San Leandro Unified School Board Looking Closely About Our Data September 6, 2006 Presented by Department of Curriculum and Instruction Prepared by Daniel

San Leandro Unified

School Board

Looking Closely About Our Data

September 6, 2006

Presented byDepartment of Curriculum and Instruction

Prepared by Daniel Chaja, Assistant Director of Research and

Program Evaluation

California Standards Test(CST)

2006 CSTs

Content Area Grades

ELA

Grade-levels 2 through 11

Grade-level Writing 4 & 7

Math

Grade-levels 2 through 7

End-of-year Courses 8 through 11

Social Sciences Grade-levels 8, 10, 11

Science

Grade-levels 5, 8, 10, 11

End-of-year Courses 9 through 11

SLUSD - California Standards Test - E/ LA - Grades 2-5

813 12 11

17 17 17 16

8 9 812

913 14 12

19

23

18 18

23 2427

20

1719

15

1517

16 13 18

39

35

31 31

3234

31

33

3736

3733

41 33 3533

23

22

28 29

2118 18

23

26 2326

23

26

24 25 23

117

11 118 7 7 9

13 13 1417

6

13 12 14

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Gr. 2,

200

3

Gr. 2,

200

4

Gr. 2,

200

5

Gr. 2,

200

6

Gr. 3,

200

3

Gr. 3,

200

4

Gr. 3,

200

5

Gr. 3,

200

6

Gr. 4,

200

3

Gr. 4,

200

4

Gr. 4,

200

5

Gr. 4,

200

6

Gr. 5,

200

3

Gr. 5,

200

4

Gr. 5,

200

5

Gr. 5,

200

6

Grade and Year Tested

Perc

ent

of

Stu

den

ts

Far Below Basic Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced


9 9 1014

11 9 1014

11 118

13

15 16 16

18

1615

16

15 19 20

18

17

4041 40

3441

39 3332

42 40

4037

2724 25 23

2529

31 26

21 21

23 20

9 9 10 117 8 10 12

7 811 12

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Gr. 6,

2003

Gr. 6,

2004

Gr. 6,

2005

Gr. 6,

2006

Gr. 7,

2003

Gr. 7,

2004

Gr. 7,

2005

Gr. 7,

2006

Gr. 8,

2003

Gr. 8,

2004

Gr. 8,

2005

Gr. 8,

2006


Perc

ent

of

Stu

den

ts



913

913

1713 14

2126 26

1923

17

1921

17

23

21 19

20

21 20

17

18

34

34

31 32

34

2936

27

2927

29

28

26

25

2322

19

23

2019

16 22

23 17

149

16 15

7

1411 13

8 612 14

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Gr. 9,

2003

Gr. 9,

2004

Gr. 9,

2005

Gr. 9,

2006

Gr. 10,

2003

Gr. 10,

2004

Gr. 10,

2005

Gr. 10,

2006

Gr. 11,

2003

Gr. 11,

2004

Gr. 11,

2005

Gr. 11,

2006


Perc

ent

of

Stu

den

ts


SLUSD - California Standards Test - Math - Grades 2-5

47 5 4

74 5 5

95

85

1714 15

12

22

26

1915

30

2823 23

26 32 27

25

34

3124

22

25

28

22

24

28

31

2620

3132

30

24

28

29

25

25

30

25

27 34

24 26

31

30

2323

23

24

18

21

2327

1914

2723

10 1015

22

10 812

23

3 5

13 14

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Gr. 2,

200

3

Gr. 2,

200

4

Gr. 2,

200

5

Gr. 2,

200

6

Gr. 3,

200

3

Gr. 3,

200

4

Gr. 3,

200

5

Gr. 3,

200

6

Gr. 4,

200

3

Gr. 4,

200

4

Gr. 4,

200

5

Gr. 4,

200

6

Gr. 5,

200

3

Gr. 5,

200

4

Gr. 5,

200

5

Gr. 5,

200

6


Perc

ent

of

Stu

den

ts


SLUSD - California Standards Test - Math - Grades 6-7

4 69

12 10 8 10 11

3131

29

3028

27

29 29

36 36 3129 38

35

3328

22 2223

2420

2421

25

5 6 85 4

7 7 8

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Gr. 6, 2003 Gr. 6, 2004 Gr. 6, 2005 Gr. 6, 2006 Gr. 7, 2003 Gr. 7, 2004 Gr. 7, 2005 Gr. 7, 2006


Perc

ent

of

Stu

den

ts


SLUSD - California Standards Test - Math - Grade 8

12 13 13 16

3 4 4 3

28 2531

40

19 14 13 14

40 42

40

30

4040 42

32

19 2015 14

3635 35

42

1 1 1 0 37 6

10

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Gr. 8 Gen.

