2004-2005
Accountability
Report
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
Ball State University, Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005 Accountability Report
For more information about this report, contact:
Ball State University Office of Charter Schools
1407 Marsh Street
Muncie, IN 47306-0618
Phone: (765) 285-1336
Fax: (765) 285-9873
www.bsu.edu/teachers/charter
Ball State University Office of Charter Schools staff:
Martin S. Dezelan, Director
Dr. Barbara L. Downey, Assistant Director
Georgette Davis, Field Representative
Nicola Johnson, Field Representative
Julie Soules, Administrative Assistant
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
Ball State University practices equal opportunity in education and employment and
is strongly and actively committed to diversity within its community.
From the
President
This fall, Ball State University is sponsoring 14 charter schools in nine Indiana counties and 11
cities. These 14 schools will have an enrollment of nearly 3300 students with more than 1000
students on waiting lists. Clearly demand for quality public school options remains strong.
Ten of these 14 charter schools were in operation during the 2004-2005 school year. Minority
students comprised 64 percent of the population and 51 percent qualified for free or reduced
lunch. These schools, and three more scheduled to open in 2006, represent geographically diverse
student populations with five schools in Gary; two in East Chicago; one in Schererville (Lake
County); one in South Bend; one in Ft. Wayne; one in Lafayette; one in Richmond; one in
Carmel; one in Noblesville; one in Indianapolis; one in Floyds Knobs (New Albany); and one in
Graysville.
Ball State's Office of Charter Schools has developed an aggressive, outcomes-based
accountability framework that monitors academic achievement, organizational strength, and
financial capacity.
Achievement data has been analyzed in detail for the most recently completed school year, and
we know that trends are very positive. For example, during the last school year, many students
made academic gains that were equal to or greater than national and Indiana norms.
While we are very disappointed that only four of nine schools met federal Adequate Yearly
Progress (AYP) standards under the No Child Left Behind Act, there are some very positive
stories to tell. For example, Thea Bowman Leadership Academy in Gary just completed its
second year. While this school did not make AYP, its students entered the school well behind their
peers in the Gary school district and showed very positive gains in all grades and subjects tested
by ISTEP+.
Irvington Community School in Indianapolis, Veritas Academy in South Bend, New Community
School in West Lafayette, and Community Montessori in Floyds Knobs all met AYP.
Seventeen schools are currently authorized: six in their fourth year of operation; two in their third
year of operation; two in their second year of operation (including Options, formerly chartered by
the Carmel-Clay School Board); four that opened in fall, 2005; and three approved to open in fall,
2006.
Ball State University takes its role as a charter authorizer seriously. By enacting thorough
reporting standards, the university is ensuring the schools in its public charter schools network
are held accountable for providing a high-quality educational experience for the children they
serve.
Sincerely,
Jo Ann M. Gora
President
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
1
Acknowledgements
Ball State University Office of Charter Schools gratefully acknowledges the following
people for contributing their knowledge, talents and expertise, to the development,
coordination and completion of the 2004-2005 Ball State University Office of Charter
Schools Accountability Report:
Academic Walkthrough Team Members - Dr. Marilynn Quick, Coordinator; Dr. Barbara
Downey; Jane Martin; and Don Setterloff.
American Institutes for Research - Dr. Harold Doran.
Constituent survey development - The Kensington Group and S.C.S. Consulting Chris
Everett and Santina Sullivan.
Dean's Office, Teacher's College - Dr. Roy Weaver, Dean; Lisa Carmichael; and Julie Eiser.
Financial reviews - Thomas Kinghorn, Vice President Business Affairs and Treasurer;
William A. McCune, Associate Vice President, Controller and Business Services; Terry
McDaniel, Teacher's College, and Tom Roberts, Office of the Vice President for Business
Affairs.
Graphic design and layout - Ali Wuensch.
Office of Charter School Research - Dr. Daniel K. Lapsley, Director; Mary BakerBoudissa, Assistant Director; Connie Clarey; and Dr. W. Holmes Finch.
The Virtual Special Education Cooperative - Dr. Susan Albrecht, Interim Director.
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
2
Table of
Contents
Accountability Framework for Ball State University Charter Schools
4
Profile of Ball State University Charter Schools
8
Demographics of Ball State University Charter Schools
8
Enrollment of Ball State University Charter Schools
10
Location of Ball State University Charter Schools
11
Performance of Ball State University Charter Schools
12
Are the educational programs a success?
12
Are the schools organizationally sound?
16
Are the schools financially viable?
27
Are the schools providing conditions for academic success?
27
Comprehensive Synopsis of Individual Schools
28
Campagna Academy Charter School
29
Charter School of the Dunes
39
Community Montessori
49
Irvington Community School
59
New Community School
69
Options Charter School
79
Rural Community Academy
89
Thea Bowman Leadership Academy
101
Timothy L. Johnson Academy
111
Veritas Academy
121
Additional Information
Appendix A- Board Self-Assessment Survey
Appendix B- Constituent Survey
The Ball State University Office of Charter Schools is pleased to provide
this Accountability Report along with additional information regarding
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
data summarized in this report on-line at: www.bsu.edu/teachers/charter
3
Accountability
Framework
for Ball State University
Charter Schools
Charter schools are independent
public schools of choice. Along
with increased school autonomy,
charter schools are held to high
standards of accountability.
In 2001, Indiana joined the growing number
of states across the country to sign charter
school legislation into law. Since that time, the
demand for charter schools in Indiana has
continued to increase. In 2004, Indiana charter
schools served over 4,600 students in 22
charter schools.
Given authority by the General Assembly to
sponsor charter schools in Indiana, Ball State
University seeks to sponsor schools that
demonstrate exemplary education and
management approaches that are tailored to
the needs of a given community. In exchange
for increased independence, Ball State
University Charter Schools are held
accountable for results. These accountability
measures are incorporated into each charter
school's contract with Ball State.
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
4
Each year, Ball State University Office of
Charter Schools publishes an accountability
report indicating the charter schools'
performance and adherence to the charter
school contract and accountability process.
This is the third annual accountability report.
As the accountability process continues to
improve and expand, it is important to
understand the organizing framework
surrounding it. This organizing framework
describes the core areas for which Ball State
University Charter Schools are to be held
accountable.
Ball State's Accountability Framework has
been developed with the belief that the
accountability process should be strategic and
beneficial to schools as they strive for
continuous improvement. Therefore, over the
life of the charter contract, accountability
reviews are structured to help a school
continue to improve and develop, and
highlight successes that can be expanded and
replicated.
Academic achievement, organizational
management, financial stability, and
appropriate environmental conditions are all
measured as a part of the rigorous
accountability program developed to evaluate
Ball State University Charter Schools.
Annual reviews of each school are conducted
using a variety of methods including site
visits, classroom observations, evaluation of
standardized tests, and analysis of schoolspecific success measures. Ball State
University Office of Charter Schools, as part
of these evaluations, asks four evaluative
questions which look at specific issues for
analysis. These questions are:
1. Is the educational program a
success?
2. Is the school organizationally
sound?
3. Is the school financially viable?
4. Is the school providing conditions
for academic success?
Key Accountability
Review Tools
Ball State University's charter
school accountability program
begins well before a school opens
its doors and continues
systematically through renewal
decisions at the end of a
contract.
Results-oriented evaluations always center on
the four key questions. Continuous
improvement is the ultimate goal. Strengths
are highlighted for all to see, and
recommendations for improvement are
reviewed and discussed with the intention of
those changes being implemented to improve
the school.
The Ball State University Office of Charter
Schools' accountability process grows and
evolves each year. In 2004-2005, the Ball
State University Office of Charter Schools
continued to evaluate their schools using a
variety of methods. The use of test score
analysis, constituent surveys, board selfassessments, academic walkthroughs,
governance reviews and financial reviews are
all examples of measures used to demonstrate
the commitment to the accountability process.
Academic walkthroughs
Two teams of education experts visit Ball
State University Charter Schools in the spring
of each school year for the purpose of
providing an independent review of curricular
and instructional practices and their
connections to larger organizational goals.
After multiple classroom observations and
administrative interviews, each school is
provided a written summary that includes
noted strengths and reflective questions to
promote continuous school improvement
efforts.
The academic walkthroughs for the 20042005 school year are summarized on the
following pages. Summary information about
academic walkthroughs for each of the ten
currently operating Ball State University
Charter Schools is provided within the
Comprehensive Synopsis of Individual
Schools. Full school reports are available on
the Ball State University Office of Charter
Schools website:
www.bsu.edu/teachers/charter.
Extended academic walkthroughs
After examination of the data collected during
the academic walkthrough as well as other
data compiled throughout the school year, the
Office of Charter Schools may choose to
perform an extended academic walkthrough as
a follow-up to the academic walkthrough.
These extended academic walkthroughs are
conducted to provide a more detailed picture
of the school's successes and challenges and
offer specific recommendations for
improvement. To support the accountability
process, the schools are asked to respond in
writing to the recommendations with details
about how these recommendations have been,
or will be, addressed.
1 Academic
walkthroughs
2
Extended academic
walkthroughs
3
Analysis of test
score data
4
Board selfassessments
5
Constituent
surveys
6
Open-ended
constituent
survey responses
7
Financial reviews
8
Pre-opening
checklists and
visits
9
Special education
reviews
Analysis of test score data
Performance on Indiana's statewide
assessment, the Indiana Statewide Test of
Educational Progress-Plus (ISTEP+) is
evaluated and reported for each school by Ball
State University Office of Charter Schools.
The ISTEP + is given in the fall. Therefore,
the ISTEP+ does not allow Ball State
University, and charter school constituents, to
understand how individual students are
progressing academically over the course of
the year. For that reason, all Ball State
University Charter Schools are required to
administer a nationally recognized
standardized test in the fall and spring of each
year.
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
5
In 2004-2005, nine of the ten Ball State
University Charter Schools administered the
Northwest Evaluation Association's Measure
of Academic Progress (NWEA-MAP) in the
fall and the spring. This test, widely used in
Indiana, and nationally recognized, allows
Ball State University Charter Schools to
measure academic growth over the course of a
school year and compare academic growth
against both Indiana and national norm
groups.
One charter high school, Campagna Academy
administered Test of Adult Basic Skills
(TABE) in the fall and spring. This
standardized test also provides the school with
academic growth information over the course
of the school year. Information regarding
results of this test is included in the
Comprehensive Synopsis of Individual
Schools, Campagna Academy.
Galileo Charter School
students “taking a study
break” for the camera
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
Board self-assessments
All charter schools are small, but growing,
not-for-profit businesses. The ability and
expertise of each school's board is critical to
the long-term success of the organization. In
order to assess how each board is currently
performing, Ball State University Office of
Charter Schools asked all members of each
board to complete a board self-assessment
survey.
Ball State University Office of Charter
Schools considers an average rating of four or
above to indicate strong board performance,
between three and four to be areas for
improvement, and below three to be areas
needing critical focus. Where areas of critical
need were identified, ongoing conversations
are held with the board and administration to
understand the depth of issues and strategies
for improvement. Ball State University Office
of Charter Schools encourages each school to
address areas of concern in strategic planning,
as a part of accountability plans, and in other
continuous improvement activities.
Constituent surveys
Ball State University Office of Charter
Schools teamed with the Kensington Group
and SCS Consulting to develop a survey of
charter school constituents, including parents,
staff, and board members. The survey was
designed to create an understanding of the
factors that drive a successful charter school
and determine how each constituent group
feels their school is performing in the areas
most critical to a school's success. These
factors include understanding how to enhance
school loyalty, understanding the perceptions
of education quality and performance, and
understanding the image and attitudes
constituents hold toward the school.
Administered in the spring of 2005,
approximately 900 staff members, board
members, and parents participated in this
survey. Summary results of this survey are
presented for the collective Ball State
University Charter School community as well
as in the Comprehensive Synopsis of
Individual Schools. A copy of the survey is
available on the Ball State University Office
of Charter Schools website:
www.bsu.edu/teachers/charter.
Open-ended constituent
survey responses
In order to give respondents an opportunity to
express personal opinions or make specific
comments regarding their individual schools,
all constituent surveys included open-ended
questions. Participants (parents, staff, and
board members) were asked to respond to
three open-ended questions on the Ball State
University 2005 constituent survey:
1. What works well at the school? What are
the strengths of the school? Please provide
examples or descriptions.
2. What does not work well at the school?
What are your concerns? Please provide
examples or descriptions.
3. Please share any additional information
about this school.
Researchers used qualitative analysis of
responses along with QSR N6 software1,
which provided the system for developing
relevant categories of analysis to organize the
data. The categories included: extracurricular,
6
1
QSR International Pty Ltd. (2002) QSR N6. [Computer software]. Melbourne, Australia: QSR.
facilities, leadership, instruction and
curriculum, transportation, safety and security,
and parental and community involvement.
Financial reviews
Ball State University's Office of the Vice
President for Business Affairs conducts a
detailed review of each charter school's
budget performance, financial status, and
future projections. In addition, the university
reviews each school's State Board of Accounts
(SBOA) Audit and monitors changes and
improvements recommended in these reports.
Pre-opening checklists and visits
University officials begin working with a
school immediately upon approval of the
proposal to clearly define expectations and
help identify resources for success. The preopening checklist reviews key preparation
issues and milestones in the areas of finance,
facilities, enrollment, curriculum, professional
development, and communication. This
document is reviewed with each organizer
immediately after Ball State's president
approves authorizing a school and is revisited
on a regular basis in the months leading up to
the first day of school.
is the accountability plan developed by
individual schools. These aggressive plans,
finalized during the first semester of the
second year in operation, are evaluated
annually. These accountability plans build on
goals contained in a school's original proposal
and should be part of the school's larger
strategic plan.
Accountability goals, developed in the areas
of academics, student-focused non-academics,
and organizational management, are tools for
a school to tell its story as it relates to its
specific mission, vision, curriculum, and
student population. Measurable goals
articulate how each school defines success
over the life of the charter contract because
each charter school has a very specific
mission, curriculum and student population.
Timothy L. Johnson students
on field day
Special education reviews2
All charter schools, as public schools, are
required to comply with federal laws that
protect children with disabilities in our public
school system. Charter schools are not exempt
from any federally mandated special
education requirements. As the authorizer,
Ball State University Office of Charter
Schools monitors individual school
compliance with special education
requirements. The Office of Charter Schools
works closely with the Ball State University
Virtual Special Education Cooperative to
monitor provided services and appropriate
record keeping.
Accountability plans
Although much of Ball State University's
Accountability Framework is centered on
Indiana's charter school law and state and
federal accountability standards, an equally
important aspect of the accountability process
2
Landau, Dr. Richard, and Dykema Gossett. “A Reference Guide to Special Education Law for Charter School Authorizers,”
National Association of Charter School Authorizers, 2003.
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
7
Profile
of Ball State University
Charter Schools
Demographics
of Ball State University Charter Schools
Demographic data
Most of the students attending Ball State
University Charter Schools represent a diverse
group of Indiana school children. Slightly
more than half of the students are males, 65%
of the students are part of minority groups,
and 51% qualify for free or reduced lunch
programs. Over 13% are identified as needing
special education services.
Figure A-1 shows the demographic
composition (black, white, Hispanic and
other3) of Ball State University Charter
Schools. The percentage of minority students
served in Ball State Charter Schools is more
than double the percentage educated in other
Indiana public schools.
Figure A-1
Racial/ethnic composition of Ball State University Charter
Schools compared to other Indiana public schools
2004-2005
90%
79%
80%
70%
60%
60%
Black
50%
40%
White
Hispanic
35%
Other
30%
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
20%
10%
12%
2%
3%
5%
4%
0%
Ball State University Charter
Schools
Indiana public schools
8
3Other
includes children of Hispanic, Asian, Native American, and Multi-racial origin.
Figure A-2 demonstrates free and reduced lunch percentages of all Ball State University Charter
Schools operating during the 2004-2005 school year. Ball State Charter Schools serve a
significantly higher number of students with limited family income.
Community Montessori 6-9
year olds working on the
skeletal system
Figure A-2
Percentage of students eligible for reduced price and free
lunch in Ball State University Charter Schools compared
to other Indiana public schools 2004-2005
60%
50%
40%
30%
% Free
42%
28%
20%
10%
9%
8%
Ball State University Charter
Schools
Indiana public schools
0%
% Reduced price
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
9
Enrollment
of Ball State University
Charter Schools
Ball State University authorized ten charter
schools to be open in the fall of 2004. Seven
Ball State Charter Schools opened in 02-03, two
more opened in 03-04, one opened in 04-05,
four more opened in 05-06, and three are
scheduled to open in 06-07. The number of
students attending these schools is expected to
double from the 04-05 school year to the 06-07
school year. The waiting list to attend these
charter schools is over 1000. It is clear that the
people of Indiana are demanding quality public
school options.
Figure A-3
Current, Projected,
Capacity Enrollment,
Grades Served for Ball
State University Charter
Schools
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
10
Figure A-3 shows the current, projected and
capacity enrollment for Ball State University
Charter Schools. In the 04-05 school year over
1800 students were in grades K-8 and over 200
were in grades 9-12. At capacity, the schools
will be able to provide education services to
almost 7,000 students.
School Name
Year
Opened
2004-2005
Enrollment
(grades
served)
Projected
Enrollment
2005-2006
Projected
Enrollment
2006-2007
Enrollment at
Capacity
(grades
served at
capacity)
Student
Waiting
List (as of
June 30,
2005)
21st Century at Gary
2005-2006
NA
267 (grades 4-9)
330
420 (grades K-12)
100
Campagna Academy
2002-2003
76 (grades 9-12)
130
130
130 (grades 9-12)
41
Charter School of the Dunes
2003-2004
442 (grades K-6)
493
675
675 (grades K-8)
55
Community Montessori
2002-2003
159 (grades K-6)
221
310
450 (grades K-12)
30
East Chicago Lighthouse
Charter School
2006-2007
NA
NA
280 (grades K-5)
616 (grades K-12)
NA
East Chicago Urban Enterprise
Academy
2005-2006
NA
208 (grades K-4)
294
444 (grades K-8)
25
Galileo Charter School
2005-2006
NA
144 (grades K-3)
180
252 (grades K-6)
NA
Gary Lighthouse Charter
School
2005-2006
NA
376 (grades K-5)
510
890 (grades K-12)
100
Irvington Community School
2002-2003
220 (grades K-7)
366
514
814 (grades K-12)
224
New Community School
2002-2003
60 (grades K-7)
66
72
84 (grades K-8)
31
Options Charter School-Carmel
2002-2003
130 (grades 9-12)
130
130
130 (grades 9-12)
75
Options Charter SchoolNoblesville
2006-2007
NA
NA
110 (grades 9-12)
130 (grades 9-12)
NA
Rural Community Academy
2004-2005
91 (grades K-6)
99
153
180 (grades K-8)
3
Thea Bowman Leadership
Academy
2003-2004
441 (grades K-7)
494
487
475 (grades K-8)
360
Timothy L. Johnson Academy
2002-2003
277 (grades K-7)
226
375
375 (grades K-8)
0
Veritas Academy
2002-2003
120 (grades K-8)
143
149
149 (grades K-8)
77
West Gary Lighthouse Charter
School
2006-2007
NA
NA
280 (grades K-5)
616 (grades K-12)
NA
2,016
3363
4979
6830
1121
Total: Ball State University
Charter Schools
Location
of Ball State University
Charter Schools
As non-traditional public schools of
choice, charter schools are gaining
attention and interest. When this
report went to print, 37 charter
schools were authorized to be in
operation for 2006-2007, three times
the number that opened in the 20022003 inaugural year. Ball State
University Office of Charter Schools
will be a leading sponsor, sponsoring
17 schools.
Figure A-4
3
16
ST. JOSEP
H
LAPORTE
17
14 6 5
LAKE
8 1
PORTE
R
2
LAGRANGE
STEUBE
N
NOBLE
DEKALB
1
21st Century at Gary
556 West Washington Street
Gary, IN 46402
2
Campagna Academy
403 Cline Avenue
Schererville, IN 46375
3
Charter School of the Dunes
860 N. Lake Street
Gary, IN 46403
4
Community Montessori
851 Highlander Point Drive
Floyds Knobs, IN 47119
5
East Chicago Lighthouse Charter School
Address pending
6
East Chicago Urban Enterprise Academy
1402 East Chicago Avenue
East Chicago, IN 46312
7
Galileo Charter School
c/o Townsend Center
855 North 12th Street
Richmond, IN 47374
8
Gary Lighthouse Charter School
3201 Pierce Street
Gary, IN 46480
9
Irvington Community School
1635 West Michigan Street
Indianapolis, IN 46222
MARSHALL
STARKE
KOSCIUS
KO
WHITLEY
JASPER
NEWTON
ALLEN
FULTON
PULASKI
15
WABASH
MIAMI
WHITE
HUNTINGTON
WELLS
CASS
ADAMS
BENTON
CARROL
L
GRANT
10
WARREN
BLACKFORD
HOWARD
TIPPECANOE
During the 2004-2005 school year, ten
charter schools in Indiana were
authorized by Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools: Campagna
Academy Charter School, Charter
School of the Dunes, Community
Montessori, Irvington Community
School, New Community School,
Rural Community Academy, Thea
Bowman Leadership Academy,
Timothy L. Johnson Academy, and
Veritas Academy. Ball State
University Office of Charter Schools
authorized an additional four charter
schools that opened in the fall of 2005
and three are scheduled to open in the
fall of 2006.
At capacity, all of these schools, each
with unique educational visions and
missions, will serve almost 7,000
students in 11 cities.
ELKHART
CLINTON
JAY
TIPTON
MADISON
DELAWARE
RANDOLP
H
FOUNTAIN
V
E
R
M
I
L
L
I
O
N
MONTGOMERY
BOONE
HAMILTON
11
PARKE
HENDRICKS
12
HENRY
7
WAYNE
HANCOCK
MARION
PUTNAM
9
10
RUSH
FAYETTE
SHELBY
MORGAN
VIGO
UNION
JOHNSON
CLAY
11
Options Charter School-Carmel
340 Ridgepoint Drive
Carmel, IN 46032
12
Options Charter School-Noblesville
Address pending
DEARBORN
13
Rural Community Academy
P. O. Box 85
Graysville, IN 47852
OHIO
14
Thea Bowman Leadership Academy
975 West 6th Avenue
Gary, IN 46402
15
Timothy L. Johnson Academy
7908 South Anthony Boulevard
Fort Wayne, IN 46816
16
Veritas Academy
814 E. LaSalle Avenue
South Bend, IN 46617
17
West Gary Lighthouse Charter School
Address pending
FRANKLI
N
OWEN
New Community School
620 Cumberland Avenue
West Lafayette, IN 47906
DECATUR
MONROE
BROWN
BARTHOLOMEW
SULLIVAN
RIPLE
Y
GREENE
JENNINGS
13
JACKSON
LAWRENCE
KNOX
DAVIESS
JEFFERSON
MARTIN
WASHINGTON
SWITZERLAND
SCOTT
ORANGE
CLARK
PIKE
DUBOIS
GIBSON
FLOYD
4
CRAWFORD
HARRISON
POSE
Y
Figure A-4 shows the geographic
distribution of current and future
authorized Ball State University Charter
Schools
VANDERBURGH
PERRY
WARRICK
SPENCER
Current Ball State University
Charter Schools
Schools opened in 2005
Schools opening in 2006
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
11
Performance
of Ball State University
Charter Schools
University Charter School students passing
ISTEP+ is still less than 50%.
1. Are the educational
programs a success?
Indiana Statewide Test of
Educational Progress Plus (ISTEP+)
New Community School
Enrichment Class
Figure A-5
Percentage of Students
in all Ball State
University Charter
Schools and Other
Indiana Public Schools
Passing ISTEP+ Tests in
the fall 2004
Most charter schools attract students who are
performing well below their peers on the
ISTEP+ test. Ball State University Charter
Schools are no exception. Figure A-5 shows
the percentage of students passing the 2004
ISTEP+ for all Ball State University Charter
Schools, with one school in its first year of
operation, two in their second, and seven in
their third year. While the percentage of
students passing ISTEP+ is generally
increasing, the percentage of Ball State
Ball State
University
Charter
Schools
English/LA
#Tested
BSU
Indiana
According to the Indiana Department of
Education, 2004 was the first year ISTEP+
was administered to all students in grades 3
through 10. Previously, ISTEP+ was
administered in grades 3, 6 and 8. ISTEP+
results for grades 4, 5, 7, and 9 will serve as
baseline data to help understand where a
student stands academically as opposed to
how much a student has learned while
enrolled in a charter school.
While it is clear that Ball State University
Charter Schools serve academically
challenged students, there is reason to be
Both English
& Math
Math
BSU
Indiana
BSU
Indiana
Science
BSU
Indiana
rd
3 grade
2004
206
49%
75%
40%
73%
33%
65%
2003
227
47%
74%
30%
71%
26%
63%
2002
65
49%
72%
45%
67%
38%
59%
220
45%
73%
44%
73%
35%
64%
200
52%
72%
38%
72%
33%
63%
2004
191
49%
70%
43%
75%
37%
63%
2003
101
45%
69%
40%
72%
31%
62%
2002
0
th
4 grade
2004
th
5 grade
2004
th
6 grade
--
69%
--
67%
--
59%
th
7 grade
2004
100
47%
68%
46%
73%
33%
61%
th
8 grade
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
2004
0
--
67%
--
71%
--
61%
2003
0
--
65%
--
71%
--
59%
2002
0
--
64%
--
66%
--
59%
th
9 grade
2004
19
32%
67%
42%
68%
32%
59%
2004
41
44%
68%
27%
64%
24%
57%
2003
23
22%
69%
22%
67%
9%
60%
2002
0
68%
--
60%
th
10 grade
12
--
69%
--
39%
62%
optimistic, especially for students in grades 6
and 10. The percentage of students in these
grades passing ISTEP+ English and math
increased, with grade 10 students more than
doubling their percentage of students passing
in two areas (those passing English/LA and
those passing both English and math).
Students in grade 3 did not perform quite as
well; however, the percentage of students
passing the English section varied only
slightly, while dropping in math.
students to the percentage of students passing
ISTEP+ for students in their first year at the
school. Returning students outperformed first
year students on ISTEP+ almost one half the
time.
The comprehensive synopsis of individual
schools will provide additional information
about how each school performed on the
ISTEP+.
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
Under federal No Child Left Behind
legislation, which requires schools to show
annual improvements in academic
achievement and attendance, the Indiana
Department of Education (IDOE) has
determined Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
for all Indiana schools, including charter
In seeking to measure student growth on
ISTEP+ performance over time, Ball State
University Office of Charter Schools has
disaggregated the data into students returning
to the charter schools and those attending the
charter schools for the first year. The desired
results would be to show that students who
Ball State
University
Charter
Schools
ALL STUDENTS
# Students
LA
Math
RETURNING STUDENTS
Both LA
# Students
& Math
LA
Math
FIRST YEAR STUDENTS
Both LA
# Students
& Math
LA
Math
Both LA
& Math
rd
206
49% 40% 33%
135
47% 39% 30%
71
52% 44% 37%
4 grade
th
220
45% 44% 35%
141
50% 50% 50%
79
34% 33% 33%
5th grade
200
52% 38% 33%
139
49% 34% 29%
61
57% 48% 41%
th
191
49% 43% 37%
121
53% 46% 40%
70
41% 37% 30%
th
100
47% 46% 33%
66
50% 47% 35%
34
41% 44% 29%
8 grade
th
0
9th grade
19
41
3 grade
6 grade
7 grade
th
10 grade
NA
NA
NA
0
NA
NA
NA
0
32% 42% 32%
0
NA
NA
NA
19
32% 42% 32%
44% 27% 24%
5
0%
0%
0%
36
50% 31% 28%
attend Ball State Charter Schools perform
better on ISTEP+ the longer they attend the
charter school.
Figure A-6 shows ISTEP+ data for all students
who attend Ball State University Charter
Schools. It then compares the percentage of
students passing ISTEP+ for returning
NA
NA
Figure A-6
Percentage of Students
in all Ball State
University Charter
School Students,
Returning Students, and
First Year Students
Passing ISTEP+ in fall
2004.
NA
schools in operation during the 2004-2005
school year. The IDOE determines AYP
designations for each school based on the
overall percentage of students passing the
English and mathematics ISTEP+ tests.
Schools must uphold or improve elementary
and middle school attendance rates, and high
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
13
school graduation rates as well. (AYP is
also determined for student subgroups
within the population, including
race/ethnicity, free/reduced price lunch
eligibility, limited English proficiency, and
special education, provided that there are at
least 30 students in a particular subgroup.)
Of the ten operating Ball State University
Charter Schools, four schools made AYP in
2004-2005. The schools achieving AYP are
Community Montessori, Irvington
Community School, New Community
School, and Veritas Academy. Five schools
did not make AYP in 2004-2005. The
schools that did not achieve AYP are
Campagna Academy Charter School,
Charter School of the Dunes, Options
Charter School, Thea Bowman Leadership
Academy, and Timothy L. Johnson
Academy. Because first year schools are
exempt, Rural Community Academy was
not eligible for an Adequate Yearly Progress
rating.
Northwest Evaluation Association
(NWEA)
Veritas Academy student
prepares to go home
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
14
Transparency and accountability are
hallmarks of the charter school movement in
Indiana. Charter schools offer the promise of
accelerating the progress of all students
through a relentless focus on results,
rigorous curriculum and creative
environments for learning. Growth during
this school year must be measured across a
number of important parameters.
Each Ball State Charter School in Indiana
has administered the nationally recognized
and norm-referenced Northwest Evaluation
Association's Measure of Academic
Progress (NWEA-MAP4) standardized test
in the fall and the spring. Analyzed by an
expert analysis team at the American
Institutes of Research, the results provide a
comprehensive picture of the progress Ball
State Charter Schools have made.
Figure A-7 compares Ball State University
Charter School students' spring scaled scores
to Indiana and national norms on the math,
reading, and language arts portions of the
NWEA. Students attending Ball State
Charter Schools maintained average scaled
score levels relatively even to their peers in
Indiana and nationally.
Figure A-7
NWEA scaled scores comparing Ball State
Charter Schools to Indiana and national norms
in math, reading, and language arts
Average Math Scaled Scores
All BSU
Indiana
National
Schools
2
183
*
194
3
196
204
200
4
201
211
208
5
209
219
217
6
217
227
222
7
221
231
227
8
205
238
234
9
230
242
240
10
228
*
242
11
236
*
*
12
235
*
*
Grade
Average Reading Scaled Scores
Grade
All BSU
Indiana
National
Schools
2
178
*
193
3
190
201
198
4
198
207
204
5
205
213
211
6
210
218
215
7
212
221
219
8
210
226
223
9
222
227
225
10
221
*
224
11
224
*
*
12
218
*
*
Average Language Scaled Scores
Grade
All BSU
Indiana
National
Schools
2
182
*
*
3
196
204
199
4
203
209
206
5
207
215
212
6
213
219
216
7
217
221
219
8
215
225
222
9
217
226
224
10
221
*
223
11
221
*
*
12
218
*
*
*an asterisk indicates that data were not available for this subject and grade,
either because the school did not test students in that grade/subject or because
NWEA does not provide norm data for it.
4MAP generates a “Rasch Unit score,” or RIT score, to describe achievement and growth, where scores range from 150
(second and third grade) to 300 (end of high school). It is an equal interval score so scores can be added to calculate
classroom or school averages. It is important to note that these values come from the norm group scores during the spring
semester, rather than theoretically possible maximum and minimum values.
Figure A-8 presents the average growth rate
for students in Ball State Charter Schools for
each grade and for each subject area tested
in fall 2004 and spring 2005. Only students
who took the test in both fall and spring are
included. Students made the most significant
growth as compared to their peers in reading
in grades 5, 6, 9, and 10, and in language
arts in grades 4, 6, 7, and 10. The least
significant growth was in grade 9 math and
language arts, where students lost ground
from fall to spring.
Figure A-8
Growth rate for Ball State University
Charter School students compared to
Indiana and national norms in math, reading
and language arts
Grade
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Average Math Growth Rate
All BSU
Indiana
National
Schools
9
*
16
7.8
10.6
12
5
8.8
9
5.3
9
9
4.6
9.1
8
4.2
7.3
7
*
7
7
-0.4
6.2
6
2.3
*
5
3.3
*
*
8.1
*
*
Average Reading Growth Rate
Grade
All BSU
Indiana
National
Schools
2
10.8
*
15
3
6.5
9
10
4
4.8
6.8
7.4
5
6.4
5.9
6
6
6.3
5.3
5
7
1.1
4.1
4
8
NaN
4.1
4
9
9.9
1.6
3
10
13.7
*
3
11
7.1
*
*
12
10
*
*
Average Language Growth Rate
Grade
All BSU
Indiana
National
Schools
2
9.8
*
*
3
6.7
8.5
9.3
4
7.4
5.8
6.5
5
5.4
5.2
5.8
6
4.7
4.1
4.5
7
3.5
3
3.6
8
NaN
3.2
3.5
9
-1.6
2
2.4
10
8.7
*
1.9
11
-1
*
*
12
6.5
*
*
*an asterisk indicates that data were not available for this subject and grade,
either because the school did not test students in that grade/subject or because
NWEA does not provide norm data for it.
Campagna Academy
students completing
science experiment
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
15
2. Are the schools
organizationally sound?
soundness: policy and strategic planning; 3.
Academic success: programs and services; 4.
Performance against success measures:
communication and advocacy; 5. Financial
viability: budget development and
management; 6. Organizational soundness:
risk management; 7. Academic success:
leadership development; 9. Organizational
soundness: board development and
education; 9. Organizational soundness: the
board's role.
Board self-assessments
Charter school boards play a significant role
in ensuring the school is developing the
climate and culture necessary to achieve
academic success. Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools has developed a
board self-assessment survey5 to help each
school board evaluate its performance and
identify areas of strength and areas in need of
improvement. This survey can be viewed on
the website www.bsu.edu/teachers/charter.
Ball State University Office of Charter
Schools considers an average rating of four
or above to indicate strong board
performance, between three and four to be
areas for improvement, and below three to be
areas needing critical focus.
Administered in the spring of the 04-05
school year, results are compiled for all the
schools in Figure A-9. On a scale of one to
five, with five being “strongly agree” and one
being “strongly disagree”, board members
were asked to rate themselves in nine areas
related to board development. These nine
areas ask a series of questions related to the
following: 1. Academic success: missiondriven organization; 2. Organizational
Figure A-9
Series One
Questions
Academic success:
mission-driven
organization
Series 1
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
1.1
1.2
1.3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
Veritas
Academy
Timothy L.
Johnson
Academy
Thea
Bowman
Leadership
Academy
Rural
Community
Academy
Options
Charter
School
New
Community
School
Irvington
Community
School
Community
Montessori
Charter
School of
the Dunes
Campagna
Academy
0
*Series One questions ask the board to rate itself on three mission-related issues: (1.1)
familiarity with the school's mission, (1.2) the degree to which policy decisions reflect that
mission, and finally, (1.3) its understanding and agreement of who should be served by the
school.
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
16
5Board
self-assessment tool was adopted from the Girls, Inc. “Board Self Assessment.”
