Adequate Yearly Progress

and Special Education

ESC-2 Regional Superintendent’s Meeting

November 17, 2008

1:30- 3:30 p.m.

2008 AYP Ratings Highlights

Percent Met Standard

State Region 2 Number

District Meets 66.4% 61.2% 30 of 49

District Missed 32.5% 38.8% 19

Campus Meets 74.7% 83.1% 187 of 225

Campus Missed 14.2% 16.9% 38

Charter Campus Meets 53.7% 80.0% 8 of 10

Charter Campus Missed 27.3% 20.0% 2

2008 State/Region 2 Performance Comparison

2008 AYP Ratings Highlights2008 Region 2 Performance Comparison to

Regions 1 and 3

Percent Met Standard

Region 1 Region 2 Region 3

District Meets 42% (18) 61% (30) 66% (27)

District Missed 58% (25) 39%(19) 34% (14)

Campus Meets 79% (359) 83% (187) 89% (134)

Campus Missed 21% (97) 17% (38) 11% (16)

Charter Campus Meets 57%(8) 80% (8) n/a

Charter Campus Missed 43% (6) 20% (2) n/a

2008 AYP Ratings Highlights

Reading (60%)Percent Met Standard

2007 2008 Difference

All 85% 87% +2

African American 82% 84% +2

Hispanic 83% 84% +1

White 92% 93% +1

Eco. Dis. 81% 82% +1

SPED* OLD vs. NEW Alternate Tests 67% 57% -10

LEP 77% 77% +0

Region 2 AYP Reading Performance Comparison 2007 to 2008

2008 AYP Ratings Highlights

Mathematics (50%)Percent Met Standard

2007 2008 Difference

All 74% 74% +0

African American 68% 69% +1

Hispanic 70% 71% +1

White 84% 84% +0

Eco. Dis. 69% 68% -1

SPED* OLD vs. NEW Alternate Tests 65% 45% -20

LEP 69% 69% +0

Region 2 AYP Mathematics Performance Comparison 2007 to 2008

Region 2 ResultsMissed AYP

• High Schools: 20

• Middle Schools: 15

• Intermediate/Elementary Schools: 5

Region 2 AYP Results Content AreasReading (includes Districts & Campuses)

– SPED: 28 – Eco. Disadvantaged: 1

Mathematics (includes Districts & Campuses)

– SPED: 33 – All: 12– Hispanic: 13– Eco. Disadvantaged: 19– African American: 1

Graduation: 16

How has the SPED landscape changed over the years?

Date Lifeskills Resource General Ed

2004-2005 20% 65% 15%

2005-2006 18% 55% 27%

2006-2007 16% 45% 39%2007-2008 14% 35% 51%2008-2009

What Happened? Why Did So Many Schools Miss the Mark?

•New alternate state assessments:

“School districts have responded to the new federal requirements by significantly increasing the number of students with disabilities assessed on grade level. However, it will take districts some time to fully address the increasing expectations …,”

-----Commissioner of Education Robert Scott

What Happened? Why Did So Many Schools Miss the Mark?

• Moving a mass amount of special education students into the general education setting: If not supported, teachers may not be able to sustain all students appropriately.

• Secondary vs. Elementary: Secondary students may not have had opportunities to be instructed on-grade level until recently.

• Inappropriate state assessment: Many students may not have been placed in appropriate state assessments.

State/Federal Assessments 2008-09

• TAKS– Enrolled Grade Level/General Ed Curriculum– With/Without Accommodations

• TAKS Accommodated (TAKS-A)– Enrolled Grade Level/General Ed Curriculum– With Accommodations

• TAKS Modified (TAKS-M)– Enrolled Grade Level/Modified Achievement

Standards• TAKS Alternate (TAKS-Alt)

– Grade Level TEKS accessed through prerequisite skills

Is there a cap on the number of students districts must place in each state assessment?

• The decision to administer a test to a student must be made by the student’s ARD committee. It cannot be based solely on disability category or placement setting, nor can it be determined administratively for accountability purposes.

» TAA Letter August 29, 2008

AYP 1st Visual / Scenario

What happened in many cases…

AYP Q&A Document

• Does the federal cap limit the number of students that are allowed to take the TAKS-M or TAKS-Alt?– No, the cap relates to counting students as

proficient for AYP purposes only and does not limit the number of students that may take an alternate assessment.

» See1.2 in Q&A document

AYP Q&A Document• If my district or campus exceeds either

the 1% or 2% cap, does that mean we automatically fail to meet AYP? Will the district be penalized?– There are no penalties for exceeding the

caps. The only potential impact of exceeding the federal caps is the resulting AYP status for the district or campus.

