• Accountability FAQ


     

  • February 28, 2020

    Can a campus be identified for targeted support and additional targeted support simultaneously?

    A campus may receive only one label. Based on the campus’ outcomes in the Closing the Gaps domain, the agency identifies comprehensive support and improvement schools. Then, those campuses that were not identified for comprehensive support and improvement are evaluated for targeted support and improvement. Lastly, those campuses that were not identified for comprehensive or targeted are evaluated for additional targeted support.

  • February 21, 2020

    If a student transfers campuses/districts after meeting College Career or Military Readiness (CCMR) criteria, which campus/district receives the CCMR credit?

    The district/campus from which the student graduates receives CCMR credit regardless of whether the student met the criteria while enrolled in that district/campus.

  • February 14, 2020

    When will the agency receive a decision regarding amendments to the state’s Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) plan?

    After providing an opportunity for public comment, the agency submitted an ESSA state plan amendment to the U.S. Department of Education (USDE) on January 31, 2020. The USDE has 120 days to review Texas’ amendment requests. When, and if, TEA receives USDE approval of the amendment, additional information will be provided to local education agencies on the impact to August 2020 accountability ratings and identification of schools for improvement.

    To view FAQs about the amendment request, visit our resources webpage.

  • February 7, 2020

    What does the accountability system development process look like?

    The 2020 Accountability Policy Advisory Committee (APAC) and the Accountability Technical Advisory Committee (ATAC), which include representatives from legislative offices, the business community, parents of children attending Texas public schools, and educators from school districts, open-enrollment charter schools, and education service centers meet multiple times each year to make suggestions and recommendations on key components of the academic accountability system. The commissioner considers all proposals and makes final decisions.

    Our final advisory group meeting for 2020 accountability was held earlier this week. To learn more about the topics discussed during committee meetings visit the 2020 Accountability Development webpage. 

  • February 3, 2020

    Is the 2020 A–F estimator available? If so, where is it located?

    Yes, the 2020 A–F Estimator is available in the TEA Login (TEAL) Accountability application and at the following website https://rptsvr1.tea.texas.gov/perfreport/account/2020/estimator/search.html. The tool prepopulates domain and component values with 2019 accountability outcomes. Users can enter 2020 component values to estimate the corresponding 2020 domain and overall results. The accuracy and validity of the estimation is based solely on the data inputted by the user.

    Domain and overall rating estimations are based on the 2019 accountability system methodology and are intended as a planning resource for districts and campuses. The tool does not include alternative education accountability (AEA) bonus points, Local Accountability, or updates based on the development of the 2020 accountability system, which will be finalized in late spring.

  • January 24, 2020

    ACT, Inc. and College Board college readiness standards are different from those used for accountability. How did the agency establish the accountability college readiness standards?

    While ACT, Inc. and the College Board have their own college readiness standards, the standards used for accountability are based on the Texas Success Initiative assessment (TSIA) exemption criteria established by the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. For more information, please see the TSIA exemptions, exceptions, and waivers statute.

  • January 17, 2020

    How will the new Texas Success Initiative Assessment 2.0 (TSIA2) results be included in College, Career, and Military Readiness (CCMR)?

    TEA and the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (THECB) are collaborating on the revision and launch of the TSIA2. The new assessment will include an integrated reading and writing section as well as updated standards and is scheduled to launch August 31, 2020. During the transition, both TSIA and TSIA2 results will be used for CCMR. The standard that was in place when the student tested will be used to determine college readiness.

    For additional information on the TSIA2, visit the Texas Success Initiative and Developmental Education website.

  • January 10, 2020

    Regarding the proposed amendment to the graduation rate methodology used in the Closing the Gaps domain, will student groups be required to show growth even after meeting the 94.0 percent long-term target?

    No, any student group with a graduation rate at or above 94.0 percent would meet the requirement as mentioned in step 1. Steps 2–4 would only apply if the student group did not meet the 94.0 percent long-term target. 

  • December 13, 2019

    If a student in grade 5 or 8 achieves the Approaches Grade Level on reading and/or mathematics during the April administration, are they allowed to retake the assessment during the May administration in order to achieve the Meets Grade Level or Masters Grade Level standard?

    The accountability retest provision is not applicable for Student Success Initiative (SSI) grades. The 2019 Accountability Manual allows a district to retest a student who achieves the Approaches Grade Level standard on an English I EOC assessment or an Algebra I EOC assessment in order to provide an opportunity for the student to achieve the Meets Grade Level or Masters Grade Level standard only under the following conditions:

    • the student is in ninth grade;
    • the student first takes the EOC during the December administration; and
    • the student retakes the EOC during the spring administration immediately following the December administration during which the student first took the assessment.
  • December 6, 2019

    I’ve heard that unschooled asylees, unschooled refugees, and students with interrupted formal education (SIFEs) will now be included in accountability after their first year of enrollment in U.S. school. Is this true?

