Fiscal Year 2012 AEL Program Monitoring Reports Program 1

Findings

1. Program Data indicators not met:

Program is meeting or exceeding the post-test benchmark of 60% for the previous year.

Program met the targets for academic levels and goal attainment for the previous year.

Program shows consistent improvement in meeting academic targets and GED, post-secondary and employment goal attainments for the previous two years to within 5 percent of the established state targets.

Satisfactory “progression” outcomes are reliant upon two components of effective AEL

programming. To achieve a high rate of progression, an AEL program must first effectively engage students so that they continue to persist in their studies through the number of hours that it takes to make significant academic gains. Then, students must successfully demonstrate mastery of content on a post-test as an indication of that academic gain. These academic gains are measured and reported as students score high enough to advance to the next “educational functioning level.”

Upon reviewing data from the West Plains AEL program for the current fiscal year, a low

overall rate of progression is noted. A contributing factor to this low progression rate might be that students are dropping out and not persisting in their studies long enough to be ready for a post-test. This trend in the program data is evidenced by a post-test rate of 54% in the past fiscal year and 50% in the current year. The state target in this area is 60%.

Overall progression rates for previous fiscal years have been at or above the state target, and

several months remain in which to achieve the goal for the current year. During the review, several strategies were discussed to improve overall progression. It was suggested that the program adopt a stronger attendance policy, including a written commitment from the student. The current West Plains enrollment form asks students to sign a statement saying, “It is understood that I will attend class a minimum of 12 hours.” It was suggested that this statement be omitted, as it suggests a minimal level of commitment. To strengthen the orientation process, the session could include an in-depth discussion of realistic estimates of the amount of time needed to achieve significant academic gains. When partnering this discussion with goal-setting activities, students should accomplish an understanding of a long-term commitment to themselves and to the program in order to accomplish the goals they have established. Then, by signing a commitment form, they would be documenting that commitment in a formal and contractual manner.

The program is required to submit a plan for improving the overall progression rate for the

program.

2. Program Administration indicators not met:

Check of student records shows data is being entered accurately.

Program is exiting students if the students have been inactive for 90 days.

The review included a quality check of data entry procedures. Omissions and errors were noted.

o Attendance had not been recorded since January for the Gainesville and Alton sites and since mid-February for the West Plains class.

o Testing information recorded on a student file did not match what was recorded in the Adult Computer Enrollment System (ACES).

o A student’s social security number was entered incorrectly. o The “Data Quality Inactive Report” produced a number of students that had been

inactive for over 90 days and had not been exited from the program, as policy requires.

It was noted that a key staff person, a secretary, had been transferred from the program

earlier in the year to another position in the district. Ms. Wright stated that she had done her best to meet the clerical and data entry requirements of managing an effective AEL program, however, she acknowledged that she felt there was not enough time in the week to fulfill all of her job responsibilities, as she is contracted by the school district as a full-time counselor at the Career Center as well.

The absence of a front-line person for the program also meant that potential and current

students were now always communicating with an answering machine to get their questions answered, and teachers were fielding those calls during breaks from their instructional duties.

While accurate and timely data entry is a critical component of an effective AEL program, the

reviewers felt that these duties consume Ms. Wright’s limited time to devote to the program, and that she is more critically needed as an effective instructional leader and needs to devote her limited time to being accessible to students and teachers. Furthermore, the program is limited in its ability to effectively market to new students without someone to meet and greet at the AEL office.

The program is required to submit a plan stating how West Plains AEL will accomplish

accurate and timely data entry as well as other clerical duties, while protecting the director’s need to spend her limited time resources in leadership-level activities.

3. Assessment indicators not met:

The administration of the assessment is being followed according to the Missouri AEL State Assessment Policy.

Program that has students who are post-tested before the recommended hours specified in the Missouri AEL Assessment should show documentation of academic progress or informal assessments.

A. Through a review of testing data entered into ACES, the review team noted that post- tests were occurring before the recommended hours of instruction had occurred.

Post-testing that occurs after less than 40 hours of instruction for students at Levels 1-4

and less than 30 hours of instruction for Levels 5-6 is considered “early” post-testing and is contrary to the publisher’s recommendation. Therefore, the Missouri State AEL Assessment Policy states that “the local program will be required to provide documentation showing mastery of the applicable benchmarks prior to the [early] post-testing and any additional reasons for post-testing outside the policy.”

During the review, the requirement of documenting early post-testing was discussed,

and suggestions were made to the program director for establishing a local procedure to document the early post-testing of a student.

The program must submit a statement of policy regarding early post-testing. The

program must also develop or adapt and submit a form to be included in the student folder that documents evidence of necessity to post-test based on justifiable factors, including evidence of student readiness. An example of a form is included with this letter. (See attached document.)

B. The publisher’s guidelines state that a TABE test form may not be re-administered to a

student for six months, and the State AEL Assessment Policy requires 120 hours of instruction to occur before the same test form is re-used with a student. These standards are in place to avoid a “practice effect” which could produce invalid test results. In a sampling of ACES test data, it was noted that identical test forms were re- used to assess students in several instances, and in those instances those conditions were not satisfied.

The program is required to submit a plan for ensuring that conditions stated in the

Assessment Policy for re-administering a test have been met before a test form is re- used with a student.

4. Curriculum and instruction indicators not met:

The program can provide evidence of how they are addressing the needs of target populations listed in the grant.

At the Alton class site, it was noted that the students in attendance would certainly best be

described as beginning ESL students. The review team observed that the program is identifying the students served at this class site as AEL students in ACES. The students have been given a TABE test to determine pre-test and post-test scores. Despite numerous hours of class attendance, the students have failed to progress. Students who meet the criteria for ESL services must be identified as such in ACES and, based on state policy, must be given a CASAS Appraisal and assessment to determine educational need. Additionally, the grant application submitted by West Plains AEL and approved by MO

AEL states that students will be served with CASAS assessment tools and ESL instructional materials. The program is required to submit a plan describing how students will be identified appropriately based on services needed, and how students needing ESL instruction will be provided this instruction. As the class site has Internet access, it is suggested that the program might engage these learners in the numerous free ESL resources available on the web.

COMMENTS

1. To determine an AEL student’s progress, it is important to establish a baseline of a student’s

educational functioning, and this is accomplished through pre-testing. The pre-test target established by the state for Fiscal Year 2012 is 90%. West Plains AEL program’s rate was 100% and 99% in the two previous fiscal years, respectively, and 100% in the current fiscal year. The program is commended for efforts to ensure that all students are pre-tested upon enrolling in the program.

