+ All Categories
Home > Documents > Grade 3-8 Math Results 2009

Grade 3-8 Math Results 2009

Date post: 05-Jan-2016
Category:
Upload: field
View: 28 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
Description:
Grade 3-8 Math Results 2009. 2. Student Growth Tracked Over Time: 2006 – 2009. Grade-by-grade testing began in 2006. The tests and data system track the academic growth of students over time . Example: We can see how 3 rd graders in 2006 are performing as 6 th graders in 2009. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Popular Tags:
63
Grade 3-8 Grade 3-8 Math Results Math Results 2009 2009
Transcript
Page 1: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

Grade 3-8 Grade 3-8

Math Results Math Results

20092009

Page 2: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

Student Growth Tracked Over Time: 2006 – 2009

• Grade-by-grade testing began in 2006. • The tests and data system track the academic

growth of students over time. • Example: We can see how 3rd graders in 2006 are

performing as 6th graders in 2009.• Measuring the progress of students over time from

one grade to the next: This is crucial to the Board of Regents.

• Examining student achievement over time is a valuable tool for districts and schools to monitor how their practices affect academic growth.

2

Page 3: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

1. In previous years, we have compared the same grade over a series of years – like this example for Grade 6:

We will show slides in two different ways

Percentage of Students at Levels 3 and 4

All Students Tested: 2006-09

60

.4%

71

.2%

79

.4%

83

.0%

Grade 6

2006 2007 2008 2009

3

Page 4: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

80

.5%

79

.9%

83

.2%

83

.0%

Grade 6 in 2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

3

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2014

8

2. Now we can also show the growth of classes of students as they move from one grade to the next over the 4 years of grades 3-8 tests. This example shows the growth of students from 3rd grade to 6th grade:

Percentage of Students at Levels 3 and 4

Grade 3 in 2006

Grade 6 in 2009

Grade 5 in 2008

Grade 4 in 2007

4

Page 5: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

We will also analyze student performance in 2 ways:

1. Look at the percentage of students who progress from Level 1 and 2 to Level 3 and 4

2. Look at increases in student scale scores

5

Page 6: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

What are student scale scores?

• Students are graded on a scale from the upper 400’s to the upper 700’s.

• Students at the bottom of the scale are in Level 1. Students at the top of the scale are in Level 4.

• The number of students scoring at Level 3 and 4 has shown measured progress, with gains for classes of students over time.

• But the increase in average scale scores over time is sometimes relatively smaller.

6

Page 7: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

What Are the Results?1. Measured gains overall.

2. Students who began the 3-8 grade-by-grade core curriculum in the early grades started at a higher achievement level than did older students who started the grade-by-grade curriculum in higher grades, for example, grades 6 and 7.

3. More of this year’s students are meeting the standards (scoring in Level 3 & 4) than did students in those grades 4 years ago.

7

Page 8: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

What Are the Results?

4. Average student scale scores (as opposed to the percentage at Level 3 & 4) show measured progress as students have progressed from one grade to the next.

5. Middle school performance, which was very low when the grade 3-8 core curriculum began 4 years ago, has improved significantly over time.

6. Even with the improvements, many students still are not meeting the standards.

8

Page 9: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

1. More students are scoring in Level 3 & 4 across grades 3-8.

Number of Students Tested in Grades 3-8

The percentage of students across all grades 3-8 who are scoring in Level 3 & 4 increased more this year.

65

.8%

72

.70

%

80

.7%

86

.4%

Grades 3-8 Math

2006 2007 2008 2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

Grades 3-8 1,262,139 1,238,635 1,217,789 1,211,360

9

Page 10: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

66

3

67

1

67

8

68

4

Grade 3-8

2006 2007 2008 2009

1. Measured gains overall. The average student scale score across all grades 3-8 increased this year.

650*

*A score of 650 is the cutpoint between Level 2 and Level 3.

10

Page 11: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

Why Are Average Gains in Scale Scores Sometimes Smaller Than Gains

in the Percentage at Level 3 and 4?

• The Answer: – As students progressed through school,

many have improved their performance over time enough to move over the line (a score of 650) from Level 2 to Level 3.

– But the increase in the average scale score over time was sometimes smaller.

