YSLETA INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT Division of Academics Federal & State Programs VISION STATEMENT...
-
Upload
elizabeth-horton -
Category
Documents
-
view
216 -
download
0
Transcript of YSLETA INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT Division of Academics Federal & State Programs VISION STATEMENT...
YSLETA INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICTDivision of Academics
Federal & State Programs
VISION STATEMENTAll students who enroll in our schools will graduate from high school, fluent in two or more languages, prepared and inspired to continue their
education in a four year college, university or institution of higher education so that they become successful citizens in their community.
State Compensatory Education
May, 2013
State Compensatory Education
YISD CONTACTS
Gilbert Rodriguez [email protected] (915) 434-0792
Alice Garcia [email protected] (915) 434-0796
Jackie Saenz [email protected] (915) 434-0793
SCE References• Financial Accountability System Resource Guide (FASRG) Module 9
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/index4.aspx?id=1222
SCE References• Texas Education Code, Section 29.081
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/ED/htm/ED.29.htm#29.081
SCE References• Q & A on State Compensatory Education
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/index4.aspx?id=4082
State Compensatory EducationRules and Regulations
SCE –State Mandated Program
Programs and/or Services designed to supplement the regular education program for at-risk students.
• Goal: Improve TAKS/STAAR scores
• Purpose: Increase academic Achievement
Decrease drop out rate
Planning District/Campus Improvement Plans (D/CIP)
Serves as the Primary Record, supporting expenditures• Comprehensive Needs Assessment• CIP/Goals, objectives, and strategies• Total SCE funds allocated for resources and staff• Actual dollar amounts for activities • Supplemental FTE’s for SCE• Timelines for monitoring strategies/activities• Formative and summative evaluation criteria
Planning
The district must design the State Compensatory Education Program based on the identified needs of
students at risk of dropping out of school.
The Comprehensive Needs Assessment is the Driving Force behind District/Campus Planning.
Planning
The District/Campus Improvement Plan must include the following:
• Total amount of SCE funds allocated for resources & staff
• Actual dollar amounts for the activities and SCE dollars that show 52% of the entitlement
• Cumulative summary of program and entire budget in the DIP
• Specific campus activities and campus budget in the CIPs
Staff Development • School Personnel – Receive training designed to
assist students at risk of dropping out of school-Training & training expense must be reasonable and
necessary
-Training must be aligned with the needs of at-risk students
-District must ensure training is not a “one time” event
• District must maintain documentation -Training was evaluated for effectiveness
-District established written policies regarding attendance of staff development
Evaluation of SCE
• SCE program must be evaluated and documented by showing the effectiveness of reducing disparity in
₋ Assessments performed between at risk students and all district students
₋ Rates of high school completion
₋ Effectiveness of the SCE program
₋ Assure strategies have been implemented as designed
₋ SCE resources must be Redirected when programs/services are unsuccessful
State Compensatory Education13 @ Risk Indicators
Texas Education Code §29.081A student at risk of dropping out of school includes each student who is under 21 years of age and who… 1. Unsatisfactory performance on a readiness test (PK -3)2. Did not maintain an average of 70 in two or more subjects3. Not promoted for one or more school years (R)
4. Did not perform satisfactorily on an assessment instrument
5. Is pregnant or is a parent (R) http://www.tea.state.tx.us/PRS.html
6. Placed in an alternative education program (TEC37.006)
7. Expelled (TEC37.007)
8. Parole, probation, deferred prosecution, or other conditional release
9. Dropped out of school as reported PEIMS (R)
10. Is a student of Limited English Proficiency
11. Custody or care of the Department of Protective and Regulatory Services
12. Homeless
13. Resides in a residential placement facility.
Local Student EligibilityModule 9, Section 9.2.3.2
o Local criteria must be adopted by the board of trustees
oAdopted criteria must be clearly defined in the district improvement plan for districts or the instructional plan for charter schools
oNumber of students may not exceed 10% of the number of students who received services during the preceding school year
o Students identified using local criteria - Not reported through PEIMS
Local Student Eligibility (cont.)
