student achievement indicators · 2019-05-13 · 2014-2015. 48%. 60%: year 12. 2015-2016. 52%. 60%:...

Student Achievement Indicators

LegendAbbreviation DefinitionDL Distance LearningN Enrollment at the InstitutionFace to Face Mode of Instruction in PersonDE Dual EnrollmentUVA University of VirginiaVCU Virginia Commonwealth UniversityJMU James Madison UniversityFY Fiscal YearFA Fall

LegendReview 2007 10.25.07 Meeting TargetReview 2008 10.28.08 Monitor, data inconsistentReview 2009 9.4.09 Not meeting target Review 2011 1.24.11Review 2012 1.24.12Review 2013 10.28.14Review 2014 03.16.15Review 2015 02.08.16Review 2016 02.02.18Review 2017 02.02.18

Within this document is the key indicators for Piedmont Virginia Community College assessing student achievement in the areas of student progress, general education, enrollment, distance education, dual enrollment, developmental education, and transfer.

President's Staff Review Log

The purpose of this core indicator series is to provide insight into the area of developmental education.

Data Source: SIS, Annual Grade Distribution ReportFrequency: Annually

MTH, BSK, MTT, MTE Target 65%MTH, BSK, MTT, MTE Threshold of Acceptability 60%ENG, ENF Target 75%ENG, ENF Threshold of Acceptability 70%

IE Year Academic Year MTH % Passing

BSK % Passing

MTT % Passing

MTE % Passing

ENG % Passing

ENF% Passing

Baseline 2006-07 57% 79%Year 1 2007-08 57% 51%* 74%Year 2 2008-09 64% 53% 76%Year 3 2009-10 67% 64% 78%Year 4 2010-11 58% 64% 75%Year 5 2011-12 69% 60% 64% 69%Year 6 2012-13 67% 61% 66% 66% 70%Year 7 2013-14** 75% 64% 77%Year 8 2014-15 49% 65% 80%Year 9 2015-16 52% 65% 83%

Year 10 2016-17 55% 76%Year 11 2017-18 53% 74%

Developmental Education

Successful Completion of Developmental Courses/Program

Percentage of Developmental Course Enrollments Successfully Completed Each Year (Grade of "S" or "P")

Action Items and Notes: *BSK (a Basic Math Skills Course) initially offered** VCCS Developmental Education Redesign Implemented Spring 2008 concluded a pilot of the BSK program and the Math Center as a part of the Title III initiatives. Summer 2008 reviewed the implementation results of BSK for Math 4. Students who took BSK and received assistance from the Math Center had significantly better outcomes (70% passing) thank students who did not receive Math Center Services. Fall 2010, BSK students will be required to receive services from Math Center. Spring 2010, implementation of FIPSE Grant program. Summer 2011, implementation the VCCS Developmental Education Design began.

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Developmental Math Course % Passing

MTH % Passing BSK % Passing MTT % Passing

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Developmental English Course % Passing

ENG % Passing ENF% Passing

Data Source: Student Information System (IRPIE)Frequency: Annually

Target Within 3% points of comparison group or over. Threshold of acceptability More than 10% points of comparison group.

IE Year Fiscal Year ENG ENG DEV 3% MTH MTE 3%Baseline 2006-07 74% 52% N 68% 62% N

Year 1 2007-08 77% 59% N 71% 54% NYear 2 2008-09 76% 56% N 70% 69% YYear 3 2009-10 77% 57% N 65% 67% YYear 4 2010-11 76% 60% N 65% 45% NYear 5 2011-12 76% 54% N 73% 60% NYear 6 2012-13Year 7 2013-14 83% 70% N 67% 60% NYear 8 2014-15 82% 85% Y 78% 66% NYear 9 2015-16 84% 59% N 73% 52% N

