Franklin High School 2012 Annual Progress Targets MATHEMATICS Subgroup 2011 Baseline Yearly 2012 2012 % Proficient % Proficient Increment Target 78.7 School-wide 80.6 82.2 1.6 88.9 White 90.4 90 - 74.6 African-American 72.1 74.4 2.3 63.2 Latino 72 74.4 2.4 96.6 Asian 98.1 90 - 30.9 Students w/Disab 30.6 36.4 5.8 Econ Disadvantaged 69.3 73.7 71.9 2.6 Met Progress Missed Met Goal Met Progress Targets Targets w/ Interval Targets - African-American - Asian - School-wide - Latino - Econ Disadvantaged - White - Students w/ Disabilities
Franklin Township Public Schools Franklin High School / State of New Jersey HSPA: Over 2 Years Language Arts 100.0% 90.0% 80.0% Math 70.0% 100.0% 60.0% 90.0% 50.0% 40.0% 80.0% 30.0% 70.0% 20.0% 60.0% 10.0% 50.0% 0.0% 40.0% FHS State 30.0% 2011 90.2% 90.3% 20.0% 2012 89.9% 92.7% 10.0% 0.0% FHS State 2011 80.6% 76.0% 2012 78.7% 83.3%
High School Adjusted Cohort Graduation Rate Formula ( Effective 2011) 4 year cohort graduates in year 2012 (1 st time 9 th graders in 2009) + (transfers in) – (verified transfers out) – (excluded from cohort)
High School Adjusted Cohort Graduation Rate Formula Definitions Transfer in – active cohort students who have transferred into the district and have been added to the adjusted cohort. Transferred out unverified – students who have transferred out but were never reactivated by another district or state institution. Thus, the student remains in the original district’s cohort and is considered a non-graduate in the rate calculation. A transfer out is not removed from the original district until he/she is activated by another district. Source: NJDOE 2011
High School Adjusted Cohort Graduation Rate Formula Definitions On-Track Continuing – active students who are considered on track to graduate in four years. Each submission, active students’ cohort status is updated based on their submitted grade level. If the student progresses as expected, they will remain ‘on-track’ until they graduate. Off-Track Continuing – active cohort students who, while still attending, are not progressing through grade levels as expected and are considered ‘off track’ to graduate in four years. Source: NJDOE 2011
High School Adjusted Cohort Graduation Rate Formula Definitions Dropout– students who have dropped out of school for various reasons. Excluded from Cohort – exemptions not included in adjusted cohort rate (death of student, transfer to a non-public school or country, transfer to parental instruction, transfer to a private facility. Source: NJDOE 2011
2012 Franklin High School Adjusted Cohort Graduation 4 Year Rate 437 11 24 • 4 Year • Dropouts Cohort 36 Graduates • Transferred 9 2012 Out • Off Track Continuing • On Track Adjusted Continuing Cohort Count 517 2012 2011 84.5% 82.4%
Use of district attendance officer In a pursuit of our goal to to improve individual student increase our graduation attendance. This officer can identify potential truancy rate, we are using the issues, attend court hearings, as following student based well as identify students that may have left district without properly practices: withdrawing or maybe attending Franklin and are non-residents. Audited all transcripts. Each counselor has met with their Sending letter home to parents 11 th and 12 th grade student to that have missed 4, 11 and 18 review their transcript and on classes. These letters also allow track with their graduation us to create individualized cohort. This will make sure all attendance plans for students in transcripts are up to date and danger of losing credit. accurate. Refocused efforts on the I&RS Students are utilizing the process. We have held several PD Naviance system to track their sessions with the faculty on how college and career readiness. the process will help identify kids This online system allows that are off track continuing. We student to identify areas of have designated a standing strengths and areas that require committee that meets regularly to focus for post graduation years. discuss individual cases.
Students not on track with their In a pursuit of our goal to cohort will be given the option to increase our graduation take part in the new APEX credit rate, we are using the recovery system. Up to 100 licenses are available to 12 th following student based graders to recover credit to get them back on track to graduate practices: with their cohort. Remaining slots can be filled by senior students and 11 th graders to ensure on All graduation requirements track graduation. have been placed on the FHS web site, report cards and progress reports. Each Enrolled students in the LEAD document gives the specific Program. This is a mentoring requirements for promotion program that is open for high risk to the next grade level as students in need of additional well as for graduation. support. This program matches Requirements were students with a mentor from the business community and helps discussed with parents and students with a wide range of students at New Student academic need. The LEAD Orientation, Back to School program includes free tutoring Night, and during Parent and SAT prep. All costs are Conferences. covered by a grant form AT&T.
