COMPARATIVE DATA - Berkeley Heights Public Schools · COMPARATIVE DATA BERKELEY HEIGHTS PUBLIC SCHOOLS February 25, 2016 1 Miss Patty Gasparini Mr. Frank Geiger ... Mean Score: 7

Measuring College and

Career Readiness

PARCC RESULTS: COMPARATIVE DATA

BERKELEY HEIGHTS PUBLIC SCHOOLSFebruary 25, 2016

1

Miss Patty GaspariniMr. Frank Geiger

Mr. Scott McKinneyMr. Jon Morisseau

Mrs. Jessica NardiMr. Robert NixonMs. Laurie ScottMr. Drew Ziobro

Today’s presentation

● District PARCC Scores in comparison to the DFG Averages and Dashboard Group Scores

● Plans for using this data to support students and improve instruction

Coming soon

● Complete Data Dashboard presentation ○ Following the release

of the School Performance Reports by NJ DOE

2

TONIGHT’S PARCC PRESENTATION

● In 2014-15 school year, New Jersey adopted the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) to replace HSPA & ASK and assess the Common Core State Standards.

● Students took PARCC English Language Arts and Literacy Assessments (ELA) in grades 3 – 11.

● Students took PARCC Mathematics Assessments in grades 3 – 8 and End-of-Course Assessments in Algebra I, Geometry, and Algebra II.

● These assessments took place in March and May of the 2014-2015 school year.

NEW JERSEY’S STATEWIDE ASSESSMENT PROGRAM

3

PARCC Performance Levels

HOW IS STUDENT PERFORMANCE SCORED ON PARCC TESTS?

4

Not yet meeting

grade-level expectations

Partially meeting

grade-level expectations

Approaching grade-level

expectations

Meeting grade-level

expectations

Exceeding grade-level

expectations

● Mean Scores, Performance Scores, Passing Rates, and Participation Rates

● This information will be compared with:○ DFG Averages (A state created socio-economic grouping)

■ DFG I: our grouping■ DFG J: the wealthiest grouping in NJ

○ Dashboard Group Scores● Summary Data will be used to make these comparisons.● Grade-level data sorted by Passing Rates and Mean Scores is

available in the appendix of this presentation.

5

What will be shared in this presentation?

6

Dashboard Group Percentile ELA Passing Rates

7

Dashboard Group Percentile Math Passing Rates

8

Grades 3-5 ELA Passing Rates

9

Grades 3-5 ELA Mean Scores

10

Grades 3-5 Math Passing Rates

11

Grades 3-5 Math Mean Scores

● Our students, at the elementary level, surpassed the DFG I and Dashboard Group Averages.

● Each elementary school performed consistently with slight variations that are similar to the year-to-year fluctuations that occurred on previous assessments.

● Areas of focus pending Item Analysis Report○ ELA will focus on the areas of Vocabulary and Writing

sub-claims.○ Mathematics will focus on Reasoning sub-claim.

PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS AND ANALYSIS

12

13


14


15

Comparing PARCC Math Scores

● PARCC Math Assessments administered from Grades 3-8 and Algebra, Geometry, and Algebra 2○ Students take grade-level tests until they enter Algebra 1, then students take

PARCC assessments based upon current course enrollment.○ For Berkeley Heights students, some students take Algebra 1 beginning in

7th grade and all the way through high school.○ Districts vary in their approach to math placements throughout the state.

● These differences make comparing the assessments more challenging than ELA.

● In an effort to give an accurate comparison of student performance compared to our dashboard group, we will present the information by grade level, regardless of the assessment the student took beginning with 7th grade students. ○ Additional comparisons by test are included in the appendix.

16


17


● Middle School scores and passing rates fell beneath the DFG and Dashboard Group averages.

● Grade 6 scores in ELA and Math require closer examination and monitoring.

○ While DFG I, J, and our Dashboard all experienced a dip in scores for Grade 6, our drop was more significant.

○ Areas of focus pending Item Analysis Report■ ELA will focus on the areas of vocabulary and grammar as

well as the expansion of informational text materials■ Mathematics will focus on an examination of scope and

sequencing of our courses


18

19


20


21


22


● The high school ELA performance surpasses the DFG I and Dashboard group passing rates, while grade-level Math scores fall beneath our comparison groups.

