Building Data Report

Building

Data Report

2018-2019

Now with

more data!

Learn about how our students perform on an ever-increasing range of AP exams.

2017-2018 Data Report

1

Table of Contents

Graduation

Students

College Readiness

State Report Card

Credit Recovery

OGT Achievement

OST Achievement

ACT Achievement

AP Achievement

Finances

Teachers

39

2

41

52

8

15

18

31

36

48

47

Learn about graduation rates and new data on how the class of 2018 met Ohio’s new Graduation Pathways requirement.

Learn about who our students are and have been for the past fourteen years, including demographics and attendance.

Learn generally about our students’ performance in Ohio colleges and specifically at the University of Toledo and Bowling Green State University.

Learn about the component grades for the new state report card that recently completed full transition.

Learn about the class failure patterns of students and the recent decline in student failure rates, as well as

intervention programs that address academic challenges.

Learn about how our students in the past performed on the previous state tests: the Ohio Graduation Tests.

Learn about how our students perform on the current state tests: Ohio’s State Tests, including recent intervention programs to support at-risk students.

Learn about how our juniors performed on the statewide ACT and how the support programs offered by

Southview affected performance.

Learn about funding and spending trends in Sylvania Schools compared to similar districts and state averages. Learn about how well-educated our teachers are and how well they perform on teacher evaluations.

Click on an icon to go directly to the first page of the section.

2017-2018 Data Report

2

Students

Demographics

The student population at Southview demonstrates diversity in race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, ability, and more. Data reported here come from the data collected by the ODE and reflects some limits in their data collecting.

Southview Enrollment 1,311 1,295 1,321 1,302 1,291 1,272 1,239 1,267 1,240 1,196 1,151 1,086 1,068 Southview 1.30% 7.30% 6.40% 8.50% 9.10% 8.80% 10.00% 19.20% 23.40% 22.30% 20.10% 21.30% 21.90% 21.50%

Economic Disadvantage

Discussion

Rates of students living with economic disadvantage have risen dramatically in the past fifteen years throughout the district. Southview has seen a larger increase than Northview.

Northview 2.20% 5.20% 5.20% 6.70% 6.60% 6.10% 7.00% 13.00% 15.30% 16.10% 15.80% 15.00% 16.30% 16.50% District 0.70% 8.10% 7.60% 9.40% 6.40% 5.40% 7.90% 18.00% 21.00% 20.10% 20.80% 20.50% 21.50% 21.50% Year 04-05 05-06 06-07 08-09 09-10 07-08 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 14-15 15-16 16-17

Discussion

Enrollment has steadily declined in both high schools over the past fifteen years with a recent increase at Northview. Northview Enrollment 1,374 1,345 1,386 1,340 1,292 1,213 1,325 1,231 1,214 1,132 1,213 1,241 1,248

Enrollment

Year 04-05 05-06 06-07 08-09 09-10 07-08 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 14-15 15-16 16-17 03-04

2017-2018 Data Report

3

Students

Demographics

English Learners

Discussion

Rates of English Learners have rise by over a factor of seven throughout the district, but the population remains small. Northview rarely has enough to count in state totals. (NC=not counted due to small size)

Northview NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1.00% 0.90% NC 1.10% District 0.30% 0.80% 1.30% 0.60% 1.00% 1.60% 1.10% 1.60% 1.70% 1.40% 2.00% 2.00% 1.80% 2.30%

Disability

Discussion

Rates of students with disabilities have remained relatively static over the last fifteen years, with Northview generally seeing a slightly higher rate.

Northview 11.20% 12.10% 11.40% 11.00% 13.60% 14.20% 12.60% 15.50% 15.00% 14.40% 14.10% 15.20% 13.70% 12.60% District 12.30% 13.30% 13.40% 13.80% 13.50% 13.90% 12.30% 14.00% 13.90% 13.00% 13.30% 13.10% 12.60% 12.30% Southview 10.70% 11.80% 11.00% 10.80% 11.10% 11.90% 11.50% 13.20% 14.30% 13.50% 14.20% 15.00% 14.30% 16.60% Southview NC NC 1.00% NC NC 1.40% NC 1.40% 1.20% NC 0.90% 0.90% 1.10% 1.60% 04-05 05-06 06-07 08-09 09-10 07-08 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 14-15 15-16 16-17 Year 03-04 04-05 05-06 06-07 08-09 09-10 07-08 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 14-15 15-16 16-17 Year 03-04

2017-2018 Data Report

4

Students

Demographics

Black, Non- Hispanic 5.0% 6.0% 5.0% 4.2% 4.9% 6.0% 4.3% 8.2% 8.5% 9.4% 9.4% 9.1% 8.1% 9.0% Asian or Pacific Islander 3.8% 4.6% 5.2% 4.9% 5.4% 5.1% 5.3% 5.0% 4.8% 5.4% 5.0% 5.8% 6.3% 5.9%

Race

78.8% 9.0% 5.9% 3.2% 3.0% White, Non- Hispanic 87.9% 85.3% 85.5% 86.7% 84.6% 83.0% 86.0% 80.2% 80.5% 78.8% 79.6% 79.2% 78.5% 78.8% 04-05 05-06 06-07 08-09 09-10 07-08 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 14-15 15-16 16-17 Year 03-04 White, Non-Hispanic* Hispanic 1.6% 1.8% 1.9% 2.0% 1.8% 1.8% 1.8% 2.0% 2.4% 2.2% 2.4% 2.7% 3.5% 3.2% Multi- Racial 1.7% 2.3% 2.3% 2.2% 3.3% 4.1% 2.7% 4.4% 3.8% 4.1% 3.5% 3.1% 3.5% 3.0% Black, Non-Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander

Hispanic Multiracial

2016-2017

Trends

Discussion

Over time, the percentage of black, hispanic, and multiracial students at Southview has roughly doubled, but remains a small portion of the overall population. The Asian population has remained relatively static, and the white population has decreased by close to 10%.

*Note that for state reporting purposes, students of Arabic heritage are counted as “White, Non-Hispanic.”

2017-2018 Data Report

5

Students

Attendance

Southview reports attendance to the state, which is collected and reported to the public as both an overall attendance rate and a chronic absenteeism rate (CAR). The CAR is defined as a student missing two days of school per month. The state has been reporting CAR since the 2013-2014 school year.

Overall Attendance

Year Overall Attendance 2003-2004 95.3% 2004-2005 94.9% 2005-2006 95.0% 2006-2007 94.7% 2007-2008 96.0% 2008-2009 93.7% 2009-2010 95.5% 2010-2011 96.0% 2011-2012 95.9% 2012-2013 95.2% 2013-2014 95.5% 2014-2015 94.8% 2015-2016 93.7% 2016-2017 94.7%

Chronic Absenteeism

Year CAR 2013-2014 9.7% 2014-2015 11.5% 2015-2016 14.8% 2016-2017 12.9%

Discussion

While attendance rates have remained static, the chronic absenteeism rate has risen over the past four years. This CAR data is less robust, though.

2017-2018 Data Report

6

Discipline

Student discipline is tracked by referrals that become log entries in PowerSchool. The data on this page come from those records.

Offenses

Offense 14-15 15-16 16-17 17-18 Tardy (school) 77 63 110 85 Truancy 191 157 389 293 Tardy (class) 121 820 1128 1123 Disruptive Behavior 125 114 245 195 Electronic Devices 64 86 82 119 Other Warnings 105 50 47 44 Failure to Comply 80 48 142 105 Disrespect 78 77 245 104 Cheating/Plagiarism 9 19 31 18 Drugs/Alcohol 6 6 6 4 Fighting 10 14 33 10 Tobacco 7 3 1 7 Theft 9 12 2 10 Forgery 2 3 5 4 Harassment/Bullying 15 7 6 13

2017-2018 Data Report

7

Discipline

Discussion

The highest rates of discipline offenses come from student refusal to attend school or attend on time. These offenses include tardy to school, tardy to class, and truancy. The next category comes from various forms of insubordinate actions, including disruptive behavior, failure to comply, and disrespect. Those offenses peaked in 2016-2017. No clear trend in consequences is revealed here.

