1
2008 Grade 3-8English Language Arts
and Math Results
New York State Board of Regents
Committee on Elementary, Middle, Secondary and Continuing Education
June 23, 2008
2
Achievement is Up Statewide
Percentage of Students Statewide Scoring at Levels 3 and 4 on Grades 3-8 English and Math
61
.5%
65
.8%
63
.4% 72
.70
%
68
.5% 8
0.7
%
Grades 3-8 ELA Grades 3-8 Math
2006 2007 2008
3
20083-8 English Language Arts
4
Achievement is up in English statewide, except in Grade 8.
69
.0%
68
.6%
67
.1%
60
.4%
56
.4%
49
.3% 6
1.5
%
67
.1%
68
.0%
68
.1%
63
.2%
57
.8%
57
.0%
63
.4%
70
.1%
71
.1%
77
.6%
66
.9%
70
.0%
56
.1% 6
8.5
%
Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grades 3-8
2006 2007 2008
Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4
Grade 3 185,603 198,457 195,777Grade 4 190,951 197,499 197,016Grade 5 201,262 202,133 198,022Grade 6 204,249 204,463 200,505Grade 7 210,735 211,839 207,278Grade 8 212,320 213,971 209,180Grades 3-8 1,205,120 1,228,362 1,207,778
Number Tested 2006 2007 2008
2008 3-8 ELA results
5
2008 English Language Arts Grades 3-8 Percent of Students Scoring at Levels 1,2,3,4
6
Fewer students showed serious academic difficulties in English in all grades, including
Grade 8.
8.6
%
9.0
%
6.4
%
7.3
%
8.1
%
9.5
%
8.1
%
9.0
%
7.9
%
5.0
%
2.5
% 6.0
%
6.2
%
6.1
%
6.0
%
7.5
%
1.9
%
1.7
%
1.9
% 5.2
%
4.0
%
Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grades 3-8
2006 2007 2008
Percentage of Students Scoring at Level 1
2008 3-8 ELA results
7
More Students with Disabilities are meeting the English standards at every grade level.
26
.6%
26
.5%
26
.6%
16
.8%
16
.1%
10
.5%
20
.2%
28
.0%
27
.6%
29
.1%
19
.7%
17
.3%
15
.6%
22
.8%
30
.8%
29
.8%
40
.7%
23
.9%
29
.4%
13
.3% 27
.9%
Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grades 3-8
2006 2007 2008
Percentage of Students with Disabilities Scoring at Levels 3 and 4
Grade 3 23,811 26,692 27,285Grade 4 26,474 28,281 29,983Grade 5 28,987 29,985 30,661Grade 6 28,883 29,055 31,195Grade 7 29,237 29,842 31,180Grade 8 29,119 29,514 31,077Grades 3-8 166,511 173,369 181,381
Number Tested 2006 2007 2008
2008 3-8 ELA results
8
The achievement gap in English is narrowing for Black and Hispanic students.
