Overview of the Annual Performance Report Development:
See Overview of the Development of the Annual Performance Report on page 1.
Monitoring Priority: FAPE in the LRE |
Indicator #3: Participation and performance of children with disabilities on statewide assessments:
A. Percent of districts that have a disability subgroup that meets the State’s minimum “n” size meeting the State’s AYP objectives for progress for the disability subgroup.
B. Participation rate for children with IEPs in a regular assessment with no accommodations; regular assessment with accommodations; alternate assessment against grade level standards; alternate assessment against alternate achievement standards.
C. Proficiency rate for children with IEPs against grade level standards and alternate achievement standards.
(20 U.S.C. 1416 (a)(3)(A))
Measurement: A. Percent = [(# of districts meeting the State’s AYP objectives for progress for the disability subgroup (children with IEPs)) divided by the (total # of districts that have a disability subgroup that meets the State’s minimum “n” size in the State)] times 100. B. Participation rate = a. # of children with IEPs in assessed grades; b. # of children with IEPs in regular assessment with no accommodations (percent = [(b) divided by (a)] times 100); c. # of children with IEPs in regular assessment with accommodations (percent = [(c) divided by (a)] times 100); d. # of children with IEPs in alternate assessment against grade level achievement standards (percent = [(d) divided by (a)] times 100); and e. # of children with IEPs in alternate assessment against alternate achievement standards (percent = [(e) divided by (a)] times 100). Account for any children included in a but not included in b, c, d, or e above. Overall Percent = [(b + c + d + e) divided by (a)]. C. Proficiency rate = a. # of children with IEPs in assessed grades; b. # of children with IEPs in assessed grades who are proficient or above as measured by the regular assessment with no accommodations (percent = [(b) divided by (a)] times 100); c. # of children with IEPs in assessed grades who are proficient or above as measured by the regular assessment with accommodations (percent = [(c) divided by (a)] times 100); d. # of children with IEPs in assessed grades who are proficient or above as measured by the alternate assessment against grade level achievement standards (percent = [(d) divided by (a)] times 100); and e. # of children with IEPs in assessed grades who are proficient or above as measured against alternate achievement standards (percent = [(e) divided by (a)] times 100). Account for any children included in a but not included in b, c, d, or e above. Overall Percent = [(b + c + d + e) divided by (a)]. New York State Notes:
|
Target:
FFY |
Measurable and Rigorous Target |
2005 |
AYP: There will be an increase annually in the number and percent of school districts that make AYP for the students with disabilities subgroup in grades 3-8 ELA, grades 3-8 math, high school ELA and high school math. Participation: 95 percent in grades 3-8 and high school in ELA and math. Performance: The State’s average
performance on the performance indices (PI) which represent the percent
of students with disabilities performing at Level 2 (basic proficiency)
and above plus the percent of students with disabilities performing at
Level 3 (proficiency) and above will be as follows: |
Actual Target Data for FFY 2005:
The participation rate of students with disabilities in 2005-06
school year in Grades 3-8 ELA was 95 percent, in Grades 3-8 math, 96 percent,
in high school ELA, 90 percent and in high school math, 91 percent. The State
met its target of 95 percent participation rate for students with disabilities
in Grades 3-8 ELA and Grades 3-8 math, but not in high school ELA and math.
In 2005-06, the State developed four performance indices (PI). The performance
indices represent the percent of students scoring at Levels 3-4 plus the percent
of students scoring at Levels 2-4. These four indices replaced the six indices
that were used to measure performance on State assessments in Grades 4, 8 and
high school ELA and math. The State average performance for the students with
disabilities subgroup on these indices was as follows:
Grades 3-8 ELA: 91
Grades 3-8 Math: 100
High School ELA: 114
High School Math: 124
In the 2005-06 school year, 57.6 percent of school districts that were required
to make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) made AYP in every grade and subject
in which they had sufficient number of students with disabilities. The State
met its 2005-06 target of 55.9 percent of school districts making AYP.