Series Two
Questions
Series 2
5
4
3
2.1
2.2
2.3
2
Organizational
soundness: policy
and strategic
planning
1
0
Campagna
Academy
Charter
Community Irvingto n
New
School of Monte ssori Community Community
the Dunes
School
School
Options
Charter
School
Rural
Thea
Community Bow man
Academy Le adership
Academy
Timothy L.
Johnson
Academy
Veritas
Acade my
*Series Two questions ask the board the degree to which it: (2.1) focuses on long-term strategic
issues vs. short-term administrative issues, (2.2) has a shared strategic vision for the school, and
(2.3) feels that as a board it engages in periodic strategic planning based on sound evidence.
Series Three
Questions
Series 3
5
4
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3
2
Academic success:
programs and
services
1
0
Campagna
Academy
Charter
Community Irvingto n
New
School of Monte ssori Community Community
the Dunes
School
School
Options
Charter
School
Rural
Thea
Community Bow man
Academy Le adership
Academy
Timothy L.
Johnson
Academy
Veritas
Acade my
*Series Three questions ask the board to rate itself on: (3.1) its familiarity with the school's
accountability plan, (3.2) knowledge of programs and services, (3.3) the degree to which it
evaluates those services for consistency with the school's mission, and finally, (3.4) the degree
to which it works with the school leader to evaluate the effectiveness of these programs.
Series Four
Questions
Series 4
5
4
4.1
4.2
4.3
3
2
1
0
Campagna
Academy
Charter Community Irvington
New
School of Montessori Community Community
the Dunes
School
School
Options
Charter
School
Rural
Thea
Timothy L.
Community Bowman
Johnson
Academy Leadership Acade my
Academy
Performance
against success
measures:
communication and
advocacy
Veritas
Academy
*Series Four questions ask the board to rate itself on its communication and advocacy on behalf
of the school focusing on: (4.1) development of a plan for communicating the school's purpose
to the community, (4.2) ability of individual board members to communicate the school's
mission and programs to the community, and (4.3) the degree to which individual members and
the board as a whole are advocates for their students' education.
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
17
Series Five
Questions
Financial viability:
budget
development and
management
Series 5
5
4
3
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
2
1
0
Campagna
Academy
Charter
Community Irvington
New
School of Montessori Community Community
the Dunes
School
School
Options
Charter
School
Rural
Thea
Timothy L.
Community Bow man
Johnson
Academy Leadership Academy
Academy
Veritas
Academy
*Series Five questions ask the board to rate itself on the school's financial management focusing on:
(5.1) its understanding of the budget and making strategic financial decisions, (5.2) timeliness,
accuracy, and clarity of financial reports made to the board, (5.3) soundness of the organization's
financial policies, (5.4) its fund development strategy, and (5.5) its understanding of financial needs
related to planned growth.
Series Six
Questions
Series 6
5
4
Organizational
soundness: risk
management
3
6.1
6.2
6.3
2
1
0
Campagna
Academy
Charter Community Irvington
New
School of Montessori Community Community
the Dunes
School
School
Options
Charter
School
Rural
Thea
Timothy L.
Community Bowman
Johnson
Academy Leadership Academy
Academy
Veritas
Academy
*Series Six questions ask the board to rate itself on the degree to which it has protected the
organization against risk by: (6.1) adopting a risk management program, (6.2) purchasing adequate
insurance to protect itself from loss, and (6.3) adopting and understanding school emergency
procedures.
Series Seven
Questions
Academic success:
leadership
development
Series 7
5
4
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
7.6
3
2
1
0
Campagna
Academy
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
18
Charter
Community Irvington
New
School of Montessori Community Community
the Dunes
School
School
Options
Charter
School
Rural
Thea
Community Bow man
Academy Leadership
Academy
Timothy L.
Johnson
Academy
Veritas
Academy
*Series Seven questions ask the board to rate its success in developing school leadership by: (7.1)
ensuring the school leader directs the organization, (7.2) working with the school leader to ensure the
leader receives goal-focused support from the board, (7.3) systematically evaluating the school leader,
(7.4) delegating to the school leader the authority and responsibility necessary to successfully manage
the school, (7.5) understanding its role in hiring the leader and empowering the leader to build its own
staff, and finally, (7.6) developing a depth of leadership that would enable transition of primary
leaders if necessary.
Series Eight
Questions
Series 8
5
4
8.1
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
8.6
8.7
3
2
1
Organizational
soundness: board
development and
education
0
Campagna
Academy
Charter
Community Irvingto n
New
School of Monte ssori Community Community
the Dunes
School
School
Options
Charter
School
Rural
Thea
Community Bow man
Academy Le adership
Academy
Timothy L.
Johnson
Academy
Veritas
Acade my
*Series Eight questions ask the board to rate its own development and education by: (8.1)
recruiting board members based on needed expertise, (8.2) holding orientation and education
sessions for new members, (8.3) receiving regular education and development related to their
roles, (8.4) familiarity with the organization's by-laws, (8.5) focusing time and energy
effectively, (8.6) forging strong internal relationships, and lastly, (8.7) regularly assessing its
own performance.
Series Nine
Questions
Series 9
5
4
9.1
9.2
9.3
9.4
9.5
3
2
Organizational
soundness: the
board's role
1
0
Campagna
Academy
Charter
Community Irvington
New
School of Montessori Community Community
the Dunes
School
School
Options
Charter
School
Rural
Thea
Community Bow man
Academy Leadership
Academy
Timothy L.
Johnson
Academy
Veritas
Academy
*Series Nine questions ask the board to evaluate how well it understands its role: (9.1) as a
steward of public tax dollars, (9.2) as the entity accountable for meeting student achievement
requirements, (9.3) in complying with its charter contract, (9.4) in developing the school and
getting it up and running, and (9.5) in transitioning to a policy making and governing body.
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
19
Constituent surveys
The Ball State University Office of Charter
Schools distributed surveys to parents, staff,
and board members during late spring, 2005.
Approximately 900 surveys were returned.
The survey was designed to create an
understanding of the factors that drive a
successful charter school and determine how
each constituent group feels their school is
performing in the areas most critical to a
school's success. These factors include
understanding how to enhance school loyalty,
understanding the perceptions of education
quality and performance, and understanding
the image and attitudes constituents hold
toward the school. The data is summarized
below. Complete constituent survey data,
including correlation matrices, can be found
on the Ball State University Office of Charter
Schools website:
www.bsu.edu/teachers/charter.
Figure A-10 shows the percentage of parents,
staff, and board who are extremely likely or
very likely to be an advocate for the school.
Quality of Education
Nearly eight of ten parents and board
members view the quality of education at the
Ball State University Charter Schools
positively. Approximately two-thirds of the
staff indicates a positive view of the education
quality at the charter schools. Comparatively,
almost nine of ten parents and board members
view the quality of education at Ball State
University Charter Schools to be better than at
other schools. This level of response is
significantly more favorable than that of staff
members where seven of ten indicate the
quality of education as better than at other
schools.
Loyalty
Parents and board members register a
favorable level of loyalty to Ball State
University Charter Schools. Staff members
indicate a similar level of favorable support in
their likelihood to return to the schools.
However, fewer staff members are likely to
recommend the schools as compared to
parents and board members.
It is interesting to note that the level of
satisfaction is elevated for each group. This
appears to indicate that satisfaction is not as
stringent of a test or criterion on which to
evaluate the quality of education, especially
when compared to the overall quality of
education ratings.
Figure A-11 shows the percentage of parents,
staff, and board members who are very
satisfied and somewhat satisfied with the
quality of education at their school.
Figure A-10
Parents, Staff, and Board Overall Loyalty Survey Results
Overall Loyalty- includes extremely
likely and very likely responses
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
20
% Parents
% Staff
% Board
Likelihood to recommend
83%
66%
88%
Likelihood to return next year
86%
82%
82%
Likelihood to increase support
83%
75%
87%
Figure A-11
Parents, Staff, and Board Quality of Education Survey Results
Quality of Education- includes very
satisfied and somewhat satisfied responses
% Parents
% Staff
% Board
Overall Quality
76%
58%
79%
Overall Quality – Better Than Other Schools
85%
69%
84%
Overall Satisfaction
90%
79%
91%
Image/attitude
Ball State Charter Schools are noted by
parents and staff for a caring environment,
comprehensive assessment of student
achievement, communicating student
performance, continuous improvement,
innovative practices, and a safe environment
for students. In addition, parents highlight
relative strengths of the schools to include
quality academics, mission-driven focus,
positive school spirit, and available and open
leadership. Staff members are relatively less
positive in their assessment but highlight the
high expectations of teachers as a strength.
The relative concerns that are common among
parents and staff is the appropriate level of the
discipline and spending more time on
academics than other schools. In addition,
parents are relatively less favorable in their
view of holding teachers accountable and
having all members of the school community
focused on the mission of the school. The
areas of relative concern to faculty include:
having a positive school spirit, having clearly
defined expectations and having an effective
administration.
The detailed list of image/attitude statements
used in the survey is provided in Figure A-12
below. It shows the percentage of parents and
staff who strongly agree or agree with the
related statements.
Figure A-12
Parent and Staff Image/attitude Survey Results
%
Parents
%
Staff
All members of the school community understand the mission of the school
76%
68%
Our school has a caring environment
92%
90%
Our school communicates student performance to parents/guardians
91%
88%
Our school continuously improves
85%
79%
Our school holds teachers accountable for student performance
71%
77%
Expectations are clearly defined for all members of the school community
81%
64%
Our school makes a comprehensive assessment of student achievement
88%
79%
Our school has a positive school spirit
86%
64%
Our school has high expectations for teachers
83%
87%
Our school is safe for students
School leaders are available and open to all members of the school
community
Our school has a high quality academic program
Our school has all members of the school community focused on the
mission of the school
Our school has the appropriate level of discipline
81%
82%
87%
71%
84%
69%
75%
65%
76%
46%
Our school has the resources to achieve its mission
73%
58%
Our school has a mission-driven academic program
84%
68%
Our school has an effective board
Our school uses a team approach to education that involves the entire
school community
Our school spends more time than other schools on academics
All members of the school community are committed to the mission of the
school
Our school empowers teachers to make decisions
72%
56%
82%
73%
68%
49%
74%
62%
80%
67%
Our school has effective administration
81%
63%
Our school is financially stable
58%
53%
All members of the school community are proud of our school
81%
67%
Our school uses innovative educational practices
87%
79%
Survey Item
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
21
Performance areas
Parents and staff have a similar view of
some performance areas as relative strengths
of the Ball State University Charter Schools.
These strengths focus on the quality of
teaching, faculty/teachers, access and use of
computers and other technology as well as
providing opportunities for parental
involvement. In addition, parents view the
academic program, student development,
communicating student achievement, the
enrollment process, individual student
attention, and the administration as relative
strengths of the school.
Classroom management is one relative
concern that parents and staff share. In
addition, it seems that support services
might also be considered a relative concern
of some parents.
Somewhat in contrast, the relative concerns
of the staff include some areas highlighted
by parents as relative strengths. The areas
that register as relative concerns for staff are
the academic program, student development,
communicating student achievement,
communicating, meeting the school's
mission, the administration, and the students
and student development.
The detailed list of performance areas used
in the survey is provided in Figure A-13
below. It shows the percentage of parents
and staff who rate the related performance
area as excellent or very good.
Figure A-13
Parents, Staff, and Board Overall Loyalty Survey Results
%
Parents
61%
%
Staff
44%
Enrollment/admissions process
68%
59%
Quality of teaching/instruction
73%
66%
School administration
69%
54%
Teacher professional development
68%
41%
School facilities
54%
35%
Individualized student attention
67%
53%
Access to/use of computers and other technologies
74%
73%
Parents
62%
42%
Support services (e.g. counseling, healthcare, etc.)
56%
35%
Faculty/teachers
Services provided to special needs students (e.g. English as a second
language, disabilities, academically challenged, etc.)
School safety
72%
75%
64%
47%
67%
54%
Communication about student learning/achievement
70%
56%
Student development
69%
54%
Opportunities for parental involvement
81%
73%
Curriculum/academic program
70%
56%
Transportation services
31%
24%
Students
62%
48%
Communication about meeting the school’s mission
64%
44%
Student-teacher ratio/class size
65%
57%
Food service
30%
20%
School size
60%
49%
Teacher decision making
63%
56%
Location of school
63%
50%
School material and supplies
Classroom management (e.g. student behavior,
discipline, etc.)
56%
41%
51%
52%
Survey Item
School board
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
22
Open-ended constituent
survey responses
All ten Ball State University Charter Schools
participated in the 2005 constituent survey.
Participants were also provided an opportunity
to respond to three open-ended questions on
the survey:
Academy, which had 82% of the responses
with a positive tone, Charter School of the
Dunes had 76% positive tone, and Timothy L.
Johnson Academy's responses to question one
were only 65% positive.
1. What works well at the school? What are
the strengths of the school? Please provide
examples or descriptions.
Most of the schools had 80-97% of their
responses coded with a negative tone for
question two. Exceptions were: Options
Charter School, which had 72% of the
responses coded with a negative tone,
Community Montessori, which had 70% of
the responses coded with a negative tone, and
Thea Bowman Leadership Academy, which
had only 55% of question two coded with a
negative tone.
2. What does not work well at the school?
What are your concerns? Please provide
examples or descriptions.
3. Please share any additional information
about this school.
Qualitative analysis of participant responses
included reading and coding responses as
categories emerged. QSR N6 software6
provided the system for developing relevant
categories of analysis to organize the data.
Figure A-14 shows how responses were tallied
for each category as positive tones, negative
tones, neutral tones or no comment (NC)
based on the prominent tone in the response.
On question one most schools had responses
that were positive with 90-100% of the
answers in those schools coded as having a
positive tone. Exceptions were: Campagna
Question 1: What is
working well?
The third question provided an opportunity for
respondents to answer positively, negatively,
or neutrally. Those schools that had more
responses for question three coded positively
than negatively were: Irvington Community
School, Community Montessori, New
Community School, Options Charter School,
Thea Bowman Leadership Academy, and
Veritas Academy. Those schools that had more
responses for question three coded negatively
than positively were: Campagna Academy,
Charter School of the Dunes, Rural
Community Academy and Timothy L.
Johnson Academy.
Question 2: What needs to
be improved?
Question 3: Any
additional comments?
Q. 2
Neutral
or (no)
9%
Q. 3
Positive
Tone
9%
Q. 3
Negative
Tone
27%
Q. 3
Neutral
or (no)
64%
School
Campagna Academy
Total #
Responses
11
Q. 1
Positive
Tone
82%
Q. 1
Negative
Tone
0%
Q. 1
Neutral
or (no)
18%
Q. 2
Positive
Tone
9%
Charter School of the
Dunes
80
76%
11%
13%
1%
83%
16%
21%
31%
48%
Community
Montessori
66
98%
0%
2%
3%
70%
27%
42%
8%
50%
Irvington Community
School
52
90%
4%
6%
2%
81%
17%
40%
21%
39%
New Community
School
32
100%
0%
0%
0%
97%
3%
47%
6%
47%
Options Charter
School
39
97%
3%
0%
5%
72%
23%
64%
15%
21%
Rural Community
Academy
36
92%
8%
0%
0%
97%
3%
42%
44%
14%
Thea Bowman
Leadership Academy
207
95%
1%
4%
7%
55%
38%
31%
16%
54%
Timothy L Johnson
Academy
40
65%
7%
28%
10%
83%
8%
33%
35%
33%
Veritas Academy
29
100%
0%
0%
0%
86%
14%
41%
21%
38%
6QSR
Q. 2
Negative
Tone
82%
International Pty Ltd. (2002) QSR N6. [Computer software]. Melbourne, Australia: QSR.
Figure A-14
Open-ended Constituent
Survey Coded Responses
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
23
Strengths
After analyzing the respondents' open-ended
answers, the researchers found that these
categories emerged as strengths across the ten
charter schools.
Figure A-15 shows the strengths determined
in the survey. Based on the information
below, constituents at all schools indicate that
the teachers at their school are a strength.
Instructional programs (60% of the schools)
and parental support (50% of the schools) are
also strengths based on participants'
responses. Additionally, administration,
communication, school and class size, and
support staff were indicated as strengths (40%
of the schools). Other areas only have one or
two schools with enough responses to list the
area as a strength.
Figure A-15
Open-ended Survey Responses Coded as Strengths
# of Schools
with area
selected
as a strength
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
24
Positive Tone
Schools
10
*(7 1) Instruction and
Curriculum/Teachers
**CA, CSOD, CM, ICS,
NCS, OCS, RCA ,
TBLA, TLJA, and VA
6
(7 2) Instruction and Curriculum/
Instructional Programs
CSOD, CM, NCS, OCS,
RCA, TBLA
5
(10 1) Parental and Community
Involvement/Parental Support
CM, NCS, RCA, TBLA,
VA
4
(6 4) Leadership/Administration
ICS, OCS, TBLA, VA
4
(6 3) Leadership/Communication
CM, ICS, OCS, TBLA
4
(7 5) Instruction and
Curriculum/Classroom/ School Size
NCS, OCS, RCA, VA
4
(7 11) ) Instruction and
Curriculum/Support Staff
CM, ICS, OCS, VA
2
(6 2) Leadership/Collaboration
CSOD, VA
1
(10 2) Parental and Community
Involvement/Community Support
RCA
1
(7 3) Instruction and Curriculum/Student
Needs/Special Needs
CA
1
(6 4 1) Leadership/Admin./Student
Discipline
TBLA
1
(5 5) Technology
VA
1
(4) Extracurricular
RCA
*Survey category numbers are listed in parentheses.
**School names are abbreviated. Campagna Academy (CA), Charter School of the Dunes (CSOD), Community
Montessori (CM), Irvington Community School (ICS), New Community School (NCS), Options Charter School
(OCS), Rural Community Academy (RCA), Thea Bowman Leadership Academy (TBLA), Timothy L. Johnson
Academy (TLJA), Veritas Academy (VA)
Areas for improvement
After analyzing the respondents' open-ended
answers, the researchers categorized the
primary areas needing improvement across the
ten charter schools.
Figure A-16 shows the areas for improvement
identified in the survey. Student discipline
was viewed as an area for improvement in
70% of the Ball State University Charter
Schools. Fifty percent of the schools
indicated that transportation, parking, and/or
student pick-up needed to improve in their
schools. Those areas with 30% of the schools
listing the problem as a primary area for
improvement were: teachers, communication,
and administration. The rest of the areas for
improvement involved only one or two
schools.
Schools that had the greatest number of
strengths (six or seven) cited by respondents
were: Options Charter School, Rural
Community Academy, Thea Bowman
Leadership Academy, and Veritas Academy.
Those schools with the fewest number of
strengths (one or two) cited by their
respondents were: Campagna Academy and
Timothy L. Johnson Academy (which had
very few respondents and needed 20% of the
respondents to cite a strength or area for
improvement).
Schools that had the fewest number of areas
for improvement (one or two) cited by their
respondents were: Campagna Academy,
Community Montessori, New Community
School, Options Charter School, and Thea
Bowman Leadership Academy. Those schools
that had the greatest number of areas for
improvement (six) cited by their respondents
were: Rural Community Academy and
Timothy L. Johnson Academy.
Figure A-16
Open-ended Survey Responses Coded as Areas for Improvement
# of Schools
with area
selected
as an area for
improvement
Negative Tone
Schools
7
*(6 4 1)
Leadership/Administration/Student
Discipline
**CA, CSOD, CM, ICS,
OCS, RCA, TLJA
5
(8) Transportation/Parking/Pick-Up
CSOD, ICS, TLJA, TBLA,
VA
3
(7 1) Instruction and
Curriculum/Teachers
ICS, RCA, TLJA
3
(6 3) Leadership/Communication
RCA, TLJA,VA
3
(6 4) Leadership/Administration
CSOD, ICS, RCA
2
(10 1) Parental and Community
Involvement/Parental Support
RCA, TLJA
2
(5 4) Facilities/Playground
TLJA, VA
2
(5 2) Facilities/Buildings/Classrooms
CM, NCS
2
1
(7 2) Instruction and
Curriculum/Instructional Programs
(7 10) Instruction and
Curriculum/Structure/Consistency
RCA, VA
OCS
*Survey category numbers are listed in parentheses.
**School names are abbreviated. Campagna Academy (CA), Charter School of the Dunes (CSOD), Community
Montessori (CM), Irvington Community School (ICS), New Community School (NCS), Options Charter School
(OCS), Rural Community Academy (RCA), Thea Bowman Leadership Academy (TBLA), Timothy L. Johnson
Academy (TLJA), Veritas Academy (VA)
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
25
Summary
Researchers concurred that respondents
often conveyed strong emotion in their
open-ended survey answers and a tone of
honesty. All schools were united in their
appreciation for the teachers in their
schools with a range of 39% to 64% of
each school's respondents specifically
mentioning teachers in a positive way.
Although seven schools listed student
discipline as an area for improvement, a
range of 15% to 38% of each of these
school's respondents noted student
discipline as an area for improvement.
The positives outweighed the negatives
with most schools' respondents. The data
will assist Ball State University's Charter
Schools in continuing a progress of
building on their strengths and
proactively addressing areas for
improvement.
Irvington Charter School
grade 3 student creates a
dinosaur for a unit on the
extinct creatures
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
26
3. Are the schools
financially viable?
With limited funds and high start-up costs, the
first few years of a charter school's existence
are critical. Establishment of strong
accounting and financial management
practices is essential to success. Ball State
University's Office of the Vice President for
Business Affairs conducts a detailed review of
each charter school's budget performance,
financial status, and future projections.
In addition, the university reviews each
school's State Board of Accounts Audit and
monitors changes and improvements
recommended in these reports. Currently,
eight schools will be audited by the SBOA
following the 2005 fiscal year: Campagna
Academy, Community Montessori, Irvington
Community School, New Community School,
Options Charter School, Rural Community
Academy, Timothy L. Johnson Academy, and
Veritas Academy.
4. Are the schools providing
conditions for academic
success?
Academic walkthroughs
Two teams of education experts led by Dr.
Marilynn Quick, Assistant Professor of
Educational Leadership, and including Dr.
Barbara Downey, Jane Martin, and Donald
Setterloff, conducted classroom observations
at eight of the ten Ball State University charter
schools in February, 2005. Each walkthrough
had a specific structure7. Team members
collected data on student engagement (on-task
behavior), curriculum focus and instructional
practices. For example, classroom
organization and management, questioning
strategies, and teacher-student interactions
might be noted.
After multiple visits to individual classrooms
and administrative interviews, team members
processed the data. Global school patterns
were compared to Indiana standards, the
7Academic
standards of “best practice”8, and to the
unique goals set forth in the school's charter. A
debriefing to share strengths that had been
observed by all team members and reflective
questions proposed, took place at the end of
the visit. The purpose of the reflective
questions was to guide future planning and
discussion for the school as the staff engages
in continuous school improvement.
Baseline data has been gathered for the Ball
State University Charter Schools in the areas
of student engagement (on-task behavior),
curriculum focus, and instructional practices.
Team members have determined that all ten
charter schools are functioning at the average
to high performance level in all three areas
observed.
Two schools, considered performing at an
exceptional level, were excused from the 2005
academic walkthrough process. Community
Montessori, Inc. and New Community School
were excused, so academic walkthrough
summary information does not appear in the
individual school synopses.
Extended academic walkthroughs
Similarly, if it was deemed necessary,
additional data was gathered during an
extended in-depth academic walkthrough
performed as a follow-up to the February,
2005, academic walkthrough. These extended
academic walkthroughs were conducted to
provide a more detailed picture of the school's
successes and challenges and offer specific
recommendations for improvement. To
support the accountability process, the
schools' were asked to respond in writing to
the recommendations with details about how
these recommendations have been, or will be,
addressed.
The Ball State University Office of Charter
Schools conducted extended academic
walkthroughs in the spring of 2005, at Charter
School of the Dunes, Rural Community
Academy, and Veritas Academy. Summaries
of these reviews appear in the Comprehensive
Synopsis of Individual Schools.
Community Montessori
students discuss possible
solutions
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
walkthrough structure adapted from Carolyn Downey and Larry Frase's model, Curriculum Management Services,
Inc.
8Best
practices (as defined by Zemelman, S., Daniels, H., and Hyde, A. 1998. Best Practice: New Standards for Teaching and
Learning in America's Schools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann) are “current, national consensus recommendations about 'best
educational practice' in each of the traditional school curriculum areas: reading, writing, math, science, and social studies.”
27
Comprehensive Synopsis of
Individual
Schools
To accompany the information reported on
Ball State University Charter Schools as a
whole, a comprehensive synopsis for each of
the ten individual currently operating Ball
State University Charter Schools is presented
on the following pages.
Campagna Academy Charter School
Each report contains profile information on
the schools, including demographics, student
and teacher retention, enrollment, location,
and summaries of the school's purpose and
educational program.
New Community School
Detailed school performance information is
organized according to the four accountability
questions described in the previous section of
this report.
Charter School of the Dunes
Community Montessori
Irvington Community School
Options Charter School
Rural Community Academy
Thea Bowman Leadership Academy
Timothy L. Johnson Academy
Veritas Academy
Those four questions are:
1. Is the educational
program a success?
2. Is the school
organizationally sound?
3. Is the school financially
viable?
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
28
4. Is the school providing
conditions for academic
success?
Campagna Academy
Charter School
Campagna Academy
Charter School
“Restoring Hope and Building Dreams”
Grades Served . . . 9-12
2004-2005 Enrollment
2003-2004 Enrollment
2002-2003 Enrollment
Enrollment at capacity
. . . . . . . . . . 76
. . . . . . . . . . . 36
. . . . . . . . . . . 16
. . . . . . . . . . 130
Student Attendance Rate . . . . . . . *89%
Student Retention Rate . . . . . . **68%
Teacher Retention Rate . . . . . . . **78%
Students in
Special Education . . . . . . . . . . . . *9.3%
Limited English
Proficiency Students . . . . . . . . . . . *0%
* Source: Indiana Department of Education website
** Percentages determined using ADM count numbers on returning students and teachers
403 Cline Avenue
Schererville, IN 46375
(219) 322-8614
Profile of Campagna Academy Charter School
Demographics
campagnaacademy.org
Figure B-1 shows the demographic composition (black, white, Hispanic and other9) of
Campagna Academy Charter School. Campagna Academy serves a minority population of 99%
compared to the state average of 21%. Figure B-2 demonstrates free and reduced lunch
percentages at Campagna Academy. Seventy-six percent of students that attend Campagna
Academy qualify for free or reduced lunch.
Figure B-1
Figure B-2
Campagna Academy Charter School Percentage
Paid, Reduced price, Free lunch 2004-2005
Campagna Academy Charter School
Race/Ethnicity 2004-2005
Other
14%
Paid
24%
Hispanic
10%
Black
Paid
White
White
1%
Reduced price
Hispanic
Other
Black
75%
Free
65%
Reduced price
11%
Free
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
29
9 Other
includes children of Hispanic, Asian, Native American, and Multi-racial origin.
Enrollment
Purpose
Figure B-3 shows the current, projected and
capacity enrollment for Campagna Academy
Charter School. At capacity, Campagna
Academy will provide education services to
130 students. In 2004-2005, the enrollment at
Campagna Academy was almost double that
of the 2002-2003 year.
The Campagna Academy Charter School
(CACS) is an “alternative school of choice”
located in Schereville, Indiana. The school
provides partial-day, full-day and evening
educational programs to serve grades 9-12.
Many students attending CACS had poor
performance or attendance in high school.
Additionally, students may choose to attend
Campagna Academy for a more structured
education environment and smaller classes.
Figure B-3
Current, Projected, Capacity Enrollment, Grades
Served for Campagna Academy Charter School
School
Name
Campagna
Academy
Year
Opened
2002-2003
2004-2005
Enrollment
(grades
served)
Projected
Enrollment
2005-2006
76
(grades 9-12)
130
(grades 9-12)
Location
403 Cline Avenue
Schererville, IN 46375
Campagna Academy is located in
Schererville, Indiana. Schererville is in Lake
County.
Campagna Academy
Charter School
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
30
Projected
Enrollment
2006-2007
130
(grades 9-12)
Enrollment
at Capacity
(grades
served at
capacity)
Student
Waiting
List (as of
June 30,
2005)
130 students
41
(grades 9-12)
Educational
Program
Campagna Academy offers instruction in Core
40 curriculum classes taught by qualified,
Indiana state-licensed teachers. Elective
courses are offered to students to expand their
knowledge base. Advanced and remedial
programs are available through computerassisted instruction and independent study
programs. The school requires the completion
of an independent project in order to graduate
and also requires either school involvement or
community service as a part of graduation
requirements.
A very small number of students at Campagna
Academy, 18, took the ISTEP+ exams in fall of
2004. Additionally, students that attend
Campagna Academy have traditionally struggled
academically. Academic progress as measured
by ISTEP+, was not made for students in grades
9 and 10.
Performance
of Campagna Academy
Charter School
1. Is the educational
program a success?
Ultimately, charter schools are evaluated by their
academic success. The Ball State Office of
Charter Schools evaluates how each charter
school is performing against multiple success
measures, including results of Indiana Statewide
Test of Educational Progress-Plus (ISTEP+),
Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA) or
Test of Adult Basic Skills (TABE), and Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP).
Figure B-5 shows ISTEP+ results for all students
who attend Campagna Academy. It then
compares the percentage of students passing
ISTEP+ for returning students to the percentage
of students passing ISTEP+ for students in their
first year at the school. The grade 10 data shows
that students new to Campagna Academy
performed better on the Language Arts portion
of the ISTEP+. New and returning students both
did poorly on the Math portion of the ISTEP+.
Adequate yearly progress (AYP)
Under federal No Child Left Behind
legislation, which requires schools to show
annual improvement in academic achievement
and attendance, the Indiana Department of
Education (IDOE) has determined Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP) for all Indiana schools,
including charter schools.
Indiana Statewide Test of
Educational Progress-Plus (ISTEP+)
Figure B-4 shows the results of ISTEP+ for
Campagna Academy students compared to
students in Gary Public Schools and other public
schools in Indiana. It is not possible to use the
results to measure individual students' progress
over time because each grade's test results
pertain to different children from year to year.
However, performance trends can be observed.
The IDOE determines AYP designations for
each school based on the overall percentage of
students passing the English and Mathematics
Figure B-4
Percentage of Students in Campagna Academy, Gary Public Schools, and Indiana Public Schools
Passing ISTEP+ in the fall 2004
Campagna
Academy
Charter
School
English/LA
Math
Both English & Math
Campagna
Gary
Indiana
Campagna
Gary
Indiana
Campagna
Gary
Indiana
2004
0%
34%
67%
0%
24%
68%
0%
19%
59%
2003
**
2002
10th grade
**
33%
35%
32%
68%
67%
69%
0%
22%
*
19%
26%
25%
64%
69%
68%
0%
9%
*
16%
21%
19%
57%
60%
60%
9th grade
2004
2003
2002
8%
22%
*
* Percentages not reported due to the small numbers of students taking the ISTEP+.
** No students tested in 9th grade for 2002 and 2003.
Campagna Academy
Charter School
Figure B-5
Percentage of Students in Campagna Academy Charter School, Returning Students, and First Year
Students Passing ISTEP+ in fall 2004.
Campagna
Academy
Charter
School
ALL STUDENTS
RETURNING STUDENTS
FIRST YEAR STUDENTS
#
Students
LA
Math
Both
LA &
Math
#
Students
LA
Math
Both
LA &
Math
#
Students
LA
Math
Both
LA &
Math
9th Grade
6
0%
0%
0%
*0
NA
NA
NA
6
0%
0%
0%
10th Grade
12
8%
0%
0%
5
0%
0%
0%
7
14%
0%
0%
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
31
ISTEP+ tests. Additionally, schools must
uphold or improve elementary and middle
school attendance rates, and high school
graduation rates. (AYP is also determined for
student subgroups within the population,
including race/ethnicity, free/reduced price
lunch eligibility, limited English proficiency,
and special education, provided that there are
at least 30 students in a particular subgroup.)
Campagna Academy Charter School did not
make AYP in 2004-2005. Schools must meet
every AYP target for each category in order to
make AYP. Missing any one AYP target will
result in the school not making AYP.
As a Title I School, Campagna Academy
Charter School met all student performance
targets except one, the percentage of students
passing the mathematics portion of ISTEP+.
Campagna Academy Charter School did not
have enough students in any of the subgroup
categories, so AYP was not determined for the
subgroups.
Test of Adult Basic Education (TABE)
A total of 57 students completed the TABE in
the fall of 2004, producing scores in the
content areas of reading, math computation,
applied math, language and spelling. Of this
original group of examinees, only 27 students
also completed the TABE in spring, 2005. The
mean scores on the fall test for the 27 students
who also participated in the spring test, appear
in Figure B-6.
Of those 27 examinees who had scores in both
fall and spring, Figure B-7 includes the mean
growth for each test, as well as the number
(and percent) of these individuals who
experienced positive change in scores.
As is evident in the table, the majority of
students completing both fall and spring
testing experienced some growth in the GE
(grade equivalent) scores in all subjects. The
greatest growth was experienced in Language,
with an average gain of just over one GE. On
the other hand, average growth in both math
content areas was less than one GE over the
testing period.
Figure B-8 includes the average GE scores for
the 27 individuals tested in the spring. These
results show that on average, the GE scores
fall between upper grade 6 and upper grade 8
with the bulk being in grade 7. It is important
to remember that GE scores reflect the
average performance of individuals at a
particular grade level, taking this test. It does
not mean that the examinees should be in the
grade reflected by the GE score. It is also
worth noting that Campagna Academy
students start out performing academically
well behind their peers. While the students
experienced academic growth from fall to
spring, they are still performing at a level well
below their peers.
Figure B-6
Campagna Academy mean exam scores by content area: fall 2004
Reading
Mean
Math
Computation
6.26
Applied
Math
6.26
Language
7.16
Spelling
6.40
7.74
Figure B-7
Campagna Academy change in exam score by content area: mean growth, percent positive change
Campagna Academy
Charter School
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
N=27
Mean growth
N (%) positive
change
Reading
Math
Computation
0.96
17 (63%)
0.55
17 (63%)
Applied
Math
Language
0.60
16 (59%)
Spelling
1.31
20 (74%)
1.15
18 (67%)
Figure B-8
Campagna Academy mean exam scores by content area: spring 2005 test
N=27
Reading
Math
Computation
32
Mean
7.22
6.81
Applied
Math
Language
7.76
Spelling
7.71
8.89
5
5
5
4.5
4
4
3
Series 1
2
3
Average
Average
5
5
4.5
5
2. Is the school
organizationally
sound?
