HomeMy WebLinkAboutSchools 2000 Annual Prog Report
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS
2000 ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT
SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS
Dr. Charles M. Ward, Chairman
Mrs. Susan C. Gailion, Vice-Chairman
Mr. R. Madison Cummings
Mr. Gary W. Grant
Mr. Kenneth C. Boyd
Mr. Steve Koleszar
Mrs. Diantha McKeel
White Hail District
Rio District
Samuel Miller District
At-Large Member
Rivanna District
Scottsville District
Jack Jouett District
SUPERINTENDENT
Dr. Kevin C. Casmer
Fifth Edition
Albemarle County Public Schools
401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, VA 22902
Web site: kl2.albemarle.org
Annual Progress Report, 2000, Fifth Edition
For information regarding this publication or the items contained within,
please contact staff at (804) 296-5820.
Dr. ,lean Murray, .4ssistant Superintendent for Instruction
Dr. Kevin Hughes, Coordinator of Testing and Program 21nalysis
Lucinda Erbach, Management ~tnalyst II
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Part A: Introduction and Overview of Albemarle County Public Schools
A-2
Superintendent's Message .................................................
A-3
Introduction .............................................. A - 4
Executive Summary .....................................................
A-7
Mission and Goals Statement ......................................................................... A - 8
2000-02 School Board/Superintendent Priorities ..................................... A-10
Profile of the Albemarle County Schools ................................................... A-12
SpeCial Programs ................................................
Albemarle County Schools Demographic Information ........................... A-14
Part B: Report of Albemarle System Data
Academic Achievement
I. National Indicators B - 3
A. Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT) ...........................................................
B. Advanced Placement Courses and Exams (AP) ....................................... B - 5
C. Stanford 9 Achievement Tests ....................................
I1. State Indicators B-22
A. Standards of Learning Tests (SOL) ............................... . ....... B-73
B. Vocational Completers .......................................................................
C. Diplomas onferred ................................................................................... B-74
D. Graduatesc' c°ntinuing Education Plans ................................................... B-75
Iii. Local Indicators B-77
A. Second-Grade Reading Assessment ........................................................
B. Albemarle County Foreign Language Comprehensive Exams ................. B-82
............................ B-83
C. Foreign Language Completers ......................................
D. Algebra I Completers, Prior to the 9~-Grade ............................................. B-84
E. Algebra I Completers, High School Graduates ......................................... B-84
F. Albemarle County Physical Education Progress Report ........................... B-85
G. Virginia Wellness-Related Fitness Testing Program ................................ B-86
H. instructional Technology: Courses, Computers, and Internet Activity B-88
................... B-90
I. participation in Student-Business Cooperations .................... B-91
J. CATEC Career Programs ..........................................................................
i
Part B: Report of Albemarle System Data, continued
Diverse Learner
At Risk
Title I ..................................................
......................................................... B-93
Academic Learning Program Schools (ALPS) ........................................... B 94
Special Education ............................................................................................
Gifted ............................................................................................................... B - 97
National Medt Scholarships ............................................................................. B - 99
General Education Development (GED) ........................................................ B-105
Evening High SChool ....................................................... , .... '.' ....................... B-106
Responsible Citizenship B-106
Dropout Rate ...................................................................................................
Daily Student Attendance ................................................................................ B-109
Suspensions and Expulsions ......................................................... , ................ B-109
Voter Registration ......................................................................................... ,.. B-110
Community Relations B-111
Parent and Community Volunteers .................................................................
Parent Survey Results ..................................................................................... B-113
B-115
Continuing Education Programs ..................................................................... B-127
School-Business-Community Partnerships ..................................................... B-128
APPENDIX
Academic Awards
AthletiC Awards ................................................................... Appendix-2
Community Awards ....................................... Appendix-3
Fine Arts Awards .... iiiii ............................................................................... Appendix-5
Staff Awards ........ ' ..................................................................... Appendix-6
...................................... Appendix-7
Part C: School Improvement Planning Process and School Profiles
Elementary School Profiles
Agnor-Hurt ........
Broadus Wood ................................................................
..... · .............................. C-3
Brownsville. ' ............................................................................................ Cc - 7
Paul H. Cale ....................................................................................................... C'~ 1
MaryC. Greer .............................................................. i ........... i.i .......... i.i.i.i.i.i C-23
...............................................................................................
Virginia L. Murray .....................................
................................... C-31
Red Hill ... ............................................................................. C-35
Scottsville ;i; ....................................................................................................... C-39
Stone-Robin~'~'~ .................................................................................................. C-43
Stony Point.. ' ............................................................................................... C-47
Woodbrook .' ..................................................................................................... C-51
Benjamin F. :::::~:::::::::::::::::: ......................................................................... C-55
TABLE of CONTENTS
TABLE of CONTENTS
Part C: School Improvement Planning Process and Individual School Data, continued
Middle School Profiles
Jackson P. Burley ........................................................................................... C- 64
Joseph T. Henley ............................................................................................ C - 68
Jack Jouett ...................................................................................................... C - 72
Mortimer Y. Sutherland, Jr .............................................................................. C - 76
Leslie H. Walton ............................................................................................. C - 80
High School Profiles
Albemarle ........................................................................................................ C - 85
Monticello ........................................................................................................ C - 89
Murray ............................................................................................................. C - 93
Western Albemarle ......................................................................................... C - 97
Charlottesville-Albemarle Technical Education Center (CATEC) .................. C-101
Part D: Reference Guide
Glossary of Terms ............................................................................................. D - 2
Indicator Definitions ........................................................................ '. ................ D - 4
Subject Index ...................................................................................................... D-16
Table/Figure Index ............................................................................................ D-20
111
INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW OF
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS
SUPERINTENDENT'S MESSAGE
INTRODUCTION
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
MISSION AND GOALS STATEMENT
PROFILE OF THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY SCHOOLS
SPECIAL PROGRAMS
ALBEMARLE COUNTY SCHOOLS DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS
office of the Superintendent
401 McInfire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Dear Parents and Community Members:
On behalf of the Albemarle County Public Schools, I am pleased to share the 2000 Annual Progress
Report. The information contained in this report assists division staff and community members in
evaluating the quality of our schools. We can all use the data in the report to:
· highlight the successes of our students and staff,
· measure progress toward meeting our goals, and
· guide decisions that are aimed at improving student learning.
e stron 1 support high academic standards an~d accountabi, l.i~.for student learning. A key School
W g Y ....... ,~t and exceed state accrecntauon requirements by the end of the
Board priority is that all our scnoms m~
2001-02 school year. We are pleased that five Albemarle County schools have now met state accreditation
requirements and that we have shown improvements in all schools since last year. We recognize that the
journey to full accreditation may be longer for some schools than others. In using the data in this report to
evaluate a school or program, we look for patterns across multiple measures and for trends over time.
Along with other national, state, and local data, the Standards of Learning test data provide important
measures of success and areas for improvement.
Although schools have until the end of the 2006-07 school year to meet State requirements or face
the loss of accreditation, high stakes begin much s°oner for students. Beginning with the graduation class
of 2004, students must pass at least six end-of-course Standards of Learning tests to earn a high school
diploma. Our division staff is committed to the priority that every student will receive a high school
diploma. Yet, some of our students have not yet reached the level of achievement required for success on
orous tests, en our sense oi urge y '
these rig ' · - ~'----Anc-. and critically examine and modify our cur~. cula
We must cont. mue to .height. . ,.:,,~ ~na v,,~, oe needed for aduation, further stucty, or
and ~nstmctton so that all studems gain the stm,~ --,, ~,,wled~, gr
a position in the work force. We readily acknowledge that we must work even harder to reach our goals.
We know where we are and where we have to go. We also have a plan for getting there.
We know from this report that significant achievement gaps exist for black students and students
eligible for free and reduced lunch. Closing achievement gaps is another critical Board priority. Although
some progress has been made towards closing the gap, we clearly have a long way to go. However, we
know that with the hard work of teachers, students, and parents coupled with the division literacy initiative,
differentiated staffing, and provision of extra learning time for students who need additional help, we will
close achievement gaps.
Finally, we must avoid the temptation to seek quick fixes. Instead, we must continue to seek balance
between mere coverage of content and deep understanding of it. We also must assure that all students are
challenged to perform at the highest academic levels possible. To that end, we pledge our continued
commitment to the success of all of our students. As always, we appreciate your continued support as we
strive for excellence. S¢~qrely' _
Division Superintendent
A-2
"We Expect Success"
INTRODUCTION
The Annual Progress Report of the Albemarle COunty Public Schools is a compilation and analysis
of student performance data. The information contained in this report will assist the School Board,
school personnel, and citizens in evaluating the quality of our schools and programs. The Annual
Progress Report serves as documentation of progress toward meeting performance goals established
by the School Board and Superintendent. Most importantly, the progress report provides a data-
driven framework to guide discussions related to division and school improvement and the budget.
This edition of the Annual Progress Report is different in several ways from previous reports.
· An attempt was made to make the document easier to read by integrating related text and graphics
that previously had been Presented separately. For example, Advanced Placement exam data
are now Presented in a single section, rather than spread over several sections.
· Where possible, data are discussed in relation to specific School Board goals and measurable
targets. The goal and measurable target are presented at the beginning of relevant sections and
may be repeated throughout the report as appropriate.
· Longitudinal data are Presented for groups of students who have been tested at two different
points in their academic careers.
· SOL test results for black and white students are further disaggregated by socioeconomic status,
as defined by eligibility for 'free- or reduced-price lunch.
· Data are presented for students scoring in the Advanced Attainment of the Standards achievement
level for SOL tests.
· Percentages of students scoring 600 or above on SAT verbal and math tests are Presented.
· The parent survey was conducted again in 1999-2000 and results are reported in the Community
Relations section and school profiles.
Throughout this report, data from previous years are presented when available. Data are
disaggregated by gender, race/ethnicity, disability status, and socioeconomic status where possible.
However, for categories of fewer than 11 students, data have been omitted to maintain the
confidentiality of individual student results.
The 2000 Annual Progress Report is divided into four main sections.
Part A, Introduction and Overview of Albemarle County Public Schools, provides a variety of
information including an executive summary of this report, the division mission and goals statement,
2000-02 School Board/Superintendent Priorities, and general information about the school division.
Part B, Report of Albemarle System Data, provides data on a variety of student Performance
indicators. In Part B, indicators are divided into four sections: Academic Achievement, Diverse
Learner, Responsible Citizenship, and Community Relations. The indicators presented in the
Academic Achievement section are further categorized into national, state, and local indicators, based
on the availability of comparable data to that of the nation and/or state.
Part C, School Improvement Planning Process and School Profiles, provides individual school profiles
that serve as a data source for continuous school improvement. From these data, as well as from
school-determined indicators, each school develops a School Improvement Plan based on the division
goals.
Part D provides an easy Reference Guide.
A-3
INTRODUCTION
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
- 0 school ear, elementary schools ranged in size from 156 to 620
~. During the 199.9 2.00 _ Y students, the three comprehensive high schools
students, middle schools ranged ~n s~ze from 491 to 616
ranged in size from 921 to 1,564 students, and the non-traditional high school housed 75 students. Racial
or ethnic makeup of the schools varied from 48.5 percent white to 96.3 percent white, 1.0 percent black
to 39.8 percent black, and 0 percent other (American Indian, Asian, Hispanic, etc.) to 26.5 percent other.
Percentages of students on free or reduced lunch at schools participating in the National School Lunch
Program ranged from 4 percent to 58 percent. Mobility of school populations varied from 7.7 percent
turnover of students to 32.7 percent during the 1999-2000 school year. The identified gifted population
ranged from 1.4 percent to 26.5 percent and identified populations with disabilities ranged from 9 percent
to 26.6 percent.
Academic Achievemen_t.
Scholastic Assessment Tests (SAT)
· The SAT was taken by 71.5 percent of the students in the Albemarle County graduating class
of 2000, compared to 44 percent for the nation and 67 percent for Virginia.
· The mean (average) verbal score of 547 in 1999-2000 was four points higher than the mean score
in 1998-99, but one point below the five-year high of 548 in 1997-98.
· The mean (average) math score of 535 in 1999-2000 was four points higher than the mean score
in 1998-99, but two points below the five-year high of 538 in 1997-98.
· The mean (average) verbal score of 547 in 1999-2000 exceeds that of the nation by 38 points and
that of the state by 42 points.
· The mean (average) math score of 535 in 1999-2000 exceeds that of the nation by 21 points and
that of the state by 35 Points.
Advanced Placement (AP) Exam_s
· The percentage of students scoring three or higher on Advanced Placement (AP) exams was
83.5 in 1999-2000, up from 76.3 percent last year.
Standards of Learning (SOL~ Tests_
Based on results of SOL tests taken in the spring of 2000, five Albemarle County elementary
schools met the current state requirements for full accreditation. At least 70 percent of students
must pass tests in each of four core content areas for a school to attain full accreditation status.
The four core content areas are English, mathematics, history, and science. The exceptions to
the 70 percent pass requirement are grade 3 science and history for which the requirement is 50
percent. The five schools meeting current requirements for full accreditation are:
· Hollymead Elementary
· Meriwether Lewis Elementary
· V. L. Murray Elementary
· Stony Point Elementary
· Woodbrook Elementary
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A-4
,,Academic Achievement
S~tandards of Leamin.q ~SOL) Test,~., continued
Elementary Highlights
· At grade 3, increases were posted in each of the four core academic areas.
· At grades 3 and 5, the largest gains were posted in mathematics.
· Grade 5 results were mixed, with large gains in writing and mathematics accompanied by
declines in history and science. Preliminary discussions with teachers and principals indicate
that scheduling and amount of time spent on history and science are areas of concern
because of extra time spent on language and mathematics.
Middle School Highlights
· All five middle schools met requirements for full accreditation in the content areas of English,
mathematics, and science. Performance on the grade 8 history test continues to be an area
of concern.
· The grade 8 history test covers SOLs from three years (U.S. history to 1877, U.S. history
since 1877, and civics and economics). In our present curriculum, the content from the civics
and economics SOLs is integrated across the two years of history (grades 6 and 7). This
year, the grade 8 test was given to seventh-graders, as well as eighth-graders. The
percentage passing for eighth-graders was 56.0 compared to 53.6 percent for seventh-
graders.
· Albemarle COunty middle school social studies teachers have worked very hard to teach the
content covered by the test in only two years, but have not yet been successful. Therefore,
we will align and sequence the middle school social studies curriculum to support teaching the
content across grades 6, 7, and 8.
High School Highlights
· Albemarle High School and Western Albemarle High School met requirements for full
accreditation in English, history, and science. Each school missed full accreditation due to
mathematics. Monticello High School is approaching the required passing mark in English
and science, missing by less than two percentage points.
· Gains were made in writing, algebra I, geometry, world history 1 and 2, U.S. history, earth
science, and biology. The percentage of students passing English/literature was fiat, but
remains above 70 Percent. Slight declines were observed in algebra II and chemistry, but
were coupled with dramatic increases in the number of students taking the courses. The
number of students taking chemistry increased from 440 in 1999 to 550 in 2000, The number
of students taking algebra II increased from 609 in 1999 to 720 in 2000.
Stanford Achievement Test~
· Achievement in grade 4 was at or above national and state averages on all tests and content
areas. Fall 1999 scores forAIbemarle County students in grade 4 dropped slightly from 1998, but
the difference was not statistically significant.
e Achievement in grade 6 was above the state average on all tests and content areas. Achievement
in grade 6 was above the national average on all tests and content areas, with the exception of
Prewriting. Scores forAIbemarle County students in grade 6 increased slightly, but the difference
was not statistically significant.
e Achievement in grade 9 was at or above national and state averages on all tests and content
areas. Scores forA/bemarle County students in grade 9 increased slightly, but the difference was
not statistically significant.
A-5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Academic Achievement, continued
Other
e In 1999-2000, 83.1 percent of second-graders achieved on or above grade level in reading. This
increase represented the fifth consecutive year of improvement on this important measure.
e Thirty-one percent of eighth-grade students completed a foreign language in 1999-2000, compared to
34 percent in 1998-99 and 40 percent in 1997-98.
· The percentage of eighth-grade students completing algebra I prior to ninth-grade rose from 23 percent
in 1998-gg to 27 percent in 1999-2000. An all-time high of 98 percent of 1999-2000 high school
graduates completed algebra I.
e Fifty-nine percent of graduates in 2000 eamed an Advanced Studies diploma, compared with 55 percent
in 1999 and 59 percent in 1998.
~, Over 80 percent of 2000 graduates reported plans to pursue further education, with 53.4 percent stating
plans to attend a four-year college and 26.4 percent stating plans to attend a two-year college. Nearly
19 percent planned to enter the work force.
e The number of computers in schools has dramatically increased from 552 in 1994-95 to 2,292 in 1999-
2000. The student-to-computer ratio has dropped from 11.8 in 1995-96 to 5.3 in 1999-2000.
Diverse Learners.
e Title I, grades K-3, and Academic Leaming Program Schools (ALPS), grades 2-7, showed one year's growth
in reading for one year of instruction.
e Eight county students were accepted to the academic Governor's School; ten, to the foreign language
Governor's School; and six, to the fine arts Govemor's School.
e Fourteen different Advanced Placement courses were offered division-wide.
e The number of students participating in the Independent Study program increased to 120.
e Four county teams progressed to the global finals of Destination ImagiNation, a problem-solving competition.
Responsible Citizenship.
~ In 1999-2000 student average daily attendance was a five-year high of 95.97 percent.
~ The dropout rate decreased from 2.85 percent in 1997-98 to 1.65 percent in 1998-99.
e The dropout rate for minority students decreased from 4 to 3 percent.
Community Relations.
~ Over 40,000 volunteer hours were donated to the schools during the 1999-2000 school year.
e The number of students participating in continuing education classes rose from 1,743 in 1997 to 2,114
in 2000.
~ Over 80 percent of responding parents agree or strongly agree that the school their child attends has a
climate of high expectations for all students.
~, Nearly 82 percent of responding parents agree or strongly agree that the school their child attends has
a safe and orderly environment.
e Overall, schools were rated just above 70 percent on Strong Instructional Leadership and Positive Home-
School Relations.
Conclusion.
While we have made continuous progress over the last few years, significant achievement gaps exist for
black students and students eligible for free- or reduced-priced lunch. We know that with the hard work
of teachers, students, and parents coupled with the division literacy initiative, differentiated staffing, and
provision of extra learning time for students who need additional help, these gaps will close.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A-6
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS
MISSION
The primary mission of Albemarle County Schools is to provide and promote a dynamic environment
for learning through which ali students acquire the knowledge, skills and values necessary to live as
informed and productive members of society.
GOALS
Albemarle County Public Schools will nurture a climate that promotes trust, idea sharing and sensitivity
to student needs and ensure a healthy environment for intellectual development for all children. To provide
such an environment, we will ensure that:
Student Performance Standards
* The primary purpose of all disciplines is for students to apply knowledge, facts, concepts and
skills in new situations.
School Climate and Board Adopted Values
~ All schools will promote an environment conducive to learning in which all members of the
school community practice the system's established core values.
Feeder Pattern Support
~ Individual schools will operate in feeder patterns that provide consistent, comprehensive
opportunities and early intervention strategies for students to acquire the knowledge and
demonstrate sound physical, mental and emotional health.
Curriculum and Staff Development
~ Curriculum development and implementation, including staff development, will be a dynamic
process which supports student learning. A primary focus will be in reading, math, written
and oral communication, science and social studies.
Extended School Community
* Schools will welcome and encourage involvement of parents, community members, and
businesses. Working together, we will ensure that all students develop the skills and abilities
to be contributing members of the community.
EVIDENCE
Indicators to provide evidence of progress toward each goal's attainment are found in the system' Strategic Plan
for a Total School System Commitment to the School Improvement Process. A Progress Report, which outlines
the division's performance on these indicators, is issued annually by the Superintendent.
Amended November 8, 1999
A-7
2000-02 School Board/Superintendent Priorities
The School Board/Superintendent Priorities are designed to support the division's Mission and the five
System Goals, which have been formally adopted in Albemarle County School Board Policy AE. The
Priorities are organized based on the five System Goals. Much of the evidence of progress on
System Goals and Board Priorities is documented in the division's Annual Progress Report.
Mission
The primary mission of the Albemarle County Schools is to provide and promote a dynamic
environment for learning through which students acquire the knowledge, skills, and values
necessary to live as informed and productive members of society.
Goal 1 - Student Performance Standards
Priority
·
·
·
·
1.1 - Standards of Accreditation
By 2002, all schools will be accredited.
By 2004, all students who earn sufficient credit for a Standard diploma will have earned a sufficient
number of verified credits to graduate.
By June 2001, and annually thereafter, the division will measure the progress of each ninth-grade
cohort in meeting verified credit requirements for graduation.
By 2004, the dropout rate will not exceed 2 percent, even with the increased graduation requirements.
Priority 1.2 - Academic Progress of High Achieving Students · A division team will be established to define measurable targets for the academic progress of high
achieving students by December 2000.
· By July 2001, baseline data will be collected to utilize in defining these targets.
Goal 2 - School Climate and Board Adopted Values
Priority 2.1 - School Climate and Board Adopted Values
· By 2002, all schools will implement a structured character education program.
· By 2002, a school for chronically disruptive middle and high school students will be fully implemented
and evaluated.
· By June 2001, baseline data will be collected concerning school climate across the division.
Priority 2.2- Equity and Diversity
· By January 2001, Board members, the Superintendent, and Assistant Superintendents will participate in
Multicultural Competency Workshops.
· The Discrimination Incident Report will be fully implemented and baseline data reported to the Board by
September 2001.
Goal 3 - Feeder Pattern Support
Priority 3.1 - K-12 Achievement Gap Intervention Programs
· The division will continue to develop and implement early intervention strategies that close the
achievement gap in English and math.
· The achievement gap between black and white students and between students eligible for free/reduced
lunch and those who are not, aS evidenced in 1999-2000 SOL test results, will decrease by 25 percent
per year until closed in the year 2004.
^-8
Priority 3.2 - Students Passing SOL and Scoring at Grade Level in Reading, Writing, and Math
· By the spring of 2001, 85 percent of students in grade 2 will score at or above grade level on the local
second-grade reading assessment.
· By the spring of 2002, 85 percent of students in grades 3, 5 and 8 will pass the SOL tests in language
arts areas and math.
Priority 3.3 - Research on Extended Learning Time
· By December 2000, a report on extended learning
implications, will be presented to the School Board.
time, including
recommendations and cost
Goal 4 - Curriculum and Staff Development
Priority 4.t - Grade Level Performance Benchmarks/Workplace Standards
· By 2004, local assessments will be developed and implemented in all core content areas to measure
students' ability to apply knowledge in performance situations using portfolios and performance
assessments that are representative of grade level performance benchmarks.
Priority 4.2- Middle School Program Review
· In 2000-01, the division will fully review its middle school programs for appropriate curriculum
implementation, rigo[ of instructional program, student performance, school climate, staff development,
and school-community relations.
Priority 4.3 - Staff Development · By September 2001, a Comprehensive Division Staff Development Plan will be fully developed that is
tied directly to the division's major instructional and management initiatives.
· For the FY 2001-02 budget development cycle, strategies will be developed to consistently compensate
staff for time beyond contract devoted to curriculum and staff development and intervention instruction.
· Building level professional development focus areas will be established by December 2001.
· By June 2001, a pool of at least 20 internal candidates for administrative poSitions will have participated
in the Adminstrators for Tomorrow Academy.
Goal 5- Extended School Community
Priority 5.1 - Communications · The Division Communications Plan will continue to be strengthened during 2000-01.
· Business-Community-School and school division partnerships will be identified and documented by July
2001.
· Eighty percent of parents will agree or strongly agree that the school their child attends is satisfactory
based upon each of the Effective Schools correlates in the 2001 Parent Survey.
Priority 5.2 - Budget Process
· Refinement of the division's budget process will continue through implementation of the Board accepted
recommendations of the Budget Review Committee.
Division Goals Support Priority
The recruitment and retention of high-quality and diverse teaching, administrative, and classified staff will
continue to be vigorously pursued, with particular emphasis on increasing the percentage of minority teachers to
reflect the diversity of the system.
Recruitment and Retention
· The current gap between system diversity (15 percent) and the percentage of minority teachers (8
percent) will be reduced by 25 percent each year beginning in the fall of 2001.
· At least 75 early teacher contracts will be awarded for 2000-01.
· At least 20 percent of early teacher contracts will be awarded to minorities for 2000-01.
PROFILE OF THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY SCHOOLS
ALBEMARLE COUNTY DEMOGRAPHY
The Albemarle County school division is one of 134 in Virginia. It is the fifth largest in
geographical area, encompassing 740 square miles, and has a population of approximately 80,000.
The 1999-2000 school enrollment of 12,187 students was 19th largest in the state. The county
ranks in the top 10 percent of the state in education level of its adults and for average per capita
income.
FACILITIES '-.
!
The Albemarle County Schools includes:
15 elementary schools
5 middle schools
3 comprehensive high schools
1 alternative high school
1 special needs school.
Albemarle County students also have
access to programs at the
Charlottesville-Albemarle Technical
Education Center (CATEC), which is
jointly operated with the
Charlottesville City Schools.
..
PUBLIC EDUCATION FUNDING
1999-2000
Local
Federal
1%
$1.1 mil.
State
34%
/'"' GRADUATION REQUIREMENTS ..... '",.
(For students graduating in 2000 & 2001.)
For a Standard Diploma, the requirements are as
follows:
English 4 credits
Math 2 Credits
Lab Science 2 credits
Other Math or Science 1 credit
Virginia and U.S. History 1 credit
Virginia and U.S. Government 1 credit
World Studies 1 credit
Health and Physical Education 2 credits
Fine or Practical Arts 1 credit
Electives 6 credits
TOTAL 21 credits
For an Advanced Studies Diploma, the
requirements are as follows:
English
Math
Lab Science
Virginia and U.S. History
Virginia and U.S. Government
World Studies
Foreign Language
Health and Physical Education
Fine or Practical Arts
Electives
4 credits
3 credits
3 credits
1 credit
1 credit
1 credit
3 credits
2 credits
1 credit
4 credits
· .. TOTAL 23 credits ...
A-10
All items reported are for the 1999-2000 SChOol year, unless otherwise indicated.
~" EMPLOYEE POSITIONS '""
Albemarle County School Board employed
approximately 1,946 people, as follows:
Full-Time Part-Time
59 0 Administrators
907 84 Teachers
98 177 Teacher Assistants
250 231 Other Support*
*This does not include bus drivers.
TEACHING STAFF
DEMOGRAPHICS
Average Annual Salary: $35,905*
Average Years of
Teaching Experience: 13.06
Masters: 44.7% Masters +30:
17.1%
Doctorate Degrees: 2.2%
Males: 22.8% Female: 77.2%
· .... Minority: 8% White: 92%
/
............................ ..*..F....u..i.L'..t.i....m..~..t...e..a...c...h...e.~..~..n..!Y..: ............................. "
PER PUPIL '"
COST
Pupil cost was
approximately:
$6,786
SCHOOL
POPULATION
September 30, 1999,
enrollment was as
follows:
Elementary 5,751
Middle 2,814
High 3,622
Total 12,187
12,250-
12,000-
11,750-
11,500-
11,250-
11,000-
10,750-
10,500-
10,250-
10,000.
9,750-
9,500-
1993-94
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
System-wide professional development was offered in the
form of over 548 different workshops, seminars, courses, and
symposia. Of these, 58 were in the area of technology with a
total attendance of 527 school system employees. Overall
attendance at staff development offerings for 1999-2000 was
4,497 school system employees.
STAFFING RATIOS*
The pupil-to-instructional staff (teachers and teaching
assistants) ratios were as follows:
K - Grade 3 20.25: 1 Grades 6 - 8 22.35: 1
Grades 4 - 5 21.25: 1 Grades 9- 12 22.50: 1
with a def'med allocation for gifted, technology, media,
guidance, and at the elementary level: f'me arts, practical arts,
and health/P.E.
* Special Education, Title I, and other federally
funded positions are not included. :
ENROLLMENT HISTORY
(September 30 Enrollments)
12
11,
11,981
1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00
School Years
A-II
SPECIAL PROGRAMS
Albemarle County offers 15 elementary schools, five middle schools, one special needs school, three
comprehensive high schools, and one nontraditional high school with programs culminating in standard or
advanced studies diplomas for students. In addition, the city of Charlottesville and Albemarle County jointly
own and operate the Charlottesville-Albemarle Technical Education Center (CATEC). The K-12 general
education program prepares students for higher education and for membership in the workforce. In addition
to the general educational program, the following programs are provided to support the progress of identified
students:
Special Education
Special education programs and services are available to county residents who have children with special
education needs. These programs and services are provided for children with disabilities whose second birthday
falls on or before September 30 in a given school year through the age of 21 years. Each student receives
special education services designed to meet his or her individual needs. These programs are discussed and
planned by school personnel, parents, and the student involved. Often instruction is carried out both in the regular
and special education classrooms. The student's progress is reviewed at least annually and his/her need for
special services is reassessed at a minimum of every three years. For more information, contact the Special
Education/Student Services Del~artment at 295-5885. ·
Gifted Program '"~.
Approximately 14 percent of students have been identified through a variety of measures as intellectually
gifted. A continuum of services K - 12 is available. Elementary students receive differentiated instruction
through the combined efforts of the gifted resource teacher and the classroom teacher. Each middle school
offers at least two honors classes at each grade level. High school students maytake AP and honors courses
in core subjects and foreign languages, may explore topics of interest through the Independent Study Program,
and may participate in summer residential Governor's School. At all levels, enrichment opportunities, guidance
services, and acceleration options are available to meet students' needs. Identification for the gifted program
is ongoing. Teachers, parents, principals, community members, and students may nominate a student for
consideration. School-based selection committees review the student profile and gather information about
achievement, ability, critical thinking and problem solving skills, and creativity to determine if a student meets
the criteria. For more information, contact the Department of Instruction at 296-5820 or the gifted resource ~.
teacher at the school. /
//Title I
Title I is a federally-funded program designed to help children meet challenging content and student
performance standards. The purpose of Title I is to enable schools to provide opportunities for children served
to acquire the knowledge and skills contained in the state's performance standards that all children are
expected to meet. Title I embraces fundamental strategies to address the needs of the children served: a
school-wide focus on improving teaching and learning; flexibility at the local level in tandem with clear
accountability for results; more focused targeting of resources on the neediest schools; and stronger
partnerships between schools and communities to support the achievement of children served.
Albemarle County is focusing its Title I resources on the teaching of reading/language arts to students in grades
kindergarten through third-grade at those 10 elementary schools with the highest percentage of free/reduced
lunch children. Those schools are Agnor-Hurt, Brownsville, Cale, Orozet, Greer, Red Hill, Scottsville, Stone-
Robinson, Woodbrook, and Yancey. Students are selected based on their academic performance, and their
progress is carefully monitored throughout the school year. For more information, contact the Federal Programs
Department at 296-5888.
A-12
Academic Learning Program Schools (ALPS)
The ALPS program is a School Board initiative providing additional funding to support Students at risk of not meeting
academic standards. A total of $181,000 of local funds has been allocated for this project to be shared by all
schools. Reading/Language Arts is the focus area; student participation for intervention is based on academic
performance, and student progress is assessed using the same instrument in all schools.
The project's goal is to improve significantly the performance of students who are currently not achieving success.
The program is designed to discover and implement successful strategies. Strategies being used include tutorial
services, after-school instruction, parent/child literacy, summer enrichment and remediation, special classrooms,
and differentiated deployment of staff. For more information, contact the Federa/ Programs Department at 296-5885.
Before and After-School Programs
For more information, contact the Community Education Department at 296-5840.
Before-School Programs
Before-school programs begin at 7:00
a.m. at specific elementary and middle
schools. These programs offer activities,
such as homework help, reading, tutoring,
games, and other enrichment activities, to
students who arrive before the regular
school day begins· Cost to parents for
before-school programs is $2.00 to $3.00
· per day for daily attendance. /.
After-School Enrichment Programs (ASEP)
More than 1,300 Albemarle County elementary students are
enrolled in after-school programs at their schools each day
from the time schools dismiss until 6:00 p.m. These
programs offer enriching experiences in art, science, nature,
sports, outdoor recreation, and a variety of' supplemental
classes. Homework and tutoring assistance may be provided.
These programs are financially supported by tuition and fees
charged for participation. Financial assistance through fee
reductions may be available for families who qualify.
Charlottesvdle-Albemarle School Bus~ness Alliance (CASBA)
CASBA is a joint venture of the Charlottesville Regional Chamber of Commerce, the Albemarle County Public
Schools, the Charlottesville City Public Schools, Piedmont Virginia Community College, Fluvanna County Public
Schools, University of Virginia, regional businesses, and community organizations. CASBA promotes high
standards for academic achievement and career preparation for all students and is a catalyst for educational
change based on the understanding that today's students will work in a dynamic global marketplace using
advanced technologies. CASBA provides services to address employer and workplace needs by connecting
youth to high quality learning opportunities in schools, workplaces, the community and post-secondary
educational experiences. CASBA also provides a communications link among its partners: employers,
educational systems, and community groups.. For more information, contact the Community Education
'.... Department at 296-5812 or Ms. Linda Seaman, CASBA Director, at 973-3193 or visit www. casba.net.
/" Programs for Adults
Students who have left school without graduating may return to an adult education program to complete a
traditional diploma program or to prepare for the General Education Development (GED) test. Adult education
classes meet Monday through Thursday evening at Albemarle High School.
Each year, more than 2,700 adults participate in varied education opportunities offered through Open Doors, the
Adult and Continuing Education program. Classes cover over 100 subjects including reading and writing skills,
computer technology use, art classes, and more. For more information, contact the Community Education
Department at 296-5840.
A-13
Albemarle
County
Agnor Hurt
Broadus Wood
Brownsville
Cale
Crozet
Greer
Hollymead
Meriwcther Lewis
Murray
Red Hill
Scottsviile
Stone-Robinson
Stony Point
Woodbrook
Yancey
Burley
Henley
Jouett
Sutherland
Walton
AHS
Monticello HS
Murray HS
WAHS
TOTAL # OF STUDENTS
ALBEMARLE COUNTY SCHOOLS
Demographic Information
(End of Year)
96-97 97-98 98-99 09-00
11,235 11,527 11,885 12,186 +301
522 568 542 561 +19
426 442 447 449 +2
273 282 266 277 +11
504 530 542 602 +60
378 365 335 350 +15
496 484 499 509 +10
612 613 623 622 -1
424 428 474 482 +8
245 252 281 266 -15
160 151 182 190 +8
202 193 211 211 0
512 550 518 529 +11
296 288 268 268 0
283 320 365 419 +54
164 158 147 166 +19
433 447 462 483 +21
580 576 597 616 +19
506 531 500 514 +14
592 577 840 617 -23
557 544 574 573 -1
1,853 1,963 1,508 1,517 +9
N/A N/^ 914 989 +75
86 90 75 74 -1
1,131 1,175 915 902 -13
% BLACK
(EndofYear)
96-97 97-98 98-99 99-00
12.2 12.4 12.3 13.0 +.7
18.6 23.6 22.0 23.2 +1.2
.7 1.4 2.2 3.3 +1.1
6.6 6.4 6.8 6.1 -.7
19.4 24.2 26.2 23.4 -2.8
5.8 3.8 4.5 4.9 +.4
25.0 27.1 23.0 25.0 +2.0
10.0 9.3 8.8 8.8 0
.9 .9 0.6 1.0 +.4
2.9 2.0 2.5 4.1 +1.6
15.6 11.9 12.6 14.7 +2.1
1.5 1.6 3.8 4.3 +.5
12.3 12.4 13.1 13.4 +.3
7.1 3.8 3.7 4.9 +1.2
14.5 17.2 18.4 21.2 +2.8
39.0 37.3 38.8 39.8 +1.0
20.6 20.6 23.4 22.4 -1.0
5.3 4.9 5.5 4.5 -1,0
13,2 9.4 8.8 8.2 -.6
10.5 10.2 9.5 13.3 +3.8
16.0 15.1 15.3 16.6 +1.3
14.7 15.4 12.8 14.2 +1.4
N/A N/A 18.1 17.6 -.5
7.0 11.1 14.7 13.5 -.8
8.9 8.3 5.1 4.7 -.4
% WHITE
(End of Year)
96-97 97-98 98-99 99-00
DIffemnc~
83.7 83.4 82.8 81.4 -1.4
75.5 71.1 73.6 73.4 -.2
98.4 98.4 97.1 95.8 -1.3
90.8 91.5 90.6 89.5 -1.1
78.6 71.9 67.7 68.1 +.4
91.8 92.3 91.6 90.0 -1.6
57.5 53.5 52.7 48.5 -4.2
86.9 88.1 88.1 86.7 -1.4
97.2 97.2 96.4 96.3 -.1
93.9 96.4 95.7 93.2 -2.5
73.8 80.1 80.8 75~3 -5.5
98.5 98.4 96.2 94.8 -1.4
86.9 86.2 86.1 85.4 -.7
91.6 95.1 93.3 93.3 0
80.2 77.8 76.4 70.9 -5.5
58.5 61.4 55.8 54.2 -1.6
76.2 75.2 72.1 72.7 +.6
91.7 92.0 90.8 92.5 +1.7
78.7 82.7 82.6 82.5 -.1
86.5 86.0 86.6 80.9 -5.7
80.6 81.6 81.5 79.4 -2.1
80.3 79.3 81.0 79.4 -1.6
N/A N/A 77.6 78.7 +1.1
93.0 87.8 84.0 86.5 +2.5
88.2 89.6 92.9 92.5 -.4
% OTHER
(End of Year)
96-97 97-98 98-99 99-0Q Difference
4.1 4.2 4.9 5.5 +.6
5.9 5.3 4.4 3.4 -1.0
.9 .2 0.7 0.9 +.2
2.6 2.1 2.6 4.3 +1.7
2.0 4.0 6.1 8.5 +2.4
2.4 3.8 3.9 5.1 +1.2
17.5 19.4 24.2 26.5 +2.3
3.1 2.6 3.0 4.5 +1.5
1.9 1.9 3.0 2.7 -.3
3.3 1.6 1.8 2.6 +.8
10.6 7.9 6.6 10.0 +3.4
0 0 0 0.9 +.9
.8 1.5 0.8 1.1 +.3
1.4 1.0 3.0 1.9 -1.1
5.3 5.0 5.2 7.9 +2.7
2.4 1.3 5.4 6.0 +.6
3.2 4.3 4.5 5.0 +.5
2.9 3.1 3.7 2.9 -.8
8.1 7.9 8.6 9.3 +.7
3.0 3.8 3.9 5.8 +1.9
3.4 3.3 3.1 4.0 +.9
5.0 5.3 6.2 6.4 +.4
NH NH 4.4 3.7 -.7
0 1.1 1.3 0.0 -1.3
2.8 2.1 2.0 2.9 +.9
Albemarle 11.1 12.6
County
Agnor Hurt 7.9 7.9
Broadus Wood 17.8 19.7
Brownsville 5.5 8.2
Cale 9.7 12.1
Crozet 4.8 8.2
Greet 8.9 10.1
Hollymead 9.3 14.5
Meriwether Lewis 20.3 19.9
Murray 18.7 15.1
Red Hill 13.8 17.9
Scottsville 10.4 13.5
Stone-Robinson 6.2 6.9
Stony Point 18.6 21.2
Woodbrook 7.7 12.2
Yancey 9.8 9.5
Burley 11.9 13.9
Henley 17.6 19.4
Jouett 17.7 20.9
Sutherland 11.0 13.7
Walton 7.2 9.9
AHS 7.4 7.7 11.3 13.6
Monticello HS N/^ N/A 5.4 13.2
Murray HS 14.0 10.0 6.7 1.4
WAHS 12.9 13.9 17.4 20.4
,>
NOTE: Definitions of Gifted, Mobility, Free/Reduced Lunch and Special Education are provided in the Glossary.
% FREE/REDUCED LUNCH..
% MOBILITY - (October 30)
% GIFTED (End of Year)
(End of Year) ***
· '* 97-9
~ 99_~_-.-.-.-.-.-9~ ~ - 20 20 18 -2
13.7 13.2 -.5 14.6 14.5 17.5 16.3 -.8 19
% SPECIAL EDUCATION.
(December 1)
~ 97-9.~.__.~8 ~ 99-0___90 ~
17.0 16.1 16.2 15.9 -.3
9.0 4.8 -4.2 15.6 18.9 21.4 16.4 -5.0 31 27 27 25 -2 14.2 12.7 12.1 10.7 -1.4
18.3 12.0 -6.3 9.9 11.1 8.9 7.7 -1.2 8 9 10 10 0 12.2 tl.0 11.0 12.1 +1.1
12.4 8.3 -4.1 14.7 24.7 28.0 21.1 -6.9 31 29 25 29 +4 25.1 18.3 17.4 16.2 -1.2
15.7 12.1 -3.6 18.2 21.8 34.8 28.4 -6.4 36 35 39 36 +3 19.5 17.2 15.3 15.3 0
8.1 5.1 -3.0 12.1 6.8 12.4 11.2 -1.2 21 20 23 20 -3 19.2 18.9 22.0 21.0 -1.0
13.0 7.9 -5.1 36.8 28.8 40.1 32.3 -7.8 35 39 38 41 +3 11.3 12.0 15.1 12.2 -2.9
18.5 10.8 -7.7 10.1 15.2 13.0 12.2 -.8 6 6 5 6 +1 9.8 9.3 9.0 9.0 0
19.4 9.5 -9.9 9.5 5.9 5.7 8.1 +2.4 3 3 4 4 0 18.3 14.1 13.7 12.3 -1.4
11,0 3.8 -7.2 4.1 7.8 8.8 13.0 +4.2 8 10 10 11 +1 18.5 18.4 18.3 17.2 -1.1
16.5 10.5 -6.0 17.4 20.2 30.6 16.0 -14.6 24 30 33 34 +1 16.5 19.1 · 18.8 17.8 -1.0
15.2 5.6 -9.6 12.0 14.6 29.0 16.9 -12.1 34 31 36 32 -4 18.0 18.1 17.3 16.7 -.6
9.3 6.8 -2.5 14.8 12.5 14.8 12.7 -2.1 21 23 20 19 -1 17.3 16.1 17.6 16.0 -1.6
17.9 13.1 -4.8 9.5 5.5 12.7 8.7 -4.0 15 14 15 14 -1 19.4 17.7 22.7 15.6 -7.1
8.2 7.9 -.3 16.7 16.7 20.6 15.6 -5.0 12 21 20 24 +4 12.3 14.8 14.4 12.7 -1.7
9.5 5.4 -4.1 18.2 15.2 34.7 24.1 -10.6 60 62 58 58 0 22.0 16.7 13.0 18.9 +5.9
16.7 16.6 -.1 20.5 17.0 16.0 18.0 +2.0 24 30 28 27 -1 17.7 18.5 13.5 13.2 -.3
18.9 213 +2.9 7.9 10.4 7.4 8.5 +1.1 t5 16 16 13 -3 18.4 18.4 17.7 18.5 +.8
21.0 25.5 +4.5 15.5 15.8 16.8 13.9 -2.9 17 18 15 17 +2 14.5 14.3 13.3 12.6 -.7
16.1 20.1 +4.0 10.1 12.2 8.5 15.1 +6.6 9 8 8 10 +2 15.3 13.2 13.2 14.2 +1.0
11.7 16.4 +4.7 16.5 12.9 21.8 13.5 -6.3 36 33 34 31 -3 26.3 24.3 21.1 19.6 -1.5
+2.3 13.9 13.2 11.8 16.3 +4.5 ** ** ** 7 N/A 16.1 15.3 14.8 15.3 +.5
+7.8 N/A N/A 21.1 21.0 -1.1 N/A NIA 18 20 +2 NIA NIA 19.2 19.0 -.2
· , ** ** 5.2 9.1 16.0 26.6 +10.6
-4,7 35.0 33.5 54.7 32.7 -22.0 4 '*
+3.0 13.8 13.6 15.2 17.7 +2.5 9 11 6 4 -2 13.4 16.0 13.0 13.8 +.8
** Did not participate in National School Lunch Program
*** Difference in number of students between the last two school years. (98/99 & 99/00)
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT
I. NATIONAL INDICATORS
Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT)
Advanced Placement Courses and Exams (AP)
Stanford 9 Achievement Tests
II. STATE INDICATORS
Standards of Learning Tests (SOL)
Vocational Completers
Diplomas Conferred
Graduates' Continuing Education Plans
III. LOCAL INDICATORS
Second-Grade Reading Assessment
Albemarle County Foreign Language Comprehensive Exams
Foreign Language Completers
Algebra I Completers, Prior to the 9th-Grade
Algebra I Completers, High School Graduates
Albemarle County Physical Education Progress Report
Virginia Wellness-Related Fitness Testing Program
Instructional Technology: Courses, Computers, and Internet Activity
Participation in Student-Business Cooperations
CATEC Career Programs
Priority 1.2 - Academic Progress of High Achieving Students
· A division team will be established to define measurable targets for the
academic progress of high achieving students by December 2000.
· By July 2001, baseline data will be collected to utilize to define these
targets.
A variety of data are presented in this report on the academic progress of high achieving
students. In previous annual progress reports, some data on SAT tests and Advanced
Placement courses and exams have been presented. In this report, a wider range of data on
high achieving students is presented. It is not our intent to presuppose what indicators the
above-mentioned division team will select. Rather, our intent is to provide a variety of data to
serve as starting points in the discussion of measurable targets.
Highlights
· 34 percent of college-bound seniors scored 600 or above on the SAT verbal test.
· 31 percent of college-bound seniors scored 600 or above on the SAT math test.
· There were 788 course registrations in Advanced Placement courses.
· 310 students took 468 Advanced Placement exams.
· 83.5 percent of students scored three or higher on Advanced Placement exams.
I. National Indicators
Indicator: SCHOLASTIC ASSESSMENT TEST (SAT)
Scores from the Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT) are used by many colleges and universities as one
indicator of an applicant's potential for success. The SAT measures basic verbal and mathematical
abilities. Test items are designed to measure students' ability to reason rather than to remember facts.
Student performance is reported on a scale that ranges from 200 to 800. The midpoint on the scale is
500.
Highlights of 1999-2000 SAT results for Albemarle County are as follows:
The SAT was taken by 71.5 percent of the students in theAIbemarle County graduating
class of 2000, comPared to 44 percent for the nation and 67 percent for Virginia.
The mean (average) verbal score of 547 in 1999-2000 was four points higher than the mean
score in 1998-99, but one point below the five-year high of 548 in 1997-98.
· The mean (average) math score of 535 in 1999-2000 was four points higher than the mean
score in 1998-99, but two points below the five-year high of 538 in 1997-98.
· The mean (average) verbal score of 547 in 1999-2000 exceeds that of the nation by 38
pointS and that of the state by 42 points.
· The mean (average) math score of 535 in 1999-2000 exceeds that of the nation by 21
points and that of the state by 35 points.
· Thirty-four percent of county college-bound seniors scored 600 or above on the verbal test.
· Thirty-one percent of county college-bound seniors scored 600 or above on the math test.
· Two county college-bound seniors earned a combined verbal and math score of 1600.
Table 1 shows the number and percentage of graduating seniors taking the SAT, and verbal and math
mean (average) scores for each Albemarle County high school, the county, Virginia, and nation.
Table 1
SAT Summary Data
Percentage Percentage Mean Mean Mean
Number of of Grade 12 (Average) (Average) (Average)
Taking Graduating Fall Verbal Math Total
SAT Class Membership Score Score Score
Albemarle H.S. 236 80.5 75.2 536 522 '~ 1058
Monticello H.S. 113 55.1 52.1 522 507 1029
Murray H.S. 2 14.3 16.7 570 520 1090
Western Albemarle H.S. ! 167 79.1 79.5 ~ 580 571 1151
Albemarle 518 71.6 68.8 547 535 1082
Virginia 47,773 67* 68.9 509 500 1009
Nation 1,260,278 44* NA 505 514 1019
Source: The College Board ("Based on the projecUon of high school graduates in 2000 by the Western Interstate Commission
for Higher Education, and the number of students in the class of 2000 who took the SAT I: Reasoning Test. Updated
projections make it inappropriate to compare these percentages with those of previous years.")
Table 2 shows the number and percentage of students scoring in each score range for the verbal and
math tests for each Albemarle County comprehensive high school and the county.
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - NATIONAL - SAT B-3
Table 2
Number and Percentage of Students Scoring in Each Score Range
on SAT Verbal and Math Tests
VERBAL NumberofStuden~ Pemen~geofStuden~
Scom Range AHS MHS WAHS AIb. Va. AHS MHS WAHS AIb. Va. Nation
750-800 9 4 13 26 843 4 4 8 5 2 2
700-749 11 5 11 27 1,420 5 4 7 5 3 3
650-699 18 8 22 48 3,008 8 7 13 9 6 6
600-649 38 13 28 79 5,074 16 12 17 15 11 10
550-599 39 16 31 86 7,041 17 14 19 17 15 14
500-549 37 20 24 81 8,671 16 18 14 16 18 18
450-499 33 13 19 65 8,154 14 12 11 13 17 17
400-499' 23 16 13 52 6,428 10 14 8 10 13 14
350-399 19 12 3 34 3,950 8 11 2 7 8 9
300-349 5 4 2 11 2,063 2 4 1 2 4 4
250-299 0 2 1 3 685 0 2 1 1 1 2
200-249 4 0 0 4 436 2 0 0 1 1 1
TOTAL 236 113 167 516 47,773
MATH Number of Studen~ Pemen~ge of Studen~
Scorn Range AHS MHS WAHS AIb. Va. AHS MHS WAHS AIb. Va. NMion
750-800 2 0 6 8 701 1 0 4 2 I 2
700-749 12 2 14 28 1482 5 2 8 5 3 4
650-699 17 7 23 47 2885 7 6 14 9 6 7
600-649 26 18 34 78 4862 11 16 20 15 10 11
550-599 38 13 24 75 6579 16 12 14 15 14 15
500-549 50 20 26 96 7758 21 18 16 19 16 16
450-499 37 24 13 74 8033 16 21 8 14 17 17
400-499 25 10 17 52 6937 11 9 10 10 15 13
350-399 19 12 6 37 4468 8 11 4 7 9 8
300-349 7 5 3 15 2547 3 4 2 3 5 4
.250-299 1 1 0 2 1062 0 1 0 0 2 2
200-249 2 1 1 4 459 1 1 1 1 1 1
TOTAL 236 113 167 516 47,773
Table 3 shows the percentage of students scoring 600 or above on the verbal and math tests for each
comprehensive high school, Albemarle County, Virginia, and nation.
Table 3
Percentage of Students Scoring 600 or Above
AHS MHS WAHS Albemarle Virginia Nation
VERBAL 33 27 45 34 22 21
MATH 24 24 46 31 20 24
B-4 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - NATIONAL - SAT
Indicator: ADVANCED PLACEMENT (AP) Cb'aYSes and Exams
The Advanced Placement (AP) program was created in the 1950s to provide opportunities for high school
students to take college-level courses and exams. There are a total of 32 AP courses in 18 subject areas.
Students who earn scores of three, four, or five on AP exams may earn college credits according to the
policies of the colleges they choose to attend. Advanced Placement courses follow syllabuses published by
The College Board, and are taught at the college level. Some Albemarle County AP courses have admission
requirements.
During the 1999-2000 school year, 310 students took 466 AP exams. Participation in AP exams had
increased steadily in recent years, from 172 students taking AP exams in 1993-94 to 316 students in 1998-
99. There are various possible reasons for this leveling off in the number of students taking AP exams. Each
AP exam costs $76 and requires about one-half day to complete. In most situations students pay for their
own exam. AP exams are given during the same two-week period in May as state SOL tests, which may
discourage some students from taking the exam. Finally, students taking AP courses are not required to take
the AP exam; for example, some seniors may take AP courses but not exams after learning that the college
they have chosen to attend does not accept AP credit. In fact, some of the more selective colleges do not
grant credit for AP scores. Conversely, students may take an AP exam without having taken the
corresponding AP course.
While participation in AP exams may be leveling off, there is some evidence that demand for AP courses is
increasing. Table 4 presents 1999-2000 data on the number of registrations in AP courses. One course
shown, AP Statistics, was in one case (Monticello High School) offered in televised form in order to meet the
needs of one student. Not reflected in the table are 30 requests that could not be met for four different AP
courses. We will continue to collect these data on numbertand type of AP courses requested by students
to help assess over time how well the division is meeting the needs of students for higher-level coursework
at the secondary level.
Table 4
Registration in AP Courses by High School, 1999-2000
I Albemarle IM°nticell° I Western I CountTTotal
English
En~llish 12 I 41I21 I 28 I 90
Math
CalculusI 48120 30 98
Statistics 24 1 13 38
Science
Biology 28 18 45 91
Chemistry 14 15 29
Physics 21 17 38
Social Studies
U.S. History 52 25 47 124
European History 10 10
Psycholo~l¥ 80 29 109
Government/Politics 41 23 47 111
Fine Arts
Studio Art Portfolio I 3 I I 8 I 11
Foreign Language
French V 7 3 10
Other
Computer ScienceI 10 110
Total 351 145 292 788
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - NATIONAL - AP B-5
Table 5 below shows the number and percentage of students taking AP exams dudng 1999-2000 at each
comprehensive high school and the totals for the county.
Table 5
Number and Percentage of Students Taking Advanced Placement Exams
and Scoring Three or Higher during 1999-2000
Number of Exams Number of Scores Percentage of Scores
Taken Three or Higher of Three or Higher
Albemarle H$ 200 159 79.5
Monticello HS 74 55 74.3
Western Albemarle HS 192 175 91.1
Albemarle County 466 389 83.5
Table 6 below shows the number and percentage of grade 9-12 students who took one or more AP course
during each school year. These data represent an unduplicated count meaning students taking more than
one AP course are counted only once.
Table 6
Number and Percentage of Grade 9-12 Fall Membership Taking One or More
Advanced Placement Courses during Each School Year
1998-99 1999-2000
Number Percent Number Percent
Albemarle HS 225 14.7 220 14.4
Monticello HS 34 3.6 75 7.1
Murray HS 0 0 0 0
Western Albemarle HS 158 17.6 147 17.2
Albemarle County 417 12.1 442 12.6
Table 7 below shows the number and percentage of grade 9-12 students who scored three or higher on
at least one Advanced Placement exam dudng each school year. These data represent an unduplicated
count meaning students taking more than one AP exam are counted only once.
Table 7
Number and Percentage of Grade 9-12 Students Who Scored Three or Higher
on at Least One Advanced Placement Exam during Each School Year
1998-99 1999-2000
Number Percent Number Percent
Albemarle HS 121 53.8 112 50.9
Monticello HS 18 52.9 38 50.7
Murray HS 0 0 0 0
Western Albemarle HS 104 65.8 98 66.7
Albemarle County 243 58.3 248 56.1
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - NATIONAL - AP
Number and Percentage of Albemarle County Students
Scoring at Each Score Point on Advanced Placement Exams, 1999-2000
Score Percentage %
Scoring
SUBJECT 5 4 3 2 1 Total 5 4 3 2 1 3 to 5
U.S. History 28 50 34 30 3 145 19.3 34.5 23.4 20.7 2.0 77.2
Art History 0 N/A
Art: Studio Drawing 0 N/A
Art: Studio General * * * * * * * * * * * *
Biology 7 16 9 3 2 37 18.9 43.2 24.3 8.1 5.1 86.5
Chemistry 3 3 7 3 0 161 18.8 18.8 43.8 18.8 0.0 81.3
Computer Science A * * * * * * * * * * * *
Computer Science AB 0 N/A
Economics: Micro 0 N/A
Economics: Macro 0 N/A
English Language and . . , , · , , , · , · ,
Composition
English Literature and 32 24 11 I 0 68 47.1 35.3 16.2 1.5 0.0 98.5
Composition
Environmental Science 0 N/A
European History * * * * * * * * * * * *
French Language * * * * * * * * * * * *
French Literature 0 N/A
German Language 0 NIA
Gov'tand Politics-U.S. 5 18 17! 6 0 46 10.9 39.1 37.0 13.0 0.0 87.0
Government & Politics - , · · · , · , · , , * ·
Comparative
Latin: Literature * * * * * * * *~ * * * '
Latin: Vergil * * * * * * * * * * * *
CalculusAB 15 16 8 0 0 39 38.5 41.0 20.5 0.0i 0.0 100.0
Calculus BC * * * * * * * * * * * *
Music - Theory 0 N/A
PhysicsB 4 6 1 1 1 13 30.8 46.2 7.7 7.7 7.7 84.6
Physics C - Mechanics 0 N/A
Physics C - Elec. & Mag. 0 N/A
Psychology 11 4 8 5 1 29 37.9 13.8 27.6 17.2 3.4 79.3
Spanish Language 3 3 3 3 1 13 23.1 23.1 23.1 23.1 7.7 69.2
Spanish Literature 0 N/A
Statistics 0 8 4 5 1 18 0.0 44.4 22.2 27.8 5.6 66.7
TOTAL 114 158 117 68 9 466 24.5 33.9 25.1 14.6 1.9 83.5
* For categories with fewer than 11 students, data have been omitted
to maintain confidentiality of individual student results.
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - NATIONAL - AP B-7
Indicator: STANFORD 9 Achievement Tests
In October 1996, the Virginia State Board of Education adopted the Stanford Achievement Test
Series, Ninth Edition (Stanford 9), as the norm-referenced test for the Virginia State Assessment
Program (VSAP). The Stanford 9 was administered in April 1997 to Virginia public school students
in grades 3, 5, 8 and 11. That spring, students in those grades took both the Stanford 9 tests and field
tests of the new Standards of Learning tests. Subsequently, the State Board changed the Stanford
9 testing from a spring administration to a fall administration in an effort to lessen the testing burden
on schools and children in grades 3, 5, 8, and 11. Beginning in the fall of 1998, the Stanford 9 tests
were administered to students in grades 4, 6, and 9. The purpose of this testing program is to provide
information on how Virginia students compare to students across the nation.
What Does the Stanford 9 Measure?
The Stanford 9 measures students' school achievement in reading, mathematics, and language. All test
questions on the Stanford 9 are multiple choice and reflect academic content that is commonly taught in
schools across America. A bdef description of the tests in each content area follows.
Reading. The Stanford 9 includes subtests in reading vocabulary and reading comprehension.
Reading passages include original short stories and articles written by published authors of
children's and young people's literature. Three types of reading are included:
Recreational reading involves material read for enjoyment or literary merit, including folk
tales, historical fiction, contemporary fiction, humor, and poetry.
· Textual reading includes expository material with content from the natural, physical, and
social sciences, as well as other nonfiction general information material.
Functional reading involves material encountered in everyday life, both inside and
outside the classroom, including directions, forms, labels, schedules, and
advertisements.
Lanc~uaae. The language subtest measures prewriting, composing, editing, and spelling in a
holistic fashion that reflects the developmental nature of the writing process. The questions are
presented in the context of scenarios that engage students in the assessment and give them a real
reason to answer the questions. The scenarios include writing samples that have grammatical
errors embedded in them, thus presenting students with a task that mirrors editing their own first-
draft writing.
Mathematics. The Stanford 9 includes subtests in mathematics problem solving and
mathematics procedures. These subtests assess the mathematical content recommended by
the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics and include number theory, geometry,
algebra, and statistics. Questions are constructed so that students apply basic mathematics
procedures and problem-solving strategies to arrive at a solution. To make the test questions
more meaningful to students, many problems are presented in a real-life context and, on some
subtests, students are allowed to use calculators.
What is a Norm-Referenced Test?
Nationally norm-referenced achievement tests measure a student's knowledge in broad content areas and
provide a means by which the achievement of the student can be compared to that of students in the
same grade throughout the nation. This comparison is made possible by "norming" the test, which first
involves administering the test at a specified time of year, in all grades and under standardized conditions,
to a large sample of students referred to as the "norm group." Because this sample of students is
representative of the nation's student population in terms of geographic region, socioeconomic status
(SES), and ethnicity, test results of the students in the norm group provide an estimate of student
B-8 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - NATIONAL - STANFORD 9
achievement across the nation. When the teStis~ubsequently administered to students at the same time
of year, in the same grades, and under the same conditiOns, test sCores can be comPared to the scores
of the students in the norm group. Because the Stanford g is a norm-referenced test, scores obtained
through its administration reflect how well Virginia students performed relative to the nationally
representative sample of students in the same grade who were tested at the same time of year and under
the same conditions.
