Transcript Virginia's Implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act

NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND
ACT OF 2001
Implementation of
Virginia’s Consolidated Plan
Dr. Patricia I. Wright
Assistant Superintendent for
Instruction
August 5, 2003
1
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
PURPOSE OF NCLB
LAW
Enacted “to close the
achievement gap with
accountability, flexibility,
and choice, so that no child
is left behind”
2
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
No Child Left Behind Act
Performance Goals for All States
1.
By 2013-2014, all students will reach high standards, at a
minimum attaining proficiency or better in reading and
mathematics.
2.
All limited English proficient students will become
proficient in English and reach high academic standards,
at a minimum attaining proficiency or better in
reading/language arts and mathematics.
3.
By 2005-2006, all students will be taught by highly qualified
teachers.
4.
All students will be educated in learning environments that
are safe, drug free, and conducive to learning.
5.
All students will graduate from high school.
3
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
NCLB ACT IMPLEMENTATION
IN VIRGINIA
• The Consolidated State Application
– NCLB Overview
– NCLB and Virginia’s Accountability System
• Choice Options
• Annual Testing (Academic Content and English
Language Proficiency)
• Adequate Yearly Progress Measures
• "Highly Qualified" Teachers and
Paraprofessionals
• Parental Knowledge and Involvement (Report
Cards)
4
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
The Consolidated Application Timeline
•
May 2002, Board of Education (BOE) submitted initial consolidated
application to the U.S. Education Department (USED) to secure funding
(Excludes: Reading First and Title VI, Part A)
– $274.8 million for 2002-2003 (22 percent increase)
– $267.8 million allocated to school divisions
– $7.0 million formula-driven state set-aside
•
November 26, 2002, USED issued final Title I regulations
•
January 2003, BOE submitted to USED “Consolidated State Application
Accountability Workbook”
– February 2003, USED conducted peer review of state accountability plan
•
May 1, 2003, SEA submitted final plan for meeting NCLB accountability
requirements and AYP related baseline data
•
June 9, 2003, SEA submitted, under protest, amendments to state
accountability plan related to 2002-2003 policies for testing, and the
formula for determining Adequate Yearly Progress (“AYP”) for certain LEP
students and students with disabilities
•
June 10, 2003, USED approved Virginia’s accountability plan
•
September 2003, SEA submits baseline data and state targets for non-AYP
related indicators
5
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
VA Consolidated State Application
Accountability Workbook Approved
• The U.S. Department of Education has approved Virginia’s
Consolidated State Application Accountability Workbook, as
amended on June 9, 2003.
• The NCLB accountability plan that Virginia had proposed for
2003-2004 and beyond was approved with minor changes and
clarifications.
• The June 9 amendments relate to testing policies in effect for
2002-2003 and the formula for determining adequate yearly
progress (AYP) in 2002-2003 for certain students with limited
English proficiency and students with disabilities. Virginia agreed
to these amendments under protest and only because USED
mandated them.
6
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
THE CONSOLIDATED STATE
ACCOUNTABILITY WORKBOOK
• “Consolidated State Application
Accountability Workbook” describes
NCLB implementation status, including
• Virginia's definition of Adequate Yearly
Progress (AYP)
• Virginia's Adequate Yearly Progress
starting points and intermediate targets
• Preliminary yearly objectives:
– Increasing to 100 percent in 2013-2014
7
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
STATEWIDE ACCOUNTABILITY
SYSTEM
NCLB law requires a single
statewide accountability system
that will be effective in ensuring
that all public schools and school
divisions make adequate yearly
progress.
8
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
Virginia’s Standards of Learning
program has given us a head start
in meeting the goals and
challenges of the No Child Left
Behind Act.
9
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
ACCOUNTABILITY FOR RESULTS:
THE USE OF ASSESSMENT DATA IN VIRGINIA
• Within 12 years, beginning with 2002-2003,
all students in Virginia are to achieve
proficiency in English (reading/ language
arts) and mathematics.
• Adequate Yearly Progress, as defined in
the “Consolidated State Application
Accountability Workbook”, will be the
measure by which all Virginia public
schools, school divisions, and the state
will be evaluated to determine whether
progress in reaching academic proficiency
levels is being made.
ACCOUNTABILITY FOR RESULTS
SANCTIONS AND REWARDS
• Virginia will implement a system of sanctions and
rewards to hold ALL public schools and school
divisions accountable for student achievement.
• Sanctions will be imposed on schools and
divisions that do not make adequate yearly
progress for two consecutive years.
– Title I schools in “School Improvement” will be subject to
sanctions that increase in number and severity with each year
of the designation (Sec. 1116).
– The state’s current system of sanctions and rewards through
the school accrediting process will be expanded to include
school divisions.
