lorain city schools data summary data... · 9/28/2017 · high school graduation – below are...

Academic Diagnostic Findings

Lorain City Schools – Data Summary September 28, 2017

Contents

Performance Data .................................................................................................. 2

Comparison Districts ............................................................................................................................ 3

Cradle to Career Data........................................................................................................................... 6

Academic Diagnostic Findings .............................................................................. 14

OBSERVATION DATA ..................................................................................................................... 14

ELA OBSERVATIONS ....................................................................................................................... 18

MATH OBSERVATIONS .................................................................................................................. 22

STUDENT WORK ............................................................................................................................. 25

Equity and Access Data ........................................................................................ 28

Talent ................................................................................................................... 31

Central Office – Data, Survey and Interview Findings........................................... 32

Insight Instructional Culture Findings ................................................................... 36

Community Engagement Themes ........................................................................ 42

2

Performance Data

Performance Data The percentage of test scores in each achievement level changed only slightly from 2015-16 to 2016-17. The

percentage in Limited and Basic decreased by approximately 2 percentage points.

Percent of Students

Achievement Level 2015-16 2016-17 Difference

Limited 43.8% 42.4% -1.4%

Basic 24.1% 23.3% -0.8%

Proficient 17.8% 19.1% 1.3%

Accelerated 9.5% 9.4% -0.1%

Advanced 4.4% 4.5% 0.1%

Advanced Plus 0.1% 0.1% 0.0%

Overall Score 61.2 61.6 0.4

Some tests had large increases in the percent scoring proficient and above. Grade 3 ELA, Grade 4 ELA, Grade 5 ELA,

American Government, and Physical Science had the largest increases in percent proficient. However, Biology,

American History, Grade 7 Math, Grade 8 Science, Grade 5 Science, and Grade 6 Math had large decreases in the

percent proficient.

2015-2016 2016-2017 Difference

Grade 3 ELA 24.5% 39.9% 15.4%

Grade 3 Math 50.0% 51.0% 1.0%

Grade 4 ELA 33.3% 39.8% 6.5%

Grade 4 Math 41.7% 45.1% 3.4%

Grade 4 Social Studies 45.6% 49.1% 3.5%

Grade 5 ELA 32.5% 41.1% 8.6%

Grade 5 Math 35.2% 31.5% -3.7%

Grade 5 Science 39.9% 33.0% -6.9%

Grade 6 ELA 29.4% 28.3% -1.1%

Grade 6 Math 34.4% 28.2% -6.2%

Grade 6 Social Studies 25.4% 24.0% -1.4%

Grade 7 ELA 24.7% 27.4% 2.7%

Grade 7 Math 30.8% 20.8% -10.0%

Grade 8 ELA 25.0% 19.2% -5.8%

Grade 8 Math 27.8% 32.0% 4.2%

Grade 8 Science 40.2% 30.3% -9.9%

Algebra I 23.6% 20.2% -3.4%

Biology 43.1% 31.5% -11.6%

English I 34.5% 36.2% 1.7%

English II 32.6% 32.4% -0.2%

Geometry 19.1% 14.7% -4.4%

American government 40.7% 47.3% 6.6%

American history 48.9% 37.7% -11.2%

Physical science 0.0% 12.0% 12.0%

3

Performance Data

Comparison Districts The districts of Sheffield and Amherst are very different from Lorain in terms of racial demographics with 83% and

81% of students who are white, respectively, compared to 25% in Lorain. The racial distribution of Clearview is more

similar to Lorain.1

Achievement Performance Index2

Almost 65% of student test scores in Lorain are Limited or Basic, compared to approximately 30% in Sheffield and

45% in Clearview. Only 19% of test scores in Amherst are below Proficient.

1 2016-17 District Disaggregated Race/Ethnicity Report on http://reportcard.education.ohio.gov 2 2016-17 data pulled from district report cards on http://reportcard.education.ohio.gov

24%

83% 81%

44%

28%

2% 2%

12%

40%

10% 12%

36%

8% 3% 3% 8%

Lorain Sheffield-SheffieldLake City

Amherst ExemptedVillage

Clearview Local

Racial Demographics of Comparison Districts

White Black Hispanic Multiracial

42.4

11.9 6.418.7

23.3

17.112.9

22.7

19.1

28.1

28.8

32.2

9.4

24.828

18.4

4.517.2 23

7.6

Lorain Sheffield-SheffieldLake

Amherst ExemptedVillage

Clearview Local

Overall Achievement Levels

Lorain versus Comparison Districts

Limited Basic Proficient Accelerated Advanced Advanced Plus

4

Performance Data

Achievement Indicators Met3

Lorain is 40-60 percentage points below the rates or proficiency required to meet the ELA indicators, and rates of

proficiency decrease with each grade level. Sheffield and Clearview have decreasing rates of proficiency in middle

school, which is consistent with the pattern in Lorain. Amherst has much higher rates of proficiency compared to

Lorain and the other comparison districts.

Lorain has 51% proficient on math in grade 3, but proficiency decreases steadily to 21% in grade 7. Amherst met most

math indicators. Sheffield met or almost met 5 out of 6 of these indicators, but has similar rates of proficiency to

Lorain in grade 8.

Lorain has more than 40% proficient (halfway to the required 80% proficient) in American government. Amherst and

Clearview have much higher rates of proficiency than Lorain.

