|
Indicator 8.1.1 of 2: English proficiency: Students in the program will annually demonstrate continuous and educationally significant progress on oral or written English proficiency measures. |
|
Targets and Performance Data |
Assessment of Progress |
Sources and Data Quality |
|
Percentage of projects in which three-quarters of student groups made gains in English proficiency
|
|
Year
|
Actual Performance
|
Performance Targets
|
| |
|
|
|
1998
|
|
|
|
1999
|
|
|
|
2000
|
|
|
|
2001
|
|
|
|
Comparison within cohorts-Oral Cohort 1
|
|
Year
|
Actual Performance
|
Performance Targets
|
| |
|
|
|
1998
|
|
|
|
Comparison within cohorts-Written Cohort 1
|
|
Year
|
Actual Performance
|
Performance Targets
|
| |
|
|
|
1998
|
|
|
|
Comparison within cohorts-Oral Cohort 2
|
|
Year
|
Actual Performance
|
Performance Targets
|
| |
|
|
|
1999
|
|
|
|
Comparison within cohorts-Written Cohort 2
|
|
Year
|
Actual Performance
|
Performance Targets
|
| |
|
|
|
1998
|
|
|
|
Comparison within cohorts-Oral Cohort 3
|
|
Year
|
Actual Performance
|
Performance Targets
|
| |
|
|
|
2000
|
|
|
|
Comparison within cohorts-Written Cohort 3
|
|
Year
|
Actual Performance
|
Performance Targets
|
| |
|
|
|
2000
|
|
|
|
Status: Unable to judge
Explanation: Data analyzed reported percentages of projects, not percentages of students. ENH=Enhancement program, PDI= Program Development and Implementation Program, CS= Comprehensive School Program, SW=Schoolwide Improvement. |
Additional Source Information: Contracted synthesis of local project data.
Frequency: Annually.
Collection Period: 2002 - 2003
Data Available: January 2004
Validated By: On-Site Monitoring By ED.
Limitations: Operational definitions of LEP students vary; the amount of missing data varies greatly across projects and cohorts of projects. Prior year data has been updated from previous reports to reflect more complete information.
|
|
Indicator 8.1.2 of 2: Other academic achievement: Students in the program will annually demonstrate continuous and educationally significant progress on appropriate academic achievement of language arts, reading, and math. |
|
Targets and Performance Data |
Assessment of Progress |
Sources and Data Quality |
|
Percentage of projects in which three-quarters of student groups made gains in academic achievement in language arts, reading, and math.
|
|
Year
|
Actual Performance
|
Performance Targets
|
| |
|
Language arts |
Reading |
Math |
|
|
Language arts |
Reading |
Math |
|
|
1998
|
|
|
|
1999
|
|
|
|
2000
|
|
|
|
2001
|
|
|
|
Comparison within cohorts-Language Arts Cohort 1
|
|
Year
|
Actual Performance
|
Performance Targets
|
| |
|
|
|
1998
|
|
|
|
Comparison within cohorts-Reading Cohort 1
|
|
Year
|
Actual Performance
|
Performance Targets
|
| |
|
|
|
1998
|
|
|
|
Comparison within cohorts-Math Cohort 1
|
|
Year
|
Actual Performance
|
Performance Targets
|
| |
|
|
|
1998
|
|
|
|
Comparison within cohorts-Language Arts Cohort 2
|
|
Year
|
Actual Performance
|
Performance Targets
|
| |
|
|
|
1999
|
|
|
|
Comparison within cohorts-Reading Cohort 2
|
|
Year
|
Actual Performance
|
Performance Targets
|
| |
|
|
|
1999
|
|
|
|
Comparison within cohorts-Math Cohort 2
|
|
Year
|
Actual Performance
|
Performance Targets
|
| |
|
|
|
1999
|
|
|
|
Comparison within cohorts-Language Arts Cohort 3
|
|
Year
|
Actual Performance
|
Performance Targets
|
| |
|
|
|
2000
|
|
|
|
Comparison within cohorts-Reading Cohort 3
|
|
Year
|
Actual Performance
|
Performance Targets
|
| |
|
|
|
2000
|
|
|
|
Comparison within cohorts-Math Cohort 3
|
|
Year
|
Actual Performance
|
Performance Targets
|
| |
|
|
|
2000
|
|
|
|
Status: Unable to judge
|
Frequency: Biennially.
Collection Period: 2002 - 2003
Data Available: January 2004
Validated By: On-Site Monitoring By ED.
|