2. Many students attending the West Plains AEL program state that attainment of a high school credential, or GED, is a personal goal they aspire to achieve as a result of their participation in the AEL program. For the previous fiscal year, 68 students, or 93% of students stating that goal, attained their secondary credential, significantly surpassing the state target of 49%. Ms. Wright described how the program’s teachers meet the students at the test site on the day of the test to offer words of encouragement and support. This practice is indicative of a level of commitment and dedication that goes above and beyond, and the program is commended for their service to these students.

3. Due to higher attendance in the evening class at West Plains, Ms. Wright noted that she is considering reorganizing staffing assignments to better fit the attendance trends. This change seems warranted and responsive, as a student stated that he sometimes had to wait for the teacher to have time to help him. The review team encouraged the adjustment in staffing to reduce the teacher/student ratio in the evening.

4. A required feature of an AEL program is an up-to-date staff handbook. The West Plains AEL Staff Handbook was found to have out-of-date and missing information. Ms. Wright acknowledged that other duties had taken precedence over addressing the updating of the handbook.

The program is required to review and update the staff handbook to include complete and up-to-date guidance to staff members. Response required.

5. The AEL grant stipulates that local programs identify and serve students with learning disabilities. While the state plan for serving students with learning disabilities was accessible to staff in classrooms, the local program does not have a written plan describing what processes will be used to serve students with special learning needs (adults with learning difficulties/disabilities) as required by the AEL grant. A method or tool to screen students for

learning disabilities during the orientation process was used inconsistently and therefore no systematic accommodations were provided for these students.

The program is required to develop a written plan, which must be submitted to state AEL office for review and disseminated to all West Plains AEL teachers. Response required.

6. It was noted by the review team that “free preparation for the GED” was the singular message in several marketing pieces. Ms. Wright was urged to market all services available in recruitment materials, as is required in the AEL grant.

7. During the fiscal review, it was noted that Ms. Wright had made significant improvements in the program’s methods of documenting AEL expenditures and tracking fiscal information to ensure accuracy between the host agency and the AEL books. She is to be commended for her work in this area.

8. It was noted that Ms. Wright had trained the staff in the use of the Missouri Connections

database and that all West Plains AEL students had established a portfolio. Her leadership in encouraging career awareness is exemplary and ahead of the curve.

Program 2 Findings

1. Through a review of testing data entered into the Adult Computer Enrollment System (ACES),

the review team noted that post-tests were frequently occurring before the recommended hours of instruction had occurred. Further analysis of post-testing data indicated that this practice occurred numerous times in classes throughout the program. (See Attachment A.)

Post-testing that occurs after less than 40 hours of instruction for students at Levels 1--4 and

less than 30 hours of instruction for Levels 5--6 is considered “early” post-testing and is contrary to the publisher’s recommendation. Therefore, the Missouri Adult Education and Literacy State Assessment Policy states that “the local program will be required to provide documentation showing mastery of the applicable benchmarks prior to the [early] post-testing and any additional reasons for post-testing outside the policy.” During the review, the requirement of documenting early post-testing was discussed, and suggestions were made to the program director for establishing a local procedure to justify the early post-testing of a student. The program must submit a statement of policy regarding early post-testing and an accompanying form to the state AEL office for review.

2. An important component of standardized norm-referenced tests, such as the TABE test

utilized by AEL programs, is the accurate timing of the testing session. Through classroom visits and teacher interviews, it was noted by the review team that assessments were not being carefully timed in ECC AEL classrooms. Disregarding the time restrictions of a standardized test may invalidate results; therefore accurate measurement of student progress cannot be ensured.

The program is required to submit a plan for ensuring that all aspects of standardized test

administration are observed, including accurate timing. 3. The publisher’s guidelines state that a TABE test form may not be re-administered to a

student for six months, and the State AEL Assessment Policy requires 120 hours of instruction to occur before the same test form is re-used with a student. These standards are in place to avoid a “practice effect” which could produce invalid test results. In a sampling of ACES test data, it was noted that identical test forms were re-used to assess students in several instances, and in those instances those conditions were not satisfied.

The program is required to submit a plan for ensuring that conditions stated in the

Assessment Policy for re-administering a test have been met before a test form is re-used with a student.

4. There were several instances where there was no data entered for “hours at testing” in the ACES system. Additionally, there were discrepancies noted when cross-referencing attendance dates with test dates. In discussing this with Ms. Hoffman, it was found that the date entered for “test date” was actually the date of entering the test results into ACES, because teachers were not recording the date of the test when submitting the Scantron test cards.

The program is required to submit a plan for documenting and entering into ACES the actual

test date that will coincide with the hours of instruction that a student has received at the time of testing.

5. Various other miscellaneous irregularities in the area of assessment were noted. Several

incidents of “invalid” test results were found in student folders at several class sites. These “invalid” tests could not be entered into ACES, so it is not known exactly how frequently this is occurring. Other incidents observed could constitute a breach of test security, for example, the practice of sending students outside the classroom to complete tests unsupervised, or leaving a test booklet lying on a file cabinet during a class session. (The file cabinet was situated a distance from the teachers’ workstation.)

Through the review of ACES data it was noted that one student took a post-test that did not

show progress, and was given the next higher form a week later and showed progress. Only two hours of instruction were indicated. This test administration schedule would indicate that there was not time for “a reasonable amount of instruction and practice between tests.” (CTB Guide to Administering TABE, 2004)

These examples indicate needed attention to standardized testing procedures. The program is required to submit a plan that:

a. Addresses the need to strengthen the link between instruction, student practice, and formal assessment to ensure informal monitoring of student progress and thus avoid the overuse of the TABE, and

b. Informs and monitors all staff regarding standardized testing protocol to ensure the validity of results.

6. While Ms. Hoffman purposefully networks with numerous social service agencies in the

community, she acknowledged that the program does not have an active advisory committee. The Fiscal Year 2012 AEL grant stipulates that an AEL advisory committee must be in place and must meet a minimum of two times during each fiscal year. The program is required to submit documentation that verifies the establishment of an advisory committee, along with two proposed dates in the upcoming fiscal year that the advisory committee will be convened.

COMMENTS

1. To determine an AEL student’s progress, it is important to establish a baseline of a student’s educational functioning, and this is accomplished through pre-testing. The pre-test target established by the state for Fiscal Year 2012 is 90%. ECC AEL program’s rate was 100% in the two previous fiscal years, as well as the current fiscal year. The program is commended for efforts to ensure that all students are pre-tested upon enrolling in the program.

2. Progression rates are statistical measures that document students advancing to the next educational functioning level in AEL programs. For the previous three fiscal years, the ECC AEL program has surpassed state targets for progression rates. The program is commended for surpassing the established state targets for progression.

