Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) Related to English Language Proficiency. (Updated July 9, 2005)

Similar documents
Making the ELPS-TELPAS Connection Grades K 12 Overview

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

Cuero Independent School District

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

State Parental Involvement Plan

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

Shelters Elementary School

Miami-Dade County Public Schools

Data Diskette & CD ROM

Kansas Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Revised Guidance

Orleans Central Supervisory Union

Port Graham El/High. Report Card for

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

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

African American Male Achievement Update

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

School Performance Plan Middle Schools

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

Meeting the Challenges of No Child Left Behind in U.S. Immersion Education

Section V Reclassification of English Learners to Fluent English Proficient

Katy Independent School District Davidson Elementary Campus Improvement Plan

Alief Independent School District Liestman Elementary Goals/Performance Objectives

Manasquan Elementary School State Proficiency Assessments. Spring 2012 Results

Alvin Elementary Campus Improvement Plan

Scholastic Leveled Bookroom

Greetings, Ed Morris Executive Director Division of Adult and Career Education Los Angeles Unified School District

Proficiency Illusion

Georgia Department of Education

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

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. Title I Comparability

Standardized Assessment & Data Overview December 21, 2015

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

Katy Independent School District Paetow High School Campus Improvement Plan

Longitudinal Analysis of the Effectiveness of DCPS Teachers

Student Mobility Rates in Massachusetts Public Schools

West Haven School District English Language Learners Program

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY BOARD PhD PROGRAM REVIEW PROTOCOL

Hokulani Elementary School

Strategic Improvement Plan

3.7 General Education Homebound (GEH) Program

ILLINOIS DISTRICT REPORT CARD

African American Success Initiative

Curriculum and Assessment Guide (CAG) Elementary California Treasures First Grade

ILLINOIS DISTRICT REPORT CARD

An Introduction to School Finance in Texas

John F. Kennedy Middle School

World s Best Workforce Plan

Getting Results Continuous Improvement Plan

President Abraham Lincoln Elementary School

Status of Latino Education in Massachusetts: A Report

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

Educational Quality Assurance Standards. Residential Juvenile Justice Commitment Programs DRAFT

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

NCEO Technical Report 27

Master Plan for English Learners

Standards-Based Bulletin Boards. Tuesday, January 17, 2012 Principals Meeting

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

Florida s Common Language of Instruction

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

FOUR STARS OUT OF FOUR

Educating Georgia s Future gadoe.org. Richard Woods, Georgia s School Superintendent. Richard Woods, Georgia s School Superintendent. gadoe.

Regions Of Georgia For 2nd Grade

Iowa School District Profiles. Le Mars

Pleasant Hill Elementary

Note: This paper has been published as Betts, Julian, and Anne. Danenberg, San Diego: Do Too Many Cooks Spoil the

PEIMS Submission 3 list

Delaware Performance Appraisal System Building greater skills and knowledge for educators

Further, Robert W. Lissitz, University of Maryland Huynh Huynh, University of South Carolina ADEQUATE YEARLY PROGRESS

Gaps in Family and Teacher Involvement Beliefs

Exams: Accommodations Guidelines. English Language Learners

Campus Improvement Plan Elementary/Intermediate Campus: Deretchin Elementary Rating: Met Standard

Newburgh Enlarged City School District Academic. Academic Intervention Services Plan

Executive Summary. Marian High School (NTI Career Institute, Inc.) Mr. Larry Ivory, Principal 9896 Bissonnet, Suite 230 Houston, TX 77036

Quality Teaching for English Learners (QTEL) Impact Study

Superintendent s 100 Day Entry Plan Review

EDUCATING TEACHERS FOR CULTURAL AND LINGUISTIC DIVERSITY: A MODEL FOR ALL TEACHERS

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

DISTRICT ASSESSMENT, EVALUATION & REPORTING GUIDELINES AND PROCEDURES

Implementing an Early Warning Intervention and Monitoring System to Keep Students On Track in the Middle Grades and High School

Guidebook on Designing, Delivering and Evaluating Services for English Learners (ELs)

ASCD Recommendations for the Reauthorization of No Child Left Behind

GUIDE TO EVALUATING DISTANCE EDUCATION AND CORRESPONDENCE EDUCATION

ISD 2184, Luverne Public Schools. xcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcv. Local Literacy Plan bnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbn

Emerald Coast Career Institute N

ED : Methods for Teaching EC-6 Social Studies, Language Arts and Fine Arts

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

District English Language Learners (ELL) Plan

Gifted & Talented. Dyslexia. Special Education. Updates. March 2015!

