35
BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011

BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIPNJASK 3-8 RESULTS

2010-2011

Page 2: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

How are we doing compared to the standard?

% Partially Proficient

% Proficient

% Advanced Proficient

Page 3: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

How are we compared to the District Factor Group?

Relative Performance

Page 4: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

GRADE 3NJ ASK - SPRING 2011

LANGUAGE ARTS

Advanced Proficient Proficient

Partially

Proficient

DFGI 12.8% 66.1% 21.1%

Bethlehem Twp.

6.9% 55.2% 37.9%

Page 5: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

GRADE 3NJ ASK - SPRING 2011

MATHEMATICS

Advanced Proficient Proficient

Partially

Proficient

DFGI 54.2% 36.7% 9.1%

Bethlehem Twp.

43.1% 44.8% 12.1%

Page 6: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

GRADE 4NJ ASK - SPRING 2011

LANGUAGE ARTS

Advanced Proficient Proficient

Partially

Proficient

DFGI 13.6% 66.4% 20.0%

Bethlehem Twp.

15.7% 65.7% 18.6%

Page 7: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

GRADE 4NJ ASK - SPRING 2011

MATHEMATICS

Advanced Proficient Proficient

Partially

Proficient

DFGI 46.4% 44.3% 9.3%

Bethlehem Twp.

62.9% 25.7% 11.4%

Page 8: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

GRADE 4NJ ASK - SPRING 2011

SCIENCE

Advanced Proficient Proficient

Partially

Proficient

DFGI 64.9% 32.0% 3.1%

Bethlehem Twp.

81.4% 18.6% 0%

Page 9: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

GRADE 5NJ ASK - SPRING 2011

LANGUAGE ARTS

Advanced Proficient Proficient

Partially

Proficient

DFGI 12.3% 67.9% 19.8%

Bethlehem Twp.

15.0% 57.5% 27.5%

Page 10: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

GRADE 5NJ ASK - SPRING 2011

MATHEMATICS

Advanced Proficient Proficient

Partially

Proficient

DFGI 56.8% 35.1% 8.1%

Bethlehem Twp.

46.3% 36.3% 17.5%

Page 11: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

GRADE 6NJ ASK - SPRING 2011

LANGUAGE ARTS

Advanced Proficient Proficient

Partially

Proficient

DFGI 13.4% 69.2% 17.5%

Bethlehem Twp.

18.2% 70.5% 11.4%

Page 12: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

GRADE 6NJ ASK - SPRING 2010

MATHEMATICS

Advanced Proficient Proficient

Partially Proficient

DFGI 41.9% 47.9% 10.2%

Bethlehem Twp.

52.3% 40.9% 6.8%

Page 13: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

GRADE 7NJ ASK - SPRING 2011

LANGUAGE ARTS

Advanced Proficient Proficient

Partially Proficient

DFGI 22.7% 59.6% 17.7%

Bethlehem Twp.

25.7% 58.1% 16.2%

Page 14: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

GRADE 7NJ ASK - SPRING 2011

MATHEMATICS

Advanced Proficient Proficient

Partially Proficient

DFGI 38.9% 43.7% 17.4%

Bethlehem Twp.

33.8% 45.9% 20.3%

Page 15: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

GRADE 8NJ ASK - SPRING 2011

LANGUAGE ARTS

Advanced Proficient Proficient

Partially Proficient

DFGI 34.1% 59.7% 6.2%

Bethlehem Twp.

41.4% 55.7% 2.9%

Page 16: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

GRADE 8NJ ASK - SPRING 2011

MATHEMATICS

Advanced Proficient Proficient

Partially Proficient

DFGI 46.9% 39.5% 13.7%

Bethlehem Twp.

71.4% 20.0% 8.6%

Page 17: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

GRADE 8NJ ASK - SPRING 2011

SCIENCE

Advanced Proficient Proficient

Partially Proficient

DFGI 46.8% 46.6% 6.6%

Bethlehem Twp.

58.6% 38.6% 2.9%

Page 18: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

Data Analysis

What trends do you find in the data?

Cohort Analysis: Follow the same group of students from Grade 3-8

Page 19: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

3-8 Cohort Analysis: Language Arts

Page 20: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

3-8 Cohort Analysis: Mathematics

Page 21: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

How are we doing compared to ourselves?

Progress

Non-Cohort Analysis: Different groups of students in a specific grade over time

Page 22: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

Non-Cohort Data: Grade 3 Lang. Arts

Page 23: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

Non-Cohort Data: Grade 3 Mathematics

Page 24: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

Non-Cohort Data: Grade 4 Lang. Arts

Page 25: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

Non-Cohort Data: Grade 4 Mathematics

Page 26: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

Non-Cohort Data: Grade 4 Science!

Page 27: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

Non-Cohort Data: Grade 5 Lang. Arts

Page 28: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

7.94

50.962.7

41.2

33.3

6.8

14.8

50.3

54.2

42.9

31

18.3

11.2

47.9

46.6

33.8

42.2

10

17.3

40.8

53.4

49.2

29.3

8.911.4

37.5

52.2

53.6

36.4

8.1

17.5

35.1

36.2

56.8

46.3

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

DFG I BT DFG I BT DFG I BT DFG I BT DFG I BT DFG I BT

% S

tud

en

ts

DFG I and BT Comparison Non-Cohort Data Gr. 5 Math

2006 2007 2008* 2009 2010**

*ScoringChange

Adv. Prof.

Part. Prof.

Proficient

2011

**Stayed at Conley

Non-Cohort Data: Grade 5 Mathematics

Page 29: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

Non-Cohort Data: Grade 6 Lang. Arts

Page 30: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

Non-Cohort Data: Grade 6 Mathematics

Page 31: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

Non-Cohort Data: Grade 7 Lang. Arts

Page 32: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

Non-Cohort Data: Grade 7 Lang. Arts

Page 33: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

Non-Cohort Data: Grade 8 Lang. Arts

Page 34: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

Non-Cohort Data: Grade 8 Mathematics

Page 35: BETHLEHEM TOWNSHIP NJASK 3-8 RESULTS 2010-2011. How are we doing compared to the standard? % Partially Proficient % Proficient % Advanced Proficient

Non-Cohort Data: Grade 8 Science