The proposed rule revises the methodology by which school districts shall identify students in grades 3 – 8 who receive academic intervention services (AIS) for the 2016-2017 school year, and then for the 2017-2018 school year and each school year thereafter.
Text of proposed rule:
Paragraph (2) of subdivision (ee) of section 100.2 of the Regulations of the Commissioner of Education is amended, effective July 27, 2016, as follows:
(2) Requirements for providing academic intervention services in grade three to grade eight. [Schools shall provide academic intervention services when students:
(i) score below:
(a) the State designated performance level on one or more of the State elementary assessments in English language arts, mathematics or science, provided that for the 2015-2016 school year only, the following shall apply:
(1) those students scoring below a scale score specified in subclause (3) of this clause shall receive academic intervention instructional services; and
(2) those students scoring at or above a scale score specified in subclause (3) of this clause but below level 3/proficient shall not be required to receive academic intervention instructional and/or student support services unless the school district, in its discretion, deems it necessary. Each school district shall develop and maintain on file a uniform process by which the district determines whether to offer AIS during the 2015-2016 school year to students who scored above a scale score specified in subclause (3) of this clause but below level 3/proficient on a grade 3-8 English language arts or mathematics State assessment in 2014-2015, and shall no later than November 1, 2015 either post to its website or distribute to parents in writing a description of such process;
(3) the following scale scores shall be used to determine which students shall receive academic intervention services as specified in subclauses (1) and (2) of this clause:
Grade 3 English language arts, a scale score of 299;
Grade 4 English language arts, a scale score of 296;
Grade 5 English language arts, a scale score of 297;
Grade 6 English language arts, a scale score of 297;
Grade 7 English language arts, a scale score of 301;
Grade 8 English language arts, a scale score of 302;
Grade 3 mathematics, a scale score of 293;
Grade 4 mathematics, a scale score of 284;
Grade 5 mathematics, a scale score of 289;
Grade 6 mathematics, a scale score of 289;
Grade 7 mathematics, a scale score of 290;
Grade 8 mathematics, a scale score of 293; and/or
(b) the State designated performance level on a State elementary assessment in social studies administered prior to the 2010-2011 school year; provided that beginning in the 2010-2011 school year, at which time a State elementary assessment in social studies shall no longer be administered, a school shall provide academic intervention services when students are determined to be at risk of not achieving State learning standards in social studies pursuant to subparagraph (iii) of this paragraph;
(ii) are limited English proficient (LEP) and are determined, through a district-developed or district-adopted procedure uniformly applied to LEP students, to be at risk of not achieving State learning standards in English language arts, mathematics, social studies and/or science, through English or the student's native language. This district procedure may also include diagnostic screening for vision, hearing, and physical disabilities pursuant to article 19 of the Education Law, as well as screening for possible disability pursuant to Part 117 of this Title; or
(iii) are determined, through a district-developed or district-adopted procedure uniformly applied, to be at risk of not achieving State standards in English language arts, mathematics, social studies and/or science. This district procedure may also include diagnostic screening for vision, hearing, and physical disabilities pursuant to article l9 of the Education Law, as well as screening for possible limited English proficiency or possible disability pursuant to Part 117 of this Title.]
(i) For the 2016-17 school year, schools shall provide academic intervention services following a two-step identification process:
(a) First, students who score below a median scale score between a level 2/partially proficient and a level 3/proficient on a grade 3-8 English language arts or mathematics State assessment as determined by the Commissioner, shall be considered for academic intervention services. Students scoring at or above the median scale score determined by the Commissioner but below a level 3/proficient score shall not be required to receive academic intervention services unless the school district, in its discretion, determines that such services are needed.
(b) Districts shall then use a district-developed procedure, to be applied uniformly at each grade level, for determining which students identified in clause (a) shall receive academic intervention services after it considers a student’s scores on multiple measures of student performance, which may include, but need not be limited to, one or more of the following measures, as determined by the district:
(1) developmental reading assessments for grades kindergarten through grade 6;
(2) New York State English as a Second Language Achievement Test (NYSESLAT);
(3) benchmark and lesson-embedded assessments for reading and mathematics in grades kindergarten through grade 6 based on teacher designed and selected assessments;
(4) common formative assessments that provide information about students’ skills;
(5) unit and lesson assessments for English language arts, mathematics, science, social studies and languages other than English for grades 7 through 8; and/or
(6) results of psychoeducational evaluations based on a variety of assessments and inventories.
(c) Each school district shall develop and maintain its policies for providing academic intervention services during the 2016-2017 school year no later than September 1, 2016 and shall either post its policies to its website or distribute to parents in writing a description of such process, including a description of which student performance measures and scores on such measures will be utilized to determine eligibility for academic intervention services.