Year 10 2016-17 83% 69% N 75% 62% NYear 11 2017-18 84% 67% N 75% 51% N

RetentionData Source: Student Information System (IRPIE)Frequency: Annually

Target: 80%Threshold of acceptability: 75%

IE Year Academic Year Fall to Spring Retention Target

Baseline 2006-08 72% 80%Year 1 2007-08 73% 80%Year 2 2008-09 73% 80%Year 3 2009-10 73% 80%Year 4 2010-11 72% 80%Year 5 2011-12 74% 80%Year 6 2012-13 75% 80%Year 7 2013-14 72% 80%Year 8 2014-15 77% 80%Year 9 2015-16 74% 80%

Year 10 2016-17 72%Year 11 2017-18 77%

Fall to Spring retention of entering program-enrolled developmental students

Success in related college-level coursework

Comparison of percentage of enrollments by former developmental students and non-developmental students resulting in grades of "C" or better in gateway ENG and MTH courses (e.g., ENG 111, MTH 115, 120, 152, 163, 166, 180) Note: MTH 163 and 152 added in 06-07 analysis. Compares grades for students in gatekeeper courses for students who were and were not developmental in previous year.

Transition year for developmental redesign

Notes: [2007] Implement Title III Year 3-5 initiatives [2009] Implement "at risk student advising" and Developmental Education Program [2011] Implementing developmental education redesign. [2011] Implement Student Success Initiative, focused on retention and completion

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Developmental Students Fall to Spring Retention

Target

Notes: [10/08] Faculty of gatekeeper courses will collaborate with developmental faculty for seamless transition.[2/10] Implement CEED grant strategies to provide supplemental instruction in gatekeeper math courses. [8/11] Developmental education redesign for ENG and MTH underway.

Target: 60%Threshold of acceptability 55%

IE Year Fall to FallFall to Fall Retention Target


Year 10 2013-2014 43% 60%Year 11 2014-2015 48% 60%Year 12 2015-2016 52% 60%Year 13 2016-2017 52% 60%

Fall to Fall retention of entering program-enrolled developmental students

Notes: [2007] Implement Title III Year 3-5 initiatives [2009] Implement "at risk student advising" and Developmental Education Program [2011] Implementing developmental education redesign. [2011] Implement Student Success Initiative, focused on retention and completion

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Developmental Fall to Fall Retention

Target

The purpose of this core indicator series is to provide insight into the area of dual enrollment education.

Data Source: Dual Enrollment Report and Grade Distribution Internal ReportFrequency: Annually in Spring

Target Learning outcomes for Dual Enrolled students equal or exceed those of students in on-campus coursesThreshold of acceptability Not to fall below that of students in on-campus courses

IE Year Academic Year Face to Face DE

Face to Face

CampusBaseline 2005-06 91% 82%

Year 1 2006-07 88% 75%Year 2 2007-08 91% 82%Year 3 2008-09 91% 80%Year 4 2009-10 90% 83%Year 5 2010-11 91% 82%Year 6 2011-12 92% 82%Year 7 2012-13 92% 81%Year 8 2013-14 92% 83%Year 9 2014-15 92% 73%

Year 10 2015-16 90% 68%Year 11 2016-17 90% 72%Year 12 2017-18 94% 71%

Dual Enrollment

Student Outcomes

Proportion of enrollments resulting in grade of “C” or better compared with grades of dual credit students, recent high school graduates, and other students in traditional courses. Includes withdrawals. Online and hybrid courses are included in Distance Learning (DL)

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Dual Enrollment Academic Success

Face to Face DE Face to Face Campus

Data Source: SEB FALLFrequency: FALL AnnuallyTarget Trend IncreaseThreshold of acceptability Equal to previous year enrollment

IE Year Fall n %Baseline 2006 777 11%

Year 1 2007 895 14%Year 2 2008 983 16%Year 3 2009 1104 23%Year 4 2010 1198 22%Year 5 2011 1249 22%Year 6 2012 1242 22%Year 7 2013 1364 24%Year 8 2014 1490 27%Year 9 2015 1536 28%

Year 10 2016 1857 32%Year 11 2017 1775 32%

Data Source: Regional Public HighSchool Graduates at PVCC reportFrequency: Fall AnnuallyTarget Trend IncreaseThreshold of acceptability Equal to previous year subsequent enrollment at PVCC

