# Understanding Arkansas� AYP Status Determination for Schools and

Document Sample

```					Understanding Arkansas’ AYP
Status Determination for
Schools and Districts
Denise T. Airola, M.S.
NORMES
2/25/08
Arkansas Pilot Growth Model

   Implemented first time in 2007 AYP
calculations
   69 schools were impacted positively by the
growth model in AYP
   No schools were impacted negatively by the
growth model in AYP
Changes to the Status Determination
Model
   Applying the pilot growth model to AYP
required testing and implementing new logic
in AYP programs
Growth in AYP 2007
Sample AYP Report
1. Review overall 2007
AYP Status

2. Review Prior Year
status

3. Review overall Math
and Lit status

4. How did you get
here? Go to page 3.
3 of Report
1. Review 2006-07 %
proficient. Identify any
subgroups that are not
MS or NA for math or
literacy.
2. Review 3 year to see
which situation benefits
the status for the
subject.
3. Review the “same
subject” history.
4. If a subgroup is not MS
or NA go to Page 2 to
check safe harbor.
Then Review
Page 2.
1. Check the subgroups that did
not meet the AMO by %
proficient to see if the group
reduced the number of
students below basic by
10%.
2. If MS (SH) or SI_M (SH) then
the group met standards by
Safe Harbor provisions.
3. If not, then go to Page 1.
4. Caveat: you can not qualify
to apply Safe Harbor
provisions to a subgroup if
the subgroup did not meet
the 95% tested requirement.
How to Calculate Safe Harbor in Arkansas AYP:
   Determine the percentage Not Proficient the previous year:
 100 minus previous year percentage of students proficient = Previous
year percentage NOT proficient.
 For example,

37% proficient = 63% NOT proficient
   Calculate the number of students = 10% of previous year’s
percentage NOT proficient (63 x 0.10 = 6.3)
   Reduce Last Year’s Percent NOT Proficient by that 10%
63-6.3=56.7
   The difference you obtained in Step 3 is the largest percentage of
students who are NOT proficient that your school can have this year.
 Subtract the difference from 100 to determine the percentage
proficient you need to meet growth for Safe Harbor purposes.
100-56.7=43.3% proficient
   A 75% confidence interval for growth is then calculated and the lower
bound is applied. Schools that meet safe harbor conditions for a
subgroup are considered to have met standards for that subgroup.
Back to
Page 1
1. Check to see if the
subgroup met the %
proficient AMO after
met their expected
growth.
2. Note: no confidence
interval is applied to the
% proficient for growth.
Therefore, a small
number of schools met
% proficient AMO for
for growth.
How is student “growth” added into the
AYP status determination calculations?
Growth percent proficient =

(# prof/adv + # below proficient who met growth)
All students tested
Which schools were not impacted by
growth for AYP?
   Schools that met standards using the
   Schools that did not include grade ranges
   Grades 9-12, 10-12, etc. high schools
   Grades 8-9 junior high schools
   Elementary schools that included only grade 3 or
below.
District AYP 2007
   Traditional status determination and safe
harbor are applied to districts.
   Students are grouped into K-5, 6-8 and 9-12
   Each AYP group’s % proficient is compared
to the AMO for combined population as well
as the five subgroups.
   Safe harbor is then applied to each AYP
group.
District AYP- Status Determination
   If an AYP group misses the AMO or Safe Harbor for
Comb. Pop or any subgroup then that AYP group
does not meet standards.
   If the K-5 AYP group’s economic disadvantaged students
miss the AMO and do not meet for Safe Harbor for math,
then the K-5 AYP group does not meet AYP for math, even
though comb. pop. and the other subgroups did meet
standards for K-5 math.
   It only takes one subgroup or the combined population to
miss AMO or Safe Harbor for the AYP group to miss AYP.
   Districts must miss AMO or Safe Harbor for all 3
AYP groups in the same subject to not meet AYP
as a district.
To reiterate:
   For each AYP group (K-5, 6-8, or 9-12):
   Within the same subject, math or literacy, if any
subgroup or the combined population miss AMO
or Safe Harbor, the AYP group is considered to
have not met standards (Alert or SI)
   For all 3 AYP groups:
   Within the same subject, math or literacy, if all 3
AYP groups have not met standards, then the
district has not met standards for that subject
overall.
