2012-2013BUDGET PROPOSAL FOR PEAK PERFORMANCEwestirondequoit.ss8.sharpschool.com/UserFiles... · leaders as the 2% tax cap, the law actually requires use of an eight-stepformula based

WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT

2012-2013 BUDGET PROPOSAL

FOR

PEAK PERFORMANCE

FOCUSED ON LEARNING AND ACHIEVEMENT

CREATING AN ENVIRONMENT OF COLLEGIALITY, COOPERATION, AND TRUST

MANAGING TRANSITIONS TO THE FUTURE

West lrondequoit Central School District2012-13 Budget Proposal

Expenditures

Category 2012-2013 Proposed Difference

BOCES 4930,374 84,668Instructional Budgets 2,545,044 53,211General Support 1,665,468 7,299Operations and Maintenance 2,885,798 (316,630)Personnel 31,277,027 87,373Benefits 15,801,911 307,470Debt Service 4,758,218 (189,800)Interlund Transfers 70,523 (33,589)Transfer to Capital Fund 120,000 0Transportation 2,605,948 0

Total 66,660,311 0

West Irondequoit Central School District

2012-2013 Budget Proposal

Estimate Tax Levy

Projected Tax Levy

$35,136,341

Projected Tax Rate i,er Thousand

$26.53

Based on a $100,000 Assessed Value Home

Monthly Increase $4.97

Annual Increase $59.67

Basic STAR Savings $795.80

School Tax Incease $59.67

Basic STAR Tax Savings $736.13

WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT

PROPERTY TAX LEVY THRESHOLD CALCULATION

2012-2013

Legislation signed into law in June 2011 requires districts to calculate their own tax levy limits annually. Referred to by political

leaders as the 2% tax cap, the law actually requires use of an eight-step formula based on several factors. Tax cap calculations in

area school districts have resulted in allowable increases ranging from 1.73 to 4.33%. The maximum tax levy increase (without 60%

voter approval) for West Irondequoit is 2.23%. Our calculations are shown here:

2011-12 Tax Levy 34,370,095

Plus-

Tax Base Growth (1.0015) 51,555

2011-12 Payment in Lieu of Taxes 95,905

Total Taxes Collected 34,517,555

Minus-Taxes levied for Exemptions

(exclusive of Employee Retirement System/Teachers Retirement System)

General Fund Transfer to Capital Fund 120,000

2011-12 Debt Service 4,948,018

2011-12 Building Aid (5,498,044)

Net Capital Outlay (cannot be negative) 0

Court orders in excess of 5% 0

Total Exemptions 0

Adjusted Prior Year Tax Levy 34,517,555

Allowable Growth Factor (Lessor of 2% or CPI)

2012 CPI = 2.0% 690,351

Plus-Allowable Carryover if any 0

Minus-2012-13 Payment in Lieu of Taxes 106,995

Total Allowable Adjustments to

Tax Levy Limit 583,356

2011-12 Tax Levy Limit 35,100,911

Plus-

2011-12 Available Carryover 0

Taxes levied for Exemptions(Inclusive of Employee Retirement System/Teachers Retirement System)

General Fund Transfer to Capital Fund 0

2012-13 Debt Service 4,758,218

2012-13 Building Aid (5,597,649)Net Capital Outlay (cannot be negative) 0

Court orders in excess of 5% 0

Employee Retirement System Rate Increase: (.189 - .163 = .026)

2012/13 Employee Retirement System Salaries 5,904,987

Employee Retirement System Exemption 35,430

Teachers Retirement System Rate Increase: (.125 - .111 = .014) 0

Total Exemptions to be added to Tax

Levy Limit 35,430

Maximum Levy after Exemptions 35,136,341

2011-12 Tax Levy as of 08/16/11 34,370,095

Allowable Tax Levy Increase 766,246

Allowable Tax Levy % Increase 2.23%

West Irondequoit Central School DistrictThree Part Budget Breakdown

2012/13 Budget

Account Total Total Administration Administration Program Program Capital CapitalCode Function 2011/12 2012/13 2011-12 2012/13 2011/12 2012/13 2011/12 2012/13

1099.0 Board of Education 59,600 69,404 59,600 69,404 0 0 01299.0 Central Administration 346,950 297,920 346,950 297,920 0 0 0 01399.0 Finance 658,034 584,285 658,034 584,285 0 0 0 01420.0 Legal Services 102,800 122,000 40,000 62,000 62,800 60,000 0 01430.0 Personnel 215,805 279,991 215,805 279,991 0 0 0 01460.0 Records Management 0 26,365 0 26,365 0 0 0 01480.0 Public Information 122,212 114,119 122,212 114,119 0 0 0 01620.0 Operation of Plant 3,990,958 3,786,304 0 0 0 0 3,990,958 3,786,3041621.0 Maintenance of Plant 1,802,649 2,010,127 0 0 0 0 1,802,649 2,010,1271699.0 Other Central Services 1,290,435 852,623 1,290,435 852,623 0 0 0 01910.0 Insurance 180,000 185,000 180,000 185,000 0 0 0 01920.0 Memberships and Dues 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 0 0 0 01964.4 Refund of Taxes 61,000 61,000 0 0 0 0 61,000 61,0001998.0 Other Special Items 703,765 689,207 703,765 689,207 0 0 0 02010.0 Curriculum Development 1,095,343 1,267,463 1,095,343 1,267,463 0 0 0 02020.0 Regular School Supervision 2,016,528 1,919,371 2,016,528 1,919,371 0 0 0 02060.0 Research and Planning 0 488,115 0 0 0 488,115 0 02070.0 Inservice Training 0 246,272 0 0 0 246,272 0 02999.0 Instruction 30,584,649 30,168,759 0 0 30,584,649 30,168,759 0 05510.0 Other District Transportation 81,017 86,411 0 0 81,017 86,411 0 05540.0 Contract Transportation 2,552,465 2,544,798 0 0 2,552,465 2,544,798 0 08998.0 Community Service 1,000 102,125 0 0 1,000 102,125 0 09098.0 Employee Benefits 15,494,971 15,801,911 1,394,578 1,864,625 13,170,718 12,546,717 929,675 1,390,5689898.0 Debt Service 5,068,018 4,758,218 0 0 0 0 5,068,018 4,758,2189901.0 Other Transfers 104,112 70,523 0 0 0 0 104,112 70,5239950.0 Transfer to Capital Fund 120,000 120,000 0 0 0 0 120,000 120,000

TOTALS 66,660,311 66,660,311 8,131,250 8,220,373 46,452,649 46,243,197 12,076,412 12,196,74012.20% 12.33% 69.69% 69.37% 18.12% 18.30%

Contingent Budget

2012-2013Real Property Tax Report Card

Name of Distnct: West lrondequoit Central School District

District Code: 260803

School District Contact Person: Richard G. Stutzman, Jr.

School District Telephone Number: 585/336-2993

Budgeted 2011-12 Budgeted 2012-13 Percent Change

Total Spending 66,660,311 66,660,311 0.00%

School Tax Levy Limit 35,100,911

Permissible Exclusions to

the School Tax Levy Limit 35,430

Proposed School Tax Levy

(including Permissible Exclusions

to the School Tax Levy Limit)* 34,370,095 35,136,341 2.23%

Public School Enrollment 3,626 3,640 0.39%

Consumer Price Index N/A N/A 3.20%* If this Percent Change exceeds the Tax Levy Limit with Exclusions, approval of 60% or more of the qualified

voters present and voting is required.

Actual 2011-12 Estimated 2012-13

Adjusted Restricted

Fund Balance 9,048,468 6,102,178

Assigned AppropriatedFund Balance 4,075,000 4,281,371

Adjusted Unrestricted

Fund Balance 2,208,443 1,872,153

Adjusted Unrestricted

Fund Balance as a %of the Total Budget 3.31% 2.81%

NYS - Real Propetly System Assessor’s Rcport 2012- Girrent Year File 9P522’tIVO4/L0O1CourTtyof Monroe 5496 Exemption Impact Report Date/Time - 4/Y2012 as:5959School Distrid Summary Total Assessed VaLue 1,464,458,626

Equalized Total Assessed Value 1,464,458,626

School District- 263403W Irondequolt Cent-

Exemption ExemptIon Statutory Number of Total Equalized Value Percent of ValueCode Name Authority Exemptions & Exemptions Exempted

12100 NYS-GENERALLY RPTL4O4(1) 5 797,400 0.0513100 CO-GENERALLY RPTL4O6(1) 18 1,861,100 0.1313500 TOWN-GENERALLY RPTL4O6(1) 38 16,506,150 . 1.1313800 SCHOOL DISTRICT RPTh 406 32 61,760,000 4.2213670 SPEC 01ST USED FOR PURPOSE EST RPTL 410 7 4,498,200 0.3114110 USA-SPECiFIED USES STATE L54 1 1,470,000 0.1018020 MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEV AGENC RPTL 412-a 2

. 5,365,000 0.3721600 RESOFCLERGY-RELIGCORPOWN RPTL462 2 231,000 0.0225110 NONPROF CORP - REUG(CONST PRO RPTL 420-a 34

. 35,771,000 2.4425120 NON PROF CORP - EDUCL(CONST PRC RPTL 420-a 1 345,000 0.0225130 NONPROF CORP - CHAR (CONST PRO RPTL 420-a 1 2,200,000 0.1525300 NONPROF CORP - SPECIFIED USES RPU 420-b 3 715,000 0.0525600 NONPROFIT HEALTH MAINTENANCE C RPTh 466-a 1 2,040,000 0.1428110 NOT-FOR-PROFIT HOUSING COMPAN’ RPTL 422 1 1510,000 0.1026240 NON PROF - HOUSING/INDUST FAG CLS UCON CH 270 1 540,000 0.0441400 CLERGY RPTL 460 26 39.000 . 0.0041800 PERSONS AGE 6SOR OVER RPTL467 19 1,100,500 0.0641804 PERSONS AGE 65 OR OVER RPTL 467 137 3,412,595 0.2341834 ENHANCED STAR RPTL 425 1,956 116,799,205 7.9841854 BASiC STAR 1999-2000 RPTL 425 6.316 189,460.000 12.9441930 DISABILITIES AND LIMITED INCOM RPTL 459-c 5 275,000 0.0241934 DISABILITIES AND LIMITED INCOM RPTL 459-c 8 221,630 0.02

Page 1 of 2

NYS - Real Property System Assessor’s Report - 2012- CurrentYear File S221N04/LO0tCeunty of Monroe 5495 Exemption Impact Report DatWTkne - 41512012 OtStSS

School District Summary Total Assessed Value 1,464,458,626

Equalized Total Assessed Value 1,464,458,626

School District - 263403 W Irondequoit Cent

Exemption Exemption Statutory Number of Total Equalized Value Percent of ValueCode Name Authority Exemptions of Exemptions Exempted42120 TEMPORARY GREENHOUSES RPTL 483-c 3 296,800 DM2

Total Exemptions Exclusive ofSystem Exemptions:

6,617 447,234,560 30.54Total System Exemptions: 0 0 0.00Totals; 8,617 447,234,560 30.54

Values have been equalized using the Uniform Percentage of Value. The Exempt amounts do not take b’ito consideration, payments in lieu of taxes or other paymentsfor municipal services.

Amount, If any, attributable to payments ir lieu of taxes:

________________

Page 2 of 2


School District Budget Notice

Overall Budget Proposal

2011-12 2012-13 2012-13

Adopted Proposed Contingent

Budget Budget Budget

Total Budgeted Amount 66.660,311 66,660,311 65,694,065

lncreasel(Decrease) for the 2012-13 school year 0 (766246)

Percentage lncrease/(Decrease) in each Proposed Budgets 0.00% -1.15%

Change in Consumer Price Index 3.20%

School Tax Levy Limit (1) 35,100,911

Proposed School Year Tax Levy (without permissible

exclusions to the School Tax Levy Limit) (2) 35,100,911

Total Permissible Exclusions (3) 35,430

Proposed School Year Tax Levy (including permissible

exclusions to the School Tax Levy Limit) = (2) + (3) 34,370,095 35,136,341 2.23%

Administrative Component 8131,250 8,220,373 8,075274

Program Component 46,452649 46,243,198 45,937,351

Capital Component 12,076,412 12,196,740 11,881440

66,660,311 66,660,311 65,894,065

* The contingency budget was calculated under NYS Education Law, section 2023 in accordance with Chapter 97 of the laws

of New York (Property Tax Cap). Actual line item appropriations under a contingency budget will be determined by the

Board of Education

Notes:

(1) School Tax Levy Limit - The tax levy limit tells a school district how much community support it will need to pass a

budget with its proposed tax levy. For school districts, the tax levy limit is the highest allowable tax levy (before

exclusions) that a school district can propose as part of its annual budget and need the approval of a simple majority

of voters(50 percent plus 1) to pass the budget. School Districts are required to report their calculated tax levy limit

to the State Comptroller by March 1st. All tax levy limit calculations are subject to audit.

(2) Proposed School Year Tax Levy (without permissible exclusions to the School Tax Levy Limit) - This amount

represents the proposed tax levy, less the allowable exemptions explained in Note 3.

(3) Totsl Permissible Exclusions - The property tax cap law allows school districts to exceed the tax cap limit (see

Note 1) for expenditures that are generally outside of their control. These include payments to known cour orders

or judgments against the district arising out of tort actions and certain pension costs arising from increases in the

pension rates set by the Employees’ Retirement System and the Teachers’ Retirement System. In addition,

School Districts can exempt from the limit the portion of the proposed tax levy that was previously approved ty the

voters (e.g. debt for a voter-approved capital project or bus purchase)

Basic STAR (1) Exemption Impact

Budget

Proposed to

the 2013

School Year

Estimated Basic STAR Exemptions Savings: $795

The annual budget vote for the fiscal year 2012-2013 by the qualified voters of the West lrondequoit

Central School District, Monroe County, New York, will be held at lrondequoit High School in said

district on Tuesday, May 15, 2012 between the hours of 6:00 am and 9:00 pm, prevailing time in the

lrondequoit High School, at which times polls will be opened to vote by voting ballot or machine.

(1) The basic school tax relief (STAR) exemption is authorized by Section 425 of the Real Property

Tax Law

TOWN OF I.RONDEQUOIT

Mr. William Domm. Director ot School Business AffairsWest lrondequoit Central School District321 List Ave.Rochester, NY 14617

Re: COMLI)A PAYMENTS

Dear Mr. [)ornm:

“Where the land and waters meet. “Est. 1839

The following parcels are owned by the County of Monroe Industrial Development Agency (COMIDA) which isexempt from taxation. Users have contracted to make payments “in lieu of’ taxes, equivalent to taxes.

