1. Data Overview and Analysis for the Past Five Years N ORTHWOOD Elementary School Presentation for NWES Faculty on November 12, 2013 Presented by: Megan McGuire

2.  This presentation is intended to: ◦ Raise awareness of areas of strengths and weaknesses of our school in comparison to previous year’s data at our school and within our district ◦ Be a discussion tool of “next steps” for further success ◦ To look at “best practices” and see if we can make them even better than they already are.

3.  This school is a part of the Fulton County School System. It is one of the fifty- eight elementary schools in this county.  According to the 2011-2012 School Profile information present, the following data has been retained. Northwood is made up of a six percent Asian, five percent Multi Racial, thirteen percent African American or Black, twenty-one percent Hispanic, and fifty-five percent White population.  Our grade level breakdown was the following during the 2011-2012 school year: kindergarten had one hundred and twenty-nine students, first grade had one hundred and forty-six students, second grade had one hundred and nineteen students, third grade had one hundred and thirty-seven students, fourth grade had one hundred and sixteen students, and fifth grade had one hundred and twenty-five students.  The total student population was seven hundred and seventy-two students. Within our student population we have fourteen percent of students with disabilities, nine percent that are English Language Learners, twenty-seven percent of our students are on Free/Reduced Lunch, and a twenty-two percent mobility rate for transient students.

5. N= Student Breakdown: Third grade had one hundred and thirty-seven students, fourth grade had one hundred and sixteen students, and fifth grade had one hundred and twenty-five students. X-Axis: Our School vs. Fulton Comparison Y-Axis: Percentage of success

6. N= Student Breakdown: Third grade had one hundred and thirty-seven students, fourth grade had one hundred and sixteen students, and fifth grade had one hundred and twenty-five students. X-Axis: Our School vs. Fulton Comparison Y-Axis: Percentage of success

7. N= Student Breakdown: Third grade had one hundred and thirty-seven students, fourth grade had one hundred and sixteen students, and fifth grade had one hundred and twenty-five students. X-Axis: Our School vs. Fulton Comparison Y-Axis: Percentage of success

8. N= Student Breakdown: Third grade had one hundred and thirty-seven students, fourth grade had one hundred and sixteen students, and fifth grade had one hundred and twenty-five students. X-Axis: Our School vs. Fulton Comparison Y-Axis: Percentage of success

9. The following slides will look at CRCT data over a five year span. The number of students tested varies depending on the grade and grade level that the data is presented for. However, an average number of students in each grade is one hundred-twenty students for each grade level, each year. The 2010-2011 data is presented for each graph.

10.  This data looks critically at the number of students in the meets and exceeds categories.  The reason for looking at data in this way, is to see how we can increase rigor in our classroom to move students from the meets to exceeds category on these assessments.  This is importance in regards to the College and Career Ready Performance Index, to see if our students have the skills needed for future success.

11.  Part of the Statewide Testing Program, this writing assessment consists of an evaluation of the student’s response to an assigned topic. The topic type may be narrative, persuasive, or expository.  Similar to the CRCT, scores are reported as Does Not Meet, Meets and Exceeds Standards.

12. N= Student Breakdown: fifth grade had one hundred and twenty-five students in 2010-2011. X-Axis: Students who did not meet, met, and exceeded for our school Y-Axis: Percentage of success

13. N= Student Breakdown: 2010-2011: one hundred and twenty-five students. 2011-2012: one hundred and sixteen students. 2012-2013: one hundred and thirty-seven students. X-Axis: Year data was taken Y-Axis: Percentage of success

14. N= Student Breakdown: 2010-2011: Third grade had one hundred and thirty-seven students, fourth grade had one hundred and sixteen students, and fifth grade had one hundred and twenty-five students. X-Axis: Our School vs. Fulton Comparison Y-Axis: Percentage of success

15.  Areas of success: Reading Skills and Vocabulary Acquisition 90%  Areas for improvement: Reading for Information 78%  48 Students within 13 points of Level 3  2 Students on Level 1 (4 th )

16. N= Student Breakdown: 2010-2011: Third grade had one hundred and thirty-seven students, fourth grade had one hundred and sixteen students, and fifth grade had one hundred and twenty- five students. X-Axis: Our School vs. Fulton Comparison Y-Axis: Percentage of success

17.  Areas of Strength Students on average are scoring mid 80%  Areas for Improvement Identifying students meets category and moving them to exceeds  53 Students within 12 points of Level 3  6 Students at Level 1 (4 th )

18. N= Student Breakdown: 2010-2011: Third grade had one hundred and thirty-seven students, fourth grade had one hundred and sixteen students, and fifth grade had one hundred and twenty-five students. X-Axis: Our School vs. Fulton Comparison Y-Axis: Percentage of success

