Compliance hearing exhibits, ''Writings on Program Evaluation-Other''

"WRITINGS I ON PROGRAM EVALUATION - OTHERWritings on Program EvaluationOther Formal Program EvaluationsMiddle School Transition 1. Executive Summary, Middle School Transition Program Evaluation, July 2000 2. Middle School Transition Program Evaluation, August 2000 Mann Middle School Waiver 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Memorandum to Brenda James (Mann principal) from Boimie Lesley, March 1, 1999, in response to their request to waive the implementation of new middle school curriculum and processes
includes evaluation concerns Request for Waiver from the LRSD middle school curriculum for 2001-02 from Mann Middle School Letter from Donna Creer to Bonnie Lesley, Mar. 23, 2001, requesting her to attend the April 10, 2001, meeting of the MRC relating to discuss of Mann Middle Schools request for waiver. Letter to Donna Creer, MRC Executive Director, from Bonnie Lesley, March 28, 2001, evaluating Mann Middle Schools performance under the waiver that had been approved and recommending that the waiver not be granted for 2001-02 Letter from Donna Creer to Bonnie Lesley, Apr. 11, 2001, providing follow-up to the Magnet Review Committee meeting of April 10, 2001 relating to Mann Middle Schools request for waiver. Letter to Jim Fullerton (Mann Middle School principal), April 16, 2001, from Les Camine, Sadie Mitchell, Marian Lacey, and Bonnie Lesley denying Manns request for waiver for 2001-02 from the LRSD curriculum. Memorandum from Marian Lacey to Jim Fullerton, May 16, 2001, encouraging Mann Middle School to collaboratively plan for the correction of the decline in reading and language arts performance. 10. E-mail to Jim Fullerton from Bonnie Lesley, May 23, 2001, with recommendations for Mann Middle Schools curriculum and efforts to narrow the achievement gap 11. E-mail from Jim Fullerton to Bonnie Lesley, June 5, 2001, inviting her to a meeting to discuss changes at Mann Middle School relating to narrowing the achievement gap 12. Sample letter to parents from Mann Middle School, Aug. 1, 2001, to set up a program devoted to the academic improvement of the lowest achieving sixth grade students.Advanced Placement and Pre-Advanced Placement Program 13. Memorandum to curriculum staff from Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 27, 1998, assigning duties related to the Talent Development Plan to improve access and success in AP courses
attached planning strands with notes from meeting. 14. LRSD AP and Pre-AP Professional Development Course Survey Results (study on training experienced by AP and Pre-AP teachers conducted by Mable Donaldson to guide decision-making related to professional development plan for these teachers). 15. Memorandum in April 12, 2000, Learning Links from Bonnie Lesley to high school principals, cabinet, and Division of Instruction including analysis of Status of Enrollment in Advanced Placement and Pre-Advanced Placement Courses
Two-Year Comparison of Advanced Placement Examination Participation and Scores HIPPY 16. Evaluation of HIPPY Program: A Look at Outcomes for Children at the End of S"* Grade and 6* Grade, July 1999, conducted by PRE. M. Site Visit Report from Arkansas HIPPY, Feb. 26, 2001. Pre-Kindergarten 18. Monitoring Reports provided to schools and the District by the Division of Child Care and Early Childhood Education (annual assessments) Instructional Technology 19. Little Rock School District Technology Plan, 2001-2004, December 2000
see pp. 17- 25 on evaluation of current status and see pp. 26-45 for program goals) ^7^ 20. Inventory of Computers by School, Spring 2001 Professional Development 21. Priorities for LRSD Professional Development, 1999-2000 and 2000-01 22. Report to the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development relating to LRSDs participation in the Urban Professional Development InitiativeFirst Quarter Report, April 14, 1999
includes a plan for evaluation and baseline measures. 23. Memorandum to the Board of Education from Bonnie Lesley, Feb. 22, 2001, requesting approval of the proposed professional development policy and regulations
7 note the emphasis on using student performance data to drive the program, on expectations for improved education achievement and equity of outcomes for all students, and on the need for program evaluation. Other Programs Evaluated by PRE 24. Vital Link: Passage to 00 25. Alternative Learning Environment (ALE) Program Evaluation
Two-Year Comparison: Lyceum Scholars High School (LSHS) 26. Program EvaluationPhilander Smith College/LRSD Lyceum Scholars High School, 1999-2000. 27. Summer School 2000 (in draft) ^03 Program Evaluation Executive Summary Middle Level Transition School Year: 1999-2000 August 24, 2000 Planning Planning, Research, and Evaluation (PRE) Ish Instructional Resource Center 3001 S. Pulaski Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 501-324-2121 Executive Summary i Middle Level Evaluation Over time research has documented the diverse needs of middle level students, however recently there has been a dearth of knowledge concerning the implementation of the Carnegie Turning Points recommendations (Irvins study as cited in Seghers, Kirby, & Mesa, 1997
Milgrams study as cited in Seghers, Kirby, & Mesa, 1997
Anderman & Urdan, 1995
Jenkins & Jenkins, 1995). Recent studies have focused on evaluating middle level progress and in particular the implementation of the Carnegie Turning Points recommendations (Ward, 1998
Seghers, Kirby, & Meza, 1997). Seghers, Kirby, and Meza (1997) reported low levels of Turning points implementation in Louisiana schools. However, a high level of implementation was reported in schools with low teacher turnover. The National Association of Middle Schools (Research Brief #3, 2000) affirms the lack of consistent and valid research in the field. Small studies using similar variables have reported divergent results. However studies using a meta-analysis or longitudinal design have reported consistent results. The meta-analysis design combines small studies, using similar variables, into one study. This design increases the sample size and power. A longitudinal design establishes baseline data, collects data on the same variable over time, and compares longitudinal to baseline data. Several research studies using the meta-analysis and in particular the longitudinal design (i.e., on-going and long term) have provided consistent results which indicate that schools with high levels of Turning Points implementation have greater student achievement, behavior, and socio-emotional outcomes (Research Brief #3, 2000). 15^ Experts in the field of program evaluation agree that relying solely on achievement data as a measure of success is inappropriate (Clark & Clark, 1995). Middle level evaluations should be designed to provide a variety of information to be used by teachers and other district personnel to model personal responsibility in questioning and reflecting on ones own work, and to show growth over time so that students, teachers, and other stakeholders can know and understand individual progress (Wolf, 1989). Research Brief #2 (2000), published by the National Middle School Association, recommends that evaluations should determine best practices, identify goals, and specify outcomes, processes, and inputs. Current practices should be compared to Ijaseline data and evaluations should include participation, performance, and perception data. The Little Rock School Districts strategic planning process delivered the message that as a result of discipline problems, declining enrollment, below-average academic achievement, and failing community confidence in the junior high program^ a need had been created for a middle level program based on the Carnegie Foundations Turning Points recommendations. Section 3.4 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan calls for the establishment of a middle level program consisting of grades 6, 7, and 8. The response to the Section 3.4 mandate was the Bonds October 1998 approval of the Middle Level Program Standards based on the Carnegie J 1recommendations. Beginning with the 1999-2000 school year, the Little Rock School District (LRSD) transitioned its eight junior high schools, grades 7- 9, to eight middle level schools, grades 6- 8. Completion of the first year of transition is an appropriate time to begin the ongoing evaluation process through the collection of baseline data. Participation, performance, and perception data for this report will address the concerns expressed during the strategic plaiming process. The following data will be reported through out the evaluation process: => Participation Data Enrollment Percent of new teachers Ethnic composition => Performance Data .. i* Attendance Dropout rates Discipline data Stanford Achievement Test, 9* edition (SAT-9) State Benchmark Exam LRSDs criterion-referenced tests LRSDs Achievement Level Tests (ALTs) Perception Data Student and teacher perception Stakeholder perception comparison data comparison data comparison data comparison data comparison data comparison data comparison data baseline data baseline data baseline data initial data collection to be gathered, 2000-2001 Participation Data. Middle level school enrollment remained stable from the 1998-1999 to 1999-2000 school year. During the 1999-2000 school year. Maim Magnet had the largest population (842) and Southwest had the smallest (447). Ethnic composition of the middle schools for the 1999-2000 school year was 69% African-American, 28% White, and 3% Other. There was an expected increase of new teachers due to the movement to middle schools. The average percent of new teachers in the middle schools for the 1998-1999 school year was 11.75%, while in the 1999-2000 school year the average was 26.87%. Cloverdale Middle School had the highest percent of new teachers (35%), and Mann Magnet Middle School had the lowest (14%). 2Performance Data. I Attendance is reported to the state as a 3"* quarter average. Attendance rates for the 1999-2000 school year were the following: LRSD - 94.08%, middle level - 96.02%, Dunbar - 97.7%, highest attendance rate, and Cloverdale - 94.32%, lowest attendance rate. Dropout rates are reported as percent of the population. => The percent of middle level dropouts has decreased over the last three years: Year Dropout Percent 1997-1998 1998-1999 1999-2000 6% 3.7% 1.6% => Middle level African-American student dropout rates have sharply decreased: Year Dropout Percent 1997-1998 1998-1999 1999-2000 4% 2.3% .9% => Middle level White'student dropout rates have also decreased: Year Dropout Percent 1997-1998 1998-1999 1999-2000 2% 1% .6% The dropout disparity between African-American and White students has decreased. Over the last three years the percent of Afncan-American dropouts has approached the percent of White dropouts. 1 3Suspension Rates Cloverdale Dunbar Forest Heights Henderson Mabelvale Mann Pulaski Heights Southwest SY 1997-1998 100.64% 50.06% 86.57% 81.63% 56.92% 26.10% 28.42% 81.37% SY 1998-1999 79.61% 40.27% 78.21% 78.71% 56% 23.62% 40.81% 63.43% SY 1999-2000 78.01% 35.59% 52.61% 36.84% 37.65% 16.74% 35.92% 67.56% Southwest had an increase and the remaining schools had a decrease in suspension rates from SY 1998-1999 to SY 1999-2000. Over the last two years. Forest Heights, Henderson, and Mabelvale had a dramatic decrease in suspensions. SAT-9 percentile scores for 7* grade students have been flat over the last three years: Year 1997-1998 1998-1999 1999-2000 Percentile: Complete Battery , 43 41 42 In SAT-9 scores, Henderson, Mabelvale and Southwest Middle Schools demonstrated the highest growth in African-American scores over the last two years: School Henderson Mabelvale Southwest Change in Percentile: Complete Battery +3%, +4% +1%. Perception Data. In consultation with Dr. Steve Ross, Center for Research in Educational Policy at the University of Memphis, the Middle School Survey (MSS) was developed by LRSD Department of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (PRE) and the curriculum directors of the Language Arts, Social Studies, and Math and Science Departments. The MSS was given to students and teachers first because these two groups were impacted to a greater extent by the transition. These data will be used to help determine the level of implementation of the Middle Level Program Standards and to assist the LRSD in making data-driven decisions to improve year two implementation. Parallel versions of the survey asked students and teachers to rate the level of activity in the areas of teaching and learning, organization and accountability, governance and resources, and curriculum specific standards. Perception of implementation data was also gathered by matching 16 items on student and teacher surveys. I 4 During the close of the 1999-2000 school year all middle level students and teachers were given the opportunity to complete the survey. Student response rate was 44% (N = 2343) and teacher survey response rate was 47% (N = 210). Findings indicate there is a perception among students and teachers across the middle level that a majority of indicators of the Middle Level Program Standards are implemented either occasionally or frequently. However, both students and teachers agree that the use of flexible periods and/or extended blocks of time are not implemented on a consistent basis. There is significant difference between schools on the implementation of program standards. In analyzing the data by school, an alternate hypothesis may be the effect of teacher mobility on implementation. As previously reported, the percent of new teachers sharply increased from the 1998-1999 to the 1999-2000 school year. The percent of change from the 1998-1999 to 1999-2000 school year was as follows: Percent of New Teachers Cloverdale Dunbar Forest Heights Henderson Mabelvale Mann Pulaski Heights Southwest ^^otal SY 1998-1999 4% 16% 10% 7% 14% 14% 15% 14% ,12% SY 1999-2000 35% 29% 28% 29% 29% 14% 22% 23% 26% Change +31% +13% +10% +22% +15% No Change +7% +9% +IW The trend identified by the survey is that as the percent of new teachers increases, the perception of the implementation of the Middle Level Program Standards implementation decreases. Conclusions. Middle level attendance is above the district average and the dropout rate, particularly among African-American students has decreased sharply. Achievement scores, as measured by the SAT-9, have been flat over the last three years. However, several schools have demonstrated growth in African-American scores over the last two years. It appears the greatest effect on middle level transition has not been the movement of students, but rather the movement of teachers. This is due in part to the inverse relationship between the rate of new teachers and reported implementation of the Middle Level Program Standards. As previously stated, Seghers, Kirby, and Meza (1997) reported high levels of Turning points implementation in schools with low teacher turnover. However, LRSD survey results indicate that both students and teachers perceive that many of the Turning Points recommendations are being implemented. ) 5 Recommendations Consider this report as a baseline report for future evaluation of the middle level program. Use the data from the middle school survey to target schools and grade levels for further study. Request that additional professional development on implementing Middle Level Program Standards be made available to all teachers. Continue to encourage the development of programs that can facilitate a lower dropout rate and raise the attendance rate of middle level students. Report State Benchmark Scores and comparison data on the Districts ALT scores. Develop trend data on participation of students in extra-curricular activities. Develop trend data on letter grade distribution. Develop trend data on discipline. Benchmark progress toward implementation of the middle school transition against other successful programs on a national scale and against researchbased middle school program standards. Make middle level program evaluation an on-going activity with a status report presented as new data becomes available rather than just once a year. 6 References Anderman, E.M., & Urban, T. C. (1995). A multilevel approach to middle-level reform. Principal, 74 (3), 26-28. Clark, S. N., & Clark, D. E. (1995). Restructuring the middle school: Implications for school leaders. Albany: State University of New York Press. Irvin, J. L. (1992). Developmentally appropriate instruction: The heart of middle school. In J. L. Irvin (Ed.), Transforming middle level education: Perspectives and possibilities. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Jenkins, K. D., & Jenkins, D. M. (1995). Total quality education: Refining the middle school concept. Middle School Journal, 27 (2), 3-11. Milgram, J. (1992). Developmentally appropriate instruction: The heart of middle school. In J. L. Irvin (Ed.), Transforming middle level education: Perspectives and possibilities. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Seghers, M. M., Kirby, P. C., & Meza, J. (1997). More evidence for the implementation of middle level practices. NASSP Bulletin, 81. 99-107. Research brief #2 (2000 August). Nmsa.org Research brief #3 (2000 August). Nmsa.org Ward, M. (1998, April). A systems approach to middle school evaluation. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA. Wolf, D. P. (1089). Portfolio assessment: Sampling student work. Educational Leadership. 46 (7), 35-39. i 7f t Program Evaluation For Middle School School Year 1999-2000 August 24, 2000 fPOnsi^ lA
