A comparison of the API and AYP Systems
Both the state and federal accountability systems focus on how well students are learning. However, the approaches are quite different and cause some confusion at the local level. Comparison results show the difficulties inherent in reporting on two different accountability systems. From the data, it is difficult to determine if California middle schools are improving or not. Many schools reach their Academic Performance Index (API) targets, but not Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). Few schools do just the opposite. For example, one school may have exceeded the 800 API growth target for all schools along with meeting all the subgroup growth targets, but not met subgroup growth targets for AYP. If the school is a Title I school, they could possibly be in Program Improvement yet perform exceedingly well for the State. However, whenever a school misses its AYP or API target, leaders in the school and district must review the data and devise plans for how to address the learning needs of the subgroup(s) that did not meet yearly targets.
Differences Between API and AYP
API (State) |
AYP (Federal) |
| Indicator for state intervention programs for schools (no local educational agencies) |
Indicator for PI (Title I schools and local educational agencies only) |
| Growth model |
Status model |
| Based on API growth from one year to the next |
Based on four sets of requirements:
- Student participation in testing
- Percentage of students proficient in English language arts and mathematics
- API
- High school graduation rate
|
Related Links
Previous
Federal requirement for English learners
Next
State test results used in API and AYP calculations
Back to Top