How Are Scores on the Stanford 9 Reported?
Scores on the Stanford g are reported as percentile ranks. Percentile ranks or "percentiles" show a child's
achievement in a content area compared to other students in the same grade across the nation. More
specifically, a percentile rank Score indicates the percentage of students in a national sample whose
scores were the same as or lower than a particular child's score. For example, a percentile rank of 55 on
the reading comprehension subtest means a child scored as well as or better than 55 percent of the
students in the national sample.
How Are Stanford 9 Test Results Used?
The Stanford 9 test results allow parents, students, teachers, and school administrators to compare the
achievement of students, schools, school divisions, and the state with that of other children throughout
the country.
Who is Tested on the Stanford 9?
All students classified in grades 4, 6, and 9 at the time of the VSAP administration were to have been
tested, including:
· Any student with disabilities, unless the student was exempted as documented in his/her
individual education program OEP) or Section 504 management tool; and
· Any limited English proficient (LEP) student, unless a committee responsible for the student's
education determined that based on his/her fluency in English taking the test was not in the
student's best interest.
Some students with disabilities and LEP students were provided with testing accommodations according
to guidelines set forth by the State Board of Education and outlined in InfOrmational Superintendent's
Memo f~9, February 28, 1997. If a student was provided an accommodation that maintained the
standardized conditions of the Stanford 9 (e.g., a large-print copy of the test was used), the student's
scores were included in school, division, and state averages. If, however, an accommodation that did not
maintain standard conditions was provided (such as allowing extra time to complete the test), the student
received an individual score report, but his/her test results were not included in school, division, state and
national results.
For each student who did not take the Stanford 9, the school divisions are required to provide the reason
that the student was not tested. Reasons may include:
· disability status,
· limited proficiency in English,
· absence at the time of testing,
· refusal to take the test,
· disruptive behavior, or
· a medical emergency.
Percentile Rank Scores
Percentile rank scores provide an indication of the relative standing of a student or a group of students
in comparison to students in the same grade who took the test at the same time of year. Percentile ranks
range from a Iow of 1 to a high of 99, with 50 denoting average performance, and correspond to the
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - NATIONAL - STANFORD
percent of students in the norm group who performed at an equal or lower level on the test. For example,
if a school division has a national percentile rank of 55, average performance in the division was equal
to or better than 55 percent of the students in the norm group. Because a percentile rank of 50 denotes
average performance, the division performed above the average.
Percentile rank scores should always be interpreted with reference to the norm group from which they
were derived. Comparison of percentile rank scores between a spring and fall administration is not
statistically valid or meaningful because those percentile ranks corresponded to different norm groups.
Percentile rank scores for students taking the tests in the spring are compared against a norm group that
took the tests in the spring. Likewise, students taking the tests in the fall are compared against a norm
group that took the tests in the fall. As a result, percentile ranks cannot be used to reliably determine
whether Virginia students gained or lost in terms of real performance between spdng 1997 and fall 1999.
Scaled Scores
Scaled scores are included in this report because they facilitate comparison of results regardless of the
point of the school year or grade in which the test was administered. Thus, scaled scores may be used
to show gain/loss relative to the spring 1997 administration of theStanford 9. Student performance on
the Stanford 9 is reported as a scaled score that goes across all grade levels. In other words,
performance on a test is reported on the same scale, regardless of the grade level. The use of scaled
scores allows meaningful comparison of performance from grade to grade, from one year to the next, and
over a succession of years.
ACHIEVEMENT SUMMARY
Achievement in grade 4 was at or above national and state averages on all tests and content
areas. Fall 1999 scores forAIbemarle County students in grade 4 dropped slightly from 1998,
but the difference was not statistically significant.
Achievement in grade 6 was above the state average on all tests and content areas.
Achievement in grade 6 was above the national average on all tests and content areas, with
the exception of prewriting. Scores forAIbemarle County students in grade 6 increased slightly,
but the difference was not statistically significant.
Achievement in grade 9 was at or above national and state averages on all tests and content
areas. Scores for Albemarle County students in grade 9 increased slightly, but the difference
was not statistically significant.
Females generally scored higher than males except on mathematics tests at grades 4 and 9.
Asian/Pacific Islander students scored above the national average on all subtests and
content areas.
· Black students scored below the national average on all subtests and content area totals.
· Hispanic students scored below the national average in almost all subtests and content areas,
except in grade 6 where they scored at or above the national average in 5 of the 11 subtests
and content area totals.
* White students scored at or above the national average in all subtests and content area totals
except grade 6 prewriting.
Three sets of tables (one for each grade level tested) can be found on the pages that follow. The first set
of tables is for grade 4. The first table in each set shows the fall 1998 and 1999 percentile rank scores
for each Albemarle County school, the school division, and the state. The second table shows percentile
rank scores by gender and race/ethnicity. The third table in each set shows mean (average) scaled scores
for spring 1997, fall 1998, and fall 1999.
B- 10 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - NATIONAL - STANFORD 9
Tables 9, 10, and 11 show Stanford 9 national percentile ranks for the nation, state, school division, and
each school for 1998 and 1999, for fourth, sixth, and ninth grades. As shown, achievement of
Albemarle County students in all three grades was above the national and above or, in the case of one
fourth-grade subtest, equal to, state averages in all content areas.
However, there was considerable variability in student achievement across schools, and performance did
decline slightly between 1998 and 1999. In 1998, for example, only three of the 15 elementary schools
scored below the state average for the total fourth-grade test battery; in 1999, five elementary schools
scored below the state average. On the total sixth-grade test battery, only one of five county middle schools
scored below the state average in 1998; in 1999, two did. On the high school level, however, two schools
scored below the state average on the ninth-grade test battery in 1998 compared to only one in 1999.
Table 9
Stanford Achievement Test Series, 9th Edition - National Percentile Ranks, Grade 4
GROUP Year
National No~ 1995
1999
Virginia 1998
AlbemaHe 1999
Coun~ 1998
1999
Agnor-Hu~ 1998
Broadus 1999
Wo~ 1 ~8
1999
Brownsville
1999
Cale 1~
1999
Crozet 1~8
1999
Greet 1~
1999
Hollymead 1~
MeHwe~er 1999
Lewis 19~
1999
Murmy 1998
1999
R~ Hill 19~
1999
Sco~ville 1~8
S~ne- t999
Robinson 1~8
t999
Stony Point 1998
1999
Woodbrook 1998
t999
Yancey 19~
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - NATIONAL - STANFORD 9 B- l l
Table 10
Stanford Achievement Test Series, 9th Edition - National Percentile Ranks, Grade 6
GROUP Year ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o m ~;
National Norm 1995 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50
1999 59 59 59 62 67 55 53 43 55 60 60
Vi;inia 1998 58 58 58 58 ~ 52 51 42 ~ 57 58
Al~marle 1999 71 68 71 69 76 58 58 ~ 59 63 67
Coun~ 1998 69 67 68 69 75 60 58 46 56 65 67
1999 62 60 63 59 67 ~ 50 38 49 60 ~
BuHey 1998 66 66 65 ~ 71 56 ~ ~ 55 58 ~
t999 82 80 79 78 ~ 67 66 53 66 71 77
Henley 1998 74 74 72 77 82 67 63 46 61 71 73
1999 82 79 82 79 ~ 69 70 51 ~ 78 77
Joue~
1998 77 71 78 78 ~ 66 67 52 61 74 74
1999 75 71 75 72 79 61 60 50 63 62 71
SutheHand
1998 74 70 74 75 81 65 62 48 61 69 71
1999 47 43 51 50 57 ~ ~ 40 53 ~ 49
Walton
1998 49 50 49 47 50 46 45 42 42 52 49
Table 11
Stanford Achievement Test Series, 9th Edition - National Percentile Ranks, Grade 9
- _
GROUP Year
National No~ 1995 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50
1999 60 57 62 55 61 ~ 50 49 ~ ~ 56
Virginia 1998 58 ~ 60 ~ 58 46 48 47 52 48 55
Albemarle 1999 66 63 67 65 72 53 59 52 62 58
Coun~ 1998 ~ 61 66 63 68 5~ 55 48 57 55 62
1999 67 ~ 68 63 70 50 61 55 63 60 63
Albemarle HS
1998 69 66 70 ~ 71 56 60 51 61 60 65
1999 62 60 ~ 61 67 50 55 50 61 50 60
Monticello HS
1998 ~ 53 57 48 ~ 37 46 46 50 ~ 50
1999 35 42 ~ 21 32 t2 23 21 19 35 26
Murray HS
1998 32 38 32 18 24 14 15 19 21 16 23
Westem t 999 70 65 71 75 8t 63 63 52 ~ 62 71
Albemarle HS 1998 69 ~ 71 76 78 68 58 50 59 59 69
B- 12 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - NATIONAL - STANFORD 9
Review of the percentage of students sc0i-ing:in eaCh q~artile provides an indication of how a group's
performance on a test compares to the norm group across the entire range of performance. Each of
the four quartiles represents a range of scores for one quarter (25 percent) of the students in the
national norm group. Quartiles range from Q1 through Q4, with Q4 representing the 25 percent of
students whose scores were the highest; conversely, Q1 represents the 25 percent of students in the
norm group with the lowest scores. The split between Q2 and Q3 is the absolute midpoint of the norm
group; that is, 50 percent of the students in the norm group scored below this point, and 50 percent
of the students scored above it.
As can be seen in the accompanying pie charts (Figures 1, 2, 3, & 4) the performance of county
students remained fairly stable between 1998 and 1999. That is, the percentage of county students
scoring in each quartile for each test changed only slightly. County students also outperformed the
national norm group on every test across all three grades. More than half of county students scored
above the 50th percentile or the midpoint of scores nationally.
Figure 1, TOTAL READING
Grade 4 - 1998 Grade 4 - 1999
17% 16%
38% 35%
17%
28%
28%
~ 0-25%ile (Q1)
E~ 26-50%ile (Q2)
~ 51-75%ile (Q3)
~ 76-99%ile (Q4)
Grade 6 - 1998
13%
47%~20%
20%
Grade 6 - 1999
49% --
13%
18%
20%
Grade 9 -1998
47%--
13%
,20%
Grade 9 - 1999
45% __
15%
18%
20%
22%
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - NATIONAL - STANFORD 9 B-13
Figure 2, TOTAL LANGUAGE
Grade 4- 1998 Grade 4- 1999
15%
36%~ 34%
122%
27% 27%
15%
24%
· 0-25%ile (Q1) · 51-75%ile (Q3)
I-! 26-50%ile (Q2) ~ 76-99%ile (Q4)
Grade 6 - 1998 Grade 6 - 1999
17% 27%
28%
17%
30%
26%
31%
Grade 9- 1998
24%
Grade 9 - 1999
36%
18%
117%
25%
28%
Figure 3, TOTAL MATHEMATICS
Grade 4 - 1998
18%
37°/°1~~
21%
25%
Grade 4 - 1999
34%
27%
Grade 6 - 1998
16%
45% ~~18%
20%
Grade 6 - 1999
43%
Grade 9 - 1998
40%
20%
Grade 9- 1999
39%
20%
15%
19%
23%
16%
~20%
22%
25%
B- 14 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - NATIONAL - STANFORD 9
Figure 4, TOTAL TEST
Grade 4 - 1998
14%
37%
Grade 4 - 1999
33%
14%
~ 0-25%ile (Q1)
~ 26-50%ile (Q2)
~ 51-75%ile (Q3)
~ 76-99%ile (Q4)
29%
31%
Grade 6 - 1998
12%
43% ~21%
24%
Grade 6 - 1999
41%
12%
18%
29%
Grade 9 - 1998
39%
18%
118%
Grade 9 - 1999
36%
13%
22%
25%
29%
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - NATIONAL - STANFORD 9 B-15
Tables 12, 13, and 14 show Stanford 9 national percentile ranks for males and females and for each
racial/ethnic group for the school division and state for 1998 and 1999, for fourth, sixth, and ninth
grades.
· In most cases, Albemarle County females scored higher than males in reading and language in both
1998 and 1999.
· Albemarle County males generally scored higher than females in mathematics. In 1998, this difference
was greater in sixth and ninth grades than in fourth grade; in 1999, however, the gap was narrowest
at the sixth-grade level and most pronounced in fourth grade.
· In Albemarle County, Asian/Pacific Islander students usually scored above other racial/ethnic groups,
especially in mathematics, in both 1998 and 1999.
· In Albemarle County, black students scored below the national and state averages for all students on
all tests and at all grades.
· In fourth grade, Albemarle County's black students scored above the state average for black students
in reading in both 1998 and 1999 but below the state average for black students in mathematics.
· In sixth grade, Albemarle County's black students scored above the state average for black students
in reading in 1998, but below it in 1999. In mathematics, the county's black students scored below the
state average for black students in mathematics in both 1998 and 1999.
· In ninth grade, Albemarle County's black students scored below the state average for black students
in all areas in both 1998 and 1999, with the exception of the math problem-solving subtest in 1999,
on which they equaled the state average.
. Albemarle County's Hispanic students in fourth and sixth grades showed substantial improvement on
most subtests between 1998 and 1999; this increase was not seen for Hispanic students in ninth
grade.
· Albemarle County's Asian/Pacific Islander students scored above state averages for Asian/Pacific
Islander students on virtually all tests and subtests in both years, as did white students compared to
state averages for white students.
Table 12
Stanford Achievement Test Series, 9th Edition
National Percentile Ranks, Grade 4
c ~
.-
--I a~ CJ uJ
GROUP Year I-.- m m
1999 61 57 61 63 70 56 60 58 54 63 61
Male
1998 62 59 60 63 69 57 58 58 52 58 62
1999 63 57 65 58 64 53 63 59 57 65 61
Female
1998 67 61 67 62 68 56 68 59 62 70 65
American Indian/ 1999 54 44 60 47 56 40 52 61 68 33 50
Alaskan Native 1998 88 83 82 90 90 88 77 76 50 86 84
Asian/ 1999 79 69 78 88 86 86 78 64 72 77 80
Pacific Islander 1998 74 58 78 83 82 82 82 64 73 86 77
1999 34 33 38 33 39 31 40 42 40 41 36
Black
1998 36 39 35 33 38 31 39 44 37 41 39
1999 43 39 47 32 46 2t 57 50 54 60 43
Hispanic 1998 34 29 40 32 36 33 57 51 40 68 40
1999 66 60 66 54 70 57 65 61 58 67 64
White
1998 69 63 68 67 73 60 66 61 60 67 67
B- 16 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - NATIONAL - STANFORD 9
Stanford Achievement Test Series, 9th Edition
National Percentile Ranks, Grade 6
c ~
- a) c --.~(~
GROUP Year I- ~ i~ ~ ~. ~ ", a. o ua m m
1999 67 65 67 69 76 57 52 43 55 57 65
Male 1998 68 66 67 71 77 62 56 46 53 63 67
1999 75 71 75 69 75 59 65 50 64 69 70
Female
1998 69 67 69 67 73 59 60 47 59 67 66
American Indian/ 1999 18 16 22 22 22 26 23 20 40 24 21
Alaskan Native 1998 na na na na na na na na na na na
Asian/ 1999 79 80 76 86 89 75 69 57 65 77 79
Pacific Islander 1998 77 76 76 88 90 79 71 62 59 73 79
1999 37 37 37 32 38 27 29 27 37 32 35
Black 1998 39 43 38 32 34 32 35 31 39 42 37
1999 62 57 63 53 58 52 52 39 60 56 56
Hispanic 1998 46 40 50 49 59 41 39 35 38 44 48
1999 76 72 76 74 80 63 63 50 62 68 72
White
1998 73 71 73 74 80 65 62 49 60 69 71
Table 14
Stanford Achievement Test Series, 9m Edition
National Percentile Ranks, Grade 9
c ~
~ ~ -~ '-
~ E ~ -
GROUP Year ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~
1999 63 62 ~ 65 73 65 55 50 59 53 63
Male
1998 62 62 61 66 70 ~ 50 46 ~ 50 61
1999 69 63 71 63 71 50 ~ 55 65 63 65
Female
1998 67 61 71 61 66 51 59 51 60 59 62
American Indian/ 1999 62 60 63 50 77 30 57 51 65 55 60
Alaskan Native 1998 na na na na na na na na na na na
Asian/ 1999 68 69 68 88 85 85 63 ~ 65 67 78
Pacific islander 1998 ~ 69 62 82 82 79 62 47 66 ~ 71
1999 36 36 38 3t 38 25 32 32 37 35 ~
Black
1998 30 35 30 24 30 20 22 27 24 24 27
1999 36 36 38 ~ 50 34 27 29 37 28 39
Hispanic 1998 35 39 40 51 53 47 26 27 33 30 41
1999 71 67 73 70 77 57 65 57 67 62 69
White
1998 69 65 71 67 73 57 59 52 61 59 66
B-17
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - NATIONAL - STANFORD 9
Longitudinal Study of Stanford 9 Scores: Spring 1997 Grade 3 and Fall 1999 Grade 6
Finally, Figure 5 presents results for 553 students who took Stanford 9 tests as third-graders in spring
1997 and as sixth-graders in fall 1999. Students who entered or left the county school system and
took the Stanford 9 only once were excluded. The results shown in Figure 6 are scaled scores rather
than percentiles. Scaled scores allow comparison of results regardless of when the test was
administered. That is, performance is reported on the same scale, regardless of grade level, allowing
meaningful comparison of performance from grade to grade, from one year to the next, or over a
series of years. Also included in Figure 7 are scaled score results from the state and national levels;
for these groups it was not possible to exclude students who took the test only once.
As can be seen in Figures 5, 6, and 7 the changes in the average scaled scores for Albemarle County
students between spring 1997 and fall 1999 exceeded those for the entire state for the total reading,
total mathematics, and language portions of the Stanford 9. This means that Albemarle County
students, on average, "gained" more on those tests in that time period than did students throughout
the state. Compared to national scaled scores for the same time period, Albemarle County students
showed greater gains in the areas of total reading and total mathematics, but showed less of a gain
in language than did students on the national level. Whether this lag on the language test is due to
specific instructional patterns or to the content of the test itself is not clear.
Figure 5
= County
)K State
-' Nation
700
680
660
640
620
600
580
560
540
Total Reading
Average counb' gain = 52 points 685 --
6~7°
633 62 __
- 622 ~
Average state gain = 48 points
616
Average national gain = 42 points
Grade 3, Spring 1997
Grade 6, Fall 1999
B- 18 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - NATIONAL - STANFORD 9
Figure 6
700
680
660
640
620
600
580
560
540
Total Mathematics
Average county gain = 63 points
673
gain = poi.ts _ 663
Average state ,--55po'mts~,.~
650
__608 ~
Average national gain = 5 ! points
__ 599
Grade 3, Spring 1997
Grade 6, Fall 1999
= County
· State
-' Nation
Figure 7
700
680
660
640
620
600
580
560
540
Total Language
Average county gain = 38 points
639
~632
601~---627
-- 597 · ------~--
583 ~ Average state gain = 35 points
Average national gain = 44 points
Grade 3, Spring 1997
Grade 6, Fall 1999
.. ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - NATIONAL - STANFORD 9 B- 19
Measurable Target for 2001
The School Board and Superintendent have recently established a measurable
target by which to gauge improvement next year. The measurable target is as
follows:
· By the spring of 2002, 85 percent of students in grades 3, 5, and 8 will pass
the SOL tests in language arts and mathematics.
Grade 3
1998 1999 2000
English 59.1 65.4 67.5
Mathematics 63.1 68.5 77.8
As seen in the table above, another 17.5 percent of third-graders must pass English and another
7.2 percent must pass mathematics to meet the goal of 85 percent passing.
Grade 5
1998 1999 2000
ReadinglLiterature 70.8 77.3 76.0
Writing 67.1 86.7 85.8
Mathematics 46.3 55.6 70.6
At grade 5, the division must make significant progress in reading/literature and mathematics, but
has met the goal of 85 percent passing in writing. In reading/literature another 9 percent of
students must pass and another 14.4 percent must pass mathematics to reach the goal of 85
percent passing.
Grade 8
1998 1999 2000
Reading/Literature 65.4 73.9 73.5
Writing 68.6 74.3 81.5
Mathematics 57.8 66.9 66.5
At grade 8, the division must make significant progress in reading/literature and mathematics. In
writing, another 3.5 percent of students must pass. In reading/literature another 11.5 percent of
students must pass and another 16.5 percent must pass mathematics to reach the goal of 85
percent passing.
B-20
Measurable Target for 2002
The School Board and Superintendent have recently established a
measurable target by which to gauge improvement next year. The
measurable target is as follows:
, By 2002 all schools will be accredited.
Based on results of SOL tests taken in the spring of 2000, five Albemarle County elementary
schools met the 2006-07 state requirements for full accreditation. The five schools meeting these
requirements for full accreditation were
· Hollymead Elementary
· Meriwether Lewis Elementary
· V.L. Murray Elementary
· Stony Point Elementary
· Woodbrook Elementary
All five middle schools met requirements for full accreditation in the content areas of English,
mathematics, and science. Albemarle High School and Western Albemarle High School met
requirements for full accreditation in English, history, and science. Monticello High School was
close to the required passing mark in English and science.
B-21
II. State Indicators
Indicator: STANDARDS OF LEARNING Tests
The Standards of Learning (SOL) Assessment Program is the criterion-referenced testing program of the
Commonwealth of Virginia. In June 1995, the Virginia Board of Education approved revised standards
in English, history and social science, mathematics, and science for grades K-12, and technology
standards to be achieved by the end of grades 5 and 8. The standards were established to communicate
high levels of expectations for Virginia's public school students and schools. The SOL Assessment
Program was implemented in the spring of 1998 to provide a measure of the progress of students and
schools toward meeting established achievement levels on the standards.
Who Takes the Standards of Learning Assessments and What Content Areas Are Assessed?
Virginia students in grades 3, 5, and 8 and certain high school courses take the Standards of Learning
(SOL) Assessments. The SOL tests are listed in Table 15 below.
All students enrolled at the time of testing must be tested, with the exception of certain students, based
on application of guidelines for students with disabilities and students with limited English proficiency. In
accordance with guidelines from the Virginia Department of Education, a student with an identified
disability is to be exempted from testing when the student's instructional program does not provide for
instruction in the content covered by the test. Students with limited English proficiency are provided a one-
time exemption at grades 3, 5, and 8. No exemption clause exists for students with limited English
proficiency on the end-of-course SOL tests.
Albemarle County Public Schools strictly adhere to established state guidelines for inclusion of
students in state testing programs.
Table 15
Standards of Learning (SOL) Tests
Grade 3 SOL Tests
English
Mathematics
Science
History/Social Science
Grade 8 SOL Tests
English: Reading, Literature, & Research
English: Writing
Mathematics
Science
History/Social Science
Computer/Technology
Grade 5 SOL Tests
English: Reading, Literature, and Research
English: Writing
Mathematics
Science
History/Social Science (Virginia history)
Computer/Technology
High School End-of-Course SOL Tests
English: Reading, Literature, and Research (Grade 11)
English: Writing (Grade11)
Algebra I
Geometry
Algebra II
Earth Science
Biology
Chemistry
World History to 1000 A.D. & World Geography
World HistOry from 1000 A.D. to the Present & World Geography
U.S. History
World Geography
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL l]-22
What Types of Questions Are on the sol 'Tests?
With the exception of writing, the SOL test questions are multiple choice. For the multiple-choice
questions, students read a question, problem, or passage and then select an answer from among four
choices. Students taking the writing tests at grades 5, 8, and in high school answer multiple-choice
questions and wdte a short paper on a topic given to the student when the test begins.
How Are Scores on the Standards of Learning Tests Reported?
Results from each administration of the SOL tests are delivered to school ~divisions in three phases to
assure timely receipt of individual student results so that school personnel may make instrUctional
decisions about individual students, as required by the Standards of Accreditation. In the first phase,
school divisions receive results for individual students for whom no apparent inconsistencies were found
on answer documents. Included in this phase are two individual student reports: One to be provided to
parents and a second to be placed in the student's permanent record. SchoOl personnel have an
opportunity to review student results and .identify any potential inconsistencies in students' score reports
(e.g., a student received no score, but was known to have taken the test). Upon resolution of any
inconsistencies, any outstanding individual student reports are sent to school divisions in the second
phase. In the third phase, school divisions receive final and official division and school summary reports
showing passing rates. The third phase typically follows the second phase by one to two weeks.
Students' results are reported in two ways. The first way is as a score ranging from 0 to 600. On this
score range, a score of 600 indicates the student answered all questions correctly. A score of 500 to 600
indicates advanced performance; a score of 400 to 499 indicates the student was proficient. A score
below 400 indicates the student does not meet the standard or failed. The second way in which
performance is reported is as a level of achievement. Table 16 shows achievement levels for the SOL
Tests, the definition of each achievement level, and the result.
Table 16
Achievement Levels for the SOL Tests
Achievement Levels for the SOL Tests Definition Result
The Student has demonstrated an advanced Pass
Advanced Attainment of the Standards level of achievement on the SOL test.
The Student has demonstrated a satisfactory Pass
Proficient in the Standards level of achievement on the SOL test.
The Student has demonstrated an unsatis- Fail
Does Not Meet the Standards factory level of achievement on the SOL test.
How Are SOL Test Results Used?
Under the Regulations Establishing Standards for Accrediting Public Schools in Virginia (September
2000), students must pass certain end-of-course SOL tests to earn a high school diploma. Beginning
with the graduating class of 2004 (current rising ninth-graders), students must earn verified credits
to qualify for a Standard or Advanced Studies diploma. A student earns a verified credit in a course
by passing the course and the end-of-course SOL test for that course. Six verified credits are required
for a Standard diploma; nine verified credits are required for an Advanced Studies diploma.
At all grade levels, schools are required to include SOL test results as a part of a set of multiple
criteria in making promotion and retention decisions for individual students. School personnel also
use SOL test results to make school- and division-wide instructional and curricular decisions.
A school's performance on the SOL tests is now the major component in accreditation in Virginia. At
least 70 percent of students must pass tests in each of four core content areas for a school to attain
full accreditation status. The four core content areas are English, mathematics, history, and science.
The exceptions to the 70 percent pass requirement are grade 3 science and history for which the
requirement is 50 percent.
B-23 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL
RESULTS FOR ALBEMARLE COUNTY
FIGURES 8 through 11 (pages B-25 to B-27) show graphs of SOL test results for 1998, 1999, and 2000
for the division.
Tables 17 through 23 (pages B-28 to B-34) show the percentage of students passing each SOL test for
the division and for each elementary, middle, and high school.
Tables 24 through 27 (pages B-35 to B-39) show the percentage of students passing eaCh SOL test for
each demographic category.
Five Albemarle County elementary schools meet the state requirements for full accreditation. At least 70
percent of students must pass tests in each of four core content areas for a school to attain full
accreditation status. The four core content areas are English, mathematics, history, and science. The
exceptions to the 70 percent pass requirement are grade 3 science and history for which the requirement
is 50 percent. The five schools meeting current requirements for full accreditation are:
· Hollymead Elementary
· Meriwether Lewis Elementary
· V.L. Murray Elementary
· Stony Point Elementary
· Woodbrook Elementary
Elementary Highlights
· At grade 3, increases were posted in each of the four core academic areas.
· At grades 3 and 5, the largest gains were posted in mathematics.
Grade 5 results were mixed, with large gains in writing and mathematics accompanied by
declines in history and science. Preliminary discussions with teachers and principals indicate
that scheduling and amount of time spent on history and science are areas of concern because
of extra time spent on language and mathematics.
Middle School Highlights
All five middle schools met requirements for full accreditation in the content areas of English,
mathematics, and science. Performance on the grade 8 history test continues to be an area
of concem.
The grade 8 history test coversSOLs from three years (U.S. history to 1877, U.S. history since
1877, and civics and economics). In our present curriculum, the content from the civics and
Economics SOLs is integrated across the two years of history (grades 6 and 7). This year, the
grade 8 test was given to seventh-graders, as well as eighth-graders. The percentage passing
for eighth graders was 56.0 compared to 53.6 percent for seventh-graders.
Albemarle County middle school social studies teachers have worked very hard to teach the
content covered by the test in only two years, but have not yet been successful. Therefore, the
middle school social studies curriculum will be aligned and sequenced with the 2000-01 school
year to support the teaching of American history to 1877, American history from 1877 to
present, and civics and economics.
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL B-24
High
·
School Highlights
Albemarle High School and Western ^lbemarle High School met requirements for full
accreditation in English, history, and science. Each school missed full accreditation due to
mathematics. Monticello High School is approaching the required passing mark in English and
science, missing by less than two percentage points.
Gains were made in writing, algebra I, geometry, world history 1 and 2, U.S. history, earth
science, and biology. The percentage of students passing literature was fiat, but remains
above 70 percent. Slight declines were observed in algebra II and chemistry, but were coupled
with dramatic increases in the number of students taking the courses. The number of students
taking chemistry increased from 440 in lg9g to 550 in 2000. The number of students taking
algebra II increased from 609 in 1999 to 720 in 2000.
Figure 8
Percentage of Students Passing Standards of Learning Tests, 1998 - 2000
Grade 3
100
90
80
70
60'
50
40
3O
20
10
0
l · 1998 [31999 ! 2000
English Math History
Science
B-25 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL
Figure 9
Percentage of Students Passing Standards of Learning Tests, 1998 - 2000
Grade $
100
90
80
70
6O
5O
40
3O
20
10
0
B1~8 01999 B2000
Reading Writing Math History Science
Figure 10
Percentage of Students Passing Standards of Learning Tests, 1998 - 2000
Grade 8
B1998 D1999 B2000
80
70--
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Reading
Writing Math History Science
Comp/Tech
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL B-26
1 I I I ! I i I - I ' I ' I I -J -'! '1 -- 1 -] '] '!
Figure 11
Percentage of Students Passing Standards of Learning Tests, 1998 - 2000
End-of-Course Tests
100
~ 70l
20
10
0
Reading Writing Algebra l ~ Algebra II
· 1998 O 1999 ia 2000
World Hist VV3rld Hist US History
A B
E~dogy
Table 17
SOL Test Results for 1998, 1999, and 2000
Number and Percentages of Students Scoring at Each Achievement Level
Grade 3
Test Year #Take %Take #Prof %Prof #Adv %Adv #Pass %Pass #Fail %Fail Avg. Score #DNA Total
2000 979 96.6 512 52.3 149 15.2 661 67.5 318 32.5 432.5 34 1013
English 1999 947 98.1 473 49.9 148 15.6 621 65.6 326 34.4 422.5 18 965
1998 912 97.9 396 43.4 145 15.9 541 59.3 371 40.7 416.0 20 932
2000 981 96.8 349 35.6 414 42.2 763 77.8 218 22.2 471.2 32 1013
Mathematics 1999 948 97.7 419 44.2 233 24.6 652 68.8 296 31.2 440.4 22 970
1998 915 98.1 331 36.2 248 27.1 579 63.3 336 36. 7 427.8 18 933
2000 979 96.6 536 54. 7 145 14.8 681 69.6 298 30.4 431.0 34 1013
Histo~j 1999 946 97.2 540 57.1 87 9.2 627 66.3 319 33.7 422.9 27 973
1998 914 97.9 454 49.7 21 2.3 475 52.0 439 48.0 398.8 20 934
2000 981 96.8 562 57.3 224 22.8 786 80.1 195 19.9 456.4 32 1013
Science 1999 945 96.9 520 55.0 192 20.3 712 75.3 233 24.7 444.0 30 975
1998 913 97.9 514 56.3 120 13.1 634 69.4 279 30.6 423.2 20 933
# Take: Number of students who took the test
% Take: Percentage of total students tested
# Prof: Number of students proficient in the Standard
% Prof: Percentage of students proficient in the Standard
Avg. Score: Average (mean) score
# DNA: Number of students not tested
Total: Total number of students
# Adv: Number of students earning advanced attainment of the Standard
% Adv: Percentage of students earning advanced attainment of the Standard
# Pass: Total number of students proficient and advanced in the Standard
% Pass: Percentage of students proficient and advanced in the Standard
I ! I I 'l · 1 ..... I ......1 ' 1 -'l ' ! ' I "-!; 1 ' } 1 -I I '!
Table 18
SOL Test Results for 1998, 1999, and 2000
Number and Percentages of Students Scoring at Each Achievement Level
Grade 5
Test Year #Take %Take #Prof %Prof #Adv %Adv #Pass %Pass #Fail %Fail Avg. Score #DNA Total
2000 921 97.0 465 50.5 235 25.5 700 76.0 221 24.0 451.9 28 949
Reading/Lit 1999 887 97.7 444 50.1 245 27.6 689 77.7 198 22.3 451.7 21 908
1998 919 98.3 528 57.5 123 13.4 651 70.8 268 29.2 430.6 16 935
2000 918 96.9 471 51.3 317 34.5 788 85.8 130 14.2 470.2 29 947
Writing 1999 884 97.6 513 58.0 245 27.7 758 85.7 126 14.3 463.0 22 906
1998 915 97.8 462 50.5 152 16.6 614 67.1 301 32.9 426.5 21 936
2000 918 96.7 495 53.9 153 16.7 648 70.6 270 29.4 437,2 31 949
Mathematics 1999 887 97.7 397 44.8 100 11.3 497 56.0 390 44.0 414.8 21 908
1998 920 98.8 364 41.7 42 4.6 426 46.3 494 53.7 395.3 11 931
2000 920 96.9 499 54.2 50 5.4 549 59.7 371 40.3 412.7 29 949
History 1999 886 97.6 553 62.4 48 5.4 601 67.8 285 32.2 421.5 22 908
1998 919 98.3 271 29.5 2 0.2 273 29.7 646 70.3 377.3 16 935
2000 922 97.2 568 61.6 119 12.9 687 74.5 235 25.5 436.2 27 949
Science 1999 884 97.4 575 65.0 107 12.1 682 77.1 202 22, 9 439.6 24 908
1998 918 98.2 545 59.4 51 5.6 596 64.9 322 35.1 417.3 17 935
2000 921 97.0 477 51.8 380 41.3 857 93.1 64 6.9 481.7 28 949
Comp/Tech 1999 887 97.7 540 60.9 250 28.2 790 89.1 97 10.9 464.5 21 908
1998 919 98.3 593 64,5 140 15.2 733 79.8 186 20.2 440.8 16 935
Table 19
SOL Test Results for 1998, 1999, and 2000
Number and Percentages of Students Scoring at Each Achievement Level
Grade 8
Test Year #Take %Take #Prof %Prof #Adv %Adv #Pass %Pass #Fail %Fail Avg. Score #DNA Total
2000 898 95.6 362 40.3 298 33.2 660 73.5 238 26.5 455.0 41 939
Reading/Ut 1999 870 96.7 434 49.9 209 24.0 643 73.9 227 26.1 445.6 30 900
1998 839 96.8 391 46.6 159 19.0 550 65.6 289 34.4 424.4 28 867
2000 902 100.0 647 71.7 88 9.8 735 81.5 167 18.5 438.0 0 902
Writing 1999 867 96.7 535 61.7 108 12.5 643 74.2 224 25.8 438.0 30 897
1998 830 96.3 474 57.1 95 11.4 569 68.6 261 31.4 423.5 32 862
2000 866 92.2 465 53.7 111 12.8 576 66.5 290 33.5 428.2 73 939
Mathematics 1999 841 93.4 473 56.2 78 9.3 551 65.5 290 34.5 425.8 59 900
1998 873 96.6 398 45.6 104 11.9 502 57.5 371 42.5 416.5 31 904
2000 1822 94.9 956 52.5 42 2.3 998 54.8 824 45.2 404.6 97 1919
History 1999 869 96.6 409 47.1 41 4.7 450 51.8 419 48.2 400.5 31 900
1998 835 96.4 323 38.7 20 2.4 343 41.1 492 58.9 379.9 31 866
2000 890 94.8 562 63.1 195 21.9 757 85.1 133 14.9 460.7 49 939
Science 1999 871 96.8 549 63.0 159 18.3 708 81.3 163 18.7 447.8 29 900
1998 834 96.3 486 58.3 123 14.7 609 73.0 225 27.0 434.1 32 866
2000 901 96.0 499 55.4 236 26.2 735 81.6 166 18.4 454.7 38 939
Comp/Tech 1999 866 96.2 520 60.0 143 16.5 663 76.6 203 23.4 444.8 34 900
1998 838 96.2 476 56.8 113 13.5 589 70.3 249 29.7 426.8 33 871
Table 20
SOL Test Results for 1998, 1999, and 2000
Number and Percentages of Students Scoring at Each Achievement Level, End-of-Course Tests
Test Year f/Take %Take #Prof %Prof #Adv %Adv #Pass % Pass #Fail %Fail Avg. Score #DNA Total
2000 759 94.4 402 53.0 155 20.4 557 73.4 202 26.6 444.3 45 804
Reading/Lit 1999 716 94.0 355 49.6 178 24.9 533 74.4 183 25.6 448.1 46 762
1998 716 93.5 329 45.9 130 18.2 459 64.1 257 35.9 424.6 50 766
2000 739 88.2 478 64.7 150 20.3 628 85.0 111 15.0 453.3 99 838
Writing 1999 727 94.7 464 63.8 105 14.4 569 78.3 158 21.7 443.8 41 768
1998 739 95.8 379 51.3 97 13.1 476 I 64.4 263 35.6 419.0 32 771
2000 890 96.0 499 56.1 75 8.4 574 64.5 316 35.5 424.7 37 927
Algebra I 1999 807 97.5 396 49.1 94 11.6 490 60.7 317 39.3 424.5 21 828
1998 984 98.5 439 44.6 40 4.1 479 48.7 505 51.3 405.7 15 999
2000 701 98.0 420 59.9 90 12.8 510 72.8 191 27.2 437.0 14 715
Geometry 1999 868 98.2 500 57.6 74 8.5 574 66.1 294 33.9 426.0 16 864
1998 654 99.1 389 59.5 50 7.6 439 67.1 215 32.9 421.9 6 660
2000 720 99.2 336 46.7 30 4.2 366 50.8 364 49.2 403.1 6 726
Algebra II 1999 609 98.1 286 47.0 46 7.6 332 54.5 277 45.5 410.7 12 621
1998 572 98.5 226 39.5 5 0.9 231 40.4 341 59.6 387.2 9 581
2000 846 97.4 532 62.9 162 19.1 694 82.0 152 18.0 451.7 23 869
World
History 1 1999 829 96.7 552 66.6 57 6.9 609 73.5 220 26.5 431.0 28 857
1998 896 95.0 517 57.7 74 8.3 591 66.0 305 34.0 423.3 47 943
2000 679 98.1 425 62.6 73 10.8 498 73.3 181 26.7 434.7 13 692
WoHd
1999 106 93.0 31 29.2 4 3.8 35 33.0 71 67.0 382.8 8 114
History 2
1998 877 94.8 338 38.5 34 3.9 372 42.4 505 57.6 391.3 48 925
2000 761 95.2 289 38.0 50 6.6 339 44.5 422 55.5 390.0 38 799
US History 1999 737 95.8 268 36.4 28 3.8 296 40.2 441 59.8 388.3 32 769
1998 745 93.5 228 30.6 22 3.0 250 33.6 495 66.4 371.6 52 797
Earth 2000 705 96.2 463 65.7 70 9.9 533 75.6 172 24.4 436.9 28 733
Science 1999 690 95.3 425 61.6 52 7.5 477 69.1 213 30.9 429.3 34 724
1998 781 96.2 398 51.0 44 5.6 442 56.6 339 43.4 405.2 31 812
2000 789 98.1 539 68.3 132 16.7 671 85.0 118 15.0 453.3 15 804
Biology 1999 902 96.4 646 71.6 104 11.5 750 83.1 152 16.9 445.2 34 936
1998 786 97.5 535 68.1 77 9.8 612 77.9 174 22.1 435.0 20 806
2000 550 98.7 394 71.6 40 7.3 434 78.9 116 21.1 435.5 7 557
Chemistry 1999 440 98.9 323 73.4 44 10.0 367 83.4 73 16.6 437.1 5 4~.5
1998 432 99.1 328 75.9 29 6.7 357 82.6 75 17.4 435.2 4 436
Table 21
Percentage of Students Passing Standards of Learning Tests
for Each Elementary School and the County
Grade 3 Grade 5
English Math History Science Reading Writing Math History Science Comp/Tech
2000 67.5 77.8 69.6 80.1 76.0 86.0 70.6 59.7 74.5 93.1
Albemarle 1999 65.6 68.8 66.3 75.3 77.7 85.7 56.0 67.8 77.1 89.1
1998 59.3 63.3 52.0 69.4 70.8 67.1 46.3 29.7 64.9 79.8
2000 63.5 75.0 70.8 77.1 67.9 75.3 61.5 52.6 67.9 89.7
Agnor-Hurt 1999 61.6 66.3 64.0 68.6 71.1 77.6 44.7 47.4 73.7 80.3
1998 51.2 50.0 40.7 53.5 66.3 55.8 37.2 16.3 54.1 75.3
2000 69.2 82.8 69.4 91.9 78.7 85.1 73.3 41.3 84.0 92.0
Broadus
1999 76.6 80.8 76.9 85.9 90.8 90.8 86.2 83.1 92.3 95.4
Wood
t998 63.8 68.8 64.6 76.3 79.2 79.2 55.8 18.4 75.0 83.1
2000 67.3 69.6 71.4 73.2 73.0 78.9 64.9 56.8 75.7 91.9
Brownsville 1999 53.7 63.0 66.0 64.8 65.2 73.3 43.5 55.6 77.3 80.4
1998 57.1 57.1 45.7 57.1 63.5 44.2 28.8 26.9 57.7 61.5
2000 57.1 58.6 56.0 65.0 73.5 79.7 73.5 56.7 72.1 91.2
Cale t999 63.7 59.3 53.8 63.7 74.6 81.2 50.7 63.4 70.4 84.5
1998 53.8 60.5 51.9 69.1 58.5 61.5 36.9 43.1 50.8 70.8
2000 62.1 75.8 60.6 71.2 75.5 86.0 69.4 61.2 73.5 85.7
Crozet 1999 63.0 66.7 60.4 75.5 66.7 77.6 54.4 64.9 64.9 86.0
t998 74.5 78.4 60.8 76.5 67.2 65.7 52.2 26.9 62.7 73.1
2000 64.3 72.3 56.6 71.4 64.4 82.2 52.9 48.6 63.5 89.0
Greer 1999 67.3 76.4 69.1 81.1 77.6 86.0 44.8 72.4 77.6 94,8
1998 67.6 64.8 54.9 70.4 71.7 71.7 46.7 28.3 60.0 88.3
2000 83.2 93.8 82.3 92.9 64.1 93.3 86.9 72.0 85.0 98.1
Hollymead 1999 77.9 77.9 75.0 83.7 85.7 95.2 70.5 78.1 88.6 98.1
t998 64.8 70.8 59.4 76.2 83.9 83.9 67.0 33.0 73.2 93.8
2000 83.5 94.9 87.3 94.9 86.4 95.5 87.5 79.5 81.8 96.6
Meriwether
1999 73.0 76.4 84.3 84.3 95.3 96.5 70.9 84.9 90.7 97.7
Lewis
1998 71.4 88.1 72.6 83.3 80.0 86.2 46.2 47.7 81.5 95.4
2000 92.1 100.0 92.1 100.0 83.6 91.1 74.5 70.4 76.4 96.4
Murray 1999 56.8 68.2 68.2 84.1 90.6 92.5 49.1 75.5 81.1 96.2
Elem.
1998 59.1 73.3 53.3 77.8 78.9 81.6 52.6 28.9 78.9 86.8
2000 51.7 58.6 44.8 69.0 73.1 100.0 84.6 50.0 69.2 96.2
Red Hill 1999 60.5 63.2 52.6 57.9 41.4 75.0 31.0 27.6 41.4 69.0
1998 57.1 61.9 47.6 71.4 64.0 56.0 44.0 32.0 68.0 80.0
2000 51.6 83.9 64.5 74.2 73.3 66.7 53.3 51.1 62.2 91.1
Scottsville 1999 48.8 53.5 41.9 69.8 50.0 65.6 15,6 37.5 50.0 75.0
1998! 34.1 35.7 31.0 53.7 48.7 35.1 5.1 12.8 41.0 51.3
2000 60.2 68.2 68.2 79.5 72.0 85.4 52.4 46.9 71.6 95.1
Stone
t999 55.2 56.3 52.9 73.6 75.3 84.3 49.4 60.7 70.8 87.6
Robinson
1998 52.7 45.1 42.9 64.8 62.4 56,5 33.3 21.5 52.7 74.2
2000 69.8 79.2 69.8 79.2 79.2 93.8 79.2 72.9 83.3 93.8
Stony Point 1999 80.0 82.5 80.0 80.0 86.0 91.8 76.0 84.0 90.0 88.0
t998 52.9 66.0 46.0 72.0 80.0 68.3 58.3 51.7 80.0 88.3
2000 70.0 88.7 77.0 88.7 82.8 87.9 81.0 75.9 75.9 96.6
Woodbrook 1999 75.4 80.3 77.0 85.2 80.9 91.8 63.8 72.3 76.1 89.4
1998 68.2 65.9 56.8 75.0 85.7 85.5 71.9 42.1 82.5 82.5
2000 37.5 50.0 54.2 58.3 60.0 83.3 50.0 45.2 58.1 86.7
Yancey 1999 43.5 39.1 52.2 47.8 60.9 78.3 30.4 73.9 65.2 87.0
1998 42.9 46.4 10.7 42.9 37.5 29.2 16.7 4.2 41.7 66.7
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL B-32
~ ,Table 22.
Percentage of Students Passing Standards of Learning Tests
for Each Middle School and the County
Grade 8
Reading Writing Math History Science Comp/
Tech Algebra I, Geometry Algebra II
2000 73.5 81.5 66.5 54.8 85.1 81.6 100.0 100.0 100.0
Albemarle 1999 73.9 74,2 67.0 51.8 81.3 76.6 na na na
t998 65.6 68.6 57.5 41.1 73.0 70.3 na na na
2000 71.1 81.9 65.8 47.2 77.9 69.1 100.0 100.0 na
Burley MS 1999 73.6 77.9 56.6 41.9 79.8 73.6 95.2 na na
1998 68.3 62.0 52.5 41.1 75.5 68.8 68.7 na na
2000 80.4 85.1 73.0 60.6 91.7 88.2 100.0 100.0 na
Henley MS 1999 80.8 75.1 73.7 59.4 81.8 76.0 98,1 85.7 na
1998 65.4 72.9 55.7 45.8 74.0 71.4 100.0 na na
2000 81.4 79,4 72.5 60.8 91.4 86.9 100.0 100.0 na
Jouett MS 1999 82.4 84.4 76.3 64.0 87.5 84.4 100.0 100.0 na
1998 76.2 74.0 72.7 49.4 82.5 71.3 95.0 na na
2000 75,0 85.3 64.1 57.9 89.7 87.0 100.0 na na
Sutherland MS 1999 78.4 79.8 74.3 61.5 88.3 83.6 96.9 na na
t998 74.7 78.5 60.7 47.9 82.2 77.8 na na na
2000 62.1 78.6 60.4 47.3 75.0 76.4 100.0 100.0 na
Walton MS 1999 58.2 60.0 56.6 34.3 72.5 66.9 100,0 100.0 na
1998 48.2 57.7 48.9 24.4 55.6 66.5 89.6 na na
2000 * *- * * * * * * *
Murray HS 1999 50.0 36.8 21.1 15.8 50.0 56.3 0.0 na na
1998 14.3 16.7 0.0 0.0 26.7 20.0 na na na
* For categories with fewer than 11 students, data have been omitted
to maintain confidentiality of individual student results.
B-33 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL
Table 23
Percentage of Students Passing Standards of Learning Tests
for Each High School and the County
End of Course
World World Earth
Literature Writing Algebra I Geometry Algebra II Histoqf to History US History Science Biology Chemistry
1000 from 1000
2000 73.4 85.0 64.5 72.8 50.8 82.0 73.3 44.5 75.6 85.0 78.9
Albemarle 1999 74.4 78.3 60.7 66.1 54.5 73.5 33.0 40.2 69.1 83.2 83.4
1998 64.1 64.4 48.7 67.1 40.4 66.0 42.4 33.6 56.6 77.9 82.6
2000 76.8 86.3 61.8 72.5 47.5 87.6 77.9 48.7 78.0 86.1 89.0
Albemarle 1999 76.7 83.2 46.2 67.6 58.9 77.4 65.7 47.3 77.9 86.8 95.1
HS
1998 63.3 65.8 24.5 63.2 33.4 69.9 43.9 35.9 59.8 78.5 86.2
2000 59.8 77.4 35.1 57.4 50.0 68.7 60.0 31.5 68.9 77.0 61.9
Monticello 1999 62.4 67.2 35.9 49.8 36.3 57.8 27.8 22.9 51.7 73.6 70.2
HS
t998 na na na na na na na na na na na
2000 91.7 91.7 27.3 25.0 * , 30.8 * , 72.7 *
Murray HS 1999 72.7 72.7 * 16.7 * na 6.7 50.0 30.8 61.5 28.6
1998 68.7 69.6 na na * 63.6 na 15.4 61.5 100.0 na
2000 81.9 90.7 57.0 82.2 57.6 87.5 80.3 51.2 82.1 91.1 81.9
Westem
Albemarle 19991 82.7 82.1 47.3 79.1 68.7 64.8 5.0 47.4 77.8 90.6 84.8
HS t998 65.4 61.7 33.3 73.7 49.8 59.5 39.8 30.6 50.0 75.9 78.2
* For categories with fewer than 11 students, data have been omitted
to maintain confidentiality of individual student results.
Note: Students at Murray HS take semester-long courses and take SOL tests at the end of each
semester. Thus data are for both fall and spring test administrations.
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL B-34
Table 24
Grade 3, Percentage of Students Passing SOL Tests for Each Demographic Category
DEMOGRAPHIC English Mathematics History Science
CATEGORY 1998 ! 1999 2000 1998 1999 2000 1998 1999 2000 1998 1999 2000
All Students 59.1% 65.4% 67.5% 63.1% 68.5% 77.8% 51.7% 65.9% 69.6% 69.2% 74.9% 80.1%
Students with Disabilities na 16.3% 34.0% na 25.5% 47.4% na 25.8% 44.8% na 51.0% 55.2%
Race/Ethnicity
American Indian or
Alaskan Native na * * na * * na * * na * *
Asian or Pacific Islander 92.9% 88.9% 90.0% 92.9% 94.4% 95.0% 71.4% 94.4% 75,0% 100.0% 94.4% 95.0%
Black 31.3% 39.8% 34.2% 31.6% 37.2% !40.9% 18.4% 43.4% 32.2% 36.0% 46.9% 51.3%
Hispanic * * 38.9% * * 42.1% * * 38.9% * * 55.6%
White 62.8% , 69.0% 72.1% 67.6% 73.0% 83.3% 56.8% 69.2% 75.2% 73.8% 79.3% 84.3%
Gender
Female 64.7% 67.7% 72.0% 63.2% 65.8% 80.0% 50.7% 63.7% 68.6% 68.6% 72.5% 80.3%
Male 54.3% 63.5% 63.2% 63.3% 71.7% 75.6% 53.2% 68.8% 70.5% 70.3% 78.1% 80.0%
Limited English Proficient * * 36.8% * 50.0% 40.0% * * 31.6% * * 47.4%
i
* For categories with fewer than 11 students, data have been omitted to maintain confidentiality of individual student results.
Table 25
Grade 5, Percentage of Students Passing SOL Tests for Each Demographic Category
Reading Writing Mathematics History Science Comp/Tech
DEMOGRAPHIC
CATEGORY t 998 1999 2000 1998 1999 2000 1998 1999 2000 1998 1998 t 999 2000 t 999 2000 1998 1999 2000
All Students 70.6% 77.3% 76.0% 67.1% 86.7% 85.8% 46.3% 55.6% 70.6% 29.5% 67.7% 59.7% 65.0% 76.9% 74.5% 79.8% 88.5% 93.1%
Students with na 40.6% 44.0% na 50.0% 59.4% na 20.3% 32.1% na 31.6% 31.9% na 48.5% 45.2% na 66.9% 76.9%
Disabilities
RacelEthnicity
American
Indian or * * na * * na * * na * * na * * na * * na
Alaskan Native
Asian or 95.3% 85.7% 91.2% 90.5% 92.3% 95.7% 71.4% 64.3% 91.7% 52.4% 64.3% 87.5% 81.0% 92.9% 83.3% 95.2% 92.9% 100.0%
Pacific Islander
Black 46.0% 53.0% 53.2% 29.3% 65.7% 73.2% 14.9% 28.0% 41.1% 7.9% 38.0% 30.7% 26.0% 42.0% 44.9% 59.0% 67.0% 87.3%
Hispanic 58.3% * 65.0% 50.0% * 75.0% 33.3% * 45.0% 25.0% * 40.0% 41.7% * 52.4% 75.0% * 85.7%
White 73.5% 80.0% 79.7% 71.5% 88.2% 88.0% 49.9% 59.5% 75.4% 31.9% 71.8% 64.2% 69.7% 81.4% 79.8% 82.0% 91.9% 94.1%
Gender
Female 72.4% 81.6% 78.0% 73.2% 91.3% 90.0% 48.5% 58.6% 70.0% 24.6% 66.8% 57.5% 63.4% 76.7% 71.6% 80.6% 91.2% 94.3%
Male 69.2% 74.3% 74.1% 60.8% 81.0% 81.8% 45.2% 53.9% 71.3% 34.9% 68.7% 61.8% 66.4% 77.6% 77.4% 78.9% 87.3% 91.9%
Limited
English * * 50.0% * * 61.1% 54.5% * 41.2% * * 27.8% * * 31.6% * * 73.7%
Proficient
* For categories with fewer than 11 students, data have been omitted to maintain confidentiality of individual student results.
I ~'~1 I ..... 1 ~"~1 ' I ...... ! I 1 ] -'1 -- 1 'I i i i i I 'i
Table 26
Grade 8, Percentage of Students Passing SOL Tests for Each Demographic Category
Reading Writing Mathematics History Science Comp/Tech
:DEMOGRAPHIC ~
CATEGORY 1998 t999 2000 1998 1999 2000 1998 1999 2000 ~ 1998 1998 t999 2000 1999 2000 1998 1~,9 2000
AII Students 65.4% 73.9% 73.5% 68.6% 74.3% 81.5% 57.8% 66.9% 66.5% 41.0% 51.6% 54.8% 72.9% 81.1% 85.1% 70.2% 76.5% 81.6%
Students wi{h
Disabilities na 43.4% 41.7% na 37.0% 46.8% na 36.1% 35.7% na 30.1% 28.2% na 61.6% 63.4% na 51.6% 57.0%
Race/Ethnicity
American
Indian or~ na na * na * . na na * na na * na na * na na *
Alaskan Native
Asian or
Pacific lslander 95,2% 93.8% 76.3% 81.0% 100.0% 78.3% 86.4°/0 94.4% 81.8% 66.7°/0 62.5% 67.3% 90.5% 67.5% 87.0% 95.2% 87.5% 82.6%
Black 28.0% 40.2% 45.2% 33.7% 42.7% 61.5% 19.4% 28.6% 27.9% 8.6% 17.9% 20.2% 35.2% 47.3% 56.4% 34.8% 39.6% 54.8%
Hispanic * 58.8% 43.5% * 73.7% 59.1% 33.3% 52.9% 47.8% 9.1% 23.5% 22.2% 54.5% 64.7% 77.3% 25.0% 52.9% 56.5%
White 702% 79.2% 7e.2% 73.1°/0 79.9°/0 85.4% 62.5% 72.8°/0 72.4% 45.3°/0 57.7% 60.2% 77.7% 87.1% 88.8% 75.1% 82.9°/0 86.1o/0
Gender
Female 73.0% 78.1% 79.8°/0 76.6°/0 82.1% 89.8% 58.8% 67.9°/0 69.5% 39.1% 48-3% 51.8°/0 74.6°/0 80.7°/0 85.4% 73.9% 78.0°/0 84.8%
Male 59.2% 70.1°/0 67.4% 61.2°/0 67.1% 73.4% 57.3% 68.4% 63.7% 43.0% 55.0% 57.8°/0 71.7% 82.0% 64.7°/0 67.1% 75.4°/0 78.4%
Limited
English * * 21.4% * * 41.7% * * 42.9% * * 4.5% * * 64.3% * * 50.0%
Proficient
* For categories with fewer than 11 students, data have been omitted to maintain confidentiality of individual student results.
Table 27
End of Course, Percentage of Students Passing SOL Tests for Each Demographic Category
Reading/Lit Writing Algebra Geometry Algebra II
DEMOGRAPHIC
CATEGORY 1998 1999 2000 t998 1999 2000 1998 1999 2000 t998 1998 t999 2000 t999 2000
All Students 64.0% 74.4% 73,4% 64.3% 77.7% 85.5% 48.8% 60.9% 64.5% 67.2% 66.2% 72.8% 40,4% 54.1% 50,8%
Students with na 46.0% 42,9% na 44.4% 57,0% na 29.5% 29.1% na 47.0% 50.8% na 21.4% 30,7%
Disabilities
RacelEthnicity
American Indian or * na * na .... * na na
Alaskan Native
Asian orPacffic Islander 76.5% 81.3% 75.0% 85.0% 94.4% 84.2% 62.1% 90.0% 86.7% 72.7% 80.0% 92.3% 47.8% 73.7% 79.2%
Black 36.0% 45.0% 47.0% 50.0% 42.7% 63.4% 20.6% 25.7% 31.8% 32.5% 34.0% 29.0% 20.5% 30.3% 22,5%
Hispanic * 92.3% 56.3% 61.5% 93.8% 69.2% 25.0% 63.6% 62.5% 53.8% 41.7% 55.6% * * 30.8%
White 67.6% 77.5% 77.8% 66.1% 81.9% 88.9% 53.2% 64.4% 68.3% 71.0% 70.6% 76.7% 41.5% 55.7% 53,4%
Gender
Female 70.7% 79.3% 79.5°/0 73.3% 64.9°/0 91.4% 50.3% 60.5% 67.8°/0 66.1% 63.2°/0 71.3o/0 40,5% 52.0°/0 49.9%
Male 57.00/0 68.8% 67.0°/0 54.7% 70.5°/0 78.4% 47.60/0 60.80/0 61.3o/0 68.4°/0 68,9°/0 74.3°/0 40.5% 57.5% 51.8%
Limited English ...............
Proficient
* For categories with fewer than 11 students, data have been omitted to maintain confidentiality of individual student results.
End of Course, Percentage of Students Passing SOL Tests for Each Demographic Category
continued
World History I World History 2 U.S. History Earth Science Biology Chemistry
DEMOGRAPHIC
CATEGORY t998 1999 2000 1998 1999 2000 1998 1999 2000 t998 1998 t999 2000 1999 2000 1998 1999 2000
Ail Students 65.7% 73.0°/0 82.0% 42.2% 31.0% 73.3% 33.4% 40.1% 44.5% 56.4% 68.7% 75.6% 77.6% 82.8% 85.0% 82.8% 83.4% 78.9%
Students with
Disabilities na 42.3% 58.0% na 11.5% 52.4% na 22.8% 24.8% na 38.1% 58.0% na 63.6% 60.6% na 58.8% 50.0%
RacelEthnicity
American Indian . . .
orAlaskan Native na na na * * * * * na * * * na na na
Asian or Pacific
Islander 88.9% 93.3% 87.0% 69.0% * 84.0% 42.9% 37.5% 60.0% 57.9% 92.9% * 90.5% 96~2% 93.5% 88.9% 78.6% 93.8%
Black 39.3% 41.1% 58.3% 10~8% 13.3% 46.2% 16.0% 10.7% 11.5% 26.3% 31.3% 47.1% 52.4% 61.0% 60.8% 80.8% 66.7% 51.3%
Hispanic 65.0% 57.1% 87.5% 25.0% * 45.5% 11A% 41.7% 31.3% 52.9% 75.0% 61.1% 71.4% 83.3% 63.6% * * *
ItVhite 70.6% 76.2% 84.9% 47.0% 31.6% 75.8% 36.9% 43.4% 49.4% 63.7% 73.6% 81.4% 83.0% 85.8% 87.6% 81.9% 84.9% 80.8%
Gender
Female 68.2% 75.4% 80.4% 44.5% 36.5% 73.7% 34.2% 39.7% 43.5% 58.6% 69.8% 73.9% 80.3% 87.3% 86.9% 82.1% 82.3% 81.1%
Male 63.6% 71.5% 83.5% 39.7°/0 29,6°/0 73.0°/0 33.1% 40.8% 45.6% 55.0% 68.5% 77.3% 75.4°/0 78.9% 83.3% 83.6% 84.6% 76.3%
Limited English .........
