Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

School Improvement Advisory Committee Meeting October 25, 2011.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "School Improvement Advisory Committee Meeting October 25, 2011."— Presentation transcript:

1 School Improvement Advisory Committee Meeting October 25, 2011

2 The mission of the Pekin Community School, serving as a unifying agent of our communities, is to provide and promote lifelong learning through its commitment to quality educational programs that prepare the students to be effective, successful, and responsible citizens.

3  All K-12 students will achieve at high levels in reading comprehension, prepared to be effective, successful, and responsible citizens.  All K-12 students will achieve at high levels in mathematics, prepared to be effective, successful, and responsible citizen.  All K-12 students will achieve at high levels in science, prepared to be effective, successful, and responsible citizens.  All K-12 students will use technology in developing proficiency in reading, mathematics, science, social studies, and 21 st century learning skills.  All K-12 students will feel safe and connected to school.

4  Improve secondary student achievement in science on standardized tests, such as on the ACT or ITEDs by ensuring alignment between the curriculum and the test (e.g. give students more practice with applied knowledge, like analyzing data on charts and graphs)  Continue to improve and update student access to technology and increase the students understanding of technology and the applications of technology throughout the grade levels.

5 District Assessments

6 Class of 2012-SeniorsReading % ProficientMath% ProficientScience % Proficient Scores in 9th grade th gradePlan Test 11th grade Class of JuniorsPercent ProficientPercebt ProficientPercent Proficient ReadingMathScience Scores in 8th grade th grade th gradePlan Test Class of 2014-SophomoresPercent Proficient ReadingMathScience Scores in 7th grade th grade th grade Class of 2015-FreshmenPercent Proficient ReadingMathScience Scores in 6th grade th grade th grade768890

7 Class of th GradersPercent Proficient Reading % Proficient Science % Proficient Math % Proficient Scores in 5 th Grade th Grade th Grade Class of th GradersPercent Proficient ReadingMathScience Scores in 4 th Grade th Grade th Grade Class of th GradersPercent Proficient ReadingMathScience Scores in 3 rd Grade th Grade th Grade949597

8 Class of th GradersPercent Proficient ReadingMathScience Scores in 2nd grade rd grade th grade Class of th GradersPercent Proficient MathReadingScience Scores in 1st grade9078N/A 2nd grade rd grade9694 Class of rd GradersPercent Proficient ReadingMathScience Scores in 1st grade8478N/A 2nd grade Class of nd Graders Scores in 1st grade9878N/A

9 ReadingMath GradePekinStateGradePekinState 3rd96.09%77.32%3rd94.00%77.70% 4th97.67%79.85%4th100%81.34% 5th93.84%79.85%5th95.39%79.41% 6th76.47%69.12%6th84.61%74.22% 7th78.18%74.00%7th89.09%78.93% 8th76.47%74.35%8th88.24%76.46% 11th78.57%76.77%11th87.50%76.41% Science GradePekinState 3rd94.12%81.59% 4th97.67%82.45% 5th96.92% 81.84% 6th86.54%75.64% 7th85.44%82.72% 8th90.20%85.53% 11th83.93%81.32%

10 Percent of Students Grade Exceeds Standards Meets Standards Approaching Standards Below Standards Fall vs Spring Scores 3rd0 vs 64 vs 3719 vs 3977 vs 18 4th0 vs 99 vs 2141 vs 6750 vs 2 5th1 vs 225 vs 3033 vs 3661 vs 13 6th0 vs 353 vs 398 vs 1489 vs 12 7th3 vs 4610 vs 3040 vs 1547 vs 9 8th0 vs 240 vs 3512 vs 2288 vs 19

11 Math Percent of Students GradeExceeds StandardsMeets StandardsApproaching StandardsBelow Standards Winter vs Spring Scores 3rd2 vs 626/3728 vs 3945/18 4th3 vs 927 vs 2152 vs 6718 vs 2 5th8 vs 2211 vs 3050 vs 3632 vs 13 6th3 vs vs 3929 vs 1458 vs 12 7th0 vs 4640 vs 3040 vs 1520 vs 9 8th20 vs 2430 vs 3533 vs 2220 vs 19

