1 NAEP of of Educational Progress (NAEP) Reading andand Mathematics, 2009-2010 NAEPAssessment Assessment Educational Progress (NAEP) Reading Mathematics, 2009 If you would like more information about the NAEP assessments please go to https://www.ade.az.gov/standards/naep State Data Mathematics Grade 4 Achievement Below Basic Arizona Students 29 Participation Rate Percent Students w/Disability Limited English Proficient Mathematics Grade 8 Achievement Below Basic 33 Participation Rate Percent Students w/Disability 43 Proficient 24 Advanced Achievement 4 90 98 Arizona Students Limited English Proficient Basic Reading Grade 4 44 Participation Rate Percent Students w/Disability Limited English Proficient Basic 38 Proficient 23 Reading Grade 8 Advanced Achievement 6 84 91 Below Basic Arizona Students Below Basic 32 Participation Rate Percent Limited English Proficient Proficient Advanced Basic Proficient Advanced 32 20 5 77 90 Arizona Students Students w/Disability Basic 41 24 3 78 87 NAEP's definition of "proficiency" differs from how the word is understood in ordinary language. It requires the ability to handle "challenging" material, which can exclude people who read and do math perfectly well for everyday life. NAEP's "basic level" is more comparable to the "proficient" definition in most states. Notes: Rows may not add up to 100% due to rounding. NAEP does not offer an alternative assessment therefore participation rates may vary from the state assessment. NAEP does not disaggregate data to the district level. NAEP Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Reading and Mathematics, 2009 If you would like more information about the NAEP assessments please go to https://www.ade.az.gov/standards/naep State Data Mathematics Grade 4 Achievement Arizona Students White Black Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander American Indian Eligible for NSLP Students w/Disability Limited English Proficient Participation Rate Students w/Disability Limited English Proficient Reading Grade 4 Below Basic 29 14 41 40 13 49 42 57 69 Basic 43 41 40 45 42 38 44 29 29 Proficient 24 37 16 15 33 13 14 13 2 Advanced Achievement 4 7 3 1 12 1 1 1 # Arizona Students White Black Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander American Indian Eligible for NSLP Students w/Disability Limited English Proficient Percent Participation Rate 90 98 Students w/Disability Limited English Proficient Mathematics Grade 8 Achievement Arizona Students White Black Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander American Indian Eligible for NSLP Students w/Disability Limited English Proficient Participation Rate Students w/Disability Limited English Proficient Below Basic 44 27 48 58 24 64 58 70 86 Basic Proficient Advanced Basic Proficient Advanced 32 36 32 28 35 24 29 17 12 20 29 16 12 28 9 11 10 1 5 8 5 2 13 3 2 3 # Percent 77 90 Reading Grade 8 Below Basic 33 19 42 44 19 57 47 75 89 Basic 38 39 35 40 30 32 39 20 9 Proficient 23 32 18 15 33 10 13 4 2 Advanced Achievement 6 11 5 1 18 2 1 1 # Arizona Students White Black Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander American Indian Eligible for NSLP Students w/Disability Limited English Proficient Percent Participation Rate 84 91 Students w/Disability Limited English Proficient Below Basic 32 19 42 43 13 48 45 73 85 41 42 37 42 31 39 41 21 15 24 35 19 14 43 11 13 5 1 3 4 2 1 13 2 1 # # Percent 78 87 NAEP's definition of "proficiency" differs from how the word is understood in ordinary language. It requires the ability to handle "challenging" material, which can exclude people who read and do math perfectly well for everyday life. NAEP's "basic level" is more comparable to the "proficient" definition in most states. Notes: # rounds to zero Rows may not add up to 100% due to rounding. NAEP does not offer an alternative assessment therefore participation rates may vary from the state assessment. NAEP does not disaggregate data to the district level. 2 Percent Falls Far Below Percent Approaches Percent Meets Percent Exceeds Percent Pass Annual Objective Percent Tested Number Tested Mathematics Grade 3 2009 9 18 52 20 72 55 99 84302 2010 11 25 43 22 65 53 100 83352 2009 8 19 54 19 73 55 99 41168 2010 10 25 44 21 65 53 100 40642 2009 10 18 51 21 72 55 99 43134 2010 11 24 42 23 64 53 100 42710 2009 15 24 49 12 61 55 98 4970 2010 17 31 38 13 51 53 100 4891 2009 5 10 48 37 85 55 99 2546 2010 5 14 39 42 81 53 100 2718 2009 11 24 53 12 65 55 99 36153 2010 13 30 43 14 56 53 100 35986 2009 16 30 48 7 55 55 98 4349 2010 20 37 35 8 43 53 100 4303 2009 5 11 53 31 84 55 99 36284 2010 6 17 45 32 77 53 100 35454 Economically Disadvantaged 2009 12 24 52 12 64 55 99 46852 2010 14 30 42 14 56 53 100 46093 Students With Disabilities 2009 26 27 36 11 47 55 98 11958 2010 31 30 28 10 38 53 100 11033 Limited English Proficient 2009 20 36 42 3 45 55 99 13465 2010 27 43 28 3 31 53 100 11279 2009 16 29 49 6 55 55 100 167 2010 19 34 37 9 47 53 99 434 Year Subgroup All Students Female Male African American Asian Hispanic Native American White Migrant This table shows the AIMS results for the past two years. Results are shown as percent at each performance level and percent passing. Also shown are the percent of students tested. 