2008-2009 State Assessment Snapshot

Assessment Description Eligibility Curriculum/Instruction/Data AYP % Accountability

TAKS • Reading, Writing, ELA, Math, Science, Social Studies All students • Increased level of rigor State:
• Introduction of vertical scale • Content, context, cognitive level All tests evaluated
• Value added models • Access of metacognitive strategies
Federal :
• Based on enrolled grade level TEKS • Appropriate placement of process skills Grades 3-8 and 10
• LAT Reading, Math, Science • Cumulative effect of learning reading and math
• Dyslexia Bundles • Missing, Incomplete, Inaccurate, Competing
• New Math TEKS
97%*
TAKS • Reading, Writing, ELA, Math, Science, Social Studies Students with • IEP Development State:
• Same as TAKS disabilities 2009: Exit level (all
Accommodated Data tests), Social Studies,
• More white space
• No field test items • Item analysis/ Side by Side Science

• Accommodations Supplement • Lexiles/Quantiles 2009: Other tests/grades-

• Cumulative Passing rates Report Only
• Standard set by TEA
• For students with disabilities • Prior Year Failures Federal :
• Based on enrolled grade level TEKS • Value added Grades 3-8 and 10
reading and math

TAKS • Reading, Writing, ELA, Math, Science, Social Studies Students with • IEP Development - access to enrolled grade level State:
• “Less difficult” disabilities who standards 2009: Report Only
Modified
• Simplified language are not attaining • Instructional arrangements
• Three answer choices grade level • Inclusion in district wide testing Federal :
Grades 3-8 and 10
• Based on TAKS items proficiency • Curriculum based assessments reading and math
(see TEA guidelines) 2%*
• Designed for students with disabilities significantly • Teacher content knowledge
below grade level • Access activity concepts
• Standard set by TEA
Data
• Based on enrolled grade level TEKS
• Preliminary student eligibility
• TAKS M analysis
TAKS • Reading, Writing, ELA, Math, Science, Social Studies Students with • IEP Development - access to enrolled grade level State:
• Designed for students with significant cognitive significant standards 2009: Report Only
Alternate
disabilities cognitive • Instructional arrangements
• Makes use of standardized essence statements and disabilities • State developed essence statements and access Federal :
(see TEA guidelines) Grades 3-8 and 10
access activities activities and resources 1%* reading and math
• Online recording and administration
Data
• Standard set by TEA
• Preliminary student eligibility
• Based on enrolled grade level TEKS
• 2007 TAKS Alt data sets
• Rater training
TELPAS • Measures English Language Proficiency Students • English Language Proficiency Standards NA State :
• Rater training classified as LEP • Content Area Reading TBD

Data Federal:
AMAO
• ESC XIII ELL Toolkit
*Percentage of proficient scores used to determine AYP rating. NOTE: These percentages DO NOT determine the cap on test takers. All students who meet the eligibility criteria should take the tests appropriate to them.
Ervin Knezek, ESC Region XIII © 2008
Accountability Standards
2007 2008 2009 2010
STATE ACCOUNTABILITY AA/Re/Ex AA/Re/Ex AA/Re/Ex AA/Re/Ex
TAKS + TAKS +
(AEIS) TAKS +
TAKS TAKS (Accommodated) TAKS (Accommodated)
TAKS-Acc
(Exit level (all tests), (Exit level (all tests),
(All Grades/ Subjects)
Social Studies, Science) Social Studies, Science)
Reading/ELA 65/75/90 70/75/90 70/75/90 70/80/90
Writing 65/75/90 65/75/90 70/75/90 70/80/90
Social Studies 65/75/90 65/75/90 70/75/90 70/80/90
Mathematics 45/75/90 50/75/90 55/75/90 60/80/90
Science 40/75/90 45/75/90 50/75/90 55/80/90

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

TAKS
TAKS, TAKS, TAKS TAKS TAKS TAKS TAKS
FEDERAL ACCOUNTABILITY SDAA-II, TAKS (Accommodated) TAKS (Accommodated)
TAKS
TAKS (Acc.) TAKS (Acc.) TAKS (Acc.) TAKS (Acc.)
(Accommodated)
(AYP) SDAA-LAT TAKS-M TAKS-M
TAKS-M
TAKS-M, TAKS-M TAKS-M TAKS-M
TAKS-Alt TAKS-Alt TAKS-Alt TAKS-Alt TAKS-Alt TAKS-Alt TAKS-Alt
TAKS-Alt
TAKS-LAT TAKS-LAT TAKS-LAT TAKS-LAT TAKS-LAT TAKS-LAT TAKS-LAT
TAKS-LAT
Reading/ELA 60% 60% 67% 73% 80% 87% 93% 100%
Mathematics 50% 50% 58% 67% 75% 83% 92% 100%

The Cumulative Effect of Learning –

Why Students Struggle

• Missing learning – We didn’t teach it, so…. teach it!

• Incomplete learning – We didn’t go far enough in the thinking, so ask more questions

• Inaccurate learning – We taught it in a way that cannot be applied in later grade levels. We taught it wrong, so learn the
specific mislearnings and teach the content and processes appropriately for your grade level and those that come after.

• Competing learning – We use multiple programs with students in interventions that don’t go together, so make careful
selection or deliberate bridges.

Ervin Knezek, ESC Region XIII © 2008