Anchorage School District Profile of Performance and School Report Card to the Public 2006-2007

Anchorage School DistrictProfile of Performance

and School Report Card to the Public

2006-2007

Assessment and Evaluation Department

October 22, 2007

ASD Assessment & Evaluation Department 2October 22, 2007

Format of the Report

•Part I – District Information Overview Board Goal Performance

•Part II – School Information School Goals Demographics Student Academic Achievement


Data Reporting Points for Profile• Fall OASIS-data submission to EED with reports of our foundation average

daily membership (ADM) for the 20 school calendar days ending with the 4th Friday in October

• Participation File—data submission to EED with detailed student enrollment information as of the first day of testing (April)

• NCLB Summer Data Collection (Summer OASIS)—data submission to EED with detailed student data collection to support the annual submittal to the U.S. Dept. of Ed; data based upon enrollment for the school year (July 15 submittal)

• Report Card Data Submission—data submission to EED on the performance of each school in the district; supports annual report on the performance of school in the state to the Governor, the state legislature and the U.S. Dept. of Ed (July 15 submittal)

• SMS Year-End—data source from ASD’s system of record as of June 30th; data used for several reports and analyses; uses the last entry available for student


Race/Ethnic Distribution MembershipFall OASIS (p. 13)


Home Language (p.14)The number of families with English as a second language is increasing.


Socioeconomic Status of Students (p.15)

•Economically Disadvantaged Students (EDS): Eligible for Free and Reduced-Price Lunch Students included in the Alaska Temporary

Assistance Program (ATAP) file provided by the state

All Students in Provision 3 Schools Migrant Students Sibling Matches for all the above Students at McLaughlin, Child in Transition

Program and AVAIL

•37.3 percent of all ASD students were EDS in 2006-2007


Special Programs (pages 20-21)During 2006-2007:

1. Special Education Services: 8,431 students served2. Bilingual Program: 7,528 students eligible; 6,645 served3. Migrant Program: 1,820 students eligible; 1,100 served4. Title I Targeted Assistance: 111 students served5. Title I Schoolwide Program: 10,113 students served6. Homeless Program: 1,637 students served7. Neglected & Delinquent: 535 students served8. Title VII Indian Ed.: 7,000 students eligible; 2,176 served9. Gifted Program: 3,404 students served


Bilingual Data for 2006-2007 School Year


ASD Board Goal Indicators1- Increase achievement on the state measures of

academic performance2- Increase reading achievement of 3rd graders3- Increase the percentage of students in the

accelerated math sequence4- Decrease the dropout rate5- Increase the graduation rate6- Increase in the percentage of high school students

successfully completing higher-level courses7- Improve customer service and satisfaction8- Improve parent/guardian involvement9- Increase diversity in the work force


Board Goal Indicators•Some goals are reported looking at a status

comparison while others look at growth or a sequential cohort Status—looks at a subgroup, grade, or school’s level of

proficiency for a specific year or average of years. This level of proficiency is then compared to an established target (comparing last year’s 5th grade reading scores to this year’s 5th grade reading scores)

Growth—tracks achievement scores of the same students from one year to the next with the intent of determining whether or not the students have made progress (comparing this year’s 5th grade reading scores with the same students’ 4th grade reading scores)


Same grade (status) vs. Sequential Cohort (same students in sequential years)


Goal 1 - Indicator a-Language ArtsThe percentage of students scoring not proficient in

language arts and math will decrease by 10 percent in each AYP-designated student group.

Results (tables on pages 38 and 40): Language Arts – percent losses in not proficient for All

Students and in all designated student groups. Target not achieved at All Students category but was met by designated student groups of Black, Asian/Pacific Islander, Hispanic, EDS and LEP.

Math – percent losses in not proficient for All Students and in all designated student groups. Target achieved at All Students category and all designated student groups except Students with Disabilitites.


For Goal 1 – Indicator a:Year-to-Year Comparison of % Not Proficient in Language Arts


For Goal 1 – Indicator a:Year-to-Year Comparison of % Not Proficient in Mathematics


Goal 1 - Indicator b-ReadingIn a year-to-year comparison, the percentage of student

scoring proficient in reading on the Alaska Standards Based Assessment will increase by 2.5 percent in each AYP-designated student group in each grade 3-10.

