New Jersey State Assessment Presentation · 83.1 31.7 49.4 2013 Proficient 54.4 64.7 50.1 37.9 79.8...

New Jersey State Assessment Presentation FRANKLIN TOWNSHIP PUBLIC SCHOOLS

2012-2013

Achievement

Agenda SPECIAL BOARD MEETING DECEMBER 4, 2014

Middle Grade Span • Franklin Middle School

• Sampson G. Smith

Achievement

• Annual Progress Targets

Growth

• Student Growth Percentiles

Progress Toward District Goals

• Formative Assessments

• Instructional Programs / Strategies

New Jersey State Assessment Presentation MIDDLE GRADE SPAN

GRADES 5-8 Franklin Middle School / Sampson G. Smith

Achievement

New Jersey State Assessment Program Overview Grades 5-8

NJASK

• The NJASK assessment is administered in Language Arts and Mathematics at the end of each year to measure student proficiency toward meeting grade level standards.

PARCC

• State assessments are being redesigned to align to the new Common Core Standards.

• Beginning 2014, the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) will be the new State Assessment.

• The PARCC will provide a more accurate meausure of student proficiency of the Common Core Standards.

NJDOE: NJSMART Student Growth Percentile Tutorial (2012)

Growth

State Assessments & Student Achievement

ACHIEVEMENT

NJASK “Point in time” Achievement

Annual Progress Targets

• Targets are set by NJDOE in

annual equal increments

toward a goal of reducing

by half the percentage of

students in the “all

students” group and in each

subgroup who are not

proficient within six years.

Closing the Achievement Gap

• In addition to meeting

progress targets,

achievement gaps between

the highest and lowest

performing subgroups will

be a second measure of

achievement accountability.

2013 2012

2011

Point-in-Time

Achievement Achievement

Over Time Proficiency &

Annual Progress Targets

Growth &

Student Growth Percentiles

Performance Redefined: Achievement plus Growth

GROWTH

SGP “Performance over time” relative to peers

Student Growth Profiles (SGPs)

• Provide us with a new way to understand student performance.

• Measure performance on NJASK over time relative to peers

SGP Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6

Tyler

201

221

• What was Tyler’s performance in Grade 6

in comparison to his peer cohort?

• Did he show High, Typical or Low growth?

Tyler’s Peers

~201

~221

Tyler

5

20

35

50

65

80

95

2010 2012

• In a growth model, we look at how all students with similar scores over several years do when compared to each

other.

• In this example, we take one student, and see how all students with similar scores in 2010 and 2011 performed in

2012.

• This tells us whether the change in scores over time is average or below average.

High

Growth

65-99

Typical

Growth

35-65

Low

Growth

1-35

Growth Model

Annual Progress Targets LANGUAGE ARTS LITERACY

2012-2013

Subgroup 2011 Baseline

% Proficient

School-wide 58.4

White 73.2

African-American 52.2

Latino 41.9

Asian 79.7

Stud w/Disabilities 17.9

Econ Disadvantaged 39.2

Sampson G. School

2013 Annual Progress Targets

Measuring Student Achievement

Language Arts Literacy, Grades 5-6

Yearly

Increment

3.5

2.2

4

4.9

1.7

6.9

5.1

2013

Target

65.4

77.6

60.2

51.7

83.1

31.7

49.4

2013

% Proficient

54.4

64.7

50.1

37.9

79.8

20.9

40.1

2012

% Proficient

54.0

65.3

47.5

36.2

84.0

15.8

40.3

Met Progress Targets

w/ Confidence Interval

•Asian

Missed Targets

•School-wide, White

•African-American, Latino

•Stud w/ Disab, Econ Disadv

Improvement Status

Focus

Rationale

Highest w/in School

Gaps

Asian / Stud w/Disab

SGS State

2011 54.7% 60.9%

2012 48.4% 62.1%

2013 49.3% 61.3%

Grade 5

Franklin Township Public Schools

Sampson G. Smith School / State of New Jersey

Language Arts Literacy

NJASK 5, 6: Over 3 Years

SGS State

2011 59.8% 66.7%

2012 56.7% 64.5%

2013 54.9% 66.2%

Grade 6


% Proficient

School-wide 64.8

White 83.1


Latino 46.1

Asian 82.7



Franklin Middle School


Measuring Student Achievement

Language Arts Literacy, Grades 7-8

Yearly

Increment

2.9

1.4

3.4

4.5

1.5

6.1

4.4

2013

Target

70.6

85.9

66.2

55.1

85.7

39.1

56.2

2013

% Proficient

66.2

82.4

59.3

53.2

84.5

25.0

52.3

2012

% Proficient

63.8

79.8

56.5

50.6

86.8

24.3

46.5



• Asian

Missed Targets

• School-wide, White

• African-American, Latino

• Stud w/ Disab, Econ Disadv

Improvement Status

Focus

Rationale

Highest w/in School

Gaps

Asian / Stud w/Disab

FMS State

2011 50.1% 63.3%

2012 52.7% 61.0%

2013 53.8% 65.2%

Grade 7


Franklin Middle School / State of New Jersey



FMS State

2011 75.4% 82.1%

2012 73.2% 82.2%

2013 71.3% 81.9%

Grade 8

Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8

Advanced 5.6% 2.6% 10.2% 8.4%

Proficient 43.7% 52.3% 43.6% 62.9%

Partial 50.8% 45.1% 46.2% 28.7%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

