Elementary/Secondary Education Act (1965) “No Child Left Behind” (2002) Adequacy Committee February 6,2008.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Title I/AYP Presentation Prepared by NHCS Title I Department for NHCS PTA September 22, 2010.
Advertisements

School Accountability Ratings What Are Our District’s Accountability Ratings? What do they mean?
IDEA and NCLB The Connection Elizabeth Burmaster, State Superintendent Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction December 2003.
No Child Left Behind Act © No Child Left Behind Act ©Kristina Krampe, 2005 EDS 513: Legal Issues in Special Education.
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.
Elementary/Secondary Education Act (1965) “No Child Left Behind” (2002) Adequacy Committee February 6,2008.
Before IDEA One in five children with disabilities was educated. One in five children with disabilities was educated. More than 1 million children with.
Pitt County Schools Testing & Accountability The ABC’s of Public Education.
Schools in Alert and Schools in Need of Improvement Summary of 2007 Statistics Prepared by NORMES, University of Arkansas Presented to the Joint Adequacy.
1 Prepared by: Research Services and Student Assessment & School Performance School Accountability in Florida: Grading Schools and Measuring Adequate Yearly.
N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND Testing Requirements of NCLB test annually in reading and mathematics in grades 3-8 test at least once in reading and mathematics.
Our Children Are Our Future: No Child Left Behind No Child Left Behind Accountability and AYP A Archived Information.
Know the Rules Nancy E. Brito, NBCT, Accountability Specialist Department of Educational Data Warehouse, Accountability, and School Improvement
Florida’s Implementation of NCLB John L. Winn Deputy Commissioner Florida Department of Education.
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) and Accountability Status Determinations.
SAISD Principal’s Meeting September 17, 2003 Office of Research and Evaluation.
Ohio’s New Accountability System Ohio’s Response to No Child Left Behind (NCLB) a.k.a. Elementary & Secondary Education Act a.k.a. ESEA January 8, 2002.
Helping EMIS Coordinators prepare for the Local Report Card (LRC) Theresa Reid, EMIS Coordinator HCCA May 2004.
Annual Student Performance Report October Overview NCLB requirements related to AYP 2012 ISAT performance and AYP status Next steps.
1 No Child Left Behind for Indian Groups 2004 Eva M. Kubinski Comprehensive Center – Region VI January 29, 2004 Home/School Coordinators’ Conference UW-Stout.
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.
No Child Left Behind Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Know the Rules Division of Performance Accountability Dr. Marc Baron, Chief Nancy E. Brito, Instructional.
School Accountability in Delaware for the School Year August 3, 2005.
Lodi Unified School District Accountability Progress Report (APR) Results Update Prepared by the LUSD Assessment, Research & Evaluation Department.
District Improvement….. Outcomes  Why we are in District Improvement.  What is DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT?  How we got this rating.  What does this mean.
Annual Student Performance Report September
No Child Left Behind Education Week
No Child Left Behind. HISTORY President Lyndon B. Johnson signs Elementary and Secondary Education Act, 1965 Title I and ESEA coordinated through Improving.
August 1, 2007 DELAWARE’S GROWTH MODEL FOR AYP DETERMINATIONS.
Making Sense of Adequate Yearly Progress. Adequate Yearly Progress Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) is a required activity of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB)
Adequate Yearly Progress The federal law requires all states to establish standards for accountability for all schools and districts in their states. The.
Capacity Development and School Reform Accountability The School District Of Palm Beach County Adequate Yearly Progress, Differentiated Accountability.
NCLB / Education YES! What’s New for Students With Disabilities? Michigan Department of Education.
Parkway District Improvement…. 10/16/ Outcomes  Why we are in District Improvement.  What is DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT?  How we got this rating. 
Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) /22/2010.
ADEQUATE YEARLY PROGRESS. Adequate Yearly Progress Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP), – Is part of the federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) – makes schools.
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.
No Child Left Behind Impact on Gwinnett County Public Schools’ Students and Schools.
1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA Modified by Dr. Teresa Cortez January 2010.
School and District Accountability Reports Implementing No Child Left Behind (NCLB) The New York State Education Department March 2004.
University of Colorado at Boulder National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing Challenges for States and Schools in the No.
C R E S S T / CU University of Colorado at Boulder National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing Measuring Adequate Yearly.
Presented by: Frank Ciloski, Sherry Hutchins, Barb Light, Val Masuga, Amy Metz, Michelle Ribant, Kevin Richard, Kristina Rider, and Helena Shepard.
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.
Update on Accountability March “…to ensure that all children have a fair, equal, and significant opportunity to obtain a high-quality education.
Adequate Yearly Progress [Our School District]
Determining AYP What’s New Step-by-Step Guide September 29, 2004.
School Report Card and Identification Progression
Academic Performance Index (API) and AYP
Academic Performance Index (API) and AYP
Accountability in California Before and After NCLB
A Brief History Data-Based School & District Improvement
Metropolitan Nashville Public Schools
Bridgewater-Raritan Regional School District
2012 Accountability Determinations
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
Illinois’ Accountability Workbook: Approved Changes in 2005
Adequate Yearly Progress [Our School District]
Adequate Progress Gina LaPlaca Grand Canyon University
Michigan School Report Card Update
WELCOME!!! Triple I Conference November 19, 2005
2009 California Standards Test (CST) Results
How Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Is Determined Using Data
Education and Accountability
Schools in Alert and Schools in Need of Improvement
Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA):
Adequate Yearly Progress: What’s Old, What’s New, What’s Next?
Presentation transcript:

Elementary/Secondary Education Act (1965) “No Child Left Behind” (2002) Adequacy Committee February 6,2008

STANDARDS NCLB ACTAAP Requires states to develop rigorous and challenging academic standards in language arts, mathematics and science Academic Standards are developed for core subjects including language arts, mathematics and science

TESTS ACTAAP NCLB By 2005-2006 test reading, writing and mathematics in grades 3 – 8 and at high school By 2007-2008 test science at least once in grades 3-5, 6-8 and high school March 2005 administered reading, writing (literacy) and mathematics tests in grades 3-8 and high school (Approved) April 2008 administered science tests in grades 5, 7 and biology (Peer Review)

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Method for determining a school’s progress based on NCLB requirements Percentage of students at grade level in literacy and mathematics based on procedures established in federal law Combined population and 6 subgroups All groups must meet the target in the same subject Status Safe Harbor Growth

AYP Literacy Mathematics Combined Population Combined Population Economically Disadvantaged Students with Disabilities LEP Students African American Caucasian Hispanic Mathematics Combined Population Economically Disadvantaged Students with Disabilities LEP Students African American Caucasian Hispanic And Test 95% of students Meet secondary indicator: attendance or graduation rate

AYP Continues “N” Count – 40 for less than 800 enrollment, greater than 800 5% of the ADM not to exceed 200 Reporting Count – 10 Highly Mobile Students – are included in the % tested but not in the % proficient Alternate Assessments (Portfolio) – based on a students IEP 1% Cap – the number of students taking the Alternate counting as proficient 1st year LEP Student Status – must take mathematics test but may be excluded from literacy test District Improvement – same components of school improvement

AYP Consequences in NCLB Schools not meeting the target for two consecutive years move into improvement Year 1: Choice to another school in the district not in improvement Year 2: Choice continues plus Supplemental Educational Services (SES) Year 3 schools enter Corrective Action Year 4+ schools enter Restructuring

Where to find Information http://arkansased.org/nclb/ayp.html NCLB Accountability Workbook Arkansas’ Growth Model School Improvement Status Reports