2007-2008 Milwaukee Public
Schools Educational Plan Template
Annual
Educational Plans (Ed Plans) must be submitted electronically and in
hard copy by all schools serving MPS students.
Due Dates: By 3:30 p.m. on June 29, 2007 submit:
1.
Signed and completed hard copies of current school Ed Plans (completed signature and assurance pages and
this completed template) must be made available for public review in the “No
Child Left Behind” binder at every school serving MPS students.
2.
Signed and completed hard copies of Ed Plans, including signature and
assurance pages, for all schools must be hand delivered or sent via U.S.
or school mail to :
Attn: Ed
Plans, MPS Central Services, Room 200.
(School mail
to Attn: Ed Plans, Central Services, room 200 or
U.S. mail to:
MPS, Attn: Ed Plans, Rm. 200; P.O. Box 2181; Milwaukee, WI 53201-2181)
3.
An electronic copy of the
completed plan and any subsequent updates (in Microsoft Word format, without
signatures and assurances) must also be submitted as an e-mail attachment to edplans@lists.milwaukee.k12.wi.us.
The “initial” plan (so designated until reviewed by Central Services personnel)
should be a complete and edited version of the school Ed Plan for the coming
year.
Within one month of
receiving Ed Plan Review Team feedback, schools are to email updated documents to the email address
noted above. Post-review Ed Plans should:
- Eliminate this page and the
“initial plan” language on the cover page and in the footer
- Address requirements provided
in writing by the Ed Plan review team
- Provide other changes as
determined by the school community.
These “reviewed” Ed Plans will be available for public view
on the internet.
Instructions for completing and
submitting the Ed Plan are found in an Ed Plan Workbook that has been updated
for use with this template in 07-08. Use
the updated Ed Plan Workbook in your Ed Plan development process. It is not
possible to fully address Ed Plan requirements without using the Ed Plan workbook.
Ed Plan resources (general information, templates, training and review
calendars, supporting documents, Reviewed Ed Plans, Review Team documents,
Characteristics of High Performing Urban Classroom information, links to MPS
assessment data and more) may be found by clicking the “Staff” link in the
Public Community of the MPS portal or by visiting:
http://mpsportal.milwaukee.k12.wi.us/portal/server.pt?space=CommunityPage&cached=true&parentname=CommunityPage&parentid=4&in_hi_userid=254&control=SetCommunity&CommunityID=295&PageID=426
To find the Ed Plan Workbook at this site, look for the portlet called MPS Ed
Plan Templates on the right side of the page.
To provide feedback on the Ed Plan process at any time
during the year, complete the survey at: http://www2.milwaukee.k12.wi.us/survey/edplan.htm.
To find MediaSite audiovisual presentations on Ed Plan
related issues, visit: http://mslweb.milwaukee.k12.wi.us/Mediasite/viewer/;
First, click the 
link.
Next, find this MediaSite logo on Ed
Plan related presentations:
Initial Plan – Educational
Plan Review Team Meeting and subsequent revisions not complete.
When posting
reviewed plans enter last revision date, delete previous page and this text and
update footer (open window under view, select Header and Footer)
Alexander
Mitchell Integrated Arts
School
Michelle Hagen - Principal
1728 S. 23rd St.
902-8100
Grades: K3 - 8
MPS Location 274
|
Enter date when each revision is submitted
for posting on the internet. (earliest to latest, left to right) below:
|
|
April 25, 2007
|
May 14, 2007
|
June 18, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
Table of Contents
Contents notes
for users of the electronic file. Click the links (or hold down the control key
while clicking) highlighted in yellow to go to the section indicated. Open View
menu and select Toolbars/Web to get access to back and forward navigation
arrows within this document.
Section 2: School Profile
The mission of Alexander Mitchell
Integrated Arts
School is to provide
students from K3 Head Start through Grade 8 with a challenging and rigorous
academic program with special emphasis on the arts to ensure that all students
meet or exceed grade level expectations. Mitchell’s implementation of the MPS
maintenance model for bilingual education allows our Spanish-dominant students
to become fluent and literate in English, while developing and maintaining
their primary language.
Alexander Mitchell
Integrated Arts
School is a K3 Head Start
through 8th grade multicultural urban school located on the near
south side. We are a Neighborhood School
with a student population of approximately 700.
