|
| |
The December 36-page Littleton Public Schools Annual
Report 2006-2007 [PDF 929KB] provides
school-level
information on pages 9-32; district-level information is on the other pages.
CSAP 2007 data as district totals are provided (page 6) for each subject and grade
level for LPS totals and also disaggregated for gender, ethnicity, and subgroups
of students with limited English proficiency (ELL/ESL), disabilities (SWD), and
exceptional ability (G/T):
- Overall LPS district performance at or above proficient: 78-84% reading (grades 3-10),
64-74%
writing (grades 3-10), 43-83% math (grades 3-10), and 56-67% science (grades
5, 8, and 10).
- Gender effects on CSAP scores: Females generally outscored males in reading and writing,
and males generally outscored females in math and science.
- Ethnicity effects on CSAP scores: Whites far outscored Black and Hispanic
subgroups in all CSAP subjects.
- SWD was the lowest-performing subgroup of students.
- ELL/ESL was the next-lowest-performing subgroup of students.
- G/T was the highest-performing subgroup of students.
Some observations by ICAN:
- The LPS Annual Report for 2006-2007 has important accountability
information that includes CSAP scores (page 6), CSAP matched cohort growth
profiles (page 7), No Child Left Behind (page 8), and other standardized tests
(MAP, CogAT, ACT, and SAT) data (page 5) as district totals. That annual
report has other useful information about the 2007-2008 operating budget (page
33) and increasing student achievemet (pages 34-35). Each of the 24 school-level pages includes above applicable data as school
totals along with "Priorities" and "Accomplishments" and "About Our School"
sections.
- There is an excellent description of the ongoing transition to
Professional Learning Communities and to the new School
Improvement Plans (page 4).
That increased attention to performance of all students is based upon
the new LPS Strategic Plan 2006-2011 [PDF 19KB].
This Annual Report includes a statement of the revised District Achievement Goal ("Ninety
percent of all students will be on or
above grade level in reading, math, writing, and science by the end of the 2011-2012
school year. The
achievement gap in student performance will be cut in half by the end of the 2009-2010
school year.").
- The "Priorities" sections on all school pages are appropriate adaptations
of the 2006-2009 School Improvement Plan Cornerstone Goals. That change
is a major
improvement over the typically less-challenging Priorities in the
2004-2005
Annual Report [PDF 794KB] for individual schools.
However, the LPS annual reports are not "progress" reports either in terms of
actual results vs. measurable objectives or in terms of actual data for
2006-2007 vs. 2005-2006. Candid statements of district and school
academic achievement trends usually are not offered but can be derived by
analysis of each-year data from other reports. As indicated in the
annual report (page 6), the LPS website has additional disaggregated and
three-year trend data for CSAP district totals on its "Student
Assessment" page.
- The CSAP Matched Cohort Growth Profiles (page 7) only include students who
have taken all of the CSAP tests in LPS during the profile period; they
do not count scores for students who have entered or exited LPS. The
undisclosed overall effect of excluding the more-mobile (and typically
lower-performing) students is continuous inflation of CSAP data for the
district and schools after the base year.
- A relatively-new form of trend data in the latest annual report is the Measures of
Academic Progress (MAP) test results for reading and math during the past school year
(page 5). The Fall 2006 reading percentile ranks for Grades 3-10 are 53, 59,
61,
70, 67, 68, 72, and 72, respectively, for the district medians; the Spring
2007 reading percentile ranks for Grades 3-10 are 66, 73, 66, 70, 68, 67, 70, and
67,
respectively. The Fall 2006 math percentile ranks for Grades 3-10 are 57,
63, 64,
71, 61, 64, 69, and 64, respectively, for the district medians; the Spring
2007 math percentile ranks for Grades 3-10 are 67, 71, 74, 69, 65, 66,
63, and 61, respectively. An inference (not stated in the report) is that during the 2006-07 school year the MAP
reading and math percentile ranks increased for most
elementary school students, stayed about the same for most middle
school students, and decreased for most high
school students compared to national norms. MAP data for each school
also are listed (pages 9-32).
- The "Accomplishments" sections on most school pages mention activities
rather than significant changes ("progress") in student academic achievement.
There is little connection to previous-year priorities. Some pages have
references to outdated awards (Blue Ribbon, Newsweek, 5280, etc.) and funding
decisions related to unmet needs, not for accomplishments during the previous
year. Decreases in student achievement are not mentioned for LPS
schools, including those that have large proportions of students (20 to 40
percent or more) performing below grade level in core academic subjects. "Sources of Pride"
would be a less
inappropriate descriptor than "Accomplishments" for typical statements used.
- In summary, the overall quality of the annual report for 2006-2007
continues to be excellent.
Last modified:
02/07/2008
|