IE Year Fall %Baseline 2006 15-20%

Year 1 2007 20%Year 2 2008 17%Year 3 2009 18%Year 4 2010 20%Year 5 2011 17%Year 6 2012 16%Year 7 2013 17%Year 8 2014 19%Year 9 2015 44%

Year 10 2016 44%Year 11 2017 51%

Percentage of senior dual enrolled students who subsequently enrolled at PVCC in Fall

College AccessNumber and percentage of PVCC enrollment that is Dual Enrollment (based on HC)

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

% Senior DE students who enroll at PVCC the following Fall

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Dual Enrollment % at PVCC

Data Source: Subsequent transfer reportFrequency: AnnuallyTarget Trend IncreaseThreshold of acceptability: Equal to previous year subsequent enrollmentNote: Reports 1 year behind due to student enrollment in subsequent institution

IE Year Academic Year nBaseline 2004-05 345

Year 1 2005-06 344Year 2 2006-07 404Year 3 2007-08 466Year 4 2008-09 501Year 5 2009-10 509Year 6 2010-11 511Year 7 2011-12 549Year 8 2012-13 553Year 9 2013-14 601

Year 10 2014-15 637Year 11 2015-16 718Year 12 2016-17 705

College/University 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17JAMES MADISON UNIVERSITY 32 48 50 66 65 78 105 99 96VIRGINIA POLYTECH AND STATE UNIVERSITY 69 55 45 59 63 67 57 71 78UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA 35 36 40 44 46 52 68 101 81VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY 49 51 60 46 44 54 50 62 62CHRISTOPHER NEWPORT UNIVERSITY 32 23 24 32 29 20 25 30 28GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY 23 23 14 27 27 25 28 22 31OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY 19 21 20 24 22 29 23 19 33LONGWOOD UNIVERSITY 18 21 19 23 21 19 26 28 21RADFORD UNIVERSITY 18 27 18 24 26 15 17 14 23UNIVERSITY OF MARY WASHINGTON 18 20 19 19 19 17 17 21 18Total 501 509 511 549 553 601 637 718 705

Number of DE/DC students that enrolled at other institutions, and the institutions they enrolled in.*

Top 10 institutions transferred to in the past eight years and total number of transferring students

0100200300400500600700800

Number of DE/DC students that enrolled at other institutions

The purpose of this core indicator series is to provide insight into the area of distance learning education.

Data Source: Distance Learning ReportFrequency: Annually

Target Learning outcomes for DL students equal or exceed those of students in on campus coursesThreshold of acceptability Equal to percentage of Face to Face enrollments resulting in a grade of "C" or better

IE Year Academic Year DL Face to FaceBaseline 2005-06 71% 75%


Year 10 2015-16 80% 75%Year 11 2016-17 73% 80%Year 12 2017-18 75% 80%

Data Source: Distance Learning ReportFrequency: Annually

Target Trend increaseThreshold of acceptability Equal to previous year

IE Year Academic Year n % of Total NBaseline 2005-06 1466 24%

Year 1 2006-07 1709 26%Year 2 2007-08 1828 28%Year 3 2008-09 2088 30%Year 4 2009-10 2488 33%Year 5 2010-11 2831 36%Year 6 2011-12 2868 36%Year 7 2012-13 3590 46%Year 8 2013-14 3693 47%Year 9 2014-15 3698 48%

Year 10 2015-16 5014 66%Year 11 2016-17 2820 38%Year 12 2017-18 2990 40%

Distance Learning

Student learning outcomes

Proportion of all enrollments resulting in grade of “C” or better compared with grades of students in comparable on-campus courses.

College Access

Number of DL students and DL as percentage of PVCC enrollment

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

% of enrollments earning "C" or better

DL Face to Face

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

% of DL students of PVCC Enrollment

Target Trend increaseThreshold of acceptability Equal to previous year

IE Year Academic Year n % of Total NBaseline 2005-06 318 22%


Year 10 2015-16 969 19%Year 11 2016-17 931 33%Year 12 2017-18 940 31%

Number and percentage of DL students that are "distance only"

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

% of DL students that are "Distance Only"

The purpose of this core indicator series is to provide insight into the area of transfer success to a four year institution.

