Overview of the Annual Performance Report Development:

See Overview of the Development of the Annual Performance Report on page 1.

Monitoring Priority: FAPE in the LRE

Indicator #3:  Participation and performance of children with disabilities on statewide assessments:

A. Percent of districts that have a disability subgroup that meets the State’s minimum “n” size meeting the State’s AYP objectives for progress for the disability subgroup.

B. Participation rate for children with IEPs in a regular assessment with no accommodations; regular assessment with accommodations; alternate assessment against grade level standards; alternate assessment against alternate achievement standards.

C. Proficiency rate for children with IEPs against grade level standards and alternate achievement standards.

(20 U.S.C. 1416 (a)(3)(A))

Measurement:

A.  Percent = [(# of districts meeting the State’s AYP objectives for progress for the disability subgroup (children with IEPs)) divided by the (total # of districts that have a disability subgroup that meets the State’s minimum “n” size in the State)] times 100.

B.    Participation rate =

a.     # of children with IEPs in assessed grades;

b.     # of children with IEPs in regular assessment with no accommodations (percent = [(b) divided by (a)] times 100);

c.     # of children with IEPs in regular assessment with accommodations (percent = [(c) divided by (a)] times 100);

d.     # of children with IEPs in alternate assessment against grade level achievement standards (percent = [(d) divided by (a)] times 100); and

e.     # of children with IEPs in alternate assessment against alternate achievement standards (percent = [(e) divided by (a)] times 100).

Account for any children included in a but not included in b, c, d, or e above.

Overall Percent = [(b + c + d + e) divided by (a)].

C.    Proficiency rate =

a.     # of children with IEPs  in assessed grades;

b.     # of children with IEPs in assessed grades who are proficient or above as measured by the regular assessment with no accommodations (percent = [(b) divided by (a)] times 100);

c.     # of children with IEPs in assessed grades who are proficient or above as measured by the regular assessment with accommodations (percent = [(c) divided by (a)] times 100);

d.  # of children with IEPs in assessed grades who are proficient or above as measured by the alternate assessment against grade level achievement standards (percent = [(d) divided by (a)] times 100); and

e.  # of children with IEPs in assessed grades who are proficient or above as measured against alternate achievement standards (percent = [(e) divided by (a)] times 100).

Account for any children included in a but not included in b, c, d, or e above.

Overall Percent = [(b + c + d + e) divided by (a)].

New York State Notes:

  • New York State is not using data reported under section 618 in OSEP Table 6 for this indicator because Table 6 data are not consistent with how New York State calculates participation, proficiency and AYP under NCLB. Since school, district and State report cards contain data that are calculated to determine accountability under NCLB, the same data that are used in the State report card are presented in this APR.
     

  • One of the reasons that NYS is not using section 618 data from Table 6 in this APR is that in Table 6 there is no differentiation between the enrollment of students in each grade that is used as the basis for computing the participation rate and the proficiency rate. In NYS, there is a difference. The participation rate is computed based on total enrollment of students in a grade or for high school it is computed based on enrollment of “seniors”. However, the proficiency rate is based on the enrollment of “continuously enrolled” students in a grade or at the high school, the number of students in the accountability cohort.
  • Another reason that NYS does not use section 618 data is that for measures of proficiency, NYS uses a Performance Index (PI) for each grade and assessment, which consists of the percent of continuously enrolled tested students at “basic proficiency” and above (which is Level 2 and above) plus the percent of such students “at or above proficiency” (which is Levels 3-4). For the 2004-05 school year, NYS had six performance indices (grade 4 ELA, grade 4 math, grade 8 ELA, grade 8 math, high school ELA, and high school math).  Beginning with the 2005-06 school year, New York State has four indices (grades 3-8 ELA, grades 3-8 math, high school ELA and high school math).
     
  • NYS is not able to provide data disaggregated for students with disabilities who received testing accommodations and those who did not.  We expect to be able to report this disaggregation once our Student Information Repository System (SIRS) is fully implemented.
     
  • NYS does not currently administer an “alternate assessment against grade level standards” as described in measurement d.  NYS has an alternate assessment against alternate achievement standards that is aligned to grade level standards.

Target:

FFY

Measurable and Rigorous Target

2005
(2005-06)

AYP:   There will be an increase annually in the number and percent of school districts that make AYP for the students with disabilities subgroup in grades 3-8 ELA, grades 3-8 math, high school ELA and high school math.

Participation: 95 percent in grades 3-8 and high school in ELA and math.

Performance: The State’s average performance on the performance indices (PI) which represent the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 2 (basic proficiency) and above plus the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 3 (proficiency) and above will be as follows:
Grades 3-8 ELA: 91
Grades 3-8 Math: 100
High School ELA: 114
High School Math: 124

Actual Target Data for FFY 2005:

The participation rate of students with disabilities in 2005-06 school year in Grades 3-8 ELA was 95 percent, in Grades 3-8 math, 96 percent, in high school ELA, 90 percent and in high school math, 91 percent. The State met its target of 95 percent participation rate for students with disabilities in Grades 3-8 ELA and Grades 3-8 math, but not in high school ELA and math.

