Manhattan College

School Profile Analysis

Sonyi Santos_________________________

Name of School: P.S.024 Spuyten Duyvil

660 W 236th Bronx New York

Telephone #:

___718-796-8845_______________________

Student E-Mail:

[email protected] _________________

If your school is not located in the Bronx you will need to go to the NYSED.gov website and find your schools
report card.
New York City website is http://schools.nyc.gov.

Achievement Data
NYS Elementary English Language Arts
Students Results
Please pick one grade to analyze
_3___ Grade
2
Meets Basic
Standards
(Approaching)
30.6

3
Meets
Proficiency
Standard
42.4

4
Exceeds
Proficiency
Standards
2.1

17.1

44
2
Meets Basic
Standards
(Approaching)
29.5

61
3
Meets
Proficiency
Standard
47.3

3
4
Exceeds
Proficiency
Standards
6.2

22

38

61

Year

Level
Standards

1
Below
Standards

2013

Percent
# of
Students
Level
Standards

25.0

Year

2014

Percent
# of
Students

36
1
Below
Standards

Analysis of ELA Data Please indicate the % of students performing below grade level (i.e. levels 1 &
2). Please describe what Levels 1 & 2 represents (i.e. 1 below standards, 2 approaching standards).
Compare the last 2 years to see if there is improvement:
The year 2013 55.6% of the students performed below standards. 25% of the students scored a 1
performing below standards and 30.6% of the students were approaching ELA Standards. In 2014 46.6%
of students were performing below standards. 17.1% of the students scored a 1 below ELA standards and
29.5% scored a 2 approaching ELA standards.
In 2014 the number and percentage of students scoring below ELA standards dropped about 9%. It seems
they had a better year and because less students than the prior year performed below standards.

Achievement Data
NYS Elementary Math
Students Results
Please pick one grade to analyze
____3___ Grade
Year

Level
Standards

1
Below
Standards

2
3
4
Meets Basic
Meets
Exceeds
Standards
Proficiency Proficiency
(Approaching) Standard
Standards
2013
Percent
17.4
32.6
34.0
16.0
# of Students
25
47
49
23
Year
Level
1
2
3
4
Standards
Below
Meets Basic
Meets
Exceeds
Standards
Standards
Proficiency Proficiency
(Approaching) Standard
Standards
2014
Percent
17.1
29.5
31.8
21.7
# of Students
22
38
41
28
Analysis of Math Data Please indicate the % of students performing below grade level (i.e.
levels 1 & 2). Please describe what Levels 1 & 2 represents (i.e. 1 below standards, 2
approaching standards). Compare the last 2 years to see if there is improvement:
In 2013 54% of the students performed below standards. 17.4% of the students scored a 1
below standards and 32.6% of the students scored 2 approaching standards.
In the year 2014 46.6% of the students performed below standards. 17.1% of the students
scored a 1 below standards and 29.5% of the students scored 2 approaching standards.
Compare to 2013 the percentage of the students below standards dropped by 7.4%.

Find Information on Excel Spreadsheets (look at tabs on bottom)

Total #
Tested
427
20
13

2012-2013
% Levels
1-2
51.5
83.4
100

% Levels
3-4
48.5
16.1
0

Total #
Tested
414
17
10

2013-2014
% Levels
1-2
49.6
70.9
100

% Levels
3-4
50.5
29.2
0

Analysis of ELA Data - Compare General Ed to Students with Disabilities levels on 1&2 and also indicate if
there is a difference between the groups for past two years - Indicate if there was improvement :
51.5% of Gen Ed students in 2013 performed at levels 1 &2 below standards. 83.4% of SWD in 2013
performed at levels 1 & 2 below standards. According to the data majority of the swd performed below
standards and half of the general education students performed below standards.
49.6% of Gen Ed students in 2014 performed at levels 1 & 2 below standards. 70.9% of SWD in 2014
performed at levels 1 & 2 below standards. According to the data majority of the swd performed below
standards and half of the general education students performed below standards.
Theres a slight improvement the last two year.

Analysis of ELA Data - Compare the performance of the ELL students to the performance of all students. Please
indicate in your report what Levels 1 & 2 indicate. Compare the last 2 years to see if there is improvement:
The performance of the ELL students compare to the performance of all students were that all ELL students
performed at level 1 & 2 below standards and only 51.5% of all students performed below standards in 2013. In
2014 the performance of the ELL students remained the same and 49.6% of all students performed at level 1& 2
below standards.
The ELLs show no improvement within the last 2 years and All students show an improvement of a decrease in
level 1 & 2 by 1.9%

Find the information on the School Quality Guide

Notes

There were no significant changes over the last 2 years. The eligibility for free lunch
remains the same. IEP students increased by 2% in 2014 and ELL students decreased by
2% in 2014.

% of Racial/Ethnic Origin
Year

American
Indian/ Alaska
Native

Black or
African
American

Hispanic or
Latino

Asian or Native
Hawaiian/ Other
Pacific Islander

2012/13
8%
37%
2013/14
7%
38%
Analysis of Data Indicate any or no changes over the two years:

8%
7%

White

45%
46%

There has not been any significant change in the demographics during the last 2 years.
Black or African American went down 1% in 2014, Hispanic or Latino went up 1% in
2014, Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other pacific Islander went down 1% in 2014, and white
increased 1% in 2014, all compare to 2013.

Reflect on the analysis of the Quality Review in the School Quality Guide. Connect your experiences at this
school to the Areas of Celebration and Areas of Focus. Is your perception the same as the report? Provide
specific qualitative evidence:
The areas of celebration at this school are
Rigorous, engaging and coherent curricula aligned to the Common Core Learning Standards.
Research-based, effective instruction that yields high quality student work
Curricula-aligned assessment practices that inform instruction
Structures for positive learning environment, inclusive culture, and student success
The school reflects very minimum significant change within the last 2 years in the quality guide, I think the
school should provide more resources and support for ELL students because their performance has been 100%
below standards for the last 2 years. The schools current status is in good standing in student progress is
approaching target, student achievement meeting target, school environment not meeting target and closing the
achievement gap meeting target. Overall the quality review was proficient.
I was not able to find my charter school and I choose this school because is the school my daughter goes to.
With my relationship with the school and seeing the environment and my daughters performance and
intervention I agree with this report.

Reflect on the data within the Learning Survey (found on the school website) look closely at the Teacher data.
Connect your experiences at this school to the data. Is your perception the same as the report? Provide specific
qualitative evidence:
I was not able to find the learning survey on the school website.

Look at page 11 in the School Quality Guide identify one sub-group that is not making progress. Ask your
cooperating teacher what interventions exist at that school for this sub-group (who, when, what). Make
recommendation for this sub-group.
One sub group that is not making progress is the integrated co-teaching.