Not Rated. Not Rated. Not Rated. Coming in Report Card for Constellation Schools: Old Brooklyn Community Middle

Similar documents
Coming in. Coming in. Coming in

ILLINOIS DISTRICT REPORT CARD

ILLINOIS DISTRICT REPORT CARD

Shelters Elementary School

Cooper Upper Elementary School

Cooper Upper Elementary School

Port Graham El/High. Report Card for

College and Career Ready Performance Index, High School, Grades 9-12

African American Male Achievement Update

Student Mobility Rates in Massachusetts Public Schools

A Guide to Adequate Yearly Progress Analyses in Nevada 2007 Nevada Department of Education

Bellehaven Elementary

Data Diskette & CD ROM

Educational Attainment

Iowa School District Profiles. Le Mars

Kansas Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Revised Guidance

John F. Kennedy Middle School

READY OR NOT? CALIFORNIA'S EARLY ASSESSMENT PROGRAM AND THE TRANSITION TO COLLEGE

Status of Women of Color in Science, Engineering, and Medicine

Undergraduate Admissions Standards for the Massachusetts State University System and the University of Massachusetts. Reference Guide April 2016

64% :Trenton High School. School Grade A; AYP-No. *FCAT Level 3 and Above: Reading-80%; Math-

Getting Results Continuous Improvement Plan


File Print Created 11/17/2017 6:16 PM 1 of 10

Moving the Needle: Creating Better Career Opportunities and Workforce Readiness. Austin ISD Progress Report

Exams: Accommodations Guidelines. English Language Learners

Description of Program Report Codes Used in Expenditure of State Funds

Executive Summary. Walker County Board of Education. Dr. Jason Adkins, Superintendent 1710 Alabama Avenue Jasper, AL 35501

SUNY Downstate Medical Center Brooklyn, NY

Frank Phillips College. Accountability Report

The Condition of College & Career Readiness 2016

Psychometric Research Brief Office of Shared Accountability

Connecting to the Big Picture: An Orientation to GEAR UP

Institution of Higher Education Demographic Survey

Wisconsin 4 th Grade Reading Results on the 2015 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)

Annual Report to the Public. Dr. Greg Murry, Superintendent

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. Online courses for credit recovery in high schools: Effectiveness and promising practices. April 2017

Supply and Demand of Instructional School Personnel

Invest in CUNY Community Colleges

State of New Jersey

TSI Operational Plan for Serving Lower Skilled Learners

UPPER ARLINGTON SCHOOLS

46 Children s Defense Fund

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. Title I Comparability

Strategic Plan Dashboard Results. Office of Institutional Research and Assessment

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

Sunnyvale Middle School School Accountability Report Card Reported Using Data from the School Year Published During

School Performance Plan Middle Schools

APPLICANT INFORMATION. Area Code: Phone: Area Code: Phone:

University of Maine at Augusta Augusta, ME

World s Best Workforce Plan

Best Colleges Main Survey

ADMISSION TO THE UNIVERSITY

University of Utah. 1. Graduation-Rates Data a. All Students. b. Student-Athletes

Data Glossary. Summa Cum Laude: the top 2% of each college's distribution of cumulative GPAs for the graduating cohort. Academic Honors (Latin Honors)

Peer Influence on Academic Achievement: Mean, Variance, and Network Effects under School Choice

Miami-Dade County Public Schools

Kahului Elementary School

Bellevue University Bellevue, NE

Financing Education In Minnesota

LIM College New York, NY

Raw Data Files Instructions

SMILE Noyce Scholars Program Application

Summary of Selected Data Charter Schools Authorized by Alameda County Board of Education

Dr. Russell Johnson Middle School

Evaluation of Teach For America:

Newburgh Enlarged City School District Academic. Academic Intervention Services Plan

