1 / 11

La Vernia Elementary STaR Chart Analysis

La Vernia Elementary STaR Chart Analysis. Report to the Faculty June 15, 2009. Measuring Performance. Required annual technology assessment Comparability of progress data is essential Texas STaR Chart assessment instrument Teachers submit Teacher STaR Chart

sorley
Télécharger la présentation

La Vernia Elementary STaR Chart Analysis

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. La Vernia ElementarySTaR Chart Analysis Report to the Faculty June 15, 2009

  2. Measuring Performance • Required annual technology assessment • Comparability of progress data is essential • Texas STaR Chart assessment instrument • Teachers submit Teacher STaR Chart • Teacher results feed Campus STaR Chart

  3. Chart Basis • STaR Chart based on the Texas LRPT (Long Range Plan for Technology) • LRPT divided into four domains: • Teaching and Learning • Educator Preparation and Development • Leadership, Administration and Instructional Support • Infrastructure for Technology • STaR Chart Key Area = LRPT Domain

  4. Levels of Progress • Levels of Progress in STaR Chart Key Areas: • Early Tech • Developing Tech • Advanced Tech • Target Tech • Texas Education Agency sets goal to achieve Target Tech

  5. Comparison by Key Area Total 6-8 = Early Tech 9-14 = Developing Tech 15-20 = Advanced Tech 21-24 = Target Tech NOTE: 2005/2006 A&S and IT totals not directly comparable due to STaR Chart design changes

  6. Teaching and Learning 1 = Early Tech 2 = Developing Tech 3 = Advanced Tech 4 = Target Tech 2005/2006 Not directly comparable in this view due to STaR Chart design changes

  7. Educator Preparation and Development 1 = Early Tech 2 = Developing Tech 3 = Advanced Tech 4 = Target Tech 2005/2006 Not directly comparable in this view due to STaR Chart design changes

  8. Leadership, Administration and Instructional Support 1 = Early Tech 2 = Developing Tech 3 = Advanced Tech 4 = Target Tech 2005/2006 Not directly comparable in this view due to STaR Chart design changes

  9. Infrastructure for Technology 1 = Early Tech 2 = Developing Tech 3 = Advanced Tech 4 = Target Tech 2005/2006 Not directly comparable in this view due to STaR Chart design changes

  10. Conclusions • Greatest Strength: Infrastructure for Technology • Thin clients • Advanced wireless • Greatest Weakness: Teaching and Learning • Loss of supplemental grant funding • “The Sage on the Stage” syndrome • Marching orders • Follow the TEKS/TA-TEKS • Become “learning facilitators”

  11. Questions?

More Related