Advanced Academics and Gifted & Talented Program Evaluation€¦ · The Advanced Academics/Gifted...

Advanced Academics and Gifted & Talented

Program Evaluation

2009-2010 to 2013-14

Office of Assessment and Evaluation

Clear Creek Independent School District

Office of Assessment and Evaluation

Advanced Academics and Gifted & Talented Program Evaluation

Presented to Board of Trustees on November 10, 2014

Dr. Jo Beth Brizendine:

Signature Date

Dr. Robert Bayard:

Signature Date

Dr. Steven Ebell:

Signature Date

Dr. Gregory Smith:

Signature Date

2013-2014 Board of Trustees Program Evaluation Team Win Weber, President Laura DuPont, Ph.D., Vice President Ken Baliker, Secretary Ann Hammond, Member Charles Pond, Member Page Rander, Member Dee Scott, Member Greg Smith, Ph.D., Superintendent

Steven Ebell, Ed.D., Deputy Superintendent, Curriculum & Instruction Jo Beth Brizendine, Ed.D., Director, Advanced Academics and Gifted & Talented Robert Bayard, Ed.D., Director, Assessment and Evaluation Laura Gaffey, Data Analyst, Assessment and Evaluation Pat McKenna, Data Analyst, Assessment and Evaluation

Advanced Academics and Gifted & Talented Evaluation 2009-10 to 2013-14

Page | 1

Executive Summary

As part of CCISD’s program evaluation process, the Office of Assessment and Evaluation has completed a

program evaluation for the Advanced Academics and Gifted & Talented program encompassing the five-

year period from the 2009-10 school year through the 2013-14 school year. The Advanced Academics

and Gifted & Talented program offers a range of opportunities to students in areas including: Advanced

Placement (AP), Pre-AP, WAVE, Science Magnet, Clear Horizons Early College High School, Independent

Study Mentorship (ISM), Credit by Exam (CBE), and Dual Credit.

Previous program evaluation have been completed in five areas: Pre-AP/AP (2005-06 to 2009-10), Dual

Credit (2005-06 to 2009-10), CHECHS (2007-08 to 2010-11), WAVE (2006-07 to 2010-11) and Science

Magnet (2006-07 to 2010-11). Summaries of previous evaluations and updates on Superintendents’

Recommendations are included in this evaluation (p. 3-4 and p. 5-7, respectively).

Gifted and Talented Background:

The National Association for Gifted Children Pre-K-Grade 12 Gifted Education Programming Standards

(2010) has identified seven program goals for a Gifted and Talented program. These include:

Learning and Development,

Assessment,

Curriculum Planning and Instruction,

Learning Environments,

Programming, and

Professional Development.

The identification measures used in CCISD are comprised from six areas: classroom performance, authentic assessments, portfolio data, performance on qualitative and quantitative screening instruments, teacher recommendations, and cumulative records. The GT program begins with a process for identification of students using varied assessments. Students who are identified as GT receive general GT services in grades K-3, participate in the Alpha program in grades 4-5, then receive GT services through Pre-AP/AP in grades 6-12.

Identification – Referrals for GT testing are submitted yearly by October 1 for students in grades 1-12. All kindergarten students are screened each fall semester.

Assessment – An array of assessments are available, such as: COGAT (Cognitive Abilities Test), Otis-Lennon School Abilities Test, and Naglieri Nonverbal Abilities Test; classroom performance; professional recommendation; and student portfolios.

Alpha –Students in grades 4 and 5 receive differentiated instruction in the regular classroom, attend sessions on campus one semester, and attend an off-campus mini-course the other semester.

Omega – The Omega program originated as a home campus GT program for intermediate students, but has evolved and is now integrated into the Pre-AP program. The integrated redesign will be finalized for all intermediate students beginning fall 2015.

During the five year period of this program evaluation, between 2.3% and 3.5% of GT students were LEP, and between 1.2% and 1.4% received Special Education services (twice-exceptional). The Advanced Academics program gives careful consideration to English Language Learners (ELL) and twice exceptional students in the identification and assessment process.


Page | 2

The Texas State Plan for the Education of Gifted/Talented students provides requirements for and guidance to districts (TEA, 2009). The Director of Advanced Academics/GT, along with a committee of Advanced Academics Specialists, conducted an internal review of the state GT plan in the fall of 2014.

The internal review determined that CCISD is in Compliance in 100% of 30 indicators from the five sections. CCISD is at Recommended in 72% of 50 indicators, and CCISD is at Exemplary in 52% of 31 indicators. The Advanced Academics/Gifted and Talented program was evaluated through eight questions: 1. What is the annual number of students who qualify for GT and are retained in Advanced

Academics? Electronic tracking of elementary students who were tested for GT identification began in 2012-13. An average of 31.8% out of 1,709 students and 33.4% out of 1,796 students qualified in 2012-13 and 2013-14, respectively. The retention rate from 2009-2010 through 2013-2014 for all GT students who remained enrolled in CCISD during the five years of this evaluation was 98.5%. The retention rate from one year to the next during that same five year period ranged from 98.5% to 99.8%. Pre-AP and AP course enrollment in mathematics, language arts, science, and social studies increased over the five year period of the evaluation in all secondary grade levels. The retention rate in the WAVE program remained approximately equal to the retention from the 2012 evaluation, at approximately 91% to 93% after three years. The retention rate in Science Magnet increased from the 2012 evaluation, from between 88%-94% to 94%-96% after three years.

2. How do the demographics of Advanced Academics and GT compare to district demographics?

At the elementary level, an average of 6.0% of students in grade 1 participate in the GT program, up to a high of 10.6% of students in grade 5. At the secondary level, enrollment in Advanced Academics (which encompass GT and Pre-AP/AP) begin at an average of 61.0% in grade 6, peak at 65.2% in grade 8, then fall to a low of 53.7% in grade 11. Overall, participation levels in Advanced Academics have increased in all grade levels throughout the five years of the evaluation. Participation rates as compared to eligibility for participation has increased the most in Pre-AP (5.9%) and in AP (6.3%) over the five year period. Science magnet participation rates have been virtually unchanged, due to a fixed number of available seats in the program. Independent Study Mentorship (ISM) rates have declined; however, this program is available as an opportunity to students as space allows within individual student’s schedule. In the GT program, including Alpha and WAVE, the percentages of African American, Hispanic, and Economically Disadvantaged students are lower in the GT program than the corresponding percentages in the district, while the percentage of Asian students is higher in the GT program than overall in the district. In Pre-AP, AP, and Dual Credit, the percentage of Hispanic students, while lower than the district, has increased over the five-year period.


Page | 3

3. How have programs evolved since their last evaluation? The percentage of students enrolling in Dual Credit courses in high school fluctuated during the five years in the evaluation and ranged between 20.1% and 25.3%.

Between 2009-10 and 2013-14, the percentage of students taking one or more high school courses in grades 6-8 increased by 16.2%.

The percentage of students enrolled in at least one Pre-AP course increased in all secondary grade levels over the five-year period, at an average of 5.8%, with the greatest increases in grades 7, 9, and 10. The percentage of students enrolled in at least one AP course increased in each of grades 9-12, at an average of 6.3%, with the greatest increases in grades 9 and 10. The percentage of students who took at least one AP exam also increased in each of grades 9-12, with an average increase of 4.2%.

Out of 32 AP exams taken by CCISD students, 14 had increases in participation rates. Out of 14 exams with an increase in participation rate, 57% (8/14) also had increases in performance rates. Out of the 16 AP exams without higher participation rates, 94% (15/16) had increases in performance rates.

Students at WAVE continued to outperform their non-WAVE peers in 2012-2014 on state assessments at Advanced levels in reading, mathematics, writing, science, and social studies. Students at Science Magnet outperformed their non-Science Magnet peers in 2012-2014 on state assessments at Advanced levels in all subjects except for grade 7 writing in 2013.

4. What structures are in place to support Advanced Academics and GT students? A range of support structures are in place for students in Advanced Academics and GT programs. The support structures include: advanced academics specialists to support GT students at the elementary level; a Pre-AP summer camp for the recruitment and retention of students in advanced academics in grades 6 and 9; a WAVE liaison, a WAVE basics preparation course for students in grade 6, and a WAVE summer camp; and tutorials and Saturday camp for students in AP courses.