Math, 2003

(603)

Gr. 8 Gen.

Math, 2004

(550)

Gr. 8 Gen.

Math, 2005

(510)

Gr. 8 Gen.

Math, 2006

(389)

Gr. 8 Alg. I,

2003 (118)

Gr. 8 Alg. I,

2004 (337)

Gr. 8 Alg. I,

2005 (378)

Gr. 8 Alg. I,

2006 (281)

Grade and Year Tested (# of Students Tested)

Perc

ent

of

Stu

den

ts


SLHS - California Standards Test - Math

914 18

23

410 10 7

2834 32 32

4 6 3 7

35

49 44

48

24

4032

29

31

4538 40

16

34

2525

36

28 31

24

45

31

27 41

30

19

23 22

21

30

29

31

199 7 5

2516

24

19

92 7 6

43

21

3428

0 0 0 0 3 4 7 4 1 1 0 0

1510 9 8

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Alg. I, 2

003

(494

)

Alg. I, 2

004

(585

)

Alg. I, 2

005

(1,0

39)

Alg. I, 2

006

(930

)

Geo.,

2003

(241

)

Geo.,

2004

(255

)

Geo.,

2005

(303

)

Geo.,

2006

(335

)

Alg. II, 20

03 (1

45)

Alg. II, 20

04 (1

95)

Alg. II, 20

05 (2

15)

Alg. II, 20

06 (2

45)

Sum. M

ath, 2

003

(137

)

Sum. M

ath, 2

004

(201

)

Sum. M

ath, 2

005

(176

)

Sum. M

ath, 2

006

(192

)

Grade and Year Tested (# of Students Tested)

Perc

ent

of

Stu

den

ts


ELA & Math CSTs By Ethnicity

SUB-GROUP

2nd ‘05

2nd ‘06

3rd ‘05

3rd ‘06

4th ‘05

4th ‘06

5th ‘05

5th ‘06

6th ‘05

6th ‘06

OVERALL 39 39 26 25 41 40 39 37 35 35

Asian 70 64 40 40 58 60 62 56 51 52

Filipino 55 57 41 42 57 53 56 56 45 44

Hispanic / Latino

24 26 17 16 27 26 26 23 24 25

African America

n

26 26 19 19 27 27 21 21 30 29

White 50 50 37 35 60 59 59 55 48 44

Special Ed

13 11 10 8 13 11 17 13 6 6

English Learners

28 27 7 7 21 20 16 15 11 12

SED 27 27 17 17 33 31 27 27 27 28

ELA CST PERCENT PROFICIENT OR ABOVE

SUB-GROUP

7th ‘05

7th ‘06

8th ‘05

8th ‘06

9th ‘05

9th ‘06

10th ‘05

10th ‘06

11th ‘05

11th ‘06

OVERALL 44 41 35 34 39 39 32 31 36 35

Asian 58 60 46 46 63 67 54 54 54 55

Filipino 59 57 39 39 61 61 41 39 32 34

Hispanic / Latino

32 30 29 28 25 25 18 18 20 20

African America

n

34 33 18 18 27 26 22 21 23 22

White 60 55 56 56 43 42 44 43 49 50

Special Ed

6 4 2 2 2 2 3 3 0 0

English Learners

12 14 7 8 4 4 1 1 2 2

SED 34 31 26 26 33 33 21 23 25 25

ELA CST PERCENT PROFICIENT OR ABOVE

SUB-GROUP

2nd ‘05

2nd ‘06

3rd ‘05

3rd ‘06

4th ‘05

4th ‘06

5th ‘05

5th ‘06

6th ‘05

6th ‘06

7th ‘05

7th ‘06

OVERALL 55 54 47 46 36 35 38 36 32 31 29 28Asian 71 77 59 63 56 58 62 66 55 55 55 56