Demographics include:
·
Hispanic - 76%
·
African American - 12%
·
White - 6%
·
Asian - 2%
·
Native American - 1%
·
Other - 2%
Mitchell School
currently receives Title I funding with 96% of its students qualifying for free
or reduced lunch. Mitchell School
is a diverse community where:
·
39% of the students are in a bilingual classroom
·
40% of the students have a DPI-English Language
Proficiency Level between 1 & 5
·
12% of the students receive special education
services, but this percentage will increase with the addition of a Most
Restrictive Placement (MRP) unit
In
order to accommodate this significant Limited English Proficient population,
there are three full-time English as Second Language teachers on staff as well
as a full K4-8 Bilingual Program.
Special Needs students will receive services as indicated in their
IEPs. Three cross-categorical teachers and
one bilingual paraprofessional will serve children in a least restrictive
environment where they will receive instruction in an inclusive or resource
setting. One MRP teacher and a paraprofessional will serve EBD students in a
small, self-contained classroom.
Mitchell’s goal is
to have all students at proficient or advanced levels in all academic
areas. During the 2007-08 school year,
our Smart Goals will focus on improvement in the areas of:
·
Math
·
Reading
·
Writing
·
School Climate
·
Parent Involvement
Mitchell uses
Direct Instruction as its primary reading program in grades K -5. The McDougal-Littell
series is used for students in grades 6-8.Corrective Reading continues to be used as an
intervention strategy to help all students not reading at grade level in the
grades 6-8. It is our belief that a
strong comprehensive reading program, one that includes a systematic phonics
approach, balanced with literature, (Houghton-Mifflin, Trofeos-Harcourt Brace,
McDougall-Littell) increases students’ fluency, comprehension and overall
achievement. This reading priority is
supported by Accelerated Reader, along with several incentive programs, i.e. Reading is Fundamental
(RIF), Book It (Pizza Hut) and Six Flags Great America Reading Program. The Reading
Plus Computer program will be used to help build fluency and comprehension for
low-achieving readers.
This year we will
be implementing the district selected language arts programs Zaner-Bloser for
grades K-5 and the on-line My Access program coupled with Great Source resources
for grades 6-8. Writing journals, portfolios, writing resources and focus
writing sessions are provided to all classrooms to strengthen the support of
writing and publishing in the classroom.
Mitchell will be
using the newly adopted Scott-Foresman (K – 5) and Holt Math Series (6 – 8). ThinkLink Benchmark tests will be used to
monitor student progress in grades 3 -8.
Data from these assessments will be used to develop appropriate
instructional strategies and interventions. Our Milwaukee Mathematics
Partnership (MMP) Math Teacher Leader shares important information and
effective teaching strategies with staff throughout the year. In addition,
collaborative planning sessions were used to align the math curriculum across
all grades for the 2007-2008 school year.
Recognizing the importance of the
parent-school connection, Mitchell has invested in resources and energy to
expand and strengthen Mitchell’s Parent
Center. The Parent Center
serves as a focal point for parents, their children, and business and community
partners to work and learn together. The Parent Center
will offer more classes to the parents including English language literacy and
family enrichment courses, i.e. sewing classes and computer technology
instruction. Parents’ interests in
various subject areas will be surveyed by the Parent Coordinator to enhance the
services we can provide.
Academic Student
Planners are provided to students in grades 1-8 to help them develop strong
study skills and to foster daily communication between home and school. Parents
are expected to monitor homework completion and sign planners daily. These planners are reviewed by the teachers
to determine homework participation rates and to identify those students who
are not receiving support from home and struggling with homework completion. Monthly
calendars and a monthly bilingual publication, “Home-School Connections” will
be sent home .to inform parents of important school events. Parent meetings
will be scheduled monthly to discuss student achievement topics related to
supporting families.
Mitchell’s
strengths as a school include strong and active business/community partners, a
highly rated Community
Learning Center
and a dedicated staff. Our business
community partners, The Kiwanis Club and Badger Mutual Insurance Company, offer
many incentives and have established themselves as a presence in our building
as academic tutors and mentors at all grade levels. Mitchell has a partnership with Aurora which provides
on-site nursing services to students and staff.
Mitchell also has a part time guidance counselor to facilitate student
leadership activities.
Through
the integration of the arts, Mitchell students learn to express themselves and
develop a strong independent identity.
This vision is supported by full time certificated specialists in music,
physical education, library media, and art.
