House Bill (HB) 22 (85^th Texas Legislature, 2017) requires that districts receive A–F ratings and campuses receive Met Standard or Improvement Required ratings for 2018. Both districts and campuses will receive A–F ratings in 2019.

2. My district is a single-campus district. Why did it not receive an A–F rating this year?

A school district or charter school comprised of only one campus that shares the same 2018 performance data with its only campus must meet the performance targets required for the campus in order to demonstrate acceptable performance. For these single-campus school districts and charter schools, the 2018 performance targets applied to the campus are also applied to the district, ensuring that both the district and campus receive identical ratings. Single-campus districts receive either a Met Standard or Improvement Required rating for 2018 to align with the campus rating.

3. Are the Met Standard/Improvement Required ratings that campuses receive in August 2018 based on the four indices that have been in place since 2013?

No. Both districts and campuses are evaluated on all three domains. Districts receive A–F ratings beginning in August 2018. In 2018, campuses are evaluated on the three domains and receive a Met Standard or Improvement Required rating. Campuses will receive A–F ratings beginning in 2019.

4. When do districts and campuses receive their accountability ratings?

Each district receives its accountability ratings on August 14, 2018. By August 7, 2018, each district receives student lists and data tables for each domain. By analyzing that information, districts and campuses may anticipate their ratings. Accountability ratings are released to the public on August 15, 2018.

5. What are the domain cut points for 2018?

Cut points vary for each domain, depend on the campus type (elementary, middle, high/K–12), and whether the campus is an alternative education campus. Chapter 5 of the 2018 Accountability Manual provides the domain cut points.

6. Are all districts and campuses, including new campuses, rated in 2018?

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 2018 Accountability Manual for information on pairing.

7. Are some districts and/or campuses, excluded from the 2018 accountability system?

Yes, some campuses are excluded from state accountability because they did not have membership, as defined by Average Daily Attendance eligibility. Thus, a campus must have valid membership combined with enrollment in order to be included in the set of campuses for use in the accountability system.

8. Is membership the same as enrollment?

Membership is slightly different from enrollment. Membership does not include those students who are served in the district for fewer than two hours per day. Membership and Eligibility for Attendance and Foundation School Program (FSP) Funding defines membership as follows:

Both membership and eligibility to generate average daily attendance (ADA) are related to the amount of time that a student receives instruction each day. However, they are not the same. A student is in membership in your district if the student is enrolled in the district and is either

scheduled to attend at least two hours of instruction each school day or
participates in an alternative attendance accounting program.

9. Are state-administered districts and/or campuses, excluded from the 2018 accountability system?

State-administered school districts, including Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired, Texas School for the Deaf, Texas Juvenile Justice Department, and Windham School District are not assigned a state accountability rating.

10. All the campuses in our district are rated Met Standard, but the district is rated an F. How is this possible?

It’s not uncommon for a campus to have a higher rating than its district. This could be caused by any of several scenarios:

One or more student groups are excluded from a campus’s accountability rating because the groups do not meet minimum size criteria. At the district level, however, these student groups meet minimum size criteria and are included in the district’s accountability rating.
Students move between campuses in a district during the school year. The STAAR results of these students may be excluded from the accountability ratings of either campus according to accountability subset rules. The results are, however, included in the district's accountability ratings.
A district’s high school has a low graduation rate. Because elementary and middle schools are not accountable for the graduation rate component, they would be unaffected, but the district’s rating would reflect the low graduation rate.

11. How will multiple-year Improvement Required status for purposes of accountability interventions and sanctions be determined this year?

In determining consecutive years of Improvement Required ratings for purposes of accountability interventions and sanctions, considerations for multiple-year Improvement Required status will continue from the previous index system to the new three-domain system. Years that a district, open-enrollment charter school, or campus is assigned an accountability rating shown below will be considered.

2018: A, B, C, D, F for districts and Met Standard, Met Alternative Standard, Improvement Required for campuses
2013–2017: Met Standard, Met Alternative Standard, Improvement Required
2012: [No state accountability ratings issued]
2004–2011: Exemplary, Recognized, Academically Acceptable, Academically Unacceptable, AEA: Academically Acceptable, AEA: Academically Unacceptable

While no ratings were issued in 2012, an Improvement Required rating assigned in 2013 and Academically Unacceptable/AEA: Academically Unacceptable ratings assigned in 2011 are considered consecutive years. In addition, although the consecutive years of F/Improvement Required ratings may be separated by one or more years of temporary closure or Not Rated ratings, such separations, whether for single or multiple years, do not break the chain of consecutive years of unacceptable ratings for purposes of accountability interventions and sanctions. This policy applies to districts and charter schools as well as campuses when Not Rated and Not Rated: Data Integrity Issues labels are assigned.

More information is available on the TEA website at https://tea.texas.gov/Student_Testing_and_Accountability/Monitoring_and_Interventions.

Hurricane Harvey

12. If my district or campus is eligible for the Hurricane Harvey Provision does it automatically receive a Not Rated label?

No. Under the Hurricane Harvey Provision, 2018 accountability data and ratings are generated for eligible districts and campuses using available data.

If a district or open-enrollment charter school meets at least one of the district and open-enrollment charter school Hurricane Harvey criteria described in Chapter 10 of the 2018 Accountability Manual and receives a B, C, D, or F rating, the district or open-enrollment charter school is labeled Not Rated.

If a campus meets at least one of the Hurricane Harvey criteria described in Chapter 10 of the 2018 Accountability Manual and receives an Improvement Required rating, the campus is labeled Not Rated.

13. My district is on the list of districts eligible for the Hurricane Harvey Provision. Does this mean all the campuses in my district are eligible? Does this mean all the campuses in my district will be labeled Not Rated?

