Search

The article discusses the impression of school board presidents on the critical skills and knowledge needed for superintendents and mentions the Illinois Association of School Boards, the Adequate Yearly Progress, and an overview of what superintendents must do.

The article relates five growth models used by the U.S. Department of Education (USED) to calculate adequate yearly progress (AYP) which include value added, value table and trajectory. It notes that most of the models involve complex statistical calculations to describe students' growth. In value model, each student becomes his own control while the value table model assigns points to the school for each student. It notes that AYP is met if the school shows progress above the trajectory line.

The article features the Monte Vista Elementary School in Las Cruces Public Schools, an urban district in southern New Mexico. It relates that this K-5 elementary-school opened under the leadership of principal Theresa Jaramillo-Jones in August 2010. It discusses Monte Vista's commitment to Learning Forward's Outcomes standard. It also mentions several achievements of the Monte Vista including the Adequate Yearly Progress in mathematics and the A rating in its second year.

The article discusses the use of multiple measures of teacher and student evaluation in schools, focusing on the U.S. No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and adequate yearly progress (AYP). Several scenarios related to a principal's assessment of teachers, students, and the principal's own performance are given. The scenarios are then evaluated in terms of three purposes including increasing reliability, narrowing increments of distinction, and predicting other behaviors.

The article offers information about implementing Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in middle school math. Under the No Child Left Behind Act, AYP notes areas to be changed in math instruction, including curriculum's alignment to the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) and state learning standards, delivery of instruction based on standards with effective research-based methods, and classroom and school climate. Also describes is the testing in math of the Illinois Standards Achievement Test (ISAT).

The article presents the author's view on the significance of collaboration between secondary schools and college institutions to students who are preparing for higher education. The author elucidates the problems of several students in preparing themselves for college and cites that he identified the problems, particularly the disconnection between K-12 and collegiate education. Inasmuch, the author acknowledges the areas of disjunction including academic standards, communication, policy, and finance.

The author reflects on the failure of the U.S. No Child Left Behind (NCLB) law. She comments on the history of the law and its aim at improving education with adequate yearly progress (AYP) scores. She believes that the AYP formula sets up most public schools for failure. The effects of NCLB on U.S. schools and students are described. The author explains why she believes that NCLB is part of a campaign by corporate sectors to take control of U.S. schools and how the country can prevent this.

The article discusses how teacher training in gender differences can be leveraged and applied across subgroups, including those defined by race/ethnicity, income, and English-language ability, to support elementary schools' adequate yearly progress under the U.S. No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and develop boys' desire to read. The author examines a school principals' role in providing and assessing effective teacher training in instructional strategies to address gender differences in education.

The article presents the turn over of graduating students in Fort Sam Houston Independent School of District (FSHISD), a district which serves the children of active military personnel in Texas. Fort Sam has administered several issues on deployment, anxiety and hardship experienced by the students during their stay in the district. Despite the challenges, Fort Sam has earned high ratings in public school accountability system and made the Adequate Yearly Progress under No Child Left Behind.

The article reports about difficulties in evaluating the performance of student subgroups involved in a program for inclusion of students with disabilities in the accountability system for U.S. schools. Factors affecting schools’ Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) are discussed with focus given to variations in different states’ accountability standards and regulations introduced by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) and its 2001 reauthorization, the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB).

The article discusses a study titled "Fifty Ways to Leave a Child Behind: Idiosyncrasies and Discrepancies in States' Implementation of NCLB," by Elizabeth Davidson, Randall Reback, Jonah E. Rockoff, and Heather L. Schwartz. It mentions the reasons for the variations in the adequate yearly progress (AYP) of students in U.S. states. It discusses the difficulties in executing the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) rules, its liabilities, and the differences between AYP failing and non-failing schools.

The article discusses the effects of adequate yearly progress (AYP) waivers under the Title III grant program's annual measurable achievement objectives (AMAO) for English language learners (ELLs) covered under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) in the U.S. It comments on the U.S. Education Department's (ED) clarification on AMAO 3 and its relationship to state accountability and educational guidelines. It addresses the impact on educational quality for ELLs.

The article features a report from the Center on Education Policy (CEP), entitled "Adequate Yearly Progress Results for 2010-11" which revealed that at least 48 percent of schools did not make their adequate yearly progress (AYP) targets. The CEP results were given by state officials and taken from state websites. CEP noted that AYP results may vary due to appeals from school districts, waivers, and other factors. Findings from the report are cited.

The article reports that the U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) has reversed its plan to revamp Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) indicators. The article notes that the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP), State Performance Plan (SPP), and Annual Performance Report (APR) indicators will remain, though with a possible option for online reporting.

The article discusses the failure of the U.S. Congress to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) in 2011. Particular focus is given to the roles played by Representative John Kline and Senator Tom Harkin in the process and policy differences between the Democratic and Republican parties. A government waiver to allow schools to bypass requirements for Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) is also discussed.

