CW Leadership Meeting Notes

November 8, 2004

 

 

Attendance: Gary Clark, Sherri Nelson, Lisa Compton, Ingrid Kiehl, Theresa Myers, Catherine Miller, Marsha Silva, Dave Moll, Rolff Christensen, Frank

Cranley, Nancy Record, Janet Marsh, Pat Nesbitt, Susan Self, Jill Brogan

 

 

Facilitator: Gary Clark

 

The Leadership Group reviewed the School Profile Document by sections. The Leadership Team will be doing a similar review of this document with their Focus Group. It was suggested that each graph have a narrative that explains the significance of the chart. Focus Groups could look at the graphs and suggest narratives or any changes that would make the Profile a better representation of the school.

 

Profile Review Notes

 

Demographics

  1. Total number of students in mobility chart not the same as in other chart.
  2. The color of student mobility and CBED charts would look better if the color were different.
  3. The narrative could state that the ones who come for a second year stay in our program.
  4. The current statement about student mobility may not be an accurate comparison. It could be that we donŐt have a higher mobility.
  5. Student by County Ethnicity could be compared to Waterford.
  6. Student ethnicity could be broken down by k-8 and 9-12

 

CST Standards

1.     We donŐt show a graph for below basic but it could be in the appendix

2.     Need to write a comment about CST Math.

3.     Algebra could be affecting scores for students in grades above 7th. There was not total agreement on this statement.

4.     Should show that the number of students being tested is increasing.

5.     Standardize the colors of Waterford and Connecting Waters in all charts.

6.     CW might consider using a bus service to get students to testing next year. There is an insurance risk factor if we had teacherŐs drive students to testing sites.

7.     We need to show that we are addressing student improvement Đ This is a critical area especially in math.

8.     Becky is still working on getting all the data for AYP/API.

9.     We do not have data on WRAT test. The data would be difficult to get.

10.  Having a benchmark test would be helpful to show improvement.

11.  Compare CASHEE to all districts, break out by ethnicity and gender

12.  Jill thinks they may want a break down of test of Special Ed. She would rather not but thinks it might be required.

 

Transcript Analysis

  1. Data to back up that we have a number of students who come in with credit deficiency. Add a statement why this is important to why our scores are lower.
  2. Have a bar graph that shows the number of students by grade starting at ninth grade that come in to school with credit deficiency.
  3. Show number of students who are taking algebra.

 

English Learners

  1. Need more data
  2. We donŐt have many students
  3. We had 50 who tested but are not sure how many are ESL

 

Special Education

  1. Where it says ŇResource at CBEDSÓ it should say ŇSpecial Ed at CBEDSÓ
  2. Jill sent additional Special Ed data to Gary by email.

 

Post Graduate Survey

  1. Need discussion at focus groups to interpret data.
  2. The charts would be better if it were % of students turning in a survey not the number of students.
  3. Narrative of this chart needs to describe survey group, how survey was conducted.
  4. What is a vocational school? How is it different from other choices on the chart?
  5. Would this chart be better if it were two charts?

 

Reason for Choosing

  1. Use percent s instead of number of students.

 

Internet Computer Access

  1. 1476 is not the correct the number is probably represents the number of enrolled students

 

Parent Satisfaction

  1. Looks good.

 

Teacher Accreditation

  1. Use percent

 

 

Focus Group Parent and Student Attendance

  1. Send updated list of parent and student representatives to Sherri Nelson
  2. Parents and Students should be emailed and called about the meeting
  3. Sherri could send a letter to all of the current participants encouraging them to continue to help with this process by attending the meetings.
  4. We will not be marked down for lack of attendance. We donŐt take roll at the meetings.

 

 

NEXT LEADERSHIP MEETING

This meeting has been moved to the first Monday in December, December 6th at 10:30 AM.