11

Page 12: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

80

.5%

77

.9%

68

.4%

60

.4%

55

.6%

53

.9%

85

.2%

79

.9%

76

.1%

71

.2%

66

.4%

58

.5%

89

.9%

83

.9%

83

.2%

79

.4%

78

.9%

69

.8%

92

.9%

87

.2%

88

.1%

83

.0%

87

.3%

80

.2%

Grade 3 in 2009 Grade 4 in 2009 Grade 5 in 2009 Grade 6 in 2009 Grade 7 in 2009 Grade 8 in 2009 Grade 9 in 2009 Grade 10 in 2009 Grade 11 in 2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73

Class of 2018 Class of 2017 Class of 2016

4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

2. Growth: Students who began the grade-by-grade core curriculum in the early grades are starting at a higher achievement level than did older students who started the grade-by-grade curriculum in later grades. Both sets of students are making progress as they move through school.

Percentage of Students at Levels 3 and 4All Students Tested as They Move through School, 2006-09

12

Page 13: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

3. Status: More of this year’s students are meeting the standards (Level 3 & 4) than did students in those grades 4 years ago.

Percentage of Students at Levels 3 and 4

80

.5%

77

.9%

68

.4%

60

.4%

55

.6%

53

.9% 65

.8%

85

.2%

79

.9%

76

.1%

71

.2%

66

.4%

58

.8% 72

.7%8

9.9

%

83

.8%

83

.2%

79

.4%

78

.9%

69

.8%

80

.7%92

.9%

87

.2%

88

.1%

83

.0%

87

.3%

80

.2%

86

.4%

Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grades 3-8

2006 2007 2008 2009

Number of Students Tested 2006 2007 2008 2009Grade 3 201,956 200,217 197,500 200,336Grade 4 202,791 199,391 198,730 197,704Grade 5 209,242 203,956 199,746 199,511Grade 6 211,428 206,220 202,058 199,940Grade 7 217,308 213,436 209,039 204,648Grade 8 219,414 215,415 210,716 209,221Grades 3-8 1,262,139 1,238,635 1,217,789 1,211,360

13

Page 14: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

4. Growth in Average Scale Scores

• Students are graded on a scale from the upper 400’s to the upper 700’s.

• Students at the bottom of the scale are in Level 1. Students at the top of the scale are in Level 4.

• The number of students scoring at Level 3 and 4 had shown measured progress, with gains for classes of students over time.

• But the increase in average scale scores over time is sometimes relatively smaller.

14

Page 15: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

67

7

67

6

66

6

65

6

65

1

65

2

68

5

68

0

67

4

66

8

66

3

65

7

68

8

68

3

68

0

67

5

67

4

66

6

69

2

68

9

68

6

68

0

68

1

67

5

Grade 3 in 2009 Grade 4 in 2009 Grade 5 in 2009 Grade 6 in 2009 Grade 7 in 2009 Grade 8 in 2009 Grade 9 in 2009 Grade 10 in 2009 Grade 11 in 2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73

Class of 2018 Class of 2017 Class of 2016

4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650*

*A score of 650 is the cutpoint between Level 2 and Level 3.

Growth: Gains in average student scale scores are small to moderate as students progress from grade to grade.

All Students Tested as They Move through School, 2006-09

15

Page 16: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

67

7

67

6

66

6

65

6

65

2

68

5

67

4

66

8

66

3

65

7

68

8

68

3

68

0

67

5

67

4

66

669

2

68

9

68

6

68

0

68

1

67

5

65

1

68

0

Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8

2006 2007 2008 2009

Status: This year’s students had higher average scale scores than did the students in those same grades 4 years ago.

650

*A score of 650 is the cutpoint between Level 2 and Level 3.

16

Page 17: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

5. Status: Middle school has improved as more students meet the standards.

When the grade 3-8 tests began in 2006, the percentage of students achieving Levels 3 & 4 was lower in the middle grades than in the elementary grades. But now, performance in middle school has

improved significantly. Percentage of Students at Levels 3 and 4

80

.5%

77

.9%

68

.4%

60

.4%

55

.6%

53

.9%

65

.8%8

5.2

%

79

.9%

76

.1%

71

.2%

66

.4%

58

.8% 72

.7%8

9.9

%

83

.8%

83

.2%

79

.4%

78

.9%

69

.8%

80

.7%

92

.9%

87

.2%

88

.1%

83

.0%

87

.3%

80

.2%

86

.4%

Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grades 3-8

2006 2007 2008 2009

17

Page 18: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

67

7

67

6

66

6

65

6

65

2

68

5

67

4

66

8

66

3

65

7

68

8

68

3

68

0

67

5

67

4

66

669

2

68

9

68

6

68

0

68

1

67

5

65

1

68

0

Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8

2006 2007 2008 2009

650

Status: Middle School:

Improvement in scale scores also.

Mean Scale Scores

18

Page 19: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

Why the Progress Overall?• Over time, the State has invested significantly more

resources in education.• Universal Pre-Kindergarten has been expanding and

reaching more students each year. • The grade-by-grade core curriculum, introduced in

2006, seems to be helping. Schools are aligning their instruction with the grade-by-grade curriculum.

