Contextual
Factors
Cy-Fair High School
Brittny Carrington
Brittny Carrington
CUIN 3013
Dr. Hansen
April 24, 2013
Contextual factors
Community, District, and School Factors
Cy-Fair High School is located within the Cy-Fair Independent School District in the
growing city of Cypress, Texas. Cy- Fair ISD is located in the Harris County risdiction .The
city of Cypress is located off of highway 290 which is about 20 miles n west of Houston. As
of 2012, the population of Cypress, Texas currently sits at 56 , 8 people and growing. The city's
population has almost quadrupled over the last decade gr 'ng over 399.09 percent, according to
best places. As stated in home facts, the city of Cypress is composed of 74% Caucasian, 10%
African American, 7% Asian and 9% a mixture of others. These cjEmographics help explain the 3
higher than average income within this area of living.
-
Cy-Fair ISD is composed of 84 campuses and is third largest district within the state o II
Texas. As Reported in the 2010-2011 AEIS Report, CY- Fair Hi
chool was classified as a
Recognized campus. Cy-Fair High has a current enrollment of 3,434 students as of fall 2012. The
goal of the campus is to provide a safe and productive learning environment where all students
will be engaged in relevant and rigorous course work to prepare them to be productive citizens.
Within this campus 25.2% of the student body is considered to be economically disadva ged.
This comes from a campus that has a racial demographic that consist of 51.8% Caucasian,
24.6% Hispanic, 11.8% African American, 8.7% Asian,2.7% two or more races, 0.3% Na ' e
American, and 0.1% Pacific Islander.
Classroom Factors
This particular Health class was located on the back wing of the high school near the gym
and athletic rooms. The classroom was set up with desOm 4 rows of 7. There were also two
desks that set off to the left of the classroom for extra seating. This class is set up where each
student is directly facing the front board of the class. There is one long white dry erase board; 07
left portion of the board contains the bell schedule along with the week's agenda for the students.
The agenda contains the unit they are going to cover, what assignments they would be doing
each particular day, and any homework assignments they may have to complete. On each /
students desk there is a copy of the Health textbook they will use for that course. The seating
arrangement the students have was made at the beginning of the year by the students. They were
to pick the seat they would want to sit in for the remaining of the semester. The teacher's desk in
this class sits to the left of the class in the corner where he is visible to all students.
Along the wall on the right side of the room, contains work done by student from each
class .They were to design a poster of what they wanted their career to be aioals they had for
their selves in the future. The back of the classroom contained cabinets and shelves for the
students to keep any extra material they might need to use for classroom projects and
assignments, and for the storage of the textbooks at the end of the day. On p of the shelves the
teacher has assigned a designated area with trays for each class peri to turn in any assignments
they may have due. Posted on the shelves of this classroom are the classroom guidelips and
expectations, fire and emergency evacuation plans, and events occurring within the school.
3
2..t .to.J
Because this is a high school, the students schedules are bfeke into six to seven classesperiod5 and a lunch period in between. The first class of the day begins at 7:30 am and the
dismissal bell rings at 2:30 pm. Each class is scheduled for 51 minutes, each with a five minute
time frame for class change in between. Becaus f this, it is very important the teacher utilizes
there time well during each class period.
Technology within this school is impeccable. In each class the tea er is provided with
their own computer. On each teacher computer there is the cy-fair p gram provided for them to
take role, input grades, and communicate with students and parents. Also in this class ther
two computers for student access if quick research eds to be done. Other technology included
in the class is TV, DVD player, and a smart board. There are also two major computer labs and
a library with computer access located on the campus as well for student access. All these
features help with classroom interaction and including updating styles of teaching.
Student Characteristics
Within this fifth period Health class it ranges from grades 9-12. This class is one of
smaller classes the teacher has. There are a lytal of 18 students in this class, 13 girls and 5 bon
The racial demographic breakdown
4% African American, 33% Hispanic, 11% Asian,
8% Caucasians, and 4% a mixture of others. This is a regular placed class; however, there is one
student in this class who has small ESL learning disability being from Argentina. He has learned
the English language very well and needs little no help with completing assignments. Also,
there is one student with a learning disability and the teacher has to evaluate the student's
performance and progress every six weeks and report it to the director of instruction and
guidance counselor.
Most students within this class are on level or above with this course. There are about
four students in this class who are also in advanced placement program in the class as w ll. The
students in this class range in age between 13 and 17 are majority going through k Erikson's
identity versus role confusion tage of development. You can tell this by some of the actions and
ilS/CAAAQVQ. "
decisions that they are making. You have students who are heavily involved with school
activities and those who chose not to participate. Also, you can tell by the students they hang
around, there are students who chose to associate kids of the same age, and there are also those
who chose to hang with students that are older or younger than they are.
Instructional Implications
One important factor with dealing with students in high school is to find new ways to
teach things. High school students tend to not focus on detail very much, but more with hands on
and how it relates to real life. For example, when talking about drinking and driving and the
effect it has on your body and your impairment with all the technology in the world today the
teacher was able to give real life examples. Different videos of a people who were involved in
drunk driver accidents and the effects it had on them and their future were shown. Another idea
that I would use to keel
\ i ny class interactive and more hands on is I would provide them with
visual impaired goggles to show them the effects on their vision at different stages with alcohol
in their system. By this area being one with a small economically disadv taged group of
students it is easier to find and create differentiated activities for the s dents. These activity
gives the students the chance to experience what effects can happen to them because there may
(k).
