The Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Department of Education
350 Main Street, Malden, Massachusetts 02148-5023
Telephone: (781) 338-3700
TTY: N.E.T. Relay 1-800-439-2370
August 15, 2006
Arthur Stellar
Superintendent of Schools
Taunton Public Schools
50 Williams Street
Taunton, MA 02780
Re: Mid-cycle Coordinated Program Review Report
Dear Superintendent Stellar:
Enclosed is the Department of Education's Mid-cycle Coordinated Program Review Report (MidCycle Report). This report contains findings based on onsite monitoring conducted to verify the
implementation and effectiveness of corrective action approved by the Department to address
findings of noncompliance included in the Taunton Public Schools Coordinated Program Review
Report issued on August 14, 2003. The Mid-cycle Report also contains findings based on onsite
monitoring of special education compliance criteria that have been newly created or substantially
changed in response to IDEA 2004.
As you know, another component of the Department’s Mid-cycle Review is the review of your
school district or charter school's self-assessment in the area of English learner education (ELE).
(In the remainder of this letter, please read “district” as meaning “school district or charter
school.”) The purpose of this review is to determine whether your district is implementing the
significant changes in M.G.L. Chapter 71A, governing the education of limited English proficient
students, that were adopted by voters by means of Question 2 in 2002. The Department has
reviewed your district’s ELE self-assessment documents and, based solely on that selfassessment, is providing you in this report with comments on your ELE program and, where
necessary, corrective action to be implemented. Your district is urged to request technical
assistance in relation to any of these comments or prescribed corrective action. You may consult
with staff in the Department’s Office of Language Acquisition and Achievement at 781-338-3534
and obtain additional ELE guidance documents through the Department’s web site at
http://www.doe.mass.edu/ell/ .
While the Department of Education found your district to have resolved certain noncompliance
issues, others were partially corrected or not addressed at all, or the Department’s onsite team
identified new issues of noncompliance, either noncompliance with special education criteria
added or substantially changed in response to IDEA 2004, noncompliance with ELE criteria, or
other new noncompliance. Where the district has failed to implement its approved Corrective
Action Plan, the Department views these findings to be serious.
1
In all instances where noncompliance has been found, the Department has prescribed corrective
action for the district that must be implemented without delay. You will find these requirements
for corrective action included in the attached report, along with requirements for progress
reporting. Please provide the Department with your written assurance that all of the Department's
requirements for corrective action will be implemented by your school district within the
timelines specified. Your statement of assurance must be submitted to the Mid-cycle Review
Chairperson by August 28, 2006.
Your staff's cooperation throughout these follow-up monitoring activities is appreciated. Should
you like clarification of any part of our report, please do not hesitate to contact the Mid-cycle
Review Chairperson at 781-338-3714.
Sincerely,
Nancy Hicks, Mid-cycle Review Chairperson
Program Quality Assurance Services
Darlene A. Lynch, Assistant Director
Program Quality Assurance Services
c:
David P. Driscoll, Commissioner of Education
Peter Corr, School Committee Chairperson
Leo Melanson, District Program Review Follow-up Coordinator
Encl.: Mid-cycle Coordinated Program Review Report
Mid-cycle Cover Letter 2006.doc
Rev. 6/5/06
2
MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
MID-CYCLE COORDINATED PROGRAM REVIEW REPORT
Taunton Public Schools
ONSITE VERIFICATION OF CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
AND/OR IDENTIFICATION OF ADDITIONAL NONCOMPLIANCE REQUIRING CORRECTIVE ACTION
Date of Coordinated Program Review (CPR): March 6, 2003-March 14, 2003
Date of Coordinated Program Review Corrective Action Plan Approval: December 2, 2003
Dates of Corrective Action Plan Progress Reports: October 7, 2004, December 28, 2004, June 10, 2005, and August 15, 2005
Dates of this Mid-cycle Review Onsite Visit: May 1, 2006-May 4, 2006
Additional information requested May 4, 2006 and received June 15, 2006
Date of this Report: August 15, 2006
PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS REPORT IS IN SEVERAL SECTIONS.
Taunton Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 15, 2006
Page 1 of 16
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
(Refer to full
text of 20052006 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action
Determined
to be
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective

Record
review
The record review indicated that
students are assessed in all areas of
suspected disability. The
evaluation of students at age three
included an observation of the
child.

