Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) Title III, Part A Accountability System

Similar documents
ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR EDUCATORS. Instructional Practices in Education and Training

Elementary and Secondary Education Act ADEQUATE YEARLY PROGRESS (AYP) 1O1

Kansas Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Revised Guidance

A Guide to Adequate Yearly Progress Analyses in Nevada 2007 Nevada Department of Education

Making the ELPS-TELPAS Connection Grades K 12 Overview

ILLINOIS DISTRICT REPORT CARD

ILLINOIS DISTRICT REPORT CARD

State Parental Involvement Plan

Miami-Dade County Public Schools

DATE ISSUED: 11/2/ of 12 UPDATE 103 EHBE(LEGAL)-P

Cuero Independent School District

Educational Quality Assurance Standards. Residential Juvenile Justice Commitment Programs DRAFT

John F. Kennedy Middle School

Alvin Elementary Campus Improvement Plan

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. Title I Comparability

Foundations of Bilingual Education. By Carlos J. Ovando and Mary Carol Combs

Student Mobility Rates in Massachusetts Public Schools

Financing Education In Minnesota

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

Shelters Elementary School

An Introduction to School Finance in Texas

School Performance Plan Middle Schools

Governors and State Legislatures Plan to Reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act

African American Male Achievement Update

ASCD Recommendations for the Reauthorization of No Child Left Behind

Status of Latino Education in Massachusetts: A Report

PEIMS Submission 3 list

NCEO Technical Report 27

Intellectual Property

NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS RESPONSE TO RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE NATIONAL ASSESSMENT GOVERNING BOARD AD HOC COMMITTEE ON.

Longitudinal Analysis of the Effectiveness of DCPS Teachers

Manasquan Elementary School State Proficiency Assessments. Spring 2012 Results

Exams: Accommodations Guidelines. English Language Learners

Port Graham El/High. Report Card for

Description of Program Report Codes Used in Expenditure of State Funds

New Jersey Department of Education

PEIMS Submission 1 list

Standardized Assessment & Data Overview December 21, 2015

3.7 General Education Homebound (GEH) Program

English Language Arts Summative Assessment

Katy Independent School District Paetow High School Campus Improvement Plan

Qualitative Site Review Protocol for DC Charter Schools

Data Diskette & CD ROM

Getting Results Continuous Improvement Plan

IDEA FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART B, Additional Requirements, 2008

ACS THE COMMON CORE, TESTING STANDARDS AND DATA COLLECTION

ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS (ELL) UPDATE FOR SUNSHINE STATE TESOL 2013

Section V Reclassification of English Learners to Fluent English Proficient

Katy Independent School District Davidson Elementary Campus Improvement Plan

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS (FAQs) for. Non-Educational Community-Based Support Services Program

Personnel Administrators. Alexis Schauss. Director of School Business NC Department of Public Instruction

MIDDLE SCHOOL. Academic Success through Prevention, Intervention, Remediation, and Enrichment Plan (ASPIRE)

World s Best Workforce Plan

2015 High School Results: Summary Data (Part I)

Hokulani Elementary School

July 28, Tracy R. Justesen U.S. Department of Education 400 Maryland Ave, SW Room 5107 Potomac Center Plaza Washington, DC

Dyer-Kelly Elementary 1

Guide for Test Takers with Disabilities

Alief Independent School District Liestman Elementary Goals/Performance Objectives

AGENDA ITEM VI-E October 2005 Page 1 CHAPTER 13. FINANCIAL PLANNING

FY 2018 Guidance Document for School Readiness Plus Program Design and Site Location and Multiple Calendars Worksheets

Special Disciplinary Rules for Special Education and Section 504 Students

ACCOMMODATIONS FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES

The Condition of College & Career Readiness 2016

An Assessment of the Dual Language Acquisition Model. On Improving Student WASL Scores at. McClure Elementary School at Yakima, Washington.