Organizational Soundness:
Policy and Strategic Planning
Academic Success:
Mission-Driven Organization
Series 2
2
1
1
0
0
1.1
1.2
2.1
1.3
2.2
2.3
Question Number
Question Number
Performance Against Success
Measures:
Communication and Advocacy
Academic Success:
Mission-Driven Organization
5
5
5
4.5
5
4
5
5
4
Series 3
2
Average
Average
4
3
3.5
3
Series 4
2
1
1
0
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
0
Question Number
4.1
4.2
4.3
Question Number
Organizational Soundness:
Risk Management
Financial Viability:
Budget Development and
Management
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4.5
4
3
Series 55
2
Average
Average
4.5
5
4
3
Series 6
2
1
1
0
0
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
6.1
5.5
Academic Success:
Leadership Development
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
6.2
6.3
Question Number
Question Number
Organizational Soundness:
Board Development and
Education
5.0
4.5
5
5
5
4.5
5
5
4
Average
Series 7
2
Average
4
3
3
Series 8
2
1
1
0
0
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
8.1
7.6
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
8.6
8.7
Question Number
Question Number
Organizational Soundness:
The Board's Role
5
5
5
5
5
Campagna Academy
Charter School
5
4
Average
Figure B-9 shows the results for all
nine areas of the board selfassessment survey for Campagna
Academy. Campagna Academy's
board rated itself well in all areas.
The only exception was the need to
improve each board member's
ability to communicate programs
and services to the community.
Figure B-9
Campagna Academy Board selfassessment results (Series questions
1-9)
4.5
4
4
Board self-assessments
Organizational soundness is
essential for short-term success
and long-term growth of every
charter school. Such organizational
strength depends on strong board
leadership. Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools has
developed a board self-assessment
survey10 to help each school board
evaluate its performance and
identify areas of strength and areas
in need of improvement. This
survey can be viewed on the
website
www.bsu.edu/teachers/charter.
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
3
Series 9
2
1
0
9.1
9.2
9.3
9.4
Question Number
9.5
10 Board self-assessment tool was adopted from the
Girls, Inc. “Board Self Assessment.”
33
Constituent surveys
Loyalty
Figure B-10 demonstrates that a majority of
parents and board members responding to the
survey demonstrated loyalty to Campagna
Academy in all respects. Staff also
demonstrated loyalty to Campagna Academy,
with the exception of recommending the
school to friends and colleagues, which they
endorsed much less frequently than did
members of the other two groups. Figure B-9
shows the percentage of parents, staff, and
board members who are extremely likely or
very likely to be an advocate for Campagna
Academy.
Campagna Academy grade 9
student completing science
experiment
Quality
Figure B-11 explains that parents and board
members indicated strong support for the
quality of the school, with near unanimous
endorsements of the overall quality of
education, overall quality compared to other
schools and overall satisfaction with education
quality. Staff was somewhat less likely to
endorse the overall quality of education, but a
majority did have positive opinions about the
overall quality compared to other schools and
satisfaction with education quality. Figure B10 shows the percentage of parents, staff, and
board members who are very satisfied and
somewhat satisfied with the quality of
education at Campagna Academy.
Image/attitude
Among all constituents, there was general
agreement that the school has a caring
environment, communicates with parents,
continuously improves, holds teachers
accountable, is safe, has available
administrators, has a mission driven academic
program, has an effective board, and uses a
team approach to education. Parent and board
member responses also suggested that they
believe that members of the school
community understand its mission, have
positive school spirit, and that the school has
high quality academic programs, has sufficient
resources, and has a committed community.
All three constituent groups agreed that areas
of concern include financial stability of the
school and time devoted to academics as
compared to other schools. Furthermore, staff
also expressed concerns about the
understanding of the school's mission by
members of the school community, the level
of school spirit, the focus on the school
mission, discipline, availability of resources
and commitment of the school community to
the school's mission. Board members and
parents indicated concerns regarding the use
of innovative educational practices in the
school. The board members also responded
with concerns about the empowerment of
teachers, while parents voiced concerns about
the commitment of the school community to
Figure B-10
Campagna Academy Parents, Staff, and Board Overall Loyalty Survey Results
Overall Loyalty- includes extremely likely and very likely
responses
Likelihood to recommend
%
Parents *(7)
%
Staff (8)
%
Board (4)
86%
38%
100%
Likelihood to return next year
86%
88%
100%
Likelihood to increase support
88%
86%
67%
*() indicates number of survey responses
Campagna Academy
Charter School
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
Figure B-11
Campagna Academy Parents, Staff, and Board Quality of Education Survey Results
Overall Quality- includes very satisfied and somewhat
satisfied responses
Overall Quality
Overall Quality- Better Than Other Schools
34
Overall Satisfaction
*() indicates number of survey responses
%
Parents *(7)
%
Staff (8)
%
Board (4)
86%
63%
100%
86%
75%
75%
100%
88%
100%
the school's mission, the effectiveness of the
administration and the level of school pride by
members of the school community.
Performance
All three constituent groups surveyed
indicated that relative strengths in the
performance areas include the student-teacher
ratio, quality of teaching/instruction, and the
teachers. In all other performance areas at
least one of the groups voiced some concerns.
There was general agreement that the
following areas were of some concern: the
enrollment/admissions process, the school
facilities, access to computing facilities,
parents, support services, services for special
needs students, school safety,
curriculum/academic programs, students,
communication about meeting the school's
mission, and classroom management.
Parents and staff also showed concern about
the performance of the school's board, though
the responding board members did not share
this concern. The former two groups also
shared concerns about student development,
while parents and board members were
concerned about the level of individualized
student attention. Further, parents were
concerned about the school administration,
communication of student
learning/achievement and teacher decision
making.
Board members and staff shared concerns
about teacher professional development,
opportunities for parental involvement and
school materials and supplies. Finally, board
members alone were concerned about the
location of the school while staff were
concerned about transportation services and
food service.
Open-ended constituent
survey responses
In order to give respondents an opportunity to
express personal opinions or make specific
comments regarding their individual schools,
all constituent surveys included open-ended
questions. Participants (parents, staff, and
board members) were asked to respond to
three open-ended questions on the Ball State
University 2005 constituent survey:
1. What works well at the school? What are
the strengths of the school? Please
provide examples or descriptions.
2. What does not work well at the school?
What are your concerns? Please provide
examples or descriptions.
3. Please share any additional information
about this school.
Researchers used qualitative analysis of
responses along with QSR N6 software11,
which provided the system for developing
relevant categories of analysis to organize the
data.
Strengths
Because of the small number of surveys (11)
returned for Campagna Academy, only two
strengths and one area for improvement are
described in this report. After analyzing the
respondents' open-ended answers, the
researchers found that these categories
emerged as strengths:
1. The staff is viewed as caring and positive
collaboration exists among the staff.
Campagna Academy
students are part of
Evening Star Program
2. Small class sizes and individualized
instruction address student needs and
promote student achievement and
confidence.
Areas for improvement
After analyzing the respondents' open-ended
answers, the researchers found this theme
emerged as an area needing improvement:
1. Parents and staff are concerned about
negative student behavior and attitudes.
Summary
Campagna Academy has been successful in
creating a positive, collaborative environment
for students, staff, and parents. Some
important steps have been made in the area of
hands-on, student-centered academic
instruction. Respondents indicate that more
work needs to be done in terms of the
perception of the school.
Campagna Academy
Charter School
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
35
11QSR
International Pty Ltd. (2002) QSR N6. [Computer software]. Melbourne, Australia: QSR.
3. Is the school
financially viable?
With limited funds and high start-up costs, the
first few years of a charter school's existence
are critical. Establishment of strong
accounting and financial management
practices is essential to success.
Ball State University's Office of the Vice
President for Business Affairs conducts a
detailed review of each charter school's
budget performance, financial status, and
future projections, and shares these results
with the schools. In addition, the university
reviews each school's State Board of Accounts
Audit and monitors changes and
improvements recommended in these reports.
Campagna Academy appears to be in solid
financial shape, based on the documents
submitted. The strength of the budget is the
General Fund. Also, the procurement of grant
funds should be noted as a strength. Financial
practices seem sound. The budget was
estimated a bit high, but expenses were
budgeted soundly.
The biggest financial challenges would
include School Lunch Fund, Textbook Fund,
Student Transportation Fund and not
overspending grants. Normal adjustments
would include development of additional
object lines in accounts. One question was the
location of liability insurance in expenditures.
This was not evident in the budget.
Campagna Academy is being audited by the
State Board of Accounts following the 2005
fiscal year. Results of this audit will be
summarized in the next accountability report.
4. Is the school providing
conditions for academic
success?
Academic walkthroughs
Academic walkthrough12 team members
collected data on student engagement time on
task, curriculum focus and instructional
processes. Global school patterns were
compared to Indiana standards, the standards
of “best practice”13, and to the unique goals
set forth in the school's charter.
Strengths that were observed across the school
by all team members were shared and
reflective questions were asked. The purpose
of the reflective questions was to guide future
planning and discussion for the school as the
staff engages in continuous school
improvement.
The principal of Campagna Academy
presented materials to the team that clearly
outlined the changes that have been made at
Campagna Academy over the past year. It was
evident that the issues presented in the 2004
reflective questions had been thoughtfully
addressed.
Team members documented the following
strengths:
— curriculum topics were relevant and
appropriate for teenage learners;
— partnerships with community
organizations were still in place to
enhance student learning;
— attempts to provide technology as a
classroom learning tool were evident;
— instructional time was used very
effectively; and
— a variety of instructional grouping
Campagna Academy
Charter School
practices were used.
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
12Academic
walkthrough structure adapted from Carolyn Downey and Larry Frase's model, Curriculum Management Services,
Inc.
36
13Best
practices (as defined by Zemelman, S., Daniels, H., and Hyde, A. 1998. Best Practice: New Standards for Teaching and
Learning in America's Schools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann) are “current, national consensus recommendations about 'best
educational practice' in each of the traditional school curriculum areas: reading, writing, math, science, and social studies.”
The walkthrough team asked the Campagna
Academy staff to consider reflective questions
that addressed issues related to use of
instructional assistants, individualized
software programs, instructional materials,
and project-based learning.
Team members rated the student engagement
on-task behavior high. Curriculum focus and
instructional practices were rated as above
average.
Final summary
Campagna Academy Charter School, in the
third year of a seven-year contract, has
achieved significant levels of loyalty among
the board, staff, and parents. Each of these
constituent groups has indicated very positive
feelings about the quality of education being
delivered by the school.
Results of the academic walkthrough were
generally positive overall and the school
appears to be financially sound.
These improvements have not translated into
academic success for Campagna Academy's
students. No students passed both sections of
the ISTEP+ test in 2004. What's more, only a
small number of students participated in the
standardized test administered in the fall and
the spring. The 27 students that did take the
Test of Adult Basic Education (TABE) in the
fall and spring tested well below their grade
level and did not make academic progress at a
significant rate.
Campagna Academy
Charter School
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
37
Campagna
Academy
Charter School
Campagna Academy
Charter School
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
38
Charter School
of the Dunes
Charter School
of the Dunes
“A Tuition FREE Public School”
Grades Served . . . . K-6
2004-2005 Enrollment . . . . . . . . . 442
2003-2004 Enrollment . . . . . . . . . . 436
Enrollment at capacity . . . . . . . . . . 675
Student Attendance Rate . . . . . . . *92%
Student Retention Rate . . . . . . **80%
Teacher Retention Rate . . . . . . . **65%
Students in
Special Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . *8%
Limited English
Proficiency Students . . . . . . . . . . . *0%
* Source: Indiana Department of Education website
** Percentages determined using ADM count numbers on returning students and teachers
860 N. Lake Street
Gary, IN 46403
(219) 939-9690
Profile of Charter School of the Dunes
Demographics
www.csotd.org
Figure C-1 shows the demographic composition (black, white, Hispanic and other14) of Charter
School of the Dunes. Charter School of the Dunes serves a minority population of 98%
compared to the state average of 21%. Figure C-2 demonstrates free and reduced lunch
percentages at Charter School of the Dunes. Sixty-three percent of students that attend Charter
School of the Dunes qualify for free or reduced lunch.
Figure C-1
Figure C-2
Charter School of the Dunes Race/Ethnicity 2004-2005
Charter School of the Dunes Percentage Paid,
Reduced price, Free lunch 2004-2005
Hispanic
0%
White
2%
Charter School
of the Dunes
Other
0%
Black
Paid
37%
White
Hispanic
Other
Free
56%
Black
98%
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
Reduced price
2004-2005
Free
Accountability Report
Paid
Reduced price
7%
39
14 Other
includes children of Hispanic, Asian, Native American, and Multi-racial origin.
Enrollment
Purpose
Figure C-3 shows the current, projected and
capacity enrollment for Charter School of the
Dunes. In 2004-2005, Charter School of the
Dunes provided education services to 442
students, making it one of the largest charter
schools sponsored by Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools.
Charter School of the Dunes is designed to
inspire student success through an innovative
curriculum and creative teaching. The school
adheres to rigorous standards of academic
achievement with the expectation that
students will become lifelong learners. The
school encourages development of solid
character, citizenship, and environmental
stewardship. Charter School of the Dunes
embraces diversity in its students, adapts to
Figure C-3
Current, Projected, Capacity Enrollment, Grades
Served for Charter School of the Dunes
School
Name
Charter
School of the
Dunes
Year
Opened
2003-2004
2004-2005
Enrollment
(grades
served)
Projected
Enrollment
2005-2006
442
(grades K-6)
493
(grades K-7)
Location
403 Cline Avenue
Schererville, IN 46375
Charter School of the Dunes is located in
Gary, Indiana. Gary is in Lake County.
Projected
Enrollment
20062007
Enrollment
at Capacity
(grades
served at
capacity)
675
(grades K-8)
675
(grades K-8)
Student
Waiting
List (as of
June 30,
2005)
55
special needs, and expects students to take
responsibility for their education with the
strong support systems of family, school, and
community.
Educational
Program
Charter School of the Dunes emphasizes the
core skills of mathematics and language arts,
reasoning and research, the interdisciplinary
Paragon Curriculum integrated with
technology, and intensive teacher training to
deliver a well-rounded, quality education.
Charter School
of the Dunes
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
40
different children from year to year. However,
performance trends can be observed.
Performance
of Charter School of the Dunes
Student scores for grade 3 declined from the
2003 to the 2004 school year and were
significantly below their peers at the local and
state level. Scores for grades 4, 5, and 6 would
be considered base-line data for Charter
School of the Dunes as this was the first year
for testing students in these grades. However,
students in these grades attending Charter
School of the Dunes also underperformed
their peers at both the local and state levels.
1. Is the educational
program a success?
Ultimately, charter schools are evaluated by their
academic success. The Ball State Office of
Charter Schools evaluates how each charter
school is performing against multiple success
measures, including results of Indiana Statewide
Test of Educational Progress-Plus (ISTEP+),
Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA) or
Test of Adult Basic Skills (TABE), and Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP).
Figure C-5 further explains ISTEP+ results for
students at Charter School of the Dunes. It
compares the percentage of students passing
ISTEP+ for returning students to the
percentage of students passing ISTEP+ for
students in their first year at the school. More
returning students in grade 4 passed than first
year students in all areas, and in grade 6, more
returning students passed than first year
students in math and both language arts and
math. In grades 3 and 5, the percentages of
new students passing ISTEP+ were higher
than returning students in all areas.
Indiana Statewide Test of
Educational Progress-Plus (ISTEP+)
Figure C-4 shows the results of ISTEP+ for
Charter School of the Dunes students
compared to students in Gary Public Schools
and other public schools in Indiana. It is not
possible to use the results to measure
individual students' progress over time
because each grade's test results pertain to
Figure C-4
Percentage of Students in Charter School of the Dunes, Gary Public Schools, and Indiana Public
Schools Passing ISTEP+ in the fall 2004
Charter
School of
the Dunes
CSOD
Gary
Indiana
CSOD
Gary
Indiana
CSOD
Gary
Indiana
3rd grade
2004
English/LA
Math
Both English & Math
21%
59%
75%
16%
55%
73%
12%
44%
65%
2003
4th grade
41%
56%
74%
22%
57%
71%
20%
44%
63%
2004
2003
5th grade
38%
*
45%
73%
28%
42%
73%
23%
33%
64%
2004
2003
6th grade
2004
2003
42%
*
49%
72%
29%
43%
72%
22%
33%
63%
25%
*
43%
70%
26%
42%
75%
15%
30%
63%
* No students tested in 4th, 5th, or 6th grade for 2003.
Figure C-5
Percentage of Students in Charter School of the Dunes, Returning Students, and First Year Students
Passing ISTEP+ in fall 2004.
Charter
School of
the Dunes
ALL STUDENTS
RETURNING STUDENTS
Charter School
of the Dunes
FIRST YEAR STUDENTS
#
Students
LA
Math
Both
LA &
Math
3rd Grade
61
21%
16%
11%
43
14%
9%
7%
18
39%
33%
22%
4th Grade
64
38%
28%
23%
39
44%
41%
33%
25
28%
8%
8%
#
Students
LA
Math
Both
LA &
Math
#
Students
LA
Math
Both
LA &
Math
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
41
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
Under federal No Child Left Behind
legislation, the Indiana Department of
Education (IDOE) has determined Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP) for all Indiana schools,
including charter schools.
The IDOE determines AYP designations for
each school based on the overall percentage of
students passing the English and mathematics
ISTEP+ tests. Additionally, schools must
uphold or improve elementary and middle
school attendance rates, and high school
graduation rates. (AYP is also determined for
student subgroups within the population,
including race/ethnicity, free/reduced price
lunch eligibility, limited English proficiency,
and special education, provided that there are
at least 30 students in a particular subgroup.)
in grades 5 and 6 greatly exceeded both state
and national norms.
Figure C-6
NWEA scaled scores comparing Charter School
of the Dunes to Indiana and national norms in
math, reading, and language arts
Grade
2
3
189
204
200
4
198
211
208
5
206
219
217
6
214
227
222
7
*
231
227
8
*
238
234
Charter School of the Dunes did not make
AYP in 2004-2005. Schools must meet every
AYP target for each category in order to make
AYP. Missing any one AYP target will result
in the school not making AYP.
Grade
As a Title One School, Charter School of the
Dunes missed student performance targets for
the overall student group, the black subgroup
and the free/reduced lunch subgroup in the
percentage of students passing the English and
the mathematics portions of ISTEP+.
2
Charter School
of the Dunes
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
42
Figure C-7 presents the average growth rate
for students attending Charter School of the
Dunes for each grade and each subject area
tested in fall 2004 and spring 2005. Only
students who took the test in both fall and
spring are included.
Students at Charter School of the Dunes made
growth, but not at the rate of state and national
norms in grades 3 and 4. However, growth
rates in reading and language arts for students
Average Reading Scaled Scores
Charter School
State
National
of the Dunes
176
*
193
3
179
201
198
4
194
207
205
5
199
213
211
6
206
218
215
7
*
221
219
8
*
226
223
Grade
2
Northwest Evaluation Association
(NWEA )
Figure C-6 compares Charter School of the
Dunes students' spring scaled scores to
Indiana and national norms on the math,
reading, and language arts portions of the
NWEA. Student average scaled scores for
Charter School of the Dunes fell below norms
in Indiana and nationally.
Average Math Scaled Scores
Charter School
State
National
of the Dunes
182
*
194
Average Language Scaled Scores
Charter School
State
National
of the Dunes
181
*
*
3
186
204
199
4
199
209
206
5
204
215
212
6
211
219
216
7
*
221
219
8
*
225
222
*An asterisk indicates that data were not available for this
subject and grade, either because the school did not test
students in that grade/subject or because NWEA does not
provide norm data for it.
Charter School of the Dunes
students practicing math
skills on the computer
Figure C-7
NWEA scaled scores comparing Ball State
Charter Schools to Indiana and national norms in
math, reading, and language arts
Grade
2
Average Math Growth Rate
Charter School
State
of the Dunes
10.3
*
National
Grade
15.7
2
Average Language Growth Rate
Charter School
State
National
of the Dunes
10.6
*
*
3
7.8
10.6
11.8
3
6.4
10.6
9.3
4
4.2
8.8
8.9
4
5.6
5.8
6.5
5
5.7
9
8.8
5
8.2
5.2
5.8
6
8.7
9.1
8.1
6
9.5
4.1
4.5
7
*
7.3
6.9
7
*
3
3.6
8
*
7
7.1
8
*
3.2
3.5
Grade
2
Average Reading Growth Rate
Charter School
State
National
of the Dunes
12
*
14.9
3
3.5
9
10.4
4
4.1
6.8
7.4
5
9.6
5.9
6.3
6
15.3
5.3
5.3
7
*
4.1
4.3
8
*
4.1
4.2
*An asterisk indicates that data were not available for this
subject and grade, either because the school did not test
students in that grade/subject or because NWEA does not
provide norm data for it.
Charter School
of the Dunes
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
43
Academic Success:
Mission-Driven Organization
2. Is the school
organizationally
sound?
5
4.0
4
3
Average
Average
4.4
4.0
4
Series 1
2
3.4
3
c
Series 2
2
1
1
0
2.1
0
1.1
1.2
1.3
2.2
2.3
Question Number
Question Number
Academic Success:
Mission-Driven Organization
5
4.2
4.0
4
Performance Against Success
Measures:
Communication and Advocacy
4.0
4.8
5
3.2
3.8
3.8
4
Series 3
2
Average
3
Average
3
Series 44
2
1
1
0
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
0
4.1
Question Number
4.2
4.3
Question Number
Figure C-8 shows the results for all
nine areas of the board selfassessment survey15 for Charter
School of the Dunes. Charter School
of the Dune's board rated itself well
in most areas with series eight
questions, regarding the need for
increased development and
education for board members, as the
only area in need of improvement.
There is a need to provide on-going
education and development related
to board roles and to engage in a
regular process of self-assessment.
Financial Viability:
Budget Development and
Management
Organizational Soundness:
Risk Management
5
4.8
5
4.0
3.8
4
Average
4.2
4.4
4
3.6
3
Series 55
2
Average
Board self-assessments
Organizational soundness is essential
for short-term success and long-term
growth of every charter school. Such
organizational strength depends on
strong board leadership. Ball State
University Office of Charter Schools
has developed a board selfassessment survey10 to help each
school board evaluate its
performance and identify areas of
strength and areas in need of
improvement. This survey can be
viewed on the website
www.bsu.edu/teachers/charter.
4.8
4.6
5
Organizational Soundness:
Policy and Strategic Planning
3
Series 6
2
1
1
0
0
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
6.1
Question Number
5
4.4
4.0
4.2
5
4
3.8
3.2
3.8
4
3
Series 7
2
1
Average
Average
6.3
Organizational Soundness:
Board Development and
Education
4.8
4.4
6.2
Question Number
Academic Success:
Leadership Development
Figure C-8
Charter School of the Dunes Board
self-assessment results (Series
questions 1-9)
4.0
3.2
4.2
3.6
3.8
3.8
3.6
Series 8
3
2
1
0
0
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
7.6
8.1
Question Number
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
8.6
8.7
Question Number
Organizational Soundness:
The Board's Role
Charter School
of the Dunes
4.8
4.8
4.6
4.4
4.2
4
Average
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
5
3
2
Series 9
1
0
9.1
44
9.2
9.3
Question Number
9.4
9.5
15 Board self-assessment tool was adopted from the
Girls, Inc. “Board Self Assessment.”
Constituent surveys
Loyalty
Figure C-9 demonstrates that a majority of
each constituent group of respondents said
that they are likely to return to the school next
year, as well as increase their support for the
school. In addition, a majority of respondents
from each group were found to be satisfied,
overall, with the Charter School of the Dunes.
Approximately two-thirds of both parents and
board members would recommend the school
to friends and colleagues, though only 38% of
staff would do so.
Quality
Figure C-10 explains that parents indicated
satisfaction with the overall quality of
education at the school, while two of three
board members, and 70% of staff were not
satisfied with the quality of education. On the
other hand, almost 80% of parents and all
three board members found that the quality of
education compared to other schools was
satisfactory, though only 50% of staff voiced
this opinion. Finally, all three groups had a
majority of respondents indicating that they
were satisfied with the overall quality of the
education at the school.
Image/attitude
A majority of parents expressed concern over
just one issue, the financial stability of the
school, a concern shared by staff. In all other
respects, over half of responding parents were
positive regarding various aspects of the
school's image and attitude.
As a whole, staff expressed concerns over a
variety of areas, including positive school
spirit, openness and availability of school
leaders to all members of the community, high
quality academic programs, level of school
discipline, availability of resources to
complete the mission, a mission-driven
academic program, teaching approaches
involving all members of the school
community, empowerment of teachers in
decision making, effective administration, and
pride of school community in the school.
Board members shared the staffs' concern
regarding the level of discipline in the school,
and they were also concerned about the
understanding of the school's mission by all
members of the community, the degree to
which teachers are held accountable, the time
spent on academics relative to other schools,
and, in agreement with staff, the level of
teacher empowerment in decision making and
the school community's pride in the school.
All other areas of image and attitude were
rated positively by a majority of all three
Figure C-9
Charter School of the Dunes Parents, Staff, and Board Overall Loyalty Survey Results
Overall Loyaltyincludes extremely likely and very likely responses
Likelihood to recommend
%
Parents *(101)
%
Staff (26)
%
Board (3)
64.4%
38.5%
66.7%
Likelihood to return next year
68.9%
70.4%
66.7%
Likelihood to increase support
74.5%
61.5%
100%
*() indicates number of survey responses
Figure C-10
Charter School of the Dunes Parents, Staff, and Board Quality of Education Survey Results
Overall Qualityincludes very satisfied and somewhat satisfied responses
Overall Quality
%
Parents *(101)
%
Staff (26)
Charter School
of the Dunes
%
Board (3)
62.1%
30%
33.3%
Overall Quality-Better than other schools
78.6%
50%
100%
Overall Satisfaction
84.5%
64.3%
66.7%
*() indicates number of survey responses
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
45
enrollment and admissions process, teacher
professional support, individualized student
attention, parents, services for special needs
students, school safety, communication about
student learning/achievement, student
development, the curriculum/academic
program, students, communication about
meeting the school's mission, student-teacher
ratio, and teacher decision-making.
There were no areas about which all three
constituent groups indicated satisfaction.
Charter School of the Dunes
teacher helping student on
computer
constituent groups, including the caring
environment, communication of student
performance to parents, continuous
improvement of the school, clear definition of
expectations, comprehensive assessment of
student performance, high expectations for
teachers, safety of students, focus on school
mission, effectiveness of school board,
commitment of the school community to its
mission and the use of innovative teaching
practices.
Performance
In terms of school performance, a majority of
the three board members had concerns about
all areas except for opportunities for parental
involvement, the curriculum and academic
program, and the location of the school.
In contrast, parents had relatively fewer
concerns, including the performance of the
school board, the school administration,
school facilities, support services,
transportation services, food service, school
size, school location, school materials, and
classroom management.
Charter School
of the Dunes
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
46
A majority of the responding staff members
shared a number of these concerns with
parents, including the school board, school
administration, school facilities, support
services, transportation services, food service,
school size, school location, school materials
and classroom management. In addition, staff
also expressed concern regarding the
16QSR
Open-ended constituent
survey responses
In order to give respondents an opportunity to
express personal opinions or make specific
comments regarding their individual schools,
all constituent surveys included open-ended
questions. Participants (parents, staff, and
board members) were asked to respond to
three open-ended questions on the Ball State
University 2005 constituent survey:
1. What works well at the school? What are
the strengths of the school? Please
provide examples or descriptions.
2. What does not work well at the school?
What are your concerns? Please provide
examples or descriptions.
3. Please share any additional information
about this school.
Researchers used qualitative analysis of
responses along with QSR N6 software16,
which provided the system for developing
relevant categories of analysis to organize the
data.
Strengths
After analyzing the respondents' open-ended
answers, the researchers found that these
categories emerged as strengths:
1. Parents and staff indicate that teachers at
the school are excellent.
2. A caring staff collaborates well together
as a team.
3. A clear academic curriculum has been
provided. Additionally, an after-school
“Oasis Program” and a tutoring program
have been established.
International Pty Ltd. (2002) QSR N6. [Computer software]. Melbourne, Australia: QSR.
Areas for improvement
After analyzing the respondents' open-ended
answers, the researchers found that these
categories emerged as areas needing
improvement:
1. Discipline appears to be inconsistently
applied.
2. The transportation and after-school pickup system need to be improved.
3. Some view the administration negatively.
Summary
Strongly-worded responses by staff members,
as well as parents delivered a message of
negativity towards school leadership in
general and student discipline in particular. At
the same time, many staff responses expressed
favorable perceptions of teaching
performance. Many parent responses
indicated that their children are in a
supportive, family-like learning environment.
3. Is the school
financially viable?
With limited funds and high start-up costs, the
first few years of a charter school's existence
are critical. Establishment of strong
accounting and financial management
practices is essential to success.
Ball State University's Office of the Vice
President for Business Affairs conducts a
detailed review of each charter school's
budget performance, financial status, and
future projections. In addition, the university
reviews each school's State Board of Accounts
Audit and monitors changes and
improvements recommended in these reports.
The report noted strong cash growth in the
General Fund for Charter School of the
Dunes. Some concerns were noted in three
funding areas that needed transfers from the
General Fund to balance. However, the school
has made strong financial growth from the
previous negative General Fund balance and
17Academic
seems to be heading toward a stronger
financial standard.
The State Board of Accounts Audit Report,
covering the period from July 1, 2003 through
June 30, 2004, identified several minor
deficiencies. Charter School of the Dunes has
responded properly and in a timely fashion,
and corrections are being implemented.
4. Is the school providing
conditions for academic
success?
Academic walkthroughs
Academic walkthrough17 team members
collected data on student engagement, time on
task and curriculum focus and instructional
processes. Global school patterns were
compared to Indiana standards, the standards
of “best practice”18, and to the unique goals set
forth in the school's charter.
Strengths that were observed across the school
by all team members were shared and
reflective questions were asked. The purpose
of the reflective questions was to guide future
planning and discussion for the school as the
staff engages in continuous school
improvement.
Team members documented the following
strengths:
—
community resources are used effectively;
—
effective use of student questioning
techniques;
—
a variety of media are used during
classroom instruction;
—
staff appears interested in the affective as
well as the academic development of
students; and
—
evidence of curriculum integration and
opportunities for interdisciplinary
instruction and project-based learning.
Charter School
of the Dunes
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
walkthrough structure adapted from Carolyn Downey and Larry Frase's model, Curriculum Management Services,
Inc.
18Best
practices (as defined by Zemelman, S., Daniels, H., and Hyde, A. 1998. Best Practice: New Standards for Teaching and
Learning in America's Schools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann) are “current, national consensus recommendations about 'best
educational practice' in each of the traditional school curriculum areas: reading, writing, math, science, and social studies.”
47
The walkthrough team asked the Charter
School of the Dunes staff to consider
reflective questions that addressed issues
related to instructional “best practices”,
student access to educational supplemental
materials, collaboration among staff for
instruction and classroom management
purposes, and increasing active participation
and higher-order thinking skills in classroom
practice.
Final summary
Charter School of the Dunes, in the second
year of a seven-year contract, has achieved a
lower level of loyalty among board, staff and
parents than other Ball State charter schools.
Parents express satisfaction with Charter
School of the Dunes but are far less likely to
recommend the school to others. Satisfaction
levels and likelihood to recommend the school
to others are lower among staff and board.
Team members rated the student engagement
on-task behavior above average. Curriculum
focus and instructional practices were rated as
average.
Results of the academic walkthrough were not
positive, prompting an extended academic
walkthrough that resulted in a series of
recommendations to which the Charter School
of the Dunes board is working to respond. The
school appears to be financially sound.
Extended academic walkthroughs
The Ball State University Office of Charter
Schools conducted an extended academic
walkthrough in the spring of 2005, as a
follow-up to the February, academic
walkthrough, at Charter School of the Dunes.
Additional data was gathered during this
extended academic walkthrough, conducted
by Dr. Barbara Downey, to provide a more
detailed picture of the school's successes and
challenges and offer specific
recommendations for improvement.
To support the accountability process, the
school was asked to respond in writing to the
recommendations with details about how
these recommendations have been, or will be,
addressed.
Charter School
of the Dunes
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
48
The recommendations from the Ball State
University Office of Charter Schools asked
Charter School of the Dunes to address issues
related to reevaluating the organizational
structure with the goal of having more of the
current administrative resources focused on
teaching and learning, creating a
comprehensive professional development
plan, developing detailed staff evaluation
processes, addressing organizational
management concerns, and increased
opportunities for communication. When this
report went to print, the Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools was still awaiting a
formal response to these issues.
Academic success has not been apparent at
Charter School of the Dunes. Students
attending the school tend to be behind their
peers, evidenced by scores on the ISTEP +,
when enrolling in the school. Results of the
NWEA MAP test indicate students are not
making gains at a rate that will enable the gap
to be closed.
Charter School
of the Dunes
Community
Montessori, Inc.
Community
Montessori, Inc.
“Education from within”
Grades Served . . . . K-6
2004-2005 Enrollment
2003-2004 Enrollment
2002-2003 Enrollment
Enrollment at capacity
. . . . . . . . . 159
. . . . . . . . . . 124
. . . . . . . . . . . 75
. . . . . . . . . . 450
Student Attendance Rate . . . . . . . *96%
Student Retention Rate . . . . . . **74%
Teacher Retention Rate . . . . . . . **82%
Students in
Special Education . . . . . . . . . . . *21.9%
Limited English
Proficiency Students . . . . . . . . . . . *0%
* Source: Indiana Department of Education website
** Percentages determined using ADM count numbers on returning students and teachers
851 Highlander Point Dr.
Floyds Knobs, IN 47119
(812) 923-2000
Profile of Community Montessori, Inc.
Demographics
www.shiningminds.com
Figure D-1 shows the demographic composition (black, white, Hispanic and other19) of
Community Montessori, Inc. Community Montessori serves a minority population of seven
percent compared to the state average of 21%; however, the school serves a large percentage of
special needs students. Figure D-2 demonstrates free and reduced lunch percentages at
Community Montessori. Sixteen percent of students that attend Community Montessori qualify
for free or reduced lunch.
Figure D-1
Figure D-2
Community Montessori, Inc. Race/Ethnicity 2004-2005
Community Montessori, Inc. Percentage Paid,
Reduced price, Free lunch 2004-2005
Other
5% Black
1%
Hispanic
1%
Reduced price
10%
Free
6%
Black
White
Paid
Hispanic
Reduced price
Other
Free
White
93%
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
Paid
84%
49
19 Other
includes children of Hispanic, Asian, Native American, and Multi-racial origin.
Enrollment
Purpose
Figure D-3 shows the current, projected and
capacity enrollment for Community
Montessori, Inc. In 2002-2003, Community
Montessori opened with 75 students in grades
K-6. Community Montessori will provide
education services to 450 students in grades
K-12 when it reaches capacity.
Community Montessori provides another
quality educational choice for its community
by encouraging the development of lifelong
learning. The school mission is based on the
beliefs and theories of Maria Montessori,
Constructivism, and Schemata Development.
As an example, the school uses these beliefs
to create an environment where learning
happens naturally with an emphasis on
learning strengths, developmentally
appropriate activities, and individual interests.
Figure D-3
Current, Projected, Capacity Enrollment, Grades
Served for Community Montessori, Inc.
School
Name
Community
Montessori
Year
Opened
2002-2003
2004-2005
Enrollment
(grades
served)
Projected
Enrollment
2005-2006
159
(grades K-6)
221
(grades K-7)
Location
851 Highlander Point Dr.
Floyds Knobs, IN 47119
Community Montessori is located in Floyds
Knobs, Indiana. Floyds Knobs is in Floyd
County.