(d) Schools shall also provide academic intervention services to students who are limited English proficient (LEP) and are determined, through a district-developed or district-adopted procedure uniformly applied to LEP students, to be at risk of not achieving State learning standards in English language arts, mathematics, social studies and/or science, through English or the student's native language. This district procedure may also include diagnostic screening for vision, hearing, and physical disabilities pursuant to article 19 of the Education Law, as well as screening for possible disability pursuant to Part 117 of this Title.
(e) Schools shall also provide academic intervention services to students who are determined, through a district-developed or district-adopted procedure uniformly applied, to be at risk of not achieving State standards in English language arts, mathematics, social studies and/or science. This district procedure may also include diagnostic screening for vision, hearing, and physical disabilities pursuant to article 19 of the Education Law, as well as screening for possible limited English proficiency or possible disability pursuant to Part 117 of this Title.
(ii) Commencing with the 2017-18 school year and each school year thereafter, schools shall provide academic intervention services following a two-step identification process:
(a) First, all students performing at or below a certain scale score, established through a standard setting process conducted by the Department, on one or more of the State elementary assessments in English language arts or mathematics shall be considered for academic intervention services. The standard setting process shall include a panel of educators, including teachers, principals and other school personnel. Students scoring at or above the scale score established by the standard setting panel and approved by the Commissioner shall not be required to receive academic intervention services unless the school district, in its discretion, determines that such services are needed.
(b) Districts shall then use a district-developed procedure, to be applied uniformly at each grade level, for determining which students identified in clause (a) shall receive academic intervention services after it considers a student’s scores on multiple measures of student performance, which may include but need not be limited to one or more of the following measures, as determined by the district:
(1) developmental reading assessments for grades kindergarten through grade 6;
(2) New York State English as a Second Language Achievement Test (NYSESLAT);
(3) benchmark and lesson-embedded assessments for reading and mathematics in grades kindergarten through grade 6 based on teacher designed and selected assessments;
(4) common formative assessments that provide information about students’ skills;
(5) unit and lesson assessments for ELA, mathematics, science, social studies and languages other than English for grades 7 through 8; and/or
(6) results of psychoeducational evaluations based on a variety of assessments and inventories.
(c) Each school district shall develop and maintain its policies for providing academic services during the 2017-2018 school year and each school year thereafter no later than September 1, 2017 and each September thereafter and shall either post its policies to its website or distribute to parents in writing a description of such process, including a description of which student performance measures and scores on such measures will be utilized to determine eligibility for academic intervention services.
(d) Schools shall also provide academic intervention services to students who are limited English proficient (LEP) and are determined, through a district-developed or district-adopted procedure uniformly applied to LEP students, to be at risk of not achieving State learning standards in English language arts, mathematics, social studies and/or science, through English or the student's native language. This district procedure may also include diagnostic screening for vision, hearing, and physical disabilities pursuant to article 19 of the Education Law, as well as screening for possible disability pursuant to Part 117 of this Title; or
(e) Schools shall also provide academic intervention services to students who are determined, through a district-developed or district-adopted procedure uniformly applied, to be at risk of not achieving State standards in English language arts, mathematics, social studies and/or science. This district procedure may also include diagnostic screening for vision, hearing, and physical disabilities pursuant to article 19 of the Education Law, as well as screening for possible limited English proficiency or possible disability pursuant to Part 117 of this Title.
Text of proposed rule and any required statements and analyses may be obtained from:
Kirti Goswami, New York State Education Department, Room 148, 89 Washington Avenue, Albany, New York 12047, (618) 474-8966, email: legal@nysed.gov
Data, views or arguments may be submitted to:
Peg Rivers, New York State Education Department, Room 979, 89 Washington Avenue, Albany, New York 12047, (518) 408-1118, email: regcomments@nysed.gov
Public comment will be received until:
45 days after publication of this notice.
Regulatory Impact Statement
1. STATUTORY AUTHORITY:
Education Law (Ed.L.) § 101 charges SED with the general management and supervision of public schools and the educational work of the State.
Ed.L. § 207 empowers the Regents and the Commissioner to adopt rules and regulations to carry out the laws of the State regarding education and the functions and duties conferred on SED by law.
Ed.L. § 305 (1) and (2) provide that the Commissioner, as chief executive officer of the State system of education and of the Regents, shall have general supervision over all schools and institutions subject to the provisions of the Ed.L., or of any statute relating to education, and shall execute all educational policies determined by the Regents.
Ed.L. § 308 authorizes the Commissioner to enforce and give effect to any provision in the Ed.L. or in any other general or special law pertaining to the school system of the State or any rule or direction of the Regents.
