Annual Report
Management and Educational Success Agreement
2013-2014
School Name:
Division:
Gerald McShane School
1
2
School Principal: Christina Chilelli
Insert School Logo Here
Performance Grid
The performance grid below is used to self-evaluate your current situation with regards to the
attainment of your MESA objectives. The self-evaluation is done with respect to the following
scales:
SATISFACTORY: The results obtained are in line or closely in line with the target. The target
has been attained or maintained. “Satisfactory” means that a school may have reached their target,
but are still looking to improve their results.
MONITORED: The results obtained are slightly below the target. However, certain factors can
explain the gap between the target and the results. “Monitored” can also mean that results are
currently unavailable and that a school is tracking its results.
CRITICAL: The results obtained are drastically below the target and may require adjustments to
the strategy in order to progress towards meeting the target.
*************************
MELS/EMSB GOALS:
1

Increase the percentage of students who obtain certification and qualification before the
age of 20

Improve the Mastery of French and English (Reading and Writing)

Improve student retention and success of certain target groups, particularly students with
handicaps, social maladjustments or learning disabilities

Promote a healthy and safe environment through violence prevention

Increase the number of students under the age of 20 in Vocational Training
MELS/EMSB GOALS AND SCHOOL OBJECTIVES
MELS Goal 1: Increase the percentage of students who obtain certification and
qualification before the age of 20
Considering the target set by EMSB on the percentage of students who obtain certification
and qualification before the age of 20 by 2014, as well as the target set in your MESA,
how do you evaluate your current situation?
School Objective 1 : (Increase Math success rate of cycles 1 and 2 on EOC examsCompetency 2: Mathematical Reasoning)
Year: 2012-2013
Year: 2013-2014
Year: 2014-2015
Results:
Results:
Results:
Cycle 1
Cycle 1
Cycle 1
Result:82.1%
Target: 96.4%
Target: 97.9%
Result: 92.9%
Result: 84%
Cycle 2
Result:92.3%
Cycle 2
Cycle 2
Target: 60%
Target: 51.7%
Result: 46.7%
Result: 53.8%
Evaluation of Objective 1:
Satisfactory
Monitored
Critical
Comment:
Cycle 1 Comp. 2 Monitored
Cycle 2 Comp. 2 Monitored
OVERALL EVALUATION OF GOAL 1:
Global evaluation of Goal 1:
Satisfactory
Monitored
Critical
Were the strategies listed in your MESA for attaining the objectives implemented as
planned?
Yes
No
(explain)
Partially
(explain)
Comment :
Monitored not critical since it is only one EOC exam. There are many possible
explanations such as a difficult exam and the ability of the cohort.
Analysis within competency 2: two skills are being evaluated (problem solving and
mathematical reasoning). Our struggle lies in transferring the knowledge learned in
different contexts.
If necessary, list objectives and/or strategies to be: (1) modified (2) discontinued and/or
(3) added.
Suggestions for Math:
For cycle 1, 2, 3 dedicate specific topics for each grade level in that all topics will be
covered over a 2 year cycle
Meeting with other immersion school cycle 2 teachers and consultants to determine
common strategies
Curriculum mapping
***Consistency with the type of assistance given during class and end of cycle exams-follow
board guidelines***
2
MELS Goal 2: Improve the Mastery of French (Reading and Writing)
Considering the objective set by EMSB, which is in line with the MELS goal to improve
the mastery of French, as well as the target set in your MESA, how do you evaluate your
current situation?
School Objective 1: To improve reading skills (success rates in EOC exams) of cycle
1 students
Year: 2012-2013
Year: 2013-2014
Year: 2014-2015
Target: 92.9%
Target: 94.3%
Result: 89.3%
Result: 89.3 %
Result: 56%
Evaluation of Objective 1:
Satisfactory
Monitored
Critical
Comment: In looking at the 2013-2014 results, there are unanswered questions that need
to be addressed such as: the level of difficulty of the exam and the ability of the cohort.
School Objective 2 :To improve the French written skills(Success rate of EOC exams)
of cycle 1, cycle 2 and 3 students
Year: 2012-2013
Year: 2013-2014
Year: 2014-2015
Cycle 1
Cycle 1
Cycle 1
Result:100 %
Result: NA
Result: NA
Cycle 2
Result: 85.3%
Cycle 2
Target: 96.8%
Result: 93.5%
Cycle 2
Target: 98.5%
Result: 96.2%
Cycle 3
Result: 89.2%
Cycle 3
Target: 100%
Result: 100%
Cycle 3
Target: 100%
Result: 95.1%
Evaluation of Objective 2:
Satisfactory
Monitored
Critical
Comment:
Cycle 1, 2 and 3 continue with implemented strategies.
OVERALL EVALUATION OF GOAL 2:
Global evaluation of Goal 2:
Satisfactory
Monitored
Critical
Were the strategies listed in your MESA for attaining the objectives implemented as
planned?
No
(explain)
Partially
(explain)
Yes
Comment :
If necessary, list objectives and/or strategies to be: (1) modified (2) discontinued and/or
(3) added.
3
MELS Goal 2 : Improve the Mastery of English (Reading and Writing)
Considering the objective set by EMSB, which is in line with the MELS goal to improve
the mastery of English, as well as the target set in your MESA, how do you evaluate your
current situation?
School Objective 1: To improve English reading skills of cycle 2 and cycle 3 students
Year: 2012-2013
Cycle 2
Result: 67.5%
Year: 2013-2014
Cycle 2 (Cohort A)
Target: 73.3
Result: 60%
Year: 2014-2015
Cycle 2
Target: 65%
Result: 84.6%
Cycle 3
Result: 75.7%
Cycle 3
Target: 88.9%
Result: 80.6%
Cycle 3
Target: 85.6%
Result: 61.9%
Evaluation of Objective 1:
Satisfactory
Monitored
Critical
Comment:
Cycle 2 Comp. 2 Satisfactory
Cycle 3 Comp. 2 Monitored
School Objective 2 :To improve the written English Skills of cycle 2 and cycle 3 students
Year: 2012-2013
Cycle 2
Result: 100%
Year: 2013-2014
Cycle 2
Target: 100%
Result: 100%
Year: 2014-2015
Cycle 2
Target: 100%
Result: 96.2%
Cycle 3
Result: 91.9%
Cycle 3
Target: 96.9%
Result: 88.9%
Cycle 3
Target: 94.9%
Result: 92.9%
Evaluation of Objective 2:
Satisfactory
Monitored
Critical
Comment: Cycle 2 and 3 will focus on maintaining proficiency rate in writing given that
success rate is high.
OVERALL EVALUATION OF GOAL 2:
Global evaluation of Goal 2:
Satisfactory
Monitored
Critical
Were the strategies listed in your MESA for attaining the objectives implemented as
planned?
Yes
No
(explain)
Partially
(explain)
Comment :
If necessary, list objectives and/or strategies to be: (1) modified (2) discontinued and/or
(3) added.
4
MELS Goal 3: Improve student retention and success of certain target groups,
particularly students with handicaps, social maladjustments or learning disabilities
Considering the target set by EMSB on the percentage of students with handicaps, social
maladjustments or learning disabilities who obtain certification and qualification by 2014,
as well as the target set in your MESA, how do you evaluate your current situation?
School Objective 1 : Increase English, French and Math success rate of students
identified as having learning and/or behavioral difficulties or as having an IEP
Year: 2012-2013
Year: 2013-2014
Year: 2014-2015
Math Cycle 1
Math Cycle 1
Math Cycle 1
Sit. Prob.: 100%
Sit. Prob.: 42.9%
Sit. Prob.: 0%
Reasoning: 50%
Reasoning: 71.4%
Reasoning: 100%
Math Cycle 2
Sit. Prob.:100%
Reasoning: 87.5%
Math Cycle 2
Sit. Prob.: 60%
Reasoning: 10%
Math Cycle 2
Sit. Prob.: NA
Reasoning: 25%
Math Cycle 3
Sit. Prob.: 100%
Reasoning: 50%
Math Cycle 3
Sit. Prob.: 100%
Reasoning: No IEPs
Math Cycle 3
Sit. Prob.: NA
Reasoning: 0%
French Cycle 1
Reading: 25%
Writing: 100%
French Cycle 1
Reading: 66.7%
Writing: NA
French Cycle 1
Reading: 100%
Writing: NA
French Cycle 2
Reading: NA
Writing: NA
French Cycle 2
Reading: 100%
Writing: 77.8 %
French Cycle 2
Reading: 25%
Writing: 75%
French Cycle 3
Reading: 85.7%
Writing: 85.7%
French Cycle 3
Reading: 68.4%
Writing: 80.6%
French Cycle 3
Reading: 44.4%
Writing: 66.7%
English Cycle 2
Reading: 75%
Writing: 100%
English Cycle 2
Reading: 22.2%
Writing: 100%
English Cycle 2
Reading: 50%
Writing: 100%
English Cycle 3
Reading: 57.1%
Writing: 100%
English Cycle 3
Reading: 72.7%
Writing: 63.6 %
English Cycle 3
Reading: 11.1%
Writing: 66.7%
Evaluation of Objective 1:
Satisfactory
Monitored
Critical
Comment: Given the nature and number of students on IEPs, we will continue to
monitor this small cohort.
OVERALL EVALUATION OF GOAL 3:
Global evaluation of Goal 3:
Satisfactory
Monitored
Critical
Were the strategies listed in your MESA for attaining the objectives implemented as
planned?
Yes
No
(explain)
Partially
(explain)
Comment: Possibility for decrease in success rate is that the school board guidelines for
support during exams are being followed.
5
If necessary, list objectives and/or strategies to be: (1) modified (2) discontinued and/or
(3) added.
MELS Goal 4: To promote a healthy and safe environment through violence
prevention
Considering the targets set by EMSB, by 2014, to reduce the percentage of elementary
and high school students who are victims of bullying and to increase students’ sentiment
of school safety, as well as the target set in your MESA, how do you evaluate your current
situation?
School Objective 1 : Increase % of students who feel safe in school
Year: 2012-2013
Year: 2013-2014
Year: 2014-2015
Grade 4: 97%
Grade 4: NE
Grade 4: 67%
Grade 5: 76%
Grade 5: 74%
Grade 5: 62%
Grade 6: 91%
Grade 6: 89%
Grade 6: 54%
Evaluation of Objective 1:
Satisfactory
Monitored
Critical
Comment: These results reflect how safe students feel at school as well as going to and
from school.
OVERALL EVALUATION OF GOAL 4:
Global evaluation of Goal 4:
Satisfactory
Monitored
Critical
Were the strategies listed in your MESA for attaining the objectives implemented as
planned?
Yes
No
(explain)
Partially
(explain)
Comment:
If necessary, list objectives and/or strategies to be: (1) modified (2) discontinued and/or
(3) added.
MELS Goal 5: To increase the number of students under the age of 20 in vocational
training
Considering the target set by EMSB on the percentage of students who obtain certification
and qualification in vocational training before the age of 20 by 2014, as well as the target
set in your MESA, how do you evaluate your current situation?
School Objective 1:To increase opportunities for Guidance Oriented Approach to
Learning
Year: 2012-2013
Year: 2013-2014
Year: 2014-2015
Result: NA
Evaluation of Objective 1:
6
Target: Maintain number of
GOAL experiences for
students
Satisfactory
Target: Maintain number of
GOAL experiences for
students
Monitored
Critical
Comment: Use calendar of events to monitor number of opportunities in regards to
GOAL
OVERALL EVALUATION OF GOAL 5:
Global evaluation of Goal 5:
Satisfactory
Monitored
Critical
Were the strategies listed in your MESA for attaining the objectives implemented as
planned?
Yes
No
(explain)
Partially
(explain)
Comment:
MESA ANNUAL REPORT ANALYSIS
Goal 1
What worked and did not work:
Objective 1
Comment: Monitored not critical since it is only one EOC exam. There are many possible
explanations such as a difficult exam and the ability of the cohort.
Analysis within competency 2: two skills are being evaluated (problem solving and mathematical
reasoning). Our struggle lies in transferring the knowledge learned in different contexts.
What lies ahead:

For cycle 1, 2, 3 dedicate specific topics for each grade level in that all topics will be covered
over a 2 year cycle.

Meeting with other immersion school cycle 2 teachers and consultants to determine
common strategies.

Curriculum mapping

2015-2016 we will continue to monitor our current strategies and goals, and tracking
results bi-yearly.
***Consistency with the type of assistance given during in class and end of cycle exams-follow board
guidelines***
Goal 3
What worked and did not work:
Objective 1
 Given the nature and number of students on IEPs, we will continue to monitor this small
cohort.

7
Possibility for decrease in success rate is that the school board guidelines for support
during exams are being followed.
Goal 4
What worked and did not work:
Objective 1
 Positive response to activities/events and speakers. Difficulty in quantifying
effectiveness.
 TTFM survey is the only tool used to determine effectiveness.
What lies ahead:
 Create an additional feedback tool that tracks behaviors and consequences in order to
quantify impact of strategies put in place.
Goal 5
What worked and did not work:
Objective 1
 Events/speakers and activities were well received and were appropriate.
What lies ahead:

Assessment of the quality and effectiveness of programs/speakers/events organized for
students.
MECANISMS OF MONITORING
AND IMPLEMENTATION
Has a school/centre success team been created to guide and monitor your school’s MESA?
No
Yes
Comment: MESA is worked on by a small committee composed of staff members.
Are data and monitoring tools available or being developed to support your school’s
MESA?
Yes
No
Partially
Comment:
Please provide a general overview of the MESA implementation process (successes and
challenges encountered).
Comment:
8
Date of submission of your MESA Annual Report to your Governing Board for
approval:
Date of presentation of your MESA Annual Report to your stakeholders posted on
school website:
Date of submission of your MESA Annual Report to the EMSB:
Signature of the Principal
Signature of Governing Board Chair
Signature of Sector Director
Signature of the Deputy Director General
Signature of the Director General
Date:
Date:
Date:
Date:
Date:
Please attach any additional supporting documents
9