)■,
p—
be students who believe that things like this will not happen to them, and you do not want your
students to go out and experiment with things that can potentially put them in danger.
Each week different videos and interactive assignments are completed within the class to
help cover the unit they are going over. After each unit, the stud given an assessment to
evaluate the comprehension of what was taught during each unit. Also, the class is given one
major grade assignment after each unit as well to display what they learned during the unit that
0(0)14
was covered. For the students with ESL and learning disabilities they are also given the same
assignments they are able to take them to their help teacher and are given extra time if needed to
complete those assignments. This helps keep the class all on the same level, and gives them
opportunity to express their outlooks on the unit based off what they have learned and apply it to
their prior knowledge.
}
Texas Education AgencylPerformance Reporting
TEXAS EDUCATION AGENCY
District Name: CYPRESS-FAIRBANKS
Campus Name:
Campus
Section I
Total Students: 3
Academic Excellence Indicator System
2010-11 Campus Performance
2011 Accountability Rating: Recognized
ISD
101907002
Grade Span: 09 - 1
School Type: Secon
Gold Performance Acknowledgments:
Advanced Academic Courses (2009-10)
College-Ready Graduates (Class of 2010)
Texas Success Initiative (TSI) ELA
Texas Success Initiative (TSI) Mathematics
Commended on Social Studies
State
TAKS Met 2011
Grade 9
District
Campus
Group
Campus
African
American Hispanic
White
American
Indian
Asian
93%
95%
90%
973
97%
> 998
*
681
810
78%
80%
910
94%
•
65%
80%
75%
80%
90%
93%
•
95%
944,
95%
91%
96%
98%
918
96%
80%
816
85%
81%
77%
84%
81%
838
90%
91%
76%
83%
88%
94%
83%
836
786
86%
868
75%
81%
93%
2011
2010
93%
93%
97%
96%
97%
95%
97%
98%
99%
98%
96%
99%
> 99%
> 99%
2011
65%
738
78%
75%
86%
80%
2010
65%
74%
738
67%
75%
71%
87%
Eng Lang Arts 2011
2010
94%
93%
97%
98%
95%
99%
97%
99%
96%
97:
938
95%
99%
Mathematics
90%
88%
93%
91%
94%
91%
90%
886
94%
948
97%
97%
> 99%
95.
968
86%
87%
95%
98%
988
> 99%
998
97%
> 998
> 99%
98%
99%
99%
89%
928
94%
2010
92%
95%
95%
2011
2010
72%
72%
78%
78%
84%
78%
2011
69%
70%
76%
77%
82%
77%
Eng Lang Arts 2011
2010
91%
91%
95%
94%
Mathematics
2011
2010
75%
75%
2011
2010
Mathematics
All Tests
Econ
Disad
Standard
2011
Reading
Pacific
Two or Special
Islander More Races Ed
2010
95'
9S
S,
98%
998
•
> 99%
90%
89%
91%
88%
94%
976
*
96%
90%
63%
693
74%
79%
978
96%
*
96%
90%
61%
68%
70%
78%
97%
•
988
TAKS Met 2011 Standard
Grade 10
Science
Soc Studies
All Tests
91 ■
no
> 99%
83%
95%
> 99%
> 998
> 99%
73%
90%
> 99%
968
> 99%
928
83%
66%
63%
80%
85t
> 99%
92%
70%
60%
83%
82%
> 99%
85%
988
> 99%
90%
98%
93%
92%
48%
726
> 99%
97%
83%
42%
73%
> 99%
> 998
•
> 99%
> 998
98%
86%
98%
93%
•
> 99%
> 99%
81%
969
69%
908
98%
98%
> 99%
> 99%
83%
778
95%
88%
> 99%
> 994
> 99%
93%
92%
99%
> 99%
> 998
98%
95%
> 998
> 99%
67%
53%
911
80%
> 998
91%
98%
n/a
> 99%
90%
93%
n/a
8128
93%
96%
82%
n/a
71%
66%
n/a
> 99%
n/a
77%
684
88%
85%
n/a
> 99%
n/a
89%
918
98%
90%
96%
n/a
598
54%
76%
96%
> 99%
•
97%
> 99%
•
TAKS Met 2011 Standard
^ Grade 11
2011
2010
Science
Soc Studies
All Tests
TAKS
2011
2010
2011
2010
-
908
90%
94%
93%
968
94%
98%
978
99%
98%
99%
98%
2011
847
892
92%
2010
81%
87%
86%
99%
9:0
87%
83%
96%
75%
898
96%
968
938
94%
94%
98%
98%
•
96%
> 99%
968
988
Met 2011 Standard (Sum of All Grades Tested)
(Standard Accountability Indicator 8)
Reading/ELA
Mathematics
Science
2011
90%
93%
2010
90%
93%
2011
84%
88%
888
2010
84%
88%
838
2011
2010
Soc
Studies
All Tests
961
954
83%
82%
888
90%
899,
88%
91
97%
9.