You should Incorporate a revenue item in your 201 I - 2012 budget to offset the loss of ‘ 3.698.281) assessed saluetrout the taxable portion of the assessment oil.

21)11 “TAXABLE VALUE”

I. Tile Wholesale of Roc 1136 E. Ridge Rd.

2. ViaHealth [)ialysis (‘tr. — 41() E. Ridge Rd.

Total “IN LIEU OF A.V.’

S

S 2.578.600

$ 3.698,280

Your 2011 taxable assessed value will be $ 3.698,280 less than it would be if COMIDA were not involved. Whenyou project this revenue from the district payments. it directly offsets the tax levy and maintains the same tax rate.

Very truly yours.

ii

July I. 2011

•

,4’:‘/Ferie W. Husehy. lAO I,\ssessor

1280 TITUS AVENUE, ROCHESTER, NEW YORK 14617, PHONE: (585) 467-8840

July I. 2011

TOWN OF IRONDEQUOIT“Where the land and waters meet. “Est. 1839

WESTNo 485-B

Project

Owner:

User:

MAP ID:

Property Address:

Tile Wholesale of Roch

COMIDA Start: 2004 End: 2013

Tile Wholesale of Roch

()9l08-l—4l

1136 E Ridge Rd.

Final Assessment for he 2011 Roll:

Land Value 00% 350.000Improvements 100% 5 5,000

Full Assessed Value 865.000

485-B exemption N/A

Total 2(111 Taxahle Value” $ 8 19.680 30C/c of New construction 5226.601)

Billing Address: Tile Wholesale of RocAttn: David Firkins1136 E. Ridge Rd.Rochester, NY 14617

Prepared by Terie W. Husehy. lAO. Assessor. Town of Irondequoit


TOWN OF IRONDEQUOIT“Where the land and waters meet. “Est. 1839

July 1.2011 WESTNo 455-B

Project Seneca Ridge Associates. LLC

Owner: COMIDA Start: 2006 End: 2015

User: ViaHealth Dialysis Center

MAP ID: 0 I .06-5-7. I

Property Address: 410 East Ridge Rd.

nal Assessment for the 2011 RoIl:

Land Value I (XYY- ‘5 446.5(X)lmproernents I 00’7c 4.1)53,5(X)

Lull Assessed Value ‘5 4.500,001)

455-B Exemption N/ATotal 2011 ‘TAXABLE VALUE’40% EXEMPT ON IMPROVEMENTS $ 2.878.60()

Billing Address Seneca Ridge Associates. LLCdo Rainaldi Real Estate Inc.205 St. Paul St.. Suite 200Rochester, NY 14604-I 157

Prepared by Terie W. 1—lusehy. lAO. Assessor. Town ot Irondequoit


New York State Education Department State Aid Management System (SAMS) Page 1 of 5

Salary: Administrative Compensation Information260803 - WEST IRONDEQUOIT CSD

2011-2012 - Page 1Official - as of 04/0312012 02:50 PM

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34,

35.

36.

Submittal Form for Estimated Salaries in the Budget for the 201 2-2013 School Year

(Form Due - May 7, 2012)

Sections 1608 and 1716 of the Education Law

(Please read the instructions and definitions before completing this form.)

1. ISuoerintenderit of Schools

Title Salary Employee Benefits OtherRemuneration

j 206800 62,436 I 10

Associate, Assistant and Deputy Superintendents

(Example Titles: Associate Superintendent for Instruction, Deputy Superintendent, Assistant Superintendent for

Business, etc.)

IS0CIATE SUPERINTENDENT OF INSTRUCT

[SISTANT SUPERINTENDENT OF FINANCE

‘162,811

AND PERSONNEL 130,000

IASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT FOR SCHOOL

AND DISTRICT ACCOUNTABILITY 130,000

60 I

139,639 I

137,710 I

15,791 II I15,000 II I15,000 I

I II II I

I II II II I

I II II I

I II II II II I

I II I

I II II I

I

______________________________________________________________________

I

______________________________________________________________________

I

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

I

______________________________________________________________________

https ://eservices.nysed.gov/sams/printForm.do?methodpñntForm&fsId826&segmentKey... 4/3/2012

New York State Education Department State Aid Management System (SAMS) Page 3 of 5

Salary: Administrative Compensation Information260803 - WEST IRONDEQUOIT CSD

2011-2012 - Page 3Official - as of 04/03/2012 02:50 PM

Other Supervisory and Administrative Employees Scheduled to Receive $123,000 or More in Salary

HIGH SCHOOL PRINCIPAL [149,295

EDIRECTOR OF STUDENT SERVICES H24,89171.

72.

73.

74.

75.

76.

77.

78.

79.

80.

81.

82.

83.

84.

85.

86.

87.

88.

89.

90.

91.

92.

93.

94.

95.

96.

97.

98.

99.

100.

101.

102.

103.

104.

105.

106.

107.

108.

109.

110.

111.

112.

https ://eservices.nysed.gov/sams/printFonmdo?methodprintForm&fs1d826&segmentKey... 4/3/2012

This District’s Report Card

The NewYork State District Report Card is an important part ofthe Board ofRegents effort to raise learning standards for all students.It provides information to the public on the district’s status andthe status ofschools within the district underthe State and federalaccountability systems, on student performance, and on othermeasures of school and district performance. Knowledge gainedfrom the report card on a school district’s strengths and weaknesses

anbe used to improve instruction and services to students.

State assessments are designed to help ensure that allstudents reach high learning standards. They show whetherstudents are getting the knowledge and skills they needto succeed at the elementary, middle, and commencementlevels and beyond. The State requires that students who are notmaking appropriate progress toward the standards receiveacademic intervention services.

For more information:Office of Information arid ReporUng Sev!cesNew York State Education Departmentom 863 EBA

.klbany, NY 12234Email: [email protected]

District WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRALSCHOOL DISTRICT

District ID 26-08-03-06-0000Supenntendent JEFFREY CRANETeLephone (585) 336-2983Grades K-12

Use this report to:Get DistrictProfile information.This section shows comprehensivedata relevant to this district’sLearning environment.

2 Review DistrictAccountability Status.This section indicates whethera district made adequate yearlyprogress (AYP) and identifies thedistrict’s accountability status.

3 View SchoolAccountabilityStatus.This section Lists all schools in your districtby 2011—12 accountability status.

4 Review an Overviewof District Performance.This section has information aboutthe district’s performance on stateassessments in English, mathematics,and science.

rch 17, 2012Page 1

U.

District WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTCT l)istr jut ID 26-08-03-06-0000

District Profile

This section shows corTlpr inrisivu data releveii it to this school districtslearninq environment, including information about enrollment, averageclass size, and teuchei quIlilic 1111005.

.

Enrollment2008—09 2009—10 2010—1.1

Pre-K 0 0 0

Kindergarten 223 212 198

Grade 1 230 250 225

Grade 2 276 254 251

Grade 3 282 281 260

Grade 4 271 273 287

Grade 5 283 278 271

Grade 6 300 296 279

Ungraded Elementary 0 6 0

Grade 7 285 311 295

Grade 8 313 279 316

9 316Grade 324 290

Grade 10 375 321 331

Grade 11 329 369 315

Grade 12 352 358 390

Ungraded Secondary 5 6 0

Total K—12 3840 3818 3708

Average CLass Size2008—09 2009—10 2010—il

Common Branch 20 21 20

Grade B

English 18 21 19

Mathematics 21 19 19

Science 22 19 24

Social Studies 21 19 21

Grade W

English 23 22 23

Mathematics 22 24 20

Science 24 22 22

Social Studies 23 23 22

EnroLlmentInformationEnrollment counts are as of Basic Educational

Data System (BEDS) day, which is typicallythe first Wednesday of October of the schoolyear. Students who attend BOCES programson a part-time basis are included in a district’senrollment. Students who attend BOCES ona fuLl-time basis or who are placed full timeby the district in an out-of-district placementare not included in a district’s enrollment.Students classified by districts as “pre-first”

are included in first grade counts.

Average Class SizeInformationAverage Class Size is the total registrationin specified classes divided by the numberof those classes with registration. CommonBranch refers to self-contained classes inGrades 1—6.

.

.ch 17, 2012 Page 2

District WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT District ID 26-08-03-06-0000

Demographic Factors

2008—09 2009—10 2010—il

41 % 41 % 4$ YuEbqible for I-tee Lunch 335 9% 362 10% 347 10%

Reduced-Price Lunch 201 6% 206 6% 164 5%

Student Stabilily N/A N/A N/A

Limited English Proficient 38 1% 43 1% 39 1%

Racial/Ethnic Origin

American Indian or Alaska Native 12 0% 20 1% 12 0%

Black or African American 335 9% 339 9% 319 9%

1-lispartic or Latino 205 5% 241 6% 270 7%

Asian or Native 71 2% 75 2% 86 2%Hawaiian/Other Pacitic Islander

White 3136 82% 3050 80% 2946 79%

Multiracial 81 2% 93 2% 75 2%

Available only at the school level.

.Attendance and Suspensions

2007—08 2008—09 2009—10

% 41 % 41 %Annual Attendance Rate 96% 96% 96%

Student Suspensions 127 3% 158 4% 126 3%

41

Demographic FactorsInformationEligible frt, Free Lunch and Reduced-PriceLunch percentages are determined by dividinqthe rlumber of approved lunch applicantsby the Basic EducationaL Data System (BEDS)enrollment in full-day Kindergarten throughGrade 12. Eligible for Free Lunch and LimitedEnglish Proficient counts are used to determineSimilar Schools groupings within a Need/ResourceCapacity category.

Attendanceand SuspensionsInformationAnnual Attendonce Rote is determined by dividingthe school districts total actuaL attendanceby the total possible attendance for a school year.A districts actual attendance is the sum ofthe number of students in attendance on eachday the district’s schools were open duringthe school year. Possible attendance is the sumof the number of enrolled students who shouldhave been in attendance on each day schoolswere open during the school year. StudentSuspension rate is determined by dividingthe number of students who were suspendedfrom school (not including in-school suspensions)for one full day or longer anytime duringthe school year by the Basic Educational DataSystem (BEDS) day enrollments for that schoolyear. A student is counted only once, regardlessof whether the student was suspended oneor more times during the school year.

rch 17, 2012Page 3

Total Number of Core CLasses 864 185 819

Percent Not Taught by Highly Qualified 0% 0% 0%Teachers in This District

Percent Not Taught by Highly Qualified 8% 6% 5%in High-Poverty Schools Statewide

Percent Not Taught by Highly Qualified 1% 1% 0%in Low-Poverty Schools Slatewide

TotalNumberof CLasses 1024 1013 1019

Percent Taught by Teachers Without 0% 0% 0%Appropriate Certification

Teacher Turnover Rate2007—08 2008—09 2009—10

Turnover Rate of Teachers with Fewer 23% 18% 19%than Five Years of Experience

Turnover Rate of Alt Teachers 13% 14% 14%

Staff Counts2008—09 2009—10 2010—11

Total Other Professional Staff 43 46 90

Total Paraprotessionals 147 155 155

Assistant Principals 3 3 3

Prncipafs 7 7 7

Not available at the school level.

District Ii) 26-08-03-06-0000

Teacher QualificationsInformationThe Percent leaching (Jut of Cc’rlificaf ion is thepercent doing so more than on art incidental basis;that is, the percent teaching for mote than fiveperiods per week outside cettifiction.

Core Classes are primarily K-6 common branch,English, mathematics, science, social studies,art, music, and foreign Languages. be Highly

Quulifieri, a teacher must have at least a Bachelorsdegree, be certified to teach in the subject area,and show subject matter competency. A teacherwho taught one class outside of the certificationarea(s) is counted as Highly Qualified provided that1) the teacher had been determined by the schoolor district through the HOUSSE process or otherstate-accepted methods to have demonstratedacceptable subject knowledge and teachingskills and 2) the class in question was not the sole

assignment reported. Credit for incidental teachingdoes not extend beyond a single assignment.

Independent of Highly Qualified Teacher status,

any assignment for which a teacher did not holda valid certificate still registers as teaching out ofcertification. High-poverty and low-poverty schoolsare those schools in the upper and lower quartiles,respectively, for percentage of students eligible for

a free or reduced-price lunch.

Teacher Turnover RateInformationTeacher Turnover Rate for a specified school yearis the number of teachers in that school year whowere not teaching in the following school yeardivided by the number of teachers in the specifiedschool year, expressed as a percentage.

Staff CountsInformationOther Professionals includes administrators,guidance counsejors, school nurses, psychologists,

and other professionals who devote more than halfof their rime to rion-teacHncj duties. eachers whoare shared betweer’ bu;dinqs eili a disrict arereported on the district epct onl’i

jtriDish ict WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT

Teacher QuaLifications

2008—09 2009—10 2010—11

Total Number of Teachers 292 288 284

Percent with No Valid 0% 0% 0%Teaching Certificate

Percent Teaching Out 0% 0% 0%of Certification

Percent with Fewer Than 11% 11% 6%Three Years of Experience

Percentage with Masters Degree 9% 9% 9%Plus 30 flours or Doctorate

.

.irch 17, 2012 Page 4

District AccountabiLityI)istrjct WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT

‘Understanding How AccountabilityWorks in New York State

For more information about accountability in New York State,visit: http://wwwpl2.nysed.govfirs/accountability/.

A Participation CriterionAt the elementary/middle level, 95 percent of Grades 3—Bstudents enrolled during the test administration period ineach group with 40 or more students must be tested on theNew York State Testing Program (NYSTP) in ELA or, if appropriate,the New York State English as a Second Language AchievementTest (NYSESLAT), or the New York State Alternate Assessment(NYSAA) in ELA. At the secondary level, 95 percent of seniors in2010—11 in each accountability group with 400r more studentsmust have taken an English examination that meets thestudents’ graduation requirement.

B Performance Criterion

At the elementary/middle level, the Performance Index (P1)of each group with 30 or more continuously enrolled testedstudents must equal or exceed its Effective Annual MeasurableObjective (AMO) or the group must make Safe Harbor. (NYSESLATis used only for participation.) At the secondary level, the P1 ofeach group in the 2007 cohort with 30 or more members mustequal or exceed its Effective AMO or the group must make SafeHarbor. To make Safe Harbor, the P1 of the group must equal orexceed its Safe Harbor Target and the group must qualify for SafeHarbor using the third indicator, science or graduation rate.