Record
review
The record review indicated that
assessment results are summarized
as required.

Corrective
Action
Determined
Not to have
been
Implemented
or Not to
have been
Effective
Or
New Issues
Identified

Basis of Determination
that Implementation of
Corrective Action was
Incomplete or
Ineffective Or
Basis of Finding of New
Noncompliance
Special
Education
Criteria
Originally
Cited in CPR
Report and
Monitored in
Mid-cycle
SE 2
Required and
Optional
Assessments
SE 4
Reports of
assessment
results
Taunton Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 15, 2006
Page 2 of 16
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
(Refer to full
text of 20052006 CPR
requirements)
SE 9
Eligibility
determination
SE 17
Initiation of
services at age
three
Approved
Corrective
Action
Determined
to be
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective
Record
review
The district generally completed
the assessment and scheduled a
Team meeting within 45 days. The
district issued the N2 form
including pages 1 and 2 when
informing the parent of the finding
of no eligibility.
Record
review and
Interviews
The district has a process in place
that ensures that a student is
assessed and that services are in
place by the child’s third birthday.
The district has a strong
relationship with Early Intervention
agencies and supports are in place
to help students transition to
preschool.

Partial

Corrective
Action
Determined
Not to have
been
Implemented
or Not to
have been
Effective
Or
New Issues
Identified

Partial
Basis of Determination
that Implementation of
Corrective Action was
Incomplete or
Ineffective Or
Basis of Finding of New
Noncompliance
In some cases the
assessment was not
completed within 30 school
days of the receipt of the
consent to evaluate.
Taunton Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 15, 2006
Page 3 of 16
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
The district must provide staff
training on the requirement to
complete an evaluation within 30
school days of receipt of the
consent to evaluate and develop a
monitoring procedure to ensure
compliance. By November 20,
2006, submit a copy of the
training agenda and sign-in sheet
and a description of the procedure
that has been developed to
monitor time lines for evaluations.
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
(Refer to full
text of 20052006 CPR
requirements)
SE 18A
IEP
development
and content
Approved
Corrective
Action
Determined
to be
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective
Record
review and
Interviews
Interviews indicated that services
are provided as indicated on a
student’s IEP. In some schools the
date of the annual review has been
scheduled according to alphabetical
order so that they would not have
the majority of Team meetings at
the end of the year as it had been in
the past.

Partial
SE 18 B
Placement
Provision of IEP
Record
review and
Interviews
SE 21
Extended school
year
Record
review and
Interviews

Corrective
Action
Determined
Not to have
been
Implemented
or Not to
have been
Effective
Or
New Issues
Identified

Partial

Basis of Determination
that Implementation of
Corrective Action was
Incomplete or
Ineffective Or
Basis of Finding of New
Noncompliance
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
The record review indicated
that not all IEP goals were
measurable.
By November 20, 2006, the
district must provide a plan to
provide staff training on writing
measurable IEP goals. The
district must submit a plan that
will describe how they will
monitor IEPs to ensure that goals
are measurable and the schedule
of staff training.
The district must develop a
procedure that ensures that IEPs
are issued immediately following
the Team meeting and a procedure
to ensure that the placement page
is placed in the student record. By
November 20, 2006, the district
must provide a copy of the
training agenda and sign-in sheet
regarding these procedures.
Interviews indicated that the
district issues the proposed
placement with the IEP but a
signed placement page was
not always in the student
record. The record review
indicated that the IEP is not
always issued immediately
following the Team meeting.
Interviews indicated that staff
members understand that the
extended year program needs to be
geared to the individual needs of
each student, not to the summer
programs that are offered by the
district.
Taunton Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 15, 2006
Page 4 of 16
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
(Refer to full
text of 20052006 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action
Determined
to be
Implemented
and Effective
Corrective
Action
Determined
Not to have
been
Implemented
or Not to
have been
Effective
Or
New Issues
Identified

