Transcript Chittenden South Supervisory Union 2009 Student

Chittenden South Supervisory Union
2010 Student Performance
May 11, 2011
Presentation Overview
Part 1: The Context for Assessment:
How does student performance guide instruction?
 Data Driven Decision Making/Planning.
 Triangulate – a simple guide to using assessment data.
Part 2: NECAP Assessment:
Review of CSSU NECAP results and observations.
CSSU Improvement Initiatives.
The Context for Assessment
Student performance is a result of
a continuous instruction and assessment loop.
Instruction
Instruction revision and
differentiation based on data.
Assessment
Triangulate: Assessment of Student Performance
Classroom Assessments:
Formative and Summative
Formative - frequent, ongoing, direct feedback
Summative – cumulative, end-of-unit
Student
Performance
Common CSSU Assessments
Science Inquiry Tasks – Formative year 2 pilot
On Demand Expository Writing – Formative & Summative pilot
Fact Fluency – Formative and Summative
Common Math Assessments – CMA Summative
DRP – Degrees of Reading Power - Summative
BAS – Benchmark Assessment System
Focus of this presentation
State Assessment: NECAP
Reading
Math
Writing
Science
NECAP 2010 Results
General Overview Compared to State.
Reading performance.
Writing Performance.
Math Performance.
Science Performance.
Key to NECAP Achievement Levels
 Scores translate into four achievement levels
4:
3:
2:
1:
Proficient with Distinction
Proficient
Partially Proficient
Substantially Below Proficient
4
3
2
1
NECAP 2010 - Teaching Year
CSSU Achievement Level Grades 3-8
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
27%
56%
11%
6%
33%
27%
Prof. w/Dist.
2%
20%
25%
46%
40%
12%
9%
28%
50%
19%
4%
8%
65%
Below Prof.
22%
0%
39%
26%
7%
Partial Prof.
52%
53%
18%
10%
44%
38%
18%
17%
39%
9%
Math
Writing 5 Writing 8 Science 4 Science 8
CSSU
2%
49%
52%
29%
34%
9%
10%
Reading
13%
12%
1%
28%
49%
13%
22%
Reading
Math
Writing 5 Writing 8 Science 4 Science 8
State
Observation:
•This comparison offers perspective. It is a good indicator of the rigor of the test and alignment with CSSU programs.
•Performance of CSSU is above State in all subject areas in grades 3-8.
•CSSU achievement levels in grades 3-8 most significantly exceed the State in grade 4 science by 13% and grades 5 and 8
writing scores by 15%.
•CSSU students grades 3-8 excel in reading, math and 8th grade writing.
•These results indicate a CSSU focus area: science at grade 8.
•2010 was the first year 5th and 8th grade students were assessed using the new prompts in NECAP writing.
NECAP 2010 - Teaching Year
CSSU Achievement Level Grade 11
39%
Prof. w/Dist.
4%
5%
60%
44%
49%
10%
7%
23%
30%
23%
6%
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
Partial Prof.
Below Prof.
29%
4%
38%
43%
35%
39%
18%
11%
26%
36%
20%
Reading
Math
Writing
CSSU
1%
3%
Science
48%
2%
26%
43%
46%
7%
26%
Reading
Math
Writing
Science
State
Observations:
•Grade 11 reading performance is CVU’s highest performance content area.
•Grade 11 Science achievement is CVU’s weakest content area performance though CVU science out
performs State scores by 4%.
•Though scores exceed the State, 11th grade reading, science and math are focus areas.
Reading Performance
CSSU compared to performance in New England NECAP States..
CSSU compared to performance of comparable school districts in Vermont.
CSSU reading performance and over six years.
CSSU reading performance of students with low SES status and on IEP’s.
Below
Proficient
11%
CSSU
73%
77%
70%
70%
27%
23%
30%
30%
VT
NH
RI
ME
Observations:
•11th grade at CSSU out performs other New
England NECAP states in reading.
•CSSU 11th grade students performed 11%
higher than the rest of Vermont in reading
this year.
Overall, reading is a strength throughout CSSU.
Observations:
•CSSU grade 3-8 students out perform the other
New England NECAP states in reading.
•CSSU grade 3-8 students out perform the rest
of Vermont by 16% in reading this year.
New England Comparison NECAP 2010
Reading Grade 11
Proficient
and
Above
89%
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
New England Comparison NECAP 2010
Reading Grades 3-8
83%
72%
74%
76%
17%
28%
26%
24%
CSSU
VT
NH
RI
CSSU & Comparable Districts
2010 NECAP Reading
Grade 3-8
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
27%
27%
Below
Proficient
56%
40%
Prof. w/Dist.
Partial Prof.
Below Prof.
