1 / 34

Determining AYP

Determining AYP. What’s New Step-by-Step Guide September 29, 2004. AYP: What’s new?. AYP Determinations for 03-04 Denominator For AYP Alternate Standards Definition of Economic Disadvantage Counting ELL student test scores Identification Report Card Revisions.

chaka
Download Presentation

Determining AYP

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Determining AYP What’s New Step-by-Step Guide September 29, 2004

  2. AYP: What’s new? • AYP Determinations for 03-04 • Denominator For AYP • Alternate Standards • Definition of Economic Disadvantage • Counting ELL student test scores • Identification • Report Card Revisions

  3. AYP Determinations for 03-04 • Same targets (achievement targets in 04-05 will be 50% in ELA and 49% in Math) • 02-03 grad data for economically disadvantaged and ELL groups reported • Attendance not lagged • Writing responses in Spanish count as meeting standard for AYP for qualified students - Numbered Memo 16-2003-04

  4. New Denominator For AYP and Assessment Reports • No longer answer sheets returned • Enrollment as of May 1 (Participation) • Participation – ALL students enrolled • Performance - Highest score of students enrolled for FAY • Spring Participation Collection on May 3 • Numbered Memo 25-2003-2004

  5. Alternate Standards • New (Dec.) Guidance From USDoE • Adopted by State Board in March for Extended Assessments and CLRAS

  6. Alternate Standards • No more than 1% of student tests used to determine AYP for a district may meet alternate standards. • No Change in Choice of Test for Any Student (IEP process). • Numbered Memo 023-2003-04

  7. Economic Disadvantage • U.S. Departments of Education and Agriculture Allow Use of Free and Reduced Lunch Status with strict confidentiality requirements • Numbered Memo 143-2002-03 • May 15 Collection

  8. ELL Student Test Scores • USEd announcement February 19th • Scores of students during first year in U.S. not counted for performance • Reading and writing assessments not required during first year in U.S. • Transitioning students remain in LEP group for two years

  9. Identification for School Improvement • Only Title I schools not meeting AYP for two consecutive years in an area (ELA, Math, Other Indicator) are identified for School Improvement

  10. District AYP • USDoE recently indicated that it would approve using grade span (elementary, middle, high) data to determine 03-04 district AYP. • Districts would be identified for improvement only if they didn’t meet AYP targets in the same content area at each grade span two years in a row. • ODE is investigating the feasibility of adopting this change. • More information to follow.

  11. Report Card Update • November 10 release date • No significant changes to formula • Detail sheets part of data validation • Display of science assessment results on detail sheets • Review of report card policy and formulas through February for 04-05 and 05-06 cards

  12. Data Collection 2004-05 • Rolling validation • Consolidated Student File Format

  13. AYP Step by Step • AYP “Tests” • Participation • Performance • Status • Safe Harbor • Other Indicator

  14. English/Language Arts Total Students w/ Disabilities Limited English Proficient Poverty American Indian Asian African American Hispanic White Multi-Ethnic Mathematics Total Students w/ Disabilities Limited English Proficient Poverty American Indian Asian African American Hispanic White Multi-Ethnic AYP Tests for Each Subject and Subgroup

  15. Minimum N for each “test” • Participation – 40 expected tests in content area over two years • Performance -- 42 tests in content area over two years (If total school population has fewer than 42 scores, additional data or methods are used to determine AYP.) • Other indicator – 84 students enrolled over two years combined

  16. Participation • 95% Criteria • Participation = Number of valid test scores from all students enrolled in the school on May 3, 2004 divided by (The expected number of tests - the number of students without test scores that were not enrolled during the testing window(s) for the assessment – home schooled – district SpEd)

  17. Academic Performance • Criteria • ELA: 40% (50% for 04-05) • Math: 39% (49% for 04-05) • Target met if achievement within margin of error. • Performance = Number tests met/ number of tests from students enrolled for a full academic year • Scores from first year LEP students excluded • 10th grade MPS results for 03-04 excluded

  18. Achievement Safe Harbor • Academic Growth • Reduce the percent not meeting by 10% • Example: • If group’s 2003 achievement (single year of data) = 27%, the percent not meeting is 73%. The growth target is 7.3% increase or an achievement level of 34.3% in 2003. • AND must meet other indicator

  19. Other Indicator • Graduation Rate for High Schools • Federal Formula Required in Definition • Grad rate = grad/(grad + dropouts) • Standard Diploma Only • 68.1% Criterion • Attendance for All Other Schools • 92% Criterion • 2 Years Data Used, but graduation is lagged

  20. How AYP Tests Are Applied: No N > 40 ? Yes Participation AYP No > 95%? Yes District N > 42? No Method Yes Safe Status Harbor AYP No No Target? Target? Yes Yes - Other AYP No Indicator?

  21. AYP: Key Points • Conjunctive Model • A school meets AYP only if each and every subgroup is successful in each subject. • Fundamentally different from the Oregon School Report Card, which combines all data into a single, overall rating.

  22. AYP: Key Points (continued) • There will be significant differences in the achievement levels among schools not meeting AYP. • Schools and districts will have to analyze the data to determine appropriate responses to not making AYP.

  23. What Happens After Preliminary Designations? • Review period – through October 14 • District corrections to collections and test records • Compliance with 1% cap • AYP Substantive appeals by districts • District Preliminary AYP - October 1 target • Final Designations on School and District Report Cards – November 10

  24. 03-04 Preliminary AYP Results • 66% of schools met AYP • 76% of elementary and 24% of high schools met • 82% of Title I elementary and 48% of Title I high schools met • 38 Title I schools are identified for school improvement • 110 schools did not meet participation

  25. NCLB Accountability • Single accountability system required • Required actions for Title I schools and districts that do not make AYP in the same content area for two consecutive years • Accountability for non-Title I districts – restricted use of SRSA funding and REAP-Flex

  26. Accountability • Revise SIP and submit to ODE – schools with “low” and “unacceptable” overall ratings on school report card • Revise SIP and submit to district – schools not making AYP in the same content area for two consecutive years

  27. Resources • Documents, tools, guidance • www.ode.state.or.us/nclb • www.ed.gov (click on policy link) • Contacts • AYP: jon.bridges@state.or.us • Title I requirements: chris.rhines@state.or.us

More Related