STATE DEPARTMENT RELEASES 2009 AYP DATA
Fewer South Carolina high schools met all of their federal targets for Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) as test score targets became dramatically harder to achieve. More elementary and middle schools met all of their targets, largely due to the General Assembly’s decision to make grade-level student performance on South Carolina’s new PASS tests the standard for federal reporting purposes.
“The General Assembly’s action gives us a much more realistic picture of elementary and middle school performance relative to other states,” said State Superintendent of Education Jim Rex. “But unless Congress makes fundamental changes to this fundamentally flawed federal rating system, it won’t be long before no school in the country makes AYP.”
Rex went on to add, “No Child Left Behind’s basic goal is right on target - that schools should educate all children. But more and more people are starting to realize how irrational the federal system is, and there’s a danger that the law will lose all credibility with the public.”
Schools must meet 100 percent of their federal “proficiency” goals each year - and most South Carolina schools have either 17 or 21 goals - in order to make AYP. In four years, all students - including students who are poor, speak limited English or have learning disabilities - must meet all state targets on math and English Language Arts tests.
Each state sets its own definition for academic proficiency under NCLB, and from the federal law’s implementation in 2001 through 2008, South Carolina used PACT scores to rate elementary and middle schools for AYP. Although a score of Basic on PACT’s four-level scoring system (Below Basic, Basic, Proficient and Advanced) met South Carolina’s state standard under the Education Accountability Act, a higher score, Proficient, was required to meet AYP.
“By making 'Proficient' South Carolina’s reporting standard for AYP, our schools had a much higher bar to clear when compared to other states,” Rex said. “Other states were using grade-level performance for AYP. But “Basic” on PACT was grade level, so we were actually using higher than grade-level performance as our federal standard.”
No schools in Lexington Three met AYP for the 2009 year. Scores for the district and schools are as follows:
|
School Name
|
Objectives Met
|
Objectives Not Met
|
Objectives
|
Student Performance
|
Percent Tested
|
Graduation or Attendance Rate
|
AYP
|
|
B-L Elementary
|
18
|
3
|
21
|
Not Met
|
Met
|
Met
|
Not Met
|
|
B-L High
|
11
|
6
|
17
|
Not Met
|
Met
|
Not Met
|
Not Met
|
|
B-L Middle
|
16
|
5
|
21
|
Not Met
|
Met
|
Met
|
Not Met
|
|
District
|
19
|
6
|
25
|
Not Met
|
Met
|
Met
|
Not Met
|
Information for districts with primary-level schools has not yet been released by the State Department of Education. This information will be provided when it becomes available.
A variety of independent national research studies confirmed that South Carolina’s definition was far more rigorous than other states, and that students who scored “Basic” on PACT would have scored “Proficient” in other states.
When the General Assembly replaced PACT with PASS - with its three scoring levels of Not Met, Met and Exemplary - legislators designated “Met” as grade-level performance under the EAA and also as the scoring level that would meet the federal AYP criteria.
“The General Assembly’s action did two things,” Rex said. “It maintained the rigor of our state accountability standards under the EAA, and it made changes that gave our schools a more level playing field when comparing their performance with other states under the federal system.”
He also noted that the U.S. Department of Education is allowing several states to pilot “improvement models” that would move beyond NCLB’s current “all-or-nothing” rating system to one that would indicate when schools are moving in the right direction. Under the federal law, schools must make all of their AYP targets every year. Falling short on even one objective means that a school will not meet AYP and will move toward possible sanctions.
Rex praised NCLB’s focus on serving all children - particularly minority students, children with limited English ability and children with disabilities. But he said that if the law isn’t revised, nearly all of the nation’s Title I schools will eventually face federal sanctions because they will not be able to reach the federal goal of 100 percent proficiency by 2014.
Elementary and middle school AYP ratings
In order to meet AYP this year, South Carolina elementary and middle schools must have had at least 58.8 percent of their students proficient in English Language Arts. In math, at least 57.8 percent had to be proficient.
For 2009, 527 of 887 elementary and middle schools met AYP (59 percent), up from 19 percent last year. Of the 360 elementary and middle schools that did not meet AYP, 340 fell just short by missing 1-5 goals. About a quarter (87 schools) missed just one goal.
High school school AYP ratings
High school goals jumped upward in 2009, from 52.3 percent to 71.3 percent proficient in English Language Arts and from 50 to 70 percent proficient in math.