11
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
"SCHOOL
IMPROVEMENT"
STATUS
• Under NCLB, Title I schools are identified for
school improvement through two means:
– Title I schools have been Accredited with Warning
in English and/or mathematics for two years,
based on Standards of Learning tests
administered in 1999-2000 and 2000-2001
– Title I schools fail to make Adequate Yearly
Progress for two consecutive years after
establishment of the starting points
12
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
Choice Provisions in NCLB
Public School Choice
Title I, section 1116(b)(E)
Supplemental Services
Title I, section 1116(e)
Unsafe School Choice Option
Title IX, section 9532
13
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
PUBLIC SCHOOL CHOICE
Title I Schools in Improvement
• Must be provided no later than the first
day of the school year following school
improvement identification
• Must give priority to the lowest performing
students in the highest poverty schools
• Must be effectively communicated to
parents
14
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
STUDENT TRANSFER
CHOICE: 2002-2003
• 34 Title I schools in Virginia
identified as needing improvement
• These schools offer a student
transfer option for parents this
school year
• Nine school divisions affected to
date
15
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
SUPPLEMENTAL
SERVICES
Virginia Board of Education
• Schools that fail to make AYP after first full year in
school improvement must:
– Offer supplemental services
– Continue to provide public school choice
• Board of Education (BOE) criteria for providers:
– Have a proven record of effectiveness
– Use high quality, research-based approaches
– Align materials with the SOL
• BOE approved preliminary list of eligible providers
in September 2002, and the review and evaluation
process are ongoing.
16
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
Unsafe School Choice Option
 Allows students to transfer when:
 A school is determined to be
“persistently dangerous,” and/or
 A student becomes the victim of a violent
crime at a school.
17
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
Unsafe School Choice Option
Persistently Dangerous Schools
 The SEA must develop objective criteria to be used in identifying unsafe
schools.
 Board of Education adopted criteria and identification process at its April 29,
2003 meeting
 Identification process will involve three years of data.
 The incidents that will be used to analyze whether a school is persistently
dangerous are referenced in the criminal section of the Code of Virginia (Title
18.2) as those crimes and offenses against a person and illegal possession of
controlled drugs and substances with intent to distribute, each constituting a
felony. Only those incidents that occur on school property as it is defined by
the Code of Virginia, or at school-sponsored events on school property, will
be used in determining a school’s persistently dangerous status.
 The SEA must identify persistently dangerous schools no later than 14
days prior to the beginning of the 2003-2004 school year (USED recently
notified SEA of the extended deadline.)
 Division superintendents who have schools potentially categorized as
“cautioned” or on “probation” in 2003-2004 have been notified and
provided the opportunity to review school incident data.
18
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
Summary of NCLB Testing
Requirements
• Annual testing in reading and mathematics in grades
3-8 by 2005-2006. 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 2007-2008
• Current Science Standards of Learning tests meet
this requirement
• Participation in NAEP testing
• Assessment of English proficiency for all Limited
English Proficient (LEP students)
19
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
EXPANSION OF VIRGINIA STATE
ASSESSMENT PROGRAM
• All students expected to participate in Standards of
Learning testing program (95 % participation required)
• Virginia will develop and administer additional tests
– New Standards of Learning tests to be developed in reading
and mathematics for grades 4, 6, and 7
– Additional forms of the Standards of Learning tests in
mathematics for grades 3-8 will be developed for certain
LEP students
– Additional alternate assessments aligned to grade-level
standards for certain children with disabilities
• Test development to follow Virginia’s standard process;
items to be field tested over the next few years
20
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
ENGLISH LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY
(ELP) TESTING FOR LEP STUDENTS
• Virginia Board of Education adopted English
Language Proficiency (ELP) Standards of
Learning in November 2002
• Local school divisions will select and annually
administer ELP assessments to LEP students
beginning 2002-2003
– State approved ELP tests to be used in Title III
funded divisions
• BOE adopted list of ELP tests in January 2003
• State participating in CCSSO Consortium to
develop ELP test
21
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
LEP ACADEMIC CONTENT TESTING
• Options for LEP students in grades 3-8 at
lowest levels (Levels 1 and 2) of English
language proficiency
– Students may take state-approved ELP tests linked
directly to Standards of Learning for
English/reading Standards of Learning tests for up
to 3 years
– State to develop and administer additional forms
for mathematics with linguistic accommodations
(i.e., plain language forms)
• Students at upper levels of proficiency will
take the regular Standards of Learning tests
22
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
ADEQUATE YEARLY PROGRESS
• AYP measures school, division, and state progress in:
– Reading (English/Language Arts)
– Mathematics
– Graduation Rates
– Attendance Rates
• Board of Education set starting points in January 2003.
– Starting points calculated using formulas prescribed in federal law
and are the same for all subgroups, schools, divisions, and the
state
–
2001-2002 data and two prior consecutive years of data
included in calculations
• Reading/language arts: 60.7 percent pass rate
• Mathematics: 58.4 percent pass rate
23
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
ADEQUATE YEARLY PROGRESS
(cont.)
