Littleton public schools littleton ma
Download
1 / 31

Littleton Public Schools Littleton, MA - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 126 Views
  • Uploaded on

Littleton Public Schools Littleton, MA. 2011 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) and Accountability Status Determinations Report to School Committee Geri Lyn Ajemian, Director of Curriculum Jane Hall, Principal of Russell Street School Mark Branco, Principal of Littleton Middle School

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Littleton Public Schools Littleton, MA' - hubert


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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Littleton public schools littleton ma

Littleton Public SchoolsLittleton, MA

2011 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) and Accountability Status Determinations

Report to School Committee

Geri Lyn Ajemian, Director of Curriculum

Jane Hall, Principal of Russell Street School

Mark Branco, Principal of Littleton Middle School

October 20th, 2011


What is ayp
What is AYP?

  • AYP stands for Adequate Yearly Progress

  • Means progress towards 100% of students achieving proficiency by 2014.

  • Measures progress against specific expectations each year.


Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) determinations are a tool for assessing the progress of our climb to higher levels of student achievement.

  • Issued every year

  • Separate ELA & Math

  • Students in aggregate and eight subgroups

  • Special Education

  • Limited English Proficiency

  • Low Income

  • African American / black

  • Hispanic

  • Asian

  • Native American

  • White

1993

Education Reform Act

State Accountability System

2014

NCLB Goal-All Students Reach Proficiency

Federal Accountability System


Adequate yearly progress facts
Adequate Yearly Progress – Facts assessing the progress of our climb to higher levels of student achievement.

  • AYP reports show progress toward having all students reach grade level proficiency by the year 2014 – the principal goal of NCLB.

  • AYP determinations are issued separately for English Language arts/reading and Mathematics.

  • For each subject there are multiple AYP determinations - for all students (the aggregate) and for student groups. Students are counted in each group to which they belong.

  • District AYP determinations are based on three grade spans: grades 3-5, 6-8 and 9-12. Positive results for all groups in any grade-span yields a positive AYP determination.

  • Schools and districts that do not make AYP for two or more consecutive years in the same subject are assigned an Accountability Status designation: identified for improvement, corrective action, or restructuring.

  • The Accountability Status defines a required course of action schools and districts must follow to improve student performance.


Composite performance index cpi
Composite Performance Index (CPI) assessing the progress of our climb to higher levels of student achievement.

  • The CPI is:

  • a metric used to measure school and district performance and improvement;

  • a 100-point index that combines the scores of students who participate in standard MCAS ELA and mathematics tests, and those who participate in the MCAS-Alt.


Sample CPI Calculation assessing the progress of our climb to higher levels of student achievement.

Multiply the number of points by the number of students at each performance level,

then divide the total number of points by the total number of students


How ayp is calculated a b or c d affirmative ayp determination
How AYP is Calculated: assessing the progress of our climb to higher levels of student achievement.A + (B or C) + D = Affirmative AYP Determination



A b or c d affirmative ayp determination
A + ( Index)B or C) + D = Affirmative AYP Determination


2011 Improvement Target Calculation Index)

100 – 2010 CPI

_________________________________________________________

Number of remaining years until the year 2014 (4)

An improvement target for a given subject is calculated by subtracting the district, school, or group’s 2010 (baseline) CPI from 100 (the ultimate CPI goal), and dividing the difference by the number of remaining years until the year 2014, including the current year. For 2011 that number is 4.

The improvement target is expressed as a range.

An “error band” surrounds the target number.

Error bands range from 2.5 to 4.5, depending on size of group; 2.5 is typical.


Improvement rating categories

Improvement Rating Categories Index)

Met NCLB Goal Improved with a margin of error

of 100 percent proficiency

Above Target Improved above target range

On Target Improved within target range

Improved Below Target Improve above 2010 CPI (the baseline) but below the target range

No Change Gain was equivalent to baseline plus or minus the target range

Declined Gain was below the baseline and below the target range


Littleton schools 2011 aggregate english language arts cpis
Littleton Schools – 2011 Index)Aggregate English Language Arts CPIs

State Target = 95.1


Littleton schools 2011 aggregate mathematics cpis
Littleton Schools – 2011 Index)Aggregate Mathematics CPIs

State Target = 92.2







2011 accountability the statewide context
2011 Accountability view)The Statewide Context

  • According to 2011 AYP determinations, 1,404 schools (82%) and 354 districts

    (91%) did not make AYP in 2011.

  • 1,089 schools (64%) were identified for Improvement Status, Corrective Action or Restructuring in 2011 an increase from 971 schools (56%) in 2010.