3 Year Percent Falls Far Below Percent Approaches Percent Meets Percent Exceeds Percent Pass Annual Objective Percent Tested Number Tested Reading Grade 3 2009 6 22 58 14 72 63 99 83538 2010 6 21 60 13 73 63 100 83353 2009 5 20 60 16 76 63 99 40898 2010 4 18 62 15 77 63 100 40646 2009 8 24 56 12 68 63 99 42640 2010 7 23 58 11 70 63 100 42707 2009 9 27 56 9 65 63 98 4929 2010 8 26 57 8 66 63 100 4889 2009 4 13 59 24 83 63 99 2522 2010 4 11 60 25 85 63 100 2719 2009 9 29 55 7 62 63 99 35830 2010 8 27 59 6 65 63 100 35984 2009 11 35 50 4 54 63 98 4291 2010 11 35 50 4 55 63 99 4301 2009 4 13 61 22 83 63 99 35966 2010 3 13 64 21 84 63 100 35460 Economically Disadvantaged 2009 9 29 55 7 62 63 99 46328 2010 8 27 58 7 65 63 100 46089 Students With Disabilities 2009 26 36 32 6 38 63 98 11173 2010 24 35 34 6 40 63 100 11032 Limited English Proficient 2009 17 46 36 1 37 63 99 13399 2010 17 47 35 1 35 63 100 11277 2009 12 30 55 4 59 63 100 165 2010 13 34 50 3 53 63 99 435 Subgroup All Students Female Male African American Asian Hispanic Native American White Migrant This table shows the AIMS results for the past two years. Results are shown as percent at each performance level and percent passing. Also shown are the percent of students tested. 4 Year Percent Falls Far Below Percent Approaches Percent Meets Percent Exceeds Percent Pass Percent Tested Number Tested Writing Grade 3 All Students 2009 4 17 73 6 79 98 82616 Female 2009 3 12 78 8 86 99 40581 Male 2009 6 22 69 3 72 98 42035 African American 2009 6 20 70 4 74 97 4873 Asian 2009 4 9 74 13 87 98 2495 Hispanic 2009 5 20 71 3 74 98 35470 Native American 2009 7 25 66 2 68 96 4207 White 2009 3 13 76 8 84 98 35571 Economically Disadvantaged 2009 5 21 70 3 73 98 45745 Students With Disabilities 2009 14 39 46 1 47 91 10341 Limited English Proficient 2009 8 31 60 1 61 99 13309 Migrant 2009 4 21 75 1 76 99 163 Subgroup This table shows the AIMS results for 2009. AIMS Writing is tested in Grades 5, 6, 7, and high school only. Results are shown as percent at each performance level and percent passing. Also shown are the percent of students tested. 5 Year Percent Falls Far Below Percent Approaches Percent Meets Percent Exceeds Percent Pass Annual Objective Percent Tested Number Tested Mathematics Grade 4 2009 10 16 46 28 74 63 99 83768 2010 15 21 40 23 63 50 100 82971 2009 9 16 47 28 75 63 99 40719 2010 14 22 42 23 65 50 100 40651 2009 12 16 44 29 73 63 99 43049 2010 17 21 39 23 62 50 100 42320 2009 17 20 46 18 64 63 99 4926 2010 23 26 37 14 51 50 100 5022 2009 5 8 37 50 87 63 99 2565 2010 9 11 37 43 80 50 100 2594 2009 13 20 48 19 67 63 99 35689 2010 20 26 40 15 54 50 100 35186 2009 18 26 43 12 55 63 98 4508 2010 29 32 31 8 40 50 100 4345 2009 5 10 45 40 85 63 99 36080 2010 8 15 43 33 76 50 100 35824 Economically Disadvantaged 2009 14 21 47 18 65 63 99 46029 2010 21 26 39 15 54 50 100 44939 Students With Disabilities 2009 32 24 32 12 44 63 98 12142 2010 42 24 23 9 33 50 100 11240 Limited English Proficient 2009 26 32 37 4 41 63 99 11939 2010 42 34 22 2 24 50 100 9335 2009 12 27 47 13 60 63 98 219 2010 30 25 36 9 45 50 99 348 Subgroup All Students Female Male African American Asian Hispanic Native American White Migrant This table shows the AIMS results for the past two years. Results are shown as percent at each performance level and percent passing. Also shown are the percent of students tested. 6 Year Percent Falls Far Below Percent Approaches Percent Meets Percent Exceeds Percent Pass Annual Objective Percent Tested Number Tested Reading Grade 4 2009 8 19 60 12 72 56 99 82981 2010 5 23 59 13 72 56 100 82957 2009 6 18 63 13 76 56 99 40427 2010 3 21 61 14 76 56 100 40647 2009 11 21 58 10 68 56 99 42554 2010 7 25 57 11 68 56 100 42310 2009 13 24 56 7 63 56 99 4866 2010 8 28 57 7 64 56 100 5018 2009 5 10 64 21 85 56 99 2543 2010 4 14 59 24 83 56 100 2592 2009 12 26 56 6 62 56 99 35357 2010 7 31 57 6 62 56 100 35178 2009 13 33 51 3 54 56 98 4453 2010 9 39 48 3 51 56 100 4345 2009 4 11 66 18 84 56 99 35762 2010 3 13 63 21 84 56 100 35824 Economically Disadvantaged 2009 12 26 56 5 61 56 99 45508 2010 7 31 56 6 62 56 100 44926 Students With Disabilities 2009 33 30 32 5 37 56 98 11344 2010 22 40 33 5 38 56 100 11235 Limited English Proficient 2009 24 45 30 1 31 56 99 11874 2010 17 57 26 0 27 56 100 9325 2009 13 38 45 4 49 56 98 218 2010 11 42 45 2 47 56 99 348 Subgroup All Students Female Male African American Asian Hispanic Native American White Migrant This table shows the AIMS results for the past two years. Results are shown as percent at each performance level and percent passing. Also shown are the percent of students tested. 7 Year Percent Falls Far Below Percent Approaches Percent Meets Percent Exceeds Percent Pass Percent Tested Number Tested Writing Grade 4 All Students 2009 2 15 80 3 83 98 82172 Female 2009 1 9 85 5 90 99 40143 Male 2009 3 20 75 2 77 98 42029 African American 2009 3 19 76 2 78 97 4810 Asian 2009 2 8 82 9 91 99 2524 Hispanic 2009 2 18 78 1 79 98 35041 Native American 2009 3 20 76 2 78 97 4388 White 2009 1 11 83 5 88 98 35409 Economically Disadvantaged 2009 3 19 77 1 78 98 45001 Students With Disabilities 2009 8 40 51 1 52 91 10520 Limited English Proficient 2009 4 31 65 0 65 99 11823 Migrant 2009 2 18 79 0 79 98 218 Subgroup This table shows the AIMS results for 2009. AIMS Writing is tested in Grades 5, 6, 7, and high school only. Results are shown as percent at each performance level and percent passing. Also shown are the percent of students tested. 