IDEA and NCLB The Connection Elizabeth Burmaster, State Superintendent Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction December 2003.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
NCLB, Highly Qualified and IDEA 2004 How it all fits together and What it means for you. RIDE Spring Leadership Conference May 11, 2006 Grossi/Olsen 2006.
Advertisements

Title I & Title III Annual Parent Meeting
Title I/AYP Presentation Prepared by NHCS Title I Department for NHCS PTA September 22, 2010.
1 Overview: What is “No Child Left Behind”?. 2 Reauthorization of Elementary and Secondary Education Act (“ESEA”) of ’65 Money to states for specific.
No Child Left Behind. ALL students will attain proficiency or better in reading and mathematics by ALL limited English students will become.
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 Act January 2002 Revision of Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) Education is a state and local responsibility Insure.
‘No Child Left Behind’ Loudoun County Public Schools Department of Instruction.
JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction California Department of Education Jack O’Connell State Superintendent No Child Left Behind Act.
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.
No Child Left Behind The Federal Education Law and Science Education May, 2004.
NCLB Basics From “What Parents of Students with Disabilities Need to Know & Do” National Center on Educational Outcomes University of Minnesota
Before IDEA One in five children with disabilities was educated. One in five children with disabilities was educated. More than 1 million children with.
1 Title I Faculty Presentation Department of Federal and State Programs or PX
Title I, Part A Improving Basic Programs Program Requirements and Guidelines Sheldon ISD.
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.
The Special Education Leadership Training Project January, 2003 Mary Lynn Boscardin, Ph.D. Associate Professor Preston C. Green, III, Ed.D., J.D., Associate.
Catherine Cross Maple, Ph.D. Deputy Secretary Learning and Accountability
Common Questions What tests are students asked to take? What are students learning? How’s my school doing? Who makes decisions about Wyoming Education?
Cambrian School District Academic Performance Index (API) Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Program Improvement (PI) Report.
No Child Left Behind and Students with Disabilities Presentation for OSEP Staff March 20, 2003 Stephanie Lee Director, Office of Special Education Programs.
State Accountability and Federal Adequate Yearly Progress.
Questions & Answers About AYP & PI answered on the video by: Rae Belisle, Dave Meaney Bill Padia & Maria Reyes July 2003.
Michigan’s Accountability Scorecards A Brief Introduction.
A Parent’s Guide to Understanding the State Accountability Workbook.
1 Paul Tuss, Ph.D., Program Manager Sacramento Co. Office of Education August 17, 2009 California’s Integrated Accountability System.
1 No Child Left Behind Critical Research Findings For School Boards Ronald Dietel UCLA Graduate School of Education & Information Studies National Center.
Assessment in Early Childhood Legislation. Legislation for Young Children The need for measurement strategies and tests to evaluate federal programs led.
NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND ACT OF 2001 Public Law
Program Improvement/ Title I Parent Involvement Meeting October 9, :00 p.m. Redwood City School District.
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.
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.
Marjorie Hall Haley, PhD - GMU1 NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND The reauthorized elementary and secondary education act.
Presenters: Emily & Lily Professor: Dr. James C. Lawlor Date: July 23rd.
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.
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.
NCLBNCLB No Child Left Behind (take notes, please)
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.
N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND Jill Daignault ED 613 Unit III Assignment.
No Child Left Behind No Child Left Behind  NCLB Overview  Assessment and Accountability Requirements  Educator Quality.
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.
From the Board Room To the Classroom PDK Panel Discussion September 19, 2002.
Parkway District Improvement…. 10/16/ Outcomes  Why we are in District Improvement.  What is DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT?  How we got this rating. 
ESEA Federal Accountability System Overview 1. Federal Accountability System Adequate Yearly Progress – AYP defined by the Elementary and Secondary Education.
RECYCLE Jenkins Independent District Data STATE NCLB DATA 103 of 175 school districts (58.9%) met 100% of their No Child Left Behind (NCLB) AYP goals.
The Importance of MSIS Data for Assessment Reporting and Accountability Office of Research & Statistics Mississippi Department of Education July 2004.
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.
No Child Left Behind California’s Definition of Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) July 2003.
NCLB. Introduction Increased federal mandates and requirements on states Increased federal funding to states by almost 25% from the previous year Movement.
School and District Accountability Reports Implementing No Child Left Behind (NCLB) The New York State Education Department March 2004.
GEORGIA’S CRITERION-REFERENCED COMPETENCY TESTS (CRCT) Questions and Answers for Parents of Georgia Students February 11, 2009 Presented by: MCES.
1 NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND The reauthorized elementary and secondary education act.
No Child Left Behind. Origins of NCLB Federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) first enacted in Periodic reauthorization by Congress.
Elizabeth Burmaster, State Superintendent Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction November 2004 No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 Implementation of the.
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). What is Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)? As a condition of receiving federal funds under No Child Left Behind (NCLB), all.
Academic Performance Index (API) and AYP
Academic Performance Index (API) and AYP
Accountability in California Before and After NCLB
Elementary/Secondary Education Act (1965) “No Child Left Behind” (2002) Adequacy Committee February 6,2008.
Implementation of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Highly Qualified Teacher & Paraprofessional Requirements December 2010.
Chapter 8 (key issues for Special Education)
EDN Fall 2002.
Adequate Yearly Progress: What’s Old, What’s New, What’s Next?
Presentation transcript:

IDEA and NCLB The Connection Elizabeth Burmaster, State Superintendent Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction December 2003

Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction December 2003  Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) has been scheduled for reauthorization since  Presently, both the House and the Senate have developed draft legislation.  It doesn’t look like anything will come to pass in the near future. Currently

Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction December 2003 The Connection No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) connect in a variety of ways, the most significant of which include: ► Testing ► Accountability and Adequate Yearly Progress ► The impact of NCLB sanctions on schools in relation to students with disabilities ► Highly Qualified Teachers ► Paraprofessionals

Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction December 2003 Testing Students with Disabilities NCLB requires… 95% of enrolled students, including students with disabilities, must participate in state assessments in reading and mathematics. (Currently, grades 4, 8, and 10 and in every grade 3-8, and at least once in grades 9-12). Students with disabilities are a disaggregated subgroup under NCLB and schools and districts are held accountable when they reach a cell size of 50 or more.

Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction December 2003 IDEA requires… Students with disabilities must participate in annual statewide assessments with or without appropriate accommodations or alternate assessments and in the grade level in which they are enrolled. Testing Students with Disabilities

Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction December 2003 Currently, about 2% of Wisconsin students take the Alternate Assessment. Students with disabilities who take Wisconsin’s Alternate Assessment are credited for test participation. Testing Students with Disabilities

Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction December 2003 NCLB Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP):  Test participation  Graduation or attendance  Reading  Math Disaggregated by specific subgroups, including students with disabilities. Accountability and Adequate Yearly Progress

Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction December 2003 Test Participation Other Indicator ReadingMath Breakdown by indicators: Statewide AYP Data (as of 12/1/03) 106 schools missed AYP

Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction December 2003 Test Participation Other Indicator ReadingMath 22 districts missed AYP Statewide AYP Data (as of 12/1/03) Breakdown by indicators:

Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction December 2003 Students with Disabilities 69 schools met cell size Test Participation Statewide AYP Data (as of 12/1/03) 40 met 95% 29 missed AYP

Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction December 2003 Students with Disabilities 5 met 61% 37 made Safe Harbor 5 Missed AYP 47 schools met cell size Reading Statewide AYP Data (as of 12/1/03)

Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction December 2003 Students with Disabilities 12 Met 37% 26 made Safe Harbor 9 Missed AYP 47 schools met cell size Math Statewide AYP Data (as of 12/1/03)

Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction December 2003 IDEA accountability is built around the Individualized Education Program (IEP) IDEA seeks progress for individual child rather than state benchmarks IDEA provides entitlement until age 21 Accountability Disconnect Disconnect

Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction December 2003 Impact on special education delivery models School choice and FAPE Sanctions

Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction December 2003 n all teachers hired after January 8, 2002 and teaching in a program supported by Title I funds be highly qualified and all teachers teaching “core academic subjects” are to be highly qualified by n HOUSSE and PI 34 Highly Qualified Teachers

Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction December 2003 Paraprofessionals All Title I paraprofessionals newly hired after January 8, 2002 must have:  at least 2 years of higher education or an associates degree; or  passed formal state or local tests/assessments designed to demonstrate knowledge and ability in certain subject areas. All Title I paraprofessionals hired before January 8, 2002 must meet the above requirements by the end of the school year. Approximately 50% of paraprofessionals in Wisconsin are special education paraprofessionals.

Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction December 2003 Information on No Child Left Behind in Wisconsin can be found at: Information on Individuals with Disabilities Education Act in Wisconsin can be found at: Resources