Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
3Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Minority Report Assessment 2012 : Evaluation of Superintendent Tom Boasberg

Minority Report Assessment 2012 : Evaluation of Superintendent Tom Boasberg

Ratings: (0)|Views: 3,114|Likes:
Published by defensedenver
the evaluation of Denver Public Schools Superintendent, Tom Boasberg
the evaluation of Denver Public Schools Superintendent, Tom Boasberg

More info:

Published by: defensedenver on Feb 09, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

10/24/2013

pdf

text

original

 
DPS Board of Education Minority Report Superintendent’s Evaluation 12/20/12 Page 1
DPS
 
BOARD
 
OF
 
EDUCATION
 
 
MINORITY 
 
REPORT
Superintendent’s Evaluation, 12/20/12
F
ULFILLING
D
ISTRICT
O
BJECTIVES
 
Increasing Academic Performance (Status)
Observed Performance:
The metric to be evaluated to measure the Superintendent’s performance related toincreasing the academic performance (status) comes from the Denver Plan. This metric says, “(o)n average, theproficiency rate for grade level cohorts will increase 3.5% in reading, writing, and math over each.The table below summarizes District-wide data for the period between academic year 2009-2010 throughacademic year 2011-2012, the last testing data available for the Colorado Student Assessment.
Reading Writing Math2010 2011 2012 2010 2011 2012 2010 2011 2012District WideScore50% 49% 52% 35% 39% 41% 39% 41% 43%Year-to-YearIncrease-1 pts 3 pts 4 pts 2 pts 2 pts 2 pts
Data compiled from the CDE Colorado Growth Model
 Assessment:
Based on these results, the superintendent receives a “partially meets” evaluation for improvingacademic achievement district wide.
Evaluation:
Increases in academic performance should be additive based on the goal established in the DenverPlan. This being the case, academic performance (status) should have increased by 24.5 percentage points sinceacademic year 2005/2006. Applying this model to the time period between academic year 2009/2010 to2011/2012, the district’s status would be 57% at or above proficient for reading, 42% in writing, and 46% in math.Under the Superintendent’s leadership, the district has not come close to these levels of performance.
Development Actions:
Therefore, the Superintendent shall develop a detailed plan for improving studentperformance (status) for the 2012/2013 and 2013/2014 academic years. This plan will address the Denver Planobjective for increasing the performance status of all students by 3.5% and shall include the following to improvedistrict academic performance:
 
Methods to be used
 
Changes in the instructional model
 
Metrics for assessing progress toward meeting the Denver Plan goal
 
Identification of risk that may affect the District’s ability to improve and risk management methodologies to managethese risks
The Superintendent shall provide updates on District progress related to this action item at each monthly meetingof the school board. The board shall assess the Superintendent’s progress and provide him with feedback on aquarterly basis.
Expected Outcomes of the 2013 Performance Period:
The District’s academic performance shall increase by 3.5percentage points per year as measured by both the 2013 and 2014 TCAP testing events.
 