No. District and campus eligibility for the provision are unique. A district on the list is eligible for the district to be labeled Not Rated. It is possible that a district may be eligible and labeled Not Rated for the provision while its campuses receive ratings.

Testing Disruptions in Accountability

14. We had assessments that were affected by online disruptions. How are they used in accountability?

All assessment results affected by the April or May 2018 online testing issues are excluded from ALL domain calculations. If, however, including all affected results improve a district or campus rating, that rating is modified accordingly. The data remains the same; only the overall rating changes. TEA conducts this analysis prior to the release of the preliminary ratings on August 14.

If the disrupted assessment was a retest, all prior results for this accountability cycle for that student in that subject are also excluded from domain calculations.

15. How were assessments identified as “disrupted?”

The number of students impacted by the disruption during the April 2018 session was determined by establishing the number of students either being logged out of active test sessions or not being able to log in to a testing session. During the May 2018 administration, the students impacted by the system slowdown were determined by establishing the number of inactive test sessions lasting longer than 30 minutes and the number of students who logged in more than five times during the event. Based on feedback, these criteria were modified, expanding the criteria to also include students who had an inactive test session lasting longer than 15 minutes or students who logged in more than three times during the administration.

16. Including our disrupted assessments does not improve our rating, but it does improve our scaled scores. Does the agency calculate our improved scaled scores using the disrupted assessment results?

No. Only the overall rating is considered. All data and scores displayed on reports reflect the exclusion of affected assessments.

17. Does the agency exclude affected assessments at the Did Not Meet Grade Level standard and include affected assessments at Approaches Grade Level or above outcomes?

No. Either all affected assessments are excluded or included, whichever results in the higher overall rating.

Accountability Subset

18. What is the accountability subset?

The accountability subset is the collection of assessment results used to determine district and campus accountability ratings and distinction designations.

A subset of assessment results is used to calculate each domain. The calculation includes only assessment results for students enrolled in the district or campus in the previous fall, as reported on the TSDS PEIMS October snapshot. Three assessment administration periods are considered for accountability purposes:

STAAR results are included in the subset of district/campus accountability	if the student was enrolled in the district/campus on this date:
EOC summer 2017 administration	Fall 2016 enrollment snapshot
EOC fall 2017 administration	Fall 2017 enrollment snapshot
EOC spring 2018 administration
Grades 3–8 spring 2018 administration

The 2018 accountability subset rules apply to the STAAR performance results evaluated across all domains.

Grades 3–8 Scenarios

Districts and campuses are responsible for students reported as enrolled in the fall (referred to as October snapshot) in the spring assessment results.

A student was reported as enrolled in fall 2017 snapshot (October 27) at	The student took the spring 2018 STAAR at	The campus that receives the result is	Does the result meet the accountability subset?
Campus A	Campus A	Campus A	Yes
Campus A	Campus B	Campus B	No

End-of-Course (EOC) Scenarios

Districts and campuses are responsible for

summer 2017 results for students reported as enrolled in fall 2016 snapshot;
fall 2017 results for students reported as enrolled in the fall 2017 snapshot; and
spring 2018 results for students reported as enrolled in the fall 2017 snapshot.

If a student was enrolled on fall enrollment snapshot at	The student took	The campus that receives the result is	Does the result meet the accountability subset?
Campus A (fall 2016)	summer 2017 EOC at Campus A	Campus A	Yes
Campus A (fall 2017)	spring 2018 EOC at Campus B	Campus B	No

STAAR Retests and Mobility (SSI)

19. 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 2018 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.

20. A student is enrolled in District A on the TSDS PEIMS October snapshot date, moves to District B, and fails the first administration of an assessment. The student moves back to District A and passes the retest. How is the retest counted?

The retest is used for District A’s accountability because it is the best assessment outcome for the student. The failed assessment from the first administration at District B is not used in accountability calculations for District A or B.

Grades 5 and 8 SSI Assessment Accountability Subset Scenarios

A student was enrolled on fall 2017 enrollment snapshot (October 27) at	The student took the April 2018 STAAR at	The campus that receives the April 2018 STAAR result is	Does the result meet the subset?	The student took the May 2018 STAAR at	The campus that receives the May 2018 STAAR result is	Does the result meet the subset?
Campus A	Campus A	Campus A	Yes	Campus A	Campus A	Yes
Campus A	Campus B	Campus B	No	Campus B	Campus B	No
Campus A	Campus A	Campus A	Yes	Campus B	Campus B	No
Campus A	Campus B	Campus B	No	Campus A	Campus A	Yes

Grade 4 and 7 Writing Assessment Accountability Subset Scenarios

21. How are students included in the accountability subset who move between the April grade 4 and 7 writing STAAR and May reading and mathematics STAAR administrations?

Grade 4 and 7 writing STAAR assessment results are assigned to the same campus as a May reading and/or mathematics assessment results. The campus at which the student tested in May receives the April writing STAAR results. To meet the accountability subset, the student must have been administered the May assessment at the same campus they were enrolled on fall snapshot.

If the student took a writing STAAR in April but did not take a reading or mathematics STAAR 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.

A student was reported as enrolled in fall 2017 snapshot (October 27) at	The student took the writing STAAR at	The student took the reading and/or mathematics STAAR at	The campus that receives the result is	Does the result meet the accountability subset?
Campus A	Campus A	Campus A	Campus A	Yes
Campus A	Campus B	Campus B	Campus B	No
Campus A	Campus A	Campus B	Campus B	No
Campus A	Campus B	Campus A	Campus A	Yes
Campus A	Campus A	Didn’t Test	Campus A	Yes
Campus A	Campus B	Didn’t Test	Campus B	No

STAAR EOC Retests and Mobility

22. Is there a limit to the number of years an EOC retester is included in accountability?

No. Districts and campuses are accountable for assessment results during each accountability cycle. The accountability cycle is summer, fall, and spring. TEA does not remove assessment results for student who retest across multiple accountability cycles.