Total subsequent enrollment at four-year instutionsData Source: Annual Subsequent Transfer ReportFrequency: Annually in SpringNumber of PVCC students annually who subsequently enroll in a four-year institution (not including transient students[AcadPlan = 025])Target Trend IncreaseThreshold of acceptability Equal to the previous year

IE Year Academic Year

# of Students

who enroll in a 4 Year institution

Baseline 2004-05 796Year 1 2005-06 801Year 2 2006-07 907Year 3 2007-08 1016Year 4 2008-09 1135Year 5 2009-10 1219Year 6 2010-11 1215Year 7 2011-12 1443Year 8 2012-13 1600Year 9 2013-14 1717

Year 10 2014-15 2011Year11 2015-16 2032Year 12 2016-17 1885

Transfer

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

# of Students who enroll in a 4 Year institution

Number of curricular and non-degree transfer students, annually, who subsequently enroll in a four-year institutionTarget Trend IncreaseThreshold of acceptability Equal to the previous year

IE Year Academic Year nBaseline 2004-05 274 2004

Year 1 2005-06 329 2005Year 2 2006-07 351 2006Year 3 2007-08 483 2007Year 4 2008-09 394 2008Year 5 2009-10 429 2009Year 6 2010-11 447 2010Year 7 2011-12 575 2011Year 8 2012-13 633 2012Year 9 2013-14 677 2013

Year 10 2014-15 792 2014Year 11 2015-16 669 2015Year 12 2016-17 564 2016

0

200

400

600

800

1000

2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018

Number of curriculur and non-degree transfer students who subsequently enroll in four-year

institution

Graduate transferData Source: Graduate Follow Up SurveyFrequency: Annually in Spring

Percentage of graduates who plan to transferTarget 50%Threshold of acceptability 45%

IE Year Academic Year % TargetBaseline 2005-06 57% 50%


Year 10 2015-16 68% 50%Year 11 2016-17 67% 50%Year 12 2017-18 69% 50%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

% of graduates who plan to transfer

Target

Number and percent of transfer graduates transferring in next academic yearTarget Trend IncreaseThreshold of acceptability Equal to the previous yearData Source: Subsequent transfer report; Graduate awards by curriculum

IE Year Academic Year n %Baseline 2004-05 94 29%


Year 10 2014-15 300 44%Year 11 2015-16 353 43%Year 12 2016-17 339 35%

Transfer successData Source: Collaboration with 4 Year InstitutionsFrequency: 2 year cycle

Target 90%Threshold of acceptability 85%

IE Year Academic Year UVA JMU ODU VCU TargetBaseline 2005-06 90% 82% 91% 88% 90.00%

Year 1 2006-07 95% 78% 87% 93% 90.00%Year 2 2007-08 97% 92% - - 90.00%Year 3 2008-09 89% - - - 90.00%Year 4 2009-10 99% - - - 90.00%Year 5 2010-11 90% - - - 90.00%Year 6 2011-12Year 7 2012-13Year 8 2013-14Year 9 2014-15

Year 10 2015-16

Reported as a part of Guideline 8, this data is no longer provided by institutions on a

voluntary basis

Percentage of transfer students who persist in, and successfully complete first term courses at transfer institution with a grade of “C” or GPA of 2.0 or higher.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

% transfer graduates transfering in next academic year

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11

Percentage of transfer student who complete first term at transfer institution with a 2.0 GPA or higher

UVA JMU ODU VCU Target

GPA of graduate transfer students comparative at top transfer institutions.Target 2.80Threshold of acceptability 2.50

Year (FY) UVA JMU VCU VTGPA GPA GPA GPA

Baseline 2006 - 2.78 - -Year 1 2007 3.05 - 2.96 3.08Year 2 2008 2.99 - 3.17 2.92Year 3 2009 3.1 2.78 3.05 2.86Year 4 2010 3.04 3.09 2.98 2.59Year 5 2011 3.08 2.8 2.84 2.96Year 6 2012 3.16 2.81 2.94 2.8Year 7 2013 3.12 2.85 2.76 3.15Year 8 2014 3.2 3.07 2.54 3.04Year 9 2015 3.14 3.07 2.89 3.22

Year 10 2016 3.18 2.78 2.50 3.05

Data for 2007-2013: provided by instititions in 2014 as a part of a transfer study by IRPIE.

