Lake Elsinore Unified response to testing inquiry

8/3/2019 Lake Elsinore Unified response to testing inquiry

1/19

Lake Elsinore... Un-ified-Sc::l1ool-0-i-strict--

E.SCott

Matthies Dodd

Corral

Crippen

Thomas

W. Passarella

BowersSuperintendent& Operations

Alain GuevaraSuperintendentSupport

Superintendentl Suppor t servicesMeyerSuperintendentnel Support ServicesKathleen RobertsSuperintendentSupport Services

Taylorl Suppor t servicesWensel

253-7000Chaney StreetElsinore, CA 92530

13 December 2011

Dear Mr. Kilmer:This letter is in response to the November 30,2011, request by the CaliforniaDepartment of Education (CD E) to the Lake Elsinore Unified School District (LEUSD)to investigate allegations related to a complaint received by tDE related to processesand procedures used by the school district around the enrollrrlent and disenrollmentof students and subsequent reporting of students as continuously enrolled at thedistric t and school site levels fo r state accountability purposes.The Lake Elsinore Unified School District takes very seriously all aspects concerningtesting security and accountability, accurate reporting of demographic student data,and the integr ity of the state and federal accountabi lity systems. The LEUSD utilizesthe results of the STAR testing program to make high stakes decisions, on a continualbasis, to improve and adjust the academic program of our school system, to evaluateprograms, and to enhance the learning opportunities of all students in the district. Itis essential that those results arise from fully accurate data and the district takes allpossible steps to ensure that the regulations outlined in the STAR District and SiteCoordinator's Manual are followed.The Lake Elsinore Unified School District has conducted a thorough investigation intothese allegations in an effort to resolve the complaint. This investigation includeddetailed analysesand explanation of eachof the six (6) areas outlined in the CDErequest to the LEUSD. Please find the district's analyses and findings enclosed.This investigation included analysis of the districts CBEDS enrollment in Octoberversus the student enrollment and students tested during state testing in the spring.We also reviewed and provided explanation of the district's enrollment anddisenrollment policies and procedures related to how the schools within the districtdocument and report students entering and exiting the schools and district. Wehave evaluated and compared the rate of school and district mobility ofthe LEUSD toother districts in Riverside County. We have also compared the mobility rates ofeach of the school districts in RiversideCounty to the results of the 2010 UnitedStates Census Bureau, which documents residential mobility at various levels,including by school distr ict boundary. Our investigation included a review oftheSTAR District and Site Coordinator's Manual, Appendix K, and compared theregulations outlined in that section to the district's practices in documenting and


2/19

reporting students as continuously enrolled at the school and district levels. Thedistrict has also reviewed the STAR District and Site Coordinator's Manual regulationsregarding student participation in a migrant education program and providedexplanation as to why the LEUSD has not marked students as participants in such aprogram. We also provided analysesof districts in Riverside County to determine thenumber of students each district reports as migrant education program students.Based on extensive analyses and review of student data, documentat ion, and districtpractices and procedures, in relation to regulations outlined in the STAR District andSite Coordinator's Manual, the Lake Elsinore Unified School District is able to verifythat the student data reported for state testing purposes, including that related tostudent mobility and migrant education program participation, are consistent andaccurate with the reporting guidelines of student data used in the state and federalaccountability systems.As Assistant Superintendent of Instructional Support Services for Lake ElsinoreUnified School District, I have found no misconduct on behalf of any LEUSD employeeor contracted testing consultant, related to STAR testing and accountabi lity. Upon athorough investigation I have found that no district employee knowingly disenrolledand then reenrolled students between the CBEDS reporting date and the first day oftesting without cause. All STAR testing guidelines and protocols were upheld.If it would be helpful, we would be happy to come to the Department to fully discussand clarify our findings. Please note that the LEUSD district offices will be closedfrom December 19, 2011 through January 9, 2012. If you have addi tional questionsor require further information in order to resolve the complaint made to the CDE,please feel free to contact me at any time.