12 %Frustrated%Instructional%Independent Grade LevelFall/Spring Grade 171/0%13/23%16/77% Grade 224/5%29/49%47/45% Grade 315/12%35/28%50/60% Grade 422/13%46/40%32/47% Grade 512/22%55/46%21/32% Grade 616/6%25/23%49/71% Grade 730/22%47/49%22/29% Grade 845/42%30/43%25/16% Grade 1114/26%58/49%28/25%

13 YearNumber ofPercent ofEnglishMathReadingScienceComposite Senior Students Tested Pekin vs State Score %20.5 / / / / / %21.8/ / / / / %19.3/ / / / / %20.6/ / / / / %20.6/ / / / /22.3

14  89.80% of the 2011 Pekin senior class upon graduation last May intended to pursue post secondary level classes  100% of the 2011 Pekin senior class completed the Core program  57.45% of those tested in 2011 Pekin senior class had a composite ACT score of 20 or higher  Graduation rate for the 2011 senior class was 97.9% (48 out of 49 students-1 dropped out)

15 School Perceived to be Safe (I feel safe at school.) 90% Favorable Response School Expectations/Boundaries (At my school there are clear rules about what students can and cannot do.) 72% Favorable Response Safe (Nonviolent) School Environment (Things stolen, deliberately damaged, threatened or injured by someone with a weapon) 98% Favorable Response

16 School Staff/Student Support (My teachers care about me, my teachers are available to talk with students one-on-one, my teachers notice when I am doing a good job and let me know about it.) 47% Favorable Response Bullying (In the last 39 days, how many times have you been…called names, was made fun of, teased in a hurtful way, other students left me out of things on purpose, I was hit, kicked, pushed or shoved around.) 49% Favorable Response Family Involvement and Support (How often do my parents/guardian knows where I am, who I am with, checks to make sure I have done my homework, finds out if I have done something wrong/punishes, good/praises me.) 61% Favorable Response

17  Assessments Data: Did BRI Scores Improve from Fall to Spring? Was There Improvement in Skills Iowa Benchmark Exam Data From Fall to Spring? Was there Improvement in our ITBS/ITED Scores from 2010 to 2011?

18 Did the District’s Technology Increase? The District Has Approximately 550 Computers for Student Usage K-12  1:1 Computers in 6 th Grade – 12 Grade  2 MacBook Mobile Labs for the 3-5 Wing  1 MacBook Mobile Lab for the K-2 Wing  1 Dedicated Lab in the Media Center for K-12  2 Dedicated Labs in the High School Computer Application Courses All high school graduates must take at least one application class (multiple classes are offered) Keyboarding is taught as early as 3 rd grade

19 Are We Preparing our Students for Post Secondary Life better?  Concurrent Enrollment 83% of the 2012 senior class is enrolled in at least one concurrent enrolled course  ACT Improvement in the percent of students taking the ACT Composite score growth in trend data and Pekin versus State data

20 What are we Doing to Help Make our Students Feel Safe and Connected?  Classroom Curriculum Linda Anderson, Guidance K-5, Student Success Skills Tim Bartels, Guidance 6-12, I Have A Plan, Career Exploration, Building Relationships, Bullying and Harassing Units KC STARR  Presenters Tina Mier, Cyber-bullying, Buck Coleman and Brain Hiller, Making good choices and being a positive influence to others Climb Theater

21 Has it Changed? Must it Continue to Change? NCLB Required Changes 2002 vs 2012 Grade LevelReadingMath 4th grade64% vs 88%62% vs 87% 8th grade60% vs 86%58% vs 86% 11th grade69% vs 85%69% vs 90% Iowa Blueprint May Require Changes Governor Branstad and the Iowa Department of Education Blueprint represents a comprehensive plan that “Builds on Iowa’s strong education foundation but takes the steps necessary to remodel our house for years to come.”


Download ppt "School Improvement Advisory Committee Meeting October 25, 2011."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google