Summary of Selected Data Charter Schools Authorized by Alameda County Board of Education

For international students wishing to study Japanese language at the Japanese Language Education Center in Term 1 and/or Term 2, 2017

School Data Profile/Analysis

Supply and Demand of Instructional School Personnel

Illinois State Board of Education Student Information System. Annual Fall State Bilingual Program Directors Meeting

Cooper Upper Elementary School

TSI Operational Plan for Serving Lower Skilled Learners

Why OUT-OF-LEVEL Testing? 2017 CTY Johns Hopkins University

AYP: Adequate Yearly Progress

FOUR STARS OUT OF FOUR

Week 4: Action Planning and Personal Growth

Apply Texas. Tracking Student Progress

Guidelines for Incorporating Publication into a Thesis. September, 2015

Orleans Central Supervisory Union

State: Original. Status: Planned July 2015-June. State: Original. Status: Planned. July 2015-June. State: Original. Status: Planned.

Delaware Performance Appraisal System Building greater skills and knowledge for educators

Chapter 9 The Beginning Teacher Support Program

Institution-Set Standards: CTE Job Placement Resources. February 17, 2016 Danielle Pearson, Institutional Research

Bureau of Teaching and Learning Support Division of School District Planning and Continuous Improvement GETTING RESULTS

STEM Extension OPT Checklist

THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY SCHREYER HONORS COLLEGE DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICS ASSESSING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF MULTIPLE CHOICE MATH TESTS

PM tutor. Estimate Activity Durations Part 2. Presented by Dipo Tepede, PMP, SSBB, MBA. Empowering Excellence. Powered by POeT Solvers Limited

2013 TRIAL URBAN DISTRICT ASSESSMENT (TUDA) RESULTS

Strategic Plan Update Year 3 November 1, 2013

GRADUATE SCHOOL DOCTORAL DISSERTATION AWARD APPLICATION FORM

Kelso School District and Kelso Education Association Teacher Evaluation Process (TPEP)

Frank Phillips College. Accountability Report

The Ohio State University Library System Improvement Request,

Review of Student Assessment Data

College and Career Ready Performance Index, High School, Grades 9-12

2014 State Residency Conference Frequently Asked Questions FAQ Categories

CONTINUUM OF SPECIAL EDUCATION SERVICES FOR SCHOOL AGE STUDENTS

Arlington Elementary All. *Administration observation of CCSS implementation in the classroom and NGSS in grades 4 & 5

Instructional Intervention/Progress Monitoring (IIPM) Model Pre/Referral Process. and. Special Education Comprehensive Evaluation.

TxEIS Secondary Grade Reporting Semester 2 & EOY Checklist for txgradebook

Transcription:

2011 AMAOs Guide Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) Title III, Part A Accountability System Texas Education Agency Department of Standards and Programs Curriculum Division 2011 by the Texas Education Agency

This publication can be accessed online from the Texas Education Agency s ELL Web Portal at www.elltx.org. Copyright Notice The materials are copyrighted and trademarked as the property of the Texas Education Agency (TEA) and may not be reproduced without the express written permission of TEA, except under the following conditions: 1) Texas public school districts, charter schools, and Education Service Centers may reproduce and use copies of the Materials and Related Materials for the districts and schools educational use without obtaining permission from TEA. 2) Residents of the state of Texas may reproduce and use copies of the Materials and Related Materials for individual personal use only without obtaining written permission of TEA. 3) Any portion reproduced must be reproduced in its entirety and remain unedited, unaltered and unchanged in any way. 4) No monetary charge can be made for the reproduced materials or any document containing them; however, a reasonable charge to cover only the cost of reproduction and distribution may be charged. Private entities or persons located in Texas that are not Texas public school districts, Texas Education Service Centers, or Texas charter schools or any entity, whether public or private, educational or non-educational, located outside the state of Texas MUST obtain written approval from TEA and will be required to enter into a license agreement that may involve the payment of a licensing fee or a royalty. For information contact: Office of Intellectual Property, Texas Education Agency, 1701 N. Congress Ave., Austin, TX 78701-1494; phone 512-463-9270 or 512-463-9713; email: copyrights@tea.state.tx.us. 2011 Guide to Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) Page 2 of 15

Table of Contents SECTION I: The Title III, Part A Accountability System... 4 Title III Accountability Requirements... 4 Required Interventions for Not Meeting All AMAOs... 5 SECTION II: The Annual Measurable Achievement Objective (AMAO) Indicators... 6 AMAO 1 Progress... 6 AMAO 2 Attainment (1-4 years LEP Subgroup)... 8 AMAO 2 Attainment (5+ years LEP Subgroup)... 10 AMAO 3 LEP Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)... 12 2011 Guide to Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) Page 3 of 15