Offenses

Consequences

Consequences 14-15 15-16 16-17 17-18

One-Hour Detention 338 376 357 496

Two-Hour Detention 85 52 133 116

Three-Hour Detention 30 44 90 22

In-Class Reassignment (ICR) 0 0 0 176

Out of School Suspension

2017-2018 Data Report

8

Credit Recovery

Failures

These data show failures and credit recovery needs for the students enrolled at Southview at the beginning of the 2018-2019 school year. This includes the classes of 2019, 2020, and 2021. A single need for credit recovery means a semester failure in a course directly required for graduation.

Tracked Population Added Students Difference 15-16 265 16-17 519 254 -4.15% 17-18 762 243 -4.33%

Population Trends

Discussion

As the population of Southview decreases at a steady rate, the population of students failing at least one course decreases at a faster rate, and that rate is increasing. While the number of failing students is decreasing, last year saw a spike in the average number of failures per failing student.

Failure Trends

Failing Students Percentage of Total Population Failures Average Failures per Student 15-16 70 26.42% 81 1.16 16-17 127 24.47% 145 1.14 17-18 159 20.87% 273 1.72

2017-2018 Data Report

9

Credit Recovery

Failures

These data show failures and credit recovery needs for the students enrolled at Southview at the beginning of the 2018-2019 school year. This includes the classes of 2019, 2020, and 2021. A single need for credit recovery means a semester failure in a course directly required for graduation.

Discussion

The top ten most-failed courses are listed to the right, but the chart shows the top fifteen. These data show that non-math courses outrank math classes in failure rates, even if certain courses, like Algebra I and Algebra I 2B, are combined. Math, unlike other core disciplines, benefits from double-blocked courses, an integrated track for students on IEP’s, and math lab tutoring.

Course Failure Trends

Rank Course Failures Percentage 1 PHYSICAL SCIENCE 9 58 12.29% 2 ENGLISH 10 55 11.65% 3 ENGLISH 9 55 11.65% 4 WORLD STUDIES 51 10.81% 5 AMERICAN HISTORY 27 5.72% 6 BIOLOGY 28 5.93% 7 ALGEBRA I 27 5.72% 7 AMER LITERATURE 25 5.30% 8 GEOMETRY 25 5.30% 9 ALGEBRA II 14 2.97% 10 ALGEBRA I 2B 16 3.39%

2017-2018 Data Report

10

Credit Recovery

GradPoint

GradPoint is an online curriculum program that Sylvania Schools uses for credit recovery through the school year and summer school. Each GradPoint course addresses a semester’s worth of standards in a course offered in classrooms at Southview. The data below comes from records kept by GradPoint administrators.

Top Enrolled GradPoint Courses

Course Total Registrations

Total Incompletes

English 11 Sem 1 51 19 Prin of Sec Math Sem 1 50 7 English 11 Sem 2 36 9 English 9 Sem 2 33 17 English 10 Sem 1 33 21 Algebra II Sem 1 25 6 Algebra I Sem 2 24 13 Geometry Sem 2 22 13 American History Sem 1 22 11 Intermediate Alg Sem 1 18 5 Prin of Sec Math Sem 2 18 3 Government 18 8 World Studies Sem 1 18 10

Enrollment and Incompletes

Discussion

The enrollment in GradPoint courses has increased by a factor of 2 to 3 since fall of 2012, but the rate of increase has declined with some regularity. The incomplete rate for that period has followed suit. The courses in high demand through GradPoint do not correspond to the courses that see the highest failure rates. Those data sets differ, however, in the periods of time they cover.

Session Registrations Incompletes %

Fall 2012 19 12 63.16% Spring 2013 48 20 41.67% Fall 2013 23 9 39.13% Spring 2014 51 15 29.41% Fall 2014 26 10 38.46% Spring 2015 51 14 27.45% Fall 2015 40 21 52.50% Spring 2016 69 24 34.78% Fall 2016 53 29 54.72% Spring 2017 87 24 27.59% Fall 2017 54 19 35.19% Spring 2018 69 17 24.64%

2017-2018 Data Report

11

Credit Recovery

GradPoint

Discussion

The vast majority of students

completing GradPoint courses

are economically

disadvantaged. These students

fail to complete courses at

higher rates than

non-economically

disadvantaged IEP students.

Combining IEP and economic

disadvantage increases the

incomplete rate even more.

GradPoint Comparisons by Category

Non-IEP/ Non-ED

Students IEP Students

Economically Disadvantaged

IEP and Econ

Disadvantage All Students

Total Registrations

160

52

303

73

588

Total Incompletes

31

20

124

39

214

2017-2018 Data Report

12

Credit Recovery

Edgenuity

Course Enrollments

Beginning with a pilot program in spring and summer 2018, IEP and EL students were offered a new platform for credit recovery: Edgenuity. Edgenuity differs from GradPoint by offering greater flexibility of accommodation and a greater range of learning style supports. It also offers greater access to stakeholders like parents and intervention specialists. The data here shows results from the pilot program. All data refers to IEP and EL students only.

Incomplete Rates

Total Rank English 10 S2

7

1 Science 9 S1

5

2 American History S1

4

3 English 10 S1

4

3 English 11 S2

4

3 English 12 S1

4

3 English 12 S2

3

4 Geometry S2

3

4 Science 9 S2

3

4 Total Students Complete Courses Incomplete Courses Incomplete

Rate Pending Courses

Incomplete Rate w/Pending Courses still in progress

and able to be completed

Edgenuity Spring 2018 37 22 14 38.89% 0 38.89%

Edgenuity Summer 2018 60 38 5 11.63% 17 36.67%

GradPoint Spring 2017 17 14 10 41.67% N/A N/A

GradPoint Summer 2017 23 7 24 77.42% N/A N/A

Discussion

The pilot period shows some initial positive results for Edgenuity, especially for the summer school

program. During the pilot period, 2-3 times as many IEP students were enrolled as were enrolled in GradPoint in the same periods the previous school year. The incomplete rates for those times were lower as well. At the time of this report, students were still completing summer work through extensions, so two possible summer incomplete rates can be seen: either 36.67% if the pending courses are counted as incomplete or 11.63% if they are not yet included in the total. Depending on those interpretations, the summer comparison is either noticeably or extremely reduced from the previous summer.

2017-2018 Data Report

13

Credit Recovery

The Learning Center

The Learning Center is the evolution of the Guided Study Hall. It removes students from study hall and commons periods to put them in a smaller group with more active teacher support, direct access to the math lab, and help from NHS tutors. The TLC environment is designed to support students at academic risk. The data here focuses on one year of TLC operations.

Number Percentage Total Students 126 100.00% GenEd Students 84 66.67% IEP Students 33 26.19% EL Students 9 7.14% Grade 9 33 26.19% Grade 10 34 26.98% Grade 11 36 28.57% Grade 12 23 18.25% Failing Students 66 52.38%

Failing IEP Students 19 57.58%

Failing EL Students 2 22.22%

Failing Students Taking GradPoint 17 25.76%

Gradpoint Incomplete Rate 51.39%

Overall GradPoint Incomplete Rate 30.21%

Number

Percentage of Total Category

Population Failing IEP Students 18 54.55%

Failing EL Students 2 22.22%

Failing Non-EL Non-IEP

Students 45 53.57%

Discussion

Students in TLC fail courses at more than a 50% rate. The data does not show whether those failures come before or after TLC registration. But, the data does show that only half of those students work on GradPoint toward credit recovery. More detailed data is needed to provide clearer insight.

