Commissioner’s 2006Performance Plan:
• Increased capacity in the State Education Department
• Effective gap-closing strategies and policy implementation
• A mobilized USNY
The Percentage of Students in the 2000 Cohort by Outcome After Four Years (June 30, 2004)
and After Five Years (June 30, 2005)
Regents/Local DiplomaIEP DiplomaEnrolledTransferred to GEDDropped OutTotal
134,2482,889
34,5483,615
23,796199,312*
67.4*1.4
17.31.8
11.9100.0
149,7574,369
11,89311,94632,194
210,159*
71.32.15.75.7
15.3100.0
OutcomeAs of June 30, 2004 As of June 30, 2005
NumberNumber Percent Percent
Comparison of Records Reported Through STEP with BEDS First-Time Grade 9
Enrollment and Number Tested on Grade 8 Mathematics Assessment
Number of Student Records Reported
Number of Cohort Tested in Grade 8
First-Time Grade 9 Enrollment (BEDS)
199,312
198,512
203,917
210,159
198,512
214,494
199,330
207,315
2000 Cohort 2001 Cohort
2005 STEP2004 STEP 2005 STEP
More About This Cohort
• These students were in fourth grade in 1995-96 before New York raised standards and in seventh grade when New York began testing the higher standards in 1999.
• In Spring 2000, these students took the middle-level ELA and mathematics assessments.
• ELA assessment performance: 13.4 percent of students statewide – and 23.6 percent of students in New York City – scored at Level 1.
• Mathematics assessment: 25.1 percent statewide and 44.3 percent in New York City scored at Level 1.
Findings
• Too few students in this cohort graduated; too many dropped out.
• Certain groups of students graduated at a lower rate than other groups.
2000 Cohort After Five YearsStudents in High Need Districts graduated at much lower rates than students in
Average and Low Need Districts
Needs/
Resource Category
Cohort Enroll-
ment
Regents/ Local
Diploma
IEP Diploma
Still Enrolled
Trans-
ferred to GED
Dropped Out
New York City
74,114 52.7% 2.1% 12.2% 7.4% 25.6%
Large City 8,569 54.7% 3.4% 4.4% 14.4% 23.0%
Urban/ Suburban
16,161 68.5% 3.0% 4.5% 7.4% 16.7%
Rural High Need
14,656 76.5% 3.8% 1.3% 4.9% 13.4%
Average 68,295 83.9% 1.9% 1.8% 4.2% 8.2%
Low Need 28,237 93.4% 0.9% 0.9% 1.5% 3.2
Charter Schools
127 46.5% 0.0% 40.9% 0.8% 11.8%
Total Public
210,159 71.3% 2.1% 5.7% 5.7% 15.3%
2000 Cohort After Five YearsFewer than one-quarter of students with disabilities in New York City graduated; in the rest of State, over 50 percent did so. Almost 1/3 of
students with disabilities in New York City dropped out.
Needs/
Resource Category
Cohort Enroll-
ment
Regents/ Local
Diploma
IEP Diploma
Still Enrolled
Trans-
ferred to GED
Dropped Out
New York City
5,618 22.7% 27.1% 13.6% 5.4% 31.2%
Rest of State
18,165 56.0% 15.6% 5.3% 6.7% 16.4%
Total Public
23,783 48.1% 18.3% 7.3% 6.4% 19.9%
2000 Cohort After Five YearsStatewide, fewer than half of limited English proficient students
graduated. LEP students were more likely than other students to earn IEP diplomas.
Needs/
Resource Category
Cohort Enroll-
ment
Regents/ Local
Diploma
IEP Diploma
Still Enrolled
Trans-
ferred to GED
Dropped Out
New York City
9,584 40.2% 4.1% 15.9% 5.1% 34.8%
Rest of State
2,426 56.7% 1.3% 11.1% 8.7% 22.2%
Total Public
12,010 43.5% 3.5% 14.9% 5.8% 32.3%
2000 Cohort After Five YearsBlacks and Hispanics were less likely than Whites and Asians to graduate
and three times as likely to drop out.
Needs/
Resource Category
Cohort Enroll-
ment
Regents/ Local
Diploma
IEP Diploma
Still Enrolled
Trans-
ferred to GED
Dropped Out
American Indian/
Alaskan Native
829 56.1% 3.5% 6.3% 9.3% 24.8%
Asian/ Pacific
Islander14,171 75.7% 0.7% 5.7% 3.6% 14.3%
Black 40,216 52.6% 2.9% 11.9% 8.4% 24.2%
Hispanic 34,482 49.4% 2.5% 12.2% 8.3% 27.6%
White 120,461 83.3% 1.8% 1.7% 4.3% 8.9%
2000 Cohort After Five YearsMales were less likely than females to graduate and more likely to drop
out. This difference was more pronounced in New York City.
Needs/
Resource Category
Cohort Enroll-
ment
Regents/ Local
Diploma
IEP Diploma
Still Enrolled
Trans-
ferred to GED
Dropped Out
New York City
Female 36,130 60.1% 1.7% 9.8% 6.0% 22.4%
Male 37,984 45.6% 2.4% 14.6% 8.7% 28.7%
Rest of State
Female 66,234 84.7% 1.6% 1.6% 3.7% 8.3%
Male 69,811 78.3% 2.5% 2.5% 5.7% 11.0%
Total Public
Female 102,364 76.0% 1.6% 4.5% 4.5% 13.3%
Male 107,795 66.8% 2.5% 6.8% 6.8% 17.2%
Outcomes After Four years for the 2001 Cohort
Snapshot as of June 30, 2005
The Percentage of Students in the 2001 Cohort by Outcomes as of June 30, 2005 After
Four Years for All Public High Schools
Regents/Local Diploma
IEP Diploma
Enrolled
Transferred to GED
Dropped Out
Total
137,704
3,877
39,384
10,226
23,303
214,494
64.2
1.8
18.4
4.8
10.9
100.0
Outcomes as of June 30, 2005
Total Public
Number Percent
More About This Cohort
• These students were in fourth grade in 1996-97 before New York raised standards and in sixth grade when New York began testing the higher standards in 1999.
• In Spring 2001, these students took the middle-level ELA and mathematics assessments.
• ELA assessment performance: 13.6 percent of students statewide – and 23.1 percent of students in New York City – scored at Level 1.
• Mathematics assessment: 26.4 percent statewide and 44.2 percent in New York City scored at Level 1.
2001 Cohort After Five YearsFewer students had graduated or dropped out; more remained in enrolled. New York City
students were least likely to have graduated and most likely to remain enrolled.
Needs/
Resource Category
Cohort Enroll-
ment
Regents/ Local
Diploma
IEP Diploma
Still Enrolled
Trans-
ferred to GED
Dropped Out
New York City 73,813 43.5% 1.8% 34.9% 4.9% 15.0%
Large City 8,759 45.3% 3.2% 18.3% 11.7% 21.5%
Urban/Suburban 17,542 57.6% 2.7% 16.8% 8.3% 14.5%
Rural High Need 14,537 69.9% 3.5% 8.1% 5.6% 12.9%
Average 70,163 78.1% 1.6% 8.9% 4.1% 7.3%
Low Need 29,515 90.0% 0.6% 5.2% 1.5% 2.7%
Charter Schools 165 24.2% 0.0% 64.8% 1.8% 9.1%
Total Public 214,494 64.2% 1.8% 18.4% 4.8% 10.9%
The Percentage of Students in the 2001 Cohort by Outcomes as of June 30, 2005 after
Four Years for 127 Selected High Schools
Regents/Local Diploma
IEP Diploma
Enrolled
Transferred to GED
Dropped Out
Total
17,856
970
15,651
2,617
7,521
44,615
40.0
2.2
35.1
5.9
16.9
100.0
Outcomes as of June 30, 2005
Total Public
Number Percent
Demographic Characteristics of Selected High Schools and All High Schools in 2003-2004
Percent Eligible for FRPL
Percent Disabled
Percent Limited English Proficient
Percent Repeating Grade 9
Student Stability
Percent Certified Teachers
Books per 100 Students
Computers per 100 Students
Suspension Rate
60
14.5
14.2
24
96
79
1,180
13
7.7%
34
13.1
5.8
15.3
98
92
1,452
24
8.1%
Characteristics Selected All
• Four-year high school graduation rates are too low.
• Many students are still in school after four years; many will stay in school one additional year.
• Most students who are still in school started 9th grade academically behind their peers.
• Few students are dropping out during the first four years of high school.
• If a student who stays for the fifth year doesn’t graduate, he/she is likely to drop out.
What Do These Data Mean?
What Can Be Done?
