Upload
lora
View
44
Download
4
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Academic Workshop. September 15, 2011. Mary Hendricks-Harris. Outline. Review of AYP Provide preliminary APR Overview of School Improvement Measures. BOE Goal. Identify and close learning gaps , align research based strategies to improve teaching and - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
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