23. How are STAAR EOC retest results included in accountability calculations?

Each district and campus is accountable for three EOC assessment administrations: 1) summer 2017 results for students enrolled on the prior-year fall enrollment snapshot date (October 28, 2016), 2) fall 2017 results for students enrolled on the fall enrollment snapshot date (October 27, 2017), and 3) spring 2018 results for students enrolled on the fall enrollment snapshot date (October 27, 2017).

STAAR EOC Accountability Subset Scenarios

A student was enrolled on fall 2016 enrollment snapshot (October 28) at	The student took the summer 2017 EOC at	The campus that receives the result is	Does the result meet the accountability subset?
Campus A	Campus A	Campus A	Yes
Campus A	Campus B	Campus B	No

A student was enrolled on fall 2017 enrollment snapshot (October 27) at	The student took the fall 2017 EOC at	The campus that receives the result is	Does the result meet the accountability subset?
Campus A	Campus A	Campus A	Yes
Campus A	Campus B	Campus B	No

24. How are students included in the accountability subset who move between the April English I/English II EOC and May EOC administrations?

English I and English II EOC assessment results are assigned to the same campus as a May EOC assessment result. The campus at which the student tested in May receives the April English I and English II EOC results. To meet the accountability subset, the student must have been administered the May assessment at the same campus 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.

A student was enrolled on fall 2017 enrollment snapshot (October 27) at	The student took April 2018 EOC at	The student took May 2018 EOC at	The campus that receives the result is	Do the results meet the accountability subset?
Campus A	Campus A	Campus A	Campus A	Yes
Campus A	Campus B	Campus B	Campus B	No
Campus A	Campus A	Campus B	Campus B	No
Campus A	Campus B	Campus A	Campus A	Yes
Campus A	Campus A	Did not test	Campus A	Yes

Additional EOC Scenarios

The following charts show scenarios where EOC testers move between districts and/or campuses. The result(s) used in accountability calculations is/are highlighted in yellow.

Scenario 1:

Enrolled	Tested Summer 2017	Enrolled	Tested Fall 2017	Tested Spring 2018
Fall 2016 Snapshot Campus A	Tested Summer 2017	Fall 2017 Snapshot Campus B	Tested Fall 2017	Tested Spring 2018
	CAMPUS A		CAMPUS B	CAMPUS B
	English I = Approaches Grade Level
	Biology = Did Not Meet Grade Level		Biology = Approaches Grade Level
				English II = Meets Grade Level

Scenario 2:

Enrolled	Tested Summer 2017	Enrolled	Tested Fall 2017	Tested Spring 2018
Fall 2016 Snapshot Campus A	Tested Summer 2017	Fall 2017 Snapshot Campus A	Tested Fall 2017	Tested Spring 2018
	CAMPUS A		CAMPUS A	CAMPUS B
	Algebra I = Did Not Meet Grade Level		No retest taken	Algebra I = Approaches Grade Level*
	English II = Did Not Meet Grade Level		English II = Meets Grade Level
				U.S. History = Meets* Grade Level

*Result not included because it does not meet subset.

Scenario 3:

Enrolled	Tested Summer 2017	Enrolled	Tested Fall 2017	Tested Spring 2018
Fall 2016 Snapshot Campus A	Tested Summer 2017	Fall 2017 Snapshot Campus B	Tested Fall 2017	Tested Spring 2018
	CAMPUS A		CAMPUS A	CAMPUS B
	Algebra I = Did Not Meet Grade Level		Algebra I = Did Not Meet Grade Level	Algebra I = Approaches Grade Level
	Biology = Did Not Meet Grade Level		Biology = Approaches* Meet Grade Level
			U.S. History = Did Not Meet Grade Level	U.S. History = Approaches Grade Level

*Result not included because it does not meet subset.

Student Achievement Domain

25. What is the purpose of the Student Achievement domain?

The Student Achievement domain evaluates district and campus performance based on student achievement in three areas: performance on STAAR; College, Career, and Military Readiness (CCMR) indicators; and graduation rates.

26. What is the minimum size criteria to be evaluated on the Student Achievement domain?

A district or campus must have 10 or more STAAR assessments, combined across all subjects, in the all students group to be evaluated on Student Achievement. Small numbers analysis is not used.

27. What if my district or campus doesn’t meet minimum size for Student Achievement?

A district or campus that does not have 10 or more STAAR assessments, combined across all subjects, in the all students group does not receive a rating for 2018.

28. How is small numbers analysis used in the CCMR component of Student Achievement?

Small numbers analysis is applied to all students if the number of annual graduates is fewer than 10.

A two-year-average CCMR rate is calculated for all students. The calculation is based on an aggregated two-year uniform average using the district’s or campus’s 2018 CCMR data and the 2017 modeled CCMR data. The all students group is evaluated if the two-year average has at least 10 annual graduates.

29. When evaluating Student Achievement, if my district or campus has fewer than 10 annual graduates, is their domain score based on STAAR and the graduation rate? If so, what are the weights for each component?

A district or campus is not evaluated in the Student Achievement domain based solely on the STAAR and the graduation rate components.

For districts and campuses lacking the CCMR component, the STAAR component is weighted at 100 percent. Districts and campuses lacking the CCMR and graduation rate components in the Student Achievement domain have the STAAR component weighted at 100 percent. For districts and campuses lacking the graduation rate component, the STAAR component is weighted at 50 percent and the CCMR component is weighted at 50 percent.

