March 18, 2004

How well did Almaden schools do?

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 Almaden schools, 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 week, 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 schools faired better, inching closer to the mark with an average of 761.

Although only two Almaden schools scored below the 800 mark, the average score of 754 is also much closer to expectations than the statewide number indicates.

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.

“The new APIs are kind of confusing,” admits San Jose Unified Research and Assessment Director Aaron Buchanan. In a way they don't tell us anything that the scores last fall didn't tell us. The base API is computed off the same test scores. Last fall's API was the growth API —the weights have just changed a bit.”

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.

“At the elementary level, it was a pretty good year,” explains Buchanan. “It wasn't our best year, but still a growth year. It's still one that we're proud of. Our elementary schools have continued to grow—some have made excellent gains.”

Graystone and Williams rise into the 900s

Buchanan reiterates that when schools such as Graystone and Williams rise into the 900s, the possibility will eventually exist for the scores to bounce down from year to year. “There's always a certain amount of wobble in the scores and when you get so high, you can only wobble down,” he says. “Graystone has done particularly well this year, going from 897 to 933. That's a big increase for being that high. Simonds went from 857 to 896 and Los Alamitos from 866 to 882. There's a lot to be proud of with all of those guys and they get my vote.”

Retiring this year is Graystone Principal Jerri Kazmerczak, who admits that it will be great to go out as top dog. “I'm ecstatic about being as high as that,” she says. It's hard to keep going when we are as high as we are. We keep adding new programs to improve the children's skills, but we're not always sure it will work to improve scores. It's just great that we're up there.”

“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.

Middle schools and high schools

“Statewide, middle schools and high schools have moved up and down over the years,” admits Buchanan. “This was a good year for the middle schools and they really worked hard. It wasn't a great year for high schools in general but Pioneer met their target and Leland went up from 791 to 808—back up over 800 this year. They did well.”

In addition to the API scores, the ranking indicators show where schools stand compared to others statewide and then with similar schools that share the same characteristics, such as average class size, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, English learners, credentialed teachers, and student mobility.

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.

API measurement criteria

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. For a Parent's Guide to Similar Schools Ranking, log on to www.cde.ca.gov , click on the 2003 API and then into the www API home box at the top on the page. A list of information packets will follow.

A good example lies with Castillero Middle School, which did not reach its growth target for similar reasons, a lthough their numbers rose significantly over last year. “There's always need for improvement,” admits Principal Sandy Engel. “The teachers are working so hard on good preparation and standards based instruction and we hope to see continued improvement. We did not meet our target in three very small subgroups –Special Education for English Language Arts, English Language learners in Mathematics, and our socio-economic group barely missed the target in Math. We represent a very diverse population from throughout the city because we are a performing arts magnet, and we rank second in all the middle schools in the district.”

“They do draw from a much broader section of the district than other Almaden schools,” says Buchanan. “But they've moved up from 707 in 1999 to 765. This was a pretty good growth year for them.”

Pioneer Principal Barbara Lepiane explained that although they reached their target of 726, their base for next year would be 734. “It's confusing because the test keeps changing,” she says. “We made our overall school-wide growth numbers, but missed in one individual area—our white students. Our Hispanic students actually went up 29 points and we scored really high in our exit exams. Each year we try to reexamine the areas that kids are struggling with.”

The school plans to model their success with Hispanic students via after school tutoring programs, one-on-one counseling, and bi-lingual tutoring. According to Lepiane, they have already implemented similar programs for students who faired poorly in Algebra, English and other subjects.

Although Pioneer missed their AYP due to the less than 95 percent participation required, Lepiane is confident that steps being taken now will help rectify that next year. “We had 94.5 percent participation for the socio-economic area,” she admits. “That's one student. We are still second in high school overall scores in the district.”

Two additional 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 utilizes 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. SCF's are calculated separately for elementary schools, middle schools, and high schools.

The API reports [below] show the school's 2003 base score and next to it, rankings, followed by a growth target for 2004—which will be released in August following the 2004 STAR and CAHSEE exams. In it, schools are expected to reach their growth target—which is equal to five percent of the difference between the school's base score and the statewide performance target of 800.

“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.”

The 2003 API Base results and school rankings are posted at: http://api.cde.ca.gov . The 2003 API Base Report Information Guide is available at: www.cde.ca.gov/psaa/api .