Division10-11




 * Teacher’s Name ** ||


 * # students who took assessment ** ||


 * # students proficient and higher ** ||


 * % students proficient and higher ** ||


 * # students not proficient ** || ** # and names of students likely to be proficient at the end of instructional time- //students already close// ** || ** # and names of students likely to be proficient at end of instructional time- //students who have far to go// ** || ** # and names of students not likely to be proficient-//intervention group in need of extensive support// ** ||
 * Sprouse ||  ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||
 * Culp ||  ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||
 * Putrino ||  ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||
 * Hay ||  ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||
 * **Totals** ||  ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||


 * **__Strengths__** After examining student work, list strengths of students who were proficient and higher. || **__Obstacles__** List obstacles or reasons who students did not achieve proficiency. Where were there errors? Is there a trend? Common errors? Are there misconceptions about concepts or skills? ||


 * **Possible Instructional Strategies** ||




 * Teacher’s Name ** ||


 * # students who took assessment ** ||


 * # students proficient and higher ** ||


 * % students proficient and higher ** ||
 * GROWTH **
 * gain in % of proficiency (see Before Instruction % of students proficient and higher and add to this % students proficient and higher) ** ||


 * # of students still not proficient ** ||


 * Names of students who were “already close” __who are now proficient__ ** ||


 * Names of students who had “far to go”__who are now proficient__ ** ||
 * Sprouse ||  ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||
 * Culp ||  ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||
 * Putrino ||  ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||
 * Hay ||  ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||
 * **Totals** ||  ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||