8 Year Percent Falls Far Below Percent Approaches Percent Meets Percent Exceeds Percent Pass Percent Tested Number Tested Science Grade 4 2009 17 26 37 21 58 98 81697 2010 17 22 33 28 61 99 82247 2009 16 26 38 20 58 98 39816 2010 16 23 35 27 61 99 40325 2009 18 25 35 22 57 98 41881 2010 18 21 32 29 61 99 41922 2009 24 31 32 13 45 97 4789 2010 23 26 33 17 51 99 4978 2009 9 16 38 36 74 98 2517 2010 10 12 31 46 77 99 2582 2009 25 33 33 10 43 98 34888 2010 24 29 33 14 47 99 34887 2009 30 36 28 6 34 94 4284 2010 30 32 28 10 38 99 4301 2009 8 17 42 33 75 98 35219 2010 8 14 35 43 78 99 35499 Economically Disadvantaged 2009 25 32 33 10 43 98 44759 2010 24 28 33 16 49 99 44512 Students With Disabilities 2009 39 28 23 10 33 97 11159 2010 38 25 24 13 37 98 11096 Limited English Proficient 2009 50 37 13 1 14 98 11712 2010 53 33 13 1 14 99 9263 2009 34 35 25 6 31 98 217 2010 38 33 24 5 29 99 346 Subgroup All Students Female Male African American Asian Hispanic Native American White Migrant This table shows the AIMS results for the past two years. Results are shown as percent at each performance level and percent passing. Also shown are the percent of students tested. 9 Year Percent Falls Far Below Percent Approaches Percent Meets Percent Exceeds Percent Pass Annual Objective Percent Tested Number Tested Mathematics Grade 5 2009 10 18 49 23 72 47 99 82352 2010 19 22 39 20 59 44 100 82635 2009 9 18 51 22 73 47 99 40065 2010 18 22 40 19 60 44 100 40290 2009 12 17 47 24 71 47 99 42287 2010 21 21 37 21 58 44 100 42345 2009 17 23 47 13 60 47 99 4982 2010 30 25 34 11 45 44 100 4943 2009 6 8 40 47 87 47 99 2452 2010 9 12 36 43 79 44 100 2580 2009 13 23 50 14 64 47 99 34537 2010 25 26 37 12 49 44 100 34920 2009 21 27 43 9 52 47 98 4371 2010 36 28 29 7 36 44 100 4488 Subgroup All Students Female Male African American Asian Hispanic Native American 2009 6 11 49 33 82 47 99 36010 2010 11 17 43 30 72 44 100 35704 Economically Disadvantaged 2009 15 23 49 13 62 47 99 44479 2010 26 26 36 12 48 44 100 44645 Students With Disabilities 2009 36 26 31 7 38 47 98 11846 2010 52 21 21 6 27 44 100 11086 Limited English Proficient 2009 32 36 30 2 32 47 99 8768 2010 57 28 13 1 15 44 100 6573 2009 20 24 44 12 56 47 99 278 2010 31 27 33 8 41 44 99 396 White Migrant This table shows the AIMS results for the past two years. Results are shown as percent at each performance level and percent passing. Also shown are the percent of students tested. 10 Year Percent Falls Far Below Percent Approaches Percent Meets Percent Exceeds Percent Pass Annual Objective Percent Tested Number Tested Reading Grade 5 2009 8 18 62 11 73 55 99 81619 2010 8 20 65 7 72 55 100 82648 2009 6 17 65 12 77 55 99 39815 2010 5 18 68 9 77 55 100 40293 2009 11 20 60 10 70 55 99 41804 2010 10 22 63 6 68 55 100 42355 2009 12 23 59 6 65 55 99 4935 2010 11 26 59 4 63 55 100 4941 2009 5 9 66 20 86 55 99 2436 2010 5 11 69 14 84 55 100 2585 2009 12 24 59 5 64 55 99 34206 2010 10 27 59 3 63 55 100 34918 2009 14 31 51 4 55 55 98 4313 2010 14 35 49 2 51 55 100 4488 2009 4 11 67 18 85 55 99 35729 2010 4 12 74 11 85 55 100 35716 Economically Disadvantaged 2009 12 25 58 5 63 55 99 43998 2010 11 27 59 3 63 55 100 44651 Students With Disabilities 2009 34 31 31 4 35 55 98 11110 2010 31 34 31 3 34 55 100 11090 Limited English Proficient 2009 31 44 26 0 26 55 99 8707 2010 33 49 18 0 19 55 100 6571 2009 19 26 53 2 55 55 99 274 2010 17 37 45 2 47 55 100 397 Subgroup All Students Female Male African American Asian Hispanic Native American White Migrant This table shows the AIMS results for the past two years. Results are shown as percent at each performance level and percent passing. Also shown are the percent of students tested. 11 Year Percent Falls Far Below Percent Approaches Percent Meets Percent Exceeds Percent Pass Percent Tested Number Tested Writing Grade 5 2009 3 17 76 3 79 98 80851 2010 3 23 65 9 74 100 81605 2009 2 12 82 5 87 99 39567 2010 2 15 70 12 83 100 39918 2009 5 23 71 2 73 98 41284 2010 4 30 61 6 66 99 41687 2009 5 21 72 2 74 98 4889 2010 4 28 61 7 68 100 4875 2009 3 8 79 9 88 99 2418 2010 4 11 63 23 86 100 2560 2009 4 21 73 2 75 98 33870 2010 4 29 63 4 68 100 34469 2009 6 27 66 1 67 96 4245 2010 6 33 58 3 62 100 4421 2009 2 12 81 5 86 99 35429 2010 2 16 69 13 82 100 35280 Economically Disadvantaged 2009 5 23 71 1 72 98 43502 2010 4 30 62 4 66 99 43962 Students With Disabilities 2009 16 42 42 1 43 91 10339 2010 14 50 34 2 36 99 10239 Limited English Proficient 2009 11 40 48 0 48 99 8642 2010 12 53 35 0 35 99 6503 2009 5 25 68 2 70 98 272 2010 5 36 57 3 60 100 393 Subgroup All Students Female Male African American Asian Hispanic Native American White Migrant This table shows the AIMS results for the past two years. Results are shown as percent at each performance level and percent passing. Also shown are the percent of students tested. 