Record
review

SE 25
Parent consent
Partial
SE 32
PAC

SE 40
Instructional
Grouping
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective

SE 24
Parent Notice
SE 35
Assistive
Technology
Method(s)
of
Verification

Record
review and
Interviews
Documentation
Record
review and
Interviews
A copy of the consent for the
evaluation was present in all
preschool records.
Previously submitted
documentation indicated that the
PAC has established by-laws
Interviews indicate that assistive
technology is considered for each
eligible student at each IEP Team
meeting.
Documentation
Partial

Basis of Determination
that Implementation of
Corrective Action was
Incomplete or
Ineffective Or
Basis of Finding of New
Noncompliance
The record review indicated
that the Proposal of School
District Action (N1) was not
always in the record when
the district was proposing an
IEP. The questions on page
2 of the N1 form were not
always addressed.
See SE 18 B regarding
parent consent for
placement.
The district provided class
lists for substantially
separate classes for the
Taunton Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 15, 2006
Page 5 of 16
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
The district must provide staff
training on the requirement to
issue the N1 when proposing an
IEP and to address the questions
on page 2 of the form. By
November 20, 2006, the district
must provide a copy of the
training agenda and sign-in sheet
regarding these requirements.
See SE 18 B.
The district must review class lists
prior to the beginning of the
school year and take steps to
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
(Refer to full
text of 20052006 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action
Determined
to be
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective

Interviews
SE 53
Paraprofessionals
Partial
SE 54
Professional
Development
Partial
Documentation and interviews
Corrective
Action
Determined
Not to have
been
Implemented
or Not to
have been
Effective
Or
New Issues
Identified

Paraprofessionals working with
students have access to the
student’s IEPs through the teacher
or principal.
Documentation indicates that the
district offers a variety of
professional development
opportunities to professional staff.
Partial
Partial
Basis of Determination
that Implementation of
Corrective Action was
Incomplete or
Ineffective Or
Basis of Finding of New
Noncompliance
2005-2006 school year. One
substantially separate class
at the high school had 14
students with one teacher.
Some classes had up to 14
students with one teacher
and one aide. If up to two
students were added to the
classes after the school year
began, the Department was
not notified as required in
603 CMR 28.06(6)(e).
ensure that class sizes are
consistent with the requirements
of regulations.
Paraprofessionals have not
all had appropriate training
to assist in providing special
education and related
services.
Paraprofessionals working with
students with special needs must
have training in special education.
By November 20, 2006, provide a
copy of the training agenda and
sign-in sheet.
By November 20, 2006, the
district must submit a copy of the
topics of trainings that will be
provided for staff members for the
2006-2007 school year that
Interviews indicate that not
all staff members have
received training in state and
federal special education
requirements, analyzing and
Taunton Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 15, 2006
Page 6 of 16
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
By November 20, 2006, the
district must provide a copy of the
class lists of all substantially
separate classes indicting the
number of teachers and teacher
aides assigned to each class.
Please note that the district is not
required to submit class lists for
inclusion classes.
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
(Refer to full
text of 20052006 CPR
requirements)
SE 55
Special
Education
classes and
facilities
SE 56
Special
Education
Program
Evaluation
Approved
Corrective
Action
Determined
to be
Implemented
and Effective
Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective


Interviews
and site visits
Corrective
Action
Determined
Not to have
been
Implemented
or Not to
have been
Effective
Or
New Issues
Identified

