Arizona’s School
Accountability System
2011
Technical Manual

State of Arizona
Department of Education
Volume I: AZ LEARNS Legacy Achievement Profiles
Research & Policy
Arizona Department of Education
Achieve@azed.gov

Published by the Arizona Department of Education, January 2012.
The Arizona Department of Education of the State of Arizona does not discriminate on the basis of race,
religion, color, national origin, sex, disability or age in its programs, activities or in its hiring and employment
practices. If you have questions or grievances related to this guideline, please contact the Administrative
Services DAS at (602)542-3186.

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................................... 4
WHAT'S NEW FOR THE 2011 AZ LEARNS ACHIEVEMENT PROFILES .......................................................... 4
2. OVERVIEW OF THE AZ LEARNS EVALUATION SYSTEM .................................................................................. 5
GENERAL PROCESS TO CALCULATE AN ACHIEVEMENT PROFILE ...................................................................... 5
3. TIMELINE ............................................................................................................................................................... 7
TIMELINE ................................................................................................................................................................ 7
4. CALCULATION OF AIMS STATUS AND GROWTH POINTS .................................................................................. 8
AWARDING STATUS POINTS .................................................................................................................................. 8
DATA USED ............................................................................................................................................................. 8
AWARDING IMPROVEMENT POINTS ..................................................................................................................... 9
COMPUTATION OF THE AVERAGE ANNUAL CHANGE IN DIFFERENCE OF ACHIEVEMENT ............................... 9
DATA USED .......................................................................................................................................................... 10
CALCULATION OF SUBJECT/GRADE SCALE POINTS FROM AIMS .................................................................. 11
5. THE MEASURE OF ACADEMIC PROGRESS ........................................................................................................ 13
THE GROWTH INDEX .......................................................................................................................................... 13
CALCULATING EXPECTED GROWTH .................................................................................................................. 13
AWARDING AZ LEARNS POINTS ..................................................................................................................... 14
SCHOOLS WITHOUT MAP ................................................................................................................................... 14
6. GRADUATION AND DROPOUT RATES................................................................................................................ 15
GRADUATION RATE ............................................................................................................................................. 15
DROPOUT RATE ................................................................................................................................................... 16
7. EVALUATING PERFORMANCE ON THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT ................................................... 17
8. EVALUATING THE TOTAL SCALE SCORE VALUE TO DETERMINE A SCHOOL ACHIEVEMENT PROFILE ...... 18
9. APPLICATION OF THRESHOLD CRITERIA FOR EXCELLING AND HIGHLY PERFORMING SCHOOLS .............. 20
10. AZ LEARNS ACHIEVEMENT PROFILES FOR ALTERNATIVE SCHOOLS ...................................................... 24
DEFINITION OF AN ALTERNATIVE SCHOOL ...................................................................................................... 24
APPLYING FOR ALTERNATIVE SCHOOL STATUS ............................................................................................... 24
GENERAL PROCESS TO PRODUCE ACHIEVEMENT PROFILES FOR ALTERNATIVE SCHOOLS ......................... 25
CALCULATION OF AN ACHIEVEMENT PROFILE FOR AN ALTERNATIVE SCHOOL ........................................... 25
CLASSIFICATION SCALE FOR ALTERNATIVE SCHOOLS ..................................................................................... 26
11. AZ LEARNS ACHIEVEMENT PROFILES FOR K-2 SCHOOLS ....................................................................... 27
CALCULATION OF AN ACHIEVEMENT PROFILE FOR A K-2 SCHOOL ............................................................... 27
CLASSIFICATION SCALE FOR K-2 SCHOOLS ...................................................................................................... 27
12. AZ LEARNS ACHIEVEMENT PROFILE APPEALS PROCESS ......................................................................... 28

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

2

List of Tables
TABLE 4.1 STATUS POINTS AWARDED .................................................................................................................... 9
TABLE 4.2 PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS ................................................................................................................ 10
TABLE 4.3 YEAR-TO-YEAR CHANGE IN PERCENTAGES ...................................................................................... 10
TABLE 4.4 IMPROVEMENT POINTS ....................................................................................................................... 11
TABLE 4.5 RULES FOR DETERMINING UB95 FOR SMALL N AND P ................................................................... 12
TABLE 5.1 PARAMETERS FOR CALCULATING EXPECTED GROWTH FOR MATH................................................ 14
TABLE 5.2 PARAMETERS FOR CALCULATING EXPECTED GROWTH FOR READING........................................... 14
TABLE 8.1 ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CLASSIFICATION CUT POINTS...................................................................... 18
TABLE 8.2 HIGH SCHOOL CLASSIFICATION CUT POINTS .................................................................................... 18
TABLE 8.3 COMBINATION SCHOOL CLASSIFICATION CUT POINTS ..................................................................... 19
TABLE 9.1 PARAMETERS FOR CALCULATING Z-SCORES ..................................................................................... 22
TABLE 9.2 NUMBER OF STUDENTS EXCEEDING THE STANDARD - 3RD GRADE ............................................... 22
TABLE 9.3 AVERAGE Z-SCORES ............................................................................................................................. 23
TABLE 10.1 ALTERNATIVE SCHOOL CLASSIFICATION CUT POINTS .................................................................. 26
TABLE 11.1 AZ LEARNS SCALE FOR K-2 SCHOOLS ......................................................................................... 27

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

3

1. Introduction
In November 2001, Arizona voters approved Proposition 301 which provided funds
to the Arizona Department of Education (ADE) to develop "a system to measure school
performance based on student achievement, including student performance on the AIMS
test." The legislative requirements for the accountability system are stated in section 15241 (ARS § 15-241) of the Arizona Revised Statutes. The accountability system created to
satisfy the statute is referred to as AZ LEARNS. The school evaluation given by the ADE to
each school is referred to as the school's achievement profile. This manual describes the
method and processes used to generate the 2011 AZ LEARNS achievement profiles. It
provides formulas, parameters, and business rules that make up the profile calculation. Its
intent is to document and explain the methods used and justify the policies adopted.

What's New for the 2011 AZ LEARNS Achievement Profiles
Individual student growth (the Measure of Academic Progress) on writing was not
included because the new AIMS writing test was administered in the spring of 2011. The
2011 Status Points for writing were changed. Please see table 4.1 for further details.
Math was added to the Measure of Academic Progress in 2011.

