Hundreds of Connecticut schools, including a dozen in Norwalk, have failed to meet meet the performance standards required by the federal No Child Left Behind Act.
WSHU, an NPR affiliate, has the story
12 of Norwalk's 17 public schools are "In Need of Improvement," because they did not make adequate yearly progress (AYP) on the Connecticut Mastery Test. The Norwalk school district itself is classified as "In Need of Improvement."
No Child Left Behind requires states to measure "adequate yearly progress" (AYP) for schools receiving Title I funds with the goal of all students reaching the proficient level on reading/language arts and mathematics tests by the 2013-2014 school year. States must define minimum levels of improvement as measured by standardized tests chosen by the state. If a school receiving Title I funding fails to meet its AYP target for two or more consecutive years (described as Year I), the school is designated "in need of improvement" and faces specific consequences.
The Norwalk schools that are in Need of Improvement are:
High School
Norwalk High School, Year IV
Brien McMahon, Year IV
Briggs,Year VI
Middle School
Nathan Hale,Year IV
Ponus Ridge,Year II
Roton,Year III
West Rocks,Year III
Elementary School
Cranbury Elementary School,Year II
Fox Run, Year I
Jefferson, Year III
Silvermine, Year III
Tracey, Year II
When a Title I school fails to meet adequate yearly progress (AYP) goals for two or more consecutive years (Year I), parents of chidren in that school have the choice to transfer their children to schools which are not identified as "in need of improvement" A district cannot deny school choice to eligible students due to lack of capacity.
When a Title I school fails to meet adequate yearly progress (AYP) goals for three or more consecutive years (Year II), students are eligible for state-approved supplemental educational services, which include tutoring or other extra education services that provide academic aid to students.
In addition to these services, parents continue to have school transfer options
When a Title I school fails to meet adequate yearly progress (AYP) goals for four consecutive years (Year III), the district must implement at least one of the following corrective actions: replace school staff; implement new curriculum; decrease the authority of school-level administration; appoint outside experts to advise the school; extend the school year or school day; and/or restructure the internal organization of the school.
When a Title I school fails to meet adequate yearly progress (AYP) goals for five (Year IV) consecutive years, the district must prepare a plan to restructure the school. The restructuring plan must include one of the following alternative governance arrangements: reopen the school as a public charter school; replace all or most of the school staff, including the principal; enter into a contract to have an outside entity operate the school; arrange for the state to take over operation of the school; or any other major restructuring of the school's governance arrangement.
When a Title I school fails to meet adequate yearly progress (AYP) goals for six consecutive years, the district must implement the plan developed in the previous year to restructure the school.
I have a call into Dr. Papallo to find out exactly what corrective and restructuring actions will be taking place as a result of these new results.
UPDATE:
According to Assistant Superintendent Tony Daddona,
"Sanctions’ only apply to Title I schools. Jefferson and Silvermine are the only two schools who require corrective action. These two schools have Executive Coaches. They work with the building Principal developing a School Improvement Plan and in the implementation of the School Improvement Plan. These schools also have received a plan for service of 5 days on CALI assistance... "
CALI is the Connecticut Accountability for Learning Initiative, a program by the State Department of Education to help schools devise a plan improvement to increase student performance.
The Title 1 schools that are in need of improvement are Cranbury, Fox Run, Jefferson, Silvermine and Tracey.
As one of the comments indicates Cranbury, Roton and Silvermine are "on hold," meaning if they make AYP next year they'll be off of the "needs improvement" list.
UPDATE 2:
If you'd like to access the NCLB data go the State Dept of Ed website:
http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/cwp/view.asp?a=2662&Q=322372
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
This news is depressing. Do we need the State to take over our school system. Maybe we should have mayoral control of the schools just like in NYC
ReplyDeletedepressing, indeed!
ReplyDeleteI know Silvermine made Safe Harbor so that is a good thing. Keep up the great work!
ReplyDeleteMs. Noor, could you check and see how many school s the state has taken over? I'm guessing ZERO, even though there are some schools like Columbus School in Bridgeport that have been failing for many, many years.
ReplyDeleteI'll check into to this.
ReplyDeleteNCLB was passed in 2001 and went into effect in 2002-03. Restructuring of schools, including possible state takeovers, are just beginning to occur because they are only mandated in year 5.
Here is an article in today's CT Post about two elementary schools in Ansonia, CT that have been restructured this year.
http://www.connpost.com/ci_13254978
Can you provide us with some more information on how to transfer schools. Why is it only Title I schools "in need" that allow transfers?
ReplyDeleteThe school transfer process is, by design, limiting. Parents cannot choose the school they want to transfer to, they are assigned the school and must take it or leave it. It is probably one of the main reasons why this transfer provision nationwide has not been a very successful initiative.
ReplyDeleteThe state has not taken over a single school in this state, and so it is not about to take over a school system. Norwalk has its issues, but there are far worse problems in other districts/schools, some of which have been on the list for years longer than the Norwalk schools.
ReplyDeleteI'm wondering if you can help us understand how "On Hold"/Safe Harbor works. For instance, West Rocks and Ponus made Safe Harbor last year, but I see they are still on the list of needs improvement. Does this mean that this year they didn't make Safe Harbor? So they couldn't come off the list? And if this is the case, do they have to start from scratch to come off the list? Do you have to make Safe Harbor 2 consecutive years in a row to come of the list?
ReplyDelete