School Report Card and Identification Progression No Child Left Behind School Report Card and Identification Progression

Alphabet Soup What does it all mean?? Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) indicates satisfactory progress by a district or a school toward the goal of proficiency for all students. What it really means is : Another Yucky Performance

Performance Index (PI) Performance Index is a value from 0 to 200 that is assigned to an accountability group, indicating how that group performed on a required State test (or approved alternative) in English language arts, mathematics, or science. Student scores on the tests are converted to four performance levels, from Level 1 (indicating no proficiency) to Level 4 (indicating advanced proficiency). At the elementary/middle level, the PI is calculated using the following equation:

Performance Index Calculation (PI) 100 × [(Count of Continuously Enrolled Tested Students Performing at Levels 2, 3, and 4 + the Count at Levels 3 and 4) ÷ Count of All Continuously Enrolled Tested Students] At the secondary level, the PI is calculated using the following equation: 100 × [(Count of Cohort Members Performing at Levels 2, 3, and 4 + the Count at Levels 3 and 4) ÷ Count of Cohort Members]

Annual Measurable Objective (AMO) The Annual Measurable Objective (AMO) is the Performance Index (PI) value that signifies that an accountability group is making satisfactory progress toward the goal that 100 percent of students will be proficient in the State’s learning standards for English language arts and mathematics by 2013–14. The secondary-level AMO will be increased as specified in CR100.2(p)(14) and will reach 200 in 2013–14. So have so many schools made AMO every year for the various subgroups and still have not achieved Level 3 for all?

Continuously Enrolled Students At the elementary/middle level, continuously enrolled students are those enrolled in the school or district on BEDS day (usually the first Wednesday in October) of the school year until the test administration period. At the secondary level, all students who meet the criteria for inclusion in the accountability cohort are considered to be continuously enrolled.

Effective Annual Measurable Objective (Effective AMO) The Effective Annual Measurable Objective (Effective AMO) is the Performance Index (PI) value that each accountability group within a school or district is expected to achieve to make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). The Effective AMO is the lowest PI that an accountability group of a given size can achieve in a subject for the group’s PI not to be considered significantly different from the AMO for that subject. If an accountability group’s PI equals or exceeds the Effective AMO, it is considered to have made AYP. Are you confused yet?

Safe Harbor Safe Harbor provides an alternate means to demonstrate Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for accountability groups that do not achieve their Effective Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs) in English or mathematics.

Say what?????? Safe Harbor Targets The original 2005–06 safe harbor targets were calculated using the following equation: 2005–2006 PI + (200 – the 2005–2006 PI) × 0.10 The resulting targets were adjusted so that their proportion of the 2005–2006 AMO was the same as the original target’s proportion of the 2004–2005 AMO. Say what??????

Progress Target For accountability groups below the State Standard in science or graduation rate, the Progress Target is an alternate method for making Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) or qualifying for Safe Harbor in English language arts and mathematics based on improvement over the previous year’s performance.

English Language Arts (ELA) Participation Criterion At the elementary/middle level, 95 percent of Grades 3–8 students enrolled during the test administration period in each group with 40 or more students must be tested on the New York State Testing Program (NYSTP) in ELA or, if appropriate, the New York State English as a Second Language Achievement Test (NYSESLAT), or the New York State Alternate Assessment (NYSAA) in ELA. At the secondary level, 95 percent of seniors in 2005–06 in each accountability group with 40 or more students must have taken an English examination that meets the students’ graduation requirement.

ELA Performance Criterion At the elementary/middle level, the Performance Index (PI) of each group with 30 or more continuously enrolled tested students must equal or exceed its Effective Annual Measurable Objective (AMO) or the group must make Safe Harbor. At the secondary level, the PI of each group in the 2002 cohort with 30 or more members must equal or exceed its Effective AMO or the group must make Safe Harbor. To make Safe Harbor, the PI of the group must equal or exceed its Safe Harbor Target and the group must meet the qualification for Safe Harbor

Mathematics The same criteria for making AYP in ELA apply to mathematics. At the elementary/middle level, the measures used to determine AYP are the NYSTP and the NYSAA in mathematics. At the secondary level, the measures are mathematics examinations that meet the students’ graduation requirement.

Participation Criterion for Science Eighty percent of students in Grades 4 and/or 8 enrolled during the test administration period in the All Students group, if it has 40 or more students, must be tested on an accountability measure. In Grade 4, the measures are the Grade 4 elementary-level science test and the Grade 4 NYSAA in science. In Grade 8 science, the measures are the Grade 8 middle-level science test, Regents science examinations, and the Grade 8 NYSAA in science.

