presentation to the board of education on 2012-2013 standardized assessment results michael emmett,...

1

Presentation to the Board of Education on 2012-2013 Standardized Assessment Results

Michael Emmett, Superintendent

Timothy Howes, Assistant Superintendent of Human Resources & Finance

Sally Dastoli, Director of Curriculum & Instruction

Keith Rafaniello, Director of Technology

Emily Daigle, Director of Special Education

Darla Miner, Instructional Supervisor for Literacy

Wethersfield Public Schools

September 24, 2013

2

Overview Binder Organization

◦Types of Reports ◦How to Read Reports

Data Highlights ◦Strengths◦Focus Areas ◦What has contributed to our success? ◦Action Plan 2013-15

Overview of Presentation

CMT State-Wide Results Student performance data on the

CMT show decreases in all grades and content areas as compared to last year.

3

2012-13 CMT State Performance Grade Year Math

Percent At/Above Goal

ReadingPercent At/Above Goal

Writing Percent At/Above Goal

Science Percent At/Above Goal

3 2012 66.8 59.2 62.7  3 2013 61.6 56.9 60.0  Change   -5.2 -2.3 -2.7  4 2012 68.2 64.1 65.3  4 2013 65.4 62.7 63.1  Change   -2.8 -1.4 -2.2  5 2012 71.8 67.7 68.1 64.1 5 2013 69.4 66.9 65.6 62.5 Change   -2.4 -0.8 -2.5 -1.66 2012 69.5 74.2 67.5  6 2013 67.2 73.3 65.2  Change   -2.3 -0.9 -2.3  

4

2012-13 CMT State Performance

Grade Year MathPercent At/Above Goal

ReadingPercent At/Above Goal

Writing Percent At/Above Goal

Science Percent At/Above Goal

7 2012 68.3 79.9 65.6  7 2013 65.7 78.9 65.0  

Change   -2.6 -1.0 -0.6  

8 2012 67.4 76.8 68.4 62.1 8 2013 65.2 76.3 67.3 60.6

Change   -2.2 -0.5 -1.1 -1.5

5

*Excerpt from 2013 CAPT Results Show Increases and CMT Results Show Decreases

CAPT State-Wide Results The state-wide results of the

2013 CAPT were generally positive. Performance increased slightly in mathematics, science and reading, but decreased slightly in writing.

6

2011-2013 CAPT State Performance

Year Math Percent At/Above Goal

SciencePercent At/Above Goal

ReadingPercent At/Above Goal

Writing Percent At/Above Goal

2011 49.6 47.2 44.8 61.3

2012 49.3 47.3 47.5 63.1

2013 52.6 49.0 48.5 62.1

Change +3.3 % +1.7 % +1 % -1 %

7 *Excerpt from 2013 CAPT Results Show Increases and CMT Results Show Decreases

CSDE School Performance Index

CSDE has not released SPI (School Performance Index).

Expected to release scores late October/November.

CSDE recalculating the 3 year baseline SPI based on audit.

8

SMARTER Balanced Assessment (SBAC)Highly likely that Wethersfield will

only administer Science CMT/CAPT (grades 5, 8, & 10) and SBAC (grades 3-8 and 11) this spring.

District has already shifted instructional focus away from CMT/CAPT towards the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and SMARTER Balanced (SBAC) Assessment to prepare for this new national assessment.

9

(as of December 2011)

45 States Adopted CCSS

SBAC Member States

11

12

CMT & CAPT Scoring and Performance Levels

Five levelsLevel 5- AdvancedLevel 4- Goal (State Goal)Level 3- Proficient Level 2- BasicLevel 1- Below Basic

Our goal is to significantly decrease the % of students at basic and below basic

And significantly increase the % of students at or above goal

% Students at Goal or above

Binder Walk Overview

◦Executive Summary ◦CSDE Press Release regarding CMT

and CAPT◦ESEA Waiver Amendment ◦DRG Rankings

13

Binder Walk High School Standardized Scores

◦CAPT◦AP (Advanced Placement)◦ACT◦SAT◦ECE (Early College Experience)

14

Binder Walk - Grade 4 4-1 and 4-2

◦Overall Summary State vs. Wethersfield◦Graph – percent by level◦Number of students taking standard

CMT, Skills Checklist, MAS, ELL exempt 4-3

◦Comparison of State vs. Wethersfield over 4 years

◦% at/above goal and % at/above proficiency

15

Binder Walk – Continued 4-4

◦Results by Content Strand ◦State vs. Wethersfield vs. School

4-18◦Table with school data from 2011-13

4-19◦Performance Level Report (Line Graph)◦% at/above Goal◦State vs. Wethersfield vs. School ◦Math, Reading, & Writing

16

Binder Walk - Continued 4-40

◦Vertical Scales – Bar Graph ◦Math & Reading

4-42◦Sub-Group Graphs & Charts ◦State vs. Wethersfield ◦Male vs. Female◦Special Education ◦Free/Reduced Meals ◦ELL

17

Binder Walk Vertical Scales

◦Math◦Reading

District Assessments ◦District Assessment Calendar 2012-

13◦Benchmarks for Math and Language

Arts 2012-13◦Grades K-9

18

WHS CAPT Strengths

Increase in writing at/above goal (2.8%)Increase in math at/above goal (2.7%)Statistically same range in readingHistorically we see trends that girls outperform

boys in reading and writing. Whereas, the males are continuing to outperform the females in math and science. However, with this traditional gender gap we are starting to see a closer grouping of the data in writing.

Overall, increase in ACT and SAT scoresHave decreased number of AP exams, but this is

due to the increased number of students taking ECE in place of the AP exam.

19

WHS CAPTFocus Areas

Science declined in % at goal (6.3%), but consistent at/above % proficiency

Sub-groups (ELL, Free/Reduced, Special Education) continue to underperform their peers. However, you will see in the subgroup graphs that there have been some improvements. These subgroups are also generally outperforming the state subgroup average.

20

WHS CAPTWhat has contributed to our success?

Game Film (Zmuda Cohort) has grown from 12 teachers to the entire school in 2013-14.

Revised Algebra curriculum to align with CCSS

Algebra 1 support class and new math sequence including Algebra for all students in grades 8 or 9

Increase in AP and ECE enrollment Addition of a K-12 Instructional Supervisor for

Literacy Start focus on CCSS in English, Social Studies

and Math 21

WHSAction Plan 2013-15

Add Academic Leaders & K-12 Instructional Supervisors for Math and Science

Continue CCSS work in Math, English, and Social Studies◦ Implement CCSS Geometry and Integrated Math

Introduce CCSS to all teachers for integration of skillsData Teams to analyze student learning and improve

instructional strategies Game Film (Zmuda Cohort) will involve the entire

high school 2013-14Continue to grow ECE/AP enrollment Focus on sub-groups such as ELL, Special Education,

Free/Reduced, etc. Implement Advisor/Advisee Continue curriculum writing

22

23

DRG Comparison 2013 CAPTDRG Ranking using % at or above Goal

WHS Math Reading Writing Science

2013 21 20 17 23

2012 20 19 19 16

2011 9 9 4 7

2010 18 13 13 10

2009 13 8 16 11

24 Towns in DRG D (including Wethersfield)

24 Towns in DRG D (District Reference Groups) Berlin Bethel Branford Clinton Colchester Cromwell East Granby East Hampton East Lyme Ledyard Milford Newington

New Milford North Haven Old Saybrook Rocky Hill Shelton Southington Stonington Wallingford Waterford Watertown Wethersfield Windsor

24

GRADES 3-8

CMT

25

DRG Comparison 2013DRG Ranking using % at or above Goal

Math Reading Writing Science

Grade 3 15 (21) 18 (24) 23 (22) Not Tested

Grade 4 7 (19) 14 (23) 21 (22) Not Tested

Grade 5 22 (14) 22 (12) 22 (12) 21 (14)

Grade 6 17 (10) 10 (16) 16 (22) Not Tested

Grade 7 8 (9) 18 (15) 23 (18) Not Tested

Grade 8 10 (14) 18 (15) 21 (20) 23 (21)

26

24 Towns in DRG D (including Wethersfield)

Scores in ( ) are prior year DRG ranking • Red was lower DRG rank in 2012• Blue was higher DRG rank 2012

Grade 3 Strengths

Moved from 21st to 15th in the DRG in Math Moved from 24th to 18th in the DRG in Reading Increases in writing at/above goal: Hanmer

(2.3%) and Webb (5.6%)Significant increases in reading at/above goalCharles Wright (11.8%), Hanmer (2%), and

Webb (7.9%) showed Hanmer (11.8%) and Charles Wright (1.2%) showed increases math at/above goal

Was above the state average for reading and math at/above goal

27

Grade 3Action Plan

Writing moved from the 22nd to 23rd in the DRGWethersfield performed below state average in

writing Significant drops in writing at/above goal:

Emerson-Williams (25.9%), Charles Wright (23.8%) and Highcrest (5.2%)

Decreased in reading at/above goal: Highcrest (3.3%) and Emerson-Williams (4%)

Decreased in math at/above goal: Emerson-Williams (8.5%), Webb (15.4%) and Highcrest (5.6%)

Continue to focus on sub-groups such as ELL, free/reduced, special education and students who are scoring in level 1 and 2 on the CMT

28

Grade 4 Strengths

Moved from 19th to 7th in the DRG in Math Moved from 23rd to 14th in the DRG in Reading Moved from 22nd to 21st in the DRG in Writing Above state average for all areas Increases in math at/above goal: Emerson-

Williams (19.5%), Hanmer (10.5%), Charles Wright (11.5%), and Webb (9.8%)

Increases in reading at/above goal: Emerson-Williams (11.7%), Hanmer (20.3%), Charles Wright (maintained), Highcrest (6.6%), Webb (17.2%)

Increases in writing at/above goal: Charles Wright (1.4%)

29

Grade 4Action Plan

Decreases in writing at/above goal: Emerson-Williams (3.6%), Hanmer (10.8%), Highcrest (4%), Webb (2.5%)

Decrease in math at/above goal: Highcrest (6.8%)

Sub-groups such as ELL, free/reduced, special education continue to underperform

30

Grade 5 Strengths

Above the state average for math and reading (at/above goal)

Increased in writing at/above goal: Hanmer (4%)

31

Grade 5Action Plan

Dropped in DRG◦ Math from 14th to 22nd ◦ Reading from 12th to 22nd ◦ Writing from 12th to 22nd ◦ Science from 14th to 21st

Wethersfield is below the state average for writing and science (at/above goal)

Decreased in math at/above goal: Hanmer (8.9%), Charles Wright (18.7%), Highcrest (5.1%), and Webb (16.6%)

Decreased in reading at/above goal: Emerson-Williams (2.2%), Hanmer (1.2%), Charles Wright (27.6%), Highcrest (11.5%), Webb (8.2%)

Decreased in writing at/above goal: Emerson-Williams (20.5%), Charles Wright (18%), Highcrest (8.9%), Webb (30.4%)

32

Grade 6Strengths

Improved in DRG ranking ◦ Reading from 16th to 10th ◦ Writing from 22nd to 16th

Above the state average for math, reading and writing (at/above goal)

Increased in math: Hanmer (13.7%)Increased in reading at/above goal: Charles

Wright (11.3%), (Emerson-Williams, Webb, and Highcrest maintained their scores)

Increased in writing at/above goal: Hanmer (3.6%), Charles Wright (20.7%) (Highcrest statistically maintained their scores)

33

Grade 6Action Plan

Dropped in DRG◦ Math from 10th to 17th

Decreased in math at/above goal: Emerson-Williams (7.1%), Charles Wright (15.2%), Highcrest (3.2%), and Webb (3.5%)

Decreased in reading at/above goal: Hanmer (3.5%)

Decreased in writing at/above goal: Emerson-Williams (7%) and Webb (10.8%)

Continue to focus on sub-groups such as ELL, free/reduced, special education and students who are scoring in level 1 and 2 on the CMT

34

Grade 7 Strengths

Improved in DRG ranking ◦Math from 9th to 8th

Above the state average for math and reading (at/above goal)

Static scores in math

35

Grade 7Action Plan

Dropped in DRG◦Reading from 15th to 18th ◦Writing from 18th to 23rd

Slightly below state goal for writing Decreased in reading (4.1%) at/above

goal Decreased in writing (7.2%) at/above goalContinue to focus on sub-groups such as

ELL, free/reduced, special education and students who are scoring in level 1 and 2 on the CMT

36

Grade 8 Strengths

Improved in DRG ranking ◦Math from 9th to 8th

Above the state average for math, reading & writing (at/above goal)

Maintained in math

37

Grade 8Action Plan

Dropped in DRG◦Reading from 15th to 18th ◦Writing from 20th to 21st

Decreased in reading (2.5%) at/above goal

Decreased in writing (9.1%) at/above goal

Continue to focus on sub-groups such as ELL, free/reduced, special education and students who are scoring in level 1 and 2 on the CMT

38

What has contributed to our success?

Starting 3rd year of Reader’s WorkshopNew math curriculum implemented 2012-13

(K-4, and Algebra 1)New SRBI process and guidelines

◦ Math Universal Screens Commitment to Columbia’s Workshop model

(including purchasing of leveled readers, professional development, coaching, curriculum, assessments, teacher resources, etc.)

Implemented a minimum of 130 minutes for a daily literacy block

Increased volume of “just right books”39

What has contributed to our success?Implementation of full day Kindergarten ELL program improvements Introduction of Data Teams Administrative Walk-Throughs – with a

district focus on improving instruction and implementation of curriculum expectations

Implementation of standards-based elementary progress reports

Addition of a K-12 Instructional Supervisor for Literacy

40

Robotics, K-6 Art, 7-8 Science, 7-8 Technology Education, Accounting, French 7-8, Italian 7-8, Spanish 7-8, French I, III & IV, Spanish III &  IV, Italian I, II & III, K-8 LA, Algebra 1, Introduction to Computer Science, K-4 Math, 7-8 Math, Civics, US History, K-6 Health, 6-12 Developmental Guidance, Art Discovery, Art I Foundations, Art Design, Art II, Art III, Advanced Placement (AP) Art, World History, Child Care Skills, Child Development, Foods I, Foods II, Culinary Arts, K-6 PE, K-6 General Music, English 10, ECE/AP Language and Composition, Chemistry in the Community, Integrated Science and Biology, International Studies, ECE English/AP Language and Literature, 5-6 Math, 7-8 Social Studies, Integrated Math, Geometry, Humanities, English 9 Honors, World History

41

K-12 Curriculum Revisions

New Courses at WHS ◦ Italian V◦ Introduction to Computer Science ◦ Integrated Algebra 1 & Geometry ◦ Integrated Algebra 2 & Geometry ◦ Computer Integrated Applications: Word

Processing and Publishing◦ Computer Integrated Applications: Excel

and Multimedia Development ◦ E-Commerce and Website Development◦ ECE US History

42

New Courses at WHS

Focus Areas 2013-15

Focus on Writer’s Workshop coaching and professional development◦For example, 50 teachers and

administrators attended a 5 day summer institute in July 2013 focused on improving writing K-6. Teachers will be implementing new instructional strategies for Writer’s Workshop

◦ Implementation of new Units of Study for Writing

◦Curriculum Specialists coaching institute ◦Calendar days (workshops on new reading

and writing units) 43

Focus Areas 2013-15Professional development on:

◦Using new writing rubrics K-8◦Small group instruction K-6◦Conferring

Training on Sitton Spelling (May 2012) to address areas of word work, spelling, grammar, proofreading, editing, revising, and vocabulary.

44

Focus Areas 2013-15Implement revised 7-8 Social Studies

curriculum, aligned to CCSSImplement new district writing

assessments Columbia Teacher’s College Project

School – Staff developers will work with staff and students to improve Reader’s and Writer’s workshop (Hanmer and SDMS)

Columbia’s Teacher College Senior Staff will do three (3) workshops for administrators and teacher leaders

45

Focus Areas 2013-15

Refine new math curriculum and assessments aligned to CCSS (K-4, Algebra 1)

Implement new math curriculum aligned to CCSS (Grades 5-8, Geometry)◦Professional development ◦Common assessments

New Integrated Math course at WHSConvene a math committee to review

potential new math programs aligned to CCSS for purchase for grades K-6

46

Focus Areas 2013-15SRBI interventions for math and reading

◦ Increase tutor support ◦ Increase high quality resources aligned to CCSS◦ Work collaboratively with special education

department Improve performance of sub-groupsImprove Data Team structures to analyze

student learning and improve instructional strategies

Prepare for the SMARTER Balanced assessment ◦ Keyboarding skills◦ Hardware ◦ Increased curriculum rigor 47

Focus Areas 2013-15 Add K-12 Instructional Supervisor

for Math Add K-12 Instructional Supervisor

for Science Implement Teacher and

Administrator Evaluation plan with fidelity

Update District Improvement Plan

48

Where do we go from here?

CCSSGoals &

Standards

Reader’s/ Writer’s

Workshop &

Curriculum

Data-Driven Decision Making

Professional Development

Monitoring

Update District Improvement Plan School Improvement Plans Grade level and school level analysis of

District assessments Grade level meetings with principal,

reading consultants and curriculum specialists

Data Team analysis Coaching Feedback from Stakeholders Administrative Team meetings and

Walk-Throughs 50