Some of the classes that are made available to our students include:
piano, guitar, African drums, recorder, keyboarding, band, chorus, physical
education, dance, participation in the Art Museum Jr. Docent program. Classroom teachers collaborate with
specialists to achieve effective integration and alignment of appropriate grade
level learning targets. Also, daily common planning time has been built into
the schedule to establish a mechanism for developing common assessments,
planning, sharing and reviewing student
work
The Alexander Mitchell Community
Learning Center
has a very successful after school program.
The Community
Learning Center
helps recruit, retain, and motivate students by offering a diverse array of
programs such as: tutoring, homework help, hip-hop dance, Latin dance, African
percussion, soccer, basketball, and football. In addition, there is a strong parental
support system for the CLC, which is due to the numerous family nights offered
throughout the year, along with on going dialogue between both the staff and
parents concerning the students’ behavior and academic achievement. The success of the program is evident when
considering that it has been ranked as one of the premier Community Learning
Centers in the Milwaukee Area.
Section 3:
Needs Assessment Data and Narrative and Summary Charts
Internet links to District and State
Performance Data and Tools:
|
District Data
|
Description. (Ctrl/click button to link to resource described)
|
Link to URL
|
|
Ed Plan Workbook
|
Directions
and resources for Ed Plan development process. Also find Ed Plan templates in
this directory.
|
|
|
Report Card
|
A variety
of data on school performance over time.
|
|
|
Climate Survey
|
School
based staff, parent and student views on school performance in relation to a
number of key indictors, including Family Involvement Standards.
|
|
|
Instructional Practices Survey
|
School
based teacher views on instructional practice. Use link to find “Teacher
Instructional Survey Results by School.”
|
|
|
Charter School Evaluation Data
|
Charter School performance information with comparisons
to similar MPS schools on various indicators.
|
|
|
Suspension Data
|
School
05-06 school year and current year suspension data through April 5, 2007. Use this information
when developing School Climate SMART goal.
|
|
|
Special Education (CIFM) Data
|
School
performance on state and district identified Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act (IDEA) requirements, CIFM = Continuous Improvement Focused Monitoring. Find
school report in alphabetical list.
|
|
|
State Assessment Framework
|
Wisconsin
Knowledge and Concepts Examinations - CRT (WKCE) Criterion Referenced Test
frameworks for Reading,
Math and Science
|
|
|
MPS Learning Targets
|
District developed K-12 Learning
Targets across subject areas.
|
|
Reading Needs
Assessment
|
Academic Trend Indicators - Click on a trend indicator icon to select,
then copy and paste in trend row for each grade level
|
|
Trend up: Higher proficiency each
year
|
Bouncing up: Some movement lower,
latest results above baseline year
|
Level: Latest results match
baseline year
|
Bouncing: No consistent pattern of
results
|
Bouncing down: Some movement
higher, latest results below baseline year
|
Trend down: Lower proficiency each
year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
WKCE-CRT Reading Summary Chart - Data Source: MPS Report Card (03-04 to
05-06) and ORS (06-07)
|
|
Reading % Proficient
|
Grade 3
|
Grade 4
|
Grade 5
|
Grade 6
|
Grade 7
|
Grade 8
|
Grade 9
|
Grade 10
|
|
State
|
MPS
|
School
|
State
|
MPS
|
School
|
State
|
MPS
|
School
|
State
|
MPS
|
School
|
State
|
MPS
|
School
|
State
|
MPS
|
School
|
State
|
MPS
|
School
|
State
|
MPS
|
School
|
|
06-07
|
80
|
62
|
60
|
81
|
62
|
51
|
83
|
61
|
48
|
84
|
62
|
58
|
84
|
58
|
53
|
83
|
62
|
60
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
05-06
|
80
|
61
|
49
|
82
|
61
|
48
|
83
|
61
|
62
|
83
|
57
|
58
|
84
|
59
|
58
|
84
|
58
|
66
|
NA
|
40
|
|
74
|
41
|
|
|
04-05
|
NA
|
NA
|
|
82
|
62
|
53
|
NA
|
57
|
43
|
NA
|
51
|
63
|
NA
|
60
|
70
|
85
|
59
|
77
|
NA
|
41
|
|
74
|
45
|
|
|
03-04
|
NA
|
NA
|
|
82
|
67
|
65
|
NA
|
63
|
53
|
NA
|
65
|
55
|
NA
|
52
|
74
|
79
|
52
|
NA
|
NA
|
40
|
|
69
|
36
|
|
|
WKCE / Terra Nova Trend
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Value Added Trend
|
NA
|
|
|
|
|
NA
|
|
|
1.