g0'3^ Planning, Research, and Evaluation (PRE) Ish Instructional Resource Center 3001 S. Pulaski Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 501-324-212 1 Summary Recent longitudinal studies which focus on middle level implementation of the Carnegie Turning Points recommendations indicate that student achievement and behavior are related to the level of Turing Points implementation. In addition, research has indicated that the level of implementation is related to teacher turnover. The Little Rock School Districts strategic planning process delivered the message that as a result of discipline problems, declining enrollment, below-average academic achievement, and failing community confidence in the junior high program, a need had been created for a middle level program based on the Carnegie Foundation s Turning Points recommendations. Section 3.4 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan calls for the establishment of a middle level program consisting of grades 6, 7, and 8. The response to the Section 3.4 mandate was the October 1998 Board approval of the Middle Level Program Standards based on the Carnegie recommendations. Beginning with the 1999-2000 school year, the Little Rock School District (LRSD) transitioned its eight junior high schools, grades 7- 9, to eight middle level schools, grades 6- 8. Middle level school enrollment remained stable from the 1998-1999 to 1999-2000 school year. There was an expected increase of new teachers due to the transition to middle schools. Attendance rates for the SY 1999-2000 were above the LRSD average. Dropout rates, particularly among African-American students, have sharply decreased. The dropout disparity between African-American and White students has also decreased. Over the last three years the percent of African-American dropouts has approached the percent of White dropouts. While SAT-9 percentile scores for 7'* grade students have been flat over the last three years, several schools have demonstrated growth in Afi-ican- American student scores. In consultation with Dr. Steve Ross, Center for Research in Educational Policy at the University of Memphis, the Middle School Survey (MSS) was developed by LRSD Department of Planning Research, and Evaluation (PRE) and the curriculum directors of the Language Arts, Social Studies, and Math and Science Departments. The MSS was given to students and teachers because these two groups were impacted to a greater extent by the transition. This data is being used to help determine the level of implementation of the Middle Level Program Standards and to assist the LRSD in making data- driven decisions to improve year two implementation. Findings indicate there is the perception among middle level students and teachers that a majority of indicators of the Middle Level Program Standards are implemented either occasionally or frequently. However, both students and teachers agree that the use of flexible periods and/or extended blocks of time are not implemented on a consistent basis. The trend appears to be that as the percent of new teachers increases, the perception of the implementation of the Middle Level Program Standards implementation decreases. Recommendations include: (1) using the data from the middle school survey to target schools and grade levels for further study, (2) requesting that additional professional development on implementing the Middle Level Program Standards be made available to all teachers, and (3) continuing to encourage the development of programs that facilitate a lower dropout rate and raise the attendance rate of middle level students. can-2 Introduction Over time research has documented the diverse needs of middle level students, however recently there has been a dearth of knowledge concerning the implementation of the Carnegie Turning Points recommendations (Irvin, 1992
Milgrim, 1992
Anderman & Urdan, 1995
Jenkins & Jenkins, 1995). Recent studies have focused on evaluating middle level progress and in particular the implementation of the Carnegie Turning Points recommendations (Ward, 1998
Seghers, Kirby, & Meza, 1997). Seghers, Kirby, and Meza (1997) reported low levels of Turning points implementation in Louisiana schools. However, a high level of implementation was reported in schools with low teacher turnover. The National Association of Middle Schools (Research Brief #3, 2000) affirms the lack of consistent and valid research in the field. Small studies using similar variables have reported divergent results. However studies using a meta-analysis or longitudinal design have reported consistent results. The meta-analysis design combines small studies, using similar variables, into one study. This design increases the sample size and power. A longitudinal design establishes baseline data, collects data on the same variable over time, and compares longitudinal to baseline data. Several research studies using the meta-analysis and in particular the longitudinal design (i.e., on-going and long term) have provided consistent results which indicate that schools with high levels of Turning Points implementation have greater student achievement, behavior, and socio-emotional outcomes (Research Brief #3, 2000). Experts in the field of program evaluation agree that relying solely on achievement data as a measure of success is inappropriate (Clark & Clark, 1995). Middle level evaluations should be designed to provide a variety of information to be used by teachers and other district personnel to model personal responsibility in questioning and reflecting on ones own work, and to show growth over time so that students, teachers, and other stakeholders can know and understand individual progress (Wolf, 1989). Research Brief #2 (2000), published by the National Middle School Association, recommends that evaluations should determine best practices, identify goals, and specify outcomes, processes, and inputs. Cunent practices should be compared to baseline data and evaluations should include participation, performance, and perception data. Purpose Completion of the first year of transition is an appropriate time to begin the longitudinal evaluation process through the collection of baseline data. The purpose of this evaluation is to provide stakeholders with baseline and comparison participation, performance, and perception data that addresses concerns stated during the 1996 Strategic planning process.1 Summary raplementation is related to teacher turnover. The Little Rock School Districts strategic (Z * (7? ' Of riiseiphne problems dechS inent, below-average academic achievement, and failing community confidence in the planning process delivered the junior high program, a need had been created for Education Plan calls for the establishment of ........
- ' * rile Section 3.4 mandate was the October 1998 Board approval of the 1999-2000 schoofyem, the LiitS rRi ScVool Middle Level Program Standards based schools grades 7- 0 Tn T \t (LRSD) transitioned its eight junior high remained stable ftom the 1998 77 * sh^ y dec,S?d 7'''"'' African-American studX has also7ecreted Overtte(te S, "77'2: African-American and White students ^[77''riropouts" 9 percentile scores for 7'* grade students have been flat over the last three yea^s, severaTscL^ois* haT
dTmZtote7 American student scores. In consultation with Dr. Steve Rus
Educational Policy at the University of Memphis, the Middle developed by LRSD Department of Planning Research at ' - year two implementation. Findings indicate there is growth in African- Steve Ross, Center for Research in School Survey (MSS) was and Evaluation (PRE) and the to assist the LRSD in making data- among middle level students and teachers that a majority of indicators of the Middle Level Progrmn Standards am implemented eithD^cisS^^^^^^ SeTtaSd , extended b(octcs implemented on a consistent basis. The trend are not appears to be that as the percent of new teachers , Cv Uz w UxXu V do L mcreases, the perception of the implementation of the Middle Level implementation decreases. Recommendations include' L' survey to target schools and grade levels for further sSdy.' professional development on implementing the Middle T evei , Program Standards (1) using the data from the middle school implementing the Middle Level Program Standards be continuing to Ctteuutagc die development of progra facilitate a lower dropout rate and raise the attendance rate of middle level students. made encourage the development of programs that can4, 2 Introduction Over time research has documented the diverse needs of middle recently there has been a dearth of knowledge level students, however 1 hk on evaluating .. implementation in Louisiana schools. - ea low levels of middle level progress and recommendations (Ward, 1998
was reported in schools with low teacher turnover. However, a high level of implementation rn Association of Middle Schools (Research Brief #3,2000) affirms the lack of ^o?r' "dr high icvi'"f\ socio-emotional outcomes (Research Brief #3,2000). nievement, behavior, and in particular the longitudinal desigi :n Experts in the field of program evaluation agree that relying solely on achievement data growth over time so tin. swdemsSelXte individual progiess (Wolf, 1989). Research Brief #2 (2000), published by School Association, recommends that evaluations should determine best practices identiHz a i measure of success is on achievement data as a be and other district personnel to can know and understand the National Middle best practices, identify goals. and perception data. Purpose Completion of the first year of transition is provide stakeholders with baseline and .. The purpose of this evaluation is to . - A ------------- A'Aunvu IJ UV da,a daa, addresses concerns srated process.I I t i I Design The following data will be collected, analyzed, and reported: => Participation Data Enrollment Ethnic composition Percent of new teachers comparison data comparison data comparison data => Performance Data Attendance Dropout rates Suspension data Stanford Achievement Test, 9'* edition (SAT-9) RenrHmorlz State Benchmark Exam LRSD s criterion-referenced tests LRSDs Achievement Level Tests (ALTs) => Perception Data baseline data comparison data comparison data comparison data baseline data baseline data baseline data Student and teacher Middle School Surveys (MSS) StakeholHpr Stakeholder perception baseline data to be gathered, 2000-2001 Description of the Middle School Survey (MSS) version One of the surveys is designed e fie Fetl f 1 P3- Part Two is designed to measure cuiriculum standards P'^^^'am standards implementation. Part arts / English, and social sM2Uht dma' f 'feri ethnicity) was also collected. ' location, grade, gender, and .he 3 0 both Board of Directors on October 22, 1998 (see Appendix Cl Part Standards adopted by the PRE staff and the curriculum specialists from mfth statements were derived by studies. Part One is designed level program standards. Where as Part Two^is , of the LRSD middle curriculum standards impleme^uSn P^^^^P^on of to During the close of the 1999-2000 school year, student and teacher versions were dis,ribud .0 schools. Survey adls.radon ins,Uns CZXhhS? s. A Middle Level students and teachers were . 1^.1 mt OUI' given the opportunity to complete the MSS... 4 After reading each statement, students and teachers described bv he sXem if the activity students asked to complete the entire 3 "vvcro survey. Every teacher was asked to complete Part One while core SmTenXdT T A T"''"' fomation on their respective class in part two Students and teachers recorded their ratings-----------' ' PRE. Data were analyzed and interpreted. on scan sheets (see Appendix A and B) processed by items Student and teacher matched ! paired Part One Topic Connects subjects Computer use Group activities Extended time i Student #2 #4 #7 #1 Science Math Teacher #3 #2 #5 #4 Language Arts / English Topic Write more Skills used in other classt^ Different grade techniques Topic Group work Hands on Enough supplies Student #24 #26 #28 i Student #14 #15 #16 Teacher #20 #24 #22 Teacher Topic #18 #17 #15 Social Studies Student Teacher Group work Talk math Topic Use skills from other classes Cultural learning Hands-on work Encouraged to read #19 #20 1 #11 #12 Student #29 #30 #31 #32 Teacher #25 #26 #27 #29Results Participation Data Comparison data is available for all variables. Enrollment I I -i i i ! I Cloverdale Dunbar Forest Heights" Henderson Mabelvale Mann Pulaski Heights Southwest .i' SY 1998-1999 618 740 ' 606 500 ' 838 4T3 SY 1999-2000 705 739 785 31 493 P2 760 447 Change +87 -55 +4 No Change +34 There have been modest had the largest increase while Henderson' - Cloverdale had no change in enrollment. orgost decrease in enrollment. Pulaski Heights Ethnic Composition Cloverdale Dunbar Forest Heights I Henderson Mabelvale Mann Pulaski Heights Southwest Black 89% 59% 64% 88% 76% 51% 62% 85% SY 1998-1999 White ~6%~ 36% 32% 9% 22% 46% 36% 12% Other 3^ 5% 4% 3% 2% 3% 2% 3% Black 88% 60% 65% SY 1999-2000 White 7% 34% 32% 77% , 20% 73% 52% 25% 45% 60% 39% 91% 7% Other ~6%~ 6% 3% 3% 2% 3% 1% 2% 3% -I -6-_ f i 1 Percent of New Teachers Cloverdale Dunbar Forest Heights Henderson Mabelvale ~Mann pulaski Heights Southwest :rage r SY 1998-199y 4% 16% 10% T4% 14% 15% 14% SY1999^^000 35% 293^ 28% 29% 29% 14% S% 23% ~~26% Change +31% +13% +10% +22% +15% No Change +9% had no change increase in new teachers. ^o above average with a 22% Performance Data Comparison data is available for all students. Attendance Cloverdale Dunbar Forest Heights Henderson Mabelvale~ Mann Pulaski Heights Southwest ' SY 1998-1999* SY 1999-2000 94.32% LRSD Attendance A Data unavailable 96?TO% 9^0% 94.08%i Dropout Rate SY 1997-1998 I I I I Cloverdale Dunbar Forest Heights Henderson Mabelvaie Mann Pulaski Heights Southwest .Djist^c^i Avera^e7 Black ~7^ 2% 3% 7% 3% 0 .3% 12% 4%^* White 3^ 2% 1% 4% .1% 0 0 8% ^a% Other w .7% 0 .3% 0 0 0 Total 9%' 5% 4% 11% 3% 0 .3% 3% 21% 2%-.
