Compliance hearing exhibits, 47

School Improvement Plans Marian Lacey, Assistant Superintendent-.x ii> 7 'f if if ip (f t f p J MIDDLE SCHOOLS j 0 't t '( / David Patterson, Principal Cloverdale Middle Level Academy if if e 'f 'f- f I I p f r i II ? f f I* * t '4 I t (P < p: t 4 Debbie Berry, Principal Dunbar Magnet Middle School Elouise Hudson, Principal Forest Heights Middle School Larry Buck, Principal Henderson Middle School Ann Blaylock, Principal Mabelvale Middle School Jim Fullerton, Principal Horace Mann Magnet Middle School Nancy Rousseau, Principal Pulaski Heights Middle School Jim Mosby, Principal Southwest Middle School if 'i f- r t 'if I f 'f t tf if t a 'i 'i i< ji n if ir if 'if 'f J 't f 4 t t f 't fCLOVERDALE MIDDLE LEVEL ACADEMY SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2000-2001MISSION STATEMENl The mission of Cloverdale Middle Level Academy is to prepare all of its students not only for the upcoming experiences of suture education, but to instill a love of learning which will follow them throughout their adult lives. The task will be accomplished through a partnership of dedicated administrators, teachers, staff, and parents. Every effort will be made to create a safe atmosphere for success in life's future travels. OUR CREED ON MY HONOR I WILL DO MY BEST TO OBEY THE SCHOOL RULES, TO HELP OTHER PEOPLE AT ALL TIMES, AND KEEP MYSELF PHYSICALLY STRONG MENTALLY AWAKE AND MORALLY STRAIGHT. J VISION STATEMENT The Cloverdale Middle Level Academy family makes a positive difference in the lives of its members by providing opportunities for success. OUR PLEDGE I WILL BE. . . COURTEOUS LOYAL OBEDIENT VITAL EFFICIENT RESPECTFUL DEPENDABLE ATTENTIVE LAWFUL ENTHUSIASTIC CMLA Population 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 :?a: 'it'. 06 07 08 T T Black Count Other Count TotalCMLA Percentage Chart 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% *4 I . I --iiv- '( T Wi '"i t T 06 07 08 ?iW ! W fesi Sv I& Total Black Percent Other PercentAction Plan: Community Involvement Problem Statement: (summarize the problem indicated by data and background analysis
state the desired goals) Condition
300 hours of community involvement during 1999-2000 school year. Goal: 3500 hours of community involvement within 2 years. Stretch Goal
5000 hours of community involvement within 2 years. Strategy Mentor Program Kev Actions 1) Faculty meets with local chinch groups and neighborhood associations. 2) Compile lists of volunteers and hours/times available. Classroom Helpers 1) Volunteer enters classroom to assist classroom teacher 2) Teacher has specific guidelines to give to volunteer (resource box) PTSA 1) One team member at every PTSA meeting. 2) Develop strategies to encourage students to bring parents. Professional Dev, Mentoring Guidelines inservice l)Develop guidelines to give to volunteers. 2) Develop resource box with skill deficiencies and students' names. Introduce reward ideas for both teachers and teams to attend PTSA meetings. Timeline Meetings: Sept. Begin: Nov. 5,2000 Begin: Nov. 5, 2000 Begin: Sept. 1,2000 Person Responsible Ms. Brooks Team Leaders PTSA President Individual teachers Team Leaders Mr. Patterson PTSA President Resources Mentoring Guidelines and list of "high-risk" students Test scores Resource modifications Incentives (monetary as well as other types) Assessment Track academic improvements/discipline referral s/absenteeism Track academic improvements Increased numbers of teachers/parents/commun- ity members and students at meetings. Adult Spanish classes Recruit a community member to give adult Spanish lessons in the After School Program and provide stipend for teacher. Survey on interest of faculty in attending such a class. Survey: Sept. 1, 2(XM) Begin classes: Nov. 5, 2000 PTSA President Ms. Brooks Texts (?) Copier availability Increased number of faculty/community members speaking Spanish 1Strategy P.A.R.K. Fall Festival Open Mike at Night Form interdisciplinary units with all core classes Curriculum Mapping Analyze last year's scores Action Plan: Community Involvement Kev Actions Professional Dev. In-service on curriculum mapping Timeline (cont'd) Person Responsible P.A.R.K. staff Teachers Ms. Seabrook Ms. Brooks Staff Social Studies committee Parents Teachers Students Communitv Teachers Resources Assessment P.A.R.K. facilities PTSA 2 Action Plan: Science Problem Statement: (summarize the problem indicated by data and background analysis
state the desired goals) Condition: Goal: 75% of Sth grade students at or above the basic level on the Benchmark exam. Stretch Goal: 95% of Sth grade students at or above the basic level on the Benchmark exam. Strategy Kev Actions Professional Dev. Timeline Person Responsible Resources Assessment Increase use of act to enhance interpreting info from charts/ diagrams/illustra- tinnc Specified vocabulary list Reading/writing science articles Alternative innterpretation of science concents Science Olympiad Create vocabulary list of terms used to formulate questions_______________ Assign science articles to students who then read them and summarize them for the class.____________ Present opportunities for students to create skits/ commercials/raps________ Student demonstrates skill taught to parents/ business leaders and teachers None None None Science teachers Science teachers Science teachers Texts Magazines Newspapers Library books Science Fair Mentor Program Increase act of collecting/calcu- latinedata S.W. design/inter- pret charts/ graphs from data collected from exnerimento____ Increase use of word problems Science teachers Science teachers Science teachers Modules Modules ModulesAction Plan: Mathematics Problem Statement: (summarize the problem indicated by data and background analysis
state the desired goals) Condition: 11% of Sth grade students are at the basic and proficient level on the Benchmark Examination. Goal: 50% of Sth grade students reach the basic and above levels on the Benchmark Exam. Stretch Goal: 75% of Sth grade students reach the basic and above levels on the Benchmark Exam._________ Strategy Quiz Bowl practice Standardize Test Program________ Incentive Assemblies (small)__________ Tutoring Program Stronger Math Club____________ "Math Counts" Competition Kev Actions Create questions and distribute them to the math teachers_________________ Professional Dev. Mini-inservice during team meetings to go over Quiz SqvyI rulgs________ Timeline Begin: Oct. 2000 Person Responsible Ms. Nesmith Individual math tWfth.gI5_______ Dept. Chairs Team Leaders Teachers Math Teachers Math Teachers Resources Texts Teams Assessment Classroom testsAction Plan: Literacy Problem Statement: (summarize the problem indicated by data and background analysis
state the desired goals) Condition: 42% of Sth grade students are performing at basic and above on the Benchmark Literacy Test. Goal
60% of Sth grade students performing at basic and above on the Benchmark Literacy Test within 2 years. Stretch Goal: 90% of Sth grade students performing at basic and above on the Benchmark Literacy Test within 2 years. Strategy Accelerated Reader Program Vocabulary banks Drop Everything And Read Mentor Program (Adopt-a-student) Literary Magazine (one/nine weeks) Book Club Story Time Kev Actions Installation of program in computers 1) Compile lists of 50 words from each discipline. 2) Three new words will be presented per day, schoolwide. 3) All faculty/staff will develop strategies to reinforce words. 10 mins of reading on Wednesday a.m. instead of Chaimel One. 1) Teams identify "high- risk" students to be assigned a mentor. 2) Teacher & community mentor volunteers are matched with students. Collect stories, poetry and essays from students Create a list of books and a schedule Professional Dev. Workshop on using A.R. (Aug. 15) Mini-inservice to brainstorm strategies. Miru-inservice at faculty meeting Mini-inservice at faculty meeting with Guidelines for Mentoring None None Contact elementary schools to partner with None Timeline Begin: Sept 1, 2000 Begin: Sept. 1, 2000 Begin: Sept. 1,2000 1) Identification 1^ end of Sept. 2) Matched to mentor by Nov. 5, 2000 Oct. 2000 Oct 2000 Oct. 2000 Person Responsible Ms. Firestone Ms. McMurray Team Leaders Ms. Schutte Mr. Patterson Ms. Lamb Ms. Grecnley Mr. Bennett Tnd Teachers Team Leaders Ms. Seabrook Ms. Stewart Ms. Brooks Ms. Wickliffe Ms. Poore Ms. McMurray Ms. Schutte____ Ms. Hudson Ms. Wickliffe Ms. B. Williams Resources A.R. Software Books Incentives Text books Personal book Guidelines for Mentoring Magazine software & paper Book-of-the- month Books appropriate to rsad-tg.skm. Assessment Printouts from software In-class tests Quiz bowls Spot checks on classrooms by APs and Principal Track academic improvements/discipline referral s/absenteeism Sale of magazines Attendance at club meetings Attendance at story time days. 1Strategy Computers in all English Classes Make novels more accessible to teachers/students School-wide Incentives______ Test Preparation (for standardized tests)__________ Action Plan: Literacy Kev Actions 1) Improve communication between teachers and IRC 2) Improve ability for teachers to get books inhouse Professional Dev, None (cont'd) timeline Aug. 2000 Person Responsible District personnel Mr. Patterson Dept, chairs______ Ms. Schutte Ms. Brandon (IRC) IRC Secretary Teachers Administrators Teachers Resources Millage Partners in Ed. Class sets of novels Counselors Assessment 2A6TaP Arkinsu CimprcheaHTt TeaiDR A AssemcM FfOATun GRADE 8 BENCHMARK EXAMINATION MATHEMATICS SCHOOL SUMMARY REPORT Page: 1 A11 Students Gender Female Male District Name
LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT District Number: 60-01 Schoo) Name
CLOVERDALE JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL Schoo) Number
061 Gracie
08 Total Number of Students Tested: Date of Test: February 1999 Number ft Percentage of Students School Below Basic (BEL) 148 and below District Region State 138 Number of Students who did not attempt the Mathematics session
Number ft Percentage of Students Basic (BAS) 149-199 School District Region State 4 Ethnicity Asian/Pacific Islander African American Hispanic Native American White Gender/Ethnicity Feme 1e Asian/Pacif1c Islander African American Hispanic Native American White Gender/Ethnicity Male Asian/Pacif1c Islander African American Hispanic Native American White 122 sax 989 85X 2,388 45X 11.562 47X 13 gx 364 24Z 2,126 4OX 9,871 40X Nuaber 8 Percentage of Students Proficient (PRO) 200-249 Number ft Percentage of Students School 3 2Z District Region State School Advanced (ADV) 250 and above District Region State 133 9X 690 13% 2,822 1IX 0 OX 33 2X 121 2X 409 2t 67 93X 55 83X 0 ox 111 sox 3 loox 3 lOOX 1 SOX 0 OX 61 94X 2 10OX 2 lOOX 0 OX 0 OX 50 B5X 1 100X 1 100X 1 50X 516 6SX 473 64X 10 30X 814 81X 27 m 14 82X 106 26X 6 46X 429 BIX 15 75X 9 82X 51 26X 4 20X 385 SOX 12 SOX 5 83X 55 27X 1,245 45X 1,142 44X 4 13X 969 81X 33 49X 31 55X 1,323 34X 3 18X 482 82X 19 53X 18 BOX 709 35X 1 11 486 BOX 14 45X 13 BOX 614 33X 5,968 48X 5,587 46X 26 I7X 3,766 82X 214 57X 199 63X 7,247 38X 15 19X 1,937 B3X 110 BIX 86 BIX 3,776 39X 11 I6X 1,828 82X 103 54X 113 63X 3,471 37X 5 7X 8 12X 0 OX 11 9X 0 OX 0 ox 0 ox 0 OX 4 BX 0 OX 0 ox 0 ox 0 OX 7 12X 0 OX 0 ox 0 ox 184 24X 180 24X 11 33X 172 17X 6 I7X 3 I8X 168 42X 6 46X 88 17X 3 15X 2 18X 83 43X 5 25X 84 I7X 3 20X 1 I7X 85 4IX 1,079 39X 1,044 4OX 19 BIX 196 16X 32 48X 20 36X 1,848 47X 9 53X 90 15X 15 42X 9 30X 951 46X 10 71X 106 18X 17 55X 11 42X 895 47X 4,969 40X 4,889 4OX 73 48X 723 16X 134 36X 100 31X 8,797 46X 38 47X 351 I5X 54 30X 48 34X 4.458 46X 35 SOX 312 Ml 78 4IX 52 29X 4,333 46X 0 ox 3 5X 60 BX 13 10X 349 13X 341 13X 1.406 11X 1.415 12X 0 ox 0 ox 16 2X 17 21 64 2Z 57 2Z 181 IX 228 2X 0 OX 2 2X 0 OX 0 ox 1 BOX 9 27X 19 2X 2 6X 0 OX 103 26X 5 16X 23 2X 2 3X 5 9X 652 17X 39 26X 74 2X 23 6X 16 6X 2.661 14X 0 OX 0 ox 0 ox 0 ox 0 ox 3 9X 6 IX 0 ox 0 ox 24 BX 3 10X 5 OX 0 ox 0 ox 113 3X 14 9X 5 OX 2 IX 1 ox 385 21 0 ox 0 ox 0 ox 0 ox 0 ox 0 OX 2 3X 0 OX 0 ox 1 5OX 1 BX 9 21 2 1OX 0 ox 48 25X 8 40X 10 2X 0 OX 0 ox 55 27X 3 I8X 11 21 2 BX 3 1OX 328 16X 2 14X 12 2X 0 OX 2 8X 324 17X 22 27X 42 2X 14 8X 6 4X 1.319 14X 0 OX 0 ox 0 ox 0 ox 0 ox 0 OX 4 IX 0 ox 0 ox 12 SX 2 12X 4 IX 0 OX 0 ox 58 3X 6 11 4 OX 1 IX 0 ox 169 21 16 23X 32 IX 9 5X 12 7X 1.342 14X 0 OX 0 ox 0 ox 0 ox 0 ox 3 15X 2 OX 0 OX 0 ox 12 BX 1 11 1 OX 0 ox 0 ox 55 31 8 IIX 1 ox 1 IX 1 IX 216 21a^Tap Afkaimi ConprdiCRsnt TtainR 4 Aunneni Frounni GRADE 8 BENCHMARK EXAMINATION LITERACY SCHOOL SUMMARY REPORT Page: 2 A!! Students Gender Fema!e Male District Name: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT District Number: 60-01 School Name
CLOVERDALE JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL Schoo) Number
061 Grade: 08 Total Number of Students Tested: Date of Test
February 1999 Nunbar & Parcentage of Students School Below Basic (BEL) 163 and below District Region State 128 Number of Students who did not attempt the Literacy session