Performance Criterion for Science The PI of the All Students group must equal or exceed the State Science Standard (100) or the Science Progress Target. Qualifying for Safe Harbor in Elementary/Middle- Level ELA and Math: To qualify, the PI must equal or exceed the State Science Standard or the Science Progress Target in elementary/middle-level science for that group

Secondary –Level Graduation Rate For a school to make AYP in graduation rate, the percent of students in the 2001 graduation-rate cohort in the All Students group earning a high school diploma by August 31, 2005 must equal or exceed the Graduation-Rate Standard (55%) or the Graduation-Rate Progress Target. Qualifying for Safe Harbor in Secondary-Level ELA and Math: To qualify, the percent of the 2001 graduation-rate cohort earning a local diploma by August 31, 2005 must equal or exceed the Graduation-Rate Standard (55%) or the Graduation-Rate Progress Target for that group.

Overview of Naughtiness Designations NCLB prescribes consequences for schools and districts that fail to progress toward meeting standards SINI (School In Need of Improvement) Designation applies to Title I School SRAP (School Requiring Academic Progress) Designation applies to non-Title I schools Watch List – Fails to meet AYP target Yr. 1, is in danger if fails to meet AYP in Yr. 2

Measuring Performance At the elementary and middle levels, student performance is measured using State assessments in English Language Arts, mathematics, and science At the secondary level, student performance is measured using State Assessments in English Language Arts and mathematics and using graduation rate Elementary and Middle Levels - For an accountability group with 40 or more students to make AYP in ELA and Math, 95% of the students enrolled at the time of the test administration must have valid scores on an appropriate assessment High School – For an accountability group with 40 or more students to make AYP in ELA and math, 95% of seniors must take an assessment that meets the student’s graduation requirement in that subject

School – Level Accountability To be identified for improvement status, a school must fail to make AYP for two years. The school may fail to make AYP for those two years because of two different accountability groups. Starting in 2005-2006 there will be a combined AYP reported for grades (3-5) and grades (6-8) in ELA and Math If a previously identified school fails to make AYP in the accountability group in which it was identified, it moves to the next highest status on the continuum If an identified school makes AYP it remains in the same status on the continuum To be removed from improvement status the school must make AYP in the accountability group that it was cited for two consecutive years. The school may remain or be placed in improvement status in another category for which it has not made AYP

Sample Identifications of Schools for Improvement Status School A fails to make AYP in the following groups Grade 4 ELA White Students in 2003-04 Grade 4 Math Economically Disadvantaged Students in 2004-2005 School A is not identified for improvement because it has not failed to make AYP for two consecutive years in the same subject . Whew!!!!!!!!!!

Sample Identifications of Schools for Improvement (cont.) School B fails to make AYP in the following groups: - Grade 4 ELA Asian Students in 2003-2004 - Grade 4 ELA LEP Students in 2004-2005 School B is identified for improvement because it has failed to make AYP for two consecutive years in the same subject (Grade 4 ELA)

YEAR 1 Accountability – School fails to meet State Standard; AYP target assigned School Status – “In Good Standing” District Level Planning – Local Action Plan (LAP) is required for schools that fall below 90% on any school accountability criterion.

YEAR 2 Movement Out of Identification Accountability – Meets AYP target and assigned new AYP target School Status – Remains “In Good Standing” District Level Planning – Local Action Plan is required for schools that fall below 90% on any accountability criterion Movement to the Next Level of Identification Accountability – Fails to meet AYP target; Assigned new AYP target School Status – Remains “In Good Standing” District Level Planning – Local Action Plan

Movement Out of Identification YEAR 3 Movement Out of Identification Accountability – Meets AYP Target (2nd successive year) School Status -Remains “In Good Standing” District Level Planning – Local Action Plan

YEAR 3 Movement to the Next Level Accountability - Fails to meet AYP target; Assigned new AYP target School Standing - Becomes “School In Need of Improvement Yr. 1” (SINI 1) District Level Planning – Local Action Plan School Level Planning – CEP must be developed by building- level team; must be approved by SED School Choice – Must offer school choice if other non- identified schools exist TA – LIRSPN TA as needed (not targeted)

Long Island Region Support Network (LIRSPN) The Long Island Regional Support Network is one of seven statewide Regional Support Centers created to provide on-going targeted assistance to districts and schools identified as needing assistance under NYSED’s accountability systems.

