Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                

Chapter 15 - Appealing The Ratings

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 10

Chapter 15 – Appealing the Ratings

Providing superintendents with the opportunity to appeal accountability ratings has been a
feature of the state accountability system since 1994. Superintendents may appeal the state
accountability ratings for both standard and alternative education accountability (AEA)
procedures by following the guidelines provided in this chapter.
NEW!! Beginning with 2010 state accountability ratings, the appeals process has two steps.
Districts should register their district and campus rating appeals using the Texas Education
Agency Secure Environment (TEASE) Accountability website. This new TEASE appeals
registration system provides a mechanism for tracking all state accountability rating appeals
and allows districts to monitor the status of their appeals. After registering, districts must
then submit their appeal via the mail as has been done in the past.
Below are the dates for appealing ratings. These deadlines are final. To maintain a fair
appeals process, no late appeals will be considered.
APPEALS CALENDAR
Dropout/Completion Lists. Superintendents are given access to
confidential lists of dropouts and lists of completion cohort membership.
June 18, 2010 These reports provide a preview of the data that will be used to calculate
the Annual Dropout Rate and Completion Rate base indicators for the
state accountability ratings.
Preview Data Tables. Superintendents are given access to confidential
preview accountability data tables for their district and campuses
July 20, 2010 showing all state accountability indicator data. Principals and
superintendents can use these data tables to anticipate their campus and
district accountability ratings.
2010 Appeals Window. Appeals may be submitted by the superintendent
after receipt of the preview data tables. Districts register their district and
July 20 through
campus appeals using the TEASE Accountability website then submit
August 13, 2010
the appeal with supporting documentation via the mail. See “How to
Appeal” later in this chapter for more details.
Ratings Release. Due to the short timeline between the transmittal of the
July 30, 2010 preview data tables and the ratings release date, no appeals will be
resolved before the ratings release.
Appeals Deadline. Appeals must be postmarked or hand delivered no
August 13, 2010
later than August 13, 2010 in order to be considered.
Mid-October, Decisions Released. Commissioner’s decisions are mailed in the form of
2010 response letters to each appellant. Letters are posted to the TEASE site.
Ratings Update. The outcome of all appeals will be reflected in the
Late October, ratings update scheduled for October, 2010. At that time the Texas
2010 Education Agency (TEA) website will be updated. (TEASE and public
sites)
A more detailed calendar can be found in Chapter 19 – Calendar.
Part 3 – Items Common to Standard and AEA Procedures Chapter 15 – Appealing the Ratings 131
2010 Accountability Manual
General Considerations
APPEALS ARE NOT A DATA CORRECTION OPPORTUNITY!
The numbers shown on the data tables (and later on other agency products, such as the AEIS
reports) are final and cannot be changed, even if an appeal is granted.
Appeals should be based upon a data or calculation error attributable to TEA, regional
education service centers, or the test contractor for the student assessment program.
However, problems due to district errors in PEIMS data submissions or on TAKS answer
sheets are considered on a case-by-case basis. Statute permits consideration of data reporting
quality in evaluating the merits of an appeal. Poor data quality is not a valid reason to appeal.
CHANGED RATINGS ONLY
Only appeals that would result in a changed rating will be considered.
NO GUARANTEED OUTCOMES
Appeals that follow these guidelines are not guaranteed to be granted. Each appeal is
evaluated based on the details of its unique situation. Well-written appeals that follow the
guidelines are more easily processed, but they are not necessarily granted.
SITUATIONS NOT FAVORABLE FOR APPEAL
Districts may appeal for any reason they choose. However, one strength of the state
accountability system is that the rules are applied uniformly to all campuses and districts.
Therefore, a request to make exceptions for how the rules are applied to a single campus or
district is viewed unfavorably and will most likely be denied. Examples of some appeals
seeking inconsistent rule application follow. Because some examples apply to both standard
and AEA procedures and some are unique to one set of procedures or the other, the examples
are subdivided accordingly:
Examples applicable to both standard and AEA procedures:
Campus Mobility. A request to include the performance of students who were excluded
due to the appropriate use of the campus mobility subset criteria will likely be denied.
Rounding. A request to calculate Required Improvement, student group percentages, or
indicator values differently from the method described in this Manual will likely be
denied.
Minimum Size Criteria. A request to evaluate student groups using minimum size criteria
different from those described in this Manual will likely be denied.
Campus Configuration Changes. A request for re-calculation of prior year results due to
changes in campus configurations will likely be denied.
New Race/Ethnicity Definition. A request to use a student’s race or ethnicity based on the
new federal definition will likely be denied.
Examples applicable to standard procedures:
Exceptions Provision. Exceptions are automatically applied; a request for additional
exceptions or to defer use of an exception to a future year will likely be denied.
132 Chapter 15 – Appealing the Ratings Part 3 – Items Common to Standard and AEA Procedures
2010 Accountability Manual
Pairing. A request to alter pairing relationships that districts had the opportunity to
determine by April 23, 2010 will likely be denied.
New and Academically Unacceptable. A request to assign the Not Rated: Other label to
campuses that are Academically Unacceptable in their first year of operation will likely
be denied.
Floors. A request to waive the floor requirements when applying either the Exceptions
Provision or Required Improvement will likely be denied.
Examples applicable to AEA procedures:
Late Registration Requests. A request submitted after September 23, 2009 to be
registered as an alternative education campus (AEC) in order to be evaluated under AEA
procedures will likely be denied.
At-risk Criterion. A request by AECs or charter operators to be evaluated under AEA
procedures when they did not meet the at-risk criterion or applicable safeguards for 2010
ratings will likely be denied.
Late Requests by Charters with the Option to be Evaluated under AEA Procedures. A
request submitted after May 14, 2010 for a charter operator to be evaluated under AEA
procedures will likely be denied.
Guidelines
TAKS APPEALS
If a problem is identified with data received from the test contractor, the TAKS data may be
appealed. An appeal of the TAKS indicators should reflect a serious problem such as a
missing grade level or campus. However, coding errors on TAKS answer sheets will be
considered on a case-by-case basis. Please note the following:
If the district has requested that writing results be rescored, a copy of the dated request to
the test contractor and the outcome of the rescored tests should be provided with the
appeal. If the rescored results impact the rating, these appeals are necessary since
rescored results may not be processed in time to be included in the assessment data used
to determine the accountability ratings released by July 30.
If other serious problems are found, copies of correspondence with the test contractor
should be provided with the appeal.
Coding errors related to student demographic or program participation fields on the
TAKS answer documents will be evaluated by reviewing the student’s history in PEIMS.
A request to alter the TEA methodology for combining the first and second
administrations of grade 5 and 8 reading and mathematics results will likely be denied.
A request to alter the formulas, equations, or campus mean values for calculating a TPM
outcome for a student will likely be denied. Appeals to substitute local projections for
state-generated projections will likely be denied. Appeals to use TPM values that do not
meet state accountability mobility subset rules will likely be denied. Appeals to substitute
TPM values based on current year equations for the TPM values that were reported based