3 2016-17 data pulled from district report cards on http://reportcard.education.ohio.gov

40% 40% 41%

28% 27% 19%

73% 74% 78%

60%

77%

55%

76% 78%83% 82% 84%

71%66%

56% 60% 62% 57%

36%

Grade 3 Englishlanguage arts






ELA Performance Lorain versus Comparison Districts

Lorain Sheffield-Sheffield Lake Amherst Exempted Village Clearview Indicator Met

51%45%

32% 28%21%

32%

86% 84%

74% 73%78%

36%

88%83%

90%

79% 83% 81%72%

63%

40%

69%

40%

51%

Grade 3 math Grade 4 math Grade 5 math Grade 6 math Grade 7 math Grade 8 math

Math Performance - Percent Proficient or AboveLorain versus Comparison Districts


http://reportcard.education.ohio.gov/

5

Performance Data

20%

32%36% 32%

15%

47%38%

58% 61%70% 67% 69%

77%69%

77%87%

79%

65%

90% 91%

50%

61%

47%52%

42%

71%66%

Algebra I Biology English I English II Geometry Americangovernment

American history

High School Performance - Percent Proficient or AboveLorain versus Comparison Districts


6

Performance Data

Cradle to Career Data

Kindergarten readiness

Right now, well less than half of Lorain’s scholars are starting Kindergarten having gone to Pre-

Kindergarten and that shows up in how well Kindergarten students can achieve. Only 33% (157

out of 471 students attended preschool). Only 12% of last year’s Kindergarten scholars had the

skills they needed to succeed at the beginning of the year. In Kindergarten, the diagnostic

measures student skills in the areas early reading, letter recognition, and using words in

conversation.4

Early grade reading

In 2016-17, the percent on-track in the reading diagnostic was consistently around ~60% across

K-3 grades, but even in 2nd grade, only two-thirds of students are on-track on the reading

diagnostic. In order to be rated “on track” students must, at the beginning of the school year, be

reading at or above grade level for their previous grade. In other words, when they take the

diagnostic at the beginning of grade 2, they have to demonstrate grade 1 reading level to be

rated “on track”.

On-Track Reading, K-35 Starting in Kindergarten, only 64% of student are on-track for reading and compared to other

local districts, Lorain’s scholars are not reading as well. What we see with these comparisons is

that Lorain students perform similarly to comparison districts in Kindergarten with the exception

of Amherst which vastly outperforms Lorain and other local school districts. But as students

progress into first, second and third grades, the ones in other districts mostly get better while

those in Lorain do not.

4 http://education.ohio.gov/getattachment/Topics/Early-Learning/Kindergarten/Ohios-Kindergarten-Readiness-Assessment/KRA-Annual-Report_2014-2015.pdf.aspx 5 2016-17 data pulled from district report cards on http://reportcard.education.ohio.gov

57%

77%

64%56%

64% 62% 66%58%

Kindergarten First Grade Second Grade Third Grade

Percent On-Track in Reading Diagnostic, Over Time

Percent on track Reading 2015-16 Percent on track Reading 2016-17

http://education.ohio.gov/getattachment/Topics/Early-Learning/Kindergarten/Ohios-Kindergarten-Readiness-Assessment/KRA-Annual-Report_2014-2015.pdf.aspx

http://education.ohio.gov/getattachment/Topics/Early-Learning/Kindergarten/Ohios-Kindergarten-Readiness-Assessment/KRA-Annual-Report_2014-2015.pdf.aspx


7

Performance Data

Third Grade Reading6 Forty percent (40%) of students in Lorain are at or above proficient on third grade reading. This

is 16 percentage points lower than Ohio students over and 25-35 percentage points lower than

students in comparison districts.

This gap exists within Lorain as well – only 30% of black students and 40% of multiracial students

scored proficient or above on third grade reading in Lorain.

6 2016-17 data pulled from district report cards on http://reportcard.education.ohio.gov.

64% 62% 66%58%60%

79%85% 84%

100% 100% 99%90%

66% 65%

81%

64%

Kindergarten First Grade Second Grade Third Grade

Percent On-Track in Reading Diagnosticby District and Grade Level

Lorain Sheffield-Sheffield Lake Amherst Clearview

40% 55%73% 76% 66%

All Students

3rd Grade Reading% Proficient or Above

Lorain Ohio Overall Sheffield-Sheffield-Lake Amherst Clearview


8

Performance Data

Middle grade math

Only 32% of Lorain students scored proficient or higher on eighth grade math, 20 percentage

points lower than Ohio students overall, 20 percentage points lower than Clearview, and 50

percentage points lower than Amherst. The percentage of Lorain students who scored proficient

or higher on Algebra and Geometry was even lower. 7

This gap is even larger for some students. Only 22% of multiracial students scored proficient or

above on eighth grade math in Lorain. All students of color are much less likely to be proficient

or higher in Algebra and Geometry.

7 2016-17 data pulled from district report cards on http://reportcard.education.ohio.gov.

51% 48%

30%40%

Lorain

3rd Grade Reading% Proficient or Above, by Race

White Multiracial Black Hispanic

32%

20% 15%

53% 53% 49%

36%

58%

81%

69% 65%

51% 50%42%

8th Grade Math Algebra Geometry

Middle Grade Math Courses, % Proficient or Above

Lorain Ohio Overall Sheffield-Sheffield Lake Amherst Clearview


9

Performance Data

High school graduation – Below are some isolated data points based on Lorain High School graduation

preparedness.

• 17 of the 64 (27%) high school courses were honors or AP

• 26 courses were taken at LCCC (of ~90 courses offered total to HS Seniors)

• 12% of Algebra students were in honors Algebra

• 17% of Algebra 2 students were in honors Algebra 2

• 15% of Geometry students were in honors Geometry

• 9% of Biology students were in honors Biology

• 40% of Chemistry students were in honors Chemistry

• 41% of Economics students were in honors Economics

• 17% of English 9 students were in English 9 honors



• 220 seniors had at least 2 semesters of a foreign language; 44 had 3 or more

32% 32%23%22% 21%

16%

31%

14% 6%

35%

19% 15%

8th Grade Math Algebra Geometry

Middle Grade Math Courses, % Proficient or Above, by Race


10

Performance Data

Five-year graduation rates increase between 2015-16 and 2016-17 but are still low (less than

80% of students graduating). And these graduates reflect a low bar of graduation requirements.

Graduation Rates8 Graduation rates in Lorain are approximately 20 percentage points below graduation rates in

comparison districts.

