Understanding Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)

The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2002 gave school districts greater accountability for the performance of their schools. Schools are required to test each student in grades three through eight in reading and math, as well as test them in science at least once during elementary, middle, and high school. Data from this testing is broken down by race, gender, and disability status and reported to the Department of Education. The major goal of the Act is to make all students "proficient" in the tested subjects by 2014. The adequate yearly progress (AYP) goals are a main feature of NCLB that work to keep schools on track to help ensure that all students will be proficient by the deadline (Merrell, 2006).

Each state determines its AYP target for each of the years leading up to 2014. Each school as a whole, as well as its' nine subgroups (Asian & Pacific Islander, Black, Hispanic, American Indian, White, Free/Reduced lunch, IEP, LEP, and Other) must meet the goal for that year (Questions & Answers about No Child Left Behind, 2006). They need to meet their targets in both reading and math to be considered as having met AYP (Killpack, 2007). Ninety-five percent of children overall and in each subgroup must be tested annually (Merrell, 2006). If 95% are not tested, the school automatically fails to make AYP (Killpack, 2007). One percent of students, such as those with severe disabilities, are allowed to use alternate testing so that they do not have a negative impact on their school's AYP (Merrell, 2006).

There are three requirements that each school must meet to make AYP. First, all students and each subgroup must have 95% participation on the given tests. Second, all students who are considered "Full Academic Year" students are counted into the school's score. The full academic year means that students must have spent 160 days at the same school and been enrolled by September 15. Third, additional academic indicators are used. In high school, this is often the graduation rate. The additional academic indicators vary by state and can include things such as school attendance or writing proficiency (Killpack, 2007).

There are many provisions built into NCLB that prevents state scores from being unnecessarily lowered. States are allowed to set a minimum group size for the nine subgroups so that the groups will only be included if they are large enough to have statistically significant results. If a group is too small to participate, their participation rate is not counted for that school. States are also allowed to have wide testing windows to give each student the opportunity to take the test. This helps to prevent schools from failing to meet their AYP if many students, for example, stayed home due to sickness on the day of testing causing less than 95% of students to participate. States are also not required to include students in their participation rate calculation if they are missing a lot of school due to a significant medical emergency (Simon, 2004).

If schools fail to make AYP for a given year, there are consequences that they must face. Schools receive a warning the first year that they do not meet AYP targets. There are no consequences yet, but it is a signal to schools that they might need to improve their teaching strategies so that they will not fail again next year. Failure for two years in a row forces the schools to give parents the option of transferring their child to another school. School officials then need to develop a plan for improving the curriculum and subsequent test scores. If a school fails to make AYP for three years in a row, they must begin to offer services such as tutoring. The school will be responsible for funding such services. After not making AYP for four years, stronger corrective measures such as changing the curriculum or replacing staff will be used. Significant corrective action will be taken after five years where the state might take over or the school may be converted to a charter school (AYP Status Levels, 2009).

No Child Left Behind differs from earlier similar laws because it makes states accountable for each individual student's performance rather than the average performance of their schools. NCLB makes schools accountable for each subgroup of students by requiring each of them to make AYP. Requiring an increase in the percentage of students that are proficient in each subgroup every year ensures that no particular group is allowed to lag behind the rest (Paige, 2002).

References

AYP Status Levels. (2009, September 3). Retrieved September 25, 2009, from Pennsylvania Department of Educatino: http://paayp.emetric.net/Content/datafiles/PDE%20AYP%20Flowchart.pdf

Killpack, J. E. (2007, September 17). Understanding Adequate Yearly Progress. Retrieved September 26, 2009, from Salt Lake City School District: http://www.slc.k12.ut.us/insights/PDFs/Understanding-AYP.pdf

Merrell, K. (2006). School Psychology for the 21st Century. New York: The Guilford Press.

Paige, R. (2002, July 24). Elementary and Secondary Education. Retrieved September 26, 2009, from U.S. Department of Education: http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/secletter/020724.html

Questions & Answers about No Child Left Behind. (2006, August 6). Retrieved September 26, 2009, from Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education: http://dese.mo.gov/divimprove/nclb/QandA.html#What_is_adequate_yearly_progress_%28AYP%29

Simon, R. (2004, May 19). Calculating Participation Rates. Retrieved September 26, 2009, from U.S. Department of Education: http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/stateletters/prates.html