1
STUDENT PROGRESS AND ACCOUNTABILITY
REPORT 2013
September 10, 2013
HUNTINGTON BEACH CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT
Components of the 2013 Standardized Testing and Reporting
Program (STAR)
• California Standards Test (CST)– English/Language Arts, Grades 2 - 8– Writing, Grades 4 and 7– Mathematics, Grades 2 - 7– General Mathematics, Grade 8– Algebra, Grades 7 and 8– Geometry, Grade 8– Science, Grades 5 and 8 – History/Social Science, Grade 8
• California Alternate Performance Assessment (CAPA)• California Modified Assessment (CMA)• Standards-based Tests in Spanish (STS)
2
3
CALIFORNIA STANDARDS TEST (CST) ENGLISH-LANGUAGE ARTS
2013 Percentages of Students Meeting Proficiency
81% Average for
HBCSD
4
CALIFORNIA STANDARDS TEST (CST) MATHEMATICS
2013 Percentages of Students Meeting Proficiency
80% Average for HBCSD
Grades 2 - 8
5
CALIFORNIA STANDARDS TEST (CST) ENGLISH-LANGUAGE ARTS
2009-2013 Subgroup Results
State Results: 33% Students with Disability 45% Economically Disadvantaged 22% English Learners
6
CALIFORNIA STANDARDS TEST (CST) MATHEMATICS
2009-2013 Subgroup Results
State Results: 48% Students with Disabilities 53% Economically Disadvantaged 40% English Learners
7
CALIFORNIA STANDARDS TEST (CST) 8th GRADE HISTORY-SOCIAL SCIENCE AND
5th and 8th GRADE SCIENCE RESULTS
8
STAR WRITING ASSESSMENT 4th and 7th Graders Meeting Proficiency
* The State suspended the writing assessment for 4th Grade in 2010
Additional State and Federal Accountability Components
• Physical Fitness Test (PFT)
9
10
Physical Fitness Testing (PFT) Percentages of Students Meeting Standards 2009 - 2013
2006/07: 6 out of 6 = Meets Fitness Standards
2008/09 – 2012/13: 5 out of 6 AND 6 out of 6 = Meets Fitness Standards.
= 40% were at 6 out of 6 in 5th grade and 53% were 6 out of 6 in 7th grade
Additional State and Federal Accountability Components
• California English Language Development (CELDT)
• Title III Accountability for English Learners(EL)
Data is not available from the California Department of Education at this time and will
be presented at a future meeting. 11
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
Federal accountability reporting system Looks at the percentage of students meeting proficiency STAR CST, CMA, and CAPA tests used to determine whether a district/school has met their AYP Criteria for meeting AYP
• Participation rate of 95%• Percent proficient• Additional API Indicator (800 or more)• Criteria must be met for students districtwide/schoolwide as well as significant subgroups
13.6%24.4%
35.2%46.0%
56.8%67.6%
78.4%89.2%
100.0%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2001-2002
2002-2003
2003-2004
2004-2005
2005-2006
2006-2007
2007-2008
2008-2009
2009-2010
2010-2011
2011-2012
2012-2013
2013-2014
13
ADEQUATE YEARLY PROGRESS (AYP)ENGLISH-LANGUAGE ARTS
Proficient and Advanced
59%59%
60%60%54%54% HB HB DistrictwideDistrictwide
65%65%
69%69%
71%71%
70%70%
75%75%
77%77%
79%79%
81%81%
80%80%
n
14
2001/02–2003/04 AMO = 13.6%
2008/09 AMO = 46.0%
ADEQUATE YEARLY PROGRESS (AYP)ENGLISH-LANGUAGE ARTS
2009-2013 Subgroup Results
2010/11 AMO = 67.6%
2011/12 AMO = 78.4%
2009/10 AMO = 56.8% 2012/13 AMO = 89.2%
15
ADEQUATE YEARLY PROGRESS (AYP)ELA Achievement Gap – Subgroups Compared to AYP Targets and All Students
16
16.0%26.5%
37.0%47.5%
58.0%68.5%
79.0%89.5%
100.0%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2001-2002
2002-2003
2003-2004
2004-2005
2005-2006
2006-2007
2007-2008
2008-2009
2009-2010
2010-2011
2011-2012
2012-2013
2013-2014
ADEQUATE YEARLY PROGRESS (AYP)MATH
Proficient and Advanced
53%53% HB DistrictwideHB Districtwide
59% 59%
64%64%
65%65%
69%69%
70%70%
70%70%
75%75%
75%75%
75%75%
76%76%
79%79%
17
ADEQUATE YEARLY PROGRESS (AYP) MATH
2009-2013 Subgroup Results
2001/02-2003/04 AMO = 16.0%
2008/09 AMO = 47.5%
2009/10 AMO = 58.0%
2010/11 AMO = 68.5%
2011/12 /AMO = 79.0%
