This document provides a summary of research findings from a study of academic performance in Austin, Texas schools from 2014-2015 through 2017-2018. The summary includes: - Comparisons of reading and math growth for all Austin students versus state averages and by school sector (charter vs. district). - Analysis of subgroups including Black, Hispanic, low-income, ELL, special education, male and female students' growth within Austin and versus state averages. - Comparisons of charter management organization (CMO) affiliated charter schools versus independent charter schools' growth. - The study measures academic performance through analyzing student growth in learning gains over time rather than point-in-time achievement scores.

1. City Study
2021:
AUSTIN

2. Table of Contents
01 R E PO RT O V E R V IE W
• A bout T he C ity Studies P roject
• Sectors of Schools
• Research Question and A nalyses
• M easure of A cademic Performance
Student Subgroup Analysis
Summary of Findings
03 A PPE N DIX E S
• A cknowledgments
• T ypes of C harter Schools
• M ethods
• Days of Learning
• Full Set of Findings
02 R E S E A R CH
F INDING S
• Reading & M ath
Overall Austin Results
Sector Analysis
• vs. state & comparison
within A ustin
Charter Subsector Analysis
• Reading
• M ath
School-Level Performance by Sector
Research Findings Cont’d.
Black Students
• all vs. state
• vs. state by sector &
comparison within A ustin
Hispanic Students
• all vs. state
• vs. state by sector &
comparison within A ustin
Students in Poverty
• all vs. state
• vs. state by sector &
comparison within A ustin
ELL Students
• all vs. state
• vs. state by sector &
comparison within A ustin
Special Ed Students
• all vs. state
• vs. state by sector &
comparison within A ustin
Male Students
• all vs. state
• vs. state by sector &
comparison within A ustin
Female Students
• all vs. state
• vs. state by sector &
comparison within A ustin
• Reading
• M ath

3. REPORT OVERVIEW
01

4. About The City Studies Project
Cohort 1 Cohort 2
The City Studies project examines the performance of schools in select U.S. cities,
including Austin. We study the academic progress of students as the measure of school
performance.

5. O
O
C
C
C
CHARTER SCHOOLS
Public schools operated independently from the
traditional school district, with autonomy in adapting
school designs and held accountable for education
results.
C harter M anagement Organizations (CMOs)
O rganizations holding the charter and overseeing the
operation of at least three charter schools.
Independent C harter Schools
O rganizations holding the charter and overseeing the
operation of a single or two charter schools.
T here are only two independent charter schools with student
growth scores in A ustin during the span of this study; we
redact the results for this type due to the small number of the
schools.
SELECTIVE MAGNET SCHOOLS
District-run schools with focused themes and
academically selective admission.
There are only two selective magnet schools with
student growth scores in Austin during the span of this
study; we redact the results for this type due to the
small number of the schools.
OTHER DISTRICT-RUN SCHOOLS
Public schools not belonging to any of above two types.
C
Sectors of Schools
COMMUNITIES MA Y HA VE UP TO THREE S ECTORS OF S CHOOLS

6. Research Question and Analyses
IN THIS REPORT WE EXAMINE ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE IN
Austin USING DATA FROM THE SCHOOL YEARS 2014-15
THROUGH 2017-18. THERE ARE THREE LEVELS OF ANALYSIS.
Ov e rall performance in
Austin schools over three
years.
• The performance of Austin students
is benchmarked against the state
average performance, accounting for
student characteristics.
• The performance of charter school
students within Austin are then
compared to that of similar
traditional public school (district
school) students within Austin.
Pe rformance for Austin
charter schools a nd the
othe r public schools in
Austin over three years.
Performance in the 2017-
2018 school year by
school type, race,
pov erty status, English
la nguage learner (ELL)
status, special
e ducation status a nd
ge nder.
WE MAKE TWO SETS
OF COMPARISONS.
01 02 03

