NJSLA Tinton Falls School District 2019 Board Presentation October - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

NJSLA Tinton Falls School District 2019 Board Presentation October 28, 2019 Elizabeth Cole 1

NJ State Assessments All New Jersey public school districts are required to administer achievement tests developed by the New Jersey Department of Education. New Jersey students in Grades 3 to 11 will be tested in Literacy and in Mathematics through the New Jersey Student Learning Assessment. Literacy and Math assessments are used to measure the success of our schools on the standards set by the Federal “Every Student Succeeds Act” (ESSA) 2

NJSLA is an assessment of…. ➢ NJ Student Learning Standards (NJSLS) formerly known as the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). ➢ Prior to NJSLA, NJ standards were measured by the PARCC ➢ Prior to PARCC, NJ standards were measured by the NJ ASK assessment. ➢ NJSLA assesses the NJSLS in a rigorous manner utilizing technology. 3

What’s Different about the NJSLA than PARCC? ● NJSLA will measure the same standards with fewer questions, so the scaled scores and the performance levels will remain the same. ● For example: PARCC NJSLA 3RD GRADE ELA 3RD GRADE ELA 3 Units, 75 minutes each 2 Units, 75 minutes each GRADE 3-5 MATH GRADE 3-5 MATH 4 Testing Units (all non-calculator), 60 3 Testing Units (all non-calculator), 60 minutes each minutes each 4

NJSLA Performance Levels Performance Levels outline the knowledge, skills, and practices that students performing at a given level should demonstrate in each content area at each grade level ● Level 1: Not yet meeting grade-level expectations ● Level 2: Partially meeting grade-level expectations ● Level 3: Approaching grade-level expectations ● Level 4: Meeting grade-level expectations ● Level 5: Exceeding grade-level expectations 5

NJ Reporting Requirements The NJ Department of Education requires this presentation to report on the following: -NJSLA for ELA and Math -Dynamic Learning Map (DLM) -Aggregated and disaggregated subgroup data* (subgroups with less than 10 students are not reported) -Trends and comparative analyses -Appropriate intervention strategies 6

2019 Student Performance Compared to State in ELA Levels of Proficiency/Student Percentages GRADE LEVEL1 LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 3 LEVEL LEVEL DISTRICT STATE DISTRICT STATE DISTRICT STATE 4s/5s 4s/5s DISTRICT STATE 3 14.8 14 14.1 14.4 16.1 21.4 55 50.3 4 5.2 8.6 12.9 12.6 20.6 21.4 61.3 57.4 5 3.4 7.4 7.5 12.5 15.1 22.2 74 57.9 6 6 7.3 11.4 12.6 13.8 23.9 68.9 56.2 7 3.3 8.9 9.2 10.5 16.3 17.8 71.2 62.8 8 3.9 9.2 8.6 10.3 9.2 17.7 78.3 62.8 7

2019 Student Performance Compared to State in MATH Levels of Proficiency/Student Percentages GRADE LEVEL1 LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 3 LEVEL LEVEL DISTRICT STATE DISTRICT STATE DISTRICT STATE 4s/5s 4s/5s DISTRICT STATE 3 5.4 8 11.4 13.9 22.8 23 60.4 55.1 4 4.5 8.6 11 14.7 23.2 25.7 61.3 51 5 .7 6.4 6.2 20.9 24.7 25.8 68.5 46.8 6 7.8 9.6 17.4 22.5 23.4 27.4 51.5 40.5 7 2.6 7.6 15.1 21.1 34.2 29.3 48 42.1 8 11.3 23.3 26.4 23.1 30.2 24.3 32.1 29.3 8 Grade 8 excluded Algebra 1 students.

3 YEAR LOOK BACK 2017-2019 in ELA Percentage of PERFORMANCE of 4s and 5s 2019 2018 2017 Grade 3 55 62.4 61 Grade 4 61.3 74.2 56.5 Grade 5 74 64.7 64.5 Grade 6 68.9 66.5 69.1 Grade 7 71.2 74.7 82.3 Grade 8 78.3 80.4 81.9 9

3 YEAR LOOK BACK 2017-2019 in MATH Percentage of PERFORMANCE of 4s and 5s 2019 2018 2017 Grade 3 60.4 71.3 62.1 Grade 4 61.3 61.9 50.9 Grade 5 68.5 58 61 Grade 6 51.5 45.7 43.9 Grade 7 48 50.7 45.6 Grade 8 32.1 37 41 Algebra I 97.8 93.8 97.9 10

Same TF Students Different Tests in ELA GRADE 2019 2018 3 62.4 4 61.3 74.2 5 74 64.7 6 68.9 66.5 7 71.2 74.7 8 78.3 11

Same TF Students Different Tests in Math GRADE 2019 2018 3 71.3 4 61.3 61.9 5 68.5 58 6 51.5 43.9 7 48 50.7 8 32.1 (excl. Alg I) 12

Grade 3 Subgroups ELA Compared to State scored 4 or 5 SCHOOL STATE 55 50.3 SUBGROUP 2019 2019 Female 66.7 (60) 55 Male 47.2 (89) 46 Hispanics/Latino 32.1 (28) 36 White 63.2 (95) 59 Economically Disadvantaged 20.7 (29) 33 13 IEP Students 25 (36) 24

Grade 4 Subgroups ELA Compared to State scored 4 or 5 SCHOOL STATE 61.3 57.4 SUBGROUP 2019 2019 Female 68.6 (70) 63 Male 55.3 (85) 53 Hispanics/Latino 54.2 (24) 45 Black or African American 28.6 (21) 39 White 69.2 (91) 67 Economically Disadvantaged 36.4 (33) 40 IEP Students 34.6 (26) 26 14