9.
3.
78%
83%
92%
93%
988
85%
84%
94%
918
n/a
86%
87%
86%
87%
96%
95%
> 99%
> 99%
97%
n/a
•
n/a
n/a
•
84%
2011
2010
95%
98%
97%
98%
97%
99
98%
98%
99%
> 99%
> 998
94%
99'
98%
97%
998
> 99%
n/a
2011
76%
81%
84%
8G -
73%
77%
908
93%
96%
*
2010
76%
82%
79%
98 ,.
788
79%
92%
91%
n/a
n/a
266
26%
40%
23%
52%
21%
22%
30%
42%
33%
52%
*
•
456
24%
49%
13%
24%
63%
•
*
46%
47%
13%
9%
15%
171
*
*
46%
26%
15%
98
18%
13%
77%
TANS Commanded Performance (Sum of All Grades Tested)
Reading/ELA
Mathematics
Science
Soc Studies
All Tests
2011
33%
38%
31%
2010
32%
38%
28%
'3 ,
29%
282
35%
35%
30%
25%
2011
30%
37%
31%
2010
28%
37%
21%
23
2011
2010
47%
45%
60%
59%
61%
52%
:,
'
2011
16%
20%
16%
2011
2010
.73e;
16%
19%
40%
29%
18%
25%
39%
33%
64%
18%
23%
37%
45%
541
128
16%
33%
43%
49%
58%
51%
648
786
73%
628
76%
> 998
879
85%
118
9%
228
13%
39%
•
85%
31%
74%
29%
56%
52%
248
7%
88
2010
15%
20%
11%
20,
8%
12%
22%
40%
33%
27%
3%
81
TAKS-M Met 2011 Standard (Sum of All Grades Tested)
2011
86%
90%
864
> 99%
> 99%
98%
944
85%
908
83R
:1;
91' .
89%
2010
91%
> 99%
868
91%
95%
2011
2010
77%
758
84%
83%
69%
66%
77'
85%
858
81%
75%
75%
72%
80%
77%
85%
86%
Science
2011
2010
60%
58%
66%
58%
65%
58%
75%
57%
75%
71%
88%
38%
79%
55%
85%
45%
Soc Studies
2011
2010
68%
67%
80%
74%
76%
674,
88%
67%
60%
83%
> 99%
71%
81%
74%
851
70%
2011
2010
66%
64%
73%
70%
61%
56%
69%
69%
58%
67%
76%
63%
68%
66%
73%
> 99%
> 99%
> 99%
> 99%
> 99%
> 99%
> 993
> 99%
Reading/ELA
Mathematics
All Tests
':4.
.'‘E
>
714
TAKS-Alt Met 2011 Standard (Sum of All Grades and Subjects Tested)
All Tests
All Tests
2011
2010
97%
93%
99%
99%
> 99%
> 99%
99
> 99%
> 99%
2011 TARS Participation (Grades 3-11)
Tested
96.4%
97.0%
*
*
*
98.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
28.1%
68.3%
16.51
31.72
12.2%
7.9%
90.8%
6.3%
1.0%
3.51
1.42
0.3%
*
*
*
*
94.21
3.8%
3.8%
0.0%
88.51
7.9E
7.9%
0.0%
93.2%
3.8%
3.81
0.02
1.9%
0.0%
0.0%
1.9%
3.6%
0.7%
0.0%
2.9%
3.0%
0.31
1.9%
0.7%
52
139
573
100.0%
97.1%
96.74
94.7%
47.4%
91.9%
5.3%
5.3%
49.7%
14.6%
4.8,
0.0%
21.1%
0.7%
2.94
0.0%
0.0%
9.4%
4.7%
0.9%
0.3%
98.0%
99.1%
100.0%
97+44
92.0%
8.0%
0.7%
4.78
1.7%
1.0%
93.88
95.9%
4.3%
3.2%
1.3%
92.96
7.1%
96.91
0.4%
*
*
0.0%
0.0%
*
1.1%
0.5%
0.2%
7.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.4%
0.0%
95.1%
3.7%
3.6%
0.0%
91.7%
8.38
8.3%
0.0%
94.2%
3.8%
3.8%
0.0%
97.41,
1.7%
1.7%
0.0%
100.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
97.4%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
1.2%
0.1?
0.4%
0.6%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
2.0%
0.0%
1.5%
0.5%
0.9%
0.2%
0.9%
0.3%
0.0%
0.7%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
2.6%
0.0%
2.6%
0.0%
71,238
1,435
301
608
1,313
14
229
98.8%
98.8%
91.0%
7.6%
2.4%
3.1%
0.9%
1.3%
93.6%
5.2%
1.3%
2.2%
0.9%
0.8%
92.8%
6.0%
2.1%
2.0%
0.7%
0.9%
By Acct Status
Acct System
Non-Acct System
Mobile
Non-Acct Test
94.0%
4.6%
4.6%
0.0%
95.3%
3.58
3.5%
0.0%
Not Tested
1.4%
1.2%
Absent
0.1%
LEP Exempt
Other
0.9%
0.4%
3,231,780
Total Count
98.11
100.0%
98.6%
By Test Version
TARS (1 or more)
Not on TARS
TAKS(Acc) Only
TAKS-M Only
TAKS-Alt Only
Combination
1.9.8
0.°
0. 4.