The same criteria for making AYP in ELA apply to mathematics. At the elementary/middle level, the measures used to determineAYP are the NYSTP and the NYSAA in mathematics. At the secondary level, the measures are mathematics examinations that meetthe students’ graduation requirement.

3 Third Indicator

In addition to English language arts and mathematics, the school must also make AYP in a third area of achievement.This means meeting the criteria in science at the elementary/middle level and the criteria in graduation rate at the secondary level.Elementary/fliddle-LeveiScience: To make AYP, the All Students group must meet the participation criterion andthe performance criterion.

A Participation CriterionEighty percent of students in Grades 4 and/or B enrolledduring the test administration period in the All Studentsgroup, if it has 40 or more students, must be tested on anaccountability measure. In Grade 4, the measures are theGrade 4 elementary-level science test and the Grade 4NYSAA in science. In Grade 8 science, the measures arethe Grade B middle-level science test, Regents scienceexaminations, and the Grade 8 NYSAA in science.

B Performance CriterionThe P1 of the All Students group, if it has 30 or morestudents, must equal or exceed the State ScienceStandard (100) or the Science Progress Target.

Qualifying for Safe Harbor in Elementary/Middle-LevelELA and Math: To qualify, the group must meet both the participahoncriterion and the performance criterion in science.

District ID 26-O8-O3O6-QOOO

The federal No Child tuft [lehi id (NCLB) Act requires that states develop and report on measures of studentproficiency in 1) English language arts (HA), in 2) mathematics, arid on 3) a third indicator. In New YorkState ri 201(1-11, the third indicator is science at the elementary/middle level and graduation rate atthe secondary level. Schools or districts that meet predetined goals err these measures are iriaking AdequateYearly Progress (AYP).

1. English Language Arts(ELA)

To make AYP in ELA, every accountability group must make AYP. For a group to make AYP, it must meet the participationand the performance criteria.

2 Mathematics

Secondary-LeveL Graduation Rate: For a school to make AYP in graduation rate, the percent of students in the 2006 graduation-ratetal cohort in the All Students group earning a local or Regents diploma by August 31, 2010 must equal or exceed the Graduati on-Ratetandard (80%) or the Graduation-Rate Progress Target.

Quaiifying for Safe Harbor in Secondary-Level ELA and Math: To qualify, the percent of the 2006 graduation-rate totatcohort earning a tocatcr Regentsdiploma by August 31, 2010 must equal or exceed the Graduation-Rate Standard (80%) or the Graduation-Rate Progress Target for tt’at group.

ch 17, 2012Page 5

District AccountabilityDistrict WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT District II) 26-08-03-06-0000

Useful Terms for Understanding Accountability.

12th GradersThe count of 12 qraders era oiled during the 2070—ilschool year used to determine the Percentage tested for theParticipi-ilion part of the AYP delernrination for secondary—level ELA and matlieriratics. These ore the first numbers in theparentheses after the subgroup label on the secondary-levelELA and matherriatirs pages.

2007 CohortThe count of students in the 2007 accountability cohort usedto determine the Performance Index for the Test Performancepart of the AYP determination for secondary-level ELA andmathematics. These are the second numbers in the parenthesesafter the subgroup label on the secondary-leveL ELA andmathematics pages.

Accountability Cohort for English and MathematicsThe accountability cohort is used to determine fa schoolor district met the performance criterion in secondary-levelELA and mathematics. The 2007 school accountability cohortconsists of all students who first entered Grade 9 anywherein the 2007—08 school year, and all ungraded students withdisabilities who reached their seventeenth birthday in the2007—08 school year, who were enrolled on October 6, 2010 anddid not transfer to a diploma granting program. Students whoearned a high school equivalency diploma or were enrolled inan approved high school equivalency preparation program onJune 30, 2011, are not included in the 2007 school accountabilitycohort. The 2007 district accountability cohort consists of allstudents in each school accountability cohort plus studentswho transferred within the district after BEDS day plus studentswho were placed outside the district by the Committee onSpecial Education or district administrators and who met theother requirements for cohort membership. Cohort is defined inSection 100.2(p) (16) of the Commissioner’s Regulations.

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) indicates satisfactory progressby a district or a school toward the goal of proficiency for allstudents.

Annual Measurable Objective (AMO)The Annual Measurable Objective (AMO) is the PerformanceIndex value that signifies that an accountability group is makingsatisfactory progress toward the goat that 100 percent ofstudents will be proficient in the State’s learning standards forEnglish language arts and mathematics by 2013--14. The AMOsfor each grade level will be increased as specified in CR100.2(p)(14) and will reach 200 in 2013—14. (See Effective AMO forfurther information.)

Continuous EnrollmentThe count of continuously enrolled tested students used todetermine the Performance Index for the Test Performance partof the AYP determination for elementary/middle-level ELA,mathematics, and science. These are the second numbers inthe parentheses after the subgroup label on the elementary!middle-Level ELA, mathematics, and science pages.

Continuously Enrolled StudentsAt the elernentai y/middle level, continuously enrolled studentsare those enrolled in the school or district on BEDS day (usuallythe first Wednesday in October) of the school year until the testadministration period. At the secondary level, all students whomeet the criteria for inclusion in the accountability cohort areconsidered to be continuously enrolled.

Effective Annual Measurable Objective(Effective AMO)The Effective Annual Measurable Objective is the PerformanceIndex (Pt) value that each accountability group within a schoolor district is expected to achieve to make AYP. The EffectiveAMO is the lowest P1 that an accountability group of a given sizecan achieve in a subject for the group’s P1 not to be consideredsignificantly different from the AMO for that subject. If anaccountability group’s P1 equals or exceeds the Effective AMO,it is considered to have made AYP. A more complete definitionof Effective AMO and a table showing the P1 values that eachgroup size must equal or exceed to make AYP are available atwwwpl2nysed.gov/irs.

Graduation RateThe Graduation Rate on the Graduation Rate page is thepercentage of the 2006 cohort that earned a local or Regentsdiploma by August 31, 2010.

Graduation-Rate Total CohortThe Graduation-Rate Total Cohort, shown on the GraduationRate page, is used to determine if a school or district made AYPin graduation rate. For the 2010—li school year, this cohort is the2006 graduation-rate total cohort. The 2006 total cohort consistsof all students who first entered Grade 9 anywhere in the2006—07 school year, and all ungraded students with disabilitieswho reached their seventeenth birthday in the2006—07 school year, and who were enrolled in the school!district for five months or longer or who were enrolLed in theschool/district for less than five months but were previouslyenrolled in the same school/district for five months or longerbetween the date they first entered Grade 9 and the date theylast ended enrollment. A more detailed definition ofgraduation-rate cohort can be found in the SIRS Manual atwww.pI.2.nysed.gov/irs.

For districts and schools with fewer than 30 graduation-ratetotal cohort members in the All Students group in 2010—11,data for 2009—10 and 2010—11 for accountability groups werecombined to determine counts and graduation rates. Groupswith fewer than 30 students in the graduation-rate total cohortare not required to meet the graduation-rate criterion.

Limited English ProficientFor all accountability measures, if the court of EP stucentsis equal to or greate: than 30, former LEP stders a:e asoincluded in the performance calcuations.

Non-Accountability GroupsFemale, Male, and Nligrant groups are ro part orthe AYPdeterminaton for any measure.

.

inch 17, 2012 Page 6

District Accountability1)istrict WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT District ID 26-08-03-06-0000

UsefulTerms for Understanding Accountability (continued)ParticipationAccountabiLity groups with fewer than 40 students enrolledduring the test administration period (for elementary/middle—level f:LA, math, and science) or fewer that I 40 121h graders(lot secondary—level [LA and inatheinatice) are not requiredto meet the participation criterion. It the Percentage Testedfor an accountability group tell below 95 percent (or [LA andmath or 80 percent (or science in 2010—li, the participationenrollrnerrt (Total’ or“12th Graders’) shown in the tables isthe sum of 2009—10 and 2010--li participation enrollments andthe “Percentage Tested” shown is the weighted average of theparticipation rates over those two years.

Performance Index(PI)A Performance Index is a value from 0 to 200 that is assigned toan accountability group, indicating how that group performedon a required State test (or approved alternative) in Englishlanguage arts, mathematics, or science, Student scores on thetests are converted to four performance levels, from Level 1to Level 4. (See performance Level definitions on the Overviewsummary page.) At the elementary/middle level, the P1 iscalculated using the following equation:

100 x [(Count of Continuously Enrolled Tested StudentsPerforming at Levels 2, 3, and 4 + the Count at Levels 3 and 4) ±

Count of All Continuously Enrolled Tested Students]

At the secondary level, the P1 is calculated using the followingequation:

100 x [(Count of Cohort Members Performing at Levels 2, 3, and4 + the Count at Levels 3 and 4) Count of All Cohort Members]

A list of tests used to measure student performance foraccountability is available at www.p12.nysed.gov/irs.

Progress TargetsFor accountability groups below the State Standard in scienceor graduation rate, the Progress Target is an alternate methodfor making AYP or quaLifying for Safe Harbor in English languagearts and mathematics based on improvement over the previousyear’s performance.

Science: The current year’s Science Progress Target is caLculatedby adding one point to the previous year’s Performance Index(P1). Example: The 2010—11 Science Progress Target is calculatedby adding one point to the 2009—10 P1.

Graduation Rote: The Graduation-rate Progress Target iscalculated by determining a 20% gap reduction between therate of the previous year’s graduation-rate cohort and the statestandard. Example: The 2010—11 Graduation-Rate ProgressTarget = [(80-- percentage of the 2005 cohort earning a local orRegents diploma by August 31, 2009) x 0.20] + percentage of the2005 cohort earning a local or Regents diploma by August 31,2009.

Progress Targets are provided for groups whose P1 ((or science)graduation rate (for graduation rate) is below the State

.tandard.

Safe HarborTargetsSafe Ilarbor provides an alternate means to denionstrateAVP for accountability groups that do not achieve their [AMOsin English or mathematics. The 2010— 11 safe harbor targetsare cal(:ulated using the following equation:2009—10 P1 + (200— the 2009—10 P1) x 0.10

Safe Harbor Targets are provided (or groups whose P1 is lessthan the EAMO.

Safe Harbor Qualification (t)

On the science page, if the group met both the participationand the performance criteria for science, the Sate HarborQualification column will show “Qualified.” If the group didnot meet one or more criteria, the column witi show “Did notqualify.” A “i’ symbol after the 2010—11 Safe Harbor Target onthe elementary/middle- or secondary-level ELA or mathematicspage indicates that the student group did not make AYPin science (elementary/middle level) or graduation rate(secondary level) and; therefore, the group did not qualify forSafe Harbor in EI.A or mathematics.

State StandardThe criterion value that represents minimally satisfactoryperformance (for science) or a minimally satisfactorypercentage of cohort members earning a local or Regentsdiploma (for graduation rate), In 2010—11, the State ScienceStandard is a Performance Index of 100; the State Graduation-Rate Standard is 80%. The Commissioner may raise the StateStandard at his discretion in future years.

Students with DisabilitiesFor all measures, if the count of students with disabilities isequal to or greater than 30, former students with disabilitiesare also included in the performance calculations.

Test PerformanceFor districts and schools with fewer than 30 continuousLyenrolled tested students (for elementary/middle-level ELA,math, and science) or fewer than 30 students in the 2007cohort (for secondary-level [LA and mathematics) in the AllStudents group in 2010—11, data for 2009—10 and 2010—11 foraccountability groups were combined to determine counts andPerformance Indices. For districts and schools with 30 or morecontinuously enrolled students/2007 cohort members in theAlt Students group in 2010—11, student groups with fewer than30 members are not required to meet the performance criterion,This is indicated by a “—“ in the Test Performance column inthe table.

TotaLThe count of students enrolled during the test administrationperiod used to determirre the Percentage Tested for theParticipation part of the AYP determination for elerner.tary/middle-level [LA, mathematics, and science. These are the firstnumbers in the parentheses after the subgroup label on theelementary/middle-level ELA, mathematics, and science pages.For accountability calculations, students who were excusedfrom testing for medcal reasons n accordance with edera[NCLB guidance are not included in the count.

irch 17, 2012 Page 7

District AccountabilityP)istrict WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT Distrht Ii) 26-08-03-06-0000 .

Understanding Your District Accountability StatusThe list below defines the district status categories applied tc each accountability measure tinder New York State’s districtaccountability system, which i; divided into a Federal Title I component and a State component. Accountability measures for districtsare English language arts (FIA), matlieiriatics, elernentary/middletevel science, and graduation rate. A district may be assigneda different status for different accountability measures. The overall status of a district is the status assigned to the district forthe accountability measure with the most advanced designation in the hierarchy. If the district receives Title I funds, it is the mostadvanced designation in the Title I hierarchy, unless the district is in good standing under Title I but identified as DRAP underthe State hierarchy. A district that does not receive Title I funding in a school year does not have a federal status in that year; however,all districts receive a state status even if they do not receive Title I funding. Consequences for districts not in good standing can befound at: http://wwwp2,nysed.govIIrs/accountabiLety/.

FederalTitLe I Status New York State Status(Applies to alt New York State districts receiving Title I funds) (Applies to New York State districts)

A District in Good Standing

r A district is considered to be in good standing if it has not been identified as a District in Need of Improvementor a District Requiring Academic Progress.

A District in Need of Improvement (Year 1) District Requiring Academic Progress (Year 1)A district that has not made AYP [or two consecutive years A district that has not made AYP on the same accountabilityon the same accountability measure is considered a District measure for two consecutive years is considered a District Requiringin Need of Improvement (Year 1) for the following year, if it Academic Progress (Year 1) for the following year.continues to receive Title I funds.

Districtin Need of Improvement (Year 2) DistrIct Requiring Academic Progress (Year 2)A District in Need of Improvement (Year 1) that does not A District Requiring Academic Progress (Year 1) that does notmake AYP on the accountability measure [or which it was make AYP on the accountability measure for which it was identifiedidentified is considered a District in Need of Improvement is considered a District Requiring Academic Progress (Year 2) for(Year 2) for the following year, if it continues to receive the following year.Title I funds.

A DistrictinNeedotlmprovement(Year3) • OistrictflequlringAcademicProgress (Year 3)A District in Need of Improvement (Year 2) that does not A District Requiring Academic Progress (Year 2) that does notmake AYP on the accountability measure for which it was make AYP on the accountability measure for which it was identifiedidentified is considered a District in Need of Improvement is considered a District Requiring Academic Progress (Year 3) for(Year 3) for the following year, if it continues to receive the following year.Title I funds.

