Presentation on theme: "Second Street School 2012-2013 KPREP Data Disaggregation."— Presentation transcript:
Second Street School 2012-2013 KPREP Data Disaggregation
School Report Card Detail Our overall school score for accountability performance in the 2012-2013 assessment cycle, without the Program Review calculation of 23%, is 49.7. Our overall school score is down.3 from the 2011-2012 assessment cycle. The Annual Measurable Objective for our school, assigned by the state, was 51.
Achievement In the 2012-2013 assessment cycle our school achievement score increased from 53.7 to 56. The result of an improved Achievement score comes from the reduction of Novice in nearly all categories. The Achievement score is not significantly higher however because many of our students either did not make the jump from Novice to Proficient or fell from Proficient to Novice. Many of our students grew within categories which positively impacted our Achievement and Growth scores. We need to make certain that our efforts produce more proficient and distinguished scores which will in turn bring higher scores in the Achievement category.
Gap Score Our Gap score for the 2012-2013 assessment cycle dropped from 30.6 to 27.9. In comparison with all schools in Franklin County it is apparent that we need to increase achievement and reduce the gap between those that are in the non-duplicated group and those that are not. Gap creates a single student group that includes students with membership in the following groups: African American, Hispanic, Native American, students with disabilities, free/reduced lunch and limited English proficient. The student performance levels of novice, apprentice, proficient, and distinguished are reported for this non-duplicated group. Of the 3 groupings in the Next Generation Learners Accountability model Gap is where we struggle the most. Too many of our students that are in the Non-Duplicated Group are scoring under state norms and are not achieving at their highest potential for achievement. While nearly 70% of our student population is considered a part of the Non-Duplicated Group there is no room for excuses. The data shows that we need to finds new ways to reach the larger portion of our student body. These practices must not exclude any research based practices that have been known to be successful and must include any new ideas that we can get from new sources such as PD 360.
Percent of Students in the Non-Duplicated Group This table describes more clearly what the Gap score indicates. This for Second Street School will be one of the most challenging obstacles to overcome with regards to the accountability model. 69% of students at SSS are considered to be in the Non-Duplicated group. This number is as high as any school in the community. This in addition to our Gap Score is a very clear indication that we have to conduct business differently to reach the larger population of our students.
Putting A Face on the Numbers 2011-2012There were 215 students assessed at SSS. Of those 215 students 71 of them were in there first year at SSS or are no longer students at SSS. 2012-2013There were 235 students assessed at SSS. Of those 235 students 50 of them were in there first year at SSS or are no longer students at SSS. 2013-2014 This year at SSS we will assess 344 students. Of those 344 students 47 of them are in their first academic year in FIS. The increase of the student number to 344 includes the new areas to be assessed at SSS in 7 th and 8 th grades. To compare apples to apple of the past two assessments we will assess 244 students in grades 3-6. The trend has continued to be that we are increasing the number of students year that are assessed at SSS. For the remainder of this school year we will work to improve the infrastructure of what we do on a daily basis to make certain that transiency of students does not negatively impact the education that they receive at SSS. The best part of this information is that with the challenge our teachers and students have been able to continue to grow at a pace that is higher than the state average and is higher than all schools in the county with the exception of 2. **This data was collected on the 11 th of October. Between the dates of October 21 st and October 23 rd we enrolled 30 new students at SSS.
School Growth in Comparison Accountability-Growth A statistical program generates a Student Growth Percentile by comparing an individual students score to the students academic peers using two years of test scores. Growth is reported for reading and mathematics in grades 4 through 8 and 11. Accountability is based on students enrolled a full academic year. This information can be found on page 20 of the school report card for each school in the state. 1 2 Second Street School 61.3State Av. 59.9 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
School Goals 2012-2013 The School Improvement Committee along with each assessed grade level and Program Review Committees met for a total of 5 days in December 2012 to outline goals for the remainder of the 2012-2013 school year. The established goals were to reduce novice by 50% in each of the assessed areas through focused intervention. Skills to be addressed were academic and non-academic. Academic skills to be focused on were determined by each of the grade levels and content areas. Non-academic skills focused on during intervention were those that were suggested from Paul Toughs How Children Succeed. These skills included teaching children how to be persistent, curious, use time wisely, find an urgency, and learn how to win.