• Schools have seized opportunities to incorporate best practices and support programs and are increasing professional development to improve instruction.

19

Page 20: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

Similar Trends Emerge for Different Groups of Students

Over Time.

20

Page 21: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

50

.0%

44

.8%

31

.6%

21

.6%

18

.0%

17

.1%

57

.1%

47

.2%

41

.7%

31

.9%

26

.8%

20

.7%

66

.6%

53

.4%

52

.9%

42

.4%

42

.9%

31

.0%

74

.2%

60

.7%

62

.4%

49

.7% 59

.0%

46

.2%

Grade 3 in 2009 Grade 4 in 2009 Grade 5 in 2009 Grade 6 in 2009 Grade 7 in 2009 Grade 8 in 2009 Grade 9 in 2009 Grade 10 in 2009 Grade 11 in 2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

Growth: More students with disabilities met the standards (scoring in Levels 3 & 4) as they progressed through school.

3 3 54 565 63 4 73

Class of 2018 Class of 2017 Class of 2016

4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

Percentage of Students at Levels 3 and 4

But achievement is still low.

21

Page 22: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

23

.7%

28

.8%

35

.9% 44

.4%

42

.1%

44

.4%

17

.5%

24

.8%

23

.7% 33

.5%

28

.6% 4

0.2

%

11

.0% 20

.4%

16

.3%

23

.9%

17

.5% 2

9.5

%

5.2

%

16

.7%

9.8

% 16

.3%

6.7

% 16

.2%

Grade 3 in 2009 Grade 4 in 2009 Grade 5 in 2009 Grade 6 in 2009 Grade 7 in 2009 Grade 8 in 2009 Grade 9 in 2009 Grade 10 in 2009 Grade 11 in 2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

Growth: Fewer students with disabilities are scoring in Level 1 (showing serious academic difficulties) as they move through school.

Class of 2018 Class of 2017 Class of 2016

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

Percentage of Students at Level 1

3 3 3 64 5 8734 4 5 4 5 6 5 6 7 6 7 8 7 8 8

22

Page 23: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

64

7

64

0

63

0

61

7

61

2

61

3

65

5

64

5

64

0

62

9

62

6

62

1

66

1

64

9

64

8

64

7

63

9

62

9

66

6

65

7

65

7

64

7 65

3

64

3

Grade 3 in 2009 Grade 4 in 2009 Grade 5 in 2009 Grade 6 in 2009 Grade 7 in 2009 Grade 8 in 2009 Grade 9 in 2009 Grade 10 in 2009 Grade 11 in 2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

Growth: The average scale score for students with disabilities has shown improvement in the later grades as students have moved through school.

3 3 54 565 63 4 73

Class of 2018 Class of 2017 Class of 2016

4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

Mean Scale Scores

23

Page 24: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

58

.5%

49

.5%

36

.7%

25

.2%

20

.6%

21

.9%

68

.7%

53

.8%

45

.4%

35

.2%

27

.5%

25

.6%

78

.5%

64

.1%

58

.0%

47

.7%

44

.6%

41

.2%

84

.4%

71

.3%

69

.4%

53

.3%

58

.1%

52

.7%

Grade 3 in 2009 Grade 4 in 2009 Grade 5 in 2009 Grade 6 in 2009 Grade 7 in 2009 Grade 8 in 2009 Grade 9 in 2009 Grade 10 in 2009 Grade 11 in 2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73

Class of 2018 Class of 2017 Class of 2016

4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

Growth: English Language Learners show mixed improvement in advancing to Levels 3 & 4 as they have moved through school. Earlier grades are starting with more students at Levels 3&4.

Percentage of Students at Levels 3 and 4

24

Page 25: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

Growth: The percentage of English Language Learners scoring at Level 1 (showing serious academic difficulties) has decreased significantly.

Class of 2018 Class of 2017 Class of 2016

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

Percentage of Students at Level 11

6.4

%

22

.7%

29

.4% 4

0.4

%

39

.1%

40

.4%

10

.2% 18

.0%

20

.4% 30

.6%

27

.7% 35

.3%

5.2

% 12

.2%

13

.1%

18

.9%

15

.6%

21

.1%

2.5

% 9.5

%

7.2

% 13

.9%

6.5

%

11

.2%

Grade 3 in 2009 Grade 4 in 2009 Grade 5 in 2009 Grade 6 in 2009 Grade 7 in 2009 Grade 8 in 2009 Grade 9 in 2009 Grade 10 in 2009 Grade 11 in 2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

25

Page 26: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

655

647

637

623

617

621

665

652

645

633

628

627

671

659

653

643

642

640

675

667

663

651

653

650

Grade 3 in 2009 Grade 4 in 2009 Grade 5 in 2009 Grade 6 in 2009 Grade 7 in 2009 Grade 8 in 2009 Grade 9 in 2009 Grade 10 in 2009 Grade 11 in 2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

Growth: The increase in average scale scores for English Language Learners has been mixed, but overall performance has improved. Earlier grades now have much higher average scale scores.