Questi Question ons
RaShawn M. Adams, Principal 2012 NJ State Assessment Results
Franklin Middle School 2012 Annual Progress Targets LANGUAGE ARTS LITERACY (Grades 7, 8) 2012 Subgroup 2011 Baseline Yearly 2012 Target % Proficient % Proficient Increment 63.8 School-wide 64.8 2.9 67.7 79.8 White 83.1 1.4 84.5 56.5 African-American 59.4 3.4 62.8 50.6 4.5 Latino 46.1 50.6 86.8 Asian 82.7 1.5 84.2 24.3 Students w/Disab 26.9 6.1 33 46.5 Econ Disadvantaged 47.4 4.4 51.8 Met Progress Met Progress Missed Targets Targets w/ Interval Targets - School-wide - White - Latino - African-American - Asian - Students w/ Disabilities - Econ Disadvantaged
Franklin Middle School 2012 Annual Progress Targets MATHEMATICS (Grades 7, 8) Subgroup 2011 Baseline Yearly 2012 2012 % Proficient % Proficient Increment Target 64.4 School-wide 62.1 65.3 3.2 81 White 83.2 84.6 1.4 55.9 African-American 52.4 56.4 4 49.6 Latino 42.7 47.5 4.8 92.7 Asian 89.1 90 .9 19.5 Students w/Disab 21.1 27.7 6.6 Econ Disadvantaged 43.5 48.2 4.7 47.8 Met Progress Met Goal Met Progress Missed Targets Targets w/ Interval Targets - Asian - Students w/ - School-wide - Latino Disabilities -White - African-American - Econ Disadvantaged
Franklin Township Public Schools Franklin Middle School / State of New Jersey NJASK 7, 8: Over 2 Years Math LAL 100.0% 100.0% 90.0% 90.0% 80.0% 80.0% 70.0% 70.0% 60.0% 60.0% 50.0% 50.0% 40.0% 40.0% FMS State FMS State 2011 2011 64.8% 72.7% 62.1% 68.6% 2012 2012 63.8% 71.3% 64.4% 67.4%
Eileen Brett, Principal 2012 NJ State Assessment Results
Sampson G. School 2012 Annual Progress Targets LANGUAGE ARTS LITERACY (Grades 5, 6) Subgroup 2011 Baseline Yearly 2012 2012 % Proficient Increment Target % Proficient School-wide 58.4 3.5 54.0 61.9 White 73.2 2.2 65.3 75.4 African-American 52.2 4 47.5 56.2 36.2 4.9 Latino 41.9 46.8 84 Asian 79.7 1.7 81.4 15.8 Stud w/Disabilities 17.9 6.9 24.8 40.3 Econ Disadvantaged 39.2 5.1 44.3 Met Progress Met Progress Missed Targets Targets - School-wide Targets w/ Interval - Econ Disadvantaged -White - Asian - African-American - Latino - Stud w/ Disabilities
Sampson G. School 2012 Annual Progress Targets MATHEMATICS (Grades 5, 6) Subgroup 2011 Baseline Yearly 2012 2012 % Proficient % Proficient Increment Target 76.6 School-wide 75.9 77.9 2 78.0 White 89.1 90 .9 71.0 African-American 64.6 67.6 3 70.6 Latino 71.8 74.2 2.4 96.5 Asian 95.2 90 - 35.8 Students w/Disab 35.4 40.8 5.4 Econ Disadvantaged 61 64.3 68.8 3.3 Met Progress Met Progress Missed Met Goal Targets Targets w/ Interval Targets - Asian - African-American - School-wide - White - Latino - Econ Disadvantaged - Students w/Disabilities
Franklin Township Public Schools Sampson G. Smith School / State of New Jersey NJASK 5, 6: Over 2 Years MATH LAL 100.0% 100.0% 90.0% 90.0% 80.0% 80.0% 70.0% 70.0% 60.0% 60.0% 50.0% 50.0% 40.0% 40.0% 30.0% 30.0% 20.0% 20.0% 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 0.0% SGS State SGS State 2011 2011 58.4% 63.8% 75.9% 78.9% 2012 2012 54.0% 63.3% 76.6% 81.0%
Student Growth Profiles NJSMART Tutorial, 2012
NJSMART Tutorial, 2012 39
40
41
Growth NJDOE: NJSMART Student Growth Percentile Tutorial (2012) 42
43
Grade LAL NJ ASK SCORE Grade 4 205 Grade 5 200 Grade 6 207 44
Maria’s Test History: Grade LAL NJ ASK SCORE Grade 4 205 Grade 5 200 Grade 6 207 Maria’s Academic Peers: Grade LAL NJ ASK SCORE Grade 4 ~205 Grade 5 ~200 Grade 6 ?