Sincerely,

Dr. Alain GuevaraAssistant SuperintendentInstructional Support ServicesLake Elsinore Unified School [email protected] (office) 7 (cell)


3/19

December 8, 2011Lake Elsinore Unified School District

... __ C ? ! _ e ~ ~ . ! ' : ! E ! . . ~ ~ . : . o n d u c ! = ~ ~ = ~ ~ ~ _ a n d __ .... . .__.__. ~ _ ~ p ~ ~ s ~ ! ~ : S : ~ ' ! 1 E l ~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ _ ~ I ~ e E _ ~ . i ~ n s A c c o u n t ~ b i l i ~ r .Contents1: Analysis ofthe difference between the annual district enrollment and the number tested for 2007 to2011 22: Explanation of the district's disenrollment (and enrollment) procedures andany procedural changes

3ince 20073: Verification that the district followed all the procedures outlined in STAR District and SiteCoordinator's Manual Appendix K (Attachment One) 44: Analysis of the rate of school and district mobility (Attachment Two) i ~ 55: Comparison and analysis of the rate of school and district mobility between Lake Elsinore U ~ andthe other distr icts in Riverside County 56: Explanation why the district has not reported any migrant students from 2007 to 2011 14Attachment 1: Student Mobility Tracking Form 15Attachment 2: Completed Student Mobility Tracking Forms 16

Page 1 of17


4/19

December 8, 2011Lake Elsinore Unif ied School DistrictBespanse_tQ.:.CQmRlaint a r i l l . . A J J ~ @ ! i o n ~ 9 J J 2 J ~ ! r i c t Misconduct-Testing and Accountability

~ - ' - - _ ~ _W _, __ _ ' _ . ~ _ . .. _

1: Analysis of the difference between the annual districtenrollment and the number tested for 2007 to 2011.A few potential factors were noticed that likely account for the difference between what was reportedby the district to CBEDS in October and the number enrolled reported through STAR and CAHSEE testing.Please see the narrative response and table below.First, upon examining the district enrollment in CBEDS, it was noticed that the enrollment includesSycamore Academy for Science and Cultural Arts {SASCAL the district's independent charter. Foraccountability purposes, scores from students testing at SASCA are not included in the distr ict 's API orAYP, because they are not a dependent charter. The enro llment asof the first day of testing comes fromthe AYP page of the Accountabili ty Progress Report (APR) which would not Include SASCA students. Thisaccounts for a 195 student difference between the enrollment reported by the state through CBEDS andthe enrollment reported by the state on the (APR).Additionally, the CBEDS enrollment includes all students, grades K-12. The enrollment reported by thestate on the APR only includes students in tested AYPgrade levels (grades 2-8 and 10). When removingthe SASCA students and students in the non-tested grade levels, the difference between the OctoberCBEDS enrollment and number enrolled the first day of testing is 350 students. This di fference isaccounted for by a decrease in district enrol lment between October 2010 and April 2011 in the AYPtesting grades. Similar trends have been seen each year between CBEDS reporting in October and statetesting in the spring.

We would not necessarily expect the number of students reported to be enrolled at CBEDS versustesting to be identical between October and when STAR testing is administered. When looking moreclosely into our enters and exits, we found the district had 3,622 students enter the district betweenCBEDS and testing and 4232 students left the district between CBEDS and testing. Thus, the differencein enrollment from CBEDS to STAR testing was 610 students. Ofthe 610 students, 252 were in nontested grade levels, leaving a difference of 358 tested students between CBEDS and STAR testing. Thus,the difference between the CBEDS enrollment the enrollment the district had at the time of testing iseight students. This difference of 8 students could be accounted for by students in non-public schools,who would be included in the APR enrollment, but not in the district's enrollment.

Page2 of 17


5/19

December 8,2011Lake Elsinore Unified School District

__ _ _ _ ~ ~ ~ P Q _ n _ ? _ ~ __ ! Q _ : ~ _ ~ ' ! 1 2 J ~ i l ] ~ n d _ ~ l l e g _ ~ ~ ! 1 ~ ! DJstric!-M i s ~ o n due!=-Tes! i n [ _ ~ nd ~ c c ~ _ ~ r l t a ~ l ! l ! Y _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _2: Explanation of the district's disenrollment (and enrollment)procedures and any procedural changes since 2007.The district disenrolls a student based on evidence of the following criteria: The student died while enrolled in school. The parent/guardian withdrew the student to enroll in another school or distr ict. The parent/guardian withdrew the student to home school. The student was placed in the CAYouth Authori ty The student was expelled from the district with no further particlpatlonln the district. The student lef t the school and met the state criteria as a dropout.