    Yes, this shift is necessary to meet federal requirements. In the past, these students’ STAAR results were excluded until the student reached their sixth year of enrollment in U.S. schools. Beginning with 2020 accountability, STAAR 3–8 and STAAR end-of-course results for unschooled asylees, unschooled refugees, and SIFEs in year 2 and beyond will be included in the same manner as all English learners. For further information, please see item #1 in the U.S. Department of Education’s Performance Review Report To the Administrator Addressed letter.

  • November 22, 2019

    Does a student who earned an industry-based certification (IBC) in middle school credit College, Career, and Military Readiness (CCMR)?

    No, Performance Reporting only credits districts and campuses for IBCs earned in grades 9–12. For additional information on IBC reporting requirements, please see the October 17, 2019 To the Administrator Addressed.

  • November 15, 2019

    When will the PDF TAPR be released? 

    The PDF version of the TAPR, which includes only major data points and is designed to allow districts to fulfill their public notification requirements, will be available in the TEA Login (TEAL) accountability application and on the TEA public website in December. Once the PDF TAPR is available, the district’s board of trustees must hold a public hearing to discuss the district’s TAPR report within 90 days. Guidelines to help districts fulfill their legal responsibilities regarding the TAPR report will accompany the PDF TAPR release in December.  TAPR data downloads and a comprehensive glossary will also be released in December. The advanced data downloads, which include numerators, denominators, and rates, will be available on the public TAPR site in January.

  • November 8, 2019

    Has the U.S. Department of Education (USDE) approved the amendment to the state’s Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) plan to adjust the targets for the English Language Proficiency (ELP) measure? 

    TEA received a response from the USDE regarding the amendment request. The USDE approved the request to amend the ELP status target from 42 to 36 percent for 2018–19 through 2021–22; from 44 to 38 percent for 2022–23 through 2026–27; and from 46 to 40 percent for 2027–28 through 2031–32. You can view the amended ESSA targets at https://tea.texas.gov/sites/default/files/2019.June-ESSAAppendixA-clean.pdf.

  • October 25, 2019

    Where can I find the current Texas English Language Proficiency Assessment System (TELPAS) raw score conversion tables?

    Resources related to the scoring and reporting of assessment results for the STAAR, STAAR Alternate 2, TELPAS, and TELPAS Alternate assessments are available on the Assessment Scoring and Reporting page of Performance Reporting’s site. Please update your bookmarks as all future documents for these assessment programs will be posted here.

  • October 18, 2019

    Are all districts and campuses, including new campuses, rated in 2020?

    Beginning the first year they report fall enrollment, school districts and charter schools are rated based on the aggregate results of students in their campuses. Districts without any students enrolled in the grades for which STAAR assessments are administered (3-12) are assigned the rating label of Not Rated.

    Beginning the first year they report fall enrollment, campuses, including alternative education campuses, and open-enrollment charter schools are rated based on the performance of their students. For the purposes of assigning accountability ratings, campuses that do not serve any grade level for which the STAAR assessments are administered are paired with campuses in their district that serve students who take STAAR. Please see Chapter 7 of the 2019 Accountability Manual for information on pairing.

  • October 11, 2019

    The Campus Enrollment Type-Code in TSDS PEIMS (Data Element E1641 and Code Table C219) specifies the method by which the campus draws student enrollment (zoned, open enrollment, selective enrollment, etc.).  How do I know which category to select, and how will this designation be used?

    The campus enrollment type determination must be made by the district by evaluating which description(s) most accurately reflect current year enrollment practices. The data collection will be used to evaluate the feasibility of adding enrollment type as a variable in campus comparison group construction in future (2021 or later) accountability systems.

  • October 4, 2019

    Does the economically disadvantaged percentage used in the  School Progress, Part B: Relative Performance domain include only students who were administered STAAR or all students at the district or campus?

    The district or campus overall percentage of economically disadvantaged students, which is used in Relative Performance, is calculated based on TSDS PEIMS October snapshot data. The total number of students in membership who are eligible for free or reduced-price lunch or other public assistance is divided by the total number of students in membership.

    Whether a student is considered economically disadvantaged is also reported on STAAR answer documents. This information, however, is not used to calculate the percentage of economically disadvantaged students at a district or campus. It is used only to identify which students are included in the economically disadvantaged student group in the Closing the Gaps domain.

  • September 27, 2019

    Why did Texas develop a measure of student progress? Where can I find technical documentation regarding the STAAR progress measure?

    Progress measures are legislatively mandated for the STAAR program (Texas Education Code §39.023, §39.034, and §39.053). To meet these requirements, Texas developed the STAAR Progress Measure.

    The Technical Digest provides information about the development procedures and technical attributes of the state-mandated assessment program. Chapter 3 of the Technical Digest describes the development and implementation of the progress measure. Additional information regarding the STAAR progress measure is available here.

  • September 20, 2019

    We’ve heard that military enlistment reporting requirements for College, Career and Military Readiness (CCMR) are changing. Is this true?