2017-2018 Data Report

14

Credit Recovery

Tenth Period

In 2017-2018, the Tenth Period intervention was implemented at Southview. Tenth Period was an hour of after-school work time for students capable of succeeding, but struggling to complete homework to make academic progress. Tenth Period monitors met with parents to discuss goals and kept parents apprised of attendance and progress. The data below shows the only year of implementation so far.

Average Attendance Rate 44.12%

Average Credit Recovery Needed at the

Beginning of the Year 0.97 Average Credit Recovery Needed at the

End of the Year 2.07

Average Credits Recovered 0.64

Average Yearly Credit Recovery

Progress -0.99

Average Semester 1 Failures 1.10

Average Semester 2 Failures 1.86

Average Semester Failure Improvement 0.76

Discussion

The measures of semester failures and credit

recovery show that enrollment in Tenth Period

did not help students make academic

progress. The attendance rate of less than

50% must be noticed as well. Many students

enrolled in the program failed to attend with

regularity. These data would require further

examination of the program to determine the

reason for the results.

2017-2018 Data Report

15

OGT Achievement

Ohio began administering the Ohio Graduation Tests in March of 2005. The tests were administered to sophomores and included Reading, Writing, Math, Science, and Social Studies. Passage rates for all tests were 75%. The administration of these tests ended with the administration of Ohio’s New State Tests, which began implementation in spring of 2015.

Reading Performance

Writing Performance

Southview Reading Passage District Reading Passage 2004-2005 97.00% 98.10% 2005-2006 96.40% 96.70% 2006-2007 94.70% 95.80% 2007-2008 95.10% 94.80% 2008-2009 95.20% 94.60% 2009-2010 91.30% 91.40% 2010-2011 96.20% 96.20% 2011-2012 94.60% 94.70% 2012-2013 92.70% 94.40% 2013-2014 96.70% 96.40% Southview Writing Passage District Writing Passage 2004-2005 92.50% 94.80% 2005-2006 94.40% 94.90% 2006-2007 95.80% 97.30% 2007-2008 95.10% 94.60% 2008-2009 96.90% 96.90% 2009-2010 93.10% 92.70% 2010-2011 97.80% 97.80% 2011-2012 95.30% 95.80% 2012-2013 94.10% 93.70% 2013-2014 97.70% 96.70%

2017-2018 Data Report

16

OGT Achievement

Math Performance

Science Performance

Southview Math Passage District Math Passage 2004-2005 89.50% 91.20% 2005-2006 91.20% 92.30% 2006-2007 91.40% 92.70% 2007-2008 96.30% 96.20% 2008-2009 92.80% 92.60% 2009-2010 90.30% 90.30% 2010-2011 92.70% 94.60% 2011-2012 92.20% 93.60% 2012-2013 87.50% 91.10% 2013-2014 93.00% 94.20% Southview Science Passage District Science Passage 2004-2005 89.10% 90.20% 2005-2006 89.20% 88.70% 2006-2007 84.60% 96.40% 2007-2008 95.20% 94.70% 2008-2009 94.10% 91.30% 2009-2010 84.00% 84.50% 2010-2011 90.40% 90.10% 2011-2012 90.80% 90.50% 2012-2013 88.90% 90.80% 2013-2014 88.70% 89.40%

2017-2018 Data Report

17

OGT Achievement

Social Studies Performance

Overall Comparison

Southview Social Studies Passage District Social Studies Passage 2004-2005 91.50% 93.00% 2005-2006 93.10% 92.90% 2006-2007 87.50% 90.30% 2007-2008 95.80% 95.80% 2008-2009 95.20% 93.90% 2009-2010 87.10% 86.70% 2010-2011 91.40% 90.60% 2011-2012 91.50% 92.20% 2012-2013 90.20% 90.40% 2013-2014 93.40% 93.10% Percentage of Students Rating Accelerated or Above 2008-2009 73.20% 2009-2010 59.40% 2010-2011 72.20% 2011-2012 66.20% 2012-2013 69.40% 2013-2014 69.70%

2017-2018 Data Report

18

OST Achievement

Ohio has been requiring the new Ohio State Tests (OST’s) since the 2014-2015 school year, with the class of 2018 being the first graduating class held accountable for performance on them. These end-of-course exams, which replaced Ohio’s Graduation Tests (OGT’s), span seven subjects: Algebra I, Geometry, English Language Arts I (freshman), English Language Arts II (sophomore), American History, American Government, and Biology (formerly Physical Science). Each test is scored on a 1 to 5 scale.

Discussion

The data show a shift toward lower achievement since the 2014-2015 school year. It is important to note, though, that the 2013-2014 school year yields purely OGT scores, the 2016-2017 school year yields purely OST results, and the intervening years show the gradual shift from one set of tests to the next. This shows the more rigorous expectations of the OST’s. Year 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 Advanced Plus 0.20% 0.40% 0.10% Advanced 36.10% 22.90% 9.80% Accelerated 33.40% 36.30% 24.40% Proficient 23.60% 25.20% 36.00% Basic 3.60% 8.80% 18.90% Limited 2.20% 5.70% 10.40% Untested 0.70% 0.80% 0.40% 2016-2017 0.00% 13.5% 26.70% 36.00% 12.70% 11.20% 0.00%

2017-2018 Data will be available in fall of 2018.

Overall Performance Index Achievement

2017-2018 Data Report

19

OST Achievement

Algebra I

These pages show the results of the Algebra I end-of-course exams over the course of the first four years of OST implementation.

Discussion

Proficiency rates have tended to drop over the past four years. The 2018 overall proficiency rate was 55.88%, but in this year, Ohio has started removing retesting students from that total.

Year 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 Algebra I Proficient or Above 73.40% 73.90% 58.60% 2017-2018 67.03%

Overall Proficiency

Subscore Proficiencies

Functions 2015-2016 81.4 2016-2017 2017-2018 77.2 78.0 80.5 75.8 89.6 88.4 85.4 81.9 78.6 70.8 95.3 Numbers, Quantities, Equations, and Expressions Statistics Modeling and Reasoning

Discussion

After a drop in performance, recent trends show a rise in three of four subscores. Even though the value-added score has dropped, it remains strong, showing marked growth for SV students. Note that PARCC results from 2014-2015 are not available.

Proficiency indicates near or above proficient. Value-Added 2016

7.7

Value-Added 2017

4.1

See Value-Added Report Page for Details

2017-2018 Data Report

20

OST Achievement

Geometry

These pages show the results of the Geometry end-of-course exams over the course of the first four years of OST implementation.

Discussion

Proficiency rates have tended to drop over the past four years. The 2018 overall proficiency rate was 56.34%, but in this year, Ohio has started removing retesting students from that total.

Year 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 Geometry Proficient or Above 100.00% 64.80% 67.20% 2017-2018 65.16%

Overall Proficiency

Subscore Proficiencies

Circles 2015-2016 84.1 2016-2017 2017-2018 71.2 67.6 85.9 77.2 88.1 100 80.4 79.5 74.5 83.9 75.4 Congruence and Proof Probability Similarity and Trigonometry

Discussion

Even though one subscore has recently risen, the other four have seen drops. Despite this the value-added score has risen significantly, showing marked growth for SV students. Note that PARCC results from 2014-2015 are not available.

Proficiency indicates near or above proficient. 85.0 75.8 71.7 Modeling and Reasoning Value-Added 2016

-0.3

Value-Added 2017

1.5

See Value-Added Report Page for Details

2017-2018 Data Report

21

OST Achievement

ELA I

These pages show the results of the English Language Arts I end-of-course exams over the course of the first four years of OST implementation.

Discussion

Proficiency rates have tended to remain static over the past four years. The 2018 overall proficiency rate was 76.24%, but in this year, Ohio has started removing retesting students from that total.

