Label Assurance Response Comment Attachment
1. Did you complete the Student Performance
Data document offline and upload below?
Yes 2013-2014 Student
Evaluative Criteria and Rubrics
Overall Rating: 3.0
Statement or Question Response Rating
1. Assessment Quality The array of assessment devices used by the
institution to determine students' performances is sufficiently aligned so that valid inferences can be reached regarding students' status with respect to the entire set of curricular aims regarded as high-priority, “must accomplish,” instructional targets. The documentation provided in support of this alignment is persuasive. All of the assessments used are accompanied by evidence demonstrating that they satisfy accepted technical requirements such as validity, reliability, absence of bias, and instructional sensitivity.
Level 4
Statement or Question Response Rating
2. Test Administration All the assessments used by the institution to
determine students' performances, whether externally acquired or internally developed, have been administered with complete fidelity to the administrative procedures appropriate for each assessment. In every instance, the students to whom these assessments were administered are accurately representative of the students served by the institution. Appropriate accommodations have been provided for all assessments so that valid inferences can be made about all students' status with respect to all of the institution's targeted curricular outcomes.
Level 4
Statement or Question Response Rating
3. Quality of Learning Evidence of student learning promoted by the
institution is acceptably analyzed and presented with reasonable clarity. In comparison to institutions functioning in a similar educational context, students' status, improvement, and/or growth evidence indicates that the level of student learning is at or above what would otherwise be expected.
Level 3
Statement or Question Response Rating
4. Equity of Learning Evidence of student learning indicates
achievement gaps exist among subpopulations of students, and that minimal or no change has occurred in these achievement gaps.
Areas of Notable Achievement
Which area(s) are above the expected levels of performance?
In the areas of Reading, and Mathematics, the percentage of students making learning gains >= 50%, was met during the following assessment dates: 2010-12, 2011-12, and 2012-13. The 2012-13 FCAT 2.0 assessment, shows that the annual Target goal of 71% in the area of Reading was met, and the target goal of 72% was met in the area of Mathematics.
Describe the area(s) that show a positive trend in performance.
READING:
As evidenced by FCAT results, the Hispanic subgroup has shown a steady increase in Student Performance. In 2010-2011, 61% of the students in the Hispanic subgroup were proficient. In 2011-12, 73% were proficient and in 2012-13 72% met proficiency.
ELL learners have shown a steady increase from 43% proficiency on the 2010-11 assessment. In 2011-12, the rate of proficiency increased to 61%, and in 2012-13, 65% of the students in this subgroup were proficient.
The SWD subgroup has shown an increase. In 2010-11, 22% were achieving at a proficient rate. In 2011-12, the rate of proficiency in this area increased to 37%, and on the 2012-13 assessment, 40% of students in the SWD subgroup were proficient.
The ED subgroup also showed a steady increase. In 2010-2011, 59% were proficient and on the 2012-13 assessment, 66% were found to be proficient on the FCAT assessment.
MATHEMATICS:
The Hispanic subgroup has shown a steady increase in Student Performance in the area of Mathematics. On the 2010-2011 and 2011-12 FCAT Assessment, 65% of the students in the Hispanic subgroup were proficient, and in 2012-13 73% met proficiency.
ELL learners have shown a steady increase from 49% proficiency on the 2010-11 Mathematics FCAT assessment. In 2011-12, the rate of proficiency in the area of Mathematics increased to 51%, and in 2012-13, 69% of the students in this subgroup were proficient.
The SWD subgroup has shown an increase in Mathematics. In 2010-11, 33% were achieving at a proficient rate. In 2011-12, the rate of proficiency in this area increased to 34%, and on the 2012-13 assessment, 38% of students in the SWD subgroup were proficient in the area of Mathematics.
Writing:
The results from the 2012-2013 Writing FCAT 2.0 Assessment show an increase of 9% in the amount of students who were proficient. 63% of the fourth grade students were proficient.
Which area(s) indicate the overall highest performance?
On the 2012-2013 FCAT 2.0 assessment, 72% of those tested were proficient on the mathematics portion. In the area of writing, 63% of the students were proficient.
Over the course of three years, the Hispanic subgroup has shown an increase of 11% as shown on the FCAT scores from 2010 through 2013. This increase signifies that 72% of the students are proficient in the area of Reading. An 8% increase in the area of Mathematics, shows a 73% proficiency rate.
Between which subgroups is the achievement gap closing?
READING:
On the 2010-2011 FCAT assessment, 61% of the Hispanic subgroup performed at a proficient rate, as compared to the white subgroup which scored at 80% proficiency rate. On the 2011-2012 assessment, the Hispanic subgroup showed a 12% increase in the area of reading, whereas the White subgroup decreased 10%. On the 2012-2013 FCAT assessment, the Hispanic subgroup continued to show a positive trend, as results showed that 72% performed at a proficient rate. The White subgroup showed an additional 1% decrease.
MATHEMATICS:
On the 2010-2011 FCAT assessment, 65% of the Hispanic subgroup were proficient. The White subgroup performed at a 72% proficiency rate. The 2011-2012 assessment showed the same results for the Hispanic subgroup while the White subgroup increased by 8%. However, on the 2012-2013 assessment, the Hispanic subgroup showed a positive increase of 8%, while the White subgroup showed a drastic decrease of 13%.
Which of the above reported findings are consistent with findings from other data sources?
