Academic Workshop

Academic WorkshopSeptember 15, 2011

Mary Hendricks-Harris

Outline

• Review of AYP

• Provide preliminary APR

• Overview of School Improvement Measures

2

BOE Goal

Identify and close learning gaps, align researchbased strategies to improve teaching andlearning, and implement and monitor a rigorouscurriculum to advance the achievement of alllearners using the Professional LearningCommunities model.

3

2010-2011 CSIP Goal

GOAL PROGRESS

12/16 AYP NOT MET

14/14 APR MET

4

How is AcademicPerformance Measured?

Federal/NCLB Progress State Progress FHSD Progress AYP APR • Achievement

Adequate Yearly Progress Annual Performance Report • Attendance

• Behavior

• Climate

5

Adequate Yearly Progress

• Primarily based on MAP indicators

• Measures student achievement and student group achievement against target

• Used for federal accountability through 2014(100%)

6

Communication Arts 2014 Goal: 100% 2012 Goal: 83.7

Group 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011

Target 34.7 42.9 51 59.2 67.4 75.5Met/Not

Met

All Kids51.8 52.7 53 60.7 65.7 67.2 Not Met

Y Y Y Y G NP

Asian/Pacific Isl.56.6 54.2 53.5 66.8 70.6 71.1 Met

Y Y Y Y Y CI

Black28 27.9 33.8 39.3 43.9 44.6 Not MetS NP SC NP SC NP

Hispanic32.7 38.5 33.2 46.9 47.6 46 Not Met

CI CI NP S NP NP

White53.3 54.4 54.6 62.3 67.7 69.4 Not Met

Y Y Y Y Y NP

F/R Lunch28.8 32.8 32.2 39.5 42.9 46.4 Not MetNP NP NP S NP NP

IEP18.5 20.3 21.9 30.2 34.8 34.6 Not MetNP NP NP S NP NP

LEP13.6 8.5 3.6 17.2 23.1 26.4 Not Met

S NP NP S SC NP

Total 6/8 4/8 4/8 7/8 5/8 1/8 7

Mathematics 2014 Goal: 100% 2012 Goal: 81.7%

Group 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011

Target 26.6 35.8 45 54.1 63.3 72.5Met/Not

Met

All Kids54.9 56.3 58 60.5 66.3 67.8 Met

Y Y Y Y Y G

Asian/Pacific Isl.65.4 69.9 69.8 67.8 74.3 77.3 Met

Y Y Y Y Y Y

Black27.4 28.3 30.4 36.9 40.6 32.9 Not Met

Y NP NP NP NP NP

Hispanic41.3 39.2 37.4 45.6 51.6 56.4 Met

Y Y CI CI S S

White56.5 58 59.9 62.2 68.5 70 Met

Y Y Y Y Y G

F/R Lunch33.3 32.9 33.5 39.1 44.6 46.1 Not Met

Y CI NP SC SC NP

IEP22.8 25.7 27.4 34.1 36.4 36.3 Not MetNP NP NP SC NP NP

LEP20 18.1 13.8 26.6 36.2 41.8 MetCI NP NP S S SC

Total 7/8 5/8 4/8 7/8 6/8 5/8 8

Area District Growth in Subgroups 2002-2011

9

District Growth Comparison 2002 – 2011

  TOTAL KIDS F/R LUNCHAFRICAN-AMERICAN

HISPANIC IEP LEP

DISTRICT CA MA CA MA CA MA CA MA CA MA CA MA

St. Charles 20 31 20 26 15 27 -1 19 * * -7 29

Columbia 16 25 18 18 12 17 12 21 8 13 -8 24

Springfield 18 31 19 26 10 23 20 31 17 24 3 19

Blue Springs 22 38 28 56 20 37 33 41 19 29 21 36

Lee's Summit 23 31 24 23 23 34 17 30 16 14 20 36

Hazelwood 20 26 20 25 23 29 13 32 15 16 6 20

Pattonville 14 35 18 30 16 30 18 24 18 23 27 38

Parkway 28 39 31 33 26 28 13 24 30 32 21 38

Rockwood 25 36 27 30 22 25 21 38 24 27 20 18

Ft. Zumwalt 27 37 23 44 28 32 2 34 24 18 19 19

Francis Howell 34 43 35 35 30 30 4 44 27 32 26 31

Highest Percentage

Lowest Percentage

District AYP Groups Met

10

2010 Groups Met

Communication Arts 8 1

Mathematics 8 5

Required Action: District Improvement Level 3, Corrective Action, Continuing

District-to-District AYP Proficiency Comparative Results 2011 (Source DESE Web Site)

  Pattonville Parkway Rockwood State  Ft.

