Ohio Department of Education sources of info:
- Home Page
- Local Report Card Search - for fancy PDF files
- Building and District Search - for HTML pages
- State/Local Report Cards and Resources
- Local Report Card Info
- Guide for Ohio's 2006-2007 Report Card System - (.DOC file) - This will or should help explain how to interpret the report card.
- Expenditure and Revenue data
Old report card topics
Past Toledo Talk report card threads:
TPS results
Report cards released in August for the previous school year:
- 2002: report card showed TPS met 5 of 27 academic standards (.18) Academic Emergency
- 2003: 6 of 22 (.27) Academic Emergency
- 2004: 7 of 18 (.39) Continous Improvement
- 2005: 4 of 23 (.17) Continous Improvement
- 2006: 6 of 25 (.24) Continous Improvement
- 2007: 5 of 30 (.17) Academic Watch
TPS 2006-2007 AYP
Adequate Yearly Progress
To meet the federal AYP requirements, every student group must be at or above the annual goals or make improvement over last year. Graduation or attendance goals must be met for the district as a whole.
- Reading Participation Goal: Met
- Mathematics Participation Goal: Met
- Reading Proficiency Goal: Not Met
- Mathematics Proficiency Goal: Not Met
- Attendance Goal: Met
- Graduation Goal: Met
- Overall AYP: Not Met
TPS 2006-2007 PI
Performance Index Score
The Performance Index Score reflects the achievement of every tested student. The score is a weighted average of all tested subjects in grades 3-8 and 10. The most weight is given to the advanced students (1.2), and the weights decrease for each performance level. This creates a scale of 0 to 120 points, with 100 being the goal. Looking at the Performance Index Score over time shows trends in district achievement.
PI over time :
- 2006-2007 - 79.1
- 2005-2006 - 80.4
- 2004-2005 - 76.5
TPS Academic Watch???
If only looking at the number of academic standards TPS met, which was 5 of 30, TPS would be rated Academic Emergency. But the state provides a couple of chances for the poor peforming school districts to appear to be doing better than they really are. That would be AYP and PI.
If a school district is Academic Emergency based upon the number of indicators met, but the district meets AYP, the lowest the district can be rated is Continuous Improvement. This is how TPS got the Continuous Improvement rating after the 2004 and 2005 report cards.
If a school district is Academic Emergency based upon the number of indicators met, and the district fails to meet AYP, but the district scores at least an 80.0 on the PI, the lowest the district can be rated is Continous Improvement. This was TPS's situation last year when TPS did not meet AYP but scored 80.4 on the PI. A year ago, TPS was 0.5 away from Academic Watch.
Rating definitions
I have not yet found the rating definitions for the 2006-2007 report card. All I could find on the ODE Web site was 2005-2006 info:
2005-2006 Ohio School District Rating Definitions
Excerpts:
The 2005-2006 designations [ for districts] are determined according to the text and list below:
- Excellent districts meet 24 or 25 indicators, or 100 or above on the Performance Index (PI).
- Effective meet 19 to 23 indicators or score 90 to 99.9 on the PI.
- Continuous Improvement meets 13 to 18 indicators or 80 to 89.9 on the PI OR they meet AYP (the lowest a district can be rated if they meet AYP is CI).
- Academic Watch districts meet 9 to 12 indicators or score 70 to 79.9 and have missed AYP.
- Academic Emergency districts are those that met 8 or fewer indicators, scored less than 70 and missed AYP.
An Academic Watch or Emergency district or school gets to move up one designation by improving the performance index score over time. An improvement of 10 points in two years with at least three points coming in the most recent year moves a school or district up one designation in the current year.
Schools receive their designations, in part, based on the percentage of indicators that apply to their school (rather than out of 25 as indicated for districts).
- Excellent schools meet 94% or more of applicable indicators or 100 or above on the Performance Index (PI).
- Effective meet 75% to 93.9% of applicable indicators or score 90 to 99.9 on the PI.
- Continuous Improvement meet 50% to 74.9% of applicable indicators or 80 to 89.9 on the PI OR they meet AYP (the lowest a district can be rated if they meet AYP is CI).
- Academic Watch schools meet 31% to 49.9% of applicable indicators or score 70 to 79.9 and have missed AYP. Academic
- Emergency schools are those that met 30.9% or fewer indicators, scored less than a 70 and missed AYP.