Minnesota s Consolidated State Plan Under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)

Kannapolis Charter Academy

Research Brief. Literacy across the High School Curriculum

Assessment System for M.S. in Health Professions Education (rev. 4/2011)

IB Diploma Program Language Policy San Jose High School

Rules and Discretion in the Evaluation of Students and Schools: The Case of the New York Regents Examinations *

PEIMS Submission 1 list

CONNECTICUT GUIDELINES FOR EDUCATOR EVALUATION. Connecticut State Department of Education

NDPC-SD Data Probes Worksheet

University of New Orleans

State Budget Update February 2016

Pyramid. of Interventions

Transcription:

Attachment A 2004-05 Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) Related to English Language Proficiency (Updated July 9, 2005) In the 2004-05 school year, No Child Left Behind (NCLB) accountability measures called annual measurable achievement objectives (AMAOs) were implemented to evaluate the services that local education agencies (LEAs) and the state provide to limited English proficient (LEP) students. This attachment describes the annual measurable achievement objectives and performance targets that the Texas Education Agency (TEA) implemented. Background NCLB requires Title III-funded LEAs and the state to meet annual performance targets for three AMAOs, the first two of which relate specifically to English language proficiency. AMAO 1 measures the percent of LEP students who make progress in learning English in o Kindergarten through Grade 2 o Grades 3 through 12 AMAO 2 measures the percent of LEP students who attain English language proficiency in o Kindergarten through Grade 2 o Grades 3 through 12 AMAO 3 measures the adequate yearly progress of LEP students as described in section 1111(b)(2)(B) of NCLB. The performance targets for AMAO 3 are the AYP targets already in place. For more information on the AYP targets, please visit www.tea.state.tx.us/ayp. Under NCLB, each state s English language proficiency tests must assess K 12 LEP students in the language domains of listening, speaking, reading, and writing. The Texas English Language Proficiency Assessment System (TELPAS) will be used to fulfill this testing requirement. As of spring 2005, TELPAS consists of the Reading Proficiency Tests in English (RPTE) and the Texas Observation Protocols (TOP). In each TELPAS language domain, a student receives one of four proficiency ratings Beginning, Intermediate, Advanced, or Advanced High. Grades K 2 Grades 3 12 Listening TOP TOP Speaking TOP TOP Reading TOP RPTE Writing TOP TOP The TELPAS district and campus summary reports for 2003 and 2004 included only the English reading proficiency ratings of LEP students in Grades 3 12. The beginning, intermediate, and advanced proficiency levels were assessed through RPTE. The advanced high proficiency level was determined from a passing score on the reading

portion of the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) or, if applicable, the exit level Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS). As of spring 2005, RPTE results included all four reading proficiency ratings. In addition, TOP and RPTE results were combined to generate TELPAS composite ratings, which are the basis for AMAO progress and attainment calculations. TAKS and TAAS will no longer be used in the TELPAS composite ratings.

Goals for Establishing the AMAOs TEA developed the annual measurable achievement objectives and performance targets in conjunction with educational measurement experts, second language acquisition consultants, an advisory group of Texas educators, and other Texas stakeholders. The development process also included a review of several other states AMAOs. The principles that guided the Texas AMAO development process were that the AMAOs should: be easy to understand and make sense to Texas practitioners and parents; set rigorous, yet achievable annual performance targets; take into account the length of time second language learners have been in U.S. schools; lead naturally to a focus on improved instruction; minimize unintended consequences related to identifying, serving, and exiting LEP students; and be accurate indicators of the extent to which the state and districts are improving instructional services. The 2004-05 performance targets were established using the TELPAS summary data from the previous two school years. In establishing the performance targets, the goal was to set lower starting points and gradually increase the rigor of the targets over time. Targets for the 2004-05 school year are provided in this document. Annual performance targets for the 2005-06 school year will be provided by early spring 2006. The AMAO definitions and performance targets for the 2004-05 school year are found on the following two pages.

