Sentences with phrase «of subgroup performance»

Accordingly, as states consider the three school classification designs detailed in the next section, they may want to identify where and how they can strike a balance between disproportionately high and low weighting of subgroup performance.

While we appreciate CDE's proposal to disaggregate student subgroup data in achievement (not just growth, as was the case in previous frameworks), as well as the Department's commitment to ensuring transparency of subgroup performance data in reporting, we strongly encourage CDE to reconsider the adoption of a combined subgroup for accountability purposes, which would have significant implications for educational equity.

Not exact matches

«While more vulnerable subgroups of children may exist, the low overall difference in academic performance after childhood exposure to surgery is reassuring.

What Times readers were not told, however, was that before NCLB, North Carolina, like almost every state, did not hold schools accountable for the performance of various subgroups, like minorities and special - needs students.

The report gives only passing attention to the positive impact of NCLB on the education of the most disadvantaged students, a consequence of the requirement to report performance by specific subgroups (e.g., racial and ethnic groups and the economically disadvantaged).

In Texas, and under NCLB nationwide, holding schools accountable for the performance of every student subgroup has proven to be a mixed blessing.

NCLB mandated reading and math testing in grades 3 through 8 and at least once in high school, and it required states to rate schools on the basis of test performance overall and for key subgroups.

NCLB holds schools accountable for performance of subgroups — major racial and ethnic groups, students with disabilities, and English - language learners.

As with schools, that determination must be based not just on overall student achievement, but also on the performance of student subgroups, broken down by categories such as race and ethnicity.

Their discovery of a money - performance relationship is attributed to analyzing the effects of spending that emanates from court decisions (exogenous variation in spending), tracing the effect of this spending to long run outcomes (completed schooling and wages), and focusing on the right subgroup (disadvantaged students).

Since important differential effects were identified for only one subgroup, one can not infer that the impact of performance pay on student math learning is concentrated on any particular group of students.

(By the way, you can also see from the chart that NONE of Morton's subgroups met their unique performance standards last year.)

With one exception (immigrants benefited less than native - born students from a performance pay regime), I found only small differences in the impact of performance pay on the math achievement of subgroups in the population.

This method of calculating a school's progress has been referred to as a «trip wire» system, in which poor performance by one subgroup in one subject area can «trip up» an entire school.

The natural question is, how will that subgroup of students meet the performance targets when students who score at proficient levels are quickly taken from the group?

Among the smallest quintile of elementary schools, 47 percent of racially heterogeneous schools (those with four or more racial subgroups) won performance awards, versus 82 percent of similarly sized but racially homogeneous schools.

A smaller subgroup of 3,556 5th graders showed no difference in performance on 5th grade science standards, based on whether or not their teachers participated.

This analysis includes the entire class of 2013, as well as additional information on trends and the performance of subgroups, including students with disabilities.

Has the national performance of a particular subgroup of the student population improved over time?

Identification of, and comprehensive, evidence - based intervention in, the lowest - performing five percent of title I schools, all public high schools with a graduation rate below 67 percent, and public schools in which one or more subgroups of students are performing at a level similar to the performance of the lowest - performing five percent of title I schools and have not improved after receiving targeted interventions for a State - determined number of years; and

While this replaces the statutory approach of basing all accountability decisions on the separate performance of numerous student subgroups, including students from low - income families, the assessment results for all of these «disadvantaged» student subgroups designated in the ESEA statute must be reported each year and must be taken into account in determining performance consequences for public schools.

Ensure that all students in tested grades are included in the assessment and accountability system, hold schools and districts accountable for the performance of each student subgroup and include all schools and districts;

Rather than presenting performance as the proportion of students who have met the minimum - proficiency cut score, states could present the average (mean) score of students within the school and the average performance of each subgroup of students.

The bill replaces AYP standards with a requirement for states to annually measure all students and individual subgroups by: (1) academic achievement as measured by state assessments; (2) for high schools, graduation rates; (3) for schools that are not high schools, a measure of student growth or another valid and reliable statewide indicator; (4) if applicable, progress in achieving English proficiency by English learners; and (5) at least one additional valid and reliable statewide indicator that allows for meaningful differentiation in school performance.