A District in Need of Improvement (Year 4) • District RequiringAcademic Progress (Year 4)A District in Need of Improvement (Year 3) that does not A District Requiring Academic Progress (Year 3) that does notmake AYP on the accountability measure for which it was make AYP on the accountability measure for which it was identifiedidentified is considered a District in Need of Improvement is considered a District Requiring Academic Progress (Year 4) for(Year 4) for the following year, if it continues to receive the following year.Title I funds.

A District in Need of Improvement (Year 5 and above) • District Requiring Academic Progress (Year 5 and above)A District in Need of Improvement (Year 4 and above) A District Requiring Academic Progress (Year 4 and above) thatthat does not make AYP on the accountability measure does not make AYP on the accountability measure for which it wasfor which it was identified is considered a District in Need identified is considered a District Requiring Academic Progressof Improvement (Year 5 and above) for the following year, (Year 5 and above for the following year.if it continues to receive Title I funds.

Pending— A district’s status is “Pending” if the district requires special evaluation rirocedores and they have not yet been completed.

rchl7,2012 Pagea

District AccountabilityI)istnct WEST IRONOEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT

Summary

District IL) 26-08-03-06-0000

Overall Accountability A Good StandingStatus(2011—12)

hIA r Good Standing Science ‘ Good Standing

Math A Good Standing GladiJatk)n Rate A Good Standing

Title I Part A Funding Years the District Received Title I Part A Funding

2O0.9jO 2Q-_ 2011-12

YES YES YES

On which accountability measures did this district make AdequateYearly Progress (AYP) and which groups made AYP on each measure?

Elementary/Middle LeveL Secondary Level

English EnglishStudent Groups Language Arts Mathematics Science Language Arts Mathematics Graduation RateAll Students / / V / / /Ethnicity

merican Indian or Alaska Native ——

——

Black or African American / VHispanic or Latino f

——

Asian or NativeHawaiian/Other Pacific Islander

——

White V / ‘V VMultiraciaL

— —— —

Other Groups

Students with Disabilities X XLimited English Proficient — —

——

Economically Disadvantaged / VStudent groups makingAYPineachsubject X6ofT X6o17 /1011 X4of5 /5of5 /lofl

AYP Status

V Made AYP

Made AYP Using Safe Harbor Target

K Did not make AYP

— losutficient Number of Studentsto Determine AYP Status

AccountabilIty Status LevelsFederaL State

Good Standing A I Good StandingImprovement (Year a) A Requirine Academic Progress (Year 1)Improvement (Year 2) Requiring Academic Progress (Year 2)Improvement (Year 3 A Requiring Academic Progress lYear 3)Improvement (Year 4) A Requiring Academic Progress Year 4)

Improvement (Year 5 & Above) A I Requdng Academic Pograss (Year 5 & AhovePending — Reqwres Special Evaluaton

irch 17, 2012Page 9

District AccountabilityDistrict WEST •RONDEQUO!T CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT District ID 26O8-O3-O6-OflOO

Elementary/Middle-Level English Language Arts

Accountability Status A Good Standing

for This Subject

(2011—12)

Accountability Measures 6 of 7 Student çjrottps making AYP in English language ants

X Did not make AYP

Prospective Status A district that fails to make AYP in English language arts at the elementary/middle and secondarylevels for two consecutive years is placed in improvement status. If this district fails to make AYP atboth the elementary/middle and secondary levels in 2011-12. the district will be District In Needof Improvement (Year 1) in 2012-13. If this district makes AYP at either the elementary/middle orsecondary level in 2011-12, the district will be in good standing in 2012-13. [2021

How did students in each accountability group perform on

elementary/middle-Level English language arts accountability measures?

AYP - Participetlon Test Performance Performance Objectives

Student Group Met Percentage Met Performance Effective Safe Harbor Target(Total: Continuous Enrollment) Status Criterion Tested Criterion Index AMO 2010—11 20U -17

Accountability Groups

AltStudents (1724:1702) / 1 100% / 173 119

Ethnicity

_______ _______ _________________________ _________

American Indian or Alaska Native(5:5)

Black or African American

(149:145) 1 1 ‘7 156 113

Hispanic or Latino (155:150) -c 100% 162 114

Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other PacificIslander (46:45) 1 1 100% 7 178 108

Whte(134O:I32 10% 1•1Multiracial (29:29) — — — — — — —

Other Groups

_____ _____________________________

___________

Students with Disabilities(117:123) X 7 99% X 111 113 113 120

Limited English Proficient(28:24) — — — — — — —

Economically Disadvantaged(362:347) ‘7 7 100% ‘7 155 116

FinaLAYP Determination X 6 of 7

Non-Accountability Groups

_________________________________ ____________________________

Female (848:838) 100% 179 118Idlale (876:864) 100% 167 118

Migrant (0:0)

Symbols NOTE: See Useful Terms for Understanding AccountabilityMade AYP for eXp[anatiOfls and defln)tions of terms and tabLe [abets

vSH MadeAvPUsingSafeHarborlarget used on this page.X Did not make AYP

- Fevjer Than 4oTotal/FewerThari 30Continuous Enrotiment

Did not oua[ify tor Safe Harbor

irch 17, 2012 Page 10

District AccountabilityI)jstrjct WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT District ID 26-08-03-06-0000

ELementary/Middle-Level Mathematics

Accountability Status A Good Standing

for This Subject(2011—12)

Accountability Measures 6 of 7 Student groups making MP in mathematics

X Did not make AYP

Prospective Status This district will be in good standing in 2012-13. 12011

How did students in each accountability group perform oneLementary/middle-level mathematics accountability measures?

AYP Participation Test Performance Performance ObjectivesStudent Group Met Percentage Met Performance Effective Safe Harbor Target(Total: Continuous Enrollment) Status Criterion Tested Criterion Index AMO 2010-11 2011-12Accountability Groups

Alistudents (1723:1700) / 100% 176 134Ethnicity

_______________ _____

______ ______________

C merican Indian or Alaska Native5:5)

- -- -

-

Dtack or African American(149:144) / / 99% / 158 128

Hispanic or Latino (155:150) 1 100% 7 161 129Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other PacificIslander (46:45) 7 7 100% / 180 123

White (1339:1327) 1 100% 180 134Multiracial (29:29)

— — — — ——

—

Other Groups

_________________

___________________________

Students with Disabilities(116:123) X / 100% X 123 128 128 131Limited English Proficient(28:24)

— —— —

——

Economically Disadvantaged(362:346) / 7 99% / 163 131

Final AYP Determination X 6 of 7


_________________________

_____________

Female (847:836) 100% 177 133Mate (876:864) 100% 176 133Migrant (0:0)

SymboLsROTE: See Useful Terms for Understanding Accountability

Made AYP for expLanations and definitions of terms and tabLe Labels

I’,HMada AVP Using Sale Harbor Target used on this page.Did not make AYP

— Fewer Than 40 Totat/Fewer Than 30Contincous Enrollment

Did not quaLify tor Sate Harbor

rch 17, 2012Page 11

District AccountabiLityDistrict WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT Dish jut II) 26-OG-03-06-0000

Elementary/Middle-Level ScienceAccountability Status Good Standing

for This Subject(2011—12)

Accountahibty Measures 1 Student groups making AYP in science

Made AYP

Prospective Status This district will be in good standing in 2012-13. (201]

How did students in each accountability group perform onelementary/middle-level science accountability measures?

AYP Participation Test Performance Performance Objectives

StudentGroup SafeHarbor Met Percentage Met Perlormance State P1ogrsTg__(Total: Continuous Enrollment) Status Qualification Criterion Tested Criterion Index Standard 2010—11 2011--12

Accountability Groups

ALlStudents (603:598) 1 Qualified 100% / 194 100

Ethnicity

_______________ ________

American Indian or Alaska Native

Black or African American(4947) Qualified / 98% 7 187 100

Hispanic or latino (59:58) Qualified 100% 184 100

Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific —Islander (16:15)

White (466:465) Qualified / 100% 196 100

Multiracial (10:10) — — — — — — —Other Groups

____________________________

Students with DisabilitiesQualified —

— / 165 100(38:40)

Limited English Proficient — — — — — —

(11:9)

Economically Disadvantaged

(128:125) Qualified / 99% 7 189 100

FInaLAYP Determination -/ 1 of 1


Female (298:295) 100% 195 100

Male (305:303) 100% 194 100

Vigrant (0:0)

NOTE: See Useful Terms for Understanding AccountabilityMade AYP for explanat(cns and def]n)tions o terms and tah)e abe)sDid not make AP used on this page.Fewer Than 40 Total/Fewer Than 30ConGnuous Er:roltment

rch 17. 2012 Page 12

District AccountabilityDistrict WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT District ID 26-Oa-O3-O-OOOO

Secondary-Level English Language ArtsAccountability Status A Good Standingfor This Subject(2011—12)

Accoirntability Measures 4 of 5 Student groups making AYP in English language arts

X Did not make AYP

Prospective Status A district that fails to make AYP in English language arts at the elementary/middle and secondarylevels for two consecutive years is placed in improvement status. If this district fails to make AYP atboth the elementary/middle and secondary levels in 2011-12. the district wilt be District In Needof Improvement (Year 1) in 2012-13. II this district makes AVP at either the elementary/middle orsecondary Level in 2011-12, the district will be in good standing in 2012-13. [2021

How did students in each accountability group perform onsecondary-Level English Language arts accountability measures?

AYP Participation Test Performance Performance Ohjective5StudentGroup tiet Percentage Met Perlormance Effective SafeHarborTarget(12th Graders: 2007 Cohort) Slatus Criterion Tested Criterion Index AMO 2010—11 2011-12Accountability Groups

AltStudents (377:369) / / 99% 195 177Ethnicity

______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________

‘merican Indian or Alaska Native—1:1)

Glack or African American(34:33) / —

— / 185 166

Hispanic or Latino (26:25)—

— ——

——

Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific—Islander (8:8)

— —— —

—

—

White (306:299) / 99% 197 177Multiracial (2:3)

——

— — ——

—

Other Groups

________________________________

Students with Disabilities(36:44) X —

— X 166 168 168 169Limited EngLish Proficient(1:1)

— —— — —

——

Economically Disadvantaged / / 98% / 191 172

FinaLAYP Determination 4 of 5


Female (208:204) 100% 195 175Male (169:165) 99% 196 175Migrant (0:0)

SymboLsNOTE: See Useful Terms for Understanding Accountability

Made AYP for expLanations and definitions of terms and table LabelsMade AYP Using Safe l-IarborTarget used on this page.Dd not make AYP

— Fewer Than 40l2tI Graders/Fewer Thar 30 CohortDId not quatify for Safe Harbor

lh 17, 2012Page 13

District Accountability

_______

District WEST IRONDEQUOPT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT District ID 26-08-03-06-0000

Secondary-LeveL MathematicsAccountability Status Good Standing

for This Subject(2011—12) -

Accountability Measures 5 of 5 Student groups making AVP in mathematics

Made AYP

Prospective Status This district will be in good standing in 2012-13. (201]

How did students in each accountability group perform onsecondary-Level mathematics accountability measures3

AYP Participation Test Performance Performance Objectives

Student Group Met Percentage Met Performance Effective Safe Harbor Target —

(12th Graders: 2007 Cohort) Status Criterion Tested Criterion Index AMO 2010-li 2011—12

AccountabiLity Groups

AltStudents (377:369) / 100% 195 174

Ethnicity

___________________________________ ____________________________

American Indian or Alaska Native — —

(1:1)

Black or African American

(34:33) / — — / 191 163

Hispanic or I.atino (26:25) — — . — . — .. . — — . —

Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other PacificIslander (8:8) — — —

White (306:299) 7 100% 197 174

Multiracial (2:3) — — — — — — —

Other Groups

_________________ ______________________________

Students with Disabilities(36:44) 7 — — 7 166 165

Limited English Proficient(1:1) — -- — — —

=iicatly Disadvantaged 7 7 100% / 194 169

FinaLAYP Determination 5 ot 5

Non-AccountabiLity Groups

Female (208:204) 100% 197 172

Male (169:165) 100% 194 172

Migrant (0:0)

NOTE: See Useful Terms for Understanding AccountabilityMade AYP for exptanations and definitions of terms arid tabte [abetsMade AYP Using Safe Harbor Target used on this page.Did not make AYO

Fewer Than 40 12th Graders/Fewer Than 30 Cohc rt

Did not qualify for Safe Harbor

trch 17, 2012 Page 14

District AccountabilityDistrkt WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT District ID 26-08-03-06-0000

Graduation RateAccountabihtyStatusforThis A Good Standing

Indicator (2011—12)

Accountability Measures A

-- Made AYP

....-—-—.——.——

.— --Prospective Status This district will be in good standing in 2012-13. 12011

How did students In each accountability group performon graduation rate accountability measures?

Graduation Objectives

Student GroupMel Graduation State Progress Target

(2006 Graduation-Rate Total Cohort) AYP Critei ion Rate Standard 2010—IlAccountability Groups

Alt Students (339) / 92% 80%

Ethnicity

American Indian or Alaska NatIve (0)

3lack or African American (21)—

——

Hispanic or Latino (24)—

——

Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific IsLander (4)—

——

White (288) / 92% 80%

Multiracial (2)—

——

Other Groups

Students with DisabIlities (44) 7 80% 80%

Limited English Prolicient (1)—

—

Economically Disadvantaged (63) 78% 80% 74%

FlnalAvPDetermination 7 1 of 1

Non.Accountability Groups

Female (174) 93% 60%

Male (165) 90% 80%

Migrant (0)

Symbols NOTE: See Useful Terms for Understanding AccountabilityMade AVP for explanations and definitions of terms and table labels

X Did notmake AYP used on this page.Fewer than 30 Graduation-Rate Total Cohort

Aspirational GoalThe Board of Regents has set an aspirational goal that 95% of students in each public school and school district willgraduate within five years of first entry into grade 9. The graduation rate for the 2006 total cohort through June 2011(after 5 years) for this district is 90% and, therefore, this district did not meet this goat. The aspirational goal does notimpact accountability.

rch 17, 2012Page 15

School Accountability StatusDistrict WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT [)istrict II) 26-08-03-06-0000 .

2011—12 Accountability Status of Schools in Your DistrictThis section lists all schools iii your district by 20:11—12 accountability status.

In Good Standing

9 schools identified 90% of total

UHIARW000 SCHOOL

BROOKVIEW SCHOOL

COLEBROOK SCHOOL

IRONDEQUOIT HIGH SCHOOL

IROQUOIS MIDDLE SCHOOL

LISTW000 SCHOOL

ROGERS MIDDLE SCHOOL

SENECA SCHOOL

SOUTHLAWN SCHOOL

Improvement (year 1) BasIc

1 school identified 10% of total

DAKE JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL

.

