WLCSD Local School Improvement Advisory Council Meeting

School Board Room at 111 W. 7th St.

March 12, 2013

6:30 p.m.

Roll Call

Present: Ryan Alpen, Mark Becker, Lori Brooke, Evelyn Cardenas, JJ Garcia, Tonya Gingerich, Priscilla Haessig, Steve Hanson, Melody Henderson, Karey Hawkins, Mitch Kelly, Karen Lathrop, Lynne Sasmazer, Scott Seele, Becky Vargas Excused absences: Brenda Arthur-Miller, Nancy Gardner, Jim Hamilton, Jackie Henderson, Missy Johnson, Brooke Morrison, Vince Ottaway and Vickie Vernon

Topics of LSIAC Meetings Since April 2011

Date / Focus
April 12, 2011 /

District Improvement Plan

Sept 6, 2011 /

ITBS/ITED Results
ACT Results

Jan 10, 2012 /

The Iowa Core: What is it and how are we implementing it?
SIOP: What is it and how are we implementing it?

Mar 13, 2012 /

Graduation rates
Logramos results

May 8, 2012 /

Explore (8th grade), PLAN (10th grade) and ACT
Oral Proficiency Interview (5th grade)
Bullying & Harassment
Draft of CSIP

Sept 6, 2012 /

The C-Plan (CSIP and APR)
Iowa Assessment results

Week of November 12, 2012 /

Shadow students at MS or HS for half-a-day

December 11, 2012 /

What did we learn from our shadowing experiences?
Review of the initial findings by the Comprehensive Site Visit Team-

Student Achievement

A summary of student achievement was published in the West Liberty Index (November 29, 2012), as well as at our district website [ → “District Information” → “Student Achievement”].
Achievement Patterns
Reading proficiency ingrades 9-11 shows a steady increase for the past four years. Math achievement shows increases for grade 9 and 10, but a flat growth rate for 11th grade. Science achievement scores in the high school show patterns similar to reading.
At themiddle schoollevel, there were steady or rising patterns of achievement until the 2011-12 school year when scores dropped. A drop in 2011-12 middle school achievement scores was a statewide phenomenon, reflecting the fact that the new tests for these grades, taken for the first time in 2011-12, were “more difficult” (a higher raw score was needed to reach the 41st percentile) than the previous tests which students had been taking since the year 2000.
Results at the elementary grade level for our district are mixed. While 2nd grade scores show definite increases from year to year, scores for the 3rd grade students are staying basically the same from year to year. Scores in the 4th grade are climbing for at least the last three years in a row, while scores in the 5th grade are fluctuating for reading and science, but steadily climbing for math.
These graphs show that our average achievement rates for reading, math and science are staying 8 – 12% behind the state averages for grades 3-5, but that we begin to catch up to the state averages in middle school, and actually surpass the state averages for math and science in grade 8. Our proficiency rates for reading, math and science in grade 11 tend to stay about 5 or 6% behind the state averages for 11th grade.
The achievement gap between Whites and Hispanics persists, with Hispanics scoring on the average about 15 – 20% below Whites, but there are signs that the gaps are narrowing. In the 5th grade, there is no achievement gap between Hispanics and Whites in math. The achievement gaps between students in poverty and those who are not in poverty are similar to the gaps between Hispanics and Whites; but these gaps have practically been eliminated for 7th and 8th grade math. The gaps in achievement between special education students and those who are not in special education are the widest of all, averaging in the range of 40 – 60%. We should note that there are approximately 9 or 10 special education students at each grade level, and 70 or 80 students at each grade level who are not in special education. Achievement gaps in our district between English Language Learners (ELLs) and those who are not ELLs remain the narrowest in the elementary school grades, and the widest in the middle and high school grades.

