State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 The Performance of State Charter Schools in Georgia, 2013-14 By Tim R. Sass, Ph.D. Distinguished University Professor Department of Economics Andrew Young School of Policy Studies Georgia State University April 21, 2015 Revised May 6, 2015 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................... 1 I. Introduction and Background.................................................................................................... 3 II. Methodology and Data .............................................................................................................. 7 A. Alternative Methods for Evaluating School Performance................................................. 7 1. The Value-Added Model Approach................................................................................. 8 2. The Student Growth Model Approach............................................................................ 8 3. Proficiency Targets ......................................................................................................... 9 B. Data................................................................................................................................... 10 III. Results All State Charters ................................................................................................... 11 A. Proficiency Targets ........................................................................................................... 11 B. Value-Added and Student Growth Model Estimates........................................................ 12 C. Summary of Findings ........................................................................................................ 13 IV. Results Individual School Summaries................................................................................ 36 Atlanta Heights Charter School............................................................................................... 37 Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology (CCAT) .......................................... 57 Cherokee Charter Academy .................................................................................................... 72 Coweta Charter Academy ........................................................................................................ 95 Fulton Leadership Academy ................................................................................................. 113 Georgia Connections Academy ............................................................................................. 126 Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett................................................................................. 135 Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls ................................................................. 148 Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy ........................................................... 168 Mountain Education Center .................................................................................................. 188 Odyssey School (Including Georgia Cyber Academy) ......................................................... 192 Pataula Charter Academy...................................................................................................... 201 Provost Academy ................................................................................................................... 224 V. References ............................................................................................................................. 228 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Executive Summary A total of 16 state charter schools operated in Georgia during the 2013-2014 school year, though two of the 16 ceased operations at the end of the school year. Of the 14 with continuing operations, two schools, the Georgia Cyber Academy and the Odyssey School, appear as a single institution in Georgia Department of Education administrative records during the 2013-2014 school year. Thus, this report focuses on the performance of 13 state charter schools in the 2013-14 school year and also provides performance data for 2012-13 to gauge how state charter school performance is changing over time. Key findings are: State charter schools are diverse and many provide learning environments that differ from those of traditional public schools. State charter schools vary along multiple dimensions, including grade levels, student demographics, instructional mode (face-to-face or virtual), curricular focus and geographic area served. Four of thirteen serve only elementary and middle grades, another four serve elementary, middle and at least some high school grades, three serve both middle and high grades and two only offer grades 9-12. Four of the thirteen are single- gender schools, and African-American enrollment at four schools exceeds 90 percent. Two schools have over 10 percent of students classified as gifted while three report no gifted students. Three of the thirteen schools provide fully online course offerings while the remaining 10 provide face-to-face instruction exclusively. The three fully online virtual schools and one "brick-and-mortar" school enroll students from throughout the state, one school enrolls students who reside within a five-county region, and the remaining eight enroll students from a single school district only. The majority of state charter schools serving elementary grades do not perform as well as the average public elementary school in the state. The estimated contribution to student achievement in grades four and five across all five CRCT-tested subjects (reading, math, ELA, science and social studies) was below the state average for six of the eight state charter schools serving elementary grades. Performance for the other two was not significantly different from the state average. This cross-subject average masks significant variation across subjects, however. For example, in ELA only two of the eight schools perform below the average elementary school in the state and the performance of one school exceeds the state average. In contrast, the estimated contribution to student achievement in mathematics is below the state average for six of the eight state charters and indistinguishable from the state average for the other two. Most state charter schools serving middle grades perform as well or better than the average public middle school in the state. The estimated contribution to student achievement in grades 6-8 averaged across all five CRCT-tested subjects is indistinguishable from the state average for six of the 11 state charter schools that offer at least enroll students in one or more of grades 6-8. The cross-subject average performance of two state charters exceeds that of the average middle school in the state, and the contribution to student achievement for three state charters falls below the state average. Performance of state charters serving middle grades is particularly strong in reading and language arts. In reading, the performance of six of the eleven schools exceeds the state average, and none of the schools exhibit performance below the average middle school in the state. Likewise, in ELA the performance of only one school falls below that of the average middle school in the state, and five exhibit performance above the state average. However, performance in science and social studies is much weaker. In science, seven of eleven schools have estimated contributions to student achievement that fall below 1 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 the state average and none exhibit performance that is significantly above that of the state average middle school in the state. In social studies, the performance of seven schools is below the state average, two exhibit performance that is above the state average and the performance of two is indistinguishable from the state average. The performance of state charter schools serving high schools grades is mixed when compared to the average public high school in the state. As for elementary and middle grades, state charter schools serving some or all of grades 9-12 generally perform better in language arts than in math, science and social studies disciplines. Variation across subjects must be interpreted with caution, however, since some state charters have just begun to expand their range of grade offerings into high school and thus the sample of schools varies across subject areas. Further, three of the five state charters offering all high school grades (9-12) are virtual schools. In 9th Grade Literature, four of nine state charters are performing above the state average and the performance of the other five is indistinguishable from the state average. For the four schools with test scores for American Literature, two contribute more to student achievement than the state average while the other two contribute less than the state average. In contrast, in Analytic Geometry four of five schools perform below the state average and one performs above the state average. In Biology three of six schools perform below the state average and the performance of the other half is indistinguishable from the state average. Similarly, in Physical Science four of seven schools have estimated contributions to student achievement below the state average, two are indistinguishable from the state average and one exceeds the state average. Performance is also generally low in Economics, with three of four schools performing below the state average and one whose performance is indistinguishable from the state average. The majority of state charter schools serving elementary grades do not perform as well as the average elementary school in their district(s). Similar to statewide comparisons, the contribution to student achievement averaged across all five CRCT-tested subjects is below the average of all elementary schools in the relevant district for six of eight state charters serving elementary grades. One school's contribution is indistinguishable from the district average and one school's contribution is above the district average. The performance of state charter schools serving middle grades is mixed when compared to the average of all middle schools in the relevant district(s). Of the eight state charter schools serving middle grades, two perform better than the average of middle schools in their district (based on cross-subject averages of the estimated contribution to student achievement). Four perform worse than the average school in their district, and the performance of the other five schools is indistinguishable from the average school in the district. At the high school level, most state charters outperform the average school in their district in at least one subject, but no state charter schools outperform the average school in the district or districts they serve in a majority of subjects. Of the nine state charter schools serving one or more high school grades, one performs above the district average in one subject, three outperform the district average in two subjects and one outperforms the district average in three subjects. However, a number of schools perform below the district average in multiple subjects and no state charter schools contribute more to student achievement than the average school in their district in a majority of the subjects in which their students are tested. 2 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 I. Introduction and Background There were 16 state charter schools operating in Georgia during the 2013-2014 school year, though two of the 16 ceased operations at the end of the year. Although the current State Charter Schools Commission has only been in operation since 2013, many of the state charter schools have been in existence for several years. Some were originally formed as state chartered special schools or were initially chartered by the original Georgia Charter Schools Commission, which was declared unconstitutional by the Georgia Supreme Court.1 Table 1 summarizes information about the 14 schools that continue to operate after the 2013-14 school year, including when the school opened, whether it is affiliated with an education management organization (EMO), grades served, curricular model, school calendar, delivery model (virtual vs. physical classrooms), attendance zone, and any special enrollment requirements (parental participation requirements or gender restrictions). The 14 schools are quite diverse in their structure, mission and service area. For example, three of the 14 state charter schools are virtual schools, and many of the state charter schools target traditionally underserved populations. Four of the schools are single-gender schools. The majority of state charter schools (9 of 14) serve students in a single district/county, one school (Pataula Charter Academy) has an attendance zone that spans multiple counties and the remaining four schools serve students from the entire state. The state charter schools also vary considerably in the populations of students they serve, as illustrated in Table 2. Four of 13 schools serve almost exclusively African-American students.2 In contrast, five have student populations in which fewer than 20 percent of students are black or Hispanic. There is considerable diversity in proportions of Limited English Proficiency (LEP) students, students eligible for Free/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL), Students with Disabilities (SWD) and gifted students as well. 1 Details on the history of charter schools in general and more specifically state chartered schools, is contained in Georgia Department of Education (2012). 2The Georgia Cyber Academy and the Odyssey School appear as a single institution in Georgia Department of Education administrative records. Therefore, they are combined in Table 2 and all of the subsequent analyses. 3 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Table 1: General Characteristics of State Charter Schools School Name Atlanta Heights Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology (CCAT) Cherokee Charter Academy Calendar Year Opened 2010 2002 2011 EMO Affiliation National Heritage Academies No Charter Schools USA Grades K-8 6-12 K-9 Curriculum Focus School Year None Normal Multi-age classrooms - students grouped by skill level Year-round None Normal Single- Gender School No No No Virtual/ Online School No No No Serves Multiple Counties No No No Parental Involvement Requirement Not Specified Enrollment Restrictions Atlanta Public Schools Zone 1 Hour of Service/week Bulloch County Public Schools Zone Not Specified Cherokee County Public Schools Zone Coweta Charter Academy 2010 Charter Schools USA K-6 None Normal No No No 20 hours volunteer/year Coweta County Public Schools Zone Fulton Leadership 2010 No Academy STEM with focus on aviation and 6-9 aeronautics - Normal partnership with Civil Boys Only No Air Patrol Fulton No Not Specified County Public Schools Zone Georgia Students Connections 2011 No K-12 Online Curriculum Normal No Yes Online Not Specified residing in Academy State of GA Curriculum is entirely Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett 2008 No 6-11 College Preparatory. Saturday Academy is available to Extended Day/Week/ Year Girls- Only No struggling students. Gwinnett No Not Specified County Public Schools Zone 4 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 School Name Calendar Year Opened EMO Affiliation Ivy Preparatory Academy at 2011 No Kirkwood Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership 2011 No Academy Mountain Education 2007 No Charter School Odyssey School (including the Georgia Cyber Academy Program) 2004 K-12 (GCA Only) Pataula Charter Academy 2010 No Provost Academy 2012 No Grades K-8 K-8 9-12 K-12 K-9 Curriculum Focus School Year Curriculum is entirely College Preparatory. Saturday Academy is available to struggling students. College Preparatory curriculum for all students. Self-paced, individualized, evening high school for students struggling at other schools Multi-age classrooms - students grouped by skill level/Looping: students remain with teacher two years (Odyssey School Only) Expeditionary Learning: project based lectures and curriculum delivery/Looping: students remain with teacher for two years Extended Day/Week/ Year Extended Day/Week/ Year Year-round Normal Normal Single- Gender School Girls- Only Boys- Only No No No 9-12 Online Curriculum Normal No Virtual/ Online School No No No GCA Program No Yes Serves Multiple Counties No Parental Involvement Requirement Not Specified Enrollment Restrictions DeKalb County Schools Zone DeKalb No Not Specified County Schools Zone Students Yes No residing in State of GA Yes (GCA Only) 18 hours per academic year (Odyssey School Only) Coweta County Public Schools Zone (GCA serves students statewide) Yes Online Not Specified Not Specified Students residing in Baker, Calhoun, Clay, Early, Randolph Public School districts Students residing in State of GA Note: Grade levels served based on enrollment as of October 2013. Sources: Georgia Department of Education (2010), Georgia Department of Education (2011), Georgia Department of Education (2013), Georgia Department of Education (n.d.), individual state charter school websites. 5 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Table 2: Students Served by State Charter Schools School Name Atlanta Heights Charter School CCAT School Cherokee Charter Academy Coweta Charter Academy Fulton Leadership Academy Georgia Connections Academy Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy Mountain Education Center Odyssey School (including Georgia Cyber Academy) Pataula Charter Academy Provost Academy Georgia Pct. Female 49.2 43.5 49.2 51.1 0.0 53.5 100.0 100.0 0.0 49.7 50.1 46.2 51.1 Pct. White 0.7 81.2 79.9 78.6 0.0 55.0 1.2 3.2 1.5 90.7 60.1 78.6 28.5 Pct. Pct. Black Hispanic 94.2 0.4 14.3 1.9 9.8 3.1 9.0 6.5 99.2 0.4 30.7 6.6 97.0 1.2 75.8 2.6 95.7 1.8 5.3 0.1 34.4 1.3 13.6 1.2 62.4 1.6 Pct. Other 4.7 1.9 4.1 5.8 0.4 5.9 0.3 13.4 0.3 3.7 2.1 4.9 7.0 Pct. FRL 92.6 0.0 15.7 18.4 100.0 49.3 74.1 61.2 70.6 72.9 90.6 59.9 15.9 Pct. Pct. Pct. LEP SWD Gifted 1.8 9.1 0.0 0.0 13.0 5.8 1.2 11.0 11.6 0.0 7.7 11.2 0.0 13.9 6.5 0.1 9.4 2.5 0.0 3.0 2.7 5.5 6.7 5.5 0.0 8.9 3.7 2.1 14.0 0.0 0.2 12.6 1.1 3.1 10.3 6.6 0.0 11.6 0.0 Note: For the purposes of this table, students who attended more than one school were attributed to the school where they attended the longest period of time during the year. Source: Individual-level student data from the GAAWARDS system. 6 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 II. Methodology and Data A. Alternative Methods for Evaluating School Performance In order to evaluate the performance of state charter schools, there are two related challenges that must be addressed. First, like schools chartered by local school districts, state charter schools are schools of choice. As such, students and their parents have made a conscious decision to attend these schools rather than their neighborhood traditional public school. This individual selection process makes simple comparisons of student performance in state charter schools to traditional public schools problematic. Average test scores or other measures of student performance could reflect the attributes of the students and their families, rather than the performance of the school they attend. For example, if more highly motivated students/families select state charter schools, this would impart an upward bias to the measured performance of state charter schools. Conversely, if students who are struggling are more likely to seek out alternatives to their neighborhood traditional public school, this could bias downward the average achievement in state charter schools. Evaluation of the performance of state charter schools is further complicated by the fact that they frequently serve students from multiple counties and have specialized missions. As noted above, three of the 16 state charter schools are virtual schools, and many of the state charter schools target traditionally underserved populations, such as students at risk of dropping out. This exacerbates the selection problem; greater diversity in school programs will tend to lead to even more sorting across schools. For example, the students who choose a virtual learning environment may differ even more from the typical student in a traditional public school than would a student attending a local "brick and mortar" charter school. Although state charter schools are particularly diverse, the challenges to evaluating their performance are not unique. The issue of selection arises in the evaluation of locally approved charters, traditional public schools and individual teachers as well. A variety of methods have been employed by state and local education authorities throughout the country to evaluate the effects of schools and teachers on student achievement. While the particulars of each evaluation system vary, the methods can be placed into three general categories: value-added models, student growth percentiles and proficiency benchmarks.3 3 A fourth method used by academic researchers to evaluate charter schools is the analysis of admission lotteries (Hoxby & Rockoff (2004), Hoxby & Murarka (2009), Dobbie & Fryer (2009), Gleason, et al. (2010)). By law, charters must hold lotteries for admission if there are more students who want to attend than there are spots available. Since admission is random, one can gauge charter performance by comparing the achievement of students who "win" the lottery and gain admission to a charter to lottery "losers" who sought admission to a charter school, but ended up attending a traditional public school. In effect, the lottery creates a randomized trial where the lottery winners are the treatment group and the lottery losers are the control group. Unfortunately, since admission lottery data are not uniformly collected and not all state charter schools are oversubscribed, this is not a viable strategy in the present context. 7 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 1. The Value-Added Model Approach One way to evaluate school performance is to estimate the determinants of individual student test scores using a "value-added" model (VAM) of student achievement.4 VAMs typically include statistical controls for observable student characteristics and prior academic performance in order to account for self-selection. Most often factors like free/reduced-price lunch eligibility (a proxy for family income), English language learner status, and disability status are taken into account.5 Race, gender, mobility and age are also sometimes included in the model.6 This approach has been used by academic researchers to study the impact of charter schools in many jurisdictions including Arizona (Solmon, Paark & Garcia (2001)), Florida (Sass (2006)), North Carolina (Bifulco and Ladd (2006)) and Texas (Booker, et al. (2007)). It is also being used to evaluate teacher performance in Florida, Louisiana, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee and Washington, DC. In essence, the value-added model predicts what a student's test score would be based on his/her prior test scores and demographic characteristics. The difference between the actual and predicted current test score is a measure of the educational entity's contribution to student achievement. In the context of school-level evaluations, the estimated effect for a school is essentially the difference between actual and predicted test score for each student, averaged over all students in a school. 2. The Student Growth Model Approach Several states, including Colorado, Georgia, Massachusetts and New Jersey, are using student growth models to evaluate teacher performance.7 Like value-added models, the student growth model gauges the performance of teachers or schools by comparing the test scores of individual students to a reference standard. In the case of value-added, the benchmark is the expected performance of a student with the same observable characteristics and prior scores. For the student growth model, the standard is the actual performance of other students with the same prior-year test score (or history of test scores). There are two fundamental differences between the value-added model used in this analysis and the student growth model currently employed in Georgia, however. First, Georgia's student growth model does not include explicit controls for student characteristics like disability status or eligibility for 4 Details on the specification of value-added models and the estimates obtained for Georgia public schools are provided in the Technical Appendix. See also Todd and Wolpin (2003), Guarino, Reckase and Wooldridge (2012) and Sass, Semykina and Harris (2013). 5 For example, Florida's model includes disability status, English Language Learner status, gifted status, prior attendance, mobility and student age. Washington DC's model controls for poverty status, limited English proficiency status, prior attendance, mobility and poverty. Louisiana's model includes controls for disability status, gifted status, poverty and prior disciplinary actions. 6 While all value-added models include some measure of prior student performance, specific value-added specifications may vary in the degree to which observable student characteristics are taken into account (including none at all). The analysis below focuses on a value-added model that includes essentially all available student characteristics. However, the technical appendix reports results based on alternative value-added specifications with either no student characteristics (i.e. only prior test scores) and the full set of student characteristics except for race/ethnicity. The specification of value-added models used for teacher accountability systems vary across states. 7 For a list of states employing or planning to use student growth models, see Wash and Isenberg (2013). 8 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 free/reduced-price lunch.8 This means that school-level average student growth measures will reflect both the impact of a school on student learning and the influences of student characteristics that are not accounted for by prior test scores. For example, if students with disabilities typically experience less growth in achievement than do their typical peers who started with the same prior-year test score, a school with an unusually high proportion of students with disabilities would have a lower mean student growth score than an otherwise identical school with fewer students with disabilities. Second, the student growth model approach is based on student performance rankings among students with the same prior-year test score (or history of test scores), not absolute differences in scores across students. This means there is no need to account for differences in the scaling of tests across years and subjects. It also means that student performance is gauged by the ordering of test scores, not by how much one student's score exceeds that of another. The logic behind the approach is straightforward, though the underlying calculations are complex.9 As an example, imagine plotting the distribution of fourth-grade test scores obtained by students who all had the same third-grade test score the prior year. Students are assigned a student growth percentile (SGP) depending on where they fall in that distribution. An SGP of 70 would indicate that 70 percent of students with the same third-grade score in the prior year obtained a lower fourth-grade score. To evaluate individual teachers or schools, either the mean or the median SGP value of all students in the relevant unit is typically used. 3. Proficiency Targets Many state school accountability systems are based in part on whether or not students meet a certain threshold achievement score on tests. For example, about one-fourth of a school's score on Georgia's College and Career Ready Performance Index (CCRPI) is determined by the proportion of students who "meet" or "exceed" proficiency standards established by the state.10 In general, proficiency targets (including those in the CCRPI) and associated threshold scores for determining achievement levels are set by policy makers and focus on absolute performance rather than growth. The advantage of proficiency targets is they establish an absolute benchmark and thus all schools could potentially improve from one year to the next. In contrast, both the value- added and student growth models yield relative measures of school performance. In the case of value-added, schools are compared to the average school in a state. Student growth models yield SGPs for individual students, which by definition have a median value of 50. Therefore 8 Most student growth models used in teacher accountability systems do not include any student characteristics. One exception is the State of New York. In 2011/12 New York State used both "conditional" and "unconditional" student growth percentiles to evaluate teacher performance. The "conditional" SGP approach essentially estimated a value-added model and then used the resulting predictions to determine a student's ranking and SGP. See American Institutes for Research (2012). 