St. John Fisher College Rochester, NY

2015 High School Results: Summary Data (Part I)

NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS

El Toro Elementary School

University of Arizona

Running Head GAPSS PART A 1

Review of Student Assessment Data

Executive Summary. Hamilton High School

DATE ISSUED: 11/2/ of 12 UPDATE 103 EHBE(LEGAL)-P

NORTH CAROLINA VIRTUAL PUBLIC SCHOOL IN WCPSS UPDATE FOR FALL 2007, SPRING 2008, AND SUMMER 2008

NCEO Technical Report 27

ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS (ELL) UPDATE FOR SUNSHINE STATE TESOL 2013

Colorado s Unified Improvement Plan for Schools for Online UIP Report

KENT STATE UNIVERSITY

Personnel Administrators. Alexis Schauss. Director of School Business NC Department of Public Instruction

Governors and State Legislatures Plan to Reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act

Cupertino High School Accountabiltiy Report Card. Kami Tomberlain, Principal FREMONT UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT

Rhyne Elementary School Improvement Plan

RtI: Changing the Role of the IAT

San Luis Coastal Unified School District School Accountability Report Card Published During

Engage Educate Empower

Pathways to College Preparatory Advanced Academic Offerings in the Anchorage School District

EFFECTS OF MATHEMATICS ACCELERATION ON ACHIEVEMENT, PERCEPTION, AND BEHAVIOR IN LOW- PERFORMING SECONDARY STUDENTS

Section V Reclassification of English Learners to Fluent English Proficient

ASCD Recommendations for the Reauthorization of No Child Left Behind

Rhyne Elementary School Improvement Plan Rhyne Elementary School Contact Information

FTE General Instructions

Manasquan Elementary School State Proficiency Assessments. Spring 2012 Results

SINGLE PLAN FOR STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT. Peter Johansen High School

Dyer-Kelly Elementary 1

STEM Academy Workshops Evaluation

Student Support Services Evaluation Readiness Report. By Mandalyn R. Swanson, Ph.D., Program Evaluation Specialist. and Evaluation

2012 New England Regional Forum Boston, Massachusetts Wednesday, February 1, More Than a Test: The SAT and SAT Subject Tests

Transcription:

2016-2017 Report Card for Constellation Schools: Old Brooklyn Community Middle SCHOOL GRADE Coming in 2018 DISTRICT GRADE Achievement The Achievement component represents the number of students who passed the state tests and how well they performed on them. Performance Index Value Added 67.9%... Overall... Indicators Met 8.3%...... D F D Progress The Progress component looks closely at the growth that all students are making based on their past performances. Gifted... Students with Disabilities... Lowest 20% in Achievement... F NR C C D Gap Closing The Gap Closing component shows how well schools are meeting the performance expectations for our most vulnerable populations of students in English language arts, math and graduation. F Graduation Rate The Graduation Rate component looks at the percent of students who are successfully finishing high school with a diploma in four or five years. Not Rated Annual Measurable Objectives 13.2%... F... Graduation Rates NR This school of students is not graduated evaluated in for 4 years... graduation rate because there are NRnot NR enough of students graduated in the graduating 5 years... class. NR K-3 Literacy The K-3 Literacy component looks at how successful the school is at getting struggling readers on track to proficiency in third grade and beyond. Not Rated Prepared for Success Whether training in a technical field or preparing for work or college, the Prepared for Success component looks at how well prepared Ohio s students are for all future opportunities. Not Rated K-3 Literacy Improvement...NR Page 1 of 25

