Testing Coordinators: October 4, 2007 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) and Academic Performance Index (API)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Mt. Diablo Unified School District
Advertisements

1 Adequate Yearly Progress 2005 Status Report Research, Assessment & Accountability November 2, 2005 Oakland Unified School District.
MUIR FUNDAMENTAL SCHOOL May 2012 CST Data Presentation.
Using Data to Meet Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Middle School Principal’s Breakout Session November 16, 2005.
‘No Child Left Behind’ Loudoun County Public Schools Department of Instruction.
Elementary/Secondary Education Act (1965) “No Child Left Behind” (2002) Adequacy Committee February 6,2008.
Poway Unified Board of Education Academic Performance Index (API) and Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) October 15, 2012.
Lodi Unified School District Accountability Progress Report September 6, 2011.
Lodi Unified School District Accountability Progress Report (APR) & CAHSEE Results Update Prepared for the September 21, 2010 Board of Education.
2013 Accountability Report Jurupa Unified School District Board of Education Meeting.
Data 101 Presented by Janet Downey After School Program Specialist Riverside Unified School District.
Fontana Unified School District Student Achievement Data September 17, 2008 Instructional Services Assessment & Evaluation.
Cambrian School District Academic Performance Index (API) Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Program Improvement (PI) Report.
Title III Accountability. Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives How well are English Learners achieving academically? How well are English Learners.
California Standards Test and CAHSEE Correlation Use of Student Data for Targeted Preemptive Intervention November 1, 2006 Dr. Janis Fries-Martinez, Principal.
Title I Coordinators’ Meeting: Guiding Students to Proficiency December 07, 2005.
Questions & Answers About AYP & PI answered on the video by: Rae Belisle, Dave Meaney Bill Padia & Maria Reyes July 2003.
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Academic Performance Index (API) and Assessing California Standards Test (CST) Data.
1 Adequate Yearly Progress Fresno Unified School District 2005 Data Review.
Michigan’s Accountability Scorecards A Brief Introduction.
San Leandro Unified School Board Looking Closely About Our Data September 6, 2006 Presented by Department of Curriculum and Instruction Prepared by Daniel.
District Assessment & Accountability Data Board of Education Report September 6, 2011 Marsha A. Brown, Director III – Student Services State Testing and.
Torrance Unified School District Annual Student Achievement Dr. George W. Mannon, Superintendent Dr. E Don Kim, Senior Director of Elementary Education.
Department of Research and Evaluation Santa Ana Unified School District 2011 CST API and AYP Elementary Presentation Version: Elementary.
1 Paul Tuss, Ph.D., Program Manager Sacramento Co. Office of Education August 17, 2009 California’s Integrated Accountability System.
1 STUDENT PROGRESS AND ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT 2013 September 10, 2013 HUNTINGTON BEACH CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT.
Understandin g the API & the AYP APLUS+ Annual Conference October 2010 Del Mar, California Diane Grotjohn
State and Federal Testing Accountability: Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Academic Performance Index (API) SAIT Training September 27, 2007.
Program Improvement/ Title I Parent Involvement Meeting October 9, :00 p.m. Redwood City School District.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Tom Torlakson, State Superintendent of Public Instruction 2013 Assessment and Accountability Information Meeting State.
1 Watertown Public Schools Assessment Reports 2010 Ann Koufman-Frederick and Administrative Council School Committee Meetings Oct, Nov, Dec, 2010 Part.
CHANGES IN FEDERAL ACCOUNTABILITY FOR SCHOOLS BEGINNING IN
Spring 2012 Testing Results. GRANT API HISTORY
1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA Modified by Dr. Teresa Cortez September 10, 2007.
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Academic Performance Index (API) and Analysis of the Mathematics Section of the California Standards Test (CST) Data Elementary.
ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE INDEX (API) ADEQUATE YEARLY PROGRESS (AYP) PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT (PI) SEPTEMBER 18, 2014 Accountability Progress Reporting Update.
School Accountability in Delaware for the School Year August 3, 2005.
Lodi Unified School District Accountability Progress Report (APR) Results Update Prepared by the LUSD Assessment, Research & Evaluation Department.
Your High School Name 3-Year Achievement Results Analysis September 2013.
Santa Ana Unified School District 2011 CST Enter School Name Version: Intermediate.
Capacity Development and School Reform Accountability The School District Of Palm Beach County Adequate Yearly Progress, Differentiated Accountability.
Parents as Partners: How Parents and Schools Work Together to Close the Achievement Gap.
ESEA Federal Accountability System Overview 1. Federal Accountability System Adequate Yearly Progress – AYP defined by the Elementary and Secondary Education.
Daniel Melendez. School Demographics  Language  English Learners  7% (55 students)  Socio-Economic  35% qualify for free or reduced lunch (276) 
Meeting AYP and Generating API: Preventing “Leakage”
California Standards Test (CST) and California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE) Results, Oakland Unified School District Division of Student Achievement.
Federal and State Student Accountability Data Update Testing Coordinators Meeting Local District 8 09/29/09 1.
1 Accountability Systems.  Do RFEPs count in the EL subgroup for API?  How many “points” is a proficient score worth?  Does a passing score on the.
No Child Left Behind California’s Definition of Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) July 2003.
Sample Elementary School 3-Year Achievement Results Analysis September 2013.
SANGER HIGH SCHOOL CALIFORNIA DISTINGUISHED SCHOOL CALSTAT LEADERSHIP SITE FOR COLLABORATION
Ross Valley School District STAR, API and AYP Summary Toni Beal, Director of Student Services September 27, 2011.
AYP and Report Card. Big Picture Objectives – Understand the purpose and role of AYP in Oregon Assessments. – Understand the purpose and role of the Report.
1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA May 2003 Modified by Dr. Teresa Cortez for Riverside Feeder Data Days February.
2007 – 2008 Assessment and Accountability Report LVUSD Report to the Board September 23, 2008 Presented by Mary Schillinger, Assistant Superintendent Education.
CHANGES IN FEDERAL ACCOUNTABILITY FOR SCHOOLS BEGINNING IN Central Susquehanna Intermediate Unit.
1. Every Student Succeeds Act ESSA December
2012 Accountability Progress Report (APR) Office of Accountability October 23, 2012.
Academic Performance Index (API) and AYP
Accountability in California Before and After NCLB
Metropolitan Nashville Public Schools
What is API? The Academic Performance Index (API) is the cornerstone of California's Public Schools Accountability Act of 1999 (PSAA). It is required.
Accountability Progress Report September 16, 2010
Using Data to Drive Your School’s Instructional Program
Wade Hayashida Local District 8
AYP and Report Card.
Academic Achievement Report for Meadow Homes Elementary School
Academic Achievement Report for Washington Manor Middle School
History of No Child Left Behind (NCLB)
Presentation transcript:

