ACADEMICPERFORMANCEREPORTWoodland Park Academy

November 2019

OUR MISSIONTo transform public education through accountability, innovation andaccess to quality education for all students.

OUR VISIONWe envision a diverse and dynamic public education marketplacethat fosters academic excellence for all children.

OUR VALUESIntegrity | Respect | Compassion | InclusivenessSocial Responsibility | Excellence | Innovation

Woodland Park AcademyTable of Contents

ACADEMY OVERVIEW

4 Demographics

5 Composite Resident District

ACADEMIC

6 Reading Achievement & Growth

8 Math Achievement & Growth

10 Michigan Test of Educational Progress (M-STEP) Achievement

11 Student Growth

12 Preliminary Scholastic Aptitude Test (PSAT) Achievement

14 Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) Achievement

END NOTES

15 Sources & Citations

© 2019 The Governor John Engler Center for Charter Schools at Central Michigan University Academic Performance Report 3

Woodland Park AcademyDemographics

68%

69%

68%

69%

67%

81%

83%

71%

81%

70%

15%

13%

12%

15%

13%

2%

2%

2%

2%

3%

56%

51%

51%

55%

50%

Studentsof Color

Free/ReducedLunch

SpecialEducation

EnglishLanguageLearner

Enrolled3 or MoreYears

0% 25% 50% 75% 100%

2018−2019 2017−2018 2016−2017

2015−2016 2014−2015

ENROLLMENT BY SUBGROUP

Fig. D−1

386394402398420

0

200

400

600

2014

−201

5

2015

−201

6

2016

−201

7

2017

−201

8

2018

−201

9

Stu

dent

s

TOTAL ENROLLMENT BY YEAR

Fig. D−2

30

1

41

26

16

31

12

31

16

34

15

39

10

31

16

22

15

0

20

40

60

K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Stu

dent

s

Students Enrolled 0−2 Years

Students Enrolled 3+ Years

STUDENTS PER GRADE

Fig. D−3

African American

YourSchool

American Indian

CMUAverage

Asian

StateAverage

Hawaiian

Hispanic

Multiracial

White

50.3%

0.0%

0.3%

0.0%

2.6%

14.5%

32.4%

44.9%

0.3%

3.3%

0.0%

3.3%

8.0%

40.1%

17.6%

0.6%

3.5%

0.1%

8.0%

4.2%

66.0%

RACIAL/ETHNIC BREAKDOWN

Fig. D−4

4 Academic Performance Report © 2019 The Governor John Engler Center for Charter Schools at Central Michigan University

Woodland Park AcademyComposite Resident District

The Composite Resident District (CRD) illustrates the public school district to which students would be assigned if they were notenrolled in the Academy. Due to geographical constraints, the map may not show all districts.

!(

OaklandCounty

Saginaw County

LapeerCounty

Genesee County

Livingston County

ShiawasseeCounty

Durand4

Holly6

Davison2

Linden2

Flint240

Swartz Creek2 Grand Blanc

33

Mt. Morris13

Carman-Ainsworth42

Atherton32

Bentley2Beecher

1

Bendle6

!(

0 2 4Miles

Woodland ParkAcademy

!( SchoolStudentPopulation:

Lowest 25%25% - 50%50% - 75%Highest 25%

Student’s Resident District Number of Students Percent of Students

Flint, School District of the City of 240 62.2%Carman-Ainsworth Community Schools 42 10.9%Grand Blanc Community Schools 33 8.5%Atherton Community Schools 32 8.3%Mt. Morris Consolidated Schools 13 3.4%

Bendle Public Schools 6 1.6%Holly Area School District 6 1.6%Durand Area Schools 4 1.0%Bentley Community School District 2 0.5%Davison Community Schools 2 0.5%

Linden Community Schools 2 0.5%Swartz Creek Community Schools 2 0.5%Beecher Community School District 1 0.3%Jefferson Schools (Monroe) 1 0.3%

Fig. D-5

© 2019 The Governor John Engler Center for Charter Schools at Central Michigan University Academic Performance Report 5

Woodland Park AcademyReading Achievement

194

206

205

207

213

150

200

250

300

3 4 5 6 7Grade

Ave

rage

Sca

led

Sco

re

2016−2017 2017−2018 2018−2019 Achievement Targets

STUDENTS ENROLLED FOR THREE OR MORE YEARS AS COMPARED TO THE ACHIEVEMENT TARGETS

MAP® SPRING RESULTS − READING ACHIEVEMENT

35%

35% Students Met Target

65% Students Did Not Meet Target

2016−2017

36%

36% Students Met Target

64% Students Did Not Meet Target

2017−2018

38%

38% Students Met Target

62% Students Did Not Meet Target

2018−2019

PERCENT OF STUDENTS MEETING THE TARGET

Fig. A−1

6 Academic Performance Report © 2019 The Governor John Engler Center for Charter Schools at Central Michigan University

Woodland Park AcademyReading Growth

Grade 3

180

200

220

Fall Spring

Grade 3

Grade 3

Grade 4

Fall Spring

Grade 4

Grade 3

Grade 4

Grade 5

Fall Spring

Grade 5

Grade 4

Grade 5

Grade 6

180

200

220

Fall Spring

Grade 6

Grade 5

Grade 6

Grade 7

Fall Spring

Grade 7

Fall Spring

NA

2016−2017 2017−2018 2018−2019

Very Low (1−44) Low (45−49) Moderate (50−64) High (65−99)

