U.S. Department of Education. Office of Elementary and Secondary Education Student Achievement and School Accontability Programs Title III Group. 2009 NCLB Technical Assistance “Staying the Course Amidst Change” April 1 & 2, 2009. Amy Weinmann Education Program Specialist.
Office of Elementary and Secondary Education
Student Achievement and School Accontability Programs
Title III Group
2009 NCLB Technical Assistance
“Staying the Course Amidst Change”
April 1 & 2, 2009
Education Program Specialist
Title III: FY 2008 New Jersey received $ 18,602,562
# all LEP students reported in the New Jersey: 54,503
Type of Language Instruction Educational Programs Reported in New Jersey
Students are identified, become eligible for services, and enter the LEP Category based on an English Language Proficiency Assessment.
Entry = LEP = Services
curriculum for ALL
Different levels of need
Different accountability systems
Unequal distribution of resources
Diversity of LEP population
Different interventions for different needs
Different support capabilities
Two Sets of StandardsTwo Sets of Objectives
Title III’s accountability
Content AssessmentSetting Targets
Title I AYP
SY 2005Calculating AMAO 1
No Annual ELP Assessment
No Language Acquisition Education Program
No Additional Services
No Title III Funds
Annual ELP Assessment
Language Education Programs
Title III FundsExit Criteria from the LEP Subgroup
As Defined by State Criteria
All decisions should be based on a strong rationale, including research and analysis of the State’s historical data.
AMAO 3 = AYP
LEP Students with Disabilities ARE included in the calculations of AMAOs
AMAO requirements DO NOT applyHow about specific student categories?
Title III Served
After timely and meaningful consultation with appropriate private school officials, local education agencies (LEAs) receiving Title III funds must provide educational services to limited English proficient (LEP) children and educational personnel in private schools that are located in the geographic area served by the LEA.
In general, the Title III supplement not supplant requirement is intended to ensure that services provided with Title III funds are in addition to, and do not replace or supplant, services that students would otherwise receive.
Title III funds must be used to supplement the level of Federal, State, and local funds that, in the absence of Title III funds, would have been expended for programs for LEP children and immigrant children and youth.
[Section 3115(g) of ESEA]
The Department assumes supplanting exists if
The Department assumes supplanting exists if
An LEA uses Title III funds to provide services that it provided in the prior year with State, local, or other Federal funds.
This assumption may be rebutted.
Any determination about supplanting is calculations of AMAOsvery fact specific, and it is difficult to provide general guidelines without examining the details of a situation.
1. What is the instructional program/service provided to all students?
2. What does the LEA do to meet Lau requirements?
3. What services is the LEA required by other Federal, State, and local laws or regulations to provide?
4. Was the program/service previously provided with State, local, and Federal funds?
Based on the answers to the above questions, would the proposed funds be used to provide an instructional program/service that is in addition to or supplemental to an instructional program/service that would otherwise be provided to LEP students in the absence of a Title III grant?
Intent: to ensure that all States implement the requirements of Title III and follow the “bright line” principles of NCLB as they apply to Title III.
Background: Notice of proposed interpretations, comments, final notice, implementation of Title III annual measurable achievement objective (AMAO) determinations for 09-10 school year
1. Annual English Language Proficiency (ELP) Assessment of LEP Students
2. Use of Annual ELP Assessment Scores for AMAOs 1 (progress) and 2 (proficiency)
States may use ELP assessments that provide either:
(1) separate scores in each of the language domains, or
(2) a single composite score.
3. Students Included in Title III Accountability
1)under AMAO 1 only, the scores of LEP students who have not participated in two administrations of a State’s annual ELP assessment, and
2)under AMAO 3 only, the scores of LEP students excluded from AYP determinations under normal Title I rules.
SY 2006 calculations of AMAOs
4. Exclusion of LEP Students “Without Two Data Points” From AMAO 1 (progress)
5. Attainment of English Language Proficiency and “Exiting” the LEP Subgroup
6. Use of Minimum Group Size in Title III Accountability
7. All LEP Students, AYP, and AMAO3 (AYP)
8. AMAOs and the Use of Cohorts
9. States have flexibility in making accountability determinations for consortia.
10. Implementation of Corrective Actions Under Title III
What's New? calculations of AMAOs
Questions? calculations of AMAOs
Next Steps?Questions?? Next Steps??