The Shadowing Experience

What is different about school from the days you were in K-12?
More group work. More technology usage. Diversity of the student body. Lunch was calm/impressive. Different dress code. Cell phones. Variation in sizes of classes. More freedom of movement. Student interaction with teachers seemed more informal. Nicer facility. Modified block schedule.
What in K-12 education has not changed?
Kids doing their best. Dedicated teachers. Textbooks and note-taking. Males in math and science. Social issues. Blending of groups.
What examples of effective instruction did you see?
Group work inhand-picked groups. Music enrichment class creating a play. Science experiments (hands on). “Step-by-step” instruction (structure or scaffolding). Remedial help (before school, after school, during the day) – teachers available and ready to help. Content and language objectives were posted. Honors students seem tohave lots more rigorous content nowadays.
Other comments or questions?
The informality at the high school: is that helpful?
The kids feel comfortable there. They like to hang around. Not a bad environment. You feel safe.
Mentoring program: teachers get to know kids and take kids under their wings.
Why do students improve their performance at middle school? What is different about the environment that contributes to this feeling? The students seem to feel that they can show up and get help. Students seem content at the middle school. Their motivation levels are good.
The MS has designated, scheduled class time for students with AIPs.
There are some veteran, long-term teachers at the middle school.
Is it partially the fact that the students are given more independence and treated as people who should have more responsibility?
Only three grade levels in the building
If shadowing has opened the eyes of some of our elementary teachers, should we not offer this type of opportunity to other teachers? And maybe some more cross-grade-level meetings.
For school improvement: the ones we need to talk to are the kids. In other sectors we talk with the customer. We should let them help us.
Have teachers give students suggestions on effective ways to study.
The status quo with how we work with low-income children in the district is not acceptable. New programming and partnerships with the University of Iowa, Muscatine Connected, and volunteer resources within our community need to be developed. Meaningful change will only occur with more resources/partnerships.
Can we utilize LSIAC members more effectively than we do? More than offering ideas four days per year? Can members be more proactive – go out and spread the word about what we do?
We should be proud of our schools. We do lots of good things here.

Comprehensive Site Visit Report

Pasted below are the two pages on “Monitoring and Accountability.”

From the Comprehensive Site Visit Report (pages 15-16)

Monitoring andAccountability

In an improvingdistrict/school,thedistrict/school establishesacomprehensive systemthat monitorsanddocumentsperformance of student progress, curriculum, instruction,programs, and initiatives. Resultsfromassessmentsdrive thegoal settinganddecision-making processes.Leadership supportsa system that regularlyanalyzes studentperformanceand programeffectiveness. Instructional decision-makingutilizes aprocessofcollecting,analyzing, and summarizingdata.Evidenceincludes,butisnot limitedto, thefollowing:

Asystemfordistrict-widestudentassessments,including multiple measures thatare valid and reliable,isimplemented.

Decision-makingfor thecontinuousimprovement ofinstructionand studentlearning

usingstudentachievementandteacherimplementation data isemployed.

Thedistrict’s/school’scycle ofprogram evaluationas notedinitsCSIPsectionofC-Plan isimplemented.

Summative evaluationprocesses are usedto determinewhether professional

developmenthasresulted inimprovedstudentlearning.

Noted Strengths:

34.Thepercentage of theschool’sstudentsscoringin theproficient range of achievement on theIowa Assessmentsishigher thanAEA and/or Stateof Iowa averages in reading, mathematics,andscience insomereportedgrade levels. Thefollowingcharts indicate theseareasare:

Reading / West Liberty CSD / Stateof Iowa / MBAEA
Grade4 / 74.44% / 73.36% / 72.83%

Source: 2011-2012Annual ProgressReport

Mathematics / West Liberty CSD / Stateof Iowa / MBAEA
Grade7 / 83.33% / 77.76% / 75.46%
Grade8 / 78.48% / 81.43% / 82.26%

Source: 2011-2012Annual ProgressReport

Science / West Liberty CSD / Stateof Iowa / MBAEA
Grade8 / 75.85% / 75.10% / 70.58%

Source: 2011-2012Annual ProgressReport

35.BasicEducationalDataSurvey(BEDS)data andsite interviewsindicatethatappropriate HighlyQualified Teachers (HQT) componentsarebeingimplementedwith integrity in the district. Special education teachersareusing theconsultative modelto provide instructional and support services tospecial education students. Studentsarebenefiting from thecombinedexpertise of generaland special educationteachers.

36.Thedistrict reportedtheuseofstrategies that ensurepoorandminoritystudentsare not taught at a higher ratethanotherstudentsbyinexperienced,unqualified, orout-of-field

Page 1

teachers.TheRTIprocessisbeingimplementedto ensure studentsarereceiving reteaching/interventionstomake progress. (PreK-12TeachersandSupportTeachers)

RecommendationsforImprovement:

37.CTE documentationreviewedidentified2011-2012Perkins-relatedpurchasesforeach service areainthedistrict. For federal auditing requirements, thedistrictneeds to continue creatinganongoinginventoryofall CTE-relatedequipmentpurchased with Perkinsfunds, locationofequipment, andclearly labelingofeachpieceof equipment to have onfile.