Number t Percentage of Students Basic (BAS) 164-199 Schoo! District Region State Number 8 Percentage of Students Proficient (PRO) 200-249 Schoo! District Region State 14 Number ft Percentage of Students Advanced (ADV) 250 and above Schoo! District Region State Ethnicity Asian/Pacific Islander African Anerican Hispanic Native American White Gender/Ethnicity Female Asian/Pacif1c Islander African American Hispanic Native American White Gender/Ethnicity Male Asian/Pacif1c Islander African American Hispanic Native American White 75 59X 31 47X 43 70X 0 OX 68 59X 1 33X 1 100X 1 sox 0 ox 31 SIX 0 ox 0 ox 0 ox 0 ox 37 69X 1 100X 1 100X 1 SOX 658 46X 285 38Z 372 5X 7 2IX 533 56X 19 sex 11 131 It 19X 3 23X 240 46X 7 311 1 78X 27 14X 4 20X 293 esx 12 sex 4 tit 49 24X 1.609 31X 593 22X 1,015 40X 2 ex 655 58X 19 29X 24 44X 890 23X 2 12X 281 49X 7 20X 8 29X 288 14X 0 ox 374 e7X 12 39X 16 62X 601 32X 7.962 33X 2.822 23X 5.133 43X 22 14X 2,592 58X 146 40X 142 46X 4,977 26X 5 ex 1, 121 49X 51 29X 34X 1,569 16X 17 24X 1,471 S9X 94 51X 95 56X 3,406 37X 42 33X 28 42X 14 23X 0 OX 39 34X 1 33X 0 OX 0 ox 0 ox 25 4IX 1 SOX 0 ox 0 ox 0 OX 14 26X 0 OX 0 ox 0 ox 497 34% 291 38X 206 30X 14 42X 319 34X 9 27X 3 2OX 145 37X 5 38X 208 4OX 7 311 1 11X 64 34X 9 45X 111 2 ex 2 14X 2 33X 81 40X 2.367 45X 1.260 46X 1.105 44X 16 52X 388 34X 34 52X 25 46X 1.888 48X 7 41X 228 40X 18 SIX 15 54X 983 48X 9 64X 159 28X 16 52X 10 38X 905 49X 10.881 45X 5,749 46X 5,122 43X 63 41X 1.489 . 3 160 44X 133 43X 8.974 47X 32 40X 902 39X 84 til 68 SOX 4.637 48X 31 44X 586 211 74 4OX 65 38X 4.336 tn 11 9X 7 11X 4 n 0 OX 8 11 1 331 0 OX 1 sox 0 ox 5 8X 1 SOX 0 ox 0 ox 0 OX 3 6X 0 OX 0 ox 1 sox 269 19X 166 22X 103 15X 12 36X 92 1OX 5 15X 1 11 157 4OX 5 38X 67 13X 5 26X 1 11X Bl 46X 7 35X 25 ex 0 ox 0 ox 70 35X 1, 164 221 5,196 2IX 0 OX 18 1X 82 2Z 314 1X 794 29X 369 15X 13 42X 85 8X 12 18% 5 9X 1.044 27X 8 47X 59 10X 9 26X 5 18X 708 35X 5 36X 26 5X 3 1OX 0 ox 335 18X 3.627 29X 1.565 13X 61 40X 349 8X 59 lex 31 1OX 4,682 25X 38 47X 269 12X 41 23X 22 lex 3.245 34X 22 3IX 80 4X 18 1OX 9 5X 1,434 16X 0 ox 0 ox 0 OX 0 ox 0 ox 0 ox 0 ox 0 ox 0 ox 0 ox 0 ox 0 ox 0 ox 0 ox 0 ox 0 ox 0 ox 16 2X 2 OX 0 OX 6 IX 0 OX 0 ox 12 3X 0 OX 5 1X 0 ox 0 ex 11 6X 0 OX 1 OX 0 ox 0 ox 1 ox 63 2X 19 IX 0 OX 2 OX 1 2X 0 OX 79 21 0 OX 2 OX 1 31 0 OX 60 3X 0 ox 0 ox 0 ox 0 ox 19 IX 244 2X 70 1X 6 4X 10 OX 2 1X 0 OX 295 2X 6 7X 8 OX 2 1X 0 OX 227 2X 0 ox 2 OX 0 ox 0 ox 68 IX90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 81% 65% " >4% 2% 17%.,.., Grade 8 Benchmark (2/99): Mathematics . .77%........ 82% 26' 42% 6%-- 30% 33% 17%-- H6<%--------- 0% I 18% 9% I0% 0% Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced z is* z ^6 z z z 80% 70% 60% 56% - 50% -46% - 40% 30% - 20/,, - 10/o O/o M% M% 1/o Grade 8 Benchmark (2/99): Literacy 379! 40% 19/ 3% 58% 42% 16%...... 73% Below Basic Basic Proficient S7%--------- > fl fc O/o Advanced z ^3 '7 S' z xO'- z z z <4100% 90% 88% 80% 70% 63% 60% 50% 40% 30% :3% 20% 10% 0% )% 0% Cloverdale Dunbar Grade 8 Benchmark (2Z99): Math, All Students -....87% 73% 72% 65% :3% :3% 2 2% 52% 48% Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced
3% :2% 7%-- 2% 2% }% Forest Heights Henderson Mabelvale Mann Pulaski Heights Southwest 70% 60% 59% 50% 40% :3% 30% - 20% 10% - l% )% 0% Cloverdale 49% 5 3% 7% )% Dunbar Gracie 8 Benchmark (2Z99): Literacy, All Students 58% 51% 59% 40% 17% 1% % T : 4% 7%------- 1% Forest Heights Henderson 42% <7%-------------37J 35% 31^o2'*<il :3% 0% 1% Mabelvale 0% 2% 2% )% Mann Pulaski Heights Southwest Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced Dunbar Magnet Middle School a 2-a' i Im l^\ jFtSS>3 M- 455 !V pfij s f- -li I- o / Tuning Up For Success On The Global Highway Gifted & Talented - International StudiesLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT MIDDLE SCHOOL PROGRAM MISSION STATEMENT The mission of the Little Rock School District Middle School Program is to meet the unique needs of all young adolescents, equipping them with the knowledge and the intellectual, physical, emotional, and social skills to successfully accomplish the transition to high school. This is achieved through: a developmentally appropriate curriculum that is challenging, integrated, relevant and exploratory
specially trained, nurturing educators using varied teaching and learning approaches within a flexible organizational structure
strong family and community partnerships
programs and policies that foster health, wellness, and safety
and a faculty advocate for every student. -Adopted by LRSD Board of Directors March 26, 1998DUNBAR MAGNET MIDDLE SCHOOL MISSION STATEMENT The Dunbar Magnet staff acknowledges that the nations of the world becoming increasingly interdependent. To prepare for this are becoming increasingly uiiciucpcnwin- xv interdependence, we seek to develop thoughtful, creative individuals able to participate effectively as citizens of an international society. We plan to meet the needs of a diverse student body by offering a challenging curriculum, emphasizing creativity and higher order thinking skills. Dunbar Magnet students will develop awareness and understanding of various global issues. cultures and languages as a passport to the future.Administration Deborah Berry, Principal John Bacon, Assistant Principal Ryan Burgess, Assistant Principal Rhonda Dunn, Assistant Principal Campus Leadership Team Steering Committee Deborah Berry, Principal Linda Austin, Central Office Louise Gutierrez, Parent Charles Stewart, Business Lucious Powell, Community Gerald Talley, Community Beverly Harris, Non-Certified Staff Vickie Finney, Non-Certified Staff Edith Ax, Faculty Darrell Carr, Faculty Tyri Flynn, Faculty Arthur Olds, Faculty Dawn Terry, Faculty Francine Skotko, Faculty Oscar Dean, Designers Tyri Flynn, Corvette (8) Sara Gaines, Prowlers (7) Tina Jones, Infiniti (6) Karisa Nichols, Pathfinder (7) Arthur Olds, Renaissance Racers Susan Sloan, Explorer (6) Judy Warren, Navigator (8)School Improvement Plan School: Dunbar Magnet Middle School Year: 2000-2001 Priority: Improve Student Achievement in Mathematics Supporting Data: The Stanford 9 exam showed that 2 disaggregated groups of students were 64% and 35% above the lowest quartile but only 9% and 3%, respectfully, in the highest quartile. These same groups were at 21 and12 /o ** / __ ' ___________. ____nn and Miimhpr SVStemS Problem Solving - Estimation, and Number Systems above the 50th percentile. The lowest scores were in and Number Theory as well as in Procedures - Computation in Context and Rounding. Only 14% of the students were at or above the "proficient" level on the State Criterion-Referenced Mathematics Exam. Goal(s): 100% of a school's students shall perform at or above the "proficient" level on the mathematics exam (grade 8 on the State criterion-referenced test). 65% of a school's students in every sub-group of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50th percentile in mathematics (SAT9 - 7th grade). At least 30% of a school's students will perform at the highest quartile in mathematics (SAT9 - 7th grade). At least 90% of a school's students will perform above the lowest quartile in mathematics (SAT9 - 7th grade). 90% of a school's students shall perform at or above the "proficient" level in mathematics each semester (grades 6-8 on the LRSD criterion-referenced mathematics test). o E c w 0. E o > o Q. E o o O (0 o o CM I O o o CM (0 (l> CM 0) O) . <0 u <0 E 0) (Q o "S o Q C C E c TO C D C <D 2> 4!> * 2J c c o .2 *0 0 .TZ o o c tn o j= o *- 4= C o f-S co E c o> m a, > c >1 .c o n o IS. 'E <0 9 o O o c CJ (Z) 0) c 0 E <D Q. O) c > > o P Ji m o Q. E 2-^ (0 c 0) O} s (0 Q Q c o O 3 55 S p g 3^ (0 E 2 E o c m k. o o o (Z) O Q. (0 > d> o O j c X D 3 <D </) o o c E o = w 0) > 2 Q. E i E (0 c Q> o 3 To o CM q) o k_ Q. o m tZ (0 UJ 2 m S UJ (0 h- <11 C7 V E 0. UJ OT CO x: _i I- C i z UJ CM J CM m 23 2 < TO O O <D < * Is >* IS (0 0 TO 2 o = > ? I (0 (0 b. c o . Q ? c O 0) g P o> = O. O> a> V c o o .2 TO o o TO 5 TO .2 V w i= CM TO ^ <" Q SM r 'S e. o to xP 2 Z E 0 o X o .*2 TO O TO CM O &> 0) o O o cq co o 5 2 o o. tn (0 E CM *0 o o > O X} o o k. O) 7 O t Ui Q.^ o c >1 S) y CD Q) c ra J2 o n o o> M- C o Q. E 3 O > O) I Ji o Q. 2: -p 0) c c p tn 0) c *- O -O p (/> o U X E o <0 = s I (Q O p o TO c o c 8 o
TO CD 1 c c u o E _ H $ TO E > VO 3 t > e p w o. Q. = E CL t Q. . o 5 tn o E j: ra E c Q. E o . O 2 - o ?> ill c Q. tn TO - I I 2 I O TO - 2 TO C C5 TO E 0) C S LL O) X u TO m c Q- E <D 5 (0 3 O 2 S <u E (0 <D r> 2 c n n 5 8 E g CD TO TO .. - TO S Z - 8- S 2 $ p g w s ? 5 E g ' I c t/i 91 O V .1= a> ra o O 7. COTO 5 2 -c- 1 p V > o 95 > 2 8 = 8 TO E I V 2 ? > O- TO 9 2 I Q- liiE 1 5 O) re o (0 c E O) .c h c TO I Q. TO sz m co c TO c 2 -6 3 = 9 K -j i5 2 JO O C c _ a> 3 -o Q -5 (0 o O o O) 95 c c: TO TO o -o c = E i o 5 3 c S _ 2 ts ? " O) o M- to * c o M- _ 2 TO CM O 2 C I C O o 5 -R > O 53- O o o a 2 & 2 2 - c TO TO S
! tc f- "5 o (0 < (0 tfi c o 2 c Ui O 1- 3 M >1 O 5^ o u tn o O E o E > Q- O Q. E m i c o w 8 *5 0) 11 c Ogo 3 .c 0) S o 2! 2 E 50?^ I c TO G C C _ TO 3 TO -D Q 'S = -85 p 2 a -2 I tfi <=^ o Ci- CM 2 E TO 5 c co TO 9- .2*D c 0 Cw Q. C 0) E 0) > ko Q. E OO (Zo) o o <M Io o o CM (0 > o o o <Z) Q> $ Q> O> TO s TO -Q C a Q OO O (O qs -o CD CD O X CD o CD CD E O "eg 5 eg o >p (0 </) o' D c ns D c 0 0) 0) o CD CD O X CD <*> TO TOO) TOO TO 5TO TO 5 C cTO e TO c o '<> c a> ^3 s co Q> P 2* 5 (0 E o <D m o D. (0 > 6o $ tn o ns E CD m E c CD ns o O tn CD 5 o CD CD CD > "O o ns -Q E-ns O o> E ' O) 2. <2, (Z> t-c CD o 3 (/> ns CD > a ns CO CD o ns x: o s o E o 5 8 P Q. .E CD -D x: c I ns co 0) > o & E o 2 i I 1 o co o CD O X CD CO i_ 0) o (0^0 eg o o O (0 o n c 0) o co 1C G) o vO (0 2 a> a. Q. S' 8 -i eg jie o > CD P p SP E- .i .i o o O tn m 15 ssn 11 - c S n TO " C S ? i c E UCD- <0 tc uTO. co c S LL (0 s 91 CD c* "o TO TO .0 5 2 -TO 1 m TO O g 52 . 'to & $ - i 2! g s C S' p- -2 g a .i eq >2 Q. -i o _ g P 2 o TO c E 1 3 11 I 1S1 I5l Il UH S 1i21O) c CD e Q. CD CD qi Q. J 5 E o o O1 I 1 is to TO 3 o 0) o 3 c eg TO "S - 15 - g I I 2 S -2^ 2 0 -5 8 "S O -(6 eg TO E 7 TO - 5 5 TO "5 TO I - '52 TO .2 O TO '2 C S TO .2 i. E c C (Q CQ 5 .c o eg eg 2 5 .2 = CD 5 .2 c "S E 0) u CD C 2 C <2 c CD -E >CD CD o O o w tx: 2 Q. CD = CD C > o oo O (O ra O tn V D ns ns OS i_ -E <D E w E CD Q. CO o Ui .c a c ns CD CD D U) co o O 2* c s CD c O o >- 0 CD > Q- O CD f E vi tn I Q. W i LU o CD CD E E a: $ (A < .T2O iiuns
2 CD 10 c 0 or CD - O 1 ^ - "L 'A D o = ,rC S i *- - z CM C01D n in IC-S > rs o c o US a: x: < tn CO IS^'S V) w z CD O cE l3o {53 OO S 5 2 s o c Z Z TO t < 2 0>1 TO nj (/) O- a: TO Z O o fn c CD TO 0 2 (0 c Q_ Q LU 52 I ? CD 5^10 !s o CK 2 0) C r> W 8 s S -D CQ UI ? TO T2O II co 'xOs S <0 E CD CD o ns E tn -o CD CD T o CD c Q. CD co J) o ? E o CD C .C CD ns o E |8 E 5 o 0) C E (0 o OS op 0X0 c: ns tn tn CD "D ns c O) o E CD "O CO ns CD >1 C o -(SD ns g o CD o CD E Q2. O> CD Q_ f S o c co 3 4C E n tfi (0 o O) 1 O) *c E T> (D I S) > c <i> > (0 tn 0) E (0 0) .n &! o li c (I 11 0 C x:
I f to o P 5* o __ (0 C w 0. c 0) Ea> >o Q. E oo u W o o CM IO o o (0 > 0 (0 c '*iX Q. OQ ! s to p o 3 OQ to 5 a> .i2 g o 3 Q OQ <0 to 2 3 O (0 to a: to c </> (0 c I O E 85io^ Q- ~ S ->c w E 8w- 2 F S -5p E0 Qo . <to E E c 5 > E 5 to :c E S 5 2 2 -F d) ? c c u 0) to 5 Tj H Q O < E E 3 C 0) > E (0 !S co o 2 9 M38 to g - c ? -S 9 to 2 2 E 2m to to 2 2 s 5 o un "Oo WO CQ (Z) to (0 EE to to O o> (0 (0 0) X O) E P o i= 5 1 S E o ~ 5 (0 0) S 'Z. Vi (0 o c <1> O) < 0) Q. O I O. t/i Q, O I 0<. qI o o c o CZ) O is 0) c: o> TO (0 c 3 Q oo o (O C O o o j: 0 Vi p O Vi o TO E TO TO S c .2 *3 C CD V c C o to s to 5e co Q. OL ) to o: to c p o O. to Vi Q. to CO Q-to Ui Q. to CO g o o> c O Q. to Vi to co to CO !2 to D (0 5 .2- S o O) . 3 _ CO a (0 M o . ji: c Q -Dc </> 5 v) *2 0) =3 (0 ID Eif o 1- Q. 4S S I* E y E S -c Q - I-tn o O) * c c s IS o g to C eIe E c E E x: m .f5f2t '0w) o W 75 C UJ 0) Ci t. a> E 2 to to to c H P Ito 8 K to F "S E -2 "D CD < O OT C to T3 3 Io c o ? -C I 2 s o c C o3 S(02 E A (0 to c o 1 ro m <uD. O) O C C 0) co (0 to D (0 to E (0 to o c (0 (/) fl V & Z o o (0 c 0) 0) CT) (0 c o S5 = 3 UJ . to 3 Tt -D O 2 S to -c 9 5 O E -c c <0 O to Q. to 5 . 0) O Q 2 to E E 0) 3 s . E O 3 E S S I to 8s t fi 0 S I E o to c . toE lO TJ to to to .C 2 O II $ a d S ao & ph to Q. to Xi p> 5^ 0 < CD 0. 9 5* o 3 0) c (0 QL C o E 0) > o Q. E o o u Vi o o CM I O o o CM (0 V > CM Q> O> (0 (Q Q. OQ 0) o a o 3 CQ .0 a> 5= .fl 3 Q C& 10 3 o 0 w q: Qi E O Qi 8ST
r w <1> 0 1 TO :3 - "8 2 2 m Sa o 2 Q. o TO g 8 TO Q. TO E 3 3 8 "S E 0) (0 h O c 2 3 x> O JJ D. ti < (0 E I- .9 0. O o o c a TO D 5 -6 ) D X] 1 8 TO <!> TO i O) 8 < . (0 TO c 8 c TO c o (0 s C O 8. S s 0) o o o c u to 0) ) (ts 1 o o a> 4= Vi s o <0 o (0 Q (0 e Q> (0 S Q o o u Vi c o ".z c V 0) *- c o .c E o o) 3 < 8*2 CD '8*2 CD iz CD V- 3. TO Oi o I e o Q- 0. q: , e m o m TO o g) u y >- < TO c 15 5 Ui 8 5 S I si 'to TO (0 E C o TO X X TO 8 E o TO /9 *0 O (0 8 TO E 0) 8 c o> c 0) 8 " S TO Ui I- "5 x: (/) 2 TO TO 3 TO V! = ? <0 TO C I 1$ 2 c . B 8 E 0) C TOO Q 0. 0. O TO TO ip C c E <3s o> c 0) 11 Ui I- TO 3 o .!= . TO TO O sole