The purpose of this core indicator series is to provide insight into the area of enrollment and productivity.

Data Source: SIS; UDT T01AFrequency: AnnuallyTarget Trend Increase of +1% per yearThreshold of acceptability Equal to the previous yearNote: Reported at year end

Academic Year Enrollment% change previous

Year

2005-06 62392006-07 6489 4.0%2007-08 6598 1.7%2008-09 6910 4.7%2009-10 7485 8.3%2010-11 7817 4.4%2011-12 7887 0.9%2012-13 7876 0.0%2013-14 7800 -1.0%2014-15 7673 -1.6%2015-16 7595 -1.0%2016-17 7473 -1.6%2017-18 7420 -0.7%

Enrollment and Productivity

Annual Headcount Percent Change from Previous Year

Data Source: SIS; UDT T01AFrequency: AnnuallyTarget Trend Increase of +1% per yearThreshold of acceptability Equal to the previous yearNote: Reported at year end

Academic Year FTE% change previous

Year

2005-06 23262006-07 2409 3.6%2007-08 2456 2.0%2008-09 2668 8.6%2009-10 2878 7.9%2010-11 3059 6.3%2011-12 3033 -0.8%2012-13 3029 -0.1%2013-14 3017 -0.4%2014-15 3003 -0.5%2015-16 2983 -0.7%2016-17 2948 -1.2%2017-18 2944 -0.1%

Data Source: SIS; UDT T03B: Full Time Employment Report; VCCS review of academic programs:Enrollment and FTE (SCHEV Productivity) ReportFrequency: AnnuallyTarget Trend decrease of ___% per yearThreshold of acceptability Equal to the previous yearNote: Reported at year end

Academic Year Ratio 2005-2006 1:352006-2007 1:322007-2008 1:282008-2009 1:382009-2010 1:332010-2011 1:342011-2012 1:322012-2013 1:312013-2014 1:322014-2015 1:312015-2016 1:302016-2017 1:292017-2018 1:28

Annual FTE Percent Change from Previous Year

Ratio of full-time faculty to FTE curricular students

-2%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

Annual FTE Percent Change from Previous Year

Data Source: SIS; UDT T03B: Full Time Employment ReportFrequency: AnnuallyTarget Trend decrease of ___% per yearThreshold of acceptability Equal to the previous yearNote: Reported at year end

Academic Year Ratio 2005-2006 1:432006-2007 1:472007-2008 1:482008-2009 1:522009-2010 1:582010-2011 1:592011-2012 1:552012-2013 1:682013-2014 1:692014-2015 1:672015-2016 1:622016-2017 1:602017-2018 1:57

Data Source: HRFrequency: AnnuallyTarget Trend increase per year budget allowingThreshold of acceptability Equal to the previous yearNote: Reported at year end

Academic Year Percent2005-20062006-20072007-2008 32%2008-2009 27%2009-2010 21%2010-2011 20%2011-2012 19%2012-2013 27%2013-2014 21%2014-2015 29%2015-2016 28%2016-2017 27%2017-2018 26%

Full Time Faculty: Percent of Faculty who are full time

Ratio of full-time faculty to headcount of curricular students

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

% of Full Time Faculty

The purpose of this core indicator series is to provide insight into the area of developmental education.