24%
35%
25%
19%
24%
32%
55%
48%
56%
56%
56%
49%
11%
6%
16%
14%
15%
6%
13%
4%
14%
5%
16%
8%
13%
7%
13%
5%
CSSU
ACSU
CCSU
CESU
ETSD
LSSU
MSD
SBSD
Observations:
•CSSU grades 3-8 reading achievement surpasses scores in all but one comparable school district in Vermont.
•CSSU grades 3-8 achieved equally with Chittenden East schools in reading this year.
CSSU Comparable High Schools
2010 NECAP Reading
Grade 11
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
Prof. w/Dist.
Partial Prof.
Below Prof.
39%
40%
50%
36%
44%
44%
45%
36%
46%
41%
10%
7%
9%
-6%
8%
6%
14%
4%
8%
7%
CVU
Essex
MMU
SB
MHS
Observations:
•CSSU 11th grade reading scores are surpassed by all but one comparable high school this year, South Burlington.
•11th grade reading scores at CVU have room to grow.
CSSU Achievement Level History
Reading Grades 3-8
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
Prof. w/Dist.
Partial Prof.
Observations:
•Over 6 years we see gradual improvement of reading
achievement in grades 3-8.
•In 6 years, note a 5% increase in number of students
achieving Proficient with Distinction.
•In 6 years note a 2% decrease in scores that are Partially
and Below Proficient.
Below Prof.
22%
25%
25%
27%
29%
27%
59%
58%
56%
56%
55%
56%
13%
6%
11%
6%
13%
7%
11%
6%
11%
6%
11%
6%
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
CVU Achievement Level History
Reading Grade 11
Observations:
2009,11th
•Over 3 years, 2007 to
grade reading scores
decline slightly.
•11th grade reading scores improved 9% over last year.
•13% more students achieved Proficient with
Distinction in 2010 than 2009.
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and
Above
Proficient
Prof. w/Dist.
Partial Prof.
Below Prof.
32%
24%
26%
39%
48%
55%
48%
44%
11%
13%
16%
8%
8%
10%
10%
7%
2007
2008
2009
2010
CSSU NECAP - Reading
2010 current 8th grade cohort results
Prof. w/Dist.
Partial Prof.
Below Prof.
22%
25%
63%
63%
15%
6%
10%
5%
8%
3%
8%
2%
Gr 5 - 2007
Gr 6 - 2008
Gr 7 - 2009
Gr 8 - 2010
26%
22%
28%
56%
57%
50%
11%
7%
15%
6%
Gr 3 - 2005
Gr 4- 2006
37%
52%
Below
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
Proficient
Background:
Results are based on current 8th grade students that have been enrolled in a CSSU school from 2005 - 2010 and took the NECAP
assessment each year . 254 students were enrolled all 6 years which is 67 fewer students than originally enrolled in a CSSU school
as a 3rd grader in 2005.
Observations:
•This group of students gradually improved in reading achievement. This demonstrates consistently strong program and instruction.
•Over six years 11% more students achieve Proficient with Distinction at 8th grade than in 3rd grade.
•7% more students achieve Proficient and Proficient with Distinction over six years.
•8% fewer students achieved in the Partially and Below Proficient category over six years.
CSSU NECAP - Reading
2010 current 11th grade cohort results
Prof. w/Dist.
Partial Prof.
Below Prof.
20%
26%
29%
65%
63%
60%
9%
6%
10%
2%
8%
3%
8%
5%
Gr 6 - 2005
Gr 7- 2006
Gr 8 - 2007
Gr 11 - 2010
41%
46%
Below
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
Proficient
Background:
Results are based on current 11th grade students that have been enrolled in a CSSU school from 2005 - 2010
and took the NECAP assessment each year. 262 students were enrolled all 6 years which is 91 students fewer
than originally enrolled in a CSSU school.
Observations:
•Students in this group made 4% growth in reading achievement over three years through grade 8, 2005 to 2007.
•21% more students in this group achieved Proficient with Distinction by 11th grade than they did in 6th grade.
CSSU Low SES Students - Teaching Year Results
Reading Grades 3-8
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
5%
38%
29%
28%
3%
Prof. w/Dist.
7%
8%
8%
9%
10%
46%
42%
45%
45%
46%
48%
48%
25%
25%
31%
28%
27%
27%
25%
25%
24%
21%
22%
21%
20%
19%
18%
17%
3%
8%
38%
46%
47%
21%
25%
23%
25%
27%
24%
50%
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
CSSU
Below Prof.
5%
7%
10%
Partial Prof.
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
STATE
Observations:
•CSSU show steady improvement in reading achievement of 3-8th grade students with low SES status from 2007-2010.
•11% more of our low SES students are Proficient and Above this year compared to 2005.
•Students of low SES status statewide have also made 11% gains in Proficient and Above over six years.