Although graduation rates are low in Lorain, they are similar across racial subgroups, with

multiracial students having the highest 4-year graduation rates. Black students had the lowest

graduation rates.

8 2016-17 data pulled from district report cards on http://reportcard.education.ohio.gov

73% 74%71% 79%

4 year Graduation Rates 5 year Graduation Rates

Lorain Graduation Rates, Over Time

2015-16 2016-17

71%

79%

93% 94%92% 95%90%

95%

4 year Graduation Rates 5 year Graduation Rates

Graduation Ratesby District

Lorain Sheffield-Sheffield-Lake Amherst Clearview


11

Performance Data

Postsecondary enrollment

Based on National Clearinghouse Data, college enrollment for Lorain graduates dropped by 10

percentage points between 2009 and 2010, but leveled off to approximately 60% until 2014.

(This data includes both in-state and out-of-state enrollment). Only 17 students out of the 2014

graduating class of 375 students enrolled in college out of state.

73%

94% 93% 94%

80%

91%

79%

67% 69%

82%

70%

87%91% 92%


4 Year Graduation Rates, by District and Ethnicity


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Percent of Students Enrolled in College the Fall Immediately After High School

% all institutions % 4 year college % 2 year college

12

Performance Data

The graduating class of the 2016-2017 school year had 393 graduates. Only 48% plan to attend

college (N=188). Of these 188 scholars who are going on to college, 121 of them are attending

Lorain County Community College. And only 11 are going to Ohio State University.

2016-2017 Senior Post Graduation Plan

College Attending How many students

Lorain County Community College 121

Ohio State University 11

University of Toledo 8

Total attended college: 188

Total number of graduates 393

% of students attending college 48%

Postsecondary completion

College enrollment in in-state colleges or universities was steady at 43% for the graduating

classes of 2016 and 2017.9 College graduation rates decreased slightly from 2015-16 to 2016-

17.

9 These numbers reflect the percentage of students who enrolled in an in-state college or university. A very small number of students enrolled in an out-of-state college or university.

43%

20%

43%

17%

College Enrollement College Graduation

Lorain HS Graduates - College Enrollment and Graudation, Over Time

2015-16 2016-17

13

Performance Data

College Enrollment and Graduation Rates Forty-three percent (43%) of Lorain graduates enroll in college in-state, which is 20-30

percentage points lower than graduates from comparison districts. Only 17% graduate from

college. Graduation rates for Amherst graduates are much better than Lorain, but Sheffield and

Clearview are only slightly better. 10

10 2016-17 data on Ohio in-state college attendance pulled from district report cards on http://reportcard.education.ohio.gov.

7% 15%9% 17%10%

% Graduated College in 4 Years % Graduated College in 6 Years

Percent of Lorain High School Students Who Graduate College in 4 and 6 Years

Class of 2008 Class of 2009 Class of 2010

43%

17%

63%

24%

77%

44%

64%

25%

College Enrollement College Graduation

College Enrollment and Graduation Ratesby District



14



OBSERVATION DATA

Culture of Learning The main indicators used to assess overall culture of learning include:

• Students complete instructional tasks, volunteer responses, and ask questions.

• Student follow behavioral expectations and directions.

• Students execute transitions, routines, and procedures in an orderly and efficient manner.

• Students are engaged in the work of the lesson from start to finish; there is a sense of urgency.

• Students and teacher demonstrate a joy for learning through positive relationships and strong classroom

culture.

9%

38%

34%

19%

Overall Culture of Learning

1. Not Yet

2. Somewhat

3. Mostly

4. Yes

3% 4%

29%

5%

23%36%

59%

43%

37%

32%

12%

52%37%

28%

Grades K-2 (n=31) Grades 3-5 (n=25) Grades 6-8 (n=17) Grades 9-12 (n=21)

Overall Culture of Learning

1. Not Yet 2. Somewhat 3. Mostly 4. Yes

15


Demands of the Standards and Instructional Shifts

Only 17% of observations reflected the demands of the standards and/or instruction shifts the standards require. This

was slightly lower for ELA and slightly higher for math. Grades K-2 had the largest percentage of observations rated

“yes”, while middle and high school observations did not have any observations rated “yes”.

51%

32%

16%

1%

Overall, did this lesson reflect the demands of the

standards and/or the instructional shifts the standards

require?

No

Not really, but there were

some promising practices

Yes, but only in some

areas

Yes

53% 49%

32% 32%

13% 19%2%

ELA (n=46) Math (n=47)

Overall, did this lesson reflect the demands of the

standards and/or the instructional shifts the standards

require?

Yes

Yes, but only in some areas

Not really, but there were some promising practices

No

16


31%

69% 75%

50%

38%

15%

25%

50%25%

15%6%


Overall, did this lesson reflect the demands of the standards and/or

the instructional shifts the standards require?

ELA, by Grade

No Not really, but there were some promising practices Yes, but only in some areas Yes

13%

50% 56%

91%47%

25%

44%

9%

40%25%


Overall, did this lesson reflect the demands of the standards and/or

the instructional shifts the standards require?

Math, by Grade

No Not really, but there were some promising practices Yes, but only in some areas Yes

17


Use of Time

Time was used effectively in a little more than a quarter of all observations. Math classes were more likely than ELA

classes to demonstrate effective use of time. More than half of the K-2 lessons that were observed used time

effectively, while none of the high school lessons did.

In order for a lesson to be rated highly in use of time, the lesson must both be focused on appropriate content, and

also not waste time from things such as poor transitions.

28%

52%

32%

13% 0%

Overall (n=93) Grades K-2 (n=31) Grades 3-5 (n=25) Grades 6-8 (n=16) Grades 9-12(n=21)

Overall, was time used effectively during this lesson?