X c - c c 8 3 8 E J 15 c o >- 5 < TO -: O Q 5 tZ5 C .0 o TO T5 TO TO t E "o c o < z S E p " 5 c TO " n TO 55 C ~ 5- D O CT "O C P TO t is o O = C5> "S t c 3 > o fl S 5 -c I S -8
c c TO 0) >. W t5 15 35 8 8 8 8 I o (0 06 E to 8. E 588 0'^8 I" 2 TO f If S = TO 16 TO 8 TO m - c > E C o c C c C . 3> i TO TO c si c TO o 3 55 -j E < s. 2 ? Qi O. (0 E Z 8 p tn TO 8-2 c c 5 O 8 TO D. i= P i O) C Q TO S S 8^ oi S.'B 8 iR c s
<-> <0 > CL 8 o .TO *- 6 10 3 o TO C O o I n D TO 15 . S TO .ti 5* P < 3 (/) TO w c 3 TO c 1 o m V) 5 > C TO g Q TO c 'S. 8 CD o c TO c: TO E cf "m - C Hl $ s.^. d S 5 6 c TO E c B a m TO = "O 3 TO x: - E p -c : a 18- sl n C O o 8 c TO '8 D. 8 2 r c\i c T- TO o Q * O 3 (g Q. C (U E Q> O Q. E O o u (/) O O M O O o <M (0 <*> Q> D) to Q. 1 (0 (0 p 0. *c tn o 3 tn o 5 .52 3 Q OQ 3 O ft: Q> C O> C c ?o I i 0. re o c P *3k < re o> A Is 2 6 3 /Il a o re u. 0. ifi re D c 0) D> < a> I E re a> E (0 tn re O 0 D) m < l-i co S o o x: o </) I c o o p .W to to p c o i2 E 2^ C o (S Q. Q. c "S. Si <D Sw CD in 5 re 'C $ 5 O E - t- -c a O) 5 12 C C J 5 co o> c o a> c O a 3 a> c o> tn (0 Xi c 3 Q o Vi o p E p p c o q: c o o O O u (Z> c a> <i> c c F o 2 o- 2 E 5 S-i . G) 0 0 5 8 "S E 11 x: 'C Vi 5 3-^ lU o I? C -F m S o 2 5 <s TO . 38 m e o TO Q. 0) o re 0) P c 0) 2 o. E > 8 a> s c O -- (n 8 I = fS 8 i ^ i5 i ? E E o> 2 S o E -S-, = S.2 0) re E s re E o c "O Ml c p I re I.. 2 c < 0) ^(0 0) S lo ? w/ -si <6 3 El c 2 =3 ?2 -O c o m re 1 <l> 5 S E Q. TO - P X c .E Vi 3 F E I s O H 0) JZ o c O g * *X w S 2 E re . - o u
5S S 2 c >. TO t: EES E c E 2 y w 2 5S| c <> ^ Q. re3 :2 o u to 3 12 re I reeS 3J5: 5 t3o > > q: o lWu Hq: III I m o 8 Q Z uj re re O re c U. 2 o co o O) (0 c o f0c) = CO 2 P . "o E *3) u c o Vi re m (0 O O C : 1c f- f(f0l 0) R S X ra 2c =Q . X C 28 ? TO <Eu TO V > 0) E 2 Q. H <0 Mf 2 a (0 o 5 Q to te O Q> re -J Q> C U -S (Q a> <0 > TO m ? c .&s S <2 (t to On S 8 C (0 O E o v Di x: oo 6 o o CM O m <-> <
UJ _) < UJ > I < t~ UJ LU 0^ 56 S X S H Q Q Hl Z O Q ui Z D Q H z y I- < ? O UJ 5S _J UI t- UJ m z > I UJ UI f? 5 Sus 0^ > B 3 "O 5 O B & -O e -b > *- o -o .o o V v n s u Vi u 43 X U es cn V H .w 'C n S X a s o 0S 01) O V) = .S 0^ S E R O OD s S S on U S < -p * e 2 S V o &. OS5 cA I s o fi. (A u < "i A > o fi. V e s .2 -S s tn e X GA t A .CS A J3 -S 2 s Qi 5 3 X (O 4*- o u O Bi so fi o I K 5 s u o o Q IO N CM O CM CM o CM CM O o o CM O) c Q. CO a I c' c I 3 M IO o JM CM IO o CM o o CM _ v> te c 5 Q S M o tn It O _I < < C UI (B $ O z S e .! V u u V O. V X eIT C c\ fS bX c c c\ IT C c\ I CM 0^ 0^ > a> C <u s a> > 0^ cn V o u CZ) V & A a> > CD (1) o 2 O I D N 6^ ro (U O 2 O (D D g cc c\ CT C c\ o N <y x> D N Q c c\ ^5 TtCMOOOCD'^CNOCOO^ ^^^00000050)0) CMCMCNCMCNCNCMCMv-'^'^> V s . 3 "O o w u a. s v V > ** o -o a> H CA W CO V s X V Q a. Vw X i! w a J- O co .s a> s s a o OD s eV o. I co O 2S s 5 5 -a o. o A S .Ms V o u V aV X H E -ew s o a S V o CM V OlC u s q a 05 CA I s _o 'u V u oCZ3 u fi Vi U e u ca es s 6A oX GA A U3 V GA IS o o o CM O> c *c a (0 35 5 s u fi e u Q O s M M o co CM IO CM CM o CM CM CM < I C I IO T Ol O V CM IO o CM t- w n c (0 <3 Q s ton E .S Q "D J S < C Ui (0 z s Oi o CM iD o CM OX c CM CZ5 I GA % 0^ 0^ > 0^ C 0^ s > <u u tf3 u o u iZ3 V & a > < o o (0 k. O JO S o D (0 k. O q> o o a o o <M <M <M (O CM CM O) o CM ^9 cy xZ C*' CM r=F=i O CO CM in CM CM O CM CM m CM CM m o CM O O CM m Oi Q> c . *3 "O c s o Q. -o e 0) 5 > ** o a o V cn V E v in V H u Of) -w V x: X <w es u O R s V X 'W R o o o V o 5 <M S V .S E o Of) S c u s S s E ex V} u W5 ts > O V a. a (Z) I s .2 V QA u 9 > tn S .S 3 o J3 on c A J3 u .^ z 00 U Q U I = 3 *n E 4) 5 3 X fi. U Q S < s bJ Q O U ..j Q O a^ in in IM m *S c s .= 0^ u La 0^ ex. V 4= H o o o CM O) c Q. (0 <9 i M <> CM OMOIOOIOOMOM ^P>CMCMT-^pOO> CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMt- i_ w ra c ra Q S (0 o w .S a: "5 -I JJ s < c UJ ra 5 o z sCM CM C CM CZ5 I V) vs <u > C s (U > 0^ 4 u o u czs u 61 R u V > oo 0 "D 5 O I co 0 O (0 o 0 O g CM 00 o CM 6^ CO CM O CM CM o CM o co CM % o in CM T CD O CM I I o m o o T o in o> V e *3 *0 e o n A o e V 5 > *- O *0 JS a V V VD a> 0^ t/D co V H (0 C es s V X -M ,o o X X w u o exi O s .S O s VD o ex) V y B y ec U B . -p d2 S S a. S5 I 4> Q. 4> B ,2 "p o a 5 >n ^ w 4> 5 5 x ta< Q C c .: a> u O) & V X H c y X a 'S J. a C W -M o y = s y o u y a co s O .2 S -o V B X y y e M 5 < u B y B a g S t V A U 49 y e o .S X u s s Q -C = M fi 4> X c e M C Q V JS H o y w .SP E < 27 * > c MD 00 S MD 'O'S. c 00 R *0 sin CM in CM <> 42 e bX e I 0^ cu > 0^ c E o > Q cn u O u z/:i V & a 0^ > < V o CO o I ro X2 (U CJ) Q O CM co c\ in CM O CM u> CJ o CD CM R omomomo^ oor-h-cDcomin'M CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM <p Q % Q <s <y '5 Q1 CM CM OX e CZ) I > 0^ C3 0^ s > <3^ V) V o u V b a > oo 0 D (0 i_ O I 03 X3 0 D) CZ3 lO CM co CM co in CM co in CM in CM CM in CM o X o o co o in CM o o CM o in o o o in o <?o o W) cs *C (S' I co 0^ > S 0^ E 0^ > a> Ou a6>1 tn. V> GO 0) D CLO_ oI o E o (D O S CM o o o o o Q s CM o o co o lO CM o o CM O to o o o lO o X. h 5 3 O u <0 -1 gj E CQ 0 Q (0 > Ui CD o' V! co o> ro TO Q c a> (0 (0 m oe a 3 3 Vi >> a> o: (B O O e a (B u 5 a a CZ) < c co 0) II -O 8 I o co <o>< o J? 3 Q> O -J o C u S (B <l> <0 >- CO II <r2- E c 0 D 3 <: Io < co o u S' U. 0 E-^3 o cd 'oP H J2 2 3 1 rc U. 0) S = >p o 1? s 2 3 fs o o Stni II w - c II ^ IQs. 18 "rSe 8 = 18 2 "9) eo < 'P O V S' U. c0 0. X5 3 '3) 0) > s (0 $ Ui >p <0 * **5 >P Jk JL H ? o 5 C Q "e E '' |<<jj w55$5xx<< >p jT 5 5 0? o II s. O) c 0) S Vi S S 3 O b iIl 8 0) 15 fi Sl SEE (Q 00 6 8 -. (0 5 A E c U) o V c 6 c V co 8is5?l Eto 2 = S -a re a 2 X I-t S co oo d) o> 0) > E m 8 U) 8 - b 16 8 Oil g 'E I b. 8. ? E -i J2 c c S =-i 2 I -2 ? 16 ? 2 MZ^- VO c V JS Q. o 2 o 0) (D P- c j: > 5 0) -e -D o 8 8 S-SE S <2 qg Q> 5 I Co .o_ 6O) 8 ii> re S A E Ui 8 c 6 SV 16 c (D si z -s c E re re c "B 0. 2 tt I-co oo d) O) I I a> j= > joa o SI u a S s -s2 as u aV. 00 JS cn -O a u 0 S C 0^ o o > Ji - 'S S O .2 o U s C o -o u OS ^o. *o ' V ^ o o a a> m "O V u s u V 0^ I s o La V u V c u S V "S s V V H 5 <i0 55.2 es U Cl J! -00 S I Qu < H U < a V w a V .<u v OSI a o a> q> OJD ew a o a aw u w s O< a a a 69 tn E -w a eac rMj u ec ~ ec M 69 tn O JS cn t A US AT) o a IO % o c a 5 o Q. o > o a O n o CM o O) n c I *A o o o o o 00 o (O o a o CM o '<y e > 9 ^O. V >K o V Q ><! The percent of students performing at or above the proficient" level in mathematics on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. ACTAP - 8* Grade State Mandated Criterion-Referenced Mathematics Test (1999 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. Hispanic Maies (n = 4) 120 100 80 60 Actuai Goai 40 20 0 T 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009The percent of students performing at or above the "proficient" level in mathematics on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. ACTAP - 8*'' Grade State Mandated Criterion-Referenced Mathematics Test (1999 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. Asian/Pacific Islander Females (n 4) 120 100 80 60 Actual Goal 40 20 0 T 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in mathematics on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. ACTAP - 8* Grade State Mandated Criterion-Referenced Mathematics Test (1999 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. Asian/Pacific Islander Males (n = 7) 120 100 80 60 40 -- 20 -- 0 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Actual GoalBaseline Data Baseline Grade Year Levels LRSD Indicators Goal Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 98-99 7 Performance on SATO, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test 65% of a school's students in every subgroup of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50th percentile in mathematics. Af-Am(F)=12% Af-Am(M)=21% WF=60% WM=53% Hisp=86% As/Pac=100% 0ther=100% Af-Am(F)=5% (4 students) Af-Am(M)=5% (4 students) WF=1% (1 Student) WM=1% (1 student) 23% 20% 77% 86% 6 -6 16 32 98-99 7 Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test The percent of students in every subgroup of race and gender performing at or above the 50th percentile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. See above See above65% of a schools students in every sub-group of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50 percentile in mathematics. Stanford 9 Exams - 7* Grade (1998 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated data on Stanford 9 mathematics exams as percentages. % at or above 50th percentile 120% 100% 100100% 100% 86% 86% 80% 77% 10% 65*>5% 60/ 60% - 1998 1999 337 40% - - 23% 217feo% 20% - - 0% a.i I GOAL Af-Am(F) Af-Am(M) WF (n = (n = 67) (n s 86) 42) WIVI(ns 36) Hisp. As/Pac (n Other (n = = 5) 2) T T T T LThe percent of students in every sub-group of race and gender performing at or above the 50* percentile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Stanford 9 Exam - Grade (1998 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. African-American Females (n = 67) 70 60 50 40 30 Actual Goal 20 10 -- 0 T 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008The percent of students in every sub-group of race and gender performing at or above the 50* percentile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Stanford 9 Exam - 7* Grade (1998 baseline year) 60 50 40 30 0 20 10 This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. 70 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Goal The percent of students in every sub-group of race and gender performing at or above the 50* percentile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Stanford 9 Exam - Grade (1998 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. White Females (n = 42) 90 80 70 60 50 -- 40 -- Actual Goal 30 -- 20 -- 10 -- 0 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 LThe percent of students in every sub-group of race and gender performing at or above the 50**' percentile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Stanford 9 Exam - Grade (1998 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. White Males (n = 36) 100 90 80 70 60 50 -- Actual Goal 40 -- 30 -- 20 -- 10 -- 0 T T T 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008Baseline Data Baseline Grade Year Levels LRSD Indicators Goal Your Results Grotvth Goa/ Your Growth Your Score 98-99 7 Performance on SAT9. a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test At least 30% of a school's students will perform at the highest quartile in mathematics. Af-Am(F)=3% Af-Am(M)=9% WF=43% WM=33% Other=100% Af-Am(F)=3% (2 students) Af-Am(M)=2% {2 students) 98-99 7 Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test The percent of a school's students performing at the highest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. See above See above 4% 5% -2 -6At least 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in mathematics. Stanford 9 Exam - 7* Grade (1998 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated data on Stanford 9 mathematics exams as percentages. % in the highest quartile 120% 100% 100% 80% 80% 67% 60% 40% 30580% 20% - - 0% 3% 4% 9% i. Goal 61% 43/ 30% I T 0% Af-Am(F) Af-Am(M) WF (n = WM (n = Hisp. (n = As/Pac (n Other (n = (n = 67) (n = 86) 42) 36) 7) = 5) 6) 1998 1999The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Stanford 9 Exam - f** Grade (1998 baseline year) 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. 35 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Goal The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Stanford 9 Exam - 7* Grade (1998 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. 