AGENDA Durham Public Schools Board of Education Academic and Student Services Work Session October 6, 2016 Fuller Administration Building, 511 Cleveland Street, Durham, NC 1. Call to Order 2. Moment of Silence 3. Agenda Review and Approval 4. Public Comment 5. Academic and Student Services Work Session Meeting Minutes I. September 1, 2016 6. Reports I. Math II and Math III NCFE Update II. Update on Exceptional Children’s (EC) Nursing Services III. Academically and Intellectually Gifted (AIG) Plan 2016-2019 IV. Athletic Eligibility V. Pre-K Sliding Scale VI. Elementary District Improvement Monitoring Measures (DIMM) VII. Summary of Follow Up Items VIII. Adjournment Mission Statement In collaboration with our community and parents, the mission of Durham Public Schools is to provide all students with an outstanding education that motivates them to reach their full potential and enables them to discover their interests and talents, pursue their goals and dreams, and succeed in college, in the workforce and as engaged citizen
84
Embed
AGENDA - dpsnc.net · PDF fileIII. Academically and Intellectually Gifted (AIG) Plan 2016-2019 IV. ... Academic and Student Services Work Session PRECIS. Agenda ... The NC Math II
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
5. Academic and Student Services Work Session Meeting Minutes
I. September 1, 2016
6. Reports
I. Math II and Math III NCFE Update
II. Update on Exceptional Children’s (EC) Nursing Services
III. Academically and Intellectually Gifted (AIG) Plan 2016-2019
IV. Athletic Eligibility
V. Pre-K Sliding Scale
VI. Elementary District Improvement Monitoring Measures (DIMM)
VII. Summary of Follow Up Items
VIII. Adjournment
Mission Statement In collaboration with our community and parents, the mission of Durham Public Schools is to provide all students with an outstanding education that motivates them to
reach their full potential and enables them to discover their interests and talents, pursue their goals and dreams, and succeed in college, in the workforce and
as engaged citizen
Date: October 6, 2016
Durham Public Schools
Academic and Student Services Work Session PRECIS
Agenda Item: Academic and Student Services Work Session
Superintendent; John McCain, Assistant Superintendent; William Sudderth-III, Chief
Information Officer; Hugh Osteen, Deputy Superintendent of Operations; and Julie Spencer,
Assistant Superintendent for Research and Accountability
Attorney Present
None
Call to Order/Moment of Silence
Michael Lee, Chair, called the meeting to order and presided over a moment of silence.
Agenda Review and Approval
Mr. Lee made a motion to approve the agenda with changes and the motion passed unanimously.
Closed session followed Public Comment
Items I (2015-2016 Preliminary Data Release and II (Policy Revisions: Student Transfers,
School Assignment, and Program Magnet Schools were moved to items VI and VII)
Closed session to follow the adjournment
General Public Comment
None
Approval of Minutes
The August 4, 2016 minutes of the Academic and Student Support Services Work Session
Committee were unanimously approved.
3
Page 2 | Academic and Support Services Work Session –September 1, 2016
Reports
Memorandum of Agreement between Durham Public Schools and North Carolina Central
University
Public Comment: None
Dr. Stacey Wilson-Norman provided an update on the specifics of early college programming
and clarity regarding operational responsibilities according to the legislature and the alignment of
the ongoing commitment between the two entities. The Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) has
been updated after a ten year period to parallel with facility usage, maintenance, security, and
traffic items of concern. The major components of the MOA has been executed by the Provost
and reviewed by Durham Public Schools and North Carolina Central University attorneys. The
current enrollment is 369 students.
The Board had a full discussion regarding the report. The item was presented for action to be
executed immediately. The MOA was unanimously approved.
Contract for Services - Edmentum
Public Comment: None
DeShawna Gooch, Director of Accelerated Learning, and Richard Sheldahl, Director of Career
Technical Education (CTE) was seeking approval for a three-year contract with Edmentum. The
company will provide services through:
Plato Courseware - replaced Apex Learning and is structured to provide alternative
methods of recovering failed courses for students
Educational Options Academy - provides digital learning and acceleration options for
middle and high school students in exclusive situations
CTE Courseware - offers over 100 courses and serves as an additional instructional tool
for CTE teachers and student
With the implementation of a three year contract, the district will save $135,060.00.
The Board had a full discussion regarding the report. The contract was unanimously approved.