38.Thepercentage of theschool’sstudentsscoringin theproficient range of achievement on theIowaAssessmentsislowerthanAEA and/orStateofIowa averagesin reading, mathematics,andscience insomereportedgrade levels. Thefollowingcharts indicate these areasare:

Reading / West Liberty CSD / Stateof Iowa / MBAEA
Grade3 / 65.85% / 75.78% / 76.45%
Grade5 / 64.52% / 73.42% / 72.83%
Grade6 / 51.46% / 63.40% / 61.15%
Grade7 / 61.46% / 66.41% / 63.66%
Grade8 / 64.56% / 64.92% / 61.67%
Grade11 / 80.27% / 82.57% / 81.64%

Source:2011-2012AnnualProgress Report

It would bebeneficial tocompleteanin-depth disaggregateddataanalysisofnon-proficient performersto identifywhether commoncharacteristicsexist (e.g.,similarskill deficit orsimilar demographics), identify potential barriers to learning, and provide an additional source of data for school improvement planning. … Increase the use of cohort data (including subgroup cohorts) to identify trends and patterns over time, inform instructional decisions, and determine effectiveness of interventions.

School Board Goals

The school board has invested a significant amount of time this school year contemplating their goals and has formulated the following:

WLCSD School Board Goals

Established in 2012-13

1)Ensure that each school building reaches or exceeds the state average achievement levels in reading, math and science.

a)The board will hear reports from school leaders throughout the year as they monitor progress using benchmark assessments.

b)Each school will meet the targets set in its school improvement plan. [See CSIP and B-CSIPs].

c)The board will provide the resources necessary to achieve this goal.

2)Foster learning environments that are healthy, safe and supportive, where every student can learn to the best of his/her ability and reach his/her maximum potential.

a)Measure, identify and seek to decrease factors that are detrimental to the desired environment, and increase those that support the development of the desired environment. The board will provide the resources necessary to achieve this goal and require systematic reporting by appropriate personnel.

b)The board will hear reports from school leaders throughout the year including data related to attendance, discipline, incidents of bullying/harassment, student surveys and staff surveys.

3)Ensure an environment of continuous professional growth throughout the district.

a)Lead by example.

i)Learning time regularly scheduled on every school board meeting agenda

ii)Participation in IASB learning opportunities, leading to Better Boardsmanship status

iii)Review all board policies on a four-year cycle

b)Increased focus on district learning, as evidenced by regularly-scheduled progress reports at school board meetings

c)Meet with legislators to discuss priorities

d)Increase and improve communication with the community through visibility and involvement (attending activities, belonging to service organizations, etc.)

4)Financial goals:

a)Solvency Ratio: The district will steadily increase the solvency ratio until it meets the level established by board policy 801.11. The goal for FY 2014 is to produce and implement a plan to reach a solvency ratio of 5%.

b)Unspent Budget Authority: The district will maintain its unspent budget authority ratio within the range of 15% - 25%.

c)Modified Allowable Growth: The district will request additional allowable growth as needed.

Additional Student Achievement Data

Pasted below are additional achievement data for the 2011-12 school year, comparing grade spansthroughout our AEA and comparing to the state average.

Page 1

2011-2012AdequateYearlyProgress

DistrictComparisons(AllStudents)