Proficient .... 54.5% ....
* For categories with fewer than 11 students, data have been omitted to maintain confidentiality of individual student results.
Black and White Gap
Of continued concern is that the passing rates for the county's black students are lower than for white
students on virtually all the SOL tests at all the grade levels. While the gap between black and white
students narrowed on three of six fifth-grade SOL tests and on four of six eighth-grade tests between
1999 and 2000, the gap actually increased for three of four third-grade SOL tests. For high school end-
of-course SOL tests, the gap between black and white students narrowed between 1999 and 2000 in
writing, world history until 1000, and earth science, but increased in geometry, algebra II, world history
from 1000, and chemistry.
Table 28 shows the percentage of black students passing SOL tests in 1998, 1999, and 2000 for
Albemarle and Virginia. As shown in the table the percentage of Albemarle County black students
passing SOL tests is below that of Virginia in many areas.
Perhaps of even more concern is that this pass rate gap between black and white students persists even
when free- or reduced-price lunch status is considered. Figures 12 through 16 show the percentage of
black and white students passing SOL tests further broken out by free- or reduced-priced lunch
categories. In general, students who are not in the free- or reduced-price lunch program outperform
students who are in the program. In addition, the gap between black and white students is larger for
students not in the free- or reduced-price lunch program than it is for students in the program on virtually
all the third-, fifth-, and eighth-grade SOL tests. Results for high school end-of-course tests are mixed.
Overall gains in pass rates in most content areas suggest that the division's efforts to align curriculum
and instruction with the SOLs are working, albeit faster in some areas than others. However, Iow-
achieving students, especially black students and students in the free- or reduced-price lunch program,
need more time to master content and skills and need continued and perhaps more individualized
attention similar to the intervention efforts with kindergarten and first-grade students who are at-risk for
not reading on grade level by the second grade.
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL B-40
Table 28
Percentage of Black Students Passing Standards of Learning Tests
in 1998, t999, and 2000: Albemarle COmpared to Virginia
Albemarle Virginia
1998 I 1999I 2000 1998 I 1999 I 2000
Grade 3
English 31,3 39.8 34.2 33 42 42
Mathematics 31.6 37.2 40.9 40 45 49
History i 18.4 43.4 32.2 25 39 43
Science 36.0 46.9 51.3 37 43 51
Grade ,5
English: Reading 46.0 53.0 53.2 47 48 47
English: Writing 29.3 65.7 73.2 45 67 67
Mathematics 14.9 28.0 41.1 24 27 40
History 7.9 38.0 30.7 13 24 27
Science 26.0 42.0 44.9 33 41 37
Computer/Technology 59.0 67.0 87.3 50 62 70
Grade 8
English: Reading 28.0 40.2 45.2 45 45 49
English: Writing 33.7 42.7 61.5 48 52 62
Mathematics 19.4 28.6 27.9 27 36 36
History 8.6 17.9 20.2 14 19 26
Science 35.2 47.3 58.4 47 56 62
Computer/Technology 34.8 39.6 54.8 39 50 58
High School
English: Reading/Lit 36.0 45.0 47.0 55 59 62
English: Writing 50.0 42.7 63.4 54 68 74
Algebra I 20.6 25.7 31.8 20 36 44
Geometry 32.5 34.0 29.0 25 34 40
Algebra II 20.5 30.3 22.5 13 29 36
U.S. History 16.0 10.7 11.5 12 13 16
World History 1 39.3 41.1 58.3 38 46 55
World History 2 10.8 13.3 46.2 17 21 34
Earth Science 26.3 31.3 47.1 31 40 48
Biology 52.4 61.0 60.8 50 64 62
Chemistry 80.8 66.7 51.3 31 41 40
B-41 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL
Figure 12
Grade 3 SOL: Black and White Students Receiving and Not
Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch:
loo Percentage of Students Passing ~UL l ests
9o /
8O
?0 ~1
6O
$0
40
3O
0
ENGLISH , MATH HISTORY SCIENCE
· Black/No FRL 50.0 46.4 44.6 67.9
· ]White/No FRL ~ 77.1 87.5 80.9 89.0
I::] Black/FRL 19.3 36.2 20.7 36.2
· White/FRL 36.1 51.0 37.8 49.5
100
Figure 13
Grade 5 SOL: Black and White Students Receiving and Not
Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch:
Percentage of Students Passing SOL Tests
9O
80
7O
6O
5O
40
3O
20
10
[] Black/No FRL
[]White/No FRL i 84.2
13Black/FRL I 38.9
~[]White/FRL ' 52.1
READING WRITING I MATH HISTORY SCIENCE
64.2 I ~ 58.2 41.2 55.9
! 78.9
91.4 81.7 70.3
±
66.1 19.2 18,5
L ..................................... 65.3 I 34.4 _24,~7
84.3
31.5
51.6
C/T
94.0
96.5
77.8
79.8
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL B-42
Figure 14
Grade 8 SOL: Black and White Students Receiving and Not
Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch:
Percentage of Students Passing SOL Tests
90
80
70
60
20
~0
0
READING WRITING MATH HISTORY SCIENCE cfr
ia Black/No FRL 53.8 70.4 35.3 26.5 70.6 63.5
=aWhite/No FRL 82.7 89.7 77.3 65.1 92.1 90.5
I~Black/FRL 37.3 52.8 21.2 13.6 46.9 47.1
laVVnite/FRL 44.2 53.4 36.8 21.0 63.1 52.3
B-43 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL
Figure 15
EOC English & History SOL: Black and White Students
Receiving and Not Receiving Free-or Reduced-Price Lunch:
of Students Passin SOL Tests
100 r~l ~11LCI~I:;
80
~0
$0
40
$0
~0
~0
0
R~DING ~ITING ~ 1 ~ 2 USHIST
Blac~No FRL 55.7 70.5 ~.6 56.8 13.9
B~ite/No FRL 78.9 89.4 87.2 77.2 ~.8
Bla~FRL 11.8 33.3 45.2 20.0 0
B~ite/FRL 58.3 71.4 ~.7 40.7 33.3
100
90
Figure 16
EOC SOL Math & Science: Black and White Students Receiving and
Not Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch:
Percentage of Students Passing SOL Tests
80
70
60
50--
40
30
20
10
0
ALG I GEOM , ALG 2 t E SCI BIOLOGY CHEM
[] Black/No FRL
~RL
[DBlack/FRL
i[] White/FRL
37.9 38.6 22.7 I 51.6 73.3 48.6
70.1 77.0 53.3 ! 83.7 89.0 81.8
23.7 ,I 5.6 ~ _ 25.0 39.5 37.5 50.0
I 63.6 ; 53.3 i 63.8 69.2 87.5
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL B-44
Measurabte Target for 2004
The School Board and Superintendent have recently established a measurable
target by which to gauge improvement next year. The measurable target is as
follows:
· The achievement gap between black and white students and between students
e~igible for free/reduced lunch and those who are not, as evidenced in 1999-
2000 SOL test results, will decrease by 25 percent per year until closed in the
year 2004.
The set of graphs (Figures 17 to 20) on the following pages (Pages 46 - 54) show achievement gap
data for black and white students. The data in these charts are the percentage of students passing
SOL tests for the years 1998, 1999, and 2000.
The graphs (Figures 21 to 23) and Table 29 on pages 55 - 60 show achievement gap data for students
eligible for free- or reduced-price lunch and those who are not.
Clearly, as evidenced by these data, the achievement gaps between black and white students and
between students eligible for free- or reduced-priced lunch are wide. While these achievement gaps
are consistent with a variety of educational measures at both the national and State levels, the gaps
are unacceptable.
Progress toward closing the black-white achievement gap: · Gap decreased on one or four third-grade tests
· Gap decreased on three of six fifth-grade tests
· Gap decreased on four of six eighth-grade tests
· Gap decreased on three of seven end-of-course tests
To close this gap, we will
· hold high expectations for all students,
· identify and provide extra help to students who need it,
· provide additional resources to students and schools,
· monitor student performance on a regular basis to determine progress and needs,
· provide targeted professional development for teachers and staff,
· implement targeted academic programs to assist student achievement,
· use student data to effectively target academic needs,
· focus resources on having all students reading on grade level by third grade,
· apply best practices research to curriculum and instruction development, and
· provide extended learning time for students who need it.
B-45
Figure 17
SOL Test Results: Black-White Gap Charts
Percent of Students Passing Each Grade 3 Standards of Learning Test
lOO%
90%
8o%
7O%
60%
5o%
40%
30%
2o%
to%
O%
Grade 3 English
69.0% -- 72'1% --
--62.8% ~ .........
39.8%
. 34.2%
--31.3% ~-_
1998 1999 2000
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
5O%
40%
30%
2O%
10%
O%
Grade 3 Mathematics
73.0%
~67.6% ~
83.3%
37.2% 40.9%,,
---31.6%
1998 1999 2000
I-~- White
-B- Black
lO0%
90%
80%
= 70% ·
_=
~ 60%
~ 50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Grade 3 History
100%
' 90%
75.2%
.... 10%
1998 1999 2000
Grade 3 Science
84.3%
79.3%
~73~.~~ l ~
51.3%
46.9%
36.0% j~.~;
1998 1999 2000
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL B-46
Figure 18
SOL Test Results: Black-White Gap Charts
Percent of Students Passing Each Grade 5 Standards of Learning Test
10o%
9O%
80%
7o%
60%
50% --
40%
30%
20%
10%
o%
Grade 5 Reading
100%
'"" 80.0% '-----' 79.7% ~ 9O%
73.5% /~ ~- ~ 80%
o~ 70%
~53.0%--53.2%~ '~- 60%
46.0%~ -' ~-~ 50%
= 40%
~ 30%
20%
~o%
, , , o%
1998 1999 2O00
Grade 5 Writing
88.2% ~88.0%
~ 73.2% _
,/// 6s.,%
--29.3%
1998 1999 2000
-~- White
-~- Black
lOO%
90%
80%
= 70%
'i 60%
n
~ 50%
E 40%
n 30%
20%
lO%
o%
Grade 5 Mathematics
75.4%
....... 59L5~
--49~ 41.1%
-
~ 14~
1998 1999 2000
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Grade 5 History
71.8%
~_~ 64.2%
- 31.9% ~ 38.0%
1998 1999 2000
B-47 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL
SOL Test ReSultS: BlaCk'White Gap Charts
Percent of StudentS Passing Each Grade 5 Standards of Learning Test, continued
100%
90%
80%
70%
6o%
5O%
40%
=o%
20%
t0%
0%
Grade 5 Science
81.4% --'--'- 79.8% ~
42.0% ..,
44.9%
1998 1999 2000
-~- White
-B- Black
100%
90%
80%
= 70%
60%
50% -
40%
a. 30%
2O%
10%
0%
Grade 5 Computer/Technology
91.9%~94.1%
82 0% '
~.~ 8?.3%
8?.0%
$9,0%
1998 1999
2000
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL B-48
Figure 19
SOL Test Results: Black-White Gap Charts
Percent of Students Passing Each Grade 8 Standards of Learning Test
lOO%
90%
8o%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
2o%
lO%
0%
Grade 8 Reading
100%
~ 79.2% ~ 78.2% ~ 90%
~ 70.~~~ 80%
- ~ 70%
· , 60%
45.2% ~. sOo/o
40.2°/0-- __ --
--28.00/0 ~ ~ 40%
~ ~ 30%
r
t998 1999 2000
20%
10%
O%
Grade 8 Writing
85.4%
m ~79.9% ~
m73.1% * ~
-- ~' 61.5%
42.7% ~ m
-33.7% ~
t998 1999 2000
-~- White
-B- Black
1oo%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
lO%
0%
Grade 8 Mathematics
,72.8% ~ 72.4%
28.6% .... 27.9%
~ 19.4%' ~ =
1998 1999 2000
100%
90%
8O%
= 70%
.E
~ 60%
"E 50%
~ 40%
=- 30%
20%
lO%
0%
Grade 8 History
'57.7% ........ 60.2%
- 45.3~.~..~_.~ ~
17.9%---------20.2%--
B ,
--8.6% ~
1998 1999 2000
B-49 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL
SOL Test ReSults: Black-White Gap Charts
Percent of Students Passing Each Grade 8 Standards of Learning Test, continued
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%'
30%
20%
10%
0%
Grade 8 Science
77.7%
87.1% 88.8% .........
58.4%
47.3% ~
35.2% ......... ~
1998 1999 2000
-~- White
~- Black
100%
90%
80% ·
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Grade 8 CompUter/Technology
39.6%
34.8%
1998 1999 2000
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL B~50
Figure 20
SOL Test Results: Black-White Gap Charts
Students Passing Each High School End-of-Course Standards of Learning Test
-~- White
-B- Black
HS Reading/Literature
Number Taking Test
1998 1999 2000
White 599 582 622
Black 86 80 98
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50% · '
4O%
30%
20%
t0%
0%
--67.6% ~
45.0%
' 36.0% ~
'77.5% 77.8%
"47.0%--
t998 1999 2000
HS Writing
Number Taking Test
1998 1999 200O
White 617 601 -602
i,Black 86 75 101
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
2O%
10%
0%
88.9% "'
81.9% ~
--66.1%~
~ 63.4%-
~50.0%
.......... 42.7%
1998 1999 2000
B-51 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL
SOL Test Results: Black-White Gap Charts
Students Passing Each High School End-of-Course Standards of Learning Test, continued
HS Algebra I
Number Taking Test
1998 1999 2000
White 780 680 733
Black 126 74 107
100%
90%
8O%
70%
60%
5O%
40%
30%
20%
t0%
0%
-~- White
-B- Black
m53.2%
64.4% 68.3%
.... 31.8%
25.7%
--20.6% , ~
1998 1999 2000
HS Geometry
Number Taking Test
1998 1999 2000
White 551 694 604
Black 40 94 62
t 00%
90%
8O%
70%
60%
50%
40% ·
30%
20%
10%
0%
· 71.0%
32.5%
76.7%
34.0%
29.0%
1998 1999 2000
HS Algebra II
Number Taking Test
1998 1999 2000
White 482 524 611
Black 44 33 71
100%
90%
8O%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
O%
55.7% 53.4%
m41.5% ~ ,I-
~ 30.3% ~
1998 1999 2000
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL B-52
SOL Test Results: Black-White Gap Charts
Students Passing Each High School End-of-Course Standards of Learning Test, continued
White
t- Black
HS World History 1
Number Taking Test
1998 1999 200O
White 698 680 710
Black 117 73 96
100%
90%
8O%
7O%
6O%
5O%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
84.9%
.............. 76.2%
--70.6%
~___. ............ 58.3% .
~ 39.3% __.__. 41.1% ~~---
1998 1999 2000
HS World History 2
Number Taking Test
1998 1999 20O0
White 668 76 591
Black 120 15 52
100%
90%
8O%
.E 70%
60%
5O%
~ 40%
=. 30%
20%
10%
0%
75.8%
--47.0% //d6.2%
--10.8%
. - - 13.3%
998 1999 2000
HS U.S. History
Number Taking Test
1998 1999 2000
White 564 608 624
Black 94 84 96
100%
90%
8O%
70%
60%
soo/.
40%
n 30%
20%
10%
0%
-------49.4%
.________43.4% ...... -
16.0%
.... 10.7% -- 11.5% --
~ -
1998 1999 2000
B-53 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL
SOL Test ReSUlts: Black-White Gap Charts
Students Passing Each High School End-of-Course Standards of Learning Test, continued
-~- White
-B- Black
HS Earth Science
Number Taking Test
1998 1999 2000
White 589 554 570
Black 133 83 104
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
t0%
0%
... 81.4%
______ 73.6%
63.7%
26.3%
47.1%
~ 31.3% J
1998 1999 2000
HS Biology
Number Taking Test
1998 1999 2000
White 612 725 671
Black 103 105 74
100% ,
90% ·
80%
7O%.,,
60%
50%
4O%
30%
20%
10%
0%
83.0% .....
85.8%" 87.6%
......... 61.0%,, 60.8%
52.4% - ·
1998 1999 2000
HS Chemistry
Number Taking Test
1998 1999 2000
White 360 384 489
Black 26 24 39
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
-- 81.9% .-.---. 84.9% ,,
66.7%
.. 80.8%
51.3%B
,
998 1999 2000
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL B-54
Figure 21
SOL Test Results: Achievement Gap for Students
Receiving and Not Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch
Percent of Students Passing Each Grade 3 Standards of Learning Test
100%
90%
80%
7O%
60%
5O%
40%
30%
2O%
10%
0%
Grade 3 English
74.1% ~75.6%
--68.0% ~ --
r
35.3%
--27.7%
r
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
O%
Grade 3 Mathematics
77.1%
--72.2%
37.5%
--31.2% ~
84.9%
1998 1999 2000 1998 1999
,44.1%__
2000
-~- Not Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch
-B- Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch
10%
Grade 3 History
62.2%
74.9%
- - 78.2%
34.0% ~ 32.2%
__ 14.5% ~.~"~._
1998 1999 2000
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
5O%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Grade 3 Science
87.7%
83.6%
--78.1% ~
........... 44,0%
35.5% ~ -'
--
1998 1999 2000
B-55 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL
Figure 22
SOL Test ReSults: Achievement Gap for Students
Receiving and Not Receiving Free- or ReduCed-Price Lunch
Percent of Students Passing Each Grade 5 Standards of Learning Test
10o%
9o%
80%
70%
60%
5o%
40%
30%
20%
t0%
0%
Grade 5 Reading
84.9% 82.7%
77.7% "~~ ~
48.1%--
--40.1% 41.8%
m
t998 t999 2000
100%
9O%
80%
~ 70%
,E
~ 60%
~ s0%
E 40%
~. 30%
20% ·
10%
0%
Grade $ Writing
..... 90.9%
-- 74.9%
90.4%,
~ 66.1%--
56.8% ........
33.3% .....
1998 1999 2000
-~- Not Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch
~- Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch
10o%
90%
80%
?0%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
lO%
0%
Grade 5 Mathematics
............. ,, .80.00%m
__53.50% ~
28.90%m
15.10% 16
1998 1999 2000
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
4O%
$0%
20%
'10%
0%
Grade 5 History
74.9%
~ 68.1% ~
- 34.2%/'
~ 32.5% .....
~' L 23.0%
1998 1999 2000
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL B-56
SOL Test Results: Achievement Gap for Students
Receiving and Not Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch
Percent of Students Passing Each Grade 5 Standards of Learning Test, continued
100%
90%
8O%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Grade 5 Science
82.0%
__ 71~.6O/o ----.~ 73~~ ....
46.3% .-------42.6%
_ 34.6~~ -
1998 1999 2000
-~-Not Receiving Free-or Reduced-Price Lunch
Receiving Free-or Reduced-Price Lunch
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
5O%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Grade 5 Computer/Technoloav
~-~ 93.0% 96.4% __
86~
~'"=::~ 79.8% ~
r...-~'~ 66.9%
m52.5%
1998 1999 2000
B-57 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL
~ Figure 23
SOL Test Results: Achievement Gap for Students
Receiving and Not Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch
Percent of Students Passing Each Grade 8 Standards of Learning Test
100%
90%
80% --
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
O%
Grade 8 Reading
81.3% 80.4%
~73.9% A
41.6% 41.0%m
30.7% /
1998 1999 2000
10o%
90% ·
80%
70%
60%
50% ·
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
* Grade 8 Writin.q
87.7% ..........
76.6% ~
34.2%
52.8%
1998 2000
* Free- and reduced-price lunch data not
available for 1999 Grade 8 w#ting test.
-~- Not Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch
-! Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch
10o%
90%
80%
70% --
60%
5°%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
~Grade 8 Mathematics--.------
__63.7%
74.3% ~ 74.4% ~
~30.5% ~ 31.6°/o~
-- 22.2%_:_..~ .............. ' .~
1998 1999 2000
100%
90%
8O%
~ 70%
e 60%
~ 5o%
.u 40%
o. 30%
20%
10%
0%
'--'------Grade 8 History
............ 59.4% ' 61.9% ....
-47.6% ~ -
21.0% .... 18.5%
.4%
1998 1999 2000
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL B-58
SOL Test Results: Achievement Gap for Students
Receiving and Not Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch
Percent of Students Passing Each Grade 8 Standards of Learning Test, continued
100%
90%
8O%
7O%
60%
50%
4O%
30%
2O%
10%
O%
Grade 8 Science
87.9%
--80.8% ~ '
90.2% ~
,,
60.3%
53 6% -
-- 38.3%~~
r
1998 1999 2000
-~- Not Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch
-B- Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Grade 8 Computer/Technology
--77.6% ~%~
39.0%
~50.0%~
45.3%
1998 1999 2000
B-59 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL
Table 29
SOL Test Results: Achievement Gap for Students
Receiving and Not Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch
Percent of Students Passing Each High School
End-of-Course Standards of Learning Test, 2000
NOTE: High school data are not available for 1998 and 1999 due to the fact that Albemarle HS did
not participate in the program during those years.
I Number of I Percent within
TEST Students Category Passing
HS Reading/Literature
N°t Receiving Free-°r Reduced-Price LunchI 698 I 76.2%
51 41.2%
Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch
HS Writing
Not Receiving
Receiving
Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch I 668 87.1%
Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch 48 56.3%
HS Algebra I
Not Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch 737 67.6%
Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch 85 31.8%
HS Geometry
Not Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch I 633
Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch 46
74.6%
43.5%
HS Algebra II
Not Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch I 687 50.8%
Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch 27 51.9%
HS World History 1
75O
Not Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch
85.2%
Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch 85 58.8%
HS World History 2
Not Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch 611 76.4%
53
34.0%
Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch
HS U.S. History
Not Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch
Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch
657 42.6%
46 21.7%
HS Earth Science
N°t Receiving Free-°r Reduced-Price LunchI 585 I 80.5%
Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch 105 52.4%
HS Biology
Not Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch 700 88.0%
Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch 72 59.7%
HS Chemistry
Not Receiving Frae or Reduced-Price Lunch 514 79.8%
Receiving Fmc- or Reduced-Price Lunch 15 80.0%
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL
B-60
Priority 1.2 - Academic Progress of High Achieving Students
· A division team will be established to define measurable targets for the
academic progress of high achieving students by December 2000.
· By July 2001, baseline data will be collected to utilize to define these targets.
Data on the percentage of students scoring at the level of Advanced Attainment of the
Standards on the SOL tests are presented in this section. It is not our intent to presuppose
what indicators the above-mentioned division team will select. Rather, our intent is to
provide a variety of data to serve as starting points in the discussion of measurable targets.
Highlights:
· Larger percentages of Albemarle County students earned Advanced Attainment of the
Standards distinction on SOL tests than did Virginia students.
42.2 percent of third-graders scored at the advanced level in mathematics.
34.5 percent of fifth-graders scored at the advanced level in writing,
33.2 percent of eighth-graders scored at the advanced level in reading/literature.
About 20 percent of 11th-graders scored at the advanced level in both reading/literature
and writing.
B-61
SOL Test Results: Advanced Attainment of the Standards
Students' numeric scores on the SOL tests range from 0 to 600. On this range, a score of 600
indicates the student answered all the questions correctly. A score between 500 and 599
indicates that a student passed at an advanced level of performance, while a score between 400
and 499 indicates that the student passed at a proficient level. Scores below 400 indicate that a
student did not meet the standard and failed. It is informative to look not only at what percentage
of county students passed each SOL test, but also at the level at which they passed---proficient
or advanced.
The graphs (Figures 24 to 27) on pages 63 through 71 show the percentage of students passing
SOL tests at an advanced level for both the county and the state as a whole.
The percentage of county third-grade students passing SOLs at an advanced level increased in
2000 over 1999 on three of the four SOL tests; the one test on which the percentage of students
passing at an advanced level dropped was English, and that drop was only from 15.6 percent
advanced passes to 15.2 percent. On the third-grade mathematics SOL test, the overall pass rate
was 77.8 percent in 2000, with 42.2 percent of the students taking the test passing it at the
advanced level.
Results at the fifth-grade level were similar. Of six SOL tests, the percentage of passes at an
advanced level increased on four, although the increase for the science test was less than 1
percent. On the fifth-grade history SOL tests, the percentage of advanced level passes remained
the same between 1999 and 2000, 5.4 percent. For the fifth-grade reading and literature SOL,
the percentage of advanced level passes dropped from 27.6 percent in 1999 to 25.5 percent in
2000. Results for the fifth-grade computer/technology SOL test were noteworthy: 93.1 percent
of the county students passed the test, with 41.3 percent of the students passing at the advanced
level.
Of the six SOL tests given in eighth grade, the percentage of students passing at an advanced
level increased for four between 1999 and 2000. Drops occurred in writing, from 12.5 percent
advanced passes in 1999 to 9.8 percent in 2000, and for the history, from 4.7 percent advanced
passes in 1999 to 2.3 percent in 2000. For eighth-grade reading and literature, 73.5 percent of
students passed the test overall; 33.2 percent of the students taking the test passed at the
advanced level.
On high school end-of-course SOL tests, the percentage of advanced level passes increased on
seven of the 11 tests given, Subjects in which the percentage of advanced level passes declined
were reading and literature, algebra I, algebra II, and chemistry. In all of these subjects except
for algebra I, the percentage of students passing at either level declined.
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL B-62
Figure 24
SOL Test Results:
Advanced Attainment of the Standards
Albemarle County Public Schools Compared to the State
Grade 3
lOO%
90%
8o%
7O%
60%
5o%
40%
3o%
20% ·
lO%
o%'
Grade 3 English
15.9% 15.6% 15.2%
10.6% . 11.0°/o , 10.2% .
1998 1999 2000
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20% '
10%
0%
Grade 3 Mathematics
.......... 42.2%
--27.1% ~24.6%
~ 32.2%
__24.4% ~22.2%
1998 1999 2000
-~-Albemarle
-~- Virginia
lO0%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
lO%
0%
Grade 3 History
_, 14.8%
9.2%
~2.3%
1998 1999 2000
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%'
Grade 3 Science
20.3% ~22.8%
16.1% 14.8%
10.3% , ,
1998 1999 2000
B-63 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE ' SOL
~. Figure 25
SOL Test Results:
Advanced Attainment of the Standards
Albemarle County Public Schools Compared to the State
Grade 5
lOO%
9o%
8o%
7O%
60%
5O%
4o%
30%
20% --
lO%
0%--
Grade 5 Reading
100%
90%
80%
7O%
60%
50%
40%
' 27.6% 25.5%-
30%
__ 13.4%
20%
~____...~_ - -
.... 10%
t6.8% 15.6%
-- 11.4% . . , 0"4, --
1998 1999 2000
Grade 5 Writing
Itl
34.5%
'27.7% ~
--16.6% ~ --
-
18.4% 20.8%
--12.0% , ,
1998 1999 2000
-~ Albemarle
-~- Virginia
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
5o%
40%
30%
20%
lO%
O%
~Grade 5 Mathematics
.5.5%
~46% ~'~
1998
16.7%
11.3% ~
8.2% , 10.7%
1999 2000
t00%
90%
· 80%
70%
50%
40%
$0%
Grade 5 History
o%io5% :%
5. 5.4%
10% ·
o% .I 0.2O/o .l.d,,~ ~
2.0% ' 4.6%~
1998 1999 2000
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL B-64
SOL Test Results:
Advanced Attainment of the Standards
Albemarle County Public Schools Compared to the State
Grade 5, continued
-~- Albemarle
-B- Virginia
t00%
90% --
80%
70%
6O%
50%
40%
3O%
20% ·
10% ·
0%
Grade 5 Science
12.1% . 12.9%
5.6% ~ ..... .~
~ _-- _-
3.2% - , 5.3%, 7.2%,
1998 1999 2000
1o0% ~Grade 5 Computer/Technology__
90%
80%
70%
60%
s0%
40%
30%
2O%
10%
0%'
41.3%
__,__._,~:=::::~ 18.go/° 23.7%
10.0%
1998
1999 2000
B-65 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL
Figure 26
SOL Test Results:
Advanced Attainment of the Standards
Albemarle County Public Schools Compared to the State
Grade 8
lOO%
90%
80%
7o%
60%
5o%
40%
3o%
20%
10% ·
0%
Grade 8 Reading
33.2%
24.0%
w 19.0% ~,.._._..4,.....--'~-
- __21.0%
14.2% ~ 16.0% ~
1998 t999 2000
100%
90%
80%
~ 70%
.E
60%
60%
40%
30%
20% ·
10%
O%
Grade 8 Writing
11.4% 12.5% 9.8%
5.4% '
, 8.8% , 5.5%~
1998 1999 2000
Albemarle
Virginia
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
' Grade 8 Mathematics
m 11.9% 9.3% 12.8%
,7.2% , 6.1%, 9.0%~
1998 1999 2000
100%
90%
80%
70%
.E
~) 60%
C~
'" 50%
.o 40%
30%
20%
to% .2.6%~4'7%
o% 2.4% '
1998 1999
Grade 8 History
4.2%
3.6% 2.3%
2000
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL B-66
SOL Test Results:
Advanced Attainment of the Standards
Albemarle County Public Schools Compared to the State
Grade 8, continued
100%
90%
8O%
70%
6o%
5O%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Grade 8 Science
14.7% 18.3% 21.9%
15.4%
· 9.2% 11.9%
1998 1999 2000
-~- Albemarle
-i- Virginia
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Grade 8 Computer/Technology
26.2%
--13.5% 16.5%
_9.4%
' 91%. ' '
1998 1999 2000
B-67 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL
Figure 27
SOL Test Results:
Advanced Attainment of the Standards
Albemarle County Public Schools Compared to the State
High School End-of-Coume Tests
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
HS Reading/Literature
24.9%
-- 18.2% 2O.4%
16.7% 19.2% 17.5%
1998 1999 2000
-~- Albemarle
-I Virginia
100%
90%
8O%
70%
60%
5o%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
HS Writing
.................. 20.3%~
~13.1% 14.4% ,,. .
....... 15.3%
- 11.2% , 12.4% , ,
1998 1999 2000
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL B-68
SOL Test Results:
Advanced Attainment of the Standards
Albemarle County Public Schools Compared to the State
High School End-of-Coume Tests, continued
lO0%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10% --
0%
HS Algebra I --
11.6%
__4.1"/.
2.7%
1998 1999
8.4%
, 8.0% ,
2000
-~- Albemarle
-B- Virginia
100%
90%
8o%
7O%
6O%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10% ~z
O%
1998
HS Geometry
7.6%
- · 12.8%~
8.5%
9.1% ,
' 6.7%'
1999 2000
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
HS Algebra II
7.6%
2.6% .... ,.
0% '0.9% ~.~%
8.1%--
4.2%
1998 1999 2000
B-69 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL
too%
90%
8o%
70%
60%
5O%
40%
30%
SOL Test ResUlts:
Advanced Attainment of the Standards
Albemarle County Public Schools Compared to the State
High School End-of-Course Tests, continued
HS World History I
19.1%
0% .~5.2%- , 3.2%-- '
1998 1999 2000
00%
90%
80%
70%
r-
'~ 60%
n 50%
4O%
$O%
20%
lO%
o%
-~- Albemarle
-~- Virginia
HS U.S. History
100%
90%
80%
70%
e.
'; 60%
a. 50%
~ 40%
3O%
20%
10%
O%
HS World History II
10.8% .....
~3.9%
2.7%
1998
4.3%
m m
3.8% -- 4.9%
1999 2000
~ 3.0% ~ 3.8%, 6.6%
=
3.1% ' 2.8% ' 5.8%~
1998 1999 2000
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL B-70
SOL Test Results:
Advanced Attainment of the Standards
Albemarle County Public Schools Compared to the State
High School End-of-Course Tests, continued
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
2O%
10%
0%
HS Earth Science
5.6%
.4.3%~
1998
7.5%
9.9%
5.6%'
1999 2000
"~ 5.0%
Albemarle
Virginia
HS Chemistry
6.7%
2.5% '
1998
4.1% 5.8%
1999 2000
100%
90%,
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%,
30%
20%
10%
0%-
HS Biology
16.7%
~ 9.8% '-'--'- 11.5% ~
6.t% , 7.1% , 6.6%-m
1998 1999 2000
B-71 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL
Longitudinal Study of Standards Of Learning Results: Spring 1998 Grade 3 and
Spring 2000 Grade 5
A longitudinal study comparing SOL test results for 1997-98 third-graders and 1999-2000 fifth-
graders was done to look at progress made with students who were enrolled in Albemarle County
schools at both points in time. In this study, data from the spring 1998 graded 3 SOL tests were
merged with data from the spring 2000 grade 5 SOL tests. A total of 731 student were found to have
scores on both sets of tests.
A few notes of caution are presented to aid interpretation of the findings. First, the SOL tests were
not developed for the purpose of measuring growth across grades, but as measures of student
attainment of specific bodies of content at particular points in time. The relative difficulty between
two tests (e.g., grade 3 math compared to grade 5 math; grade 3 English compared to grade 5
reading) directly impacts the results. Second, unlike the developmental scaled score model used
with the Stanford 9 tests, the SOL test scaled score model is not developmental. A score of 400 on
every test represents the point at which the Virginia Board of Education established as the minimum
passing score.
Table 30 below shows the percentage of students passing SOL tests or scoring at the advanced
level, and average scaled scores for SOL tests in both 1998 and 2000. Data are shown for three
groups of students: Students who were enrolled in Albemarle County in 1998 and 2000, all Albemarle
students, and all Virginia students. As can be seen in the tables, students who were here in both
1998 and 2000 showed greater gains than those observed for all Virginia students, but similar results
to those for all Albemarle students.
Table 30
Students Here in
All Albemarle Students All Virginia Students
1998 and 2000
English Math History Science English Math History I Science English Math I History Science
Percentage Passing
Grade 3 (1998) 59.6 64.9 52.1 70.1 59,3 63.3 52.0 69.4 55.0 63.0 49.0 63,0
Grade 5 (2000) 75.5 71.5 59.5 75.2 76.0 70.6 59.7 74.5 68.0 63.0 51.0 64.0
Gain 1998 to 2000 15.9 6.6 7.4 5.1 16.7 ~ 7.3 7.7 5,1 13.0 0.0 '"2.0 1.0
Percentage Advanced
Grade 3 (1998) 15.2 28.2 1.8 12.9 15.9 27.1 2.3 13.1 10.6 24.4 3 10.3
Grade 5 (2000) 23.8 16.7 5.3 12.7 25.5 13.7 5.4 12.9 15.6 10.7 4.6 7.2
Gain 1998 to 2000 8.6 -11.5 3.5 -0.2 9.6 -13.4 3.1 -0.2 5.0 -13.7 1.6 -3.1
Average Scaled Scores
Grade3(1998) 416.7 432.2 399.0 424.6 416.0 427.8 398.8 423.2 406.4 427.2 397.3 414.9
Grade5(2000) 450.6 436.4 412.3 437.1 451.9 437.2 412.7 436.2 434.0 423.5 402.7 421.4
Gain 1998 to 2000 33.9 4.2 13.3 12.5 35.9 9.4 13.9 13.0 27.6 -3.7 5.4 6.5
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - SOL B-72
Indicator:
VOCATIONAL COMPLETERS, The Virginia System of Core Standards
and Measures of Performance for Secondary Vocational Education
Programs: Occupational Competence
Percent of All Completers Who Attained 80% Competencies
PR OGRAMSERVICE [1994-95 1995-96 J 1996-97 11997-98 1998-99
Agriculture Education
Albemarle ** ** ** ** **
Virginia 94% 96% 96% 97% 96%
Business
Albemarle 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Virginia 95% 96% 95% 93% 86%
Health Occupations Education
Albemarle ** ** ** ** **
Virginia 94% 97% 97% 96% 91%
Marketing Education
Albemarle 94% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Virginia 96% 94% 95% 95% 86%
Technology Education
Albemarle 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Virginia 94% 95% 95% 97% 89%
Trade and Industrial Education
Albemarle 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Virginia 91% 93% 92% 92% 90%
Work and Family Studies
Albemarle 100% 100% 100% ** 100%
Virginia 95% 95% 96% 96% 91%
TOTAL
Albemarle 97% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Virginia 94% 95% 95% 95% 89%
** Program not offered in Albemarle County high schools at this time.
B-73 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - VOCATIONAL COMPLETERS
Indicator:
Diplomas Conferred
Students graduating from high school prior to 2001 have three diploma options. The Advanced Studies
Diploma requires 23 credits including four in English; three each in math, laboratory science, and foreign
language; and four electives. The Standard Diploma requires 21 credits, including four in English; two
each in math and laboratory science; one in either math or science; and six electives. Both diplomas
require two credits in physical education and one credit each in Virginia and U.S. history, Virginia and U.S.
government, world studies, and fine or practical arts. The third diploma option is the Special Education
diploma, open only to students with an identified disability.
As can be seen in the table below, the percentage of county students earning Standard Diplomas is lower
than that at the state level; at the same time, the percentage of county students earning Advanced Studies
diplomas is higher than that at the state level. County students are thus working toward a higher standard
than are students on average across the state.
Advanced Studies
Albemarle 50% 57% 59% 55% 59%
Virginia 49% 50% 51% 51 **
Standard
Albemarle 48% 40% 39% 38% 37%
Virginia ** 47% 46% 45% **
Special Education
Albemarle 1% 1% 1% 3% 3%
Virginia ** 1% 1% 1% **
** Data not available at this time.
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - DIPLOMAS B-74
Indicator: Albemarle County GraduateS' Continuing Education Plans
Each year, county high school seniors are surveyed as to their plans to continue their education following
graduation. Options given are four-year college, two-year college, other education, and work. In the table
of continuing education plans below, work is reported as "none." The percentage of students intending
to continue their education after high school has remained fairly constant over the past five years, with
slight fluctuations in the split between four-year college, two-year college, and other.
PLAN 1996-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00
4-Year College 48.9% 52.5% 53.8% 46.4% 53.4%
2- Year College 27.6% 28.6% 26.3% 33.0% 26.4%
Other Education 3.1% 3.1% 3.1% 4.6% 1.2%
None 20.3% 15.8% 16.8% 15.9% 18.9%
55%
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Figure 28
· 1995-96 · 1996-97
[] 1997-98 [] 1998-99
[] 1999-00
4-Year College 2-Year College Other Education None
B-75 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - STATE - GRADUATE PLANS
Measurable Target for 2001
The School Board and Superintendent have recently established a
measurable target by which to gauge improvement next year. The
measurable target is as follows:
By the spring of 2001, 85 percent of students in grade 2 will
score on or above grade level on the local second grade
reading assessment.
In each of the last five years a larger percentage of students have scored on or above
grade level than had the previous year. In 1999-2000, 83.2 percent of students met
this important standard. Next year an additional 1.8 percent of second-graders will
need to read on or above grade level for the division to meet the School Board goal of
85 percent of students reading on or above grade level.
To reach and surpass this goal we will
· continue implementation of the literacy initiative,
provide required professional development in literacy education,
continue participation in the Partnership for Children literacy campaign for
preschoolers,
· provide guidance and support to K-2 teachers on best practices for teaching
reading, and
· provide additional staffing support in literacy in schools of highest need.
B-76
III. Local Indicators
Indicator: Second-Grade Reading Assessment
Every year, Albemarle County administers an individual reading assessment, the Qualitative
Reading Inventory, Second Edition (QRI-II), to every second-grader. The purpose of the second-
grade reading assessment is to obtain a measure of reading achievement early in students'
school careers, and to identify those Students needing special help to succeed academically.
During the assessment, a trained test administrator listens and records miscues while a student
orally reads a graded set of reading passages. The administrator also evaluates the accuracy of
the child's answers to a set of comprehension questions about each passage. Specific criteria
exist to determine the reading level that is appropriate for the child's classroom instruction.
Results of this reading assessment program in the 1999-2000 school year showed that over 83
percent of the students were reading on or above grade level, an increase of one percent over
1998-99. As can be seen in Figure 29, the percentage of students reading below grade level has
steadily decreased over the last five years, attesting to the success of the early intervention
programs that have been put into place. However, the fact that nearly 17 percent of the county's
second-graders are still reading below grade level emphasizes the need for the continuation of
these programs, as do the results for ethnic category and free- or reduced-price lunch shown in
Figure 30and discussed below. Although there have been gender differences in reading level in
some past years, in 1999-2000 there was only a small difference in the percentages of male and
female second-graders reading at or above grade level---81.5 percent for males versus 84.6
percent for females.
Table 31 presents the results of the second-grade reading assessment by school and ethnic
category. As can be seen, there are significant differences among racial/ethnic groups. Larger
percentages of white students were at or above grade level than black students. The percentage
of black students reading at or above grade level actually decreased from 63.3 percent in 1998-99
to 55.9 percent in 1999-2000. At the individual school level, there were six schools with more than
10 black second-grade students. At three of these six schools, more than half of the black
second-graders were reading below grade level.
BeyOnd the results for racial or ethnic groups, Figure 31 shows that there are also clear
differences in reading level based on socioeconomic status. While only 16.8 percent of all
second-graders were reading below grade level in 1999-2000, 42.8 percent of those second-
graders eligible for the free- or reduced-priced lunch program were reading below grade level.
Of the white second-graders eligible for free- or reduced-priced lunches, 35.1 percent were
reading below grade level. More than half of the black second-graders eligible for free- or
reduced-priced lunchesm51.1 percent--were reading below grade level in 1999-2000. These
results suggest clear targets for early intervention programs.
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - LOCAL - SECOND GRADE READING B-77
FIGURE 29
Percentage of Second-Graders Reading At or Above Grade Level and Below Grade Level,
1994-95 Through 1999-2000
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
73.4% 75.7% 79.3% 80.7% 82.1% 83.2%
94-95 95-96 96-97 97-98 98-99 99-00
B At or Above Grade Level
[] Below Grade Level
Figure 30
Percentage of Second-Graders Reading At or Above Grade Level
by Demographic Category, 1999-2000
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
83.2% 57.2% 88.6% 55.9% 74.6%
All
FIR
Lunch
White Black Other
81.5%
84.6%
Female
B-78 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - LOCAL - SECOND GRADE READING
..... ~..-,Table 31 _
Percentage of Second-Graders at Each Reading Level
K 1st 2nd or above Ethnic Group K let 2nd or above
Black 12.5% 31.6% 55.9%
County 4.0% 12.8% 83.1% White 2.7% 8.7% 88.6%
Other 1.7% 23.7% 74.6%
Black 4.8% 23.8% 71.4%
Agnor-Hurt 1.2% 14.3% 84.5% White 0.0% 11.3% 88.7%
Other * * *
Black * * *
Broadus 1.1% 10.2% 88.6% White 0.0% 10.8% 89.2%
Wood Other * * *
Black * * *
Brownsville 0.0% 20.0% 80.0% White 0.0% 18.9% 81.1%
Other * * *
Black 9.7% 32.3% 58.1%
Cale 6.3% 14.6% 79.2% White 5.1% 5.1% 89.8%
Other 0.0% 16.7% 83.3%
Black * * *
Crozet 3.3% 13.1% 83.6% White 3.6% 10.7% 85.7%
Other * * *
Black 22.7% 50.0% 27.3%
Greet** 9.1% 29.9% 61.0% White 6.1% 12.1% 81
Other 0.0% 36.4% 63.6%
Black 7.7% 23.1% 69.2%
Hollymead 0.9% 6.5% 92.6% White 0.0% 4.5% 95.5%
Other 0.0% 0.0% 100.0%
Black * * *
Meriwether 0.0% 2.4% 97.6% White 0.0% 1.3% 98.7%
Lewis Other * * *
Black * * *
Murray 7.5% 5.7% 86.8% White 7.8% 5.9% 86.3%
Other * * *
Black * * *
Red Hill 0.0% 16.0% 84.0% White 0.0% 16.7% 83.3%
Other * * *
Black * * *
Scottsville 3.2% 9.7% 87.1% White 3.7% 11.1% 85.2%
Other * * *
Black 42.9% 14.3% 42.9%
Stone- 10.0% 10.0% 80.0% White 6.8% 9.6% 83.6%
Robinson Other * * *
Black * * *
Stony Point 2.4% 9.8% 87.8% White 2.6% 5.3% 92.1%
Other * * *
Black 15.0% 40.0% 45.0%
Woodbrook 6.2% 18.5% 75.3% White 3.7% 9.3% 87.0%
Other 0.0% 28.6% 71.4%
Black * * *
Yancey 10.0% 20.0% 70.0% White 6.7% 20.0% 73.3%
Other * * *
** A high percentage of
English as a Second or
Ob~er Language (ESOL)
students attended
Greer.
* None or too few to report.
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - LOCAL - SECOND GRADE READING B-79
Figure 31
Second-Grade Reading Assessment
Black and White Students Not Receiving and Receiving Free- or RedUced-Price Lunch
Percentage of Students Reading At or Above Grade Level
lOO
9o
8o
7o
60
5o
40
3o
20
1o
o
68.8
48.9
[ r T
White/No FRL Black/No FRL VVhite/FRL Black/FRL
Comparison of Sec0nd-~rade Reading Assessment to Grade 3 Standards of Learning English
Test Scores
A study comparing second-grade reading assessment scores and third-grade SOL English test
scores was done in an attempt to make sense of seemingly disparate results on the two
assessments. Over the last three years in which both tests have been given, the percentage of
students scoring at or above grade level on the second-grade reading assessment has been
considerably higher than the percentage of third-graders who pass the grade 3 SOL English test. A
number of principals and teachers have expressed concern that the second-grade reading
assessment may be providing a poor indication of students' reading achievement and, thus, be a poor
predictor of performance on the grade 3 SOL English test.
The second-grade reading assessment is an individually-administered test that estimates students'
reading level as pre-primer, primer, first, second, third, fourth, or fourth plus. Students read passages
of text and answer questions asked by an examiner. The grade 3 SOL English test is a multiple-
choice test of the K-3 English Standards of Learning. Students receive a total test score and scores
on two subtests: reading and writing. The total test score ranges from 0 to 600 with a score of 400
representing the minimum passing score. The subtest scores are reported on a scale ranging from
0 to 50, with a score of 30 representing an approximation of the level of achievement a student would
need to earn on each subtest to earn a score of 400 on the total test.
In the study, data from the 1998-99 second-grade reading assessment were merged with data from
the 1999-2000 grade 3 SOL English test. A total of 847 students were found to have scores on both
tests. The statistical correlation between the scores on the two tests of 0.64 is moderately high and
indicates that the relative rankings of students by the two tests are similar. This degree of correlation
is quite high given that the two tests were administered one year apart, the second-grade reading
assessment is more subjectively scored than the SOL test, and that the second-grade reading
assessment places students' achievement on a scale having only seven points.
B-80 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - LOCAL - SECOND GRADE READING
The results of the study show that second-graders scoring at grade level on the reading assessment
had an average score very close to the cut score of 400 on the grade 3 SOL English test taken one
year later. The most interesting finding was that these students had an average reading subtest score
of 31 (just above the score needed on both subtests to pass the total test), but an average writing
subtest score of 28 (just below the score needed on both subtests to pass the total test). The
implication of these findings is that the second-grade reading assessment is functioning well as one
predictor of success on the grade 3 English reading subtest. The second-grade reading assessment
does not perform as well in predicting success on the total test. However, a reading test should not
be expected to serve as an accurate predictor of success on a writing test. The results of this study
seem to support the continued use of the second-grade reading assessment as a valid measure of
students' reading level and later success on the SOL test.
Table 32 shows the number of students scoring at each achievement level on the grade 3 SOL
English test levels and average English (total), reading, and writing scores for students scoring at
each reading level on the second-grade reading assessment (QRI-II).
Table 32
SOL Achievement Level Average SOL Score
QRI-II N Proficient Advanced Pass Fail English Reading Writing
PP 26 0 0 0 26 317 24 19
P 20 2 0 2 18 347 27 23
1 86 19 2 21 65 365 28 25
2 129 49 5 54 75 397 31 28
3 224 138 17 155 69 429 34 31
4 259 172 66 238 21 468 38 35
4+ 103 66 33 99 4 483 40 37
TOTAL 847 446 123 569 278
TABLE 33 shows the percentages of students scoring at each achievement level on the grade 3 SOL
English test levels and average English (total), reading, and writing scores for students scoring at each
reading level on the second-grade reading assessment (QRI-II).
Table 33
SOL Achievement Level Average SOL Score
QRI-II N Proficient Advanced Pass Fail English Reading Writing
PP 26 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 317 24 19
P 20 10.0 0.0 10.0 90.0 347 27 23
I 86 22.1 2.3 24.4 75.6 365 28 25
2 129 38.0 3.9 41.9 58.1 397 31 28
3 224 61.6 7.6 69.2 30.8 429 34 31
4 259 66.4 25.5 91.9 8.1 468 38 35
4+ 103 64.1 32.0 96.1 3.9 483 40 37
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - LOCAL - SECOND GRADE READING B-81
Indicator: Albemarle County Foreign Language Comprehensive Exams
Foreign language teachers in Albemarle County have recently developed end-of-course examinations for
French and Spanish. This testing program is in its infancy, and will undergo further development. This
year's Annual Progress Report includes available informatiOn from these foreign language examinations.
The results are helpful to teachers in evaluating their students and courses, and provide useful information
for making instructional decisions. Information from the comprehensive examinations provide information
to guide long-term improvement for this curriculum area.
Number of Students Average Percent of Questions
Answered Correctly
1998-99 I 1999-00 1998-99 I 1999-00
French I
High School
Advanced Course 29 54 78% 74%
Standard Course 23 17 72% 64%
Middle School 99 87 66% 73%
French II
High School
Advanced CourseI N/A 123I N/A 74%
Standard Course N/A 11 N/A 54%
German I
High School
Advanced Course I 32 58 J 70°/o171%
Standard Course 37 N/A 75% N/A
German II
High School
Advanced Course I N/A I 50 I N/A J 76%
Latin I
High School
Advanced Course I 162 I 124 I 72% I 76%
Latin II
High School
Advanced Course I N/A I 51 I N/A I 58%
Spanish I
High School
Advanced Course 222 248 77% 73%
Standard Course 143 121 61% 60%
Middle School 185 183 81% 79%
Spanish II
High School
Advanced Course I N/A I 202I N/A I 60%
Standard Course N/A 82 N/A 51%
Spanish IV
High School
Advanced Course I N/A J 40 I N/A I 72%
B-82 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - LOCAL - FOREIGN LANGUAGE COMPREHENSIVE EXAMS
Indicato'r: Foreign Language cOmPleterS' ~
Eighth-grade students meeting certain criteria may elect to take the first year of high school French or
Spanish in middle school. In 1999-2000, 31 percent of county eighth-grade students completed a year
of high school foreign language in middle school, down from 34 percent in 1998-99. Twelve percent of
minority eighth-graders completed a year of foreign language in middle school in 1999-2000, down from
21 percent in 1998-99.
Percentage of All 8th-Grade Students
Who Completed a Foreign Language Prior to the 9th-Grade by School
1995-96 t 996-97 t 997-98 1998-99 1999-00
Burley 39% 52% 48% 44% 40%
Henley 30% 38% 38% 36% 36%
Jouett 32% 38% 36% 41% 36%
Sutherland 51% 42% 45% 26% 24%
Walton 27% 38% 39% 30% 23%
50%
45%
.40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Figure 32
Percentage of 8th-Grade Students
Who Completed a Foreign Language Prior to the 9th-Grade
31%
41% 40%
34%_
31%
1995-96
1997-98
1999-00
1996-97
~"~1998-99
25% 25%
'21%
16%
12%
All Students
Minority Students
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - LOCAL - FOREIGN LANGUAGE COMPLETERS B-83
Indicator: Algebra I Completers, Prior to the 9th-Grade
The percentage of eighth-grade students who complete algebra I prior to the ninth grade reflects those
students completing the course in a single year. In 1998-99, 23 percent of eighth-grade students
completed algebra I prior to the ninth grade, and 17 percent of minority eighth-graders completed algebra
I prior to ninth grade. In 1999-2000, the percentage of eighth-graders completing algebra I in middle
school had increased to 27 percent; however, the percentage of minority eighth-graders having done so
decreased to 9 percent.
Figure 33
Percentage of 8th-Grade Students
Who Completed Algebra I Prior to the 9th-Grade
5O%
45%
4O%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
B1998-1999
D1999-2000
23% __
27%
All Students
17%
9%
Minority Students
L1
Indicator: Algebra I Completers, High School Graduates
Beginning in the 2001-02 school year, all students graduating from high school will be required to
complete algebra I. Until then, it is possible for students to graduate from high school without having taken
or passed algebra I. In 1999-2000, however, 98 percent of high school graduates completed algebra I,
the highest rate in the past five years.
Percentage of High School Graduates Completing Algebra I
1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00
Albemarle County 83% 90% 85% 94% 98%
B-84 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - LOCAL - ALGEBRA I COMPLETERS
Indicator: Albemarle County PhYsical Education Progress Report
The physical and motor benefits that can be acquired by students from instruction in physical education have been
well documented in research in growth and development, motor learning, and physical performance. The objectives
below have been identified by the Albemarle County Physical Education teachers as those that can be mastered by
students at a specific grade level.
Percentage of Students Mastering All Components of Skill
I 1995-96 I 1996-97 I 1997-98 t 1998-99 I 1999-00
GRADE 2
Hop 79% 84% 91% 88% 91%
Bounce 88% 93% 90% 94% 92%
Flexibility 94% 88% 91% 92% 93%
Agility 83% 87% 87% 87% 88%
Rope Jump 84% 82% 82% 85% 88%
Rhythmic Movement 89% 91% 92% 93% 92%
GRADE 5
Kick 87% 88% 86% 87% 93%
Punt 75% 77% 80% 82% 87%
Forehand Strike 75% 75% 83% 81% 78%
Soccer Dribble 85% 89% 87% 86% 91%
Knowledge of Physical Fitness 77% 80% 83% 86% 90%
Fitness Concepts 80% 80% 83% 84% 91%
For school year 1998-99, new objectives and norms were developed for the secondary levels.
I1997'98 I I1998'99 I 1999-00
GRADE 7
Racquet Skills Forehand Stroke 73% Trapping 92% 87%
Volleyball Overhead Pass 72% Dribbling Skills 84% 79%
Basketball Shooting 69% Forehand Stroke 71% 72%
Softball Cognitive 70% Flexibility 75% 74%
Soccer Throw In 82% Cognitive: Basketball 82% 84%
Fitness Cognitive 77% Two Hand Overhead Pass 88% 90%
GRADE t0
Fitness Muscle Strength 82% Fitness Muscle Strength 76% 76%
Fitness Individual Program 88% Fitness Individual Program 91% 90%
Softball Cognitive 85% Cognitive: Softball 83% 87%
Softball Pop Fly 89% Throwing at a Moving Target 89% 88%
Tennis Serve 84% Cognitive: Tennis 69% 80%
Tennis Cognitive 73% Overhand Serve 81% 73%
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - LOCAL - HEALTH & PHYSICAL EDUCATION B-85
Indicator: Virginia Wellness - Related Fitness Program
The goals of The Virginia Wellness-Related Fitness Testing Program (VWRFT) are to promote enjoyable
regular physical activity and to provide a wellness-related fitness assessment and baseline data for
Virginia's youth. The Virginia Wellness-Related Fitness Testing Program (VWRFT) is comprised of four
components: aerobic capacity, abdominal strength, fiexibility, and upper body strength. Each component
has a range for the student to score within. The program is administered at least twice a year and the
student's best score is recorded.
To recognize the accomplishments students in Albemarle County make in the area of fitness, an awards
program was initiated in the spring of 1999. Four certificates are awarded:
· "Excellent" for students who score better than the top score on all four components
· "Outstanding" for students who score the top score on all four components
· "Satisfactory" for students who score the lower score on all four components
· "Improved" for students who improve on 3 out of 4 components
Over 5,000 students were recognized by the individual schools for their accomplishments on the
Wellness-Related Fitness test.
Regular physical activity contributes to good health, function, learning, and well-being, and is important
throughout a person's lifetime. TheAIbemarle County physical education curriculum has a long-term view
of promoting appropriate physical activity while maintaining an acceptable level of physical fitness.
I Number of Students Tested J Percent of Tested Passing
t997-98 I 1998-99f 1999-00I 1997-98 J 1998-99 J t999-00
Upper Body Strength
Fourth- and Fifth-Graders 1,810 1,860 1,850 53% 82% 82%
Sixth-, Seventh-, and Eighth-Grsders 2,573 2,662 2,662 45% 61% 61%
Ninth- and Tenth-Graders 1,326 1,530 1,530 51% 51% 51%
Abdominal Strength
Fourth- and Fifth-Graders 1,808 1,863 1,863 84% 86% 87%
Sixth-, Seventh-, and Eighth-Graders 2,579 2,662 2,662 78% 78% 78%
Ninth- and Tenth-Gradera 1,326 1,511 1,511 85% 83% 83%
Flexibility
Fourth- and Fifth-Graders 1,811 1,865 1,862 78% 83% 83%
Sixth., Seventh-, and Eighth-Graders 2,583 2,652 2,652 70% 73% 74%
Ninth- and Tenth-Graders 1,329 1,516 1,567 76% 70% 69%
Aerobic Capacity
Fourth- and Fifth-Graders 1,801 1,852 1,853 81% 88% 88%
Sixth-, Seventh., and Eighth-Graders 2,558 2,642 2,642 67% 76% 74%
Ninth- and Tenth-Graders 1,327 1,531 1,531 63% 66% 66%
B-86 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - LOCAL - HEALTH & PHYSICAL EDUCATION
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
100%
90%
8O%
70%
60%
50%
40%
3O%
20%
10%
0%
Figure 34'
Upper Body Strength Test
4th and Sth 6th thru 8th
Grade
Flexibility Test
9th and 10th
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
~0%
10%
O%
4th and Sth 6th thru 8th
Grade
9th and 10th
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
O%
I[] 1997-98
[] 1998 -99
[] 1999-00
Abdominal Strength Test
4th and 5th 6th thru 8th 9th and 10th
Grade
Aerobic Capacity Test
4th and 5th 6th thru 8th 9th and 10th
Grade
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - LOCAL - HEALTH & PHYSICAL EDUCATION B-87
Albemarle County has made a significant commitment to instructional technology, as evidenced by the
dramatic increases in the number of computers and the number of students enrolled in courses with
a foundation in technology. The number of computers in schools has increased from 552 in 1994-95
to 2,292 in 1999-2000. The number of students enrolled in courses with a foundation in technology has
increased from 998 in 1996-97 to 2,028 in 1998-99.
The Standards of Learning include a comprehensive listing of technology objectives to be met at the
elementary and middle school levels. Computer/Technology SOL tests are administered to students
in grades 5 and 8. Albemarle County students performed very well on both tests, with 89.1percent
passing the grade 5 test and 76.6 percent passing the grade 8 test.
Indicator: High School Technology Courses
Number of Courses Offered
with a Foundation in Technology
1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00
29 35 32 35
Number of Students Enrolled
988 1,167 2,028 1,662
1~-88 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - LOCAL - INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY
Indicator: Instructional Computers
Number of Students to Every Computer
t995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00
Elementary 11.8 9.4 8.9 8.6 6.3
Middle 10.0 8.2 6.8 5.7 5.2
High 13.9 9.0 8.7 5.2 4.3
Albemarle County 11.8 9.0 8.3 6.6 5.3
2,400
2,100
1,800
1,500
1,200
900
600
3OO
0
· 1995-96
Ci 1996-97
· 199%98
· 1998-99
· 1999-00
Figure 35
Elementary Middle High
Albemarle County
Indicator:
School-Level Internet Activities
1995-96 1996-97
NUMBER OF:
School Home Pages
Teachers wi Class Pages
1997-98 .1998-99 1999-00
NOTE:
9 17 19 18' 24
48 81 117 75* 252
* Insertion of new se~er ~ 1998 mquimd m-wo~ing of afl ex~g home pages.
AIIschools have dim~internetconne~ions.