AYP for Students with Disabilities Subgroup |
||
FFY |
Number of School Districts Required to Make AYP (had minimum of 40 students for participation and 30 students for performance |
Percent of School Districts that made AYP in all the Subjects they were Required to. |
2004 (2004-05) |
290 |
48.3% |
2005 (2005-06) |
670 |
57.6% |
AYP for Students with Disabilities Subgroup by Need/Resource Capacity Category of School Districts in 2005-06 |
||
Need/Resource Capacity Category of School Districts |
Number of School Districts Required to Make AYP (had minimum of 40 students for participation and 30 students for performance |
Percent of School Districts that made AYP in all the Subjects they were Required to |
New York City |
33 |
9.1% |
Large Four Cities |
4 |
0.0% |
Urban-Suburban High Need Districts |
45 |
11.1% |
Rural High Need Districts |
137 |
66.4% |
Average Need Districts |
325 |
60.0% |
Low Need Districts |
126 |
73.0% |
Participation Rate for Students with Disabilities Subgroup |
||||
Assessment |
Enrollment in 2004-05 (Seniors in High School) |
Participation Rate in 2004-05 School Year |
Enrollment in 2005-06 (Seniors in High School) |
Participation Rate in 2005-06 School Year |
Grade 4 ELA |
30,922 |
96% |
||
Grade 4 Math |
30,567 |
97% |
||
Grade 8 ELA |
35,651 |
95% |
||
Grade 8 Math |
35,266 |
95% |
||
Grade 3-8 ELA |
198,410 |
95% |
||
Grade 3-8 Math |
198,074 |
96% |
||
High School ELA |
16,686 |
89.0% |
17,321 |
90% |
High School Math |
16,686 |
90% |
17,321 |
91% |
Performance Index for the Students with Disabilities Subgroup |
|||||||
Assessment |
2005-06 Performance |
2005-06 Standard |
Students with Disabilities Made AYP in 2005-06 |
2006-07 Safe- Harbor Target |
|||
Continuously Enrolled Students with Disabilities in Grades 3-8 and in 2002 Accountability Cohort in High School (HS) |
NYS PI |
Effective AMO |
Safe- Harbor Target |
Met Third Indicator for Safe Harbor |
|||
Grades 3-8 ELA |
184,493 |
91 |
122 |
104 |
Yes |
No |
102 |
Grades 3-8 Math |
183,411 |
100 |
86 |
Not Applicable |
Not Applicable |
Yes |
110 |
HS Eng. 2002 accountability cohort |
19,079 |
114 |
154 |
114 |
No |
No |
123 |
HS Math 2002 accountability cohort |
19,079 |
124 |
146 |
117 |
No |
No |
132 |
Discussion of Improvement Activities Completed FFY 2005
In order to focus the State’s technical assistance efforts and improve performance of students with disabilities in school districts that are the lowest performing school districts for students with disabilities, during the 2006-07 school year, the State notified 107 school districts (or 75 school districts if New York City is counted as a single district) based on their 2004-05 school year data that they were designated as in “need of assistance” or “in need of intervention”. The designations were based on graduation rates or drop-out rates of students with disabilities. Six of the 107 school districts did not have sufficient numbers of students with disabilities in the 2001 total cohort to have a valid graduation or drop-out rate, so they were identified based on the performance of students with disabilities on grades 4 and 8 ELA and math assessments.
On October 5, 2006, the Commissioner of Education held a press conference and issued a press release to publicly announce this list of school districts. See press release at http://www.oms.nysed.gov/press/specialed100506.htm and public posting of list of school districts at http://www.vesid.nysed.gov/specialed/swd-100506/swd-list.html.
See explanation under Indicator #1.
The criteria used for designations specifically related to this indicator were as follows:
2001 total cohort of at least 30 students with disabilities;
School districts with at least 30 continuously enrolled students with disabilities whose PI in 2004-05 on two State assessments for students with disabilities was below the State’s PI and who did not make adequate yearly progress under NCLB for the students with disabilities subgroup. (School districts with graduation rates above 52% for students with disabilities are not identified, regardless of their performance on State assessments.) The State’s PIs in 2004-05 were as follows:
- Grade 4 ELA: 102
- Grade 4 Math: 141
- Grade 8 ELA: 85
- Grade 8 Math: 82.
School districts that did not have at least 30 students with disabilities in the 2001 total cohort or 30 continuously enrolled students with disabilities in the tested grades in 2004-05 school year but had at least 30 continuously enrolled students tested in grade 4 ELA and grade 8 ELA combined, and whose performance on at least two of the State assessments listed below (averaged over three years) was significantly below the State average in 2004-05 were identified “in need of assistance”. Significantly below the State average was defined as:
VESID plans to make the identification of lowest performing school districts for students with disabilities an annual process and will use the best criteria that are consistent with SPP goals and with the NCLB measures.
Explanation of Progress or Slippage that occurred for FFY 2005:
The State met its target of 95 percent participation rate
for students with disabilities in Grades 3-8 ELA and Grades 3-8 math, but not
in high school ELA and math. In high school ELA, the participation rate improved
from 89 percent in 2004-05 to 90 percent in 2005-06 and from 90 percent in
math to 91 percent. It is anticipated that the high school participation rate
will improve once the State develops appropriate alternative State assessments
for some students with disabilities who cannot participate in the regular assessments
and for whom the New York State Alternate Assessment is not appropriate.