•While CSSU reading scores are improving, students of low SES status in CSSU are not performing in reading as well as they
are in the State.
CSSU Low SES Students - Teaching Year Results
Reading Grade 11
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
0%
7%
42%
38%
16%
42%
24%
6%
19%
32%
31%
Prof. w/Dist.
Partial Prof.
Below Prof.
11%
11%
14%
39%
45%
43%
42%
26%
30%
27%
26%
25%
26%
23%
18%
20%
20%
2010
2007
2008
2009
2010
18%
8%
31%
42%
2007
2008
2009
CSSU
State
Observations:
•11th grade reading scores of students of low SES status have made dramatic gains this year over last.
•11th grade Proficient and Above reading scores of this subgroup jumped 24% points over 2009.
•11th grade Partially Proficient and Below scores decreased 22% from 2009 to 2010.
•While 11th grade students of low SES status have typically scored 5-7% below the State there is
significant improvement this year.
CSSU Students on an IEP - Teaching Year Results
Reading Grades 3-8
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
Prof. & Above
0%
1%
2%
1%
25%
22%
27%
25%
29%
27%
32%
34%
37%
40%
49%
41%
44%
35%
34%
1%
22%
3%
Below Proficient
1%
1%
1%
1%
18%
1%
18%
20%
21%
22%
23%
30%
28%
30%
32%
33%
34%
35%
40%
53%
51%
47%
45%
43%
41%
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
CSSU
Partial Prof.
1%
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
STATE
Observations:
•CSSU students in grades 3-8 on IEP’s show steady, gradual improvement in reading performance.
•Grade 3-8 students on IEP’s consistently perform 4% to 13% better than the state in reading.
•Since 2005, 7% more grade 3-8 students on IEP’s achieved Proficient and Proficient with Distinction.
CSSU Students on an IEP - Teaching Year Results
Reading Grade 11
Prof. w/Dist.
Partial Prof.
Below Prof.
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
3%
0%
0%
5%
28%
23%
23%
31%
23%
38%
2007
1%
1%
1%
1%
21%
14%
19%
20%
20%
23%
29%
33%
34%
36%
34%
53%
54%
45%
52%
46%
43%
45%
2008
2009
2010
2007
2008
2009
2010
CSSU
State
Observations:
•Grade 11 students on IEP’s out perform the state in reading by 5% to 16%.
•5% grade 11 students on IEP”s in CSSU performed in the Proficient with Distinction
category compared with 1% across the State.
CSSU 2010 NECAP
Prof. w/Dist.
Partial Prof.
Below Prof.
27%
32%
56%
60%
61%
0%
34%
11%
6%
8%
1%
20%
7%
30%
12%
0%
19%
35%
37%
General Population
(Non SES or IEP)
Only Students
that are low SES
46%
Only Students
on an IEP
Only Students that
are
both low SES & on
an IEP
CSSU 2010 NECAP
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
All Students
Below
Proficient
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
Grades 3-8 Reading by Category
Prof. w/Dist.
39%
45%
44%
47%
10%
7%
6%
3%
Grade 11 Reading by Category
Partial Prof.
Below Prof.
20%
48%
9%
22%
28%
4%
35%
35%
All Students
General Population
(Non SES or IEP)
Only Students
that are low SES
Only Students
on an IEP
0%
0%
22%
78%
Only Students that
are
both
low SES & on an IEP
CSSU 2010 NECAP - Low SES Only Students Grades 3-8 Reading
Proficient
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and
Above
6%
60%
Prof. w/Dist.
13%
48%
23%
11%
23%
2006
2007
16%
Partial Prof.
Below Prof.
9%
5%
12%
62%
65%
61%
20%
10%
16%
14%
20%
7%
2008
2009
2010
CSSU 2010 NECAP – Low SES Students Grades 3-8 - READING
Proficient
and
Above
Proficient
3%
Partial Prof.
Below Prof.
7%
3%
8%
38%
46%
47%
46%
29%
21%
25%
23%
25%
28%
25%
27%
24%
24%
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
50%
Below
Proficient
Prof. w/Dist.
10%
Observations: Low SES Only
•There is steady improvement in achievement of grade 3-8 students with low SES only status from 2006.
•There is a 7% increase in the number of students in this group achieving Proficient and Above in 2010 compared with 2009.
•There is a 7 % decrease in the number of students achieving Partially Proficient and Below since 2006.
•In 2010, 3-8th grade students of low SES status only performed 19% better than the low SES subgroup.
Writing Performance
Grades 5, 8, 11
CSSU compared to performance in New England NECAP States.
CSSU compared to performance of comparable school districts in Vermont.
CSSU writing performance and over 5 years.
CSSU writing performance of students with low SES status and on IEP’s.
