MILL PARK

REVIEW DATA 2013

1

Reports to be used in 2012 review

Student Achievement Report 5 year Trend Report School Comparison Reports Group summary Report

Understanding the National Bands

At this stage Bands have no explicit curriculum meaning but results show that for Victorian Students:
A typical Y 9 level of performance is at the bottom of Band 8 A typical Y 7 level of performance is third into Band 7 A typical Y 5 level of performance is halfway into Band 6

A typical Y 3 level of performance is at the bottom of Band 5

3

Student Achievement Report

Gives personalised data. The report can be used to calculate the percentage of students that are achieving at or above the Victorian Mean National Assessment Program Scale(1-1000).

What percentage on average would you expect to be at or above the State Mean? What patterns do you notice in this report? What is this data generally telling you about your students ability and school programming in?
4

2010

YEAR 3 READING 2011

2012

41 46

49

60% at above state mean

54% at above state mean

66 at above mean

61% at above state mean

65 at above mean 66 at above mean

State Mean 433

State Mean 434

State Mean 431

45 40 63

23

24 11

109

109

123
5

YEAR 5 READING
2010 2011 2012
49

43 44

52 % at above state mean

59 at above mean

55% at above state mean

62 at above mean

67 % at above state mean

70 at above mean

State Mean 431

State Mean 431

State Mean 502

24

38 45

46 16

27

105

113

114
6

2010

YEAR 3 WRITING 2011

2012

38 44

86

63% at above state mean

68 at above mean

State Mean 429

70% at above state mean

80% at above state mean

57

77 at above mean

State Mean 424

60

99 at above mean

State Mean 430

38 13 6 1

108

109

124
7

YEAR 5 WRITING 2010

55

2011
42

2012
55

54% at above state mean

61 at above mean

57% at above state mean

65 at above mean

76% at above state mean

79 at above mean

State Mean 493

State Mean 490

State Mean 496

46

37

41

12

25

18

104

113

114
8

2010
50

YEAR 3 SPELLING 2011

42

2012
69

60% at above state mean

68 % at above state mean
73 at above mean 65 at above mean

68 % at above state mean

83 at above mean

State Mean 418

State Mean 413

State Mean 424

51 44 47

14 16

108

109

123
9

YEAR 5 SPELLING 2010

56

2011
48

2012
48

58 % at above state mean

65 at above mean

67 % at above state mea

76 at above mean

70% at above state mean

73 at above mean

State Mean 492

State Mean 499

State Mean 494

27 38

43

21

27

23

104

113

114
10

YEAR 3 GRAMMAR AND PUNCTUATION 2010

35

2012
69

2011
58

61% at above state mean

66 at above mean

53 %at above state mean

58 at above mean

State Mean 435

State Mean 435

75 % at above state me
92 at above mean
37 61

State Mean 438

43

12

14 11

108

109

123
11

2010
56

YEAR 5 GRAMMAR AND PUNCTUATION 2012 2011

45 39

48% at above state mean 60% at above state mean

68 at above mean 55 at above mean

State Mean 499

74% at above state mean

77 at above mean

State Mean 511

32 38

State Mean 512

21

30 27

43

104

113

114
12

2010
21

YEAR 3 NUMERACY 2011

27

2012
31

46% at above state mean

53% at above state mean

49 at above mean 56 at above mean

State Mean 414

State Mean 410

58% at above state mean

69 at above mean

State Mean 410

69

62 82

16 19 7

106

108

120
13

YEAR 5 NUMERACY 2010

36

2011
33

2012
38

51 % at above state mean

61% at above state mean
57 at above mean 63 at above mean

State Mean 501

55 at above mean

State Mean 503

State Mean 499

49 % at above state mean

43 42 41

26

36

33

104

112

112
14

5 Year Trend data

Where do your students sit in comparison to the state mean? Is your mean lower or higher than the state mean? What is the trend you can see over the past 5 years for all 5 areas-both strengths and challenges?

