In August 1994 the integrated accountability system, based on Academic Excellence Indicator System (AEIS) data and published decision-making rules, was used for the first time to determine campus and district accreditation status (for a historical discussion of the integrated accountability system refer to TEA, 1996b).

Three types of indicators are used in the accountability system:
(1) base indicators, (2) additional indicators, and (3) report-only indicators. Base indicators are those components of AEIS that are statutorily required to determine district accreditation. Additional indicators are used to determine acknowledgment ratings for districts and campuses. Report-only indicators are performance measures that are not statutorily required for use in accrediting districts, but may be required for reporting in AEIS.

One of the base indicators used in accrediting districts is the Grade 7-12 annual dropout rate. For the August 1994 rating, the annual dropout rates for all students and each student group (African American, Hispanic, White, and economically disadvantaged) were used in rating campuses and districts as Exemplary or Recognized only. Beginning with the August 1995 rating, additional standards were incorporated into the system. The annual dropout rates for Grades 7-12, for all students and each student group, were used to rate all districts and campuses, not just those in the Exemplary and Recognized categories.

For the August 1996 accountability rating, the 1994-95 Grade 7-12 annual dropout rate will be used to determine accountability ratings for districts and campuses.

The dropout standards for each accountability rating consists of the following (TEA, 1996a):

Exemplary --1.0% or less for all students and each student group
Recognized --3.5% or less for all students and each student group
Academically Acceptable/Acceptable --6.0% or less for all students and each student group [see 1. below]
Academically Unacceptable/Low-performing --above 6.0% for all students or any student group [see 1. below]

In August 1995, when the standards on dropout rates for all students and each student group were applied to the Acceptable and Low-performing categories, 25 districts received an Accredited Warned [see 2. below] rating and 115 campuses received a Low-performing rating based solely on these criteria. Final results of the August 1996 accountability ratings were not available at the time of this publication, but preliminary analyses indicate fewer districts and campuses will receive an Accredited Warned/Low-performing rating based solely on their dropout rates.

Since adoption of the higher standards on the dropout rate, educators and research groups have been emphasizing their concerns with the current dropout methodology. Critics of the annual dropout rate say the methodology does not accurately capture the "true" dropout problem. In order to get a true measure of dropouts, some suggest that students should be tracked over their entire middle and high school careers resulting in a longitudinal rate (Ligon, Stewart, & Wilkinson, 1990; Calderon, 1996).

The methodology used to calculate a longitudinal dropout rate can also be used to calculate a longitudinal graduation rate, which communicates the success rather than the failure of a school system. One measure of a school's success at keeping students from dropping out is the Holding Power Index (HPI; Hartzell, McKay, & Frymier, 1992). The Holding Power Index methodology tracks a cohort or class of students individually and determines their status at the end of Grade 12. All students who graduate, obtain their GED, or continue to be enrolled after Grade 12 contribute to a school's "Holding Power" under this methodology. Texas is one year away from having the capacity to calculate an HPI for a seventh grade cohort. Data needed to track a ninth grade cohort are available at the state level through PEIMS, and research into developing an HPI for Texas school districts is currently being undertaken.

[1] If a district or campus would be rated Academically Unacceptable/Low-performing solely because of a dropout rate exceeding 6.0% for a single student group (not all students), then the district or campus will be rated Academically Acceptable/Acceptable if that single dropout rate is less than 10.0%, and has declined from the previous year (a change from the 1995 accountability ratings).

[2] District rating category names were modified by the new Texas Education Code promulgated in 1995 (TEA, 1996).

Return to Dropout Report's Table of Contents