77
.6%
42
.4%
46
.1%
46
.5%
71
.8%
61
.5%7
5.6
%
45
.2%
45
.6%
50
.8%
75
.4%
63
.4%7
9.6
%
52
.9%
52
.6%
57
.3%
79
.0%
68
.5%
Asian/PacificIslander
Black Hispanic AmericanIndian/Alaskan
Native
White Total Public
2006 2007 2008
Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4
2008 3-8 ELA results
9
ELA Performance By Racial / Ethnic Group, By Gender
Grades 3-8 2008
83.3
%
58.9
%
56.9
%
63.9
%
82.8
%
75.9
%
47.1
%
48.5
%
51.1
%
75.5
%
Asian/PacificIslander
Black Hispanic AmericanIndian/Alaskan
Native
White
Female Male
Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4
10
ELA Performance for Black Students,
By Gender, By Grade 2006, 2007, 2008
56.5
%
56.2
%
53.4
%
46.5
%
40.6
%
34.0
%
56.3
%
56.4
%
54.3
%
49.8
%
45.1
%
43.4
%
60.6
%
62.6
% 67.6
%
55.8
% 62.5
%
44.9
%
45.2
%
47.5
%
44.4
%
36.1
%
31.5
%
22.0
%
46.0
%
46.3
%
48.3
%
39.1
%
30.9
%
30.0
%
52.0
%
50.5
%
60.9
%
44.3
%
46.2
%
29.3
%
Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8
Females 2006 Females 2007 Females 2008 Males 2006 Males 2007 Males 2008
Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4
11
ELA Performance for Hispanic Students,
By Gender, By Grade 2006, 2007, 2008
64.0
%
59.2
%
55.2
%
47.0
%
41.9
%
36.4
%
54.5
%
54.1
%
51.9
%
48.2
%
44.9
%
42.8
%
56.7
%
61.3
% 67.5
%
52.4
% 60.3
%
43.2
%
53.9
%
51.9
%
49.7
%
39.8
%
35.2
%
26.5
%
47.0
%
47.7
%
48.2
%
41.4
%
35.2
%
32.5
%
50.9
%
52.6
%
63.2
%
43.9
%
49.0
%
31.7
%
Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8
Females 2006 Females 2007 Females 2008 Males 2006 Males 2007 Males 2008
Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4
12
The performance of ELL students on the English test improved overall.
34
.3%
26
.6%
20
.6%
11
.2%
8.5
%
4.9
%
16
.2%
30
.5%
23
.0%
18
.9%
10
.4%
7.0
%
5.9
%
18
.0%
33
.1%
31
.9%
34
.0%
14
.9%
17
.4%
6.3
%
25
.1%
Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grades 3-8
2006 2007 2008
Percentage of ELL Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4 2006 2007 2008Grade 3 3,684 17,093 17,433Grade 4 4,379 14,200 14,683Grade 5 6,686 11,480 11,916Grade 6 5,585 9,934 10,323Grade 7 6,234 9,299 9,798Grade 8 5,852 10,076 9,046Grades 3-8 32,420 72,082 73,199
Number of ELL Students Tested
2008 3-8 ELA results
13
A much smaller percentage of ELL students showed serious
academic difficulties in English.3
1.5
%
36
.4%
30
.3%
36
.6%
36
.8% 46
.6%
36
.6%
25
.9%
30
.8%
27
.5%
15
.9%
39
.4%
39
.0%
29
.3%
18
.4%
23
.8%
9.8
%
11
.1%
11
.8%
34
.2%
18
.1%
Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grades 3-8
2006 2007 2008 2008 3-8 ELA results
Percentage of ELL Students Scoring at Level 1
14
50
.7%
30
.1% 38
.4%
34
.0%
51
.1% 6
1.5
%
50
.8%
34
.5%
38
.4%
37
.3% 4
6.7
%
63
.4%
57
.6%
42
.5%
46
.6%
42
.1%
55
.6%
68
.5%
New York City Buffalo Rochester Syracuse Yonkers Total Public
2006 2007 2008
Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4
The Big 5 districts showed substantial performance improvements in English.
2008 3-8 ELA results
15
2008 3-8 Math
16
Achievement in math is up statewide. 8
0.5
%
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%
Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grades 3-8
2006 2007 2008
Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4
Number of Students Tested 2006 2007 2008Grade 3 201,956 200,217 197,500Grade 4 202,791 199,391 198,730Grade 5 209,242 203,956 199,746Grade 6 211,428 206,220 202,058Grade 7 217,308 213,436 209,039Grade 8 219,414 215,415 210,716Grades 3-8 1,262,139 1,238,635 1,217,789
2008 3-8 math results
17
2008 Math Grades 3-8 Percent of Students Scoring at Levels 1,2,3,4
18
Fewer students showed serious academic difficulties in math in all grades, including Grade 8.