6%^ Black W 2% 2% 3% 2% .1% 1% 4%
2<3%v SY 1998-1999 White .5% 2% 2% .2% .2% .1% 3% Other Total 3% Black 11% SY 1999-2000 .3% .3% .3% 0 .1% 0 .2% r2%T 2% 4% 5% 3% .5% 1% 7% 1317% white ?7% .3% .1% 1.4% 1.6% .2% 0 0 .2% 2% 1.6% .2% 0 0 0 Other-, w 0 .1% 2% .2% 0 0 0 i Total .4% 3.6% .6% 6% 0% 0% .2% Over the three years, total dropout rates have decrease hm 2 so,de, ------------ app,3,hidgr oWppheidte sshSarpnlyt fdroromp o4u%f mtot esf, V n,'AfAn>etiean student dropout rate Suspension Data Cloverdale J to 1.6%. Dropout rates for IS Dunbar Forest Heights Henderson Mabelvale ' Mann Pulaski Heights Southwest Rflddle EevetlA^aee SY 1997-1998 100.64% ' 50?06% 807% 8lO% 502% 2O0% ~28.42% 81.37% 6r.21% SY 1998-1999 7161% 4127% 7121% 56% 372% 40.81% ~6743% 7 56.28%~T SY 1999-2000 78.01% 35.59% '5161% 3614% 704% 7192% S1o9u9th8w-eZst had font SY Mabelvale had a dramadc dec X O As 8 i ( I I 7 Grade SAT-9 Complete Battery Percentile Scores I I I Cloverdale Dunbar Forest Heights Henderson MabelvalF Mann Pulaski Heights Southwest Black 25 30 29 26 26 SY 1997-1998 White IF' 68 69 42 55 38 68 35 24 75 55 Total 29 47 43 31 37 54 58 30 Black n 36 27 25 43 37 21 SY 1998-1999 White ~^3~ 64 66 53 Total 26 40 47 30 46 29 70 71 47 58 23 Black 24 28 34 30 29 40 28 28 fi3W SY 1999-2000 Sox^hvfcsi Henderson, and Mabelvale demonstrated si White 4r~ 80 66 44 51 74 76 44 Wa student acWevement aove^^ StowU, in Aftican-Anterican White student scores. <1 Mask. Heights demonstrated growth in Total 25 51 45 33 35 58 49 29 LRSDs Achievement Level Tests (ALTs) as the aSS w. he reported in the fall and spring Perception Data from the MSS Survey results below and results by^scXaS3& " Appendix F and results by school and oradp i a results by school are in are cross tabulation tables. Data not received b^P^ through G decision-making are as follows
impacts the results and subsequent m 6th grade student surveys from Dunbar middle school, and All teacher surveys from Southwest middle school. In the tables below, the missing data column represents surveys which the respondent did not bubble in the data.-a.- Demographic data The - 2343) and the teacher rate, based on October 1, 1999 enrollment' follows: survey response rate'wi77% m = 2m v .4 i Uj. Demographic data are as Grade Level Student Teacher 6^ Grade 7'* Grade 803 (34%) 812(35%) 3r(B%)~^ Missing data indicates Gender Student Teacher 51 (24%) 8^ Grade Missing 679 (29%) 49 (2%) 35 (17%) Total 2343 72(34%) -210 surveys in which the respondents did not bubble in their grade level. Male 105374^ 43720%r~ Missing data indicates Ethnicity Student Teacher Female 1168 (50%) I45 (69%)~ Missing 122 (5%) 22(11%) Total 2343 210 surveys in which the respondents did not bubble in their gender. 1523 (65%) 70 /V 1(33%) I 533 (22%) 113 (54%) Missing data indicates lie 60 (3%) 1 (.5%) 1 Native American 15 (.7%) 1 (.5%) Asian/ Pacific Islander 41 (.2%) 0 (0%) surveys in which the respondents did Other 66 2%) 0 (0%) Missing I Total 105 _(4%) 25 (12%) not bubble in their ethnicity. 2343 210 J[ 10 I Survey Results Teaching and Learning I Student Responses to items on Teaching and Learning I i 1. I M given opportunities to be actively involved in Frequently Occasionally Seldom my classroom. 46.8% 35.6% 2. My teachers help me undTrstand how subjects' connected. 3. At school I have studied about healthy living. 4. I have had instruction at schooFon how to use' computer. 5. 1 have regular access to a computer at school. 6. My teachers encourage group work. 7. I do classroom activities in groups are a 8 At my school extra help is available outside the' classroom. 9 I have had an opportunity to'display my work or tolonfp ' talents. Teacher Responses to items 1. The classroom activities are seen as relevant by the smdents and respond to diverse needs of a multi-cultural Student body. 2.1 make appropriate use of active learning strategies, mcluding appropnate use of computers, media, and cooperative group learning. 3^ I frequently take advantage of integrated and/or thematic teaching methods to enable students connections across the curriculum to make 13% Never T5% Missing 1% 42% 32.3% 36.7% 33.2% 24.7% 25.5% 29% 32.8% 1 37.1% 32.8% 22.8% 24.8% 36.4% 39.4% 26.4% 34.2% on Teaching and Learning T Frequently Occasionaily 54.3% 40% 56.2% 41.9% Teachers had high perception levels of implementation implementation on items one and two than with the other items. 32.9% 44.8% 16.1% 23% 18.8% 24% 31% 29.7% 25.7% 20.7% 4.3% 10.8% 21.1% 17% 7.2% 4.4% 17.9% 10.7% .5% 1.1% 0.6% .9% .6% 1.1% 1% 1.6% Seldom Never Missing 4.3% 9.1% 9.5% 0.5% 1% 1.4% J____ . Students had a higher perception of 1% 1% 2.4%I i Organization and Accountability Student Responses to items 10. I participate in clubs, organizations, and athletic teams. 11. My classes meet in extended blocks of time' 11 on Organization and Accountability 12. My family has been invited to participate in school events. 13.1 participate in my school's community service projects. Teacher Responses to items Frequently 46.6% 24.5% 37.1% 11.4% Occasionally 21.7% 18.7% 30.1% T93% Seldom 15% 20.1% 20.1% 28.1% .. Never Missing 15.8% 34.5% 11.7% 40.3% on Organization and Accountability 4. I am currently utilizing flexible periods or blocks of ^ime as needed to deliver thematic teaching and learning. 5. Steps have been taken to create smaller leamine-------- environments. '6. Students spend most of their ti5ie m heterogeneous groups, with homogenous grouping used selectively for special students needs. Frequently | Occasionally 26.2% 29.5% 433% 26.2% Seldom 21.4% 22,9% Never 23.3% 9% 40% 1 12.9% .. Students perceived a low level of implementation on items 11 and 13 Tpq k i perceived low levels ofimplementation on items 4 and 5. Teachers also had 2.4% i .9% 23^ 1% .9% Missing 2.9%~ 2.4% T.4% JI -12_ i Governance and Resources Governance and Resources was not measured on the student survey. I I I I I i Teacher Responses to Governance and Resources ii I f 7. The Campus Leadershi^T^^ regularly and keeps me informed at my school meets 8^ I engage in of student achievement data and best effective schools. 9. I ensure that classroom concerning use practices of materials and supplies developmentally appropriate and directly cnntpnt Qnrl _____ . content and performance standards are support Teachers perceived high levels of implementation Frequently Occasinnally 51.9% 48.6% 75.7% .. 28.1% 35.7% 19.52% on the above items. 14.8% 9.5% 2.9% 3.3% 4.3% 1% 1.9% 1.9% 1%-IJ- Science Class 1 i Student Responses to items on Science Class 14. In science class, ~ vvxjvcpi.b. Frequently Occasionally I 39.3% 318% 46.6% activities. 17. IuseajoumiJtokS^^^5te?SJd^ science activities. from my world. 47.4% 41.4% 46.1% 29.1% 25.4% 19.7% 31.6% Teacher Responses to items on Science Class I A _______I .. :-------------- 18. Students worked productively m science activities and investigations. cooperative groups to conduct 1 Students were Seldom 18.6% 14.4% 15.8% 16.5% 13.8% Frequently Occasionally 1 47.2% 1^9% 51.35% 52.8% 51.4% 35.1% '0 21.62% 30.6% 32.4% 371% 1 Never 6.5% 8.1% 18.4% 5.5% Seldom 19.4% 18.92% 8.3% 10.8% 16.2% Teachers perceived low . - - concerning the availability of supplies items Ib^^! S ^uesi implementation was lower than student perception. ^^^^her perception of comparison question Missing ~T7^ ~33^ 3.4% 3.9% 3.1% Never 19.4 % 8.1% 83%~ 5.4% 10.8 %14 I i Math Class Student Responses to items on Math Class I I i i I 19. In math class, we work in groups or in pairs to solve problems. 20. Talking and writing about math are encouraged. 21. I am asked how I solved interesting math problems. 22. I am graded for different types of work, not just tests._________ 23. Adding, multiplying, subtracting, and dividing are taught. Frequently 37.3% Occasionally 29.1% Seldom 20.4% Never 10.2% Missing 3% 36.6% 44.7% 69.9% 65.5% 32.4% 29.3% 16.9% 14.4% Teacher Responses to items on Math Class mv the math curriculum for 11. Students worked product.wTfa?individuals and in pairs and ffrniinc tn lAarrt groups to learn mathematics. 12. I emphasize written and oral communication in my math classroom. 13. The math curriculum is closely aligned with the high stakes HPnPhmarL' _ ^.i . Benchmark Exam given in the 8th grade. 14. Instmction is significantlTdStirent in the regular math classes' OM/n rha A n !..___ and the pre-AP classes. Student perception was consistent Frequently 46.5% 45.2% 65% 39.5% 34.2% 18.1% 15.5% 6.2% 9.8% 7% 4.4% 3.1% 3.6% 2.6% 9.2% 7.6% 3.4% Occasionally 41.9% 45.2% 25% 39.5% 55.3% Seldom 7% 7.8% 5% 10.5% 5.3% except for item 13, Studenu had alZ levd^XT P<=-pdowas consistent did teachers, item 11. on working in groups, item 19, than Never 4.8% 5% 10.5% 5.3%I I I 15 Language Arts / English Class Student Responses to items on Language Arts! English Class I J I I i 1 I 24. 1 have been encouraged to read and write more this year.__________ 25. The reading and writing have improved my English skills.___________ 26. 1 practice in other classes what 1 learn in English. 27. 1 have done many different types of reading and writing. 28. I am graded for different types of work, not just tests. Teacher Responses to items Frequently 68.6% Occasionally 17.8% Seldom 7.6% Never ~4^ Missing J 2% 51% 30.8% 11.2% 3.7% 3.3% 27.2% 52.8% 28.7% 27.5% 25% 11.4% 15.3% 4% 3.8% 4.2% 69.8% 15.7% 7.7% 3.7% 3.1% on Language Arts / English Class 20. I have seen an increase in my shidents' reading and writing skills. 21. I have improved my own reading and writing proficiency. 22. 1 have used a variety of grading techniques and sources. 23 . I have taught English skills through use of the mini-lesson with minimal worksheet/grammar exercise drills. 24. My students practice their English skills through cross-curriculum activities. Frequently 65% 72.4% 71.2% 70.2% 52.5% Occasionally 30% 24.1% 25.4% 26.3% 28.8% Seldom 3.3% 1.7% 1.7% 1.8% 15.3% Except for Item 26, student perception of implementation is consistent. Teacher perception of imnlementation is mns __uvuvi pciecpuuu implementation is consistent except for item 24. Never 1.7% 1.7% 1.8% 3.4%i A Social Studies Class Student Responses to items on Social Studies Class 29. I use knowledge and skills from mhw social studies class. courses in my 30. I have learned about cultuTTSld the experiences of diverse groups. 31. I get to do hands-on learning activities and projects" 32. My social studies teacher assigns mV? and places that I study. 16 Frequently 40.9% Occasionally 3L2% Seldom Never 16.2% 8.1% Missing 3.6% 51.6% 28.5% 42% 27.2% 24.1% 21.2% Teacher Responses to items on Social Studies Class studies topics. 27. With each unit of studTl'iHgageTsnTd^^r activities and projects. in hands-on learning 12.4% 24.3% 18.1% i 5.8% 3.1% Frequently Occasionally 65.1% 36.4% 22% 43.2% 28. I iise various reso-UFZ^ilHdhiiS^^ 36.4% 38.6% about Arkansas history. 29. I assiffl and about people' events, and places that have been studied 46.2% 39.5% 28.2% 32.6% 18.4% 15.2% 4.7% 3.5% Seldom 3.4% Never 0% - 20.4% 20.4% 15.4% 18.6% - -- 30 .han did on iie^s remaining items. ofimplementation on item 25 than they did on the 0% 4.6% 10.3% 9.3%I K J 7 Comparison of Student and Teacher Responses on Similar Questions compares the percent of responses by teachers to the The chi-square statistical procedure formats oifrequently, occasionally, seldom, - exception of science pairs #14 vs. #18 and #15 and #28 vs. #22, and Social Studies pairs #32 vs. #29 all ofthe and students to response I, or never is significantly different. With the #17, language arts/ English pairs#24 vs. #20 teacher responses were significantly different. remaining pairs of student and Combined Response Formats: Frequently and Occasionally Part One Topic Connect subjects Computer use_____ Group activities Extended time * Student #2* 79.2% #4* 59.7% #7* 64.6% #11* 42.2% Science Math Teacher #3* 86.7% #2* 89.1% #5* 65.7% #4* 52.4% = Significantly different Language Arts / English Topic Write more Skills used in other classes Different grade techniques * = Significant Topic Group work Hands on Enough supplies Student #14 72.2% #15 75.7% #16* 73% i Social Studies Teacher #18 83.7% #17 83.3% #15* 61.1% Topic Group work Talk math Student #19* 40.2% #20* 69.1% Teacher #11* 90.5% #12* 90% Student #24 86.2% #26* 55.9% #28 85.5% Teacher #20 95% #24* 81.4% #22 96.6% Topic Use skills from other classes Cultural learning Hands on work y different Encouraged to read i Student #29* 71.9% #30 78.7% #31* 52.3% Teacher #25* 87.2% #26* 79.5% #27* 75% #32 63.4% #29 ' 72.1% J18 Conclusions Middle level attendance is above the district average and the dropout rate, particularly among African-American students has decreased sharply. Achievement scores, as measured by the SAT-9, have been flat over the last three years. However, several schools have demonstrated growth in African-American scores over the last two years. Students and teachers who completed and returned the MSS reported that a majority (i.e., 29 out of 32 in the student version and 29 out of 29 in the teacher version) of the program and curriculum standard items were being implemented frequently or occasionally. The perception of implementation does vary across program and cuniculum standard items. Listed below are the top three items perceived as implemented frequently and occasionally and the top three items perceived as implemented seldom or never. Student Survey Items most frequently perceived as implemented ffequently or occasionally. In math class, I am graded for different types of work, not just tests. I have been encouraged to read and write more this year. In language arts/ English class, I am graded for different types of work, not just tests. Items most frequently perceived as implemented seldom or never. I participate in my school's community service projects. In math class, we work in groups or in pairs to solve problems. My classes meet in extended blocks of time. Teacher Survey Items most frequently perceived as implemented freguently or occasionally. Language arts / English teachers have used a variety of grading techniques and Language arts/ English teachers have improved their own sources. reading and writing proficiency. I ensure that classroom materials and supplies are developmentally appropriate and directly support content and performance standards. Items most frequently perceived as implemented seldom or never. I am currently utilizing flexible periods or blocks of time as needed to deliver thematic teaching and learning. Science teachers had sufficient materials to implement the science curriculum. Steps have been taken to create smaller learning environments. While teachers tended to perceive implementation activities as happening more frequently than students, a phenomenon most commonly attributed to the self-evaluation nature of thei A 19 are very useful in significantly different, there i were IS item pair #4 vs. #2, in which 59.7% of students which includes computer use. that they make appropriate use of active learning strategies, not been the movement of reported lower levels of implementation. This many of the Turning Poims recommendations are being ^mptrnenJed."'20 Recommendations Consider this report as a baseline report for future evaluation of the middle level program. Use the data from the middle school survey to target schools and grade levels for further study. Request that additional professional development on implementing the Middle Level Program Standards be made available to all teachers. Continue to encourage the development of programs that can facilitate a lower dropout rate and raise the attendance rate of middle level students. Report State Benchmark Scores and comparison data on the Districts ALT scores. Develop trend data on participation of students in extra-curricular activities. Develop trend data on letter grade distribution. Develop trend data on discipline. Benchmark progress toward implementation of the middle school transition against other successful programs on a national scale and against research-based middle school program standards. Make middle level program evaluation an on-going activity with a status report presented as new data becomes available rather than just once a year.21 References PrinHn^74 approach to middle-level reform. r nnCIpgl, /2D2o. Cl^k, S N &. Clark, D. E. (1995). Restructuring the middle school: Implications for AOdAre Alk<-xr. O + + ____ /"kr --------= school leaders. Albany: State University of New York Press. Tn 1 T Developmentally appropriate instruction: The heart of middle school. X? J JU u Transforming middle, level education: Perspectives and possibilities (pp) Npp.dhflm Hpiohtc N/f A P, -n___ --------------kTH/* Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Jenkins, K^ D Jenkins, D. M. (1995). Total quality education: Refining the middle Pfinrpnr t____i m school concept. Middle School Journal, 21 (2), 3-11. Milgr^ Developmentally appropriate instruction: The heart of middle i education: Perspectives and possibilities (pp.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. .1,??' f *= implementation of middle level practices. NASSP Bulletin. 81.99-107. Research brief #2 (2000 August). Nmsa.org Research brief #3 (2000 August). Nmsa.org Ward M. (1998, April). A systems approach to middle school evaluation. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association., San Diego, Leadership, 46 (7), 35-39. assessment: Sampling student work. Educational.. Appendix A Student Surveyn Little Rock School District Planning, Research, and Evaluation Middle School Student Survey KIGaT <S^ a cu S> - Use a No. 2 pencil only - Fill in bubble completely - Erase completely to change - Do not fold or staple Never Seldom Occasionally -requently 'tai^:9h^^iO^iJQpBuuiltiessto b actively-involved in my classroom. P . .....V.^ (.)% r
r^ o '5^-- .>i : 2. My teachers help me understand how subjects are connected o o o 3. At school. I ha^e studieX^b6ut.hedlth^ltl^SWW3Ws SskSs^ IfeQws- 's2'q ?' ' \ 'j'*wf'('.I 4. I have had instruction at school on how to use a computer. o o o o 5. Xhave reguianaccess?tiS i-> ' 1 ' fi I- 5Sv .ja
computer a&cRa^ W?ii V' '.r's^K I.S 6. My teachers encourage group work. 'Activities in g roi v*3r.a3^7} s-Vs( i )b ?S?S- :! 'til ^^^^OWlas^room
rssap5
K>iR^g@$.