Maria’s Academic Peers: Grade LAL NJ ASK SCORE Grade 4 ~205 Grade 5 ~200 Grade 6 ? 46
Growth Model 95 High Growth 80 65-99 65 Typical 50 Growth 35-65 Maria Ma ia 35 Low 20 Growth 1-35 5 2010 2012 In a growth model, we look at how all students with similar scores over several • years do when compared to each other. In this example, we take one student, and see how all students with similar scores • in 2010 and 2011 performed in 2012. This tells us whether the change in scores over time is average or below average. •
Franklin Township Public Schools Aggregate Student Growth Profile 50% Grades 5-8 Language Arts Literacy 2012 1 50 99 35 65 Typical Growth Low Growth High Growth 48
Franklin Township Public Schools 100% Grades 5-8 Language Arts Literacy 2012 90% High Growth 80% Student Growth Profile 65-99 70% 60% 50% Typical 50% Growth 35-65 40% 30% 20% Low Growth 1-35 10% 46% 53% 51% 51% 0% Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Schoolwide
Franklin Township Public Schools NJASK 5-8 Cohort Performance Profile Test Year: 2012 Grade Comparison Year: 2011 5, 46.4% LANGUAGE ARTS LITERACY 100.0% 90.0% Grade 80.0% 6, 56.9% 70.0% 60.0% Grade 50.0% 7, 52.7% 40.0% 30.0% Grade 20.0% 8, 71.3% 10.0% 0.0% Gr. 5 Gr. 6 Gr. 7 Gr. 8 % Stayed AP, P 2012, Gr. 4 2012, Gr. 5 2012, Gr. 6 2012, Gr. 7 or Increased 1 2011 2011 2011 2011 Stayed AP or P Increased 1 or more levels or more levels Decreased 1 or more levels Stayed PP
Franklin Township Public Schools Aggregate Student Growth Profile 57% Grades 5-8 Mathematics 2012 1 50 99 35 65 Typical Growth Low Growth High Growth 51
Franklin Township Public Schools 100% Grades 5-8 Mathematics 2012 90% High Growth 80% Student Growth Profile 65-99 70% 57% 60% Typical 50% Growth 35-65 40% 30% 20% Low Growth 1-35 10% 43% 69% 60% 59% 0% Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Schoolwide
Franklin Township Public Schools NJASK 5-8 Cohort Performance Profile Test Year: 2012 Grade Comparison Year: 2011 5, 68.5% MATHEMATICS 100.0% 90.0% Grade 80.0% 6, 73.7% 70.0% 60.0% Grade 50.0% 7, 59.3% 40.0% 30.0% Grade 20.0% 8, 64.7% 10.0% 0.0% Gr. 5 Gr. 6 Gr. 7 Gr. 8 % Stayed AP, P 2012, Gr. 4 2012, Gr. 5 2012, Gr. 6 2012, Gr. 7 or Increased 1 2011 2011 2011 2011 Stayed AP or P Increased 1 or more levels or more levels Decreased 1 or more levels Stayed PP
Language Arts Progress Towards Goals 2012-2013 Presented by: Carolyn Armstrong, Supervisor 6-12 Thomas Chiola, Content Supervisor 5-8
District Goal: READING During the 2012-2013 school year, 55% of students in grades 6-8 will end the year reading at or above proficiency as measured by running records meeting the Teacher’s College grade level benchmarks (5% increase from 52% in 2011-2012). Stamina, fluency, and analysis and interpretation will improve over the course of the year for students by an average of 20% (5% increase from 2011-2012) as evidenced by reading logs, reading 6 notebooks, and performance assessments. (Qualitative measures such as notebooks and logs will be assessed by a random sampling during walk-throughs using a rubric in - development). 8 Marking Period 1: Summer reading assessment Increased fluency and stamina on reading log Beginning reader’s notebooks check Running record