7. Achievement scores capture what a student knows at a point
in time. They are influenced by students’ prior conditions in
addition to schools’ contributions.
Growth scores indicate how much progress a student makes
from one year to the next. Growth scores allow us to zero in
on the contributions of schools separately from other factors
that affect point-in-time scores.
ACHIEVEMENT VS. GROWTH
We analyze student growth in standard deviation units so
that the results can be assessed for statistical differences.
The full set of findings appear in the Appendix.
In the following graphs of findings, we transform growth
from standard deviation units into days of learning based on
a typical 180-day school year.
IN THIS STUDY WE MEASURE
ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE AS HOW
MUCH GROWTH STUDENTS MAKE FROM
ONE YEAR TO THE NEXT
Measure of Academic Performance

8. RESEARCH FINDINGS
02

9. -25
0
25
50
75
100
SY 2015-2016 SY 2016-2017 SY 2017-2018
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Overall Austin Results
> Reading & Math
Average One-Year Learning Gains for All Austin
Students Compared to the State Average Learning
Gains, by Year and Subject

10. -25
0
25
50
75
100
SY 2015-2016 SY 2016-2017 SY 2017-2018
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains in Reading for Students in Austin
Charter Schools and Austin District Schools Compared
to the State Average Learning Gains, by Year
significantly different at p< 0.05
charter
Research Findings > Sector Analysis
> Reading
VS. STATE & COMPARISON WITHIN AUSTIN
charter district
Reading
Charter vs. District
Tests of Differences
'15-'16 '16-'17 '17-'18

11. -25
0
25
50
75
100
SY 2015-2016 SY 2016-2017 SY 2017-2018
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains in Math for Students in Austin Charter
Schools and Austin District Schools Compared to the
State Average Learning Gains, by Year
significantly different at p< 0.05
charter district
Research Findings > Sector Analysis
> Math
VS. STATE & COMPARISON WITHIN AUSTIN
Math
Charter vs. District
Tests of Differences
'15-'16 '16-'17 '17-'18

12. -25
0
25
50
75
100
CMO Charter Schools Independent Charter Schools
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Relative Learning Gains for Students in Austin CMO-
Affiliated Charter Schools and Independent Austin
Charter Schools Compared to the State Average
Learning Gains, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Charter Subsector Analysis
> vs. state & comparison within Austin
Reading
CMOs vs Independent Charter Schools
Math
CMOs vs Independent Charter Schools
sig
Tests of Differences

13. -900 -800 -700 -600 -500 -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400
Growth (in Daysof Learning)
Charter
District
Research Findings > School-Level Performance by Sector
> Reading

14. -900 -800 -700 -600 -500 -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400
Growth (in Daysof Learning)
Charter
District
Research Findings > School-Level Performance by Sector
>Math

15. -25
0
25
50
75
100
Austin Black Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for All Austin Black Students
Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Black
Students Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Black Students
ALL VS. STATE

16. -25
0
25
50
75
100
Austin Charter
Black Students
Austin District
Black Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for Black Students in Austin Charter
Schools and Black Students in Austin District Schools
Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Black
Students Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Black Students
VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN AUSTIN
Reading
Charter Black vs. District Black
Math
Charter Black vs. District Black
Tests of Differences
sig

17. -25
0
25
50
75
100
Austin Hispanic Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for All Austin Hispanic Students
Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Hispanic
Students Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Hispanic Students
ALL VS. STATE

18. -25
0
25
50
75
100
Austin Charter
Hispanic Students
Austin District
Hispanic Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for Hispanic Students in Austin Charter
Schools and Hispanic Students in Austin District Schools
Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Hispanic
Students Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Hispanic Students
VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN AUSTIN
Reading
Charter Hispanic vs. District Hispanic
Math
Charter Hispanic vs. District Hispanic
Tests of Differences
sig

19. -25
0
25
50
75
100
Austin Students in Poverty
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for All Austin Students in Poverty
Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Students
in Poverty Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Students in Poverty
ALL VS. STATE