5. What processes are in place to ensure equity? A number of processes exist to ensure equity in Advanced Academics and GT, including: varied assessments for the identification of underrepresented student groups (cognitive ability assessments with non-verbal components); elimination of mandatory summer reading for Pre-AP ELA courses; elimination of mandatory participation in the Science Fair for Pre-AP Science courses; and a Post-Secondary Test Preparation Day for students in grades 9-11. Within the GT program, a gap continues to exist with an underrepresentation of African American and Economically Disadvantaged students. Analysis of AP Potential from the College Board revealed that African American and Hispanic students with potential for success in AP classes are not participating in at least one AP exam.

6. What is the scope of the professional learning process for Advanced Academics and GT staff? Teachers of students in Advanced Academics and GT receive a variety of professional learning, including mandatory requirements. Teachers of GT students must complete 30 hours of foundational training and six hours for an annual update. Teachers of Pre-AP and AP classes are required to receive updated College Board training every three years.


Page | 4

7. What is the parent/student satisfaction level in the Advanced Academics and GT program? There were three different surveys conducted: a survey for the parents of elementary GT students; a survey for the parents of secondary Advanced Academics students; and a survey for Advanced Academics students.

Parents of elementary GT students responded with an average Likert score for questions 5-15 ranging from 2.89 to 3.89. The overall average Likert score was 3.63. In general, parents of Gifted and Talented students felt that there are good processes for the identification of gifted students; the elementary GT program provides challenging and/or difficult materials and a higher level of thinking for gifted students; and, they are pleased with the pullout program for elementary GT students.

Parents of Advanced Academics students responded with an average Likert score for questions 4-23 ranging from 2.98 to 3.96. The overall average Likert score was 3.59. In general, parents of Advanced Academics students felt that CCISD provides sufficient academic options and resources such as Advanced Placement, dual credit, and career concentrations for college and career transitions; classwork in advanced academics/GT courses includes challenging and/or difficult materials and higher level thinking; and as students progress from grade to grade and campus to campus, they feel prepared and confident that they are ready for the work at the next level.

Students in Advanced Academics and GT responded with an average Likert score for questions 4-23 ranging from 2.92 to 4.24. The overall average Likert score was 3.63. In general, Advanced Academic students felt that as they progress from grade to grade and campus to campus, they are prepared and confident that they are ready for the work at the next level; classwork in advanced academics/GT courses includes challenging and/or difficult materials and higher level thinking; and they participate in a variety of activities that engage them in learning in advanced academics/GT classes.

8. What is the average annual cost per student?

Based on data provided by CCISD’s Finance Department, the average cost to CCISD per student for participation in Advanced Academics and GT has ranged from $61 to $78 per student during the five year period of this study. Advanced Academics and GT expenditures include salaries for campus and district staff, supplies, and travel. When AP Incentive funds are included, the average cost per student for participation in Advanced Academics and GT ranged from $61 to $82 per student during the five year period of this study.


Page | 5

Background Information on Advanced Academics and Gifted & Talented

The purpose of program evaluations in the Clear Creek Independent School District (CCISD) is multi-faceted and shall result in findings, recommendations, and/or conclusions that:

Ensure program alignment with District goals and vision;

Assess strengths and weaknesses of the program;

Measure the success of the program in meeting its expressed goals; and/or

Result in improvements in, revisions to, or discontinuation of the program.

As part of CCISD’s program evaluation process, the Office of Assessment and Evaluation has

completed a program evaluation for the Advanced Academics and Gifted & Talented program

encompassing the five-year period from the 2009-10 school year through the 2013-14 school year.

The Advanced Academics and Gifted & Talented program offers wide-ranging educational offerings

across the district. Students may select from a range of opportunities in the area of Advanced

Academics, such as: Pre-Advanced Placement (Pre-AP), Alpha, Advanced Placement (AP), Webster

Academy of Visions in Education (WAVE), Science Magnet, Clear Horizons Early College High School

(CHECHS), Independent Study Mentorship (ISM), Credit by Examination (CBE) without prior

instruction, and Dual Credit, to name a few. Elementary schools offer services for gifted students

through differentiation in cluster classes as well as pull out instruction and acceleration.

Advanced academic students receive services through enrichment clusters, subject area enrichment and acceleration. Gifted and Talented (GT) students in grades 4 and 5 receive differentiated instruction in the regular classroom, attend classes on campus one semester, and attend their chosen off campus mini-course the alternate semester.

Program evaluations have been completed in the past three years on several related programs: Pre-

AP/AP (2005-06 to 2009-10), Dual Credit (2005-06 to 2009-10), CHECHS (2007-08 to 2010-11), WAVE

(2006-07 to 2010-11), and Science Magnet (2006-07 to 2010-11). These previous evaluations have

been updated through 2013-14, which are summarized in this evaluation. The GT program will be

investigated more thoroughly within this evaluation.


Page | 6

Summary of Previous Advanced Academics Program Evaluations

Pre-AP/AP In August 2011, the Pre-AP/AP program evaluation was presented to the Clear Creek ISD Board of Trustees. In summary, the demographics of the students taking a Pre-AP/AP course did not reflect the demographics of the general CCISD student population. The demographics of the students taking an AP exam did not reflect the demographics of the general CCISD student population. The percentage students taking at least one Pre-AP/AP course did increase over the period of the study at both the campus and district level. The percent of students taking at least one AP exam did increase during the time of the study at both the campus and district level.

The percentage of 11th and 12th grade students passing (as defined by a score of 3 or better) an AP exam was overall higher than seventy-five percent of the forty comparable schools at each campus. Overall, about fifty percent of the students taking an AP course took the corresponding AP exam at both the campus and district level.

Not all AP teachers attended AP training in their content area before they began teaching the course.

Overall, students were satisfied with the Pre-AP/AP program in CCISD.

WAVE In April 2012, the WAVE program evaluation was presented to the Clear Creek ISD Board of Trustees. On average, more than 94% of the sixth grade students who enrolled at WAVE, and remained in CCISD, remained continuously enrolled at WAVE through eighth grade for the time period of the study.

WAVE students consistently outperformed the district on TAKS Commended performance in all areas for each year of the study. WAVE students outperformed non-WAVE GT students on TAKS Commended performance the majority of the time in Reading, Writing, Social Studies, and Science. Seventh grade non-WAVE GT students outperformed seventh grade WAVE students on TAKS Commended performance in Mathematics for four of the five years of the study.

WAVE students took a higher percentage of high school advanced academic courses than non-WAVE GT students in the majority of instances during the time period of the study. The average number of such courses taken by WAVE students was higher in all instances for each year of the study.

Duke TIP performance of seventh grade WAVE students, as well as PSAT and AP exam performance of former WAVE students, is consistently higher than the performance of non-WAVE GT students and the district. The majority of the differences in performance are statistically significant.

The majority of WAVE teachers during the time period of the study obtained a GT certification prior to their second year teaching in WAVE. Annual professional development provided for WAVE teachers ensures that WAVE teachers receive the required six hours of GT professional development each year. Inconsistencies in data collected on GT professional development, however, made it impossible to determine when WAVE staff completed each of the GT professional development requirements of TAC §89.2.

The WAVE students and teachers who were surveyed during the time of the study, felt that WAVE was beneficial for students and were satisfied with the program.


Page | 7

Summary of Previous Advanced Academics Program Evaluations

WAVE Continued

The average annual cost per student at WAVE decreased from $446 per student to $349 per student over the time period of the study. Transportation expenditures were not included in the cost per student; however, for 2010-11 and 2011-12, estimated transportation expenditures were $105,804 and $111,698, respectively.

Science Magnet On average, more than 91% of the sixth grade students who enrolled in the Science Magnet, and remained in CCISD, remained continuously enrolled in the Science Magnet through eighth grade for the time period of the study.

The Science Magnet students consistently outperformed the district on TAKS Commended performance in all areas for each year of the study.

The eighth grade Science Magnet students took a higher percentage of high school advanced academic courses than non-Science Magnet students while attending intermediate school. Former Science Magnet students have typically taken more advanced academic mathematics and science related courses once they entered high school compared to non-Science magnet students during the time of this study.

The Science course requirements for grades 6-8 are different for the Science Magnet students compared to the non-Science Magnet students. Science Magnet students have many opportunities to participate in science related activities during and outside of the school day.

Current Science Magnet students and teachers felt that the Science Magnet was beneficial for students and were satisfied with the program.

The average annual cost per student in the Science Magnet decreased from $272 to $260 over the time period of the study.

