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.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Bureau of Indian Education
Advertisements

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.
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.
Ensuring Effective Services to Immigrant &/or LEP/ELL Children & Families: It’s Right, & It’s the Law! © Statewide Parent Advocacy Network.
Update on Data Reporting April LEAP Changes LEAP software will be released shortly. Final LEAP software will not be available before mid-July. We.
1 8//03 Virginia Department of Education NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND ACT OF 2001 Implementation of Virginia’s Consolidated Plan Dr. Patricia I. Wright Assistant.
1 The Ewing Public Schools Overview of NCLB Results presented by Dr. Danita Ishibashi Assistant Superintendent.
The Evolution of the Virginia School Report Card Board of Education School & Division Accountability Committee February 25, 2015.
+ Utah Comprehensive Accountability System (UCAS) 1 Hal Sanderson, Ph.D. Research and Assessment August 21,
Lodi Unified School District Accountability Progress Report (APR) & CAHSEE Results Update Prepared for the September 21, 2010 Board of Education.
2013 State Accountability System Allen ISD. State Accountability under TAKS program:  Four Ratings: Exemplary, Recognized, Academically Acceptable, Academically.
The New York State Assessment System and LEP/ELLs: An Update David Abrams Assistant Commissioner for Standards, Assessment, and Reporting OBE-FLS 2007.
Data for Student Success Comprehensive Needs Assessment Report “It is about focusing on building a culture of quality data through professional development.
Flexibility in Determining AYP for Students with Disabilities Background Information—Slides 2—4 School Eligibility Criteria—Slide 5 Calculation of the.
Common Questions What tests are students asked to take? What are students learning? How’s my school doing? Who makes decisions about Wyoming Education?
How to Interpret and Use Standards of Learning (SOL) and ACCESS for ELLs® Data to Make Instructional Decisions for English Learners.
Our Children Are Our Future: No Child Left Behind No Child Left Behind Accountability and AYP A Archived Information.
K-12 Student Performance and Efficiency Commission July 18, 2014 School Year Data.
No Child Left Behind and Students with Disabilities Presentation for OSEP Staff March 20, 2003 Stephanie Lee Director, Office of Special Education Programs.
Arizona’s Federal Accountability System 2011 David McNeil Director of Assessment, Accountability and Research.
Update on Middle Level Accountability May “…to ensure that all children have a fair, equal, and significant opportunity to obtain a high-quality.
Torrance Unified School District Annual Student Achievement Dr. George W. Mannon, Superintendent Dr. E Don Kim, Senior Director of Elementary Education.
A Parent’s Guide to Understanding the State Accountability Workbook.
Fall Testing Update David Abrams Assistant Commissioner for Standards, Assessment, & Reporting Middle Level Liaisons & Support Schools Network November.
School Report Card ACCOUNTABILITY STATUS REPORT: ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS, MATHEMATICS, SCIENCE, AND GRADUATION RATE For GREENVILLE CSD.
Title I Annual Meeting What Every Family Needs to Know!
Presentation on The Elementary and Secondary Education Act “No Child Left Behind” Nicholas C. Donohue, Commissioner of Education New Hampshire Department.
1 Watertown Public Schools Assessment Reports 2010 Ann Koufman-Frederick and Administrative Council School Committee Meetings Oct, Nov, Dec, 2010 Part.
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.
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.
Lodi Unified School District Accountability Progress Report (APR) Results Update Prepared by the LUSD Assessment, Research & Evaluation Department.
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.
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.
Michigan School Report Card Update Michigan Department of Education.
NCLB / Education YES! What’s New for Students With Disabilities? Michigan Department of Education.
ESEA Federal Accountability System Overview 1. Federal Accountability System Adequate Yearly Progress – AYP defined by the Elementary and Secondary Education.
On the horizon: State Accountability Systems U.S. Department of Education Office of Elementary and Secondary Education October 2002 Archived Information.
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.
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.
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.
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.
NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND Adequate Yearly Progress Report August 2009.
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.
1 Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015: Highlights and Implementation Update SOL Innovation Committee Meeting April 13, 2016.
Title I Annual Meeting What Every Family Needs to Know!
Elizabeth Burmaster, State Superintendent Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction November 2004 No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 Implementation of the.
Kansas Association of School Boards ESEA Flexibility Waiver KASB Briefing August 10, 2012.
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
Accountability in California Before and After NCLB
Elementary/Secondary Education Act (1965) “No Child Left Behind” (2002) Adequacy Committee February 6,2008.
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
Analysis of No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB)
AYP and Report Card.
Presentation transcript:

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 at the high school level By , All States Must

N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND Testing Requirements of NCLB develop new Standards of Learning tests in reading and mathematics for grades 4, 6, and 7 to augment the existing tests in 3,5, and 8 use existing end-of-course tests to meet the high school requirement To meet this requirement, Virginia will

