Group report for teachers - GL Education Groupgl-education.com/sites/gl/files/images/Samplereports/CAT4-group... · types of weather and snow is also a type of weather. ... narrower

GL Assessment is part of the GL Education Group.Copyright © 2012 GL Assessment Limited.

Group report for teachers

In case of enquiries please contact GL Assessment by emailing [email protected].

22/08/2012Report generated on

CAT4 Group report for teachers

Level: B

School: Check CAT Academy

No. of students: 96Date of test: 10/08/2012

Group: ST


Three words are presented which are similar in some way orways. From a selection of five possible answers, the studentmust identify a fourth word with similar properties.

The answer is snow because rain, fog and sunshine are alltypes of weather and snow is also a type of weather.

Verbal Classification

Verbal Reasoning Battery – thinking with words

Verbal Analogies

A pair of connected words is presented alongside a singleword. From a selection of five possible answers, the studentmust select a word to complete the second pair in the sameway.

The answer is window, because a carpet goes on a floor anda curtain hangs at a window.

Quantitative (or Numerical) Reasoning Battery – thinking with numbers

Two pairs of related numbers are presented. From a selectionof five possible answers, the student must select a number tocomplete a third pair.

The answer is 8. Here 1 add 1 makes 2, but that doesn’t workfor the second pair because 5 add 1 is 6, not 10. Instead, youhave to multiply by 2 to get the second part of each pair, so 4times 2 is 8.

Number Analogies

A sequence of numbers created by a transformation rule ispresented. From a selection of five possible answers, thestudent must identify the rule and continue the sequence.

The answer is 15. There are two number patterns in thisseries. The first, third and fifth numbers go down by 1 at a time– 18, 17 then 16. The numbers in between them go up by twoat a time – 5, 7 then 9. This means the next number must be16 minus 1, giving 15.

Number Series

Page 2 of 17Copyright © 2012 GL Assessment Limited

The Cognitive Abilities Test (CAT) is a suite of tests that assesses a student's reasoning (thinking) abilities inkey areas that support educational development and academic attainment. CAT4 is the fourth edition of the testand comprises the following sections or batteries which assess different aspects of ability:

What is CAT4?


Figure Classification

Three designs are presented which are similar in some way orways. From a selection of five possible answers, the studentmust identify a fourth design with similar properties.

The answer is E because it is the only answer choice that is astriped semi-circle, like the first three figures.

Non-verbal Reasoning Battery – thinking with shapes

Designs are presented in a grid with one empty square and,from a selection of five possible answers, the student mustidentify the missing design.

The answer is C because in the top pair ‘one arrow up’ goesto ‘two arrows up’, so in the second pair ‘one arrow down’must go to ‘two arrows down’.

Figure Matrices

Spatial Ability Battery – thinking with shape and space

A series of diagrams shows a square being folded repeatedly,and then punched through with holes. From a selection of fivepossible answers, the student must identify how the paper willappear when unfolded.

The answer is D. The hole is punched through both layers ofpaper, so as it is unfolded the holes will be a mirror image ofeach other, with the crease being the mirror line.

Figure Analysis

Figure Recognition

Several complex designs are presented along with a singletarget shape. From a selection of five possible answers, thestudent must identify the target shape within one of thecomplex designs.

The answer is E. It isn’t A because that shows the targetflipped over. It isn’t B or C because they have shapes that arethe wrong size.

Page 3 of 17Copyright © 2012 GL Assessment Limited Page 3 of 17Copyright © 2012 GL Assessment Limited

Why use CAT4?

CAT4 is a comprehensive and objective test of your students’ developed abilities – those that, in part,determine attainment and can be built upon and developed to improve outcomes. For example, verbalreasoning can be developed by supporting students’ reading, comprehension and vocabulary.

CAT4 has many uses, but the focus of this group report is to inform teachers about the abilities of a pre-determined group of students – whether a whole year cohort, teaching group or tutor group or a group ofstudents who share particular characteristics, for example students with English as an additional language.

