What trends emerge across grade levels, subgroups, and core content areas? |
In 9th grade ELA, we saw significant proficiency gains from PM1 - PM 3 with a 20% overall gain. Our ESE subgroup saw a 14% increase from PM 1- PM 3, and comparatively our 9th grade ESE proficiency levels in creased by 16% from the year prior.
Our 10th grade ELA scores showed improvement from the year prior with an increase of 10% proficiency. Thanks in large part to our ESE and ELL subgroups, who showed an increase of 14 and 13 % respectively.
|
Algebra 1 scores showed an increase of 12% proficiency levels over all. However, that is despite a 2% proficiency decrease amongst our ELL subgroup. Our overall and ESE subgroup comparative gains out preformed the district.
Our geometry proficiency levels stayed stagnant from the year prior at 56%, however our ESE subgroup dropped by 9% in proficiency. Our ELL subgroup however, out preformed all other subgroups and saw a 39% proficiency increase from the year prior and out scored the district by 10%.
|
Bio proficiency levels increased across all subgroups, with the largest increase being seen with our ELL subgroup. The ELL subgroup proficiency level saw an increase from 12% proficient to 55% proficient. Our overall comparative gains show that there is room to improve in our ESE subgroup as well as our other demographic of students. As our over all proficiency levels are 5% behind the district average.
|
US History showed great overall improvement from the year prior. Raising our overall proficiency level by 7%, closing the gap between our scores and the district average. We made a comparative gain of 3 in both overall and our ESE subgroup. However, our ELL subgroup went in the opposite direction. We saw a 9% decrease in proficiency levels from our ELL subgroup. This decrease dropped us to 7% below district average for the past school year.
|
Which data component showed the most improvement? What new actions did your school take in this area? |
The data component that showed the most improvement was our ELL subgroup. ELL’s in general had massive gains, specifically in Geometry, PSAT scores, and Bio. This is due to a few factors implemented last year. We trained all teachers who had ELL sections how to utilize snap and read within their lessons. Modeled and trained teachers in the use of translation for both Microsoft and Power Point. District ELL TSA, Ilona, was on a rotating schedule to offer support and observe different sections when she was on campus. Our largest improvements were in Bio and Geometry, Geometry saw an increase in proficiency of 39%, while Bio saw an increase of 43% proficiency. |
Which data component showed the lowest performance? Explain the contributing factor(s) to last year's low performance and discuss any trends. |
Geometry across the board showed the least number of gains and lowest performance levels. We had a long-term guest teacher teaching a full slate of Geometry last year, our overall proficiency level stayed stagnant at 56%, which is in part to a 9% decrease in proficiency levels for our ESE subgroup. To focus on growth in this area we have put a veteran teacher in place of that long term guest teacher, and we added an inclusion teacher who used to teach Geometry to partner in that line of classes. We also are adding a math coach this year, which should allow for added support in our Geometry sections. |
Which data component showed the greatest decline from the prior year? Explain the factor(s) that contributed to this decline. |
Our greatest decline from last year was our US history ELL subgroup and our Geometry ESE subgroup. We have added an extra full line of inclusion Geometry classes, to help focus on our Geometry growth. However, for US history we have made a switch in scheduling and have assigned a teacher that is bilingual. We also have added an extra ELL section in all core classes, last year as numbers grew, we were handcuffed into putting all new students in classes that were already too large. These changes will help students feel more acclimated and “at-home” in their sections, allowing more independent help, and develop more confidence throughout the year. |
Which data component had the greatest gap when compared to the state average? Explain the factor(s) that contributed to this gap and any trends. State data can be found here. |
Our greatest gap when comparing to state averages comes from our Algebra scores. Our proficiency scores are 34% compared to the states 55%. However, while our proficiency scores are still below state, each year there is a consistent gain for our site-based progression, going from 22% proficient to 34% proficient. One of the factors that contributed to this year’s data can be attributed to teacher placement. We had a long-term guest teacher, take over after an internal reassignment of the original teacher, and we had two new hires running our inclusion sections. When looking at our data for Algebra, the only subgroup that dropped in proficiency rating from last year was our ELL subgroup. This is largely due to the large number of midyear international transfers and our LY sections growing too large. We have created an extra section in each core class for LY to help alleviate the issue of class size and midyear transfers. We have also added a Bi-Lingual Math Coach to help support. |
Rank your highest priorities (maximum of 5) for school improvement in the upcoming school year. |
1. Restructuring of school-based LY program: Changing ELL Class sizes/Sections for growing ELL population
2. Increased support within Algebra and Geometry: Increased support will come from our New Math Coach and our newly hired Inclusion Teacher who is certified in Math
3. Data-Driven Decision Making: Improving our utilization of data analysis to monitor student progress, identify areas for improvement, and inform instructional practices and interventions.
4. Professional Development: Supplying teachers with targeted professional development opportunities to improve upon and strengthen their instructional strategies, technology integration, and classroom management.
5. School Climate and Culture: Promoting a positive and inclusive school climate through community-building activities, proactive behavior management strategies, and “active visibility”. |