About ten years ago the federal Elementary and Secondary Act was reauthorized under the title No Child Left Behind (NCLB). Much of what was included in this reauthorization was a radical change from the original act that was designed to help educate children living in poverty. NCLB set a series of bold targets with sanctions for schools that did not meet them. Included with these was publicly labeling schools as either making or not making adequate yearly progress (AYP). The ultimate goal of the act is that by 2014 every public school student will be proficient in reading and math on their approved state exam. In response to this, states created a graduated timeline of proficiency marks that culminated with the prescribed 100% proficiency. Now that we are close to 2014, schools are finding that the raised bar is beyond their reach. For example, in New Mexico 87% of their schools did not make AYP last year. Several states are now looking for ways to opt out of the 100% requirement.
On Friday the state will release the AYP results for Alaska’s schools. I am pleased that in comparison to elsewhere in the country and state, our schools did fairly well. We are expecting however, to learn that about 35% of our schools did not make AYP for 2011. Although it is ironic, that some of these schools may have improved test results from the previous year, but did not quite clear the higher bar. NCLB also requires schools to report the progress of their subgroups, e.g., students with disabilities, and these groups if large enough, are considered for the AYP calculation. The vast majority of our schools not making AYP did so because of one of the subgroups not meeting the state set percentage of proficiency.
It is easy to assume that a school that did not make AYP is failing. Before jumping to this conclusion, take some time to investigate the series of indicators that are considered for AYP and to learn whether the school improved. AYP is an important designation, it may not however, be a defining one.
AYP, Only a Part of the Story
About ten years ago the federal Elementary and Secondary Act was reauthorized under the title No Child Left Behind (NCLB). Much of what was included in this reauthorization was a radical change from the original act that was designed to help educate children living in poverty. NCLB set a series of bold targets with sanctions for schools that did not meet them. Included with these was publicly labeling schools as either making or not making adequate yearly progress (AYP). The ultimate goal of the act is that by 2014 every public school student will be proficient in reading and math on their approved state exam. In response to this, states created a graduated timeline of proficiency marks that culminated with the prescribed 100% proficiency. Now that we are close to 2014, schools are finding that the raised bar is beyond their reach. For example, in New Mexico 87% of their schools did not make AYP last year. Several states are now looking for ways to opt out of the 100% requirement.
On Friday the state will release the AYP results for Alaska’s schools. I am pleased that in comparison to elsewhere in the country and state, our schools did fairly well. We are expecting however, to learn that about 35% of our schools did not make AYP for 2011. Although it is ironic, that some of these schools may have improved test results from the previous year, but did not quite clear the higher bar. NCLB also requires schools to report the progress of their subgroups, e.g., students with disabilities, and these groups if large enough, are considered for the AYP calculation. The vast majority of our schools not making AYP did so because of one of the subgroups not meeting the state set percentage of proficiency.
It is easy to assume that a school that did not make AYP is failing. Before jumping to this conclusion, take some time to investigate the series of indicators that are considered for AYP and to learn whether the school improved. AYP is an important designation, it may not however, be a defining one.