Data Highlights and Target Group Identification
1. What type of student achievement data did you analyze?
-CELDT scores 2013-14
-CST Scores, focusing on 9-12 grades of Mesa Court Region, for year 2011-12, 2012-13, and 2013-14
2. What were the main findings generated from the analysis of your data?
-large number of students are early advanced (92%) but only 20% reach advanced.
-For all students, scores dipped in 2013 compared to previous years, in all subjects
-ELA and Math both hover around 10-15% proficient and above. All other students equally distributed between basic, below basic and far below basic
-proficiency levels drop in higher grades, highest % proficiency in 8th and 9th grade
-far less economically disadvantaged youth in 2013 than 2012 and 2011 (50% compared to 91 and 92), yet percent of proficiency slightly dips in 2013
-No English Learners have ever scored proficient, 2011-1014. 3-4% proficiency scores for those reclassified.
-Hispanic students make up roughly 60% of the school, yet have lower than 20% and some cases lower than 5% proficiency
3. Share 5 questions that the data sparked.
4. Name 3 priority needs and mention which one of these seemed most urgent.
-Needs of English Learners
-Needs of Hispanic students as learners
-Needs of English Learners testing Advanced on CELDT but not being reclassified
5. Which target group did you select to work with and why?
I will target English Learners because it seems many ELs fall into both risk categories, as 90% of them speak Spanish and are of Hispanic ancestry. It also seems like the largest and most glaring issue, at least from my research so far. It is also one of the most measurable. By that I mean that some student populations do not get reported because they are such a small number of our already small reporting group, but at 60%+ there should always be results to look at for English Learners.
-CELDT scores 2013-14
-CST Scores, focusing on 9-12 grades of Mesa Court Region, for year 2011-12, 2012-13, and 2013-14
2. What were the main findings generated from the analysis of your data?
-large number of students are early advanced (92%) but only 20% reach advanced.
-For all students, scores dipped in 2013 compared to previous years, in all subjects
-ELA and Math both hover around 10-15% proficient and above. All other students equally distributed between basic, below basic and far below basic
-proficiency levels drop in higher grades, highest % proficiency in 8th and 9th grade
-far less economically disadvantaged youth in 2013 than 2012 and 2011 (50% compared to 91 and 92), yet percent of proficiency slightly dips in 2013
-No English Learners have ever scored proficient, 2011-1014. 3-4% proficiency scores for those reclassified.
-Hispanic students make up roughly 60% of the school, yet have lower than 20% and some cases lower than 5% proficiency
3. Share 5 questions that the data sparked.
- What are we doing to push those early advanced CELDT scorers into an advanced/reclassified state?
- What are we doing to better serve our largest population (Hispanics)?
- Are we doing enough to support English Learners in all subjects? Especially Math though?
- 90% of English Learners are also Hispanic
- Is testing a priority in this district?
4. Name 3 priority needs and mention which one of these seemed most urgent.
-Needs of English Learners
-Needs of Hispanic students as learners
-Needs of English Learners testing Advanced on CELDT but not being reclassified
5. Which target group did you select to work with and why?
I will target English Learners because it seems many ELs fall into both risk categories, as 90% of them speak Spanish and are of Hispanic ancestry. It also seems like the largest and most glaring issue, at least from my research so far. It is also one of the most measurable. By that I mean that some student populations do not get reported because they are such a small number of our already small reporting group, but at 60%+ there should always be results to look at for English Learners.