0.7%
2.3%
0.5%
0.88
3
2010 TANS Participation (Grades 3-11)
98.6%
98.84.
99.0%
99.0%
96.6%
99.2%
100.0%
100.0%
90.8%
93.8%
91.8%
92.5%
93.7%
96.0%
100.0%
99.0%
TAKS(Acc) Only
7.8%
2.3%
5.0%
1.2%
6.9%
2.4%
6.5%
1.3%
2.9%
0.3%
3.2%
1.2%
0.0%
0.0%
1.0%
0.5%
TAKS-M Only
3.3%
2.1%
2.4%
3.6%
1.9%
1.1%
0.0%
0.0%
*
*
TAKS-Alt Only
Combination
0.8%
1.3%
0.9%
0.8%
0.6%
1.1%
1.3%
0.3%
0.3%
0.3%
0.5%
0.4%
0.0%
0.0%
0.5%
0.0%
*
.
90.0%
8.6%
4.4%
4.2%
92.4%
6.4%
3.4%
87.9%
11.1%
6.28
4.9%
92.0%
4.6%
2.4-%
95.7%
3.5%
1.8%
100.0%
0.0%
0.08
99.5%
0.5%
0.0%
97.4%
2.6%
2.6%
63.2%
33.9%
2.9%
90.2%
6.5%
2.8%
3.0%
91.9%
7.18
3.8%
3.2%
2.2%
1.7%
0.0%
0.54
0.0%
31.0%
3.8%
Not Tested
1.4R
1.2%
1.0%
Absent
0.1%
0.1%
0.9%
0.48
3.4%
0.9%
1.5%
1.0%
0.8%
0.3%
0.08
0.5%
0.0%
0.0%
LEP Exempt
Other
0.1%
0.94
1.0%
0.3%
0.38
0.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.06
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.08
2.9%
1.8%
0.0%
1.2%
3.3%
1.04
1.5%
0.76
307
588
1,306
9
198
38
171
581
Tested
By Test Version
TARS (1 or more)
Not on TAKS
*
By Acct Status
Acct System
Non-Acct System
Mobile
Non-Acct Test
3,175,337
Total Count
93.91.
0.2%
0.3%
0.5%
0.4'.0.4 0.5,-
69,704
1,402
2.455
1
Progress of Prior Year TAKS Failers
Percent of Failers Passing TAKS (Sum of Grades 4-11)
Reading/ELA
Mathematics
2010
47%
50%
55%
56%
63%
61%
7E0.
47
> 99%
90%
60%
50%
76%
76%
2011
2010
42R
45%
43%
48%
52%
54%
47%
40%
68%
48%
52%
58%
2011
64%
89%
*
70%
81%
59%
52%
57%
49%
62%
Link to: Progress of Prior Year TANS Failers by Grade Level
Student Success Initiative
Grade 8 Reading
TANS Met Standard (Failed in Previous Year)
Promoted to Grade 9
2011
2010
38%
44%,
34S
38%
33%
Grade 8 Mathematics
TAKS Met Standard (Failed in Previous Year)
50%
>
Promoted to Grade 9
2011
2010
20%
22%
21%
23k
17%
•
2%.
42 ,
Attendance Rate 8
2009-10
2008-09
95.58
95.6%
Annual Dropout Rate (Gr 9-12)
2009-10
2.4%
2008-09
2.9%
*
*
80%
79%
92.5%
93.9%
92.4%
92.8%
93.1%
93.46
94.2%
96.0%
95.1%
n/a
n/a
1.2%
0.7%
1.5%
3.2%
0.4%
0.8%
0.0%
0.0%
0.8%
n/a
89.5%
0.0%
8.1%
86.0%
1.4%
6.3%
93.4%
0.3%
2.9%
*
*
n/a
n/a
n/a
2.3%
6.3%
3.4%
•
4.1:
87.6%
0.0%
7.9%
4.5%
75.7%
0.0%
13.6%
10.7%
94.5%
0.5%
3.1%
1.8%
•
93.9 .
94.3%
84.4%
96.9%
0.0%
0.08
0.5%
0.0%
2.2%
13.3%
o
..
