Springfield Public Schools Adequate Yearly Progress 2010 Overview

Springfield Public Schools

Adequate Yearly Progress 2010 Overview

Opening Remarks

Teresa BledsoeManager,

Community Relations

Overview of AYP

Matt GoodmanDirector,

Quality Improvement & Accountability

What is AYP?

• NCLB of 2001 requires all schools, districts and states to show that students are making adequate yearly progress (AYP).

• NCLB requires states to establish targets in the following ways:– Annual Proficiency Target resulting in all

students to score at/above proficient by 2014.– Attendance/Graduation Rates resulting in

an additional indicator.– Participation Rates requiring all students

and student subgroups to meet a 95% participation rate.

Meeting the Requirements of AYP(Adapted from DESE, Understanding Your AYP Report, July 23, 2010, p.2)

STEP 1:Participation

Rate Met? >=95%

STEP 3: Annual Proficiency Target Met?

-All Accountable Subgroups

STEP 2: Cell Size Met?9 subgroups + total (6 races + IEP, LEP, FRL)

>= 30

Step 4: Additional Indicator(s) Met?

-Attendance/ Graduation Rates

Attendance Rate >=95%

Graduation Rate >=85% or

demonstrates required

improvement

AYP Met

If the subgroup’s cell size is less than 30, the

subgroup is not evaluated for AYP

Step 5: Annual Proficiency Target Met

with Confidence Interval (CI)?

Step 6: Annual Proficiency Target Met with Growth? (includes

students On-Track)

Step 7: Safe Harbor Met?-Applies to subgroups not meeting STEP 5

-Decrease Not Proficient by 10%-Subgroup attendance/graduation rate must be

Met

Step 8: Safe Harbor Confidence Interval Met?-Applies to subgroups not meeting Step 5

-Decrease Not Prof. by 10%-Subgroup attendance/graduation rate must be

MetAYP

Not Met

NO

NO

Yes Yes Yes Yes

No No

No

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Subgroup Categories

1.Total2.Asian/Pacific Islander3.Black4.Hispanic5.American Indian6.White7.Free/Reduced Lunch 8.Individualized Education Plan (IEP)9.Limited English Proficiency (LEP)

To be held accountable for subgroup performance, a subgroup must contain at least 30 students. At the district level, Springfield is accountable for all nine subgroups. Building accountability depends on the cell size of each subgroup.

AYP Measures Performance in Three Areas:

1.Communication Arts (2010 Target = 67.4% Proficient/Advanced)

-Missouri Assessment Program (MAP) assessment results in elementary and middle schools

-End-of-Course assessment results in high schools

2. Mathematics (2010 Target = 63.3% Proficient/Advanced)

-Missouri Assessment Program (MAP) assessment results in elementary and middle schools

-End-of-Course assessment results in high schools

3. Additional Indicator

-Attendance rate for elementary and middle schools (93 percent or improvement from the prior year) -Graduation rate for high schools (85% or improvement from the previous year at a rate of 2% if the graduation rate is between 75% and 84.9% or a rate of 5% if the graduation rate is below 74.9%)

Confidence Interval

The confidence interval calculation is not a requirement of NCLB. However, the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) uses a confidence interval in order to account for the error inherent in making AYP classifications (“met, not met”) that are based on a targeted percentage of students who must attain proficiency. The use of confidence intervals increases the reliability of these classifications.

Growth Model

•Beginning in 2008, Missouri implemented a growth model to determine AYP.

•The Growth Model provides an opportunity for schools and districts to meet AYP by receiving credit for students who demonstrate improvement over time.

•Student growth targets are established using the student’s first MAP or MAP A baseline. Individual student growth targets determine if each student is “On Track to be Proficient” within four years or by grade 8.

•Students who are “On Track” are added to the students who are Proficient in determining if the AYP Proficiency target is met.

Safe Harbor

NCLB includes a safe harbor provision. If a subgroup of students in a school falls short of the AYP target, a district or building can still meet AYP if the percentage of students who score below the proficient level is decreased by 10% from the previous year.

AYP 2010 Results

Overview of Compilation Table

2026

21

3024 30

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010

Num

ber o

f Sch

ools

School Year

Springfield Public Schools, Number of Schools Making AYP, Communication Arts, 2008-2010

Total Not Making Total Making

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) 2010 Overview - Springfield Public Schools

Communication Arts

Level

Number Buildings

“Met” 2007-2008

(Target = 51.0)

Number Buildings “Met”

2008-2009(Target = 59.2%)


2009-2010(Target = 67.4%)

Elementary 26 out of 35 17 out of 35 26 out of 36

Middle School 3 out of 10 3 out of 10 1 out of 10

High School 1 out of 5 4 out of 5 3 out of 5

1320

27

3730

24

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010

Num

ber o

f Sch

ools

School Year

Springfield Public Schools, Number of Schools Making AYP, Mathematics, 2008-2010

Total Not Making Total Making


Mathematics

Level


2007-2008(Target = 45.0)


2008-2009(Target = 54.1%)


2009-2010(Target = 63.3%)





Additional Indicator (attendance for elementary and middle schools; graduation rate for high schools)

Level

Number Buildings

“Met” 2007-2008


2008-2009


2009-2010




1 high school, 3 middle schools, and 26 elementary schools {30 total} increased the percent of students who scored proficient and advanced in communication arts between 2008-2009 and 2009-2010.