While the enrollment and disenrollment policies of the district have not changed since 2007, there hasbeen a procedural change in how the d istrict tracks students who enroll and disenroll f rom a school siteor the district. Beginning in the 2007-2008 school year, the district required all school sites to documentand submit, on a weekly basis, the names of all students who enter and all students who exit the school,as well as the date the student is entering or exiting the school. The schools also submit where thestudent has come from or is going to attend. This information is provided by the parent/guardianenroll ing or disenrolling the student. Attachment 1 is a sample of the district mobility tracking formprovided to the school sites and returned to the district each week. Attachment 2 shows two completedstudent mobility tracking forms completed by the attendance clerks. These lists are ernailed or faxed tothe district office eachTuesday by noon. The district enters the information obtained weekly bytheschool sites into a spreadsheet. Additionally, the district prints out the form from each site and retainsit. Data from the school sites are used for the STAR and CAHSEE pre-id files. Students who have entereda school from a different district between the October CBEDS date and the first day of testing are notconsidered continuously enrolled for state testing purposes. Students who enter a school from anotherschool site within the distr ict are considered continuously enrolled at the district level but not at theschool level.

Page 3 of 17


6/19

December 8, 2011Lake Elsinore Unified School DistrictR e s p o m e _ t Q _ ; . . . . C Q m p l q l D J . C ! Q ~ L 6 U ~ . R ~ t L Q n s . 2 L D i s t r i c tMisconduct-Testing and Accountability------_._-'------">_.-.. _ - ~ - _ . _ " . _ - - - - - . . . . - ._-_.__ --- -_. ---_ . __ - - _ . _ - - ~ . _ - _ ._---_.,. _ - - - . _ - - - ~ . _ . _ - _ . _ - - ~ - - - - , - - " - - - - - -3: Verification that the district followed all the proceduresoutlined in STAR District and Site Coordinator's ManualAppendix K (Attachment One).The STAR District and Site Coordinator's Manual Appendix K requires that districts mark "Yes" at theschool level if a student is continuously enrolled in the school from the CBEDS enrollment reporting datein October through the first day of STAR testing and mark "No" if the student enters the school betweenthe CBEDS enrollment reporting date in October and the first day of STAR testing. At the district level,Appendix K requires districts to mark "Yes" if a student is continuously enrolled in the distric t from theCBEDS enrollment reporting date in October through the first day of STAR testing and mark "No" if thestudent enters the district between the CBEDS enrollment reporting date in October and the first day ofl'STAR testing. Appendix Kspecifies that districts evidence of withdrawl includes, but may not be limitedto, the following: The student died while enrolled in school. The parent/guardian withdrew the student to enroll in another school or district. The parent/guardian withdrew the student to home school. The student was placed in the CAYouth Authority

All such criteria are used by the district to withdraw students from enrol lment. The Lake ElsinoreUnified School District documents students entering and exiting district schools on a weekly basis. Thedocumentation is obtained by parents/guardians providing information to the school sites and includesthe date of entry or exit, the students name and where the student is coming from (if entering theschool) or going to (i f leaving the school). The primary source of withdrawal from the district is whenthe parent/guardian withdrew the student to enroll in another school or district. The schools anddistricts do not drop students due to extended absence caused by illness, vacation, or a temporary movewhen the student does not enter in another school or district. Students are only recorded as entering orexiting a school at the time of enrollment or disenrollment.The documentation of students entering and exit ing schools and the associated tracking allows the LakeElsinore Unified School District to verify that the district followed all procedures outlined in the STARDistrict and Site Coordinator's Manual, Appendix K, related to CBEDS enrollment.