35 30 25 20 15 10 0 5 African-American Males (n = 86) Goal 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Baseline Data Baseline Grade Year Levels LRSD Indicators Goal Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 98-99 7 Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test At least 90% of a school's students will perform above the lowest quartile in mathematics. Af-Am(F)=35% Af-Am(M)=44% WF=81% WM=81% Others=75% Af-Ann(F)=6% (4 students) Af-Am(M)=3% (2 students) WF=1% (1 student) WM=1% (1 student) 0=2% (1 student) 42% 44% 87% 95% 100% 98-99 7 Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test The percent of a school's students performing above the lowest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. See above See above -1 -3 5 13 23At least 90% of a schools students will perform above the lowest quartile in mathematics. Stanford 9 Exams - V* Grade (1998 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated data on Stanford 9 mathematics exams as percentages. % above the lowest quartile 120% 100% 100% 100% 9O/O% 87% 86% 81/ 81V 80% - 60% - 1998 1999 42% 44*/4% 40% - - 20% - 0% T 1 T T T T T Goal Af-Am(F) Af-Am(M) WF (n = WM(n= Hisp. (n= As/Pac (n Others (n (n = 67) (n = 86) 42) 36) 7) = 5) = 6)The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Stanford 9 Exam -1^'' Grade (1998 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. African-American Females (n = 67) 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Goal The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Stanford 9 Exam - 7* Grade (1998 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. African-American Maies (n 86) 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 -- 30 -- 20 -- 10 -- 0 T T 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Actual GoalThe percent of a school's students performing above the lowest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Stanford 9 Exam - 7* Grade (1998 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. White Females (n = 42) 92 90 88 86 84 82 80 -- 78 -- 76 T T 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Actual GoalThe percent of a schools students performing above the lov^est quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Stanford 9 Exam - 7" Grade (1998 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. White Males (n = 36) 100 95 90 85 80 -- 75 -- 70 ml 111111 !! Illi Actual Goal 11 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 LThe percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Stanford 9 Exam - 7* Grade (1998 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. Others (n = 6) 120 100 80 60 -- 40 -- 20 -- 0 T T Actual Goal 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 School Improvement Plan School: Dunbar Magnet Middle School Year: 2000 - 2001 Priority: Improve Student Achievement in Reading Supporting Data: The Stanford 9 exam showed that 2 disaggregated groups of students were 46% and 32% above the lowest quartile but only 1% and 0% respectfully, in the highest quartHe^ These above the 50th percentile. The lowest scores were in Reading Comprehension, notably Recreational, Textual, Punctuation and Sentence Structure continue to be weak points. Initial Understanding and Interpretation. Only 18% of the students were at or above the "proficient" level on the State Criterion-Referenced Literacy Exam. Goal(s): 100% of a school's students shall perform at or above the "proficient" level on the reading and writing literacy exam (grade 8 on the State criterion-referenced test). 65% of a school's students in every sub-group of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50th percentile in reading (SAT9 - 7th grade). At least 30% of a school's students will perform at the highest quartile in reading (SAT9 - 7th grade). At least 90% of a school's students will perform above the lowest quartile in reading (SAT9 - 7th grade). 90% of a school's students shall perform at or above the "proficient" level in reading each semester (grades 6-8 on the LRSD criterion-referenced reading test).School Improvement Plan School: Dunbar Magnet Middle School Year: 2000 - 2001 Priority: Improve Student Achievement in Reading, page 2 One-Year Benchmark(s): The percent of students performing at or above the "proficient- ievei in reading and writing iiteracs, on the criterion-referenced (grades 6-8 tests wiii meet or exceed the trend and improvement goais each year (grade 8 on the State criterion-referenced test). In 2000 - 2001 Dunbar students shall improve 8.2% to a total of 26.2%. This means that 17.5 students must improve to the "proficient" or above level this year. DATA NOT AVAILABLE UNTIL SEPTEMBER. The percent of students in every sub-group of race and gender performing at or above the 50th percentile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year (SAT9 - 7th grade). In 2000 - 2001 Dunbar students shall improve at the following rates: Black Males need to improve 4%, to a total of 32% (this is a total of 4 students who need to improve)
Black Females need to improve 6%, to a total of 22% (this is a total of 6 students who need to improve). These are the rates of improvement needed to match the improvement goals
more growth, of course, is sought. The percent of a school's students performing at the highest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year (SAT9 - 7th grade). Dunbar students shall improve at the following rates: Black Males need to improve 3%. to a total of In 2000 - 2001 --------------------- 7% (this is a total of 3 students who need to improve)
Black Females need to improve 3%, to a total of 6% (this is a total of 2 students who need to improve). These are the rates of improvement needed to match the improvement goals
more growth, of course, is sought.School Improvement Plan School: Dunbar Magnet Middle School Year: 2000 - 2001 Priority: Improve Student Achievement in Reading, page 3 One-Year Benchmark(s): The percent of a school's students performing above the lowest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year (SAT9 - 7th grade). In 2000 - 2001 Dunbar students shall improve at the following rates: Black Males need to improve 4%, to a total of 54% (this is a total of 4 students who need to improve)
Black Females need to improve 6%, to a total of 44% (this is a total of 4 students who need to improve)
White Males need to improve 1%, to a total of 85% (this is a total of less than 1 student who needs to improve): White Females need to improve 1 %, to a total of 80% (this is a total of less than 1 student who needs to improve). These are the rates of improvement needed to match the improvement goals
more growth, of course, is sought. The percent of students performing at or above the "proficient" level in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester (grades 6-8 on the LRSD criterion-referenced reading test). "Proficient" levels have not yet been determined. Charts show NWEA Medians, District Medians, and Dunbar Medians by grade level and subject for the Spring 2000 test. District-wide school comparisons are also included. The percent of students demonstrating gains from the reading pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year (grades 6-8 on the LRSD criterion-referenced reading test). The second series of tests have not yet been administered: growth goals are thus not available at this time. LSchool Improvement Plan School: Dunbar Magnet Middle School Year: 2000 - 2001 Intervention: Reading Across the Content Areas Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources District Budget Title I Budget APIG/Other Budget 1. Establish block class scheduling to promote hands-on instructional techniques. Deborah Berry, Principal 1 Sept. Team study/block research. Development of a professional Library in the Media Center, Staff development in block scheduling/team teaching. $1,000 2. Establish common planning periods for each team in order to facilitate across the curriculum reading. Deborah Berry, Principal Team Leaders 1 Sept. See above, number 1. 3. Increase the amount of time students are engaged in on-task instruction. Administrative Team Calendar Coordinator 1 Sept. Bobcat Babble (Used to schedule announcements.) School calendar done monthly. 4. Establish the use of learning logs and daily use of agendas across the curriculum. Team Leaders 1 Sept. Agendas, Notebooks Money spent on the agendas will be reimbursed through agenda sales. 5. Increase the circulation of books, etc., in the Media Center. Martha James, Media Specialist Team Leaders Reading Teachers 15 Sept. Media Center, Media resources. Library Use instruction by Media Specialist. District Media BudgetSchool Improvement Plan School: Dunbar Magnet Middle School Year: 2000 - 2001 Intervention: Reading Across the Content Areas, page 2 Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources District Budget Title I Budget APIG/Other Budget 6. Identify and plan remediation for those incoming 6th grade students who score in the bottom quartile in reading on last year's Sth grade Stanford 9 exams. Mr. Acre and Ms. Slater, Counselors Aug. 10 Individuals and their scores provided by Dr. Lesley's office. 7. Use curriculum mapping to ensure that reading will be stressed in all areas. Steering Committee Team Leaders Begin 1 Nov. Curriculum Maps, Professional Library 8. Design, in collaboration with representative parents, a plan that involves parents in the reading component of the content areas. Deborah Berry, Principal Parent Mathematics Committee Begin 1 Nov. PTSA, Parent Reading Committee 9. Design school, as well as individual team, incentives for improvement. Steering Committee Team Leaders Begin 1 Nov. Depends on the incentives developed. Again, the budget will depend on the incentives selected. 10. Discuss School Improvement (re: reading) in every faculty meeting. Deborah Berry, Principal Begin with Nov. Fac. Meeting Faculty Meeting Agendas, Professional Library 11. Monitor the entire plan and make needed adjustments to ensure Deborah Berry, Principal Ongoing Team Meeting Agendas improvement before the April Benchmark Team Leaders examinations.School Improvement Plan School: Dunbar Magnet Middle School Year: 2000-2001 Intervention: Reading Across the Content Areas, page 3 Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources District Title I Budget Budget APIG/Other Budget 12. Conduct summative evaluations of the Campus Leadership June plan and its implementation
make adjustments for next year. Team Synthesis from Team Meeting AgendasBaseline Data Baseline Year Grade Levels LRSD Indicators Goal Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 2000-2001 all LRSD Criterion-Referenced The percent of students performing at or Reading and Language Usage above the "proficient" level in Reading and Tests Language Usage will meet or exceed the trends and improvement goals each semester. "PROFICIENT' LEVELS HAVE NOT BEEN DETERMINED. THE SECOND SERIES OF TESTS HAVE NOT BEEN GIVEN, AND NO TREND DATA IS AVAILABLE. CHARTS SHOWING CURRENT DATA ARE INCLUDED, HOWEVER.The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in Reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester. LRSD Criterion-Referenced Mathematics Test Spring, 2000 This chart shows Median Scores. READING - GRADE 6 218 212 216----- 214 212----- 210----- 208 ----- 2fla 211 Spring 2000 206 ----- 204 T NWEA LRSD Dunbar Medians Medians MediansLRSD Achievement Level Tests - Spring 2000 (Average Scores) Reading - Grade 6 220 215 215 210 209 211 210 203 205 -- 204 200 195 195 -- 190 -- 185 (0 c Q c c ra CL in g T T T T I 213 202 T T I T T oThe percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in Language Usage will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester. LRSD Criterion-Referenced Mathematics Test Spring, 2000 This chart shows Median Scores. LANGUAGE USAGE - GRADE 6 217 216 216 215----- 214----- 213----- 212----- 212 213 Spring 2000 211----- 210 T NWEA LRSD Dunbar Medians Medians Medians LLRSD Achievement Level Tests - Spring 2000 (Average Scores) Language Usage - Grade 6 250 212 200 1 213 219 215 212 210 204 209 150 -- 100 50 0 T T T T T T T T 6^'The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in Reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester. LRSD Criterion-Referenced Mathematics Test Spring, 2000 This chart shows Median Scores. READING - GRADE 7 222 221 2ia 220 - 218----- 216----- 214----- 212----- 210----- 208 212 Spring 2000 T T NWEA LRSD Dunbar Medians Medians MediansLRSD Achievement Level Tests - Spring 2000 (Average Scores) Reading - Grade 7 220 219 216 215 210 205 -- 200 -- 195 211 210 210 209 206 T T T T T T T T xOThe percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in Language Usage will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester. LRSD Criterion-Referenced Mathematics Test Spring, 2000 This chart shows Median Scores. LANGUAGE USAGE - GRADE 7 223 222 221 220 1222 22e 219----- 218----- 217----- 216----- 215 - Spring 2000 24^ 214----- 213 T T NWEA LRSD Dunbar Medians Medians MediansLRSD Achievement Level Tests - Spring 2000 (Average Scores) Language Usage - Grade 7 225 222 221 220 216 215T" 210 205 200 T" << 217 209 212 O' XV / T T T T T T T oThe percent of students performing at or above the "proficient level in Reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester. LRSD Criterion-Referenced Mathematics Test Spring, 2000 This chart shows Median Scores. READING - GRADE 8 226 22^ 224 ----- 222 - 220 ----- 218----- 216----- 214------ 212----- 210 211 Spring 2000 T 7TC T NWEA LRSD Dunbar Medians Medians Medians LLRSD Achievement Level Tests - Spring 2000 (Average Scores) Reading - Grade 8 250 216 217 222 218 212 214 208 211 200 150 100 50 0 T T T T T T T TThe percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in Language Usage will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester. LRSD Criterion-Referenced Mathematics Test Spring, 2000 This chart shows Median Scores. LANGUAGE USAGE - GRADE 8 224 223 222 - 221 220 ----- 219----- 218----- 217 - 216 - Spring 2000 215 T T NWEA LRSD Dunbar Medians Medians MediansLRSD Achievement Level Tests - Spring 2000 (Average Scores) Language Usage - Grade 8 250 218 218 225 219 215 215 210 214 200 150 100 50 -- 0 T T T T T T T T 4^Baseline Data Baseline Grade Year Levels LRSD Indicators Goal Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 98-99 7 Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test 65% of a school's students in every subgroup of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50th percentile in reading. Af-Am(F)=10% Af-Am(F)=6% Af-Am(M)=24% (6 students) 21% 5 98-99 7 Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test WF=71% VVM=67% Others=80% Af-Am(M)=4% (4 students) 24% The percent of students in every subgroup of race and gender performing at or above the 50th percentile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. See above See above65% of a schools students in every sub-group of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50 percentile in reading. Stanford 9 Exam - 7* Grade (1998 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated data on Stanford 9 reading exams as percentages. % at or above 50th percentile 120% 100% 100% 90% 81% 80% 80% 71^ 65/5% 67/ 71% 60% - 1998 1999 40% - [3%r 20% - - 0% Goal 21% 24%M% II T T 1 Af-Am(F) Af-Am(M) (n = 2) WM (n Hisp. (n = As/Pac (n Others (n (n = 67) (n = 86) 36) 7) = 5) = 6)The percent of students in every sub-group of race and gender performing at or above the 50* percentile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Stanford 9 Exam - 7* Grade (1998 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. African-American Females (n = 67) 70 50 40 30 20 10 0 60 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Actual Goal The percent of students in every sub-group of race and gender performing at or above the 50* percentile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Stanford 9 Exam - 7*'' Grade (1998 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. African-American Males (n = 86) 70 60 50 40 30 Actual Goal 20 -- 10 -- 0 T 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008Baseline Data Baseline Grade Year Levels LRSD Indicators Goal Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 98-99 7 Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test At least 30% of a school's students will perfonn at the highest quartile in reading. Af-Am(F)=0% Af-Am(M)=1% WF=40% WM=39% Others=50% Af-Am(F)=3% (2 students) Af-Am(M)=3% (3 students) 7% 6% 4 2 98-99 7 Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test The percent of a school's students performing at the highest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. See above See aboveAt least 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in reading. Stanford 9 Exam -1*'' Grade (1998 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated data on Stanford 9 reading exams as percentages. /. in the highest quartile 80% 74% 70% 60% 60% 50% 50% 40/. 30/. 30/30% 40/ 39/ 1998 1999 20/. 10/. 0/. 3% 0/. 04 T T T T Goal Af-Am(F) Af-Am{M) WF (n = WM (n = Hisp. (n = As/Pac (n Others (n (n = 67) (n = 86) 42) 36) 7) = 5) = 2)The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Stanford 9 Exam - 7* Grade (1998 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. African-American Females (n = 67) 35 30 25 20 15 Actual Goal 10 5 0 T 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 LThe percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Stanford 9 Exam - 7* Grade (1998 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. African-American Males (n = 86) 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 35 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Goal L Baseline Data Baseline Grade Year Levels LRSD Indicators Goal Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 98-99 7 Performance on SATO, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test At least 90% of a school's students w/ill perform above the lowest quartile in reading. Af-Ani(F)=6% Af-Am(M)=46% (4 students) WF=78% 39% 1 WM=83% Af-Am(M)=4% 46% 98-99 7 Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test The percent of a school's students performing above the lowest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 0thers=100% (4 students) See above WF=1% (1 student) WM=1% (1 student) See above 84% 98% 5 14 LAt least 90% of a schools students will perform above the lowest quartile in reading. Stanford 9 Exam - 7* Grade (1998 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated data on Stanford 9 reading exams as percentages. % above the lowest quartile 120% 100% 98% 100% 100% 90<y0% 80% - 84% 78*/^ 83/ 86% 17% 60% - 1998 1999 46<S6% 40% - - 39% 20% - - 0% T T T Goal Af-Am(F) Af-Am(M) WF (n = WM(n= Hisp. (n= As/Pac (n Others (n (n = 67) (n = 86) 42) 36) 7) = 5) = 2)The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Stanford 9 Exam - Grade (1998 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. African-American Females (n = 67) 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Goal The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Stanford 9 Exam - 1**' Grade (1998 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. African-American Males (n = 86) 100 90 80 70 60 50 Actual Goal 40 - 30 -- 20 -- 10 -- 0 T T 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Stanford 9 Exam - T*** Grade (1998 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. White Females (n = 42) 92 90 88 86 84 82 80 78 76 74 72 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Goal The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Stanford 9 Exam - 7* Grade (1998 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. White Males (n = 36) 100 95 90 Actual Goal 85 80 -- 75 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008Baseline Data Baseline Grade Year Levels State Indicators Goal Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 99-00 8 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Literacy Test 100% of a school's students shall perform at or above the "proficient" level in grade 8 reading and writing literacy. School=18% Af-Am(F)=4% Af-Am(M)=2% White(F)=53% School=8.2% (17.5 students) Af-Am(F)=9.6% White(M)=32.5% (6.8 students) Hisp(F)33% Hisp(M)=0% Af-Am(M)=9.8% As/Pac(F)=25% (5 students) As/Pac(M)=43% White(F)=4.7% (2.5 students) VVhite(M)=6.75% {2.7 students) Hisp(F)=6.7% (.2 students) Hisp(M)=10% (.4 students) As/Pac(F)=7.5% {.3 students) 99-00 8 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Literacy Test The percent of students performing at or above the "proficient" level in reading and writing literacy on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. See above Data not available until September. As/Pac(M)=5.7% (.4 students) See aboveM 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in grade 8 reading and writing literacy. ACTAP - S* Grade State Mandated Criterion-Referenced Literacy Test (1999 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated data on State Criterion-Referenced Literacy Exams as percentages. % at or above "proficient" 120 100 100 80 60 -- 51 43 1999 40 11 20 -- 0 T 18 4 T 25 2 0 T T T T cP' n> A^^ V** / z Z ^3^ .s< The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in reading and writing literacy on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. ACTAP - 8* Grade State Mandated Criterion-Referenced Literacy Test (1999 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. School (n = 214) 120 100 80 60 Actual Goal 40 20 0 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in reading and writing literacy on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. ACTAP - 8* Grade State Mandated Criterion-Referenced Literacy Test (1999 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. African-American Females (n = 71) 120 100 60 40 20 0 80 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Actual Goal The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in reading and writing literacy on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. ACTAP - S* Grade State Mandated Criterion-Referenced Literacy Test (1999 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. African-American Males (n = 51) 120 100 80 60 Actual Goal 40 20 0 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009The percent of students performing at or above the "proficient" level in reading and writing literacy on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. ACTAP - 8* Grade State Mandated Criterion-Referenced Literacy Test (1999 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. White Females (n = 30) 120 100 80 60 Actual Goal 40 -- 20 -- 0 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009The percent of students performing at or above the "proficient" level in reading and writing literacy on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. ACTAP - 8* Grade State Mandated Criterion-Referenced Literacy Test (1999 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. White Males (n = 40) 120 100 80 60 Actual Goal 40 20 -- 0 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009The percent of students performing at or above the "proficient level in reading and writing literacy on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. ACTAP - 8* Grade State Mandated Criterion-Referenced Literacy Test (1999 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. Hispanic Females (n = 3) 120 100 80 60 Actual Goal 40 20 -- 0 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009The percent of students performing at or above the "proficient" level in reading and writing literacy on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. ACTAP - 8* Grade State Mandated Criterion-Referenced Literacy Test (1999 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. Hispanic Males (n = 4) 120 100 80 60 Actual Goal 40 20 0 T 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in reading and writing literacy on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. ACTAP - 8' Grade State Mandated Criterion-Referenced Literacy Test (1999 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. Asian/Pacific isiander Femaies (n = 4) 120 100 80 60 Actual Goal 40 20 -- 0 -l-LJ 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009The percent of students performing at or above the proficient" level in reading and writing literacy on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. ACTAP - S* Grade State Mandated Criterion-Referenced Literacy Test (1999 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated trend and improvement goals as percentages. Asian/Pacific Islander Males (n = 7) 120 100 80 60 Actual Goal 40 20 -- 0 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009School Improvement Plan School: Dunbar Magnet Middle School Year
2000-2001 Priority: Improve Student Success In Academic and Non-Academic Areas Supporting Data: In 1998 - 99 discipline reports were down to 48 from the previous year's total of 401. Further reduction is needed for male students (41 of the 48 reports). The Stanford 9 exams show below average scores .H in Thinking Skills and Listening Comprehension, with improvement needed in Total Study Skills. 18 students were reported as drop-outs last year. Only 18% of the students were at or above proficient on the State criterion-referenced Literacy Exam. Only 14% of the students were at or above "proficient on the State criterion-referenced Mathematics Exam. Goal(s): At least 99% of secondary students will remain in school to complete the 8th grade. Average daily attendance rate will be at least 95%. 100% of a school's classes will be taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. 100% of a school's certified staff will complete at least 30 hours of approved professional development. Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts. 65% of a middle school's students will be enrolled in at least one Pre-AP course each year. 90% of a middle school's students will be enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8. LSchool Improvement Plan School: Dunbar Magnet Middle School Year: 2000 - 2001 Priority: Improve Student Success In Academic and Non-Academic Areas, page 2 One-Year Benchmark(s): Secondary schools will improve the percentage of students who stay in school to complete the 8th grade (the State Indicator is 12th grade). Schools will improve their average daily attendance rate. Schools will improve the percent of classes taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. Schools will increase the percent of certified staff who complete 60 or more hours of approved professional development annually. The percent of students enrolled in at least one Pre-AP course each year will meet or exceed the trend goal. The percent of students enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8 will meet or exceed the trend goal each year.Baseline Data Baseline Grade Year Levels State Indicators Goal Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 2000-2001 all School Dropout At least 99% of secondary students will remain in school to complete the 12th grade. 100% 0% 2000-2001 all Average Daily Attendance Average daily attendance rate will be at least 95%. 98% 0% 2000-2001 all Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher 100% of a school's classes will be taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. 