Frequently Asked Questions

Exemplary campuses but Acceptable district

Q: All the campuses in our district are Exemplary or Recognized, but the district is rated Acceptable. How can that be?

A: It is often the case that individual schools have higher ratings than their district because there are fewer students at the school level. That is, while schools and districts are held accountable for the performance of all students, the individual student groups must have at least 30 students to be considered in the ratings system. For that reason an elementary school might only be judged on 7 or 8 indicators because it only had a handful of students taking (for example) 5th grade TAKS science, but at the district level, where science is tested in grades 5, 10, and 11, there are enough students in each group, so the district is held accountable for the performance of every student group in science.

Also, elementary and middle schools are not accountable for the Completion Rate indicator. As a result, districts are more likely to be held accountable for all 36 indicators, while many schools are held accountable to fewer than 10 indicators.

Q: I carefully checked the performance of my district on every indicator, and it appears they should be rated Recognized, but the state rated them Acceptable. How can this be?

A: Districts whose performance is at the Recognized or Exemplary level can be held to a rating of Academically Acceptable for several reasons:

  1. Any district that has one or more campuses rated Academically Unacceptable cannot receive a rating of Exemplary or Recognized.
    2.  
     
  2. Districts are required to report the "leaver" status of all grade 7–12 students who were enrolled at any time in the prior year (2004–05) but who did not continue in the current year (2005–06). These students may have left the district because they graduated, transferred to another district, dropped out, or some other reason. When districts fail to provide a leaver record for a student who is no longer in enrollment, TEA counts him or her as underreported. In order to maintain a rating of Exemplary or Recognized, districts must not exceed the accountability standards for underreporting students.
    3.  
     
  3. Districts are held responsible for the performance of all their students, including those who attend campuses that do not receive a regular rating, such as a Juvenile Justice Alternative Education Program.

Please see the 2006 Accountability Manual for more information on student groups and minimum size requirements (Chapter 2), underreported leavers (Chapter 3), and additional students in district ratings (Chapter 3).

Comparing TAKS performance from 2005 to TAKS performance from 2006

Q: I checked the 2005 TAKS performance shown on the 2006 Data Tables with that shown on the 2004–05 AEIS reports, and the numbers don't match. Why is this?

A: In order to allow for "apples to apples" comparison, the 2005 TAKS results were recomputed to match the 2006 student passing standards. For this reason, the results shown on the 2006 data tables may differ in a number of ways from the AEIS reports:

  1. Different Passing Standard. In order to allow for Required Improvement to be applied fairly, and to allow for comparison across years, TAKS performance is also provided for 2005. It will not match last year's reports exactly, due to the different student passing standards used for the exit-level TAKS in 2005 and 2006. 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 1 standard error of measurement (SEM) below panel recommendation for students in grade 11. For 2006, the passing standard for grade 11 is panel recommendation. The 2005 performance for grade 11 was recalculated to show how many would have passed at the 2006 standard. This provides an accurate comparison of performance across the two years.
  2. Summed Across Grades. Only performance "summed across all grades" is used for accountability purposes. The AEIS reports provide grade-level performance as well as performance summed across grades. The closest comparison to the 2005 performance used for 2006 accountability is that shown in the section in the AEIS reports titled:
    TAKS Met Standard (Sum of All Grades Tested)
    (Panel Recommendation)

Comparing Completion Rates from the class of 2004 to the class of 2005

Q: I checked the Class of 2004 Completion Rate shown on the 2006 Data Tables with that shown on the 2004–05 AEIS reports, and the numbers don't match. Why is this?

A: In order to allow for "apples to apples" comparison, prior year Completion Rate II results were replaced with Completion Rate I results. The definition of a "completer" has changed for the 2006 accountability year. Beginning this year, "Completion Rate I" is used for accountability purposes. Under this definition, students who attain a GED certificate are no longer considered completers. Only those students who received a high school diploma with their class (or earlier) and students who re-enrolled in the fall of 2005 will count as completers. Note that Completion Rate II remains in use under the Alternative Education Accountability (AEA) procedures.

Mobility

Q: What happens when a student comes to my school just a week before the TAKS test? We try hard to get them ready for the tests, but it's difficult with so little time. Will their performance affect our rating?

A: No, students who change schools after the PEIMS snapshot date (end of October) and before the date of testing are taken out of the accountability subset. Please see Chapter 2, Table 3 in the 2006 Accountability Manual for a complete explanation.

Masking

Q: Why does the data table for my school show >99% under Percent Met Standard? I know that 100% of the students passed that test!

A: The accountability data tables now employ more masking of assessment data than has been used in the past, in order to comply with the federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). For more detailed information, please see the Explanation of Masking.