The 2002 federal Adequate Yearly Progress school assessment figures were released yesterday, and the handwringing and worrywarting has begun. The Sacramento Bee notes, for example, that 70% of California's schools failed to meet the new standards, which are described below:
Under AYP, progress must be shown not only for each school but also in subgroups within a school. The subgroups include major ethnic groups, English learners, disabled students and poor children. If any subgroup comes up short, then the whole school fails.
AYP mandates that certain requirements are met each year:
* Each school and subgroup must perform to a proficiency level. In the first three years of AYP, 13.6 percent of elementary and middle school students must be proficient in English and 16 percent in math. For high school students, 11.2 percent must be proficient in English and 9.6 percent in math. Those percentages climb in future years.
* All schools and districts must have at least 95 percent of their students take state standards tests.
* Schools must also show improvement in their Academic Performance Index -- a number between 200 and 1,000 assigned to schools based on student performance on standardized tests.
* Finally, schools must show growth in high school graduation rates.
Sanctions for insufficient progress include allowing students to transfer to schools that meet the standards, requiring schools to provide tutoring, or even firing school staff.
Why is it difficult for schools to meet the standards above? Many, it seems, don't manage to test 95% of their kids, and that requirement that all subgroups show improvement is tricky, although the percentages stated above proficient performers is surprisingly low. Only 11.2% of high school students must be proficient in English? What schools are failing to teach 9 out of 10 teenagers to read?
On paper, Oakland's schools seem to be failing in that mission, but, although only 5% of Oakland's schools met the required progress standard, it appears that at least a few schools fell short because they didn't test 95% of their students in each subgroup. And one Fremont elementary school, widely considered to be one of the best, is indignant at being included in the "failing to make progress" category:
Mission Valley, for instance, scored a perfect 10 on the 2002 Academic Performance Index, but it is considered deficient in both math and English in the AYP ratings because 92.2 percent of white children took the test instead of the required 95 percent. That equals about five children.
Never mind that more than more than 75 percent of the kids who did take the test were rated proficient in both subjects, surpassing by far the requirement of 13.6 percent in English and 16 percent in math.
"The 95 percent participation rate is a difficult baseline for all districts to reach," said Jessica Zektser, testing director for the Fremont school district, who noted that every district in Alameda County was thwarted by that requirement.
Emphasis mine. If nothing else, perhaps these sorts of numbers can provide impetus for some sort of change to that section of the law. I understand why the 95% requirement is there - to keep schools from fudging the numbers by refusing to test low-performers - but if a school shows that 94%, or 93%, were tested, and that this group was very far above the national benchmark, an allowance should be made. It's silly for a school whose children perform well overall to get a low rating just because five Hispanic kids stayed home on the days the tests were given.
The full report, which will include 2003 results, will be released in August of this year.