3 3 54 565 63 4 73

Class of 2018 Class of 2017 Class of 2016

4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

Mean Scale Scores

26

Page 27: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

85

.2%

45

.7%

51

.5%

53

.9%

76

.3%

65

.8%

89

.0%

54

.6%

60

.5%

61

.8%

82

.0%

72

.7%

92

.9%

65

.9%

71

.1%

73

.0% 8

8.3

%

80

.7%94

.9%

75

.0%

79

.5%

81

.6%

92

.2%

86

.4%

Asian Black Hispanic AmericanIndian/Alaskan

Native

White Total Public

2006 2007 2008 2009

Across all Grades 3-8, Black, Hispanic, and American Indian students have experienced the most growth in meeting the standards.

Percentage of Students at Levels 3 and 4

27

Page 28: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

68

8

64

4

64

9

65

0 66

369

6

65

8

65

8 67

9

67

170

1

66

1

66

5

66

6 68

5

67

870

5

66

9

67

3

67

4 69

0

68

4

67

2

65

3

Asian Black Hispanic AmericanIndian/Alaskan

Native

White Total Public

2006 2007 2008 2009

Across all Grades 3-8, Black, Hispanic, and American Indian students also had the most growth in average scale scores.

650

Mean Scale Scores

28

Page 29: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

66

.4%

62

.4%

49

.3%

40

.5%

31

.1%

28

.3%

74

.5%

64

.9%

60

.5%

53

.1%

42

.9%

34

.4%

81

.3%

71

.9%

70

.5%

63

.9%

60

.9%

48

.3%

87

.0%

77

.6%

78

.3%

69

.8%

74

.9%

62

.9%

Grade 3 in 2009 Grade 4 in 2009 Grade 5 in 2009 Grade 6 in 2009 Grade 7 in 2009 Grade 8 in 2009 Grade 9 in 2009 Grade 10 in 2009 Grade 11 in 2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

Growth: More Black students have reached Levels 3 & 4 as they moved through school.

Percentage of Black Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4

3 3 54 565 63 4 73

Class of 2018 Class of 2017 Class of 2016

4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

29

Page 30: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

66

2

65

9

64

7

63

8

62

9

62

9

67

2

66

2

65

8

65

0

64

3

63

6

67

5

66

7

66

4

65

7

65

5

64

7

67

9

67

5

67

2

66

4

66

5

65

9

Grade 3 in 2009 Grade 4 in 2009 Grade 5 in 2009 Grade 6 in 2009 Grade 7 in 2009 Grade 8 in 2009 Grade 9 in 2009 Grade 10 in 2009 Grade 11 in 2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

Growth: Black students made gains in average scale scores as they progressed through school.

3 3 54 565 63 4 73

Class of 2018 Class of 2017 Class of 2016

4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

Mean Scale Scores

30

Page 31: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

71

.5%

66

.6%

56

.1%

45

.2%

37

.2%

33

.0%

78

.5%

70

.2%

65

.7%

58

.4%

50

.3%

40

.4%

85

.1%

76

.8%

75

.3%

67

.8%

66

.5%

55

.1%

89

.9%

82

.0%

83

.1%

73

.7%

78

.6%

69

.3%

Grade 3 in 2009 Grade 4 in 2009 Grade 5 in 2009 Grade 6 in 2009 Grade 7 in 2009 Grade 8 in 2009 Grade 9 in 2009 Grade 10 in 2009 Grade 11 in 2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

Growth: More Hispanic students reached Levels 3 & 4 as they moved through school.

3 3 54 565 63 4 73

Class of 2018 Class of 2017 Class of 2016

4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

The percentage of this year’s Hispanic 7th and 8th graders scoring in Levels 3 & 4 increased significantly as they moved from one grade to the next through school.

Percentage of Students at Levels 3 and 4

31

Page 32: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

66

7

66

3

65

3

64

2

63

4

63

3

67

6

66

7

66

2

65

5

64

8

64

1

67

9

67

2

66

9

66

1

65

9

65

2

68

3

68

0

67

7

66

8

66

8

66

3

Grade 3 in 2009 Grade 4 in 2009 Grade 5 in 2009 Grade 6 in 2009 Grade 7 in 2009 Grade 8 in 2009 Grade 9 in 2009 Grade 10 in 2009 Grade 11 in 2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

Growth: Hispanic students have made gains in average scale scores as they progressed through school.