    For now, districts should continue to report “intent to enlist” in TSDS PEIMS until told otherwise.  The agency is hopeful the Department of Defense (DoD) will provide enlistment records this spring that may be used for future accountability cycles. Once the agency obtains these records directly from the DoD, criteria related to military enlistment for academic accountability will align with the CCMR Outcomes Bonus criteria, which requires graduates to achieve a passing score on the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) and enlist in the Armed Forces. Because all enlistees must pass the ASVAB, DoD enlistment data will provide confirmation of both requirements.

  • September 13, 2019

    Additional Targeted Support and Improvement Identification

    Any campus that is not identified for comprehensive or targeted support and improvement is identified for additional targeted support if an individual student group’s percentage of evaluated indicators met is at or below the percentage used to identify that campus type for comprehensive support and improvement. Identification of additional targeted support campuses occurs on an annual basis. 

    For 2019, the scaled Closing the Gaps cut point for comprehensive identification at the bottom five percent of Title I campuses was a scaled score of 42. Unscaling the 42 equated to a 9 elementary raw score, a 4 middle/high school raw score, and 1 alternative education accountability (AEA) raw score. Those raw scores were then set as the percentage of indicators a student group must meet (by campus type). For example, any middle school campus that had a student group that met fewer than 4 percent of evaluated indicators was identified for additional targeted support. This occurs regardless of the Closing the Gaps domain rating or overall rating earned. An example is shown below. 

    ats

    As a reminder, the identification of campuses for comprehensive, targeted, or additional targeted support is a federal requirement under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). Campuses that are excluded from state accountability requirements (such as residential facilities) cannot be excluded from federal identifications. 

    The lists of campuses identified for support under ESSA are available at https://tea.texas.gov/2019Accountability.aspx. If you have questions about interventions associated with support and improvement campuses, please contact the School Improvement Division at (512) 463-5226 or SIDivision@tea.texas.gov.

  • September 6, 2019

    When will the 2018–19 Texas Academic Performance Report (TAPR) be released?

    The TAPR System (HTML version) will be updated on a rolling basis as data becomes available. STAAR data is expected to be updated in September with other accountability-related data to follow. The majority of data will be processed and released by the end of October in the HTML system. This weekly bulletin will provide release dates for tabs within the TAPR System.

    The PDF version of the TAPR will be released in the TEA Login (TEAL) and on the TEA public website shortly after final ratings are released in December.

  • August 30, 2019

    What are the posting requirements for the 2019 accountability ratings? Am I required to post these reports on our district website?

    The Texas Education Code (TEC) requires the following:

    • TEC §39.361 requires districts to state whether one or more of its campuses have been awarded a distinction designation or is currently rated F and to provide an explanation of the significance of the information.
    • TEC §39.362 requires districts to post on the district website the current accreditation status and accountability ratings, Texas Academic Performance Reports (TAPR), and School Report Cards (SRC) as well as an explanation of the information by the 10th day of each school year. The district should update its website with the 2018–19 TAPR and 2018–19 SRC as soon as they are available.

    For additional information, see the Requirement for Posting of Performance FAQ.

  • August 23, 2019

    On our 2019 Closing the Gaps data table, the Pacific Islander group achieved a 94.0 percent four-year federal graduation rate in 2017 and a 93.0 percent four-year federal graduation rate in 2018, which does not meet the requirement for improving at least a tenth of a percent. For 2020 accountability, will the target for the Pacific Islander group revert to 90.0 percent, or will the target be 93.1 percent?

    As approved by the U.S. Department of Education, the ESSA state plan requires student groups who meet or exceed the four-year federal graduation target (90.0 percent) to improve that rate in the following year. As graduation rates are rounded to one decimal place, a student group must exceed their prior year rate by one-tenth of a percentage point. In the example above, because the Pacific Islander group achieved a 93.0 percent four-year federal graduation rate in 2018, they are required to exceed that rate by at least a tenth of a percent in the following year. As such, the target for the Pacific Islander group would be 93.1 percent to meet the four-year federal graduation rate for 2020 accountability.

    What was the 2019 Closing the Gaps scaled score cut point for comprehensive support and improvement identification?

     The 2019 lowest five percent Closing the Gaps scaled score cut point for Title I campuses was 42. Title I campuses with a Closing the Gaps scaled score at or below 42 were identified, or reidentified, for comprehensive support and improvement.

  • August 16, 2019

    Why does my domain/overall score show an 89, but when I drill down to the data the raw component score would scale to an A?  