o LEA must maintain current auditable documentation regarding the locally identified at risk students
o Documentation indicating the compliance with the 10 percent cap must be:
-maintained at the LEA level
-addressed in the district/charter improvement plan
o SCE allotment may not be used to serve students on a particular campus if:
-the LEA has not identified any students on the same campus that meet any of the state criteria
SCE Funding
Direct Cost: 52% may be used to meet the costs of
(1) a supplemental compensatory, intensive, or accelerated instruction program under Section 29.081; or
(2) an alternative education program established under Section 37.008; or
(3) support to a program at a campus at which at least 40% of the students are low income; or
(4) a program specifically designed to serve students at risk of dropping out of school as defined by TEC Section 29.081.
SCE Funding (cont.)
Indirect Cost : 48% may be attributed in the General Fund to the following expenditure function codes:
• 34-Student Transportation • 41-General Administration• 81- Facilities Acquisition and Construction• Function 90 series of the General Fund, as defined in the
TEA Financial Accountability System Resource Guide (FASRG).
SCE Funding (cont.)
Understanding Program Intent codes (PIC)
• PIC 24 – Accelerated Instruction • PIC 26 – SCE: Non-Disciplinary Alternative Ed (Basic)• PIC 28 – SCE: Disciplinary Alternative Ed (Basic)• PIC 29 – SCE: Disciplinary Alternative Ed (Supplemental)• PIC 30 – Title I School-Wide Activities• PIC 32 – Pre-Kindergarten (Basic)• PIC 33 – Pre-Kindergarten (Special Education)• PIC 34 – Pre-Kindergarten (State Compensatory Education)• PIC 35 – Pre-Kindergarten (Bilingual Education)
State Compensatory EducationYsleta ISD Model
• Identify-Students• Enter/Exit-Students• Interventions/RTI• Goals/Benchmarks• Reports/Evaluation• Data Archiving
Enrollment Data
Homeless • Teen Parent
PEIMS
SCE
ALPS
CAMPUS@ Risk
LEP
Enrollment D
ata
Homeless • LEP • T
een Parent
@ Risk
Ysleta ISD Model
Ysleta ISD Statistics
• Total Enrollment:
43,504
• Total Campuses:62
• School-wide Campuses:
61
• Total At-Risk Students
21,889
Criteria #1 Pre-K thru 3rd Grade Reading Assessments
Pre-K: CIRCLE/C-PALLS+ (Center for Improving the Readiness of Children for
Learning and Education) / (Phonological Awareness Language and Literacy Screener)
K-2: TPRI/Tejas LEE (Texas Primary Reading Inventory)
3rd Grade: WRAP (Writing, Reading Assessment Protocol)
Criteria #1 Pre-K thru 3rd Grade Math Assessments
Pre-K: CIRCLE/C-PALLS+ (Center for Improving the Readiness of Children for Learning and Education) / (Phonological Awareness Language and Literacy Screener) + = Math Screener
K-2: TCM (Teacher Created Materials)
3rd Grade: TCM (Teacher Created Materials)
Criteria 4 TAKS 110% Calculation
Excel Spreadsheet- Example of 110%Calculation
110% Rule:Student Needs to Pass Re-Test with 110% of Failed Score
Step 1: Total Test Questions Quantity of Questions Answered Correctly
4428
Test Score 63.4%
(Failed)
Step 2: 110% Rule: 28 X .110 = 3 28 + 3 = 31
Required Correct Answer 31
Procedures and Program Description
• Program Overview• Campus Committee• Campus Contact• Student Eligibility • Student Identification • Student Exit • Program Evaluation
Ysleta ISD –Funding
SCE Funds for 2012-13 (Approx. $22 Million)
• Compensatory Educational enrichment activities
• IntensiveExtended day, week, year E2020
•Accelerated TAKS/STAAR remediation Specialized Reading & Math ProgramsIndividualized Computer-Assisted Instruction
SCE Campus Trainings