3 3 54 565 63 4 73

Class of 2018 Class of 2017 Class of 2016

4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

Mean Scale Scores

32

Page 33: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

88

.0%

86

.2%

77

.9%

70

.7%

69

.0%

68

.0%

90

.9%

87

.7%

83

.9%

80

.4%

78

.8%

71

.9%

94

.1%

89

.7%

89

.6%

87

.7%

88

.7%

80

.8%

95

.8%

91

.7%

92

.7%

90

.1%

94

.1%

89

.2%

Grade 3 in 2009 Grade 4 in 2009 Grade 5 in 2009 Grade 6 in 2009 Grade 7 in 2009 Grade 8 in 2009 Grade 9 in 2009 Grade 10 in 2009 Grade 11 in 2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

Growth: White students often made smaller gains in reaching Levels 3 & 4 as they progressed through school than did Black and Hispanic students, but overall performance is much higher.

3 3 54 565 63 4 73

Class of 2018 Class of 2017 Class of 2016

4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

Percentage of Students at Levels 3 and 4

33

Page 34: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

68

5

68

5

67

4

66

5

66

3

66

3

69

1

68

8

68

0

67

6

67

3

66

7

69

5

69

0

68

6

68

3

68

5

67

5

69

8

69

5

69

3

68

7

68

9

68

3

Grade 3 in 2009 Grade 4 in 2009 Grade 5 in 2009 Grade 6 in 2009 Grade 7 in 2009 Grade 8 in 2009 Grade 9 in 2009 Grade 10 in 2009 Grade 11 in 2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73

Class of 2018 Class of 2017 Class of 2016

4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

Growth: Average scale scores for White students have improved for most classes of students as they moved through school.

Mean Scale Scores

34

Page 35: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

68

5

68

5

67

4

66

5

66

3

67

269

1

68

0

67

6

67

3

66

7 67

969

5

69

0

68

6

68

3

68

5

67

5 68

569

8

69

5

69

3

68

7

68

9

68

3

69

0

66

368

8

Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grades 3-8

2006 2007 2008 2009

Status: This year’s White students have higher average scale scores than White students in those grades did 4 years before.

650

Mean Scale Scores

35

Page 36: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

Across all Grades 3-8, districts in all need/resource categories have made significant gains in the percentage of students scoring in Levels 3 & 4.

Percentage of Students at Levels 3 and 4

57

.0%

35

.1%

55

.0%

62

.3% 73

.9% 86

.3%

65

.8%

65

.1%

41

.0%

63

.5%

70

.2%

79

.9%

90

.0%

72

.7%

74

.3%

54

.5%

73

.2%

79

.3%

86

.9%

93

.9%

80

.7%

81

.8%

64

.7% 8

1.0

%

85

.8%

91

.1%

95

.9%

86

.4%

New York City Large City Urban-Suburban

Rural Average Low Total Public

2006 2007 2008 2009

36

Page 37: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

656

684

663

665

660

665 67

5 690

671

672

651 66

7

671 68

2 696

678

680

660 67

4

677 68

7 699

684

669

634 65

2

657

641

New YorkCity

Large City Urban-Suburban

Rural Average Low Total Public

2006 2007 2008 2009

Across grades 3-8, average scale scores improved also.

650

2006-2009 Math: Grades 3-8 Need/Resource Capacity CategoryMean Scale Scores

37

Page 38: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

75

.3%

70

.9%

61

.3%

52

.7%

43

.9%

38

.9%

82

.2%

74

.1%

71

.1%

63

.2%

55

.5%

45

.6%

87

.2%

79

.6%

79

.2%

71

.7%

69

.0%

59

.6%

91

.4%

84

.9%

85

.5%

77

.0%

80

.8%

71

.3%

Grade 3 in 2009 Grade 4 in 2009 Grade 5 in 2009 Grade 6 in 2009 Grade 7 in 2009 Grade 8 in 2009 Grade 9 in 2009 Grade 10 in 2009 Grade 11 in 2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

Growth: In New York City, students beginning the grade-by-grade core curriculum earlier in their careers have a larger percentage at Levels 3&4. All students are improving as they move through classes.