20. -25
0
25
50
75
100
Austin Charter
Students in Poverty
Austin District
Students in Poverty
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for Austin Charter School Students in
Poverty and Austin District School Students in Poverty
Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Students in
Poverty Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Students in Poverty
VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN AUSTIN
Reading
Charter Poverty vs. District Poverty
Math
Charter Poverty vs. District Poverty
Tests of Differences
sig

21. -25
0
25
50
75
100
Austin ELL Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for All ELL Students in Austin
Compared to the Average Learning Gains of ELL
Students Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> ELL Students
ALL VS. STATE

22. -25
0
25
50
75
100
Austin Charter
ELL Students
Austin District
ELL Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for ELL Students in Austin Charter
Schools and ELL Students in Austin District Schools
Compared to the Average Learning Gains of ELL
Students Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> ELL Students
VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN AUSTIN
§ Redacted to comply with the state’s suppression rule of small sample size.
Reading
Charter ELL vs. District ELL
Math
Charter ELL vs. District ELL
Tests of Differences
sig

23. -25
0
25
50
75
100
Austin Special Ed Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for All Austin Students in Special
Education Compared to the Average Learning Gains of
Students in Special Education Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Special Ed Students
ALL VS. STATE

24. -25
0
25
50
75
100
Austin Charter
Students in Special Ed.
Austin District
Students in Special Ed.
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for Austin Charter School Students in
Special Ed. and Austin District School Students in
Special Ed. Compared to the Average Learning Gains
of Students in Special Ed. Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Special Ed Students
VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN AUSTIN
Reading
Charter Sped vs. District Sped
Math
Charter Sped vs. District Sped
Tests of Differences
sig

25. -25
0
25
50
75
100
Austin Male Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for All Austin Male Students
Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Male
Students Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Male Students
ALL VS. STATE

26. -25
0
25
50
75
100
Austin Charter
Male Students
Austin District
Male Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for Male Students in Austin Charter
Schools and Male Students in Austin District Schools
Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Male
Students Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Male Students
VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN AUSTIN
Reading
Charter Male vs. District Male
Math
Charter Male vs. District Male
Tests of Differences
sig
Reading
Charter Male vs. District Male
Math
Charter Male vs. District Male
Tests of Differences
sig

27. -25
0
25
50
75
100
Austin Female Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for All Austin Female Students
Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Female
Students Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Female Students
ALL VS. STATE

28. -25
0
25
50
75
100
Austin Charter
Female Students
Austin District
Female Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for Female Students in Austin Charter
Schools and Female Students in Austin District Schools
Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Female
Students Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Female Students
VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN AUSTIN
Reading
Charter Female vs. District Female
Math
Charter Female vs. District Female
Tests of Differences
sig

29. Summary of Findings
The summary of the findings from the analysis of Austin schools is presented here.

30. APPENDIXES
03

31. Acknowledgments
Texas Education Agency, Texas Schools Project, and Texas Higher
Education Advisory Board provided supports in the acquisition of student-level
data.
Disclaimer: The conclusions of this research do not necessarily reflect the opinions or official
position of the Texas Education Agency, the Texas Highe r Education Coordinating Board, the Texas
Workforce Commission or the State of Texas.

32. Types of Charter Schools
• With more schools and students than a single charter
school, CMOs have some operational advantages in their
ability to spread administrative fixed costs, thus
providing the possibility of greater efficiency. In
addition, CMOs may be able to support additional
programs and more robust staffing.
• Whether CMOs lead to better student outcomes is a
matter of interest across the country.
• There are only two independent charter schools with
student growth scores in Austin during the span of this
study; we redact the results for this type due to the
small number of the schools.
OUR ANALYSES OF AUSTIN CHARTER
SCHOOLS INCLUDE A BREAKOUT OF
CMOS AND INDEPENDENT CHARTERS.
There are two types
of charter schools.
CHA RTER MA NA GEMENT ORGA NIZA TIONS (CMOS)
O rga ni zati ons hol ding the c ha rte r and o verseei ng t he
o p e ra tio n o f a t l e ast t hree charter scho ols .
INDEP ENDENT CHA RTER SCHOOLS
O rga ni zati on ho ldi ng the cha rte r and o verseei ng t he
o pe rati on o f a single charte r schoo l . It may run t he scho ol
d irectl y o r co nt ract wit h a n orga nizati on which p rov ides
s e rvices t o o ne o r t wo c ha rt er schoo ls.

