Small/ASAM Schools and PI

1. Categorical Program Director’s Meeting September 16, 2008 Jan Volkoff, Consultant Policy and Evaluation Division California Department of Education Small/ASAM Schools and PI

2. State and Federal Accountability • Reports and requirements differ for state and federal accountability. • This is especially true for small schools and schools in the Alternative Schools Accountability Model (ASAM).

3. API Reports • Small schools with 11-99 valid scores receive an API with an asterisk to denote the greater statistical uncertainty of an API based on a small number of scores. • Very small schools with fewer than 11 valid scores do not receive an API report. (APIs for these schools are calculated for AYP but are not shown on the reports.) • ASAM schools receive an API report but do not have API growth targets or ranks.

4. AYP Reports • All schools receive an AYP report, including small schools and ASAM schools. Schools with as few as one enrolled or one valid score receive an AYP report. • All schools that receive Title I, Part A, funds receive a PI status. • A school with an invalid Growth API does not meet the API indicator for AYP, and the school would not make AYP.

5. Accountability Development • Efforts have been made over the years to ensure fairness in API and AYP reporting and requirements, particularly for small schools and ASAM schools. • California’s Accountability Workbook must be approved by the U.S. Department of Education (ED). • Requests for Accountability Workbook revisions are not always approved.

6. API and AYP Implementation 1999 - API established. 2001 – ASAM implemented. Small schools receive APIs with asterisks. 2003 –Schools and districts receive AYP and PI reports under NCLB. Districts and ASAM schools receive APIs for NCLB. 2005 – API 85% tested rule becomes applicable only for schools with 100 or more students enrolled in each content area. 2007 – CA requests high mobility schools be allowed to use LEA results for AYP (denied by ED).

7. AYP Alternate Criteria for Small Schools • Despite the denial of some proposed amendments, the ED has approved other requests for alternate criteria for schools with small numbers.

8. Small Schools - Participation Rate • The participation rate does not apply if the school has fewer than 50 enrolled on the first day of testing. • A school with 50 enrolled must test at least 47 students. • A school with between 51 to 99 students enrolled must test at least 95% (rounded up).

9. Example 1 • Participation Rate • Enrolled = 49 • Tested = 24 • Participation Rate = 41% • Met Criteria = Yes • Alternative Method = EN • EN = Enrollment less than 50

10. Small Schools – Percent Proficient (AMOs) • A school with fewer than 100 valid scores has adjusted AMOs to account for the small number of test scores. • These schools must meet the adjusted AMOs, which were calculated using a confidence interval methodology. • For the adjusted AMOs, refer to pages 29 to 31 in the 2008 AYP Report Information Guide on the AYP Web page at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ayp/.

11. Example 2 • Percent Proficient • Valid Scores = 9 • Number At or Above Proficient = 0 • Percent At or Above Proficient = 0 • Met Criteria = Yes • Alternative Method = CI • CI = Passed Using Confidence Intervals

12. Confidence Interval Adjusted AMO Table See next page

13. Small Schools – API Indicator • Very small schools with fewer than 11 valid scores have adjusted API criteria for AYP reporting to account for the very small number of test scores.

14. Confidence Interval Adjusted API Table

15. Example 3 • API Additional Indicator • Valid Scores = 10 • 2008 Growth API = 478 • 2007 Base API = 477 • API Growth = 1 • Met Criteria = Yes • Alternative Method = CI • CI = Passed Using Confidence Intervals

16. Small Schools – Graduation Rate • ED has insisted that all high schools must have a graduation rate, even those without a graduating class. • ED approved the use of proxy graduation rates for schools without complete graduation data. • ED approved assigning the LEA or countywide rate for ASAM high schools with the primary mission of returning the students to a comprehensive high school.

17. Example 4 • Graduation Rate • Rate for 2007 = 96.7 • Rate for 2008 = 100.0 • Change = 3.3 • Average 2-Year Change = N/A • Met Criteria = Yes • Alternative Method = PX • PX = Proxy Graduation Rate

18. Example 5 • Graduation Rate • Rate for 2007 = 83.0 • Rate for 2008 = 85.2 • Change = 2.2 • Average 2-Year Change = -3.9 • Met Criteria = Yes • Alternative Method = DA • DA = District Average

19. PI Identification • The criteria for PI identification is the same for all schools. A Title I school is identified for PI when, for each of two consecutive years, the school: • Does not make AYP in the same content area (schoolwide or subgroups), OR • Does not make AYP on the same indicator (schoolwide)

20. API and AYP calculations – Robert Bernstein, Manager Academic Accountability Unit Policy and Evaluation Division (916) 319-0863 aau@cde.ca.gov More Information

21. PI Status Determinations – Paula Bellacera, Manager Evaluation, Research, and Analysis Unit Policy and Evaluation Division (916) 319-0875 era@cde.ca.gov More Information

22. PI Plans and Planning – Julie Baltazar, Manager District and School Program Coordination Accountability and Improvement Division (916) 319-0833 jbaltazar@cde.ca.gov More Information