Examining Data for the 1% Waiver

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
IMPLICATIONS FOR KENTUCKY’S SCHOOLS AND DISTRICTS SUPERINTENDENTS’ WEBCAST MARCH 6, 2012 NCLB Waiver Flexibility 1.
Advertisements

1 Accountability System Overview of the Accountability Rating System for Texas Public Schools and Districts.
2015 SpEd Assessment Updates TETN Event # Presented June 5, 2013 TEA’s Student Assessment Division.
Texas State Accountability 2013 and Beyond Current T.E.A. Framework as of March 22, 2013 Austin Independent School District Bill Caritj, Chief Performance.
Brian A. Harris-Kojetin, Ph.D. Statistical and Science Policy
Monthly Conference Call With Superintendents and Charter School Administrators.
ALTERNATE/ALTERNATIVE ASSESSMENTS VGLA AND VMAST UPDATES VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AUGUST Regional Administrators Update Training.
1 Utah Performance Assessment System for Students U-PASS Accountability Plan Judy W. Park Assessment & Accountability Director Utah State Office of Education.
A ccountability R esearch and M easurement 1 Overview of Proposed School Grading Formula for :
Index Accountability 2014 Created by Accountability and Compliance staff of Region 17 Education Service Center.
Mark DeCandia Kentucky NAEP State Coordinator
Verification Visit by the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) September 27-29, 2010.
Selecting Students for Title I Services in a Targeted Assistance School (TAS)
P t G T P ersistence t o G raduation T ool A tool designed to identify students who may be off-track for graduating.
TASSP Spring 2014 Tori Mitchell, ESC 17 Specialist Ty Duncan, ESC 17 Coordinator Overview of 2014 Accountability
Proficiency Delivery Plan Strategies Curriculum, Assessment & Alignment Continuous Instructional Improvement System ( CIITS) New Accountability Model KY.
Strategic Planning Update Kentucky Board of Education January 31, 2012.
1 Early Childhood and Accountability OSEP’s Project Director’s Meeting August 2006.
TOM TORLAKSON State Superintendent of Public Instruction National Center and State Collaborative California Activities Kristen Brown, Ph.D. Common Core.
1 Results for Students with Disabilities and School Year Data Report for the RSE-TASC Statewide Meeting May 2010.
Data in Perspective: A view of national, state, and local data collection, compilations and systems Presented by : Beth Hartness Program Specialist, National.
What are the STAAR Performance Standards? Copyright 2013 by Region 7 Education Service Center. All rights reserved.
March 7, 2013 Texas Education Agency | Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Performance Reporting Accountability Policy Advisory Committee.
IDEA and NCLB Standards-Based Accountability Sue Rigney, U.S. Department of Education OSEP 2006 Project Directors’ Conference.
Mark DeCandia Kentucky NAEP State Coordinator
Lodi Unified School District Accountability Progress Report (APR) Results Update Prepared by the LUSD Assessment, Research & Evaluation Department.
CAHSEE Results Board Report 1 Lodi Unified School District 2009 California High School Exit Examination Results September 15, 2009.
Kentucky Continuous Monitoring Process Spring 2012.
2014 National Call Collaboration for Effective Educator Development, Accountability and Reform H325A
NCLB / Education YES! What’s New for Students With Disabilities? Michigan Department of Education.
January 15, Utilization of the Personal Curriculum.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Tom Torlakson, State Superintendent of Public Instruction 2011–2012 Federal Program Monitoring English Learner Accountability.
2011 OSEP Leadership Mega Conference Collaboration to Achieve Success from Cradle to Career 2.0 Maryland IDEA Scorecard Data Driven Decision Making Nancy.
1 Mississippi Statewide Accountability System Adequate Yearly Progress Model Improving Mississippi Schools Conference June 11-13, 2003 Mississippi Department.
Ohio’s Alternate Assessments for Students with Disabilities Thomas Lather Office for Exceptional Children (614)
August 28, Liz Jones Suzanne Swaffield Douglas Alexander Anne Mruz Chris Webster 2.
Determining AYP What’s New Step-by-Step Guide September 29, 2004.
DISPROPORTIONALITY REGULATIONS
IDEA Assessment Data Anne Rainey, IDEA Part B Data Manager, Montana
Educator preparation policy as a lever for improving teacher and leader preparation: Keeping promises in Tennessee Collaboration for Effective Educator.
What is Title I and How Can I be Involved?
What is API? The Academic Performance Index (API) is the cornerstone of California's Public Schools Accountability Act of 1999 (PSAA). It is required.
Assessment.
What States are Doing That Meet the 1% Cap
KY Alternate Assessment
Federal Policy & Statewide Assessments for Students with Disabilities
Kentucky Alternate Assessment-Alternate K-PREP
Accountability Update
Why was the NCAAAI Developed?
2018 OSEP Project Directors’ Conference
2018 OSEP Project Directors’ Conference
Kentucky School for the Blind
Alternate Assessment Updates
A-F Accountability and Special Education
Every Student Succeeds Act
State and Federal Accountability Overview
2009 California Standards Test (CST) Results
Every Student Succeeds Act Update
WA-AIM 1% Participation Cap
2019 OSEP Leadership Conference
2011–2012 Federal Program Monitoring
Section 618 Public Reporting Requirements Thursday, September 11, 2014
Willow Elementary School
The Annual Report to Congress on IDEA
Getting Everyone Together:
Access, Equity, and Progress
An explanation and demonstration
An explanation and demonstration
State and Local Data Use for Policy, Practice, and Program Improvement
Presentation transcript:

Examining Data for the 1% Waiver Kentucky Department of Education’s Use of Data to Monitor Appropriate Use of Alternate State Assessments Kentucky Department of Education (KDE) Office of Special Education and Early Learning (OSEEL)

2019 OSEP Leadership Conference OSEP Disclaimer 2019 OSEP Leadership Conference DISCLAIMER: The contents of this presentation were developed by the presenters for the 2019 OSEP Leadership Conference. However, these contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government. (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1221e-3 and 3474)

Tools Kentucky Statewide Student Information System – Infinite Campus Includes Special Education Module Alternate Assessment based on Alternate Academic Achievement Standards (AA-AAAS) Eligibility Learner Characteristics Inventory (LCI) Justification Survey Data – required for all districts with more than 1% of students participating in the alternate assessment Training Participation Data – participation in online training modules

Additional Tools EDFacts data (C175, C178, C179, C185, C188, C189)/Other Assessment Data Participation Rate for State Participation Rate for LEAs Significant Disproportionality Data for State by Student Group Significant Disproportionality Data for each LEA Scale – up plan for categories Economically Disadvantaged in 2017-2018 Economically Disadvantaged, Pacific Islanders, English Learners, and Males in 2018-2019 Achievement Rate

What tools are your state using?

Timeline Spring/Summer – begin planning for waiver application Summer - seek and respond to public comment for 1% waiver Early August – submit waiver application End of October - receive preliminary data from KDE/OSAA Mid-December – EDFacts files available Mid-December - pull numbers of students by district and by disability who are eligible for alternate assessment according to their IEPs January – submit addendum with final data

Timeline (continued) January/February - districts are notified that they have a greater than 1% participation rate in AA-AAAS in any subject area February/March – districts analyze data and provide justification for exceeding 1% Spring – monitoring of student files for those participating in alternate assessment participation Training modules ongoing Alternate Assessment and Diploma Advisory Group meets throughout

Data For the Waiver

Initial Waiver Request (2017-2018) Use previous year’s data (2016-2017) for initial waiver request Participation rate for state Calculated based on EDFacts data for mathematics, reading/language arts, and science Data for social studies and writing obtained directly from Kentucky Department of Education (KDE)/Office of Standards, Assessment and Accountability (OSAA) Calculated by number of students participating in AA-AAAS divided by all students participating (EDFacts data/OSAA) 170 out of 175 districts had more than 1% of students participating in the alternate assessment