Results (tables on pages 42-57): Gains made at the All Students category at all

grades 3-10 Percent gains ranged from 2.1 percent gained in

gr.4 to 8.4 percent gained in gr. 9 Grades 5 and 9 met the target at the All Students

category and in all of the designated student groups


Goal 1-Indicator b—Reading-Gr.3,4,5,62.5% increase


Goal 1-Indicator b—Reading-Gr.7,8,9,102.5% increase


Goal 1 - Indicator c-MathIn a year-to-year comparison, the percentage of student

scoring proficient in mathematics on the Alaska Standards Based Assessment will increase by 2.5 percent in each AYP-designated student group in each grade 3-10.

Results (tables on pages 58-73): Gains made at the All Students category at all

grades 3-10 Percent gains ranged from 1.05 percent gained

in gr. 4 to 13.28 percent gained in gr. 9 Grades 5, 7 and 8 met the target at the All

Students category and in all of the designated student groups


Goal 1-Indicator c—Math-Gr.3,4,5,62.5% increase


Goal 1-Indicator c—Math-Gr.7,8,9,102.5% increase


Goal 1 - Indicator d - MathIn a sequential cohort comparison, the percentage of

students scoring proficient in mathematics on the Alaska Standards Based Assessment in 8th grade will be greater than the percentage of those same students scoring proficient in 7th grade the previous year.

Results (tables on pages 74-75): Percentage point gains achieved in the All

Students category and all designated student groups

All groups achieved the target


For Goal 1 – Indicator d:Sequential Cohort Comparison of % Proficient in Mathematics Grade 7 to 8Increased percentage points


Achievement Gap

There are three ways to reduce the achievement gap:1. Both the identified group and the identified

comparison group have gains but the identified group has a greater gain than the comparison group (positive)

2. The identified group has a gain and the identified comparison group has a loss (negative)

3. The identified group and the identified comparison group both have losses but the loss of the comparison group is greater than the identified group (negative)


Achievement GapReduced Achievement Gap Increased Achievement Gap


Goal 1-Indicator e – Achievement GapEthnicity Student Groups

In a year-to-year comparison, the achievement gap in language arts and math will decrease significantly between each AYP-designated group and the White group, narrowing the achievement gap.

Results (tables on pages 76-79): In language arts, the achievement gap decreased between

each designated ethnic group and the White group. A significant decrease was achieved in the Black and Asian/Pacific Islander student groups.

In math, the achievement gap decreased between each designated ethnic group and the White group, except for Alaska Native/American Indian. The ethnic group that significantly decreased its achievement gap with the White group was the Asian/Pacific Islander.


For Goal 1 – Indicator e:Year-to-Year Comparison of Achievement Gap—Ethnicity Student Groups-Language ArtsDecrease Significantly


For Goal 1 – Indicator e:Year-to-Year Comparison of Achievement Gap—Ethnicity Student Groups-MathDecrease Significantly


Goal 1-Indicator f – Achievement GapEDS and non-EDSDecrease Significantly

In a year-to-year comparison, the achievement gap in language arts and math will decrease significantly between economically disadvantaged and non-economically disadvantaged students.

Results (tables on pages 80-83): In language arts, the achievement gap decreased

significantly. In math, the achievement gap decreased but was not

significantly significant.


Goal 1-Indicator f – Achievement GapLEP vs. Non-LEPDecrease Significantly

In a year-to-year comparison, the achievement gap in language arts and math will decrease significantly between limited English proficient and non-limited English proficient students.

Results (tables on pages 84-87): In language arts, the achievement gap decreased

significantly. In math, the achievement gap decreased significantly.


Goal 1-Indicator f – Achievement GapDisabled vs. Non-Disabled

In a year-to-year comparison, the achievement gap in language arts and math will decrease significantly between Disabled and Non-Disabled Students

Results (tables on pages 88-91): In language arts, the achievement gap increased between

the disabled and non-disabled students. In math, the achievement gap increased between the

disabled and the non-disabled students.


