franklin public schools: mcas update 2014

Franklin Public Schools MCAS Presentation

November 18, 2014

Joyce Edwards

Director of Instructional Services

Agenda • Introduction

• CPI and PPI

• Accountability Data

• P+ Results

• Achievement and Growth Data

• DART Comparison

• Analysis

• PARCC

• Focus Areas and Curriculum Plans

Introduction • Goal that replaced Adequate Yearly Progress

(AYP)is to reduce proficiency gaps by half by the

end of the 2016-2017 school year

• Districts and schools placed into one of five state

designated Accountability and Assistance Levels,

based on progress towards meeting this goal

o Results determined using Composite

Performance Index (CPI) and Progress and

Performance Index (PPI)

o Results in aggregate and subgroup (high needs)

CPI • Composite Performance Index (CPI) is the

baseline indicator for aggregate

performance

• CPI score this year becomes the baseline

score for the next year

• CPI is calculated for ELA, Math and Science

• Uses 100 point index

• Used to calculate Progress and

Performance Index (PPI)

PPI • Determines accountability levels of districts, schools, and

subgroups

o Includes student achievement in ELA, Math, and

Science

o Incorporates growth and improvement as measured

by the Student Growth Percentile (SGP)

o Utilizes High school includes dropout and graduation

rates

• PPI status based on progress and performance annually

as well as cumulatively

• Cumulative calculation is based on four years of data

PPI • PPI calculations are done for state, district,

school o in the aggregate and subgroups

• High needs students are considered to be

students who belong to at least one of these

subgroups:

o students with disabilities

o English language learners

o economically disadvantaged students

PPI • Indicators used are:

• ELA Achievement (based on CPI)

• Mathematics Achievement (based on CPI)

• Science Achievement (based on CPI)

• ELA Growth/Improvement (based on median

SGP)

• Mathematics Growth/Improvement (based on

median SGP)

• Cohort Graduation Rate

• Annual Dropout Rate

Accountability Status • Based on CPI and PPI we are a Level 2

district

oBased on category of lowest school

• Level 1 schools:

oFranklin High School

oKennedy Elementary School

• All other Franklin schools are Level 2

• Data gaps due to PARCC field test

Narrowing the Gap Overall progress in narrowing gaps

Massachusetts aims to reduce proficiency

gaps by half between 2011 and 2017.

All students Did Not Meet

Target

High needs students Did Not Meet

Target

Low income students Did Not Meet

Target

Students with

disabilities

Did Not Meet

Target

English language

learners & former ELLs Met Target

Special Education Determination

District determination of need for special education technical assistance or intervention

Districts, including single school districts, are assigned a determination of need for special

education technical assistance or intervention. These determinations, which are typically based on

the district's accountability and assistance level, range from Meets Requirements – Provisional

(districts with insufficient data) to Needs Substantial Intervention (Level 5 districts). The

determination, which also incorporates compliance measures, helps to identify whether the

Department will require districts to take additional actions to support improved outcomes for all

children, especially students with disabilities.

P+ Analysis • P+ is percentage of students achieving

in the Advanced and Proficient categories

• Significantly outperformed state results

• ELA continues to be stronger than Math and Science

• Will continue to focus on subgroups as well as aggregate

• Overall: quite similar to last year

ELA Achievement

• Percent of students in Proficient and Advanced

2011 2012 2013 2014

Franklin 84 84 82 82

Massachusetts 69 69 69 69

Math Achievement


2011 2012 2013 2014



Science Achievement


2011 2012 2013 2014



Growth Analysis • SPG Range Growth Description

• 1-39 Lower Growth • 40-60 Moderate/Typical Growth • 61-99 Higher Growth

• Growth model is another method to evaluate performance • Measures progress by tracking scores from one year to next

• Intended to be used in conjunction with the MCAS achievement levels

• Student growth percentile (SGP) is calculated using two or more years of MCAS data.

• Growth for students is measured by comparing changes with that of their “academic peers.”

