Today, Commissioner Virginia M. Barry, Ph.D. announced the release of 2012 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) reports for New Hampshire schools and school districts including the preliminary designations for new schools and districts in need of improvement (SINIs and DINIs). “Over seventy percent of schools and sixty-five percent of districts failed to make AYP in 2012. This is ample evidence that the accountability system is broken, not that the vast majority of schools in New Hampshire are failing,” stated Commissioner Barry. “In New Hampshire we need an accountability system that rewards the great schools and accurately identifies those schools and districts that need our support,” Commissioner Barry added.
The 2012 AYP Reports are based on the October 2011 New England Common Assessment Program (NECAP) results for grades three through eight and eleven, together with the 2010-2011 NH Alternate Learning Progressions Assessment (NH-ALPs) results for grades two through seven and ten, and the Class of 2011 graduation rate. AYP is calculated through an index system, with schools and districts receiving full credit for each student that scores proficient or better and partial credit for student scores below proficient.
To make AYP, a school or district must meet performance targets established for students in reading and mathematics, as well as meet state targets for student NECAP participation, attendance, and graduation (at high school only). Student performance is summarized for the whole school and subgroups of students including, by race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, educational disability, and non- or limited- English proficient. To make AYP a school or district must meet the targets in every category (NECAP participation, performance, and graduation/attendance) for every subgroup. To comply with the requirements of the federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), all students within a school and district must demonstrate proficiency by 2013-2014.
One hundred and twenty-one (26%) schools made AYP in all areas measured and 332 (71%) schools did not make AYP in one or more areas. The remaining twelve (3%) schools are subject to review until AYP can be calculated (some of these are very small schools which complicates calculations of AYP). In addition, twenty-seven (33%) high schools missed the graduation rate target, and one elementary school missed for its attendance rate.
Schools not making AYP for two consecutive years in the same content (i.e. reading or math) area are designated a School in Need of Improvement (SINI). Based on the 2012 AYP results, thirty schools are identified as new SINIs, increasing the total number of schools identified for improvement to 330 (71%). Schools not making AYP have thirty days to file an appeal with the State Department of Education.
Five schools in need of improvement made AYP for the second consecutive year, and therefore exited improvement status: Lin-Wood Elementary, Pittsfield Middle School, Sanbornton Central School, School Street School in Rochester, and White Mountains Regional High School.
To calculate AYP at the district level, student data are aggregated by grade span groupings: elementary/middle (grades three through eight) and high school (grade eleven), and then compared to the performance targets in reading and mathematics. For the district to receive a negative AYP designation, both grade span groups must fail to make AYP in the same content area. Districts not making AYP for two consecutive years in the same content area are identified as Districts In Need of Improvement (DINI).
Of the 161 AYP district reports issued, fifty-two (32%) districts made AYP and 107 (66%) did not make AYP, with two (2%) districts in need of additional review and not receiving an AYP determination at this time. An analysis of the new results shows that two districts made AYP for the second consecutive year and exited improvement status: Newmarket and White Mountains Regional Districts.
Sixteen new districts are preliminarily identified as in need of improvement, increasing the number of districts in improvement to 101 (63%). The appeal process and timeline for districts is similar to the process provided for schools. In accordance with state and federal law, SINIs and DINIs must develop improvement plans focused on the category (or categories) that resulted in a failure to meet AYP targets.
Deputy Commissioner Paul Leather noted, “New Hampshire is nationally recognized for innovative practices, including course competencies. AYP as an accountability system does not capture the performance of our schools and districts in implementing these practices, which is why the Department is working closely with our schools around the future of accountability.”
Individual school and district reports, together with SINI and DINI information, and additional information about understanding AYP can be found at www.education.nh.gov/instruction/accountability/ayp/2012.htm