1 high school, 9 middle schools, and 16 elementary schools {26 total} increased the percent of students who scored proficient and advanced in mathematics between 2008-2009 and 2009-2010.

There is not a growth component for high school end-of-course (EOC).

Schools Meeting in 2010 that Did Not in 2009

• Seven schools that did not meet AYP in 2009 achieved AYP in 2010.– Bingham– Boyd– Truman– Watkins– Wilder– York– Wilson’s Creek

Communication Arts

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Perc

ent

School Year

Springfield Public Schools, Communication Arts AYP Results, 2002-2010, School Total

CA Target CA SPS School Total

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Perc

ent

School Year

Springfield Public Schools, Communication Arts AYP Results, 2002-2010, Asian/Pacific Islander

CA Target Asian/PI

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Perc

ent

School Year

Springfield Public Schools, Communication Arts AYP Results, 2002-2010, Black

CA Target Black

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Perc

ent

School Year

Springfield Public Schools, Communication Arts AYP Results, 2002-2010, Hispanic

CA Target Hispanic

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Perc

ent

School Year

Springfield Public Schools, Communication Arts AYP Results, 2002-2010, American Indian

CA Target Am. Indian

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Perc

ent

School Year

Springfield Public Schools, Communication Arts AYP Results, 2002-2010, White

CA Target White

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Perc

ent

School Year

Springfield Public Schools, Communication Arts AYP Results, 2002-2010, Free/Reduced Lunch

CA Target FRL

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Perc

ent

School Year

Springfield Public Schools, Communication Arts AYP Results, 2002-2010, IEP

CA Target IEP

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Perc

ent

School Year

Springfield Public Schools, Communication Arts AYP Results, 2002-2010, LEP (Limited English Proficient)

CA Target LEP

Math

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Perc

ent

School Year

Springfield Public Schools, Mathematics AYP Results, 2002-2010, School Total

Math Target Math SPS School Total

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Perc

ent

School Year

Springfield Public Schools, Mathematics AYP Results, 2002-2010, Asian/Pacific Islander

Math Target Asian/PI

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Perc

ent

School Year

Springfield Public Schools, Mathematics AYP Results, 2002-2010, Black

Math Target Black

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Perc

ent

School Year

Springfield Public Schools, Mathematics AYP Results, 2002-2010, Hispanic

Math Target Hispanic

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Perc

ent

School Year

Springfield Public Schools, Mathematics AYP Results, 2002-2010, American Indian

Math Target Am. Indian

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Perc

ent

School Year

Springfield Public Schools, Mathematics AYP Results, 2002-2010, White

Math Target White

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Perc

ent

School Year

Springfield Public Schools, Mathematics AYP Results, 2002-2010, Free/Reduced Lunch

Math Target FRL

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Perc

ent

School Year

Springfield Public Schools, Mathematics AYP Results, 2002-2010, IEP

Math Target IEP

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Perc

ent

School Year

Springfield Public Schools, Mathematics AYP Results, 2002-2010, LEP (Limited English Proficient)

Math Target LEP

Implications of Not Meeting AYP

Brian HubbardDirector,

Title I

The following schools receiving federal Title I funding are identified as needing improvement based on AYP 2010:

Elementary Buildings:1. Boyd Elementary (Level I / delayed) 2. Holland Elementary (Level I) 3. McGregor Elementary (Level IV/restructuring)4. Sunshine Elementary (Level I)5. Twain Elementary (Level I)6. Weaver Elementary (Level I)7. Weller Elementary (Level II)8. Westport Elementary (Level II/delayed)9. Williams Elementary (Level III/corrective action)10. York Elementary (Level II/delayed)

Middle Schools:1. Pipkin Middle School (Level III/corrective action)2. Reed Middle School (Level V/ restructuring)3. Study Middle School (Level III/corrective action)

School Improvement Flowchart

School Improvement Identification

Title I schools are identified as in “School Improvement” when they do not make AYP in the same content area or the additional indicator (attendance rate for schools with grades K-8 and graduation rate for schools with grades 9-12) for two consecutive years.

Exiting School Improvement

Every school must remain in School Improvement for at least two years. After being in SI for two consecutive years, the school may exit SI if: – AYP is met for two consecutive years in the

content area or additional indicator that caused the initial SI status and no other content areas or additional indicators are not making AYP for two consecutive years. After exiting School Improvement, the School may re-enter School Improvement, Level 1, if another content area or an additional indicator is not met for two consecutive years.

School Improvement Level 1 (after AYP is not met for 2 consecutive years)

The district must ensure that the identified school implements the following:

1. Develop or revise a school improvement plan2. Notify parents of each child enrolled in the school and provide:

a. The meaning of the notification; b. The reasons for the identification and what the school, district and state are doing to help address the problem; c. Ways parents can become involved in addressing the academic issues that caused the school to be identified for school improvement; d. An explanation of the parent’s option(s) to transfer their child.

4. Offer Public School Choice (PSC) to all students to transfer to another public school within the district.

5. Districts are to include on their web sites information regarding PSC such as parent notification letters and the previous year’s transfer numbers

School Improvement Level 2 (after AYP is not met for 3 years)

Follow the steps from School Improvement Level I along with the following:

• Make Supplemental Educational Services (SES) available to students receiving free/reduced lunch

• Provide SES information on the district website.

School Improvement Level 3 – Corrective Action, Year 1 (after AYP is

not met for 4 years)


• The district is still required to provide school choice and supplemental educational services

• The district is required to take corrective measures: – Possible corrective actions include

implementing a new curriculum, working with outside expert consultants, extending instructional time, or making staff changes.

School Improvement Level 4 – Restructuring, Planning (after AYP

is not met for 5 years)


• The school continues to offer school choice and supplemental educational services

• The district is also required to restructure the school. Restructuring can include replacing staff, contracting with an outside expert consultant, or other major restructuring of the school’s administration and operations.

School Improvement Level 5 – Restructuring, Implementation (after

AYP is not met for 6 years)


• The school continues to offer school choice and supplemental educational services

• The school must continue to implement the requirements of School Improvement, Level 4, Restructuring, Planning.

Schools in School Improvement

SI Level I SI Level 2 SI Level 3 SI Level 4 SI Level 5

Central HS* Parkview* (D) Hickory Hills MS*

Hillcrest HS* Reed MS

Boyd (D) Jarrett MS* Pipkin MS McGregor

Holland Pleasant View MS*

Study MS

Mark Twain Weller Williams

Rountree* (D) Westport (D)

Sunshine York (D)

Weaver

•Indicates a Non-Title I Building•(D) indicates the school is in School Improvement, Delayed

Bissett Elementary made AYP for 2 years and came out of School Improvement

Public School Choice

• In 2009-10, 105 out of 3,276 eligible students took part in school choice transfers.



A Principal’s Viewpoint

Tim ZeiglerPrincipal, Pipkin MS

CARVER CHEROKEE HICKORY HILLS JARRETT PERSHING PIPKINPLEASANT

VIEW REED STUDY

2004 0.084 0.064 0.115 0.124 0.055 0.267 0.083 0.114 0.149

2005 0.092 0.067 0.132 0.131 0.071 0.276 0.078 0.132 0.148

2006 0.105 0.07 0.141 0.14 0.058 0.239 0.095 0.14 0.142

2007 0.114 0.076 0.151 0.166 0.079 0.23 0.109 0.176 0.153

2008 0.113 0.084 0.174 0.183 0.099 0.224 0.088 0.161 0.169

2009 0.112 0.092 0.163 0.202 0.096 0.235 0.1 0.157 0.193

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

Min

orit

y Pe

rcen

tage

Enr

olle

dR12 Middle School Minority Enrollment by School by Year (2004-2009)

2009-2010 F/R at Pipkin ≈78%

18.5

25.3 25.4 23.6

40.6 41.4

51.8 50.2 52

75.5

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

Perc

ent P

rofic

ient

and

Adv

ance

dCommunication ArtsPipkin Middle School

All Students Percent Proficient and Advanced

AYP Requirements

To be completed in April 2011

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Prec

ent P

rofic

ient

and

Adv

ance

dCommunication Arts Percent Proficent and AdvancedPipkin Middle School MAP History by Ethnicity Group

Asian/Pac Isl. Black Hispanic American Indian White F/R Lunch IEP

16.512.9

21.7

33.6

48.4 50.654.4

59.764.2

72.5

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

Perc

ent P

rofic

ent a

nd A

dvan

ced

MathematicsPipkin Middle School

All Students Percent Proficient and Advanced

AYP Requirements

To be completed in April 2011

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Perc

ent P

rofic

ient

and

Adv

ance

dMathmatics Percent Proficient and Advanced

Pipkin Middle School MAP History by Ethnicity Group

Asian/Pac Isl. Black Hispanic American Indian White F/R Lunch IEP

40.6

48.4

41.4

50.651.8

54.4

47.7

55.9

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Communication Arts

Mathematics Communication Arts



Mathematics

2006 2007 2008 2009

MAP Percent Proficient and Advanced 2005- 2009

Pipkin and Comparable School

BRITTANY WOODS

CENTER MIDDLE

EASTGATE MIDDLE

GRANDVIEW MIDDLE

JENNINGS JR. HIGH

KENNETT MIDDLE

KIRBY MIDDLE

PIPKIN MIDDLE

R. G. CENTRAL MIDDLE

REED MIDDLE

SIKESTON MIDDLE

SOUTH MIDDLE

SOUTHEAST MIDDLE

91.8

91.1

92.5

91.3 91.491.8

93.794 94.07

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

Perc

ent A

tten

ding

Attendance 2002 -- 2010Pipkin Middle School

Questions

Documents

Springfield Public Schools Adequate Yearly Progress 2010 Overview