District / Grade
3-5
Math / District / Grade
6-8
Math / District / Grade
11
Math
Delwood / 97.8 / Delwood / 100.0 / Bennett / x
Northeast / 94.7 / Preston / 92.5 / Delwood / x
Bellevue / 94.1 / Bennett / 90.9 / Andrew / x
Preston / 93.2 / Northeast / 89.7 / EastCentral / x
North Scott / 91.5 / PleasantValley / 88.6 / Central / 95.7
PleasantValley / 88.8 / North Scott / 85.9 / PleasantValley / 94.4
Calamus-Wheatland / 86.6 / EastCentral / 84.2 / Bettendorf / 90.9
Bettendorf / 86.4 / Bettendorf / 80.5 / Preston / 90.5
Wilton / 86.0 / STATE GOAL** / 79.0 / Calamus-Wheatland / 89.7
Camanche / 84.4 / Bellevue / 77.7 / Northeast / 88.9
Muscatine / 83.2 / Durant / 76.1 / North Scott / 88.7
Central / 82.8 / WestLiberty / 76.1 / Bellevue / 86.7
Bennett / 82.1 / Central / 76.0 / Wilton / 86.4
STATE GOAL** / 81.0 / Maquoketa / 75.3 / Maquoketa / 85.2
Louisa-Muscatine / 79.5 / State Average** / 74.6 / STATE GOAL** / 84.5
Clinton / 79.0 / Calamus-Wheatland / 74.3 / State Average** / 82.8
State Average** / 78.2 / Wilton / 74.3 / Clinton / 82.4
AEA* / 77.4 / Camanche / 73.8 / Muscatine / 81.9
Durant / 76.2 / AEA* / 70.5 / AEA* / 81.8
Andrew / 75.9 / Muscatine / 66.2 / Louisa-Muscatine / 78.3
WestLiberty / 75.0 / Louisa-Muscatine / 65.9 / Durant / 76.8
Davenport / 73.8 / Davenport / 65.1 / WestLiberty / 73.6
Maquoketa / 73.2 / Andrew / 64.6 / Davenport / 73.6
EastCentral / 70.8 / Columbus / 64.0 / Camanche / 71.4
Columbus / 60.9 / Clinton / 63.9 / Columbus / 58.6
Grade / Grade / Grade
3-5 / 6-8 / 11
District / Reading / District / Reading / District / Reading
Bennett / 96.4 / Bennett / 90.9 / Bennett / x
Delwood / 91.1 / Delwood / 85.7 / Delwood / x
North Scott / 88.6 / Preston / 81.3 / Andrew / x
Northeast / 87.1 / STATE GOAL** / 80.0 / EastCentral / x
PleasantValley / 84.5 / PleasantValley / 77.3 / PleasantValley / 95.1
Preston / 83.8 / Durant / 74.7 / Central / 93.0
Andrew / 83.3 / North Scott / 73.5 / Preston / 90.5
Central* / 82.4 / Northeast / 73.1 / Bettendorf / 89.9
Calamus-Wheatland / 82.4 / Bettendorf / 72.0 / North Scott / 87.4
STATE GOAL** / 82.0 / Calamus-Wheatland / 70.8 / Northeast / 87.0
Bettendorf / 82.0 / Central / 69.9 / Louisa-Muscatine / 86.7
Bellevue / 81.5 / State Average** / 66.1 / Calamus-Wheatland / 84.6
Clinton / 80.9 / Camanche / 65.2 / Clinton / 84.6
Muscatine / 79.7 / EastCentral / 63.2 / STATE GOAL** / 84.5
Wilton / 79.3 / AEA* / 62.8 / State Average** / 83.9
Camanche / 78.4 / WestLiberty / 60.6 / AEA* / 82.1
Durant / 76.2 / Maquoketa / 60.5 / Wilton / 81.4
State Average** / 74.4 / Clinton / 60.2 / WestLiberty / 80.6
Louisa-Muscatine / 74.1 / Wilton / 59.3 / Camanche / 80.0
AEA* / 73.0 / Muscatine / 59.0 / Bellevue / 80.0
EastCentral / 72.9 / Louisa-Muscatine / 58.2 / Maquoketa / 79.6
WestLiberty / 72.7 / Davenport / 56.9 / Davenport / 78.7
Davenport / 67.7 / Andrew / 56.3 / Muscatine / 75.8
Maquoketa / 66.4 / Bellevue / 52.9 / Durant / 73.2
Columbus / 62.3 / Columbus / 42.7 / Columbus / 58.6

*:AEAproficiencylevelsbasedon2011-2012schoolyear.TakenfromIa.TestingProgramdata.Dataisforgrades4,8,and11only.

**:Source-TheStateReportCardforNCLB,September,2012.Figuresarefor2011-2012grade4,8and11only.DistrictdatafromtheIowaDept.ofEducationAnnualYearlyProgresswebsite.