Data Source: Graduate SurveyFrequency: AnnuallyTarget 95%Threshold of acceptability 90%Note: Reported at year end

Graduate Cohort Year Percent Target2006 96% 95%2007 97% 95%2008 95% 95%

2009 98% 95%2010 97% 95%2011 99% 95%

2012 98% 95%2013 96% 95%2014 95% 95%

2015 99% 95%2016 98%2017 98%

Student Progress

Student Goal Attainment: Percentage of graduates reporting that PVCC helped them further their academic and/or professional goals

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Percent of Graduates reporting that PVCC helped them further their academic and/or professional goals

Data Source: Fall to Fall Retention Summary ReportFrequency: AnnuallyTarget 50%Threshold of acceptability 45%Note: Reported at year end

Fall to Fall Percent Target2006-2007 40% 50%2007-2008 42% 50%2008-2009 45% 50%2009-2010 45% 50%2010-2011 44% 50%2011-2012 43% 50%2012-2013 42% 50%2013-2014 41% 50%2014-2015 42% 50%2015-2016 43% 50%2016-2017 43%

Data Source: Fall to Spring Retention Summary ReportFrequency: AnnuallyTarget 70%Threshold of acceptability 65%Note: Reported at year end

Academic Year Percent Target2007-2008 69% 70%2008-2009 70% 70%2009-2010 70% 70%2010-2011 69% 70%2011-2012 70% 70%2012-2013 69% 70%2013-2014 70% 70%2014-2015 69% 70%2015-2016 70% 70%2016-2017 70% 70%2017-2018 71% 70%

Fall to Fall Retention

Fall to Spring Retention

00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9

1

Fall to Fall Retention

Target

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Fall to Spring Retention

Target

The purpose of this core indicator series is to provide insight into the area of general education .

Cultural and Social UnderstandingData Source: Graduate SurveyFrequency: AnnuallyTarget: 75%Threshold of acceptability 70%

Data Source: Graduate Survey

IE Year Academic YearPercentage of Students Target


Year 10 2017-18 89% 75%

General Education

Working effectively with people of varying racial, ethnic, and cultural backgrounds

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Working with vary backgrounds

Target




Year 10 2017-18 90% 75%




Year 10 2017-18 86% 75%

Understanding the interdependence of social, economic, geo-political and cultural systems

Effectively communicating in various social and cultural contexts

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Effective communication in various social and cultural contexts

Target

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Interdependence of social, economic, geo-political and cultural systems

Target




Year 10 2017-18 88% 75%

Establishing and maintaining a personal code of ethics and valuesData Source: Graduation Survey Target 80%Threshold of acceptability 75%



Year 10 2017-18 87% 80%

Understanding the role and impact of social institutions on development of individuals and cultures

Personal Development

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Role and impact of social institutions on development of individuals and cultures

Target

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Establishing and maintaining a personal code of ethics and values

Target

Identifying my own biases and prejudices Data Source: Graduation Survey Target 80%Threshold of acceptability 75%



Year 10 2017-18 85% 80%

Making informed, reasonable decisions about personal wellness Data Source: Graduation Survey Target 80%Threshold of acceptability 75%



Year 10 2017-18 88% 80%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Identifying my own biases and prejudices

Target

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Making informed, reasonable decisions about personal wellness

Target

Making informed, reasonable decisions about personal, academic, and career goals Data Source: Graduation Survey Target 80%Threshold of acceptability 75%



Year 10 2017-18 93% 80%

Academic Preparation

Data Source: Follow-up survey of graduates IRPIE and/or graduation survey Target 90%Threshold of acceptability 85%



Year 10 2017-18 92% 90%

Reason logically

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Reason Logically

Target

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Making informed, reasonable decisions about personal, academic and career goals

Target

Data Source: Follow-up survey of graduates IRPIE and/or gradation survey Target 90%Threshold of acceptability 85%



Year 10 2017-18 92% 90%




Year 10 2017-18 93% 90%

Research a topic

Solve problems

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Research a topic

Target

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Solve problems

Target




Year 10 2017-18 91% 90%




Year 10 2017-18 86% 85%

Speak clearly and effectively

Use computers

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Speak clearly and effectively

Target

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Use computers

Target




Year 10 2017-18 88% 85%

Data Source: Follow-up survey of graduates IRPIE and/or graduation survey Target 90%Threshold of acceptability 90%



Year 10 2017-18 91% 90%

Use Math

Write clearly and effectively

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Use math

Target

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%Write clearly and effectively

Target

student achievement indicators · 2019-05-13 · 2014-2015. 48%. 60%: year 12. 2015-2016. 52%. 60%:...

Documents