In 2005-06, the State developed four performance indices (PI). The performance
indices represent the percent of students scoring at Levels 3-4 plus the percent
of students scoring at Levels 2-4. These four indices replaced the six indices
that were used to measure performance on State assessments in Grades 4, 8 and
high school ELA and math. The State average performance for the students with
disabilities subgroup on these indices was as follows:
Grades 3-8 ELA: 91
Grades 3-8 Math: 100
High School ELA: 114
High School Math: 124
Since the grades 3-8 PI scores were established for the first time in 2005-06
school year, it is not possible to evaluate the State’s progress compared
to the previous year. However, in high school ELA, the PI score improved from
104 to 114 and high school math PI improved from 108 to 124. The State met
its 2005-06 targets since the State’s targets were the State average
PIs.
In the 2005-06 school year, 57.6 percent of school districts that were required
to make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) made AYP in every grade and subject in
which they had sufficient number of students with disabilities. The State met
its 2005-06 target of 55.9 percent of school districts making AYP. There was
an increase from 290 school districts in 2004-05 to 670 school districts in 2005-06
in the number required to demonstrate AYP. This increase is due to many more
school districts having sufficient enrollment of students with disabilities in
Grades 3-8 combined, compared to enrollment in Grades 4 or 8 only.
Revisions, with Justification, to Proposed Targets/ Improvement Activities/ Timelines/ Resources for FFY 2005
The targets established for the three measures relating to the participation
and performance of students with disabilities on statewide assessments
use the same data that are used for accountability as described in the
State’s approved plan under NCLB.
FFY |
Measurable and Rigorous Target |
2005 |
AYP: 55.9 percent of school districts that are required to make AYP for the students with disabilities subgroup will make AYP in grades 3-8 ELA, grades 3-8 math, high school ELA and high school math. Participation: 95 percent in grades 3-8 and high school in ELA and math. Performance: The State’s average
performance on the performance indices (PI) which represent the percent
of students with disabilities performing at Level 2 (basic proficiency)
and above plus the percent of students with disabilities performing at
Level 3 (proficiency) and above will be as follows: |
2006 |
AYP: 57 percent of school districts that are required to make AYP for the students with disabilities subgroup will make AYP in grades 3-8 ELA, grades 3-8 math, high school ELA and high school math. Participation: 95 percent in grades 3-8 and high school in ELA and math. Performance: The State’s average
performance on the performance indices (PI) which represent the percent
of students with disabilities performing at Level 2 (basic proficiency)
and above plus the percent of students with disabilities performing at
Level 3 (proficiency) and above will be as follows: |
2007 |
AYP: 58 percent of school districts that are required to make AYP for the students with disabilities subgroup will make AYP in grades 3-8 ELA, grades 3-8 math, high school ELA and high school math. Participation: 95 percent in grades 3-8 and high school in ELA and math. Performance: The State’s average performance
on the performance indices (PI) which represent the percent of students
with disabilities performing at Level 2 (basic proficiency) and above
plus the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 3
(proficiency) and above will be as follows: |
2008 |
AYP: 59 percent of school districts that are required to make AYP for the students with disabilities subgroup will make AYP in grades 3-8 ELA, grades 3-8 math, high school ELA and high school math. Participation: 95 percent in grades 3-8 and high school in ELA and math. Performance: The State’s average performance
on the performance indices (PI) which represent the percent of students
with disabilities performing at Level 2 (basic proficiency) and above
plus the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 3
(proficiency) and above will be as follows: |
2009 |
AYP: 61 percent of school districts that are required to make AYP for the students with disabilities subgroup will make AYP in grades 3-8 ELA, grades 3-8 math, high school ELA and high school math. Participation: 95 percent in grades 3-8 and high school in ELA and math. Performance: The State’s average performance
on the performance indices (PI) which represent the percent of students
with disabilities performing at Level 2 (basic proficiency) and above
plus the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 3
(proficiency) and above will be as follows: |
2010 |
AYP: 65 percent of school districts that are required to make AYP for the students with disabilities subgroup will make AYP in grades 3-8 ELA, grades 3-8 math, high school ELA and high school math. Participation: 95 percent in grades 3-8 and high school in ELA and math. Performance: The State’s average performance
on the performance indices (PI) which represent the percent of students
with disabilities performing at Level 2 (basic proficiency) and above
plus the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 3
(proficiency) and above will be as follows: |
Revisions to Improvement Activities/Timelines/Resources for FFY 2005:
See Indicator #1.