Detroit Community Schools (82925) Annual Education Report For Detroit Community Elementary and Middle School (k-8) And Detroit Community High School
|
|
- Erick Arnold
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Detroit Community Schools (895) Annual Education Report For Detroit Community Elementary and Middle School (k-8) And Detroit Community High School (9-) Bart Eddy, Supertendent
2 Detroit Community Schools School -9 District High School Elementary/Middle Graduation Rate 9% Attendance Rate 88% 86% 9 School Phase Phase (Identified for Improvement) Phase Professional Qualifications of Teachers with a B.A. or M.A. B.A: % M.A: 66% B.A: 5% M.A: 6% Not Highly Qualified % 6% Teacher Permits Core Academics Without Highly Qualified Teacher High Poverty/Low Poverty Not Applicable
3 Trend MME Results Subject Readg 9 Writg 9 Total ELA 9 Math 9 Science 9 S.Studies 9 Students Tested Level Level Level Level Males ( & ) % 5% % % % 8% % 77% 89% 88% 59% 67% 7% % % 7% 8% 5% 5% 79% 7% 6% 6% 5% 5 6% % 8% % % 9% 6% 7% 8% % % % % 5% % 8% 9% 7% % % % 7% 55% 5% % Females ( & ) 8% % 5% 5% 6% % 7% % 5% 7% % % 7% % Key: Level - Advanced Level - Proficient Level - Partially Proficient Level - Not Proficient In School -9, Detroit Community High School did not meet AYP, receivg a Composite of D-Alert. However, we rema phase due to an appeal that was filed with the Michigan Department of Education that was granted our favor. Additionally, we were aga above the state s mimum graduation rate of 8 with a 9% graduation rate.
4 MEAP ANALYSIS The MEAP scores (Michigan Educational Assessment Program) have been analyzed by the School Improvement Team. The graphs below illustrate how students at Detroit Community Elementary performed on the MEAP Test over the past four years. Analysis of the Readg Data: Readg/s NP P NP P NP P NP P NP P NP P % 78% 6% 5% 56% % 59% % 59% % 5 5 5% 65% % 57% 58% % 9% 5% 7% 6% > > 6 % 69% 6 7% 9% % 56% > > > > 5 % 68% 67% % > > > > > > > > >=Not Applicable ( was not established) Percentage Proficient 8 6 Readg/s -8 rd th 5th 6th 7th 8th Level : Students scores creased by % from to. From 5 to scores have creased from % to %. : Students scores decreased by % from to. As a result of the scores, a Readg/Writg Coach has been hired. Students engage our Readg Level Program. This program allows students to read chapter books on their appropriate readg level and to practice readg comprehension strategies to answer questions and summarize formation. 5: Students scores creased by % from to and creased by % from 6 to. Analysis of the Writg Data: Writg/s -8 Writg NP P NP P NP P NP P NP P NP P 7% 6% 9 87% % 65% 5% 5% 9% % 57% 6 96% % 8% 8% 55% 5% 5% 8% > > 6% 8% 76% % 8% 7% 6 > > > > % 7% > > > > > > > > >=Not Applicable 6: Students scores decreased by from to and decreased by 5% from 6 to. As a result o the scores, a Readg/Writg Coach has been hired. Students engage our Readg Level Program. This program allows students to read chapter books on thei appropriate readg level and to practice readg comprehension strategies to answer questions and summarize formation. 7: Students scores creased by 5% from to. 8: There is no data available for comparison because this grade was a new addition to the school for /9 school year. Percent Proficient 8 6 Writg/s -8 rd th 5th 6th 7th 8th Levels : Students scores decreased % from to and decreased % from 5 to 6. As a result of this data, a Readg/Writg Coach has been hired and DCES has implemented the 6 + Writg Traits Initiative. This program allows students to focus on particular writg components. Students engage daily writg prompts to provide more opportunities to practice writg traits. : Students scores creased 6% from to and creased by 7% from 5 to 6. 5: Students scores decreased 5% from to. As a result of this data, a Readg/Writg Coach has been hired and DCES has implemented the 6 + Writg Traits Initiative. This program allows students to focus on particular writg components. Students engage daily writg prompts to provide more opportunities to practice writg traits. 6: Students scores decreased by from to. As a result of this data, a Readg/Writg Coach has been hired and DCES has implemented the 6 + Writg Traits Initiative. This program allows students to focus on particular writg components. Students engage daily writg prompts to provide more opportunities to practice writg traits. 7: Students scores creased % from to. 8: There is no data available for comparison because this grade was a new addition to the school for /9 school year.
