1. MINNEAPOLIS PUBLIC SCHOOLS

2. Instructional Core Adapted from Harvard University PELP Framework

3. MINNEAPOLIS PUBLIC SCHOOLS Dependencies  Alignment of current district resources and personnel  Collaboration among district departments  Securing and sustaining grants, external funding, and partnerships  Policy development and implementation  Contract negotiations

4. Academic Achievement – Conceptual Framework  Bernadeia Johnson

5. MINNEAPOLIS PUBLIC SCHOOLS Recommendations  Increase access to quality early childhood school programs and services  Implement programs to support students’ transition from elementary to middle; middle to high; high to post- secondary  Develop sustainable K-12 reform:  Common Characteristics of High Quality Schools (Middle School Platform and Small Learning Communities)  Professional Learning Communities  Cross-Functional Teams  Data-Driven Decision Making  Formative Assessment

6. MINNEAPOLIS PUBLIC SCHOOLS Recommendations  Provide teachers and administrators with more strategies and training in classroom management  Develop professional relationships with other urban districts  Increase opportunities to communicate and build partnerships with parents and the community to extend expectations for learning  Review and determine alternative school needs  Increase accountability among departments, programs, and providers

7. MINNEAPOLIS PUBLIC SCHOOLS Recommendations  Engage parents and provide increased training and support  Continue to mobilize community resources  Increase and align support to improve behavior in schools  Build partnerships with parents and the community to communicate expectations for behavior

8. MINNEAPOLIS PUBLIC SCHOOLS

11. 2006 AYP Updates  New tests (MCA-II) aligned with Minnesota academic standards  New Standards/Achievement Levels  New Score Scale  New Processes (TEAE reading substituting for the MCA-II reading for ELL students)

12. 2006 AYP Updates  The AYP calculation includes: MCA-II and TEAE results from Grades 3-8, 10 (Reading Only), and 11 (Math Only).  Special Ed includes: expanded Special Ed sometimes called Special Ed+2 years.  Adjustments: Because of the new tests, new standards, and new processes, MDE will adjust the index points in the three previous school years and re-calculate the safe- harbor and averaging targets.

13. New Achievement Levels & AYP index points The results of the MCA-II will be placed into FOUR LEVELS: Does not Meet the Standards (Level D) 0 pts Partially Meet the Standards (Level P) ½ pt Meets the Standards (Level M) 1 pt Exceeds the Standards (Level E) 1 pt

14. New Score Scale

15. 1420 = Proficiency in 2005 (Below the Partially Meet the Standard in 2006) 1510 = Partially Meet the Standard on 11 th Grade Math in 2006 (1140 on MCA-II) 1650 =Meets the Standard on 11 th Grade Math in 2006 (1150 on MCA-II)

16. 2006 AYP Test Participation Rates for Minneapolis Public Schools

17. AYP Proficiency: 2006 District Results GroupsReadingMath All StudentsSafe HarborSafe Harbor - Averaging Native American/Alaskan NativeBelow Target Asian/Pacific IslanderMet TargetSafe Harbor - Averaging HispanicMet TargetSafe Harbor - Averaging African AmericanSafe Harbor - Averaging Below Target WhiteMet Target Limited English ProficientMet TargetSafe Harbor - Averaging Special EducationBelow Target Free/Reduced Priced LunchSafe HarborSafe Harbor - Averaging

18. 2006 AYP Attendance Rates: District Results  The District made Adequate Yearly Progress on attendance (92.29%) in 2006 based on the 2004-05 attendance rate for the All Students group.  Native American and Special Education categories had an attendance rate below the AYP requirement (90%).

19. 2004 - 2006 AYP Attendance Rates by NCLB Subgroups (Minneapolis)

20. 2005 AYP Graduation Rates for Minneapolis Public Schools (MPS)  The AYP criterion requires districts and high schools to have an average graduation rate of 80% or show an acceptable improvement (.1%) from the previous year (2003-04).  AYP status on graduation rate is only based on the All Students group at the school or district except when safe harbor rule is applied.  Based on 2004-05 graduation rates, the district and five of the seven high schools made the AYP graduation rate criterion in 2006.

21. 2004 - 2006 AYP Graduation Rates for MPS & its Seven High Schools

22. 2004 - 2006 AYP Graduation Rates by NCLB Subgroups (Minneapolis)

23. 2006 District AYP Summary School TypeMade AYP Did Not make AYP Total% of Schools Making AYP In 2006 % of Schools Making AYP In 2005 % of Schools Making AYP In 2004 Elementary Schools 2373076.7%89.5%50.0% K-8 & 6-8 8212927.6%63.3%16.1% High Schools 0770.0% District Alternatives 24633.3%14.3%16.7% Contract Alternatives 3161915.8%45.5%29.2% Total 36559139.6%61.5%29.8%

24. 2006 AYP Data Correction Summary  Over 5,000 records with data corrected and over 400 Alternate Assessments were entered.  12 schools made AYP after data correction.  2 more schools made AYP after further data investigation.  14 schools that did not make AYP reviewed their data in details.

25. 2006 AYP Appeal Summary  The MDE re-calculated the 1% Cap calculation based on the tested population enrollment.  The Alternate Assessment Waiver impact analyses showed that it costs more than benefits the District by applying the waiver.  Based upon further data investigation and evidence, the District has filed appeal for 9 schools  1 Elementary  4 K-8 or 6-8  2 Public Alternatives  2 Contract Alternatives

26. When will the final reports be available?  The District will receive the final test and AYP results on November 14 from the MDE.  November 15 is the official date for the State release of the data to the public.  The Individual Student Report (ISR) (Parents Copy) will be in paper format.  MDE will put all the school reports (including ISR – School Copy) in a CD, so school results will be delivered electronically.  MCA individual data will be put on the OCR web sit by Friday Sept. 29th

27. Q & A Thank You! Are there any questions?