LAL


Performance by Proficiency Level

NJASK 2013, Grades 5-8


Advanced 5.6% 2.6% 10.2% 8.4%

Proficient 43.7% 52.3% 43.6% 62.9%

Partial 50.8% 45.1% 46.2% 28.7%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

LAL


Advanced 5.6% 2.6% 10.2% 8.4%

Proficient 43.7% 52.3% 43.6% 62.9%

Partial 50.8% 45.1% 46.2% 28.7%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

LAL

4th to 5th(547)

5th to 6th(545)

6th to 7th(492)

7th to 8th(512)

Advanced 5.5% 2.8% 11.0% 9.0%

Proficient 43.7% 52.8% 43.9% 63.9%

Partial 50.8% 44.4% 45.1% 27.1%

NJASK Language Arts Literacy Performance by Proficiency

Sampson G. Smith / Franklin Middle School

Individual Cohort Performance

SY 2012 to SY 2013

33.3% 46.7%

25.9%

67.4%

66.7% 53.3%

74.1%

32.6%

4th to 5th (30) 5th to 6th (15) 6th to 7th (54) 7th to 8th (46)

NJ ASK Language Arts Literacy 2012 to 2013 Cohort Performance by Proficiency Level

ADVANCED PROFICIENT

StayedAdvanced

Proficient toAdvanced

33.3% 46.7%

25.9%

67.4%

66.7% 53.3%

74.1%

32.6%

4th to 5th (30) 5th to 6th (15) 6th to 7th (54) 7th to 8th (46)


ADVANCED PROFICIENT

Proficient toAdvanced

RemainedAdvanced

Cohort High

Growth

Typical

Growth

Low

Growth

4th to 5th 67% 33% -

Student Growth Percentile 2013

Advanced Proficient Cohort

Achievement

Cohort High

Growth

Typical

Growth

Low

Growth

4th to 5th 67% 33% -

5th to 6th 93% 7% -

6th to 7th 94% 6% -

7th to 8th 82% 18% - 33.3%

46.7%

25.9%

67.4%

66.7% 53.3%

74.1%

32.6%

4th to 5th(30)

5th to 6th(15)

6th to 7th(54)

7th to 8th(46)


ADVANCED PROFICIENT

ProficienttoAdvanced

RemainedAdvanced

Achievement Growth (as compared to peers)

1.3% 2.1% 1.4% 3.7%

79.9% 72.2%

84.3%

63.9%

18.8% 25.7%

14.4%

32.4%

4th to 5th(239)

5th to 6th(288)

6th to 7th(216)

7th to 8th(327)


PROFICIENT

Partial toProficent

StayedProficient

AdvancedtoProficient

Cohort High

Growth

Typical

Growth

Low

Growth

4th to 5th 34% 38% 28%

5th to 6th 53% 29% 18%

6th to 7th 46% 35% 19%

7th to 8th 31% 33% 36%


24.1% 10.3%

16.2% 2.9%

75.9% 89.7%

83.8% 97.1%

4th to 5th(278)

5th to 6th(242)

6th to 7th(222)

7th to 8th(139)


PARTIALLY PROFICIENT

StayedPartial

Proficientto Partial

Cohort High

Growth

Typical

Growth

Low

Growth

4th to 5th 12% 24% 64%

5th to 6th 23% 33% 44%

6th to 7th 19% 36% 45%

7th to 8th 13% 29% 58%


Student Growth Profile LANGUAGE ARTS LITERACY

2012-2013

Student Growth measures the performance of students from

one year to the next on the New Jersey Assessment of Skills

and Knowledge (NJASK) in Language Arts Literacy and Math

when compared to students with a similar history of

performance on the NJASK.

Student Growth Profile LANGUAGE ARTS LITERACY

2012-2013

Typical Growth Low Growth High Growth

35 65 1 50 99

Mean SGP 49% Franklin Township Public Schools

Aggregate Student Growth Profile

Grades 5-8

Language Arts Literacy 2013

23

41% 54% 55% 47% 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


Schoolwide


Grades 5-8

Language Arts Literacy 2013

Typical

Growth

35-65

Student Growth Profile 49%

Sampson G. Smith

Eileen Brett, Principal


School Goals

By June, 2014 all content area teachers will have implemented the reading and writing process

By September, 2013 all staff members will have daily common planning

By June, 2014 all teaching staff will plan and implement meaningful instructional strategies to show 10% growth for all students in ELA and Math

School Improvement Strategies

Design a schedule to allow for common planning

Form PLCs on Marzano’s work, Classroom Instruction That Works

Provide small group instruction based on data

Provide professional development on the reading and writing process

Provide Extended Day services for cusp students


RaShawn M. Adams, Principal


School Goals

Formative and common assessments will be developed, monitored and revised to

measure student progress toward meeting grade level standards in language arts for

grades 7-8.

