2006-2007 school report card accountability status report: english language arts, mathematics,...

2006-2007 School Report Card

ACCOUNTABILITY STATUS REPORT:ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS, MATHEMATICS, SCIENCE, AND GRADUATION RATEFor GREENVILLE CSD

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)

Indicates satisfactory progress by a district or a school toward the goal of proficiency for all students

Participation RateElementary-Middle Level

40 or more students in an accountability group

95% of students enrolled must have valid scores on an appropriate assessment

Participation RateSecondary Level

40 or more students in an accountability group

95% of seniors must take the appropriate assessment by June of their senior year

Performance Index (PI)

A value from 0 to 200 assigned to an accountability group

Indicates how that group performed on a required State test

Measuring Performance

At the elementary and middle levels, performance measured using assessments in ELA, math, and science

At the secondary level, performance measured using assessments in ELA and math, and graduation rate

Assessment performance is defined by four levels:Level 1 = Not meeting learning standardsLevel 2 = Partially meeting learning standardsLevel 3 = Meeting learning standardsLevel 4 = Meeting learning standards

with distinction

Effective Annual Measurable Objectives

The lowest performance index that an accountability group is expected to achieve

If an accountability group’s performance index equals or exceeds the Effective AMO, AYP has been reached

Greenville Central School District

OVERVIEW OF DISTRICT PERFORMANCE IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS, MATHEMATICS, AND SCIENCE

Elementary/Middle-Level English Language Arts

AYP Participation Test Performance Performance Objectives

Student Group StatusMerit

CriterionPercentage

TestedMerit

CriterionPerformance

IndexEffective

AMO

Safe Harbor Target

2005 - 06 2006 - 07

All Students (623:610) 100% 156 118

Ethnicity

White (601:591) 100% 157 118

Other Groups

Students with Disabilities (115:113) 99% X 94 112 108 105

Economically Disadvantaged (165:160) 100% 131 114

Final AYP Determination 4 of 4

GCS Compared to NYS Public- 3-5 ELAGCS NYS

Grade 3 64% 69%

Grade 4 63% 69%

Grade 5 71% 67%

Percentage of Students Scoring at 3 and 4 in ELA

01020304050

60708090

100

Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5

GCS

NYS

GCS Compared to NYS Public- 6-8 ELA GCS NYS

Grade 6 55% 60%

Grade 7 58% 56%

Grade 8 66% 49%


0102030405060708090

100


GCS

NYS

Elementary/Middle-Level Mathematics



CriterionPercentage

TestedMerit


IndexEffective

AMO

Safe Harbor Target

2005 - 06 2006 - 07

All Students (617:600) 99% 163 82

Ethnicity

White (598:581) 99% 164 81

Other Groups

Students with Disabilities (115:109) 97% 106 76

Economically Disadvantaged (158-156) 100% 147 78


GCS Compared to NYS Public 3-5 Mathematics

GCS NYS

Grade 3 81% 78%

Grade 4 82% 68%

Grade 5 73% 60%

Percentage of Students Scoring at 3 and 4 in Mathematics

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100


GCS

NYS

GCS Compared to NYS Public 6-8 Mathematics

GCS NYS

Grade 6 65% 60%

Grade 7 74% 56%

Grade 8 43% 54%


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100


GCS

NYS

Elementary/Middle-Level Science


Student GroupSafe Harbor Qualification

Met Criterion

Percentage Tested

Merit Criterion

Performance Index

Effective AMO

Safe Harbor Target

2005 - 06 2006 - 07

All Students (209:205) Qualified 100% 192 100

Ethnicity

White (205:201) Qualified 100% 192 100

Other Groups

Students with Disabilities (38:37) - - - 181 100

Economically Disadvantaged (42:42) Qualified 100% 183 100


GCS Compared to NYS Public4 and 8 Science

GCS NYS

Grade 4 98% 86%

Grade 8 88% 64%

Percentage of Students Scoring at 3 and 4 in Science

0102030405060708090

100

Grade 4 Grade 8

GCS

NYS

Secondary-Level English Language Arts AYP Participation Test Performance Performance Objectives


CriterionPercentage

TestedMerit


IndexEffective

AMO

Safe Harbor Target

2005 - 06 2006 - 07

All Students (82:75) 99% 169 143

Ethnicity

White (79:72) 99% 169 143

Other Groups

Students with Disabilities (16:16) - - - - - -

Economically Disadvantaged (7:8) - - - - - -


GCS Compared to NYS PublicSecondary ELA

GCS NYS

2002 Cohort 71% 69%

2001 Cohort 71% 68%


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002 Cohort 2001 Cohort

GCS

NYS

Secondary-Level Mathematics AYP Participation Test Performance Performance Objectives


CriterionPercentage

TestedMerit


IndexEffective

AMO

Safe Harbor Target

2005 - 06 2006 - 07

All Students (82:75) 98% 183 135

Ethnicity

White (79:72) 97% 183 135

Other Groups

Students with Disabilities (16:16) - - - - - -

Economically Disadvantaged (7:8) - - - - - -


GCS Compared to NYS PublicSecondary Mathematics

GCS NYS

2002 Cohort 80% 71%

2001 Cohort 85% 67%


0102030405060708090

100

2002 Cohort 2001 Cohort

GCS

NYS

GCS Compared to NYS PublicSecondary Graduation Rate

GCS NYS

2002 Cohort 78% 55%

2002 Cohort Graduation Rate

010

20304050

607080

90100

GCS NYS

2002 Cohort

Greenville Central School DistrictSummaryElementary/Middle

Level Secondary Level

Student Group

English Language

Arts Mathematics Science

English Language

Arts MathematicsGraduation

Rate

All Students

Ethnicity

White

Other Groups

Students with Disabilities - -

Economically Disadvantaged - -

Student Groups Making AYP in each subject 4 of 4 4 of 4 1 of 1 2 of 2 2 of 2 1 of 1

Greenville CSD Receives Special Recognition

GCSD-Title I High Performing, Gap Closing District, May 2007

Leading New York forward to accomplish dual goal of increasing student achievement while closing the gap in student performance

Greenville CSD Future Implications

K-12 Curriculum Alignment

Professional development concerning research based instruction

2006-2007 school report card accountability status report: english language arts, mathematics,...

Documents

accountability group95

accountability groupindicates

middle levels

nys public

effective amo

valid scores

goal of proficiency

total testedfebruary