35%
CSSU
50%
56%
59%
50%
44%
41%
VT
NH
RI
Observations:
CSSU grade 5, 8 and 11 out
perform all other New England
NECAP States.
43%
57%
ME
New England Comparison NECAP 2010
Writing Grade 8
Proficient
and
Above
65%
77%
62%
64%
61%
53%
23%
38%
36%
39%
47%
CSSU
VT
NH
RI
ME
Below
Proficient
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and
Above
New England Comparison NECAP 2010
Writing Grade 5
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
New England Comparison NECAP 2010
Writing Grade 11
64%
36%
CSSU
49%
45%
51%
51%
55%
49%
VT
NH
RI
CSSU & Comparable Districts
2010 NECAP Writing Grade 5
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
25%
40%
14%
30%
28%
8%
40%
CSSU
ACSU
16%
Prof. w/Dist.
10%
20%
Partial Prof.
Below Prof.
10%
13%
20%
14%
47%
38%
42%
34%
42%
42%
36%
7%
36%
5%
42%
39%
6%
14%
32%
7%
36%
7%
CCSU
CESU
ETSD
LSSU
MSD
SBSD
Observations:
CSSU grade 5 writing scores are
highest in New England, VT., and
all comparable school districts.
CSSU & Comparable Districts
2010 NECAP Writing Grade 8
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
Below
Proficient
Observations:
CSSU grade 8 writing
achievement is second to one
comparable school district,
South Burlington.
Prof. w/Dist.
Partial Prof.
Below Prof.
25%
18%
24%
14%
32%
45%
50%
50%
49%
57%
55%
24%
10%
30%
7%
21%
4%
28%
3%
23%
5%
19%
10%
9%
4%
ACSU
CCSU
CESU
ETSD
LSSU
MSD
SBSD
27%
20%
18%
50%
47%
19%
4%
CSSU
CSSU & Comparable High Schools
2010 NECAP Writing
Grade 11
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
Prof. w/Dist.
Partial Prof.
4%
4%
2%
60%
61%
66%
30%
30%
29%
6%
5%
3%
CVU
Essex
MMU
Below Prof.
2%
2%
58%
56%
39%
37%
1%
5%
SB
MHS
Observations:
•Grade 11 writing at CSSU ranks third with comparable high school comparison, out performed by
Essex and MMU.
CSSU Achievement Levels History
Writing Grades 5 & 8
* 2009 - pilot year for new prompts
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
18%
28%
45%
26%
10%
Prof. w/Dist.
26%
41%
25%
45%
36%
29%
40%
17%
10%
21%
16%
18%
11%
28%
8%
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Grade 5
Partial Prof.
Below Prof.
19%
22%
16%
21%
27%
55%
44%
54%
49%
50%
23%
3%
25%
9%
22%
8%
22%
7%
19%
4%
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Grade 8
Background:
NECAP writing assessment is given at 5th, 8th and 11th grades. 2009 was a pilot year for testing new prompts at grades
5 and 8. One CSSU school participated in the electronic trial this spring.
Observations:
•CSSU grade 5 writing is consistently high and out performs the state by 15% points in 2010.
•CSSU grade 5 students performing Proficient and Above increased 2% since 2005.
•CSSU grade 8 writing scores show improvement and are consistently high.
•Grade 8 scores are higher than our grade 5 scores and are 15% points above the State in 2010.
•Grade 8 students performing in Proficient and Above increased 3% since 2005.
• 15% fewer 8th grade students performed in the Partial and Below Proficient category in 2010 than in 2008.
CSSU NECAP Achievement Level History
Writing Grade 11
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
Prof. w/Dist.
Partial Prof.
Below Prof.
4%
8%
9%
49%
54%
50%
60%
34%
30%
33%
30%
8%
8%
6%
2009
2010
6%
11%
2007
2008
Observations:
•CSSU grade 11 writing scores are consistently better than the state by 15-20% points.
•Grade 11 scores show gradual improvement.
•Scores in Proficient and Above categories increased 9% points since 2007 and 5% since last year.
•The number of students performing Partially Proficient and Below has decreased 9% since 2007.
CSSU - Low SES Students - Teaching Year Results
Writing Grade 5
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
0%
3%
24%
Below
Proficient
21%
52%
12%
5%
24%
30%
32%
27%
35%
26%
36%
42%
30%
Prof. w/Dist.
Below Prof.
5%
6%
8%
15%
6%
21%
30%
28%
24%
24%
30%
39%
40%
28%
31%
30%
32%
24%
38%
37%
31%
7%
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
CSSU
Partial Prof.
48%
16%
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
STATE
Observations:
•This is a concern area for CSSU.
•Achievement of grade 5 students of low socio economic status is inconsistent.