Formative assessments will be analyzed for quality, clarity, rigor and alignment to the

standards and revised.

Teachers will collaboratively develop ambitious but achievable Student Growth

Objectives with their supervisors and principal. Teachers will finalize and submit

Student Growth Objectives to be included in the teacher's end of year evaluation.

Units of study will be revised and a curriculum outline designed to track progression

of standards and SLOs through grade levels 7-8 in reading, writing, research, and

language skills.


RaShawn M. Adams, Principal (cont.)



Students will begin to demonstrate proficiency in citing contextual evidence.

Provide PD for co-teaching model

Weekly PD with Language Arts Coach

Monthly PD with Teacher’s College Consultants

Teachers will participate & develop PLC’s based on Marzano’s work

Provide extended ELA instructional opportunities through school wide afterschool

tutorial program

Revamped Title I day program to include all students in school-wide Instructional Lab

class in ELA

Progress Toward Goals LANGUAGE ARTS LITERACY

2012-2013


Sampson G. Smith

District Goal

Language Arts Literacy: Reading Grade 5

Grade 5

During the 2012-2013 school year, 60% of grade 5 students will end the year meeting or exceeding benchmarks as measured by Teachers College Reading and Writing Project Running Records.

This is a 5% increase from 2011-2012 when 57% of students in grade 5 met or exceeded reading benchmarks.

Benchmark #1 (September-Beginning of the Year) • High frequency Word Assessment • Spelling Inventory • Running Records • Beginning of year check of volume of reading logs


District Goal

Language Arts Literacy: Reading Grades 6-8

Grades 6-8

During the 2012-2013 school year, 55% of students in grade 6 will end the year reading at or above proficiency as measured by running records meeting the Teacher’s College grade level benchmarks (5% increase from 52% in 2011-2012).

Stamina, fluency, and analysis and interpretation will improve over the course of the year for students by an average of 20% (5% increase from 2011-2012) as evidenced by reading logs, reading notebooks, and performance assessments.

Marking Period 1: • Summer reading assessment • Increased fluency and stamina on reading log • Beginning reader’s notebooks check • Running record

READING

DATA COLLECTION &

ANALYSIS

Grades 5-8: The largest percentage of the sample falls between the “yellow and green flag” range. These

students have overcome the “red flag” and “orange flag” categories in terms of reading behaviors. They have

moved past issues around reading disengagement, inconsistency in volume and stamina, ineffective partner

work, and an inability to apply a repertoire of strategies as they read.

This finding indicates that for this group of readers who may be reading without purpose or intention,

instruction needs to focus on building their reflectiveness and accountability. Additionally, for this group of

readers, instruction needs to continue to focus on pushing up the level of the reading work and thinking in an

effort to help students to outgrow their current levels.

Strategies from the continuum and from Building a Reading Life by Calkins and Tolan provide teachers with

strategies to help these students to grow as readers and to extend their reading work.

Grade Red Flag Orange Flag Yellow Flag Green Flag Blue Flag

Fifth (37) 11% 14% 38% 35% 8%

Sixth (42) 17% 10% 28% 28% 17%

Seventh (33) 6% 12% 49% 27% 6%

Eighth (30) 17% 6% 37% 30% 10%

Building a Reading Life Continuum:

Measuring Reading Behaviors - Grades 5-8

This work of increasing student engagement and independence, volume and

stamina, partner work, and ways Post-Its can be utilized to support and extend

reading work continues to help these students to grow as readers and to be in

charge of their own reading lives.

The ongoing goal revolves around working to increase the overall percentage of

readers falling into the “blue flag” range. This category is characterized by, for

example, expertise in the application of reading strategies, greater independence

and a sense of agency about reading (“I am in charge of my own reading life” and

“Reading can change me”), and possessing metacognition and the ability to reflect

upon what is read.


Measuring Reading Behaviors

Seventh Grade: The largest percentage of the sample falls into the “yellow flag” range.

This finding indicates that for this group of readers who may be reading without purpose or

intention, instruction needs to focus on building their reflectiveness and accountability.

This work will help these students to grow as readers and to be in charge of their own reading lives.

Eighth Grade: The largest percentage of the sample falls into the “green flag” range. This finding

indicates that for this group of readers, independence and agency should be the goal in order to move

them into the blue category and make them life-long readers who challenge and improve their own

reading.

Grade Red Flag Orange Flag Yellow Flag Green Flag Blue Flag

Seventh (29) 10% 10% 31% 24% 24%

Eighth (21) 10% 10% 29% 38% 14%


Measuring Reading Behaviors

GRADE September November March June

Grade 5 1=P or below (avg. M)

2=Q/R (avg. Q)

3=S

4=T or above

1=P or below (avg. N)

2=Q/R/S (avg. Q)

3=T

4=U or above

1=Q or below (avg. O)

2=R/S/T (avg. R/S)

3=U

4=V or above

1=R or below (avg. P)

2=S/T/U (avg. S/T)

3=V

4=W or above

% Students

Reading at

Grade Level

59%

58%

54%

51%

District Goal: Reading, Grade 5

60% of Grade 5 students will read at grade level.

