academic achievement
Post on 11-Jan-2016
53 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Academic AchievementAcademic AchievementBoard Presentation
San Francisco Unified School DistrictSeptember 2011
CST by Content Area
47.5 49.2 50.554.0
56.357.4
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
% At or Above Proficient
2006(n=41,456)
2007(n=40,624)
2008(n=39,925)
2009(n=38,783)
2010(n=37,668)
2011(n=37,666)
CST English Language Arts:Trend for Proficient and Above
(Grade 2 to 11)
+2.3+1.3 +3.5+1.7
+1.1
56.6 57.9 59.462.2
65.2 66.0
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
% At or Above Proficient
2006(n=23,856)
2007(n=23,275)
2008(n=22,808)
2009(n=22,076)
2010(n=21,998)
2011(n=22,207)
CST Mathematics:Trend for Proficient and Above
(Grade 2 to 7)
+3.0
+1.3 +1.5+2.8 +0.8
48.2 48.8 50.652.5
55.4 55.6
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
% At or Above Proficient
2006(n=41,019)
2007(n=40,291)
2008(n=39,615)
2009(n=38,733)
2010(n=37,573)
2011(n=37,783)
CST Mathematics:Trend for Proficient and Above
(Grade 2 to 11)
+0.2
+0.6 +1.8 +1.9 +2.9
41.9
51.8 52.7
61.2 63.2
49.055.3 56.5
63.161.6
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
% At or Above Proficient
GR 5 Science GR 8 Science
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
CST Science:Trend for Proficient and Above
(Grade 5 & 8)
+21.3 +12.6
CST
• Comparison to State
• API
• AYP
SFUSD Compared to the State
5754
6662 63
5862 63
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
% A
t o
r A
bo
ve
Pro
fici
ent
ELA (Gr 2-11) Math (Gr 2-7) Science (Gr 5) Science (Gr 8)
SFUSD State
Academic Performance Index (API)
SFUSD 5-Year Trend for Academic Performance Index (API)
753764
772 775
791
763771 777
791 796
650
700
750
800
850
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11
AP
I S
core
Base Growth
+5
+10+7 +5
+16
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
CST Growthby Ethnicity & Program
21
27
232122
2826
2123
28
24 2527
3229 2829
3532
24
32
36 36
26
0
10
20
30
40
50
AA Latino Samoan ELL
% At or Above Proficient
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
CST English Language Arts:Trend for Proficient and Above
(AA, Latino, Samoan, Grade 2-11)
+11+9
+13
+5
24
3438
47
25
3539
47
26
35 35
51
30
39 38
53
35
4246
53
35
4448
54
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
AA Latino Samoan ELL
% At or Above Proficient
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
CST Mathematics:Trend for Proficient and Above
(AA, Latino, Samoan, Grade 2-7)
+11
+10
+13 +7
CST English Language Arts:Trend for Proficient and Above by Ethnicity
(Grade 2-11)
Ethnicity
% at or above Proficient
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
AA 22 23 27 29 32
Latino 28 28 32 35 36
Samoan 26 24 29 32 36
Chinese 63 64 67 68 68
Filipino 49 49 53 55 56
Japanese 78 76 79 82 83
Korean 73 76 78 81 79
American Indian 38 40 48 48 49
Other Non-White 58 60 62 63 65
White 73 75 79 81 81
CST Mathematics:Trend for Proficient and Above by Ethnicity
(Grade 2-7)
Ethnicity
% at or above Proficient
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
AA 25 26 30 35 35
Latino 35 35 39 42 44
Samoan 39 35 38 46 48
Chinese 81 81 83 86 85
Filipino 56 57 60 62 63
Japanese 83 82 86 87 89
Korean 85 88 88 86 86
American Indian 43 45 51 47 51
Other Non-White 65 66 67 70 70
White 71 75 78 82 82
481
482
14451750
1920
39963298
26002328
459
457
455713
433
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2007(N=4,451)
2008(N=4,188)
2009(N=3,772)
2010(N=4,254)
2011(N=4,152)
% of Total Test Takers
CST CAPA CMA
SPED Students:CST, CAPA, and CMA Test Participants
English Language Arts (Gr 2-11)
11 13 1618 23
79 83 84 84 85
31 32 32 33
0
20
40
60
80
100
% At or Above Proficient
CST/ELA CAPA/ELA CMA/ELA
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
SPED Students:CST, CAPA, and CMA Test resultsEnglish Language Arts (Gr 2-11)
+6
+12
+2
477
479
11191580
2195
38963280
28082433
452456
452 628358
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2007(N=4,348)
2008(N=4,094)