•They are not achieving at the same level as their counter parts across the state.
•7% more of this CSSU student group achieved Partial and Below in 2010, compared with the State.
CSSU - Low SES Students - Teaching Year Results
Writing Grade 8
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
5%
45%
37%
48%
16%
39%
36%
3%
27%
47%
21%
32%
Partial Prof.
Below Prof.
6%
4%
0%
19%
Prof. w/Dist.
2%
31%
37%
36%
43%
40%
27%
33%
28%
25%
33%
41%
12%
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
CSSU
27%
4%
25%
41%
23%
4%
4%
5%
41%
38%
16%
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
STATE
Observations:
•Performance of grade 8 students with low socio economic status is inconsistent.
•Some years this group performs better than the State.
•CSSU 2010 results are a significant improvement over 2008. In 2010, 17% more CSSU 8th grade
students of low SES status performed Proficient and Above compared to 2008.
Proficient
and Above
CSSU Low SES Students - Teaching Year Results
Writing Grade 11
0%
21%
Below
Proficient
26%
53%
2007
0%
29%
39%
0%
0%
17%
18%
57%
64%
32%
2008
27%
18%
2009
2010
CSSU
3%
1%
21%
2%
25%
33%
0%
33%
51%
55%
52%
53%
27%
19%
12%
13%
2007
2008
2009
2010
State
Observations:
•This is a concern area for CSSU.
•Grade 11 students of low SES status have not kept up with gains in writing of their counterparts
in the state in 2009 and 2010.
•Grade 11 students of low SES status in 2009 and 2010 have more students achieving in the
Partially and Below Proficient categories than State performance in this area.
CSSU Students on an IEP - Teaching Year Results
Writing Grades 5
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
0%
8%
Below
Proficient
29%
63%
5%
20%
35%
40%
0%
0%
17%
83%
0%
11%
28%
61%
Prof. & Above
0%
7%
0%
11%
36%
37%
57%
51%
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
CSSU
Partial Prof.
Below Proficient
1%
6%
17%
76%
1%
7%
1%
9%
23%
28%
69%
63%
1%
9%
50%
40%
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
STATE
Observations:
•The performance of our grade 5 students on IEP’s is inconsistent and does not mirror
steady progress in State scores.
CSSU Students on an IEP - Teaching Year Results
Writing Grades 8
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
Below
Proficient
0%
6%
0%
18%
18%
0%
14%
34%
56%
0%
8%
Prof. & Above
0%
21%
45%
50%
47%
29%
Partial Prof.
1%
8%
0%
6%
29%
24%
62%
70%
64%
51%
38%
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
CSSU
Below Proficient
0%
8%
0%
8%
34%
36%
57%
57%
0%
13%
46%
40%
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
STATE
Observations:
•Grade 8 students on IEP’s are performing better than the State.
•They have improved since 2008 by 13% points.
•While 92% of this student group performed at Partial and Below Proficient in 2008, 79% were
in this category in 2010, a 13% improvement.
CSSU Students on an IEP - Teaching Year Results
Writing Grade 11
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
Prof. w/Dist.
Partial Prof.
Below Prof.
0%
29%
0%
0%
0%
0%
16%
5%
57%
48%
26%
0%
7%
0%
12%
0%
8%
43%
51%
60%
64%
51%
43%
27%
29%
2007
2008
2009
2010
0%
6%
61%
45%
36%
43%
2007
2008
2009
34%
2010
CSSU
Observations:
•Writing for 11th grade students in IEP’s is a focus area.
•NECAP improvement for this group is inconsistent.
State
Math Performance
CSSU compared to performance in New England NECAP States.
CSSU compared to performance of comparable school districts in Vermont.
CSSU math performance and over six years.
CSSU math performance of students with low SES status and on IEP’s.
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
New England Comparison NECAP 2010
Math Grades 3-8
79%
66%
71%
59%
60%
21%
34%
29%
41%
40%
CSSU
VT
NH
RI
ME
New England Comparison NECAP 2010
Math Grade 11
Below
Proficient
Math Performance of 3-8th
grade and 11th grade students
in CSSU out perform NECAP
scores in New England and
State of Vermont.
Proficient
and
Above
Observations:
54%
40%
36%
33%
46%
60%
64%
67%
CSSU
VT
NH
RI
CSSU & Comparable Districts
2010 NECAP Math Grades 3-8
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
Prof. w/Dist.
Partial Prof.
Below Prof.
Observations:
CSSU 3-8th grade out perform
all comparable towns in
Vermont in Math.
33%
27%
33%
32%
28%
21%
32%
36%
46%
40%
43%
46%
48%
46%
43%
42%
12%
9%
16%
14%
14%
8%
14%
10%
17%
15%
13%
12%
11%
10%
-11%
-10%
CSSU
ACSU
CCSU
CESU
ETSD
LSSU
MSD
SBSD
11th
CSSU
grade scores rank
third and out perform two
comparable high schools, SB
and MMU.
