Four
of six “Below Average” and “Unsatisfactory” elementary and middle schools that
attended the professional development regional sessions and
received WIN’s onsite professional development showed increases of 2.8 to 7.0
percentage points in students meeting standard on PACT after
receiving WIN’s services. Two of four “Below Average” and “Unsatisfactory”
elementary and middle schools (shaded in table) that attended only
one to three regional sessions showed increases of 1.8 to 9.7 percentage points
in students meeting standard, with the school attending the
most regional sessions showing the highest increase (9.7%).
| Table 1 |
|
PACT Data for "Below Average" and "Unsatisfactory"
Elementary and Middle Schools in 2005 before and in 2006 after WIN's Professional Development Services |
| District | School |
Number Tested 2005 2006 |
% Below Basic 2005 2006 |
% Basic 2005 2006 |
% Proficient 2005 2006 |
% Advanced 2005 2006 |
% Meeting Standard* 2005 2006 |
% Increase/ Decrease 2005 to 2006 |
# of WIN Sessions 2006 |
| Dillion 2 | J.V.Martin Jr.High | 544 496 | 43.75% 50.00% | 43.01% 39.52% | 11.76% 9.27% | 1.47% 1.21% | 56.25% 50.00% | -6.25% | 11 |
| Lauren 56 |
M.S.Bailey Elem |
108 119 | 43.52% 46.22% | 37.04% 34.45% | 19.44% 18.49% | 0.00% 0.84% | 56.48% 53.78% | -2.70% | 9 |
| Lee | Mt. Pleasant Mid | 385 355 | 46.49% 43.66% | 43.38% 43.38% | 10.13% 11.55% | 0.00% 1.41% | 53.51% 56.34% | 2.84% | 12 |
| Orangeburg 3 | Elloree Elem | 127 123 | 36.22% 30.89% | 41.73% 43.09% | 21.26% 26.02% | 1.00% 0.00% | 63.78% 69.11% | 5.33% | 9 |
|
Orangeburg 3 |
Elloree Mid | 167 154 | 40.12% 33.12% | 46.71% 48.05% | 12.57% 16.88% | 0.60% 1.95% | 59.88% 66.88% | 7.00% | 12 |
| Spartanburg 7 | Whitlock Jr High | 336 356 | 61.61% 58.43% | 31.85% 35.11% | 6.55% 6.46% | 0.00% 0.00% | 38.39% 41.57% | 3.18% | 12 |
| Berkeley** | Cainhoy Elem | 121 128 | 33.06% 34.38% | 41.32% 45.31% | 24.79% 18.75% | 0.83% 1.56% | 66.94% 65.63% | -1.31% | 1 |
| Berkeley** | Cainhoy Mid | 116 117 | 37.93% 39.92% | 45.69% 50.43% | 16.38% 9.40% | 0.00% 0.85% | 62.07% 60.68% | -1.39% | 1 |
| Fairfield** | Fairfield Mid | 497 463 | 47.69% 38.01% | 41.25% 48.38% | 10.06% 12.96% | 1.01% 0.65% | 52.31% 61.99% | 9.68% | 3 |
| Greenville** | Hollis Academy | 217 232 | 41.01% 39.22% | 40.55% 41.81% | 16.13% 18.10% | 2.30% 0.86% | 58.99% 60.78% | 1.78% | 1 |
* Increases in percentage of students meeting
standards are highlighted in yellow.
** Note that the schools highlighted in gray only participated in a limited
number of group sessions and did not take advantage of
on-site visits.
Five
of eight “Average” and “Good” elementary and middle schools receiving a total of
27 of WIN’s onsite professional services showed increases of 0.2
to 5.3 percentage points in students meeting standard on the PACT after
receiving WIN’s services. The value of WIN’s assistance in these schools is
evident in these improvements.