Page 4 of 17


7/19


. R e s R o n ~ ~ J : ~ _ ~ _ ~ ~ r : ! : ' e i a i n t a A I ~ t : ~ a t i o n s of District Misconduct- T e s t i n ~ _ ~ ~ ~ A c c o ~ n t ~ ~ ~ ~ ! : t . .__ . . . _4: Analysis ofthe rate of school and districtmobility(Attachment Two)5: Comparison and analysis of the rate of school and districtmobility between Lake Elsinore usn and the other districts inRiverside County.Because Concerns 4 and 5 are related in terms of our analyses, we have combined the responses tothese tw o concerns. First, we provide background as to potential sources of d ~ t a errors and how thedistrict handles such errors. Next, we provide information as to our ongoing process fo r assessingvalidity of our mobility tracking. The last two sections provide an analysis of ou r district mobility incomparison to other districts in Riverside County and an analysis of our school mobility by site.Accurate Demographic DataIn LEUSD, we pride ourselves on closely monitoring all data to increase the integrity of our data. Inaddition to concerns with accuracy of mobility, we have noted that data inaccuracies in studentinformation systems are not uncommon, due in a large part, to human error. In LEUSD, we have foundand fixed many errors that could impact accountability results and work dil igently to correct such errorsto maintain the integrity ofthe accountability system. This is not done to specifically impact test scores;the corrections to errors are made so we have an accurate depiction of how our distr ict, schools, andprograms are performing in terms of student achievement. Without accurate data, we cannot knowwhere to provide support to better instruction and ultimately allow student achievement to increase.Some errors that we have found and corrected include English learners marked as speaking English only,R-FEP students marked proficient/advanced in language arts for three years after only one year,students receiving special education services without a disability code, missing dates fo r students exitingspecial education services, wrong or missing race/ethnicity codes, incorrect or missing parent educationlevels, and incorrect student mobili ty informat ion. These types of errors are not unique to LEUSD.Because we have noticed errors both internally at LEUSD and we are aware of similar errors reported byother districts, we believe it is important to take great measures to provide the most accurate datapossible. We make every attempt to provide the state accurate data by the time students takeassessments. We do this by working closely with Key Data Systems to merge external data, identifyerrors, correct data, submit pre-IDs, continue to collect/verify student data after pre-IDs are submitted,review each individual student's demographic record being submitted to the state, and utilize extendeddata corrections window to update/correct data through the last day of testing in May.Another way we attempt to provide accurate data is through tracking student mobi lity. We understandthat we track our mobility different ly than most other districts. In fact to our knowledge, LEUSD is

Page 5 of 17


8/19


..__ - _ R e s p Q n s _ e _ t Q ; _ C Q m p J q l o 1 i ! D ~ L 6 U g g ~ t J Q n s of District Misconduct-Testing and Accountability~ .. _ __ ._,__ ~ . _ ~ , * . . , ~ _ . , . _ w ~ . , _ > ~ ~ _ possibly the only district that does not rely solely on its Student Information System (SIS) to gather dataabout student mobility. Most districts rely on canned extracts from their SIS, which are typically thesource of data inaccuracies due to human error. As stated in our response to question 2, we rely onsimple, weekly reports that come directly from our attendance clerks to determine whether a student iscontinuously enrolled or not (CBEDS Yes or 1\10).Validation of LEUSD Mobility RatesIn addition to following our mobility trends within the district and across the county, we have takenmeasures to verify the accuracy of what we report to the state both internally and through externalsources. We have interviewed school staff, including principals, teachers, and office staff as an informalcheck-and-balance. When interviewing teachers, some have reported that theirdassrooms turned overby half or more within a single school year. This has been echoed by principals a n other staff membersat schools who interact with their students on a daily basis. All staff interviewed stated their schoolmobility rates were in line with what they expected considering their school site. Additionally, both theprincipal and clerk providing the report sign of f as to the accuracy of their mobility tracking report eachweek.We have also looked to outside sources, such as the US CensusBureau, to examine the validity of ourmobil ity rates. Through many surveys, the Census Bureau reports data for a wide variety of geographictypes, including by school district (see diagram below fo r report ing structure). For the purposes ofvalidating our mobility rates, we examined results from the American Communi ty Survey.

The American Community Survey (ACS) is an annual national survey collected monthlywhich provides communities with reliable and t imely demographic, housing, social, andeconomic data every year.

Annual data on Migration is used to determine the extent of residential mobility of thepopulation for the U.S., states, metropolitan areas, and more specific geographical areas for thegiven survey year. The US Census Residential Mobility is also disaggregated by school districtboundary. Data are available from 2000 to the present.(http://www.census.qovlhheslmiqrationldatalacs.htmll

Survey results show the percent of people that live in the same house as they did the prior year. This issimilar to school districts' measures of mobility.