Transition From Middle School to High School
A. Review and revise professional development plans/Establish collegial circles
B. Determine student preparedness for high school
C. Revise 9th grader orientation programs
D. Discontinue social promotion
Targeted Intervention Programs for Students “At Risk”
A. Establish summer academies for “at risk” incoming 9th graders
B. Develop an alternative program for “at risk” students
C. Establish school academies/programs to enhance language and math skills for identified 8th grade students transitioning to high school
Student Engagement, Recognition and Support
A. Establish small learning communities in high schools
B. Every staff member “adopts” (mentors) a student
C. Establish student advisories and town hall meetings
D. Partner with institutions of higher education
E. Establish student of the month/recognition programs
(Con’t)
F. Addition of elective course offerings to increase student engagement
G. Establish programs to promote student health and wellness and positive youth development
H. Improve building security
I. Monitor student attendance and the guidance department
J. Extend library hours to improve access to technology and study/research support
K. Increase parent involvement through parent conferences, mailings, PTA meetings
L. Establish student mentor/intern program
Academic Programs and Services
A. Revise pacing and segmenting of academic instruction
B. Provide transportation for after-school tutoring
C. Extend the consultant teacher model
D. Adjust teacher schedules to allow for common planning time for all teachers
E. Establish a Word-of-The-Day program
F. Establish a model to be used by teachers in developing daily lessons plans
G. Establish Advance Via Individual Determination (AVID) program
H. Establish a reading intervention program (Con’t)
I. Audit the English as a Second Language Program
J. Revise/establish system to ensure availability of high quality strategic/performance data
K. Use data to evaluate programs and to drive instruction and services
L. Establish a team of Literacy Specialists (or a Literacy Coordinator) to support literacy in the schools
M. Prioritize literacy instruction
N. Establish SAT prep courses, honors classes and/or advanced courses to increase high school academic rigor
O. Establish programs/services to better support students with disabilities and English language learners
P. Establish in-school detention disciplinary option
Fiscal Support/Realignment of Resources
A. Realign school district fiscal resources to implement multi-year district plan
B. Review current programs; discontinue less effective programs and reallocate resources to support more strategic, high impact initiatives
Leadership
A. Target professional development for principals and assistant principals
B. Integrate teachers and administrator leadership development
C. Reassign/realign the roles and responsibilities of central office/high school administrators
D. Establish new administrative positions (Director of Secondary ELA and the Academy Director for each secondary school)
E. Revise school district “feeder patterns” for high schools
Urgent Action on Early Childhood Education
1. Make pre-kindergarten universal throughout the State.
2. Change the compulsory school attendance age from six to five.
3. Ensure adequate funding to all school districts so they provide full-day kindergarten to all students.
4. Make sure that early education programs starting with pre-kindergarten are standards-based and research-driven, employ the best curriculum and instructional methods, maximize the integration of students with disabilities with their peers, and incorporate the resources of cultural institutions.
5. Make sure school districts are able to hire and retain qualified teachers who can teach a diverse group of students with a range of needs.
Urgent Action on High Schools
1. Set targets and measure results.
2. Make local school boards accountable for high school performance.
3. Check teacher qualifications and order changes where necessary.
4. Strengthen teaching, especially in math and the sciences.
5. Ensure safety.
6. Engage the public.
7. Improve achievement among the highest performers.
Urgent Action in Higher Education
1. Increase college attendance and graduation rates, especially among underrepresented groups. Increase the number of graduates in critical academic majors and professions.
2. Make college more affordable. Increase investment in faculty, infrastructure, and research.
3. Expand close ties among higher education institutions.
Strategies on High Schools
• Set targets for high school graduation and measure results.
• Make local school boards accountable for high school performance.
• Check teacher qualifications and order changes where necessary.
• Strengthen teaching.
• Ensure safety.
• Engage the public and students.
• Support the highest performers.
Strategies on Students with Disabilities
• Produce accurate and timely data, set targets for improved outcomes, and increase public awareness of results to leverage change.
• Refocus monitoring to hold schools accountable for improving instructional practice.
• Focus technical assistance networks through increased accountability for student performance.
• Increase the supply of qualified special education teachers and other staff.
• Expand high quality in-State special education options for students with the most severe disabilities.
Strategies on LEP Students
• Hold districts and schools accountable for meeting improvement targets in English language acquisition. Raise the level of improvement over time.
• Increase monitoring to ensure students are receiving all required time and services in English and native language instruction. Report results. The Regents will determine consequences for noncompliance.
• Improve quality of bilingual and ESL teachers through new incentives and expanded professional development.
• Increase outreach with NYCDOE to provide better information to parents on ESL and bilingual programs that can improve their own levels of reading, writing, and speaking English.
Recommended