Year 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 ELA I Proficient or Above 74.00% 74.61% 74.30% 2017-2018 82.43%

Overall Proficiency

Subscore Proficiencies

Reading- Informational Text 2015-2016 85.9 2016-2017 2017-2018 88.7 88.7 81.3 88.7 81.2 84.4 83.6 87.0 Reading- Literary Text Writing

Discussion

A rise in Writing recently was accompanied by a drop in Reading-Literary Text. Value-added remains relatively unchanged. Note that PARCC results from 2014-2015 are not available. Proficiency indicates near or above proficient. Value-Added 2016

0.5

Value-Added 2017

0.3

See Value-Added Report Page for Details

2017-2018 Data Report

22

OST Achievement

ELA II

These pages show the results of the English Language Arts II end-of-course exams over the course of the first four years of OST implementation.

Discussion

Proficiency rates have tended to rise over the past four years. The 2018 overall proficiency rate was 71.62%, but in this year, Ohio has started removing retesting students from that total.

Year 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 ELA II Proficient or Above Not Tested 65.50% 74.45% 2017-2018 78.49%

Overall Proficiency

Subscore Proficiencies

Reading- Informational Text 2015-2016 79.5 2016-2017 2017-2018 82.3 88.3 78.0 83.9 64.2 76.1 78.1 83.7 Reading- Literary Text Writing

Discussion

A rise in Writing and Reading-Informational Text recently was accompanied by a drop in Reading-Literary Text. Despite stronger achievement, the value-added score has dropped. Note that PARCC results from 2014-2015 are not available.

Proficiency indicates near or above proficient. Value-Added 2016

1.3

Value-Added 2017

0.4

See Value-Added Report Page for Details

2017-2018 Data Report

23

OST Achievement

American History

These pages show the results of the American History end-of-course exams over the course of the first four years of OST implementation.

Discussion

Proficiency rates have tended to fluctuate over the past four years. The 2018 overall proficiency rate was 85.34%, but in this year, Ohio has started removing retesting students from that total.

Year 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 American History Proficient or Above 77.90% 85.20% 80.20% 2017-2018 86.10%

Overall Proficiency

Subscore Proficiencies

Discussion

A significant rise from original scores has lead

to relative fluctuations in scores.

Skills and Documents 2015-2016 92.1 2016-2017 2017-2018 88.0 95.6 91.9 86.9 86.1 90.6 88.0 86.1 1877-1945 1945- Present Proficiency indicates near or above proficient. 2014-2015 75.6 75.6 63.3

2017-2018 Data Report

24

OST Achievement

American Government

These pages show the results of the American Government end-of-course exams over the course of the first four years of OST implementation.

Discussion

After a recent downward trend in performance, proficiency has risen steeply.

Year 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 American Government Proficient or Above 92.10% 79.80% 72.10% 2017-2018 88.52%

Overall Proficiency

Subscore Proficiencies

Historic Documents 2015-2016 88.8 2016-2017 2017-2018 85.7 94.5 89.1 80.2 89.6 88.1 83.3 89.6 Principles and Structure Ohio, Policy and Economy

Discussion

Despite some recent fluctuations, the last testing year shows a concerted rise in all subscores.

Proficiency indicates near or above proficient. 2014-2015 88.0 55.1 56.3

2017-2018 Data Report

25

OST Achievement

Biology

These pages show the results of the Biology end-of-course exams over the course of the first four years of OST

implementation. Note that originally students tested in Physical Science, leading to less regular data. Those scores are not included here.

Discussion

Despite the unrepresentative opening year of scores, the recent trend has shown an increase in proficiency. Year 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 Biology Proficient or Above Not Tested 45.80% 76.50% 2017-2018 82.28%

Overall Proficiency

Subscore Proficiencies

Heredity 2015-2016 85.7 2016-2017 2017-2018 85.2 90.9 65.6 84.4 76.0 56.3 85.2 89.4 Evolution Diversity of Life

Discussion

Following the increase from the irregular first year, scores have fluctuated.

Proficiency indicates near or above proficient. 68.8 89.1 89.0 Cells

2017-2018 Data Report

26

OST Achievement

Goal Reflection

At the beginning of the 2017-2018 school year, Southview teachers, counselors, and administrators, in conjunction with the department chair team, wrote two academic goals based on analyzed test data from recent years. The data below demonstrates progress toward those goals. Numbers show the percentage of students performing above proficient on the relevant subscore. Gap closing data is not yet available at the time of this reporting.

Discussion

As mentioned above, this is not the data mentioned in the goal, but until those data arrive, this data can give a preliminary indication of progress. The most recent year of testing shows a drop from recent years, which is a reversal of trend in Geometry.

Goal #1

Goal #2

Southview students will improve their

mathematics performance strongly

enough to raise the Southview math gap

closing score from 61.4 to 72 through a

cross-curricular emphasis on modeling,

reasoning, and data analysis. Students

on IEP’s will achieve proficiency in math

at a rate of 30%.

Southview will increase ELA writing

performance to 70% through a

cross-curricular focus on in-class writing

to explain content concepts, justify

answers, and explore ideas. This writing

will happen especially in timed

environments, where appropriate.

Discussion

An initial drop in writing for ELA I and rise in ELA II has led to a plateau between 16-18 and 17-18. Progress toward the 70% goal has not been seen, even though no ground has been lost.

Percentage of students scoring above proficient in modeling and reasoning

2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 Algebra I 57.67% 42.92% 40.34%

Geometry 46.36% 51.23% 36.97%

Percentage of students scoring above proficient in writing

2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 ELA I 68.36% 61.09% 60.99%

2017-2018 Data Report

27

OST Achievement

Interventions

In 2017-2018, two test preparation intervention programs were implemented in both the fall and spring OST administration periods. The first was the “Boot Camp” program, which offered four days of after-school preparation classes for an hour each. This program was open to every student and invitations were sent to the general testing population. The second program was the “Daily Intervention” program, which involved individual and small group preparation sessions during the school day. Participating students were pulled from scheduled periods for the intervention. This program was only open to students on IEP’s, and their participation was required. The data below shows the impact of these interventions for both first-time testers, students that were taking a given test for the first time, and retesters, students that were taking a given test for the second time.

First-Time Testers

Discussion

The intervention programs do not show an improvement over the general score average, but these programs serve students that often need extra help. In the data, this group is compared to students that historically score very well on these tests, including honors and AP students. A truly useful comparison would compare the group to similar students that did not avail themselves of the interventions.

First Tester Score Average Total

3.36

Without Intervention

3.39

With Intervention

2.30

First Tester Score Average Boot Camp Only

2.72

Daily Intervention Only

1.62

Both Interventions

1.67

2017-2018 Data Report

28

OST Achievement

Interventions

Retesters

Discussion

Both interventions seem to have a greater impact on retesting students, but this is possibly apparent because the comparison made is to other retesting students, who are similar in testing ability to the intervention group. The greatest impact seems to be with the students on IEP’s in daily

intervention. Retester Improvement Average Total

0.32

Without Intervention

0.22

With Intervention

0.39

Improved Retesters Static Retesters Declined Retesters Total

74

89

25

Without Intervention

31

48

15

With Intervention

42

40

12

Retester Improvement Average Boot Camp Only

0.07

Daily Intervention

Only

1.06

2017-2018 Data Report

29

OST Achievement

Exam Grade Replacement

In 2017-2018, the Sylvania Board of Education approved an incentive program for students taking OST’s. Students

achieving certain scores were able to replace their second semester exam grade in an associated class. See the full policy

here. These data show the impact of this policy. The data here is current as of August 17, 2018, but new requests continue to be entered.

Discussion

The request data here corresponds roughly with the overall achievement for these tests. Scores for Biology and American History tests were the highest, ELA I and ELA II were next, and Algebra I and Geometry followed. Replacement requests follow this pattern. The exception here is American

Government, but that exception makes sense as many seniors did not take the second semester exam, and most did not care to take advantage of the policy as they had already graduated.

