Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). What is Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)? As a condition of receiving federal funds under No Child Left Behind (NCLB), all.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA September 2003.
Advertisements

Title I & Title III Annual Parent Meeting
Title I School Improvement in North Carolina. Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) determines if a Title I school goes into Title I School Improvement.
Title I/AYP Presentation Prepared by NHCS Title I Department for NHCS PTA September 22, 2010.
School Accountability Ratings What Are Our District’s Accountability Ratings? What do they mean?
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) “No Child Left Behind” Act of 2001 Public Law (NCLB) Brian Jeffries Office of Superintendent of.
‘No Child Left Behind’ Loudoun County Public Schools Department of Instruction.
Pennsylvania’s Continuous Improvement Process. Understanding AYP How much do you know about AYP?
Elementary/Secondary Education Act (1965) “No Child Left Behind” (2002) Adequacy Committee February 6,2008.
1 Title I Faculty Presentation Department of Federal and State Programs or PX
Determining Validity For Oklahoma’s Educational Accountability System Prepared for the American Educational Research Association (AERA) Oklahoma State.
No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Public School Choice The School District Of Palm Beach County May 2011.
Annual Title I Parent Meeting Martin Luther King Jr. Middle School.
Common Questions What tests are students asked to take? What are students learning? How’s my school doing? Who makes decisions about Wyoming Education?
Our Children Are Our Future: No Child Left Behind No Child Left Behind Accountability and AYP A Archived Information.
Title I Annual Meeting Presented by: SCHOOL NAME HERE.
NCLB Title I, Part A Parent Notification Idaho SDE Title I Director’s Meeting September 15, 2008 Cathryn Gardner, Senior Program Advisor Northwest Regional.
A Guide to No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and Public School Choice The School District Of Palm Beach County April 2010.
ESEA NCLB  Stronger accountability  More freedom for states and communities  Use of proven research-based methods  More choices.
High Stakes Testing EDU 330: Educational Psychology Daniel Moos.
Questions & Answers About AYP & PI answered on the video by: Rae Belisle, Dave Meaney Bill Padia & Maria Reyes July 2003.
Springfield Public Schools Adequate Yearly Progress 2010 Overview.
San Leandro Unified School Board Looking Closely About Our Data September 6, 2006 Presented by Department of Curriculum and Instruction Prepared by Daniel.
A Parent’s Guide to Understanding the State Accountability Workbook.
School Report Card ACCOUNTABILITY STATUS REPORT: ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS, MATHEMATICS, SCIENCE, AND GRADUATION RATE For GREENVILLE CSD.
May 25,  MSP scores are compared against a uniform bar.  The MSP scores compared against the uniform bar are not representative of individual.
Title I Annual Meeting What Every Family Needs to Know!
Program Improvement/ Title I Parent Involvement Meeting October 9, :00 p.m. Redwood City School District.
State Test Results & AYP Status Shelton School District SY Pam Farr, Director of Teaching & Learning Gail Straus, Director of ECE & Federal Programs.
SAISD Principal’s Meeting September 17, 2003 Office of Research and Evaluation.
Title I Faculty Presentation (Faculty Title I and AYP Combined Presentation) 1 Department of Federal and State Programs or PX
Title I and Families. Purpose of Meeting According to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, schools are required to host an Annual Meeting to explain.
Title I and Families. Purpose of Meeting According to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, schools are required to host an Annual Meeting to explain.
Annual Student Performance Report October Overview NCLB requirements related to AYP 2012 ISAT performance and AYP status Next steps.
1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA Modified by Dr. Teresa Cortez September 10, 2007.
No Child Left Behind Tecumseh Local Schools. No Child Left Behind OR... 4 No Educator Left Unconfused 4 No Lawyer Left Unemployed 4 No Child Left Untested.
Title I and Families. Purpose of Meeting According to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, schools are required to host an Annual Meeting to explain.
School Accountability in Delaware for the School Year August 3, 2005.
1 Title I Faculty Presentation Department of Federal and State Programs or PX
District Improvement….. Outcomes  Why we are in District Improvement.  What is DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT?  How we got this rating.  What does this mean.
No Child Left Behind. HISTORY President Lyndon B. Johnson signs Elementary and Secondary Education Act, 1965 Title I and ESEA coordinated through Improving.
Making Sense of Adequate Yearly Progress. Adequate Yearly Progress Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) is a required activity of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB)
Title I Faculty Presentation Faculty Title I and AYP Combined Presentation.
NCLB / Education YES! What’s New for Students With Disabilities? Michigan Department of Education.
Understanding AMAOs Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives for Title III Districts School Year Results.
ESEA Federal Accountability System Overview 1. Federal Accountability System Adequate Yearly Progress – AYP defined by the Elementary and Secondary Education.
Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) /22/2010.
No Child Left Behind Application 1 Title I, Part A Part 1.
1 Accountability Systems.  Do RFEPs count in the EL subgroup for API?  How many “points” is a proficient score worth?  Does a passing score on the.
1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA Modified by Dr. Teresa Cortez January 2010.
1 Welcome to the Title I Annual Meeting for Parents Highland Renaissance Academy.
Springs 2006 and 2007 Adequate Yearly Progress Results Potential Challenges with 2008 Annual Measurable Objectives & District Corrective Action.
AYP and Report Card. Big Picture Objectives – Understand the purpose and role of AYP in Oregon Assessments. – Understand the purpose and role of the Report.
Coordinator’s Academy Local District 6 Program Improvement Thursday October 27, 2005.
Presented by: Frank Ciloski, Sherry Hutchins, Barb Light, Val Masuga, Amy Metz, Michelle Ribant, Kevin Richard, Kristina Rider, and Helena Shepard.
- 0 - OUSD Results MSDF Impact Assessment State Accountability Academic Performance Index (API) The API is a single number, ranging from a low.
Preliminary AYP Preliminary Adequate Yearly Progress Data.
1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA Modified by Dr. Teresa Cortez September 1, 2008.
1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA May 2003 Modified by Dr. Teresa Cortez for Riverside Feeder Data Days February.
Title I Faculty Presentation Faculty Title I and AYP Combined Presentation.
Title I Annual Meeting What Every Family Needs to Know!
Elizabeth Burmaster, State Superintendent Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction November 2004 No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 Implementation of the.
Adequate Yearly Progress [Our School District]
NYS School Report Card & Spring 2014 NYS Assessment Results Orchard Park Central School District Board of Education Presentation August 26, 2014.
Accountability in California Before and After NCLB
Title III of the No Child Left Behind Act
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
Accountability Progress Report September 16, 2010
PHILLIPS PREPARATORY SCHOOL
AYP and Report Card.
Presentation transcript:

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)

What is Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)? As a condition of receiving federal funds under No Child Left Behind (NCLB), all states are required to define a process for identifying groups of students, schools, districts and the state as being in need of improvement. This requirement is called adequate yearly progress or AYP. Federal accountability under No Child Left Behind looks at the performance of groups of students: All students, American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian or Pacific Islander, white not Hispanic, black not Hispanic, Hispanic, students receiving special education services, learning English for the first time and students eligible for free or reduced priced meals.

How is Adequate Yearly Progress determined? The performance of all students and groups of students, who have been enrolled in a district for a full academic year, must equal or exceed the state goal in reading (NeSA-R) and math (NeSA-M), and At least 95% of all students must participate in the assessments, and The school and district must meet or demonstrate progress toward meeting a state goal for one other indicator for elementary and middle schools (NeSA- Writing) and a State goal for a graduation rate at the high school level.

AYP and “Need of Improvement” To make Federal AYP (Adequate Yearly Progress), schools and districts must meet all target goals in all areas. NCLB also requires progress to be measured over two consecutive years. If the school has not met the target goals in the same subject and grade level for both years, the school is identified as being in “need of improvement.”

New AYP Mathematics Goals ElementaryMiddle SchoolHigh School %50 %41 % % 61 % %83 %80 % %

New AYP Reading Goals ElementaryMiddle SchoolHigh School %70%68% %80%79% %90%89% %

What does it mean if a school doesn’t make AYP in No Child Left Behind? AYP is one indicator of a school or district’s performance. It focuses solely on whether any group of students is meeting the expectations for growth. A school will be able to identify and address the instruction and services for that group of students not meeting the state goals for adequate yearly progress. AYP does NOT mean a “failing school,” but it does mean that schools must address the needs of the group of students or subject area that is not showing progress.

What happens to schools and districts that do not make AYP? The NCLB consequences for not making AYP targets apply only to schools and districts that have Title I programs. The federal law prescribes graduated sanctions for Title I schools beginning with the second consecutive year of not making AYP.

School Improvement Consequences Any building identified for Title I school improvement must: Notify parents of all students that the school has been identified for Title I School Improvement and what caused the identification. Provide students the option to transfer to a building not in School Improvement. o The district must spend the equivalent of 20% of Title I allocations on choice-related transportation, or a lesser amount that satisfies the demands from parents of eligible students. Spend, from any source, funds equal to 10% of the Title I building allocation on professional development. Include parents, school staff, district staff, and other experts in developing or revising a 2-year plan which specifically addresses how funds will be remove the school from school improvement status.

LINCOLN HEIGHTS READING

LONGFELLOW MATH

BLUFFS MIDDLE SCHOOL READING

BLUFFS MIDDLE SCHOOL MATH

SCOTTSBLUFF HIGH SCHOOL MATH

SCOTTSBLUFF HIGH SCHOOL READING

The Challenge The challenge for all schools is to use the results to show improvement over time in all groups of students. Scottsbluff Public Schools has begun and will continue the process of continuous improvement to address areas of low student performance.

HOW DO WE REACH OUR GOALS? We must ensure our students have the opportunity to learn the tested indicators. o All teachers must be knowledgeable about the state standards and indicators. o All teachers must align classroom instruction with the state standards and indicators by using the district learning guides. o All students should have access to grade level curriculum with support if needed.

HOW DO WE REACH OUR GOALS? (Continued) We must frequently check to see how the students are performing on the indicators. o All teachers must be involved in the development and implementation of common formative assessments. We must reteach the indicators if necessary. o All teachers must provide opportunities for reteaching for students that are not proficient on common formative assessments of indicators.

Questions?