Click here to subscribe today or Login.
Adequate Yearly Progress weighed by overall scores and subgroups as well.
With the state slated to release its annual report today on how public schools did last year in meeting mandatory reading and math test goals, what can we expect from our local districts?
Most, if not all, will have better test results than they did last year. Despite that, more will have failed this year to achieve mandatory Adequate Yearly Progress in making test scores go up. How is that paradox possible? Call it failing to the “nth” degree.
“N” is a key number in a sophisticated state scrutiny of test results designed to make sure no children slip through the cracks. It’s tricky, but here’s how it works.
The state looks at each school’s overall results – this year, the minimum goal is to have 45 percent of the test takers score “proficient” or better in math and 54 percent do so in reading. But it also looks at how well different “subgroups” of students did. Those subgroups include special education, low income, minority and limited English speaking students. Statistically, those groups tend to do more poorly in standardized tests.
So a school can have an outstanding result – say, 90 percent of all students scoring above the minimum goal – and still fail to make Adequate Yearly Progress, if the students in any subgroup miss the goal.
All of this is required under the federal No Child Left Behind law, which allows each state to set a minimum number of students in a subgroup for that subgroup to count toward Adequate Yearly Progress. That is the “n” number. It varies from state to state. In Pennsylvania, the “n” number is 40.
That means if a school has 39 special education students, they aren’t counted as a subgroup. Consider one possibility:
Assume school A has 39 special education students and school B has 40. Then assume that in school A all 39 special education students do terribly on the tests while in School B only 19 do poorly. Though it seems that School B may do a better job on the tests, School A still makes Adequate Yearly Progress, because that subgroup isn’t big enough to count. School B does not make AYP, because it has 40 special education students, which means their test results do count. School B did better on the tests, but school A looks better on the state report.
“N” number negatively impacts overall score
One reason to have an “n” number is simple statistics. Since AYP is achieved by having a percentage of the students score proficient or better, a larger number of students must be in the group for the percentage to be meaningful. That is, if there are only 10 students, the test results from a single student can radically change the percentage. If there are 100, it takes 10 students to have the same impact.
So, what’s different about the “n” number this year that is probably going to result in more schools not making Adequate Yearly Progress?
The state tests reading and math. It started measuring Adequate Yearly Progress in 2002-03, using test results in grades 5, 8 and 11. In 2005-06, it started using grade 3 tests. Last year, it started testing grades 4, 6 and 7, but didn’t count the results toward AYP. This year, those grades count.
That means more students are taking the test in many schools and there are probably more students in the subgroups taking the tests in many schools.
Schools that did not have the magic “n” number of students (40) in a subgroup last year (when only grade 3,5,8 and 11 counted) may have the “n” number this time (thanks to the addition of grades 4, 6 and 7).
That is what happened in some local districts, according to superintendents who see the results before they become public. It most likely has happened state wide.
Area superintendents see goal as unrealistic
At Greater Nanticoke Area, Superintendent Anthony Perrone noted that, at the Elementary Center, when the state only counted test results from grade 3 and 5, the school didn’t have enough special education students to hit the state’s “n” number of 40. With grade 4 added, it did. Last year the Elementary Center met AYP goals. This year it did not, even though the goals are the same. (The state increases the goals every few years. They go up next year).
Wilkes-Barre Area Superintendent Jeff Namey said the same problem occurred in several of his schools. All of them met AYP last year, but some missed this year, and the primary reason was the increase in grades being tested, which pushed those schools over the “n” number in some subgroups – again, it was mostly in special education.
Other superintendents said their districts were not affected by the “n” number this year. Dallas and Northwest Area, for example, met all AYP goals even with the increase in grades being tested.
Things will change next year when the “n” number and the grades tested will remain the same, the goals will get tougher. In 2008-09 and 2009-10, the goals will be 63 percent scoring proficient or better in reading and 56 percent in math. And it just keeps going up. The current version of No Child Left Behind (it is up for renewal and could be revised) mandates that 100 percent of students score proficient or better by 2014.
It is a goal local superintendents have repeatedly called unrealistic, even as they embrace the accountability the law is intended to enforce. They argue that some special education students simply will never be able to score high enough on the tests.The state has implemented some ways meeting such relative goals can count toward AYP, but this year’s results will likely show how those measures may not be enough. Most local districts and schools will show improvement in test scores, but those subgroups – particularly special education – will block them from meeting Adequate Yearly Progress.
On the Web
To see details of how local schools did in the state report, check www.timesleader.com throughout the day (note that the state may choose to delay the scheduled release of the data)