Lauderhill High School in Lauderhill, Florida (FL)



City-data.com school rating (using weighted 2010 test average as compared to other schools in Florida) from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) is 4.

4131 NW 16TH ST
Lauderhill, FL 33313

Show street view No street view available for this location
Other nearby schools ratings:
The Quest Center School (7.5 miles):

87
Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School (11.6 miles):

75
Boca Raton High School (16.0 miles):

58
Atlantic Technical Center School (6.8 miles):

40
Drop Back In School (2.0 miles):

22
Hallandale High School (11.0 miles):

14
Lauderhill High School:

4
International Of Broward School (7.9 miles):

2
Lauderhill High School rating compared to average state, county and city schools ratings:
Florida:

45
Broward County:

47
Lauderhill:

4
Lauderhill High School:

4

Review, comment, or add new information about this topic:


Discuss this school with others on our active Florida forum
Phone: (954) 731-2585 (make sure to verify first before calling)
District Number: 6
School number: 5351
School type: Senior High
District Name: BROWARD
Grade range: GRADES 9 TO 12
Fax Number (verify independently before using): (954) 731-2587
Principal: Garthion Muhammed
Regular charter school.
School in Need of Improvement (SINI) Status: Title 1 school not in need of improvement
The main educational program offered at the school: Alternative Education
Congressional District (The assigned Congressional District for the area in which the school is located.): 23
House District (The assigned Florida House of Representatives District for the area in which the school is located.): 94
Senate District: 39
School Web Address: www.yourdiplomayourway.com

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) results for school year 2009-2010



AYP 2009-2010 - Subgroup: TOTAL
Number of Students Tested in Reading: 110 (59%)
Number of Students Tested in Math: 104 (58%)

Writing Performance Percent Proficient
Here:

62%
State average from 27 schools:

59%
Writing Performance Number with Scores: 34
Performance Improved performance in Writing by 1%: No

Reading Proficiency Percent Proficient
Here:

6%
State average from 27 schools:

59%
Reading Proficiency Number with Scores: 65
Reading Growth Model - Number with Scores: 49

Math Proficiency Percent Proficient
Here:

13%
State average from 27 schools:

59%
Math Proficiency Number with Scores: 60
Math Growth Model - Number with Scores: 43
School-Wide Measures Adequate Yearly Progress AYP Status: NO

AYP 2009-2010 - Subgroup: WHITE
Number of Students Tested in Reading: 3
Number of Students Tested in Math: 2
Writing Performance Number with Scores: 1
Reading Proficiency Number with Scores: 2
Reading Growth Model - Number with Scores: 2
Math Proficiency Number with Scores: 2
Math Growth Model - Number with Scores: 2
School-Wide Measures Adequate Yearly Progress AYP Status: NO

AYP 2009-2010 - Subgroup: BLACK
Number of Students Tested in Reading: 101 (58%)
Number of Students Tested in Math: 97 (58%)
Writing Performance Number with Scores: 31
Reading Proficiency Number with Scores: 58
Reading Growth Model - Number with Scores: 45

Math Proficiency Percent Proficient
Here:

13%
State average from 27 schools:

59%
Math Proficiency Number with Scores: 55
Math Growth Model - Number with Scores: 40
School-Wide Measures Adequate Yearly Progress AYP Status: NO

AYP 2009-2010 - Subgroup: HISPANIC
Number of Students Tested in Reading: 6
Number of Students Tested in Math: 5
Writing Performance Number with Scores: 2
Reading Proficiency Number with Scores: 5
Reading Growth Model - Number with Scores: 2
Math Proficiency Number with Scores: 3
Math Growth Model - Number with Scores: 1
School-Wide Measures Adequate Yearly Progress AYP Status: NO

AYP 2009-2010 - Subgroup: ASIAN
School-Wide Measures Adequate Yearly Progress AYP Status: NO

AYP 2009-2010 - Subgroup: AMERICAN INDIAN
School-Wide Measures Adequate Yearly Progress AYP Status: NO

AYP 2009-2010 - Subgroup: ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED
Number of Students Tested in Reading: 79 (61%)
Number of Students Tested in Math: 71 (59%)
Writing Performance Number with Scores: 20

Reading Proficiency Percent Proficient
Here:

6%
State average from 27 schools:

59%
Reading Proficiency Number with Scores: 48
Reading Growth Model - Number with Scores: 36

Math Proficiency Percent Proficient
Here:

16%
State average from 27 schools:

59%
Math Proficiency Number with Scores: 43
Math Growth Model - Number with Scores: 31
School-Wide Measures Adequate Yearly Progress AYP Status: NO

AYP 2009-2010 - Subgroup: ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS
Number of Students Tested in Reading: 6
Number of Students Tested in Math: 5
Writing Performance Number with Scores: 2
Reading Proficiency Number with Scores: 4
Reading Growth Model - Number with Scores: 3
Math Proficiency Number with Scores: 3
Math Growth Model - Number with Scores: 1
School-Wide Measures Adequate Yearly Progress AYP Status: NO

AYP 2009-2010 - Subgroup: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
Number of Students Tested in Reading: 17
Number of Students Tested in Math: 16
Writing Performance Number with Scores: 3
Reading Proficiency Number with Scores: 10
Reading Growth Model - Number with Scores: 7
Math Proficiency Number with Scores: 10
Math Growth Model - Number with Scores: 5
School-Wide Measures Adequate Yearly Progress AYP Status: NO

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) results for school year 2008-2009



AYP 2008-2009 - Subgroup: TOTAL
Number of Students Tested in Reading: 126 (65%)
Number of Students Tested in Math: 119 (65%)
Writing Performance Number with Scores: 17

Reading Proficiency Percent Proficient
Here:

10%
State average from 27 schools:

59%
Reading Proficiency Number with Scores: 30
Reading Growth Model - Number with Scores: 19

Math Proficiency Percent Proficient
Here:

6%
State average from 27 schools:

59%
Math Proficiency Number with Scores: 31
Math Growth Model - Number with Scores: 18
School-Wide Measures Adequate Yearly Progress AYP Status: NO

AYP 2008-2009 - Subgroup: WHITE
Number of Students Tested in Reading: 10
Number of Students Tested in Math: 9
Writing Performance Number with Scores: 4
Reading Proficiency Number with Scores: 5
Reading Growth Model - Number with Scores: 3
Math Proficiency Number with Scores: 4
Math Growth Model - Number with Scores: 2
School-Wide Measures Adequate Yearly Progress AYP Status: NO

AYP 2008-2009 - Subgroup: BLACK
Number of Students Tested in Reading: 112 (64%)
Number of Students Tested in Math: 107 (65%)
Writing Performance Number with Scores: 10
Reading Proficiency Number with Scores: 24
Reading Growth Model - Number with Scores: 15
Math Proficiency Number with Scores: 27
Math Growth Model - Number with Scores: 16
School-Wide Measures Adequate Yearly Progress AYP Status: NO

AYP 2008-2009 - Subgroup: HISPANIC
Number of Students Tested in Reading: 3
Number of Students Tested in Math: 2
Writing Performance Number with Scores: 2
Reading Proficiency Number with Scores: 1
Reading Growth Model - Number with Scores: 1
School-Wide Measures Adequate Yearly Progress AYP Status: NO

AYP 2008-2009 - Subgroup: ASIAN
School-Wide Measures Adequate Yearly Progress AYP Status: NO

AYP 2008-2009 - Subgroup: AMERICAN INDIAN
School-Wide Measures Adequate Yearly Progress AYP Status: NO

AYP 2008-2009 - Subgroup: ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED
Number of Students Tested in Reading: 70 (66%)
Number of Students Tested in Math: 67 (66%)
Writing Performance Number with Scores: 7
Reading Proficiency Number with Scores: 8
Reading Growth Model - Number with Scores: 7
Math Proficiency Number with Scores: 7
Math Growth Model - Number with Scores: 5
School-Wide Measures Adequate Yearly Progress AYP Status: NO

AYP 2008-2009 - Subgroup: ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS
Number of Students Tested in Reading: 10
Number of Students Tested in Math: 8
Reading Proficiency Number with Scores: 2
Reading Growth Model - Number with Scores: 1
Math Proficiency Number with Scores: 1
School-Wide Measures Adequate Yearly Progress AYP Status: NO

AYP 2008-2009 - Subgroup: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
Number of Students Tested in Reading: 12
Number of Students Tested in Math: 11
Writing Performance Number with Scores: 1
Reading Proficiency Number with Scores: 2
Reading Growth Model - Number with Scores: 2
Math Proficiency Number with Scores: 2
Math Growth Model - Number with Scores: 2
School-Wide Measures Adequate Yearly Progress AYP Status: NO

Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT) 2010 - 2011 Results


2010 - 2011 FCAT Reading Grade 9 Test Results:
Mean Developmental Scale Score
Here:

1610
State average:

1922
Mean Scale Score 100-500
Here:

254
State average:

312
% in each Achievement Level 1
Here:

67%
State average:

25%
% in each Achievement Level 2
Here:

29%
State average:

30%
% in each Achievement Level 3
Here:

5%
State average:

26%
Mean Points Earned Percent in Achievement Levels 3 and Above
Here:

5%
State average:

45%
Mean Points Earned Words Phrases max 9
Here:

3
State average:

6
Mean Points Earned Main Idea Purpose max 17
Here:

8
State average:

11
Mean Points Earned Comparisons max 17
Here:

4
State average:

6
Mean Points Earned Reference Research max 2
Here:

5
State average:

7

2010 - 2011 FCAT Reading Grade 10 Test Results:
Mean Developmental Scale Score
Here:

1534
State average:

1938
Mean Scale Score 100-500
Here:

228
State average:

302
Percent Passing
Here:

13%
State average:

56%
% in each Achievement Level 1
Here:

81%
State average:

35%
% in each Achievement Level 2
Here:

15%
State average:

28%
% in each Achievement Level 3
Here:

4%
State average:

17%
Mean Points Earned Percent in Achievement Levels 3 and Above
Here:

4%
State average:

37%
Mean Points Earned Words Phrases max 9
Here:

4
State average:

5
Mean Points Earned Main Idea Purpose max 17
Here:

10
State average:

15
Mean Points Earned Comparisons max 17
Here:

4
State average:

7
Mean Points Earned Reference Research max 2
Here:

4
State average:

7

2010 - 2011 FCAT Science Grade 11 Test Results:
Mean Scale Score 100-500
Here:

244
State average:

303
% in each Achievement Level 1
Here:

68%
State average:

31%
% in each Achievement Level 2
Here:

27%
State average:

33%
% in each Achievement Level 3
Here:

5%
State average:

30%
Mean Points Earned Percent in Achievement Levels 3 and Above
Here:

5%
State average:

36%
Mean Points Earned Physical and Chemical max 14
LAUDERHILL HIGH:

5
State average:

8
Mean Points Earned Earth and Space max 12
LAUDERHILL HIGH:

5
State average:

7
Mean Points Earned Life and Environmental max 13
Here:

4
State average:

6
Mean Points Earned Scientific Thinking max 12
Here:

4
State average:

7

2010 - 2011 FCAT Math Grade 9 Test Results:
Mean Developmental Scale Score
Here:

1712
State average:

1925
Mean Scale Score 100-500
Here:

240
State average:

303
% in each Achievement Level 1
Here:

62%
State average:

17%
% in each Achievement Level 2
Here:

23%
State average:

22%
% in each Achievement Level 3
Here:

10%
State average:

31%
% in each Achievement Level 4
Here:

5%
State average:

21%
Mean Points Earned Percent in Achievement Levels 3 and Above
Here:

15%
State average:

61%
Mean Points Earned Number Sense max 12
Here:

3
State average:

5
Mean Points Earned Measurement max 8
Here:

2
State average:

4
Mean Points Earned Geometry max 7
Here:

3
State average:

6
Mean Points Earned Algebraic Thinking 6
Here:

3
State average:

6
Mean Points Earned Data Analysis 7
Here:

2
State average:

4

2010 - 2011 FCAT Math Grade 10 Test Results:
Mean Developmental Scale Score
Here:

1811
State average:

1995
Mean Scale Score 100-500
Here:

281
State average:

326
Percent Passing
Here:

42%
State average:

80%
% in each Achievement Level 1
Here:

42%
State average:

13%
% in each Achievement Level 2
Here:

40%
State average:

18%
% in each Achievement Level 3
Here:

13%
State average:

28%
% in each Achievement Level 4
Here:

5%
State average:

33%
Mean Points Earned Percent in Achievement Levels 3 and Above
Here:

18%
State average:

69%
Mean Points Earned Number Sense max 12
Here:

4
State average:

7
Mean Points Earned Measurement max 8
Here:

2
State average:

5
Mean Points Earned Geometry max 7
Here:

3
State average:

6
Mean Points Earned Algebraic Thinking 6
Here:

4
State average:

8
Mean Points Earned Data Analysis 7
Here:

3
State average:

5

2009 - 2010 FCAT Reading Grade 9 Test Results:
Mean Developmental Scale Score
Here:

1614
State average:

1907
Mean Scale Score 100-500
Here:

255
State average:

309
% in each Achievement Level 1: 75%
% in each Achievement Level 2: 15%
% in each Achievement Level 3: 5%
% in each Achievement Level 4: 3%
% in each Achievement Level 5: 2%
Mean Points Earned Percent in Achievement Levels 3 and Above: 10%
Mean Points Earned Words Phrases max 9: 4
Mean Points Earned Main Idea Purpose max 17: 9
Mean Points Earned Comparisons max 17: 4
Mean Points Earned Reference Research max 2: 3

2009 - 2010 FCAT Reading Grade 10 Test Results:
Mean Developmental Scale Score
Here:

1504
State average:

1921
Mean Scale Score 100-500
Here:

222
State average:

299
Percent Passing: 5%
% in each Achievement Level 1: 95%
% in each Achievement Level 2: 2%
% in each Achievement Level 3: 3%
Mean Points Earned Percent in Achievement Levels 3 and Above: 3%
Mean Points Earned Words Phrases max 9: 2
Mean Points Earned Main Idea Purpose max 17: 6
Mean Points Earned Comparisons max 17: 5
Mean Points Earned Reference Research max 2: 4

2009 - 2010 FCAT Science Grade 11 Test Results:
Mean Scale Score 100-500
Here:

254
State average:

299
% in each Achievement Level 1: 77%
% in each Achievement Level 2: 17%
% in each Achievement Level 3: 3%
% in each Achievement Level 4: 3%
Mean Points Earned Percent in Achievement Levels 3 and Above: 7%
Mean Points Earned Physical and Chemical max 14: 4
Mean Points Earned Earth and Space max 12: 4
Mean Points Earned Life and Environmental max 13: 5
Mean Points Earned Scientific Thinking max 12: 5

2009 - 2010 FCAT Math Grade 9 Test Results:
Mean Developmental Scale Score
LAUDERHILL HIGH:

1743
State average:

1925
Mean Scale Score 100-500
Here:

249
State average:

303
% in each Achievement Level 1: 56%
% in each Achievement Level 2: 26%
% in each Achievement Level 3: 14%
% in each Achievement Level 4: 4%
Mean Points Earned Percent in Achievement Levels 3 and Above: 19%
Mean Points Earned Number Sense max 12: 2
Mean Points Earned Measurement max 8: 2
Mean Points Earned Geometry max 7: 4
Mean Points Earned Algebraic Thinking 6: 3
Mean Points Earned Data Analysis 7: 3

2009 - 2010 FCAT Math Grade 10 Test Results:
Mean Developmental Scale Score
Here:

1747
State average:

1972
Mean Scale Score 100-500
Here:

265
State average:

321
Percent Passing: 21%
% in each Achievement Level 1: 71%
% in each Achievement Level 2: 23%
% in each Achievement Level 3: 3%
% in each Achievement Level 4: 3%
Mean Points Earned Percent in Achievement Levels 3 and Above: 6%
Mean Points Earned Number Sense max 12: 3
Mean Points Earned Measurement max 8: 2
Mean Points Earned Geometry max 7: 2
Mean Points Earned Algebraic Thinking 6: 3
Mean Points Earned Data Analysis 7: 2

Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT) 2009 - 2010 Writing Results



2009 - 2010 FCAT Writing Grade 10 Test Results:
Number of Students - Combined: 26
Mean Writing Score 100-500 - Combined
Here:

3
State average from 27 schools:

59
Percent Earning Each Score Point 2 - Combined: 4%
Percent Earning Each Score Point 2.5 - Combined: 12%
Percent Earning Each Score Point 3 - Combined: 4%
Percent Earning Each Score Point 3.5 - Combined: 38%
Percent Earning Each Score Point 4 - Combined: 15%
Percent Earning Each Score Point 4.5 - Combined: 15%
Percent Earning Each Score Point 5 - Combined: 12%
Percent 4.0 or Above - Combined: 42%

  1. All Cities
  2. Florida forum
  3. Florida
  4. Lauderhill, FL
  5. Lauderhill High School in Lauderhill, Florida (FL)


City-data.com does not guarantee the accuracy or timeliness of any information on this site.  Use at your own risk.
Website © 2024 Advameg, Inc.