Goal 1 - Indicator g – Writing Content StrandsThe performance of the sequential cohort of students in 5th,

7th, and 9th grades will show a 2.5 percent increase in the percent proficient from the previous year on the writing content strand of Structures and Conventions of Writing

Results (tables on pages 92-97): Loss in mean scale score at the All Students category for all three

sequential cohorts Loss in mean scale score ranged from -1.37 for grade 4 to 5 to -

22.83 for grade 8 to 9


Goal 1 - Indicator g – Structures and Conventions of Writing2.5 percent increase


Goal 1 - Indicator g – Revision

The performance of the sequential cohort of students in 5th, 7th, and 9th grades will show a 2.5 percent increase in the percent proficient from the previous year on the writing content strand of Revision

Results (tables on pages 98-103): Loss in mean scale score at the All Students category for all three

sequential cohorts Loss in mean scale score ranged from -8.92 for grade 8 to 9 to

28.39 for grade 4 to 5


Goal 1 - Indicator g – Revision2.5 percent increase


3-yr. trend of percent proficient in writing by strands


HSGQE Performance-Gr. 12


TerraNova—Maintained or increased NCE scores at tested grades (5 and 7) on all subtests


3-yr. trend Reading (Status/Sequential Cohorts)


3-yr. trend Writing (Status/Sequential Cohorts)


3-yr. trend Math (Status/Sequential Cohorts)


3-yr. SBA Proficiency


Goal 2 - Indicator a—SBA Reading Gr.3

In a year-to-year comparison, the percentage of students scoring proficient in reading on the Alaska Standards Based Assessment will increase by 2.5 percent in each AYP-designated group in grade 3.

Results (tables on pages 134-135): Percent gains made for All students and all

designated student groups, except Asian/Pacific Islander.

Target achieved at the All Students category and in all designated student groups except Asian/Pacific Islander, White, LEP, Migrant and Female


For Goal 2 – Indicator a:Year-to-Year Comparison of Percent Proficient—3rd Grade SBA Reading2.5 percent increase


Goal 2 - Indicator b— DRA Gr.3

In a year-to-year comparison, the percentage of students scoring proficient in reading on the Development Reading Assessment will increase by 2.5 percent in each AYP-designated group in grade 3.

Results (tables on pages 136-137): Percent gain was not made at the All Student

category. Percent gains made by designated student

groups of Black, White, 2 or more races, Hispanic, EDS and Female.

Target was achieved in the designated student groups of Black and Hispanic.


For Goal 2 – Indicator b:Year-to-Year Comparison of Percent Proficient—3rd Grade DRA2.5 percent increase


Comparison of SBA and DRA


Goal 3 - Indicator a— Algebra I- Gr. 8

The percentage of students in each AYP-designated student group who successfully complete Algebra I in 8th grade or earlier with a grade of C or higher will increase by 5 percent in a year-to-year comparison.

Results (tables on pages 139-140): Percent gains for the All Students category and all

designated student groups except Alaska Native/American Indian, 2 or more races, Hispanic, Students with Disabilities and Migrant.

The target was achieved at the All Students category and in the designated student groups of Black, Asian/Pacific Islander, White, EDS, LEP and Female.

A 7.1 percent gain for All Students from previous school year


For Goal 3 – Indicator a:Accelerated Math Sequence—Algebra I Gr. 8 or Earlier5% increase


Goal 3 - Indicator 3b— Successful completion of Geometry or Algebra IIWhen compared to the baseline year of 2005-2006, the

District will increase the percentage of students still enrolled in the Anchorage School District who successfully completed Algebra I with a B or better in 8th grade or earlier and enrolled in Geometry or Algebra II in 9th grade and successfully completed the course with a C or higher.

Results (tables on pages 141-142): The percentage of students who successfully completed

Algebra I by gr. 8 or earlier and successfully completed Geometry or Algebra II in gr. 9 decreased or did not change for the All Students category and all of the designated student groups except Asian/Pacific Islander and White.