CAT4 provides important information about your group of students because it is an objective measure of ability.Data from other sources such as the Fischer Family Trust, teacher assessment and key indicators such asattendance may be used alongside CAT4 data to ensure that information about students’ ability, attainment andany external factors affecting achievement that may impact on progress are part of the decision-making processat many levels.

Furthermore, results from CAT4:


• provide indicators of attainment for KS2, KS3, GCSE and AS/A level which are a starting point for targetsetting for the group

offer a comparison between performance of different groups of students in order to better identify needs andtarget resources

•

identify groups of students who may be underachieving •

• monitor trends and changes in the ability profile of the school’s intake over time

• and, importantly, set a baseline against which to assess the value added by the school.


Battery In CAT4 battery is the title given to each of the four pairs of tests which assessdifferent aspects of ability.

Questions attempted The number of questions attempted can be important: a student may have workedvery slowly but accurately and not finished the test and this will impact on his or herresults.

Raw Score (RS) The raw score (RS) is the total number of questions a student has answeredcorrectly.

The Standard Age Score (SAS) is the most important piece of information derivedfrom CAT4. The SAS is based on the student’s raw score which has been adjustedfor age and placed on a scale that makes a comparison with a nationallyrepresentative sample of students of the same age across the UK. The average scoreis 100. The SAS is key to benchmarking and tracking progress and is the fairest wayto compare the performance of different students within a year group or across yeargroups.

Standard Age Score (SAS)

National Percentile Rank (NPR) The National Percentile Rank (NPR) relates to the SAS and indicates the percentageof students obtaining any particular score. NPR of 50 is average. NPR of 5 meansthat the student’s score is within the lowest 5% of the national sample; NPR of 95means that the student’s score is within the highest 5% of the national sample.

The Stanine (ST) places the student’s score on a scale of 1 (low) to 9 (high) andoffers a broad overview of his or her performance.

Stanine (ST)

The Group Rank (GR) shows how each student has performed in comparison tothose in the defined group. The symbol = represents joint ranking with one or moreother students.

Group Rank (GR)


Understanding CAT4 scores

Relationship between CAT4 scores

Confidence band Performance on a test like CAT4 can be influenced by a number of factors and theconfidence band is an indication of the range within which a student's score lies. Thenarrower the band the more reliable the score. This means that 90% confidencebands are a very high level estimate.



Group: ST

No. of students: 96Date of test: 10/08/2012 Level: B


Scores for the group (by overall mean SAS)

QuantitativeVerbal

No.attempted

(/48)SAS GR

(/96)No.

attempted(/36)

SAS GR(/96)ClassStudent name

Non-verbal

No.attempted

(/48)SAS GR

(/96)

Spatial

No.attempted

(/36)SAS GR

(/96)

Overall

MeanSAS

GR(/96)

4848 36 =1Heidi Bowden 1 36 141141 =1=1 141 141 =1 =114148 =148 36 =1Jenny Richards 2 14136 141141 =1=1 141 141 =1

4848 36 =1Joel Beach 2 36 141141 =1=1 141 141 =1 =114148 =148 36 =1Florence Hunt 2 14136 141141 =1=1 141 141 =1

4848 36 8Melanie Hill 1 36 141141 =1=1 129 141 =1 513848 648 36 7Tammy Braun 2 13736 131141 =1=1 133 141 12

4848 36 5Stephanie Anthony 1 36 120141 =1=1 138 141 =23 =713548 =748 36 =10Janet Kearney 2 13536 134141 13=1 124 139 10

4848 36 9Tom Haynes 3 36 141141 20=1 125 128 =1 913448 =1048 36 =20Curtis McKay 2 13336 140141 =1=1 111 141 =8

4848 36 14Jack Pritchard 1 36 130141 =1=1 120 141 13 =1013348 =1048 36 =10Ronald Blackwell 3 13336 132141 14=1 124 135 11

4848 36 6Dwight Solomon 2 36 121141 =16=1 136 130 =20 =1313248 =1348 36 =10Milton Tyson 3 13236 121141 =1=1 124 141 =20

4848 36 19Shawn Benson 1 36 141141 =16=1 113 130 =1 1513148 =1648 36 =20Willie Koch 1 13036 128141 =1=1 111 141 14