The article reports that the U.S. Department of Education has approved a plan which would allow states extensions in applying for waivers to bypass educational accountability requirements outlined in the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). The article cites the education reform plans necessary for states to design in order to receive the waivers as reasons for the extension. Other topics include the waiver application review process, adequate yearly progress (AYP), and comments from education official Sharon Hall.

The article discusses a letter from the U.S. National Center for Learning Disabilities (NCLD) which argues that S. 1571, the Elementary and Secondary Education Amendments Act, an amendment to Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), would be counterproductive. It examines the aims of the amendment, including the establishment of a college- and career-readiness goal, the elimination of the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) system, and the simplification of Title I state plans.

The article discusses a standards-based curriculum and delivery system implemented at Manchester Elementary School in Pinewood, South Carolina. The author describes efforts to reach and maintain adequate yearly progress (AYP) in schools as mandated by the No Child Left Behind Act. The author describes aspects of the system including classroom observations, technology support for students, and targeted intervention for students.

The article discusses confidence intervals, which are similar to adjustments for margins of error, in the calculation of adequate yearly progress (AYP) for schools and the reauthorization of the U.S. Elementary and Secondary Schools Act (ESEA). The U.S. Department of Education has decided that confidence intervals will not be used for AYP. Examples of how confidence intervals would impact the AYP of the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) in California, the Abington School District in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and the School District of Philadelphia are examined.

The article discusses data the journal obtained from the U.S. Department of Education detailing the statistical methods used to arrive at U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan's claim that 82 percent of American schools would fail to make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) during the 2010-2011 school year. Comments from Wayne Riddle, a consultant with the Center on Education Policy (CDP), are offered regarding his contention that the Department of Educations processes were oversimplified.

The article reports on calls for relief from Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) sanctions by the U.S. National School Boards Association (NSBA) and the American Association of School Administrators (AASA). A clearer assessment policy that does not set such strict parameters for achievement is sought by the groups which were affected by sanctions defined by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.

The article discusses the report "Federal Policy, ESEA Reauthorization, and the School-to-Prison Pipeline," in which the negative impact that the rules about educational accountability and adequate yearly progress (AYP) in the U.S. No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) has had on educational quality at failing schools. The report also found that school discipline policies are hindering some students' academic achievement. The reauthorization of the U.S. Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) is considered.

The article discusses the reauthorization of the U.S. Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), which Arne Duncan, the U.S. Secretary of Education, and President Barack Obama would like to see completed in 2011. U.S. Representative John Kline comments on how the reauthorization should not be rushed. Consideration is given to data about the number of schools in the U.S. that are not meeting targets for adequate yearly progress (AYP). The number of duplicate federal programs that address teacher quality are also discussed.

The article presents a list of issues that U.S. Representative Mike Enzi and Senator Lamar Alexander have targeted as necessary to focus on in the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). It mentions proposed changes to several issues included in the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) such as adequate yearly progress (AYP), decision-making regarding education funding, and teaching to the test.

The article discusses a report by the U.S. Institute of Education Sciences about school improvement strategies that school principals and special educators believes are successful. The study will focus on schools that have not reached goals of adequate yearly progress (AYP). The report is part of an initiative to examine the efficacy of the U.S. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Principals will be asked about teacher development, grade repetition among special education students, and about response to intervention (RTI).

The article discusses the four-year adjusted cohort graduation rate method that schools are adopting per the instructions of the U.S. Department of Education. It is noted that states have different methods for calculating graduation rates. Kathy Christie, who is the chief of staff of the Education Commission of the States (ECS), comments on the likelihood that there will ever be a national standard for calculating graduation rates. Other topics include adequate yearly progress (AYP).

The article discusses academic accountability, failing schools, and adequate yearly progress (AYP) in connection to the reauthorization of the U.S. Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan comments on the creation of a more targeted approach to educational accountability in which schools focus energy on struggling educational subsets. School improvement, educational change, and closing achievement gaps are also discussed.

The article discusses the North East Independent School District (ISD) in San Antonio, Texas and its success in helping students with disabilities and meeting the goals of adequate yearly progress. (AYP). Special education executive director Judith Moening of North East ISD talks about the district's success and how it tests students with disabilities, teaching methods, and the use of alternative curricula.

The article reports on reaction which has been seen among the Council of Chief State School Officers and the educational community of the U.S. in response to the U.S. Department of Education's plans to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act in 2010. A discussion of the role that U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan will play in the reauthorization is presented. The impact the reauthorization will have on the measurement of adequate yearly progress of students is discussed.

The article discusses the U.S. Department of Education's fiscal year 2011 budget, which Education Secretary Arne Duncan termed as a strategic shift towards competitive grant programs. Duncan mentions that the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) reauthorization program would replace Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP), with a broader picture of school performance that looks at student growth and school progress. The article also enumerates several education programs, among them, Promise Neighborhood, Race to the Top and Investing in Innovation Fund.