Dual Credit

In April 2011, the Dual Credit program evaluation was presented to the Clear Creek ISD Board of Trustees. In summary, the average course grade in each dual credit course offered was at least as high as its corresponding high school course at both the campus and district level. The percentage of students obtaining at least one dual credit before graduation did increase during the time period of the study. Overall teachers and students were satisfied with the Dual Credit program. The demographic breakdown of students in participating in the Dual Credit program did not reflect the demographics of the general CCISD student population.


Page | 8

Advanced Academics Previous Program Evaluation Superintendent Recommendations

Pre-AP/AP

1. By May 2013, develop a plan to ensure that 100% of the AP Teachers have received College Board training by the end of the 2012-13 school year.

Complete. A professional learning plan was developed for AP teachers, utilizing federal and local funds to train Advanced Placement teachers at College Board institutes.

2. By May 2013, develop a plan to train all Pre-AP teachers through the College Board by the end of the 2013-14 school year.

Complete. A professional learning plan was developed for Pre-AP teachers which has two components: to include in-district training (1 and 2 day workshops led by CCISD teacher leaders) and College Board Institutes.

3. By May 2013, provide College Board update training for all Pre-AP/AP teachers by the end of the 2013-14 school year.

Complete. A professional learning plan was developed for update training which includes College Board Institutes, College Board SpringBoard training for Pre-AP ELA teachers and in-district workshops.

4. By May 2013, develop a succession plan at each secondary school for Pre-AP/AP teachers.

Complete. The succession plan allows for each campus to design their master schedule to include teaching assignments that provide replication and succession in Pre-AP and AP staffing.

5. By May 2013, examine area and national practices to determine success of voluntary/mandatory AP testing for all students completing the coursework.

Complete. After review, CCISD determined that mandatory AP testing for all students is not advisable for several reasons. First, the mandatory test may discourage registration for the classes and undermine recruitment efforts. Second, some students may not be able to utilize the specific AP test, depending on their college choice. Third, such a requirement would impose a financial requirement and potential burden on some students. Districts that have mandatory AP testing generally pay for the tests, at a significant cost to the district.

6. By May 2013, develop a plan to increase participation of student groups that are underrepresented in AP coursework and testing.

Participation in AP Testing

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 5 Year

Change

AS 24.8% 24.0% 22.6% 22.4% 23.0% -1.8%

BL 3.7% 4.1% 3.6% 3.0% 3.6% -0.1%

HI 11.6% 14.1% 12.8% 14.6% 14.7% 3.0%

WH 57.5% 55.4% 58.2% 56.7% 55.4% -2.0%

ECO 7.1% 8.4% 8.8% 10.1% 8.2% 1.1% AS- Asian, BL –Black/African American, HI – Hispanic, WH- White, ECO – Economically Disadvantaged


Page | 9


Pre-AP/AP Continued

Complete. A plan was developed and implemented. During the five year period of this study, there has been a 3.0% increase in the number of Hispanic students who have participated in the AP testing. This is reflective of the overall demographics of the students enrolled in AP courses. (see page 25)

7. By May 2013, develop a plan to increase passing scores (3, 4, or 5) of student groups that are underrepresented.

Percentage of Students Who Have Scored 3, 4, or 5 on AP Exams

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 5 Year

Change

AS 74.2% 73.9% 76.6% 72.4% 75.3% 1.2%

BL 57.6% 48.0% 43.3% 41.9% 50.4% -7.2%

HI 54.9% 61.0% 61.9% 56.1% 66.0% 11.1%

WH 73.5% 74.0% 74.1% 70.5% 74.3% 0.8%

ECO 52.5% 55.6% 57.1% 52.4% 59.4% 6.9% AS- Asian, BL –Black/African American, HI – Hispanic, WH- White, ECO – Economically Disadvantaged

Complete. A plan was developed and implemented. During the five year period of this study, there has been an increase in the percentage of Asian, Hispanic, White, and Economically Disadvantaged students who have scored a 3, 4, or 5 on their AP exams.

WAVE

1. By December 2012, develop a plan to enhance identification of GT students so WAVE enrollment is representative of the student population.

Complete. CCISD continues to put forth a concerted effort to identify diverse populations at the elementary level.

2. By December 2012, complete action plans as appropriate by the WAVE Expansion Committee and communicate the progress to stakeholders.

Complete. A presentation was made to the Board in December 2012 by the WAVE Liaisons indicating that the targets recommended by the WAVE Expansion Committee had been met and exceeded.

3. By August 2013, provide the Board of Trustees with six and twelve month updates of both WAVE campuses during the 2012-13 school year.

Complete. An update report was provided to the Board.

4. By December 2012, develop a plan to ensure that all WAVE teachers are GT certified and receive periodic GT professional development updates.

Complete. A plan was developed to ensure GT certification is required for all WAVE staff.


Page | 10


WAVE Continued

5. By August 2013, determine the number of former WAVE students who are four-year Superintendent Scholars.

Year 4 Year Superintendent

Scholars WAVE Students

2010-2011 30 33.3%

2011-2012 47 25.5%

2012-2013 71 42.3%

2013-2014 115 49.6%

Complete.

Science Magnet

1. By May 2013, formulate a committee of stakeholders to review a cost effective and efficient way to expand the program at the current site or in another part of the district without losing the quality control measures that currently exist.

Complete. Meetings were conducted throughout the 2012-2013 school year to review a way to expand the Science Magnet program. It was determined under the district budget constraints there was not a viable way to cost effectively or efficiently expand the program.

2. By May 2013, review the application process to determine if this process can or should be modified so the population of the Science Magnet program reflects the student population in CCISD.

Complete. During the 2012-13 school year, a comprehensive plan was developed and implemented to target students from all elementary campuses who are from the underrepresented populations in the Science Magnet Program. Additional modifications were implemented for the 2013-2014 school year to target students at Stewart and McWhirter elementary schools.

3. By May 2013, develop a plan to continue to explore grants to offset the costs associated with Science Magnet equipment.

Complete. Campus administrators and Science Magnet teachers continue to seek grants or other funding sources to offset the costs associated with the program.


Page | 11


Dual Credit

1. By May 2013, share the results of the program evaluation with our two impacted community colleges.

Complete. Meetings were conducted during the 2011-2012 school year with the two impacted community colleges to share the results of the survey.

2. By May 2013, develop an action plan to close the participation gap between student groups.

Complete. A plan was developed to target all students in grades 10 and 11 during course registration.

3. By May 2013, review and consider a reduction or elimination of student transportation for a savings of $60,000.

Complete. A committee was formed to review this recommendation. The committee determined it was not beneficial to students to eliminate transportation provided by CCISD.

4. By May 2013, develop a plan to increase participation of dual credit programs to reduce the cost of CCISD teaching staff.

Complete. The availability of Dual Credit courses is publicized on the CCISD website to increase awareness of different credit options. Campuses publicize the opportunities students have to participate in Dual Credit courses.

5. By May 2015, develop a plan to partner with UHCL and their downward expansion for dual credit opportunities.

In progress. In the fall of 2012 leaders from both institutions met to discuss the development of a plan for Dual Credit opportunities. Due to UHCL’s commitment to developing their downward expansion it was decided to not offer Dual Credit until sometime after the downward expansion.


Page | 12

Gifted and Talented Program

The National Association for Gifted Children Pre-K- Grade 12 Gifted Education Programming Standards has identified six program goals for a Gifted and Talented program. These include:

Learning and Development To promote ongoing self-understanding, awareness of their needs, and cognitive and affective growth of these students in school, home, and community settings in recognizing the learning and developmental differences of students with gifts and talents.

Assessment To utilize assessments which provide information about identification, learning progress and outcomes, and evaluation of programming for students with gifts and talents in all domains.

Curriculum Planning and Instruction To apply pertinent theory and research-based models of curriculum and instruction related to students with gifts and talents and respond to their needs by planning, selecting, adapting, and creating culturally relevant curriculum and by using a variety of evidence-based instructional strategies.

Learning Environments To foster personal and social responsibility, multicultural competence and interpersonal and technical communication skills for leadership in the 21st century in appropriate learning environments.

Programming Through adequate funding and resources, to systematically and collaboratively develop, implement, and effectively manage comprehensive services, policies and procedures for students with a variety of gifts and talents.

Professional Development To formally assess professional learning needs, systematically engage in training to meet those identified needs, and demonstrate mastery of such professional learning. To access resources to provide for release time, substitute support and funding for continuing education.