3 3 54 565 63 4 73

Class of 2018 Class of 2017 Class of 2016

4 6 85

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

87 8

Percentage of Students at Levels 3 and 4

38

Page 39: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

75

.3%

70

.9%

61

.3%

52

.7%

43

.9%

38

.9% 5

7.0

%

82

.2%

74

.1%

71

.1%

63

.2%

55

.5%

45

.6%

65

.1%

87

.2%

79

.6%

79

.2%

71

.7%

69

.0%

59

.6% 7

4.3

%91

.4%

84

.9%

85

.5%

77

.0%

80

.8%

71

.3% 81

.8%

Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grades 3-8

2006 2007 2008 2009

Status: More of this year’s New York City students are scoring in Level 3 & 4 than did students in those grades 4 years ago.

Percentage of Students at Levels 3 and 4

39

Page 40: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

67

4

66

9

66

0

65

0

64

1

64

0

68

3

67

5

67

0

66

2

65

4

64

7

68

5

67

9

67

7

66

8

66

5

65

9

68

9

68

8

68

3

67

5

67

4

66

8

Grade 3 in 2009 Grade 4 in 2009 Grade 5 in 2009 Grade 6 in 2009 Grade 7 in 2009 Grade 8 in 2009 Grade 9 in 2009 Grade 10 in 2009 Grade 11 in 2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73

Class of 2018 Class of 2017 Class of 2016

4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

Growth: The average scale score of New York City students has generally increased as students have progressed from one grade to the next through school.

Mean Scale Scores

40

Page 41: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

67

4

66

9

66

0

65

0

64

0

68

3

67

0

66

2

65

4

64

7

68

5

67

9

67

7

66

8

66

5

65

9

68

9

68

8

68

3

67

5

67

4

66

8

64

1

67

5

Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8

2006 2007 2008 2009

Status: New York City students in 2009 have higher scale scores than did students in those same grades 4 years ago.

650

Mean Scale Scores

41

Page 42: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

Across all Grades 3-8, in each of the Big 5 Cities, the percentage of students scoring in Levels 3 & 4 has significantly increased over the past 4 years.

Percentage of Students at Levels 3 and 4

57.0

%

28.6

%

33.1

%

30.1

%

52.9

% 65.8

%

65.1

%

35.9

%

39.2

%

39.4

% 52.3

%

72.7

%

74.3

%

50.0

%

54.6

%

49.8

% 65.1

%81.8

%

63.3

%

63.4

%

58.2

% 73.8

%

80.7

%

New York City Buffalo Rochester Syracuse Yonkers Total Public

2006 2007 2008 2009

42

86.4

%

Page 43: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

65

6

62

8

63

2

62

9

66

3

66

5

63

9

64

0 65

2 67

1

67

2

64

7

65

0

64

8 66

2 67

8

68

0

65

8

65

7

65

5 67

1 68

4

65

2

63

7

New York City Buffalo Rochester Syracuse Yonkers Total Public

2006 2007 2008 2009

Across all Grades 3-8, in each of the Big 5 Cities, students’ average scale scores have increased over the past 4 years.

650

Mean Scale Scores

43

Page 44: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

40

.1%

47

.4%

27

.1%

27

.2%

22

.5%

17

.0%

43

.0%

44

.3%

38

.0%

37

.8%

29

.1%

25

.8%

66

.4%

53

.2%

50

.2%

48

.9%

49

.6%

33

.8%

75

.5%

64

.1%

61

.9%

56

.9%

63

.3%

57

.8%

Grade 3 in 2009 Grade 4 in 2009 Grade 5 in 2009 Grade 6 in 2009 Grade 7 in 2009 Grade 8 in 2009 Grade 9 in 2009 Grade 10 in 2009 Grade 11 in 2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

Growth: In Buffalo, the percentage of students scoring in Level 3 & 4 has increased substantially as students have moved from one grade to the next through school during the past 4 years.

3 3 54 565 63 4 73

Class of 2018 Class of 2017 Class of 2016

4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

Percentage of Students at Levels 3 and 4

44

Page 45: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

63

9 64

4

62

6

62

4

62

0

62

1

64

3

64

5

63

9

63

6

63

2

63

0

66

1

65

0

64

6

64

5

64

6

63

6

66

5

66

0

65

6

65

5

65

7

65

4

Grade 3 in 2009 Grade 4 in 2009 Grade 5 in 2009 Grade 6 in 2009 Grade 7 in 2009 Grade 8 in 2009 Grade 9 in 2009 Grade 10 in 2009 Grade 11 in 2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

Growth: In Buffalo, the average student scale score has typically increased as students have moved from one grade to the next through school during the past 4 years.

3 3 54 565 63 4 73

Class of 2018 Class of 2017 Class of 2016

4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

Mean Scale Scores

45

Page 46: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

In Buffalo, more students in every grade have met the standards than 4 years ago.