33. Methods
The annual academic growth of students in Austin from
2014-15 to 2017-18, overall and by sector, is benchmarked to
the state average growth, accounting for student
characteristics.
We also explore how one-year growth of Austin students for
the period ending in Spring 2018 differs by school type, race,
poverty status, English language learner status, special
education status, and gender.

34. Days of Learning
While these tools create precise and reliable answers,
they are presented in technical terms that are not
user-friendly to a general audience. To translate the
technical results into terms that are accessible to non-
technical audiences, CREDO developed Days of
Learning.
CREDO USES ADVANCED
TECHNOLOGY AND
SOPHISTICATED STATISTICAL
TOOLS TO MEASURE STUDENTS,
SCHOOLS AND THE EDUCATION
LANDSCAPE.
Think about the students in your state’s public schools. For many of their years
of schooling, they take achievement tests to measure what they know at the end of
the school year. We can identify the average score for each test each year.
Imagine a student who scores exactly at the average in one year, say 4th
grade, and then in the following year, scores exactly at the average again on the 5th-
grade test. The amount of year-to-year learning for that student show us what the
average learning is for all the students who took both tests.
We do that calculation for every grade the state tests: 4th to 5th, 5th to 6th,
and so on.
CREDO uses those annual measures of average learning to represent a typical
year of learning, and equates that to a typical 180-day school year. We say that the
student in our example has gained 180 days of learning.
If a stude nt makes more progress than the average stude nt, we take the
amount of extra achievement and translate it into 180-days of learning plus “X” extra
days. We are creating a measure of student learning as if the student went to school
for 180 days plus X days. The size of “X” depends on how much more the student
learns than the average student — if it’s a lot more, then “X” will be a large number,
and if it’s a small amount more, “X” will be a small number.
The same is true for students who do not learn as much as the average
student. Instead of adding to the 180-days-of-learning average, we subtract from
that base to reflect the smaller-than-average advances that those students realize. In
these cases, the difference leads to numbers such a “165 days of learning” or “152
days of learning”. Against the average standard of 180 days, these smaller days show
that students learned as if they had only attended school for 180 days minus X days
during the school year.
01
02
03
04
05
06
3rd
Grade
4th
Grade
= 180
days
More than 180
days
Less than 180
days
Student
A
Student
A

35. Overall Austin Results
S i g ni fi c ant a t p < 0 .0 5 *
S i g ni fi c ant a t p < 0 .0 1 **
R E A D ING M A T H
St a n d a rd
D e v i a t i on
D a y s o f
L e a rn i n g
St a n d a rd
D e v i a t i on
D a y s o f
L e a rn i n g
A u s t i n O v e r a l l 2 0 1 5 - 1 6 0.04** 20** -0.01 -7
A u s t i n O v e r a l l 2 0 1 6 - 1 7 0.11** 64** 0.07** 39**
A u s t i n O v e r a l l 2 0 1 7 - 1 8 0.04** 25** 0.04** 25**

36. Austin School Sectors Compared
to State Average
S i g ni fi c ant a t p < 0 .0 5 *
S i g ni fi c ant a t p < 0 .0 1 **
R E A D ING M A T H
St a n d a rd
D e v i a t i on
D a y s o f
L e a rn i n g
St a n d a rd
D e v i a t i on
D a y s o f
L e a rn i n g
C h a r t e r S c h o o l s 2 0 1 5 - 1 6 0.04* 23* -0.02 -15
C h a r t e r S c h o o l s 2 0 1 6 - 1 7 0.09** 50** 0.08* 44*
C h a r t e r S c h o o l s 2 0 1 7 - 1 8 0.08** 47** 0.07** 41**
D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 5 - 1 6 0.03** 18** -0.01 -6
D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 6 - 1 7 0.11** 64** 0.07** 39**
D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 7 - 1 8 0.03** 18** 0.04* 23*