Describe
your school’s overall trend in reading over time in terms of proficient and not
proficient students.
|
Data reveals very little growth across grade levels in
reading. Although grades 3, 6, 7 &
8 are close to meeting district performance levels, they remain considerably below
state levels.
|
2.
How
does your school’s performance compare to the district and the state?
|
All grades and all standard performance
indicators remain slightly below district and well below state performance
levels
|
3.
Where
do you see achievement gaps? Are there
student groups that have significantly lower performance?
|
The
largest achievement gap in reading comprehension occurs with our African American
students. Overall, only 35% of African
American students scored “proficient” on the WKCE. A significant gap in reading comprehension also exists with our Special Education population. Only 25%
of Special Education students scored “proficient.”
|
4.
What
does your school-level value added data say about student growth? What does your grade-level value added data
say about student growth? Which grades,
if any, are experiencing lower than average growth?
|
Value added data reveals lower than average growth across
all grade levels.
|
5.
Identify
your reading urgent fact.
|
In 4th
grade, only 8% of African American students scored “proficient” in reading comprehension
on the WKCE.
|
|
Standards Performance Summary Chart –Data Source: ORS
(06-07)
|
|
Reading Objectives % Proficient
|
Determines Meaning
|
Understands Text
|
Analyzes Text
|
Evaluates/Extends Text
|
|
State
|
District
|
School
|
State
|
District
|
School
|
State
|
District
|
School
|
State
|
District
|
School
|
|
Grade 3
|
63.4
|
53.3
|
51.6
|
75.8
|
63.6
|
61.3
|
67.9
|
56.3
|
54.2
|
61.7
|
52.4
|
51.0
|
|
Grade 4
|
73.5
|
60.8
|
55.9
|
71.7
|
60.3
|
55.1
|
59.0
|
47.7
|
43.0
|
49.5
|
39.8
|
35.7
|
|
Grade 5
|
67.9
|
55.3
|
49.2
|
76.3
|
63.6
|
57.9
|
58.6
|
47.2
|
43.2
|
59.0
|
45.4
|
40.1
|
|
Grade 6
|
70.4
|
55.7
|
54.3
|
73.7
|
61.1
|
60.6
|
60.9
|
48.9
|
49.2
|
62.0
|
48.8
|
48.4
|
|
Grade 7
|
65.9
|
51.6
|
49.6
|
69.5
|
54.9
|
53.4
|
60.0
|
44.7
|
43.5
|
57.9
|
43.8
|
42.8
|
|
Grade 8
|
72.2
|
57.9
|
56.6
|
71.4
|
58.3
|
57.1
|
58.7
|
45.8
|
44.8
|
65.8
|
52.6
|
50.8
|
|
Grade 10
|
73.2
|
55.5
|
|
65.7
|
49.5
|
|
62.3
|
47.0
|
|
65.0
|
48.0
|
|
6.
Identify
the strengths and weaknesses you see across grade levels in reading objectives
as compared to the state and the district.
|
Grade 3 reading scores increased by 11% and Grade 4
increased by 3%. We scored lower than
the district on all reading standards.
|
7.
Analyze
additional reading information collected at your school (e.g. local
assessments, learning walk data, and Instructional Practices Survey). What you
are doing or not doing that might be contributing to student achievement
results (address achievement gaps, if any)?
|
We are
not making adequate lesson progress in Direct Instruction. The reading block was shortened and went
against program recommendations. Interventions
for low achieving students were not identified and provided in a timely
manner. The growth in 3rd grade can be attributed to “double
dosing” DI reading instruction in the 2005-2006 2nd semester.
|
a.
Why
are students performing as they are in the area you identified as a weakness?
|
We believe low performance is a result of the
following: lack of background
knowledge development; increased student mobility; inadequate English
language development for ELL students; and reading comprehension strategies
not being uniformly taught across grade levels and in other content areas.
|
b.
How
and where are teachers currently addressing this area?
|
ESL teachers are working more closely with
classroom teachers to provide more targeted language instruction. DI
coach is reviewing weekly lesson progress.
|
c.
What
additional ways and places could you address this area in your instruction?
|
Implement school wide strategies to improve reading
comprehension, e.g. Text coding, K-W-L , Key Questions, and Marzano’s 6 Steps
to teaching vocabulary.
|
d.
