Sentences with phrase «made adequate yearly progress for»

U.S. Education Secretary Margaret Spellings announced on Aug. 4 that Alabama, Arkansas, Tennessee, and Utah will be allowed to let districts provide supplemental educational services, or SES, to eligible students whose Title I schools fail to make adequate yearly progress for two years.

Schools that fail to make Adequate Yearly Progress for six consecutive years are subject to the accountability provisions of No Child Left Behind.

Alternatively, children who choose to remain in low - performing schools are eligible for after - school and weekend tutoring once their school fails to make adequate yearly progress for three years» running.

For those of you who may not know, PI is a formal designation for Title I - funded schools that do not make Adequate Yearly Progress for two consecutive years.

Anderson was one of only two schools in the state to fail to make adequate yearly progress for three consecutive years.

Not exact matches

The No Child Left Behind Act requires that students in schools that fail to make «adequate yearly progress» for two years in a row be given the opportunity to transfer to another public school.

Schools that fail to make adequate yearly progress (meet achievement targets) for three consecutive years, even if it's just for a particular subgroup of students, must offer free tutoring to all students.

NCLB is most often characterized as having been implemented during this year, in part because states were required to use testing outcomes from the prior 2001 — 02 year as the starting point for determining whether a school was making adequate yearly progress (AYP) and to submit draft «workbooks» that described how school AYP status would be determined.

Meanwhile, the expectation that all schools will achieve this goal has created a trajectory of failure that guarantees a steady increase in the number of schools that are stigmatized for not making adequate yearly progress.

NCLB requires annual testing of students in reading and mathematics in grades 3 through 8 (and at least once in grades 10 through 12) and that states rate schools, both as a whole and for key subgroups, with regard to whether they are making adequate yearly progress (AYP) toward their state's proficiency goals.

• Twenty - seven D.C. schools faced restructuring for failing to make Adequate Yearly Progress, but when Rhee investigated, she says, «Most of the people I talked to were like, «What is restructuring?

It also required that all schools make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) to 100 percent proficiency in reading and math by 2014 and prescribed specific interventions for schools that failed to make AYP.

At the heart of both bills was a detailed formula for determining when a school is making «adequate yearly progress.»

For last school year, 187 Georgia schools did not make «adequate yearly progress» under federal law solely because they fell short of the required participation level.

Conservatives pointed to a legal requirement in an earlier appropriations law that created public - school choice after schools failed to make adequate yearly progress (AYP) for two years.

A Title I school that fails to make adequate yearly progress (AYP) for two consecutive years is considered a school in need of improvement under the No Child Left Behind Act.

Under the federal No Child Left Behind Act, Title I schools that fail to reach state goals for making adequate yearly progress must offer such tutoring to students from poor families.

One of the key reasons for a possible disconnect is the law's requirement that not only the entire school but also racial, ethnic, economic, and other subgroups within the school make adequate yearly progress.

This partially reflects the fact that most states had accepted the ideas that schools should be held responsible for student performance and that results from standardized tests should play a large role in determining consequences (to view the consequences for schools failing to make adequate yearly progress, see Figure 2).

Examples of such initiatives include the No Child Left Behind legislation in the United States, which required schools to demonstrate that they were making adequate yearly progress and provided escalating negative consequences for schools that were unable to do this; the creation and publication of league tables of «value - added» measures of school performance in England; proposals to introduce financial rewards for school improvement and performance pay tied to improved test results in Australia; and the encouragement of competition between schools under New Zealand's Tomorrow's Schools program.

Schools that failed to make «Adequate Yearly Progress» toward the 100 percent proficiency goal for each subgroup would face sanctions, such as reorganization or closure.

[23] The designated ESEA requirements that can be set aside in states that obtain such waivers include some of the most significant outcome accountability requirements, such as the requirement that states set performance standards for schools and LEAs aiming toward a goal of 100 percent student proficiency in reading and mathematics by the end of the 2013 - 14 school year and take a variety of specific actions with respect to all schools and districts that fail to make adequate yearly progress toward this goal.

the school or district has made adequate yearly progress on all applicable criteria and indicators in paragraphs (14) and (15) of this subdivision for two consecutive years.

In public schools, charter schools or school districts with fewer than 30 students subject to an accountability performance criterion set forth in paragraphs (14) and (15) of this subdivision, the commissioner shall use the weighted average of the current and prior school year's performance data for that criterion in order to make a determination of adequate yearly progress.

Except as provided in subparagraph (vi) of this paragraph, a local educational agency (LEA) that received funds under title I for two consecutive years during which the LEA did not make adequate yearly progress on all applicable criteria in paragraph (14) of this subdivision in a subject area, or all applicable indicators in subparagraphs (15)(i) through (iii) of this subdivision, or the indicator in subparagraph (15)(iv) of this subdivision, shall be identified for improvement under section 1116 (c) of the NCLB, 20 U.S.C. section 6316 (c) and shall be subject to the requirements therein (Public Law, section 107 - 110, section 1116 [c], 115 STAT.