Ed.L. § 309 charges the Commissioner with the general supervision of boards of education and their management and conduct of all departments of education.
Ed.L. § 3204(3) set forth the programs of study in the public schools.
2. LEGISLATIVE OBJECTIVES:
The proposed amendment is consistent with the authority conferred by the above statutes and is necessary to establish t the methodology by which school districts shall identify students in grades 3 – 8 eligible for academic intervention services for the 2016-2017 school year, and then for the 2017-2018 school year and each school year thereafter.
3. NEEDS AND BENEFITS:
Commissioner’s regulation § 100.2(ee) requires school districts to provide AIS to students scoring below the State designated performance level on the grades 3–8 State assessments for ELA and mathematics and/or at risk of not achieving the State learning standards. The requirement to provide AIS has existed for more than 20 years.
The State assessments for grades 3-8 in ELA and mathematics have four designated performance levels:
Level 1 Students performing at this level are well below proficient in standards for their grade.
Level 2: Students performing at this level are partially proficient in standards for their grade.
Level 3: Students performing at this level are proficient in standards for their grade.
Level 4: Students performing at this level excel in standards for their grade.
Previously, all students who scored at Levels 1 and/or 2 on the grades 3-8 ELA or mathematics assessments were eligible to receive AIS. In 2013, SED for the first time, administered assessments in grades 3-8 that were based on the NYS P-12 Common Core Learning Standards(CCLS), a set of standards that articulate the knowledge and skills students need to be college and career ready.
In September 2013, the Regents adopted amendments to § 100.2(ee) that provided flexibility to districts in the provision of AIS for the 2013-14 school year, in recognition of the fact that the new State assessments were the first administered to New York students that measured the progress of students in meeting the expectations of the CCLS.
In the 2013-14 school year § 100.2(ee) required districts to establish a policy to determine what services, if any, to provide to students who scored at or above the transitional cut scores established by SED, but below proficiency levels on the 2013 assessments. Specifically, for the 2013-14 school year § 100.2(ee) required:
• Students who scored below the specified cut scores for Grades 3-8 ELA and mathematics must receive AIS;
• Students who scored at or above the specified cut scores, but below the 2013 Level 3/proficient cut scores, would not be required to receive AIS and/or student support services unless the school district deemed it necessary;
• Each school district was required to develop and maintain on file a uniform process by which the district determined whether to offer AIS to students who scored at or above the specified cut scores but below Level 3/proficient on grades 3-8 ELA or mathematics assessments; and
• By November 1, 2013, each school was required to either post a description of this process to its website or distribute a written description of such process to parents.
For the 2014-15 and 2015-16 school years, the Regents acted to extend these provisions to continue flexibility in providing AIS. However, in September 2015, the Board also directed SED to establish a committee to examine the effectiveness of AIS and to make recommendations to the Board relating to the eligibility requriements for the 2016-17 school year. At its February 2016 Board meeting, SED presented several options for amending Commissioner’s Regulations and shared feedback received from key stakeholders. In addition, the Board heard presentations from two school districts (Liverpool Central School District and the NYC Department of Education) on strategies used to implement AIS as well as resources used and challenges that districts face in implementing AIS.
Feedback from Stakeholders
During the 2015-16 school year, SED hosted several meetings and conference calls attended by the New York State Council of School Superintendents, the School Administrators Association, Superintendents, Assistant Superintendents, AIS instructors, Curriculum Directors and teachers trained in the Response to Intervention (RTI) from 13 school districts1. Participants informed SED on AIS implementation, and how decisions are made regarding the types of AIS students receive. The four main areas of concern were:
• Identification services should not be based upon a single measure;
• Some districts voiced concern that the current process resulted in over identification of students;
• Many districts preferred an RTI approach but need additional resources and/or training to make this transition;
• Many districts questioned the utility of having to provide AIS in science or social studies or to certain students who may be better served by more classroom embedded supports, i.e.ELL in ELA, students with severe disabilities, students who need as many periods as possible to be dedicated to credit-bearing high school courses in order to graduate.
Many stakeholders assert that the determination of whether a student would benefit from AIS should be based on multiple measures rather than on the results of a single State assessment. This is consistent with Recommendation #19 of the Governor’s Common Core Task Force Report (“Prevent students from being mandated into Academic Intervention Services based on a single test.” December 2015). Given the Task Force’s recommendation and the feedback received by SED on the importance of multiple measures in decision-making processes, SED asked stakeholders to share recommendations on how to incorporate multiple measures into the AIS identification process.