Projected
Enrollment
20062007
Enrollment
at Capacity
(grades
served at
capacity)
310
(grades K-8)
450
(grades K-12)
Student
Waiting
List (as of
June 30,
2005)
30
By the use of many tools, including
technology, authentic assessment, and
educational manipulatives, each learner is
nurtured through the eight constructs: social,
emotional, physical, moral, intellectual,
aesthetics, creative, and “school success.”
This helps encompass the multi-facet, total
education of the whole learner.
Educational
Program
Community
Montessori, Inc.
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
50
Montessori is a comprehensive educational
approach with a focus of knowing each
individual learner and partnering in his/her
continued growth in connecting knowledge
for lifelong learning. Under guidance,
children in Community Montessori
classrooms learn by making discoveries and
cultivating concentration, motivation, selfdiscipline, and a love of learning.
over time because each grade's test results
pertain to different children from year to year.
However, performance trends can be observed.
Performance
of Community Montessori, Inc.
Scores indicate that the students attending
Community Montessori generally perform
equally or better on the ISTEP+ than other
public school students in Floyd County and in
Indiana. The only exception is in grade 3. The
percentage of students passing ISTEP+ in grade
3 was below other Floyd County and Indiana
percentages.
1. Is the educational
program a success?
Ultimately, charter schools are evaluated by their
academic success. The Ball State Office of
Charter Schools evaluates how each charter
school is performing against multiple success
measures, including results of Indiana Statewide
Test of Educational Progress-Plus (ISTEP+),
Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA) or
Test of Adult Basic Skills (TABE), and Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP).
Figure D-5 further explains results in grade 3
and other areas where scores at Community
Montessori were not as high. Returning students
performed considerably better on the ISTEP+
than first year students. This is evident in grade
3, which has a large number of first-year
students.
Indiana Statewide Test of
Educational Progress-Plus (ISTEP+)
Figure D-4 shows the results of ISTEP+ for
Community Montessori students compared to
students in Floyd County and other public
schools in Indiana. It is not possible to use the
results to measure individual students' progress
Figure D-4
Percentage of Students in Community Montessori, Inc., Floyd County Schools, and Indiana Public
Schools Passing ISTEP+ in the fall 2004
Community
Montessori
English/LA
Community
Montessori
Floyd Co.
2004
73%
2003
82%
2002
Math
Indiana
Community
Montessori
Floyd Co.
76%
75%
55%
72%
74%
55%
82%
74%
72%
2004
2003
2002
69%
*
*
73%
2004
2003
2002
79%
*
*
2004
2003
2002
80%
*
*
Both English & Math
Indiana
Community
Montessori
Floyd Co.
Indiana
73%
73%
55%
65%
65%
71%
71%
55%
62%
63%
82%
72%
67%
73%
64%
59%
73%
77%
74%
73%
62%
65%
64%
76%
72%
86%
78%
72%
79%
70%
63%
68%
70%
70%
73%
75%
70%
61%
63%
3rd grade
4th grade
5th grade
6th grade
* No students tested in 4th, 5th or 6th grade for 2002 and 2003.
Figure D-5
Percentage of Students in Community Montessori, Inc., Returning Students, and First Year Students
Passing ISTEP+ in fall 2004.
ALL STUDENTS
Community
Montessori
RETURNING STUDENTS
FIRST YEAR STUDENTS
#
Students
LA
Math
Both
LA &
Math
#
Students
LA
Math
Both
LA &
Math
#
Students
LA
Math
Both
LA &
Math
3rd Grade
22
73%
55%
55%
13
85%
69%
69%
9
56%
33%
33%
4th Grade
13
69%
77%
62%
9
89%
78%
78%
4
25%
75%
25%
5th Grade
14
79%
86%
79%
13
85%
92%
85%
1
0%
0%
0%
6th Grade
10
80%
70%
70%
6
83%
83%
83%
4
75%
50%
50%
Community
Montessori, Inc.
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
51
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
Under federal No Child Left Behind
legislation, the Indiana Department of
Education (IDOE) has determined Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP) for all Indiana schools,
including charter schools.
The IDOE determines AYP designations for
each school based on the overall percentage of
students passing the English and mathematics
ISTEP+ tests. Additionally, schools must
uphold or improve elementary and middle
school attendance rates, and high school
graduation rates. (AYP is also determined for
student subgroups within the population,
including race/ethnicity, free/reduced price
lunch eligibility, limited English proficiency,
and special education, provided that there are
at least 30 students in a particular subgroup.)
Community Montessori made AYP in 20042005.
Northwest Evaluation Association
(NWEA )
Figure D-6 compares Community Montessori
students' spring scaled scores to Indiana and
national norms on the math, reading, and
language arts portions of the NWEA. Students
that attend Community Montessori maintained
average scaled score levels relatively even to
their peers in Indiana and nationally.
Figure D-7 presents the average growth rate
for students attending Community Montessori
for each grade and each subject area tested in
fall 2004 and spring 2005. Only students who
took the test in both fall and spring are
included. While students at Community
Montessori made growth, their growth rate
was not as great or significant as that of their
peers.
Community
Montessori, Inc.
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
52
Figure D-6
NWEA scaled scores comparing Community
Montessori to Indiana and national norms in
math, reading, and language arts
Grade
2
Average Math Scaled Scores
Community
State
Montessori
185
*
National
194
3
202
204
200
4
207
211
208
5
216
219
217
6
225
227
222
7
*
231
227
8
*
238
234
Grade
2
Average Reading Scaled Scores
Community
State
National
Montessori
178
*
193
3
200
201
198
4
204
207
205
5
216
213
211
6
220
218
215
7
*
221
219
8
*
226
223
Grade
2
Average Language Scaled Scores
Community
State
National
Montessori
183
*
*
3
202
204
199
4
206
209
206
5
215
215
212
6
218
219
216
7
*
221
219
8
*
225
222
*an asterisk indicates that data were not available for this
subject and grade, either because the school did not test
students in that grade/subject or because NWEA does not
provide norm data for it.
Community Montessori
10-11 year olds sharing
information about their
class pet chinchilla
“Missy”
Figure D-7
NWEA scaled scores comparing Community
Montessori to Indiana and national norms in
math, reading, and language arts
Grade
2
Average Math Growth Rate
Community
State
Montessori
10.3
*
National
Grade
15.7
2
Average Language Growth Rate
Community
State
National
Montessori
12.5
*
*
3
8.3
10.6
11.8
3
6.9
10.6
9.3
4
8.5
8.8
8.9
4
5.8
5.8
6.5
5
0.4
9
8.8
5
5.2
5.2
5.8
6
-0.6
9.1
8.1
6
-2.1
4.1
4.5
7
*
7.3
6.9
7
*
3
3.6
8
*
7
7.1
8
*
3.2
3.5
Grade
2
Average Reading Growth Rate
Community
State
National
Montessori
11.8
*
14.9
3
8.5
9
10.4
4
6.1
6.8
7.4
5
5.8
5.9
6.3
6
5.7
5.3
5.3
7
*
4.1
4.3
8
*
4.1
4.2
*an asterisk indicates that data were not
available for this subject and grade, either
because the school did not test students in that
grade/subject or because NWEA does not
provide norm data for it.
Community
Montessori, Inc.
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
53
2. Is the school
organizationally
sound?
Academic Success:
Mission-Driven
Organization
Organizational Soundness:
Policy and Strategic
Planning
4.8
4.3
5
4.0
Series 1
2
2.8
3
Series 2
2
1
0
0
2.1
1.1
1.2
2.2
2.3
1.3
Question Number
Question Number
Academic Success:
Mission-Driven Organization
Performance Against
Success Measures:
Communication and Advocacy
5
4.0
5.0
4.0
5
4
Average
3.0
3
Series 3
2
Average
3.3
4
3.3
3.3
3
Series 4
2
1
1
0
3.1
3.2
3.3
0
3.4
4.1
Question Number
Financial Viability:
Budget Development and
Management
4.8
5
4.0
4
3.5
2.5
3
Series 5
2
Average
4.0
4
3.3
2.8
3
Series 6
2
1
1
0
0
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
6.1
Question Number
4.8
4.8
4.5
5
4.0
3.7
4
6.3
Organizational Soundness:
Board Development and
Education
3.5
3.8
4
3
Series 7
2
Average
5
6.2
Question Number
Academic Success:
Leadership Development
3.0
3.0
3
3.3
2.8
2.8
2.8
Series 8
2
1
0
Figure D-8
Community Montessori, Inc. Board
self-assessment results (Series
questions 1-9)
4.3
Organizational Soundness:
Risk Management
4.8
5
4.2
Question Number
1
0
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
7.6
8.1
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
8.6
8.7
Question Number
Question Number
Organizational Soundness:
The Board's Role
Community
Montessori, Inc.
5
4
3.8
3.8
3.3
Average
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
3.8
3.3
4
1
Average
Figure D-8 shows the results for all
nine areas of the board selfassessment survey for Community
Montessori. The board at
Community Montessori was clearly
self-reflective about areas of strong
performance and areas needing
additional improvement. The areas
needing critical focus of the board
include Series Two questions,
concerning strategic planning, Series
Eight questions, regarding the need
for increased development and
education for board members, and
Series Nine questions, regarding
transitioning to a policy making
board.
3
Average
Board self-assessments
Organizational soundness is essential
for short-term success and long-term
growth of every charter school. Such
organizational strength depends on
strong board leadership. Ball State
University Office of Charter Schools
has developed a board selfassessment survey20 to help each
school board evaluate its
performance and identify areas of
strength and areas in need of
improvement. This survey can be
viewed on the website
www.bsu.edu/teachers/charter.
Average
4
Average
5
3.8
3.3
3
Series 9
2
1
0
9.1
9.2
9.3
Question Number
54
9.4
9.5
20 Board self-assessment tool was adopted from the
Girls, Inc. “Board Self Assessment.”
Constituent surveys
Loyalty
Figure D-9 demonstrates that large majorities
of parents, staff, and board members who
responded to this survey expressed high
degrees of loyalty to the Community
Montessori School. Over 75% of each group
indicated that they would recommend the
school to friends and colleagues, would return
next year, would increase their support of the
school and were satisfied, overall, with the
school.
Quality
Figure D-10 explains that as with the loyalty
items, respondents appeared to be very
pleased with the quality of the Community
Montessori school, with over 75% from each
group rating the overall quality, quality
compared to other schools and satisfaction
with school quality as excellent or very good.
Image/attitude
All three constituent groups indicated very
positive attitudes about the image and attitude
of the school. Indeed, never did a majority of
parents indicate concern about any of these
issues. Staff did appear to be concerned about
the amount of time that the Community
Montessori school spent on academics as
compared to other schools. A majority of
board members had concerns about whether
teachers were held accountable for student
performance and whether the school has an
appropriate level of discipline. For all other
items, a majority of respondents from each
group indicated that they were satisfied with
the image and attitude of the school, and
indeed in most cases over two thirds in each
group were positive.
Performance
With respect to school performance, parents
and staff were significantly positive. The two
groups did share concerns about the school
facilities and transportation services. Parents
were also concerned about the food service,
while staff had an additional concern about
support services.
In contrast to the other groups, board
members who responded to the survey were
concerned about a variety of aspects of school
performance, including the board itself,
teacher professional development, school
facilities, access to computers, support
services, faculty, services for special needs
students, school safety, communication about
student learning, student development,
transportation services, communication about
meeting the school's mission, student teacher
ratio, food service, school size, teacher
decision making, location of the school,
school material and classroom management.
Figure D-9
Community Montessori, Inc. Parents, Staff, and Board Overall Loyalty Survey Results
Overall Loyaltyincludes extremely likely and very likely responses
Likelihood to recommend
%
Parents *(55)
%
Staff (20)
%
Board (4)
98.2%
81%
100%
Likelihood to return next year
96.4%
95%
100%
Likelihood to increase support
89.1%
83.3%
75%
*() indicates number of survey responses
Figure D-10
Community Montessori, Inc. Parents, Staff, and Board Quality of Education Survey Results
Overall Qualityincludes very satisfied and somewhat satisfied responses
Overall Quality
Overall Quality-Better than other schools
Overall Satisfaction
*() indicates number of survey responses
Community
Montessori, Inc.
%
Parents *(55)
%
Staff (20)
%
Board (4)
92.5%
76.2%
100%
98%
80%
100%
98.2%
85.7%
100%
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
55
Strengths
After analyzing the respondents' open-ended
answers, the researchers found that these
categories emerged as strengths:
1. The staff is perceived very positively
because parents view them as childcentered adults who tailor instruction to
the individual child. Rapport between
staff and students is often cited as a
strength.
2. Parents are supportive of the school and
frequently volunteer.
Community Montessori
student taking care of the
plants in the 3-6 year old
room
3. The staff works together and supports
children, as well as being committed to
individual children's needs.
On the other hand, the board members appear
to have been satisfied with the
enrollment/admissions process, quality of
teaching, school administration,
individualized instruction, support services,
opportunities for parental involvement,
curriculum program and the students.
Open-ended constituent
survey responses
In order to give respondents an opportunity to
express personal opinions or make specific
comments regarding their individual schools,
all constituent surveys included open-ended
questions. Participants (parents, staff, and
board members) were asked to respond to
three open-ended questions on the Ball State
University 2005 constituent survey:
1. What works well at the school? What are
the strengths of the school? Please
provide examples or descriptions.
2. What does not work well at the school?
What are your concerns? Please provide
examples or descriptions.
Community
Montessori, Inc.
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
56
3. Please share any additional information
about this school.
Researchers used qualitative analysis of
responses along with QSR N6 software21,
which provided the system for developing
relevant categories of analysis to organize the
data.
21QSR
4. There is effective parent/teacher
communication, which leads to
collaboration between the school and
home.
5. The curriculum and philosophy of the
school is clearly understood, valued, and
shared by the entire school community.
Areas for improvement
After analyzing the respondents' open-ended
answers, the researchers found these themes
emerged areas needing improvement:
1. There is a perception that staff morale
suffers because of low teacher pay,
ineffective communication between the
staff and director, and inconsistent
enforcement of school discipline rules.
2. The facilities and food services concern
some respondents.
Summary
The parents, students, staff at Community
Montessori are in agreement about certain
basic issues. The school is small enough to
promote a positive, caring support system for
individual student learning. Communication is
generally viewed as effective with matters of
concern handled in a timely manner. The
Montessori philosophy is valued and provides
relevant, student-centered learning that allows
for student choice.
International Pty Ltd. (2002) QSR N6. [Computer software]. Melbourne, Australia: QSR.
A few issues are represented with less
consistency. Some parents see their children
learning more quickly at this school; some
parents see their children progressing more
slowly than they believe they would
elsewhere. Some parents applaud the efforts
of the school leaders, while others point to a
lack of leadership.
3. Is the school
financially viable?
With limited funds and high start-up costs, the
first few years of a charter school's existence
are critical. Establishment of strong
accounting and financial management
practices is essential to success.
Ball State University's Office of the Vice
President for Business Affairs conducts a
detailed review of each authorized charter
school's budget performance, financial status,
and future projections. In addition, the
university reviews each school's State Board
of Accounts Audit and monitors changes and
improvements recommended in these reports.
Community Montessori continues its
construction projects and has continued to
demonstrate a solid financial position. Overall
revenue exceeded expenses, and all expenses
seemed appropriate. The school appears to be
in solid financial shape and seems likely to be
able to maintain strong finances in the future.
walkthrough summary information is not
available.
Final summary
Community Montessori, in the third year of a
seven-year contract, has achieved significant
levels of loyalty among the board, staff, and
parents. Each of these constituent groups has
indicated very positive feelings about the
quality of education being delivered in the
school.
While board members express concern about
organizational and governance issues, the
school appears to be financially sound. Results
of the 2003 academic walkthrough were
positive enough that the academic
walkthrough team did not conduct a
walkthrough in 2004.
Positive results in other areas have translated
into academic success for Community
Montessori's students. Overall, growth from
fall to spring, as demonstrated by the NWEA
MAP test, shows academic growth slightly
less than state and national norms. However,
performance on the ISTEP+ shows
Community Montessori's students testing at or
above their peers in Floyd County. What's
more, ISTEP+ scores show that returning
students perform better over time.
Community Montessori, Inc. is being audited
by the State Board of Accounts following the
2005 fiscal year. Results of this audit will be
summarized in the next accountability report.
4. Is the school providing
conditions for academic
success?
Academic walkthroughs
A few Ball State University charter schools,
considered performing at an exceptional level,
were excused from the 2005 academic
walkthrough22 process. Community
Montessori, Inc. was excused, so academic
22Academic
Inc.
walkthrough structure adapted from Carolyn Downey and Larry Frase's model, Curriculum Management Services,
Community
Montessori, Inc.
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
57
Community
Montessori, Inc.
Community
Montessori, Inc.
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
58
Irvington
Community School
Irvington
Community School
“A Lighthouse for Learning”
Grades Served . . . . K-7
2004-2005 Enrollment
2003-2004 Enrollment
2002-2003 Enrollment
Enrollment at capacity
. . . . . . . . . 220
. . . . . . . . . . 129
. . . . . . . . . . 116
. . . . . . . . . . 814
Student Attendance Rate . . . . . . . *95%
Student Retention Rate . . . . . . **85%
Teacher Retention Rate . . . . . . . **93%
Students in
Special Education . . . . . . . . . . . . *11%
Limited English
Proficiency Students . . . . . . . . . . . *0%
* Source: Indiana Department of Education website
** Percentages determined using ADM count numbers on returning students and teachers
1635 West Michigan Street
Indianapolis, IN 46222
(317) 357-5359
Profile of Irvington Community School
Demographics
www.ics-charter.org
Figure E-1 shows the demographic composition (black, white, Hispanic and other23) of
Irvington Community School. Irvington serves a minority population of 18% compared to the
state average of 21%. Figure E-2 demonstrates free and reduced lunch percentages at Irvington
Community School. Less than one half of the students qualify for free and reduced lunch prices.
Figure E-1
Figure E-2
Irvington Com munity School Percentage Paid,
Reduced price, Free lunch 2004-2005
Irvington Com m unity School
Race/Ethnicity 2004-2005
Other
4%
Hispanic
3%
Free
16%
Black
11%
Black
White
Hispanic
Reduced
price
12%
Other
White
82%
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
Reduced price
2004-2005
Free
Accountability Report
Paid
Paid
72%
59
23 Other
includes children of Hispanic, Asian, Native American, and Multi-racial origin.
Enrollment
Purpose
Figure E-3 shows the current, projected and
capacity enrollment for Irvington Community
School. Irvington opened in 2002 with 118
students in grades K-6. Irvington will provide
education services to 814 students in grades
K-12 at capacity.
Irvington Community School strives to
educate children by providing a proven
academic curriculum paired with an arts-andmusic component within a safe environment.
Irvington Community School emphasizes
achievement and strong character education
for its students. The school plans to grow to
become an excellent K-12 school that will
also serve as a resource center for the
Irvington area. Irvington Community School
Figure E-3
Current, Projected, Capacity Enrollment, Grades
Served for Irvington Community School
School
Name
Irvington
Community
School
Year
Opened
2002-2003
2004-2005
Enrollment
(grades
served)
Projected
Enrollment
2005-2006
220
(grades K-7)
366
(grades K-8)
Location
1635 West Michigan Street
Indianapolis, IN 46222
Irvington Community School is located in
Indianapolis, Indiana. Indianapolis is in
Marion County.
Projected
Enrollment
20062007
Enrollment
at Capacity
(grades
served at
capacity)
514
(grades K-9)
814 students
(grades K-12)
Student
Waiting
List (as of
June 30,
2005)
224
works to bring together diverse community
groups to strengthen the Irvington community.
Educational
Program
Irvington Community School is built upon the
premise that a well-conceived, Internet-based
educational program can help boost student
achievement, serve the unique needs of
students and families, and offer a new model
for effective publication in the 21st century.
The educational program is designed to
provide a comprehensive mastery-based
curriculum with high student expectations.
Irvington
Community School
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
60
other public schools in Indiana. It is not possible
to use the results to measure individual students'
progress over time because each grade's test
results pertain to different children from year to
year. However, performance trends can be
observed.
Performance
of Irvington Community School
1. Is the educational
program a success?
Ultimately, charter schools are evaluated by their
academic success. The Ball State Office of
Charter Schools evaluates how each charter
school is performing against multiple success
measures, including results of Indiana Statewide
Test of Educational Progress-Plus (ISTEP+),
Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA) or
Test of Adult Basic Skills (TABE), and Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP).
Indiana Statewide Test of
Educational Progress-Plus (ISTEP+)
Figure E-4 shows the results of ISTEP+ for
Irvington Community School students compared
to students in Warren Township Schools and
Irvington
Community
School
Student performance trends have increased
steadily in all areas for grade 3 from 2002 to
2004. In 2004, the percentage of students
passing ISTEP+ was greater for English/LA and
both English and math.
Figure E-5 further explains ISTEP+ results for
students at Irvington Community School. It
compares the percentage of students passing
ISTEP+ for returning students to the percentage
of students passing ISTEP+ for students in their
first year at the school. The percentage of
students passing ISTEP+ was higher for
returning students than new students in almost
all tested areas and grades.
English/LA
Math
Irvington
Warren
Township
Indiana
2003
85%
71%
75%
72%
2002
60%
2004
2003
2002
Both English & Math
Irvington
Warren
Township
Irvington
Warren
Township
Indiana
Indiana
75%
74%
70%
65%
77%
71%
73%
71%
70%
59%
66%
62%
65%
63%
74%
72%
35%
72%
67%
35%
64%
59%
71%
*
**
73%
73%
67%
77%
73%
62%
66%
64%
2004
2003
2002
50%
*
**
74%
72%
35%
77%
72%
25%
66%
63%
2004
2003
2002
81%
67%
**
60%
61%
70%
69%
67%
72%
76%
66%
75%
72%
67%
61%
55%
54%
63%
62%
80%
62%
68%
2004
*
2003
**
2002
* No students tested in 4th, 5th or 7th grade for 2003.
70%
72%
73%
60%
55%
61%
3rd grade
2004
4th grade
Figure E-4
Percentage of Students in
Irvington Community
School, Warren Township
Schools, and Indiana
Public Schools Passing
ISTEP+ in the fall 2004
5th grade
6th grade
7th grade
** No students tested in 4th, 5th, 6th or 7th grade for 2002.
Figure E-5
Percentage of Students in Irvington Community School, Returning Students, and First Year Students
Passing ISTEP+ in fall 2004.
Irvington
Community
School
ALL STUDENTS
RETURNING STUDENTS
FIRST YEAR STUDENTS
#
Students
LA
Math
Both
LA &
Math
#
Students
LA
Math
Both
LA &
Math
#
Students
LA
Math
Both
LA &
Math
3rd Grade
20
85%
70%
70%
15
87%
67%
67%
5
80%
80%
80%
4th Grade
21
71%
67%
62%
14
71%
71%
64%
7
71%
57%
57%
5th Grade
20
50%
35%
25%
16
56%
38%
25%
4
25%
25%
25%
6th Grade
21
81%
67%
67%
13
92%
77%
77%
8
63%
50%
50%
7th Grade
20
80%
70%
60%
14
71%
79%
71%
6
100%
50%
50%
Irvington
Community School
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
61
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
Under federal No Child Left Behind
legislation, the Indiana Department of
Education (IDOE) has determined Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP) for all Indiana schools,
including charter schools.
The IDOE determines AYP designations for
each school based on the overall percentage of
students passing the English and mathematics
ISTEP+ tests. Additionally, schools must
uphold or improve elementary and middle
school attendance rates, and high school
graduation rates. (AYP is also determined for
student subgroups within the population,
including race/ethnicity, free/reduced price
lunch eligibility, limited English proficiency,
and special education, provided that there are
at least 30 students in a particular subgroup.)
As a Title One school, Irvington Community
School made AYP in 2004-2005. Irvington
Community School also made AYP in 20032004.
Northwest Evaluation Association
(NWEA )
Figure E-6 compares Irvington Community
School students' spring scaled scores to
Indiana and national norms on the math,
reading, and language arts portions of the
NWEA. Students that attend Irvington
Community School maintained average scaled
score levels relatively even to their peers in
Indiana and nationally.
The following data in Figure E-7 present the
average growth rate for students attending
Irvington Community School for each grade
and each subject area tested in fall 2004 and
spring 2005. Only students who took the test
in both fall and spring are included.
Irvington
Community School
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
62
Students at Irvington Community School
made growth at a rate consistent with their
peers in grades 4, 5, and 6 in reading, and
language, and grade 5 in math. Growth rates
fell below state and national norms in other
areas.
Figure E-6
NWEA scaled scores comparing Irvington
Community School to Indiana and national
norms in math, reading, and language arts
Grade
2
Average Math Scaled Scores
Irvington
State
Community School
192
*
National
194
3
203
204
200
4
208
211
208
5
212
219
217
6
223
227
222
7
229
231
227
8
*
238
234
Grade
2
Average Reading Scaled Scores
Irvington
State
National
Community School
192
*
194
3
203
201
198
4
208
207
205
5
210
213
211
6
220
218
215
7
219
221
219
8
*
226
223
Grade
2
Average Language Scaled Scores
Irvington
State
National
Community School
195
*
*
3
205
204
199
4
209
209
206
5
209
215
212
6
222
219
216
7
220
221
219
8
*
225
222
*An asterisk indicates that data were not available for this
subject and grade, either because the school did not test
students in that grade/subject or because NWEA does not
provide norm data for it.
Irvington Charter School
grade 3 students doing a
"web-quest" to further
research a unit on dinosaurs
Figure E-7
NWEA scaled scores comparing Irvington
Community School to Indiana and national
norms in math, reading, and language arts
Grade
2
Average Math Scaled Scores
Irvington
State
Community School
192
*
National
Grade
Average Language Scaled Scores
Irvington
State
National
Community School
195
*
*
194
2
3
203
204
200
3
205
204
199
4
208
211
208
4
209
209
206
5
212
219
217
5
209
215
212
6
223
227
222
6
222
219
216
7
229
231
227
7
220
221
219
8
*
238
234
8
*
225
222
Grade
2
Average Reading Scaled Scores
Irvington
State
National
Community School
192
*
194
3
203
201
198
4
208
207
205
5
210
213
211
6
220
218
215
7
219
221
219
8
*
226
223
*An asterisk indicates that data were not available for this
subject and grade, either because the school did not test
students in that grade/subject or because NWEA does not
provide norm data for it.
Irvington
Community School
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
63
2. Is the school
organizationally
sound?
Academic Success: Mission
Driven Organization
4.6
4.4
5
4.0
3.9
3.9
4
3
Series 1
2
Average
Average
4
Board self-assessments
Organizational soundness is essential
for short-term success and long-term
growth of every charter school. Such
organizational strength depends on
strong board leadership. Ball State
University Office of Charter Schools
has developed a board selfassessment survey24 to help each
school board evaluate its
performance and identify areas of
strength and areas in need of
improvement. This survey can be
viewed on the website
www.bsu.edu/teachers/charter.
3
1
1
0
1.2
'
1.3
2.1
2.2
Question Numbers
4.3
4.4
4.3
2.3
Question Number
Performance Against Success
Measures: Communication
and Advocacy
Academic Success: MissionDriven Organization
5
Series 2
2
0
1.1
4.9
4.4
4.4
5
4
3
Series 3
2
Average
Average
4
3.3
Series44
3
2
1
1
0
3.1
3.2
3.3
0
3.4
4.1
4.2
4.3
Question Number
Question Number
Financial Viability: Budget
Development and
Management
4.7
4.6
5
5
4.1
3.6
4
Average
Organizational Soundness:
Risk Management
3.7
4
3.3
3
Series55
2
3.6
3.4
3
Average
Figure E-8 shows the results for all
nine areas of the board selfassessment survey for Irvington
Community School. The board at
Irvington Community School was
clearly self-reflective about areas of
strong performance and areas
needing additional improvement.
The board has identified series six
questions, about risk management as
an area in need of improvement.
Series 6
2
1
1
0
6.1
0
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
6.2
6.3
Question Number
Question Number
Academic Success:
Leadership Development
4.7
5
Organizational Soundness:
Board Development and
Education
4.7
4.3
4.3
3.9
5
4
3.0
4.4
3.9
4
3
Series 77
2
Average
Average
Figure E-8
Irvington Community School Board
self-assessment results (Series
questions 1-9)
4.7
5
Organizational Soundness:
Policy and Strategic Planning
3.6
3.9
4.3
4.3
3.3
3
Series 88
2
1
1
0
0
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
8.1
7.6
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
8.6
8.7
Question Number
Question Number
Organizational Soundness:
The Board's Role
Irvington
Community School
4.9
4.9
4.7
4.3
4
Average
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
4.9
5
3
Series 9
2
1
0
9.1
9.2
9.3
Question Number
64
66
9.4
9.5
24 Board self-assessment tool was adopted from the
Girls, Inc. “Board Self Assessment.”
Constituent surveys
Loyalty
Figure E-9 demonstrates that parents, board
members and staff who responded to the
survey exhibited a high degree of loyalty to
the school. A majority of each group indicated
that they would recommend the school to
friends and colleagues, return to the school
next year, increase their support to the school
and are satisfied, overall, with the school. In
all cases, more than two thirds of respondents
in each constituent group responded positively
to these items.
Quality
Figure E-10 explains that among parents and
board members, there was strong endorsement
of the quality of education provided at
Irvington Community School. Specifically,
over 80% of each group rated the overall
quality of education as very good or excellent
and indicated that the quality of education was
better than that at other schools. A large
majority of each group also said that they
were satisfied with the overall quality of
education at the school.
Staff also responded positively in terms of
their overall level of satisfaction with the
quality of education at the school, and the
quality of education compared to that of other
schools. Four of the six respondents also rated
the overall quality of education at Irvington
Community School as very good or excellent,
a smaller majority than for the other quality
items.
Image/attitude
As for the items dealing with loyalty and
quality, a majority of responding parents,
board members and staff indicated positive
attitudes for all of the image and attitude
items. In the case of parents and board
members, these majorities are very large for
all items, over 60% in all cases.
While staff as a whole responded positively to
these issues, there were a somewhat higher
proportion of negative responses. Specifically,
three of the six staff respondents indicated
some concerns with the focus of all members
of the school community on its mission, the
level of discipline, the effectiveness of the
board, the use of a team approach involving
the entire school community and the relative
time spent on academics versus that spent in
other schools.
Performance
With respect to the performance items, a
majority of parents responding to the survey
exhibited concerns about only one issue,
transportation services. This concern was
shared by board members and staff as well.
Members of the board also voiced concerns
about teacher professional development,
support services, services for special needs
Irvington Charter School
grade 3 students completing
group project
Figure E-9
Irvington Community School Parents, Staff, and Board Overall Loyalty Survey Results
Overall Loyalty- includes extremely likely and very likely
responses
Likelihood to recommend
%
Parents *(56)
%
Staff (6)
%
Board (4)
83.9%
83.3%
100%
Likelihood to return next year
89.1%
83.3%
100%
Likelihood to increase support
79.2%
66.7%
100%
Irvington
Community School
*() indicates number of survey responses
Figure E-10
Irvington Community School Parents, Staff, and Board Quality of Education Survey Results
Overall Quality
%
Parents *(56)
%
Staff (6)
%
Board (4)
Overall Quality
83.3%
57.1%
100%
Overall Quality-Better than other schools
78.8%
83.3%
100%
Overall Satisfaction
89.5%
71.4%
100%
*() indicates number of survey responses
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
65
comments regarding their individual schools,
all constituent surveys included open-ended
questions. Participants (parents, staff, and
board members) were asked to respond to
three open-ended questions on the Ball State
University 2005 constituent survey:
1. What works well at the school? What are
the strengths of the school? Please
provide examples or descriptions.
2. What does not work well at the school?
What are your concerns? Please provide
examples or descriptions.
3. Please share any additional information
about this school.
Irvington Charter School
grade 3 student during a luau
celebrating completion of a
standards-based "Survivor"
competition in her daily
physical-education class
students, communication about meeting the
school's mission, food service and classroom
management. In all other respects, a majority
of board members had positive opinions about
the performance of Irvington Community
School.
Staff responded with a larger number of
concerns than either of the other two
constituent groups. Specifically, a majority of
staff who completed the survey indicated
concerns with the school administration,
teacher professional development,
individualized student attention, parents,
support services, services provided to special
needs students, school safety, student
development, curriculum, students,
communication about meeting the school's
mission, teacher decision making, school
materials and supplies and classroom
management.
Irvington
Community School
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
66
A majority of all three constituent groups had
positive responses regarding the school board,
the enrollment/admissions process, quality of
teaching, school facilities, access to
computers, faculty, communication about
student learning, opportunities for parental
involvement, student teacher ratio, school size
and location of the school.
Open-ended constituent
survey responses
In order to give respondents an opportunity to
express personal opinions or make specific
25QSR
Researchers used qualitative analysis of
responses along with QSR N6 software25,
which provided the system for developing
relevant categories of analysis to organize the
data.
Strengths
After analyzing the respondents' open-ended
answers, the researchers found that these
categories emerged as strengths:
1. Teachers are appreciated because of their
flexibility, caring, and their instruction
and curriculum.
2. Administration is well-liked because of
friendliness, efficient response rate to
questions, and passion about the school.
3. Parents and staff communication and
cooperation are viewed as positive.
4. Parents include the entire faculty (support
staff) when they mention teachers as a
strength of the school.
Areas for improvement
After analyzing the respondents' open-ended
answers, the researchers found these themes
emerged as areas needing improvement:
1. Although teachers were listed as a
strength, there were several respondents
who viewed teachers at the school
negatively. There seems to be an
inconsistent level of experience and
expertise of teachers in terms of effective
classroom discipline and the ability to
meet students' varied needs.
International Pty Ltd. (2002) QSR N6. [Computer software]. Melbourne, Australia: QSR.
2. The transportation system creates an
inefficient, unsafe drop-off and pickup
situation.
3. Although the school leader had many
positive comments, there were several
negative comments as well. The
implication was that leadership might be
overextended.
4. Discipline is inconsistent.
Summary
The survey responses from Irvington
Community School lacked consistency. Some
respondents praise the teachers and feel that
they are very professional. Others would like
to see more experienced teachers in the
school. Some report a “sense of family” and
believe that Irvington Community School has
become a neighborhood school. Others point
to “cliques” of students and adults who make
newcomers uncomfortable. Some praise the
dedication and work of the school leader;
while others worry that the pressure he faces
threaten his personal well being and the well
being of the school itself.
However, there are several areas of general
agreement. The size, location, and design of
the new school building are praised along
with the academic curriculum and the change
to participate in art, music, gym, and Spanish.
Technology is mentioned very little.
3. Is the school
financially viable?
With limited funds and high start-up costs, the
first few years of a charter school's existence
are critical. Establishment of strong
accounting and financial management
practices is essential to success.
Ball State University's Office of the Vice
President for Business Affairs conducts a
detailed review of each charter school's
budget performance, financial status, and
future projections. In addition, the university
26Academic
reviews each school's State Board of Accounts
Audit and monitors changes and
improvements recommended in these reports.
Irvington Community School appears to be
financially strong.