95.6%
95.8%
95.2%
94.9%
93.0%
93..';
1.1%
1.1%
0.4%
0.8%
0.6
71%
291
44%
•
85%
70%
81%
82%
93.7%
n/a
89.4%
89.7%
91.5%
92.2%
n/a
0.0%
n/a
1.9%
1.4%
1.6%
1.4%
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
69.0%
2.4%
19.0%
9.5%
84.6%
0.9%
10.3%
4.3%
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
68.9%
0.0%
21.3%
9.8%
83.0%
0.0'
11.0%
6.0%
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
84.1%
89.9%
n/a
0.0%
1.0%
0.5%
2.1%
n/a
n/a
4.8%
11.1%
2.0%
7.1%
97.0%
0.8%
1.2%
1.0%
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
83.9%
5.9%
90.1%
1.48
2.1%
6.3%
11.8%
0.0%
82.8%
1.6%
6.3%
9.4%
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
88.1%
94.9%
90.26
94.08
60.2%
n/a
n/a
41.3%
n/a
18.7%
21.8%
35.2%
33.9%
72.0%
67.83
93%
> 99%
8
4-Year Completion Rate (Gr 9 - 12) 8
Class of 2010
Graduated
84.3%
89.4%
1.3%
Received GED
0.3%
7.2%
Continued HS
7.1%
7.3%
Dropped Out
3.2%
Class of 2009
Graduated
Received GED
Continued HS
Dropped Out
*
*
38%
36%
English Language Learners Progress Indicator
2010-11
80%
88%
85%
79%
2009-10
88%
86%
22%
60%
*
13%
50%
80.6%
1.4%
87.3%
0.3%
9.0%
3.4%
8.68
9.4%
93.7%
0.6%
2.5%
91.2'
0. , •
4.6P
2.0%
92.4%
0.6%
3.2%
2.9%
0.3'
-
5 -Year Extended Completion. Rate (Gr 9 - 12) 8
Class of 2009
Graduated
85.1'7
93.0%
94.8%
Received GED
Continued HS
1.9%
2.1%
0.5%
2.3%
0.9%
0.6%
10.9%
4.2%
3.2%
4.6 ,
5.7%
83.48
2.1%
2.4%
92.1%
0.7%
2.7%
92.3%
1.5%
0.9%
9',.4
0.9 ,
91.2%
0.0%
Continued HS
Dropped Out
12.2%
4.5%
4.4%
Dropped Out
Class of 2008
Graduated
Received GED
2.9%
4.36
Completion Rate I (Graduates and Gontinumrs) 8
(Standard Accountability Indicator)
Class of 2010
91.44
96.5Y,
97.1 ,)
95.9
Class of 2009
89.2%
96.3%
96.7%
95.76
97.7%
95.5%
92.3%
89.3%
96.3%
97.7%
Advanced Course/Dual Enrollment Completion
2009-10
26.3?
43.3%
27.0%
2008-09
24.6%
39.9%
25.6%
45.6:
39.4 ,
39.2%
36.6%
40.1%
34.7%
47.6%
39.0%
COLLEGE READINESS INDICATORS
22.2%
27.3%
RHSP/DAP Graduates 8
Class of 2010
82.7%
82.5%
75.7%
76.3%
87.6%
82.4%
7 9.0 ,.
77.1
69.4%
67.9%
79.3%
71.6%
78.8%
79.3%
91.9%
n/a
n/a
72.2%
n/a
6.3%
8.7%
22.7%
21.2%
20.8%
19.4%
24.3%
20.0%
22.2.'
11.2%
9.1%
17.6%
13.3%
22.6%
15.7%
46.2%
n/a
n/a
26.7%
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
50.8%
51.2%
70.6%
71.8%
66.4%
58.3%
7 3.9 ,.
77.8%
57.1%
63.2%
69-.7%
77.6%
77.0%
72.2%
n/a
n/a
75.0%
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
2010
46.7%
64.1%
60.3%
59.5%
52.4%
71.68
66.7%
2009
47.4%
65.88
49.7%
61.5%
61.4%
66.1%
Class of 2009
Results
Tested
AP/IB
2010
2009
17.7',
Examinees > Criterion
2010
2009
Scores >= Criterion
Texas Success Initiative (TSI)
-
66.7%
67%
69%
73%
57%
67%
64%
78%
78%
67%
2010
2011
2010
69%
66%
73%
71%
75%
72%
70%
53%
74%
71%
87%
87%
86%
Tested
Class of 2010
Class of 2009
62.6%
61.5%
66.6%
62.8%
.70.5%
65.6%
70.1'
7 2.1 4
87.3%
88.7%
57.9%
45.8%
68.3%
74.2%
•
At/Above Criterion
class of 2010
Class of 2009
26.9%
26.9%
38.0%
36.08,
34.8%
28.2%
5.6.
37.7'
10.9%
15.9%
32.5%
20.4%
41.2%
*
41.4%
*
985
985
1047
1035
1033
1015
1049
1044
930
1018
969
1074
1066
*
945
20.5
22.2
22.5
20.5
22.0
21.3
21.6
26.4
18.8
18.8
20.5
20.7
22.0
22.3
College-Ready Graduates 8
Eng Lang Arts
66%
Class of 2010
62%
Class of 2009
75%
70%
76%
69%
72%
62%
73%
56%
81%
79%
Mathematics
SAT/ACT
Results
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
868
74%
•
64%
73%
36%
27%
72%
58%
85%
718
37%
36%
69%
62%
93.3%
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Higher Education Readiness Component
66%
60%
Eng Lang Arts 2011
n/a
61.9%
78%
98%.
89%
e
Average SAT Score
Class of 2010
Class of 2009
Average ACT Score
Class of 2010
Class of 2009
.:,
,
-,.
