Transcript Preparing for the 2007 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP

MCAS/Adequate Yearly Progress
(AYP) Determinations
NCLB Accountability
School Committee
October 5, 2009
What are the Purposes of
MCAS?



Test all public school students in Massachusetts,
including students with disabilities and limited English
proficient students
Measure performance based on the Massachusetts
Curriculum Framework learning standards
Report on the performance of individual students,
schools, and districts
2
What Types of Questions Appear on
MCAS Tests?
Multiple-choice questions

used in all subject area tests except the ELA Composition test

Students select the correct answer from four options.
Open-response questions

used in all subject area tests except the ELA Composition test

create a written response that consists of one or more paragraphs and/or a chart, table, diagram,
illustration, or graph.
Short-answer questions

Students generate a brief response

Math only
Writing Prompts

ELA Composition tests (grades 4, 7, and 10)

students write a composition in response to a writing prompt
3
What Tests Were Administered in 2009?
Grade 3
ELA Reading Comprehension
Mathematics
Grade 4
ELA (Composition; Reading Comprehension)
Mathematics
Grade 5
ELA Reading Comprehension
Mathematics
Science and Technology/Engineering
Grade 6
ELA Reading Comprehension
Mathematics
Grade 7
ELA (Composition; Reading Comprehension)
Mathematics
Grade 8
ELA Reading Comprehension
Mathematics
Science and Technology/Engineering
Grade 10
High School
ELA (Composition; Reading Comprehension)
Mathematics
Science and Technology/Engineering
• Biology
• Chemistry
• Introductory Physics
• Technology/Engineering
4
How Will Test Results Be Used?

Parent/Guardian Reports



child’s academic performance in the subjects tested by MCAS
becomes part of his or her temporary student record
Students must demonstrate proficiency in grade 10 MCAS


ELA and Mathematics
Needs Improvement or better in one of the four Science and
Technology/Engineering subject tests

Educators use student, school, and district results to review
curriculum and instruction and to plan for improvement

DESE uses MCAS results to gauge each school’s progress toward all
students being proficient in ELA and Mathematics (AYP)
5
Grade 10 English Language Arts
6
Grade 10 Mathematics
7
Grade 10 Science and
Technology
8
Grade 8 English Language Arts
9
Grade 8 Mathematics
10
Grade 8 Science and Technology
11
Grade 7 English Language Arts
12
Grade 7 Mathematics
13
Grade 6 English Language Arts
14
Grade 6 Mathematics
15
Grade 5 English Language Arts
16
Grade 5 Mathematics
17
Grade 5 Science and Technology
18
Grade 4 English Language Arts
19
Grade 4 Mathematics
20
Grade 3 English Language Arts
21
Grade 3 Mathematics
22
Adequate Yearly Progress: Facts


AYP reports show the progress schools and
districts are making toward having all students
reach proficiency by the year 2014 – the principal
goal of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB).
AYP determinations are issued each year
separately for English language arts/reading and
for mathematics.
23
Adequate Yearly Progress: Facts


For each subject there are multiple AYP
determinations - for all students and for student
subgroups. Students are counted in each student
group to which they belong.
Schools and districts that do not make AYP for two
or more consecutive years in the same subject must
follow a required course of action to improve school
performance.
24
A + (B or C) + D = AYP
A Participation
95% or greater participation in MCAS and MCAS Alt.
Assessment tests
B Performance
85.4 or greater Composite Performance Index (CPI) in
ELA
76.5 or greater CPI in mathematics
C Improvement
Meet or exceed 2009 improvement target (specific to
districts, schools and subgroups)
D Additional
Indicator
Grades 1-8: 92% or higher attendance rate, or 1%
improvement over 2008
HS: 60% or higher graduation rate for 2008 cohort or
2% improvement over 2007 cohort
25
A + (B or C) + D = AYP
Target
target
26
NCLB Accountability Status and
Required Actions (School Level)

A school is newly identified for improvement if it fails to make
AYP in the same subject area for (aggregate or any subgroup)
for two consecutive years.

If a school makes AYP for one year, it stays at the previous
year’s status.

If it makes AYP for two years in a row, the school is assigned
to the positive No Status category.

NCLB School Choice and Supplemental Educational Services
(SES) apply to schools receiving Title I funding in current
school year.
27
NCLB Accountability Status and
Required Actions (School Level)
Years Not
Making AYP
NCLB Accountability Status
Required Actions
0–1
No Status
None
2
Improvement (Year 1)
Parent/Guardian notification,
Improvement Planning, School
Choice*
3
Improvement (Year 2)
Above requirements (plus SES &
10% of school’s Title I allocation
for PD)*
4
Corrective Action
Above requirements plus
district takes 1+ corrective action
5
Restructuring (Year 1)
Above requirements plus
district plans for fundamental
reform
6+
Restructuring (Year 2+)
Above requirements plus
district restructures school
*School Choice & Supplemental Educational Services
(SES) apply to Title I schools only.
28
NCLB Accountability Status and
Required Actions (District Level)