Part 3 – Items Common to Standard and AEA Procedures Chapter 15 – Appealing the Ratings 133
2010 Accountability Manual
on two-year equations will likely be denied. See Appendix D – Data Sources for more
detail on the selection of TPM values for use in state accountability.
Spring 2010 TAKS Corrections Window: TEA offers districts the opportunity to correct
the TEST TAKEN INFO field. This correction opportunity is available only for the primary
administrations in the spring.
Changes to the TEST TAKEN INFO field submitted within the correction window will be
included in the TAKS data files used in determining the 2010 accountability ratings. Appeals
from districts that missed this corrections window will likely be denied. Corrections to fields
other than the TEST TAKEN INFO field will not be used in determining accountability
ratings. For accountability purposes, student identification information, demographic or
program participation, and score code status will be based on the information provided on the
answer document at the time of testing.
ANNUAL DROPOUT RATE APPEALS
Districts are responsible for providing accurate information to TEA, including the data used
to determine the grade 7-8 and grade 7-12 annual dropout rate accountability indicators.
Appeals of the Annual Dropout Rate indicator are handled on a case-by-case basis. Please
note the following:
As shown in Chapter 19 – Calendar, in June the agency provides superintendents access
to lists of their dropouts as well as summary tables of the annual dropout rates. Only
students shown as dropouts on these lists may be appealed. See Appendix D – Data
Sources for more information about the processing of dropout data.
Appeals from districts that located students after the last day of the school start window
will likely be denied. This policy ensures that all districts have an equal opportunity to
locate dropouts.
No more than ten dropouts may be appealed for any campus or district.
Data quality will be a consideration in evaluating the merits of a dropout rate appeal.
Poor data quality is not a valid reason to appeal.
COMPLETION RATE APPEALS
Districts are responsible for providing accurate information to TEA, including the data used
to determine the longitudinal completion rate accountability indicators. Appeals of the
Completion Rate indicators are handled on a case-by-case basis. Please note the following:
For 2010, the use of the district Completion Rate I for secondary campuses without their
own data continues to be suspended. These secondary schools are not evaluated on the
Completion Rate I indicator in 2010.
As shown in Chapter 19 – Calendar, the agency provides superintendents access to
longitudinal completion information in June. This includes lists showing the final status
of students in the 2009 cohort and summary tables of the longitudinal completion rates
that will be used for accountability. Only students shown on these lists may be appealed.
See Appendix D – Data Sources for more information completion data processing.