37. Comparison of School Sectors within Austin
S i g ni fi c ant a t p < 0 .0 5 *
S i g ni fi c ant a t p < 0 .0 1 **
R E A D ING M A T H
St a n d a rd
D e v i a t i on
D a y s o f
L e a rn i n g
St a n d a rd
D e v i a t i on
D a y s o f
L e a rn i n g
C h a r t e r S c h o o l s v s . D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 5 - 1 6 0.01 4 -0.02 -9
C h a r t e r S c h o o l s v s . D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 6 - 1 7 -0.03 -15 0.01 4
C h a r t e r S c h o o l s v s . D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 7 - 1 8 0.05** 28** 0.03 17

38. Charter Subsector Analysis
S i g ni fi c ant a t p < 0 .0 5 *
S i g ni fi c ant a t p < 0 .0 1 **
R E A D ING M A T H
St a n d a rd
D e v i a t i on
D a y s o f
L e a rn i n g
St a n d a rd
D e v i a t i on
D a y s o f
L e a rn i n g
A u s t i n C M O s v s . S t a t e A v e r a g e 0.09** 51** 0.09** 50**
A u s t i n I n d e p e n d e n t C h a r t e r s v s . S t a t e A v e r a g e 0.06* 33* 0.02 10
A u s t i n C M O s v s . A u s t i n I n d e p e n d e n t C h a r t e r s 0.03 18 0.07 40

39. Student Subgroup Analysis> Black Students
S i g ni fi c ant a t p < 0 .0 5 *
S i g ni fi c ant a t p < 0 .0 1 **
R E A D ING M A T H
St a n d a rd
D e v i a t i on
D a y s o f
L e a rn i n g
St a n d a rd
D e v i a t i on
D a y s o f
L e a rn i n g
Compared with Statewide Average of Black Students
A u s t i n B l a c k S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l -0.01 -6 0.02 12
A u s t i n C h a r t e r S c h o o l B l a c k S t u d e n t s 0.06* 35* 0.11** 62**
A u s t i n D i s t r i c t S c h o o l B l a c k S t u d e n t s -0.03* -16* 0.00 1
Compared with Black Students in District Schools in
Austin
A u s t i n C h a r t e r S c h o o l B l a c k S t u d e n t s 0.09** 51** 0.10* 60*

40. Student Subgroup Analysis> Hispanic Students
S i g ni fi c ant a t p < 0 .0 5 *
S i g ni fi c ant a t p < 0 .0 1 **
R E A D ING M A T H
St a n d a rd
D e v i a t i on
D a y s o f
L e a rn i n g
St a n d a rd
D e v i a t i on
D a y s o f
L e a rn i n g
Compared with Statewide Average of Hispanic Students
A u s t i n H i s p a n i c S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l 0.01 6 0.01 3
A u s t i n C h a r t e r S c h o o l H i s p a n i c S t u d e n t s 0.10** 56** 0.06* 37*
A u s t i n D i s t r i c t S c h o o l H i s p a n i c S t u d e n t s -0.02 -10 -0.01 -6
Compared with Hispanic Students in District Schools in
Austin
A u s t i n C h a r t e r S c h o o l H i s p a n i c S t u d e n t s 0.11** 65** 0.07* 43*

41. Student Subgroup Analysis> Students in Poverty
S i g ni fi c ant a t p < 0 .0 5 *
S i g ni fi c ant a t p < 0 .0 1 **
R E A D ING M A T H
St a n d a rd
D e v i a t i on
D a y s o f
L e a rn i n g
St a n d a rd
D e v i a t i on
D a y s o f
L e a rn i n g
Compared with Statewide Average of Students in Poverty
A u s t i n S t u d e n t s i n P o v e r t y O v e r a l l 0.01 2 0.01 4
A u s t i n C h a r t e r S c h o o l S t u d e n t s i n P o v e r t y 0.11** 62** 0.09** 50**
A u s t i n D i s t r i c t S c h o o l S t u d e n t s i n P o v e r t y -0.03** -16** -0.01 -8
Compared with Students in Poverty in District Schools in
Austin
A u s t i n C h a r t e r S c h o o l S t u d e n t s i n P o v e r t y 0.13** 78** 0.10** 57**

