1 / 38

2011-12 Lodi Unified School District Accountability Progress Report

2011-12 Lodi Unified School District Accountability Progress Report. November 13, 2012. Accountability Progress Report ( APR) – Executive Summary.

ophira
Télécharger la présentation

2011-12 Lodi Unified School District Accountability Progress Report

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 2011-12 Lodi Unified School DistrictAccountability Progress Report November 13, 2012

  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 2012-13, including Earth Science and Physics

  3. Accountability Progress Report – Executive Summary 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

  4. Accountability Progress Report – Executive Summary Highlights • STAR achievements include: • Increasing the percent of students meeting or exceeding standards for the fifth consecutive year in: • Grade level English Language Arts (ELA) • Math • 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. • API achievements include: • 11 schools reaching or exceeding the state’s goal of 800 • The district average growth API rising to 760, representing a four-year 40-point and a one-year 11-point gain, respectively • 16 schools exceeding the district’s four-year gain, with 12 of these schools also exceeding the district’s11-point gain • 4 schools with four consecutive years of year-to-year improvement on their growth API. • AYP achievement include: • Steadily increasing ELA and Math proficiency based on our district’s AYP reports; and • One Title 1 schools meeting 100% of its AYP criteria.

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

  6. APR Primary Assessment – STAR/CST Executive Summary • For the fifth consecutive year, there was an increase in the percent of students meeting or exceeding standards in: • Grade level English Language Arts • Math • Science • World History • From 2011 to 2012, the percent of students meeting or exceeding English Language Arts and Math standards increased for each of these numerically significant student groups: • African American • Asian • Filipino • Hispanic or Latino • Pacific Islander • White • Socioeconomically Disadvantaged

  7. APR Primary Assessment – STAR/CST English Language Arts • Overall, 49% of our students met or exceeded grade level CST English Language Arts standards. • This represents three (3) percentage point increase from 2011 and a ten (10) percentage point increase since 2008. • 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 • One-year percent proficient increase: Grades 4, 5, 6, and 7 • Percent proficient no change: Grades 2, 3, 9, and 11

  8. APR Primary Assessment – STAR/CST ELA

  9. APR Primary Assessment – STAR/CST ELA for Non-Ethnic Student Subgroups • For all of our non-ethnic student subgroups, the percent of students meeting English Language Arts standards increased from 2011 to 2012. • For the fourth consecutive year, the percent of students meeting English Language Arts standards steadily increased for Socioeconomically Disadvantaged students.

  10. APR Primary Assessment – STAR/CST ELA for Ethnic Student Subgroups • For all of our ethnic student subgroups, the percent of students meeting English Language Arts standards increased from 2011 to 2012 except for one (1). • For the fourth consecutive year, the percent of students meeting English Language Arts standards has steadily increased for four (4) of our ethnic subgroups.

  11. APR Primary Assessment – STAR/CST Grade Level Math • Overall, 55% of our students met or exceeded grade level CST Math standards. • This represents a one (1) percentage point increase from 2011, and a nine (9) percentage point increase since 2008. • 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 7 • Three-year consecutive percent proficient increase: Grade 5 • Two-year consecutive percent proficient increase: Grade 3 • One-year percent proficient increase: Grade 6 • Percent proficient decrease: Grades 2 and 4

  12. APR Primary Assessment – STAR/CST End-of-Course Math • Overall, 32% of our students met or exceeded end-of-course CST Math standards. • This represents a six (6) percentage point increase from 2011, and a nine (9) percentage point increase since 2008. • From 2011 to 2012, 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: Algebra I, Geometry, Algebra II, Summative High School Math • Percent proficient decrease: General Math

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

  14. APR Primary Assessment – STAR/CST Math for Non-Ethnic Student Subgroups • The percent of students meeting Math standards increased from 2011 to 2012 for two (2) of the non-ethnic student subgroups. • For the fourth consecutive year, the percent of students meeting Math standards steadily increased for Socioeconomically Disadvantaged students.

  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 2011 to 2012. • For the fourth consecutive year, the percent of students meeting Math standards has steadily increased for three (3) of our ethnic subgroups.

  16. APR Primary Assessment – STAR/CST Grade Level Science • Overall, 53% of our students met or exceeded grade level CST science standards. • This represents a two (2) percentage point increase from 2011, and a 11 percentage point increase since 2008. • 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 no change: Grade 5

  17. APR Primary Assessment – STAR/CST End-of-Course Science • Overall, 45% of our students met or exceeded end-of-course science standards. • This represents a four (4) percentage point increase from 2011, and a 10 percentage point increase since 2008. • For the third consecutive year, the percent of students meeting or exceeding standards in end-of-course science increased for two (2) of the subjects tested. • Three-year percent proficient increase: Biology • One-year percent proficient increase: Chemistry • Percent proficient decrease: Earth Science, Physics

  18. APR Primary Assessment – STAR/CST Grade Level History / Social Science • Overall, 47% of our students met or exceeded grade level history / social science standards. • This represents no percentage point increase from 2011, and a 14 percentage point increase since 2008.

  19. APR Primary Assessment – STAR/CST World History • Overall, 43% of our students met or exceeded end-of-course history / social science standards. • This represents a three (3) percentage point increase from 2011, and a 15 percentage point increase since 2008.

  20. APR Primary Assessment – CAHSEE Executive Summary • 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.

  21. APR Primary Assessment – CAHSEE Results • 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… • A one (1) percentage point increase from 2011 for Math sub-test. • No change in the percentage of students passing for English Language Arts.

  22. APR Primary Assessment – CAHSEE Results

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

  24. Schools by 2012 Growth API Range

  25. API Trend: Non-Ethnic Student Subgroup

  26. API Trend: Ethnic Student Subgroup

  27. API Trend Comparison: Schools With Greater Growth Than District Average Since 2008 CAPS - SCHOOLS WITH HIGHER GROWTH API IN EACH OF PREVIOUS API CYCLES*School had 2008 Growth API equal or greater than 800.

  28. API Trend Comparison: (Year-to-Year Change in Growth API) CAPS - SCHOOLS WITH HIGHER GROWTH API IN EACH OF PREVIOUS API CYCLES*School had 2008 Growth API equal or greater than 800.

  29. API Trend Comparison: Schools With Less Growth Than District Average Since 2008 CAPS - SCHOOLS WITH HIGHER GROWTH API IN EACH OF PREVIOUS API CYCLES*School had 2008 Growth API equal or greater than 800.

  30. API Trend Comparison: (Year-to-Year Change in Growth API) CAPS - SCHOOLS WITH HIGHER GROWTH API IN EACH OF PREVIOUS API CYCLES*School had 2008 Growth API equal or greater than 800.

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

  32. Overview of Yearly AYP Targets *See Safe Harbor slide

  33. 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.

  34. AYP ELA Trend: Non-Ethnic Student Groups

  35. AYP Math Trend: Non-Ethnic Student Groups

  36. AYP ELA Trend: Ethnic Student Groups

  37. AYP Math Trend: Ethnic Student Groups

  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

More Related