1. From Z to A: Setting the STAAR Cut
Points from End to Beginning
Gloria Zyskowski, TEA
Kimberly O’Malley, Pearson

2. Session Overview
• STAAR Assessment Program
• Alignment of Content Standards
• Standard Setting 101
• Alignment of Performance Standards
• STAAR Standard-Setting Process

3. STAAR Assessment Program
• Emphasis on college and career readiness
• Aligned system of assessments
• Increased rigor
 Focus—on the curriculum (TEKS) that are most
critical to assess
 Clarity—regarding what will be assessed and
how the assessed content standards are
preparing students for their next step
 Depth—is emphasized over breadth in
assessing student expectations

4. College Readiness Goals
• To become one of the top 10 states in the
nation in terms of college readiness by the
2019–2020 school year
• High school graduates prepared for
postsecondary opportunities

5. Texas Definition of College Readiness
Texas Education Code (TEC) §39.024:
• ―…the level of preparation a student must attain
in English language arts and mathematics
courses to enroll and succeed, without
remediation, in an entry-level general education
course for credit in that same content area.‖
 at four-year college and universities
 at institutions that offer associate degrees and
certificates

6. Alignment of Content Standards
• Start with college readiness
• Align to high school standards
• Vertically align down to elementary school

7. Texas College and Career Readiness
Standards (CCRS)
• Legislation required TEA and THECB to
establish vertical teams to develop standards in
 English language arts
 Mathematics
 Science
 Social studies
• Approved in January 2008
• Have been compared with other national
standards

8. Aligned to High School Standards
• Gap analysis and alignment study
• TEKS refinements and revisions
• Identification of critical skills in
 English III
 Algebra II

9. Vertically Aligned to Elementary
• Map critical skills back to third grade
• Focus on essential skills for current grade and
important to be prepared for the next grade
• Readiness vs. supporting student expectations
 Readiness student expectation emphasized in
the STAAR assessments

10. College and Career Readiness
Standards (CCRS):
• First integrated into the EOC
assessment at the end of the
sequence (English III and
Algebra II)
• Then mapped backwards across
courses and grades to form a
content-aligned system

11. Standard Setting 101
• Different types of standards
 Content Standards
 Performance Standards
 Accountability Standards
• Process of determining the level of knowledge
and skill students need to demonstrate to be
classified into the various performance levels.
• Involves obtaining recommendations from those
who are knowledgeable of
 the content/skills to be assessed
 the test population
 the ways in which test scores are used

12. Standard Setting 101
• Combines content, data, and policy expertise

13. Alignment of Performance Standards
• Start with college readiness
• Align to high school standards
• Vertically align down to elementary school

14. College Readiness Standards
TEC § 39.024 mandates:
• The setting of college readiness performance
standards for English III and Algebra II
 Informed by research studies
 Research studies conducted prior to initial standard
setting and at least every three years thereafter
• The comparison of standards to national and
international ―college readiness‖ assessments and
success in military service or the workforce
• The conducting feasibility studies for science and
social studies EOC assessments

15. Aligned to High School Standards
• Performance standards in lower-level EOC
assessments informed by studies that relate
student performance in one course with student
performance in the next course
 Algebra I standard aligned with Algebra II
 English II standard aligned with English III
 English I standard aligned with English II

16. Vertically Aligned to Elementary
• Performance standards in middle and
elementary school also informed by studies,
relating student performance in one
grade/course with student performance in the
next grade/course
 Grade 8 math standard aligned with Algebra I
 Grade 8 reading standard aligned with English I
 Standards in grades 3–7 reading and
mathematics aligned with next grade/course

17. Performance standards
based on empirical
evidence from student
performance
• across courses and grades
• on external assessments

18. STAAR Standard-Setting Process
Eight steps for setting STAAR performance standards:
1. Conduct validity and linking studies
2. Develop performance labels and policy definitions
3. Develop grade/course specific performance level
descriptors
4. Standard-setting committee
5. Policy review committee
6. Approval of performance standards
7. Implementation of performance standards
8. Review of performance standards

19. 1. Conduct Validity and Linking Studies
Studies to inform the college readiness standard:
• Follow students from high school to college
• Compare EOC performance and other test
performance
 SAT
 ACT
 ACCUPLACER
 THEA
• College students take STAAR EOC
assessments

20. 1. Conduct Validity and Linking Studies
Studies to inform standards for STAAR EOC
assessments:
• Relationship between test performance in the
same content area
• Relationship between test and course
performance
• Comparison to TAKS
• Comparison with NAEP

21. 1. Conduct Validity and Linking Studies
Studies to inform standards for STAAR 3–8
assessments:
• Relationship between test performance in
different grades in the same content area
• Relationship between grade 8 and high school
• Comparison with TAKS
• Comparison with NAEP
• Vertical Scale

22. Why Studies for Setting Performance
Standards?
• Texas goal is to be in the Top 10 in terms of
college readiness by 2019–2020.
• Comparisons of Texas standards with national
and international standards are important in
meeting this goal.
• Studies will be conducted at least every three
years to update standards and monitor
progress.