    A statutory domain or overall adjustment to a B or 89 may have been applied for several reasons:

    • The district received an 89 overall if it includes any campus with an overall rating of D or F. In this case, the highest overall scaled score a district can receive is an 89.
    • A district received an 89 domain scaled score if it includes any campus with a corresponding domain rating of D or F. In this case, the highest scaled score a district can receive for that domain is an 89.
    • The district or campus received an F rating in either the School Progress, Part A or Part B domains; therefore, the better outcome of the two domains is limited to a scaled score of 89.
    • The district or campus received an F rating in either the Student Achievement domain or the School Progress domain; therefore, the better outcome of the two domains is limited to a scaled score of 89.
  • August 9, 2019

    On our Closing the Gaps report, the Pacific Islander student group had a 91.0 percent four-year federal graduation rate for 2019 and the report reflects a No for meeting the target. How can this be?

    As approved by the U.S. Department of Education, the state ESSA plan requires student groups who meet or exceed the four-year federal graduation target to improve that rate in the following year. As graduation rates are rounded to one decimal place, a student group must exceed their prior year rate by one-tenth of a percentage point. For example, if the Pacific Islander group achieved a 91.0 percent four-year federal graduation rate in 2018, they would have to achieve at least a 91.1 percent four-year federal graduation rate in 2019 to meet the target. This requirement can be found on page 36 of Chapter 4 of the 2019 Accountability Manual.

  • August 2, 2019

    Our campus has hired a new principal for the upcoming school year; however, TXschools.gov lists our previous principal in the profile section of our campus. When will this be updated? 

    The contact information listed in a district or campus profile page on TXschools.gov is updated each fall, spring, and summer from the information listed through the online Texas Education Directory, AskTED. To ensure the information shown in AskTED is accurate, please contact your district’s AskTED administrator to update records for your campuses and district. The profile section of TXschool.gov will then reflect those changes made through AskTED.   

     If you do not know who your district’s AskTED administrator is, you can find them using the AskTED website. Choose Search by district, select the Personnel information type radio button, check Include Other District Roles, and select TED ADMINISTRATOR.

  • July 26, 2019

    Has the U.S. Department of Education (USDE) approved the amendment to the state’s Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) plan to adjust the targets for the English Language Proficiency (ELP) measure? 

    At this time, TEA has not received a response from the USDE regarding the approval of the new proposed target. However, the agency is calculating 2019 accountability ratings using the amended ELP target of 36 percent. Additional information can be found in Chapter 4 of the 2019 Accountability Manual.

  • July 19, 2019

    How are 12th grade students identified for inclusion in the College, Career, and Military Readiness (CCMR) component of Closing the Gaps? 

    The Closing the Gaps CCMR denominator is annual graduates plus students in grade 12 who did not graduate. This includes grade 12 students who were in attendance during the last six weeks of school year 2017–18 but did not graduate, as reported in TSDS PEIMS attendance records.

  • July 12, 2019

    How do the component weights in the Closing the Gaps domain change if we don’t meet minimum size in one or more components?

    The weighting is proportionally distributed to those components that do meet the minimum size requirements.

    For example, a middle school met the minimum number of evaluated indicators in only two components. The campus does not have five evaluated indicators in the Student Achievement Domain Score: STAAR Component Only. It also does not meet minimum size for the English Language Proficiency component. The 20 percent total weight of the Student Achievement Domain Score: STAAR Component Only and English Language Proficiency components is distributed proportionally among the two remaining components.

    Removing the 20 percent from the denominator of the remaining components produces their new weights. In this case, 30/100 = 30 percent becomes 30/80 = 37.5 percent. In the same manner 50/100 = 50 percent becomes 50/80 = 62.5 percent. The new weightings sum to 100 percent as shown in the chart below:

    closing gap

  • June 28, 2019

    Can you delineate the 3 of 4 F provision and the provision that limits a district rating to a B if any of its campuses receive a D or F?

    Districts and campuses are considered separately for the 3 of 4 F provision. If a district has 3 of 4 areas rated an F, the provision is applied, and the highest scaled score the district can receive is a 59 (F) (unless the Student Achievement domain rating is a D or higher). If a campus has 3 of 4 areas rated an F, the provision is applied, and the highest scaled score the campus can receive is a 59 (F) (unless the Student Achievement domain rating is a D or higher).

    The second provision states that a district may not receive an overall or domain rating of A if the district includes any campus with a corresponding overall or domain rating of D or F. In other words, if a campus has a D or F in a domain, the district cannot receive an A in that domain. If a campus has an overall rating of D or F, the district cannot receive an A overall.

  • June 24, 2019

    How are the STAAR grades 5 and 8 results for students with Student Success Initiative (SSI) requirements included in accountability calculations? 

    For students in grades 5 and 8, accountability calculations include assessment results for reading and mathematics from the first administration and first retest administration of all STAAR versions. The second retest administration in June 2019 is not used.

    For students in grades 5 and 8, the STAAR reading and mathematics assessment results from the first and second administration (first retest opportunity) are processed in two steps. First, the best result from both administrations is found for each subject. The best result is found for performance and progress, considered separately. If all results have the same level of performance, then the most recent result is selected for calculation. Second, the accountability subset rules determine whether the result is included in accountability.

