lodi unified school district
DESCRIPTION
Lodi Unified School District. Accountability Progress Report (APR) & CAHSEE 2009-10 Results Update. Prepared for the September 21, 2010 Board of Education by the LUSD Assessment, Research & Evaluation Department. Executive Summary – Academic Performance Index (API). - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Lodi Unified School District
Accountability Progress Report (APR) & CAHSEE
2009-10 Results Update
Prepared for the September 21, 2010 Board of Educationby the LUSD Assessment, Research & Evaluation Department
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 2
Executive Summary – Academic Performance Index (API)The API is the state’s accountability system and its
focus is on how much schools are improving academically from year-to-year.
LUSD’s 2010 Growth API was 737, representing an increase of 10 points compared to the 2009 Base API of 727; California’s API was 767, representing an increase of 13 points.
31 district schools met their school-wide API targets 20 of these schools met all of their subgroup API
targetsNine of the 10 800+ schools from last year maintained
an 800+ ranking. One additional school achieved the 800 mark
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 3
Executive Summary – Academic Performance Index (API) There were strong API gains at 26 schools:
5 schools went up 40 or more points Elementary Schools – Beckman, Lakewood CDS Middle Schools – Henderson CDS High Schools – Independence, Liberty
2 schools went up 30-39 points Elementary Schools – Needham Middle Schools - McAuliffe
8 schools went up 20-29 points Elementary Schools – Heritage, Larson, Lawrence, Oakwood,
Podesta Ranch, Silva, Sutherland High Schools – Bear Creek
11 schools went up 10-19 points Elementary Schools – Adams, Borchardt, Creekside, Davis,
Live Oak, Nichols, Vinewood, Woodbridge Middle Schools – Lodi High Schools – Lodi, McNair
See Appendix A for a complete list of schools by 2010 API growth
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 4
Executive Summary – Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) The AYP is the Federal accountability system, and its focus is
on school performance, regardless of growth or baseline data. AYP calculations will be revised in November 2010 to include
the new California Modified Assessment results for students with disabilities in grades 7 through 11.
LUSD made positive API growth and positive growth in AYP/English Language Arts and AYP/Mathematics for the sixth consecutive year.
A total of 46.6% of the students in LUSD performed at or above the Proficient level in English Language Arts; the 2010 AYP target was 56.0%.
A total of 47.7% of the students in LUSD performed at or above the Proficient level in Mathematics; the 2010 AYP target was 56.4%
A total of 2 Title I Program Improvement schools (Beckman and Lawrence) met 100% of their AYP criteria.
*Per the CDE exclusionary rules, AYP proficiency calculations only include grade 2-8 Standardized Testing and Reporting program and grade 10 California High School Exit Exam results, and excludes results for students who enrolled after the first week of October and for English Learner students enrolled for less than 12 months.
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 5
Executive Summary – AYP
Since 2007, the achievement gap between White students and African American students has widened in English Language Arts and Mathematics.
Over this same time period, the achievement gap between White students and Hispanic students has narrowed in English Language Arts and in Mathematics.
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 6
Executive Summary – AYP AYP Percent Proficient Criteria
46.6% of LUSD students were proficient in English Language Arts in 2010, representing a 1-year increase of .9 points and a 2-year increase of 8.6 points.
47.7% of LUSD students were proficient in Mathematics in 2010, representing a 1-year increase of .1 points and a 2-year increase of 4.5 points.
10 schools met all AYP targets with 1 additional school “pending” until the graduation rate is completed
The number of AYP Criteria LUSD met decreased from 39 of 46 in 2008 to 30 of 46 in 2010 due to the increased proficiency targets (see next slide).