5 Analysis of the ELA Data: Total ELA/s -8 ELA/s -8 Total ELA NP P NP P NP P NP P NP P NP P 7 6% 6% 7% 6% 6% 8% 5% 7% 8% 5% 9% 5% 59% % 7% 7% 5% 6% 7% 8% > > 8% 6% 67% % 59% % 66% % > > > > 6 5 7% 5% 7% 8% > > > > > > > > >=Not Applicable Percent Proficient 8 6 rd th 5th 6th 7th 8th Levels : Students scores creased by 9% from to and creased by 9% from 5 to 6. : Students scores decreased by 5% from to. As a result of the data, an ELA Coach has been hired to assist students with dividual assistance as well as work small groups to improve ELA comprehension. Also, Paraprofessionals provide dividual and small group assistance. 5: Students scores decreased % from to. Students scores decreased by 5% from to. As a result of the data, an ELA Coach has been hired to assist students with dividual assistance as well as work small groups to improve ELA comprehension. Also, Paraprofessionals provide dividual and small group assistance. 6: Students scores decreased by 8% from to Students scores decreased by 5% from to As a result of the data, an ELA Coach has been hired assist students with dividual assistance as well as w small groups to improve ELA comprehension. Also Paraprofessionals provide dividual and small group assistance. 7: Students scores creased by 9% from to 8: There is no data available for comparison becau this grade was a new addition to the school for /9 school year. Analysis of the Total Mathematics Data: Total Mathematics/s -8 Mathematics/s -8 Total ELA NP P NP P NP P NP P NP P NP P % 78% 8% 6% 7 65% 5% 6% 7% 66% % 5% 65% % 57% 9 7% 8% 69% % > > % 69% 6% 8% 86% % 88% % > > > > 6 5 % 68% 78% % < < > > > > > > >=Not Applicable Percent Proficient 8 6 rd th 5th 6th 7th 8th Levels 5 6 : Students scores creased by % from to and creased by % from 5 to 6. : Students scores creased by 5% from to and by 6% from 5 to 6. 5: Students scores creased by. 6: Students scores creased by 7% from to and decreased by 6% from 6 to. 7: Students scores creased by 6% from to. 8: There is no data available for comparison because the eighth grade was a new addition to the school for /9 school year.
6 Analysis of the Science Data: Science Science/s 5 and NP P NP P NP P NP P NP P NP P 6 5 s Not Tested=Shaded >=Not Applicable 67% % 6% 8% 8 > > 68% % > > > > > > Percent Proficient 8 6 Science/s 5 and 8 rd th 5th 6th 7th 8th Level 5 6 5: Students scores creased by % from to and decreased by % from 6 to. DCES is workg to hire a Science Coach to mata the crease scores. 8: There is no data available for comparison because this grade was a new addition to the school for /9 school year. Analysis of the Social Studies Data: Social Studies Social Studies/ NP P NP P NP P NP P NP P NP P 6 5 s Not Tested=Shaded >=Not Applicable 8% 9% 85% 5% 7% 6% > > Percent Proficient 8 6 Social Studies/ 6 rd th 5th 6th 7th 8th Level 5 6 6: Students scores creased % from to and decreased by % from 6 to. The DCES Textbook Committee is workg to purchase a new Social Studies series to mata the crease scores. D. MEAP Subgroup Analysis Group 5 *Percentage of the Sub-Group meetg State Proficiency Standards Readg Writg Total ELA Math Male 65% 7 56% 75% 5% % 5% 5% 5 67% 8% 6% 5 56% 6% 76%
7 Female 7% < 7 8% 57% < 8% 7% 57% < 59% 8% 7% < 8% 7% Asian/Pacific Islander Black, Not of 7 7% 65% 78% % 6% 5% 67% 5% 7 6 6% 7% 75% Orig White, Not of Orig Social Economic Status 69% 67% 7% 8% % 6% 5% 6% 5 77% 75% Not 68% 69% 6% < 8% 8% < 5% 6% 6% < 6 5% 69% < English Proficient 68% 69% 65% 78% 8% 6% 5% 6% 5% 7 6 5% 7% 75% English Language Students with < < < < < < < < Students without 68% 77% % 7% 5% 7% 78% 7% <=No summary scores provided if < students : Total ELA: In, females scored % higher than males; In females scored 9% higher than males Mathematics In, females scored 8% higher than males; In, Males scored % higher than females. (ED)/Non-economically (NED): Total ELA: In, ED scored 7% higher than NED; In there were less than of NED attendance Mathematics In, ED scored 8% higher than NED; In there were less than of NED attendance Group 5 *Percentage of the Sub-Group meetg State Proficiency Standards Readg Writg Total ELA Math Male < 9% 6% 5 < 5% < % 8% % < 8% 6% 67% Female 6% < 5% 57% % < 8% 9% 8% < % 8% % < 5% 57% Asian/Pacific Islander < < < < Black, Not of % 8% 5 56% 7% 7% 5% % 8% 8% 5% 6% % % 5% 58% Orig White, Not of Orig Social Economic Status < 6% 66% 58% < 6% % < 8% 5 6% < 7% 66% 7% Not 9% 5% 6% 6% 8% 7% % % 5% 8% 5% 6% 8% English Proficient % 57% 5% 7% % % 8% % % 6% % 8% 57% 6% English Language Students with < < < < < < < < < < < < Students without % 56% 57% 5% % % % 8% 9% 58% 65% <=No summary scores provided if < students : Total ELA In, females scored 6% higher than males; In, Females scored 6% higher than males. Mathematics In, females scored 8% higher than males; In, Males scored % higher than females. (ED)/Non-economically (NED): Total ELA In, ED scored 9% higher than NED; In ED scored % higher than NED. Mathematics In, ED scored 8% higher than NED; In ED scored 5% higher than NED