Page6 of 17


9/19

December 8, 2011Lake Elsinore Unified School DistrictResponse to : Complaint and Allegations of District lVIisconduct-Testing and Accountability

Page 7 of 17


10/19

December 8, 2011Lake Elsinore Unified School DistrictRe.?-.ponse to: Complaint and Allegations of District M i s c o n d u c ~ = . 2 : e s t i n g and ~ ~ - = - c . > ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ' : . . ~ ~ ~ y .

\ Lake El5inor.e untnee School OI5tr1et, Californiisejecteo Social C h a ~ c t e r i s l h = - l n me Untied Stain; 2006-2009 0OJltaS ~ 100&-2D09AmerlC1lI'1Community Survey s-teer fatlmllle&Survey:American Communrty Survey'...cIII.fQlXl'lllPll . .l.lJ/Vllil.ll.lI., R ~ J l \ l p . FlIl1Dly. ~ l .~ _ l n o o " " I . . E ~ . n l . ~ l . O ; I n . , C " " " , , , I I 1 " ' i r t l W o t r ~ . ~ . o c . e v P J . l ' I t ) I . r d S ~ I " " . H/)lIJIlI;V.lt1I.n1 cern. UIillIJfI.,~ 6ufJ14 A ~ Raoi, H I I P l ' ~ 0rQIr..Hwsr'9 urss..

HOTE.A1t1Wj1n ,,,. ~ - CorTVIJur.Y 6 ~ , . " e y v.csJ P ~ I ~ , o ~ " " m . 1" & 2 1 O . 7 ~ \ i + ' - - : l ~ PLACE OF BIRTHTotal pOflulation 1'llB.74}3! +1-1,99;..:.7+,. . .=;=-c: (Xt

liati, ':: W,7(57! +/-2.011 +!-,.OBorn"ir-,~ U ; - n ~ i t - ~ C : ' - ' : S : C t a ' l e s ,'>&,9,,41 +J-2,OZS! +i-:.'JiI ' .. ')1Stat.:-of r-a;):)eJ1Da 70,1&>1 +,l_'I>JI'. . 7"4/iiierenlstate ~ .. o . , - i - - - - - ~ ~ B52!orein Puerto Ri:x', U.S. ISP-Ild areas, or 'Omr, abroa-: to Arr,;,n:>ar,'j:.arent(s} - - t - - , - - :=t- - - - - - ' - ' -=. . : . . - j - - -==?-- +/fJ.2!j1R!r'r.1 ...1-"101

Page8 of 17


11/19


. Resnonse.to:__Cornp l a i n L 9 D J L t \ J l ~ g 9 J L 9 } } ~ - 2 f J ? 1 ~ ! r : k t _ ' Y ! 1 ~ ~ ~ n d uc!=-Iestil}g and A . c ~ ( J u n t a _ ~ ~ ! y ~ _ . .... ._.As can be seen below, districts in Riverside County report considerably lessmobility (more continuouslyenrolled) than residents within their district boundaries report moving in year. While these two sourcesof data are not identical, there is reason to believe they should be similar. Nearly three-quarters of theresidents in Riverside County (73.6%) are families, thus they cont ribute largely to the reports ofresidential mobility. In Lake Elsinore, 79% of residents arefamilies.

Reported Percent of Students Continuously Enrolled {CBEDSYes) Versus Census Datafrom 2005-2009American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

I.D I.D I.D I.D \J:lU'1 U'1 L!l W'l


12/19


. .Re s J m n ~ ~ _ t ~ < : : ~ r : o . Q L i : l j n . L i : l _ ' l . d _ . 6 1 1 e g a t i Q ~ Q f g i s t r i c 1 : . - M i s ~ o n . 9 - ~ ~ . . ! _ - = - ~ ~ ~ t i nKa ~ 6 _ c c o u n _ ~ _ ~ 1:J.!!!!y.._._. .._....__ ..._.__~ _ ._Below is a table that shows the 2010 and 2011 reported rates of non-mobile students and the residentsreport of non-mobil ity in Riverside County, by district. It also shows the degree to which these twomeasures are similar.