12 Year Percent Falls Far Below Percent Approaches Percent Meets Percent Exceeds Percent Pass Annual Objective Percent Tested Number Tested Mathematics Grade 6 2009 16 16 47 21 68 54 99 81994 2010 20 23 34 23 57 43 100 81012 2009 14 16 49 21 70 54 99 39752 2010 18 24 35 23 58 43 100 39622 2009 18 16 45 21 66 54 99 42242 2010 23 22 32 23 55 43 100 41390 2009 25 19 45 12 57 54 99 4877 2010 30 26 30 14 44 43 100 5050 2009 8 9 41 43 84 54 100 2460 2010 9 13 31 47 78 43 100 2466 2009 21 20 47 12 59 54 99 34254 2010 26 27 32 15 47 43 100 33724 2009 28 24 40 8 48 54 98 4223 2010 37 29 26 9 34 43 100 4305 Subgroup All Students Female Male African American Asian Hispanic Native American 2009 9 11 48 31 79 54 99 36180 2010 13 18 37 32 69 43 100 35467 Economically Disadvantaged 2009 22 20 46 12 58 54 99 43452 2010 27 27 32 14 46 43 100 42859 Students With Disabilities 2009 50 20 25 6 31 54 98 11219 2010 58 21 15 5 21 43 100 10331 Limited English Proficient 2009 49 26 23 2 25 54 99 7258 2010 64 24 10 1 12 43 99 4435 2009 24 25 42 8 50 54 100 271 2010 33 24 30 13 43 43 100 452 White Migrant This table shows the AIMS results for the past two years. Results are shown as percent at each performance level and percent passing. Also shown are the percent of students tested. 13 Year Percent Falls Far Below Percent Approaches Percent Meets Percent Exceeds Percent Pass Annual Objective Percent Tested Number Tested Reading Grade 6 2009 9 21 65 6 71 56 99 81271 2010 6 17 70 8 78 56 100 81027 2009 6 20 68 6 74 56 99 39478 2010 3 15 73 9 82 56 100 39627 2009 11 23 62 5 67 56 99 41793 2010 8 19 67 6 73 56 100 41400 2009 12 26 59 2 61 56 99 4821 2010 8 22 66 4 70 56 100 5054 2009 6 12 71 12 83 56 100 2446 2010 4 9 72 16 87 56 100 2473 2009 12 29 57 2 59 56 99 33926 2010 8 23 66 4 70 56 100 33731 2009 14 35 50 2 52 56 98 4186 2010 11 29 57 2 60 56 100 4303 2009 4 13 74 9 83 56 99 35892 2010 3 9 76 12 88 56 100 35466 Economically Disadvantaged 2009 13 29 56 2 58 56 99 42980 2010 8 23 66 4 69 56 100 42864 Students With Disabilities 2009 36 34 28 3 31 56 98 10491 2010 26 36 34 3 37 56 100 10337 Limited English Proficient 2009 38 46 16 0 16 56 99 7187 2010 31 48 20 0 21 56 99 4435 2009 17 35 48 0 48 56 100 270 2010 13 28 56 2 58 56 100 452 Subgroup All Students Female Male African American Asian Hispanic Native American White Migrant This table shows the AIMS results for the past two years. Results are shown as percent at each performance level and percent passing. Also shown are the percent of students tested. 14 Year Percent Falls Far Below Percent Approaches Percent Meets Percent Exceeds Percent Pass Percent Tested Number Tested Writing Grade 6 2009 2 12 79 7 86 98 80541 2010 2 26 60 13 72 100 80040 2009 1 7 82 10 92 99 39233 2010 1 18 64 17 81 100 39270 2009 3 17 76 4 80 98 41308 2010 3 33 55 8 64 99 40770 2009 3 15 77 5 82 98 4764 2010 3 29 58 9 67 100 4991 2009 3 6 76 15 91 99 2426 2010 3 13 57 27 84 100 2454 2009 2 15 78 4 82 98 33617 2010 2 32 59 7 66 100 33286 2009 4 17 76 3 79 97 4137 2010 3 36 56 5 61 100 4219 2009 1 9 80 11 91 98 35597 2010 2 19 61 18 80 100 35090 Economically Disadvantaged 2009 3 16 77 4 81 98 42517 2010 3 33 58 7 65 99 42218 Students With Disabilities 2009 11 38 50 1 51 91 9749 2010 11 57 30 2 32 99 9480 Limited English Proficient 2009 9 35 56 0 56 98 7125 2010 11 62 27 0 27 99 4391 2009 4 10 83 3 86 99 269 2010 6 39 50 5 55 100 446 Subgroup All Students Female Male African American Asian Hispanic Native American White Migrant This table shows the AIMS results for the past two years. Results are shown as percent at each performance level and percent passing. Also shown are the percent of students tested. 15 Percent Falls Far Below Percent Approaches Percent Meets Percent Exceeds Percent Pass Annual Objective Percent Tested Number Tested Mathematics Grade 7 2009 11 15 54 19 73 58 99 82228 2010 22 20 34 24 58 44 100 80741 2009 9 15 56 19 75 58 99 40267 2010 20 21 35 24 59 44 100 39330 2009 13 16 52 19 71 58 98 41961 2010 24 19 32 25 57 44 100 41411 2009 17 20 54 9 63 58 98 4809 2010 32 22 33 13 46 44 99 4841 2473 Year Subgroup All Students Female Male African American Asian Hispanic Native American 2009 5 6 46 42 88 58 99 2010 11 11 29 49 78 44 100 2463 2009 15 20 54 11 65 58 99 33437 2010 29 24 32 14 47 44 100 33429 2009 20 24 49 7 56 58 97 4402 2010 40 26 26 8 34 44 99 4328 2009 7 11 55 28 83 58 99 37107 2010 13 16 36 35 71 44 100 35680 Economically Disadvantaged 2009 16 20 53 11 64 58 99 41562 2010 30 24 32 14 46 44 100 41750 Students With Disabilities 2009 42 24 28 5 33 58 97 10567 2010 62 17 15 5 20 44 99 9615 Limited English Proficient 2009 39 32 27 1 28 58 99 6945 2010 70 19 9 2 11 44 100 4637 2009 20 20 51 9 60 58 100 281 2010 41 27 23 9 32 44 100 382 White Migrant This table shows the AIMS results for the past two years. Results are shown as percent at each performance level and percent passing. Also shown are the percent of students tested. 16 Year Percent Falls Far Below Percent Approaches Percent Meets Percent Exceeds Percent Pass Annual Objective Percent Tested Number Tested Reading Grade 7 2009 8 20 65 8 73 59 99 81516 2010 5 18 67 10 77 59 100 80754 2009 5 17 68 9 77 59 99 39985 2010 3 15 70 12 81 59 100 39335 2009 10 22 61 7 68 59 98 41531 2010 7 20 65 9 73 59 100 41419 2009 10 24 61 5 66 59 98 4765 2010 7 22 64 6 70 59 100 4846 2009 5 10 68 17 85 59 99 2453 2010 4 9 67 20 87 59 100 2464 2009 11 26 59 4 63 59 99 33109 2010 7 24 64 5 69 59 100 33432 2009 13 30 54 2 56 59 97 4342 2010 10 30 57 3 60 59 100 4332 2009 4 12 71 12 83 59 99 36847 2010 2 10 72 16 87 59 100 35680 Economically Disadvantaged 2009 11 27 59 3 62 59 99 41089 2010 7 24 63 5 68 59 100 41758 Students With Disabilities 2009 34 35 28 3 31 59 97 9854 2010 25 40 32 3 35 59 99 9625 Limited English Proficient 2009 34 47 19 0 19 59 99 6869 2010 28 52 20 0 20 59 100 4636 2009 14 31 52 3 55 59 100 277 2010 14 33 51 3 53 59 100 382 Subgroup All Students Female Male African American Asian Hispanic Native American White Migrant This table shows the AIMS results for the past two years. Results are shown as percent at each performance level and percent passing. Also shown are the percent of students tested. 