2008 Missed Criteria 2009 Missed Criteria 2010 Missed Criteria
English Language Arts – Percent Proficient
African American Students
Hispanic Students
Economically Disadvantaged Students
English Learners
Students with Disabilities
Mathematics – Percent Proficient
African American Students
Students with Disabilities
English Language Arts – Percent Proficient
African American Students
Hispanic or Latino Students
Economically Disadvantaged Students
English Learners
Students with Disabilities
Mathematics – Percent Proficient
African American Students
Hispanic or Latino Students
Pacific Islander Students
Economically Disadvantaged Students
English Learners
Students with Disabilities
Graduation Rate
English Language Arts – Percent Proficient
Districtwide
African American Students
American Indian/Alaska Native Students
Asian Students
Hispanic or Latino Students
Economically Disadvantaged Students
English Learners
Students with Disabilities
Mathematics – Percent Proficient
Districtwide
African American Students
Asian Students
Hispanic or Latino Students
Pacific Islander Students
Economically Disadvantaged Students
English Learners
Students with Disabilities
Graduation Rate - Pending
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 7
Executive Summary – AYP Proficiency Targets
EL
A
23
.0%
EL
A
23
.0%
EL
A
23
.0%
EL
A
56
.0%
EL
A
67
.0%
EL
A
78
.0%
EL
A
89
.0%
EL
A
10
0.0
%
Mat
h
12
.8%
Mat
h
12
.8%
Mat
h
12
.8%
Mat
h
23
.7%
Mat
h
23
.7%
Mat
h
23
.7%
Mat
h
56
.4%
Mat
h
67
.3%
Mat
h
78
.2%
Mat
h
89
.1%
Mat
h
10
0.0
%
EL
A
34
.0%
EL
A
12
.0%
EL
A
12
.0%
EL
A
12
.0%
ELA
45.0%
Mat
h
34
.6%
Math
45.5%
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
90.00%
100.00%
20
01
-02
20
02
-03
20
03
-04
20
04
-05
20
05
-06
20
06
-07
20
07
-08
20
08
-09
20
09
-10
20
10
-11
20
11
-12
20
12
-13
20
13
-14
ELA
Math
English Language Arts Targets
Mathematics Targets
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 8
Executive Summary – Next Steps
APR information is shared with district and site leadership teams.
Site specific information is used by the Educational Services Division for program monitoring and assistance efforts. Graduation rate
Information is used to develop and guide systemic program improvement efforts.
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 9
Overview of California’s Accountability Reporting System
The California Department of Education (CDE) uses the Accountability Progress Report (APR) to report LUSD’s: Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) results for
federal accountability, and Academic Performance Index (API) results for
state accountability.
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 10
Overview of California’s Accountability Reporting SystemDifference Between API and AYP API results focus on how much schools are improving
academically from year-to-year. Results are reported using scores ranging from 200 to 1000. California’s expectation is that every school will annually
make-up at least 5% of the difference between their base API and the statewide performance target of 800.
AYP results focus on school performance, regardless of growth or baseline data. Results are reported in terms of the:
Participation rate for English Language Arts and Mathematics Annual Measureable Objective (AMO) - percent proficient* in
English Language Arts and Mathematics API as an other indicator Graduation rate as an other indicator
*See Safe Harbor Slide
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 11
Overview of California’s Accountability Reporting System Safe Harbor is an alternate method of
meeting the Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs). Specifically, if a school, an LEA, or a subgroup
does not meet its AMO criteria in either or both content areas and shows significant progress in moving students from scoring below the proficient level to the proficient level or above on the assessments, AYP may be achieved.