District Mobility TrackingCBEDS Yes (Non-Mobi le)

2010 2011

92 8891 9293 9593 9396 9695 9693 9291 9380 7993 9491 9194 9594 9695 9595 9589 9191 9295 9690 8988 8995 9689 89

Census Bureau Mobility fromAmerican Community Survey

(Non-Mobile)Residential Margin of

Mobility Error -t-:79.3 2.2080.2 2.8080.5 2.5084.6 2.1083.1 1.1081.7 1.3077.6 1.6084.8 2.1080.8 1.9080.2 2.2087.0 1.1081.9 1.6088.8 4.4082.2 1.5074.7 3.3081.2 3.1081.1 1.5081.0 1.2080.9 4.3078.1 3.5082.4 1.4083.5 2.10

Alvord UnifiedBanning UnifiedBeaumont UnifiedCoachella Valley UnifiedCorona-Norco UnifiedDesert Sands UnifiedHemet UnifiedUurupa UnifiedLake Elsinore UnifiedMenifee Union ElementaryMoreno Valley UnifiedMurrieta Vallev UnifiedNuview UnionPalm Springs UnifiedPalo Verde UnifiedPerris ElementaryPerris Union HighRiverside UnifiedRomoland ElementarySan Jacinto UnifiedTemecula Valley UnifiedVal Verde Unified

Difference Between 2011District Reported and Census

MobilityDoes the District Mobi lityMatch Census Mobility?

8.70 NOI' 11.80 NO

14.50 NO8.40 NO12.90 NO

14.30 NO14.40 NO8.20 NO1.80 YES13.80 NO4.00 NO

13.10 NO7.20 NO

12.80 NO20.30 NO9.80 NO

10.90 NO15.00 NO8.10 NO

10.90 NO13.60 NO5.50 NO*A margin of error is a statistic showing the amount of random sampling error survey results have when

the entire populat ion is not given.the survey. They give the confidence to which the survey results areaccurate. For example, one could say we are confident that the residential mobility reported by theLEUSD residents is anywhere between 78.9 and 82.7.

Page 10 of 17


13/19

- - - - - - - - - -December 8, 2011Lake Elsinore Unified School DistrictRes[.lonse to: Coml2laint and Allegations of District Misconduct-Testing and Accountability- ----------- -- -----------------. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .Comparison of LEUSD to Other Riverside County Districts

Analyses comparing the mobili ty rates in Lake Elsinore Unified School District with the other districts inthe county have been performed each year since 2008 through the Riverside County Office of Educationand Key Data Systems. This is done to provide staff development and to encourage Riverside Countydistricts to look into the accuracy of their student mobility reporting, aswell asthe accuracy of data inother demographic fields. These reports have been shared in many public forums through the RiversideCounty Office of Education. This school year, we have shared much of the informat ion in thisexplanation with various county-level groups.Immediately following the adoption of rigorous tracking of student mobility at the site level and furthermonitoring by the LEUSD district office, decreases in the reported mobi lity were noticed. Whencomparing the mobility rates among the districts in Riverside County, LEUSD has had the second highestmobil ity since 2008, following the Riverside County Office of Education, which by its nature serves ahighly mobile population. For example, in 2007, we reported 93% of students to be continuouslyenrolled as opposed to 87% in 2008. As we became more eff icient at implementing our mobil ity trackingprocess, the percent of students who were reported to be continuously enrolled decreased. For the lasttwo years, our percent of students continuously enrolled has stabilized to around 80%. Over this sameperiod of time, the mobility rates for other districts in Riverside County remained relatively unchanged,in spite of the economic downturn and the ever increasing foreclosure rates in Riverside County, whichleads to a more mobile population including parents and their children attending LEUSD schools. Seethe chart below for 2010 and 2011 percent continuously enrolled by RiversideCounty District. InRiverside County, the average percent of CBEDS yes reported is about 93%, as compared to the ACS forthe US Census Bureau report at 82% for the county.