More TPS testing info
3rd Grade
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 3rd Grade Reading Achievement Test (2006-07) 65.2
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 3rd Grade Reading Achievement Test (2005-06) 57.7
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 3rd Grade Reading Achievement Test (2004-05) 66.4
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 3rd Grade Math Achievement Test (2006-07) 67.8
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 3rd Grade Math Achievement Test (2005-06) 56.4
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 3rd Grade Math Achievement Test (2004-05) 47.8
4th Grade
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 4th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2006-07) 65.4
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 4th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2005-06) 60.3
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 4th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2004-05) 62.9
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 4th Grade Math Achievement Test (2006-07) 57.9
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 4th Grade Math Achievement Test (2005-06) 40.2
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 4th Grade Writing Achievement Test (2006-07) 74.8
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 4th Grade Writing Achievement Test (2005-06) 74.4
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 4th Grade Writing Achievement Test (2004-05) 65.5
5th Grade
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 5th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2006-07) 64.2
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 5th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2005-06) 57.4
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 5th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2004-05) 59.5
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 5th Grade Math Achievement Test (2006-07) 41.3
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 5th Grade Math Achievement Test (2005-06) 40.2
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 5th Grade Social Studies Achievement Test (2006-07) 39.6
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 5th Grade Science Achievement Test (2006-07) 46.2
6th Grade
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 6th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2006-07) 57.0
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 6th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2005-06) 71.8
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 6th Grade Math Achievement Test (2006-07) 49.9
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 6th Grade Math Achievement Test (2005-06) 46.1
7th Grade
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 7th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2006-07) 51.5
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 7th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2005-06) 56.2
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 7th Grade Math Achievement Test (2006-07) 39.7
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 7th Grade Math Achievement Test (2005-06) 36.4
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 7th Grade Math Achievement Test (2004-05) 28.6
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 7th Grade Writing Achievement Test (2006-07) 63.4
8th Grade
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 8th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2006-07) 59.2
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 8th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2005-06) 53.2
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 8th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2004-05) 55.8
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 8th Grade Math Achievement Test (2006-07) 41.1
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 8th Grade Math Achievement Test (2005-06) 36.0
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 8th Grade Math Achievement Test (2004-05) 25.8
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 8th Grade Social Studies Achievement Test (2006-07) 21.8
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 8th Grade Science Achievement Test (2006-07) 30.9
10th Grade
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Social Studies Ohio Graduation Test (2006-07) 63.7
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Social Studies Ohio Graduation Test (2005-06) 64.6
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Social Studies Ohio Graduation Test (2004-05) 67.9
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Math Ohio Graduation Test (2006-07) 64.9
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Math Ohio Graduation Test (2005-06) 63.4
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Math Ohio Graduation Test (2004-05) 70.3
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Reading Ohio Graduation Test (2006-07) 78.6
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Reading Ohio Graduation Test (2005-06) 80.4
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Reading Ohio Graduation Test (2004-05) 90.6
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Writing Ohio Graduation Test (2006-07) 85.2
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Writing Ohio Graduation Test (2005-06) 79.1
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Writing Achievement Test (2004-05) 82.7
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Science Ohio Graduation Test (2006-07) 54.2
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Science Ohio Graduation Test (2005-06) 50.3
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Science Ohio Graduation Test (2004-05) 52.9
11th Grade
Percentage of 11th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Social Studies Ohio Graduation Test (2006-07) 80.5
Percentage of 11th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Social Studies Ohio Graduation Test (2005-06) 81.8
Percentage of 11th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Math Ohio Graduation Test (2006-07) 80.8
Percentage of 11th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Math Ohio Graduation Test (2005-06) 86.1