8 5 Group 5 *Percentage of the Sub-Group meetg State Proficiency Standards Readg Writg Total ELA Math Science Male < 9% 5% 8% < 7% % 5% < % % 9% < % % 7% < % % Female < 8% 5 < % % < % % < 8% % < 8% Asian/Pacific < < < < < < < < < < < < < < Islander Black, Not of Orig < % % < 8% % < 6% % < < % 9% < < White, Not of Orig Social Economic Status Not < % 6% < % % < 6% % < 8% 8% < 8% 5% < 7% 6% < 8% < % 6% < % 6% < 6% 55% English Proficient < 9% % % < 7% 8% % < % 7% 6% < % < % % English Language Students with Students without <=No summary scores provided if < students 6 < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < 5% 7% < % % < 6% % < % % < % : Total ELA: In, females scored higher than males; In females scored % higher than males. Mathematics In, males scored 5% higher than females; In, females scored 6% higher than males. (ED)/Non-economically (NED): Total ELA: In, NED scored % higher than ED; In NED scored 5% higher than ED. Mathematics In, NED scored % higher than ED; In NED scored 8% higher than ED. Group 5 *Percentage of the Sub-Group meetg State Proficiency Standards Readg Writg Total ELA Math Social Studies Male 56% % 5% % % % % % 8% % 6% % 5% Female 65% 7% 65% 5 65% 7% 8% 9% 7% % Asian/Pacific < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < Islander Black, Not of 6% 5% % 9% % 5% % 6% 8% % 9% 7% % % Orig White, Not of Hispan Orig Social Economic Status 58% % % 5% % % 5% % 8% % 9% % 9% % Not 5% 57% 9% % 6% 9% % 8% 9% % 8% 9% 8% % % English Proficient 56% 5% % 5% 5% % 6% 8% % 8% 5% 6% 5% 9% English Language Students with < < < < < < < < < <
9 Students without 58% 6% 5% 5% % % % 7% <=No summary scores provided if < students : Total ELA: In, females scored % higher than males; In females scored 7% higher than males. Mathematics In, females scored higher than males; In, females scored 7% higher than males. (ED)/Non-economically (NED): Total ELA: In, NED scored % higher than ED; In, NED scored % higher than ED. Mathematics In, ED scored % higher than NED; In, NED scored 5% higher than ED. 7 Group 5 *Percentage of the Sub-Group meetg State Proficiency Standards Readg Writg Total ELA Math Male % 7% % 8% % % 6% % Female 56% 6% 6 % 6% 7% % Asian/Pacific Islander < < < < < < Black, Not of 9% % 8% 9% 7% % 7% Orig White, Not of Orig Social Economic Status 6% % % 6% % 9% % Not 6% 5% 58% 7% % 6% 7% 55% English Proficient 6% % 8% 9% 8% 7% % 7% English Language Students with < < < < < < < < Students without 7% 5% 5% 55% 9% 5% % % <=No summary scores provided if < students : Total ELA: In, females scored higher than males; In females scored % higher than males. Mathematics In, females scored % higher than males; In, Males scored higher than females. (ED)/Non-economically (NED):Total ELA: In, NED scored 6% higher than ED; In, NED scored % higher than ED Mathematics In, NED scored 8% higher than ED; In, NED scored % higher than ED. 8 Group 5 *Percentage of the Sub-Group meetg State Proficiency Standards Readg Writg Total ELA Math Science Male 7% % 7% % Female 6% 69% 66% 8% % Asian/Pacific < < < < < Islander Black, Not of 8% 57% 5% % 9% Orig White, Not of Orig Social Economic Status 5% 6% 55% % % Not % % % % 5%