Fourteen of the state’s 202 high schools met all of their federal AYP goals, down from 63 last year. Of the 188 high schools that did not meet AYP, 76 fell short by missing 1-5 goals.
District, state AYP ratings
None of the state’s school districts made AYP, the same as last year.
Fifty-nine districts fell short by missing 1-5 goals.
As a whole, South Carolina made 34 of its 37 goals and so fell short of making AYP.
NCLB background information and school transfer data
NCLB requires schools and districts to break out their performance data into a number of student "subcategories" that include ethnicity, special education, poverty and limited ability with English. The more demographic categories a school has, the more goals it must meet.
Most South Carolina schools have either 17 or 21 of these AYP targets, although some have as many as 37. If even one subcategory of students doesn't meet its goal for that year, or if more than five percent of those students weren't tested, the school does not meet AYP for that year. Elementary and middle schools can also miss AYP if their overall attendance rate is lower than 94 percent. High schools miss if graduation rates decline from the previous year.
For "Title I schools" - those that receive federal Title I funds because they have a significant number of students from economically disadvantaged families - not meeting AYP carries considerable consequences. When a Title I school misses the same AYP target for two years consecutively, the school is designated in "Needs Improvement"
status.
For schools identified as being in “Needs Improvement” status, parents must be offered the choice of sending their children to another school in that district that is not in "Needs Improvement" status. A second year in "Needs Improvement" (third year of not meeting AYP) requires the school to offer supplemental services such as student tutoring, as well as the choice option. The parent may request either of these options. More severe consequences follow for Title I schools that continue to be designated as "Needs Improvement."
A total of 256 Title I (high-poverty) schools will offer school transfer options this school year because they did not meet all of their federal AYP targets for a second consecutive year. That’s nearly the same as last year’s 259 schools that offered transfer options.
A school district in “Needs Improvement” status must use 10 percent of its Title I funds for professional development. In addition, the district must develop a district-wide improvement plan.
Rex said that schools should not be labeled as “failing” if they don’t meet all of their AYP goals. "If you’ve got 21 targets and you meet 20, you haven’t failed,” he said, noting that the term 'failing school' does not even appear in the federal law. “You have to look at each school’s data in depth before you can make a determination of how it performed.”
While NCLB relies on PASS scores to determine performance ratings for South Carolina’s elementary and middle schools, high school data come from student performance on the High School Assessment Program.
Background on changes in AYP reporting
When the General Assembly approved the EAA in 1998, PACT test scores were designated as the main factors for determining School Report Card ratings. PACT had four scoring levels (Below Basic, Basic, Proficient and Advanced) and the General Assembly determined that a score of Basic reflected grade-level performance. Under South Carolina’s EAA, Proficient and Advanced scores were higher than grade-level performance.
When Congress approved NCLB in 2001, it designated Proficient performance as the goal for AYP but left the definition of Proficient up to the states. Most states decided to report grade-level performance as Proficient under AYP, but in South Carolina, Proficient continued to mean higher than grade-level performance. That’s why a series of national research studies and newspaper stories determined that it was harder to make AYP in South Carolina than in other states.
One such report, in the national journal “Education Next,” was titled “Johnny Can’t Read … in South Carolina. But if his parents moved to Texas, he’d be reading up a storm.” That study, as did most others, rated South Carolina’s AYP reporting standard far higher than other states.
When the General Assembly replaced the 10-year-old PACT tests with the new PASS tests, which have three scoring categories instead of four: Not Met, Met and Exemplary. Whereas “Basic” was considered the state standard under PACT (performing on grade level), legislators designated “Met” as grade-level performance under the new PASS tests.
The Education Oversight Committee then aligned the Met cut scores from PASS to the Basic cut scores from PACT. That meant that the performance required to “pass” the new test and be considered “on grade level” remained consistent from the old test to the new one. And it allowed for “apples-to-apples” transition when rating schools under the EAA.
In terms of NCLB, the General Assembly also set “Met” as the federal reporting standard. That means that for the first time, South Carolina schools’ AYP targets are now based on grade-level performance as opposed to higher-than-grade-level performance. The General Assembly’s goal was to level the playing field so that South Carolina’s AYP results could be more accurately compared to other states.
Changing the scoring levels counted for AYP ratings does not change anything that students are expected to learn because the state’s nationally respected academic standards have not changed. Likewise, nothing has changed in terms of what teachers are expected to teach or what it takes to pass the test.
To view all of the information on the South Carolina 2009 AYP results, please visit the following website: