The Academic Excellence Indicator System (AEIS) reports provide a great deal of performance information about every public school and district in the state. These reports also provide extensive profile information about staff, finances, and programs. Please read About AEIS for a more detailed description of the reports.

We recommend that you narrow your search to neighborhoods you like, and then print AEIS reports for the schools there. Once you have this background information we suggest that you contact the principal and/or counselor of each school to get a more complete picture of the school. For names and addresses, see the Texas Education Directory.

Yes. TEA's School District Locator provides a map of Texas that you can use for finding a specific district. Also, some internet mapping services will locate schools or districts according to zip code or city name.

The Texas Education Agency does not rank-order schools or districts. We do assign accountability ratings to each school and district, based on their performance. For more information about ratings, see the Accountability website. Additionally, there are a number of other district-level reports that are accessible through the TEA website. TEA's Division of School Finance creates the District Performance Summary Reports, with rank-ordered data for districts on various indicators.

4. Why are there no state accountability ratings shown on the 2011-12 AEIS Reports?

The Texas Legislature (in House Bill 3 of 2009) mandated the development of new assessments and a new accountability system for 2013. They allowed for no ratings in 2012 while the tests are rolled out and a new accountability system is developed. For information on the new accountability system, see the 2013 Accountability Development site.

5. Why are there no test results for grades 3-9 on the 2011-12 AEIS Reports?

No STAAR results are shown on the 2011-12 AEIS reports, because performance standards were not finalized for the grades 3–8 STAAR assessments prior to the publication of the 2012 AEIS reports. Results of the spring and summer 2012 STAAR EOC assessments at the state, region, district, and campus levels can be accessed online at http://www.texasassessment.com.

The district-level AEIS reports for 70 districts were updated on 12/17/12. An email was sent to the superintendents of the 70 school districts whose AEIS reports were affected.

7. How do Texas schools compare to schools in other states?

The Texas Education Agency does not have information to report about other states. However, there are several sites that do provide reports comparing different states' performance. Among them are the National Center for Education Statistics (which produces the Nation's Report Card), the National Education Association (which produces Rankings & Estimates), and the Council of Chief State School Officers.

On occasion, our server experiences problems, or may be down briefly for upgrades. Please try to run your report again later. This problem will also result if you try running a report when we are receiving an overwhelming number of hits, such as when accountability ratings are released. At times like this we get hundreds of thousands of hits a day. Please be patient and try back later. If the problem persists, you may contact us at performance.reporting@tea.state.tx.us.

The Academic Excellence Indicator System (AEIS) reports are produced and put online in the fall of each year.

For 2011-12 there are no School Report Cards. For prior years, the School Report Cards are found on the AEIS site, by year.

The School Report Card contains a small subset of the information provided on the AEIS report.

As of November 2002, the AEIS reports are available as PDF as well as HTML format. PDF files can be easily stored on a disk and printed. For more help with opening and printing PDF files, refer to our PDF help page.

13. On the 2010-11 AEIS reports I noticed a lot of "n/a" for performance for some ethnicities. Why is this?

For the 2010-11 AEIS reports, the new federal definitions for the collection of ethnicity and race are used. Beginning in 2010-11, students and staff are reported as African American, Hispanic, White, American Indian, Asian, Pacific Islander, and Two or More Races. In the Profile section, both counts and percentages of the total number of students and staff in each of these categories are shown.

For some performance measures—TAKS (Accountability Indicator), Attendance, Annual Dropout Rate, Advanced Course/Dual Enrollment, RHSP/DAP Graduates, AP/IB, ACT/SAT, and College-Ready Graduates—the groups of Asian, Pacific Islander, and Two or More Races have no data available for the prior school year since the former definitions were in use that year. Missing information is noted as “n/a” for Not Available. The Completion Rate and TAKS Exit-level measures show “n/a” for both current and prior years for these groups because these measures use the former definitions for both years.

14. I compared the TAKS numbers on the 2009-10 AEIS reports to those on the 2010-11 AEIS reports, and the numbers don't match. Why is this?

In order to allow for "apples to apples" comparison, and to accurately calculate Required Improvement, the prior year (2010) TAKS results were recomputed to include performance on TAKS-Modified (TAKS-M) and TAKS-Alternate (TAKS-Alt) for all grades and subjects.

15. I compared the TAKS numbers on the 2008-09 AEIS reports to those on the 2009-10 AEIS reports, and the numbers don't match. Why is this?

In order to allow for "apples to apples" comparison, and the ability to accurately calculate Required Improvement, the prior year (2009) TAKS results were recomputed. For the following reasons, the results used to determine ratings for 2009 may differ from those shown on the 2010 data tables:

• TAKS (Accommodated). The 2009 TAKS base indicator has been rebuilt to include the performance of all TAKS (Accommodated) assessments (this includes reading and mathematics (grades 3-10) and writing (grades 4 and 7), and the Spanish versions for these grades and subject areas.
• New Vertical Scale Cut Points. New vertical scale cut points for grades 3-8 for reading and mathematics that are used in 2010 have been applied to 2009.
• TAKS Grade 3 Reading. In 2010, there is only one administration of grade 3 reading, so the 2009 results have been rebuilt to use only the first administration of grade 3 reading from that year.
• TAKS Grade 6 Spanish. As of 2010, grade six Spanish assessments are no longer administered.