  • June 18, 2019

    In August 2018, campuses that received an Improvement Required rating in both the Student Achievement and the School Progress domains were placed on the 2019–20 Public Education Grant (PEG) List. In August 2019, will campuses that earn a D or F rating be placed on the 2020–21 PEG List?

    No. The 2020–21 PEG List, which will be released in August, will include campuses that receive an F rating in both the Student Achievement and the School Progress domains.

  • June 10, 2019

    The proposed 2019 Accountability Manual introduced the new OnRamps indicator for College, Career, and Military Readiness (CCMR). Must a student accept the college credit hours earned and have them transcribed on their transcript in order to receive CCMR credit?

    No. The OnRamps program provides the agency with OnRamps dual-enrollment course completion data that is used in accountability calculations. CCMR credit will be awarded for successful course completion and eligibility for college credit hours without regard to whether the student accepted the credit hours.

  • May 31, 2019

    Does the ELP component of the Closing the Gaps domain employ a subset rule similar to accountability subset applied to STAAR components?

    Yes. A subset rule will continue to be applied to the ELP component; if the student was enrolled in the same campus or district on the October 2018 TSDS PEIMS snapshot as the campus or district that they were administered the TELPAS in spring 2019, the result will be included in the district’s or campus’s 2019 ELP calculations.

     How are results included in accountability calculations for those students who move between the April English I/English II EOC and May EOC administrations?  

    English I and English II EOC assessment results from the April administration are assigned to the same campus or district as a May EOC assessment result. To meet the accountability subset, the student must have been administered the May assessment at the same campus or district that they were enrolled on fall snapshot.

     If the student took an English I or English II EOC in April but did not take an EOC in May, the April result is reported to the campus at which the April assessment was administered, even if the student moved between April and May.

  • May 24, 2019

    Does the English Language Proficiency component include students who test in nonconsecutive grade levels?

    Yes. The ELP component evaluates the TELPAS results for current ELs in grades K–12 who have made progress in developing their English language proficiency since it was last assessed. Enrolled grade level is not considered. 

  • May 17, 2019

    In 2018, a district could not receive an overall or domain rating of A if the district included any campus with an overall or corresponding domain rating of Improvement Required. With the implementation of letter grade ratings for campuses, this step will be updated for 2019 to align with statute. Statute specifies a district may not receive an overall or domain rating of A if the district includes any campus with a corresponding overall or domain rating of D or F. Does this provision also apply to each of the School Progress domain parts?

    No. This provision will only consider the resolved School Progress domain rating. In other words, if the better of School Progress, Part A or Part B is a D or F for a campus, the district School Progress domain scaled score is limited to an 89. 

    Keep in mind that this provision applies from domain to domain rating and overall to overall rating. For example, if a campus earns a D in Student Achievement, the district’s Student Achievement scaled score is limited to an 89. In turn, that 89 will be used to calculate the district’s overall rating. If a campus earns a D overall, the district’s overall scaled score is limited to an 89. 

  • May 10, 2019

    The CCMR Preview Student Listing released on April 25th did not include results for graduates who met the criterion score on the SAT or ACT. Will that data be provided to districts?

    The April 25th CCMR Preview Student Listing provided districts early access to nine CCMR indicators. Results for the remaining CCMR indicators are currently being processed and will be released for preview in late May. The second preview will include the following data:

    ·         AP/IB 

    ·         OnRamps 

    ·         Level I and Level II Certificates 

    ·         SAT and ACT Results 

    A final 2019 CCMR Student Listing will be released in mid-June through the TEA Login (TEAL) Accountability application.

  • May 6, 2019

    Are individualized education program (IEP) continuers included in 2019 College, Career, and Military Readiness (CCMR) calculations?

    The CCMR denominator in the Student Achievement domain only consists of 2018 annual graduates while the denominator in the Closing the Gaps domain consists of 2018 annual graduates plus students in grade 12 who did not graduate. These grade 12 students are those who were in attendance during the last six weeks of school year 2017–18 as reported in TSDS PEIMS attendance records. 

    Grade 12 students reported in the TSDS PEIMS 2017–18 fall collection as individualized education program (IEP) continuers are excluded from the Closing the Gaps CCMR denominator for 2019. IEP continuers are students who are at least 18 years of age by September 1, have satisfied credit requirements for high school graduation, have not completed their IEP, and are enrolled and receiving IEP services. 

    Grade 12 students reported in TSDS PEIMS as IEP Continuers on the 2017–18 October snapshot will be excluded from the Closing the Gaps CCMR denominator for 2019 accountability.

    STAAR data files show values of 0, 1, or 2 for progress. Are these point values used to calculate School Progress, Part A: Academic Growth? Where can I find my 0.5 point awarded for students who maintained performance?

    No. In the STAAR data files, a 0 indicates Limited progress, a 1 indicates Expected progress, and a 2 indicates Accelerated progress. For Academic Growth, one point is awarded for Expected or Accelerated progress. For additional information, including when 0.5 point is awarded, see the matrices in Chapter 3 of the 2019 Accountability Manual. 

