| Goal 8: To help limited-English proficient (LEP) students reach high academic standards. |
| Objective 1 of 4: IMPROVE ENGLISH PROFICIENCY AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT OF STUDENTS SERVED BY TITLE VII OF THE BILINGUAL EDUCATION ACT |
| Indicator 8.1.1 of 3: English proficiency: Students in the program will annually demonstrate continuous and educationally significant progress on oral or written English proficiency measures. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Targets and Performance Data | Assessment of Progress | Sources and Data Quality | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Status: Unable to judge.
Explanation: Due to a combination of grantee and government delay in getting complete data and evaluations to the contractor (accomplished Feb. 8) OELA requested a no-cost extension to these task orders until September 30, 2002. ENH=Enhancement program, PDI= Program Development and Implementation Program, CS= Comprehensive School Program, SW=Schoolwide Improvement. Percentages for Cohort 3 are based on partial data. |
Additional Source Information: Contracted synthesis of local project data. Frequency: Annually. Validated By: On-Site Monitoring By ED. Limitations: Operational definitions of LEP students vary; the amount of missing data varies greatly across projects and cohorts of projects; grantees use different measures and different scoring mechanisms to test program objectives. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Indicator 8.1.2 of 3: Other academic achievement: Students in the program will annually demonstrate continuous and educationally significant progress on appropriate academic achievement of language arts, reading, and math. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Targets and Performance Data | Assessment of Progress | Sources and Data Quality | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Status: Unable to judge.
Explanation: Due to a combination of grantee and government delay in getting complete data and evaluations to the contractor (accomplished Feb. 8) OELA requested a no-cost extension to these task orders until September 30, 2002. ENH=Enhancement program, PDI= Program Development and Implementation Program, CS= Comprehensive School Program, SW=Schoolwide Improvement Percentages for Cohort 3 are based on partial data. |
Additional Source Information: Contracted synthesis of local project data. Frequency: Annually. Validated By: On-Site Monitoring By ED. Limitations: Operational definitions of LEP students vary; the amount of missing data varies greatly across projects; grantees use different measures and different scoring mechanisms to test program objectives. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Objective 2 of 4: BUILD CAPACITY OF SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN PROGRAM TO SERVE LEP STUDENTS. |
| Indicator 8.2.1 of 2: Programs meeting standards: Each year the number of grantees meeting ?criteria for model programs? will increase by 20 percent. | ||
| Targets and Performance Data | Assessment of Progress | Sources and Data Quality |
|
Status: Unable to judge.
Analysis of data delayed. Explanation: Due to a combination of grantee and government delay in getting complete data and evaluations to the contractor (accomplished Feb. 8), OELA requested a no-cost extension to these task orders until September 30, 2002. |
Additional Source Information: Performance Report. Frequency: Biennially. Validated By: No Formal Verification. Limitations: Various definitions of ?model? project will need to be combined and may identify different projects - need to determine how to combine definitions, use definitions, and evaluate the results. |
|
| Indicator 8.2.2 of 2: Teacher training: Each year, the numbers of teachers in Title VII Systemwide and Comprehensive School Grants Program who receive quality professional development in the instruction of LEP students will increase by 20 percent. | ||
| Targets and Performance Data | Assessment of Progress | Sources and Data Quality |
|
Status: Unable to judge.
This information was reported in last year's GPRA report, but was not part of the Departmentally approved research agenda for this fiscal year. We have no data to report on this activity. Explanation: Program office is developing criteria for quality in service professional development based on contracted synthesis of local project evaluations and other sources; criteria will be available late 2001. Contractors who are synthesizing the biennial evaluation reports will be asked to add this data element to their information. Initial goal is 20% but the target will be revised based on initial results. |
Additional Source Information: Performance Report. Frequency: Biennially. Validated By: No Formal Verification. Limitations: Biennial evaluations typically list how many teachers participate in professional development activities only, without considering an evaluation of those activities. |
|
| Objective 3 of 4: PROVIDE EFFECTIVE GUIDANCE AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND IDENTIFY AND DISSEMINATE RELIABLE INFORMATION ON EFFECTIVE PRACTICES. |
| Indicator 8.3.1 of 2: Inquiries to the National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education (NCBE): The number of inquiries to NCBE will increase 15 percent per year. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Targets and Performance Data | Assessment of Progress | Sources and Data Quality | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Status: Target exceeded.
Explanation: The average number of hits per day (including weekends) is approximately 30,000. |
Source: Other Other: Other. Sponsor: NCBE Annual Performance Reports. Additional Source Information: Frequency: Annually. Validated By: On-Site Monitoring By ED. Limitations: Measure does not address customer satisfaction, although anecdotal comments support satisfaction. Planned Improvements: Disaggregation of data to examine who uses NCBE and what types of materials are downloaded. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Indicator 8.3.2 of 2: More specific reporting: All states will increase their capacity to plan for and provide technical assistance by reporting more specifically on LEP programs designed to meet the educational needs of LEP students, their academic test performance, and grade retention rates. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Targets and Performance Data | Assessment of Progress | Sources and Data Quality | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Status: Unable to judge.
Explanation: HR1 provided for an alternative, uniform procedure for State reporting on the numbers and status of LEP students. The 2001 Survey of the State information are due April 30, 2002. |
Additional Source Information: Performance Report; Redesigned Summary Report of the Survey of the States' LEP Students and Available Educational Programs and Services, 2000. Frequency: Annually. Validated By: No Formal Verification. Limitations: Survey relies on self-reports from states; department plans to continue technical assistance on data collection issues. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Objective 4 of 4: IMPROVE THE QUALITY AND QUANTITY OF EDUCATIONAL PERSONNEL SERVING LEP STUDENTS |
| Indicator 8.4.1 of 2: New teachers: At least 4,000 teachers per year will complete high-quality bilingual education/ESL programs accreditation or degree programs through the Bilingual Education Professional Development programs. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Targets and Performance Data | Assessment of Progress | Sources and Data Quality | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Status: Unable to judge.
Analysis of data delayed. Explanation: Due to a combination of grantee and government delay in getting complete data and evaluations to the contractor (accomplished Feb. 8), OELA requested a no-cost extension to these task orders until September 30, 2002. |
Additional Source Information: Contracted Synthesis of Project data. Frequency: Annually. Validated By: No Formal Verification. Limitations: Original data based on a sample of reports; program office has to develop criteria for ?high quality?. Planned Improvements: Implementing proposed new evaluation requirements; developing criteria for ?high quality;? verifying data through periodic monitoring; providing guidance and technical assistance to grantees to improve the timeliness and quality of source data. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Indicator 8.4.2 of 2: Bilingual fellowship program: Bilingual fellows who have completed their studies will be employed in training classroom teachers or in other positions directly related to serving LEP students. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Targets and Performance Data | Assessment of Progress | Sources and Data Quality | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Status: Positive movement toward target.
Explanation: The high rate of employment of bilingual fellows in training classroom teachers and other areas directly related to serving LEP students is yet more evidence of the critical shortage of teachers trained to serve LEP students. It is difficult to evaluate since bilingual fellowship projects fund new students each year. Thus any given year?s students may be from cohorts who began during various different fiscal years. |
Frequency: Other. Validated By: No Formal Verification. Limitations: Data from fellows who finish is typically late in arriving and with new database may be entered late. Data will be entered as soon as possible. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