I

srch 17, 2012 Page 16

Overview of District PerformanceDisirict WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT

Summaryof 2010—11

District PerformancePerformance on the State assessments in Lnglish language arts, rneithernatics,and science at the elementary and middle levels is reported in terms o meanscores and the percentage of tested students scoring at or above [cool 2,Level 3, and Level 4. Performance on the State assessments in ELA andmathematics at the secondary level is reported in terms of the percentageof students in a cohort scoring at these levels.

Percentage of students thatscored at or above Level 3

Total

Tested

English Language Arts 0% -- 50% 100%

Grade 3 80% 261

Grade 4 78% 287

Grade 5 78% 268

Grade 6 79% 282

Grade 7 62% 302

Grade 8 76% 312

Mathematics

‘grade 3 73% 261

Grade 4 84%

Grade 5 81% 268

Grade 6 77% 281

Grade 7 74% ... . . 302

Grade 8 83% 311

Science

Grade 4 96% 289

Grade 8 93% 310

Percentage of students that 2007 Totalscored at or above Level 3 Cohort

Secondary Level 0% 5q% lop%

English 94% 380

Mathematics 96% 380

District ID 26-08-03-06-0000

About the PerformanceLevel Descriptors

English Language ArtsLevel 1: Below StandardStudent performance does not demonstrate anunderstanding at the English language arts knowledgeand skills expected at this grade level.

Level 2: Meet; Basic StandardStudent performance demonstrates a partialunderstanding of the English language arts knowledgeand skills expected at this grade level.

Level 3: Me•te Proficiency StandardStudent performance demonstrates an understanding ofthe English language arts knowledge and skills expectedat this grade level.

Level 4: Exceeds Proficiency StandardStudent performance demonstrates a thoroughunderstanding of the English language arts knowledgeand skills expected at this grade level.

MathematicsLev.li: Below StandardStudent performance does not demonstrate anunderstanding of the mathematics content expected atthis grade level,

Level 2: Meets Basic StandardStudent performance demonstrates a partialunderstanding of the mathematics content expected atthis grade leveL

Level 3: Meets Proficiency StandardStudent performance demonstrates an understanding ofthe mathematics content expected at this giade level.

Level 4: Exceeds Proficiency StandardStudent performance demonstrates a thoroughunderstandIng of the mathematics content expected atthis grade level.

How are Need/ResourceCapacity(N/RC) categories determined?Districts are divided Into high, average, and low needcategories based on their ability to meet the specialneeds of their students with local resources. Districts inthe high need category are subdivided into four categoriesbased on enrollment size and, in some cases, numberof students per square mile. More information aboutthe categories can be found In the Report to the Governorand the Legislature on the Educational Status of theState’s Schools at www.pZ2.nysed.govlira.

in this section, this district’s perlormance is comparedwith that of public schools statewide.

This Districts N/RC Category:Average Need Districts

This is a school district with aveiage stdei needs inrelation to district resource cEapaciiy

arch 17, 2012 Page 17

Overview of District Performancelush ci WEST IRONDEOUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT Distrit t H) 26-08-03-06-0000

4

This District’s Results in Grade 3 EngLish Language ArtsThis District NY State Public

I’t?rrorltaqe scoring iii Icvel(s): Perconlage ccoring it level(s):

2—4 3-4 2-4 3-4

____________ ___ -

2011 Mean Score: 673 Range: 644—780 663—780

2010 Mean Score: 679 coos I

87%80%

56% 55%

249 265 208 209 25 68

2010-11

II 2009—10

‘1

694- 780

75%86%

.

Number of Tested Students:

Results by 2010—11 School Year 2009—10 School Year —

Student Group TotaL Percentage scoring at level(s): TotaL Percentage scoring at level(s):

Tested 2—4 3_4 Tested 2—4 3—4 4

AflStudents 261 95% 80% 10% 279 95% 75% 24%

FemaLe 133 97% 82% 11% 132 95% 76% 23%

Male 128 94% 77% 9% 147 95% 74% 25%

American Indian or Alaska Native 1 — — — 3 — — —

Black or African American 31 87% 65% 13% 22 86% 64% 23%

Hispanic or Latino 26 100% 85% 4% 21 95% 67% 10%

Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 7 100% 86% 29% 8 100% 100% 38%

White 191 96% 81% 9% 217 95% 76% 26%

MultiraciaL 5 — — — 8 — — —

Small Group Totals 6 100% 83% 0% 11 100% 91% 27%

General-Education Students 248 97% 82% 10% 270 98% 77% 25%

Students with Disabilities 13 62% 38% 0% 9 11% 11% 11%

English Proficient 256 96% 81% 10% 272 95% 76% 25%Limited English Proficient 5 60% 0% 0% 7 86% 29% 0%

Economically Disadvantaged 41 90% 61% 0% 32 91% 56% 22%

Not Disadvantaged 220 96% 83% 11% 247 96% 77% 25%

Migrant

Not Migrant 261 95% 80% 10% 279 95% 75% 24%

NOTESThe — symbol indicates that data for a group of students have been suppressed. If a group has fewer than five students.data for that group and the next smallest grouplsi are suppressed to protect the privacy of individual students.

These ranges are for 2010—11 data only. Ranges for the 2009—10 data are available in the 2009—10 Accountability and Overview Reports.

Other 2010—11 School Year 2009—10 School Year

Assessments Total Number scoring at level(s): Total Number scoring at level(s):

Tested 2—4 3—4 - 4 Tested 2—4 3—4 4

New York State Alternate Assessment2 — — - 1 - - —

(NYSAA): Grade 3 Equivalent

New York State English as a Second Language0 N/A N/A N/A 0 N/A N/A N/A

Achievement Test (NYSESLAT)t: Grade 3

• Total Total

0 N/A N/A N/A 0 N/A N/A N/ARecently Arrived LEP Students NOT Tested on

the ELA NYSTP: Grade 3

I These counts represent recently arrived LEP students who used the NVSESAT to fulfill the English language arts participation requirement.

irch 17, 2012 Page 18

Overview of District PerformanceDistrict WEST (RONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT District II) 26-08-03-05-0000

This District’s Results in Grade 3 MathematicsThis District NY State Public

Percenlaqe scoriltq at level(s): ercentage scoring at level(s):

2--4 3—4 4 2-4 3—4 4

2011 Mean Score: 691 *Range: 662—770 684—770 707--770

2010 Mean Score: 695 100%

94% 95%91% 91%

“° 67”

::::= 1 r 5%27/O I[.I1LNumber of Tested Students: 245 268 191 188 40 76

Results by oso—ii School Year 2009—10 School Year

Student Group TotaL Percentage scorIng at level(s): TotaL Percentage scoring at level(s):Tested 2—4 34 4 Tested 2—4 3—4 4

AflStudents 261 94% 73% 15% 281 95% 67% 27%Female 133 95% 70% 17% 133 95% 67% 26%Male 128 93% 77% 14% 148 96% 67% 28%ftmerican Indian or Alaska Native 1 — — — 3 — — —

ilack or African American 31 87% 61% 10% 22 86% 50% 14%Hispanic or Latino 26 92% 73% 4% 21 86% 48% 10%Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 7 100% 71% 14% 8 — — —

White 191 95% 76% 18% 219 97% 70% 30%Multiracial 5 — — — 8 88% 63% 13%Small Group Totals 6 100% 50% 17% 11 100% 73% 36%General-Education Students 248 96% 75% 16% 272 97% 69% 28%Students with Disabilities 13 62% 38% 0% 9 33% 11% 0%English Prolicient 256 94% 74% 16% 273 96% 67% 27%Limited English Proficient 5 100% 20% 0% 8 88% 50% 25%Economically Disadvantaged 41 85% 51% 0% 32 88% 41% 9%Not Disadvantaged 220 95% 77% 18% 249 96% 70% 29%Migrant

Not Migrant 261 94% 73% 15% 281 95% 67% 27%NOTESThe — symbol indicates that data for a group of students have been suppressed. It a group has fewer than five students.data for that group and the nest smallest groupisi are suppressed to protect the privacy of individual students.

These ranges are for 2010—11 data only, flanges for the 2009—10 data are available in the 2009—10 Accountability and Overview Iteports.



Tested 2-4 3—4 4 Tested 2—4 3—4 4New York State Alternate Assessment

. 2 — — - 1 - — —(NYSAA): Grade 3 Equivalent

4

.

irch 17, 2012Page 19

Overview of District PerformanceDistrict WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT District ID 26-OB-03-05-0000

722—775

.

Total Total

4

Recently Arrived LEP Students NOT Tested on

the ELA NYSTP: Grade

These counts represent recently arrived LEP students who used the NYSESI.AT to fulfill the Engl:sh language arts participation requirement.

arch 17, 2012

This District’s Results in Grade 4 English Language ArtsThis District NY State Public

Percentaqe scaring at level(s): l’ercvntage scoring at level(s):

2-4 3-4 2-4 3--4

2011 Mean Score: 685 flatige: 637—775 671—775

2010 Mean Score: 687

4 4

92% 92%78% 76%

::I__1_____i_______

Number of Tested Students: 277 263 224 204 20 33.

ResuIts by 2010—11 School Year 2009—jo School Year

Student Group Total Percentage scoring at level(s): Total Percentage scoring at level(s):

Tested 2—4 34 4 Tested 2—4 3—4 4

All Students 287 97% 78% 7% 267 99% 76% 12%

Female 133 98% 83% 10% 136 99% 78% 15%

Male 154 95% 73% 5% 131 98% 75% 8%

American Indian or Alaska Native 3 — — —



Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific stander 8 100% 75% 0% 4 — —

White 223 97% 81% 8% 229 99% 79% 13%

Multiracial 4 -- — — 4 — — —




English Proficient 280 96% 79% 7% 265 — — —

Limited English Proficient 7 100% 29% 0% 2 — — —



Migrant

Not Migrant 287 97% 78% 7% 267 99% 76% 12%

NOTESThe — symbol indicates that data for a group of students have been suppressed. If a group has fewer than five students,data for that group and the nest smallest groupisl are suppressed to protect the privacy of individual students.

These ranges are tar 2010—11 data only. Ranges br the 2009—10 data are available in the 2009—10 Accountability and Overview Reports.

Other 2010—11 School Year 2009—jo School Year —

Assessnients Total Number scoring at level(s): Total Number scoring at level(s):

Tested 2—4 3—4 4 Tested 2—4 3—4 4

New York State Alternate Assessment1 — — - 2


New York State English as a Second Language1 N/A N/A N/A 1 N/A N/A N/A

Achievement Test (NYSESLAT)t: Grade 4

1 N/A N/A N/A 1 N/A N/A N/A

Page 20

Overview of District Performance[)istrict WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT District ID 26-08-03-06-0000

This District’s Results in Grade 4 MathematicsThis District

— NY State Public

lereviitaqe scoring at level(s): lkrcoittaqe scorirftj at level(s):

2-4 3-42—4 3—4 4 4

2011 Mean Score: 100 Range: 636—800 676—800 707—8002010 Mean Score: 699 100%

98% 98% 94% 95%84% 83%I I I 67% 64%

•• 2010-11 • ‘‘° I I 27% 26%2009—10 1Number of Tested Students: 282 264 242 223 105 104

ResuLts by 2010—11 School Year 2009—10 School Year

Student Group Total Percentage scoring at level(s): Total Percentage scoring at level(s):Tested 2—4 34 4 Tested 2—4 3—4 4

All Students 289 98% 84% 36% 269 98% 83% 39%Female 134 98% 84% 38% 137 98% 80% 44%Male 155 97% 83% 35% 132 98% 86% 33%American Indian or Alaska Native 3 — — —

Jiack or African American 24 92% 75% 33% 23 100% 70% 17%Hispanic or Latino 26 96% 58% 15% 8 88% 63% 13%Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 9 100% 78% 22% 4 — — —

White 223 98% 87% 39% 230 98% 84% 41%Multiracial 4 — — — 4 — — —

Smalt Group Totals 7 100% 100% 43% 8 100% 100% 63%General-Education Students 278 98% 85% 37% 260 98% 84% 39%Students with Disabilities 11. 82% 55% 9% 9 89% 56% 22%English Proficient 281 98% 84% 37% 266 — — —

Limited_English_Proficient 8 100% 63% 0% 3 — — —

Economically Disadvantaged 62 95% 73% 24% 51 100% 78% 22%Not Disadvantaged 227 98% 87% 40% 218 98% 84% 43%Migrant

Not Migrant 289 98% 84% 36% 269 98% 83% 39%NOTESThe — symbot indicates that data tor a group of students have been suppressed. II a group has Iewer than five students.data for that group and the nest smallest group(s) ore suppressed to protect the privacy of individual students.


Other 2010—11 SchooL Year 2009—10 School Year

Assessnients Total Number scoring at level(s): Total Number scoring at level(s):

Tested 2—4 3—4 4 Tested 2—4 34 4New York State Alternate Assessment

1 — - — 2 - — —NYSAA): Grade 4 Equivalent

.rch 17, 2012

Page 21

Overview of District PerformanceDish ict WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT District It) 26-08-03-06-0000

This District’s Results in Grade 4 ScienceThis District NY State PubLic

Pcrcentaqe scoring at Ievi(): Percentage scoring at level(s):

2-4 3-4 4 2-4 3—4 4

2011 Mean Score: 84 Range: 4 --100 65-100 85-400

2010 Mean Score: 86 ioo100% 99% 96% 96% 98% 97%

:::: Iii1iz_..Number of Tested Students: 288 266 278 258 171 178

ResuLts by 2010—11 School Year 2009—10 School Year

Student Group Total Percentage scoring at level(s): TotaL Percentage scoring at level(s):

Tested 2—4 34 4 Tested 2—4 3—4 4

AU Students 289 100% 96% 59% 269 99% 96% 66%

Female 134 100% 97% 58% 137 99% 95% 66%

Male 155 99% 95% 60% 132 98% 95% 66%



Hispaitic or Latino 26 100% 85% 38% 8 88% 88% 25%

Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 9 100% 100% 44% 4 — —

White 223 100% 97% 62% 230 99% 97% 71%

Multiracial 4 — — — 4 — — —








Migrant

Not Migrant 289 100% 96% 59% 269 99% 96% 66%

NOTESThe — symbol indicates that data tor a group of students have been suppressed. If a group has fewer than five students,data for that group and the nevt smallest groupisi are suppressed to protect the privacy of individual students.