2012/13 /AMO = 89.5%
18
ADEQUATE YEARLY PROGRESS (AYP)Math Achievement Gap – Subgroups Compared to AYP Targets and All Students
Huntington Beach City School District2013 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Summary
19
Site Number of Criteria
AYP Outcomes
Subgroups Not Meeting ELA
Subgroups Not Meeting Math
PI Status
District 33 Met 26 of 33 LEAWide, Hispanic, White, Two/More Races, SED, EL,
SWD
Year 2
Dwyer 29 Met 19 of 29 Schoolwide, Asian, Hispanic, SED, EL, SWD
White, SED, EL, SWD Year 2
Sowers 25 Met 18 of 25 Schoolwide, Hispanic, White, SED, SWD
Hispanic, SWD
Eader 13 Met 11 of 13 Schoolwide, White
Hawes 13 Met 12 of 13 Schoolwide
H. Seacliff 13 Met 13 of 13
Moffett 15 Met 8 of 15 Schoolwide, White, SED, SWD
Schoolwide, SED, SWD
Perry 25 Met 18 of 25 Schoolwide, Hispanic, White, SED, EL, SWD
SWD Year 2
Peterson 17 Met 16 of 17 Schoolwide Year 1
Smith 17 Met 14 of 17 Schoolwide, White SED
State accountability reporting system
Looks at growth in district/school’s performance
Star CST, CMA, and CAPA tests used in API calculation
Academic Performance Index (API)
Huntington Beach City School District Growth Academic Performance Index Results
Eader Elementary School Growth Academic Performance Index Results
Hawes Elementary School Growth Academic Performance Index Results
Huntington Seacliff Elementary School Growth Academic Performance Index Results
Moffett Elementary School Growth Academic Performance Index Results
Perry Elementary School Growth Academic Performance Index Results
Peterson Elementary School Growth Academic Performance Index Results
Smith Elementary School Growth Academic Performance Index Results
Dwyer Middle School Growth Academic Performance Index Results
Sowers Middle School Growth Academic Performance Index Results
31
ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE INDEX (API)Multi-Year Growth Trend
1999/00 2012/13 OverallSchool Site Baseline Results GrowthDwyer 732 895 163Eader 781 932 151Hawes 846 940 94Huntington Seacliff 844* 968 124Moffett 793 921 128Perry 621 812 191Peterson 757 937 180Smith 794 910 116Sowers 807 892 85
*2000 Baseline
32
HBCSD POINTS OF PRIDEAdequate Yearly Progress (AYP)•One (1) school met all AYP criteria •One (1) Title I school met goals through Safe Harbor•Twenty-Seven (27) groups made Safe Harbor goals•HBCSD students continue to outperform when compared to county and state data
Academic Performance Index (API)• All schools at or above the State Target of 800• Seven (7) schools made growth•Six (6) schools over 900•Positive multi-year growth trend for schools ranging from 85-191 points
33
Program Improvement (PI)HBCSD Responsibilities
Program Improvement (PI)• Year 1 designation for Peterson• Year 2 designation for District, Dwyer, and Perry•Continued data analysis and implementation of addendum to Local Education Agency (LEA) Plan•Set aside Title I funding for professional development, choice transfers, and supplemental educational services (Year 2 sites only)
Huntington Beach City School District
Next Steps for Success:• Continue to conduct data analysis on 2012/13 STAR and
Multiple Measures assessment data • Identify and support student achievement needs based
on data analysis• Develop and implement targeted academic interventions
for students at each school site• Continue to align Single Plans for Student Achievement
to reflect identified needs and goals in English-language arts and Mathematics
34
Huntington Beach City School District
Next Steps for Success (continued):• Support the continuation of the Benchmark Assessment
System to inform instruction and monitor student achievement in English-language arts and Mathematics
• Provide Common Core professional development for staff to support instructional goals for student achievement
• Take steps to prepare for rigorous assessments in Spring of 2014
• Emphasis during instruction on 21st Century skills
35