  • April 26, 2019

    What are Level I and Level II certificates, and how are they used in CCMR?

    According to the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (THECB), Level I and Level II certificates are awarded by an institution of higher education (IHE) certifying the satisfactory completion of a higher education program. Upon completion, a certificate is valid without further action on the individual’s part. They are usually awarded in workforce education areas by public and private two-year institutions. Level I certificates are awarded for completing a program consisting of at least 15 and no more than 42 semester credit hours. Level II certificates are awarded for completing a program of at least 30 but not more than 51 semester credit hours.

    Certificates are different from certifications, which are not administered by an institution of higher education; instead, certifications are administered by a certification body, usually an organization such as a trade association or industry-approved testing entity. Certifications are often time-limited credentials, where individuals need to meet ongoing requirements to maintain the currency of the certification.

    Credit will be awarded in CCMR for graduates (and non-graduating 12th graders in Closing the Gaps) who have earned Level I or Level II certificates. The THECB will provide TEA Level I and Level II certificate completion data.

  • April 22, 2019

    TEA recently published the 2019 CTE Courses Aligned with Industry-Based Certifications (IBC) for 2019 accountability and the 2019–20 Approved Industry-Based Certifications lists. Why aren’t the aligned courses for all the updated IBCs listed on the 2019–20 IBC list? For example, Floral Design is listed on the 2019–20 IBC list but it doesn’t have a corresponding course on the 2019 list of CTE aligned courses. 

    The courses on the 2019 accountability CTE list are aligned with the previous 73 IBCs, which are applicable to 2018 graduates. The newly published list of 244 IBCs becomes effective during the 2019–20 school year and will be used for 2021 accountability.

    Floral Design will not be used until August 2021 accountability ratings, which will evaluate 2020 graduates. Additionally, the CTE Coherent Sequence Coursework Aligned with Industry-Based Certifications indicator will be transitioned out in August 2020. 2020 graduates must earn an approved IBC (or meet the criteria in another indicator) in order to earn credit for College, Career, and Military Readiness.

  • April 15, 2019

    In 2018, a district could not receive an overall or domain rating of A if the district included any campus with an overall or corresponding domain rating of Improvement Required. With the implementation of letter grade ratings for campuses, this step will be updated for 2019 to align with statute. Statute specifies a district may not receive an overall or domain rating of A if the district includes any campus with a corresponding overall or domain rating of D or F. Does this provision also apply to each of the School Progress domain parts?

    No. This provision will only consider the resolved School Progress domain rating. In other words, if the better of School Progress, Part A or Part B is a D or F for a campus, the district School Progress domain scaled score is limited to an 89. 

    Keep in mind that this provision applies from domain to domain rating and overall to overall rating. For example, if a campus earns a D in Student Achievement, the district’s Student Achievement scaled score is limited to an 89. If a campus earns a D overall, the district’s overall scaled score is limited to an 89. 

  • April 5, 2019

    If a student receives an industry-based certification at our school in the fall, but withdraws in the spring and graduates from another high school, which school gets "credit" for the certification?

    Industry-based certifications are linked to students. The campus from which the student was reported as a graduate in TSDS PEIMS will receive CCMR credit for this graduate. The accountability subset rule does not apply when evaluating CCMR; it is only applicable when calculating assessment outcomes.

  • March 29, 2019

    In response to the March 21, 2019, To The Administrator Addressed letter, will TEA continue to include substitute assessments in accountability calculations for 2019?

    Currently there is no change to the 2018–19 school year in relation to the U.S. Department of Education’s (USDE) action item regarding substitute assessments. Substitute assessments submitted in summer 2018, December 2018, and spring 2019 will be included at the Meets Grade Level standard. 

    TEA is requesting that the USDE’s Office of State Support (OSS) grant TEA additional time to generate an action plan to research the feasibility of the continued use of substitute assessments in accountability as allowable locally-selected assessments under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), as amended by ESSA.

    The 2019 Accountability Manual—expected to be published in the Texas Register for a 30-day public comment period in May and effective early August—will provide additional details about the use of substitute assessments in the 2019 accountability system.

  • March 11, 2019

    How are student attendance rates used in determining our accountability rating?

    Attendance rates are not used as an indicator to generate accountability ratings. However, the attendance rate is an indicator evaluated when determining distinction designations for academic achievement in ELA/reading, mathematics, science, and social studies. The attendance rate is based on student attendance for the entire school year for students in grades 1–12. 

  • March 5, 2019

    Is a district’s financial accountability rating a factor in the A–F ratings system?