| Table 2 |
|
PACT Data for "Average" and "Good" Elementary and
Middle Schools in 2005 before and in 2006 after WIN's Professional Development Services |
| District | School |
Number Tested |
% Below Basic |
% Basic |
% Proficient |
% Advanced |
% Meeting Standard |
% Increase/ Decrease |
% of WIN Sessions |
| 2005 2006 | 2005 2006 | 2005 2006 | 2005 2006 | 2005 2006 | 2005 2006 | 2005 to 2006 | 2006 | ||
| Anderson 2 | Honea Path Elementary | 185 175 | 6.49% 4.00% | 40.54% 40.57% | 49.73% 51.43% | 3.24% 4.00% | 93.51% 96.00% | 2.49% | 2 |
| Anderson 5 | Lakeside Middle | 844 811 | 20.26% 20.72% | 47.99% 49.69% | 26.54% 25.28% | 5.21% 4.32% | 79.74% 79.28% | -4.60% | 4 |
| Anderson 5 | McCants | 1086 1132 | 14.64% 14.31% | 40.24% 43.02% | 35.82% 33.83% | 9.30% 8.83% | 85.36% 85.69% | 0.33% | 4 |
| Anderson 5 |
Southwood Middle |
414 430 | 28.74% 23.49% | 50.24% 57.91% | 20.05% 15.81% | 0.97% 2.79% | 71.26% 76.51% | 5.25% | 4 |
| Greenwood 50 |
Westview Middle |
659 686 | 29.89% 32.22% | 41.73% 43.15% | 22.91% 21.57% | 5.46% 3.06% | 70.11% 67.78% | -2.33% | 1 |
| Horry County | Homewood Elementary | 214 247 | 11.68% 11.34% | 42.52% 38.06% | 42.06% 40.08% | 3.74% 10.54% | 88.32% 88.66% | 0.34% | 6 |
| Horry County |
Waccamaw Elementary |
249 253 | 9.64% 9.49% | 38.96% 36.76% | 45.38% 42.29% | 6.02% 11.46% | 90.36% 90.51% | 0.15% | 2 |
| Clarendon 2 |
Manning Jr High |
504 476 | 34.13% 38.24% | 49.01% 49.58% | 15.28% 10.92% | 1.59% 1.26% | 65.87% 61.76% | -4.11% | 4 |
*
Increases in percentage of students meeting standards are highlighted in yellow.
The SAT, ACT, and HSAP results for Lee Central High School (attended all four
regional sessions and received five onsite WIN visits),
Allendale-Fairfax High School (attended only one regional session), and
Fairfield Central High School (attended two regional sessions)
are provided in Table 5, page 9.
| Table 3 |
|
SAT, ACT, and HSAP Data for "Below Average" and
"Unsatisfactory" High Schools in 2005 before and in 2006 after WIN's Professional Development Services |
| District | School |
SAT 2005 2006 |
Point Increase/ Decrease |
ACT 2005 2006 |
Point Increase/ Decrease |
HSAP % Meeting Standard* 2005 2006 |
% Increase/ Decrease |
WIN Sessions 2006 |
| Lee | Lee Central Hi | 828 847 | 19 | 14.60 15.30 | 0.70 | 64.00 | 9 | |
| Allendale | Allendale-Fairfax | 895 778 | -117 | 18.40 16.50 | -1.90 | 76.40 | 1 | |
| Fairfield |
Fairfield Central |
846 812 | -34 | 15.60 16.90 | 1.30 | 80.60 | 2 |
*
Increases in percentage of students meeting standards are highlighted in yellow.
Despite changes to the SAT format for 2006 and the State’s overall drop in
performance, Lee Central High School’s
scores improved by 19 points from 2005 to 2006 even with more students being
tested. On the ACT, Lee Central
High School’s scores showed a .70 point increase. Allendale-Fairfax High
School’s scores declined 117 points on
the SAT and 1.9 on the ACT, and Fairfield Central High School’s scores declined
34 points on the SAT but increased
1.3 points on the ACT. The 2006 HSAP percentage meeting standard data are not
reported since this data have
yet to be released.
Table 4 shows that seven of 10 grades of students in elementary and middle
schools that attended the professional
development regional sessions and received WIN's onsite professional development
showed increases in performance
in the next highest grade after the teachers and schools had the benefit of
WIN's services. For example,
52.0% of 7th grades at J.V. Martin Junior High met PACT Standard in 2005, but
55.7% of the same students met
standard as 8th graders, indicating a 3.7 percentage point increase after WIN
services. Typically, fewer students
meet standard as they move to a higher grade because both the grade level
content and the PACT test become
more difficult. These increases in student scores seem to suggest that WIN's
services had a positive impact on
instruction and, ultimately, student performance. For the students in schools
only attending one to three regional
sessions (shaded in table), only three of eight groups of students showed
improvement in the next grade.