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - LOCAL - INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY B-89
Indicator: Participation in Cooperative Education, Internships, and Job
Shadowing Programs
Albemarle County students participate in a vadety of vocational education programs. Students at every
level of schooling have been encouraged to become involved in planning for their future careers and
to engage in activities that will help prepare them for the world of work.
PROGRAM 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00
Cooperative Education 144 126 119 124
Internships 79 209 263 182
Job Shadowing 142 72 60 128
B-90 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT - LOCAL - STUDENT/BUSINESS COOPERATIONS
Indicator:
CHARLOTTESVILLE-ALBEMARLE TECHNICAL EDUCATION
CENTER (CATEC) CAREER PROGRAMS, Participation of
Albemarle County Students in CATEC Programs
Elementary
Middle
Junior Apprenticeship 18 120 ' '
162 107 119
Career Awareness Outreach 557 846 400 500 75
Summer School Program t N/A 65 35 45 0
High
Career Awareness Outreach 343 630 300 400 400
Vocational/Technical Education 157 230 270 245 85
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT . LOCAL - CATEC PARTICIPATION
B-91
DIVERSE LEARNER
TITLE I
ACADEMIC LEARNING PROGRAM SCHOOLS (ALPS)
SPECIAL EDUCATION
GIFTED EDUCATION
NATIONAL MERIT SCHOLARSHIPS
GENERAL EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT (GED)
EVENING HIGH SCHOOL
Indicator: Title I Performance - Reading Assessment
Kindergarten through third grade students are served by the Title I program based on their need for extra help in reading. The
graphs on this and the following page illustrate the improvement in reading achievement made by students in this program. As
the figures attest, students served by this program began the year considerably below their grade level in reading. Most
students made at least a year's growth during the school year; many jumped two years'or more.
(Refer to page A-12 for a more complete descrfption of the Title I Program.) I Above Grade Level
['--} At Grade Level
Figure 36 m~ Below Grade Level
Readin;I levels of tested Kindergartners
Tested in the Retested in the SPRING FALL
FALL SPRING.
LEVEL # '% ~- %
Pre-K 31 100% 3 9.7%
Grade K 0 0% 27 87.1%
Grade I 0 0% 1 3.2%
Readin;I levels of tested First-Graders
Tested in the Retested in the
FALL SPRING.
LEVEL,, ~_ % ~- ~
Pre-K 71 61.2% 2 1.7%
Grade K 45 38.8% 25 21.6%
Grade 1 0 0% 76 65.5%
Grade 2 0 0% 12 10.3%
Grade 3 0 0% I .9%
FALL
SPRING
Reading levels of tested Second-Graders
Tested in the ReteSted in the
FALL SPRING
LEVEL ~_ "% ~- %
Pre-K 15 15.5% 1 1.0%
Grade K 38 39.2% 7 7.2%
Grade 1 44 45.4% 37 38.1%
Grade 2 0 0% 36 37.1%
Grade 3 0 0% 15 15.5%
Grade 4 0 0% 1 1.0%
FALL
FALL
Reading levels
Tested in the
FALL,
LEVEL ~_ %
Pre-K 1 1.6%
Grade K 20 32.3%
Grade 1 14 22.6%
Grade 2 27 43.5%
Grade 3 0 0%
Grade 4 0 0%
Grade 5 0 0%
of tested Third-Graders
Reteste~i in the
SPRING.
0 O%
0 O%
2 3.2%
12 19.4%
39 62.9%
7 11.3%
2 3.2%
FALL
SPRING
DIVERSE LEARNER B-93
Indicator: Academic Learning Project Schools (ALPS) Performance-
Reading Assessment
Local funding for school-based intervention programs has been available to ALPS schools for the past
two years. Each school that participates in the ALPS program has designed its own intervention program
based on the needs of its particular population. However, all ALPS schools administer the same
assessments.
The reading levels of students in second through eighth grades were assessed by use of the Qualitative Reading Inventory,
Second Edition (QRI II), a published informal reading inventory. For this inventory, each student is tested individUally. The
student reads orally from a set of graded reading passages and answers questions to indicate how well he or she understood
what was read. As the charts indicate, most students in grades 2 - 7 made at least a year's progress through the program. A
year's progress is the average expectation for an average child in a year of schooling. It should be noted that the students
selected for this program had not previously made a year's progress each year, as demonstrated by their below-grade-level
reading ability in the fall of the year. Therefore, making at least a year's progress represents a breakthrough for these students,
and attests to the success of the program.
(Referto page A-13 fora mom complete desc#ption of the ALPS Program.)
,Reading levels of tested First-Gradem
LEVEL
Pre-K
Grade K
Grade 1
Grade 2
Tested in the Retested in the
FALL SPRING
25 61.0% 4 9.8%
16 39.0% 22 53.7%
0 0% 13 31.7%
0 0% 2 4.9%
Figure 37
FALL
I Above Grade Level
['--'] At Grade Level
m Below Grade Level
SPRING
Reading levels oftested Second-Gradem
~EVEL
Pre-K
Grade K
Grade 1
Grade 2
Grade 3
Tested in the Retested in the
...FALL SPRING
7 21.2% 2 6.1%
13 39.4% 0 0%
13 39.4% 8 24.2%
0 0% 12 36.4%
0 0% 11 33.3%
FALL SPRING
B-94 DIVERSE LEARNER
Indicator:
ALPS Performance - Reading Assessment (continued)
Readin;t levels of tested Third-Graders
- Tested in the Retested in the
LEVEL
Pm-K
Grade K
Grade 1
Grade 2
Grade 3
Grade 4
Grade 5
FALL SPRING
I 3.0% 1 3.0%
3 9.1% 0 0%
10 30.3% 3 9.1%
19 57.6% 6 18.2%
0 0% 14 42.4%
0 0% 8 24.2%
0 0% I 3.0%
FALL
Above Grade Level
At Grade Level
Below Grade Level
SPRING
Reading levels of tested Fourth-Graders
Tested in the Retested i,'~ the
LEVEL
Grade 2
Grade 3
Grade 4
Grade 5
FAL_L SPRING,
8 61.5% 0 0%
5 38.5% 1 7.7%
0 0% 9 69.2%
0 0% 3 23.1%
FALL
SPRING
Readin¢~ levels of tested Fifth-Grader_s
Tested in the Retest=d in the
LEVEL
Grade K
Grade 1
Grade 2
Grade 3
Grade 4
Grade 5
Grade 6
FALL. SPRING
%
8.3% 0 0%
4.2% 1 4.2%
9 37.5% 4 16.7%
7 29.2% 4 16.7%
5 20.8% 4 16.7%
0 0% 10 41.7%
0 0% 1 4.2%
FALL
SPRING
Readina levels of tested Sixth-Graders
Tested in the Retested in the
LEVEL
Grade 1
Grade 2
Grade 3
Grade 4
Grade 5
Grade 6
FALL. SPRING.
1 2.9% 0 0%
16 45.7% 2 5.7%
15 42.9% 13 37.1%
2 5.7% 14 40.0%
1 2.9% 4 11.4%
0 0% 2 5.7%
FALL
SPRING
DIVERSE LEARNER
B-95
Indicator:
ALPS Performance - Reading Assessment (continued)
ReadinR levels of tested Seventh-Grader:
Tested in the Retested in the
..Li~,VEI,
Grade 1
Grade 2
Grade 3
Grade 4
Grade 5
Grade 6
Grade 7
Grade 8
,FALL ,,SPRING
I 2.6% 0 0%
5 12.8% 4 10.3%
14 35.9% 9 23.1%
14 35.9% 12 30.8%
3 7.7% 7 17.9%
2 5.1% 5 12.8%
0 0% 1 2.6%
0 0% 1 2.6%
~ Above Grade Level
F-'] At Grade Level
~ Below Grade Level
FALL SPRING
Reading levels of tested Eighth-Grader:
Tested in the Retested in the
.FALL .SPRING
LEVEL
Grade 2 7 12.7% 4 7.3%
Grade 3 7 12.7% 6 10.9%
Grade 4 14 25.5% 8 14.5%
Grade 5 16 29.1% 14 25.5%
Grade 6 6 10.9% 6 10.9%
Grade 7 5 9.1% 11 20.0%
Grade 8 0 0% 6 10.9%
FALL
SPRING
Reading levels of tested Ninth-Gradem
Tested in the Retested in the
FALL .SPRING
Grade 3 6 15.8% 1 2.6%
Grade 4 8 21.1% 3 7.9%
Grade 5 14 36.8% 3 7.9%
Grade 6 6 15.8% 7 18.4%
Grade 7 4 10.5% 5 13.2%
Grade 8 0 0% 9 23.7%
Grade 9 0 0% 5 13.2%
Grade 10 0 0% 3 7.9%
Grade 11 0 0% I 2.6%
Grade 12 0 0% I 2.6%
FALL SPRING
Reading levels of tested Tenth-Gradem
Tested in the Retested-in the
FALL ,SPRING
LEVEL #
Grade 4 3 17.6% 0 0%
Grade 5 6 35.3% 1 5.9%
Grade 6 3 17.6% 0 0%
Grade 7 3 17.6% 5 29.4%
Grade 8 2 11.8% 2 11.8%
Grade 9 0 0% 8 47.1%
Grade 10 0 0% I 5.9%
FALL SPRING
B-96 DIVERSE LEARNER
Indicator: STANDARDS OF LEARNING TEST-
Percentage of Students with Disabilities Passing
About 16 percent of the students in Albemarle County Public Schools have been identified with
disabilities and are provided services through special education. Almost three-quarters of these
students are males, which parallels national data trends. Students who receive free- or reduced-price
lunches make up a larger proportion of the special education population than the general population.
SOL test passing rates of students with disabilities for 1998-99 are shown in the data section of the
report. These data show that many students with disabilities are achieving at a level below that of their
peers, and imply that we must find ways to ensure their success.
SOL test results for students with disabilities are shown in the
Tables 24 through 27 on pages B-35 through B-39.
Indicator: Special Education Demographics, 1999-2000
The table below shows how the percentages of certain demographic categories compare in the
tOtal student population and in the end-of-the-year special education population. The special
education population makes up 15.9 percent of the total student population, and includes 19
percent of the male students division-wide and 8 percent of the female students. These
percentages are in line with national percentages of identified special education students.
In terms of racial/ethnic demographic categories, 14 percent.of white students division-wide are
identified as special eduCation students, compared with 4 percent of Asian students, 17 PerCent
of black students, and 9 percent of Hispanic students. Nineteen percent of the students in the free-
or reduced-price lunch program are identified as special education students.
Coii~position of
Composition of Total Special Ed.
Student Population Population
DEMOGRAPHIC
Total Number 12,186 1,735
Male 51.1% 70%
Female 48.9% 30%
Asian 3.1% 1%
Black 13.0% 15%
Hispanic 2.3% 1%
White 81.4% 14%
Free!Reduced Lunch I 18.0% I 24%
DIVERSE LEARNER B-97
Priori 1.2 - Academic Pro ress of Hi h Achievin Students
· A division team will be established to define measurable targets for
the academic progress of high achieving students by December
2000.
· By July 2001, baseline data will be collected to utilize to define
these targets.
^ variety of data are presented in this report on the academic progress of high achieving
students. It is not our intent to presuppose what indicators the above-mentioned division team
will select. Rather, our intent is to provide a variety of data to serve as starting points in the
discussion of measurable targets.
Highlights
· Eight county students were accepted to the academic Governor's School; ten, to the
foreign language Governor's School; and six, to the fine arts Governor's School.
· Fourteen different Advanced Placement courses were offered division-wide.
· The number of students participating in the Independent Study program increased to
120.
· Four county teams progressed to the global finals of DestinationlmagiNation, a problem-
solving competition.
B-98
High Achieving Students
The percentage of students identified for Albemarle County's program for the intellectually gifted
continues to increase. The demographics of the program show that there is no difference between
the percentages of males and females in the program. Asian and white Students are more heavily
represented; black and Hispanic students are underrepresented. Only 3 percent of the students
who receive free- or reduced-price lunch have been identified for the program. Highlights of the
gifted services programming for 1999-2000 are discussed below.
For the 1999-2000 school year, 10 Albemarle County students earned the distinction of National
Merit Scholarship finalist, Eleven additiOnal Students were recognized as semi-finalists, and 42
students were commended under the program.
Governor's School acceptances continued to be exceptional. For the third year in a row, eight of
eight county applicants to the academic Governor's School were accepted. Ten of 14 foreign
language applicants were accepted, as were six fine arts applicants, two more than had ever been
accepted in the past. These distinctions were spread across the county's three comprehensive
high schools: At least one student from each high school was named to the Fine Arts Governor's
School, and at least two students from each were selected to the Academic and Foreign Language
Academies.
Fourteen different Advanced Placement courses were offered across the three comprehensive
high schools, with a minimum of 10 such courses at each school. This number exceeds the
county's minimum expectation of one Advanced Placement course per core area.
In 1999-2000, 120 students participated in the Independent Study program, up from 112 in 1998-99
and from 19 in 1992-93. Each participating student earned at least 0.5 elective credit; some
students received multiple credits in one year.
Over 200 county students on 29 teams participated in the Destination ImagiNation program in
1999-2000, a decrease from participation in the Odyssey of the Mind program the year before.
Seven county teams advanced to the state tournament, with four county teams representing
Virginia in the global finals.
DIVERSE LEARNER B-99
Indicator: Gifted Demographics, t999-2000
The table below shows how the percentages of certain demographic categories compare in the
total student population and in the end-of-the-year identified gifted population. The gifted
population makes up 14 percent of the total student population, and includes 14 percent of the
male students division-wide and 14 percent of the female students.
In terms of racial/ethnic demographic categories, 16 percent of white students division-wide are
identified as special education students, compared with 18 percent of Asian students, 3 percent
of black students, and 4 percent of Hispanic students. Three percent of the students in the free-
or reduced-price lunch program are identified as special education students.
Composition of
Composition of Total Gifted
DEMOGRAPHIC Student Population Population
Total number 12,186 1,760
Male 51.1% 50%
Female 48.9% 50%
Asian 3.1% 4%
Black 13.0% 3%
Hispanic 2.3% 1%
White 81.4% 92%
Free/Reduced Lunch I 18.0% I 3%
B- 100 DIVERSE LEARNER
Indicator: Destination ImagiNatiOn
Destination ImagiNation (DI) - formerly OM - is an international problem-solving program that fosters creative
thinking, problem-solving and group process skills in participating students from kindergarten through college.
Working under the guidance of coaches, teams of 5 to 7 students develop solutions to problems and have the
opportunity to test their creative solutions against those of other teams. Regional, state, and world competition
levels are part of the DI program.
Number of Schools
Elementary 10 12 15 13
Middle 5 5 4 4
High 1 2 3 3
TOTAL 16 19 22 20
Number of Teams
Elementary 17 23 38 19
Middle 15 15 9 6
High 1 3 5 4
TOTAL 33 41 52 29
Number of Students
Elementary 117 155 266 133
Middle 100 100 63 42
High 7 21 35 28
TOTAL 224 276 $64 203
TEAMAWARDS I 1997/98 1998/99' J 1999/00
Regional
1st Place (3)
1st Place (3) 2nd Place (2)
1st Place (3) 2nd Place (4)
Elementary 2nd Place (3) 3rd Place (1)
3rd Place (3) 3rd Place (2) DaVinci (1)
OMer (2) Renaissance (1)
OMer (2) Ranatra Fusca Award (1) Spirit of Di (1)
1st Place (2) 1st Place (3)
Middle 2nd Place (1) 2nd Place (1) 1st Place (2)
3rd Place (3) 3rd Place (1)
3rd Place (1) Ranatra Fusca Award (1)
1st Place (1) 1st Place (2)
High 1st Place (2) 2nd Place (2) 2nd Place (1)
2nd Place (1)
OMer Award (1) 3rd Place (1)
State
Elementary 2nd Place (1) 1st Place (1)
Middle 1st Place (1) 1st Place (1) 1st Place (2)
High 1st Place (1)
World
DIVERSE LEARNER B- 101
Indicator: Independent Study Program
The Independent Study Program encourages high school students to pursue intellectual, artistic, or
career interests beyond what is offered in the present high school curriculum. With the aid of an adult
mentor from the school or community, a student designs a course of study which can be completed in
one semester (for .5 credit) or in two semesters (full credit). Grades are assigned on a pass/fail basis
and passing grades are not computed into class rank or grade point averages. Students receiving a
"fail" pass/fail course shall receive a grade point of 0 which will be included in calculations of the
student's GPA. Credit is "elective" and cannot be designated for any particular graduation requirement.
(For example, an independent study in sports psychology cannot substitute for Physical Education;
an independent study in Polish can not substitute for foreign language; an independent study in pottery
can not substitute for fine arts.
Students may complete the Independent Study course during school hours (during a study hall, for
example) or outside of school. A student should spend a minimum of five hours a week, on average,
on the project. Students should have at least 75 hours of study for one semester credit or 150 hours
of study for a full year credit.
The project is under the direction of a mentor and school sponsor (currently the Gifted Resource
Teacher, or GRT). The mentor should be an expert in the field of the student's interest and must be
willing to offer guidance, supervision, and evaluation. The mentor may be a school employee or a
community member approved by the GRT and a school administrator. A student should attempt to find
his/her own mentor, however, when asked, the sponsor will try to assist the student in finding a suitable
mentor. Every two weeks, the mentor, in consultation with the student, submits a brief written critique
of the student's progress. Critiques are maintained by the sponsor at the school. Students must
submit these forms bi-weekly by the established due dates in order to receive credit for work.
Any student meeting the following criteria is eligible to undertake an Independent Study project. Good
candidates are students who are above average in academic achievement, self-discipline, motivatiOn,
and ability to work with a minimum of direction and supervision. Candidates must also have at least
a 2.0 grade point average. Regulations require that students in Independent Study maintain a 2.0
"S"
minimum average, at least a "C" in any class required for graduation, and a minimum of a in
courses directly related to the Independent Study project. A student must apply to the program and
have his/her proposal approved.
The Gifted Resource Teacher/Independent Studystaff are available for consultation. In addition, staff
members will conduct informational meetings before course scheduling; date and times will be
announced and posted.
1995-96 t996-97 t997-98 1998-99 1999-00
Student Participants 64 50 64 112 120
Each participating student received at least .5 elective credit; some students received multiple
credits in one year.
Independent Study is administered through gifted services but is available to any interested student
who meets the criteria for approval.
VVhile participation in Independent Studies has increased by 700 percent in the past eight years,
staffing for high school gifted resource teachers has increased by only 62 percent.
B- 102 DIVERSE LEARNER
Indicator:
Governor's School
Follows are records of students selected for Governor's School (Academic and Fine Arts) and Foreign
Language Academies. Please note:
· For the third year in a row, eight of eight academic applicants were selected.
Six fine arts applicants were selected - two more than we've ever had in the past.
· Ten of 14 Foreign Language applicants were selected.
· At least one student from all three comprehensive high schools was selected to the Fine
Arts Governor's Schools and at least two students from all three comprehensive high
schools were selected to the Academic and the Foreign Language Academies.
Academic Governor's Schools
11995'9611996'9711997-9811998-9911999-00
Nominees
Albemarle HS 4 4 2 4 3
Monticello HS N/A N/A N/A 0 2
Murray HS 0 0 0 0 0
Western Albemarle HS 3 4 6 4 3
TOTAL 7 8 8 8 8
Accepted
Albemarle HS 3 3 2 4 3
.... Monticello HS N/A N/A N/A 0 2
Murray HS 0 0 0 0 0
Western Albemarle HS 3 4 6 4 3
TOTAL 6 7 8 8 8
Foreign Language Academies
11995'9611996-9711997-9811998-9911999-00
Nominees
Albemarle HS 4 7 3 4 4
Monticello HS N/A N/A N/A 4 4
Murray HS 0 0 0 0 0
Western Albemarle HS 8 9 5 5 6
TOTAL 12 16 8 13 14
Accepted
Albemarle HS 3 2 3 2 4
Monticello HS N/A N/A N/A 4 2
Murray HS 0 0 0 0 0
Western Albemarle HS 6 8 5 5 4
TOTAL 9 10 8 1 1 10
DIVERSE LEARNER B- 103
Visual and Performin~ Arts Governor's Schools
(Dance, Instrumental Music, Theatre, Vocal Music, Visual Arts)
· The division may send up to 15 candidates (three in each of the 5 areas) to compete in the state
adjudication process; following receipt of the performance reviews, the division nominates up to 10
candidates for consideration (two in each area).
· A candidate's performance review from state adjudication is weighted 72 percent in the final
application.
I 1995-96 I t999-97 I t997-98 I 1998'99 I 1999'00
Nominees for Adjudication
Albemarle HS 4 6 2 2 4
Monticello HS N/A N/A N/A 5 1
Murray HS 1 1 1 0 0
Western Albemarle HS 4 7 10 6 4
TOTAL 9* 14 13 14'* 9--*
Division Nominees
Albemarle HS 2 4 1 2 2
Monticello HS N/A N/A NIA 2 1
Murray HS 0 0 1 0 0
Western Albemarle HS 4 6 6 6 3
TOTAL 6 10 8 10 6
Accepted
Albemarle HS 1 0 0 1 2
Monticello HS N/A N/A N/A 1 1
Murray HS 0 0 0 0 0
Western Albemarle HS 2 3 3 2 3
TOTAL 3 3 3 4 6
* Three nominees withdrew priorto adjudication (2 AHS, 1 Murray HS) in 1996.
** One nominee withdrew prior to adjudication (Monticello HS) in 1999.
*** Two nominees withdrew prior to adjudication (1 WAHS, 1 AHS) in 2000.
B' 104 DIVERSE LEARNER
Indicator: National MeritScholamhips
National Medt Scholarship finalists, semi-finalists, and commended students are chosen on the basis
of their scores on the Preliminary Scholastic Achievement Test (PSAT), which students may take in
October of their junior year in high school. Students scoring in the top one half of one percent in each
state are selected to be semifinalists. Here inAIbemarle County, 1 percent of our graduates were
selected as semi-finalists. Approximately 90 percent of semifinalists are named as finalists, on the
basis of further information about their high school records. Students scoring in the top five percent
in each state are named as commended students.
1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00
Finalists 9 7 7 4 10
Semi-Finalists 9 7 7 4 11
Commended 30 17 26 20 42
National Hispanic Scholars 1 0 0 1 0
National Achievement Scholars * 0 2 0 0 3
* Program open only to black students.
DIVERSE LEARNER B- ! 05
Indicator: General Education Development (GED) Test
GED provides a course of study leading to the GED diploma. Studies include writing, social
studies, science, literature, and math. Enrollment is open at no charge. GED testing for the
diploma is conducted on a regional basis through the Charlottesville City Schools.
1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00
Albemarle County Residents Passing the GED Test 50 72 76 78
Indicator: Evening High School Program
Evening High School is an opportunity for people who left high school to return to the classroom
to earn a traditional diploma. Each course is conducted at Albemarle High School two nights per
week, two and one half hours each session. Up to four high school credits can be earned per
school year.
1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00
Albemarle County Residents who
Graduated from the Evening High School 10 8 10 11
B- 106 DIVERSE LEARNER
RESPONSIBLE CITIZENSHIP
NOTE: The academic learning of students is for naught if they are not prepared to
participate in our democratic society as responsible citizens, workers, and family members.
Much of the construct of responsible citizenship does not lend itself to quantitative
measurement. Therefore the section of the Progress Report titled "Responsible
Citizenship" is a short one, belying the importance of its concept.
DROPOUT RATE
DALLY STUDENT ATTENDANCE
SUSPENSIONS AND EXPULSIONS
VOTER REGISTRATION
Measurable Target for 2004
The School Board and Superintendent have recently established a
measurable target by which to gauge improvement next year. The
measurable target is as follows:
· By 2004, the dropout rate will remain at 2% even with the
increased graduation requirements.
In 1999-2000, the dropout rate for Albemarle County was 1.65 percent.
B-108 ;
Indicator: Dropout Rate: 7-12 Grades
The dropout rate for all students increased from 2.08 in 1996-97 to 2.85% in 1997-98. The dropout rate
in 1998-99 was 1.65. The dropout rate for minority students decreased from 4 percent in 1996-97 to 3
percent in 1997-98 and remained at 3 percent in 1998-99.
All Students
Albemarle 2.80% 2.31% 2.08% 2.85% 1.65%
Virginia 3.66% 3.44% 3.47% 3.28% 3.19%
Minority Students
Albemarle 3% 2% 4% 3% 3%
Virginia 5% 5% 5% * *
* The state no longer reports this data.
Indicator: Average Daily Student Attendance
Average daily attendance for Albemarle County students reached a five-year high of 95.99 percent in
1999-000.
1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000
Elementary 96.2% 96.13% 96.25% 96.40% 96.39%
-Middle 95.4% 95.27% 95.85% 95.79% 95.75%
High 93.4% 94.40% 94.30% 95.32% 95.44%
ALL LEVELS 95.3% 95.44% 95.60% 95.94% 95.97%
RESPONSIBLE CITIZENSHIP
B-109
Indicator: Out-of-School Student Suspensions and Expulsions
Albemarle County Schools maintain a strict code of conduct, which is supported by the School Board.
Accordingly, the out-of-school suspension rate is high. Approximately 11 percent of middle and high
school students were suspended at some point during the 1999-2000 school year, and 35 middle and high
school students were expelled. Student behavior is an area that merits continued attention.
SUSPENSIONS EXPULSIONS
1~,~,6-9711997-9811998-9911999-00 199-/97 11997.9811998.9911999.00
Elementary
# of incidents * * : * * 0 0 0 0
# of students involved * * * * 0 0 0 0
% of student body involved * * * * 0 0 0 0
Middle
# of incidents 890 636 559 654 7 2 5 13
# of students involved 343 292 271 296 5 2 5 13
% of student body involved 12.9% 10.8% 9.8% 10.6% 0.2% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5%
High
# of incidents 819 887 637 746 11 13 10 22
# of students involved 362 372 358 386 11 13 10 22
% of student body involved 11.8% 11.0% 10.5% 11.1% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.6%
All Levels
# of incidents I 1,709 1,523 1,196 1,400 18 15 15 35
# of students involved 705 664 629 682 16 15 15 35
* No central record keeping.
B- 110 RESPONSIBLE CITIZENSHIP
Indicator: High School Voter Registration
The percentage of eligible seniors who registered to vote rose from 67 percent in 1997-98 to 98 percent
in 1998-99, then dropped to 83 percent in 1999, and 62 percent in 1999-2000.
SENIORS 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00
ft Registered 414 299 425 429 230
fl Eligible to Register 577 447 433 527 369
% Registered 72% 67% 98% 83% 62%
NOTE: Data prior to 1998-99 includes only Albemarle and Westem Albemarle high schools.
Due to a snow day, Monticello H. S. was unable to hold a registration event and is not included in the
1999-2000 data. (These data are not included in either the # Registered or # Eligible categories.)
Figure 38
t00%
90%
8O%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
2O%
10%
O%
1996
98%
67%
1997 1998 1999
Spring Voter Registration
2000
RESPONSIBLE CITIZENSHIP B- 111
COMMUNITY RELATIONS
The fifth goal of the school division's list states:
Schools will establish comprehensive opportunities to ensure parental and
community involvement toward making each student's education a substantiv~
and valuable experience. They will develop partnerships with parents, community
members, and businesses that directly support and guide our educational goals.
Working together, we will ensure that all students develop the skills and abilities
necessary to be self-sufficient and contributing members of the community.
PARENT and COMMUNITY VOLUNTEERS
PARENT SURVEY RESULTS
CONTINUING EDUCATION
SCHOOL-BUSINESS-COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS
Indicator: Parent and Community Volunteer Hours
Schools have encouraged parents and community members to become engaged in school activities, and
parents and community members have been very generous with their time. The information shown in the
table below indicates that over 40,000 hours were donated to the schools this year. The drop in volunteer
hours in 1998-99 is likely to be largely due to record-keeping differences, rather than an actual drop in
volunteerism. Involvement of parents and other community members pays intangible rewards to both parties
as well. Increased attention should be directed to the volunteer program to ensure high levels of
participation, and to increase participation at the middle and high school levels.
I 1996-97 I 1997-96 I 1998-99 I 1999-00
TUTORING
Elementary 19,456 14,168 10,696 22,476
Middle 906 77 287 133
High 357 0 96 *
ALL COUNTY 20,719 14,245 11,079 22,608*
RESOURCES
Elementary 9,788 12,778 6,961 12,189
Middle 2,659 3,037 344 487
High 34 0 40 *
ALL COUNTY 12,481 15,815 7,345 12,676'
CLERICAL
Elementary 4,046 4,076 1,658 4,385
Middle 523 186 181 418
High 511 74 80 *
ALL COUNTY 5,080 4,336 1,919 4,803*
TOTAL
Elementary 33,290 31,022 19,315 39,050
Middle 4,088 3,300 812 1,037
High 901 74 216 933
ALL COUNTY 38,279 34,396 20,343 41,020
PER PUPIL
Elementary 6.1 5.6 3.4 6.8
Middle 1.5 1.2 .3 .3
High .3 .02 .06 .3
ALL COUNTY 3.4 3.0 .6 3.4
* 1999-2000 volunteer
hours for the high
schools were not
recorded for specific
categories. Only a
TOTAL number is
available.
Figure 39
24,000
21,000
18,000
15,000
12,000
9,000
6,000
3,000
Tutoring
Resources
Volunteer Areas
COMMUNITY RELATIONS
[] 1996-97
· 1997-98
[31998-99
· 1999-00'
Clerical
B-113
Measurable Target for 2001
The School Board and Superintendent have recently established
a measurable target by which to gauge improvement next year.
The measurable target is as follows:
Eighty percent of parents will agree or strongly agree that the
school their child attends is satisfactory based upon each of
the Effective Schools correlates in the 2001 Parent Survey.
B-114
Indicator: Parent Survey Results, 1999-2000
The 1999-2000 Parent Survey provides a measure of parents' opinions about their children's schools.
The results are used by School Board members, division- and building-level administrators, and
teachers as a measure of current performance and to highlight areas for improvement.
Surveys were mailed to the parents or guardians of all students in the school division. Table 34 shows
the response rate by elementary, middle, or high school level. Approximately 25 percent of the 10,169
households returned completed surveys, representing a drop of 5 percent from 1996-97. The
response rate of 25 percent is well below the rate statisticians would deem appropriate for making
generalizations to all parents of Albemarle County public school students. Given this Iow response
rate, we must be careful to interpret these data as an indication of the opinions of the group that
completed and returned the survey. We cannot infer that the other 75 percent of parents would rate
the schools either less or more favorably.
Table 34
Parent Survey 1999-2000 Response Rate
# of Households that % of Sent Surveys
were Sent Surveys Completed and Returned
Elementary 4,502 27.1%
Middle 2,567 25.2%
High 3,100 20.1%
All Levels 10,169 24.5%
The response rate of 25 percent in 1999-2000 is below the rates of 29 percent in 1996-97 and 30
percent in 1995-96. This trend for the parent survey mirrors the general trend observed by survey
researchers across the country. The general decline in response rates may be attributed, in large
part, to the fact that the number and frequency of requests for information made of individuals have
increased dramatically over recent years. The Iow response rate and recent drop cause us concern
and indicate we need to carefully review the parent survey process. Specifically, we need to consider
the amount of time required to complete and return the survey, relevance of the questions to parents,
level of use of the results, and coordination of the division survey with school-based surveys. We
must also demonstrate that what is learned from the parent survey results in action that leads to
improvement.
Six Correlates of Effective Schools
The 1999-2000 Parent Survey, like previous surveys, was based upon research describing effective
schools. Each question on the Parent Survey corresponds to one of six factors (or correlates) related
to student achievement in highly effective schools. The six correlateS are as follows:
· Climate of high expectation for success for ail students,
· Strong instructional leadership,
· Opportunity to learn and adequate time spent on academic tasks,
· Frequent monitoring of student progress,
· Safe and orderly environment, and
· Positive home-school relations.
The questions appearing in the 1999-2000 Parent Survey are somewhat different than those found
in previous versions. Several questions were edited for greater specificity and clarity. Some new
questions were added, and some old questions were deleted.
COMMUNITY RELATIONS B- ! 15
RESULTS
In this section, results are shown and discussed for each of the six correlates. Table 35 shows results
for each survey question by grade levels (elementary, middle, and high).
The schools have met the 2001 target for two of the six Effective Schools correlates. Those correlates
are as follows:
· Climate of high expectation for success for all students, and
· Safe and orderly environment.
The correlates in which the schools have not yet reached the target for 2001 but are approaching 80
percent are as follows:
· Opportunity to learn and adequate time spent on academic tasks, and
· Frequent monitoring of student progress.
The schools were rated just above 70 percent on two correlates which are as follows: · Strong instructional leadership, and
· Positive home-school relations.
The percentage of parents who responded "Don't Know" to survey questions causes us to take note
of the important need to improve communication with parents and the public.
A Climate of High Expectation for Success for All Students
Perhaps the most important of the six correlates is a climate of high expectation for success for all
students. Effective schools have been found to embody a climate in which all students are expected
to learn and staff members believe they have the capability to help all students achieve. An average
of 80.4 percent of parents agreed with the statements related to this correlate.
Don't Strongly Disagree/
Strongly Agree/Agree Know Disagree
80.4 2.7 17.0
Eighty percent of parents who responded to the survey agreed with the statement, "The school holds
high academic expectations that challenge my child." Likewise, 80 percent of parents agreed with the
statement, "My child is continuously encouraged by teachers to work hard."
Strong Instructional Leadership
Principals of effective schools act as instructional leaders and consistently communicate the school's
instructional mission to staff, students, and parents. An average of 73.3 percent of survey
respondents agreed with the statements related to this correlate.
Don't Strongly Disagree/
Strongly Agree/Agree Know Disagree
73.3 12.4 14.3
Parents were asked to rate the effectiveness displayed by our principals. When asked about the
leadership provided by the principal, 74 percent of parents agreed that they were pleased with the
principal's leadership. Eighty-six percent of parents agreed with the statement, "The principal
frequently communicates the school's purpose and goals through newsletters, PTO/A meetings,
conferences, and the like." While 60 percent of parents agreed with the statement, "School
administrators have high expectations for staff," only 10 percent disagreed. The remainder (30%) of
parents responded "Don't Know" to this question.
B- 116 COMMUNITY RELATIONS
RESULTS, continued
Opportunity to Learn and Adequate Time Spent on Academic Tasks
In effective schoOls, a significant proportion of students' time in school is devoted to instruction
in essential content and skills. An average of 75.8 percent of survey respondents agreed with the
statements related to this correlate.
Don't Strongly Disagree/
Strongly Agree/Agree Know Disagree
75 8 t3 2 ~u
Over 85 percent of parents agreed that their child received quality instruction in each of the core
academic areas of English, mathematics, science, and social studies. Seventy-seven percent of
parents believed their child was assigned meaningful homework on a regular basis. Seventy-nine
percent of parents believed their child's time at school was well used. Over 85 percent of parents
agreed that their child received quality instruction in physical education. Parents rated the schools
less favorably in other instructional areas, including art, foreign language, and practical arts.
Nearly 70 percent of parents of children served by the special education program indicated they
were pleased with the program. Forty-nine percent of parents of children served by the gifted
education program indicated they were pleased with the program. Analysis of parent comments
related to the gifted education program indicated that parents are generally pleased with the
instruction received by students, but desire more opportunities for their children.
Frequent Monitoring of Student Progress
An important ingredient in the recipe for student achievement is frequent assessment of student
progress, coupled with communication of that progress to both the student and parents. An average
of 77.4 percent of parents agreed with the statements related to this correlate.
Don't StrOngly Disagree/
Strongly Agrsa/Agree Know Disagree
77A 19.6 3.0
Seventy-one percent of parents agreed with the statement, "My child's teacher keeps me informed."
Eighty-five percent of parents agreed that their child's report card and interim reports provide useful
and understandable information in a timely manner.
Safe and Orderly Environment
Students are able to learn when they feel safe and are taught in an orderly environment. We take very
seriously our responsibility for providing a safe and positive experience for all students. An average
of 81.9 percent of parents agreed with the statements related to this correlate.
Don't Strongly Disagree/
Strongly Agrsa/Agree Know Disagree
t2.4 5.6
Eighty-nine percent of parents agreed with the statement, "My child feels safe at this school.' About
76 percent of parents agreed with the statement, "Students behave respectfully at this school." Sixty-
five percent of parents agreed with the statement, "Discipline is consistent and fair at this school,'
while 19 percent disagreed and 15 percent indicated they did not know. Ninety-five percent of parents
responded that they believed the school building and grounds were attractive and clean.
COMMUNITY RELATIONS B- 117
RESULTS, continued
Positive Home-School Relations
In effective schools, parents understand and support the school's basic mission and are given the
opportunity to participate in helping the school to achieve its mission. Almost 71 percent of survey
respondents a.qreed with statements related to this correlate.
Don't Strongly Disagree/
Strongly Agree/Agree Know Disagree
70.9 22.3 6.7
Over 75 percent of parents indicated that teachers and school administrators listen to and welcome my
ideas about how to improve my child's learning. Fifty-eight percent of parents responding indicated they
participate in their school's PTO/A activities.
Additional Information Available
Results for each school are shown in the School Profiles section. School Profiles are also sent to parents
via mail and posted on the Albemarle County Public Schools Web site at http://k12.albemarle.or.q.
B- I 18 COMMUNITY RELATIONS
Table 35
Parent Responses to Questions from 1999-2000 Parent Survey
N = The number of people who responded.
% = The percentage of people who responded.
CORRELATE: A CLIMATE OF HIGH EXPECTATION FOR SUCCESS FOR ALL STUDENTS
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongl¥ Disagree Don't Know
QUESTION N °4, N % N 04, N 04, N %
Elementary 392 32.9% 622 52.3% 125 10.5% 36 3.0% 15 1.3%
The school holds high academic Middle 138 22.0% 326 52.1% 97 15.5% 47 7.5% 18 2.9%
expectations that challenge my child. High 149 24.8% 328 54.7% 77 12.8% 34 5.7% 12 2.0%
All Levels 679 28.1% 1276 52.8% 299 12.4% 117 4.8% 45 1.9%
Elementary 473 39.9% 568 47.9% 92 7.8% 22 1.9% 31 2.6%
My child is continuously encouraged Middle 138 22.0% 312 49.8% 111 17.7% 39 6.2% 26 4.2%
by teachers to work hard. High 136 22.8% 295 49.5% 100 16.8% 38 6.4% 27 4.5%
All Levels 747 31.0% 1175 48.8% 303 12.6% 99= 4.1% 84 3.5%
Elementary 865 36.4% 1190 50.1% 217 9.1% 58 2.4% 46 1.9%
TOTAL: Middle 276 22.0% 638 51.0% 208 16.6% 86 6.9% 44 3.5%
High 285 23.8% 623 52.1% 177 14.8% 72 6.0% 39 3.3%
All Levels 1426 29.6% 2451 50.8% 602 12.5% 216 4.5% 129 2.7%
Parent Responses to Questions from 1999-2000 Parent Survey, continued
N = The number of people who responded.
% = The percentage of people who responded.
CORRELATE: STRONG INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP
Stronc~ly ARree Agree Disac~ree Strongly Disa;ree Don't Know
QUESTIONS N % N % N % N % N %
Elementary 316 26.6% 494 41.7% 52 4.4% 21 1.8%' 303 25.5%
School administrators have high Middle 88 14.1% 227 36.3% 75 12.0% 32 5.1% 204 32.6%
expectations for staff. High 80 13.4% 230 38.7% 46 7.7% 23 3.9°/ 216 36.3%
All Levels 484 20.1% 951 39.5% 173 7.2% 76 3.2% 723 30.0%
Elementary 525 44.2% 472 39.7% 69 5.8% 49 4.1% 73 6.1%
I am pleased with the leadership Middle 138 22.2% 243 39.1% 91 14.6% 91 14.6% 59 9.5%
provided by the principal. High 147 24.7% 255 42.8% 66 11.1% 46 7.7% 82 13.8%
All Levels 810 33.7% 970 40.3% 226 9.4% 186 7.7% 214 8.9%
The principal frequently Elementary 546 45.9% 540 45.4% 54 4.5% 12 1.0% 38 3.2%
communicates the school's purpose Middle 153 24.5% 343 55.0% 81 13.0% 19 3.0°/, 28 4.5%
and goals through newsletters, PTO/A High 160 26.8% 338 56.6% 56 9.4% 11 1.8% 32 5.4%
meetings, conferences, and the like. A~ Levels 859 35.6% 1221 50.6% 191 7.9% 42 1.7% 98 4.1%
Elementary 1387 38.9% 1506 42.3% 175 4.9% 82 2.3% 414 11.6%
TOTAL: Middle 379 20.2% 813 43.4% 247 13.2% 142 7.6% 291 15.5%
High 387 21.6% 823 46.0% 168 9.4% 80 4.5% 330 18.5%
All Levels 2153 29.8% 3142 43.5°/, 590 8.2% 304 4.2% 1035 14.3%
Parent Responses to Questions from 1999-2000 Parent Survey, continued
N = The numberofpeople who responded.
% = The percentage of people who responded.
CORRELATE: THE OPPORTUNITY TO LEARN AND ADEQUATE TIME SPENT ON ACADEMIC TASKS
QUESTIONS N 1% N 1% N 1% N i % N 1%
My child(ten) is receivin~ quality instruction in:
Elementary 465' 39.1%I 643 54.0% 61 5.1% 15 1.3% 6 0.5%
Middle 187 30.0% 329 53.0% 72 11.6% 27 4.3% 6 1.0%
a. Language Arts/English High 189 31.8% 320 53.9% 54 9.1% 20 3.4% 11 1.9%
Ai~ Levele 841 35.0% 1292 53.7% 187 7.8% 62 2.6% 23 1.0%
Elementary 436 36.7% 640 53.9% 74 6.2% 29 2.4% 9 0.8%
b. Mathematics Middle 213 34.4% 324 52.3% 49 7.9% 26 4.2% 7 1.1%
High 167 28.4% 313! 53.3% 61 10.4% 34 5.8% 12 2.0%
All Levele 816 34.1% 1277 53.3% 184 7.7% 89 3.7% 28 1.2%
Elementary 345 29.2% 704 59.5% 91 7.7% 17 1.4% 26 2.2%
Middle 182 29.5% 322 52.2% 67 10.9% 37 6.0% 9 1.5%
C. Science
High 174 29.7% 324 55.3%1 46 7.8% 24 4.1% 18 3.1%
All Levele 701 29.4% 1350 56.6% 204 8.5% 78 3.3% 53 2.2%
Elementary 361 30.6% 706 59.9% 66 5.6% 13 1.1% 32 2.7%
d. Social Studies Middle 170 28.0% 342 56.3% 60 9.9% 23 3.8% 12 2.0%
High 179 30.9% 311 53.7% 47 8.1% 17 2.9% 25 4.3%
All Levele 710 30.0% 1359 57.5% 173 7.3% 53 2.2% 69 2.9%
Elementary 300 26.2% 611 53.4% 113 9.9% 60 5.2% 61 5.3%
e. Art Middle 65 12.0% 223 41.1% 66 12.2% 46 8.5% 142 26.2%
High 98 19.8% 161 32.5% 36 7.3% 11 2.2% 190 38.3%
All Levele 463 21.2% 995 45.6% 215 9.8% 117 5.4% 393 18.0%
Elementary N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
f. Foreign Language(s) Middle 58 11.6% 127 25.5% 57 11.4% 65 13.1% 191 38.4%
High 148 27.1% 241 44.1% 68 12.5% 34 6.2% 55 10.1%
Ail Levele 206 19.7% 368 35.2% 125 12.0% 99 9.5% 246 23.6%
Parent Responses to Questions from 1999-2000 Parent Survey, continued
N = The number of people who responded.
% = The percentage of people who responded.
CORRELATE: THE OPPORTUNITY TO LEARN AND ADEQUATE TIME SPENT ON ACADEMIC TASKS, continued
QUEST, OHS N 1% N 1% N 1% N I % N I%
My child(ran) is raceiving quality instruction in: (continued)
Elementary 399 34.0% 608 51.9% 84 7.2%I 33 2.8% 48 4.1%
g. Music Middle 153 26.8% 228 39.9% 56 9.8°~ 33 5.8% 101 17.7%
High 101 21.4% 110 23.3% 25 5.3°~ 10 2.1% 227 48.0%
All Levels 653 29.5% 946 42.7% 165 7.4% 76 3.4% 376 17.0%
Elementary 423 37.1°/~ 646 56.7% 40 3.5% 12 1.1% 19 1.7%
h. Physical Education Middle 133 22.1% 366 60.7% 52 8.6% 31 5.1% 21 3.5%
High 86 16.2% 288 54.1% 38 7.1% 23 4.3% 97 18.2%
All Levels 642 28.2% 1300 57.1% 130 5.7°& 66 2.9% 137 6.0%
Elementary 149 14.0% 442 41.6% 77 7.2% 21 2.0% 374 35.2%
I. Practical Arts (i.e. Technology Ed., Middle 126 22.7% 295 53.2% 30 5.4% 18 3.2%I 86 15.5%
Business Ed., Work & Family Studies) High 70 15.3% 185 40.5% 22 4.8% 12 2.6% 168 36.8%
All Levels 345 16.6% 922 44.4% 129 6.2% 51 2.5% 628 30.3%
Elementary 330 28.0% 641 54.4% 152 12.9% 48 4.1% 8 0.7%
My child(ran) is assigned meaningful Middle 95 15.3% 347 56.1% 126 20.4% 47 7.6% 4 0.6%
homework on a regular basis. High 97 16.3% 337 56.6% 94 15.8% 47 7.9°/ 20 3.4%
All Levels 522 21.8% 1325 55.4% 372 15.5% 142 5.9% 32 1.3%
Elementary 344 29.2% 700 59.4% 79 6.7% 15 1.3% 40 3.4%
The school has materials and Middle 94 15.2% 395 64.0% 63 10.2% 22 3.6% 43 7.0%
supplies needed for learning. High 78 13.1% 396 66,3% 47 7.9% 15 2.5% 61 10.2%
All Levels 516 21.6% 1491 62.3% 189 7.9% 52 2.2% 144 6.0%
Elementary 354 30.4% 687 59.0~ 77 6.6% 17 1.5% 30 2.6%
My child(ran)'s time at school is well Middle 87 14.2% 345 56.5% 99 16.2% 37 6.1% 43 7.0~
used. High 70 12.0% 334 57.3% 79 13.6% · 42 7.2% 58 9.9%
All Levels 5111 21.7% 1366 57.9% 255 10.8% 96 4.1% 131 5.6%
I am pleased with this school's:
:Elementary 2541 22.1% 557 48.4% 78 6.8% 22 1.9% 240 20.9%
a. Athletic programs Middle 76 13.0% 243 41.6% 98 16.8% 51 8.7% 116 19.9%
High 113 19.6% 281 48.7% 44 7.6% 34 5.9% 105 18.2%
All Levels 443 19,2% 1081 46.8% 220 9.5% 107 4.6% 461 19.9%
Parent Responses to Questions from 1999-2000 Parent Survey, continued
N = The number of people who re.%oonded.
% = The percentaffe of people who responded.
lATE TIME SPENT ON ACADEMIC TASKS, cont/nued
I am pleas~ with this sch~l's: (continu~)
E~ 269 23.~% 5~0~ 43.8% 75: 6.4% 24 2.~% 286~ 24.6%
Midd~ 76 ~2.5% 3~ 49.5% 85 ~4.0% 52 8.6% 93' ~5.3%
b. Guidan~ pr~ram High 91 15.4% 2~ 48.1% 1~ 17.6% 63 10.7% 48 8.1%
A, ~ve~s 4~ 18.5% 10~ 46.4% 2~ 11.2% 139 5.9% 427 18.1%
C. Intell~tually G~ Eduction E~ ~ 24.0% 127 ~.3%~ 61 17.4% 47 13.4% 31 8.9%
pr~mm Midme 18 7.1% 71 28.0% 63 24.8% 59 23.2% 43 16.9%
(Res~ndents indicting High 23 12.8% 60 33.5% 31 17.3% 25 14.0% 40 22.3%
~ild(mn) in pr~ram.) All ~,ls 125 16.0% 258 33.0% 155 19.8% 131 16.7% 114 14.6%
~~ 1~ 12.4~ 2~ 21.~ 1~ 10.~ 80 7.4% ~1 49.1%
Mi~ 28 5.~ 1~ 19.~ ~ 15.~ 72 13.4% 2~ 46.5%
* (All m~nts) High 37 7.~, 101 20.~ 36 7.1% 35 6.9% 296 ~.6%
All Lev~ 199 9.4% 434 20.4% 228 10. ~ 187 8.~ 1077 ~. 7%
E~e~n=w 378 ~.1% 620 55.9% 40 3.6% 7 0.6% ~ 5.8%
Middle ~ 15.2% 273 49.5% ~ 9.8% 21 3.8% 120 21.7%
d. Libra~/M~ia Center pr~mm High 49 9.3% 229 43.5% ~; 6.5% 9 1.7% 205 39.0%
A, ~ve~s 511 23.4% 1122 51.3% 128 5.9% 37 1.7% 389 17.8%
Elemen~w 60 46.9% ~ ~.4% 6 4.7% 6: 4.7% 12 9.4%
e. Special Eduction program Middle 25 31.3% 28 35.0% 5 6.3% 4 5.0% 18 22.5%
(Res~ndents indicting High 8 11.3% 28 39.4% 9 12.7% 10 14.1% 16 22.5%
~ild(mn) in pr~ram.) All ~ve;s 93 33.3% 100 35.8% 20 7.2% 20 7.2% 46 16.5%
EI~M~ 103 11.4% 138 15.~ 20 2.~ 12 1.3% ~3 69.9%
Middle ~ 7.~ ~ 12.9% 13 3.~ 12 2.~ 319 73.5%
* (All m~nts) High 19 4.~ 57 13.~ 17 4.1% 13 3.1% 308 74.4%
~1 Levels 1~ 8.~ 251 14.~ ~ 2.~ 37 2.1% 12~ 71.~
E~e~w ~5 29.2% 7~ 59.5% 91 7.7% 17 1.4% 26 2.2%
This sch~l ad~uately prepares Midme 182 29.5% 322 52.2% 67 10.9% 37 6.0% 9 1.5%
students for transition to the
wor~or~ or ~ntinuing eduction. High 174 29.7% 324 55.3% 46 7.8% 24 4.1% 18 3.1%
A, ~v~ 701 29.4% 1350 ~.6% 2~ 8.5% 78 3.3% 53 2.2%
TOTAL: E~W 4951 29.7% 88~ 53.3% 1174 7.0% 386 2.3% 1286 7.7%
* IntelM~ually G~ and S~cial Eduction Midd~ 1~2 20.1% 4558 49.8% 1102 12.0% 599 6.5% 1055 11.5%
"All Resonants" ~suEs am NOT in~ in High 1823 19.9% ~76 48.9% 897 9.8% 453 5.0% 1501 16.4%
the~f~ures. AIILevels 8616 24.6% 17920 51.2% 3173 9.1% 1438 4.1% 3~2 11.0%
Parent Responses to Questions from 1999-2000 Parent Survey, continued
N = The number of people who responded.
% = The percentage of people who responded.
CORRELATE: FREQUENT MONITORING OF STUDENT PROGRESS
Stron.~lv Aeree Aflree Disagree Stronc~lv Disa.qree Don't Know
QUESTIONS N % N % N % N % N %
iElementary 521 44.0% 518 43.8% 104 8.8% 34 2.9% 6 0.5%
My child(ren)'s teacher keeps me IMiddle 75 12.4% 283 46.6% 171 28.2% 72 11.9% 6 1.0%
informed. High 70 11.9% 235 39.8% 192 32.5% 78 13.2% 15 2.5%
:All Levels 666 28.0% 1036 43.5% 467 19.6% 184 7.7% 27 1.1%
;Elementary 415 35.2% 558 47.4% 99 8.4% 26 2.2% 80 6.8°/{
The teacher explains to my child(ten Middle 95 15.5% 318 51.8% 113 18.4% 43 7.0% 45 7.3%
how he/she is doing. High 86 14.5% 316 53.3% 93 15.7% 42 7.1% 56 9.4%
AIILevels 596 25.0% 1192 50.0% 305 12.8% 111 4.7% 181 7.6%
My child(ren)'s report card and interim Elementary 440 37.0% 608 51.1% 106 8.9% 29 2.4°~ 6 0.5%
reports provide useful and Middle 155 24.9% 368 59.2% 65 10.5% 33 5.3% 1 0.2%
understandable information in a timely High 128 21.3% 366 60.9% 69 11.5% 37 6.2% 1 0.2%
manner. A. Levels 723 30.0% 1342 55.6% 240 10.0% 99 4.1% 8 0.3%
Elementary 1376 38.8% 1684 47.4% 309i 8.7% 89 2.5% 92 2.6%
TOTAL: Middle 325 17.6% 969 52.6% 349~ 18.9% 148 8.0% 52 2.8%
High 284 15.9% 917 51.4% 354 19.8% 157 8.8% 72 4.0%
All Levels 1985 27.7% 3570 49.7% 1012 14.1% 394 5.5% 216 3.0%
Parent Responses to Questions from 1999-2000 Parent Survey, continued
N = The number of people who responded.
% = The percentage of people who responded.
CORRELATE: SAFE AND ORDERLY ENVIRONMENT
Stronalv Aaree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Don~ Know
QUESTIONS N % N % N % N % N
Elementary 648 54.2% 517 43.3% 19 1.6% 5 0.4% 6 0.5%
Middle 161 25.7% 370 59.0% 64 10.2% 18 2.9% 14 2.2%
My child(ren) feels safe at this school. High 109 18.2% 373 62.3% 76 12.7% 26 4.3% 15 2.5%
All Levels 918 37.9%! 1260 52.0% 159 6.6% 49 2.0% 35 1.4%
Elementary 627: 52.7% 535 45.0% 23 1.9% 5 0.4% 0 0.0%
The school building and grounds are Middle 218 34.5% 376 59.5% 31, 4.9% 5 0.8% 2 0.3%
attractive and clean. High 190 31.5% 360~ 59.7% 38 6.3% 13 2.2% 2 0.3%
All Levels 1035 42.7% 1271 52.4% 92 3.8% 23 0.9% 4~ 0.2%
Elementary 322 27.1% 724 60.9%! 88 7.4% 16 1.3% 39 3.3%
Students behave respectfully at this Middle 55 8.8% 373 59.9% 102 16.4% 42 6.7% 51 8.2%
school. High 39 6.5% 317 52.7% 117 19.5% 44 7.3% 84 14.0%
All Levels 416 17.2% 1414 58.6% 307 12.7% 102 4.2% 174 7.2%
Elementary 317 26.6% 611 51.3% 100 8.4% 30 2.5% 134 11.2%
Discipline is consistent and fair at this Middle 77 12.3% 268 42.7% 110 17.5% 79 12.6% 93 14.8%
school. High 50 8.4% 262 43.9% 64 14.1% 60 10.1%= 141 23.6%
All Levels 444 18.4% 1141 47.2% 294 12.2% 169 7.0% 368 15.2%
Elementary 478 40.2% 643 54.1% 41 3.4% 12 1.0% 15 1.3%
Teachers and administrators show Middle 118 18.8% 336 53.6% 92 14.7% 48 7.7% 33 5.3%
respect toward students. High 87 14.5% 348 58.1% 75 12.5% 38 6.3% 51 8.5%
'Aii Levels 683 28.3% 1327 54.9°,/, 208 8.6% 98 4.1% 99 4.1%
Elementary 2392 40.2% 3030 50.9% 271 4.6% 68 1.1°,~ 194 3.3%
Middle 629 20.1% 1723 54.9% 399 12.7% 192 6.1% 193 6.2%
TOTAL: High 475 15.8% 1660 55.4% 390 13.0% 181 6.0% 293 9.8%
All Levels 3496 28.9% 6413 53.0% 1060 8.8% 441 3.6% 680 5.6%
Parent Responses to Questions from 1999-2000 Parent Survey, continued
N = The number of people who responded.
% = The percentage of people who responded.
CORRELATE: POSITIVE HOME-SCHOOL RELATIONS
Stronalv Aaree Agree Disaaree Stron;lv Disagree Don't Know
QUESTIONS N % N % N % N % N %
Teachers and school administrators Elementary 375~ 31.6% 667 56.2% 58 4.9% 19 1.6% 68 5.7%
listen to and welcome my ideas about Middle 72 11.5% 325 52.0% 116 18.6%i 45 7.2% 67 10.7%
how to improve my child's learning. High 46 7.7% 337 56.5~ 75 12.6% 44 7.4% 94 15.8%
All Levels 493 20.5% 1329 55.2% 249 10.3% 108 4.5% 229 9.5%
I believe parents, students, teachers, Elementary 445 37.6%I 608 51.3% 78 6.6% 15 1.3% 39 3.3%
and administrators work together to Middle 98 15.8% 324 52.3% 109 17.6% 53 8.5% 36 5.8%
resolve concerns in this school. High 95 16.0% 315 53.0% 76 12.8% 47 7.9% 61 10.3%
All Levels 638 26.6% 1247 52.0% 263 11.0% 115 4.8%' 136 5.7%
Elementary 231 19.9% 587 50.7% 225 19.4% 67 5.8% 48 4.1%
I participate in my school's PTO/A Middle 59 10.0% 259 43.8% 183 31.0% 67 11.3% 23 3.9%
activities. High 32 5.8% 171 30.9% 241 43.5% 70 12.6% 40 7.2%
All Levels 322 14.0% 1017 44.2% 649 28.2% 204 8.9% 111 4.8%
Elementary 1051 29.8% 1862 52.7% 361 10.2% 101 2.9% 155 4.4%
TOTAL: Middle 229 12.5% 908 49.5% 408 22.2% 165 9.0% 126 6.9%
High 173 9.9% 823 47.2% 392 22.5% 161 9.2B 195 11.2~
All Levels 1453 20.4% 3593 50.5% 1161 16.3% 427 6.0% 476
i
Stronalv Agree Aeree Disaaree Stronaly Disagree Don't Know
N % N % N % N % N %
Elementary 12022 33.7% 18158 50.9% 2507 7.0% 784 2.2% 2187 6.1%
OVERALL TOTAL: Middle 3680 19.3% 9609 50.3% 2713 14.2% 1332 7.0% 1761 9.2%
High 3427 18.4% 9322 50.0% 2378 12.7% 1104 5.9% 2430 13.0%
All Levels 19129 26.1% 37089 50.5°/, 7598 10.3% 3220 4;4% 6378 8.7%
Indicator: Participation in Continuing Education Programs
The number of continuing education classes has increased from 171 in 1996-97 to 225 in 1999-2000.
Similarly, the number of students participating in continuing education classes has increased from
1,743 in 1996-97 to a high of 2,292 in 1998-99 and declined slightly to 2,114 in 1999-2000.
I t996-97 1997-98 I 1998-99 1999-00
I
OPEN DOORS
# of Students 1,743 1,872 2,292 2,114
# of c~ass 171 182 209 225
CHARLOTTESVILLE-ALBEMARLE TECHNICAL EDUCATION CENTER
# of Students
Adult Education 475 886 1,212 1,500
Apprenticeships 217 217 199 237
Customized Business Training 395 179 301 194
COMMUNITY RELATIONS B- 127
Indicator: School-Business-Community Partnerships, 1999-2000
The Charlottesville-Albemarle School-Business Alliance (CASBA) is a joint venture of the
Charlottesville-Albemarle Chamber of Commerce, the Albemarle County Public Schools, the
Charlottesville Public Schools, Piedmont Virginia Community College, government officials, and
community members. It was formed to coordinate business, government, and community
resources with schools to enhance the education of students. CASB^'s future projects include:
area Career Day activities for middle and high school students, work-based learning projects such
as job shadowing and internships for staff and students, a speaker's bureau, as well as recruitment
of businesses to work with schools. Career Day for seventh-graders was a success with 1,550
students and 83 presenters from business and industry. Career Day for 10th -graders was a
success with 1,263 students and 125 presenters from business and industry. The job fair was
attended by 83 students, and 33 employers were represented.