● Areas of focus pending Item Analysis Report○ ELA will focus on the literary portion of the Reading sub-

claim as well as the expression portion of the Writing sub- claim.

○ Mathematics will focus on higher-level modeling and reasoning in all areas of mathematics.


23

24

PARCC Participation Rate Comparison

● The testing experience for the first PARCC administration was very different from district to district.○ Generally speaking, Berkeley Heights had a much

higher participation rate than the averages in DFG I or DFG J.

○ Experiences varied from student refusal to unmotivated/unengaged students to full participation.

○ Some districts had many more technology issues than occurred in Berkeley Heights.

25

PARCC Math Participation Rate

● Overall our performance, mirrored the performance of the DFG and Dashboard groupings.

● Berkeley Heights Schools tied or exceeded Dashboard averages. (Includes DFG I & DFG J districts)○ Passing Rate:

■ 6 out of 9 Grade Levels in ELA■ 4 out of 9 Grade Levels in Math

○ Mean Score:■ 7 out of 9 Grade Levels in ELA■ 4 out of 9 Grade Levels in Math

● We require further analysis and additional data points to diagnose the reasons for the lagging performance in PARCC Math scores.

26

Initial Observations

● Student Analysis and Support○ Analyze the PARCC results alignment with other measures of

student ability and achievement. (Ongoing, upon release of item analysis)

■ WRAP/F&P, COGATs, ASK, HSPA, Course grades, GPA, SAT, ACT, AP, etc.○ Distribute appropriate data to grade levels, departments and

teaching staff members for reflection and to compare against other data points for in-depth analysis at district, building, classroom, & student level. (completed)

○ Incorporate PARCC test samples and resources into classroom instruction. (completed, will continue through spring)

○ Continue the remediation of students who have been identified as needing targeted interventions. (ongoing)

HOW WILL OUR DISTRICT USE THESE RESULTS TO DRIVE INSTRUCTION AND HELP OUR STUDENTS?

27

● Curriculum Planning & Classroom Instruction○ Utilize item analysis data to identify strengths and areas of

concern in tested areas. (upon release of data)○ Sort interactive report data to analyze student/teacher/district

performance in sub-claim areas. (upon arrival)■ Are there content areas that need greater emphasis?

■ Are there skills that need to be implemented, revised, or reviewed?

○ Provide opportunities for professional development for teaching staff members. (as identified & to be included in the 16-17 District Professional Development Plan)

HOW WILL OUR DISTRICT USE THESE RESULTS TO DRIVE INSTRUCTION AND HELP OUR STUDENTS?

28

● Closer examination of areas of concern as determined through our analysis of comparative PARCC data. (upon arrival of Item Analysis reports)○ Grade 6 ELA and Math○ Math progression and placement of students middle school

through high school.● Identification of districts and/or programs for visitation and sharing

of best practices utilizing Council on Instruction committees. (Spring-Fall, 2016)

● Ongoing evaluation of instructional practice that exposes our students to PARCC style assessments and questioning. (ongoing)

● Working to establish a culture of high participation and high engagement on this standardized assessment. 29

What is the plan?

30

Questions?

◼ Grade Level Score comparisons to Dashboard Group Scores, DFG Averages, and State Average▪ Sorted by Mean Score▪ Sorted by Passing Rates

31

Appendix

32

ELA GRADE 3 PASSING RATE

33


34


35


36


37


38


39


40


41

ELA GRADE 3 MEAN

42

ELA GRADE 4 MEAN

43

ELA GRADE 5 MEAN

44

ELA GRADE 6 MEAN

45

ELA GRADE 7 MEAN

46

ELA GRADE 8 MEAN

47

ELA GRADE 9 MEAN

48

ELA GRADE 10 MEAN

49

ELA GRADE 11 MEAN

50

MATH 3 PASSING RATE

51

MATH 4 PASSING RATE

52

MATH 5 PASSING RATE

53

MATH 6 PASSING RATE

54

GRADE 7 MATH PASSING RATE

55


56


57


58


59

MATH 3 MEAN

60

MATH 4 MEAN

61

MATH 5 MEAN

62

MATH 6 MEAN

63

GRADE 7 MATH MEAN

64

GRADE 8 MATH MEAN

65

GRADE 9 MATH MEAN

66

GRADE 10 MATH MEAN

67

GRADE 11 MATH MEAN

● While ELA is tested by grade levels from 3-11 grade, Math is assessed from grades 3-8 but students are assessed in Algebra I, Geometry, and Algebra II in the year in which they take the course regardless of their grade level.

