MCAS REPORTMCAS REPORTSpring 2013Spring 2013

Presented to the Hingham School Committee

November 18, 2013

by

Ellen Keane, Assistant Superintendent

OVERVIEW OF MCAS TESTSOVERVIEW OF MCAS TESTS

Grades 3-8 and 10 – ELA and Math Grades 4, 7 and 10 – Composition Grades 5 and 8 – Science and Technology Grades 9/10 – Science and Technology

(Biology and Chemistry)

Multiple Choice Open Response Short Answer Writing Prompts

MCAS DATAMCAS DATA

Percentage of Students at Proficient/ Percentage of Students at Proficient/ Advanced LevelsAdvanced Levels

Composite Performance Index – CPI Composite Performance Index – CPI (measure of progress toward 100% proficient/advanced goal)

Student Growth Percentile - SGP Student Growth Percentile - SGP (measure of progress in student performance over previous year compared to academic peers)

MCAS RESULTSMCAS RESULTSPercentage of Students at Proficient / Advanced LevelsPercentage of Students at Proficient / Advanced Levels

20132013

Grades 3, 4 and 5 Mass. Hingham

Grade 3 Reading 57 77

Grade 3 Math 66 80

Grade 4 ELA 53 81

Grade 4 Math 52 79

Grade 5 ELA 66 86

Grade 5 Math 61 81

Grade 5 Science 51 78

Grades 6, 7 and 8 Mass. Hingham

Grade 6 ELA 67 86

Grade 6 Math 61 83

Grade 7 ELA 72 96

Grade 7 Math 52 73

Grade 8 ELA 78 94

Grade 8 Math 55 82

Grade 8 Science 39 58

Grade 10 Mass. Hingham

Grade 10 ELA 91 100

Grade 10 Math 80 95

Grade 10 Science 71 94

All Grades Mass. Hingham

ELA 69 88

Math 61 81

Science 53 75

MCAS RESULTSMCAS RESULTSComposite Performance Index Results (CPI)Composite Performance Index Results (CPI)

20132013

Grades 3, 4 and 5 Mass. Hingham

Grade 3 Reading 83.3 92.6

Grade 3 Math 84.3 92.4

Grade 4 ELA 78.9 93.1

Grade 4 Math 80.2 92.6

Grade 5 ELA 84.7 94.2

Grade 5 Math 80.6 91.9

Grade 5 Science 78.5 91.6

Grades 6, 7 and 8 Mass. Hingham

Grade 6 ELA 85.1 94.8

Grade 6 Math 80.3 92.3

Grade 7 ELA 88.4 98.8

Grade 7 Math 74.4 89.1

Grade 8 ELA 90.1 97.8

Grade 8 Math 76.0 93.8

Grade 8 Science 71.0 84.7

Grade 10 Mass. Hingham

Grade 10 ELA 96.9 100

Grade 10 Math 90.2 98.1

Grade 10 Science 88.0 98.1

All Grades Mass. Hingham

ELA 86.8 95.6

Math 80.8 92.6

Science 79.0 91.0

MCAS RESULTSMCAS RESULTSStudent Growth Percentile (SGP)Student Growth Percentile (SGP)

(Massachusetts 2013 Median Scores – 50(Massachusetts 2013 Median Scores – 50thth Percentile) Percentile)

Grade 10 Hingham

ELA 68*

Math 56.5

Grades 4 and 5 Hingham

Grade 4 ELA 64*

Grade 4 Math 66*

Grade 5 ELA 67*

Grade 5 Math 64*

Grades 6, 7 and 8 Hingham

Grade 6 ELA 60*

Grade 6 Math 47

Grade 7 ELA 64*

Grade 7 Math 47

Grade 8 ELA 47

Grade 8 Math 56.5

All Grades Hingham

ELA 63*

Math 57

* High SGP 60 - 99 Typical SGP 40 - 59 Low SGP 0 - 39

DISTRICT STRENGTHSDISTRICT STRENGTHS

Scores higher than stateScores higher than state: percentage scoring proficient/advanced and CPIs

Highest scoresHighest scores: gr. 10 ELA, math and science; gr. 6, 7 and 8 ELA and gr. 6 math; gr. 5 ELA and math; gr. 4 ELA

Highest CPIsHighest CPIs: gr. 10 ELA, math and science; gr. 6, 7, and 8 ELA; gr. 5 ELA

Highest SGPsHighest SGPs: gr. 10 ELA; gr. 6 and 7 ELA; gr. 5 ELA and math; gr. 4 ELA and math

