_Section VII - AYP and the Accountability System_

The federal legislation known as No Child Left Behind (NCLB) requires that all schools and districts be evaluated for Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). Although Texas has had an academic accountability system in place since 1993, its campuses and districts must also meet the federally defined requirements of AYP in order to continue receiving essential federal funding.

The following plan for alignment of the two systems has been approved by the U.S. Department of Education. However, this alignment will not be fully implemented with the 2004 ratings, due to new federal requirements that have delayed the AYP release. For further information about AYP, refer to that website at http://www.tea.state.tx.us/ayp/index.html.

Systems Aligned

The state accountability system, mandated by the Texas legislature, and the AYP procedures, mandated by the U.S. Department of Education, will be aligned in a number of ways:

Release Date. The release dates for state accountability ratings and AYP status will be aligned in the future, but not in 2004.
Labels. The labels for state ratings will include the AYP status. Labels will also show the reasons AYP was not met. These labels will appear for both Title I and non-Title I campuses and districts:
- Exemplary, Meets AYP
- Exemplary, Missed AYP [reason]
- Recognized, Meets AYP
- Recognized, Missed AYP [reason]
- Academically Acceptable, Meets AYP
- Academically Acceptable, Missed AYP [reason]
- Academically Unacceptable, Meets AYP
- Academically Unacceptable, Missed AYP [reason]
  (These labels will not be available in time for the September 30, 2004 release.)
Appeals Process. The appeals processes for state ratings and AYP status are aligned to the extent possible. See Section VIII - Appealing the Ratings for more information.
Final Ratings Release. Post-appeals state ratings and AYP status will be released concurrently in the future, but not in 2004.

Comparison

The following two tables provide an overview of how the two systems overlap. Table 8 is oriented by grade span; a district or campus can see which indicators under each system will affect them.

Table 9 is oriented by indicator. It contains a more detailed comparison of the indicators, restrictions, requirements, and source data for both systems.

Table 8: 2004 Comparison of State Accountability System to Adequate Yearly Progress by Grade Level

†Reading
/ELA

†Math

Writing

Social Studies

Science

‡SDAA

**HS
Completion

Dropout

Attendance

Participation

Read/ELA

Math

Grade 1 ¥

All Students

AYP

AA/H/W/ED*

Special Ed & LEP

Grade 2 ¥

All Students

AYP

AA/H/W/ED*

Special Ed & LEP

Grade 3

All Students

AYP/State

AYP

AA/H/W/ED*

AYP/State

AYP

Special Ed & LEP

AYP

Grade 4

All Students

AYP/State

State

AYP/State

AYP

AA/H/W/ED*

AYP/State

State

AYP

Special Ed & LEP

AYP

Grade 5

All Students

AYP/State

State

AYP/State

AYP

AA/H/W/ED*

AYP/State

State

AYP

Special Ed & LEP

AYP

Grade 6

All Students

AYP/State

AYP

AA/H/W/ED*

AYP/State

AYP

Special Ed & LEP

AYP

Grade 7

All Students

AYP/State

State

AYP/State

State

AYP

AA/H/W/ED*

AYP/State

State

AYP

State

AYP

Special Ed & LEP

AYP

Grade 8

All Students

AYP/State

State

AYP/State

State

AYP

AA/H/W/ED*

AYP/State

State

AYP

State

AYP

Special Ed & LEP

AYP

Grade 9

All Students

State

AA/H/W/ED*

State

Special Ed & LEP

Grade 10

All Students

AYP/State

State

AYP

AA/H/W/ED*

AYP/State

State

AYP

Special Ed & LEP

AYP

Grade 11

All Students

State

AA/H/W/ED*

State

Special Ed & LEP

Grade 12

All Students

AYP/State

AA/H/W/ED*

AYP

Special Ed & LEP

* AA/H/W/ED refers to the student groups African American, Hispanic, White, and Economically Disadvantaged.

** High School Completion is defined differently for AYP: Under AYP, a longitudinal Graduation rate is used, which includes only diploma recipients. Differences also exist between the two systems in the treatment of secondary schools without their own completion data.

¥ Schools are paired when they do not have grades tested. Pairing circumstances differ between the two systems.

† Performance on TAKS reading/ELA and math include slightly different groups of students for AYP: Minimum size for student groups in AYP is 50/10%/200; for state accountability it is 30/10%/50.

‡ Performance on SDAA is used differently for AYP: Under AYP, SDAA performance is combined with TAKS performance. In the state system, SDAA is evaluated as a separate indicator.

Table 9: Comparison of 2004 State Accountability to Federal Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)

