THE STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT / THE UNIVERSITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK / ALBANY, NY 12234

 

TO:	EMSC-VESID Committee
FROM:	James A. Kadamus
SUBJECT:	New York State High School Initiative
DATE:	December 7, 2005
STRATEGIC GOAL:	Goals 1 and 2
AUTHORIZATION(S):

 

SUMMARY

 

Issue for Discussion

 

What additional performance indicators should be monitored to track the progress of high schools/districts in our New York State High School Initiative?

 

Reason(s) for Consideration

 

Implemention of policy.
         

Proposed Handling

 

This issue will come before the Regents EMSC-VESID Committee on December 8, 2005.

 

Procedural History

 

The New York High School Initiative includes several strategies focused on identifying students in academic difficulty and ensuring they get adequate help.  The high school completion strategy is focused on the urgency of improving high school performance and brings together schools that have the lowest graduation rates and the highest proportions of students taking three or fewer Regents exams in four years.  Through a series of “Destination Diploma” forums, SED’s goal is to create a community of professional practice among school district teams, along with State and regional technical assistance providers and professional organizations that have been struggling with these issues.  In May, the Regents received a report on the first Destination Diploma forums held in March in Albany and in May in New York City.  On May 25, a PBS broadcast of High School Completion Strategies That Work examined three of the high schools involved in the May Destination Diploma meeting.  In September, the Regents received an update on the high school completion strategy, information on what other states and national organizations are doing and saying about high schools, and a proposal for five key strategies to serve as the foundation of the New York High School Initiative.  A third Destination Diploma forum is scheduled on December 12-13, 2005 in Albany and we will report to the Board on the results in January.

 

Background Information

 

In December 2004, the Committee received an analysis of the Regents exam performance and educational outcomes of students who first entered grade 9 in the 2000-01 school year.  It showed a disturbing picture of many students who entered high school unprepared to do high school-level work, do not pass their courses and earn fewer than the 22 local high school credits they need for graduation in four years.  Further, the data showed that these students were concentrated originally in 135 high schools in 12 school districts and represented about 22 percent of the State’s high school enrollment.  Several of those high schools were closed during this year so we now have 127 schools from 12 school districts that we are tracking.  We will monitor the progress of these schools using a number of performance indicators. 

 

The attached report provides updated summary data for the 2000 cohort based on STEP files submitted in August 2005.  Summary data are provided for all public high schools, New York City high schools and rest of State high schools.  In addition, aggregate and school level data are presented for the 127 identified high schools on selected performance indicators.  In January, we will provide the Committee with statewide performance results for the 2001 student cohort and a status report on activities undertaken during 2005 and planned for 2006 to target assistance to these high schools.

 

We continue to establish ongoing capacity building with teams from those schools and districts and will create a greater sense of urgency to improve student performance.  That work has concentrated on a short list of practices with a high probability of success.  As we learned at the Summit on New York Education, additional work is needed to build urgency on high schools in areas such as the following:

 

1.               Set targets for high school graduation and measure results.

2.               Make local school boards accountable for high school performance.

3.               Check teacher qualifications and order changes where necessary to ensure qualified staff.

4.               Strengthen teaching through professional developed focused on proven curricula and lesson plans.

5.               Update school safety plans.

6.               Engage the public and students.

7.               Improvement achievement among the highest performing students.

 

Details of these initiatives are included in the Commissioner’s Monthly Report to the Regents.

 

 

 

 

 

Recommendation

 

We recommend that the Regents review the data provided on the 127 high schools and 12 districts and identify whether there are additional performance indicators on which staff should monitor progress.

 

Timetable for Implementation

 

Staff will continue to provide the Committee with reports on the progress of the 127 high schools in improving student performance.