21.3 27.9 36.4 9.0 23.9 23.7 44.7 6.8 1.7 0.7 1.6 6.9 34.4 33.6 14.3 1.4 12.3 24.5 15.3 1.9 16.4 27.1 13.8 2016-2017 Report Card for Constellation Schools: Old Brooklyn Community Middle Achievement The Achievement component represents the number of students who passed the state tests and how well they performed on them. D GRADE D Performance Index The Performance Index measures the test results of every student, not just those who score proficient or higher. There are six levels on the index and districts receive points for every student in each of these levels. The higher the achievement level the more the points awarded in the district's index. This rewards schools and districts for improving the performance of all students, regardless of achievement level. 120 Performance Index Trend Performance Index 40 60 20 0 80 100 67.9% 81.5 of a possible 120.0 Achievement Level Advanced Plus Advanced Accelerated Proficient Basic Limited Untested Pct of Students 1.5 13.6 14.8 27.1 23.1 19.9 0.0 x x x x x x x Points for this Level 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.0 0.6 0.3 0.0 = = = = = = = Points Received 1.9 16.4 16.3 27.1 13.8 6.0 0.0 81.5 100 80 60 40 96.3 99.9 90.9 77.6 81.5 17.3 16.3 A = 90.0-10 B = 80.0-89.9% C = 70.0-79.9% D = 50.0-69.9% F = 0.0-49.9% 23.1 19.9 1.5 13.6 27.1 14.8 Advanced Plus Advanced Accelerated Proficient Limited Basic Untested 20 0 6.9 6.0 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Limited Performance Index Points Accelerated Performance Index Points Basic Performance Index Points Advanced Performance Index Points Proficient Performance Index Points Advanced Plus Performance Index Points Page 2 of 25

GRADE Indicators Met F Indicators Met measures the percent of students who have passed state tests. It also includes the gifted indicator. Test results are reported for each student in a grade and subject. The passage rate for each indicator is 80%. Indicators Met % 8.3% 1 out of 12 40 60 A = B = C = D = F = 90.0-10 80.0-89.9% 70.0-79.9% 50.0-69.9% 0.0-49.9% 20 0 80 100 Grades 3-5 Grades 6-8 High School English Language Arts 67.2% English Language Arts 42.9% HS Algebra I 95.2% 5th Grade Mathematics Science 45.9% 73.8% 6th Grade Mathematics Social Studies English Language Arts 41.4% 51.4% 48.3% This school does not have enough Ohio Graduation Test results to display this table. 7th Grade Mathematics 60.3% English Language Arts 5 8th Grade Mathematics 71.8% Science 71.7% GIFTED INDICATOR Page 3 of 25

Achievement Levels by Grade Proficient Percent Trend by Grade 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 63.8% 3rd Grade Reading Mathematics School District State Average 70.6% 3rd Grade No data returned for this view. This might be because the applied filter excludes all data. 4th Grade 4th Grade 100% 80% 60% 62.8% 72.4% 77.5% No data returned for this view. This might be because the applied filter excludes all data. 40% 20% 0% Reading Mathematics Social Studies School District State Average 5th Grade 5th Grade 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 67.2% 67.7% 45.9% 61.6% 73.8% 68.3% 100% 90% 80% 70% 30% 20% 10% 0% Reading Mathematics Science 60% 50% 40% 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 School District State Average Reading Mathematics Science 6th Grade 6th Grade Page 4 of 25

70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 60.2% 60.2% 64.0% 51.4% 42.9% 41.4% Reading Mathematics Social Studies 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 School District State Average Reading Mathematics Social Studies 7th Grade 7th Grade 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 48.3% 59.2% 60.3% 56.1% Reading Mathematics 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 School District State Average Reading Mathematics 8th Grade 8th Grade 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 71.8% 71.7% 65.8% 5 50.3% 54.9% Reading Mathematics Science 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 School District State Average Reading Mathematics Science High School High School Page 5 of 25

100% 95.2% 100% 80% 60% 72.1% 68.7% 58.3% 55.2% 61.1% 96% 92% 40% 45.3% 42.9% 38.1% 31.3% 88% 20% 19.1% 84% 0% Government History Physical English I English II Algebra I Geometry Math I Math II Biology Science School District State Average 80% 2015 2016 2017 Algebra I Proficiency % Trend Page 6 of 25