For Goal 3 – Indicator b: Successful completion of Geometry or Algebra IIIncrease percentage


Goal 4 - Indicator a—Dropout RateThe dropout rate of 7th through 12th grade students will decrease

by 5 percent in each AYP-designated group in a year-to-year comparison across the District and in each school.

Results (tables on pages 145-208): District level had decreases for All Students and in all designated student

groups except Black, Asian/Pacific Islander, 2 or more races, Students with Disabilities, LEP and Migrant.

The All Student category as well as 5 student groups achieved the target at the district level—White, Hispanic, EDS, Male and Female.

At the individual school level the target was achieved for the All Students category by 13 of the 31 schools who serve students in grades 7-12 and have a dropout rate —Girdwood, Goldenview, Northern Lights, Wendler, Chugiak, Dimond, Service, South, ASSDHH, Family Partnership, Frontier, Highland Tech and Polaris.

Dropout rate for 2006-2007was 5.10% compared to 5.78% for 2005-2006 School level data fluctuates greatly with a change in a few students when

the cell sizes are small


For Goal 4 – Indicator a:Dropout Rates5% decrease


For Goal 4 – Indicator a:Dropout Rates—ASD Calculation


For Goal 4 – Indicator a:Dropout Rate—EED Calculation


For Goal 4 – Indicator a:Dropout Rate—Comparison of EED and ASD Calculations


Dropout reasons reported by grade and district


Goal 5 - Indicator a—Graduation RateThe graduation rate will increase by 5 percent from year-to-year

in each AYP-designated student group across the District and in each school.

Results (tables on pages 213-254): District level had percent gains for All Students and in all designated

student groups except Hispanic and Migrant. Target not met at All Students category but met in the designated student

groups of Alaska Native/American Indian, 2 or more races, EDS, Students with Disabilities and LEP.

District graduation rate for 2006-2007 was 64.99% compared to 63.91% in 2005-2006

Target achieved at the All Students category by 10 of the 20 schools that have reported graduation rates. Schools that met the target at the All Students category were ASSDHH, AVAIL, Crossroads, Family Partnership, Frontier, Highland Tech, McLaughlin, SAVE, Steller and Whaley.


For Goal 5 – Indicator a:Graduation Rates5% increase


4-yr. history of graduation rates by school


For Goal 5 – Graduation RatesReporting Direction: Grade 9 students on track to graduateEstablish Baseline


Goal 6 - Indicator a—TerraNova CAT/6The District will maintain or increase the percent of

students scoring in the 4th quartile (76-99 percent) on the TerraNova CAT/6 in grades 5 and 7.

Results (tables on pages 257-268): Percentage points were gained in all subjects (reading,

language, and math) in both grades tested


Goal 6 - Indicator a – 4th quartile TerraNova CAT/6—Grade 5Maintain or increase


Goal 6 - Indicator a – 4th quartile TerraNova CAT/6—Grade 7Maintain or Increase


Goal 6 - Indicator b—PSATThere will be at least a 5 percent increase in each

AYP-designated student group in the number of students taking the PSAT in a year-to-year comparison. The 2005-2006 school year will establish the baseline.

Results (table on page 269): The target at the overall student category was not met. The designated student groups of White and Male had

percent gains from the previous year. When comparing the numbers in the designated student

groups who took the PSAT in 2005-2006, only the designated student group of White met the target of at least a 5 percent increase.


For Goal 6 – Indicator b:PSAT5% increase


Goal 6 - Indicator c—AP CoursesThere will be at least a 5 percent increase in each AYP-

designated student group in the percent of high school students who successfully complete AP courses in a year-to-year comparison. “Successfully complete” is defined as passing the AP course with a grade of C or higher.

Results (table on page 271-272): There were percent gains for All Students and in all

designated student groups except Black, Asian/Pacific Islander, Hispanic, EDS, Students with Disabilities, LEP and Migrant

Target achieved at the All Student category and the designated student groups of Alaska Native/American Indian, White, 2 or more races and Male.


For Goal 6 – Indicator c:AP Courses5% increase


Goal 6 – Reporting DirectionThere will be an increase in the percent of students in each AYP-

designated student group who take the College Board AP examination that have successfully completed the AP course with a C or higher.