RUNNING RECORDS

Teachers College Benchmark Reading Levels

and Expectations

Note: Reading level expectations increase with each benchmark.

The % of students reading at grade level reflects the expectation at the new benchmark.

Expected number of Reading Levels for students to progress through: 3

District Average: 2

GRADE Baseline Mid-Year Year End

Grade 6 1=R or below (avg. O)

2=S/T/U (avg. S)

3=V/W (avg. V)

4=X or above

1=T or below

2=U/V

3=W/X

4=Y or above

1=U or below (avg. Q)

2=V/W (avg. V)

3=X

4=Y or above

% Students

Reading at Grade

Level

55%

40%

45%



RUNNING RECORDS


and Expectations



GRADE September Mid-year Year end

Grade 7 1=T or below (avg. P)

2=U/V (avg. U)

3=W/X (avg. W)

4=Y or above

1=U or below

2=V/W

3=X

4=Y or above

1=V or below (avg. R)

2=W/X (avg. W)

3=Y

4=Z or above

% Students

Reading at Grade

Level

69%

55%

69%




and Expectations



Expected number of Reading Levels for students to progress through: 3

District Average: 2

GRADE Baseline Mid-Year Year End

Grade 8 1=V or below

2=W

3=X/Y/Z

4=Adult Literature

1=W or below

2=X/Y

3=Z/Adult Literature

4=Adult Literature

1=W or below

2=X/Y/Z

3=Adult Literature

4=Adult Literature

% Students

Reading at Grade

Level

62%

71%

71%




and Expectations



Findings and Next Steps

The data shows that students improve as they move up from grade 5 to 6, grade 6 to 7, and then grade 7 to 8 both on the Reading Behavior Continuum, and in running record level growth.

Our challenge is to increase student reading growth earlier in grades 5, 6 and 7, while maintaining the upward growth trend through the grades.

Our second challenge is to increase the percentage of students meeting or exceeding benchmark reading levels mid- year and end of the year.

Findings and Next Steps (cont.)

The goal is to strive for more 5-8 students to move into the blue flag zone in which they are independent, metacognitive, and reflective. Instructional strategies to build independence such as self-assessment using student-facing checklists and goal setting are a focus.

Work with the Teacher’s College Staff Developer on increasing the repertoire of small group instructional strategies designed to move students through text levels appropriately.

Using the Bands of Text, Character Bands, and Prompts into Bands indicators to inform small group lessons for specific reading levels.

Calibrating the scoring of common assessments.

Running Record PD in December to prepare for mid-year administration.

Reconvening of Assessment team to revise and benchmark assessments.

Continued work in grade level meetings with the coaches to calibrate scoring, review the data and develop next steps for instruction.

On-going Professional Development in the 2013-14 school year with the Teacher’s College Staff Developer focused on reading instructional strategies.


District Goal

Writing, Grade 5

Grade 5

By the end of the 2012-2013 school year, the District average writing score (as measured by the

Teachers College Reading and Writing Continuum) for students in grade 5 for the final on-demand

narrative pieces will increase by 5% from the final on-demand narrative writing pieces from the

2011-2012 school year.

Benchmark #1 (September-Beginning of the Year)

• On-demand/post-assessment writing pieces • Beginning of year check of volume of writing notebooks

On Demand

Writing Task

Grade

5

Average

Score

Task #1

4.1

Task #2

4.6

Task #3

4.8

Task #4

5.0

GOAL by June

2013

8.0

• District Writing Samples are administered four times

each year (September, December, April, June).

• Writing is scored using the Teachers College

Narrative Writing Continuum.

Average writing scores are depicted on the chart to

right.

The goal on the rubric is a score of 8.


ON-DEMAND NARRATIVE WRITING TASK

Grade 5, 2012-2013

24%

45%

31%

8%

59%

32%

Score 1 Score 2 Score 3

Language Arts Literacy Qualitative Writing Collection

Grade 5, 2012-2013

December

April

Writing Rubric Category 1 2 3

Organization Includes either the date

or the page number.

Writing occasionally

starts at the margin.

Writing is occasionally

neat and easy to read.

Includes both the date

and the page number.

Writing frequently


Writing is frequently


Each unit of study is

clearly divided with page

numbers and dates.

Writing consistently


Writing is consistently


Daily Writing 1 entry has been added

during the week.

2-3 entries have been

added during the week.

4-5 entries have been

added during the week.

Length of

Entries

Each entry has stayed

the same length (1/2 –

¾ page).

Each entry has

increased a little (3/4 –

1 and ½ pages).

Entries continue to grow

in length from day to day

(1 and ½ - 2 pages).

Classroom

Charts

Applies only one

strategy during the unit

of study. Uses the same

classroom charts and

mini-lessons strategy in

each entry.

Applies a couple of

strategies during the

unit of study. Tries to

use different classroom

charts and mini-lesson

strategies.

Applies many different

strategies taught during

mini-lessons and

conferences. Uses many

different strategies

taught during mini-

lessons and conferences.