3. Nearly half of students attending the ECC AEL program state that attainment of a high school credential, or GED, is a personal goal they aspire to achieve as a result of their participation in the AEL program. For the previous fiscal year, 75% of those students achieved that goal, significantly surpassing the state target of 49%. The program is commended for their service to these students.

4. The host agency for the adult education program provides substantial monetary funding and in-kind contributions of facilities, equipment, and technical support. Additionally, during the host agency exit conference, ECC personnel Gretchen Pettet, Director of Workforce Development and Brenda Bouse, Vice-President, Career and Outreach Education, indicated a strong commitment to continued assistance. In the coming fiscal years, AEL programs will increase their emphasis on employment and postsecondary goals, and these ECC leaders indicated enthusiasm and support in making this transition. The state AEL office recognizes and appreciates this outstanding contribution to the local AEL program and the ECC community.

5. In regards to marketing the adult education program to the community, two suggestions were made by the review team. It was noted that “free preparation for the GED” was the singular message in several marketing pieces. Ms. Hoffman was urged to market all services available in recruitment materials, as is required in the AEL grant. Additionally, it was requested that the current AEL logo be used on all marketing pieces. Ms. Hoffman agreed to make these changes.

6. Ms. Hoffman submitted an extensive list of local social service providers with which ECC AEL has a cooperative relationship. She is to be commended for her participation and leadership in the ECC community in promoting AEL and providing AEL services to adult students.

7. Missouri AEL requires instructional approaches that utilize multiple research-based teaching strategies. Classroom observations and student questionnaires indicated that instructional delivery consisted primarily of independent study, with assistance provided when students requested help. Ms. Hoffman was urged to move teachers toward multiple instructional

strategies, including group lessons that are tied to a class profile system, and she acknowledged that this was an area to work toward improvement.

8. The AEL grant stipulates that local programs identify and serve students with learning disabilities. While the state plan for serving students with learning disabilities was accessible to staff in classrooms, the local program does not have a written plan describing what processes will be used to serve students with special learning needs (adults with learning difficulties/disabilities) as required by the AEL grant. No method or tool was used to screen students for learning disabilities during the orientation process and therefore no systematic accommodations were provided for these students.

9. Ms. Hoffman states that she is planning on utilizing the expertise of new staff members that have backgrounds in serving learning disabled individuals to provide training for her staff. The program is required to develop a written plan, which must be submitted to state AEL office for review and disseminated to all ECC AEL teachers. Response required.

10. The AEL Administrative Assistant is currently funded with 75% of time allocated to Category I/AEL instruction and 25% of time allocated to Category II/AEL administration. It is requested that a time and effort study be submitted, and an analysis of activities will be conducted to ensure that funds are being properly allocated. The program may be notified that adjustments to this allocation of funds must be made. Documentation required.

11. The review team noted during the fiscal review that a small amount for GED graduation expenses had been charged to the AEL budget. The only allowable AEL expenses related to the GED are expenses related to a student’s instruction and preparation to take the GED test. Ms. Hoffman indicated that in the future, no GED graduation expenses will be charged to the AEL grant.

12. The review team was informed that teachers were being compensated for planning time

and/or attendance at professional development activities at the end of the year by dispersing funds that were remaining in the Category I – Salaries budget line. The program is required to develop a written policy that clearly describes what process will be utilized to pay teachers for attendance at professional development activities and/or accumulated planning time at the end of the fiscal year. At a minimum, the policy must require teachers to document their planning time and/or their attendance at professional development activities in order to establish a basis for the compensation. A copy of the policy is requested to be submitted to the state AEL office for review. Response required.

13. It is a requirement of the AEL grant that local programs document a working partnership

with the local One Stop Career Center and/or Workforce Investment Board. The program is requested to submit a signed Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the appropriate local agency. Response required.

Program 3 FINDINGS

Program Administration

A review of the program’s data collection and data entry system noted that student data was not being entered into the state’s ACES system in the timeframe required in the grant. Section 2.3.1 F of the grant stipulates that student data must be entered into the ACES system at least monthly. A review of a select number of student files and the information that had been entered into ACES for these students noted that there was student information in the files that should have been entered in August or September but had not been entered. The program is required to submit a plan that describes what steps will be taken to ensure that student data is entered into the ACES system at least monthly.

COMMENTS

Program Performance Review Program performance data was reviewed for the Fiscal Years of 2009 to 2011.

Program demonstrated an increase in the progression rate during this performance period. For Fiscal Year 2011, the program exceeded the state’s progression target by six percentage points.

The program’s persistence rate for Fiscal Year 2011 was one percentage point below the state benchmark (69% for Fiscal Year 2011, 70% state benchmark).

The number of students enrolled over this performance period declined from 435 students in Fiscal Year 2009 to 341 in Fiscal Year 2011.

The program’s post-test rate increased each year over the performance period reviewed. In Fiscal Year 2011 the post-test rate was 65% (five percentage points above the state’s benchmark of 60%).

The program failed to meet the Fiscal Year 2011 state targets for entered employment and retained employment. However, the program exceeded the postsecondary enrollment and GED attainment by significant margins.

Program Administration

See Finding in preceding section.

The review team noted discrepancies between educational functioning levels in ACES and educational functioning levels recorded in student files. Teachers submit test results that are entered into the ACES system, which are converted to the appropriate educational functioning level. However, when teachers manually convert test scores and record them on the “Student Progress Sheet”, in 50% of the student files sampled, the teacher mistakenly calculated an incorrect educational functioning level. The review team believes the teachers are interpreting the TABE Norms Manual incorrectly. The program director is encouraged to review with all the AEL teachers the process of converting test results to educational functioning levels in order to determine appropriate educational functioning levels for each student.

The review team also noted discrepancies between the hours recorded in the Kirkwood class site’s student tracking ledger and the hours recorded in ACES. Teachers forward the student sign-in sheets to AEL program’s main office. Student hours are then reviewed by the director and then entered into ACES. The program director is encouraged to review with all the AEL teachers the importance of having an accurate accounting of student hours both at the class site and what is entered into ACES. This will also assist teachers in determining if the student has sufficient instructional hours to post-test.

The program is encouraged to use the state’s AEL logo on all marketing material.

The program has a very comprehensive teacher manual that is updated as needed. Teacher Certification and Professional Development All AEL teachers are currently AEL certified. The program has developed a tracking system to ensure that AEL teachers are complying with all certification requirements. Assessment The review team noted during class site visits that student enrollment forms (which contain personal information regarding the student) and assessment material were kept in an unlocked file drawer during the class period. The program must ensure that this information is never accessible to the students. It is recommended that whenever the teacher leaves the room, the teacher locks the file drawer or takes steps to ensure this information is made inaccessible to other students. Curriculum and Instruction

The review team noted during class site visits to the AEL classrooms in Mehlville and Affton, the lack of adequate instructional material to serve all levels of instruction. The classroom on the Meramec campus appeared to have sufficient instructional material. It is recommended that the program conduct an inventory of instructional materials and

determine what instructional material needs to be obtained in order to provide adequate instruction material for all levels of instructional need in all classrooms.