6.4
%
7.5
%
10
.3%
13
.4%
13
.2%
15
.0%
11
.1%
4.1
%
6.1
%
5.9
%
8.8
%
7.6
% 12
.3%
7.5
%
2.3
%
4.8
%
3.8
%
5.6
%
3.9
%
7.5
%
4.7
%
Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grades 3-8
2006 2007 2008
Percentage of Students Scoring at Level 1
2008 3-8 math results
19
More Students with Disabilities met the math standards at every grade level.
50
.0%
44
.8%
31
.6%
21
.6%
18
.0%
17
.1%
30
.2%
57
.1%
47
.2%
41
.7%
31
.9%
26
.8%
20
.7% 37
.2%
66
.6%
53
.4%
52
.8%
42
.4%
42
.9%
31
.0% 47
.8%
Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grades 3-8
2006 2007 2008
Percentage of Students with Disabilities Scoring at Levels 3 and 4
Grade 3 27,045 26,780 27,325Grade 4 29,043 28,327 30,072Grade 5 30,290 29,960 30,662Grade 6 30,077 29,040 31,119Grade 7 29,791 29,659 31,037Grade 8 29,539 29,305 30,899Grades 3-8 175,785 173,071 181,114
Number Tested 2006 2007 2008
2008 3-8 math results
20
The achievement gap in math is narrowing for Black and Hispanic students.
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%
Asian/PacificIslander
Black Hispanic AmericanIndian/Alaskan
Native
White Total Public
2006 2007 2008
Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4
2008 3-8 math results
21
Math Performance By Racial / Ethnic Group, By Gender
Grades 3-8 2008
93.6
%
68.5
%
72.2
%
74.8
% 89.1
%
92.2
%
63.4
%
70.0
%
71.3
%
87.6
%
Asian/PacificIslander
Black Hispanic AmericanIndian/Alaskan
Native
White
Female Male
Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4
22
Math Performance for Black Students,
By Gender, By Grade 2006, 2007, 2008
67.9
%
62.5
%
50.9
%
42.7
%
33.9
%
31.5
%
75.9
%
65.4
%
62.0
%
56.0
%
47.0
%
37.4
%
82.9
%
73.4
%
71.9
%
67.4
%
64.7
%
52.1
%
65.0
%
62.2
%
47.7
%
38.2
%
28.3
%
25.1
%
73.1
%
64.4
%
59.0
%
50.3
%
38.9
%
31.4
%
79.7
%
70.4
%
69.2
%
60.5
%
57.2
%
44.6
%
Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8
Females 2006 Females 2007 Females 2008 Males 2006 Males 2007 Males 2008
Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4
23
Math Performance for Hispanic Students,
By Gender, By Grade 2006, 2007, 2008
71.6
%
65.5
%
55.5
%
44.7
%
38.1
%
33.7
%
78.9
%
69.5
%
65.9
%
59.3
%
52.0
%
41.7
%
86.0
%
77.0
%
75.7
%
69.3
%
68.6
%
56.6
%
71.5
%
67.7
%
56.6
%
45.6
%
36.2
%
32.3
%
78.1
%
70.9
%
65.5
%
57.5
%
48.7
%
39.1
%
84.3
%
76.6
%
74.9
%
66.4
%
64.5
%
53.8
%
Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8
Females 2006 Females 2007 Females 2008 Males 2006 Males 2007 Males 2008
Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4
24
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% 6
5.1
% 80
.7%
New York City Buffalo Rochester Syracuse Yonkers Total Public
2006 2007 2008
Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4
The Big 5 districts showed substantial performance improvements in math.
2008 3-8 math results
25
Next Steps• Review and update the learning
standards – ongoing
• Fully engage P-16 partners to help close achievement gap
• Continue work on growth model of accountability
• Strengthen school improvement
• Support the work of teachers and other school leaders
• Share best practices across schools statewide
• Other