Results (table on page 273-274): There were percent increases and the target was met in

the All Students category as well as the designated student groups of Alaska Native/American Indian, White, 2 or more races, Migrant, Male and Female.


For Goal 6 – Reporting DirectionCollege Board AP ExamsIncrease


Number of AP Courses Completed


Anchorage AP Test Performance by District and School


ACT and SAT Scores Above State and National Averages


Goal 7 - Indicator —Customer SatisfactionWhen compared to the baseline year of 2005-2006, the District

will increase the survey response rate and the Respectful Climate factor score measured in the student, staff and parent/guardian climate survey at the District and division levels.

Results (tables on pages 282-284): An increase in the response rate was achieved on the parent/guardian

survey for all categories—elementary, middle school, high school, alternative/charter and district.

The student and staff survey response rates declined in all of the categories.

There was an increase in the mean score of the respondents on the Respectful Climate factor at the student level in all categories.

There was in increase in the mean score of the respondents on the Respectful Climate factor at the parent/guardian level in all categories.

There was in increase in the mean score of the respondents on the Respectful Climate factor at the staff level in all categories except the middle school which stayed the same.


For Goal 7 – Indicator a:Customer Service-Climate Survey Response RatesIncrease


For Goal 7 – Indicator a:Customer Service—Respectful ClimateIncrease


Goal 8 – Indicator a —Parent/Guardian InvolvementWhen compared to the baseline year of 2005-2006, the

Parent/Guardian and Community Involvement Factor score reported in the staff climate survey will increase at the District and division levels.

Results (table on page 285): From the 2006-2007 Climate Staff Survey all categories (elementary,

middle school, high school, alternative/charter and district) had an increase in the mean scale score of respondents on the parent/guardian and community involvement factor.


For Goal 8 – Indicator a:Parent/Guardian Involvement—Staff Climate SurveyIncrease


Goal 8 – Indicator b —Parent/Guardian InvolvementAn additional question specific to parent/guardian involvement

will be added to the 2006-2007 survey and it will be combined with other questions to report a Parent/Guardian and Community Involvement Factor score. The 2006-2007 school year established the baseline.

Results (table on page 286): Baseline was established during the 2006-2007 school year.


For Goal 8 – Indicator b:Parent/Guardian Involvement-Parent/Guardian Climate SurveyEstablish Baseline


Goal 9 —Increase diversity in the work forceIn a year-to-year comparison, the district will increase the

percent of non-White employees in the overall work force.

Results (table on page 299): Employees of color accounted for 20% of the overall work force reported

in both years Percent undeclared dropped from 2005-2006 Percent of Hispanic and Asian Pacific Islander employees increased by one

percentage point Percentages for Alaska Native/American Indian and Black employees

remained the same


Goal 9 —Increase diversity in the work forceIncrease


2007 SBA Results Compared to State


TerraNova Quartile Percentages—Gr.5


TerraNova Quartile Percentages—Gr.7


Status AYP 2005-2006


Status AYP 2006-2007


Growth AYP 2006-2007


Overall Summary of ASD Board Goal Indicators—Strengths


Overall Summary of ASD Board Goal Indicators—Challenges


Contact InformationThe complete Profile of Performance is available on

the ASD Web site:

www.asdk12.org/depts/assess_eval/pop0607.asp

For more information, contact us: Laurel Vorachek

(907) 742-4427 email: [email protected]

Xiaogeng Sun (907) 742-4884 email:

[email protected] Kristine Liebner

(907) 742-4425 email: [email protected]

http://www.asdk12.org/depts/assess_eval/pop0607.asp

mailto:[email protected]


Thank you to the staff of theAssessment & Evaluation

Department:

Kristine Liebner, Eugene Geller, Teresa Welch, Sharon

Brewer,Julie Melson, Ria Stevens and

Dr. Xiaogeng Sun

…..and Marie Ochadleus from IT…for your hard work and long

hours.

Anchorage School District Profile of Performance and School Report Card to the Public 2006-2007

Documents

Transcript of Anchorage School District Profile of Performance and School Report Card to the Public 2006-2007