% Yes

18


ELA OBSERVATIONS

K-2 Lesson Focus

The majority of ELA lessons in observed in grades K-2 focused on Reading and Listening Comprehension (RLC). 31%

focused on Reading Foundational Skills (RFS).

Note: There were only 5 RFS observations, which is not a large enough sample size to break down the data. We would

expect to see a more balanced distribution of RLC and RFS in grade K-2, however this could also be a result of what

part of the ELA lesson we observed.

63%

31%

0%

6%

Focus of ELA Lessons

Grades K-2 (n=16)

Reading and Listening

Comprehension

Reading Foundational

Skills

Narrative Writing

None

19


Core Action 1: Appropriate Texts

60% of ELA observations in K-2 and 57% of observations in 9-12 received a “yes” on all three Core Action 1 indicators

to meet Core Action 1. None of the observation in grades 6-8 received a “yes” on all three Core Action 1 indicators.

• 1a: Students spend the majority of the lesson listening to, reading, writing, and/or speaking about

text(s)

• 1b: The texts are at or above the complexity level expected for the grade and time in the school year.

• 1c: The texts are worthy of student time and attention

Observations in elementary grades were most likely to receive a “yes” on indicator 1a. Observations in high school

were most likely to receive a “yes” on indicator 1c.

36%

60%

20% 0%

57%

ELA Overall

(n=33)

Grades K-2

(n=10)

Grades 3-5

(n=10)

Grades 6-8 (n=6) Grades 9-12

(n=7)

ELA Core Action 1

% Met ELA Core Action 1

64%

80%

50%

33%

86%

47%

60%

22%

33%

71%

53%60%

22%

33%

100%

ELA Overall

(n=33)

Grades K-2

(n=10)

Grades 3-5

(n=10)


(n=7)

ELA Core 1 Indicators

% Yes

Indicator 1a Indicator 1b Indicator 1c

20


Core Action 2: Questioning Practices

Overall, 15% of Reading and Listening Comprehension ELA observations received a rating of “mostly” or “yes” on Core

Action 2 (“Do questions and tasks, both oral and written, integrate the standards and build students’ comprehension

of the text(s) and its meaning?”).

61%24%

12%

3%

Core Action 2

ELA Overall (n=33)


60% 60%67%

57%

10%

30%

33%

29%

20%

10%0%

14%10%


ELA Core Action 2


21


Core Action 3: Student Ownership

Only 3% of observations were rated “yes” on Core Action 3 (“Are students responsible for doing the thinking in this

classroom?”), and K-2 observations were the only ones that received a score of “yes”. None of the observations

received a score of “maybe”.

61%

36%

0%3%

Core Action 3

ELA Overall (n=33)


60%

40%

100%

57%

30%60%

43%

10%


ELA Core Action 3


22


MATH OBSERVATIONS

Core Action 1: Reflecting the Shifts of the CCSS

• 1a: The lesson focuses on the depth of the grade/ course-level clusters, grade/ course-level content

standards, or parts thereof

• 1b: The lesson intentionally connects mathematical concepts within and/or across grades as appropriate,

reflecting the coherence in the standards.

• 1c: The lesson intentionally targets the aspect(s) of rigor (conceptual understanding, procedural skill and

fluency, application) called for by the standard(s) being addressed.

15% of math observations received a “yes” on all three Core Action 1 indicators to meet Core Action 1.

NOTE: Indicator 1c, about rigor, can be rated highly even if content is poor because, if a teacher is working on

appropriate rigor for a below-grade-level standard, it is still considered appropriate. However, the overall rating would

still be poor if the content was poor.

15%

40%

8% 0% 0%

Math Overall

(n=47)

Grades K-2

(n=15)

Grades 3-5

(n=12)


(n=11)

Math Core Action 1

% Met

45%

80%

58%

11% 9%

30%

60%

42%

0% 0%

54%

71%

58%

33%

45%

Math Overall

(n=47)

Grades K-2

(n=15)

Grades 3-5

(n=12)


(n=11)

Math Core Action 1 Indicators

% Yes

Indicator 1a Indicator 1b Indicator 1c

23


Core Action 2: Instructional Practices

Only 15% of math observations were rated “mostly” on Math Core Action 2 (Do teachers employ instructional

practices that allow all students to learn the content of the lesson?), however one-third of K-2 observations were rated

“mostly”. None of the observations were rated “yes” on Core Action 2.

53%32%

15%

0%

Core Action 2

Math Overall (n=47)


13%

42%

78%

100%

53%

42%

22%

0%

33%

17%


Math Core Action 2


24


Core Action 3: Student Ownership

Only 7% of math observations were rated “yes” or “mostly” on Core Action 3 (Do teachers provide all students with

opportunities to exhibit mathematical practices while engaging in the content of the lesson?), and they were all in

grades K-5..

70%

24%

7%

0%

Core Action 3

Math Overall (n=46)


36%

58%

100% 100%

50%

33%

14% 8%


Math Core Action 3


25


STUDENT WORK

Student Work Overall

More than half of all students meet the demands of the assignment but only 12% meet the demands of standards.

This is because few assignments were aligned to the demands of the standards.

62%71%

51%

12% 11% 12%

Overall (n=97) ELA (n=50) Math (n=47)

Percent of Students Meeting Demands of Assignments

and Standards

% of students meeting demands of the assignment

% of students meeting demands of the standards

38% 42%34%

40%42%

38%

20%16%

23%

2% 4%

Overall (n=97) ELA (n=50) Math (n=47)

Overall, do the content demands of this assignment align with the expectations

defined by grade-level standards?

Not at All Weak Strong Excellent

26


ELA Student Work

More than two-thirds of ELA student work samples indicate that students meet the demands of the assignment, but

only 18% of work samples in elementary grades meet the demands of the standards and none of the middle or high

school samples demonstrate that students meet the demands of the standards. This indicates that the students were

not given the opportunity to meet the demands of the standards in the assignments, not that the students are unable

to meet the demands of the standards.