Building a Reading Life Continuum: Measuring Reading Behaviors Findings indicate that 6-8 readers comprising this sample mostly have moved past the “red flag” and “orange flag” categories in terms of reading behaviors. That is, issues around reading disengagement, inconsistency in volume and stamina, ineffective partner work, and an inability to apply a repertoire of strategies seem to have been overcome by most of the children in the sample. The ongoing goal revolves around working to increase the overall percentage of readers falling into the “blue flag” range. The ongoing goal revolves around working to increase the overall percentage of readers falling into the “blue flag” range. This category is characterized by, for example, greater independence and a sense of agency about reading (“I am in charge of my own reading life” and “Reading can change me”), and possessing metacognition and the ability to reflect upon what is read. Grade Red Orange Yellow Green Blue Flag Flag Flag Flag Flag Sixth (48) 13% 19% 28% 34% 6% Seventh (29) 10% 10% 31% 24% 24% Eighth (21) 10% 10% 29% 38% 14%
Building a Reading Life Continuum : Measuring Reading Behaviors Grade Red Orange Yellow Green Blue Flag Flag Flag Flag Flag Sixth (48) 13% 19% 28% 34% 6% Seventh (29) 10% 10% 31% 24% 24% Eighth (21) 10% 10% 29% 38% 14% Sixth and Eighth Grades: The largest percentage of the sample falls into the “green flag” range. This finding indicates that for this group of readers who may be reading without purpose or intention, instruction needs to focus on building their reflectiveness and accountability. This work will help these students to grow as readers and to be in charge of their own reading lives. Seventh Grade: The largest percentage of the sample for each of these grade levels falls into the “yellow flag” range. This finding indicates that for this group of readers, instruction needs to continue to focus on pushing up the level of the reading work and thinking in an effort to help them to outgrow their current levels.
Teachers College Benchmark Reading Levels and Marking Period Expectations Grade Bench Sept Jan June mark 1-2 A-U A-V A-W Sixth 6 3-4 V-Z W-Beyond X-Beyond 1-2 A-V A-W A-X Seventh 3-4 W- X-Beyond Y-Beyond - Beyond 1-2 A-W A-Y A-Z Eighth 8 3-4 X-Beyond Z-Beyond Beyond RUNNING RECORDS: Measuring Reading Levels
TC Target Gr. 6-8 Grade Benchmark Reading Level September Level for September Benchmark Data 1-2 A-U 60% Sixth 3-4 V-Z 40% 1-2 A-V 57% Seventh 3-4 W-Beyond 43% 1-2 A-W 32% Eighth 3-4 X-Beyond 68% RUNNING RECORDS: September Benchmark Progress Toward Goal
District Goal: READING In the 2012-2013 school year, students in grades 9- 12 will deepen their analysis and interpretive reading skills as evidenced by unit common assessments, common midterm assessments and common final exams (cold reads). Students will 9 increase an average of 1 rubric point on the state open-ended rubric 4 point scale. (No baseline data because common assessments were not in - place for the 2011-2012 school year). 12 Marking Period 1: Summer reading assessment Baseline cold read common assessment (by grade level)
Common Core State Anchor Standards for Reading Key Ideas and Details Craft and Structure Range of Reading and Level of Text Complexity For the first time, grade level teams • Cold Read: developed a common cold read to use as a baseline assessment and administered Measuring and scored it in September. Reading A second cold read is being developed by • grade level teams to administer as a Comprehension mid-year benchmark. A final cold read will be administered • near the end of the year. Grade September Cold Read The cold read is a piece of writing the • 9 th 56% students have not seen before. The passage represents the grade level 10 th 54% • standard for the end of the year. 11 th 80% The questions measure student ability to • meet the Common Core State Anchor 12 th 60% Standards for Reading.