17 Year Percent Falls Far Below Percent Approaches Percent Meets Percent Exceeds Percent Pass Percent Tested Number Tested Writing Grade 7 2009 3 14 80 3 83 98 80866 2010 2 23 69 6 75 99 79851 2009 1 9 85 5 90 98 39738 2010 1 16 76 8 83 100 38987 2009 4 19 75 2 77 98 41128 2010 3 30 63 4 67 99 40864 2009 4 16 78 2 80 97 4728 2010 3 28 65 4 69 99 4784 2009 3 7 79 11 90 98 2427 2010 3 11 70 16 86 100 2448 2009 4 19 76 1 77 98 32821 2010 2 29 66 3 69 99 33038 2009 4 22 73 1 74 96 4298 2010 4 34 60 2 62 99 4271 2009 2 10 84 5 89 98 36592 2010 1 17 73 8 82 100 35310 Economically Disadvantaged 2009 4 20 75 1 76 98 40664 2010 3 30 65 3 67 99 41165 Students With Disabilities 2009 14 40 45 0 45 90 9111 2010 11 55 33 1 33 99 8868 Limited English Proficient 2009 13 39 48 0 48 98 6783 2010 11 58 31 0 32 99 4579 2009 2 22 74 3 77 98 273 2010 6 38 55 1 56 100 376 Subgroup All Students Female Male African American Asian Hispanic Native American White Migrant This table shows the AIMS results for the past two years. Results are shown as percent at each performance level and percent passing. Also shown are the percent of students tested. 18 Year Percent Falls Far Below Percent Approaches Percent Meets Percent Exceeds Percent Pass Annual Objective Percent Tested Number Tested Mathematics Grade 8 2009 17 19 48 15 63 38 99 80719 2010 29 14 37 20 57 44 100 80811 2009 16 20 49 15 64 38 99 39408 2010 27 15 38 19 57 44 100 39755 2009 19 18 47 16 63 38 98 41311 2010 30 14 36 21 56 44 100 41056 2009 27 24 42 8 50 38 98 4835 2010 39 16 34 11 45 44 100 4847 2009 7 10 47 36 83 38 99 2531 2010 14 8 33 46 78 44 100 2501 2009 24 24 44 8 52 38 99 32494 2010 37 17 34 11 46 44 100 32567 2009 29 28 37 5 42 38 96 4183 2010 49 17 27 7 34 44 100 4250 2009 10 14 53 23 76 38 99 36676 2010 18 12 41 28 69 44 100 36646 Economically Disadvantaged 2009 25 24 43 8 51 38 99 39688 2010 39 17 34 11 45 44 100 40383 Students With Disabilities 2009 53 21 21 5 26 38 97 10445 2010 69 10 16 4 20 44 100 9321 Limited English Proficient 2009 57 25 16 1 17 38 99 6299 2010 78 11 10 1 11 44 100 3959 2009 33 24 39 4 43 38 99 269 2010 45 20 28 8 35 44 100 408 Subgroup All Students Female Male African American Asian Hispanic Native American White Migrant This table shows the AIMS results for the past two years. Results are shown as percent at each performance level and percent passing. Also shown are the percent of students tested. 19 Year Percent Falls Far Below Percent Approaches Percent Meets Percent Exceeds Percent Pass Annual Objective Percent Tested Number Tested Reading Grade 8 2009 10 21 60 9 69 54 99 79969 2010 9 17 67 6 74 54 100 80833 2009 7 19 64 10 74 54 99 39103 2010 6 15 71 8 79 54 100 39763 2009 13 22 57 8 65 54 98 40866 2010 12 20 64 5 69 54 100 41070 2009 14 24 58 4 62 54 98 4767 2010 12 21 64 3 68 54 100 4851 2009 6 11 64 19 83 54 99 2519 2010 7 9 70 14 84 54 100 2502 2009 15 27 54 4 58 54 99 32177 2010 12 23 63 3 65 54 100 32577 2009 17 34 47 3 50 54 96 4128 2010 17 29 52 2 54 54 100 4251 2009 5 13 67 14 81 54 99 36378 2010 5 11 74 10 84 54 100 36652 Economically Disadvantaged 2009 15 28 54 4 58 54 99 39205 2010 13 23 61 3 64 54 100 40391 Students With Disabilities 2009 40 33 24 2 26 54 97 9670 2010 38 31 28 2 30 54 100 9327 Limited English Proficient 2009 45 40 14 0 14 54 99 6248 2010 48 37 15 1 15 54 100 3958 2009 21 29 49 1 50 54 99 264 2010 20 26 52 2 54 54 100 409 Subgroup All Students Female Male African American Asian Hispanic Native American White Migrant This table shows the AIMS results for the past two years. Results are shown as percent at each performance level and percent passing. Also shown are the percent of students tested. 20 Year Percent Falls Far Below Percent Approaches Percent Meets Percent Exceeds Percent Pass Percent Tested Number Tested Writing Grade 8 All Students 2009 2 11 83 3 86 98 79288 Female 2009 1 7 88 4 92 98 38848 Male 2009 3 16 79 2 81 97 40440 African American 2009 3 14 81 2 83 97 4708 Asian 2009 2 5 83 10 93 99 2505 Hispanic 2009 3 15 80 1 81 98 31875 Native American 2009 3 17 79 1 80 96 4099 White 2009 1 7 87 5 92 98 36101 Economically Disadvantaged 2009 3 16 79 1 80 98 38783 Students With Disabilities 2009 11 37 51 0 51 89 8901 Limited English Proficient 2009 11 37 52 0 52 98 6179 Migrant 2009 2 15 81 2 83 98 260 Subgroup This table shows the AIMS results for 2009. AIMS Writing is tested in Grades 5, 6, 7, and high school only. Results are shown as percent at each performance level and percent passing. Also shown are the percent of students tested. 