Small numbers analysis, as described below, applies to all students if the number of annual graduates is fewer than 10.

A two-year-average CCMR rate is calculated for all students. The calculation is based on an aggregated two-year uniform average using the district’s or campus’s 2018 CCMR data (2017 graduates) and the 2017 modeled CCMR data (2016 graduates).
The all students group is evaluated if the two-year average has at least 10 annual graduates.

30. How does the agency determine whether a graduate was enrolled in a CTE coherent sequence and completed and earned credit for coursework aligned with the approved industry-based certification list for College, Career, and Military Readiness credit?

The CTE coherent sequence status comes from the summer 2017 submission of TSDS PEIMS Element ID E0031. Then the agency verifies the graduate completed one of the 85 aligned courses through the TSDS PEIMS course completion records. Additionally, Element ID E0948 must indicate the graduate completed all semesters of the course. See Appendix H of the 2018 Accountability Manual or the TSDS PEIMS Data Standards for more details.

31. How does the agency determine whether a graduate met the criteria for dual credit or college prep course completion for College, Career, and Military Readiness?

The dual credit course completion data comes from three elements in TSDS PEIMS. Specifically, Element ID E1011, Element ID E1081, and Element ID E0948 are used to determine whether the graduate met the requirements. These elements provide information on whether the course is dual credit, the number of college credit hours earned, and if the student completed all semesters of the course.

The college prep course completion data comes from two specific TSDS PEIMS data codes. First, the course code must be correctly identified in the course completion record (CP110100 for ELA & CP111200 for mathematics). Second, the course completion record must indicate the student competed all semesters of the course in TSDS PEIMS Element ID E0948.

The codes valid for dual credit and college prep course 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

See Appendix H of the 2018 Accountability Manual or the TSDS PEIMS Data Standards for more details.

32. How and when will the new College, Career, and Military Readiness (CCMR) indicators be incorporated into accountability?

All CCMR indicators used in accountability lag by a year, meaning that, for 2017–18 accountability, the data is from 2017 graduates. This is not new; the accountability system has used lagging data for some time because the graduation data used for accountability is final for a given year, meaning it includes summer graduates. This data is submitted to via TSDS PEIMS after August 15, which means it arrives too late to be included in the accountability calculations for that academic year. Because of this lag, and because some indicators take time to develop and for data collection to begin, there are three CCMR indicators that are not used the first year of the A–F system:

Completion of an OnRamps course (beginning in the 2018–19 school year)
Admission to a postsecondary industry certification program (school year TBD)
Meeting standards on a composite of indicators that indicate college preparation (school year TBD)

34. We give every student the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB). Can we code every student as intending to enlist in the U.S. Armed Forces?

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.

School Progress, Part A: Academic Growth Domain

35. What is the purpose of the School Progress domain?

The School Progress domain measures district and campus outcomes in two areas: the number of students that grew at least one year academically (or are on track) as measured by STAAR results and the achievement of students relative to districts or campuses with similar economically disadvantaged percentages.

36. What is the STAAR progress measure?

The STAAR progress measure quantifies a student’s year-to-year improvement by comparing current and prior-year scores on STAAR. By comparing the change in his or her score to growth expectations, each student is assigned to one of three categories: Limited, Expected, or Accelerated.

More information about the STAAR progress measure is available on the TEA website at https://tea.texas.gov/Student_Testing_and_Accountability/Testing/State_of_Texas_Assessments_of_Academic_Readiness_(STAAR)/Progress_Measures

37. Why didn’t a student get a STAAR progress measure?

While STAAR progress measures are available for most students, there are circumstances in which progress measures are not calculated. Students do not receive a progress measure if they do not have a valid score in consecutive years in the same content area.

38. The STAAR Alternate 2 English I EOC is eligible for a progress measure. Are those results included in Academic Growth calculations?

No. In order to evaluate the same subjects across all assessment types, only English II and Algebra I EOCs are evaluated in the Academic Growth domain.

39. How is our School Progress domain rating calculated if we don’t meet minimum size in Part A: Academic Growth?

Districts and campuses are evaluated for Part A: Academic Growth if there are 10 or more STAAR progress measures, combined across ELA/reading and mathematics. If a district or campus does not receive an Academic Growth score, the Part B: Relative Performance score is used for the School Progress domain score.

40. Our campus is an AEA. AEAs are not evaluated on Part B: Relative Performance. We do not meet minimum size for Part A: Academic Growth. How does this impact our rating?

If a district or campus does not have a School Progress, Part A or Part B outcome, the Student Achievement scaled score is weighted at 70 percent for the overall rating calculation.

School Progress, Part B: Relative Performance Domain

41. How is the percentage of economically disadvantaged students calculated?

The district or campus overall percentage of economically disadvantaged students is calculated based on TSDS PEIMS fall snapshot data. The 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. This percentage is used in School Progress, Part B: Relative Performance.

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.

42. How are economically disadvantaged students counted at campuses that opt into the Community Eligibility Provision (CEP) under the National School Lunch Program?

Although CEP relaxes some campus data collection requirements for the purposes of providing free and reduced lunches, the accountability system relies on an accurate count of economically disadvantaged students. For accountability, the percentage of economically disadvantaged students at a campus or district is based on TSDS PEIMS fall snapshot data.

Closing the Gaps Domain

43. What is the purpose of the Closing Performance Gaps domain?

The Closing the Gaps domain uses disaggregated data to demonstrate differentials among racial/ethnic groups, socioeconomic backgrounds, and other factors. The indicators included in this domain, as well as the domain’s construction, align the state accountability system with the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA).