Writing

Quality

Occasionally spells high

frequency words

correctly. Occasionally

uses punctuation and

grammar correctly.

Occasionally attempts

to use writing strategies

Frequently spells high

frequency words

correctly. Frequently


grammar correctly.

Frequently attempts to

use writing strategies.

Consistently spells high

frequency words

correctly. Consistently


grammar correctly.

Consistently uses a

variety of writing

strategies effectively.


District Goal

Writing, Grades 6-8

Grades 6-8

By the end of the 2012-2013 school year, the average writing score for students in grades 6-8

for on-demand pieces will be a 4 on the NJ Holistic Scoring Rubric, a 1-6 scale, (an increase of

1.5 rubric points from the 2011-2012 school year).

Volume in the writer’s notebook will also increase to an average of 2.5 pages a day (an

increase of 1 page from the 2011-2012 school year). Student writing will improve in quality

on genre-based process pieces as evidenced by student writing portfolios.

(Qualitative measures such as notebooks and writing portfolios will be assessed by a random

sampling during walk-throughs using a rubric in development).

Marking Period 1:

• Increased fluency and stamina on reading log

• Beginning reader’s notebooks check • Running record

NJ Registered Holistic

Scoring Rubric

Sixth

(493)

Score 0 1%

Score 1 6%

Score 2 19.6%

Score 3 39.5%

Score 4 30.2%

Score 5 3.4%

Score 6 0%

• District Writing Samples are administered in

September, December and May.

• Writing is scored using the New Jersey Registered

Holistic Scoring Rubric.

• The 6 point rubric measures the quality of writing in

the following categories:

• Content and Organization

• Usage

• Sentence Construction

• Mechanics

Although all areas are essential for good

writing, Content and Organization is

weighed the most heavily on the rubric and

is the area of the greatest instructional

focus.


ON-DEMAND NARRATIVE WRITING TASK

Grade 6, 2012-2013

Grade

Level

Baseline

Score

Mid-year

Score

June

2013

June

2013 Goal

Sixth 3 3 3.3 4

Seventh 2.8 3.7 3.9 4

Eighth 3.0 3.6 3.1 4

June 2013

Score Distribution


Although our students showed progress in meeting goals in all grades, the NJ

Holistic Rubric used in grades 6-8 has many components needed to move from

one level to the next and was not giving us the specific information needed to

target instruction to student needs.

For the 2013-2014 school year, we are assessing students using the Columbia

Teacher’s College continua. Not only do the continua give us specific targeted

information about what students are able to do, but also strategies and next

steps for moving students forward.

Teachers are meeting with the coaches in grade level teams to analyze the

student data on the continua and design strategies for improvement for each

indicator listed.

For 2013-2014 year, qualitative data will be collected for all students to

eliminate the issues we encountered with a random sampling.

Questions

5 min break

Annual Progress Targets MATHEMATICS

2012-2013


% Proficient

School-wide 75.9

White 89.1


Latino 71.8

Asian 95.2



Sampson G. School


Mathematics, Grades 5-6

Yearly

Increment

2

.9

3

2.4

-

5.4

3.3

2013

Target

79.9

90

70.6

76.6

90

46.2

67.6

2013

% Proficient

72.4

76.9

68.7

63.3

90.9

36.6

62.5

2012

% Proficient

76.6

78.0

71.0

70.6

96.5

35.8

68.8

MET GOAL

• Asian



• African-American

Missed Targets


• Latino, Stud w/ Disab

• Econ Disadvantaged

SGS State

2011 75.6% 80.6%

2012 73.1% 83.3%

2013 72.1% 79.9%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Grade 5


Sampson G. Smith School / State of New Jersey

Mathematics


SGS State

2011 72.9% 77.4%

2012 77.4% 78.8%

2013 67.8% 78.9%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Grade 6


% Proficient

School-wide 62.1

White 83.2


Latino 42.7

Asian 89.1





Mathematics, Grades 7-8

Yearly

Increment

3.2

1.4

4

4.8

.9

6.6

4.7

2013

Target

68.5

86

60.4

52.3

90

34.3

52.9

2013

% Proficient

63.2

78.1

53.1

54.1

86.6

18.0

50.9

2012

% Proficient

64.4

81.0

55.9

49.6

92.7

19.5

47.8

MET GOAL

• Asian



• African-American

Missed Targets


• Latino, Stud w/ Disab

• Econ Disadvantaged

FMS State

2011 55.9% 65.7%

2012 60.4% 63.2%

2013 54.2% 63.5%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Grade 7


Franklin Middle School / State of New Jersey

Mathematics


FMS State

2011 63.7% 71.5%

2012 65.4% 71.6%

2013 64.7% 69.3%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Grade 8


Advanced 34.7% 21.3% 21.1% 28.3%

Proficient 37.4% 46.5% 33.1% 36.4%

Partial 27.9% 32.2% 45.9% 35.3%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Math


Performance by Proficiency Level

NJASK 2013, Grades 5-8


Advanced 34.7% 21.3% 21.1% 28.3%

Proficient 37.4% 46.5% 33.1% 36.4%

Partial 27.9% 32.2% 45.9% 35.3%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Math


