Middle, High School Principals Talk AYP and Accountability

and North high schools and were all listed this year as not making adequate yearly progress (AYP) under No Child Left Behind Standards due to test scores.

And while the schools' principals all said they find the testing data useful, they said one flaw with the current method of testing is that it measures a different group of students each year, rather than following students through the years to see whether they’re improving.

“These numbers—they’re a one and done snapshot, this isn’t measuring improvement,” said North High School Principal Greg Nelson. “It’s just a quick snapshot as far as how these students are doing in 10th grade. There’s nothing done to track a reading score in 11th or 12th grade to see if it’s improved.”

The Minnesota Department of Education has proposed moving to what's called a growth model for testing in its request for a waiver from some of No Child Left Behind’s provisions.

Under current standards, an entire school can be labeled as failing to make adequate yearly progress based on the performance of one subgroup, such as a particular race of students, or the group of students receiving free and reduced lunch. Even after learning that a particular subgroup is struggling, targeting that group can be difficult, the high school principals said.

Nelson said the faculty isn't privy to which students are on free and reduced lunch, and Tartan principal John Bezek said focusing on a racial subgroup can be tricky.

“You don’t want to have a preconceived notion that some kids are going to struggle, but we do have that achievement gap,” Bezek said.

Tartan does pre-test students to identify those who might struggle on the test and then offer before-school classes to those who could use extra help, Bezek said.

For the most part, though, the schools just focus on improving all students’ scores,

“It’s not as if AYP triggers this whole brand new movement,” Nelson said. “It’s an ongoing process, scores are not.”

Here are some questions and answers on the three schools’ adequate yearly progress statuses:

Why did the schools not make adequate yearly progress?

Tartan: The black, special education and free and reduced lunch subgroups were not proficient in reading, and the special education subgroup was not proficient in math.

North: The special education and Hispanic subgroups were not proficient in reading and the special education subgroup was not proficient in math.

Skyview Middle: The Asian subgroup was not proficient in reading.

What are the schools doing to improve scores?

Skyview has increased the use of literacy strategies for teachers across the curriculum and students who are not proficient in reading are placed in intervention classes in addition to their regular language arts classes, said Skyview Middle School Principal Christina Hester.

At North High School, there’s been some restructuring of special education courses in math and reading, Nelson said. Tartan uses the testing data to make sure its curriculum is aligned with the state standards that are being tested, Bezek said. For example, the math department looks at the “sub scores” to see which math topics students are weak in. 

“We’re constantly looking at our curriculum and revising things,” Bezek said. “We’re just constantly looking to get better at what we’re trying to do.”

Do parents pay attention to the AYP labels?

All three of the principals said they get few, if any, questions about whether the school made “adequate yearly progress," under the federal standards.

“Parents are much more interested in what opportunities we offer, what our graduation rate is,” Nelson said. “I have yet to field a question about (AYP).”