134 Chapter 15 – Appealing the Ratings Part 3 – Items Common to Standard and AEA Procedures
2010 Accountability Manual
The status of no more than ten non-completers or one percent of the non-completers in
the cohort (whichever is larger) may be appealed for any campus or district.
Data quality will be a consideration in evaluating the merits of a completion rate appeal.
Poor data quality is not a valid reason to appeal.
GOLD PERFORMANCE ACKNOWLEDGMENT APPEALS
Gold Performance Acknowledgments (GPA) cannot be appealed. Campuses or districts that
appeal an Academically Unacceptable rating will automatically receive any GPA earned if
their appeal is granted and their rating is raised to Academically Acceptable or higher.
ADDITIONAL CAMPUS IMPROVEMENT PLAN (CIP) REQUIREMENTS APPEALS
Campuses rated Academically Acceptable in 2010 under either standard or AEA procedures
may be required to revise and submit portions of the CIP developed under TEC §11.253 that
are relevant to those areas for which the campus would not satisfy performance requirements
if their 2010 performance does not meet the accountability criteria established for the 2011
accountability system. The identification of a campus that is subject to these requirements
cannot be appealed. The identification occurs after the resolution of all appeals; therefore,
campuses rated Academically Acceptable as a result of a granted appeal are considered for
identification. Data are never changed as a result of granted appeals, so the data used for
possible identification may include data with documented quality problems. Identification
occurs in November 2010 prior to final determination of all 2011 accountability system
decisions. Should the commissioner’s final decisions for 2011 alter the outcomes for any
identified campuses; the list of identified campuses will not be reconstructed.
NOT RATED APPEALS
Districts rated Not Rated: Other are responsible for appealing this rating by the scheduled
appeal deadline if the basis for this rating was a result of errors made by the district in their
submission of PEIMS data, assessment data, or other data collections used to determine
accountability ratings. If the agency determines that the Not Rated: Other rating was assigned
due to district error, the agency can assign an updated rating based on the correct data.
Special Circumstance Appeals
HURRICANES
The class of 2009 completion rates may be negatively affected by students displaced by
Hurricanes Katrina or Rita during 2005-06, or Hurricane Ike during 2008-09. A district may
appeal the Completion Rate indicator when the campus or district rating is limited from the
next higher rating due to a displaced student with a non-completion status. For Katrina- or
Rita-displaced students, only students with a final status of “dropout” during 2005-06 (the
year of these two hurricanes) will be considered favorable for appeal. The 2010
accountability cycle is the last year this special circumstance appeal is permitted for these
hurricanes, as this is the last year students with a final status during 2005-06 are part of a
cohort used for accountability.
For Hurricane Ike-displaced students, only students with a final status of “dropout” during
2008-09 (the year of the hurricane) will be considered favorable for appeal. This special
circumstance appeal will be permitted through the 2013 accountability cycle, the last year
students with a final status during 2008-09 are part of a cohort used for accountability.
Part 3 – Items Common to Standard and AEA Procedures Chapter 15 – Appealing the Ratings 135
2010 Accountability Manual
For these special circumstance appeals, the district is required to supply appropriate
documentation that the student was displaced due to a hurricane, and for Ike-displaced
students, use of the PEIMS Crisis Code for appealed students will be researched. This appeal
category applies to both standard and AEA procedures. As with all granted appeals, no
changes will be made to the data shown on the reports.
MISSING TEXAS PROJECTION MEASURE VALUES
If a Texas Projection Measure (TPM) value could not be calculated due to non-matching
identification information, districts may appeal to use TPM values based on the TPM
Calculator that is available online from the Student Assessment website. All supporting
performance results for these students must be included.
How to Appeal
NEW!! A district wishing to appeal a school or district rating should register their intention
to appeal on the TEA Secure Environment (TEASE) Accountability website. To register an
appeal:
Log on to TEASE at https://seguin.tea.state.tx.us/apps/logon.asp
Click on ACCT – Accountability.
From the Welcome page, click on the Appeals Registration link and follow the
instructions.
The Appeals Registration site will be available during the appeals window, from July 20
through 5:00 p.m. CDT on August 13.
The status of the appeal, e.g. receipt of registration and receipt of documentation, will be
available on the TEASE Accountability website.
Superintendents who do not have TEASE access must request access at the TEASE
Applications Reference Page at http://www.tea.state.tx.us/index2.aspx?id=2684
Once the appeal is registered, districts have until August 13, 2010 to submit their appeal to
TEA. As in past years, the submitted appeal must include:
A statement that the letter is an appeal of the 2010 state accountability rating;
The name and ID number of the district and/or campuses to which the appeal applies;
The specific indicator(s) appealed;
The problem, including details of the data affected and what caused the problem;
If applicable, the reason(s) why the cause of the problem is attributable to TEA, a
regional education service center, or the test contractor;
The reason(s) why the change would result in a different rating, including calculations
that support the different outcome;
A statement that all information included in the appeal is true and correct to the
superintendent’s best knowledge and belief; and,
The superintendent’s signature on official district letterhead.

