April 2, 2004

API rankings show California schools improved over 2002

By Kymberli W. Brady
Staff Writer

The much-anticipated results from the annual Academic Performance Index (API) are in, and almost all schools located in Evergreen, as well as those throughout California, are showing signs of improvement, with solid gains over last year’s scores.

Developed in 1999 as part of the Public Schools Accountability Act, the API scores are still evolving in an effort to establish accurate benchmarks for measuring student academic performance and determine annual growth targets by using a numeric index that ranges from 200 to 1,000. In California, the statewide goal is to see that all schools reach a target of at least 800.

In a report issued by State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O’Connell last month, California’s schools are “making steady progress toward reaching the state’s 800 mark,” with 21.7 percent currently at or above the threshold, compared to 15.5 percent in 2002. The median base score for California as a whole was 703, while Santa Clara County schools faired better, inching closer to the mark with an average of 761.

Until last year, API numbers were based exclusively from the results of the Stanford 9 [SAT/9] exam. In order to provide a more accurate learning assessment, the API added the California Standards Tests [CST] and the California High School Exit Exams [CAHSEE] in 2002-2003, followed in 2003-2004 with the addition of high school science tests and the California Alternate Performance Assessment [CAPA], which was taken by students in grades 2-11 with significant cognitive disabilities.

Broken down to the school level, numbers show that 26.3 percent of the state’s elementary schools scored at or above the 800-point target—up from 20.1 percent, while middle schools improved from 12.7 to 15.6 percent, and high schools are up from 4 to 7 percent.

“Over the past few years, students have made impressive gains in our elementary schools, where most of our standards-based reforms have been focused,” says O’Connell. “It is clear, however, that while high schools are moving in the right direction, they are still struggling.”

O’Connell plans to propose a series of tough “roll-up-our-sleeves” measures in an effort to further improve high school achievement. “Our students deserve nothing less,” he says.

SJUSD schools in Willow Glen
Overall, San Jose Unified’s schools did quite well, according to district spokesperson Karen Fuqua. She notes that teachers are teaching to standards rather than teaching to the tests and the relationship being measured is much healthier.

The district still has a lot of work to do though, especially considering its diverse population, English as second language students and the rate of mobility. Unfortunately, the mobility rate cannot be measured, but it is a challenging factor.

“With students arriving at different times throughout the year, sometimes it’s hard to move them along the course. We also have to deal with English language learners, and that’s a tough aspect. But we are facing these challenges and continue to work on them, they are not an excuse, but a challenge.”

Aaron Buchanan, the district’s director of accountability, assessment and research noted that some things don’t change. “Booksin’s always a superstar,” he said. He also praised Canoas and River Glen. Both schools had a great year, their scores improved significantly.” On the other hand, he sees lots of challenges ahead for Gardner, while Galarza being a relatively new school needs some time to settle down. “It took two to three years for Hammer to settle down and develop,” he said.

Fuqua also praised Canoas Elementary. “Canoas did awesome. With the large number of ESL students at the school and working as hard as they did to raise their scores, they did a phenomenal job.”

Carol Garcia, Canoas’ principal emphasized how hard the school’s staff has and continues to work to improve the children’s learning. The school’s population includes 51 percent that are English learners and 71 percent receiving free and reduced lunch. In addition, more than 30 children entered the school since January.

“We have a high mobility rate,” Garcia says. The staff works very hard to improve the students’ skills, she adds. Every Tuesday, the staff meets and evaluates the students’ work through performance-based assessments and then sets goals. “We do a lot of planning and evaluation and a lot of goal setting.” Garcia says.

Additionally, the school offers a tutoring program staffed by parents and a peer-tutoring program at lunch. There’s also an after school skills lab for second and third grade readers and a homework lab for all students that works predominantly with math three days a week. Both of the latter programs offer no transportation, but Garcia said parents are behind the programs and are helping by picking up their children.

Garcia has high hopes Canoas’ students’ scores can continue to rise, but it’s difficult to predict. “Every year is different, we’re working with a population that’s always transitioning. But the hard work of our teachers, the constant student evaluation, the planning, communication and ongoing analysis of student’s progress and finding the strengths and areas that need to be redone, are the building blocks” toward continued success, she said.

River Glen Elementary’s principal, Cecilia Barrie, also was pleased with the scores. Her student’s scores were up 60 points from 2002. “We’ve worked extremely hard [to improve the scores] by providing all kinds of strategies for the children who aren’t doing as well such as after school reading, tutoring and resource teachers.”

Barrie says River Glen’s goal is to continue to increase the scores. While River Glen is a Spanish immersion school and students go through a lottery to get in, 48 percent of the students’ family incomes are under the poverty level.
“If you look at all the scores throughout the state, the schools in the more affluent areas [such as Beverly Hills, Los Altos Hills, Saratoga and Cupertino] have higher scores because money buys opportunities.

Parents can provide tutors and have the means to provide access to more life experiences that do those who are in poorer circumstances,” she added. “But we are extremely happy that our school is doing well.”

API measurement criteria
Tests specifically targeted toward California standards make up the majority of the API scores and are comprised in part from results of the STAR program and the CAHSEE. While 80 percent of the API for elementary and middle schools rely on the California Standards Tests (CST), an estimated 90 percent of the API for high schools relies this year on the CST and the CAHSEE exams.

The balance of the API score consists of numbers taken from the California Achievement Test, Sixth Edition Survey (CAT/6), a “nationally normed” test used as a benchmark against other students nationwide and replaces the SAT/9 tests from prior years.

Because they are not the same, in order to create a consistent year-to-year comparison, additional criteria was factored into the original API numbers published last fall, resulting in a recalculation of the original scores in order to make the figures more comparable for next year.

Some schools feel they are being penalized as the revised numbers differ to the downside from those previously published. This drop is not necessarily an indicator that schools have not performed as well as prior years and can in most cases be attributed to the recalculations.

Additionally, in the comparable school-ranking category, numbers can change from year to year due to socioeconomic factors. If it appears that your school has dropped, it could mean that it has been added to a different grouping based on its current socioeconomic status.

Two new components to the 2003 API Base included the CST Science and the California Alternate Performance Assessment [CAPA], which was taken by students with significant cognitive disabilities. The two tests will also shift the indicators a bit from the previous year for grades 9-11, making accurate year-to-year comparisons difficult and incompatible. Additionally, the CAHSEE indicator for 2003 includes only grade 10 results. As before, the CST scores for English Language Arts and Mathematics for grades 2-11 are included, along with the CST Social Science scores for grades 10-11.

According to GreatSchools.net, because the 2003 API Base includes new CSTs as well as the CAPA, and because the calculation of the 2003 API Base is different from the 2002-2003 API Growth released in October 2003, it would not be appropriate to compare the 2003 Base with the 2003 Growth.

However, in order to maintain consistency from one API reporting cycle to the next, the California Department of Education uses the Scale Calibration Factor (SCF) to provide a positive or negative adjustment to a school’s API Base each year. In general, the calculation of the SCF is the difference between the statewide average 2003 API Growth and the statewide average API Base. SCFs are calculated separately for elementary schools, middle schools, and high schools.

“Even in this most challenging budget year, I call upon school administrators, teachers, and students to set their sights high and top last year’s gains,” said O’Connell. “I know that our hard-working schools can meet and even surpass our expectations.”

Carol Rosen contributed information to this article.