unduplicated count of students who were reported in enrollment in 2005-06 PEIMS submission 1 or in attendance in 2005-06 PEIMS submission 3.

Minimum Size Requirements: Districts with 5 or more underreported students will be evaluated.

Data Source and Year: PEIMS submission 1 (October 2005, October 2006); PEIMS submission 3 (June 2006)

Other Information:

Additional Students in District Ratings

Generally speaking, districts are held accountable for the performance of all their students, including those who attend alternative education campuses that are registered for evaluation under AEA procedures. See Chapter 6 – Special Issues and Circumstances for more information on various campus situations and how they affect the district’s performance data.

Additionally, districts are responsible for the performance of students who are not in any campus accountability subset because they changed campuses within the district between the October “as of” date and the date of testing. See Table 3 in Chapter 2 – The Basics: Base Indicators for more information on the accountability subset.


2007 Accountability | Accountability | Performance Reporting | TEA Home