    The A–F rating system for academic accountability and the state's school financial accountability rating system (School Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas [FIRST]) are separate systems, but the results of both are posted on TXschools.gov. Whereas the A–F rating system holds districts and campuses accountable for the academic performance of students, FIRST ensures that Texas school districts and open-enrollment charter schools are accountable for the quality of their fiscal management practices. FIRST also encourages schools to better manage their financial resources in order to provide the maximum allocation possible for direct instructional purposes. For more information on FIRST ratings, please visit TEA’s Division of Financial Compliance website.

  • January 10, 2019 

    Why does my TAPR show asterisks for entire student groups for a particular grade level and subject area when looking at STAAR performance? 

    In order to comply with the federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and to insure personally identifiable information is not compromised, TAPR uses special symbols (masking) to maintain student confidentiality when a numerator is fewer than 5. Because the TAPR now shows STAAR performance disaggregated by the Approaches, Meets, and Masters Grade Level, the Masters Grade Level numerator often triggers a need to mask data, as it may be fewer than 5. In this case, all STAAR performance levels for that student group for that grade level and subject area are masked.

    For small districts and campuses, this further disaggregation of data has resulted in much more masking than in the past.

  • Regarding the four-year federal graduation rate that is used in the Closing the Gaps domain, student groups who met or exceeded their targets will be required to exceed that rate in the following year. Does this mean that if, for example, the Pacific Islander student group had a 91.0 percent federal graduation rate in 2018, they’d have to have at least a 92.0 percent federal graduation rate in 2019? 

    No, graduation rates are rounded to one decimal place; therefore, the student group must exceed their prior year rate by one tenth of a percentage point. For example, if the student group achieved a 91.0 percent federal graduation rate in 2018, they’d have to achieve at least a 91.1 percent federal graduation rate in 2019 to meet the target.

  • On November 15, 2018, we received a notification requiring that our district classify each of our campuses by enrollment type in AskTED. How do I know which category to select, and how will this designation be used?

    The campus enrollment type determination must be made by the district by evaluating which description(s) most accurately reflect current year enrollment practices. The AskTED data collection will be used to evaluate the feasibility of adding enrollment type as a variable in campus comparison group construction in future (2020 or later) accountability systems. Campus enrollment type will be added in the future as a TSDS PEIMS element. 

  • What happens when a district or campus does not meet the 95 percent participation target in the Closing the Gaps domain? 

    Should the participation rate for the all students group or any student group fall below 95 percent, the denominator used for calculating performance in the Closing the Gaps Academic Achievement component is adjusted to include the necessary number of assessments to meet the 95 percent threshold. The performance results shown on the Closing the Gaps domain data table account for any adjustments that were made. Below is an example of this adjustment.

    Example:

    Original ELA/Reading Academic Achievement Performance Calculation:

    53 assessments at Meets Grade Level or above standard

    ---divided by---

    93 scored assessments that meet accountability subset

    (out of the 100 total assessments)

     

    Adjusted ELA/Reading Academic Achievement Performance Calculation:

    53 assessments at Meets Grade Level or above standard

    ---divided by--- 

    95 assessments (93 scored plus 2 absent/other assessments)

  • Students who pass the optional English III EOC and Algebra II EOC are considered (Texas Success Initiative) TSI exempt. Many of these students do not take the TSIA, ACT, or SAT; therefore, they do not meet the TSI requirement in ELA and mathematics through the TSIA, ACT, or SAT. Why don't students who meet the requirements on English III and Algebra II EOCs credit the College, Career, and Military Readiness (CCMR) components in accountability?

    Statute (TEC §39.0238 [f][1]) prohibits the use of Algebra II and English III results in accountability calculations; therefore, they may not be used to credit the CCMR component.   

  • Targeted support and improvement campuses will be identified for the first time in 2019 using 2017, 2018, and 2019 Closing the Gaps data. What if a student group missed the target for an indicator in 2017, didn’t meet minimum size to be evaluated in 2018 but missed the target again in 2019? Will the consecutive years start over with 2019? 

    No, consecutive years do not start over. Each year that the student group meets minimum size is considered. For example, in the scenario described above, if the student group met minimum size for that indicator again in 2020 and did not meet the target, the campus would be identified for targeted support for 2020. Furthermore, if the student student group did not meet minimum size for that indicator again in 2020 but did in 2021 and did not meet the target, it would be identified for targeted support for 2021. In other words, it is three consecutive years for which the student group and indicator was evaluated. 

  • Do students count toward the Texas Success Initiative (TSI) Criteria indicator if they meet the ELA/reading criteria on an assessment (SAT, ACT, or TSIA) and earn credit for a mathematics college prep course?  

    Yes, the TSI Criteria indicator gives credit for students who meet the standards on a Texas Success Initiative assessment (TSIA), SAT,  ACT, or complete and earn credit for a college prep course within the respective subject area. Students must meet the criteria for both reading and mathematics but do not have to meet both on the same assessment/course. For example, a student who met the ELA/reading TSI criteria on the ACT and earned credit for a mathematics college prep course would credit the TSI indicator. 

