In addition, the bill requires states to develop a plan to address problems in their «achievement gap schools» — the 5 percent of elementary and middle schools and the 5 percent of high schools in each state with the largest achievement gaps among student subgroups, or the lowest
student subgroup performance based on achievement tests and graduation rates.
Not exact matches
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.
It refers to schools with stubborn achievement gaps or weak
performance among «
subgroup»
students, such as English - language learners or
students in special education.
Focus School: A school with persistent achievement gaps or poor
performance among «
subgroup»
students, such as English - language learners or
students in special education.
NCLB holds schools accountable for
performance of
subgroups — major racial and ethnic groups,
students with disabilities, and English - language learners.
It would require statewide and gap - closing goals that are then translated into
performance targets for districts, schools, and
student subgroups.
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).
The purpose behind these
subgroups is to make it impossible to hide inadequate
student performances.
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.
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.
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?
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.
I would include:
Student growth,
subgroup performance, graduation rates, and more.
Part of their job will be to assemble «a repository of practices that are most effective in improving
performance of
student subgroups,» Cohn said.
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.
Using the NY State Assessments in evaluations allows us to meaningfully compare teacher
performance statewide, which helps policymakers know which
students need help or which teachers serving particular
student subgroups may need additional support.
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
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
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.
But because the NCLB escalating
performance goals also apply to
subgroups - including special education
students and English learners - even the best schools nationally have struggled to keep up and avoid being designated as «failing.»
During her tenure at Hamilton,
student achievement improved in all
subgroups as evidenced by growth on the California Academic
Performance Index.
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.
It has a custom comparison tool that lets you compare schools»
performances for all
students on all indicators — but not for individual
subgroups.
The plan still includes tracking
performance on annual standardized tests in grade 3 - 8 and in specific high school courses, measuring how well non-native English speakers are learning the language, and breaking down
student performance by
subgroups such as ethnicity, economic status, and
students with disabilities.
«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.
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.