State Board of Education Study Session October 2013
Closing the Achievement Gap
What is the data telling us about how our students are performing and improving over time?
Who is making a difference and what can we learn from them?
How can the state support districts in addressing achievement
gaps?
Agenda
2
What is the data telling us about how our students are achieving and improvement
over time?
3
Student performance has been steadily improving for all students across multiple
grades.
CSAP/TCAP Math Percent Proficient and Advanced
CSAP/TCAP Reading Percent Proficient and Advanced
Source: CDE, CSAP/TCAP Data, Data Lab
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Grade 3 Grade 6 Grade 10
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Grade 3 Grade 6 Grade 104
Although not shown, year-to-year performance trends for low income students, English language learners, and minority students were largely similar in middle and high school. Similar trends hold true for math.
In most subjects and grades, achievement increased more for our low income students,
English language learners, and minority students.
Year-to-Year Change in Percent of Students Proficient and Advanced on CSAP/TCAP Reading by Student Demographics - Elementary
Source: CDE, CSAP/TCAP Data, Data Lab
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
2010 to 2011 2011 to 2012 2012 to 2013
Non-Minority Minority ELL FRL
ELL: English language learner FRL: Free and reduced price lunch 5
Despite this progress, our overall results appear relatively stagnant compared to
results nine year ago.
Percent of Students Proficient and Advanced, CSAP/TCAP
Source: CDE, CSAP/TCAP Data, Data Lab
50.6 52.4 53.1 53.2 54.5 54.9 55.7 55.8 56.7
66.3 67.6 67.2 67.8 68.3 68.4 67.9 69.3 69.5
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Math Reading6
48.6 50.8 49.9 52.2 53.1
79.7 79.6 80.1 81.5 81.6
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Low Income Non-Low Income
The same is true when we disaggregate by income and minority status. Gaps are large and
persistent, despite modest gains.
29% gap has been consistent with minimal closing
Percent of Students Proficient and Advanced by Income, CSAP/TCAP Reading
24% gap: The gap between minority and non minority has improved marginally, but is still large
Percent of Students Proficient and Advanced by Minority, CSAP/TCAP Reading
Similar achievement gaps exist for Colorado English learners, student with disabilities, and on-time graduation rates for all these sub-groups. !
Source: CDE, CSAP/TCAP Data, Data Lab
51.1 52.5 53.3 55.2 56.3
79.2 78.7 78.9 80.2 80.0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Minority Non-Minority
7
The racial achievement gap is most pronounced for black and Hispanic students.
76.1 75.8 74.8 75.7 76.9
52.1 53.5 48.6
51.6 52.0
47.4 49.0 49.8 51.6 52.8
79.2 78.7 78.9 80.2 80.0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Asian Black Hispanic White
71.0 70.2 70.9 71.9 73.2
34.5 36.0 33.3 33.6 35.5
35.9 36.8 39.3 39.0 40.2
64.3 64.5 65.8 66.2 67.0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Asian Black Hispanic White
Percent of Students Proficient and Advanced CSAP/TCAP Math by Race
Percent of Students Proficient and Advanced CSAP/TCAP Reading by Race
8
Controlling for income, gaps remain for students of color.
-.19 -.21 -.17 -.12 -.12
-.03 -.02
-.71 -.71 -.63 -.62
-.56 -.55 -.52
-1.00-.90-.80-.70-.60-.50-.40-.30-.20-.10.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.90
1.00
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Not FRL FRL
Re ad ing A chievement : Eth ni c i ty by F re e an d Re d uce Lu n c h ( F RL)
Whi te H is panic
.35 .35 .36 .37 .37 .37 .38
-.18 -.18 -.17 -.15 -.15 -.14 -.10
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Not FRL FRL
Stan
dard
scor
e
What’s Going on?
Within group income gap
Between group race gap
Source: Analysis by CDE staff, CSAP/TCAP Reading data
! Although not shown, the finding holds true for black, Native American, and, to some degree, Asian students.
9
Digging Further into the Data
10
Instead of growing more, our low income and minority students are falling further behind.
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
100.0%
2011 2012 2013
Non-Minority Non-FRL Minority FRL IEP
Percent of Students Making Catch Up Growth, Math
While reading results are not shown here, about 70% of minority and low income students are NOT making sufficient growth to catch up to proficiency.
Source: CDE, CSAP/TCAP Data, Data Lab
Less than 1 in 5 students is making sufficient growth to catch up to PROFICIENCY in math within three years or by grade 10. This is even worse for our low income and minority students where the number hovers at 1 in 10 making catch up growth. These numbers have not changed within the last several years.
11
And fewer minority and low income students are making sufficient growth to maintain proficiency.
Percent of Minority/Low Income Students Making Keep Up Growth, Math
1 in 4 minority and low income students is NOT making sufficient growth to maintain proficiency in reading. Source: CDE, CSAP/TCAP Data, Data Lab
While about 65% of non-minority
and non-FRL students make
sufficient growth to maintain
proficiency, the number drops to 50% and below for minority and
low income students.
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
100.0%
2011 2012 2013
Non-Minority Non-FRL Minority FRL IEP
12
How can this be?
Some answers lie in the data…
13
18.5% 16.8%
21.7%
35.0%
17.8% 18.1%
22.6%
33.7%
1 - Low Minority/Poverty 2 3 4 - High Minority/Poverty
Minority Poverty
Data suggests a tendency to concentrate our novice teachers in our highest minority/highest poverty
schools.
Percent of Novice Teachers by School Minority and Poverty Quartiles, 2012
Source: CDE HR Data, 2011-12
14
We have a much higher turnover of principals and teachers in our lowest performing distr icts ; and we know that poor
and minority students are 4 t imes more l ikely than their counterparts to be served in these distr icts .
Source: CDE HR Data, 2011-12
30.4%
22.8%
17.6% 17.4% 16.9%
27.6%
17.1% 15.4%
12.9% 14.1%
Accred. with Turnaround Accred. w/PriorityImprovement
Accred. with Improvement Accredited Accred. with Distinction
Principals Teachers
Principal and Teacher Turnover by District Accreditation Rating, 2012
15
Fewer percentages of Hispanic/Latino and black students are identified to engage in gifted
education experiences.
Proportion of Students Identified as Gifted
9.6%
4.3% 4.1%
White Hispanic or Latino Black or African American
Source: CDE Student Oct Count, SY2011-12
16
But…that’s not the case across the system.
We see some districts and schools where the data is playing
out differently.
These “opportunity to learn” indicators suggest we may not be providing all of our students with
access to the same opportunities.
17
Who is making a difference and what can we learn from
them?
18
Districts making a difference
Several districts around the state are closing the minority and/or poverty achievement gaps.
• Del Norte • Delta County • Garfield 16 • Harrison • Cherry Creek • Fort Morgan • Holyoke
19
Nisley showed strong achievement gains for many of its student populations.
53.5
43.9
49.5
36.4
66.2 61.8 62.6
53.1
All Hispanic FRL ELL
2009 2013
Percent of Students Proficient or Advanced in Reading by Student Subgroup
Source: CDE, CSAP/TCAP Data, Data Lab
80.6% of Nisley students qualify for free and reduced price lunch
42.9% of Nisley students are minority
20
NISLEY ELEMENTARY HOME OF THE GRIZZLIES
MCVSD-51 Streamlined School Systems Quarterlies
PLC Conversations
Responsive Interventions
District & State Initiatives Curriculum Resource Title Schools MTSS/PBIS/RtI
Family Ties Staff Comradery: Together we are all in this!
Family Engagement: BEAR Nights, Co. Health Foundation, Muffins for Mom
Community Support: Back Pack Program, High School Mentors
http://youtu.be/meQsEep6Lzs
Harrison School District has successfully narrowed the minority achievement gap in math and reading
over time.
Percent of Students Proficient and Advanced by Minority/Non-Minority - Math
Source: CDE, CSAP/TCAP Data, Data Lab
While results are not shown here, Harrison achieved similar gap closing in reading.
42.8 46.1 48.2 50.3
53.2
59.7 62.5 62.3 64.0
66.9
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Perc
ent P
rofic
ient
or A
dvan
ced
Minority Non Minority
70% of Harrison students qualify for free and reduced price lunch
66% of Harrison students are minority
22
Curry Newton, Principal, Nisley Elementary School Deb Lamb, Assistant Principal, Nisley Elementary School
Edwin Saunders, Elementary School Leadership Officer,
Harrison School District
Lessons from Practitioners
How can the state support districts in addressing
achievement gaps?
24
Findings from 2005 Colorado Commission on Closing the Achievement Gap Final Report: Comprehensive data and assessment system to identify gaps High expectations Rigorous, aligned P-16 curriculum Administrator and teacher cultural competencies Parent/community connections Research-based instructional strategies
…Why then, is it so hard to move the needle at scale?
The steps to achieve and maintain the gains we see in successful districts/schools have
been well documented…
25
Inconsistent or unclear expectations across the system Staff turnover at all levels in the system Changes with service providers Management and flexibility issues with vendors Uneven implementation Limited use of data and poor target/goal setting Source: Final Report for the Evaluation of the Colorado Department of Education Closing the Achievement Gap Project; Submitted by The Center for Education Policy Analysis School of Public Affairs at the Buechner Institute for Governance University of Colorado Denver and Augenblick, Palaich, and Associates, June 2011.
Implementation Challenges
26
Provide organization-wide focus through CDE strategic plan (Goal 3) Build strong delivery plan for our achievement gap work building on
lessons learned and working with Education Trust Theory of action Metrics (that can be translated to district/school level) Strategies & action plan
Implement delivery plan, including but not limited to: Providing statewide data and helping district use/analyze their data Capturing and sharing what is working Partnering with interested districts to implement targeted strategies and
to learn how the state can best support districts in this work
Next Steps How can we build on the lessons learned from the past
and from successful districts to close achievement gaps?
27