How
will students demonstrate proficiency in this area?
|
CABS, WKCE, Reading Benchmarks, DI Mastery tests, Bloom’s book report, oral
presentations, and/or nonlinguistic representations.
|
Math Needs Assessment
|
Academic Trend Indicators - Click on a trend indicator icon to select,
then copy and paste in trend row for each grade level
|
|
Trend up: Higher proficiency each
year
|
Bouncing up: Some movement lower,
latest results above baseline year
|
Level: Latest results match baseline
year
|
Bouncing: No consistent pattern of
results
|
Bouncing down: Some movement
higher, latest results below baseline year
|
Trend down: Lower proficiency each
year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
WKCE-CRT Math Summary Chart - Data Source: MPS Report Card (03-04 to
05-06) and ORS (06-07)
|
|
Math % Proficient
|
Grade 3
|
Grade 4
|
Grade 5
|
Grade 6
|
Grade 7
|
Grade 8
|
Grade 9
|
Grade 10
|
|
State
|
MPS
|
School
|
State
|
MPS
|
School
|
State
|
MPS
|
School
|
State
|
MPS
|
School
|
State
|
MPS
|
School
|
State
|
MPS
|
School
|
State
|
MPS
|
School
|
State
|
MPS
|
School
|
|
06-07
|
73
|
46
|
29
|
77
|
52
|
40
|
74
|
46
|
43
|
75
|
40
|
52
|
78
|
44
|
59
|
74
|
40
|
53
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
05-06
|
73
|
43
|
33
|
73
|
44
|
33
|
72
|
40
|
43
|
72
|
38
|
47
|
73
|
37
|
31
|
73
|
37
|
36
|
NA
|
29
|
|
70
|
31
|
|
|
04-05
|
NA
|
53
|
35
|
72
|
46
|
37
|
NA
|
50
|
40
|
NA
|
39
|
54
|
NA
|
38
|
54
|
73
|
36
|
55
|
NA
|
30
|
|
72
|
31
|
|
|
03-04
|
NA
|
52
|
53
|
74
|
53
|
56
|
NA
|
54
|
41
|
NA
|
38
|
63
|
NA
|
39
|
63
|
65
|
29
|
NA
|
NA
|
29
|
|
69
|
29
|
|
|
WKCE / Terra Nova Trend
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Value Added Trend
|
|
|
|
|
|
NA
|
|
|
1.
Describe
your school’s overall trend in math over time in terms of proficient and not
proficient students.
|
The number of Mitchell students scoring proficient
increases as they progress through the grades.
|
2.
How
does your school’s performance compare to the district and the state?
|
In grades
6, 7, and 8, the percentage of students scoring proficient is above the
district. In grades 3 and 4 this
percentage is well below the district performance level. The performance of fifth grade students matches
the district’s. The percentages of
proficient students in grades 3 – 8 are 15% or more below state levels.
|
3.
Where
do you see achievement gaps? Are there
student groups that have significantly lower performance?
|
A higher percentage of African American and Special
Education students are not proficient compared to other subgroups. Overall, 5
out of 49 African-American students are proficient (10%) and 6 out of 49
Special Education students are proficient (12%).
|
4.
What
does your school-level value added data say about student growth? What does your grade-level value added data
say about student growth? Which grades,
if any, are experiencing lower than average growth?
|
In grades 4, 5, and 6 we are showing growth trends above
the district average. In grades 7 and 8, we are experiencing average or below
average growth compared to the district.
|
5.
Identify
your math urgent fact.
|
Proficiency
levels related to mathematical processes are low at all grade levels.