ZumwaltFrancis Howell

WentzvilleSt.

CharlesOrchard

Farm

CA 75.5% 59.2 70.7 74.3 62   63.6 67.2 63.2 55.8 59.2

CA Sub-groups Met

2/8 4/9 5/9 0/10   2/9 1/8 3/8 1/8 3/6

MA 72.5% 58.7 69.7 72.1 54.2   59.4 67.8 67.3 57.5 60.1

MA Sub-groups Met

3/8 3/9 4/9 1/10   3/9 5/8 5/8 3/8 4/6

11

District CA ALL - 2010 CA ALL - 2011 Gain

Ladue 77.0 77.8 .8

Kirkwood 75.6 76.2 .6

Clayton 77.4 76.1 -1.3

Rockwood 74.3 74.3 0

Webster Groves 72.6 70.9 -1.7

Parkway 69.6 70.7 1.1

FHSD 65.7 67.2 1.5

FTZ 60.8 63.6 2.8

Orchard Farm 58.4 59.2 .8

Pattonville 58.6 59.2 .6

St. Charles 56.9 55.8 -1.1

State 53.6 54.6 1.0

STL 30.7 33.1 2.4

CA Comparison Gains

12

District MA ALL - 2010

MA ALL- 2011

Gain

Ladue 76.5 78.3 1.8

Clayton 75.2 76.9 1.7

Kirkwood 75.5 75.8 .3

Rockwood 71.0 72.1 1.1

Parkway 67.5 69.7 2.2

FHSD 66.3 67.8 1.5

Webster Groves

69.5 67.5 -2.0

Wentzville 63.9 67.3 3.4

FTZ 65.2 66.6 1.4

Orchard Farm 55.1 60.1 5.0

Pattonville 57.4 58.7 1.3

St. Charles 52.9 57.5 4.6

State 52.7 54.2 1.5

STL 26.9 30.9 4

MA Comparison Gains

13

Schools in ImprovementElementary

Becky-David CA (Year 1)

Castlio CA MA (Year 1)

Central CA MA (Year 2)

Fairmount CA MA (Year 1)

Harvest Ridge CA MA (Year 2)

Henderson CA MA (Year 1)

Independence CA MA (Year 2)

Middle

Barnwell CA MA (Year 4)

Bryan CA MA (Year 4)

Howell Middle (Year 3, Delayed)

Hollenbeck MA (Year 4, Delayed)

Saeger CA MA (Year 5)

High

FHN MA (Year 4)

FHC CA MA (Year 1)14

Additional Title 1 Supports

• Professional Development Funds

• Staffing Pattern• Tutoring• Spring Break school

• Technical Support– Parent Involvement– School Improvement

Plan

15

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT=

ACCREDITATION

16

APR• Determine accreditation level of a school district

– Currently Accredited with Distinction in Performance

• Need to meet 11 of 14 for “full waiver” for MSIP 4

– 14 Standards:• 6 MAP• ACT• Advanced Courses• Career Education• College Placement• Career Education Placement• Graduation Rate• Attendance• Subgroup Achievement