The Gifted and Talented Program

The following topics will be addressed in this program evaluation with respect to the Gifted and Talented (GT) program:

1. Demographics

2. Criteria

3. Identification

4. Assessment

5. Retention


Page | 13


Criteria According to the National Association for Gifted Children (NAGC), “gifted individuals are those who demonstrate outstanding level [of] aptitude (defined as an exceptional ability to reason and learn) or competence (documented performance or achievement in top 10% or rarer) in one or more domains. Domains include any structured area of activity with its own symbol system (e.g., mathematics, music, language) and/or set of sensorimotor skills (e.g., painting, dance, sports)” (2010).

NAGC’s position is students with giftedness develop their ability or talent over the period of their lifetime. Students may perform exceptionally on tests or other measures of ability or have a rapid rate for learning as compared to other students of the same age. As students mature, their achievement and high level of motivation in their field of interest become the foremost characteristics of their giftedness.

CCISD’s definition for Gifted and Talented students follows the federal definition which is taken from the Javits Act, “the term gifted and talented student means children and youths who give evidence of higher performance capability in such areas as intellectual, creative, artistic, or leadership capacity, or in specific academic fields, and who require services or activities not ordinarily provided by the schools in order to develop such capabilities” (NAGC, 2010).

The identification measures used in CCISD are comprised from six areas: classroom performance, authentic assessments, portfolio data, performance on qualitative and quantitative screening instruments, teacher recommendations, and cumulative records. The GT program begins with a process for identification of students using varied assessments. Students who are identified as GT receive general GT services in grades K-3, participate in the Alpha program in grades 4-5, then receive GT services through Pre-AP/AP in grades 6-12.

Identification All kindergarten students are screened during the fall semester. Advanced Academic Specialists visit every kindergarten classroom and conduct lessons with the kindergarten students. Teachers and parents may refer kindergarten students for testing. The deadline for referrals is December 1. Kindergarten students who have been referred for GT testing are tested in January. Qualifying students are placed in the GT program by March 1 of their kindergarten year. Students may be tested two times during grades K-5. Non-English speaking students are assessed using a nonverbal based test.

For students in grades 1-12, referrals should be submitted to the campus by October 1. Anyone—parent, teacher, student—may refer a student for GT testing. Students who have been referred are tested on their campus sometime during October-November. Once a student qualifies for candidacy to the GT program based upon the assessment (quantitative data) and classroom performance, professional recommendation, and/or student portfolio (qualitative data), a selection committee consisting of at least three Advanced Academics Specialists will examine the qualifications of each candidate and recommend appropriate placement. Qualifying students are placed in the GT program by January. Students may be tested two times during grades 6-12. Non-English speaking students are assessed using a nonverbal based test.


Page | 14


Assessment An array of assessments may be used as part of the identification of GT students which may include the Cognitive Abilities Test (CogAT), Otis-Lennon School Abilities Test, Naglieri Nonverbal Abilities Test, or other similar cognitive assessments. In general, qualifying scores are performance at or above the 97th percentile nationally in more than one intellectual area.

Alpha In grades 4 and 5, gifted students receive differentiated instruction in the regular classroom, attend sessions on campus one semester, and attend their chosen off campus GT mini-course the other semester.

Omega The Omega program, originally designed to be a home campus GT program, is now integrated into the Pre-AP program at all intermediate campuses. Omega/Pre-AP classes in English/Language Arts and Social Studies are now offered as one rigorous program with open enrollment, designed as part of a vertical Pre-AP and AP district program. Starting with the interdisciplinary focus of the original Omega curriculum, the curriculum department and district teachers have redesigned the Omega ELA and Social Studies curriculum. Professional development in the use of Springboard materials by College Board (Pre-AP ELA adoption) has supplemented the internal curriculum design process, along with professional development in the nature and needs of gifted students.

The application process has been eliminated, and counselors encourage families considering Omega/ Pre-AP enrollment to keep in mind such factors as student work ethic, previous academic performance, teacher input and attitude toward challenging coursework.

Omega/Pre-AP redesign and open enrollment are complete for grade 6 in 2013-14, grade 7 in 2014-15, and redesign for grade 8 will occur in 2014-15 with open enrollment in 2015-16.

The Omega/Pre-AP program change is being monitored through student performance data; retention data; teacher, parent, and student input; as well as classroom observations.


Page | 15


Percentage of GT Students Who Are Limited English Proficient and/or Who Receive Special Educational Services

N* LEP SPED

2009-10 2,837 2.3% 1.2%

2010-11 2,984 2.4% 1.4%

2011-12 3,074 3.1% 1.3%

2012-13 3,334 3.5% 1.3%

2013-14 3,565 2.7% 1.4% *N is the number of identified GT students

Diversity, Including ELL and Twice Exceptional

The growing diversity in CCISD and the greater community establishes a need for identification of and appropriate services for high-ability and gifted English language learners. Several procedures have been implemented in CCISD to address gifted ELL students. During the identification procedures for gifted programming, specific assessments (CogAT and Naglieri) are used. Consideration of language limitations are used in establishing the matric for consideration. All specialists are trained in the use of and application of these assessments. Additionally, English learners are targeted for talent development in challenge and enrichment classes. At the secondary level, CCISD offers a limited number of ESL AP classes as well.

Twice-Exceptional Students

Children who are both gifted and learning-disabled are often called twice-exceptional (or 2e) because their abilities lie outside the norms at both ends of the bell curve. These 2e children are immensely diverse. The difficulties a 2e child faces largely depend on their own combination of strengths and weaknesses; still, the divergence between strengths and weaknesses produce numerous challenges. Gifted children can also face challenges from specific learning problems or encounter social, emotional, and psychological difficulties; learning difficulties; social and emotional problems; “difficult” gifted character traits, such as over-excitabilities and perfectionism; existential depression; anorexia nervosa; ADHD; and autistic diagnoses.

Failure to treat a 2e child’s weakness will keep him/her from learning to his/her full potential. Weaknesses should be identified using individual norms, not age or grade norms. Failure to address a gifted child’s weaknesses inevitably holds back progress in areas of strength.

With early remediation, compensation, and accommodations, 2e students can be helped to expand their strengths as well as overcome their weaknesses (Eide & Eide, 2007).

CCISD adheres to the suggestions published in the National Education Association (2006, p.11), which addresses the 2e dilemma, including but not limited to, the following areas:

“Gathering information to identify student needs and strengths,”

“Developing and implementing Individualized Education Program (IEP),”

“Collaboration with other professionals in the district to better serve twice-exceptional students,” and

“Exploring avenues to meet individual student needs.”


Page | 16


The Texas Education Agency has developed a plan specifically for gifted and talented students (TEA, 2009). This plan is designed as a guide for school districts to form and improve services for students identified as gifted and talented.

The plan addresses the areas for: student assessment, service design, curriculum and instruction, professional development, and family-community involvement. For each of these areas the plan is divided into three categories: In Compliance, Recommended, and Exemplary. This provides school districts with the flexibility to develop their own plan and policies to determine the targeted standard level the district is aiming to achieve.

Five sections of services are divided into three standards: Compliance, Recommended, and Exemplary. The Recommended and Exemplary standards are included in the plan as targets for which districts may strive to achieve. The Director of Advanced Academics and GT, along with a committee of Advanced Academics Specialists, conducted an internal review of the State GT plan in the fall of 2014. Below is a summary of how CCISD currently measures against the standards in each of the five sections:

Section 1 - Student Assessment: Assessment instruments and gifted/talented identification procedures provide students an opportunity to demonstrate their diverse talents and abilities.

In Compliance: 12 out of 12 Recommended: 12 out of 15 Exemplary: 4 out of 9

Section 2 - Service Design: Assessment instruments and gifted/talented identification procedures provide students an opportunity to demonstrate their diverse talents and abilities.


Section 3 - Curriculum and Instruction: Districts meet the needs of gifted/talented students by modifying the depth, complexity, and pacing of the curriculum and instruction ordinarily provided by the school.


Section 4 - Professional Development: All personnel involved in the planning, creation, and delivery of services to gifted/talented students possess the knowledge required to develop and provide appropriate options and differentiated curricula.


Section 5 - Family/Community Involvement: The district involves family and community members in services designed for gifted/talented students throughout the school year.