MAP FALL−TO−SPRING RESULTS − READING GROWTH

26%

13%

4%

57%34

2016−2017

37%

13%5%

45% 48

2017−2018

35%

14%3%

48% 49

2018−2019

Very Low (1−44) Low (45−49) Moderate (50−64) High (65−99)

MEDIAN GROWTH PERCENTILE & PERCENT OF STUDENTS IN PERCENTILE CATEGORIES

Fig. A−2

© 2019 The Governor John Engler Center for Charter Schools at Central Michigan University Academic Performance Report 7

Woodland Park AcademyMath Achievement

201

209

212

208

218

150

200

250

300

3 4 5 6 7Grade

Ave

rage

Sca

led

Sco

re

2016−2017 2017−2018 2018−2019 Achievement Targets

STUDENTS ENROLLED FOR THREE OR MORE YEARS AS COMPARED TO THE ACHIEVEMENT TARGETS

MAP SPRING RESULTS − MATH ACHIEVEMENT

25%

25% Students Met Target

75% Students Did Not Meet Target

2016−2017

30%

30% Students Met Target

70% Students Did Not Meet Target

2017−2018

34%

34% Students Met Target

66% Students Did Not Meet Target

2018−2019

PERCENT OF STUDENTS MEETING THE TARGET

Fig. A−3

8 Academic Performance Report © 2019 The Governor John Engler Center for Charter Schools at Central Michigan University

Woodland Park AcademyMath Growth

Grade 3

180

200

220

Fall Spring

Grade 3

Grade 3

Grade 4

Fall Spring

Grade 4

Grade 3

Grade 4

Grade 5

Fall Spring

Grade 5

Grade 4

Grade 5

Grade 6

180

200

220

Fall Spring

Grade 6

Grade 5

Grade 6

Grade 7

Fall Spring

Grade 7

Fall Spring

NA

2016−2017 2017−2018 2018−2019

Very Low (1−44) Low (45−49) Moderate (50−64) High (65−99)

MAP FALL−TO−SPRING RESULTS − MATH GROWTH

17%

11%

3%68%

29

2016−2017

28%

15%

5%

53% 42

2017−2018

32%

11%3%

54% 41

2018−2019

Very Low (1−44) Low (45−49) Moderate (50−64) High (65−99)

MEDIAN GROWTH PERCENTILE & PERCENT OF STUDENTS IN PERCENTILE CATEGORIES

Fig. A−4

© 2019 The Governor John Engler Center for Charter Schools at Central Michigan University Academic Performance Report 9

Woodland Park AcademyMichigan Test of Educational Progress (M-STEP) Achievement

30.0%

23.1%22.7% 27.2%

62.3% 62.0%

57.8%54.9%

24.7%

25.6%

16.0%19.1%

47.3%

46.0%43.9%

44.3%

0%

20%

40%

60%

2015−2016 2016−2017 2017−2018 2018−2019

Per

cent

Pro

ficie

nt

Academy Composite Resident District Local District State Average

PERCENT PROFICIENT FOR ALL STUDENTS IN GRADES 3 THROUGH 7 AS COMPARED TO THE COMPOSITE RESIDENTDISTRICT, LOCAL DISTRICT AND STATE AVERAGE

M−STEP ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS

13.7%

18.3% 19.1%21.7%

48.0% 46.5% 43.0% 41.4%

14.7%15.3%

10.2%13.3%

37.3%37.9% 37.4% 38.7%

0%

20%

40%

60%

2015−2016 2016−2017 2017−2018 2018−2019

Per

cent

Pro

ficie

nt

Academy Composite Resident District Local District State Average

PERCENT PROFICIENT FOR ALL STUDENTS IN GRADES 3 THROUGH 7 AS COMPARED TO THE COMPOSITE RESIDENTDISTRICT, LOCAL DISTRICT AND STATE AVERAGE

