FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, January 10, 2007

 

For More Information, Contact:

Jonathan Burman, or Tom Dunn, or Alan Ray at (518) 474-1201

Internet:  http://www.nysed.gov

506 TITLE I SCHOOLS AND 56 DISTRICTS  STATEWIDE ARE “IN NEED OF IMPROVEMENT” UNDER NCLB; 193 SCHOOLS ALSO IDENTIFIED UNDER SEPARATE STATE RULES

            A total of 506 schools and 56 districts have been identified by the State Education Department as “In Need of Improvement” under the federal No Child Left Behind Act.  Of these, 73 schools and 14 districts were newly identified this school year.   

In addition, 52 schools and 8 districts have been removed from the Title I improvement list because they have made Adequate Yearly Progress for two consecutive years in all areas for which they were identified.   

Forty-five of the newly identified schools and 27 of the newly removed schools were in New York City.   

All of these 506 schools and 56 districts receive Title I funds and must take a variety of actions under federal law.   

A total of 193 schools have also been identified as “Schools Requiring Academic Progress” (SRAP).  These schools did not receive Title I funds for the number of years required to be identified as schools “In Need of Improvement” under federal NCLB rules. Of these, 17 schools—6 in New York City—are newly identified. These schools are required to develop a plan for improvement in the area(s) for which they are identified. Thirty-three schools—12 in New York City—in SRAP status in 2005-06 made sufficient progress to be placed in good standing.   

The number of schools identified as either “In Need of Improvement” or “Requiring Academic Progress” increased slightly statewide from 694 in 2005-2006 to 699 in 2006-2007. The counts of schools identified for 2005-06 include only those schools operating in 2005-06. Some schools that were placed in improvement status for the 2005-06 school year closed before the beginning of that year. The following tables summarize the accountability status of all State schools and New York City schools.

 


School Status for All State Schools

2005-06

2006-07

 

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Good Standing

3,743

84.4%

3,749

84.3%

In Improvement Status under Title 1

502

11.3%

506

11.4%

Requiring Academic Progress

192

4.3%

193

4.3%

Total in improvement status

694

15.6%

699

15.7%

Total Schools

4,437

 

4,448

 

 

School Status for New York City Schools

2005-06

2006-07

 

Number

Percent

Number

Percent

Good Standing

931

69.5%

927

68.8%

In Improvement Status under Title 1

332

24.8%

335

24.9%

Requiring Academic Progress

77

5.7%

86

6.4%

Total in improvement status

409

30.5%

421

31.2%

 

1,340

 

1,348

 

 

Of the 506 schools identified as in need of improvement under NCLB, four schools that had previously been SRAP schools have now received Title I funds for a sufficient period of time to become identified as Schools in Need of Improvement (SINI). Conversely, of the 193 schools identified as SRAP, 21 schools that had been SINIs were moved to the SRAP list because they will not receive Title I funds during the 2006-2007 school year.

The counts of schools identified as in need of improvement under NCLB or requiring academic progress include schools at the elementary, middle, and high school level. In September 2006 the Department released the list of high schools that had been identified as in need of improvement based upon 2002 high school cohort results in English language arts and mathematics and high school completion results through August 2005 for students who first entered grade nine in 2001.  The list issued today updates the status of a small number of high schools.  The changes reflect such factors as the completion of the special assessment process for new high schools where no students had first entered grade 9 prior to 2002 and the completion of the analysis of the performance in high schools that also enroll students in the elementary and/or middle level grades.

Public announcement of the elementary and middle school results was delayed this year, with the approval of the United States Department of Education, as the State Education Department implemented both a new testing program in grade 3-8 English and mathematics and a new individualized student data collection system.  This new system will provide the public with significantly more information as part of the dissemination of electronic school and district report cards.  The State Education Department will release accountability decisions based on 2006-07 school year results prior to the start of the 2007-08 school year.