In Compliance Recommended Exemplary

100% 72% 52%


Page | 17

Program Evaluation Questions

The following questions were determined by this program evaluation team to evaluate Advanced Academics and Gifted and Talented:

1. What is the annual number of students who qualify for GT and are retained in Advanced Academics?

2. How do the demographics of Advanced Academics and GT compare to District demographics?

3. How have programs evolved since the last evaluation?

4. What structures are in place to support Advanced Academic and GT students?

5. What processes are in place to ensure equity?

6. What is the scope of the professional learning process for Advanced Academic and GT staff?

7. What is the parent/student satisfaction level in the Advanced Academic and GT program?

8. What is the average annual cost per student?


Page | 18


Number of Students Grades K-5 Who Met GT Criteria in 2012-13

Grade Level Total Number Qualified Did Not Qualify

Kinder 496 38.9% 61.1%

1 177 24.9% 75.1%

2 260 21.5% 78.5%

3 290 24.1% 75.9%

4 262 36.3% 63.7%

5 224 37.9% 62.1%

Totals 1,709 31.8% 68.2% Data provided by GT Staff

Number of Students Grades K-5 Who Met GT Criteria in 2013-14

Grade Level Total Number Qualified Did Not Qualify

Kinder 495 41.6% 57.4%

1 191 29.3% 69.6%

2 265 23.4% 75.5%

3 286 30.1% 69.2%

4 299 33.1% 64.9%

5 260 35.0% 64.2%

Totals 1,796 33.4% 65.6% Data provided by GT Staff

There were a total of 1,709 students in kindergarten through grade 5 who were tested during the 2012-13 school year as one component for qualifying for GT services. Of the 1,709, 31.8% qualified for GT services, while 68.8% did not qualify.

There were a total of 1,796 students in kindergarten through grade 5 who were tested during the 2013-14 school year as one component for qualifying for GT services. Of the 1,796, 33.4% qualified for GT services, while 65.6% did not qualify.

Retention Retention in the GT program is based upon a student’s academic performance. If a student fails a core academic course (class), he/she is placed on probation for one grading period (9 weeks). If the student continues to perform unsatisfactorily, he/she may be furloughed from the GT program, or probation may continue. Each student is considered on a case by case basis. Students who fail a course for the semester or the school year are furloughed from the GT program. Students who fail any portion of the state-mandated assessments are also placed on furlough for one school year until they are re-assessed and meet satisfactory levels of performance.

The retention rate from 2009-2010 through 2013-2014 for all GT students who remained enrolled in CCISD during the five years of this evaluation was 98.5%. The retention rate from one year to the next during that same five year period ranged from 98.5% to 99.8%.


Page | 19


Distribution of GT Students by Grade Level

Grade Level

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

1 4.9% 5.6% 5.8% 6.9% 6.5%

2 5.1% 5.9% 6.4% 7.3% 7.7%

3 6.7% 6.5% 7.1% 7.8% 8.6%

4 8.3% 8.1% 8.4% 9.1% 9.4%

5 8.6% 10.9% 10.0% 11.1% 12.2%

6 10.4% 10.3% 13.2% 12.2% 13.1%

7 9.8% 10.8% 9.9% 12.8% 12.0%

8 10.8% 9.5% 10.2% 9.6% 12.5%

9 7.5% 9.5% 8.4% 9.1% 8.6%

10 7.7% 7.9% 9.8% 8.8% 9.4%

11 9.9% 7.8% 7.5% 9.7% 8.8%

12 8.8% 10.2% 7.6% 7.8% 10.2% Data based on Snapshot day

There has been an increase in the number of students who have been identified as GT from 2837 in 2009-2010 to 3565 in 2013-2014. The distribution by grade level reveals the majority of those identified each year fall within grades 5 through 9, with a high of 13.2% of the GT students identified in 2011-2012 were in grade 6.

The largest percentage of students in GT occurs when students are in grades 6-8. As a cohort of students, a maximum percentage of GT occurs usually by grade 6.


Page | 20


Pre-AP/AP Course Enrollment by Grade Level

Curriculum Area

Grade 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 5 Year

Enrollment Change

5 YR Change

Mathematics

5 1 3

6 1282 1379 1339 1320 1359 0.8% 5.7%

7 1326 1377 1494 1421 1428 2.4% 7.1%

8 1405 1498 1451 1552 1473 5.2% 4.6%

9 1163 1288 1347 1357 1424 6.4% 18.3%

10 1182 1089 1294 1469 1367 3.7% 13.5%

11 996 872 960 1128 1228 13.4% 18.9%

12 788 760 780 941 1019 8.4% 22.7%

Language Arts

6 1193 1317 1318 1488 1453 0.8% 17.9%

7 1308 1312 1440 1650 1757 2.4% 25.6%

8 1345 1410 1356 1393 1514 5.2% 11.2%

9 926 1040 1187 1318 1308 6.4% 29.2%

10 868 834 1060 1254 1245 3.7% 30.3%

11 575 594 625 862 904 13.4% 36.4%

12 369 449 426 449 497 8.4% 25.8%

Science

6 1168 1274 1247 1284 1448 0.8% 19.3%

7 1239 1175 1274 1286 1452 2.4% 14.7%

8 1410 1391 1360 1465 1692 5.2% 16.7%

9 986 1147 1251 1277 1410 6.4% 30.1%

10 819 797 1014 1222 1218 3.7% 32.8%

11 790 817 811 988 1117 13.4% 29.3%

12 459 635 566 756 653 8.4% 29.7%

Social Studies

6 1145 1241 1271 1310 1458 0.8% 21.5%

7 1355 1326 1418 1404 1559 2.4% 13.1%

8 1368 1440 1376 1484 1491 5.2% 8.2%

9 1232 1395 1542 1481 1535 6.4% 19.7%

10 1275 1253 1513 1616 1489 3.7% 14.4%

11 800 754 886 970 965 13.4% 17.1%

12 904 873 1038 1066 1195 8.4% 24.4% Data based on Snapshot day


Page | 21


Pre-AP/AP Course Enrollment by Grade Level

Curriculum Area

Grade 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 5 Year

Enrollment Change

5 YR Change

LOTE

7 52 57 41 68 77 2.4% 32.5%

8 220 390 382 379 340 5.2% 35.3%

9 416 594 582 787 784 6.4% 46.9%

10 504 547 434 953 908 3.7% 44.5%

11 457 405 184 596 548 13.4% 16.6%

12 153 164 107 161 175 8.4% 12.6%

Visual Arts

7 6 12 53 29 16 2.4% 62.5%

8 110 96 128 137 136 5.2% 19.1%

9 40 51 51 57 79 6.4% 49.4%

10 8 24 31 41 61 3.7% 86.9%

11 44 48 49 72 86 13.4% 48.8%

12 74 74 61 90 87 8.4% 14.9% Data based on Snapshot day

An analysis was conducted based on the number of students in grades 6-12 who enroll in a Pre-AP and/or AP course. Over the five year period of this study, each content area and grade level has seen an increase in the percentage of students who enroll in a Pre-AP and/or AP course. Some grade levels have had a decrease in the percentage of students enrolled in a Pre-AP and/or AP course in a three year period.

Pre-AP and `AP courses are subject to open enrollment for all students.


Page | 22


An analysis of sixth grade students enrolling at the WAVE through eighth grade was conducted. Students who were enrolled on the annual PEIMS Snapshot date were compared across grades 6-8 to determine who remained enrolled in the WAVE program.

In 2009-10, 241 sixth grade students enrolled at the WAVE. Of the students remaining continuously enrolled in CCISD each year, 94% remained enrolled at the WAVE through 2010-11 and 91% through 2011-12.

In 2010-11, 229 sixth grade students enrolled at the WAVE. Of the students remaining continuously enrolled in CCISD each year, 97% remained enrolled at the WAVE through 2011-12 and 91% through 2012-13.

In 2011-12, 304 sixth grade students enrolled at the WAVE. Of the students remaining continuously enrolled in CCISD each year, 95% remained enrolled at the WAVE through 2012-13and 93% through 2013-14.

In 2012-13, 272 sixth grade students enrolled at the WAVE. Of the students remaining continuously enrolled in CCISD each year, 97% remained enrolled at the WAVE through 2013-14.