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

4

2. Overview of the AZ LEARNS Evaluation System
This section provides an overview of how AZ LEARNS achievement profiles are
determined. More detailed discussions of the methodology used to determine the profiles,
including descriptions of equations, algorithms, and data used are given in subsequent
chapters.
Arizona law (ARS § 15-241) mandates that the Arizona Department of Education
shall compile an annual achievement profile for each public school. It specifies that the
profiles of schools serving grades K-8 shall be based on:
 Percent of students who pass AIMS.
 Arizona Measure of Academic Progress (MAP).
 Performance on the English language proficiency test.
The law specifies that the profiles of high schools shall be based on:
 Percent of students who pass AIMS.
 Dropout rate.
 Graduation rate.
 Performance on the English language proficiency test.
Starting in 2008, a school that serves both grades K-8 and high school receives a unified
achievement profiles based on all of the above performance measures.
The law also calls for the ADE to use a research-based methodology that shall:
 Include performance of pupils at all achievement levels.
 Account for pupil mobility.
 Account for the distribution of pupil achievement.
 Include longitudinal indicators of academic performance.
A research-based methodology is defined as the "systematic and objective application of
statistical and quantitative research principles to determine a standard measurement of
acceptable academic progress for each school."
The law also calls for a system of parallel achievement profiles for accommodation
schools/alternative schools as defined by the Board of Education.

General Process to Calculate an Achievement Profile
The achievement profile for a school serving grades 3 through 8 consists of the
following performance measures:
1. A status measure based on the performance of students on all three sections of the
AIMS (reading, writing, and mathematics) in the current year.
2. A measure of improvement in aggregate student performance on the AIMS
compared to the baseline year.
3. A measure of growth in individual student performance. This is the Measure of
Academic Progress (MAP)

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

5

4. A measure of student performance on the state's English language proficiency
assessment, AZELLA.
5. In order to create the incentive for schools to improve the achievement of average
and above-average students, a school cannot earn the highly performing or excelling
labels unless the percentage of its students exceeding the standard on AIMS meets
specific thresholds.
The achievement profile for a high school is made up of all of the above components
except for measure 3 (MAP). In addition, the following performance measures are used for
high schools:
6. Dropout rate.
7. Graduation rate.
Schools are awarded scale score points based on their performance on measures
one through four, six, and seven. Scale score points are then summed up for each school
and compared to a scale that relates scale score points to the five profile labels: excelling,
highly performing, performing plus, performing, and underperforming. Performance
measure five is then examined to determine if the school has earned the highest labels of
highly performing or excelling.
Note: Prior to 2009, one additional point was available to schools for meeting AYP.
To compensate for the possible loss of this point, the student-level growth formula was
modified to give greater weight to the available MAP points.

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

6

3. Timeline
Districts and charter holders (Local Education Agencies - LEAs) are solely
responsible for submitting the data necessary for calculating achievement profiles for their
schools and for ensuring its accuracy. From April 27, 2011 through August 24, 2011,
schools and LEAs were given an opportunity to review and correct their testing data
through on-line applications. The primary purpose of the process was to allow LEAs to
correct the information for individual students. From April 27, 2011 through August 24,
2011, schools and LEAs were given the opportunity to review and correct the data used for
calculating the five-year graduation rate and dropout rates used in the AZ LEARNS profile.
All program membership and demographic information relevant to AZ LEARNS
profiles were taken by matching test records to the state's SAIS database of student
records. Consequently, the only information that schools needed to correct in the ADE
AIMS testing file were students' SAIS ID numbers (needed for matching). If program
membership or other information was incorrect, schools and LEAs were required to
correct it in the SAIS database.
IMPORTANT NOTE: The criteria used to select AIMS scores for AZ LEARNS profiles differ
from the criteria used to select scores for AYP under NCLB. Indeed, the criteria differ
among the separate components of the AZ LEARNS evaluation. The criteria also differ from
the scores provided to schools by the testing contractor, and the scores publicly reported
by ADE, which are available here: http://www.azed.gov/research-evaluation/aimsassessment-results/.

Timeline
Start of statistical review and correction of graduation and dropout rate
data.
April 27, 2011
Submission of correct SAIS IDs for AIMS reading, and mathematics.
May 30, 2011
Close of application process for alternative schools.
Close of statistical review and correction of graduation and dropout
August 24, 2011
rate data.
August 19, 2011 Preliminary release of AZ LEARNS achievement profiles for all schools.
August 19, 2011 Opening of window for appeals submissions.
August 24, 2011 Close of window for appeals submissions.
October 12, 2011 Public release of AZ LEARNS achievement profiles for all schools.
April 27, 2011

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

7

4. Calculation of AIMS Status and Growth Points
In the AZ LEARNS profile, schools are awarded scale score points based on student
performance on the AIMS. Points are determined by performance in the current year, and
improvement in student performance from the baseline year.

Awarding Status Points
The following method is used to calculated status points for every subject and grade
offered by a school in which the AIMS test is administered. First, calculate the percent
passing in the current year. The percentage is compared to the scale given in table 4.1,
which in turn gives the status points achieved for the subject and grade.

Percent Passing in the current year 

# Students Passing AIMS in the current year
# Students tested in the current year

The points are rounded to the nearest hundredth, e.g.: .675=.68; .672=.67.

Data Used
A student's score is excluded from the calculation if any of the following criteria are
met:
1.
2.
3.
4.

The student was not matched to SAIS with a valid SAIS ID.
The student received no score on the test.
The student received an alternate accommodation on the test.
The student was not English proficient. A student was considered not proficient if it
was indicated that she was a participant in the English language learner program for
three years or less.
5. The student was not enrolled in the school for the full academic year (FAY). A
student was considered FAY if she enrolled in a school during the first ten school
days of the school year and remained continuously enrolled up through the testing
date.

The calculation for high schools includes all students in grades 10 through 12 who
have taken the AIMS either in the fall or the spring. If a high school student took the test
twice in a school year in the same school, the higher of the student's two scores is used.