YEAR 4 Movement Out of Identification Accountability – Makes AYP target (after having failed to make AYP in Year 3) ; Assigned new AYP target School Status – Remains “School in Need of Improvement, Yr. 1” (SINI I) District Level Planning – Local Action Plan School Level Planning – Development of CEP with building level team; must be approved by SED School Choice - Must offer School Choice if there are other non-identified schools in district TA – LIRSPN TA as needed, (may be targeted)

YEAR 4 Movement to the Next Level Accountability – Fails to meet AYP target (3rd successive year): Assigned new AYP target School Status – Becomes SINI School Year 2 District Level Planning – LAP School Level Planning – CEP developed by building-level team School Choice – Must offer School Choice if other non-identified school exist TA – LIRSPN TA, as needed (may be targeted) SES - Must offer Supplemental Education Services (minimum equal to 5% of Title I , Part A allocation)

Year 5 Movement Out of Identification Accountability – Makes (AYP 2nd successive year) School Standing – Becomes School “In Good Standing” District Level – Local Action Plan

YEAR 5 Movement to the Next Level Accountability – Fails to meet AYP target (4th successive year); Assigned new AYP target School Status – Becomes “School in Need of Corrective Action, Yr. 1” (CA-1) District Level Planning – District must select one of 8 corrective actions for school and develops Corrective Action Plan (CAP) with school based team School Level Planning - CEP developed; Must be approved by SED School Choice - Must offer school choice if other non- identified schools TA – LIRSPN TA (targeted) SES – Must offer Supplemental Educational Services If you are here, shoot yourself!

Why are all of these “fixes that fail?” Corrective Actions Replace school staff who are relevant to the failure to make AYP – Bye Bye! Institute a new curriculum Decrease management authority at the school Appoint an outside expert to advise the school (I’m available for a hefty sum!) Extend the school day or school year Restructure the internal organization of the school Provide teacher professional development Why are all of these “fixes that fail?”

YEAR 6 Movement Out of Identification Accountability – Makes AYP (after having failed to make AYP in Year 5) School Status – Remains “School in Need of Corrective Action Yr. 1” (CA-1) District Level Planning – District must select one of 8 correction actions for school and develops Corrective Action Plan (CAP) School Level Planning – CEP developed with school team; must be approved by SED School Choice – Must offer school choice TA - LIRSPN TA (targeted) SES – Must offer Supplemental Educational Services

YEAR 6 Movement to the Next Level Accountability - Fails to meet AYP target (5th successive year); Assigned new AYP target School Status - Becomes “School in Need of Corrective Action, Yr 2/Planning for Restructuring” (CA-2) District Level Planning – District must select one of 8 corrective actions for school and develops a Corrective Action Plan (CAP)

YEAR 6 Movement to the Next Level (continued) School Level Planning – District selects one of 4 Restructuring options; Restructuring Plan developed by building-level team in tandem with district and TA providers; Must be approved by SED; Restructuring Plan to be implemented the following year if AYP not achieved School Choice – Must offer school choice if other non-identified schools exist in the district TA – LLIRSPN TA (targeted) SES - Must offer Supplemental Educational Services Geez! The horse is dead; dismount!!!

NCLB Restructuring Options Reopening the school as a public charter school Replacing all or most of the school staff (which may include the principal) who are relevant to the failure to make adequate early progress (AYP) Any other major restructuring of the school’s governance arrangement that makes fundamental reforms, such as significant changes in the school’s staffing and governance, to improve student academic achievement in the school and that has substantial promise of enabling the school to make adequate yearly progress

NCLB Restructuring Options (continued) Enter into a contract with a private management company to run the school Turn the operation of the school over to the state

Year 7 Movement Out of Identification Accountability – Makes AYP target (2nd successive year) School Status – Becomes “School in Good Standing”

YEAR 7 Movement to the Next Level Accountability – Fails to meet AYP target (6th successive year); Assigned new AYP target School Status – Becomes “School in Restructuring” District Level Planning – District must implement Corrective Action Plan (CAP) School Level Planning – Restructuring Plan is Implemented School Choice – Must offer School Choice TA – LIRSPN TA (targeted) SES – Must offer Supplemental Educational Services

Comments and Questions Cries of outrage? Now you can see why you need to see things systemically. This is insane and causes districts to chase their tails to conform when they should be focused on helping teachers move ALL of their children to mastery! If all were at mastery, problem solved! YOU SHOULD HAVE MADE YOUR DISTRICT ALBANY AND D.C. PROOF!

Education If you are focused on seat time you are focused on the wrong end of the student.