» See 1.7 in Q&A document

Analysis of AEIS vs. AYP

“Mystery” Region 2 Campus

2008 AEIS/AYP Comparison

ReadingPercent Met Standard

AEIS AYP Difference

All 81% 74% -7%

African American * * *

Hispanic 81% 74% -7%

White * * *

Eco. Dis. 81% 74% -7%

SPED* OLD vs. NEW Alternate Tests NA 45% -30% (AYP)

Mystery Campus AEIS/AYP Reading Performance Comparison

2008 AEIS/AYP Comparison

MathematicsPercent Met Standard

AEIS AYP Difference

All 64% 57% -7%

African American * * *

Hispanic 65% 57% -8%

White * * *

Eco. Dis. 64% 57% -7%

SPED* OLD vs. NEW Alternate Tests NA 25% -44% (AYP)

Mystery Campus AEIS/AYP Mathematics Performance Comparison

Additional Information• AEIS Report

– GPA: Commended Reading/ELA (> 25%)

– Comparable Improvement: • Reading/ ELA (Q4)

– (Ranked 40th out of 41 schools)

• Mathematics (Q2)

What can schools do now?

• Locate students who took an alternate test who barely passed/barely failed.

– Focus on these “bubble” students…they will make the most difference in scores in 2009

– Are some of these students able to move to a higher level alternate test? Some scores were “commended”…move them up!

What can schools do now?

• Locate students who failed at a high level.

– Were these students placed on the correct test?

– Were these students instructed (on grade level) to meet the alternate test objectives?

What can schools do now?• Increase ALL passing scores in ALL subgroups!

This creates the AYP “cushion” necessary to ABSORB any “artificial failures.”

• Districts/campuses need more students passing the tests at higher levels of mastery (aim for commended)

• How??? Bell to bell instruction of grade level curriculum taught at the high rigor that the TEKS demand

AYP 2nd Visual / Scenario

What Needs to Happen?

What Can Schools Do for Systemic Change?

3 Steps to Changing Mindsets

1. See past the numbers and work on individual students’ needs.

2. Place students on appropriate state assessments.

3. Access to the General Curriculum (AGC): Get students on grade level instruction.

What Assistance is Available?

ESC-2 Trainings and AssistanceBased on Best Practices:

• Braided Services

• ARD Decision-Making Process

• Accommodations Manual

• Access to the General Ed Curriculum

•Differentiation for Inclusion

• Monitoring Systems’ Analysis (i.e. PBMAS and SPP Indicators)

Braided Services: Blending of General Ed and Special Ed

•Response to Intervention (RtI)

•Early Intervening Services

•Disproportionality (Overrepresentation)

•Positive Behavior Supports

Braided Services: Why Do This?•Proactive

•Promotes school improvement

•Improve test results

•Improve instruction

•Improve evaluation eligibility

•Involves entire campus

Braided Services: Why Do This?Resources:Building the Legacy: IDEA 2004 (U.S. Department of Education Website)

National Research Center on Learning Disabilities

Texas Center for Learning Disabilities

ARD Decision-Making Process for the Texas Assessment Program

• The federal cap relates to counting students as proficient for AYP purposes only and does not provide direction to ARD committees regarding how students with disabilities should be assessed. It is important that local school districts ensure that appropriate assessments are selected and administered to students with disabilities.--- AYP Guide

ARD Decision-Making Process: District Level Training

–Superintendents

–Testing Coordinators

–Curriculum Directors

–Special Education Administrators

–Bilingual / ESL Coordinators

ARD Decision-Making Process: Campus Level Training

• Principals and other administrators

• Testing Coordinators

• Test Administrators

• Educational Diagnosticians

•LSSPs•Counselors•Teachers•Special Education Staff•Bilingual Staff•Parents

Which Assessment is Appropriate? ARD Decision-Making Process Guide:

•4 Steps to Making Assessment Decisions: p. 14

•Access to the General Curriculum: p. 17

•Participation Requirements Chart p. 19

•(For TAKS-M or TAKS-Alt)

•Choosing Appropriate Assessments: p. 26

Which Assessment is Appropriate? ARD Decision-Making Process Guide:

•Sample Scenario

•9th grader receives 1-hr of Sp. Ed. in reading daily

•Uses the following accommodations:

•Larger font and fewer questions on worksheets and less text on the page

Which Assessment is Appropriate?

• See Page 65 in the ARD Decision-Making Guide

Curriculum Format

Focus Examples Assessment Option

TEKS Grade-level Shortened Tests TAKS

TAKS (A)

TEKS Modified and or Accommodations

Allow access to the TEKS through learning styles

Simplified Vocab TAKS- M

TEKS Accessed through Prerequisite Skills

Real life application of skills through student’s needs

Find real-life applications of assignments for skills

TAKS-Alt

Which Assessment is Appropriate? ARD Decision-Making Process Guide:

•Sample Scenario

•9th grader receives 1 hr of Sp. Ed. in rdg daily

•Uses the following accommodations:

•Larger font and fewer questions on worksheets and less text on the page.