District Goal: WRITING By the end of the 2012-2013 school year, the average writing score for students in grades 6-8 for on-demand pieces will be a 4 on the NJ Holistic Scoring Rubric, a 1-6 scale, (an increase of 1.5 rubric points from the 2011-2012 school year). Volume in the writer’s notebook will also increase to an average of 2.5 pages a day (an increase of 1 page from the 2011-2012 school year). Student writing will improve in quality on genre-based process pieces as evidenced by student 6 writing portfolios. (Qualitative measures such as notebooks and writing portfolios will be assessed by a random sampling during walk-throughs using a - rubric in development). 8 Marking Period 1: Baseline on-demand writing sample Beginning writer’s notebooks First units’ process pieces
NJ Registered Sixth Seventh Eighth • District Writing Samples Holistic Scoring (493) (488) (430) are administered in Rubric September, December and Score 0 1% 2% 1% May. Score 1 6% 6.9% 6% • Writing is scored using Score 2 19.6% 20.4% 22% the New Jersey Registered Score 3 39.5% 30.7% 28.1% Holistic Scoring Rubric. Score 4 30.2% 29.3% 32.4% • The 6 point rubric Score 5 3.4% 10% 11.4% measures the quality of Score 6 0% .1% .1% writing in the following categories: Although all areas are essential for • Content and good writing, Content and Organization Organization is weighed the most • Usage heavily on the rubric and is the area of • Sentence Construction the greatest instructional focus. • Mechanics On-Demand Writing (Grades 6-8): Measuring Writing Performance
District Goal: WRITING By the end of the 2012-2013 school year, the average writing score for students in grades 9-12 for on-demand pieces will be a 4.5 on the NJ Holistic Scoring Rubric, a 1-6 scale, (an increase of 1 rubric point from the 2011-2012 school year). 9 Student writing will improve in quality on genre- based process pieces as evidenced by student writing portfolios. - 12 Marking Period 1: Baseline on-demand writing sample
NJ Registered Holistic Ninth Tenth Eleventh Twelfth Scoring Rubric (569) (388) (405) (342) Score 0 3% 2.8% 3% 2.6% Score 1 5.9% 4% 9.3% 7% Score 2 6.5% 11.5% 17% 8.7% Score 3 31.6% 21.3% 26% 19.5% Score 4 38% 31.7% 23% 42.6% Score 5 12% 20.6% 18% 14.3% Score 6 2.4% 7.7% 3% 4.9% On-Demand Writing (Grades 9-12): Measuring Writing Performance
Social Studies in both 7 th & 8 th grade have formed Collaborative • Inquiry Groups to read, discuss and implement Best Practices in Reading & Writing in their content area. • Professional Book Studies focusing on Reading in the Content Areas. • Use of text rendering strategies in reading in the content areas with a focus on citing textual evidence to support students’ opinions in writing. • Use of double-entry journals and interactive notebooks in Science and Social Studies to enhance students’ overall writing performance. • Use of Word Walls and argument/opinion writing in physical education classes • Content Area teachers in grades 5-8 work with the literacy coach to implement literacy strategies in their content areas. Literacy Initiatives in the Content Areas
Language Arts Literacy 6-12 • Use data dialogue meetings to begin a collaborative assessment process that will encourage an inquiry based view of data. Teachers will develop their own wonderings and begin to search for “root causes”. • Implementation and revision of the units of study developed last year. • Teacher’s College Reading and Writing Project professional development for teachers in writing for new staff and reading for seasoned staff. • Continued development of common assessments and resources for the units of study. • Continued use and development of intervention for students at risk in Title 1, AIS, and differentiation through small group and individualized instruction. Next Steps
Mathematics Progress Towards Goals 2012-2013 Presented by: Nubeja Allen, Supervisor of Math 6-12
District Goal: MATH During the 2012-2013 school year, 60% of students in grades 6-8 will increase their proficiency of math problem solving standards within the grade band domains (10% increase from 55% in 2011- 6 2012 school year). - Marking Period 1 8 Beginning-of-Year assessment data (BOY) Quarterly assessment data Overall proficiency average Percent proficiency on extended-constructed response questions Percent proficiency on major cluster standards
