Federal ESSA Equity Report

ESSA Equity Report

Summary: This report exemplifies how TEA is looking at low-income and minority students being served at campuses at a disproportionate rate of inexperienced teachers (teachers in their first two years of teaching).

Usage:

• The Poverty Groups displays the disproportionate rates between the district’s high and low quartile, as well as between the district’s high quartile and the state average.
• The Minority Group displays the disproportionate rates between the district’s high and low quartile, as well as between the district’s high quartile and the state average.
• To see campuses in each quartile:

–Sort column by low income. Campuses in the High and Low quartiles are color coded.

–Sort column by minority (not white) students. Campuses in the High and Low quartiles are color coded.

Data Sources:

• PEIMS Fall and Summer XML files one year prior to year filter
  • Student Percentages:
    • Unique count by student id based on Summer attendance records (42400)
    • Attributed to all campuses attended
  • Staff Percentages:
    • Unique count by staff id based on Fall responsibility (30090)
    • Attributed to all campuses taught

Definitions:

• Inexperienced Teacher: Role-ID = 087 and Total Years Professional Experience = 00 or 01 in Fall submission Divided by Total Role-ID =087.
• Low Income: Students coded Economically Disadvantaged (01,02,99) in either Fall or Summer submission
• Minority: Students not coded as white, alone.
• Quartile: Campuses sorted by Low Income for 1 report and for Minority on the other report. Then divided as evenly as possible into 4 groups. The High and Low groups are selected. The teachers who have less than 3 years of experience are averaged at those Campuses for both quartiles.
• Disproportionate: The difference between the rate at which low-income students or students of color are taught by inexperienced teachers and the rate at which their peers are taught by inexperienced teachers.

NOTE: Comparison will be made with High and Low quartiles at the District and the High quartile % with the state % of inexperienced teachers for both the low-income students and the students of color.

EXAMPLE:

Row	Comparison	Inexperienced Teachers
Equity Gap Calculations: Low-Income Students
A	High-poverty quartile	9.56%
B	Low-poverty quartile	4.03%
C	District equity gap: High-poverty quartile minus low-poverty quartile (row A-row B)	9.56%-4.03% =5.53%
D	State average	13.05%
E	State equity gap: High-poverty quartile minus state average (row A-row D)	9.56%-13.05% =-3.49%

Equity Gap Calculations: Students of Color
F	High-minority quartile	9.03%
G	Low-minority quartile	4.41%
H	District equity gap: High-minority quartile minus low-minority quartile (row F-row G)	9.56%-4.03% =5.53%
E	State equity gap: High-minority quartile minus state average (row F-row D)	9.03%-13.05% =-4.02%

Resource for qualifications and calculations:

• https://texasequitytoolkit.org/
• Note: For the 2019-2020 school year, LEAs will be not be expected to submit new equity plans.