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

School Comparison Reports

Matched Cohort Year 3 & Year 5

26

School Comparison Report

In comparison with the state Have all students made similar progress? Is the rate of progress different for groups? Are some groups of students profiting more than others from the current program? (e.g. most able, least able, average )? What is good growth? What expectations do you have for your students? (Refer to bottom grid of School Comparison Report matched cohort) Have your students met targets set in review Phase 1 cycle? ( Analysis Session)
27

2008-2010

2009-2011

2010-2012

28

29

Value Added Growth over 2 years

30

31

32

Group Summary Report

Are both girls and boys contributing to overall growth? Are there any gender issues? How are my LBOTE students performing in comparison to the other students (and the state) in these 5 areas/dimensions?
33

Reading
GROUP SUMMARY REPORT: YEAR 3

2010

2011

2012

34

GROUP SUMMARY REPORT: YEAR 5 2010

Reading

2011

2012

35

Writing

GROUP SUMMARY REPORT: YEAR 3

2010

2011

2012

36

Writing GROUP SUMMARY REPORT: YEAR 5 2010

2011

2012

37

GROUP SUMMARY REPORT: YEAR 3 2010

Spelling

2011

2012

38

Spelling GROUP SUMMARY REPORT: YEAR 5

2010

2011

2012

39

GROUP SUMMARY REPORT: YEAR 3 2010

Grammar & Punctuation

2011

2012

40

GROUP SUMMARY REPORT: YEAR 5 2010

Grammar & Punctuation

2011

2012

41

Numeracy

GROUP SUMMARY REPORT: YEAR 3 2010

2011

2012

42

Numeracy GROUP SUMMARY REPORT: YEAR 5

2010

2011

2012

43

A-E SUMMARY REPORTS (VELS) Teacher Judgment Data

2010- 2011-2012 June

44

1ST Semester Summary Report

Year Prep 1 2 3 4 5 6 A 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 B 20 35 15 18 13 22 17 JUNE 2010 Reading C 104 89 93 98 96 82 100 JUNE 2011 Reading C 138 96 105 89 84 95 88 JUNE 2012 Reading C 127 125 105 108 91 71 79 D 16 0 1 4 9 10 11 ILP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Year Prep 1 2 3 4 5 6

A 0 2 0 0 0 0 6

B 14 38 19 20 27 13 16

D 3 5 2 7 6 8 7

ILP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Year Prep 1 2 3 4 5 6

A 1 1 0 0 1 1 2

B 11 33 33 18 20 35 31

D 0 4 3 3 3 12 9

ILP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

45

1ST Semester Summary Report

Year Prep 1 2 3 4 5 6 A 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 B 15 16 15 15 14 16 15 JUNE 2010 Writing C 97 107 88 93 87 80 97 JUNE 2011 Writing C 149 120 103 88 101 81 73 JUNE 2012 Writing C 132 149 117 103 97 92 88 D 29 1 6 10 17 17 14 ILP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Year Prep 1 2 3 4 5 6

A 0 1 0 0 0 0 10

B 2 17 17 16 5 14 19

D 4 3 6 10 11 21 15

ILP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Year Prep 1 2 3 4 5 6

A 1 1 0 0 0 0 1

B 4 12 21 20 11 10 21

D 2 1 3 6 7 17 11

ILP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

46

1ST Semester Summary Report

Year Prep 1 2 3 4 5 6 Year Prep 1 2 3 4 5 6 A 0 1 3 0 0 0 1 A 0 2 0 0 0 0 12 B 4 11 30 25 18 22 24 B 4 19 8 13 5 16 26 JUNE 2010 Numeracy C 126 112 74 91 94 81 91 JUNE 2011 Numeracy C 148 118 118 100 106 87 67 JUNE 2012 Numeracy C 137 152 112 106 96 80 83 D 11 1 3 4 6 11 13 D 3 2 0 3 7 13 12 ILP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ILP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Year Prep 1 2 3 4 5 6

