Presentation Transcript

1. Annual Student Performance ReportOctober 2012

2. Overview

   NCLB requirements related to AYP 2012 ISAT performance and AYPstatus Next steps

3. No Child Left Behind Act andAdequate Yearly Progress (AYP)

   Overall goal is 100% proficiency in Reading and Math by 2014 Targets increase nearly every year Recent target proficiencies: 2010: 77.5% 2011: 85% 2012: 85% (Illinois waiver) 2013: 92.5%

4. No Child Left Behind Act andAdequate Yearly Progress (AYP)

5. Making AYP: Subgroups

   Target must be met by all subgroups: Ethnic group Economically disadvantaged Students with disabilities Limited English proficiency Applies to all subgroups with at least 45 members

6. Making AYP: Overall Requirements

   Three overall requirements: At least 95% of students in each subgroup must be tested in reading and math. At least 85% (in 2012) of students must meet or exceed standards in the subject. If the percentage is less than 85%, the 95% confidence interval is applied. If a subgroup did not make AYP the previous year, but decreased the percentage not meeting standards by at least 10%, the Safe Harbor provision will allow it to meet the conditions. School must have at least a 91% attendance rate.

7. Making AYP: Additional Factors

   Annual target percentages are lowered in specific circumstances: 95% confidence interval based on group size Safe Harbor provision of 10% decrease in percent not meeting from one year to next

8. Making AYP: Complicating Factors

   Home school versus serving school May 1 attendance cutoff Some students in multiple subgroups

9. Reading ISAT

10. Math ISAT

11. 2012 AYP Status

    Eight schools made AYP in both subjects Two schools did not make AYP in one or both subjects for one or more subgroups One failed for the second consecutive year One failed for the third consecutive year The District as a whole did not make AYP for the second consecutive year

12. 2012 AYP Status: District 97Subgroups Making AYP in Math

13. 2012 AYP Status: District 97Subgroups Making AYP in Reading

14. 2012 AYP Status: District 97Subgroups not Making AYP

    *met AYP target

15. 2012 AYP Status Update

16. Federal and State Requirementsfor Schools not Making AYP

    First year: No consequences Second consecutive year: Complete a School Improvement Plan and receive change in status: Federal (Title I schools): School in Need of Improvement (Choice) State: Academic Early Warning Status – Year 1 Third consecutive year: Complete a School Improvement Plan and receive change in status: Federal (Title I schools): School in Need of Improvement (SES) State: Academic Early Warning Status – Year 2

17. Student Progress: 2011-2012

    Reminders: AYP compares different sets of students from year to year Vast majority of students do improve from one year to next District focus is on student growth

18. Next Steps:Response to AYP Status

    School improvement planning at all ten schools using new Rising Star tool West 40 engaged as consultants to process

19. School Improvement Planning:Characteristics of Rising Star

    Continual monitoring Student outcomes and effective practices Combines several initiatives in one comprehensive plan Focus on all schools, not just Title I Completely online; increased record-keeping requirements

20. School Improvement Planningwith Rising Star

    Required webinar to gain system access prior to Oct. 4 Initial overview with West 40 consultants: Oct. 4 Each school assembling team of 6-8, creating calendar, and gathering data Smart Start and Smart Data indicators recorded: Nov. 1 Smart Plan indicators recorded: Dec. 14 On-going West 40 support throughout school improvement planning process

21. School Improvement Planning:Summary

    Plans completed online following required format Goal: all plans (SIP, Title I, and Technology) working together to improve student achievement by using best practices Intent: classroom focus changes from “I taught…” to “The students learned…”; all teachers and administrators utilize effective practices Duration: on-going