| Table 4 |
|
PACT Data for Same Students in "Below Average" and
"Unsatisfactory" Schools in 2005 before and in 2006 after WIN's Professional Development Services |
|
District |
School |
Grade |
# Tested 2005 2006 |
% Below Basic 2005 2006 |
% Basic 2005 2006 |
% Proficient 2005 2006 |
% Advanced 2005 2006 |
% Meeting Standard 2005 2006 |
% Increase/ Decrease 2005 to 2006 |
# WIN Sessions 2006 |
| Dillion 2 |
J.V.Martin Jr Hi |
7th 2005 vs 8th 2006 | 271 262 | 48.00 44.30 | 42.40 46.20 | 8.10 7.60 | 1.50 1.90 | 52.00 55.70 | 3.70 | 11 |
| Laurens 56 |
M.S. Bailey Elem |
3rd 2005 vs 4th 2006 | 40 44 | 15.00 38.60 | 45.00 43.20 | 40.00 18.20 | 0.00 0.00 | 85.00 61.40 | -23.60 | 9 |
| 4th 2005 vs 5th 2006 | 40 37 | 65.00 73.00 | 30.00 18.90 | 5.00 8.10 | 0.00 0.00 | 35.00 27.00 | -8.00 | |||
| Lee |
Mt Pleasant Mid |
7th 2005 vs 8th 2006 | 205 184 | 47.80 39.10 | 46.30 47.80 | 5.90 11.40 | 0.00 1.60 | 52.20 60.90 | 8.40 | 12 |
|
Orangeburg 3 |
Elloree Elem | 3rd 2005 vs 4th 2006 | 41 43 | 24.40 41.90 | 31.70 44.20 | 43.90 14.00 | 0.00 0.00 | 75.60 58.10 | -17.50 | 9 |
| 4th 2005 vs 5th 2006 | 38 34 | 36.80 23.50 | 52.60 52.90 | 10.50 23.50 | 0.00 0.00 | 63.20 76.50 | 13.30 | |||
|
Orangeburg 3 |
Elloree Mid |
5th 2005 vs 6th 2006 | 48 45 | 45.80 42.20 | 41.70 40.00 | 10.40 11.10 | 2.10 6.70 | 54.20 57.80 | 3.60 | 12 |
| 6th 2005 vs 7th 2006 | 58 55 | 34.50 32.70 | 46.60 45.50 | 17.20 21.80 | 1.70 0.00 | 66.50 67.30 | 1.80 | |||
| 7th 2005 vs 8th 2006 | 54 54 | 42.60 25.90 | 50.00 57.40 | 7.40 16.70 | 0.00 0.00 | 75.40 74.10 | 16.70 | |||
|
Spartanburg 7 |
Whitlock Jr Hi |
7th 2005 vs 8th 2006 | 165 170 | 63.00 57.60 | 30.90 37.10 | 6.10 5.30 | 0.00 0.00 | 37.00 42.40 | 5.40 | 12 |
| Berkeley** |
Cainhoy Elem |
3rd 2005 vs 4th 2006 | 38 49 | 10.5 30.6 | 42.1 51 | 44.70 16.30 | 2.60 2.00 | 89.50 69.40 | -20.10 | 1 |
| 4th 2005 vs 5th 2006 | 44 41 | 31.8 41.5 | 43.2 39 | 25.00 19.50 | 0.00 0.00 | 68.20 58.50 | -9.70 | |||
| Berkeley** |
Cainhoy Mid |
5th 2005 vs 6th 2006 | 39 40 | 56.4 47.5 | 38.5 45 | 5.10 7.50 | 0.00 0.00 | 43.60 52.50 | 8.90 | 1 |
| 6th 2005 vs 7th 2006 | 38 45 | 34.2 35.6 | 52.6 57.8 | 13.20 6.70 | 0.00 0.00 | 65.80 64.40 | -1.40 | |||
| 7th 2005 vs 8th 2006 | 39 32 | 38.5 34.4 | 41 46.9 | 20.50 15.60 | 0.00 3.10 | 61.50 65.60 | 4.10 | |||
| Fairfield ** | Faifield Mid | 7th 2005 vs 8th 2006 | 236 227 | 49.6 35.7 | 42.4 48.9 | 8.10 14.10 | 0.00 1.30 | 50.40 64.30 | 2.10 | |
| Greenville ** |
Hollis Academy |
3rd 2005 vs 4th 2006 | 70 71 | 27.1 42.3 | 41.4 47.9 | 24.30 8.50 | 7.10 1.40 | 72.90 57.70 | -15.20 | 3 |
| 4th 2005 vs 5th 2006 | 63 76 | 36.5 48.7 | 42.9 39.5 | 20.60 11.80 | 0.00 0.00 | 63.50 51.30 | -12.20 | 1 |
* Increases in percentage of students
meeting standards are highlighted in yellow.