Grade 5 Subgroups ELA Compared to State scored 4 or 5 SCHOOL STATE 74 57.9 SUBGROUP 2019 2019 Female 76.5 (81) 64 Male 70.8 (65) 52 Black or African American 58.3 (24) 39 White 79.8 (93) 68 IEP Students 27.3 (22) 24 15

Grade 6 Subgroups ELA Compared to State scored 4 or 5 SCHOOL STATE 68.9 56.2 SUBGROUP 2019 2019 Female 69.6 (92) 65 Male 68 (75) 48 Hispanics/Latino 54.1 (37) 43 White 75 (92) 66 Economically 34.8 (23) 39 Disadvantaged IEP Students 21.4 (42) 19 16

Grade 7 Subgroups ELA Compared to State scored 4 or 5 SCHOOL STATE 71.2 62.8 SUBGROUP 2019 2019 Female 82.9 (70) 71 Male 61.4 (83) 55 Hispanics/Latino 59.1 (22) 50 White 72.8 (92) 72 Economically 65 (20) 45 Disadvantaged IEP Students 27 (29) 22 17

Grade 8 Subgroups ELA Compared to State scored 4 or 5 SCHOOL STATE 78.3 62.8 SUBGROUP 2019 2019 Female 83.3 (78) 71 Male 73 (54) 55 Hispanic/Latino 66.7 (24) 49 White 82.8 (93) 71 Economically 51.7 (29) 45 Disadvantaged IEP Students 23.1 (26) 22 18

Grade 3 Subgroups MATH Compared to State scored 4 or 5 SCHOOL STATE 60.4 55.1 SUBGROUP 2019 2019 Female 73.3 (60) 54 Male 51.7 (89) 56 Hispanics/Latino 35.7 (28) 40 White 66.3 (95) 66 Economically 24.1 (29) 37 Disadvantaged IEP Students 25 (36) 32 19

Grade 4 Subgroups MATH Compared to State scored 4 or 5 SCHOOL STATE 61.3 51 SUBGROUP 2019 2019 Female 55.7 (70) 50 Male 65.9 (85) 52 Hispanics/Latino 41.7 (24) 36 Black or African 28.6 (21) 29 American White 71.4 (91) 62 Economically 36.4 (33) 32 Disadvantaged IEP Students 34.6 (26) 24 20

Grade 5 Subgroups MATH Compared to State scored 4 or 5 SCHOOL STATE 68.5 46.8 SUBGROUP 2019 2019 Female 67.1 (82) 47 Male 70.3 (64) 47 Hispanics/Latino 30.8 (13) 31 Asian 92.9 (14) 80 Black/African American 41.7 (24) 24 White 77.4 (93) 58 Economically 27.8 (18) 27 Disadvantaged 21 IEP Students 31.8 (22) 19

Grade 6 Subgroups MATH Compared to State scored 4 or 5 SCHOOL STATE 51.5 40.5 SUBGROUP 2019 2019 Female 46.7 (92) 41 Male 57.3 (75) 40 Hispanics/Latino 32.4 (37) 24 Asian 73.3 (15) 76 Black or African 18.8 (16) 18 American White 58.7 (92) 52 Economically 17.4 (23) 21 Disadvantaged IEP Students 16.7 (42) 12 22

Grade 7 Subgroups MATH Compared to State scored 4 or 5 SCHOOL STATE 48 42.1 SUBGROUP 2019 2019 Female 53.6 (69) 42 Male 43.4 (83) 41 Hispanics/Latino 13.6 (22) 26 Black/African American 26.3 (19) 20 White 54.9 (91) 53 Economically 25 (20) 24 Disadvantaged IEP Students 21.4 (28) 12 23

Grade 8 Subgroups MATH Compared to State scored 4 or 5 SCHOOL STATE 32.1 29.3 SUBGROUP 2019 2019 Female 33.9 (56) 31 Male 30 (50) 27 Hispanics/Latino 36.4 (22) 28 Black/African American 5.9 (17) 15 White 37 (62) 38 Economically 14.3 (28) 20 Disadvantaged IEP Students 0 (26) 12 24

Algebra Subgroups SCHOOL STATE 87.8 42.9 2019 SUBGROUP 2019 100 (23) Females 45 100 (23) Males 41 100 (31) Whites 55 25

DYNAMIC LEARNING MAP (DLM) RESULTS 7 students participated in DLM Score Rubric ELA MATH SCIENCE 1 -Emerging 1 -Emerging 3 2-Approaching 3 4 2 -Approaching Target 3-At Target 4 3 3 -At Target 4-Advanced 4 -Advanced *Only students in Grades 5 and 8 take Science DLM 26

19-20 Action Steps for Math in grades 3-8 1. Increased Math minutes to 84 min. From 57 minutes at TFMS 2. Provided researched-based PD with Paul Riccomini in June 19, Sept. 19, and Feb. 20; ongoing Zoom Meetings in between. 3. Monitoring of Math Retention Strategies 4. Implemented Math Inventory 3 times per year to obtain Quantiles (Math Levels) for students in grade 3-8. 5. Monthly grade level Data Chats with staff 27

19-20 Action Steps for ELA in K-5 1. Guided Reading Training for K-5 to ensure reading instruction with fidelity Sept. 2019. 2. Instituted universal screener DIBELS training for K-2 teachers October, 2019 3. All K students have been assessed using DIBELS 8 Summer, 2019 4. All students in K-2 will be assessed using DIBELS Winter and Spring 2020. 5. Instituted 3 tiers of intervention at the K-2 level in ASP program. 6. Implementation of Linguistics program in grades 3-5 with Teacher Training. 7. Sheltered Instruction Training for 16 K-8 teachers. 8. Gifted and Talented Training October 2019 and March 2020 for Cluster Teachers in grades 3-5 28