NA:CalculatedTotalTested<30x:Nodata

Page 1

2011-2012AdequateYearlyProgress

DistrictComparisons(LowSESStudents)

District / Grade
3-5
Math / District / Grade
6-8
Math / District / Grade
11
Math
Andrew / NA / Andrew / NA / Bennett / x
Bennett / NA / Bennett / NA / Delwood / x
Delwood / NA / Delwood / NA / Andrew / x
Durant / NA / EastCentral / NA / EastCentral / x
EastCentral / NA / Preston / NA / Bellevue / NA
Preston / NA / Bellevue / NA / Calamus-Wheatland / NA
Bellevue / NA / Northeast / 84.9 / Camanche / NA
Northeast / 90.5 / STATE GOAL** / 79.0 / Central / NA
Calamus-Wheatland / 84.9 / North Scott / 74.3 / Durant / NA
STATE GOAL** / 81.0 / Durant / 69.7 / Louisa-Muscatine / NA
North Scott / 80.9 / WestLiberty / 68.2 / Northeast / NA
Wilton / 79.5 / PleasantValley / 66.1 / PleasantValley / NA
Bettendorf / 77.0 / Maquoketa / 65.9 / Preston / NA
Muscatine / 76.3 / Bettendorf / 65.3 / Wilton / NA
Louisa-Muscatine / 76.0 / Calamus-Wheatland / 63.4 / STATE GOAL** / 84.5
Clinton / 74.5 / Central / 62.9 / Bettendorf / 84.0
Camanche / 73.2 / Camanche / 62.8 / North Scott / 79.1
WestLiberty / 69.6 / Wilton / 62.7 / Clinton / 75.8
Central / 69.1 / State Average** / 58.5 / Muscatine / 71.1
PleasantValley / 68.5 / Louisa-Muscatine / 58.3 / State Average** / 69.0
Maquoketa / 67.9 / Clinton / 55.6 / AEA* / 68.4
State Average** / 66.8 / Davenport / 55.1 / Maquoketa / 64.7
AEA* / 66.4 / Columbus / 54.7 / WestLiberty / 64.5
Davenport / 66.0 / AEA* / 54.6 / Davenport / 64.3
Columbus / 57.8 / Muscatine / 53.2 / Columbus / 48.7
Grade / Grade / Grade
3-5 / 6-8 / 11
District / Reading / District / Reading / District / Reading
Andrew / NA / Andrew / NA / Bennett / x
Bennett / NA / Bennett / NA / Delwood / x
Delwood / NA / Delwood / NA / Andrew / x
Durant / NA / EastCentral / NA / EastCentral / x
EastCentral / NA / Preston / NA / Bellevue / NA
Preston / NA / Bellevue / NA / Calamus-Wheatland / NA
Bellevue / NA / STATE GOAL** / 80.0 / Camanche / NA
STATE GOAL** / 82.0 / Northeast / 69.8 / Central / NA
Calamus-Wheatland / 81.8 / Durant / 66.7 / Durant / NA
Northeast / 81.0 / Central / 58.4 / Louisa-Muscatine / NA
North Scott / 78.9 / North Scott / 57.6 / Northeast / NA
Clinton / 75.9 / Louisa-Muscatine / 56.7 / PleasantValley / NA
Central / 75.3 / Bettendorf / 55.7 / Preston / NA
Muscatine / 73.9 / Camanche / 53.9 / Wilton / NA
Bettendorf / 72.1 / Clinton / 53.0 / STATE GOAL** / 84.5
Camanche / 70.4 / Wilton / 52.5 / Bettendorf / 84.0
Louisa-Muscatine / 65.3 / Calamus-Wheatland / 51.2 / Clinton / 78.0
WestLiberty / 64.9 / Maquoketa / 50.7 / State Average** / 71.3
Wilton / 64.1 / WestLiberty / 50.4 / Davenport / 70.2
PleasantValley / 61.6 / State Average** / 49.9 / North Scott / 69.8
AEA* / 61.6 / AEA* / 47.1 / AEA* / 68.1
State Average** / 61.4 / Davenport / 46.6 / WestLiberty / 67.7
Davenport / 59.1 / PleasantValley / 43.6 / Muscatine / 60.5
Columbus / 58.6 / Muscatine / 43.3 / Maquoketa / 58.8
Maquoketa / 57.4 / Columbus / 37.7 / Columbus / 43.6

*:AEAproficiencylevelsbasedon2011-2012schoolyear.TakenfromIa.TestingProgramdata.Dataisforgrades4,8,and11only.