-
82.0%
n/a
n/a
40.0%
n/a
n/a
42.9%
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
1078
n/a
n/a
1118
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
-
23.5
n/a
n/a
24.7
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
*
*
88%
n/a
n/a
88%
n/a
22%
12%
67%
54%
-
-
*
Mathematics
Class of 2010
Class of 2009
64%
60%
74%
70%
74%
66%
Both Subjects
Class of 2010
Class of 2009
52%
47%
635
58%
644
51%
District Name: CYPRESS-FAIRBANKS ISD
Campus Name:
CY-FAIR HIGH SCHOOL
Campus 0:
101907002
tO
62%
53%
70%
59%
82%
77%
89%
t
81%
33%
n/a
n/a
n/a
197.
76%
52%
50'F
43%
58%
40%
71%
71%
n/a
n/a
81%
n/a
5%
6%
58%
37%
81%
Section II
Total Students: 3,310
Grade Span: 09 - 12
School Type: Secondary
TEXAS EDUCAT/ON AGENCY
Academic Excellence Indicator System
2010-11 Campus Profile
STUDENT INFORMATION
Count
Percent
Campus
Group
District
3,310
100.0%
72,932
105,860
4,912,385
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
951
838
765
756
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
28.7%
25.3%
23.1%
22.8%
0.04,
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
29.0%
27.6%
22.4%
21.0%
0.5%
3.3%
7.3%
7.7%
7.8%
7.6%
7.6%
7.6%
7.6%
7.6%
7.4%
8.2%
7.34
6.5%
6.3%
0.3%
4.5%
7.6%
7.9%
7.71
7.6%
7.6%
7.6%
7.4'
7.3%
7.2%
7.9%
7.0%
6.4%
5.9%
390
797
1,751
9
288
2
73
11.8%
24.1%
52.9%
0.3%
8.7%
0.1%
2.2%
10.2%
26.0%
52.6%
0.7%
7.8%
0.2%
2.7%
15.5%
42.5%
31.0%
0.2%
8.0%
0.0%
2.7%
12.9%
50.34
31.2%
0.5%
3.4%
0.1%
1.6
778
79
94
997
323
16.9
23.5%
2.4%
2.8%
30.1%
9.7%
n/a
24.5%
2.4%
2.9%
30.6%
12.2%
15.3
46.5%
16.5%
1.6%
40.9%
13.5%
16.4
59.2%
16.9%
1.9%
46.3%
18.2%
14.7
Campus
I
Total Students:
Students By Grade: Early Childhood Education
Pre-Kindergarten
Kindergarten
Grade 1
Grade 2
Grade 3
Grade 4
Grade 5
Grade 6
Grade 7
Grade 8
Grade 9
Grade 10
Grade 11
Grade 12
Ethnic Distribution: African American
Hispanic
White
American Indian
Asian
Pacific Islander
Two or More Races
Economically Disadvantaged
Limited English Proficient (LEP)
Students w/Disciplinary Placements (2009-10)
At-Risk
Mobility (2009-10)
Number of Students per Teacher
Campus
I
Graduates (Class of 2010):
I
Total Graduates
By Ethnicity (incl. Special Ed.):
African American
Hispanic
White
American Indian
Asian
Pacific Islander
Two or More Races
By Graduation Type (incl. Special Ed.):
Minimum H.S. Program
Recommended H.S. Pgm./DAP
Special Education Graduates
I
Percent
Count
Campus
Group
District
State
State
653
100.0%
14,390
6,111
280,520
72
140
359
2
62
0
18
11.0%
21.4%
55.0%
0.3%
9.5%
0.0%
2.8%
1,458
3,330
8,295
94
898
31
284
866
1,968
2,519
10
576
0
172
36,988
119,365
108,577
1,452
9,967
363
3,808
137
516
21.0%
79.0%
2,081
12,309
1,485
4,626
48,391
232,129
48
7.4%
1,036
374
25,537
CLASS SIZE INFORMATION
(Derived from teacher responsibility records.)
Campus
Class Size Averages by Grade and Subject:
-
Elementary: Kindergarten
Grade 1
Grade 2
Grade
Grade
Grade
Grade
Mixed
Secondary:
Campus
Group
?
-
3
4
5
6
Grades
22.0
22.6
27.0
24.9
28.6
English/Language Arts
Foreign Languages
Mathematics
Science
Social Studies
19.4
20.3
20.3
20.5
22.2
District
State
19.1
19.0
19.5
18.9
19.6
19.6
19.3
21.6
24.4
-
18.8
18.8
19.0
21.4
20.7
23.9
21.5
22.1
24.2
24.6
26.2
17.3
19.0
17.9
19.0
19.6
Count
Percent
Campus
Group
District
State
Total Staff:
223.2
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
Professional Staff:
Teachers
Professional Support
Campus Admin. (School Leader.)
223.2
196.4
17.9
9.0
100.0%
88.0%
8.0%
4.0%
92.4%
80.3%
7.9%
4.2%
63.0%
50.8%
8.2%
3.4%
63.4%
50.5%
9.0%
2.8%
STAFF INFORMATION
Campus
I
0.0
0.0%
7.6%
0.20
35.8
16.1%
17.2%
35.2%
44.0%
11.0
5.6%
4.7%
10.2%
15.9
8.1%
8.0%
11.9%
161.5
1.0
2.0
82.3%
0.5%
83.3%
0.7%
74.2%
0.4%
9.3%
23.78
63.9%
0.4%
1.0%
0.0%
2.54.