Basis of Determination
that Implementation of
Corrective Action was
Incomplete or
Ineffective Or
Basis of Finding of New
Noncompliance
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation,
and Progress Reporting
accommodating diverse
learning styles of all
students, and methods of
collaboration among
teachers, paraprofessionals
and teacher assistants.
include topics identified in SE 54.
The district submitted their
District Improvement Plan
but did not submit
documentation of program
evaluation specific to special
education programs, services
and administrative functions.
By November 20, 2006, the
district must submit a copy of
their plan to evaluate the
effectiveness of the special
education special education
services and administrative
functions.
The district has addressed the
concerns sited regarding the
location and conditions of special
education facilities by making
repairs and moving classes.
Documentation

Taunton Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 15, 2006
Page 7 of 16
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Implemented

Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Documentation,
interviews
and student
record review
Documentation indicates that the
district has a form to document
transition planning for students at
age 15 or older.
Documentation,
interviews
and student
record review
The record review indicated that
team meetings had the required
persons in attendance.
(Refer to full
text of 20052006 CPR
requirements)
Criterion
Determined
to be
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
The record review indicated
that the IEPs of students age
16 and older did not always
contain transition goals and
services and/or
documentation of the Team
discussion and decision that
transition goal and services
were not needed.
Initialed sign-in sheets were
not in the student record for
each Team meeting.
Training must be provided on the
requirement to include transitional
goals and services for students at
age 16 and older or to include
documentation of the Team
decision not to include transitional
goals and services. By November
20, 2006, provide a copy of the
training agenda and sign-in sheet.
The district must provide training
to staff members regarding the
requirement to document
attendance at Team meetings and
include the documentation in the
student record. By November 20,
2006, provide a copy of the
training agenda and sign-in sheet.
All progress reports required
for each student were not
The district must develop a
procedure to ensure that IEP
Special
Education
Criteria created
or revised in
response to
IDEA-2004
SE 6
Determination
of Transition
Services
SE 8
IEP Team
SE 12
Frequency of reevaluation
SE 13
Progress
Partial
Partial

Partial
Interviews
and student
records
Student
record review
The record review and interviews
indicate that the district conducts a
re-evaluation every three years
consistent with the requirements.
The record review indicated that
progress reports generally address
Partial
Partial
Partial
Taunton Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 15, 2006
Page 8 of 16
Reports and
content
the progress the student is making
toward reaching the IEP goals.
always present in the record.
Progress reports did not
always indicate if progress
was sufficient for the student
to achieve the goal by the
end of the year.
Taunton Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 15, 2006
Page 9 of 16
progress reports are part of the
student record. Staff training on
this procedure and on the required
elements of progress reports must
be provided. By November 20,
2006, provide a copy of the
training agenda and sign-in sheet.
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Criterion
Implemented

Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Criterion was Implemented
Interviews
and record
review
Interviews and the record review
indicated that IEPs are reviewed
annually.
(Refer to full
text of 20052006 CPR
requirements)
SE 14
Review and
revision of IEPs
SE 25B
Resolution of
disputes
Documentation and
interviews
SE 30
Notice of
procedural
safeguards
Documentation
SE 46
Procedures for
suspension of
students with
disabilities more
than 10 days
Interviews
and student
records
Criterion
Determined
to be
Partially
Implemented
or Not
Implemented

Basis of Determination
that Criterion was
Partially Implemented
or Not Implemented
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
The record review indicated
that amendments are
sometimes incorrectly used
to extend the period of the
IEP.
The district must provide training
on the use of the IEP amendment.
By November 20, 2006, provide a
copy of the training agenda and
sign-in sheet.
The district holds a meeting
to determine if the student’s
behavior was a manifestation
of the disability but they did
not always document the
details of the Team’s
determination. They did not
include documentation of the
consideration of the need for
a functional behavioral
assessment, the need for
behavioral intervention
services or the need for
modifications to address the
behavior.
The district must provide training
on documenting the meeting to
determine if a behavior is a
manifestation of a student’s
disability, the consideration of the
need for a functional behavioral
assessment, the need for
behavioral intervention services or
the need for modifications to
address the behavior. By
November 20, 2006, provide a
copy of the training agenda and
sign-in sheet.
Documentation and interviews
indicated that the district has
scheduled resolution sessions as
required when they receive notice
that an official hearing request has
been made.
The district’s Notice of Procedural
Safeguards is current and contains
all required elements.
Interviews indicated that staff
members were knowledgeable of
the requirements for disciplining a
student with a disability. They
hold a Team meeting frequently
when a student has accumulated
seven days of suspension.
Taunton Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 15, 2006
Page 10 of 16
Criterion
Number
and
Topic
(Refer to full
text of 20052006 CPR
requirements)
Approved
Corrective
Action
Determined
to be
Implemented
and Effective