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

8

Table 4.1 Status Points Awarded
Grade

Subject

3
3
4
4
5
5
5
6
6
6
7
7
7
8
8
HS
HS
HS

Math
Reading
Math
Reading
Math
Reading
Writing
Math
Reading
Writing
Math
Reading
Writing
Math
Reading
Math
Reading
Writing

Status
Points 1
<40%
< 46%
<37%
< 40%
<31%
< 42%
< 32%
<30%
< 38%
< 32%
<29%
< 41%
<26%
<28%
< 35%
<11%
< 16%
< 34%

Status Points
2
40%
46% to 59%
37%
40% to 53%
31%
42% to 56%
33%
30%
38% to 52%
33%
29%
41% to 54%
27%
28%
35% to 48%
11%
16 % to 28%
35%

Status Points
3
52%
60% to 73%
50%
54% to 69%
44%
57% to 72%
45%
43%
53% to 69%
45%
42%
55% to 69%
39%
41%
49% to 65%
22%
29% to 46%
49%

Status Points
4
66%
74% to 84%
65%
70% to 81%
60%
73% to 84%
59%
59%
70% to 82%
60%
58%
70% to 82%
53%
56%
66% to 79%
40%
47% to 65%
65%

Status Points
5
79%
85% to 92%
78%
82% to 90%
73%
85% to 92%
71%
73%
83% to 91%
73%
72%
83% to 90%
67%
70%
80% to 88%
61%
66% to 79%
79%

Status
Points 6
87%
≥ 93%
87%
≥ 91%
84%
≥ 93%
> 80%
84%
≥ 92%
>82%
83%
≥ 91%
>77%
81%
≥ 89%
77%
≥ 80%
> 87%

A school is awarded status points for each grade and subject if offers in which the AIMS
test is administered.
Example: In the current year, 66 percent of the students in Gila Monster Elementary passed the
math portion of the third grade AIMS. This value places the subject/grade in status grouping
three. Gila Monster Elementary has earned three status points for this particular subject and
grade.

Awarding Improvement Points
Determining a school's improvement points for each subject/grade combination is
based on the average of the annual changes in the difference between the percentage of
students passing and the percentage of students scoring falls far below (FFB) on the AIMS.
The improvement points earned are determined by the average of the annual changes from
2006 or when a school opened, whichever is latest. Improvement points are awarded for
all grades, three through eight and high school. No minimum group size is applied.

Computation of the Average Annual Change in Difference of Achievement
Improvement points for a subject/grade are calculated in the following five steps:

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

9

1. For every year for which the school was open, or until 2006, whichever is latest, for
each subject/grade combination, the percentage of students passing and percentage
of students scoring FFB is computed.
2. The difference in these percentages is then taken.
3. The annual change between the differences is found.
4. The average of the annual changes is compared to the improvement points (table
4.4) to determine the AZ LEARNS points for the subject/grade combination.
All values are rounded to the nearest hundredth, e.g.: .675=.68; .672=.67.

Data Used
The rules for using student scores for the growth measure are the same as for the
status measure. For high school students who took the test multiple times, each student's
highest score in each year is used.
Example: the following example demonstrates how growth points are calculated for a
single grade and subject. Table 4.2 shows the percentage of students passing and scoring
FFB, and the difference in the two percentages from 2008 to 2011 of AIMS scores for a
single subject and grade for a hypothetical school.

Year
2008
2009
2010
2011

Table 4.2 Percentage of Students
Percent
Percent Falls
Difference
Passing
Far Below
52
18
34
54
17
37
57
15
42
60
10
50

Table 4.3 shows the year-to-year changes in the differences from table 4.2
Table 4.3 Year-to-Year Change in Percentages
Years
Difference
Year-to year
change
2007 to 2008
37 - 34
3
2008 to 2009
42 - 37
5
2009 to 2010
50 - 42
8
The growth measure is the average (3+5+8)/3=5.3.

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

10

The improvement point thresholds are given in table 4.4. This table is used to convert the
average annual improvement measure to AZ LEARNS improvement points.

Grade
3-8
3-8
5-7
HS
HS
HS

Subjec
t
Math
Read
Writ
Math
Read
Writ

AZ
LEARNS
Points 1
<-14
< -14
< -16
<-13
< -12
< -10

Table 4.4 Improvement Points
AZ
AZ
AZ
LEARNS
LEARNS LEARNS
Points 2
Points 3 Points 4
-14
-10
-5
-14 to -8
-7 to 0
1 to 7
-16 to -8
-7 to 0
1 to 11
-13
-9
-4
-12 to -5
-4 to 4
5 to 13
-10 to -2
-1 to 7
8 to 16

AZ
LEARNS
Points 5
0
8 to 14
12 to 20
0
14 to 21
17 to 25

AZ
LEARNS
Points 6
4
≥ 15
≥ 21
4
≥ 22
≥ 26

Calculation of Subject/Grade Scale Points from AIMS
The total scale score points derived from AIMS performance for each subject/grade
combination are calculated by adding the status points awarded to the AZ LEARNS
improvement points awarded. A 70 percent weight is given to the school's strongest point
value (status or improvement) and a 30 percent weight is given to the other point value.
If a subject/grade group earned six points, 100 percent of the weight is given to the
status points. As long as data is available for the past two years, for a subject/grade
combination, improvement points are both computed and combined with the status points.
The points derived from AIMS for all subject/grade combinations for a school are
averaged across grades by subject and added to the scale score values for other
performance measures.

Special Cases
Missing Data. If a school is missing current year AIMS test data for a subject/grade
combination it offers, it receives zero growth/status scale points for that subject/grade for
the achievement profile calculation for the year.
Small Grades. Subject/grade combinations with less than ten students meeting the
selection criteria in the current year were not evaluated and received zero growth/status
scale points.
Second Look for Small Schools. Because of the high-stakes consequences of being labeled
an underperforming school and because of the uncertainty of measurement involved with
small sample sizes, a school with a small number of students is given a "second look" if it
faces the possibility of receiving an underperforming profile. If the preliminary profile of a
school is underperforming, then the AIMS scale score points for that school are recalculated