The review team recommends that the program search for a more accessible location in Mehlville. The classroom is extremely hard to locate and there are no signs to assist students in finding the classroom.

The program is encouraged to assist teachers in expanding the types of teaching strategies. The review team noted in the class sites visited, that the primary method of instruction was independent study. The wider variety of instruction, e.g. group instruction, study groups, leveled instruction, allows the teacher to provide a variety of instruction methods so as to best facilitate effective learning experiences of the students. The review team sees this as the best place for the program to continue improving their performance and enrollments.

Learning Disabilities No issues or concerns were noted with the program’s process for serving students with disabilities. Fiscal No issues or concerns were noted with the program’s accounting and financial tracking system.

Program 4

FINDING

The review team noted that the CASAS assessment tool is not being administered in accordance with the Missouri AEL State Assessment Policy. Page 11 of the assessment policy states the following:

For TABE, the Locator test must be used to determine the appropriate TABE level test that will be administered. For CASAS, the Appraisal test must be used to determine the appropriate CASAS level test to be administered.

The CASAS Test Administration Manual, pages 3-4 says the following:

Initial assessment with an appraisal gauges a learner’s reading, math or listening comprehension skill level….Generally, a learner takes an appraisal test at program entry to determine the appropriate pretest forms.

The review team noted the program is not using the Appraisal to determine what level of the CASAS assessment to give students. The program is required to submit a plan of action that will describe what steps will be taken to ensure that the Appraisal is being administered to ESL students.

COMMENTS

Program Performance

Program performance data was reviewed for the Fiscal Years of 2010 to 2012.

1. The state benchmark for pre-test rate for Fiscal Year 2012 is 90%. The St. Charles

Community College AEL program’s rate was 99% in the two previous fiscal years. The rate for Fiscal Year 2012 as of the date of the review was 100%, with only one student of 875 not being pre-tested. The program is commended for the efforts to ensure all students receive a pre-test upon enrolling in the program.

2. Missouri AEL established a state target for persistence at 70% for Fiscal Year 2012. St.

Charles Community College AEL showed a persistence rate of 86% for 2010, improving to 91% in 2011. As of the time of the review for Fiscal Year 2012 the rate was 88%, which exceeds the state target, with four months remaining in the fiscal year. Over the years, the program demonstrates a persistence rate consistently exceeding the state target. Persistence rate can impact post-test percentages and ultimately affect students’

progression rates. The program is commended for these efforts to ensure the continued attendance of AEL students.

3. The state target for post-test rate for Fiscal Year 2010 was 55% and the target increased to

60% in Fiscal Year 2011. The program’s post-test rate was 69% in Fiscal Year 2010 and 70% in Fiscal Year 2011. The rate for Fiscal Year 2012 at the time of the review was 60%. The program is again commended for consistently exceeding state targets for post-test rates.

4. Missouri’s academic performance targets are negotiated each year with the U.S.

Department of Education, Office of Vocational and Adult Education (OVAE), establishing an average rate of progression for students advancing to the next educational functioning level in AEL classrooms. In each of the three previous fiscal years, the program has met and exceeded the state’s overall academic target. At the time of the review, the rate of progression for the program’s students was 42%, with a goal of achieving the state target of 50% by the end of the fiscal year. The director indicated confidence that this would occur, based on the program’s previous performance. The program is commended for consistently meeting and exceeding academic targets.

5. St. Charles Community College AEL met targets in the program performance areas of

Entered Employment, Retained Employment, Entered Post-Secondary and GED Attainment. In all areas of program performance reviewed, the program data produced documentation indicating an AEL program that is highly effective in achieving target outcomes. Program Administration 1. The review team noted the program has a very strong data collection process in place.

Review of data entered from student records show accurate data entry. The three staff members involved in data entry have had current advanced ACES data entry training. The program is commended for the high level of expertise of staff members performing data management duties.

2. Communication with teachers about program data and effective evaluation of instruction is

facilitated by the support staff of lead teachers in the SCC AEL program. Dr. Schroeder indicated many times that the commitment of staff members to program excellence was a strength of the SCC AEL program. The review team was able to observe this commitment.

3. A dedicated registration classroom at each site with staff trained as registrars is a feature of a smooth and efficient orientation process. The staff members work from procedural checklists and scripts to ensure a uniform and complete orientation experience at all class times and locations.

4. The program benefits from outstanding support from the host agency, St. Charles

Community College. The college pays the salaries of two AEL staff persons: the program director and the literacy coordinator. Excellent and ample office and classroom space is

provided by the college. The AEL program receives donations from the college of computers and laptops that have been cycled out of the college’s programs when they are three years old. Services provided by the college’s Copy Center include free white paper copies. Teachers can e-mail copy requests and receive copies by campus mail. The SCC Marketing Department designs and prints high quality promotional materials to market the AEL program in the community. The level of support from the host agency is exemplary.

5. All other areas of program administration reviewed indicate that the goal of the program’s

administration, as Dr. Schroeder states, is to “make life easier for teachers,” and that this purpose is fulfilled with excellence.

Teacher Certification and Professional Development 1. All AEL teachers are currently AEL certified. The tracking system to ensure that AEL

teachers are complying with all certification requirements and completing professional development hours is well-documented in a color-coded spreadsheet.

2. Dedication to continuous and on-going professional development is modeled by the

program director, Dr. Schroeder, who, in addition to the AEL state-level director’s PD activities, accesses opportunities through the college. This has included an extensive Leadership Enrichment Program. Dr. Schroeder actively promotes participation in PD activities, and organized a local PD day where the program’s teachers shared their best practices with their colleagues. Dr. Schroeder expressed the need for the state to provide more PD activities to help teachers become more comfortable with technology.

Assessment 1. Post-testing that occurs before the student has received forty hours of instruction is

contrary to publishers’ recommendations, and therefore the Missouri Adult Education and Literacy State Assessment Policy that states “the local program will be required to provide documentation showing mastery of the applicable benchmarks prior to the post-testing and any additional reasons for post-testing outside the policy.” The procedure for documenting early post-testing was discussed, and suggestions were made to the program director for changing the current local protocol regarding this policy. Dr. Schroeder indicated that the suggested revisions to the form would be made and that the form would be completed prior to the administration of an early post-test. The program is requested to submit the revised form to the state AEL office for review.

