FORM 3:1 Variety of
Academic and Non-Academic Assessment Measures
ACADEMIC DATA
1. State Report Card:
Sub-Group Disaggregated CRT
Writing Scores
No Child Left Behind
Criterion Reference Student Achievement (3 year average)
TVAAS (Value Added)
CRT RCPI Cut Scores
2. Terra Nova Second Grade
Scores: Median Percentile
Performance Level Summary
(Comparison school and
national)
3. Mean Scale Scales:
Comparison Males and Females (3-8)
4. TVAAS Performance
Disaggregated Report:
Economically Disadvantaged
(Number of students 4-8)
5. Performance
Disaggregated Diagnostic Report:
Special Education (Males and
females by numbers)
6. Terra Nova Achievement CRT Performance Summary Percentages:
Years 2004-05 - Grades
(3-8)
7. STAR Reading Growth Report: Grades 1-8
8. STAR Literacy Test: Grades K and 1
9. Promotion and Retention: Three-year comparison (grades K-8)
* Tables 1-9
NON-ACADEMIC
10. Attendance and Enrollment: Three-year data
11. Special Education Enrollment
12. Student Mobility
13. Free/Reduced Lunch Data
14. Parent, Teacher/Administrator, and Student Surveys
15. Community Impact
·
Tables 10-13
FORM 3:2 DATA COLLECTION
AND ANALYSIS
Describe the data
collection and analysis process used in determining your strengths and
weaknesses.
All of our teachers and
administrators are involved in the analysis of student performance data as well
as non-academic data throughout the school year. Our data information is looked
at as it is made available to the faculty. We began our academic data
analysis shortly after school began so teachers could identify strengths and
challenge areas, as well as the instructional needs of their present students.
The teachers and administrators met several times in grade levels as well as
school wide groups to look at our 2005 Terra Nova Test scores. We looked at all the Terra Nova Test Data,
STAR and STAR Literacy Test Data, teachers’ present students’ cumulative
records and pre-tests that were given in subject areas to determine strengths
and challenge areas. The school wide
coordinators then converted data for the last three years into charts, graphs,
and tables and shared the information with the faculty and committee
members.
In November, when our State
Report Card and other Terra Nova Test Data were made available to our school,
we again looked at our academic strengths and challenge areas and made plans to
teach, re-teach, and review skills that students did not master. We then looked
at school wide strengths and challenge areas in our school program and decided
to focus on these areas as well as the individual needs of our students.
The teachers and administrators
also looked at our non-academic data as well as our schools mission statement,
vision, beliefs, and our desired learning results, and determined the areas
that our school needed to focus on. Some community issues and challenge areas
were identified and discussed, but our school does not have any control over
these issues.
In preparing our School
Plan, our school wide coordinators set up several planning meetings for each of
the six School Plan components. EVERY
teacher in our school was a committee member on one of the six components. Each component had representatives from
primary, intermediate and middle grades. A chairperson was selected for each
component. The two school wide
coordinators, the principal, and assistant principal served on each component
committee. We also had community
members, usually parents, and students participate in our Title I Committee
meetings. The committee members again looked at our entire academic and
non-academic data before deciding on our school’s target areas for the
2006-2007 school year.
FORM 3.3: REPORT CARD
DISAGGREGATED DATA
Provide Narrative
Analysis of Disaggregated Report Card Data
Our stakeholders (committee
members, all teachers/administrators, other staff and community members) looked
at our state report card (Table I) and
also reflected upon York’s mission statement, our vision, our beliefs,
our desired results for student learning, and our SIP. The group came to the consensus that
although our students were making progress and scoring in the average range (50
to 52 percentile in reading/language and math and 49 percentile on science and
social studies on the Criterion Reference part of the Terra Nova and also
showing AYP on the “No Child Left Behind” for the past three years), we were
not satisfied with the report card grades or the amount of progress that our
students were making in these areas.
Our TVAAS grades (Table 2) (CRT 3-year average) has remained a “C” in
reading/language, dropped to a “C” in math, dropped to a “D” in social studies,
but did increase to a “C” in science.
