Missouri

School and Teacher Demographics
Per pupil expenditures
(CCD, 2000-01)

http://www.dese.state.mo.us
Student Demographics
Public school enrollment (CCD) Pre-K K-8 9-12 Total (K-12)
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Statewide Accountability Information
(Collected from states, January 2002 for 2001-02 school year)

$6,667 524

Number of districts
(CCD, 2001-02)

Number of charter schools
(CCD, 2001-02)

1993-94 23,597 601,691 241,874 843,565
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

2001-02 20,503 620,200 264,729 884,929
○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Number of public schools (CCD) 1993-94 1,177 Elementary 314 Middle 482 High 26 Combined 1,999 Total Number of FTE teachers Elementary Middle School High School Combined Total
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

2001-02 1,244 376 494 106 2,220 2001-02 30,916 12,321 17,394 2,470 63,101
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Race/ethnicity (CCD) 1993-94 American Indian/Alaskan Natives * 1% Asian/Pacific Islander 16 Black 1 Hispanic 82 White — Other Students with disabilities (OSEP)
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

2001-02 * 1% 18 2 81 — 2001-02 13% 2001-02 1%
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

(CCD)

Migratory students (OME)
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Students with limited English proficiency (ED/NCBE)
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

1993-94 1%
○ ○ ○ ○ ○

2000-01 1%
○ ○ ○ ○ ○

All schools by percent of students eligible to participate in the Free and Reduced-Price Lunch Program^ (CCD, 2001-02)

Sources of funding
District average
(CCD, 2000-01)

0-34% 35-49% 50-74% 75-100%
^ 1 school did not report.

958 534 545 236

State 38% Intermediate 1%

Federal 7% Local 55%

KEY: * KEY: — KEY: n/a

62

#

= Less than 0.5 percent = Not applicable = Not available = Sample size too small to calculate

Percentage of teachers with a major in the main subject taught, grades 7-12 (SASS) 1994 2000 81% 64% English 89 52 Math 70 70 Science 84 80 Social Studies

1993-94 *

1993-94 26,009 9,764 14,939 375 51,087
○ ○ ○

1993-94 11%

21

Statewide Goal for Schools on State Assessment Increase in top two achievement levels and decrease in bottom two achievement levels in all five of the Missouri Assessment Program subjects in the respective grades. Reduce the gap in the majority and minority student performances. Expected School Improvement on Assessment Three percent increase in students scoring in top two achievement levels and 3 percent decrease in bottom two achievement levels OR a Missouri Assessment Program Index change reflecting improvement of students throughout the distribution. Title I Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for Schools Five percent increase in students at highest level and 5 percent decrease in lowest level or 5 percent or less in lowest level.

Title I 2001-02
(ED Consolidated Report, 2001-02)

Schoolwide Targeted Total Programs Assistance

393 30% 367 Schools meeting AYP goal 28% Schools in need of improvement 26 70%
Number of schools

932 1,325 70% 100% 921 1,288 72% 97% 11 37 30% 3%

Title I allocation

$150,588,984

(Includes Basic, Concentration, and LEA grants, Capital Expenditures, Even Start, Migrant Education, and Neglected and Delinquent, ED, 2001-02)

NAEP State Results
Reading, 2003 Proficient level and above Basic level and above Math, 2003 Proficient level and above Basic level and above
Grade 4 Grade 8

34% 68

35% 80

30% 79

28% 71

Missouri
Student Achievement 2001-02

Assessment State Definition of Proficient

Missouri Assessment Program. See Appendix A.

Elementary School
Grade 3
Communication Arts
Students in: All Schools Title I Schools Economically Disadvantaged Students Pro- Nearing Step 1 gressing Prof. 6% 20% 38% 12 30 38 11 28 39
Proficient 0

Grade 7
Communication Arts
Proficient 0

○ ○ ○ ○

Middle School

High School
Grade 11
Communication Arts
Students in: All Schools Title I Schools Economically Disadvantaged Students Pro- Nearing Step 1 gressing Prof. 17% 18% 42% 35 22 33 31 23 35
Proficient 0

○○

○ ○

○ ○

○ ○

Prof. 34% 20 21

Adv. 2% 1 1

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○○

Students in: All Schools Title I Schools Economically Disadvantaged Students

Pro- Nearing Step 1 gressing Prof. 13% 22% 33% 26 31 29 23 30 31

Prof. 30% 14 16

Adv. 2% 1 1

Prof. Adv. 23% 1% 10 1 11 11

○○

○○

○○

○○

○○

Grade 3
Mathematics
Pro- Nearing Students in: Step 1 gressing Prof. All Schools 3% 18% 41% Title I Schools 5 30 44 Economically 5 28 44 Disadvantaged Students Students with Limited English Proficiency 13 Migratory Students 6 Students with Disabilities 2
Proficient 0

Grade 8
Mathematics
Pro- Nearing Students in: Step 1 gressing Prof. All Schools 20% 34% 32% Title I Schools 37 37 20 Economically 35 38 21 Disadvantaged Students Students with Limited English Proficiency 46 Migratory Students 31 Students with Disabilities 29
Proficient 0

Students with Limited English Proficiency 27 Migratory Students 21 Students with Disabilities 11

33 35 30

29 29 39

11 15 21

1 1 1

Students with Limited English Proficiency 48 Migratory Students 35 Students with Disabilities 18

○ ○

26 30 34

14 29 30

11 6 17

1 0 1

Students with Limited English Proficiency 63 Migratory Students 44 Students with Disabilities 25

18 6 19

17 44 38

2 6 18

0 0 1

○ ○ ○ ○

Grade 10
Mathematics
Pro- Nearing Students in: Step 1 gressing Prof. All Schools 25% 34% 30% Title I Schools 50 31 16 Economically 44 35 18 Disadvantaged Students Students with Limited English Proficiency 59 Migratory Students 36 Students with Disabilities 27
Proficient 0

Prof. 30% 19 20

Adv. 8% 3 3

Prof. 13% 5 5

Adv. 1% 1 1

Prof. Adv. 10% 1% 4 0 3 0

32 29 28

38 49 43

14 15 23

3 1 5

Student Achievement Trend Reading 3rd grade Meets or Exceeds Standards
100 80 60 40 20 0
KEY: * — n/a # High Poverty Schools

Student Achievement Trend Mathematics 8th grade Meets or Exceeds Standards
100 80 60 40 20 0 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 13 11 14 14 14

30 44 39

16 19 25

7 5 7

1 2 1

30 25 47

11 36 22

1 3 4

0 0 1

High School Indicators
High school dropout rate (CCD, event)
1993-94 2000-01

7%
1994-95

4%
2000-01

29

32

32

36

1999 2000 2001 2002
= Less than 0.5 percent = Not applicable = Not available = Sample size too few to calculate = 75-100% of students qualify for lunch subsidies

Postsecondary enrollment
(NCES, High school graduates enrolled in college)

51%

53%

F O R

M O R E

I N F O R M A T I O N ,

R E F E R

T O

S O U R C E S ,

P A G E

1 1 7

63