Percentage of 11th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Reading Ohio Graduation Test (2006-07) 88.3
Percentage of 11th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Reading Ohio Graduation Test (2005-06) 92.6
Percentage of 11th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Writing Ohio Graduation Test (2006-07) 89.2
Percentage of 11th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Writing Ohio Graduation Test (2005-06) 91.2
Percentage of 11th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Science Ohio Graduation Test (2006-07) 70.9
Percentage of 11th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Science Ohio Graduation Test (2005-06) 74.2
Attendance Rate
Student Attendance Rate (2006-07) 92.3
Student Attendance Rate (2005-06) 93.2
Student Attendance Rate (2004-05) 93.2
Graduation Rate
Student Graduation Rate (2005-06) 90.5
Student Graduation Rate (2004-05) 80.2
Student Graduation Rate (2003-04) 76.6
PI and AYP
District Performance Index Score (2006-07) 79.1
District Performance Index Score (2005-06) 80.4
District Performance Index Score (2004-05) 76.5
District's AYP Determination (2006-07 applied to school year 2007-08) Not Met
Area School Ratings
A school district's 2006-2007 rating and the number of academic indicators met out of a possible 30:
Fulton County
| District Name | Rating | Standards Met | AYP | PI Score |
| Archbold-Area | Excellent | 29 | Met | 103.9 |
| Evergreen | Excellent | 29 | Met | 100.1 |
| Gorham Fayette | Effective | 23 | Not Met | 96.7 |
| Pettisville | Excellent | 29 | Met | 106.2 |
| Pike-Delta-York | Effective | 26 | Met | 97.4 |
| Swanton | Effective | 21 | Met | 94.1 |
| Wauseon | Excellent | 28 | Not Met | 100.5 |
Lucas County
| District Name | Rating | Standards Met | AYP Met | PI Score |
| Anthony Wayne | Excellent | 29 | Met | 101.6 |
| Maumee | Effective | 26 | Not Met | 98.7 |
| Oregon | Effective | 24 | Met | 95.2 |
| Ottawa Hills | Excellent | 30 | Met | 108.5 |
| Springfield | Effective | 25 | Met | 96.1 |
| Sylvania | Excellent | 29 | Not Met | 102.2 |
| Toledo | Academic Watch | 5 | Not Met | 79.1 |
| Washington Local | Effective | 22 | Not Met | 94.3 |
Ottawa County
| District Name | Rating | Standards Met | AYP Met | PI Score |
| Benton Carroll Salem | Effective | 26 | Not Met | 97.1 |
| Danbury | Effective | 23 | Met | 94.6 |
| Genoa Area | Effective | 24 | Met | 95.6 |
| Port Clinton | Continuous Improvement | 24 | Not Met | 95.2 |
| Put-In-Bay | Effective | 2 | Met | 98.5 |
Wood County
| District Name | Rating | Standards Met | AYP Met | PI Score |
| Bowling Green | Effective | 28 | Not Met | 99 |
| Eastwood | Effective | 27 | Not Met | 99.8 |
| Elmwood | Effective | 25 | Not Met | 95.7 |
| Lake | Effective | 20 | Met | 92 |
| North Baltimore | Effective | 21 | Not Met | 92.7 |
| Northwood | Effective | 28 | Not Met | 97.8 |
| Otsego | Effective | 24 | Met | 95.9 |
| Perrysburg | Excellent | 29 | Not Met | 103.1 |
| Rossford | Effective | 22 | Not Met | 95.2 |
TPS Building Ratings
Aug 14, 2007 Blade story
| Building Name | Rating |
| Allied Health Academy High School | Continuous Improvement |
| Arlington Elementary | Effective |
| Arts and Media Academy High School | Academic Watch |
| Beverly Elementary | Excellent |
| Birmingham Elementary | Continuous Improvement |
| Bowsher High School | Effective |
| BTI Academy High School | Academic Watch |
| Burroughs Elementary | Continuous Improvement |
| Byrnedale Junior High | Continuous Improvement |
| Chase Elementary | Academic Emergency |
| Cherry Elementary | Continuous Improvement |
| Cowboy Academy of Business High School | Continuous Improvement |
| Crossgates Elementary | Effective |
| Cummings-Zucker High School | Academic Emergency |
| DeVeaux Junior High | Academic Watch |
| East Side Central Elementary | Academic Watch |
| East Toledo Junior High | Continuous Improvement |
| Edgewater Elementary | Continuous Improvement |
| Ella P. Stewart Academy Elementary | Academic Watch |
| Elmhurst Elementary | Effective |
| Fulton Elementary | Academic Watch |
| Garfield Elementary | Continuous Improvement |
| Gateway Academy High School | Academic Watch |
| Glendale-Feilbach Elementary | Continuous Improvement |
| Grove Patterson Academy Elementary | Continuous Improvement |
| Hale Elementary | Academic Emergency |
| Harvard Elementary | Excellent |
| Hawkins Elementary | Continuous Improvement |
| Human Services Academy High School | Academic Emergency |
| Humanities Academy High School | Academic Watch |
| Jones Junior High | Academic Emergency |
| Keyser Elementary | Continuous Improvement |
| Lagrange Elementary | Academic Emergency |
| Larchmont Elementary | Continuous Improvement |
| Leverette Junior High | Academic Emergency |
| Libbey High School | Not Rated |
| Lincoln Academy for Boys Elementary | Academic Watch |
| Longfellow Elementary | Continuous Improvement |
| Marshall Elementary | Academic Watch |
| Mckinley Elementary | Academic Watch |
| McTigue Junior High | Academic Watch |
| Navarre Elementary | Continuous Improvement |
| Newbury Elementary | Academic Watch |
| Oakdale Elementary | Continuous Improvement |
| Old Orchard Elementary | Academic Watch |
| Old West End Academy Elementary | Effective |
| Ottawa River Elementary | Continuous Improvement |
| Pickett Elementary | Academic Emergency |
| Raymer Elementary | Continuous Improvement |
| Reynolds Elementary | Academic Watch |
| Riverside Elementary | Continuous Improvement |
| Robinson Junior High | Academic Emergency |
| Rogers High School | Continuous Improvement |
| Scott High School | Not Rated |
| Sherman Elementary | Academic Emergency |
| SMART Academy High School | Continuous Improvement |
| Start High School | Effective |
| Toledo Technology Academy High School | Excellent |
| Waite High School | Continuous Improvement |
| Walbridge Elementary | Academic Watch |
| Whittier Elementary | Academic Watch |
| Woodward High School | Academic Watch |
TPS Levy success
- Nov 2002: new building levy passed
- Nov 2003: renewal levy passed
- Nov 2004: renewal levy passed
- Nov 2005: renewal levy passed
- Nov 2006: no levy on the ballot
School Spending
FY04 data posted by historymike.