Page 11 of 17


14/19


. J t ~ . ~ Q Q I l ~ ~ _ ~ Q l ! : n . J : l l . ~ I ~ _ ~ ~ g ~ ~ __ c t . . ' ? l ~ ! t M i S C D n ~ ~ - T e s t i n ~ ~ . ! : ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . .Reported Percent of Students Continuously Enrolled (CBEDS Yes) by Riverside

County District-->I"l \D.D.n,D l"f'I'l" ~ ~ l . / V 1 L 1 l J ) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ S ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

908070

DistrIct

112010 1i12011

Page 12 of 17


15/19

December 8, 2011Lake Elsinore Unified School District~ ~ ~ o n s e ~ ~ ~ o m 2 ~ n ~ ~ n d ~ _ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ! _ e ~ s . ! ! ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ n _ ~ _ ~ _ : t = ~ ~ ~ _ ! ~ n ~ _a n 9 . _ ~ : 5 ~ u n t a b i l i ! ~

Site level Analysis of Mobili ty (Attachment Two)

When analyzing Attachment Two, our site level mobility rates since 2007, a similar trend was found as atthe district level; mobility increased at most sites when we implemented our mobility tracking. Districtwide, our school mobili ty was 74% in 2011, five percentage points lower than our district mobility. Thus,the majority of the movement we see in LEUSD is students moving outside of our district . This is notsurprising given the geographic location of LEUSD. LEUSD borders at least six other school districts, fiveof which are in Riverside County. Some sites have more school mobi li ty than others. This is a functionof several things. Some schools are situated in locations where more residential mobility is occurring,such as in areas with more multi-family living residences. Other factors that impact-school mobility arewhen students move to different schools without moving residences, such asattendance at a schoolthat is impacted at the beginning ofthe school year, and as spots open up from other students leaving,the student is gained access to attend their school of residence; attendance at impaction overflowschools; more intra-district transfers requested for certain sites, etc.On each of the weekly mobi lity tracking reports, both the principal and clerk providing the report signoff asto the accuracy of the report. Based on the analyses comparing our student mobility trackingsystem and that of the US Census Bureau, the LEUSD mobility appears to be accurate to studentmovement into and ou t of our schools.

Page 13 of 17


16/19

December 8, 2011Lake Elsinore Unified School Distr ict_ . _ ~ . ~ _ - - ' 3 J : ~ 5 R Q ! 1 ~ ~ _ t Q ~ ~ . Q - ' ! l P . l . 9 j n t ~ ! l Q . l l e g a t i o n sof District Misconduct-Testing and Accountability---- - _ . - . ~ . ~ ' ~ , . _ - - " . _ - - - - - - - - - ~ . _ - , _ . _ - -6: Explanation why the district has not reported any migrantstudents from 2007 to 2011.The Lake Elsinore Unified School District does not operate a migrant education program and receives noTitle funds fo r such a program. Therefore, no students have participated in a distric t migrant educationprogram. It would not be appropriate to document any students as migrant education programparticipants for the purposes of STAR testing or for any other purpose. In Riverside County, only sevendistricts reported having migrant students, the majority of which are from Coachella Valley UnifiedSchool District.

Page14 of17


17/19


____.Respo n s _ e _ t o ; J : ; Q I : r : u ~ t ~ L r : r L Q n ~ L A l l ~ g ~ ! J . Q } } . 2 _ 2 L R i ? ! ! : l ~MJ ~ c o nduct- Testi ng and Aceounta biIit y_ . _ - " - . - - - - _ . _ - - - - - ~ .__ ..----,-_._._-_._-- ~ _ . _ .._'-_._._._._ .._ ~ . _ - _ . _ . _ - - - - - - - - -Attachment 1: Student Mobility Tracking Form

;LakeOsinvr-eUnified SChvvlVistrictStudent Mobility Record

2(/1 (::--2V11Please return this completedform to Instructional Support Services viadistrict mailor email before 11001/ 011 Tr'1'5dny, October 26,1010School: _

Time period: October 19, 2010 - Mondnr, October 25, 2010Student, whoenteredthissiteduringthe currenttimeperiod, IndicateALL students whohaveenteredthe site.regardless of reason. Please type orprim lIently.Entered

Students who exited this site duringthe currenttime period. IndicateALL student,whohave exited the site, regardless ofreason, Please IJpe orprim l f t ' a t ~ r . Exited

Important Note: I fno students enter or exit yoursiteduring the indic-ated timeperiod,pleasewrite Dane acrossthepaper andsubmit itto my officeor e-mail thattherewere no studentswhoentered or exited your schoolsite.