Filipino 70 69 74 75 56 52 48 45 46 46 34 31Hispanic / Latino

47 47 38 38 24 25 27 26 21 22 20 20

African America

n

38 39 33 31 22 21 15 15 18 17 10 9

White 61 61 56 55 43 44 48 46 43 41 42 41Special

Ed19 16 21 19 8 8 11 8 1 3 2 2

English Learners

50 49 34 34 24 25 25 24 15 14 11 11

SED 49 47 39 39 31 30 28 27 26 26 25 23

Math CST Percent PROFICIENT OR ABOVE

Academic Performance Index(API)

• Measures performance & progress based on results from statewide tests at grades 2-12

• Statewide tests include:

• Numeric index from 200 to 1000• API cycle includes API Base & API Growth• API Growth Target established as 5% of difference between

API Base and 800

Used in API Calculations Subjects GradesCalifornia Standards Test (CSTs) ELA, Math, History-Social Science, Science 2 through 11California Alternate Performance Assessment (CAPA) ELA and Math 2 through 11California High School Exit Examination (CAHSEE) ELA and Math 10 (also 11 & 12 if passed)California Achievement Tests, 6th Edition (CAT6) Reading/Languages Arts, Math, Spelling 3 & 7

SLUSD API Results

Reported by District, School and Subgroup

(2005-2006 API Cycle)

SLUSDGarfieldJeffersonMadisonMcKinleyMonroeRooseveltWashingtonWilsonBancroftMuirSLHSLincoln

"*" means this API is calculated for a small school; therefore, the API is based on small numbers and are less reliable.

Afr

ican

Am

. 20

05-2

006

Gro

wth

Afr

ican

Am

. Met

S

ubgr

oup

Gro

wth

Tar

get

Asi

an 2

005-

2006

Gro

wth

Asi

an M

et

Sub

grou

p G

row

th T

arge

t

Fili

pino

200

5-20

06 G

row

th

Fili

pino

Met

S

ubgr

oup

Gro

wth

Tar

get

His

pani

c/La

tino

2005

-200

6 G

row

th

His

pani

c/La

tino

Met

Sub

grou

p G

row

th T

arge

t

Whi

te 2

005-

2006

Gro

wth

Whi

te M

et

Sub

grou

p G

row

th T

arge

t

SE

D 2

005-

2006

G

row

th

SE

D M

et

Sub

grou

p G

row

th T

arge

t

EL

2005

-200

6 G

row

th

EL

Met

S

ubgr

oup

Gro

wth

Tar

get

SP

ED

200

5-20

06 G

row

th

SP

ED

Met

S

ubgr

oup

Gro

wth

Tar

get

SLUSD 9 7 -1 -4 6 -3 -2 15Garfield 82 Yes 36 Yes 15 YesJefferson -40 No -14 No -14 No -28 NoMadison -41 Yes 13 Yes -63 No -55 NoMcKinley -17 No -8 No 22 Yes -1 NoMonroe 73 Yes 28 Yes 57 Yes 71 Yes 51 YesRoosevelt 64 Yes 42 Yes 12 Yes 67 YesWashington 15 Yes -21 No 34 YesWilson 15 Yes 14 Yes 19 YesBancroft -20 No 51 Yes -20 No 13 Yes -20 No -10 NoMuir 14 Yes 0 Yes 12 Yes -27 No -10 No -14 No -2 No 28 YesSLHS 10 Yes -9 No -11 No -13 No -21 No -15 No -23 No -19 NoLincoln

= not numerically significant = there are no growth targets for LEAs

YesYesNoYesNoNoNo

YesNoNoNo

NoNoNo

YesYesNoYes

YesNoNoNo

NoNoNo

YesYesYesYes

YesNoNoNo

-6-9

-10187

41341122

57-23-13-12

646*

4166

8514

689713675444*

727791679686

650701781722

683704665631*

768825690708

707678768710

99411261905

31

306345238556

263346242339

16704 698 697

Met Growth Target School-

wide

Comparable Improvement (CI)

Both Schoolwide and CI

# of Students incl. In the 2005 API

Growth2006 Growth 2005 Base

2005-2006 Growth Target

API Met Target Growth

2005-2006 Growth

Comparative API Data Over a 4-Year PeriodAlameda County School Districts and High Schools

Alameda County School Districts:

API Data School Districts: 2003 2004 2005 2006 2003 2004 2005 2006 2003 2004 2005 2006 4-Yr. Avg.