M−STEP MATH

Fig. A−5

10 Academic Performance Report © 2019 The Governor John Engler Center for Charter Schools at Central Michigan University

Woodland Park AcademyStudent Growth

48

43

5149

5154

4748

44

46

35

45

50 50 5050

20

40

60

80

2015−2016 2016−2017 2017−2018 2018−2019

Mea

n S

tude

nt G

row

th P

erce

ntile

Academy Composite Resident District Local District State Average

MEAN STUDENT GROWTH PERCENTILE FOR ALL STUDENTS AS COMPARED TO THE COMPOSITE RESIDENTDISTRICT, LOCAL DISTRICT AND STATE AVERAGE

ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS

4449

53

42

5250

48 47

3843

38

4250

5050 50

20

40

60

80

2015−2016 2016−2017 2017−2018 2018−2019

Mea

n S

tude

nt G

row

th P

erce

ntile

Academy Composite Resident District Local District State Average

MEAN STUDENT GROWTH PERCENTILE FOR ALL STUDENTS AS COMPARED TO THE COMPOSITE RESIDENTDISTRICT, LOCAL DISTRICT AND STATE AVERAGE

MATH

Fig. A−6

© 2019 The Governor John Engler Center for Charter Schools at Central Michigan University Academic Performance Report 11

Woodland Park AcademyPreliminary Scholastic Aptitude Test (PSAT) Achievement

61.9

%

78.3

%

31.3

%

50.0

%

0%

25%

50%

75%

2018−2019

Per

cent

Pro

ficie

nt

Academy Composite Resident District Local District State Average

PERCENT OF STUDENTS ADVANCED OR PROFICIENT

PSAT GRADE 8 EVIDENCE−BASED READING AND WRITING

8.1%

16.7%

41.4

%

48.6

%

0%

25%

50%

75%

2018−2019

Per

cent

Pro

ficie

nt

Academy Composite Resident District Local District State Average

PERCENT OF STUDENTS ADVANCED OR PROFICIENT

PSAT GRADE 8 MATH

Fig. A−7

12 Academic Performance Report © 2019 The Governor John Engler Center for Charter Schools at Central Michigan University

Woodland Park AcademyPSAT Achievement

Not Applicable

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

Per

cent

Pro

ficie

nt

PERCENT OF STUDENTS ADVANCED OR PROFICIENT

PSAT GRADES 9 & 10 EVIDENCE−BASED READING AND WRITING

Not Applicable

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

Per

cent

Pro

ficie

nt

PERCENT OF STUDENTS ADVANCED OR PROFICIENT

PSAT GRADES 9 & 10 MATH

Fig. A−8

© 2019 The Governor John Engler Center for Charter Schools at Central Michigan University Academic Performance Report 13

Woodland Park AcademyScholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) Achievement

Not Applicable

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

Per

cent

Pro

ficie

nt

PERCENT PROFICIENT FOR ALL STUDENTS IN GRADE 11 AS COMPARED TO THE COMPOSITE RESIDENTDISTRICT, LOCAL DISTRICT AND STATE AVERAGE

GRADE 11 SAT EVIDENCE−BASED READING AND WRITING

Not Applicable

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

Per

cent

Pro

ficie

nt

PERCENT PROFICIENT FOR ALL STUDENTS IN GRADE 11 AS COMPARED TO THE COMPOSITE RESIDENTDISTRICT, LOCAL DISTRICT AND STATE AVERAGE

GRADE 11 SAT MATH

Fig. A−9

14 Academic Performance Report © 2019 The Governor John Engler Center for Charter Schools at Central Michigan University

Woodland Park AcademySources & Citations

Fig. D-1 CEPI Public Data; Michigan Student Data System (MSDS) fall – UnauditedFig. D-2 CEPI Public DataFig. D-3 MSDS fall – Unaudited; The display of 3+ students in kindergarten and first grade is due to the enrollment date provided in the fall MSDS.Fig. D-4 MSDS fall – UnauditedFig. D-5 MSDS fall – UnauditedFig. A-1 NWEA’s MAP: reading – spring; MSDS fall – UnauditedFig. A-2 NWEA’s MAP: reading – springFig. A-3 NWEA’s MAP: math – spring; MSDS fall – UnauditedFig. A-4 NWEA’s MAP: math – springFig. A-5 Spring M-STEP – Student-level and Public DataFig. A-6 Spring MI-Access, M-STEP, PSAT 8, SAT – Student-level and Public DataFig. A-7 Spring PSAT 8 – Student-level and Public DataFig. A-8 Spring PSAT 9 & 10 – Student-levelFig. A-9 Spring SAT – Student-level and Public Data

© 2019 The Governor John Engler Center for Charter Schools at Central Michigan University Academic Performance Report 15

THE GOVERNOR JOHN ENGLER CENTER FOR CHARTER SCHOOLSCENTRAL MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY | MOUNT PLEASANT, MI 48859

(989) 774-2100 | www.TheCenterForCharters.org