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 12
Overview of California’s Accountability Reporting System
Tests Used in Calculating the API and AYP
Test Academic Performance Index (API) Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
California Standards Test (CST)
Grade 2-11
English Language Arts, Mathematics, Science, and History-Social Science (Heavily Weighted test)
Grades 2-8
English Language Arts and Mathematics(Heavily weighted test)
California Alternate Performance Assessment (CAPA)
Students with Disabilities in Grades 2-11
English Language Arts, Mathematics and Science
Grades 2-8, and 10
English Language Arts and Mathematics
California Modified Assessment (CMA)
Students with Disabilities in Grades 3-8
English Language Arts, Mathematics, Science and History-Social Science
Grades 3-8
English Language Arts, Mathematics and Science
California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE)
Grade 10 (and 11 and 12 if passed)
English Language Arts and Mathematics
Score of 350 = Passed = 1000
Grade 10
English Language Arts and Mathematics
Score of 380 – Proficient (Heavily weighted test)
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 13
Overview of California’s Accountability Reporting System
Yearly AYP targets for LUSD
YearParticipation
Rate
Percent Proficient – English
Language Arts
Percent Proficient –
Mathematics
API or growth of at least 1
point
Graduation rate or average growth of
at least 0.1 percentage point
2002 to 2004 95 12 12.8 560 82.8
2005 to 2007 95 23 23.7 590 82.9
2008 95 34 34.6 620 83.0
2009 95 45 45.5 650 83.1
2010 95 56 56.4 680 83.2
2011 95 67 67.3 710 83.3
2012 95 78 78.2 740 83.4
2013 95 89 89.1 770 83.5
2014 95 100 100 800 83.6
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 14
High Achieving Comparative Districts
In 2008 high achieving comparative districts were selected using the following criteria: District type Size of English Learner population Size of Economically Disadvantaged population
Alhambra, Garden Grove, and San Francisco were selected
Comparing our results along with the results of these high achieving districts highlights available growth opportunities for our district related to API and AYP.
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 15
Academic Performance Index680 Total Points or Growth of At Least 1 Point Improvement
to Meet 2010 AYP Criteria
696
710
720
729
737
762
766
782
804
814
755
763
771
777
791
756
766
778
792
802
720
728
742
755
767
200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Lodi USD Alhambra USD San Francisco USD Garden Grove USD State of California2010 API includes:# tested: 21,568%EL: 35.5%SED: 64.8
2010 API includes:# tested: 13,756%EL: 43.1%SED: 67.3
2010 API includes:# tested: 37,232%EL: 41.4%SED: 59.6
2010 API includes:# tested: 35,545%EL: 47.0%SED: 61.2
2010 API includes:# tested: 4,676,660%EL: 33.1%SED: 56.8
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 16
Adequate Yearly Progress - English Language Arts56.0% Proficient Needed to Meet 2010 Criteria
37.0
38.0
40.8
45.4
46.6
54.4
54.4
56.6
61.6
64.0
51.0
52.1
53.2
56.4
58.3
47.1
47.3
50.8
53.9
55.4
44.8
45.5
48.2
52.0
55.0
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Lodi USD Alhambra USD San Francisco USD Garden Grove USD State of California
2010 AYP Includes: # Enrolled: 18,121 %EL: 35.7 %SES: 64.5
2010 AYP Includes: # Enrolled: 10,363 %EL: 41.7 %SES: 64.3
2010 AYP Includes: # Enrolled: 31,064 %EL: 42.1 %SES: 60.2
2010 AYP Includes: # Enrolled: 29,751 %EL: 53.1 %SES: 60.7
2010 AYP Includes: # Enrolled: 3,759,414 %EL: 34.1 %SES: 58.2
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 17
Adequate Yearly Progress - Mathematics56.4% Proficient Needed to Meet 2010 Criteria
42.4
43.2
45.5
47.4
47.7
62.3
62.3
64.0
68.9
70.5
57.0
58.4
59.8
60.8
62.8
56.4
55.3
56.8
61.6
66.4
48.0
48.5
51.0
54.2
57.3
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Lodi USD Alhambra USD San Francisco USD Garden Grove USD State of California
2010 AYP Includes: # Enrolled: 18,115 %EL: 35.7 %SES: 64.5
2010 AYP Includes: # Enrolled: 10,361 %EL: 41.7 %SES: 64.3
2010 AYP Includes: # Enrolled: 31,092 %EL: 42.1 %SES: 60.2
2010 AYP Includes: # Enrolled: 29,750 %EL: 53.1 %SES: 60.7
2010 AYP Includes: # Enrolled: 3,759,137 %EL: 34.1 %SES: 58.2
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 18
Subgroup Performance Based on API
Subgroups with a positive 2010 API growth that exceeded the district’s overall growth of 10 points: Asian (+19), African American (+18), Students with Disabilities (+17), and Economically Disadvantaged (+15).