aws -" o )3 o o o 8. At my school extra help is available outside the classroom. o o Sfe'Ai-9' if :isS-Wi SI tefei
. l*s it sB : 'ij 5 10. I participate in clubs, organizations, and athletic teams. T O o o o T
1t My classes^meetimextended blocks of time, .. 2R- r? ?- V* -Vj:> >. ) Cf'')\ t % J '^. * Wr 12. My family has been invited to participate in school events. o o o o I.?' pl participate in my school's community service projects
Uli. V ) School Number Grade ) <A') E? i Q & V @ Gender Male O Female |fS| Race/Ethnicity Black White Hispanic American Indian/AI. Native Asian/Pacific Islander Other ( 111 PLEASE USE NO. 2 PENCIL EIGHT * Ml A 2> WONG <S< O cS> <S> - Little Rock School District Planning, Research, and Evaluation Middle School Student Survey - Use a No, 2 pencil only -Fill in bubble completely - Erase completely to change - Do not fold or staple NeveL^ Seldom [ Occasionally Science Class
T4i Un^science
Glassi-ie work in?groi3p^^i^t^^g^? I Frequently 15. Hands-on activities help me understand science concepts. 16. We ha>Z& had enobgfi supplies to do science acfivitiesC i
17. I use a journal to keep notes and data from my science activities. jO leniS
-fii^KiW^^il^tf tciefice 'Ll''.Vs.'
''i?
.5*
'-<''
-''-' ' O'ii^-^ t. :
(J o J o o o o o Math Class 19. in math class, we work in groups or in pairs to solve problems. ^ai
jiStl^*ana
Vvriti'H^B^^h^ghig5ufag^^^^g^ 21. lam asked how I solved interesting math problems. 23. Adding, multiplying, subtracting, and dividing are taught. English Class 24& Lilave b'f '.v
: sirTtfc
-j-
si:'iS!..
as15!W:><S5 JU.-l 25. The reading and writing have improved my English skills. I^actfcb In : <4Xusc^*'. < SusSd 27, I have done many different types of reading and writing. 28. i anfiQraSe'ci fdr^iffSSi^iy^pl^^^^j^^^^^'i^^is. . Social Studies Class 29. I use knowlege and skills from other courses in my social studies class. 30. I have learfiid SSodt culture and the expediences MS.iverse groups. . 31. I get to do hands-on learning activities and projects. 32. My social stuciies teacher assigns arid encourages nie to ' ,-' read books about the people, events, and places that I study
.
- IV o o * o o 5^7=: o o o o o o T o F: gSR#^ J3S<^ wway.#". o t. ^2, o c> o ,os C)'i. o o ) Q X: LRSD/PRE A. Appendix B Teacher SurveyOB SH SBB a a Little Rock School District Planning, Research, and Evaluation Middle School Teacher Survey PLEASE USE NO. 2 PENCIL > EIGHT SI M WEONG-O IS? - Use a No. 2 pencil only - Fill in bubble completely - Erase completely to change 1. The classroom activlties are seen as retevant by thenstudenfs , andrespond to diverse needs of a multi-cultural student body. 1 I 1 Never [Occasionally I Frequently .'11 X* 4r 1 i'Tr'A?! ii ' 2. I make appropriate use of active learning strategies, including appropriate use of computers, media, and cooperative group learning. ,3/1.frequently fakeadvant^e of integrated(and/br thiBma^<^ tif',. - teaching rnethods to enable students tojmake conhectiiOT'''across the curriculum 4. I am currently utilizing flexible periods or blocks of time as needed to deliver thematic teaching and learning. 5j:ISfeps'have been
taken tol *& rrfe smaller letting environmerfts^S^isI' J -Ai Seldom * 'S' y .r 1 4. o y-o o o u S!?S'3 e ?( tf - / ?< ?

iSC 6. Students spend most of their time in heterogeneous groups, with homogeneous grouping used selectively for special students needs. >7 i Ki ^7: o [ )'K5y(. ig ^2 o . The Campus LeadershlpTeam at my,schqqF meets regularly anti keeps ' 8. I engage in professional discussions concerning use of student achievement data and best practices of effective schools 9. I ensure.that classroom materials and .Applies.'a^e '^jappfopfiate affd directlysupport cdnt^^Snd petfoi School Number Grade develop^^t^ irrmmaannccee standards. A-./ .'rt'l'. (uj fry (1.) 'a
(3) (3) ' ik < ,i a? T
i
iTsSfeSseTaa^ss o o
f* m5ir2T I'.** W.' o 7Jr \3- k'.l .'i ' o .s
-r. Race/Ethnicity Black White Z-*- Q (3.) Cv fa.i (Tj (Si (3) re) . Gender Male jgj Female Hispanic fj American Indian/AI. Native (', Asian/Pacific Islander Other (' i '.J Please complete both sides ofthe survey. On the reverse side complete the subject area that applies to you. ' ~ LRSD/PRE I. Truett Never Math Teachers j
'-T0. I FeceJve(1.acrequaVe fralHiH'g io imjoTelH'etit tHe'ifiaW '^.
,-.-curriculum for my
grade'levfel.' Si! '.nt' I Occasionally I Frequently Seldom Bi M - 11. Students worked productively as individuals and in pairs and groups to learn mathematics. o o o. .,^ .12
kemphasize?wntten andioralscommuriicationiin'my .Y :
,O7nathzcIassrd6m5^
i?^^UYYiA^^M Ste 'a- os 13. The math curriculum is closely aligned with the high stakes Benchmark Exam given in Sth grade. iJ. R^jj^l^ru^idm^signi&earftil^i^re^ Yy bfassfesi airiohtif^ pr eiAOHatRecla^s? tne^reguiarrnath- s/cTs S.4 M'O WB nn O o o o Science Teacher 15. I had sufficient materials to implement the science curriculum
y: o o O ^
^
3 r.-t6., I r^etved adet^uate training to teach the science curriculum for my grade level O Lbl' 17. Students learned important science concepts and inquiry skills through their engagement in the science program. O o o o inf T3.,jStirafents^ipH pHiaij0Yei|^HfcBg^iBFaH^fe^^ut3s^o.fe^ =
sciehc^ activities?and4nvbstigati6ns.^r?<iSS0ii:'fttftSi< 19. When requested, I received technical assistance related to the science program !S lis, r 'J O ra^ t' English Teacher . .. . . -jrjT-- u , ^, jgj.ui 20. l.have seen an 1^7-.J?-'
'-.'.'- ''"T.sV-JfeiSf.v ..? increase,in rny.students' readihg:and writing skihs. 'y s 21. I have improved my own reading and writing proficiency x 22. I have used a variety ,of grading techniques and sources. ,) O' O
-ifcX' O Q O O % SS^ 23. I have taught English skills through use of the mini-lesson with minimal worksheet/grammar exercise drills. o o o o 24. My students practice their English skills through cfbss-cu rf icul ii miacti v^itiesi Social Studies Teacher 25. In my class, I discuss other subiect areas that apply to social studies topics vjsgta SssSsjitea ? ST- r 26 My students seem to know and respect experiences of diverse groups of people M. '.(Si (J fl( ) ' V-i ys o C <!< 'X 27. With each unit of study I engage students in hands-on learning activities and projects. -8^ ji.c-'' y. 28 f use variousVesources and instructional materials ' tt/nen teaching aSoutArkansas histotv*. 2^ i.a *9f 29. I assign and encourage students to read trade books about people, events, and places that have oeen studied. (J n J ?? &a. J . K o y c u ) > I J uAppendix C Middle School Mission Statement and Program StandardsA, Mission for the Division of Instruction Little Rock School District The mission of the Division of Instruction is to improve the academic achievement of all students by providing leadership, standards, curriculum, instructional resources, technical , * A -------~***2^, WVVUASAMA V*U5 WSAAXlV-VilWiilj lllOt, assistance, professional development, and student advocacy. Middle School Program Mission Statement The mission of the Little Rock School District Middle School Program is to meet the umque 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. LRSD Middle School Program Standards (Adopted by the Board of Directors on October 22, 1998) Teaching and Learning All LRSD Middle Schools will: Align all parts of grades 6-8 academic programming with grades K-5 and 9-12 K?31?Xoi and learning of language arts/reaaing, nia?heScs5cta^^^^^ Establish a district-wide set of clear and challenging standards for student performance in language arts/readmg, mathematics, science, and social studies. learning for all students through age and skill appropriate study of visual and nerfnrmina nrtc nrr,! fXr
r,r. appiupiidic Sluuy of visual and performing arts and foreign languages. Provide all students with health and fitness education that promotes the fiftvp nnmpnT at q hTA_i/-i-n- ____j -ztr. development of a life-long healthy lifestyle and offers a v^iety of recreation nersona fitnecQ ivuitauuu, personal fitness, and individual and team sport activities. SnSS, teaching as a method for helping all students to make curriculum, and in ways that make it possible for all sruaents to^ -think critically and creatively and problem solve
A -participate as empowered and engaged hands-on learners
-make real-world connections and school-to-work applications (career education)" -use technology as a tool for learning and for skills building practice
-Onl lohArc+Q ________1 u. _ _ Or 9 -collaborate with their peers and teachers
~ * ^develop socialization skills and cultural awareness through opportunities to interact with others beyond the classroom and into the community
and -demonstrate evidence of learning in a variety of ways. Assess and report individual and/or group learning in relation to the performance standards. Organization and Accountability All LRSD Middle Schools will: Organize teaching staff into interdisciplinary teams that serve a common group of fk . manageable size for appropriate periods of time during the school day, throughout the school year, and throughout the Middle School experience. Structure required and elective course offerings to fit the interdisciplinary team approach, well as the learning interests, abilities, and needs of all students including those with identified giftedness, those in need of special education services, and those in need of English-as-a-Second Language (ESL) services- Provide all students with access to interest clubs, scholar clubs, student 8ovemment participation opportunities, intramural sports, and competitive athletics to provide opportunities for healthy interaction with peers and adults. Use flexible scheduling to provide appropriate periods of time for thematic learning and provide extended learning opportunities beyond the school day and the school year to enhance and support the learning success of all students. Ensure that adequate time is provided for common planning for teams, for professional development, for interaction with specialized teaching and support services staff and student families, and for staff participation in campus-based decision-makmg. Commit to campus-based leadership and decision-making to chart and customize the educational course of the school, using student achievement data and proven practices. Develop opportunities for families and the community-at-large to support the QrhnnI iinH tn J______xt______i__________ .i . . * * X ------------ wxxx>x Uixw wwxxxxxivwixitj-UU-XCU gv lU Ol school and to participate in the educational processes of the school. Governance and Resources All LRSD Middle Schools will: Ensure through an ongoing professional development program that all middle k specifically prepared for middle school work and are committed to the education of all young adolescents in a culturally diverse community.Empower each middle school principal to be a leader of leaders for whom a primary task is to develop leadership in teachers. Empower all middle school teachers to perceive themselves as generalists first and specialists second, who perform multiple roles and who are committed to interdisciplinary team organization. Plan to acquire on a most-to-least needed basis all materials, including technology, and supplies necessary to provide thematic learning experiences through interdisciplinary team organization. Ensure that classroom materials and supplies are age and skill appropriate, that they directly support content and performance standards, and that they appeal to the interests of the students. Empower teams to determine how the school budget is appropriated to ensure that needs are met and goals are achieved.APPENDIX D Teacher Survey Results by SchoolI 1. The classroom activities are seen as reievant by the students and respond to diverse needs of a muiti-culturai student body. * Schooi Crosstabulation % within School ii 1. I he classroom activities are seen as relevant by the students and respond to diverse needs of a multi-cultural student body. Total t-requently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 72.9% 27.1% 100.0% Dunbar 89.5% 10.5% 100.0% Forest Heights 40.7% 55.6% 3.7% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 33.3% 60.6% 6.1% 100.0% Henderson 83.3% 16.7% 100.0% Cloverdale 34.3% 51.4% 11.4% 2.9% 100.0% Mabelvale 52.9% 41.2% 5.9% 100.0% 2. I make appropriate use of active learning strategies, including appropriate use of computers, media, and cooperative group learning. * School Crosstabulation - % Within School 2. I make appropriate use of active learning strategies, including appropriate use of computers, media, and cooperative group learning. Total t-requently Occasionally Seldom Never Total 54.8% 40.4% 4.3% .5% 100.0% Mann 72.9% 16.7% 10.4% 100.0% Dunbar 47.4% 52.6% 100.0% Forest Heights 55.6% 25.9% 14.8% 3.7% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 48.5% 42.4% 9.1% 100.0% Henderson 83.3% 8.3% 8.3% 100.0% Cloverdale 40.0% 45.7% 11.4% 2.9% 100.0% Mabelvale 55.9% 38.2% 5.9% 100.0% Total 56.7% 33.2% 9.1% 1.0% 100.0% 3. I frequently take advantage of integrated and/or thematic teaching methods to enable students to make connections across the curriculum. * School Crosstabulation % within School 3. I frequently take advantage of integrated and/or thematic teaching methods to enable students to make connections across the curriculum. Total frequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 61.7% 31.9% 6.4% 100.0% Dunbar 57.9% 36.8% 5.3% 100.0% Forest Heights 44.4% 44.4% 7.4% 3.7% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 30.3% 54.5% 12.1% 3.0% 100.0% Henderson 33.3% 66.7% 100.0% Cloverdale 17.6% 55.9% 23.5% 2.9% 100.0% Mabelvale 48.5% 45.5% 6.1% 100.0% Total 42.9% 45.9% 9.8% 1.5% 100.0% I 4. I am currently utilizing flexable periods or blocks of time as needed to deliver thematic teaching and learning. * School Crosstabulation % within School I 1 4. I am currently utilizing flexable periods or blocks of time as needed to deliver thematic teaching and learning. Total % within School 5. Steps have been taken to create smaller learning environments. Total i-requently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 14.6% 20.8% 18.8% 45.8% 100.0% Dunbar 73.7% 15.8% 10.5% 100.0% Forest Heights 15.4% 50.0% 15.4% 19.2% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 21.9% 15.6% 37.5% 25.0% 100.0% Henderson 16.7% 66.7% 8.3% 8.3% 100.0% Cloverdale 24.2% 24.2% 27.3% 24.2% ___ 100.0% 5. Steps have been taken to create smaller learning environments. * School Crosstabulation I-requently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 28.3% 43.5% 19.6% 8.7% 100.0% Dunbar 63.2% 15.8% 21.1% 100.0% Forest Heights 42.9% 14.3% 10.7% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights TFTJr 36.4% 30.3% 15.2% 100.0% Henderson 50!