Replacement Requests

Test Replacements Biology 76 American History 66 English 10 54 English 9 44 Geometry 34 Algebra I 32 American Government 4 Course Replacement Requests Level Biology 37 Regular

American History 40 Regular

Honors Biology 36 Honors/AP

English 10 33 Regular

Algebra I 33 Regular

AP US History 26 Honors/AP

Honors English 9 26 Honors/AP

Honors English 10 20 Honors/AP

Geometry 23 Regular

English 9 17 Regular

Honors Geometry 11 Honors/AP

American Government 3 Regular

AP US Government 1 Honors/AP

2017-2018 Data Report

30

OST Achievement

Exam Grade Replacement

Discussion

A surprising number of replacement requests did not result in semester grade changes. The ratio is roughly 2:1 on raises to non-raises. The number of replacements that led to credit recovery was relatively low, and it represents approximately 4% of the overall credit recovery need of these students.

Replacement Impacts

Semester Grade Raised Number

Yes 166

No 115

Failure Reversed Number

Yes 22

2017-2018 Data Report

31

ACT

Achievement

Beginning with the 2016-2017 school year, Southview began administering the state-required college entrance exam. The state allowed districts to choose an exam for the required administration, and Sylvania chose the ACT due to the

preference for that exam demonstrated by Sylvania students. The data here shows that general administration, which includes all eligible students, not merely those college-bound that elect to take the test.

2016-2017 2017-2018 % Difference Number of Students Southview

266

261

-1.88%

State

115,380

114,252

-0.98%

% Meeting English Benchmark Southview

66

54

-18.18%

State

51

48

-5.88%

% Meeting Mathematics Benchmark Southview

51

41

-19.61%

State

36

33

-8.33%

% Meeting Reading Benchmark Southview

51

46

-9.80%

State

40

36

-10.00%

% Meeting Science Benchmark Southview

46

42

-8.70%

State

32

29

-9.38%

% Meeting All Four Benchmarks Southview

35

28

-20.00%

State

22

19

-13.64%

2017-2018 Data Report

32

ACT

Achievement

2016-2017 2017-2018 % Difference Average English Score Southview

21.4

19.7

-7.94%

State

18.6

18.2

-2.15%

Average Mathematics Score Southview

22.1

20.9

-5.43%

State

20.0

19.5

-2.50%

Average Reading Score Southview

22.1

21.4

-3.17%

State

20.2

19.7

-2.48%

Average Science Score Southview

22.3

21.5

-3.59%

State

19.9

19.5

-2.01%

Average Composite Score Southview

22.1

19.8

-10.41%

State

19.8

19.4

-2.02%

Discussion

The data here do not show a long enough trend to generate any solid conclusions, but some observations can be made. Scores across the board dropped this year, even though the tested group did not change significantly in number. The state experienced a similar drop, even though Southview’s drop happened at a higher rate of decline. The rough correspondence could indicate a more challenging test overall. ACT usually adjust scale scores to account for that, but they also report percentile rank as an indicator that can account for difference in test level difficulty from administration to administration.

2017-2018 Data Report

33

ACT

College Prep Challenge

Southview continued its offering of ACT support programs in 2017-2018, this time offering four supports: after-school preparation courses, analyzed practice tests, seminars on late start days, and digital practice through Albert.io. A student completing most of these challenges earned the completion of the College Prep Challenge. The data below show results from those support programs.

Participation Results

CPC Level

(Each number indicates an intervention completed) Average English Score Average Math Score Average Reading Score N 0 16.83 19.14 19.34 148 1 23.81 23.99 24.18 67 2 22.9 22.64 25.06 33 3 22 20.73 21.91 11 6 22 24.5 22.5 2

2017-2018 Data Report

34

ACT

College Prep Challenge

Participation Results

CPC Level

(Each number indicates an intervention completed) Average Difference from Predicted Percentile in English Average Difference from Predicted Percentile in Math Average Difference from Predicted Percentile in Reading N 0 1.38 0.94 3.2 134 1 -3.84 -3.75 -1.53 63 2 0.56 2.16 4.88 32 3 -3.5 -6.36 -5 11 6 11 17 13 2

2017-2018 Data Report

35

ACT

College Prep Challenge

Discussion

Overall, participation in supports leading to the College Prep Challenge did not seem to help or hurt students on the ACT. Further analysis comparing students participating and not participating by similar GPA grouping also did not reveal trends one way or another. The above analysis, however, shows that students participating in one of the supports, the after-school prep courses, did show noticeably better results. These students not only scored better on average test score, but also on their differential from Ohio’s predicted score. This means they tended to come closer to that average, with Reading test performance showing the strongest results.

Participation Results

Students completing after-school prep course (n=54) Students not completing after-school prep course (n=207) Average English Score 23.0 19.2 Average Math Score 22.5 19.0 Average Reading Score 23.2 20.3 Students completing after-school prep course (n=54) Students not completing after-school prep course (n=207) Average English Differential -0.18 -3.76 Average Math Differential -2.61 -3.22 Average Reading Differential 2.47 -3.69

2017-2018 Data Report

36

AP Achievement

Southview has gradually added AP courses to the 2018-2019 level of 18. Students in all 18 courses register for the AP exams in May, and some students register for exams for courses not offered at Southview. The data here show scores and exam registration numbers from the College Board.

Unique Exams and Scores

# of Unique

Exams Taken Average Score

2013 10 3.70 2014 13 3.57 2015 14 3.35 2016 16 3.51 2017 17 3.50 2018 20 3.34

Total Students and Scores

Total Students Average Score

2013 175 3.70 2014 197 3.57 2015 276 3.35 2016 282 3.51 2017 255 3.50 2018 279 3.34

SV Passage Rates

SVHS Passage Rates Ohio Passage Rates 2013 84.6% 66.70% 2014 85.3% 68.00% 2015 75.7% 64.80% 2016 79.1% 64.20% 2017 74.5% 63.80% 2018 74.2% 64.40%

The number of unique AP exams administered at Southview has doubled in the past six years and the number of examined students has increased by 60%. Over that same time, passage rates and averages scores have dropped by 10%. These declines are expected as a larger percentage of students participate in AP programs.

2017-2018 Data Report

37

AP Achievement

Discussion

Multi-Level Comparison

Total Students Number of Exams % of Students Passing 2013 175 294 84.6% 2014 197 302 85.3% 2015 276 441 75.7% 2016 282 447 79.1% 2017 255 446 74.5% 2018 279 447 74.2%

2017-2018 Data Report

38

AP Achievement

Albert Practice

In the 2017-2018 school year, all AP teachers had access to Albert.io, a digital practice platform that offers students feedback-rich AP test practice. Most AP teachers were new to the system, and those familiar with it were becoming used to the full premium program for the first time. Data on correlation between individual student usage and test performance will come, but for now, this data focuses on usage in the first year of implementation. Total Average per Teacher Average per Student Number of Enrollments

896

59.7

Attempts

65667

113.9

Success

41393

2759.5

Average

Performance

Success Rate

63.8%

2017-2018 Data Report

39

Graduation

Rates

Graduation rates provide data on the percentage of seniors that graduate in a four-year or five-year

period.

Discussion

On-Time Graduation rates have dropped and recovered in recent years. They remain close to district averages and far above state averages. 5-year averages have risen consistently,

overtaking the district average for the first time in recording. Year 2003 2004 2005 2006 2008 2009 2007 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Southview Rate 96.6% 93.6% 95.6% 97.2% 93.2% 89.8% 93.2% 91.1% 90.0% 88.5% 90.7% 91.3% 95.0% District Rate 95.6% 95.0% 96.8% 96.9% 94.7% 92.3% 96.0% 93.3% 90.4% 89.3% 92.3% 92.3% 94.0% Year 2010 2011 2012 5-Year Rate 90.3% 91.6% 91.4% 2016 94.9% 94.5% 2013 2014 2015 93.7% 93.3% 97.0% State Average 81.3% 82.2% 82.2% 83.0% 83.6% Data Not Available District Rate N/A 92.4% 92.0% 95.1% 94.8% 96.0% State Average N/A 91.6% 91.4% 93.7% 93.3% 94.9%

2017-2018 Data Report

40

Graduation

Pathways

Starting with the class of 2018, Ohio now requires all Ohio graduates to earn a Graduation Pathway in addition to

accumulating necessary credits. Three Pathways existed originally, but the class of 2018 enjoyed two alternate options for their year only. The pathways met by each student graduating in the past year are listed below.