10 English Proficient 5 57% 5% % English Language Students < < < < with Students 5% 6 56% 7% without <=No summary scores provided if < students : Total ELA: In, eighth grade was not established; In females scored 9% higher than males. Mathematics In, eighth grade was not established; In, females 8% higher than males. (ED)/Non-economically (NED): Total ELA: In, eighth grade was not established; In, ED scored % higher than NED Mathematics In, eighth grade was not established; In, ED scored % higher than NED. E. ly Assessment Data: Appendix B Mathematics Comparative Report (/9) Level (9/8) (/8) Decrease (/8) (/9) Decrease (/9) * (6/9) K 7 88% 8% 88% 89% % 89% NA st 55% 78% % 78% 87% 9% 87% NA nd % % % 6 6% 6 NA rd 7% 5% 5% 5% 6% % 6% NA th % % 9% % 6% % 6% NA 5 th % 6% % 6% % % % NA 6 th 5% 5% 9% % 9% NA 7 th % 7% 5% 5% 5% NA 8 th 8% 7% 9% 7% 5% % 5% NA *Test Date is June 9 All scores across grade levels creased from the month of September to December. From December to March, fifth grade decreased by %; sixth grade scores decreased by %; seventh grade scores decreased by 5%; eighth grade scores decreased by %. English Language Arts Middle School Comparative Report (/9) Level (9/8) (/8) Decrease (/8) (/9) Decrease (/9) * (6/9) 6 th 9% 8% 9% 8% 8% 8% NA 7 th 5% 5% % 5% % 8% % NA 8 th 9% 56% 7% 56% 58% % 58% NA (See the DRA assessment for grades K-5 ELA scores) *Test Date is June 9 All scores middle school ELA creased from the month of September to December. From December to March, sixth grade and seventh grade scores decreased by and 8%. eight scores ELA creased by % from December to March. Dec S Decreas Durg the -9 school year, Detroit Community Elementary/Middle School did not make AYP due to the fact that the school reported an 87% attendance rate when No Child Left Behd requires us to achieve a 9 attendance for elementary/middle. The attendance rate is derived from the - school year. Academically, we achieved the required goals under NCLB that would have allowed us to make AYP. The school received a grade of C and is Phase of NCLB compliance.
University Hgts. Elem. School School Report Card Bowling Lane Jonesboro, AR
University Hgts. Elem. School School Report Card 2015 2016 300 Bowling Lane Jonesboro, AR 72401 870 910 7823 SCHOOL CHARACTERISTICS Principal Superintendent STUDENT DEMOGRAPHICS Kelli Murray James Dunivan
More informationEnrollment Type. Proportion of Non AAS Students by Enrollment Type. UW Colleges Campus Profile: UW Fox Valley
Ten Year Enrollment Trends by Enrollment Type Fall AAS High School Special Audit Other Total Enrollment 2008 1473 62 88 5 13 1641 2009 1520 111 106 1 10 1748 2010 1583 118 97 9 24 1831 2011 1615 105 79
More informationEnrollment Type. UW Colleges Campus Profile: UW Marathon County. Proportion of Non AAS Students by Enrollment Type
Ten Year Enrollment Trends by Enrollment Type Fall AAS High School Special Audit Other Total Enrollment 2008 1250 12 62 11 28 1363 2009 1292 22 57 13 15 1399 2010 1315 25 41 14 14 1409 2011 1266 15 41
More informationEnrollment Type. UW Colleges Campus Profile: UW Manitowoc. Proportion of Non AAS Students by Enrollment Type
Ten Year Enrollment Trends by Enrollment Type Fall AAS High School Special Audit Other Total Enrollment 2008 507 10 16 1 6 540 2009 489 14 31 5 9 548 2010 573 11 20 4 4 612 2011 624 10 20 4 6 664 2012
More informationProposed Budget
ELMIRA CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT 28-29 Proposed Budget Public Vote Tuesday, May 5, 28 Ernie Davis Academy and Elmira High School 7 a.m.-8 p.m. Elmira City School District Mission "The Elmira City School District
More informationHIAWATHA USD NO. 415
HIAWATHA USD NO. 415 Budget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures KSDE Website Information Available Summary of Expenditures (Sumexpen.xls)
More informationONE HUNDRED SEVENTH STREET ELEMENTARY
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH STREET ELEMENTARY UPDATED - 03/28/16 Public school 912 students CDS code: 19647336018535 SD: 88% AA: 22% FI: 0% LAUSD-S EL: 51% AI/AN : PI: 147 East 107th Street SWD: 9% AS: WH: 1%
More informationSAN LEANDRO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT JUNE 30, 2013
ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS FINANCIAL SECTION Independent Auditors' Report 2 Management's Discussion and Analysis 5 Basic Financial Statements Government-Wide Financial Statements Statement
More informationDR. MAYA ANGELOU COMMUNITY HIGH
DR. MAYA ANGELOU COMMUNITY HIGH UPDATED - 03/28/16 Public school 1248 students CDS code: 19647330124479 SD: 65% AA: 11% FI: LAUSD-C EL: 41% AI/AN :0% PI: 0% 300 East 53rd Street SWD: 14% AS: WH: 0% Los
More informationDRAFT Bond & Mill Levy Planning. Mill Levy CPAC Kick-off. Denver Public Schools. February 29, 2012
2012 Bond & Mill Levy Planning Mill Levy CPAC Kick-off Denver Public Schools February 29, 2012 Table of Contents I. Update on DPS Academic Progress I. Enrollment II. Graduation rate III. Dropout rate IV.