Advanced 34.7% 21.3% 21.1% 28.3%

Proficient 37.4% 46.5% 33.1% 36.4%

Partial 27.9% 32.2% 45.9% 35.3%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Math

4th to 5th(549)

5th to 6th(544)

6th to 7th(491)

7th to 8th(508)

Advanced 35.2% 21.5% 22.2% 29.7%

Proficient 37.9% 47.6% 33.8% 37.2%

Partial 27.0% 30.9% 44.0% 33.1%

NJASK Mathematics Performance by Proficiency


Individual Cohort Performance

SY 2012 to SY 2013

Cohort High

Growth

Typical

Growth

Low

Growth

4th to 5th 47% 30% 23%

5th to 6th 65% 23% 12%

6th to 7th 51% 33% 16%

7th to 8th 57% 27% 16%

69.9% 74.4%

92.7%

74.2%

29.0% 25.6%

7.3%

23.2%

1.0% 2.6%

4th to 5th(193)

5th to 6th(117)

6th to 7th(109)

7th to 8th(151)

NJ ASK Mathematics 2012 to 2013 Cohort Performance by Proficiency Level

ADVANCED PROFICIENT

Partial toAdvanced

Proficientto Advanced

RemainedAdvanced


12.5% 14.7% 27.1%

7.4%

66.8% 74.9%

69.9%

64.0%

20.7% 10.4%

3.0%

28.6%

4th to 5th(208)

5th to 6th(259)

6th to 7th(166)

7th to 8th(189)


PROFICIENT

Partial toProficent

StayedProficient

AdvancedtoProficient

Cohort High

Growth

Typical

Growth

Low

Growth

4th to 5th 23% 34% 43%

5th to 6th 37% 37% 26%

6th to 7th 41% 30% 29%

7th to 8th 40% 30% 30%


29.1% 26.2%

48.1%

16.1%

67.6% 73.8%

50.9%

83.9%

3.4% 0.9%

4th to 5th(148)

5th to 6th(168)

6th to 7th(216)

7th to 8th(168)


PARTIALLY PROFICIENT

Advancedto Partial

StayedPartial

Proficientto Partial

Cohort High

Growth

Typical

Growth

Low

Growth

4th to 5th 32% 47% 61%

5th to 6th 13% 32% 55%

6th to 7th 16% 29% 55%

7th to 8th 19% 23% 58%


Student Growth Profile MATHEMATICS

2012-2013

Student Growth measures the performance of students from

one year to the next on the New Jersey Assessment of Skills

and Knowledge (NJASK) in Language Arts Literacy and Math

when compared to students with a similar history of

performance on the NJASK.

Student Growth Profile MATHEMATICS

2012-2013

Typical Growth Low Growth High Growth

35 65 1 50 99

Mean SGP 49% Franklin Township Public Schools

Aggregate Student Growth Profile

Grades 5-8

Mathematics 2013

59

41% 53% 47% 54% 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


Schoolwide


Grades 5-8

Mathematics 2013

Typical

Growth

35-65

Student Growth Profile 49%

Sampson G. Smith

Eileen Brett, Principal

Mathematics

School Goals

Continuous improvement of student achievement through

successful implementation of the workshop model of instruction

Continuous improvement of student achievement through

meaningful application of instructional strategies


Use a variety of strategies to use the writing process in math

Form a PLC on Instructional Rounds to build a repertoire of best

practices

Provide an Extended Day Math program for cusp students


RaShawn M. Adams, Principal

Mathematics

School Goals

Students in grades 7-8 will make measurable progress in the major content

standards within the grade bans as measured by multiple question types.

Teachers will collaboratively develop ambitious but achievable Student Growth

Objectives. Teachers will finalize and submit SGO’s to be included in their end of

the year evaluation.

Teachers will participate in professional development to connect content knowledge

to effective teaching practices, implement these practices in the classroom and

reflect on how utilizing the practices impact on student learning


RaShawn M. Adams, Principal (cont.)

Mathematics


Students will begin to demonstrate proficiency in citing contextual evidence in their

math writing

Provide professional development for the co-teaching model

Weekly professional development with Math coach

Monthly sessions with math teachers and consultant from Generation Ready (formerly

Aussie)

Teacher participation & development in PLC’s based on Marzano’s work

Provide extended day Math program for all students through school-wide Title I

afterschool tutorial program

Revamped Title I day program to include all students in school-wide Instructional Lab

class in Math

Questions

5 min break

Progress Toward Goals MATHEMATICS

2012-2013 Iris Blay

Math Supervisor, K-5

Nubeja Allen

Math Supervisor, 6-12

Grade 6

3-5 GOALS

District Goal

Mathematics

Grade 6

During the 2012-2013 school year, 60% of students in

grades 6-8 will increase their proficiency of math

problem solving standards within the grade band domains

(10% increase from 55% in 2011-2012 school year).

2012-2013

MATH 5-8 DATA BACKGROUND

During the 2012-2013 school year a

Beginning of Year Assessment, Marking

Periods 1-3 Quarterly Assessments and an

End-of-Year Assessment provided formative

and summative assessment data on

students’ progress towards meeting grade

level standards.