Gifted Students The Gifted Students data and Indicator highlight the opportunities for and performance of gifted students. The dashboard answers several questions: How many students are identified as gifted and in what categories? How many of those students are receiving gifted services? How well are those gifted students performing? The Gifted Indicator measures whether opportunity and performance expectations are being met for gifted students. INDICATOR The Gifted Indicator is derived from three components: Gifted Value Added grade, the Performance Index for gifted students, and a Gifted Inputs score. Value Added Grade: Value Added Met?: Performance Index: Performance Index Met?: Total Points: Gifted Inputs Met?: INDICATOR NR Gifted Value Added Schools must earn a Gifted Value Added grade of C or better to meet the Gifted Value Added component. Gifted Performance Index 0.0 Not Met Overview Schools with at least 10 unique students in the Gifted Performance Index calculation must score 117.0 or better to meet the Gifted Performance Index component. Gifted Inputs Points are earned based on identification and services provided to gifted students. Schools must earn 80 or more points out of a possible 100 to meet the Gifted Inputs component. Gifted Indicator Final Result The Gifted Indicator is Met if none of the three components are Not Met. Gifted Inputs alone cannot determine the Gifted Indicator, however; if both the Value Added and Performance Index components are, then the Gifted Indicator is also. 20 0 40 60 0.000 of a possible 120.0 A = 90.0-10 B = 80.0-89.9% C = 70.0-79.9% D =50.0-69.9% F = 0.0-49.9% Performance Index The Performance Index calculation for gifted students. Only tests taken by students identified as gifted in that subject (e.g. gifted in Math and taking the Math test), or taken by students identified with Super Cognitive abilities regardless of test subject are included. 80A performance index cannot be calculated Achievement for this school Pct of because Points for Level Students this Level there are not enough students. 100 Points Received Advanced Plus 0.0 x 1.3 = 0.0 Advanced 0.0 x 1.2 = 0.0 Accelerated 0.0 x 1.1 = 0.0 Proficient 0.0 x 1.0 = 0.0 Basic 0.0 x 0.6 = 0.0 Limited 0.0 x 0.3 = 0.0 Untested 0.0 x 0.0 = 0.0 0.000 Advanced Plus Advanced Accelarated Proficient Limited Basic Untested Page 7 of 25

Gifted Indicator The Gifted Inputs calculation assigns points based on the percentage of students identified and served in eight categories (factors). The points earned for each category are totaled to determine the final Met/Not Met determination for the Gifted Input component. Reading, Math, Science, Social Studies, and Superior Cognitive Abilities Visual/Performing Arts and Creative Thinking 10 10 Disadvantaged Students Minority Students 10 10 Receiving Gifted Services Identified as Gifted, but not receiving services Not Identified as Gifted Page 8 of 25

Progress The Progress component looks closely at the growth that all students are making based on their past performances. D GRADE F GRADE NR GRADE C GRADE C GRADE NR Overall This measures the progress for all students in math, ELA, science and social studies using tests in grades 4-8 and some end-of-course exams. Gifted Students This measures the progress for students identified as gifted in reading, math, science, social studies and/or superior cognitive ability. Students in the Lowest 20% in Achievement This measures the progress for students identified as the lowest 20% statewide in reading, math, science or social studies achievement. Students with Disabilities This measures the progress for students with disabilities. High Mobility For districts and schools with a mobility rate of 25% or higher, this measures the progress of a subset of students that have been in the district for at least two years. This measure will not be included in the Progress component grade. These tables show the Progress scores by test grade and subject for students in grades 4-8 and some end-of-course tests, and includes up to three years of data as available. Test Grade All Grades 5th Grade 6th Grade 7th Grade 8th Grade Progress Score English Language Arts Mathematics Social Studies Science All Tests Orange Red Red Red Red Red Red Light Green Red Yellow Dark Green Red Yellow Light Green Dark Green Dark Green Red Yellow Red Red No data returned for this view. This might be because the applied filter excludes all data. High School English Language Arts Value Added data is not available for this school What do the colors mean? Dark Green Light Green Yellow Orange Red Progress Details Test Grade Metrics Progress Score High School Algebra I Orange The Progress Component measures how groups of students made progress as compared to the statewide expectation of growth. The expectation of growth is based on how students in the group performed, on average, compared to other students like them across the state Students made more progress than expected significant evidence Students made more progress than expected moderate evidence Students made progress similar to the statewide expectation evidence Students made less progress than expected moderate evidence Students made less progress than expected significant evidence Page 9 of 25