^ 25.0% 16.7% 100.0% Cloverdale W 32.4% 38.2% 20.6% 100.0% Mabelvale 38.2% 23.5% 23.5% 14.7% 100.0% Mabelvale ---- 367^ 45.5% 18.2% 100.0% Total 27.0% 27.0% 22.1% 24.0% 100.0% Total 30.2% 37.1% 23.4% 9.3% 100.0% 6. Students spend most of their time in heterogeneous groups, with homogenous grouping used selectively for special students needs * School Crosstabulation % within School 6. Students spend most of their time in heterogeneous groups, with homogenous grouping used selectively for special students needs. Total l-requentiy Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 41.7% 50.0% 4.2% 4.2% 100.0% Dunbar 57.9% 31.6% 10.5% 100.0% Forest Heights 40.7% 29.6% 25.9% 3.7% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 39.4% 42.4% 15.2% 3.0% 100.0% Henderson 41.7% 50.0% 8.3% 100.0% Cloverdale 34.3% 40.0% 25.7% 100.0% Mabelvale 57.6% 36.4% 3.0% 3.0% 100.0% Total 44.0% 40.6% 13.0% 2.4% 100.0% 7. The Campus Leadership Team at my school meets regularly and keeps me informed. * School Crosstabulation % within School 1 M /. 1 he Campus Leadership Team at my school meets regularly and keeps me informed. frequently Occasionally Seldom Never Total Mann 47.5% 31.3% 16.7% 4.2% 100.0% Dunbar 63.2% 36.8% 100.0% Forest Heights " 50.0% 35.7% 14.3% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 83.5% 12.9% 3.2% 100.0% Henderson ------5573^ 25.0% 8.3% 8.3% 100.0% Cloverdale 35.3% 29.4% 8.8% 100.0% Mabelvale ---- STW 23.5% 20.6% 2.9% 100.0% Total "52.5% 28.6% 15.0% 3.4% 100.0% 8. I engage in professional discussions concerning use of student achievement data and best practices of effective schools. * School Crosstabulation % within School / l 8. I engage in professional discussions concerning use of student achievement data and best practices of effective schools. Total t-requently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 57.4% 27.7% 10.6% 4.3% 100.0% Dunbar 73.7% 21.1% 5.3% 100.0% Forest Heights 30.8% 42.3% 23.1% 3.8% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 48.5% 45.5% 6.1% 100.0% Henderson 83.3% 16.7% 100.0% Cloverdale 22.9% 51.4% 14.3% 11.4% 100.0% Mabelvale 55.9% 35.3% 2.9% 5.9% 100.0% Total 49.5% 36.4% 9.7% 4.4% 100.0% 9. I ensure that classroom materials and supplies are developmentally appropriate and directly support content and performance standards. * School Crosstabulation % within School y. I ensure that classroom materials and supplies are developmentally appropriate and directly support content and performance standards. Total hrequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 87.5% 8.3% 2.1% 2.1% 100.0% Dunbar 94.7% 5.3% 100.0% Forest Heights 71.4% 21.4% 3.6% 3.6% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 69.7% 30.3% 100.0% Henderson 83.3% 16.7% 100.0% Cloverdale 61.8% 29.4% 8.8% 100.0% Mabelvale 73.5% 23.5% 2.9% 100.0% Total 76.4% 19.7% 2.9% 1.0% 100.0% / % within School 1Q. I received adequate training to implement the math curriculum for my grade level. * School Crosstabulation 10. I received adequate training to implement the math curriculum for my grade level. 1-requently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 35.5% 66.7% Dunbar 55'3% 66.7% Forest Heights 25.0% 62.5% School Pulaski Heights 40.0%' 40.0% 20.0% Henderson ------7515^ 25.0% Total 100.0% 100.0% 12.5% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 22.2% 22.2% 11.1% 100.0% Mabelvale ---- TSUW 25.0% 100.0% 11. Students worked productively as individuals and in pairs and groups to learn mathematics. * School Crosstabulation % within School 11. students worked t-requentiy productively as individuals and in pairs and groups to learn mathematics. Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 33.3% 50.0% 16.7% Dunbar 50.0% 50.0% Total % within School 100.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 50.0% 25.0% 12.5% 12.5% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 20.0% 80.0% 100.0% Total 46.5%' 41.9% 7.0% 4.7% 100.0% Henderson 75.0% 25.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 33.3% 55.6% 11.1% 100.0% Mabelvale 62.5% 37.5% 100.0% Total 45 2% 45.2% 4.8% 4.8% 100.0% 12. I emphasize written and oral communication in my math classroom. * School Crosstabulation 12. I emphasize written and oral communication in my math classroom. hrequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 83.5% 16.7% Dunbar 100.0% Forest Heights 75.0% 12.5% School Pulaski Heights SOTW 20.0% Henderson ----- 55155^ 50.0% Total 100.0% 100.0% 12.5% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale -------TTW 33.3% 22.2% 11.1% 100.0% Mabelvale ---- 7T75^ 28.6% 100.0% Total 65.0% 25.0% 5.0% 5.0% 100.0% I' 1 % within School 13. The math curriculum is closely aligned with the high stakes Benchmark Exam given in Sth grade. * School Crosstabulation I J TT I ne math curriculum is closely aligned with the high stakes Benchmark Exam given in 8th grade. Total Frequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 40.0% 40.0% 20.0% 100.0% Dunbar 100.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 57.1% 14.3% 28.6% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 40.0% 60.0% 100.0% Henderson SCTJT 50.0% 100.0% Cloverdale ------- 55.6% 11.1% 11.1% 100.0% Mabelvale -- 57T!r 42.9% 100.0% 14. Instruction is significantly different in the reguair math classes and the pre-AP math classes. * School Crosstabulation % within School 14. Instruction IS significantly different in the reguair math classes and the pre-AP math classes. Total % within School 1 b. I had sufficient materials to implement the science curriculum. Total Frequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 33.3% 66.7% 100.0% Dunbar 100.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 50.0% 33.3% 16.7% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 20.0% 40.0% 20.0% 20.0% 100.0% Henderson 25.0% 75.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 33.3% 55.6% 11.1% 100.0% 15. I had sufficient materials to implement the science curriculum. * School Crosstabulation Frequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 75.0% 12.5% 12.5% 100.0% Dunbar 100.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 33.3% 66.7% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights ' 40.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 100.0% Henderson SIW Cloverdale ------- 20.0% 20.0% 100.0% 14.3% 28.6% 100.0% Mabelvale 42.9% 57.1% 100.0% Mabelvale 25:5%- 14.3% 42.9% 14.3% 100.0% Total 39.5% 39.5% 10.5% 10.5% 100.0% Total 34.2% 55.3% 5.3% 5.3% 100.0% Total 47.2% 13.9% 19.4% 19.4% 100.0% / i 4^ / % within School I <' 16. I received adequate trainng to teach the science curriculum for my grade level. * School Crosstabulation 1 lb. I received adequate trainng to teach the science curriculum for my grade level. Total Frequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 75.0% 25.0% 100.0% Dunbar 100.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 25.0% 25.0% 50.0% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 20.0% 100.0% Henderson TOW 60.0% 100.0% Cloverdale -----57W 28.6% 14.3% 100.0% Mabelvale 28.6% 42.9% 100.0% Total 51.4% 21.6% 18.9% 8.1% 100.0% 17. Students learned important science concepts and inquiry skills through their engagement in the science program. * School Crosstabulation . % within School 11. Students learned important science concepts and inquiry skills through their engagement in the science program. Total l-requently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 87.5% 12.5% 100.0% Dunbar 100.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 60.0% 40.0% 1000% Henderson 40.0% 40.0% 20.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 28.6% 28.6% 14.3% 28.6% 100.0% Mabelvale 57.1% 28.6% 14.3% 100.0% 18. Students worked productively in cooperative groups to conduct science activities and investigations. * School Crosstabulation % within School 1 a. Students worked productively in cooperative groups to conduct science activities and investigations. Total Frequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 62.5% 37.5% 100.0% Total 52.8% 30.6% 8.3% 8.3% 100.0% Dunbar 100.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 50.0% 25.0% 25.0% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 80.0% 20.0% 100.0% Henderson 20.0% 40.0% 40.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 28.6% 28.6% 28.6% 14.3% 100.0% Mabelvale 57.1% 42.9% 100.0% Total 51.4% 32.4% 10.8% 5.4% 100.0% % within School 19j When requested, I received technical assistance related to the science program. School Crosstabulation 1 M iy. When requested, I received technical assistance related to the science program. hrequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 50.0% 37.5% 12.5% Dunbar 100.0% Forest Heights 25.0% Total % within School 20. I have seen an increase in my students' reading and writing skills. Total % within School 21. I have improved my own reading and writing proficiency. Total 100.0% 100.0% 50.0% 25.0% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights ""5015% 60.0% 20.0% 100.0% Henderson ----- SJTW 40.0% 20.0% 20.0% 100.0% Cloverdale ------- 28.6% 14.3% 28.6% 100.0% 20. I have seen an increase in my students' reading and writing skills. * School Crosstabulation hrequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 100.0% 100.0% Dunbar '100.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 45:w 57.1% 100.0% Total 35.1% 37 8% 16.2% 10.8% 100.0% Forest Heights 62.'5% 25.0% 12.5% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 70.0% 30.0% 100.0% Henderson ------ 5TW 42.9% 100.0% Cloverdale ----- 55:5%' 57.1% 14.3% 100.0% 21. I have improved my own reading and writing proficiency. * School Crosstabulation hrequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 100.0% 100.0% Dunbar 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% Mabelvale ---- 7575%' 25.0% 100.0% Total 55T)% 30.0% 3.3% 1.7% 100.0% Forest Heights 71.4% 14.3% 14.3% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 90.0% 10.0% 100.0% Henderson ---TOT 28.6% 100.0% Cloverdale -----45W 50.0% 7.1% 100.0% Mabelvale ----- 75755^ 25.0% 100.0% Total 72.4% 24.1% 1.7% 1.7% 100.0% / i 4' 'I ' % within School 22. I have used a variety of grading techniques and sources. Total ) 1 22. 1 have used a variety of grading techniques and sources. * School Crosstabulation hrequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 90.0% 10.0% 100.0% Dunbar ~66.7% 33.3% Forest Heights " 57.1% 28.6% School Pulaski Heights 80.0% 20.0% Henderson ----- TTW 28.6% Cloverdale 6TW 28.6% 7.1% Mabelvale 37.5% 100.0% 14.3% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Total 71.2% 25.4% 1.7% 1.7% 100.0% 23. I have taught English skills through use of the mini-lessen with minimal worksheet/grammar exercise drills. * School Crosstabulation % within School 23. I have taught English hrequentiy skills through use of the mini-lessen with minimal worksheet/grammar exercise drills. Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 88.9% 11.1% Dunbar 66.7% 33.3% Forest Heights 71.4% 14.3% School Pulaski Heights 80.0% 20.0% Henderson 71.4% 14.3% 14.3% Cloverdale 53.8% 46.2% Mabelvale 62.5% 37.5% Total % within School 100.0% 100.0% 14.3% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 24. My students practice their English skills through cross-curriculum activities. * School Crosstabulation 24. My students practice their English skills through cross-curriculum activities. t-requently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 80.0% 20.0% Dunbar '66.7% 33.3% Total 100.0% 100.0% Forest Heights SSW 28.6% 28.6% 14.3% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights SCTJW 30.0% 10.0% 100.0% 100.0% Total 70.2% 26.3% 1.8% 1.8% 100.0% Henderson 7T7%' 14.3% 14.3% 100.0% Cloverdale -----2TW 42.9% 28.6% 7.1% 100.0% Mabelvale 6235^ 25.0% 12.5% 100.0% Total " 52.5% 28.8% 15.3% 3.4% 100.0% /' 'i i % within School 25. In my class, I discuss other subject areas that apply to social studies topics. * School Crosstabulation 25. In my class, 1 discuss other subject areas that apply to social studies topics. Total % within School hrequently Occasionally Seldom Mann 85.7% 14.3% 100.0% Dunbar 66.7% 33.3% Forest Heights 83.3% 16.7% School Pulaski Heights 57.1% 42.9% Henderson 40.0% 60.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 55.6% 22.2% 22.2% 100.0% Mabelvale 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% 26. My students seem to know and respect experiences of diverse groups of people. * School Crosstabulation 2b. My students seem to know and respect experiences of diverse groups of people. Total I-requently Occasionally Seldom Mann 57.1% 42.9% 100.0% Dunbar 100.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 66.7% 16.7% 16.7% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights iT3% 71.4% 14.3% 100.0% Henderson Cloverdale 60.0% 40.0% 100.0% 55.6% 44.4% 100.0% Mabelvale 57??% 28.6% 14.3% 100.0% 27, With each unit of study I engage students in hands-on learning activities and projects. * School Crosstabulation % within School 2/. With each unit or study I engage students in hands-on learning activities and projects. hrequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann ~7'1.'4% 14.3% 14.3% Dunbar "35.5% 66.7% Forest Heights 66.7% 33.3% School Pulaski Heights 57.1% 42.9% Henderson 60.0% 20.0% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale ----- TTK 33.3% 44.4% 11.1% 100.0% Mabelvale -- 577^ 28.6% 14.3% 100.0% Total 65.1% 30.2% 4.7% 100.0% Total 36.4% 43.2% 20.5% 100.0% Total "36.4% 38.6% 20.5% 4.5% 100.0% t iX 1