2009(N=3,888)
2010(N=4,029)
2011(N=4,254)
% of Total Test Takers
CST CAPA CMA
SPED Students:CST, CAPA, and CMA Test Participants
Mathematics (Gr 2-11)
14 16 1822 25
6372 69
7472
34 3237
30
0
20
40
60
80
100
% At or Above Proficient
CST/Math CAPA/Math CMA/Math
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
SPED Students:CST, CAPA, and CMA Test results
Mathematics (Gr 2-11)
+9
+11
-4
Other Measures
CST 8th Grade Algebra 1 or Higher: Trend for Proficient and Above
57.7 58.8 57.8 55.951.6
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
% At or Above Proficient
2007(n=2,385)
2008(n=2,395)
2009(n=2,512)
2010(n=2,960)
2011(n=3,084)
CST 8th Grade Algebra 1 or Higher: Trend for Proficient and Above
Algebra 1 or Higher % Proficient
DISTRICT 51.6
Ethnicity
African American 14.5
Chinese 72.5
Filipino 24.1
Japanese 68.8
Korean 70.8
Latino 22.4
American Indian 30.4
Other Non-White 48.3
White 59.2
77.1 77.0 77.180.2 77.8
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
% Passing
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
CAHSEE:ELA Passing Rate
(Grade 10)
81.5 79.3 78.4 80.2 81.0
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
% Passing
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
CAHSEE:Mathematics Passing Rate
(Grade 10)
CAHSEE:ELA Passing Rate by Ethnicity
(Grade 10)
ELA Passed
Rate
DISTRICT 77.8
Ethnicity
American Indian 90.0
Asian 84.9
African American 56.9
Declined to State 88.5
Filipino 81.4
Latino 63.7
Pacific Islander 66.0
White 88.7
CAHSEE:Mathematics Passing Rate by Ethnicity
(Grade 10)
Math
Passed Rate
DISTRICT 81.0
Ethnicity
American Indian 88.9
Asian 95.7
African American 47.0
Declined to State 89.8
Filipino 82.7
Latino 61.3
Pacific Islander 60.0
White 87.9
5.2
6.77.4
6.35.7
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11
Suspension Rate(%)
Suspensions5-Year Trend
10.9%18.2%
7.1% 7.5%
82.0%74.4%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
SFUSD STATE
Percent of Class of 2009-10
Graduates Dropouts Others
Graduation & DropoutSFUSD vs State
Data Source: California Department of Education webiste
http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/CohortRates/GradRates.aspx?Agg=D&Topic=Dropouts&TheYear=2009-10&cds=38684780000000&RC=District&SubGroup=Ethnic/Racial
SFUSD Grade 5 Student Satisfaction Survey 2011
3.55
3.59
3.77
3.52
3.53
3.77
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00
Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree
Q06
Q17
Q04
Q17
Q06
Q04
2010 3 Highest Rated Questions (n=3,193)
2011 3 Highest Rated Questions (n=3,550)
My teachers help me when I do not understand a lesson.
I enjoy the sports, library, and arts and music programs at my school.
I have friends at my school.
I enjoy the sports, library, and arts and music programs at my school.
My teachers help me when I do not understand a lesson.
I have friends at my school.
SFUSD Grade 8 Student Satisfaction Survey 2011
3.07
3.10
3.40
3.05
3.06
3.43
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00
Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree
Q23
Q10
Q21
Q04
Q10
Q21
2010 3 Highest Rated Questions (n=2,444)
2011 3 Highest Rated Questions (n=2,835)
The principal treats me and all other students with respect.
I know about the after school and other extra curricular activities that are offered at my school.
I have somebody at home who cares about me and supports me in my learning.
I have supportive and caring relationships with other students at my school.
I know about the after school and other extra curricular activities that are offered at my school.
I have somebody at home who cares about me and supports me in my learning.
SFUSD Grade 11 Student Satisfaction Survey 2011
3.13
3.18
3.35
3.10
3.10
3.29
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00
Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree
Q04
Q23
Q21
Q04
Q23
Q21
2010 3 Highest Rated Questions (n=2,528)
2011 3 Highest Rated Questions (n=2,496)
I have supportive and caring relationships with other students at my school.