Because of these recalculations, the overall result is that nearly all 2010 reports show lower passing rates for 2009. This is not done to re-evaluate 2009, but rather to accurately show improvement when looking at 2010 performance. For more details on the changes and how it affected accountability, please refer to the Accountability FAQ.

16. I compared the TAKS numbers on the 2006-07 AEIS reports to those on the 2007-08 AEIS reports, and the numbers don't match. Why is this?

In order to allow for "apples to apples" comparison, the 2007 TAKS results shown on this year's data tables were recalculated to match the 2008 TAKS by including both TAKS grade 8 science and the selected grades and subjects for TAKS (Accommodated).

17. I compared the TAKS numbers on the 2004-05 AEIS reports to those on the 2003-04 AEIS reports, and the numbers don't match. Why is this?

This is due to the different standards used in the two years. To determine whether a student counts as a passer, the student must meet the passing standard adopted by the State Board of Education (SBOE) for the current year. For 2005 the student passing standard was panel recommendation (PR) for students in grades 3-10 and 1 standard error of measurement (SEM) below PR for students in grade 11. For 2004, the student passing standard was 1 SEM below PR for grades 3-10 and 2 SEM below PR for grade 11. The 2004 performance was recomputed according to the 2005 standards. Because the 2005 standard is more difficult, the 2005 reports show lower passing rates for 2004—providing an accurate comparison of performance across the two years.

18. I compared the TAKS numbers on the 2003-04 AEIS reports to those on the 2002-03 AEIS reports, and the numbers don't match. Why is this?

A number of changes occurred in 2004 in computing TAKS values. In order to allow for "apples to apples" comparison, the 2003 TAKS results were recomputed. For this reason, the results shown for prior year on the 2003-04 reports may differ in a number of ways from the 2002-03 AEIS reports:

• Rounding. The 2002-03 AEIS reports show all TAKS values rounded to one tenth. That is, a passing rate of 89.945% was rounded to 89.9%. For the 2003-04, the Met Standard calculations are rounded to whole numbers. For example, 49.877% is rounded to 50%; 79.4999% is rounded to 79%; and 89.5% is rounded to 90%.
• ELA and Reading Combined. Performance on English Languages Arts (tested in grades 10 and 11) and Reading (tested in grades 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9) is now combined to show one passing rate when summed across grades. In the 2002-03 AEIS reports, ELA and Reading performance were shown separately.
• Accountability Subset. Sometimes referred to as the mobility subset, this is the performance used for determining the accountability ratings. While an accountability subset has always been used for AEIS, accountability, and other products, in 2004 the accountability subset methodology changed. For the first time, campus-to-campus mobility removes a student's performance from the subset, even if both campuses are in the same district. At the district level, the accountability subset remains the same. This affects the performance of all campuses, especially those in large districts, where mobility within the district is more common.
• Different Standards. To determine whether a student counts as a passer, the student must meet the passing standard adopted by the State Board of Education (SBOE) for the current year. For 2004 the student passing standard was 1 standard error of measurement (SEM) below panel recommendation (PR) for students in grades for students in grades 3-10 and 2 SEM below PR for students in grade 11. For 2003, the student passing standard was 2 SEM below PR for all grades. The 2003 performance was recomputed according to the 2004 standards to allow for apples-to-apples comparison across years.

Because of these recalculations, the overall result is that nearly all 2004 reports show lower passing rates for 2003. This is not done to re-evaluate 2003, but rather to accurately show improvement when looking at 2004 performance. For more details on the changes and how it affected accountability, please refer to the 2004 Accountability FAQ.

19. The 2004-05 and 2005-06 AEIS sites both say “Updated February 2007”.  What changed and why?

In February 2007, an error was discovered and corrected on the 2005-06 and 2004-05 AEIS reports. This error was specific to TAKS grade 3 and grade 5, the "All Tests" row. Because these indicators are only reported on AEIS and not used in accountability, none of the changes affected accountability ratings.

All reports for 2005-06 and 2004-05 that contained the error have been corrected and annotated as of February 2007. This includes reports at the campus, district, region, and state level as well as all downloads. For more information, see the complete explanation.

You can download the entire AEIS data set in ASCII format (delimited), or you can download selected data in Excel or ASCII format. Choose the year of the AEIS you are interested in, and from there select the Download Data Files site. Please be aware that these data sets can be massive, and that they require the use of data-management software such as Access, Excel, FoxPro, SPSS, SAS, or other programming languages.

The first AEIS report was for the 1990-91 school year. This website provides dynamically-generated AEIS reports back to the 1993-94 school year. Archival reports for 1990-91, 1991-92 and 1992-93 are also available from the AEIS website. Prior to the AEIS, TEA and districts produced the Annual Performance Reports (APR) from 1987-88 to 1989-90. The AEIS archives have been expanded online to include found APR reports for 1988-89 and 1989-90.

