Including analysis and self-help tools for
coordination with Section 618: Table 6
Presentation Goals
To enhance understanding of the meaning behind
the APR reports and what information is needed to
properly analyze them
2. To provide state personnel with clarified instructions
on how to properly complete the data analysis
behind the Indicator
3. To enhance state by state APR reporting similarity
4. To clarify the similarities and differences between
the APR and Table 6 sets of data and to show
shortcuts between the two sets
1.
2
APR and Table 6 of 618 –
Trail of History
APR 03-04 (looks
a lot like Table 6)
SPP 04-05
(new format)
SEPARATE
04-05 Table 6
APR 05-06 through 07-08
Table 6 attached!
X
3
Why Is This Important?
 Table 6 Provides the Backbone to APR
Indicator 3 (Most states fill out their
Section 618 report first)
 OSEP needs the data from both these
sources so that it has a clear picture of
Participation and Performance in States
 National Summary by Content, Type of
Assessment, and Grade are important
4
What do the data tell us?
We know how difficult your job as data managers can
be!!!
5
Instructions – 07-08
AYP
1.
1.
# of districts meeting the State’s AYP objectives for progress
for the disability subgroup divided by the total # of districts
meeting minimum “n” size
Participation
2.
1.
Sub-indicators for Regular Assessment (both with and
without accommodations), and Alternate Assessment (both
AA-GLAS, and AA-AAS)
Performance
3.
1.
Sub-indicators for Regular Assessment (both with and
without accommodations), and Alternate Assessment (both
AA-GLAS, and AA-AAS)
6
General Instructions
Data Source:
 Data source is assessment data collected for purposes
of determining AYP (Your states NCLB assessment)
 Data should be provided for all grade levels and
content areas tested
 Data MUST be provided in raw numbers in addition to
percentages (separate tables work very well!!!)
 Participation and performance data to be taken from
data collected for reporting under section 618 (Annual
Report of Children Served); Table 6 (Section 618) is to
be attached to this APR.
7
General Instructions
 Sampling from State’s 618 data is not allowed.
 States should use the same assessments used for reporting under




NCLB.
States must meet AYP targets in both content areas to be
counted as having made overall AYP (NEED overall number).
States must attach Table 6 of their 618 submission. Participation
and proficiency calculations in this APR report must report
participation and proficiency rates by content area for each of
the grades shown in Table 6.
States should EXPLAIN (not just describe) the results of the
calculations and compare the results to their target.
States are encouraged to present their APR information in
summary tables and include multiple years of data for
comparison purposes.
8
Indicator 3A - AYP
 This number is intended to show the percentage of
districts in your state that are making Adequate Yearly
Progress
 To do this, districts must meet AYP for both Math
AND Reading
 FOR THIS REASON AYP DATA WHICH ARE BROKEN
UP BY CONTENT AREA ARE USELESS WITHOUT AN
OVERALL NUMBER
 Proper Calculation on following page
9
Indicator 3A - AYP
 Example calculation – State XYZ has had 32 districts
meet AYP for Math, and 28 districts meet AYP for
Reading
 ONLY 14 districts made AYP for BOTH Math and
Reading
 State XYZ had 50 districts meet the minimum “N” size
 Calculation = districts meet AYP / total “N” districts
 = 14 / 50
 = 28% overall

NOTICE – THIS NUMBER IS SMALLER THAN THE MATH
OR READING CONTENT AREA ONLY CALCULATION
10
Indicator 3B - Participation
 This number is intended to show the percentage of
students with IEPs in your state that are participating
in statewide assessments
 The intent is to be able to measure by accommodation
or alternate assessment
 In order for full analysis to be possible data should be
provided for each grade level and content area tested
 Also each sub-indicator should have data provided
(3B(b), 3B(c), etc.)
 Proper Calculation on following page
11
Indicator 3B - Participation
 Calculations:
 A. # of children with IEPs in assessed grades;
 B. # of children with IEPs in regular assessment with no
accommodations
 C. # of children with IEPs in regular assessment with
accommodations
 D. # of children with IEPs in alternate assessment against grade
level achievement standards
 E. # of children with IEPs in alternate assessment against alternate
achievement standards
 Account for any children included in “A” but not included
in “B, C, D, or E” above.