The Principal treats me and all other students with respect
I have somebody at home who cares about me and supports me in my learning.
I have supportive and caring relationships with other students at my school.
The Principal treats me and all other students with respect
I have somebody at home who cares about me and supports me in my learning.
SFUSD Family Satisfaction Survey 2011
3.47
3.50
3.52
3.48
3.51
3.54
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00
Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree
Q02
Q24
Q01
Q02
Q24
Q01
2010 3 Highest Rated Questions (n=14,354)
2011 3 Highest Rated Questions (n=11,680)
The teachers at the school motivate my child to learn.
My child's teachers deal with me in a fair and respectful manner
My child enjoys going to school.
The teachers at the school motivate my child to learn.
My child's teachers deal with me in a fair and respectful manner
My child enjoys going to school.
SFUSD School Staff Satisfaction Survey 2011
3.29
3.38
3.42
3.23
3.34
3.38
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00
Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree
Q04
Q06
Q03
Q12
Q06
Q03
2010 3 Highest Rated Questions (n=2,838)
2011 3 Highest Rated Questions (n=2,711)
Teachers in my school work together to improve their instructional practice.
Students at this school have a meaningful and caring relationship with at least one adult advocate.
Teachers at my school believe that their efforts make a difference in their students' learning.
Teachers in this school use multiple assessment practices to measure student progress throughout the year.
Students at this school have a meaningful and caring relationship with at least one adult advocate.
Teachers at my school believe that their efforts make a difference in their students' learning.
School Data ConferenceResults
Reasons for Celebration
School Data Conference Results
1. Using Formative Assessments to inform instructionCorrelation between MAP (CLA) and CST-ELA was 0.77 and between MAP (CLA) & CST-Math was 0.75 (Districtwide).eg. Carver (ELA 3.2%, Math 9.0%)
Starr King (ELA 20.4%, Math 7.1%)ER Taylor (ELA 5.8%, Math 6.1%)
2. Balanced Literacy Reading & Writing Focuseg. Mission Zone (ELA 2%)
Sherman (86% proficiency)Hillcrest ( 6.3%)
School Data Conference Results
3. Focus on Closing the Achievement Gapeg. Milk (ELA: school 4.8%, Latino 14.2%; Math: school 0.8%, Latino 2.5%)
Flynn (ELA: school 4.5%, AA 5.1%; Math: school 3.7%, AA 12.0%)Washington HS (ELA: school 2.0%, AA 21%)
4. Focus on EL StudentsQuality of ELD program, Structure Time when ELD was delivered, Rigorous Professional Development, Monitoring Delivery of Instruction.eg. Ulloa (N=122, 80% prof, 8.5%)
Redding (N=117, 43.6% prof, 16.6%)Paul Revere (N=104, 25% prof, 8.3%)
5. Focal Student Approacheg. George Peabody (ELA: 81% prof, 7.9%, 84% prof, Math: 4.5%) Sunset (ELA: 79% prof, 4.2%, Math: 85% prof, 5.2%) A. Fong Yu (ELA: 84% prof, 5%, Math: 94% prof, 3.3%)
School Data Conference Results
6. Vigorous Intense Curriculum Focuseg. Muir (ELA 38.2%, 12.8%)
New Tradition (Math 71.4%, 10.8%)Aptos (Algebra EL participation N from 276 to 336, 55%, 7%)
7. Grade Level Collaboration – Practice of ROCI eg. Monroe, Carver, Starr King, Everett, Chavez
8. Additional Resources – SIG Schools showed API Growth eg. Muir +54, Everett +31, Mann +29, Mission +15, Revere +28,
Bryant +5
School Data Conference Results
9. WISE Program Grant for Science in grades 3, 4 and 5
More Science Instruction, Analytical Writing in Science, Project Based Learning, Science Notebooks, Increased Analytical thinking in all curriculum areas.
10.Restorative Practices
Intensive Professional Development, Community Meetings, Modeling of Restorative Practices
11.Support of Area TeamsProfessional Development in Complex Instruction for MathImplementation of ALEKSELD Focus for Immersion SchoolsAlgebra PD by SERP for Middle SchoolsBalanced Literacy Model Support for Mission Zone SchoolsData Coaching for Elementary and Zone Schools
top related