% within School .^28. I use various resources and instructional materials when ! ) 28. I use vanous resources and instructional materials when teaching about Arkansas history. Total l-requently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 80.0% 20.0% 100.0% teaching about Arkansas history. * School Crosstabulation Dunbar 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% Forest Heights 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 33.3% 33.3% 16.7% 16.7% 100.0% Henderson 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 22.2% 22.2% 44.4% 11.1% 100.0% 29. I assign and encourage students to read trade books about people, events, and places that have been studied. % within School 29. I assign and encourage students to read trade books about people, events, and places that have been studied. Total l-requently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 42.9% 42.9% 14.3% 100.0% Dunbar 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% Forest Heights 66.7% 16.7% 16.7% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 28.6% 28.6% 42.9% 100.0% Henderson 25.0% 75.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 57.1% 14.3% 14.3% 14.3% 100.0% Total 46.2% 28.2% 15.4% 10.3% 100.0% School Crosstabulation Cloverdale 22.2% 33.3% 33.3% 11.1% 100.0% Mabelvale 42.9% 14.3% 14.3% 28.6% 100.0% Total 39.5% 32.6% 18.6% 9.3% 100.0% I I A APPENDIX E Teacher Survey Results by School and GradeI ' ( Grade Level = 6^h t 1. The classroom activities are seen as relevant by the students and respond to diverse needs of a multi-cultural student body. * School Crosstabulation % within School a Mann 1. I he Classroom activities are seen as relevant by the students and respond to diverse needs of a multi-cultural student body. Total a. Grade Level = 6th Hrequently Occasionally Seldom 90.0% 10.0% 100.0% Dunbar 88.9% 11.1% 100.0% Forest Heights 16.7% 83.3% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 27.3% 72.7% 100.0% Henderson Cloverdale Mabelvale Total 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% 60.0% 40.0% 100.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 57.7% 38.5% 3.8% 100.0% I 2. I make appropriate use of active learning strategies, including appropriate use of computers, media, and cooperative group learning. * School Crosstabulation % within School a /: 2. I make appropriate hrequently Mann Dunbar Forest Heights School Pulaski Heights Henderson Cloverdale Mabelvale Total f . k*. use of active learning strategies, including appropriate use of computers, media, and cooperative group learning. Total a. Grade Level = 6th Occasionally Seldom 90.0% 33.3% 66.7% 50.0% 33.3% 10.0% 100.0% 100.0% 16.7% 100.0% 45.5% 54.5% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 80.0% 20.0% 100.0% 87.5% 12.5% 100.0% 65.4% 30.8% 3.8% 100.0% J4 Page f , 4 3.?nrequept)y take advantage of integrated and/or thematic teaching methods to en^le
I School Crosstabulation % within School 3. I trequently take advantage of integrated and/or thematic teaching methods to enable students to make connections across the curriculum. Total a. Grade Level = 6th l-requently Occasionally Seldom 4. I am currently utilizing flexable periods % within School ! 4. lam currently utilizing flexable periods or blocks of time as needed to deliver thematic teaching and learning. Total a. Grade Level = 6th j % within School 5.'Steps have been taken to create smaller learning environments. Total a.' Grade Level = 6th Mann 55.6% 33.3% 11.1% 100.0% Dunbar 55.6% 44.4% 100.0% students to make connections across the curriculum. * Forest Heights 16.7% School Pulaski Heights 45.5% Henderson Cloverdale Mabelvale Total 66.7% 45.5% 16.7% 9.1% 33.3% 66.7% 20.0% 60.0% 20.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 75.0% 47.1% 25.0% 45.1% 7.8% 100.0% 100.0% or blocks of time as needed to deliver thematic teaching and learning. * School Crosstabulation a Frequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 10.0% 10.0% 40.0% 40.0% 100.0% Dunbar 66.7% 22.2% 11.1% 100.0% Forest Heights 60.0% 20.0% 20.0% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 36.4% 27.3% 18.2% 18.2% 100.0% Henderson 33.3% 66.7% 100.0% Cloverdale 40.0% 40.0% 20.0% 100.0% 5. Steps have been taken to create smaller learning environments. School Crosstabulation frequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann ~40.0% 50.0% 10.0% 100.0% Dunbar 55W 11.1% 33.3% 100.0% Forest Heights T5?7^ 33.3% 33.3% 16.7% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 27.3% 36.4% 18.2% 100.0% Henderson 10o.o% 100.0% Cloverdale 20.0% 20.0% 40.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 62.5% 25.0% 12.5% 100.0% Total 37.3% 29.4% 15.7% 17.6% 100.0% Mabelvale -----373^ 37.5% 25.0% 100.0% Total 36.5% 28.8% 23.1% 11.5% 100.0% Page 2 9. Students spend most of their time in heterogeneous groups, with homogenous grouping used selectively for special students needs. * School Crosstabulation % within School a B. Students spend most of their time in heterogeneous groups, with homogenous grouping used selectively for special students needs. Total a. Grade Level = 6th frequently Occasionally Seldom Mann 60.0% 40.0% 100.0% Dunbar 55.6% 33.3% 11.1% 100.0% Forest Heights 33.3% 16.7% 50.0% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 36.4% 63.6% 100.0% Henderson Cloverdale Mabelvale Total 33.3% 66.7% 100.0% 60.0% 20.0% 20.0% 100.0% 62.5% 37.5% 100.0% 50.0% 40.4% 9.6% 100.0% % within School 7. The Campus Leadership Team at my school meets regularly and keeps me informed. * School Crosstabulation a / /. I he Campus Leadership Team at my school meets regularly and keeps me informed. Total a. Grade Level = 6th frequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 60.0% 20.0% 20.0% 100.0% Dunbar 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% Forest Heights 66.7% 16.7% 16.7% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights STTW 10.0% 100.0% Henderson ----- SSTJT 33.3% 100.0% Cloverdale -----5CW 40.0% 20.0% 20.0% 100.0% Mabelvale ------ 37.5% 12.5% 100.0% Total 62.7% 21.6% 13.7% 2.0% 100.0% 8. I engage in professional discussions concerning use of student achievement data and best practices of effective schools. * % within School School Crosstabulation^ y. I engage in 'professional discussions concerning use of ^student achievement 'data and best practices of effective schools. 'Total a. Grade Level = 6th frequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 60.0% 30.0% 10.0% 100.0% Dunbar 55.6% 33.3% 11.1% 100.0% Forest Heights 33.3% 66.7% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 54.5% 45.5% 100.0% Henderson 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 60.0% 20.0% 20.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 50.0% 37.5% Total 55.8% 36.5% 1.9% 12.5% 100.0% 5.8% 100.0% Page r'i . 4 r 9. I ensure that classroom materials and supplies are developmentally appropriate ^d directly support content and performance standards * ' ( School Crosstabulation % within School
9. I ensure that classroom materials and supplies are developmentally appropriate and directly support content and performance standards. Total a. Grade Level = 6th t-requently Occasionally Seldom Mann 90.0% 10.0% 100.0% Dunbar 88.9% 11.1% 100.0% Forest Heights 66.7% 16.7% 16.7% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 90.9% 9.1% 100.0% Henderson Cloverdale Mabelvale Total 100.0% 100.0% 80.0% 20.0% 100.0% 75.0% 84.6% 25.0% 11.5% 3.8% 100.0% 100.0% I * 10. I received adequate training to implement the math curriculum for my grade level. * School Crosstabulation % within School School 10. I received adequate training to implement the math curriculum for my grade level. Total a. Grade Level = Sth Frequently Occasionally Mann 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 100.0% 100.0% Henderson Cloverdale Mabelvale Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% J J 11. Students worked productively as individuals and in pairs and groups to learn mathematics. * School Crosstabulation % within School a 4 School ,11. Students worked hrequently ' productively as . individuals and in t pairs and groups to . learn mathematics. fTotal a. Grade Level = 6th Occasionally Mann 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 100.0% 100.0% Henderson 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 100.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 100.0% 100.0% Total 83.3% 16.7% 100.0% Page % within Schooi 4^ " '' 1?, I emphasize written and oral communication in my math classroom. * School Crosstabulation a 'll 1 ii. I emphasize written and oral communication in my math classroom. Total a. Grade Level = 6th frequently Mann 100.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 100.0% 100.0% School Henderson Cloverdale Mabelvale Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 13. The math curriculum is closely aligned with the high stakes Benchmark Exam given in Sth grade. * School Crosstabulation % within School I I 13. I he math curnculum : is closely aligned with the high stakes Benchmark Exam given in Sth grade. Total a. Grade Level = 6th Hrequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 100.0% 100.0% School Henderson Cloverdale 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Mabelvale TOO.0% 100.0% Total 33.3% 33.3% 16.7% 16.7% 100.0% h*' 14. Instruction is significantly different in the reguair math classes and the pre-AP math classes, * School Crosstabulation % within School a .V' 4- 14. Instruction is significantly different in the reguair math classes and the pre-AP math classes. (Total a. Grade Level = 6th Hrequently Occasionally Mann 100.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 100.0% 100.0% School Henderson Cloverdale Mabelvale Total 100.0% 100.0% 16.7% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 83.3% 100.0% Page 7 ,<1 15. I h'^d sufficient materials to implement the science curriculum. * Schooi Crosstabulation % within School School 15. I had sutticient materials to implement the science curriculum. Total a. Grade Level = 6th frequently Seldom Mann 100.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 100.0% 100.0% Henderson 100.0% Mabelvale 50.0% Total 85.7% 100.0% 50.0% 100.0% 14.3% 100.0% ! 1 I 1 4 a 16. I received adequate trainng to teach the science curriculum for my grade level. * School Crosstabulation % within School a School I 16. I received adequate 'trainng to teach the science curriculum for my grade level. Total a. Grade Level = 6th t-requently Occasionally Seldom Mann 100.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 100.0% 100.0% Henderson 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 100.0% 100.0% Total 57.1% 14.3% 28.6% 100.0% 1,*' 17. Students learned important science concepts and inquiry skills through their engagement in the science program. * % within School School Crosstabulation a School 4 1/. Students learned important science concepts and inquiry skills through their engagement in the (Science program. Total I a. Grade Level = 6fh frequently Occasionally Seldom J Mann 100.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 100.0% 100,0% Henderson 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Total 71.4% 14.3% 14.3% 100.0% Page I i I '! I' I 18. Students worked productively in cooperative groups to conduct science activities and % within School T i 18. Students worked productively in cooperative groups to conduct science activities and investigations. Total a. Grade Level = 6th l-requently Occasionally Mann 100.0% 100.0% investigations. * Schooi Crosstabulation a Pulaski Heights School 100.0% 100.0% Henderson Mabelvale Total 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 71.4% 28.6% 100.0% 19. When requested, I received technical assistance related to the science % within School program. * School Crosstabulation a School 1 y. When requested. I received technical assistance related to the science program. Total a. Grade Level = 6th % within School 2U. I have seen an increase in my students' reading and writing skills. Total a. Grade Level = 6th l-requently Occasionally Mann 100.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 100.0% 100.0% Henderson 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 100.0% 100.0% Total 71.4% 28.6% 100.0% 20. I have seen an increase in my students' reading and writing skills. * School Crosstabulation Frequently Occasionally Seldom Mann "100 0% 100.0% Dunbar 100.0% 100.0% Forest Heights " 100.0% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 60.0% 50.0% 100.0% Henderson 5irw 50.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% Mabelvale 1oo.o% 100.0% Total ~55.7% 27.8% 5.6% 100.0% Pagel / I % within School 24^ My students practice their Engiish skiils through cross-curriculum activities. * School Crosstabulation 1 24. My students practice their English skills through cross-curriculum activities. Total a. Grade Level = 6th Frequently Occasionally Seldom Mann 100.0% 100.0% a Dunbar 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% Forest Heights 100.0% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 50.0% 25.0% 25.0% 100.0% Henderson 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 33.3% 33.3% 33.3% 100.0% 25. In my class, I discuss other subject areas that apply to social studies topics. * School Crosstabulation^ % within School 25. In my class, I discuss other subject areas that apply to social studies topics. Total______________ a. Grade Level = 6th t-requentiy Occasionally Sc
hool Mann 100.0% 100.0% Dunbar 100.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 33.3% 66.7% 100.0% Henderson 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 100.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 100.0% 100.0% 26. My students seem to know and respect experiences of diverse groups of people. * School Crosstabulation ' % within School School a Mabelvale 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Total 61.1% 22.2% 16.7% 100.0% Total 60.0% 40.0% 100.0% 26. My students seem to know and respect experiences of diverse groups of people. Total Frequently Occasionally Seldom Mann 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% , a. Grade Level = 6th Dunbar 100.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 100.0% 100.0% Henderson Cloverdale Mabelvale 100.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Total 30.0% 50.0% 20.0% 100.0% Pagi I ,Y I 7 % within School c 21. I nave improved my own reading and writing proficiency. Total a. Grade Level = 6th % within School 22. I have used a ! variety of grading techniques and sources. Total a. Grade Level = 6th 21. I have improved my ovim reading and writing proficiency. * School Crosstabulation a Frequently Occasionally Mann 100.0% 100.0% Dunbar 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% Forest Heights 100.0% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 75.0% 25.0% 100.0% Henderson 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% 22. I have used a variety of grading techniques and sources. * School Crosstabulation a Mabelvale 100.0% 100.0% Total 83.3% 16.7% 100.0% Frequently Occasionally Mann 100.0% 100.0% Dunbar 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% Forest Heights 100.0% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 75.0% 25.0% 100.0% Henderson 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 100.0% 100.0% 23. I have taught English skills through use of the mini-lessen with minimal worksheeUgrammar exercise drills. * % within School 23. I have taugnt tngiish skills through use of the mini-lessen with minimal worksheet/grammar exercise drills. Total )' a. Grade Level = 6th Frequently Occasionally Mann 100.0% 100.0% Dunbar 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% Forest Heights 100.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Total 83.3% 16.7% 100.0% School Crosstabulation a School Pulaski Heights 75.0% 25.0% 100.0% Henderson Cloverdale Mabelvale Total 100.0% 100.0% 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 72.2% 27.8% 100.0% Page I ' * 27,