 

 

 

Attachment

New York State High School Initiative

 

 

Analysis of Graduation Rates for the 2000 Cohort Based on the 2005 STEP File

 

In January 2005, we presented the Board of Regents with a plan of action for helping high school students in academic difficulty. The proposed approach was intended to help students in academic difficulty, to help educators in schools with low graduation rates who work with these students, and to provide reasonable opportunities for a small number of students who may be close to passing the Regents exams and who pass their courses but may not do as well on a particular test.

Based on cohort data first available in 2004, in January 2005, we identified 135 high schools in 12 school districts that had graduation rates under 70 percent and were already identified as needing improvement or as a School under Registration Review (SURR) under the State accountability system (see Appendix A for a list of schools). The 12 school districts were:  New York City, Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, Yonkers, Mount Vernon, Amsterdam, Roosevelt, Hempstead, Wyandanch, Freeport and Central Islip. 

These schools were identified based on an analysis of the graduation rates of students who first enrolled in grade 9 during the 2000-01 school year (or were ungraded and reached their seventeenth birthday during that school year) and who were enrolled in a public school in New York State in at least part of the 2001-02, 2002-03, or 2003-04 school years and for whom a district submitted a STEP record in August 2004. This paper presents updated graduation rates for public schools, statewide, in New York City, and in rest of State schools, and in the high schools identified in January 2005.  The updated figures are based on analyses of student records in the STEP files submitted to the Department in August 2005, which reported on student outcomes through June 30, 2005.

The 2005 STEP file included records for 243,869 students (both general-education students and students with disabilities) reported to have first entered grade 9 in 2000-01.  Of those records, 210,159 reported students who had graduated, earned an IEP diploma, dropped out, entered a GED program, or were still enrolled. The records of these students were used in these analyses. Another 8,052 records reported that a student had left New York State public schools to transfer out of State, to a nonpublic school, or to home instruction, or that the student had died. Because these students were no longer in the pool of possible graduates, these records were removed from the study. The remaining 25,658 records reported that the student had transferred to another district at some time between first entering grade 9 in the 2000-01 school year and June 30, 2005. These students were assumed to have duplicate records reported by the district to which the student transferred and were not included in the study. 

The 2005 STEP file included more records for students in this cohort than the 2004 STEP file (which included 199,312 records used in the 2004 analyses).  This difference can be attributed to greater understanding of, and compliance with, reporting requirements. In addition, the fact that the 2000 cohort was used for graduation rate accountability in the 2004-05 school year may have motivated schools to be particularly careful in reporting data for students in this cohort.

Tables 1-3 show the percentages of 2000 cohort members as of June 30, 2005 in each outcome category. Statewide, five years after first entering grade 9, more than 71 percent of this cohort had graduated and another 2 percent had earned IEP diplomas. Almost six percent had entered a general education development (GED) program; we do not have data showing the number of these students who may have earned high school equivalency diplomas. Finally, over 15 percent of these students left school without earning a diploma.

Not surprisingly, New York City, which serves a large percentage of at-risk students, had a lower graduation rate than rest of State schools. The calculations used in the present study are different than those used by the New York City Department of Education in their longitudinal cohort studies. New York City names their cohorts according to the expected date of graduation; therefore, the State’s 2000 Cohort would be New York City’s Class of 2004. The Class of 2004 is different from the State’s 2000 cohort in that it does not include students with disabilities educated in self-contained classrooms (5,842 students were excluded for this reason). The published graduation rate for New York City’s Class of 2004 after four years is 54.3 percent. In New York City’s calculation, students who earned high school equivalency diplomas are counted as graduates. The inclusion of all students with disabilities in the cohort and the exclusion of high school equivalency diploma recipients from the count of graduates result in the State reporting a lower graduation rate than New York City reports.