2. Test security and test administration were found to be in compliance with policy guidelines. Curriculum and Instruction 1. Classrooms at SCC are optimally furnished and arranged so that both group and

individualized instruction is easily facilitated. Instructional materials are well organized and leveled in a program library in the AEL office.

2. A clear link to assessment results is indicated by the organization and content of student

work folders. 3. A lesson plan form used by all teachers in the program documents topics of instruction

taught in group instruction during each class session. Each ASE class session has instruction planned in reading, writing, and math.

4. Classrooms are equipped with assistive technology, and teachers are using the technology to

enhance instruction. 5. An outstanding network of volunteers enhances the learning experience in SCC AEL

classrooms. These volunteers were observed to be participating in discussions, leading group mini-lessons, performing clerical and housekeeping duties to facilitate the teacher’s instruction, tutoring students one-on-one, and leading small groups. The contribution to the program of these volunteers is significant and notable.

Learning Disabilities 1. Low-level literacy students are referred to the literacy coordinator for one-on-one

instruction.

2. All students complete a learning needs screening tool as part of the registration process, and appropriate referrals to the literacy coordinator for extra support and further assessment are made.

Fiscal Review 1. The program must discontinue the practice of charging expenses labeled “GED Graduation”

to the AEL expense account. The only allowable AEL expenses related to the GED are expenses related to a student’s instruction and preparation to take the GED test. Dr. Schroeder indicated that this would not be done in the future.

2. The review team was informed that teachers were being compensated for planning time at

the end of the year by dispersing funds that were remaining in the Category I – Salaries budget line. However, there was no documentation to support the planning time of the teachers. The program is required to develop a written policy that clearly described what process will be utilized to pay teachers for accumulated planning time at the end of the fiscal year. At a minimum, the policy must require teachers to document their planning time in order to establish a basis for the compensation. A copy of the policy is requested to be submitted to the state AEL office for review.

3. No other concerns were noted, and a collegial relationship was evident between the

director and SCC fiscal personnel.

Program 5

FINDINGS

Program Performance

Program performance data was reviewed for the Fiscal Years of 2009 to 2012. 1. A review of the program’s core follow-up outcome measures indicated an “entered

employment” rate of 35.71% for Fiscal Year 2011. The state’s performance target was 55% for that performance outcome. The program must submit a plan that describes what steps will be taken to improve this outcome and achieve the state’s target for entered employment.

2. For Fiscal Year 2011, the program’s entered postsecondary education or training rate was 22%. The state’s target for Fiscal Year 2011 was 50%. The program must submit a plan that describes what steps will be taken to improve this outcome and achieve the state’s target for entered postsecondary education and training. The review team suggested that the program report to the state AEL office students that enroll in postsecondary vocational programs at the correctional facility.

COMMENTS

Program Performance Program performance data was reviewed for the Fiscal Years of 2009 to 2011.

The program shows consistent performance in meeting academic progression targets. For the previous years’ reviewed, each demographic group for each year exceeded the federal progression rate (with the exception of one group in one year: ABE/ASE-5 in 2009). The program easily surpasses the federal targets by 15%--35% in these demographic groups in the previous fiscal year.

As of the date of the review, the rate of progression for the current fiscal year was 49%, with the federal target being 50%. Noting the program’s past success, the review team anticipates that the program will meet and exceed the current year’s federal target for progression rate.

While the number of students enrolled over this performance period declined from 979 students in Fiscal Year 2009 to 700 in Fiscal Year 2011, persistence rates remain high for the program. A decline in enrollment numbers accompanied by an increase in

persistence is being noted across the state and may be attributed to the procedural changes related to managed intake and enrollment.

The rate of post-testing is very high for the program relative to state’s target of 60%. In Fiscal Year 2011, the post-test rate was 80%.

The program demonstrated significant improvement in the category of GED attainment. In Fiscal Year 2010 the rate of attainment was 19%, while in Fiscal Year 2011, the rate was 65%.

Program Administration

The review team noted that student sign-in sheets were not being signed by the instructor, which would acknowledge the instructor’s oversight of the students sign-in, sign-out procedure. The program is requested to implement this procedure to ensure student attendance and accurate accounting of student hours.

The program director has devised remarkably efficient and accurate means to manage all aspects of data collection and record keeping. Students’ work folders were uniform in their organization across all sites. All student folders were set up so that data was easily reviewed and retrieved. A sampling of data from student folders compared to information entered into the ACES system found no discrepancies or errors.

The director reported a routine intake and orientation program at the corrections site, with rooms and personnel dedicated to orientation and assessment. She acknowledged the need to build up the Van-Far public site in this area. The program’s public sites are struggling to generate the number of new students necessary to effectively implement managed intake and enrollment.

The director identified the need to increase local community support and involvement in the AEL advisory committee and the overall public program. The review team offered several suggestions to improve community awareness and involvement.

Teacher Certification and Professional Development All AEL teachers are currently AEL certified. The tracking system to ensure that AEL teachers are complying with all certification requirements and completing professional development hours was one part of the exemplary and thorough record keeping system developed by the program director. Assessment Assessment procedures were observed to be consistent with the state AEL Assessment Policy. Special attention was given to verify readiness for post-testing through the pilot classroom

implementing the current Program Improvement Plan, and early testing required director approval. Curriculum and Instruction

Adequate materials were evident in all class sites visited. Materials were organized and accessible.

The program director and lead teacher manage all assessment data to facilitate the linking of assessment results to student instruction.

Learning Disabilities No issues or concerns were noted with the program’s process for serving students with disabilities. Fiscal

An examination of teachers’ timesheets, noted that in several instances, teachers recorded their time-in and time-out when they signed in. The program director was directed to correct the practice of having teachers sign-out at the same time that they sign in on time sheets that document their work hours.

During a review of the previous month’s expense report to the state AEL office, a discrepancy was noted when comparing the state’s report to the local records. This was discovered to be a matter of how the data was saved electronically and submitted. The issue was corrected.

Program 6 FINDINGS

A. Program Performance

1. The program’s post-test rate for Fiscal Year 2011 was 55%. The state’s performance measure was set at 60%. The program must submit a plan that describes what steps will be taken to meet the state’s post-test rate.

2. The program’s retained employment rate for Fiscal Year 2011 was 60%. The state’s performance target was 72%. The program must submit a plan that describes what steps will be taken to meet Fiscal Year 2012’s retained employment target of 64%.

3. The program’s entered postsecondary education or training rate for Fiscal Year 2011 was 10%. The state’s performance target was 40%. The program must submit a plan that describes what steps will be taken to meet Fiscal Year 2012’s entered postsecondary education or training target of 47%.

