So what in the world is AYP? AYP stands for Adequate Yearly Progress. This is simply the present reform initiatives for educating our nation’s children. The concept of AYP is also the nation’s way of monitoring student progress under the guidelines of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). However, before one can begin to sift through the tons of data that exist, there is one document that is a must read.

Approved 2004-2005 Georgia Accountability Workbook). It is the responsibility of each state to determine how it's schools will make AYP based on the guidelines set under NCLB. Therefore this document is the one key source of information for figuring out how each school in a state can make AYP.

For the purpose of this website I will be focusing on making AYP as it relates to middle school, however much of the information discussed is overlapping information which remains true for elementary & high schools. This website is not designed for administrators only, but for teachers and parents as well. It is crucial that all stake-holders understand the concept of AYP and work together in reaching our goal. Our goal should be and has always been to educate our children and prepare them to be productive and functional citizens in the society in which we live.

Before an administrative team can begin to prepare a Consolidated School Improvement Plan (CSIP) the team must first look at how its students will be measured. There are key areas that will be used to measure student progress in middle school: Reading / ELA, Math and Attendance. Attendance is considered the 2nd indicator of progress. Each school is expected to make progress in student achievement using these key areas as indicators of school improvement. Yes, students learn more than Reading/ELA and Math, however, these subjects have rippling effects on other areas which will ultimately determine student achievement.

Attendance is a crucial area as well because if students to do not attend school they inevitably will not learn what has been taught during the school day. The state has established Annual Measurable Objectives (AMO). These measurable objectives are bench marks for improvement. For example, in math it is the goal of each school in the state of Georgia to have at least 58.3% of the total school population including all subgroups individually to either meet or exceed the standards of proficiency in the Spring of 2007 based on the Georgia Criterion Reference Competency Test. Therefore it is important to know what your AMO is for both academic areas. So let’s look at each area individually.

    As we have just discussed in math each school must get at least 58.3% of its students to meet or exceed standards of proficiency by Spring of 2007.

In Reading and Language Arts combined each school in the state of Georgia must get 66.7% of its students to meet and/or exceed standards of proficiency. The formula for calculating the Reading/Language Arts combined score is as follows:

Second Indicator for Georgia is (Attendance)

According to the state of Georgia, it is up to the LEA (Local Educational Agency) to determine the local school systems second indicator. There is a chart that list all of the choices of second indicators that a LEA can choose from which can be referenced under section 7.2 of the (Approved 2004-2005 Georgia Accountability Workbook). The DCSS chose as a second indicator student attendance. No school can have 15% or greater of its total school population or any of its subgroups to miss 15 or more days of school. This includes Excused Absences, Unexcused Absences, and Out of School Suspensions. After all, if a child is not present in the class they will not learn. It is my observation that schools that do not make AYP in attendance could have actually made AYP if discipline problems were managed more effectively. For example if a student is in violation according to the Students Rights and Responsibility Hand Manuel and is given 10 days of out of school suspension, this child can only miss 4 more days that entire school year. Please keep in mind FAY does not apply to attendance. If a child commits two offenses in the same year and gets a 5 or more day suspension then that student could possibly affect the school in making AYP. Even greater, students who are not in school are not learning the carefully planned GPS/QCC correlated objectives and standards that are being presented. Therefore this student’s absence will inevitably cause a ripple effect that will spill over into their academic performance on standardized test.

It is also recommended that the total number of days a student has been given In School Suspension be monitored, especially if that student has academic concerns. If the student is never in class, given our rigorous curriculum, it is not possible to think that the student would be able to keep up with the lessons being taught. When this is the case students act out and misbehave causing a never ending cycle of low achievement.

It is recommended that the administrative team, faculty, and community work together to form a rubric that guides administrators in how students are disciplined. This is not an indictment on the discipline policies that are already in place, but a simple evaluation of whether or not it is effective when student achievement is the ultimate goal. Again, our goal is to Leave No Child Behind. It is not being recommended to ignore inappropriate behavior, but I challenge any school to have an open minded discussion on discipline and how it is administered. If the purpose of discipline is to redirect inappropriate behavior, how does sending the child home help the child deal with their violent behavior? If a student is rude and disrespectful, what type of corrective action can be implemented to really deal with and get to the true source of the disrespectful behavior? Removing the student from the learning environment does not redirect or remediate the inappropriate behavior and most often only moves the problem from one place to another causing the child to miss even more hours of instruction.

Another area of concern as it relates to attendance is test participation. Each school as a whole and all subgroups with at least 40 members must have a participation rate of 95% or above on selected state assessments in Reading/English Language Arts and Mathematics.

There are obviously other areas of improvement that your school may want to look at such as Science and Social Studies scores as well as incorporating technology during instructional delivery and differentiating instruction to name a few. However, according to the state of Georgia, for middle school, they are looking at Reading/ELA score, Math scores, and Attendance. It is not being said to only focus on these three areas. It is the opinion of the creator of this website that all curricula that is offered in the school be assessed to determine whether or not the students are actually learning the material being presented.