Percentage of Students at Levels 3 and 4

40

.1%

47

.4%

27

.1%

27

.2%

22

.5%

17

.0% 28

.6%43

.0%

44

.3%

38

.0%

37

.8%

29

.1%

25

.8%

35

.9%

66

.4%

53

.2%

50

.2%

48

.9%

49

.6%

33

.8% 5

0.0

%

75

.5%

64

.1%

61

.9%

56

.9%

63

.3%

57

.8%

63

.3%

Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grades 3-8

2006 2007 2008 2009

46

Page 47: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

650

In Buffalo, students in every grade have now achieved higher average scale scores than 4 years ago.

Mean Scale Scores

63

9

64

4

62

6

62

4

62

1

62

864

3

63

9

63

6

63

2

63

0

63

766

1

65

0

64

6

64

5

64

6

63

6 64

766

5

66

0

65

6

65

5

65

7

65

4

65

8

62

064

5

Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grades 3-8

2006 2007 2008 2009

47

Page 48: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

Similar Patterns Emerge for the other Big 4 Cities.

48

Page 49: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

55

.8%

54

.6%

31

.4%

30

.5%

12

.6%

20

.0%

62

.3%

52

.0%

47

.5%

40

.6%

21

.9%

17

.9%

70

.6%

62

.1%

59

.4%

56

.3%

48

.3%

32

.9%

79

.1%

65

.3%

68

.2%

64

.5%

58

.5%

42

.9%

Grade 3 in 2009 Grade 4 in 2009 Grade 5 in 2009 Grade 6 in 2009 Grade 7 in 2009 Grade 8 in 2009 Grade 9 in 2009 Grade 10 in 2009 Grade 11 in 2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73

Class of 2018 Class of 2017 Class of 2016

4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

Math 2006-2009: Rochester

Percentage of Students at Levels 3 and 4

All Students Tested as They Move through School

49

Page 50: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

65

2

65

1

63

2

62

9

61

2 62

0

66

0

65

0

64

6

64

0

62

5

62

1

66

4

65

8

65

4

65

0

64

4

63

3

66

7

66

1

66

2

65

9

65

2

64

2

Grade 3 in 2009 Grade 4 in 2009 Grade 5 in 2009 Grade 6 in 2009 Grade 7 in 2009 Grade 8 in 2009 Grade 9 in 2009 Grade 10 in 2009 Grade 11 in 2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73

Class of 2018 Class of 2017 Class of 2016

4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

Math 2006-2009: Rochester All Students Tested as They Move through School

Mean Scale Scores

50

Page 51: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

Math 2006-2009: Rochester 5

5.8

%

54

.6%

31

.4%

30

.5%

12

.6%

20

.0% 33

.2%

62

.3%

52

.0%

47

.5%

40

.6%

21

.9%

17

.9%

39

.2%

70

.6%

62

.1%

59

.4%

56

.3%

48

.3%

32

.9%

54

.6%

79

.1%

65

.3%

68

.2%

64

.5%

58

.5%

42

.9%

63

.4%

Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grades 3-8

2006 2007 2008 2009

Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4

51

Page 52: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

65

2

65

1

63

2

62

9

62

0 63

2

66

0

64

6

64

0

62

5

62

1 63

966

4

65

8

65

4

65

0

64

4

63

3 65

066

7

66

1

66

2

65

9

65

2

64

2 65

7

61

2

65

0

Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grades 3-8

2006 2007 2008 2009

650

Math 2006-2009: Rochester

Mean Scale Scores

52

Page 53: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

42

.5%

48

.6%

27

.5%

26

.0%

16

.1%

20

.4%

56

.9%

55

.3%

43

.0%

35

.0%

26

.1%

20

.1%

65

.8%

60

.4%

53

.0%

49

.0%

40

.6%

28

.9%

75

.1%

62

.0%

60

.9%

52

.5% 62

.0%

35

.0%

Grade 3 in 2009 Grade 4 in 2009 Grade 5 in 2009 Grade 6 in 2009 Grade 7 in 2009 Grade 8 in 2009 Grade 9 in 2009 Grade 10 in 2009 Grade 11 in 2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73

Class of 2018 Class of 2017 Class of 2016

4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

Math 2006-2009: Syracuse

Percentage of Students at Levels 3 and 4

All Students Tested as They Move through School

53

Page 54: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

64

2

64

5

62

8

62

4

61

3 62

2

65

7

65

3

64

4

63

4

62

8

62

4

66

1

65

8

64

9

64

5

63

8

63

3

66

7

66

0

65

6

64

9 65

5

63

8

Grade 3 in 2009 Grade 4 in 2009 Grade 5 in 2009 Grade 6 in 2009 Grade 7 in 2009 Grade 8 in 2009 Grade 9 in 2009 Grade 10 in 2009 Grade 11 in 2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73