70%

80%

90%

100%

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12

100% 94% 91%

2009-10 Grade 6 Cohort Remaining at WAVE

70%

80%

90%

100%

2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

100% 97% 91%


70%

80%

90%

100%

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

100% 95% 93%


70%

80%

90%

100%

2012-13 2013-14

100% 97%



Page | 23


An analysis of sixth grade students enrolling at the Science Magnet through eighth grade was conducted. Students who were enrolled on the annual PEIMS Snapshot date were compared across grades 6-8 to determine who remained enrolled in the Science Magnet program.

In 2009-10, 99 sixth grade students enrolled at the Science Magnet. Of the students remaining continuously enrolled in CCISD each year, 92% remained enrolled at the Science Magnet through 2010-11 and 91% through 2011-12.

In 2010-11, 120 sixth grade students enrolled at the Science Magnet. Of the students remaining continuously enrolled in CCISD each year, 96% remained enrolled at the Science Magnet through 2011-12 and 96% through 2012-13.

In 2011-12, 123 sixth grade students enrolled at the Science Magnet. Of the students remaining continuously enrolled in CCISD each year, 97% remained enrolled at the Science Magnet through 2012-13and 94% through 2013-14.

In 2012-13, 101 sixth grade students enrolled at the Science Magnet. Of the students remaining continuously enrolled in CCISD each year, 97% remained enrolled at the Science Magnet through 2013-14.

70%

80%

90%

100%

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12

100%92% 91%

2009-10 Grade 6 Cohort Remaining at Science Magnet

70%

80%

90%

100%

2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

100% 96% 96%


70%

80%

90%

100%

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

100% 97% 94%


70%

80%

90%

100%

2012-13 2013-14

100% 97%



Page | 24


The chart below displays the distribution of the percentage of students who have participated in at least one Advanced Academic program over the five year period of this study. The chart displays low percentages during the elementary years, however, the percentage of students participating in Advanced Academic programs increases during the secondary years due to more opportunities for participating. At grades 1-5, students can be identified as GT. GT Students in grades 4 and 5 participate in the Alpha program. GT students in grades 6-12 are integrated in an overall advanced academics program through Pre-AP and AP courses.

Grade Level Distribution of Students Who Participated in Advanced Academics and GT

Year 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 Average 5 Year

Change

1 5.0% 5.6% 5.8% 6.9% 6.6% 6.0% 1.6%

2 5.2% 5.9% 6.4% 7.3% 7.7% 6.5% 2.5%

3 6.7% 6.5% 7.1% 7.8% 8.6% 7.3% 1.9%

4 8.4% 8.1% 8.4% 9.1% 9.4% 8.7% 1.1%

5 8.7% 11.0% 10.0% 11.1% 12.2% 10.6% 3.6%

6 56.5% 60.9% 60.6% 63.8% 63.3% 61.0% 6.9%

7 60.6% 60.6% 64.1% 68.1% 69.2% 64.5% 8.6%

8 64.7% 64.4% 64.0% 66.1% 66.9% 65.2% 2.2%

9 49.4% 53.6% 55.8% 57.5% 57.6% 54.8% 8.3%

10 50.8% 50.2% 56.1% 60.8% 58.4% 55.4% 7.7%

11 53.9% 50.7% 51.0% 56.6% 56.0% 53.7% 2.1%

12 55.2% 67.5% 54.6% 53.1% 56.7% 57.4% 1.5% Data based on Snapshot day *Unique students for each program from 2012-13 through 2013-14 for GT, Alpha, WAVE, Science Magnet, PAP, AP, Dual Credit, ISM, and CHECHS

Students in the district’s Elementary Gifted and Talented Program, grades K-5, are cluster-grouped and receive differentiated instruction in the core content areas with a classroom teacher who has at least 30 hours of gifted awareness training, plus the required 6-hour annual update.

In grades K-3, gifted students participate with an Advanced Academics/GT Specialist in a program on their campus that is designed to provide challenging activities in seven strands: creativity, problem solving, research, communication, thinking skills, affective thinking, and leadership training.

In grades 4 and 5, gifted students receive differentiated instruction in the regular classroom, attend sessions on campus one semester, and attend their chosen off-campus GT mini-course the other semester.

Advanced Academics/GT Specialists work with students in grades K-5 as well as with GT Cluster teachers in meeting the needs of the gifted learners on each campus.


Page | 25


Participation Rate by Year as Compared to Peer Group

Program* Peer

Group 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

5 Year Change

GT Gr 1-12 7.6% 7.8% 7.8% 8.4% 8.9% 1.3%

Alpha Gr 4-5 8.5% 9.5% 9.2% 10.1% 10.9% 2.3%

PAP Gr 6-12 46.5% 46.2% 48.6% 52.1% 52.4% 5.9%

WAVE Gr 6-8 7.5% 7.4% 8.2% 8.4% 9.5% 2.0%

Sci Magnet Gr 6-8 3.9% 3.8% 3.7% 3.5% 3.3% -0.6%

AP Gr 9-12 23.1% 24.7% 26.7% 29.6% 29.5% 6.3%

Dual Credit Gr 9-12 8.7% 9.9% 9.6% 8.7% 9.2% 0.5%

ISM Gr 9-12 5.5% 5.7% 3.8% 3.9% 4.3% -1.1%

CHECHS Gr 9-12 2.8% 3.1% 3.1% 3.3% 3.4% 0.6% Data Based on attendance on Snapshot day *Unique students in each program from 2009-10 through 2013-2014

An analysis was conducted to compare how many students participated in each program as compared to their peer group. For example, students in grades 4 and 5 could participate in the Alpha program; therefore, in 2009-2010 there were 8.5% of the students in grades 4 and 5 who were in the Alpha program.


Page | 26


Data based on Snapshot day Demographics based on AEIS, TAPR, and CCISD student information system

Clear Creek ISD demographics have had little change with regard to gender, Asian, and Black populations. Economically disadvantaged has increased through 2012-2013 with a slight decrease in 2013-2014. The Hispanic population has increased by 6.7% from 2009-2010 through 2013-2014. The White population has declined by 7.7% from 2009-2010 through 2013-2014.

48

.4%

51

.6%

22

.7%

10

.4%

9.2

%

21

.3%

58

.8%

48

.6%

51

.4%

25

.3%

9.8

%

10

.0%

25

.1%

53

.8%

48

.7%

51

.3%

28

.1%

9.8

%

8.3

%

26

.0%

52

.3%

48

.8%

51

.2%

28

.0%

9.8

%

8.3

%

26

.9%

51

.3%

48

.9%

51

.1%

27

.4%

9.8

%

8.2

%

28

.0%

50

.1%

F E M A L E M A L E E C O D I S A S I A N B L A C K H I S P A N I C W H I T E

DISTRICT DEMOGRAPHICS

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14


Page | 27


Data based on Snapshot day

The Gifted and Talented program is predominantly comprised of male students. Asian and White students make up a higher percentage of the Gifted and Talented population than is reflected in the overall CCISD population.


45

.9% 5

4.1

%

6.5

%

20

.6%

2.3

%

9.2

%

64

.6%

45

.9% 5

4.1

%

7.7

%

21

.2%

2.8

%

10

.7%

61

.4%

46

.0% 5

4.0

%

8.3

%

21

.2%

2.6

%

11

.3%

60

.9%

46

.9% 53

.1%

9.1

%

20

.8%

2.5

%

11

.9%

60

.5%

47

.2% 52

.8%

8.5

%

20

.7%

2.5

%

12

.7%

59

.8%

F E M A L E M A L E E C O A S B L H I W H

GT DEMOGRAPHICS

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

48

.4%

51

.6%

22

.7%

10

.4%

9.2

%

21

.3%

58

.8%

48

.6%

51

.4%

25

.3%

9.8

%

10

.0%

25

.1%

53

.8%

48

.7%

51

.3%

28

.1%

9.8

%

8.3

%

26

.0%

52

.3%

48

.8%

51

.2%

28

.0%

9.8

%

8.3

%

26

.9%

51

.3%

48

.9%

51

.1%

27

.4%

9.8

%

8.2

%

28

.0%

50

.1%



2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14


Page | 28



The Alpha program demographics mirror that of the overarching Gifted and Talented program. There is a higher percentage of Asian and White students as compared to the overall demographics of the district.