Rankings Since 07-08 Statewide Rankings Since 2007-2008 2007-2008668 out of 727 2008-2009649 2009-2010605 2010-2011547 2011-2012567 2012-2013612 out of 730 Notes added on 10/24/13 Elementary Performance Rankings Graph 07-0808-0909-1010-1111-1212-1313-14 547? 567 605 612 649 668 2224112 Number of Intervention Teachers at SSS
School Wide Intervention 2012-2013 Our One to One Intervention initiative included over 40 adults that came in one day a week for 30 minutes to play competitive games with students and to work on the skills identified by Toughs book. All students were assigned to intervention with exposure to these same skills 1 day per week in the regular classroom. All classroom teachers used lab instruction time to have small group intervention while students used school purchased intervention products, Reading Eggs and Dreambox.
Novice Reduction Novice reduction was achieved in all grade levels and in all subject areas for the 2012-2013 assessment cycle. We did not achieve a 50% reduction but were able to receive a reduction in most cases. This is very clear in the Apples to Apples slides that are to follow this slide. Those slides are grade level comparisons as they age. One of the most valuable pieces of evidence from this disaggregation was that in reducing novice we bottle necked in many cases in the Apprentice category. School goals for the 13-14 assessment cycle must include the further reduction of novice but also the increase in students in the proficient and distinguished categories. This will be achieved in all areas by further improving students academic and non-academic skills in math, reading and writing. Reading School Wide Reduction of 4% Math School Wide Reduction of 1% Science Increase in novice of 8% Social Studies Reduction of novice by 19% Writing Reduction of novice by 3 % Language Mechanics Increase of novice by 2%
Apples to Apples The class of 2018, current 8 th grade students: Reading 2011-201230% Novice 46.5% P/D 2012-201327% Novice40.9% P/D Math 2011-201216% Novice62.8% P/D 2012-201320% Novice34.1% P/D
Apples to Apples The class of 2019, our current 7 th graders: Reading 2011-201251% Novice36.7% P/D 2012-201344% Novice26.9% P/D Math 2011-201243% Novice24.5% P/D 2012-201335% Novice32.7% P/D
Apples to Apples The class of 2020, our current 6 th graders: Reading 2011-201238% Novice39% P/D 2012-201330% Novice44% P/D Math 2011-201231% Novice34.4 P/D 2012-201318% Novice46% P/D
Apples to Apples The class of 2021, our current 5 th graders: Reading 2011-201240% Novice44% P/D 2012-201335% Novice44% P/D Math 2011-201236% Novice27% P/D 2012-201333% Novice35% P/D
Apples to Apples The class of 2022, our current 4 th graders: Reading 2011-2012MAP Below 55%Above 45% 2012-201336% Novice21.5% P/D Math 2011-2012MAP Below 68%Above 29% 2012-201342% Novice20.0% P/D
Apples to Apples The class of 2023, our current 3 rd graders: Reading 2012-2013 MAP Below 52%Above 48% Math 2012-2013 MAP Below 67%Above 33%
How Do We Improve? Increase focus in our daily instruction on reading mastery, reading in the content areas,writing of understanding, math computation, number sense, and application. Identify individual student needs for intervention. Use intervention staff and support staff service students needs in addition to regular classroom teachers. Increase conversations at the PLC level with regards to student work, work quality and the quality of feedback given to students and parents. Provide parent packs and other resources on the teacher website for homework help and home intervention. Use classroom technology to increase exposure to knew learning opportunities within the content areas. Target specific groups of students to move into the proficient and distinguished categories. This will increase our ability to reduce gaps and increase scores of students in the non-duplicated group. Continue to work hard and persist through the noise.
Program Review Data Arts and Humanities 6.4Needs Improvement Practical Living 6.5Needs Improvement Writing 7.0Needs Improvement
Explore Data English At or Above BM 48%(68%) Mathematics At or Above BM 28%(36%) Reading At or Above BM 24%(36%) Science At or Above BM 20%(37%)