In 2005-06, the State developed four performance indices (PI). The performance indices represent the percent of students scoring at Levels 3-4 plus the percent of students scoring at Levels 2-4. These four indices replaced the six indices that were used to measure performance on State assessments in Grades 4, 8 and high school ELA and math. The State average performance for the students with disabilities subgroup on these indices was as follows:  
Grades 3-8 ELA: 91
Grades 3-8 Math: 100
High School ELA: 114
High School Math: 124

In the 2005-06 school year, 57.6 percent of school districts that were required to make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) made AYP in every grade and subject in which they had sufficient number of students with disabilities. The State met its 2005-06 target of 55.9 percent of school districts making AYP.

AYP for Students with Disabilities Subgroup

FFY

Number of School Districts Required to Make AYP (had minimum of 40 students for participation and 30 students for performance

Percent of School Districts that made AYP in all the Subjects they were Required to.

2004

(2004-05)

290

48.3%

2005

(2005-06)

670

57.6%

AYP for Students with Disabilities Subgroup by Need/Resource Capacity Category of School Districts in 2005-06

Need/Resource Capacity Category of School Districts

Number of School Districts Required to Make AYP (had minimum of 40 students for participation and 30 students for performance

Percent of School Districts that made AYP in all the Subjects they were Required to

New York City

33

9.1%

Large Four Cities

4

0.0%

Urban-Suburban High Need Districts

45

11.1%

Rural High Need Districts

137

66.4%

Average Need Districts

325

60.0%

 Low Need Districts

126

73.0%

Participation Rate for Students with Disabilities Subgroup

Assessment

Enrollment in 2004-05 (Seniors in High School)

Participation Rate in 2004-05 School Year

Enrollment in 2005-06 (Seniors in High School)

Participation Rate in 2005-06 School Year

Grade 4 ELA

30,922

96%

   

Grade 4 Math

30,567

97%

   

Grade 8 ELA

35,651

95%

   

Grade 8 Math

35,266

95%

   

Grade 3-8 ELA

   

198,410

95%

Grade 3-8 Math

   

198,074

96%

High School ELA

16,686

89.0%

17,321

90%

High School Math

16,686

90%

17,321

91%

Performance Index for the Students with Disabilities Subgroup

Assessment

2005-06 Performance

2005-06 Standard

Students with Disabilities Made AYP in 2005-06

2006-07

Safe- Harbor Target

Continuously Enrolled Students with Disabilities in Grades 3-8 and in 2002 Accountability Cohort in High School (HS)

NYS PI

Effective AMO

Safe- Harbor Target

Met Third Indicator for Safe Harbor

Grades 3-8 ELA

184,493

91

122

104

Yes

No

102

Grades 3-8 Math

183,411

100

86

Not Applicable

Not Applicable

Yes

110

HS Eng.  2002 accountability cohort

19,079

114

154

114

No

No

123

HS Math 2002 accountability cohort

19,079

124

146

117

No

No

132

Discussion of Improvement Activities Completed FFY 2005

In order to focus the State’s technical assistance efforts and improve performance of students with disabilities in school districts that are the lowest performing school districts for students with disabilities, during the 2006-07 school year, the State notified 107 school districts (or 75 school districts if New York City is counted as a single district) based on their 2004-05 school year data that they were designated as in “need of assistance” or “in need of intervention”. The designations were based on graduation rates or drop-out rates of students with disabilities. Six of the 107 school districts did not have sufficient numbers of students with disabilities in the 2001 total cohort to have a valid graduation or drop-out rate, so they were identified based on the performance of students with disabilities on grades 4 and 8 ELA and math assessments.

On October 5, 2006, the Commissioner of Education held a press conference and issued a press release to publicly announce this list of school districts. See press release at http://www.oms.nysed.gov/press/specialed100506.htm and public posting of list of school districts at http://www.p12.nysed.gov/specialed/swd-100506/swd-list.html.

See explanation under Indicator #1.

The criteria used for designations specifically related to this indicator were as follows:

Small District Criteria:

VESID plans to make the identification of lowest performing school districts for students with disabilities an annual process and will use the best criteria that are consistent with SPP goals and with the NCLB measures.

Explanation of Progress or Slippage that occurred for FFY 2005:

The State met its target of 95 percent participation rate for students with disabilities in Grades 3-8 ELA and Grades 3-8 math, but not in high school ELA and math. In high school ELA, the participation rate improved from 89 percent in 2004-05 to 90 percent in 2005-06 and from 90 percent in math to 91 percent. It is anticipated that the high school participation rate will improve once the State develops appropriate alternative State assessments for some students with disabilities who cannot participate in the regular assessments and for whom the New York State Alternate Assessment is not appropriate.