All reports were clear and detailed, and strong
financial accounting was evident. Future fiscal
growth will depend on the ability to keep a
healthy General Fund and to make other
accounts self-supporting.
Irvington Community School is being audited
by the State Board of Accounts following the
2005 fiscal year. Results of this audit will be
summarized in the next accountability report.
4. Is the school providing
conditions for academic
success?
Academic walkthroughs
Academic walkthrough26 team members
collected data on student engagement, time on
task, curriculum focus and instructional
processes. Global school patterns were
compared to Indiana standards, the standards
of “best practice”27, and to the unique goals set
forth in the school's charter.
Strengths that were observed across the school
by all team members were shared and
reflective questions were asked. The purpose
of the reflective questions was to guide future
planning and discussion for the school as the
staff engages in continuous school
improvement.
The team commended the school on the new
facility which provides excellent opportunities
for enhanced classroom environments and
student grouping patterns.
Team members documented the following
strengths:
— growing classroom and school-wide
libraries;
Irvington
Community School
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
walkthrough structure adapted from Carolyn Downey and Larry Frase's model, Curriculum Management Services,
Inc.
27Best
practices (as defined by Zemelman, S., Daniels, H., and Hyde, A. 1998. Best Practice: New Standards for Teaching and
Learning in America's Schools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann) are “current, national consensus recommendations about 'best
educational practice' in each of the traditional school curriculum areas: reading, writing, math, science, and social studies.”
67
— excellent rapport among students and staff;
— classroom instruction that was motivating
and relevant, allowing student active
participation;
— use of research-based instructional
practices; and
— student immersion in foreign language
class;
The walkthrough team asked the Irvington
Community School staff to consider reflective
questions that addressed issues related to
instructional leadership, professional
development and collaboration, classroom
environments, and instructional techniques
that encourage active participation and a
variety of student grouping strategies.
Team members rated the student engagement
on-task behavior above average. Curriculum
focus and instructional practices were rated
average.
Final summary
Irvington Community School, in the third year
of a seven-year contract, has achieved
significant levels of loyalty among the board,
staff, and parents. Each of these constituent
groups has indicated very positive feelings
about the quality of education being delivered
in the school.
While board members express concern about
risk management, governance and operations
appear strong and the school appears to be
financially sound. Results of the academic
walkthrough were generally positive.
Irvington
Community School
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
68
Positive results in other areas have translated
into academic success for Irvington
Community School's students. Overall,
growth from fall to spring, as demonstrated by
the NWEA MAP test, shows academic growth
on par with state and national norms in most
grades and subjects. Performance on the
ISTEP+ shows Irvington Community School's
students testing at or above their peers in
neighboring Warren Township. What's more,
ISTEP+ scores show that returning students
perform better over time.
Irvington
Community
School
New Community School
New Community
School
“Nurturing Confident, Creative,
and Capable Students”
Grades Served . . . . K-7
2004-2005 Enrollment
2003-2004 Enrollment
2002-2003 Enrollment
Enrollment at capacity
. . . . . . . . . . 60
. . . . . . . . . . . 46
. . . . . . . . . . . 38
. . . . . . . . . . . 84
Student Attendance Rate . . . . . . . *94%
Student Retention Rate . . . . . . **98%
Teacher Retention Rate . . . . . . . **70%
Students in
Special Education . . . . . . . . . . . *18.5%
Limited English
Proficiency Students . . . . . . . . . . . *0%
* Source: Indiana Department of Education website
** Percentages determined using ADM count numbers on returning students and teachers
620 Cumberland Avenue
West Lafayette, IN 47906
(765) 464-8999
Profile of New Community School
Demographics
www.ncs.lafayette.in.us
Figure F-1 shows the demographic composition (black, white, Hispanic and other28) of New
Community School. New Community serves a minority population of five percent compared to
the state average of 21%.; however, the school serves a large percentage of special needs
students. Figure F-2 demonstrates free and reduced lunch percentages at New Community
School. Thirty-six percent of students that attend New Community qualify for free or reduced
lunch.
Figure F-1
Figure F-2
Ne w Com m unity School Race /Ethnicity 20042005
New Com m unity School Percentage Paid,
Reduced price, Free lunch 2004-2005
Other
5% Black
Hispanic 0%
0%
Black
Free
28%
White
Paid
Hispanic
Other
White
95%
Reduced price
Reduced price
8%
Paid
64%
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
Free
69
28 Other
includes children of Hispanic, Asian, Native American, and Multi-racial origin.
Enrollment
Purpose
Figure F-3 shows the current, projected and
capacity enrollment for New Community
School. New Community School is the
smallest charter school sponsored by Ball
State University Office of Charter Schools. In
2004, 60 students attended New Community
School. The school will provide education
services to 84 students at capacity.
New Community School provides a
progressive educational alternative for
families in the Lafayette-West Lafayette
community. New Community School's
mission is to promote each child's emotional,
social, and academic growth through creative
and exploratory learning experiences. Parents,
students, and staff actively share
responsibility for the well being of the school
and the growth of confident, creative, and
capable students. New Community School
offers small classes led by highly educated,
Figure F-3
Current, Projected, Capacity Enrollment,
Grades Served for New Community School
School
Name
New
Community
School
Year
Opened
2002-2003
2004-2005
Enrollment
(grades
served)
Projected
Enrollment
2005-2006
60
(grades K-7)
66
(grades K-8)
Location
620 Cumberland Avenue
West Lafayette, IN 47906
New Community School is located in West
Lafayette, Indiana. West Lafayette is in
Tippecanoe County.
New Community School
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
70
Projected
Enrollment
20062007
Enrollment
at Capacity
(grades
served at
capacity)
72
(grades K-8)
84
(grades K-8)
Student
Waiting
List (as of
June 30,
2005)
31
caring teachers as well as a strong sense of
community throughout the school. New
Community School is a democratic
environment in which real and worthwhile
choices are available for children within the
context of respect, safety, and self-discipline.
Educational
Program
New Community School places an emphasis
on integrated learning in order to build on the
natural curiosity of children (teaching reading,
writing, math, and social skills though all
content areas such as science, literature, art,
and social studies). There is also an emphasis
on problem formation, critical thinking, and
problem solving in order to foster independent
thought. The teaching is flexible and
responsive to each child's strengths, needs,
and style of learning. The school offers
opportunities for many levels of parent
involvement that range from teaching classes
to determining school policies.
and other public schools in Indiana. It is not
possible to use the results to measure individual
students' progress over time because each
grade's test results pertain to different children
from year to year. However, performance trends
can be observed.
Performance
of New Community School
1. Is the educational
program a success?
Student performance trends showed very
positive gains in both grade 3 and grade 6 for
New Community School from 2003 to 2004. In
grade 3, while the percentage of students passing
was below West Lafayette Community,
percentages were higher than state percentages.
Percentages of grade 6 students passing ISTEP+
was higher than both West Lafayette Community
students and state percentages.
Ultimately, charter schools are evaluated by their
academic success. The Ball State Office of
Charter Schools evaluates how each charter
school is performing against multiple success
measures, including results of Indiana Statewide
Test of Educational Progress-Plus (ISTEP+),
Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA) or
Test of Adult Basic Skills (TABE), and Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP).
Figure F-5 further explains ISTEP+ results for
students at New Community School. It compares
the percentage of students passing ISTEP+ for
returning students to the percentage of students
passing ISTEP+ for students in their first year at
the school. The number of students tested in
each grade at New Community is so small, the
Indiana Statewide Test of
Educational Progress-Plus (ISTEP+)
Figure F-4 shows the results of ISTEP+ for New
Community School students compared to
students in West Lafayette Community Schools
New
Community
School
English/LA
New
Community
West
Lafayette
Community
Math
Indiana
New
Community
Both English & Math
West
Lafayette
Community
Indiana
New
Community
West
Lafayette
Community
Indiana
3rd grade
2004
80%
93%
75%
60%
86%
73%
40%
84%
65%
2003
60%
96%
74%
40%
93%
71%
40%
90%
63%
90%
72%
80%
67%
77%
59%
50%
92%
73%
50%
94%
73%
50%
90%
64%
100%
94%
72%
40%
92%
72%
40%
91%
63%
100%
75%
90%
93%
70%
69%
100%
50%
90%
93%
75%
72%
100%
50%
87%
91%
63%
62%
100%
94%
68%
67%
94%
73%
67%
92%
61%
2002
***
2004
2003
2002
*
**
2004
2003
2002
*
**
***
***
4th grade
Figure F-4
Percentage of Students in
New Community School,
West Lafayette
Community Schools, and
Indiana Public Schools
Passing ISTEP+ in the
fall 2004
5th grade
6th grade
2004
2003
2002
**
2004
2003
2002
*
**
7th grade
* No students tested in 4th, 5th or 7th grade for 2003.
** No students tested in 4th, 5th, 6th or 7th grade for 2002.
*** Percentages not reported due to the small number of students taking the ISTEP+.
Figure F-5
Percentage of Students in New Community School, Returning Students, and First Year Students
Passing ISTEP+ in fall 2004.Passing ISTEP+ in fall 2004.
New
Community
School
ALL STUDENTS
RETURNING STUDENTS
#
Students
LA
Math
Both LA &
# Students
Math
3rd Grade
5
80%
60%
40%
4th Grade
6
50%
50%
5th Grade
5
100%
6th Grade
5
7th Grade
3
New Community School
FIRST YEAR STUDENTS
Both LA
# Students
& Math
LA
Math
Both LA
& Math
0
NA
NA
NA
50%
2
50%
50%
50%
33%
33%
2
100%
50%
50%
100%
100%
100%
1
100%
100%
100%
100%
67%
67%
0
NA
NA
NA
LA
Math
5
80%
60%
40%
50%
4
50%
50%
40%
40%
3
100%
100%
100%
100%
4
100%
67%
67%
3
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
71
percentages can easily vary. For the 2004 school
year, the results for first year and returning
students were fairly consistent.
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
Under federal No Child Left Behind
legislation, the Indiana Department of
Education (IDOE) has determined Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP) for all Indiana schools,
including charter schools.
The IDOE determines AYP designations for
each school based on the overall percentage of
students passing the English and mathematics
ISTEP+ tests. Additionally, schools must
uphold or improve elementary and middle
school attendance rates, and high school
graduation rates. (AYP is also determined for
student subgroups within the population,
including race/ethnicity, free/reduced price
lunch eligibility, limited English proficiency,
and special education, provided that there are
at least 30 students in a particular subgroup.)
New Community School made AYP in 20042005. New Community School did not have
enough students in any of the subgroup
categories, so AYP was not determined for the
subgroups.
Northwest Evaluation Association
(NWEA )
Figure F-6 compares New Community School
students' spring scaled scores to Indiana and
national norms on the math, reading, and
language arts portions of the NWEA. Students
that attend New Community School
maintained average scaled score levels
relatively even to their peers in Indiana and
nationally.
New Community School
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
72
The following data in Figure F-7 present the
average growth rate for students attending
New Community School for each grade and
each subject area tested in fall 2004 and spring
2005. Only students who took the test in both
fall and spring are included.
Students at New Community School made
growth at a rate consistent with their peers in
most areas. The growth rate in grades 3 and 7
in reading and in grades 3, 4, and 5 in
language was much greater than state and
national norms. Growth rates fell well below
state and national norms in grade 6 reading.
Figure F-6
NWEA scaled scores comparing New
Community School to Indiana and national
norms in math, reading, and language arts
Grade
2
Average Math Scaled Scores
New Community
State
School
*
*
National
194
3
205
204
200
4
207
211
208
5
218
219
217
6
232
227
222
7
235
231
227
8
*
238
234
Grade
2
Average Reading Scaled Scores
New Community
State
National
School
*
*
193
3
208
201
198
4
210
207
205
5
214
213
211
6
226
218
215
7
233
221
219
8
*
226
223
Grade
2
Average Language Scaled Scores
New Community
State
National
School
*
*
*
3
204
204
199
4
208
209
206
5
213
215
212
6
223
219
216
7
229
221
219
8
*
225
222
*An asterisk indicates that data were not available for this
subject and grade, either because the school did not test
students in that grade/subject or because NWEA does not
provide norm data for it.
Figure F-7
NWEA scaled scores comparing New
Community School to Indiana and national
norms in math, reading, and language arts
Grade
2
Average Math Scaled Scores
New Community
State
School
*
*
New Community School
Enrichment Class
National
Grade
Average Language Scaled Scores
New Community
State
National
School
*
*
*
15.7
2
3
11.4
10.6
11.8
3
13.4
10.6
9.3
4
7.8
8.8
8.9
4
9.6
5.8
6.5
5
7.6
9
8.8
5
9.6
5.2
5.8
6
6.8
9.1
8.1
6
2.2
4.1
4.5
7
8
7.3
6.9
7
2.7
3
3.6
8
*
7
7.1
8
*
3.2
3.5
Grade
2
Average Reading Scaled Scores
New Community
State
National
School
*
*
14.9
3
18
9
10.4
4
5.8
6.8
7.4
5
6.6
5.9
6.3
6
-1.8
5.3
5.3
7
8
4.1
4.3
8
*
4.1
4.2
*An asterisk indicates that data were not available for this
subject and grade, either because the school did not test
students in that grade/subject or because NWEA does not
provide norm data for it.
New Community School
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
73
Academic Success:
Mission-Driven Organization
2. Is the school
organizationally
sound?
5
4.6
4.4
Series 1
2
1
Series 22
2
0
1.1
1.2
1.3
2.1
Question Number
4.1
3.4
2.3
Performance Against
Success Measures:
Communication and Advocacy
4.6
5
2.2
Question Number
Academic Success:
Mission-Driven Organization
4
3.4
3
1
0
4.6
5
3.4
3.9
3.9
Average
3
Series 3
2
Average
4
3
1
1
0
3.1
3.2
3.3
Series 4
2
0
3.4
4.1
4.2
Question Number
Organizational Soundness:
Risk Management
Financial Viability:
Budget Development and
Management
4.6
5
4.7
3.9
4
4.0
4.3
4
3.1
3
Series 5
2
Average
5
3.4
Series 6
2
0
0
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
6.1
5.5
5.0
6.3
Organizational Soundness:
Board Development and
Education
Academic Success:
Leadership Development
4.7
6.2
Question Number
Question Number
Average
3.4
3
1
1
5
4.3
Question Number
4.9
4.9
4.6
5
4.4
4.1
4
Figure F-8
New Community School Board
self-assessment results (Series
questions 1-9)
Average
Average
3
4.0
3.7
4
4.0
4
3.4
4.0
3.7
3.1
3
Series 77
2
1
Average
Figure F-8 shows the results for
all nine areas of the board selfassessment survey for New
Community School. New
Community's board rated itself
well in most areas, yet still found
areas for improvement in almost
one half of the series questions.
Series eight questions, related to
board development and
education, revealed the most
areas in need of improvement.
4.4
4
Average
Board self-assessments
Organizational soundness is
essential for short-term success
and long-term growth of every
charter school. Such
organizational strength depends
on strong board leadership. Ball
State University Office of Charter
Schools has developed a board
self-assessment survey29 to help
each school board evaluate its
performance and identify areas of
strength and areas in need of
improvement. This survey can be
viewed on the website
www.bsu.edu/teachers/charter.
5
Organizational Soundness:
Policy and Strategic Planning
3.1
3
Series 8
2
1
0
0
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
7.6
8.1
Question Number
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
8.6
8.7
Question Number
Organizational Soundness:
The Board's Role
New Community School
5
4.4
4.4
4.7
4.1
4.3
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
Average
4
3
Series 9
2
1
0
9.1
9.2
9.3
Question Number
74
9.4
9.5
29 Board self-assessment tool was adopted from the
Girls, Inc. “Board Self Assessment.”
Constituent surveys
Loyalty
A majority of responding staff, parents and
board members said that they would
recommend New Community School to
friends and colleagues, would return to the
school next year, would increase their support
of the school and were satisfied with the
school overall.
Quality
Figure F-9 demonstrates that a majority of
staff, parents and board members had positive
responses to the quality items. Specifically,
they rated the overall quality of education as
very good or excellent, had positive opinions
regarding the overall quality of education as
compared to other schools and were satisfied
with the overall quality of education.
Image/attitude
Figure F-10 explains that members of the
three constituent groups surveyed generally
had positive opinions with respect to the
image and attitude at the school. An area of
shared concern for a majority of each group
was the relative time spent on academics
versus other schools. In addition, parents and
board members had a concern about the
availability of resources for the school to
complete its mission.
Respondents from the three constituent groups
shared positive opinions regarding the
understanding by members of the school
community of its mission, the caring
environment, communication of student
performance to parents, continuous
improvement at the school, teacher
accountability, clearly defined expectations,
comprehensive assessment of student
achievement, positive school spirit, high
expectations for teachers, safety, availability
of school leaders, high quality academic
program, focus on school mission, discipline,
mission driven academic program, board
effectiveness, team approach to education,
commitment to school mission, teacher
empowerment, administration effectiveness,
financial stability, school pride and innovative
education practices.
Performance
Several areas of concern in the realm of
performance were cited by a majority of each
constituent group. These concerns included
school facilities, support services,
transportation services and food service. In
addition, parents expressed concerns about the
enrollment/admissions process and school
materials and supplies. This latter concern was
shared by a majority of board members, who
also had less than positive opinions about
services provided to special needs students,
New Community School
students preparing for class
presentation
Figure F-9
New Community School Parents, Staff, and Board Overall Loyalty Survey Results
Overall Loyalty- includes extremely likely and very
likely responses
Likelihood to recommend
%
Parents *(30)
%
Staff (11)
%
Board (5)
87.1%
81.8%
100%
Likelihood to return next year
92.6%
90.9%
75%
Likelihood to increase support
96.4%
70%
80%
*() indicates number of survey responses
New Community School
Figure F-10
New Community School Parents, Staff, and Board Quality of Education Survey Results
Overall Quality- includes very satisfied and somewhat
%
Parents *(30)
%
Staff (11)
87.1%
81.8%
100%
Overall Quality-Better than other schools
84.6%
81.8%
100%
Overall Satisfaction
93.3%
90.9%
80%
satisfied responses
Overall Quality
*() indicates number of survey responses
%
Board (5)
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
75
2. What does not work well at the school?
What are your concerns? Please provide
examples or descriptions.
3. Please share any additional information
about this school.
Researchers used qualitative analysis of
responses along with QSR N6 software30,
which provided the system for developing
relevant categories of analysis to organize the
data.
Strengths
After analyzing the respondents' open-ended
answers, the researchers found that these
categories emerged as strengths:
1. Teachers are nurturing and create a caring
environment.
New Community School
student playing music
boom wackers
school safety, communication about the
school's mission, school size and the location
of the school. Staff shared these latter two
concerns, and also indicated the school board
as an area of concern.
All three constituent groups shared positive
opinions regarding the quality of teaching,
school administration, teacher professional
development, individualized student attention,
access to computers, parents, faculty,
communication about student learning,
student development, opportunities for
parental involvement, curriculum, students,
student teacher ratio, teacher decision making
and classroom management.
New Community School
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
76
Open-ended constituent
survey responses
In order to give respondents an opportunity to
express personal opinions or make specific
comments regarding their individual schools,
all constituent surveys included open-ended
questions. Participants (parents, staff, and
board members) were asked to respond to
three open-ended questions on the Ball State
University 2005 constituent survey:
2. Small class sizes allow for more
individual student attention.
3. Parents are actively involved in the
school. The curriculum includes themebased units. Art, music, Spanish, and
“gym” are also offered.
Areas for improvement
After analyzing the respondents' open-ended
answers, the researchers found this theme
emerged as an area needing improvement:
1. The school site creates limitations.
Summary
Most respondents value the small class sizes,
the theme-based curriculum, and the
individual attention each child gets. Parent
involvement is considered a key element in
the building of this educational community. A
main cause for concern is the current school
facility and the negative impact of the facility
on the school program. In general, however,
participants responded positively about the
school.
1. What works well at the school? What are
the strengths of the school? Please
provide examples or descriptions.
30QSR
International Pty Ltd. (2002) QSR N6. [Computer software]. Melbourne, Australia: QSR.
3. Is the school
financially viable?
Each of these constituent groups has indicated
very positive feelings about the quality of
education being delivered in the school.
With limited funds and high start-up costs, the
first few years of a charter school's existence
are critical. Establishment of strong
accounting and financial management
practices is essential to success.
While board members express concern about
risk management and budget development,
governance and operations appear strong and
the school appears to be financially sound.
Results of the 2003 academic walkthrough
were positive enough that the academic
walkthrough team did not conduct a
walkthrough in 2004.
Ball State University's Office of the Vice
President for Business Affairs conducts a
detailed review of each charter school's
budget performance, financial status, and
future projections. In addition, the university
reviews each school's State Board of Accounts
Audit and monitors changes and
improvements recommended in these reports.
With a small number of students tested at each
grade, percentages can easily vary. However,
results of the ISTEP+ and growth
demonstrated on the NWEA MAP test are
generally positive.
New Community School stayed well within
budget for the fiscal year. Despite operating
on a rather small overall budget, New
Community School demonstrates sound
financial management and good financial
growth for the future.
New Community School is being audited by
the State Board of Accounts following the
2005 fiscal year. Results of this audit will be
summarized in the next accountability report.
New Community School
students observing during
in class shapes project
4. Is the school providing
conditions for academic
success?
Academic walkthroughs
A few Ball State University charter schools,
considered performing at an exceptional level,
were excused from the 2005 academic
walkthrough31 process. New Community
School was excused, so academic
walkthrough summary information is not
available.
New Community School
Final summary
New Community School, in the fourth year of
a seven-year contract, has the lowest
enrollment of any Ball State charter school.
The school has achieved significant levels of
loyalty among the board, staff, and parents.
31Academic
Inc.
walkthrough structure adapted from Carolyn Downey and Larry Frase's model, Curriculum Management Services,
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
77
New
Community
School
New Community School
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
78
Options Charter School
Options
Charter School
“Belong-Believe-Achieve”
Grades Served . . . 9-12
2004-2005 Enrollment
2003-2004 Enrollment
2002-2003 Enrollment
Enrollment at capacity
. . . . . . . . . 130
. . . . . . . . . 104*
. . . . . . . . . 104*
. . . . . . . . . . 130
*Options Charter School was authorized by the Carmel-Clay
School District during the 02-03 and 03-04 school years.
Student Attendance Rate . . . . . . . *93%
Student Retention Rate . . . . . . **85%
Teacher Retention Rate . . . . . . . **72%
Students in
Special Education . . . . . . . . . . . *30.8%
Limited English
Proficiency Students . . . . . . . . . . . *0%
340 Ridgepoint Drive
Carmel, IN 46032
(317) 815-2098
* Source: Indiana Department of Education website
** Percentages determined using ADM count numbers on returning students and teachers
Profile of Options Charter School
Demographics
www.optionsined.org
Figure G-1 shows the demographic composition (black, white, Hispanic and other32) of Options
Charter School. Options Charter School serves a minority population of eight percent compared
to the state average of 21%; however, the school serves a large percentage of special needs
students. Figure G-2 demonstrates free and reduced lunch percentages at Options Charter School.
The majority of students at Options Charter School do not qualify for free or reduced lunch.
Figure G-1
Figure G-2
Options Charter School Race/Ethnicity 20042005
Other
3% Black
Hispanic
2%
Options Charter School Percentage Paid,
Reduced price, Free lunch 2004-2005
Free
9%
3%
Black
Reduced price
0%
White
Paid
Hispanic
Reduced price
Free
Other
White
92%
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
Paid
91%
79
32 Other
includes children of Hispanic, Asian, Native American, and Multi-racial origin.
Enrollment
Purpose
Figure G-3 shows the current, projected and
capacity enrollment for Options Charter
School. Options Charter School opened in
2002 with 104 students. In 2004, the school
reached capacity enrollment, providing
education services to 130 students.
The purpose of Options Charter School is to
provide a caring community for those students
who are seeking an alternative to traditional
high school programs. They offer educational
services specifically for students who are not
achieving in the traditional schools of
Hamilton County and northern Marion
County. Their focus is on the educational
success and the health and wellness of each
student. Options' goal is to develop
Figure G-3
Current, Projected, Capacity Enrollment, Grades
Served for Options Charter School
School
Name
Options
Charter
School
Year
Opened
2002-2003
2004-2005
Enrollment
(grades
served)
Projected
Enrollment
2005-2006
130
(grades 9-12)
130
(grades 9-12)
Location
340 Ridgepoint Drive
Carmel, IN 46032
Options Charter School is located in Carmel,
Indiana. Carmel is in Hamilton County.
Options Charter School
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
80
Projected
Enrollment
20062007
Enrollment
at Capacity
(grades
served at
capacity)
130
(grades 9-12)
130
(grades 9-12)
Student
Waiting
List (as of
June 30,
2005)
75
responsible individuals who are skilled
problem solvers and caring, productive
citizens.
Educational
Program
The purpose of Options Charter School is
accomplished through an educational program
that meets the Indiana Academic Standards for
a Core 40 diploma. Teachers in this small
learning environment are able to focus on the
students' learning styles, talents,
developmental levels, and emotional needs. It
is a place where those students who have
disengaged from the learning process can reengage, and those students who need a nontraditional approach to learning can flourish.
The curriculum, developed by the teachers
with input from students, parents, and the
business community, is based on 12 exit
standards that have been developed by the
state.
Performance
Figure G-5 further explains ISTEP+ results for
students at Options Charter School. It compares
the percentage of students passing ISTEP+ for
returning students to the percentage of students
passing ISTEP+ for students in their first year at
the school. This was the opening year for
Options Charter School as a Ball State
University sponsored charter so there were no
returning students for comparison data in 2004.
of Options Charter School
1. Is the educational
program a success?
Ultimately, charter schools are evaluated by their
academic success. The Ball State Office of
Charter Schools evaluates how each charter
school is performing against multiple success
measures, including results of Indiana Statewide
Test of Educational Progress-Plus (ISTEP+),
Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA) or
Test of Adult Basic Skills (TABE), and Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP).
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
Under federal No Child Left Behind
legislation, the Indiana Department of
Education (IDOE) has determined Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP) for all Indiana schools,
including charter schools.
The IDOE determines AYP designations for
each school based on the overall percentage of
students passing the English and mathematics
ISTEP+ tests. Additionally, schools must
uphold or improve elementary and middle
school attendance rates, and high school
graduation rates. (AYP is also determined for
student subgroups within the population,
including race/ethnicity, free/reduced price
lunch eligibility, limited English proficiency,
and special education, provided that there are
at least 30 students in a particular subgroup.)
Indiana Statewide Test of
Educational Progress-Plus (ISTEP+)
Figure G-4 shows the results of ISTEP+ for
Options Charter School students compared to
students in Carmel-Clay Schools and other
public schools in Indiana. It is not possible to
use the results to measure individual students'
progress over time because each grade's test
results pertain to different children from year to
year. However, performance trends can be
observed. The percentage of students passing
ISTEP+ was consistent with state percentages
but fell well below Carmel-Clay Schools.
Figure G-4
Percentage of Students in Options Charter School, Carmel-Clay Schools, and Indiana Public Schools
Passing ISTEP+ in the fall 2004
Options
Charter
School
English/LA
Math
Both English & Math
Options
Carmel-Clay
Indiana
Options
Carmel-Clay
Indiana
Options
Carmel-Clay
Indiana
2004
46%
92%
67%
62%
94%
68%
46%
90%
59%
2003
*
2002
10th grade
**
94%
68%
38%
95%
64%
34%
92%
57%
9th grade
2004
2003
2002
59%
*
**
* No students tested in 9th or 10th grade for 2003.
** No students tested in 9th or 10th grade for 2002.
Figure G-5
Percentage of Students in Options Charter School, Returning Students, and First Year Students Passing
ISTEP+ in fall 2004.Passing ISTEP+ in fall 2004.Passing ISTEP+ in fall 2004.
ALL STUDENTS
RETURNING STUDENTS
Options
Charter
School
#
Students
LA
Math
9th Grade
13
46%
62%
46%
10th Grade
29
59%
38%
34%
Both LA &
# Students
Math
FIRST YEAR STUDENTS
Both LA
# Students
& Math
LA
Math
0
NA
NA
NA
0
NA
NA
NA
LA
Math
Both LA
& Math
13
46%
62%
46%
29
59%
38%
34%
Options Charter School
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
81
Options Charter School did not make AYP in
2004-2005. Schools must meet every AYP
target for each category in order to make AYP.
Missing any one AYP target will result in the
school not making AYP.
Options Charter School missed student
performance targets for the overall student
group in one area, percentage of students
passing the mathematics portion of ISTEP+.
Options Charter School did not have enough
students in any of the subgroup categories, so
AYP was not determined for the subgroups.
Northwest Evaluation Association
(NWEA )
Figure G-6 compares Options Charter School
students' spring scaled scores to Indiana and
national norms on the math, reading, and
language arts portions of the NWEA. Students
that attend Options Charter School maintained
average scaled score levels relatively even to
their peers in Indiana and nationally.
Options Charter School
students researching career
and college opportunities
The following data in Figure G-7 present the
average growth rate for students attending
Options Charter School for each grade and
each subject tested in fall 2004 and spring
2005. Only students who took the test in both
fall and spring are included. Growth rates for
Options Charter School students were
significantly greater than their peers in grade
9 reading and grade 10 reading and language,
and much less than their peers in grade 9 math
and language.
Figure G-6
NWEA scaled scores comparing Options
Charter School to Indiana and national norms in
math, reading, and language arts
Grade
9
Options Charter School
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
82
Average Math Scaled Scores
Options Charter
State
School
230
242
National
240
10
228
*
242
11
236
*
*
12
235
*
*
Grade
9
Average Reading Scaled Scores
Options Charter
State
National
School
222
227
225
10
221
*
224
11
224
*
*
12
218
*
*
Grade
9
Average Language Scaled Scores
Options Charter
State
School
217
226
National
224
10
221
*
223
11
221
*
*
12
218
*
*
*An asterisk indicates that data were not available for this
subject and grade, either because the school did not test
students in that grade/subject or because NWEA does not
provide norm data for it.
Figure G-7
NWEA scaled scores comparing Options
Charter School to Indiana and national norms in
math, reading, and language arts
Grade
9
Average Math Scaled Scores
Options Charter
State
School
-0.4
6.2
National
5.8
10
2.3
*
4.8
11
3.3
*
*
12
8.1
*
*
Grade
9
Average Reading Scaled Scores
Options Charter
State
National
School
9.9
1.6
2.9
10
13.7
*
2.6
11
7.1
*
*
12
10
*
*
Grade
9
Average Language Scaled Scores
Options Charter
State
School
-1.6
2
National
2.4
10
8.7
*
1.9
11
-1
*
*
12
6.5
*
*
*An asterisk indicates that data were not available for this
subject and grade, either because the school did not test
students in that grade/subject or because NWEA does not
provide norm data for it.
Academic Success:
Mission-Driven Organization
4.7
5
Organizational Soundness:
Policy and Strategic Planning
4.8
4.7
5
4
3
Series 1
2
3
Average
Average
4
Series 2
2
1
1
0
0
1.1
1.2
2.1
1.3
2.2
Academic Success:
Mission-Driven Organization
4.8
5
4.5
4.2
2.3
Question Number
Question Number
Performance Against
Success Measures:
Communication and Advocacy
4.5
5.0
5.0
5
4
3.8
4
3
Series 3
2
1
Average
Average
4.7
4.3
4.2
3
Series 4
2
1
0
3.1
3.2
3.3
0
3.4
4.1
Question Number
4.2
4.3
Question Number
Financial Viability:
Budget Development and
Management
Organizational Soundness:
Risk Management
4.8
5
5.0
4.7
5
4.2
4.8
4.4
3.8
4
3.8
Series 5
2
Average
Average
4
3
3
Series 6
2
1
1
0
0
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
6.1
5.5
6.2
Organizational Soundness:
Board Development and
Education
Academic Success:
Leadership Development
5.0
5.0
5.0
6.3
Question Number
Question Number
5.0
4.5
5
4.8
4.8
5
4
4.3
4.0
4.3
4.2
Average
Average
Series 7
2
3.8
3
1
0
0
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
8.1
7.6
Question Number
Figure G-8 shows the results for
all nine areas of the board selfassessment survey for Options
Charter School. Option's board
rated itself extremely well in
almost all areas, with only four
individual series questions, 4.1,
5.4, 6.3 and 8.7, below the
rating of 4.0.
Ser ies 88
2
1
Board self-assessments
Organizational soundness is
essential for short-term success
and long-term growth of every
charter school. Such
organizational strength depends
on strong board leadership. Ball
State University Office of
Charter Schools has developed
a board self-assessment survey33
to help each school board
evaluate its performance and
identify areas of strength and
areas in need of improvement.
This survey can be viewed on
the website
www.bsu.edu/teachers/charter.
Figure G-8
Options Charter School Board
self-assessment results (Series
questions 1-9)
5.0
4
3
2. Is the school
organizationally
sound?
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
8.6
8.7
Quest ion Number
Organizational Soundness:
The Board's Role
5
4.8
4.8
4.8
5.0
4.8
Options Charter School
4
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
Average
3
Series 9
2
1
0
9.1
9.2
9.3
Question Number
9.4
9.5
33 Board self-assessment tool was adopted from the
Girls, Inc. “Board Self Assessment.”
83
Constituent surveys
Loyalty
Figure G-9 demonstrates that large majorities
(over 80%) of staff and parents responding to
the survey indicated that they would
recommend the school to friends and
colleagues, return to the school next year,
increase their support for the school and are
satisfied with the school. Such positive results
were also seen for the two board members
who responded to the survey.
Options Charter School
students in Social Studies
class
Quality
Figure G-10 explains that a majority of
parents believe that the overall quality of
education at Options Charter School is very
good or excellent, that it is better than that at
other schools and they are satisfied with the
overall quality of education. On the other
hand, eight of ten staff had concerns about the
overall quality of education at the school, and
seven of ten compared the quality of
education unfavorably to that of other schools.
Interestingly, however, nine of the ten
responding staff were satisfied with the
overall quality of education at Options Charter
School.
Image/attitude
Parents were generally positive about the
image and attitudes around Options Charter
School. The only areas of concern appear to
be the amount of time spent on academics
relative to other schools and the financial
stability of the school. The staff was also
generally positive, sharing with parents the
concern about the relative amount of time
devoted to academics. Over half of the staff
respondents also voiced concerns about the
positive school spirit, the level of discipline
and the availability of resources to complete
the mission.
Performance
In the area of school performance, parents and
staff shared several concerns, including the
parents, the food service (based on responses
the greatest area of concern), school materials
and supplies and classroom management. In
addition, parents also had concerns about the
communication of student learning/
achievement, the curriculum, transportation
services and the students. Staff had
independent concerns about the quality of
teaching and teacher professional
development.
Parents and staff shared positive opinions
about the school board, the enrollment
process, school administration, school
facilities, individualized student attention,
access to computers, support services, faculty,
services for special needs students, school
safety, student development, opportunities for
parental involvement, communication about
meeting the school's mission, student teacher
ratio, school size, teacher decision making and
location of the school.