4. The program’s GED attainment for Fiscal Year 2011 was 27%. The state’s

performance target was 36%. The program must submit a plan that describes what steps will be taken to meet Fiscal Year 2012’s GED attainment target of 66%.

B. Program Administration

The program could only show evidence of having convened one advisory committee meeting last year. The grant requires a minimum of two advisory committee meetings be held each year (Grant, 3.2.7). The program must submit a calendar for Fiscal Year 2012 that indicates at least two proposed dates that an advisory committee will be convened.

C. Certification and Professional Development

No findings were noted.

D. Assessment

The review team’s review of student files noted that students that were being post-tested prior to the prescribed intervals outlined in the State Assessment Policy, did not include “documentation showing mastery of the applicable benchmarks prior to the post-testing.” The program is required to develop and submit a written post-test policy that requires the AEL teacher to record in the student’s file, why the student is being post-tested prior to the guidelines in the state policy (State Assessment Policy, page 14).

E. Curriculum and Instruction

The review teams’ interviews with classroom teachers and a review of student files noted that the Missouri Content Standards were not being integrated into instruction (Grant, 2.9.J). The program must submit a response that details how these Content Standards will be integrated into student instruction.

F. Learning Disabilities

The program does not have a written plan describing what processes will be used to serve students with special learning needs (adults with learning difficulties/disabilities) as required by the grant (2.9.T). The program is required to develop a written plan, which must be disseminated to all AEL teachers. The program is strongly encouraged to review this plan and its implementation with all the AEL teachers.

G. Fiscal No findings were notes.

COMMENTS

A. Program Performance Review Program performance data was reviewed for the Fiscal Years of 2009 to 2011.

1. Program demonstrated an increase in the progression rate during this performance period. For Fiscal Year 2011, the program exceeded the state’s progression target by one percentage point.

2. The number of students served over this performance period declined from 286 students in Fiscal Year 2009 to 155 in Fiscal Year 2011. The program’s grant indicates that approximately 350 students will be served in Fiscal Year 2012. The program is requested to submit a plan that describes what steps will be taken to serve this number of students. Response required.

B. Program Administration The program has a very comprehensive teacher manual that is updated as needed. C. Teacher Certification and Professional Development All AEL teachers are currently AEL certified. The program has developed a tracking system to ensure that AEL teachers are complying with all certification requirements. D. Assessment The review team observed that in the evening class at the Hannibal Career and Technical Center, students were being tested in the same classroom where instruction was being provided. The program is required to ensure that assessment tests are administered in compliance with the State Assessment Policy manual. The director is encouraged to review these requirements with all staff who administer the tests. E. Curriculum and Instruction During interviews with AEL teachers, teachers commented that they would like to utilize the computer more to provide instruction but did not have websites or software that provided this instruction. The director is encouraged to contact other program directors to determine what online/software programs their teachers are using and have found to be helpful. F. Learning Disabilities See Finding under F. Learning Disabilities G. Fiscal The program’s accounting system for AEL funds was reviewed and several recommendations were made:

1. The YTD expenses should be tracked internally by line item and total. These YTD expenses should be compared against the expense report submitted to DESE to ensure that the expenses reported are accurate.

2. The reports with the corresponding documentation should be organized internally in a manner that can easily be reviewed and tracked. It was suggested that all documents corresponding to each report submitted should be kept together in their own separate folder; however, the school district may develop their own method of organizing this.

3. The transmittal of receipts should be compared against the expense report submitted to ensure proper receipt of funds.

The strategies presented in the exit conference by the school district were acceptable to address the financial issues noted above; however, the program must submit these strategies to DESE in writing. Response required.

Program 7

FINDINGS

1. Program Data indicators not met:

Program met the targets for academic levels and goal attainment for the previous year.

Program shows consistent improvement in meeting academic targets and GED, post-secondary and employment goal attainments for the previous two years to within 5 percent of the established state targets.

A. Data indicated that progression rates for ABE/ASE educational functioning levels surpassed

state targets in four of five levels. However, ESL progression rates were significantly lower than state targets, and this trend was noted over a three-year period.

During the review, different elements of program management were discussed to help

identify components that could be addressed in an effort to improve progression rates for ESL students. The review team suggested that the program contact other AEL programs that have successful ESL programs, and also conduct targeted professional development as possible means to address this issue.

The program is required to submit a plan for improving the progression rate for ESL students.

B. The program also did not meet performance targets for entering employment, retaining employment, and entering post-secondary education. The program is required to submit a plan that describes what steps will be taken to meet state targets in these outcomes.

2. Certification and Professional Development indicators not met:

The local program has a system of recording/tracking certification requirements of staff.

The local program has a system in place for monitoring certification applications and renewals.

Teachers are meeting their certification requirements.

All professional staff is certified within the time frames required. The Crowder College AEL program currently employs nineteen teachers in eleven sites. According to the DESE’s Office of Educator Quality, one of those teachers failed to maintain current certification. The teacher had been previously AEL certified for a three-year period of time, which expired on July 1, 2006. Since that time, the teacher has been working in the program without official certification.

The state AEL program requires that any individual providing instruction to students enrolled in the AEL program must be DESE certified as an AEL instructor. If an instructor is not properly certified, all costs associated with this individual could be considered disallowed if DESE has reimbursed the program for these costs. The program is required to:

for all costs associated with this individual reimbursed by DESE AEL, submit an accounting of those costs for the period of time during which the individual was not certified. This includes salary, benefits, travel expenses, and any other expense associated with this individual. Please be sure to include in the accounting all grants funded by DESE AEL that may have been used to fund costs associated with this teacher, e.g. AEL, EL/Civics, etc. See Local AEL Program Director’s Guide, page 1-3 ,

submit an explanation how this oversight had occurred for so many years,

submit documentation indicating that the program’s records of teacher certifications and expiration dates have been cross-checked with state certification records,

submit a plan to ensure that accurate records of teacher certifications are maintained, and

submit a document for state AEL office staff review of a system that tracks all the certification requirements established by DESE for AEL teacher certification.

3. Assessment indicators not met:

The administration of the assessment is being followed according to the Missouri AEL State Assessment Policy.

Program that has students who are post-tested before the recommended hours specified in the Missouri AEL Assessment Policy should show documentation of academic progress or informal assessments.

A. Through a review of testing data entered into ACES, the review team noted that post-tests

were occurring before the recommended hours of instruction had occurred. More than half of the post-tests administered in the current fiscal year would be considered “early” post-tests.

A post-test is considered “early” if the test is administered before 40 hours of instruction for students of all ESL levels and ABE Levels 1-4, and before 30 hours of instruction for students in ASE Levels 5-6. If a post-test is administered before the recommended hours, the Missouri AEL State Assessment Policy states that “the local program will be required to provide documentation showing mastery of the applicable benchmarks prior to the [early] post-testing and any additional reasons for post-testing outside the policy.”