47

.2% 52

.8%

9.7

%

22

.5%

2.1

%

11

.2%

60

.8%

48

.4%

51

.6%

9.6

%

23

.4%

3.2

%

11

.9%

56

.7%

45

.4% 5

4.6

%

9.3

%

20

.7%

2.1

%

11

.0%

61

.2%

46

.6% 53

.4%

11

.4% 17

.4%

2.9

%

13

.1%

63

.6%

47

.9%

52

.1%

9.5

%

19

.9%

2.6

%

12

.8%

61

.7%

F E M A L E M A L E E C O A S B L H I W H

ALPHA DEMOGRAPHICS

2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014

48

.4%

51

.6%

22

.7%

10

.4%

9.2

%

21

.3%

58

.8%

48

.6%

51

.4%

25

.3%

9.8

%

10

.0%

25

.1%

53

.8%

48

.7%

51

.3%

28

.1%

9.8

%

8.3

%

26

.0%

52

.3%

48

.8%

51

.2%

28

.0%

9.8

%

8.3

%

26

.9%

51

.3%

48

.9%

51

.1%

27

.4%

9.8

%

8.2

%

28

.0%

50

.1%



2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14


Page | 29



During the five year period of this study, more females than males have participated in Pre-AP courses. There has been an increase in the percentage of economically disadvantaged students as well as an increase in the percentage of Black and Hispanic students in Pre-AP courses. In order for students to be successful in AP courses, they need to complete Pre-AP coursework to ensure they are prepared for the rigor of the AP course(s).


51

.5%

48

.5%

9.2

% 13

.8%

5.6

%

15

.5%

62

.2%

51

.5%

48

.5%

11

.9%

14

.1%

5.7

%

17

.3%

59

.6%

51

.5%

48

.5%

13

.4%

13

.7%

5.9

%

17

.9%

58

.9%

52

.8%

47

.2%

14

.7%

14

.3%

6.3

%

19

.9%

59

.5%

52

.2%

47

.8%

13

.7%

14

.3%

6.4

%

21

.1%

58

.3%


PRE-AP DEMOGRAPHICS

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

48

.4%

51

.6%

22

.7%

10

.4%

9.2

%

21

.3%

58

.8%

48

.6%

51

.4%

25

.3%

9.8

%

10

.0%

25

.1%

53

.8%

48

.7%

51

.3%

28

.1%

9.8

%

8.3

%

26

.0%

52

.3%

48

.8%

51

.2%

28

.0%

9.8

%

8.3

%

26

.9%

51

.3%

48

.9%

51

.1%

27

.4%

9.8

%

8.2

%

28

.0%

50

.1%



2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14


Page | 30



During the five year period of this study, there has been an increase in the number of economically disadvantaged students as well as an increase in the percentage of Hispanics participating in the AP program. This may be attributed to the findings of the first program evaluation conducted for Pre-AP/AP and the Superintendent’s recommendation to develop a plan to increase participation of student groups that are underrepresented in AP coursework and testing.


52

.9%

47

.2%

5.9

%

21

.7%

5.0

%

13

.4%

57

.5%

53

.7%

46

.3%

9.6

%

21

.0%

4.6

%

15

.3%

56

.4%

53

.0%

47

.0%

10

.9%

20

.2%

4.2

%

15

.4%

57

.4%

53

.2%

46

.8%

11

.1%

20

.0%

4.7

%

17

.1%

58

.2%

52

.7%

47

.3%

10

.5%

20

.4%

5.2

%

18

.5%

56

.0%


AP DEMOGRAPHICS

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

48

.4%

51

.6%

22

.7%

10

.4%

9.2

%

21

.3%

58

.8%

48

.6%

51

.4%

25

.3%

9.8

%

10

.0%

25

.1%

53

.8%

48

.7%

51

.3%

28

.1%

9.8

%

8.3

%

26

.0%

52

.3%

48

.8%

51

.2%

28

.0%

9.8

%

8.3

%

26

.9%

51

.3%

48

.9%

51

.1%

27

.4%

9.8

%

8.2

%

28

.0%

50

.1%



2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14


Page | 31



Over the five year period of this study, there has been an increase in the percentage of females and Hispanic students participating in the WAVE program. The economically disadvantaged population in WAVE has increased during the five year period. All students in the WAVE program are identified as GT.


45

.7% 5

4.3

%

4.9

%

26

.7%

2.9

% 7.5

%

62

.5%

47

.9%

52

.1%

6.2

%

26

.4%

3.5

% 9.5

%

55

.4%

49

.5%

50

.5%

6.2

%

26

.8%

4.5

% 10

.7%

52

.6%

48

.4%

51

.6%

6.8

%

31

.4%

2.9

%

10

.6%

55

.2%

47

.4%

52

.7%

5.7

%

29

.6%

2.9

%

12

.9%

55

.4%


WAVE DEMOGRAPHICS

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

48

.4%

51

.6%

22

.7%

10

.4%

9.2

%

21

.3%

58

.8%

48

.6%

51

.4%

25

.3%

9.8

%

10

.0%

25

.1%

53

.8%

48

.7%

51

.3%

28

.1%

9.8

%

8.3

%

26

.0%

52

.3%

48

.8%

51

.2%

28

.0%

9.8

%

8.3

%

26

.9%

51

.3%

48

.9%

51

.1%

27

.4%

9.8

%

8.2

%

28

.0%

50

.1%



2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14


Page | 32



Over the five year period of this study, there has been an increase in the percentage of females, economically disadvantaged students, and Hispanic students in the Science Magnet program. This appears to be the direct result of the implementation of the changes in the application and selection process of students in grade 5.


60

.6%

39

.4%

2.6

%

11

.3%

2.0

%

14

.6%

72

.2%

53

.1%

46

.9%

6.1

% 9.1

%

2.6

%

17

.5%

65

.7%

51

.3%

48

.7%

6.9

% 9.9

%

1.8

%

17

.0%

66

.9%

49

.8%

50

.2%

7.5

% 11

.0%

2.5

%

16

.6%

66

.8%

55

.7%

44

.3%

6.7

% 11

.0%

3.0

%

19

.3%

62

.3%


SCIENCE MAGNET DEMOGRAPHICS

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

48

.4%

51

.6%

22

.7%

10

.4%

9.2

%

21

.3%

58

.8%

48

.6%

51

.4%

25

.3%

9.8

%

10

.0%

25

.1%

53

.8%

48

.7%

51

.3%

28

.1%

9.8

%

8.3

%

26

.0%

52

.3%

48

.8%

51

.2%

28

.0%

9.8

%

8.3

%

26

.9%

51

.3%

48

.9%

51

.1%

27

.4%

9.8

%

8.2

%

28

.0%

50

.1%



2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14


Page | 33


Data based on Snapshot day Includes CHECHS students

Over the five year period of this study, there has been an increase in the percentage of females, economically disadvantaged students, and Hispanic students in the Dual Credit program.


50

.8%

49

.2%

10

.9%

12

.5%

5.2

%

15

.5%

64

.4%

52

.6%

47

.4%

10

.5%

13

.8%

5.1

%

16

.9%

61

.0%

52

.7%

47

.3%

13

.9%

13

.6%

4.9

%

20

.0%

59

.0%

53

.5%

46

.5%

16

.7%

15

.1%

5.8

%

21

.8%

55

.2%

53

.0%

47

.0%

13

.1%

15

.9%

5.9

%

21

.7%

54

.1%


DUAL CREDIT DEMOGRAPHICS

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

48

.4%

51

.6%

22

.7%

10

.4%

9.2

%

21

.3%

58

.8%

48

.6%

51

.4%

25

.3%

9.8

%

10

.0%

25

.1%

53

.8%

48

.7%

51

.3%

28

.1%

9.8

%

8.3

%

26

.0%

52

.3%

48

.8%

51

.2%

28

.0%

9.8

%

8.3

%

26

.9%

51

.3%

48

.9%

51

.1%

27

.4%

9.8

%

8.2

%

28

.0%

50

.1%



2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14


Page | 34



Over the five year period of this study, there have been more females and white students who have participated in the Independent Study Mentorship program. There has been some variation in the percentage of economically disadvantaged students as well as Hispanic students. There has been an increase in the percentage of Asian students participating in the ISM program.


