1. Background/Trend Data
   (for reporting period July 1, 2002 through June 30, 2003. Use Attachments 2 and 3 when completing this cell.):

• Definition of Need/Resource Capacity category of school districts: (See Appendix 38).
• Definitions of 1999 and 2000 Cohorts: (See Appendices 34 and 35).

Participation and Performance on Large-Scale Assessments

• Participation of Students with Disabilities in Grades 4 and 8 ELA and Math assessments:
  • Statewide (Public and Charter Schools) in 2001-02 and 2002-03: (See Appendix 24).
  • By High Need school districts and Average or Low Need school districts: (See Appendix 53).
  • By Big Five Cities and other districts, not including the Big Five Cities: (See Appendix 53).
• Performance of Students with Disabilities on Grades 4 and 8 ELA and Math
  • By Statewide at each level: (See Appendices 25, 26, 27, 28).
  • By Need/Resource Capacity at Levels 2-4, 3-4 and Level 4: (See Appendices 45, 47, 49, 51).
  • By Need/Resource Capacity at Level 3-4, general education student’s performance compared with students with disabilities performance: (See Appendices 46, 48, 50, 52).
• Participation of Students with Disabilities on five Regents examinations:
  • Statewide (Public and Charter Schools) on English Regents examinations: (See Appendix 29).
  • Statewide (Public and Charter Schools) on Sequential Mathematics, Course I and Math A examinations: (See Appendix 30).
  • Statewide (Public and Charter Schools) on Global Studies and Global History and Geography examinations: (See Appendix 31).
  • Statewide (Public and Charter Schools) on U.S. History and Government: (See Appendix 32).
  • Statewide (Public and Charter Schools) on Biology and Living Environment: (See Appendix 33).
• Participation and Performance on Regents examinations in High N/RC and Average/Low N/RC school districts and by Big Five and other school districts: (See Appendix 54).
• Performance of Students with Disabilities on selected Regents examinations:
  • By High N/RC school districts and Average or Low N/RC school districts: (See Appendix 54).
  • By Big Five Cities and other districts, not including the Big Five Cities: (See Appendix 54).
• Participation and Performance on Regents Examinations by Three Cohorts of Students with Disabilities After Four Years of High School:
  • Statewide (See Appendices 36 and 37).
  • By High N/RC school districts and Average or Low N/RC school districts: (See Appendix 55).
  • By Big Five Cities and other school districts: (See Appendix 55).
• Enrollment of students with disabilities in the Large Five Cities, compared to rest of the state. (See Appendix 57).
• Percent of students with disabilities participating in English Regents examination in the Large Five Cities, compared to the percent of students with disabilities residing in the Large Five Cities: (See Appendix 58).

2. Targets
   (for reporting period July 1, 2002 through June 30, 2003):

• Increasing percentages of students with disabilities will participate in regular State examinations. In addition, less than 2 percent of all students will participate in the New York State Alternate Assessment.
• Increasing percentages of students with disabilities will score at or above Level 3 and decreasing percentages of students will perform at Level 1 on the Elementary-Level and Middle-Level English Language Arts and Mathematics examinations. Increasing percentages of students with disabilities will pass Regents examinations.

