CONTINUED FROM 1
The redesigned exam may also lead to changes in how STAAR scores are weighed, which could impact district accountability ratings. The ratings assist administrators in identifying their high-performing campuses and working to replicate their success in other schools, said Krista Mo att, assistant superintendent of teaching, learning and leadership for CISD. The new test also features ques- tion variation and changes to written essay prompts. It requires knowledge of subjects outside of the one being tested, according to the TEA. “Being able to broaden the way that we’re assessing so that it is something that allows students to demonstrate their learning in more ways is just an exciting development for the test and exciting to see that in action,” said Lily Laux, deputy commissioner of school programs at the TEA. Teaching the test Only 75% of the questions are mul- tiple choice with the remainder made up of the new question types, includ- ing short constructive responses and extended constructed responses, according to the TEA. One of the goals of the redesigned exam is to align better with classroom instruction, which Mo att said she can see re ected in the cross-curricu- lar test questions. “There is a lot of deeper thinking during the assessment and question- ing, being able to nd multiple ways for students to show what they know,” Mo att said. “This is what happens in the classroom.” Matt Jones, NBISD’s chief commu- nications and technology o cer, said overall, students have adapted well. “Our students have been taking practice STAAR tests on the app,
CALCULATING ACCOUNTABILITY The Texas Education Agency provides annual academic accountability ratings to its public school districts, individual campuses and charter schools for three areas across several factors, including STAAR scores.
2021-22 accountability rating scores:
COMAL ISD
NEW BRAUNFELS ISD
Scores are tallied for three areas.
1
Re ects students’ scores on STAAR; graduation rates; and college, career and military readiness Student Achievement
School Progress
Re ects how well a school or district is ensuring all student groups are successful Closing the Gaps
Re ects students’ performance over time and how a school’s performance compares to other schools with similar economically disadvantaged student populations
86
92
79
90
85
95
Take the higher score
2
School Progress score: 86 x 70% + Closing the Gaps score: 85 x 30% = 85.7
School Progress score: 92 x 70% + Closing the Gaps score: 95 x 30% = 92.9
The higher score of either Student Achievement or School Progress accounts for 70% of the total score, while Closing the Gaps accounts for 30%.
30% Closing the Gaps
70% Student Achievement or School Progress
Round the total
3
A = 90-100 B = 80-89 C = 70-79 Not rated = 0-69
Round the total score to a whole number to determine the overall ranking.
85.7 rounds to an overall score of 86 .
92.9 rounds to an overall score of 93 .
NOTE: SCHOOL DISTRICTS WITH A SCORE LOWER THAN 70 ARE GIVEN A NOT RATED LABEL.
SOURCE: TEXAS EDUCATION AGENCY COMMUNITY IMPACT
Tackling technology Laux said the TEA took a multi- year approach to prepare students and educators for the new exam. The TEA conducted a feasibility study and provided grants to school districts in need of technical support to build up their infrastructure.
Funding from the 2021 bond helped CISD strengthen its Wi-Fi connections and purchase more computers for its students districtwide. Jones said due to the district’s Transforming Every Classroom 21 ini- tiative, which has been in place since 2012 and prioritizes online learning,
which has really helped them prepare for the redesigned testing process,” Jones said. Accommodations were also made for students who needed to take the paper exam or required text-to- speech service, American Sign Lan- guage videos or braille devices.
26
COMMUNITYIMPACT.COM
Powered by FlippingBook