Figure G-9
Options Charter School Parents, Staff, and Board Overall Loyalty Survey Results
Overall Loyalty- includes extremely likely and very
likely responses
Likelihood to recommend
%
Parents *(41)
%
Staff (10)
%
Board (2)
88.1%
80%
100%
Likelihood to return next year
84.2%
90%
100%
Likelihood to increase support
71.8%
90%
100%
*() indicates number of survey responses
Options Charter School
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
84
Figure G-10
Options Charter School Parents, Staff, and Board Quality of Education Survey Results
Overall Quality- includes very satisfied and
%
Parents *(41)
%
Staff (10)
%
Board **(2)
64.3%
20%
50%
Overall Quality-Better than other schools
73.2%
30%
100%
Overall Satisfaction
90.5%
90%
100%
somewhat satisfied responses
Overall Quality
*() indicates number of survey responses
**Note that only 2 board members responded. Given this small sample size, their results will not be presented.
Open-ended constituent
survey responses
In order to give respondents an opportunity to
express personal opinions or make specific
comments regarding their individual schools,
all constituent surveys included open-ended
questions. Participants (parents, staff, and
board members) were asked to respond to
three open-ended questions on the Ball State
University 2005 constituent survey:
1. What works well at the school? What are
the strengths of the school? Please
provide examples or descriptions.
2. What does not work well at the school?
What are your concerns? Please provide
examples or descriptions.
3. Please share any additional information
about this school.
Researchers used qualitative analysis of
responses along with QSR N6 software34,
which provided the system for developing
relevant categories of analysis to organize the
data.
Strengths
After analyzing the respondents' open-ended
answers, the researchers found that these
categories emerged as strengths:
1. Teachers are perceived as caring,
accessible, and involved with students'
individual needs.
2.
Small class sizes promote an atmosphere
of concern for each student.
3. Leadership is dedicated to the students
and school program.
4. The staff supports students by not giving
up on them and communicating well to
families.
5. There is a flexible, dynamic curriculum
that builds on the strengths of students.
6. There is effective communication between
parents, staff and students.
Areas for improvement
After analyzing the respondents' open-ended
answers, the researchers found these themes
emerged as areas needing improvement:
Options Charter School
student doing research in
practical applications
1. Roles/boundaries/responsibilities are not
always clear. Also, the system of
discipline is viewed as inconsistent.
2. More effective teaching is needed in terms
of being consistent and raising
expectations for students.
Summary
Options Charter School offers options. It
provides a small school environment with
small class sizes and dedicated staff and
leadership who create innovative learning
plans. Parents and students seem unanimous
in their enthusiasm and appreciation.
There are some areas that seem to be of
concern to a significant number of
respondents, however. Inconsistent discipline,
the lack of clarity in teacher and
administrative roles brought on by such
practices as students being on a first name
basis with everyone in the school, and some
teaching practices that seem to indicate low
student expectations.
Options Charter School
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
85
34QSR
International Pty Ltd. (2002) QSR N6. [Computer software]. Melbourne, Australia: QSR.
3. Is the school
financially viable?
With limited funds and high start-up costs, the
first few years of a charter school's existence
are critical. Establishment of strong
accounting and financial management
practices is essential to success.
Ball State University's Office of the Vice
President for Business Affairs conducts a
detailed review of each charter school's
budget performance, financial status, and
future projections. In addition, the university
reviews each school's State Board of Accounts
Audit and monitors changes and
improvements recommended in these reports.
Options Charter School showed financial
growth and appears to be in solid financial
standing.
Options Charter School is being audited by
the State Board of Accounts following the
2005 fiscal year. Results of this audit will be
summarized in the next accountability report.
4. Is the school providing
conditions for academic
success?
Academic walkthroughs
Academic walkthrough35 team members
collected data on student engagement, time on
task, and curriculum focus and instructional
processes. Global school patterns were
compared to Indiana standards, the standards
of “best practice”36, and to the unique goals
set forth in the school's charter.
Options Charter School
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
It was noted that Options Charter School has
been in operation since the 2002-2003 school
year, however, Ball State University Office of
Charter Schools, took over the oversight of the
charter starting with the 2004-2005 school
year. This was the school's first academic
walkthrough conducted by Ball State
University.
Team members documented the following
strengths:
—
treating students “as if”, allowing
appropriate freedom and choice;
—
a business-like atmosphere with
corporate-looking furnishings and
technology;
—
evidence of higher-order thinking skills
during classroom instruction and
assignments;
—
evidence of self-directed, individualized,
project-based learning; and
—
excellent rapport between students and
staff.
The walkthrough team asked the Options
Charter School staff to consider reflective
questions that addressed issues related to
professional development, individualized
instruction through use of computer software,
preparing students for “real world” work
expectations, and effective use of instructional
time.
Team members rated student engagement ontask behavior and instructional practices
above average. Curriculum focus was rated
high.
Strengths that were observed across the
school by all team members were shared and
reflective questions were asked. The purpose
of the reflective questions was to guide future
planning and discussion for the school as the
staff engages in continuous school
improvement.
35Academic
walkthrough structure adapted from Carolyn Downey and Larry Frase's model, Curriculum Management Services,
Inc.
86
36Best
practices (as defined by Zemelman, S., Daniels, H., and Hyde, A. 1998. Best Practice: New Standards for Teaching and
Learning in America's Schools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann) are “current, national consensus recommendations about 'best
educational practice' in each of the traditional school curriculum areas: reading, writing, math, science, and social studies.”
Final summary
Options Charter School completed the first
year of a seven-year contract with Ball State
and its third year as a charter school. Options
Charter School has achieved significant levels
of loyalty among the board, staff and parents.
However, all three constituent groups express
a belief that the overall quality of the school
merits improvement.
Board members express positive feelings
about governance and management and the
school appears to be financially sound.
Results of the academic walkthrough were
generally positive.
Students at Options Charter School perform
well below their peers in the Carmel-Clay
School District on the ISTEP+ though
academic growth results, as measured by the
NWEA MAP test, are generally positive.
Options Charter School
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
87
Options
Charter
School
Options Charter School
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
88
Rural Community
Academy
Rural Community
Academy
“Where Every Child Soars”
Grades Served . . . . K-7
2004-2005 Enrollment . . . . . . . . . . 91
Enrollment at capacity . . . . . . . . . . 180
Student Attendance Rate . . . . . . . *95%
Student Retention Rate . . . . . . **97%
Teacher Retention Rate . . . . . . . **38%
Students in
Special Education . . . . . . . . . . . *24.9%
Limited English
Proficiency Students . . . . . . . . . . . *0%
* Source: Indiana Department of Education website
** Percentages determined using ADM count numbers on returning students and teachers
Profile of Rural Community Academy
Demographics
P. O. Box 85
Graysville, IN 47852
(812) 382-4500
www.rcsi.k12.in.us
Figure H-1 shows the demographic composition (black, white, Hispanic and other ) of Rural
Community Academy. Rural Community Academy serves a minority population of two percent
compared to the state average of 21%.; however, the school serves a large percentage of special
needs students. Figure H-2 demonstrates free and reduced lunch percentages at Rural
Community Academy. Forty-one percent of the students qualify for free and reduced lunch
prices.
37
Figure H-1
Figure H-2
Rural Community Academy Race/Ethnicity 20042005
Rural Comm unity Academ y Percentage Paid,
Reduced price, Free lunch 2004-2005
Other
0%
Hispanic Black
2%
0%
Black
Free
21%
Hispanic
White
98%
Other
Ball State University
Office
of Charter Schools
Reduced price
2004-2005
Free
Accountability Report
Paid
White
Reduced
price
20%
Paid
59%
89
37 Other
includes children of Hispanic, Asian, Native American, and Multi-racial origin.
Enrollment
Purpose
Figure H-3 shows the current, projected and
capacity enrollment for Rural Community
Academy. Rural Community Academy
opened in the 2004-2005 school year,
providing education services to 91 students.
At capacity, the number of students served
will double.
The purpose of the Rural Community
Academy is to provide rural students with a
top-quality educational program using a
place-based approach. With careful attention
to the social dynamics and cultural values of
the rural setting, the Rural Community
Academy seeks to instill students with selfconfidence, practical skills, pride of place, and
excellent academic abilities through
differentiated instruction, strong parental
Figure H-3
Current, Projected, Capacity Enrollment, Grades
Served for Rural Community Academy
School
Name
Rural
Community
Academy
Year
Opened
2004-2005
2004-2005
Enrollment
(grades
served)
Projected
Enrollment
2005-2006
91
(grades K-6)
99
(grades K-7)
Location
P. O. Box 85
Graysville, IN 47852
Rural Community Academy is located in
Graysville, Indiana. Graysville is in Sullivan
County.
Projected
Enrollment
20062007
153
(grades K8)
Enrollment
at Capacity
(grades
served at
capacity)
180
(grades K-8)
Student
Waiting
List (as of
June 30,
2005)
3
support, and continuous interaction with the
local community. Students will be equipped to
excel in their academic, personal, and social
lives long after their attendance at this school.
Educational
Program
The educational program of Rural Community
Academy will use local community resources,
both people and places, textbooks, and
computer-aided learning tools to meet state
standards. All students will have the
advantage of small class sizes, individualized
lessons, and differentiated instruction in order
to succeed and contribute back to the
community.
Rural Community
Academy
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
90
to use the results to measure individual students'
progress over time because each grade's test
results pertain to different children from year to
year. However, performance trends can be
observed.
Performance
of Rural Community Academy
1. Is the educational
program a success?
Scores for Rural Community Academy would be
considered base-line data as this was the opening
year for the school. The percentages of students
passing ISTEP+ were generally consistent with
local and state percentages, with the exception
of grade 4 English/LA and math where scores
were significantly lower.
Ultimately, charter schools are evaluated by their
academic success. The Ball State Office of
Charter Schools evaluates how each charter
school is performing against multiple success
measures, including results of Indiana Statewide
Test of Educational Progress-Plus (ISTEP+),
Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA) or
Test of Adult Basic Skills (TABE), and Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP).
Figure H-5 further explains ISTEP+ results for
students at Rural Community Academy. It
compares the percentage of students passing
ISTEP+ for returning students to the percentage
of students passing ISTEP+ for students in their
first year at the school. This was the opening
year for Rural Community Academy so there
were no returning students for comparison data
in 2004.
Indiana Statewide Test of
Educational Progress-Plus (ISTEP+)
Figure H-4 shows the results of ISTEP+ for
Rural Community Academy students compared
to students in Southwest School Corporation and
other public schools in Indiana. It is not possible
Figure H-4
Percentage of Students in Rural Community Academy, Southwest School Corporation, and Indiana
Public Schools Passing ISTEP+ in the fall 2004
Rural
Community
Academy
English/LA
Rural
Community
Southwest
School Corp
2004
71%
2003
*
2002
**
2004
2003
2002
Math
Both English & Math
Indiana
Rural
Community
Southwest
School Corp
Indiana
Rural
Community
Southwest
School Corp
Indiana
61%
75%
71%
70%
73%
57%
55%
65%
57%
*
**
70%
73%
57%
71%
73%
50%
61%
64%
2004
2003
2002
64%
*
**
68%
72%
64%
68%
72%
57%
56%
63%
2004
2003
2002
64%
*
**
63%
70%
71%
65%
75%
57%
53%
63%
3rd grade
4th grade
5th grade
6th grade
* No students tested in 3rd, 4th, 5th or 6th grade for 2003.
** No students tested in 3rd, 4th, 5th or 6th grade for 2002.
Figure H-5
Percentage of Students in Rural Community Academy, Returning Students, and First Year Students
Passing ISTEP+ in fall 2004.
Rural
Community
Academy
ALL STUDENTS
RETURNING STUDENTS
#
Students
Both LA &
# Students
Math
LA
Math
3rd Grade
14
71%
71%
57%
4th Grade
14
57%
57%
5th Grade
14
64%
6th Grade
14
64%
Rural Community
Academy
FIRST YEAR STUDENTS
Both LA
# Students
& Math
LA
Math
Both LA
& Math
14
71%
71%
57%
NA
14
57%
57%
50%
NA
NA
14
64%
64%
57%
NA
NA
14
64%
71%
57%
LA
Math
0
NA
NA
NA
50%
0
NA
NA
64%
57%
0
NA
71%
57%
0
NA
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
91
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
Under federal No Child Left Behind
legislation, the Indiana Department of
Education (IDOE) has determined Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP) for all Indiana schools,
including charter schools.
The IDOE determines AYP designations for
each school based on the overall percentage of
students passing the English and mathematics
ISTEP+ tests. Additionally, schools must
uphold or improve elementary and middle
school attendance rates, and high school
graduation rates. (AYP is also determined for
student subgroups within the population,
including race/ethnicity, free/reduced price
lunch eligibility, limited English proficiency,
and special education, provided that there are
at least 30 students in a particular subgroup.)
In its first year of operation, Rural
Community Academy was not eligible for an
AYP rating.
Northwest Evaluation Association
(NWEA )
Figure H-6 compares Rural Community
Academy students' spring scaled scores to
Indiana and national norms on the math,
reading, and language arts portions of the
NWEA. Students that attend Rural
Community Academy maintained average
scaled score levels relatively even to their
peers in Indiana and nationally. However,
grade 6 scaled scores in reading and language
fell below norms in Indiana and nationally.
Rural Community
Academy
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
92
Figure H-7 presents the average growth rate
for students attending Rural Community
Academy for each grade and each subject area
tested in fall 2004 and spring 2005. Only
students who took the test in both fall and
spring are included. Although students at
Rural Community Academy made growth, the
rate of growth was generally below growth
rates at the state and national levels. The
exception was in grade 4 language where
growth rates for Rural Community Academy
students exceeded growth at the state and
national level.
Figure H-6
NWEA scaled scores comparing Rural
Community Academy to Indiana and national
norms in math, reading, and language arts
Grade
2
Average Math Scaled Scores
Rural Community
State
Academy
186
*
National
194
3
197
204
200
4
203
211
208
5
213
219
217
6
224
227
222
7
*
231
227
8
*
238
234
Grade
2
Average Reading Scaled Scores
Rural Community
State
National
Academy
187
*
193
3
196
201
198
4
196
207
205
5
208
213
211
6
207
218
215
7
*
221
219
8
*
226
223
Grade
2
Average Language Scaled Scores
Rural Community
State
National
Academy
185
*
*
3
199
204
199
4
197
209
206
5
212
215
212
6
209
219
216
7
*
221
219
8
*
225
222
*An asterisk indicates that data were not available for this
subject and grade, either because the school did not test
students in that grade/subject or because NWEA does not
provide norm data for it.
Rural Community Academy
grade 4 Grandparents Day
Figure H-7
NWEA scaled scores comparing Rural
Community Academy to Indiana and national
norms in math, reading, and language arts
Grade
2
Average Math Scaled Scores
Rural Community
State
Academy
11
*
National
Grade
Average Language Scaled Scores
Rural Community
State
National
Academy
12.2
*
*
15.7
2
3
3.9
10.6
11.8
3
9.6
10.6
9.3
4
5.9
8.8
8.9
4
8.4
5.8
6.5
5
0
9
8.8
5
4.8
5.2
5.8
6
7.3
9.1
8.1
6
2.3
4.1
4.5
7
*
7.3
6.9
7
*
3
3.6
8
*
7
7.1
8
*
3.2
3.5
Grade
2
Average Reading Scaled Scores
Rural Community
State
National
Academy
13.3
*
14.9
3
5.6
9
10.4
4
3.9
6.8
7.4
5
1.9
5.9
6.3
6
0.8
5.3
5.3
7
*
4.1
4.3
8
*
4.1
4.2
*An asterisk indicates that data were not available for this
subject and grade, either because the school did not test
students in that grade/subject or because NWEA does not
provide norm data for it.
Rural Community
Academy
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
93
2. Is the school
organizationally
sound?
4.6
5
5
4.2
4
3.4
3.2
3
Series 1
2
1
Series 22
1.8
2
0
1.1
1.2
1.3
2.1
2.2
Question Number
2.3
Question Number
Academic Success:
Mission-Driven Organization
Performance Against
Success Measures:
Communication and Advocacy
5
5
3.6
3.4
3.2
4.4
3.8
4
2.8
3
Series 3
2
Average
4
2.8
3
Series 4
2
1
1
0
3.1
3.2
3.3
0
3.4
4.1
Question Number
Financial Viability:
Budget Development and
Management
4.0
5
3.6
2.6
2.2
Series 5
2
Average
Average
4.4
4
3
Series 6
2
0
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
6.1
Question Number
6.3
Organizational Soundness:
Board Development and
Education
5
5
3.4
2.4
4.0
3.2
4
2.6
2.2
2.2
Series 7
2
Average
4
Average
6.2
Question Number
Academic Success:
Leadership Development
Figure H-8
Rural Community Academy Board
self-assessment results (Series
questions 1-9)
3.0
2.8
3
1
1
0
3
4.3
Organizational Soundness:
Risk Management
4.8
5
4.2
Question Number
4
1
0
7.3
7.4
7.5
2.6
2.6
Series 8
8.1
7.6
2.8
2.4
2
0
7.2
3.2
3.0
3
1
7.1
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
8.6
8.7
Question Number
Question Number
Organizational Soundness:
The Board's Role
Rural Community
Academy
5
4.6
4.8
5.0
4.6
4
Average
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
2.6
3
1
0
Figure H-8 shows the results for all
nine areas of the board selfassessment survey for Rural
Community Academy.
2004-2005 was the opening year for
Rural Community Academy. It is not
unusual, and in fact is favorable, for
a board to take a critical look at
areas of need and reflection at the
completion of the first year. Rural
Community's areas of greatest need
are in the areas of financial viability,
budget development and
management, academic success,
leadership development, and board
development and education.
Average
Average
4
Average
Board self-assessments
Organizational soundness is
essential for short-term success and
long-term growth of every charter
school. Such organizational strength
depends on strong board leadership.
Ball State University Office of
Charter Schools has developed a
board self-assessment survey38 to
help each school board evaluate its
performance and identify areas of
strength and areas in need of
improvement. This survey can be
viewed on the website
www.bsu.edu/teachers/charter.
Organizational Soundness:
Policy and Strategic Planning
Academic Success:
Mission-Driven Organization
3
Series 9
1.8
2
1
0
9.1
94
9.2
9.3
Question Number
9.4
9.5
38 Board self-assessment tool was adopted from the
Girls, Inc. “Board Self Assessment.”
Constituent surveys
Loyalty
Figure H-9 demonstrates that a majority of
parents responding to the survey indicated that
they would recommend Rural Community
Academy to friends and colleagues, would
return to the school next year, would increase
their support of the school and were satisfied,
overall, with the school. In contrast, three of
the four responding board members were not
likely to recommend the school to friends and
colleagues, return to the school next year,
increase their support of the school and were
not satisfied with the school. Among the staff
completing the survey, a majority said that
they would recommend the school to friends
and colleagues, would return to the school
next year, and would increase their support of
the school. However, a majority of staff was
not satisfied with the school.
Quality
Figure H-10 explains that all three constituent
groups of had concerns about the overall
quality of education at Rural Community
Academy. A majority of parents were positive
about the overall quality as compared to other
schools and were satisfied with the overall
quality of education. In contrast, board
members and staff shared concerns about the
overall quality of education, the quality
relative to other schools and were not satisfied
with the overall quality of education at Rural
Community Academy.
Image/attitude
Parents had few concerns about the image and
attitude pervading Rural Community
Academy. Only two areas were cited by a
majority of responding parents, including the
level of discipline and the school's financial
stability. In all other respects, parents
indicated positive opinions regarding the
image and attitude of the school.
In sharp contrast to the parents' positive
responses, board members and staff were
much less positive about the image and
attitude of Rural Community Academy.
Indeed, members of the board were optimistic
about the school spirit, student safety,
involving all members of the school
community and the financial stability of the
school. They had concerns about the
understanding of the school's mission by all
members of the community, the caring
environment, communication of student
performance to parents, continuous
improvement of the school, teacher
accountability, definition of expectations,
assessment of student achievement,
expectations of teachers, availability of school
leaders, quality of academic programs, focus
on the school mission, discipline, availability
of resources to complete mission, mission
driven academic program, effectiveness of the
school board, time spent on academics relative
to other schools, commitment to the mission
of the school, empowerment of teachers,
effectiveness of administration, pride in the
Figure H-9
Rural Community Academy Parents, Staff, and Board Overall Loyalty Survey Results
Overall Loyalty- includes extremely likely and very likely
responses
Likelihood to recommend
Likelihood to return next year
Likelihood to increase support
%
Parents *(30)
%
Staff (8)
%
Board (4)
63.3%
71.4%
25%
80%
75%
25%
76.7%
75%
33.3%
Rural Community
Academy
*() indicates number of survey responses
Figure H-10
Rural Community Academy Parents, Staff, and Board Quality of Education Survey Results
Overall Quality- includes very satisfied and somewhat
satisfied responses
Overall Quality
%
Parents *(30)
%
Staff (8)
%
Board (4)
48.3%
50%
25%
Overall Quality-Better than other schools
62.1%
33.3%
0%
Overall Satisfaction
75.9%
44.4%
50%
*() indicates number of survey responses
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
95
of concern to board members were the
enrollment/admission process, access to
computers, parents, parents, opportunities for
parental involvement, student teacher ratio
and school materials.
Interestingly, these areas of non-concern to
the board were generally shared by both staff
and parents, including the enrollment/
admission process, access to computers,
parents, opportunities for parental
involvement, student teacher ratio, school size
and school materials.
Rural Community Academy
students practicing math
concepts
school and use of innovative education
practices.
Staff also expressed a number of areas of
concern, including the understanding of the
school mission by all members of the
community, communication of student
performance to parents, continuous
improvement, holding teachers accountable
for student performance, clear definition of
expectations, positive school spirit,
availability of leaders, focus on school's
mission, discipline, mission driven academic
program, team approach to education,
commitment of community to school's
mission, effectiveness of administration and
pride in the school.
The only area of image and attitude about
which all three groups were positive was the
safety of students.
Rural Community
Academy
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
96
Performance
A majority of responding parents identified a
number of areas of concern, including quality
of teaching, school administration, teacher
professional development, support services,
faculty, services for special needs students,
communication about student learning,
student development, curriculum,
transportation services, communication about
meeting school's mission, food service,
teacher decision making and classroom
management.
Staff and board members had more concerns
than did the parents. Indeed, the only areas not
Staff and board members shared concerns
about the school board, quality of teaching,
school administration, teacher professional
support, school facilities, individualized
student instruction, support services, faculty,
services for special needs students,
communication about student learning,
student development, curriculum,
transportation services, students,
communication about meeting school's
mission, food service, teacher decision
making and classroom management. In
addition, the board members also had
concerns about the location of the school and
school safety.
Open-ended constituent
survey responses
In order to give respondents an opportunity to
express personal opinions or make specific
comments regarding their individual schools,
all constituent surveys included open-ended
questions. Participants (parents, and board
members) were asked to respond to three
open-ended questions on the Ball State
University 2005 constituent survey:
1. What works well at the school? What are
the strengths of the school? Please
provide examples or descriptions.
2. What does not work well at the school?
What are your concerns? Please provide
examples or descriptions.
3. Please share any additional information
about this school.
Researchers used qualitative analysis of
responses along with QSR N6 software39,
which provided the system for developing
relevant categories of analysis to organize the
data.
Strengths
After analyzing the respondents' open-ended
answers, the researchers found that these
categories emerged as strengths:
1. The hard-working, capable staff works as
a team.
2. The support and community support are
very strong
3. There are a large number of parent and
community volunteers.
4. Rural Community Academy is a small
school with small class sizes.
5. Rural Community Academy has a placebased curriculum that supports multi-aged
groupings.
6. Varied extracurricular offerings are a
strong component of the school.
Areas for improvement
After analyzing the respondents' open-ended
answers, the researchers found these themes
emerged as areas needing improvement:
1. Leadership is not effective.
2. There is a lack of teacher collaboration
and communication. Staff morale is low.
3. Parent/Teacher communication is weak.
4. The parents and community are viewed as
trying to exert too much control.
5. School goals/image for the curriculum and
instructional program is not clear.
frequently cited as the reason for this lack of
clarity.
Balance has not yet been reached in several
areas. Parents and community members make
significant contributions to the school, but are
perceived by some as wanting too much
control over what is being taught. The
curriculum is fun and “place-based,” but many
staff and parents worry about the academic
foundation of the program.
3. Is the school
financially viable?
With limited funds and high start-up costs, the
first few years of a charter school's existence
are critical. Establishment of strong
accounting and financial management
practices is essential to success.
Ball State University's Office of the Vice
President for Business Affairs conducts a
detailed review of each charter school's
budget performance, financial status, and
future projections. In addition, the university
reviews each school's State Board of Accounts
Audit and monitors changes and
improvements recommended in these reports.
The checking/savings account shows strong
balances. Rural Community Academy is
staying within budget guidelines, indicating
current financial stability. Minor
recommendations were made concerning
reporting formats and categories.
Rural Community Academy is being audited
by the State Board of Accounts following the
2005 fiscal year. Results of this audit will be
summarized in the next accountability report.
6. Problems with student discipline are
explained as a lack of consistency and
leadership.
Summary
Rural Community Academy's sound
educational vision was not, according to
respondents, followed up with detailed
strategic plans that clarified yearly goals and
expectations. Leadership problems were
39QSR
International Pty Ltd. (2002) QSR N6. [Computer software]. Melbourne, Australia: QSR.
Rural Community
Academy
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
97
4. Is the school providing
conditions for academic
success?
Academic walkthroughs
Academic walkthrough40 team members
collected data on student engagement, time on
task, curriculum focus and instructional
processes. Global school patterns were
compared to Indiana standards, the standards
of “best practice”41, and to the unique goals
set forth in the school's charter.
Strengths that were observed across the school
by all team members were shared and
reflective questions were asked. The purpose
of the reflective questions was to guide future
planning and discussion for the school as the
staff engages in continuous school
improvement.
It was noted that 2004-2005 was the first year
of operation for Rural Community Academy.
Many positive developments can be
documented from Rural Community
Academy's first year. Challenges remain,
which is true of all new charter schools. This
was the school's first academic walkthrough
conducted by Ball State University.
Team members documented the following
strengths:
— the development of place-based
curriculum as a unique curricular focus;
— use of Junior Achievement and other
community resources for student
engagement;
— display of student work;
— classroom and school-wide libraries
Rural Community
Academy
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
support student choices of quality reading
materials and appropriate levels; and
— physical environment of the school and
dedication to small class sizes.
The walkthrough team asked the Rural
Community Academy staff to consider
reflective questions that addressed issues
related to an articulated curriculum scope and
sequence, differentiated instruction to
optimize small class sizes, “best practices” in
literacy and mathematics instruction, effective
use of instructional time, and efficient and
effective use of parent and community
volunteers.
Team members rated student engagement ontask behavior high. Instructional practices
were rated average and Curriculum focus was
rated below average.
Extended academic walkthrough
The Ball State University Office of Charter
Schools conducted an extended academic
walkthrough in the spring of 2005, as a
follow-up to the February, academic
walkthrough, at Rural Community Academy.
Additional data was gathered during this
extended academic walkthrough, conducted
by Dr. Barbara Downey, to provide a more
detailed picture of the school's successes and
challenges and offer specific
recommendations for improvement.
To support the accountability process, the
school was asked to respond in writing to the
recommendations with details about how
these recommendations have been, or will be,
addressed.
The recommendations from the Ball State
University Office of Charter Schools, asked
Rural Community Academy to address issues
related to an articulated curriculum
development plan, development of a strategic
plan, reestablishment of communication and
trust, leadership development, review of the
organizational management structure to
determine if there is adequate administrative
support, and development of an articulated
professional development plan.
Rural Community Academy's leadership has
responded to this report. Curriculum
development and standards alignment is
40Academic walkthrough structure adapted from Carolyn Downey and Larry Frase's model, Curriculum Management Services,
Inc.
98
41Best practices (as defined by Zemelman, S., Daniels, H., and Hyde, A. 1998. Best Practice: New Standards for Teaching and
Learning in America's Schools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann) are “current, national consensus recommendations about 'best
educational practice' in each of the traditional school curriculum areas: reading, writing, math, science, and social studies.”
underway and the board is in the process of
developing a strategic plan for the school.
Final summary
Rural Community Academy, in the first year
of a seven-year contract, experienced
difficulties typically faced by a first year
school. Overall quality of education was rated
relatively low by board, staff, and parents.
Parents and staff, however, indicated a
likelihood to return to the school and increase
support for the school.
Board members expressed significant
concerns about governance, operations and
management. Results of the academic
walkthrough identified concerns as well,
prompting an extended academic walkthrough
that resulted in a series of recommendations to
which the Rural Community Academy board
has responded. The board and staff have
contracted with outside assistance for
development of a strategic plan.
While financial controls are in place, Rural
Community Academy faces financial
challenges consistent with all smaller start-up
charters.
Academically, students at Rural Community
Academy performed at a level consistent with
their peers in the Southwest Community
School Corporation. However, academic
growth, as measured by the NWEA MAP Test
was generally less that state and national
norms.
Rural Community
Academy
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
99
Rural
Community
Academy
Rural Community
Academy
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
100
Thea Bowman
Leadership Academy
Thea Bowman
Leadership Academy
“One Who Learns, Leads”
Grades Served . . . . K-7
2004-2005 Enrollment . . . . . . . . . 441
2003-2004 Enrollment . . . . . . . . . . 387
Enrollment at capacity . . . . . . . . . . 475
Student Attendance Rate . . . . . . . *96%
Student Retention Rate . . . . . . **92%
Teacher Retention Rate . . . . . . . **78%
Students in
Special Education . . . . . . . . . . . . *5.3%
Limited English
Proficiency Students . . . . . . . . . . . *0%
* Source: Indiana Department of Education website
** Percentages determined using ADM count numbers on returning students and teachers
975 West 6th Avenue
Gary, IN 46402
(219) 883-4826
Profile of Thea Bowman Leadership Academy
Demographics
bowmancharterschool.org
Figure I-1 shows the demographic composition (black, white, Hispanic and other42) of Thea
Bowman Leadership Academy. Thea Bowman serves a minority population of 99% compared
to the state average of 21%. Figure I-2 demonstrates free and reduced lunch percentages at Thea
Bowman Leadership Academy. Sixty percent of students that attend Thea Bowman Leadership
Academy qualify for free or reduced lunch.
Figure I-1
Figure I-2
Thea Bow m an Leadership Academy
Percentage Paid, Reduced price, Free
lunch 2004-2005
Thea Bow m an Leadership Academ y
Race/Ethnicity
2004-2005
Ot her
0%
Hispanic
2%
Whit e
0%
Black
Paid
Whit e
40%
Paid
Hispanic
Free
Reduced price
Ot her
53%
Free
Black
Reduced price
98%
7%
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
101
42 Other
includes children of Hispanic, Asian, Native American, and Multi-racial origin.
Enrollment
Purpose
Figure I-3 shows the current, projected and
capacity enrollment for Thea Bowman
Leadership Academy. In 2004-2005, Thea
Bowman Leadership Academy provided
education services to 441 students, making it
one of the largest charter schools sponsored
by Ball State University Office of Charter
Schools. Thea Bowman Leadership Academy
will provide education services to 491
students in grades K-12 at capacity.
Thea Bowman Leadership Academy strives to
provide Gary parents and children a highquality academic option within the public
schools. The school is based on a rigorous
curriculum that will allow children to succeed
in high school and beyond. Thea Bowman
Leadership Academy's mission is to create a
pre-high school college preparatory program
that combines academic achievement with
leadership skills and opportunities.
Figure I-3
Current, Projected, Capacity Enrollment, Grades
Served for Thea Bowman Leadership Academy
School
Name
Thea Bowman
Leadership
Academy
Year
Opened
2003-2004
2004-2005
Enrollment
(grades
served)
Projected
Enrollment
2005-2006
441
(grades K-7)
491
(grades K-8)
Location
975 West 6th Avenue
Gary, IN 46402
Thea Bowman Leadership Academy is located
in Gary, Indiana. Gary is in Lake County
Thea Bowman
Leadership Academy
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
102
Projected
Enrollment
20062007
Enrollment
at Capacity
(grades
served at
capacity)
487
(grades K-8)
475
(grades K-8)
Student
Waiting
List (as of
June 30,
2005)
360
Educational
Program
Thea Bowman utilizes the Core Knowledge
curriculum as the instructional foundation
based on Indiana standards. SRA's Open
Court reading is used to teach reading and
writing simultaneously, and Saxon Math is the
core mathematics curriculum. Students are
also taught character education, multicultural
information and appreciation, civic leadership,
and economic justice through business,
entrepreneurial leadership, and professional
leadership.
Performance
of Thea Bowman Leadership
Academy
1. Is the educational
program a success?
Ultimately, charter schools are evaluated by their
academic success. The Ball State Office of
Charter Schools evaluates how each charter
school is performing against multiple success
measures, including results of Indiana Statewide
Test of Educational Progress-Plus (ISTEP+),
Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA) or
Test of Adult Basic Skills (TABE), and Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP).
Indiana Statewide Test of
Educational Progress-Plus (ISTEP+)
Figure I-4 shows the results of ISTEP+ for Thea
Thea
Bowman
Leadership
Academy
Bowman Leadership Academy students
compared to students in Gary Community
Schools and other public schools in Indiana. It is
not possible to use the results to measure
individual students' progress over time because
each grade's test results pertain to different
children from year to year. However,
performance trends can be observed. Student
performance trends for Thea Bowman
Leadership Academy increased from the 2003 to
the 2004 school year, outperforming percentages
of students passing in Gary Community Schools
in grade 6.
Figure I-5 further explains ISTEP+ results for
students at Thea Bowman Leadership Academy.
It compares the percentage of students passing
ISTEP+ for returning students to the percentage
of students passing ISTEP+ for students in their
first year at the school. The percentage of
students passing ISTEP+ was generally higher
for returning students in grades 4 and 6 than
first-year students in those grades.
English/LA
Math
Both English & Math
TBLA
Gary
Indiana
TBLA
Gary
Indiana
TBLA
Gary
Indiana
2004
57%
59%
75%
45%
55%
73%
35%
44%
65%
2003
48%
72%
74%
22%
57%
71%
18%
44%
63%
2002
**
2004
2003
2002
37%
*
**
45%
73%
35%
42%
73%
28%
33%
64%
2004
2003
2002
58%
*
**
49%
72%
33%
43%
72%
33%
33%
63%
2004
2003
2002
59%
46%
**
43%
61%
70%
69%
43%
33%
42%
37%
75%
72%
41%
28%
30%
28%
63%
62%
2004
2003
2002
44%
*
**
39%
68%
39%
33%
73%
28%
24%
61%
3rd grade
4th grade
5th grade
Figure I-4
Percentage of Students in
Thea Bowman
Leadership Academy,
Gary Public Schools, and
Indiana Public Schools
Passing ISTEP+ in the
fall 2004
6th grade
7th grade
* No students tested in 4th, 5th or 7th grade for 2003.
** No students tested in 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th or 7th grade for 2002.
Figure I-5
Percentage of Students in Thea Bowman Leadership Academy, Returning Students, and First Year
Students Passing ISTEP+ in fall 2004.