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

11

for each subject and grade combination that has less than 16 students. For each
subject/grade combination with less than 16 students, to calculate which baseline group
the school belongs to, the upper bound of the 95-percent confidence interval is used. If the
recalculated points move the school into a classification higher than underperforming, the
school receives a performing profile, regardless of the points earned.
Let p = the percent of students in a group passing the AIMS and n = the number of
students in the group. Then the equation for the upper bound of the 95-percent confidence
interval (UB95) is:
UB95  p  1.96 p(1  p) n.
As can be seen from the equation, the confidence interval depends upon the percent
of students who passed the test and the number of students tested. Thus, the confidence
interval will differ among grades, subjects, and schools.
The equation is an approximation of the confidence interval for a binomially
distributed variable. It uses the standard normal distribution and is sufficiently accurate if
the group size and percentage of students passing are large enough. For small values of n
and p, a more accurate estimate of the confidence interval is made using statistical tables
that provide confidence intervals for a binomially distributed variable1. The tables are
applied using the rules given in table 4.5.
Table 4.5 Rules for Determining UB95 for Small n and p
If n ≥ 0 and n < 8, and
If n ≥ 16 and n < 20, and
p ≥ 0.00 and p < 0.04, then UB95=0.42;
p ≥ 0.00 and p < 0.04, then UB95=0.24;
p ≥ 0.04 and p < 0.10, then UB95=0.50;
p ≥ 0.04 and p < 0.10, then UB95=0.32;
p ≥ 0.10 and p < 0.20, then UB95=0.60.
p ≥ 0.10 and p < 0.20, then UB95=0.44.
If n ≥ 8 and n < 10, and
p ≥ 0.00 and p < 0.04, then UB95=0.37;
p ≥ 0.04 and p < 0.10, then UB95=0.45;
p ≥ 0.10 and p < 0.20, then UB95=0.55.

If n ≥ 20 and n < 24, and
p ≥ 0.00 and p < 0.04, then UB95=0.21;
p ≥ 0.04 and p < 0.10, then UB95=0.29;
p ≥ 0.10 and p < 0.20, then UB95=0.42.

If n ≥ 10 and n < 12, and
p ≥ 0.00 and p < 0.04, then UB95=0.33;
p ≥ 0.04 and p < 0.10, then UB95=0.41;
p ≥ 0.10 and p < 0.20, then UB95=0.52.

If n ≥ 24 and n < 30, and
p ≥ 0.00 and p < 0.04, then UB95=0.18;
p ≥ 0.04 and p < 0.10, then UB95=0.27;
p ≥ 0.10 and p < 0.20, then UB95=0.38.

If n ≥ 12 and n < 16, and
p ≥ 0.00 and p < 0.04, then UB95=0.27;
p ≥ 0.04 and p < 0.10, then UB95=0.35;
p ≥ 0.10 and p < 0.20, then UB95=0.47.

If n ≥ 30 and n < 40, and
p ≥ 0.00 and p < 0.04, then UB95=0.15;
p ≥ 0.04 and p < 0.10, then UB95=0.23;
p ≥ 0.10 and p < 0.20, then UB95=0.36.

1

Mansfield, Edwin. 1991. Statistics for Business and Economics, 4th Edition. New York: W. W. Norton and
Company. 280-284.

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

12

5. The Measure of Academic Progress
The measure of academic progress (MAP) is a measure of individual student
academic growth based on performance on the AIMS reading and math tests. (Writing is
not included in the MAP analysis.) It uses a conventional value-added approach to
measuring student progress.
Calculating the number of points earned from MAP has three steps:
1. Individual expectations of one year's growth (OYG) are calculated for each student.
2. The expectation of OYG is subtracted from the actual growth achieved by the
student to determine a growth index.
3. The average growth index for a school is calculated by averaging growth indices for
individual students across all grades and subjects. Schools are awarded AZ LEARNS
points based on this average.
Actual growth, expected growth, and the growth index are expressed in AIMS scale score
points.

The Growth Index
In order to control for a ceiling effect and for student mobility, the MAP analysis is
done using a standard value-added model. The value-added model is used to calculate an
estimate of the expected growth for each student for each subject. The expected growth is
the subtracted from actual growth to determine a student's growth index.
The results of the MAP analysis for students and schools are reported in terms of the
growth index. Growth indices for individual students can be averaged across schools,
grades, and subjects to measure performance.

Calculating Expected Growth
The expected growth for an individual student is calculated using the following
formula:
Expected Growth = A + B X (209 scale score) + C X (FAY);
where FAY = 1 if the student has been enrolled of the full 2011 academic year, and FAY = 0
if not. A student is considered to have been enrolled for the full 2011 academic year if she
was enrolled within the first two weeks of the school year and remained continuously
enrolled up to the first day of the testing window.

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

13

The parameters A, B, and C are given in tables 5.1 and 5.2 below:
Table 5.1 Parameters for Calculating Expected Growth for Math
Student’s Grade
Current Year
A
B
C
4
120.9638
-0.2269
3.7108
5
153.1619
-0.2879
4.106
6
105.8317
-0.2016
4.343
7
88.3119
-0.1492
5.1193
8
89.8856
-0.1688
7.0786

Table 5.2 Parameters for Calculating Expected Growth for Reading
Student’s Grade
Current Year
A
B
C
4
82.1792
-0.1864
6.6005
5
59.1302
-0.1202
4.6881
6
61.8342
-0.12
6.139
7
70.8678
-0.1421
5.6349
8
100.1088
-0.2193
5.1823

Awarding AZ LEARNS Points
The Growth Index for a school is calculated by averaging the student-level growth
indices across all grades for math and reading. The number of AZ LEARNS points earned
by a school is calculated using the following formula:
AZ LEARNS points = 5.9 + .22 * (School’s growth index.)
The scale is bounded at the bottom by 2. So, if the result of the above formula is less
than 2, a school would earn 2 points. No maximum limit is placed on the number of points
a school may earn. This is to reward schools that make outstanding growth with students.
The point formula and the profile scale thresholds were re-developed in 2009 to
compensate for the potential loss of the AYP point that was removed from the AZ LEARNS
formula.

Schools without MAP
MAP is only evaluated for grades four through eight using student scores from
grades three through eight. Schools do not receive points from MAP if they do not have a
grade evaluated for MAP or if they have less than 16 scores in the MAP analysis.

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

14

6. Graduation and Dropout Rates
High schools are able to earn a maximum of two points total for graduation and
dropout rates in the AZ LEARNS achievement profiles.