21 Year Percent Falls Far Below Percent Approaches Percent Meets Percent Exceeds Percent Pass Percent Tested Number Tested Science Grade 8 2009 25 19 24 32 56 97 78574 2010 23 18 25 33 58 99 80180 2009 24 20 25 31 56 97 38454 2010 21 19 26 34 60 99 39463 2009 27 18 23 32 55 97 40120 2010 25 18 23 33 57 99 40717 2009 35 22 22 21 43 97 4691 2010 31 22 25 22 47 99 4803 2009 12 11 23 54 77 98 2495 2010 12 11 21 55 77 99 2488 2009 36 23 23 17 40 97 31601 2010 33 23 25 19 44 99 32330 2009 44 26 19 11 30 94 4026 2010 43 25 19 13 32 98 4202 2009 13 15 25 47 72 97 35761 2010 13 14 25 48 74 99 36357 Economically Disadvantaged 2009 37 23 22 18 40 97 38519 2010 33 23 25 20 44 99 40026 Students With Disabilities 2009 61 17 13 8 21 95 9470 2010 59 17 14 9 23 98 9220 Limited English Proficient 2009 79 15 5 1 6 97 6106 2010 80 14 5 1 6 99 3932 2009 43 24 23 11 34 100 265 2010 44 22 24 10 34 100 408 Subgroup All Students Female Male African American Asian Hispanic Native American White Migrant This table shows the AIMS results for the past two years. Results are shown as percent at each performance level and percent passing. Also shown are the percent of students tested. 22 Year Percent Falls Far Below Percent Approaches Percent Meets Percent Exceeds Percent Pass Annual Objective Percent Tested Number Tested Mathematics High School 2009 20 10 53 17 70 40 97 75712 2010 29 12 36 23 58 48 98 75870 2009 19 10 55 16 71 40 97 37306 2010 28 13 37 23 60 48 98 37377 2009 22 10 51 17 68 40 97 38406 2010 31 12 34 23 57 48 98 38493 2009 30 13 49 8 57 40 96 4634 2010 41 14 33 12 46 48 97 4629 2009 9 5 46 40 86 40 97 2349 2010 14 8 30 48 78 48 98 2473 2009 28 13 51 8 59 40 97 28813 2010 39 15 34 12 46 48 98 29475 2009 37 15 44 5 49 40 96 4426 2010 49 13 30 7 37 48 97 4231 2009 12 7 56 25 81 40 97 35490 2010 18 10 39 33 72 48 98 35062 Economically Disadvantaged 2009 29 13 50 7 57 40 98 30010 2010 41 14 33 12 45 48 98 32640 Students With Disabilities 2009 60 12 25 3 28 40 95 8443 2010 71 9 16 3 19 48 96 7910 Limited English Proficient 2009 65 15 20 1 21 40 97 4059 2010 79 8 11 2 12 48 97 2840 2009 32 16 48 4 52 40 99 320 2010 45 14 33 8 40 48 97 405 Subgroup All Students Female Male African American Asian Hispanic Native American White Migrant This table shows the AIMS results for the past two years. Results are shown as percent at each performance level and percent passing. Also shown are the percent of students tested. 23 Year Percent Falls Far Below Percent Approaches Percent Meets Percent Exceeds Percent Pass Annual Objective Percent Tested Number Tested Reading High School 2009 6 20 66 9 75 49 97 75330 2010 5 18 66 11 77 49 98 76674 2009 4 19 68 9 77 49 97 37176 2010 3 16 68 12 80 49 98 37728 2009 7 21 64 8 72 49 96 38154 2010 6 20 64 10 74 49 98 38946 2009 9 25 62 4 66 49 96 4561 2010 7 23 64 6 70 49 97 4668 2009 4 12 64 20 84 49 97 2326 2010 3 13 61 22 84 49 98 2478 2009 8 28 60 3 63 49 97 28700 2010 7 26 63 5 67 49 98 29845 2009 11 37 51 2 53 49 95 4384 2010 10 32 55 3 58 49 96 4272 2009 2 11 73 14 87 49 97 35359 2010 2 10 70 18 88 49 98 35411 Economically Disadvantaged 2009 9 29 58 3 61 49 97 29917 2010 8 26 61 5 66 49 98 33227 Students With Disabilities 2009 26 43 29 3 32 49 95 7774 2010 22 43 33 3 35 49 96 8086 Limited English Proficient 2009 31 53 16 0 16 49 97 4063 2010 31 57 12 0 13 49 97 2873 2009 10 32 56 1 57 49 99 321 2010 16 35 46 3 49 49 97 415 Subgroup All Students Female Male African American Asian Hispanic Native American White Migrant This table shows the AIMS results for the past two years. Results are shown as percent at each performance level and percent passing. Also shown are the percent of students tested. 24 Year Percent Falls Far Below Percent Approaches Percent Meets Percent Exceeds Percent Pass Percent Tested Number Tested Writing High School 2009 3 25 65 7 72 96 74522 2010 3 24 58 15 73 97 75805 2009 2 20 69 9 78 96 36811 2010 2 20 61 17 78 97 37415 2009 5 30 60 5 65 95 37711 2010 4 29 55 12 67 96 38390 2009 5 29 61 5 66 94 4505 2010 5 28 58 9 67 95 4586 2009 3 13 67 18 85 96 2317 2010 4 13 53 30 83 98 2468 2009 4 33 59 4 63 96 28341 2010 4 33 56 8 63 97 29497 2009 7 42 49 2 51 93 4303 2010 7 40 48 5 53 95 4193 2009 2 17 72 10 82 96 35056 2010 2 16 62 21 83 97 35061 Economically Disadvantaged 2009 5 35 56 3 59 96 29410 2010 5 34 54 7 61 97 32710 Students With Disabilities 2009 17 58 24 1 25 85 7017 2010 17 55 26 1 28 87 7269 Limited English Proficient 2009 22 61 17 0 17 95 4007 2010 26 59 14 0 14 96 2826 2009 4 47 48 1 49 98 317 2010 8 50 40 2 42 97 412 Subgroup All Students Female Male African American Asian Hispanic Native American White Migrant This table shows the AIMS results for the past two years. Results are shown as percent at each performance level and percent passing. Also shown are the percent of students tested. 25 Percent Falls Far Below Percent Approaches Percent Meets Percent Exceeds Percent Pass Percent Tested 2009 48 18 23 11 34 61 47100 2010 45 17 23 15 38 89 189502 2009 48 19 23 10 33 61 23204 2010 45 18 24 13 37 88 94036 2009 48 17 22 13 35 61 23896 2010 45 16 23 16 39 89 95466 2009 59 18 17 6 23 66 3141 2010 57 17 18 8 26 90 11672 2009 33 17 30 20 50 56 1349 2010 29 15 28 28 56 85 5986 2009 61 18 17 5 22 67 19585 2010 59 17 17 6 23 91 73852 2009 69 17 12 3 15 70 3160 2010 67 16 13 3 16 91 11156 2009 31 19 31 20 51 55 19865 2010 29 17 30 24 54 86 86836 Economically Disadvantaged 2009 61 18 17 5 22 68 20651 2010 60 17 17 6 23 91 79113 Students With Disabilities 2009 75 9 11 5 16 68 5503 2010 81 8 8 3 11 90 18603 Limited English Proficient 2009 93 4 2 0 2 71 2943 2010 94 4 2 0 2 93 9340 2009 73 15 12 1 13 73 233 2010 73 14 11 2 13 94 831 Subgroup All Students Female Male African American Asian Hispanic Native American White Migrant Number Tested Year Science High School This table shows the AIMS results for the past two years. Results are shown as percent at each performance level and percent passing. Also shown are the percent of students tested. 