^With each unit of study I engage students in hands-on learning activities and projects. * School Crosstabulation % within School iV a School 2/. With each unit ot study I engage students in hands-on learning activities and projects. Total a. Grade Level = 6th hrequently Occasionally Seldom Mann 100.0% 100.0% Dunbar 100.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% Henderson 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 100.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 100.0% 100.0% Total 40.0% 40.0% 20.0% 100.0% 28. I use various resources and instructional materials when teaching about Arkansas history. * School Crosstabulation % within School a School / 28. I use vanous resources and instructional materials when teaching about Arkansas history. Total a. Grade Level = 6th hrequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 100.0% 100.0% Dunbar 100.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Henderson 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 100.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 100.0% 100.0% Total 28.6% 28.6% 14.3% 28.6% 100.0% 29. I assign and encourage students to read trade books about people, events, and places that have been studied. * School Crosstabulation . % within School 11 a School 29. I assign and encourage students to read trade books about people, events, and places that have been studied. Total * a. Grade Level = 6th hrequently Occasionally Seldom Mann 100.0% 100.0% Dunbar 100.0% 100.0% 7 Pulaski Heights 33.3% 66.7% 100.0% Henderson Cloverdale Mabelvale Total 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 60.0% 20.0% 20.0% 100.0% Page I Grade Level = 7th 1. The classroom actWities are seen as relevant by the students and respond to diverse needs of % within School I a multi-cultural student body. * School Crosstabulation 1. I he classroom activities are seen as relevant by the students and respond to diverse needs of a multi-cultural student body. Total a. Grade Level = 7th hrequently Occasionally Seldom Mann 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Dunbar 80.0% 20.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 14.3% 85.7% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 20.0% 70.0% 10.0% 100.0% Henderson Cloverdale Mabelvale Total 100.0% 100.0% 83.3% 16.7% 100.0% 75.0% 12.5% 12.5% 100.0% 41.2% 52.9% 5.9% 100.0% I 2. I make appropriate use of active learning strategies, including appropriate use of computers, media, and cooperative group learning. * School Crosstabulation % within School a t 'L' 4 2. I make appropriate use of active learning strategies, including appropriate use of computers, media, and cooperative group learning. Total a. Grade Level = 7th hrequently Occasionally Seldom Mann 64.3% 21.4% 14.3% 100.0% Dunbar 40.0% 60.0% 100.0% ^7 Forest Heights 57.1% 28.6% 14.3% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 40.0% 40.0% 20.0% 100.0% Henderson Cloverdale Mabelvale Total 100.0% 100.0% 16.7% 66.7% 16.7% 100.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 49.0% 39.2% 11.8% 100.0% Page I v/ V. )' 4A .3. I frequehtly take advantage of integrated and/or thematic teaching methods to enabie students to make ' i School Crosstabulation ( % within School 3. I trequently take advantage of integrated and/or thematic teaching methods to enable students to make connections across the curriculum. Total a. Grade Level = 7th l-requently Occasionally Seldom Mann 42.9% 42.9% 14.3% 100.0% Dunbar 60.0% 40.0% 100.0% connections across the curriculum. * Forest Heights School Pulaski Heights Henderson Cloverdale Mabelvale Total 57.1% 28.6% 70.0% 100.0% 20.0% 60.0% 57.1% 42.9% 14.3% 30.0% 20.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 36.7% 49.0% 14.3% 100.0% 4. I am currently utilizing flexable periods or blocks of time as needed to deliver thematic teaching and learning. * School Crosstabulation .'% within School 4. I am currently utilizing flexable periods or blocks of time as needed to deliver thematic teaching and learning. Total a. Grade Level = 7th % within School 5. Steps nave been taken to create smaller learning environments. Total Grade Level = 7th a Frequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 42.9% 14.3% 42.9% 100.0% Dunbar 80.0% 20.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 14.3% 57.1% 14.3% 14.3% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights rri 66.7% 22.2% 100.0% Henderson 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 33.3% 33.3% 33.3% 100.0% 5. Steps have been taken to create smaller learning environments. * School Crosstabulation a Frequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann ^3.1% 46.2% 23.1% 7.7% 100.0% Dunbar ~gn.o% 20.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 1'4.3% 85.7% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 10.0% 100.0% Henderson 100.0% Cloverdale 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 50.0% 12.5% 12.5% 25.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 373%' 50.0% 12.5% 100.0% Total 20.0% 30.0% 24.0% 26.0% 100.0% Total TSW 46.0% 22.0% 4.0% 100.0% Page / k.*' I 6. Students spend most of their time in heterogeneous groups, with homogenous grouping used selectively for special students needs. * School Crosstabulation % within School 6. Students spend most of their time in heterogeneous groups, with homogenous grouping used selectively for special students needs. Total a. Grade Level = 7th ,% within School a I-requently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 35.7% 57.1% 7.1% 100.0% Dunbar 40.0% 60.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 28.6% School Pulaski Heights 40.0% Henderson Cloverdale 33.3% Mabelvale 57.1% Total 38.0% 71.4% 30.0% 30.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 50.0% 16.7% 100.0% 42.9% 52.0% 8.0% 2.0% 100.0% 7. The Campus Leadership Team at my school meets regularly and keeps me informed. * School Crosstabulation a 100.0% /. I he Campus Leadership Team at my school meets regularly and keeps me informed. Total a. Grade Level = 7th hrequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 28.6% 50.0% 14.3% 7.1% 100.0% Dunbar SITW 40.0% 100.0% Forest Heights ' 57.1% 42.9% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights " 80.0% 20.0% 100.0% Henderson 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale ----- TS7K 50.0% 33.3% 100.0% Mabelvale sinrjr 12.5% 25.0% 12.5% 100.0% Total 47.1% 37.3% 11.8% 3.9% 100.0% 8. I engage in professional discussions concerning use of student achievement data and best practices of effective schools. * School Crosstabulation % within School 8. I engage in professional discussions concerning use of student achievement data and best practices of effective schools. Total ,'a. Grade Level = 7th hrequently Occasionally Seldom Mann 42.9% 50.0% 7.1% 100.0% Dunbar 100.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 40.0% School Pulaski Heights 60.0% Henderson Cloverdale Mabelvale Total 100.0% 16.7% 62.5% 53.1% 20.0% 40.0% 100.0% 40.0% 100.0% 100.0% 50.0% 33.3% 100.0% 25.0% 34.7% 12.5% 12.2% 100.0% 100.0% Page ( I ensure that classroom materials and supplies are developmentally appropriate directly support content and performance standards. * V School Crosstabulation %' within School i 9. I ensure that classroom materials and supplies are developmentally appropriate and directly support content and performance standards. Total________________ a. Grade Level = 7th hrequently Occasionally Mann 92.9% 7.1% 100.0% Dunbar 100.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 71.4% 28.6% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 80.0% 20.0% 100.0% Henderson Cloverdale Mabelvale Total 100.0% 100.0% 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% 62.5% 37.5% 100.0% 80.4% 19.6% 100.0% I 10. I received adequate training to implement the math curriculum for my grade level. * School Crosstabulation %, within School a School / ,1 1U. I received adequate training to implement the math curriculum for my grade level. Total________________ a. Grade Level = 7th hrequently Occasionally Seldom Mann 33.3% 66.7% 100.0% Dunbar 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 100.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale Mabelvale 100.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 100.0% Total 33.3% 50.0% 16.7% 1 100.0% II 11 Students worked productively as individuals and in pairs and groups to learn mathematics. * School Crosstabulation a 4A % within School School i ll. Students worked productively as individuals and in ' pairs and groups to , learn mathematics. Total ?. Grade Level = 7th hrequently Occasionally Mann 33.3% 66.7% 100.0% Dunbar 100.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Total 45.5% 54.5% 100.0% Page ) / I ( % within School 12. I emphasize written and oral communication in my math classroom. * School Crosstabulation a School 12. I emphasize written and oral communication in my math classroom. Total a. Grade Level = 7th Frequently Occasionally Mann 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% Dunbar 100.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 100.0% 100.0% Total 70.0% 30.0% 100.0% 13. The math curriculum is closely aligned with the high stakes Benchmark Exam given in Sth grade. * School Crosstabulation % within School School a 13. I he math curriculum is closely aligned with the high stakes Benchmark Exam given in Sth grade. Total a. Grade Level = 7th Frequently Occasionally Seldom Mann 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Dunbar 100.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 100.0% 100.0% 14. Instruction is significantly different in the reguair math classes and the pre-AP math classes. * School Crosstabulation % within School School Total 55.6% 22.2% 22.2% 100.0% 14. Instruction is significantly different in the reguair math classes and the pre-AP math classes. Total a. Grade Level = 7th frequently Occasionally Mann 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% Dunbar 100.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 100.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 100.0% 100.0% Total 54.5% 45.5% 100.0% Page 15. I had sufficient materials to implement the science curriculum. * School Crosstabulation a % within School School 15. I had sufficient materials to implement the science curriculum. t-requently Occasionally Seldom Mann 66.7% Dunbar 100.0% Pulaski Heights "50.0%' 50.0% Total a. Grade Level = 7th 33.3% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Total 50.0% 33.3% 16.7% 100.0% 16. I received adequate trainng to teach the science curriculum for my grade level. * School Crosstabulation % within School a / Schooi 16. I received adequate trainng to teach the science curriculum for my grade level. Total a. Grade Level = 7th l-requently Occasionally Mann 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% Dunbar 100.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 100.0% 100.0% Total 83.3% 16.7% 100.0% 17. Students learned important science concepts and inquiry skills through their engagement in the science program. * School Crosstabulation a % within School .V 1/. students learned important science concepts and inquiry skills through their .engagement in the ' science program. ! Total a. Grade Level = 7th l-requently Occasionally School -1 Mann 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% Dunbar 100.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 100.0% 100.0% Total 83.3% 16.7% 100.0% Page 4 (/ I 48. Students worked productively in cooperative groups to conduct science activities and investigations. * School Crosstabulation i% within School 4! a i School 18. Students worked productively in cooperative groups to conduct science activities and investigations. Total a. Grade Level = 7th hrequently Occasionally Mann 33.3% 66.7% 100.0% Dunbar 100.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Total 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 19. When requested, 1 received technical assistance related to the science program. * School Crosstabuiation % within School i a I School iy. When requested, I received technical assistance related to the science program. Total a. Grade Level = 7th hrequently Occasionally Seldom Mann 33.3% 33.3% 33.3% 100.0% Dunbar 100.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Total 50.0% 33.3% 16.7% 100.0% I 3'^ 20. I have seen an increase in my students' reading and writing skills. * School Crosstabulation a % within School 4 School 20. I have seen an increase in my students' reading and writing skills. Total a. Grade Level = 7th hrequently Occasionally Mann 100.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 100.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 100.0% 100.0% Henderson 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% Mabelvale 100.0% 100.0% Total 85.7% 14.3% 100.0% Page / I 21. I have improved my own reading and writing proficiency. * School Crosstabulation % within School School 21. I have improved my own reading and writing proficiency. Total a. Grade Level = 7fh Frequently Occasionally Mann 100.0% 100.0% % within School Forest Heights 100.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 100.0% 100.0% Henderson 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 33.3% 66.7% 100.0% Mabelvale 100.0% 100.0% 22. I have used a variety of grading techniques and sources. * School Crosstabulation Total 85.7% 14.3% 100.0% r a a School / 22. I have used a variety of grading techniques and sources. Total a. Grade Level = 7th hrequently Occasionally Mann 75.0% 25.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 100.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% Henderson 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 33.3% 66.7% 100.0% Mabelvale 100.0% 100.0% Total 64.3% 35.7% 100.0% 23. I have taught English skills through use ofthe mini-lessen with minimal worksheet/grammar exercise drills. * School Crosstabulation % within School a School 23. I have taught bngiish skills through use of the mini-lessen with minimal worksheet/grammar exercise drills. Total hrequently Occasionally Mann 75.0% 25.0% 100.0% ' a. Grade Level = 7th Forest Heights 100.0% Pulaski Heights 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Henderson Cloverdale Mabelvale Total 100.0% 100.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 84.6% 15.4% 100.0% Page I 1 i I 'I, 4 1 i 24. My students practice their English skills through cross-curriculum activities. * School Crosstabulation % within School School a 24. My students practice their English skills through cross-curriculum activities. Total a. Grade Level = 7th hrequently Occasionally Mann 75.0% 25.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 100.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% Henderson 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 100.