Charlottesville-Albemarle School Business Alliance (CASBA)
PROJECTS PARTICIPANTS
Career Day for Seventh-Graders 1,550 students attended
83 presenters from business & industry participated
Career Day for lOt~-Graders
1,263 students attended
125 presenters from business & industry participated
Job Fair
83 students and parents participated
33 employers from business & industry participated
Educators in Business and Industry Program
Career Forum
31 businesses participated
45 educators participated
110 participants
11 business and industry participants
3 underwriters
B- 128 COMMUNITY RELATIONS
AWARDS
ACADEMICS
ATHLETICS
COMMUNITY
FINE ARTS
STAFF
Indicator: Academic Awards and Special Recognitions, 1999-2000
National
· College of William and Mary James Monroe Scholars (3)
· Cornell University John McMullen Dean's Scholar (1)
· Johns Hopkins University Talent Search: Placed with Distinction (2)
· National Latin Exam: Most Outstanding (1)
Medal of Excellence (1)
Gold Medal (11)
Silver Medal (22)
· Roanoke College Honors Program (1)
· United States Marine Corps Scholastic Excellence Award (1)
· Virginia Commonwealth University Honors Program (1)
State
· American Association of French Teachers'
La Grand Concours State Competition:
First place (3)
Second place (1)
Third place (3)
Environthon State Competition: First place team (1)
Knowledge Masters State Competition: Third place team (1)
National History Day State Competition: First place team (1)
Rec~ional
· 24 Challenge Regional Competition: Second place (1)
· Charlottesville-Albemarle School-Business Alliance Portfolio Award (2)
· Daughters of the American Revolution Citizenship Award (1)
· District Leadership Conference: First place (4)
Second place (3)
Third place (7)
· Future Business Leaders of America Regional Competition:
First place (3)
Second place (5)
Third place (1)
· MathCounts Regional Competition: First place (1)
Third place team (1)
· National History Day Regional Competition: First place team (1)
Second place team (1)
· Piedmont Regional Science Fair: First place (2)
Second place (1)
· Virginia Math League Regional Contest: First place (4)
Second place (5)
Third place (4)
First place team (1)
AWARDS - ACADEMICS Appendix - 2
Indicator: Athletic Awards and Special Recognitions, 1999-2000
INDIVIDUAL ACHIEVEMENTS:
State Champions All Regional
· Golf (1) · Baseball (5)
· Track, boys (5) , Basketball, boys (2)
· Track, girls (1) · Cross-Country, boys (4)
· Wrestling (1) · Cross-Country, girls (2)
· Field Hockey (6)
All State
· Football (5)
· Baseball (1)
· Golf (2)
· Cross-Country, boys (4)
· Soccer, boys (8)
· Cross-Country, girls (2)
· Soccer, girls (5)
· Golf (1)
· Softball (1)
· Track, boys (15)
· Track, boys (16)
· Track, girls (6)
· Track, girls (10)
· Volleyball (2)
· Volleyball (4)
· Wrestling (1)
· Wrestling (1)
OTHER:
U.S. Marine Corps
· Distinguished Athlete (1)
U.S. National Disability
· Swim Team Member (1)
District Awards
· Runner of the Year:
Cross-Country, boys (1)
· Player of the Year:
Volleyball (1)
All District
· Baseball (15)
· Basketball, boys (5)
· Basketball, girls (7)
· Cross-Country, boys (7)
· Cross-Country, girls (6)
· Field Hockey (9)
· Football (19)
· Golf (7)
· Soccer, boys (16)
· Soccer, girls (23)
· Softball (10)
· Tennis, boys (2)
· Tennis, girls (2)
· Track, boys (24)
· Track, girls (23)
· Volleyball (11)
· Wrestling (9)
Women In Sports Awards
· Player of the Year:
Basketball, girls (1)
Appendix - 3 AWARDS - ATHLETICS
Indicator: Athletic Awards and Special Recognitions, continued
TEAM/INDIVIDUAL PLACEMENTS:
State
Cross-Country, boys: First place (1)
Cross-Country, girls: Second place (1)
· Golf: Second place (1), Third place (1)
· Lacrosse, boys: Second place (1)
· Lacrosse, girls: Second place (1)
Track, boys: First place (4), Second place (1)
· Track, girls: First place (1)
· Volleyball: Second place (1)
Wrestling: First place (1)
Reftional
· Baseball: First place (1)
· Cross-Country, boys: First place (1)
· Cross-Country, girls: Second place (1)
· Golf: First place (1), Second place (1)
· Lacrosse, boys: First place (1)
· Lacrosse, girls: First place (1)
· Soccer, boys: Second place (1)
· TraCk, boys: First place (4), Second place (2)
,, Track, girls: First place (1)
· Volleyball: First place (1)
· Wrestling: First place (1)
District
· Baseball: First place (1),
Second place (1)
· Basketball, boys: Second place (2)
· Basketball, girls: Second place (1),
Third place (1)
· Cross-Country, boys: First place (2)
· Cross-Country, girls: First place (1),
Second place (1)
· Football: Third place (1)
· Golf: First place (2), Second place (1)
· Lacrosse, boys: First place (1)
· Lacrosse, girls: First place (1),
Second place (1)
· Soccer, boys: First place (1),
Third place (1)
· Soccer, gids: First place (1),
Second place (1), Third place (1)
· Softball: Second place (1),
Third place (1)
· Tennis, boys: First place (1),
Second place (1)
· Tennis, girls: First place (1),
Second place (1)
· Track, boys: First place (4),
Second place (2), Third place (1)
· Track, girls: First place (1), ~ Second place (2)
· Volleyball: First place (2)
· Wrestling: First place (2)
AWARDS - ATHLETICS Appendix - 4
Indicator: Community Awards and Special Recognitions, 1999-2000
National
· Boy Scouts of America Eagle Scout (1)
,. Harry F. Byrd Leadership Award (1)
· Ruritan National Foundation Grant (1)
· Scholastic News Letter to the President Contest Winner (1)
State
· Boy's State Representative (2)
· Girl's State Representative (2)
· Virginia Governor's Office Real Virginia Academic and Humanitarian Award (1)
Recfional
· Albemarle County Rotary:
Citizenship (1)
Leadership (2)
,. Charlottesville-Albemarle Community Foundation: Citizenship (1)
· Daughters of the American Revolution: Amedcan History (6)
Citizenship (4)
Patriotism (3)
· Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc.: Outstanding Black Students (2)
· Eta Phi Omega chapter, Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Inc.: Citizenship (2)
Mclntire Medal (1)
Appendix - 5 AWARDS - COMMUNITY
Indicator: Fine Arts Awards and Special ReCognitions, 1999-2000
National
· 1999 John Lennon Song Writing Contest in Folk Music:
· Chantilly Jazz Festival: Superior Rating (1)
Ali-Star Band, First Chair (2)
, King's Dominion Music Festival:
North American Music Festival:
Grand Prize (1)
Superior Rating (2)
First Chair (1)
First place (5), Second place (1)
Superior Rating (3)
· Tri-M National Music Honor Society (19)
· U.S. Marine Corps Semper Fidelia Music Award (1)
State
Ali-Virginia Chorus (12)
· College of William and Mary's Talent Search for Promising Student Authors:
· Richmond-Times Dispatch/Target's "Hopes" Essay Contest: First place (1)
·
Third place (1)
Virginia High School League Winter One-Act Play Competition: Best Actor (1)
Virginia Theater Association Fall Conference Competition: Best (1)
Reaional
· Ali-Region Chorus (19)
· Bayly Art Museum Writer's Eye Contest:
First place (1)
Second place (1)
Third place (1)
· Central Virginia Watercolor Guild Award (2)
· Charlottesville Omni's Annual Holiday Art Card Contest winners (5)
· Festival of the Book Poster Contest: Second Place (1)
· McGuffey Art Center Showing: Excellent (1)
· Piedmont Council for the Arts: Rising Star (1)
Outstanding Performance (1)
· Second Street Gallery' Holiday Happiness Poster Contest: First place (1)
· Virginia High School League Winter Forensics Competition: Second place (3)
Third place (3)
· Virginia High School League Winter One-Act Play Competition: First place (1)
· Walton's Mountain Essay Contest: Grand Prize (1)
AWARDS - FINE ARTS Appendix - 6
Indicator: Staff Awards, Special Recognitions, and Publications, t999-2000
National
· Fulbright Memorial Fund fellowship (1)
· International Society for Technology Education - NETS Teachers Writing Team member (1)
· Strategies, A Journal for Physical and Sport Education: Article (1)
· Teaching the Nuts and Bolts of Physical Education: Textbook published
State
· Edgar and Eleanor Shannon Foundation's Excellence in Public Education Award (12)
Reoional
· Albemarle County Rotary: Teacher Leadership Award (1)
· District Coach of the Year (7)
· Martin Luther King, Jr. Community Service Award (1)
· Phi Delta Kappa: Outstanding Educator in Central Virginia Award (1)
Outstanding First-Year Teacher (1)
· Region Coach of the Year (2)
· The Daily Progress' Paintings from the Piedmont Show (8)
Appendix - 7 AWARDS - STAFF
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLANNING
PROCESS AND INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL DATA
(SCHOOL PROFILES)
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
MIDDLE SCHOOLS
HIGH SCHOOLS
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
AGNOR-HURT
BROADU$ WOOD
BROWNSVILLE
CALE
CROZET
GREER
HOLLYMEAD
MERIWETHER LEWIS
MURRAY
RED HILL
$COTTSVlLLE
,STONE-ROBIN,SON
STONY POINT
WOODBROOK
YANCEY
Agnor-Hurt Elementary School
1999-2000 School Profile
School Characteristics
Representative areas and communities include: Airport
Road, Airport Acres, Berkley, Brookmill, Cedar Hill,
Crenshaw, Deerwood, Dunlora, Four Seasons,
Greenfields, Minor Ridge, Northfield, Pen Park,
Raintree, Rio Heights, River Run, Stonehenge,
Townwood, Triangle, Village Square, and ~V~ildwood.
Facilities include a library, cafeteria, and gymnasium. The
school play areas, Little League field, and soccer fields
serve as a community park after school hours.
Average Class Size
9~ooI 16.4 I 22.0 I 21.0 24.3 22.8 20.3
Year Occupied 1992
Program Capacity (1999-2000) 562
Student Enrollment (1999-2000) 561
Average Daily Attendance (1999-2000) 96.3%
Mobility Index (1999-2000) 16.39%
Portable Classrooms (1999-2000) 2
Before/After School Program NO/YES
Title I School YES
District Rio
Setting Urban
Site Size 20 acres
Middle School the Students Will Burley or
Attend Sutheriand
High School the Students Will Attend Albemarle
Staff Characteristics
FULL- &
PART-TIME
STAFF
TOTAL
GENDER
ETHNICITY
MALE
WHITE OTHER
2 0
45 3
14 4
61 7
FEMALE
Administrative 2 1 1
Teacher 48 5 43
TeacheFsAssi~. 18 I 17
Totals 68 7 61
Average % with
Years of Graduate
Experience Degree
Student Characteristics
Ethnicity
Free/Reduced Lunch
Special Education
25.0% Yes 75.0% No
Other 10.7% Yes 89.3% No
3.4%
Identified Gifted ~
4.8% Yes 95.2% No
Student Performance Measures A nor-Hurt Elementar
*None or Too Few to Report. ** Data Not Available. 1~ Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Catego#es upon Request.
Grade 3 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNIClTY/' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
White Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98*98 99-00 ig7-98 98-99 ~ 97-98 98-99 99-430 97-98 9~.99 99-00 97-99 9~-99 g9-00 97-98 98-9~ 99-00 97-9898-99 ~cj--00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00
Reading& 51.2 61.6 63.5 59.1 65.4 67.5 55 61 61 61.8 66.2 71.0 22.2 55.3 39.1 42.9 60.9 62.3 56.9 62.5 65.1 23.1 28.6 29.4 63.4 67.6 71.8
Writing
Math 50.0 66.3 75.0 63.1 68.5 77.8 63 68 71 58.2 73.8 81.2 25.9 33.3 52.2 45.7 69.6 73.6 52.9 62.5 76.7 23.0 42.9 35.3 61.7 70.4 83.3
History 40.7 64.0 70.8 51.7 65.9 69.6 49 62 65 54.5 69.2 79.7 7.4 46.7 43.5 37.1 67.4 73.6 43.1 60.0 67.4 7.7 28.6 35.3 55.0 70.5 79.5
Science 53.5 68.6 77.1 69.2 74.9 80.1 63 68 73 63.6 76.9 64.1 25.9 33.3 52.2 45.7 67.4 79.2 58.8 70.0 74.4 15.4 42.9 47.1 70.0 73.2 83.3
%Taking 96.6 100 99.0 99.1 99.3 96.7 97 97 **
Grade 5 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY/' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
White Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-~8 98-99 99-00 97-98 ~8-99 9~00 97-g8 98,-99 ~ 97-98 g~-99 99-00 97-9898-99 99-00 97-98 99-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00
Reading 66.3 71.1 67.9 70.8 77.3 76.0 68 69 68 68.3 77.8 72.5 55.6 56.3 54.2 62.5 75.0 67.7 69.6 '65.6 68.0 27.8 62.5 45.5 77.7 73.4 76.8
Writing 55.8 77.6 75.3 67.1 86.7 85.8 65 81 81 65.0 85.2 81.1 16.7 56.3 60.0 47.5 77.3 63.6 63.0 78.1 83.3 5.6 68.8 60.9 70.1 79.6 81.01
Math 37.2 44.7 61.5 46.3 55.6 70.6 47 51 83 !45.0 55.6 76.5 5.8 18.8 i25.0 37.5 43.2 61.3 37.0 46.9 61.7 5.6 18.8 31.8 46.3 51.7 73.2
History 16.3 47.4 52.6 29.5 67.7 59.7 33 46 51 16.7 57.4 80.8 5.6 12.5 29.2 17.5 54.5 54.8 15.2 37.5 51.1 5.6 18.8 31.8 19.34 55.0 60.7
Science 54.1 73.7 67.9 65.0 76.9 74.5 59 67 64 63.3 79.6 80.4 17.6 ,50.0 37.5 52.5 79.5 77.4 55.6 65.6 61.7 11.8 56.3 40.9 65.7 78.4 78.6
Computer 75.3 80.3 89.7 79.8 88.5 93.1 72 81 85 76.7 88.9 92.2 70.6 56.3 83.3 70.0 81.8 87.1 80.0 78.1 91.5 35.3 62.5 72.7 86.6 85.0 96.4
7ech.
%Taking 98.9 98.7 98.7 98.8 98.4 97.0 97 96 **
Student Performance Measares
*None or Too Few to Report. ** Data Not Available.
t Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Categories upon Request
Grade 2 - Individual Reading Assessment- Percentage of students scoring at each grade level.
Grade SCHOOL
Level SCHOOL COUNTY ETHNICITY/' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
Equiva- W'nite Black Male Female Yes No
lence
First 19.6 14.3 13.4 12,9 18.3 11.3 22.7 23.8 13,2 12.0 20.5 17.6 38.9 34.8 15,2 6.6
Kindergarten 2.1 1.2 4.5 4.1 1.4 0 4.5 4,8 1.9 0 2.3 2.9 5.6 4.3 1.3 0
Grade 4 - Stanford 9 Achievement Tests - Average National Percentile Rank
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY/~ GENDER
White Black Male Female
Reading 53 49 64 62 50 52 63 56 30 23 48 49 57 49
Math 47 45 63 61 53 57 55 51 27 23 45 47 49 44
Language 54 52 63 62 54 57 61 58 33 29 41 53 63 51
Battery 52 48 63 61 53 56 60 54 32 26 47 48 55 47
% Taking 100 100 96 97 96 96
Quartile Distribution for Battery
Percent of students scoring in each
percentile range.
76-99%ile 1-25%ile
51-75%ile
C-5
1999-2000 Parent Survey A nor-Hurt Elementar
Response Rate: 24.0% of households · Agree/Strongly Agree
[3 Don't Know
Effective Schools Correlates (Refer to Glossary) · Disagree/Strongly Disagree
A Climate of High Expectation for Success for all Students:
20.1%
77.9% 2.0%
Strong Instructional Leadership:
83.0% 7.7%
The Opportunity to Learn and Adequate Time Spent on Academic Tasks:
81.8% 7.4%
13.8%
84.2% 2.0%
Safe and Orderl Environment:
10.2%
87.8% 2.0%
Positive Home-School Relations:
13.7%
79.1% 7.2%
School Highlights
As a result of the recommendations made by the Albemarle County Literacy Task Force, the
Agnor-Hurt faculty and School Improvement Team launched a literacy plan for the 1999-2000
school year. The focus was on grades K - 2.
Dudng the 1999-2000 school year, reading test scores improved from 27 percent of students
reading below grade level to seven percent between kindergarten to first grade. At the same
time, the first grade to second grade class scores went from 34 percent of students reading
below grade level to 13 percent. Of the 11 students still below grade level, none were students
who had experienced the Bright Stars Program as 4-year olds.
In the spring of 2000, a grant was written and accepted by the State Farm Insurance Company
to fund a mobile classroom to be used in targeted areas of the community to assist students in
completing homework assignments four nights a week, Monday through Thursday. The School
Board decided to provide a school bus, State Farm will support the project with materials and
salaries for teachers, the teacher will provide the energy and inspiration, and the students will
complete their assignments. This project will begin in the fall of 2000.
Agnor-Hurt initiated its first year of the Character Counts program with many positive results.
The students are reminded daily of the importance of the six pillars contained in the program
and respond by working hard to be recognized for being responsible, caring, trustworthy,
respectful, fair, and especially a good citizen.
Broadus Ele htary SChool
1999- 2000 School Profile
School Characteristics
Representative areas and communities include: Advance
Mills, Boonesville, Earlysville, Nortonsville, Forest
Springs, Templeton Acres, and the Chris Greene Lake
Road area. Facilities include a library, cafeteria, and
gymnasium. The school play area, softball field, exercise
track, and soccer field serve as a community park after
school hours.
Average ClasS Size
Grade: ] K 1 2 $ { 4
go-goI 21.0 121.0 122.0 123.0 121.0 I lg.o
Staff Characteristics
Year Occupied 1935
Program Capacity (1999-2000) 375
Student Enrollment (1999-2000) 449
Average Daily Attendance (1999-2000) 90.5%
Mobility Index (1999-2000) 7,70%
Portable Classrooms (1999-2000) 4
Before/After School Program YES/YES
Title I School NO
District White Hall
Setting Rural
Site Size 12 acres
Middle School the Students Will
Attend Jouett
High School the Students Will Attend Albemarle
FULL- &
PART-TIME
STAFF
Administrative
Teacher
Teacher's Assist.
Totals
TOTAL
1
20
ETHNICITY
WHITE OTHER
I 0
33 3
14 6
48 9
GENDER
MALE FEMALE
0 1
2 34
0 20
2 55
Student Characteristics
Average
Years of
Experience
17
% with
Graduate
Degree
42
EthniCity
Other
.9%
Black
3.3%
Free/Reduced Lunch
10.4% Yes 89.6% No
Special Education
12.1% Yes 87.9% No
Identified Gifted ~
12.0% Yes 88.0% No
C-7
Student Performance Measures Broadus Wood Elementary
*None or Too Few to Report. ** Data Not Available. ~ Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Categories upon Request.
Grade 3 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY/~ GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
VVhite Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 9900 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-9898-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 9900
Reading& 63.8 76.6 69.2 59.1 65,4 67.5 55 61 61 62.8 76.0 71.4 * * * 52.8 77.5 62.1 85.2 75.7 75,0 * * 20.0 67.6 77.1 73.3
Wr~ng
Math 68.8 80.8 82.8 63.1 68.5 77.8 63 68 71 69.2 80.3 83.9 * * * 60.4 82.9 78.6 85.2 78.4 86.1 * * 60.0 73.0 83,1 84.7
History 64.6 76.9 69.4 51.7 65.9 69.6 49 62 65 63.6 76.3 71.7 * * * 58.5 78.0 66.7 76.9 75.7 71.4 * * * 68.5 77.5 75.4
Science 76.3 85.9 91.9 69.2 74.9 80.1 63 68 73 76.9 85.5 91.7 * * * 69.8 87.8 92.6 88.9 83.8 91.4 * * 60,0 79.7 88.8 94.7
%Taking 100 98.7 97.3 99.1 99.3 96.7 97 97 **
Grade 5 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNIClTY/' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
White Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 9900 97-9898-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00
Reading 79.2 90.8 78.7 70.8 77.3 76.0 68 69 68 78.9 90.8 77.8 * * * 83.3 90.3 76.5 75.6 91.2 83.3 * * 50.0 80.6 96.6 83.6
Writing 79.2 90.8 85.1 67.1 86.7 85.8 65 81 81 80.3 90.8 84.5 * * * 75.0 87.5 82.0 82.9 93.9 91.7 * * 33.3 80.6 94.8 91.0
Math 55.8 86.2 73.3 46.3 55.6 70.6 47 51 63 56.6 86.2 75.0 * * * 69.4 87.1 76.5 43.9 85.3 66.7 * * 50.0 58.4 93.1 77.6
History 18.4 83.1 41.3 29,5 67.7 59.7 33 46 51 18.7 83.1 43.1 * * * 33.3 90.3 39.2 5.0 76.5 45.8 * * 33.3 18.3 88.0 43.3
Science 75.0 92.3 84.0 65.0 76.9 74.5 59 67 64 76.0 92.3 83.3 * * * 88.9 93.5 82.4 62.5 91.2 87.5 * * 50.0 76.0 94.8 89.6
Computer 83.1 95.4 92.0 79.8 88,5 93.1 72 81 '85 82.9 95.4 91.7 * * * 88.9 93.5 92.2 78.0 97.1 91.7 * * 66.7 83.4 98.3 95.5
Tech,
%Taking 98.7 100 100 98,8 98,4 97.0 97 96 **
Student Performance Measures
Broadus Wood Elementar
*None or Too Few to Report. ** Data Not Available.
1' Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Categories upon Request.
Grade 2 - Individual Reading Assessment- Percentage of students scodng at each grade level.
Grade SCHOOL
Level SCHOOL COUNTY ETHNICITY/' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
Equiva- White Black Male Female Yes No
lence
First 14.5 10.1 13.4 12,9 14.9 10.8 * * 8,6 11.3 8.8 8.3 * 18.2 12.7 9.0
Kindergarten 1,4 1.1 4.5 4.1 1.5 0 * * 0 0 0 2.8 * 9.1 0 0
Grade 4 - Stanford 9 Achievement Tests - Average National Percentile Rank
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNIClTY/' GENDER
White Black Male Female
Reading 68 63 64 62 50 52 67 65 * * 60 61 80 65
Math 63 68 63 61 53 57 63 69 * * 60 71 68 66
Language 62 64 63 62 54 57 62 65 * * 53 64 77 65
Battery 64 65 63 61 53 56 64 66 * * 59 65 73 65
% Taking 100 99 96 97 96 96
Quartile Distribution for Batterl~
Percent of students scoring in each
percentile range
76-99%ile
1-25%ile
26-50%ile
51-75%ile
1999-2000 Parent Survey Broadus Wood Elementar
Response Rate: 25.4% of households · Agree/Strongly Agree
E] Don't Know
Effective Schools Correlates (Refer to Glossary) · Disagree/Strongly Disagree
A Climate of High Expectation for Success for all Students:
7.3%
92.0% 0.6%
Strong Instructional Leadership:
11.8%
74.2% 13.9%
The Opportunity to Learn and Adequate Time Spent on Academic Tasks:
8.3%
84.4% 7.4%
Free uent Monitorin
of Student ress:
83.0% 1.7%
15.3%
Safe and Orderl Environment:
5.7%
89.9% 4.4%
Positive Home-School Relations:
13.5%
83.7% 2.9%
School Highlights
Broadus Wood's School Improvement Plan continued to focus on the writing and language
strands of the Standards of Learning. Fifth grade continued to score above 70 percent on
the Virginia Standards of Learning writing test. Fourth grade students showed improvement
on the Stanford language test, and the scores remained above the county and state
averages.
With the opening of Broadus Wood's technology lab, staff focused on implementing
technology across the curriculum. Both staff and students increased their awareness and
use of technology. Staff participated in in-service training. Grades completed units that
demonstrated technology skills pertinent to their students in grade level.
Safety awareness was recognized as having high importance during the 1999-2000 school
year. Safety procedures were written and implemented throughout the year. Programs
such as student council, safety patrol, and classroom guidance sessions focused on school
safety awareness activities.
C-10
Brownsville Elementary School
1999-2000 School Profile
School Characteristics
Representative areas and communities include:
Alton, Cory Farm, Greenwood, and Western Ridge.
Facilities include a library, cafeteria, and gymnasium.
The school play areas and multi-purpose fields serve
as a community park after school hours.
Average Class Size
99-00122.0I 20.0 120.01 19.0 i 19.0 1 ~9.0
Staff Characteristics
Year Occupied 1966
Program Capacity (1999-2000) 285
Student Enrollment (1999-2000) 277
Average Daily Attendance (1999-2000) 96.0%
Mobility Index (1999-2000) 21.13%
Portable Classrooms (1999-2000) 1
Before/After School Program NO/YES
Title I School YES
District White Hall
Setting Rural
Site Size 20 acres
Middle School the Students Will Attend Henley
Western
High School the Students Will Attend Albemarle
FULL- &
PART-TIME
STAFF
TOTAL
GENDER
ETHNICITY
MALE
WHITE OTHER
I 0
22 2
13 1
36 3
FEMALE
AdminiStrative I I 0
Teacher 24 2 22
Teacher's Assist. 14 0 14
Totals 39 3 36
Average
Years of
Experience
% with
Graduate
Degree
20 60
Student Characteristics
Free/Reduced Lunch [
Ethnicity 28.8% Yes 71.2% No
Other
4.3%
Special Education
Black 16.2% Yes 83.8% No
6.1%
Identified Gifted ~
8.3% Yes 91.7% No
C-11
Student Performance Measures Brownsville Elementary
*None or Too Few to Report. ** Data Not Available. ? Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Categodes upon Request.
Grade 3 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNIClTY t GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
White Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 99-00 197-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-9~ 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-(X3 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00
Reading &
W~ng 57.1 53.7 67.2 59.1 65.4 67.5 55 61 61 58.8 59.2 71.2 * * * 54.2 50.0 56.0 63.6 56.7 76.7 * 15.4 45.5 65.3 66.6 72.7
Math 57.1 63.0 69.6 63.1 68.5 77.8 63 68 71 58.8 67.3 73.6 * * * 66.7 70.8 60.0 36.4 56.7 77.4 * 38.5 36.4 73.1 69.2 77.8
History 45.7 66.0 71.4 51.7 65.9 69.6 49 62 65 47.1 72.9 73.6 * * * 50.0 66.7 68.0 36.4 65.5 74.2 * 30.8 45.5 61.5 77.0 77.8
Science 57.1 54.8 73.2 69.2 74.9 80.1 63 68 73 58,8 69.4 77.4 * * * 66.7 66.7 72.0 36.4 63.3 74.2 * 30.8 45.5 69.2 76.9 80.0
%Taking 97.9 98.2 97.8 99.1 99.3 96.7 97 97 **
Grade 5 - Standards of Learning Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNIClTY/' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
White Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 9899 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-.00 97-98 98-99 9900 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 9899 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00
Reading 63.5 65.2 73.0 70.8 77.3 76.0 68 69 68 66.7 67.4 75.0 * * * 60.0 47.6 73.9 66,7 80.0 71.4 16.7 16.6 * 79.5 82,4 79.4
Writing 44.2 73.3 78.9 67.1 86.7 85.8 65 81 81 46.7 75.6 81.1 * * * 32.0 52.4 73,9 55.6 91,7 86.7 8.3 25,0 33.3 56.4 87.8 82.9
Math 28.8 43.5 64.9 46.3 55.6 70.6 47 51 63 31.1 44.2 66.7 * * * 28.0 42.9 65.2 29.6 44.0 54.3 0 16,7 * 38.5 52.9 70.6
History 26.9 55.6 56.8 29.5 67.7 59.7 33 46 51 28.9 59.5 58.3 * * * 32.0 42.9 56.5 22.2 66.7 57.1 8.3 25.0 33.3 33.3 54.7 58.8
Science 57.7 77.3 75.7 65.0 76.9 74.5 59 67 64 62.2 78.0 77.8 * * * 60.0 75.0 82.6 55.6 79.2 64.3 25.0 45.5 33.3 69.2 85.3 79.4
Computer
~ Tech. 61.5 80.4 91.9 79.8 88.5 93.1 72 81 85 64.4 79.1 91.7 * * * 52,0 66.7 87,0! 70.4 92.0 100 25.0 41.7 66.7 74.3 91.2 94.1
%Taking 98.1 97.9 94.9 98.8 98.4 97.0 97 96 **
Student Performance Meas .r s
Brownsville Elementar
*None or Too Few to Report. ** Data Not Available.
~ Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Categories upon Request.
Grade 2 - Individual Reading Assessment- Percentage of students scoring at each grade level.
Grade SCHOOL
Level SCHOOL COUNTY ETHNIClTY ~' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
Equiva- White Black Male Female Yes No
lence
First 15.7 20.0 13.4 12.9 16.3 18.9 * * 13.0 21.4 17.9 19.2 * 27.3 14.0 17.2
Kindergarten 3.9 0 4.5 4.1 4.1 0 * * 8.7 0 0 0 * 0 2.3 0
Grade 4 - Stanford 9 Achievement Tests - Average National Percentile Rank
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY/' GENDER
White Black Male Female
Reading 63 48 64 62 50 52 63 52 · , 64 41 62 64
Math 60 55 63 61 53 57 60 58 * * 60 58 58 52
Language 58 57 63 62 54 57 58 60 * * 63 51 48 63
Battery 60 54 63 61 53 56 60 58 * * 61 53 57 56
% Taking 100 98 96 97 96 96
Quartile Distribution for Batter~_
Percent of students scoring in each
percentile range
76-99%ile 1-25%ile
51-75%ile
26-50%ile
C-13
1999-2000 Parent Survey Brownsville Eiementar
Response Rate: 30.4% of households El Agree/Strongly Agree
E:] Don't Know
Effective Schools Correlates (Refer to Glossary) · Disagree/Strongly Disagree
A Climate of High Expectation for Success for all Students:
17.7%
81.5% 0.8%
Strong InstruCtional Leadership:
11.3%
79.4% 9.2%
The Opportunity to Learn and Adequate Time Spent on Academic Tasks:
7.2%
86.6% 6.2%
87.7% 0.5%
Safe and Orderl Environment:
87.7% 2.6%
11.7%
9.7%
78.2% 4.4%
17.5%
School Highl
Brownsville School provides a caring and safe environment. All students are encouraged and guided as they
acquire the knowledge, skills, confidence, and vision to become productive, informed, responsible, and
compassionate members of school and society. -~.
Our community concentrated on three areas of school improvement during the 1999-2000 school year:
· Increase to 90 percent the number of students reading on or above grade level by the spring of 2001;
· Significantly improve the computer skills of students and teachers; and
· Promote a school environment in which people feel secure, appreciate diversity, and demonstrate
compassion for others.
Each of these objectives was directly related to goals established by the Albemarle County School Board.
School improvement activities included a three-week summer school program, literacy and computer workshops
for teachers, "Book Buddies," after school tutoring, and extensive use of the Cornerstone Math program.
Our accomplishments for the year include:
· The percentage of students passing the third- and fifth-grade SOL tests increased significantly on nine of the
10 tests.
· Eighty percent of Brownsville second graders were assessed as reading on or above grade level on the
Qualitative Reading Inventory.
· A new iMac lab became fully operational and all students were scheduled for technology lessons each week.
· Every Brownsville student was publicly recognized for performing an Act of Kindness during the school year.
School improvement objectives for 2000-01 will continue to focus on literacy, technology, and school climate.
An important initiative is the implementation of the Character Counts program.
C-14
Paul H. CaleElementary SChool
1999-2000 School Profile
School Characteristics
Representative areas and communities include: Country
Green, Marshall Manor, Oak Hill, Lake Reynovia,
Redfields, Mill Creek, Lakeside, Sherwood ManOr,
Southwood, ~/illow Lake, and ~X/illOughby. Facilities
include a library, cafeteria, and gymnasium. The school
play areas and multi-purpose fields serve as a community
park after school hours.
Average Class Size
Grade:] K I 1 213 4 5
99-001 46.3 I 19.5 I 2z0 I 22.0 1 23.0 I 2~.3
Staff Characteristics
Year Occupied 1990
Program Capacity (1999-2000) 432
Student Enrollment (1999-2000) 602
Average Daily Attendance (1999-2000) 95.6%
Mobility Index (1999-2000) 28.35%
Portable Classrooms (1999-2000) 5
Before/After School Program NO/YES
Title I School YES
District Scottsville
Setting Suburban
Site Size 16 acres
Middle School the Students Will Burley or
Attend Walton
High School the Students Will Attend Monticello
FULL- &
PART-TIME
STAFF
TOTAL
GENDER
ETHNICITY
MALE
WHITE OTHER
1 1
41 8
18 0
60 9
FEMALE
Administrative 2 I 1
Teacher 49 3 46
Teacher's Assist. 18 1 17
Totals 69 5 64
Average
Years of
Experience
% with
Graduate
Degree
9 48
Student Characteristics
Free/Reduced Lunch
Ethnicity
Other
8.5%
Special Education
36.3% Yes 63.7% No
15.3% Yes 84.7% No
Black
23.4%
Identified Gifted ~
12.1% Yes 87.9% No
C-15
Student Performance Measures Paul H. Cale Elementary
*None or Too Few to Report. *' Data Not Available. 1' Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Catego#es upon Request.
Grade 3 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
~ SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNIClTY/' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
White Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 9900 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 9~-99 9900 97-98 98-99 9900
Reading &
53.8 63,7 57.1 59.1 65.4 67.5i 55 61 61 58,6 67.6 64.9 36.8 44.4 31.6 56.4 59.5 56.4 51.2 67.3 58.1 20.7 42.1 26.9 77.1 78.2 68.1
Wdting
Malh 60.5 59.3 58.6 63.1 68.5 77.8 63 68 71 70,7 66.2 70.3 35.0 33.3 21.1 64.1 54.8 60.7 57.1 63.3 55.8 36.6 34.2 29.6 79.2 74.5 69.4
History 51.9 53.8 56,0 51.7 65.9 69.6 49 62 65 58.6 57.7 65.8 30.0 33.3 31.6 51.3 57.1 60.7 52.4 51.0 50.0 20.0 26.3 25.0 72.9 70.9 68.1
Science 69.1 63.7 65.0 69.2 74.9 80.1 63 68 73 75.9 69.0 71.1 50.0 38.9 47.4 74.4 61.9 66.1 64.3 65.3 63.6 43.3 34.2 28.6 85.5 81.8 79.2
% Taking 98.7 97.9 98.3 99.1 99.3 96.7 97 97 **
Grade 5 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNIClTY ~' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
White Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-9898-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00
Reading 58.5 74,6 73.5 70.8 77.3 76.0 68 69 68 56.9 82.6 80.9 54.5 56.5 50.0 60.7 73.7 72.4 56.8 75.8 74.4 50.0 50.0 45.0 60.8 86.9 85.4
Writing 61.5 81.2 79.7 67.1 86.7 85.8 65 81 81 66.7 91.1 83.7 27.3 59.1 66.7 46.4 78.4 78,6 73.0 64.4 80.6 57.1 56.5 63.2 62.7 93.5 86.7
Math 36.9 50.7 73.5 46.3 55.6 70.6 47 51 63 41.2 58.7 80.9 9,1 30,4 55.6 42.9 52.6 75.9 32.4 48.5 71.8 7.1 15.4 40.0 45.1 67.4 87.5
History 43.1 63.4 56.7 29.5 67.7 59,7 33 46 51 41.2 73.9 63.0 36.4 39.1 33.3 46.4 68.4 58.6 40.5 57.6 55.3 28.6 26.9 20.0 47.1 82.6 72.3
Science 50.8 70.4 72.1 65,0 76.9 74.5 59 67 64 55.0 87.0 82.6 27.3 34.8 50.0 50.0 68.4 79.3 51.4 72.7 66.7 28.6 34.6 47.6 56.8 89.1 83.0
Computer 70.8 64.5 91.2 79.8 88.5 93.1 72 81 85 72.5 95.7 93.5 64.5 60.9 83.3 67.9 81,6 89.7 73.0 87,9 92.3 57.1 61.5 76.2 74.5 93.5 97.9
Tech.
%Taking 98.5 98.6 96.6 98.8 98,4 97.0 97 96 **
Student Performance MeaSUV
Paul H. Cale Elementary
*None or Too Few to Report. ** Data Not Available.
1~ Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Catego#es upon Request.
Grade 2 - Individual Reading ~ssessment- Percentage of students scoring at each grade level.
Grade SCHOOL
Level SCHOOL COUNTY ETHNICITY '~ GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
Equiva- VVhite Black Male Female Yes No
lence
98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98:99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00
First 11.8 14.3 13:4 12.9 11.7 5.1 9.5 32.3 7.1 14.9 17.4 13.7 20,7 25,6 8.2 6.8
Kindergarten 7.8 7.1 4.5 4.1 3.9 5.1 23.8 9.7 8.9 6.4 6.5 7.8 13,8 12,8 5.5 3.4
Grade 4 - Stanford 9 Achievement Tests - Average National Percentile Rank
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY/' GENDER
White Black Male Female
98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00
Reading 57 51 64 62 50 52 70 55 37 41 60 52 55 50
Math 60 49 63 61 53 57 69 54 45 41 61 47 59 51
Language 59 54 63 62 54 57 67 60 43 40 58 51 60 57
Battery 58 51 63 61 53 56 67 55 43 41 59 50 57 51
% Taking 96 95 96 97 96 96
Quartile Distribution for Batter~
Percent of students scoring in each
pe[centile range.
76-99%ile 1-25%ile
,ile
C-17
1999-2000 Parent Survey Paul H. Cale Elementar~
Response Rate: 22.1% of households a Agree/Strongly Agree
I-1 Don't Know
Effective Schools Correlates (Refer to Glossary) · Disagree/Strongly Disagree
A Climate of High Expectation for Success for all Students:
7.7%
90.2% 2.1%
86.9% 10.4%
2.7%
7.2%
83.3% 9.5%
Frequent Monitoring of Student Progress:
6.9%
89.7% 3.5%
Safe and Orderl, Environment:
3.5%
91.3% 5.2%
85.4% 4.9%
9.7%
School Highlights
During the 1999-2000 school year, the following initiatives were implemented and achievements
made at Cale:
1. A Writing Laboratory was implemented.
2. A Primary Bookroom was established.
3. The Saturday Morning Academy was instituted.
4. Fifth-grade students made significant gains on the Standards of Learning mathematics tests.
5. A children's garden was developed.
C-18
CrOzet SchOol
1999-2000 School Profile
School Characteristics
Representative areas and communities include:
Brookwood, Crozet, Highlands, Jarmans Gap Estates,
and Orchard Acres. Facilities include a library,
cafeteria, and 8ymnasium. The school play area and
multi-purpose fields serve as a community park after
school hours.
Average Class Size
Grade: I K I 2 3 415
99-00121.6117.6 120.3122.3 8.0
Staff Characteristics
Year Occupied 1990
Program Capacity (1999-2000) 342
Student Enrollment (1999-2000) 350
Average Daily Attendance (1999-2000) 96,3%
Mobility Index (1999-2000) 11.18%
Portable Classrooms (1999-2000) 0
Before/After School Program NO/YES
Title I School YES
District White Hall
Setting Suburban
Site Size 21 acres
Middle School the Students Will
Attend Henley
High School the Students Will Attend Westem
Albemarle
FULL- & ETHNICITY GENDER Average I % with
PART-TIME Years of ~ Graduate
STAFF TOTAL WHITE OTHER MALE FEMALE
Experience I Degree
Administrative I 1 0 1 0 ~
Teacher 31 30 I 27 4
Teacher's Assist. 13 13 0 1 12
Totals 45 44 I 29 16
Student Characteristics
Free/Reduced Lunch [
Ethnicity 20.0% Yes 80.0% No
Other
Black
4.9%
Special Education 1
21.0% Yes
79.0% No
Identified Gifted ~
5.1% Yes 94.9% No
C-19
Student Performance Measures Crozet Elementary
*None or Too Few to Report. ** Data Not Available. ~ Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Categories upon Request.
Grade 3 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNtCITY/' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
White Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 9900 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00
Reading& 74.5 63.0 62.1 59,1 65.4 67.5 55 61 61 76.1 62.0 64.4 * * * 72.4 62.0 52.9 77.3 64.0 71.9 * 27.3 18.2 76.5 72.1 73.6
Writing
Math 78.4 i66.7 75.8 63.1 68.5 77.8 63 68 71 82.6 66.0 78.0 * * * 82.8 69,0 70.6 72,7 64.0 81.3 * 27.3 36.4 83.0 76.8 86.8
History 60.8 ~60.4 60.6 51.7 65.9 69.6 49 62 65 63.0 59,2 62.7 * * * 72.4 62.1 55.9 45.5 58.3 65.6 * 40.0 18.2 66,0 65.1 71.7
Science 76.5 75.5 71.2 69.2 74.9 80,1 63 68 73 78.3 75.5 74.6 * * * 79.3 79.3 64.7 72.7 70.8 78.1 * 40.0 18,2 80.8 83.7 64.9
%Taking 100 100 98.5 99.1 99.3 96.7 97 97 **
Grade 5 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY 1' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
AREA
White Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 994)0 97-98 98-99 99430 97-98 98-99 994)0 97-9898-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99430
Reading 67.2 66.7 75.5 70.8 77.3 76.0 68 69 68 71.2 67.9 79.1 * * * 62.5 44.8 77.8 71.4 89.3 72.7 43.8 40.0 40.0 74.5 73.9 85.4
Writing 65.7 77.6 86.0 67.1 86,7 85.8 65 81 81 71.2 78.2 88.6 * * * 59.4 60.7 81.5 71.4 92.9 91.3 37.6 45.5 60.0 74.5 83.3 90.9
Math 52.2 54.4 69.4 46.3 55.6 70.6 47 51 63 55.9 54.4 72.1 * * * 43.8 34.5 74.1 60.0 75.0 63.6 25.0 30.0 * 60.8 60.8 80.5
History 26.9 64.9 61.2 29.5 67.7 59.7 33 46 51 28.8 66.1 62.8 * * * 37.5 55.2 70.4 17.1 75.0 50.0 6.3 30.0 20.0 33.3 73.9 70.7
Science 62.7 64.9 73.5 65.0 76.9 74.5 59 67 64 67.8 66.1 76.7 * * * 62.5 58.6 77.8 62.9 71.4 68.2 37.5 40.0 60.0 70.5 71.7 82.9
Computer 73.1 86.0 85.7 79.8 88.5 93.1 72 81 85 78.0 87.5 90.7 * * * 71.9 75.9 92.6 74.3 96.4 77.31 50.0 60.0 * 80.4 93.4 92.7
%Taking 100 93.4 100 98.8 98.4 97.0 97 96 **
Student Performance Measures
Crozet Elementary
*None or Too Few to Report. ** Data Not Available.
~ Data Are AVailable for Other Racial/Ethnic Catego~es Upon Request.
Grade 2 - Individual Reading Assessment- Percentage of students scoring at each grade level.
Grade SCHOOL
Level SCHOOL COUNTY ETHNICITY/' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
Equiva- White Black Male Female Yes No
lence
98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00
First 15.3 13.1 13.4 12.9 16.4 10,7 * * 18.2 14.3 11.5 11.5 35.7 15.4 8.9 12.5
Kindergarten 5.1 3.3 4.5 4.1 5.5 3,6 * * 9,1 5.7 0 0 21.4 15.4 0 0
Grade 4 - Stanford 9 Achievement Tests - Average National Percentile Rank
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY/' GENDER
VVhite Black Male Female
98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99*00
Reading 70 64 64. 62 50 52 70 62 * * 74 68 66 60
Math 60 68 63 61 53 57 62 64 * * 71 71 48 65
Language 69 67 63 62 54 57 70 63 * * 74 66 63 69
Battery 65 66 63 61 53 56 65 64 * * 71 68 59 65
% Taking 100 95 96 97 96 96
Quartile Distribution for BatterT_
Percent of students scoring in each
percentile range.
76-99%ile
26-50%ile
51-75%ile
C-21
1999-2000 Parent Survey Crozet Elementar
Response Rate: 22.8% of households [ BAgreelStrongly Agree
Effective Schools Correlates (Refer to Glossary) I [3 Don't Know
· Disagree/Strongly Disagree
A Climate of High Expectation for Success for all Students:
10.3%
87.3% 2.4%
:ional Leadershi ):
79.8%
13.3%
6.9%
The O to arn and
uate Time S
on ACademic Tasks:
9.4%
83.7%
6.9%
uent Monitorin of Student Pro
Safe and
83.9%
Environment:
88.5%
Positive Home-School Relations:
4.3%
5.4%
11.9%
6.t%
13.4%
81.8% 4.8%
School Highlights
To promote literacy, Crozet School coordinated and worked with parents to support the
literacy objectives. ^ pro-school initiative was developed. This included a plan to locate
families, determine the services needed, and establish school contact with families prior to
students entering kindergarten. A Literacy Coordinator position was established for the
2000-01 school year.
The school focused on the SOL objectives and information, which allowed students to
become more familiar with materials and testing formats, leading to positive results.
Crozet School also continued its emphasis on The Positive Life Skills. This has led to an
increased positive climate in the school.
C-22
Mary C. ..... tary SChOOl
1999-2000 School Profile
School Characteristics
Representative areas and communities include:
Canterbury Hills, Colthurst Farms, Copeley Hill,
Georgetown Green, Hessian Hills, Hunter Creek, Ivy
Garden, Ivy Ridge, Linden Avenue Apartments, Old
Salem, Roslyn Ridge, Terrell, Trophy Chase, Turtle Creek,
~/estfield, and '~/hitewood Road. Facilities include a
library, cafeteria, and gymnasium. The school play area
and multi-purpose fields serve as a community park after
school hours.
Average Class Size
trade: I K , 2 3 4 J 5 J
99-001 '~9.8 22.~ 2'~.0 ~9.4 ~9.3 20.3I
Staff Characteristics
Year Occupied 1974
Program Capacity (1999-2000) 432
Student Enrollment (1999-2000) 509
Average Daily Attendance (1999-2000) 96.6%
Mobility Index (1999-2000) 32.32%
Portable Classrooms (1999-2000) 0
Before/After School Program NO/YES
Title I School YES
District Jack Jouett
Setting Urban
Site Size 15 acres
Middle School the Students Will
Attend Jouett
High School the Students Will Attend Albemarle
FULL- & ETHNICITY GENDER I Average I % with
PART-TIME I Years of ~ Graduate
STAFF TOTAL VVHITE OTHER MALE FEMALE
I Experience I Degree
Administrative 2 2 0 1 1 ~
Teacher 44 39 5 2 42 110156
Teacher's Assist. 21 20 1 0 21
Totals 67 61 6 3 64 ~
Student Characteristics
Free/Reduced Lunch [
Ethnicity 40.5% Yes 59.5% No
Special Education
12.2% Yes 87.8% No
Black
25.0%
Identified Gifted ~
7.9% Yes 92.1% No
C-23
Student Performance Measures
Mary C. Greer Elementary
*None or Too Few to Report.
** Data Not Available.
1' Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Categories upon Request.
Grade 3 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY ~' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
White Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99.00 97-98 98-99 99.00
Reading& 67,6 67.3 64.2 59.1 65.4 67.5 55 61 61 77.3 70.6 73.8 40.0 38.5 39.3 69.2 65.6 57.9 65.6 69.6 69.6 51.7 42.9 32.4 78.6 85.3 86.0
Writing
Math 64.8 76.4 72,3 63.1 68.5 77.8 63 68 71 79.5 79.4 85.4 25.0 53.8 46.4 69.2 81.3 62.2 59.4 69.6 80.4 41.3 52.1 45.5 81.8 91.7 90.0
History 54.9 69.1 56.6 51.7 65.9 69.6 49 62 65 70.5 76.5 65.9 20.0 38.5 32.1 59.0 75.0 54.1 50.0 60.9 58.7 27.6 28.6 30.3 71.4 94.2 74.0
Science 70.4 81.1 71.4 69.2 74.9 80.1 63 68 73 84.1 87.5 78.6 30.0 58,8 53.8 71.8 90.3 71.7 68.8 68.2 71.7 55.2 52.7 44.1 80.9 94.1 90.0
%Taking 98.6 100 85.2 99.1 99.3 96.7 97 97
Grade 5 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNIClTY/' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
AREA
White Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-~9 99-00 97-98 98-99 99~00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-9898-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00
Reading 71.7 77.6 64.4 70.8 77.3 76.0 68 69 68 81.8 83.0 76.3 52.6 50.0 36.8 70.4 77.8 56.3 72.7 77.4 70.7 65.2 53.0 38.5 78.1 85.7 78.3
Wri'dng 71.7 86.0 82.2 67.1 86.7 85.8 65 81 81 91,2 87.5 89.5 36.8 75.0 73.7 63.0 88.5 81.3 78.8 83.9 82.9 65.0 68.81 69.2 85.0 90.2 89.1
Math 46.7 44.8 52.9 46,3 55.6 70.6 47 51 63 60.6 48.9 62.2 15.8 20.0 29.4 40.7 40.7 50.0 51.5 48.4 55.3 24.0 23.5 13.0 65.1 50.0 71.7
History 28,3 72.4 48.6 29,5 67.7 59.7 33 46 51 36.4 78.7 59.0 10.5 40.0 26.3 25.9 77.8 45.5 30.3 67.7 51.2 13.0 47.1 7.7 34.1 80.9 70.2
Science 60.0 77,6 63.5 65.0 76.9 74.5 59 67 64 81,8 89.4 82.1 15.8 20.0 31.6 48.1 81.5 63.6 69.7 74.2 63.4 43.5 58.9 38.5 73.2 85.7 76.6
Computer 88.3 94.8 89.0 79.8 88.5 93.1 72 81 85 97.0 95.7 94.7 68.4 90.0 78.9 81.5 96.3 87.5 93.9 93.5 90.2 82.6 88.2 80.8 92.6 92.8 93.5
Tech.
%Taking 100 98,4 85.9 98.8 98.4 97.0 97 96 **
Student Performance Mea es
,i wary C. Greer Elementary
*None or Too Few to Report. ** Data Not Available.
~ Data Am Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Categodes upon Request.
Grade 2 - Individual Reading ~L~sessment- Percentage of students scoring at each grade level.
Grade SCHOOL
Level SCHOOL COUNTY ETHNICITY 1' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
Equiva- White Black Male Female Yes No
lence
98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00
i;}~: ~:i:i::6i1~::~i;6~;!~;:::~:2~:';~: 83.0 87.5 81.8 46.1 27.3 7~0'
First 15.6 29,9 13.4 12.9 12.5 12.1 30,8 50.0 14.0 28.6 17.4 31.4' 29.8 44.4 2.0 17.1
Kindergarten 8.3 9.1 4.5 4.1 0 6.1 23.1 22.7 12.0 14.3 4.3 2.9 14.9 13.9 2.0 4.9
Grade 4 - Stanford 9 Achievement' Tests - Average National Percentile Rank
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNIClTY )' GENDER
White Black Male Female
98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 9900 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00
Reading 66 71 64 62 50 52 78 74 32 54 61 64 69 77
Math 59 67 63 61 53 57 73 70 18 33 54 68 63 66
Language 60 70 63 62 54 57 67 72 29 56 45 68 71 72
Battery 63 68 63 61 53 56 74 71 31 46 57 66 67 70
% Taking 89 83 96 97 96 96
Quartile Distribution for Battery_
Percent of students scoring in each
percentile range.
1-25%ile
76-99%ile
26-50%ile
51-75%ile
C-25
1999-2000 Parent Survey Mary C. Greer Elementary
Response Rate: 25.1% of households · Agree/Strongly Agree
E] Don't Know
Effective Schools Correlates, (Refer to Glossary) El Disagree/Strongly Disagree
A Climate of High Expectation for Success for all Students:
1t.1%
84.5% 4.3%
Strong Instructional Leadership:
4.6%
74.8% 20.6%
The Opportunity to Learn and Adequate Time Spent on Academic Tasks:
7.8%
87.4% 4.8%
Frequent Monitoring of Student Progress:
8.6%
88.9% 2.5%
Safe and Orderly Environment:
5.8%
90.4% 3.8%
83.0% 5.1%
tl.9%
School Highlights
School Improvement Goals for 1999-2000:
GOAL 1:
RESULT:
GOAL 2:
RESULT:
GOAL 3:
RESULT:
GOAL 4:
RESULT:
Students will exit Greer School computer literate according to the SOLs and
Albemarle County Curriculum.
Ninety-four percent of fifth-grade students passed the SOLs and 41 percent
achieved an advanced score.
One hundred percent of Greer School students will be reading/writing on grade
level.
Sixty-five percent of Greer students were functioning on or above grade level and
69 percent of the students passed the SOLs in reading/writing.
One hundred percent of Greer School students will be able to understand and
apply mathematical concepts at grade level.
Eighty-six percent of Greer students were functioning on or above grade level in
math and 62 percent of the students passed the SOLs in mathematics.
One hundred percent of students will be able to understand and apply the six
pillars of Character: Trustworthiness, Respect, Responsibility, Fairness, Caring,
and Citizenship.
Greer School students developed a common terminology related to school
behavior and citizenship that led to an improved school climate.
C-26
Hollymead Elementary School
1999-2000 School Profile
School Characteristics
Representative areas and communities include:
Briarwood, Camelot, Chesterfield, Forest Lakes North,
Forest Ridge, Hollymead, Jefferson, Meadow Field,
North Pines, Northwood, and Terrybrook. Facilities
include a library, cafeteria, and gymnasium. The school
play area, baseball field and three multi-purpose fields
serve as a community park after school hours.
Average Class Size
Grade: I K 1 213 4 5
99-001 20.01 19.0 I 22.0 I 23.0 I 20.0 I 21.0
Staff Characteristics
Year Occupied 1972
Program Capacity (1999-2000) 554
Student Enrollment (1999-2000) 622
Average Daily Attendance (1999-2000) 96.8%
Mobility Index (1999-2000) 12.21%
Portable Classrooms (1999-2000) 4
Before/After School Program YES/YES
Title I School NO
District Rivanna
Setting Suburban
Site Size 20 acres
Middle School the Students Will
Attend Sutherland
High School the Students Will Attend Albemarle
FULL- & ETHNICITY GENDER Average % with
PART-TIME Years of Graduate
STAFF TOTAL WHITE OTHER MALE FEMALE Experience Degree
Administrative 2 2 0 1 1 ~ ~1~
Teacher 44 42 2 2 42 13 50
Teacher's Assist. 16 15 I 0 16 ~ ~
Totals 62 59 3 3 49 ~
Student Characteristics
Free/Reduced Lunch
Ethnicity $.6% Yes 94.4% No
Other
4.5%
Black
8.8%
Special Education
9.0% Yes 91.0% No
Identified Gifted ~
10.8% Yes 89.2% No
C-27
Student Performance Measures Holl;ymead Elementary
*None or Too Few to Report. ** Data Not Available. ~ Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Catego#es upon Request.
Grade 3 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNIClTY/' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
White Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 99-.00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-9898-99 99-00 97-98 9899 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00
Reading& 64.8 77.9 83.2 59.1 65.4 67;5 55 61 61 69.8 82.4 82.6 12.5 41.7 * 62.7 73.2 77.2 67.4 83.3 89.3 * * * 67.3 82.3 84.6
Writing
Math 70.8 77.9 93,8 63.1 68,5 77.8 63 68 71 72.9 81.3 93.3 44.4 50,0 * 66.7 76,8 91.2 76.1 79.2 96.4 * * * 72.3 81.3 94,2
History 59.4 75.0 82.3 51.7 65.9 69,6 49 62 65 65.6 78.0 83.8 0 50.0 * 58.3 69.6 80.7 60.9 81.3 83.9 * * * 61.4 79.2 86.5
Science 76.2 83.7 92.9 69.2 74.9 80.1 63 68 73 81.1 85.7 92.4 22.2 66.7 * 78,0 85.7 91.2 73.9 81.3 94.6 * * * 78.0 87.6 93.3
%Taking 100 100 98.3 99.1 99.3 96.7 97 97 **
Grade 5 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNIClTY/' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
AREA
White Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 99-00 97~98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-9898-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00
Reading 83.9 85.7 84,1 70.8 77.3 76.0 68 69 68 86.3 87.6 87.4 50.0 76.9 * 78.4 84.2 85.5 88.5 87.5 82.7 * * * 84.8 87.9 64.5
WritJng 83.9 95.2 93.3 67.1 86.7 85.8 65 81 81 87.3 94.3 92.5 37.5 100 * 78.0 91.1 89.1 88.7 100 98.0 * * * 85.4 95,8 94.1
Malh 67.0 70.5 86.9 46.3 55,6 70,6 47 51 63 68.6 70.8 88.4 37.5 69.2 * 56.9 64.9 87.3 75.4 77.1 86.5 * * * 66.7 72.7 88.3
History 33.0 78.1 72.0 29.5 67.7 59.7 33 46 51 35.3 77.5 74.7 0 64,6 * 39.2 78.9 74.5 27.9 77,1 69.2 * * * 33.4 79.8 74.8
Science 73.2 88,6 85.0 65.0 76.9 74.5 59 67 64 75.5 89.9 85.3 50.0 76.9 * 70.6 64,2 81.8 75.4 93,8 88.5 * * * 73.3 89.9 85.4
Computer 93.8 98.1 98.0 79.8 88.5 93,1 72 81 85 94.1 97.8 97.9 87.5 100 * 92,2 96.5 96.4 95.1 100 100 * * * 94.3 98.0 98.1
Tech.
%Taking 100 100 100 98.8 98.4 97.0 97 96 **
Student Performance
Hollymead Elementar
*None or Too Few to Report. ** Data Not Available.
1~ Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Catego#es upon Request.
Grade 2 - Individual Reading ~L~sessment- Percentage of students scoring at each grade level.
Grade SCHOOL
Level SCHOOL COUNTY ETHNICITY/' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
Equiva- VVhite Black Male Female Yes No
lence
98-99 99.00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00
First 5.1 6.5 13.4 12.9 4.7 4,5 * 23.1 3.3 10.6 7.0 3.3 * * 3.6 5.1
Kindergarten 4.2 0.9 4.5 4,1 4.7 0 * 7.7 4.9 2.1 3.5 0 * * 3,6 1.0
Grade 4 - Stanford 9 Achievement Tests - Average National Percentile Rank
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY/' GENDER
White Black Male Female
98-99 99.00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99.00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99430 98-99 99-00
Reading 71 73 64 62 50 52 74 77 * 47 72 71 71 76
Math 67 69 63 61 53 57 70 74 * 32 70 71 63 66
Language 74 63 63 62 54 57 76 68 * 36 71 61 79 66
Battery 71 68 63 61 53 56 72 72 * 40 71 67 70 69
% Taking 99 100 96 97 96 96
Quartile Distribution for Battery
Percent of students scoring in each
percentile range.
1-25%ile
26-50%ile
76-99%ile
H-75%ile
C-29
1999-2000 Parent Survey Hollymead Elementary
Response Rate: 31.0% of households
Effective Schools Correlates (Refer to Glossary)
A Climate of High Expectation for Success for all Students:
88.2%
Strong Instructional Leadership:
73.8% 16.2%
· Agree/Strongly Agree
[3 Don°t Know
· Disagree/Strongly Disagree
1.0%
t0.8%
10.0%
The Opportunity to Learn and Adequate Time Spent on Academic Tasks:
9.0%
83.5% 7.4%
Safe and Orderly Environment:
82.3% 3.6%
92.0% 2.4%
14.0%
5.6%
77.6% 5.5%
16.9%
School Highlights
Hollymead Elementary School continued its tradition of academic excellence by posting more growth in
the Standards of Learning tests and continuing its status as a fully accredited elementary school, having
passed all of the SOL tests. Hollymead exceeded the county and state averages in each of the areas
tested under the Standards of Learning.
The following highlights some of the additional achievements made during the 1999-2000 school year:
· The Hollymead volunteer program, including volunteers from Madison House, parents, students
from county high schools, and community members, logged over 4000 hours of volunteer time
reading to students, providing additional help to below-grade-level students, and supporting the
school's instructional efforts.
· A "Parent Corner~' was established in the school foyer for parent information and resources.