Recommendations to Revise the Methodology
SED recommends that the Board amend § 100.2(ee) for the identification of students eligible for AIS in grades 3 – 8 ELA and mathematics:
For 2016-17, districts shall identify students through a two-step process:
• First, all students performing at or below a median cut point score between a level 2/partially proficient and a Level 3/proficient, as determined by the Commissioner, shall be considered for AIS.
• Upon identification of a student for consideration for AIS, Districts shall then use a district-developed procedure, to be applied uniformly at each grade level, for determining which students shall receive AIS after the district considers a student’s scores on multiple measures of student performance, which may include but not be limited to the following measures, as determined by the district:
o developmental reading assessments for K-6;
o NYSESLAT;
o benchmark and lesson-embedded assessments for reading and math in K-6 based on teacher designed and selected assessments;
o common formative assessments that provide information about students’ skills;
o unit and lesson assessments for ELA, mathematics, science, social studies and LOTE for grades 7-12;
o results of psychoeducational evaluations based on a variety of assessments and inventories.
Beginning with the 2017-18 school year, districts shall identify students for AIS through a two-step process:
• First, all students performing at or below a cut score established through the standard setting process shall be considered. The process shall be conducted by a panel of educators led by SED(to meet in the summer of 2016) to recommend the performance level for 3-8 ELA and mathematics assessments below which student’s could be considered for AIS.
• Upon a student’s identification for consideration for AIS, districts shall then use a district-developed procedure, to be applied uniformly at each grade level determining which students shall receive AIS after the district considers a student’s scores on multiple measures of student performance, which may include but not be limited to the following measures, as determined by the district:
o developmental reading assessments for K-6;
o (NYSESLAT);
o benchmark and lesson-embedded assessments for reading and math in K-6 based on teacher designed and selected assessments;
o common formative assessments that provide information about students’ skills;
o unit and lesson assessments for ELA, mathematics, science, social studies and LOTE for grades 7-12;
o results of psychoeducational evaluations based on a variety of assessments and inventories.
As is currently the case, districts have the flexibility to determine that a student who scores above the cut score for eligibility for AIS should receive this service. As is also currently the case, districts must by September 1 each year develop and maintain their policies for providing AIS and either post the district’s policies to its website or distribute to parents in writing a description of such process, including a description of which student performance measures and scores on such measures will be utilized to determine eligibility for academic intervention services.
4. COSTS:
(a) Costs to State government: None.
(b) Costs to local governments: None.
(c) Costs to private regulated parties: None.
(d) Costs to regulating agency for implementation and continued administration of this rule: None.
5. LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANDATES:
The proposed amendment does not impose any additional program, service, duty or responsibility upon local governments but merely revises the currently methodology by which school districts shall identify students in grades 3 – 8 who receive AIS for the 2016-2017 school year, and then for the 2017-2018 school year and each school year thereafter. The proposed amendment will not impose any additional compliance requirements but instead will allow for continued flexibility to school districts in identifying students eligible for AIS.
6. PAPERWORK:
The proposed amendment does not impose any new specific recordkeeping, reporting or other paperwork requirements.
7. DUPLICATION:
The proposed amendment does not duplicate existing State or federal regulations.
8. ALTERNATIVES:
In September 2015, the Board directed SED to establish a committee to examine the effectiveness of AIS and to make recommendations for amendments. At the February 2016 meeting, NYSED presented to the Board several alternatives for amendments which included:
1. All students performing below Level 3 in 3-8 ELA/mathematics will receive AIS, returning to the pre-NYS P-12 CCLS approach.
2. All students scoring below the current regulatory cut points will be required to receive AIS(this standard sunsets at the end of the 2015-16 school year).
3. All students scoring below a cut point created so that the same percentage of students statewide are receiving AIS as previously received AIS prior NYS P-12 CCLS.
4. All students performing below a "mid-Level 2" cut point.
5. SED conducts a Standard Setting process in which a group of teachers recommends a cut score based upon a “book-marking process.” This proposed amendment combines four and five and responds to concern from the field about identification for AIS based on a single measure.
9. FEDERAL STANDARDS:
There are no related federal standards.
10. COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE:
It is anticipated that the proposed amendment will be adopted at July Regents meeting and will become effective on July 27, 2016 and the eligibility requirements for AIS services will begin to apply in the 2016-2017 school year. It is anticipated that regulated parties will be able to achieve compliance with the proposed amendment by its effective date.
_______________
1 Participating school Districts included: New York City Department of Education, Buffalo City School District, Syracuse City School District, Yonkers City School District, Rochester City School District, Corinth Central School District, Schalmont Central School District, Penfield Central School District, Chenango Forks Central School District, Elmira Central School District, Liverpool Central School District, Wappinger Falls Central School District, and Arlington Central School District.