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 100.0% 100.0% 25. In my class, I discuss other subject areas that apply to social studies topics. * School Crosstabulation % within School 25. In my class, I discuss other subject areas that apply to social studies topics. Total a. Grade Level = 7th hrequently Occasionally Seldom Mann 100.0% 100.0% School Total 57.1% 42.9% 100.0% Dunbar 100.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 100.0% Pulaski Heights 50.0% 50.0% Cloverdale 50.0% Mabelvale 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% 100.0% 50.0% 100.0% 100.0% 26. My students seem to know and respect experiences of diverse groups of people. * School Crosstabulation '% within School School Total 76.9% 15.4% 7.7% 100.0% a 26. My students seem to know and respect experiences of diverse groups of people. 'Total I a. Grade Level = 7th hrequently Occasionally Seldom Mann 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Dunbar 100.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 50.0% Pulaski Heights Cloverdale Mabelvale 66.7% 50.0% 100.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 33.3% 100.0% Total 46.2% 30.8% 23.1% 100.0% Page 27. With each unit of study I engage students in hands-on learning activities and projects. * School Crosstabulation %'within Schooi f School 2/. With each unit ot study I engage students in hands-on learning activities and projects. Total a. Grade Level = 7th Frequently Occasionally Seldom Mann 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Dunbar 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 33.3% 66.7% 100.0% Total 30.8% 53.8% 15.4% 100.0% 28. I use various resources and instructional materials when teaching about Arkansas history. * School Crosstabulation % within School a i I School t 28. I use various resources and instructional materials when teaching about Arkansas history. Total a. Grade Level = 7th l-requently Occasionally Mann 100.0% 100.0% Dunbar 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 100.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% Total 69.2% 30.8% 100.0% i u Al) 29. I assign and encourage students to read trade books about people, events, and places that have been studied. * School Crosstabulation % within School a A' J School 29. I assign and encourage students to read trade books a^out people, events, and places that have been studied. Total a. Grade Level = 7th Frequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 100.0% 100.0% 7 Dunbar 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 100.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 33.3% Total 23.1% 53.8% 33.3% 15.4% 33.3% 100.0% 7.7% 100.0% Page 2C I I ' Grade Level = ^th '-p' 1. The classroom activities are seen as relevant by the students and respond to diverse needs of a multi-cultural student body. * School Crosstabulation % within School a School i. I he classroom activities are seen as relevant by the students and respond to diverse needs of a multi-cultural student body. Total a. Grade Level = Sth hrequently Occasionally Seldom Mann 85.7% 14.3% 100.0% Forest Heights 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 50.0% 37.5% 12.5% 100.0% Henderson 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% Cloverdale 62.5% 25.0% 12.5% 100.0% Mabelvale 33.3% 50.0% 16.7% 100.0% Total 54.3% 34.3% 11.4% 100.0% I I i 2. I make appropriate use of active learning strategies, including appropriate use of computers, media, and cooperative group learning. * School Crosstabulation % within School a School A > , ?? X 4 2. I make appropnate use of active learning strategies, including appropriate use of computers, media, and cooperative group learning. Total a. Grade Level = Sth hrequently Occasionally Seldom Never >. - .t I Mann 57.1% 28.6% 14.3% 100.0% Forest Heights 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 62.5% 25.0% 12.5% 100.0% Henderson 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 50.0% 25.0% 12.5% 12.5% 100.0% Mabelvale 50.0% 33.3% 16.7% 100.0% Total 60.0% 22.9% 11.4% 5.7% 100.0% Page I t / A t 41' ,Y <1 4I '*. ' I ' I ,3. I frequently.take advantage of integrated "<VorttGmatic ^ching^methods to ensile students to make connections across the % within School 3. I frequently take advantage of integrated and/or thematic teaching methods to enable students to make connections across the curriculum. Total a. Grade Level = 8th I-requently Occasionally Seldom Never curriculum. * School Crosstabulation Mann 71.4% 28.6% 100.0% Forest Heights 66.7% Pulaski Heights 50.0% School Henderson 100.0% Cloverdale 25.0% Mabelvale 33.3% Total 51.4% 33.3% 37.5% 50.0% 25.0% 50.0% 37.1% 16.7% 8.6% 100.0% 12.5% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 2.9% 100.0% 4. I am currently utilizing flexable periods or blocks of time as needed to deliver thematic teaching and learning. * School Crosstabulation % within School a 4. I am currently utilizing flexable periods or blocks of time as needed to deliver thematic teaching and learning. Total a. Grade Level = 8th % within School hrequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 14.3% 28.6% 57.1% 100.0% Forest Heights 33.3% 33.3% 33.3% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 12.5% 12.5% 50.0% 25.0% 100.0% Henderson 33.3% 33.3% 33.3% 100.0% Cloverdale 37.5% 12.5% 25.0% 25.0% ___ 100.0% 5. Steps have been taken to create smaller learning environments. * School Crosstabulation '5. Steps have been .taken to create smaller learning environments. Total Grade Level = 8th hrequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 28.6% 28.6% 28.6% 14.3% 100.0% Forest Heights "33.3% 66.7% 100.0% Pulaski Heights ~12.5% 37.5% 25.0% 25.0% 100.0% School Henderson ----- 333% 66.7% Cloverdale 100.0% 37.5% 12.5% 50.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Total 20.0% 17.1% 37.1% 25.7% 100.0% a Mabelvale ----20% 40.0% 40.0% 100.0% Total 17.6% 35.3% 20.6% 26.5% 100.0% Page 2 / I ^bTStudenU spend most of their time in heterogeneous groups, with homogenous ' % within School B. Students spend most of their time in heterogeneous groups, with homogenous grouping used selectively for special students needs. Total a. Grade Level = Sth % Within School / l-requently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 28.6% 57.1% 14.3% 100.0% grouping used selectively for special students needs. * School Crosstabulation a Forest Heights 66.7% Pulaski Heights 37.5% School 37.5% 12.5% 33.3% 100.0% 12.5% 100.0% Henderson 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 12.5%' 50.0% 37.5% 100.0% Mabelvale 33.3% Total 37.1% 50.0% 40.0% 16.7% 17.1% 100.0% 7. The Campus Leadership Team at my school meets regularly and keeps me informed. * School Crosstabulation a 5.7% 100.0% I. I he Campus Leadership Team at my school meets regularly and keeps me informed. Total a. Grade Level = Sth l-requently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann "57.1% 28.6% 14.3% 100.0% Forest Heights 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 14.3% School 100.0% Henderson 33.3% 100.0% Cloverdale ----- 5575%- 37.5% 25.0% 12.5% 100.0% Mabelvale ------ 33.3% 100.0% 8, I engage in professional discussions concerning use of student achievement data and best practices of effective schools. * % within School U. I engage in professional discussions concerning use of student achievement data and best practices of effective schools. Total . a. Grade Level = Sth hrequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 57.1% 14.3% 28.6% 100.0% Forest Heights 66.7% 33.3% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 25.0% 50.0% 25.0% 100.0% Henderson 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 37.5% 37.5% 25.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 33.3% 66.7% 100.0% Total 58.8% 20.6% 17.6% 2.9% 100.0% School Crosstabulation" Total 45.7% 34.3% 14.3% 5.7% 100.0% Page <
. I ensure that classroom materials and directly support content and performance I sianoaros. " achool Crosstabulation ' % within School t y. I ensure that classroom materials and supplies are developmentally appropriate and directly support content and performance standards. Total a. Grade Level = Sth trequently Occasionally Seldom Mann 85.7% 14.3% 100.0% Forest Heights 66.7% Pulaski Heights 25.0% School Henderson Cloverdale Mabelvale Total 100.0% 50.0% 66.7% 60.0% 33.3% 75.0% 37.5% 12.5% 16.7% 16.7% 34.3% 5.7% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% I 10. I received adequate training to implement the math curriculum for my grade level. * School Crosstabulation a , % within School / 10. I received adequate training to implement the math curriculum for my grade level. Total a. Grade Level = Sth Frequently Occasionally Never Mann 100.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 503% 50.0% 100.0% Henderson 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 100.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Total 60.0% 30.0% 10.0% A 100.0% 11. Students worked productively as individuals and in pairs and groups to learn mathematics. * % within School School Crosstabulation 11. students worked i-requentiy productively as Mann Forest Heights Pulaski Heights School individuals and in pairs and groups to learn mathematics. Total a. Grade Level = Sth Occasionally Seldom Never 100.0% 100.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Henderson 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Total 30.0% 40.0% 20.0% 10.0% 100.0% Page I. 12. I emphasize written and oral communication in my math classroom. * School Crosstabulation , % within School ,1 School 12. I emphasize wntten and oral communication in my math classroom. Total a. Grade Level = Sth Frequently Occasionally Never Mann TOW 100.0% Forest Heights 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights "TOW 100.0% Henderson ---- TOW 100.0% Cloverdale SCTW 50.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Total >0.0% 20.0% 10.0% 100.0% , 1 I a 13. The math curriculum is closely aligned with the high stakes Benchmark Exam given in Sth grade. * School Crosstabulation % within School a School / Is. I he math curnculum is closely aligned with the high stakes Benchmark Exam given in Sth grade. Total a. Grade Level = Sth Frequently Occasionally Never Mann 100.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 50.0% Pulaski Heights 100.0% Henderson 100.0% Cloverdale 100.0% Mabelvale 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Total 40.0% 50.0% 10.0% 100.0% 14. Instruction is significantly different in the reguair math classes and the pre-AP math classes. * School Crosstabulation % within School a School .I' ! 14. Instruction is significantly different in the reguair math classes and the pre-AP math classes. Total a. Grade Level = Sth Frequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 100.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Henderson 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 100.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Total 30.0% 50.0% 10.0% 10.0% 100.0% Page I 4 ): ' % within School I , 15. I had sufficient materials to implement the 1 b. I had sutticient materials to implement the science curriculum. Total a. Grade Level = Sth Frequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% science curriculum. * School Crosstabulation a Forest Heights School Pulaski Heights Cloverdale 100.0% Mabelvale 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Total " 25.0% 25.0% 12.5% 37.5% 100.0% 16. I received adequate trainng to teach the science curriculum for my grade level. School Crosstabulation '% within School a IB. I received adequate trainng to teach the science curriculum for my grade level. Total a. Grade Level = Sth Hrequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 50.0% 50.0% Forest Heights 50.0% 100.0% 50.0% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale njo.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% Total " 37.5%' 37.5% 12.5% 12.5% 100.0% r w TT School C^cUbuMoh ' A) Within School a 1 f. Students learned important science concepts and inquiry skills through their engagement in the science program. Total a. Grade Level = Sth hrequently Occasionally Never y Mann 100.0% Forest Heights School Pulaski Heights 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 100.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 50.0% Total 57.1% 50.0% 28.6% 100.0% 14.3% 100.0% Page: k*
' )1' f' I 18. StudQhts^worked productively in cooperative groups to conduct science activities and investigations. * School Crosstabulation i % within School I 18. Students worked productively in cooperative groups to conduct science activities and investigations. Total a. Grade Level = Sth hrequently Occasionally Never Mann 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% a Forest Heights 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% School Pulaski Heights 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 100.0% 100.0% Mabelvale 50.0% Total 50.0% 50.0% 37.5% 100.0% - 19. When requested, I received technical assistance related to the science program. School Crosstabulation % within School I ia. When requested, I received technical assistance related to the science program. Total a. Grade Level = Sth % within School 12.5% 100.0% a Frequently Occasionally Seldom Never Mann 100.0% 100.0% Forest Heights School Pulaski Heights Cloverdale ---- TOITTOr Mabelvale 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Total 12.5% 50.0% 25.0% 12.5% 100.0% 20. I have seen an increase in my students reading and writing skills. * School Crosstabulation 2U. I have seen an increase in my students' reading and writing skills. Total a. Grade Level = Sth Frequently Occasionally Never Mann 77^0% 100.0% Forest Heights Pulaski Heights School Henderson TUTTW 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Cloverdale 5575^ 33.3% 100.0% Mabelvale ---- 57515^ 50.0% 100.0% Total "65.7% 25.0% 8.3% 100.0% Page i* I,' A' 4 <1 % within School 21. I have improved my own reading and writing proficiency. * School Crosstabulation 2i. I have improved my own reading and writing proficiency. Total a. Grade Level = Sth % within School t-requently Occasionally Never Mann 700.0% 100.0% Forest Heights 100.0% 100.0% Schooi Pulaski Heights "77)0.0% 100.0% Henderson ----- STTW 50.0% 100.0% Cloverdale ----TOTW 100.0% Mabelvale ---- STW 50.0% 100.0% Total 72.7% 18.2% 9.1% 100.0% 22. I have used a variety of grading techniques and sources. * School Crosstabulation a School 22. I have used a variety of grading techniques and sources. Total a. Grade Level = Sth l-requently Occasionally Never Mann 1oo.o% 100.0% Forest Heights 100.0% 100.0% Pulaski Heights 100.0% 100.0% Henderson 100^0% 100.0% Cloverdale 100.0% 100.0% Mabelvale SITW 50.0%
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.