• Board of Education set annual measurable
objectives in mathematics and reading in January
2003.
• "Yearly Objectives" increase to 100 percent in 20132014
• Objectives must be met by all subgroups of
students:
–
–
–
–
Students with disabilities
Economically disadvantaged students
Limited English proficient students
Major racial/ethnic groups
• Groups exceeding 5% of total student population in state:
Black (not of Hispanic origin), White (not of Hispanic origin),
Hispanic
24
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
Starting Points: Other
Academic Indicators
• 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
25
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
AYP: Annual Measurable
Objectives
Reading/Language arts (percent pass)
20012002
20022003
20032004`
20042005
20052006
20062007
20072008
20082009
20092010
20102011
20112012
20122013
20132014
Start
Point
60.7
61.0
61.0
Int.
Goal
70.0
70.0
70.0
Int.
Goal
80.0
26
80.0
80.0
Int.
Goal
90.0
90.0
100
90.0
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
AYP: Annual Measurable
Objectives
Mathematics (percent pass)
20012002
20022003
20032004`
20042005
20052006
20062007
20072008
20082009
20092010
20102011
20112012
20122013
20132014
Start
Point
58.4
59.0
59.0
Int.
Goal
70.0
70.0
70.0
Int.
Goal
80.0
27
80.0
80.0
Int.
Goal
90.0
90.0
100
90.0
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
AYP
• Establish minimum “n” for statistically valid
and reliable determinations:
– 50 students for AYP
– 10 students for reporting
• Include students present for “full academic
year”
28
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
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)
29
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
Example of “Safe Harbor”
• Suppose a school’s pass rate for mathematics is
57%. The school has not met the annual
measurable objective (AMO) for mathematics.
• To check for safe harbor, calculate the failure rate
(43%) and compare it to data for 2001-2002.
•
Suppose the 2001-2002 failure rate were 48%. 10%
of 48% is 4.8% .
• Therefore, the failure rate must be less than (48% 4.8%) 43.2% to meet safe harbor.
• Since the failure rate is 43%, safe harbor has been
met.
30
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
Calculating AYP
• DOE staff will calculate AYP in the summer of
2003 using student-level test data. This data is
the same as that received by divisions for review
prior to summary reports being run.
• AYP will be calculated as data becomes available.
• AYP calculations will include scores from SOL
tests, alternate assessment, and substitute tests.
31
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
AYP Issues
• Students with Disabilities
– Participation Rate
– Alternate assessment
• Limited English Proficient Students
– Participation Rate
32
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
Notification of AYP
• Superintendents will be notified of AYP
status as data becomes available.
• School divisions will have the opportunity
to appeal AYP status based on questions
about statistical accuracy
33
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
The LEA and AYP
• The local school division must:
– Ensure schools have assessment and
indicator data
– Notify schools making/not making AYP prior to
the beginning of the school year
– Publicize and disseminate AYP determinations
to school community
– Review efforts of schools to improve student
achievement [Section 1116(a)]
34
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
ANNUAL STATE, DIVISION, AND
SCHOOL REPORT CARDS
• Virginia’s annual School Performance
Report Card will be expanded to include
all required NCLB data elements.
– School Performance
•
•
•
•
Student achievement disaggregated by subgroup
Graduation rates
Attendance
Number and names of schools identified for
school improvement
– Teacher Quality
• Percentage of classes not taught by highly
qualified teachers
• Percentage of teachers with provisional
credentials
35
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
VIRGINIA’S ANNUAL REPORT CARD
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
• The Virginia Department of Education will
– Design and publish Web-based report cards
for the state, divisions, and schools
– Expand data collections to capture additional
required data
– Enhance data analysis capacity to ensure
accurate reporting of results to USED and
parents
– Seek solutions for instituting a statewide
individual student records system
36
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
LEA Report Cards
• The local school division must disseminate to parents,
schools, and the general public an annual school and division
report card designed by the state. The report will summarize
the academic performance of schools and students.
• The following data will be included:
– Student academic achievement on the Standards of
Learning tests disaggregated by:
• economically disadvantaged students
• students from each major racial and ethnic group
• students with disabilities
• LEP students
• gender
• student’s migrant status
37
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
LEA Report Card Requirements
(continued)
• The report card must include:
– Student achievement at the proficient and advanced levels
on the state assessments
– Secondary school graduation rates disaggregated by
subgroup
– The number, percentage, and names of schools identified
for improvement
– How students in each school performed on the state
assessments compared to school division and state as a
whole
– The percentage of students who were not tested
disaggregated by subgroup
– The professional qualifications of division teachers
38
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
ACCOUNTABILITY IN THE CLASSROOM
HIGH QUALITY STANDARDS FOR INSTRUCTIONAL
PERSONNEL
• Virginia will require certain teachers and
paraprofessionals, as required in NCLB, to
meet the definition of “highly qualified”
within required time frames.