Subgroups with a positive 2010 API growth that did not exceed the districts overall growth: Filipino (+10), Hispanic or Latino (+10), White (+9), Pacific Islander (+8), and English Learner (+8).
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 19
Achievement Gap Update Based on API Growth The achievement gap between White
students and African American students narrowed by 7 points.
The achievement gap between White students and Hispanic students was unchanged.
The achievement gap between all LUSD students and students with disabilities narrowed by 7 points.
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 20
LUSD Academic Performance IndexSubgroup Performance
2010 API Growth
10
18
19
10
8
9
15
8
17
10
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
LUSD AfricanAmerican
AmericanIndian
Asian Filipino Hispanic Pacific Islander White EconomicallyDisadvantaged
EnglishLearner
Students WithDisabilities
(21,568) (1,767) (138) (3,775) (1,141) (8,314) (180) (5,985) (13,970) (7,653) (2,689)
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 21
Subgroup Performance Based on AYP
From 2009 to 2010, there were proficiency increases in English Language Arts for every numerically significant subgroup except for African American which remained constant.
From 2009 to 2010, there were proficiency increases in Mathematics for every numerically significant subgroup except for African American and Pacific Islander.
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 22
LUSD Adequate Yearly Progress - English Language Arts Subgroup Performance for 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010
56.0% Proficient Needed to Meet 2010 Criteria
26.7
46.5
37.7
52.4
27.4
34.7
52.4
26.8
24.2
17.4
28.3
51.3
42.8
55.4
30.0
37.6
55.0
30.0
26.7
22.0
33.2
51.8
46.9
57.6
35.5
43.5
59.2
35.5
31.0
26.1
33.2
41.2
50.2
61.6
36.7
41.8
60.6
37.6
31.5
27.7
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0
African American
American Indian
Asian
Filipino
Hispanic
Pacif ic Islander
White
Economically Disadvantaged
English Learner
Students With Disabilities
Percent of students performing at or above the Proficient Level
2007 2008 2009 2010
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 23
LUSD Adequate Yearly Progress - MathematicsSubgroup Performance for 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010
56.4% Proficient Needed to Meet 2010 Criteria
28.1
46.4
48.6
57.7
34.6
40.7
53.0
35.2
35.4
23.7
28.9
50.0
23.5
59.4
36.1
41.4
55.8
37.0
37.4
27.5
30.9
47.7
54.3
58.1
39.2
42.8
57.6
39.8
39.3
30.0
29.0
49.1
55.6
62.5
39.7
41.8
57.7
40.7
39.5
31.0
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0
African American
American Indian
Asian
Filipino
Hispanic
Pacific Islander
White
Economically Disadvantaged
English Learner
Students With Disabilities
Percent of students performing at or above the Proficient Level
2007 2008 2009 2010
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 24
Achievement Gap Update Based on AYP – Percent of Proficient Students From 2007 to 2010, the achievement gap
between White students and African American students widened by 1.7 points in English Language Arts and 3.8 points in Mathematics.
From 2007 to 2010, the achievement gap between White students and Hispanic students narrowed by 1.1 points in English Language Arts and 0.4 points in Mathematics.