Class of 2018 Class of 2017 Class of 2016

4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

Math 2006-2009: Syracuse All Students Tested as They Move through School

Mean Scale Scores

54

Page 55: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

Math 2006-2009: Syracuse 4

2.5

%

48

.6%

27

.5%

26

.0%

16

.1%

20

.4%

30

.2%

56

.9%

55

.3%

43

.0%

35

.0%

26

.1%

20

.1%

39

.4%

65

.8%

60

.4%

53

.0%

49

.0%

40

.6%

28

.9%

49

.8%

75

.1%

62

.0%

60

.9%

52

.5%

62

.0%

35

.0%

58

.2%

Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grades 3-8

2006 2007 2008 2009

Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4

55

Page 56: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

64

2

64

5

62

8

62

4

62

2

62

9

65

7

64

4

63

4

62

8

62

4 64

066

1

65

8

64

9

64

5

63

8

63

3 64

866

7

66

0

65

6

64

9

65

5

63

8 65

5

61

3

65

3

Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grades 3-8

2006 2007 2008 2009

650

Math 2006-2009: Syracuse

Mean Scale Scores

56

Page 57: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

74

.1%

76

.8%

61

.5%

43

.4%

31

.3%

30

.9%

74

.3%

63

.1%

55

.1%

49

.5%

41

.3%

32

.2%

82

.2%

76

.7%

67

.7%

63

.2%

59

.3%

41

.8%

88

.5%

80

.1%

79

.4%

66

.5%

73

.3%

53

.9%

Grade 3 in 2009 Grade 4 in 2009 Grade 5 in 2009 Grade 6 in 2009 Grade 7 in 2009 Grade 8 in 2009 Grade 9 in 2009 Grade 10 in 2009 Grade 11 in 2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73

Class of 2018 Class of 2017 Class of 2016

4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

Math 2006-2009: Yonkers

Percentage of Students at Levels 3 and 4

All Students Tested as They Move through School

57

Page 58: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

67

1

67

4

66

0

64

0

63

0

63

3

67

0

66

1

65

3

64

7

64

3

63

6

67

8

67

4

66

3

65

7

65

5

64

4

68

6

68

1

67

4

66

2

66

5

65

4

Grade 3 in 2009 Grade 4 in 2009 Grade 5 in 2009 Grade 6 in 2009 Grade 7 in 2009 Grade 8 in 2009 Grade 9 in 2009 Grade 10 in 2009 Grade 11 in 2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73

Class of 2018 Class of 2017 Class of 2016

4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

Math 2006-2009: Yonkers All Students Tested as They Move through School

Mean Scale Scores

58

Page 59: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

Math 2006-2009: Yonkers 7

4.1

%

76

.8%

61

.5%

43

.4%

31

.3%

30

.9%

53

.1%

74

.3%

63

.1%

55

.1%

49

.5%

41

.3%

32

.2%

52

.3%

82

.2%

76

.7%

67

.7%

63

.2%

59

.3%

41

.8%

65

.1%

88

.5%

80

.1%

79

.4%

66

.5%

73

.3%

53

.9%

73

.8%

Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grades 3-8

2006 2007 2008 2009

Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4

59

Page 60: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

67

1

67

4

66

0

64

0

63

3 65

267

0

65

3

64

7

64

3

63

6 65

267

8

67

4

66

3

65

7

65

5

64

4 66

268

6

68

1

67

4

66

2

66

5

65

4 67

1

63

0

66

1

Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grades 3-8

2006 2007 2008 2009

650

Math 2006-2009: Yonkers

Mean Scale Scores

60

Page 61: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

What Are the Results?

1. Consistent, measured gains overall.

2. Students who began the 3-8 grade-by-grade curriculum in the early grades started at a higher achievement level than did older students who started the grade-by-grade curriculum in higher grades, for example, grades 6 and 7.

3. More of this year’s students are meeting the standards (scoring in Level 3 & 4) than did students in those grades 4 years ago.

61

Page 62: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

What Are the Results?

4. Average student scale scores (as opposed to the percentage at Level 3 & 4) show measured progress as students have progressed from one grade to the next.

5. Middle school performance, which was very low when the grade 3-8 curriculum began 4 years ago, has improved significantly over time.

6. Even with the improvements, many students still are not meeting the standards.

62

Page 63: Grade 3-8    Math Results 2009

Grade 3-8 Grade 3-8

Math Results Math Results

20092009


Recommended