Page 15 of 17


18/19

December 8, 2011Lake Elsinore Unified School Distr ict

: . C o m p l a i r : l t . a n c L A U e g a t i o . o s . o f . . D i s t r 1 c t _ M j s q m Q 1 ! ~ t - = T e ~ t l O K . 9 _ Q . . ( t 6 ~ S : 2 . ~ I ] _ ~ ~ . ! ? i l i t _ y_. .__. _Attachment 2: Completed Student Mobility Tracking Forms

~ a s e return ( h i ~ c o m p J t ! u : d form to P/KlrJ Services viaI distric: mail or e-mailbe/on noon 011 Tuesday, Mtm:h 1, 2011

School: Wst s\ & . . h b c - ~ St.l).ll,--- _,_......._y ...... - ._.._. _ ._.- . - .......- .. _ ~ - - - _ . _ ~ - ~ _ ..- ..... ,.-. _ ~ _ .. - ~ - . - ......_......_ ._,._ ..._...... '" _ . _.....- ...... _._..... - .._.- r_._.-.- .- 1. - ~ _ . -l _ . _ . _ . I ! ~ , ~ . I j ! ; ~ . : _ ! ~ . ' : ~ - ~ ~ r Y ! ! ! ~ ~ 9 ' _ ~ ~ l . ~ ~ ! . : . M . t . ! ~ ! ! ~ ~ . ~ ~ 1 . ? 1 ) ~ ~ _ r y ~ f . ~ ! ~ _ . _ . _ . ~ Students who entered th.\R site duringthecurrent timeperiod. lndicate ALL studentswhohaveentered thesite. regardless of reason. Please fyJH orprint lil1tltly.Entered

Studentf; who exited this site dering fhecurrenrtimc period. Indicate ALL studentswhohave exited thesite, regardless of reason, Pleasetype or print ncatly.&!ted

Page16 of 17


19/19


__ R e s p O l l i , e . J o _ ~ _ C o m p J a L o L a n d - A U e g ; ; l . t i w l $ - - Q f J ) j s . t r L c . t M L $ C Q r u i y ~ t - Te $ l i o g _ ~ ! 1 Q __6 _ l ; . ~ Q J . l DbQ!lLtY.. ', _i-P/{![Jse return this completed form 10 >ponSen-ires via

dis/riel mail or e-mail before noon on Tuesday, January 18. 2011School: ".Raill'oad Canyon _

~ . _ . _ . _ ~ . _ . ~ - - . ~ . - . - . - . -... ...... " ......... , - .- _._-_ ............- -, .. - _. .. _.-. - . . . . _.-._._.-.- - - . - . , : ' . . ' f ~ , ! I ~ p ~ ) " i ~ . ~ : T ~ . ~ _ ~ ~ r ~ J ~ n . l l _ ~ ~ ~ } . ! . ' _ ~ ~ ! ~ . l \ 1 C ! _ n ! l ~ j ' : ~ ~ ! ~ ~ J ~ . ~ r J . J ? , ~ ~ l }

Students who entered this site during the current lime period. Indicate AL L student" whohave entered the site, regardless of reason. Please type OTprint neatly.

." .. " , , , , , ~ .. _ , , ~ ~ , , , .. - ~ . ~ J ~ ~ i i ~ Huntington Beach

. E -E5 - - - - - - - - - - - l- - - 1 - - - - _ .._._.- ...._-- - - - - -1Santa Rosa Academy

....:...A...::.:.I-=a=_ba_=m;,.;.:..=a:.......... __ .._.._ .__

Student': who exiled this site during the current lime period. Indi cate ALL students whonave exited the site, regardless of reason. Plea...e type or print neatly.

111T/n11111111/11/111/12{ttt/13hl1/11ft11/12/111114/111/141111/14111

Texas

1/14/11

- ' ~ ~ f : ;

WESTemeculaTexcsLVS

I: - - _ . . L - . . : . . . ' - ' - - " ' < : . . - - - - ~

Menifee

LV5

._--_..---_.-...---ORlahomaArtzonoI - - - - - i - - - - - - ~ . . : . . . . . . . - -Arizona

IF--- -I [ ~ ~ = = 1 _ . . .__'_ .. "'._ ______L__ 1--_._-_. . . .-. +--_....._ ..- . ~ . -.-.-._._-.-

Page 17 af17

Documents

Lake Elsinore Unified response to testing inquiry