Undeterred by a preliminary state rating system that suggests Plano ISD could better prepare students for life after high school, district officials are maintaining their approach to postsecondary readiness and lobbying for changes to what they say is a flawed rating formula.

PLN-2017-02-01-5The district does not plan to alter its postsecondary approach to fit the formula that on Jan. 6 assigned PISD and similar Collin County districts a C grade in postsecondary readiness, district Superintendent Brian Binggeli said. About 60 percent of the nearly 1,000 districts in the state received a grade of C, D or F in that category.

Instead, the district is lobbying the Texas Education Agency and lawmakers to amend portions of the state's preliminary A-F accountability formula that has received skepticism across Texas from local school officials.

The A-F system will replace the existing accountability system, which simply states whether school districts met standards under certain performance indicators. The A-F rating system, which will be fully implemented in 2018, will give districts and their campuses an overall grade and an individual grade in five domains.

At issue for the district is whether the state used a “bell curve approach” to determine what postsecondary readiness scores constitute an A grade, a B grade and so forth, Binggeli said. The district has argued the high school grades for Domain IV—which measures postsecondary readiness—appear to primarily reward academy-style schools. This would effectively crowd out districts like PISD that have high schools with a traditional variety of course offerings, Binggeli said.

However, the TEA has denied using such an approach in the preliminary ratings.

“We didn’t use a bell curve approach for any of this,” TEA spokesperson Lauren Callahan said.

Callahan pointed to the first page of a TEA document that explains the rating methodology to the public, noting one of the project’s guiding principles is to not use a forced distribution.

“The system should not be built on a forced distribution so that some set percentages of campuses must get an A or an F,” the document reads. “It should be based on criteria meaningful to ensure our students are prepared for success, and it should be mathematically possible that all campuses achieve an A rating.”

PISD was not the only district to speak out publicly against the preliminary ratings—particularly regarding postsecondary readiness.

Most Collin County school districts, which in large part received A's and B's in the first three domains, did not score higher than a C in Domain IV, which measures postsecondary readiness. PISD scored A's in student achievement and student progress but scored C's in closing performance gaps and postsecondary readiness.

The new rating system is required by House Bill 2804, which was passed during the 2015 legislative session.

In a Senate Finance Committee hearing held Jan. 24, TEA Commissioner Mike Morath said he has heard “buckets” of feedback regarding the A-F system. He said there has been a small, quiet group in support of the evaluation, but a multitude of others had louder criticism.

Morath said although three of the categories, or domains, within the new rating system have clear metrics, the domain that measures postsecondary readiness is a “strange mix of remaining qualifiers that don’t necessarily fit well together.”

Calculating Domain IVPLN-2017-02-01-6

At the high-school level, Domain IV looks at three variables to measure postsecondary readiness: the graduation rate, the percentage of students graduating with a higher-level graduation plan, and college and career readiness.

To measure college and career readiness, several indicators are considered, including SAT and ACT scores, postsecondary credits earned and how many students took Advanced Placement courses. The indicators that were not measured for the preliminary ratings but will be used in the final ratings in 2018 include the number of students who enlisted in the armed forces and the number of students who earned an industry certification.

Callahan said the Domain IV ratings may change by 2018 because the TEA did not have all the data required under HB 2804.

Under HB 2804, all campuses are to be graded on postsecondary readiness, but a district’s score will only consider the postsecondary score for its high schools in most cases. For Domain IV, elementary schools are graded on the number of students who are chronically absent, and middle schools are graded on the absenteeism rate as well as the dropout rate.

Addressing performance gaps

In Domain III, which measures closing performance gaps, PISD received a C grade. This domain measures how well campuses close the achievement gaps for economically disadvantaged students.

To quantify closing the gaps, the rating system looks at the percentage of economically disadvantaged students who met or exceeded the State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness Satisfactory, Postsecondary Readiness and Advanced standards. These students and their scores count equally toward the overall scores.

Binggeli acknowledged the district could improve in this category and did not take issue with the methodology. He said the district has devoted resources toward closing performance gaps and would continue to do so.

Competing priorities

Binggeli is also concerned the new rating system will cause districts and campuses to focus too heavily on receiving an A grade. In doing so, he said, schools could eliminate extracurricular activities to allow more time to focus on standardized testing.

“The essence of my concern really comes from not giving our community enough information about the performance of their schools and their school district,” he said. “The only measure in our elementary and our middle schools [for domains I, II and III] is the STAAR test. … We really would like a much more multimetric approach.”

The district would not respond to the new grading system by chasing a grade, Binggeli said.

“If for instance, Domain IV stayed the way it [is], then we’re going to say, 'To heck with the A,'" he said. "We’re not going to stop offering a robust curriculum. We certainly are going to keep serving all children that come to us, and we’re going to keep doing it and help them pursue excellence in wherever their interests or passions lie.”

Not prioritizing an A grade is hard, Binggeli said, because parents and news organizations get the grades and “put it out there for all to see.”

Next steps

Despite the fact that school districts across the state are seeking to repeal the A-F rating system, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick has said A-F will not be repealed or replaced. State legislators seem poised to move forward with the new system.

Some state lawmakers have filed bills that either add more indicators to Domain IV or slightly change the wording in the Texas Education Code for the accountability system.

“I realize that some folks are frustrated with accountability, but the taxpayers of Texas deserve to know if their hard-earned tax dollars are being wisely spent and that our students are getting the quality education they deserve,” Republican state Sen. Larry Taylor of Friendswood, who sponsored HB 2804, said in a statement.

During the Senate Finance Committee hearing held Jan. 24, Taylor said he would devote part of this session to refining the domains so they would be better indicators of student performance going forward.

Legislative reporter Emily Donaldson contributed to this story from Austin.