Graduation Rate
The graduation rate is a five-year, longitudinal measure of how many students
graduate from high school. The formula to calculate the one-year graduation rate (used to
compute average annual growth and for determining the growth needed to earn points) is:
One-year Graduation Rate =

Number in cohort who graduated within five years
Original cohort + Transfers in - Transfers out

The three-year average is calculated by taking the total number of combined fiveyear graduates for the three most recent graduating classes and dividing by the total
number of students in the combined classes.
Three-year Graduation Rate =

2008 + 2009 + 2010 five-year graduates
Combined number of students in three adjusted cohorts

The graduation rate is rounded to two digits, e.g.: .705=.71; .704=.70.
A school can earn one AZ LEARNS scale point for its graduation rate in one of three

ways:
1. If its three-year average graduation rate is 90 percent or greater.
2. If its three-year average graduation rate is less than 90 percent, its current year
graduation rate is greater than or equal to 74 percent, and the average annual
growth of its graduation rate is 1 percentage point.
3. If its three-year average graduation rate is less than 90 percent, its current year rate
is less than 74 percent, and the average annual growth of its graduation rate is 2
percentage points.
The baseline year for graduation rate is 2006 or the school's first year serving grade
12, whichever is latest. A school's annual average growth is calculated by subtracting the
baseline year's rate from the current year's rate and dividing by the number of years
spanned by the calculation.
Average Annual Growth =

Current one-year rate - Baseline one-year rate
number of years in span

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

15

A school will not be evaluated on graduation rate until it serves grade 12 for two
years. Additionally, there is a minimum cohort size of 15. Schools that are not evaluated
for graduation rate will receive double the number of points earned via the dropout rate.

Dropout Rate
The dropout rate is an annual measure of how many students drop out of a school
during a twelve-month period. The formula to calculate the one-year dropout rate (used to
compute average annual decrease and for determining the decrease needed to earn points)
is:
One-year Dropout Rate =

# of student who dropped out
# of students enrolled during the school year

The three-year average is calculated by taking the total number of dropouts for the
most recent three years and dividing by the total number of students enrolled.
Three-year Dropout Rate =

total # of dropouts for 2008, 2009, and 2010
total # of students enrolled in 2008, 2009, and 2010

Like the graduation rate, a school can earn one AZ LEARNS scale point for its
dropout rate in one of three ways:
1. If the three-year average dropout rate is 6 percent or less, the target is automatically
met.
2. If its three-year average dropout rate is greater than 6 percent, its current year rate
is greater than 9 percent, and the average annual decrease of its dropout rate is 2
percentage points.
3. If its three-year average dropout rate is greater than 6 percent, its current year is
less than or equal to 9 percent, and the average annual decrease of its dropout rate
is 1 percentage point.
The baseline year for dropout rate is 2006 or the school's first year of operation,
whichever is latest. A school's annual average decrease is calculated by subtracting the
baseline year's rate from the current year's rate and dividing by the number of years
spanned by the calculation.
Average Annual Decrease =

Baseline one-year rate - Current one-year rate
Number of years in span

A school will not be evaluated on dropout rate if it has less than 15 students in the
group. Schools that are not evaluated on dropout rate will receive double the number of
points earned via the graduation rate.

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

16

7. Evaluating Performance on the English Language Assessment
State law governing AZ LEARNS requires that the "results of English language
learners tests" be included as part of the AZ LEARNS school evaluation. {ARS § 15-241 (D)
(3) and ARS § 15-241 (E) (4)} In order to comply with this requirement, the following is
part of the AZ LEARNS achievement profile calculations:
A school receives one scale point if the percentage of English language learner (ELL)
students reclassified during the year across all grades served is greater than or equal to 30
percent. The formula used to determine the percentage of reclassified ELL students is:
Percent Reclassified =

Number of students reclassified
Number of students tested with AZELLA

The percent reclassified is rounded to two digits, e.g.: .206=.21; .204=.20

Data Used





Students are included in this calculation if they meet the following criteria:
Identified as continuing English language learners;
Were continuously enrolled in the ELL program within the school for at least 150
calendar days;
Were not withdrawn from the program either due to Special Education criteria or
by parent request;
Passed ELL integrity within SAIS.

Special Rules
Only groups of 16 or more students are evaluated.

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

17

8. Evaluating the Total Scale Score Value to Determine a School
Achievement Profile
The tables below show the total number of scale points that schools must earn in
order to receive a given achievement profile. A school may receive up to 18 scale points
from status and growth; unlimited scale points from MAP if it is an elementary or middle
school; a single point if it was able to reclassify 30 percent of its ELL students; and up to
two graduation/dropout rate points if it is a high school.
For each school, the applicable scale score cut points for achievement profiles are
calculated by averaging the AIMS scale points received for each subject; adding the ELL
point received; adding points from MAP if applicable; and adding points from the
graduation/dropout rate if applicable. The classification cut points for elementary schools
are given in the first two columns of table 8.1 and those for high schools are given in the
first column of table 8.2. In order for schools to be classified as highly performing or
excelling, there is an additional z-score criterion that must be met, which is explained in the
next chapter.
Table 8.1 Elementary School Classification Cut Points
Performance Thresholds
Profile
Scale with
Non-MAP
z-score
MAP
Scale
Underperforming
<13
<7.7
Performing
13 to 15.9
7.7 to 12.0
NA
Performing Plus
16 or more 12.1 or more
NA
Highly Performing
16 or more 12.1 or more 0.45 to 0.99
Excelling
19 or more 14.1 or more 1.00 or more
Table 8.2 High School Classification Cut Points
Performance Thresholds
Profile
Scale Points
z-score
Underperforming
<9.4
Performing
9.4 to 14.6
NA
Performing Plus
14.7 or more
NA
Highly Performing
14.7 or more
0.45 to 0.99
Excelling
16.5 or more
1.00 or more

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

18

Table 8.3 Combination School Classification Cut points
Performance Thresholds
Profile
Non-MAP
Scale with MAP
z-score
Scale
Underperforming
<14
<9
Performing
14 to 16.9
9 to 13.9
NA
Performing Plus
17 or more
14 or more
NA
Highly Performing 17 or more
14 or more 0.45 to 0.99
Excelling
20 or more
16 or more 1.00 or more

Special Rules
Schools with no subject/grade combinations with at least ten students meeting the
selection criteria for the status measure in the current year were automatically assigned a
performing profile.
A combination (K-12) school that has insufficient students to be evaluated on MAP
will be evaluated using the scale for high schools.
A combination (K-12) school that has insufficient students to be evaluated on
graduation/dropout rates will be evaluated using the scale for elementary/middle schools.