Contract for Services – Curriculum and Associates (iReady)
Public Comment: None
Timothy Gibson, Director of K-5 Teaching, Learning and Leadership, was seeking approval on
the Curriculum and Associates contract which supports:
iReady – Universal screener that supports the MTSS process for elementary and middle
schools in math grades 3-8 and reading grades 4-8. The iReady data monitors/measures
student growth during the beginning, middle and year-end
Teacher Toolbox – provides online instructional resources for students and teachers
Teacher-Direct Instruction – provides downloadable lessons to students based on the
diagnostic results
The Board had a full discussion regarding the report. The contract was unanimously approved.
4
Page 3 | Academic and Support Services Work Session –September 1, 2016
Contract for Services – Discovery Education
Public Comment: None
Timothy Gibson, Director of K-5 Teaching, Learning and Leadership, was seeking approval on
the Discovery Education contract which provides:
Digital resources for standards-aligned curricular activities, virtual field trips, and other
instructional materials to all schools from kindergarten to grade 12
Over 25,000 logins
Lessons and assignment resources created by DPS teachers
The Board had a full discussion regarding the report. The contract was unanimously approved.
Contract for Services – Learning A-Z
Public Comment: None
Timothy Gibson, Director of K-5 Teaching, Learning and Leadership was seeking approval on
the Learning A-Z contract which provides:
Lesson plans and leveled texts that integrate science and social studies accessible to
teachers during reading for grades K-5
Tutoring/mentoring methods for teachers with specialized lessons for student intervention
Digital educational resources that support instruction and student practices in reading,
science, and writing.
The Board had a full discussion regarding the report. The contract was unanimously approved.
2015-2016 Preliminary Data Release
Public Comment: None
Dr. Julie Spencer, Assistant Superintendent for Research and Accountability, provided an
overview of the federal and state accountability models and preliminary district data for the
2015-2016 school year. The report consisted of the summary and highlights of overall
achievements that were met or exceeded expected growth. She also provided a full report on the
school performance grades for Elementary, Middle, and High Schools.
Dr. Stacey Wilson-Norman, Deputy Superintendent for Academic Services, provided a full
report on the district goals, and implementation plans for 3rd
grade - students who enter pre-k or
kindergarten will be reading at or above grade level; 8th
grade - students will be prepared for high
school at the end of 8th
grade; and 12th
grade – an annual 2% graduation rate increase. The
Bottom-line expectations were adopted to support the District Improvement Plan’s academic
expectations that ensure systemic improvements to guarantee growth for all students. The
District Improvement Monitoring Measures (DIMM) aligns with the District goals, supports the
implementation, and will monitor and measure student growth that will assist in evaluating
student efforts. A draft timeline and key data sets have been developed in order to assist with
measuring student growth.
5
Page 4 | Academic and Support Services Work Session –September 1, 2016
Policy Revisions: Student Transfers, School Assignment, and Program Magnet Schools
Public Comment: None
The board of education approved the following revisions of Policy 4132 - Student Transfers and
Policy 4130 - School Assignment:
Students who are domiciled in the attendance zones of Holt and Easley calendar magnet
schools may opt out to their designated traditional schools without an “approved”
transfer. (4132.5)
Students who would receive a sibling priority or program link to a calendar magnet
school, but fail to submit a lottery application by the published deadline due to an
extenuating circumstance, may be given a priority to receive a transfer. (4132.6)
Students assigned to a school through a student transfer or lottery application may
voluntarily decline their assignment until the first day of school. (4132.8)
Revisions to Policy 4130-School Assignment reflect the changes approved for Policy
4132-Student Transfers.
The board discussed Policy 4131 - Program Magnet Schools to consider an assignment priority
for siblings of students assigned to a secondary program magnet school through the
application/lottery process (4131.2 and 4131.2.B). No action was taken.
The board had a full discussion and requested additional information from the administration in
preparation for a future discussion. The items were placed on the agenda for full board meeting.
Summary of Follow-up Items
There being no further business, Michael Lee, Chair, adjourned the meeting at 7:30 P.M and the
board moved to closed session.
6
Date: October 6, 2016
Academic & Student Services Work Session
PRECIS
Agenda Item: Math II and Math III NCFE Update
Staff Liaison Present: Dr. Alisa Mclean Phone: (919) 560-2550
Melissa Watson (919) 560-2505
Amy Gross (919) 560-2000 x21314
NCDPI communicated that the North Carolina Final Exam (NCFE) scores for NC
Math II and Math III will not be returned to schools and therefore, will not be available to
include as a minimum of 20 percent (20%) of the students’ final grades.
