_Chapter 12 - AEA Ratings_

This chapter illustrates how to apply the alternative education accountability (AEA) indicator data results and the additional features of AEA to determine ratings for registered alternative education campuses (AECs) and charters evaluated under AEA procedures.

Who is Rated?

The state accountability system is required to rate all districts and campuses serving students in grades 1-12.  Under the new AEA procedures, the first step in determining AEA ratings is to identify the universe of AECs and charters.  The AEA universe consists of:

• AECs of Choice and Residential Facilities that meet the registration criteria, register as an AEC, and meet the at-risk registration criterion;
• charters that operate only registered AECs; and
• charters that operate both standard campuses and registered AECs, meet the AEC enrollment criterion, and opt to be evaluated under AEA procedures.

The next step is to determine whether the AEC or charter has TAKS results on which it can be evaluated.  In order to attain an AEA: Academically Acceptable rating, AECs and charters must have at least one Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) test result.  Furthermore, performance on any one of the TAKS subjects is sufficient for a rating to be assigned.  AECs with no TAKS test results are evaluated using district at-risk performance results.  Information on use of district at-risk data is in Chapter 11 – Additional Features of AEA.  AECs and charters need not have data for the State-Developed Alternative Assessment II (SDAA II), Completion Rate II, and Annual Dropout Rate indicators to receive an AEA rating.  Charters that have only SDAA II results, Completion Rate II, and/or Annual Dropout Rate will not receive an AEA rating.

AECs and charters with very small numbers of TAKS test results in the accountability subset may ultimately receive an AEA: Not Rated – Other label.  Special Analysis is employed when very small numbers of total tests determine whether a rating is appropriate.  AECs undergo Special Analysis when the AEC is evaluated on district at-risk data and there are fewer than 10 at-risk TAKS tests in the district.  Charters are rated on the aggregate performance of all students in the charter.  Charters with TAKS results for fewer than 10 tests will receive Special Analysis under circumstances similar to those used in the standard accountability procedures.  Special Analysis consists of analyzing current and past performance data to determine if the initial rating assigned under the evaluation process is an aberration or an indication of consistent performance.  Additional details on Special Analysis are in Chapter 6 – Special Issues and Circumstances.

AEA Rating Labels

Accountability rating labels for districts are specified in statute.  Beginning in 2004, campuses are assigned the same labels as districts under the standard accountability procedures.  Registered AECs and charters rated under AEA procedures are assigned three rating labels:

• AEA: Academically Acceptable
• AEA: Academically Unacceptable
• AEA: Not Rated – Other

Table 15:  AEA Rating Labels

Accountability ratings are final when the accountability appeals process for the year is completed in the fall following release of the ratings in August.

Using the Data Table to Determine an AEA Rating

On June 21, completion/dropout data from the Texas Education Agency (TEA) will be released to districts and campuses in the TEA Secure Environment (TEASE).  On July 20, prior to finalizing all computations necessary for accountability ratings, preview data tables will be available in TEASE for the district and each campus.

These tables will not show a rating and will not provide calculations for Required Improvement.  However, by using the preview data tables and the 2007 Accountability Manual, districts can anticipate their ratings in advance of the TEA ratings release on

August 1.  The preview data tables will contain unmasked data and must be treated as confidential.  The performance of individual students may be shown.

A sample unmasked preview data table for a campus serving grades 9-12 follows.  This grade span includes data for all AEA indicators.

The sample preview data table above illustrates the types of information provided.  See Chapter 10 – AEA Base Indicators for more information about each measure.  The final AEA data table released in August may include minor modifications.  An explanation of each numbered topic follows.

1. Confidential:  Performance data are unmasked on the AEA data tables posted in TEASE.  For this reason, personal student information may be shown.  To be compliant with the federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), all unmasked data must be treated as confidential.
   
   Alternative Education Accountability (AEA) Procedures:  This indicates that the AEC or charter is rated under AEA procedures.  Campuses not registered for evaluation under AEA procedures are evaluated under standard accountability procedures.
2. % At-Risk:  All registered AECs must meet the at-risk registration criterion or the applicable safeguards in order to remain registered and be evaluated under AEA procedures.
3. Campus Type:  Each AEC registered for evaluation under AEA procedures is designated as an AEC of Choice or Residential Facility.
4. Rating:  AEA rating labels are not available for the preview data tables.
5. Messages:  A complete list of messages that may appear on AEA data tables is provided later in this chapter.

District at-risk TAKS data used:  If an AEC has no TAKS results or does not meet the 45% TAKS Progress standard based on results for fewer than 10 tests, then the AEC is evaluated on performance of at-risk students in the district.

If the AEC does not meet the performance standard based on district performance data of at-risk students, then Required Improvement is calculated using district performance data of at-risk students.