The article reports that U.S. education groups are concerned about what the U.S. Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) reauthorization proposal may contain. Groups are positioning themselves to make recommendations. They are concerned because the administration of U.S. President Barack Obama has been hinting that the proposal will eliminate the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) system and the 2014 student proficiency deadline.

The article reports on the effects of the U.S. Education Department's Race to the Top education grant program on special education teachers and students with disabilities. U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan has stated that the program's name is in response to critics of the U.S. No Child Left Behind act, who believe states have lowered their student achievement standards to help states make adequate yearly progress. Information is given for the program's definition of an effective teacher.

The article discusses a report by the Center for Public Education (CPE) on the performance of students who take longer to graduate from high school compared to those who dropout and those who get a general equivalency diploma (GED). Jim Hull of CPE comments on how the study could be used to reevaluate how graduate rates are calculated and how schools calculate their adequate yearly progress (AYP).

The article offers discussion on the concept of a failing school. It states that the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) defines failing schools as those that fail to make adequate yearly progress for two or more years in a row. However, challenges on this NCLB definition were raised by D.B. Downey, P.T. von Hippel, and M. Hughes. According to them, there are other ways to identify failing schools, such as by measuring learning or by measuring impact.

The article discusses the U.S. No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and the issues that the law raises with its requirements for the disaggregation of test scores by a variety of categories for educational accountability purposes. The National Technical Advisory Council (NTAC) favors lowering the size of each student group that will be used in the accountability equations. The sample sizes vary by state and can, depending on the size, impact a school's adequate yearly progress (AYP).

The article discusses the U.S. Education Department's suggestions for calculating graduation rates under the Title I regulations. The author explains that the rule requires all student subgroups to meet a school's target graduation rate in order to make adequate yearly progress. The author states that the aim of the regulation is to establish a uniform method of calculating graduation rates. The article also discusses when schools should report the extended-year rates for any cohort of students.

The article discusses a court case wherein the Ohio Court of Appeals revived a school's circumlocutory efforts to establish that it was making adequate yearly progress (AYP) under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), and concluded that the school could argue that the Ohio Department of Education's (ODE) AYP appeals protocols violated the state's rule-making statute. In W.C. Cupe Community Sch. v. Zelman, a school claimed that the ODE never proposed its AYP appeals procedure before implementing it.

The article discusses the changes that U.S. Education Secretary Margaret Spellings has proposed for Title I that include the use of growth models for calculating adequate yearly progress (AYP). Other stakeholders have asked that the timeline for school restructuring be revisited because such changes can be timely. A proposal regarding graduation rates has been criticized by the National Governors Association (NGA).

The article focuses on Michigan and Missouri, who have joined the states that will use a growth model to determine the level of academic achievement that schools are gaining or losing. U.S. Department of Education Secretary Margaret Spellings was needed to approve of the decision and supports the use of the growth models. The growth models track student achievement from year to year as a way to calculate adequate yearly progress (AYP).

The article focuses on the funding programme, Small, Rural School Achievement Program, organized by the U.S. Department of Education. It informs that the Local Education Agencies (LEA) are eligible for the programme. The main motive is that the programme provides financial assistance to rural districts which is helpful to them in meeting their state's adequate yearly progress.

The article focuses on the Idaho State Board of Education and its appeal to the U.S. Department of Education to adjust its school improvement schedule. The timeline is laid out according to the U.S. No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). The changes would reclassify schools that failed to meet their target adequate yearly progress (AYP). The state is arguing that the first four years of NCLB did not provide reliable data about academic achievement and should not be considered.

The article discusses a proposed pilot program that was designed by the U.S. Department of Education for the calculation of educational accountability, which is part of the U.S. No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). One change is that schools that are identified as troubled according to their adequate yearly progress (AYP) are able to get help sooner. Florida, Ohio, Virginia, and Arkansas have all implemented versions of the program.

This article reports on the proposed regulations from the U.S. Department of Education that require states to submit their No Child Left Behind Act accountability plans for review. According to proponents, statistical safeguards and calculations to annual test results minimize errors associated with test-score variances and increase the accuracy of Adequate Yearly Progress decisions. The American Association of School Administration expressed its concerns over the proposal.

The article focuses on an increase in student proficiency targets and the U.S. No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). States were able to choose their own benchmarks for adequate yearly progress (AYP) and it is believed that many schools will be considered failing. Michael Petrilli of the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation believes that the U.S. government must make NCLB a priority. The implications of the increases in California and South Carolina are that failing schools will increase.

The article reveals several issues that postponed the proposed revisions to the U.S. No Child Left Behind Act of 2007 (NCLB). One issue is accountability which covered three revisions to the law's adequate yearly progress system which remain in question such as whether the U.S. Congress will allow states to use multiple measures for school accountability. Another issue is school improvement which covered a proposal for a two-tiered sanction system.