· A Curriculum Night, attended by over 100 parents, was held in March 2000 with the purpose of
familiarizing parents with different instructional strategies used at school and which parents could
use at home to reinforce student achievement.
· The Character Counts program was launched at Hollymead with students who displayed the
various character pillars being recognized on the School's television station, WHMD.
· Fifth-grader Chris Jones and his teacher Ms. Lynnette Wilk, met with President Bill Clinton at the
White House to recognize the student's winning one of two awards in the Scholastic News
Contest featuring school safety. One of Jones' suggested strategies was to expand Character
Counts across the country.
C-30
Meriwether Lewis 'Elementary School
1999-2000 School Profile
SchOol Characteristics
Representative areas and communities include: Albemarle
Lake, Arbor Park, Ballard ~/oods, Beaumont, Buck
Mountain, Candlewick, Clearview, Free Union,
Harmony, lnglecress, Ivy Oaks, ivy Farms, Lewis Hill,
Meriwether Hills, Owensville, Owensfield, Peavine
Hollow, Rivanwood, ~X/averly, ~Jest Leigh, ~/estover
Hills, ~X/est ~/oods, and ¥(/hippoorwill. Facilities include
a library, cafeteria, and gymnasium. The school play
areas, Little League field, and multi-purpose field serve as
a community park after school hours.
Average Class Stze'
Grade: ] K 1 2 3 4 5
I
99-001 ~8.0 I 2~,0 I 27.0 I 20.0 I 23.0 I 22.0
Staff Characteristics
Year Occupied 1988
Program Capacity (1999-2000) 431
Student Enrollment (1999-2000) 482
Average Daily Attendance (1999-2000) 97.2%
Mobility Index (1999-2000) 8.09%
Portable Classrooms (1999-2000) 1
Before/After School Program NO/YES
Title I School NO
District Samuel
Miller
Setting Rural
Site Size 18 acres
Middle School the Students Will Henley or
Attend Jouett
High School the Students Will Attend Western
Albemarle
FULL- & ETHNICITY GENDER, I Average
%
with
PART-TIME
STAFF TOTAL WHITE OTHER MALE FEMALE I Years of ~ Graduate
I Experience I Degree Experience Degree
Administrative 1 I 0 0 1
Teacher 32 32 0 5 27 117170
Teacher's Assist. 15 14 1 213 ~----------------13 .......................
T°tals~ .... 48 47 1 7
Student Characteristics
Free/Reduced Lunch
Ethnicity 3.9% Yes 96.1% No
Other
2.7%
Black
1.0%
Special Education ~
12.3% Yes 87.7% No
Identified Gifted ~
9.5% Yes 90.5% No
C-31
Student Performance Measures Meriwether Lewis Elementary
*None or Too Few to Report. ** Data Not Available. 1~ Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Categories upon Request.
Grade 3 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY '/' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
White Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99*00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-9898-99 99-00 I97-98 98-99 ~9-00 97-98 98-99 99-00
Reading& 71.4 73.0 83.5 59.1 65.4 67.5 55 61 61 72.8 73.6 83.5 * * * 55.3 75.5 85.0 84.8 70.0 82.1 * * * 75.4 76.2 84.4
Wr~ng
Math 88.1 76.4 94.9 63.1 68.5 77.8 63 68 71 90.1 77.0 94.9 * * * 86.8 81.6 92.5 89.1 70.0 97.4 * * * 89.7 78.6 94.8
History 72,6 84.3 87.3 51.7 65.9 69,6 49 62 65 74.1 83.9 87.3 * * * 68.4 91.8 87.5 76.1 75.0 87.2 * * * 77.9 85.7 88.3
Science 83.3 84.3 94.9 69.2 74.9 80.1 63 68 73 85.2 85.1 94.9 * * * 81.6 91.8 92.5 84.8 75.0 97.4 * * * 85.7 86.9 94.8
%Taking 100 100 98.8 99.1 99.3 96.7 97 97 **
Grade 5 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY '/' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
White Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 99-00 I 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-9898-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00
Reading 80.0 95.3 86.4 70.8 77.3 76.0 68 69 68 79.4 95.1 86.6 * * * 75.0 91.5 77.2 88.0 100 95.5 * * * 78.7 95.2 88.8
Writing 86.2 96.5 95.5 67.1 86.7 85.8 65 81 81 85.7 96.3 96.3 * * * 82.5 93.6 93.2 92.0 100 97.7 * * * 88.3 96.4 97.6
Math 46.2 70.9 87.5 46.3 55.6 70.6 47 51 63 46.0 70.7 89.0 * * * 50.0 70.2 79.5 40.0 71.8 95.5 * * * 49.1 72.3 91.3
History 47.7 84.9 79.5 29.5 67.7 59.7 33 46 51 46.7 84.1 79.3 * * * 50.0 87.2 77.3 44.0 82.1 81.8 * * * 49.2 84.3 82,5
,Science 81.0 90.7 81.8 65,0 76.9 74.5 59 67 64 81.0 90.2 81.7 * * * 82.5 89.4 79.5 80,0 92.3 84.1 * * * 82.0 90.4 83.8
Computer 95.4 97.7 96.6 79,8 88,5 93.1 72 81 85 95.2 97.6 96.3 * * * 100 95.7 93.2 88.0 100 100 * * * 95.1 97.6 98.8
Tech.
%Taking 100 100 100 98.8 98.4 97.0 97 96 **
Student Performance Measti
Meriwether Lewis Elementary
*None or Too Few to Report. ** Data Not Available,
1~ Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Categories upon Request.
Grade 2 - Individual Reading Assessment- Percentage of students scoring at each grade level.
Grade SCHOOL
Level SCHOOL COUNTY ETHNICITY '~ GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
Equiva- White Black Male Female Yes No
lence
98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 $9-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00
~¢~ii;,,,;.i ~83;0' 89.9 98.7 91;4 '9671 882
First 7.2 2.4 13.4 12.9 7.2 1.3 * * 2.9 3.9 11.8 0 * * 7.2 2.5
Kindergarten 2.9 0 4.5 4.1 2.9 0 * * 5.7 0 0 0 * * 2.9 0
Grade 4 - Stanford 9 Achievement Tests - Average National Percentile Rank
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY ~- GENDER
VVhite Black Male Female
98-99 99--00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00
Reading 82 77 64 62 50 52 83 77 * * 77 79 86 75
Math 84 74 63 61 53 57 84 74 * * 83 82 84 65
Language 76 74 63 62 54 57 76 74 * * 70 77 80 71
Battery 80 73 63 61 53 56 81 73 * * 78 78 82 68
% Taking 100 100 96 97 96 96
Quartile Distribution for Battem/
Percent of students scoring in each
percentile range.
1-25%ile
1
26-50%ile
76-99%ile
51-75%ile
C-33
1999-2000 Parent Survey Meriwether Lewis Elementar
Response Rate: 38.5% of households mAgreelStrongly Agree
[3 Don't Know
Effective Schools Correlates (Refer to Glossary) · Disagree/Strongly Disagree
A Climate of High Expectation for Success for all Students:
9.0%
88.8% 2.2%
Strong InstructiOnal Leadership:
5.5%
86.8% 7.7%
The Opportunity to Learn and Adequate Time Spent on Academic Tasks:
82.7% 7.3%
Frequent Monitoring of Student Progress:
9.4%
89.t% 1.5%
Safe and Orderly Environment:
Positive Home-School Relations:
3.3%
94.1% 2.6%
10.5%
87.3% 2.2%
School Highlights
The School Improvement Team focUsed on the following goals for the 1999-2000 school year:
Continue to emphasize character education through the Character Counts pro,qram:
Teachers and students consistently used the language of the six pillars, students were recognized
in classrooms for displaying good character, and several school assemblies focused on character
issues. Each grade level planned and implemented specific service projects throughout the year.
The school newsletter contained Character Counts updates for parents. Staff development
activities continued.
Increase diversity awareness for staff and students:
Related assemblies were presented during the school year, a diversity awareness workshop was
conducted for the faculty, and the Chairperson of the Albemarle Equity and Diversity Committee
presented an overview of the committee's work to the School Improvement Committee. Other
activities included grade level discussion, musical programs, and guidance related activities.
Maintain a 70 percent or higher pass rate on every SOL test in third and fifth grades to remain
fully accredited (50 percent on third grade History/Social Studies and Science):
Each grade level/specialist continued to work on curriculum maps and pacing; identified children
received extra reading help from the remedial reading teacher and volunteers; related staff
development activities and workshops were held; and teachers utilized the new mathematics
series. A SOL math grant provided tutors for identified students to increase their math skills.
C-34
Virginia L. Mfi " Ei rmentary SchOol
1999-2000 School Profile
School Characteristics
Representative areas and communities include:
Belair, Buckingham Circle, Country View, Ednam
Forest, Farmington, Flordon, Glenair, Ivy \YJoods,
Ivy Creek, Ivy Meadows, Kearsarge, Langford,
Mechums ~YJest, Peacock Hill, Piedmont Housing,
Skyline Crest, and Spring Hill. Facilities include a
library, cafeteria, and gymnasium. The school play
areas and multi-purpose fields serve as a community
park after school hours.
Average Class Size
Grade: I K-1 2 3 I 4 5
99-00 I 22.6 26.5 19.0 20.5 27.5
Staff Characteristics
Year Occupied 1960
Program Capacity (1999-2000) 277
Student Enrollment (1999-2000) 266
Average Daily Attendance (1999-2000) 96.5%
Mobility Index (1999-2000) 13.01%
Portable Classrooms (1999-2000) 0
Before/After School Program NO/YES
Title I School NO
District Samuel
Miller
Setting Rural
Site Size 21 acres
Middle School the Students Will Attend Henley
High School the Students Will Attend Western
Albemarle
FULL- & ETHNICITY GENDER, I Average
%
with
PART-TIME
STAFF TOTAL WHITE OTHER MALE FEMALE ~ Years of I Graduate
Administrative 1 1 0 I 0
Teacher 20 19 1 1 19J 12 110012 100
Teacher's Assist. 12 12 0 1 11
Totals 33 32 1 3 30 ,r
Student Characteristics
Ethnicity
Other
2.6%
Free/Reduced Lunch ~
11.2% Yes 88.8% No
Black
4.1%
Special Education [
17.2% Yes
82.8% No
Identified Gifted ~
3.8% Yes 96.2% No
C'35
.,S..,tudent Performance Measures Virginia L. Murray Elementary
*None or Too Few to Report. '* Data Not Available. 1~ Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Categories upon Request.
Grade 3 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY/' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
V~rnite Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-O0 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 9900 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-9898-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00
Reading &
Writing 59.1 56.8 92.1 59.1 65.4 67.5 55 61 61 61.9 57.1 91.7 * * * 54.5 54.2 82.4 63.6 60.0 100 * * * 68.5 61,7 92.1
Math 73,3 68.2 100 63.1 68.5 77.8 63 68 71 76.7 69.0 100 * * * 69.6 75.0 100 77.3 60.0 100 * * * 79,5 73.5 100
History 53,3 68.2 92.1 51.7 65.9 69.6 49 62 65 55.8 69.0 91.6 * * * 60,9 66,7 94,1 45.5 70.0 90.5 * * * 61.6 73.5 92.1
Science 77.8 84,1 100 69.2 74,9 80.1 63 68 73 81,4 85,7 100 * * * 78.3 83.3 100 77.3 85.0 100 * * * 87.2 88.2 100
%Taking 97.8 100 100 99.1 99.3 96.7 97 97 **
Grade 5 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNIClTY/' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
White Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00
Reading 78.9 90.6 83.6 70.8 77.3 76.0 68 69 68 78.4 92.2 88.0 * * * 76.2 96.8 85.2 82.4 81.8 82.1 * * * 83.3 93.8 87.5
Writing 81.6 92.5 91.1 67.1 86.7 85.8 65 81 81 81.1 94.1 96.1 * * * 71.4 90.3 85.7 94.1 95.5 96.4 * * * 86.1 93.9 94.0
Math 52.6 49.1 74.5 46.3 55.6 70.6 47 51 63 51.4 49,0 78.0 * * * 42.9 58.1 77.8 !64.7 36.4 71.4 * * * 55.6 53.0 81.3
History 28.9 75.5 70.4 29.5 67,7 59.7 33 46 51 29.7 76.5 73.5 * * * 23.8 87.1 81.5 35.3 59.1 59.3 * * * 30.6 77.6 74.5
Science 78.9 81.1 76.4 65.0 76.9 74.5 59 67 64 78.4 82.3 80.0 * * * 76,2 90.3 85.2 82.4 68.2 67.9 * * * 83.4 85.7 79.2
Computer 86,8 96.2 96.4 79.8 88.5 93.1 72 81 85 86.5 98.0 100 * * * 85.7 96.8 92.6 88.2 95.5 100 * * * 91.7 97.9 97.9
Tech.
%Taking 97.4 94.6 100 98.8 98.4 97.0 97 96 **
}
Student Performance Mea dr s
Virginia L. Murray Elementary
*None or Too Few to Report. ** Data Not Available.
~ Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Catego#es upon Request.
Grade 2 - Individual Reading ~sessment- Percentage of students scoring at each grade level.
Grade SCHOOL
Level SCHOOL COUNTY ETHNICITY/- GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
Equiva- White Black Male Female Yes No
lence
98-99 99.-00 98--99 99.00 98-99 99..00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 ~9.-00 98-99 99-00
First 13.2 5.7 13.4 12.9 13.5 5.9 * * 25.0 7.7 4.5 3.7 * * 13.2 0
Kindergarten 0 7.5 4.5 4.1 0 7.8 * * 0 11.5 0 3.7 * * 0 6.3
Grade 4 - Stanford 9 Achievement Tests - Average National Percentile Rank
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY 1' GENDER
VVhite Black Male Female
98-~9 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99.-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00
Reading 65 62 64 62 50 52 67 68 * * 62 65 67 59
Math 75 62 63 61 53 57 76 67 * * 74 67 76 56
Language 65 63 63 62 54 57 70 67 * * 64 68 67 58
Battery 70 62 63 61 53 56 71 66 * * 69 66 71 57
% Taking 100 100 96 97 96 96
Quartile Distribution for Batter~
Percent of students scoring in each
percentile range.
1-25%ile
76-99%ile
26-50%ile
51-75%ile
C-37
1999-2000 Parent Survey Virginia L. Murray Elementary
Response Rate: 29.0% of households B AgreelStrongly Agree
E] Don't Know
Effective Schools Correlates, (Refer to Glossary) · Disagree/Strongly Disagree
A Climate of High Expectation for Success for all Students:
12,6%
85.8% 1.7%
Strong Instructional Leadership:
5.0%
88.8% 6.1%
The Opportunity to Learn and Adequate Time Spent on Academic Tasks:
14.6%
76,3% 9.0%
Safe and Orderl,
Environment:
82.4% 3.4%
91.9% 3.0%
14.2%
5.0%
82.2% 4.4%
13.3%
School Highlights
During the 1999-2000 school year, Virginia L. Murray Elementary School focused on three
school improvement goals: building "habits of mind" which help students be successful school
citizens and learners, strengthening our math instruction, and providing more consistency
across grade levels in our writing program.
Teachers, parents/guardians, and students were involved in this school/community process of
researching, studying, and developing the programs and strategies needed to obtain our goals.
Teachers established class meetings to encourage productive participation in class rules and
problem-solving. We began a review of how our "Positive Discipline Program" leads to more
responsible behavior and how it prepares our students for the Character Counts program that
is in place at Henley.
We focused on math and writing instruction in faculty meetings throughout the year. Teachers
developed high-level thinking activities for math and shared their projects to provide extra
resources for all teachers. As a faculty, 'we studied the county rubric in writing to improve
assessment techniques.
Our students performed very well last year: Over 90 percent of our second-graders were on or
above grade level in literacy skills, and this rate of excellence continues to be reflected
throughout all grade levels. We were delighted that our school qualified for accreditation under
the Standards of Learning for last year. Murray has continued its pursuit of excellence in
academics and citizenship. Student performance is the hallmark.
C-38
Red Hill El~~htary SChoOl
1999-2000 School Profile
School CharaCteristics
Representative areas and communities include:
Covesville, Heards, Hickory Hill, North Garden,
Sherwood Farms, and Southern Hills. Facilities
include a library, cafeteria, and gymnasium. The
school play areas and multi-purpose fields serve
as a community park after school hours.
Average Class Size
Grade: I K 1 2 3 4I 5
99-001,5.01 18.0 i 19.5 i 20.6 1 23.5 i ,8.6
Staff Characteristics
Year Occupied 1982
Program Capacity (1999-2000) 164
Student Enrollment (1999-2000) 190
Average Daily Attendance (1999-2000) 95.9%
Mobility Index (1999-2000) 15.95%
Portable Classrooms (1999-2000) 1
Before/After School Program NO/YES
Title I School YES
District Samuel Miller
Setting Rural
Site Size 11 acres
Middle School the Students Will Attend Walton
High School the Students Will Attend Monticello
FULL- & ETHNICITY GENDER I Average % with
I
Years of Graduate
PART-TIME STAFF TOTAL WHITE OTHER MALE FEMALE Experience Degree
Administrative I I 0 0 1 ~
Teacher 17 16 1 2 15 I 13 71
I
Teacher's Assist. 7 7 0 0 7
Totals 25 ' 24 1 2 23'TI~'~I
Student Characteristics
Ethnicity 66.0% No
Other
10.0%
Free/Reduced Lunch [
34.0% Yes
Black
14.7%
Special Education [
17.8% Yes
82.2% No
Identified Gifted ~
10.5% Yes 89.5% No
C-39
Student Performance Measures
Red Hill Elementar
*None or Too Few to Report.
** Data Not Available.
Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Categodes upon Request.
Grade 3 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNIClTY/' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
White Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 99-00 [ 97-98 98-~9 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 9900 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00
Reading& 57.1 60.5 51.7 59.1 65.4 67.5 55 61 61 55.5 71.0 60.9 * * * 36.4 53.3 61.1 80.0 65.2 36.4 * 15.4 * 57.9 83.3 61.9
Wdting
Math 61.9 63.2 58.6 63.1 68.5 77.8 63 68 71 61.1 71.0 69.6 * * * 54.5 60.0 61.1 70.0 65.2 54.5 * 30.8 * 63.2 79.2 71.4
History 47.6 52.6 44.8 51.7 65.9 69.6 49 62 65 50.0 61.3 52.2 * * * 45,5 60.0 50.0 50.0 47.8 36.4 * 23.1 * 52.6 66.7 52,4
Science 71.4 57.9 69.0 69.2 74.9 80.1 63 68 73 66.7 67.7 69.6 * * * 54.5 66.7 72.2 90.0 52.2 63.6 * 30.8 * 73.7 75.0 7114
%Taking 95.5 100 90.6 99.1 99.3 96.7 97 97 **
Grade 5 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY/' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
AREA
White Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-9898-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00
Reading 54.0 41.4 73.1 70.8 77.3 76.0 68 69 68 66.7 46.2 66.7 * * * 50.0 30.8 64.3 76,9 50,0 83.3 * * * 66.7 52.2 73.9
W~ng 56.0 75.0 100 67.1 86.7 85.8 65 81 81 61.9 80.0 100 * * * 41.7 58.3 100 69.2 87.5 100 * * * 72.2 87.0 100
Math 44.0 31.0 84.6 46.3 55.6 70.6 47 51 63 47.6 34.6 81.0 * * * 33.3 15.4 71.4 53.8 43.8 100 * * * 47.6 39.1 82.6
History 32.0 27.6 50.0 29.5 67.7 59.7 33 46 51 38.1 30.8 57.1 * * * 25.0 23.1 50.0 38.5 31.3 50.0 * * * 38.1 34.8 56.5
Science 68.0 41.4 69.2 65.0 76.9 74.5! 59 67 64 66.7 46.2; 76.2 * * * 58.3 30.8 71.4 76.9 50.0 66.7 * * * 71.4 52.2 78.3
Computer 80.0 69.0 96.2 79.8 88.5 93.1 72 81 85 81.0 76.9 95.2 * * * 75.0 69.2 92.3 84.6 68.8 100 * * * 85.7 78.3 95.7
Tech.
%Taking 92.6 100 84.4 98.8 98.4 97.0 97 96 **
Student Performance MeaSures
Red Hill Elementar
*None or Too Few to Report. ** Data Not Available.
1~ Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Categodes upon Request.
Grade 2 - Individual Reading Assessment- Percentage of students scoring at each grade level.
Grade SCHOOL
Level SCHOOL COUNTY ETHNIClTY t GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
Equiva- White Black Male Female Yes No
lence
98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00
:=6Z~i!~!~ :83.0 70.0103.3 . . ~:.6 70.0 40.0 931~ 2~;/2' :~i~'~!:: i!!~i~i;;;-;~;I'
First 25.0 16.0 13.4 12.9 25.0 16.7 * * 27.8 30.0 20.0 6.7 36,4 33,3 17.6 6.3
Kindergarten 17.9 0.0 4.5 4.1 5.0 0 * * 5.6 0 40.0 0 36,4 0 5.9 0
Grade 4 - Stanford 9 Achievement Tests - Average National Percentile Rank
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNIClTY t GENDER
White Black Male Female
98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98~99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00
Reading 62 61 64 62 50 52 65 70 * * 54 61 69 60
Math 54 55 63 61 53 57 55 59 * * 49 63 58 50
Language 52 58 63 62 54 57 54 64 * * 47 56 56 59
Battery 57 58 63 61 53 56 59 65 * * 51 64 62 55
% Taking 100 88 96 97 96 96
Quartile Distribution for Batte~
Percent of students scoring in each
percentile range.
76-99%ile
1-25%ile
26-50%ile
51-75%ile
C-41
1999-2000 Parent Survey Red Hill Elementar
Response Rate: 25.2% of households ;;Agree/Strongly Agree
[3 Don't Know
Effective Schools Correlates (Refer to Glossary) · Disagree/Strongly Disagree
A Climate of High Expectation for Success for all Students:
9.5%
87.7% 2.7%
Strong Instructional Leadership:
7.2%
83.9% 8.9%
The Opportunity to Learn and Adequate Time Spent on Academic Tasks:
tl.6%
81.1% 7.3%
Safe and Orderl~
Environment:
91.0% 2.7%
95.7% 2.2%
6.3%
2.2%
Positive Home-School Relations:
14.4%
81.1% 4.5%
School Highlights
Increased student achievement in reading/mathematics and "Building a Community of Respect"
have been the focus at Red Hill Elementary School. Goals and projects from the 1999-2000 School
Improvement Plan resulted in:
· An increase in all fifth-grade Standards of Learning scores - with special note to the 100
percent pass rate on the writing test.
· An increase in intervention programs in mathematics and reading/writing for identified students
(after-school tutorials for third, fourth and fifth graders).
· An increase in the number of second graders reading on/or above grade level.
· An increase in volunteers for the Book Buddy program.
· Identifying a need for early intervention for 4 year-olds - preschool students from Red Hill will
attend Scottsville's Bright Star program in fall 2000.
· An identifiable and structured character education program.
· An increase in PTO attendance - with Spanish translation of two meetings.
· A Destination ImagiNation team winning at the regional level and competing in the state
competition.
The School Improvement Goals for 2000-01 continue the focus on student achievement, character
education, and the use of technology.
C-42
Scottsville Elementary School
1999-2000 School Profile
School Characteristics
Representative areas and communities include:
Hatton, Scottsville, and Warren. Facilities include a
library, cafeteria, and gymnasium. The school play
areas, baseball diamond and multi-purpose fields
serve as a community park after school hours.
Average Class Size
Grade: I K I 2 3
99-001 19.0 i 1~.0 i 16.01 14.0 121.0I
Staff Characteristics
Year Occupied 1981
Program Capacity (1999-2000) 188
Student Enrollment (1999-2000) 211
Average Daily Attendance (1999-2000) 95.4%
Mobility Index (1999-2000) 16.85%
Portable Classrooms (1999-2000) 2
Before/After School Program NO/YES
Title I School YES
Distdct Scottsville
Setting Rural
Site Size 15 acres
Middle School the Students Will Attend Walton
High School the Students Will Attend Monticello
FULL- & ETHNICITY GENDER I Average I % with
PART-TIMEI Years ofI Graduate
STAFF TOTAL WHITE OTHER MALE FEMALE Experience Degree
Administrative 1 1 0 0 I m
Teacher 20 18 2 4 16 I 4 ] 59
Teacher's Assist. 8 8 0 0 8
Totals 29 27 2 4 25 · ~ .
Student Characteristics
Ethnicity
Other
0.9%
Free/Reduced Lunch [
32.1% Yes
67.9% No
Black
4.3%
Special Education
16.7% Yes 83.3% No
Identified Gifted ~
15.6% Yes 84.4% No
C-43
Student Performance Measures Scottsville Elementary
*None or Too Few to Report. ** Data Not Available. ~ Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Categories upon Request,
Grade 3 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY 7~ GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
W13ite Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 99q30 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-98 99-00 97-~8 98-99 Sg-O0 97-~8 98-98 ~ 97*98 98~99 99-00 97-98 98-~9 99-00 97-98 ea-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 98~O0
Reading& 34.1 48.8 51.6 59.1 65.4 67.5 55 61 61 35.0 48.8 55.2 * * * 31.8 42.9 38.9 36.8 51.7 69.2 21.4 33.4 * 41.6 57.2 62.5
Writing
Math 35.7 53.5 83.9 63.1 68.5 77.8 63 68 71 34,1 53.5 86.2 * * * 39.1 64.3 88,9 31.6 48.3 76.9 13.4 33.3 * 54.2 64.3 87.5
History 31.0 41.9 64.5 51.7 65.9 69.6 49 62 65 31.7 41,9 65,5 * * * 30.4 57,1 66.7 31.6 34.5 61.5 20.0 26.7 * 41.7 50.0 70.8
Science 53.7 69.8 74.2 69.2 74.9 80.1 63 68 73 52.5 69.8 75.9 * * * 60.9 71.4 77.8 44.4 69.0 69.2 33.4 46.7 * 65.2 82.2 79.2
%Taking 100 100 96.9 99.1 99.3 196.7 97 97 **
Grade 5 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL i
SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY '/' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
AREA
White Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 98-00 97-98 98-98 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-9898-99 99-00 97-98 98-~9 98-00 97-98 98-99 99-00
Reading 48.7 50.0 73.3 70.8 77.3 76.0 68 69 68 48.6 50.0 74.4 * * * 54.5 41.2 77.3 41.2 60.0 69.6 27.3 8,3 64.3 64.0 73.7 77.4
Writing 35,1 65.6 66.7 67.1 86.7 85.8 65 81 81 36.1 67.7 65.1 * * * 42.9 41.2 63.61 25.0 93.3 69.6 30.0 100 46.7 38.5 90.0 76.7
Math 5.1 15.6 53.3 46.3 55.6 70.6 47 51 63 5.4 15.6 53.5 * * * 9.1 11,8 59.1 0 20.0 47.8 0 0 21.4 8.0 26.3 67,7
History 12,8 37.5 51.1 29.5 67.7 59.7 33 46 51 13.5 37.5 51.2 * * * 22.7 35.3 63.6 0 40.0 39.1 0 0 21.4 20.0 57.9 64.5
Science 41.0 50.0 62.2 65.0 76.9 74.5 59 67 64 43.2 50.0 60.5 * * * 50.0 52.9 72.7 29.4 46.7 52.2 36.4 33.3 42,9 48.0 57.9 71,0
Computer 51.3 75.0 91.1 79.8 88.5 93.1 72 81 85 54.1 75.0 90.7! * * * 54.5 70.6 86.4 47.1 80.0 95.7 36.4 58.3 85.7 64,0 84,2 93.5
Tech.
%Taking 100 100 100 98.8 98.4 97.0 97 96 **
Student Performance Measures
Scottsviile Eiementar
*NOne or Too Few to Report. ** Data Not Available.
~ Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Categories upon Request.
Grade 2 - Individual Reading Assessment- Percentage of students scoring at each grade level.
Grade SCHOOL
Level SCHOOL COUNTY ETHNICITY ~' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
Equiva- White Black Male Female Yes No
lence
98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 gg-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-g9 99-00
First 7.1 9.7 13.4 12.9 7.4 11.1 * * 11.1 15.4 0 5.6 * * 4.5 8.7
Kindergarten 0 3.2 4.5 4.1 0 3.7 * * 0 0 0 5.6 * * 0 4.3
Grade 4 - Stanford 9 Achievement Tests - Average National Percentile Rank
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY ~' GENDER
White Black Male Female
98-99 99-00 98-99 99*00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00
Reading 45 44 64 62 50 52 47 44 * * 39 40 52 45
Math 42 40 63 61 53 57 43 40 * * 41 39 42 41
Language 45 42 63 62 54 57 46 42 * * 37 36 54 45
Battery 44 43 63 61 53 56 45 43 * * 41 40 48 44
% Taking 100 100 96 97 96 96
Quartile Distribution for Battery_
Percent of students scoring in each
percentile range.
76-99%ile
1-25%ile
51-75%ile
C-45
1999- 2000 Parent Survey Scottsville Elementar
Response Rate: 18.0% of households B Agree/Strongly Agree
E] Don't Know
Effective Schools Correlates (Refer to Glossary) · Disagree/Strongly Disagree
A Climate of High Expectation for Success for all Students:
21.5%
76.8% 1.8%
Strong Instructional Leadership:
~ 12.0%
77.4% 10.7%
The OpportUnity to Learn and Adequate Time Spent on Academic Tasks:
10.9%
81.6% 7.5%
Safe and Orderl Environment:
Positive Home-School Relations:
86.1% 3.5%
87.8% 4.3%
10.4%
7.8%
School Highlights
77.8% 3.7%
The Scottsville School Improvement Plan focused on three areas: Academic Success, School Climate
and Parental Involvement. The first goal targeted 70 percent or greater student success on the English,
math, social studies, and science Virginia SOL tests. Scottsville students' scores in grades 3 and 5
increased on all 10 SOL tests, while passing five out of 10 total. Scottsville students made significant
progress in the area of mathematics particularly! The regular use of Cornerstone Math, STAR reading
assessments, and Accelerated Reader activities enhanced student academic growth significantly.
The second goal focused on School Climate. Our classroom teachers adopted the Five Lifelong
Guidelines - Trustworthiness, Truthfulness, Active Listening, No Put-Downs, and Personal Best - as a
crucial part of the Integrating Thematic Instruction (ITl) learning environment. These guidelines are
consistent with brain research, based upon respect for others and self, and when consistently followed,
ensure that students can remain "upshifted" for learning. Accompanying these are 17 lifeskills that help
students evaluate their own performances. They include Integrity, Initiative, Flexibility, Perseverance,
Organization, Sense of Humor, Effort, Common Sense, Problem-Solving, Responsibility, Patience,
Friendship, Curiosity, Cooperation, Caring, Courage, and Pride. All students are applying these lifeskills
and aiming toward their Personal Best in daily routines. The results are positive learning environments,
fewer discipline issues, and a healthy respect for self and others.
The third goal of the School Improvement Plan includes parents as integral players in the success
connections necessary for student achievement. SIP team members provide parents and guardians with
lists of suggested community activities to support grade-level curriculum. We organized a main hallway
bulletin board demonstrating places to go in Virginia of historical importance. Parents enriched not only
their own children with visits, books, and videos; they also included neighborhood children on these
adventures. Scottsville is an exciting place to learn thanks to teachers, students, parents, and community
volunteers!
C-46
Stone- Robinson SchoOl
1999-2000 School Profile
School Characteristics
Representative areas and communities include: Ashcroft,
Auburn Hills, Boyd Tavern, Cismont, Cobham,
Glenmore, Keswick, Lindsay, Milton Hills, Running Deer,
and Shadwell. Facilities include a library, cafeteria, and
gymnasium. The school play areas, baseball diamond,
and multi-purpose fields serve as a community park after
school hours.
Average Class Size
Grade:I K-1 2 3 4 5
99-001 19.7 I 20.3 I 22.2 I 22.0 I 20.5
Staff Characteristics
Year Occupied 1961
Program Capacity (1999-2000) 532
Student Enrollment (1999-2000) 529
Average Daily Attendance (1999-2000) 96.2%
Mobility Index (1999-2000) 12.69%
Portable Classrooms (1999-2000) 0
Before/After School Program NO/YES
Title I School YES
District Rivanna
Setting Suburban
Site Size 11 acres
Middle School the Students Will Burley or
Attend Walton
High School the Students Will Attend Monticello
FULL- & ETHNICITY GENDER Average % with
PART-TIME TOTAL WHITE OTHER MALE FEMALE Years of Graduate
STAFF ~__
Administrative 2 2 0 0 2
Teacher 42 41 I 4 38 14 I 69
I
Teacher's Assist. 24 23 I 2 22
Totals 68 66 2 6 62
Student Characteristics
Free/Reduced Lunch [
Ethnicity '19.5% Yes 80.5% No
Other
1.1%
Black
13.4%
Special Education ~
16.0% Yes 84.0% No
Identified Gifted ~
6.8% Yes 93.2% No
C-47
Student Performance Measures
Stone-Robinson Elemcntary
*None or Too Few to Report.
** Data Not Available.
Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Catego#es upon Request.
Grade 3 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNIClTY/' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
White Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-9898-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00
Reading& 52.7 55.2 60.2 59.1 65.4 67.5 55 61 61 56.1 59,5 64.9 * 36,4 * 42.9 45.5 59.1 61.2 65.1 61.4 12.5 27.8 20.0 66.2 63.6 67.6
Writing
Math 45.1 56.3 68.2 63.1 68.5 77.8 63 68 71 47.6 63.5 75.3 * 18.2 * 38.1 54.5 70.5 51.0 58,1 65.9 12.5 11.1 33.3 55.9 80.7 74.6
History 42.9 52.9 68.2 51.7 65.9 69.6 49 62 65 45.1 55.4 74.0 * 45.5 * 40.5 45.5 72.7 44.9 60.5 63.8 4.2 27,8 26.7 55.9 62.1 76.1
Science 64.8 73.6 79.5 69,2 74.9 80.1 63 68 73 67,1 77.0 85.7 * 63.6 * 66.7 68.2 86,4 63.3 79.1 72.7 25.0 50.0 46.7 78.0 80.3 85.9
%Taking 100 100 98.9 99.1 99.3 96.7 97 97 **
Grade 5 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY .STATE ETHNICITY/' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
White Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97~98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-9§ 98-99 99qX) 97-9898-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00
Reading 62.4 75.3 72.0 70.8 77.3 76.0 68 69 68 62.8 80.3 73.2 57.1 36.4 63.6 62.0 69,6 65.9 62.8 84.8 78.0 36.9 33.3 38.9 68.9 81.8 81.0
Writing 56.5 84.3 85.4 67.1 86.7 85.8 65 81 81 55.8! 87.0 87.3 57.1 63,6 72,7 49.0 80.4 78.0 65.1 90.9 92.7 36.8 58,3 73.7 61.7 88.4 88.9
Math 33.3 49.4 52.4 46.3 55.6 70.6 47 51 63 34.6 53.9 56.3! 21.4 18.2 27.3 28.0 46.4 46.3 39.5 54.5 58.5 15.8 16.7 5.6 37.8 54.6 65.1
History 21.5 60.7 46.9 29.5 67.7 59.7 33 46 51 23.1 68.4 52.9 7.1 18.2 9.1 28.0 60.7 42,5 14.0 60.6 51.2 0 25.0 5.9 27.0 66.2 58.7
Science 52.7 70.8 71.6 65.0 76.9 74.5 59 67 64 56.4 76,3 74.3 28.6 36,4 54,5 58.0 71.4 70.0 46.5 69,7 73.2 31.6 25.0 35.3 58.2 77.9 82.5
Computer 74.2 87.6 95.1 79.8 88.5 93,1 72 81 85 75.6 90.8 94.4 64.3 63.6 100 76.0 85.7 92.7 72.1 90.9 97.6 52,6 50.0 83.3 79.7 93.5 98.4
Tech.
%Taking 100 100 99.6 98.8 98.4 97.0 97 96 **
Student Performance Me.urns
' Stone-Robinson Elementary
*None or Too FeW to Report. ** Data Not Available.
~ Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Categories upon Request.
Grade 2 - Individual Reading Assessment- Percentage of students scoring at each grade level.
Grade SCHOOL
Level SCHOOL COUNTY ETHNICITY/' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
Equiva- White Black Male Female Yes No
lence
98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00
First 20.4 11.1 13.4 12.9 19.3 9.6 28.6 * 19.1 14,7 21.6 8.5 31.8 27.8 17.1 6.3
Kindergarten 5.1 9.9 4.5 4.1 2.4 6.8 21.4 * 6.4 14.7 3,9 6.4 9.1 22.2 3.9 6.3
Grade 4 - Stanford 9 Achievement Tests - Average National Percentile Rank
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNIClTY/' GENDER
White Black Male Female
98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99.00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 9899 99-00
Reading 54 61 64 62 50 52 59 63 * * 48 52 59 68
Math 50 57 63 61 53 57 52 60 * * 47 53 53 60
Language 55 61 63 62 54 57 58 64 * * 48 51 61 70
Battery 54 59 63 61 53 56 57 62 * * 49 53 57 65
% Taking 100 100 96 97 96 96
Quartile Distribution for Batterv
Percent of students scoring in each
percentile range.
1-25%ile
76-99%ile
51-75%ile
26-50%ile
C-49
1999-2000 Parent Survey Stone-Robinson Elementary
Response Rate: 25.1% of households I; Agree/Strongly Agree
E) Don't Know
Effective Schools Correlates (Refer to Glossary) · Disagree/Strongly Disagree
A Climate of High Expectation for Success for all Students:
11.8%
87.2% 1.0%
Strong Instructional Leadership:
5.8%
83.0% 11.2%
The Opportunity to Learn and Adequate Time Spent on Academic Tasks:
11.2%
82.2% 6.6%
Safe and Environment:
88.4% 3.8%
7.6%
5.3%
91.8% 2.9%
Positive Home-School Relations:
t 2.4%
84.6% 3.1%
School Highlights
During school year 1999-2000, the Stone-Robinson faculty continued its focus on teaching and
learning mathematics. School-based staff development and faculty discussions emphasized
the use of the Investigations program recently adopted for use in Albemarle County. In
addition, the faculty began work on a problem-solving strand to supplement the math
benchmarks.
This year's new initiative was in the area of character education. The School Improvement
Team researched several character education approaches and programs, and used state and
county guidelines to design a program that we believe best meets our students' needs. The
program, Acorns to Oaks, uses class meetings as a vehicle for teaching the adopted character
education goals. School-wide activities, assemblies, and incentives round out the program,
which is being fully implemented in the fall of 2000.
C-50
Stony Point Elementary School
1999-2000 School Profile
School Characteristics
Representative areas and communities include:
Bentivar, Fontana, Franklin, Key YUest, Redbud Hills,
Stony Point, and ~0(/ilton Farms. Facilities include a
library, cafeteria, and gymnasium. The school play
areas and multi-purpose fields serve as a community
park after school hours.
Average Class Size
Grade: ] K 1 2 3 4 5
99-00 1 18.0 I 21.0 I 21.5 27.5 22.0 25.0
Staff Characteristics
Year Occupied 1934
Program Capacity (1999-2000) 277
Student Enrollment (1999-2000) 268
Average Daily Attendance (1999-2000) 96.5%
Mobility Index (1999-2000) 8.70%
Portable Classrooms (1999-2000) 0
Before/After School Program NO/YES
Title I School YES
District Rivanna
Setting Rural
Site Size 12 acres
Middle School the Students Will Attend Burley or
Sutherland
Albemarle or
High School the Students Will Attend
Monticello
FULL- & ETHNICITY GENDER Average % with
PART-TIME Years of Graduate
STAFF TOTAL WHITE OTHER MALE FEMALE Experience Degree
Administrative I 1 0 0 1 ~
Teacher 23 23 0 3 20 17167
Teacher's Assist. 13 11 2 0 13
Totals 37 35 2 3 34
Student Characteristics
Free/Reduced Lunch
Ethnicity 14.0% Yes 86.0% NO
Black
4.9%
Other
1.9%
Special Education
15.6% Yes 84.4% No
Identified Gifted ~
13.1% Yes 86.9% No
C-51
Student Performance Measures Stony Point Elementar
*None or Too Few to Report, ** Data Not Available. t Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Categodes upon Request,
Grade 3 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY/' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
White Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-9898-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97~98 98-99 99-00
Reading& 52.9 80.0 69.8 59,1 65.4 67.5 55 61 61 52.0 81.6 68.6 * * * 52.2 95.5 63.0 53.6 61.1 76.9 * 63.6 * 54.3 85.7 75.0
Writing
Math 66,0 82.5 79.2 63.1 68.5 77.8 63 68 71 66.0 81.6 78.4 * * * 77.3 95.5 77.8 57.1 66.7 80.8 * 63.7 * 66.7 89.3 84.1
History 46,0 80.0 72.0 51.7 65.9 69.6 49 62 65 44.7 78.9 70,6 * * * 50.0 86,4 74.0 42.9 72.2 65.4 * 63,6 * 46.6 85.7 75,0
Science 72.0 80.0 80.0 69,2 74.9 80.1 63 68 73 72.3 78,9 78,4 * * * 77.3 95.5 74.0 67.9 61.1 84.6 * 63.6 * 68.9 85.7 86.4
%Taking 98.1 95.2 96,4 99,1 99.3 96.7 97 97 **
Grade 5 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY/' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
White Black Male Female Yes No i
97-98 98-~9 9900 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-9898-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 9899 99-00
Reading 80.0 86.0 79.2 70.8 77.3 76.0 68 69 68 80.0 87.2 79.5 * * * 85.3i 85.7 80.0 73.1 86.4 78.2 * * * 85.2 90.3 80.0
Writing 68.3 91.8 93.8 67,1 86.7 85.8 65 81 81 68,3 93.5 95.5 * * * 73.5 92.9 92.0 61.5 90.5 95.7 * * * 72.2 92.7 93.5
Math 58.3 76.0 79.2 46.3 55.6 70.6 47 51 63 58.3 78.7 79.5 * * * 73.5 78.6 88.0 38.5 72.7 69.6 * * * 62.9 83.0 80.0
History 51.7 84.0 72.9 29.5 67.7 59.7 33 46 51 51.7 85.1 75.0 * * * 58.8 82.1 80.0 42.3 86.4 65.2 * * * 57.5 90.3 73.3
Science 80.0 90.0 83.3 65.0 76.9 74.5 59 67 64 80.0 91.5 84.1 * * * 88.2 96.4 92.0 69.2 81.8 73.9 * * * 85.2 92.7 82.2
Computer 88.3 88,0 93.8 79.8 88.5 93.1 72 81 85 88.3 89,4 93.2 * * * 94.1 92.9 100 80.8 81.8 86.6 * * * 90,7 90.3 93.3
Tech,
%Taking 95,2 100 96.0 98.8 98.4 97.0 97 96 **
Student Performance MeasUres
Stony Point Elementar
*None or Too Few to Report. ** Data Not Available.
1' Data Are Available for Other RaciaJ/Ethnic Categories upon Request.
Grade 2 - Individual Reading Assessment- Percentage of students scoring at each grade level.
Grade SCHOOL
Level SCHOOL COUNTY ETHNIClTY t GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
Equiva- White Black Male Female Yes No
lence
98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99..00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00
First 9.4 9.8 13.4 12.9 9.8 5.3 * * 3.6 7.7 8.0 13.3 18.2 * 7.1 5.4
Kindergarten 3.8 2.4 4.5 4.1 3,9 2.6 * * 7.1 3.8 4.0 0 9.1 * 2,4 2.7
mil
Grade 4 - Stanford 9 Achievement Tests -Average National Percentile Rank
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICtTY/' ~ GENDER
VYhite Black Male Female
98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99.00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99--00
Reading 70 75 64 62 50 52 70 77 * * 67 80 72 69
Math 73 77 63 61 53 57 74 77 * * 80 82 68 70
Language 73 72 63 62 54 57 73 73 * * 68 72 77 72
Battery 71 73 63 61 53 56 71 74 * * 71 77 70 69
% Taking 98 98 96 97 96 96
Quartile Distribution for Battery
Percent of students scoring in each
percentile range.
1-25%ile
76-99%ile
26-50%ile
~1-75%ile
C-53
1999-2000 Parent Survey Stony Point Elementary
Response Rate: 29.8% of households BAgreelStrongly Agree
E] Don't Know
Effective Schools Correlates, (Refer to Glossary) · Disagree/Strongly Disagree
A Climate of High Expectation for Success for all Students:
7.0%
90.5% 2.6%
Strong Instructional Leadership:
· 2.40/0
90.7% 7.0%
The Opportunity to Learn and Adequate Time Spent on Academic Tasks:
84.4% 7.5%
8.1%
Safe and Environment:
90.3% 0.0%
93.4%
3.8%
9.7%
2.8%
90.8% 2.9%
6.3%
School Highlights
The School Improvement Program concentration area of literacy was addressed through creative block
scheduling to allow for a Flexible Academic Block (FAB) where students of greatest need would be provided
literacy intervention to increase reading comprehension, to use phonetic decoding skills, and to increase reading
fluency and speed. Support from trained teachers and assistants, intervention specialists, parent volunteers,
and special education teachers offered services appropriate to the need of the children. Student access to the
new computer lab was ensured through FAB time each week. Projects integrating core content with technology
proliferated at the school. Enrichment activities included guest speakers, performances, and voluntary
academic challenge activities such as a spelling bee. As an example, Dr. Fred Diehl, of the University of
Virginia Biology Department, volunteered his time with investigative science studies for the children.
Margo Figgins, University of Virginia professor, was funded as a poet in residence through grants from the
Virginia Commission for the Arts and the PTO. Dr. Figgins worked with K-5 teachers and students to integrate
writing and literature appreciation across the grades. Several teachers received incentive grants for the Virginia
Commission for the Arts to integrate art projects with our core curriculum. Grant funding was also received for
Mr. Darrel Rose and Ms. Donna Graham for an African drumming artist-in-residence program teaching
traditional African percussion drumming and dance. Students and teachers have also received awards for
academic and artistic accomplishments from such organizations as the Shannon Foundation and the Piedmont
Council for the Arts.
Our PTO sponsored numerous programs for parents and raised nearly $20,000 to supplement instructional
activities to support our School Improvement Program and the priorities of the School Board. Over 200 families
volunteered in some capacity to assist with PTO activities, classroom programs, and school-wide projects. A
team of parents tended to the landscaping in our inner courtyards and the gardens outside. Community
volunteers from the senior center and the community assisted in the library and in classrooms as readers with
individual and small groups of children.
C-54
Woodbrook Elementary School
1999-2000 School Profile
School Characteristics
Representative areas and communities include:
Carrsbrook, Fieldbrook, Forest Lakes South, Mallside
Forest Apartments, Ridgewood, Rio Hill
Apartments, Still Meadows, Squire Hill,
~/estmoreland, and ~O~'oodbrook. Facilities include a
library, cafeteria, and gymnasium. The school play
areas and multi-purpose fields serve as a community
park after school hours.
Average Class Size
Grade: [ K-1 2 3 4 5
99-00 I 21.9 19.8 20.7 21.3 20.3
Staff Characteristics
Year Occupied 1966
Program Capacity (1999-2000) 332
Student Enrollment (1999-2000) 419
Average Daily Attendance (1999-2000) 96.6%
Mobility Index (1999-2000) 15.64%
Portable Classrooms (1999-2000) 0
Before/After School Program NO/YES
Title I School YES
District Rio
Setting Suburban
Site Size 12 acres
Middle School the Students Will Attend Sutherland
High School the Students Will Attend Albemarle
FULL- & ETHNICITY GENDER Average I % with
PART-TIME Years ofI Graduate
STAFF TOTAL VWIITE OTHER MALE FEMALE Experience Degree
Administrative I 1 0 1 0
Teacher 39 39 0 3 36 10171
Teacher's Assist. 18 16 2 0 18
Totals 58 56 2 4 54
Student Characteristics
Ethnicity
Other
7.9%
Black
21.2%
Free/Reduced Lunch 1
23.9% Yes
76.1% No
Special Education
12.7% Yes
87.3% No
Identified Gifted ~
7.9% Yes 92.1% No
C-55
Student Performance Measures Woodbrook Elementar
*None or Too Few to Report. ** Data Not Available. ~ Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Categories upon Request.
Grade 3 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNIClTY ¢ GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
White Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 sg-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-9898-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00
Reading& 68.2 75.4 70.0 59.1 65.4 67.5 55 61 61 70.3 80.9 76.5 * 53.8 * 58.3 65.4 69.4 80,0 82.9 70.8 * * 30.0 75.7 81,2 78.0
Writing
Math 65.9 80.3 88.7 63.1 68.5 77.8 63 68 71 67,6 87.2 94.2 * 53.8 * 70.8 84.6 86.1 60.0 77,1 92.3 * * 81.8 67.5 85.0 90.2
History 56.8i 77.0 77.0 51.7 65,9 69.6 49 62 65 59.5 78.7 90.2 * 69.2 * 58.3 80.8 83.3 55,0 74.3 68.0 * * 27.3 62.2 83.0 88.0
Science 75.0 85.2 88.7 69.2 74.9 80,1 63 68 73 78.4 91.5 96.2 * 61.5 * 75.0 88.5 88.9 75.0 82.9 88.5 * * 63,6 81,1 88.7 94,1
%Taking 100 98,4 98.8 99.1 99.3 96.7 97 97 **
Grade 5 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNIClTY ~' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
AREA
White Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-~9 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-9898-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00
Reading 85.7 80.9 82,8 70.8 77,3 76.0 68 69 68 93.6 85.0 92.3 * * 46.2 81.5 80.0 78.8 89.7 82.4 88.0 * * 57.1 92.0 85,7 93.0
Writing 85.5 91.8 87.9 67.1 86.7 85,8 65 81 81 93.5 92.9 89.7 * * 78.6 77.8 90.9 81.8 92.9 93.8 96.0 * * 80.0 94.0 93.0 90.7
Math 71,9 63.8 81,0 46.3 55.6 70.6 47 51 63 80.9 70.0 92.3 * * 38,5 64,3 63.3 84.8 79.3 64.7 76.0 * * 42.9 78.4 71.4 95.3
History 42.1 72.3 75,9 29.5 67.7 59.7 33 46 51 48.9 80.0 87.2 * * 30.8 42.9 66.7 81.8 41.4 82.4 68.0 * * 28.6 47.1 78.6 93.0:
Science 82.5 76.1 75.9:65.0 76.9 74,5 59 67 64 89.4 82.1 92,3 * * 23.1 78.6 79.3 81.8 86.2 70.6 68.0 * * 28.6 86.3 80.9 93.0
Computer 82.5 89.4 96,6 79,8 88.5 93.1 72 81 85 91,5 95.0 97.4 * * 92.3 78.6 86.7 97.0 86.21 94.1 96.0 * * 85.7 90.2 90.5 100
Tech.
%Taking 100 92.4 94.8 98.8 98.4 97.0 97 96 **
Student Performance Measures
Woodbrook Elementar
*None or Too Few to Report. ** Data Not Available.
~ Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Catego#es upon Request.
Grade 2 - Individual Reading Assessment- Percentage of students scoring at each grade level.
Grade SCHOOL
Level SCHOOL COUNTY ETHNICITY ~' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
Equiva- White Black Male Female Yes No
lence
98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-S9 99-00 98-99 99-00
First 3.2 18.5 13.4 12.9 0 9.3 * 40.0 0 13.3 6.9 25.0 20 44.8 0 3.8
Kindergarten 1.6 6.2 4.5 4.1 1.9 3.7 * 15.0 0 8.9 3.4 2,8 0 13.8 1.9 1.9
Grade 4 - Stanford 9 Achievement Tests -Average National Percentile Rank
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY ~' GENDER
White Black Male Female
98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 9900 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00
Reading 71 73 64 62 50 52 75 77 * * 87 70 78 74
Math 80 66 63 61 53 57 81 70 * 43 78 65 81 66
Language 67 66 63 62 54 57 68 69 * 55 61 67 74 65
Battery 73 68 63 61 53 56 76 I 72 * * 70 67 77 69
% Taking 98 100 96 97 96 96
Quartile Distribution for Batterly
Percent of students scoring in each
percentile range.
1-25%ile
26-50%ile
76-99%ile
51-75%ile
C-57
1999-2000 Parent Survey Woodbrook Elementar
Response Rate: 32.1% of households · Agree/Strongly Agree
E] Don't Know
Effective Schools Correlates (Refer to Glossary) la Disagree/Strongly Disagree
A Climate of High Expectation for Success for all Students:
tt.9%
85.7% 2.4%
Strong Instructional Leadership:
7.2%
79.8% 12.9%
The Opportunity to Learn and Adequate Time Spent on Academic Tasks:
9.5%
83.1% 7.4%
Safe and )nment:
81.9% 3.1%
15.1%
6.8%
90.6% 2.6%
80.7% 5.1%
14.2%
School Highlights
Our School Improvement goals for 1999-2000 were in the areas of technology, Character
Counts, and literacy.
On the parent survey, 96.1 percent of the parents responding say they believe "Teachers and
Administration show respect toward students." We model what we teach in Character Counts.
Eighty-three percent of our third-graders and 83 percent of our fifth-graders passed the reading
subtests of the Virginia Standards of Learning tests.
Twenty-four percent of our students in the fifth grade received advanced pass rates for fifth-
graders in the reading test of the Virginia Standards of Learning tests.
Woodbrook teachers participated in two one-hour graduate level courses in technology:
"Introduction to Educational Technologies and the Virginia Computer/Technology Standards"
and "Word Processing in the Classroom."
Ninety-seven percent of our fifth-grade students passed the technology test of the Virginia
Standards of Learning tests.
C-58
Benjamin F. yancey Elementary School
1999- 2000 SChool Profile
School Characteristics
Representative areas and communities include:
Alberene, Esmont and Howardsville. Facilities
include a library, cafeteria, and gymnasium. The
school play areas and multi-purpose fields serve as a
community park after school hours.
Average Class Size
Grade: [ K-1 1 2 2-3 3 4 5
99-00 I 21.0 20.0 15.0 14.0 21.0 15.0 14.0
Staff Characteristics
Y~ar Occupied 1960
Program Capacity (1999-2000) 134
Student Enrollment (1999-2000) 166
Average Daily Attendance (1999-2000) 96.9%
Mobility Index (1999-2000) 24.09%
Portable Classrooms (1999-2000) 0
Before/After School Program NO/YES
Title I School YES
District Scettsville
Setting Rural
Site Size 7 acres
Middle School the Students Will Attend Walton
High School the Students Will Attend Monticello
FULL-& ETHNICITY GENDER AverageI %with
PART-TIME Years of Graduate
STAFF TOTAL WHITE OTHER MALE FEMALE _EX.Preriencer ~ Degree
Adminisira[ive I I 0 1 0
Teacher 14 12 2 4 10 15171
Teacher's Assist. 9 8 1 0 9
Totals 24 21 3 5 19
Student Characteristics
Free/Reduced Lunch
Ethnicity 68.3% Yes 41.7% No
Other
6.0%
Special Education [
18.9% Yes
91.t% No
Black
39.8%
Identified Gifted ~
5.4% Yes 94.6% No
C-59
Student Performance Measures Benjamin F. Yance;y Elementary
*None or Too Few to Report. ** Data Not Available. ~ Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Catego#es upon Request.
Grade 3 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNIClTY/' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
White Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 ~9-00 97-98 98-99 ~9-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99q30 97-98 98-99 99~00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-9898-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00
Reading& 42.9 43.5 37,5 59.1 65.4 67.5 55 61 61 50.0 60.0 46.7 * 30.0 * 40.0 40.0 22.2 44.4 50.0 46.7 37.6 46.2 36.4 50.0 45.5 38.5
Writing
Math 46.4 39.1 50.0 63.1 68.5 77.8 63 68 71 55.6 70,0 66.7 * 15.4 * 50.0 40,0 44.4 44.4 37.5 53.3 43.8 30.8 45.5 50.0 45.5 53.8
History 10,7 52.2 54.2 51.7 65.9 69.6 49 62 65 16.7 60.0 60.0 * 46.2 * 20.0 53.3 44,4 5,6 50.0 60.0 6.3 53.9 54.5 20.0 54.5 53.8
Science 42.9 47.8 58.3 69.2 74.9 80.1 63 68 73 50.0 60.0 60.0 * 38.5 * 40.0 46.7 55.6 44.4 50.0 60.0 31.3 38.5 45.5 60,0 54.5 69.2
%Taking 100 100 96.0 99.1 99.3 96.7 97 97 **
Grade 5 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNIClTY 1' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
VVhite Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 i97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00
Reading 37.5 60.9 60.0 70.8 77.3 76.0 68 69 68 46.7 58.3 58.8 * 63.6 * 30.0 40.0 54.5 42.9 76.9 63.2 23.1 45.5 54.3 60.0 75,0 56,3
Writing 29.2 78.3 83,3 67.1 86.7 85,8 65 81 81 33.3 83.3 76.5 * 72.7 * 10.01 70,0 72.71 42.9 84,6 89.5 14.3 80.0 78.6 50.0 76.9 87.5
Math 16.7 30.4 50.0 46.3 55.6 70,6 47 51 63 20.0 33.3 52.9 * 27.3 * 10.0 30.0 54.5 21.4 30.8 47.4 15.4 18.2 42,9 20.0 41.7 56.3
History 4.2 73.9 45.2 29.5 67.7 59.7 33 46 51 6.7 83,3 47.1 * 63,6 45.5 10.0 60.0 50.0 0 84.6 42.1 0 72.7 50.0 10.0 75.0 41.2
Science 41,7 65.2 58.1 65.0 76.9 74.5 59 67 64 46.7 83.3 64.7 * 45.5 45.5 40.0 50.0 41.7 42.9 76.9 68.4 38.5 63.6 64.3 50.0 66.6 52.9
Computer 66.7 87.0 86.7 79,8 88.5 93,1 72 81 85 66.7 100 82.4 * 72.71 * 50.0 90.0 81.8 78.6 84.6 89.5 46.2 100 85.7 100 75.0 87.5
Tech.
%Taking 96.0 100 97,9 98.8 98.4 97.0 97 96 **
Student Performance MeasUres n amin F. Yancey Elementary
*None or ToO FeW to Reportl · ** Data Not Available,
1' Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Categories upon Request.
Grade 2 - Individual Reading Assessment- Percentage of students Scoring at each g, rade !~vel.
Grade SCHOOL
Level SCHOOL COUNTY ETHNIClTY ~- GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
Equiva-
lence VVhite Black Male Female Yes No
98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99.-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 ..9~-~0
~:83:0' 70:6 73.3 * * 70.0 S~.{) 64.7 60.0 6;l;~17/~!9'
First 29.6 20.0 13.4 12.9 29,4 20.0 * * 20.0 20.0 29.4 20.0 28.6 * 30.8 15,4
Kindergarten 3.7 10.0 4,5 4,1 0 6.7 * * 10.0 0 5.9 20.0 0 * 7.7 7.7
Grade 4 - Stanford 9 Achievement Tests - Average National Percentile Rank
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY '/- GENDER
White Black Male Female
98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00
Reading 37 33 64 62 50 52 37 * , 25 51 36 31 *
Math 44 31 63 61 53 57 55 * , 22 67 31 35 *
Language 47 42 63 62 54 57 51 * , 33 60 40 41
Battery 42 35 63 61 53 56 47 * , 27 57 36 36 *
% Taking 97 96 96 97 96 96
Quartile Distribution for BatterT
Percent of students scoring in each
percentile range,
76-99%ile
51-75%ile
1-25%ile
26-$0%ile
C-61
1999-2000 Parent Survey
Benjamin F. Yancey Elementary
Response Rate: 16.3% of households EIAgree/Strongly Agree
E] Don't Know
Effective Schools Correlates (Refer to Glossary) · Disagree/Strongly Disagree
A Climate of High Expectation for Success for all Students:
13.5%
83.7% 2.7%
Strong Instructional Leadership:
~ t5.5%
72.4% t 2.1%
The Opportunity to Learn and Adequate Time Spent on Academic Tasks:
82.1% 8.6%
Safe and Orderl'
Environment:
94.7%
87.4% 4.2%
1.8%
3.6%
8.4%
Positive Home-School Relations:
16.3%
76.3% 7.3%
School Highlights
For the 1999-2000 school year, the School Improvement Plan centered on math, reading, and
writing goals with one goal related to School Safety. As part of the reading goal, a two-hour literacy
block was developed to better meet the instructional levels of the students. Students participated in
Literacy Groups across grade levels. Another part of the reading and writing goals was to review
and evaluate a reading program change that could be used with students in the greatest danger of
not passing the Standards of Learning reading test in third and fifth grades. Based on this
evaluation, the SPA reading program was selected to supplement the reading program for these
students during the 2000-01 school year.