Results from the 2012-2013 CELLA (Florida Comprehensive English Language Learning Assessment) indicate that 83% of the students tested scored within the "high intermediate/ proficient" range in the area of Listening/Speaking, 64% in Reading and 64% in the area of writing.
In the area of Reading, the 2012-2013 Reading District Baseline Assessment indicate that students in Grade 3 showed a 28% proficiency rate in the area of Informational Text/Research Process, however, on the 2012-2013 Reading District Winter Interim Assessment, scores indicate a 19% increase, as 47% of students were proficient in the area of Informational Text/Research Process. The 2012-13 FCAT 2.0 showed a considerable gain, as 75% of 3rd grade students were proficient in Informational Text/Research.
Students in Grade 4 showed a 31% proficiency rate in the area of Reading Application on the 2012-2013 Reading District Baseline Assessment, whereas a 28% gain was made on the 2012-2013 Reading District Winter Interim Assessment in the area of Reading Application. The 2012-13 FCAT 2.0 showed a consistent increase, as 75% of 4th grade students were proficient in the area of Reading Application.
Grade 5 showed a 61% proficiency rate in the area of Vocabulary on the 2012-2013 District Baseline Assessment, and increased 4% on the 2012-2013 District Winter Interim Assessment. The 2012-13 FCAT 2.0 showed a considerable increase in the area of Vocabulary, as 70% scored a proficient rating.
In the area of Mathematics, students in grade 3 showed difficulty on the 2012-2013 District Baseline Assessment in the area of Number Operations, Problems and Statistics with a 3% overall proficiency rate. The 2012-2013 District Winter Interim Assessment, showed a 27% gain in the area of Number Operations, Problems and Statistics. The FCAT 2.0 showed an 81% proficiency rate in the same area. Students
Areas in Need of Improvement
Which area(s) are below the expected levels of performance?
READING:
67% of students made learning gains on the 2012-2013 FCAT 2.0 which shows a decline by 12% from the previous year.
In 2012-13, only 68% of those in the lowest 25% made learning gains, as opposed to the prior year, where 79% made learning gains.
Describe the area(s) that show a negative trend in performance.
The 2012-13 FCAT 2.0 Science results show a significant decrease in student proficiency. In 2011-12, 69% received a proficient rating, as opposed to the 2012-13 results, which show that only 50% were proficient.
Which area(s) indicate the overall lowest performance?
The students who were in fifth grade during the 2012-13 school year, scored 73% proficiency in the area of reading on the 2011-12 FCAT Reading Assessment. However, on the 2012-13 FCAT 2.0 assessment, those same students dropped to a 64% proficiency rate. In the area of mathematics, these same students dropped from 75% proficiency in fourth grade to only 57% scoring proficient on the fifth grade math assessment.
The SWD subgroup scored a 22% proficiency rate in the area of reading on the 2010-11 FCAT 2.0. The same subgroup showed an increase of 13% on the 2011-2012 FCAT 2.0. On the 2012-13 FCAT 2.0, the SWD subgroup were at a 40% proficiency rate. Even with the gradual increase, the SWD subgroup still scores far below all the subgroups.
Which subgroup(s) show a trend toward decreasing performance?
READING:
Students in the Black subgroup showed a decrease in the area of reading during the 2012-13 FCAT administration. During the 2011-12 school year, 67% of the students in this subgroup were proficient in the area of reading, as opposed to the results on the 2012-13 reading assessment, which show that only 57% scored a proficient rating. This 10% decrease shows that additional emphasis needs to be placed on students in the Black subgroup. Differentiated instruction in the area of reading will allow all students additional support.
Between which subgroups is the achievement gap becoming greater?
The White subgroup has shown a decline in proficiency level in the areas of Reading and Mathematics over the past two FCAT 2.0 assessments. There is an 11% decline in Reading and a 5% decline in Mathematics since the 2010-11 assessment.
The Black subgroup has shown a 6% decline in the area of Reading and a 4% decline in the area of Mathematics since the 2010-11 FCAT 2.0 administration.
Which of the above reported findings are consistent with findings from other data sources?
On the 2011-12 FCAT 2.0 Science Assessment, 69% of 5th grade students were proficient. The overall district average was 49%. However on the 2012 FCAT Science Assessment, results show a decline of 19%.
The Science Winter Interim Assessment administered in 2012-13 showed that only 48% scored a proficient rating. The areas of greatest concern were in the "Nature of Science" and "Life Science." Additional hands on science experiments have been provided to all students in grades 4 and 5.
The 2012-2013 Mathematics District Winter Interim Assessment showed that students in grade 3 were deficient in the area of Number: Fractions, as only 48% of students tested were proficient. On the FCAT 2013 assessment, 3rd grade students showed a significant improvement in the area of Number: Fractions, as 70% were proficient in this area.
The 2012-2013 Math District Winter Interim Assessment showed that students in grade 4 were deficient in the area of Number: Base Ten and Fractions as only 55% scored a proficient rating. On the FCAT 2.0 2012, students in grade 4 scored an 80% proficiency rate in the area of Number: Base Ten and Fractions.
The 2012-13 Mathematics District Winter Interim Assessment only 47% of the 5th grade were proficient in the area of Number: Base Ten and Fractions.
On the FCAT 2012, a 64% proficiency rate was achieved by 5th grade students in the area of Number: Base Ten and Fractions.
On the FCAT 2012, the same students only improved 9%, as only 59% of the students tested were proficient in the area of the Number: Base Ten and Fractions.
Report Summary
Scores By Section
Sections
1 2 3 4
Section Score