NCLB Recommendation #4

SUBJECT
AYP Determinations:
Performance of Students Belonging to Multiple Subgroups

P.L. 107-110 PROVISIONS
TITLE I  PART A  SUBPART 1  SEC. 1111(b)(2)

NSBA RECOMMENDATION
#4: In calculating AYP, students identified in multiple subgroups should be represented in the count for each subgroup as an equal fraction totaling one student.

RATIONALE
The change creates a more appropriate approach in determining AYP for schools with large numbers of students belonging to several subgroups than over-representing their count; and would not adversely affect schools with greater diversity. Each student should be counted as one student, not some students counted up to four times.

PROPOSED BILL LANGUAGE
Section 1111 (20 U.S.C. 6311) is further amended in subsection (b)(2) by adding at the end the following:
“(L) Counting students who are in more than one group. For the purpose of determining adequate yearly progress, the State may establish a uniform procedure for counting students under which a student who belongs to more than one of the groups described in subparagraph (C)(v) is counted toward each such group to which the student belongs as a fraction of 1 student, the numerator of the fraction being 1 and the denominator being the number of such groups to which the student belongs.”

IMPACT OF CURRENT LAW
Under current law students identified in several subgroups must have their test scores counted for AYP for each subgroup they belong to, resulting in over-representation of their performance within a school or a school district. Since students who are in multiple subgroups are more likely to be academically challenged, this practice creates an unfair statistical bias in evaluating and sanctioning schools and school districts that have many subgroups. Over the past few years, several states have requested the permission from the U.S. Department of Education to apportion the scores of students who are in multiple subgroups. NSBA’s recommendation will help states and school districts target their limited resources to the schools that truly need extra help.

CASE STUDY (EXAMPLE)

School Enrollment
The Johnson-Reagan Elementary School has 1,000 students enrolled.  Of the 1,000 students, 700 students belong to one or more demographic subgroups.  The 700 are identified as follows:

• 350 students are identified as African-American, with a disability and in poverty;
• 250 students are identified as African-American and in poverty;
• 350 students are identified with disabilities; and
• 100 students are identified as in poverty.

TABLE 1 - SCHOOL ENROLLMENT*

*1,000 students total enrolled at Johnson-Reagan Elementary School

In calculating AYP under the current law:

• 700 students are identified as in poverty;
• 600 students are identified as African-American students; and
• 350 students are identified with disabilities.

The AYP target for the previous school year was a 60% proficiency rate for all students and for the demographic subgroups.  Under the current system, the following number of students would need to be successful on their assessments:

TABLE 2 – NUMBER OF STUDENTS NEEDED TO
MAKE 60% AYP TARGET UNDER CURRENT LAW

TABLE 3 – NUMBER OF STUDENTS NEEDED TO
MAKE 60% AYP TARGET UNDER PROPOSED RECOMMENDATION

In summary, this proportional formula is a fairer way to determine the status of a school or school district than the current law:

TABLE 4 – COMPARISON:  NUMBER OF STUDENTS NEEDED TO
MAKE 60% AYP TARGET UNDER CURRENT LAW AND PROPOSED LAW

Analysis
Under the proposed recommendations, schools would still be held accountable for providing innovative interventions to improve academic performance of the demographic subgroup; however, the number of students needing to meet their AYP targets for school and school district performance would be adjusted so as not to penalize the school or school district due to its demographics.

NSBA CONTACT
Reggie Felton, director of federal relations, 703-838-6782 or rfelton@nsba.org.