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(a) Small Businesses:
The proposed amendment revises the currently methodology by which school districts shall identify students in grades 3 – 8 who receive AIS for the 2016-2017 school year, and then for the 2017-2018 school year and each school year thereafter. The proposed amendment will not impose any additional compliance requirements but instead will allow for continued flexibility to school districts in identifying students eligible for AIS. The proposed amendment does not impose any adverse economic impact, reporting, record keeping or any other compliance requirements on small businesses. Because it is evident from the nature of the proposed amendment that it does not affect small businesses, no further measures were needed to ascertain that fact and none were taken. Accordingly, a regulatory flexibility analysis for small businesses is not required and one has not been prepared.
(b) Local Government:
The proposed amendment does not impose any additional program, service, duty or responsibility upon local governments but merely revises the currently methodology by which school districts shall identify students in grades 3 – 8 who receive AIS for the 2016-2017 school year, and then for the 2017-2018 school year and each school year thereafter. The proposed amendment will not impose any additional compliance requirements but instead will allow for continued flexibility to school districts in identifying students eligible for AIS.
1. EFFECT OF RULE:
The proposed amendment applies to each of the 695 public school districts in the State.
2. COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS:
Commissioner’s regulation § 100.2(ee) requires school districts to provide AIS to students scoring below the State designated performance level on the grades 3–8 State assessments for ELA and mathematics and/or at risk of not achieving the State learning standards. The requirement to provide AIS has existed for more than 20 years.
The State assessments for grades 3-8 in ELA and mathematics have four designated performance levels:
Level 1: Students performing at this level are well below proficient in standards for their grade.
Level 2: Students performing at this level are partially proficient in standards for their grade.
Level 3: Students performing at this level are proficient in standards for their grade.
Level 4: Students performing at this level excel in standards for their grade.
Previously, all students who scored at Levels 1 and/or 2 on the grades 3-8 ELA or mathematics assessments were eligible to receive AIS. In 2013, SED for the first time, administered assessments in grades 3-8 that were based on the NYS P-12 Common Core Learning Standards(CCLS), a set of standards that articulate the knowledge and skills students need to be college and career ready.
In September 2013, the Regents adopted amendments to § 100.2(ee) that provided flexibility to districts in the provision of AIS for the 2013-14 school year, in recognition of the fact that the new State assessments were the first administered to New York students that measured the progress of students in meeting the expectations of the CCLS.
In the 2013-14 school year § 100.2(ee) required districts to establish a policy to determine what services, if any, to provide to students who scored at or above the transitional cut scores established by SED, but below proficiency levels on the 2013 assessments. Specifically, for the 2013-14 school year § 100.2(ee) required:
• Students who scored below the specified cut scores for Grades 3-8 ELA and mathematics must receive AIS;
• Students who scored at or above the specified cut scores, but below the 2013 Level 3/proficient cut scores, would not be required to receive AIS and/or student support services unless the school district deemed it necessary;
• Each school district was required to develop and maintain on file a uniform process by which the district determined whether to offer AIS to students who scored at or above the specified cut scores but below Level 3/proficient on grades 3-8 ELA or mathematics assessments; and
• By November 1, 2013, each school was required to either post a description of this process to its website or distribute a written description of such process to parents.
For the 2014-15 and 2015-16 school years, the Regents acted to extend these provisions to continue flexibility in providing AIS. However, in September 2015, the Board also directed SED to establish a committee to examine the effectiveness of AIS and to make recommendations to the Board relating to the eligibility requriements for the 2016-17 school year. At its February 2016 Board meeting, SED presented several options for amending Commissioner’s Regulations and shared feedback received from key stakeholders. In addition, the Board heard presentations from two school districts (Liverpool Central School District and the NYC Department of Education) on strategies used to implement AIS as well as resources used and challenges that districts face in implementing AIS.
Feedback from Stakeholders
During the 2015-16 school year, SED hosted several meetings and conference calls attended by the New York State Council of School Superintendents, the School Administrators Association, Superintendents, Assistant Superintendents, AIS instructors, Curriculum Directors and teachers trained in the Response to Intervention (RTI) from 13 school districts1. Participants informed SED on AIS implementation, and how decisions are made regarding the types of AIS students receive. The four main areas of concern were:
• Identification services should not be based upon a single measure;
• Some districts voiced concern that the current process resulted in over identification of students;
• Many districts preferred an RTI approach but need additional resources and/or training to make this transition;
• Many districts questioned the utility of having to provide AIS in science or social studies or to certain students who may be better served by more classroom embedded supports, i.e.ELL in ELA, students with severe disabilities, students who need as many periods as possible to be dedicated to credit-bearing high school courses in order to graduate.