4848 36 18Kyle Greenberg 3 36 121141 =1=1 117 141 =20 =1613048 =1848 36 =23Aaron Robinson 1 12936 140141 =16=1 106 130 =8

4848 36 =16Seth Quinn 3 36 126141 =16=1 118 130 16 =1812948 =2048 36 15Julia Hansen 2 12836 125141 =21=1 119 127 17

4848 36 =16Alex Knight 1 36 127141 =21=1 118 127 15 =2012848 =2048 36 13Sandy Kirk 3 12836 122141 =21=1 122 127 19

4848 36 =20Edwin Hayes 2 36 123141 15=1 111 133 18 2312748 2448 36 =23Sherri Mayo 3 12036 118141 =30=1 106 113 25

4848 36 =28Patrick Nixon 3 36 120141 =28=1 101 114 =23 25119

The Standard Age Score (SAS) is based on the student’s raw score which has been adjusted for age and placed on a scale thatmakes a comparison with a nationally representative sample of students of the same age across the UK. The average score is 100.

The Group Rank (GR) shows how each student has performed in comparison to those in the defined group. The symbol = represents joint rankingwith one or more other students.

The number of questions attempted can be important: a student may have worked very slowly but accurately and not finished the test and thiswill impact on his or her results.

Copyright © 2012 GL Assessment Limited Page 6 of 17


QuantitativeVerbal

No.attempted

(/48)SAS GR

(/96)No.

attempted(/36)


Non-verbal

No.attempted

(/48)SAS GR

(/96)

Spatial

No.attempted

(/36)SAS GR

(/96)

Overall

MeanSAS

GR(/96)

48 2648 36 =28Miriam Marks 3 11736 117135 =2833 101 114 26

4848 36 =25Shannon Cooke 3 36 106141 =30=1 102 113 29 =2711648 =2748 36 =33Joel Callahan 1 11636 104141 27=1 100 117 =30

4848 36 =37Hannah Finch 2 36 103141 24=1 99 120 =32 =2711648 =3048 36 =44Clara Haynes 2 11536 103141 26=1 97 118 =32

4848 36 =33Jackie Hendrix 3 36 104141 =30=1 100 113 =30 =3011548 3248 36 =44Becky Norton 1 11436 107141 33=1 97 111 =27

4848 36 =49Audrey Barber 3 36 94141 25=1 95 119 =45 3311248 3448 36 =25Zachary Dyer 3 10936 95131 3435 102 106 =42

4848 36 =28Rick Byers 3 36 92126 =3737 101 102 =52 3510548 =3648 36 =25Tracy Townsend 1 10436 81133 4034 102 98 =67

4848 36 =42Dana High 3 36 82130 3536 98 105 =65 =3610448 3848 36 =28Samantha Lang 1 10236 94111 =37=41 101 102 =45

4848 36 =33Jeanne Boyette 3 36 83118 3638 100 104 =63 3910148 4048 36 =37Emily Burnette 2 10036 92113 =41=39 99 97 =52

4848 36 =33Jeff Sullivan 3 36 83111 39=41 100 99 =63 =419848 =4148 36 =37Kent Livingston 2 9836 10796 =55=53 99 89 =27

4848 36 =52Anita Hanson 3 36 89111 =44=41 94 94 =57 439748 4448 36 =52Allen Zimmerman 3 9636 78113 =41=39 94 97 =69

4848 36 =52Ronald Levine 2 36 10389 =44=70 94 94 =32 459548 =4648 36 =60Suzanne Lawson 1 9436 85104 43=45 91 96 62

4848 36 =64Gilbert Preston 2 36 10091 =4466 90 94 36 =469448 =4848 36 =49Walter McKenna 3 9336 9298 =57=49 95 88 =52

4848 36 =37Katherine Dickerson 1 36 9390 =57=67 99 88 =49 =489348 =4848 36 =44Jennifer Rowland 1 9336 9392 =57=62 97 88 =49