Below
Proficient
Observations:
Proficient
and
Above
CVU & Comparable High Schools
2010 NECAP Math
Proficient
5%
Prof. w/Dist.
7%
Partial Prof.
Below Prof.
9%
3%
9%
49%
56%
46%
47%
41%
23%
21%
26%
24%
23%
19%
18%
24%
24%
25%
CVU
Essex
MMU
SB
MHS
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
CSSU Achievement Levels History
Math Grades 3-8
Proficient
Prof. w/Dist.
Partial Prof.
Below Prof.
33%
33%
35%
32%
36%
33%
57%
48%
46%
44%
45%
46%
10%
8%
12%
10%
11%
8%
13%
11%
11%
8%
12%
9%
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Observations:
•CSSU Math performance from 2005-2010
has been fairly level, and consistently strong.
•CSSU grades 3-8 consistently out perform
the State.
•CSSU grades 3-8 out performed the State by
13% in 2010.
CSSU Achievement Level History
Math Grade 11
Below
Proficient
Observations:
•CSSU 11th graders made strong improvement in
math this year, a 10% gain over 2009.
•CSSU grade 11 math performance has gradually
improved by 8% since 2007 and demonstrates
higher achievement than 11th grades across the
State.
•CSSU 11th graders out performed the state by
14% this year.
Proficient
and
Above
Proficient
Prof. w/Dist.
Partial Prof.
4%
42%
1%
45%
5%
39%
22%
27%
29%
32%
26%
27%
2007
2008
2009
Below Prof.
5%
49%
23%
23%
2010
CSSU NECAP - Math
2010 current 8th grade cohort results
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
Prof. w/Dist.
Partial Prof.
Below Prof.
38%
30%
31%
37%
36%
36%
49%
52%
51%
49%
46%
46%
9%
13%
5%
11%
8%
9%
6%
10%
12%
8%
6%
Gr 4- 2006
Gr 5 - 2007
Gr 6 - 2008
Gr 7 - 2009
Gr 8 - 2010
Below
Proficient
5%
Gr 3 - 2005
Background:
Results are based on current 8th grade students that have been enrolled in a CSSU school from
2005 - 2010 and took the NECAP assessment each year . 253 students were enrolled all 6 years.
68 students left CSSU schools between 2005 and 2010.
Observations:
•This cohort of current 8th graders scored consistently in math across their 6 year history.
•This demonstrates strong and consistent program and instruction.
CSSU NECAP - Math
2010 current 11th grade cohort results
Prof. w/Dist.
Partial Prof.
Below Prof.
41%
44%
37%
44%
43%
49%
53%
10%
5%
8%
5%
10%
5%
24%
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
5%
18%
Gr 6 - 2005
Gr 7- 2006
Gr 8 - 2007
Gr 11 - 2010
Background:
Results are based on current 11th grade students that have been enrolled in a CSSU school from 2005 - 2010 and took the
NECAP assessment each year. 259 students were enrolled all 6 years. 94 students left CSSU schools from 2005 – 2010,
between 6th and 11th grade.
Observations:
•Math performance is consistent until 11th grade when scores decline by 28% points in 11th grade. Those performing
Partially and Below Proficient increased 27%.
•This most likely indicates lack of preparation for concepts in the 11th grade NECAP test, largely Algebra II.
CSSU Grade 8 Students
Enrolled in Algebra 1
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
42%
43%
2009-2010
2010-2011
37%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008-2009
Observations:
•Increasing student preparation for and success in Algebra I as 8th graders is a focus in CSSU.
•Since this focus, students successfully completing Algebra I in 8th grade has increased 6% since 2008.
CSSU Low SES Students - Teaching Year Results
Grades 3-8 - Math
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
10%
7%
Prof. w/Dist.
6%
8%
10%
11%
Partial Prof.
Below Prof.
7%
8%
8%
9%
10%
10%
39%
48%
40%
37%
38%
37%
37%
38%
37%
39%
39%
39%
21%
21%
24%
23%
23%
19%
25%
23%
25%
23%
23%
24%
28%
23%
30%
32%
29%
33%
32%
30%
30%
29%
28%
27%
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
CSSU
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
STATE
Observations:
•Performance of grade 3-8 students with low SES status is similar to state performance.
•The State scores show gradual and steady improvement of 5% since 2005 and about 2%
improvement for CSSU.
CSSU Low SES Students - Teaching Year Results
Grades 11 - Math
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
0%
6%
0%
Prof. w/Dist.
Partial Prof.
Below Prof.