TAKS Accommodated in Reading

TAKS in Math

ARD Decision-Making Process Training

• Robstown Cluster TOT November 21st

• Kingsville Cluster TOT December 15th

• ESC-2 Training: December 2008– Remote-site video conferencing available– DVDs available for purchase

Accommodations Manual Training

• Robstown Cluster Site: November 21st

• ESC-2: December 2008– Video Conferencing Available– DVD’s Available for Purchase

Access to the General Curriculum (AGC)

• Inclusion Models: No ONE Correct Way!

• AGC Network has not provided us with any model schools yet.

• We are working with a couple of districts to help them become model schools in our region.

AGC: Differentiation

• ESC-2 will offer different opportunities for teachers to work on differentiating actual lessons: January 2009.

Access to General CurriculumSample Analysis: Where is Your District?

Date Lifeskills Resource General Ed

2004-2005 20% 65% 15%

2005-2006 18% 55% 27%

2006-2007 16% 45% 39%2007-2008 14% 35% 51%2008-2009

Access to the General Curriculum• Don’t move all students or a mass of students

in one year for the sake of numbers.• Most likely place to start is to look at your

students with Learning Disabilities and determine if the student could be successful in the general education setting with special supports.

• Continue to analyze each student’s information to determine if the child can be placed in a less restrictive setting.

AGC: Paradigm Shift from 1970’s

Should some students in the general education classroom taking TAKS or TAKS-A be

exited from Special Education?

Monitoring Systems’ Analysis:PBMAS and SPP Indicators

• Administrative Decisions have major implications:

Example: Student is sent to DAEP (Discretionary Placement) Potential dropout– PBMAS #11 Graduation Rate / #2 Dropout Rate– PBMAS # 16 DAEP Placement– SPP #1 Graduation Rate / #2 Dropout Rate

Monitoring Systems’ Analysis:PBMAS and SPP Indicators

• ARD Decisions have major implications:– Example: Placing most students in TAKS-A

• Will reduce the numbers in TAKS and TAKS-M and TAKS-Alt

• PBMAS # 3 TAKS / TAKS – Acc Participation Rate• PBMAS # 4 TAKS – M Participation (Report Only)• PBMAS # 5 TAKS Alt Participation (Report Only)• Graduation Rate

2009 and Beyond

Student Success Initiative

• Expanded testing opportunities for TAKS-M for grade levels and subjects affected by the SSI grade advancement requirements– Grade 3, 5, or 8 Reading– Grade 5 or 8 Mathematics

• See calendar in ARD Manual: p. 34

Accommodations 2009 and Beyond

• New Accommodations Policy Changes and Clarifications

• Starting Spring 2009

• Should result in a significant reduction of Accommodations Request Form (ARF) submissions

State Assessment Validity

• Texas publishes an annual interpretive guide that provides examples of standard and optional assessment reports as well as an explanation of appropriate uses of the scores: http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/resources/guides/interpretive/index.html

Relationship between AYP and PBMAS

• AYP staff will consider indicators from the Performance-Based Monitoring Analysis System (PBMAS) when making findings on AYP appeals, as well as other district data submitted through PEIMS or the state assessment contractor.

Measuring Student Growth

• TAAS: TLI (Texas Learning Index )–Normative growth measure–Compared student performance across years within a subject

• TAKS: TGI (Texas Growth Index)–Estimated growth over 2 consecutive years and in 2 consecutive grades–Does not meet USDE requirements for growth-based accountability for NCLB

Preliminary Growth Proposal to USDE

• Includes a student growth measure in AYP calculations in 2009, based on a “regression-based model.”

• Final proposal to be sent in December.• Link: http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/index.html

• Response to USDE Clarification Questions on Texas’

Growth Model Pilot Proposal Link: http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/resources/growth_proposal/111208_TXResponseto_USDE_ClarificationQuestions.pdf

Don’t Forget…

• In 2009-2010 (next school year), ALL of the TAKS Accommodated tests will count for the STATE accountability system.

• Presently, the TAKS-M and TAKS-Alt will be a report only for the state system…but this may change

• TAKS-M and TAKS-Alt results will be reported on AEIS, but will not affect accountability

Issues to Consider

• Guaranteed viable curriculum

• Comprehensive Needs Assessment– Sufficient time and depth

• In identifying “weaknesses” don’t forget to emphasize strengths– Instructional– Individual student strengths

• Implement appropriate accommodations for students – Accommodations Manual

• Differentiate interventions based on need– E.g., academic based tutorials vs. study hall

Questions? Comments?

Associate Directors for Instructional Services:

•Nori Mora 361-561-8501Nori.mora@esc2.us

•Dawn Schuenemann 361-561-8551Dawn.schuenemann@esc2.us