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 25
LUSD Achievement Gap Between White and African American StudentsAdequate Yearly Progress - English Language Arts
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0 P
erc
en
t o
f stu
de
nts
pe
rfo
rmin
g a
t o
r
ab
ove
the
Pro
ficie
nt l
eve
l
White 42.8 43.3 49.0 52.9 52.4 55.0 59.2 60.6
African American 17.3 17.2 20.7 24.0 26.7 28.3 33.2 33.2
Achievement Gap 25.5 26.1 28.3 28.9 25.7 26.7 26.0 27.4
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 26
LUSD Achievement Gap Between White and African American StudentsAdequate Yearly Progress - Mathematics
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0 P
erc
en
t o
f stu
de
nts
pe
rfo
rmin
g a
t o
r
ab
ove
th
e P
roficie
nt le
ve
l
White 45.4 46.3 49.0 53.6 53.0 55.8 57.6 57.7
African American 17.4 16.4 20.7 25.1 28.1 28.9 30.9 29.0
Achievement Gap 28.0 29.9 28.3 28.5 24.9 26.9 26.7 28.7
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 27
LUSD Achievement Gap Between White and Hispanic StudentsAdequate Yearly Progress - English Language Arts
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0 P
erc
en
t o
f stu
de
nts
pe
rfo
rmin
g a
t o
r
ab
ove
th
e P
roficie
nt le
ve
l
White 42.8 43.3 49.0 52.9 52.4 55.0 59.2 60.6
Hispanic 17.0 18.2 22.6 25.7 27.4 30.0 35.5 36.7
Achievement Gap 25.8 25.1 26.4 27.2 25.0 25.0 23.7 23.9
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 28
LUSD Achievement Gap Between White and Hispanic StudentsAdequate Yearly Progress - Mathematics
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0 P
erc
en
t o
f stu
de
nts
pe
rfo
rmin
g a
t o
r
ab
ove
th
e P
roficie
nt le
ve
l
White 45.4 46.3 49.0 53.6 53.0 55.8 57.6 57.7
Hispanic 23.5 24.6 28.8 32.8 34.6 36.1 39.2 39.7
Achievement Gap 21.9 21.7 20.2 20.8 18.4 19.7 18.4 18.0
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 29
2010 CAHSEE ResultsGrade 10 First Time Test Takers
Overall English Language Arts Results English Language Arts - A total of 79% of LUSD
Grade 10 students passed the English Language Arts (ELA) sub-test in 2010. The 2010 school year represented the second year in a row that there was an increase in the percent of LUSD students passing this sub-test.
LUSD’s 2010 passing rate was – higher than San Joaquin County’s passing rate by 1
percentage point, and lower than California’s passing rate by 2 percentage
points.
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 30
2010 CAHSEE ResultsGrade 10 First Time Test Takers
Overall Mathematics Results Math - A total of 78% of LUSD Grade 10
students passed the Math sub-test in 2010. After maintaining a passing rate of 79% on the Math sub-test from 2007 to 2009, this passing rate represented a slight decrease in scores for this sub-test.
LUSD’s 2010 passing rate was – higher than San Joaquin County’s passing rate by 1
percentage point, and lower than California’s passing rate by 3 percentage
points.
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 31
California High School Exit Examination English Language Arts
Percent of Students Who Passed by Academic YearAll Grade 10 Students
75% 74%78% 79% 78% 81%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2007 LodiUSD
2008 LodiUSD
2009 LodiUSD
2010 LodiUSD
2010 SanJoaquin Co.
2010 California
California High School Exit Examination Mathematics
Percent of Students Who Passed by Academic YearAll Grade 10 Students
79% 79% 79% 78% 77%81%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2007 Lodi USD 2008 Lodi USD 2009 Lodi USD 2010 Lodi USD 2010 San JoaquinCo.
2010 California
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 32
2010 CAHSEE ResultsGrade 10 First Time Test Takers
Achievement Gap between White and African American Students
From 2007 to 2010, the achievement gap on the CAHSEE between White and African American students has been narrowing in ELA and Math. On the ELA sub-test, the passing rate increased by 3
percentage points for White students and increased by 10 percentage points for African American students. This represents a narrowing in the CAHSEE ELA achievement gap by 7 percentage points.
On the Math sub-test, the passing rate increased by 1 percentage point for White students and increased by 6 percentage points for African American students. Again, this represents a narrowing in the CAHSEE Math achievement gap by 5 percentage points.
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 33
2010 CAHSEE ResultsGrade 10 First Time Test Takers
Achievement Gap between White and Hispanic or Latino Students
From 2007 to 2010, the achievement gap on the CAHSEE between White and African American students has been narrowing in ELA and widening in Math. On the ELA sub-test, the passing rate increased by 3
percentage points for White students and increased by 6 percentage points for Hispanic or Latino students. This represents a narrowing in the CAHSEE ELA achievement gap by 3 percentage points.