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

19

9. Application of Threshold Criteria for Excelling and Highly
Performing Schools
To ensure continued focus on improving the academic achievement of all students,
including those students currently demonstrating proficiency, threshold criteria are
applied to determine excelling and highly performing schools. To be deemed highly
performing or excelling, a school must meet certain levels in the percentage of its students
exceeding the standard on the AIMS. Schools must not only receive a total scale score value
that places them into either excelling or highly performing, but must also meet the
requisite percentage of students in the exceeds the standard category on AIMS to be
designate as either excelling or highly performing. The application of threshold criteria for
excelling and highly performing schools results in the following scenarios:
1. A school that receives a total scale value that places it in the excelling classification
and meets the requisite percentage of students in the exceeds category on AIMS
necessary for an excelling classification will be designated an excelling school.
2. A school that receives a total scale value that places it in the excelling classification
and did not meet the requisite percentage of students in the exceeds performance
category on AIMS necessary for an excelling profile, but did meet the requisite
percentage of students in the exceeds category on AIMS necessary for a highly
performing classification will be designated as a highly performing school.
3. A school that receives a total scale value that places it in the excelling classification
and does not meet either the requisite percentage of students exceeding the
standard on AIMS necessary for the excelling or the highly performing classification
will be designated as a performing school. Such schools are recognized with the
non-statutory profile of performing plus.
4. A school that receives a total scale value that places it in the highly performing
classification and meets the requisite percentage of students in the exceeds category
on AIMS necessary for an excelling classification will be designated as a highly
performing school.
5. A school that receives a total scale value that places it in the highly performing
classification and meets the requisite percentage of students in the exceeds category
on AIMS necessary for a highly performing classification will be designated as a
highly performing school.
6. A school that receives a total scale value that places it in the highly performing
classification and does not meet either the requisite percentage of students in the
exceeds category on AIMS necessary for an excelling or highly performing
classification will be designated as a performing school. Such schools are
recognized with the non-statutory profile of performing plus.
7. A school that receives a total scale value that places it in the performing
classification will be designated as a performing school, regardless if the school

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

20

meets the requisite percentage of students in the exceeds category on AIMS
necessary for an excelling or highly performing classification.
8. A school that receives a total scale value that places it in the underperforming
classification will be designated as an underperforming school, regardless if the
school meets the requisite percentage of students in the exceeds category on AIMS
necessary for an excelling or highly performing classification.
The determination of whether a school met the goals for percent exceeding is based
on a z-score calculated in the following manner:
1. For each school, the percent exceeding is calculated by grade across all three
subjects for 2011 and for 2009 through 2011. The one-year estimation of percent
exceeding gives credit to schools that have shown improvement in the percent of
students exceeding the standard.
2. The percent exceeding is converted into a z-score for each grade by subtracting the
statewide average for that grade for percent exceeding and divided by the statewide
standard deviation for that grade. These parameters are given in table 9.1.
Note: The same statewide parameters are used to calculate both the one-year and threeyear z-score. This is because the purpose of the z-score is to create standard scores
comparable across grades, not to create scores comparing a school's performance to the
state norm. The z-scores are fixed parameters so, if a school shows improvement over
time, its z-score will increase regardless of the movement of the state average over the
same period.
3. The one-year and three-year z-scores are averaged across all grades for a school.
Each school will have two z-scores: one based on its three-year average for percent
exceeding, the other based on the percent exceeding for the current year.
4. The higher of the one- and three-year averages are taken and compared to the
performance thresholds. To be a highly performing school, the school must first
meet the appropriate number of scale points, as explained in chapter 8, plus the
average z-score for the school must be greater than or equal to 0.45. To be an
excelling school, the school must first meet the appropriate number of scale points
plus the average z-score must be greater than or equal to 1.00.

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

21

Table 9.1 Parameters for Calculating Z-Scores
Grade
Average
Standard Deviation
3
0.17
0.12
4
0.16
0.11
5
0.11
0.1
6
0.14
0.12
7
0.12
0.12
8
0.12
0.11
10
0.07
0.12
Example: The following table shows the third grade AIMS scores for Gila Monster
Elementary over the past three years.
Table 9.2 Number of Students Exceeding the Standard - 3rd Grade
Subject
Reading
Mathematics
Year
# Exceeding #Tested # Exceeding
#Tested
2009
25
100
24
100
2010
24
105
23
105
2011
26
99
25
99
Total
75
304
72
304
The three-year average for percent of students exceeding the standard is:
Percent

Exceeding 

75  72  69
 23.6%.
304  304  304

The one-year average for percent of students exceeding the standard is:
Percent Exceeding 

25  25  24
 25.3%.
99  99  99

The three-year z-score for third grade is:
z - score 

.236 - .125
 1.19.
.093

The one-year z-score for third grade is:

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

22

z - score 

.253 - .125
 1.38.
.093

Gila Monster Elementary serves grades K-6. The one- and three-year average z-scores for
the entire school are:
Table 9.3 Average Z-scores
Grade
One-year
Three-year
K-2
NA
NA
3
1.38
1.19
4
1.02
.86
5
.89
.72
6
.95
.80
Average
1.06
.89
The highest z-score for Gila Monster Elementary is 1.06 for the one-year average. This zscore is greater than 1.00, so Gila Monster Elementary would earn an excelling - if it has
earned sufficient scale points.

Special Rules
The minimum group size for computing z-scores is 16. If a school has less than 16
students with usable test scores for either the one-year or the three-year calculation, then
that z-score is not evaluated and the other is assigned. If a school has less than 16 students
with usable test scores for both the one-year and the three-year calculations, the z-score is
not evaluated at all for the school.
For high schools, students who take the math or reading test more than once during
the fall or spring testing period within the one or three years used for the calculation have
only their highest scores used in the calculation.

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

23

10. AZ LEARNS Achievement Profiles for Alternative Schools
Alternative schools are defined as schools that meet the Board-approved definition
as schools whose sole and clearly-stated mission is to serve specific populations of at-risk
students. Alternative school status is granted by application to the ADE. ARS §15-241
makes an allowance for a "parallel" evaluation method for alternative schools.
In 2011, there were 153 alternative schools in operation. The alternative schools
list for 2011 can be found here: http://www.azed.gov/research-evaluation/az-learns/.