Pathways

OST Achievement* Students score at least 18 points

with a required distribution across content areas.

ACT College-Ready Score* Students score at least 18

in English, 22 on Math, and 22 on Reading.

Industry Credentials Students complete a career tech

program with necessary industry credentials and passing

score on the WorkKeys test.

Alternative Option 1 Students retake all failed OST’s

and complete two required options, such as minimum

GPA or work/volunteer hours

Alternative Option 2 Students complete a career tech

program and earn proficient scores on their WebXams.

*Note that a student could be counted as earning both required OST and ACT scores.

Pathway OST Achievement ACT CR Score Industry Credentials Alternative Option 1 Alternate Assessment Alternative Option 2 Number 221 81 0 20 6 9 Percentage 80.95% 29.67% 0.00% 7.33% 2.20% 3.30% IEP Exemption 11 4.03% No Pathway 2 0.73%

2017-2018 Data Report

41

College Readiness

General

The readiness of Southview students for college is measured by data from the ODE’s Higher Ed Data and Reports, updated yearly. In addition, Sylvania Schools has recently joined the P3 _{Partnership, a cohort of twenty local high schools}

that are working with the University of Toledo and Bowling Green State University to examine data provided by those colleges on how high school graduates from those schools individually are performing at those colleges. The data analyzed the group of 844 Southview graduates attending one of those two post-secondary institutions (PSI’s) over the past eight years. Full analysis of Southview student performance at UT and BGSU can be found in this sheet.

Discussion

Southview

students

tend to

attend PSI’s

in Ohio, and

more than

half of those

students

attend UT or

BGSU.

PSI Attendance

Graduating Class Number of Students Enrolling in an Ohio post-secondary institution % of Students Enrolling in an Ohio post-secondary institution Number of Students Enrolling at UT or BGSU % of PSI-enrolling Students enrolling in at UT or BGSU 2010 319 186 58.31% 109 58.60% 2011 270 164 60.74% 95 57.93% 2012 306 191 62.42% 101 52.88% 2013 308 195 63.31% 124 63.59% 2014 286 158 55.24% 96 60.76% 2015 287 156 54.36% 100 64.10% 2016 268 151 56.34% 106 70.20%

2017-2018 Data Report

42

College Readiness

General

Discussion

Southview students tend to require college remediation at distinctly lower rates than the state average, but a

comparison to similar schools would yield better data. What is obvious is that the need for English remediation is distinctly lower than the need for math.

Remedial Math and English Participation

% of Entering SV Students Taking Developmental Math State Average % of Entering SV Students Taking Developmental English State Average 2010 12% 34% 5% 19% 2011 9% 35% 2% 20% 2012 19% 34% 7% 20% 2013 25% 32% 11% 16% 2014 8% 28% 5% 13% 2015 10% 27% 5% 13% 2016 9% 25% 5% 13%

2017-2018 Data Report

43

College Readiness

Student Populations

The data below show the composition of students attending UT or BGSU.

Discussion

The racial composition of Southview graduates attending UT or BGSU tends to follow the racial composition of Southview for the same time period. The percentage of those students that are economically disadvantaged, though, is much higher, possibly due to differences in the requirements of Pell Grant eligibility vs. Free/Reduced Lunch status.

Racial Composition

Race/Ethnicity PSI % SV % Total BGSU UT

Black 4.74% 8.46% 40 6 34 Hispanic 3.32% 2.53% 28 5 23 NotSpec 4.38% 37 3 34 Other 11.49% 8.85% 97 8 89 White 76.07% 79.83% 642 126 516 Cohort % of enrollees qualifying for federal Pell Grants % of Southview students qualifying for Free/Reduced Lunch status 2010 44.04% 8.80% 2011 42.11% 19.20% 2012 45.54% 23.40% 2013 41.46% 22.30% 2014 29.79% 20.10% 2015 36.00% 21.30% 2016 33.96% 21.90% 2017 36.28% 21.50%

Economic Disadvantage

2017-2018 Data Report

44

College Readiness

GPA Prediction

The data below show correlations between high school academic performance, as measured by GPA, with college academic performance, also measured by GPA. “Cohort” refers to the total student group (N=9673) of the BGSU/UT P3 partnership that produced the data and includes 20 high schools from Northwest Ohio.

Discussion

Unsurprisingly, high school GPA seems to predict college success rather well as those with high GPA’s tend to be more likely to graduate. They also tend to graduate on time. Southview students attending these schools tend to hold GPA’s of 2.5-4.0.

GPA Prediction of Success

GPA Range Grad/On Pace Non-Grad/Not on Pace 0-1.49 80.00% 20.00% 1.50-1.99 26.47% 73.53% 2.0-2.49 50.54% 49.46% 2.50-2.49 61.29% 38.71% 3.0-3.49 76.62% 23.38% 3.50-3.99 82.23% 17.77% 4.0+ 84.15% 15.85%

GPA Range Number

0-1.49 5 1.50-1.99 34 2.0-2.49 93 2.50-2.49 186 3.0-3.49 231 3.50-3.99 213 4.0+ 82

2017-2018 Data Report

45

College Readiness

CCP & AP Prediction

The data below show correlations between high school participation in CCP or AP programs, measured by transfer credits accumulated, and college success. To appear in the data, the student must have earned at least one credit through CCP courses or AP test scores.

CCP Prediction of Success

Cohort Grad/On Pace Non Grad/No On Pace 2010 Total 62.23% 37.77% 2011 Total 80.11% 19.89% 2012 Total 100.00% 0.00% 2013 Total 91.51% 8.49% 2014 Total 92.62% 7.38% 2015 Total 85.06% 14.94% 2016 Total 96.87% 3.13% 2017 Total 62.88% 37.12%

AP Prediction of Success

Cohort Grad/On Pace Non Grad/No On Pace 2010 Total 62.23% 37.77% 2011 Total 80.11% 19.89% 2012 Total 100.00% 0.00% 2013 Total 91.51% 8.49% 2014 Total 92.62% 7.38% 2015 Total 85.06% 14.94% 2016 Total 96.87% 3.13% 2017 Total 62.88% 37.12%

Discussion

Students succeeding in CCP or AP programs are much more likely to succeed in college than not. Further, that likelihood far exceeds the same likelihood for their non-participating counterparts. (See full analysis)

2017-2018 Data Report

46

College Readiness

Subject-level Performance

The data below show performance of students in freshman-level courses at both PSI’s, as measured by average GPA points awarded. “Cohort” refers to the total student group (N=9673) of the BGSU/UT P3 partnership that produced the data and includes 20 high schools from Northwest Ohio.

Discussion

Southview students tend to perform on average in freshman-level math, science, and social studies courses. The exception is Introductory Biology, where Southview students tend to outperform other students in the cohort by a sizeable margin. Southview students tend to underperform

compared to the cohort in College Composition I and II by sizeable margins.

