BILL NUMBER: SB 722 CHAPTERED 09/30/04 CHAPTER 915 FILED WITH SECRETARY OF STATE SEPTEMBER 30, 2004 APPROVED BY GOVERNOR SEPTEMBER 29, 2004 PASSED THE SENATE AUGUST 26, 2004 PASSED THE ASSEMBLY AUGUST 24, 2004 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY AUGUST 23, 2004 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY JUNE 22, 2004 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY JUNE 8, 2004 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY AUGUST 18, 2003 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY JULY 28, 2003 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY JUNE 26, 2003 AMENDED IN SENATE MAY 7, 2003 INTRODUCED BY Senator McPherson FEBRUARY 21, 2003 An act to amend Section 52052 of the Education Code, relating to school performance. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST SB 722, McPherson. School performance. Existing law establishes the Public Schools Accountability Act of 1999 and requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction to develop an Academic Performance Index (API), which consists in part of the results of the tests administered pursuant to the Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) Program, to measure the performance of schools, to demonstrate comparable improvement in academic achievement by all numerically significant ethnic and socioeconomically disadvantaged subgroups within schools, and to rank schools based on the value of the API. The API measures the performance of schools and the academic performance of pupils and consists of a variety of indicators. This bill would require that the comparable improvement in academic achievement be measured by the API for all numerically significant pupil subgroups at the school, including ethnic subgroups, socioeconomically disadvantaged pupils, English language learners, and pupils with disabilities. The bill would define a numerically significant pupil subgroup by requiring the test scores of the pupils in the subgroup to be valid test scores and by requiring the subgroup to meet certain other criteria to ensure that the subgroup is numerically significant as compared to the total pupil population. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Section 52052 of the Education Code is amended to read: 52052. (a) (1) By July 1, 1999, the Superintendent of Public Instruction, with approval of the State Board of Education, shall develop an Academic Performance Index (API), to measure the performance of schools, especially the academic performance of pupils. (2) A school shall demonstrate comparable improvement in academic achievement as measured by the API by all numerically significant pupil subgroups at the school, including: (A) Ethnic subgroups. (B) Socioeconomically disadvantaged pupils. (C) English language learners. (D) Pupils with disabilities. (3) (A) For purposes of this section, a numerically significant pupil subgroup is one that meets both of the following criteria: (i) The subgroup consists of at least 50 pupils each of whom has a valid test score. (ii) The subgroup constitutes at least 15 percent of a school's total population of pupils who have valid test scores. (B) If a subgroup does not constitute 15 percent of the school's total population of pupils with valid test scores, the subgroup may constitute a numerically significant pupil subgroup if it has at least 100 valid test scores. (C) For a school with an API score that is based on no fewer than 11 and no more than 99 pupils with valid test scores, numerically significant subgroups shall be defined by the Superintendent of Public Instruction, with approval by the State Board of Education. (4) The API shall consist of a variety of indicators currently reported to the department including, but not limited to, the results of the achievement test administered pursuant to Section 60640, attendance rates for pupils in elementary schools, middle schools, and secondary schools, and the graduation rates for pupils in secondary schools. (A) The pupil data collected for the API that comes from the achievement test administered pursuant to Sections 60640 and 60644 and the high school exit examination administered pursuant to Section 60851, when fully implemented, shall be disaggregated by special education status, English language learners, socioeconomic status, gender and ethnic group. Only the test scores of pupils who were counted as part of the enrollment in the annual California Basic Education Data System's data collection for the current fiscal year and who were continuously enrolled during that year may be included in the test result reports in the school's API. Results of the achievement test and other tests specified in subdivision (b) shall constitute at least 60 percent of the value of the index. (B) Before including high school graduation rates and attendance rates in the index, the Superintendent of Public Instruction shall determine the extent to which the data are currently reported to the state and the accuracy of the data. (b) Pupil scores from the following tests, when available and when found to be valid and reliable for this purpose, shall be incorporated into the API: (1) The assessment of the applied academic skills matrix test developed pursuant to Section 60604. (2) The nationally normed test designated pursuant to Section 60642. (3) The standards-based achievement tests provided for in Section 60642.5. (4) The high school exit examination. (c) Based on the API, the Superintendent of Public Instruction shall develop, and the State Board of Education shall adopt, expected annual percentage growth targets for all schools based on their API baseline score from the previous year. Schools are expected to meet these growth targets through effective allocation of available resources. For schools below the statewide API performance target adopted by the State Board of Education pursuant to subdivision (d), the minimum annual percentage growth target shall be 5 percent of the difference between a school's actual API score and the statewide API performance target, or one API point, whichever is greater. Schools at or above the statewide API performance target shall have, as their growth target, maintenance of their API score above the statewide API performance target. However, the State Board of Education may set differential growth targets based on grade level of instruction and may set higher growth targets for the lowest performing schools because they have the greatest room for improvement. To meet its growth target, a school shall demonstrate that the annual growth in its API is equal to or more than its schoolwide annual percentage growth target and that all numerically significant pupil subgroups, as defined in subdivision (a), are making comparable improvement. (d) Upon adoption of state performance standards by the State Board of Education, the Superintendent of Public Instruction shall recommend, and the State Board of Education shall adopt, a statewide API performance target that includes consideration of performance standards and represents the proficiency level required to meet the state performance target. When the API is fully developed, schools must, at a minimum, meet their annual API growth targets to be eligible for the Governor's Performance Award Program as set forth in Section 52057. The State Board of Education may establish additional criteria that schools must meet to be eligible for the Governor's Performance Awards Program. (e) Beginning in June 2000, the API shall be used for both of the following: (1) Measuring the progress of schools selected for participation in the Immediate Intervention/Underperforming Schools Program pursuant to Section 52053. (2) Ranking all public schools in the state for the purpose of the High Achieving/Improving Schools Program pursuant to Section 52056. (f) (1) A school with 11 to 99 pupils with valid test scores shall receive an API score with an asterisk that indicates less statistical certainty than API scores based on 100 or more test scores. (2) A school shall annually receive an API score, unless the Superintendent of Public Instruction determines that an API score would be an invalid measure of the school's performance for one or more of the following reasons: (A) Irregularities in testing procedures occurred. (B) The data used to calculate the school's API score are not representative of the pupil population at the school. (C) Significant demographic changes in the pupil population render year-to-year comparisons of pupil performance invalid. (D) The department discovers or receives information indicating that the integrity of the API score has been compromised. (E) Insufficient pupil participation in the assessments included in the API. (3) If a school has less than 100 pupils with valid test scores, the calculation of the API or adequate yearly progress pursuant to the federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (20 U.S.C. Sec. 6301 et seq.) and federal regulations may be calculated over more than one annual administration of the tests administered pursuant to Sections 60640 and 60644 and the high school exit exam administered pursuant to Section 60851, consistent with regulations adopted by the State Board of Education. (g) Only schools with 100 or more test scores contributing to the API may be included in the API rankings. (h) By July 1, 2000, the Superintendent of Public Instruction, with the approval of the State Board of Education, shall develop an alternative accountability system for schools under the jurisdiction of a county board of education or a county superintendent of schools, community day schools, and alternative schools serving high-risk pupils, including continuation high schools and opportunity schools. Schools in the alternative accountability system may receive an API score, but shall not be included in the API rankings.