• The Board of Education is in the process
of examining and amending its “Licensure
Regulations for School Personnel” to
provide greater flexibility for teachers
entering the profession.
39
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
HIGHLY QUALIFIED
TEACHERS
Virginia Board of Education
• Teachers
– Board of Education initiated:
• Review of regulatory and policy actions
• Revision of licensure regulations to
address requirements for certain teachers
to meet NCLB highly qualified definition
– Local license holders teaching in core
academic areas are not considered to be
"highly qualified”
40
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
HIGHLY QUALIFIED TEACHERS
• All teachers of core academic subjects hired after the first
day of the 2002-2003 school year who work in Title I,
Part A supported programs must be “highly qualified.”
– The core academic subjects under NCLB are English, reading or
language arts, mathematics, science, foreign language, civics
and government, economics, arts, history, and geography
• ALL teachers of core academic subjects must be "highly
qualified" by the end of the 2005-2006 school year.
• In Virginia, a "highly qualified teacher" means:
– a teacher of core academic subjects who:
• holds full state licensure as a teacher (including licensure
earned through alternate routes)
AND
• is teaching only in the area(s) of endorsement
41
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
HIGHLY QUALIFIED
PARAPROFESSIONALS
• Paraprofessionals
– All paraprofessionals who are hired to
perform instructional duties in
programs supported by Title I, Part A
funds
• Regardless of hiring date
• Must have a secondary school
diploma or a GED
42
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
HIGHLY QUALIFIED
PARAPROFESSIONALS (cont.)
• Paraprofessionals
– All Title I paraprofessionals hired after January
8, 2002
• whose duties include instructional support
• must be "highly qualified”
– All Title I paraprofessionals hired on or before
January 8, 2002
• whose duties include instructional support
• must become "highly qualified" by January
8, 2006
43
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
HIGHLY QUALIFIED
PARAPROFESSIONALS (cont.)
• A “highly qualified” paraprofessional means one of
the following options has been met:
– completed two years of study at an institution of higher
education;
– obtained an associate’s (or higher) degree;
– met a rigorous standard of quality and be able to
demonstrate, through a formal state or local academic
assessment, knowledge of and the ability to assist in
instructing reading, writing, and mathematics (or, as
appropriate, reading readiness, writing readiness, and
mathematics readiness)
44
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
HIGHLY QUALIFIED
PARAPROFESSIONALS (cont.)
• Paraprofessionals
– The ParaPro Assessment
• A formal state test for paraprofessionals
• Developed by Educational Testing Service (ETS)
• Administered over the Internet
• BOE set statewide cut-score (455) in March 2003
– School divisions may also develop and
administer their own assessment.
45
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
TEACHER QUALITY DATA
• State must implement plan for achieving
annual increases in highly qualified
teachers
– Comprehensive data collection to identify an
accurate number of current highly qualified
teachers
– Identify high-quality professional
development offerings
• Information collected must be reported to
parents and public
46
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
A Parent’s “Right-to-Know”
Teacher Qualifications
Local school divisions
receiving Title I funds must
notify parents at the
beginning of each school
year that they may request
and obtain information from
the division about
qualifications of staff
instructing their children in
Title I schools.
47
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
A Parent’s “Right-to-Know”
Teacher Qualifications
(continued)
• Information must include:
– Whether the teacher has met state qualification and
licensing criteria for the grade levels and subject
areas taught
– Whether the teacher is teaching under emergency
or other provisional status
– The baccalaureate degree major of the teacher and
any other graduate certification
– Whether their children are provided services by
paraprofessionals and, if so, their qualifications
48
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
Parental Notification:
Not “Highly Qualified”
The local school division
must ensure that Title I
schools give timely notice
to parents that their
children have been
assigned or have been
taught for four or more
consecutive weeks by a
teacher who is not highly
qualified.
49
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
Military Access
• Local school divisions receiving
assistance under NCLB must provide
military recruiters the same access to
secondary school students as is generally
provided to post-secondary educational
institutions or to prospective employers of
those students.
• A secondary school student or parent
may request that the student’s name,
address, and telephone listing not be
released without prior written consent.
50
8//03 Virginia Department of Education
Constitutionally
Protected Prayer
• As a condition of receiving funding under No Child
Left Behind, school divisions must annually certify to
the state that they have no policies that would prevent
or deny participation in constitutionally protected
prayer.
• Written certification must be provided to the state by
October 1 of each year.
– A constitutionally protected prayer assurance for
superintendent and local school board chairperson’s
signature can be found among the assurances in the local
consolidated or individual applications for federal funds.
51
8//03 Virginia Department of Education