42. Student Subgroup Analysis> ELL Students
S i g ni fi c ant a t p < 0 .0 5 *
S i g ni fi c ant a t p < 0 .0 1 **
R E A D ING M A T H
St a n d a rd
D e v i a t i on
D a y s o f
L e a rn i n g
St a n d a rd
D e v i a t i on
D a y s o f
L e a rn i n g
Compared with Statewide Average of ELL Students
A u s t i n E L L S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l 0.01 7 0.01 7
A u s t i n C h a r t e r S c h o o l E L L S t u d e n t s 0.08** 44** 0.07** 39**
A u s t i n D i s t r i c t S c h o o l E L L S t u d e n t s -0.01 -5 0.00 -3
Compared with ELL Students in District Schools in
Austin
A u s t i n C h a r t e r S c h o o l E L L S t u d e n t s 0.08** 48** 0.07* 41*

43. Student Subgroup Analysis> Special Ed Students
S i g ni fi c ant a t p < 0 .0 5 *
S i g ni fi c ant a t p < 0 .0 1 **
R E A D ING M A T H
St a n d a rd
D e v i a t i on
D a y s o f
L e a rn i n g
St a n d a rd
D e v i a t i on
D a y s o f
L e a rn i n g
Compared with Statewide Average of Special Ed Students
A u s t i n S p e c i a l E d S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l 0.04** 24** 0.06* 32*
A u s t i n C h a r t e r S c h o o l S p e c i a l E d S t u d e n t s 0.11* 67* 0.14* 79*
A u s t i n D i s t r i c t S c h o o l S p e c i a l E d S t u d e n t s 0.03* 18* 0.05* 27*
Compared with Special Ed Students in District Schools in
Austin
A u s t i n C h a r t e r S c h o o l S p e c i a l E d S t u d e n t s 0.08 48 0.09 52

44. Student Subgroup Analysis> Male Students
S i g ni fi c ant a t p < 0 .0 5 *
S i g ni fi c ant a t p < 0 .0 1 **
R E A D ING M A T H
St a n d a rd
D e v i a t i on
D a y s o f
L e a rn i n g
St a n d a rd
D e v i a t i on
D a y s o f
L e a rn i n g
Compared with Statewide Average of Male Students
A u s t i n M a l e S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l 0.05** 30** 0.06** 33**
A u s t i n C h a r t e r S c h o o l M a l e S t u d e n t s 0.10** 59** 0.08** 45**
A u s t i n D i s t r i c t S c h o o l M a l e S t u d e n t s 0.04** 23** 0.05** 31**
Compared with Male Students in District Schools in
Austin
A u s t i n C h a r t e r S c h o o l M a l e S t u d e n t s 0.06** 35** 0.02 14

45. Student Subgroup Analysis> Female Students
S i g ni fi c ant a t p < 0 .0 5 *
S i g ni fi c ant a t p < 0 .0 1 **
R E A D ING M A T H
St a n d a rd
D e v i a t i on
D a y s o f
L e a rn i n g
St a n d a rd
D e v i a t i on
D a y s o f
L e a rn i n g
Compared with Statewide Average of Female Students
A u s t i n F e m a l e S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l 0.04** 21** 0.03 18
A u s t i n C h a r t e r S c h o o l F e m a l e S t u d e n t s 0.06** 36** 0.06* 37*
A u s t i n D i s t r i c t S c h o o l F e m a l e S t u d e n t s 0.03* 14* 0.03 15
Compared with Female Students in District Schools in
Austin
A u s t i n C h a r t e r S c h o o l F e m a l e S t u d e n t s 0.04 21 0.04 21

46. THANK YOU