NCLB, API, and AYP pdf

Ten slides (click NCLB, API, and AYP, above) summarize two data-driven aspects of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation. In 2002, Congress approved NCLB. One of the many targets of NCLB was focused at the state level: strengthen student assessment and school accountability for teaching and learning in the state's public schools. The alphabet soup included in NCLB at the federal level are

NCLB sought to determine the percentage of students in each state who attained proficiency in Math and English/Language Arts (ELA) in a given year.

In the Federal Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) system, Annual Measurable Objectives (AMAO) reflect the percentage of students in several subgroups scoring at Proficient and above. In the Federal AYP system, every school is expected to have a minimum percentage of students scoring at Proficient level or above. This percent floats upwards over time. For example, the Proficiency target for English-Language Arts has floated from 13.6% to 24.4%, rising in 2008-09 to 35.2%, and eventually to 100% in 2013-14. Similarly, the target has floated from 16% to 26.5%, rising in 2008-09 to 37%, and eventually to 100% in 2013-14. All student target groups must meet common targets. Much criticism has arisen over state practices for excluding data from certain groups for state reporting.

Each state determined the way the state chose to illustrate this. California created an Academic Performance Index (API) to do this. Each public school receives a score between 200 and 1,000, based on the distribution of student scores in grades 2-11 on the California Standardized Test (CST) across five performance levels: Advanced, Proficient, Basic, Below Basic, and Far Below Basic. For more information on California's assessment system, look at
http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us/ .  The concept for improvement in California is a base API score and a growth target for the following year. Each school is compared to its own past performance and to other schools in a comparison called "similar schools ranking." The latter has come under scrutiny.

Consider how your state has approached this issue. Your contribution in the Discussions regarding your state's practices will help your colleagues broaden their perspective