1. 1 2011 Lodi Unified School District Accountability Progress Report September 20, 2011

2. 2 Accountability Progress Report (APR) – Executive Summary The primary assessments that determine school and district success in meeting State Academic Progress Index (API) and Federal Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) accountability requirements are the STAR and California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE) assessments. Focus Areas for 2011-12, including Algebra II and Chemistry

3. 3 Differences Between API and AYP API results focus on how much schools are improving academically from year-to-year.  Results are reported using scores ranging from 200 to 1000.  California’s expectation is that every school will annually make-up at least 5% of the difference between their base API and the statewide performance target of 800. AYP results focus on school performance, regardless of growth or baseline data.  Results are reported in terms of the: Participation rate for English Language Arts and Mathematics Annual Measureable Objective (AMO) - percent proficient in English Language Arts and Mathematics API as an other indicator Graduation rate as an other indicator Accountability Progress Report – Executive Summary

4. 4 STAR achievements include:  Increasing the percent of students meeting or exceeding standards for the fourth consecutive year in: Grade level English Language Arts, Math, Science, and History / Social Science World History CAHSEE achievements include:  A total of 81% of LUSD Grade 10 students passing the English Language Arts and Math sub-tests of the CAHSEE on their first attempt, representing: The third year in a row that there was an increase in the percent of LUSD students passing the English Language Arts sub-test. A three (3) percentage point increase from 2010 for Math sub-test. API achievements include:  10 schools reaching the state’s goal of 800  20 district schools making significant gains during the current reporting cycle  Eight (8) school making significant gains in current and previous reporting cycles. AYP achievement include:  Six (6) schools, including one (1) Title I Program Improvement school (Needham), meeting 100% of their AYP criteria, and  A total of 13 other schools, including six other (6) Title I schools, meeting at least 80% of their AYP criteria. Accountability Progress Report – Executive Summary Highlights

5. 5 Accountability Progress Report Primary Assessments: Standardized Testing and Reporting Program (STAR) California Standards Test (CST) California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE)

6. 6 APR Primary Assessment – STAR/CST Executive Summary For the fourth consecutive year, there was an increase in the percent of students meeting or exceeding standards in:  Grade level English Language Arts, Math, Science, and History / Social Science  World History From 2010 to 2011, the percent of students meeting or exceeding English Language Arts and Math standards increased for each of these numerically significant student groups:  African American  American Indian Filipino  Hispanic or Latino  White  English Learner  Socioeconomically Disadvantaged  Student with Disabilities

7. 7 Overall, 46% of our students met or exceeded grade level CST English Language Arts standards.  This represents one (1) percentage point increase from 2010 and a ten (10) percentage point increase since 2007. For the fourth consecutive year, the percent of students meeting or exceeding standards in CST English Language Arts increased for at least two (2) of the grade levels tested.  Four-year consecutive percent proficient increase: Grades 8 and 10  Three-year consecutive increase: Grade 2  One-year percent proficient increase: Grades 3 and 11  Percent proficient no change: Grades 4, 5, 6, and 9  Percent proficient decrease: Grade 7 APR Primary Assessment – STAR/CST English Language Arts

8. 8

9. 9 For all of our non-ethnic student subgroups, the percent of students meeting English Language Arts standards increased from 2010 to 2011. For the fourth consecutive year, the percent of students meeting English Language Arts standards steadily increased for Socioeconomically Disadvantaged students. APR Primary Assessment – STAR/CST English Language Arts for Other Subgroups

10. 10 For all of our ethnic student subgroups, the percent of students meeting English Language Arts standards increased from 2010 to 2011 except for two (2). For the fourth consecutive year, the percent of students meeting English Language Arts standards has steadily increased for four (4) of our ethnic subgroups. APR Primary Assessment – STAR/CST English Language Arts for Ethnic Subgroups

11. 11 Overall, 54% of our students met or exceeded grade level CST Math standards.  This represents a three (3) percentage point increase from 2010, and a nine (9) percentage point increase since 2007. For the fourth consecutive year, the percent of students meeting or exceeding standards in grade level CST Math increased for one grade level tested.  Four-year consecutive percent proficient increase: Grade 4  Three-year consecutive percent proficient increase: Grade 7  Two-year consecutive percent proficient increase: Grade 5  One-year percent proficient increase: Grades 2 and 3  Percent proficient no change: Grade 6 APR Primary Assessment – STAR/CST Grade Level Math

12. 12 Overall, 26% of our students met or exceeded end- of-course CST Math standards.  This represents a two (2) percentage point increase from 2010, and a four (4) percentage point increase since 2007. From 2010 to 2011, the percent of students meeting or exceeding standards in CST end-of-course Math increased for four (4) of the subjects tested.  Percent proficient increase: General Math, Algebra I, Geometry, Summative High School Math  Percent proficient decrease: Algebra II APR Primary Assessment – STAR/CST End- of-Course Math

13. 13 APR Primary Assessment – STAR/CST End-of-Course Math

14. 14 APR Primary Assessment – STAR/CST Math for Other Subgroups For all of our non-ethnic student subgroups, the percent of students meeting Math standards increased from 2010 to 2011. For the fourth consecutive year, the percent of students meeting Math standards steadily increased for Socioeconomically Disadvantaged students.