44. How does the accountability system ensure that individual student groups are not ignored?

The Closing the Gaps domain is specifically designed to address this concern. Closing the Gaps is critical in the overall district or campus evaluation. It ensures the lowest-performing student groups receive focused interventions. The system evaluates the performance of fourteen student groups: all students, African American, Hispanic, white, American Indian, Asian, Pacific Islander, two or more races, economically disadvantaged, current special education, former special education, current and monitored English learners, continuously enrolled, and non-continuously enrolled.

45. What is the minimum size for the Closing the Gaps domain to evaluated?

A district or campus must have 10 assessments in ELA/reading and 10 assessments in mathematics in the Academic Achievement component to be evaluated in the Closing the Gaps domain.

Additionally, the Academic Achievement component must have five indicators that meet minimum size for Closing the Gaps to be evaluated.

If a district or campus does not meet both of these minimum size requirements, the Closing the Gaps domain is not evaluated.

46. How many assessment results are required for a student group to be evaluated?

A student group needs at least 25 assessment results in reading or mathematics to be evaluated. If a student group has at least 25 assessment results in reading but not mathematics, or vice versa, that student group is evaluated only for the subject that meets the minimum size.

47. How many indicators must meet minimum size for a component to be evaluated?

The following components must have a minimum of five indicators that meet minimum size to be included in the Closing the Gaps calculation:

Academic Achievement
Academic Growth Status
Student Achievement Domain Score: STAAR Component Only

The remaining components only require one evaluated indicator:

Federal Graduation Status
English Language Proficiency Status
CCMR Status

See Chapter 4 of the 2018 Accountability Manual for details on the minimum size requirements for each component.

48. What does “five evaluated indicators” mean with respect to whether or not a component is evaluated?

There must be at least five indicators that meet the minimum size requirements. Five evaluated indicators could come from as few as three student groups. For example, consider a campus that meets minimum size in all students (reading and mathematics), Hispanic (reading and mathematics), and continuously enrolled (mathematics). This is five evaluated indicators.

49. 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 meet the minimum size requirements.

For example, consider an elementary school that has fewer than five evaluated indicators in the Academic Growth Status component. That 50 percent weight is proportionally distributed to the remaining three components, assuming they meet the minimum size requirements. Removing the 50 percent from the denominator of the remaining components produces their new weights. In this case, 30/100 = 30% becomes 30/50 = 60%. In the same manner 10/100 = 10% becomes 10/50 = 20%. The new weightings sum to 100% as shown in the chart below:

Elementary Example:

Closing the Gaps Domain Component	Regular Weight	Sample Adjusted Weight
Academic Achievement	30%	30/50 = 60%
Academic Growth Status	50%	0
English Language Proficiency	10%	10/50 = 20%
Student Achievement Domain Score: STAAR Component Only	10%	10/50 = 20%

50. How is an overall rating calculated for districts and campuses that don’t have a Closing the Gaps domain score?

If a district or campus does not have a Closing the Gaps domain score, the better of Student Achievement or School Progress is used for the overall rating.

51. I have a high school that serves only students in grades 9 and 10. How is this campus evaluated in Closing the Gaps?

The campus is evaluated on the following components:

Academic Achievement (STAAR Performance at Meets Grade Level or above in ELA/Reading and Mathematics) is weighted at 50%.
Academic Growth Status (as the campus does not have Federal Graduation Status data) is weighted at 10%.
English Language Proficiency is weighted at 10%.
Student Achievement Domain: STAAR component only (as the campus does not have annual graduates) is weighted at 30%.

52. How are 12th grade students identified for inclusion in the 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 2016–17 but did not graduate, as reported in TSDS PEIMS attendance records.

53. What if a 12th grade student was reported in attendance at multiple campuses the last six weeks?

If a student was reported in attendance at more than one campus during the last six weeks, the student is removed from all campuses at which he/she was reported. If the student was reported at more than one district during the last six weeks, he/she is removed from all districts at which he/she was reported.

54. How does TEA conduct small numbers analysis on the CCMR component of Closing the Gaps?

If the all students group has fewer than 10 students, TEA conducts small numbers analysis, as described below.

A two-year-average CCMR rate is calculated for all students. The calculation is based on an aggregated two-year uniform average using the district’s or campus’s 2018 CCMR data and the 2017 modeled CCMR data.
The all students group is evaluated if the two-year average has at least 10 annual graduates plus students in grade 12 who did not graduate.

55. What is meant by “Ever EL” in the Closing the Gaps domain?

Ever ELs are students reported in TSDS PEIMS as English learners at any time while attending grades 9–12 in a Texas public school. This student group is used in the Federal Graduation Status component of the Closing the Gaps domain.

56. Does the English Language Proficiency (ELP) use grades 3–12 TELPAS results for current year EL students or does it consider all K–12 results?

The English Language Proficiency component measures the percentage of current ELs in grades K–12 [CJ1] who have made progress in developing their English language proficiency since it was last assessed. To be considered as having made progress, a student must increase at least one proficiency level on the TELPAS composite rating from the prior year to the current year or have a composite rating of Advanced High. Students who had a TELPAS composite rating of Advanced High in the prior year must maintain the composite rating of Advanced High in the current year in order to be considered as having made progress.

Calculating an Overall Score

57. What happens if a district or campus does not meet the minimum size requirements for a rating in the Student Achievement domain?

That district or campus does not receive a 2018 accountability rating.

58. What if a campus does not have data to calculate a specific domain rating?

If a district or campus does not have data to calculate a score for the Student Achievement domain, the district or campus does not receive a rating. If the district or campus does not have data to calculate a score for School Progress, the Student Achievement domain is used for 70 percent of the overall rating. If the district or campus does not have data to calculate a Closing the Gaps domain score, the better of Student Achievement or School Progress is used for the overall rating. There are several reasons that a district or campus might not have data for a domain.

