BIE Accountability: Adequate Yearly Progress

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
NCLB Accountability Title III of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) as Amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) Presented.
Advertisements

U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Indian Education Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) Flexibility Request: Summary of Key Provisions.
Bureau of Indian Education
Presented to the State Board of Education August 22, 2012 Jonathan Wiens, PhD Office of Assessment and Information Services Oregon Department of Education.
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 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.
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.
Before IDEA One in five children with disabilities was educated. One in five children with disabilities was educated. More than 1 million children with.
BIE Flexibility Request Summary of Key Provisions Bureau of Indian Education U.S. Department of the Interior.
ESEA FLEXIBILITY WAIVER Overview of Federal Requirements August 2, 2012 Alaska Department of Education & Early Development.
Determining Validity For Oklahoma’s Educational Accountability System Prepared for the American Educational Research Association (AERA) Oklahoma State.
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?
Data: The Afternoon Presentation Brian Bough again.
Springfield Public Schools Adequate Yearly Progress 2010 Overview.
Arizona’s Federal Accountability System 2011 David McNeil Director of Assessment, Accountability and Research.
SCHOOL ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT ALBUQUERQUE PUBLIC SCHOOLS RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY DEPARTMENT.
A Parent’s Guide to Understanding the State Accountability Workbook.
1 No Child Left Behind Critical Research Findings For School Boards Ronald Dietel UCLA Graduate School of Education & Information Studies National Center.
Florida’s Implementation of NCLB John L. Winn Deputy Commissioner Florida Department of Education.
What is Title I ?  It is federal funding that is attached to NCLB/ESEA legislation  It is intended to help students who are falling behind.
Program Improvement/ Title I Parent Involvement Meeting October 9, :00 p.m. Redwood City School District.
Agenda (5:00-6:30 PM): Introduction to Staff Title I Presentation PTA Information Classroom visits (two 30 minute rotations)
July,  Congress hasn’t reauthorized Elementary & Secondary Education Act (ESEA), currently known as No Child Left Behind (NCLB)  U.S. Department.
1 Connecticut Mastery Test (CMT) Steve Martin, CMT Program Manager Bureau of Research, Evaluation, and Student Assessment Connecticut State Department.
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.
The Do’s and Don’ts of High-Stakes Student Achievement Testing Andrew Porter Vanderbilt University August 2006.
School Accountability in Delaware for the School Year August 3, 2005.
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.
Making Sense of Adequate Yearly Progress. Adequate Yearly Progress Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) is a required activity of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB)
From the Board Room To the Classroom PDK Panel Discussion September 19, 2002.
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.
On the horizon: State Accountability Systems U.S. Department of Education Office of Elementary and Secondary Education October 2002 Archived Information.
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.
February 2016 Overview of the Every Student Succeeds Act.
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.
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.
Overview: Every Student Succeeds Act April ESEA in Ohio In 2012, our state applied for and received a waiver from provisions of No Child Left Behind.
The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA): A Briefing for Alaska Lee Posey State-Federal Relations Division National Conference of State Legislatures.
Aim: Does the US need to reform the educational system? Do Now: Make a list of the best aspects of the education you receive and make a list of the worst.
THE APR AND SPP--LINKING SPECIAL EDUCATION DATA TO ACCOUNTABILITY FOR EDUCATION RESULTS Building a Brighter Tomorrow through Positive and Progressive Leadership.
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.
Kansas Association of School Boards ESEA Flexibility Waiver KASB Briefing August 10, 2012.
1. Every Student Succeeds Act ESSA December
Adequate Yearly Progress [Our School District]
Source: The National Council of State Title III Directors
Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015: Highlights and
Accountability in California Before and After NCLB
Welcome to our SCHOOL’S Parents Are Connected (PAC) Meeting
Elementary/Secondary Education Act (1965) “No Child Left Behind” (2002) Adequacy Committee February 6,2008.
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
Highlights of Utah’s Plan
Indistar Summit, Biloxi Mississippi February 29, 2012
WAO Elementary School and the New Accountability System
AYP and Report Card.
EDN Fall 2002.
History of No Child Left Behind (NCLB)
Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA):
Presentation transcript:

BIE Accountability: Adequate Yearly Progress Brian W. Bough Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe Education Research Analyst Bureau of Indian Education Division of Performance and Accountability

Overview of BIE The BIE serves 44,000 students in 173 schools with academic programs and 12 dormitory-only facilities on or near 64 reservations across 23 states. It is responsible for two post-secondary education schools, Haskell Indian Nations University (HINU) in Lawrence, Kansas, and Southwest Indian Polytechnic Institute (SIPI) in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Approximately seven percent of American Indian/Alaska Native students attend schools administered by the Department of Interior’s (DOI) Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) supported schools.

Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA): No Child Left Behind Act Emphasized measurement and transparency to hold schools accountable for student performance on tests Designed to inform parents about school performance and to offer parents choices about where their students could be educated Requires that all students and sub-groups be held to the same standards of achievement Outlined requirements for standards and assessments for states Mandated that all students perform at 100% proficiency on Mathematics and Reading tests by 2014 The BIE judges whether a school is making Adequate Yearly Progress as measured by the performance indicators

BIE Implementation 25 CFR 30.100-150 is the result of Negotiated Rulemaking Process for BIE implementation of NCLB Negotiated Rulemaking required the BIE to determine AYP using state standards for the state in which the school is located 25 CFR and NCLB both require the BIE to make school-level AYP determinations (as opposed to district-level determinations) NCLB requires schools to meet all AYP indicators in order to be judged as Making AYP US Department of Education requires that the BIE verify assessment data used in NCLB determinations and BIE reporting to ED

Limited English Proficient Indicator All Students Limited English Proficient Special Education Mathematics (Achievement) AMO (Participation) 95% Reading or Language Arts Science Administered Attendance (K-8)   Target or Improve Graduation (9-12) Definitions Arizona New Mexico Utah Minimum N (FAY) 40 per grade 25 per school 10 per sub-group Full Academic Year Enrolled in First 10 Days of the School Year Enrolled In All Four Census Periods Enrolled 160 Days Prior to Testing Confidence Interval Attendance Target (FAY and Non-FAY) 90% 92% 93% Graduation Target 71% 52% 85%

Arizona Annual Measurable Objectives (Averaged Across Grades)

New Mexico Annual Measurable Objectives (Kindergarten through High School Configuration)

Utah Annual Measurable Objectives High School Grades 3-8

SY2009-10 AYP Determinations Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah Disaggregated by Tribally-Controlled and Bureau-Operated Schools Percent of schools making AYP within the category

Bureau Trends in AYP Percent of schools making AYP, tribally-controlled versus BIE-operated

Student Performance on Assessments Percent Proficient or Advanced

Unintended Consequences State standards are not designed for BIE schools (nor should they be) AYP determinations, like state assessments, are not comparable across state lines BIE makes decisions on grants and school improvement plans based on AYP determinations Program implementation success is difficult to assess BIE lacks a consistent definition of what accountability means that is applied to all BIE-funded schools

Discontent with NCLB “Current law also sets annual targets for proficiency and mandates that every student meet those goals by 2014. Today, almost 40 percent of America's schools are not meeting their goals and as we approach the 2014 deadline, that number will rise steeply. “In fact, we did an analysis which shows that -- next year -- the number of schools not meeting their goals under NCLB could double to over 80 percent -- even if we assume that all schools will gain as much as the top quartile in the state. “So let me repeat that: four out of five schools in America may not meet their goals under NCLB by next year.” --Arne Duncan testimony before Congress, March 9, 2011

Waiting for Reauthorization Montana has opted-out of increases in the AMO More assessments, less assessment? Common Core Standards Local Standards Changes in assessments Teacher Accountability BIE Accountability System: Integrating Assessments with Curricula

Vision Accountability system is meaningful Accountability system is consistent across BIE Accountability system, course standards (curricula), and assessments are all aligned Intervention in curricula and instruction are well-defined DPA serves as a comprehensive statewide system of support for schools on matters of program implementation and school improvement