Pennsylvania

1
Pennsylvanias Continuous Improvement Process
2
Understanding AYP

• How much do you know about AYP?

3
No Child Left Behind

• No Child Left Behind Act of 2001
• All students must be Proficient or higher in
  mathematics and reading/language arts by 2014.
• To ensure that districts and schools are on track
  to achieve this goal, states determine if
  districts and schools are making sufficient
  progress each year
• Adequate Yearly Progress

4
AYP Review

• AYP is calculated differently for schools and
  districts
• Schools
• Performance and participation
• Tested grades in the school
• All relevant subgroups or student groups N 40
  in the tested grades in the school
• Other academic indicator (Attendance or
  Graduation)
• Entire school population

5
AYP Targets for Schools

6
AYP Targets for Schools

• Participation in the math assessment - 95
• Participation in the reading assessment - 95
• Attendance for schools without graduating class
  90 or improvement
• Or.
• Graduation for schools with a graduating class
  80 or improvement

7
AYP Review

• AYP is calculated differently for schools and
  districts
• Districts
• Performance and participation
• Grade spans
• Grades 3 to 5
• Grades 6 t0 8
• Grades 9 to 12
• All relevant subgroups or student groups N 40
  in the grade span
• Other academic indicators (Attendance AND
  Graduation)
• District population

8
(No Transcript)
9

• Answer these questions relative to the reading
  concerns identified through data analysis

10
(No Transcript)
11
Standards Aligned System
12
Aligning the Components

• 1. Is there strong, observable evidence that the
  standards-aligned curriculum and instructional
  practices are consistently implemented across all
  classrooms?

13
Aligning the Components

• Activity

14
Standards Aligned System
2. Is there strong, observable evidence that
school staff regularly uses standards-aligned
benchmark assessments to monitor and adjust
instructional practices?
15
Standards Aligned System
3. Is there strong, observable evidence that
struggling students are identified early and are
supported by an intervention infrastructure with
a system for monitoring effectiveness?
16
Standards Aligned System
4. Is there strong, observable evidence that all
students (e.g. English Language Learners,
students with disabilities etc.) have access to
challenging, on-standard curriculum and rigorous
assignments?
17
Standards Aligned System
5. Is there strong, observable evidence that the
effectiveness and experience of the teacher are
matched to the needs of students as equitably as
possible?
18
Standards Aligned System
6. Is there strong, observable evidence that
professional development is linked directly to
the schools instructional priorities is
standards-based and is differentiated to meet
the continuous learning needs of school staff?
19
Standards Aligned System
7. Is there strong, observable evidence that
school staff and administrators meet regularly to
reflect on their professional practice and the
progress of student learning, through an on-going
review and analysis of a variety of data and a
sharing of best practices?
20
Standards Aligned System
8. Is there strong, observable evidence that new
and/or struggling teachers, staff, and
administrators receive timely, effective support
and intervention?
21
Standards Aligned System
9. Is there strong, observable evidence that a
significant proportion of the schools resources
(e.g., money, people, time) is directed toward
strategies that enhance professional practice and
the core instructional program?
22
Standards Aligned System
10. Is there strong, observable evidence that the
principal is proactively involved in aligning the
components of a standards-aligned system?
23
Questions?