Table 1

The Percentage of Students in the 2000 Group by

Outcomes as of June 30, 2005 after Five Years for All Public High Schools

Outcomes as of June 30, 2005	Total Public
	Number	Percent
Regents/Local Diploma	149,757	71.3
IEP Diploma	4,369	2.1
Enrolled	11,893	5.7
Transferred to GED	11,946	5.7
Dropped Out	32,194	15.3
Total	210,159	100.0

 

Table 2

The Percentage of Students in the 2000 Group by

Outcomes as of June 30, 2005 after Five Years for All New York City High Schools

Outcomes as of June 30, 2005	Total Public
	Number	Percent
Regents/Local Diploma	39,027	52.7
IEP Diploma	1,520	2.1
Enrolled	9,071	12.2
Transferred to GED	5,489	7.4
Dropped Out	18,997	25.6
Total	74,104	100.0

 

Table 3

The Percentage of Students in the 2000 Group by

Outcomes as of June 30, 2005 after Five Years for All Rest of State High Schools

Outcomes as of June 30, 2005	Total Public
	Number	Percent
Regents/Local Diploma	110,730	81.4
IEP Diploma	2,849	2.1
Enrolled	2,822	2.1
Transferred to GED	6,457	4.7
Dropped Out	13,197	9.7
Total	136,055	100.0

 

Rates for the Identified High Schools

The analyses of the 2000 cohort data submitted in December 2004 were intended primarily to provide improved estimates of cohort graduation and dropout rates at the total public, New York City and rest of State levels.  In calculating the school graduation rates for the 135 identified schools, we only included students who met the criteria for membership in the school accountability graduation rate cohort.  Students who did not meet these criteria were included only in the calculation of district-level graduation rates.

In doing the analyses of 2005 STEP data, we have anticipated the cohort definition which will be used for graduation-rate accountability beginning with the 2003 cohort. In calculating the school-level rates, we have included all 2000 cohort members whose last enrollment record in the school showed that they had been enrolled in that school for a minimum of five months.  This procedure will provide the greatest consistency with analyses of future cohorts and provides rates that more accurately reflect the performance of each school.

Table 4 provides summary data for 127 of the 135 schools that were identified in the January 2005 Regents item. The remaining schools were closed. Almost 80 percent of these 127 schools were in New York City. The five-year average graduation rate of these schools was substantially lower than the total public graduation rate (56.4 percent compared with 71.3 percent).  Similarly these schools had substantially higher percentages of students who dropped out or transferred to GED programs than all public high schools. On the positive side, 11.2 percent of students in these schools were still enrolled five years after first entering grade 9 and therefore may have graduated at a later date.  The attached school-level data shows that some of the identified schools had five-year graduation rates higher than the State average.

Table 4

The Percentage of Students in the 2000 Group by

Outcomes as of June 30, 2005 after Five Years for 127 Selected High Schools

Outcomes as of June 30, 2005	Total Public
	Number	Percent
Regents/Local Diploma	22,658	56.4
IEP Diploma	958	2.4
Enrolled	4,479	11.2
Transferred to GED	3,471	8.6
Dropped Out	8,586	21.4
Total	40,152	100.0

 

Demographic and Resource Characteristics of Identified Schools and All Public Schools

Table 5 compares the demographic characteristics of all high schools with the identified schools. The pattern of performance, demographics, and resources in the identified schools corresponds with the relationship among these variables documented annually in the Report to the Governor and the Legislature on the Educational Status of the State’s Schools (the Chapter 655 Report). These schools have more at-risk students and fewer resources than higher-performing schools. The comparison shows that the identified schools serve students who are more likely to be eligible for subsidized lunches, to be disabled, to be limited English proficient, and to have repeated grade 9 than students in the typical public high school. The greater risk factors of these students are not matched with greater resources to meet their needs. In fact, all identified schools are in districts that have high student needs in relation to district ability to raise resources locally. Students in these schools are more likely than other students to be taught by teachers without appropriate certification; they have fewer books and computers per 100 students.

 

Table 5

Demographic Characteristics of Selected High Schools and All High Schools in 2003-04

 

Appendix A

 

Schools with Graduation Rates Below 70 Percent That Are in Improvement Status and/or SURR Status Under the Accountability System (Alternative High Schools Were Eliminated From This List)