4848 36 =60Jonathan Bowling 1 36 9594 =50=58 91 92 =42 =489348 =5248 36 =64Hazel Pickett 3 9236 93101 =7148 90 82 =49

4848 36 =49Joann Copeland 3 36 9785 =50=77 95 92 =37 =529248 =5248 36 =57Jacob Godwin 1 9236 9788 =5374 93 90 =37

4848 36 66Steven Rice 1 36 9592 =47=62 89 93 =42 =529248 =5248 36 59Rita Zhang 1 9236 9787 =4775 92 93 =37

4848 36 =79Kristen Cook 3 36 10195 65=56 84 85 35 579148 =5848 36 =75Lorraine Pitts 1 8936 8989 =50=70 86 92 =57

4848 36 =52Kristen Peterson 2 36 9489 76=70 94 80 =45 =5889



QuantitativeVerbal

No.attempted

(/48)SAS GR

(/96)No.

attempted(/36)


Non-verbal

No.attempted

(/48)SAS GR

(/96)

Spatial

No.attempted

(/36)SAS GR

(/96)

Overall

MeanSAS

GR(/96)

48 =5848 36 =67Lester Gibson 3 8936 8696 =62=53 88 87 61

4848 36 =28Robyn Livingston 1 36 68108 =7944 101 78 73 =588948 =5848 36 =67Renee Grimes 1 8936 8193 =4761 88 93 =67

4848 36 =60Bonnie Gunter 2 36 8296 =68=53 91 83 =65 =638848 =6348 36 =77Cathy Bowers 1 8836 9786 =6676 85 84 =37

4848 36 =77Claire Fleming 3 36 8892 =57=62 85 88 60 =638848 =6648 36 =67Marion Cline 2 8736 7698 =62=49 88 87 =71

4848 36 =81Bob Berman 2 36 9790 =77=67 83 79 =37 =668748 =6848 36 =73Angela Harris 2 8636 9482 =7383 87 81 =45

4848 36 =81Don Wu 2 36 8985 =57=77 83 88 =57 =688648 =6848 36 =42Eva Lin 1 8636 61103 =7347 98 81 =74

4848 36 =83Dorothy Cannon 3 36 9194 =79=58 81 78 55 =688648 =6848 36 =67Chris Klein 3 8636 7890 64=67 88 86 =69

4848 36 48Helen Lynch 3 36 6197 =53=51 96 90 =74 =688648 =7448 36 =60Sherry Benton 3 8536 61104 =68=45 91 83 =74

4848 36 =73Harvey O'Connell 1 36 9085 =77=77 87 79 56 =748548 =7448 36 =37Nina McCall 2 8536 6197 =68=51 99 83 =74

4848 36 =44Lois Murphy 3 36 6195 =71=56 97 82 =74 778448 7848 36 =52Gayle Underwood 1 8336 6194 =66=58 94 84 =74

4848 36 =75Annie Anthony 2 36 7685 =73=77 86 81 =71 798248 =8048 36 =57Bradley Sutton 3 8036 6189 =81=70 93 77 =74

4848 36 =67Allan Kirby 1 36 6192 =81=62 88 77 =74 =808048 =8048 36 =67Carol Dunn 1 8036 6183 =5582 88 89 =74

4848 36 85Megan McCormick 2 36 6176 8384 79 76 =74 837348 8448 36 =89Milton Galloway 3 7036 6184 8481 61 74 =74

4848 36 87Brooke Carroll 2 36 6174 =8685 69 60 =74 =856648 =8548 36 =83Barbara Simpson 3 6636 6160 =86=87 81 60 =74

4848 36 =79Sandra Stanley 3 36 6160 =86=87 84 60 =74 =856648 =8848 36 =89Jeanette Sutherland 2 6436 6160 85=87 61 73 =74

4848 36 86Maurice Ball 3 36 6160 =86=87 75 60 =74 =886448 =9048 36 88Lee Bowling 1 6236 6160 =86=87 66 60 =74

4848 36 =89Eleanor Floyd 2 36 6167 =8686 61 60 =74 =906248 =9248 36 =89Anne Dickson 3 6136 6160 =86=87 61 60 =74