56

.7%

43

.3%

9.3

% 12

.6%

5.7

%

16

.8%

62

.7%

53

.0%

47

.0%

11

.6%

12

.6%

7.9

%

18

.7%

56

.9%

59

.2%

47

.8%

13

.1%

21

.5%

3.5

%

20

.3%

51

.2%

59

.1%

40

.9%

9.5

%

23

.4%

3.2

%

16

.8%

56

.6%

55

.2%

44

.8%

7.7

%

25

.3%

3.8

%

17

.1%

53

.8%


ISM DEMOGRAPHICS

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

48

.4%

51

.6%

22

.7%

10

.4%

9.2

%

21

.3%

58

.8%

48

.6%

51

.4%

25

.3%

9.8

%

10

.0%

25

.1%

53

.8%

48

.7%

51

.3%

28

.1%

9.8

%

8.3

%

26

.0%

52

.3%

48

.8%

51

.2%

28

.0%

9.8

%

8.3

%

26

.9%

51

.3%

48

.9%

51

.1%

27

.4%

9.8

%

8.2

%

28

.0%

50

.1%



2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14


Page | 35

2. How do the Demographics of Advanced Academics and GT compare to District demographics?

Data based on Snapshot day Data included in Dual Credit

Over the five year period of this study, there has been a decline in the percentage of White students who have enrolled at CHECHS. There has been some variation in the percentage of economically disadvantaged students during those same five years.


55

.7%

44

.3%

25

.2%

21

.5%

5.5

%

24

.0%

48

.6%

56

.2%

43

.7%

21

.1%

21

.4%

5.3

%

23

.0%

45

.7%

56

.9%

43

.1%

29

.0%

23

.2%

5.3

%

26

.6%

40

.2%

56

.0%

44

.0%

29

.2%

23

.3%

7.3

%

30

.4%

39

.0%

56

.2%

43

.8%

23

.5%

26

.4%

7.7

%

28

.7%

37

.2%


CHECHS DEMOGRAPHICS

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

48

.4%

51

.6%

22

.7%

10

.4%

9.2

%

21

.3%

58

.8%

48

.6%

51

.4%

25

.3%

9.8

%

10

.0%

25

.1%

53

.8%

48

.7%

51

.3%

28

.1%

9.8

%

8.3

%

26

.0%

52

.3%

48

.8%

51

.2%

28

.0%

9.8

%

8.3

%

26

.9%

51

.3%

48

.9%

51

.1%

27

.4%

9.8

%

8.2

%

28

.0%

50

.1%



2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14


Page | 36


High School Courses Taken by Students in Grade 6-8

Grade Level

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 5 Year

Change

N % N % N % N % N % %

6 2959 0.0% 2968 0.2% 2945 0.2% 2967 0.2% 2978 0.1% 0.1%

7 3003 5.8% 2994 12.3% 3071 18.5% 2996 17.7% 3069 18.9% 13.1%

8 2896 40.3% 3072 58.5% 3024 59.7% 3109 57.6% 3047 56.5% 16.2%

Total 8858 15.2% 9034 24.0% 9040 26.3% 9072 25.7% 9094 25.3% 10.1% N is the number of students enrolled in the grade level Data based on Snapshot day Data includes all high school level courses which intermediate students are enrolled

An analysis of high school courses taken by students in grades 6-8 was conducted. The percentage of students taking a high school course was calculated as well as the average number of high school courses taken per student. High school courses taken most often by students in grades 6-8 include Algebra 1, Biology, 21st Century Learning, and Spanish 1.

Over the course of this study, the percentage of students in grades 6-8 taking a high school course has increased from 15.2% to 25.3%, with a five year change of 10.1%.


Page | 37


Percentage of Students Enrolled in at Least One Pre-AP Course

Grade Level 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 5 Year

Change

6 53.1% 56.9% 56.4% 60.3% 59.8% 6.8%

7 57.2% 57.3% 60.3% 64.4% 65.9% 8.7%

8 61.0% 61.4% 60.8% 62.5% 63.6% 2.6%

9 49.0% 53.2% 55.3% 57.3% 57.3% 8.3%

10 50.2% 49.6% 55.3% 60.5% 57.8% 7.6%

11 40.2% 34.4% 36.4% 44.3% 43.9% 3.7%

12 9.4% 4.1% 10.9% 10.8% 14.3% 4.9%

Total 46.5% 46.1% 48.6% 52.0% 52.4% 5.8% Data based on Snapshot day Data includes high school level courses which intermediate students are enrolled.

Over the five year period of this study, there has been an increase in the percentage of students who have participated in the Pre-AP program at each grade level, with the greatest increases in grades 7, 9, and 10. There was an overall average increase of 5.8% over all grade levels.


Page | 38


Percentage of Students Enrolled in at Least One AP Course

Grade Level

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 5 Year

Change

9 10.7% 15.3% 15.8% 17.3% 17.3% 6.7%

10 13.6% 14.1% 19.8% 21.0% 20.2% 6.5%

11 35.3% 32.5% 35.2% 40.5% 40.6% 5.3%

12 36.5% 39.6% 38.5% 42.1% 42.1% 5.6%

Total 23.1% 24.7% 26.7% 29.6% 29.5% 6.3% Data based on Snapshot day *Unique students for each program

Over the five year period of this study, there has been an increase in the percentage of students who have enrolled in an AP course with an increase occurring at each grade level. The greatest increases occurred in grades 9 and 10. There was an overall increase of 6.3% over all grade levels.

Percentage of Students Enrolled in at Least One Pre-AP and/or AP Course

Grade Level

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 5 Year

Change

6 53.1% 56.9% 56.4% 60.3% 59.8% 6.8%

7 57.2% 57.3% 60.3% 64.4% 65.9% 8.7%

8 61.0% 61.4% 60.8% 62.5% 63.6% 2.6%

9 49.2% 53.5% 55.7% 57.4% 57.5% 8.3%

10 50.6% 49.9% 56.0% 60.7% 58.3% 7.7%

11 48.3% 44.0% 46.8% 52.9% 52.5% 4.2%

12 39.2% 40.9% 43.2% 44.6% 45.8% 6.5%

Total 51.5% 52.3% 54.4% 57.7% 57.8% 6.3% Data based on Snapshot day *Unique students for each program

Over the five year period of this study, there has been an increase in the percentage of students enrolled in a Pre-AP or AP course, or in both a Pre-AP and AP course. The greatest increases occurred in grades 7 and 9. There was an overall increase of 6.3% over all grade levels.


Page | 39


Percentage of Students Who Take at Least One AP Exam

Grade Level 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 5 Year Change

9 8.1% 11.6% 12.4% 13.8% 12.8% 4.6%

10 11.4% 12.0% 16.1% 15.7% 15.6% 4.2%

11 26.7% 25.5% 27.8% 32.1% 31.3% 4.6%

12 24.4% 26.2% 26.7% 25.6% 26.9% 2.5%

Total 17.1% 18.4% 20.3% 21.4% 21.3% 4.2% Data based on enrollment on Snapshot day Data Source: College Board Reports, Student information system, AEIS, TAPR

The percentage of students who take at least one AP exam while attending high school has increased from 17.1% to 21.3% over the period of this study with an overall average of 19.7% of high school students take at least one AP exam.


Page | 40


Clear Creek ISD Average AP Exam Score Comparison

AP Exams 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total

Average Score

Average Score

Average Score

Average Score

Average Score

Average Score

Art History 2.63 2.46 2.73 3.46 3.38 2.93

Tested 24 13 15 26 8 86

State Average 2.66 2.69 2.69 2.70 2.69

Global Average 2.89 2.85 2.86 2.85 2.82

Music Theory 2.97 2.81 3.63 3.37 3.22 3.20

Tested 37 31 30 38 27 163

State Average 2.89 2.70 2.87 2.89 2.96

Global Average 3.04 2.98 3.04 3.01 3.07

Studio Art: 2-D Design Portfolio

3.31 3.44 3.43 3.62 3.63 3.49

Tested 32 25 23 26 30 136

State Average 3.12 3.17 3.27 3.33 3.24

Global Average 3.15 3.18 3.28 3.34 3.33

Studio Art: 3-D Design Portfolio

3.57 2.00 3.00 4.00 3.25 3.16

Tested 7 * 6 6 12 33

State Average 2.9 2.82 3.06 2.90 3.01

Global Average 2.93 2.93 3.00 3.03 3.04

Studio Art: Drawing Portfolio

3.83 3.68 3.71 3.70 4.13 3.81

Tested 23 22 21 10 16 92

State Average 3.15 3.12 3.12 3.15 3.22

Global Average 3.16 3.09 3.18 3.27 3.27

English Language and Com

Advanced Academics and Gifted & Talented Program Evaluation€¦ · The Advanced Academics/Gifted...

Documents

Transcript of Advanced Academics and Gifted & Talented Program Evaluation€¦ · The Advanced Academics/Gifted...