59. A campus in my district has an Improvement Required rating in the Student Achievement domain. How does this impact my district rating?

A district may not receive a domain rating of A if the district includes any campus with a corresponding domain rating of Improvement Required. In this case, the highest scaled score a district can receive for the Student Achievement domain is an 89.

60. A campus in my district has an overall rating of Improvement Required. How does this impact my district rating?

A district may not receive an overall rating of A if the district includes any campus with an overall rating of Improvement Required. In this case, the highest scaled score a district can receive for the overall rating is an 89.

61. My campus has a Student Achievement domain rating of Improvement Required and a School Progress domain rating of Met Standard. How does this impact my “better of Student Achievement or School Progress” score?

Determine the better outcome of the Student Achievement and the School Progress domain scaled scores. If either domain’s scaled score results in an Improvement Required rating, the highest scaled score that can be used is an 89.

62. My district has an F rating in the Student Achievement; School Progress, Part A; and Closing the Gaps domains. How does this impact my district rating?

If the district is evaluated in all four areas: Student Achievement; School Progress, Part A: Academic Growth; School Progress, Part B: Relative Performance; or Closing the Gaps and receives an F rating in three of the four areas, the highest overall scaled score the district can receive is a 59.

Scaling

63. I have calculated my raw domain score. Now what?

In order to align letter grades and scores used in the A–F academic accountability system to the common conception of letter grades, raw domain and component scores are adjusted to scaled scores. Domain and component scores can be scaled using the scaling formulas found in Chapter 5 or by using the 2018 Scaled Score Conversion Tool.

64. When I am calculating my School Progress, Part B: Relative Performance, do I use my raw or scaled STAAR component score/raw or scaled STAAR and CCMR component scores along with my economically disadvantaged percentage?

To scale Relative Performance, use the raw STAAR component score or the average of the raw STAAR and CCMR components, depending on your campus type.

Participation

65. Is the accountability subset applied to participation calculations?

No.

66. We have an English I EOC retester who was absent for the December administration but tested in May. How does this impact our participation rate?

One result per student, per subject, per cycle is used in participation calculations. The scored May assessment would be used in the participation calculation.

Identification of Schools for Improvement

67. My campus did not meet the minimum size to be evaluated in Closing the Gaps. Will my campus be evaluated for comprehensive support and improvement?

No. The identification for comprehensive support and improvement is based on performance in the Closing the Gaps domain. If the campus does not have a Closing the Gaps score, it will not be identified for comprehensive support and improvement.

68. My campus is not a Title I, Part A campus. Can it be identified for comprehensive support and improvement?

Comprehensive support and improvement is limited to campuses that receive Title I, Part A funds with the exception of campuses identified due to graduation rates. If a campus does not attain a 67 percent four-year graduation rate for the all students group, the campus is automatically identified for comprehensive support and improvement regardless of whether it receives Title I, Part A funding.

Targeted and additional targeted support and improvement is not limited to Title I, Part A campuses.

Alternative Education Accountability (AEA)

69. What are alternative education campuses (AECs), and how are ratings assigned under AEA provisions?

AECs are those that serve students at risk of dropping out of school as defined in Texas Education Code (TEC) §29.081(d). Accountability ratings for AECs and charter schools are assigned similarly to non-AEA districts and campuses, but the cut points are modified and alternative procedures applicable to the graduation rate and annual dropout rate calculations are provided. Furthermore, AEA charter schools and AECs are not evaluated on School Progress, Part B due to the small number of districts and campuses used for comparison.

70. How do campuses qualify to be evaluated under AEA provisions, and when does registration occur?

To be eligible to be evaluated under AEA provisions, an alternative education campus (AEC) must meet the criteria outlined on pages 68–71 in Chapter 7 of the 2018 Accountability Manual.

Registration occurs in spring of the school year for which a charter school or campus wishes to be rated under AEA provisions. Eligible districts and campuses file an AEA Campus Registration Form using the TEASE Accountability application. Filing an AEA Campus Registration Form is required for each AEC not on the list of pre-registered AECs that wishes to be evaluated by current-year AEA provisions. AECs rated under AEA provisions the previous year are pre-registered. A charter school or campus that was evaluated under AEA provisions the previous year and does not wish to be evaluated under AEA provision in the current year should file an AEA Campus Rescission Form using the TEASE Accountability website. The current-year registration process occurred March 26–April 6, 2018.

See Chapter 7 in the 2018 Accountability Manual for additional details.

English Learners (ELs)

71. How are STAAR results for ELs included in each of the domains?

English learners (ELs) who are year one in U.S. schools are excluded from all accountability performance calculations.

Due to changes to the Texas English Language Proficiency Assessment System (TELPAS), Texas requested a waiver from the U.S. Department of Education to exclude EL students who are year two in U.S. schools from 2018 performance calculations. If granted, ELs who are in their second year in U.S. schools will be included in accountability beginning in 2019. If denied, ELs who are in their second year in U.S. schools will be included in accountability for 2018.

STAAR Alternate 2 assessment results are included regardless of an EL’s years in U.S. schools.

The STAAR progress measure is used for ELs and non-ELs in the School Progress, Part A domain.

Unschooled asylees, unschooled refugees, and students with interrupted formal education (SIFEs) are not included in state graduation rate or STAAR-based indicators in the state accountability until their sixth year of enrollment in U.S. schools. These students are evaluated in CCMR indicators.

