Skip to main content
California Department of Education Logo

Glossary for the 2004 APR

Glossary of terms for the 2004 Accountability Progress Report (APR).

School and Local Education Agency (LEA) Reports

The 2004 Accountability Progress Report for schools and local education agencies (LEAs) provides information prior to the beginning of the 2004–05 school year about current progress on the Academic Performance Index (API) for the 2003–04 reporting cycle and 2004 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). This Glossary is designed to assist in interpreting the report. A detailed description of the report is provided in the 2004 Accountability Progress Report Information Guide on the California Department of Education (CDE).

Local Education Agency (LEA)

An LEA may be a school district or a county office of education.

Progress on the Academic Performance Index (API)
2003–04 Reporting Cycle

State legislation, the Public Schools Accountability Act (PSAA) of 1999 (Chapter 3, Statutes of 1999), established the API, which summarizes a school's or LEA's academic performance and progress on statewide assessments. The API is also used as an additional indicator for federal AYP requirements.

2003–04 Reporting Cycle

Each annual API reporting cycle includes two reports: a base report, which appears after the first of the calendar year, and a report of API growth, which appears after school starts in the fall. This pair of reports comprises an API reporting cycle. The 2003 API Base and 2003–04 API Growth reports comprise the 2003–04 API reporting cycle.

API Scores

An API is an index (or score) ranging from 200 to 1000 that summarizes a school's or LEA's performance based on student results on statewide assessments.

Because of concerns for student confidentiality, an API is not shown for a school or LEA if the number of valid scores is less than 11. In addition, an API is not shown if the API is not valid. In these cases, the growth from 2003 to 2004 is also not shown.

2003 API Score

The 2003 API score summarizes a school's or LEA's performance on the spring 2003 Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) Program and California High School Exit Examination (CAHSEE). It serves as the baseline score, or starting point, of performance, also referred to as the 2003 API Base.

  • Detailed information about the 2003 API Base report is provided in the 2003 Academic Performance Report Information Guide.
2004 API Score

The 2004 API score summarizes a school's or LEA's performance on the spring 2004 STAR and CAHSEE. It is compared to the 2003 API Base to determine growth in the API and is also referred to as the 2004 API Growth.

  • The complete 2003–04 API Growth reports will be released in October 2004. These reports will include results at the school, LEA, and subgroup levels.
Growth in the API Score from 2003 to 2004

The 2003 API score is subtracted from the 2004 API score to determine how much the school or LEA grew between 2003 testing and 2004 testing.

Calculation of the 2003 and 2004 API

The APIs in a reporting cycle are calculated in the same fashion with the same indicators (but using test results from two different years).

 

2004 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)

The federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 requires that California determine whether or not each public school and LEA is making Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP).

School or LEA met all 2004 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) criteria?

This item indicates whether the school or LEA made AYP for 2004. The possible values are "Yes" or "No."   The report for a school or an LEA displays a "Yes" only if the school or LEA as well as each of its numerically significant student subgroups met all of the AYP requirements.

This School or LEA Met ___ of its ___ AYP Criteria

Depending on the number of numerically significant subgroups, a school or LEA may be required to meet up to 46 AYP criteria (22 for participation rate, 22 for percent proficient, 1 for API, and 1 for graduation rate). Most schools and LEAs will not be required to meet all 46 criteria. "N/A" is not counted as criteria.

2004 AYP Criteria Summary

This summary provides a listing of 2004 AYP criteria for schools and LEAs.

  • Detailed descriptions of AYP criteria and calculation are provided in the 2004 Accountability Progress Report Information Guide on pages 28-51 and 65-72.
  • Definitions of numerically significant subgroups are provided in the 2004 Accountability Progress Report Information Guide on page 49.
AYP Components

The components in this box summarize whether the school or LEA met 2004 AYP criteria in each required area. "Yes" means results for all criteria were at or above 2004 targets. "No" means results for at least one criteria were below the 2004 targets. "N/A" means the participation rate or graduation rate does not apply.

Methodology Used

This item indicates whether or not a standard methodology was employed to determine if the criteria were met. Standard methodology was used for most schools and LEAs. Alternate methodologies were used for schools or LEAs with no students in the grade levels tested.

  • Alternate methodologies are detailed in the 2004 Accountability Progress Report Information Guide on pages 50-51.
API for numerically significant, socioeconomically disadvantaged subgroup - (LEA reports only)

An LEA receiving Title I funds will be identified for Program Improvement (PI) status when, for two consecutive years, it does not make AYP and does not meet or exceed an API of 560 for its numerically significant, socioeconomically disadvantaged subgroup. 

  • Information about the PI requirements for LEAs are detailed in the 2004 Accountability Progress Report Information Guide on pages 55-60.
California Alternate Performance Assessment (CAPA) - (LEA reports only)

An LEA receiving Title I funds must meet federal regulations limiting the percentage of students in an LEA whose alternate assessment scores can be counted as proficient or above in AYP calculations.

  • Information about the CAPA requirements for LEAs are detailed in the 2004 Accountability Progress Report Information Guide on page 63 and in the July 2004 letter Application for Exception to the 1.0 Percent Cap.
Participation Rate

This reflects the rate at which students participated in the assessments used to determine the percentage of students at or above the proficient level in English-language arts and mathematics. The assessments used were the California Standards Tests (CSTs), grades 2-8; California Alternate Performance Assessment (CAPA), grades 2-8 and 10; and the California High School Exit Examination (CAHSEE), grade 10. "Yes" means all participation rate criteria were met. "No" means one or more criteria were not met. "N/A" means the participation rate criteria do not apply. 

