|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Texas’ system for assessing academic performance in schools has been surrounded by uncertainty for months — the result of adjustments to its grading formula, ongoing legal challenges and objections to its fairness.
As a result, school districts still don’t have their A-through-F letter grades, which families often use to evaluate how well Texas schools are educating children. The Texas Education Agency, which typically releases the scores in August, is under a court order prohibiting the release of ratings.
However, the agency and all Texas public school districts have the information needed to calculate and publish the scores. Houston ISD released its preliminary analysis of the scores Tuesday, showing a massive spike in the number of schools set to receive D or F grades. Districts across Texas are expected to see similar drops in scores.
But what has led up to this point? And what does all of this mean for districts? Here are answers to some of the major questions causing uncertainty for families and educators.
What are Texas academic accountability scores?
The Texas Education Agency evaluates almost every public school and district in the state and assigns each an A-through-F letter grade.
The scores are determined by a combination of multiple factors:
- Student performance on standardized tests, with a major emphasis on the State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness, commonly known as STAAR.
- How much students improve year-over-year on those tests.
- How a district or school performs in comparison to other districts and schools with similar student populations.
- Success in closing achievement gaps between student demographic groups.
- For high schools, graduation rates and the number of students deemed ready for college, a career or the military. The readiness rates are determined by student performance on college-focused tests, completion of college-level courses and the number of industry certifications obtained by seniors, among several other metrics.
The TEA uses complex formulas to convert performance on each factor into an overall score for each district or campus. Each factor can have a different amount of influence on the overall score. To learn more about the accountability system and each factor, click here. To review recent ratings for all Texas schools, including 2022, click here.
Why do the scores matter?
The public can use accountability scores as a simple glimpse into how well a school or district is educating children. Supporters of the system argue that it provides needed insight to families and educators.
However, critics say the methods used to assess schools are unfair, place too much weight on standardized test scores and stigmatize many kids living in lower-income neighborhoods. While the accountability system is designed to give all districts and schools an opportunity to earn an A rating, those serving higher shares of students from lower-income families are more likely to receive low ratings.
The state also uses the grades to more closely monitor campuses that are not performing well. The TEA may intervene and employ different measures to improve struggling campuses.
If a campus in a traditional public school district receives five straight failing grades — which HISD’s Wheatley High School did in recent years — Texas law says the state’s education commissioner must close the campus or replace the district’s elected school board. The commissioner also must close charter schools with three straight failing grades.
Why haven’t scores been released this year?
Accountability scores, calculated using data from the previous school year, are typically released in mid-August. This year, with an updated accountability system in place, the TEA planned to unveil scores in late September.
But in mid-September, the TEA decided to delay the release of scores to make adjustments to the “academic growth” part of the formula.
When students returned to the classroom post-pandemic, standardized test scores shot up, allowing districts to show more growth and boost their overall scores. The TEA predicted that these scores would stabilize with students back in the classroom for longer, which could result in a decline in their growth and lower accountability scores.
In addition, more than 100 school districts sued the TEA over its revamp this year of the rating system, which makes it more difficult for districts to achieve higher ratings. A Travis County judge blocked the release of the ratings in October, finding that the TEA unlawfully changed the accountability system. The case remains pending in a state appellate court. A trial date is set for Feb. 12.
What changes did the TEA make to the formula?
After the most recent accountability system was created in 2017, no major changes had been made until earlier this year.
The new changes raise the bar for scoring well on the “academic growth” portion of the evaluation, makes the criteria for “closing the gaps” more rigorous and accounts for the STAAR test’s recent redesign.
The most significant update makes it more difficult for campuses to score well on the college, career and military readiness factor. Previously, high schools would receive an “A” in the metric if 60 percent of seniors were deemed college, career or military ready. The new formula raises that criteria to 88 percent.
It also cracks down on a method campuses have used to more easily boost their scores. The system awards schools for students that receive “industry-based certifications,” a criteria campuses could more easily meet by, for example, getting high school students certified in Microsoft Word or Google Analytics. The TEA eliminated some of these popular options and toughened requirements, such as adding a course requirement for such certifications.
Why are the changes being challenged?
The changes sparked outrage from many districts and families because some schools would see lower grades — even if performance did not necessarily decline.
For example, in September, HISD projected that the new formula would drop its district letter grade from B to C if all performance remained the exact same. This angered some families who feel the state is moving the goalpost for academic success and attempting to falsely create the narrative that public school performance is declining.
More than 200 school districts responded by protesting the new formula in a letter to state officials. The districts argue it’s unfair to rate performance from a previous year using a new method announced after the start of the 2022-23 school year. They also fear the possible drop in ratings for districts and schools could confuse families by inaccurately signaling a sudden drop in performance.
Many of those districts joined the lawsuit against the TEA, including Cypress-Fairbanks, Pasadena, Klein and Spring Branch independent school districts.
Why did HISD share its unofficial scores?
It’s unclear when districts will receive their official ratings. In the meantime, TEA officials said districts received their raw accountability data and the TEA’s accountability formulas so they could calculate what their ratings would be.
On Tuesday, HISD Superintendent Mike Miles shared the district’s own calculations using the materials received from the TEA. The results are bleak: District officials project they will have 52 F-rated and 59 D-rated campuses this year, an enormous spike from 2022, when they had nine total campuses with those ratings.
Without the raw data or the TEA’s validation of HISD’s math, it’s unclear how much of this drop in scores is attributable to a decrease in performance or the changes in the system.
Asked why he decided to release the unofficial scores now, Miles said: “I don't know when the official announcement will come out at all, and I suspect most people have no idea when that is.”
HISD officials will publicly share each school’s unofficial score in January, before the district’s school choice application process begins.
HISD joined the letter of protest to state officials about the accountability changes, before the state ousted its elected school board and appointed Miles this summer. Miles pointed to the unofficial scores as proof that state intervention was needed.
“I'm focused on Houston. I'm focused on where we are and the distance we have to travel,” Miles said. “So I don't have time for the argument about whether or not these accountability ratings should be posted, or not posted, or whether or not they should count this number of points, or that number of points.”
Republish our articles for free, online or in print.