72. Where does TEA get the information for years in U.S. schools and asylee, refugee, and SIFE status?

In order to apply exclusions for years in U.S. schools or for unschooled asylee, unschooled refugee, or students with interrupted formal education (SIFE) status, TEA must receive a current year, scored TELPAS document. Additionally, the TELPAS years in U.S. schools and asylee, refugee, or SIFE information must not be blank or missing. If a student does not have a current year TELPAS, the EL exclusion rules are not applied.

73. How does TEA identify which EL students are in year 3 and year 4 of monitored status as this is not reported in TSDS PEIMS?

For 2018 accountability, a proxy is used to determine which students are in year 3 and year 4 of monitored status based on whether they were reported as monitored year 1 or year 2 in the previous two years. For 2019 accountability, TSDS PEIMS codes will be added to collect year 3 and year 4 of monitored status.

74. Why is there no longer an EL progress measure?

Due to changes to the Texas English Language Proficiency Assessment System (TELPAS), an EL progress measure is not calculated for 2018.

Special Issues

75. Are STAAR results for foreign exchange students used in accountability?

Yes, if a foreign exchange student takes the STAAR and is in the accountability subset, his or her assessment results are included in accountability calculations.

76. How does district participation in the Texas Writing Pilot program impact accountability?

All STAAR writing assessment results (including STAAR Alternate 2) received for students in the accountability subset are used for district and campus accountability calculations. Writing samples and portfolios from the Texas Writing Pilot are not used in accountability calculations.

77. How are students with No Authentic Academic Response (NAAR), medical exception, or medically exempt designation included in accountability?

STAAR results with NAAR, medical exception, or medically excluded designations are not included in domain calculations. In the Closing the Gaps domain, STAAR Alternate 2 students with NAAR designation are included as participants. Students with the medical exception or medically exempt designations are not included in the participation rate calculation. For more information on how participation is calculated, please see Appendix H of the 2018 Accountability Manual.

Algebra I EOC in Middle School

78. If a middle school student takes the Algebra I EOC, at which campus are the results included for accountability?

The assessment results are reported as Algebra I on accountability reports to the campus identified in the answer document header. Generally, this is the campus at which the student was currently enrolled.

79. Which assessment is included in accountability if a grade 8 student takes the grade 8 mathematics STAAR and the Algebra I EOC? Which campus is held accountable?

If a student takes both the Algebra I EOC and grade 8 STAAR mathematics assessments, only the Algebra I EOC result is used in accountability calculations. The results are reported as Algebra I on accountability reports to the campus identified in the answer document header. Generally, this is the campus at which the student was enrolled at the time of testing.

80. If a student at the middle school doesn’t pass the Algebra I EOC and retests during the summer, which campus is credited for the retest?

If the student meets the standard on the retest, the result is included in the accountability calculations for the middle school in the next accountability cycle. If the student fails and retests again during the fall, the result is included in the accountability calculations for the campus at which he or she is enrolled in the fall.

Distinction Designations

81. What are distinction designations?

Distinction designations are awarded to campuses for outstanding performance in relation to 40 other similar campuses of similar type, size, grade span, and student demographics. A campus that receives an accountability rating of Met Standard is eligible for the following distinction designations in 2018. Districts that earn a rating of A, B, C, or D are eligible for a distinction designation in postsecondary readiness.

For 2018, distinction designations are awarded in the following areas:

Academic Achievement in English Language Arts/Reading (campus only)
Academic Achievement in Mathematics (campus only)
Academic Achievement in Science (campus only)
Academic Achievement in Social Studies (campus only)
Top 25 Percent: Comparative Academic Growth (campus only)
Top 25 Percent: Comparative Closing the Gaps (campus only)
Postsecondary Readiness (district and campus)

A campus earns a distinction designation if it is in the top quartile (Q1) of its comparison group for at least 33 percent (for high schools and K–12 campuses) or 50 percent (for elementary and middle schools) of the indicators used to award the distinction.

For an indicator to be used to evaluate campuses for a distinction designation, at least 20 campuses in the comparison group must have data for that indicator. If fewer than 20 campuses have data for an indicator, it cannot be used to evaluate campuses for the distinction. This often affects schools with non-traditional grade spans.

For details on how campus comparison groups are determined, see Appendix E in the 2018 Accountability Manual.

82. Are alternative education campuses (AECs) eligible for distinction designations?

No, campuses evaluated under alternative education accountability (AEA) provisions are not eligible for distinction designations, per TEC §39.201.

83. How is the Algebra I by Grade 8 Participation indicator calculated for the Academic Achievement Distinction Designation in Mathematics?

The Algebra I by Grade 8 Participation indicator limits the denominator to grade 8 students based on 2017 TSDS PEIMS fall enrollment. The numerator is Algebra I assessments taken in either the current or any prior school year as reported as reported on the Consolidated Accountability File (CAF) cumulative history section.

84. My campus had two indicators in Social Studies and was in the top quartile for attendance rate. Why didn’t we earn a distinction designation?

The attendance rate indicator applies to all four subject area distinctions. Consequently, this indicator cannot be the sole measure used by a campus to attain a distinction.

85. Which grade levels are considered for the attendance rate indicator?

The attendance rate calculation is based on student attendance for the entire school year for students in grades 1–12. Please see Appendix H of the 2018 Accountability Manual for additional details.

86. What is a campus comparison group?

Campus comparison groups are used to determine which campuses earn distinction designations. Distinction designations are awarded to campuses for outstanding performance in relation to 40 other similar campuses. Each campus is assigned to a unique comparison group comprised of Texas schools that are most like it. To determine the campus comparison group, each campus is identified by school type (See the School Types chart in Chapter 1 of the 2018 Accountability Manual.) then grouped with 40 other campuses from anywhere in Texas that are most similar in grade levels served, size, percentage of students who are economically disadvantaged, mobility rate, percentage of English learners, percentage of students served by special education, and percentage of students enrolled in an Early College High School program. See Appendix E of the 2018 Accountability Manual for more details.