It is a local decision to additionally administer a teacher-made final exam for NC Math II
and NC Math III.
Durham Board of Education Policy 3200.5 requires the student’s final grades in all
courses be determined by calculating 80% of the grade as the course average and 20% of
the student’s’ final grade.
Administration is asking for approval to waive the 20% required final exam calculation
for NC Math II and NC Math III.
Fiscal Implications:
None
Purpose
Information Discussion Action Consent
Reviewed by: Finance Attorney __________
7
Project Title: Math II and Math III NCFE Update
Project Team:
Dr. Alisa McLean, Assistant Superintendent of High School Teaching, Learning and Leadership
Melissa Watson, Director, High School Teaching, Learning and Leadership
Amy Gross, 9-12 Mathematics Curriculum Specialist
Project Description:
The North Carolina Department of Public Instruction has revised the standards for Math I, Math II, and Math
III. These revisions were approved by the State Board of Education. The courses have been renamed as NC
Math I, NC Math II, and NC Math III. When curriculum standards are revised, each associated assessment must
also be revised to reflect alignment to the new content standards. The End of Course for NC Math I has required
minor revisions to align with the new content standards and will be administered as scheduled during the regular
testing windows. The revisions do not have an impact on the return of student scores or the inclusion of NC Math
I data in accountability and growth reports for 2016–17.
The NC Math II and NC Math III assessments, however, will require more extensive revisions. Therefore, the
2016-17 NC Math II and NC Math III assessments will be used to develop new test items for the 2017–18 NC
Math II and NC Math III assessments.
NCDPI determined that scores for NC Math II and Math III will not be returned to schools and therefore, will not
be available to include as a minimum of 20 percent (20%) of the students’ final grades. It is a local decision to
additionally administer a teacher-made final exam for NC Math II and NC Math III.
The High School Teaching, Learning and Leadership staff met with the high school principals regarding the
NCDPI expectations for how end-of-year testing for Math II and Math III will be executed this year. Principals
requested that we consider waiving the additional teacher-made final exam this year to avoid added stress to both
teachers and students.
After researching over 15 NC school districts, it was determined that this waiver for an additional final exam
would be consistent with other districts in the region. This will result in a change from Durham Public School’s
Board of Education Policy 3200.5 that requires the student’s final grades in all courses be determined by
calculating 80% of the grade as the course average and 20% of the student’s’ final grade.
Grading would be calculated as follows:
Semester course: 50% Term 1 and 50% Term 2
Year-long course: 25% Term 1, 25% Term 2, 25% Term 3, and 25% Term 4
The High School Teaching, Learning and Leadership requests that Durham Public School’s Board of Education
waive the 2016-17 teacher-made final exam for all NC Math II and NC Math III Durham Public School
students.
In addition, procedures will be taken to reflect the “no-final exam” calculation in the PowerSchool gradebook.
Academic and Support Services Executive Summary
8
Math II and Math III NCFE Update
Dr. Alisa McLean, Assistant Superintendent of High School Teaching, Learning & Leadership
Melissa Watson, Director, High School Teaching, Learning and Leadership
Amy Gross, Mathematics Curriculum Specialist
Academic and Student Services Work Session
October 6, 2016
9
NCDPI UPDATE:
• NCDPI determined that scores for NC Math II and III will not be returned to schools and therefore, will not be available to include as a minimum of 20 percent (20%) of the students’ final grades. It is a local decision to additionally administer a teacher-made final exam for NC Math II and NC III.
10
Main Points
• The high school leadership team
determined that the administration of an additional assessment would not provide any academic benefit for students.
• Administration is asking for approval to waive the 20% required final exam calculation for NC Math II and NC
Math III • This change has no fiscal implications
11
Questions
12
Date: October 6, 2016
Durham Public Schools
Academic and Student Services Work Session
PRECIS
Agenda Item: Update on Exceptional Children’s (EC) Nursing Services
The North Carolina Department of Public Instruction requires each district to submit a plan every three years
according to statute Article 9B (N.C.G.S. § 115C-150.5-.08) enacted in 1996. Each LEA’s plan must show a
district response to each of the six NC AIG Program Standards which were approved by the State Board of
Education on July 9, 2009. The NC AIG Program Standards serve as a statewide framework and guide LEAs
to develop, coordinate, and implement thoughtful and comprehensive AIG programs. These standards reflect
Article 9B (N.C.G.S. § 115C-150.5-.08) and nationally-accepted best practices in gifted education.