Progress vs. Performance Index This bubble chart shows the relationship between each subgroup's Performance Index results (horizontal axis) to the Value-Added letter grade (vertical axis). The size of the bubble represents the size of the student subgroup. A B G r C Overall Students w/ Disabilities Lowest 20% Gifted High School Highly Mobile D F 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Performance Index Page 10 of 25

Gap Closing The Gap Closing component shows how well schools are meeting the performance expectations for our most vulnerable populations of students in English language arts, math and graduation. F GRADE F AMO Points Annual Measurable Objectives Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs) compare the performance of student groups to a state goal which is displayed as the red line in the following charts. These charts show how well each group achieves that goal in reading, math and graduation and emphasize any achievement gaps that exist between groups. The ultimate goal is for all groups to achieve at high levels. English Language Arts Math Graduation Rate No data returned for this view. This might be because the applied filter excludes all data. 40 60 20 80 54.2 60.9 This school does not have an Annual Measurable Objective for Graduation Rate because there were not enough students to evaluate. 0 100 51.8 52.6 13 13.2% A = 90.0-10 B = 80.0-89.9% C = 70.0-79.9% D = 60.0-69.9% F = 0.0-59.9% 45.7 43.9 43.2 36.4 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100 White Hispanic All Students Econ Disadvantage White Econ Disadvantage All Students Hispanic The red line on each graph identifies the Annual Measurable Objective. The 2017 AMO for ELA is 77.1%, for Math is 72%, and for Graduation Rate is 85.1%. Subgroups with fewer than 30 students are not rated and do not appear on the graphs. Page 11 of 25

Graduation Rate The Graduation Rate component looks at the percent of students who are successfully finishing high school with a diploma in four or five years. Not Rated 4-Year Graduation Rate The 4-year graduation rate applies to the Class of 2016 who graduated within four years, i.e. students who entered the 9th grade in 2013 and graduated by 2016. GRADE NR 5-Year Graduation Rate GRADE NR NR A = 93.0-10 B = 89.0-92.9% C = 84.0-88.9% D = 79.0-83.9% F = 0.0-78.9% The 5-year graduation rate applies to the Class of 2015 who graduated within five years, i.e. students who entered the 9th grade in 2012 and graduated by 2016. NR A = 95.0-10 B = 90.0-94.9% C = 85.0-89.9% D = 80.0-84.9% F = 0.0-79.9% 20 0 4-Year Rate 100 100 40 60 This 20 school 80 has not been assigned 80 83.4 80 0 100 a grade for Graduation Rate 60 60 because there were not enough students 40 to evaluate. 40 20 0 40 60 80 100 0.0 0.0 School State Average District 20 0 5-Year Rate 85.6 0.0 0.0 School District State Average Page 12 of 25

Graduation Rate Trend No data returned for this view. This might be because the applied filter excludes all data. The Graduation Rate graph that would appear in this space cannot be displayed because there were not enough students to evaluate. Note: The 5-year graduation rate does not appear in the final year of this graph because the necessary data is not yet available to calculate the 5-year rate for that school year. Page 13 of 25