1.7%
0.1%
1.4%
1.8%
0.0%
1.4%
1.3%
0.1%
1.3%
64.5
131.9
32.88
39.3%
17.3E
23.2%
67.2%
60.7%
82.7%
76.8%
9.0
37.7
51.5
50.1
48.1
4.68
19.28
26.2%
25.58
24.5%
5.0%
3.7%
36.5E
22.2%
24.2%
13.5%
6.0%
30.0%
21.1%
25.0%
17.9%
District
State
Educational Aides:
Total Minority Staff:
Teachers By Ethnicity and Sex:
African American
Hispanic
White
American Indian
Asian
Pacific Islander
Two or More Races
0.0
5.0
Males
Females
Teachers by Years of Experience:
Beginning Teachers
1-5 Years Experience
6-10 Years Experience
11-20 Years Experience
Over 20 Years Experience
26.7%
22.1%
26.8%
19.4%
Campus
Group
Campus
Average Years Experience of Teachers:
Average Years Experience of Teachers with District:
Average Teacher Salary by Years of Experience:
(regular duties only)
Beginning Teachers
1-5 Years Experience
6-10 Years Experience
11-20 Years Experience
Over 20 Years Experience
13.8 yrs.
12.0 yrs.
10.2 yrs.
11.4 yrs.
10.2 yrs.
7.1 yrs.
7.1 yrs.
7.7 yrs.
$45,472
$46,470
$48,941
$54,023
$62,769
$43,397
$46,081
$48,051
$52,014
$61,238
$40,112
$46,226
$48,697
$53,047
$61,327
$41,272
$44,013
$46,604
$50,476
$58,691
$52,987
$64,111
082,228
$50,916
$56, 984
$77,343
$50,239
$58,489
$67,471
$48,638
$57,045
$70,819
0.0
4.1
0.0
Average Actual Salaries (regular duties only):
Teachers
Professional Support
Campus Administration (School Leadership)
Contracted Instructional Staff (not incl. above):
ACTUAL OPERATING EXPENDITURE INFORMATION
(2009-10)
By Function:
Total Operating Expenditures
Instruction (11,95)
Instructional-Related Services (12,13)
Instructional Leadership (21)
School Leadership (23)
Support Services-Student (31,32, A
Other Campus Costs (35,36,51,52,53)
By
Program:
Total Operating Expenditures
Bilingual/ESL Education (25)
Career 6 Technical Education (22)
Accelerated Education (24,30)
Gifted 6 Talented Education (21)
Regular Education (11)
Special Education (23)
Athletics/Related Activities (91)
High School Allotment (31)
Other (26,28,29)
I
Campus
General Percent
Fund
Per
Student
16,011,371
12,778,304
100.0%
79.8%
$5,018
$4,004
$181,280
$0
$997,551
1.1%
0.0%
6.2%
$57
$0
$313
$208
$665,203
4.2%
$1,389,033
8.7%
14,622,338
100.0%
$54,386
0.4%
9.4%
1.8%
1.8%
73.9%
12.8%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
$1,369,329
$260,445
$263,573
10,804,844
$1,869,761
$0
$0
$0
$4,582
$17
$429
$82
$83
$3,386
$586
$0
$0
$0
C ampus
PROGRAM INFORMATION
Count
I
Percent
2,180.4
Campus Group
I I
Percent
Per
Student
17,969,895
13,784,811
$195,653
100.0%
76.7%
$5,631
$4,320
1.1%
$61
$16,191,063
$24,870
$1,023,563
0.1%
5.7%
$8
$321
$34,444,568
$217
All
Funds
$692,256
3.9%
$2,248,742
12.5%
15,721,153
$55,144
$1,378,714
$280,741
$263,573
11,096,293
$2,646,688
$0
$0
SO
100.0%
0.4%
8.8%
1.8%
1.7%
70.6%
16.8%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
$4,927
$17
$432
$88
$83
$3,477
$829
$0
$0
$0
All
Funds
Percent
Pe
Stud
$474,535,554 100.0%
$320,801,105
67.6%
$6,6
$4,5
3.4%
1.3%
7.3%
$2
$
$4
$27,884,981
5.9%
$3
$69,187,167
14.6%
$9
$401,996,818 100.0%
$2,413,753
0.6%
$38,428,093
9.6%
$5,6
$
$5
$6,026,670
$11,075,293
2.8%
$1
$8,630,076
$271,234,871
$54,929,491
$72,462
$14,483,382
$729,397
2.1%
67.5%
13.7%
0.0%
3.6%
0.2%
$1
$3,8
$7
$2
$
Campus
Group
District
State
16.2%
21.0%
7.7%
8.8%
5.5%
4.0%
2.9%
1.9%
73.4%
9.1%
3.2%
Student Enrollment by Program:
Bilingual/ESL Education
Career & Technical Education
Gifted 4 Talented Education
Special Education
71
2.1%
2.2%
1,972
59.6%
55.1%
10.3%
7.9%
15.6%
25.1%
4.2%
7.2%
0.9%
9.7%
0.6%
1.9%
63.4%
11.2%
12.4%
2.1%
3.3%
3.2%
0.4%
68.9%
11.3%
10.88
Teachers by Program (population served):
Bilingual/ESL Education
Career & Technical Education
Compensatory Education
Gifted & Talented Education
Regular Education
Special Education
Other
303
9.2%
200
6.0%
1.5
19.3
0.82
0.0
1.8
90.7
9.8%
0.0%
0.98
46.2%
34.1
17.4%
48.8
24.9%
Primary Spring Administration, plus October first-time 11th grade testers who pass all 4 tests in October.