• Area Learning Communities• Counselors Professional Development • One-on-One Campus• Clerks• Principals/Administrators• PEIMS Data Quality Control Conferences• YISD Data Quality, Policies, and Procedures• Teachers – Holiday Exchange
At-Risk Identification Process
• Committee
Reviews Student Cum Folders
Identify At –Risk Students (13 At-Risk Criteria)
Enter/Exit Students from At-Risk Criteria/Status
• Administrators/Teachers
Interventions- Strategies and Activities
• Administrators/Clerks
Data entry @ Risk students SCE Module
Review/Monitoring Process
August – September 30 Students transitioning from:
- Pre-K to elementary
- Elementary to middle & middle to high schools New Identified At-Risk Students (30-days)
October-January Ongoing review of interventions/cum folders of all identified
at-risk students
March-May Final Updates –SCE module records and end of year student
cum folders (Exit – Transition)
Ysleta ISD ElementaryStudent Performance Comparison
Grade
TAKS Subject
Tests Difference Difference At Risk Other At Risk Other
3rd Reading 79% 79% 0% 90% 75% 15%3rd Math 70% 50% 20% 90% 80% 10%4th Reading 63% 93% -30% 86% 81% 5%4th Math 61% 100% -39% 78% 100% -22%5th Reading 79% 83% -4% 75% 86% -11%5th Math 74% 88% -14% 73% 86% -13%6th Reading 50% 92% -42% 72% 70% 2%6th Math 81% 92% -11% 83% 85% -2%Total: Reading 67% 86% -19% 77% 78% -1%Total: Math 71% 79% -8% 83% 87% -4%
2009-10 2010-11
• Where are the concerns for the campus?• Have gains or losses been analyzed?
State Compensatory EducationTAKS Percent Passing
Students At-Risk and All Other District Students
2009-2010 2010-2011
READING/ELA
Number Number Percent Number Number Percent
Tested Passing Passing Tested Passing Passing
At-Risk 13,392 11,293 84% 13,748 11,323 82%
All Others 13,846 13,371 97% 13,704 13,157 96%
MATHEMATICS
Number Number Percent Number Number Percent
Tested Passing Passing Tested Passing Passing
At-Risk 13,212 9,838 74% 13,575 10,154 75%
All Others 13,821 12,956 94% 13,714 12,681 92%
14%
17%
Ysleta Independent School DistrictState Compensatory EducationAt-Risk Student Dropout Rate
2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-11
9.9% 9.8% 8.7%
At Risk Students/Interventions
June 2010 June 2011 June 2012 April 20130
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
23,927 24,389
20,29021,761
15,191
19,743
16,734
23,431
# of At Risk Students
# of Students with Interven-tions
Electronic Student Data Entry System
State Comp Ed – Content Screen
Search Screen
56321
32547
69821
45873
63251
85691
32687
19648
98564
86524
96587
Arellano
Fernandez
Garcia
Garcia
Hernandez
Herrera
Jacquez
Martinez
Avila
Contreras
Davis
Mickey
Bugs
Porky
Sylvester
Popeye
Elmer
Petunia
Goofy
Donald
Daffy
Daisy
13 At-Risk Data
Enter/Edit At-Risk Data13 At-Risk Data
Entry Date Withdraw Date
09/01/2008
09/01/2008 01/10/2009
09/04/2012
06/06/2010
2nd Grade
2009-10
1
Pretest - Failed reading portion of TPRI Midtest – Passed reading portion of TPRI
06/12/2012
09/20/2012
Intervention Screen
Interventions – Drop Down Box
Intervention Screen
Tutoring will take place Monday-Thursday from 3:00-4:00 in a small group setting. Student progress will be monitored every six weeks and will need to have gained 5%. If student does not meet progress within the 6 weeks, reevaluate intervention and possibly assign an alternate.
20%
Intervention Panel
State Comp Ed – Content Screen
Reports Screen
Campus Summary Report
Standard Student Report
12345
85632
96587
23658
12587
36521
32547
12547
Avila, Joseph
Campos, Ana
Davis, Greg
Garcia, Robert
Garcia, Shawn
Lopez, Jaime
Murray, John
Smith, Albert
Questions?