12
Indicator 3B - Participation
 Proper formatting for tables (one each content area):
 A table for raw #’s and one for percentages works best
Statewide Assessment –
2007-2008
A
B
C
D
E
F (not
required,
but helpful
to report)
G
Reading Assessment Participation
Grade 3
Grade 4
Grade 5
Grade 6
Grade 7
Grade 8
Grade HS
Total
#
%
Children with IEPs
IEPs in regular
assessment with no
accommodations
IEPs in regular
assessment with
accommodations
IEPs in alternate
assessment against
grade-level standards
(AA-GLAAS)
IEPs in alternate
assessment against
alternate standards
(AA-AAAS)
IEPs in alternate
assessment against
modified standards
(AA-MAAS)
Overall (b+c+d+e)
Baseline
Overall %
Students Included in IEP count but not included in assessments above
Students who took an
out of level Test
Parental Exemptions
Absent
Did not take for other
reasons
13
Indicator 3B - Participation
 Example % calculation – State XYZ had 1,000 students
with IEPs at the 4th grade level for reading
 Of these, 900 took the regular assessment
 400 of these used accommodations
 Calculation = # on regular assessment with
accommodations / total IEP students
 = 400 / 1,000
 = 40% participation
 NOTE – The remaining 500 would account for 50% of the
overall population who took the regular assessment without
accommodations
14
Indicator 3C - Performance
 This number is intended to show the percentage of
students with IEPs in your state that are PROFICIENT
in statewide assessments
 The intent is to be able to measure by accommodation
or alternate assessment
 In order for full analysis to be possible data should be
provided for each grade level and content area tested
 Also each sub-indicator should have data provided
(3B(b), 3B(c), etc.)
 Proper Calculation on following page
15
Indicator 3C - Performance
 Calculations:
 A. # of children with IEPs in assessed grades;
 B. # of children with IEPs proficient or above in regular assessment
with no accommodations
 C. # of children with IEPs proficient or above in regular assessment
with accommodations
 D. # of children with IEPs proficient or above in alternate
assessment against grade level achievement standards
 E. # of children with IEPs proficient or above in alternate
assessment against alternate achievement standards
 REMEMBER – Raw numbers are VITAL!!!
16
Indicator 3C - Performance
 Proper formatting for tables (one each content area):
Statewide Assessment –
2007-2008
A
B
C
D
E
F (not
required,
but helpful
to report)
G
Reading Assessment Performance
Grade 3
Grade 4
Grade 5
Grade 6
Grade 7
Grade 8
Grade HS
Total
#
%
Children with IEPs
IEPs in regular
assessment with no
accommodations
IEPs in regular
assessment with
accommodations
IEPs in alternate
assessment against
grade-level standards
(AA-GLAAS)
IEPs in alternate
assessment against
alternate standards
(AA-AAAS)
IEPs in alternate
assessment against
modified standards
(AA-MAAS)
Overall (b+c+d+e)
Baseline
Overall %
A table for raw #’s and one for percentages works best
17
Indicator 3C - Performance
 Example % calculation – State XYZ had 1,000 students
with IEPs at the 4th grade level for reading
 Of these, 400 took the regular assessment with
accommodations
 300 of these scored proficient or above
 Calculation = # on regular assessment with
accommodations / total IEP students
 = 300 / 1,000
 = 30% proficient
 NOTE – Similar calculations should take place for nonaccommodated regular assessments and alternate assessments
18
Indicator 3 vs. Table 6 – the connection
 Much of the data included in indicator 3 can also be
found with Section 618: Table 6 – which must be
included with all APR submissions.
 This included ALL participation information
 However, remember – SAMPLING is not allowed
 For example –
- APR Indicator 3B(a) for a given grade level should be
equal to column 1 data in Table 6
- APR Indicator 3B(d) for a given grade level should be
equal to column 4a data in Table 6
19
Indicator 3 vs. Table 6
 Use the below table when lifting data from Table 6 for Indicator 3
618: Table 6
APR Indicator 3
Column 1
Data Point B(a), C(a)
Column 3 (–) Column 3A
Data Point B(b)
Column 3A
Data Point B(c)
Column 4A
Data Point B(d)
Column 4D
Data Point B(e)
Columns 6, 7, and 8
Explanation of Not Tested
Proficient Columns 9B
Data Point C(d)
Proficient Columns 9D
Data Point C(e)
 Note that there is no transfer possible from columns 9A to Data
Points C(b) and C(c). Table 6 does not ask for proficiency
information for the regular assessment by accommodation status
20
NCEO Data Viewer
 Check your states policy and assessment performance using the
NCEO Data Viewer, an interactive data Web site available online
at http://data.nceo.info/.
 It contains information on:
 State policies on assessment participation and accommodations
 State Annual Performance Report (APR) data (taken from Table 6)
 Users can create customizable reports (color-coded maps and
tabular charts) based on chosen criteria.
 The Data Viewer also provides a Tutorial, Glossary of Terms, and
links to related NCEO Publications.
 Coming soon to the site will be more prefabricated Special
Analyses and other unique reports.
21
NCEO Data Viewer
 Here is an example of a policy report:
22
NCEO Data Viewer
 Here is another example of a policy report:
23
NCEO Data Viewer
 The map below shows the percent of high school students
proficient on the regular assessment in each state for 2003-04. :
24
Questions; Comments
 Jason Altman, altma014@umn.edu
 Chris Bremer, breme006@umn.edu
 Christopher Rogers, roge0229@umn.edu
 NCEO “online”, www.nceo.info
 NCEO Data Viewer, data.nceo.info
25