4848 36 =89Melinda Blackburn 1 36 6160 =86=87 61 60 =74 =9261



QuantitativeVerbal

No.attempted

(/48)SAS GR

(/96)No.

attempted(/36)


Non-verbal

No.attempted

(/48)SAS GR

(/96)

Spatial

No.attempted

(/36)SAS GR

(/96)

Overall

MeanSAS

GR(/96)

48 =9248 36 =89Jon Carver 2 6136 6160 =86=87 61 60 =74

4848 36 =89Vanessa Long 1 36 6160 =86=87 61 60 =74 =926148 =9248 36 =89Doris Lindsay 1 6136 6160 =86=87 61 60 =74


Analysis of group scores (by battery)


Level: B



Group: ST

The table below shows the distribution of scores for your group compared with those for the national sample. Inaddition, the bar chart presents this information.

Group

Description

National average

Verbalmean SAS

Quantitativemean SAS

Spatialmean SAS

Non-verbalmean SAS

107.9

100.0

97.3

100.0

99.2

100.0

94.8

100.0

SAS bands

Verbal

Quantitative

Non-verbal

Spatial

National average

Very low

<74

Below average Average Above average Very high

>12674–81 82–88 89–96 97–103 104–111 119–126112–118

12% 20% 17%17%4% 7% 4%7% 12%

11% 2% 10% 22% 6% 6% 3% 1% 38%

4% 17% 8%5% 4%24%20%10% 7%

2%

13% 17%

10%

24%

5%

4% 7%

7%25% 9%

6%15%13%

16%

2%

6% 19%

The table below shows mean (average) scores for your group compared with those for the national sample.

Overallmean SAS

99.9

100.0


Student profiles


Group: ST

No. of students: 96Date of test: 10/08/2012 Level: B


The analysis of CAT4 scores allows allstudents to be assigned a profile; that is theyare assigned to one of seven broaddescriptions of their preferences for learning.The Verbal Reasoning and Spatial AbilityBatteries form the basis of this analysis andthe profiles are expressed as a mild,moderate or extreme bias for verbal orspatial learning or, where no bias isdiscernable (that is, when scores on bothbatteries are similar), as an even profile.

The diagram shows the distribution ofstudents across the seven profiles which areindicated by the coloured bands.

Extreme verbal bias

Moderate verbal bias

Mild verbal bias

No bias

Mild spatial bias

Moderate spatial bias

Extreme spatial bias

Males

Females

•



General characteristics of each student profileIt may be helpful to consider which students fall into which broad profile, but this information must be treatedwith caution as the descriptors are general and not individualised: students’ preferences for learning will beinfluenced by other factors. The CAT4 Individual report for teachers offers more fine detail.

No bias or even profile

No. of students

Extreme verbal bias

Mild verbal bias

Mild spatial bias

National

%

Group

%

5%11% 5

2% 15% 14

1213%

57

8

66%

8%11%

59%

00%

0Extreme spatial bias 0%

Moderate verbal bias 4%

2%

Moderate spatial bias 4%

•

•

They may prefer to learn step-by-step, building on prior knowledge, as their spatial skills are relatively weaker,being in the low average or below average range.

These students should excel in written work and should enjoy discussion and debate.They should prefer to learn through reading, writing and may be very competent independent learners.

•

•They are likely to be high achievers in subjects that require good verbal skills such as English, modern foreignlanguages and humanities.

Extreme verbal bias

Students:

Audrey Barber Sherry Benton Jeanne Boyette

Rick Byers Zachary Dyer Hannah Finch

Clara Haynes Dana High Eva Lin

Robyn Livingston Helen Lynch Nina McCall

Tracy Townsend Allen Zimmerman

•

•

Students in this group will have average to high scores for Verbal Reasoning and relatively weaker Spatial Abilitywith scores in the average range.These students are likely to prefer to learn through reading, writing and discussion. •

Step-by-step learning, which builds on prior knowledge incrementally, is likely to suit these students.

