your high school name 3-year achievement results analysis september 2013

Your High School Name

3-Year Achievement Results AnalysisSeptember 2013

State Accountability

Academic Performance Index (API)

State Accountability - APIAPI continues to be an important part of public school accountability in California. 1

For 2013, schools must reach an API of 770 or grow at least 5% of the difference between their Base API and 800 each year until they reach an API of 800.

2

Districts must also meet the yearly API target and reach 800 by the 2013-14 school year.

3

English-Language Arts, Mathematics, History-Social Science, and Science test results are included in the API calculation.

4

Graduation rates are also included in the high school API calculations.

5

School API 10-Year Growth Trend

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013700

720

740

760

780

800

820

840

860

880

757769

790808 815

827836

850 856868

API

3-Year API Growth Analysis – 20 Mile March

Name of SchoolBase 2010

Growth 2011

Diff. 2010-11

Base 2011

Growth 2012

Diff. 2011-12

Base 2012

Growth 2013

Diff. 2012-13

Average Growth Per Year 2010-2013

SCHOOLWIDE 644 659 15 683 690 7 690 709 19 13.7

Asian 790 799 9 811 818 7 818 836 18 11.3

Hispanic or Latino 591 610 19 642 635 -7 666 642 -24 -4.0

White 712 682 -30 706 715 9 N/A N/A N/A N/A

SES Disadvantaged 632 649 17 673 674 1 674 701 27 15.0

English Learners 623 621 -2 644 666 22 666 657 -9 3.7

Students with Disabilities 361 362 1 374 422 48 431 455 24

24.3

Summarizing Test ResultsCST

CSTs by Grade Level

CST– English/Language Arts

Grade 9 Grade 10 Grade 110

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

8071

62

7573

67

7477

70

78

2011

2012

2013

Percent of Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced

CST/CMA ELA – Sliders, Stickers, and Jumpers

Number of Students Making Proficiency Band Growth in ELA-3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3

Grade 9 1 0 13 42 3 0 0

Grade 10 0 3 11 44 2 1 0

Grade 11 1 0 13 42 3 0 0

Who are your students who have/have not made proficiency band growth? What are your plans for students who have dropped one or more levels?

CST– Algebra 1


10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

71

62

34

7367

35

77

70

31

2011

2012

2013


CST– Geometry


10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

71

62

37

7367

43

77

70

55 2011

2012

2013


CST– Algebra 2


10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

62

45

34

67

52

33

70

54

36

2011

2012

2013


CST– High School Summative Math

Grade 10 Grade 110

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

45

34

52

33

54

36

2011

2012

2013


CST/CMA Algebra 1 – Sliders, Stickers, and Jumpers

Number of Students Making Proficiency Band Growth in Math

-3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3

Grade 9 1 0 13 42 3 0 0

Grade 10 0 3 11 44 2 1 0

Grade 11 0 2 26 230 157 19 1


CST/CMA Geometry – Sliders, Stickers, and Jumpers


-3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3

Grade 9 1 0 13 42 3 0 0

Grade 10 0 3 11 44 2 1 0

Grade 11 0 2 26 230 157 19 1


CST/CMA Algebra 2 – Sliders, Stickers, and Jumpers


-3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3

Grade 9 1 0 13 42 3 0 0

Grade 10 0 3 11 44 2 1 0

Grade 11 0 2 26 230 157 19 1


CST/CMA HS Summative Math – Sliders, Stickers, and Jumpers


-3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3

Grade 9 1 0 13 42 3 0 0

Grade 10 0 3 11 44 2 1 0

Grade 11 0 2 26 230 157 19 1


CST– Life Science (Grade 10)

Science0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

75 74 78

2011

2012

2013


CST– Biology


10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

7568 65

74 7367

78 75 69

2011

2012

2013


CST– Chemistry

Grade 10 Grade 110

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

68 6573

6775

69

2011

2012

2013


CST– Earth Science

Grade 10 Grade 110

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

68 6573

6775

69

2011

2012

2013


CST– Physics

Grade 10 Grade 110

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

68 6573

6775

69

2011

2012

2013


CST– World History (Grade 10)

Grade 100

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

65 68 712011

2012

2013


CST– US History (Grade 11)

Grade 110

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

65 68 712011

2012

2013


CST Cluster Scores

CST Cluster Scores for English/Language ArtsBy Grade Level

Word Analysis and Vocabulary Devel-

opment

Reading Compre-hension

Literary Response and Analysis

Written Conven-tions

Writing Strategies

Grade 9 0.75 0.75 0.78 0.23 0.67

Grade 10 0.69 0.7 0.76 0.45 0.59

Grade 11 0.83 0.56 0.81 0.37 0.78

5%

15%

25%

35%

45%

55%

65%

75%

85%

CST Cluster Scores for Algebra 1

Number Properties, Opera-tions, Linear Equations

Graphing and Systems of Linear Equations

Quadratics and Polynomi-als

Functions and Rational Ex-pressions

Grade 9 0.75 0.75 0.78 0.23

Grade 10 0.42 0.56 0.43 0.38

Grade 11 0.75 0.75 0.78 0.23

5%

15%

25%

35%

45%

55%

65%

75%

CST Cluster Scores for Geometry

Logic and Geometric Proofs

Volume and Area Formulas Angle Relationships, Con-structions, and Lines

Trigonometry

Grade 9 0.75 0.75 0.78 0.23

Grade 10 0.42 0.56 0.43 0.38

Grade 11 0.75 0.75 0.78 0.23

5%

15%

25%

35%

45%

55%

65%

75%

CST Cluster Scores for Algebra 2

Polynomials and Rational Expressions

Quadratics, Conics, and Complex Numbers

Exponents and Logarithms Series, Combinatorics, Probability, Statistics

Grade 9 0.75 0.75 0.78 0.23

Grade 10 0.42 0.56 0.43 0.38

Grade 11 0.75 0.75 0.78 0.23

5%

15%

25%

35%

45%

55%

65%

75%

CST Cluster Scores for Summative HS Math

Algebra I Geometry Algebra II Probability and Statistics

Grade 10 0.42 0.56 0.43 0.38

Grade 11 0.75 0.75 0.78 0.23

5%

15%

25%

35%

45%

55%

65%

75%

AYP Growth

Significant Subgroup Data – 2013 AYP Comparison of Percent Proficient or Above – English/Language Arts

All StudentsAfrican AmericanAsianFilipinoHispanic or LatinoWhiteTwo or More RacesSocioeconomically DisadvantagedEnglish LearnersStudents with Disabilities

73.3%64.1%93.9%85.6%57.3%81.9%83.3%56.4%57.3%49.0%

201370.7%51.2%93.4%84.0%53.8%82.3%86.1%52.3%53.7%49.8%

69.3%54.7%92.6%82.8%50.0%82.6%82.3%48.5%49.6%48.2%

2011 2012Subgroup 3-Year Growth

+4+9.4+1.3+2.8+7.3-.5

+1.0+7.9+7.7+.8

Significant Subgroup Data – 2013 AYP Comparison of Percent Proficient or Above – Mathematics

All StudentsAfrican AmericanAsianFilipinoHispanic or LatinoWhiteTwo or More RacesSocioeconomically DisadvantagedEnglish LearnersStudents with Disabilities

73.3%64.1%93.9%85.6%57.3%84.8%83.3%56.4%57.3%49.0%

201370.7%51.2%93.4%84.0%53.8%82.3%86.1%52.3%53.7%49.8%

69.3%54.7%92.6%82.8%50.0%82.6%82.3%48.5%49.6%48.2%

2011 2012Subgroup 3-Year Growth

+4+9.4+1.3+2.8+7.3+2.2+1.0+7.9+7.7+.8

English Language Development

3-Year CELDT Analysis

2011 2012 2013

Beginning 0.04 0.08 0.06

Early Intermediate 0.08 0.14 0.11

Intermediate 0.21 0.39 0.39

Early Advanced 0.42 0.32 0.39

Advanced 0.26 0.07 0.05

3%

8%

13%

18%

23%

28%

33%

38%

43%

Percent of Students Redesignated English Proficient (2012-13)

2011 2012 2013

Your School Name 0.152 0.076 0.122

District 0.079 0.126 0.141

County 0.109 0.132 0.143

State 0.114 0.163 0.122

1%

3%

5%

7%

9%

11%

13%

15%

17%

Long Term English LearnersHow are EL students performing on the CELDT based on the length of time

they have been in U.S. schools?Length of Time in

U.S. SchoolsNumberPercent

Early Advanced or Advanced;

English Proficient

Early Advanced or Advanced; Not English Proficient

Intermediate Early Intermediate

Beginning Total (by Time)

6 or more years N 143 5 58 5 8 219

% 65% 2% 26% 2% 4% 90%

5 years N 7 1 1 0 0 9

% 78% 11% 11% 0% 0% 4%

4 years N 5 0 0 1 0 6

% 83% 0% 0% 17% 0% 2%

3 years or less N 2 1 1 0 4 8

% 25% 13% 13% 0% 50% 3%

Total (by level)

N 157 7 60 6 12 242

% 65% 3% 25% 2% 5% 100%

Intermediate Level English LearnersCST English-Language Arts

How are EL students at the Intermediate level on CELDT performing on the CST E/LA by grade level?

ELA CST Performance

NumberPercent

Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Total (by CST)

Far Below Basic N 0 1 0 1 2

% 0% 17% 0% 33% 7%

Below Basic N 2 2 0 1 5

% 18% 33% 0% 33% 19%

Basic N 4 2 1 1 8

% 36% 33% 0% 33% 30%

Proficient N 3 1 3 0 7

% 27% 17% 43% 0% 26%

Advanced N 2 0 3 0 5

% 18% 0% 43% 0% 19%

Total by Grade N 11 6 7 3 27

% 41% 22% 26% 11% 100%

• Who are your Intermediate EL students who are scoring Basic and Below on the CST E/LA?• What are your plans for these students?

Intermediate Level English LearnersMathematics

How are EL students at the Intermediate level on CELDT performing on the CST Mathematics by grade level?

ELA CST Performance

NumberPercent

Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Total (by CST)

Far Below Basic N 0 1 0 1 2

% 0% 17% 0% 33% 7%

Below Basic N 2 2 0 1 5

% 18% 33% 0% 33% 19%

Basic N 4 2 1 1 8

% 36% 33% 0% 33% 30%

Proficient N 3 1 3 0 7

% 27% 17% 43% 0% 26%

Advanced N 2 0 3 0 5

% 18% 0% 43% 0% 19%

Total by Grade N 11 6 7 3 27

% 41% 22% 26% 11% 100%

• Who are your Intermediate EL students who are scoring Basic and below on the CST ELA?

• What are your plans for these students?

CAHSEE – Grade 10

CAHSEE Proficiency Rates by Gender – ELA

2011 2012 2013

Schoolwide 0.75 0.75 0.78

Male 0.69 0.7 0.76

Female 0.83 0.81 0.81

5%

15%

25%

35%

45%

55%

65%

75%

85%

CAHSEE Proficiency Rates by Ethnicity - ELA

2011 2012 2013


Asian 0.86 0.84 0.94

Hispanic/Latino 0.71 0.71 0.74

White 0.88 0.82 0.86

5%

15%

25%

35%

45%

55%

65%

75%

85%

95%

CAHSEE Proficiency Rates by Language Proficiency - ELA

2011 2012 2013


English Only 0.78 0.79 0.78

IFEP 0.87 0.87 0.86

RFEP 0.94 0.99 0.98

EL 0.38 0.48 0.5

5%15%25%35%45%55%65%75%85%95%

CAHSEE Proficiency Rates by SES Status - ELA

2011 2012 2013


SES Disadvantaged 0.84 0.86 0.81

Non SES Disadvantaged 0.72 0.72 0.78

63%

68%

73%

78%

83%

88%

CAHSEE Proficiency Rates for Special Education Students - ELA

2011 2012 2013


SpEd 0.27 0.31 0.38

5%

15%

25%

35%

45%

55%

65%

75%

CAHSEE Proficiency Rates by Gender – Mathematics

2011 2012 2013


Male 0.77 0.74 0.76

Female 0.82 0.77 0.76

71%

73%

75%

77%

79%

81%

CAHSEE Proficiency Rates by Ethnicity - Mathematics

2011 2012 2013


Asian 0.98 0.93 0.98

Hispanic/Latino 0.74 0.69 0.7

White 0.73 0.76 0.79

5%

15%

25%

35%

45%

55%

65%

75%

85%

95%

CAHSEE Proficiency Rates by Language Proficiency - Mathematics

2011 2012 2013


English Only 0.79 0.76 0.68

IFEP 0.87 0.82 0.86

RFEP 0.93 0.97 0.99

EL 0.58 0.56 0.55

5%15%25%35%45%55%65%75%85%95%

CAHSEE Proficiency Rates by SES Status - Mathematics

2011 2012 2013


SES Disadvantaged 0.85 0.82 0.75

Non SES Disadvantaged 0.78 0.73 0.76

67%

69%

71%

73%

75%

77%

79%

81%

83%

85%

CAHSEE Proficiency Rates for Special Education Students - Mathematics

2011 2012 2013


SpEd 0.17 0.12 0.33

5%

15%

25%

35%

45%

55%

65%

75%

AP Equity Access

Access to AP Exams (Equity)AP Data 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

# of Test Takers

# of Tests Taken

# of Tests Scored 3 or Above

Grade 11 and 12 Enrollment

Passing Rate

% of AP Students w/ Scores of 3 or Above

*Qualifying Rate

* Qualifying Rate = # Passed Tests/Grade 11 & 12 Enrollment

Other Indicators(Discipline, Attendance, SAT, ACT, Benchmarks, etc.)

How our School is Responding to the Data

• Signature Practice: – Next steps

Transition to Common Core

• Steps we are taking in 2013-14

your high school name 3-year achievement results analysis september 2013

Documents