97% 0.30% 2000-2001 all Professional Development 100% of a school's certified staff- will complete at least 30 hours of approved professional development. 100% 0% 2000-2001 all School Safety Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts. 1 incident avoid 1 incidentBaseline Data Baseline Year Grade Levels LRSD Indicators Goal Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 2000-2001 all Enrollment in Pre-AP Courses 65% of a middle school's students will be enrolled in at least one Pre-AP course each year. 63% 0.20% (1.4 students) 2000-2001 8 Enrollment in Algebra I by grade 8 90% of a middle school's students will be enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8. 12% 7.80% (56 students) LSchool Improvement Plan School: Dunbar Magnet Middle School Year: 2000 - 2001 Intervention: Students Shall Develop Positive Success Patterns Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources District Budget Title I Budget APIG/Other Budget 1. Design, in collaboration with representative parents, a plan to increase student attendance. Campus Leadership Team, Parent Team 1 Dec. ERIC, Professional Library, Internet, NCA materials 2. Increase parent involvement in team counseling sessions. Team Leaders 15 Sept. 3. Increase the amount of time the counselors are directly involved with students. Mr. Acre and Ms. Slater, Counselors 1 Nov. 4. Establish incentives and rewards for positive behavior. Team Leaders Administrative Team 1 Dec. ERIC, NCA materials Depends on the incentives and rewards established. 5. Begin instruction in test-taking/study skills in each team and/or homeroom. Team Leaders, Home Room Teachers, Mr. Acre and Ms. Slater, Counselors 15 Sept. Videos, Internet, ERIC, NCA materials 6. Broaden the scope of the peer mediation program. 1 Dec. Peer Mediation Coordinator, Administrative Team Peer mediation materials and training for both students and faculty.School Improvement Plan School: Dunbar Magnet Middle School Year: 2000-2001 Intervention: Students Shall Develop Positive Success Patterns, page 2 Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources District Title I Budget Budget APIG/Other Budget 7. Include special groups of students (ESL and Special Education) in established teams. Administrative Team Ms. Carr, ESL Coordinator, Ms. Davis and Mr. Shavers, Special Education 15 Sept 8. Discuss School Improvement (re: student success) in every faculty meeting. Deborah Berry. Principal Begin with Nov. Fac. Meeting Faculty Meeting Agendas, Professional Library 9. Monitor the entire plan and make needed adjustments to ensure continued growth and improvement toward positive success patterns. Deborah Berry, Principal Team Leaders Ongoing Team Meeting Agendas 10. Conduct summative evaluations of the plan and its implementation
make adjustments for next year. Campus Leadership Team June Synthesis from Team Meeting Agendas. L 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in grade 8 mathematics. ACTAP - 8* Grade State Mandated Criterion-Referenced Mathematics Test (1999 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated data on State Criterion-Referenced Math Exams as percentages. % at or above "proficient" 120 100 100 80 60 -- 57.1 1999 39 40 20 14 1.6 1.4 eP' I 0 0 0 0 T T T T T 5$* L . zACTAP - 8* Grade State-Mandated Criterion-Referenced Mathematics Test 1999 This chart presents the percentages disaggregated by race and gender as well as the total for Dunbar Magnet. The State goal for ff this test is 100% at or above "proficient. Percentages 100 90 80 70 60 -n 50 - 40 - 30 - 20 - 10 - 0 BE I Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced z z 55^ vS" ' / ** V (S'- z rIt 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in grade 8 reading and writing literacy. ACTAP - 8*'' Grade State Mandated Criterion-Referenced Literacy Test (1999 baseline year) This chart shows disaggregated data on State Criterion-Referenced Literacy Exams as percentages. % at or above "proficient" 120 100 100 80 60 -- 52L 43 1999 40 -- 20 -- 0 T 18 2 4 T T 32A 31 25 T 0 T T T z z z A'V IP z z.ACTAP - 8* Grade State-Mandated Criterion-Referenced Reading and Writing Literacy Test 1999 This chart presents the percentages disaggregated by race and gender as well as the total for Dunbar Magnet. The State goal for this test is 100% at or above "proficient. Percentages 120 100 80 60 40 - 20 - lllll T> o* 'S'* 'S'* rr 4- SC' Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced 0 T A T T Lv"" GRADE STUDENTS Stanford 9 Exams - Content Clusters (Total School) These charts show NCE percentages. 1998-99 N = 236 1999-00 N = 198 Reading Vocabulary (30 items) 60 50 40 as. 30-- 20 -- 10-- Below Average 56 56 Average 25 Above Average 1998/99 44 1999/00 0 Reading Vocabulary - Synonyms (16 items) 50 46 <5 44 40-- 30-- 20-- 10 -- 25 Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average 44 0 Reading Vocabulary - Context (7 items) 80 64-6fr 60 40 20 0 T Below Average Average JSL TT 1998/99 1999/00 Above Average Reading Vocabulary - Multiple Meanings (7 items) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 46-21 Below Average 60.IT Average Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 ?" GRADE STUDENTS Stanford 9 Exams - Content Clusters (Total School) These charts show NCE percentages. 1998-99 N = 236 1999-00 N = 198 Reading Comprehension (54 items) 50 40 35 30-- 20-- 10-- Below Average 47 47 Average TF Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 21 0 Reading Comprehension - Recreationai (18 items) 60 50 40 ee 30-- 20- - 10- Below Average 4-60. Average TT21 Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 0 Reading Comprehension - Textual (18 items) 50 40 30 20 10 0 47 jU. Average 1998/99 1999/00 Above Average Below Average Reading Comprehension - Functional (18 items) 50 40 30 20 10 0 46 Average 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Above Average t"" grade students Stanford 9 Exams - Content Clusters (Total School) These charts show NCE percentages. 1998-99 N = 236 1999-00 N = 198 Reading Comprehension - Initial Understanding (12 items) SO 40 30 20 10 0 45 TT 36 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average Reading Comprehension - Interpretation (24 items) SO -42. 44^ 40-- 30-- 20-- 10- 1998/99 1999/00 0 Below Average Average Above Average Reading Comprehension - Critical Analysis (9 items) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 tr 22. Below Average 56 57 Average Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 Reading Comprehension * Process Strategies (9 items) 60 50 40 sr 30- 20-- 10 -- Below Average 4 53 TT a 1998/99 1999/00 Average Above Average 0t"" grade students Stanford 9 Exams - Content Clusters (Total School) These charts show NCE percentages. 1998-99 N = 236 1999-00 N = 198 Math: Problem Solving (48 items) 50 40 37 46 137 30 20 - 10 1998/99 1999/00 17 0 Below Average Average Above Average Math: Problem Solving - Measurement (6 items) SO 40 3g-4e 36 30-- 20-- 10-- 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average 1? 0 Math: Problem Solving - Estimation (6 items) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 ee Below Average AS 33] 1998/99 1999/00 Average Above Average 40. Math: Problem Solving - Problem- Solving Strategies (5 items) 60 so 40 30 20 10 0 ST IT 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average M * 7" GRADE STUDENTS Stanford 9 Exams - Content Clusters (Total Sehool) These charts show NCE percentages. 1998-99 N = 236 1999-00 N = 198 Math: Problem Solving - Number and No. Relationships (6 items) 50 40 30 20 10 0 Below Average Average Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 Math: Problem Solving - Number Systems and No. Theory (5 items) 60 50 51 40- - 30-- 20-- 10 - 1998/99 1999/00 0 Below Average Average Above Average Math: Problem Solving - Patterns and Functions (3 items) 100 80 60 40 20 0 *-|T I 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average Math: Problem Solving - Algebra (3 items) 80 60 40 20 0 Average 1998/99 1999/00 Above Average Below Average 7 GRADE STUDENTS Stanford 9 Exams - Content Clusters (Total School) These charts show NCE percentages. 1998-99 N = 236 1999-00 N = 198 Math: Problem Solving - Statistics (6 items) 60 SO 40 30-- 20-- 10 -- Below Average 2. 181 1998/99 1999/00 Average Above Average 0 Math: Problem Solving - Probability (3 items) 50 40 30 a- 25 47 381 20- - 10 -- 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average SZ 0 Math: Problem Solving - Geometry (7 items) 80 60 40 20 0 66 16 46- 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average Math: Procedures (30 items) 50 47 46 40 - 30- 20-- 10-- 381 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average 0f GRADE STUDENTS Stanford 9 Exams - Content Clusters (Total Sehool) These charts show NCE percentages. 1998-99 N = 236 1999-00 N = 198 Math: Procedures - Computation/Symbolic Notation (10 items) 60 40 20 0 47 46 Average 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Above Average Math: Procedures - Computation in Context (16 items) 50 40 44 M. 30-- 20 10 0 3-4& 1998/99 1999/00 T Below Average Average ' Above Average Math: Procedures - Rounding (4 items) 50 44 40 M 30 20 - - 10 4e-9 1998/99 1999/00 2? 0 Below Average Average Above Average Language (48 items) 60 w 50 40 30-- 20-- 10- 45 a* Below Average Average tb
Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 H. 0 7 GRADE STUDENTS Stanford 9 Exams - Content Clusters (Total School) These charts show NCE percentages. 1998-99 N = 236 1999-00 N = 198 Language - Capitalization (8 items) 80 60 40 20 0 55 2aJ2 XJ2 1998/99 1999/00 T Below Average Average Above Average Language - Punctuation (8 items) 60 50 40 30-- 20-- 42. 1998/99 1999/00 10 0 Below Average Average Above Average mT Language - Usage (8 items) 60 50 40 30 20-- 10-- Below Average 56 52 ---- 32 16, 1998/99 1999/00 Average Above Average 0 Language - Sentence Structure (12 items) 46 44 50 40 -3 I** 30- 20-- 10- 25 15i 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average 0 T*" GRADE STUDENTS Stanford 9 Exams - Content Clusters (Total School) These charts show NCE percentages. 1998-99 N = 236 1999-00 N = 198 Language - Content and Organization (12 items) 50 40 30 20 10 0 46 3S -34-M 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average T Spelling (30 items) 60 50 40 30 20 - 10 -- w
25 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average 0 Spelling - Homophones (5 items) 60 50 "48----- r** 40- - 30-- 20-- 10-- 36 3jr TT a* 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average 0 Spelling - Phonetic Principles (10 items) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 4e-tT Below Average -SC 31 Al 1998^9 1999/00 Average Above Average 42.7*'' GRADE STUDENTS Stanford 9 Exams - Content Clusters (Total School) These charts show NCE percentages. 1998-99 N = 236 1999-00 N = 198 Spelling - Structural Principles (10 items) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 40-ee- Below Average 57 54 Average Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 Spelling No Mistake (5 items) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 56 Average 1998^9 1999/00 Above Average Below Average Study Skills (30 items) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 aa 23 Below Average -64 .44 Average Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 Study Skills - Library/Reference Skills (17 items) 50 40 30 20 10 0 34 33. Below Average 45 -34 sr 1998/99 1999/00 Average Above Average 7* GRADE STUDENTS Stanford 9 Exams - Content Clusters (Total School) These charts show NCE percentages. 1998-99 N = 236 1999-00 N = 198 Study Skills - Information Skills (13 items) 80 60 40 20 0 57 I? 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average Science (40 items) 50 40 4 30- - 20-- 10 -- nr 45 4 1998/99 1999/00 137 0 Below Average Average Above Average Science - Earth & Space Science (12 items) eo 50 40 30 20 10 0 xr 22. Below Average -e-wr Average 2S' Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 JX Science - Physical Science (14 items) 50 40 sr 42. 35 30- - 20- - 10 - - 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average 0v"" GRADE STUDENTS Stanford 9 Exams - Content Clusters (Total School) These charts show NCE percentages. 1998-99 N = 236 1999-00 N = 198 Science - Life Science (14 items) 50 40 30 20 10 rstr -at- 27 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average M 0 Science - Science Process Skills (30 items) SO 46 45 44 40-- 30-- 20- - 10-- T 25 19989 1999/00 50 40 Below Average Average Above Average Social Science (40 items) 38 36 30-- 20-- 10 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average 0 0 r Social Science - History (10 items) 50 40 38 3ff Mfr JI 30 20 1998/99 1999/00 10 -- 0 Below Average Average Above Average 7"* GRADE STUDENTS Stanford 9 Exams - Content Clusters (Total School) These charts show NCE percentages. 