Among the ELA examples of student work, only those in elementary grades were rated “strong” (aligns to the fact that

0% of students in middle or high school met the demands of the standards).

68%74% 76%

66%

18% 18% 0% 0%


Percent of ELA Students Meeting Demands of

Assignments and Standards,

by Grade



35%46%

56%40%

35%31%

44%60%

29% 23%


Overall, do the content demands of this assignment align with

the expectations defined by grade-level standards?

ELA, by Grade


27


Math Student Work

21% of K-2 work samples demonstrate that students meet the demands of the standards, however only 2% of high

school work samples demonstrate that students meet the demands of standards.

Among the math examples of students work, those from grades 3-5 were most likely to be rated “strong” or

“excellent”.

62%55%

42% 43%

21% 16% 9% 2%


Percent of Math Students Meeting Demands of

Assignments and Standards,

by Grade



31% 33%

75%

38%

54%

44%

17%23%38%

22%8%8% 8%


Overall, do the content demands of this assignment align

with the expectations defined by grade-level standards?

Math, by Grade


28

Equity and Access Data


Attendance

More than 40% of Lorain High School students are absent more than 10 days out of the year. However,

certain subgroups of students have an even larger percentage of high school students who are absent

more than 10 days a year, with more than half of black and disabled high school students missing more

than 10 days a year.11

11 Based on data from the Equity Audit Report.

55%50%

42%45%

38%

Disabled Black Hispanic Multiracial White

Percent Absent > 10 daysLorain High School

30%

12% 10% 15%

Lorain Sheffield Amherst Clearview

Chronic Absenteeism Rates

29


Discipline

The following graph demonstrate the difference between the percentage of the district that each

subgroup accounts for and the percentage of out-of-school suspensions (OSS) each group accounts for.

The percentage of suspensions that black males and males with disabilities account for is much higher

that the percentage of the district they represent.

16% 17%

11%

18%14% 15%

18% 17% 16%

22%

District Mobility %, by Subgroup

13% 14%19%

4%13%

21%25%

21%

6% 11%

SWD Male Black Male Hispanic Male Multiracial Male White Male

Male Students

% District Enrollment % District OSS

30


English Language Learners – 7.6% of students are Limited English Proficiency based on online data,

7.04% based on the data Bill shared. (Bill’s data looks like there is about 20 more students enrolled than

what I see reflected on the website.)

ACT – Hispanic/Latino students made up a large proportion of students who took the ACT last year (153

out of 333), but you can see in the graph below that white students were much more likely to meet the

benchmarks (and not need remediation).

25% 14% 15%22% 8% 16%

46%

27% 30%17% 10% 10%

30%21% 12%

English (Benchmark=18) Math (Benchmark=22) Reading (Benchmark=22)

Percent of Students Meeting ACT Benchmarks, by Race

All Students (n=333) Black/African American (n=74)

White (n=63) Hispanic/Latino (n=153)

Two or more races (n=33)

31

Talent Data

Talent Data

Despite the fact that only 25% of students are white, 84% of teachers, 58% of admin, and 61% of

support staff are white. There is a large discrepancy between the percentage of the district that Hispanic

students represent and the percent of staff they represent.

According to data collected from LCSD’s central office, in SY16-17, teachers were never rated as

Ineffective on the Ohio state evaluation.12

Rating # of Teachers % of Teachers

Accomplished 120 29%

Skilled 256 61%

Developing 18 4%

Ineffective 0 0%

Blank* (no data) 24 6%

12 Based on 2016-17 teacher evaluation ratings Bill Ohle shared.

27%

40%

25%5% 11%

84%

27%

15%

58%

15%23%

61%

Black Hispanic/Latino White

Percentage of Students, Teachers, Administrators and Support Staff,

by Race

% of students % of teachers % of building administrators % of support staff

http://education.ohio.gov/getattachment/Topics/Teaching/Educator-Evaluation-System/Ohio-s-Teacher-Evaluation-System/OTES-Original-Framework-Graphic112015_acc.pdf.aspx

32

Central Office Data

Central Office – Data, Survey and Interview Findings

From the Central Office Performance Evaluation data, 90% of the staff are rated Exemplary (the highest

category).

Performance Category Number of Staff Percent of Staff

Above Average 1 1.7%

Exemplary 53 89.8%

Satisfactory 5 8.5%

Grand Total 59 100%

* I deleted two people – one was the Superintendent who didn’t have a rating and one didn’t have a

rating because of LOA.

35 people responded to the Central Office survey which was administered between September 11 – 22,

2017.

Although more than half of respondents agree that vision drives priorities and goals, almost a quarter

disagree that vision drives decision making at all levels.

Central office teams report that the lack of communication across teams keeps them from both making

decisions and being informed about what decisions have been made.

Half of the respondents report that staff at all levels do not share a common vision of what effective

teaching looks like.

57% 51%37% 32% 41%

29% 31%43% 56%

53%

14% 17% 20% 12% 6%

The district has aclearly-stated,

overarching visionthat drives priorities.


overarching visionthat drives goals.


overarching visionthat drives decisionmaking at all levels.

The district has astrategic plan that

guides central officestaff in their decision

making.

When districtleadership commit toa program or priority,they follow through.

Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements about the district’s planning:

Agree Neutral Disagree

33

Central Office Data

Three-quarters of survey respondents report that staff do not feel like those who deserve leadership

positions are the ones most likely to get them. Only one-third of respondents agree that leaders work

hard to retain effective staff. Just over one-third of respondents agree there is someone who is thinking

about their career progression. (Note that all of these questions have an unusually small percent of

strongly agree/agree response.)

Central office does not communicate well across departments. Staff attribute their limited capacity to

meet deadlines and complete key work activities to the disconnects across the central office.

91%79%

91% 91%

50%

3%9%

6% 3%

34%

6% 12% 3% 6%16%

I know what isexpected of me at

work.

My team regularlydiscusses our

progress towardachieving our goals.