Grades by Freshman-Level Course

Course PSI Department

HS

Department Cohort GPA Cohort Grade SV GPA SV Grade Difference College

Composition I English English 3.379 B+ 2.929 B- -0.450 College

Composition II

English English 3.186 B 2.965 B- -0.221

Introductory

Biology Science Science 2.524 C+ 2.780 B- 0.256 Elementary

Chemistry Science Science 2.455 C+ 2.408 C+ -0.047 Psychology Science Social Studies 2.514 C+ 2.504 C+ -0.010

Sociology Social Studies Social Studies 2.775 B- 2.846 B- 0.070

Remedial

Math Math Math 2.776 B- 2.750 B- -0.026

College

Algebra Math Math 2.132 C 2.325 C- 0.193 Statistics Math Math 2.873 B- 2.959 B- 0.086

Calculus I Math Math 2.434 C+ 2.562 C+ 0.127

Red indicates a GPA difference of -0.2 (-5%) or lower. Yellow indicates a GPA difference between -0.2 and +0.2 (between -5% and +5%).

Green indicates a GPA difference of +0.2 (5%) or higher.

To examine more detailed data for

subject-level performance, visit these sheets:

2017-2018 Data Report

47

Teachers

Education and Performance

% of Teachers with at least a Master's Degree 2003-2004 44.7% 2004-2005 52.7% 2005-2006 51.3% 2006-2007 55.4% 2007-2008 55.4% 2008-2009 52.0% 2009-2010 66.5% 2010-2011 63.0% 2011-2012 66.5% 2012-2013 65.9% 2013-2014 69.0% 2014-2015 72.7% 2015-2016 71.9% 2016-2017 73.6%

Discussion

Teacher education levels have steadily increased to the point where a majority of teachers hold a Master degree or higher. Accomplished Skilled 2012-2013 NR NR 2013-2014 NR NR 2014-2015 96.1% 3.1% 2015-2016 89.6% 10.4% 2016-2017 95.6% 4.4%

Education

Performance Evaluations

Discussion

Performance evaluations are based on OTES performance evaluations and value-added scores. The data shows that not a single teacher has earned lower than a skilled rating during the reporting period.

2017-2018 Data Report

48

Finances

Expenditures and Revenue

These pages report the financial data reported to the state through the yearly District Profile Report, also known as the Cupp Report. The data show revenue from different sources, expenditures per pupil, and income data for the Sylvania community. All data refers to Sylvania overall, not Southview specifically.

Per Pupil Expenditure

Fiscal Year Local State Federal Other FY06 $6,870.92 $2,539.39 $328.75 Not Reported

FY07 $6,960.11 $2,610.95 $322.87 Not Reported

FY08 $7,188.92 $2,818.47 $399.99 Not Reported

FY09 $6,859.00 $3,144.00 $381.00 Not Reported

FY10 $6,811.64 $3,207.89 $522.94 Not Reported

FY11 $6,886.63 $3,107.79 $605.99 Not Reported

FY12 $7,260.73 $3,200.73 $432.33 Not Reported

FY13 $7,323.63 $3,006.97 $510.83 $434.07 FY14 $6,199.50 $2,714.55 $416.77 $367.40 FY15 $7,261.81 $3,288.86 $452.94 $433.77 FY16 $7,299.63 $3,276.03 $426.21 $430.15 FY17 $7,843.73 $3,420.54 $522.50 $467.77

Overall Revenue

Fiscal Year Sylvania Similar State FY06 $9,399.72 $9,104.09 $9,343.03 FY07 $9,647.98 $9,503.89 $9,622.67 FY08 $10,536.08 $10,132.62 $9,990.67 FY09 $11,203.00 $10,282.93 $10,253.57 FY10 $13,036.69 $10,877.40 $10,564.85 FY11 $11,574.28 $10,628.94 $10,696.94 FY12 $10,660.40 $10,477.58 $10,597.21 FY13 $10,875.00 $10,359.87 $10,445.61 FY14 $11,382.54 $10,891.91 $10,912.65 FY15 $10,908.13 $11,264.65 $10,984.86 FY16 $10,874.90 $11,251.12 $11,164.17 FY17 $11,254.46 $11,597.07 $11,603.12 Revenue FY2017 Local $7,843.73 State $3,420.54 Federal $522.50 Other $467.77

2017-2018 Data Report

49

Finances

Expenditures and Revenue

Local Revenue

State Revenue

The U.S. inflation rate from 2006 to 2017, as calculated by the U.S Bureau of Labor Statistics CPI, is 21.42%

Fiscal Year Sylvania Similar State FY06 $6,870.92 $6,068.83 $4,741.87 FY07 $6,960.11 $6,320.36 $5,042.18 FY08 $7,188.92 $6,516.32 $5,078.95 FY09 $6,859.00 $6,217.64 $4,942.01 FY10 $6,811.64 $6,513.77 $4,905.91 FY11 $6,886.63 $6,578.27 $5,053.49 FY12 $7,260.73 $6,837.95 $5,276.25 FY13 $7,323.63 $6,814.44 $5,002.14 FY14 $6,199.50 $6,288.36 $4,583.52 FY15 $7,261.81 $7,022.46 $5,413.90 FY16 $7,299.63 $7,141.44 $5,569.76 FY17 $7,843.73 $7,433.15 $5,779.10

Fiscal Year Sylvania Similar State FY06 $2,539.39 $2,727.47 $3,963.09 FY07 $2,610.95 $2,924.15 $4,196.93 FY08 $2,818.47 $3,091.25 $4,412.37 FY09 $3,144.00 $3,248.07 $4,667.94 FY10 $3,207.89 $3,257.58 $4,571.27 FY11 $3,107.79 $3,098.52 $4,509.89 FY12 $3,200.73 $3,281.97 $4,674.52 FY13 $3,006.97 $3,063.38 $4,976.53 FY14 $2,714.55 $2,945.00 $4,663.71 FY15 $3,288.86 $3,938.62 $5,756.27 FY16 $3,276.03 $3,844.39 $5,865.91 FY17 $3,420.54 $3,727.24 $6,025.85

2017-2018 Data Report

50

Finances

Expenditures and Revenue

Discussion

The funding provided to Sylvania Schools, coming mostly from local taxes, has steadily increased in non-adjusted dollars. In looking at inflation-adjusted dollars, the total revenue has decreased slightly over this period, with revenue decreasing from local taxes and increasing from state and federal funds. During that same time, the median income in Sylvania has dropped significantly while the average income has increased slightly. This is in line with trends in similar districts and the state overall.

Federal Revenue

Fiscal Year Sylvania Similar State FY06 $328.75 $319.27 $769.55 FY07 $322.87 $322.18 $773.41 FY08 $399.99 $340.15 $815.11 FY09 $381.00 $349.55 $822.13 FY10 $522.94 $487.60 $1,031.90 FY11 $605.99 $499.04 $1,050.92 FY12 $432.33 $426.30 $899.87 FY13 $510.83 $461.31 $980.45 FY14 $416.77 $400.20 $837.79 FY15 $452.94 $470.06 $951.40 FY16 $426.21 $457.63 $990.81 FY17 $522.50 $480.34 $985.01

Sylvania Similar State

Median Average Median Average Median Average FY06 $42,014.00 $71,079.00 $42,114.00 $65,780.11 $30,476.00 $55,338.00

Inflation-Adjusted FY06 $51,013.40 $86,304.12 $51,134.82 $79,870.21 $37,003.96 $67,191.40

FY2017 $44,726.00 $88,055.00 $44,726.00 $84,269.12 $33,782.00 $78,257.00

Net Difference -$6,287.40 $1,750.88 -$6,408.82 $4,398.91 -$3,221.96 $11,065.60

% Difference -12.32% 2.03% -12.53% 5.51% -8.71% 16.47%

Inflation Analysis

PPE Local State Federal Total FY06 $9,399.72 $6,870.92 $2,539.39 $328.75 $9,739.06

Inflation-Adjusted FY06 $11,413.14 $8,342.67 $3,083.33 $399.17 $11,825.17

FY2017 $11,254.46 $7,843.73 $3,420.54 $522.50 $11,786.77

Net Difference -$158.68 -$498.94 $337.21 $123.33 -$38.40

2017-2018 Data Report

51

Finances

Income

These pages report the financial data reported to the state through the yearly District Profile Report, also known as the Cupp Report. The data show revenue from different sources, expenditures per pupil, and income data for the Sylvania community.