N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND Testing Requirements of NCLB occur over the next several years, and follow the same process used for existing Standards of Learning tests The test development process for the new tests will

N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND Testing Requirements of NCLB Content Review Committees composed of Virginia educators will be formed for each new test Committees will review potential test questions

N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND Item Development Superintendents have been asked to nominate educators to serve on the new content review committees for grades 4, 6, and 7 Committees will begin reviewing items this summer

N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND Field testing and Additional Item Development Field testing for the new grade 4, 6, and 7 tests will begin in spring 2004 Committees will review field tested items in summer 2004 and will also review additional new items Additional field testing will occur in spring 2005

N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND Test Development Once new tests for grades 4,6, and 7 are developed, tests for grades 5 and 8 will focus on the Standards of Learning for that grade level rather than being cumulative. The grade 3 tests will continue to be cumulative.

N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND Testing Requirements of NCLB By all states must administer science tests in at least one grade level in elementary, middle, and high school. Current Standards of Learning tests in science meet this requirement, so development of new tests will not be necessary.

N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND 95% Participation Requirement 95% requirements also applies to the following subgroups: –Students with disabilities –Limited English Proficient (LEP) students –Disadvantaged Students –Major Ethnic Groups

N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND All states are required to participate in NAEP Testing No real change in Virginia since we already participated in NAEP NAEP tests in reading and mathematics will be administered every other year in grades 4 and 8. Only a sample of Virginia schools are selected by NAEP for participation.

N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND Testing Requirements of NCLB Annual testing in reading and mathematics in grades 3-8 by Administration of reading and mathematics tests at least once at the high school level. Administration of science tests at least one time each in elementary, middle, and high schools by Participation in NAEP testing Assessment of English proficiency for all Limited English Proficient (LEP students)

N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND Reporting Reported on Web-based Report Cards School, division and state progress toward AYP, disaggregated by subgroup Assessment Results Student Attendance Student Graduates Classes taught by highly qualified teachers

Adequate Yearly Progress “AYP” A Means of Measuring Progress Beginning

N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND Background Based on NCLB and on final Title I regulations issued November 26, 2002 Additional guidance expected from USDOE! Opportunities to modify, based on federal changes Subject to approval from USDOE

N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND Adequate Yearly Progress Means: Measuring student progress annually, Meeting annual measurable objectives for student performance on statewide annual tests and other indicators Identifying schools/divisions making and not making AYP

N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND Other Academic Indicators Graduation Attendance

N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND AYP: Who? Applies to all students and to subgroups: –Students with Disabilities –LEP –Economically Disadvantaged –Major racial/ethnic groups In every school, each school division, whole state

N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND Starting Points Reading/language arts: 60.7% pass Mathematics: 58.4% pass Graduation rate data: –67.2% graduation rate –Secondary schools and any school having a graduating class Attendance rate data: –93.4% ADA –Elementary/Middle schools and any school NOT having a graduating class

N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND AYP: Intermediate Goals From starting point established using school year data Incrementally increasing to “100%” in Increase equally Every 3 years, beginning in Can be adjusted periodically

N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND AYP: Annual Measurable Objectives Beginning with school year Set separately for each indicator Do not need to increase at equal increments from one year to the next Can be adjusted periodically

N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND AYP: Annual Measurable Objectives Start Point ` Int. Goal 70.0 Int. Goal 80.0 Int. Goal Reading/Language arts (percent pass)

N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND AYP: Annual Measurable Objectives Start Point ` Int. Goal 70.0 Int. Goal 80.0 Int. Goal Mathematics (percent pass)

N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND Summary: Annual Measurable Objectives Apply to ALL students, all subgroups of students identified in NCLB, all schools, all school divisions and the state Are the basis for determining AYP

N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND AYP Establish minimum “n”: 50 for AYP; 10 for reporting Include students present for “full academic year”: on or before 20 th day/hour; attends over 50% Must make AYP on each statewide assessment AND graduation or attendance for ALL students and by subgroup

N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND AYP: One Way to Make AYP At least 95% of enrolled students participate in testing program (all students and by subgroup) AND All students and all subgroups score at least proficient in statewide assessments, at level specified by annual measurable objectives AND The school/LEA meet annual measurable objective for graduation or attendance or make progress OR …

N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND AYP: A Second Way to Make AYP At least 95% of students enrolled participate in state wide testing (all students and by subgroup) AND Student performance on statewide assessment(s) is below level specified by annual measurable objectives AND Percent of students [all or in subgroup(s)] failing decreases by at least 10% from previous year AND Students [all or in subgroup(s)] make progress in graduation rate or attendance rate

N O C HILD L EFT B EHIND Summary: Making AYP 95% participation of all students and all subgroups of students in statewide assessment program AND Meeting annual measurable objectives for assessments AND meeting/making progress in graduation/attendance OR Reducing failure rates by at least 10% AND making progress in graduation rate or attendance rate (both, for LEAs, state)