During the review, the requirement of documenting early post-testing was discussed, and suggestions were made to the program director for establishing a local procedure to document the early post-testing of a student.

The program must submit a statement of policy regarding early post-testing. The program must also develop or adapt and submit a form to be included in the student folder that documents the reason for exemption from the early post-test policy. An example of a form is included with this letter. (See attached document.)

B. The publisher’s guidelines state that a TABE test form may not be re-administered to a student for six months, and the Missouri AEL State Assessment Policy requires 120 hours of instruction to occur before the same test form and level is re-used with a student. These standards are in place to avoid a “practice effect” which could produce invalid test results. In a sampling of ACES test data, it was noted that identical test forms and levels were re-used to assess students in several instances, and in those instances, the required conditions were not satisfied.

The program is required to submit a plan for ensuring that conditions stated in the state assessment policy for re-administering an identical test form and level have been met before that test form and level is re-used with a student.

C. Standardized tests require testing procedures that remain constant in all administrations. During the review, a teacher reported to a reviewer that they were discussing the test items that the student had missed after the test was completed, and it was noted at another site that testing time was not being closely and accurately monitored. These practices are violations of standardized testing protocol.

The program is required to submit a plan to ensure that the publishers’ guidelines and

the state assessment policy are followed in the administration of standardized tests. 4. Learning Disabilities indicator not met:

Have a written plan describing what processes will be used to serve students with special learning needs (adults with learning difficulties/disabilities).

The program did not have a written plan. The program is required to develop a policy on serving students with Learning Disabilities, and to publish that policy in the Program Handbook to be utilized by all teachers.

COMMENTS

1. Program Data: Crowder College AEL achieved an overall progression rate of fifty percent in the

previous fiscal year, making the program one of the 38 Missouri AEL programs that met the state target of 45% for overall progression. The program also met targets for pre-testing, persistence, and post-testing. The program is to be commended for the accomplishment of these statistical benchmarks that indicate strong fundamentals in program administration.

2. Program Administration:

A. Through a review of ACES data entry, questions came up regarding the tracking of student hours for the testing window, especially when a student moves from one class to another within the program. The ACES data entry person stated that sometimes students arrive in a new class without sharing that they have been previously enrolled in another class. Therefore, the teacher administers a new pretest, which appears in ACES as a post-test due to the prior testing done in the previous class. The program has been reporting only hours in the current class in the “hours at testing” box.

The proper accounting of these hours is outlined in the ACES Training Manual. To clarify, the program should report a cumulative total of all AEL instructional hours that have occurred since the pre-test in the “hours at testing” box, and this is regardless of which actual classroom that the instruction occurred in. In other words, the test data moves with the student, and the previous pre-test results should be communicated to the new teacher and should continue to be used for prescriptive purposes.

The program is asked to describe procedures that will be put in place to prevent the “re-pre-testing” of students that change from one class to another. Furthermore, explain how teachers will access and use the pre-test and progress plan from the previous class to facilitate continuity and consistency in instruction. Response required.

B. It was noted that the Program Handbook had several areas that could be more thorough

and inclusive of current AEL Policies and Procedures, and the program is asked to review and revise the document to ensure accurate, up-to-date, and complete information for program staff. This would include guidelines for assessment and a written policy for serving students with learning disabilities. Additionally, the review team recommends that the program schedule a meeting with all staff involved in the administration of assessment instruments and review the Missouri State AEL Assessment Policy. All AEL classrooms should have a copy of the updated Program Handbook and most recent Missouri State AEL Assessment Policy document.

3. Certification and Professional Development: Performance-based teacher evaluations are a

requirement of the AEL program. The new program director shared a new format for conducting those evaluations, replacing a self-reporting form that would have been marginally acceptable. Ms. DeNisco is to be commended for her foresight in instituting this improvement during the short period of time that she has assumed leadership of the program.

4. Curriculum and Instruction: Throughout all student and teacher interviews and classroom

observations, an attitude of caring, enthusiasm, and purpose toward goals was prevalent. This

positive learning environment came across as a strength of the program. The review team challenged the director to use this positive focus to move the program toward standardization and quality control from classroom to classroom in the program. With nearly twenty teachers at eleven sites in a four-county area, the program director faces a challenge to communicate and effect changes at the classroom level.

During the review, logistical issues were noted, for instance, students signing out at the same

time that they signed in on the attendance sheet at the beginning of the class period. The degree of feedback from teachers indicated in the student folder varied from classroom to classroom, being minimal in some cases. Student folders in ESL classrooms did not contain prescriptive information in the form of progress plans. The learning styles or learning differences screening tools appeared in some student folders but not others. Some classes operate on open entry/open exit policies, others begin with an orientation period. The program presented a Program Improvement Plan that focused on managed intake, and the implementation of this plan should address some of these issues. Ms. DeNisco comes to the program with a strong instructional background, and she is urged to forge ahead as an instructional leader to standardize an effective, high quality learning experience for each Crowder College AEL student.

5. Fiscal Review: An excellent sense of teamwork existed between Sheri Swift, Administrative

Assistant, Program Supervisor Tiffany Slinkard, and Juli DeNisco, who took the helm as the new director of the program just one month prior to the review. Sheri has served the Crowder College AEL program for over twelve years, the past five of which she has been the Administrative Assistant. During the fiscal review, she exhibited a thorough knowledge and and attention to detail in tracking and documenting all fiscal matters related to the program, including multiple funding sources.

When the timeline for a newly awarded grant source (WorkKeys) did not align with the

college’s fiscal management timeline, the team worked together to manage the situation in a fiscally responsible manner. While explaining this methodology to the review team took the whole team and a little time to accomplish, the conclusion of the reviewers was that the challenge was managed accurately and responsibly.

The program is to be commended for this excellent teamwork in managing the fiscal resources

of the program during transitions of leadership and changes in funding structures.

Program 8

FINDINGS 1. Program Data indicators not met:

Program is meeting or exceeding the post-test benchmark of 60% for the previous year.

Program shows consistent improvement in meeting academic targets and GED, post-secondary, and employment goal attainments for the previous two years to within 5% of the established targets.

A. The post-test measure describes the number of students that have been enrolled in the

program for more than twelve hours, have persisted through their instructional progress plan, and have taken a post-test. For 2011, the Caruthersville program had a post-test rate of 43%, and the post-test rate for the current fiscal year is 52%. This indicates an improvement in the program’s ability to motivate students to attend for the period of time necessary to achieve the significant educational gain necessary to take a post-test, however the number still falls short of the state’s target of 60%.