Given the planning involved in meeting SINI and SRAP requirements, the Department strives to provide districts with the information they need to determine the accountability status of their schools at the earliest possible date. Last spring, the Department informed school districts regarding which schools would be required to provide choice and Supplemental Educational Services in the 2006-2007 school year as well as those that might have to provide choice and Supplemental Educational Services based on 2005-2006 school year results.  In addition, the Department since last summer has been providing schools and districts with information that they can use to assist them in making judgments about whether a school or district would likely be identified for improvement. To facilitate the provision of Supplemental Educational Services, the Department has approved 298 Supplemental Educational Services providers with multiple sites across the state.

Schools and districts are identified for improvement based on elementary, middle and high school results in English and math, as well as elementary and middle level science results and high school completion rates. This year, for the first time, results from State tests in grades 3-8 in English and math were used to determine whether schools and districts made Adequate Yearly Progress. Previously State tests in English and math were administered to students only in grades four and eight. Schools are held accountable for the achievement of students of different races and ethnic groups, students with disabilities, students with limited English proficiency, and low-income students.  Schools are accountable for these groups of students if they have 30 or more students in the group.

Some of the schools identified today as needing improvement have educational programs that have produced good results for many students. However, the identified schools have not sufficiently improved achievement for particular groups of students, most often the students with disabilities subgroup.  In other cases, 95 percent of the students did not participate in State tests as required. 

For most elementary and middle schools and for districts, the implementation of grade 3-8 testing increases the number of students for whom they can now be held accountable, which in turn increases the number of groups for which the schools and districts are responsible for demonstrating Adequate Yearly Progress. In general, the more groups for which a school or district is held accountable the more difficult it becomes to make Adequate Yearly Progress. A particular challenge for many schools and districts is that the new grade 3-8 testing program results in schools and districts now being held accountable for the aggregated performance of students with disabilities and English Language Learners. These two groups typically demonstrate Adequate Yearly Progress at lower rates than do the other NCLB accountability groups.

Under NCLB, schools receiving Title I funds that did not make Adequate Yearly Progress for two consecutive years in the same subject and grade are designated as


Schools In Need of Improvement. Among other requirements, these schools are required to develop school improvement plans and offer public school choice.   Schools In Need of Improvement receive additional funding.

Schools that have been identified previously as in need of improvement that subsequently fail to make Adequate Yearly Progress on a criterion for which they have been identified are subject to additional requirements.  These schools are required to continue to implement their improvement plans, provide public school choice and also offer eligible students Supplemental Educational Services.  These services are provided outside of regular school hours by an organization selected by the parent from a list of qualified providers approved by the Department.  Continued failure to make Adequate Yearly Progress will result in schools being subject to corrective actions or restructuring. In some cases, school districts make a determination to phase out a school and replace it with a new one as a means to meet this restructuring requirement.

Schools Requiring Academic Progress do not fall under the provisions of Title I school accountability. However, they must develop improvement plans in the area for which they are identified and may also be required to take corrective actions or to restructure.  Schools Requiring Academic Progress are not required to offer public school choice or supplemental educational services.

Districts receiving Title I funds that did not make Adequate Yearly Progress for two consecutive years at both the elementary-middle level and high school level in the same subject are designated as Districts In Need of Improvement (DINI) and must develop a Local Educational Agency (LEA) Plan within three months of being identified. DINIs that fail for two years to make Adequate Yearly Progress at every applicable grade level in the subject area for which they are identified while receiving Title I funds become a District Requiring Corrective Action. These districts must conduct and implement the recommendations of a curriculum audit or risk the withholding of funds.

 

Four of the 506 schools in improvement status under NCLB are charter schools, three located in Buffalo and one in New York City.

 

There are 28 New York City school districts and 28 districts outside of New York City that are identified as Districts in Need of Improvement.  In addition, six Special Act School Districts that do not receive Title I funds have been designated as Districts Requiring Academic Progress.

Information on New York’s accountability system is available at www.p12.nysed.gov/irs/accountability/home.shtml.

The consequences for schools is spelled out at:

http://www.p12.nysed.gov/irs/school-accountability/about.shtml

 

- 30 -