In 2005-06, the State developed four performance indices (PI). The performance indices represent the percent of students scoring at Levels 3-4 plus the percent of students scoring at Levels 2-4. These four indices replaced the six indices that were used to measure performance on State assessments in Grades 4, 8 and high school ELA and math. The State average performance for the students with disabilities subgroup on these indices was as follows:  
Grades 3-8 ELA: 91
Grades 3-8 Math: 100
High School ELA: 114
High School Math: 124

Since the grades 3-8 PI scores were established for the first time in 2005-06 school year, it is not possible to evaluate the State’s progress compared to the previous year. However, in high school ELA, the PI score improved from 104 to 114 and high school math PI improved from 108 to 124. The State met its 2005-06 targets since the State’s targets were the State average PIs.

In the 2005-06 school year, 57.6 percent of school districts that were required to make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) made AYP in every grade and subject in which they had sufficient number of students with disabilities. The State met its 2005-06 target of 55.9 percent of school districts making AYP. There was an increase from 290 school districts in 2004-05 to 670 school districts in 2005-06 in the number required to demonstrate AYP. This increase is due to many more school districts having sufficient enrollment of students with disabilities in Grades 3-8 combined, compared to enrollment in Grades 4 or 8 only.

Revisions, with Justification, to Proposed Targets/ Improvement Activities/ Timelines/ Resources for FFY 2005


The targets established for the three measures relating to the participation and performance of students with disabilities on statewide assessments use the same data that are used for accountability as described in the State’s approved plan under NCLB. 

FFY

Measurable and Rigorous Target

2005
(2005-06)

AYP55.9 percent of school districts that are required to make AYP for the students with disabilities subgroup will make AYP in grades 3-8 ELA, grades 3-8 math, high school ELA and high school math.

Participation: 95 percent in grades 3-8 and high school in ELA and math.

Performance: The State’s average performance on the performance indices (PI) which represent the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 2 (basic proficiency) and above plus the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 3 (proficiency) and above will be as follows:
Grades 3-8 ELA: 91
Grades 3-8 Math: 100
High School ELA: 114
High School Math: 124

2006
(2006-07)

AYP: 57 percent of school districts that are required to make AYP for the students with disabilities subgroup will make AYP in grades 3-8 ELA, grades 3-8 math, high school ELA and high school math.

Participation: 95 percent in grades 3-8 and high school in ELA and math.

Performance: The State’s average performance on the performance indices (PI) which represent the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 2 (basic proficiency) and above plus the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 3 (proficiency) and above will be as follows:
Grades 3-8 ELA: 96
Grades 3-8 Math: 105
High School ELA: 119
High School Math: 129

2007
(2007-08)

AYP:  58 percent of school districts that are required to make AYP for the students with disabilities subgroup will make AYP in grades 3-8 ELA, grades 3-8 math, high school ELA and high school math.

Participation: 95 percent in grades 3-8 and high school in ELA and math.

Performance: The State’s average performance on the performance indices (PI) which represent the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 2 (basic proficiency) and above plus the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 3 (proficiency) and above will be as follows:
Grades 3-8 ELA: 101
Grades 3-8 Math: 110
High School ELA: 124
High School Math: 134

2008
(2008-09)

AYP:  59 percent of school districts that are required to make AYP for the students with disabilities subgroup will make AYP in grades 3-8 ELA, grades 3-8 math, high school ELA and high school math.

Participation: 95 percent in grades 3-8 and high school in ELA and math.

Performance: The State’s average performance on the performance indices (PI) which represent the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 2 (basic proficiency) and above plus the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 3 (proficiency) and above will be as follows:
Grades 3-8 ELA: 106
Grades 3-8 Math: 115
High School ELA: 129
High School Math: 139

2009
(2009-10)

AYP: 61 percent of school districts that are required to make AYP for the students with disabilities subgroup will make AYP in grades 3-8 ELA, grades 3-8 math, high school ELA and high school math.

Participation: 95 percent in grades 3-8 and high school in ELA and math.

Performance: The State’s average performance on the performance indices (PI) which represent the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 2 (basic proficiency) and above plus the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 3 (proficiency) and above will be as follows:
Grades 3-8 ELA: 111
Grades 3-8 Math: 120
High School ELA: 134
High School Math: 144

2010
(2010-11)

AYP:  65 percent of school districts that are required to make AYP for the students with disabilities subgroup will make AYP in grades 3-8 ELA, grades 3-8 math, high school ELA and high school math.

Participation: 95 percent in grades 3-8 and high school in ELA and math.

Performance: The State’s average performance on the performance indices (PI) which represent the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 2 (basic proficiency) and above plus the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 3 (proficiency) and above will be as follows:
Grades 3-8 ELA: 116
Grades 3-8 Math: 125
High School ELA: 139
High School Math: 149

Revisions to Improvement Activities/Timelines/Resources for FFY 2005:

See Indicator #1.