SECTION I: The Title III, Part A Accountability System Title III Assessment and Accountability Requirements Under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), as reauthorized under the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), local education agencies (LEAs) that receive Title III, Part A funding for English language acquisition programs are held accountable for their English language learners (ELLs) achievement in learning the English language. Each spring in Texas, our ELLs, also identified in statute as limited English proficient (LEP), are assessed using the Texas English Language Proficiency Assessment System (TELPAS). The achievement of each Title III-funded LEA s LEP student population then is measured against the state's achievement standards known as the Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs). Each Title III-funded LEA must meet all of the AMAOs to receive an overall AMAO status of Met. The Title III, Part A accountability system includes three AMAOs for measuring student achievement as follows: AMAO 1 Progress Measures how many of the LEA s LEP students have made progress in learning English; a LEP student s progress is demonstrated with an increase of at least one overall proficiency level, when his/her current year s TELPAS Composite Rating is compared to that of the prior year. AMAO 2 Attainment Measures how many of the LEA s LEP students have become proficient in English; a LEP student s attainment is demonstrated when the student receives a TELPAS Composite Rating of Advanced High. AMAO 3 LEP AYP Measures how many of the LEA s LEP students have made adequate yearly progress (AYP) in meeting the state s student academic achievement standards. 2011 Guide to Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) Page 4 of 15

Required Interventions for LEAs Not Meeting All AMAOs Each LEA must meet all AMAOs in order to have an overall AMAO status of Met. Under Title III, Part A, the interventions required for the LEA and the state education agency (SEA) are based on the number of consecutive years for which the LEA has not met all AMAOs. 1 st Consecutive Year 2 nd Consecutive Year 3 rd Consecutive Year 4 th Consecutive Year The LEA must: Send parent notification within Send parent notification within Send parent notification within (As determined by TEA) 30 days of notification by TEA. 30 days of notification by TEA. Develop and implement a Continuous Improvement Plan (CIP). 30 days of notification by TEA. Update CIP, as appropriate, and continue implementation. The SEA must: Provide technical assistance; Develop P.D. strategies/activities; and Incorporate strategies/methodologies. Monitor implementation of CIP; Continue P.D. strategies/activities; and Continue to incorporate strategies/methodologies. Require LEA to modify curriculum, program, or method of instruction; OR Determine whether to continue Title III funding and require that LEA replace relevant personnel. 2011 Guide to Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) Page 5 of 15

SECTION II: The Annual Measurable Achievement Objective (AMAO) Indicators AMAO 1 PROGRESS DEFINITION Progress, as defined in Texas for AMAO 1, is the percent of current English Language Learners (ELLs) in all grades (K-12) who made progress of at least one proficiency level on the Texas English Language Proficiency Assessment System (TELPAS) Composite Rating from the prior year (2009-2010) to the current year (2010-2011). CALCULATION METHOD Number of current ELLs* who progressed at least one proficiency level on the TELPAS Composite Rating from 2009-2010 to 2010-2011 Number of current ELLs* assessed with TELPAS in both 2009-2010 to 2010-2011 = LEA Rate for AMAO 1 Progress Standard for Met: LEA rate must be at least 47.0%. MINIMUM SIZE REQUIREMENT DATA SOURCES Minimum Size Requirement (MSR): At least 30 current ELLs assessed Performance Data: Are based on students reported by the LEA as: with TELPAS in 2009-2010 and 2010-2011. Enrolled in the LEA on the PEIMS fall 2010 snapshot date (110 Record); and If MSR Is Not Met: LEA may be eligible for SSA-level Result If LEA does not meet MSR and is part of a Title III Assessed in the four language domains for the 2011 TELPAS Shared Service Arrangement (SSA). administration. Special Analysis If LEA does not meet MSR, however, is not part of a Title III SSA NOTES: TEXAS ENGLISH LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY ASSESSMENT SYSTEM (TELPAS) COMPOSITE RATING The TELPAS Composite Rating provides a single measure of a student s overall level of English language proficiency determined from the student s listening, speaking, reading, and writing proficiency ratings. A weighted formula is used to generate composite ratings of Beginning, Intermediate, Advanced, and Advanced High. Additional information on TELPAS is available at the following web address: http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/. Language Domain Weight in Composite Score Listening 5.0% Speaking 5.0% Reading 75.0% Writing 15.0% *Note: Students with prior year composite rating of Advanced High are excluded from calculations for AMAO 1 and AMAO 2 (from both denominator and numerator). 2011 Guide to Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) Page 6 of 15