Monitoring Monitor a sample of districts based on data Districts over 1% Districts under 1% Specific student characteristics LCI Specific disabilities Achievement scores Districts with highest disproportionality Analysis of justification responses Training Data Other – based on extraneous information

District Data for Students Eligible to Participate Pulled from the Kentucky Statewide Student Information System Infinite Campus (IC) Special Education Module (IEP) Alternate assessment eligibility Provide data to districts by disability for districts to analyze District reviews student files for “red flags” Student achievement Disability eligibility LCI data Disproportionality Other factors

District Rate of Participation in AA-AAAS Using EDFacts files and additional data obtained by KDE/OSAA Sample: District Math AA Math All % Math Reading AA Reading All % Reading Sci AA Sci All % Sci D1 9 1402 0.64% 11 1404 0.78% 616 1.46% D2 27 1602 1.69% 29 1604 1.81% 7 693 1.01% D3 1 254 0.39% 84 1.19% Also calculated for Social Studies and Writing for each district

Students Eligible for AA-AAAS Data based on eligibility data in student IEPs

Learner Characteristics Inventory (LCI) Designed to identify levels of communication and other complex characteristics of students participating in alternate assessment Embedded in IEP Districts review Desk reviews at state level Developed by the National Center and State Collaborative LCI included in Kentucky’s Alternate Assessment Participation Guidelines

How do you monitor participation?

Disproportionality Kentucky uses 2.0 and above as the threshold Do not eliminate any district based on n-size or cell-size, but it is considered Highest rate of disproportionality in 2016-2017 was in the content areas of reading and math among those students who are Economically Disadvantaged This data was considered in decisions regarding monitoring Scale up plan was developed for future years

Calculation – Risk Ratio A risk ratio is the comparison of two different risks: The risk for a specific student group to participate in alternate assessment Compared To The risk for all students NOT in that student group to participate in alternate assessment

Categories for Risk Ratio Calculation Subjects Student Groups Reading (Elementary/Middle) Math (Elementary/Middle) Writing (Elementary/Middle/High) Science (Elementary/Middle) Social Studies (Elementary/Middle) English II (High) Algebra II (High) US History (High) Race Gender Free/Reduced Lunch Eligible English Learners Migrant Homeless

Example White students taking alternate assessment: 2 All white students assessed in the district: 250 Non-white students taking alternate assessment: 4 Non-white students assessed in the district: 2000 Risk of white students taking alt. assessment: 2/250 = 0.008 = 0.8% Risk of non- white students taking alt. assessment: 4/2000 = 0.002 = 0.2% Risk ratio = 0.8/0.2 = 4.00 White students are 4.00 times more likely than non-white students to take the alternate assessment

Questions? Is your state using a different method?

Justification Survey Required for Directors of Special Education in LEAs over 1% KY Justification Survey KY Alternate Assessment Participation Waiver

What choices do you provide for justification What choices do you provide for justification? How did you determine them?

Training and Guidance Extensive statewide training, coaching, and support plan, known as the Participation for Alternate Assessment (P4AA) Project Online training modules Regional cooperative ARC (IEP team meeting) simulations Regional cooperative coaching (in-person and by teleconferencing) Guidance documents Record review document

Online Training Modules Housed at Human Development Institute at the University of Kentucky Developed by KDE advisory group KDE and district monitors completion Required survey for each module to provide feedback (data) Module 5 focuses on data

2017-2018 Waiver

Comparison of SY 2016-17 and SY 2017-18 Alternate Assessment Participation by Subject

Overall Statewide Participation

Overall Statewide Percentage of Students Eligible to Participate in the AA-AAAS

Districts Assessing More than 1% of Students in the Alternate Assessment

2019 OSEP Leadership Conference OSEP Disclaimer1 2019 OSEP Leadership Conference DISCLAIMER: The contents of this presentation were developed by the presenters for the 2019 OSEP Leadership Conference. However, these contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government. (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1221e-3 and 3474)