1998-99 N = 236 1999-00 N = 198 Social Science - Geography (9 items) 50 40 30-- 20-- -40 47 a* 16 1998/99 1999/00 10 -- 0 Below Average Average Above Average Social Science - Civics & Government (8 items) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Average 1998/99 1999/00 Above Average Below Average Social Science Economics (8 items) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 53 46-^ 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average 14 75^ Social Science - Culture (5 items) 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 62.6* Average Above Average 1998^9 1999/00 Below Average 7 GRADE STUDENTS Stanford 9 Exams - Content Clusters (Total School) These charts show NCE percentages. 1998-99 N = 236 1999-00 N = 198 Listening (40 items) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average Listening: Vocabulary (10 items) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 25 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average ' Above Average ^8^ Listening: Comprehension (30 items) 80 60 40 20 0 34 Below Average 54 to Average 12 TV 1998/99 1999/00 Above Average Listening: Comprehension - Recreational (10 items) 80 60 40 20 0 32 ----- Below Average -es JL. 14 1998/99 1999/00 Average Above Average I7"* GRADE STUDENTS Stanford 9 Exams - Content Clusters (Total School) These charts show NCE percentages. 1998-99 N = 236 1999-00 N = 198 Listening: Comprehension - Informational (10 items) 50 40 35 44 43 30-- 20-- 10- 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average 44 4i 0 T Listening: Comprehension - Functional (10 items) 80 60 40 20 0 r aj> 11 12 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average ,3iL. Listening: Comprehension - Initial Understanding (10 items) 80 60 40 20 0 32 Below Average srT Average 17 Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 Listening: Comprehension - Interpretation (14 items) 50 40 30-- 20- - 10 -- Below Average 44*5 Average Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 1? 0?" GRADE STUDENTS Stanford 9 Exams - Content Clusters (Total School) These charts show NCE percentages. 1998-99 N = 236 1999-00 N = 198 Listening: Comprehension - Critical Analysis/Strategies (6 items) 80 60 40 20 0 3T 3Z. Below Average 9- 68 Average Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 Using Information (69 items) 60 50 40 30 29 29 20-- 10 -- Below Average Average se- Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 4? 1^ 0 Thinking Skills (229 items) 50 40 38 45 4T 1? 30-- 20- 10 -- >7 1998^9 1999/00 0 Below Average Average Above Average7* GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. READING VOCABULARY (30 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 60 50 45 ----- 55 55 40 30 20 1998/99 1999/00 10 - 0 7 Below Average Average Above Average African-American Males 80 60 551 SB 40T 20 Below Average Average Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 0 White Females 80 Vt- 60 40 20 -10- Below Average PIS' 55 1998/99 1999/00 Average Above Average 0 0 White Males 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 ee 45 55 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. READING VOCABULARY - Synonyms (16 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36), 1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 80 -6fr 60- - IfiL 40- - 1998/99 1999/00 20- - 0 T 0 T Below Average Average Above Average African-American Males 60 56 50-- 40- - 30- - MM 20-- 10 -- 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average T 0 White Females 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 -IS J. Below Average S2. Average 1998/99 1999/00 Above Average White Males SX 0 20- 10-- 60 50 40 30 55 Below Average Average Above Average 1998^9 1999/00 7* GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. READING VOCABULARY - Context (7 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 80 60 40 37 81 11 1998/99 1999/00 20.- 1 T 0 Below Average Average Above Average African-American Males 80 76 60 40 20 35 120 Below Average 62l Z~T Average Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 0 White Females 80 6^ 60 40 20 17 e Below Average 55 Average 39 Above Average 1998/99 1999ffm 0 White Males 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 -14- a2. Below Average 64 48- 19989 1999/00 Average Above Average 7*** GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. READING VOCABULARY - Multiple Meanings (7 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 3r 241 1998/99 21 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average African-American Males 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Below Average Average 1998/99 1999/00 Above Average White Females 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 45 55 55 19989 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average T White Males 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Average 01998/99 1999/00 Below Average Above Average 7^** GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. READING COMPREHENSION (54 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36), 1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 60 50 -61 I*" 56 40- - 30-- 20-- 10 -- 1998/99 1999/00 0 Below Average Average Above Average African-American Males 60 50 42 40-- 30-- 20-- 10 -- 0 -fT 19989 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average White Females 70 60 SO 40 30 20 10 0 41 1998^9 1999/00 21 Below Average Average Above Average White Males 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2. Below Average ee 45 Average 42 Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 JA7*** GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. [1998/99 n READE^G COMPREHENSION - Recreational (18 items) = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42) Wte Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 60 50 jnr 46 -as 40-- 30- - 20- - 10- 6^ 1998/99 1999/00 0 Below Average Average Above Average African-American Males 60 50-- 40._ 30- 20- -Wf 45 19989 1999/00 10-- 0 Below Average Average Mioye Kyorago White Females 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 57 Average Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average White Males 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 IT Below Average 53 6a A3. Above Average 1998^9 1999/00 AMoraga GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. READING COMPREHENSION - Textual (18 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 60 50 40-- 30-- 20 -- 10- 135 Below Average 56 r 1998/99 1999/00 Average Above Average 0 African-American Males 60 50 40 47 30- 20- 10 -- 0 1998^9 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average White Females 80 40 20 0 60 Average 1998^9 1999/00 Below Average Above Average White Males 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Al jbz 19989 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average i. 7^** GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. READING COMPREHENSION - Functional (18 items) [1998/99 n - African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 60 50 tr 40- - 30- - 20- - 1998/99 1999/00 10- 0 Below Average Average Above Average African-American Males I 60 50 40 30- - 20-- 10 - Below Average JS i* 43. 16 1998/99 1999/00 Average Above Average 0 White Females n 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 -4 res 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average ss ^4 13 White Males 60 50 40 30 20 w 55 44 AS 36^ 1998^9 1999/00 4. 10-- 0 Below Average Kyenge Above Average7* GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. READB^G COMPREHENSION - Initial Understanding (12 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 se 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average African-American Males 60 50 40 MeTe- 30-- 20-- 1998/99 1999/00 10-- 0 Below Average Average Above Average White Females 80 60 40 33 |1 1998/99 1999n>0 20 Below Average Average Above Average 2L11 0 White Males 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 64 1998ra9 1999/00 41 T r21 Below Average Average Above Average7* GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. READE^G COMPREHENSION - Interpretation (24 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 70 60 se 50-- 40-- 30-- 20 - 144 AS 1998/99 1999/00 10- zz Below Average Average Above Average 0 T African-American Males 60 54 55 50-- 40-- 30- 42. 20-- 10 - 1998^9 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average T 0 White Females 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 ini Below Average Average se Above Average White Males 1998/99 1999nX) 60 50 40 30 20-- 10- SO-JB- 32 Average 1998/99 1999/00 Above Average Below Average 0 7* GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. READESG COMPREHENSION - Critical Analysis (9 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 70 60 50 40 30- - 20-- 10- - Below Average 54 -e 1S Average Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 0 African-American Males 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 st se T-r 1998ra9 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average . I-M t White Females 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 45 ee 45 1998/99 1999/00 Below /kyarage Average Above Average 6 White Males 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 -8- D 3. Below Average se IT 1998/99 1999/00 Average Above Average7** GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. READING COMPREHENSION - Process Strategies (9 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 70 60 se 54 50- - 40- - 30- - 20- - 10- - 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average 0 African-American Males 60 50 40 30-- 20-- 10 -- Below Average 55 -64- a Average Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 vr 5 0 White Females 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 60 50 40 30 20 57 26 Ji Below Average Average 10- sr Above Average White Males IT Average 1998/99 1999/00 Above Average Below Average 1998/99 1999/00 0 TF 7^ GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. MATH: PROBLEMSOLVING (48 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 60 56 4^ SO- AO 30 20- - 10 -- 1998/99 1999/00 0 Below Average Average Above Average African-American Males 60 SO 46 i*- 40 30 20 10 1998/99 1999/00 0 Below Average Average Above Average White Females 80 21 60 40 20 14 1 Below Average 40 51 1998/99 1999/00 Average Above Average 41 0 White Males 70 60 SO 40 30 20 10 0 -U- 2. Below Average Average 64 31 Above Average 19989 1999/007^ GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. MATH: PROBLEM SOLVING - Measurement (6 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 70 60 se-w 50-- 40- - 30 20 10 TB-sr 1998/99 1999/00 0 Below Average Average Above Average African-American Males 70 60 50 40- 30- 20 10 Below Average 4 14 1998/99 1999/00 Average Above Average [31 T 0 T White Females 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 J3. 55 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average H 13 White Males 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 w 3i 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average T? 7* GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. MATH: PROBLEM SOLVING - Estimation (4 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 60 sx 50- - 40- - 30- 20- 44 19989 1999/00 T 10- 0 Below Average Average Above Average African-American Males 60 50 40 30-- 20 -- 10 - Below Average 55 145 16 1998/99 1999/00 Average Above Average 5 0 White Females 50 40 30 20 10 0 Average 1998/99 1999/00 Above Average Below Average White Males 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Average 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Above Average 7^^ GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. MATH: PROBLEM SOLVING - Problem Solving Strategies (5 items) 11998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 60 50 ^8^ 40- - 30-- 20-- 10- 0 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average African-American Males 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 -S9- 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average W7 41 T 2. White Females 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 57 Average 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Above Average White Males 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 64 Average 1998/99 1999/00 Above Average Below Average 7** GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. MATH: PROBLEM SOLVK4G - Number & No. Relationships (6 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36), 1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females so 48 40- - 30- 20- - 36 18 18 1998ra9 1999/00 10 -- 0 Below Average Average Above Average African-American Males 50 40 30- 20-- 10- - 46 47 1998/99 1999/00 0 Below Average Average Above Average White Females 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 .14 11 Below Average 44. IT Average Above Average 1998^9 1999/00 44 White Males 80 60 40 20 0 74 Average 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Above Average 7**' GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. MATH: PROBLEM SOLVING - Number Systems & No. Theory (5 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 70 60 61 SB 50-- 40-- 30-- 20-- 10-- 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average 3r3T 0 African-American Males 60 S4 53 SO-AO- - 40-62. 