  • Performance Reporting has received multiple inquiries regarding the U.S. Armed Forces indicator included in the College, Career, and Military Readiness components of the accountability system. The data source for this indicator is TSDS PEIMS Element ID E1589. 

    The wording of the element was designed to align with statute— “students who enlist in the armed forces of the United States.” Since the introduction of this indicator, the agency has received feedback from the Department of Defense regarding access to records for military enlistment. For reasons of national security and privacy, the department is unable to share post-enlistment data with TEA or districts. As a result, districts need to decide how to collect and report data for students who have enlisted or intend to enlist in the U.S. Armed Forces. At this time, Performance Reporting will not provide a list of what would or would not suffice for documentation for the intent to enlist. Each district must maintain supporting documentation to support the data submission. However it is collected, we recommend keeping accurate records to support the submission. While the ASVAB may be part of the documentation a district uses to document military enlistment, a student taking an ASVAB, with no other supporting documentation, may not necessarily indicate the intent to enlist. 

    The U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force, Coast Guard, and Marines are considered for this indicator. For accountability purposes, Reserve Forces and the National Guard are not considered to be part of the U.S. Armed Forces. 

  • Is the y-axis of School Progress, Part B: Relative Performance the raw or scaled score from the Student Achievement domain?

    Relative Performance evaluates the overall student performance using the raw STAAR component (for elementary and middle schools) or the average of the raw STAAR and College, Career, and Military Readiness components (for high schools, K–12s, and districts) from the Student Achievement domain. 

    To view additional House Bill 22 FAQs, please visit https://tea.texas.gov/perfreport/resources/index.html 

  • Why are the Closing the Gaps domain component weights for elementary and middle schools in recent presentations different from the final ESSA state plan? Also, I’ve heard that the state has requested a waiver for the English Language Proficiency component. If the waiver is granted, what will happen to the 10 percent currently assigned to the English Language Proficiency component?

     

    The weights provided in recent presentations reflect an amendment to the state ESSA plan. If the amendment is approved, Closing the Gaps domain components will be weighted as follows for elementary/middle schools and high schools/K–12, and districts:

     

    Elementary/Middle Schools

    Component

    Weight

    Academic Achievement

    30%

    Academic Growth

    50%

    English Language Proficiency

    10%

    Student Achievement Domain Score: STAAR Component Only

    10%

     

    High School/K–12/District

    Component

    Weight

    Academic Achievement

    50%

    Federal Graduation Status

    10%

    English Language Proficiency

    10%

    College, Career and Military Readiness

    30%

    Due to changes to the TELPAS, TEA has requested a waiver from the USDE to waive the English Language Proficiency component for 2018 accountability. If granted, the English Language Proficiency component weight will be distributed proportionally to the remaining components as follows:

    Elementary/Middle Schools

    Component

    Weight

    Academic Achievement

    33.3%

    Academic Growth

    55.6%

    Student Achievement Domain Score: STAAR Component Only

    11.1%

     

    High School/K–12/District

    Component

    Weight

    Academic Achievement

    55.6%

    Federal Graduation Status

    11.1%

    College, Career and Military Readiness

    33.3%

  • What data sources are used to determine whether a graduate met the criteria for dual-credit course completion for College, Career, and Military Readiness? 

    Three specific TSDS PEIMS data codes are used to determine whether the graduate met the dual-credit course requirement. First, the course must be identified as dual credit in TSDS PEIMS Element ID E1011. Second, the number of hours earned is sourced from TSDS PEIMS Element ID E1081. Third, the course completion record must indicate the student completed all semesters of the course in TSDS PEIMS Element ID E0948.

    The codes valid for completion are 0, 2, 5, or 9: 

    0 – completed a one semester course 

    2 – completed the second half of a two semester course

    5 – completed the last third of a three semester course

    9 – completed the last fourth of a four semester course 

    To view more 2018 accountability FAQs, please visit https://tea.texas.gov/perfreport/resources/index.html

    Additionally, the 2018 Accountability Administrator’s Guide, which is intended to provide relevant information about this year’s accountability system to school district and open-enrollment charter school administrators, is available at https://tea.texas.gov/2018Accountability.aspx

  • We have an English learner (EL) who was identified on the STAAR answer document as an EL but does not have a current year scored TELPAS. How is this student included in accountability?

    The EL status from the STAAR answer document is used for demographic purposes. The student is included in the EL student group population. In order to apply exclusions for years in U.S. schools or for unschooled asylee, unschooled refuge, or students with interrupted formal education (SIFE) status, TEA must receive a current year TELPAS document. Additionally, the TELPAS years in U.S. schools and asylee, refugee, or SIFE information must not be blank. As this student does not have a current year TELPAS, the EL exclusion rules will not be applied.

    To view additional information regarding TELPAS answer documents, please visit https://tea.texas.gov/student.assessment/manuals/dccm/

    To view additional House Bill 22 FAQs, please visit https://tea.texas.gov/perfreport/resources/index.html