How the LEA s Status Is Assigned for AMAO 1 Progress The percent of the LEA s current LEP students making progress of at least one proficiency level for TELPAS Composite Rating is at least 47%. The percent of the LEA s current LEP students making progress of at least one proficiency level for TELPAS Composite Rating is less than 47%. The LEA meets the minimum size requirement (MSR). The LEA does not meet the minimum size requirement (MSR). The LEA is a member of a Title III Shared Service Arrangement (SSA) and the combined SSA total meets the MSR. The LEA is not a member of a Title III Shared Service Arrangement (SSA) or the combined SSA total does not meet the MSR. MET NOT MET Assigned SSA-level result. Assigned by Special Analysis. 2011 Guide to Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) Page 7 of 15

AMAO 2 ATTAINMENT Attainment, as defined in Texas for AMAO 2, is demonstrated by receiving a composite rating of Advanced High on the TELPAS. To determine each LEA s status for AMAO 2, the state applies different standards to two subgroups of current ELLs based on the number of years for which each student has been enrolled as a limited English proficient (LEP) student. For AMAO 2, the LEA must meet standards for both of its subgroups. AMAO 2 ATTAINMENT (1-4 Years LEP) The percent of current ELLs who have been identified as LEP one through four years and have received a composite rating of Advanced High on the 2010-2011 TELPAS. CALCULATION METHOD Number of current ELLs* (1-4 years LEP) with Advanced High composite rating on 2010-2011 TELPAS Number of current ELLs* (1-4 years LEP) assessed on 2010-2011 TELPAS = LEA Rate for AMAO 2 Attainment (1-4 yrs. LEP) Standard for Met: LEA rate must be at least 13.0%. MINIMUM SIZE REQUIREMENT Minimum Size Requirement (MSR): At least 30 current LEP students assessed on TELPAS in 2010-2011. If MSR Is Not Met: LEA may be eligible for SSA-level Result If LEA does not meet MSR and is part of a Title III SSA. Special Analysis If LEA does not meet MSR and is not part of a Title III SSA; or If LEA meets MSR for number of all LEP students, but not for the subgroup. DATA SOURCES Data for Students in Each Subgroup: Are based on the number of years each student has been enrolled as LEP according to PEIMS enrollment data for 2006-2007 through 2010-2011. Performance Data: Are based on students reported by the LEA as: Enrolled in the LEA on the PEIMS fall 2010 snapshot date (110 Record); and Assessed in the four language domains for the 2011 TELPAS administration. NOTES: TEXAS ENGLISH LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY ASSESSMENT SYSTEM (TELPAS) COMPOSITE RATING The TELPAS Composite Rating provides a single measure of a student s overall level of English language proficiency determined from the student s listening, speaking, reading, and writing proficiency ratings. A weighted formula is used to generate composite ratings of Beginning, Intermediate, Advanced, and Advanced High. Additional information on TELPAS is available at the following web address: http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/. Language Domain Weight in Composite Score Listening 5.0% Speaking 5.0% Reading 75.0% Writing 15.0% *Note: Students with prior year composite rating of Advanced High are excluded from calculations for AMAO 1 and AMAO 2 (from both denominator and numerator). 2011 Guide to Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) Page 8 of 15

The percent of the LEA s students with 1-4 years as LEP who received a TELPAS Composite Rating of Advanced High is at least 13.0%. MET How the LEA s AMAO Status Is Assigned for the AMAO 2 Attainment (1-4 yrs. LEP subgroup) Indicator The LEA meets the minimum size requirement (MSR) for the total of all LEP students in the LEA. The LEA has at least 30 1-4 yrs. LEP subgroup. NOT MET The LEA has fewer than 30 1-4 yrs. LEP subgroup. The percent of the LEA s students with 1-4 years as LEP who received a TELPAS Composite Rating of Advanced High is less than 13.0%. The LEA does not meet the minimum size requirement (MSR) for the total of all LEP students in the LEA. The LEA is a member of a Title III SSA and the SSA has a combined total fewer than 30 1-4 yrs. LEP subgroup. Assigned using Special Analysis. The LEA is a member of a Title III SSA and the SSA has a combined total of at least 30 1-4 yrs. LEP subgroup. Assigned SSA-level result. 2011 Guide to Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) Page 9 of 15