9 Student growth percentiles are generated using a non-parametric quantile regression model. For details see Betebenner (2009) and Goldhaber, Walch and Gabele (2012). 10 For 2014, 60 points of the CCRPI are based on "achievement," 40 percent of which is based on content mastery. The remaining 40 points of the CCRPI are determined by progress (25 points) and closing achievement gaps (15 points). An additional 10 points can be earned above the 100-point total through challenge points. The progress portion of the CCRPI is based on a school's students demonstrating typical or high growth via their student growth percentile. 9 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 aggregations of student performance to the school level (whether means or medians) are implicitly tied to the median student's performance across the state. The downside of achievement levels and associated proficiency targets is that they do not control for student selection into schools. Thus, scores may reflect the abilities of students and the parental support they receive, rather than a school's contribution to student learning. For example, on average, students from more affluent families tend to score higher on achievement exams than do students from lower-income families. Thus, even if the quality of teachers and school leaders were equal across all schools in a state, the schools serving more advantaged students would tend to receive higher scores on a proficiency-target metric. Given the problems associated with the use of proficiency targets, this report focuses on value-added and student-growth estimates to evaluate the performance of state charter schools. However, descriptive evidence in the form of proportions of students meeting proficiency standards are reported in order to provide a picture of the current achievement level of students attending state charter schools. B. Data To estimate the value-added model and derive estimates of the impact of each school on student achievement, data from Georgia's State Longitudinal Data System, known as GAAWARDS (Georgia's Academic and Workforce Analysis and Research Data System) are employed. GAAWARDS is maintained by the Governor's Office of Student Achievement (GOSA) and combines data from the Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE) along with data from eight other state agencies: Department of Labor (workforce data), Department of Early Care and Learning ("Bright From the Start" pre-K program), Georgia Student Finance Commission (financial aid), Governor's Office of Student Achievement, Georgia Professional Standards Commission (teacher licensure), Technical College System of Georgia, University System of Georgia and the State Charter Schools Commission. GAAWARDS also includes data from the Georgia Independent College Association. For grades 3-8, achievement is measured by scores on the Criterion Referenced Competency Test (CRCT) in Reading, English Language Arts (ELA), Math, Science and Social Studies. Prior-year scores in all five subjects are used to control for student ability and prior educational inputs.11 For high school students, End-of-Course test (EOCT) scores in Math (Analytic Geometry, Coordinate Algebra, Math II), ELA (9th Grade Literature and Composition, American Literature and Composition), Science (Biology, Physical Science) and Social Studies (U.S. History, Economics) are employed. For the analysis of EOCT scores, 8th grade CRCT scores in all five subjects are used as controls. Because the CRCT does not vertically align scale scores over time, and the CRCT and End-of-Course Tests can vary from year to year, all scale scores are converted to normal-curve equivalents (z-scores) based on the testing population in the state for each grade, year, and subject. Thus, school effect estimates are measured in standard deviation units or "effect sizes." In addition to prior test scores, the value-added model includes the following student characteristics as controls: gender, foreign-born indicator, race/ethnicity, ESOL enrollment, 11 Same-subject actual prior-year scores are employed. For other subjects (e.g. prior-year science score when evaluating value added in math), missing values are imputed by using the mean of scores from other subjects. 10 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 free/reduced-price lunch eligibility, gifted status, primary-language-not-English indicator, disability status (15 specific disability categories), number of schools attended in the current year, an indicator for students who changed schools from the prior year, number of disciplinary incidents in the prior year, attendance in the prior year and the difference between a student's age (in months) and the modal age of students in the same grade.12,13 Individual-level student growth percentiles were calculated by the GaDOE and provided to the GAAWARDS staff who in turn assigned anonymous student codes. A very small number of students with SGPs could not be matched to records in the GAAWARDS system and were thus excluded from the analysis. It is important to note that SGPs are not calculated by the GaDOE for students who repeat a grade or skip a grade because the pool of students who took the same grade level exam in the prior year is too small to form a valid SGP. For both the value-added and student growth model analyses, students were assigned to schools using the "Full Academic Year" (FAY) rule used in the CCRPI calculations. For grades 3-8, FAY was determined by the number of calendar days between the start of each school's school year and the end of the state CRCT testing window. For grades 9-12, FAY for each school was measured by the calendar days between the start and end of the school year. For each student, the school of longest attendance was determined based on individual attendance records. The total calendar days enrolled at the school of longest attendance was then determined. If a student's calendar days of enrollment were at least 65 percent of the FAY, they were assigned to that school for the purposes of determining value-added school effects and mean or median school SGPs. III. Results All State Charters A. Proficiency Targets Proficiency percentages obtained by students in state charters on the CRCT and EOCT exams are those reported publicly by the GaDOE and are presented in the individual school summaries.14 Statewide and district averages are also provided for reference.15 It is important to emphasize that proficiency percentages reflect the ability and motivation of students, family resources and the quality of education received in prior years. As such, they provide a picture of 12 The difference between a student's age and the modal age of other students in the same grade is included to control for students who had previously be retained or started kindergarten late. This variable was not included in the value-added model used for 2012/13 state charter schools accountability report. 13 In addition to the value-added model with all of the specified student characteristics as controls, two other specifications were also estimated. One alternative specification omitted student race/ethnicity and the other omitted all student characteristics (and thus only included prior test scores). Results based on these alternative specifications are available in the Technical Appendix. 14 Georgia Department of Education (2014a) and Georgia Department of Education (2014b). Minor differences in underlying data sometimes result in slight discrepancies when compared to the proficiency levels published on the Governor's Office of Student Achievement's Report Card. 15 Cross-school comparisons of proportions of students meeting proficiency targets are provided in the Technical Appendix. 11 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 the current achievement level of students, not necessarily the impact a student's current school has had on their achievement within the previous year. When considering the proficiency percentages, a few patterns emerge at the elementary and middle school levels (grades 3-5 and 6-8). First, there is considerable variation across subjects and across grades, even within a school. Second, three state charter schools stand out as having large proportions of struggling students across multiple subjects. Atlanta Heights and Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy each have 40 percent or more of their students in the "does not meet standards" category in multiple CRCT-tested subjects. Similarly, Provost Academy has over half of their students failing to meet standards on four End- of-Course Exams: Math II, Biology, U.S. History and Economics. At the other end of the scale, Coweta Charter Academy frequently has much larger percentages of students in the "exceeding state standards" category than the statewide average. Cherokee Charter Academy also tends to have relatively high proportions of students exceeding grade-level expectations. While proficiency targets are important to show a school's absolute performance, examining student growth within a school year provides a stronger indication of the school's impact on student learning. The next section provides an overview of the value-added and student growth estimates that provide a more complete picture of a school's impact. B. Value-Added and Student Growth Model Estimates By construction, the average school at a given grade grouping (elementary, middle or high school) in Georgia has a school effect of zero in the value-added model (controlling for student characteristics). The performance of each school in a given grade grouping is measured relative to this average. Thus, a positive estimated value for an elementary school's effect indicates that students attending that school experience greater growth in achievement than do students with the same observable characteristics at the average elementary school in the state. Negative values do not mean that the achievement of the school's students fell during the year. Instead, a negative school effect indicates the gap between that school's contribution to student achievement and the contribution of the average school (measured in standard deviation units). For example, a value of -0.10 means that a school's contribution to student achievement is 0.10 standard deviations below that of the average school in the state. In the same way, a value of 0.10 means that a school's effect is 0.10 standard deviations above the average school in the state. To put this in perspective, reducing class size in elementary grades by seven students is associated with a 0.10 to 0.20 standard deviation increase in student achievement (Whitehurst and Chingos (2011)) and the difference in the effectiveness of a rookie teacher and one with three years of experience is about 0.07 standard deviations (Dee and Wyckoff (2013)). The value-added effects for schools are statistical estimates and carry some degree of uncertainty. Along with the estimated effects, the value-added model generates a measure of the uncertainty of each school's effect, the estimated standard error. The estimated standard errors can be used to develop confidence intervals around each school's estimated impact on student achievement. With a confidence interval of approximately plus-or-minus two standard errors, one can be 95 percent confident that the true school effect lies in that range. Thus, for example, if a school's estimated effect is 0.5 and the standard error is 0.1, one can be 95 percent confident that the true effect lies in the range of 0.3 to 0.7. This information can then be used to determine how confident we are that a given school's performance is above, below, or equal to the average school. The standard errors and confidence intervals will generally be smaller the larger the number of students per school. The estimated school effect on achievement will 12 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 vary with the performance of individual students. In a small school, random events like a student having a poor night's sleep or getting "lucky" in their guesses on an exam will have a larger impact on the school's overall effect creating more uncertainty in the true school effect whereas in a large school such random events will tend to cancel out. Thus, for example, the Odyssey School, which includes the virtual Georgia Cyber Academy, has the largest enrollment of any state charter school and correspondingly tends to have the smallest confidence interval. Student growth percentiles measure where a student is in the distribution of current achievement relative to students with the same prior-year test score (or history of test scores). Thus, by definition, a score of 50 for a student indicates that about half of students with the same test score last year did better this year and about half did worse. School-level averages of student growth percentiles are reported below. The statewide school-level mean of SGPs is approximately equal to the statewide student median of 50, which provides a benchmark for comparing scores across schools.16 Unlike the value-added model, the student growth percentiles produced from Georgia's model do not include standard errors or confidence intervals at this time.17 Without this information, one cannot quantify the likelihood that two schools with different mean or median SGPs are in fact no different. Put differently, absent a measure of precision, we could judge one school as superior to another when in fact they are likely no different. For both the value-added and student growth models, separate estimates are presented for different grade groupings and for different subjects. In addition, an estimated effect on average performance across all subjects in each grade grouping is produced. Thus, for example, a charter serving grades K-8 receives two value-added scores in math, one for its impact on math achievement of students in elementary grades (grades 4 and 5) and another for its impact on students in middle grades (grades 6-8). C. Summary of Findings A total of 21 figures are presented, five for each of the subjects tested in elementary school, five more for the same subjects in middle school, nine high school courses for which 16 For 2013-14 the GaDOE computed student growth percentiles in two different ways. In the "cohort SGP" approach, statistical models are updated annually so that the median student receives a SGP of 50 each year. This means that the baseline is reset each year and (as with value-added measures), it is not possible to measure a general increase in student achievement gains across all students. In attempt to capture general changes over time in teacher effectiveness the GaDOE also computed a "baseline- referenced SGP." As the name implies, the baseline-referenced SGP uses the same model each year which was developed using a baseline cohort of students. This results in SGPs relative to the baseline cohort and therefore allows for the possibility of universal improvement in performance over time. However, as a consequence, the median baseline-referenced SGP will not necessarily equal 50. In 2013- 14 cohort-referenced SGPs were used for EOCTs in math, but baseline-referenced SGPs were used for the CRCTs and all non-math EOCTs. Future SGP calculations will only use the cohort-referenced method. See McCaffrey, Castellano and Lockwood (2014). 17 It is possible to compute standard errors for student growth percentiles, but there is no single accepted methodology for doing so and most state accountability systems that utilize student growth percentiles, including Georgia's, do not report standard errors at this time. The GaDOE is still developing its approach for calculating standard errors. For a discussion of standard errors in the student growth model see Doran, Swanlund and Lemke (2012) and American Institutes for Research (2012). 13 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 EOCTs are administered, and two for the five-subject averages for elementary and middle school. Based on value-added, the majority of state charters perform at a level that is not significantly different from the average school in Georgia in three of the 19 specific grade group/subject combinations: Elementary ELA, 9th Grade Literature and Coordinate Algebra. In ten areas, the majority of state charters perform significantly worse than the average school in Georgia: Elementary Math, Elementary Science, Elementary Social Studies, Middle Science, Middle Social Studies, Analytic Geometry, Biology, Economics, Physical Science and U.S. History. Conversely, state charters tend to outperform the average school in Middle School Reading. Results are mixed for state charters in the remaining five grade level/subject areas: Elementary Reading, Middle Math, Middle ELA, High School American Literature and High School Math II. The comparisons with state averages provide an overall picture of state charter school performance. More relevant are comparisons between individual state charter schools and other schools (both traditional public schools and local charters) in the geographic areas they serve. Following the 21 figures mentioned above that combine results for all state charters, Section IV presents individual school summaries as well as graphs comparing each school's results with schools in the district it serves (where applicable). 14 S ch ool F E in S td. D ev. U nits -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Pr ep. - Young M ens C herokee GA Connections Atlanta Heights O d y s se y Pa ta ul a C oweta State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Figure 1: Value-added School Effects and Mean Student Growth Percentiles for Schools Serving Grades 4 and 5 Average Across All Subjects [Statewide] School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 15 90 100 80 70 60 Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Pr ep. - Young M ens Atlanta Heights C herokee O d ys s e y GA Connections Pa ta ula C oweta S ch ool M ean SG P in P ercen tile U nits 50 40 30 20 10 0 S ch ool F E in S td. D ev. U nits -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. - Young Mens Ivy Pr ep. - Kirkwood Atlanta Heights C herokee P at aul a C ow eta Odyssey GA Connections State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Figure 2: Value-added School Effects and Mean Student Growth Percentiles for Schools Serving Grades 4 and 5 Reading [Statewide] School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 16 90 100 80 70 GA Connections S ch olars Atlanta Heights O d y s se y Co we ta ng Mens K irkwood 60 Pa ta ula C her okee - You rep. - S ch ool M ean SG P in P ercen tile U nits 50 Pre p. Ivy P Iv y 40 30 20 10 0 S ch ool F E in S td. D ev. U nits -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Pr ep. - Young M ens C herokee GA Connections P at aul a Atlanta H eights Cow eta O d ys s e y State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Figure 3: Value-added School Effects and Mean Student Growth Percentiles for Schools Serving Grades 4 and 5 English Language Arts [Statewide] School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 17 90 100 80 70 Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Pr ep. - Young M ens C herokee O d y s se y Atlanta Heights C ow eta GA Connections P at aula 60 S ch ool M ean SG P in P ercen tile U nits 50 40 30 20 10 0 S ch ool F E in S td. D ev. U nits -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. - Young Mens GA Connections Odysse y Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Atlanta Heights C herokee Pa ta ul a C oweta State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Figure 4: Value-added School Effects and Mean Student Growth Percentiles for Schools Serving Grades 4 and 5 Math [Statewide] School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 18 90 100 80 70 60 Ivy Prep. - Young Mens GA Connections O d ys s e y Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Atlanta Heights C herokee Pa ta ul a C oweta S ch ool M ean SG P in P ercen tile U nits 50 40 30 20 10 0 S ch ool F E in S td. D ev. U nits -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Pr ep. - Young M ens C herokee Atlanta Heights GA Connections O d y s se y Pa ta ula C oweta State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Figure 5: Value-added School Effects and Mean Student Growth Percentiles for Schools Serving Grades 4 and 5 Science [Statewide] School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 19 90 100 80 70 Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Pr ep. - Young Mens C herokee O d y s se y Atlanta Heights GA Connections Pa ta ul a C oweta 60 S ch ool M ean SG P in P ercen tile U nits 50 40 30 20 10 0 S ch ool F E in S td. D ev. U nits -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Pr ep. - Young M ens GA Connections Atlanta Heights O d ys s e y C he roke e Pa ta ul a C oweta State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Figure 6: Value-added School Effects and Mean Student Growth Percentiles for Schools Serving Grades 4 and 5 Social Studies [Statewide] School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 20 90 100 80 70 Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Pr ep. - Young M ens Atlanta Heights GA Connections C herokee O d y s se y Pa ta ula C oweta 60 S ch ool M ean SG P in P ercen tile U nits 50 40 30 20 10 0 C herokee Fulton Leadership Odyssey Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Atlanta H eights Ivy Prep. Co we ta Me ns oun g Y Ivy Prep. P at au la GA Connections S ch ool F E in S td. D ev. U nits -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 C CAT State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Figure 7: Value-added School Effects and Mean Student Growth Percentiles for Schools Serving Grades 6, 7 and 8 Average Across All Subjects [Statewide] School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 21 90 100 80 70 F ulton Leader ship C herokee Atlanta H eights Co we ta Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood P at au la M en s Ivy Prep. Odys sey Ivy Prep. - Young GA C onnec tions 60 S ch ool M ean SG P in P ercen tile U nits 50 C CAT 40 30 20 10 0 Fulton Leadership s s od M en n tio ec K ir k w o Y ou ng G A Conn C ow eta Iv y Prep. Ivy Pr ep. - O d y s se y Pa ta ula Ivy Prep. Che r o ke e C CAT Atlanta Heights S ch ool F E in S td. D ev. U nits -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Figure 8: Value-added School Effects and Mean Student Growth Percentiles for Schools Serving Grades 6, 7 and 8 Reading [Statewide] School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 22 90 100 Fulton Leadership 80 Me n s GA Connections C ow eta Y oun g - Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood 70 Ivy Prep. O d ys s ey Ivy Prep. Atlanta H eights C herokee P at au la 60 C CA T S ch ool M ean SG P in P ercen tile U nits 50 40 30 20 10 0 hip rs hts L e ade ig n ta He Fu lto A tlan C ow eta IvGyOAdPrCyeospsn.en -yecKtiiroknwso od ns e M un g Yo e Ivy Prep. Che r o ke Ivy Prep. P at au la S ch ool F E in S td. D ev. U nits -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 C CAT State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Figure 9: Value-added School Effects and Mean Student Growth Percentiles for Schools Serving Grades 6, 7 and 8 English Language Arts [Statewide] School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 23 90 100 80 IvAytClhaPernrteoap.kHe-eeiYgohutsng M ens O d y s se y IGv yACPoCroweneptn.ae-c tiK iorkn swo od 70 ip rsh ade 60 e Fulton L P at aul a Ivy Prep. S ch ool M ean SG P in P ercen tile U nits 50 C CA T 40 30 20 10 0 Ivy Prep. - Young Mens p. - Kirkwood ILveya dP re resp.h ip nta H eights ro ke e Ivy Pre F ulton A t la Che O d ys s e y Pa ta ul a ns tio S ch ool F E in S td. D ev. U nits -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 nec GA C on Cow eta C CAT State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Figure 10: Value-Added School Effects and Mean Student Growth Percentiles for Schools Serving Grades 6, 7 and 8 Mathematics [Statewide] School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 24 90 100 80 IvyChPerreopk.e-eYoung Mens 70 ip h 60 Le a ders Pr e p. Fu lton Ivy Cow eta O dyssey IvAyPtlataPranteulap.aH-eiKigrhktsw ood S ch ool M ean SG P in P ercen tile U nits tio ns 50 c GA C onne CC AT 40 30 20 10 0 ig hts Atlanta He Co we ta s C herokee GIFvAuyltCoPornnenLp.eecatidoernssh ip O d y s se y en ir k woo d Young M Ivy Prep. - K Ivy Prep. P at aul a S ch ool F E in S td. D ev. U nits -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 C CAT State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Figure 11: Value-Added School Effects and Mean Student Growth Percentiles for Schools Serving Grades 6, 7 and 8 Science [Statewide] School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 25 90 100 80 Atlanta H eights K irk wo od 70 - Ivy Prep. C ow eta C herokee Ivy FPruPleattpo.anu-lLaYeoaudnergshMiepns 60 ns tio S ch ool M ean SG P in P ercen tile U nits O d ys s e y GA C onnec Ivy Prep. 50 C CAT 40 30 20 10 0 S ch ool F E in S td. D ev. U nits -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy PrGeAp. -CoYnonuenctgioMnesns O d ys s e y C CAT Cow eta Atlanta Heights Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. Pa t aula F ulton Leader ship C herokee State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Figure 12: Value-added School Effects and Mean Student Growth Percentiles for Schools Serving Grades 6, 7 and 8 Social Studies [Statewide] School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 26 90 100 80 Ivy Prep. C ow eta Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Pa t aul a Atlanta H eights F ulton Leader ship C herokee 70 60 S ch ool M ean SG P in P ercen tile U nits C CAT Ivy PreGp.A-CYoonunnegctiMoennss O d ys s e y 50 40 30 20 10 0 School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Provost Ivy Prep. Mountain Ed. Cherokee CCAT GA Connections Odyssey Fulton Leadership Pataula State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Figure 13: Value-added School Effects and Mean Student Growth Percentiles for Schools Serving Grades 9 through 12 9th Grade Literature [Statewide] School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 27 90 100 Mountain Ed. Provost Ivy Prep. Cherokee CCAT GA Connections Odyssey Fulton Leadership Pataula 80 70 60 50 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 40 30 20 10 0 GA Connections Odyssey School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Mountain Ed. Provost State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Figure 14: Value-added School Effects and Mean Student Growth Percentiles for Schools Serving Grades 9 through 12 American Literature [Statewide] School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 28 90 100 80 70 GA Connections Odyssey 60 Mountain Ed. 50 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units Provost 40 30 20 10 0 Pataula School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Provost CCAT Odyssey GA Connections State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Figure 15: Value-added School Effects and Mean Student Growth Percentiles for Schools Serving Grades 9 through 12 Analytic Geometry [Statewide] School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 29 90 100 Pataula 80 70 60 Odyssey GA Connections CCAT 50 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 40 Provost 30 20 10 0 School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Provost Mountain Ed. Odyssey GA Connections Cherokee Pataula Fulton Leadership State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Figure 16: Value-added School Effects and Mean Student Growth Percentiles for Schools Serving Grades 9 through 12 Coordinate Algebra [Statewide] School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 30 90 100 80 Provost Odyssey Mountain Ed. GA Connections Fulton Leadership Pataula Cherokee 70 60 50 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 40 30 20 10 0 Mountain Ed. School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Provost State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Figure 17: Value-added School Effects and Mean Student Growth Percentiles for Schools Serving Grades 9 through 12 Mathematics II [Statewide] School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 31 90 100 80 Mountain Ed. 70 60 50 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units Provost 40 30 20 10 0 School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Odyssey Provost CCAT GA Connections Cherokee Mountain Ed. State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Figure 18: Value-added School Effects and Mean Student Growth Percentiles for Schools Serving Grades 9 through 12 Biology [Statewide] School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 32 90 100 80 70 Cherokee GA Connections Mountain Ed. CCAT 60 50 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units Provost Odyssey 40 30 20 10 0 Pataula Provost CCAT Odyssey GA Connections Fulton Leadership Mountain Ed. School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Figure 19: Value-added School Effects and Mean Student Growth Percentiles for Schools Serving Grades 9 through 12 Physical Science [Statewide] School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 33 90 100 80 CCAT Provost GA Connections Odyssey Fulton Leadership Mountain Ed. Pataula 70 60 50 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 40 30 20 10 0 School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Provost GA Connections Odyssey Mountain Ed. State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Figure 20: Value-added School Effects and Mean Student Growth Percentiles for Schools Serving Grades 9 through 12 Economics [Statewide] School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 34 90 100 80 Mountain Ed. 70 60 GA Connections Odyssey 50 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units Provost 40 30 20 10 0 School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 GA Connections CCAT Provost Odyssey Mountain Ed. State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Figure 21: Value-added School Effects and Mean Student Growth Percentiles for Schools Serving Grades 9 through 12 U.S. History [Statewide] School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 35 90 100 80 70 60 Provost Odyssey Mountain Ed. 50 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 40 CCAT GA Connections 30 20 10 0 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 IV. Results Individual School Summaries The following tables summarize both state and district comparisons of performance for each state charter school. Two estimates of school performance are reported, one based on the value-added model and the other derived from the student growth models. The value-added model includes all available student characteristics (plus prior-year test scores) as controls. Results from two other value-added models, one excluding student race/ethnicity and the other including only lagged test scores, are presented in the Technical Appendix. The student growth model yields individual student growth percentiles which are then averaged across students in a school to produce a mean student growth percentile measure of school performance. For both the value-added and student-growth percentile measures, a state percentile and a district rank are presented. The state percentile represents the proportion of schools in the state with a lower school effect. Thus, for example, a state percentile of 60 means that 60 percent of schools in the relevant grade group rank below the school. District ranks represent the position of a school relative to other schools in the same district offering the same grade group. For example a ranking of "25 out of 40" indicates that 24 schools from the relevant district have higher scores and 15 have lower scores. For state charters serving students from a single school district or county, it is possible to compare their performance to traditional public schools and locally approved charters in the same area. For nearly all state charter students, the relevant public school option is a school in the same district as the district served by their current school. Put differently, a within-district comparison shows how students would likely fare if a state charter were to close. Five of the 15 state charter schools serve students from multiple counties or the entire state. Thus, the following analyses only cover the remaining 10 single-district/county state schools. Of these 10 schools, some do not currently serve all high school grades or have fewer than 15 test takers on some of the EOCT exams. Consequently, the within-district comparisons at the high school level are limited. For both the value-added and student-growth metrics a comparison between a school's 2013/14 and 2012/13 performance is provided. Estimates for both years are based on the model used in 2013/14, and thus the performance estimates for 2012/13 reported here differ from those in the 2012/13 State Charter Schools Performance Report.18 Each school summary report is structured as follows: Key Findings General Characteristics School Demographics Value-Added and SGP Results Summary by Grade Level and Subject Comparison of Summary Results from 2013/14 and 2012/13 Comparison of School Impact Proficiency Level 18 The value-added model used in the 2012/13 report did not include a control for a student's age relative to the age of their grade-level peers. Also, the mean student growth percentiles in the 2012/13 report are schoolwide averages that include all students in a school for which a student growth percentile was calculated. The student growth percentiles averages for 2012/13 reported here include only those students that are included in the value-added model and are limited to the same grade range as reported for the value-added estimates (i.e. elementary, middle and high). 36 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Atlanta Heights Charter School Key Findings The value-added estimate of the school's impact on a student's average achievement across all subjects is -0.1152 in elementary grades and -0.0143 in middle grades, meaning that Atlanta Heights Charter School is below the state average in elementary grades and not significantly different than the state average in middle grades. In general, Atlanta Heights Charter School is strong in middle school ELA and science, but its performance in elementary math and reading is weak relative to both the district and the state. Atlanta Heights Charter School's 2013/14 performance in elementary and middle grades is generally comparable to performance in 2012/13. Performance in middle school social studies in 2013/14 is improved relative to performance in 2012/13. The school's contribution to student achievement is: o above the district and state average in middle school ELA and above the district average in middle school science o below the district and state average in reading and math in elementary grades and below the state average in elementary science and middle school social studies. o indistinguishable from the district and state average in ELA and social studies in elementary grades and in reading and math in middle grades. General Characteristics School Name Atlanta Heights Calendar Year Opened 2010 EMO Affiliation National Heritage Academies Grades K-8 Curriculum Focus None School Year Single- Gender School Normal No Virtual/ Online School No Serves Multiple Counties No Parental Involvement Requirement Not Specified Enrollment Restrictions APS District Enrollment Zone School Demographics School Name Atlanta Heights Charter School Pct. Female Pct. White Pct. Pct. Pct. Other Pct. Black Hispanic FRL 49.2 0.7 94.2 0.4 4.7 92.6 Pct. Pct. SWD LEP 1.8 9.1 Pct. Gifted 0.0 Atlanta Heights Charter School 37 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Value-Added and SGP Results Summary by Grade Level and Subject Overall School Effect: -0.1152 Elementary / -0.0143 Middle Overall District Effect: -0.0446 Elementary / -0.0331 Middle Atlanta Heights's contribution to an elementary student's average achievement across all five CRCT-tested subjects is less than that of the average elementary school in the state and district, and its contribution to a middle school student's cross-subject average achievement is not statistically different from the average middle school in the state and district. It is important to note that averaging achievement scores across subjects masks any variation in school performance between subject areas. As a result, the table below includes the school's effect on student achievement in each subject area. Grade Level and Subject Elementary Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average Middle Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect State Percentile (higher is better) Statistically Different From State Average? District Rank (lower is better) Statistically Different From District Average? -0.1293 0.0227 -0.1838 -0.1083 -0.1692 -0.1152 11 Lower 58 No 14 Lower 21 Lower 18 No 14 Lower 45 of 57 Lower 16 of 57 No 43 of 57 Lower 33 of 57 No 39 of 57 No 36 of 57 Lower -0.0582 0.1470 -0.0462 0.0409 -0.1613 -0.0143 25 No 96 Higher 36 No 65 No 17 Lower 44 No 17 of 26 No 3 of 26 Higher 18 of 26 No 6 of 27 Higher 18 of 27 No 13 of 27 No Note: statistical significance based on a 95 percent confidence level. Student Growth Percentiles School Mean of Individual SGPs State Percentile (higher is better) District Rank (lower is better) 47 17 40 of 57 46 43 31 of 57 34 10 48 of 57 45 19 37 of 57 37 13 43 of 57 42 10 44 of 57 51 17 21 of 26 50 69 8 of 26 40 18 22 of 26 51 57 10 of 27 53 70 8 of 27 49 40 15 of 27 Atlanta Heights Charter School 38 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Comparison of 2013/14 and 2012/13 Value-Added and SGP Summary Results Atlanta Height's performance in elementary and middle grades in 2013/14 is generally on par with its performance in 2012/13. The all-subject elementary school average value added has changed little, moving from -0.106 in 2012/13 to -0.115 in 2013/14. In 2012/13 the all-subject average value-added for middle grades was -0.0678 whereas in 2013/14 it was -0.0143. Performance in middle school social studies in 2013/14 was substantially higher than in 2012/13. Grade Level and Subject Elementary Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average Middle Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect 2012/13 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? School Effect 2013/14 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? -0.0634 0.0050 -0.1719 -0.0884 -0.2057 -0.1056 39 of 58 20 of 58 49 of 58 44 of 58 47 of 58 46 of 58 No No Lower No Lower Lower -0.1293 0.0227 -0.1838 -0.1083 -0.1692 -0.1152 45 of 57 Lower 16 of 57 No 43 of 57 Lower 33 of 57 No 39 of 57 No 36 of 57 Lower 0.0098 0.0094 -0.1668 0.1443 -0.3561 -0.0678 10 of 27 15 of 27 26 of 27 5 of 27 26 of 27 20 of 27 No No Lower Higher Lower No -0.0582 0.1470 -0.0462 0.0409 -0.1613 -0.0143 17 of 26 No 3 of 26 Higher 18 of 26 No 6 of 27 Higher 18 of 27 No 13 of 27 No Note: statistical significance based on a 95 percent confidence level. Student Growth Percentiles 2012/13 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 2013/14 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 44 48 of 58 43 22 of 58 38 53 of 58 43 47 of 58 41 37 of 58 42 48 of 58 53 16 of 27 46 15 of 27 37 26 of 27 58 5 of 27 33 23 of 27 45 20 of 27 47 40 of 57 46 31 of 57 34 48 of 57 45 37 of 57 37 43 of 57 42 44 of 57 51 21 of 26 50 8 of 26 40 22 of 26 51 10 of 27 53 8 of 27 49 15 of 27 Atlanta Heights Charter School 39 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Comparison of School Impact Subject Area: All-Subject Elementary Average State Charter: Atlanta Heights Comparison District: Atlanta Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Atlanta Heights State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Atlanta Heights 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Atlanta Heights Charter School 40 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: All-Subject Middle Average State Charter: Atlanta Heights Comparison District: Atlanta Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) A t lan ta H eig ht s S ch ool F E in S td. D ev. U nits -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) A tlan ta Heig hts 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 S ch ool M ean SG P in P ercen tile U nits 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Atlanta Heights Charter School 41 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary Reading State Charter: Atlanta Heights Comparison District: Atlanta Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Atlanta Heights State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Atlanta Heights 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Atlanta Heights Charter School 42 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary ELA State Charter: Atlanta Heights Comparison District: Atlanta Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Atlanta Heights School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Atlanta Heights 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Atlanta Heights Charter School 43 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary Mathematics State Charter: Atlanta Heights Comparison District: Atlanta Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Atlanta Heights State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Atlanta Heights School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Atlanta Heights Charter School 44 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary Science State Charter: Atlanta Heights Comparison District: Atlanta Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Atlanta Heights School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Atlanta Heights 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Atlanta Heights Charter School 45 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary Social Studies State Charter: Atlanta Heights Comparison District: Atlanta Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Atlanta Heights State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Atlanta Heights 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Atlanta Heights Charter School 46 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Reading State Charter: Atlanta Heights Comparison District: Atlanta Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) S ch ool F E in S td. D ev. U nits -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 At lan t a H eig h ts State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) At lant a H eigh ts 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 S ch ool M ean SG P in P ercen tile U nits 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Atlanta Heights Charter School 47 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle ELA State Charter: Atlanta Heights Comparison District: Atlanta Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) A tlan ta He ig hts S ch ool F E in S td. D ev. U nits -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) At lan ta H eig h ts 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 S ch ool M ean SG P in P ercen tile U nits 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Atlanta Heights Charter School 48 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Math State Charter: Atlanta Heights Comparison District: Atlanta Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) S ch ool F E in S td. D ev. U nits -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 At lan t a H eigh ts State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) At lant a H eigh ts 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 S ch ool M ean SG P in P ercen tile U nits 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Atlanta Heights Charter School 49 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Science State Charter: Atlanta Heights Comparison District: Atlanta Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) A tlan ta H eig hts S c h o o l F E in S td . D e v . U n i ts -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) A tlan ta H eig hts 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 S c h o o l M e a n S G P i n P e r c e n t il e U n it s 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Atlanta Heights Charter School 50 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Social Studies State Charter: Atlanta Heights Comparison District: Atlanta Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Atlant a Heigh ts S ch ool F E in S td. D ev. U nits -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) A tlan ta H eig hts 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 S ch ool M ean SG P in P ercen tile U nits 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Atlanta Heights Charter School 51 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Proficiency Levels System Name Grade 3 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average Grade 4 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average Grade 5 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average Grade 6 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average CRCT Reading N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 76 13.2 59.2 27.6 86.8 4,202 14.9 46.2 38.9 85.1 126,745 7.7 46.5 45.9 92.3 79 8.9 62.0 29.1 91.1 3,893 11.9 44.3 43.8 88.1 124,872 6.4 41.3 52.3 93.6 66 12.1 74.2 13.6 87.9 3,817 9.2 56.5 34.3 90.8 123,653 5.2 53.1 41.7 94.8 60 3,466 124,746 0.0 85.0 15.0 100.0 5.4 55.7 38.9 94.6 2.8 47.6 49.6 97.2 58 10.3 69.0 20.7 89.7 3,347 8.8 58.2 32.9 91.2 127,269 5.3 53.0 41.7 94.7 45 3,259 126,232 4.4 68.9 26.7 95.6 4.7 53.7 41.6 95.3 3.0 43.7 53.2 97.0 Atlanta Heights Charter School 52 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 System Name Grade 3 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average Grade 4 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average Grade 5 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average Grade 6 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average N Tested CRCT ELA % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 76 26.3 59.2 14.5 73.7 4,201 21.6 51.1 27.4 78.4 127,032 11.5 56.1 32.3 88.5 79 11.4 73.4 15.2 88.6 3,893 20.0 49.9 30.1 80.0 124,719 11.3 54.0 34.8 88.7 66 3,818 123,571 3.0 83.3 13.6 97.0 9.9 58.2 31.9 90.1 5.3 55.6 39.2 94.7 60 10.0 73.3 16.7 90.0 3,462 13.4 61.7 25.0 86.6 124,615 8.2 59.6 32.2 91.8 58 3,343 126,992 8.6 60.3 31.0 91.4 9.8 52.0 38.3 90.2 6.1 46.6 47.3 93.9 45 15.6 57.8 26.7 84.4 3,253 8.1 58.6 33.3 91.9 126,011 5.5 50.3 44.3 94.5 Atlanta Heights Charter School 53 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 System Name Grade 3 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average Grade 4 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average Grade 5 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average Grade 6 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average CRCT MATHEMATICS N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 76 44.7 36.8 18.4 55.3 4,217 31.3 35.7 33.1 68.7 127,519 19.3 36.7 44.0 80.7 79 34.2 54.4 11.4 65.8 3,895 30.1 39.5 30.3 69.9 124,706 18.3 42.6 39.0 81.7 66 42.4 51.5 6.1 57.6 3,796 22.0 43.9 34.1 78.0 123,006 12.3 43.8 43.8 87.7 60 30.0 65.0 5.0 70.0 3,446 25.6 54.8 19.6 74.4 124,070 15.9 55.8 28.3 84.1 58 34.5 48.3 17.2 65.5 3,335 22.6 51.7 25.7 77.4 126,420 12.4 50.2 37.4 87.6 45 48.9 40.0 11.1 51.1 3,224 30.0 46.2 23.8 70.0 125,259 18.5 47.5 34.1 81.5 Atlanta Heights Charter School 54 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 System Name Grade 3 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average Grade 4 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average Grade 5 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average Grade 6 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average N Tested CRCT SCIENCE % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 76 38.2 40.8 21.1 61.8 4,285 37.4 34.3 28.4 62.6 129,662 22.9 41.1 35.9 77.1 80 37.5 38.8 23.8 62.5 4,007 34.0 32.9 33.0 66.0 127,657 19.1 38.0 42.9 80.9 66 37.9 51.5 10.6 62.1 3,954 31.1 37.4 31.5 68.9 127,252 18.1 39.8 42.1 81.9 60 46.7 51.7 1.7 53.3 3,578 41.1 43.8 15.1 58.9 127,590 24.9 52.4 22.7 75.1 59 30.5 49.2 20.3 69.5 3,442 26.2 41.8 32.0 73.8 129,848 15.8 38.0 46.2 84.2 45 42.2 48.9 8.9 57.8 3,377 34.8 50.4 14.9 65.2 128,936 22.1 52.9 25.0 77.9 Atlanta Heights Charter School 55 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 System Name Grade 3 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average Grade 4 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average Grade 5 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average Grade 6 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Atlanta Heights District Average Statewide Average CRCT SOCIAL STUDIES N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 76 19.7 44.7 35.5 80.3 4,271 26.0 43.3 30.7 74.0 129,137 16.3 47.7 35.9 83.7 80 30.0 63.8 6.3 70.0 3,986 31.9 41.7 26.3 68.1 127,178 18.8 51.1 30 81.2 66 45.5 53 1.5 54.5 3,942 30.1 44.5 25.4 69.9 126,802 19.3 53.8 26.9 80.7 61 55.7 36.1 8.2 44.3 3,560 31.2 35.5 33.2 68.8 127,200 20.2 35.1 44.8 79.8 59 45.8 37.3 16.9 54.2 3,432 27.9 35.6 36.5 72.1 129,400 16.5 30.5 53.0 83.5 45 40.0 53.3 6.7 60.0 3,374 31.4 44.7 23.9 68.6 128,365 19.4 44.4 36.2 80.6 Atlanta Heights Charter School 56 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology (CCAT) Key Findings The value-added estimate of the school's impact on a student's average achievement across all subjects is -0.1966 in middle grades, meaning that in the middle grades the performance of Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology is significantly below the state average of middle schools. The value-added estimates in Analytic Geometry, Physical Science and U.S. History are also below the state and district averages. In general, the Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology is weak in all subjects except for reading at the middle school level and is also weak in Analytic Geometry, Physical Science and U.S. History at the high school level, relative to both the state and the district. Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology's performance in middle grades in 2013/14 is generally lower than in 2012/13; its performance in high school is roughly comparable to its performance in 2012/13. The school's contribution to student achievement is: o below the state and district averages in middle school math, science and social studies and in Analytic Geometry, Physical Science and U.S. History. o indistinguishable from the district and state average in middle school reading and in 9th Grade Literature and Biology. General Characteristics School Name Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology (CCAT) Calendar Year Opened 2002 EMO Affiliation No Grades Curriculum Focus School Year Multi-age classrooms 6-12 - students grouped Year-round by skill level Single- Gender School No Virtual/ Online School No Serves Multiple Counties No Parental Involvement Requirement Enrollment Restrictions 1 Hour of Service/week Bulloch County Public Schools Zone 57 Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology (CCAT) State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Students Served School Name CCAT School Pct. Female Pct. White Pct. Pct. Pct. Other Pct. Pct. Pct. SWD Pct. Black Hispanic FRL LEP Gifted 43.5 81.2 14.3 1.9 1.9 0.0 0.0 13.0 5.8 Value-Added and SGP Results Summary by Grade Level and Subject Overall School Effect: -0.1966 Middle Overall District Effect: -0.0331 Middle Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology's contribution to a middle school student's cross-subject average achievement is lower than the average middle school in the state or district. It is important to note that averaging achievement scores across subjects masks any variation in school performance between subject areas. As a result, the table below includes the school's effect on student achievement in each subject area. In all three of the five measured subjects, CCAT's contribution to a high school student's achievement is lower than both the average high school in the district and the average high school in the state. 58 Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology (CCAT) State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Grade Level and Subject Middle Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect State Percentile (higher is better) Statistically Different From State Average? District Rank (lower is better) Statistically Different From District Average? 0.0315 -0.1982 -0.2933 -0.2847 -0.2441 -0.1966 66 No 1 Lower 1 Lower 2 Lower 8 Lower 2 Lower 1 of 5 No 5 of 5 No 5 of 5 Lower 5 of 5 Lower 5 of 5 Lower 5 of 5 Lower 9th Grade Literature American Literature Analytic Geometry Biology Coordinate Algebra Economics Math II Physical Science U.S. History 0.0781 -0.3250 -0.0988 -0.3788 -0.4934 75 No 3 Lower 31 No 3 Lower 3 Lower 2 of 4 No 4 of 4 Lower 2 of 4 No 4 of 4 Lower 4 of 4 Lower Note: statistical significance based on a 95 percent confidence level. Student Growth Percentiles School Mean of Individual SGPs State Percentile (higher is better) District Rank (lower is better) 50 11 4 of 5 41 6 5 of 5 37 9 5 of 5 34 4 5 of 5 38 10 5 of 5 39 3 5 of 5 54 73 2 of 4 38 9 4 of 4 56 83 1 of 4 25 1 4 of 4 23 4 4 of 4 59 Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology (CCAT) State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Comparison of 2013/14 and 2012/13 Value-Added and SGP Summary Results Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology's performance in 2013/14 is generally lower in the middle grades relative to its performance in 2012/13. The all-subjects average contribution to achievement of middle school students was -0.1966 in 2013/14 compared to 0.0368 in 2012/13. In high school, results were mixed, with improvement in the school's contribution to student achievement in 9th Grade Literature and little change in the contribution to student achievement in Physical Science. Grade Level and Subject Middle Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average High 9th Grade Literature American Literature Analytic Geometry Biology Coordinate Algebra Economics Math II Physical Science U.S. History Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect 2012/13 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? School Effect 2013/14 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? 