Tested 2—4 3—4 4 Tested 24 34 4

New York State Alternate Assessment. 1 - - - 2 — — —


.arch 17, 2012 Page 22

This District’s Results in Grade 5 English Language ArtsThis District NY State Publicf’erceiitaqe coIiiiq t level(s): t’rcetaqe scoring at level(s):2-4 3—4 4 2 4 3—4 4

2011 Mean Score; 611 Hange: 648—795 668—795 100—7952010 Mean Score: 684

98% 95%89/a 88%18%

70%I I 54% 52%

‘:

Number of Tested Students: 263 262 208 195 26 70

ResuLts by 2010—11. School Year 2009—1.0 School Year

Student Group Total Percentage scoring at Level(s): TotaL Percentage scoring at level(s):Tested 2—4 3—4 4 Tested 2—4 3—4 4

AliStudents 268 98% 78% 10% 277 95% 70% 25%Female 135 100% 84% 14% 137 92% 72% 27%Male 133 96% 71% 5% 140 97% 69% 24%American Indian or Alaska Native

Jiack or African American 22 86% 45% 0% 28 89% 57% 14%Hispanic or Latino 11 100% 64% 9% 25 96% 48% 20%Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 4 — — 13

— — —

White 228 99% 81% 11% 209 95% 74% 24%Multiracial 3 — — — 2 — —

Small Group Totals 7 100% 100% 14% 15 93% 80% 73%General-Education Student5 258 99% 79% 10% 261 97% 73% 26%Students with DisaI;ilities 10 80% 40% 0% 16 63% 25% 6%English Proficient 266 — — — 273 — — —

Limited English Proficient 2 — — — 4 — — —


Not Migrant 268 98% 78% 10% 277 95% 70% 25%NOTESThe — symbol indicates that data tar a group ot students have been suppressed. If a group has fewer than five students.data for that group and the neat smallest group(s) are suppressed to protect the privacy of Individual students.

These ranges are for 2010—11 data only. Ranges for the 2009—10 data are available in the 2009—10 AccoUntability and Overview Reports.

Other 2010—11 School Year 2oog—lo School Year

Assessments Total Number scoring at level(s):Total Number scoring at level(s):

Tested 2—4 3—4 4 Tested 2—4 344New York State Alternate Assessment

2 — - -- 1 - —(NYSAA): Grade 5 Equivalent

New York State English as a Second Language1 N/A N/A N/A 1 N/A N/A N/Achieement Test (NYSESLAT)’: Grade 5

-Total Total

Recently Arrived LEP Students NOT Tested onthe ELA NYSTP: Grade 5

I These counts represent recently arrived LEP students who used the NYSESLAT to fulFil the English language arts participation requirement.rch 17, 2012


4

.Overview of District Performance

[)istrict WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT Distrit:l ID 26-08-03-05-0000

Page 23

Overview of District PerformanceDistrict WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT District ID 26-08-03-06-0000

This District’s Results in Grade 5 Mathematics

This District NY State Public

Fercuntage scoring at level(s): Per -utnqe scoring at level(s):

3—4 24 3—4

.

24 4 4

2011 Mean Score: 691 Rartge: 640—780 676—780 707—780

2010 Mean Score: 70198% 97% 94% 94%

81% 82%‘ 66% 65%

• 2010-11 I I 42% II2009-10

I I 1 - I

23%24%


Results by 2010—11 School Year 2009—10 School Year

Student GroupTotaL Percentage scorIng at Level(s): Total Percentage scoring at level(s):

Tested 2--4 3_4 4 Tested 2—4 3—4 4

All Students 268 98% 81% 34% 278 97% 82% 42%

Female 135 97% 81% 31% 138 96% 83% 36%

Male 133 99% 82% 37% 140 99% 81% 48%




Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 4 — — — 13 — — —

White 228 98% 84% 36% 209 99% 86% 45%



GeneralEducation Students 259 98% 82% 34% 262 98% 84% 44%


English Proficient 265 — — — 273 98% 84% 42%

Limited English Proficient 3 — — — 5 60% 0% 0%



Migrant

Not Migrant 268 98% 81% 34% 278 97% 82% 42%

NOTESThe — symbol indicates that data for a group of students have been suppressed. If a group has fewer than five students,data for that group and the next smallest group(sl are suppressed to protect the privacy of individual students.

These ranges are for 2010—11 data only. Ranges for the 2009—10 data are available in the 2009—10 Accounfabllity and Overview Reports.

Other 2010—11. School Year 2009—10 School Year

Assessments Total Number scoring at level(s): Total Number scoring at tevel(s):

Tested 2—4 3—4 4 Tested 2—4 3-4 4

New York State Alternate Assessment2 - -. — 1 — .. —

(NYSAA): Grade 5 Equivatent

.trch 17, 2012 Page 24

Overview of District PerformanceI)istrkt WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT Dish ci 10 26-08-03-06-0000

This District’s Results in Grade 6 EngLish Language ArtsThis DIstrict NY State PubLicpercentage sco leg a) level(s): Percentage scoring at level(s):

2-4 3—4 4 2—4 3—4 4

2011 Mean Score: 673 ‘Range: 644—785 662—785 694—785

2010 Mean Score: 677 100%

96%86% 89%79% 74%II • 56%54%

• 2010—11S 2009—10

10% 17%

.--.— -- -—- —-—-——— -.-- -.-.


Results byStudent Group

2010—11 SchooL Year 2009—10 SchooL YearTotal Percentage scoring at level(s): Total Percentage scoring at level(s):Tested 2—4 3—4 4 Tested 2—4 3—4 4

All Students 282 96% 79% 10% 288 95% 74% 17%Female 135 96% 79% 10% 138 96% 83% 22%Male 147 97% 80% 10% 150 94% 66% 13%American Indian or Alaska Native 1 — — —

lack or African American 28 93% 61% 11% 16 88% 50% 19%Hispanic or Latino 28 96% 75% 7% 23 91% 74% 0%Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 13 — — — 7 — — —

White 211 97% 82% 9% 234 96% 76% 18%Multiracial 2 — — — 7 100% 71% 14%Small Group Totals 15 93% 87% 20% 8 88% 75% 38%General-Education Students 261 98% 84% 11% 265 97% 78% 18%Students with Disabilities 21 76% 29% 0% 23 78% 30% 9%English Proficient 277 97% 81% 10% 286 — — —



Not Migrant 282 96% 79% 10% 288 95% 74% 17%NOTESThe — symbol indicates that data for a group of students have been suppressed. If a group has fewer than five students,data for that group and the next smallest group(s) are suppressed to protect the privacy of individual students.• These ranges are for 2010—11 data only. Ranges for the 2009—10 data are available in the 2009—10 Accountability and Overview Reports.



Tested 2—4 3—4 — 4 Tested 2—4 3—4 4New York State Alternate Assessment

1 — - - 2 - - -(NYSAA): Grade 6 Equivalent

New York State English as a Second Language0 N/A N/A N/A 2 N/A N/A N/Achievement Test (NYSESLAT)t: Grade 6

Total Total —


Recently Arrived LEP Students NOT Tested onthe ELA NYSTP: Grade 6

These counts represent recently arrived LEP students who used the NYSESLAT to fulfill the Engliuh language arts participatiol requirement.irch 17, 2012

Page 25

Overview of District PerformanceDistrict WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT District II) 26-08-03-06-0000

This District’s ResuLts in Grade 6 MathematicsThis District NY State Public

Pctrcntaqn Scoring at lcvl?t(S): crccIlrrrJo Scoring a) level(s):

24 3-4

.

24 3-4 4 4

2011 Mean Score: 692 Range: 640—780 674—7130 700—780

2010 Mean Score: 68997% 98%

92% 92%77% 77%

:: := I ii.i89ZI ]I61INumber 01 Tested Students: 273 285 217 223 105 111

Results by 2010—11 SchooL Year 2009—10 School Year

Student Group Total Percentagescorinqatlevel(s): Total Percentaqescoringatlevel(s):

Tested 2—4 34 4 Tested 2—4 3—4 4

All Students 281 97% 77% 37% 290 98% 77% 38%Female 134 98% 78% 33% 138 99% 80% 43%

Mate 147 97% 76% 41% 152 98% 74% 34%American Indian or Alaska Native 1 — — —

Btack or African American 27 93% 56% 26% 16 100% 56% 13%


Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 13 — — — 8 100% 100% 63%

White 211 99% 81% 40% 234 98% 80% 41%


Small Group Totals 15 93% 87% 53% 8 88% 63% 25%General-Education Students 260 98% 81% 40% 267 99% 79% 40%Students with Disabilities 21 81% 29% 5% 23 87% 48% 13%


Limited English Proficient 5 80% 20% 0% 4 —


Not Migrant 281 97% 77% 37% 290 98% 77% 38%NOTESThe — symbol indicates that data for a group ot students have been suppressed It a group has fewer than five students,data for that group and the next smallest groupis) are suppressed to protect the privacy of individual students.

These ranges are for 2010—11 data only. Ranges for the 2009—10 data are available in the 2009—10 Accountability and Overview Reporti

Other 2010—11 SchooL Year 2009—10 SchooL Year


Tested 2—4 3—4 - 4 Tested 2--4 3—4 4 —

New York State Alternate Assessment1 -- -- -- 2 — —)NYSAA): Grade 6 Equivalent

.rch 17, 2012 Page 26

7

RecentLy Arrived LEP Students NOT Tested onthe ELA NYSTP: Grade

I These counts represent recently arrived LEP students who used the NYSESLAT to fulfill the English language arts participation requirement.rch 17, 2012

4


District WEST IRONOEQUGIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT District ID 26-08-03-06-0000

This District’s Results in Grade 7 EngLish Language ArtsThis District NY State Public —___________________

Perceiltatje scoring at level(s): Percentage scoring at level(s):

2-4 3-4 4 2-4 3--4 42011 Mean Score: 670 Range: 642—790 665—790 698—7902010 Mean Score: 679 100%

%91% 90%

• 72%

•62% I 48% 50%:::: jji


Results by 2010—il SchooL Year 2009—10 School Year

Student Group Total Percentage scoring at level(s): Total Percentage scoring at level(s):Tested 2—4 34 4 Tested 2—4 3—4 4

All Students 302 95% 62% 7% 313 97% 72% 21%Female 144 98% 73% 11% 160 99% 79% 24%Male 158 92% 53% 4% 153 96% 65% 18%e smerlcan Indian or Alaska Native 1 — — —

Jlack or African American 18 94% 50% 6% 27 93% 52% 7%Hispanic or Latino 30 90% 47% 0% 25 96% 64% 12%Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 6 — — — 7 100% 100% 0%White 238 96% 65% 8% 246 98% 74% 24%Multiracial 9 100% 67% 11% 8 100% 75% 25%Small Group Totals 7 86% 57% 14%General-Education Students 274 98% 66% 8% 291 99% 76% 23%Students with Disabilities’ 28 64% 25% 0% 22 73% 23% 0%English Proticient 298 — — — 311 — — —



Not Migrant 302 95% 62% 7% 313 97% 72% 21%NOTESThe — symbol indicates that data for a group of students have been suppressed. It a group has fewer than five students.data for that group and the next smallest group(s) are suppressed to protect the privacy of Individual students.

These ranges are for 2010—il data only. Ranges for the 2009—10 data are available In the 2009—10 Accountability and Overview Reports.

Other 2010—Il School Year 2009—10 School Year

Assessments Total Number scoring at level(s): Total Number 5coring at level(s):

Tested 2—4 3—4 4 Tested 2—4 3-4 4New York State Alternate Assessment

2 - . — I —(NYSAA): Grade 7 Equivalent

New. York State English as a Second Language0 N/A N/A N/A 1 N/A N/A N/Achievement Test (NYSESLAT)’: Grade 7

Total Total

0 NJA N/A N/A 1 N/A N/A N/A

Page 27

Overview of District PerformanceDistrict WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT District ID 26-08-03-06-0000

This District’s Results in Grade 7 Mathematics.

This District

I’erccrilisge scot inq ul bud(s):

3—4

NY State Public

Percentage scoring at level(s):

2•--4 3-42-4 4 4

2011 Mean Score: 684 Range: 639—800 670—800 694—800

2010 Mean Score: 688 100%

97% 98% 92% 92%83/0

65% 62%

:::=Number of Tested Students: 292 307 222 260 117 138

Results by 2010—11. School Year 2009—10 SchooL Year

Student Group Total Percentage scoring at level(s): Total Percentage scoring at level(s):

Tested 2—4 34 4 Tested 2—4 3—4 4

AU Students 302 97% 74% 39% 314 98% 83% 44%

Female 144 97% 77% 41% 160 98% 85% 44%

Male 158 96% 70% 37% 154 97% 81% 44%




Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 6 — — — 7 100% 86% 14%

White 238 96% 76% 44% 247 98% 84% 47%

Multiracial 9 100% 78% 11% 8 100% 88% 50%

Small Group Totals 7 100% 86% 57%



English Proficient 298 — — — 311 — — —

Limited English Proficient 4 — — — 3 — —



Migrant

Not Migrant 302 97% 74% 39% 314 98% 83% 44%

NOTESThe — symbol indicates that data for a group of students have been suppressed. If a group has fewer than five students,data for that group and the next smallest group(s) are suppressed to protect the privacy of Individual students.


Other 2010—li SchooL Year 2009—10 SchooL Year

Assessnients Total Number scoring at level(s): Total Number scoring at leveL(s:

Tested 2-4 3—4 4 Tested 2—4 3—4 4

New York State Alternate Assessment. 2 — - - 1 . —.

)NYSAA(: Grade 7 EquIvalent

.4

arch 17, 2012 Page 28

Recently Arrived LEP Students NOT Tested onthe ELA NYSTP: Grade

I These counts represent recently arrived LEP students who used the NYSESLAT to Icifiti the English language arts participation reqLirement.arch 17, 2012

4


District WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT Disti ct ID 26-08-03-06-0000

This District’s Results in Grade 8 English Language ArtsThis District NY State Public

iorcriilaqe icorlttq itt level(s): Percentage scoring of level(s):

2-4 34 4 2—4 3—4 4

2011 Medrt Score: 670 Range: 628—190 658—790 699-790

2010 Mean Score: 67698% 98% 92% 91%• • 76% 74%

51%

‘.



