Sentences with phrase «not make adequate yearly progress»

Though thin on the details of the waivers, U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan says too many schools will not make adequate yearly progress measurements this year, and the law needs to be overhauled.

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.

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.

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.

But an accompanying chart revealed that 12 of Dayton's 19 K — 8 charters did not make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP); 8 of the 10 charter high schools fell short of their AYP benchmark.

Central High did not make the Adequate Yearly Progress standard under the federal No Child Left Behind Act, and less than 20 percent of its students score «proficient» on state standardized math tests.

The reasons why were simple: we were not making Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) and we wanted to make significant academic gains with our students.

It's since been closed because of not making adequate yearly progress four years running,» he says.

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.

Any well - designed measuring stick should provide that kind of basic information, especially if it purports to identify schools that are or are not making Adequate Yearly Progress.

Acting upon the superintendent's recommendation, the SRC decided that the six schools should come under direct district control once again because they had not made Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP), as required by No Child Left Behind.

By considering subgroup performance data from 2001 - 2004, the research team sought to determine which schools, including those not making Adequate Yearly Progress, were, in fact, making significant progress toward closing the gap.

In Fairfax County, Dr. Eller helped transform a school that was not making adequate yearly progress, had low SES, and a high minority population through the implementation of professional learning communities, the use of data, and the refinement of teaching and learning strategies.

Not exact matches

In fact, the «safe harbor» provisions in NCLB mean that all schools do not have to meet fixed targets across the board each year, but only make some improvement in order to make adequate yearly progress.

Under the law, schools must show not only that their overall student body is making «adequate yearly progress» on state tests, but also that a sufficient percentage of certain subgroups of students are likewise proficient.

The students made progress — but not enough so the school met Safe Harbor or adequate yearly progress (AYP) as defined by the federal No Child Left Behind Act.

Instead, a school is evaluated according to whether or not its students are making Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) toward full proficiency by 2014.

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.

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.

Currently, about one - third of all public schools in the nation — more than 30,000 — have been stigmatized as failing because they did not make what the law calls «adequate yearly progress.»

• 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.

NCLB requires states to divide schools into those making «Adequate Yearly Progress» (AYP) toward the goal of having all of their students proficient in math and reading by 2014 and those that aren't.

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.»

If their request is granted, student scores on Smarter Balanced assessments this year would be reported to the U.S. Department of Education, as they will be to parents and schools in California, but would not be used to measure whether a school or district has made Adequate Yearly Progress.

Question: Under NCLB a school either makes Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) or it does not.

Schools couldn't score higher than a C if any one subgroup of students failed to make adequate yearly progress, or AYP.

My school is a Title 1 school under No Child Left Behind and did not make AYP (adequate yearly progress).

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.

If any one subgroup was underperforming, the feds wouldn't consider the school to have made «Adequate Yearly Progress.»

(Schools that don't make «Adequate Yearly Progress» or «AYP» under that law can face serious consequences.)

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.

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.

Those scores were out of line with those for the rest of the school; Stanton did not make «adequate yearly progress» in 2009.

Adequate yearly progress had not been made they said.

NCLB's rough measure of school performance has led to failing results for more and more schools: In New Mexico, 87 percent of schools did not make «adequate yearly progress» under the law this year.

In a letter written almost a year ago, 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.»

Not only did teachers notice a positive change in student behavior, but compared with schools that were not making adequate yearly academic progress under NCLB, schools that were meeting their annual academic targets also had a greater commitment to SELNot only did teachers notice a positive change in student behavior, but compared with schools that were not making adequate yearly academic progress under NCLB, schools that were meeting their annual academic targets also had a greater commitment to SELnot making adequate yearly academic progress under NCLB, schools that were meeting their annual academic targets also had a greater commitment to SEL.21

Under the law, schools that didn't make «adequate yearly progress» faced ever more draconian sanctions, including wholesale reorganization and closings.

Schools were deemed to have not made «Adequate Yearly Progress» if too many students in any sub-group — a minority group of sufficient size, students with disabilities, English language learners, the poor — failed either of the state tests in reading or math, in any grade.

The school has made adequate yearly progress in English / language arts but not yet in math.

Under the federal No Child Left Behind Act, school districts must make fundamental changes at schools that haven't made so - called «adequate yearly progress» for six years.

That announcement comes too late for 319 Indiana schools that could have earned A's or B's from the state this year if they hadn't failed to make Adequate Yearly Progress under NCLB.

Caillier (2007) states that while many states were not on track towards making adequate yearly progress (AYP) in both reading and mathematics, there have been recorded improvements in student achievement in almost all states.