Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Use data identified on the Data Sources tab (or from other sources) as the basis for understanding the school and identifying
1. What does the summative data analysis tell you about your schools strengths?
2013 - The summative EOG data signifies that math achievement levels are higher than reading in relationship to the state average.
Third grade math, 5th grade math and 5th grade science were above the state average. All reading tested areas were below the state
average. However, all grades met growth in reading except 6th grade. AMO targets were met for every subgroup with the exception
of "All students" and "White."
2014 - The summative data signifies that reading proficiencies in grades 3 , 5, 7 and 8 were at or above the state average. Grades 3, 4,
5, 6,and 7 math were above the state average. Growth expectations were met in all areas except 4th and 6th grade math.
2. What does the summative data analysis tell you about your schools gaps or opportunities for improvement?
2013 - The summative data reveals that 4th grade, 8th grade and Math I did not meet growth expectations which allows a definite
opportunity for improvement. Also all reading proficiency levels are below the state average. Most federal and state target goals
were met in regards to AMO's.
2014 - The DIP Prioirty Goals 1 and 2 address the areas of needed improvment and identificed strategies: Grade 4,6,and 8 Math and
Math 1 and reading in grades 4 & 6 and English II.
3. Based upon the analysis conducted, what 3-5 top priorities emerge for the school?
Cite relevant evidence from your analysis to support these priorities.
2013
Increase proficiency and growth in 4th grade, 8th grade and Math I.
Increase EOG reading proficiency and English II.
Increase teacher effectiveness in the areas of curriculum, assessment and instruction.
2014-15
Growth not met in grades 4 (-2.2) and 6 math (-1.3) in 2013-14. Grade 8 Math and Math I were below state average. Grade 8 = 38%
state avg = 42 (-4), Math I = 55.5% State avg = 60 (-4.5)
(2014-15) Grades 4,6 and Eng II proficiency levels remain below the
state average. 4th = -2, 6th = - 3.2, Eng II= -6
Growth expectations were met in all areas except 4th and 6th grade math