69ý

Federal

Shifts in State Systems for Gauging AYP Seen As Impeding Analysis

By Lynn Olson — November 29, 2005 3 min read
  • Save to favorites
  • Print
Email Copy URL

Determining whether schools and districts are making adequate yearly progress under the federal No Child Left Behind Act “has evolved into 50 intricate formulas that vary greatly from state to state,” according to a recent report by the Center on Education Policy.

The report from the Washington-based policy group tracks changes to state accountability plans approved by the U.S. Department of Education in 2004 and 2005, based on decision letters posted on the department’s Web site.

Read the report, available from the .

The federal law requires schools and districts to meet annual performance targets, based largely on test scores, for their student populations overall and for subgroups of students who are poor, speak limited English, have disabilities, or belong to racial or ethnic minorities. 69ý and districts that fail to meet their targets for adequate yearly progress, or AYP, for two or more years face sanctions.

According to the Nov. 18 report, “constant changes in how states determine AYP make it difficult to tell whether student achievement is really improving, because year-to-year comparisons in the number of schools making AYP are less meaningful if the rules change each year.”

Transparency Needed

For example, the center found:

• Most states now use a “confidence interval,” a statistical technique akin to a margin of error that makes it easier to make AYP.

• Nine states use some type of indexing system that gives credit for gains made at achievement levels below “proficient.”

• The number of states in which scores from retests can count in calculating AYP has risen from four in 2003 to 11 this year.

• In 2004 and 2005, a total of 23 states increased the minimum number of students needed in a subgroup before it counts for AYP purposes.

• Thirty-one states have won approval in the past two years to identify districts as needing improvement only when they miss AYP in the same subject across all grade spans: elementary, middle, and high school.

“Unable to change the fundamental requirements written into the law, states are using administrative methods to lessen the numbers of schools and districts not making AYP,” the report contends.

While the federal department’s willingness to make adjustments based on state and local experience is commendable, the center says, parents in many states would now find it hard to understand what criteria were used to determine whether a school was succeeding or falling short.

“Public support may also wither,” the report says, “if the implementation of the law is perceived as deceptive or confusing.”

The report recommends that states fully and clearly explain their rationales for requesting changes to accountability plans. And the federal government should make public all state requests for changes, including the rationales for any changes it has denied as well as those it has approved, the report says.

Oral Responses

Another analysis of amendments this year to state accountability plans, released this month by the Council of Chief State School Officers, found that it is not unusual for the Education Department “to respond publicly and in writing only to some of a state’s requests.”

Authors William D. Erpenbach and Ellen Forte write that in “numerous off-the-record conversations,” representatives from several states reported that federal officials responded in writing to some requests but only orally to others.

“These ‘oral only’ responses tend to be denials,” the authors say, “and may not be accompanied by rationales.”

Chad Colby, a spokesman for the department, said: “We want to be as transparent as possible. We want states to feel comfortable coming to us with amendment requests, and there is a lot more discussion beyond the decision letters between staff at the state level and staff at the department level.”

This month, the department released “No Child Left Behind: A Road Map for State Implementation” to help people understand how the law and the amendment process works and to give examples. The report stresses that because each state is unique, no two state accountability plans are identical.

“While approved changes to state accountability plans are not uniform across the states,” it notes, “our criteria for evaluating and approving such changes are uniform. They reflect the department’s commitment to maximizing accountability while minimizing error in measuring school performance.”

Events

School & District Management Webinar Crafting Outcomes-Based Contracts That Work for Everyone
Discover the power of outcomes-based contracts and how they can drive student achievement.
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
School & District Management Webinar
Harnessing AI to Address Chronic Absenteeism in 69ý
Learn how AI can help your district improve student attendance and boost academic outcomes.
Content provided by 
School & District Management Webinar EdMarketer Quick Hit: What’s Trending among K-12 Leaders?
What issues are keeping K-12 leaders up at night? Join us for EdMarketer Quick Hit: What’s Trending among K-12 Leaders?

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.

Read Next

Federal Video Linda McMahon: 5 Things to Know About Trump's Choice for Education Secretary
President-elect Donald Trump plans to nominate former pro-wrestling CEO Linda McMahon to lead the education department.
1 min read
Federal The K-12 World Reacts to Linda McMahon, Trump's Choice for Education Secretary
Some question her lack of experience in education, while supporters say her business background is a major asset.
7 min read
Linda McMahon, former Administrator of Small Business Administration, speaks during the Republican National Convention on July 18, 2024, in Milwaukee.
Linda McMahon speaks during the Republican National Convention on July 18, 2024, in Milwaukee. McMahon has been selected by President-elect Trump to serve as as the next secretary of education.
J. Scott Applewhite/AP
Federal What a National School Choice Program Under President Trump Might Look Like
School choice advocates—and detractors—see a second Trump term as the biggest opportunity in decades for choice at the federal level.
8 min read
President Donald Trump listens during a "National Dialogue on Safely Reopening America's 69ý," event in the East Room of the White House, on July 7, 2020, in Washington.
President Donald Trump listens during a "National Dialogue on Safely Reopening America's 69ý," event in the East Room of the White House on July 7, 2020, in Washington. He returns to power with more momentum than ever behind policies that allow public dollars to pay for private school education.
Alex Brandon/AP
Federal 5 Things to Know About Linda McMahon, Trump's Pick for Education Secretary
President-elect Donald Trump’s selection, the former CEO of World Wrestling Entertainment has long spoken favorably about school choice.
7 min read
Small Business Administrator Linda McMahon speaks during a briefing at the White House in Washington on Oct. 3, 2018.
Linda McMahon speaks during a briefing at the White House in Washington on Oct. 3, 2018, when she was serving as head of the Small Business Administration during President Trump's first administration. McMahon is now President-elect Trump's choice for U.S. secretary of education.
Susan Walsh/AP