Alameda 755 765 784 806 22 10 26 22 2.91% 1.31% 3.32% 2.73% 2.57%Castro Valley 807 813 810 821 11 2 1 11 1.36% 0.25% 0.12% 1.34% 0.77%Hayward 635 653 679 683 12 20 27 4 1.89% 3.06% 3.98% 0.59% 2.38%San Leandro 648 680 697 698 19 -2 19 1 2.93% -0.29% 2.73% 0.14% 1.38%San Lorenzo 677 665 674 689 25 -4 13 15 3.69% -0.60% 1.93% 2.18% 1.80%

Alameda County High Schools:

API DataHigh Schools: 2003 2004 2005 2006 2003 2004 2005 2006 2003 2004 2005 2006 2003 2004 2005 2006 2003 2004 2005 2006 4-Yr. Avg.Alameda 729 734 785 803 3 1 59 17 0.41% 0.14% 7.52% 2.12% 3 3 4 1 100.00% 33.33% 1475.00% 1700.00% 827.08%Encinal 651 665 703 715 10 23 35 11 1.54% 3.46% 4.98% 1.54% 10 8 7 5 100.00% 287.50% 500.00% 220.00% 276.88%Castro Valley 754 760 754 769 17 -9 -16 15 2.25% -1.18% -2.12% 1.95% 3 2 2 2 566.67% -450.00% -800.00% 750.00% 16.67%Hayward 597 616 629 648 28 24 4 19 4.69% 3.90% 0.64% 2.93% 12 10 9 9 233.33% 240.00% 44.44% 211.11% 182.22%Mt. Eden 584 635 657 655 C 45 20 -2 0.00% 7.09% 3.04% -0.31% C 11 8 7 C 409.09% 250.00% -28.57% 210.17%Tennyson 517 575 631 605 C 52 52 -26 0.00% 9.04% 8.24% -4.30% C 14 11 8 C 371.43% 472.73% -325.00% 173.05%San Leandro 646 635 675 665 35 -6 39 -10 5.42% -0.94% 5.78% -1.50% 9 8 8 6 388.89% -75.00% 487.50% -166.67% 158.68%Arroyo 675 677 703 717 32 13 31 14 4.74% 1.92% 4.41% 1.95% 8 7 6 5 400.00% 185.71% 516.67% 280.00% 345.60%San Lorenzo C 549 605 647 C C 56 42 C 0.00% 9.26% 6.49% C C 13 10 C C 430.77% 420.00% 425.38%

"C" = School did not have a valid API base and will not have any target growth information

API Score Growth in API Score % API Growth

% Growth API TargetAPI Score Growth in API Score % API Growth Growth API Target

API Scores for Alameda County School Districts

755

807

635648

677

765

813

653680

665

784810

679697

674

806821

683698 689

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

Alameda Castro Valley Hayward San Leandro San Lorenzo

Alameda County School Districts

AP

I Sco

re 2003200420052006

SLUSD Percent Average API Growth Over Four-year Period

2.93%2.73%

0.14%

1.38%

-0.29%

-0.5%

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

3.5%

1

AP

I Gro

wth

Sco

re

2003 2004 2005 2006 4-Yr. Avg.

Year

Student Subgroup API Growth Targets

• Since 1999 API Growth Targets for numerically significant subgroups was 80 percent of the schoolwide target

• Beginning with the 2006-2007 API Cycle calculations for numerically significant subgroups will parallel schoolwide target calculations

API By Student Subgroups

• African American

• Hispanic/Latino

• EL Hispanic/Latino

Subgroup Percentage of Overall Student Population

Student Groups:

All SLUSD Students 8268 100.00% 8303 100.00% 8253 100.00% 8729 100.00%

African American 1402 16.96% 1451 17.48% 1430 17.33% 1524 17.46%

Hispanic/Latino 2964 35.85% 3074 37.02% 3140 38.05% 3424 39.23%

EL Hispanic/Latino 1368 16.55% 1346 16.21% 1416 17.16% 1393 15.96%

2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007

Number of SLUSD K-12 Students In Each Student Subgroup African American, Hispanic/Latino, and EL Hispanic/Latino

8268 8303 82538729

1402 1451 1430 1524

2964 3074 31403424

1368 1346 1416 1393

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007School Year

Num

ber

of S

tude

nts

All SLUSD Students African American Hispanic/Latino EL Hispanic/Latino

Percent SLUSD K-12 Student Subgroup PopulationsAfrican American, Hispanic/Latino, and EL Hispanic/Latino

