NCLB Updates

1
NCLB Updates

• June, 2004
• Marilyn Peterson
• Nebraska Department of Education

2
Agenda

• NDE Portal
• Determining AYP Status
• Determining 2nd year AYP Status
• 2004-05 NCLB Allocations
• Online NCLB Consolidated Applications

3
Determining AYP

• Changes for 2003-04
• Confidence Intervals
• Special Education
• Participations Rates
• Safe Harbor
• Proposed changes
• Small Schools

4
Confidence Intervals

• CI are a statistically developed range of
  possible scores that replace the single score to
  determine if a target goal was MET.
• CI are similar to the sampling error of a
  survey or poll. (plus or minus points)
• Increase the confidence that the AYP
  determination (decision) is appropriate

5
Appropriate Decisions

• AYP determinations are made about the
  effectiveness of the school or district
• Confidence intervals are used because the group
  tested in any one year might not be
  representative of the students in that school
  across years

6
Example of a Confidence Interval

• Confidence Interval of 95
• Goal is 50 proficient

7
2003-04 Results

• Confidence intervals will be applied to all
  group, school and district data that meets the 30
  minimum number
• Reading student performance
• Mathematics student performance
• Writing student performance (proposed)
• Graduation rates (proposed)
• Participation Rates for Reading and Math

8
Special Education

• The minimum number of students for the group of
  students with disabilities was set at 45 (higher
  than the minimum number of 30 for all other
  groups)
• Proposed the minimum number for students with
  disabilities will be 30 because the CI replaces
  the need to account for the variability in that
  group

9
Participation Rates

• New guidance allows the use of the greater number
  of
• The current years participation rate, OR
• The average of the participation rates from last
  year and this year
• The confidence interval will be applied to the
  higher number

10
Safe Harbor

• A provision of NCLB, safe harbor allows a group
  that demonstrates progress without meeting the
  target goal in Reading and Math.
• Requires a 10 decrease in the percentage of
  students not proficient from the previous year

11
Small Schools

• Proposed Change to Federal Accountability System
• Since confidence intervals will provide more
  appropriate decisions for small groups, we are
  proposing to include more small groups in the
  accountability system

12
Accumulated Data

• Groups, schools and districts with 10 or more but
  less than 30
• AYP data from three years (2002-03, 2003-04 and
  2004-05) will be aggregated and Federal
  Accountability will be applied in 2004-05
• Starting in 2005-06, Grades 3-8 will be reported
  and AYP determinations will be made on an annual
  basis to all with minimum numbers

13
Five Year Cycle

• Schools and districts reporting 5 or more but
  fewer than 10 students will have the data
  accumulated for five years
• Any group meeting the minimum number of 30 with
  the total of 5 years of data will be included in
  AYP decisions

14
AYP Status 2nd Year

• NCLB requirement to look at schools and districts
  for 2 consecutive years of progress
• Applied this year to all schools and districts
• Not making AYP for 2 consecutive years
  identifies the school or building as being in
  school improvement
• Sanctions of NLCB apply only to Title I schools
  and districts

15
School Improvement 2 years

• Any NOT MET in the same subject area and grade
  level for schools
• Any NOT MET in the aggregated data for
  districts in the same subject area and grade
  level
• Last years (2002-03) district AYP status
  unintentionally not displayed on the State of the
  Schools Report

16
State of the Schools Report

• AYP Status will be displayed again as Federal
  Accountability
• MET if all target goals are reached
• NOT MET if not all target goals are reached but
  not consecutively in the same subject and same
  grade level
• NOT MET, SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT if 2nd year in the
  same subject and grade

17
AYP Target Goals

• Subject areas
• Reading and Reading Participation
• Math and Math Participation
• Other Academic Indicator
• Writing Assessment and Elementary and Middle
  School
• Graduation rate at High School
• Quality rating of STARS assessments

18
(No Transcript)
19
(No Transcript)
20
2004-05 NCLB Allocations

• As soon as the NCLB allocations are completed,
  files will be posted on the Links to Federal
  Programs page and districts notified by an email
  message
• Allocations will be in the online NCLB
  Consolidated Applications

21
NCLB Planning Form

• Assignments to Consortia have been reviewed by
  ESUs
• Assigned allocations will be placed in the ESUs
  application
• Districts assigning only part of their allocation
  to a consortia must identify the amount of funds
• Districts assigning all allocations from all
  programs will not need to submit an application.

22
Timeline

• Early June testing within the Department
• Late June field test with invited ESU and
  district staff
• Early July Website where anyone can test the
  system
• Late July Official opening of applications for
  all

23
Training and Help

• Within the system instructions for each page,
  links to guidance, etc.
• Users guide on NDE homepage
• Training video telecast and webcast with a link
  for ongoing availability and reference
• Call numbers for help with the Portal or with the
  NCLB application
• Test site at Administrators Days

24
Changes

• The payment component will not be added until
  closeout of the current (2003-04) school years
  projects
• Title I will not include estimated carryover
  amounts in the initial application
• Carryover from any program will be added after
  closeout (after September)

25
(No Transcript)