Framework for District Accountability and Assistance view)

http://www.doe.mass.edu/sda/framework/default.html



State Accountability and Assistance Levels view)

* As of September 13, 2011, the Commissioner has not yet made the decision to identify a new cohort of Level 4 schools. As a consequence, no new Level 4 schools or districts will be identified in the data that will be released to the public early the week of September 19, 2011.


Relationship between State and Federal Accountability Requirements for Schools (Level 1)


Middle school improvement efforts math lab
Middle School Improvement Efforts Requirements for Schools (Level 1)Math Lab

  • A comparison of 2010 & 2011 MCAS performance data for the 81 students in the FY11 Math lab program reveals:

    • the scores of 41% of math lab participants went up

    • 19% maintained equivalent scores as in 2010

    • 60% of math lab participants maintained or improved their MCAS scores

  • Moving Towards Proficiency

    • 5 students went from the Warning to the Needs Improvement Performance Level

    • 11 students progressed from the Warning or Needs Improvement Performance Levels to Proficient

  • This was the first year of implementation with the program starting December 1st. We anticipate even greater success rates on the 2012 MCAS.


Middle school improvement efforts moving forward in mathematics
Middle School Improvement Efforts Requirements for Schools (Level 1)Moving Forward in Mathematics

  • Math Lab

    • Full year of math lab classes

    • New 6 day rotation schedule that provides two consecutive lab classes

    • Practice with the new Buckle Down MCAS preparation materials and explicit / systematic instruction driven by the GMADE and MCAS data

  • School-wide progress monitoring

    • Grade level end-of-unit assessments

    • MCAS

    • GMADE administered to all students twice a year

  • Implementation of new school-wide program supported by new textbooks published by Glencoe/McGraw-Hill

    • Aligned with the Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks, incorporating the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics

    • Leveled classes in grades 7 and 8

  • Implementation of Co-Teaching Model

    • Model is in place

    • PD has started

  • Staff Changes


Middle school improvement efforts moving forward in ela
Middle School Improvement Efforts Requirements for Schools (Level 1)Moving Forward in ELA

  • Last Year

    • Members of the English/Language Arts and Special Education teams attended a workshop on teaching and assessing MCAS Open Response questions and answers. They, in turn, provided LMS staff with training in a specific instructional methodology and grading rubric to standardize our practices in all disciplines across all grade levels.

    • With input from the staff, these “trainers” designed classroom posters to be used in all subject areas to develop school-wide consistency.

  • This Year

    • Posters were distributed the first month of school.

    • ELA team will lead staff through the process of embedding quality Open Response questions in all content area assessments.

    • ELA team will lead staff through a review of the information presented last year.

    • Implementation of Co-Teaching Model

      • Model is in place

      • PD has started


Russell street improvement efforts
Russell Street Improvement Efforts Requirements for Schools (Level 1)

Professional Development

  • Literacy – IDEAL Consulting

    • Response to Intervention (RtI)

    • Tiered instructional model

    • Using data to make instructional decisions

  • Strategies for answering Open Response MCAS questions

    Instruction & Intervention

  • Development of “MCAS Math Plan for Improvement”

  • Tiered Instruction - (RtI) in Literacy

    • Grade Level Data Team Meetings – 3 times / year

    • Frequent progress monitoring

    • Small group, targeted instruction


Russell street improvement efforts1
Russell Street Improvement Efforts Requirements for Schools (Level 1)

Increased Resources

  • Instructional materials for Tiers 2 & 3 reading intervention

  • Math Intervention Specialist (.4) to work with students not achieving Proficiency on MCAS

  • Updated edition of Everyday Mathematics

    • Aligns with Common Core State Standards (CCSS)

    • Includes 6-year access to on-line technology suite

  • Increased classroom technology

    (LCD Projectors, interactive white boards)

  • Instructional software: Lexia, Symphony Math

  • SMART Notebook software for ELA, Math, & Science

    • Utilized with SMART boards

    • Consists of curriculum titles & interactive lessons that correlate to CCSS


Where to Go for More Information Requirements for Schools (Level 1)

http://www.doe.mass.edu/sda/ayp/2011/default.html

  • The guidance document titled 2011-12 Massachusetts School & District Accountability and Assistance Levels & Required Actions outlines the planning, communication, and fiscal requirements associated with a school or district’s federal NCLB Accountability Status and/or state Accountability and Assistance Level.

  • For more information about the accountability designations that are annually assigned to Massachusetts districts and schools and information in understanding 2011 district and school accountability reports, please refer to the School Leaders’ Guide to the 2011 Accountability Reports and the 2011 Glossary of Accountability Reporting Terms.


ad