0.3976 0.0044 -0.1289 0.0244 -0.1271 0.0368 1 of 5 4 of 5 5 of 5 4 of 5 4 of 5 4 of 5 Higher No Lower No No No 0.0315 -0.1982 -0.2933 -0.2847 -0.2441 -0.1966 1 of 5 No 5 of 5 No 5 of 5 Lower 5 of 5 Lower 5 of 5 Lower 5 of 5 Lower -0.0193 0.1228 3 of 4 No 1 of 4 No -0.1950 0.0602 4 of 4 No 2 of 4 No 0.0781 -0.3250 -0.0988 2 of 4 No 4 of 4 Lower 2 of 4 No -0.3156 4 of 4 No -0.3788 -0.4934 4 of 4 Lower 4 of 4 Lower Note: statistical significance based on a 95 percent confidence level. Student Growth Percentiles 2012/13 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 2013/14 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 65 1 of 5 47 4 of 5 50 5 of 5 47 5 of 5 43 5 of 5 50 5 of 5 49 3 of 4 45 1 of 4 39 4 of 4 66 1 of 4 38 4 of 4 50 4 of 5 41 5 of 5 37 5 of 5 34 5 of 5 38 5 of 5 39 5 of 5 54 2 of 4 38 4 of 4 56 1 of 4 25 4 of 4 23 4 of 4 60 Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology (CCAT) State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Comparison of School Impact Subject Area: All-Subject Middle Average State Charter: Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology (CCAT) Comparison District: Bulloch County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 CCAT State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 CCAT School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional 61 Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology (CCAT) State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Reading State Charter: Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology (CCAT) Comparison District: Bulloch County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) CCAT School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) CCAT 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional 62 Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology (CCAT) State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle ELA State Charter: Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology (CCAT) Comparison District: Bulloch County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 CCAT State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 CCAT School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional 63 Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology (CCAT) State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Mathematics State Charter: Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology (CCAT) Comparison District: Bulloch County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 CCAT 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) CCAT State Charters Local Charters Traditional 64 Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology (CCAT) 0 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Science State Charter: Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology (CCAT) Comparison District: Bulloch County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 CCAT State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units CCAT 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional 65 Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology (CCAT) State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Social Studies State Charter: Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology (CCAT) Comparison District: Bulloch County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 CCAT State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 CCAT School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional 66 Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology (CCAT) State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: 9th Grade Literature State Charter: Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology (CCAT) Comparison District: Bulloch County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) CCAT School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) CCAT 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional 67 Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology (CCAT) State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Proficiency Levels System Name Grade 6 CCAT School District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 CCAT School District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 CCAT School District Average Statewide Average System Name Grade 6 CCAT School District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 CCAT School District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 CCAT School District Average Statewide Average CRCT Reading N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 23 706 124,746 0.0 43.5 56.5 100.0 3.1 47.2 49.7 96.9 2.8 47.6 49.6 97.2 19 692 127,269 5.3 57.9 36.8 94.7 6.1 57.5 36.4 93.9 5.3 53 41.7 94.7 25 638 126,232 0.0 56 44 100.0 2.2 47.2 50.6 97.8 3.0 43.7 53.2 97.0 CRCT ELA N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 23 17.4 60.9 21.7 82.6 708 8.1 63.1 28.8 91.9 124,615 8.2 59.6 32.2 91.8 19 15.8 52.6 31.6 84.2 704 6.3 48.9 44.9 93.8 126,992 6.1 46.6 47.3 93.9 25 630 126,011 0.0 72.0 28.0 100.0 4.8 52.2 43.0 95.2 5.5 50.3 44.3 94.5 68 Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology (CCAT) State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 System Name Grade 6 CCAT School District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 CCAT School District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 CCAT School District Average Statewide Average System Name Grade 6 CCAT School District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 CCAT School District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 CCAT School District Average Statewide Average CRCT MATHEMATICS N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 22 27.3 54.5 18.2 72.7 703 12.4 58.2 29.4 87.6 124,070 15.9 55.8 28.3 84.1 19 10.5 73.7 15.8 89.5 704 11.5 52.8 35.7 88.5 126,420 12.4 50.2 37.4 87.6 25 24.0 68.0 8.0 76.0 627 11.8 48.8 39.4 88.2 125,259 18.5 47.5 34.1 81.5 CRCT SCIENCE N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 24 33.3 54.2 12.5 66.7 736 25.1 55.3 19.6 74.9 127,590 24.9 52.4 22.7 75.1 20 25.0 60.0 15.0 75.0 716 13.1 40.5 46.4 86.9 129,848 15.8 38.0 46.2 84.2 26 30.8 61.5 7.7 69.2 660 20.3 59.7 20.0 79.7 128,936 22.1 52.9 25.0 77.9 69 Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology (CCAT) State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 System Name Grade 6 CCAT School District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 CCAT School District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 CCAT School District Average Statewide Average CRCT SOCIAL STUDIES N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 24 41.7 33.3 25.0 58.3 733 20.2 38.5 41.3 79.8 127,200 20.2 35.1 44.8 79.8 20 25.0 60.0 15.0 75.0 713 16.1 36.5 47.4 83.9 129,400 16.5 30.5 53.0 83.5 26 23.1 65.4 11.5 76.9 657 14.6 47.0 38.4 85.4 128,365 19.4 44.4 36.2 80.6 70 Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology (CCAT) State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 System Name 9TH Grade Literature CCAT School District Average Statewide Average American Literature CCAT School District Average Statewide Average Analytic Geometry CCAT School District Average Statewide Average Biology CCAT School District Average Statewide Average US History CCAT School District Average Statewide Average Economics CCAT School District Average Statewide Average END OF COURSE TEST N Tested % Did Not Meet the standard % Met the standard % Exceeded the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 21 4.8 57.1 38.1 95.2 446 12.1 47.5 40.4 87.9 112,505 12.3 45.1 42.6 87.7 9 246 93,689 -- 10.6 7.5 -- 69.5 50.7 -- 19.9 41.9 -- 89.4 92.6 17 82.4 17.6 0.0 17.6 366 68.6 26.2 5.2 31.4 97,659 65.4 28.9 5.7 34.6 14 14.3 78.6 7.1 85.7 224 17.0 43.3 39.7 83.0 109,030 25.0 41.1 33.9 75.0 26 53.8 34.6 11.5 46.1 369 29.3 37.7 33.1 70.8 93,645 27.2 32.6 40.2 72.8 14 50.0 35.7 14.3 50.0 297 22.6 45.5 32.0 77.5 59,564 18.8 39.1 42.1 81.2 71 Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology (CCAT) State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Cherokee Charter Academy Key Findings The value-added estimate of the school's impact on a student's average achievement across all subjects is -0.1228 in elementary grades and 0.0727 in middle grades, meaning that Cherokee Charter Academy is below the state average in elementary grades and above the state average in middle grades. The school's contribution to student achievement in 9th Grade Literature, Biology and Coordinate Algebra are all not significantly different from district and state averages. In general, Cherokee Charter Academy's performance is strong in middle school social studies, but its performance in elementary school math and science is weak relative to both the district and the state. Cherokee Charter Academy's performance in 2013/14 is generally better than in 2012/13 in the middle grades and generally weaker in the elementary grades in 2013/14 compared to 2012/13. The school's contribution to student achievement is: o above the district and state average in middle school social studies, above the state average in middle school ELA, and above the district average in middle school science. o below the state and district averages in math and science in elementary grades, below the state average in elementary reading and ELA, and below the district average in math in the middle grades. o indistinguishable from the district and state averages in elementary social studies, middle school reading, 9th Grade Literature, Biology, and Coordinate Algebra. General Characteristics School Name Cherokee Charter Academy Calendar Year Opened 2011 EMO Affiliation Charter Schools USA Grades K-9 Curriculum Focus None School Year Single- Gender School Normal No Virtual/ Online School No Serves Multiple Counties No Parental Involvement Requirement Not Specified Enrollment Restrictions Cherokee County Public Schools Zone 72 Cherokee Charter Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Students Served School Name Cherokee Charter Academy Pct. Female Pct. White Pct. Pct. Pct. Other Pct. Black Hispanic FRL 49.2 79.9 9.8 3.1 4.1 15.7 Pct. Pct. SWD LEP 1.2 11.0 Pct. Gifted 11.6 Value-Added and SGP Results Summary by Grade Level and Subject Overall School Effect: -0.1228 Elementary /0.0727 Middle Overall District Effect: -0.0561 Elementary / 0.0137 Middle Cherokee Charter Academy's contribution to an elementary student's average achievement across all five CRCT-tested subjects is lower than that of the average elementary school in the state and district, and its contribution to a middle school student's cross-subject average achievement is higher than that of the average middle school in the state and district. It is important to note that averaging achievement scores across subjects masks any variation in school performance between subject areas. As a result, the table below includes the school's effect on student achievement in each subject area. Grade Level and Subject Elementary Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect State Percentile (higher is better) Statistically Different From State Average? District Rank (lower is better) Statistically Different From District Average? -0.0924 -0.0999 -0.1660 -0.1501 -0.0971 -0.1228 18 Lower 16 Lower 16 Lower 14 Lower 31 No 12 Lower 21 of 25 No 16 of 25 No 22 of 25 Lower 19 of 25 Lower 14 of 25 No 19 of 25 Lower Student Growth Percentiles School Mean of Individual SGPs State Percentile (higher is better) District Rank (lower is better) 46 16 11 of 25 42 15 13 of 25 43 33 20 of 25 43 12 20 of 25 42 26 19 of 25 43 15 19 of 25 73 Cherokee Charter Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Grade Level and Subject Middle Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average High 9th Grade Literature American Literature Analytic Geometry Biology Coordinate Algebra Economics Math II Physical Science U.S. History Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect State Percentile (higher is better) Statistically Different From State Average? District Rank (lower is better) Statistically Different From District Average? 0.0292 0.0640 -0.0453 0.0387 0.2596 0.0727 64 No 81 Higher 37 No 65 No 93 Higher 81 Higher 12 of 18 No 8 of 18 No 14 of 18 Lower 7 of 18 Higher 4 of 18 Higher 4 of 18 Higher 0.0544 69 No 4 of 7 No -0.0740 0.0579 36 No 69 No 7 of 7 No 4 of 7 No Note: statistical significance based on a 95 percent confidence level. Student Growth Percentiles School Mean of Individual SGPs State Percentile (higher is better) District Rank (lower is better) 54 39 13 of 18 51 75 3 of 18 51 70 14 of 18 50 52 8 of 18 57 87 4 of 18 53 75 6 of 18 53 68 1 of 7 36 20 7 of 7 68 96 1 of 7 Comparison of 2013/14 and 2012/13 Value-Added and SGP Summary Results Cherokee Charter Academy's performance in 2013/14 is generally weaker in the elementary grades relative to 2012/13. In 2013/14 the school's cross-subject contribution to student achievement in the elementary grades was -0.1228 whereas in 2012/13 it was 0.0554. In contrast, Cherokee Charter Academy's performance in the middle grades in 2013/14 was generally better than in 2012/13. In 2013/14 Cherokee Charter Academy's cross-subject average contribution to student achievement in middle grades was 0.0727, whereas in 2012/13 it was -0.0943. Cherokee Charter Academy did not serve any high school grades in 2012/13, and therefore it is not possible to make any year-to-year comparisons at the high school level. 74 Cherokee Charter Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Grade Level and Subject Elementary Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average Middle Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average High 9th Grade Literature American Literature Analytic Geometry Biology Coordinate Algebra Economics Math II Physical Science U.S. History Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect 2012/13 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? School Effect 2013/14 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? 0.0685 0.0235 -0.1179 0.0472 0.2112 0.0554 9 of 26 10 of 26 20 of 26 4 of 26 2 of 26 6 of 26 No No No Higher Higher Higher -0.0924 -0.0999 -0.1660 -0.1501 -0.0971 -0.1228 21 of 25 No 16 of 25 No 22 of 25 Lower 19 of 25 Lower 14 of 25 No 19 of 25 Lower -0.0589 -0.0381 -0.2599 -0.1713 0.0486 -0.0943 18 of 19 17 of 19 19 of 19 17 of 19 3 of 19 16 of 19 Lower Lower Lower Lower Higher Lower 0.0292 0.0640 -0.0453 0.0387 0.2596 0.0727 12 of 18 No 8 of 18 No 14 of 18 Lower 7 of 18 Higher 4 of 18 Higher 4 of 18 Higher 0.0544 4 of 7 No -0.0740 0.0579 7 of 7 No 4 of 7 No Note: statistical significance based on a 95 percent confidence level. Student Growth Percentiles 2012/13 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 2013/14 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 54 11 of 26 48 11 of 26 47 18 of 26 50 12 of 26 59 3 of 26 52 8 of 26 55 16 of 19 52 10 of 19 48 18 of 19 42 14 of 19 50 3 of 19 49 14 of 19 46 11 of 25 42 13 of 25 43 20 of 25 43 20 of 25 42 19 of 25 43 19 of 25 54 13 of 18 51 3 of 18 51 14 of 18 50 8 of 18 57 4 of 18 53 6 of 18 53 1 of 7 36 7 of 7 68 1 of 7 75 Cherokee Charter Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Comparison of School Impact Subject Area: All-Subject Elementary Average State Charter: Cherokee Charter Academy Comparison District: Cherokee County Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Cherokee School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Cherokee 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional 76 Cherokee Charter Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: All-Subject Middle Average State Charter: Cherokee Charter Academy Comparison District: Cherokee County Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Cherokee School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Cherokee 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional 77 Cherokee Charter Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary Reading State Charter: Cherokee Charter Academy Comparison District: Cherokee County Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Cherokee State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Cherokee 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional 78 Cherokee Charter Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary ELA State Charter: Cherokee Charter Academy Comparison District: Cherokee County Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Cherokee School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Cherokee 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional 79 Cherokee Charter Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary Mathematics State Charter: Cherokee Charter Academy Comparison District: Cherokee County Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Cherokee State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Cherokee 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional 80 Cherokee Charter Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary Science State Charter: Cherokee Charter Academy Comparison District: Cherokee County Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Cherokee State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Cherokee 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional 81 Cherokee Charter Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary Social Studies State Charter: Cherokee Charter Academy Comparison District: Cherokee County Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Cherokee School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Cherokee 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional 82 Cherokee Charter Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Reading State Charter: Cherokee Charter Academy Comparison District: Cherokee County Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Cherokee School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Cherokee 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional 83 Cherokee Charter Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle ELA State Charter: Cherokee Charter Academy Comparison District: Cherokee County Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Cherokee School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Cherokee 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional 84 Cherokee Charter Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Mathematics State Charter: Cherokee Charter Academy Comparison District: Cherokee County Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Cherokee State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Cherokee 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional 85 Cherokee Charter Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Science State Charter: Cherokee Charter Academy Comparison District: Cherokee County Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Cherokee School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Cherokee 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional 86 Cherokee Charter Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Social Studies State Charter: Cherokee Charter Academy Comparison District: Cherokee County Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Cherokee School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Cherokee 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional 87 Cherokee Charter Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: 9th Grade Literature State Charter: Cherokee Charter Academy Comparison District: Cherokee County Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Cherokee School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Cherokee 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional 88 Cherokee Charter Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Biology State Charter: Cherokee Charter Academy Comparison District: Cherokee County Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Cherokee State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Cherokee School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional 89 Cherokee Charter Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Coordinate Algebra State Charter: Cherokee Charter Academy Comparison District: Cherokee County Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) C he ro ke e S c h o o l F E in S td . D ev . U n i ts -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) C he ro ke e 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 S c h o o l M e a n S G P i n P e r c e n t il e U n it s 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional 90 Cherokee Charter Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Proficiency Levels System Name Grade 3 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 4 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 5 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 6 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average System Name Grade 3 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 4 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average N Tested CRCT Reading % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 109 2,927 126,745 0.0 31.2 68.8 100 4.1 36.8 59.0 95.9 7.7 46.5 45.9 92.3 115 3,068 124,872 3.5 34.8 61.7 96.5 4.4 34.8 60.9 95.6 6.4 41.3 52.3 93.6 115 3,046 123,653 0.9 45.2 53.9 99.1 2.9 45.4 51.7 97.1 5.2 53.1 41.7 94.8 108 2,973 124,746 0.9 35.2 63.9 99.1 1.4 36.4 62.2 98.6 2.8 47.6 49.6 97.2 113 2,978 127,269 4.4 32.7 62.8 95.6 2.3 40.1 57.6 97.7 5.3 53 41.7 94.7 95 3,037 126,232 0.0 35.8 64.2 100 1.4 32.2 66.4 98.6 3.0 43.7 53.2 97.0 CRCT ELA N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 109 2.8 46.8 50.5 97.2 2,940 7.0 48.4 44.6 93.0 127,032 11.5 56.1 32.3 88.5 115 6.1 49.6 44.3 93.9 3,062 8.4 48.4 43.2 91.6 124,719 11.3 54 34.8 88.7 91 Cherokee Charter Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Grade 5 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 6 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average System Name Grade 3 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 4 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 5 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 6 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average 114 3,038 123,571 1.8 54.4 43.9 98.2 3.6 50.0 46.4 96.4 5.3 55.6 39.2 94.7 108 2,968 124,615 3.7 53.7 42.6 96.3 5.4 51.4 43.2 94.6 8.2 59.6 32.2 91.8 112 2,963 126,992 7.1 31.3 61.6 92.9 3.2 33.5 63.3 96.8 6.1 46.6 47.3 93.9 96 3,028 126,011 2.1 33.3 64.6 97.9 2.8 39.4 57.8 97.2 5.5 50.3 44.3 94.5 CRCT MATH N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 110 9.1 33.6 57.3 90.9 2,977 14.4 34.0 51.6 85.6 127,519 19.3 36.7 44.0 80.7 114 20.2 37.7 42.1 79.8 3,064 12.5 41.5 46.0 87.5 124,706 18.3 42.6 39.0 81.7 114 7.9 45.6 46.5 92.1 3,016 7.2 40.9 51.9 92.8 123,006 12.3 43.8 43.8 87.7 107 8.4 64.5 27.1 91.6 2,964 9.7 51.5 38.8 90.3 124,070 15.9 55.8 28.3 84.1 111 9.0 45.9 45.0 91.0 2,950 5.1 40.8 54.1 94.9 126,420 12.4 50.2 37.4 87.6 94 14.9 56.4 28.7 85.1 3,008 8.0 43.4 48.7 92.0 125,259 18.5 47.5 34.1 81.5 92 Cherokee Charter Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 System Name Grade 3 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 4 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 5 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 6 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average System Name Grade 3 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 4 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average CRCT SCIENCE N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 114 5.3 29.8 64.9 94.7 3,054 16.9 36.6 46.5 83.1 129,662 22.9 41.1 35.9 77.1 116 10.3 39.7 50.0 89.7 3,124 14.5 37.5 47.9 85.5 127,657 19.1 38 42.9 80.9 116 11.2 29.3 59.5 88.8 3,127 11.6 36.0 52.4 88.4 127,252 18.1 39.8 42.1 81.9 112 13.4 52.7 33.9 86.6 3,024 15.5 55.3 29.2 84.5 127,590 24.9 52.4 22.7 75.1 114 7.0 31.6 61.4 93.0 3,043 8.7 32.2 59.1 91.3 129,848 15.8 38.0 46.2 84.2 96 14.6 58.3 27.1 85.4 3,101 12.4 51.2 36.3 87.6 128,936 22.1 52.9 25 77.9 CRCT SOCIAL STUDIES N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 114 4.4 43.9 51.8 95.6 3,043 13.3 42.0 44.8 86.7 129,137 16.3 47.7 35.9 83.7 116 10.3 62.1 27.6 89.7 3,115 14.1 52.5 33.4 85.9 127,178 18.8 51.1 30.0 81.2 93 Cherokee Charter Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Grade 5 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 6 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average 116 10.3 52.6 37.1 89.7 3,115 15.1 53.8 31.1 84.9 126,802 19.3 53.8 26.9 80.7 112 10.7 28.6 60.7 89.3 3,024 13.6 35.0 51.5 86.4 127,200 20.2 35.1 44.8 79.8 114 6.1 16.7 77.2 93.9 3,035 8.2 23.7 68.2 91.8 129,400 16.5 30.5 53.0 83.5 96 9.4 40.6 50 90.6 3,090 9.9 41.2 48.9 90.1 128,365 19.4 44.4 36.2 80.6 System Name 9TH Grade Literature Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average Analytic Geometry Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average Biology Cherokee Charter District Average Statewide Average END OF COURSE TEST N Tested % Did Not Meet the standard % Met the standard % Exceeded the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 26 3.8 46.2 50.0 96.2 3,103 6.3 37.3 56.4 93.7 112,505 12.3 45.1 42.6 87.7 9 --- --- 2,271 50.9 45.3 97,659 65.4 28.9 --- 3.8 49.1 5.7 34.6 25 16.0 52.0 32.0 84.0 2,836 10.0 35.6 54.3 89.9 109,030 25.0 41.1 33.9 75.0 94 Cherokee Charter Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Coweta Charter Academy Key Findings The value-added estimate of the school's impact on an elementary student's average achievement across all subjects is 0.0491, meaning that Coweta Charter Academy's performance is indistinguishable from the state average and greater than the district average of elementary schools. In middle school the school's contribution to student achievement averaged across all subjects is -0.0017, meaning that Coweta Charter Academy's contribution to student achievement is not statistically different from either the state average or the district average of middle schools. In general, Coweta Charter Academy's strengths include elementary ELA and middle school reading. Coweta Charter Academy's performance in the elementary grades in 2013/14 is generally on par with its performance in 2012/13. The school's contribution to student achievement is: o above the district average in elementary ELA and above the state average in middle school reading. o lower than the state and district average in middle school math and social studies. o indistinguishable from the district and state averages in elementary reading, elementary math, elementary science, elementary social studies, middle school ELA and middle school science. General Characteristics School Name Calendar Year Opened Coweta Charter Academy 2010 EMO Affiliation Charter Schools USA Grades K-6 Curriculum Focus None School Year Single- Gender School Normal No Virtual/ Online School No Serves Multiple Counties No Parental Involvement Requirement 20 hours volunteer/year Enrollment Restrictions Coweta County Public Schools Zone Students Served School Name Coweta Charter Academy Pct. Female Pct. White Pct. Pct. Pct. Other Pct. Black Hispanic FRL 51.1 78.6 9.0 6.5 5.8 18.4 Pct. Pct. SWD LEP 0.0 7.7 Pct. Gifted 11.2 95 Coweta Charter Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Value-Added and SGP Results Summary by Grade Level and Subject Overall School Effect: 0.0491 Elementary/-0.0017 Middle Overall District Effect: -0.0424 Elementary/0.0153 Middle Coweta Charter Academy's contribution to an elementary student's average achievement across all five CRCT-tested subjects is indistinguishable from the average elementary school in the state but higher than that of the average elementary school in the district. The school's contribution to student achievement averaged across all middle school subjects is indistinguishable from both the average middle school in the state and the average middle school in the district. It is important to note that averaging achievement scores across subjects masks any variation in school performance between subject areas. As a result, the table below includes the school's effect on student achievement in each subject area. Grade Level and Subject Elementary Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average Middle Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect State Percentile (higher is better) Statistically Different From State Average? District Rank (lower is better) Statistically Different From District Average? 0.0191 0.0529 0.0323 0.0683 0.0809 0.0491 56 No 72 No 57 No 70 No 67 No 67 No 2 of 20 No 1 of 20 Higher 8 of 20 No 5 of 20 No 2 of 20 No 2 of 20 Higher 0.2024 0.1401 -0.1909 0.0712 -0.2366 -0.0017 98 Higher 96 No 6 Lower 73 No 9 Lower 49 No 1 of 7 No 1 of 7 No 7 of 7 Lower 2 of 7 No 7 of 7 Lower 6 of 7 No Note: statistical significance based on a 95 percent confidence level. Student Growth Percentiles School Mean of Individual SGPs State Percentile (higher is better) District Rank (lower is better) 53 57 3 of 20 47 53 5 of 20 51 66 6 of 20 51 46 11 of 20 52 66 4 of 20 51 62 3 of 20 62 93 1 of 7 55 96 1 of 7 41 23 7 of 7 51 55 3 of 7 39 14 7 of 7 49 40 4 of 7 96 Coweta Charter Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Comparison of 2013/14 and 2012/13 Value-Added and SGP Summary Results Coweta Charter Academy's performance in elementary grades in 2013/14 is generally equivalent to their performance in 2012/13. In 2013/14 the school's cross-subject contribution to student achievement in the elementary grades was 0.0491 and in 2012/13 it was 0.1291. In both years, its contribution to student achievement averaged across subjects at the elementary level ranked in the top 2 out of 20 schools. However, performance was somewhat weaker in both elementary reading and ELA relative to the prior year. The school did not offer any middle school grades in 2012/13, and thus no year-to-year comparisons can be made at the middle school level. Grade Level and Subject Elementary Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average Middle Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect 2012/13 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? School Effect 2013/14 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? 