The 2016-2019 plan has been revised to include alignment with DPS Office of Academic Services:
Teaching, Learning, and Leadership’s Instructional Framework
Bottom Line Expectations
Goals for the District
District Improvement Plan
.
Changes to previous plan include:
Lowering of composite score for Intellectually Gifted Identification from 97% to 96% composite score.
Creation of a district level AIG Review Team to look at nominated students who may have special
circumstances.
Adoption of High School Advanced Academics Lead Teachers.
Timeline Immediate Implementation through 2016-2019
Impact on resources AIG allotments, Advanced Academics budget
Alignment to local, state, or federal
policies
Alignment with state policy Article 9B (N.C.G.S. § 115C-150.5-.08
Intended Outcomes More comprehensive Advanced Academics program
Board Action Consent
Communication and Next Steps Notify DPS District and School Staff, Parents, and Community
Members
21
Academically and Intellectually
Gifted (AIG) Plan 2016-2019
Beth Cross
Director Advanced Academics
1
Laura Parrott Coordinator
Advanced Academics
Academic and Student Services Work Session October 6, 2016
22
Advanced Academics Goals
2016-2019
Communication
Diversity
Rigor/Relevance
K-2 Programming
9-12 Programming
3-8
AIG Achievement
Growth
23
1: Student Identification
Establish District Review Team Articulate Portfolio of Evidence Ensure consistency
Strengthen intentionality of K-2 programming Strengthen district-wide network of collaboration Develop and implement a standard for high school Honors courses
2: Differentiated Curriculum & Instruction
24
3: Personnel and Professional
Development
Articulate role of AIG Specialist (80/20) Continue professional development
Implement opportunities for compacted and advanced coursework, 3-12 Facilitate communication among and between teachers and schools Create opportunities for professional collaboration
4: Comprehensive Programming
within Total School Community
25
5: Partnerships
Continue current partnerships and seek additional sponsorships and opportunities.
Utilize AIG District Advisory Council.
Implement K-8 AIG Partnership Committees.
6: Program Accountability Weekly walkthroughs.
Use data to drive decisions.
5 26
Date: October 6, 2016
Academic & Student Services Work Session
PRECIS
Agenda Item: Athletic Eligibility
Staff Liaison Present: Dr. Alisa McLean Phone: (919) 560-2550
Larry McDonald (919) 560-3742
Mary Griffith (919) 560-2123
Main Points:
The North Carolina State Board of Education revised the Interscholastic Athletics Policy.
The new policy reflects a grade level change wherein students may participate in
interscholastic competition. The grade level changed from 7 – 12 to 6 – 12.
The North Carolina State Board of Education is giving LEA’s the choice to allow sixth
graders to play middle school sports, with the exception of football. If approved this change
would impact the local board policy 3505.
These changes will begin January 18, 2017. Administration is requesting that in accordance
with the North Carolina State Board of Education Policy ID Number HRS-D-001, students be
allowed to participate.
Fiscal Implications:
No fiscal implications exist for 6th
graders to participate in sports since programs would
not be expanded.
Purpose
Information Discussion Action Consent
Reviewed by: Finance Attorney __________
27
Project Title:
Athletic Eligibility
Project Team:
Dr. Alisa McLean, High School Assistant Superintendent, Teaching, Learning & Leadership
Larry McDonald, District Athletic Director
Mary Griffith, Magnet Administrator
Project Description:
Topic 1: Sixth Grader Participation in Sports
The State Board of Education revised the Interscholastic Athletics Policy on Thursday, August 4,
2016. Administration is proposing that sixth graders be allowed to participate in every sport
except football as outlines in the new policy. The new policy changed the grade level wherein
students may participate in interscholastic competition from grades 7 – 12 to grades 6 – 12.
Currently, the Durham Public Schools Board Policy states in section 3505 that “students in
grades 7-12 may participate.” The new policy from the state indicates student participation will
be a local decision as to whether or not, and the degree to which, the new policy will be
implemented.