Thea
Bowman
Leadership
Academy
ALL STUDENTS
RETURNING STUDENTS
Thea Bowman
Leadership Academy
FIRST YEAR STUDENTS
#
Students
LA
Math
Both
LA &
Math
#
Students
LA
Math
Both
LA &
Math
#
Students
LA
Math
Both
LA &
Math
3rd Grade
49
57%
45%
35%
44
52%
43%
32%
5
100%
60%
60%
4th Grade
54
37%
35%
28%
44
43%
39%
32%
10
10%
20%
10%
5th Grade
52
58%
33%
33%
43
58%
33%
33%
9
56%
33%
33%
6th Grade
54
59%
43%
41%
41
66%
44%
46%
13
38%
38%
23%
7th Grade
54
44%
39%
28%
42
45%
38%
26%
12
42%
42%
33%
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
103
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
Under federal No Child Left Behind
legislation, the Indiana Department of
Education (IDOE) has determined Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP) for all Indiana schools,
including charter schools.
The IDOE determines AYP designations for
each school based on the overall percentage of
students passing the English and mathematics
ISTEP+ tests. Additionally, schools must
uphold or improve elementary and middle
school attendance rates, and high school
graduation rates. (AYP is also determined for
student subgroups within the population,
including race/ethnicity, free/reduced price
lunch eligibility, limited English proficiency,
and special education, provided that there are
at least 30 students in a particular subgroup.)
Thea Bowman Leadership Academy did not
make AYP in 2004-2005. Schools must meet
every AYP target for each category in order to
make AYP. Missing any one AYP target will
result in the school not making AYP.
As a Title One School, Thea Bowman
Leadership Academy missed student
performance targets for the overall student
group, the black subgroup and the
free/reduced lunch subgroup in the percentage
of students passing the mathematics portion of
ISTEP+. The free/reduced lunch subgroup
also missed student performance targets for
the English portion of ISTEP+.
Thea Bowman
Leadership Academy
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
104
Northwest Evaluation Association
(NWEA )
Figure I-6 compares Thea Bowman
Leadership Academy students' spring scaled
scores to Indiana and national norms on the
math, reading, and language arts portions of
the NWEA. Students that attend Thea
Bowman Leadership Academy maintained
average scaled score levels relatively even to
their peers in Indiana and nationally.
Figure I-7 presents the average growth rate for
students attending Thea Bowman Leadership
Academy for each grade and each subject area
tested in fall 2004 and spring 2005. Only
students who took the test in both fall and
spring are included. While students at Thea
Bowman Leadership Academy made growth,
their growth rate was not as great as that of
their peers at the state and national level.
Figure I-6
NWEA scaled scores comparing Thea Bowman
Leadership Academy to Indiana and national
norms in math, reading, and language arts
*An asterisk indicates that data were not available for this
Grade
2
Average Math Scaled Scores
Thea Bowman
State
Leadership
Academy
181
*
National
194
3
196
204
200
4
199
211
208
5
211
219
217
6
219
227
222
7
221
231
227
8
*
238
234
Grade
2
Average Reading Scaled Scores
Thea Bowman
State
National
Leadership
Academy
174
*
193
3
193
201
198
4
200
207
205
5
209
213
211
6
213
218
215
7
213
221
219
8
*
226
223
Grade
2
Average Language Scaled Scores
Thea Bowman
State
National
Leadership
Academy
175
*
*
3
200
204
199
4
205
209
206
5
209
215
212
6
216
219
216
7
217
221
219
8
*
225
222
subject and grade, either because the school did not test
students in that grade/subject or because NWEA does not
provide norm data for it.
Thea Bowman Leadership
Academy Kindergarten
students eating (gummy)
worms
Figure I-7
NWEA scaled scores comparing Thea Bowman
Leadership Academy to Indiana and national
norms in math, reading, and language arts
Grade
2
Average Math Scaled Scores
Thea Bowman
State
Leadership
Academy
8.3
*
National
Grade
15.7
2
Average Language Scaled Scores
Thea Bowman
State
National
Leadership
Academy
5.6
*
*
3
6.5
10.6
11.8
3
8.3
10.6
9.3
4
4.9
8.8
8.9
4
8.6
5.8
6.5
5
6
9
8.8
5
4.1
5.2
5.8
6
5.5
9.1
8.1
6
3.5
4.1
4.5
7
4.5
7.3
6.9
7
2.5
3
3.6
8
*
7
7.1
8
*
3.2
3.5
Grade
2
Average Reading Scaled Scores
Thea Bowman
State
National
Leadership
Academy
9.8
*
14.9
3
7.3
9
10.4
4
7.1
6.8
7.4
5
5
5.9
6.3
6
4.9
5.3
5.3
7
3.5
4.1
4.3
8
*
4.1
4.2
*An asterisk indicates that data were not available for this
subject and grade, either because the school did not test
students in that grade/subject or because NWEA does not
provide norm data for it.
Thea Bowman
Leadership Academy
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
105
2. Is the school
organizationally
sound?
4.8
Organizational Soundness:
Policy and Strategic Planning
4.8
5
4.4
3
Series 1
2
1
3
Series 2
2
0
1.1
1.2
1.3
2.1
Question Number
4.8
4.6
4.8
4.4
4.8
5
4.4
3.8
Series 3
2
Average
Average
4
3
3
Series 4
2
1
1
0
0
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
4.1
Question Number
4.8
5
4.2
4.0
4
3.4
3
Series 5
2
3
1
1
0
0
5.2
5.3
5.4
Series 6
2
5.5
6.1
5.0
5
6.3
Organizational Soundness:
Board Development and
Education
5.0
4.8
6.2
Question Number
Academic Success:
Leadership Development
4.4
4.4
4.4
5
4
4.2
4.2
3
Series 77
2
1
Average
4
Average
4.6
4.4
Question Number
3.8
4.2
4.0
3.6
3.8
3
Series 8
2
1
0
0
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
8.1
7.6
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
8.6
8.7
Question Number
Question Number
Organizational Soundness:
The Board's Role
Thea Bowman
Leadership Academy
5
4.6
4.8
5.0
4.6
4.2
Average
4
3
Series 9
2
1
43 Board self-assessment tool was adopted from the
Girls, Inc. “Board Self Assessment.”
0
106
4.3
Organizational Soundness:
Risk Management
5.0
4.4
4
4.2
Question Number
Financial Viability:
Budget Development and
Management
Figure I-8
Thea Bowman Leadership Academy
Board self-assessment results (Series
questions 1-9)
2.3
Performance Against
Success Measures:
Communication and Advocacy
4
5.1
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
2.2
Question Number
Academic Success:
Mission-Driven Organization
5
4.2
1
0
5
4.4
4
Average
Average
4
Average
Figure I-8 shows the results for all
nine areas of the board selfassessment survey for Thea
Bowman Leadership Academy. Thea
Bowman Leadership Academy's
board rated itself extremely well in
most areas, with only five individual
series questions, 4.2, 5.3, 8.3, 8.6,
and 8.7 below the rating of 4.0.
4.8
5
Average
Board self-assessments
Organizational soundness is
essential for short-term success and
long-term growth of every charter
school. Such organizational strength
depends on strong board leadership.
Ball State University Office of
Charter Schools has developed a
board self-assessment survey43 to
help each school board evaluate its
performance and identify areas of
strength and areas in need of
improvement. This survey can be
viewed on the website
www.bsu.edu/teachers/charter.
Academic Success:
Mission-Driven Organization
9.1
9.2
9.3
9.4
Question Number
9.5
Constituent surveys
Loyalty
Figure I-9 demonstrates that parents, staff and
board members who responded to the survey
all indicated high levels of loyalty to the
school. Over 90% said that they would
recommend the school to friends and
colleagues, would return to the school next
year, and would increase their support of the
school.
availability of school leadership, high quality
academic program, focus on school's mission,
discipline, availability of resources, mission
driven program, school board, team approach
to education, relative time spent on academics,
commitment to school's mission, teacher
empowerment, effective administration,
financial stability of school, school pride and
use of innovative education practices.
Quality
Figure I-10 explains that over 80% of
respondents in each constituent group rated
the overall quality of education as excellent or
very good. More than 90% believed that the
quality of education at the school was better
than that of other schools and were satisfied
overall.
Performance
A majority of each of the three constituent
groups surveyed shared concerns about the
transportation services at Thea Bowman. In
addition, parents and staff had a concern about
the food service. A majority of board
members and staff also shared concerns about
the parents. Additional concerns for the staff
included support services, student teacher
ratio, school size and classroom management.
Image/attitude
As with the loyalty and quality items,
respondents to the survey from all three
constituent groups reported very positive
feelings about the image and attitude of Thea
Bowman Leadership Academy. These positive
beliefs included the understanding of the
school's mission, caring environment,
communication of student performance to
parents, continuous improvement, teacher
accountability, clearly defined expectations,
comprehensive assessment of student
achievement, positive school spirit, high
expectations for teachers, student safety,
All constituent groups had positive
impressions of the performance of the school
board, the enrollment process, quality of
teaching, school administration, teacher
professional development, school facilities,
individualized student attention, access to
computers, faculty, services for special needs
students, school safety, communication about
student learning, student development,
opportunities for parental involvement,
curriculum, students, communication about
meeting school's mission, teacher decision
making, location of school and school
materials.
Overall Loyalty- includes extremely likely and very
likely responses
Likelihood to recommend
%
Parents *(217)
%
Staff (39)
%
Board (8)
93.2%
91.9%
100%
Likelihood to return next year
94.8%
92.1%
100%
Likelihood to increase support
92.4%
91.9%
100%
Figure I-9
Thea Bowman Leadership
Academy Parents, Staff,
and Board Overall Loyalty
Survey Results
*() indicates number of survey responses
Figure I-10
Thea Bowman Leadership Academy Parents, Staff, and Board Quality of Education Survey Results
Overall Quality- includes very satisfied and
somewhat satisfied responses
Overall Quality
%
Parents *(217)
%
Staff (39)
%
Board (8)
86.6%
82.1%
100%
Overall Quality-Better than other schools
94.9%
92.1%
100%
Overall Satisfaction
96.4%
97.3%
100%
*() indicates number of survey responses
Thea Bowman
Leadership Academy
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
107
3. The instruction and curriculum at the
school fosters high expectations for
student learning.
4. The staff and administration foster open
communication and are accessible to
families.
5. Parents are encouraged to provide input
and participate in their children's
education.
6. Thea Bowman Leadership Academy was
the only Ball State University Charter
school to have 15% or more respondents
indicate that discipline procedures work
well.
Thea Bowman Leadership
Academy school leader,
Dr. Adell, talking with
students
Open-ended constituent
survey responses
In order to give respondents an opportunity to
express personal opinions or make specific
comments regarding their individual schools,
all constituent surveys included open-ended
questions. Participants (parents, staff, and
board members) were asked to respond to
three open-ended questions on the Ball State
University 2005 constituent survey:
1. What works well at the school? What are
the strengths of the school? Please
provide examples or descriptions.
Areas for improvement
After analyzing the respondents' open-ended
answers, the researchers found that one theme
emerged as an area needing improvement:
1. Student transportation is requested.
Summary
Survey responses reflect excitement about the
present academic success and optimism about
the future. Thea Bowman Leadership
Academy's positive school spirit is mentioned.
2. What does not work well at the school?
What are your concerns? Please provide
examples or descriptions.
3. Please share any additional information
about this school.
Researchers used qualitative analysis of
responses along with QSR N6 software44,
which provided the system for developing
relevant categories of analysis to organize the
data.
Thea Bowman
Leadership Academy
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
Strengths
After analyzing the respondents' open-ended
answers, the researchers found that these
categories emerged as strengths:
1. More than half of the respondents indicate
that staff at the school are dedicated and
excellent.
2. Dynamic leadership effects positive
change in the school.
108
44QSR
International Pty Ltd. (2002) QSR N6. [Computer software]. Melbourne, Australia: QSR.
3. Is the school
financially viable?
With limited funds and high start-up costs, the
first few years of a charter school's existence
are critical. Establishment of strong
accounting and financial management
practices is essential to success.
Ball State University's Office of the Vice
President for Business Affairs conducts a
detailed review of each charter school's
budget performance, financial status, and
future projections. In addition, the university
reviews each school's State Board of Accounts
Audit and monitors changes and
improvements recommended in these reports.
Thea Bowman Leadership Academy began
and ended the year with a negative fund
balance, although there was a net gain toward
resolving the deficit. The General Fund
presented a healthy picture with a net gain.
Overall, Thea Bowman Leadership Academy's
accounting was strong with complete
accounting and complete reports, and the
details of the notes provided were
outstanding.
The State Board of Accounts Audit Report,
covering the period from July 1, 2003 through
June 30, 2004, identified several minor
deficiencies. Thea Bowman Leadership
Academy has responded properly and in a
timely fashion, and corrections are being
implemented.
While Thea Bowman Leadership Academy is
not yet strong financially, there is financial
growth and steps toward financial stability.
4. Is the school providing
conditions for academic
success?
Academic walkthroughs
Academic walkthrough45 team members
collected data on student engagement, time on
45Academic
task, curriculum focus and instructional
processes. Global school patterns were
compared to Indiana standards, the standards
of “best practice”46, and to the unique goals set
forth in the school's charter.
Strengths that were observed across the school
by all team members were shared and
reflective questions were asked. The purpose
of the reflective questions was to guide future
planning and discussion for the school as the
staff engages in continuous school
improvement.
The academic walkthrough team commented
that they had observed progress on many of
the reflective questions from 2004. The
principal at Thea Bowman Leadership
Academy indicated that she had purchased
Zemelman and Hyde's book, Best practice:
New standards for teaching and learning in
America's schools, for each teacher in the
school and that discussion groups had focused
on the concepts of the book. Some of the
progress made in the school was attributed to
that work by the staff.
Team members documented the following
strengths:
— Clear instructional goals tied to Indiana
standards were posted;
— Instruction was supported with many
manipulatives and supplementary
materials;
— Effective use of technology;
— Monthly assessments and use of rubrics to
monitor student progress; and
— Leadership with clear vision surrounded
by a quality faculty who utilize ongoing
professional development and full-time
instructional coaches.
The walkthrough team asked the Thea
Bowman Leadership Academy staff to
consider reflective questions that addressed
issues related to differentiated instruction,
Thea Bowman
Leadership Academy
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
walkthrough structure adapted from Carolyn Downey and Larry Frase's model, Curriculum Management Services,
Inc.
46Best
practices (as defined by Zemelman, S., Daniels, H., and Hyde, A. 1998. Best Practice: New Standards for Teaching and
Learning in America's Schools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann) are “current, national consensus recommendations about 'best
educational practice' in each of the traditional school curriculum areas: reading, writing, math, science, and social studies.”
109
rigorous curriculum, monitoring student work,
and student physical needs.
Team members rated all three areas, student
engagement on-task behavior, curriculum
focus and instructional practices high.
Final summary
Thea Bowman Leadership Academy, in the
third year of a seven-year contract, has
achieved significant levels of loyalty among
the board, staff, and parents. Each of these
constituent groups has indicated very positive
feelings about the quality of education being
delivered in the school.
Board members express positive feelings
about governance and management and the
school appears to be financially sound.
Results of the academic walkthrough were
generally positive.
Academically, students at Thea Bowman
Leadership Academy are demonstrating mixed
academic results. Students attending the
school tend to be behind their peers when
enrolling in the school. ISTEP+ scores
increased from year one to year two, but
academic growth, as measured by the NWEA
MAP Test was less than state and national
norms.
Thea Bowman
Leadership Academy
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
110
Thea Bowman
Leadership
Academy
Timothy L. Johnson
Academy
Timothy L. Johnson
Academy
“A Different Kind of Public School”
Grades Served . . . . K-7
2004-2005 Enrollment
2003-2004 Enrollment
2002-2003 Enrollment
Enrollment at capacity
. . . . . . . . . 277
. . . . . . . . . . 218
. . . . . . . . . . 174
. . . . . . . . . . 375
Student Attendance Rate . . . . . . . *95%
Student Retention Rate . . . . . . **79%
Teacher Retention Rate . . . . . . . **50%
Students in
Special Education . . . . . . . . . . . *18.3%
Limited English
Proficiency Students . . . . . . . . . . . *0%
* Source: Indiana Department of Education website
** Percentages determined using ADM count numbers on returning students and teachers
7908 South Anthony Blvd.
Fort Wayne, IN 46816
(260) 441-8727
Profile of Timothy L. Johnson Academy
Demographics
Figure J-1 shows the demographic composition (black, white, Hispanic and other47) of Timothy
L. Johnson Academy. Timothy L. Johnson Academy serves a minority population of 94%
compared to the state average of 21%. Figure J-2 demonstrates free and reduced lunch
percentages at Timothy L. Johnson Academy. Eighty-five percent of the students that attend
Timothy L. Johnson Academy qualify for free or reduced lunch.
Figure J-1
Figure J-2
Timothy L.Other
Johnson Acadmey Race/Ethnicity
2004-2005
2%
Timothy L. Johnson Academy Percentage
Paid, Reduced price, Free lunch 2004-2005
Hispanic
0%
White
6%
Paid
15%
Black
Reduced price
10%
White
Hispanic
Reduced price
Other
Black
92%
Paid
Free
Free
75%
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
111
47 Other
includes children of Hispanic, Asian, Native American, and Multi-racial origin.
Enrollment
Purpose
Figure J-3 shows the current, projected and
capacity enrollment for Timothy L. Johnson
Academy. Timothy L. Johnson Academy
opened in 2002-2003 with 174 students. It
will serve 375 students at capacity.
Timothy L. Johnson Academy was established
to serve students who are at risk due to
economic, educational, or social disadvantage.
The academy provides a choice in the array of
public education alternatives available to
parents and children to better suit their
individual needs. The academy provides a
safe, secure, and welcoming environment that
Figure J-3
Current, Projected, Capacity Enrollment,
Grades Served for Timothy L. Johnson
School
Name
Timothy L.
Johnson
Academy
Year
Opened
2002-2003
2004-2005
Enrollment
(grades
served)
Projected
Enrollment
2005-2006
277
(grades K-7)
226
(grades K-8)
Location
7908 South Anthony Boulevard
Fort Wayne, IN 46816
Timothy L. Johnson Academy is located in
Fort Wayne, Indiana. Fort Wayne is in Allen
County.
Timothy L. Johnson
Academy
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
112
Projected
Enrollment
20062007
Enrollment
at Capacity
(grades
served at
capacity)
375
(grades K-8)
375
(grades K-8)
Student
Waiting
List (as of
June 30,
2005)
0
has teachers with expertise in specific subject
areas dedicated to helping students master the
core curriculum. The program provides
students with experience-based, hands-on
curriculum, an all-day kindergarten, and a
focus on the fine and performing arts.
Educational
Program
Timothy L. Johnson Academy's curriculum is
designed to encourage teachers to work in
subject areas in which they are particularly
well qualified. Teachers work collaboratively
to design and map a sequence of instruction
that correlates the content of the four core
subject areas throughout the school year. The
educational program emphasizes the
performing arts as a way of addressing the
needs of the whole child. Music, art, and
drama are provided as a part of the regular
curriculum.
Schools and other public schools in Indiana. It is
not possible to use the results to measure
individual students' progress over time because
each grade's test results pertain to different
children from year to year. However,
performance trends can be observed.
Performance
of Timothy L. Johnson Academy
1. Is the educational
program a success?
Ultimately, charter schools are evaluated by their
academic success. The Ball State Office of
Charter Schools evaluates how each charter
school is performing against multiple success
measures, including results of Indiana Statewide
Test of Educational Progress-Plus (ISTEP+),
Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA) or
Test of Adult Basic Skills (TABE), and Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP).
Indiana Statewide Test of
Educational Progress-Plus (ISTEP+)
Figure J-4 shows the results of ISTEP+ for
Timothy L. Johnson Academy students
compared to students in Fort Wayne Community
Timothy L.
Johnson
Academy
English/LA
Percentage data shows that students at Timothy
L. Johnson continue to struggle academically.
Students passing ISTEP+ is well below local and
state levels for grades tested.
Figure J-5 further explains ISTEP+ results for
students at Timothy L. Johnson Academy. It
compares the percentage of students passing
ISTEP+ for returning students to the percentage
of students passing ISTEP+ for students in their
first year at the school. Students that attend
Timothy L. Johnson continue to struggle
academically. In two of five grades, new
students outperformed returning students.
Math
Timothy L.
Johnson
Ft. Wayne
Community
Schools
Indiana
2003
24%
37%
66%
69%
2002
10%
2004
2003
2002
Both English & Math
Timothy L.
Johnson
Ft. Wayne
Community
Schools
Timothy L.
Johnson
Ft. Wayne
Community
Schools
Indiana
Indiana
75%
74%
14%
37%
72%
76%
73%
71%
5%
26%
59%
64%
65%
63%
65%
72%
14%
75%
67%
10%
60%
59%
31%
66%
73%
15%
**
60%
69%
46%
71%
73%
23%
59%
64%
30%
67%
72%
10%
54%
62%
2004
2003
2002
12%
64%
72%
8%
69%
72%
4%
56%
63%
2004
2003
2002
8%
*
**
60%
70%
13%
70%
75%
4%
54%
63%
2004
2003
2002
11%
*
**
59%
68%
37%
67%
73%
11%
54%
61%
3rd grade
2004
4th grade
Figure J-4
Percentage of Students in
Timothy L. Johnson
Academy, Fort Wayne
Community Schools, and
Indiana Public Schools
Passing ISTEP+ in the
fall 2004
5th grade
*
**
6th grade
7th grade
* No students tested in 5th, 6th or 7th grade for 2003.
** No students tested in 4th, 5th, 6th or 7th grade for 2002.
Figure J-5
Percentage of Students in Timothy L. Johnson Academy, Returning Students, and First Year Students
Passing ISTEP+ in fall 2004.
Timothy L.
Johnson
Academy
ALL STUDENTS
RETURNING STUDENTS
FIRST YEAR STUDENTS
#
Students
LA
Math
Both
LA &
Math
#
Students
LA
Math
Both
LA &
Math
#
Students
LA
Math
Both
LA &
Math
3rd Grade
21
24%
14%
5%
7
43%
29%
0%
14
14%
7%
60%
4th Grade
35
31%
46%
23%
19
37%
53%
37%
16
25%
38%
10%
5th Grade
25
12%
8%
4%
17
6%
6%
0%
8
25%
13%
33%
6th Grade
24
8%
13%
4%
10
20%
20%
10%
14
0%
7%
23%
7th Grade
19
11%
37%
11%
5
0%
20%
0%
14
14%
43%
33%
Timothy L. Johnson
Academy
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
113
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
Under federal No Child Left Behind
legislation, the Indiana Department of
Education (IDOE) has determined Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP) for all Indiana schools,
including charter schools.
The IDOE determines AYP designations for
each school based on the overall percentage of
students passing the English and mathematics
ISTEP+ tests. Additionally, schools must
uphold or improve elementary and middle
school attendance rates, and high school
graduation rates. (AYP is also determined for
student subgroups within the population,
including race/ethnicity, free/reduced price
lunch eligibility, limited English proficiency,
and special education, provided that there are at
least 30 students in a particular subgroup.)
Timothy L. Johnson Academy did not make
AYP in 2004-2005. Schools must meet every
AYP target for each category in order to make
AYP. Missing any one AYP target will result in
the school not making AYP.
Timothy J. Johnson Academy
grade 2 students
As a Title One School, Timothy L. Johnson
Academy missed student performance targets
for the overall student group, the black
subgroup and the free/reduced lunch subgroup
in the percentage of students passing the
English and the mathematics portions of
ISTEP+.
Northwest Evaluation Association
(NWEA )
Figure J-6 compares Timothy L. Johnson
Academy students' spring scaled scores to
Indiana and national norms on the math,
reading, and language arts portions of the
NWEA. Student average scaled scores for
Timothy L. Johnson fell below norms in
Indiana and nationally.
Timothy L. Johnson
Academy
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
114
Figure J-7 presents the average growth rate for
students attending Timothy L. Johnson
Academy for each grade and each subject area
tested in fall 2004 and spring 2005. Only
students who took the test in both fall and
spring are included. Growth rates for students
at Timothy L. Johnson were inconsistent, with
students experiencing negative growth in grade
4 reading and grade 6 math and reading.
Growth rates exceeded state and national
norms in grades 4 and 7 language.
Figure J-6
NWEA scaled scores comparing Timothy L.
Johnson Academy to Indiana and national norms
in math, reading, and language arts
Grade
2
Average Math Scaled Scores
Timothy L. Johnson
State
Academy
169
*
National
194
3
184
204
200
4
195
211
208
5
192
219
217
6
197
227
222
7
207
231
227
8
*
238
234
Grade
2
Average Reading Scaled Scores
Timothy L. Johnson
State
National
Academy
159
*
193
3
176
201
198
4
183
207
205
5
182
213
211
6
191
218
215
7
189
221
219
8
*
226
223
Grade
2
Average Language Scaled Scores
Timothy L. Johnson
State
National
Academy
170
*
*
3
184
204
199
4
195
209
206
5
192
215
212
6
197
219
216
7
208
221
219
8
*
225
222
*An asterisk indicates that data were not available for this
subject and grade, either because the school did not test
students in that grade/subject or because NWEA does not
provide norm data for it.
Figure J-7
NWEA scaled scores comparing Timothy L.
Johnson Academy to Indiana and national norms
in math, reading, and language arts
Grade
2
Average Math Scaled Scores
Timothy L. Johnson
State
Academy
2.4
*
National
15.7
3
6.2
10.6
11.8
4
3.9
8.8
8.9
5
3.6
9
8.8
6
-5
9.1
8.1
7
4
7.3
6.9
8
*
7
7.1
Grade
2
Average Reading Scaled Scores
Timothy L. Johnson
State
National
Academy
0.6
*
14.9
3
*
9
10.4
4
-4.7
6.8
7.4
5
4.6
5.9
6.3
6
-2.6
5.3
5.3
7
-11.9
4.1
4.3
8
*
4.1
4.2
Grade
2
Average Language Scaled Scores
Timothy L. Johnson
State
National
Academy
7.8
*
*
3
0.7
10.6
9.3
4
8.2
5.8
6.5
5
2.1
5.2
5.8
6
2.2
4.1
4.5
7
12.3
3
3.6
8
*
3.2
3.5
Timothy L. Johnson
Academy students at lunch
*An asterisk indicates that data were not available for this
subject and grade, either because the school did not test
students in that grade/subject or because NWEA does not
provide norm data for it.
Timothy L. Johnson
Academy
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
115
2. Is the school
organizationally
sound?
4.7
4.3
4.0
Series 1
2
Average
Average
3
1
3
Series 2
2
1
0
0
1.1
1.2
1.3
2.1
2.2
Question Number
2.3
Question Number
Academic Success:
Mission-Driven Organization
Performance Against Success Measures:
Communication and Advocacy
5.0
5
5.0
4.7
4.3
4.7
5
4.0
4.7
4
3
Series 33
2
Average
Average
4
1
3
Series 4
2
1
0
0
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
4.1
Question Number
5.0
4.2
Organizational Soundness:
Risk Management
5
5.0
4.7
5
4.3
Question Number
Financial Viability:
Budget Development and
Management
4.3
4.3
4.7
4.0
3.7
4
3
Series 5
2
Average
4
3
Series 66
2
1
1
0
0
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
6.1
Question Number
5
4.3
4.7
4.3
Average
6.2
6.3
Question Number
Academic Success:
Leadership Development
Organizational Soundness:
Board Development and
Education
5.0
4.3
3.7
5
4.7
4.0
4.3
4.3
4.7
4.7
4.3
4
3
Series 7
2
1
3
Series 88
2
1
0
0
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
7.6
8.1
Question Number
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
8.6
8.7
Question Number
Organizational Soundness:
The Board's Role
Timothy L. Johnson
Academy
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5
4.7
4
3
Average
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
4.3
4
4
Figure J-8
Timothy L. Johnson Academy Board
self-assessment results (Series
questions 1-9)
5
4
Average
Figure J-8 shows the results for all
nine areas of the board selfassessment survey for Timothy L.
Johnson Academy. Timothy L.
Johnson Academy has a small
board, so it is sometimes difficult to
develop an accurate picture with so
few responses. Given that small
number, Timothy L. Johnson
Academy's board rated itself
extremely well in most areas, with
only two individual series
questions, 6.1 and 7.3 below 4.0.
Organizational Soundness:
Policy and Strategic Planning
5.0
4.7
5
Average
Board self-assessments
Organizational soundness is
essential for short-term success and
long-term growth of every charter
school. Such organizational
strength depends on strong board
leadership. Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools has
developed a board self-assessment
survey48 to help each school board
evaluate its performance and
identify areas of strength and areas
in need of improvement. This
survey can be viewed on the
website
www.bsu.edu/teachers/charter.
Academic Success:
Mission-Driven Organization
Series 99
2
1
0
9.1
9.2
9.3
Question Number
116
9.4
9.5
48 Board self-assessment tool was adopted from the
Girls, Inc. “Board Self Assessment.”
Constituent surveys
Loyalty
Figure J-9 demonstrates that approximately
half of parents indicated positive loyalty to
Timothy L Johnson Academy. More
specifically, just over half of the parents
responded by saying that they would return to
the school next year, would recommend the
school to others and were likely to increase
their support. In contrast, less than half of the
staff respondents provided positive responses
to these items. Finally, both of the board
members who responded to the survey
indicated that they would return to the school,
would increase their support and would
recommend it to others.
Approximately half of parents indicated
positive loyalty to Timothy L Johnson
Academy. More specifically, just over half of
the parents responded by saying that they
would return to the school next year, would
recommend the school to others and were
likely to increase their support. In contrast,
less than half of the staff respondents provided
positive responses to these items. Finally,
both of the board members who responded to
the survey indicated that they would return to
the school, would increase their support and
would recommend it to others.
Quality
Figure J-10 explains that as with the loyalty
items, roughly half of the parents provided
positive responses to the questions dealing
Overall Loyalty- includes extremely likely and very
likely responses
Likelihood to recommend
with the quality of education provided at
Timothy L. Johnson Academy. Almost 50%
rated highly the quality of education, while
67% said that they were satisfied overall. On
the other hand, just over 40% believed that the
education provided at Timothy L. Johnson
Academy was better than that at other schools.
One of the board members believed that the
education at Timothy L. Johnson Academy
was better than at other schools, and one was
satisfied overall. Among staff, well under half
indicated positive responses for any of these
three items.
Image/attitude
With respect to the items dealing with the
image and attitude at Timothy L. Johnson
Academy, parents indicated concerns in only
three areas: the effectiveness of the school
board, the amount of time spent on academics
by the school and its financial stability. In
contrast, staff responded with concern in all
areas except for the caring environment at the
school and the level of student safety. For all
other items, a majority of the staff responding
said that they had concerns. Because only two
board members responded, their surveys will
not be discussed here.
Performance
A majority of both parents and teachers
responded with concerns about the
performance of Timothy L. Johnson Academy
on nearly all areas included in the survey.
Indeed, a majority of staff indicated concern
on every item dealing with performance.
%
Parents *(45)
%
Staff (13)
%
Board (2)
53.3%
21.4%
100%
Likelihood to return next year
51.1%
42.9%
100%
Likelihood to increase support
51.2%
35.7%
100%
Figure J-9
Timothy L. Johnson
Academy, Parents, Staff,
and Board Overall Loyalty
Survey Results
*() indicates number of survey responses
Timothy L. Johnson
Academy
Figure J-10
Timothy L. Johnson Academy Parents, Staff, and Board Quality of Education Survey Results
Overall Quality
%
Parents *(45)
%
Staff (13)
%
Board (2)
Overall Quality
51.1%
7.7%
50%
Overall Quality-Better than other schools
42.2%
15.4%
50%
Overall Satisfaction
66.7%
15.4%
100%
*() indicates number of survey responses
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
117
Parents did not express concern about two
areas: communication about student
learning/achievement and opportunities for
parental involvement. In the case of
communication, half of the parental responses
demonstrated concern and half did not. In all
other cases, parents were concerned about the
performance of Timothy L. Johnson Academy.
Open-ended constituent
survey responses
In order to give respondents an opportunity to
express personal opinions or make specific
comments regarding their individual schools,
all constituent surveys included open-ended
questions. Participants (parents, staff, and
board members) were asked to respond to
three open-ended questions on the Ball State
University 2005 constituent survey:
1. What works well at the school? What are
the strengths of the school? Please
provide examples or descriptions.
Timothy L. Johnson
Academy grade 3 students
2. What does not work well at the school?
What are your concerns? Please provide
examples or descriptions.
3. Please share any additional information
about this school.
2. Discipline concerns are not handled
consistently and teachers express a lack
of support with classroom management
problems.
3. A gym and playground are needed.
4. Communication is expressed as a problem
within the school and between parents
and the school.
5. More parental support and help are
needed at Timothy L. Johnson Academy.
6. Transportation affects the school
program.
Summary
Survey responses lack consistency. Some
love small class sizes, others complain about
large classes. Some praise the quality of
teaching; others are concerned about the lack
of resources and non-certified staff conducting
classes. Some praise the “open-door” policy
and open communication; others find it
difficult to be heard. Some point to the
dedication and commitment of the school
leader; others claim there are serious problems
with favoritism and communication.
Researchers used qualitative analysis of
responses along with QSR N6 software49,
which provided the system for developing
relevant categories of analysis to organize the
data.
Strengths
After analyzing the respondents' open-ended
answers, the researchers found that these
categories emerged as strengths:
1. The faculty and staff are committed to the
children and each other.
2. There is an open-door policy for parents.
Timothy L. Johnson
Academy
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
118
Areas for improvement
After analyzing the respondents' open-ended
answers, the researchers found these themes
emerged as areas needing improvement:
1. There are high staff turnover and staff
shortages.
49QSR
International Pty Ltd. (2002) QSR N6. [Computer software]. Melbourne, Australia: QSR.
3. Is the school
financially viable?
With limited funds and high start-up costs, the
first few years of a charter school's existence
are critical. Establishment of strong
accounting and financial management
practices is essential to success.
Ball State University's Office of the Vice
President for Business Affairs conducts a
detailed review of each charter school's
budget performance, financial status, and
future projections. In addition, the university
reviews each school's State Board of Accounts
audit and monitors changes and improvements
recommended in these reports.
The checking/savings account for Timothy L.
Johnson Academy shows strong balances. If
funding continues as present, Timothy L.
Johnson will show continued financial
stability. Reports were brief, but very easy to
read and understand.
Timothy L. Johnson is being audited by the
State Board of Accounts following the 2005
fiscal year. Two concerns about petty cash and
deposits were noted that should be addressed
prior to the audit. Results of this audit will be
summarized in the next accountability report.
4. Is the school providing
conditions for academic
success?
Academic walkthroughs
Academic walkthrough50 team members
collected data on student engagement, time on
task, curriculum focus and instructional
processes. Global school patterns were
compared to Indiana standards, the standards
of “best practice”51, and to the unique goals
set forth in the school's charter.
reflective questions were asked. The purpose
of the reflective questions was to guide future
planning and discussion for the school as the
staff engages in continuous school
improvement.
The walkthrough team commended the school
for hiring an educational leader for the school.
Some positive changes had resulted in the
short time that the new person had been
assigned to that role.
