91°µÍøÆƽâ°æ

A total of 532 elementary, middle and high schools and 35 districts statewide have been identified for improvement under the federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act. Of these, 99 schools and 4 districts were newly identified this year.Ìý Of the identified schools, 483 will receive Title I funds in 2010-11 and are required to offer extra help to eligible low-income students; 373 of these Title I schools must also offer public school choice (as appropriate) to all enrolled students.Ìý

A total of 53 schools and 3 districts that were identified for the 2009-10 school year have been removed from the improvement list because they made Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for two consecutive years in all areas for which they were identified.Ìý An additional 14 schools that were in improvement status during 2009-10 have closed or are in the process of closing. AYP is the minimum level of performance schools and districts must achieve each year and is based on student participation and performance on state assessments. Sixty-four schools identified this year made AYP, and are eligible to be removed from the improvement list if they make AYP again next year.Ìý

At the beginning of the 2009-2010 school year, 499 schools and 35 districts were identified. The increase in identified schools and districts follows a change made in the calculation of AYP for the Students with Disabilities subgroup, as well as time adjustment of assessment cut scores based on a later administration of state assessments. The new, higher cut scores for student proficiency on the grades 3-8 English language arts and mathematics assessments announced by the Regents in July 2010 were not used to make AYP determinations in 2009-10 but will first be used for this purpose in 2010-11.

ANALYSIS OF SCHOOL DATA

The number of schools and districts identified for accountability status increased this year compared to 2009–10.Ìý This year 99 schools and 4 districts were newly identified compared to 49 schools and 3 districts for 2009-10. Fifty-eight of the newly identified schools and 23 of the newly removed schools were in New York City.ÌýÌý None of the newly identified or newly removed districts were in New York City, (Note: for accountability purposes New York City consists of 32 community school districts).

ANALYSIS OF DISTRICT DATA

Of the 35 districts identified, 12 are in New York City and 23 are in the rest of the state. Districts in Need of Improvement (DINI) must develop a Local Educational Agency (LEA) Plan within three months of being identified.Ìý The LEA plans must be submitted to the SED for approval.

DIFFERENTIATED ACCOUNTABILITY

Under New York’s federally approved Differentiated Accountability (DA) system, schools and districts are responsible for the performance of every accountability group in which at least 30 students participate in the elementary/middle-level math, English Language Arts, and science tests. At the high school level, school and districts are responsible for English language arts and math assessment results through June 2010 for students who first entered ninth grade during the 2006-07 school year and the graduation results through August 2009 of students who first entered ninth grade during the 2005-06 school year. Disaggregated groups include low-income students, students with disabilities, limited English proficient students, and racial/ethnic groups.

Differentiated Accountability places schools into three phases and three categories of identification.Ìý Under DA, each 91°µÍøÆƽâ°æ public and charter school that is not in Good Standing in 2010-11 has been designated to an accountability phase – Improvement, Corrective Action, or Restructuring – based on its history of making AYP and its 2009–10 AYP status for each accountability measure. These schools have also been assigned an accountability "category" – Basic, Focused, or Comprehensive – based on the student accountability group(s) whose failure to make AYP caused the school to be identified.

Schools in the Comprehensive category are generally demonstrating a systemic inability to make Adequate Yearly Progress.Ìý Schools in the Basic and Focused categories generally need to make progress with specific subgroups of students, such as students with disabilities or limited English proficient students.

Under DA, both Title I and non-Title I schools are generally required to undertake the same improvement efforts.Ìý Improvement plans must be based on a School Quality Review report; corrective action plans must be based on a curriculum audit; and the restructuring plans must incorporate an educational assessment made by a Joint Intervention Team.Ìý However, only Title I schools must offer Supplemental Educational Services (SES) and may also be required to offer public school choice. Beginning in 2009-10, eligible students in Title I schools must receive SES in the first year of designation rather than in the second.Ìý School choice must be offered in the second year rather than in the first year of designation.Ìý More information on New York’s Differentiated Accountability system can be found at:.

RAISING PROFICIENCY STANDARDS

In July 2010, the Board of Regents made the decision to raise Grades 3-8 ELA and mathematics achievement standards so that academic proficiency in 91°µÍøÆƽâ°æ will now mean that a student is on track to meet high school exit examination requirements and pass first year college courses in ELA and mathematics without the need for remediation. In revising academic achievement standards, the Regents recognized that in many schools and districts there will be a significant decline in the percentage of students who will demonstrate proficiency on the Grades 3-8 ELA and mathematics assessments.

In order to ensure a smooth transition to these new standards, the State Education Department (SED) has begun to report school and district performance using these new proficiency standards with the 2009–10 school year results. However, SED will first apply the new standards when making AYP determinations to 2010–11 assessment results.

Because the Grades 3-8 ELA and mathematics assessments were administered later in the school year in 2009-10 than in previous years, SED has established time adjusted cut scores for the 2009-10 assessments based on the 2008-09 academic achievement standards.Ìý More information about time adjusted cut scores can be found at:

PERSISTENTLY LOWEST-ACHIEVING/SCHOOLS
UNDER REGISTRATION REVIEW

Later in the school year, the Commissioner will identify persistently lowest-achieving /Schools Under Registration Review (PLA/SURR) for 2010.Ìý PLA/SURR schools are identified from among the lowest performing five percent of schools in 91°µÍøÆƽâ°æ, based on school performance on state ELA and mathematics assessments combined. In addition, schools that have graduation rates below 60 percent for three consecutive years are also identified as PLA/SURR.Ìý Districts with PLA/SURR will be required to submit plans to the Commissioner for approval to implement one of four federally mandated intervention strategies: turnaround, restart, closure, or transformation.Ìý More information on the intervention requirements for these schools can be found at:
.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Complete lists of schools and districts with their accountability status are available by clicking on

. The lists are grouped by district. Lists also show newly identified schools, schools removed from School in Need of Improvement status, and schools in Good Standing.

Ìý