17

6 MAP Standards: All High 1

• CA1. Grades 3-52. Grades 6-83. English 2

• Math4. Grades 3-55. Grades 6-86. Algebra I

18

Elementary MPI 2006 - 2011

19

Middle School MPI 2006 - 2011

20

EOC MPI 2009-2011

21

EOC MPI 2010 - 2011Not Included in APR Calculation

22

768.7792.0 789.2

600

650

700

750

800

850

900

2009 - 3rd Grade 2010 - 4th Grade 2011 - 5th Grade

Elementary Communication Arts Cohort

23

761.6778.0

792.6

600

650

700

750

800

850

900

2009 - 6th Grade 2010 - 7th Grade 2011 - 8th Grade

MS Communication Arts Cohort

24

761.1776.2

793.1

600

650

700

750

800

850

900

2009 - 3rd Grade 2010 - 4th Grade 2011 - 5th Grade

Elementary Mathematics Cohort

25

776.8 782.6 785.3

600

650

700

750

800

850

900

2009 - 6th Grade 2010 - 7th Grade 2011 - 8th Grade

MS Mathematics Cohort

26

Advanced Courses

27

28

Percent Exams Scoring 3 or Higher

29

ACT Composite Score - FHSDGoal: 24

30

ACT Composite Scores – District and State

31

% of Grads Taking ACT

32

College PlacementPercent of Graduates Entering College

33

Career Education PlacementNumber of Graduates Completing a Career Education Program

Who Are Placed in Occupations Relating to their Training, Attending College, or in the Military

34

Combined Career and College Placement

% College and Career Education Placement

35

Francis Howell School District2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

K-12 Attendance 95 95 94.9 95.3 95.2 95.7

Graduation 89.6 90.1 90.8 91.8 94.5 94.4

Attendance and Graduation Rate

36

APR 14 Standards MET

MSIP Standard/Indicator 2005-2006

2006-2007

2007-2008

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

9.1*1 MAP Grades 3-5 Mathematics Met Met Met Met Met Met9.1*2 MAP Grades 3-5 Communication Arts Met Met Met Met Met Met9.1*3 MAP Grades 6-8 Mathematics Met Met Met Met Met Met9.1*4 MAP Grades 6-8 Communication Arts Met Met Met Met Met Met9.1*5 EOC Algebra I Mathematics Met Met Met Met Met Met9.1*6 EOC English II Communication Arts Met Met Met Met Met MetBONUS MAP ACHIEVEMENT Met Met Met Met Met Met

MSIP Standard/Indicator Met/Not Met

9.3 ACT Met Met Met Met Met Met9.4*1 Advanced Courses Met Met Met Met Met Met9.4*2 Career Education Courses Met Met Met Met Met Met9.4*3 College Placement Met Met Met Met Met Met9.4*4 Career Education Placement Met Met Met Met Met Met9.5 Graduation Rate Met Met Met Met Met Met9.6 Attendance Rate Met Met Met Met Met Met9.7 Subgroup Achievement Met Not Met Not Met Met Met Not Met

Total Standards Met 14 14* 14# 14 14 *Additional Indicator "Met" Earned in Voluntary Subject Area Bonus # Additional indicator "Met" Earned in Science Bonus

37

Other District Data

• Literacy• 10+ Absences• Discipline

38

Reading Levels

39

10+ Absence2008-2011

40

41

District Data Strengths

• All High 1 in MAP APR grade span areas• EOC • Cohort gains• Attendance and 10+• Drop-outs/Grad Rate• AP scores

42

Areas for Improvement

• Math, Reading and Communication Arts• Subgroups performance

– More than 20% gap in LEP, F/R and African American

• AP participation• ACT performance• OSS/ISS incidents

43

2010-2011 BOE Goal

• Eliminate identified learning gaps using research-based teaching and learning strategies and a rigorous curriculum to advance the achievement of all learners including students with diverse needs through the Professional Learning Communities school improvement model.

44

2011-2012 Achievement Proposed Goals

APR

FHSD will meet 14/14 APR indicators.

(Specific targets for each indicator will be identified when all data has been validated.)

AYP

FHSD will show improvement in all subgroups by the average annual gain from the previous five years.

45

Adjustments• Focus building professional development

• Provide GWM pd to elementary

• Recommit to IBD sessions with follow-up

• Provide structures to reading in special education classrooms

• Implement targeted reading tutoring

• Provide rigor at MS

• Ensure targeted interventions

46

Achievement Highlights

• ACT Down• AP Down and Up• MAP CA UP• MAP MA UP• Achievement Gap IMPROVED

47

• Daily attendance UP• Greater than 10 absences DOWN• Graduation rate ?

48

Far and away the best prize that life offers is the chance to work

hard at work worth doing.

-Theodore Roosevelt

49