Many stakeholders assert that the determination of whether a student would benefit from AIS should be based on multiple measures rather than on the results of a single State assessment. This is consistent with Recommendation #19 of the Governor’s Common Core Task Force Report (“Prevent students from being mandated into Academic Intervention Services based on a single test.” December 2015). Given the Task Force’s recommendation and the feedback received by SED on the importance of multiple measures in decision-making processes, SED asked stakeholders to share recommendations on how to incorporate multiple measures into the AIS identification process.
Recommendations to Revise the Methodology
SED recommends that the Board amend § 100.2(ee) for the identification of students eligible for AIS in grades 3 – 8 ELA and mathematics:
For 2016-17, districts shall identify students through a two-step process:
• First, all students performing at or below a median cut point score between a level 2/partially proficient and a Level 3/proficient, as determined by the Commissioner, shall be considered for AIS.
• Upon identification of a student for consideration for AIS, Districts shall then use a district-developed procedure, to be applied uniformly at each grade level, for determining which students shall receive AIS after the district considers a student’s scores on multiple measures of student performance, which may include but not be limited to the following measures, as determined by the district:
o developmental reading assessments for K-6;
o NYSESLAT;
o benchmark and lesson-embedded assessments for reading and math in K-6 based on teacher designed and selected assessments;
o common formative assessments that provide information about students’ skills;
o unit and lesson assessments for ELA, mathematics, science, social studies and LOTE for grades 7-12;
o results of psychoeducational evaluations based on a variety of assessments and inventories.
Beginning with the 2017-18 school year, districts shall identify students for AIS through a two-step process:
• First, all students performing at or below a cut score established through the standard setting process shall be considered. The process shall be conducted by a panel of educators led by SED(to meet in the summer of 2016) to recommend the performance level for 3-8 ELA and mathematics assessments below which student’s could be considered for AIS.
• Upon a student’s identification for consideration for AIS, districts shall then use a district-developed procedure, to be applied uniformly at each grade level determining which students shall receive AIS after the district considers a student’s scores on multiple measures of student performance, which may include but not be limited to the following measures, as determined by the district:
o developmental reading assessments for K-6;
o (NYSESLAT);
o benchmark and lesson-embedded assessments for reading and math in K-6 based on teacher designed and selected assessments;
o common formative assessments that provide information about students’ skills;
o unit and lesson assessments for ELA, mathematics, science, social studies and LOTE for grades 7-12;
o results of psychoeducational evaluations based on a variety of assessments and inventories.
As is currently the case, districts have the flexibility to determine that a student who scores above the cut score for eligibility for AIS should receive this service. As is also currently the case, districts must by September 1 each year develop and maintain their policies for providing AIS and either post the district’s policies to its website or distribute to parents in writing a description of such process, including a description of which student performance measures and scores on such measures will be utilized to determine eligibility for academic intervention services.
3. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES:
The proposed amendment imposes no additional professional service requirements on school districts.
4. COMPLIANCE COSTS:
The proposed amendment will not impose any additional costs but merely revises the currently methodology by which school districts shall identify students in grades 3 – 8 who receive AIS for the 2016-2017 school year, and then for the 2017-2018 school year and each school year thereafter. The proposed amendment will not impose any additional compliance costs but instead will allow for continued flexibility to school districts in identifying students eligible for AIS.
5. ECONOMIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL FEASIBILITY:
The proposed rule does not impose any additional costs or technological requirements on local governments.
6. MINIMIZING ADVERSE IMPACT:
The proposed amendment is necessary to implement Regents policy to provide academic intervention services to students in need of such supports, as identified by multiple measures of student performance. This amended identification methodology will provide flexibility to school districts in determining which measures of academic performance are valuable indicators of student need for academic intervention services while at the same time ensure that students who will be best served by academic intervention services will be eligible to receive such services.
7. LOCAL GOVERNMENT PARTICIPATION:
Comments on the proposed rule were solicited from school districts through the offices of the district superintendents of each supervisory district in the State, and from the chief school officers of the five big city school districts. The amendments were also generated from suggestions received during meetings and conference calls held during the 2015-16 school year from the New York State Council of School Superintendents, the School Administrators Association, Superintendents, Assistant Superintendents, AIS instructors, Curriculum Directors and teachers trained in the Response to Intervention (RTI) from 13 school districts. Participating school Districts included: New York City Department of Education, Buffalo City School District, Syracuse City School District, Yonkers City School District, Rochester City School District, Corinth Central School District, Schalmont Central School District, Penfield Central School District, Chenango Forks Central School District, Elmira Central School District, Liverpool Central School District, Wappinger Falls Central School District, and Arlington Central School District.
