Part B

theedukator2020

PartA.docx

School Improvement Planning Project

Part A: Data Analysis and Summary

I. Data Sets Used for This Analysis

The two publicly posted datasets used in this analysis are the high school cohort from Ritenour High School in St. Louis, Missouri. The initial data set is the Missouri End of Course English II data from the Ritenour School District dashboard (Ritenour School District, n.d.-b). According to that dashboard, the overall English Language Arts 2 proficiency level is 27.6% in Ritenour, along with subgroup data on the district equity dashboard (Ritenour School District, n.d.-b). The second data source is the district attendance and federal reporting dashboard, which provides a local source that relates to access and opportunity to learn (Ritenour School District, n.d.-a). That local source shows proportional attendance at Ritenour High School in 2019, 2023, and 2025, as well as average daily attendance of the high school reporting set of 2024 to 2025. Since the student-level records are not shown in the public dashboard, this summary will examine the cohort based on school and subgroup trends as opposed to examining the records based on individual student files.

The area to be analyzed is English II since Missouri mandates End of Course English II accountability and graduation issues, and since the performance of literacy has a close relationship with college and career readiness (Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, n.d.). The focus is consistent with Ritenour High School's mission, which states that the school is a community of learning that is tenacious in terms of college and career readiness of all learners (Ritenour High School, n.d.). The mission and vision are relevant in this assignment since the choice of the problem and subsequent planning of the actions ought to be based on the declared school readiness, equity, and long-term development of the learners.

Data set	Measure	Population	Use in analysis
State assessment	Missouri End of Course English II proficiency	Ritenour district and subgroup dashboard reporting	Identifies overall performance and subgroup opportunity gaps in English II
Local data source	Attendance and federal reporting dashboard	Ritenour High School plus public high school reporting set	Shows access to instruction and opportunity to learn conditions

II. Analysis summary

Step 1. What parts of this data catch your attention?

A number of figures are readily noticeable. The general proficiency in English II stands at 27.6%, meaning that no more than one-third of students tested are rated proficient or advanced at the district level on the public dashboard (Ritenour School District, n.d.-b). The subgroup performance also indicates high levels of performance differences. Regarding English II proficiency on the equity dashboard, White students have 58% proficiency, Black students have 27%, Latinx students have 30%, English Learners have 14%, and students with IEPs have 7%. The attendance information is also attractive. Ritenour High School's proportional attendance fell by almost half to 44.1 in 2023 and only slightly to 49.2 in 2025 (Ritenour School District, n.d.-a). In the public high school reporting set, an average daily attendance rate of 82.71% for RHS, Husky Academy, and IWC is also indicated, in the 2024 to 2025 school year.

Key data point	Value	Why it matters
English II overall proficiency	27.6%	Schoolwide results show a significant literacy concern in a required Missouri End of Course area.
English II, White students	58%	Serves as a within-system comparison point for subgroup gaps
English II, Black students	27%	Shows a large racial opportunity gap relative to the strongest subgroup result
English II, Latinx students	30%	Indicates persistent underperformance in another major subgroup
English II, English Learners	14%	Identifies the target subgroup with one of the most urgent needs
English II, students with an IEP	7%	Signals severe access and support concerns for students with disabilities
RHS proportional attendance	49.2	Suggests that many students face reduced access to instruction
High school reporting set the average daily attendance	82.71%	Shows weaker daily attendance than a typical strong attendance target

Step 2. What do the data tell us? What do the data not tell us?

These data inform us that the problem of English II performance is not just a general schoolwide problem. Rather, the lowest results are observed in students who have the highest probability of requiring excellent language supports, differentiated literacy instruction, and consistent instructional access. The fact that the gap between White students reached 58% and English Learners reached 14% is critical, as it demonstrates an opportunity gap and that the problem of unified instruction is not one (Ritenour School District, n.d.-c). The fact that the percentage of students with an IEP has been at a very low level, namely 7 percentage points to a second major access issue is associated with the specialized support and inclusion practices. These conclusions are reinforced by attendance information, since poor attendance is likely to limit exposure to core texts, vocabulary routines, writing practice, and feedback cycles that the English II course needs (Sälzer et al., 2024).

Simultaneously, the information does not reveal all that we should be aware of. The publicly available dashboards do not replace what English II standards students were missing most of the time, what were the strongest and weakest classrooms or course sections, or what was the performance by gender (Ritenour School District, n.d.-b). The attendance dashboard indicates an average daily attendance number of a combined high school reporting set, as opposed to Ritenour High School only. Also, the dashboard indicates that the eligibility of free and reduced lunch in the set being reported is at 100%, which implies that a meaningful within-school comparison of poverty is not possible using the public source (Ritenour School District, n.d.-a). That is why the analysis can outline the patterns and probable causes, but it will never be able to replace the more in-depth review of classroom assignments, benchmark data, transcripts, and student work.

Step 3. What good news is there to celebrate?