Domains Grade BOY 1st MP % Change 42% 62% The Number System +20% 6 Statistics & Probability 43% 51% +8% Problem Solving 37% 53% +16% 41% 52% The Number System +11% 7 Problem Solving 37% 53% +16% 26% 52% Geometry +26% 8 Problem Solving 12% 49% +37% Math Overall Proficiency (Grades 6-8)
Domains Grade BOY 1st MP % Change +20% 6 42% 62% Average Percent Proficient 7 34% 52% +18% Based on: Major Cluster Student Learning Objectives 8 21% 65% +44% Math Overall Proficiency (Grades 6-8)
2012-2013 Franklin High School Algebra I Mathematics Common Assessment Data Marking Cluster Area Strengths Areas of Concern Period • • 6.NS.2 Compute fluently w/ multi- 6.NS.1 Interpret & compute digit numbers 70% (+16) quotients of fractions 48% (+20) • • 6.NS.5 Understand integers in 6.NS.3 +, − , × , ÷ multi-digit decimals Grade 6 Problem Solving context 73% (+42) 57% 53% (+16) • 6.SP.1 Recognize a statistical • 6.SP.3 Recognize how measures of question 60% (+24) center & measures of variation • 6.SP.2 Describe data distribution describes the data set 57% (-7) • by its center spread & overall 6.SP.5 Summarize numerical data shape 70% (+4) sets in context 38% (+15) 7.NS.1Add/Subtract Rational 7.NS.2d Convert Fractions to • • Numbers 60% (-3) Decimals 56% Grade 7 Problem Solving 7.NS.2 Multiply and Divide Rational 7.NS.3 Operations on Rational • • 31% (+9) Numbers 61% Numbers- to solve problems 32% (-9) 7.EE.1 Simplify Expressions 72% • 8.G.5 use informal arguments to 8.G.2 understand the relationship • • establish facts about angle between congruence and Grade 8 Problem Solving relationships- angles made transformation 56% (+11) 49% (+37) w/parallel lies and transversals 74% (+68) 8.G.3 & 4 Describe effect of a • sequence of transformations and dilations 70% (+21) 72
Math 6 Learning experiences will be integrated each week, regardless of the unit that allow students to practice: Performing operations on multi-digit numbers, decimals and fractions • in order to meet the grade level fluency expectation by June, including in context and in problem situations; Comparing fractions using equivalent fractions, number lines, fraction • tiles & area models; Analyzing and interpreting statistical data using measures of center • and spread; and Using 4-step approach to problem solving with exemplar student • responses and scoring rubric. Professional learning activities on best practices and strategies for teaching and understanding concepts and problem solving process, strategies and organization will take place during grade level meetings, PD sessions and consultant sessions . Next Steps
Math 7 Learning experiences will be integrated each week, regardless of the unit that allow students to practice: Performing operations on rational numbers in different forms in order • to meet the grade level fluency expectation by June, including in context and in problem situations; Comparing & ordering rational numbers in different forms using • equivalent fractions, number lines, fraction tiles & area models; Using models, such as scale models to simplify algebraic expressions; • and Using 4-step approach to problem solving with exemplar student • responses and scoring rubric. Professional learning activities on best practices and strategies for teaching and understanding concepts and problem solving process, strategies and organization will take place during grade level meetings, PD sessions and consultant sessions. Next Steps
Math 8 Learning experiences will be integrated each week, regardless of the unit that allow students to practice: Justifying and explaining angle relations given 2 parallel lines cut by a • transversal, setting up simple 2 step equations or simplifying algebraic expressions that represent the angle pair; Using 4-step approach to problem solving with exemplar student • responses and scoring rubric; and Professional learning activities on best practices and strategies for teaching and understanding concepts and problem solving process, strategies and organization will take place during grade level meetings, PD sessions and consultant sessions. Next Steps