DISTRICT STRENGTHS DISTRICT STRENGTHS (continued)

Increases in percentage at proficient/ Increases in percentage at proficient/ advancedadvanced: gr. 10 ELA (100) and science; gr. 7 ELA; gr. 8 math; gr. 5 ELA; gr. 4 ELA and math

Special education CPIs higher than state CPIsSpecial education CPIs higher than state CPIs

Gender CPIs similarGender CPIs similar

Small range between elementary school Small range between elementary school scoresscores: gr. 3 reading; gr. 4 ELA and math

High district state rankingsHigh district state rankings: gr. 10 ELA and science; gr. 7 ELA; gr. 4 ELA and math

DISTRICT CONCERNSDISTRICT CONCERNS

Lowest scoreLowest score: gr. 8 science

Lowest SGPLowest SGP: gr. 6 and 7 math and gr. 8 ELA below state SGP

Lowest Special Education CPIsLowest Special Education CPIs: gr. 3 math; gr. 6 and 7 math

Large range between elementary Large range between elementary school scoresschool scores: gr. 5 math and science

DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT STEPSDISTRICT IMPROVEMENT STEPS

Analyze and monitor student performance results

Implement intervention and challenge programs

Implement state funded MCAS high school tutoring programs

Continue use of test taking and instructional strategies

Align curriculum with Common Core State Standards

Revise/update curriculum, as necessary

Continue professional development programs

Continue use of supervision and evaluation process

MASSACHUSETTSACCOUNTABILITY

REPORTS

HHINGHAM INGHAM PPUBLIC UBLIC SSCHOOLS CHOOLS

DDISTRICTISTRICT20132013

MASSACHUSETTSMASSACHUSETTSACCOUNTABILTIY SYSTEMACCOUNTABILTIY SYSTEM

School Percentiles (1-99): Overall performance compared to other schools with same grade span

Accountability and Assistance Levels (1-5):Level 1 – highest performing to Level 5 –lowest performing – reported for all students and high needs subgroup

MCAS Participation: Minimum of 95% students required

(ELA, math, science)

MASSACHUSETTS MASSACHUSETTS ACCOUNTABILTIY SYSTEMACCOUNTABILTIY SYSTEM

Annual Progress & Performance Index / PPI (0-100): Measure of improvement toward indicator targets over two years – target of 75+

Cumulative Progress & Performance Index / CPPI (0-100): Combination of assessment data including indicators on performance and growth over last 4 years – target of 75+

CPPI Indicators: Narrowing proficiency gap (ELA, math, science), growth (ELA & math), 10% increase scoring advanced (ELA, math, science), 10% decrease scoring warning/ failing (ELA, math, science), high school only-graduation and drop out rates

HINGHAM 2013 ACCOUNTABILITY RESULTSHINGHAM 2013 ACCOUNTABILITY RESULTSSCHOOL PERCENTILESSCHOOL PERCENTILES

East School 88 Foster School 88 PRS 98 South School 90 HMS 89 HHS 94

HINGHAM 2013 ACCOUNTABILITY RESULTSHINGHAM 2013 ACCOUNTABILITY RESULTSCUMULATIVE PROGRESS AND PERFORMANCE CUMULATIVE PROGRESS AND PERFORMANCE

INDEX AND STATE LEVELSINDEX AND STATE LEVELS

CPPI – TARGET 75

AllStudents

High NeedsStudents

Levels1-5

EAST 92 47 2

FOSTER 97 86 1

PRS 100 74 2

SOUTH 98 63 2

HMS 90 73 2

HHS 100 89 1

HINGHAM 94 71 2

HINGHAM 2013 ACCOUNTABILITY RESULTSHINGHAM 2013 ACCOUNTABILITY RESULTS

School Percentiles – All Schools “Highest Performing”

CPPI – All Students – All Schools Exceeded Target – High Levels of Progress

CPPI – High Needs – Met Target/Level 1:Foster and HHS

CPPI – High Needs – Below Target/Level 2:East, PRS, South and HMS

DESE REQUIREMENTS LEVEL 2 SCHOOLSDESE REQUIREMENTS LEVEL 2 SCHOOLS

Analyze “High Needs” data

Review level of implementation of “Conditions for School Effectiveness”

Revise School Improvement Plans with interventions and support strategies

Disseminate DESE required Report Cards to parents

Prioritize Title I funding for Level 2 schools