More informationNEW JERSEY QUALITY SINGLE ACCOUNTABLITY CONTINUUM DISTRICT PERFORMANCE REVIEW (DPR)
INSTRUCTION AND PROGRAM 1. a. The district meets the current district definition of Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in language arts literacy. b. The district meets the third grade New Jersey state benchmark
More informationEaston Unified School District No. 449
Easton Unified School District No. 449 Budget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures KSDE Website Information Available Summary
More informationUSD 337 Royal Valley
USD 337 Royal Valley Budget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures KSDE Website Information Available Summary of Expenditures (Sumexpen.xls)
More informationPRETTY PRAIRIE USD 311
PRETTY PRAIRIE USD 311 Budget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures KSDE Website Information Available Summary of Expenditures
More informationMorris County USD 417
Morris County USD 417 Budget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures KSDE Website Information Available Summary of Expenditures
More informationExample: Calculating the School Wide Composite Performance Index (CPI) Target for SY
Example: Calculating the School Wide Composite Performance Index (CPI) Target for SY2012-13 Go to DESE website and locate your school s profile: http://profiles.doe.mass.edu Access the 2012 accountability
More informationCherry Creek School District Profile of Student-Based Budgeting for Schools FY
Cherry Creek School District Profile of Student-Based Budgeting for Schools FY2011-12 TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword... 1 Introduction... 2 The Annual Budget... 2 The Budget Process... 3 FY2011-12 General
More informationBY: Teresa Hyden Cynthia Glover Woods Chief Business Official Chief Academic Officer (951) (951)
DATE: TO: FROM: Dr. Julie A. Vitale, District Superintendent Mrs. Sandra Tusant, Board President Mrs. Hilda Murallo, Chief Business Official Mr. Trevor Painton, Assistant Superintendent Kenneth M. Young,
More informationRawlins County USD #105
Rawlins County USD #5 Budget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures KSDE Website Information Available Summary of Expenditures
More informationBudget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures
USD 428, Great Bend Budget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures KSDE Website Information Available Summary of Expenditures (Sumexpen.xls)
More informationTotal Enrollment by Division, Department, Degree Track and Year of Study as of 10/15/17
Enrollment by Division, Department, Degree Track and Year of Study as of 1/1/1 G1 G G G G DCE G1 G G G + Architecture 1 1 Art and Archaeology 1 1 1 Classics Comparative Literature 1 1 East Asian Studies
More informationJOHN C. FREMONT SENIOR HIGH
JOHN C. FREMONT SENIOR HIGH UPDATED - 03/28/16 Public school 2143 students CDS code: 19647331933118 SD: 88% AA: 8% FI: LAUSD-S EL: 38% AI/AN :0% PI: 7676 South San Pedro Street SWD: 13% AS: 0% WH: 1% Los
More informationBudget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures
Easton USD #449 Budget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures KSDE Website Information Available Summary of Expenditures (Sumexpen.xls)
More informationMICHIGAN LINKING STUDY
MICHIGAN LINKING STUDY A Study of the Alignment of the NWEA RIT Scale with the Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) April 2012 COPYRIGHT 2012 NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION All rights reserved.