The good news is important. First, the school already has data that higher results of the English II can be achieved in the same district setting since there are sub-groups that achieve significantly higher results than the rest of them. That is to say that the school does not have to create success out of nothing. It should research which better instructional routines and access conditions are already present and scale them. Second, proportional attendance increased from 2023 (44.1) to 2025 (49.2), indicating that the school and district have already begun to move in a more positive direction following the severe post-pandemic disruption (Ritenour School District, n.d.-a). Third, the school's mission and vision are based on solid improvement since they put college and career readiness, collaboration, and learner development at the center of school work.

Step 4. What are the problems of practice suggested by the data?

The information indicates various practice issues. The instruction in core English II does not seem to provide sufficient proficiency for the general population, and it is particularly ineffective for students who require language development and disability-responsive instruction (Ritenour School District, n.d.-c). Such a direction indicates the inconsistent application of explicit comprehension routines, development of academic vocabulary, structured dialogue, scaffolded writing about text, and checks on comprehension (Bowman-Perrott et al., 2025). The data also indicate that attendance and instructional support can not yet be considered a single coherent system. In cases of poor attendance, students fail to get the repeated exposure, repeated practice, and guided practice that literacy development involves, but the public data fails to indicate a closely coupled schoolwide reaction that links attendance, course recovery, tutoring, and English II gains.

The second issue of practice is that there is a high likelihood of limited utilization of subgroup-specific monitoring. If English Learners are 14% and students with an IEP are 7%, then the whole-group averages are obscuring students with the highest needs (Ritenour School District, n.d.-c). Teachers and leaders who respond too late and interventions that are not targeted will be the result of a lack of disaggregation on a regular basis. The third issue of practice is the fragmentation that exists in general education, English Learner services, special education, and family outreach. The trend of the performance indicates that the instructional coordination effort should be closer, instead of individual support.

Step 5. What are our key conclusions and recommendations?

The significant conclusion is that English II in Ritenour High School needs to be improved with the help of a specific opportunity gap issue that combines instruction, access, and monitoring. The statistics reveal that English Learners and students with disabilities record the poorest results, whereas the general condition of attendance is also quite poor. English II proficiency should not be a generic test preparation problem at the school. Rather, it ought to target literacy training, attendance response, and subgroup tracking as interconnected learning drivers (Sohn et al., 2023). This orientation is most appropriate to the school mission since it is college and career readiness for all the students, not just an increase in the general average.

III. Problem Identification

· Overall English II proficiency is only 27.6%, which indicates a major schoolwide literacy concern.

· A substantial race and ethnicity opportunity gap exists. English II proficiency is 58% for White students, 27% for Black students, and 30% for Latinx students.

· English Learners show a severe gap at 14% proficiency, which is 13.6 points below the schoolwide English II rate and far below the strongest subgroup result on the dashboard.

· Students with an IEP show an equally urgent gap at 7% proficiency.

· Instructional access is weak. Ritenour High School's proportional attendance is 49.2 in 2025 after falling to 44.1 in 2023, and the public high school reporting set shows average daily attendance of 82.71% in 2024 to 2025.

· The public data do not provide a gender comparison for English II, and the free and reduced lunch reporting set is listed at 100%, so those public measures do not support a meaningful within-school subgroup comparison.

IV. Potential Root Causes

The root causes related to school practices comprise ineffective integration of the academic and attendance systems, restricted use of subgroup-specific progress monitoring, and lack of coordination between English II teachers, the English Learner staff, special education staff, counselors, and family outreach staff. By examining results primarily at the aggregate level, the most pressing pattern of subgroups may be viewed as blurred out by leaders. Also indicated in the public data, attendance recovery processes are still likely to be loosely connected to course access services like tutoring, structured make-up work, or specific conferencing.

The possible underlying causes related to teacher practices are sporadic explicit teaching in comprehension skills, inadequate provision of academic vocabulary, the lack of any structured language production during the reading and discussion, and the unequal differentiation of students with disabilities (Ritenour School District, n.d.-c). The success of English II relies on the ability to read, analyze a complicated text, and write analytically. Students who skip lessons or require greater language scaffolding will not close gaps when instruction relies too heavily on independent reading or unstructured whole-class discussion.

Several possible causal factors associated with student factors are interrupted attendance, fewer opportunities to learn following the pandemic, language acquisition requirements by multilingual students, literacy needs due to disability, and economic need focus. All these do not justify low performance, yet they make up for what students require. This school improvement response should then be an integration of high expectations and the addition of stronger access structures and more purposeful instructional support.

V. State the Problem You Plan to Address

The opportunity gap that I intend to focus on is English II among English Learners in Ritenour High School. This subgroup has a recorded low 14% proficient or advanced in the dashboard of the public English II, as opposed to 27.6% overall and 58% White students (Ritenour School District, n.d.-c). I chose this problem because it is evident in the state assessment data, aligns with the school mission of making all students college- and career-ready, and is specific enough to plan targeted improvement (Ritenour High School, n.d.). Even though there is an urgent need among students with an IEP, the issue of English Learners will be given priority, as it integrates language development, literacy instruction, and access to grade-level material in a manner that can be addressed at the schoolwide and classroom levels.