My work at the LCSmakes a difference

for students.

I understand how mywork contributes todistrict priorities and

goals.

Staff at all levels ofthe district share acommon vision of

what effectiveteaching looks like.

Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements:


26% 35% 35% 34%

53%50% 59% 51%

21% 15% 6% 14%

The staff who deserveleadership positions in

the district are themost likely to get

them.

There is someone inthe district who isthinking about my

career progression.

There areopportunities for

career growth andadvancement in the

district.

Leaders in the districtwork hard to retain

effective staff.



34

Central Office Data

Staff do not feel like they have the capacity to do their job well.

Staff do not feel like there is low tolerance for ineffective performance in the central office. In

interviews, staff mention that there are not any strategies to retain high performers, and also

acknowledge that there is no concrete approach for removing low performers, as evidenced by little

turnover.

29%

77% 69% 65%

43%

17% 26% 35%29%6% 6%

The central officecommunicates well across

departments.

I know the people and thework of other departmentswell enough to reach out

across departments when Ineed help.

When I need help fromanother central office

colleague to accomplish mywork, they come through for

me.

The time I spend collaboratingwith my colleagues is

productive.

Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements about interactions between colleagues and departments in the LCS’s central office:


71% 74%

54%

83% 80% 77%

20% 20%

31%

14% 20%14%

9% 6%14%

3% 0%9%

I have autonomy tomake critical

decisions.

I am involved in thedecisions that

affect my work.

On my team, wehave the capacity

(people, time,resources) neededto do our jobs well.

I can easily accessthe data and

information I needto do my jobeffectively.

My directsupervisor has

made me better atmy job.

I have beenprovided consistentfeedback from my

supervisor(including

evaluation)throughout the

year.



35

Central Office Data

Many staff feel like their team has the tools and resources they need to effectively support schools.

However, in interviews, staff report that decisions are often made with little input from school-based

personnel.

Additional takeaways from central office team interviews:

- Decisions need to be made – quit talking about the same things over and over again; usually

goes nowhere

- Projects/initiatives are rolled out but the implementation support is lacking.

- It is difficult to know what other departments are doing as well as understand how that fits in

the district priorities.

- Staff need a Cross-walk of all the initiatives (e.g., co-teaching, RTI, PBIS, instructional framework)

74%89%

76%

51%

21%9%

21%

26%

6% 3% 3%23%

At the LCS, it’s typical for one colleague to help

another when they are struggling with something.

I feel safe admitting when I don’t know something.

My co-workers arecommitted to doing quality

work.

There is a low tolerance forineffective performance in

the central office.



91% 94%

59%

91%

9%

34%

9%6%

My team aligns ourwork to the needs ofthe schools that we

serve.

I prioritize the needs of schools when

planning my team’s work and projects.

My team has the toolsand resources weneed to effectively

support schools.

I would like ideasabout how to betterserve the schools in

this district.



36

Instructional Culture Insight Survey Findings

Insight Instructional Culture Findings

We administered Insight to all teachers in all schools in Lorain between September 11 – 20, 2017.

Overall participation reached 63% and all schools reached a minimum response rate of 40%.

Our research has shown that in schools with the strongest cultures, as measured by the Instructional

Culture Index (these are the top quartile schools), students learn more in both math and reading. And

great teachers stay longer - they plan to leave strong schools at half the rate of weaker-cultured schools.

In short, these schools are great places for teachers and students to teach and learn, and their results

speak for themselves.

Using these data (which are still preliminary), we have been able to explore the following domains -

Learning Environment, Observation & Feedback, Evaluation, Academic Expectations, Leadership, and

Family and Community Engagement.

Learning

Environment

Students and teachers need a safe and predictable environment to focus on the hard

work of learning. In the Learning Environment domain, teachers assess the

consistency of expectations and consequences for student conduct, as well as

leadership support in maintaining a productive learning environment.

Academic

Expectations

Academic standards are designed to be rigorous and ensure students are prepared

for success in college and career. In this domain, teachers assess the extent to which

rigorous academic practices are visible in classrooms and whether school leaders

have the necessary resources and knowledge to support these practices.

Observation

& Feedback

Classroom observation should be a powerful source of feedback for teachers, as well

as a valuable source of information for teacher evaluation. In the Observation &

Feedback domain, teachers report how frequently they are observed and how

consistently they get helpful feedback to improve their instruction.

Evaluation Evaluation systems should set clear expectations for teachers and generate useful

feedback on their performance. In the Evaluation domain, teachers report how clearly

performance expectations have been communicated, how much they agree with

those expectations, and how accurately evaluations represent teacher performance

in this school.

Family and

Community

Engagement

To ensure students’ success, learning should be well-supported both within and

outside of school. In the Family & Community Engagement domain, teachers assess

the relationships they have built with students’ families and the systems in place to

keep families involved in students' education.

37


I. Learning Environment

Learning Environment shows one of the largest differences between top and bottom quartile schools in

LCSD. Teachers at top-quartile schools are more likely than those at bottom-quartile schools to agree

they have what they need to maintain behavior in their classroom and interactions between students

and adults are respectful.

All LCSD schools could benefit from improved systems and expectations for students. On average, less

than 40% of teachers across LCSD agree that there are consistent expectations for students or that

adults immediately address student misbehavior in shared school spaces.

Domain Score: Top-quartile schools: 7.7; Bottom-quartile schools: 5.8

86% 84%

93%

75%68%

76%

36%29%

54%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Interactions between adults andstudents at my school are respectful.

School leaders provide me with theresources and support I need to

maintain high standards for studentbehavior in my classroom.

School leaders promote a safe andproductive learning environment in

my school.

Learning Environment Questions

National District TQ (Fall 2016) Top Quartile Bottom Quartile

56%63%

39%46%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Across my school, there are consistent expectationsand consequences for student behavior.

Teachers and leaders at my school immediatelyaddress misbehavior in shared school spaces like

hallways and the lunch room.