● 97% of NJ 7th graders took the grade 7 Math assessment as compared to 74% of Berkeley Heights 7th graders.


MATH ASSESSMENTS

% of students taking

Grade Level Math Algebra 1 Geometry Algebra 2

Grade 7 74% 25% 1% 0%

Grade 8 38% 35% 28% 0%

Grade 9 DNA 39% 39% 16%

Grade 10 DNA 5% 39% 44%

Grade 11 DNA 1% 2% 51%68

●The following slides are in response to questions raised regarding the release of comparative PARCC scoring information for NJ school districts.

●When comparing Math scores between districts, it is important to consider the student populations that are represented in the test results.

69

UNDERSTANDING THE PARCC SCORES-MATH SECTION

●ELA testing is done based completely on grade level.

●Math testing is assessed by grade level until a student reaches Algebra.

●A student taking Algebra 1, Geometry, or Algebra 2 will take the PARCC assessment as determined by their course level regardless of their grade level.

UNDERSTANDING THE PARCC SCORES-MATH SECTION

● PARCC Consortium 8th grade test takers ○18% taking Algebra 1 or Geometry○82% of eighth graders took Grade 8 Math test

● NJ 8th grade test takers ○34% taking Algebra 1 or Geometry○66% of eighth graders took Grade 8 Math test

● Berkeley Heights 8th grade test takers ○62% taking Algebra 1 or Geometry○38% of eighth graders took Grade 8 Math test

A QUICK COMPARISON OF 8TH GRADE TEST TAKERS

● While ELA is tested by grade levels from 3-11 grade, Math is assessed from grades 3-8 but students are assessed in Algebra I, Geometry, and Algebra II in the year in which they take the course regardless of their grade level.



MATH ASSESSMENTS

% of students taking

Grade Level Math Algebra 1 Geometry Algebra 2

Grade 7 74% 25% 1% 0%

Grade 8 38% 35% 28% 0%

Grade 9 DNA 39% 39% 16%

Grade 10 DNA 5% 39% 44%

Grade 11 DNA 1% 2% 51%72

BERKELEY HEIGHTS 2015 PARCC SCHOOL & GRADE-LEVEL OUTCOMES

MATHEMATICS

Grade 3 %

>= Level 4

Grade 4 % >=

Level 4

Grade 5 % >=

Level 4

Grade 6 % >=

Level 4

Grade 7 % >=

Level 4

Grade 8 % >=

Level 4

Algebra I % >= Level 4

Geometry % >=

Level 4

Algebra II % >= Level 4

Mountain Park 78 76 80

T. P. Hughes 81 76 83

W. Woodruff 74 62 63

Columbia 54 42 22 86 100

GLHS 11 26 41

District 78 72 76 54 42 22 47 41 41

NJ 45 40 41 41 37 24 36 23 24

*Note: Approximately 30,000 New Jersey students participated in the PARCC Algebra I assessment while in middle school. PARCC Math 7 & 8 outcomes are not representative of grade-level performance as a whole. 73

●Berkeley Heights students are taking higher-level Math courses much sooner than the state averages.

●The students identified to take these Math courses, while in middle school, did well on the PARCC assessment.

●The Grade 8 Math scores represent only 38% of our Grade 8 students.

74

SUMMARY

75

MATH 07 PASSING RATE

76

MATH 08 PASSING RATE

77

ALGEBRA 2 PASSING RATE

78

MATH 07 MEAN

79

MATH 08 MEAN

80

ALGEBRA 2 MEAN

81

ALGEBRA 1 DFG COMPARISON BY GRADE

82

GEOMETRY DFG COMPARISON BY GRADE

83

ALGEBRA 2 DFG COMPARISON BY GRADE

84

Dashboard Group Percentile ELA Mean Score

85

Dashboard Group Percentile Math Mean Score

Documents

COMPARATIVE DATA - Berkeley Heights Public Schools · COMPARATIVE DATA BERKELEY HEIGHTS PUBLIC SCHOOLS February 25, 2016 1 Miss Patty Gasparini Mr. Frank Geiger ... Mean Score: 7