15. 15 APR Primary Assessment – STAR/CST Math for Ethnic Subgroups For all of our ethnic student subgroups, the percent of students meeting Math standards increased from 2010 to 2011 except for one (1). For the fourth consecutive year, the percent of students meeting Math standards has steadily increased for two (2) of our ethnic subgroups.

16. 16 Overall, 51% of our students met or exceeded grade level CST science standards.  This represents a three (3) percentage point increase from 2010, and a 17 percentage point increase since 2007. For the fourth consecutive year, the percent of students meeting or exceeding standards in grade level CST Science increased for two of the grade levels tested.  Four-year percent proficient increase: Grades 8 and 10  Percent proficient decrease: Grade 5 APR Primary Assessment – STAR/CST Grade Level Science

17. 17 Overall, 41% of our students met or exceeded end-of-course science standards.  This represents a three (3) percentage point increase from 2010, and a nine (9) percentage point increase since 2007. For the second consecutive year, the percent of students meeting or exceeding standards in end-of-course science increased for two (2) of the subjects tested.  Two-year percent proficient increase: Biology and Earth Science  One-year percent proficient increase: Physics  Percent proficient decrease: Chemistry APR Primary Assessment – STAR/CST Grade End-of-Course Science

18. 18 Overall, 47% of our students met or exceeded grade level history / social science standards.  This represents a seven (7) percentage point increase from 2010, and a 17 percentage point increase since 2007. APR Primary Assessment – STAR/CST Grade Level History / Social Science

19. 19 Overall, 40% of our students met or exceeded end-of-course history / social science standards.  This represents a seven (7) percentage point increase from 2010, and a 15 percentage point increase since 2007. APR Primary Assessment – STAR/CST World History

20. 20 The purpose of CAHSEE is to improve student achievement in public high schools and ensure that students who graduate from public high schools can demonstrate competency in reading, writing, and mathematics. Results from Grade 10 first-time test-takers are used for high school accountability measures. APR Primary Assessment – CAHSEE Executive Summary

21. 21 A total of 81% of LUSD Grade 10 students passed the English Language Arts and Math sub-tests of the CAHSEE on their first attempt, representing… The third year in a row that there was an increase in the percent of LUSD students passing the English Language Arts sub-test. A three (3) percentage point increase from 2010 for Math sub-test. APR Primary Assessment – CAHSEE Results

22. 22 APR Primary Assessment – CAHSEE Results

23. 23 Accountability Progress Report California Academic Performance Index (API)

24. 24 Academic Performance Index (API) – Executive Summary LUSD’s 2011 Growth API was 749, representing an increase of 12 points compared to the 2010 Base API of 737; California’s API was 778, representing an increase of 10 points. 29 district schools met their school-wide API targets  12 of these schools met all of their subgroup API targets Nine of the district’s ten 800+ schools from last year maintained an 800+ ranking.  One additional school achieved the 800 mark.

25. 25 Twenty (20) of the district’s schools achieved significant growth during the recent API reporting cycle*, including nine (9) of the district’s thirteen Title 1 schools: Three (3) schools showed gains of 40+ points 10 schools showed gains of 20 – 39 points Seven (7) schools showed gains of 10 – 19 points Academic Performance Index (API) – Executive Summary

26. 26 Eight (8) of the district’s schools achieved significant growth of at least 10 points during the recent and previous API reporting cycles including four (4) of the district’s thirteen Title 1 schools: Needham 2009-10 cycle +35, 2010-11 cycle +48 (83 points combined) Live Oak 2009-10 cycle +12, 2010-11 cycle +49 (61 points combined) Podesta Ranch 2009-10 cycle +24, 2010-11 cycle +25 (49 points combined) Sutherland 2009-10 cycle +28, 2010-11 cycle +21 (49 points combined) Bear Creek 2009-10 cycle +21, 2010-11 cycle +23 (44 points combined) Lodi High 2009-10 cycle +18, 2010-11 cycle +22 (40 points combined) Lawrence 2009-10 cycle +21, 2010-11 cycle +18 (39 points combined) Lodi Middle 2009-10 cycle +13, 2010-11 cycle +15 (28 points combined) Academic Performance Index (API) – Executive Summary

27. 27 API – 800+ Schools by Year Number of LUSD Schools at 800+ API: 2011 = 10 2010 = 10 2009 = 10

28. 28 API – District by Subgroups African American +15 American Indian +12 Asian +7 Filipino +19 Hispanic +13 Pacific Islander +27 White +14 Two or More +50 Socioeconomically Disadvantaged +13 English Learners +13 Students with Disabilities +5 Lodi USD 2011 API of 749