K-3 Literacy The K-3 Literacy component looks at how successful the school is at getting struggling readers on track to proficiency in third grade and beyond. Not Rated GRADE NR 0 Students Moved to On Track - 0 RIMP Deductions In Your School... 0 Students Started Off Track Details of Measure K-3 Literacy Year 2 Improvement K-3 Literacy was not calculated for this school because there were not enough students to evaluate. This data is not displayed because there are not enough 40students 60 to 20evaluate. 80 Year 3 0 100 Year 1 0.0 A = 74.7-10 B = 49.3-74.6% C = 23.9-49.2% D = -1.5-23.8% F = <= -1.6% RIMP = Reading Improvement and Monitoring Plan. Districts are required to create a RIMP for students not on track to be proficient in English Language Arts by the end of 3rd grade. 10 Year 4 10 Remained Off Track Moved to On Track Remained Off Track Moved to On Track Page 14 of 25

Kindergarten Diagnostic First Grade Diagnostic Second Grade Diagnostic Third Grade Diagnostic Percentage On-Track in Reading Diagnostic K-3 Literacy was not calculated for this school because there were not enough students to evaluate. -800% -400% 0% 400% 800% On-Track Not On-Track Third Grade Reading Guarantee Ohio's Third Grade Reading Guarantee ensures that students are successful in reading before moving on to fourth grade. Schools must provide supports for struggling readers in early grades. If a child appears to be falling behind in reading, the school will immediately start a Reading Improvement and Monitoring Plan. The program ensures that every struggling reader gets the support he or she needs to learn and achieve. Students have multiple opportunities to meet promotion requirements including meeting a minimum promotion score on the third grade state reading tests given in the fall and spring. Students have an additional opportunity to take the state assessment in the summer, as well as a district-determined alternative assessment. The Parent Roadmap is available to help parents understand how the Third Grade Reading Guarantee applies to your child. How many third graders met the Third Grade Reading Guarantee requirements for promotion to 4th grade? This chart shows the overall percentage of students that were on-track/not-on-track for each grade level reading diagnostic in 2016-2017. How many third graders scored proficient on the state Reading test? Page 15 of 25

Prepared for Success Whether training in a technical field or preparing for work or college, the Prepared for Success component looks at how well prepared Ohio s students are for all future opportunities. Not Rated Not Rated How Prepared were Your 2015 and 2016 Graduating Classes? ACT: Participation A = B = C = D = F = 20% 0% 40% 60% 80% 100% Number of students that earned a remediation free score on all parts of the ACT or SAT, earned an honors diploma, and/or earned an industryrecognized credential The number of "bonus" students that count an additional 0.3 bonus points each, because they did the above and also earned a 3 or higher on at least one AP exam; earned a 4 or higher on at least one IB exam; and/or earned at least three college credits before leaving high school Number of Students Point Value Points Earne d 0 1 0.0 This data cannot be shown because there are not enough students in the graduating class of 2016 to evaluate. 9-10 7-89.9% 45.0% - 69.9% 25.0% - 44.9% - 24.9% 0 0.3 0.0 Total Points: Graduation Cohort: Percentage: 0.0 0 ACT: Remediation Free SAT: Participation SAT: Remediation Free Honors Diploma Industry-Recognized Credential Advanced Placement: Participation AP: Exam Score of 3 or Better Dual Enrollment Credit This data cannot be shown because there are not enough students in the graduating class of 2016 to evaluate. International Baccalaureate IB: Exam Score of 4 or Better 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Note: These data represent students in the 4-year and 5-year graduation rates, i.e. students who entered 9th grade in 2012 and 2013. Page 16 of 25

Outcomes after High School Graduation Districts and schools have long-term impacts on student outcomes. The Prepared for Success component provides information on how schools prepare students for different pathways of college and career success. It also provides insights on how those students do once they leave high school. What happens beyond the diploma is an important indicator of how well schools are preparing students. The University System of Ohio provides district reports on enrollment and remediation of high school graduates attending in-state, public colleges and universities. What Percentage of the 2014 Graduating Class Entered College within Two Years? This graph is not displayed because the result is Not 10 Calculated. What Percentage of the 2010 Graduating Class Graduated from College within Six Years of Leaving High School? This graph is not displayed 10 because the result is Not Calculated. Note: These data represent students in the 4-year and 5-year graduation rates, i.e. students who entered 9th grade in 2012 and 2013. Page 17 of 25