SDAA II not evaluated due to grade span, small numbers, or no data:  If the AEC or charter does not serve students in grades 3-10 or has fewer than 30 SDAA II test results in the accountability subset, then the AEC or charter is not evaluated on SDAA II.

District at-risk Completion Rate II used:  If the AEC of Choice does not meet the 75.0% Completion Rate II standard or demonstrate Required Improvement, does not meet minimum size requirements for All Students, or if the AEC of Choice serves students in any of grades 9-12 but does not have a Completion Rate II, then the AEC of Choice is evaluated on the Completion Rate II of at-risk students in the district.

If the AEC of Choice does not meet the accountability standard based on at-risk students in the district, then Required Improvement is calculated using Completion Rate II of at-risk students in the district.

6. Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) (Grades 3-12):  One of the four AEA base indicators on which AECs and charters are evaluated.  The TAKS Progress indicator evaluates test results across grades and subjects.

Analysis Groups Evaluated:  Analysis groups used to determine AEA ratings are marked with an ‘X.’

# Tests Met Standard:  The numerator used to calculate % Met Standard – TAKS tests meeting the standard or having a TGI score of 0 (zero) or higher and exit-level retests meeting the standard at the spring administrations or in the previous fall or summer.

# Tests:  The denominator used to calculate % Met Standard – TAKS tests taken and exit-level retests meeting the standard at the spring administrations or in the previous fall or summer.

% Met Standard:  The percent of tests that met the TAKS Progress standard.

Student Group %:  Used to identify which student groups meet minimum size requirements for the indicator.  TAKS performance is always evaluated for All Students and the following student groups meeting minimum size requirements:  African American, Hispanic, White, and Economically Disadvantaged.

TAKS Required Improvement:  Moves an AEC or charter to AEA: Academically Acceptable if the AEC or charter demonstrates sufficient improvement on the deficient TAKS measures to meet a standard of 45% within two years.  Required Improvement is not calculated if the AEC or charter has fewer than 10 test results (for the student group) in 2006.

Actual Change:  The difference between performance in 2007 and 2006.  Actual Change is always shown when two years of data are available.

7. State-Developed Alternative Assessment II (SDAA II) (Grades 3-10):  One of the four AEA base indicators on which AECs and charters are evaluated.  SDAA II assesses grades 3-10 students with disabilities who receive instruction in the state’s curriculum but for whom the TAKS test is inappropriate.

Analysis Groups Evaluated:  Analysis groups used to determine AEA ratings are marked with an ‘X.’

SDAA II performance is evaluated for All Students only.  Student groups are not evaluated.

# Tests Met ARD Expectations:  The numerator used to calculate % Met ARD Expectations – SDAA II tests Meeting ARD Expectations.

# Tests:  The denominator used to calculate % Met ARD Expectations – SDAA II tests taken.

% Met ARD Expectations:  The percent of tests that Met ARD Expectations.

SDAA II Required Improvement:  Moves an AEC or charter to AEA: Academically Acceptable if the AEC or charter demonstrates sufficient improvement to meet a standard of 45% within two years.  Required Improvement is not calculated if the AEC or charter has fewer than 10 test results in 2006.

Actual Change:  The difference between performance in 2007 and 2006.  Actual Change is always shown when two years of data are available.

8. Completion Rate II (Grades 9-12):  One of the four AEA base indicators on which AECs of Choice and charters are evaluated.  Completion Rate II counts graduates, continuing students (students who return to school for a fifth year), and General Educational Development (GED) recipients as completers.  This longitudinal rate shows the percent of students who first attended grade 9 in the 2002-03 school year who completed or are continuing their education four years later.  Residential Facilities are not evaluated on Completion Rate II.

Analysis Groups Evaluated:  Analysis groups used to determine AEA ratings are marked with an ‘X.’

# Completers:  The numerator used to calculate Completion Rate II – number of completers.

# Non-completers:  Used together with # in Class to determine if minimum size requirements are met for a group to be evaluated.

# in Class:  The denominator used to calculate Completion Rate II – number of students in the class.

Completion Rate II:  The percent of the student group that completed high school –

# Completers divided by # in Class.

Student Group %:  Used to identify which student groups meet minimum size requirements for the indicator.  All Students and the following student groups meeting minimum size requirements are evaluated:  African American, Hispanic, White, and Economically Disadvantaged.

Completion Rate II (Grades 9-12) Required Improvement:  Moves an AEC of Choice or charter to AEA: Academically Acceptable if the AEC of Choice or charter demonstrates sufficient improvement on the deficient Completion Rate II measures for the Class of 2005 to meet a standard of 75.0% within two years.

Actual Change:  The difference between the Completion Rate II for the Classes of 2006 and 2005.  Actual Change must be equal to or greater than the Improvement Required.  Actual Change is always shown when two years of data are available.