136 Chapter 15 – Appealing the Ratings Part 3 – Items Common to Standard and AEA Procedures
2010 Accountability Manual
Other Information:
The appeal should be addressed to the Division of Performance Reporting as follows:

Your ISD
Your address
City, TX zip postage

Division of Performance Reporting


Texas Education Agency
1701 Congress Avenue
Austin, TX 78701-1494

Attn: Accountability Ratings Appeal

The appeal letter should be addressed to Mr. Robert Scott, Commissioner of Education
(see letter examples, below).
Appeals for more than one campus within a district may be included in the same letter.
Appeals for more than one indicator may be included in the same letter.
Appeals of ratings issued under both standard and AEA procedures may be included in
the same letter.
Districts have only one opportunity to appeal each indicator for any campus or the district.
If the campus appeal will impact the rating of a paired campus, that must be noted.
If the campus appeal will impact the rating of the district, that must be noted.
When student-level information is in question, supporting information must be provided
for review, i.e., a list of the students in question by name and identification number. It is
not sufficient to claim data are in error without providing information with which the
appeal can be researched and evaluated. Confidential student-level documentation
included in the appeal packet will be processed and stored in a secure location and will
be accessible only by TEA staff authorized to view confidential student results.
It is the district’s responsibility to ensure all relevant information is included in the appeal
as districts will not be prompted for additional materials.
Appeal letters must be postmarked on or before August 13, 2010. Appeals postmarked
after this date will not be considered. Appeals delivered to TEA in person must be time-
stamped in the Division of Performance Reporting by 5:00 p.m. CDT on August 13,
2010. Overnight courier tickets or tracking documentation must indicate package pickup
on or before August 13.
Only send one copy of the appeal letter and/or supporting documentation.
Districts are encouraged to obtain delivery confirmation services from their mail courier.
Examples of satisfactory and unsatisfactory appeals are provided on the next page for
illustration.

Part 3 – Items Common to Standard and AEA Procedures Chapter 15 – Appealing the Ratings 137
2010 Accountability Manual
Appeal Letter Examples
Satisfactory Appeal: Unsatisfactory Appeals:

Dear Commissioner Scott, Dear Commissioner Scott,


This is an appeal of the 2010 state accountability I have analyzed the percentage passing for the
rating issued for Elm Street Elementary School Economically Disadvantaged mathematics
(ID 123456789) in Elm ISD. students. The campus is allowed two
exceptions. The floor for using the exception
Specifically, I am appealing TAKS mathematics
table is 55% for mathematics. The campus has
for the Hispanic student group. This is the only
54%. Therefore, the campus was not able to use
indicator keeping Elm Street Elementary from
both exceptions. I am seeking consideration for
achieving a rating of Academically Acceptable.
the 54% in mathematics for the Economically
My analysis shows a coding change made to Disadvantaged student group. If granted, the
one student’s ethnicity on the answer document school’s rating would become Academically
at the time of testing was in error. One 5th grade Acceptable. Attached is a copy of the
Hispanic student was miscoded as White on the preliminary accountability data table.
answer document. Had this student, who passed
the mathematics test, been included in the Sincerely,
Hispanic student group, the percent passing for J. Q. Educator
this group would have met the Academically Superintendent of Schools
Acceptable standard. Removing this student
from the White student group does not cause attachment
the White student group performance to fall Dear Commissioner Scott,
below the Acceptable standard.
Maple ISD feels that its rating should be
Attached is the student’s identification
Exemplary. The discrepancy occurs because
information as well as the PEIMS data for this
TEA shows that the performance for Hispanic
student for the last six years (kindergarten
Writing is 89%.
through 5th grade) showing we have
consistently reported this student as Hispanic. We have sent two compositions back for
The second attachment shows the recalculated scoring, and are confident they will be changed
mathematics percent passing statistics for both to passing.
the White and Hispanic student groups for Elm If you have questions, do not hesitate to contact
Elementary. us, at 701-555-1234.
We recognize the importance of accurate data Sincerely,
coding, and have put new procedures in place
to prevent this from occurring in the future. J. Q. Educator
Superintendent of Schools
By my signature below, I certify that all
information included in this appeal is true and (no attachments)
correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Sincerely,
J. Q. Educator
Superintendent of Schools
attachments

138 Chapter 15 – Appealing the Ratings Part 3 – Items Common to Standard and AEA Procedures
2010 Accountability Manual
How an Appeal Will Be Processed by the Agency
Once an appeal is received by the Division of Performance Reporting, the process for
evaluating the information will be followed as outlined below:
The TEASE Accountability website is updated to indicate when each appeal is received.
Districts may monitor the status of their appeal(s) using the TEASE Accountability
website. This website will include the postmark date for each appeal and the date on
which each appeal packet is received by the agency.
Researchers evaluate the request using agency data sources to validate the statements
made to the extent possible. The agency examines all relevant data, not just the results for
the students specifically named in the correspondence.
Researchers analyze the effect that granting a campus appeal may have on other
campuses in the district (such as paired campuses), whether they are specifically named
in the appeal or not. Similarly, the effect that granting a campus appeal may have on the
district is evaluated, whether the district is named in the appeal or not. In single-campus
districts, both the campus and the district are evaluated, whether the district submits the
appeal as a campus or district appeal.
Staff prepares a recommendation and forwards it to an external panel for review.
Legislation passed in 2006 requires use of an appeals panel to ensure independent
oversight of the appeals process. The use of an external, independent, three-member
panel has been a feature of the state accountability system since 2004.
The review panel examines the appeal, supporting documentation, staff research, and the
staff recommendation. The panel determines its recommendation.
The panel’s recommendation is forwarded to the commissioner.
The commissioner makes a final decision.
The superintendent is notified in writing of the commissioner's decision and the rationale
upon which the decision was made. The decision of the commissioner is final and is not
subject to further negotiation. The commissioner will respond in writing to each appeal
received. The commissioner’s response letters are posted to the TEASE site at the same
time the letters are mailed. Superintendents are notified via email that the appeal
decisions are available on TEASE.
If an appeal is granted, the data upon which the appeal was based will not be modified.
Accountability and AEIS reports, as well as all other publications reflecting
accountability data, must report the data as they are submitted to the TEA. Accountability
data are subject to scrutiny by the Office of the State Auditor.
When a rating is changed due to a granted appeal, the letter from the commissioner serves as
notification of the official rating for the district or campus. Districts may publicize the
changed rating at that time. The agency website and other state accountability products will
be updated after the resolution of all appeals. This update will occur in October 2010
concurrent with the release of the GPAs. Note that the update will reflect only the changed

Part 3 – Items Common to Standard and AEA Procedures Chapter 15 – Appealing the Ratings 139
2010 Accountability Manual
rating; the values shown on the report, such as percent met standard, are never modified.
Between the time of receipt of the commissioner’s letter granting an appeal and the update of
agency state accountability products, the agency sources will not reflect the changed campus
or district rating.

140 Chapter 15 – Appealing the Ratings Part 3 – Items Common to Standard and AEA Procedures
2010 Accountability Manual

You might also like