Method(s)
of
Verification
Basis of Determination that
Corrective Action was
Implemented and has been
Effective
Corrective
Action
Determined
Not to have
been
Implemented
or Not to
have been
Effective
Or
New Issues
Identified

Basis of Determination
that Implementation of
Corrective Action was
Incomplete or
Ineffective
Or
Basis of Finding of New
Noncompliance
Required Corrective Action,
Timelines for
Implementation, and
Progress Reporting
Requirements
The documentation review
indicates that language in
student handbooks regarding
the discipline of students
with disabilities needs to be
up-dated.
By November 20, 2006, submit a
copy of student handbooks.
Please note that the requirements
for disciplining a student with a
disability can be found in
Coordinated Program Review
Procedures booklet SE 45-47. If
handbooks have not been updated,
submit a copy of a notice
containing the required
information that will be
distributed to parents this year and
will be incorporated into
handbooks for the next school
year.
Civil Rights
(MOA) and
Other General
Education
Requirements
MOA 10
Student
Handbooks
Documentation
MOA 11
Notice of Nondiscrimination
Documentation
MOA 17
Code of
Documentation
The documentation review
indicated that the district’s
statement of nondiscrimination
includes all groups.
See MOA 10.
Taunton Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 15, 2006
Page 11 of 16
Conduct
MOA 21
Civil Rights
Training
Documentation and
interviews
MOA 22
Accessibility
Site visit
MOA 23
Comparability
of facilities
Interviews
and site visits
Documentation and interviews
indicated that staff members have
received the required civil rights
training.
A bathroom at the high school has
been renovated to make it
handicapped accessible for use at
evening activities when the public
is in attendance. The existing door
handles in that bathroom, however,
would make it difficult for a person
with a physical disability to have
access.
See SE 55.
Taunton Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 15, 2006
Page 12 of 16
Taunton Public Schools
English Learner Education (ELE) Requirements
Mid-Cycle Review Comments and Corrective Action Based on the Department’s Review Of Local Self-Assessments
(Please refer to full text of 2005-2006 CPR-ELE legal requirements and related implementation guidance at
http://www.doe.mass.edu/pqa/review/cpr/instrument/chapter71A.doc )
ELE Criterion
Number
and
Topic
ELE 1
Annual
Assessment
ELE 2
MCAS
Participation
ELE 3
Initial
Identification
ELE 4
Waiver
Procedures
ELE 5
Program
Placement and
Structure
Comments Based on the Department’s Review of Local
ELE Self-Assessment
Required Corrective Action, Timelines for Implementation, and Progress
Reporting
The district has trained staff able to administer the state required
assessments. Documentation indicates that during the 2005-2006
school year, the required assessments were administered to LEP
students.
Documentation submitted by the district indicates that Limited
English Proficient (LEP) students participate in the annual
administration of the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment
System0 (MCAS) exam as required and in accordance with
Department guidelines.
The district has conducted a Home Language Survey and they
screen all in coming students. Professional staff members are
trained to assess those whose first language is not English.
The district has waiver procedures in place that are consistent with
regulations.
The district provides English language development instruction
based on English Language Proficiency Benchmarks and Outcomes.
The district has sheltered English immersion classrooms where
nearly all educational instruction and instructional materials are in
English.
Some teachers of LEP students have not had training is sheltered English instruction.
By November 20, 2006, provide a list of the teachers of LEP students and the date and
content of their training in SEI. If they have not as yet had training, indicate when the
training will be provided.
Taunton Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 15, 2006
Page 13 of 16
ELE Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Comments Based on the Department’s Review of Local