Per-pupil by district
Fulton County
| District | FY05 | FY06 |
| Archbold-Area | $8,818 | $9,800 |
| Evergreen | $8,242 | $8,436 |
| Gorham Fayette | $9,184 | $10,246 |
| Pettisville | $7,530 | $8,390 |
| Pike-Delta-York | $8,094 | $8,883 |
| Swanton | $7,077 | $8,135 |
| Wauseon | $6,637 | $7,234 |
Lucas County
| District | FY05 | FY06 |
| Anthony Wayne | $7,923 | $8,169 |
| Maumee | $10,116 | $10,022 |
| Oregon | $9,678 | $10,979 |
| Ottawa Hills | $11,504 | $11,639 |
| Springfield | $8,977 | $8,912 |
| Sylvania | $8,980 | $9,400 |
| Toledo | $10,604 | $11,202 |
| Washington Local | $9,682 | $9,993 |
Ottawa County
| District | FY05 | FY06 |
| Benton Carroll Salem | $9,374 | $9,900 |
| Danbury | $12,417 | $12,028 |
| Genoa Area | $6,975 | $7,933 |
| Port Clinton | $10,155 | $10,793 |
| Put-In-Bay | $23,090 | $25,749 |
Wood County
| District | FY05 | FY06 |
| Bowling Green | $9,346 | $10,180 |
| Eastwood | $8,265 | $8,414 |
| Elmwood | $7,727 | $8,560 |
| Lake | $6,824 | $6,720 |
| North Baltimore | $8,319 | $8,946 |
| Northwood | $9,151 | $9,076 |
| Otsego | $7,837 | $8,123 |
| Perrysburg | $8,582 | $9,194 |
| Rossford | $10,516 | $10,816 |
Source from the Expenditure and Revenue data page at the ODE Web site.
Teacher Salaries
From a Sep 13, 2004 Toledo Talk posting titled Teacher's pay that pointed to a Blade Sep 13, 2004 story titled Teachers' pay varies widely by district
My comments about the Blade story, which posted its salary info in an image that was in the newspaper but is not on the Web site.
From the Blade story:
There is a stark difference between the starting salaries paid to teachers in public schools versus parochial schools. College graduates who get a job teaching at a Catholic school will earn much less, said Jack Altenburger, superintendent of education for the Toledo Catholic Diocese. Catholic high schools in the metro Toledo area paid an average starting salary of $24,506 last year. On the elementary-school level, the average starting pay was $20,925.
"Overall, our goal has to be 75 to 80 percent of what the local [public] district pays," Mr. Altenburger said. "On average, our schools pay 65 to 70 [percent] of what the public school district pays."
Michigan teachers on average took home nearly $10,000 more than their Ohio counterparts. The average teacher salary in that state was $54,020 for the 2002-03 school year, which was the second-highest in the nation behind California.What about parents?
From a Jun 29, 2004 Toledo Talk thread titled More evidence that parents are at fault? that pointed to a Jun 26, 2004 Blade story titled Bulk of TPS students ignore free test help
Free test help? I don't think so. Taxpayers paid for the "free" help that went mostly ignored by the students/parents. From the 2004 Blade story:
At the East Toledo school, about 15 students are attending a three-week, half-day summer session focusing on all areas of the test. An additional 20 students took advantage of some before and after-school tutoring in March and April, with another 30 students in Saturday sessions during February, said Robin Wheatley, assistant principal of curriculum and instruction. But those 70 students were among hundreds invited.
"I was extremely disappointed," Miss Wheatley said. "I sent letters to the parents saying, 'Your student refused to be tutored.'"
Teachers called parents at all times of the day to inform them about the free summer session and sent letters explaining the test and the extra help students could get.
At Scott High School, about 46 of the roughly 180 invited students attended the summer sessions that focused on mathematics and reading, said Jose Hernandez, the summer program coordinator. "We send out a letter to parents. We call parents. We talk to parents at freshman meetings," he said. "We have incentive packages - T-shirts and things like that. Right now, we're getting the kids who really want to improve."Blade stories
- Aug 15, 2007 Toledo Blade story titled Most suburban schools hold steady on new tests; but 3 local districts fall grade lower
- Aug 15, 2007 Toledo Blade story titled Charters fare poorly in state report cards