3. Explanation of Progress or Slippage
   (for reporting period July 1, 2002 through June 30, 2003):

• Grade 4 English Language Arts Assessment:
  The performance of students with disabilities improved at all levels up until 2002, however, declined in 2003. In 2003, 22.6 percent of students with disabilities performed at proficient levels (Levels 3 and 4) compared to 29.7 percent in 2002.
• Grade 4 Mathematics Assessment:
  The performance of students with disabilities continues to improve at all levels.
  In 2003 there was significant improvement; 47.8 percent of students with disabilities performed at proficient levels (Levels 3 and 4), compared to 37.2 percent in 2002.
• Grade 8 English Language Arts:
  The performance of students with disabilities on this assessment improved in 2002, compared to earlier years, however, declined in 2003. In 2003, 61.6 percent of students with disabilities performed at Levels 2 and above and 7.9 percent at Levels 3 and above compared with 72.3 percent at Level 2 and above and 9.2 percent at Level 3 and above in 2002.
• Grade 8 Mathematics:
  The performance of students with disabilities on this assessment continues to improve. In 2003, 51.5 and 16.4 percent of students with disabilities performed at Levels 2 and above and Levels 3 and above, respectively, compared to 48.4 and 14.7 percent at Levels 2 and above and Levels 3 and above, respectively, in 2002.
• English Regents examination:
  The numbers of students with disabilities tested continues to increase. Since 1997, there has been a 269 percent increase in the numbers of students with disabilities tested. Of the students tested in 2003, 59 percent achieved a score of 55-100. More than twice as many students passed the examination than took the examination in 1997.
• Mathematics Regents examination:
  Compared to the previous year when 13,016 students took this examination, in 2003, 16,826 students with disabilities took this examination. Of the students tested in 2003, 45.8 percent achieved a score of 55-100. More students passed the Mathematics Regents examination in 2003 than took the examination in 1997.
  
  See the brief narrative statements that are attached to each data table and chart listed and linked under Background/Trend Data section of this probe.

Technical Assistance Networks
As indicated for previous probes in this section, and in the General Supervision Cluster, many of the initiatives summarized in the executive summaries for these clusters apply to numerous clusters and probes. Such is the case with this probe. Many of the activities associated with the Focused Reviews, the Comprehensive System of Personnel Development (CSPD) Process, the Special Education Training and Resource Center (SETRC) network, Regional School Support Center (RSSC) networks, and preservice quality initiatives associated with the Higher Education Support Center (HESC) will have both short and long term impact on the performance of students with disabilities on large-scale assessments. Please refer to the executive summaries of those clusters for additional information.

The SETRC and RSSC networks are the premier resources supported by the NYSED to “close the gap” in performance for students with disabilities. In 2002-03, the SED supported 42 SETRC programs with a combined budget of over $15 million. Each SETRC program was required to “target” a minimum of five low-performing districts based on key performance indicators (which include participation in and performance on large-scale assessments). Eighty percent of the effort for each SETRC program must be directed to single, targeted districts based on needs documented in the district’s CSPD Plan. All of the Big Five Cities were supported with separate SETRC Programs. New York City (NYC) was funded at $4.6 million and supported approximately 30 Professional Development Specialists (PDS). Each NYC PDS was required to target their efforts on five separate schools. Outside of NYC, the SETRC Program targeted approximately 200 districts. Progress in all targeted districts is monitored through the Targeted District Narrative Report (TDNR), which is developed and updated regularly by the SETRC Network.

The Regional School Support Centers (RSSC), established in 2000-01, are also a primary strategy to address low performing schools.

Reading and Math Initiative
The Reading and Math Improvement Initiative, which began in 1998, demonstrates how districts, whose students are performing significantly below grade level, can be assisted to make systemic changes that close the gap in reading and math performance between students with disabilities and their nondisabled peers. These strategies for change included developing instructional leaders; aligning curriculum and instruction to the learning standards, establishing a comprehensive district-wide reading policy; using data to drive instruction; providing job-embedded and focused professional development for all teachers, and implementing instructional methods that are grounded in the reading and math research.

• 120 school buildings participated in this initiative from 37 of the lowest performing school districts in the State. The achievement in these buildings was significantly lower than the statewide average and lower than that of comparable districts with the same need resource capacity. In 2003, data indicate that 2/3 of the participating school districts are demonstrating significant improvements in the reading performance of their students with disabilities. Almost half of these significantly improved school districts were publicly recognized by having buildings in the initiative identified in SED’s list of Most Improved Schools. What has been learned from these districts has been shared with EMSC and has been incorporated into the Reading First application. VESID will be publishing a final report on this initiative in 2004.