0.2499 0.2064 0.0029 0.1093 0.0906 0.1291 1 of 20 1 of 20 5 of 20 1 of 20 2 of 20 1 of 20 Higher Higher No No Higher Higher 0.0191 0.0529 0.0323 0.0683 0.0809 0.0491 2 of 20 No 1 of 20 Higher 8 of 20 No 5 of 20 No 2 of 20 No 2 of 20 Higher 0.2024 0.1401 -0.1909 0.0712 -0.2366 -0.0017 1 of 7 No 1 of 7 No 7 of 7 Lower 2 of 7 No 7 of 7 Lower 6 of 7 No Note: statistical significance based on a 95 percent confidence level. Student Growth Percentiles 2012/13 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 2013/14 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 66 1 of 20 57 1 of 20 57 2 of 20 60 1 of 20 57 2 of 20 59 1 of 20 53 3 of 20 47 5 of 20 51 6 of 20 51 11 of 20 52 4 of 20 51 3 of 20 62 1 of 7 55 1 of 7 41 7 of 7 51 3 of 7 39 7 of 7 49 4 of 7 97 Coweta Charter Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Comparison of School Impact Subject Area: All-Subject Elementary Average State Charter: Coweta Charter Academy Comparison District: Coweta County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Coweta School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Coweta 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional 98 Coweta Charter Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: All-Subject Middle Average State Charter: Coweta Charter Academy Comparison District: Coweta County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Coweta School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Coweta 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Coweta Charter Academy 99 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary Reading State Charter: Coweta Charter Academy Comparison District: Coweta County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Coweta School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Coweta 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Coweta Charter Academy 100 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary ELA State Charter: Coweta Charter Academy Comparison District: Coweta County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Coweta School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Coweta 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Coweta Charter Academy 101 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary Mathematics State Charter: Coweta Charter Academy Comparison District: Coweta County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Coweta School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Coweta 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Coweta Charter Academy 102 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary Science State Charter: Coweta Charter Academy Comparison District: Coweta County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Coweta School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Coweta 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Coweta Charter Academy 103 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary Social Studies State Charter: Coweta Charter Academy Comparison District: Coweta County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Coweta School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Coweta 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Coweta Charter Academy 104 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Reading State Charter: Coweta Charter Academy Comparison District: Coweta County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Coweta School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Coweta 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Coweta Charter Academy 105 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle ELA State Charter: Coweta Charter Academy Comparison District: Coweta County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Coweta School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Coweta 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Coweta Charter Academy 106 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Mathematics State Charter: Coweta Charter Academy Comparison District: Coweta County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Coweta State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Coweta 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Coweta Charter Academy 107 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Science State Charter: Coweta Charter Academy Comparison District: Coweta County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Coweta School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Coweta 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Coweta Charter Academy 108 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Social Studies State Charter: Coweta Charter Academy Comparison District: Coweta County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Coweta State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Coweta School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Coweta Charter Academy 109 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 System Name Grade 3 Coweta Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 4 Coweta Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 5 Coweta Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 6 Coweta Charter District Average Statewide Average System Name Grade 3 Coweta Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 4 Coweta Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 5 Coweta Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 6 Coweta Charter District Average Statewide Average Proficiency Levels N Tested CRCT Reading % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 93 1,592 126,745 2.2 28 69.9 97.8 5.8 44.0 50.3 94.2 7.7 46.5 45.9 92.3 91 1,558 124,872 2.2 25.3 72.5 97.8 5.1 43.4 51.5 94.9 6.4 41.3 52.3 93.6 71 1,591 123,653 2.8 47.9 49.3 97.2 4.0 54.2 41.7 96.0 5.2 53.1 41.7 94.8 39 1,634 124,746 0.0 38.5 61.5 100 1.6 42.5 55.9 98.4 2.8 47.6 49.6 97.2 CRCT ELA N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 93 1.1 47.3 1,592 7.9 55.9 127,032 11.5 56.1 91 4.4 46.2 1,555 9.8 55.4 124,719 11.3 54.0 71 1,594 123,571 1.4 60.6 4.0 57.1 5.3 55.6 39 1,625 124,615 0.0 56.4 5.6 57.8 8.2 59.6 Coweta Charter Academy 51.6 98.9 36.2 92.1 32.3 88.5 49.5 95.6 34.8 90.2 34.8 88.7 38.0 98.6 38.9 96.0 39.2 94.7 43.6 100.0 36.6 94.4 32.2 91.8 110 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 System Name Grade 3 Coweta Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 4 Coweta Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 5 Coweta Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 6 Coweta Charter District Average Statewide Average System Name Grade 3 Coweta Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 4 Coweta Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 5 Coweta Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 6 Coweta Charter District Average Statewide Average N Tested CRCT MATH % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 93 5.4 21.5 73.1 94.6 1,591 15.1 37.0 47.8 84.9 127,519 19.3 36.7 44.0 80.7 91 4.4 38.5 57.1 95.6 1,556 16.9 45.8 37.3 83.1 124,706 18.3 42.6 39.0 81.7 71 5.6 50.7 43.7 94.4 1,579 9.7 44.1 46.2 90.3 123,006 12.3 43.8 43.8 87.7 39 25.6 48.7 25.6 74.4 1,619 8.8 56.6 34.6 91.2 124,070 15.9 55.8 28.3 84.1 CRCT SCIENCE N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 93 5.4 26.9 67.7 94.6 1,605 17.4 41.6 41.1 82.6 129,662 22.9 41.1 35.9 77.1 91 4.4 26.4 69.2 95.6 1,573 15.1 40.6 44.3 84.9 127,657 19.1 38 42.9 80.9 71 11.3 45.1 43.7 88.7 1,627 13.6 38.5 47.9 86.4 127,252 18.1 39.8 42.1 81.9 39 23.1 38.5 38.5 76.9 1,667 18.2 59.3 22.5 81.8 127,590 24.9 52.4 22.7 75.1 Coweta Charter Academy 111 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 System Name Grade 3 Coweta Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 4 Coweta Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 5 Coweta Charter District Average Statewide Average Grade 6 Coweta Charter District Average Statewide Average CRCT SOCIAL STUDIES N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 93 5.4 37.6 57.0 94.6 1,602 10.7 50.9 38.3 89.3 129,137 16.3 47.7 35.9 83.7 91 5.5 42.9 51.6 94.5 1,568 16.3 55.4 28.4 83.7 127,178 18.8 51.1 30.0 81.2 71 14.1 64.8 21.1 85.9 1,624 16.8 57.5 25.7 83.2 126,802 19.3 53.8 26.9 80.7 39 23.1 46.2 30.8 76.9 1,662 12.7 31.2 56.1 87.3 127,200 20.2 35.1 44.8 79.8 Coweta Charter Academy 112 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Fulton Leadership Academy Key Findings The value-added estimate of the school's impact on a student's average achievement across all subjects in middle school is 0.1033, meaning that Fulton Leadership Academy is above both the state and district average of all middle schools. The school's contributions to student achievement in 9th Grade Literature and Coordinate Algebra are both above state averages. In general, Fulton Leadership Academy's strengths include middle school reading, ELA and social studies as well as 9th Grade Literature and Coordinate Algebra. Relative to 2012/13, Fulton Leadership Academy's performance in 2013/14 is generally comparable to its performance in 2012/13. However, in middle school social studies and math the estimated contribution to student achievement is lower than in the prior year. The school's contribution to student achievement is: o above the district and state average in middle school reading, middle school ELA, middle school social studies and 9th Grade Literature as well as above the state average in Coordinate Algebra. o indistinguishable from both the district and state averages in middle school math and science and high school Physical Science and indistinguishable from the district average in Coordinate Algebra. General Characteristics School Name Fulton Leadership Academy Calendar Year Opened 2010 EMO Affiliation No Grades Curriculum Focus School Year STEM with focus on aviation and 6-9 aeronautics - Normal partnership with Civil Air Patrol Single- Gender School Boys Only Virtual/ Online School No Serves Multiple Counties No Parental Involvement Requirement Enrollment Restrictions Not Specified Fulton County Public Schools Zone Students Served School Name Fulton Leadership Academy Pct. Female Pct. White 0.0 0.0 Pct. Black 99.2 Pct. Pct. Other Hispanic 0.4 0.4 Pct. FRL 100.0 Pct. Pct. SWD LEP 0.0 13.9 Pct. Gifted 6.5 113 Fulton Leadership Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Value-Added and SGP Results Summary by Grade Level and Subject Overall School Effect: 0.1033 Middle Overall District Effect: 0.0129 Middle Fulton Leadership Academy's contribution to a middle school student's cross-subject average achievement is greater than that of the average middle school in the state and district. It is important to note that averaging achievement scores across subjects masks any variation in school performance between subject areas. As a result, the table below includes the school's effect on student achievement in each subject area. Grade Level and Subject Middle Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average High 9th Grade Literature American Literature Analytic Geometry Biology Coordinate Algebra Economics Math II Physical Science U.S. History Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect State Percentile (higher is better) Statistically Different From State Average? District Rank (lower is better) Statistically Different From District Average? 0.2748 0.2197 -0.0113 -0.0705 0.1128 0.1033 99 Higher 98 Higher 49 No 27 No 77 Higher 89 Higher 1 of 24 Higher 2 of 24 Higher 14 of 24 No 19 of 24 No 5 of 24 Higher 5 of 24 Higher 0.3009 98 Higher 1 of 19 Higher 0.2485 -0.0105 92 Higher 50 No 6 of 18 No 12 of 19 No Note: statistical significance based on a 95 percent confidence level. Student Growth Percentiles School Mean of Individual SGPs State Percentile (higher is better) District Rank (lower is better) 63 95 2 of 24 49 56 14 of 24 44 33 16 of 24 47 30 15 of 24 53 71 6 of 24 51 55 12 of 24 65 99 1 of 19 52 59 11 of 18 48 52 10 of 19 Fulton Leadership Academy 114 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Comparison of 2013/14 and 2012/13 Value-Added and SGP Summary Results Fulton Leadership Academy's performance in 2013/14 is generally comparable to its performance in 2012/13. In 2012/13 its average contribution to student achievement across all five middle school subjects tested on the CRCT was 0.1670 and in 2013/14 it was 0.1033. Its contribution to student achievement in middle school math fell from 0.1392 to -0.0113 and its contribution to student achievement in middle school social studies fell from 0.3217 in 2012/13 to 0.1128 in 2013/14. Fulton Leadership Academy did not offer any high school grades in 2012/13, so no year-to-year comparisons can be made at the high school level. Grade Level and Subject Middle Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average High 9th Grade Literature American Literature Analytic Geometry Biology Coordinate Algebra Economics Math II Physical Science U.S. History Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect 2012/13 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? School Effect 2013/14 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? 0.1512 0.1882 0.1392 0.0314 0.3217 0.1670 1 of 24 1 of 24 2 of 24 5 of 24 2 of 24 1 of 24 Higher Higher Higher No Higher Higher 0.2748 0.2197 -0.0113 -0.0705 0.1128 0.1033 1 of 24 Higher 2 of 24 Higher 14 of 24 No 19 of 24 No 5 of 24 Higher 5 of 24 Higher 0.3009 1 of 19 Higher 0.2485 6 of 18 No -0.0105 12 of 19 No Note: statistical significance based on a 95 percent confidence level. Student Growth Percentiles 2012/13 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 2013/14 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 57 12 of 24 54 6 of 24 53 9 of 24 57 5 of 24 69 1 of 24 58 2 of 24 63 2 of 24 49 14 of 24 44 16 of 24 47 15 of 24 53 6 of 24 51 12 of 24 65 1 of 19 52 11 of 18 48 10 of 19 Fulton Leadership Academy 115 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Comparison of School Impact Subject Area: All-Subject Middle Average State Charter: Fulton Leadership Academy Comparison District: Fulton County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Fulton Leadership School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Fulton Leadership 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional 116 Fulton Leadership Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Reading State Charter: Fulton Leadership Academy Comparison District: Fulton County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Fulton Leadership School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Fulton Leadership 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Fulton Leadership Academy 117 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle ELA State Charter: Fulton Leadership Academy Comparison District: Fulton County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Fulton Leadership School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 50 60 70 80 90 100 Fulton Leadership School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 10 20 30 40 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Fulton Leadership Academy 118 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Mathematics State Charter: Fulton Leadership Academy Comparison District: Fulton County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Fulton Leadership School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Fulton Leadership 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Fulton Leadership Academy 119 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Science State Charter: Fulton Leadership Academy Comparison District: Fulton County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Fulton Leadership State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Fulton Leadership 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Fulton Leadership Academy 120 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Social Studies State Charter: Fulton Leadership Academy Comparison District: Fulton County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Fulton Leadership School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Fulton Leadership 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Fulton Leadership Academy 121 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: 9th Grade Literature State Charter: Fulton Leadership Academy Comparison District: Fulton County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Fulton Leadership School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Fulton Leadership 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Fulton Leadership Academy 122 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Proficiency Levels System Name Grade 6 Fulton Leadership District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Fulton Leadership District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Fulton Leadership District Average Statewide Average System Name Grade 6 Fulton Leadership District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Fulton Leadership District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Fulton Leadership District Average Statewide Average N Tested CRCT Reading % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 57 6,757 124,746 3.5 40.4 56.1 96.5 2.4 41.4 56.2 97.6 2.8 47.6 49.6 97.2 57 7,043 127,269 0.0 40.4 59.6 100.0 4.2 46.5 49.3 95.8 5.3 53.0 41.7 94.7 52 6,971 126,232 0.0 46.2 53.8 100.0 2.4 37.5 60.1 97.6 3.0 43.7 53.2 97.0 CRCT ELA N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 55 6,755 124,615 57 7,031 126,992 52 6,972 126,011 3.6 63.6 32.7 96.4 6.8 51.7 41.6 93.2 8.2 59.6 32.2 91.8 0.0 38.6 61.4 100.0 4.6 39.3 56.1 95.4 6.1 46.6 47.3 93.9 3.8 55.8 40.4 96.2 4.6 42.0 53.3 95.4 5.5 50.3 44.3 94.5 Fulton Leadership Academy 123 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 System Name Grade 6 Fulton Leadership District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Fulton Leadership District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Fulton Leadership District Average Statewide Average System Name Grade 6 Fulton Leadership District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Fulton Leadership District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Fulton Leadership District Average Statewide Average System Name Grade 6 Fulton Leadership District Average N Tested CRCT MATH % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 55 16.4 72.7 10.9 83.6 6,722 14.9 46.4 38.6 85.1 124,070 15.9 55.8 28.3 84.1 56 0.0 51.8 48.2 100.0 6,984 11.1 42.2 46.6 88.9 126,420 12.4 50.2 37.4 87.6 50 10.0 68.0 22.0 90.0 6,922 16.7 41.2 42.1 83.3 125,259 18.5 47.5 34.1 81.5 CRCT SCIENCE N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 58 27.6 62.1 10.3 72.4 6,931 24.1 47.6 28.3 75.9 127,590 24.9 52.4 22.7 75.1 58 5.2 48.3 46.6 94.8 7,159 14.2 33.9 51.9 85.8 129,848 15.8 38.0 46.2 84.2 53 20.8 67.9 11.3 79.2 7,104 20.5 46.0 33.5 79.5 128,936 22.1 52.9 25.0 77.9 CRCT SOCIAL STUDIES N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 58 13.8 37.9 48.3 86.2 6,901 19.9 30.0 50.1 80.1 Fulton Leadership Academy 124 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Statewide Average Grade 7 Fulton Leadership District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Fulton Leadership District Average Statewide Average 127,200 20.2 35.1 44.8 79.8 58 3.4 29.3 67.2 96.6 7,130 16.5 25.6 57.9 83.5 129,400 16.5 30.5 53.0 83.5 53 17.0 54.7 28.3 83.0 7,069 19.5 39.5 41.0 80.5 128,365 19.4 44.4 36.2 80.6 System Name 9TH Grade Literature Fulton Leadership District Average Statewide Average Coordinate Algebra Fulton Leadership District Average Statewide Average Physical Science Fulton Leadership District Average Statewide Average END OF COURSE TEST N Tested % Did Not Meet the standard % Met the standard % Exceeded the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 60 5.0 48.3 46.7 95.0 7,471 9.0 37.5 53.4 90.9 112,505 12.3 45.1 42.6 87.7 60 68.3 30.0 1.7 68.3 7,638 48.2 32.3 19.5 51.8 124,492 59.7 31.4 8.8 40.3 60 11.7 46.7 41.7 88.3 4,185 19.3 37.0 43.7 80.7 71,340 15.5 32.8 51.8 84.5 Fulton Leadership Academy 125 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Georgia Connections Academy Key Findings The value-added estimate of the school's impact on a student's average achievement across all subjects is -0.1212 in elementary grades and -0.0674 in middle grades, meaning that Georgia Connections Academy's performance is below the state average in elementary and middle grades. The school's estimated contribution to student achievement exceeds the state average in 9th Grade Literature and American literature, but is below the state average in Analytic Geometry, Biology, Economics, Physical Science and U.S. History. In general, Georgia Connections Academy's strengths include elementary reading, middle school reading and ELA, and 9th Grade Literature and American Literature in high school. However, its performance in elementary and middle school math, elementary and middle school science, middle school social studies and high school Analytic Geometry, Biology, Economics and U.S. History is weak relative to the state. Relative to 2012/13, Georgia Connections Academy's performance appears to be somewhat weaker in 2013/14, with substantial declines in elementary social studies and three high school subjects. The school's contribution to student achievement is: o above the state average in elementary reading, middle school reading, middle school ELA, 9th Grade Literature, and American Literature. o below the state average in elementary math, elementary science, middle school math, middle school science, middle school social studies, high school Analytic Geometry, Biology, Economics, Physical Science and U.S. History. o indistinguishable from the state average in elementary ELA, elementary social studies, and high school Coordinate Algebra. General Characteristics School Name Georgia Connections Academy Calendar Year Opened EMO Affiliation Grades 2011 No K-12 Curriculum Focus Online Curriculum School Year Single- Gender School Virtual/ Online School Serves Multiple Counties Normal No Yes Online Parental Involvement Requirement Not Specified Enrollment Restrictions Students residing in State of GA 126 Georgia Connections Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Students Served School Name Georgia Connections Academy Pct. Female Pct. White Pct. Pct. Pct. Other Pct. Black Hispanic FRL 53.5 55.0 30.7 6.6 5.9 49.3 Pct. Pct. SWD LEP 0.1 9.4 Pct. Gifted 2.5 Value-Added and SGP Results Summary by Grade Level and Subject Overall School Effect: -0.1212 Elementary / -0.0674 Middle Georgia Connections Academy's contribution to an elementary student's average achievement across all five CRCT-tested subjects is lower than that of the average elementary school in the state, and its contribution to a middle school student's cross-subject average achievement is also lower than that of the average middle school in the state. It is important to note that averaging achievement scores across subjects masks any variation in school performance between subject areas. As a result, the table below includes the school's effect on student achievement in each subject area. In high school, Georgia Connections outperformed the state in 9th Grade Literature and American Literature but performed below the state average in Analytic Geometry, Biology, Economics, Physical Science, and U.S. History. Performance was indistinguishable in Coordinate Algebra. Grade Level and Subject Elementary Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect State Percentile (higher is better) Statistically Different From State Average? District Rank (lower is better) Statistically Different From District Average? 0.0969 0.0054 -0.3276 -0.0886 -0.2563 -0.1212 84 Higher 50 No 3 Lower 25 Lower 8 No 12 Lower Student Growth Percentiles School Mean of Individual SGPs State Percentile (higher is better) District Rank (lower is better) 54 64 48 53 30 4 46 24 39 18 43 16 Georgia Connections Academy 127 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Grade Level and Subject Middle Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average High 9th Grade Literature American Literature Analytic Geometry Biology Coordinate Algebra Economics Math II Physical Science U.S. History Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect State Statistically District Rank Statistically Percentile Different (lower is Different From (higher is From State better) District better) Average? Average? 0.1862 0.1092 -0.1937 -0.0858 -0.3521 -0.0674 97 Higher 91 Higher 5 Lower 22 Lower 3 Lower 20 Lower 0.1506 0.1558 -0.2586 -0.0935 -0.0574 -0.3992 92 Higher 87 Higher 8 Lower 32 Lower 39 No 7 Lower -0.1895 -0.5646 15 Lower 1 Lower Note: statistical significance based on a 95 percent confidence level. Student Growth Percentiles School Mean of Individual SGPs State Percentile (higher is better) District Rank (lower is better) 59 74 53 87 36 8 43 12 33 4 45 14 55 73 50 61 37 8 38 23 50 48 39 19 36 10 21 3 Georgia Connections Academy 128 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Comparison of 2013/14 and 2012/13 Value-Added and SGP Summary Results Georgia Connections Academy's performance in 2013/14 appears to be somewhat weaker than its performance in 2012/13, though in only four subjects, elementary social studies, high school Biology, high school Economics and high school U.S. History does the decline exceed 0.15 standard deviations. In 2012/13 the school's cross-subject average contribution to student achievement in the elementary grades was 0.0029, whereas in 2013/14 it was -0.1212. The school's cross-subject average contribution to student achievement in middle school grades was -0.0127 in 2012/13 and -0.0674 in 2013/14. Grade Level and Subject Elementary Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average Middle Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect 2012/13 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? School Effect 2013/14 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? 0.1209 0.1455 -0.2357 0.0497 -0.0792 0.0029 0.0969 0.0054 -0.3276 -0.0886 -0.2563 -0.1212 0.2552 0.1707 -0.1863 -0.0726 -0.2303 -0.0127 0.1862 0.1092 -0.1937 -0.0858 -0.3521 -0.0674 Student Growth Percentiles 2012/13 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 2013/14 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 55 54 55 48 38 30 49 46 48 39 49 43 61 59 53 53 40 36 44 43 34 33 46 45 Georgia Connections Academy 129 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Grade Level and Subject High 9th Grade Literature American Literature Analytic Geometry Biology Coordinate Algebra Economics Math II Physical Science U.S. History Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect 2012/13 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? School Effect 2013/14 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? 0.2365 0.2714 0.1091 -0.2022 -0.1109 0.1506 0.1558 -0.2586 -0.0935 -0.0574 -0.3992 -0.1532 -0.3671 -0.1895 -0.5646 Note: statistical significance based on a 95 percent confidence level. Student Growth Percentiles 2012/13 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 2013/14 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 62 55 54 50 37 50 38 43 50 42 39 48 36 29 21 21 Georgia Connections Academy 130 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Proficiency Levels System Name Grade 3 Georgia Connections Statewide Average Grade 4 Georgia Connections Statewide Average Grade 5 Georgia Connections Statewide Average Grade 6 Georgia Connections Statewide Average Grade 7 Georgia Connections Statewide Average Grade 8 Georgia Connections Statewide Average System Name Grade 3 Georgia Connections Statewide Average Grade 4 Georgia Connections Statewide Average Grade 5 Georgia Connections Statewide Average Grade 6 Georgia Connections Statewide Average N Tested CRCT Reading % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 133 12.0 37.6 50.4 88.0 126,745 7.7 46.5 45.9 92.3 134 124,872 4.5 35.8 59.7 95.5 6.4 41.3 52.3 93.6 167 123,653 6.0 46.1 47.9 94.0 5.2 53.1 41.7 94.8 232 124,746 3.0 34.5 62.5 97.0 2.8 47.6 49.6 97.2 289 127,269 2.8 42.6 54.7 97.2 5.3 53.0 41.7 94.7 312 126,232 2.2 42.3 55.4 97.8 3.0 43.7 53.2 97.0 CRCT ELA N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 132 15.2 53.8 31.1 84.8 127,032 11.5 56.1 32.3 88.5 133 12.8 39.1 48.1 87.2 124,719 11.3 54.0 34.8 88.7 168 123,571 9.5 58.9 31.5 90.5 5.3 55.6 39.2 94.7 231 124,615 5.6 61.0 33.3 94.4 8.2 59.6 32.2 91.8 131 Georgia Connections Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Grade 7 Georgia Connections Statewide Average Grade 8 Georgia Connections Statewide Average System Name Grade 3 Georgia Connections Statewide Average Grade 4 Georgia Connections Statewide Average Grade 5 Georgia Connections Statewide Average Grade 6 Georgia Connections Statewide Average Grade 7 Georgia Connections Statewide Average Grade 8 Georgia Connections Statewide Average System Name Grade 3 Georgia Connections Statewide Average Grade 4 Georgia Connections Statewide Average Grade 5 Georgia Connections Statewide Average 286 126,992 4.2 40.2 55.6 95.8 6.1 46.6 47.3 93.9 307 126,011 6.2 45.6 48.2 93.8 5.5 50.3 44.3 94.5 CRCT MATH N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 133 38.3 34.6 27.1 61.7 127,519 19.3 36.7 44.0 80.7 134 33.6 42.5 23.9 66.4 124,706 18.3 42.6 39.0 81.7 166 34.9 46.4 18.7 65.1 123,006 12.3 43.8 43.8 87.7 228 20.2 61.4 18.4 79.8 124,070 15.9 55.8 28.3 84.1 284 13.0 57.7 29.2 87.0 126,420 12.4 50.2 37.4 87.6 307 37.5 48.5 14.0 62.5 125,259 18.5 47.5 34.1 81.5 CRCT SCIENCE N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 132 27.3 37.1 35.6 72.7 129,662 22.9 41.1 35.9 77.1 132 21.2 40.2 38.6 78.8 127,657 19.1 38.0 42.9 80.9 168 21.4 42.9 35.7 78.6 127,252 18.1 39.8 42.1 81.9 Georgia Connections Academy 132 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Grade 6 Georgia Connections Statewide Average Grade 7 Georgia Connections Statewide Average Grade 8 Georgia Connections Statewide Average System Name Grade 3 Georgia Connections Statewide Average Grade 4 Georgia Connections Statewide Average Grade 5 Georgia Connections Statewide Average Grade 6 Georgia Connections Statewide Average Grade 7 Georgia Connections Statewide Average Grade 8 Georgia Connections Statewide Average 232 22.0 64.2 13.8 78.0 127,590 24.9 52.4 22.7 75.1 289 17.0 40.5 42.6 83.0 129,848 15.8 38.0 46.2 84.2 315 30.5 54.6 14.9 69.5 128,936 22.1 52.9 25.0 77.9 CRCT SOCIAL STUDIES N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 132 30.3 50.0 19.7 69.7 129,137 16.3 47.7 35.9 83.7 132 24.2 54.5 21.2 75.8 127,178 18.8 51.1 30.0 81.2 167 30.5 56.3 13.2 69.5 126,802 19.3 53.8 26.9 80.7 231 35.1 44.6 20.3 64.9 127,200 20.2 35.1 44.8 79.8 287 28.9 48.1 23.0 71.1 129,400 16.5 30.5 53.0 83.5 315 25.4 52.1 22.5 74.6 128,365 19.4 44.4 36.2 80.6 Georgia Connections Academy 133 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 System Name 9TH Grade Literature Georgia Connections Statewide Average American Literature Georgia Connections Statewide Average Biology Georgia Connections Statewide Average US History Georgia Connections Statewide Average Economics Georgia Connections Statewide Average END OF COURSE TEST N Tested % Did Not Meet the standard % Met the standard % Exceeded the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 313 8.6 44.1 47.3 91.4 112,505 12.3 45.1 42.6 87.7 248 93,689 4.0 48.4 47.6 96.0 7.5 50.7 41.9 92.6 314 24.5 46.8 28.7 75.5 109,030 25.0 41.1 33.9 75.0 238 53.8 33.2 13.0 46.2 93,645 27.2 32.6 40.2 72.8 143 28.0 51.7 20.3 72.0 59,564 18.8 39.1 42.1 81.2 Georgia Connections Academy 134 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett Key Findings The value-added estimate of the school's impact on a student's average achievement across all subjects is -0.0027 in middle grades, meaning that in the middle grades the Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett is not significantly different than the state average of middle schools. The school's estimated contribution to student achievement in 9th Grade Literature is not significantly different from either the state or district averages. In general, the Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett is strong in middle school math, but its performance in middle school science is weak relative to the district and state. Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett's performance in 2013/14 is generally comparable to its performance in 2012/13. The school's contribution to student achievement is: o above the state average in middle school math. o below the district average in middle school reading, ELA, math, science and social studies. o indistinguishable from the district and state average in 9th Grade Literature. General Characteristics School Name Calendar Year Opened Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett 2008 EMO Affiliation No Grades Curriculum Focus School Year Curriculum is entirely College Preparatory. Extended 6-11 Saturday Academy is Day/Week/ available to Year struggling students. Single- Gender School Girls- Only Virtual/ Online School No Serves Multiple Counties No Parental Involvement Requirement Enrollment Restrictions Not Specified Gwinnett County Public Schools Zone Students Served School Name Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett Pct. Female Pct. White Pct. Pct. Pct. Other Pct. Black Hispanic FRL 100.0 3.2 75.8 2.6 13.4 61.2 Pct. Pct. SWD LEP 5.5 6.7 Pct. Gifted 5.5 135 Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Value-Added and SGP Results Summary by Grade Level and Subject Overall School Effect: -0.0027 Middle Overall District Effect: 0.1041 Middle Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett's contribution to a middle school student's cross-subject average achievement is not statistically different from the average middle school in the state, but it is below the average middle school in the district. It is important to note that averaging achievement scores across subjects masks any variation in school performance between subject areas. As a result, the table below includes the school's effect on student achievement in each subject area. Grade Level and Subject Middle Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average High 9th Grade Literature American Literature Analytic Geometry Biology Coordinate Algebra Economics Math II Physical Science U.S. History Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect State Percentile (higher is better) Statistically Different From State Average? District Rank (lower is better) Statistically Different From District Average? 0.0148 -0.0256 0.0831 -0.0681 -0.0138 -0.0027 58 No 39 No 77 Higher 27 Lower 46 No 48 No 30 of 30 Lower 29 of 30 Lower 22 of 30 Lower 30 of 31 Lower 29 of 31 Lower 29 of 31 Lower 0.0103 53 No 17 of 23 No Note: statistical significance based on a 95 percent confidence level. Student Growth Percentiles School Mean of Individual SGPs State Percentile (higher is better) District Rank (lower is better) 55 45 29 of 30 45 27 30 of 30 47 49 28 of 30 44 15 28 of 31 38 10 28 of 31 46 20 28 of 31 47 23 17 of 23 Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett 136 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Comparison of 2013/14 and 2012/13 Value-Added and SGP Summary Results Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett's performance in 2013/14 is generally comparable to its performance in 2012/13. The estimated impact on student achievement averaged across all subjects was -0.0027 in 2013/14 compared to 0.0077 in 2012/13. Changes in estimated performance in specific subjects were generally not large. Grade Level and Subject Middle Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average High 9th Grade Literature American Literature Analytic Geometry Biology Coordinate Algebra Economics Math II Physical Science U.S. History Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect 2012/13 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? School Effect 2013/14 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? -0.0930 0.0389 0.1717 -0.1281 0.0398 0.0077 29 of 31 8 of 31 3 of 31 30 of 31 20 of 31 23 of 31 Lower No Higher Lower Lower No 0.0148 -0.0256 0.0831 -0.0681 -0.0138 -0.0027 30 of 30 Lower 29 of 30 Lower 22 of 30 Lower 30 of 31 Lower 29 of 31 Lower 29 of 31 Lower 0.1515 3 of 23 No 0.0103 17 of 23 No 0.0557 -0.0725 -0.5441 11 of 23 No 16 of 22 No 23 of 23 Lower Note: statistical significance based on a 95 percent confidence level. Student Growth Percentiles 2012/13 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 2013/14 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 55 29 of 31 54 7 of 31 57 10 of 31 30 29 of 31 47 22 of 31 50 26 of 31 51 6 of 23 46 12 of 23 45 15 of 22 22 23 of 23 55 29 of 30 45 30 of 30 47 28 of 30 44 28 of 31 38 28 of 31 46 28 of 31 47 17 of 23 Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett 137 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Comparison of School Impact Subject Area: All-Subject Middle Average State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett Comparison District: Gwinnett County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Ivy Prep. 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional 138 Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Reading State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett Comparison District: Gwinnett County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Ivy Prep. 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett 139 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle ELA State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett Comparison District: Gwinnett County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Ivy Prep. 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett 140 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Mathematics State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett Comparison District: Gwinnett County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Ivy Prep. 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett 141 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Science State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett Comparison District: Gwinnett County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Ivy Prep. 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett 142 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Social Studies State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett Comparison District: Gwinnett County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Ivy Prep. School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett 143 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: 9th Grade Literature State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett Comparison District: Gwinnett County Public Schools School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Ivy Prep. School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Ivy Prep. 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett 144 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Proficiency Levels System Name Grade 6 Ivy Prep - Gwinnett District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Ivy Prep - Gwinnett District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Ivy Prep - Gwinnett District Average Statewide Average System Name Grade 6 Ivy Prep - Gwinnett District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Ivy Prep - Gwinnett District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Ivy Prep - Gwinnett District Average Statewide Average N Tested CRCT Reading % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 94 12,734 124,746 2.1 36.2 61.7 97.9 1.8 37.3 60.9 98.2 2.8 47.6 49.6 97.2 88 13,004 127,269 3.4 48.9 47.7 96.6 2.2 41.8 55.9 97.8 5.3 53.0 41.7 94.7 114 12,936 126,232 0.9 39.5 59.6 99.1 1.6 31.7 66.7 98.4 3.0 43.7 53.2 97.0 CRCT ELA N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 94 12,752 124,615 88 12,985 126,992 113 12,940 126,011 3.2 60.6 36.2 96.8 4.9 50.3 44.8 95.1 8.2 59.6 32.2 91.8 1.1 42.0 56.8 98.9 2.3 35.7 62.0 97.7 6.1 46.6 47.3 93.9 2.7 47.8 49.6 97.3 3.0 40.7 56.3 97.0 5.5 50.3 44.3 94.5 Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett 145 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 System Name Grade 6 Ivy Prep - Gwinnett District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Ivy Prep - Gwinnett District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Ivy Prep - Gwinnett District Average Statewide Average System Name Grade 6 Ivy Prep - Gwinnett District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Ivy Prep - Gwinnett District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Ivy Prep - Gwinnett District Average Statewide Average N Tested CRCT MATH % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 94 5.3 55.3 39.4 94.7 12,702 9.0 49.0 42.1 91.0 124,070 15.9 55.8 28.3 84.1 86 10.5 43.0 46.5 89.5 12,936 4.5 39.6 55.8 95.5 126,420 12.4 50.2 37.4 87.6 111 9.0 50.5 40.5 91.0 12,932 8.9 41.1 50.0 91.1 125,259 18.5 47.5 34.1 81.5 CRCT SCIENCE N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 95 11.6 68.4 20.0 88.4 13,068 16.5 47.8 35.7 83.5 127,590 24.9 52.4 22.7 75.1 89 10.1 41.6 48.3 89.9 13,300 6.5 27.2 66.3 93.5 129,848 15.8 38.0 46.2 84.2 114 11.4 70.2 18.4 88.6 13,232 14.6 50.1 35.3 85.4 128,936 22.1 52.9 25.0 77.9 Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett 146 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 System Name Grade 6 Ivy Prep - Gwinnett District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Ivy Prep - Gwinnett District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Ivy Prep - Gwinnett District Average Statewide Average CRCT SOCIAL STUDIES N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 95 9.5 18.9 71.6 90.5 12,995 12.2 26.7 61.1 87.8 127,200 20.2 35.1 44.8 79.8 89 6.7 33.7 59.6 93.3 13,227 6.8 19.3 73.9 93.2 129,400 16.5 30.5 53.0 83.5 114 14.9 57.9 27.2 85.1 13,144 11.8 36.1 52.1 88.2 128,365 19.4 44.4 36.2 80.6 System Name 9TH Grade Literature Ivy Prep - Gwinnett District Average Statewide Average Analytic Geometry Ivy Prep- Gwinnett District Average Statewide Average Biology Ivy Prep - Gwinnett District Average Statewide Average US History Ivy Prep Academy District Average Statewide Average END OF COURSE TEST N Tested % Did Not Meet the standard % Met the standard % Exceeded the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 15 13.3 33.3 53.3 86.6 13,386 8.4 41.2 50.4 91.6 112,505 12.3 45.1 42.6 87.7 15 80.0 20.0 7,884 64.3 31.8 97,659 65.4 28.9 0.0 20.0 3.8 35.6 5.7 34.6 14 35.7 42.9 21.4 64.3 13,842 16.6 38.6 44.7 83.3 109,030 25.0 41.1 33.9 75.0 10 60.0 40.0 0.0 40.0 11,284 21.1 31.1 47.8 78.9 93,645 27.2 32.6 40.2 72.8 Ivy Preparatory Academy at Gwinnett 147 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls Key Findings The value-added estimate of the school's impact on a student's average achievement across all subjects is -0.3300 in elementary grades and -0.0171 in middle grades, meaning that Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls is below the state and district averages in elementary grades and not significantly different than the state and district averages in middle grades. In general, Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls' strengths include middle school reading, but its performance in elementary reading, ELA and science are weak relative to the state and district. Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls' performance in 2013/14 is generally weaker than in 2012/13. The estimated impact on student achievement averaged across all subjects in elementary school was -0.3300 in 2013/14 compared to -0.0757 in 2012/13. In middle school the cross-subject average contribution to student achievement was 0.0339 in 2012/13 and -0.0171 in 2013/14. The school's contribution to student achievement is: o above the state average in middle school reading. o below the district and state average in elementary school reading, ELA and science, and below the state average in elementary math and in middle school science and social studies. o indistinguishable from the district and state average in elementary social studies and middle school ELA and math. General Characteristics School Name Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls Calendar Year Opened 2011 EMO Affiliation No Grades Curriculum Focus School Year Curriculum is entirely College Preparatory. Extended K-8 Saturday Academy is Day/Week/ available to Year struggling students. Single- Gender School Girls- Only Virtual/ Online School No Serves Multiple Counties No Parental Involvement Requirement Not Specified Enrollment Restrictions DeKalb County 148 Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Students Served School Name Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls Pct. Female Pct. White Pct. Pct. Pct. Other Pct. Black Hispanic FRL 100.0 1.2 97.0 1.2 0.3 74.1 Pct. Pct. SWD LEP 0.0 3.0 Pct. Gifted 2.7 Value-Added and SGP Results Summary by Grade Level and Subject Overall School Effect: -0.3300 Elementary / -0.0171 Middle Overall District Effect: -0.0624 Elementary / - 0.0225 Middle Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls' contribution to an elementary student's average achievement across all five CRCT-tested subjects is below that of the average elementary school in the state and district. Its contribution to a middle school student's cross-subject average achievement is not statistically different from the average middle school in the state and district. It is important to note that averaging achievement scores across subjects masks any variation in school performance between subject areas. As a result, the table below includes the school's effect on student achievement in each subject area. Grade Level and Subject Elementary Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect State Percentile (higher is better) Statistically Different From State Average? District Rank (lower is better) Statistically Different From District Average? -0.1971 -0.2659 -0.2206 -0.4394 -0.5292 -0.3300 3 Lower 1 Lower 9 Lower 1 Lower 1 No 1 Lower 82 of 85 Lower 84 of 85 Lower 68 of 85 No 85 of 85 Lower 85 of 85 No 85 of 85 Lower Student Growth Percentiles School Mean of Individual SGPs State Percentile (higher is better) District Rank (lower is better) 44 8 73 of 85 33 1 85 of 85 33 9 75 of 85 25 1 85 of 85 16 1 85 of 85 30 1 85 of 85 Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls 149 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Grade Level and Subject Middle Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect State Percentile (higher is better) Statistically Different From State Average? District Rank (lower is better) Statistically Different From District Average? 0.1309 0.1044 -0.0223 -0.1542 -0.1171 -0.0171 93 Higher 90 No 47 No 10 Lower 23 Lower 42 No 6 of 30 No 5 of 30 No 12 of 30 No 26 of 30 No 19 of 30 No 10 of 30 No Note: statistical significance based on a 95 percent confidence level. Student Growth Percentiles School Mean of Individual SGPs State Percentile (higher is better) District Rank (lower is better) 56 51 11 of 30 53 89 4 of 30 39 14 23 of 30 51 54 10 of 30 39 15 24 of 30 47 30 17 of 30 Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls 150 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Comparison of 2013/14 and 2012/13 Value-Added and SGP Summary Results Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls' performance in 2013/14 is generally weaker than in 2012/13. The estimated impact on student achievement averaged across all subjects in elementary school was -0.3300 in 2013/14 compared to -0.0757 in 2012/13. In middle school the cross-subject average contribution to student achievement was -0.0171 in 2013/14, which is not substantially different from the estimated contribution in 2012/13 of 0.0339. The largest declines were in elementary reading, ELA, science and social studies. Grade Level and Subject Elementary Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average Middle Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect 2012/13 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? School Effect 2013/14 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? -0.0193 0.0208 -0.4699 -0.0600 0.1479 -0.0757 58 of 85 27 of 85 85 of 85 36 of 85 8 of 85 48 of 85 No No Lower No Higher No -0.1971 -0.2659 -0.2206 -0.4394 -0.5292 -0.3300 82 of 85 Lower 84 of 85 Lower 68 of 85 No 85 of 85 Lower 85 of 85 No 85 of 85 Lower 0.1660 0.0294 0.1129 -0.2869 0.1340 0.0339 3 of 29 5 of 29 3 of 29 28 of 29 4 of 29 4 of 29 Higher No Higher Lower Higher Higher 0.1309 0.1044 -0.0223 -0.1542 -0.1171 -0.0171 6 of 30 No 5 of 30 No 12 of 30 No 26 of 30 No 19 of 30 No 10 of 30 No Note: statistical significance based on a 95 percent confidence level. Student Growth Percentiles 2012/13 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 2013/14 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 44 74 of 85 48 31 of 85 25 85 of 85 48 29 of 85 56 9 of 85 44 52 of 85 58 6 of 29 53 5 of 29 56 4 of 29 34 28 of 29 61 3 of 29 52 5 of 29 44 73 of 85 33 85 of 85 33 75 of 85 25 85 of 85 16 85 of 85 30 85 of 85 56 11 of 30 53 4 of 30 39 23 of 30 51 10 of 30 39 24 of 30 47 17 of 30 Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls 151 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Comparison of School Impact Subject Area: All-Subject Elementary Average State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls Comparison District: DeKalb County School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional 152 Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: All-Subject Middle Average State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls Comparison District: DeKalb County School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. - Young Mens Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls 153 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary Reading State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls Comparison District: DeKalb County School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. - Young Mens Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls 154 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary ELA State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls Comparison District: DeKalb County School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls 155 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary Mathematics State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls Comparison District: DeKalb County School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. - Young Mens Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units Ivy Prep. - Young Mens 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls 156 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary Science State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls Comparison District: DeKalb County School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls 157 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary Social Studies State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls Comparison District: DeKalb County School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls 158 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Reading State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls Comparison District: DeKalb County School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls 159 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle ELA State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls Comparison District: DeKalb County School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Ivy Prep. - Young Mens Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Ivy Prep. - Young Mens Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls 160 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Mathematics State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls Comparison District: DeKalb County School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Ivy Prep. - Young Mens Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls 161 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Science State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls Comparison District: DeKalb County School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls 162 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Social Studies State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls Comparison District: DeKalb County School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. - Young Mens Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Ivy Prep. - Young Mens School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls 163 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Proficiency Levels System Name Grade 3 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average Grade 4 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average Grade 5 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average Grade 6 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average System Name Grade 3 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average Grade 4 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average N Tested CRCT Reading % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 45 6.7 44.4 48.9 93.3 7,566 13.7 50.8 35.6 86.3 126,745 7.7 46.5 45.9 92.3 24 16.7 41.7 41.7 83.3 7,207 12.0 45.0 43.0 88.0 124,872 6.4 41.3 52.3 93.6 24 8.3 58.3 33.3 91.7 7,119 10.7 57.9 31.5 89.3 123,653 5.2 53.1 41.7 94.8 25 6,610 124,746 4.0 52.0 44.0 96.0 6.1 55.4 38.5 93.9 2.8 47.6 49.6 97.2 42 0.0 59.5 40.5 100.0 6,976 13.3 56.8 29.8 86.7 127,269 5.3 53.0 41.7 94.7 37 6,875 126,232 2.7 43.2 54.1 97.3 8.7 50.0 41.2 91.3 3.0 43.7 53.2 97.0 CRCT ELA N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 45 2.2 55.6 42.2 97.8 7,577 19.9 56.2 23.9 80.1 127,032 11.5 56.1 32.3 88.5 24 8.3 62.5 29.2 91.7 7,203 18.5 53.0 28.4 81.5 124,719 11.3 54.0 34.8 88.7 Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls 164 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Grade 5 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average Grade 6 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average System Name Grade 3 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average Grade 4 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average Grade 5 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average Grade 6 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average 24 12.5 58.3 29.2 87.5 7,132 10.4 60.0 29.5 89.6 123,571 5.3 55.6 39.2 94.7 25 0.0 68.0 32.0 100.0 6,608 14.2 61.1 24.7 85.8 124,615 8.2 59.6 32.2 91.8 42 0.0 52.4 47.6 100.0 6,972 14.2 50.8 35.0 85.8 126,992 6.1 46.6 47.3 93.9 36 2.8 38.9 58.3 97.2 6,881 12.6 54.9 32.5 87.4 126,011 5.5 50.3 44.3 94.5 CRCT MATH N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 45 20.0 37.8 42.2 80.0 7,669 32.0 37.2 30.8 68.0 127,519 19.3 36.7 44.0 80.7 24 29.2 62.5 8.3 70.8 7,245 32.3 41.3 26.4 67.7 124,706 18.3 42.6 39.0 81.7 24 29.2 33.3 37.5 70.8 7,151 23.6 46.7 29.6 76.4 123,006 12.3 43.8 43.8 87.7 25 16.0 80.0 4.0 84.0 6,590 27.1 53.8 19.1 72.9 124,070 15.9 55.8 28.3 84.1 42 4.8 83.3 11.9 95.2 6,942 25.9 51.7 22.5 74.1 126,420 12.4 50.2 37.4 87.6 35 25.7 45.7 28.6 74.3 6,884 35.0 46.1 18.9 65.0 125,259 18.5 47.5 34.1 81.5 Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls 165 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 System Name Grade 3 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average Grade 4 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average Grade 5 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average Grade 6 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average System Name Grade 3 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average Grade 4 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average CRCT SCIENCE N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 45 6.7 55.6 37.8 93.3 7,808 35.9 37.8 26.3 64.1 129,662 22.9 41.1 35.9 77.1 24 41.7 54.2 4.2 58.3 7,427 32.3 37.3 30.5 67.7 127,657 19.1 38.0 42.9 80.9 24 33.3 50.0 16.7 66.7 7,398 33.8 39.4 26.9 66.2 127,252 18.1 39.8 42.1 81.9 25 32.0 64.0 4.0 68.0 6,814 42.0 45.1 12.9 58.0 127,590 24.9 52.4 22.7 75.1 43 14.0 65.1 20.9 86.0 7,139 32.3 39.3 28.4 67.7 129,848 15.8 38.0 46.2 84.2 37 24.3 73.0 2.7 75.7 7,025 37.9 48.0 14.1 62.1 128,936 22.1 52.9 25.0 77.9 CRCT SOCIAL STUDIES N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 45 4.4 40.0 55.6 95.6 7,707 27.4 47.3 25.3 72.6 129,137 16.3 47.7 35.9 83.7 24 37.5 62.5 0.0 62.5 7,343 33.1 48.8 18.1 66.9 127,178 18.8 51.1 30.0 81.2 Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls 166 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Grade 5 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average Grade 6 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Ivy Prep Kirkwood District Average Statewide Average 24 29.2 70.8 0.0 70.8 7,332 33.9 49.7 16.4 66.1 126,802 19.3 53.8 26.9 80.7 25 24.0 60.0 16.0 76.0 6,786 35.0 34.6 30.3 65.0 127,200 20.2 35.1 44.8 79.8 43 11.6 51.2 37.2 88.4 7,116 31.4 34.5 34.1 68.6 129,400 16.5 30.5 53.0 83.5 37 18.9 62.2 18.9 81.1 6,976 35.2 42.9 21.9 64.8 128,365 19.4 44.4 36.2 80.6 Ivy Preparatory Academy at Kirkwood for Girls 167 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy Key Findings The value-added estimate of the school's impact on a student's average achievement across all subjects is -0.3223 in elementary grades and -0.0616 in middle grades, meaning that Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy is below both the state and district average in elementary grades and not significantly different from the state and district average in middle grades. In general, Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy's performance in elementary reading, math and science and in middle school social studies is weak relative to the state and district. However, its contribution to student achievement in middle school math is strong, exceeding both the state and district averages. Performance at Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy generally declined in the elementary grades relative to the prior year, while performance in some middle school subjects showed improvement from 2012/13. The school's contribution to student achievement is: o below the state and district averages in elementary reading, elementary math, elementary science and middle school social studies, and below the state average in middle school science. o above the state average in middle school reading and above both the state and district averages in middle school math. o indistinguishable from the district and state average in elementary ELA and social studies as well as in middle school ELA. General Characteristics School Name Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy Calendar Year Opened 2011 EMO Affiliation No Grades K-8 Curriculum Focus College Preparatory curriculum for all students. School Year Extended Day/Week/ Year Single- Gender School Boys- Only Virtual/ Online School No Serves Multiple Counties No Parental Involvement Requirement Not Specified Enrollment Restrictions DeKalb County 168 Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Students Served School Name Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy Pct. Female Pct. White Pct. Pct. Pct. Other Pct. Black Hispanic FRL 0.0 1.5 95.7 1.8 0.3 70.6 Pct. Pct. SWD LEP 0.0 8.9 Pct. Gifted 3.7 Value-Added and SGP Results Summary by Grade Level and Subject Overall School Effect: -0.3223 Elementary / -0.0616 Middle Overall District Effect: -0.0624 Elementary / - 0.0225 Middle Ivy Preparatory Academy Young Men's Leadership Academy's contribution to an elementary student's average achievement across all five CRCT- tested subjects is less than the average elementary school in the state and district, and its contribution to a middle school student's cross-subject average achievement is not statistically different than that of the average middle school in the state and district. It is important to note that averaging achievement scores across subjects masks any variation in school performance between subject areas. As a result, the table below includes the school's effect on student achievement in each subject area. Grade Level and Subject Elementary Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect State Percentile (higher is better) Statistically Different From State Average? District Rank (lower is better) Statistically Different From District Average? -0.2072 -0.1430 -0.4430 -0.3944 -0.4343 -0.3223 2 Lower 8 No 1 Lower 1 Lower 1 No 1 Lower 84 of 85 Lower 79 of 85 No 83 of 85 Lower 84 of 85 Lower 81 of 85 No 84 of 85 Lower Student Growth Percentiles School Mean of Individual SGPs State Percentile (higher is better) District Rank (lower is better) 40 2 82 of 85 38 5 83 of 85 23 1 84 of 85 32 1 82 of 85 25 2 83 of 85 31 1 84 of 85 Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy 169 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Grade Level and Subject Middle Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect State Percentile (higher is better) Statistically Different From State Average? District Rank (lower is better) Statistically Different From District Average? 