87. Can a district earn a distinction designation in postsecondary readiness if any of its campuses are rated Improvement Required?

Yes, as long as the district itself received an A, B, C, or D rating.

88. Do students count toward the TSI Criteria Graduates indicator used for distinction designations if they meet the ELA/reading criteria on one type of assessment or earn credit for an ELA college prep course and meet the mathematics benchmark on another type of assessment or earn credit for a mathematics college prep course?

Yes, the TSI Criteria Graduates indicator gives credit for students who meet the Texas Success Initiative (TSI) standards on a Texas Success Initiative assessment (TSIA), SAT, or ACT or complete and earn credit for a college prep course within the respective subject area. To be included, the student must meet the standards in both ELA/reading and mathematics.

2018 Accountability Development

89. Who helped TEA develop the state accountability rating system?

The 2018 accountability system was informed by extensive feedback from educators and the public, including over 100 meetings and focus groups and countless individual communications gathered over the course of the last two years, which in turn were also reviewed and further refined by recommendations from the Accountability Policy Advisory Committee (APAC) and Accountability Technical Advisory Committee (ATAC). The accountability development materials that were reviewed at each meeting by the advisory groups are available online at https://tea.texas.gov/2018AccountabilityDevelopment.

90. Who are the members of the advisory groups?

The 2018 Accountability Policy Advisory Committee (APAC) includes representatives from legislative offices, school districts, the business community, and parents of children attending Texas public schools.

Members of the 2018 Accountability Technical Advisory Committee (ATAC) are Texas public school educators from districts and education service centers who have detailed knowledge of the state assessment and accountability systems.

Technical Information

91. If a student's reported racial/ethnic value is different in each of the individual assessment files (STAAR 3–8, STAAR EOC, or TELPAS), which race/ethnicity is used?

The accountability results are based on the demographic information from the Consolidated Accountability File (CAF) which includes only one racial/ethnic value. The CAF provides the most recent demographic information based on the last test administration available for each student.

92. If a student is coded as a special education student or Limited English Proficiency (LEP) on any one test document, is the student considered special education/LEP for all documents?

The accountability results are based on the demographic information from the Consolidated Accountability File (CAF) which includes only one special education/LEP value. The CAF provides the most recent program information based on the last test administration available for each student. For the LEP field, if the student tested in TELPAS or is identified as a current LEP student (value of “C”) in any current-year test administration, the value on the CAF file is “C.”

93. Which TELPAS file is used to determine the number of years an EL student is enrolled in U.S. schools?

Years in U.S. schools is based on 2018 TELPAS data. If information on years in U.S. schools does not exist, results are included with a value of 5 years.

TEASE Accountability Application

94. How do I gain access to the TEASE Accountability Application?

On the TEA main page (www.tea.texas.gov), select TEA Secure Applications (at the top of the page). Complete the Request Access Form for Accountability. The form needs to be printed, signed and dated by the appropriate personnel, and emailed to performance.reporting@tea.texas.gov or faxed to Performance Reporting at (512) 936-6431. Request forms generally take two to three business days to process.

95. What information can be found in the TEASE Accountability Application?

Unmasked data related to accountability ratings, the public education grant, alternative education accountability, pairing, and appeals are in the TEASE Accountability application. Additionally, confidential student lists for STAAR performance, STAAR growth, CCMR, and ELP are available through the application.

District Posting Requirements

96. What does the district need to provide to the public regarding the ratings?

Each district must post its ratings on its website. They must also provide information directly to parents regarding school performance. For detailed information on what is required, see the Posting FAQ.

Consolidated Accountability File (CAF)

97. What is the Consolidated Accountability File?

The testing contractor provides TEA, ESCs, and school districts with a Consolidated Accountability File (CAF), which contains all performance results as well as all demographic and program information for every student. Accountability calculations are based on the CAF.

98. How am I supposed to read the CAF?

The CAF is a large, complex data file. Specialized software is required to view it. Annually, the Student Assessment Division produces a data file format, which describes each field found in the CAF. You may download the relevant data file format at https://tea.texas.gov/Student_Testing_and_Accountability/Accountability/State_Accountability/Performance_Reporting/Data_File_Formats.

99. Why do results for students that moved out of our district appear in our CAF? Why does our CAF include county district campus numbers other than our own?

For 2018, the CAF contains all data related to students who were administered an assessment in the district at any point during the 2016–17 or 2017–18 school year. A student who tested in two or more districts is reported to each district. The student’s record contains the same data for each district. It is not filtered for the accountability subset. When Performance Reporting processes the CAF for accountability calculations, the data is filtered according to accountability methodology.

100. How do we know which results in the CAF are included in our accountability calculations?

Confidential student lists for STAAR performance, STAAR growth, CCMR, and ELP were made available through TEASE on August 7.

101. How many years of testing data are included on the CAF?

The CAF includes testing data from 2017–18 starting with 2017 summer EOC through 2018 spring EOC (with Pearson data for TELPAS and STAAR Alternate 2). It also includes testing data from the prior year (2016–17) starting with 2016 summer EOC and ending with 2017 spring EOC (with Pearson data for TELPAS and STAAR Alternate 2).

102. Who do I contact to correct the CAF?

Requests for corrections to the CAF need to be made directly to the testing contractor during the corrections window. For accountability purposes, data are considered final at the close of the corrections window.

Contact Information

Performance Reporting
Phone: (512) 463-9704
Fax: (512) 936-6431
performance.reporting@tea.texas.gov