The program is required to submit a plan for achieving the state’s target rate.

B. Data for the outcome measures of postsecondary and employment goal attainments are not available for the Caruthersville program, as these are long-term measures and the program has not been in place long enough to generate this information. However, statistics on GED attainment of program participants is available and pertinent. This is a calculation of the number of students who actually attained their GED compared to those who stated GED attainment as a goal. For the previous fiscal year, the Caruthersville AEL program had a GED attainment rate of 50%, while the state’s target was 66%.

The program is required to submit a plan for achieving the state’s target rate.

2. Program Administration indicators not met:

Check of student records shows data is being entered accurately.

Program has a process in place to track and count student hours for all the students in the program.

One activity during the review process is to check the methods used and accuracy of the program’s attendance records. Students attending AEL programs are required to sign in and sign out on class attendance sheets to document the amount of time they are present in class. When comparing actual sign-in sheets with the computer spreadsheet where attendance was compiled for the program’s recordkeeping purposes, it was noted that there were students signed in on the attendance sheets whose names did not appear on the

program’s spreadsheet. When asked about this, the director stated that certain clientele were attending class on a “trial” basis and were not officially enrolled. The mandatory enrollment criteria for federally funded AEL programs were reviewed with the program director, including the requirement that any and all students that attend for more than twelve hours will be officially enrolled in the local program through the ACES data management system and tracked in the program’s attendance records. Starting with the current month, the program is required to officially enroll any student that has attended for more than twelve hours, and to submit a statement certifying that this corrective action has been made.

3. Assessment indicators not met:

Program that has students who are post-tested before the recommended hours specified in the Missouri AEL Assessment Policy should show documentation of academic progress or informal assessments.

A. Through a review of testing data entered into ACES, the review team noted that post-tests

were occurring before the recommended hours of instruction had occurred.

A post-test is considered “early” if the test is administered before 40 hours of instruction for students at ABE Levels 1-4, and before 30 hours of instruction for students in ASE Levels 5-6. If a post-test is administered before the recommended hours, the Missouri AEL State Assessment Policy states that “the local program will be required to provide documentation showing mastery of the applicable benchmarks prior to the [early] post-testing and any additional reasons for post-testing outside the policy.” This policy had been discussed in detail at a recent director’s meeting, and Ms. Taylor indicated her awareness that the Caruthersville program needed to make changes to comply. The program must submit a statement of policy regarding early post-testing. The program must also develop or adapt and submit a form to be included in the student folder that documents the reason for the early post-test. An example of a form is included with this letter. (See enclosed document.)

COMMENTS

1. Program Data:

As has been previously noted, data on long-term outcomes is not available for a new program. Nevertheless, the director reported diligence in achieving these potential outcomes. She actively counsels students to pursue goals beyond their success in the AEL program, and tracks

all former students as to their progress on long-term goals. Referring to a list of students that had exited the program this year, she reported the goals, future plans, and accomplishments of each student. Ms. Taylor is to be commended for her purposeful attention to the long-term success of the program’s students.

2. Program Administration: A. Effective data collective and entry is ensured in the Caruthersville program by the hands-on

leadership style of the director. She conducts each monthly orientation session and leads goal-setting and pre-testing activities. She provides instructional support alongside her teaching staff during each class session, and acts as test proctor for all post-tests. Upon completion of the post-test, students receive their scores and progress plans and results are immediately entered into the ACES system by Ms. Taylor.

B. Ms. Taylor reported outstanding progress in enlisting support from members of her AEL Advisory Committee. A business partner on the committee expedites continuous press coverage in the form of articles and ads in the local newspaper and public service announcements on the local radio and television stations. Other members of the committee represent local service agencies and frequently refer clients to the program. Ms. Taylor also meets regularly with the local probation and parole officers to report on their clients’ progress in the AEL program.

Furthermore, Ms. Taylor offers particularly strong leadership due to her life-long roots in

the community. This is tremendously helpful in recruiting students for the program and making them feel comfortable in the initial orientation period. She states that she has personally known most AEL students all of their lives.

3. Certification and Professional Development: Annual performance-based teacher evaluations are a requirement of the AEL program, and

Ms. Taylor reported that she would be adapting a form for this used by the host agency. It is required that the program conduct these evaluations of the two members of the teaching staff before the end of the current fiscal year.

4. Curriculum and Instruction: When reviewing student folders, it was noted that the program is successfully utilizing the

Test-Mate software that generates prescriptive progress plans based on TABE test results. The program has made this improvement since a technical assistance visit earlier in the year.

As part of the review of student folders, the staff was asked by the review team to improve the

documentation of teacher monitoring of student progress plans. Following that discussion, the teaching staff devised a form to be included in student folders. On the form, students will record their assignments and teachers would monitor the work and sign off to document the successful completion of those assignments.

A particular strength that was noted in the Caruthersville classroom was the varied

instructional strategies that the teachers sited as part of their daily classroom operations. They described group lessons, peer tutoring, web-based computer assisted learning, and individualized study. The program is to be commended for their utilization of multiple methods of instructing students.

5. Fiscal Review: Noting that adequate funding was available for the current fiscal year, Ms. Taylor has

scheduled a day class to be held this summer for Caruthersville students. Ms. Taylor will also use AEL moneys to provide funds for child care expenses for parents of young children to attend this class. The Caruthersville superintendent was highly supportive of this additional class, and hopes to continue day classes in the coming school year. Superintendent Bullington indicated that in the coming school year, she would like to manage staffing to relieve the director of her current district duties so that she will be available in the afternoons to facilitate an afternoon day class.

Ms. Taylor is asked to submit her plan to document the day care expenses of the program’s

students for state office approval. During the fiscal review, it was noted that expenses for the director to attend the state

director’s conference had been charged to Category I: Instruction, and the nature of this meeting requires it to be charged to Category II: Administrative. Furthermore, the only moneys budgeted to Category II: Administrative were in the sub-category of salary and benefits. Travel expenses would be considered purchased services.

As attendance at these director’s conferences is vital to Ms. Taylor’s ability to direct the local

AEL program, the problem of properly funding the trips was discussed with Ms. Davis, the bookkeeper, and Ms. Bullington, Caruthersville Superintendent of Schools. It was noted that $3,000 that was budgeted for clerical salary and benefits had not been tapped in the current or previous fiscal year, and the review team suggests that these funds should be transferred to the Purchased Services area of Category II to allow money for director’s travel expenses.

The local program is asked to correct the accounting of previous director’s travel expenses on

their next month’s Excel expense reporting form. In addition, funds should be properly allocated in next year’s budget for future such expenses. Response required.

The fiscal review noted that previous errors noted in a technical assistance visit had been

corrected.