More informationLEADERSHIP IN ENTERTAINMENT AND MEDIA ARTS (LEMA)
LEADERSHIP IN ENTERTAINMENT AND MEDIA ARTS (LEMA) UPDATED - 03/28/16 Public school 228 students CDS code: 19647330125963 SD: 68% AA: 2% FI: LAUSD-E EL: 34% AI/AN : PI: 3501 North Broadway SWD: 27% AS:
More informationNumber of Classroom Sections: SY Actual SY Actual SY Actual SY Actual SY Projected Grade Grade
)LHOG 6FKRRO Superintendent's Recommended School: Field School Principal: Joseph Russo Grades: Grade 4 and Grade 5 Address: 16 Alphabet Lane Weston MA 02493 PH: 781-786-5500 Fax: 781-786-5509 The Field
More informationSuperintendent s Proposed Budget Recommendation
Superintendent s 2011-12 12 Proposed Budget Recommendation April 12, 2011 Framework for Budget Development Align resources to support Strategic Plan 2014 Keep strong academic focus coupled with data driven
More informationPerry-Lecompton School District #343
Perry-Lecompton School District #343 Budget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures KSDE Website Information Available Summary of
More informationDistrict Name: FORT WORTH ISD District Number: Accountability Rating: Met Standard
2016-17 District Name: FORT WORTH ISD 2017 Accountability Rating: Met Standard 2017 ucation Determination Status: Needs Intervention This page intentionally left blank. 2016-17 District Performance Region
More informationName: Address: Telephone number: Social Security Number: Relationship to HOH
Family Information Name: Address: Telephone number: Social Security Number: Primary language: Yes No Family Composition (circle all appropriate categories from the choices below)* Name (last, first) Date
More informationMPC Employee Demographics. Presented to the Board of Trustees May 24, 2011
MPC Employee Demographics Presented to the Board of Trustees May 24, 2011 Background Education Code Academic excellence can best be sustained in a climate of acceptance and with the inclusion of persons
More informationPROFILE INFORMATION HIAWATHA USD #
PROFILE INFORMATION 25-6 HIAWATHA USD #45 School Finance Kansas State Department of Education Landon State Office Building 9 SW Jackson Street, Suite 356 Topeka, Kansas 6662-22 www.ksde.org Budget General
More informationPopular Annual Financial Report
H I L L I A R D C I T Y S C H O O S L Popular Annual Financial Report FOR THE YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2015 COLUMBUS, OHIO Numbers Behind Hilliard City Schools EMPLOYEES STUDENTS 2015 GRADUATES 1,695 16,045
More informationA Study of the Alignment of the NWEA RIT Scale with the New England Common Assessments Program (NECAP) March, 2010 January, 2016 (Revised)
A Study of the Alignment of the NWEA RIT Scale with the New England Common Assessments Program (NECAP) March, 2010 January, 2016 (Revised) Copyright 2015 Northwest Evaluation Association All rights reserved.
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 602894 Central Cities (CC) 227,818 Outside Central Cities 375,076 Percent of Entire MSA 37.79% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from 1999
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 1187941 Central Cities (CC) 511,843 Outside Central Cities 676,098 Percent of Entire MSA 43.09% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 661645 Central Cities (CC) 247,057 Outside Central Cities 414,588 Percent of Entire MSA 37.34% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from 1999
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 583845 Central Cities (CC) 316,649 Outside Central Cities 267,196 Percent of Entire MSA 54.24% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from 1999
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 1251509 Central Cities (CC) 540,423 Outside Central Cities 711,086 Percent of Entire MSA 43.18% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 1135614 Central Cities (CC) 677,766 Outside Central Cities 457,848 Percent of Entire MSA 59.68% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 591932 Central Cities (CC) 260,970 Outside Central Cities 330,962 Percent of Entire MSA 44.09% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from 1999
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 1100491 Central Cities (CC) 735,617 Outside Central Cities 364,874 Percent of Entire MSA 66.84% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 540258 Central Cities (CC) 198,915 Outside Central Cities 341,343 Percent of Entire MSA 36.82% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from 1999
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 1249763 Central Cities (CC) 691,295 Outside Central Cities 558,468 Percent of Entire MSA 55.31% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 1088514 Central Cities (CC) 272,953 Outside Central Cities 815,561 Percent of Entire MSA 25.08% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 922516 Central Cities (CC) 470,859 Outside Central Cities 451,657 Percent of Entire MSA 51.04% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from 1999
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 687249 Central Cities (CC) 198,500 Outside Central Cities 488,749 Percent of Entire MSA 28.88% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from 1999
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 542149 Central Cities (CC) 181870 Outside Central Cities 360279 Percent of Entire MSA 33.55% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from 1999
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 1025598 Central Cities (CC) 293,834 Outside Central Cities 731,764 Percent of Entire MSA 28.65% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 875583 Central Cities (CC) 232,835 Outside Central Cities 642,748 Percent of Entire MSA 26.59% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from 1999
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 716998 Central Cities (CC) 448,275 Outside Central Cities 268,723 Percent of Entire MSA 62.52% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from 1999
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 1333914 Central Cities (CC) 284,943 Outside Central Cities 1,048,971 Percent of Entire MSA 21.36% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 712738 Central Cities (CC) 448,607 Outside Central Cities 264,131 Percent of Entire MSA 62.94% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from 1999
More informationMorris County USD 417
Morris County USD 47 Budget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures KSDE Website Information Available Summary of Expenditures (Sumexpen.xls)
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean. Population Entire MSA
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 1169641 Central Cities (CC) 0 Outside Central Cities 1,169,641 Percent of Entire MSA 0% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from 1999 to
