Menu

Menu

Breadcrumb

2. Data Collection Analysis

2.1 Coherent Instructional System

Analyze the LEA’s data (including sections 2.6) and answer the guiding questions to determine existing trends and patterns that support the identification of instructional needs. Complete a data-informed self-rating for each Georgia District Performance Standard (GDPS). See the Coherent Instructional System webinar for additional information and guidance.

2.2 Effective Leadership

Analyze the LEA’s data (including sections 2.6) and answer the guiding questions to determine existing trends and patterns that support the identification of leadership needs. Complete a data-informed self-rating for each Georgia District Performance Standard (GDPS). See the Effective Leadership webinar for additional information and guidance.

2.3 Professional Capacity

Analyze the LEA’s data (including sections 2.6) and answer the guiding questions to determine existing trends and patterns that support the identification of professional capacity needs. Complete a data-informed self-rating for each Georgia District Performance Standard (GDPS). See the Professional Capacity webinar for additional information and guidance.

2.4 Family and Community Engagement

Analyze the LEA’s data (including sections 2.6) and answer the guiding questions to determine existing trends and patterns that support the identification of needs related to family and community engagement. Complete a data-informed self-rating for each Georgia District Performance Standard (GDPS). See the Family and Community Engagement webinar for additional information and guidance. Visit Georgia’s Family Connection Partnership’s KIDS COUNT for additional data.

2.5 Supportive Learning Environment

Analyze the LEA’s data (including sections 2.6) and answer the guiding questions to determine existing trends and patterns that support the identification of needs related to a supportive learning environment. Complete a data-informed self-rating for each Georgia District Performance Standard (GDPS). Student subgroups with a count of less than 15 are denoted by “TFS” (too few students). See the Supportive Learning Environment webinar for additional information and guidance.

2.6 Data Analysis Questions

Analyze the LEA’s data and answer the guiding questions to determine existing trends and patterns that support the identification of demographic and financial needs. Student subgroups with a count of less than 15 are denoted by “TFS” (too few students).

What perception data did you use? [examples: student perceptions about school climate issues (health survey, violence, prejudice, bullying, etc.); student/parent perceptions about the effectiveness of programs or interventions; student understanding of relationship of school to career or has an academic plan]

Georgia Cyber Academy (GCA) used the CLIP questions to create the Comprehensive Needs Assessment (CNA) survey to share with stakeholders. GCA held meetings with leadership, staff, and parents to receive feedback. GCA also worked with the PTSO, our Parent Advisory Council, human resources, and our Student Advisory Councils to obtain regular feedback. Weekly meetings are held with all areas of responsibility and concern including curriculum, academics, operations, financial, human resources, federal programs, compliance, special education, Parent, Faculty and Student Advisories, Assessments, Counseling, and Instructional supports. GCA evaluated the information
received and used that data to focus on the most prevalent needs.

What process data did you use? (examples: student participation in school activities, sports, clubs, arts; student participation in special programs such as peer mediation, counseling, skills conferences; parent/student participation in events such as college information meetings and parent workshops)

Multiple sources of process data were used; formal and informal classroom observations, percentage of staff meeting TKES goals, student participation in clubs, staff and student participation in counseling services, and parent meeting participation.

What does the process data tell you? (process data describes the way programs are conducted; provides evidence of participant involvement in programs; answers the question “What did you do for whom?”)

The process data shows a need for greater staff communication across all department and levels. There is still a need to partner with local libraries to address the need for physical reading materials and leverage clubs and resources provided. Students and parents are requesting in-person club opportunities to reduce the amount of screen time. Data shows the need to continue to improve awareness of resources and initiatives being offered to both staff and students. GCA will increase the employment of Spanish- speaking and literate employees across various departments to better assist the growing Spanish population.

What achievement data did you use?

Required Class Attendance Rate:

  • All grade bands met their goal of having a 95% attendance rate for required classes.

Assessment Completion:

  • All grade bands met their Interim Assessment goal of 96% completion.
  • PGB and EGB met their MAP goal of 96% completion.

Primary Grade Band RIT Scores:

  • They met their goal of 89% of students increasing their Math MAP RIT score from fall to spring.
  • They met their goal of 87% of students increasing their Reading MAP RIT score from fall to spring.
  • They did not meet their goal of 84% of students increasing Reading Lexile score from fall to spring. 79% of students increased on their Reading Lexile Score.

Elementary Grade Band RIT Scores:

  • EGB met their goals to increase their RIT Scores in Reading, Math, and Social studies by 3% from fall to winter administrations.

Interim Assessments:

  • EGB, MGB, and SGB did not meet their goal of having 70% of students passing core IA's.

Georgia Milestones:

  • 3rd-8th EOG Math:43% of students are performing at level 1. 37% of students are performing at level 2.
  • 5th & 8th EOG Science: 33.59% of students are performing at level 1.
  • 25.52% of students are performing at level 2.
  • 8th Grade SS:30.5% of students performing at level 1. 39.83% students are performing at level 2.
  • Algebra 1:45.54% of students are performing at level 1. 29.79% of students are performing at level 2.
  • American Lit:21% of students are performing at level 1. 32% of students are performing at level 2.
  • Biology: 29.71% of students are performing at level 1. 21% of students are performing at level 2.
  • US History:26% of students are performing at level 1. 32% of students are performing at level 2.

ACCESS for ELs 2.0 ELP Composite Scores:

  • 1.0-1.9:6.95%
  • 2.0-2.9: 12.83%
  • 3.0-3.9: 42.78%
  • 4.0-4.9: 31.55%
  • 5.0-5.9: 5.35%
  • 6.0: 0.53%
  • 12 students exited with a clean exit of 5.0 or higher. 12 students were reclassified to exit after holding reclassifications meetings; exiting a total of 24 multilingual learners.
  • 85% of active ELs received a 70% or higher for their ELA engagement grade.

What does your achievement data tell you? 

50% to 80% of 3rd to 12th grade students are performing below grade level in all EOG and EOC tested subjects. Our standardized test scores have decreased compared to SY22.

62.56% of EL students are developing or lower in their overall English Language Proficiency based on the Composite Score from ACCESS for ELs 2.0. These students will need intensive and intentional language support in their content courses.

What demographic data did you use?

Students' academic achievement data (Pass/Fail of contents, MAP, and Interim Assessments) and attendance were compared by ethnicity and subgroups to identify equity gaps, trends, and patterns.

What does the demographic data tell you?

Students in the various subgroups (EL, MKV, 504, and Sped) perform at a lower achievement level than the grade level average. Students participating in the gifted program are performing at a higher achievement level than the grade level average. MKV students have been identified to be performing lower than any other subgroup at all grade bands. EL students are passing their contents at 8%-16% rate lower than the grade level averages at all grade bands except Primary. There continues to be a need to better serve students in the various subgroups through using evidence based interventions to teach diverse learners.

McKinney Vento Student truancy rate is 10 times greater than any other subgroup.