District Goal: MATH During the 2012-2013 school year, 64% of students in Algebra 1 will increase their proficiency of math problem solving standards within the grade band 9 domains (10% increase from 58% in 2011-2012 school year). - Marking Period 1 12 Beginning-of-Year Assessment Data Quarterly Assessment Data Overall proficiency average Percent proficiency on extended-constructed response questions Percent proficiency on major cluster standards
Conceptual Category BOY 1st MP % Change 14% 79.3% Number & Quantity +65.3% 23% 58.3% Algebra +35.3% 20% 56% Functions +36% Statistics & Probability 40% N/A Problem Solving 17% 56% +39% Average Percent Proficient 22% 60% +38% (Based on Major Cluster SLOs) Algebra I Overall Proficiency
2012-2013 Franklin High School Algebra I Mathematics Common Assessment Data Marking Period Cluster Area Strengths Areas of Concern • • A.REI.1, 3, 4 Reason w/ A.SSE.1 Interpret the expressions, linear equations & structure of expressions 51% inequalities 73% (+51) (+15) • • Algebra 1 Problem Solving A.REI.10, 11, 12 Represent and A.CED.2, 3 & 4 Create First 56% (+39) solve equations and inequalities equations 48% (+25) graphically 61% (+43) • Fluency- Solve equations & inequalities 69% (+48) How to Address Concerns (Instructional Implications) Practice each week, regardless of the unit: • Solving linear equations and inequalities in 1 variable, justifying each step of the process. • Solving linear equations and inequalities in 2 variables as well as graphing in the coordinate plane., including in context and problem situations. • Analyzing and interpreting the meaning of solutions of linear equations in 2 variables including systems. • Modeling real world problems using linear equations. • Using 4-step approach to problem solving with exemplar student responses and scoring rubric Professional learning activities on best practices and strategies for teaching and understanding concepts and problem solving process, strategies and organization will take place during grade level meetings, PD sessions and consultant sessions. 78
Questi Question ons 5 5 min break min break
2012 NJ State Assessment Results
District: Elementary 2012 Annual Progress Targets LANGUAGE ARTS LITERACY (Grades 3, 4) 2012 Subgroup 2011 Baseline Yearly 2012 Target % Proficient % Proficient Increment 57 School-wide 54.8 3.8 58.6 69.1 White 65.8 2.9 68.7 50.9 African-American 49.1 4.2 53.3 32.9 5.1 Latino 38.5 43.6 79.3 Asian 80.1 1.7 81.8 24.4 Students w/Disab 26.5 6.1 32.6 39.7 Econ Disadvantaged 38.4 5.1 43.5 Met Progress Missed Targets Met Progress Targets w/ Interval Targets - Latino - School-wide -White - Students w/ Disabilities - African-American - Asian - Econ Disadvantaged
District: Elementary 2012 Annual Progress Targets MATHEMATICS (Grades 3, 4) Subgroup 2011 Baseline Yearly 2012 2012 % Proficient % Proficient Increment Target 74.3 School-wide 75.3 77.4 2.1 86.5 White 86.5 87.6 1.1 66.4 African-American 68.7 71.3 2.6 55.1 Latino 65.4 68.3 2.9 92.6 Asian 93.7 90 - 52.5 Students w/Disab 59.5 62.9 3.4 Econ Disadvantaged 62.7 65.8 60.1 3.1 Met Progress Met Progress Missed Targets Targets Targets w/ Interval - Latino - School-wide - Asian - Students w/disabilities -White - African American - Econ Disadvantaged
Franklin Township Public Schools District / State of New Jersey NJASK 3, 4: Over 2 Years MATH LAL 100.0% 100.0% 90.0% 90.0% 80.0% 80.0% 70.0% 70.0% 60.0% 60.0% 50.0% 50.0% 40.0% 40.0% 30.0% 30.0% 20.0% 20.0% 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 0.0% District State District State 2011 2011 56.1% 62.8% 63.1% 79.1% 2012 2012 55.6% 62.7% 66.8% 77.9%
Franklin Township Public Schools Aggregate Student Growth Profile 49% Grades 3, 4 Language Arts Literacy 2012 1 50 99 35 65 Typical Growth Low Growth High Growth 84
Franklin Township Public Schools 100% Grades 3, 4 90% High Language Arts Literacy 2012 Growth 80% 65-99 Student Growth Profile 70% 60% 49% Typical Growth 50% 35-65 40% 30% Low 20% Growth 1-35 10% 38% 56% 41% 46% 54% 53% 0% Conerly Elizabeth Franklin Hillcrest MacAfee Pine Road Avenue Park Grove Manor Schoolwide
