Transcript Document

Watertown Public Schools
Assessment Reports 2010
Part I – October 18, 2010
MCAS, AYP
Part II – November
AMOA, SAT, AP
Part III – December
MAP
Ann Koufman-Frederick and Administrative Council
School Committee Meetings
Oct, Nov, Dec, 2010
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction
• Purposes of Educational Assessment
Part I
• MCAS % Proficient or higher: Watertown compared to State, Spring 2010
• MCAS Changes in Performance, 1998 - 2010
• MCAS Student Growth Percentile, Spring 2010
• Adequate Yearly Progress, Spring 2010
• What have we learned?
Part II
• AMOA, Spring 2010
• SAT, Spring 2010
• AP, Spring 2010
Part III
• MAP, Measures of Academic Progress, Ongoing
2
Educational Assessment
•
Diagnostic
– used to identify a student’s academic, cognitive, or behavioral strengths
and weaknesses
– used to identify teacher performance
•
Instructional
– used to modify and adapt instruction to meet students’ needs
– progress monitoring
•
Predictive
– used to determine the likelihood that a student or a school will meet a
predetermined goal
•
Evaluative
– used to determine the outcome of a particular curriculum
– often compared a predetermined goal or objective
3
MCAS Purposes
Evaluative
• Measure individual student performance and make sure that every child has
adequate knowledge and skills by the time they graduate from high school
– Measures performance based on the Massachusetts Curriculum Framework
learning standards
– Tests all public school students in Massachusetts, including students with
disabilities and students with limited English proficiency
– Reports on the performance of individual students, schools, and districts
Accountability
• Assess and publically release school and district performance ratings,
holding school systems accountable for student achievement
– Used to hold schools and districts accountable, on a yearly basis, for the
progress they have made toward the objective of the No Child Left Behind Law
that all students be proficient in Reading, Mathematics, and Science by 2014
(State assessment used to determine AYP)
– Students must pass the grade 10 tests in English Language Arts (ELA),
Mathematics and Science as one condition of eligibility for a high school diploma
(in addition to fulfilling local requirements)
4
MCAS
% Proficient and higher
Watertown compared to State
Spring 2010
Scores are from 200-280
Advanced 260-280
Proficient 240-258
Needs Improvement 220-238
Warning 220-218
5
Grades 3 to 5
% Proficient and higher
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
LA 3
M3
LA 4
M4
Watertown
LA 5
M5
S&T5
State
6
Grades 6 to 10
% Proficient and higher
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
LA 6
M6
LA 7
M7
LA 8
Watertown
M8
S&T8
LA 10
M 10
S&T10
State
7
All Grades ELA
(including outplacements)
100
80
60
40
20
0
Advanced
Proficient
N.I.
Warning
Watertown
14
55
22
8
State
16
52
24
8
Watertown
State
All Grades Math
(including outplacements)
100
80
60
40
20
0
Advanced
Proficient
N.I.
Warning
Watertown
27
33
25
15
State
26
33
27
15
Watertown
State
Grade 10
Mathematics
English Language Arts
100
100
80
80
60
60
40
40
20
20
0
Proficient +
N.I.
Warning
Watertown
88
9
2
State
78
18
4
Watertown
State
0
Proficient +
N.I.
Warning
Watertown
83
12
5
State
75
17
7
Watertown
State
High School Science
Biology
Introductory Physics
100
100
80
80
60
60
40
40
20
20
0
Advanced
Proficient
N.I.
Warning
Watertown Physics
48
43
10
0
State Physics
16
39
30
14
Watertown Physics
State Physics
0
Advanced
Proficient
N.I.
Warning
Watertown Biology
4
60
31
5
State Biology
17
46
23
13
Watertown Biology
State Biology
MCAS
Changes in Performance
1998-2010
12
1998 to 2010
% of Students scoring Proficient and higher
Change,
Change,
1998
2005
2009
2010
2009 to
2010
1998 to
2010
English Language Arts
35
72
85
88
3
53
Mathematics
23
73
80
83
3
60
English Language Arts
38
65
81
78
-3
40
Mathematics
24
62
75
75
0
51
Watertown High School
Statewide - Grade 10
13
Grade 10 Math and English
% of Students Scoring Proficient and higher
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
'98
'99
'00
'01
'02
'03
'04
English
'05
'06
'07
'08
'09
'10
Math
14
Grade 10 Math
% of Students Scoring Proficient and higher
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
'98
'99
'00
'01
'02
'03
'04
Massachusetts
'05
'06
'07
'08
'09
'10
Watertown
15
Grade 10 English
% of Students Scoring Proficient and higher
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
'98
'99
'00
'01
'02
'03
'04
Massachusetts
'05
'06
'07
'08
'09
'10
Watertown
16
MCAS
Student Growth Percentile
2010
17
Why a new statistic?
• The MCAS is a criterion based test.
• SGP is an attempt to establish a basis of
comparison from year to year.
• The SGP can provide a way to indicate that low
achieving students are “making progress”.
• Race to the Top participation requires a metric to
show student growth.
• SGP available for an individual student; Median
SGP for schools and districts.
18
Student Growth Percentile
19
WPS SGP Math
20
WPS SGP ELA
21
AYP
Adequate Yearly Progress
Spring 2010
22
WPS AYP 2010
Accountability Status
• The District has “no status” because we have met Adequate Yearly
Progress targets as an aggregate. Unlike districts who have status, we
have no required district-wide actions to take.
Performance Rating
• High in ELA
• High in Math.
Improvement Rating
• On Target in ELA
• Improved Below Target in Math
23
kTime™ and a
W) decompressor
to see this picture.
AYP District History
QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (LZW) decompres
are needed to see this pic
24
AYP by Grade Spans
25
Grade 10 Math and English
% of Students Scoring Proficient and higher
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
'98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 '13 '14
English
Math
26
MCAS: What have we learned?
• Watertown Public Schools continues to make progress on MCAS.
• Over the past 5 years, progress is steady at the Elementary and Middle
Schools, and in particular by 10th grade we are overtaking the State
averages.
• We continue to use MCAS student and school results to help plan
improvements and make adjustments in curricular and instructional
programming. Examples:
• Early reading curriculum to be scaled to intermediate grades
• Writing curriculum developed in Elementary grades
• Fine-tune our instruction with the Think Math curriculum
• ELL curriculum more focused work on math
• Impact Math curriculum implementation is being fine-tuned
• Middle grades English and science are identifying gaps in curriculum
alignment and instruction
• Expectation is to be much more above the State average
• MAP implementation is being scaled up through Middle School
27
Questions about MCAS?
http://www.watertown.k12.ma.us/wps/assessment.html
28