PRESS RELEASES
Secretary Paige Issues New Policy for Calculating Participation Rates Under No Child Left Behind
Archived Information


FOR RELEASE:
March 29, 2004
Contact: Jo Ann Webb
(202) 401-1576

More Resources
Secretary's Remarks
Remarks by First Lady
Letter to Chief State School Officers

In an effort to help states implement the No Child Left Behind Act , U.S. Secretary of Education Rod Paige today announced new policies for calculating participation rates -- the percentage of enrolled students who participate in an assessment program. The announcement was made at the National School Boards Association’s 64th annual conference in Orlando, Fla.

States will be able to average participation rates over a three-year period. In addition, students who are unable to take the test during the testing and make-up windows because of a unique, significant medical emergency will not count against the school’s participation rate.

"Participation in assessments makes our schools more inclusive, responsive and fair in meeting the needs of struggling students, which is why accountability is at the heart of No Child Left Behind," Paige said. "Every student should count, but if they don’t take the tests, they can’t be counted. The 95 percent participation rate was included in the law to ensure that all children are assessed. However, we recognized that there were circumstances whereby a few absent students prevented an otherwise successful school from meeting the 95 percent participation rate requirement. Thus, the school did not make AYP (adequate yearly progress). This practical examination of the law allows for those schools still to meet their AYP requirements."

States already have significant authority in calculating participation rates. They determine how large a subgroup must be in order to be considered separately for participation rate calculations. In addition, many states have testing windows, which include "make-up assessments" for students who miss tests. These make-up tests can count toward the school’s participation rate.

Under the new policy, a state may use data from the previous one or two years to average the participation rate data for a school and/or subgroup, as needed. If this two- or three-year average meets or exceeds 95 percent, the school will still meet the AYP requirement. Thus, schools that are performing well in this category may not be identified as "in need of improvement" because of a one- or two-year dip in their participation rates. The new policy also makes allowances for those rare circumstances when a student cannot take the assessment during the entire testing window, including make-up dates, due to a significant medical emergency, such as a car accident. Although students remain enrolled in the school during this period, schools do not have to include these students when calculating their participation rates.

"This policy reinforces the accurate measurement of test administration in a given school," Paige added. "We remain committed to putting policies in place that are consistent with the intent of No Child Left Behind, as well as right for children and fair for schools. This new policy meets those goals."

Fact Sheet:

New Policy on Participation Rates

No Child Left Behind requires all students to participate in a state’s test, although a school can make "adequate yearly progress" if at least 95 percent of students, measured by total school population and by subgroup, participate in a state’s annual assessment of student achievement. This provision is one of the cornerstones of the No Child Left Behind reforms. It ensures that every child is counted so students who are struggling get the help they need. Full participation in assessments will make our schools more inclusive, responsive and fair.

It is important to note that states already have significant authority in calculating participation rates: 1) states determine how large a subgroup must be to be considered separately for participation rate calculations and 2) make-up assessments count toward the school’s participation rate if a student is unable to take the scheduled assessment.

The department continues to work with education leaders in each state to understand the practical challenges in implementing No Child Left Behind. This is part of the department’s ongoing effort to develop policies that are right for students and fair for schools.

  1. Average Participation Rate

    In order to make "adequate yearly progress" (AYP), schools must demonstrate that at least 95 percent of all students participated in the assessment. This requirement must be met for all students in a school and subgroups of those students (including ethnicity, poverty, disability, or English language proficiency, if the subgroup has sufficient numbers of students).

    • Under the new policy, a state may use data from the previous one or two years to average the participation rate data for a school and/or subgroup as needed. If this two- or three-year average meets or exceeds 95 percent, the school will meet this AYP requirement. Schools that are performing well in this category may not be unduly identified as "in need of improvement" because of a one- or two-year dip in their participation rates.

    • For example, a school might find that its participation rate dropped to 94 percent for one year. If in the previous two years, the rates were 95 percent and 96 percent then the school may average these three years to meet the 95 percent participation rate requirement.

  2. Medical Emergencies

    There are rare circumstances when a student cannot take the assessment during the entire testing window, including make-up dates, due to a significant medical emergency. For example, this might include a situation in which a student is recovering from a car accident. These students remain enrolled at the school, although such circumstances might prohibit them from participating in the test during the testing window.

    • The new policy allows schools to omit such students when calculating their participation rates. This will ensure that schools whose averages might be affected by such situations will not be unduly identified for improvement.

###

Top

Back to March 2004

 
Print this page Printable view Send this page Share this page
Last Modified: 05/24/2004