Principal: Address: Cherie Kaiser 5730 Broadview Rd Parma OH 44134-1602 Career Technical Planning District: Phone: (216) 351-0280 Cleveland Municipal CTPD Directory information current as of the 2016-2017 Report Card publication date. Your School's Students Average Daily Enrollment: Enrollment by Subgroup 80% 252 Number of Limited English Proficiency Students Excluded from Accountability Calculations: -- Am. Indian / Alaskan Native Asian or Pacific Islander Black, Non-Hispanic Hispanic Multiracial White, Non-Hispanic Students with Disabilities Economically Disadvantaged Limited English Proficiency Migrant Enrollment # Enrollment % 12 4.8% 47 18.5% 21 8.3% 170 67.6% 23 9.1% 114 45.3% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 67.6% 45.3% 18.5% 8.3% 9.1% 4.8% = Not Calculated because there are fewer than 10 in the group State and federal law require an annual assessment of Limited English Proficient (LEP) students to measure their English language proficiency. The Ohio English Language Proficiency Assessment (OELPA) is the assessment used in Ohio to gauge LEP students' growth in learning English. For information about your district's OELPA results, see the Department of Education's web site at http://education.ohio.gov. American Indian or Alaska... Asian or Pacific Islander Black, Non-Hispanic Hispanic Multiracial White, Non-Hispanic Students with Disabilities Migrant Economic Disadvantage Limited English Proficiency Page 18 of 25

Attendance Rate Chronic Absenteeism Rate: 16.1% All Students 94.5% Am. Indian / Alaskan Native Asian or Pacific Islander Black, Non-Hispanic 93.8% Hispanic 93.2% Multiracial 93.6% White, Non-Hispanic 95.0% Students with Disabilities 94.2% Economic Disadvantage 93.3% Limited English Proficiency Migrant Male 94.7% Female 94.4% = Not Calculated because there are fewer than 10 in the group 93.2% 95.0% 93.3% 10 94.5% 93.8% 93.6% 94.2% 8 6 4 2 All Students American Indian or Alaska... Black, Non-Hispanic Hispanic Multiracial White, Non-Hispanic Limited English Proficiency Female Students with Disabilities Migrant 94.4% 94.7% Asian or Pacific Islander Economic Disadvantage Male Attendance Rate is not shown if enrollment is less than 10. Page 19 of 25

Mobility Rates by Subgroup Student Mobility % All Students Am. Indian / Alaskan Native Asian or Pacific Islander Black, Non-Hispanic Hispanic Multiracial White, Non-Hispanic Students with Disabilities Economically Disadvantaged Limited English Proficiency Migrant = Not Calculated because there are fewer than 10 in the group 600% A mobility rate chart cannot be displayed for this school because either there are not enough 0% students to evaluate in any subgroup or all calculated results are. 400% 200% -200% -400% -600% All Students American Indian or Alaska... Black, Non-Hispanic Economic Disadvantage Hispanic Limited English Proficiency Students with Disabilities Migrant White, Non-Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander Multiracial Page 20 of 25