16.96% 17.48% 17.33% 17.46%

35.85%37.02% 38.05%

39.23%

16.55% 16.21% 17.16%15.96%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007

School Year

Per

cent

of O

vera

ll S

tude

nt P

opul

atio

n

African American Hispanic/Latino EL Hispanic/Latino

Alameda County School District Data:

African American DataCounty & LEA's: 2004 2005 2006 2004 2005 2006 2004 2005 2006Alameda 629 660 671 7 34 11 1.11% 5.15% 1.64%Castro Valley 726 726 717 1 2 -9 0.14% 0.28% -1.26%Hayward 626 649 649 26 24 0 4.15% 3.70% 0.00%San Leandro 609 623 632 -12 13 9 -1.97% 2.09% 1.42%San Lorenzo 583 603 619 -8 26 16 -1.37% 4.31% 2.58%

Hispanic/Latino DataCounty & LEA's: 2004 2005 2006 2004 2005 2006 2004 2005 2006Alameda 667 688 709 11 26 21 1.65% 3.78% 2.96%Castro Valley 729 722 728 -7 -6 6 -0.96% -0.83% 0.82%Hayward 612 643 647 19 30 4 3.10% 4.67% 0.62%San Leandro 620 643 639 -2 21 -4 -0.32% 3.27% -0.63%San Lorenzo 624 631 650 0 9 19 0.00% 1.43% 2.92%

Alameda County High School Data:

African American DataHigh Schools: 2004 2005 2006 2004 2005 2006 2004 2005 2006 2004 2005 2006 2004 2005 2006 3 Yr. Avg.Encinal 575 646 621 5 69 -25 0.87% 10.68% -4.03% 6 6 4 83.33% 1150.00% -625.00% 202.78%Hayward 608 606 618 32 -11 12 5.26% -1.82% 1.94% 8 7 7 400.00% -157.14% 171.43% 138.10%Mt. Eden 586 589 578 66 -3 -11 11.26% -0.51% -1.90% 9 6 6 733.33% -50.00% -183.33% 166.67%Tennyson 524 584 523 28 57 -61 5.34% 9.76% -11.66% 11 9 6 254.55% 633.33% -1016.67% -42.93%San Leandro 542 592 602 -29 45 10 -5.35% 7.60% 1.66% 6 6 5 -483.33% 750.00% 200.00% 155.56%San Lorenzo 496 585 616 C 95 31 C 16.24% 5.03% C 10 8 C 950.00% 387.50% 668.75%Alameda * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *Castro Valley * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *Arroyo * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Hispanic/Latino DataHigh Schools: 2004 2005 2006 2004 2005 2006 2004 2005 2006 2004 2005 2006 2004 2005 2006 3 Yr. Avg.Alameda 619 683 694 -22 67 11 -3.55% 9.81% 1.59% 2 3 1 -1100.00% 2233.33% 1100.00% 744.44%Encinal 625 642 622 47 21 -21 7.52% 3.27% -3.38% 6 6 4 783.33% 350.00% -525.00% 202.78%Castro Valley 671 656 681 -43 -25 25 -6.41% -3.81% 3.67% 2 2 2 -2150.00% -1250.00% 1250.00% -716.67%Hayward 565 584 606 39 8 22 6.90% 1.37% 3.63% 8 7 7 487.50% 114.29% 314.29% 305.36%Mt. Eden 589 616 612 9 22 -4 1.53% 3.57% -0.65% 61 6 6 14.75% 366.67% -66.67% 104.92%Tennyson 532 588 588 28 50 0 5.26% 8.50% 0.00% 11 9 6 254.55% 555.56% 0.00% 270.03%San Leandro 563 612 599 5 43 -13 0.89% 7.03% -2.17% 6 6 5 83.33% 716.67% -260.00% 180.00%Arroyo 614 639 666 8 36 28 1.30% 5.63% 4.20% 6 5 4 133.33% 720.00% 700.00% 517.78%San Lorenzo 528 574 626 C 36 52 C 6.27% 8.31% C 10 8 C 360.00% 650.00% 505.00%

"*" = Not numerically significant"C" = School did not have a valid API base and will not have any target growth information

API ScoreGrowth in API

Score% API Growth


Score% API Growth

% Growth API Target

% Growth API Target


Score% API Growth

Growth API Target

Growth API Target


Score% API Growth

Alameda County School District Data:

African American DataCounty & LEA's: 2004 2005 2006 2004 2005 2006 2004 2005 2006 3 Yr. Avg.Alameda 629 660 671 7 34 11 1.11% 5.15% 1.64% 2.63%Castro Valley 726 726 717 1 2 -9 0.14% 0.28% -1.26% -0.28%Hayward 626 649 649 26 24 0 4.15% 3.70% 0.00% 2.62%San Leandro 609 623 632 -12 13 9 -1.97% 2.09% 1.42% 0.51%San Lorenzo 583 603 619 -8 26 16 -1.37% 4.31% 2.58% 1.84%

Hispanic/Latino DataCounty & LEA's: 2004 2005 2006 2004 2005 2006 2004 2005 2006 3 Yr. Avg.Alameda 667 688 709 11 26 21 1.65% 3.78% 2.96% 2.80%Castro Valley 729 722 728 -7 -6 6 -0.96% -0.83% 0.82% -0.32%Hayward 612 643 647 19 30 4 3.10% 4.67% 0.62% 2.80%San Leandro 620 643 639 -2 21 -4 -0.32% 3.27% -0.63% 0.77%San Lorenzo 624 631 650 0 9 19 0.00% 1.43% 2.92% 1.45%


Score % API Growth


Score % API Growth

API Subgroup Data: African American and

Hispanic/Latino Students

African American Percent Growth of API TargetSan Leandro High School

-600%

-500%

-400%

-300%

-200%

-100%

0%

100%

200%

300%

400%

500%

600%

700%

800%

Year

Per

cen

t Gro

wth

of A

PI T

arg

et

2004 2005 2006 3 Yr. Avg.

100%(Met 3-Year Combined

Target Growth)

Hispanic/Latino Percent Growth of API TargetSan Leandro High School

-400%

-300%

-200%

-100%

0%

100%

200%

300%

400%

500%

600%

700%

800%

Year

Year

Per

cent

Gro

wth

of A

PI T

arge

t

2004 2005 2006 3 Yr. Avg.

100%(Met 3-Year Combined

Target Growth)

Adequate Yearly Progress(AYP)

• Must meet annual targets that increase over time

• Goal is 100% of students proficient in ELA and mathematics by 2013-2014

• Annual determination for schools and LEAs

Requirements:

Federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) requires states to reports results of each public school and school district

AYP Components

Components Tests Subjects Grades Targets

CST ELA & Math 2 through 8 95%

CAHSEE ELA & Math 10 95%

CST ELA & Math 2 through 8 24.0% / 26.5%

CST ELA & Math 9 through 11 22.3% / 20.9%

CAHSEE ELA & Math 10 380 or Above

3 API(CST, CAPA,

CAHSEE, CAT6)

ELA, Math, History-Social Sci., Science, Reading,

Spelling

2 through 12 590 or 1 pt growth

4 Graduation Rate high schools only

Participation Rate1

Percent Proficient2

• Participation rate– Up to 11 different student subgroups– Two content areas– 22 ways

• Percent proficient– Up to 11 different student subgroups– Two content areas– 22 ways

• API• High school graduation rate

AYP Components

ELA Math

Elementary and Middle

Schools24.4% 26.5%

High Schools 22.3% 20.9%

2004-2007 Percent Proficient Targets

Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs)Percent Proficient ELA

Elementary Schools, Middle Schools, and Elementary School Districts

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Gr. 2 34 29 39 40

Gr. 3 29 25 25 32

Gr. 4 39 36 40 40

Gr. 5 32 37 37 37

Gr. 6 36 33 35 34

Gr. 7 32 37 41 38

Gr. 8 28 29 34 32

1 2 3 4

2003 2004 2005 2006

SLUSD Elementary & Middle Schools ELA Proficient and Above Performance Levels

2004-2007 AYP

Elementary

& Middle ELA %

Proficient Target(24.4%)

2007-2008 AYP

Elementary

& Middle ELA %

Proficient Target(35.2%)

11.2%

88.9%

22.3%

100.0%

77.8%

33.4%44.5%

55.6%66.7%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

2001

-200

2

2002

-200

3

2003

-200

4

2004

-200

5

2005

-200

6

2006

-200

7

2007

-200

8

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2013

-201

4

Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs)Percent Proficient ELA

High Schools and High School Districts

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Gr. 9 40 34 39 37

Gr.10 26 37 31 32

Gr.11 24 28 35 31

1 2 3 42003 2004 2005 2006

SLUSD High Schools ELA Proficient and Above Performance Levels

2004-2007

AYPHigh

School

ELA % Proficient

Target(22.3%)