Research Study to Assess Impact of Graduation Requirements on Students with Disabilities
In 2002-2003 a contract was awarded to research the following:

• Impact of taking of multiple Regents examinations on results for students with disabilities;
• Exploration of the possibility of component retesting for certain Regents examinations for students with disabilities; and
• The characteristics of students with disabilities who are not able to pass Regents or Regents Competency Tests but who are not appropriate for the New York State Alternate Assessment for Students with Severe Disabilities.

4. Projected Targets
   (for next reporting period July 1, 2003 through June 30, 2004):

• Increasing percentages of students with disabilities will participate in regular State examinations. In addition, less than 2 percent of all students will participate in the New York State Alternate Assessment.
• Increasing percentages of students with disabilities will score at or above Level 3 and decreasing percentages of students will perform at Level 1 on the Elementary-Level and Middle-Level English Language Arts and Mathematics examinations. Increasing percentages of students with disabilities will pass Regents examinations.

5. Future Activities
6. Projected Timelines and Resources
   (for next reporting period July 1, 2003 through June 30, 2004 and on going):

VESID will revise its strategic plan and associated key performance indicators, targets and benchmarks as part of a continuous improvement process and will reflect the new plan in the next edition of this report.

Technical Assistance Networks
The 2003-04 Special Education and Training Center (SETRC) program was modified to reflect the key role of BOCES District Superintendents and Superintendents of the Big Five Cities in providing leadership to targeted districts/schools. The BOCES District Superintendent became responsible for approving Comprehensive System of Personnel Development (CSPD) plans for target districts, approving upfront agreements, and approving Targeted District Narrative Reports (TDNR) prior to submission to the Department. In essence, the District Superintendent became a full and active partner with VESID in school improvement efforts. VESID also reevaluated and adjusted the method used to determine funding levels for regions based on several key demographic characteristics (# of students with disabilities, #districts, #schools). The allocation for SETRC was ultimately increased. VESID plans to continue the SETRC network and recently released competitive RFP’s to fund up to 42 centers statewide. The NYC RFP was issued separately. The resultant contracts will be for five years through the 2009 program year. The terms and conditions of the RFP are based on VESID's successful experiences redirecting the network over the past several years.

In 2003-04, the Regional School Support Center (RSSC) network was extended through a five-year competitive RFP. Prior to the competition, the regions covered by the network were revised from ten to seven while still maintaining statewide coverage and the focus was shifted to providing technical assistance to designated districts failing to make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) under NCLB. As in the previous version of the RSSC network, the general and special education partnership is critical to the model and was considered a key component of the RFP. As with the SETRC network, RSSC’ s focus on low-performing districts with an emphasis on general education performance. However, all RSSC’s include a special education specialist on staff, and address special education needs within a school-based planning process. The RSSC and SETRC networks work in partnership.

Reading and Math Initiative

• VESID is an active partner in SED planning teams to design the approach for improving schools under the Reading First grant application process, the Math Improvement project and the Math and Science Partnerships, ensuring that students with disabilities and special education teachers benefit from these resources. Improvement strategies that benefit students with disabilities are being incorporated in the school improvement efforts led by the Regional School Support Centers, the State Improvement Grant and the Special Education Technical Resource Centers' technical assistance processes.

• VESID is also initiating an incentive grant program to help preschool special education programs to improve their preliteracy instruction so that students with disabilities entering Kindergarten will be ready to learn.

• VESID will be publishing a final report on the results of the Reading and Math Improvement Initiative in 2004.

• An RFP will disseminate and award IDEA discretionary funds in 2004 to improve math results for students with disabilities statewide through intensive technical assistance from staff with expertise in math instruction to targeted districts statewide.

Research Study to Assess Impact of Graduation Requirements on Students with Disabilities

• Complete the analysis and review results of the Research Study to Assess Impact of Graduation Requirements on Students with Disabilities and determine the impact of these results on State level policy.

Top of Page