An AEIS Glossary is available for every year of the AEIS. Simply go to that year's AEIS webpage, and select the Glossary.

No, AEIS reports are produced only for public schools. The Texas Education Agency receives very little information from private schools. For information on those schools please contact the Texas Private School Accreditation Commission at (903) 643-8770.

The Accountability Rating System for Texas Public Schools and School Districts uses a small subset of the information provided on the AEIS reports to assign a rating to schools and districts. For lists of ratings and other accountability information, visit our Accountability website.

25. I noticed that my child's school received Gold Performance Acknowledgment for certain areas. What does this mean?

While accountability ratings are assigned based on performance on the state-administered tests, completion rates, and on dropout rates, schools and districts may receive Gold Performance Acknowledgment for performance on a number of other indicators. For more information, see the Accountability Manual for the year in question. These are accessible through the Accountability website.

No, not at the present time.

The campus group column on the AEIS report shows the average performance of a group of 40 schools that are demographically similar to the school whose report you have. For a complete explanation of how campus groups are determined, see "Campus Group" in the AEIS Glossary. You can find the Glossary by going to the AEIS site and selecting the appropriate year. You may access the list of campuses your school is compared by accessing their Comparable Improvement Report, also by year on the AEIS site.

Charter schools have AEIS reports just like any other school and can be found at our AEIS website.

Districts do not identify "Magnet" schools in the information they provide TEA, so we cannot identify them. You should contact the local district office to identify their magnet schools or programs.

From 2005 to 2011, registered alternative education campuses (AEC) were evaluated using alternative education accountability (AEA) procedures. This is defined in the Accountability Manual, available by year through the Accountability website.

31. How are data attributed to Residential Treatment Facilities (RTF), Texas Juvenile Probation Commission (TJPC) campuses, and Texas Youth Commission (TYC) facilities within a Texas public school district appropriately excluded from district level AEIS reports?

Texas Education Code (TEC)  §39.054(f) and §39.055 stipulates that the performance of students served in certain campuses cannot be used in evaluating the district where the campus is located. Three campus types that are specifically addressed in statute are RTF campuses, TJPC campuses, and TYC campuses.  For each type of campus, specific student attribution codes are used to identify and remove students from the serving district rates.

The performance indicators for campuses and students with certain attributes are excluded from district aggregate data due to state statutory requirements. For data reported on 2011-12 AEIS reports, specific student performance results are excluded based on the student attribution codes submitted by the district. Student results are excluded by using PEIMS student attribution codes of 13, 14, 17, 18, 21, and 22.

2012 AEIS: Inclusion or Exclusion of Performance Data

Campus Type	Student-Level Processing
	Longitudinal Graduation and Dropout (2010-11)	All Other Performance Indicators (2011-12)
TJPC	PEIMS student attribution codes 13, 14, and 15: Remove dropouts from serving district results. Remove dropouts from serving campus results if the campus is a regular campus.	PEIMS student attribution codes 13 and 14 remove results from serving district.
TYC	PEIMS student attribution codes 17, 18, and 19: Remove dropouts from serving district results. Remove dropouts from serving campus results if the campus is a regular campus.	PEIMS student attribution codes 17 and 18 remove results from serving district.
RTF	PEIMS student attribution codes 21, 22, and 23: Remove dropouts from serving district results. Remove dropouts from serving campus results.	PEIMS student attribution codes 21 and 22 remove results from serving district.
JJAEP	Dropout data are attributed to non-JJAEP campus using PEIMS attendance data or district-supplied campus of accountability. Students who cannot be attributed to a non-JJAEP campus remain dropouts at the JJAEP campus. Dropouts at the JJAEP campus will be included in the district results.	No assessment data should be reported to the JJAEP. Data reported mistakenly to the JJAEP will be included in the district results.
DAEP	Dropout data are attributed to non-DAEP campus using PEIMS attendance data or district-supplied campus of accountability. Students who cannot be attributed to a non-DAEP campus remain dropouts at the DAEP campus. Dropouts at the DAEP campus will be included in the district results.	No assessment data should be reported to the DAEP. Data reported mistakenly to the DAEP will be included in the district results.

PEIMS Data Standards Student Attribution Codes

Student Attribution Codes
13	Texas Juvenile Probation Commission facility—by court order, not regularly assigned to the district
14	Texas Juvenile Probation Commission facility—by court order, regularly assigned to the district
17	Texas Youth Commission facility—by court order, not regularly assigned to the district
18	Texas Youth Commission facility—by court order, regularly assigned to the district
21	Residential treatment facility—by court order, not regularly assigned to the district
22	Residential treatment facility—by court order, regularly assigned to the district

32. What happened to the 2003 Accountability Ratings?

Because 2003 was a transition year between the state-administered TAAS test and the new TAKS test, no new school-level ratings were issued in 2003. Ratings based on the new accountability system were assigned again, starting in 2004. For more information about ratings, see the Accountability website.

Performance Reporting