Moderate verbal bias

Students :

Emily Burnette Joel Callahan Marion Cline

Shannon Cooke Jackie Hendrix Allan Kirby

Suzanne Lawson Lois Murphy Becky Norton

Jeff Sullivan Bradley Sutton Gayle Underwood

Some students with this profile will have low average or below average scores for Verbal Reasoning and relativelyweaker Spatial Ability, but the gap between scores will be narrow.A slight bias for learning through reading, writing and discussion may be discerned in the students in this group.

•

•

Mild verbal bias



Mild verbal bias

Students :

Carol Dunn Milton Galloway Renee Grimes

Anita Hanson Chris Klein Samantha Lang

Miriam Marks Sherri Mayo

•

Students with low even scores, conversely, may require significant levels of support to access the curriculum butwill be open to a range of teaching and learning methods.

Scores for students with this profile will be very similar for both Verbal Reasoning and Spatial Ability but will beacross the range from low to high.

•

•

Students with high even scores will excel across the curriculum and will learn through the range of media andmethods.

No bias or even profile

Students :

Annie Anthony Stephanie Anthony Maurice Ball

Joel Beach Shawn Benson Bob Berman

Melinda Blackburn Ronald Blackwell Heidi Bowden

Jonathan Bowling Lee Bowling Tammy Braun

Dorothy Cannon Brooke Carroll Jon Carver

Kristen Cook Katherine Dickerson Anne Dickson

Claire Fleming Eleanor Floyd Lester Gibson

Kyle Greenberg Bonnie Gunter Julia Hansen

Angela Harris Edwin Hayes Tom Haynes

Melanie Hill Florence Hunt Janet Kearney

Sandy Kirk Alex Knight Willie Koch

Ronald Levine Doris Lindsay Vanessa Long

Megan McCormick Curtis McKay Walter McKenna

Patrick Nixon Harvey O'Connell Kristen Peterson

Hazel Pickett Lorraine Pitts Gilbert Preston

Jack Pritchard Seth Quinn Steven Rice

Jenny Richards Aaron Robinson Jennifer Rowland

Barbara Simpson Dwight Solomon Sandra Stanley

Jeanette Sutherland Milton Tyson Don Wu

• Some students with this profile will have low average or below average scores for Spatial Ability and relativelyweaker Verbal Reasoning skills, but the gap between scores will be narrow.A slight bias for learning through visual media may be discerned in the students in this group. •

Mild spatial bias

Students :

Cathy Bowers Joann Copeland Jacob Godwin

Kent Livingston Rita Zhang



• Students in this group will have average to high scores for Spatial Ability and relatively weaker Verbal Reasoningwith scores in the average range.

• These students are likely to prefer to learn through visual and kinaesthetic media and will need to use diagrams,pictures, videos and objects to learn best.Students with above average or high Spatial Ability are often characterised as ‘intuitive’ or ‘big picture’ learners:attention to detail may be a weakness.

•

• Owing to a relative weakness in verbal skills, attainment may be uneven and they are likely to need support insubjects where the emphasis is on the written word.

Moderate spatial bias

Students : None

• These students should excel in problem solving and will grasp concepts quickly and intuitively.

• They will not enjoy rote learning and may arrive at a correct solution to a task without demonstrating the stepsalong the way.They are likely to be high achievers in subjects that require good visual-spatial skills such as maths, physics andtechnology.

•

• Owing to a relative weakness in verbal skills, attainment may be uneven and they may need support in subjectswhere the emphasis is on the written word.

Extreme spatial bias

Students : None



Level: B



Group: ST

KS2 indicators

There has always been a significant and positive correlation (that is, a link which is supported by statisticaldata) between a student’s scores on reasoning tests such as CAT4 and his or her performance in national testsand examinations. CAT4 provides a range of indicators of future attainment which can form the basis ofdiscussion with an individual about targets for learning or help set realistic but challenging targets for nationaltests and examinations.

External factors will affect a student’s eventual attainment – not least effort and motivation – but CAT4 resultsdemonstrate what can be achieved because the test is established as a good predictor of subsequentattainment.

