1. Clark Creek STEM July 2014 Third Grade – Administration Meeting
Data Overview
Clark Creek STEM
July 2014
Third Grade – Administration Meeting
Welcome to the data overview.

2. Purpose County Trends Data from CRCT for 2012-2013
Strengths
Weaknesses
Subgroups
Set the stage for school improvement
Instructional changes
Student driven, teacher changes
The purpose of reviewing the data will be to see trends in areas of strengths and weaknesses. We will be looking at two main subgroups today, ESOL and ED.
From there we will look at possible instructional changes and what we as teachers need to do to help these students succeed.

3. State – 2012-2013 Governor’s Office of Student Achievement
For the school year, the state percentages Reading 5% did not meet, English/Language Arts 8%, Math 14%, Science 21% and Social Studies 19%.
We see that reading and language arts have been a focus, then math and lastly science and social studies.
Let’s look out the county numbers.
Governor’s Office of Student Achievement

4. District –
Here are the county’s scores for the school year.
You can see that only 2% did not meet in reading 6 percentage points lower than the state.
4% in English/Lang. Arts 4 percentage points lower than the state
8% in math 6 percentage points
Science 12%, 9 percentage points
Social Studies 13%, 6 percentage points
Overall we performed as a school system better than the state averages.

6. Last 5 Years – 3rd grade Math
Let’s break one subject area down. Let’s look at math for 3rd grade students for the county over the last 5 years. We will look at each school year.
We are also going to be looking at ESOL and ED.
Starting in 08-09, 22% of students did not meet in math
Now look at ESOL 29%,
ED 30% versus the Non-ED 11%

7. 09-10
Math is at 20%
ESOL 25%
ED 28% versus non-nd 9%
The scores are getting better but these two sub groups were are looking at are still above

8. 10-11
Over all 19% did not meet
ESOL 23%
ED 26%
Non-ED 8%

9.
11-12
Math is down to 13%
But let’s look at the subgroups

10. ESOL
ESOL 29%
ED 24%
NonED 8% ED
NonED

11.
12-13
Math 15%
Sub groups

12. ESOL ED
ESOL 30%
ED 25% NonED 9%
NonED

13. So let’s look at the percentages over time all together
We can see that overall all students are making gains in math
But our ESOL and ED populations are still struggling.
There is a wide achievement gap for these subgroups.
all 22 20 19 13 15
ESOL 29 25 23 30 ED 28 26 24
NonED 11 9 8

14. Clark Creek – 3rd Grade 2012-2013 (n=903)
For Clark Creek there is only one year on the state site because we are a new school.
So let’s look at our scores for all of our students and the ESOL and ED subgroups. As a title one school we serve these populations, as well as others, but as I reviewed the data these 2 groups stood out to me the most.
So let’s look at the school year and compare that to the trends of the county in the last 5 years for ESOL and ED
So here are the overall percentages.
(n=903)

15. ESOL ED NonED Our ESOL 26% ED 28% NonED 12% For math
Now reading shows a different story. Our over all was 3% for the grade level
0% for ESOL
4% for ED
1% for nonED
So we are meeting all students needs in reading
NonED

17. Dialogue First Impressions & Observations Teaching Implications
What can we do differently?
How do we utilize best practices for the ESOL and ED?
On the tables are post-it’s
Write down your first impression of what has been said about the data shown.
(Time should be given for teachers to have a dialogue about the post-its.)
Now let’s organize our impressions and observations.
(Have the group organize how they see fit, flexible groupings.)
So what are the teaching implications?
Let’s brainstorm ideas using the guiding questions.
Remember we don’t want to place blame on the students, how do we accommodate them.