T
'?'
Asian, Pacific Islander and Two or More Races are not available for indicators that use the former race/ethnicity definitions.
Glossary for more details.
Indicates that the data for this item were statistically improbable, or were reported outside a reasonable range.
14V
Indicates results are masked due to small numbers to protect student confidentiality.
Indicates zero observations reported for this group.
'n/a' Indicates data reporting is not applicable for this group.
1_1
Link to 2010-11 Campus Comparable Improvement Report
Link to 2009-10 APIS Report
See t
Contextual Factors
Rubric
TWS Standard: The teacher uses information about the learning/teaching context and student
individual differences to set learning objectives, plan instruction and assess learning.
Rating -÷
Indicator
1
Knowledge of
Community,
School and
Classroom
Factors
Knowledge of
Characteristics of
Students
1
Indicator Not Met
Knowledge of
Students' Skills
and Prior
Learning
Implications for
Instructional
Planning and
Assessment
N
3
Indicator Met
irrelevant, or biased
knowledge of the
characteristics of the
community, school, and
classroom.
Teacher displays minimal,
stereotypical, or irrelevant
knowledge of student
Teacher displays general
knowledge of student
differences (e.g., development,
differences (e.g.,
development, interests,
culture, abilities/disabilities).
interests, culture,
abilities/disabilities) that may
affect learning.
(e.g., development,
interests, culture,
abilities/disabilities) that
may affect learning.
Teacher displays general
knowledge about the different
ways students learn (e.g.,
learning styles, learning
modalities).
Teacher displays general
& specific understanding
of the different ways
students learn (e.g.,
learning styles, learning
modalities) that may affect
learning.
stereotypical, or irrelevant
knowledge about the different
ways students learn (e.g.,
learning styles, learning
modalities).
Teacher displays little or
irrelevant knowledge of
students' skills and prior
learning.
Teacher displays general
knowledge of students' skills
and prior learning that may
affect learning.
Teacher does not provide
implications for instruction
and assessment based on
student individual differences
Teacher provides general
implications for instruction and
assessment based on student
and community, school, and
classroom characteristics OR
provides inappropriate
implications.
r
individual differences and
community, school, and
classroom characteristics.
_71/n
Score
Teacher displays a
Teacher displays some
knowledge of the
characteristics of the
community, school, and
classroom that may affect
learning.
Teacher displays minimal,
Teacher displays minimal,
Knowledge of
Students' Varied
Approaches to
Learning
2
Indicator Partially Met
comprehensive
understanding of the
characteristics of the
community, school, and
classroom that may affect
learning.
Teacher displays general
& specific understanding
of student differences
Teacher displays general
& specific knowledge of
students' skills and prior
learning that may affect
learning.
Teacher provides specific
implications for
instruction and assessment
based on student
individual differences and
community, school, and
classroom characteristics.
k,
•
Consultation Follow-Up
Phone Call
Date:
❑ Consultant:
❑ Email
Date:
Consultant:
THE
WRITINg
CENTER
11
7
" mptooing the wart, not juot the limiting"
Personal Information
r lykY1
Name
Date:
Phone:
93,55-
Student ID# JO /6
/lea
Major.
,R;a9 5%1
Gender:
teitic t
)0'4--
E.] Male litrfemale
Class Rank: ❑ Freshman ❑ Sophomore Cf/Junior [1 Senior ❑ Graduate ❑ Other.
How did you hear about the Writing Center?
Is this your first Writing Center consultation this year? A' 'es
❑ No
May we contact you for follow up? Email:1'A
Phone:
-
Assignment or Task Information
diAlfociwi
Assignment
Due Date:
1-i
Course Name and Number:
Instructor:
Did your instructor require that you to use the Writing Center?
Do you have the assignment sheet?
es
es H No
❑ No
Suggestions/Recommendations for Student
C , ,c,-.\-bic
Consultant Name:
9 -5
Length of Consultation:
to
Student's Stage of the Writing Process:
[1 Invention
ii Outline/Thesis
Rough Draft
[1 Completed Draft
11 Revision
Areas of concern:
Li Thesis Statement
❑ Organization
❑ Outlining/Planning
Et Paragraph Development
E] Understanding the Assignment
❑ Selecting Topic/Generating Ideas
Unity/Transition
❑ Incorporating Quotes
❑ Research
❑ APA/ MLA Formatting
❑ Academic Language
❑ Vocabulary/ Word Choice
Plan for Improvement:
pia
sTcA
\
Ao
e,
4 4.2
Sentence Grammar
❑ Punctuation/ Mechanics
❑ Proofreading
F] Other:
e
nd