26 NCLB Federal Accountability School Improvement Status Improvement Status 2009 2010 Year 1 111 90 Year 2 67 65 Corrective Action 55 41 Restructuring Implemented 40 64 Restructuring Planning 38 37 Out of School Improvement 31 48 Warning 117 161 Total Identified 311 297 Total Not-Identified 877 936 Number of Title I Schools Identified for Improvement. For status definitions, please see page 28. Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)* School and District Year School AYP 2010 District AYP Met Not Met Met Not Met 1389 567 353 238 *AYP: A measure of school performance as mandated by the federal government under the No Child Left Behind Act. AYP holds schools accountable for the performance of subgroups, as well as all students. AYP measures schools toward the goal of having 100 percent of all students proficient in state standards for reading and math by 2013-14. Statewide Four-Year Graduation Rates (percent) 2008 2009 All Students 75 76 Female 79 80 Male 71 72 African American 73 73 Asian/Pacific Islander 87 88 Hispanic 67 69 Native American 60 63 White 82 83 Limited English Proficient 48 44 Students with Disabilities 64 65 Economically Disadvantaged 66 69 Migrant 71 80 27 Average Daily Attendance Rates (percent) 2008-2009 All Students (All Grades) 94.2261 Female 94.3036 Male 94.1529 African American 94.4101 Asian/Pacific Islander 95.9451 Hispanic 94.1395 Native American 91.8086 White 94.4654 Limited English Proficient 94.5165 Students with Disabilities 92.3905 Economically Disadvantaged 93.9076 This table shows statewide performance on the additional indicator as required by the No Child Left Behind Act. AZ LEARNS - State Accountability Achievement Profile Number of Schools Excelling 272 Highly Performing 242 Performing Plus 707 Performing 623 Underperforming 89 Failing to Meet Academic Standards 11 This table shows the number of schools that have earned each of the AZ LEARNS profiles in 2010. AZ LEARNS is the system for evaluating schools required by state law. For profile definitions, please see page 41. Highly Qualified Teachers 2009-2010 Highest Degree Held Number of Teachers Bachelors 28,701 Other 55 Doctorate 401 Masters 22,276 Professional Qualifications of All Public K-12 School Teachers in the State 28 State (FY2010) 3 High Poverty (FY2010) 2.9 Low Poverty (FY2010) 2.8 Percentage of Core Academic Classes Not Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers Percentage of Public K-12 Teachers with Emergency/ Provisional Certification (FY2010) 0.4% Title I Schools Identified for Improvement Title I School Improvement - Year 1 – A Title I school that has not made adequate yearly progress (AYP) for two consecutive years. Upon identification, the school must: notify parents/legal guardians of the school status; develop and implement a School Improvement Plan within 90 days of the identification; set aside 10% of the schools Title I funds for professional development for teachers and the principal; the district must offer parents the option of transfer and support to the school in its school improvement efforts. Title I School Improvement - Year 2 – A Title I school that has not made adequate yearly progress (AYP) for three consecutive years. Upon identification, the school must: notify parents/legal guardians of the school status; develop and implement a School Improvement Plan within 90 days of the identification; set aside 10% of the schools Title I funds for professional development for teachers and the principal; the district must offer parents the option of transfer and offer supplemental educational services to eligible students, and offer support to the school in its school improvement efforts. Title I School Improvement - Year 3 or Corrective Action – A Title I school that has not made adequate yearly progress (AYP) for four consecutive years. Upon identification, the school must: notify parents/legal guardians of the school status; develop and implement a School Improvement Plan within 90 days of the identification; set aside 10% of the schools Title I funds for professional development for teachers and the principal; the district must offer parents the option of transfer and offer supplemental educational services to eligible students, and offer support to the school in its school improvement efforts. In addition, the school must choose and implement at least one of six corrective actions. See Section 1116(b)(7) of NCLB for a list of the corrective action options. Title I School Improvement - Year 4 or Restructuring (Planning Phase) – A Title I school that has not made adequate yearly progress (AYP) for five consecutive years. Upon identification, the school must: notify parents/legal guardians of the school status; develop and implement a School Improvement Plan within 90 days of the identification; set aside 