   The final overall status for district is equal to
the worst case status for math or literacy.
Example: Overall Math Status is Meets Standards
Because only the K-5 AYP Group missed the AMO
K-5 AYP      6-8 AYP     9-12 AYP
Group        Group       Group

AYP Group Status      Alert        Met         Met
Standards   Standards
Combined Pop           MS          MS          MS
African Am.            MS          MS           MS
Hispanic               MS          MS           MS
Caucasian              MS          MS           MS
LEP                    MS          MS           MS
SwD                    MS          MS           MS
Example: Overall Math Status is Meets Standards
Because only the K-5 and 9-12 AYP Group missed the AMO
K-5 AYP        6-8 AYP       9-12 AYP
Group          Group         Group

AYP Group Status         Alert          Met           SI-1
Standards
Combined Pop              MS            MS            MS
African Am.               MS             MS            A
Hispanic                  MS             MS           MS
Caucasian                 MS             MS           MS
LEP                       MS             MS           MS
SwD                       MS             MS           MS
Example: Overall Math Status is School Improvement Year 1
Because all three AYP Groups missed the AMO for subgroup or CP

K-5 AYP       6-8 AYP       9-12 AYP
Group         Group         Group

Combined Pop               MS             A            MS
African Am.                MS            MS            SI-1
Hispanic                   MS            MS            MS
Caucasian                  MS            MS            MS
LEP                        MS            MS            MS
SwD                        MS            MS             A
District AYP Report: Page 1 summary
Pages 2-7 are AYP Group detail pages

District Name
9999
City, State, Zip Code
County
Phone
AYP Group % Proficient Detail Page

range the
subgroup
calculations are
delineated.
All non-mobile
students from all
schools in the
district are
included.
AYP Group Safe Harbor Detail Page

For each AYP
Group Safe
Harbor is
calculated and
applied to each
subgroup.
Percent tested
must be met for
the AYP Group
subgroups to
be eligible.
Quick Facts About AR Growth Model
   Growth is represented by a student making
expected gains in a one year period.
   The amount of expected gain is determined
by several factors:
   The baseline score of the student
   The baseline grade level of the student
   An expected gain proportion
   Proficiency from year to year is non-linear
   Practice of focusing on “Bubble Students” ignores
non-linear progression and misdirects
improvements
Expected Scale Score Growth for Students
at the Proficiency Cut Score

Literacy           Mathematics

3 to 4        59 points            59 points

4 to 5        45 points            45 points

5 to 6        37 points            37 points

6 to 7        32 points            32 points

7 to 8        27 points            27 points

3 to 8        200 points           200 points
Arkansas Scale Scores 3-8
Proficiency Expecations for Arkansas Benchmark

750

700

650
Scale Score

600

550

500

450
3           4           5           6           7    8
Two conditions: students below proficient
at baseline and students proficient or
above:
   GI = Growth Increment = required scale score to
a with current-grade scale score (below Proficient)
of x;
   PT = Proficiency Threshold = required scale score
below which student would not be expected to
maintain proficiency or above at Grade 8 for a
(Proficient or above) of x
Growth Trajectories for Students
Illustration of Student's Trajectory to
Proficiency
Scaled Score on Benchmark

750
700
650
600
550
500
Exam

450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
3            4             5          6           7            8
Scaled Score for Trajectory Student Amy          Expected Growth Increment Student Amy
Scaled Score for Trajectory Student Jennifer
Level Growth Increment Student Jennifer
Scaled Score for Trajectory Student Bill         Expected Growth Increment Student Bill
Proficiency Cut Score
Student Level Questions
   Which students did not meet expected growth?
   Is there a pattern among the students who did
not meet growth?
   Which students did not meet the proficiency
threshold (lost ground this year)?
   Is there a pattern?
   What do you know about the students’
performance in the subject that may inform
further instructional action or intervention?
   What additional information do you need to guide