0.1313 0.0359 0.1302 -0.1275 -0.4200 -0.0616 93 Higher 71 No 85 Higher 15 Lower 2 Lower 22 No 5 of 30 No 11 of 30 No 5 of 30 Higher 22 of 30 No 30 of 30 Lower 22 of 30 No Note: statistical significance based on a 95 percent confidence level. Student Growth Percentiles School Mean of Individual SGPs State Percentile (higher is better) District Rank (lower is better) 56 53 10 of 30 49 61 20 of 30 50 63 6 of 30 44 17 24 of 30 27 2 30 of 30 45 14 25 of 30 Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy 170 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Comparison of 2013/14 and 2012/13 Value-Added and SGP Summary Results Ivy Preparatory Academy Young Men's Leadership Academy's performance in 2013/14 is generally lower in the elementary grades relative to its performance in 2012/13. The cross-subject average contribution to student achievement in elementary grades fell from -0.0589 in 2012/13 to -0.3223 in 2013/14. In middle grades the school's overall performance in 2013/14 was roughly on par with its performance in the prior year; the cross-subject average contribution to student achievement in the middle grades was -0.0616 compared to -0.1695. There were, however, substantial improvements in the school's estimated contribution to student achievement in middle school reading and ELA. Grade Level and Subject Elementary Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average Middle Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect 2012/13 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? School Effect 2013/14 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? 0.0933 0.1069 -0.1621 -0.0668 -0.2730 -0.0589 21 of 85 No 7 of 85 No 52 of 85 No 39 of 85 No 72 of 85 No 42 of 85 No -0.2072 -0.1430 -0.4430 -0.3944 -0.4343 -0.3223 84 of 85 Lower 79 of 85 No 83 of 85 Lower 84 of 85 Lower 81 of 85 No 84 of 85 Lower -0.0990 -0.1412 -0.1696 -0.1815 -0.3371 -0.1695 26 of 29 27 of 29 22 of 29 23 of 29 27 of 29 27 of 29 No No No No Lower Lower 0.1313 0.0359 0.1302 -0.1275 -0.4200 -0.0616 5 of 30 No 11 of 30 No 5 of 30 Higher 22 of 30 No 30 of 30 Lower 22 of 30 No Note: statistical significance based on a 95 percent confidence level. Student Growth Percentiles 2012/13 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 2013/14 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 56 15 of 85 49 26 of 85 43 47 of 85 46 43 of 85 39 63 of 85 47 40 of 85 52 19 of 29 40 27 of 29 43 19 of 29 44 19 of 29 31 26 of 29 42 24 of 29 40 82 of 85 38 83 of 85 23 84 of 85 32 82 of 85 25 83 of 85 31 84 of 85 56 10 of 30 49 20 of 30 50 6 of 30 44 24 of 30 27 30 of 30 45 25 of 30 Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy 171 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Comparison of School Impact Subject Area: All-Subject Elementary Average State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy Comparison District: DeKalb County School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional 172 Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: All-Subject Middle Average State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy Comparison District: DeKalb County School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. - Young Mens Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy 173 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary Reading State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy Comparison District: DeKalb County School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. - Young Mens Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy 174 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary ELA State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy Comparison District: DeKalb County School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy 175 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary Mathematics State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy Comparison District: DeKalb County School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. - Young Mens Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units Ivy Prep. - Young Mens 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy 176 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary Science State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy Comparison District: DeKalb County School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy 177 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary Social Studies State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy Comparison District: DeKalb County School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy 178 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Reading State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy Comparison District: DeKalb County School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy 179 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle ELA State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy Comparison District: DeKalb County School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Ivy Prep. - Young Mens Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Ivy Prep. - Young Mens Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy 180 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Mathematics State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy Comparison District: DeKalb County School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Ivy Prep. - Young Mens Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy 181 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Science State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy Comparison District: DeKalb County School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood Ivy Prep. - Young Mens 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy 182 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Social Studies State Charter: Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy Comparison District: DeKalb County School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Ivy Prep. - Young Mens Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Ivy Prep. - Kirkwood 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Ivy Prep. - Young Mens School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy 183 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Proficiency Levels System Name Grade 3 Ivy Prep Young Men's District Average Statewide Average Grade 4 Ivy Prep Young Men's District Average Statewide Average Grade 5 Ivy Prep Young Men's District Average Statewide Average Grade 6 Ivy Prep Young Men's District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Ivy Prep Young Men's District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Ivy Prep Young Men's District Average Statewide Average System Name Grade 3 Ivy Prep Young Men's District Average Statewide Average Grade 4 Ivy Prep Young Men's District Average Statewide Average N Tested CRCT Reading % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 41 9.8 65.9 24.4 90.2 7,566 13.7 50.8 35.6 86.3 126,745 7.7 46.5 45.9 92.3 24 8.3 54.2 37.5 91.7 7,207 12.0 45.0 43.0 88.0 124,872 6.4 41.3 52.3 93.6 16 31.3 56.3 12.5 68.8 7,119 10.7 57.9 31.5 89.3 123,653 5.2 53.1 41.7 94.8 25 16.0 56.0 28.0 84.0 6,610 6.1 55.4 38.5 93.9 124,746 2.8 47.6 49.6 97.2 49 16.3 67.3 16.3 83.7 6,976 13.3 56.8 29.8 86.7 127,269 5.3 53.0 41.7 94.7 39 6,875 126,232 0.0 53.8 46.2 100.0 8.7 50.0 41.2 91.3 3.0 43.7 53.2 97.0 CRCT ELA N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 41 17.1 63.4 19.5 82.9 7,577 19.9 56.2 23.9 80.1 127,032 11.5 56.1 32.3 88.5 24 20.8 62.5 16.7 79.2 7,203 18.5 53.0 28.4 81.5 124,719 11.3 54.0 34.8 88.7 Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy 184 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Grade 5 Ivy Prep Young Men's 16 25.0 62.5 12.5 75.0 District Average 7,132 10.4 60.0 29.5 89.6 Statewide Average 123,571 5.3 55.6 39.2 94.7 Grade 6 Ivy Prep Young Men's 24 12.5 66.7 20.8 87.5 District Average 6,608 14.2 61.1 24.7 85.8 Statewide Average 124,615 8.2 59.6 32.2 91.8 Grade 7 Ivy Prep Young Men's 49 22.4 57.1 20.4 77.6 District Average 6,972 14.2 50.8 35.0 85.8 Statewide Average 126,992 6.1 46.6 47.3 93.9 Grade 8 Ivy Prep Young Men's 39 10.3 51.3 38.5 89.7 District Average 6,881 12.6 54.9 32.5 87.4 Statewide Average 126,011 5.5 50.3 44.3 94.5 System Name Grade 3 Ivy Prep Young Men's District Average Statewide Average Grade 4 Ivy Prep Young Men's District Average Statewide Average Grade 5 Ivy Prep Young Men's District Average Statewide Average Grade 6 Ivy Prep Young Men's District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Ivy Prep Young Men's District Average Statewide Average N Tested CRCT MATH % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 41 22.0 51.2 26.8 78.0 7,669 32.0 37.2 30.8 68.0 127,519 19.3 36.7 44.0 80.7 24 45.8 45.8 8.3 54.2 7,245 32.3 41.3 26.4 67.7 124,706 18.3 42.6 39.0 81.7 17 52.9 35.3 11.8 47.1 7,151 23.6 46.7 29.6 76.4 123,006 12.3 43.8 43.8 87.7 24 25.0 70.8 4.2 75.0 6,590 27.1 53.8 19.1 72.9 124,070 15.9 55.8 28.3 84.1 49 18.4 55.1 26.5 81.6 6,942 25.9 51.7 22.5 74.1 126,420 12.4 50.2 37.4 87.6 Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy 185 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Grade 8 Ivy Prep Young Men's District Average Statewide Average System Name Grade 3 Ivy Prep Young Men's District Average Statewide Average Grade 4 Ivy Prep Young Men's District Average Statewide Average Grade 5 Ivy Prep Young Men's District Average Statewide Average Grade 6 Ivy Prep Young Men's District Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Ivy Prep Young Men's District Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Ivy Prep Young Men's District Average Statewide Average System Name Grade 3 Ivy Prep Young Men's District Average Statewide Average 39 23.1 56.4 20.5 76.9 6,884 35.0 46.1 18.9 65.0 125,259 18.5 47.5 34.1 81.5 CRCT SCIENCE N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 43 32.6 48.8 18.6 67.4 7,808 35.9 37.8 26.3 64.1 129,662 22.9 41.1 35.9 77.1 24 41.7 41.7 16.7 58.3 7,427 32.3 37.3 30.5 67.7 127,657 19.1 38.0 42.9 80.9 17 52.9 35.3 11.8 47.1 7,398 33.8 39.4 26.9 66.2 127,252 18.1 39.8 42.1 81.9 25 32.0 64.0 4.0 68.0 6,814 42.0 45.1 12.9 58.0 127,590 24.9 52.4 22.7 75.1 50 36.0 52.0 12.0 64.0 7,139 32.3 39.3 28.4 67.7 129,848 15.8 38.0 46.2 84.2 43 37.2 60.5 2.3 62.8 7,025 37.9 48.0 14.1 62.1 128,936 22.1 52.9 25.0 77.9 CRCT SOCIAL STUDIES N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 43 14.0 53.5 32.6 86.0 7,707 27.4 47.3 25.3 72.6 129,137 16.3 47.7 35.9 83.7 Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy 186 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Grade 4 Ivy Prep Young Men's 24 33.3 58.3 8.3 66.7 District Average 7,343 33.1 48.8 18.1 66.9 Statewide Average 127,178 18.8 51.1 30.0 81.2 Grade 5 Ivy Prep Young Men's 17 70.6 17.6 11.8 29.4 District Average 7,332 33.9 49.7 16.4 66.1 Statewide Average 126,802 19.3 53.8 26.9 80.7 Grade 6 Ivy Prep Young Men's 25 52.0 40.0 8.0 48.0 District Average 6,786 35.0 34.6 30.3 65.0 Statewide Average 127,200 20.2 35.1 44.8 79.8 Grade 7 Ivy Prep Young Men's 50 46.0 44.0 10.0 54.0 District Average 7,116 31.4 34.5 34.1 68.6 Statewide Average 129,400 16.5 30.5 53.0 83.5 Grade 8 Ivy Prep Young Men's 43 39.5 55.8 4.7 60.5 District Average 6,976 35.2 42.9 21.9 64.8 Statewide Average 128,365 19.4 44.4 36.2 80.6 Ivy Preparatory Young Men's Leadership Academy 187 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Mountain Education Center Key Findings Mountain Education Center's contribution to student achievement exceeds the state average in Math II, but falls below the state average in American Literature. Since the school serves students from multiple counties it does not have a district comparison group. Compared to 2012/13, Mountain Education Center had a substantial increase in the contribution to student achievement in Math II but had a large decrease in 9th Grade Literature. The school's contribution to student achievement is: o above the state average in Math II. o below the state average in American Literature. o indistinguishable from the state average in 9th Grade Literature, Biology, Coordinate Algebra, Economics and Physical Science and U.S. History. General Characteristics School Name Calendar Year Opened EMO Affiliation Mountain Education 2007 No Charter School Grades 9-12 Curriculum Focus Self-paced, individualized, evening high school for students struggling at other schools School Year Year-round Single- Gender School No Virtual/ Online School No Serves Multiple Counties Yes Parental Involvement Requirement No Enrollment Restrictions Students residing in State of GA Students Served School Name Mountain Education Center Pct. Female Pct. White Pct. Pct. Pct. Other Pct. Black Hispanic FRL 49.7 90.7 5.3 0.1 3.7 72.9 Pct. Pct. SWD LEP 2.1 14.0 Pct. Gifted 0.0 188 Mountain Education Center State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Value-Added and SGP Results Summary by Grade Level and Subject Mountain Education Center's contribution to student achievement is less than the state average in American Literature and greater than the state average in Math II. The table below includes the school's effect on student achievement in each subject area. Grade Level and Subject High 9th Grade Literature American Literature Analytic Geometry Biology Coordinate Algebra Economics Math II Physical Science U.S. History Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect State Percentile (higher is better) Statistically Different From State Average? District Rank (lower is better) Statistically Different From District Average? 0.0498 -0.1565 67 No 13 Lower -0.0198 -0.1002 0.0812 0.3140 0.0914 -0.0678 47 No 26 No 62 No 86 Higher 73 No 42 No Note: statistical significance based on a 95 percent confidence level. Student Growth Percentiles School Mean of Individual SGPs State Percentile (higher is better) District Rank (lower is better) 44 14 46 38 46 53 49 47 61 79 64 93 52 65 43 42 Mountain Education Center 189 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Comparison of 2013/14 and 2012/13 Value-Added and SGP Summary Results Mountain Education Center's performance in 2013/14 was similar to it performance in 2012/13 in most subjects. However, the school's contribution to student achievement in Math II rose from -0.0506 in 2012/13 to 0.3140 in 2013/14. Mountain Education Center's contribution to student achievement in 9th Grade Literature declined from 0.4303 to 0.0498. It also experienced a smaller decline in American Literature from -0.0020 to -0.1565 Grade Level and Subject High 9th Grade Literature American Literature Analytic Geometry Biology Coordinate Algebra Economics Math II Physical Science U.S. History Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect 2012/13 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? School Effect 2013/14 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? 0.4303 -0.0020 0.0498 -0.1565 0.0675 0.0413 -0.0506 0.0078 -0.0463 -0.0198 -0.1002 0.0812 0.3140 0.0914 -0.0678 Note: statistical significance based on a 95 percent confidence level. Student Growth Percentiles 2012/13 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 2013/14 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 65 44 40 46 50 46 49 60 61 51 64 55 52 37 43 Mountain Education Center 190 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Proficiency Levels System Name 9TH Grade Literature Mountain Education Statewide Average American Literature Mountain Education Statewide Average Math II Mountain Education Statewide Average Biology Mountain Education Statewide Average US History Mountain Education Statewide Average Economics Mountain Education Statewide Average END OF COURSE TEST N Tested % Did Not Meet the standard % Met the standard % Exceeded the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 37 8.1 64.9 27.0 91.9 112,505 12.3 45.1 42.6 87.7 83 93,689 8.4 63.9 27.7 91.6 7.5 50.7 41.9 92.6 41 63.4 36.6 4,946 77.4 22.2 0.0 36.6 0.3 22.5 62 27.4 51.6 21.0 72.6 109,030 25.0 41.1 33.9 75.0 104 27.9 44.2 27.9 72.1 93,645 27.2 32.6 40.2 72.8 159 19.5 50.9 29.6 80.5 59,564 18.8 39.1 42.1 81.2 191 Mountain Education Center State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Odyssey School (Including Georgia Cyber Academy) Key Findings The value-added estimate of the school's impact on a student's average achievement across all subjects is -0.0694 in elementary grades and -0.0256 in middle grades, meaning that Odyssey School is below the state average in both elementary and middle school. The value-added estimates in 9th Grade Literature and American Literature are above state averages but below state averages for Analytic Geometry, Biology, Coordinate Algebra, Economics and Physical Science. Because Georgia Cyber Academy serves students throughout Georgia, the school does not have a district comparison group. In general, Odyssey School's strengths include reading and ELA at all levels and its weaknesses include math, science, and social studies at all levels. The Odyssey School's performance in the elementary grades in 2013/14 is comparable to their performance in 2012/13. In middle school, the Odyssey School's performance improved overall. The school's contribution to student achievement is: o above the state average in elementary reading and ELA, middle school reading and ELA and 9th Grade Literature and American Literature at the high school level. o below the state average in elementary math and science, middle school math, science, and social studies and high school Analytic Geometry, Biology, Coordinate Algebra, Economics, Physical Science and U.S. History. General Characteristics School Name Calendar Year Opened EMO Affiliation Odyssey School 2004 None Georgia Cyber Academy (program of 2009 K-12 Odyssey School) Grades Curriculum Focus School Year Multi-age classrooms - students grouped K-8 by skill level/Looping: Normal students remain with teacher two years Single- Gender School No K-12 Online Curriculum Normal No Virtual/ Online School No Yes Serves Multiple Counties No Yes Parental Involvement Requirement Enrollment Restrictions 18 hours per academic year Coweta County Public Schools Zone Not Specified Students residing in State of GA 192 Odyssey School (Including Georgia Cyber Academy) State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Students Served School Name Odyssey School (including Georgia Cyber Academy) Pct. Female Pct. White Pct. Pct. Pct. Other Pct. Black Hispanic FRL 50.1 60.1 34.4 1.3 2.1 90.6 Pct. Pct. SWD LEP 0.2 12.6 Pct. Gifted 1.1 Value-Added and SGP Results Summary by Grade Level and Subject Overall School Effect: -0.0694 Elementary / -0.0256 Middle Odyssey School's contribution to an elementary student and a middle school student's average achievement across all five CRCT-tested subjects is less than the average elementary and middle school in the state. It is important to note that averaging achievement scores across subjects masks any variation in school performance between subject areas. As a result, the table below includes the school's effect on student achievement in each subject area. At the high school level, the school's contribution to student achievement is above the state average in 9th Grade Literature and American Literature, but below the state average in Analytic Geometry, Biology, Coordinate Algebra, Economics, Physical Science and U.S. History. Grade Level and Subject Elementary Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect State Percentile (higher is better) Statistically Different From State Average? District Rank (lower is better) Statistically Different From District Average? 0.0900 0.0539 -0.2435 -0.0856 -0.1635 -0.0694 82 Higher 72 Higher 7 Lower 26 Lower 19 No 26 Lower Student Growth Percentiles School Mean of Individual SGPs State Percentile (higher is better) District Rank (lower is better) 49 31 46 41 33 8 44 18 44 32 43 16 193 Odyssey School (Including Georgia Cyber Academy) State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) Grade Level and Subject Middle Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average High 9th Grade Literature American Literature Analytic Geometry Biology Coordinate Algebra Economics Math II Physical Science U.S. History School Effect 0.1478 0.1280 -0.0971 -0.0467 -0.2648 -0.0256 0.2234 0.2245 -0.2586 -0.2082 -0.0867 -0.3351 -0.2394 -0.4012 State Percentile (higher is better) Statistically Different From State Average? 95 Higher 94 Higher 21 Lower 33 Lower 7 Lower 36 Lower 96 Higher 95 Higher 8 Lower 12 Lower 31 Lower 10 Lower 10 Lower 7 Lower District Rank (lower is better) Statistically Different From District Average? Note: statistical significance based on a 95 percent confidence level. Student Growth Percentiles School Mean of Individual SGPs State Percentile (higher is better) District Rank (lower is better) 56 54 52 82 41 21 44 17 36 6 46 19 57 85 50 67 42 24 32 9 48 42 50 49 39 16 27 7 194 Odyssey School (Including Georgia Cyber Academy) State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Comparison of 2013/14 and 2012/13 Value-Added and SGP Summary Results The Odyssey School's performance in the elementary grades in 2013/14 is on par with their performance in 2014/15. In 2013/14 their cross- subject average contribution to student achievement in elementary was -0.0694 compared to -0.0559 in 2012/13. In middle school, the school's performance generally improved in 2013/14; the cross-subject average contribution to student achievement in middle grades was -0.3500 in 2012/13 and -0.0256 in 2013/14. At the high school level, results were generally similar from one year to the next. Grade Level and Subject Elementary Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average Middle Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average High 9th Grade Literature American Literature Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect 2012/13 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? School Effect 2013/14 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? 0.1632 0.0634 -0.1992 -0.0941 -0.1978 -0.0559 0.0900 0.0539 -0.2435 -0.0856 -0.1635 -0.0694 0.1734 0.1057 -0.1239 -0.0686 -0.2542 -0.0350 0.1478 0.1280 -0.0971 -0.0467 -0.2648 -0.0256 0.1689 0.1578 0.2234 0.2245 Student Growth Percentiles 2012/13 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 2013/14 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 52 49 49 46 39 33 44 44 43 44 45 43 57 56 51 52 42 41 44 44 34 36 46 46 57 57 36 50 195 Odyssey School (Including Georgia Cyber Academy) State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Grade Level and Subject Analytic Geometry Biology Coordinate Algebra Economics Math II Physical Science U.S. History Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect 2012/13 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? -0.2300 -0.2096 School Effect 2013/14 District Rank (lower is better) -0.2586 -0.2082 -0.0867 -0.3351 Statistic- ally Different From District Average? -0.2327 -0.3975 -0.2394 -0.4012 Note: statistical significance based on a 95 percent confidence level. Student Growth Percentiles 2012/13 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 2013/14 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 42 32 32 42 48 50 35 39 29 27 196 Odyssey School (Including Georgia Cyber Academy) State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Proficiency Levels System Name Grade 3 Odyssey School Statewide Average Grade 4 Odyssey School Statewide Average Grade 5 Odyssey School Statewide Average Grade 6 Odyssey School Statewide Average Grade 7 Odyssey School Statewide Average Grade 8 Odyssey School Statewide Average System Name Grade 3 Odyssey School Statewide Average Grade 4 Odyssey School Statewide Average Grade 5 Odyssey School Statewide Average Grade 6 Odyssey School Statewide Average CRCT Reading N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 798 13.3 42.4 44.4 86.7 126,745 7.7 46.5 45.9 92.3 809 124,872 8.9 42.3 48.8 91.1 6.4 41.3 52.3 93.6 873 123,653 8.4 47.7 44.0 91.6 5.2 53.1 41.7 94.8 1,089 124,746 2.1 42.4 55.5 97.9 2.8 47.6 49.6 97.2 1,378 127,269 5.0 51.2 43.8 95.0 5.3 53.0 41.7 94.7 1,511 126,232 2.9 42.8 54.3 97.1 3.0 43.7 53.2 97.0 CRCT ELA N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 797 20.1 52.9 27.0 79.9 127,032 11.5 56.1 32.3 88.5 801 17.1 49.6 33.3 82.9 124,719 11.3 54.0 34.8 88.7 874 10.0 54.7 35.4 90.0 123,571 5.3 55.6 39.2 94.7 1,088 124,615 8.2 57.8 34.0 91.8 8.2 59.6 32.2 91.8 197 Odyssey School (Including Georgia Cyber Academy) State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Grade 7 Odyssey School Statewide Average Grade 8 Odyssey School Statewide Average System Name Grade 3 Odyssey School Statewide Average Grade 4 Odyssey School Statewide Average Grade 5 Odyssey School Statewide Average Grade 6 Odyssey School Statewide Average Grade 7 Odyssey School Statewide Average Grade 8 Odyssey School Statewide Average System Name Grade 3 Odyssey School Statewide Average Grade 4 Odyssey School Statewide Average Grade 5 Odyssey School Statewide Average 1,367 126,992 7.1 46.2 46.7 92.9 6.1 46.6 47.3 93.9 1,500 126,011 6.9 48.9 44.1 93.1 5.5 50.3 44.3 94.5 CRCT MATH N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 798 36.8 33.0 30.2 63.2 127,519 19.3 36.7 44.0 80.7 799 33.7 37.9 28.4 66.3 124,706 18.3 42.6 39.0 81.7 870 32.4 44.0 23.6 67.6 123,006 12.3 43.8 43.8 87.7 1,071 24.0 55.6 20.4 76.0 124,070 15.9 55.8 28.3 84.1 1,355 15.9 57.3 26.8 84.1 126,420 12.4 50.2 37.4 87.6 1,485 35.1 48.6 16.3 64.9 125,259 18.5 47.5 34.1 81.5 CRCT SCIENCE N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 803 31.6 36.1 32.3 129,662 22.9 41.1 35.9 823 26.4 39.5 34.1 127,657 19.1 38.0 42.9 886 25.4 40.2 34.4 127,252 18.1 39.8 42.1 Odyssey School (Including Georgia Cyber Academy) 68.4 77.1 73.6 80.9 74.6 81.9 198 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Grade 6 Odyssey School Statewide Average Grade 7 Odyssey School Statewide Average Grade 8 Odyssey School Statewide Average System Name Grade 3 Odyssey School Statewide Average Grade 4 Odyssey School Statewide Average Grade 5 Odyssey School Statewide Average Grade 6 Odyssey School Statewide Average Grade 7 Odyssey School Statewide Average Grade 8 Odyssey School Statewide Average 1,111 27.6 54.0 18.4 72.4 127,590 24.9 52.4 22.7 75.1 1,408 20.2 46.2 33.5 79.8 129,848 15.8 38.0 46.2 84.2 1,533 29.2 55.5 15.3 70.8 128,936 22.1 52.9 25.0 77.9 CRCT SOCIAL STUDIES N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 801 32.2 49.6 18.2 67.8 129,137 16.3 47.7 35.9 83.7 821 30.9 54.0 15.1 69.1 127,178 18.8 51.1 30.0 81.2 881 28.9 52.3 18.7 71.1 126,802 19.3 53.8 26.9 80.7 1,106 35.7 39.4 24.9 64.3 127,200 20.2 35.1 44.8 79.8 1,400 30.8 39.4 29.9 69.2 129,400 16.5 30.5 53.0 83.5 1,525 30.9 50.7 18.4 69.1 128,365 19.4 44.4 36.2 80.6 199 Odyssey School (Including Georgia Cyber Academy) State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 System Name 9TH Grade Literature Odyssey School Statewide Average American Literature Odyssey School Statewide Average Math II Odyssey School Statewide Average Biology Odyssey School Statewide Average US History Odyssey School Statewide Average Economics Odyssey School Statewide Average END OF COURSE TEST N Tested % Did Not Meet the standard % Met the standard % Exceeded the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 1,198 9.2 45.7 45.2 90.9 112,505 12.3 45.1 42.6 87.7 728 93,689 7.0 49.0 44.0 93.0 7.5 50.7 41.9 92.6 5 --- --- 4,946 77.4 22.2 --- 0.3 22.5 1,218 44.8 42.2 13.0 55.2 109,030 25.0 41.1 33.9 75.0 697 52.2 31.6 16.2 47.8 93,645 27.2 32.6 