SUBGROUPS

If you have noticed the term subgroup has been mentioned a lot. What in the world is a subgroup? Georgia’s definition of subgroups as it relates to AYP includes all of the required student subgroups, disaggregated by racial/ethnic categories, disability, limited English proficiency,

and socioeconomic status. Georgia law requires the reporting and/or grading of schools in the aggregate and by these subgroups. Georgia’s racial/ethnic categories include Asian/Pacific Islander, Black, Hispanic, American Indian/Alaskan Native, White, and Multiracial. Please remember no whole is any greater than it’s individual parts. Not only must the school as a whole perform well based on the 1st and 2nd indicators, but each subgroup must meet the requirements of the 1st and 2nd  indicators. According section 5.2 of the (Approved 2004-2005 Georgia Accountability Workbook) Please read this excerpt:

5.2 How are public schools and LEAs held accountable for the progress of student subgroups in the determination of adequate yearly progress?

STATE RESPONSE AND STATE ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING REQUIREMENTS

Georgia 's State Accountability System holds public schools and LEAs accountable for the progress of students overall and in each required subgroup, disaggregated by racial/ethnic categories, disability, limited English proficiency, and socioeconomic status, in determining AYP. See Georgia ’s AYP Workbook 1.2, 3.2, and 5.1.

• The “all” student category and each AYP required student subgroup (at or above the minimum number of 40 students or 10% of students enrolled in AYP grades, whichever is greater (with a 75 student cap) must meet the State’s annual measurable objective regarding percent proficient or advanced on State assessments (or meet “confidence interval, 16 multi-year average, or safe harbor”).

• Each school, LEA, and the State must meet the State standard regarding progress on its “second indicator” (subgroups using “safe harbor” must also show progress on the second indicator). The minimum number for the second indicator equals 40 students or 10% of students enrolled in AYP grades, whichever is greater (with 75 student cap).

• For AYP determinations in 2005-2006 and subsequent QCC/GPS transition years, Georgia will equate QCC to GPS assessment results in grades and subjects where appropriate using an

Equipercentile adjustment for multi-year averaging, safe harbor, and second indicator calculations.

• For AYP determinations, the Displaced Hurricane subgroup will count toward school and district

participation rate calculations only.

FAY

Now that we know what our performance indicators are and what a subgroup is let’s talk about the concept of Full Academic Year (FAY). Federal and State educators do realize that it is not fair to hold a school accountable for a student's standardized test scores when the student enrolls in the middle or end of the school year. Many of our school systems have a high transient student population. According to the (Approved 2004-2005 Georgia Accountability Workbook), only FAY student’s scores will be counted toward AYP. Georgia will define “full academic year” (FAY) for AYP purposes as follows:

• For school accountability purposes, “full academic year” will be defined as continuous enrollment in the same school from the Fall FTE count (which

on the first Tuesday in October each year) through state’s Spring testing window (which occurs in March for the E-GHSGT and April/May for the CRCT).

• For LEA accountability purposes, “full academic year” will be defined as continuous enrollment in the same LEA from the Fall FTE count through the state’s Spring testing window.

• For State accountability purposes, “full academic year” will be defined as continuous enrollment in the State of Georgia ’s public schools from the Fall FTE count through state’s Spring testing window.

GDOE has modified the Student Record collection to include data elements that will allow improved tracking of the “continuous enrollment” component of the FAY definition. The Fall FTE count, the Student Record, and the test window dates will be used concurrently to identify the pool of FAY students upon which a school’s AYP determination will be based.

Therefore the student must be enrolled continuously between the periods of time stated above in order for the students test scores to count toward AYP.

Ok....Now that we know the basics lets talk about our

plan of action.

Lets talk data. When looking at data school officials should first ask the question how did our students perform in all four content areas. Before you answer this question, be prepared to answer this question looking at the school as a whole. This means all students.

Next look at each subgroup individually. As discussed earlier, if the school as a whole does well but one or more of its subgroups performs poorly then the school as a whole may fail to make adequate yearly progress. So I ask again, how did each of the subgroups perform individually? Did each subgroup meet its AMO for each of its content domains? Although only the math and reading/language arts sections are our primary performance indicators, it should be the goal of every school to perform well in all content areas. It is crucial that all faculty have a good understanding of how the school performed. When looking at the data and formulating a plan it is important that the school as a whole is apart of this process. The rule of thumb is, who ever writes the plan and takes part in the creation of the plan will typically take ownership of the plan. Buy in and team work are crucial. Include administrators, faculty, parents and the student council.

Looking at the data tells one who is making progress and who is not. The next question to ask is why are these students not making progress? Does the curriculum adequately cover the standards addressed by the assessment instrument (CRCT)? The next question should be, are all of the standards being properly presented to the students. Did the teacher cover all of the standards? Were the students assessed( Test, Quizzes, projects, homework, etc.) on the same level throughout the year in the classroom t

hat they were assessed on when they took the CRCT? Meaning was the class work presented on a basic knowledge and comprehension level or were there assignments that were presented on a higher level of blooms taxonomy (evaluation and application)?

Now focus your view. Lets say 7th grade math is the trouble area for one of your subgroups. Out of all of the domains in math, identify three domains that students scored the lowest on. Now again ask the question why? This is something that would be best answered by the 7th grade math department and lead by the math department chair.

More Information Coming Soon