AMAO 2 ATTAINMENT (5+ Years LEP) The percent of current ELLs who have been identified as LEP five or more years and have received a composite rating of Advanced High on the 2010-2011 TELPAS. CALCULATION METHOD Number of current ELLs* (5+ years LEP) with Advanced High composite rating on 2010-2011 TELPAS Number of current ELLs* (5+ years LEP) assessed on 2010-2011 TELPAS MINIMUM SIZE REQUIREMENT Minimum Size Requirement (MSR): At least 30 current LEP students assessed on TELPAS in 2010-2011. If MSR Is Not Met: LEA may be eligible for SSA-level Result If LEA does not meet MSR and is part of a Title III SSA. Special Analysis If LEA does not meet MSR and is not part of a Title III SSA; or If LEA meets MSR for number of all LEP students, but not for the subgroup. = LEA Rate for AMAO 2 Attainment (5+ yrs. LEP) DATA SOURCES NOTES: TEXAS ENGLISH LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY ASSESSMENT SYSTEM (TELPAS) COMPOSITE RATING The TELPAS Composite Rating provides a single measure of a student s overall level of English language proficiency determined from the student s listening, speaking, reading, and writing proficiency ratings. A weighted formula is used to generate composite ratings of Beginning, Intermediate, Advanced, and Advanced High. Additional information on TELPAS is available at the following web address: http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/. Standard for Met: LEA rate must be at least 25.0%. Data for Students in Each Subgroup: Are based on the number of years each student has been enrolled as LEP according to PEIMS enrollment data for 2006-2007 through 2010-2011. Performance Data: Are based on students reported by the LEA as: Enrolled in the LEA on the PEIMS fall 2010 snapshot date (110 Record); and Assessed in the four language domains for the 2011 TELPAS administration. Language Domain Weight in Composite Score Listening 5.0% Speaking 5.0% Reading 75.0% Writing 15.0% *Note: Students with prior year composite rating of Advanced High are excluded from calculations for AMAO 1 and AMAO 2 (from both denominator and numerator). 2011 Guide to Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) Page 10 of 15

The percent of the LEA s students with 5 years or more as LEP who received a TELPAS Composite Rating of Advanced High is at least 25.0%. MET How the LEA s AMAO Status Is Assigned for the AMAO 2 Attainment (5+ yrs. LEP subgroup) Indicator The LEA meets the minimum size requirement (MSR) for the total of all LEP students in the LEA. The LEA has at least 30 5+ yrs. LEP subgroup. NOT MET The LEA has fewer than 30 5+ yrs. LEP subgroup. The percent of the LEA s students with 5 years or more as LEP who received a TELPAS Composite Rating of Advanced High is less than 25.0%. The LEA does not meet the minimum size requirement (MSR) for the total of all LEP students in the LEA. The LEA is not a member of a Title III SSA or the SSA has a combined total fewer than 30 5+ yrs. LEP subgroup. Assigned using Special Analysis. The LEA is a member of a Title III SSA and the SSA has a combined total of at least 30 5+ yrs. LEP subgroup. Assigned SSA-level result. 2011 Guide to Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) Page 11 of 15

AMAO 3 LEP AYP This indicator measures the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) of students with limited English proficiency (LEP). The LEA must meet AYP for its LEP student group, based on at least the first two indicators listed below, but possibly all three, as used in evaluating school districts for AYP: Reading/English Language Arts Mathematics One Other Indicator Graduation Rate or Attendance Rate (if applicable) Although student groups are not required to meet the Graduation Rate or Attendance Rate standard, they may be required to either meet the standard or show improvement on the Graduation Rate or Attendance Rate to meet the performance improvement/safe harbor standard. For each indicator that applies to the LEP student group, the group must meet for both performance and participation. The performance standard is based on test results for students enrolled for the full academic year. The participation standard is based on participation in the assessment program of all students enrolled on the day of testing. AYP INDICATORS (as applicable to LEP student group for AMAO 3) Reading/English Language Arts Meet for all students in the LEP student group for both performance and participation. Performance Meet:: - Standard = 80% counted as proficient on test for students enrolled the full academic year subject to the federal cap** OR - Improvement/Safe Harbor = 10% decrease in percent not proficient on test and meet the standard or meet the improvement requirement for the relevant other measure (Graduation Rate or Attendance Rate) Participation Meet:: - Standard = 95% participation in the assessment program for students enrolled on the date of testing OR - Average Participation Rate = 95% participation based on combined 2009-10 and 2010-11 assessment data 2010 2011 Assessments (Grades 3-8 and 10, summed across grades): TAKS TAKS (Accommodated) TAKS M TAKS Alt TELPAS Reading (if applicable) LAT 2011 Guide to Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) Page 12 of 15

