mcguffey school district welcome back!

McGuffey School DistrictWelcome Back!

McGuffey School District90 McGuffey Drive; Claysville, PA 15323

(724) 948-3731

August 23, 2010

Discussion Points

• 2009 – 2010 Data Summary• Curriculum • Professional Development• Overview of ESL

2009 -2010 Data Summary

Standardized Testing

• AYP Proficiency Targets• PSSA/AYP Historical Data• 2009 – 2010 Summary• PSSA/TN Reading 2010• PSSA/TN Math 2010• PSSA Writing 2010• PSSA Science 2010

Terra Nova

• Grades K, 1, 2: Reading and Math

• Grades 9, 10: Reading and Math

PSSA Administration SummaryGrade Level PSSA Reading PSSA Math PSSA Writing PSSA Science

3 X X

4 X X* X

5 X X* X

6 X X*

7 X X*

8 X X* X X

11 X X* X X

*The PSSA-M was available to be administered in these grades to students who met eligibility criteria.

AYP Proficiency Targets

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Reading

45 45 45 54 54 54 63 63 63 72 81 91 100

Math

35 35 35 45 45 45 56 56 56 67 78 89 100

1030507090

110

Perf

orm

ance

Tar

get

District Performance Level – PSSA Reading 2010

District Performance Levels – PSSA Math 2010

District Performance Level – PSSA Writing 2010

District Performance Level – PSSA Science 2010

2009 – 2010 AYP Summary

Building 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Claysville Elementary Warning Made AYP Made AYP

Warning Made AYP *SH

Made AYP

Made AYP

Made AYP

Joe Walker Elementary NA Made AYP Made AYP

Made AYP

Made AYP

Made AYP

Made AYP

Made AYP

Middle School Warning Made AYP Made AYP

Made AYP

Made AYP

Made AYP

*SHCI

Made AYP

Made AYP

High School Warning Made AYP Warning Made AYP

Made AYP *CI

Warning Made AYP

Warning

District Warning District Improvement

I

Making Progress

Made AYP

Made AYP *CI

Made AYP

Made AYP

Made AYP

PSSA/TN Reading 2010

K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

All 78.1 76.7 77.5 71.8 76.2 72 73.3 79.9 86.1 64 59 57

ED 69 65.5 63.3 66.7 60.6 52 59.2 62.8 78.7 37 33 39

IEP 50 72 66.7 57.1 50 49 37 40.7 57.6 14 17 6

5152535455565758595

% o

f Pro

ficie

nt S

tude

nts

63%

72%

81%91%

100%

Cohort Data Summary - ReadingYear AYP K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12*

2002-03 45 29.9 47.8 37.8 58.8 20.5 29.3 59.4 43.8

2003-04 45 18.5 56.6 32.2 54.5 19 30.7 62.6 57.8

2004-05 54 33.7 55.8 65.4 38.1 62.8 19.8 42.1 71.7 11.9 61.2 60.8

2005-06 54 25.6 54.7 59 65.1 65.2 63 66.5 77.1 12.1 20.8 62.4 64.4

2006-07 54 25.2 54.9 72.8 74 59.5 63.3 67.4 66 16.1 19.7 59.3 72

2007-08 63 38.7 59.5 82.5 66.2 68.3 70 72.4 81.2 12.7 23 61.6 63.5

2008-09 63 45 74 66.4 78.9 80.3 64.8 70.3 73.4 86.7 9.6 12.2 61.1 71.6

2009-10 63 78.1 76.7 77.5 71.8 76.2 72 73.3 72.0 86.1 64 59 57 67.9

*The 12th grade proficiency level is determined by adding the number of students who met proficiency on the retest to their 11 th grade cohort. The difference between 11th and 12th grades ranges from approximately three – ten percent.

**Data in grades K, 1, 2, 9, and 10 is collected from the TerraNova assessment. Data in grades 3 – 8 and 11 is collected from the PSSA. The numbers on this chart were collected from EdInsight, which may vary from actual data archives due to the recent transfer of data in the software program.

PSSA/TN Math 2010

K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

All 76.6 76 71.6 78.6 89.9 75 72.2 85.1 78.9 49 51 49

ED 70.7 65.5 61.5 72.2 81.5 63 66.5 75.8 73.3 25 29 29

IEP 50 57 61.9 57.1 75.9 63 51.6 49.9 42 4 12 6

5152535455565758595

% o

f Pro

ficie

nt S

tude

nts

56%

67%

78%89%

100%

Cohort Data Summary - MathYear AYP K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12*

2002-03 35 26.5 47.8 16.7 38.8 14.4 16.7 38.7 30.9

2003-04 35 28.1 54.9 21.8 45.4 13.2 22.5 45 33.8

2004-05 45 30.1 56.5 79.8 23.2 58.9 17.8 31.3 56.5 12.5 33.1 36.4

2005-06 45 23.7 52.2 83.3 78.9 62.7 63.6 69.5 69.4 14.2 22.5 46.5 37.5

2006-07 45 22.4 47.1 82.1 86.3 73.4 71.1 69 67 17.3 19.8 47.3 53

2007-08 56 18.5 58.1 83.9 78.3 72.4 69.4 75.9 73.1 13.7 28.3 50.3 48.5

2008-09 56 45 71 52.3 83.1 86.8 68.6 70.3 78.5 75.9 13.3 17.7 56.2 55

2009-10 56 76.6 76 71.6 78.6 89.9 75 72.2 85.1 78.9 49 51 49 61.1

*The 12th grade proficiency level is determined by adding the number of students who met proficiency on the retest to their 11 th grade cohort. The difference between 11th and 12th grades ranges from approximately one – five percent.