With the adoption of the new math series, a School Improvement Plan goal was to see that the
transition to the new math series was as smooth as possible for the teachers. Training and support
were provided on a weekly schedule to provide this support for the teachers. The continued rise in
the math SOL scores in the third and fifth grades were noted. Teachers will continue to receive in-
service training during the 2000-01 school year in the area of math.
Overall, the 1999-2000 school year was a very successful one for the students and staff of Yancey
Elementary School. A discovery of papers relating to Mr. Benjamin Yancey and his work in the
community was covered by the news media at the local, state, and national levels. Students were
excited to learn about the history of education in the area as well as the challenges that faced early
African-American educators. Those papers were donated to the University of Virginia's Alderman
Library.
C-62
MIDDLE SCHOOLS
BURLEY
HENLEY
JOUETT
SUTHERLAND
WALTON
Jackson P. Burley Middle School
1999-2000 School Profile
School Characteristics
Facilities include a library, technology center, computer lab,
full auditorium, band room, art room, cafeteria, and
gymnasium. Intramural athletics are offered in several
sports. The school play area, multi-purpose field, and
baseball diamond serve as a district park after school hours.
Class Size # of classes in each range per subject.
STUDENTS English Math Science Social Health/ Foreign
Stud. PE Lang.
15 or Less 5 5 2 2 0 0
16 to20 3 6 4 5 0 3
21 to25 14 9 13 13 9 0
26 to 29 1 3 2 1 9 0
30 or more 0 0 0 0 0 0
Staff Characteristics
Year Occupied 1951
Program Capacity 415
Student Enrollmenl 483
Average Daily Attendance 95.0%
Mobility Index 17.93%
Portable Classrooms 2
Before/After School Program NO/NO
Setting Urban
Site Size 15 acres
Elementary Schools That Agnor-Hurt,
Feed into This School Stone-Robinson,
and Stony Point
High School the Students Albemarle or
Will Attend Monticello
FULL- & ETHNICITY GENDER J Average %with
PART-TIME Years of Graduate
STAFF TOTAL WHITE OTHER MALE FEMALE I Experience Degree
Administrative 2 0 2 1 1
Teacher 40 37 3 9
Teacher's Assist. ~5 4~ 1 0
Totals 47 41 6 10 37
Student Characteristics
Free/Reduced Lunch
27.5% Yes
Ethnicity 72.5% No
Other
s.o% Special Education
13.2% Yes
86.8% No
Black
22.4%
Identified Gifted
16.6% Yes 83.4% No
C-64
*None or Too Few to Report.
** Data Not Available.
Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Categories upon Request.
Grade 6 - Sl_anford 9 Achievement Tests - Average National Percentile Rank
SCHOOL
SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY ~' GENDER
AREA White Black Male Female
98-99 99-00 98-~9 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 ' 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-09 99-00
Reading 66 62 69 71 58 59 73 71 35 32 62 59 69 66
Math 64 59 69 69 58 62 74 68 25 27 63 59 65 59
Language 54 5O 58 58 51 53 59 57 26 27 45 46 61 55
Battery 64 58 67 67 58 60 71 66 31 31 61 57 67 , 60
% Taking 98 98 96 97 96 95
Quartile Distribution for Batter~
Percent of students scoring in each
percentile range.
1-25%ile
76-99%ile
26-50%ile
51-75%ile
Grade 8 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY/'
White Black
SCHOOL
GENDER
Male Female
FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
Yes No
8th Grade~ Corn letin Courses for High School Credit.
Foreiqn Lan~uacl~
45% -40% · 1998ot999 ~- 45%-
2S%- 34% -].,[::] t999-2000 ~ 40%
30% - 35%
25% 30% '--
20% 25%'
20%'
lS%~ "12%~ 13%_ 13%--
10%-
$%_ 10%
0o~ $%
0%'
County School County School
All Students Minority Students
32%'
t H 1998-t999
[3 t999-2000
21%~
County School County School
All Students Minority Students
.8%__
,1999- 2000 Parent Survev
Response Rate: 24.9% of households
..Effective Schools Correlate. (Refer to Glossary)
A Climate of Hi for Success for all Students:
74.0%
3.9%
r~ Agree/Strongly Agree
[~ Don't Know
· Disagree/Strongly DisagreeJ
22.1%
Strong Instructional Leadership:
68.8% 12.1%
The Opportunity to Learn and Adequate Time Spent on Academic Tasks:
19.0%
67.6%
Frequent Monitoring of Student Progress:
10.9%
21.6%
74.1%
Safe and Orderly Environment:
2.7%
23.2%
71.1%
Positive Home-School Relations:
5.7%
23.2%
60.8%
6.1%
33.1%
C-66
School Hi hli hts Jackson P. Burle Middle
Burley Middle School is committed to establishing and maintaining a learning community which
strives for excellence, creatively pursues challenges, acts responsibly, and encourages an
appreciation of life-long learning with a respectful and caring environment.
We continue to address the needs of our school through the school improvement process. The
School Improvement Team focused on the three goals of improving student academic
performance, creating a positive school climate, and promoting the necessary link between the
home and school.
Goal 1' Six of the 10 objectives aimed toward improving student performance were
successfully met. The math SOL scores increased 9 percent over the previous school year.
The social studies scores showed an increase of 8.6 percent passing.
Goal 2: Four of the five objectives for promoting a positive school climate were successfully
met. Student, faculty, and parent survey data were collected to evaluate their impressions
of Burley. These data will be further analyzed and utilized as part of the continuous process
to improve service.
Goal 3: This objective was successfully met. The PTO raised over $10,000 and worked
with the staff to supplement their financial needs.
C-67
Joseph T. Henley Middle School
1999-2000 School Profile
School Characteristics
Facilities include a library, technology center, computer
lab, cafeteria, band room, art room, and gymnasium.
Intramural athletics are offered in several sports. The
school play area and multi-purpose fields serve as a district
park after school hours.
!' Class Size # of classes in each range per subject.
STUDENTS English Math Science Social Health/I Foreign
Stud. PE Lang.
15 or Less 9 10 2 9 0 0
16to20 5 6 10 5 4 3
21 to 25 9 7 10 8 8 2
26 to 29 7 7 8 8 11 3
30 or more 0 0 0 0 0 0
Staff Characteristics
Year Occupied 1966
Program Capacity 675
Student Enrollment 616
Average Daily Attendance 96.4%
Mobility Index 8.45%
Portable Classrooms 1
Before/After School Program YES/YES
Setting Rural
Site Size 30 acres
Brownsville,
Elementary Schools That Crozet,
Feed into This School Meriwether Lewis,
and Murray
High School the Students Western
Will Attend Albemarle
FULL- &
PART-TIME
STAFF
Administrative
Teacher
Teacher's Assist.
Totals
ETHNICITY GENDER
TOTAL WHITE OTHER MALE FEMALE
2 2 0 2 0
47 42 5 14 33
6 6 0 0 6
55 50 5 16 39
Average % with
Years of Graduate
Experience Degree
17 57
Student Characteristics
Ethnicity
Other
2.9%
Black
4.5%
Free/Reduced Lunch
13.0% Yes
Special Education I
18.5% Yes
Identified Gifted [
21.8% Yes
87.0% No
81.5% No
78.2% No
C-68
*None or Too Few to Report.
** Data Not Available.
Data A~e Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Catego#es upon Request.
Grade 6 - Stanford 9 Achievement Tests - Average National Percentile Rank
SCHOOL
SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNIClTY/' GENDER
AREA White Black Male Female
~--~ 98-9.__.__~9 ~ '--98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 _99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00
Reading 74 82 69 71 58 59 77 83 * * 75 80 73 83
Math 77 78 69 69 58 62 80 80 * * 79 79 75 78
Language 63 66 58 58 51 53 65 68 * * 61 61 66 71
Battery 73 77 67 67 58 60 75 79 * * 74 76 71 79
% Taking 99 96 96 97 96 95
Quartile Distribution for Batter~.
Percent of students scoring in each
percentile range.
1-25%ile
__ 5%~ 26-50%ile
76-99%ile
51-75%ile
Grade 8 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHN~C~TY ~'
White Black
SCHOOL
GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
Male Female Yes No
Student Performance Measures Jose h T. Henle Middle
8th Graders Corn letin Courses for Hi h School Credit:
Foreicln Lan~luaqe
80%'
40% · 1998-1999 4S%t
3S% 34% 36%36% ~ 40%
35%
30%, '27%~
25%* 30% ~
20%- 25%-
1fi%- 20%
10% 9% 15%
5% 10%'
o%. $%'
o%
County School County School
All Students Minority Students
1998-1999
t999-2000
27% 28%_
14%.
;9%
County School
All Students
County School
Minority Students
1999-2000 Parent Survev
Response Rate: 26.0% of households
Effective Schools Correlates (Refer to Glossary)
A for Success for all Students:
78.8%
Strong Instructional Leadership:
2.4%
69.0% 14.9%
The Opportunity to Learn and Adequate Time Spent on Academic Tasks:
71.7%
Frequent Monitoring of Student Progress:
10.1%
74.4%
Safe and Orderly Environment:
2.4%
81.3%
Positive Home-School Relations:
6.5%
66.9%
6.3%
D Agree/Strongly Agree
[3 Don't Know
· Disagree/Strongly Disagreel
18.8%
16.1%
18.2%
23.2%
12.2%
26.7%
C-70
School Hi hli hts Jose h T. Henle Middle
Students At-Risk for Academic Failure:
A total of 85 students were identified to participate in one or more of our support programs: after-school tutorial,
Organizational Homeroom, Extra Core extended learning time, sixth-, seventh-, and eighth-grade Language/
Program, and eighth-grade Junior Apprenticeship at CATEC.
School Improvement Committee Programs developed for identified at-risk students show results as follows: of the
63 participants in academic support programs, 70 percent received passing grades in all of their core classes, 20.5
percent received passing grades in three of four academic classes, 6.5 percent received passing grades in two of
four academic classes and 2.5 percent received passing grades in one of four academic classes. None of the
participating students were recommended for retention. Additionally, 22 eighth-grade students successfully
participated in the Junior Apprenticeship Program offered at CATEC. QIRI pre-testing was completed on all
participating students and shows a decoding range from second through sixth grades. Post-test results show an
increase of one or more years for all participating students. We continue to be fortunate to have both parents and
WAHS honor students volunteer as tutors in our after-school program.
Student Accountability I Responsibility:
School Improvement Committee Programs in the area of Student Accountability/Responsibility are highlighted by
the pilot of a Character Counts Education Program. A quotation/message from "Project Wisdom" was read each
day. A kickoff campaign was held which raised over $3,400 for Hurricane Floyd flood victims. The campaign
involved guest speakers including Dom Starsia from the University of Virginia National Champion Lacrosse Team
as well as Robert Van Winkle, appearing twice, from Channel 29 News. The "Coins for Kids" campaign resulted in
contributions of $2,823. This program is in support of the local Ronald McDonald House, and we have partnered
with a local radio station, MIX 107.5, to help promote our efforts. Individual students were recognized for
demonstrating the pillar of character of the month through a Character Counts Honor Roll. Students identified were
recognized and a list was posted in the guidance office window.
Character Counts Honor Roll:
Pillar # Nominated # Selected
Trustworthiness 22 14
Respect 19 14
Responsibility 34 27
Fairness 7 6
Caring 51 33
Citizenship 31 16
The six pillars of character were prominently displayed throughout the building and classrooms. Student planners
were utilized daily to assist students in their organizational skills as well as provide a tool of communication to
parents. The committees' efforts in the area of student discipline show a 36.3 percent decrease in the number of
students assigned to in-school suspension and a 30.8 percent decrease in the number of students assigned to out-
of-school suspension. To assist in the regulation of hall traffic, students recorded the times they exit classrooms.
Sign-up sheets were posted in all classrooms. As a culminating activity, Dr. John Jane presented information
regarding his work with actor Christopher Reeve. Dr. Jane tied his presentation into the theme of Caring. Finally,
the entire student body participated in a school service day scheduled during the last week of school.
Literacy I SOL Improvement;
School Improvement Committee Programs in the area of Literacy/SOL Improvement is highlighted by the success
of the Language! Program implemented in all three grades. Ninety-six students in six sections are served in this
program and all sections have completed at least Unit 18 with 80 percent mastery. Language! teachers met weekly
with the English lead teacher to review and share strategies. Regular meetings with our feeder schools were hel~d8ttoh
share literacy program information and plan for the transition of fifth-grade students to the sixth grade. January
marked our "Best Practices in Language!lCurriculum Map" share fair faculty meeting. Teachers in the Language!
Program presented an overview of the program to all staff including a practice exercise in using the Fry Readability
Graph for their individual content area. Additionally, pre-reading strategies like Anticipation Guide and K-W-L Chart
were reviewed as well as discussions about text structure. Teachers reviewed their curriculum maps with specific
reference to SOL skills, timelines, and modifications needed to attain the best results during the spring
administration of the SOL tests. Review and practice materials were available and shared through the lead
teachers. An after-school tutorial program was added to target identified eighth-grade students at risk for failing one
or more of the SOL tests. This tutorial program ran twice each week and was designed to strengthen skills and
practice test formats in preparation for the spring administration of the SOL tests. SOL results show an increase in
the percentage of students passing in six of eight tests. The STAR Reading Assessment package was installed
prior to the end of school and all Language! students were assessed to create baseline data for the 2000-01 school
year. Next fall plans are underway to use this assessment with all students.
C-71
Jack School
1999-2000 School Profile
,School Characteristics
Facilities include a library, technology center, computer lab,
cafeteria, band room, art room, and gymnasium. Intramural
athletics are offered in several sports. The school play area,
multi-purpose field, softball diamond, and tennis courts
serve as a district park after school hours.
Class Size # of classes in each range per subject.
STUDENTS English Math Science Social !Health/ Foreign
Stud. PE Lang.
.... 15 or Less 6 7 5 6 0 0
16to20 6 6 5 10 0 2
21 to25 13 7 9 2 2 1
26 to 29 3 5 5 7 11 0
.... 30 or more 1 0 0 0 5 0
Staff Characteristics
Year Occupied 1966
Program Capacity 503
Student Enrollment 514
AVerage DailY Attendance 96.5%
Mobility Index 13.91%
Portable Classrooms 5
Before/After School Program NO/YES
Setting Suburban
Site Size 20 acres
Broadus Wood,
Elementary Schools That Greer, and
Feed into This School Meriwether
Lewis
High School the Students Albemarle or
Will Attend Western
Albemarle
!' FULL- & ETHNICITY GENDER Average % with
PART-TIME
STAFF TOTAL WHITE OTHER MALE FEMALE Years of Graduate
~ ~ ~ Experience Degree
Administrative ~2 1~ 1 1 1 ~ ~
Teacher 39 35 4 8 31 19 59
Teacher's Assist. ~3 2 I 0 3 ~l
Totals 44 ~ 6~ ~9 35 _~
Student Characteristics
Ethnicity
Other
9.3%
Black
8.2%
Free/Reduced Lunch ~
17.5% Yes 82.5% No
Special Education ~
12.6% Yes 87.4% No
Identified Gifted [
25.5% Yes
74.5% No
C-72
Student Performance Measures
*None or Too Few to Report. ** Data Not Available.
Jack Jouett Middle
Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Catego#es upon Request.
Grade 6 - Stanford 9 Achievement Tests - Average National Percentile Rank
SCHOOL
SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY/' GENDER
AREA White Black Male Female
98-9----"-~--- 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 - 99-00 98-99 99-0'--"-~ 98-~ 99'---"-'~ ~ -99-00 98-99 - 99~'-
Reading 77 82 69 71 58 59 83 84 48 81 78 74 86
Math 78 79 69 69 58 62 80 81 55 * 83 79 74 79
Language 67 70 58 58 51 53 71 73 55 * 71 62 63 77
Battery 74 77 67 67 58 60 78 79 53 * 78 74 70 80
% Taking 97.8 94.5 96 97 96 95
Quartile Distribution for Batter~
Percent of students scoring in each
percentile range.
1-25%ile
__ 5%'"'~
26-50%ile
76-99%ile
51-75%ile
Grade 8 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY/'
White Black
SCHOOL
GENDER
FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
Yes No
Male Female
Student Performance Measures
8th Graders Com leting Courses for High School Credit:
Jack Jouett Middle
Foreign Lan(]uaae
4~% 4t%' I · t998-1999 45%
4O%
3s%- 34% 36% ].,D 1999-2000 4o%~
30%- 35%
20%
1s% 13%__
10%. 15%
5%. 10%-
0%- 5%-
0%-
County School County School
All Students Minority Students
1998-1999
1999-2000
27% 280/'~
-- 17%~
13%__
County School
All Students
County School
Minority Students
.! 999- 2000 Parent Survey
Response Rate: 27.4% of households
,,Effective Schools Correlate~ (Refer to Glossary)
A Climate of Hi for Success for all Students:
72.6%
3.7%
~ Agree/Strongly Agree
[3 Don't Know
· Disagree/Strongly Disagree~
23.6%
Strong Instructional Leadership:
57.5% 18.4%
The Opportunity to Learn and Adequate Time Spent on Academic Tasks:
67.6%
Frequent Monitoring of Student Progress:
12.5%
~ 24.1%
19.9%
22.1%
76.0%
Safe and Orderly Environment:
t.9%
12.0%
80.8%
Positive Home-School Relations:
7.2%
26.0%
65.0%
9.0%
C-74
School Hi
Jack Jouett Middle
C-75
Mortimer Y. Sutherland Middle School
1999-2000 School Profile
School Characteristics
Facilities include a TV studio, library, technology center,
computer lab, "gathering place," band room, art room,
cafeteria and gymnasium. Intramural athletics are offered in
several sports. The school play areas, multi-purpose fields,
baseball diamond and tennis courts serve as a district park
after school hours.
Class Size # of classes in each range per subject.
STUDENTS English Math Science Social Health/ Foreign
Stud. PE Lang.
.... 15 or Less 7 5 2 1 0 2
16to20 1 6 3 13 0 1
21 to25 4 12 10 12 14 0
26 to 29 16 7 12 3 26 0
30 or more 5 I 0 1 8 0
Year Occupied 1994
Program Capacity 712
Student Enrollment 617
Average Daily Attendance 96.4%
Mobility Index 15.06%
Portable Classrooms 0
Before/After School Program NO/NO
Setting Suburban
Site Size 21 acres
Agnot-Hurt,
Elementary Schools That Hollymead,
Feed into This School Stony Point, and
Woodbrook
High School the Students
Will Attend Albemarle
Staff Characteristics
FULL- &
PART-TIME
STAFF
Administrative
Teacher
Teacher's Assist.
Totals
TOTAL WHITE
2 1
47 45
4 3
53 49
ETHNICITY
OTHER
1
2
1
GENDER
MALE FEMALE
1 1
14 33
0 4
15 38
Average % with
Years of Graduate
Experience Degree
12 49
,Student Characteristics
Ethnicity
Other
5.8%
Black
13.3%
Free/Reduced Lunch
10.4% Yes 89.6% No
Special Education ~
14.2% Yes 85.8% No
Identified Gifted I
20.1% Yes
79.9% No
C-76
Student Performance Measures
*None or Too Few to Report. ** Data Not Available.
Mortimer Y. Sutherland Middle
1' Data Are Available for Other I~acial/Ethnic Catego#es upon I~equest.
Grade 6 - Stanford 9 Achievement Tests - Average National Percentile Rank
SCHOOL
SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY/' GENDER
AREA White I Black Male Female
98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-"~' ~~ 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00
Reading 74 75 69 71 58 59 76 79 54 49 72 69 75 83
Math 75 72 69 69 58 62 78 77 43 44 77 71 74 74
Language 62 60 58 58 51 53 65 65 42 37 60 51 65 71
Battery 71 71 67 67 58 60 74 74 49 48 71 66 72 76
% Taking 99 99 96 97 96 95
Quartile Distribution for Batter~
Percent of students scoring in each
percentile range.
1-25%ile
26-50%ile
76-99%ile
51-75%ile
8 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY ~'
White Black
SCHOOL:
GENDER
Male Female
FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
Yes No
Student Performance Measures
V!tttt.cr 1. ~utfierlanfl lVllflOle
8th Graders Corn lefin Courses for Hi h School Credil:
Foreicln Lanclua,qe
[] 1999-2000 39% 4~%
40%
3o%
25% 24% 30%
25%
20%' 17%-- 2O%'
15%
15%-
10%'
t0%-
S%-
0%~
0%
County School County School
All Students Minority Students
· t998-1999]---
[] 1999-2000 ~-
29%
13%__
County School
All Students
County School
Minority Students
1999- 2000 Parent Survey
· Response Rate: 28.2% of households
,Effective Schools Correlates (Refer to Glossary)
A Climate of High Expectation for Success for all Students:
63.6%
Strong Instructional Leadership:
4.0%
The
54.2%
to Learn and Ad; uate Time
70.2%
uent Monitorin of Student
tess:
63.9%
m Agree/Strongly Agree
E] Don't Know
· Disagree/Strongly Disagreel
32.3%
18.3%
on Academic Tasks:
11.5%
27.6%
18.3%
3.8%
32.3%
71.6%
Positive Home-School Relations:
53.0%
7.4%
5.7%
22.7%
39.6%
C-78
School Hi Mortimer Y. Sutherland Middle
C-79
Leslie H. Walton Middle School
1999-2000 School Profile
School Characteristics
Facilities include a TV studio, library, technology center,
computer lab, amphitheater, band room, art room, cafeteria
and gymnasium. Intramural athletics are offered in several
sports. The school play areas, multi-purpose field, track, and
tennis courts serve as a district park after school hours.
Class Size # of classes in each range per subject.
STUDENTS English Math !Science Social Health/ Foreign
Stud. PE Lang.
15 or Less 16 11 12 12 0 2
16 to 20 9 8 0 0 6 1
21 to25 5 10 12 12 6 0
26 to 29 5 3 7 6 5 0
30 or more 0 0 0 0 3 0
Staff Characteristics
Year Occupied 1974
Program Capacity 535
Student Enrollment 573
Average Daily Attendance 94.3%
Mobility Index 13.52%
Portable Classrooms 3
Before/After School Program NO/NO
Setting Rural
Site Size 50 acres
Cale, Red Hill,
Elementary Schools That Scottsville,
Feed into This School Stone-
Robinson,
and Yancey
High School the Students
Will Attend Monticello
FULL-& ETHNICITY GENDER I Average I %with
PART-TIME
STAFF TOTAL WHITE OTHER MALE FEMALE ~ Years of ~ Graduate
..Administrative 2 2 0 1 1
Teacher 51 47 4 17 34 ~i~
Teacher's Assist. 8 6 2 I 7
Totals 61 55 6 19 42
,Student Characteristics
Ethnicity
Other
4.0%
Free/Reduced Lunch
30.6% Yes
69.4% No
Black
16.6%
Special Education
19.6% Yes 80.4% No
Identified Gifted ~
16.4% Yes 83.6% No
C-80
Student Performance Measures
*None or Too Few to Report. ** Data Not Available.
Leslie H. Walton Middle
Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Categories upon Request.
Grade 6 - Stanford 9 Achievement Tests - Average National Percentile Rank
SCHOOL
SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNIClTY ~- GENDER
AREA White Black Male Female
98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-~9 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00
Reading 48 47 69 71 58 59 56 52 36 26 48 40 49 53
Math 47 50 69 69 58 62 56 58 25 24 50 50 44 50
Language 44 44 58 58 51 53 51 50 37 23 43 38 45 49
Battery 49 49 67 67 58 60 57 55 34 27 49 46 48 52
% Taking 96 98 96 97 96 95
Quartile Distribution for Batter~
Percent of students scoring in each
percentile range.
76-99%ile
1-25%ile
51-75%ile
26-50%ile
8 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNIClTY/'
VVhite Black
Male
SCHOOL
GENDER
Female
FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
Yes No
Student Performance Meashres
Leslie H. Walton Middle
8th Graders Com letin Courses for Hi h School Credit:
Foreian Lancluaae
so%i
4S%'I I ' tS98'lS99 ~ 4S%
4O%. [] 1999-2000
3S%- 34% 40%
30% 3s%,
30%
26% 30%-
20%' 2fl%-
15%' 20%-
15%
~0%' 9%
5% - 10%
0% 5%*
0%*
County School County School
All Students Minority Students
, '32%'
1998-1999
1999.2000
29%
~21%
11%
County School County School
All Students Minority Students
,! 999-2000 Parent Surve?
Response Rate: 19.4% of households
,,Effective Schools Correlate,~ (Refer to Glossary)
A Climate of H Success for all Students:
78.0%
Strong Instructional Leademhip:
"'~ Agree/Strongly Agree
[3 Don't Know
· Disagree/Strongly Disagreef
3.8%
72.5% 12.0% '
The Opportunity to Learn and Adequate Time Spent on Academic Tasks:
73.5%
Frequent Monitoring of Student Progress:
12.1%
63.4%
Safe and Orderly Environment:
3.0%
68.2%
Positive Home-School Relations:
5.4%
65.1%
5.2%
18.1%
15.6%
14.4%
33.7%
26.4%
29.7%
C-82
School
Leslie H. Walton Middle
Over the past three years, the faculty and staff at Walton Middle School have worked very hard
on improving SOL scores. Each team has set very high expectations and worked diligently in
the planning and implementation of goals for improving student achievement. The success that
was experienced during the 1999-2000 school year is a tribute to everyone at the school.
Walton Middle School has reached a 70 percent passing rate in the areas of writing,
mathematics, science, and computer technology.
Several areas showed remarkable achievement and improvement on the SOLs. Walton's
algebra I and geometry students had a 100 percent pass rate for the second consecutive year.
The computer technology score (76.4 percent) showed an increase of almost 10 percent over
the previous year. The students' SOL score in writing (78.6 percent) improved 18.6 percent in
one school year.
The Pupil-Personnel Services implemented strategies to help decrease the number of reported
incidents of students indicating that mean things are being said and done to them. The
department also began to implement the Character Counts program in order to reinforce the
school's commitment to building good character among its students. This program got off to a
successful start in the 1999-2000 school year and will be continued and expanded in future
years.
Walton Middle School's faculty and staff are committed to providing the best education possible
to all students and to challenge each student to perform to the best of his/her capabilities.
C-83
HIGH SCHOOLS
ALBEMARLE
MONTICELLO
MURRAY
WESTERN ALBEMARLE
CHARLOTTESVILLE-ALBEMARLE TECHNICAL EDUCATION CENTER
Mbemarle High School
1999-2000 School Profile
School Characteristics
Facilities include science labs, computer labs, a library, vocational labs, a full auditorium, band and choral rooms,
art rooms, photography lab, cafeteria, and gymnasiums. Honors, advanced placement and special education
classes are available. A stadium with track and sports fields are available for soccer, baseball, field hockey, tennis,
and football. The Virginia High School League sports offered are track, football, soccer, basketball, baseball,
volleyball, cross-country, field hockey, wrestling, tennis, lacrosse, and softball; Extensive club activities including
art, yearbook, newspaper, debating, languages, drama, service, and vocations are available. Adult Education
programs, GED, and evening high school courses are offered in the evening.
Class Size # of classes in each range per subject.
Social Health/ Foreign
STUDENTS English Math Science
Stud. PE Lang.
15 or Less 13 10 13 10 3 15
16to20 25 27 24 19 8 15
21 to25 31 24 26 27 12 15
26 to29 3 4 2 9 8 6
30 or more 1 0 0 0 3 0
Staff Characteristics
Year Occupied 1953
Program Capacity 1,791
Student Enrollment 1,517
Average Daily Attendance 96.6%
Mobility Index 16.32%
Portable Classrooms 6
Setting Suburban
Site Size 40 acres
Middle Schools That Feed Burley, Jouett,
intoThis School and Sutherland
FULL- & ETHNICITY GENDER I Average I % with
PART-TIME I Years of I Graduate
STAFF TOTAL WHITE OTHER MALE FEMALE I Experience ~ Degree
Administrative 6 3 3 3 3
Teacher 130 124 6 47 83 1141 76
Teacher's Assist. 13 7 6 1 12
Totals 149 134 15 51 98
Student Characteristics
Ethnicity
Other
6.4%
Free/Reduced Lunch
Special Education
Black
14.2%
Identified Gifted
6.5% Yes 93.5% No
15.3% Yes 84.7% No
13.6% Yes 86.4% No
C-85
Student Performance Measures
Mbemarle Hi
*None or Too Few to Report.
** Data Not Available.
Data At~ Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Categories upon Request.
Grade 9 - Stanford 9 Achievement Tests -Average National Percentile Rank
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY '/' GENDER
White Black Male Female
98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00
Reading 69 67 64 66 58 60 75 74 35 36 66 65 71 69
Math 66 63 63 65 54 55 71 69 28 28 69 65 63 61
Language 60 61 55 59 48 50 66 69 27 34 55 57 64 65
Battery 65 63 62 64 55 56 70 70 32 34 65 63 65 64
% Taking 92 97 92 94 93 92
Quartile Distribution for Battery
Percent of students scoring in each
percentile range.
1-25%ile
76-99%ile
26-50%ile
51-75%ile
End of Course Tests - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY ~- GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
AREA
White Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-?0 97-98 98~99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 I 98-99 99-00 97-98 I 98-99 I 99-00
Reading 63.1 76.7 76.8 64.0 74.4 73.4 72 75 78 66.9 78.8 79.3 37.7 44.8 66.7 54.1 69.572.8 71.2 84.0 80.3 52.6 78.8
Writing 65.8 82.1 86,3 64.3 77.7 85.5 71 81 85 67.3 87.9 89.3 52.5 45.2 74.4 55.3 75.2 80.1 75.0 91.0 i91.8 71.4 87.0
Albemarle Albemarle
Algebral 24.7 46.4 61,8 48.8 60.9 64.5! 40 56 65 27.4 51.1 65.2 16,2 17.6 44.7 22.3 44.9 59.0 :27.1 47.3 64.6 High 35.7 High 68.5
School School
Algebrall 33.4 58.1 47.5 40.4 54.1 50.8 31 51 58 35,0 59.0 49.1 14.3 42.9 26.8 36.1 65.3 43,6 31.3 53.5 51,1 did 60.0 did 47,3
not not
Geomet~ 63.4 67.6 72.5 67.2 66.2 72.8 52 62 67 68.0 71.9 77,8 35.7 36.6 26.5 66.3 68.1 75.2 61.0 67.0 70.3 participate 48.1 participate 75.1
in the in the
Earth Sci.59.7 76.7 78.0 56,4 68,7 75.6 58 65 70 70.0 86.0 85.3 28.8 31,0 47.2 58.3 76.6 82.4 61.4 79.2 74.7 National 57.6 National 82.0
Biology 78.1 86.5 86.1 77.6 82.8 85.0 72 81 79 64,4 88.5 89.9 56.0 74.4 61.9 76.5 81.9 82.6 80,6 91.0 89.5 Lunch 69.7 Lunch 88.1
Program Program
Chemistry 86.3 95.2 89.0 82.8 83.4 78.9 54 64 64 86.1 95.4 89.6 83.3 * 81.3 91.3 96.0 86.0 82.1 94.3 91.3 during 85.7 during 89,2
these these
World 69.6 76.2 87.6 65.9 73.0 82.0 62 68 75 76.2 82.1 91.0 41.1 39.0 64.0 69.7 72.5 89.4 70.3 81.6 86.1 years. 71,4 years. 90.4
History
World 43.9 57.5 77.9 42.2 31.0 73.3 41 47 60 50.6 65.0 80.5 11,2 * 48.1 43.1 52.9 76.3 44.2 77.8 79.0 50.0 80.7
Histo[y II
U,S, Hist.35.8 46.8 48.7 33.4 40.1 44.5 30 32 39 39.3 50.5 51.8 20.0 20.0 23.1 136.5 47,0 50.9 34.8 47.9 46.6 35.7 41.0
Student Performance Measures ri' Albemarle Hi h
Scholastic Assessment Tests
Average Scores (Scale: 200-800)
NATION STATE COUNTY SCHOOL
TEST
1999 2000 1999 2000 1999 2000 1999 2000
Verbal 505 505 508 509 547 547 542 536
Math 511 514 499 500 536 535 521 522
% Taking 43 44 65 67 67 72 76 81
** Data Not Available.
I 1997-98 1998-99, J 1999-00
Dropout Rate 4% 2%I **
Diplomas Earned
Percent of Advanced 65% 68% 60%
graduates earning Standard 33% 28% 35%
each of these
diploma types. Special
Education 1% 2% 3%
Vocational Completers
Percent of graduates who I
completed a vocational program.I 8% 18% 13%
National Merit Scholarship
Program
1998-99 1999-00
Finalists 4 3
Semi Finalists 4 3
Commended 11 12
Graduate Continuing Education Plans: ·
Other Education 0%
None
2-Year
College
4-Year
College
1999-2000 Parent Surve),
Response Rate: 19.9% of households
Effective Schools Correlates (Refer to Glossary)
la Agree/Strongly Agree
E] Don't Know
· Disagree/Strongly Disagree
A Climate of Hi,
~ectation for Success for all Students:
74,5%
3.3%
22.2%
Strong Instructional Leadership:
59.3%
22.3%
~ 18.4%
The Opportunity to Learn and Adequate Time Spent on Academic Tasks:
~ 15.1%
69.3% 15.6%
Frequent Monitoring of Student Progress:
28.3%
66.9% 4.8%
Safe and Orderly Environment:
21.5%
68.1% t0.4%
Positive Home-School Relations:
~ 33.7%
53.5% 12.9%
C-87
School Hi Albemarle
Albemarle High school made good progress on its school improvement goals for the 1999-2000
school year, achieving success in nine target areas. Efforts continued to develop a mentoring
program for students at the local elementary school, under the rationale that high school students
who are helping elementary students might be motivated to take more academically challenging
classes. Following a careful review of the literacy goal area, the recommendation was made to
implement a literacy program at AHS. The SIP goal in math was a 10 percent improvement in
SOL scores. The focus of this effort was in algebra I, where a 15 percent gain in pass rate was
made. Unfortunately, algebra II scores dropped, preventing achievement of an overall 10 percent
gain.
Student recognition continued to be a focus for SIP. Over 55 percent of the student body were
recognized in a Renaissance program in early May. The SIP team furthered efforts to provide
recognition to the teaching staff for the outstanding job they are doing. Character education was
another focus of SIP, with the implementation of a Character Counts program at AHS. School
safety was also an area of focus, with a survey being conducted of students, staff, and parents.
Those results are still being tabulated.
The last two goals of the 1999-2000 SIP were in the area of community partnerships. Plans were
developed and efforts were made to implement a Community Day to recognize all the businesses
and community people who provide support for the senior internship program, work-study
programs, and shadowing opportunities. A reception was held to recognize them in early May.
Additionally, the Fine Arts Department continued to promote partnerships with the local
community. This design team also worked to gain recognition of the arts program through the
National Art Education Association. Unfortunately, a change in the evaluation process prevented
successful completion of this goal area.
Overall, 1999-2000 was a very positive year for SIP at AHS, with many positive gains being made
in the areas of focus.
C-88
Monticello High School
1999-2000 School Profile
School Characteristics
Facilities include science labs, computer labs, a library, a 500-seat forum, a black box for stage productions, band
and choral rooms, art rooms, photography lab, television production studio, cafeteria, and gymnasiums. Honors,
advanced placement and special education classes are available. A stadium with track and sports fields are
available for soccer, baseball, field hockey, tennis, and football. The Virginia High School League sports offered
are track, football, soccer, basketball, baseball, volleyball, cross-country, field hockey, wrestling, tennis, lacrosse,
and softball. Extensive club activities including art, yearbook, newspaper, debating, languages, drama,
community service, and vocations are available. Cooperative educational programs with Piedmont Virginia
Community College (PVCC) are available.
Class Size # of classes in each range per subject.
Social Health/ Foreign
STUDENTS English Math Science
Stud. PE Lang.
15or Less 16 23 15 14 2 10
16to20 9 17 6 11 2 13
21 to25 19 10 20 19 19 6
26 to 29 7 2 1 6 14 1
30 or mom 0 0 0 0 6 0
Staff Characteristics
Year Occupied 1998
Program Capacity 1,028
Student Enrollment 989
Average Daily Attendance 94.2%
Mobility Index 20.97%
Portable Classrooms 4
Setting Rural
Site Size 70 acres
Middle Schools That Feed Burley and
into This School Walton
FULL-& ETHNICITY GENDER Average] %with
PART-TIME Years of Graduate
STAFF TOTAL VVHITE OTHER MALE FEMALE Experience [ Degree
Administrative 4 3 I 2 2
Teacher 88 81 7 29 59 10163
Teacher's Assist. 15 7 8 5 10
Totals 107 91 16 36 71
Student Characteristics
Ethnicity
Other
3.7%
Black
17.6%
Free/Reduced Lunch
Special Education
19.7% Yes 80.3% No
19.0% Yes 81.0% No
Identified Gifted
13.2% Yes 86.8% No
C-89
Student Performance Measures Monticello High
*None or Too Few to Report.
** Data Not Available.
1' Data Are Available for Other Raciai/Ethnic Categories upon Request.
Grade 9 - Stanford 9 Achievement Tests -Average National Percentile Rank
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY/' GENDER
White Black Male Female
98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00
Reading 54 62 64 66 58 60 59 68 27 37 48 61 60 63
Math 48 61 63 65 54 55 52 66 23 35 43 63 52 58
Language 46 55 55 59 48 50 51 60 19 34 37 51 53 59
Battery 5o 60 62 64 55 56 55 66 25 37 45 60 55 60
% Taking 88 88 92 94 93 92
Quartile Distribution for Batter~/
Percent of students scoring in each
percentile range.
1-25%ile
76-99%ile
26-50%ile
End of Course Tests - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY/~ GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
AREA
VVhite Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-9898-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-9999-00 97-9898-99 99-00
Reading N/A 62.4 59.8 64.0 74.4 73.4 72 75 78 N/A 66.3 68.6 N/A 47.4 28,9 N/A 55.6 51.9 N/A 66.9 68.3 N/A * 32.1 N/A 64.6 64.8
Writing N/A 66.8 77.4 64.3 77.7 85.5 71 81 85 N/A 72.0 82.8 N/A 36,7 58,3 N/A 57.7 67.6 N/A 73.1 87,7 N/A ** 50.0 N/A ** 81.7
Algebra l N/A 36,1 35.1 48,8 60.9 64.5 40 56 65 N/A 38.6 40.0 N/A 19~0 18.8 N/A 38.5 32.2 N/A 33.3 39.1 N/A * 20.0 N/A 38,7 39,4
Algebra llN/A 36.0 50.0 40.4 54.1 50.8 31 51 58 N/A 37.8 55.5 N/A 28.6 21.7 N/A 34.6 58,3 N/A 37.8 43.9 N/A * ~33.3 N/A 135.1 50.6
Geometry N/A 50,0 57.4 67.2 66,2 72.8 52 62 67 N/A 56.6 61.6 N/A 23.1 27.3 N/A 56.5 58.8 N/A 45.2 56.2 N/A * 37,5 N/A 50.7 59.9
Earth Sci,N/A 52.0 68.9 56.4 68.7 75,6 58 65 70 N/A 54.0 75.0 N/A 32.3 45.2 N/A 53.9 68.8 N/A 49.5 69,1 N/A * 49.0 N/A 57.6 74.4
Biology N/A 73.0 77.0 77.6 82.8 85.0 72 81 79 N/A 78.6 78.6 N/A 50.0 63.0 N/A 66.9 76,9 N/A 79.7 77.1 N/A 61.1 48.5 N/A 74.7 83.5
Chemistry N/A 70.2 61.9 82.8 83.4 78.9 54 64 64 N/A 75.6 66.4 N/A 38.5 27.8 N/A 68.1 56.0 N/A 71.9 65.3 N/A * 60.0 N/A 70,6 62,7
Wodd N/A 58.0 68,7 65.9 73.0 82.0 62 68 75 N/A 59.0 72.1 N/A 44.4 52,5 N/A 58.4 70.1 N/A ;57.3 67,0 N/A * 45.8 N/A 65.1 73.9
History I
World N/A 26.3 60.0 42.2 31.0 73.3 41 47 60 N/A 33,3 60.9 N/A * 55,0 N/A 26.3 60,8 N/A 29.4 59.4 N/A * 22.2 N/A 14.3 61.3
History II
U,S. Hist.N/A 22.9 31.5 33.4 40.1 44.5 30 32 39 N/A 26.9 40.4 N/A 7.7 4.1 N/A 21.5 32.4 N/A 24.0 30.5 N/A * 15,4 N/A 23,6 34.2
Student Performance Measures Monticello Hi h
:t: Mean score for seniors enrolled at Monticello H.S. and seniors that would have attended
Monticello H.S, but opted to remain at Albemarle H.S. or Western Albemarle H.S.
cholastic Assessment Tests Average Scores (Scale: 200-800)
NATION STATE COUNTY SCHOOL
TEST
1999 2000 1999 2000 1999 2000 1999 2000
Verbal 505 505 508 509 547 547 :1:521 522
Math 511 514 499 500 536 535 :1:516 507
% Taking 43 44 65 67 67 72 26 55
**Data Not Available, 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00
DroDout Rate N/A 2% **
Diplomas Earned
Percent of Advanced N/A 32% 52%
graduates earning Standard N/A 50% 43%
each of these
diploma types. Special N/A 5% 3%
Education
Vocational Completers
Percent of graduates who t
completed a vocational program,t N/A 27% 26%
1999-2000 Parent Survey
National Merit Scholarship
Pro~ram
1998-99 1999-00
Finalists N/A 2
Semi Finalists N/A 2
Commended N/A 8
Graduate Continuing Education Plans:
Other Education 2%
2-Year None
College
4-Year College
Response Rate: 18.5% of households
Effective Schools Correlates, (Refer to Glossary)
A Climate of Hi for Success for all Students:
70.6% 4.7%
B Agree/Strongly Agree
[3 Don't Know
· Disagree/Strongly Disagree
24.7%
Strong Instructional Leadership:
15.8%
71.2% 13.1%
The Opportunity to Learn and Adequate Time Spent on Academic Tasks:
~ 15.4%
68.8% 15.9%
Frequent Monitoring of Student Progress:
30.0%
67.5% 2.6%
Safe and Orderly Environment:
24.6%
67.0% 8.4%
Positive Home-School Relations:
35.9%
54.7% 9.4%
C-91
School Hi hli hts Monticello Hi h
Monticello High School, in its second year has shown tremendous growth. The primary goal of
the school improvement team during the 1999-2000 school year was to measure and monitor
the academic achievement and success of Monticello High School students. Some of the
activities to accomplish this goal were to analyze feeder pattern level and school level data to
make instructional decisions to ensure the success of our students. With the incorporation of
the Language/. Program and the Creating Independence through Student-owned Strategies
(CRISS) program, we noticed significant percentage gains in our Standards of Learning writing
scores, moving from 66.8 percent in the 1998-99 school year to 77.4 percent in 1999-2000.
While we did not make significant gains in our reading scores, there is evidence to suggest that
the Language/. and CRISS programs will continue to have a positive impact upon the reading
and writing scores in the upcoming school year.
Also, as a result of aligning the curriculum to the Standards of Learning goals by creating
curriculum maps, we have experienced percentage gains in algebra II moving from a 36
percent pass rate to 50 percent, geometry from 50 percent to 57.4 percent, earth science from
52 percent to 68.9 percent, biology from 73 percent to 77 percent, world history I from 58
percent to 68.7 percent, world history II from 26.3 percent to 60 percent and U.S. history from
22.9 percent to 31.5 percent passing. Our emphasis will be focused on continuous
improvement of these areas, with special attention given to reading, algebra I, and chemistry in
the upcoming school year.
Some of the strategies that we have explored this year include developing practice test
questions, examining previous years' SOL results, analyzing SOL blueprints, and reviewing
grade distribution data with departments and individual teachers. Additionally, teachers have
been engaged in ongoing professional development activities at the county level and in the
school. Also, teacher training in all aspects of instructional technology is ongoing.. Finally, the
emphasis on developing an interdisciplinary model of instruction is becoming a reality as
teachers continue to engage in discussions about making cross-curricular connections in
helping students achieve a deep understanding of the curriculum and meeting SOL objectives.
C~92
MurraY' High School
1999-2000 School Profile
School Characteristics
Murray is a non-traditional, school of choice that receives approximately 100 students from throughout the
county. Instructional facilities include a science lab, library, computer lab, multi-purpose room, and gymnasium.
Honors, advanced placement, and dual-enrollment (with Piedmont Virginia Community College) classes are
available. An "Eight-Plus" program for at-risk eighth-grade students is available. No sports are offered.
Class Size # of classes in each range per subject.
Social Health/ Foreign
STUDENTS English Math Science
Stud. PE Lang.
15 or Less 10 6 6 6 4 4
16 or mom 0 0 0 0 0 0
Staff Characteristics
Year Occupied t959
Program Capacity 108
Student Enrollment 74
Average Daily Attendance 89.2%
Mobility Index 32.70%
Portable Classrooms 0
Setting Urban
Site Size 7 acres
Middle Schools That Feed
into This School Any
FULL- & ETHNICITY GENDER I Average % with
PART-TIMEl Years of Graduate
STAFF TOTAL WHITE OTHER MALE FEMALE Experience Degree
Administrative I I 0 0 1
Teacher 10 10 0 1 9 18167
Teacher's Assist. 0 0 0 0 0
Totals 11 11 0 1 10
Student Characteristics
Ethnicity
Other
0.0%
Black
13.5%
Does not participate in the National School Lunch Program.
Special Education [
26.6% Yes
73.4% No
Identified Gifted
1.4% Yes
98.6% No
C-93
Student Performance Measures
*None or Too Few to Report. ** Data Not Available. 1' Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Categories upon Request.
Grade 8 - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY '/' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
AREA
White Black Male Female Yes I No
97-98 98-99 9900 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-981 98-99199-00[ 97-981 98-991~9-00
Reading 14.3 50.0 27.3 65.4 73.9 73.5 64.7 67 70 * 75.0 .... 14.3 57,1 * 14.3 33.3 *
Wdting 16.7 36.8 42.9 68.6 74.3 81,5 67.2 70 76 * 42.9 .... 16.7 38.5 50.0 16.7 33.3
Murray High
Math 0 21.1 9.1 57.8 66.9 66.5 52.8 60 61 * 28.6 .... 0 30.8 * 0 0 * School did not
participate in
History 0 15.8 9.1 41.1 51.6 54.8 35.3 40 50 * 28.6 .... 0 23.1 * 0 0 * the National
Lunch Program.
Science 26.7 50.0 58.3 72.9 81.1 85.1 71.2 78 82 * 75.0 .... 25.0 64.3 * 28.6 16.7 *
Comp. Tech. 20.0 56.3 53.8 70.2 76.5 81.6 63.4 72 78 * 100 .... 12.5 70.0 45.5 28.6 33.3 *
%Taking 93.3 92.8 92.2 97.0 97.1 95.6 95.6 94 **
End of Course Tests - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY/' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
AREA Wnite Black Male Female Yes I No
Reading * 72.7 91.7 64.0 ~'4.4 ! 73.4 72 75 78 * * * * * N/A ..... N/A
W~iting 69.6 72.7 91.7 64.3 ~'7.7 85.5 71 81 85 72.7 .... N/A 63.6 * * 75.0 * N/A
Algebra I N/A 0 27.3 48.8 60.9 64.5 40 56 65 N/A * 41.7 N/A * * N/A * * N/A * *
Algebra II * · , 40.4 54.1 50.8 31 51 58 ..... N/A ......
Geometry N/A 16.7 25.0 67.2 66.2 72.8 52 62 67 N/A * * N/A * N/A N/A * * N/A * * Murray High
School did not
Earth Sdence 61.5 30.8 * 56.4 68.7 75.6 58 65 70 ............ participate in
the National
Biology 100 61.5 72.7 77.6 82.8 85.0 72 81 79 100 54.5 .......... Lunch Program.
Chemist~/ N/A 28.6 N/A 82.8 83.4 78.9 64 64 64 N/A * N/A N/A * N/A N/A * N/A N/A * N/A
World History I 63.6 N/A * 65.9 73.0 82.0 62 68 75 * N/A * * N/A N/A * N/A * * N/A N/A
WorldHist. II N/A 6.7 30.8 42.2 31.0 73.3 41 47 60 N/A 9.1 * N/A * N/A N/A * * N/A * *
U.S. Hist. 15.4 50.0 * 33.4 40.1 44.5 30 32 39 .... , N/A ......
Student Performance Measures ·
urra Hi h
*None or Too Few to Report. ** Data Not Available.
1' Data Are Ava#able for Other Racial/Ethnic Categodes upon Request.
Grade 9 - Stanford 9 Achievement Tests -Average National Percentile Rank
SCHOOL
AREA SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY/' GENDER
White Black Male Female
98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 9900 98-99 99-00 88-99 99-00
Reading 32 35 64 66 58 60 ........
Math 18 21 63 65 54 55 ........
Language 15 23 55 59 48 50 ........
Battery 23 26 62 64 55 56 ........
% Taking 94 75 92 94 93 92
Quartile Distribution for Battery
Percent of students scoring in each
percentile range.
76-99%ile
0%
51-75%ile 0%
1-25%ile
26-50%ile
Scholastic Assessment Tests
Average Scores (Scale: 200-800)
NATION STATE COUNTY SCHOOL
TEST
1999 2000 1999 2000 1999 2000 1999 2000
Verbal 5O5 5O5 5O8 5O9 547 547 516 ,
Math 511 514 499 500 536 535 460 *
% Taking 43 44 65 67 67 72 56 14
** Data Not Available.
1997-98 1998-99 1999-00
Dropout Rate 10% 5% **
Diplomas Earned
Percent of Advanced 9% 0% 14%
graduates earning Standard 91% 100% 79%
each of these
diploma types. Special 0% 0% 7%
Education
Vocational Completers
Percent of graduates who J J
completed a vocational program. 0% 0% 0%
Graduate Continuing
Education Plans:
2-Year
College
4-Year Colleg{
Other
Education
None
C-95
1999-2000 Parent Surve Murra Hi h
Response Rate: 13.3% of households ;;Agree/Strongly Agree
E} Don't Know
Effective Schools Correlates (Refer to Glossary) · Disagree/Strongly Disagree
A Climate of Hi h Ex ectation for Success for all Students:
t 5.0%
95.0% 0.0%
Strong Instructional Leadership:
51.7% 37.9%
~ 10.3%
The Opportunity to Learn and Adequate Time Spent on Academic Tasks:
~ 18.5%
62.3% 19.3%
Frequent Monitoring of Student Progress:
13.3%
86.7% 0.0%
Safe and Orderly Environment:
8.o%
90.0% 2.0%
Positive Home-School Relations:
30.1%
69.8% 0.0%
School Highlights
The 1999-2000 school year was one of re-visioning for Murray High School. As a non-traditional school of
choice, Murray is committed to providing a nurturing environment in which all students will be motivated to learn.
Community commitments were revised, and every student and member of the staff committed to the five
community values of respect, attendance, participation, mediation, and sharing.
Two primary focus areas were identified for the 1999-2000 School Improvement Plan. The first area of attention
was on improving the academic achievement of students. This was accomplished through offering courses that
promoted deep understanding of the subject matter by students and that focused on the Virginia Standards of
Learning. A major goal was to improve SOL scores in the four academic areas with an emphasis on literacy.
Reading SOL scores were up 19 percent over the previous year. SOL scores improved in all four areas as
follows:
Subject Improvement 1999-2000 Pass Rate
English + 19% 92%*
Math + 18% 28%
Science + 16% 56%**
Social Studies + 20% 45%**
* Meets state required pass rate.
** Meets state required provisional
pass rate for 1999-2000.
Improvement on the SOL will continue to be a major goal.
School climate was the second major area of energy and effort by the staff and students. Community meetings
were reorganized, and a number of community activities were held to promote leadership by all students.
Community celebrations of individual achievements were held and the celebration of the diversity in our
community was a year-long theme.
C-96
Western MbemarlC High School
1999-2000 School Profile
School Characteristics
Facilities include science labs, computer labs, a library, vocational labs, a full aUditOrium, band and chOral rooms,
art rooms, cafeteria, and gymnasiums. Honors, advanced placement and special education classes are available. A
stadium with track is on the grounds. Sports fields are available for soccer, baseball, field hockey, tennis, and
football. The major Virginia High School League sports offered are track, football, soccer, basketball, baseball,
volleyball, cross-country, field hockey, wrestling, tennis, lacrosse, and softball. Extensive club activities including
art, yearboOk, newspaper, languages, drama and vocations are available. Facilities are available to the
community.
Class Size # of classes in each range per subject.
Social Health/ Foreign
STUDENTS English Math Science
Stud. PE Lang.
15or Less 18 13 12 6 3 7
16to20 14 15 17 14 2 19
21 to25 14 11 13 8 3 6
26 to 29 3 4 0 7 8 1
30 or more 0 0 0 3 2 0
Staff CharaCteristiCs
Year Occupied 1977
Program Capacity 1,148
Student Enrollment 902
Average Daily Attendance 95.3%
Mobility Index 17.70%
Portable Classrooms 1
Setting Rural
Site Size 75 acres
Middle Schools That Feed Henley and
into This School Jouett
FULL- & ETHNICITY GENDER I Average I %with
PART-TIME
STAFF TOTAL WHITE OTHER MALE FEMALE I Years of I Graduate
Administrative 4 3 1 2 : 2~ ~
Teacher 69 68 1 ~ ~ ~
Teachers Assist. 7 5 2 ~ ~~
Totals~ 80 76 4
Student Characteristics
Ethnicity
Other
2.9%
Black
4.7%
Free/Reduced Lunch
4.3% Yes 95.7% No
Special Education ~
13.8% Yes 86.2% No
Identified Gifted [
20.4% Yes
79.6% No
C-97
Student Performance Measures Western Mbemarle High
*None or Too Few to Report.
** Data Not Available.
1' Data Are Available for Other Racial/Ethnic Categories upon Request.
Grade 9 - Stanford 9 Achievement Tests -Average National Percentile Rank
SCHOOL
SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNIClTY/' GENDER
AREA
White Black Male Female
98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00 98-99 99-00
Reading 69 70 64 66 58 60 71 72 * * 69 65 69 76
Math 76 75 63 65 54 55 77 76 * * 80 75 69 76
Language 58 63 55 59 48 50 60 65 * * 56 57 61 72
Battery 69 71 62 64 55 56 71 72 * * 71 68 66 75
% Taking 95 95 92 94 93 92
Quartile Distribution for Batter~
Percent of students scoring in each
percentile range.
1-25%ile
76-99%ile
26-50%ile
51-75%ile
End of Course Tests - Standards of Learning - Percentage of Students Passing
SCHOOL
SCHOOL COUNTY STATE ETHNICITY/' GENDER FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
AREA ' '
White Black Male Female Yes No
97-98 98/-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-.00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 ! 99-.00 ~ 97-98 98-99 99-00 97-98 98-99 99-00
Reading 65.4~ 82.7 81.9 64.0 74.4 73.4 72 75 78 68.7 85.4 83.3 32.0 38.5 * 61.2 78.3 74.5 69.7 87.0 89.1 .... 50.0 ** ** 82.5
Writing 61.5 82.1 90.7 64.3 77.7 85.5 71 81 85 63.8 84.0 93.0 45.8 50.0 * 53.0, 73.7 86.9 70.3 90.9 94.4 .... 50.0 .... 91.8
Algebral 33.3 47.3 57.0 48.8 60.9 64.5 40 56 65 33.3 48.6 58.4 17.6 * * 28.1 48.1 57.7 40.8 45.7 56.1 .... 40.0 .... 58.2
Algebrall 50.0 66.7 57.6~ 40.4 54.1 50.8 31 51 58 49.3 69.0 58.4 * * * 46.1 68.3 60.0 53.3 65.3 54.8 ** ** 66.7 .... 57.4
Geometry 73,7 79.1 82.2 67,2 66.2 72.8 52 62 67 75.4 79.9 83.0 25.0 58.3 * 70.6 77.7 79.8 76.1 81.5 85.0 ** ** 50.0 .... 82.6
Earth Sci, 49.8 77.8 82.1 56.4 68.7 75.6 58 65 70 53,9 79.6 84.1 13.6 * * 47.7 73.6 82.8 53,3 83,1 81.0 .... 52.9 ** ** 85.8
Biology 75.9 90.6 91.1 77.6 82.8 85.0 72 81 79 79.9 91.4 91.9 42.9 * * 72,9 88.4 91.3 78.7: 93.7 90.8 .... 60.0 ** ** 91.8
Chemistry 78.4 84.8 81.9 82,8 83.4 78.9 54 64 64 77.1 64.5 82.5 * * * 74.1 86.6 79.2 82.1 83.5 85.7 ** ** 100 ** ** 81.5
World 59.5 64.8 87.5 65.9 73.0 82.0 62 68 75 62.8 85.9 88.4 31.8 * * 64.0 83.1 90.0 65.0 87.2 64.4 .... 87.5 .... 87.5
History I
World 39.6 5.0 80.3 42.2 31.0 73.3 41 47 60 41.1 5.6 83.0 9.1 * * 34.3 7.7 79.1 45.0 * 81.9 .... 11.1 .... 83.7
History II
U.S. Hist,30.4 47.4 51.2 33,4 40.1 44.5 30 32 39 34.7 50.5 52.6 6.9 0 * 29.0 47.9 50.1 33.3 46.9 52.0 .... 20.0 .... 52.0
Student Performance Measures
Western Albemarle High
Scholastic Assessment Tests
Average Scores ,'Scale: 200-800)
NATION STATE COUNTY SCHOOL
TEST
1999 2000 1999 2000 1999 2000 1999 ~2000
Verbal 505 505 5O8 509 547 547 558 580
Math 511 514 499 500 536 535 567 571
% Taking 43 44 65 67 67 72 75 79
** Data Not Available.
1997-98 1998-99 I 1999-00
Dropout Rate 8% 3%I **
Diplomas Earned
Percent of Advanced 56% 54% 67%
graduates earning Standard 44% 40% 30%
each of these
diploma types. Special 0% 2% 2%
Education
Vocational Completers
Percent °f graduates wh°I J
completed a vocational program. 20% 21% 15%
National Merit Scholarship
Program
1998-99 1999-00
Finalists 0 5
Semi Finalists 0 6
Commended 9 22
Graduate Continuing Education Plans:
Other Education 2%
2-Year Colle
None
4-Year C~
1999- 2000 Parent Survey
Response Rate: 21,9% of households
Effective Schools Correlates (Refer to Glossary)
· Agree/Strongly Agree
E] Don't Know
· Disagree/Strongly Disagree
A Climate of Hi,
for SucCess for all Students:
81.9%
2.1%
15.9%
Strong Instructional Leadership:
77.1%
16.9%
The Opportunity to Learn and AdeqUate Time SPent on Academic TaSkS:
~~ 14.3%
69.7% t 5.9%
Frequent Monitoring of Student Progress:
29.4%
65.9% 4.7%
Safe and Orderly Environment:
11.1%
78.6% 10.4%
Positive Home-School Relations:
63.7%
~ 25.4%
10,9%
C-99
School Hi hli hts Western Albemarle Hi h
The 1999-2000 School Improvement Plan addressed the following general goal: "The WAHS
School Improvement Team will work to build our school community by developing the school
culture and climate and by improving instruction and guidance." School Improvement Team
initiatives supported the efforts of faculty, students, and parents and led to enhanced school
climate and instructional growth. Results from several of the areas monitored during the year
follow.
Curriculum, Instruction, and Student Performance Standards
· In 1999-2000, the percent of students meeting the State Standards of Learning (SOL)
"pass" or "advanced pass" score increased over 1997-98 and 1998-99 in every content
area.
· Percent of graduates earning Advanced Studies diplomas increased to a record 67
percent from 56 percent the previous year.
· Based on the results of a peer review team visit, the Southern Association of Colleges
and Schools (SACS) recommended without reservation the continuing accreditation of
Western Albemarle.