10% of the schools Title I funds for professional development for teachers and the principal; the district must offer parents the option of transfer and offer supplemental educational services to eligible students, and offer support to the school in its school improvement efforts. In addition, the school must prepare a restructuring plan and make necessary arrangements to carry out one of three restructuring activities. See Section 1116(b)(8) of NCLB for a list of the restructuring activities. Title I School Improvement - Year 5 or Restructuring (Implementation Phase) – A Title I school that has not made adequate yearly progress (AYP) for six consecutive years. Upon identification, the school must: notify parents/legal guardians of the school status; develop and implement a School Improvement Plan within 90 days of the identification; set aside 10% of the schools Title I funds for professional development for teachers and the principal; the district must offer parents the option of transfer and offer supplemental educational services to eligible students, and offer support to the school in its school improvement efforts. In addition, the school must implement the restructuring plan. Out of School Improvement – A Title I school that has made adequate yearly progress (AYP) for two consecutive years and is no longer identified. Total Identified – Total number of Title I schools identified for Title I school improvement. Total Not-Identified – Total number of Title I and non-Title I schools identified as making adequate yearly progress (AYP). Title I School – any school that receives Federal Title I funds; the school agrees to the accountability measures mandated by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB). 29 AZ LEARNS - State Accountability Excelling - meets or exceeds state performance and state progress goals and has the requisite percentage of students “Exceeding the Standard” category on AIMS. School performance was at or above the state baseline and/or the school made adequate growth during the past three years. Additionally, the school met the performance threshold required for Excelling schools with a certain percentage of their students exceeding the standard on the Arizona Instrument to Measure Standards (AIMS) over the past three years. Highly Performing - meets or exceeds state performance and state progress goals and has the requisite percentage of students “Exceeding the Standard” category on AIMS. School receives total scale value placing it in the Highly Performing classification. School performance was at or above the state baseline and/or the school made adequate growth during the past three years. Additionally, the school met the performance threshold required for Highly Performing schools with a certain percentage of their students “Exceeds the Standard” category on the Arizona Instrument to Measure Standards (AIMS) over the past three years. Performing - meets state performance goals, and meets state progress goals. School receives total scale value placing it in the Performing classification. School performance was at or above the state baseline and/or the school made adequate growth during the past three years. Performing Plus - above state performance goals, however the number of students exceeding the standard on the AIMS test is not sufficient to earn a highly performing or excelling label. Underperforming - needs to meet state performance and state progress goals. School receives total scale value placing it in the Underperforming classification. School performance was below the state baseline and did not make adequate growth, or the school started above the state baseline and did not make adequate growth during the past three years. Failing to Meet the Academic Standards - needs to meet state performance and state progress goals. School performance has been designated as Underperforming for three consecutive years and a site review determined that the designation of Failing to Meet the Academic Standards was warranted. 30 Arizona Department of Education Tom Horne, Superintendent of Public Instruction Research and Evaluation 602-542-5151 www.ade.az.gov ReportCards@ade.az.gov The distribution of this report is mandated by the No Child Left Behind Act. The contents of this publication were developed with funds allocated by the U.S. Department of Education under Title I, Part A of the No Child Left Behind Act. The distribution of this report is mandated by the No Child Left Behind Act. The contents of this publication were developed with funds allocated by the U.S. Department of Education under Title I, Part A of the No Child Left Behind Act. The Arizona Department of Education does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, disability, religion, sexual orientation or age in its programs, activities or in its hiring and employment practices. The following division has been designated to handle inquiries regarding the nondiscrimination policies: Administrative Services, 1535 W. Jefferson, Phoenix, AZ 85007, Phone: (602) 542-3186, Fax: (602) 542-3073 Research and Evaluation 602-542-5151 • www.ade.az.gov • ReportCards@ade.az.gov Printed in Phoenix, AZ by the Arizona Department of Education. Copies: 1,169,000, Total Cost: $80,099.76, Unit Cost: $.0685, Date: 3/08 31