County offices of education are working with districts identified for «differentiated assistance» due to poor performance by student subgroups.

Using the NLSLSASD's standardized testing results by subgroup, the analysis illuminates the potential role of school isolation in student test score performance.1

Under current law, a state must determine the average yearly progress (AYP) for all students and subgroups at the school, LEA, and state level; AYP standards mandate specified thresholds of performance with respect to assessments and graduation rates.

In many waiver states, some of the primary accountability determinations, such as the selection of Priority schools, are based on the performance of all students plus students in a limited number of demographic subgroups.

In math, charter school entry increases performance among all subgroups of students at district schools except Hispanic students and students classified as LEP, who experience no effects; Asian students only experience a significant positive effect in math in district schools located within a half - mile radius.

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.

Randy Bomer's discussion of deficit perspective is well - taken as political issues surrounding school performance have highlighted the fact that schools are struggling to achieve adequate progress within the economically disadvantaged subgroup.

Part of their job will be to assemble «a repository of practices that are most effective in improving performance of student subgroups,» Cohn said.

We would argue that authorizers should require and actively monitor enrollment and performance data, disaggregated by subgroup, in line with the spirit of state laws.

High - needs students in a school or district are often placed in a demographic subgroup for purposes of comparing their academic performance with those of other students.

Efforts to improve school attendance and reduce dropout rates are part of the larger effort to increase achievement and close performance gaps between student subgroups.

A Tier 3 school that has implemented targeted supports for more than three years, but has not improved the performance of the same student subgroup compared to the «all students» group will be classified as Tier 4 and qualify for comprehensive supports.

«While the performance of Virginia students compares favorably to that of students in other states, the disparities between subgroups underscore the importance of the Board of Education's policies and initiatives aimed at narrowing, and ultimately closing, achievement gaps,» Board of Education President David M. Foster said.

The super subgroups combined smaller subgroups of low - performing or disadvantaged students, but Ed Week notes that «civil rights advocates argued they allowed states to mask the performance of some student subgroups.»

One proposed regulation in the Every Student Succeed Act (ESSA) is for states to analyze the performance of student subgroups separately in order to show how states are leveling the playing field over time to ensure educational equity.

In return, the state must lay out plans for improving performance of the lowest - achieving schools and student subgroups, including African - American students and students with disabilities.

Overall, while questions remain, the regulations make clear that the graduation rate and performance data of students in foster care must be reported on, and can not be lumped in with other subgroups as part of a «super-subgroup» to conceal its outcomes.

«Meanwhile,» he wrote, «student achievement remains low» for all student subgroups, compared with the performance of students in other states on national tests.

Absent a district - wide effort to improve academic engagement and performance of this large and growing student subgroup, read more

Performance of students in prekindergarten through grade 12 who are assigned to in - field program completers aggregated by student subgroups, as defined in the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), 20 U.S.C. s. 6311 (b)(2)(C)(v)(II), as a measure of how well the program prepares teachers to work with a variety of students in Florida public schools.

«However, by including former English learners, overall scores for the subgroup will rise and may mask the performance of current English learners,» Delia Pompa, senior fellow for education policy at the Migration Policy Institute in Washington, D.C., wrote in a commentary for EdSource.

According to the piece, states will now be accountable for: • Tracking the performance of public and charter schools • Track data that allows for comparison of student subgroups • Promote increased academic performance and graduation rates

The district used data - warehousing technology to disaggregate longitudinal data that addressed the teams» questions about the performance of different student subgroups.

The federal one looks at the performance of certain «subgroups» of kids: minorities, poor students, youngsters with disabilities and those still learning English.

Planners can gain additional insights by analyzing the performance of subgroups of students, in particular the learning progress of students of different socioeconomic backgrounds, ability levels, language experiences, ethnicities, races, and genders.

But the attachment of sanctions to the low performance of even one student subgroup has meant that educators may have second thoughts about newcomers.