Utilization of Certainty Interims in Execution Change Offers.


42 views
Uploaded on:
Category: Sports / Games
Description
Review of CI Process. Qualification for utilization of CIMatched sets of studentsRecalculate execution improvementRecalculate required improvementCalculate furthest point of confinement of CICompare maximum breaking point to recalculated RI. Qualification for Application of CI. To be qualified to have certainty interims connected to execution change on offer, the region/grounds probably demonstrated change on:The meas
Transcripts
Slide 1

Utilization of Confidence Intervals in Performance Improvement Appeals Performance Reporting Division Texas Education Agency

Slide 2

Overview of CI Process Eligibility for use of CI Matched sets of understudies Recalculate execution change Recalculate required change Calculate maximum point of confinement of CI Compare furthest farthest point to recalculated RI

Slide 3

Eligibility for Application of CI To be qualified to have certainty interims connected to execution change on claim, the locale/grounds more likely than not indicated change on: The measure being referred to, and The other measure (graduation or participation for the particular understudy bunch). Requests for CI by ineligible areas/grounds were denied.

Slide 4

Matched Pairs of Students Next we utilized the understudy level information to make coordinated sets of understudies. Understudies in 2004 were coordinated by understudy gathering and test (TAKS versus SDAA, and so on.) to understudies in 2005. Unmatched understudies were dropped from the investigation.

Slide 5

Recalculate Performance Rates Passing rate of the coordinated sets of understudies in 2004 ( p py ). Passing rate of the coordinated sets in 2005 ( p cy ). A third passing rate, the passing rate of coordinated sets crosswise over both years ( p pc ) was likewise figured, which will become possibly the most important factor later.

Slide 6

Recalculate Performance Improvement Performance change was computed as the distinction between the passing rate of the coordinated sets of understudies in 2004 ( p py ) and the passing rate of the coordinated sets in 2005 ( p cy ).

Slide 7

Recalculate Required Improvement Required change was computed by stopping p py (coordinated pair execution in 2004) into the RI equation on p. 26 of the 2005 AYP Guide . RI = 100 – p py 10

Slide 8

Calculate Confidence Interval A 68% one-followed (furthest point of confinement just) Wald certainty interim for execution change was processed. UL = PI + [(z/sqrt(n))*sqrt((p py *(1-p py ))+(p cy *(1-p cy ))+(2*((p py *p cy )- p pc ))] Where: UL = Upper point of confinement of the Wald certainty interim PI = recalculated execution change rate (p cy - p py ) z = z-score for chose certainty level (for a 68% CI, z = 0.47) n = number of coordinated sets p py = execution (passing rate) of coordinated sets in earlier year p cy = execution (passing rate) of coordinated sets in current year p pc = execution (passing rate) of coordinated sets in earlier year and current year

Slide 9

We create a scope of potential PI values in view of the recalculated PI and its standard blunder to get a typical bend.

Slide 10

Calculating as far as possible utilizing the Wald recipe gives us an extent (or interim) of PI qualities we are certain the genuine PI esteem falls in (the green zone). Furthest Limit

Slide 11

Compare Upper Limit to RI The maximum furthest reaches of the certainty interim must be more prominent than or equivalent to required change for the engage be conceded. Another approach to say the above is that required change must fall inside the certainty interim of execution change for the engage be conceded.

Slide 12

Compare Upper Limit to RI If RI falls inside CI (green region) then advance for CI is conceded! On the off chance that RI falls outside the CI, then advance is denied. NOTE: Because RI will never be under zero, the genuine territory of interest is the bit of the green range somewhere around 0 and the UL.

Slide 13

2005 Preliminary AYP (Reading, Special Education bunch) 2005 Met Standard = 49% 2004 Met Standard = 44% Change (PI) = 5% RI = 6% 0.1% change on other measure FAILS SAFE HARBOR Example from an Actual Appeal

Slide 14

Example from an Actual Appeal (cont.) On Appeal (Matched pair information) Pcy = 42% Ppy = 22% Ppc = 12% Recalc. PI = 20% Recalc. RI = 8% 68% Wald UL = 24% GRANTED NOW MEETS AYP

Recommended
View more...