Your School's Teachers Your School's Poverty Status: Medium-Low Percentage of teachers with at least a Bachelor's Degree Percentage of teachers with at least a Master's Degree Percentage of core academic subject and elementary classes not taught by Highly Qualified Teachers Percentage of core academic subject and elementary classes taught by properly certified teachers Percentage of core academic subject elementary and secondary classes taught by teachers with temporary, conditional or long-term substitute certification/licensure Your School 100.0 Lead or Senior Teachers: 0.0 12.6 0 100 0 Your District -- -- -- -- -- 0.0 Number of Teachers by Program Area General Education Teachers 13.0 Career-Technical Teachers 0.0 Special Education Teachers 4.0 Teacher Aides 0.0 7.3 Gifted Intervention Specialists 0.0 Fine Arts Teachers 1.0 Music Teachers 0.8 Physical Education Teachers 1.0 ELL Specialists 0.0 # State Avg per 1000 Students 46.8 2.3 10.9 0.6 3.0 2.5 2.8 0.3 A district's high-poverty schools are those ranked in the top quartile based on the percentage of economically disadvantaged students. Low-poverty schools are those ranked in the bottom quartile based on the percentage of economically disadvantaged students. A district may have buildings in both quartiles, in just one quartile or in neither quartile. = Not Calculated because there are fewer than 10 in the group Page 21 of 25

Teacher Evaluations 21.1% Fine Arts Courses Offered No data returned for this view. This might be because the applied filter excludes all data. No Fine Arts courses offered by this school. 73.7% 5.3% Accomplished Skilled Developing Ineffective Not Complete Wellness and Physical Education The extent to which students are successful in meeting the benchmarks contained in Ohio's physical education standards Compliance with the federal requirement for implementing a local wellness policy Elected to administer BMI screening Participation in Physical Activity Pilot Program Moderate Success Page 22 of 25

Financial Data These measures answer several questions about spending and performance. How much is spent on Classroom instruction? How much, on average, is spent on each student? What is the source of the revenue? How do these measures compare to other districts and schools? Comparison Group: Community Schools with Enrollment between 150 and 499 Classroom Spending Data Spending per Pupil Data School State What percent of funds are spent on classroom instruction? 57.2% How does this school rank in comparison to other schools of similar size? 67 out of 165 A rank of 1 indicates the highest percent spent on classroom instruction. 100 Percentage Spent for Non- Classroom Instruction 42.8% Rank in comparison group for highest % spent 90 out of 165 Rankings subject to change due to data appeals. 80 60 40 20 0 Operating Spending per Pupil $7,117 $9,150 School Classroom Instruction $4,067 $6,180 Non-Classroom Spending $3,049 $2,970 $4,067 $3,049 School Comparison Group State 42.8% 40.3% 32.5% State $6,180 $2,970 57.2% 59.7% 67.5% $0 $4,000 $8,000 $12,000 Classroom Instruction Non-Classroom Instruction Constellation Schools: Old Brooklyn Community Middle IS NOT among the 20% of traditional community schools with the lowest operating expenditures per pupil. Constellation Schools: Old Brooklyn Community Middle IS among the 20% of traditional community schools organizations with the highest academic performance index scores. Page 23 of 25

Spending and Performance This measure answers the question what is the relationship of average spending per student to performance, and how does that compare to similar districts and schools? Comparison Group All Community & STEM Schools 120.0 120.0 110.0 110.0 P e P e 100.0 100.0 90.0 90.0 80.0 80.0 70.0 70.0 60.0 $0 $4,000 $8,000 $12,000 $16,000 $20,000 $24,000 $28,000 $32,000 60.0 $0 $4,000 $8,000 $12,000 $16,000 $20,000 $24,000 $28,000 $32,000 Spending per Pupil Spending per Pupil The quadrant lines on these graphs represent the statewide average performance index score and the statewide average spending per pupil for all Community and STEM schools. Page 24 of 25

Source of Revenue Source of Funds School State Total Local State Federal Other Non-Tax Total $0 $1,851,461 $217,656 $100,143 $2,169,260 85.3% 1 4.6% 10 $9,013,382,621 $10,329,964,470 $1,689,939,468 $1,662,319,384 $22,695,605,944 39.7% 45.5% 7.4% 7.3% 10 School State 45.5% 1 4.6% 7.3% 85.3% 7.4% 39.7% Local Federal State Other Non-Tax Local State Federal Other Non-Tax Page 25 of 25