2007-2008

AYPHigh

School

ELA % Proficient

Target(33.4%)

Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs)Percent Proficient Math

Elementary Schools, Middle Schools, and Elementary School Districts

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Gr. 2 49 39 54 57

Gr. 3 34 36 46 52

Gr. 4 33 31 35 47

Gr. 5 21 26 36 41

1 2 3 4

2003 2004 2005 2006

SLUSD Elementary Schools Mathematics Proficient and Above Performance Levels

2004-2007 AYPElementary

Math % Proficient

Target(26.5%)

2007-2008 AYPElementary

Math % Proficient

Target(37.0%)

0

10

20

30

40

50

Gr. 6 27 28 31 29

Gr. 7 24 31 28 33

General Math 20 21 16 14

Algebra I 39 42 41 52

1 2 3 4

2003 2004 2005 2006

SLUSD Middle Schools Mathematics Proficient and Above Performance Levels

2004-2007 AYP

Middle School

Math % Proficient

Target(26.5%)

2007-2008 AYP

Middle School

Math % Proficient

Target(37.0%)

9.6%

20.9%

32.2%

43.5%

54.8%

66.1%

77.4%

88.7%

100.0%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2001-2002

2003-2004

2005-2006

2007-2008

2009-2010

2011-2012

2013-2014

Annual Measurable Objectives for High Schools - Percent Proficient Math

Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs) Percent Proficient Math High Schools and High School Districts

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Algebra I 23 16 12 16

Geometry 29 22 31 23

Algebra II 10 3 7 6

High School Math 58 31 43 36

1 2 3 4

2004-2007 AYP

HS Math % Proficient

Target (20.9%)

2003 2004 2005 2006

SLUSD High Schools Mathematics Proficient and Above Performance Levels(Algebra & Geometry include Grade 8)

2007-2008 AYP

HS Math % Proficient

Target (32.2%)

Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives

(AMAOs)

AMAOs for English Learners (ELs)

• Performance objectives or targets that all school districts receiving Title III funds must meet

• Must meet all three AMAOs

• Two English language proficiency AMAOs calculated from the California English Language Development Test (CELDT)

• One academic achievement AMAO based on AYP information

AMAO 1Percent Making Annual Progress in Learning English

(CELDT Assessment)

Figure 2

AMAO 1 Targets 2003-04 to 2013-14

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

Per

cen

t o

f S

tud

ents

Mee

tin

g

An

nu

al G

row

th O

bje

ctiv

e

51 51.5 52 52.5 54.1 55.8 57.4 59 60.6 62.2 64

2003-04

2004-05

2005-06

2006-07

2007-08

2008-09

2009-10

2010-11

2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

SLUSD 2005-2006(57.5%)

Figure 3

AMAO 2 Targets 2003-04 to 2013-14

25

35

45

55

Per

cen

t o

f S

tud

ents

Ach

ievin

g

En

gli

sh L

ang

uag

e P

rofi

cie

ncy

30 30.7 31.4 32.1 34.1 36.1 38.1 40.1 42.1 44.1 46

2003-04

2004-05

2005-06

2006-07

2007-08

2008-09

2009-10

2010-11

2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

AMAO 2Percent Attaining English Proficiency

(CELDT Assessment)

SLUSD 2005-2006(37%)

AMAO 3 ELAMeeting AYP Requirements for the EL Subgroup at the District Level

(CST, CAPA, CAHSEE Assessments)

SLUSD 2005-2006(35%)

AMAO 3 MathMeeting AYP Requirements for the EL Subgroup at the District Level

(CST, CAPA, CAHSEE Assessments)

SLUSD 2005-2006(45%)

Program Improvement(PI)

• Applies only to schools and school districts that receive federal Title I funds

• Status assigned only if AYP targets were not met for 2 consecutive years within specific areas

• Must implement additional federal requirements• Exiting PI status requires meeting AYP for 2

consecutive years

San Leandro Unified School DistrictAYP

PI Status

All English- Graduation

Components Language

ArtsRate

SAN LEANDRO UNIFIED Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Not In PI