Team members documented the following
strengths:
— Indiana standards seemed to guide the
curriculum;
— collaborative curriculum planning was
apparent;
— focus on cultural heritage of students;
— classroom environments and
arrangements support student learning;
and
— evidence of teachers using a variety of
instructional techniques.
The walkthrough team asked the Timothy L.
Johnson Academy staff to consider reflective
questions that addressed issues related to
integrating the curriculum, developing a
curricular scope and sequence, use of
instructional assistants, and instructional
techniques that encourage active participation
and a variety of grouping strategies.
Team members rated student engagement ontask behavior high. Curriculum focus and
instructional practices were rated above
average.
Strengths that were observed across the school
by all team members were shared and
50Academic
Timothy L. Johnson
Academy
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
walkthrough structure adapted from Carolyn Downey and Larry Frase's model, Curriculum Management Services,
Inc.
51Best
practices (as defined by Zemelman, S., Daniels, H., and Hyde, A. 1998. Best Practice: New Standards for Teaching and
Learning in America's Schools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann) are “current, national consensus recommendations about 'best
educational practice' in each of the traditional school curriculum areas: reading, writing, math, science, and social studies.”
119
Final summary
Timothy L. Johnson, in the third year of a
five-year contract, receives low marks from
parents and staff with regard to overall quality
and other indicators of long-term loyalty. This
is also evidenced by the fact that about 25
percent of students enrolled in the school's
first year remain enrolled in the school. Board
members, on the other hand, demonstrate
unanimity with regard to positive long-term
loyalty and overall satisfaction with the
school.
Board members express positive feelings
about governance management and
operations. The school appears to be
financially sound. Results of the academic
walkthrough were generally positive.
Academic success has not been apparent at
Timothy L. Johnson. Students attending the
school tend to be behind their peers when
enrolling in the school. ISTEP+ scores are
lower for this year than the year before and
results of the NWEA MAP test indicate
students are not making gains at a rate that
will enable the gap to be closed.
Timothy L.
Johnson
Academy
Timothy L. Johnson
Academy
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
120
Veritas Academy
Veritas
Academy
“A Classical Education for Today's Child”
Grades Served . . . . K-8
2004-2005 Enrollment
2003-2004 Enrollment
2002-2003 Enrollment
Enrollment at capacity
. . . . . . . . . 120
. . . . . . . . . . 84
. . . . . . . . . . 63
. . . . . . . . . . 149
Student Attendance Rate . . . . . . . *96%
Student Retention Rate . . . . . . **91%
Teacher Retention Rate . . . . . . . **82%
Students in
Special Education . . . . . . . . . . . . *23%
Limited English
Proficiency Students . . . . . . . . . . . *0%
* Source: Indiana Department of Education website
** Percentages determined using ADM count numbers on returning students and teachers
814 E. LaSalle Avenue
South Bend, IN 46617
(574) 287-3220
Profile of Veritas Academy
Demographics
www.veritas-academy.net
Figure K-1 shows the demographic composition (black, white, Hispanic and other52) of Veritas
Academy. Veritas Academy serves a minority population of 39% compared to the state average
of 21%. Figure K-2 demonstrates free and reduced lunch percentages at Veritas Academy.
Thirty-eight percent of the students qualify for free and reduced lunch prices.
Figure K-1
Figure K-2
Veritas Academ y Race/Ethnicity 2004-2005
Ot her
13%
Veritas Academ y Percentage Paid,
Reduced price,
Free lunch 2004-2005
Black
18%
Hispanic
8%
Black
Free
23%
White
Hispanic
Paid
Other
Reduced price
Reduced price
15%
White
61%
Paid
62%
Free
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
121
52 Other
includes children of Hispanic, Asian, Native American, and Multi-racial origin.
Enrollment
Purpose
Figure K-3 shows the current, projected and
capacity enrollment for Veritas Academy.
Veritas Academy opened in 2002-2003 with
63 students. Veritas Academy will provide
educational services to 149 students at
capacity.
Veritas Academy teaches children to think
clearly, speak eloquently, write persuasively,
and calculate accurately. The curriculum
offers a traditional, well-balanced core of
subjects that are challenging and effective. In
addition, a character development focus is
integrated throughout the instructional
program to help students develop into caring,
responsible citizens. Veritas Academy
Figure K-3
Current, Projected, Capacity Enrollment, Grades
Served for Veritas Academy
School
Name
Veritas
Academy
Year
Opened
2002-2003
2004-2005
Enrollment
(grades
served)
Projected
Enrollment
2005-2006
120
(grades K-8)
143
(grades K-8)
Location
814 E. LaSalle Avenue
South Bend, IN 46617
Veritas Academy is located in South Bend,
Indiana. South Bend is in St. Joesph County.
Projected
Enrollment
20062007
Enrollment
at Capacity
(grades
served at
capacity)
149
(grades K-8)
149
(grades K-8)
Student
Waiting
List (as of
June 30,
2005)
77
provides a learning environment designed to
develop each child's search for knowledge, to
encourage each child's curiosity, and to foster
each child's creativity. A central focus of
Veritas Academy is the creation of an
inclusive community where students, parents,
staff, and community members are partners in
the educational process and achievement of all
children.
Educational
Program
Veritas Academy
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
122
The educational curriculum of Veritas closely
follows the Core Knowledge Sequence
developed by E.D. Hirsch, a national leader in
educational reform. It involves teaching core
content in highly specified yearly sequences
so that children have a coherent, cumulative,
solid foundation of knowledge and
competencies. The basic premise of Core
Knowledge is that children expand their
learning by building on what they already
know.
use the results to measure individual students'
progress over time because each grade's test
results pertain to different children from year to
year. However, performance trends can be
observed.
Performance
of Veritas Academy
1. Is the educational
program a success?
Student trend data showed percentages of
students in grade 6 passing ISTEP+ increased
for Veritas Academy from the 2003 to the 2004
school year. Grade 3 percentages also increased
from 2003 to 2004, back to 2002 levels.
Percentages of students passing ISTEP+ are
generally consistent with South Bend
Community Schools and other Indiana public
schools.
Ultimately, charter schools are evaluated by their
academic success. The Ball State Office of
Charter Schools evaluates how each charter
school is performing against multiple success
measures, including results of Indiana Statewide
Test of Educational Progress-Plus (ISTEP+),
Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA) or
Test of Adult Basic Skills (TABE), and Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP).
Figure K-5 further explains ISTEP+ results for
students at Veritas Academy. It compares the
percentage of students passing ISTEP+ for
returning students to the percentage of students
passing ISTEP+ for students in their first year at
the school. The percentage of first year students
passing ISTEP+ was higher than that of
returning students in three out of four grades.
Indiana Statewide Test of
Educational Progress-Plus (ISTEP+)
Figure K-4 shows the results of ISTEP+ for
Veritas Academy students compared to students
in South Bend Community Schools and other
public schools in Indiana. It is not possible to
English/LA
Veritas
Academy
Math
Veritas
South Bend
Community
Schools
Indiana
2003
57%
62%
63%
52%
2002
58%
2004
2003
2002
62%
2004
2003
2002
80%
2004
2003
2002
2004
2003
2002
Both English & Math
Veritas
South Bend
Community
Schools
Veritas
South Bend
Community
Schools
Indiana
Indiana
75%
74%
64%
31%
56%
52%
73%
71%
43%
31%
48%
39%
65%
63%
55%
72%
67%
53%
67%
58%
41%
59%
55%
73%
62%
56%
73%
62%
45%
64%
56%
72%
73%
57%
73%
67%
45%
63%
70%
40%
**
55%
60%
70%
69%
60%
20%
63%
53%
75%
72%
50%
20%
48%
46%
63%
62%
50%
*
**
55%
68%
50%
61%
73%
50%
47%
61%
3rd grade
2004
4th grade
Figure K-4
Percentage of Students in
Veritas Academy, South
Bend Community
Schools, and Indiana
Public Schools Passing
ISTEP+ in the fall 2004
*
**
5th grade
*
**
6th grade
7th grade
* No students tested in 4th, 5th or 7th grade for 2003.
** No students tested in 4th, 5th, 6th or 7th grade for 2002.
Figure K-5
Percentage of Students in Veritas Academy, Returning Students, and First Year Students Passing
ISTEP+ in fall 2004.
ALL STUDENTS
Veritas
Academy
RETURNING STUDENTS
#
Students
LA
Math
Both LA &
# Students
Math
3rd Grade
14
57%
64%
43%
4th Grade
13
62%
62%
5th Grade
15
80%
6th Grade
10
7th Grade
4
Veritas Academy
FIRST YEAR STUDENTS
Both LA
# Students
& Math
LA
Math
Both LA
& Math
6
67%
67%
50%
67%
1
0%
0%
0%
70%
60%
5
100%
80%
80%
63%
50%
38%
2
100%
100%
100%
50%
50%
50%
2
50%
50%
50%
LA
Math
8
50%
63%
38%
62%
12
67%
67%
73%
67%
10
70%
70%
60%
50%
8
50%
50%
50%
2
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
123
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
Under federal No Child Left Behind
legislation, the Indiana Department of
Education (IDOE) has determined Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP) for all Indiana schools,
including charter schools.
The IDOE determines AYP designations for
each school based on the overall percentage of
students passing the English and mathematics
ISTEP+ tests. Additionally, schools must
uphold or improve elementary and middle
school attendance rates, and high school
graduation rates. (AYP is also determined for
student subgroups within the population,
including race/ethnicity, free/reduced price
lunch eligibility, limited English proficiency,
and special education, provided that there are
at least 30 students in a particular subgroup.)
Veritas Academy
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
124
Figure K-6
NWEA scaled scores comparing Veritas
Academy to Indiana and national norms in math,
reading, and language arts
Grade
2
Average Math Scaled Scores
Veritas Academy
State
198
*
National
194
3
208
204
200
4
213
211
208
5
225
219
217
6
222
227
222
7
226
231
227
8
205
238
234
Grade
2
Average Reading Scaled Scores
Veritas Academy
State
National
199
*
193
3
200
201
198
4
211
207
205
5
219
213
211
Veritas Academy made AYP in 2004-2005.
Veritas Academy did not have enough
students in any of the subgroup categories, so
AYP was not determined for the subgroups.
6
218
218
215
7
214
221
219
8
210
226
223
Northwest Evaluation Association
(NWEA)
Figure K-6 compares Veritas Academy
students' spring scaled scores to Indiana and
national norms on the math, reading, and
language arts portions of the NWEA. Students
that attend Veritas Academy maintained
average scaled score levels relatively even to
their peers in Indiana and nationally, except
for grade 8 which showed a larger gap
between Veritas Academy scores and state and
national norms.
Grade
2
Figure K-7 presents the average growth rate
for students attending Veritas Academy for
each grade and each subject area tested in fall
2004 and spring 2005. Only students who
took the test in both fall and spring are
included. Student growth rates were greater
for students at Veritas Academy than state and
national norms in grades 3, 4, and 5 in math,
grades 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 in reading, and grades
4, 5, 6, and 7 in language.
Average Language Scaled Scores
Veritas Academy
State
National
199
*
*
3
203
204
199
4
216
209
206
5
221
215
212
6
219
219
216
7
223
221
219
8
215
225
222
*An asterisk indicates that data were not available for this
subject and grade, either because the school did not test
students in that grade/subject or because NWEA does not
provide norm data for it.
Veritas Academy students
during individual testing and
assignment completion
Figure K-7
NWEA scaled scores comparing Veritas
Academy to Indiana and national norms in math,
reading, and language arts
Grade
2
Average Math Scaled Scores
Veritas Academy
State
12.7
*
National
15.7
Grade
2
Average Language Scaled Scores
Veritas Academy
State
National
11.8
*
*
15.3
10.6
11.8
3
5.1
10.6
9.3
4
9.2
8.8
8.9
4
10.4
5.8
6.5
5
10.8
9
8.8
5
6.9
5.2
5.8
6
8.9
9.1
8.1
6
5.2
4.1
4.5
7
7
7.3
6.9
7
8
3
3.6
8
*
7
7.1
8
*
3.2
3.5
3
Grade
2
Average Reading Scaled Scores
Veritas Academy
State
National
17.7
*
14.9
3
11.4
9
10.4
4
13.2
6.8
7.4
5
10
5.9
6.3
6
8.3
5.3
5.3
7
4.8
4.1
4.3
8
*
4.1
4.2
*An asterisk indicates that data were not available for this
subject and grade, either because the school did not test
students in that grade/subject or because NWEA does not
provide norm data for it.
Veritas Academy
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
125
2. Is the school
organizationally
sound?
5
4.3
4.0
4.0
4
Series 1
2
Average
Average
3
3.0
1
0
1.2
Series 2
2
0
1.1
3.3
3
1
2.1
1.3
2.2
2.3
Question Number
Question Number
Performance Against Success
Measures:
Communication and Advocacy
Academic Success:
Mission-Driven Organization
5
4.7
5
4.0
3.3
3.0
4
3.0
2.7
3
2
Series 3
Average
Average
4
1
2.7
3
Series 4
2
1
0
0
3.1
3.2
3.3
4.1
3.4
4.2
Financial Viability:
Budget Development and
Management
5
Organizational Soundness:
Risk Management
5
4.3
4.0
4.0
3.7
4
2.7
3
2.7
2
Series 5
Average
4
4.3
Question Number
Question Number
1
2.7
3
2.3
Series 6
2
1
0
0
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
6.1
Question Number
Academic Success:
Leadership Development
5
6.3
Organizational Soundness:
Board Development and
Education
4.3
4.0
4.0
5
3.7
4
6.2
Question Number
4.0
3.3
3.0
4
3
Series 7
2
1
Average
Figure K-8
Veritas Academy Board selfassessment results
(Series questions 1-9)
4.3
4
Average
Figure K-8 shows the results for
all nine areas of the board selfassessment survey for Veritas
Academy. The Veritas Academy
board rated itself well in some
areas. It also found areas for
improvement in academic success,
programs and services and
leadership development. Areas in
need of critical focus are
organizational soundness, risk
management, and board
development and education.
5
Average
Board self-assessments
Organizational soundness is
essential for short-term success
and long-term growth of every
charter school. Such
organizational strength depends on
strong board leadership. Ball State
University Office of Charter
Schools has developed a board
self-assessment survey53 to help
each school board evaluate its
performance and identify areas of
strength and areas in need of
improvement. This survey can be
viewed on the website
www.bsu.edu/teachers/charter.
Organizational Soundness:
Policy and Strategic Planning
Academic Success:
Mission-Driven Organization
3
3.3
2.3
3.7
3.3
2.3
2.0
2
Series 88
1
0
0
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
8.1
7.6
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
8.6
8.7
Question Number
Question Number
Organizational Soundness:
The Board's Role
5
Veritas Academy
4.3
4.3
4.3
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
Average
4
3.3
2.7
3
Series 9
2
1
0
9.1
9.2
9.3
Question Number
126
9.4
9.5
53 Board self-assessment tool was adopted from the
Girls, Inc. “Board Self Assessment.”
Constituent surveys
Loyalty
Figure K-9 demonstrates that a majority of
parents and board members who responded to
the survey indicated that they would
recommend Veritas Academy to friends and
colleagues, would return to the school next
year, would increase their support of the
school and were satisfied, overall, with the
school. In contrast, a majority of staff
responding to the survey were not likely to
recommend the school to friends and
colleagues and would not increase their
support of the school. However, a majority of
staff did say that they would return to the
school next year and were satisfied with
Veritas Academy overall.
Quality
Figure K-10 explains that a majority of
parents and staff rated the overall quality of
education at Veritas Academy as excellent or
very good. A majority of both groups also
rated the quality of education as somewhat
better or much better than that of other
schools, and indicated satisfaction with the
overall quality of education at the school. A
majority of board members also responded
that the overall quality of education high and
rated it high when compared to other schools.
Half of the board members rated the overall
quality as excellent or very good.
Image/attitude
Parents were generally satisfied with the
attitude and image of the school. The only
areas of concern were with respect to the
resources available for the school to complete
its mission and the effectiveness of the school
board.
In contrast to parents, a majority of staff
reported a number of areas of concern,
including clearly defined expectations,
positive school spirit, availability of resources
to complete mission, effectiveness of school
board, approach to education, amount of time
spent on academics compared to other
schools, empowerment of teachers in decision
making, effectiveness of administration,
financial stability of the school and pride in
school by members of the community.
A majority of the board members also had
several areas of concern, including positive
school spirit, safety of students, level of
discipline, availability of resources to achieve
the mission, commitment of all members of
community to the school's mission, financial
stability of the school and pride in the school.
Performance
Overall, parents were satisfied with the
performance of the school, with the only areas
of concern being school facilities, support
services, transportation services and food
service.
Figure K-9
Veritas Academy Parents, Staff, and Board Overall Loyalty Survey Results
Overall Loyalty- includes extremely likely and very likely
responses
Likelihood to recommend
%
Parents *(33)
%
Staff (11)
%
Board (4)
87.9%
30%
75%
Likelihood to return next year
87.9%
60%
75%
Likelihood to increase support
81.8%
33.3%
100%
*() indicates number of survey responses
Veritas Academy
Figure K-10
Veritas Academy Parents, Staff, and Board Quality of Education Survey Results
Overall Quality- includes very satisfied and somewhat
satisfied responses
Overall Quality – Total Positive
%
Parents *(33)
%
Staff (11)
%
Board (4)
87.9%
54.5%
50%
Better than other schools – Overall Quality
90.9%
81.8%
100%
Overall Satisfaction – Total Positive
97.0%
90.9%
100%
*() indicates number of survey responses
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
127
Researchers used qualitative analysis of
responses along with QSR N6 software54,
which provided the system for developing
relevant categories of analysis to organize the
data.
Strengths
After analyzing the respondents' open-ended
answers, the researchers found that these
categories emerged as strengths:
1. Small class size promotes extra student
support.
2. Teachers care about students.
3. Many parents are involved with the
school.
4. Parents appreciate the school's leadership.
Veritas Academy students
outside during routine
firedrill
Parents approved of the performance of the
school board, the enrollment procedure,
teaching, administration, professional
development for teachers, individualized
attention for students, access to computers,
parents, faculty, services for special needs
students, school safety, communication about
achievement, student development,
opportunities for parental involvement,
curriculum program, students, communication
about school's mission, student teacher ratio,
school size, teacher decision making, location
of the school, school materials and classroom
management.
Open-ended constituent
survey responses
In order to give respondents an opportunity to
express personal opinions or make specific
comments regarding their individual schools,
all constituent surveys included open-ended
questions. Participants (parents, and board
members) were asked to respond to three
open-ended questions on the Ball State
University 2005 constituent survey:
Veritas Academy
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
1. What works well at the school? What are
the strengths of the school? Please
provide examples or descriptions.
2. What does not work well at the school?
What are your concerns? Please provide
examples or descriptions.
5. The entire staff provides support for
children.
6. Families and staff agree that collaboration
between them is positive.
7. The curriculum integrates technology
with academics.
Areas for improvement
After analyzing the respondents' open-ended
answers, the researchers found these themes
emerged as areas needing improvement:
1. Playground needs were expressed as a
problem.
2. Several respondents view communication
as a problem.
3. Some of the curriculum and a lack of
educational focus concern some
respondents.
4. Transportation and parking are seen as
potential safety problems.
Summary
Parents appreciate the small class sizes and
communication with staff. One decision made
by the leadership at Veritas resulted in a
negative reaction from respondents and was
mentioned in communication areas as well as
by 13.8% of the respondents as a discipline
concern.
3. Please share any additional information
about this school.
128
54QSR
International Pty Ltd. (2002) QSR N6. [Computer software]. Melbourne, Australia: QSR.
3. Is the school
financially viable?
With limited funds and high start-up costs, the
first few years of a charter school's existence
are critical. Establishment of strong
accounting and financial management
practices is essential to success.
Ball State University's Office of the Vice
President for Business Affairs conducts a
detailed review of each charter school's
budget performance, financial status, and
future projections. In addition, the university
reviews each school's State Board of Accounts
Audit and monitors changes and
improvements recommended in these reports.
At the request of Ball State Office of Charter
Schools, a site visit, conducted by Mr. Tom
Roberts, was made to Veritas Academy for the
purpose of a more detailed financial review.
This review was conducted primarily because
Veritas Academy had been consistently late,
or non-responsive, with regard to required
semi-annual financial reports.
This review revealed very serious concerns
with regard to the school's financial health and
internal controls. Veritas Academy's financial
practices were significantly lacking and the
schools financial health questionable. Ball
State's Office of Charter Schools presented
findings and recommendations at a full
meeting of the board of directors in June
2005.
These findings and recommendations called
for the Veritas Academy board of directors to
act immediately to completely restructure the
school's internal financial procedures. The
board was also called to seriously consider a
change in the organizational structure of the
school and to re-evaluate its role and level of
financial oversight. The Office of Charter
Schools alerted the Veritas Academy board
that a Corrective Action Plan, a precursor to
revocation, was required to bring confidence
55Academic
that immediate financial and structural
procedures would be developed.
The Veritas Academy board of directors has
followed all recommendations outlined in the
report from the financial site visit, and has
produced a comprehensive Corrective Action
Plan that includes financial compliance in
order to make needed financial corrections.
Veritas Academy is being audited by the State
Board of Accounts following the 2005 fiscal
year. Results of this audit will be summarized
in the next accountability report.
4. Is the school providing
conditions for academic
success?
Academic walkthroughs
Academic walkthrough55 team members
collected data on student engagement, time on
task, curriculum focus and instructional
processes. Global school patterns were
compared to Indiana standards, the standards
of “best practice”56, and to the unique goals set
forth in the school's charter.
Strengths that were observed across the school
by all team members were shared and
reflective questions were asked. The purpose
of the reflective questions was to guide future
planning and discussion for the school as the
staff engages in continuous school
improvement.
Team members documented the following
strengths:
— efforts to integrate the Indiana standards
as a curricular focus;
— increased facility space with opportunity
for a wider variety of instructional
strategies;
— technology is available and being used;
and
Veritas Academy
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
walkthrough structure adapted from Carolyn Downey and Larry Frase's model, Curriculum Management Services,
Inc.
56Best
practices (as defined by Zemelman, S., Daniels, H., and Hyde, A. 1998. Best Practice: New Standards for Teaching and
Learning in America's Schools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann) are “current, national consensus recommendations about 'best
educational practice' in each of the traditional school curriculum areas: reading, writing, math, science, and social studies.”
129
— teachers monitoring classroom instruction
and practice.
The walkthrough team asked the Veritas
Academy staff to consider reflective questions
that addressed issues related to creating a
positive learning environment, instructional
leadership, professional development and
collaboration, curriculum fragmentation, and
classroom practices that support student
success.
Team members rated student engagement ontask behavior above average. Curriculum
focus and instructional practices were rated
average.
Extended academic walkthrough
The Ball State University Office of Charter
Schools conducted an extended academic
walkthrough in the spring of 2005, as a
follow-up to the February academic
walkthrough at Veritas Academy. Additional
data was gathered during this extended
academic walkthrough, conducted by Dr.
Barbara Downey, to provide a more detailed
picture of the school's successes and
challenges and offer specific
recommendations for improvement.
The recommendations from the Ball State
University Office of Charter Schools, asked
Veritas Academy to attend to issues related to
the strategic plan guiding the board and the
organization, roles and responsibilities of
administrative staff, instructional leadership,
addressing curriculum fragmentation,
development of a staff evaluation process, and
increased opportunities for two-way
communication.
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
Ball State's Office of Charter Schools
presented these findings and
recommendations at a full meeting of the
board of directors in June 2005. During this
meeting, the Office of Charter Schools alerted
the Veritas board that a Corrective Action
Plan, a precursor to revocation, was required
to bring confidence that immediate financial
and structural procedures would be developed.
130
Veritas' board responded appropriately and is
in the process of implementing this Corrective
Action Plan.
Veritas Academy
Final summary
Veritas Academy, in the third year of a fiveyear contract, received high marks from
parents with regard to the school's overall
quality and long-term loyalty. Board members
and staff are less positive, but do demonstrate
satisfaction with the school overall.
Board members expressed significant
concerns about governance, operations and
management. Results of the academic
walkthrough identified concerns as well,
prompting an extended academic walkthrough
and financial review.
This financial review revealed very serious
concerns with regard to the school's financial
health and internal financial controls. Board
members have developed a Corrective Action
Plan in response to the financial review and
extended academic walkthrough. Office of
Charter School staff will monitor the board's
implementation of this plan over the next
school year.
Academically, Veritas Academy students are
performing at a level consistent with their
peers in the South Bend Community Schools
and academic growth from fall to spring, as
measured by the NWEA MAP Test exceeds
state and national norms in nearly every grade
and subject.
Veritas Academy
Appendix A
Board Self-Assessment Survey
Appendix A
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
A-1
Ball State University Office of Charter Schools 2005
Board Self Assessment Tool
This questionnaire is designed to help you and your board colleagues and Ball State assess how well the board
is functioning, and to identify areas where the board might improve itself. It should take about 15 minutes to
complete. You may answer the questions with candor, as all responses will be aggregated before your board
discusses them.
The questions ask about your satisfaction with your board’s fulfillment of basic board responsibilities.
Answer these questions for the board as a whole. Please answer on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 representing
“strongly agree” and 1 representing “strongly disagree”.
At the end of the questionnaire are three open-ended questions that give you the opportunity to respond with
a sentence or two. Your responses here will be especially helpful when the board looks for the best ways to
strengthen itself. Thank you for your time and responses.
Charter school with which you are affiliated: ______________________________________________________
How much do you agree or disagree with the following statements?
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral Disagree Strongly
Disagree
1.1
All trustees are familiar with and support the current mission statement.
5
4
3
2
1
1.2
The board’s policy decisions and the organization’s services reflect the
mission.
5
4
3
2
1
1.3
The trustees agree on who should be served by the school.
5
4
3
2
1
2.1
The board focuses much of its attention on long-term, significant policy
issues rather than short-term administrative matters.
5
4
3
2
1
2.2
The board shares a strategic vision of how the organization should be
evolving over the next three to five years.
5
4
3
2
1
2.3
The board periodically engages in a strategic planning process, basing its
planning decisions on sound evidence.
5
4
3
2
1
3.1
All trustees are familiar with and understand the accountability plan.
5
4
3
2
1
3.2
The board is knowledgeable about the organization’s current programs
and services.
5
4
3
2
1
3.3
The board periodically reviews programs, both current and proposed, for
their fit with the mission.
5
4
3
2
1
3.4
The board receives reports from the staff on the need for, and the effectiveness of, the programs.
5
4
3
2
1
4.1
The board has a plan for communicating the organization’s purpose to the
community.
5
4
3
2
1
4.2
Individual trustees understand the organization’s mission and programs
well enough to speak about them when the trustees attend community
events.
5
4
3
2
1
4.3
The trustees individually and the board as a whole are advocates for our
students’ education.
5
4
3
2
1
Ball State University Office of Charter Schools 2005
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral Disagree Strongly
Disagree
5.1
The board understands the operating budget and makes financial decisions
based on a working knowledge of the school.
5
4
3
2
1
5.2
The board receives financial reports on a regular basis that are understandable, accurate and timely.
5
4
3
2
1
5.3
The board has adopted a set of financial management policies and procedures that include investment and gift policies.
5
4
3
2
1
5.4
The board has approved a fund development strategy for the organization.
5
4
3
2
1
5.5
The board understands the financial needs required by the organization for
future growth.
5
4
3
2
1
6.1
The board has adopted a risk management program that reduces the organization’s exposure to risks
5
4
3
2
1
6.2
The organization maintains an adequate level of insurance coverage to
protect trustees, staff members and the organization as a whole from loss.
5
4
3
2
1
6.3
The board has reviewed and approved the organization’s emergency and
disaster procedures.
5
4
3
2
1
7.1
The board ensures that a school leader who brings vision, leadership and
commitment to the mission directs the organization.
5
4
3
2
1
7.2
The board works in partnership with the school leader, providing the support and resources needed to adequately meet the organization’s goals.
5
4
3
2
1
7.3
The board assesses the school leader’s performance at least annually in a
systematic and fair way.
5
4
3
2
1
7.4
The board gives the school leader enough authority and responsibility to
lead and manage the organization successfully.
5
4
3
2
1
7.5
The board understands its role in hiring and supporting the school leader
and delegates the hiring and supervision of all other staff members.
5
4
3
2
1
7.6
The board is confident that there is enough depth in school leadership that
someone could take over as school leader if necessary.
5
4
3
2
1
8.1
The board assesses the qualities needed in new trustees based on the organization’s strategic plan and recruits appropriate people to fill those needs.
5
4
3
2
1
8.2
The board provides orientation for new trustees about their responsibilities to the organization.
5
4
3
2
1
8.3
All trustees receive regular and continuing education about their role,
including leadership development opportunities for future officers of the
board.
5
4
3
2
1
8.4
The board is familiar with and follows the bylaws of the organization.
5
4
3
2
1
8.5
Meetings, committees and back-up materials are designed to make good
use of trustees’ time, helping them focus on the critical issues facing the
organization.
5
4
3
2
1
8.6
The trustees regularly take time to better know each other and improve
their functioning as a group.
5
4
3
2
1
Ball State University Office of Charter Schools 2005
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral Disagree Strongly
Disagree
8.7
The board assesses its own work on a regular basis.
5
4
3
2
1
9.1
The board understands it is responsible as a financial steward for public
tax dollars.
5
4
3
2
1
9.2
The board understands it is accountable for state and federal student
achievement requirements.
5
4
3
2
1
9.3
The board understands it is responsible for operating in compliance with
its charter contract.
5
4
3
2
1
9.4
The board was hands-on in developing the school and getting it up and
running.
5
4
3
2
1
9.5
The board is where it should be in the transition of moving from hands on
management to a policy making and governing body.
5
4
3
2
1
Answer questions below if your board contracts with an Education Management Organization
10.1 Our management organization is doing a good job with financial management.
5
4
3
2
1
10.2 Our management organization is doing a good job with staffing.
5
4
3
2
1
10.3 Our management organization is doing a good job with education programming.
5
4
3
2
1
10.4 Our management organization does a good job communicating with us.
5
4
3
2
1
Ball State University Office of Charter Schools 2005
What issues should occupy the board’s time and attention during the coming year or two?
.
How can the board’s organization or performance be improved in the next year or two?
What other comments or suggestions would you like to offer related to the board’s performance?
addd
Appendix B
Constituent Survey
Appendix B
Ball State University
Office of Charter Schools
2004-2005
Accountability Report
B-1
addd
Charter School Survey
1. General Attitudes & Perceptions about the School
1. Please indicate your role with the school? (indicate all that apply)
Parent/Guardian
Board member
Administrator
Paraprofessional
2a. How would you rate the overall quality of education?
Excellent
2b. How would you compare the overall quality of education to that of other schools?
Much
Better
Faculty
Very
Good
Other
Good
Fair
Poor
Don't know
Somewhat
About
Better
the same
Somewhat
Worse
Much
Worse
Don't know
Somewhat
Very
Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Don't know
2c. How satisfied are you with the overall quality of education?
Very
Satisfied
Somewhat
Satisfied
Neutral
Please read each of the following statements and indicate how much you
agree or disagree with each statement as it relates to your school.
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Neither
Agree nor
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
No
Opinion
Good
Fair
Poor
Don't
Know
3a. All members of the school community understand the mission of the school
3b. Our school has a caring environment
3c. Our school communicates student performance to parents/guardians
3d. Our school continuously improves
3e. Our school holds teachers accountable for student performance
3f. Expectations are clearly defined for all members of the school community
3g. Our school makes a comprehensive assessment of student achievement
3h. Our school has a positive school spirit
3i. Our school has high expectations for teachers
3j. Our school is safe for students
3k. School leaders are available and open to all members of the school community
3l. Our school has a high quality academic program
3m. Our school has all members of the school community focused on the mission of the school
3n. Our school has the appropriate level of discipline
3o. Our school has the resources to achieve its mission
3p. Our school has a mission-driven academic program
3q. Our school has an effective board
fold here
fold here
fold here
3r. Our school uses a team approach to education that involves the entire school community
3s. Our school spends more time than other schools on academics
3t. All members of the school community are committed to the mission of the school
3u. Our school empowers teachers to make decisions
3v. Our school has effective administration
3w. Our school is financially stable
3x. All members of the school community are proud of our school
3y. Our school uses innovative educational practices
Please indicate your overall evaluation of each of the following aspects of
the
school. Departments Overall
3m. Academic
Excellent
Very
Good
4a. School board
4b. Enrollment/admissions process
4c. Quality of teaching/instruction
4d. School administration
4e. Teacher professional development
4f. School facilities
4g. Individualized student attention
4h. Access to/use of computers and other technologies
4i. Parents
fold here
fold here
fold here
4j. Support services (e.g. counseling, healthcare, etc.)
4k. Faculty/teachers
Services provided to special needs students (e.g. English as a second language,
4l.
disabilities, academically challenged, etc.)
4m. School safety
4n. Communication about student learning/achievement
4o. Student development
6. Opportunities
Extracurricular
Activities
for parental
involvement
4p.
4q. Curriculum/academic program
4r. Transportation services
4s. Students
4t. Communication about meeting the school's mission
© The Kensington Group (Indianapolis, IN), Page 1 of 2
50062
Charter School Survey
Please indicate your overall evaluation of each of the following aspects of
the school. (continued)
Excellent
Very
Good
Good
Fair
Poor
Don't
Know
Extremely
Likely
Very
Likely
Somewhat
Likely
Not Very
Likely
Not at all
Likely
Don't
Know
Very
Satisfied
Somewhat
Satisfied
Neutral
4u. Student-teacher ratio/class size
4v. Food service
4w. School size
4x. Teacher decision making
4y. Location of school
4z. School material and supplies
4aa Classroom management (e.g. student behavior, discipline, etc.)
How likely are you to . . .
12. Overall Relationship with the School
5a. recommend the school to friends and colleagues
5b. return to the school next year
fold here
fold here
fold here
5c. increase your support of the school
Overall satisfaction
Somewhat Very
Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Don't know
5d. Overall, how satisfied are you with this charter school?
6. Special School Questions - Please read each question provided on the enclosed sheet and then indicate
your answer in the appropriate column below.
1.
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
i
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
fold here
fold here
Background Information
7. Please indicate how many children you have in the school.
9. Please indicate the grade level(s) of your student(s).
Kindergarten
Three or more
children
Two children
One child
8. Please indicate the gender(s) of your student(s) in the school
fold here
fold here
Male
Female
10. Please answer the following questions about your student(s)?
One
Two
Three
Four
Five
Six
Seven
Eight
Nine
Ten
Eleven
Twelve
fold here
a) Has your child(ren) had special needs (e.g.
English as a second language, disabilities, etc.)
during this school year?
Yes
No
b) Did your child(ren) use the school's
transportation services during this school year
(e.g. school buses, special passes for public
transportation/buses, carpools arranged by the
Yes
No
fold here
fold here
fold here
11. What is your child(ren)'s race/ethnicity? Please indicate all that apply.
American Indian or Alaskan Native
Black or African American
12. Please indicate your gender
Male
Female
Hispanic or Latino
Asian
White
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
Multiethnic
Other
© The Kensington Group (Indianapolis, IN) , Page 2 of 2
50062