Hinsdale Central Meets Federal AYP Standards, South Falls Short

Hinsdale Central hit federal adequate yearly progress (AYP) benchmarks according to No Child Left Behind during the 2013 school year, while Hinsdale South and District 86 as a whole did not.

To make AYP in 2013, a school or district needed to either have 92.5 of that year’s juniors and 92.5 of every subgroup within that junior class that contains 45 or more students meet or exceed state math and reading standards on the Prairie State Achievement Examination (PSAE), or have the junior class and the qualifying subgroups meet or exceed at a “safe-harbor” rate that would show a certain amount of growth over 2012. 

AYP benchmarks rise each year under No Child Left Behind. The 92.5 percent 2013 benchmark was up from the 85 percent benchmark of 2012.

Beyond the junior class as a whole, which had an 89.6 percent meet-or-exceeds rate in reading and an 89.7 percent rate in math that each surpassed the respective safe-harbor targets of 87.9 percent and 88.8 percent, Hinsdale Central’s only subgroups large enough to measure were white students and Asian students. 

White students at Central met or exceeded reading standards at a 90.2 percent clip (safe-harbor target was 88.9 percent) and math standards at a 91.2 percent clip. Asian students met or exceeded in reading at a 92.3 percent rate in both reading and math.

Acting Superintendent Bruce Law said the white math rate and both Asian rates satisfied non-safe-harbor AYP standards based on the size of the group and the rates being as close as they are to the 92.5 percent target.

In 2012, Hinsdale Central did not make AYP because one subgroup, students with disabilities, did not hit its safe-harbor target. This year, students with disabilities was not a subgroup large enough to be considered for Hinsdale Central, though the district-wide disabled subgroup failed to make AYP with only 43.8 percent meeting or exceeding standards in reading and math. 

At Hinsdale South, where the junior class as a whole failed to hit its safe-harbor target, the qualifying subgroups were white, black and economically disadvantaged students. White students met or exceeded at a 79.4 percent clip in reading and a 78.8 percent clip in math, both short of the 82.2 percent safe-harbor targets. 

Thirty-six percent of black students met or exceeded in reading, and 24 percent met or exceeded in math. The economically disadvantaged met or exceeded at a 51.5 percent clip in reading, short of the 58.9 percent safe-harbor target, and at a 39.7 percent clip in math, which was close enough to the 43.4 percent safe-harbor target to make AYP. 

According to district documents, it's the sixth straight year Hinsdale South has failed to make AYP. 

Hinsdale South Principal Brian Waterman said the 92.5 percentage is "virtually impossible" to hit for his school based on its demographics.

"We don’t get this report and say, 'We didn’t make AYP; what are we going to do?'" Waterman said. 

While he does not put much stock into the yes-or-no AYP determination, Waterman and his staff do pay attention to the PSAE numbers and use them to study what's happening with struggling students. For example, they may look at the course progressions different students take and how they correlate with PSAE results.  

Waterman said he's proud that the percentage of black and economically disadvantaged South students meeting or exceeding has remained steady as those "historically underperforming" populations have grown significantly in recent years.

"That would buck the national trend," he said.

As a whole District 86 did not make AYP. Its entire junior class met or exceeded reading standards at an 83.1 percent clip, short of the 84.4 percent safe-harbor target, and math standards at an 81.3 percent clip, short of the 84.5 percent safe-harbor target. 

The district’s white students made AYP in both subjects, but black, Hispanic, Asian, disabled, and economically disadvantaged students made AYP in neither.

Law called the AYP determination a "lag indicator" that the district does not prioritize as high as "leading indicators," such as individual student interventions, which instead of judging students based on what they've done in the past  aims to project how they will grow in the future.

"That’s what we’re really working towards," Law said.