** Note that the schools highlighted in gray only participated in a limited
number of group sessions and did not take advantage of on-site visits.
Table 5 shows that students in nine of 14 grades posted increases in
performance in the next highest grade after WIN's onsite visits.
These schools, already higher performers, received fewer professional
development sessions than the "Below Average" and
"Unsatisfactory" schools; however, they showed significant improvement after
WIN's onsite services.
| Table 5 |
| PACT Data for Same Students in "Average" and "Good" Schools in 2005 before and in 2006 after WIN's Professional Development Services |
|
District |
School |
Grade |
# Tested 2005 2006 |
% Below Basic 2005 2006 |
% Basic 2005 2006 |
% Proficient 2005 2006 |
% Advanced 2005 2006 |
% Meeting Standard 2005 2006 |
% Increase/ Decrease 2005 to 2006 |
# WIN Sessions 2006 |
| Anderson 2 | Honea Path Elem | 3rd 2005 vs 4th 2006 | 95 81 | 1.1 6.2 | 21.1 45.7 | 72.6 45.7 | 5.3 2.5 | 98.9 93.8 | -5.1 | 2 |
| Anderson 5 | Lakeside Mid | 6th 2005 vs 7th 2006 | 290 271 | 29 21.4 | 38.3 48 | 26.2 27.7 | 6.6 3 | 71.00 78.60 | 7.60 | 4 |
| 7th 2005 vs 8th 2006 | 285 287 | 15.4 15.3 | 53 53.7 | 28.4 26.50 | 3.20 4.50 | 84.60 84.70 | 0.10 | |||
| Anderson 5 | McCants Mid | 6th 2005 vs 7th 2006 | 373 394 | 17.7 13.2 | 37.3 45.7 | 32.70 35.30 | 12.30 5.80 | 82.30 86.80 | 4.50 | 4 |
| 7th 2005 vs 8th 2006 | 358 371 | 13.7 14.3 | 46.4 46.6 | 36.90 33.40 | 3.10 5.70 | 86.30 85.70 | -0.60 | |||
| Anderson 5 |
Southwood Mid |
6th 2005 vs 7th 2006 | 154 150 | 40.9 21.3 | 46.1 65.3 | 12.30 12.00 | 0.60 1.30 | 59.10 78.70 | 19.60 | 4 |
| 7th 2005 vs 8th 2006 | 123 127 | 25.2 18.9 | 57.7 61.4 | 17.10 18.10 | 0.00 1.60 | 74.80 81.10 | 6.30 | |||
| Clarendon 2 |
Manning Jr Hi |
7th 2005 vs 8th 2006 | 249 230 | 37.3 25.2 | 49.4 54.3 | 12.90 10.00 | 0.40 0.40 | 62.70 64.80 | 2.10 | 4 |
| Greenwood 50 |
Westview Mid |
6th 2005 vs 7th 2006 | 225 233 | 40.4 34.8 | 37.3 42.1 | 19.60 21.00 | 2.70 2.10 | 59.60 65.20 | 5.60 | 1 |
| 7th 2005 vs 8th 2006 | 192 212 | 26 27.8 | 46.9 45.3 | 22.90 23.10 | 4.20 3.80 | 74.00 72.20 | 1.80 | |||
| Horry County |
Homewood Elem |
3rd 2005 vs 4th 2006 | 73 80 | 2.7 15 | 31.5 28.8 | 56.20 51.30 | 9.60 5.00 | 97.30 85.00 | -12.30 | 6 |
| 4th 2005 vs 4th 2006 | 65 81 | 18.5 16 | 47.7 50.6 | 32.30 27.20 | 1.50 6.20 | 81.50 84.00 | 2.50 | |||
| Horry County |
Waccamaw Elem |
3rd 2005 vs 4th 2006 | 73 84 | 5.5 10.7 | 26 34.5 | 56.20 40.50 | 12.30 14.30 | 94.50 89.30 | -5.20 | 2 |
| 4th 2005 vs 4th 2006 | 100 92 | 13 9.8 | 41 50 | 41.00 35.90 | 5.00 4.30 | 87.00 90.20 | 3.20 |
* Increases in percentage of students meeting standards are highlighted in yellow.