_______________
1 Participating school Districts included: New York City Department of Education, Buffalo City School District, Syracuse City School District, Yonkers City School District, Rochester City School District, Corinth Central School District, Schalmont Central School District, Penfield Central School District, Chenango Forks Central School District, Elmira Central School District, Liverpool Central School District, Wappinger Falls Central School District, and Arlington Central School District.
Rural Area Flexibility Analysis
1. TYPES AND ESTIMATED NUMBER OF RURAL AREAS:
The proposed rule applies to all school districts in the State, including those located in the 44 rural counties with less than 200,000 inhabitants and the 71 towns in urban counties with a population density of 150 per square mile or less.
2. REPORTING, RECORDKEEPING AND OTHER COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS; AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES:
Commissioner’s regulation § 100.2(ee) requires school districts to provide AIS to students scoring below the State designated performance level on the grades 3–8 State assessments for ELA and mathematics and/or at risk of not achieving the State learning standards. The requirement to provide AIS has existed for more than 20 years.
The State assessments for grades 3-8 in ELA and mathematics have four designated performance levels:
Level 1: Students performing at this level are well below proficient in standards for their grade.
Level 2: Students performing at this level are partially proficient in standards for their grade.
Level 3: Students performing at this level are proficient in standards for their grade.
Level 4: Students performing at this level excel in standards for their grade.
Previously, all students who scored at Levels 1 and/or 2 on the grades 3-8 ELA or mathematics assessments were eligible to receive AIS. In 2013, SED for the first time, administered assessments in grades 3-8 that were based on the NYS P-12 Common Core Learning Standards(CCLS), a set of standards that articulate the knowledge and skills students need to be college and career ready.
In September 2013, the Regents adopted amendments to § 100.2(ee) that provided flexibility to districts in the provision of AIS for the 2013-14 school year, in recognition of the fact that the new State assessments were the first administered to New York students that measured the progress of students in meeting the expectations of the CCLS.
In the 2013-14 school year § 100.2(ee) required districts to establish a policy to determine what services, if any, to provide to students who scored at or above the transitional cut scores established by SED, but below proficiency levels on the 2013 assessments. Specifically, for the 2013-14 school year § 100.2(ee) required:
• Students who scored below the specified cut scores for Grades 3-8 ELA and mathematics must receive AIS;
• Students who scored at or above the specified cut scores, but below the 2013 Level 3/proficient cut scores, would not be required to receive AIS and/or student support services unless the school district deemed it necessary;
• Each school district was required to develop and maintain on file a uniform process by which the district determined whether to offer AIS to students who scored at or above the specified cut scores but below Level 3/proficient on grades 3-8 ELA or mathematics assessments; and
• By November 1, 2013, each school was required to either post a description of this process to its website or distribute a written description of such process to parents.
For the 2014-15 and 2015-16 school years, the Regents acted to extend these provisions to continue flexibility in providing AIS. However, in September 2015, the Board also directed SED to establish a committee to examine the effectiveness of AIS and to make recommendations to the Board relating to the eligibility requriements for the 2016-17 school year. At its February 2016 Board meeting, SED presented several options for amending Commissioner’s Regulations and shared feedback received from key stakeholders. In addition, the Board heard presentations from two school districts (Liverpool Central School District and the NYC Department of Education) on strategies used to implement AIS as well as resources used and challenges that districts face in implementing AIS.
Feedback from Stakeholders
During the 2015-16 school year, SED hosted several meetings and conference calls attended by the New York State Council of School Superintendents, the School Administrators Association, Superintendents, Assistant Superintendents, AIS instructors, Curriculum Directors and teachers trained in the Response to Intervention (RTI) from 13 school districts1. Participants informed SED on AIS implementation, and how decisions are made regarding the types of AIS students receive. The four main areas of concern were:
• Identification services should not be based upon a single measure;
• Some districts voiced concern that the current process resulted in over identification of students;
• Many districts preferred an RTI approach but need additional resources and/or training to make this transition;
• Many districts questioned the utility of having to provide AIS in science or social studies or to certain students who may be better served by more classroom embedded supports, i.e.ELL in ELA, students with severe disabilities, students who need as many periods as possible to be dedicated to credit-bearing high school courses in order to graduate.
Many stakeholders assert that the determination of whether a student would benefit from AIS should be based on multiple measures rather than on the results of a single State assessment. This is consistent with Recommendation #19 of the Governor’s Common Core Task Force Report (“Prevent students from being mandated into Academic Intervention Services based on a single test.” December 2015). Given the Task Force’s recommendation and the feedback received by SED on the importance of multiple measures in decision-making processes, SED asked stakeholders to share recommendations on how to incorporate multiple measures into the AIS identification process.
