Good afternoon Madam Chair and members of the committee. I appreciate the opportunity to come before you today and deliver information, which I hope will provide a context for a better understanding of the federal No Child Left Behind Act.
In your letter inviting me to testify, you laid out several questions you wanted me to address. So with your permission I thought I'd just jump in an address those inquiries.
As you can see, I'm also joined here today by Geno Flores my Deputy for Assessment and Accountability. In addition, Teri Burns, whom I know you all know, is with me as well. After I speak to your questions, we would be happy to answer any additional questions you may have.
The first question you asked was: What are the assessment and accountability requirements of NCLB and how will they affect California schools over the coming years?
The assessment and accountability requirements of NCLB are encompassed within what the federal government defines as "Adequate Yearly Progress." It is important to note that the federal government has asked all fifty states to make, and held state's accountable for making, AYP since 1996. However, before NCLB states were given flexibility to define AYP -- and California used our current accountability system, the API, to define AYP.
Now, for 2003, California's new definition of AYP under NCLB encompasses the following four requirements:
- Annual Measurable Objectives ( AMOs )
- AMOs are the minimum required percentages of students at proficient or above in each content area.
- The assessment of proficiency in English Language Arts (ELA) and Mathematics will be the California Standard Tests (CSTs):
- Participation Rate
Achievement of a 95% student participation rate on 2003 ELA and mathematics assessments
- Academic Performance Index (API )
Growth in the 2002-2003 Academic Performance Index (API) Score of at least one point or a minimum 2003 Growth API of 560 (school wide/district wide)
- Graduation Rate
Improvement in the graduation rate of at least 0.1% or a graduation rate of 100% (school wide/district wide), applying only to high schools and districts with high school students
For schools not making their AYP, NCLB has laid out clear and concise consequences for not meeting targets.
It should be noted, however, that only schools that receive Title I funding are subject to the consequences. Non Title I schools will be publicly recognized as having not made their targets, but there will be no additional consequences.
But for those Title I schools which fail to make AYP in the same subject are for two years in a row, they will be placed into Program Improvement (PI) and be required to implement certain NCLB mandates immediately.
For example, in the first year of PI all schools must offer choice for their students to attend another public school in the district that is not in Program Improvement (PI). Transportation to the new school must be paid by the PI school.
Beyond choice, there are a set of additional consequences ranging from choice in the first year to a state takeover in the fifth. That progression is laid out in a chart, which I believe you have before you entitled: NCLB Program Improvement Timeline.
In addition, you should be aware that a district also has responsibility under NCLB and can fall into PI as well. However the consequences for a district are not as onerous as for a school.
As I am sure you are aware, only about 30% of our schools would have made AYP in 2002 under the current definition. This year, about 55% of our schools made it. We are very pleased with this trend and expect it to continue to rise next year. However, as you can see from the chart: "AMO's — English Language Arts" as the bar rises to 100% in 2014 we have serious concerns about the number of schools that will be forced into PI.
Ok, your second question was: What is annual yearly progress (AYP) and how is it calculated? What is the difference between AYP and California's Academic Performance Index (API)?
So I gave you the broad scope of AYP, but let me get a little more specific. As we discussed, in order to make AYP a school must meet the proficiency bar for their AMO's and test 95% or more of their kids. But in addition, in these two major categories, AMO's and participation, all major ethnic subgroups as well as learning disabled kids, English learners and economically disadvantaged kids must pass the bar. So for example, if all your kids and subgroups make their AMO's and all except one single group makes their participation, the school as a whole fails to make AYP.
The major difference between AYP and API is that while AYP sets a static bar and asks all our schools to get over it, the Academic Performance Index measures growth in our schools and rewards those schools that improve.
Looking at your final question, I believe I have already answered it today in answering your first two questions.
So let me stop at this point, thank you again for your time, and answer any additional questions you may have.
Thank you.