Student Group Total Percentage scoring at level(s): Total Percentage scoring at level(s):Tested 2-4 34 4 Tested 2—4 3—4 4

AllStudents 312 98% 76% 7% 278 98% 74% 20%FemaLe 163 100% 79% 9% 158 99% 82% 24%Mate 149 97% 72% 5% 120 97% 65% 14%American Indian or Alaska Native

ilack or African American 24 100% 71% 0% 31 97% 52% 6%Hispanic or Latino 33 94% 64% 3% 20 100% 75% 10%Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 7 100% 86% 0% 6 100% 100% 0%

White 242 99% 78% 8% 215 98% 77% 23%Multiracial 6 100% 83% 17% 6 100% 67% 17%Small Group Totals

General-Education Students 287 100% 81% 7% 256 100% 79% 21%Students with Disabilities 25 84% 16% 0% 22 77% 23% 0%




Not Migrant 312 98% 76% 7% 278 98% 74% 20%NOTESThe — symbol indicates that data for a group of students have been suppressed. If a group has fewer than five students,data for that group and the next smallest groupls) are suppressed to protect the privacy of individual studentx.

These ranges are for 2010—11 data only. Ranges for the 2009—10 data are available In the 2009—10 Accountability and Overview Reports.

Other 2010-11 School Year 2009—10 School Year


Tested 2—4 3—4 4 Tested 24 34 4New York State Alternate Assessment

1 -- - — 1 - - —(NYSAA): Grade 8 Equivalent

New York State EngLish as a Second Language0 N/A N/A N/A 0 N/A N/A N/Achievement Test (NYSESLAT)t: Grade 8

Total Total

0 N/A N/A N/A 0 N/A N/A N/A8

Page 29

Overview of District PerformanceI)istrict WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT Districl ID 26-08-03-06-0000

This District’s Results in Grade 8 MathematicsThis District NY State Public

I-’erceiitaqe scoring at lcvel(s): [‘ercenlaqe scoring at level(s):

2—4 3--4

.

2-4 3-4 4 4

2011 Mean Score: 691 Range: 639—775 674-775 704—775

2010 Mean Score: 692 soot98% 97% 91% 91%

83%I 60%

•• 2010-11 29% 32% IR 2009-10 1B%18%



Student Group TotaL Percentage scoring at level(s): Total Percentage scoring at level(s):Tested 2-4 34 4 Tested 2—4 3—4 4

AliStudents 311. 98% 83% 29% 279 97% 77% 32%

Female 162 99% 82% 30% 158 99% 81% 34%

Mate 149 97% 83% 28% 121 96% 72% 29%




Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific IsLander 7 100% 71% 14% 6 100% 100% 50%

White 242 100% 86% 33% 216 97% 79% 34%

Multiracial 6 100% 83% 50% 6 100% 67% 0%

Small Group Totals







Migrant

Not Migrant 311 98% 83% 29% 279 97% 77% 32%

NOTESThe — symbol indicates that data for a group of students have been suppressed. It a group has fewer than five students.data for that group and the next smallest group(s) are suppressed to protect the privacy of individuat students.


Other 2010—il School Year 2009—10 School Year


Tested 2—4 3—4 - 4 Tested 2—4 3—4 4

New York State Alternate Assessment1 1 - .. —

)NYSAA): Grade 8 Equivalent

.rch 17, 2012 Page 30

Overview of District Performance[)istrict WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT [)istrict l[) 26-08-03-06-0000

This District’s Results in Grade 8 ScienceNY State Public

FercenIaqe scorirlçj at level(s):

This District

F’ercct taqe scorl tig dl (suel (s):

2—4 3—4 4 2--4 3-4 4

100%100%

94%

P

74%

•• 2010-11 : I

t3 2009-10 —

Number of Tested Students: — 280 — 261 — 160

Results by 2010—Il School Year 2009—10 School Year

Student Group Total Percentage scoring at level(s): TotaL Percentage scoring at level(s):Tested 2—4 34 4 Tested 2—4 3—4 4

AflStudents 310 100% 93% 52% 281 100% 93% 57%Female 162 100% 92% 49% 159 100% 93% 55%Male 148 99% 93% 56% 122 99% 93% 60%American Indian or Alaska Native

rn 23 78% 2 3Hispanic. or Latino 33 97% 85% 24% 20 100% 100% 50%Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 7 100% 86% 14% 6 100% 100% 33%White 241 100% 95% 59% 217 100% 94% 61%Multiracial 6 100% 100% 67% 6 100% 83% 67%Small Group Totals

General-Education Students 285 100% 96% 56% 259 100% 97% 61%Students with Disabilities 25 100% 52% 12% 22 100% 45% 14%


Limited English Proficient 3 — — — 3 —

Economicaffy Disadvantaged 64 98% 84% 30% 68 100% 87% 38%Not Disadvantaged 246 100% 95% 58% 213 100% 95% 63%Migrant

Not Migrant 310 100% 93% 52% 281 100% 93% 57%NOTESThe — symboL indicates that data for a group of students have been suppressed. If a group has fewer than five students.data for that group and the nest smallest groupisl are suppressed to protect the privacy of individual students.


Number scoring at level(s):Total Number scoring at level(s):Total

Tested 2—4 3—4 4 Tested 2—4 3—4 4AssessmentsNew York State Alternate Assessment

— —

(NYSAA): Grade 8 Equivalent1

Regents Science 1 — — — 0

1 —

arch 17, 2012 Page 31

Overview of District Performancel)istrict WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT Dish CI I[) 26-08-03-06-0000

This District’s Total Cohort* Results in Secondary-LevelEnglish after Four Years of Instruction

This District NY State Public

Percentage scoring at level(s): Percentage scoring at level(s):

‘ ::lOOi[__j54___j4i4__I___

0%79

Results by 2007 Cohort 2006 Cohort**

L Number Percentaqe scoring at level(s): Number Percentage scoring at level(s):LuuenL roup of Students 2—4 34 4 of Students 2—4 3—4 4

All Students 380 95% 94% 72% 339 94% 94% 68%

Female 208 95% 95% 77% 174 95% 95% 76%

Male 172 95% 94% 66% 165 93% 92% 59%




Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other — — -- — — —

Pacific Islander

White 302 97% 97% 77% 288 97% 96% 73%

MultiraciaL 2 — — — 2 — — —



Students with_Disabilities 42 76% 67% 19% 44 77% 77% 27%

EngLish Proficient 379 — — — 338 — - —




Migrant

Not Migrant 380 95% 94% 72% 339 94% 94% 68%

NOTES

The — symbol indicates that data for a group of students have been suppressed. If a group has fewer than five students.data for that group and the nest smallest group(s) are suppressed to protect the privacy of individuat students.

A total cohort consists of all students who first entered Grade 9 in a particular year, end all ungraded students with disabilities who reached their seventeenth birthday in that

year, and were enrolled in the school/district for five months. Students are excluded from the cohort if they transferred to another school district, nonpublic school, or criminal

justice facility, or loft the U.S. and its territories or died before the report date. Statewide total cohort also includes students who were enrolled for fewer than See months.

20013 cohort data arc’ those reported in the 2009-10 Acccmunlability and Overview Report.

.3rch 17, 2012 Page 32

Overview of District PerformanceDisti jut WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT Distri(t $0 26-08-03-06.0000

This District’s Total Cohort* Results in Secondary-LevelMathematics after Four Years of Instruction

‘ :: I________I_______.:°:_____Results by 2007 Cohort 2006 Cohort**r. .1 Number Percentage scoring at level(s): Number Percentage scoring at level(s):LuuenL Jroup of Students 2—4 34 of Students 2—4 3—4 4

Afl Students 380 97% 96% 40% 339 96% 95% 47%Female 208 97% 97% 40% 174 96% 95% 51%

Mate 172 96% 94% 39% 165 96% 96% 44%

American Indian or ALaska Native 1 — — —

• Mack or African American 38 92% 92% 32% 21 86% 86% 19%

spanic or Latino 29 86% 86% 10% 24 92% 92% 8%

Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other8 — — — 4 — — —

Pacific Islander

White 302 98% 97% 43% 288 98% 97% 52%






Limited English_Proficient 1 — — — 1 — — —



Migrant

Not Migrant 380 97% 96% 40% 339 96% 95% 47%

NOTES

The — symbol indicates that data tor a group of students have been suppressed. If a group has fewer than five students.data for that group and the neat smallest group(s) are suppressed to protect the privacy of individual students.

This District


3—4

NY State Public


2—4 3—4

A total cohort consists of all students who first enteied Grade gina particular year, and alt ungraded students with disabilities who reached their seventeenth birthday in thatyear, rind ws’re enrolled in the school/district for five months. Students are excluded from the cohort if they transferred to another school district, nonpublic school, or criminaljustice facility, or left the U.S. and its territories or died before the report date. Statewide total cohort also includes students who were enrolled for fewer than five months.

2001, cohort data are those reported in the 2009—10 Accosinfabilify oncl Overview Report.

,rch 17, 2012 Page 33

The — symbol indicates that data for a group of students have been suppressed. If arta for that group and the neat smalest çroup(s) are suppressed to protect thc- privacy of indivdual students.

District WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRALSCHOOL DISTRICT

District ID 26-08-03-06-0000Superintendent JEFFREY CRANETeLephone (585) 336-2983Grades K-12

Regents ExamsAll Students

Total Percentage of students

Tested scoring at or above:

55 65 05

General-Education Students Students with Disabilities

Total Percentage of students Total Percentage nistudonts

Tcsted scoc ing at or above: Tested scorIng at or above:

55 65 85 55 65 85

Comprehensive English 2010—11 322 99% 94% 66% 276 99% 97% 72% 46 96% 78% 24%2009-10 ITt) 98% 97% 74% 338 lO0% 100% 78% 32 81% 72% 25%20(cH tc 328 99% “ “ i;’, 99% 75% 39 “

‘“

Integrated Algebra 2010—11 322 97% 89% 36% 289 99% 94% 39% 33 76% 45% 6%2OIJrf-10 34.1 98% 94% 32% 307 98% 06% 35% 34 97% 79% 9%2008 cc’: 374 95% 90% 28% 331 06% 93% 31% 38 82% 63%

Geometry 2010—11 353 92% 78% 29% 320 96% 83% 32% 33 58% 30% 3%iooq- 10 374 91% 19% 14% 34(1 94% 83% .16% 34 68% 41% 0%2008—on 361. “1’ i” c ‘c::,, 86% 23% 27 T1’a ‘:Igebra 2/Trigonometry 2010—11 336 80% 68% 23% 322 81% 68% 23% 14 64% 50% 21%oo’- 10 308 81% 71% 27% 29.3 84% 73% 28% 15 33% 33% 7%

2008—09 N/A N/A N ‘‘ M N//c N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/AGlobal History 2010—11 345 97% 93% 54% 312 98% 96% 59% 33 82% 73% 12%and Geography 2009-10 338 96% 91% 57% 292 97% 94% 62% 46 9.3% 72% 26%

2008—0” 384 94% 89% ‘c” 93’.,, 63% 37 73% 57% 19%U.S. History 2010—11 320 97% 94% 68% 278 98% 97% 72% 42 90% 74% 40%and Government

2009—10 361 98% 96% 76% 329 99% 98% 79% :32 91% 75% 41%-fy-Q ,,n ‘i” nfl’’ fl741F 7fl0. ‘“‘ rfl”, “r” 7ii) “ C,C0! ) 401

Living Environment

Physical Setting/

Earth Science

Physical Setting/Chemistry

Physical SettIng/Physics

2010—11 358 99% 96% 54% 325 100% 97% 58% 33 97% 79% 21%2009—10 291 99% 94% 41% 252 99% 96% 46% 39 95% 79% 13%200R rc 374 99% 97% flO,. 9°’ ‘.c8. ‘ 26 96% 5% 2

2010—11 308 92% 86% 38% 278 95% 90% 42% 30 60% 47% 3%2009-10 374 95% 89% 42% 343 97% 91% 45% 31 77% 68% 13%2ool ‘ 336 92% 84% 075L ‘100 qo/.. flTOL :L(” . 84% 66% 13%

2010—11 237 97% 83% 17% 226 97% 84% 17% 11 100% 73% 9%2009-10 267 97% 87% 16% 260 97% 88% 16 7 71% 43% 0%-innO un 248 98% 90% 25% 37 99% 92°’— 2i I 1 82% 55% 9%2010—11 152 96% 89% 41% 149 — — — 3 — — —

2009—jo 136 94°/s 90% 43% 127 95% 91% 44% 9 78% 78% 22%

. :30 92% 91% 44% 126 - -, 4 — *

NOTE

group has fewer than five students,

rch 17, 2012 Page 1

Regents Exams in Languages Other Than EnglishI)ictrjri WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICTDistrict ID 26-08-03-06-0000

Regents Exams.

All Students General-Education Students Students with Disabilities —

lobil Percei-rlace of students Total Peicerrtaqe of students Total Percentage of studentslasted scoring at or ubov: Tested scoring at or above: Tested scoring at or above:

85 55 65 85 55 6555 65 85Comprehensive French 2010—11 37 97% 97% 59% 35 — — — 2 — — —

.‘onj-- in )C) 100% 100% 38% 25 100% 100% 38% (1

)(rrIS- iirr 38 97% 97% 38 97% 9?% 45% 0Comprehensive Italian 2010—11 92 99% 98% 65% 91 — — — 1 — — —

.‘t I a; 11) 7 1 100% 99% 136% 1 1 100% 99% 89% 6 100% 100% 50%)flrH i 69 100% 100% 71% I — —

Comprehensive Spanish 2010—11 113 96% 92% 48% 112 — — — 1 — — —

2005 1 U 110 100% %°; 545f 109 — I — —

2008—09 145 100% 97% 61% 141 4 — — —

NOTE

The. symbol indicates that data br a group ot students have beerr suppressed. If a group tins tewe, than live students,data for that group and the next smallest group(s) arc suppressed to protect the privacy ol individual students.

.

.th 17, 2012

Page 2

Regents Competency TestsDistrict WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICTDistrict ID 26-08-03-06-0000

Regents Competency TestsAU Students General-Education Students Students with Disabilities —

Total Tested Percent Passing: Total Tested Percent Passing: Total Tested Percent F’issinJ:Mathematics 2010-li 4 0 4

21) 5 I () 2 (3 22111)11 1)9 13 100’ If 11 100%

Science 2010--li 5 60% 0 5 60%1111- It) 1 1

moP, oq 3 0 3Reading 2010—il 4 0 4

20(15 II) 6 83% 1) 6 83%

--

______

21)013-09 1 -

___________________

- I ——____________

Writing 2010—11 2 0 2 —

2005--lU 5 100% (1 5 100%10013- 1)1) 1

-. 1) 1Global Studies 2010—11 4 0 4

i o 8 63% 0 8 63%2008- 14 21% (1 14 21%

U.S. History 2010—11 5 60% 0 5 60%and Government 20(19 6 83% 0 6 83%

2008—05 4 () $

NOTEThe-- symbol indicates that data for a group of students have been suppressed. If a group has lewd than five students,data for that group and the nest smallest group(s) are suppressed to protect the privacy of individual students.

irchlT,2012 Page3

English as a Second Language Achievement Test

General-Education Students

Total Pei ent of students cccl inqlestcd in cacti pci (üi malice level:

Begin. Interm. Adv. Prof.

