Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Performance Comparisons for Mobile County Schools Public Affairs Research Council of Alabama November 4, 2010.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Performance Comparisons for Mobile County Schools Public Affairs Research Council of Alabama November 4, 2010."— Presentation transcript:

1 Performance Comparisons for Mobile County Schools Public Affairs Research Council of Alabama November 4, 2010

2 The PARCA Approach

3 ANALYSIS OF DEMOGRAPHICS AND FINANCES The Goal: Provide a brief analysis of size, diversity, revenues, and expenditures. Factors that must be managed to maximize student performance. Today we are looking at Alabama’s 10 largest school systems. Some have high levels of student poverty, others do not. - Demographics do not determine destiny. Some enjoy higher levels of local tax support than others. - The state foundation program ensures access to basic educational opportunity, but additional local support enhances quality. Some allocate a higher percentage of spending to instructional activities than others.

4 ANALYSIS OF ARMT RESULTS The Goal: Engage the System and Community in a process focused on improving student performance. A positive process that celebrates successes while recognizing areas of focus for improvement. Two important principles: 1.All students can learn at high levels. Demographics do not determine destiny. - Set expectations high. - Develop improvement goals. 2. All schools can improve. Every performance number can change for the better. Labels are inappropriate. - Recognize where we are at the start of the process. - Focus on how to improve from there.

5 THE WAY WE LOOK AT THE DATA The Method: Easily Understood Comparisons The best way to engage the community: comparisons all can understand. - Straightforward comparisons create common understanding. - Complicated methods deny transparency. - Recognizing multiple levels of performance avoids labeling. Data are readily available, but improvement-oriented perspectives are scarce. - Measure where we are, in terms of high expectations. - Celebrate successful performance. - Use the data to raise questions and suggest where to focus. - Set goals for improvement.

6 ANALYZING STUDENT PERFORMANCE The Focus: Subgroup Performance Subgroup analysis ensures that we focus on success for all students. - Goal: Close the gaps between subgroups, - By bringing all performance to the highest level. Focus first on the major student subgroups in the school system. - White – Black, Non-Poverty – Poverty are the major subgroups in Alabama. -Measure each subgroup against its statewide benchmark, as a starting comparison. - Measure the gaps between subgroups in the same way. - Move to higher benchmarks as improvement occurs.

7 SETTING HIGH STANDARDS Focus on Level IV Results Best correlate with what NAEP tells us about Alabama student performance.

8 AVOIDING LABELS Recognize a Range of Performance We score results in five categories. “Pass-fail” scoring methods can categorize schools arbitrarily and lead to labeling.

9 Demographic Comparisons

10

11

12 Financial Comparisons

13

14

15

16

17

18 System-Level ARMT Comparisons

19 Mobile vs. State Benchmarks

20

21

22

23

24

25 Math 3Math 4 Math 5

26 Math 6Math 7 Math 8

27 Reading 3Reading 4 Reading 5

28 Reading 6Reading 7 Reading 8

29 Mobile vs. Other Systems

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47 School-Level ARMT Comparisons

48

49 Demographics don’t determine destiny: All students can learn at high levels. George Hall Elementary, Mobile Co. Brookwood Forest Elementary, Mt. Brook

50

51 ASHGE Comparisons

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63 Enrollment by Grade and Graduates

64

65

66


Download ppt "Performance Comparisons for Mobile County Schools Public Affairs Research Council of Alabama November 4, 2010."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google