30- - 20 -- 10-- White Females 1998/99 1999/00 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 55 24 IT OX Average 1998/99 1999/00 Above Average 80 60 40 20 Below Average White Males 76 58 22 19 19 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average 0 0 I 5 s > a 5e 5 & S a A T 7*^ GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. MATH: PROBLEM SOLVING - Patterns & Functions (3 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 80 71 70 60 40 20 asaa. 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average 0 0 0 T African-American Males 100 80 60 40 20 0 76 78 TT Below Average Average Above Average 1998/99 e* 22 1999/00 T White Females 100 80 60 40 20 0 9-fr Below Average 95 94 DO Average Above Average 1998/99 a 1999/00 White Males 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 T7 Below Average -BA toe Average Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 1 7^** GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. MATH: PROBLEM SOLVING - Algebra (3 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 80 zo. 60 40 20 Below Average Average Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 0 W African-American Males 60 40 20 0 80 Average 1998/99 1999/00 Above Average Below Average White Females 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 22 4W sr 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average ZZi White Males 70 60 SO 40 30 20 10 0 S8- IS 22. 1998^9 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average U-T 7* GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. MATH: PROBLEM SOLVING - Statistics (6 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 4* 44. 1998/99 1999/00 T Below Average Average Above Average African-American Males 60 50 17 40 30 20-- 10 0 4S 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average White Females 60 50 40 30 20- -T" 55 46l a* 4a 1998/99 1999/00 21 A 10- - 0 Below Average Average Above Average White Males 60 50 40 30 43. 55 a* 20 10 19989 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average 0 77*^ GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. MATH: PROBLEM SOLVING - Probability (3 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 50 40 30 20 10 0 38 1998/99 1999/00 SO 40 Below Average Average Above Average African-American Males 36 W 34. 30 20 10 Below Average Average Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 1^ 0 White Females 100 80 60 40 20 0 ----- .13 62] 77 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average White Males 80 60 40 20 0 74 Average 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Above Average 7*^ GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. MATH: PROBLEM SOLVING - Geometry (7 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 80 73 60 40 20 -s 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average Tra T 0 African-American Males 70 JB2. 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Below Average 1998Z99 1999/00 Average Above Average w White Females 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 57 Average 1998/99 1999rao Above Average Below Average White Males 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 I**' 01998/99 1999/00 9S Below Average Average Above Average 7**' GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. MATH: PROCEDURES (30 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 70 64 60-- 50-- 40-- 30-- 20-- 10 - Al 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average 1x0 I_5 0 African-American Males 60 56 50- - 40-- 30-- 20-- IT 45 10 -- LT 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average 0 White Females 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 IO' Below Average 45 Average Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 21 42. White Males 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 55 Below Average Average 1998/99 1999/00 Above Average 7*** GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. MATH: PROCEDURES - Computation/Symbolic Notation (10 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 60 50 4S44 40-- 30-- 20-- 2a. 1998/99 1999/00 10-- 0 60 50 Below Average Average Above Average African-American Males 45 45 40-- 30- 20- 10- 16 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average White Females 70 60 50 40 30 20 10- Below Average A2. T Average 1998/99 1999/00 Above Average White Males 70 60 SO 40 30-4 20 - 10 - Below Average 64 IF Average Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 sa 0 0 0 JX 7 31 7*** GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. MATH: PROCEDURES - Computation in Context (16 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 60 57 64 50-- 40-- 30-- 20-- IO - - J. 1998/99 1999/00 T 0 Below Average Average Above Average African-American Males 60 50 M 49 40- 30-- 20 -- 10 - 0 16 1998/99 1999/00 T Below Average Average Above Average White Females 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 40- AZ. 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average 4* White Males 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 64 Average Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average 7*** GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. MATH: PROCEDURES - Rounding (4 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 1998/99 1999/00 0 Below Average Average Above Average African-American Males 60 ex 50 40 30 20 10 1998/99 1999/00 0 Below Average Average Above Average White Females 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 65 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average White Males 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 KT Below Average Average 55 Above Average 19989 1999/00 m7* GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. LANGUAGE (48 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 60 50 40 - 30-- 20 10 ee ,48 1998/99 1999/00 , r-M-j Below Average Average Above Average 8 8 0 African-American Males 60 50 4^ 40 30 20 10 0 T 1998/99 1999/00 T 4 Below Average Average Above Average White Females 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 J2_U. Below Average Average 65 Above Average 19989 1999/00 White Males 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Below Average Average Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. LANGUAGE - Capitalization (8 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2. 2. Below Average Average Above Average 1998/99 I 1999/00 i African-American Males 60 50 40 W se sar 30 20 10 0 1998/99 1999/00 T a Below Average Average Above Average White Females 80 21sr 60 40 20 12. 17| 80 60 40 20 J2. 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average White Males 17 la 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average 0 0 7* GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. LANGUAGE - Punctuation (8 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 60 50 45 45 90 90 40-- 30-- 20-- 10 -- 1998/99 1999/00 5 5 0 Below Average Average Above Average African-American Males 70 60 SO 40 30 20 10 0 61 69 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average * ? White Females 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 64 65 TT 23. 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average White Males 60 40 20 0 80 Average 1998/99 1999/00 Above Average Below Average 7*** GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. LANGUAGE - Usage (8 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 60 50 ee- 56 |46 AO- SO 20 10 4 1998/99 1999/00 0 Below Average Average Above Average African-American Males 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 Below Average SI *-4 1998/99 1999/00 Average Above Average 0 White Females 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 "W 45 361 1998/99 1999/00 80 60 40 20 Below Average Average Above Average White Males 74 20 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average TT 6 2 0 "W 4fr7* GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. LANGUAGE - Sentence Structure (12 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 60 50 so-w 40 30 20 - 10 0 T 4+ 1998/99 1999/00 S Below Average Average Above Average African-American Males 60 50-- 40-- 30-- 20 10 0 T-r 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average White Females 60 SO 40 30 20 10 0 Si 38 Si 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average 14 <3 White Males 60 50 40 30 20 1 10 Below Average 57 46 1998/99 1999/00 Average Above Average 0 57"* GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. LANGUAGE - Content & Organization (12 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 as Below Average se-5T Average TT 11 Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 African-American Males 60 50 "WAl <e 40 30 20 10 43.IT 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average 0 White Females 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 64 Average 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Above Average White Males 60 50 40 30 20 10 Ml 46 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average 0 A 7* GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. SPELLING (30 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), WWte Male 06), 1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)J African-American Females 70 60 50 40 30 -M- 20-- 10 - -S Below Average st r** Average Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 4-41 0 T African-American Males 60 50 4f 451 56 41 40 30 20 10 1998/99 1999/00 T 4 0 Below Average Average Above Average White Females 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 TT Below Average Average 61 Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 W White Males 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 56 Average 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Above Average 7* GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. SPELLING - Homophones (5 items) r 1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 -41 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average 3F 0 African-American Males ! 70 65 SI 60 50 40 30 20 10 Is 9- 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average 0 I White Females 50 40 30 ST so 1998/99 1999/00 lo-- 0 Below Average Average Above Average White Males 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 56 1998/99 1999/00 42. S & o SI 1 S7^** GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. SPELLING - Phonetic Principles (10 items) 11998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-A< me_r.ic_a__n__ MKa-Kle (/5f 4), AWizhui:t*e-. Female (Z3'1 11 \) , WWVhksitfeA Male f(42)] African-American Females 70 60 SO 40 30 20 10 0 Average 1998/99 1999/00 Above Average Below Average African-American Males 60 SO 40 30 20 10 26 Below Average 46 Average Above Average 1998/99 86 1999/00 0 White Females 100 80 60 40 20 0 62 TO 77 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average I White Males 70 60 SO 40 30 20 10 0 ,2. Below Average e-sfr Average Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 41 7*** GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. SPELLING - Structural Principles (10 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 < Below Average se-Sf Average e Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 4 African-American Males I 70 60 50 40 .52. St li rl J 30 20 - 10 Below Average Average Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 0 White Females 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 55 Average 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Above Average White Males 80 -es 60 40 20 14 14 Below Average Average 36 Above Average 1998/99 1999/00 0 7* GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. SPELLING - No Mistake (5 items) [1998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), White Male (42)] African-American Females 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Average 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Above Average African-American Males 50 40 nF 30- 20- 28 ar 1998/99 1999/00 TT 10 - 0 Below Average Average Above Average White Females 100 80 60 40 20 0 2a. |13 80 60 40 20 77 55 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average White Males 74 21 48- 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average 2Lia 19 0 T 7* GRADE STUDENTS STANFORD 9 EXAMS - CONTENT CLUSTERS These charts show disaggregated data as NCE percentages. STUDY SKILLS (30 items) 11998/99 n = African-American Female (67), African-American Male (84), White Female (42), White Male (36)
1999/2000 n = African-American Female (56), African-American Male (54), White Female (31), 'White Male (42)] African-American Females M 63 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 9 1998/99 1999/00 Below Average Average Above Average African-American Males 60 50 40 3
This project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.