Testing Coordinators: October 4, 2007 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) and Academic Performance Index (API)

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) vs. Academic Performance Index (API) Understanding the Difference

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Federal Testing Accountability No Child Left Behind Testing Accountability: Required Elements

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) and Annual Measurable Objectives (AMO) All Title I Schools must meet Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) school wide. Failure to meet AYP for two consecutive years in a single curricular area or AYP component will move a school into Program Improvement (PI) status. Curricular Areas: Language Arts and Math

Exiting Program Improvement (PI) To exit PI status, a PI school must meet Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in each AYP component for two consecutive years.

AYP Criteria for High School: 1. Participation Rate: 95% participation rate must be met in California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE) for all 10th graders and for each significant 10 th grade subgroup.

AYP Annual Measurable Objectives High School Level ELA CAHSEE Proficiency* ’07= 22.3% ’08= 33.4% ’09=44.5% Math CAHSEE Proficiency* ’07=20.9% ’08=32.2% ’09=43.5% 2. Proficiency:

CAHSEE Passing English Language Arts: Scaled Score of 350 Mathematics: Scaled Score of 350

CAHSEE Proficiency English Language Arts: 380 Scaled Score Mathematics: 380 Scaled Score

AYP Criteria for Elementary/Middle School/High School: 3. Academic Performance Index (API) Minimal School API Score of 590 (620 in Spring ‘08) Or Increase of 1 API point per year

AYP Criteria for High School: 4. Graduation Rate : Improvement in the graduation rate of at least.1%

ALL Title I Schools are accountable for significant subgroups If a Title I High School has a 10th grade subgroup population which is: 100 students or greater who are to be STAR tested, or 99 to 50 students which represent at least 15% of the total number of students to be tested, the subgroup must meet: Participation Rate and Annual Measurable Objectives (AMO) Proficiency Rates.

