Stillman Valley High School 2005-2006 S chool I mprovement P lan.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Standards Based Report Card Standards Based Report Card.

Advertisements

. Information from “Countdown to Accountability” Summer Leadership Institute July 2002 Arizona School Boards Association from presentations by Chris Thomas.

Bureau of Indian Education

Grinnell High School Student Achievement Data.

No Child Left Behind Act January 2002 Revision of Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) Education is a state and local responsibility Insure.

‘No Child Left Behind’ Loudoun County Public Schools Department of Instruction.

Elementary/Secondary Education Act (1965) “No Child Left Behind” (2002) Adequacy Committee February 6,2008.

1 The Federal No Child Left Behind Act and the Financial Impact on Manchester Public Schools Fiscal Year

Coal City Unit District #1 Title I Parent Meeting.

What You Should Know About the State’s Two Year Old Accountability System.

High Stakes Testing and Other Traditional School Assessments Gary L. Cates, Ph.D., N.C.S.P.

Hickory Ridge Elementary School Annual Title One Parent Meeting

Prairie State Achievement Examination (PSAE) Illinois State Board of Education Division of Student Assessment 100 North First Street, E-216 Springfield,

2013 Accountability Report Jurupa Unified School District Board of Education Meeting.

1 Prepared by: Research Services and Student Assessment & School Performance School Accountability in Florida: Grading Schools and Measuring Adequate Yearly.

Data for Student Success Comprehensive Needs Assessment Report “It is about focusing on building a culture of quality data through professional development.

County: Rock Island City: Small School: Large School Summary School Enrollment 1,679 State Status AWSAWS All Subjects Meets and Exceeds 27.50% Made Adequate.

Common Questions What tests are students asked to take? What are students learning? How’s my school doing? Who makes decisions about Wyoming Education?

Grinnell High School Student Achievement Data.

ESEA NCLB  Stronger accountability  More freedom for states and communities  Use of proven research-based methods  More choices.

High Stakes Testing EDU 330: Educational Psychology Daniel Moos.

* AYP stands for Adequate Yearly Progress. As a part of the No Child Left Behind Act, schools are held accountable for their students reaching certain.

Arizona LEARNS: Overview of the Achievement Profiles.

Grading and Reporting Second Grade

Standards Based Report Card Standards Based Report Card.

CHANGES IN FEDERAL ACCOUNTABILITY FOR SCHOOLS BEGINNING IN

Annual Student Performance Report October Overview NCLB requirements related to AYP 2012 ISAT performance and AYP status Next steps.

1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA Modified by Dr. Teresa Cortez September 10, 2007.

Presenters: Emily & Lily Professor: Dr. James C. Lawlor Date: July 23rd.

School Accountability in Delaware for the School Year August 3, 2005.

Grading and Reporting Grades K-3. Purpose of Grading and Reporting Our primary purposes of grading and reporting include:  Report student progress toward.

AYP and Report Card. AYP/RC –Understand the purpose and role of AYP in Oregon Assessments. –Understand the purpose and role of the Report Card in Oregon.

Governor Thomas Johnson High School Analysis of 2008 AYP Scores.

Annual Student Performance Report September

No Child Left Behind Education Week

Urbana School District #116 AYP Status Report 2009 Report to the Board of Education October 6, 2009 Donald Owen, Assistant Superintendent.

Making Sense of Adequate Yearly Progress. Adequate Yearly Progress Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) is a required activity of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB)

ESEA Federal Accountability System Overview 1. Federal Accountability System Adequate Yearly Progress – AYP defined by the Elementary and Secondary Education.

RECYCLE Jenkins Independent District Data STATE NCLB DATA 103 of 175 school districts (58.9%) met 100% of their No Child Left Behind (NCLB) AYP goals.

Using Assessments to Plan for Learning MEAP and MME Data Collection.

Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) /22/2010.

No Child Left Behind California’s Definition of Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) July 2003.

1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA Modified by Dr. Teresa Cortez January 2010.

Parent Workshop Garnet Valley Elementary School Garnet Valley School District February 21, 2012.