Median Income

Average Income

The U.S. inflation rate from 2006 to 2017, as calculated by the U.S Bureau of Labor Statistics CPI, is 21.42%

Fiscal Year Sylvania Similar State FY06 $71,079.00 $65,780.11 $55,338.00 FY07 $76,367.00 $69,341.40 $58,776.00 FY08 $78,523.00 $74,033.19 $63,444.00 FY09 $83,295.00 $76,705.75 $68,327.00 FY10 $77,766.00 $72,471.10 $61,453.00 FY11 $73,113.00 $67,804.41 $58,564.00 FY12 $78,460.00 $70,077.11 $64,761.00 FY13 $83,235.00 $72,493.72 $66,744.00 FY14 $87,272.63 $76,892.61 $75,754.00 FY15 $84,663.00 $77,391.09 $70,871.00 FY16 $89,230.00 $80,482.61 $76,621.00 FY17 $88,055.00 $84,269.12 $78,257.00

Fiscal Year Sylvania Similar State FY06 $42,014.00 $42,114.00 $30,476.00 FY07 $41,012.00 $42,113.00 $30,356.00 FY08 $42,206.00 $43,544.00 $31,316.00 FY09 $43,255.00 $43,968.00 $31,448.00 FY10 $42,231.00 $43,938.00 $31,787.00 FY11 $41,438.00 $42,298.00 $30,827.00 FY12 $42,323.00 $43,057.00 $31,681.00 FY13 $42,495.00 $43,096.00 $32,180.00 FY14 $43,624.00 $43,697.00 $33,074.00 FY15 $43,279.00 $45,953.00 $32,873.00 FY16 $43,717.00 $44,593.00 $33,100.00 FY17 $44,726.00 $47,438.00 $33,782.00

2017-2018 Data Report

52

State Report Card

In the 2012-2013 school year, the state began a transition into a new report card that would report data on added factors in addition to those that had been reported previously. This transition would begin to take into account new state tests,

progress vs. achievement, improvement for specific subgroups, and college and career preparedness. The report card data here is often incomplete as the transition period was not complete until the 2015-2016 school year. Each of the subsections below show data for an individual component grade of the report card.

Discussion

Achievement reporting comes from two sets of data. First, the performance index is built with the different levels of achievement, from 1 to 5. Higher scores build a higher performance index, not merely baseline passage. Second, Indicators Met show whether the students met the passage threshold for a given test. This score is purely based on passage, whereas Performance Index is based on strength of scores. The data above seem to show a decline in achievement, but that decline is actually an adjustment to new expectations and reporting approaches. The years reported above show a transition between the OGT’s and the OST’s. So, the 12-13 report of 100% indicators met show Southview’s historically excellent performance on OGT’s. The lower performance recently shows not only the more rigorous demands of the OST’’s, but also their increased expectations for passage thresholds on indicators met. At the end of the transition period, an 80% passage rate is required to meet an indicator.

Achievement

Year Performance Index PI Grade # of Indicators Met % of Indicators Met IM

Grade Overall Grade

12-13 88.20% B 10 of 10 100.00% A NR

13-14 89.10% B 10 of 10 100.0% A NR

14-15 83.40% B 16 of 17 94.10% A NR

15-16 74.30% C 8 of 14 57.10% D C

2017-2018 Data Report

53

State Report Card

Discussion

Gap closing shows how well a school makes progress with reported subgroups. This means that these groups are a sizeable enough portion of the student population to merit state reporting. To earn a strong score, these students must demonstrate progress toward a state goal for that subgroup. Southview’s subgroups currently include All Students, White Students, Students with Disabilities, and Economically Disadvantaged Students. This composition has changed slightly over the years, with African American subgroups appearing sometimes and Students with Disability subgroups disappearing sometimes. But, the four first mentioned are most prevalent. The data above show variation that does not reveal a trend overall, but digging into data from group to group and year to year, Economically Disadvantaged Students and Students with Disabilities are the most likely subgroups to fail to meet state goals.

Gap Closing

Year Annual Measurable Objectives Grade

12-13 58.30% F

13-14 89.40% B

14-15 76.70% C

15-16 33.30% F

2017-2018 Data Report

54

State Report Card

Discussion

Unlike Gap Closing, the student groups examined in Progress are the same for every school. These include All Students, Gifted Students, Students in the Lowest 20% in Achievement (based on statewide comparison), and Students with Disabilities. The scores here are built through a value-added determination, which shows whether or not students in this group have demonstrated a year of growth. Making a year of expected growth earns a C grade, and making more or less than a year of growth modifies that grade accordingly.

The data here is quite incomplete due to a lack of reporting between the 12-13 and 14-15 school years. The current data, though, shows that Southview makes more than expected growth on average.

Progress

Year Overall Gifted Students Students in Lowest 20% of Achievement Students with Disabilities Compon ent 12-13 NR NR NR NR NR 13-14 NR NR NR NR NR 14-15 NR NR NR NR NR 15-16 A C B B B 16-17 A A C C B

Value-Added

2016

2017

Algebra I

7.7

4.1

Geometry

-0.3

1.5

ELA I

0.5

0.3

ELA II

1.3

0.4

Value-added measures are provided for each teacher of a state test, but also for each building based on English and math tests. A measure of 0 for value-added indicates one year’s worth of growth, numbers above and below that value show growth above or below that year’s expectation.

DG Significant evidence that the school's students made

more progress than the Growth Standard

LG Moderate evidence that the school's students made more progress than the Growth Standard

Y Evidence that the school's students made progress similar to the Growth Standard

O Moderate evidence that the school's students made less progress than the Growth Standard

R Significant evidence that the school's students made less

2017-2018 Data Report

55

State Report Card

Prepared for Success

Year Prepared for Success Students Earning Full Credit* Bonus Students** Grade

12-13 NR NR NR NR 13-14 NR NR NR NR 14-15 NR NR NR NR 15-16 57.20% 289 174 C 16-17 63.40% 294 222 C

Discussion

Prepared for Success measures how well the school prepares students for college and career opportunities in the future. A school earns points for ACT, SAT, AP, and IB participation and success, CCP credit accumulation, honors diplomas, and earning industry-recognized credentials.

The data is relatively incomplete due to a lack of reporting for most of the transition period. But, from 15-16 to 16-17, Southview’s score rose to less than 7% away from a B component grade.

*These are students students that earned a remediation free score on all parts of the ACT or SAT, earned an honors diploma, and/or earned an industry-recognized credential.

** These are students that they did the above and also earned a 3 or higher on at least one AP exam; earned a 4 or higher on at least one IB exam; and/or earned at least three college credits before leaving high school. They count an additional 0.3 points in the calculation.

Graduation

Year 4-Year Graduation Rate Grade 5-Year Graduation

Rate Grade Overall

12-13 88.50% C 91.60% B NR 13-14 90.70% B 91.40% B NR 14-15 91.30% B 93.70% B NR 15-16 95.00% A 93.30% B A 16-17 94.90% A 97.00% A A

Discussion

Graduation trends are

reported with component

grades attached. See the

Graduation sections

of

this report for more

details on the data.

2017-2018 Data Report

56

References

Data for the 2017-2018 Southview High School Data Report has come from internal

records kept through PowerSchool, GradPoint, Edgenuity, and Google Drive files. In

addition, data has come from the following external resources:

Ohio’s State Report Cards

2003-2017

Link

Ohio’s District Profile Reports (Cupp Reports)

2006-2017

Link

Pathways to Promise P

3

Data Report

2018

ACT District Profile Report

2018

AP Five-Year School Score Summary

2018

Link

Ohio Higher Ed: College Readiness Data

2010-2016