**Data in grades K, 1, 2, 9, and 10 is collected from the TerraNova assessment. Data in grades 3 – 8 and 11 is collected from the PSSA. The numbers on this chart were collected from EdInsight, which may vary from actual data archives due to the recent transfer of data in the software program.

PSSA Writing 2010

5 8 11

All 81 81.9 70

ED 72 76.9 63

IEP 67 60 6

51525354555657585

% o

f Pro

ficie

nt S

tude

nts

Cohort Data Summary - WritingYear K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12*

2005-06 23.7 52.2 83.3 78.9 53.8 63.6 69.5 62.5 14.2 22.5 76.9

2006-07 22.4 47.1 82.1 86.3 42.1 71.1 69 55.5 17.3 19.8 88.6 84.2

2007-08 18.5 58.1 83.9 78.3 70.6 69.4 75.9 71.9 13.7 28.3 77.8 90.4

2008-09 45 71 52.3 83.1 86.8 57.2 70.3 78.5 76.8 13.3 17.7 80.2 83.3

2009-10 76.6 76 71.6 78.6 89.9 81.1 72.2 85.1 82 49 51 69.6 84.4

*The 12th grade proficiency level is determined by adding the number of students who met proficiency on the retest to their 11 th grade cohort.

PSSA Science 2010

4 8 11

All 92.5 59.5 32

ED 86.2 43.6 18

IEP 85.3 24 6

5152535455565758595

% o

f Pro

ficie

nt S

tude

nts

Cohort Data Summary - ScienceYear K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12*

2007-08 89.7 52.7 23.7

2008-09 96.7 64.8 44.0

2009-10 93 59.5 32 49.3

*The 12th grade proficiency level is determined by adding the number of students who met proficiency on the retest to their 11 th grade cohort.

Strategic Plan (2007 – 2012)

• Phase II School District• Midpoint Review due September 30, 2010

– Academic Standards and Assessment Plan– Professional Education Plan– Teacher Induction Plan– Educational Technology Plan– Student Services Plan

• District Improvement Plan– Two-Year Plan– Due July 1, 2011

• Special Education Plan– Approved July 30, 2010

Curriculum

• Finished textbook adoptions in the 2009 – 2010 School Year:– Computer– Technology Education– Science– Health– Agricultural Science– Economics

• Begin to write for adoption for the 2011 - 2012:– World Languages– Guidance– Social Studies K – 12

Curriculum Cycle

Content and Grade Level Focus Areas

Phase Symbol Activity

1 N Needs Assessment

2 TA & D Textbook Adoption & Development

3 I Purchase of Textbooks & Implementation

4 M1 Monitor 1

5 M2 Monitor 2

6 E Evaluation

Reading K – 8, SpellingHandwriting

E N TA & D I M1 M2

English 6 – 12, Library M2 E N TA & D I M1

Business Education, Family & Consumer Science,

Math K – 12

M1 M2 E N TA & D I

Computer, Technology Education, Science K – 12Health K – 6, Agricultural

Education

I M1 M2 E N TA & D

World Languages, Guidance, Social Studies K – 12

TA & D I M1 M2 E N

Art, Music K – 12, Physical Education, Health 6 – 12,

Safety

N TA & D I M1 M2 E

Professional Education Plan• 2009 – 2010

– School District Topics• Differentiated Instruction• Writing K – 12• Technology Implementation• Curriculum Development and

Revisions • Special Education• Assessments (DIBELS, 4Sight,

common assessments, PSSA, use of data by classroom teachers)

– State-Mandated Topics• CPR• English as a Second Language• Gifted Education Program

Practices• IDEA

• 2010 – 2011– Continuation of 2009 –

2010 school district and state-mandated topics

– Reading Apprenticeship– Differentiated

professional development

PA Accountability Block Grant

• Full-Day Kindergarten at Joe Walker and Claysville

• Elementary Student Assistance Program at Joe Walker and Claysville

• Home and School Visitor• Elementary Health Office Assistant• Alternative Education Program• Assessments

PA Educational Assistance Program

• Tutors • Site Coordinators• Assessments• Tutoring during school hours for students who

are not proficient in reading and/or math

Overview of English Language Learner Program

• Approximately 42,542 students in PA with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) speaking 175 different language

• McGuffey School District currently has one LEP student.

• Program must include English as a Second Language (ESL) instruction (Title 22, Chapter 4, Section 4.26).

McGuffey ESL Program

• Home Language Survey• Screenings by guidance counselors and/or

school psychologist• Assessment by Intermediate Unit 1 personnel• Contracted ESL teacher from I.U. 1 to provide

instruction and support

Six Guiding Principles for ESL Program Development

1. Same expectations for all students2. Proficiencies in English – listening, speaking,

reading, and writing3. Challenging curriculum content and performance

standards4. Instruction builds on previous knowledge and

abilities5. Evaluation with appropriate, valid assessments6. Shared responsibility of ESL student success

SAS: Standards-Aligned System

• Clear Standards• Fair Assessments• Curriculum Framework• Instruction• Materials & Resources• Interventions

Technology

• Mr. Wilson• Technology Leaders– Laura Jacob – HS– Teresa Engler – MS– Bonnie Sikorski– CL– Elaine Calvert – JW

Thank you!