3%
0%
0%
16%
0%
15%
0%
17%
1%
17%
1%
19%
17%
14%
17%
17%
24%
24%
26%
26%
24%
78%
69%
79%
61%
60%
56%
56%
56%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2007
2008
2009
2010
CSSU
State
Observations:
•CSSU grade 11 students of low SES status improved performance in math this year by 13%.
•Performance of 11th graders of low SES status is inconsistent and does not keep up with gradual
improvement indicated by state scores.
•Math progress of 11th graders of low SES status is a concern area.
CSSU Students on an IEP Teaching Year Results
MATH Grades 3-8
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
2%
26%
2%
27%
28%
21%
45%
50%
2%
4%
Prof. & Above
23%
2%
24%
27%
26%
49%
46%
22%
2%
Below Proficient
21%
2%
18%
30%
26%
44%
51%
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
CSSU
Partial Prof.
2%
17%
2%
17%
2%
19%
2%
20%
2%
19%
21%
20%
23%
22%
23%
24%
60%
61%
58%
56%
55%
55%
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
STATE
Observations:
•Math performance of 3-8 grade students on IEP’s is relatively steady in math.
• Math performance of 3-8 grade students on IEP’s is about 2%-8% above the state.
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
CSSU Students on an IEP - Teaching Year Results
Grades 11 - Math
0%
7%
7%
0%
3%
87%
93%
2007
2008
3%
0%
6%
0%
0%
12%
23%
88%
71%
2009
2010
0%
2%
8%
0%
2%
9%
0%
2%
10%
0%
3%
10%
90%
89%
88%
87%
2007
2008
2009
2010
CSSU
Observations:
•11 graders on IEP’s perform similarly in math to the State.
State
Science Performance
Grades 4, 8, 11
Background:
Science NECAP assessment is three years old. It is administered in May, with results
reported in the fall.
CSSU compared to performance in New England NECAP States.
CSSU compared to performance of comparable school districts in Vermont.
CSSU science performance and over 5 years.
CSSU science performance of students with low SES status and on IEP’s.
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and
Above
New England Comparison NECAP 2010
Science Grade 4
67%
54%
54%
44%
33%
46%
46%
56%
CSSU
VT
NH
RI
Below
Proficient
Observations:
•Science performance of 4th,
8th, and 11th graders surpass
New England NECAP states
and Vermont.
Proficient
and Above
New England Comparison NECAP 2010
Science Grade 8
39%
29%
27%
22%
61%
71%
73%
78%
CSSU
VT
NH
RI
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
New England Comparison NECAP 2010
Science Grade 11
42%
58%
CSSU
27%
24%
21%
73%
76%
79%
VT
NH
RI
CSSU & Comparable Districts
2010 NECAP Science Grade 4
2%
Prof. w/Dist.
Below Prof.
4%
2%
3%
2%
3%
55%
65%
66%
61%
55%
57%
37%
23%
8%
28%
5%
29%
8%
30%
33%
13%
8%
CESU
ETSD
LSSU
MSD
SBSD
1%
0%
65%
57%
26%
7%
26%
CSSU
ACSU
16%
Partial Prof.
9%
CCSU
Observations:
CSSU grade 4 NECAP
performance ranks third in these
comparable Vermont districts.
CSSU & Comparable Districts
2010 NECAP Science Grade 8
Observations:
•CSSU grade 8 is exceeded by six of
the seven comparable districts.
•Grade 8 science is a CSSU focus area.
Proficient
and
Above
Proficient
Below
Proficient
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
Prof. w/Dist.
Partial Prof.
Below Prof.
5%
2%
0%
39%
0%
42%
3%
3%
46%
46%
48%
1%
28%
43%
52%
52%
45%
41%
40%
43%
50%
45%
37%
9%
14%
10%
11%
4%
CSSU
ACSU
CCSU
CESU
ETSD
20%
LSSU
General Observations: CSSU science scores, grades 4, 8, and 11 exceed statewide performance.
0%
11%
MSD
-10%
SBSD
CSSU & Comparable High Schools
2010 NECAP Science
Grade 11
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
Partial Prof.
4%
4%
38%
Below
Proficient
Prof. w/Dist.
39%
20%
CVU
51%
33%
3%
33%
41%
13%
22%
Essex
MMU
Below Prof.
2%
3%
43%
34%
36%
39%
18%
SB
Observations:
CVU 11th grade science performance is ranked third behind two high schools.
24%
MHS
3%
1%
2%
61%
61%
65%
32%
5%
31%
7%
26%
7%
2008
1%
2009
2010
Grade 4
1%
0%
39%
46%
33%
43%
52%
52%
14%
9%
2009
2010
11%
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
Science NECAP Spring
3 Year History
2008
Grade 8
Observations:
•Grade 4 scores are strong and show gradual improvement.