VI. Evidence-Based Recommendations to Address The Problem

The first suggestion is to reinforce Tier 1 English II teaching by using explicit adolescent literacy routines in each classroom. The instructional strategies that teachers must employ include consistent instruction in comprehension strategies, teaching academic vocabulary, structured, evidence-based discussion, and short analytical writing directly related to complex texts (Sohn et al., 2023). This recommendation will deal with the underlying factors associated with the uneven literacy teaching and poor language instruction in the general classroom.

The second recommendation is to adopt a coordinated English II support model for English Learners. Those models must consist of scheduled language goals, sentence structures, discourse supports, summary routines, and routine co-planning among English II teachers and English Learner specialists (Bowman-Perrott et al., 2025). This recommendation bridges the gap between learning content and language development and minimizes the possibility that the English Learners only receive generalized remediation, but not specific scaffolding.

The third recommendation will be to establish an English II early warning and response cycle attendance. A weekly check-up ought to consist of coursework, assignments not done, and attendance patterns of the target subgroup students. Those who meet the threshold should be given quick family contact, post-mentoring or advisement, structured make-up opportunities, and access to focused tutoring aligned with the current English II standards.

The fourth recommendation is to set short-cycle progress monitoring over three to four weeks. Teachers and leaders are expected to look at the formative assessment outcomes, writing samples, attendance records, and subgroup-specific progress data to ensure that supports can be modified as soon as possible (Sälzer et al., 2024). This recommendation deals with the root cause of the delayed or poorly disaggregated monitoring and ensures the school improvement effort keeps with the evidence and not the guesswork.

Annotated Evidence-Based Resource List

Bowman-Perrott, L., Boon, R. T., Ewoldt, K. B., Burke, M. D., Eslami, Z., & Mirzaei, A. (2025). Reading Interventions to Support English Learners with Disabilities in High School: A Systematic Review. Education Sciences, 15(2), 223. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15020223

This systematic review is highly relevant because it focuses specifically on high school English Learners with disabilities, a population that closely overlaps with students who show the weakest English II outcomes on the Ritenour dashboard. The review summarizes interventions that improved reading outcomes through explicit vocabulary instruction, comprehension routines, repeated supported reading, summarization, and multi-component instructional packages. This source supports a school recommendation to strengthen Tier 1 literacy practices and to coordinate English Learner and special education supports rather than treating them as separate systems. It is especially useful for planning classroom-level scaffolding that helps students access complex texts and demonstrate understanding in writing.

Sälzer, C., Ricking, H., & Feldhaus, M. (2024). Addressing school absenteeism through monitoring: A review of evidence-based educational policies and practices. Education Sciences, 14(12), 1365. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14121365

This review is valuable because the local Ritenour data show persistent attendance issues that likely limit students’ opportunities to benefit from English II instruction. The authors argue that comprehensive, ongoing attendance monitoring is essential for preventing and reducing absenteeism, and that monitoring systems are most useful when they lead to timely intervention rather than relying solely on passive reporting. This source therefore supports a weekly English II attendance and performance review process that triggers family outreach, mentoring, tutoring, and structured make-up opportunities for students in the target subgroup. It connects the literacy problem in Part A to an access problem that the school can address through organized leadership action.

Sohn, H., Acosta, K., Brownell, M. T., Gage, N. A., Tompson, E., & Pudvah, C. (2023). A meta–analysis of interventions to improve reading comprehension outcomes for adolescents with reading difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 38(2), 85-103. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12307

This meta-analysis synthesizes intervention studies with adolescents in Grades 6 through 12 who have reading difficulties and reports an overall positive effect of reading comprehension interventions. Because English II requires students to interpret complex texts, cite evidence, and explain ideas clearly, this resource directly supports the need for explicit comprehension strategy instruction in the core classroom. The findings also help justify schoolwide use of structured discussion, guided reading of texts, and short-cycle comprehension checks, rather than relying solely on broad exposure to grade-level material. This article offers strong evidence that carefully designed literacy instruction can improve outcomes for struggling secondary readers.

References

Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. (n.d.). End-of-course. https://dese.mo.gov/quality-schools/assessment/end-course

Ritenour High School. (n.d.). Mission & vision. https://rhs.ritenourschools.org/about-us-12/mission-vision

Ritenour School District. (n.d.-a). Attendance/Federal reporting. https://www.ritenourschools.org/rsd/~board/sdz-dashboard/post/attendance

Ritenour School District. (n.d.-b). End-of-course exams. https://www.ritenourschools.org/rsd/~board/sdz-dashboard/post/end-of-course-exams

Ritenour School District. (n.d.-c). State test scores. https://www.ritenourschools.org/parents/equity-dashboard/state-test-scores