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 3251876 Central Cities (CC) 2,078,750 Outside Central Cities 1,173,126 Percent of Entire MSA 63.92% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 1592383 Central Cities (CC) 1,181,140 Outside Central Cities 411,243 Percent of Entire MSA 74.17% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 1776062 Central Cities (CC) 716,793 Outside Central Cities 1,059,269 Percent of Entire MSA 40.36% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 4112198 Central Cities (CC) 416,474 Outside Central Cities 3,695,724 Percent of Entire MSA 10.13% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 9519338 Central Cities (CC) 4408996 Outside Central Cities 5110342 Percent of Entire MSA 46.32% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 1623018 Central Cities (CC) 152397 Outside Central Cities 1470621 Percent of Entire MSA 9.39% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from 1999
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 1731183 Central Cities (CC) 776733 Outside Central Cities 954450 Percent of Entire MSA 44.87% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from 1999
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 2968806 Central Cities (CC) 669,769 Outside Central Cities 2,299,037 Percent of Entire MSA 22.56% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 2846289 Central Cities (CC) 809063 Outside Central Cities 2037226 Percent of Entire MSA 28.43% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from 1999
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 4441551 Central Cities (CC) 1147720 Outside Central Cities 3293831 Percent of Entire MSA 25.84% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 1500741 Central Cities (CC) 661799 Outside Central Cities 838942 Percent of Entire MSA 44.1% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from 1999
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 2552994 Central Cities (CC) 686992 Outside Central Cities 1866002 Percent of Entire MSA 26.91% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from 1999
More informationSDs from Regional Peer Group Mean. SDs from Size Peer Group Mean
Family: Population Demographics Population Entire MSA 2414616 Central Cities (CC) 764431 Outside Central Cities 1650185 Percent of Entire MSA 31.66% Population in CC Percent Change in Population from 1999
More informationUSD 483 Kismet-Plains
USD 483 Kismet-Plains Budget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures KSDE Website Information Available Summary of Expenditures
More informationSouth Butler County School District
South Butler County School District Negotiation Update February 16, 2017 In an effort to provide the public with accurate information regarding the status and progress of the negotiations with the South
More informationBudget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures
Liberal USD 48 Budget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures KSDE Website Information Available Summary of Expenditures (Sumexpen.xls)
More informationMassachusetts LINKING STUDY
Massachusetts LINKING STUDY A Study of the Alignment of the NWEA RIT Scale with the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System February 2011 COPYRIGHT 2011 NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION All rights
More informationIrvine Unified School District
Irvine Unified School District LCAP/Budget Update for Public Hearing June 13, 2017 Local Control Accountability Plan Part 1: Plan Summary 2 Dashboard Indicators Suspension: EL Progress: Graduation: ELA/Math:
More informationPlease complete all forms in their entirety. All documents submitted become the property of Drew and cannot be returned.
I N S T R U C T I O N S F O R C O M P L E T I N G T H E M. A.T. A P P L I C AT I O N Office of Graduate Admission The Caspersen School Drew University Madison, New Jersey 07940 973.408.3110 fax: 973.408.3040
More informationApril 19, Jeff Delorme, Assistant Superintendent for Administrative Services Paul Webster, School Business Official
April 19, 2017 Jeff Delorme, Assistant Superintendent for Administrative Services Paul Webster, School Business Official This presentation will provide the Board of Education with: A summary of the status
More informationUNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 504 Oswego, Kansas
UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 54 Oswego, Kansas Budget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures KSDE Website Information Available
More informationNorton Community Schools USD 211
Norton Community Schools USD 2 Budget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures KSDE Website Information Available Summary of Expenditures
More informationBudget Overview Daniel G. Lowengard, Interim Superintendent of Schools Everton Sewell, Chief Financial Officer March 19,
Budget Overview 2019-2020 Daniel G. Lowengard, Interim Superintendent of Schools Everton Sewell, Chief Financial Officer March 19, 2019 1 Our Mission The mission of the Rochester City School District is
More informationEverett. Change in 38,037 41,689 3,652
Everett The percentage of Everett residents who speak English less than very well nearly doubled over the last decade, to 29.1%, while the percentage of foreign-born rose to 39.9%. More than half (51.7%)
More informationSMCPS will establish, implement, and communicate timelines that comply with standards for certification of teachers who are highly qualified
Objective 1: Strategy 1: Comply with federal and state mandates of No Child Left Behind guidelines. SMCPS will establish, implement, and communicate timelines that comply with standards for certification
More informationFY Superintendent s Proposed Budget. Dr. Catherine Magouyrk Superintendent February 13, 2018
FY2018-2019 Superintendent s Proposed Budget Dr. Catherine Magouyrk Superintendent February 13, 2018 FY 2018-2019 Proposed Budget Presentation Overview State and Local Funding History and Student Per Pupil
More informationBudget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures
USD 375 - Circle Budget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures KSDE Website Information Available Summary of Expenditures (Sumexpen.xls)
More informationBudget Development Update. December 18, 2018
Budget Development Update December 18, 2018 The mission of the Burlington School District is to graduate students who: Value different cultures Engage with the community Communicate effectively Think creatively
More informationAPPENDIX TABLE OF CONTENTS
PPENDIX TBLE OF CONTENTS PPENDIX LETTER PGE NUMBER DOCUMENT TITLE 92 Measurements of Interim Progress B 93 Educator Equity in Rates Tables C 95 Educator Equity Extension Plan and in Rates Tables 91 PPENDIX
More informationCherry Creek School District Profile of Student-Based Budgeting for Schools FY
Cherry Creek School District Profile of Student-Based Budgeting for Schools FY2014-15 Profile of Student-Based Budgeting for Schools TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword... 1 Introduction... 2 The Annual Budget...