CAT4 scores and subsequent KS2 results (or teacher assessments) are collected from a large sample ofschools and students. The KS2 indicators are derived from the statistical relationship between CAT4 scoresand the end of KS2 results. The indicators are updated regularly to reflect changes in national KS2 attainment.Indicators for maths and science are calculated from the mean CAT4 Standard Age Score (SAS). The SAS forVerbal Reasoning has been found to give more accurate results for English so, when available, this is used asthe basis for the indicators for English. Should scores for one of more batteries be missing, indicators will bebased on scores for those batteries administered to the student.

The indicators in this report are shown as National Curriculum levels.

Student name Class Mean SAS English Maths Science

Indicated KS2 level(most likely level followed by ‘if challenged’ level in bold)

Jenny Richards 2 141 5a 5a 5a 5a 5a 5a

Joel Beach 2 141 5a 5a 5a 5a 5a 5a

Florence Hunt 2 141 5a 5a 5a 5a 5a 5a

Heidi Bowden 1 141 5a 5a 5a 5a 5a 5a

Melanie Hill 1 138 5a 5a 5a 5a 5a 5a

Tammy Braun 2 137 5a 5a 5a 5a 5a 5a

Stephanie Anthony 1 135 5a 5a 5a 5a 5a 5a

Janet Kearney 2 135 5a 5a 5a 5a 5a 5a

Tom Haynes 3 134 5a 5a 5a 5a 5a 5a

Jack Pritchard 1 133 5a 5a 5a 5a 5b 5a

Curtis McKay 2 133 5a 5a 5a 5a 5b 5a

Ronald Blackwell 3 133 5a 5a 5a 5a 5a 5a

Milton Tyson 3 132 5a 5a 5a 5a 5b 5a

Dwight Solomon 2 132 5a 5a 5a 5a 5a 5a

Shawn Benson 1 131 5a 5a 5a 5a 5b 5a

Willie Koch 1 130 5a 5a 5a 5a 5b 5a

Kyle Greenberg 3 130 5a 5a 5a 5a 5b 5a

Seth Quinn 3 129 5a 5a 5a 5a 5b 5a

Aaron Robinson 1 129 5a 5a 5b 5a 5b 5a

Julia Hansen 2 128 5a 5a 5a 5a 5b 5a

Sandy Kirk 3 128 5a 5a 5a 5a 5b 5a





Alex Knight 1 128 5a 5a 5a 5a 5b 5a

Edwin Hayes 2 127 5a 5a 5b 5a 5b 5a

Sherri Mayo 3 120 5a 5a 5b 5a 5b 5a

Patrick Nixon 3 119 5a 5a 5b 5a 5b 5a

Miriam Marks 3 117 5b 5a 5b 5a 5c 5b

Shannon Cooke 3 116 5a 5a 5b 5a 5b 5a

Joel Callahan 1 116 5a 5a 5b 5a 5c 5b

Hannah Finch 2 116 5a 5a 5b 5a 5c 5b

Clara Haynes 2 115 5a 5a 5b 5a 5c 5b

Jackie Hendrix 3 115 5a 5a 5b 5a 5c 5b

Becky Norton 1 114 5a 5a 5b 5a 5c 5b

Audrey Barber 3 112 5a 5a 5c 5b 5c 5b

Zachary Dyer 3 109 5b 5a 5c 5b 5c 5b

Rick Byers 3 105 5b 5a 5c 5b 5c 5b

Dana High 3 104 5b 5a 4a 5c 5c 5b

Tracy Townsend 1 104 5b 5a 5c 5b 5c 5b

Samantha Lang 1 102 4a 5c 4a 5c 4a 5c