Our writing grades have also decreased from an “A” to a “B” over the
past three year period in grade 5 and remained at a “B” in grade 8 (Table I).
After many meetings with our stakeholders and reviewing our
state report card grades, the group came to the consensus that most of our
students are scoring in the proficient level on the CRT portion of the test
with few students reaching the advanced level. (Sub-Group CRT-Table I). After much discussion and reflection on all
data, the group came to the conclusion that students had difficulty applying
thinking and reasoning skills across the curriculum in all subject areas.
Students in all grade levels also seem to have trouble applying effective writing
skills across the curriculum (Writing Scores-Table I, and teacher consensus
grades K-8)
FORM 3.4: NARRATIVE
SYNTHESIS OF ALL DATA
York
Elementary looked at both academic and non-academic data to determine our
strengths and challenges. One of our
strengths was TCAP Writing Report Card scores for the 5th and 8th grade 3-year
average has been a “B” (Table 1).
Another strength is that our Terra Nova CRT Report Card 3-year average
grade has been a “B” in math for the years 2003-2005 (Table 1). Terra Nova median percentile scores for
grade 2 were 60 percent and above in reading and math and also higher than the
National Level(Table 3). All of the federal benchmarks (AYP) for NCLB have been
met for the 3 year period (Table 1). Reading growth in grades 1-4 have been 1
year and above for the past three years according to the STAR Reading Growth
Report (Table 2). Grades kindergarten
and first have shown growth for the past two years according to the STAR
Literacy Test (Table 8). Another
strength is that educators are accountable for student learning and believe
students can learn (Table 11). Teachers also give help when it is needed
(Table 13).
Our non-academic strengths include attendance percentages
improving for the past three years (Table 9), parents feeling welcome at our
school (Table 12), and students feeling that teachers are fair (Table 13).
Some of our academic challenges include a three year average
of a “C” on our Terra Nova State Report Card in reading/language, science, and
social studies (Table 1), our average 3-year percentile score in
reading/language is 50 %, and improving writing in all grade levels (Table 1),
and successful transition between grade and school levels (Table 11).
Other challenges include: the
percent of male and female scale scores on the Terra Nova Test ,including the
economically disadvantaged students, were on the proficient level (Tables 4
& 5). Another challenge is that
more economically disadvantaged females scored in the non-proficient levels in
all subject areas than males (Table 5), and that more special education
students including CDC students scored in the non-proficient level (Table
6). A major challenge for us to
overcome is the fact that we are the center for developmentally delayed
students. Students whose needs cannot
be met at their home school are transported to York. These students (CDC) then must take the Terra Nova Test on an age
appropriate level instead of on their ability level (Table 7). We also need to decrease the number of students
retained (Table 9), have grades 5-8 show a year’s growth on the STAR Reading
Test (Table 8), and have teacher’s collaborate more in developing instructional
units (Table 11).
Our non-academic challenges include a high mobility rate (Table 10),
and a high unemployment rate in our county (School Profile-Component I). Our school is located in the midst of a low
income, high poverty area with many low income housing units and the county
housing project surrounding our school (Community Impact 14). Although, this is not something we can
remedy, it does effect our student achievement.
FORM 3.5: PRIORITIZED
LISTS OF GOAL TARGETS
A List of Our Prioritized
Goal Targets is:
1. More students need to score in the advanced level instead of the proficient level in reading/language on the Criterion Reference Part of the Terra Nova test, which would raise our State Report Card grade from a C to a B and would raise our TVAAS report card grade as well.
2. Our reading/language three-year average CRT percentile score needs to increase to 52% or above.
3. Writing grades need to increase from a B to an A on our state
report card.
4. More economically disadvantaged females and special education students, including all the students in CDC classes (all county wide students at our school), need to score in the proficient levels in all subject areas.
5. Focusing on comprehension and higher order thinking skills across
the curriculum in K-8 and in all subject areas would raise report card grades
in all subject areas.
6. Reduce the number of students who are retained.
7. Students need to respect others.