The following have been identified as the

CCSS in Math critical areas of instructional

focus and the major cluster standards by

the Partnership for Assessment of

Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC)

frameworks.

• Math 6: Number Systems, Expressions

and Equations and Ratios and

Proportional Relationships

Assessment items were aligned to the major cluster

standards as defined by the New Jersey Department of

Educations’ model curriculum units that contain student-

learning objectives (SLOs).

For each assessment, data was compiled for the grade

level. Teachers utilized their individual data, as compared

to the grade level, in order to reteach, support or extend

students’ understanding. The data was also used to

determine professional learning activities during the year.

Beginning of Year Assessment: provide formative

assessment data on students’ prior knowledge as it relates

to grade level standards.

Marking Periods 1-3 Assessments: provide on-going

benchmark data on standards that were taught during the

marking period. The 2nd marking period assessment was

cumulative.

End of Year Assessment: provide cumulative summative

data on students’ overall progress for the year. This data

was used to identify priority areas of focus during the

2013-2014 school year.

5th GRADE OVERALL PROFICIENCY

5th GRADE

DOMAINS

Beginning-of-Year

Assessment

End-of Year

Assessment

Number and

Operations -

Fractions

29% 49%

Number and

Operation in Base

Ten

37% 61%

Measurement and

Data 32% 75%

Problem Solving

Standards 5% 41%

Overall Proficiency

70% or greater 21% 44%

Sampson G. Smith School 2012-2013 Common Assessment Data

Mathematics, Grades 5

• The overall percentage

shows 44% of students in

Grades 5 demonstrated

proficiency by obtaining a

score of 70% or greater

on the end-of-year

assessment.


Mathematics, Grades 5

Beginning-of-Year

Problem Solving Standard

Proficiency

End-of-Year Problem

Solving Standard

Proficiency

Score

0 Score

1 Score

2 Score

3 Score

0 Score

1 Score

2 Score

3

84% 7% 3% 6% 34% 17% 21% 28%

9% of 429 students

entered grade 5 with

sufficient prior

knowledge on Extended

Constructed Responses

At the end of the year,

49% of 452 students in

grade 5 students

demonstrated Proficiency

on Extended Constructed

Responses

Analysis of Math 5 Student

Assessment Data: Problem solving standards were analyzed in two

ways:

• CCSS Problem Solving Standards were

assessed using all question types (MC, SCR,

ECR): The overall percentage of students in

grade 5 demonstrating proficiency was 41%

by obtaining a score of 70% or greater on

the end-of-year assessment.

• Extended-constructed responses questions

using the New Jersey Holistic scoring rubric

in which “proficiency” is defined as scoring a

2 or 3. 49% of students demonstrated

proficiency on the end-of-year problem

solving standard.

6th GRADE OVERALL PROFICIENCY

6th GRADE

DOMAINS

Beginning-of-Year

Assessment

End-of Year

Assessment

The Number System 42% 60%

Ratios & Proportional

Reasoning

51%

52%

Expressions and

Equations

33%

61% Geometry N/A 63%

Statistics & Probability 43% 57%

Problem Solving 37% 56% Percent proficient

(based on Major Cluster

SLOs) 42% 59%


Mathematics, Grades 6 Analysis of Math 6 Student Assessment

Data

• 56% of 6th grade students’ demonstrated

proficiency (a score of 2 or higher on

the NJ holistic scoring rubric).

• The 6th grade students missed the goal

by 1% in the 3rd marking period and by

4% in the 4th marking period.

• Instructional strategies to support

students in writing detailed responses

on extended constructed response

questions are needed.

• Students also demonstrate challenges in

determining which operations to use in

multiple-step problems.

2012-2013 Franklin Middle School Grade 7

Mathematics Common Assessment Data

7th GRADE DOMAINS

Beginning-of-Year Assessment End-of Year Assessment


Ratios & Proportional Reasoning

38% 59%

Expressions and Equations

22% 55%

Geometry 32% 64%

Statistics & Probability

Problem Solving 22% 59%

Average percent proficient

(based on Major Cluster SLOs)

34% 61%

Analysis of Math 7 Student Assessment

Data


proficiency (a score of 2 or higher on the

NJ holistic scoring rubric). Students

missed the goal by 1%

• Instructional strategies to support

students in writing detailed responses on

extended constructed response

questions are needed.