Jeanne Boyette 3 101 5c 5b 4a 5c 4a 5c

Emily Burnette 2 100 5c 5b 4a 5c 4a 5c

Kent Livingston 2 98 4b 4a 4b 4a 4a 5c

Jeff Sullivan 3 98 4a 5c 4a 5c 4a 5c

Anita Hanson 3 97 4a 5c 4b 4a 4a 5c

Allen Zimmerman 3 96 5c 5b 4b 4a 4a 5c

Ronald Levine 2 95 4c 4b 4b 4a 4b 4a

Gilbert Preston 2 94 4c 4b 4b 4a 4b 4a

Suzanne Lawson 1 94 4a 5c 4b 4a 4b 4a

Jennifer Rowland 1 93 4b 4a 4b 4a 4b 4a

Walter McKenna 3 93 4b 4a 4b 4a 4b 4a

Jonathan Bowling 1 93 4b 4a 4b 4a 4b 4a

Katherine Dickerson 1 93 4c 4b 4b 4a 4b 4a

Jacob Godwin 1 92 4c 4b 4c 4b 4b 4a

Joann Copeland 3 92 3a 4c 4c 4b 4b 4a

Hazel Pickett 3 92 4b 4a 4b 4a 4b 4a

Steven Rice 1 92 4b 4a 4c 4b 4b 4a

Rita Zhang 1 92 4c 4b 4c 4b 4b 4a

Kristen Cook 3 91 4b 4a 4c 4b 4b 4a

Robyn Livingston 1 89 4a 5c 4b 4a 4b 4a

Lorraine Pitts 1 89 4c 4b 4c 4b 4b 4a

Lester Gibson 3 89 4b 4a 4c 4b 4b 4a

Kristen Peterson 2 89 4c 4b 4c 4b 4b 4a

Renee Grimes 1 89 4b 4a 4c 4b 4b 4a





Bonnie Gunter 2 88 4b 4a 4c 4b 4b 4a

Cathy Bowers 1 88 4c 4b 3a 4c 4b 4a

Claire Fleming 3 88 4b 4a 4c 4b 4b 4a

Bob Berman 2 87 4c 4b 3a 4c 4b 4a

Marion Cline 2 87 4b 4a 4c 4b 4b 4a

Don Wu 2 86 3a 4c 3a 4c 4b 4a

Dorothy Cannon 3 86 4b 4a 3a 4c 4b 4a

Eva Lin 1 86 4a 5c 4c 4b 4b 4a

Chris Klein 3 86 4c 4b 3a 4c 4b 4a

Angela Harris 2 86 3a 4c 3a 4c 4b 4a

Helen Lynch 3 86 4b 4a 4c 4b 4b 4a

Harvey O'Connell 1 85 3a 4c 3a 4c 4b 4a

Nina McCall 2 85 4b 4a 4c 4b 4b 4a

Sherry Benton 3 85 4a 5c 4c 4b 4b 4a

Lois Murphy 3 84 4b 4a 4c 4b 4b 4a

Gayle Underwood 1 83 4b 4a 3a 4c 4b 4a

Annie Anthony 2 82 3a 4c 3a 4c 4c 4b

Bradley Sutton 3 80 4c 4b 3a 4c 4c 4b

Carol Dunn 1 80 3a 4c 3b 3a 4c 4b

Allan Kirby 1 80 4b 4a 3a 4c 4c 4b

Megan McCormick 2 73 3b 3a 3c 3b 3a 4c

Milton Galloway 3 70 3a 4c 2 3c 3b 3a

Barbara Simpson 3 66 2 3c 2 3c 3b 3a

Brooke Carroll 2 66 3b 3a 2 3c 3b 3a

Sandra Stanley 3 66 2 3c 2 3c 3b 3a

Jeanette Sutherland 2 64 2 3c 2 3c 2 3c

Maurice Ball 3 64 2 3c 2 3c 3c 3b

Lee Bowling 1 62 2 3c 2 3c 2 3c

Eleanor Floyd 2 62 2 3c 2 3c 2 3c

Melinda Blackburn 1 61 2 3c 2 3c 2 3c

Anne Dickson 3 61 2 3c 2 3c 2 3c

Doris Lindsay 1 61 2 3c 2 3c 2 3c

Vanessa Long 1 61 2 3c 2 3c 2 3c

Jon Carver 2 61 2 3c 2 3c 2 3c


Documents

Group report for teachers - GL Education Groupgl-education.com/sites/gl/files/images/Samplereports/CAT4-group... · types of weather and snow is also a type of weather. ... narrower