A 1 0 0 0 1 0 2

B 0 10 26 19 16 30 31

D 1 1 3 4 3 9 5

ILP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

47

LITERACY ADVANCE
Prep Year 2 2010 -2011-2012

48

St Francis of Assisi Primary

Prep-Year Two Post Literacy Data 2009-2010-2011
With Thanks & Permission

49

Prep-Year Two Post Literacy Data

Oral Language-Post ROL

Reading

-Post Text
-Post WORD

Writing Spelling

-Post BURT
-Post HRSW -Peters Dictation

50

2010, 2011- Median scores are above LIKE and ALL schools. 2010- 80% of students equal to ALL schools. 2011- 80% of students equal to LIKE school. 2012- Median scores are well above. 2012- 80% of students above LIKE and ALL schools. 51

2010- well above the median and 80% of students. 2011-12- above the median and 80% of students. 2010- indicates a higher median and 80% of students when compared to 2011 and 2012. 52

2010- Median and 80% of students well below LIKE and ALL schools. 2011/2012- Median below LIKE and ALL schools. 80% of students equal to LIKE school. 53

2010-2011-Median above LIKE and ALL schools. 2010-80% of students equal to LIKE school. 2011-80% of students above LIKE and ALL schools. 2012-Median and 80% of students above LIKE and ALL schools.

54

2010, 2011, 2012- Median well above LIKE and ALL schools. 80% of students above LIKE and ALL schools. 2012- 80% of students data shows a greater increase when compared to 2010 and 2011.
55

2010, 2011, 2012- Median and 80% of students remain consistently higher than LIKE and ALL schools. 56

2010, 2011, 2012- Median remains consistently higher than LIKE and ALL schools. 2010- 80% of students equal to LIKE and ALL schools. 2011, 2012- 80% of students are above LIKE and ALL schools.

57

2010, 2011, 2012- Median and 80% of students remains consistently higher than LIKE and ALL schools.

58

2010- Median higher than LIKE school. 80% of students much higher than LIKE and ALL schools. 2011-2012- Median and 80% of students higher than LIKE and ALL schools, displaying consistent growth. 59

2010, 2011- Median and 80% of students above LIKE and ALL schools. 2012- Median and 80% of students well above LIKE and ALL schools. 2011- a slight regression when comparing Median to 2010. 2012- greatest growth displayed in both Median and 80% of students, in comparison to 2010 and 2011 data.

60

2010. 2011, 2012- Median and 80% of students remains higher than LIKE and ALL schools. 2012- displays a slight regression in the Median when compared to 2011.
61

2010, 2011, 2012- Median and 80% of students are above LIKE and ALL schools. 2011- displays progression from 2010, with the Median and 80% of students being well above LIKE and ALL schools. 2012- a regression is evident based on the 2011 Median. 62

2010, 2011, 2012- the Median remains higher than LIKE and ALL schools. 2010- 80% of students are equal to LIKE school. 2012- A slight regression is evident from 2011 when comparing the Median. 2011-2012- 80% of students has been maintained.

63

2010, 2011, 2012- the Median and 80% of students has been maintained. 2011- 80% of students equal to LIKE and ALL schools.
64

2010, 2011, 2012- Median remains higher than LIKE and ALL schools. There is a slight regression in the Median from 2011-2012. 2010-2011- 80% of students remains higher than LIKE and ALL schools. 2012- 80% of students is lower than LIKE and ALL schools. A large regression in data is present here from 2011. 65

2010, 2011- Median maintained with LIKE and ALL schools. 2012- Median is higher than LIKE and ALL schools. A progression from 2011 is evident. 2010, 2011- 80% of students is lower than LIKE and ALL schools. 2012- 80% of students is higher than LIKE and ALL schools. A progression from 2011 is evident.

66

School Improvement Reports

CEVN

67

68

69