	State Accountability	AYP (preliminary)
TAKS
Subjects & Standards	Reading/ELA-- Exemplary 90% / Recognized 70% / Acceptable 50% Mathematics -- Exemplary 90% / Recognized 70% / Acceptable 35% Writing -- Exemplary 90% / Recognized 70% / Acceptable 50% Social Studies -- Exemplary 90% / Recognized 70% / Acceptable 50% Science -- Exemplary 90% / Recognized 70% / Acceptable 25% All values rounded to whole numbers. Includes cumulative pass rate for grade 3 reading.	Reading/ELA-- Meets AYP 47% Mathematics -- Meets AYP 33% All values rounded to whole numbers.* *Includes cumulative pass rate for grade 3 reading.
Grades	3-11 (English); 3-6 (Spanish)	3-8, and 10 (English); 3-6 (Spanish)
Student Groups	All Students African American Hispanic White Economically Disadvantaged	All Students African American Hispanic White Economically Disadvantaged Special Education Limited English Proficient (LEP)
Minimum Size	All Students -- Any (Special Analysis if small) Student Groups -- 30/10%/50	All Students -- Any (Special Analysis if small) Student Groups -- 50/10%/200
Improvement	To Acceptable: Has enough gain to meet Acceptable standard in 2 years. To Recognized: At 65% - 69% and has gain to meet 70% standard in 2 years. Minimum Size (all students and groups): At least 10 in prior year.	10% decrease in percent not passing and at least 0.1% improvement on "other measure." TAKS - no prior year minimum size; Other Measure - student groups must meet 50/10%/200 both years.
Pairing	Paired with feeder campus (or district).	Paired with feeder campus (or district).
SDAA
Subjects & Standards	Reading + Mathematics + Writing Exemplary 90% / Recognized 70% / Acceptable 50% Number "met expectations" summed across grades and subjects. Results rounded to whole numbers.	SDAA (grades 3-8 only) is combined with TAKS and other assessments by subject for performance and participation. See TAKS (above) for standards, subjects, and groups. Note: there is a cap on the percentage of students who can be counted as proficient based on alternative assessment results (i.e. SDAA, and LDAA).
Grades	3-8
Student Groups	All Students only
Minimum Size	All Students -- At least 30 tests in denominator Student Groups -- N/A
Improvement	To Acceptable: Has enough gain to meet 50% standard in 2 years. To Recognized: At 65% - 69% and has gain to meet 70% standard in 2 years. Minimum Size (all students only): At least 10 tests in prior year.
Pairing	N/A: No pairing for SDAA.
Other Assessment Indicators
RPTE and LEP Math	N/A: Indicator not evaluated.	Combined with TAKS and SDAA results (by subject for students not tested on TAKS or SDAA) for Performance and Participation.
LDAA	N/A: Indicator not evaluated.
Additional Assessment Features
Mobility Adjustment	District and campus accountability subsets used.	District and campus accountability subsets used.
Exceptions	Allowed for up to 3 of the 26 TAKS and SDAA measures depending on the number of assessment measures evaluated.* *Only used to move to Acceptable; must be within 5 percentage points of Acceptable standard; other conditions apply.	N/A
Attendance Rate (grades 1-8)
Standard	N/A: Used only for Gold Performance Acknowledgment (for grades 1-12).	Met -- 90.0% "Other Measure" for elementary and middle schools. All values rounded to one-tenth.
Student Groups		All Students only
Minimum Size		All Students -- 7,200 (40 students x 180 days) Student Groups* -- 50/10%/200 *Student groups used only for performance gain.
Improvement		At least 0.1% improvement.
Completion Rate (grades 9-12)
Standards	Grads+cont+GED -- Exemplary 95.0%/Recognized 85.0%/Acceptable 75.0% All values rounded to one-tenth.	Graduates only -- 70.0% "Other Measure" for high schools and districts. All values rounded to one-tenth.
Student Groups	All Students African American Hispanic White Economically Disadvantaged	All Students only
Minimum Size	All Students -- At least 10 non-completers and 10 in denominator Student Groups -- At least 10 non-completers and 30/10%/50 in denominator	All Students -- At least 40 in denominator Student Groups* -- 50/10%/200 *Student groups used only for performance gain.
Improvement	To Acceptable: Has gain to meet 75% standard in 2 years To Recognized: n/a Minimum Size (All Students and groups): At least 10 in prior year	At least 0.1% improvement
High School w/o completion rate	District completion rate used.	N/A: Indicator not evaluated.
Annual Dropout Rate (grades 7-8)
Standards	Grades 7-8 Exemplary 0.2% / Recognized 0.7% / Acceptable 2.0% All values rounded to one-tenth.	N/A: Indicator not evaluated.
Student Groups	All Students African American Hispanic White Economically Disadvantaged
Minimum Size	All Students -- At least 10 dropouts and 10 in denominator Student Groups -- At least 10 dropouts and 30/10%/50 in denominator
Improvement	To Acceptable: Has decline to meet 2.0% standard in 2 years. To Recognized: n/a. Minimum Size (All Students and groups): At least 10 in prior year.
Middle School w/o dropout rate	N/A: Indicator not evaluated.
Participation Rate: Reading & Mathematics
Standard	N/A: Indicator not evaluated. Data investigations may occur with excessive exemptions.	Tested at campus/district -- 95% All values rounded to whole numbers.
Student Groups		All Students African American Hispanic White Economically Disadvantaged Special Education Limited English Proficient (LEP)
Minimum Size		All Students -- At least 40 in denominator Student Groups -- 50/10%/200
Other Campus and District Situations
Registered Alternative Education Campuses	Rated Alternative Education.	Evaluated under same criteria as regular campuses.
Charter Operators	Evaluated under same criteria as regular districts.* Charter Operators may be rated Alternative Education; if new for 2003-04, then may be* Not Rated.	N/A: Not evaluated.
Charter Schools	Evaluated under same criteria as regular campuses. (Charter schools are not paired.)	Evaluated under same criteria as regular campuses.
New Campuses	If Unacceptable, then Not Rated.	N/A: Not evaluated.
Additional District Requirements	Must have no Unacceptable campuses to be Exemplary or Recognized. Must meet Underreported Student standards to be Exemplary or Recognized.	No additional district requirements.

Accountability 2004 | Accountability | Performance Reporting | TEA Home