Elementary Schools

Garfield Elementary No No Yes Yes N/A Year 2

Jefferson Elementary No No Yes Yes N/A Year 1

Madison (James) Elementary Yes Yes Yes Yes N/A Not T1

McKinley Elementary No No Yes Yes N/A Not in PI

Monroe Elementary No Yes No Yes N/A Not T1

Roosevelt Elementary Yes Yes Yes Yes N/A Not T1

Washington Elementary No No Yes Yes N/A Not in PI

Wilson Elementary No No Yes Yes N/A Year 1

Middle Schools

Bancroft Middle No No No Yes N/A Not T1

Muir (John) Middle No No No Yes N/A Not T1

High Schools

San Leandro High No No No Yes Yes Not T1

ASAM Schools

Lincoln High (Continuation) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Not T1

PI Status

Met 2006 Criteria for:

Mathematics API

California High School Exit Exam(CAHSEE)

California High School Exit Examination (CAHSEE)

• Aims to significantly improve pupil achievement in public high schools

• Ensures that pupils who graduate from public high schools can demonstrate grade level competency in reading, writing, and mathematics

• Helps identify students who are not developing skills that are essential for life after high school

• Encourages districts to give these students the attention and resources needed to help them achieve these skills during their high school years

• Is used in determining AYP (participation rate – grade 10 and graduation rate)

0.00%

20.00%

40.00%

60.00%

80.00%

100.00%

Perc

ent o

f Sen

iors

Pas

sing

Comparison of SLUSD High School Seniors Who Passed CAHSEE between 2003-2004 through 2005-2006

2003-2004 67.03%

2004-2005 52.40%

2005-2006 85.34%

Year

364 Students

306 Students

483 Students

Comparison by Ethnicity of SLUSD High School Seniors Who Passed CAHSEE between 2003-2004 through 2005-2006

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%

Per

cent

of S

enio

rs P

assi

ng

2003-2004 33.33% 84.69% 77.78% 78.18% 60.58% 48.98% 70.71%

2004-2005 40.00% 79.00% 55.56% 70.00% 37.65% 35.00% 58.09%

2005-2006 50.00% 92.50% 85.71% 95.35% 84.38% 77.57% 86.07%

Native American

AsianPacific

IslanderFilipino Latino

African-American

White

Student Suspensions & Expulsions

Comparison of the Number of Days SLUSD Students Were Suspended between 2003-2004 through 2005-2006

33673726

5057

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

School Year

# of

Day

s S

LUS

D S

tude

nts

Wer

e S

uspe

nded

2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006

Percent of Students Suspended One or More Times vs. Percent of Student Population by Ethnicity for

the District and for Each School During the 2005-2006 School Year

Note: Schools not depicted had no suspensions

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Per

cent

Percent of Students Suspended

Percent of Student Population

SLUSD Percent of Students Suspended vs. Percent of Total Student Population by Ethnicity(Percent of Students Suspsended One or More Times)

Jefferson ElementaryPercent of Students Suspended One or More Times vs.

Percent of Student Population by Ethnicity

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Pe

rce

nt



McKinley ElementaryPercent of Students Suspended One or More Times vs.


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Pe

rce

nt



Monroe ElementaryPercent of Students Suspended One or More Times vs.


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Pe

rce

nt



Wilson ElementaryPercent of Students Suspended One or More Times vs.


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Pe

rce

nt



Bancroft Middle SchoolPercent of Students Suspended One or More Times vs.


0%5%

10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%

Pe

rce

nt



Muir Middle SchoolPercent of Students Suspended One or More Times vs.


0%5%

10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%

Pe

rce

nt



Lincoln High SchoolPercent of Students Suspended One or More Times vs.


0%5%

10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%

Pe

rce

nt



San Leandro High SchoolPercent of Students Suspended One or More Times vs.


0%5%

10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%50%

Pe

rce

nt



Comparison of the Number of SLUSD Students Expelled between 2003-2004 through 2005-2006

38

51

80

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

School Year

# of

SLU

SD S

tude

nts

Expe

lled

2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006

SLUSD Percent of Students Expelled vs. Percent of Total Student Population by Ethnicity

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Per

cent

Percent of Students ExpelledPercent of Student Population

The End

Documents

San Leandro Unified School Board Looking Closely About Our Data September 6, 2006 Presented by Department of Curriculum and Instruction Prepared by Daniel