  • Detailed information about participation rate criteria and calculation is provided in the 2004 Accountability Progress Report Information Guide on pages 36-37.
Enrollment First Day of Testing

This is the total number of students enrolled in grades 2-8 and grade 10 for each content area (English-language arts and mathematics).

  • A detailed definition is provided in the 2004 Accountability Progress Report Information Guide on pages 65-68.
Number of Students Tested

This is the number of students in grades 2-8 and grade 10 who took the statewide assessments used to establish the percentage of students at or above the proficient level for each content area (English-language arts and mathematics).

  • A detailed definition is provided in the 2004 Accountability Progress Report Information Guide on pages 65-68.
Rate

The participation rate is the number tested divided by the enrollment on the first day of testing for each content area (English-language arts and mathematics).

Met 2004 AYP Criteria

For the participation rate for each content area (English-language arts and mathematics), the possible values in this column are:

Yes    =    Yes, using one-year rate
Yes2   =    Yes, using two-year average
No       =    Did not meet criterion
N/A      =    Not applicable

Participation rate for schools, LEAs, and subgroups with less than 50 students enrolled is printed on the report, but "N/A" is printed in the "Met 2004 AYP Criteria" column.

  • Further definition of possible values is provided in the 2004 Accountability Progress Report Information Guide on pages 69-72.
Groups

Under the NCLB, not only schools and LEAs as a whole must meet AYP requirements but also numerically significant subgroups within those schools and LEAs. Those subgroups include:

  • Ethnic/racial subgroups
  • Socioeconomically Disadvantaged students
    These are students whose parents both have not received a high school diploma or students who participate in the free or reduced-price lunch program.
  • English Learners
    These include re-designated-fluent-English-proficient students who have not scored proficient or above on the California Standards Test in English-language arts for three years.
  • Students with Disabilities
    These are students who receive special education services and have a valid disability code.
  • Detailed information about student subgroups used in AYP is provided in the 2004 Accountability Progress Report Information Guide on pages 48-50.
Percent Proficient - Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs)

This reflects the percentage of students who scored at or above the proficient level on the assessments used in English-language arts and mathematics. The assessments used were the California Standards Tests (CSTs), grades 2-8; California Alternate Performance Assessment (CAPA), grades 2-8 and 10; and the California High School Exit Examination (CAHSEE), grade 10. "Yes" means all percent proficient criteria were met, and "No" means one or more criteria were not met.

  • Detailed information about percent proficient criteria and calculation is provided in the 2004 Accountability Progress Report Information Guide on pages 37-41.
Valid Scores

This is the number of students with test results who have been in the school or the district for most of the school year for each content area (English-language arts and mathematics).

  • A detailed definition is provided in the 2004 Accountability Progress Report Information Guide on pages 65-68.
Number At or Above Proficient

This is the number of students with valid scores who scored at or above the proficient level of performance for each content area (English-language arts and mathematics).

  • A detailed definition is provided in the 2004 Accountability Progress Report Information Guide on pages 65-68.
Percent At or Above Proficient

This is the number of students at or above proficient divided by the number of valid scores for each content area (English-language arts and mathematics).

Met 2004 AYP Criteria

For the percent proficient for each content area (English-language arts and mathematics), the possible values in this column are:

Yes   =   Met the criteria without the application of a confidence interval table
                (the school, LEA, or subgroup has at least 100 valid test scores)
Yes* =   Met the criteria through the application of confidence interval table
                (the school or LEA has fewer than 100 valid test scores)
No     =   Did not meet the criteria
No*   =   School or LEA has fewer than 100 valid scores and did not meet the criteria
N/A    =   Not applicable or not reported

Because of concerns for student confidentiality, the number and percentage of students at or above proficient are not shown for a school, LEA, or subgroup if the number of valid scores is less than 11.

  • Detailed descriptions about the confidence interval table is provided in the 2004 Accountability Progress Report Information Guide on pages 38-40.
  • Further definition of possible values is provided in the 2004 Accountability Progress Report Information Guide on pages 69-72.
Graduation Rate

This graduation rate calculation corresponds to the National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES) four-year completion rate. This rate includes information on high school graduates and high school dropouts aggregated over a four-year period.

  • Detailed information about graduation rate criteria and calculation is provided in the 2004 Accountability Progress Report Information Guide on pages 43-47.
Questions: Academic Accountability Team | aau@cde.ca.gov | 916-319-0863 
Last Reviewed: Tuesday, August 16, 2016
Recently Posted in Accountability

  • State Accountability Report Card 2011-12 (PDF) (added 18-Nov-2016)
    California's State Accountability Report Card for 2011-12 as required by the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act.
  • Updates to SARC Data 2015–16 (added 16-Nov-2016)
    Description of updates to data contained in the 2015–16 School Accountability Report Card (SARC) data files.
  • 2015-16 SARC Data Layout (DOC) (added 16-Nov-2016)
    School Accountability Report Card (SARC) Data Layout used to map field names to descriptive labels for each table.
  • Downloadable SARC Data Files (added 16-Nov-2016)
    Template table names, downloadable data files, and mapping document to populate School Accountability Report Card (SARC) Reports.
  • Data Element Definitions and Sources 2013-14 (DOC) (added 16-Nov-2016)
    Descriptions of data elements and their sources for the 2013-14 School Accountability Report Card (SARC).