Students with Disabilities

total Percent of students scoringTested in each pertormance tevet:


Dislrict WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICTDistrict It) 26-O8-03O6-OOOO

New York State English as a Second LanguageAchievement Test (NYSESLAT)

ALL Students

Total Pprcent of students scoringlestect in each pci tormrinco level:


Listening 2010—il 6 0% 33% 33% 33% 6 0% 33% 33% 33% 0and Speaking

I 11 0% 13% 38% 50% .9 0% 13% 38% 50% 0(Grades K—i)o8 6 0% 0% 83% 17% 1. 0% 0% 83% 17% 0

Reading oio—ii 6 33% 17% 33% 17% 6 33% 17% 33% 17% 0and Writing to 0 13% 50% 13% 25% ft 13% 50% 13% 25% 0(Grades K—i)

200.01 0 .17% 50% 17% 17% 0 17% 50% 17% 1 7% 0Listening 2010—11 16 6% 6% 25% 63% 16 6% 6% 25% 63% 0and Speaking 20(1’) 17 0% 12% 29% 59% 11 0% 12% 29% 59% 0(Grades 2—4)

2008 -o’; 12 0% 17% 42% 42% 1 1 -, — 1 - —

Reading 2010—11 16 19% 25% 44% 13% 16 19% 25% 44% 13% 0and Writing 20(0)-lU 1 1 12% 29% 53% 6% 17 12% 29% 53% 6% 0(Grades 2—4)

8 12 0% 42% 25% 33% ii — . - 1 --

Listening 2010—11 8 13% 0% 50% 38% 7 — — — 1 — — —

andspeaking 2009-to 0% 11% 44% 44% 7 — - — 2 — —(Grades 5—6)2008—ill,) 9 0% 11% 44% 44% 8 — — *

ReadIng 2010—11 8 13% 13% 63% 13% 7 — — — — 1 — — — —

and Writing 2009- to 9 0% 56% 44% 0% 7 - -- - 2 — — —(Grades 5—6)2 9 1 1% 0% 67% 22% 8 — . I

Listening 2010—11 7 0% 14% 43% 43% 3 — — — — 4 — — — —

andSpeaking 209-10 6 17% 0% (1% 83% 6 17% 0% 0% 83% 0(Grades 7—8) ,nnfk 3 — — -- 3 . - -- — I.)

Reading 2010—11 7 29% 43% 14% 14% 3 — — — — 4 — — — —

and Writing 2009—1.0 6 17% 1 1% 17% 50% Ci 17% 27% 17% 50% 0(Grades 7—8)— 2008—09 3

— -. 3 . . — — 0Listening 2010—11 8 0% 50% 25% 25% 7 — — — — 1 — — — —

and Speaking 2009—10 8 13% 13% 63% 13% 7 — — 1 —(Grades 9—12)2008—09 4 — — -- — 3 — — 1 - — —

Reading 2010—11 8 13% 50% 13% 25% 7 — — — — 1 — — — —

and Writing201)9—so B 13% 25% 25% 38% 7 — 1. — - —(Grades 9—12)2008—09 4 — -• — - 3

.. 1 —

NOTE

.

.

.

lie — symbol indicates thai dale for a group of students have been suppressed. Ifs group has fewer than live students,data for that group cccl the next smallest group(s) arc’ suppressed to protc’ct the priracy of individual students.

ch 17, 2012Page 4

National Assessment of Educational Progressl)istrkt WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICTDishict ID 26-08-03-06-0000

Statewide 2010—11 Results on the National Assessment ofEducational Progress (NAEP)

% Below Basic % Basic % Proficient % Advanced

Grada4Reading 32% 33% 26% 9%Grade8Reading 24% 41% 31% 4%Grade4Mathematlcs 20% 44% 31% 5%Grade B Mathematics 30% 40% 23% 7%

Statewide 2010—11 NAEP Participation Rates for LEP Studentsand Students with Disabilities

Participation Rate

Grade 4 ReadIngLimited English Proficient 84%StudentS with Disabilities

— 85%Grade B Reading

Limited English Proficient 77%Students with Disabilities 84%

3rade 4 MathematicsLimited English Proficient 91%Students with Disabilities 90%

Grade B MathematicsLimited English Proficient 92%Students with DisabiLities 91%

NOTE

Thu National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), developed in 1969, isa nationally representative assessment of the performance of United States’ students inmathematics, reading, science, writing, the arts, civics, economics, geography, and U.S. history. Teachers, principals, parents, policymakers, and researchers use NAEP resultsto assess progiess and develop ways to improve education in the United States.

Lrchl7,2012Page5

District WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICTDistrict If) 26-08-03-06-0000

2007 TotaL Cohort Performance onRegents Exams After Four Years

.

c Percentage ofOrU Lii students scoring:

55—64 65—84 85—100

General-Education Students

CCL,

,? Percentage ofa r:U w students scoring:

55—64 65-84 85-100

New York State Alternate Assessments (NYSAA) 2010—11All Students

Total Number of students scoring

Tested at Level:

The New York State Alternate Assessment (NYSAA)is for students with severe cognitive disabilities. Resultsfor students taking the NYSAA in English language arts,mathematics, and science at the elementary and middlelevels are available in the Accountability and OverviewReport part of The New York Stote Report Cord.

All Students Students with Disabilities

Ca,

3 Percentage ofU Lii students scoring:

GlobaL History 380 2% 35% 59% 338 0% 33% 64% 42 12% 52% 14%and Geography

U.S. History 380 1% 19% 73% 338 0% 17% 78% 42 10% 33% 33%and Government

Science 380 2% 41% 53% 338 1% 40% 58% 42 10% 55% 14%

55—64 65—84 85—100

1 2 3 4

Secondary Level

English Language Arts 2 — — — —

Mathematics 2 — — — —Social Studies 2 — — — —

Science 2 — — — —

NOTEThe-— symbol indicates that data for a group of students have been suppressed. If a group has fewer than five students,data for that group end the nevt smallest group(s) ore suppressed to protect the privacy ot individual students.

.

1)

ch 17,2012Page 6

l)jstrjct WEST IRONDEQUOIT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICTDisIi)ct ID 26-08-03-06-0000

High SchooL CompletersAlL Students General-Education Students

Number Percentage Number Percent ageof Sludnts of Gruduales otStudcnls of Graduates

Total Graduates 2010—li 358 325

2(1(19 10 322 205

)008--OCJ 31) ( 275

Receiving a Regents DipLoma 2010—il 346 97% 325 100%

2009-- 10 310 98% 285 100%

/1(00 09 297 97% 2(5 100%

ReceMngaRegentsDiploma 2010--li 241 67% 237 73%with Advanced Designation ‘(H 1(1 22(1 68% 21(1 14%

229 75% 225 82%

Receiving an 2010—il 6 N/A 0individualized Education N/AProgram (IEP) Diploma

4 C)

NOTE Students receiving Regents diplomas and Regents diplomas with advanced designation are considered graduates; recipients ol IEP diplomas are noL

High SchooL NoncompletersAll Students General-Education Students Students with Disabilities

Number Percentage Number Percentage Number Percentageof Students of Students of Students of Students of Students of Students

Dropped Out 2010—11 12 1% 7 0% 5 3%

100cJ--.lO 33 2% 31 2% 2 1%

?O08—0’ 9 1% 7 0% 2 1%

Entered Approved High School 20 10-11 7 0% 7 0% 0 0%Equivalency Preparation 200C) 1% 9 1% 0 0%Program

8 17 1% 10 1% 7 3%

Total Noncompleters 2010—li 19 1% 14 1% 5 3%

2009—10 42 3% 40 3% 2 1%

2008—09 26 2% 17 1% 9

Post-secondary PLans of 2010—11 CompLetersAll Students General-Education Students Students with Disabilities

Number Percentage Number Percentage Number Percentageof Students of Students of Students of Students of Students of Students

To4-yeartollege

_____

209 57% 204 63% 5 13%To2-yearCollege 122 34% 102 31% 20 51%To Other Post-secondary

____

3 1% 2 1% 1 3%To the Military 4 1% 2 1% 2 5%To Employment 20 5% 14 4% 6 15%To Adult Services 6 2% 1 0% 5 13%

‘ Other Known Plans 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%•. tan Unknown 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

High School information—--% I

Students with Disabilities

Numbei Percentage01 Students of Graduates

33

I

32

21 64%

31 84%

22 69%

4 12%

10 27%

13%

6 N/A

8 N/A

4 N/A

rch 17, 2012 Page 7

SDL: 2691 LEA: 260603060000

The New York State School Report CardFiscal Accountability Supplement

forWest lrondequoit Central School District

New York State Education Law and the Commissioner’s Regulations require the attachment of the NYS School

Report Card to the public school district budget proposal. The regulations require that certain expenditure ratios

for general education and special education students be reported and compared with ratios for similar districts

and all public schools. The required ratios for this district are reported below.

2009-20 10 School Year General Education Special Education

This Instructional Expenditures $35,22 1,328 $9,323,047

School Pupils —________ 3,788 326

District Expenditures Per Pupil $9,298 $28,598

Similar Instructional Expenditures $793 1,685,291 $3,040.1 44.023

District Pupils - - 818,103 112,811Group Expenditures Per Pupil $9,695 $26,949

Total of All Instructional Expenditures $30,088,! 58,593 $11,362,166,093

School Pupils 2.709,505 422,576Districts mNY State Expenditures Per Pupil $11,105 $26,888

Similar District Group Description: Average Need/Resource Capacity

Instructional Expenditures for General Education are K-12 expenditures for classroom instruction (excluding Special Education) plus a pro

ration of building level administrative and instructional support expenditures. These expenditures include amounts for instruction of stu

dents with disabilities in a general education setting. District expenditures, such as transportation, debt service, and district-wide adminis

tration, are not included.

The pupil count for General Education is K-12 average daily membership plus K-12 pupils for whom the district pays tuition to another

school district. This number represents all pupils, including those classified as having disabilities and those not classified, excluding only

students with disabilities placed out of district. For districts in which a county jail is located, this number includes incarcerated youth to

whom the district must provide an education program.

Instructional Expenditures for Special Education are K-12 expenditures for students with disabilities (including summer special education

expenditures) plus a proration of building-level administrative and instructional support expenditures. District expenditures, such as trans

portation. debt service, and district-wide administration, are not included.

The pupil count for Special Education is a count of K-i 2 students with disabilities for the 2009-10 school year plus students for whom the

district receives tuition from another district plus students for whom the district pays tuition to another district. Students attending the State

schools at Rome and Batavia, private placements, and out-of-state placements are included.

Instructional Expenditures Per Pupil is the simple arithmetic ratio of Instructional Expenditures to Pupils. The total cost of instruction for stu

dents with disabilities may include both general and special education expenditures. Special education services provided in the general ed

ucation classroom may benefit students not classified as having disabilities.

This School Similar District Total of All SchoolI 2009-20 10 School YearDistrict Group Districts in NY State I

Total Expenditures Per Pupil $16,507 $18,262 $19,921

Total Expenditures Per Pupil is the simple arithmetic ratio of Total Expenditures to Pupils. Total Expenditures include district expenditures

for classroom instruction, as well as expenditures for transportation, debt service, community service and district-wide administration that

are not included in the Instructional Expenditure values for General Education and Special Education. As such, the sum of General Educa

tion and Special Education Instructional Expenditures does not equal the Total Expenditures.

The numbers used to compute the statistics on this page were collected on the State Aid Form A, the State Aid Form F, the School DistrictAnnual Financial Report (ST-3), and from the Student Information Repository System (SIRS).

SDL 2691 IEA: 260803060000

The New York State School Report CardInformation about Students with Disabilities

for


New York State Education Law and the Comrnissione?s Regulations require the attachment of the NYS School

Report Card to the public school district budget proposal. The regulations require reporting students with disabi

lities by the percent of time they are in general education classrooms and the classification rate of students with

disabilities. These data are to be compared with percentages for similar districts and all public schools. The re

quired percentages for this district are reported below.

Student Counts as of . . . Similar District Total of All SchoolThis School District

October 6, 2010 Group Districts in NY State

Student Placement -- Count of Percentage of Percentage of Percentage of

Percent of Time Inside Students with Students with Students with Students with

Regular Classroom Disabilities Disabilities Disabilities Disabilities

80% or more 219 72.8% 57.3% 56.2%

40%to79% 35 11.6% 19.8% 11.9%

Less than 40% 27 9.0% 16.8% 23.0%

Separate Settings 12 4.0% 3.8% 6.0%

Other Settings 8 2.7% 2.3% 2.9%

The source data for the statistics in this table were reported through the Student Information Repository System (SIRS) and

verified in Verification Report 5. The counts are numbers of students reported in the least restrictive environment categories

for school-age programs (ages 6-21) on October 6, 2010. The percentages represent the amount of time students th

disabilities are in general education class-rooms, regardless of the amount and cost of special education services they

receive. Rounding of percentage values may cause them to sum to a number slightly different from 100%.

School-age Students with Disabilities Classification Rate

201 0-1 1 School Year This School Similar District Total of All SchoolDistrict Group Districts in NY State

Special Ed Classification Rate 8.0% 12.3% 13.0%

This rate is a ratio of the count of school-age students with disabilities (ages 4-21) to the total enrollment of all school-age

students in the school district, including students who are parentally placed in nonpublic schools located in the school

district. The numerator includes all school-age students for whom a district has Committee on Special Education (CSE)

responsibility to ensure the provision of special edu-cation services. The denominator includes all school-age students who

reside in the district. In the case of parentally placed students in nonpublic schools, it includes the number of students who

attend the nonpublic schools located in the school district. Source data are drawn from the SIRS and from the Basic

Education Data System (BEDS).

Similar District Group Description: Average Need/Resource Capacity ISimilar District Groups are identified according to the Need-to-Resource-Capacity Index. More information about this

categorization is on the Internet at: http:I/www.pl 2.nysed.gov/irslaccountability/201 1-1 2lNeedResourceCa pacityl ndex.pdf

Documents

2012-2013BUDGET PROPOSAL FOR PEAK PERFORMANCEwestirondequoit.ss8.sharpschool.com/UserFiles... · leaders as the 2% tax cap, the law actually requires use of an eight-stepformula based