In this example, Required Improvement will be calculated; therefore, Met Minimum Size Requirements?, Improvement Required, and Met Required Improvement? will be shown on the final data table for the analysis groups evaluated.

9. Annual Dropout Rate (Grades 7-12):  One of the four AEA base indicators on which AECs and charters are evaluated.  This annual rate is grade 7-12 dropouts as a percent of all students enrolled at the AEC or charter in grades 7-12 in a single school year.

Analysis Groups Evaluated:  Analysis groups used to determine AEA ratings are marked with an ‘X.’

# Dropouts:  The numerator used to calculate Annual Dropout Rate – number of grade 7-12 students designated as official dropouts.

# Students in Grades 7-12:  The denominator used to calculate Annual Dropout Rate – number of grade 7-12 students in attendance at any time during the school year.

Dropout Rate:  The percent of the student group that dropped out of school – # Dropouts divided by # Students in Grades 7-12.

Student Group %:  Used to identify which student groups meet minimum size requirements for the indicator.  All Students and the following student groups meeting minimum size requirements are evaluated:  African American, Hispanic, White, and Economically Disadvantaged.  If the AEC does not meet the minimum size requirements for All Students, then the AEC is not evaluated on Annual Dropout Rate.

Annual Dropout Rate (Grades 7-12) Required Improvement:  Due to the definitional changes, Annual Dropout Rate Required Improvement is not calculated in 2007.

Final Data Tables

Preview data tables will be available only via TEASE prior to finalizing accountability ratings.  Ratings will be released on August 1, 2007.  Final data tables that include masked data will be online and available to districts and the public on August 1.  See Chapter 18 – Calendar for other important dates.

The following will appear on the final data tables:

Accountability Ratings.  AEA rating labels are:

• AEA: Academically Acceptable,
• AEA: Academically Unacceptable, or
• AEA: Not Rated – Other.

Messages.  When applicable, these messages appear in the top section of the data table after the rating label:

• District at-risk TAKS data used.  (AEC only)
• District at-risk Completion Rate II used.  (AEC of Choice only)
• Residential Facilities are not evaluated on Completion Rate II.  (Residential Facility only)
• This campus is not rated due to grade span.  (AEC only)
• Charter operates only Residential Facilities.  (charter only)
• Charter exceeds threshold for underreported students.  (charter only)
• Special Analysis conducted.  (AEC or charter)
• SDAA II not evaluated due to grade span, small numbers, or no data.  (AEC or charter)
• Completion Rate II not evaluated due to grade span, small numbers, or no data.  (AEC of Choice or charter)
• Annual Dropout Rate not evaluated due to grade span, small numbers, or no data.  (AEC or charter)
• Rating is not based on data shown in the table (School Leaver Provision used).  (AEC or charter)
• Rating changed due to an appeal.  Data not modified.  (AEC or charter)

Required Improvement.  The final data table shows all calculations for Required Improvement when calculated:

• Met Minimum Size Requirements? – “Y” or “N” is shown.
• Actual Change – The difference between current-year and prior-year data.
• Improvement Required – The amount of change needed for Required Improvement to be met.
• Met Required Improvement? – If Required Improvement is calculated, “Y” or “N” is shown depending on the comparison of Actual Change to the Improvement Required.

Masked Data

As in the past, performance on the data tables posted to the agency website is masked when there are very small numbers of tests or students in the denominator of the measure.  Additionally, all performance at or near 0% or 100% is masked.  It is necessary to mask data that potentially reveals the performance of a student in order to be in compliance with FERPA.

AEA Summary

Two tables follow that summarize the 2007 AEA procedures.  Table 17 provides an overview of the requirements for achieving the AEA: Academically Acceptable rating label.  An AEC or charter must meet the criteria for every applicable measure to be rated AEA: Academically Acceptable.  If the criteria are not met for every measure, then AEA: Academically Unacceptable is assigned.

For example, to be rated AEA: Academically Acceptable, an AEC or charter must satisfy all requirements for each indicator evaluated.  As shown, AECs and charters can meet the criteria for the AEA: Academically Acceptable rating by either meeting an absolute performance standard or demonstrating Required Improvement for the indicators.

Table 18 provides a detailed overview of the 2007 AEA procedures, with the base indicators listed as columns.  For example, for each of the indicators, Table 18 provides a brief definition, use of district at-risk data, the rounding methodology, the standards, the accountability subset methodology, subjects, student groups, minimum size criteria, and application of Required Improvement.

Table 17: Requirements for 2007 AEA: Academically Acceptable Rating

Table 18: Overview of 2007 AEA Procedures

2007 Accountability | Accountability | Performance Reporting | TEA Home