Average Score to Learning Environment Questions

National District Average (Fall 2016) Average Score

38


II. Observation & Feedback and Evaluation

All schools in LCSD are struggling to administer strong observational feedback to teachers. On

average, less than 40% all teachers agree that they receive support to implement feedback or that

observational feedback helps them improve student outcomes. Relatedly, less than one-third of

teachers agree that the evaluations accurately reflect teacher effectiveness.

70%61% 60% 60%

48%

37% 35% 33%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

The feedback I get frombeing observed helps me

improve student outcomes.

I regularly discuss feedbackabout my teaching with aninstructional leader at my

school.

When I get feedback afteran observation, I receive

support to implementthose changes.

My observer consistentlyfollows up to see how

successfully I amimplementing feedback

from our last observation.

Average Score to Observation & Feedback Questions

National District Average (Fall 2016) LCSD Average Score

57% 57%

70%

32%

42%

32%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

At my school, evaluation ratings areaccurate reflections of teacher

effectiveness.

The teacher evaluation processhelps identify my strengths and

weaknesses.

Professional developmentopportunities at my school are well

planned and facilitated.

Average Score to Evaluation & PD Questions


39


III. Academic Expectations

Another top difference between top and bottom-quartile schools exists in the Academic Expectations

domain. Teachers at top-quartile schools are more likely to agree that their school implements a

rigorous academic curriculum and that all teachers take responsibility for developing students’ literacy

skills. Across all schools in LCSD, less than half of teachers are likely to agree that students are critically

engaging in school tasks.

Domain Score: Top-quartile schools: 7.7; Bottom-quartile schools: 6.1

91%94%

83% 81%

40%37%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

All teachers at my school take responsibility for developing students’ literacy skills.

My school implements a rigorous academiccurriculum.

Academic Expectations Questions


68% 68% 71%

40% 42%

50%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Students at my school respond to and build on their peers’ thinking,

ideas and answers

Across my school, students supporttheir answers with evidence and

explain their thinking.

Students at my school arefrequently asked to write in various

styles across all subject areas.

Average Score to Academic Expectations Questions


40


IV. Leadership

Other large differences between top and bottom quartile schools are found in areas having to do with

leadership and teacher effectiveness. Teachers at top-quartile schools are more likely to agree that

their school leaders articulate a clear overarching vision and have a low tolerance for ineffective

teaching.

94% 92% 89%89%

78%71%

53% 53%

28%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Teachers understand how ouractions contribute to school

priorities and goals

My school leaders articulate a clearoverarching vision that drives

priorities, goals and decision makingwithin the school.

There is a low tolerance forineffective teaching at my school.

Additional Questions


41


V. Family and Community Engagement

Family and Community Engagement survey results are mixed in LCSD. Most teachers across LCSD agree

that teachers actively work to establish positive, trusting relationships with students’ families and that

their schools have established systems to ensure families are well informed about student progress.

However, only half of teachers across schools agree that the school seeks input from families.

Domain Score: 7.6 (No national comparison available)

72% 74%71%70% 71% 72%

59%65%

57%

46%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Teachers at myschool actively

work toestablish

positive, trustingrelationships

with students'families.

My school hasestablished

systems thatensure families

are wellinformed about

the school.

Families at myschool regularlyreceive usefulupdates abouttheir student's

progress.

My schoolencourages andhelps families tosupport student

learning athome.

Teachers at myschool viewfamilies aspartners inefforts to

increase studentachievement.

Leaders at myschool set clearexpectations for

family andcommunity

engagement.

My schoolregularly seeks

input fromstudents'families.

Average Score to F&CE Questions


42

Community Engagement Themes

Community Engagement Themes Student discipline and quality of support from Central Office were the aspects of LCS that had the lowest rates of satisfied or very satisfied

responses from all stakeholders on the community survey. Student discipline had the lowest rates of satisfactions among all stakeholder groups

except former employers, who were more likely to have lower satisfaction with support from Central Office, and community members, who had

equally low rates of satisfaction for student discipline and Central Office support.

Student discipline and quality of support from Central Office are also the aspects of LCS that have the highest rates of respondents who are

dissatisfied or very dissatisfied, with the exception of parents of current students. However, it should be noted that among parents of current

high school students, student discipline was the aspect that had the highest rates of dissatisfaction.

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

Overall (n=770) Parents of currentstudents (n=214)

Parents of current HSstudents (n=119)

Parents of formerstudents (n=115)

Parent of studentoutside LCS (n=13)

Current Employee(n=475)

Former Employee(n=37)

Community Member(n=152)

Percentage of Stakeholders Satisfied or Very Satisfied with Aspects of LCS, by Stakeholder Group

School transportation Communications from the district/schools

Opportunities to engage with and support schools Access to Spanish language resources and communications

Student discipline Quality of teaching

Quality of support from district Central Office School Safety

School environment that supports and values the diversity of student backgrounds

43


0%

20%

40%

60%

Overall (n=770) Parents of currentstudents (n=214)

Parents of currentHS students (n=119)

Parents of formerstudents (n=115)

Parent of studentoutside LCS (n=13)

Current Employee(n=475)

Former Employee(n=37)

CommunityMember (n=152)

Percentage of Stakeholders Disatisfied or Very Disatisfied with Aspects of LCS, by Stakeholder Group

School transportation Communications from the district/schools

Opportunities to engage with and support schools Access to Spanish language resources and communications

Student discipline Quality of teaching

Quality of support from district Central Office School Safety

School environment that supports and values the diversity of student backgrounds

44


The themes outlined below represent a synthesis of responses from multiple sources including focus

groups, interviews, and surveys of community members, teachers, students, and Central Office staff.