|
|
Standards Performance Summary Chart – Data Source: ORS
(06-07)
|
|
Math Objectives
|
Mathematical Processes
|
Number Operations
|
Geometry
|
Measurement
|
Statistics and Probability
|
Algebraic Relationships
|
|
State
|
District
|
School
|
State
|
District
|
School
|
State
|
District
|
School
|
State
|
District
|
School
|
State
|
District
|
School
|
State
|
District
|
School
|
|
Grade 3
|
38.9
|
23.0
|
19.1
|
73.2
|
60.1
|
56.4
|
77.9
|
66.8
|
64.8
|
76.4
|
64.2
|
62.8
|
77.3
|
63.9
|
61.0
|
73.7
|
61.4
|
58.1
|
|
Grade 4
|
34.1
|
21.7
|
16.4
|
85.9
|
75.4
|
70.5
|
76.4
|
67.4
|
63.9
|
69.9
|
56.7
|
50.4
|
68.3
|
54.6
|
48.6
|
77.8
|
65.1
|
59.1
|
|
Grade 5
|
43.6
|
29.1
|
25.8
|
78.9
|
66.8
|
66.9
|
68.1
|
58.1
|
56.8
|
70.2
|
59.7
|
58.2
|
64.5
|
47.8
|
44.4
|
66.5
|
52.8
|
51.3
|
|
Grade 6
|
43.5
|
23.8
|
25.7
|
65.9
|
47.9
|
51.3
|
73.6
|
59.4
|
64.6
|
59.3
|
42.1
|
45.0
|
62.8
|
44.0
|
46.6
|
71.8
|
54.3
|
58.4
|
|
Grade 7
|
46.9
|
28.2
|
33.2
|
63.7
|
47.2
|
50.2
|
60.7
|
45.0
|
48.6
|
52.5
|
36.9
|
39.2
|
66.1
|
48.4
|
54.4
|
81.3
|
67.3
|
71.6
|
|
Grade 8
|
56.0
|
34.9
|
37.0
|
49.3
|
33.8
|
35.3
|
53.4
|
36.8
|
37.9
|
52.6
|
39.8
|
41.4
|
56.6
|
40.9
|
42.8
|
75.9
|
62.1
|
64.0
|
|
Grade 10
|
41.7
|
42.8
|
|
68.8
|
49.9
|
|
53.3
|
34.0
|
|
55.8
|
34.5
|
|
61.0
|
44.0
|
|
58.3
|
39.1
|
|
6.
Identify
the strengths and weaknesses you see across grade levels in math objectives?
|
Relative strengths are noted in the areas of geometry and
number operations. As noted in question 5, mathematical processes is a
significant weakness.
|
7.
Analyze
additional math information collected at your school (e.g. local assessments,
learning walk data, and Instructional Practices Survey). What you are doing or
not doing that might be contributing to student achievement results (address
achievement gaps, if any)?
|
Student
performance on the school generated Basic Skills tests in grades 3 – 8
indicates students are not mastering foundational mathematical skills and
concepts. We believe the results may reflect that teachers are not teaching
to mastery in order to cover all concepts and skills identified in MPS Math
Pacing Guide. Math was not identified
as a SMART goal in our Educational Plan for 05-06.
|
a. Why are students performing as they
are in the area you identified as a weakness?
|
Students are not mastering basic facts and concepts
at the primary grades. Our instructional strategies have not focused on
communication and problem solving skills.
|
b. How and where are teachers currently
addressing this area?
|
There is nothing systemic in place at this time. We
will introduce and implement new strategies in our Educational Plan.
|
c. What additional ways and places could
you address this area in your instruction?
|
The MMP problem solving “think aloud” strategy can
be introduced and taught in all subject areas.
|
d. How will students demonstrate
proficiency in this area?
|
We will analyze Benchmarks, WKCE, and CABS data.
|
Writing Needs
Assessment
|
Writing Performance Summary Chart - Data source (grades 3, 5, 7): MPS
report card in 04-05 or before. Writing results in 05-06 were disseminated
to schools but not reported in the report card. Schools scored and maintained results
locally beginning in 06-07.Data source (grades 4, 8, 10): Online Reporting
System (ORS)/Turnleaf. Composition
(Comp) score based 0-6 rubric, Convention (Conv) score based on 0-3 rubric.
Higher scores indicate better performance.
|
|
Writing Data
|
Grade 3
% Proficient*
|
Grade 4 Rubric Scores**
|
Grade 5
% Proficient*
|
Grade 7
% Proficient*
|
Grade 8 Rubric Scores**
|
Grade 10 Rubric Scores**
|
|
|
Comp
|
Conv
|
|
Comp
|
Conv
|
|
Comp
|
Conv
|
|
06-07
|
School
|
7%
|
WKCE
|
2.8
|
2.0
|
School
|
17%
|
School
|
17%
|
WKCE
|
3.3
|
1.9
|
WKCE
|
|
|
|
05-06
|
School
|
6%
|
WKCE
|
2.3
|
1.9
|
School
|
27%
|
School
|
15%
|
WKCE
|
3.3
|
1.9
|
WKCE
|
|
|
|
04-05
|
MPS
|
6%
|
WKCE
|
2.6
|
1.8
|