Mathematics Meet for all students in the LEP student group for both performance and participation. Performance Meet:: - Standard = 75% counted as proficient on test for students enrolled the full academic year subject to the federal cap** OR - Improvement/Safe Harbor = 10% decrease in percent not proficient on test and meet the standard or meet the improvement requirement for the relevant other measure (Graduation Rate or Attendance Rate) Participation Meet:: - Standard = 95% participation in the assessment program for students enrolled on the date of testing OR - Average Participation Rate = 95% participation based on combined 2009-10 and 2010-11 assessment data 2010 2011 Assessments (Grades 3-8 and 10, summed across grades): TAKS TAKS (Accommodated) TAKS M TAKS Alt LAT Other Indicator Though the LEP student group is not required to meet the Graduation Rate or Attendance Rate standards, it may be required to meet the standard or meet the improvement requirement on the Graduation Rate or Attendance Rate as part of performance improvement/safe harbor for Reading/English Language Arts or Mathematics. (See 2011 AYP Manual for more details.) 2011 Guide to Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) Page 13 of 15

MINIMUM SIZE REQUIREMENT Performance Test results for 50 or more students in the student group (summed across Grades 3 8 and 10) for the subject, and the student group must comprise at least 10 percent of all test takers in the subject OR Test results for 200 or more students in the student group, even if that group represents less than 10 percent of all test takers in the subject. For the LEP student group, minimum size is evaluated based on students currently identified as LEP in 2010 11 only. If the LEP student group meets the minimum size requirement based on current-year identification, the performance evaluated will include additional students who were identified as LEP in the prior two years as described above. If a student is identified as a current year LEP student on the TAKS answer documents for either Reading/English Language Arts or Mathematics, the student is considered current year LEP for both subjects. If the student is tested on TELPAS Reading, the student is considered current year LEP for both subjects. If the student is not tested on TELPAS Reading and the LEP field is blank on the TAKS answer documents, the student is assumed to be non-lep. Participation 50 or more students in the group enrolled on the test date (summed across Grades 3 8 and 10) for the subject, and the student group must comprise at least 10 percent of all students enrolled on the test date OR 200 or more students in the group enrolled on the test date, even if that group represents less than 10 percent of all students enrolled on the test date. Only students identified as LEP in 2010-11 are included in the LEP group for participation. If a student is identified as a current year LEP student on the TAKS answer documents for either Reading/English Language Arts or Mathematics, the student is included in the LEP group for both subjects. If a TELPAS test document is submitted for any TELPAS component, the student is included in the LEP student group for both subjects. If a TELPAS test document is not submitted and the LEP field is blank on the TAKS answer documents, the student is assumed to be non-lep. NOTES: The performance level assignments for this indicator are based on districts preliminary 2011 AYP status prior to appeals and will not be changed due to any resulting appeals being granted. For more information on Adequate Yearly Progress, please refer to the 2011 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Guide available at the following web address: http://www.tea.state.tx.us/ayp. 2011 Guide to Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) Page 14 of 15

AYP Label = Meets AYP: Indicates that AYP standards were met on all indicators for which the LEA is evaluated. IF the district met the 2011 AYP standard for its LEP student population, then How the LEA s AMAO Status Is Assigned for the AMAO 3 LEP AYP Indicator AYP Label = Missed AYP [reason] Indicates that AYP standards were not met on one or more indicator components, as well as which of those components were not met. IF the district did not meet the 2011 AYP standard for its LEP student population, then AYP Label = Not Evaluated AYP: Indicates that the LEA was not evaluated for AYP for one of a number of possible reasons. (Refer to 2011 AYP Guide for more information.) If the district was not assigned an AYP status for its LEP student population, then MET NOT MET NOT ASSIGNED 2011 Guide to Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) Page 15 of 15