19.  Areas of Strength All areas  Areas for Improvement Identifying students meets category and moving them to exceeds  31 Students within 15 points of Level 3  19 Students at Level 1 (5-3 rd, 8-4 th, 6-5 th )

20. N= Student Breakdown: 2010-2011: Third grade had one hundred and thirty-seven students, fourth grade had one hundred and sixteen students, and fifth grade had one hundred and twenty-five students. X-Axis: Our School vs. Fulton Comparison Y-Axis: Percentage of success

21.  Areas of Strength Life Science School average 82% correct  Areas for Improvement Earth Science School average 72% correct  23 Students within 12 points of Level 3  22 Students at Level 1 (2-3 rd, 10-4 th, 10-5 th )

22. N= Student Breakdown: 2010-2011: Third grade had one hundred and thirty-seven students, fourth grade had one hundred and sixteen students, and fifth grade had one hundred and twenty-five students. X-Axis: Our School vs. Fulton Comparison Y-Axis: Percentage of success

23.  Areas of Strength Economics and History school average 82% correct  Areas for Improvement Government/Civics school average 73% correct  39 Students within 13 points of Level 3  20 Students at Level 1 (2-3 rd, 10-4 th, 8-5 th )

24.  Regarding the Criterion Reference Competency Test (CRCT), Northwood has made significant strides towards success.  The April 2013 test results indicate the following data. ◦ Third grade had one hundred percent of their students meet or exceed standards for at least one subject. ◦ Additionally, seventy-four percent of students exceeded the Reading portion and a ten percent gain was made in the “exceeds” category for the Social Studies portion. ◦ Fourth grade made double digit gains in the “exceeds” category for Math. ◦ Fifth grade had one hundred percent of their students meeting or exceeding the Language Arts portion of the test.

25.  These CRCT scores are important for future success.  They play a role in our College and Career Ready Performance Index, which shows us how we compare to others in our county and state, in regards to college and career readiness.

26.  “ Georgia was one of 10 states granted a waiver from the federal No Child Left Behind Act in February 2012. The state created a new accountability system called the College and Career Ready Performance Index, which will roll out for the first time this spring. The Index will help us tell parents and the public how schools are performing in a more comprehensive manner than the pass/fail system previously in place under Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP).  The Index supports the state’s core educational principles: ◦ exemplary student achievement that prepares all for success in college and careers ◦ effective teaching and leadership in all schools ◦ innovative school improvement, particularly in low performing schools ◦ reduction in the duplicative reporting requirements for local school districts.” (http://www.gadoe.org/)

27.  The CCRPI is broken into three sections.  Each section has different domains and weights. More details are on the slides to come.  The three sections are:  Achievement  Progress  Gap Closure.

28. HS all 8 EOCT Courses (3.5% Each) ES & MS all 5 CRCT areas (5.6% Each) Content (28%) Access for ELL Growth Inclusion of students w/Disabilities Lexile scores, Writing Scores CTAE, Grad Plans, Attendance SAT, AP, ACT, IB, World Language Credit Student Readiness (21%) HS 4 and 5 Year Cohort Grad Rates ES/MS Exceeds on CRCT Grades 5 & 8 passing 4 core subjects Graduation Prediction (21%) Achievement ACHIEVEMENT – measures actual student performance 28

29. Students are compared to similar performing peers Median Growth Percentile at the School Growth Percentile (15%) PROGRESS– measures student growth at a school, regardless of where they started 29

30. Sub Groups must 15 students to be measured Sub Groups compared to targets o 25 th %ile to State Mean Sub Group Performance (15%) 30 GAP CLOSURE– refers to the school’s ability to raise student performance in groups that have persistently lagged.

31. By comparing the percentage of students in these subgroups, and their performance on state tests, schools will be awarded up to 10 additional points to their index score Subgroups considered are: o Economically disadvantaged o English Language Learners o Students with Disabilities o 6 Different Ethnic Categories Challenge Point Awards 31 CHALLENGE POINTS – maximum of 10 “bonus” points for successfully serving traditionally hard to serve student groups.

32. Northwood scored 96.6  17 th in Fulton County overall  All schools above use have more Achievement Points and Progress Points (except one) Challenge Points  15 th with 5.1  Highest 8.9  3.8 points we are the 1 st in Fulton County overall EL/ED/SWD Performance Points  15 th with 3.6  Highest is 7.4

33.  What change are you going to implement this week individually in your instruction?  What is one change that your grade level is going to work on and hold each other accountable for?  How will you increase the rigor in your classrooms?  How is the rigor of your instruction and activities going to change?

34.  As you leave, please list a “take away” and an idea of one way that you are going to change your rigor, instruction, or educational practice in the week to come. Take Away Idea of one way that you are going to change your rigor, instruction, or educational practice Example: It is imperative to have rigorous instruction in order to advance students from “meets” to “exceeds.” Example: Prepare rigorous depth of knowledge questions for my lessons in advance.