On the Math sub-test the passing rate increased by 1 percentage point for White students and decreased by 4 percentage points for Hispanic or Latino students. This represents a widening in the CAHSEE Math achievement gap by 5 percentage points.
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 34
California High School Exit Examination English Language Arts
Percent of Students Who Passed by Academic YearGrade 10 Students by Ethnic Student Groups
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2007 Lodi USD 68% 58% 74% 89% 67% 75% 86%
2008 Lodi USD 75% 63% 72% 87% 61% 56% 89%
2009 Lodi USD 66% 77% 92% 70% 67% 88%
2010 Lodi USD 68% 80% 73% 56% 89% 88%
2010 San Joaquin Co. 78% 68% 81% 89% 71% 78% 88% 67%
2010 California 79% 71% 91% 92% 73% 80% 91% 82%
American Indian or Alaska
African American
Asian FilipinoHispanic or Latino
Pacific Islander
WhiteTwo or more races
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 35
California High School Exit Examination Mathematics
Percent of Students Who Passed by Academic YearGrade 10 Students by Ethnic Student Groups
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2007 Lodi USD 54% 80% 83% 90% 74% 73% 87%
2008 Lodi USD 57% 82% 84% 91% 69% 59% 89%
2009 Lodi USD 60% 81% 94% 72% 87% 89%
2010 Lodi USD 60% 85% 70% 69% 88% 78%
2010 San Joaquin Co. 64% 77% 85% 89% 70% 88% 88% 61%
2010 California 67% 78% 95% 92% 74% 80% 91% 81%
African American
American Indian or Alaska
Asian FilipinoHispanic or Latino
Pacific Islander
WhiteTwo or more races
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 36
Appendix A
API Results by School
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 37
Appendix A
Growth from 2009 Base to 2010 Growth APIElementary Schools
(40)
(30)
(20)
(10)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Lake
woo
d C
omm
unity
Day
Bec
kman
Ele
men
tary
Cly
de W
. N
eedh
am E
lem
enta
ry
Elle
rth
E. L
arso
n E
lem
enta
ry
Sut
herla
nd E
lem
enta
ry
Pod
esta
Ran
ch E
lem
enta
ry
Her
itage
Ele
men
tary
Oak
woo
d E
lem
enta
ry
Law
renc
e E
lem
enta
ry
Man
lio S
ilva
Ele
men
tary
Ans
el A
dam
s
Vin
ewoo
d E
lem
enta
ry
Dav
is E
lem
enta
ry
Lero
y N
icho
ls E
lem
enta
ry
Woo
dbrid
ge
Cre
eksi
de E
lem
enta
ry
Live
Oak
Ele
men
tary
Lois
E.
Bor
char
dt E
lem
enta
ry
Hou
ston
Joe
Ser
na J
r. C
hart
er
Erm
a B
. Ree
se E
lem
enta
ry
Geo
rge
Linc
oln
Mos
her
Vic
tor
Ele
men
tary
Tok
ay C
olon
y E
lem
enta
ry
John
Mui
r Ele
men
tary
Wag
ner-
Hol
t E
lem
enta
ry
Lock
efor
d E
lem
enta
ry
Par
klan
e E
lem
enta
ry
Julia
Mor
gan
Ele
men
tary
Geo
rge
Was
hing
ton
Ele
men
tary
Wes
twoo
d E
lem
enta
ry
Lake
woo
d E
lem
enta
ry
Cla
irmon
t E
lem
enta
ry
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 38
Appendix A
Growth from 2009 Base to 2010 Growth APIMiddle Schools
(10)
0
10
20
30
40
50
HendersonCommunity Day
Christa McAuliffeMiddle
Lodi Middle Elkhorn Millswood Middle Morada Middle Delta SierraMiddle
043 Accountability Progress Report Update _ September 2010 39
Appendix A
Growth from 2009 Base to 2010 Growth APIHigh Schools
(30)
(20)
(10)
0
10
20
30
40
50
Independence Liberty High Bear CreekHigh
Lodi High Ronald E.McNair High
Tokay High Middle CollegeHigh
Plaza RoblesContinuation
High