DPS Board of Education Minority Report Superintendent’s Evaluation 12/20/12 Page 2
Increasing Academic Performance (growth)
Observed Performance:
The metric to be evaluated measuring the Superintendent’s performance related todecreasing the number of students scoring unsatisfactory on the state’s standardized test comes from the DenverPlan. This metric says, On average, the percentage of students scoring unsatisfactory will decrease by 3.5% inreading, writing, and math each year.The table below summarizes District-wide data, by grade, for the percent change in students scoring unsatisfactoryon the CSAP for the period between academic year 2009-2010 and academic year 2011-2012, the last testing dataavailable for the Colorado Student Assessment Test. The expected change is 3.5 percentage points.
GradeReading Writing Math2010 2011 2012 11/12Delta2010 2011 2012 11/12Delta2010 2011 2012 11/12Delta
3 24% 18% 14.5 -3.5pts15% 12% 10% -2 pts 18% 18% 17% -1 pts4 22% 25% 21% -4 pts 16% 15% 14% -1 pts 18% 18% 17% -1 pts5 23% 24% 21% -3 pts 11% 9% 9.5% 0.5 pts 17% 20% 18% -2 pts6 18% 21% 18% -3 pts 9% 8% 9% 1 pts 22% 22% 20% -2 pts7 22% 24% 22.5 -1.5pts9% 6% 6% 0 pts 33% 25% 25% 0 pts8 19% 18% 21% 3 pts 7% 7% 5% -2 pts 34% 32% 34% 2 pts9 17% 16% 14% -2 pts 12% 10% 9% -1 pts 52% 51% 49% -2 pts10 17% 17% 15% -2 pts 16% 11% 12% 1 pts 49% 47% 43% -4 pts
Data compiled from the CDE School View Data Lab
 Assessment:
Based on these results, the superintendent receives a “partially meets” evaluation for decreasingdistrict-wide the percent of students receiving an unsatisfactory ranking on the state’s standardized test.
Evaluation:
As above, decreases in the students receiving unsatisfactory ratings should be additive based on thegoal established in the Denver Plan. This being the case, this numbers should have decreased by 24.5 percentagepoints since academic year 2005/2006. Nowhere has this gain been seen for this metric. However, in Reading, thedata show that a solid track record of decreasing the number of unsatisfactory evaluations is being achievedoverall. The Superintendent should take heart in this achievement as it appears to be reflective the hard workperformed under his leadership related to reading in all schools across the district. However, this same gains arenot being seen in Math and Writing.
Development Actions:
The Superintendent shall perform an analysis showing the reasons for the improvementsbeing achieved in Reading. The Superintendent will then evaluate the ability of the District to implement thesesame strategies across the Writing and Math subject areas. Based on this evaluation, the Superintendent willdevelop a detailed plan for implementing these strategies for the 2012/2013 and 2013/2014 academic years. Thisplan shall include the following to decrease the number of unsatisfactory ratings received by district students:
 
Methods to be used
 
DPS Board of Education Minority Report Superintendent’s Evaluation 12/20/12 Page 3
 
Changes in the instructional model
 
Metrics for assessing progress toward meeting the Denver Plan goal
 
Identification of risk that may affect the District’s ability to improve and risk management methodologies to managethese risks
The Superintendent shall provide updates to the school board on District progress related to this action itemquarterly. These updates shall be provided as part of the board monthly meetings. The board shall assess theSuperintendent’s progress and provide him with feedback at the six month point in this assessment cycle.
Expected Outcomes of the 2013 Performance Period:
The District’s academic performance shall increase by 3.5percentage points per year as measured by both the 2013 and 2014 TCAP testing events.
Decreasing the Achievement Gap
Observed Performance:
The metric to be evaluated to measure the Superintendent’s performance related toincreasing the academic performance (growth) comes from the Denver Plan. This metric says, The performancegap between Asian / Caucasian students and African-American / Hispanic students scoring Proficient & above onCSAP will decrease by 3.5% annually, closing the achievement gap.The table below summarizes District-wide data for the period between academic year 2009/10 through academicyear 2011-2012, the last testing data available for the TCAP.
Reading Writing MathAsn Wht Blk Lat Asn Wht Blk Lat Asn Wht Blk Lat2010CSAP 59% 76% 45% 40% 48% 62% 29% 26% 56% 63% 28% 32%2010Median68% 43%Gap25.0pts55% 28%Gap27.5pts60% 30%Gap29.5pts2011CSAP 53% 82% 40% 40% 46% 73% 30% 29% 54% 71% 26% 35%2011Median68% 40%Gap27.5pts60% 30%Gap30.0pts63% 31%Gap32.0ptsPoints Reduction 2010 vs 2011 +2.5 pts +2.5 pts +2.5 pts2012TCAP 58% 84% 43% 42% 51% 74% 30% 32% 59% 75% 27% 35%2012Median71% 42.5%28.5pts62.5% 31%31.5pts67% 31%Gap36.0pts
Points Reduction 2011 vs 2012 +1.5 pts +1.5 pts +4.5 pts
Data compiled from the CDE School View Data Lab
 
*
Asn = Asian Students; Wht = White Students; Blk = Black Students; Lat = Latino Students
 Assessment:
Based on these results, the superintendent receives a “does not meet” evaluation for decreasing theachievement gap between Asian / White students and Black / Latino students.
 
Evaluation:
Decreases in the achievement gap should be additive based on the goal established in the Denver Plan.This being the case, the achievement gap should have increased by 24.5 percentage points since academic year

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->