Definition of an Alternative School
The following is the definition of an alternative school as approved by the Board of
Education in 2002.
1. A school operated by a school district must have adopted a mission statement that
clearly identifies its purpose and intent to serve a specific student population
(please see criterion three) that will benefit from an alternative school setting. A
charter school must be expressly chartered to serve a specific student population
that will benefit from an alternative school setting.
2. The educational program and related student services of the school must match the
mission or charter of the school.
3. The school must intend to serve students exclusively in one or more of the following
categories:
 Students with behavioral issues (documented history of disruptive behavior)
 Students identified as dropouts
 Students in poor academic standing who are either severely behind on
academic credits (more than one year) or have demonstrated a pattern of
failing grades
 Pregnant and/or parenting students
 Adjudicated youth
4. Any school offering secondary instruction for academic credit used to fulfill Arizona
State Board of Education graduation requirements (in part or in full) must offer a
diploma of high school graduation.

Applying for Alternative School Status
To apply for alternative school status, an entity must submit a letter of application
and supporting documentation to Achieve@azed.gov. The supporting documentation can
include mission statements and any other information indicating that it is the school’s sole
mission to serve students listed in the definition above. The report card for a school
applying for alternative status under AZ LEARNS must state in the “School Mission and
Goals” section that it is an alternative school. Failure to specifically state this in the school
report card will result in the application being denied.

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

24

If a school does not have current year AIMS data, alternative status will not be
granted.
Schools already granted alternative status need not reapply. If granted, alternative
status will apply until the school asks to have alternative status revoked or the school
closes. Alternative status is not granted or applied retroactively. Applications that are
submitted after the deadline will not be processed until the next accountability cycle.
As there is no LEA designation of alternative status, an LEA will not be designated as
alternative. The designation only applies at the school level for individual schools.

General Process to Produce Achievement Profiles for Alternative Schools
The method for calculating an achievement profile for alternative schools is as
follows:
1. AIMS scale score points are calculated using the status point calculation as for all
other schools. Alternative schools do not receive points for improvement or MAP.
2. Points based on an alternative school's dropout rate are calculated as for all other
schools.
3. Alternative schools will only receive profiles of performing and underperforming.
4. Schools serving both elementary and high school grades will receive a single profile.
Because of the uncertainty of measurement associated with small sample sizes and
the high stakes of school profiles, schools initially deemed underperforming receive a
"second look". Instead of determining baseline groups based on the mean percent of
students passing AIMS, an alternate baseline group for these schools is determined based
on the upper bound of a 95 percent confidence interval around the mean. If a school
initially determined to be underperforming moves to a higher profile due to the second
look, that school will receiving a performing label.

Calculation of an Achievement Profile for an Alternative School
The method used to calculate scale points earned by alternative schools, regardless
of the grades served, for these performance measures, are the same as the methods used
for other schools.
 A school may receive up to six scale score points for each subject. Due to the small
size of alternative schools, status points are calculated using a multi-year average of
scores. Starting in the current year, scores from previous years are averaged until
the total number of scores is 32. The status points are averaged across grades and
then summed across subjects.
 A school may receive one point based on its dropout rate.
 The total points earned by a school are added up and compared to the school
classification scale to determine a school's profile.

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

25

Classification Scale for Alternative Schools
The following classification scale is used for all alternative schools.
Table 10.1 Alternative School Classification Cut Points
Scale Points
Underperforming
Performing

< 6.0
6.0

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

26

11. AZ LEARNS Achievement Profiles for K-2 Schools
K-2 schools are schools that serve only Kindergarten through second grade. Since
the AIMS is not administered at any of the grades served by these schools, the AZ LEARNS
profiles for K-2 schools are based solely on the performance of the schools' second graders
on the state's norm-referenced test.

Calculation of an Achievement Profile for a K-2 School
The method of calculating achievement profiles for these schools is straightforward:
1. The average normal curve equivalents (NCE) on the reading and math portions of
the norm-referenced test are calculated for the most current year for a school's
second graders.
2. The average normal curve equivalents for the school are added together, and
3. Compared to a scale to determine the school's profile.

Classification Scale for K-2 Schools
Table 11.1 provides the performance thresholds for K-2 schools.
Table 11.1 AZ LEARNS Scale for K-2 Schools
Achievement Profile

Points

Underperforming

<70

Performing

70 to 96.9

Highly Performing

97 to 105.9

Excelling

106 or more

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

27

12. AZ LEARNS Achievement Profile Appeals Process
Procedure and Timeline
In accordance with ARS §15-241, school administrators are allowed the opportunity
to appeal an achievement profile on behalf of the schools for which they are responsible.

Step 1: Data Correction. The first step in completing the AZ LEARNS appeals process
required LEAs and schools to review their data in order to confirm its accuracy. Data
correction took place from April 27, 2011 through August 24, 2011. It is important to note
that LEAs were solely responsible for verifying information for their schools. If an LEA did
not change the information for its schools through the correction process, the ADE
assumed the schools on file and the data available were correct as listed.

Step 2: Substantive Appeal Submission. Administrators choosing to appeal an AZ
LEARNS profile submitted appeals via the online appeals application during the specified
appeals window. Substantive appeals were accepted from August 19, 2011 through August
24, 2011.
Schools were able to appeal AZ LEARNS profiles in two categories: data (statistical)
and non-data (substantive) reasons - schools were not limited to one category and were
able to appeal both if necessary. Statistical appeals are appeals of the accuracy of the data
used in the calculation of the AZ LEARNS profile. Given the extensive time allowed to view
and correct the data, it is expected that any errors should be corrected by the time
preliminary profiles were release (August 19, 2011). Statistical appeals were not granted
unless the underlying data was corrected. Substantive appeals are arguments by schools
that circumstances outside of the school's control negatively impacted school performance.
Administrators that chose to appeal an AZ LEARNS profile must have clearly
articulated the issues they believe merited an appeal. Administrators must have submitted
evidence that the issues they believe merited an appeal directly resulted in a significant
decrease in student academic achievement as demonstrated on the AIMS. Failure to
provide this evidence resulted in the appeal not being granted. Evidence submitted after
the appeals deadline was not considered.
NOTE: In order to protect student privacy and the integrity of the appeals process, schools
were asked to refer to a specific student only by the student's SAIS ID number. The SAIS ID
number was required so that ADE staff could verify the contentions in the appeal.
The ADE, if necessary, requested additional information/evidence from an LEA or
school to assist in the appeals process. Only those requests for additional information that
were provided during the specified appeals timeframe were included in the appeals
process. Unsolicited additional information submitted after the appeals deadline was not
accepted.