Transition and Orientation Pro,qrams
· Support for entering ninth-graders (collaboratively taught classes, parent and student
tours and orientation, and the Transition Orientation Programs during extended learning
time at lunch), was continued.
· Support was extended to students and parents in grades 10 through 12 by including
them in separate orientation sessions in August. In January, a schedule-planning night
was held for parents and students in grades 10 through 12 separate from the planning
program for entering ninth-graders and their parents.
School Climate, Values and Extended School Community
· Through a grant with the University of Virginia Music Department and the UptOn
Foundation, students in each grade level were provided a curriculum-related musical
experience.
· As a result of community concern raised about a proposed musical production, the
school staff held three forums to hear from stakeholders interested in discussing the
play and related matters.
· The Multicultural Fair was held in April with more than 50 presenters and sessions;
student and faculty reactions were very positive.
· When the school celebrated Peace Week, Washington Post columnist Colman
McCarthy was the featured speaker.
· A Senior Community Service/Service Learning project was initiated.
· The Crisis Plan was updated and reviewed by the Crisis Team.
The School Improvement Team will seek additional data and continue to address the key
issues of education - student learning and the school climate in which learning can best occur.
C-lO0
Charlottesville-Albemarle Technical Education Center
(wvvw. CATEC.org)
1999-2000 School PrOfile
School Characteristics
CATEC is a vocational/technical school jointly operated by the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County school
divisions. CATEC receives high school students from Charlottesville, Albemarle County, and several contiguous counties.
During the day, CATEC offers 14 technical programs in five career cluster areas: Mechanical Technology - Auto Body,
Automotive Technology; Construction Technology - Carpentry, Construction Trades (Intro.), Electricity, Masonry;
Information Technology ~ A+ Computer Repair, Computer Network Design, Design Technology; Health
Occupations - Licensed Practical Nursing; Service Occupations - Cosmetology, Culinary Arts, Early Childhood
Education, Hotel & Restaurant Management. Fully functional training labs and shops are available for each program
offering.
Most students have a split day with their "home" schools, where they receive academic
instruction. Some students receive their academic instruction at CATEC, and high
school seniors may stay at CATEC all day. CATEC also offers academic and vocational
exploratory programs: 9th Grade Exploratory (English, math, vocational exploratory);
10th Grade Discovery (English, math, vocational exploratory); 12th Grade Academics
(English, math, government); and GED class. The Center also offers a four- to six-week
vocational exploratory program to city and county middle school students. CATEC
provides certificates to those who successfully complete program competencies. Club
activities and competitions are held with other vocational/technical centers throughout
the state. No sports are offered.
In the evening, the Center provides an array of adult education and apprenticeship
programs. The Center is the official service agency for the administration and
operation of the regional apprenticeship program. CATEC administers the
Charlottesville Public School Adult Education Program, including ABE, GED, and ESOL
services at various sites in the city. CATEC also provides customized business training.
Year Occupied 1973
Program 408
Capacity
Student
Enrollment 361
Average Daily 89%
Attendance
Perfect
Attendance 18%
CATEC Honor
Roll Students 58%
Portable
Classrooms 0
Setting Suburban
Site Size 20 acres
Staff Characteristics
FULL-
&
ETHNICITY
GENDER
I Average Years 1% Licensed
PART-TIME STAFF TOTAL WHITE OTHER MALE FEMALE ~Experience I Teachers
Administrative 3 3 0 3 0
Teacher 13 9 4 7 6 ~ 10 ~ 96%
Teacher's Assistants 3 0 3 1 2
Totals 19 12 7 11 8
Student Characteristics
Gender
[
63% Male
Grade Level
37% Female
Ethnicity
Other
3%
Black
30%
4% - 15% -
9th 10th
48% - 11th
29% - t 2th 4% -
Post
Grad.
C-lO1
Student Performance Mea. sures
Charlottesvdle-Mbemarle Technical Education Center
Student Safety _
Number of Expulsions 0
-- Number of Long Term 0
Suspensions _
Number of Out-of-School 112
Suspension Days
- Percent of Students with 92%
No Discipline Referral
Average Monthly Accidents .5
Student Training Days 0
I Missed Due to Accident
~Follow-up Data for 1997-98 Graduates
-Percent Contacted I 59%
EMPLOYMENT STATUS: _
-- Full Time 86%
- Part Time 0%
Post-Secondary Training, Full Time 9%
Post_Secondary Training, Part Time 26% _
Military, Full Time 3%
Homemaker, Full Time 0%
Inactive 3%
EARNINGS: -
$6.50/hr. to $8.00/hr. 17% _
$8.00/hr. or more 67%
School
Initiated a School Improvement Plan and team that focused on school environment, program
evaluation, and community awareness. As a result, C^TEC implemented a student self-
management program, reduced out-of-school suspension days by 24 percent, increased
average number of students without discipline referrals per six weeks by 12 percent, and
increased average attendance by one percent.
Initiated a Design Team to plan for CATEC's future. Team completed phase one that
established the concepts and principals as the foundation for future service delivery.
CATEC received a five-year, $400,000 economic competitiveness grant through the Thomas
Jefferson Planning Commission to establish a "virtual" Information Technology Academy.
This academy will serve students from Charlottesville, Albemarle, and Fluvanna. Additional
information can be obtained at www. ITacademv.net_.
CATEC assisted Senator Emily Couric in the passage of the Advanced Mathematics and
Technology Seal (HBT06) to be initiated in school year 2000-01. This seal is for students
meeting advanced math requirements, completing technology courses (B average), and
receiving an industry, professional, or trade certification.
· CATEC focused on the integration of reading, math, and writing through the correlation and
implementation of SOL standards as related to occupational competencies being taught for
each trade.
· In 1999-00 CATEC had 126 completers, 14 Technical Honor Society members, and six
students awarded scholarships. Completers progressed to employment, apprenticeship
training, technical schools, and community and four-year colleges.
REFERENCE GUIDE
GLOSSARY
INDICATOR DEFINITIONS
SUBJECT INDEX
TABLE/FIGURE INDEX
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
ADVANCED STUDIES DIPLOMA - A high school graduation diploma earned by a student who has
completed a defined number of credits in prescribed course areas.
ALPS - Academic Learnin,q Pro,qram Schools. An initiative funded through the local school division to
improve the performance of students who are academically or economically disadvantaged. (Refer
to page A-13 for a more complete description of the ALPS program.)
AP COURSES - Advanced Placement Courses. These advanced courses are designed to enable
students to be prepared to take the Advanced Placement Examinations administered by the College
Board. A student earning a score of three or more (out of a possible five) on one of these
examinations can often receive college credit.
BOOK BUDDIES - A one-on-one tutorial program which uses community volunteers to tutor young
readers who are below grade level. A trained reading specialist (reading coordinator) oversees the
program at the school level. The coordinator assesses the students recommended by the classroom
teacher and writes the 30-45 minute lesson plan for the community volunteer to use with his/her
assigned student.
CLASS SIZE, ELEMENTARY - This indicates class size with the regular education teacher. Students
also receive instruction during the school day from specialty teachers in art, music, physical
education, and library/media/instructional technology skills. While students are receiving instruction
in specialty areas, the regular classroom teachers have instructional planning time.
EFFECTIVE SCHOOLS CORRELATES - Factors shown by reSearch to be related to student
achievement in highly effective schools.
FEEDER PATTERN - The county is divided into five "feeder pattemS.'' Each feeder Pattem is comprised
of a middle school, all of the elementary schools that send their students to the middle school, and
the high school that its students attend.
FREE/REDUCED LUNCH - This classification refers to students who are eligible for the federal lunch
program. Students are eligible for free- or reduced-price lunch based on family income.
GIFTED - This classification refers to students found eligible to receive services in the school
division's gifted program. Eligibility is determined through a process outlined in the division's Plan
for Gifted Education.
MOBILITY - Movement into and out of the school and district during the school year. The mobility rate
is figured by adding the number of students entering the school/district after the beginning of the
school year to the number of students withdrawing from school and dividing by the average daily
membership.
DESTINATION IMAGINATION - Destination ImagiNation (DI) is an international problem-solving program
which fosters creative thinking, problem-solving and group process skills in participating students
from kindergarten through college. Working under the guidance of team managers (coaches), teams
of five to seven students develop solutions to problems and have the opportunity to test their creative
solutions against those of other teams. Regional, State, and global competition levels are part of the
DI program.
GLOSSARY D - 2
GLOSSARY continued
OTHER CLASSIFIED "Other Classified" refers to all full- and part-time secretaries, in-school
suspension personnel, computer lab assistants, health clinicians, and a limited number of cafeteria
and custodial workers.
PSAT - The Preliminary Scholastic Assessment Test The College Board administers this test. Students
may elect to take the test as a practice for the SAT. Scores from the October administration of a
student's junior year are used to qualify for the National Merit Scholarship Program.
READING BUDDIES - A reading-assistance program which pairs an upper elementary classroom with
a younger grade classroom. The older children select and rehearse books that they read to the
younger children.
SAT - The Scholastic Assessment Test. The College Board administers this test. Colleges use its
results in making admissions decisions.
SOL - Standards of Learnin,q. These standards provide a framework for the instructional program
required by the state for all students. As part of this program the Virginia Department of Education
administers tests of performance for reading and writing and for mathematics, history, and science
knowledge to students in grades 3, 5, and 8. Tests of computer technology knowledge are given
to grades 5 and 8. Also administered are end-of-course tests for students for reading and writing,
and for students completing algebra I, geometry, algebra II, earth science, biology, chemistry,
world history I, world history il, and U.S. history courses.
SPECIAL EDUCATION - This classification refers to students who are eligible under federal law to
receive services for diagnosed disabilities which significantly impact the ability to learn. Eligibility
for these services is based on specific legal guidelines.
TEACHER - ~Teachers~ refers to all full- and part-time personnel whose jobs require teacher certification.
Included are classroom teachers, media specialists, guidance counselors, and teachers of
physical education, arts, special education, remedial programs, pre-school teachers, etc.
TITLE I - Title I is a federally funded program which provides financial assistance to meet the
educational needs of children who are failing or most at risk of failing to meet the state's
performance standards. Albemarle County focuses its Title I resources on the teaching of
Reading/Language Arts to students in kindergarten through grade 3. Students are selected
based on their need for extra help in reading, and progress is carefully monitored throughout
the school year. (Refer to page A-12 for a more complete description of the Title I Program.)
VSAP - Vir,qinia State Assessment Pro,qram. The state's program of nationally-normed standardized
tests administered to students in grades 4, 6, and 9. The Stanford Achievement Test, 9th
Edition, published by Harcourt Educational Measurement, is the test of the current program.
D - 3 GLOSSARY
INDI
FINITIONS
SASl = the student database
PROFILE of the ALBEMARLE COUNTY
Sections pg. #
Demography/Population
Enrollment A-10 &
A-11
Virginia school divisions rankings A-10
Public Education Funding/Per Pupil A-10
Cost/Staffing Ratios
Employee Positions A-11
Teaching Staff Demographics A-11
Professional Development A-11
Enrollment A-14
Gifted A-15
Mobility A-15
Free/Reduced Lunch
A-15
Special Education A-15
SCHOOLS
Note: There will be
percentage~ reported
that when summed do
not equal 100%. Thi,
~ due to rounding.
,Source (Numerator/Denominator)
Number of students enrolled on Sept. 30"~
Virginia Department of Education
Albemarle County Public Schools Budget
Human Resources database (FQS), (February)
Human Resources database (FQS), (February)
Albemarle Resource Center and Information Services
Department trainings, workshops, and courses
Number of students enrolled at the end of the school year
as listed in SASI
Number of students identified as Gifted (June) / end of
year enrollment
Sum of students entering the school or district after the
beginning of the school year and students withdrawing
from school / average daily membership
In each of the schools participating in the National School
Lunch Program: Number of students eligible for free or
reduced lunch in the National School Lunch Program
(October Monthly Eligibility.. rePort) / Number of students
enrolled on September 30"'
Number of students identified for the Special Education
program (December Ist Child Count report) / Number of
students enrolled on September 30"~
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT
I. National Indicators
Indicator Name
Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT)
Advanced Placement (AP) Courses
and Exams
Stanford 9 Achievement Test
P~. #
B-3 &
B-4
B-5 to
B-7
B-8 to
B-19
Source (Numerator/Denominator)
SAT Program Summary Reporting Service, The College
Entrance Examination Board, Princeton, NJ
AP Program, The College Entrance Examination Board, NJ
Virginia Department of Education
INDICATOR DEFINITIONS D-4
ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT continued
II. State Indicators
Indicator Name
Standards of Learning Test
Vocational Completers
PR. #
B-22 to
B-72
B-73
Diplomas Confered B-74
Graduates' Continuing Education B-75
Plans
SASI = the student database
Source, (Numerator/Denominator)
Virginia Department of Education
Virginia System of Core Standards and Measures of
Performance for Secondary Vocational Education Program
Virginia Department of Education
Number of all graduates whose post-graduation plans match as
reported in the Term Graduates Report / Number of graduates
III. Local Indicators
Indicator Name PR. #
Second Grade Reading B-77 to
Assessment B-81
Albemarle County Foreign
Language Comprehensive
Exams
B-82
Foreign Language Completers B-83
Algebra I Completers, Prior to
the 9th-Grade
B -84
Algebra I Completers, High B-84
School Graduates
Albemarle County Physical B-85
Education Cumulative
Progress Report
Virginia Wellness Related - B-86 to
Fitness Program B-87
High School Technology B-88
Courses
Instructional Computers B-88
School-Level Internet Activities B-89
Participation in Cooperative B-90
Education, Internships, Job
Shadowing, and Mentoring
Programs
Participation in Charlottesville- B-91
Albemarle Technical Education
Center (CATEC) Programs
Source (Numerator/Denominator)
Number of children assessed, using the Qualitative Reading
Inventory, Second Edition (QRI II), to be reading at a specific grade
level / Number of children assessed
For each subject: Sum of percentage correct for students who took that
specific Foreign Language Comprehensive Exam / Number of students
who took that specific Foreign Language Comprehensive Exam
Number of 8th grade students who successfully completed a foreign
language course prior to the 9th grade as listed in SASI / Number of
8th grade students at the end of the year as listed in SASl
Number of 8th grade students who successfully completed Algebra I
prior to the 9th grade as listed in SASI / Number of 8th grade students
at the end of the year as listed SASI
Number of graduates who took Algebra I prior to graduation as listed
in SASI / Number of graduates
For each task within each grade: Number of students who mastered
a task / Number of students in that grade (September 30th enrollment)
Number of students who passed the Virginia Wellness Related -
Fitness Test / Number of students who took the test
Number of technology courses and the number of students enrolled in
technology courses as listed in SASI
Number of computers as reported by the Department of Instructional
Technology / Number of students (September 30t~ enrollment)
Department of Instructional Technology
Vocational Coordinator
CATEC Administration
D-5 INDICATOR DEFINITIONS
DIVERSE LEARNER
Indicator Nam Pg. #
Title I B-93
Performance -
Reading
Assessment
Academic
Leaming Project
Schools (ALPS)
Performance ~
Reading
Assessment
Standards of
Learning Test
Results for
Students with
Disabilities
Special Educatio
Demographics
B-94 to
B-96
B-97
B-97
Gifted
Demographics
B-100
Destination
ImagiNation
B-101
Independent
Study Program
Governor's
School
B-102
B-103
&
B-104
SASl = the student database
Definition
Percent of Title I students from
Kindergarten through 4th grade
whose reading was assessed at a
certain grade level in the Fall &
then reassessed in the Spring to
see if there had been improvement
Percent of ALPS students from 1st
through 9th grade whose reading
was assessed at a certain grade
level in the Fall & then reassessed
in the Spring to see if there had
been improvement
Percent of 3rd, 5th, & 8th grade &
high school students with disabilities
Source (Numerator~Denominator))
For each grade in the Fall & the Spring:
Number of children assessed, using the
Qualitative Reading Inventory, Second
Edition (QRI II), to be reading at a specific
grade level / Number of children assessed
For each grade in the Fall & the Spring:
Number of children assessed, using the
Qualitative Reading Inventory, Second
Edition (QRI II), to be reading at a specific
grade level / Number of children assessed
Virginia Department of Education
who passed the Standards of Learning
tests under standard conditions for
each of the test subjects.
Percent of entire student
population of a specific
demographic that are special
education students (gender,
ethnicity, FIR lunch)
Number of special education students at the
end of the year of a specific demographic as
listed in SASI / Number of students of that
same demographic enrolled at the end of
the year as listed in SASI
Percent of special education
student population who are a
specific demographic: gender,
ethnicity, F/R lunch
Percent of entire student
population of a specific
demographic that are identified as
gifted students (gender, ethnicity,
F/R lunch)
Percent of identified gifted student
population who are a specific
demographic: gender, ethnicity,
F/R lunch
Number of special education students at the
end of the year of a specific demographic as
listed in SASI / Number of special education
students at the end of the year as listed in
SASl
Number of identified gifted students at the
end of the year of a specific demographic
as listed in SASI / Number of students of
that same demographic enrolled at the end
of the year as listed in SASl
Number of identified gifted students at the
end of the year of a specific demographic
as listed in SASI / Number of identified
gifted students at the end of the year as
listed in SASI
Number of schools, teams, & students
who participated in the Destination
ImagiNation program
Regional, state, & world awards won by
teams during the Destination ImagiNation
competition
The number of high school students who
have proposed & had approved an
independent course of study
The number of students selected for
Governor's School (Academic & Fine Arts)
& Foreign Language Academies
Gifted Resource Teachers
Gifted Resource Teachers
Gifted Resource Teachers
Gifted Resource Teachers and
Virginia Department of Education
INDICATOR DEFINITIONS D-6
DIVERSE LEARNER continued
Indicator Name, Pa. #
National Merit B-105
Scholarships
General Education
Development
(GED) Test
B-106
Evening High B-106
School Program
Definition
Number of graduating students who were
selected as finalists, semi-finalists,
commended, & special scholars in the
National Merit Scholarship program
Number of Albemarle County residents who
passed the General Education
Development Test
Number of Albemarle County residents who
graduated from the Evening High school
program
SASI = the student database
Source, (Numerator/Denominator)
National Merit Scholarship
Program, Evanston, IL
Community & Program Specialist
Community & Program Specialist
RESPONSIBLE CITIZENSHIP
Indicator Name Pa. # Definition
Dropout Rate: B-109 Percent of students in grades
9 - 12 Grades 9-12 who dropped out of
school
Daily Student B-109
Attendance
Averaged percent of daily
student attendance for
school year
Out-of-School
Student
Suspensions
and Expulsions
B-110
Number of out-of-school
suspensions & the number of
students receiving out-of-
school suspensions
Number of expulsions & the
number of students expelled
Voter B-111
Registration
Percent of Albemarle &
Western Albemarle high
school 12th grade students
eligible to vote who
registered to vote
Source (Numerator/Denominator)
Number of students in grades 9-12 who dropped out
of school & did not return by the following Fall /
Number of students grades 9-12 as listed in SASI
End-of-year average daily attendance as listed in
SASI / end-of-year average daily membership as
listed in SASI
Number of out-of-school suspensions & the
number of students receiving out-of-school
suspensions as listed in SASI
School Board meeting minutes
Number of 12th grade students registered to vote
(Albemarle County Registrar's Office) / Number of
12th grade students eligible to vote (A U. S.
citizen & will turn 18 years old between November
1 of the current year & November 1 of the previous
year as listed in SASI)
COMMUNITY RELATIONS
Indicator Name PR. # Definition
Parent and B-113 Number of parent & community
Community volunteer hours given to the individual
Volunteers schools either in the form of tutoring,
clerical, or serving as a resource
Number of parent & community
volunteer hours for every student
Source (Numerator/Denominator)
Coordinator - Community Partnerships &
Services
Number of parent & community volunteer
hours / September 30th enrollment
D-7 INDICATOR DEFINITIONS
COMMUNITY RELATIONS continued
SASI = the student database
Indicator Name P¢~. #
Parent Survey B-115
Results to
B-126
Participation in
Continuing
Education
Programs
School-
Business-
Community
Partnerships
B-127
B-128
Definition
Percent of respondents to the Parent
Survey who responded Agreed/
Strongly Agreed, Disagreed/Strongly
Disagreed, or Don't Know to questions
within each of the Effective Schools
Correlates
N umber of students enrolled/classes
offered in continuing education
through Open Doors and the
Charlottesville-Albemarle Technical
Education Center (CATEC)
Projects of the Charlottesville-
Albemarle School Business Alliance
(CASBA), the number of participants
in these projects, and any local,
regional, state, or national awards
given for these projects
Source (Numerator/Denominator)
Number of respondents who responded in
a particular way to questions within each of
the Effective Schools Correlates on the
Parent Survey / Number of respondents to
questions within the same Effective
Schools Correlate on the Parent Survey
Coordinator - Community Partnerships &
Services and Charlottesville-Albemarle
Technical Education Center administration
Charlottesville-Albemarle School Business
Alliance (CASBA) Coordinator
AWARDS
Indicator Name
Academics
Pg. #
Appendix-
2
Athletics Appendix-
3&4
Community Appendix-
5
Fine Arts Appendix°
6
Staff Appendix-
7
Definition
Local, Regional, State, and National academic
awards or honors received by students
Local, Regional, State, and National athletic
awards or honors received by students
Local, Regional, State, and National awards or
honors received by students for community
work in areas like citizenship and leadership
Local, Regional, State, and National awards or
honors received by students related to the Arts,
and Choral and Band programs
Local, Regional, State, and National awards or
honors received by staff and items submitted by
staff that were published
Source
School Principals, Directors,
and Lead Teachers
High School Athletic
Directors
School Principals, Directors,
and Lead Teachers
School Principals, Directors,
and Lead Teachers
School Principals, Directors,
and Lead Teachers
INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL PROFILES
I. Elementary
Indicator Name Definition
SCHOOL CHARACTERISTICS
Year Occupied
Program
Capacity
Student
Enrollment
Average Daily
Attendance
Year school was opened
The number of students the school
is physically capable of holding
Number of students enrolled
Averaged percent of daily student
attendance for school year
Source (Numerator/Denominator)
Building Services Department
Building Services Department
Number of students enrolled at the end of the year
as listed in SASI
End of year average daily attendance as listed in
SASI / End of year average daily membership as
listed in SASI
INDICATOR DEFINITIONS D-8
INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL PROFILES
Elementary continued
SASI = the student database
Indicator Name Definition
SCHOOL CHARACTERISTICS continued
Mobility Index Percent of students who have moved
in or out of the school during the
school year
Portable
Classrooms
Before/After
School Program
Title I School
AVERAGE CLASS
SIZE
Number of portable classrooms
(trailers) on site at the school used for
grades K- 5 instruction
VVhether or not the school participates
in either the Before or After School
Program
VVhether or not the school is
participating in the Federal Title I
program
Average number of students in a class
for each grade level
STAFF CHARACTERISTICS
Full- and Part- Number of full- and part-time admini-
Time Staff
Average Years of
Experience
Percent with
Graduate Degrees
strators, teachers, and teacher's
assistants (also by demographics)
Average years of all teaching
experience by the teaching staff
Percent of teachers with at least a
graduate degree
STUDENT
CHARACTERISTICS
Ethnicity
Percent of students who are white,
black or of an other ethnicity
Free/Reduced
Lunch
Percent of students who are or are not
eligible for free or reduced lunch
Special
Education
Percent of students who are or are not
participants in the special education
program
Identified
Gifted
Percent of students who are or are not
identified gifted
Source (Numerator/Denominator)
Sum of students entering the school or district
after the beginning of the school year and
students withdrawing from school as listed in
SASI / average daily membership
Building Services Department
Coordinator - Community Partnerships and
Services
Federal Programs, Grants, Adult & Vocation
Education Department
Sum of the number of students in classes of a
particular grade level / Number of classes of
that particular grade level
Human Resources database (FQS),
(February)
Sum of all the years of experience by teachers
/ Number of teachers
Number of teacher with at least graduate
degree / Number of teachers
Number of students of a certain ethnicity as
listed in SASI / Number of students enrolled at
the end of the year as listed in SASI
Number of students eligible for free or reduced
lunch in the National School Lunch Program
(October Monthly Eligibility report) / Number of
students enrolled on September 30th
Number of students identified for the Special
Education program (December I Child Count
report) / Number of students enrolled on
September 30th
Number of students identified as Gifted (June)
/ Number of students enrolled at the end of the
year as listed in S^SI
D-9 INDICATOR DEFINITIONS
INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL PROFILES
Elementary continued
Indicator Name Definition Source (Numerator/Denominator)
GRADE 3 - STANDARDS OF LEARNING TESTS
,Groups School, County, State, White, Black, Male, Female, and Free/Reduced Lunch status
.Tested Areas: Percent of 3rd-grade students belonging to a Virginia Department of
Reading & Writing, Math, specific group who passed the Standards of Education
History, and Science Learning test
% Taking Percent of 3rd-grade students belonging to a Virginia Department of
specific group who took the Standards of Education
Learning test
GRADE 5 - STANDARDS OF LEARNING TESTS
,,Groups: School, County, State, White, Black, Male, Female, and Free/Reduced Lunch status
,,Tested Areas:
Reading, Writing, Math,
History, Science, and
Computer Technology
% Taking
Percent of 5th-grade students belonging to a
specific group who passed the Standards of
Learning test
Percent of 5th-grade students belonging to a
specific group who took the Standards of
Learning test
Virginia Department of
Education
Virginia Department of
Education
GRADE 2 - INDIVIDUAL READING ASSESSMENT
Groups: School, County, White, Black, Male, Female, and Free/Reduced Lunch status
_Readine Levels: Percent of 2nd-grade
2~-grade or Above, students belonging to a
1=t-grade, or specific group who were
kindergarten assessed at graded reading
levels
Number of children within a specified group
assessed, using the Qualitative Reading
Inventory, Second Edition (QRI II), to be reading
at a specific grade level / Number of children
within that specified group aSsessed
PARENT SURVEY
Effective Schools
Correlates
GRADE 4 - STANFORD 9 ACHIEVEMENT TESTS
,,Groups: School, County, State, White, Black, Male, and Female
Tested Areas: National Percentile Ranks of 4%grade students
Reading, Math, belonging to a specific group who took the Virginia
Language, and State Assessment Program under standard
the Battery score conditions in each area
% Taking Percent of 4th-grade students belonging to a
specific group who took the Virginia State
Assessment Program under standard conditions
Quartile Percent of 4th-grade students who took the Virginia
Distribution State Assessment Program under standard
conditions in either the 1-25%ile, 25-50%ile, 51-
75%ile, or 76-99%ile range on the Battery score
Percent of respondents to the Parent
Survey who responded Agreed/Strongly
Agreed, Disagreed/Strongly Disagreed,
or Don't Know to questions within each of
the Effective Schools Correlates
School Improvement Plan (SIP) activities over
the past year, as well as other achievements
made by members of the school community
SCHOOL
HIGHLIGHTS
Virginia Department of
Education
Virginia Department of
Education
Virginia Department of
Education
Number of respondents who responded in
a particular way to questions within each
of the Effective Schools Correlates on the
Parent Survey / Number of respondents
to questions within the same Effective
Schools Correlate on the Parent Survey
School Principals
INDICATOR DEFINITIONS D- ] 0
INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL PROFILES contniued SASI = the student database
II. Middle
Indicator Name Definition
SCHOOL CHARACTERISTICS
Year Occupied
Program
Capacity
Student
Enrollment
Year school was opened
The number of students the school
is physically capable of holding
Number of students enrolled
Average Daily
Attendance
Averaged percent of daily student
attendance for school year
Mobility Index
Percent of students who have
moved in or out of the school during
the school year
Portable
Classrooms
Before/After
School Program
AVERAGE CLASS
SIZE
Number of portable classrooms
(trailers) on site at the school used
for grades 6 - 8 instruction
Whether or not the school
participates in either the Before or
After School Program
Average number of students in
classes for subject areas: English,
Math, Science, Social Studies,
Health/PE, and Foreign Language
Source (Numerator/Denominator)
Building Services Department
Building Services Department
Number of students enrolled at the end of the year
as listed in SASI
End of year average daily attendance as listed in
SASI / End of year average daily membership as
listed in SASI
Sum of students entering the school or district after
the beginning of the school year and students
withdrawing from school as listed in SASI / average
daily membership
Building Services Department
Coordinator - Community Partnerships and
Services
Sum of the number of students in classes of a
particular subject / Number of classes of that
particular subject as listed (This is calculated by
the individual school administration.)
STAFF CHARACTERISTICS
Full- and Part- Number of full- and part-time
Time Staff administrators, teachers, and teacher's
assistants (also by demographics)
Average Years of Average years of all teaching
Experience experience by the teaching staff
Percent with Percent of teachers with at least a
Graduate Degrees graduate degree
Human Resources database (FQS),
(February)
Sum of all the years of experience by
teachers / Number of teachers
Number of teacher with at least graduate
degree / Number of teachers
STUDENT CHARACTERISTICS
Ethnicity Percent of students who are
white, black or of an other
ethnicity
Free/Reduced
Lunch
Percent of students who are
or are not eligible for free or
reduced lunch
Special
Education
Identified
Gifted
Percent of students who are
or are not participants in the
special education program
Percent of students who are
or are not identified gifted
Number of students of a certain ethnicity as listed in SASI /
Number of students enrolled at the end of the year as
listed in SASI
Number of students eligible for free or reduced lunch in
the National School Lunch Program (October Monthly
Eligibility report) / Number of students enrolled on
September 30th
Number of students identified for the Special Education
program (December 1 Child Count report) / Number of
students enrolled on September 30th
Number of students identified as Gifted (June) I Number of
students enrolled at the end of the year as listed in SASI
D-11 INDICATOR DEFINITIONS
INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL PROFILES
Middle continued
SASI = the student database
Indicator Name Definition
GRADE 6 - STANFORD 9 ACHIEVEMENT TESTS
Groups: School, County, State, White, Black, Male, and Female
Tested Areas: National Percentile Ranks of 6th-grade students
Reading, Math, belonging to a specific group who took the Virginia
Language, and State Assessment Program under standard
the Battery score conditions in each area
% Taking Percent of 6th-grade students belonging to a
specific group who took the Virginia State
Assessment Program under standard conditions
Quartile Percent of 6%grade students who took the Virginia
Distribution State Assessment Program under standard
conditions in either the 1-25%ile, 25-50%ile, 51-
75%ile, or 76-99%ile range on the Battery score
GRADE 8 - STANDARDS OF LEARNING TESTS
Groups: School, County, State, White, Black, Male, Female, and Free/Reduced Lunch status
Tested Areas: Percent of 8th-grade students belonging to a Virginia Department of
Reading, Writing, Math,
History, Science, and
Computer Technology
% Taking
specific group who passed the Standards of
Learning test
Percent of 8th-cjrade students belonging to a
specific group who took the Standards of
Learning test
,Source (Numerator / Denominator)
Virginia Department of
Education
Virginia Department of
Education
Virginia Department of
Education
Education
Virginia Department of
Education
8TM GRADERS COMPLETING COURSES FOR HIGH SCHOOL CREDIT
Foreign Language Percent of 8th grade students Number of 8th grade students who successfully
Algebra I
PARENT SURVEY
Effective Schools
Correlates
SCHOOL
HIGHLIGHTS
who successfully completed a
foreign language course prior to
the 9th grade
Percent of 8th grade students
who successfully completed a
algebra I prior to the 9th grade
completed a foreign language course prior to the 9th
grade as listed in SASI / Number of 8th grade
students at the end of the year as listed in SASI
Number of 8th grade students who successfully
completed Algebra I prior to the 9th grade as listed
in SASI / Number of 8th grade students at the end of
the year as listed SASI
Percent of respondents to the Parent
Survey who responded Agreed/Strongly
Agreed, Disagreed/Strongly Disagreed,
or Don't Know to questions within each
of the Effective Schools Correlates
School Improvement Plan (SIP) activities
over the past year, as well as other
achievements made by members of the
school community
Number of respondents who responded in
a particular way to questions within each of
the Effective Schools Correlates on the
Parent Survey / Number of respondents to
questions within the same Effective
Schools Correlate on the Parent Survey
School Principals
INDICATOR DEFINITIONS D- 12
INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL PROFILES contniued SASI = the student database
III. High
Indicator Name Definition
SCHOOL CHARACTERISTICS
Year Occupied
Program
Capacity
Student
Enrollment
Average Daily
Attendance
Year school was opened
The number of students the school
is physically capable of holding
Number of students enrolled
Averaged percent of daily student
attendance for school year
Mobility Index
Percent of students who have
moved in or out of the school during
the school year
Portable
Classrooms
Before/After
School Program
AVERAGE CLASS
SIZE
Number of portable classrooms
(trailers) on site at the school used
for grades 9 - 12 instruction
VVhether or not the school
participates in either the Before or
After School Program
Average number of students in
classes for subject areas: English,
Math, Science, Social Studies,
Health/PE, and Foreign Language
Source (Numerator/Denominator)
Building Services Department
Building Services [2apartment
Number of students enrolled at the end of the year
as listed in SASI
End of year average daily attendance as listed in
SASI / End of year average daily membership as
listed in SASI
Sum of students entering the school or district after
the beginning of the school year and students
withdrawing from school as listed in SASI / average
daily membership
Building Services Department
Coordinator - Community Partnerships and
Services
Sum of the number of students in classes of a
particular subject / Number of classes of that
particular subject as listed (This is calculated by
the individual school administration.)
STAFF CHARACTERISTICS
Full- and Part- Number of full- and part-time
Time Staff administrators, teachers, and teacher's
assistants (also by demographics)
Average Years of
Experience
Average years of all teaching
experience by the teaching staff
Percent with Percent of teachers with at least a
Graduate Degrees graduate degree
Human Resources database (FQS),
(February)
Sum of all the years of experience by
teachers / Number of teachers
Number of teacher with at least graduate
degree / Number of teachers
STUDENT CHARACTERISTICS
Ethnicity Percent of students who are
white, black or of an other
ethnicity
Free/Reduced
Lunch
Percent of students who are
or are not eligible for free or
reduced lunch
Special
Education
Identified
Gifted
Percent of students who are
or are not participants in the
special education program
Percent of students who are
or are not identified gifted
Number of students of a certain ethnicity as listed in SASI /
Number of students enrolled at the end of the year as
listed in SASI
Number of students eligible for free or reduced lunch in
the National School Lunch Program (October Monthly
Eligibility report) / Number of students enrolled on
September 30th
Number of students identified for the Special Education
program (December 1 Child Count report) / Number of
students enrolled on September 30th
Number of students identified as Gifted (June) / Number of
students enrolled at the end of the year as listed in S^SI
D- 13 INDICATOR DEFINITIONS
INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL PROFILES
High continued
Indicator Name Definition
GRADE 9 - STANFORD 9 ACHIEVEMENT TESTS
Groups: School, County, State, White, Black, Male, and Female
Tested Areas: National Percentile Ranks of 9th-grade students
Reading, Math, belonging to a specific group who took the Virginia
Language, and State Assessment Program under standard
the Battery score conditions in each area
% Taking Percent of 9th-grade students belonging to a
specific group who took the Virginia State
Assessment Program under standard conditions
Quartile Percent of 9~"-grade students who took the Virginia
Distribution State Assessment Program under standard
conditions in either the 1-25%ile, 25-50%ile, 51-
75%ile, or 76-99%ile range on the Battery score
END-OF-COURSE - STANDARDS OF LEARNING TESTS
Groups: School, County, State, White, Black, Male, Female, and Free/Reduced Lunch status
'rested Areas:
Reading, Writing,
Algebra I, Algebra II,
Geometry,
Earth Science,
Biology, Chemistry,
World History I,
World History II, and
U.S. History
% Taking
Percent of 8th-grade students
belonging to a specific group who
passed the Standards of Learning
test
Source (Numerator / Denominator)
Percent of 8th-grade students
belonging to a specific group who
took the Standards of Learning test
Virginia Department of
Education
Virginia Department of
Education
Virginia Department of
Education
Virginia Department of Education
Virginia Department of Education
SCHOLASTIC ASSESSMENT TESTS
Groups: Nation, State, County, and School
Tested Areas: Average scores of 12th grade students
Verbal and Mat who took the Scholastic Assessment
Tests
% Taking Percent of 12th grade students who
took the SAT
NATIONAL MERIT
SCHOLARSHIP
PROGRAM
DROPOUT RATE
Number of graduating students who
were selected to be commended, or as
semi-finalists, or finalists in the National
Merit Scholarship program
Percent of students in grades 9-12 who
dropped out of school
DIPLOMAS
EARNED
Percent of graduates receiving each of
these diploma types: Advanced,
Standard, Special Education
SAT Program Summary Reporting
Service, The College Entrance
Examination Board, Princeton, NJ
Number of 12th grade students who took
the SAT / Number of 12th grade students
(September 30th enrollment)
National Merit Scholarship Program,
Evanston, IL
Number of students in grades 9-12 who
dropped out of school & did not return by
the following Fall / Number of students
grades 9-12 as listed in SASI
Number of all graduates whose diploma
type match as reported in the Term
Graduates Report / Number of graduates
INDICATOR DEFINITIONS D- J, 4
INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL PROFILES
High continued
Indicator Name
VOCATIONAL
COMPLETERS
Definition
Percent of graduates who completed a
vocational program
GRADUATE
PLANS
Percent of high school graduates
continuing education plans: 4-year
college, 2-year college, other, or none
PARENT SURVEY
Effective Schools
Correlates
Percent of respondents to the Parent
Survey who responded Agreed/stronglY
Agreed, Disagreed/Strongly Disagreed,
or Don't Know to questions within each
of the Effective Schools Correlates
SCHOOL
HIGHLIGHTS
School Improvement Plan (SIP) activities
over the past year, as well as other
achievements made by members of the
school community
Source,, (Numerator / Denominator)
Number of all graduates who completed
a vocational program as reported in the
Term Graduates Report / Number of
graduates
Number of all graduates whose post-
graduation plans match as reported in
the Term Graduates Report / Number of
graduates
Number of respondents who responded in
a particular way to questions within each of
the Effective Schools Correlates on the
Parent Survey / Number of respondents to
questions within the same Effective
Schools Correlate on the Parent Survey
School Principals
D- 15 INDICATOR DEFINITIONS
SUBJECT INDEX
ACADEMIC LEARNING PROG~M
SCHOOLS (ALPS)
A-6, A-13, B-94 thru B-96
ADULT EDUCATION
A-13, B-127
ADVANCED PLACEMENT (AP)
A-4, A-6, B-2, B-5 thru B-7, B-98, B-99
AFTER-SCHOOL ENRICHMENT
PROGRAM (ASEP)
A-13, C-3, C-7, C-11, C-15, C-19, C-23,
C-27, C-31, C-35, C-39, C-43, C-47, C-51,
C-55, C-59, C-64, C-68, C-721 C-76, C-80
AGNOR-HURT, E.S.
A-5, B-24, C-3 thru C-6
ALBEMARLE, H.S.
A-5, B-25, C-85 thru C-88
ALGEBRA
A-6, B-84, C-66, C-70, C-74, C-78, C-82
ALPS (see Academic Learning Program
Schools)
AP (see Advanced Placement)
APPRENTICSHIPS
B-127
ARTS
Appendix-6
ASEP (See After-School Enrichment
Program)
ATHLETICS
Appendix-3, Appendix-4
ATTENDANCE
A-6, B-109, C-3, C-7, C-11, C-15, C-19,
C-23, C-27, C-31, C-35, C-39, C-43, C-47,
C-51, C-55, C-59, C-64, C-68, C-72, C-76,
C-80, C-85, C-89, C-93, C-97, C-101
AWARDS/RECOGNITIONS
Appendix-2 thru Appendix-7
BAND
Appendix-6
BEFORE-SCHOOL PROGRAM
A-13, C-3, C-7, C-11, C-15, C-19, C-23,
C-27, C-31, C-35, C-39, C-43, C-47, C-51,
C-55, C-59, C-64, C-68, C-72, C-76, C-80
BEHAVIOR
B-110, C-102
BROADUS WOOD, E.S.
A-5, B-24, C-7 thru C-10
BROWNSVILLE, E.S.
A-5, B-24, C-11 thru C-14
BURLEY, Jackson P., M.S.
A-5, B-24, C-64 thru C-67
CALE, PAUL H., E.S.
A-5, B-24, C-15 thru C-18
CAPACITY
C-3, C-7, C-11, C-15, C-19, C-23, C-27,
C-31, C-35, C-39, C-43, C-47, C-51,
C-55, C-59, C-64, C-68, C-72, C-76,
C-80, C-85, C-89, C-93, C-97, C-101
CAREER AWARENESS
B-91, B-128
CASBA (see Charlottesville-Albemarle
School-Business Alliance)
CATEC (see Charlottesville-Albemarle
Technical Education Center)
CHARLOTTESVILLE-ALBEMARLE
SCHOOL-BUSINESS ALLIANCE
(CASBA)
A-13, B-128
CHARLOTTESVILLE-ALBEMARLE
TECHNICAL EDUCATION CENTER
(CATEC)
B-91, B-127, C-101, C-102
SUBJECT INDEX D- 16
CHORAL
Appendix-6
CLASS SIZE
C-3, C-7, C-11, C-15, C-19, C-23, C-27,
C-31, C-35, C-39, C-43, C-47, C-51,
C-55, C-59, C-64, C-68, C-72, C-76,
C-80, C-85, C-89, C-93, C-97
COMMUNITY RELATIONS
A-6, B-112 thru B-127, Appendix-5
CONTINUING EDUCATION
B-75, B-127, C-87, C-91, C-95, C-99,
C-102
COMPLETERS
A-6, B-73, B-83, B-84, C-66, C-70, C-74,
C-78, C-82, C-87, C-91, C-95, C-99
COOPERATIVE EDUCATION
B-90
CROZET, E.S.
A-5, B-24, C-19 thru C-22
DESTINATION IMAGINATION
A-6, B-98, B-99, B-101
DIPLOMAS
A-6, C-87, C-91, C-95, C-99
DIVERSE LEARNERS
A-6, B-92 thru B-105
DROPOUT RATE
A-6, B-108, B-109, C-87, C-91, C-95,
C-99
EMPLOYEE DEMOGRAPHICS
A-11, C-3, C-7, C-11, C-15, C-19, C-23,
C-27, C-31, C-35, C-39, C-43, C-47, C-51,
C-55, C-59, C-64, C-68, C-72, C-76, C-80,
C-85, C-89, C-93, C-97, C-101
ENROLLMENT
A-11,A-14, C-3, C-7, C-11, C-15, C-19,
C-23, C-27, C-31, C-35, C-39, C-43, C-47,
C-51, C-55, C-59, C-64, C-68, C-72, C-76,
C-80, C-85, C-89, C-93, C-97, C-101
EVENING HIGH SCHOOL
B-106
SUBJECT INDEX
EXPULSIONS
B-110, C-102
FACILITIES
A-10, C-3, C-7, C-11, C-15, C-19, C-23,
C-27, C-31, C-35, C-39, C-43, C-47,
C-51, C-55, C-59, C-64, C-68, C-72,
C-76, C-80, C-85, C-89, C-93, C-97,
C-101
FOREIGN LANGUAGE
A-6, B-82, B-83, C-66, C-70, C-74,
C-78, C-82
FREE/REDUCED LUNCH
A-15, C-3, C~7, C-11, C-15, C'19, C-23,
C-27, C-31, C-35, C-39, C-43, C-47,
C-51, C-55, C-59, C-64, C-68, C-72,
C-76, C-80, C-85, C-89, C-93, C-97
FUNDING
A-10
GED (see General Education Development)
GENERAL EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT
(GED)
B-106
GIFTED
A-12, A-15, B-99, B-100, C-3, C-7,
C-11, C-15, C-19, C-23, C-27, C-31,
C-35, C-39, C-43, C-47, C-51, C-55,
C-59, C-64, C-68, C-72, C-76, C-80,
C-85, C-89, C-93, C-97
GOALS/PRIORITIES
A-7 thru A-9, B-2, B-20, B-21, B-45,
B-61, B-76
GOVERNOR'S scHOOL
A-6, B-98, B-99, B-103, B-104
GRADUATE CONTINUING EDUCATION
PLANS
B-75, C-87, C-91, C-95, C-99
GREER, Mary C., E.S.
A-5, B-24, C-23 thru C-26
HENLEY, Joseph T., M.S.
A-5, B-24, C-68 thru C-71
D- 17 SUBJECT INDEX
HIGHLIGHTS
C-6, C-10, C-14, C-18, C-22, C-26, C-30,
C-34, C-38, C-42, C-46, C-50, C-54,
C-58, C-62, C-67, C-71, C-75, C-79,
C-83, C-88, C-92, C-96, C~100, C-102
HOLLYMEAD, E.S.
A-4, A-5, B-24, C-27 thru C-30
INDEPENDENT STUDY
A-6, B-98, B-99, B-102
INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY
A-6, B-88, B-89
INTERNET ACTIVITIES
B-89
INTERNSHIPS
B-90
JOUETT, Jack, M.S.
A-5, B-24, C-72 thru C-75
JOB SHADOWING
B-90
MERIWETHER LEWIS, E.S.
A-4, A-5, B-24, C-31 thru C-34
MOBILITY
A-15, C-3, C-7, C-11, C-15, C-19, C-23,
C-27, C-31, C-35, C-39, C-43, C-47,
C-51, C-55, C-59, C-64, C-68, C-72,
C-76, C-80, C-85, C-89, C-93, C~97
MONTICELLO
A-5, B-25, C-89 thru C-92
MURRAY, H.S.
A-5, B-25, C-93 thru C-96
MURRAY, Virginia L., E.S.
A-4, A-5, B-24, C-35 thru C-38
NATIONAL MERIT SCHOLARSHIP
B-105, C-87, C-91, C-99
OCCUPATIONAL COMPETENCE
B-73, C-87, C-91, C-95, C-99
OPEN DOORS
B-127
SUBJECT INDEX
PARENT SURVEY
A-6, B-114 thru B-126, C-6, C-10, C-14,
C-18, C-22, C-26, C-30, C-34, C-38,
C-42, C-46, C-50, C-54, C-58, C-62,
C-66, C-70, C-74, C-78, C-82, C-87,
C-91, C-96, C-99
PE (see Physical Education)
PER-PUPIL SPENDING
A-11
PHYSICAL EDUCATION (PE)
B-85 thru B-87
PORTABLE CLASSROOMS
C-3, C-7, C-11, C-15, C-19, C-23, C-27,
C-31, C-35, C-39, C-43, C-47, C-51,
C-55, C-59, C-64, C-68, C-72, C-76,
C-80, C-85, C-89, C-93, C-97, C-101
PRIORITIES (see Goals/Priorities)
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
A-11
PUBLICATIONS
Appendix-7
RECOGNITION (see Awards/Recognitions)
RED HILL, E.S.
A-5, B-24, C-39 thru C-42
RESPONSIBLE CITIZENSHIP
A-6, B-106 thru B-111
SAT (see Scholastic Assessment Test)
SCHOLASTIC ASSESSMENT TEST (SAT)
A-4, B-2 thru B-4, C-87, C-91, C-95,
C-99
SCOTTSVlLLE, E.S.
A-5, B-24, C-43 thru C-46
SECOND GRADE READING
A-6, B-77thru B-81, C-5, C-9, C-13,
C-17, C-21, C-25, C-29, C-33, C-37,
C-41, C~45, C-49, C-53, C-57, C-61
SOL (see Standards of Learning Tests)
SUBJECT INDEX D- 18
SPECIAL EDUCATION
A-12, A-15, B-97, C-3, C-7, C-11, C-15,
C-19, C-23, C-27, C-31, C-35, C-39,
C-43, C-47, C-51, C-55, C-59, C-64,
C-68, C-72, C-76, C-80, C-85, C-89,
C-93, C-97
STAFF (see Employee Demographics)
STAFFING RATIOS
A-11
STANDARDS OF LEARNING (SOL) TESTS
A-4 thru A-6, B-20 thru B-72, C-4, C-8,
C-12, C-16, C-20, C-24, C-28, C-32,
C-36, C-40, C-44, C-48, C-52, C-56,
C-60, C-65, C-69, C-73, C-77, C-81,
C-86, C-90, C-94, C-98
STANFORD 9 ACHIEVEMENT TEST
A-5, B-8 thru B-19, C-5, C-9, C-13,
C-17, C-21, C-25, C-29, C-33, C-37,
C-41, C-45, C-49, C-53, C-57, C-61,
C-65, C-69, C-73, C-77, C-81, C-86,
C-90, C-95, C-98
STONE-ROBINSON, E.S.
A-5, B-24, C-47 thru C-50
STONY POINT, E.S.
A-4, A-5, B-24, C-51 thru C-54
STUDENT DEMOGRAPHICS
A-4, A-10, A-14, A-15, C-3, C-7, C-11,
C-15, C-19, C-23, C-27, C-31, C-35,
C-39, C-43, C-47, C-51, C-55, C-59,
C-64, C-68, C-72, C-76, C-80, C-85,
C-89, C-93, C-97, C-101
SUSPENSIONS
B-110, C-102
SUBJECT INDEX
SUTHERLAND, Mortimer Y., Jr., M.S.
A-5, B-24, C-76 thru C-79
TECHNOLOGY (see Instructional
Technology)
TITLE I
A-6, A-12, B-93, C-3, C-7, C-11, C-15,
C-19, C-23, C-27, C-31, C-35, C-39,
C-43, C-47, C-51, C-55, C-59
VIRGINIA WELLNESS RELATED FITNESS
PROGRAM
A-6, A-13
VOCATIONAL EDUCATION
B-73, C-87, C-91, C-95, C-99, C-101
VOLUNTEERS
A-6, B-113
VOTER REGISTRATION
B-111
VSAP (Virginia State Assessment
Program)(see Stanford g)
WALTON, Leslie H., M.S.
A-5, B-24, C-80 thru C-83
WESTERN ALBEMARLE, H.S.
A-5, B-25, C-97 thru C-100
WOODBROOK, E.S.
A~4, A-5, B-24, C-55 thru C-58
YANCEY, Benjamin F., E.S.
A-5, B-24, C-59 thru C-62
D- 19 SUBJECT INDEX
TABLES and FIGURES
Public Education Funding .................................................................................................... A-10
Enrollment History ............................................................................................................... A-11
Student Demographic Information ............................................................................ A-14, A-15
Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT), Summary Data, Table #1 ........................................... B-3
SAT, Number and Percentage of Students Scoring in each Score Range on Verbal
and Math Tests, Table #2 ................................................................................................... B-4
SAT, Percentage of Students Scoring 600 or Above on Verbal and Math Tests,
Table #3 ................................................................................................................... ,~ .......... B-4
Advanced Placement (AP) Courses, Student Registration by High School ~4 ................. B-5
AP Exams, Number and Percentage of Students Taking and Scoring Three or Higher,
Table #5 ............................................................................................................................... B-6
AP Courses, Number and Percentage of Grade 9-t2 Fall Membership Taking One or
More, Table #6 .................................................................................................................... B-6
AP Exam, Number and Percentage of Grades 9-12 Who Scored Three or Higher on at
Least One, Table #7 ............................................................................................................. B-6
AP Exam, Number and Percentage of Students Scoring at Each Score Point,
Table #8 ................................................................................................................................ B-7
Stanford 9 Achievement Test, National Percentile Ranks by School, Grade 4,
Table #9 ...................................................................................................................... ,, ...... B-11
Stanford 9 Achievement Test, National Percentile Ranks by School, Grade 6,
Table #10 ............................................................................................................................ B-12
Stanford 9 Achievement Test, National Percentile Ranks by SChOOl, Grade 9,
Table #11 ............................................................................................................................ B-12
Stanford 9 Achievement Test, Quartile Ranges, Grades 4, 6, and 9, Total Reading,
Figure#1 ................................................................................................................... ~ .... ,,,.. B-13
Stanford 9 Achievement Test, Quartile Ranges, Grades 4, 6, and 9, Total Language,
Figure #2 ............................................................................................................................ B-14
Stanford 9 Achievement Test, Quartile Ranges, Grades 4, 6, and 9, Total Mathematics,
Figure #3 ............................................................................................................................ B-14
TABLES AND FIGURES INDEX D-20
TABLE/FIGURE INDEX
Stanford 9 Achievement Test, Quartile Ranges, Grades 4, 6, and 9, Total Test,
B-15
Figure #4 ............................................................................................................................
Stanford 9 Achievement Test, National Percentile Ranks by Demographics, Grade 4,
B-16
Table #12 ............................................................................................................................
Stanford 9 Achievement Test, National Percentile Ranks by Demographics, Grade 6,
Table #13 ........................................................................................................................... B-17
Stanford 9 Achievement Test, National Percentile Ranks by Demographics, Grade 9,
Table #14 .............................................................................. ~ ............................................ B-17
Stanford 9 Achievement Test, Longitudinal Study, Spring 1997 Grade 3 and Fall 1999
Grade 6, Total Reading, Figure ~4 .................................................................................. B-18
Stanford 9 Achievement Test, Longitudinal Study, Spring 1997 Grade 3 and Fall 1999
Grade 6, Total Mathematics, Figure #5 ............................................. : ............................. B-18
Stanford 9 Achievement Test, Longitudinal Study, Spring 1997 Grade 3 and Fall 1999
Grade 6, Total Language, Figure #6 ................................................................................ B-19
Standards of Learning (SOL) Test Subjects, Table #J 5 .................................................... B-22
SOL Tests, Achievement Levels Described, Table #t6 .....................................................B-23
SOL Tests, Percentage of Students Passing, 1998-2000, Grade 3, Figure #8 .................. B-25
SOL Tests, Percentage of Students Passing, Grade 3, Figure #8 ..................................... B-25
SOL Tests, Percentage of Students Passing, Grade 5, Figure #9 ..................................... B-26
SOL Tests, Percentage of Students Passing, Grade 8, Figure #10 ................................... B-26
SOL Tests, Percentage of Students Passing, End-of-Course (EOC), Figure #11 ............ B-27
SOL Tests, Number and Percentages of Students Scoring at Each Achievement
............................................ B-28
Level, Grade 3, Table #17 ....................................................
SOL Tests, Number and Percentages of Students Scoring at Each Achievement
............................................ B-29
Level, Grade 5, Table #t 8 ....................................................
SOL Tests, Number and Percentages of Students Scoring at Each Achievement
........................ B-30
Level, Grade 8, Table #t9 ........................................................................
SOL Tests, Number and Percentages of Students Scoring at Each Achievement
B-31
Level, EOC, Table #20 ......................................................................................................
SOL Tests, Percentage of Students Passing, by School, Grades 3 and $, Table #21 .... B-32
SOL Tests, Percentage of Students Passing, by School, Grade 8, Table #22 ................. B-33
D-21 TABLES AND FIGURES INDEX
TABLE/FIGURE INDEX
SOL Tests, Percentage of Students Passing, by School, EOC, Table #23 ...................... B-34
SOL Tests, Percentage of Students Passing for Each Demographic Category, Grade 3,
Table #24 ............................................................................................................................ B-35
SOL Tests, Percentage of Students Passing for Each Demographic Category, Grade 5,
Table #25 ........................................................................................................................... B-36
SOL Tests, Percentage of Students Passing for Each Demographic Category, Grade 8,
Table #26 ........................................................................................................................... B-37
SOL Tests, Percentage of Students Passing for Each Demographic Category,
Grade EOC, Table #27 ...................................................................................... B-38 and B-39
SOl_ Tests, Percentage of Black Students 'Passing, County and State, Table #28 ......... B-41
SOL Tests, Percentage of Students Passing, Black and White Students Receiving and
Not Receiving Free. or Reduced Price Lunch, Grade 3, Figure #12 .............................. B-42
SOL Tests, Percentage of Students Passing, Black and White Students Receiving and
Not Receiving Free- or Reduced Price Lunch, Grade 5, Figure #13 .............................. B-42
SOL Tests, Percentage of Students Passing, Black and White Students Receiving and
Not Receiving Free- or Reduced Price Lunch, Grade 8, Figure #14 .............................. B-43
SOL Tests, Percentage of Students Passing, Black and White Students Receiving and
Not Receiving Free- or Reduced Price Lunch, EOC English and History, Figure #15. B-44
SOL Tests, Percentage of Students Passing, Black and White Students Receiving and
Not Receiving Free-or Reduced Price Lunch, EOC Math and Science, Figure #16~,.. B-44
SOL Tests, Percentage of Students Passing, Black and White Gap, Grade 3,
Figure #17 ......................................................................................................................... B-46
SOL Tests, Percentage of Students Passing, Black and White Gap, Grade 5,
Figure #18 .................................................................................................. , ...... B-47 and B-48
SOL Tests, Percentage of Students Passing, Black and White Gap, Grade 8,
Figure #19 ......................................................................................................... B-4g and B-§0
SOL Tests, Percentage of Students Passing, Black and White Gap, EOC,
Figure #20 ........................................................................................................ B-51 thru B-§4
SOl. Tests, Percent of Students Passing, Achievement Gap for Students Receiving
and Not Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch, Grade 3, Figure #21 ..................... B-$5
SOL Tests, Percent of Students Passing, Achievement Gap for Students Receiving
and Not Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch, Grade 5, Figure #22 ..... B-56 and B-57
SOL Tests, Percent of Students Passing, Achievement Gap for Students Receiving
and Not Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch, Grade 8, Figure #23 ..... B-58 and B-59
TABLES AND FIGURES INDEX D-22
TABLE/FIGURE INDEX
SOL Tests, Percent of Students Passing, Achievement Gap for Students Receiving and
Not Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch, EOC, Table #29 ................................... B-60
SOL Tests, Advanced Attainment, County and State, Grade 3, Figure #24 ...................... B-63
SOL Tests, Advanced Attainment, County and State, Grade 5, Figure #25 ...... B-64 and B-65
SOL Tests, Advanced Attainment, County and State, Grade 8, Figure #26 ...... B-66 and B-67
SOL Tests, Advanced Attainment, County and State, EOC, Figure #27 ........... B-68 thru B-71
SOL Tests, Longitudinal Study, Spring 1998 Grade 3 and Spring 2000 Grade 5,
Table #30 ........................................................................................................................... B-72
Graduates' Continuing Education Plans, Figure #28 ......................................................... B-75
Second-Grade Reading Assessment, Percentage At or Above Grade Level and Below
Grade Level, Figure #29 ................................................................................................... B-78
Second-Grade Reading Assessment, Percentage At or Above Grade Level and Below
Grade Level by Demographic Category, Figure #30 ...................................................... B-78
Second-Grade Reading Assessment, Percentage at Each Reading Level, Table #31 .... B-79
Second-Grade Reading Assessment, Percentage of Black and White Students Not
Receiving and Receiving Free- or Reduced-Price Lunch that are Reading At or
Above Grade Level, Figure #31 ....................................................................................... B-80
Second-Grade Reading Assessment Compared to Grade 3 Standards of Learning
English Test Scores, Number of Students Scoring at Each Reading Level,
Table #32 ........................................................................................................................... B-81
Second-Grade Reading Assessment Compared to Grade 3 Standards of Learning
English Test Scores, Percentage of Students Scoring at Each Reading Level,
Table #33 ........................................................................................................................... B-81
Foreign Language, Percent of 8th-Grade Completers, Figure #32 .................................... B-83
Algebra I, Percent of 8th-Grade Completers, Figure #33 ................................................... B-84
Virginia Wellness Related - Fitness Program, Percent of Students Passing Each Skill,
by Grade, Figure #34 ........................................................................................................ B-87
Instructional Computers, Number, by Level, Figure #35 ................................................... B-89
D-23 TABLES AND FIGURES INDEX
TABLE/FIG[~RE INDEX
Title I - Reading Assessment, Fall Compared to Spring, by Grade, Figure #36 ............. B-93
Academic Learning ProJect Schools (ALPS) - Reading Assessment, Fall Compared
to Spring, by Grade, Figure ~37 ......
............................... B-94 thru B-96
Voter Registration, Percent of Eligible Seniors Registered, Figure #38 ........................ B-111
Volunteer Hours, by Category, Figure #39 .........
.............................................................. B-113
Parent Survey Response Rate, Table #34 .........
............................................................... B-115
Parent Survey, Percent Responding Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, Strongly
Disagree, or Don't Know, by Correlate and Question, Table #35 ............. B-119 thru B-126
TABLES AND FIGURES INDEX D-24