More informationFY 2009 STAFFING ALLOCATION AND FORMULAS
Savannah-Chatham County Public Schools FY 29 Adopted Budget FY 29 STAFFING ALLOCATION AND FORMULAS 489 Staffing Allocations Elementary Schools FY 9 A D D I T I O N S Food Service Staff Academies Staff
More informationNJ Single Accountability Continuum (NJQSAC) District Performance Review - School Year
NJ Single Accountability Continuum (NJQSAC) Performance Review - School Year 2016-17 Information and Summary Name and CDS # Name Superintendent Name Mailing Address Superintendent Email Address Elizabeth
More informationFor more commentary from Professor Redlawsk see
Eagleton Institute of Politics Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey 191 Ryders Lane New Brunswick, New Jersey 08901-8557 www.eagleton.rutgers.edu eagleton@rci.rutgers.edu 732-932-9384 Fax: 732-932-6778
More informationSOUTHWESTERN OKLAHOMA STATE UNIVERSITY ASSOCIATE'S DEGREE EXIT SURVEY 2017
SOUTHWESTERN OKLAHOMA STATE UNIVERSITY ASSOCIATE'S DEGREE EXIT SURVEY 2017 1. What is your undergraduate CATC General Studies 0 0.00% major? Computer Science 0 0.00% Other: English Education Parks and
More informationUSD Canton-Galva
USD 419 - Canton-Galva Budget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures KSDE Website Information Available Summary of Expenditures
More informationBudget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures
USD 273 - Beloit Budget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures KSDE Website Information Available Summary of Expenditures (Sumexpen.xls)
More informationBudget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures
USD 363 Holcomb Budget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures KSDE Website Information Available Summary of Expenditures (Sumexpen.xls)
More informationUSD 500-Kansas City, Kansas Public Schools
USD 5-Kansas City, Kansas Public Schools Budget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures KSDE Website Information Available Summary
More informationBudget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures
Seaman USD #345 i Budget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures KSDE Website Information Available Summary of Expenditures (Sumexpen.xlsx)
More informationUnified School District #218 Elkhart Schools
Unified School District #218 Elkhart Schools Budget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures KSDE Website Information Available Summary
More informationWinfield Public Schools
Winfield Public Schools Budget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures KSDE Website Information Available Summary of Expenditures
More informationAustin ISD & Fort Worth ISD Financial Ratios. Presented by Quang Tran Juan Ramirez Carlos Rodriguez Alesander Olaizola
& 2011-2012 Financial Ratios Presented by Quang Tran Juan Ramirez Carlos Rodriguez Alesander Olaizola 2011-2012 Districts Highlights District population: 642,663 District population: 466,910 Total enrollment:
More informationNorton Community Schools
Norton Community Schools Budget General Information (characteristics of district) Supplemental Information for Tables in Summary of Expenditures KSDE Website Information Available Summary of Expenditures
More informationThe Public Schools of Brookline Town Hall 333 Washington Street, 5 th Floor Brookline, Massachusetts
Andrew J. Bott Superintendent The Public Schools of Brookline Town Hall 333 Washington Street, 5 th Floor Brookline, Massachusetts 02445 617.730.2401 TO: FROM: Brookline School Committee Andrew J. Bott
More informationPHOTO: BIZUAYEHU TESFAYE / AP. 70 EDUCATION NEXT / SUMMER 2014 educationnext.org
PHOTO: BIZUAYEHU TESFAYE / AP 70 EDUCATION NEXT / SUMMER 2014 educationnext.org research Early Retirement Payoff Incentive programs for veteran teachers may boost student achievement As public budgets
More information