• Academic peers are students in the state who have the same MCAS performance history

• Typical and desired growth is 40-60%

Growth Comparison ELA Math

Low Growth

Target 40%-60%

High Growth

Franklin 51%

MA 50%

Low Growth

Target 40%-60%

High Growth

Franklin

48

MA 50

DART Comparison-DESE

2013-14 October Enrollment 2014 MCAS % Proficient or

Higher

2014 MCAS

Growth Median

SGP

District Name

Total

Enrollmen

t #

Low

Income

%

SWD % ELL % ELA % Math % Science % ELA % Math

%

Chelmsford* 5,124 8.1 15.9 2.1 83% 76% 75% 57.0 59.0

Easton* 3,867 12.0 16.8 1.2 79% 71% 66% 50.0 47.0

Franklin* 5,760 10.4 16.1 1.0 82% 76% 73% 51.0 48.0

Hanover* 2,642 7.8 16.4 1.0 83% 68% 74% 49.0 48.0

Mansfield* 4,320 13.0 18.1 1.0 81% 73% 66% 55.5 53.0

Natick* 5,285 9.6 14.4 1.0 85% 77% 71% 53.0 52.0

Needham* 5,523 6.5 14.5 1.5 86% 80% 74% 54.0 57.0

Reading* 4,432 6.6 16.9 0.6 80% 69% 67% 46.0 46.0

Wachusett* 7,384 8.7 14.3 1.4 83% 76% 73% 55.0 55.0

Wakefield* 3,347 10.8 15.0 0.8 77% 68% 65% 45.0 49.0

Wilmington* 3,522 9.4 15.7 0.9 78% 67% 61% 53.5 51.0

Comparable Districts Overview

DART Comparison-Selected Districts

2013-14 October Enrollment 2014 MCAS % Proficient or

Higher

2014 MCAS

Growth Median

SGP

District Name Total

Enrollment #

Low

Income

%

SWD % ELL % ELA % Math % Science % ELA % Math

%

Shrewsbury 6011 15.0 13.4 2.5 86 81 76 52 50

Sharon 3434 6.6 14.6 2.5 89 83 78 55 56

Franklin* 5760 10.4 16.1 1.0 82% 76% 73% 51.0 48.0

Westwood 3199 4.7 16.1 1.3 89 84 77 55 57

King Philip* 2123 6.7 13.5 0.3 89 71 74 40 42

North Attleboro 4645 15.8 15.3 2.3 79 71 69 47 52

Foxboro 2738 15.5 15.8 0.6 78 78 62 49 63

Stoughton 3651 34.2 15.0 5.1 74 59 59 58 46

Canton 3247 14.1 14.1 1.4 81 74 70 45 51

Medway 2423 6.3 14.1 0.2 85 79 69 54 53

Comparable Districts Overview

Analysis

• Some data gaps due to PARCC field

testing

• Data, curriculum review, instructional

changes, and professional development

are analyzed at district level and in

schools

• Use MCAS data to inform instruction

• Collaborate on improving student

performance and instructional practice

Future of Testing • PARCC is the Partnership for the Assessment

of Readiness for College and Careers

• Massachusetts is part of a multi-state state

consortium developing the next generation

of assessments

• PARCC tests to be piloted 2014-2015 and

we will receive data this year

• State will then decide whether or not to

adopt PARCC testing to replace MCAS in

ELA and Math as of 2016

• MCAS testing will change to reflect

adoption of the new Massachusetts

Curriculum Frameworks

• MCAS testing to be phased out by

2015

• Massachusetts is part of a 24 state

consortium

• Developing the next generation of

assessments

PARCC This Year • All students in Grades 3-8 and some FHS Algebra I

and II students will take PARCC

o Not grade 10

• Tests are in ELA and Math (except at FHS) o Science MCAS continues

• Students will take a Performance Based Assessment

(PBA) and an End of Year (EOY)Assessment

• All testing will be done electronically

• MCAS continues in grade 10 for high school

competency determination

• Accountability will be “held harmless”

Focus Areas

• Development of local common

assessments to determine

achievement and growth

oSound instructionally, but will also

serve as District Determined

Measures for Educator Evaluation

• Targeted support work provided with

identified students

• Prepare for PARCC electronic testing

Curriculum Plans

• Continued expansion of Keys to Literacy in the middle schools and high school

• Continued implementation of Responsive Classroom

• Implementation of new elementary math program

• Implementation of revised elementary report cards

• Continued implementation of literacy programs for elementary:

o Reader’s Workshop

o Writer’s Workshop

o Fundations

Curriculum Plans

• PS-12 Science committee to begin alignment to new MA Frameworks

• New Digital Learning Committee to work on digital citizenship and digital literacy for all students

• Professional development:

o Continuing to build internal capacity for curriculum leadership

• Curriculum leaders facilitating PD

o Graduate courses made available

o Content and instructional workshops

o Instruction in the use of technology

o Professional learning communities

Questions

franklin public schools: mcas update 2014

Government & Nonprofit