Administration is requesting the adoption of Policy HRS-D-001, “Athletic Participation State of
North Carolina”, beginning January 18, 2017. The policy coincides with the beginning of the
new semester as well as academic eligibility.
Administration is not requesting additional funding. The intent is to transition this policy into the
scope of the current athletic team composition and current team maximums.
The district Athletic Director met with middle school coaches and it was determined that
students in grade 6 should be allowed to try out for and join existing middle school athletic
teams.
Timeline Spring 2017
Impact on resources No impact. We are not requesting any change in current status
Alignment to local, state or
federal policies Board Policy 3505 if approved will need to updated to reflect
the change in grade level participation
Intended outcomes Students in 6th
grade and students would be allowed to
participate in state approved sports for 6th
graders
Board Action Discussion/Action
Communication and Next Steps Notify Principals, Teachers and parents of the adjustment to
• The Pre-K Task Force explored the expansion of Pre-K offerings
• Task Force Committee discussions highlighted the need for high
quality programming and noted that “universal programming” does not necessarily mean “free”
• Current DPS Pre-K Programs include Exceptional Children, Title I and, NC Pre-K • New programming will target future Pre-K students that
demonstrate developing skills and provide additional options for diverse populations
• Watts and Morehead Montessori currently provide high quality
Montessori programs at no charge
43
Process used to Create
Pre-K Sliding Scale
• Compared proposed scale to other state scales
• Used poverty as a baseline • Considered “phase-in” of amount owed
by program participants • Consideration provided for household
size and amount of income 44
Impact on Resources
• Verification of eligibility
• Staff responsibilities
• Fiscal accountability & sustainability
• Management of project
45
46
Questions
47
Date: October 6, 2016
Academic & Student Services Work Session
PRECIS
Agenda Item: Elementary District Improvement Monitoring Measures (DIMM)
Staff Liaison Present: Dr. Stacey Wilson-Norman Phone: (919) 560-3874
John McCain (919) 560-3730
Tim Gibson (919) 560-3755
Main Points:
The elementary District Improvement Monitoring Measures (DIMM) system provides an
analysis of the mClass and End-of-Grade assessment data over the previous three years via:
o cohort trends,
o subgroup performance,
o rapid gains schools and
o best practices.
The DIMM will assist in providing a common framework for understanding both district and
individual school performance in order to focus our improvement efforts for students in
grades Kindergarten through three.
As a part of the review, we will discuss student growth, best practices and notable trends.
Additionally, we will highlight schools exceeding expectations and identify areas of
improvement.
Fiscal Implications:
No fiscal implications exist at this time. This presentation is for the purposes of
information.
Purpose
Information Discussion Action Consent
Reviewed by: Finance Attorney __________
48
Elementary District Improvement Monitoring Measures
GROWING THE COHORT:
Digging Deeper into K-3 Data
Dr. Stacey Wilson-Norman, Deputy Superintendent for Academic Services
John McCain, Tim Gibson, Assistant Superintendent of Elementary Teaching, Learning and Leadership Director of Elementary Teaching, Learning and Leadership
Academic and Student Services Work Session October 6, 2016
49
District Improvement Monitoring
Measures (DIMM)
Elementary Monitoring Update
Selected Data Sets 1. mClass TRC Reading 2. Cohort Trends 3. Subgroup Performance 4. Rapid Gain Schools 5. Best Practices
50
Are students
growing in K-3
reading over
time?
(GROWTH)
Are students on
track and
academically
prepared?
(Benchmark
Attainment)
What do the
schools
experiencing
consistent
improvement do
differently?
How have schools performed on mClass over 3 years?
Which schools are experiencing the most success overall and with subgroups over 3 years?
What is the readiness of incoming Kindergarten students?
Who are the rapid support schools and what best practices are in place to support improvement?
Academic
Status
Subgroup
Performance
Rapid
Growth
Schools
DIMM K-8 Methodology
How are cohorts of students performing over time?
What are the patterns in the performance of cohorts?