ELE Self-Assessment
ELE 6
Program Exit
and Readiness
The district has developed exit procedures that ensure that a student
is not re-designated from LEP to Formerly Limited English
Proficient (FLEP) until the student is deemed English proficient
based on Multiple measures.
ELE 7
Parent
Involvement
The district has a parent advisory council for parents of English
language learners (ELL). They translate school notices and
encourage parents to participate. Translators attend meetings when
needed.
ELE 8
Declining Entry
to a Program
The district has procedures in place consistent with the regulations.
ELE 9
Instructional
Grouping
LEP students are grouped appropriately.
ELE 10
Parental
Notification
The parent notice did not contain all required elements.
Required Corrective Action, Timelines for Implementation, and Progress
Reporting
The parent notification letter must also include the child’s level of English proficiency, an
explanation of how the program will meet the student’s needs, and exit requirements. By
November 20, 2006, provide a copy of the revised parent notice.
ELE 11
Equal Access to
Academic
Programs and
Services
LEP students are not segregated from their English-speaking peers.
LEP students have access to the full range of academic opportunities
and supports.
ELE 12
Equal Access to
Nonacademic
and Extracurricular
Programs
LEP students are encouraged to take part in extracurricular activities
and supports are provided when needed. Examples were sited of
LEP students participating in sports, theater and music.
Taunton Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 15, 2006
Page 14 of 16
ELE Criterion
Number
and
Topic
Comments Based on the Department’s Review of Local
ELE Self-Assessment
ELE 13
Follow-up
Support
The district monitors students for at least two years after exiting the
ELL program. A form is used to document the monitoring
activities.
ELE 14
Licensure and
Fluency
Requirements
Teachers providing English instruction are fluent in English and are
appropriately licensed.
Required Corrective Action, Timelines for Implementation, and Progress
Reporting
Teachers providing subject matter instruction have subject matter license, but have not all
had training in the following: sheltering content instruction, second language learning and
teaching, assessment of speaking and listening, and teaching reading and writing to LEP
students. See ELE 5 regarding teacher training.
Taunton Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 15, 2006
Page 15 of 16
ELE Criterion
Number
and
Topic
ELE 15
Professional
Development
Requirements
Comments Based on the Department’s Review of Local
ELE Self-Assessment
Teachers providing subject matter instruction have subject matter license, but have not all
had training in the following: sheltering content instruction, second language learning and
teaching, assessment of speaking and listening, and teaching reading and writing to LEP
students. See ELE 5 regarding teacher training.
There is an instructional space for LEP students at the Mulcahey School that is not
adequate for the number of students assigned to the class. By November 20, 2006
provide a description of the steps taken to provide an adequate instructional space for
LEP students at the Mulcahey School.
ELE 16
Equitable
Facilities (To be reviewed
during next
CPR visit)
ELE 17
DOE Data
Submission
Requirements
and Program
Evaluation
ELE 18 Records
of LEP
Students(To be reviewed
during next
CPR visit.)
Required Corrective Action, Timelines for Implementation, and Progress
Reporting
The district reports annually to the Department information
regarding their LEP students as required. The district looks at test
scores and provides the superintendent with information regarding
program placement and/or the method of instruction for LEP
students.
There are no specific program goals and no procedure to formally evaluate the
effectiveness of the English language education (ELE) program. By November 20,
2006, provide a plan to evaluate the effectiveness of the district’s ELE program.
Not reviewed.
Mid-cycle Report Format 2006.doc
Rev. 6/5/06
Taunton Public Schools Coordinated Program Review Mid-cycle Report
August 15, 2006
Page 16 of 16