**:Source-TheStateReportCardforNCLB,September,2012.Figuresarefor2011-2012grade4,8and11only.DistrictdatafromtheIowaDept.ofEducationAnnualYearlyProgresswebsite.

NA:CalculatedTotalTested<30x:Nodata

Page 1

2011-2012AdequateYearlyProgress

DistrictComparisons(SpecialEducation Students)

District / Grade
3-5
Math / District / Grade
6-8
Math / District / Grade
11
Math
Andrew / NA / Bennett / NA / Bennett / x
Bellevue / NA / Andrew / NA / Delwood / x
Bennett / NA / Bellevue / NA / Andrew / x
Calamus-Wheatland / NA / Calamus-Wheatland / NA / EastCentral / x
Columbus / NA / Delwood / NA / Bellevue / NA
Delwood / NA / Durant / NA / Calamus-Wheatland / NA
Durant / NA / EastCentral / NA / Camanche / NA
EastCentral / NA / Louisa-Muscatine / NA / Central / NA
Louisa-Muscatine / NA / Northeast / NA / Columbus / NA
Northeast / NA / Preston / NA / Durant / NA
Preston / NA / WestLiberty / NA / Louisa-Muscatine / NA
Wilton / NA / Wilton / NA / Maquoketa / NA
STATE GOAL** / 81.0 / Columbus / NA / NorthScott / NA
NorthScott / 66.7 / STATE GOAL** / 79.0 / Northeast / NA
Camanche / 61.8 / Clinton / 49.4 / PleasantValley / NA
PleasantValley / 61.7 / Camanche / 43.3 / Preston / NA
Bettendorf / 61.2 / PleasantValley / 37.5 / WestLiberty / NA
Central / 59.4 / Central / 33.3 / Wilton / NA
Muscatine / 54.5 / Bettendorf / 33.3 / Muscatine / NA
Maquoketa / 53.2 / NorthScott / 32.7 / STATE GOAL** / 84.5
Clinton / 52.3 / Maquoketa / 29.2 / Bettendorf / 65.0
StateAverage** / 48.2 / StateAverage** / 28.0 / Clinton / 50.0
AEA* / 46.9 / Muscatine / 25.2 / StateAverage** / 45.4
Davenport / 46.2 / Davenport / 19.3 / AEA* / 44.9
WestLiberty / 43.3 / AEA* / 18.3 / Davenport / 35.1
Grade / Grade / Grade
3-5 / 6-8 / 11
District / Reading / District / Reading / District / Reading
Andrew / NA / Bennett / NA / Bennett / x
Bellevue / NA / Andrew / NA / Delwood / x
Bennett / NA / Bellevue / NA / Andrew / x
Calamus-Wheatland / NA / Calamus-Wheatland / NA / EastCentral / x
Columbus / NA / Delwood / NA / Bellevue / NA
Delwood / NA / Durant / NA / Calamus-Wheatland / NA
Durant / NA / EastCentral / NA / Camanche / NA
EastCentral / NA / Northeast / NA / Central / NA
Louisa-Muscatine / NA / Preston / NA / Columbus / NA
Northeast / NA / WestLiberty / NA / Durant / NA
Preston / NA / Wilton / NA / Louisa-Muscatine / NA
Wilton / NA / Louisa-Muscatine / NA / Maquoketa / NA
STATE GOAL** / 82.0 / Columbus / NA / NorthScott / NA
Central / 68.8 / STATE GOAL** / 80.0 / Northeast / NA
NorthScott / 57.4 / Clinton / 35.3 / PleasantValley / NA
Clinton / 54.0 / Central / 30.3 / Preston / NA
Camanche / 52.9 / PleasantValley / 25.0 / WestLiberty / NA
Muscatine / 50.6 / Bettendorf / 20.8 / Wilton / NA
PleasantValley / 46.8 / StateAverage** / 20.2 / Muscatine / NA
Bettendorf / 42.4 / Muscatine / 19.3 / STATE GOAL** / 84.5
StateAverage** / 35.9 / Maquoketa / 18.8 / Bettendorf / 57.5
Maquoketa / 29.8 / Camanche / 16.7 / Clinton / 41.7
AEA* / 29.6 / Davenport / 16.5 / StateAverage** / 38.9
Davenport / 29.1 / NorthScott / 16.4 / AEA* / 32.7
WestLiberty / 20.0 / AEA* / 12.8 / Davenport / 17.3

*: AEAproficiency levels basedon2011-2012schoolyear. TakenfromIa. TestingProgramdata. Dataisfor grades4, 8, and11only.