29. 29 API Gains by Growth & School 40 + Point Gain Live Oak+49 Needham+48 Parklane+40 20 - 39 Point Gain Westwood+38 Wagner-Holt+29 Morada+28 Clairmont+27 Podesta Ranch+25 Morgan+24 Bear Creek+23 Lodi High+22 Tokay High+22 Sutherland+21 10 – 19 Point Gain Lawrence+18 Middle College+17 Joe Serna Ch.+17 Lodi Middle+15 Delta Sierra+15 Lakewood+12 Washington+11 1 - 9 Point Gain Oakwood+7 Independence +7 McNair+6 Henderson+6 Elkhorn+4 McAuliffe+2 Creekside+2 Mosher+1 Davis+1 Plaza Robles+1

30. 30 No API Change Larson Reese Borchardt 1 - 9 Point Loss Vinewood-3 Tokay Colony-4 Victor-4 Lockeford-8 10 – 19 Point Loss Adams-10 Muir-11 Houston-12 Beckman-12 Millswood-13 Nichols-14 Woodbridge-17 Silva-18 20 - 39 Point Loss Liberty-20 Heritage-39 API Gains by Growth & School

31. 31 Accountability Progress Report Federal Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)

32. 32 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) – Executive Summary LUSD made positive API growth and positive growth in AYP/English Language Arts and AYP/Math for the seventh consecutive year. A total of 47.8% of the students in LUSD performed at or above the Proficient level in English Language Arts; the 2011 AYP target was 67.0%. A total of 50.5% of the students in LUSD performed at or above the Proficient level in Math; the 2011 AYP target was 67.3%. Six (6) schools, including one (1) Title I Program Improvement school (Needham), met 100% of their AYP criteria; another 13 schools, including six (6) Title I schools, met at least 80% of their AYP criteria.  AYP calculations will be revised at the end of the year to include the California Modified Assessment results for students with disabilities in grades 8 through 11. *Per the CDE exclusionary rules, AYP proficiency calculations only include grade 2-8 Standardized Testing and Reporting program and grade 10 California High School Exit Exam results, and excludes results for students who enrolled after the first week of October and for English Learner students enrolled for less than 12 months.

33. 33 Overview of Yearly AYP Targets Year Participation Rate Percent Proficient – English Language Arts Percent Proficient – Mathematics API or growth of at least 1 point Graduation rate or average growth of at least 0.1 percentage point 2002 to 2004 9512*12.8*56082.8 2005 to 2007 9523*23.7*59082.9 2008 9534*34.6*62083.0 2009 9545*45.5*65083.1 2010 9556*56.4*68090.0 2011 9567*67.3*71090.0 20129578*78.2*74090.0 2013 9589*89.1*77090.0 2014 95100* 80090.0 *See Safe Harbor slide

34. 34 Adequate Yearly Progress – Executive Summary Safe Harbor is a method of meeting the Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs) by reducing the percentage of not proficient students.

35. 35 Adequate Yearly Progress Schools that met all or nearly all AYP Targets 100% Met80 – 89% Met Needham (Title 1) Washington (Title 1) ElkhornDelta Sierra Live Oak (Title 1) Mosher Middle CollegeBorchardt Podesta RanchParklane (Title 1) Vinewood 90 – 99% MetWagner-Holt (Title 1) Westwood (Title 1) Henderson Clairmont (Title 1) Plaza Robles MorganTokay Colony

36. 36 AYP – District by Subgroups

37. 37 AYP – District by Subgroups

38. 38 Appendix A: Glossary of Terms AMO – Annual Measurable Objective API – Academic Performance Index APR – Accountability Progress Report AYP – Adequate Yearly Progress CAHSEE – California High School Exit Exam CAPA – California Alternate Performance Assessment CMA – California Modified Assessment CST – California Standards Test STAR – Standardized Testing and Reporting program

39. 39 API 900+ Elkhorn992 Middle College908 API 800 – 899 Podesta Ranch852 Vinewood845 Larson836 Silva830 Reese819 Muir816 Borchardt815 Morgan815 API 750 – 799 Mosher799 Tokay Colony796 Live Oak795 Lodi High791 Morada774 Clairmont772 McAuliffe764 Lakewood760 Woodbridge759 Westwood757 Bear Creek756 Lockeford753 Appendix B – 2011 Academic Performance Index by School

40. 40 API 700 – 749 Adams749 Davis748 Wagner-Holt742 Houston739 Tokay High735 Lodi Middle733 Creekside724 Nichols723 Beckman723 Joe Serna Charter718 Washington717 Millswood713 Needham711 Parklane704 Sutherland703 Delta Sierra700 Below 700. Victor692 Oakwood690 Lawrence687 McNair686 Heritage652 Independence605 Henderson577 Liberty571 Plaza Robles570 Appendix B – 2011 Academic Performance Index by School