3 Key Subgroups English Learners Socio Economically Disadvantaged Special Education

Key Subgroup: EL Students Includes RFEPS (Proficiency only).

Key Subgroup: Socio Economically Disadvantaged Free and Reduced Lunch. Parents did not graduate from High School.

Key Subgroup: Special Education Any student with an IEP. Exited Special Ed Students count for Proficiency (2 years max). Math Proficiency Provision.

Review New AYP Report Accountability Progress Report

Meeting AYP: While Implementing the Core Program Elements, Consider:

1. 10 Grade CAHSEE Testing Drive 2. Providing 9 th and 10 th grade students with adequate review of 6th, 7th, and 8th grade CAHSEE tested Math standards in all 9 th and 10 grade Math classes. 3. Targeting the key standards in English 9 & 10 that are CAHSEE tested. 4. “Bridge” / Articulation with Middle Schools to align ELA and Math strategies and to target CAHSEE needs early.

Academic Performance Index (API) State of California Testing Accountability

The Big Six: API Component Breakdown 1. ELA CST: 28.8% 2. Math CST EOC: 18.0% 3. Science CST Grade 10+EOC Grade 9-11: 19.3% 4. History CST: 14.7% 5. CAHSEE ELA : 9.6% 6. CAHSEE Math: 9.6%

API Participation Rate: 85% participation rate must be met in California Standards Tests (CST) Grade Level Exams: ELA Grades 9-11 US History Grade 11 Life Science Grade 10

Calculating API Key to API Growth

Academic Performance Index (API) Criteria: Quintile Rankings and Weights Quintile API Weights Advanced Proficient Basic Below Basic Far Below Basic

Academic Performance Index (API) Criteria: Quintile Rankings and Weights Quintile API Weights Advanced Proficient Basic Below Basic Far Below Basic Numbers of Students

Academic Performance Index (API) Criteria: Quintile Rankings and Weights Quintile API Weights Gain in API Weight N/A Advanced Proficient Basic Below Basic Far Below Basic

Figure #1- California Standards Test (CST) Levels: Language Arts Far Below BasicBelow BasicBasicProficientAdvanced 150 to to to to to 600 State Target for All Students API For Academic Performance Index (API), greatest gains will occur when moving students from the lowest CST levels due to weighting factors.

Academic Performance Index (API) Criteria: CAHSEE Weights Scaled Score API Weights (350)1000 XXXX (Below 350)200 Pass XXXX Fail

Review New API Report Accountability Progress Report

Generating API: “Checking for Leaks”: SIS CST Comparison Reports

“Leakage” API Two Reasons API drops: 1. Failure to move students from Far Below Basic to Below Basic. 2. Having students “leak” multiple quintile levels.

“Checking for Leaks”: XXXXX Middle School Spring 2004 to Spring 2005 CST results Targeted Intervention Program in Math 50 students moved to CST proficiency 60 students move out of CST proficiency Net Growth of Proficient students in Math: -10

Academic Performance Index (API) Criteria: Quintile Rankings and Weights Quintile API Weights Advanced Proficient Basic Below Basic Far Below Basic

ID99,2 (current year) “1” (for active) (enter today’s date) “2” (select by class number) “Y” (enter by district course #) – Grade 6 Math Grade 7 Math – Algebra I – Algebra Readiness (proceed to next step) “T” (sort by teacher) Press enter (Do start a new page or switch to Don’t) (create a new report) Type in title, then enter Preventing Leakage: Secondary

While Implementing the Core Program Elements, Consider: CST Testing Drive Full Implementation of Read 180 Computerized ELA Intervention Program Full Implementation of Cognitive Tutor Algebra I Intervention Program Check For “Leaks”

Wade Hayashida Categorical Program Coordinator Local District