2018-19 School Development Plan Welcome Agenda Presentation - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

School Results and 2018-19 School Development Plan  Welcome  Agenda  Presentation  Q & A  Gather feedback  Meeting evaluation

School Results and School Development Plan 101  What are school results?  How are school results used?  What is a school development plan?  Why do schools have a school development plan?  What is the school development planning process?  How is the school development plan used?  How are your child’s learning needs being accommodated?

What are School Results? School results are drawn from:  Report cards.  Standardized tests (PATs and Diploma Exams, current and multi-year).  CBE Student Survey.  Accountability Pillar Report.  Measures of achievement for previous school development plans.  Other achievement data collected by teachers throughout the year.

How are School Results Used?  Support student learning on a daily basis as staff individually and collaboratively develop instructional strategies and lesson plans.  Inform professional development throughout the year.  Inform the Three-Year Education Plan.  Provide key data for the school development planning process.

What is a School Development Plan?  A school development plan is an action plan for a school outlining what students and teachers will do to improve student learning outcomes connected to the school results.  A school development plan has three main parts:  Theory of Action  Achievement  Instruction

Why Do We Have a School Development Plan?  Ensures a targeted and focused approach to address achievement gaps.  Allows staff, students and parents to understand the strategies the school will use to improve student learning.  Fulfills legislated requirement under the School Act.

How Do We Develop a School Development Plan?  Dig deeply as a staff into student data and other achievement results.  Identify an issue for whole-school focus.  Develop an action plan to influence student learning outcomes.  Share with school council for feedback.

How is the School Development Plan Used?  The school development plan is the driver for closing the gap and informs aspects such as:  Strategies for student learning.  Professional development.  Requests to parent associations.  Offsite activities.  Residencies.

How Are Your Child’s Learning Needs Being Accommodated?  The school development plan aligns with:  The Programs of Study.  Personalized learning.  Other supports such as mental health.

School Results Overview Student Learning Data SLA results beginning grade 3 students reading comprehension multiple choice test English Program: Excellent 5 Proficient 4 Adequate 3 Limited 2 Insufficient 1 Total 3-4-5 reading Sept. 2017 4% 18% 51% 16% 4% 73% Sept. 2018 4% 20% 60% 12% 4% 84% French Immersion Excellent Proficient Adequate Limited Insufficient Program: reading Sept. 2017 10% 12,5% 62.5 % 7.5% 7.5% 85% Sept 2018 6% 19% 51% 19% 5% 76% Key understandings from these findings indicated that students: In the English program, 84% of students met the expectations at the beginning of grade 3 in reading comprehension, which is higher than the percentage obtained in Sept 2017 by 11%. In the French Immersion program, the percentage of students meeting the expectations at a beginning grade 3 level i n reading in French (76%) was lower than last year’s (85%). It was noted that more students scored in the proficient range but more students than last year placed in limited range. For the 2018-19 school year, teachers will be focusing on the high impact reading strategies at the surface, deep and transfer levels to increase students’ reading comprehension to reduce the percentage of students who scored in the limited range in both French and English.

School Results Overview Report card results June 2018 (grades 1-4) Language Arts In 2017-18, our theory of action was : If teachers are explicit in their instruction of high impact reading comprehension strategies then students will increase their achievement in reading comprehension. The results for report 1 and report 2 for both programs are presented in the graphs below. English Language Arts comparison of results report 1 Jan 2018 and report 2 June 2018 60 50 40 Level 1 30 Level 2 Level 3 20 Level 4 10 0 Rpt 1 Rpt 2 Rpt 1 Rpt 2 Rpt 1 Rpt 2 Rpt 1 Rpt 2 Grade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4

School Results Overview French Language Arts comparison of levels from report 1 Jan 2018 and report 2 June 2018 80 70 60 50 Level 1 40 Level 2 Level 3 30 Level 4 20 10 0 Rpt 1 Rpt 2 Rpt 1 Rpt 2 Rpt 1 Rpt 2 Rpt 1 Rpt 2 Grade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4

School Results Overview Goal 1: Students Measure of goal achievement: Decrease in the number of 2s and an increase in the number of 3s and 4s by 2% on the report card in the Language Arts outcome: Reads to explore, construct and extend understanding. For students in the English program, goal 1 was achieved in all grades. In grades 1, 2 and 4 the percentage of students achieving at level 2 decreased by more than 2 % while at the same time the percentage of students achieving at level 3 increased by more than 2% except in grade 3. In grade 3 the goal is considered as being achieved because even though the percentage of students achieving at level 3 decreased the level of students achieving at level 4 consequently increased by 13%. For students in the French Immersion program a 2% decrease in the percentage of students achieving at level 2 was evident in grades 2, 3, and 4. In grade 1 French Immersion the increase in the percentage of students achieving a 1 decreased by 5% directly related to the increase in the percentage of 2s . The decrease in the percentage of students achieving at level 3 was lower than the previous year but this decrease was directly related to the percentage increase at level 4. In grade 3, the decrease in the percentage to students achieving at level 3 is directly related to the significant increase in the percentage of students achieving at level 4. Given these explanations, all grades in the French Immersion program were assessed as having achieved goal 1.

School Results Overview Correlation between SLA results for beginning grade 3 students and June report 2 results June results in demonstrating achievements in reading comprehension English Program Reading % of % of Reading levels % of % of levels SLA students students report card students students Sept 2017 Sept 2018 June 2017 June 2018 1/2 21% 24% 1 8.5 % 6% 3/4/5 75% 76% 2/3/4 91.5% 94% French Immersion Program Reading % of students % of Reading levels % of % of levels Sept 2017 students Report card students students SLA Sept 2018 June 2017 June 2018 1/2 15% 12% 1 0 % 12% 3/4/5 85% 88% 2/3/4 100% 88%

School Results Overview • The different levels for measuring achievement in reading comprehension for SLAs and report cards, posed a challenge in comparing the results obtained. However, some degree of correlation can be observed when comparing grouped levels. The descriptors for achieving at a level 1 in the report card corresponds to levels 1 and 2 combined for SLAs. The levels 3/4/5 combined have their equivalence in the report card levels 2/3/4 combined. • Focussing on the results at the levels 3/4/5 for both measures, the correlation for the English program is 81% and for the French Immersion program is 100%. • The discrepancy between the level 3/4/5 SLA and 2/3/4 on the report card can be attributed to the fact that the SLA is a one time measure and would be expected to be lower while the report card is a summative evaluation of a few months of learning which are assessed in a number of different ways. • The target of achieving 95% correlation between the SLA results at the beginning of grade 3 when compared with the report card results at the end of grade 2 was not achieved in the English program but showed 100% correlation in the French Immersion program. • However, it should be noted that the results obtained for SLAs and report cards for both programs were very consistent when comparing the 2016-17 year and the 2017- 18 year results.

School Results Overview Perception data CBE Student survey 94 grade 4 students surveyed Subject % Strongly agree/agree Reading I understand what I read 90% Reading helps me learn 96% Reading at school help me read when I am 92% not at school I like to read 82% Reading summary 90.5% Writing summary Ability to share ideas through writing 82% Math summary Confidence in their ability to learn and use 88% math Art summary Ability to work with different materials and 89% share ideas through art Music summary Understand sounds and rhythm and can be 86% creative through music Science summary Good at describing things and am curious 86% about science

School Results Overview Accountability Pillar Overall Summary 3-Year Plan May 2018 Janet Johnstone School