To make adequate yearly progress, or AYP, under the federal law, schools and districts must meet annual targets for the percentage of students who score at least at the proficient level on state reading and mathematics tests, both for the student population as a whole and for certain subgroups of students.

• The requirements for adequate yearly progress and school improvement apply equally to high schools and elementary schools, yet it is not clear that they make as much sense at the secondary level.

Schools that have not made state - defined adequate yearly progress for two consecutive school years are identified as needing school improvement before the beginning of the next school year.

2001 brought passage of the No Child Left Behind Act, a momentous reauthorization of the ESEA, declaring not only that every single student should become «proficient» in math and reading, but also that every school in the land would have its performance reported, both school wide and for its student demographic subgroups, and that schools failing to make «adequate yearly progress» would face a cascade of sanctions and interventions.

When Hall came to Anderson, the school was one of only two schools in Nevada to have failed to make adequate yearly progress (AYP) for three consecutive years.

The act provides a «safe harbor» for schools whose total student populations make adequate yearly progress, but in which one or more subgroups fail to meet the target.

The No Child Left Behind Act prescribed sanctions for schools and districts failing to make «Adequate Yearly Progress,» and even under the waivers that most states have now obtained from NCLB's accountability provisions they must still show how they will take action on their lowest - performing schools.

Howell neglects to mention that among the 14 largest urban districts in Massachusetts, Worcester had the second highest percentage (68 percent) of schools meeting state targets for making «adequate yearly progress» under the law; the statewide average was 48 percent.

An article in the Oct. 25, 2006, issue of Education Week on charter schools in the District of Columbia («At Age 10, Booming D.C. Charters Feel «Growing Pains»») should have said that 118 out of 146 regular public schools in the city did not make adequate yearly progress under the No Child Left Behind Act for last school year.

For a school or district to make adequate yearly progress, both the overall student population and each subgroup of students — major racial and ethnic groups, children from low - income families, students with disabilities, and students with limited proficiency in English — must meet or exceed the target set by the state.

In her Nov. 22 letter (starts on page 6), Assistant Secretary of Education Deborah Delisle wrote, «The requirements to determine whether schools have made adequate yearly progress (AYP) and to identify schools for improvement, corrective action and restructuring have not been waived, and any State laws or regulations, including those related to AYP or school improvement status, are not affected by the waivers granted to your district.»

Under the law, for the first time, schools were required to test every student annually in math and reading in grades K - 8, and schools had to make «adequate yearly progress» — as measured by student test scores — or face increasingly heavy penalties.

All five schools failed to make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for several consecutive years, and — once in restructuring — had to chart a course to overhaul the way their schools operated.

Additionally, the scores that will be used to make determinations of «adequate yearly progress» (AYP) are too unreliable to use for this purpose.

Eight years after they found themselves lumped in with some of the lowest - performing schools in the state, Mobile County schools such as Mae Eanes Middle School and Grant Elementary are now regularly making Adequate Yearly Progress on state exams and have become turnaround models for educators around the country.

The school is not required by the state to make Adequate Yearly Progress under NCLB because students are often there for a short time period.

But it's also garnered lots of criticism for its focus on standardized test - scores and its system of rating schools according to whether they make «adequate yearly progress.»

Oak Brook Elementary is an A-rated school serving over 350 students from diverse backgrounds, but it struggles to make Adequate Yearly Progress in reading, as required by the No Child Left Behind Act, when student performances for Hispanics and English language learners are disaggregated.

Here's the critical point: Even if your school has been an A + school for years — if any of the 39 subgroups of students (learning disabilities, low readers, etc) fail to make adequate yearly progress, the entire school fails.

Just look at maybe one of the most important sections of the law: Section 1116 (b)(7)-- it provides for districts overseeing schools who don't make AYP two years straight to «replace the school staff who are relevant to the failure to make adequate yearly progress,» overhaul curriculum, or let parents send their kids to another school in the district.

One recent study, in fact, found that nearly one - third of states have lowered their academic proficiency standards in reading and mathematics to make it easier for schools to make adequate yearly progress under NCLB (Dillon, 2009).

By eviscerating No Child's Adequate Yearly Progress provisions, the administration also takes away real data on school performance, making it more difficult for families from being the lead decision - makers reformers need in order for overhauls to gain traction, and complicating the activities of researchers (including those doing state - by - state comparisons).

And so, five years ago, the district was flagged for not making federal benchmarks for adequate yearly progress (AYP).

Parent - student - teacher dialogues like this can provide an accountability forum for a high school campus that has not been making adequate yearly progress.

In 2002, Anderson Elementary, a preK — 6 school founded in 1886, was dubbed «In Need of Improvement» after failing for three years in a row to make the adequate yearly progress (AYP) required under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB).