Release: #03-40
July 24, 2003

Contact: Pam Slater
E-mail: communications@cde.ca.gov
Phone: 916-319-0818

SACRAMENTO — The California Department of Education (CDE), in accordance with new federal guidelines outlined in the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001, today released the 2002 Base Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report for all California districts and schools.

The report is posted on the CDE Web site: Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP).

According to the 2002 Base AYP Report, only about 30 percent of California schools have met this new criterion with their 2002 assessment results. This varies from nearly 40 percent of the elementary schools to less than 20 percent of middle and high schools.

The results validate earlier CDE estimates that a majority of California schools would not meet the newly approved AYP criteria (see Table 1 attached below for a summary of results).

They also are consistent with other states that have reported their scores and are expected to be similar to those states still in the process of reporting.

"These results tell us what we expected to hear," said State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell. "I am truly concerned with the outcome, but it only strengthens my resolve to focus on California's ongoing educational improvement efforts. We should all be encouraged with the results of our existing Academic Performance Index (API), which is a more accurate assessment of learning in our schools. California's testing system shows we are making steady progress in educating our state's six million school children, a result we can all be proud of."

NCLB guidelines require all districts and schools to demonstrate annual progress with an eventual goal that 100 percent of all students are proficient or above in English-language arts and mathematics by 2014.

For 2003, 13.6 percent of elementary and middle school students and 11.2 percent of high school students must be proficient or above in English-language arts. In math, 16 percent of elementary and middle school students and 9.6 percent of high school students must be at the proficient or above level. (Please refer to pages 22 and 23 of the 2002 Base AYP Report Information Guide on the CDE Web site Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP).)

The 2002 Base AYP Report states the percentage of California public school students who performed at or above the proficient level on the state's standards-based tests in 2002 and the participation rates of those students.

The results of the 2002 standards-based tests in English-language arts and mathematics already have been publicly released, but the data have been recalculated for the new AYP purposes.

To make AYP under the new definition, a school, as a whole and all numerically significant subgroups within a school, will have to meet Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs) in both English-language arts as well as mathematics and demonstrate a 95 percent participation rate in the assessments used to arrive at these results. The subgroups include major ethnic/racial groups, socioeconomically disadvantaged students, students with disabilities, and English learners. (Numerically significant subgroups are those with at least 100 students or 50-99 students when the subgroup constitutes at least 15 percent of a school's enrollment.)

If one of these subgroups does not meet any one criterion, then the school as a whole does not make AYP, regardless of the school-wide results (see Table 2 attached below for details on the AMOs). With the release of our 2003 data on August 15, districts and schools that receive Title I funds and miss their AYP objectives for two years in a row will be identified as in need of improvement and therefore subject to the provisions of the NCLB Act on school choice and supplemental services. (Please refer to page 29 of the Information Guide for a complete list of sanctions.) Schools previously identified for program improvement may face corrective action if they continue to miss their objectives.

While the federal government requires all districts and schools to receive AYP reports, only districts and schools that receive Title I funds are subject to the provisions of the NCLB Act that deal with program improvement. For a list of Title I schools in California, please refer to the CDE Web site: 2004-05 Title I Program Improvement Status Reports - Adequate Yearly Progress.

It is important to note, however, that today's Base AYP Report will not identify districts and schools for program improvement. The 2002 designation of AYP was done under the pre-NCLB definition using our state API system as the guide.

Today's baseline report is intended simply to provide districts and schools with their 2002 starting points and serve as an early warning for districts and schools that are in jeopardy of missing the 2003 AYP criteria. The release of the 2003 AYP results in August will be the first time AYP is officially counted under the new definition.

"Today's results, though merely a guide for schools, are an important indication of how our system will look under the new federal law," said O'Connell. "I strongly feel that our state API, which is based on schools improving as opposed to simply meeting a bar, is the best indication of learning. But we certainly share the underlying goal of leaving no child behind."

The 2002 Base AYP Report includes:

• The percentage of pupils at or above the proficient performance level on the rigorous California standards-based tests in 2002
• The participation rates of students in these assessments

To make AYP beginning in 2003, a school or district must:

• Demonstrate a 95 percent participation rate on standards-based assessments in English-language arts and mathematics
• Meet AMOs in the percentage of students proficient or above on standards-based assessments in English-language arts and mathematics
• Demonstrate progress on California's API
• Demonstrate progress on the graduation rate (high schools only)

These requirements apply not only to the school or district as a whole, but also to numerically significant student subgroups within the school or district, including English learners and students with disabilities.

Legislation has been introduced to align California's existing comprehensive system of educational accountability with the new federal requirements.

# # # #

Attachments

Table 1: 2002 Base AYP Results

Schools*	Elementary Number	Elementary Percent	Middle Number	Middle Percent	High Number	High Percent	All Schools Number	All Schools Percent
Made AMOs and Part. Rates	1,911	37.2%	233	19.7%	194	19.7%	2,338	32.0%
Failed only Part. Rates	977	19.0%	174	14.7%	422	42.8%	1,573	21.5%
Below AMOs Only	1,398	27.2%	272	23.0%	53	5.4%	1,723	23.6%
Below AMO & Part. Rates	855	16.6%	504	42.6%	318	32.2%	1,677	22.9%
All Schools	5,141	100.0%	1,183	100.0%	987	100.0%	7,311	100.0%

Table 2

Title I Schools*	Elementary Number	Elementary Percent	Middle Number	Middle Percent	High Number	High Percent	All Schools Number	All Schools Percent
Made AMOs and Part. Rates	885	25.5%	71	10.1%	45	12.6%	1,001	22.1%
Failed only Part. Rates	543	15.7%	74	10.5%	107	29.9%	724	16.0%
Below AMOs Only	1,289	37.2%	199	28.3%	29	8.1%	1,517	33.5%
Below AMO & Part. Rates	749	21.6%	360	51.1%	177	49.4%	1,286	28.4%
All Schools	3,466	100.0%	704	100.0%	358	100.0%	4,528	100.0%

* Includes schools with 100 or more enrolled in grades 2-8 and 10.

AMOs=Annual Measurable Objectives (Percent Proficient or Above in English Language Arts and Mathematics).

AMOs in English Language Arts (ELA) and Math

To make AYP under the new definition, a school must demonstrate that a minimum percentage of its students score proficient or above on a standards-based assessment in ELA and Math. This includes the school as a whole as well as all numerically significant student subgroups within the school.  If one numerically significant student subgroup does not meet one of the criteria, then the school as a whole is deemed not to have made AYP.

These minimum percentages are termed Annual Measurable Objectives or AMOs.  The AMOs are: 

Schools	ELA	Math
Elementary/Middle	13.6%	16.0%
High	11.2%	9.6%

Additionally, a school must demonstrate a 95% participation rate in the assessments used to establish the percentages of students who are proficient or above.  Each numerically significant subgroup within the school must also demonstrate a 95% participation rate in the assessments.