Adequate Yearly Progress: Literature Review

Introduction

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) is a measure established under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB, 2002) by which schools and districts must demonstrate that their students are improving annually in academic achievement. Specifically, to achieve Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP), public schools must demonstrate an increase in the percentage of students who meet or exceed the statewide annual achievement objectives (Wright, 22). If schools or systems fail to meet their goals, they can be subject to three remedies of increasing severity. This entry describes the background of NCLB's AYP requirements and their accompanying penalties.

Background of the Law

For decades, researchers, educators, and policymakers have attempted to remedy the gross disparities in achievement between students of color and Whites. The realization that a large achievement gap persists, despite a half a century of efforts to improve educational opportunities, brought issues of access, equity, and student achievement to the fore. Stakeholders in education begin to re-evaluate the current education system in an effort to develop more effective educational reform measures.

A subgroup is deemed to be making adequate yearly progress (AYP) if it meets or exceeds that year's AMAO (Rivera, 10). In addition, to be deemed as making AYP, at least 95% of the students in the subgroup must be tested each year, and each subgroup must meet the criteria of one other achievement indicator (typically attendance or graduation rates). Thus, if a subgroup does not reach its AMAO or if fewer than 95% of the students in that group take the test, that subgroup is deemed as “failing” to make AYP. Furthermore, schools and school districts are held accountable for ensuring that each subgroup reaches its AMAO. If any one of its subgroups does not, then the entire school (or district) is deemed as failing to make adequate yearly progress (Nichols, 85).

Once a school has been deemed as “failing” to make AYP for 2 consecutive years, it is identified by the state for “school improvement.” The school must notify parents and must provide students the opportunity to transfer to another school that is not “failing” and cover any necessary transportation costs (§1116(b)(l)(D)). Within 3 months, the “failing” school must develop and implement a 2-year school improvement plan (Menken, 21). If the school fails to make AYP the following year, it must provide “supplemental educational services” to students from an outside provider, such as after-school tutoring from a private company. The district must also take “corrective action,” which could include appointing outside experts to advise the school, decreasing the authority of the school's management, or even replacing school staff (§1116(b)(7)). If the school fails to make AYP the following year, it is subject to “Restructuring,” which could entail state takeover of the school, replacing the entire staff, converting the school into a charter school, or turning the school over to a private company (§1116(b)(8)). Title I does not clearly provide for accountability after state or private takeover, and no indication of when or how a school is to be returned to ...