40.2 72.8 56 42.9 37.5 19.6 57.1 59,564 18.8 39.1 42.1 81.2 200 Odyssey School (Including Georgia Cyber Academy) State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Pataula Charter Academy Key Findings The value-added estimate of the school's impact on a student's average achievement across all subjects is -0.0091 in elementary grades and -0.0332 in middle grades, meaning that Pataula Charter Academy is not significantly different than the state average in elementary and middle grades. At the high school level, the value-added estimates in 9th Grade Literature, Analytic Geometry and Physical Science are all above the state average. In general, Pataula Charter Academy's performance is strong in middle school social studies relative to the five-county area it serves, but its performance in middle school science is weak relative to the state average. The school's performance is also strong in high school 9th Grade Literature, Physical Science, and Analytic Geometry where its contribution to student achievement exceeds the state average. Relative to 2012/13, Pataula Charter Academy's performance is generally equivalent in 2013/14. The school's contribution to student achievement is: o above the five-county average in middle school social studies, above the state and five-county averages in Physical Science and above the state average in 9th Grade Literature and Analytic Geometry. o below the state average in middle school science. o indistinguishable from both the state and five-county average in all five CRCT-tested subjects in elementary and in middle school reading, ELA and math as well as in Coordinate Algebra at the high school level. General Characteristics School Name Calendar Year Opened Pataula Charter Academy 2010 EMO Affiliation No Grades Curriculum Focus School Year Expeditionary Learning: project based lectures and K-9 curriculum Normal delivery/Looping: students remain with teacher for two years Single- Gender School No Virtual/ Online School No Serves Multiple Counties Yes Parental Involvement Requirement Not Specified Enrollment Restrictions Students residing in Baker, Calhoun, Clay, Early, Randolph Public School districts 201 Pataula Charter Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Students Served School Name Pataula Charter Academy Pct. Female Pct. White Pct. Pct. Pct. Other Pct. Black Hispanic FRL 46.2 78.6 13.6 1.2 4.9 59.9 Pct. Pct. SWD LEP 3.1 10.3 Pct. Gifted 6.6 Value-Added and SGP Results Summary by Grade Level and Subject Overall School Effect: -0.0091 Elementary / -0.0332 Middle Overall District Effect: -0.0207 Elementary/-0.0540 Middle Pataula Charter Academy's contribution to an elementary student and a middle school student's average achievement across all five CRCT- tested subjects is not statistically different from the average elementary and middle school in the state and five surrounding county districts. It is important to note that averaging achievement scores across subjects masks any variation in school performance between subject areas. As a result, the table below includes the school's effect on student achievement in each subject area. At the high school level, Pataula Charter Academy's contribution to student achievement exceeded the state and five-county district averages in 9th Grade Literature, Analytic Geometry and Physical Science; it was not significantly different from either the state or five-county averages in Coordinate Algebra. Grade Level and Subject Elementary Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect State Percentile (higher is better) Statistically Different From State Average? District Rank (lower is better) Statistically Different From District Average? -0.0234 0.0136 -0.0156 -0.0553 0.0028 40 No 54 No 46 No 35 No 51 No 4 of 6 No 4 of 6 No 3 of 6 No 3 of 6 No 3 of 6 No Student Growth Percentiles School Mean of Individual SGPs State Percentile (higher is better) District Rank (lower is better) 46 16 5 of 6 51 74 1 of 6 43 35 3 of 6 47 28 3 of 6 50 54 4 of 6 Pataula Charter Academy 202 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Grade Level and Subject All-Subject Average Middle Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average High 9th Grade Literature American Literature Analytic Geometry Biology Coordinate Algebra Economics Math II Physical Science U.S. History Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect -0.0091 State Percentile (higher is better) 46 Statistically Different From State Average? No District Rank (lower is better) 3 of 6 Statistically Different From District Average? No 0.0440 -0.0283 -0.0886 -0.1229 0.0127 -0.0332 69 No 37 No 23 No 15 Lower 51 No 32 No 2 of 6 5 of 6 5 of 6 3 of 6 1 of 6 2 of 6 No No No No Higher No 0.3183 99 Higher 2 of 6 No 0.3016 90 Higher 1 of 5 No 0.0945 75 No 3 of 6 No 0.4804 98 Higher 1 of 6 Higher Note: statistical significance based on a 95 percent confidence level. Student Growth Percentiles School Mean of Individual SGPs 48 State Percentile (higher is better) 41 District Rank (lower is better) 3 of 6 55 45 4 of 6 49 57 3 of 6 41 20 1 of 6 48 37 3 of 6 47 37 3 of 6 48 31 3 of 6 69 99 2 of 6 78 99 1 of 5 64 93 1 of 6 65 95 1 of 6 Pataula Charter Academy 203 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Comparison of 2013/14 and 2012/13 Value-Added and SGP Summary Results Relative to 2012/13, Pataula Charter Academy's performance is generally equivalent in 2013/14. The school's cross-subject average contribution to student achievement in elementary was virtually unchanged, moving from -0.0045 in 2012/13 to -0.0091 in 2013/14. Similarly, there was little change in the cross-subject average contribution to student achievement; in 2012/13 it was 0.0025 and in 2013/14 it was -0.0332. No year- to-year comparison can be made at the high school level because Pataula Charter Academy did not serve any high school grades in 2012/13. Grade Level and Subject Elementary Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average Middle Reading ELA Math Science Social Studies All-Subject Average Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect 2012/13 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? School Effect 2013/14 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? 0.0463 1 of 6 No -0.0234 4 of 6 No -0.0925 4 of 6 No 0.0136 4 of 6 No 0.0694 3 of 6 No -0.0156 3 of 6 No -0.1610 5 of 6 No -0.0553 3 of 6 No 0.1182 1 of 6 Higher 0.0028 3 of 6 No -0.0045 3 of 6 No -0.0091 3 of 6 No 0.0215 0.0133 -0.0816 0.0203 0.0052 0.0025 2 of 6 4 of 6 4 of 6 2 of 6 2 of 6 2 of 6 No No No No Higher No 0.0440 -0.0283 -0.0886 -0.1229 0.0127 -0.0332 2 of 6 5 of 6 5 of 6 3 of 6 1 of 6 2 of 6 No No No No Higher No Student Growth Percentiles 2012/13 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 2013/14 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 54 1 of 6 44 2 of 6 48 4 of 6 44 5 of 6 52 2 of 6 49 2 of 6 57 2 of 6 55 1 of 6 50 1 of 6 58 2 of 6 48 3 of 6 54 2 of 6 46 5 of 6 51 1 of 6 43 3 of 6 47 3 of 6 50 4 of 6 48 3 of 6 55 4 of 6 49 3 of 6 41 1 of 6 48 3 of 6 47 3 of 6 48 3 of 6 Pataula Charter Academy 204 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Grade Level and Subject High 9th Grade Literature American Literature Analytic Geometry Biology Coordinate Algebra Economics Math II Physical Science U.S. History Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect 2012/13 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? School Effect 2013/14 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? 0.3183 2 of 6 No 0.3016 1 of 5 No 0.0945 3 of 6 No 0.4804 1 of 6 Higher Note: statistical significance based on a 95 percent confidence level. Student Growth Percentiles 2012/13 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 2013/14 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 69 2 of 6 78 1 of 5 64 1 of 6 65 1 of 6 Pataula Charter Academy 205 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Comparison of School Impact Subject Area: All-Subject Elementary Average State Charter: Pataula Charter Academy Comparison Districts: Baker, Calhoun, Clay, Early, and Randolph School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Pataula School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Pataula 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional 206 Pataula Charter Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: All-Subject Middle Average State Charter: Pataula Charter Academy Comparison Districts: Baker, Calhoun, Clay, Early, and Randolph School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Pataula School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Pataula 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Pataula Charter Academy 207 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary Reading State Charter: Pataula Charter Academy Comparison Districts: Baker, Calhoun, Clay, Early, and Randolph School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Pataula State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Pataula 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Pataula Charter Academy 208 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary ELA State Charter: Pataula Charter Academy Comparison Districts: Baker, Calhoun, Clay, Early, and Randolph School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Pataula School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Pataula 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Pataula Charter Academy 209 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary Mathematics State Charter: Pataula Charter Academy Comparison Districts: Baker, Calhoun, Clay, Early, and Randolph School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Pataula School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Pataula 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Pataula Charter Academy 210 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary Science State Charter: Pataula Charter Academy Comparison Districts: Baker, Calhoun, Clay, Early, and Randolph School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Pataula School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Pataula 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Pataula Charter Academy 211 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Elementary Social Studies State Charter: Pataula Charter Academy Comparison Districts: Baker, Calhoun, Clay, Early, and Randolph School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Pataula School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Pataula 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Pataula Charter Academy 212 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Reading State Charter: Pataula Charter Academy Comparison Districts: Baker, Calhoun, Clay, Early, and Randolph School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Pataula School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Pataula 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Pataula Charter Academy 213 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle ELA State Charter: Pataula Charter Academy Comparison Districts: Baker, Calhoun, Clay, Early, and Randolph School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Pataula State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Pataula 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Pataula Charter Academy 214 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Mathematics State Charter: Pataula Charter Academy Comparison Districts: Baker, Calhoun, Clay, Early, and Randolph School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 Pataula State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Pataula School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Pataula Charter Academy 215 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Science State Charter: Pataula Charter Academy Comparison Districts: Baker, Calhoun, Clay, Early, and Randolph School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Pataula School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Pataula 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Pataula Charter Academy 216 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Middle Social Studies State Charter: Pataula Charter Academy Comparison Districts: Baker, Calhoun, Clay, Early, and Randolph School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Pataula School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Pataula 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Pataula Charter Academy 217 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: 9th Grade Literature State Charter: Pataula Charter Academy Comparison Districts: Baker, Calhoun, Clay, Early, and Randolph School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Pataula School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Pataula 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Pataula Charter Academy 218 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Subject Area: Analytical Geometry State Charter: Pataula Charter Academy Comparison Districts: Baker, Calhoun, Clay, Early, and Randolph School Value-Added Estimate with 95% Confidence Intervals (Mean Effect with all controls across all Georgia public schools= 0) Pataula School FE in Std. Dev. Units -.7 -.6 -.5 -.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Mean Student Growth Percentile (Median SGP across all Georgia public school students = 50) Pataula 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 School Mean SGP in Percentile Units 0 State Charters Local Charters Traditional Pataula Charter Academy 219 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Proficiency Levels System Name Grade 3 Pataula Charter Five-County Average Statewide Average Grade 4 Pataula Charter Five-County Average Statewide Average Grade 5 Pataula Charter Five-County Average Statewide Average Grade 6 Pataula Charter Five-County Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Pataula Charter Five-County Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Pataula Charter Five-County Average Statewide Average System Name Grade 3 Pataula Charter Five-County Average Statewide Average Grade 4 Pataula Charter Five-County Average Statewide Average N Tested CRCT Reading % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 41 4.9 53.7 41.5 95.1 313 15.3 56.2 28.4 84.7 126,745 7.7 46.5 45.9 92.3 45 325 124,872 2.2 46.7 51.1 97.8 9.8 52.3 37.8 90.2 6.4 41.3 52.3 93.6 44 2.3 45.5 52.3 97.7 292 15.4 66.1 18.5 84.6 123,653 5.2 53.1 41.7 94.8 46 346 124,746 4.3 56.5 39.1 95.7 5.2 62.1 32.7 94.8 2.8 47.6 49.6 97.2 38 313 127,269 7.9 47.4 44.7 92.1 7.0 66.5 26.5 93.0 5.3 53.0 41.7 94.7 43 332 126,232 2.3 30.2 67.4 97.7 6.9 63.9 29.2 93.1 3.0 43.7 53.2 97.0 CRCT ELA N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 42 7.1 66.7 26.2 92.9 313 18.2 61.3 20.4 81.8 127,032 11.5 56.1 32.3 88.5 44 6.8 61.4 31.8 93.2 323 18.6 63.8 17.6 81.4 124,719 11.3 54.0 34.8 88.7 Pataula Charter Academy 220 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Grade 5 Pataula Charter Five-County Average Statewide Average Grade 6 Pataula Charter Five-County Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Pataula Charter Five-County Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Pataula Charter Five-County Average Statewide Average System Name Grade 3 Pataula Charter Five-County Average Statewide Average Grade 4 Pataula Charter Five-County Average Statewide Average Grade 5 Pataula Charter Five-County Average Statewide Average Grade 6 Pataula Charter Five-County Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Pataula Charter Five-County Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Pataula Charter Five-County Average Statewide Average 44 0.0 52.3 47.7 100.0 293 11.3 70.3 18.4 88.7 123,571 5.3 55.6 39.2 94.7 46 6.5 76.1 17.4 93.5 347 12.7 70.0 17.3 87.3 124,615 8.2 59.6 32.2 91.8 38 315 126,992 5.3 55.3 39.5 94.7 6.0 56.8 37.1 94.0 6.1 46.6 47.3 93.9 43 331 126,011 4.7 48.8 46.5 95.3 8.5 66.2 25.4 91.5 5.5 50.3 44.3 94.5 CRCT MATH N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 41 7.3 48.8 43.9 92.7 312 28.8 44.2 26.9 71.2 127,519 19.3 36.7 44.0 80.7 44 9.1 68.2 22.7 90.9 323 28.5 55.4 16.1 71.5 124,706 18.3 42.6 39.0 81.7 44 4.5 40.9 54.5 95.5 289 21.8 49.8 28.4 78.2 123,006 12.3 43.8 43.8 87.7 46 10.9 73.9 15.2 89.1 347 25.6 66.6 7.8 74.4 124,070 15.9 55.8 28.3 84.1 38 10.5 52.6 36.8 89.5 313 15.0 55.9 29.1 85.0 126,420 12.4 50.2 37.4 87.6 43 20.9 65.1 14.0 79.1 333 31.5 53.2 15.3 68.5 125,259 18.5 47.5 34.1 81.5 Pataula Charter Academy 221 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 System Name Grade 3 Pataula Charter Five-County Average Statewide Average Grade 4 Pataula Charter Five-County Average Statewide Average Grade 5 Pataula Charter Five-County Average Statewide Average Grade 6 Pataula Charter Five-County Average Statewide Average Grade 7 Pataula Charter Five-County Average Statewide Average Grade 8 Pataula Charter Five-County Average Statewide Average System Name Grade 3 Pataula Charter Five-County Average Statewide Average Grade 4 Pataula Charter Five-County Average Statewide Average CRCT SCIENCE N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 42 16.7 42.9 40.5 83.3 318 32.1 47.8 20.1 67.9 129,662 22.9 41.1 35.9 77.1 45 8.9 60.0 31.1 91.1 328 33.8 44.2 22.0 66.2 127,657 19.1 38.0 42.9 80.9 45 11.1 35.6 53.3 88.9 293 37.5 44.7 17.7 62.5 127,252 18.1 39.8 42.1 81.9 46 37.0 52.2 10.9 63.0 351 45.9 45.3 8.8 54.1 127,590 24.9 52.4 22.7 75.1 39 17.9 43.6 38.5 82.1 321 31.5 43.9 24.6 68.5 129,848 15.8 38.0 46.2 84.2 42 14.3 64.3 21.4 85.7 333 44.4 49.5 6.0 55.6 128,936 22.1 52.9 25.0 77.9 CRCT SOCIAL STUDIES N Tested % Did not meet the standard % Meets the standard % Exceeds the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 42 14.3 54.8 31.0 85.7 318 20.4 56.3 23.3 79.6 129,137 16.3 47.7 35.9 83.7 45 8.9 71.1 20.0 91.1 328 27.4 53.0 19.5 72.6 127,178 18.8 51.1 30.0 81.2 Pataula Charter Academy 222 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Grade 5 Pataula Charter 45 17.8 42.2 40.0 82.2 Five-County Average 293 30.4 55.6 14.0 69.6 Statewide Average 126,802 19.3 53.8 26.9 80.7 Grade 6 Pataula Charter 46 17.4 54.3 28.3 82.6 Five-County Average 351 39.0 41.3 19.7 61.0 Statewide Average 127,200 20.2 35.1 44.8 79.8 Grade 7 Pataula Charter 39 15.4 25.6 59.0 84.6 Five-County Average 321 25.5 43.6 30.8 74.5 Statewide Average 129,400 16.5 30.5 53.0 83.5 Grade 8 Pataula Charter 42 9.5 54.8 35.7 90.5 Five-County Average 332 34.9 50.9 14.2 65.1 Statewide Average 128,365 19.4 44.4 36.2 80.6 System Name 9TH Grade Literature Pataula Charter Five-County Average19 Statewide Average Analytic Geometry Pataula Charter Five-County Average20 Statewide Average END OF COURSE TEST N Tested % Did Not Meet the standard % Met the standard % Exceeded the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 36 5.6 36.1 58.3 94.4 311 23.8 58.8 17.4 76.2 112,505 12.3 45.1 42.6 87.7 20 15.0 70.0 15.0 85.0 269 83.3 16.0 0.74 16.7 97,659 65.4 28.9 5.7 34.6 19 Only four counties took the 9th Grade Literature exam: Calhoun, Clay, Early and Randolph County Schools 20 Only three counties took the Analytical Geometry exam: Calhoun, Early and Randolph County Schools Pataula Charter Academy 223 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Provost Academy Key Findings In general, Provost Academy performance in American Literature, Analytic Geometry, Biology, Coordinate Algebra, Economics, Math II, Physical Science and U.S. History is weak relative to the state. Because the school serves students throughout the state it does not have a district comparison group. Provost Academy's performance in 2013/14 is somewhat weaker than in 2012/13. The school's contribution to student achievement is: o below the state average in American Literature, Analytic Geometry, Biology, Coordinate Algebra, Economics, Math II, Physical Science and U.S. History. o indistinguishable from the state average in 9th Grade Literature. General Characteristics School Name Provost Academy Calendar Year Opened EMO Affiliation Grades 2012 No 9-12 Curriculum Focus Online Curriculum School Year Single- Gender School Virtual/ Online School Serves Multiple Counties Normal No Yes Online Parental Involvement Requirement Not Specified Enrollment Restrictions Students residing in State of GA Students Served School Name Provost Academy Pct. Female Pct. White Pct. Pct. Pct. Other Pct. Black Hispanic FRL 51.1 28.5 62.4 1.6 7.0 15.9 Pct. Pct. SWD LEP 0.0 11.6 Pct. Gifted 0.0 224 Provost Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Value-Added and SGP Results Summary by Grade Level and Subject Provost Academy's contribution to student achievement was below the state average in American Literature, Analytic Geometry, Biology, Coordinate Algebra, Economics, Math II, Physical Science and U.S. History; it was not significantly different from the state average in 9th Grade Literature. Grade Level and Subject High 9th Grade Literature American Literature Analytic Geometry Biology Coordinate Algebra Economics Math II Physical Science U.S. History Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect State Percentile (higher is better) Statistically Different From State Average? District Rank (lower is better) Statistically Different From District Average? -0.0349 -0.1480 -0.3882 -0.1998 -0.3199 -0.4493 -0.4450 -0.3824 -0.4703 38 No 14 Lower 2 Lower 13 Lower 3 Lower 5 Lower 4 Lower 3 Lower 5 Lower Note: statistical significance based on a 95 percent confidence level. Student Growth Percentiles School Mean of Individual SGPs State Percentile (higher is better) District Rank (lower is better) 69 99 37 5 35 15 34 4 61 79 37 10 27 2 26 7 Provost Academy 225 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Comparison of 2013/14 and 2012/13 Value-Added and SGP Summary Results Provost Academy's performance in 2013/14 is generally somewhat weaker than in 2012/13. Its estimated contribution to student achievement fell by more than 0.15 standard deviations in three subjects and increased by more than 0.15 standard deviations in just one subject.. Grade Level and Subject High 9th Grade Literature American Literature Analytic Geometry Biology Coordinate Algebra Economics Math II Physical Science U.S. History Value-Added (Controls for Student Demographics and Prior Test Scores) School Effect 2012/13 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? School Effect 2013/14 District Rank (lower is better) Statistic- ally Different From District Average? 0.1668 0.0233 -0.2831 -0.3020 -0.3012 -0.6350 -0.1548 -0.4902 -0.0349 -0.1480 -0.3882 -0.1998 -0.3199 -0.4493 -0.4450 -0.3824 -0.4703 Note: statistical significance based on a 95 percent confidence level. Student Growth Percentiles 2012/13 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 2013/14 School District Mean of Rank Individual (lower is SGPs better) 56 69 37 37 30 35 29 34 33 61 17 37 43 27 20 26 Provost Academy 226 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Proficiency Levels System Name 9TH Grade Literature Provost Academy Statewide Average American Literature Provost Academy Statewide Average Math II Provost Academy Statewide Average Biology Provost Academy Statewide Average US History Provost Academy Statewide Average Economics Provost Academy Statewide Average END OF COURSE TEST N Tested % Did Not Meet the standard % Met the standard % Exceeded the standard % Met or Exceeded the standard 96 22.9 53.1 24.0 77.1 112,505 12.3 45.1 42.6 87.7 128 14.8 60.9 24.2 85.1 93,689 7.5 50.7 41.9 92.6 37 91.9 8.1 4,946 77.4 22.2 0.0 8.1 0.3 22.5 131 70.2 26.7 3.1 29.8 109,030 25.0 41.1 33.9 75.0 146 68.5 26.0 5.5 31.5 93,645 27.2 32.6 40.2 72.8 146 52.1 40.4 7.5 47.9 59,564 18.8 39.1 42.1 81.2 227 Provost Academy State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 V. References American Institutes for Research (2012). 2011-2012 Growth Model for Educator Evaluation Technical Report: Final. Available at http://www.engageny.org/sites/default/files/resource/attachments/growth-model-11- 12-air-technical-report.pdf Betebenner, D. (2009). "Norm- and criterion-referenced student growth." Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 28: 4251. Bifulco, R., & Ladd, H. F. (2006). "The impacts of charter schools on student achievement: Evidence from North Carolina." Education Finance and Policy, 1(1), 50-90. Booker, K., Gilpatric, S. M., Gronberg, T., & Jansen, D. (2007). "The impact of charter school attendance on student performance." Journal of Public Economics, 91(5), 849-876. Charter School Achievement Consensus Panel (2006). "Key Issues in Studying Charter Schools and Achievement: A Review and Suggestions for National Guidelines." National Charter School Research Project White Paper Series, No. 2. Seattle: Center on Reinventing Public Education. Dee, T., & Wyckoff, J. (2013). "Incentives, Selection and Teacher Performance: Evidence from IMPACT." NBER Working Paper 19529. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Dobbie, W., & Fryer, R. G. (2009). "Are high quality schools enough to close the achievement gap? Evidence from a social experiment in Harlem." NBER Working Paper 15473. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Doran, Harold, Andrew Swanlund and Mariann Lemke (2012). Office of the State Superintendent of Education School-Level Model to Measure Student Achievement over Time: Technical Report. Available at http://seo.dc.gov/publication/school-level-model-measure- student-achievement-over-time-technical-report. Georgia Department of Education (2011). Chartering in Georgia 2011-2012: The Charter Schools Division Annual Report for 2011 2012. Available at http://www.gadoe.org/External-Affairs-and-Policy/Charter-Schools/Pages/Annual- Reports.aspx Georgia Department of Education (2010). Georgia Charter School Activity Each Year Since the First Charter School Law Passed in 1993. Available at http://www.gadoe.org/External- Affairs-and-Policy/Charter-Schools/Pages/default.aspx Georgia Department of Education (2012). State Charter Schools Commission Briefing. Powerpoint presentation. Available at http://www.gadoe.org/External-Affairs-and- Policy/Charter-Schools/Pages/default.aspx Georgia Department of Education (2013). Approved Charter Schools 2013-14. Available at http://www.gadoe.org/External-Affairs-and-Policy/Charter-Schools/Pages/default.aspx 228 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Georgia Department of Education (2014a). CRCT Statewide Scores. Available at http://www.gadoe.org/Curriculum-Instruction-and- Assessment/Assessment/Pages/CRCT-Statewide-Scores.aspx Georgia Department of Education (2014b). EOCT Statewide Scores. Available at http://www.gadoe.org/Curriculum-Instruction-and- Assessment/Assessment/Pages/EOCT-Statewide-Scores.aspx Georgia Department of Education (nd). Enrollment by Grade Level for Years 2002 through 2013. Available at http://www.gadoe.org/Technology-Services/Data- Collections/Pages/Home.aspx Gleason, P., Clark, M., Tuttle, C. C., & Dwoyer, E. (2010). The evaluation of charter school impacts: Final report (No. NCEE 2010-4029). Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Goldhaber, D., Walch, J. and Gabele, B. "Does the Model Matter? Exploring the Relationship Between Different Student Achievement-Based Teacher Assessments." Seattle: Center for Education Data and Research. Guarino, C. M., Reckase, M. D. and Wooldridge, J. M. (2012). "Can Value-Added Measures of Teacher Performance be Trusted?" East Lansing, MI: The Education Policy Center at Michigan State University. McCaffrey, Daniel F., Katherine E. Castellano and J.R. Lockwood (2014). "A Technical Evaluation of the Student Growth Component of the Georgia Teacher and Leader Evaluation System." Educational Testing Service. Sass, T. R., Semykina, A. and Harris, D. N. (forthcoming). "Value-Added Models and the Measurement of Teacher Productivity." Economics of Education Review. Hoxby, C. M., Muraka, S. (2009). "Charter Schools in New York City: Who Enrolls and How They Affect Their Students' Achievement." NBER Working Paper 14852. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Hoxby, C. M., & Rockoff, J. E. (2004). "The impact of charter schools on student achievement." Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Paper Series. Sass, T. (2006). "Charter Schools and Student Achievement in Florida." Education Finance and Policy 9(1), 91-122. Solmon, L., Paark, K., & Garcia, D. (2001). "Does charter school attendance improve test scores? The Arizona results." Phoenix, AZ: Goldwater Institute. Todd, P. E. and Wolpin, K. I. (2003). "On the Specification and Estimation of the Production Function for Cognitive Achievement," Economic Journal 113(485):F3-F33. 229 State Charter Schools Performance Evaluation, 2013-2014 Walsh, Elias and Eric Isenberg (2013). "How Does a Value-Added Model Compare to the Colorado Growth Model?" Mathematica Policy Research working paper. Whitehurst, G. J. and Chingos, M. M. (2011). "Class Size: What Research Says and What it Means for State Policy." Brown Center on Education Policy at Brookings. 230