AYP and Report Card. Big Picture Objectives – Understand the purpose and role of AYP in Oregon Assessments. – Understand the purpose and role of the Report.

GEORGIA’S CRITERION-REFERENCED COMPETENCY TESTS (CRCT) Questions and Answers for Parents of Georgia Students February 11, 2009 Presented by: MCES.

1 NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND The reauthorized elementary and secondary education act.

C R E S S T / CU University of Colorado at Boulder National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing Measuring Adequate Yearly.

Ohio’s Alternate Assessments for Students with Disabilities Thomas Lather Office for Exceptional Children (614)

Participation in Math Class: The Effect on Student Achievement By: Nicolas Millet.

Annual Progress Report Summary September 12, 2011.

 Educator Effectiveness System  Comparative Measures  Resource for Professional Development.

HALL HIGH SCHOOL Academic Indicators Students meeting or exceeding the Illinois Learning Standards (reading, math, science) 2002………………………………..43%2003………………………………..58%2004………………………………..42%2005………………………………..45%2006………………………………..48%2007…………………………

What You Should Know About the State’s Two Year Old Accountability System.

1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA Modified by Dr. Teresa Cortez September 1, 2008.

1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA May 2003 Modified by Dr. Teresa Cortez for Riverside Feeder Data Days February.

Connecticut Mastery Test Fourth Generation Grades 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 Connecticut Academic Performance Test Third Generation Grade 10 Presented to the.

Tony McCoy EDL 518 Summer 2010 Elmwood High School- iirc Data Evaluation.

Academic Performance Index (API) and AYP

Academic Performance Index (API) and AYP

Accountability in California Before and After NCLB

STANDARDS BASED REPORT CARDS.

Metropolitan Nashville Public Schools

Academic Report 2007/2008 AYP.

Demystifying and Implementing the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001

AYP and Report Card.

NECAP PRESENTATION.

Stillman Valley High School

AYP and Report Card.

Education and Accountability

Presentation transcript:

Stillman Valley High School S chool I mprovement P lan

SIP Team/Process  5 Facilitators and I meet once a month  Each department sets their own goals oAligned to Illinois State Learning Standards oSVHS data driven oPages 1-17

Review Goals 1.Make adequate yearly progress as defined by NCLB. All 3 subject area tests made AYP 2. Increase the average daily attendance rate to 93.8% % 3. Decrease the number of tardies and tardy related referrals. 11% decrease in tardies 19% increase in tardy referrals Appendix C

Review Discipline Issues

PRAIRIE STATE ACHIEVEMENT EXAMINATION Purpose Measure how well our students and school did in meeting the Illinois State Learning Standards Reading Math Science

ASSESSMENT Day 1 ACT Day 2 ACT Work Keys ISBE Assessments

ACT

ACT Composite Scores Compared to the State

ACT Last 5 Years

Composite Scores Compared to the State

Performance Levels Academic Warning Below Standards Meets Standards Exceeds Standards (Prairie State Designation)

PSAE Reading

PSAE Math

PSAE Science

Additional PSAE Data

 18 students recorded 23 exceeds designation (16%).  59 students scored in the meets or exceeds categories in all 3 subjects areas (52%).  19 students scored in the meets or exceeds categories in 2 out of 3 subjects areas (18%).  22 students scored in the below or warning categories in all 3 subject areas (16%).  15 students scored in the below or warning categories in 2 out of 3 subject areas (14%).

 17 students were within 5 points of meeting in reading (would be an additional 15% in the meets category)  18 students were within 5 points of meeting in math (would be an additional 15% in the meets category)  12 students were within 5 points of meeting in science (would be an additional 10% in the meets category)

No Child Left Behind Annual Yearly Progress 2003 = 40% 2004 = 40% 2005 = 47.5% 2006 = 47.5% 2007 = 55% 2008 = 62.5%

SVHS Goals for Continue our quest in becoming a school in the top 10% in the State of Illinois Keeping ahead of the AYP as it relates to NCLB Prepare students for the next step in their lives