District AYP determinations are based on grade
spans (3-5, 6-8, 9-12).
A district is newly identified for improvement if it
fails to make AYP in the same subject area for all
grade-spans (aggregate or any subgroup) for two
consecutive years.
A district is assigned to the positive No Status
category if it makes AYP for all groups in the same
subject area for at least one grade-span for two
consecutive years.
29
NCLB Accountability Status and
Required Actions (District Level)
Years Not
Making
AYP
NCLB Accountability
Status
Required Actions
0–1
No Status
None
2
Improvement (Year 1)
Parent/Guardian Notification
Improvement Planning
10% set aside of Title I funds for P.D.
Limitations on transferability of federal
funds
3
Improvement (Year 2)
Same as above
4+
Corrective Action
Above requirements plus:
Prohibition on transfer of federal funds
State Takes 1+ Corrective Actions
30
2008 School and
District Accountability
Status
For more information regarding state, district, and
school assessment results:
31
http://profiles.doe.mass.edu/state_report/mcas.aspx
School Improvement Planning
(FFES, HES, IBES, MES)

Annual, measurable goals and improvement objectives

Analysis of the causes or reasons for the school’s failing to make AYP

Improvement strategies

High-quality professional development

Parental involvement

Extended time programs

Identification of resources needed to implement the school’s improvement plan

Incorporation of a teacher mentoring program

Methods for coordinating and monitoring the implementation of the school’s improvement
plan

Identification of the responsibilities of the school and the school district
32
School in Restructuring
Requirements (PCIS)




Parent/Guardian Notification letter
School Improvement Planning (Performance
Improvement Mapping – PIM)
Technical Assistance from district level administration
Plan for Fundamental Reforms

The district, in concert with teachers and parents, must
analyze the school’s needs and develop a plan for
fundamental reforms, including change in the school’s
governance and/or staffing, to improve student
performance in the school.
33
District in Corrective Action
Requirements
Parent/Guardian Notification letter Corrective Actions
(at least one)

Defer/reallocate programmatic funds or reduce administrative funds

Institute and fully implement a new curriculum based on state
standards and includes scientifically based professional development

Replace district personnel

Remove individual schools from jurisdiction of the district

Appoint a receiver or trustee to administer the affairs of the district

Abolish or restructure the district
34
Next Steps


District Improvement Plan
 Improvement Goals
 Professional Development Goals
 District In-service Program
 Performance Improvement Mapping (PIM)
School & District Testing Reports
School Data Teams






Administrators
Classroom Teachers
Special Education Teachers
Guidance Counselors
Coordinators
Curriculum Presentations/Program updates
 English Language Arts/Reading
 Mathematics
 Science, Technology & Engineering
 History & Social Science
 Special Education
 Remediation Program
35
Current Initiative Highlights
(District)
English Language Arts
Elementary ELA Initiatives:




Elementary Literacy Embedded PD Model (Year 2)
Writer’s Workshop
Comprehensive Literacy Assessments
Differentiated Reading Instruction
Secondary ELA Initiatives:

Secondary Literacy Initiative/ PCIS Reading Grant

Socratic Circles/Seminars & Literature Discussions

Updated Writing Folder Requirements/Emphasis on Revision

Curriculum Mapping/Pacing Guides (MS)

Vocabulary: Word within the Word (MS)

Expanded Literature Choices (MS)

Cumulative Writing Portfolios (HS)

Action Research Projects (HS)
36
Current Initiative Highlights
(District)
Mathematics







Service delivery for special education students & PD in
math content & instruction for MSN (Moderate Special Needs) Teachers
Adoption and implementation
of new elementary math
program (Everyday Math – EDM)
Use of Larson Math Software for DI (Differentiated Instruction)
Problem solving
Vocabulary
Concrete to abstract instructional strategies
Fraction/Decimal/Percent
37
Additional Initiative Highlights
(Schools)
Middle Schools







Realign grade five & six student schedule to maximize
time on learning for ELA and Math per week.
Offer After school MCAS tutoring program
Job embedded Math/SPED Professional Development
[PCIS]
Review special education model for content support in ELA
and Math
Continue to monitor use of MCAS Alt.
Review MCAS accommodations
Review instructional techniques for Special Ed students in
general classroom settings
38
Additional Initiative Highlights
(Schools)
High Schools






SLC grant – 4 additional sped teachers for Freshman Academies
Redesign the delivery of Special Ed services by adding a Learning
Center and a Students At Risk behavior program (PNHS)
Continue Credit Recovery, Freshman Reading
FINAO program – failure is not an option – reduced 9th grade failure
rates by 32% - seniors mentor grade 9 failing kids (PSHS)
Addition of CP2 level
Added an “English Essentials”




for repeat grade 9 kids – who are almost grade 10 (PSHS pilot, 2008)
Very successful (added to PNHS)
Addition of Alt. HS
MCAS Tutoring (ELA/Math/Science)
39