2004-05 AMAO Performance Targets and s for Grades 3 12 AMAO 1: Progress AMAO 2: Attainment by Either of the Following Methods 40% 25% 40% Method 1 Method 2 Percent of current LEP students progressing by at least one proficiency level a year on TELPAS Percent of current LEP students reaching Advanced High on TELPAS Percent of current and monitored LEP students demonstrating attainment based on time in U.S. Time in U.S. (current LEP students) Grade 3: 3 or more years Grades 4 12: 4 or more years Attainment Current LEP: Advanced High on TELPAS Monitored LEP: Passing TAKS reading/ela, Gr. 3-11 PROGRESS, GRADES 3 12 The progress objective is to increase the percent of LEP students who make progress in learning English annually, as determined by progress of at least one proficiency level a year on TELPAS. The 2004-05 progress target for Grades 3 12 is 40%. Students need to have two consecutive years of results (that is, from spring 2004 and from spring 2005) to show progress from one proficiency level to the next. Note that spring 2005 third graders are not currently included in this AMAO since they would have been second graders in spring 2004, at which time TELPAS results for K 2 students were not available. Note also that current LEP students who received an Advanced High TELPAS rating in both spring 2004 and spring 2005 count as having made progress. ATTAINMENT, GRADES 3 12 The attainment objective for Grades 3 12 is to increase the percent of LEP students who meet the attainment goal for English language proficiency annually, as determined by a TELPAS composite rating of Advanced High. There are two methods for meeting the attainment AMAO. The first method evaluates the percent of current LEP students who reach Advanced High on TELPAS. This method does not consider how long the students have been in U.S. schools. The second method takes time in U.S. variables into account, which addresses the effect that varying influxes of immigrants may have within and across districts.

Both current and monitored LEP students are evaluated in Method 2. Under Method 2, attainment of current LEP students is defined as obtaining an Advanced High composite rating on TELPAS, and attainment of monitored LEP students is defined as passing the TAKS reading/ela assessment. Method 2 includes current LEP students in Grade 3 who have been enrolled in U.S. schools for three or more school years and current LEP students in Grades 4 12 who have been enrolled in U.S. schools for four or more schools years. Districts submit each student s number of years in U.S. schools on the TELPAS answer document. Monitored LEP students who take TAKS reading/ela in Grades 3 11are included in Method 2 regardless of their number of years in U.S. schools. Monitored LEP students are students identified as M1 (first year of monitoring) or M2 (second year of monitoring) on the TAKS answer document. Monitored LEP students in Grade 12 are not included in this indicator. Districts that do not meet the target under Method 1 but do meet the target under Method 2 will meet this AMAO. Method 1: The 2004-05 attainment target for Method 1 is 25%. Method 2: The 2004-05 attainment target for Method 2 is 40%.

2004-05 AMAO Performance Targets and s for Kindergarten Grade 2 AMAO 1: Progress AMAO 2: Attainment n/a 1.5% Percent of current LEP students progressing by at least one proficiency level a year on TELPAS Percent of current LEP students reaching Advanced High on TELPAS PROGRESS, K 2 As with Grades 3 12, the progress objective is to increase the percent of LEP students in K 2 who make progress in learning English annually, as determined by progress of at least one proficiency level a year on TELPAS. In 2004-05, progress for K 2 was not measured because two years of test results are required to show progress from one proficiency level to the next. TELPAS results were first available for K 2 students in spring 2005. ATTAINMENT, K 2 As with Grades 3 12, the attainment objective is to increase the percent of LEP students in K 2 who meet the attainment goal for English language proficiency annually, as determined by a TELPAS composite rating of Advanced High. At the time the AMAO targets for 2004-05 were set, there was not yet a state assessment of English language proficiency to use for setting K 2 attainment targets. However, the bilingual/esl program exit rate was estimated to be no higher than 6% for the K 2 student group based on PEIMS data. The 2004-05 target of 1.5% was established in keeping with the approach used with all of the AMAOs, which is to set lower starting targets and increase the rigor of the targets over time. It is important to note that reaching Advanced High on TELPAS is not a state criterion for program exit. The program exit criteria, which are delineated in Chapter 89 of the Texas Administrative Code, have not changed.