•4% fewer 4th grade students performed Partially and Below since 2008.
•CSSU 4th grade scores exceed the State by 13% in Proficient and Above in 2010 compared to 2008.
•8% fewer 8th grade students are performing at Proficient and Above in 2010 compared to 2008.
•7% increase in the number of 8th grade students performing at Partially and Below Proficient in 2010
compared to 2008.
•While grade 8 performance exceeds the State results by 10%, our decline in scores since 2008 is a focus area.
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
Science NECAP – 3 Year History
Grade 11
9%
3%
31%
39%
38%
34%
40%
39%
26%
18%
20%
2008
2009
4%
2010
CSSU
2%
1%
2%
23%
26%
26%
48%
44%
46%
27%
29%
26%
2008
2009
2010
VT
Observations:
•11th grade students perform significantly better than the State in Science.
•11th grade achievement trend indicates 2% improvement at Proficient and Above since 2008.
•In 2010, 11th graders performed 14% higher in the Proficient and Above category than the State.
Reading and Math Performance of
English Language Learners
NECAP 2010 - ELL - Teaching Year
CSSU Achievement Level Grades 3-8
11%
Prof. w/Dist.
Partial Prof.
Below Prof.
22%
6%
60%
47%
16%
16%
13%
16%
Below
Proficient
Proficient
and Above
Proficient
Reading
Math
9%
38%
29%
26%
21%
29%
42%
Reading
Math
CSSU
State
Background: Total number of ELL students in CSSU for 2010 is 114.
Observations:
•Reading and math performance of students learning English in 3-8th grade surpasses the state by
27% in reading and 31% in math.
Gender
CSSU 2010 NECAP Proficient & Above - Gender Grades 3-8
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
79%
87%
80%
78%
77%
83%
74%
69%
61%
54%
Male
Female
Reading Gr 3-8
Male
Female
Math Gr 3-8
Male
Female
Writing Gr 5
Male
Female
Male
Writing Gr 8
Female
Science Gr 4
41%
38%
Male
Female
Science Gr 8
CVU 2010 NECAP Proficient & Above Gender Grade 11
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
77%
90%
75%
55%
Male
Female
Reading Gr 11
Male
54%
Female
Math Gr 11
54%
Male
Female
Writing Gr 11
44%
39%
Male
Female
Science Gr 11
Observations:
•There is little gender disparity in NECAP performance in math grades 3-8 and 11.
•Gender disparity increases in 11th grade reading scores from 8% in 3-8th grades to 13% at 11th grade.
•Disparity in science performance decreases from 13% in grade 4, to 3% in grade 8, to 5% in 11th grade.
•Females excel in writing at all grade levels tested.
•The greatest disparity in gender performance in writing is apparent in grade 5 writing where a 23% difference exits this
year. This becomes a 14% difference in grade 8 gender performance, and a 21% difference in grade 11 writing.
CSSU 2010 NECAP Proficient & Above
Gender Math Grades 3-8
100%
90%
80%
70%
83%
80%
79%
83%
81%
Female
Male
82%
83%
Female
Male
81%
82%
Female
Male
81%
80%
78%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Male
Female
Male
2005
2006
2007
2008
Female
2009
49%
44%
Male
Female
2007
49%
44%
Male
Female
2008
55%
45%
54%
43%
Male
Female
2009
Male
Female
2010
Female
2010
CSSU 2010 NECAP Proficient & Above
Gender Math Grade 11
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Male
Final Conclusions
 Focus Areas
o Students of Low SES Status
o11th grade reading, writing, math
o3-8th grade reading
o5th grade writing
o8th grade science
Improvements and Strengths
o 11th grade performance improved dramatically over last year in reading, writing and math.
o Scores of 3-8th and 11th grade students of low SES status improved in reading and math.
oCSSU grade 3-8 students excel in reading, math and writing.
o CSSU achievement in grade 5 writing and grade 3-8 math exceeds all New England NECAP
scores, Vermont scores and comparable school comparisons.
CSSU Improvement Initiatives
 RTI - Response to Intervention
o Tier I emphasis on best first instruction
o Tier II research based interventions for students who are not making expected improvements
o Progress monitoring to determine efficiency of intervention and monitor student growth.
 Data driven decision making – Data Teams
 Continued development and alignment of common formative assessments which
inform instruction.
 Science Initiative 2009
o 3 year improvement plan
o Professional development – VSI workshops through out school year.
o Common science inquiry assessment development and implementation
 Math Initiative
o Professional development -Best Practices – Teacher Development Group
o Consistent Fact Fluency program and progress monitoring.
o Math program implementation and professional development
oFall 2010, grades 1-2
oFall 2011, grades 3-5
oImplementation of revised summative grade level assessments.