**: Source-TheStateReport Cardfor NCLB, September, 2012. Figuresarefor 2011-2012grade4, 8and11only. DistrictdatafromtheIowaDept. ofEducationAnnualYearly Progresswebsite.

NA: CalculatedTotalTested30x:Nodata

Page 1

2011-2012AdequateYearlyProgress

DistrictComparisons(ELLStudents)

District / Grade
3-5
Math / District / Grade
6-8
Math / District / Grade
11
Math
Andrew / x / Andrew / x / Andrew / x
Bellevue / x / Bennett / x / Bellevue / x
Bennett / x / Calamus-Wheatland / x / Bennett / x
Camanche / x / Camanche / x / Calamus-Wheatland / x
Delwood / x / Central / x / Camanche / x
Durant / x / Delwood / x / Central / x
EastCentral / x / Durant / x / Delwood / x
Preston / x / EastCentral / x / Durant / x
Wilton / x / Louisa-Muscatine / x / EastCentral / x
Northeast / x / Preston / x / Louisa-Muscatine / x
Calamus-Wheatland / NA / Northeast / x / Northeast / x
Central / NA / Bellevue / NA / Preston / x
Louisa-Muscatine / NA / Wilton / NA / Wilton / x
PleasantValley / NA / Bettendorf / NA / Bettendorf / x
Bettendorf / NA / Clinton / NA / Clinton / NA
Clinton / NA / Maquoketa / NA / North Scott / NA
Maquoketa / NA / North Scott / NA / PleasantValley / NA
North Scott / NA / PleasantValley / NA / Maquoketa / NA
STATE GOAL** / 81.0 / STATE GOAL** / 79.0 / Columbus / NA
Davenport / 64.3 / Davenport / 57.6 / Davenport / NA
WestLiberty / 63.2 / WestLiberty / 50.0 / Muscatine / NA
State Average** / 59.3 / Muscatine / 40.0 / WestLiberty / NA
Muscatine / 59.2 / AEA* / 35.3 / STATE GOAL** / 84.5
AEA* / 55.6 / State Average** / 33.9 / State Average** / 44.2
Columbus / 50.0 / Columbus / 32.4 / AEA* / 43.5
Grade / Grade / Grade
3-5 / 6-8 / 11
District / Reading / District / Reading / District / Reading
Andrew / x / Andrew / x / Andrew / x
Bellevue / x / Bennett / x / Bellevue / x
Bennett / x / Calamus-Wheatland / x / Bennett / x
Calamus-Wheatland / x / Camanche / x / Calamus-Wheatland / x
Camanche / x / Central / x / Camanche / x
Central / x / Delwood / x / Central / x
Delwood / x / Durant / x / Delwood / x
Durant / x / EastCentral / x / Durant / x
EastCentral / x / Louisa-Muscatine / x / EastCentral / x
Louisa-Muscatine / x / Preston / x / Louisa-Muscatine / x
Preston / x / Northeast / x / Northeast / x
Wilton / x / Bellevue / NA / Preston / x
Northeast / x / Wilton / NA / Wilton / x
PleasantValley / NA / Bettendorf / NA / Bettendorf / x
Bettendorf / NA / Clinton / NA / Clinton / NA
Clinton / NA / Maquoketa / NA / North Scott / NA
Maquoketa / NA / North Scott / NA / PleasantValley / NA
North Scott / NA / PleasantValley / NA / Maquoketa / NA
STATE GOAL** / 82.0 / STATE GOAL** / 80.0 / Columbus / NA
Muscatine / 62.1 / Davenport / 30.4 / Davenport / NA
WestLiberty / 59.8 / Muscatine / 18.8 / Muscatine / NA
AEA* / 47.5 / State Average** / 18.8 / WestLiberty / NA
Davenport / 46.8 / WestLiberty / 18.0 / STATE GOAL** / 84.5
State Average** / 46.7 / AEA* / 12.2 / State Average** / 35.5
Columbus / 39.6 / Columbus / 5.9 / AEA* / 28.3

*:AEAproficiencylevelsbasedon2011-2012schoolyear.TakenfromIa.TestingProgramdata.Dataisforgrades4,8,and11only.