Community

Theme Description Voices Evidence

Social and emotional needs of students

Need more support to address social and emotional needs of students

Teachers, Principals, Students

Most teacher focus groups and many principal interviews included request for more counseling and social worker support in schools Social workers/support for mental health came up as a theme, especially among LCS staff, in survey results for What ideas do you have to help Lorain reach its fullest potential? (8 respondents mentioned mental health services) Teacher: “There are so many kids with so many needs that it’s overwhelming… We went to school to be educators. The other things that we are expected to be doing related to students social and mental health needs are taking over what we should be doing instructionally.”

Family support resources

Need to find respectful, coordinated approach to support families living in poverty

Teachers, Principals

Teacher: "Big thing we have to remember: A lot of these parents don’t know where they are going to be or what they will need the next week – it’s just survival. We take for granted because we’re not in that position. Parents feel like they’re being judged. They are worried about making ends meet. " Principal: "I wish we could do parent coaching, education, engagement training." Teacher (survey): "There are a lot of issues arising from poverty, i.e. unaddressed health issues, parents working multiple jobs to make ends meet, and lack of access to transportation."

45



33 respondents referenced families living in poverty and their specific needs

Community organization involvement

Organizations want to be involved, but do not know how

Community organizations; Teachers

El Centro lunch participant question for DH: "What are the top three ways that we as community organizations can support you?" 23 respondents mentioned the need and/or desire to get members of the community more involved, both teachers wanting community orgs in the classroom and community members wanting to be invited in. Teacher (survey): "The Toni Morrison area has a lot of Seniors who have had children graduate from LCS. They are very happy with the education their children received. Many would volunteer, have ideas, tell what worked with their children. They just need to be asked!"

Communication channels between schools and families

Multiple, but possibly unclear or ineffective, communication channels used by schools in reaching out to families

Teachers, Principals, Parents

Teachers and principals reported using a wide variety of communication channels with families – paper, email, website, social media, robo-calls and texts and apps like ClassroomDojo. However, the channels varied school to school and even classroom to classroom within a school. 23 survey respondents mentioned improving communications as a way to help LCS reach its full potential Parent (survey): "There needs to be better communication between offices/schools/departments. We are new to the district and have a nightmare of a time getting anything accomplished on the administrative and logistical side of things. "

46



Parent (survey): "We need clearer communication. For example, I received two robot calls on the 22nd giving two different times for an open house. Parents came at each time resulting in an unorganized four-hour open house while teachers were trying to prepare their rooms for the first day."

School Culture and Equity


Student discipline

Dissatisfaction with student discipline

Teachers, Parents

In survey results, there is a theme around improving discipline. It was an area of low satisfaction with 34% of current parents dissatisfied and 53% of LCS staff respondents dissatisfied. Respondents want more accountability for students, families, and teachers, and want more consistent enforcement of rules like attendance and dress code. 24 respondents cited rules and discipline as ideas for LCS reaching its fullest potential. Parent (survey): "I think that the schools need to do away with the Dress Code. Uniforms are so hard to find for Middle and High School kids. Kids get sent home and their education disrupted over clothing. My kids hate wearing the uniforms. This is what they complain about all the time. I think education is more important than what kids are wearing!" Teacher (survey): "Enforce the rules, including dress code, that are already in place." Teacher (survey): "A small percentage of students at the High School bring attendance rates down. Also, a small percentage of students are continual discipline problems. These students need to be sent to an alternative school (New Beginnings)"

47



Change fatigue

Feel as though change is only constant in district; as soon as a leader or program is established, it ends or is changed leading to poor outcomes


Teacher: "Lorain has always susceptible to an attitude of – 'This is a good idea!' – Then they throw teachers in with minimal training. I'm doing my 5th reading program in like 7 years." 16 survey respondents mentioned change fatigue Teacher (survey): "One idea would be to pick an initiative and stick to it more than a year or two." Teacher (survey): "Every year it's different new programs. We never stick with something to see how it works. We never ask why it works for some and not others. Maybe the others do not know how to use it. We never ask teachers what programs they like and why. "

Community & School Culture and Equity


Family involvement

Two perspectives: Schools concerned about lack of involvement from families; Families concerned about communication and culture of schools (do not always feel welcomed)

Teachers, Principals, Parents

Most teacher focus groups reported greater family attendance at "fun" events where food was provided or they could see their student perform (sports, concert) but very poor attendance at more academically focused events and conferences 49 respondents mentioned parent involvement as a key lever for LCS success. Some of these responses referred to parents needing to become more involved while others were from parents wanting to know how to be more involved. Teacher (survey): "I believe for a student to be successful it starts from home. So many dysfunctional children in this city. Ideas such as mandatory

48



involvement from parent or guardian. Have courses as "how to be a parent". Former LCS parent (survey): "There is a "significant" portion of the student population here that lacks ANY parental support or involvement, quite the opposite to be blunt. Until this is corrected LCS will never accomplish other educational goes that have been set forth!"

Equitable access to resources

Resources for schools and families seems unevenly distributed across district (examples: Pre-K; access to translation and language services; counseling; funding for family and community activities)

Teachers, Students, Central Office

Interviews with central office and community members yielded several comments about uneven access to resources across schools (i.e. Pre-K, translation support) Teacher focus group participants referenced similar resource concerns along with questions about the funding to support family engagement events (i.e. some schools had active PTO that raised money, several schools had no PTO and no additional funding) Other than principal and front office staff, schools appear to lack a knowledgeable point-person who can assist families in seeking support or provide information about services available

Community & Systems and Support Structures


Early Childhood Education

Desire for more expansive Pre-K program in LCS


Teacher: "We don’t have preschool here – other schools do. It’s a real challenge that so many students don’t have Pre-K coming in; they are already so far behind."

49



Principal: "First year our building has had some pre-k. It’s been great. Need to see kids earlier. Will look forward to seeing data – how kids with pre-k will do over time. We’ve noticed that kids in LCS Pre-K stronger than Headstart. Better prepared when they come to K."

lorain city schools data summary data... · 9/28/2017 · high school graduation – below are...

Documents