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

28

Step 3: Appeals Resolution. After all appeals were submitted and the appeals
window closed, the ADE began to process the submitted appeals. Appeals were addressed
categorically, not necessarily in the order they were received, so the fact that a school
submitted its appeal during the first day of the appeals window did not mean it necessarily
received a decision first during the resolution process.
Statistical appeals were resolved only through the recalculation of AZ LEARNS
profiles by ADE staff using any corrected data submitted by schools. The purpose of a
statistical appeal is principally to advise ADE staff that data was in error and has been
corrected. Calculations submitted by schools via an appeal were not taken at face value nor
used to alter a profile if the underlying data was not corrected.
Schools that were labeled underperforming for a third consecutive year were
entitled to a site visit to determine if the profile was warranted. These site visits were
important, as the third year underperforming profile merited an alternative designation of
failing to meet the academic standards in accordance with statute. After the statistical
review of appeals took place, schools that received an underperforming profile for the third
consecutive time were scheduled to receive that visit. Teams from the Research and
Evaluation and State Intervention sections of the ADE visited each of the third year
underperforming schools to gather additional supporting data for the appeal as well as
gather information related to the school's Arizona school improvement plan (ASIP) as
required by statute. All information gathered from the site visits was taken to the
substantive appeals committee for use in the third stage of the appeals process. Only third
year underperforming schools received site visits as part of the appeals process.
Substantive appeals were resolved in a committee process. Committee members
represented a diverse background of ADE staff and school administrators to ensure that
appeals were considered from a multiple perspectives. Appeals were evaluated using an
appeals rubric approved by the State Board of Education that evaluated the argument
presented and whether or not the evidence provided to support the argument was
compelling. The appeals rubric consists of a three-tiered system for appeal evaluation:
1) Initial review of the appeal to determine its merit.
2) Review of the evidence provided.
3) Committee recommendation.
Initial Review
The substantive appeals rubric provides for three categories that apply during the
initial review. Each appeal was classified into the categories based on the information
provided in the appeals.
1. Mitigating factors outside of the school's control. Appeals of this nature
referenced when the school indicated significant issues that affected test scores
outside of the school's control. If a school provided information detailing a

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

29

significant event that impacted test scores, which was clearly outside the school's
control, the appeal was deemed as passing the initial review. Appeals involving the
adverse affect of school or LEA policies; errors made by school or district personnel
regarding test administration or data entry; or events whose impact could have
been foreseen and mitigated by school or LEA action were not considered valid
appeals.
2. Implementation of the school improvement plan. Appeals in this category
discussed how the school was actively, consistently, and reliably implementing the
school improvement plan; that the priorities of the solutions team had been
addressed; the school improvement plan had been revised and updated to address
assessed ongoing needs; and that professional development that supported the
targeted goals had been planned and implemented. If a school provided information
highlighting its school improvement plan, it may have accentuated the other two
components on the rubric. However, per statute, a successful implementation of the
school improvement plan alone cannot change the profile of a school. Additionally,
only third-year underperforming schools may include the information about their
ASIP in their appeal.
Review of Evidence
Once the appeals progressed through the first tier of the rubric, initial review, the
evidence provided to support the appeal was evaluated. In this tier, three determinations
were possible:
1. Compelling evidence. In this area, the school adequately provided information that
led the committee to conclude that, had the circumstance been different, the
achievement profile would have been different as well. If a school had a special
circumstance that affected a certain grade and was able to demonstrate that the
specific grade's test scores suffered, the school was deemed to have provided
compelling evidence. Again, if a school provided compelling evidence highlighting
their school improvement plan, it may have accentuated the other two components
on the rubric (data calculations/mitigating factors). However, per statute, a
successful implementation of the school improvement plan alone cannot change the
profile of a school.
2. Not compelling evidence. Appeals were categorized in this area when the school
was able to provide information that a significant issue could have impacted the
school's performance but did not provide detailed, specific information as to specific
outcomes that hindered the school's performance.
3. Not applicable evidence. If an appeal was submitted, made it through the initial
review, and presented evidence that was not linked in any way to the performance
of the school, the evidence was deemed not applicable. If the evidence did not
directly support the claim made in the appeal, it was deemed not applicable.

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

30

Committee Recommendation
Once the appeal and evidence were reviewed, the committee arrived at a decision as
to the outcome of the appeal. There were three possible outcomes:
1. Appeal granted and AZ LEARNS achievement profile changed. In these cases, the
appeal successfully made it through the initial review and evidentiary stages. It was
determined that the points needed to change the profile would have been earned by
the school had the special circumstances/data discrepancy not occurred. Therefore,
the profile for the school was changed.
2. Appeal granted and AZ LEARNS profile remains the same. In these cases, the
appeal successfully made it through the initial review and evidentiary stages.
However, it was determined that the criteria needed to change the profile were not
earned by the school had the special circumstances/data discrepancy not occurred.
For example, a school provided information and evidence that their ELL
reclassification point was not accurately included in the calculations and the
committee determined the school provided information to prove it earned the one
point for ELL reclassification rate. However, the school needed 5 additional points
to go from underperforming to performing. Therefore, the one point earned in the
appeal was not enough to change the school's profile, so the profile remained the
same.
3. Appeal denied. In these cases, the appeal did not successfully make it through the
initial review and evidentiary stages. Therefore, the profile for the school remained
the same.

Step 4: Notification of results sent to schools.
Once all appeals were resolved, notifications were sent to the entities that had filed
appeals. The contact person of record for the entity received an email from Achieve when
the appeal had been processed. Entities were notified no later than September 22, 2011 of
the outcome of the appeals process. The final public release of the AZ LEARNS achievement
profiles occurred on October 12, 2011. All appeals were final.

Research and Evaluation1535 West JeffersonPhoenix, Arizona 85007602-542-5151www.azed.gov

31