23. Example: Algebra II and SAT
Content Overlap
• SAT (general) is broader, but STAAR is deeper
SAT Mathematics (not SAT STAAR Algebra II
Subject Test)
• Quadratic Functions and
• Arithmetic operations Relations
• Algebra • Square Root Functions
• Geometry • Rational Functions
• Statistics • Exponential and
Logarithmic Functions
• Probability
• Etc…
• Etc…

24. Example: Algebra II and SAT
Timing
• STAAR Algebra II
 Spring of junior year
 Spring of senior year
• SAT (General Test)
 Spring of junior year
 Fall of senior year
• Students take the assessments around the
same time of year. However…

25. Example: Algebra II and SAT
Data are not available on the same timeline
• SAT data are typically available to the state after students
graduate
• Initial standards will be set using data from tests not used for
students’ graduation requirements.
• Standards review will incorporate data from tests used for
students’ graduation requirements.
STAAR SAT
Initial Seniors 2011
Standard
Juniors 2010 Graduating seniors 2011
Setting
(Algebra II FT)
Standards
Review
Juniors 2014 Graduating seniors 2015

26. Additional Considerations
• SAT—no college ready benchmark for comparison
 ACT does have a college ready benchmark and it will
be used in comparisons
• Student motivation now and then
• Algebra II is a newly-tested content area
 Required course as part of 4x4
 Required assessment for graduation (recommended
and distinguished achievement programs)
 Instruction will improve
 Curriculum may be changed/updated
• SAT is typically taken by college-bound students

27. 2. Performance Labels and Policy Definitions
• TEA and THECB convened a committee
September 30–October 1, 2010
• 26 committee members represented by diverse
stakeholders in:
 Public education
 Higher education
 Business community
 Legislature

28. Committee Charges
• Assume that the state assessment system will
be implemented under current federal and
state statute, both of which require a minimum
of three performance levels.
• Reach consensus on recommendations for the
names of the performance labels (categories
of performance) for student achievement on
the assessments (general, modified and
alternate).
• Make recommendations for key words/phrases
to be used in drafting the policy definitions
that will define student performance within
each category.

29. Performance Label & Policy Definition
TAKS Example
• Performance Label
 Met the Standard
• Policy Definition
 Satisfactory academic achievement, students
performed at a level that was at or somewhat
above the state passing standard, students
demonstrated a sufficient understanding of the
knowledge and skills measured at this grade.

30. Committee Process
Step 1: Brainstorm key words/phrases to be used in
developing the policy definitions
Step 2: Share recommendations for key words/phrases
Step 3: Reach consensus on recommendations for key
words/phrases to be used in developing the policy
definitions
Step 4: Brainstorm performance labels for each of the
performance categories
Step 5: Share recommendations for performance labels
Step 6: Reach consensus on recommendations for
performance labels

31. Final labels and definitions to
be approved by the
commissioner of education by
December 31, 2010.

32. 3. Specific Performance Level Descriptors
• Committees to meet in 2011
• Committees to primarily include educators from
both public education and higher education
• Translate the policy definitions into
grade/course and content specific descriptions

33. 3. Specific Performance Level Descriptors
TAKS Exit-level ELA Example Performance
Label
Met the Standard
Satisfactory performance; at or above state
Policy passing standard; a sufficient understanding of
Definition the ELA TEKS curriculum
Students Who Met the Standard
1. Use appropriate strategies to comprehend
both fiction and nonfiction most of the time.
2. Understand, for the most part, how literary
techniques, such as symbolism,
foreshadowing, and flashback, contribute to
the development of a story.
3. Have some awareness of personal strengths
and weaknesses as a writer.
4. Etc…
Specific
Performance Level
Descriptors (PLDs)

34. 4. Standard-Setting Committee
• STAAR EOC: February 2012
• STAAR 3–8: October 2012
• Committee members to represent broad
perspectives including:
 Educators (from both public and higher
education)
 Policy experts (including business
representatives)
 Dual expertise in education and policy

35. 4. Standard-Setting Committee
• Committee will follow a research-based
standard-setting process
• Cut scores will be informed by
 Test content (item difficulty, required skills)
 Alignment within content area
 External study results (e.g. SAT, ACT)
 Linking studies (e.g. Algebra I to Algebra II)
 Student performance (estimated % passing)
 Expert judgment
• Cut score will be set starting with highest
grade/course, with lower grade/course vertically
aligned to higher grade/course

36. 5. Policy Review Committee
• STAAR EOC: March 2012
• STAAR 3–8: November 2012
• Committee of higher and public education
policy experts from prior committee and
additional policy experts
• Review recommended cut scores across the
entire STAAR program – all grades/courses
and content areas

37. 6. Approve Performance Standards
• STAAR EOC: March 2012
• STAAR 3–8: December 2012
• College readiness performance standards
approved by commissioner of education and
commissioner of higher education
• All other performance standards approved by
commissioner of education

38. 7. Implement Performance Standards
• STAAR EOC: May 2012 (first high stakes
administration)
• STAAR 3–8: Late fall 2012 or early 2013
• New standards are expected to be used in state
and federal accountability systems starting in
2013

39. 8. Review Performance Standards
• Legislative requirement to review performance
standards at least once every three years
• First review in 2013
• Consider additional data from research studies
 Longitudinal data (follow cohorts of TX students
from EOC to college and careers)
 Substitute tests (AP, IB, SAT subject)
 Military service
 Workforce
 College readiness for science and social studies
(depending on findings of feasibility studies)

40. Summary
The STAAR Assessment Program will feature:
• Content and performance standards that are an aligned
system from grade 3 to college and career readiness to
prepare all students for postsecondary opportunities
• Performance standards that are not set in isolation but
informed by data from research studies that include
comparisons with national and international assessments
• A multi-step research-based standard-setting process
that includes diverse stakeholders from higher and public
education and involves frequent review of standards
Additional information can be found in the transition report
submitted to the legislature on December 1.

41. Questions?

42. Session Code
<Insert Session Code here>