Recommendations to Revise the Methodology
SED recommends that the Board amend § 100.2(ee) for the identification of students eligible for AIS in grades 3 – 8 ELA and mathematics:
For 2016-17, districts shall identify students through a two-step process:
• First, all students performing at or below a median cut point score between a level 2/partially proficient and a Level 3/proficient, as determined by the Commissioner, shall be considered for AIS.
• Upon identification of a student for consideration for AIS, Districts shall then use a district-developed procedure, to be applied uniformly at each grade level, for determining which students shall receive AIS after the district considers a student’s scores on multiple measures of student performance, which may include but not be limited to the following measures, as determined by the district:
o developmental reading assessments for K-6;
o NYSESLAT;
o benchmark and lesson-embedded assessments for reading and math in K-6 based on teacher designed and selected assessments;
o common formative assessments that provide information about students’ skills;
o unit and lesson assessments for ELA, mathematics, science, social studies and LOTE for grades 7-12;
o results of psychoeducational evaluations based on a variety of assessments and inventories.
Beginning with the 2017-18 school year, districts shall identify students for AIS through a two-step process:
• First, all students performing at or below a cut score established through the standard setting process shall be considered. The process shall be conducted by a panel of educators led by SED(to meet in the summer of 2016) to recommend the performance level for 3-8 ELA and mathematics assessments below which student’s could be considered for AIS.
• Upon a student’s identification for consideration for AIS, districts shall then use a district-developed procedure, to be applied uniformly at each grade level determining which students shall receive AIS after the district considers a student’s scores on multiple measures of student performance, which may include but not be limited to the following measures, as determined by the district:
o developmental reading assessments for K-6;
o (NYSESLAT);
o benchmark and lesson-embedded assessments for reading and math in K-6 based on teacher designed and selected assessments;
o common formative assessments that provide information about students’ skills;
o unit and lesson assessments for ELA, mathematics, science, social studies and LOTE for grades 7-12;
o results of psychoeducational evaluations based on a variety of assessments and inventories.
As is currently the case, districts have the flexibility to determine that a student who scores above the cut score for eligibility for AIS should receive this service. As is also currently the case, districts must by September 1 each year develop and maintain their policies for providing AIS and either post the district’s policies to its website or distribute to parents in writing a description of such process, including a description of which student performance measures and scores on such measures will be utilized to determine eligibility for academic intervention services.
3. COMPLIANCE COSTS:
The proposed amendment does not impose any additional costs but merely revises the currently methodology by which school districts shall identify students in grades 3 – 8 who receive AIS for the 2016-2017 school year, and then for the 2017-2018 school year and each school year thereafter.
4. MINIMIZING ADVERSE IMPACT:
The proposed amendment does not impose any additional compliance requirements or costs and is necessary to implement Regents policy to revise the currently methodology by which school districts shall identify students in grades 3 – 8 who receive AIS for the 2016-2017 school year, and then for the 2017-2018 school year and each school year thereafter. The proposed amendment will not impose any additional compliance requirements but instead will allow for continued flexibility to school districts in identifying students eligible for AIS.
5. RURAL AREA PARTICIPATION:
Comments on the proposed amendment were solicited from the Department's Rural Advisory Committee, whose membership includes school districts located in rural areas. The amendments were also generated from suggestions received during meetings and conference calls held during the 2015-16 school year from the New York State Council of School Superintendents, the School Administrators Association, Superintendents, Assistant Superintendents, AIS instructors, Curriculum Directors and teachers trained in the Response to Intervention (RTI) from 13 school districts. Among the school districts represented included rural school districts including: Participating rural school Districts included: Corinth Central School District and Chenango Forks Central School District,
_______________
1 Participating school Districts included: New York City Department of Education, Buffalo City School District, Syracuse City School District, Yonkers City School District, Rochester City School District, Corinth Central School District, Schalmont Central School District, Penfield Central School District, Chenango Forks Central School District, Elmira Central School District, Liverpool Central School District, Wappinger Falls Central School District, and Arlington Central School District.
Job Impact Statement
The proposed amendment relates to the methodology by which school district shall identify students in grades 3 through 8 who receive Academic Intervention Services (AIS). The proposed amendment does not impose any adverse economic impact, reporting, record keeping or any other compliance requirements on small businesses. Because it is evident from the nature of the proposed amendment that it does not affect small businesses, no further measures were needed to ascertain that fact and none were taken. Accordingly, a regulatory flexibility analysis for small businesses is not required and one has not been prepared.