51
mClass Reading 3D Assessment
• K-3 reading assessment tool used to inform instruction
Target Audience
• Teachers assess students 1on1 3 times per year (BOY, MOY and EOY)
Assessment Cycle
• DIBELS – assesses early literacy skills
• TRC – assesses text reading and comprehension
Assessment Components
52
Text Reading and Comprehension
Authentic Text
Student reads text
individually. Completes
follow-up tasks to examine reading and
comprehension
Follow-up Tasks
Oral Comprehension
Recalling or Retelling
Writing
Scores Range:
Four Levels
Far below proficient
Below proficient
Proficient
Above proficient
Proficiency Benchmarks
K – Level D
First – Level J
Second – Level N
Third – Level P
53
KINDERGARTEN
ENTRY DATA
54
2012-2016 Entering Kindergarten
Between years 2012 and 2014, a 14% increase was observed in student being far below the benchmark on BOY
School Year
Far Below Below Proficient Above Total Kindergartners
Percent with
mClass scores
2012-2013 45.3 4.1 44.8 5.8 2,940 91.5
2013-2014 44.7 4.5 46.0 4.0 3,140 95.2
2014-2015 59.0 3.6 33.6 3.9 2,963 93.5
2015-2016 47.0* 9.0 40.0 4.0
55
Kindergartners’ BOY mClass Proficiency
Level in 2014-2015, by School
% of students far below proficient on BOY
Schools
87%+ YE Smith Eastway
RN Harris CC Spaulding
60-76% Merrick-Moore Parkwood Eno Valley Glenn Lakewood Bethesda WG Pearson
Hope Valley Forest View EK Powe Oak Grove Fayetteville Street Little River
40-59% Burton Southwest Club Blvd Hillandale
Mangum Sandy Ridge School Creekside Spring Valley
<22% Easley Holt George Watts
Pearsontown Morehead Montessori
56
Students Entering Kindergarten: EOY mClass
Proficiency in 2014-15
At the end of kindergarten, 61.2 percent of students scored at or above proficient on the mClass assessment.
• Of kindergartners who scored far below proficient on the beginning-of-year assessment, 44.3 percent scored proficient or above by the end of the year.
• Of kindergartners who scored below proficient on the beginning-of-year assessment, 82.1 percent scored proficient or above by the end of the year.
• Of kindergartners who scored far below proficient on the beginning-of-the-year assessment, 83.8 percent scored proficient or above by the end of the year.
• Nearly all (99.0%) of kindergartners who scored above proficient in kindergarten entry scored above proficient at the end of kindergarten.
57
COHORT COMPARISONS
58
Grade 1314 1415 1516
K 66.02 60.02 64.71
1 60.22 48.70 47.42
2 62.29 55.92 51.89
3 62.31 61.01 61.10
mClass Cohort Performance 2013-2016
The cohort analysis here represents EOY performance at each grade level. The Durham Children’s Data Center conducted a correlation study and found kindergarten MOY scores were strongly related to 1st and 2nd grade EOY mClass scores.
59
Kindergarten
Eno Valley
Lakewood
Hope Valley
Fayetteville Street
First
Powe
Pearsontown
Eastway
Holt
Second
Holt
Morehead
Eno Valley
Spaulding
Trends and Patterns Across Schools
A few patterns
were highlighted
within schools. A
deeper dive will be
conducted with each principal
60
Students are growing over time
Cohort performance is
inconsistent
Kindergarten EOY data has shown
consistent positive gains
First and Second Grade
performance is inconsistent
Summary of Cohort
Performance, 2013-2016
61
Grade 3: mClass EOY, BOG and
EOG Comparison
School Year
mClass BOY
mClass EOY
Difference in BOY & EOY
BOG (GLP)
EOG Grade 3 Reading (GLP)
Difference In BOG & EOG
2013-14 55.0% 62.3% 7.3 22.6% 48.8% 26.2
2014-15 53.5% 61.0% 7.5 21.1% 45.4% 24.4
2015-16 50.5% 61.1% 10.6 23.7% 45.7% 22.0
2016-17 47.0%* - - 23.8% - -
62
CHANGE BETWEEN
BOY AND EOY ACROSS
3 YEARS
63
K-3 Benchmark Attainment,
2013-2016
School Year BOY District EOY Difference
2013-2014 55.29 62.78 7.49
2014-2015 50.78 56.28 5.50
2015-2016 47.53 56.22 8.39
* District average change over three years is 7.1
64
K-3 Benchmark Attainment EOY,
2015-2016 Performance Bands Schools Schools
0-30% Glenn
31%-50% Bethesda Burton Fayetteville Street Eno Valley Eastway Forest View Hope Valley Holt
Harris Lakewood Merrick-Moore Oak Grove Pearson Sandy Ridge Spaulding Smith