2012-2013 Franklin Middle School Grades 7 and 8


Math 7 Major Cluster Standard Headings with Overall Proficiency BOY MP4

Apply and extend previous understandings of operations with fractions to add, subtract, multiply and divide rational numbers. 7.NS.1 (a-d), 7.NS.2(a-d), 7.NS.3

41%

69%

Use properties of operations to generate equivalent expressions. 7.EE.1, 7.EE.2 30% 42%

Solve real-life and mathematical problems using numerical and algebraic expressions and equations. 7.EE.3, 7.EE.4(a-b) 14% 62%

Analyze proportional relationships and use them to solve real-world and mathematical problems. 7.RP.1, 7.RP.2, 7.RP.3 38% 59%

Fluency 7.NS.1(a-d) +, − rational numbers; 7.NS.2(a-d) ×, ÷ rational numbers; 7.EE.1 +, −, factor and expand linear

expressions with rational coefficients; 7.EE.3 convert between forms and calculate rational numbers; 7.EE.4 construct and create 2-step equations and inequalities

41% 63%

Problem Solving (solve real-world and mathematical problems): 7RP.3 use proportional relationships to solve multi-step ratio &

% problems; 7.NS.3 +, −, ×, ÷ rational numbers; 7.EE.3 convert between forms and calculate rational numbers, assess

reasonableness of answer (use mental computation and estimation strategies); 7.EE.4 construct 2-step equations and inequalities; 7.G.1 compute lengths & areas of scale drawings and reproduce scale drawings at different scales; 7.G.4 area and circumference

of a circle; 7.G.6 area, volume & surface area (SA) of 2 and 3 dimensional objects composed of triangles, quadrilaterals, polygons, cubes and right prisms

22% 59%

Blue represents formative data

2012-2013 Franklin Middle School Grade 8


8th GRADE DOMAINS

Beginning-of-Year Assessment

End-of Year Assessment


Linear Functions

21%

56%

Expressions and Equations

15% 53%

Geometry 26% 61%

Problem Solving 12% 58%

Average percent proficient

(based on Major Cluster SLOs)

21% 65%

Analysis of Math 8 Student Assessment

Data


proficiency (a score of 2 or higher on the

NJ holistic scoring rubric).

2012-2013 Franklin Middle School Grades 7 and 8


Math 8 Major Cluster Standard Headings with Overall Proficiency BOY MP 4

Work with radicals and integer exponents. 8.EE.1, 8.EE.2, 8.EE.3, 8.EE.4 24% 46%

Understand the connections between proportional relationships, lines and linear equations.

8.EE.5, 8.EE.6

10%

59%

Analyze and solve linear equations and pairs of simultaneous linear equations. 8.EE.7 (a, b),

8.EE.8(a, b, c) 17% 59%

Define, evaluate and compare functions. 8.F.1, 8.F.2, 8.F.3

38% 57%

Use functions to model relationships between quantities. 8.F.4, 8.F.5 56%

Understand congruence and similarity using physical models, transparencies or geometry

software. 8.G.1(a, b, c), 8.G.2, 8.G.3, 8.G.4, 8.G.5 33% 52%

Understand and apply the Pythagorean Theorem. 8.G.6, 8.G.7, 8.G.8 19% 69%

Fluency: 8.EE.7 (a, b) solve linear equations (1 variable) w/ rational coefficients using the

distributive property & combining like terms; 8.G.9 know & use formulas to find volume of

cylinder, cones & spheres

61.5%

Problem Solving (solve real-world and mathematical problems): 8.EE.8c two linear equations

in 2 variables (systems of equations); 8.G.7 apply the Pythagorean Theorem to find unknown

side lengths in 2 and 3 dimensions; 8.G.9 know & use formulas to find volume of cylinder, cones

& spheres

21% 65%

Blue represents formative data

Curriculum and Assessment:

Revise curriculum scope and sequence so that major content is taught during the first half of the school year.

Continue the use critical content areas and math practice standards to focus in-depth instruction and revisit the 6 shifts in instruction required for the CCSSM.

Make connections to supporting and additional standards to apply and extend content.

Define the assessment cycle (pre/post and on-going) during units of study.

Planning and instruction for problem solving will include the following strategies:

Further develop students use of the Polya four-phase approach for attacking a problem – Understand the problem; Devise a plan; Carry out the plan; Look back.

Use problem solving for teaching or introducing the content as it relates to real world.

Use routine and non-routine problems for class instruction, small strategy groups and interventions.

Grade 5 and 6 will participate in a school-wide problem-solving contest for 2013-2014.

Appropriately incorporate differentiation (beyond tiering) in math lesson weekly to meet the needs of individual students during the Math workshop time (Student Activity).

Small Strategy Groups:

20-minute sessions during math block, at the beginning of the block.

Groups will continue to support students on every level including enrichment for students consistently performing above the district average to push them from proficiency to advanced proficiency.


Data will be utilized to:

Determine on-going professional development needs by teachers and by grade-level.

Determine subsequent consultant sessions in each building

Create small strategy groups.

Professional Learning Activities:

Revise rubrics using indicators from PARCC assessment rubrics.

Use instructional round experiences and data to target professional learning in components 2b

culture of learning, 3b questioning and discussion, 3c student engagement, and 3d assessment.

Further develop methods to collect, document and use formative and summative data in order to

inform instruction and professional learning activities.

Further develop intervention strategies, differentiation (beyond tiering) and modifications for

Title 1 and Special Education teachers.

Continue to study learning progressions grades 5-8.

Findings and Next Steps (cont.)

Questions

5 min break

Date post:	19-Aug-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

New Jersey State Assessment Presentation · 83.1 31.7 49.4 2013 Proficient 54.4 64.7 50.1 37.9 79.8...

Documents