Franklin Township Public Schools NJASK 3,4 Cohort Performance Profile Conerly, Test Year: 2012, Grade 4 42.6% Comparison Year: 2011, Grade 3 Language Arts Literacy Elizabeth , 50.5% 100.0% 90.0% 80.0% Franklin Park , 59.8% 70.0% 60.0% Hillcrest, 50.0% 47% 40.0% 30.0% MacAfee, 5 20.0% 2.3% 10.0% 0.0% Pine Grove, Conerly Elizabeth Franklin Hillcrest MacAfee Pine 47.6% Park Grove Stayed AP or P Increased 1 or more levels % Stayed AP, P Decreased 1 or more levels Stayed PP or Increased 1 or more levels
Franklin Township Public Schools Language Arts Literacy NJASK Cohort Performance Profile 100.0% Test Year: 2012, Grade 4 Comparison Year: 2011, Grade 3 90.0% 80.0% 70.0% % Stayed AP, P or Increased 1 60.0% or more levels 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 46.4% 20.0% Grade 4 to 5 10.0% 0.0% 51.2% Gr. 3 to 4 Gr. 4 to 5 Grade 3 to 4 Stayed AP or P Increased 1 or more levels Decreased 1 or more levels Stayed PP
Franklin Township Public Schools Aggregate Student Growth Profile 44% Grades 3, 4 Mathematics 2012 1 50 99 35 65 Typical Growth Low Growth High Growth 88
Franklin Township Public Schools 100% Grades 3, 4 90% Mathematics 2012 High Growth 80% 65-99 Student Growth Profile 70% 60% Typical 50% 44% Growth 35-65 40% 30% 20% Low Growth 10% 1-35 33% 37% 38% 54% 55% 57% 0% Conerly Elizabeth Franklin Hillcrest MacAfee Pine Road Avenue Park Grove Manor Schoolwide
Franklin Township Public Schools NJASK 3, 4 Cohort Performance Profile Conerly , Test Year: 2012, Grade 4 62.2% Comparison Year: 2011, Grade 3 Mathematics Elizabeth , 63.4% 100.0% 90.0% Franklin 80.0% Park, 67.6% 70.0% Hillcrest, 60.0% 68.2% 50.0% 40.0% MacAfee, 70.5% 30.0% 20.0% Pine Grove, 56. 10.0% 4% 0.0% Conerly Elizabeth Franklin Hillcrest MacAfee Pine Grove Park % Stayed AP, P or Increased 1 Stayed AP or P Increased 1 or more levels or more levels Decreased 1 or more levels Stayed PP
Franklin Township Public Schools Mathematics NJASK Cohort Performance Profile 100.0% Test Year: 2012, Grade 4 Comparison Year: 2011, Grade 3 90.0% 80.0% 70.0% % Stayed AP, P or Increased 1 60.0% or more levels 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 68.5% 20.0% Grade 4 to 5 10.0% 0.0% 64.9% Gr. 3 to 4 Gr. 4 to 5 Grade 3 to 4 Stayed AP or P Increased 1 or more levels Decreased 1 or more levels Stayed PP
Language Arts Progress Towards Goals 2012-2013 Presented by: Dr. Karen Schubert-Ramirez, Director (PreK-5)
District Goal: READING During the 2012-2013 school year, 72.5% of K-2 students will end the year meeting or exceeding benchmarks as measured by Teachers College Reading and Writing Project Running Records. This is a 5% increase from 2011-2012 when 69% of K-2 students met or exceeded reading benchmarks. K (Qualitative measures such as notebooks and logs will be assessed by a random sampling during walk-throughs using a rubric in development). - 2 Benchmark #1 (September-Beginning of the Year) *High frequency Word Assessment (Grades 1 and 2) *Spelling Inventory (Grades 1 and 2) *Running Records (Grades 1 and 2) *Beginning of year check of volume of reading logs (K-Grade 2)
District Goal: READING During the 2012-2013 school year, 60% of 3-5 students will end the year meeting or exceeding benchmarks as measured by Teachers College Reading and Writing Project Running Records. This is a 5% increase from 2011-2012 when 57% of 3-5 students met or exceeded reading benchmarks. 3 (Qualitative measures such as notebooks and logs will be assessed by a random sampling during walk-throughs using a rubric in development). . - 5 Benchmark #1 (September-Beginning of the Year) *High frequency Word Assessment *Spelling Inventory *Running Records *Beginning of year check of volume of reading logs
Teachers College Benchmark Reading Levels and Marking Period Expectations Grade Bench Sept Nov March June mark 1-2 B-C C-E E-F G-H 1 First 3-4 D-F F-H G-I I-L - 1-2 F-H G-I I-K J-L Second 3-4 I-L J-M L-N M-N 2 RUNNING RECORDS: Measuring Reading Levels
TC Target Gr. 1-2 Grade Benchmark Reading Level September Level Benchmark Data Sept Nov Sept Nov First 1-2 B-C C-E 46% 50% 3-4 D-F F-H 54% 50% 1-2 F-H G-I 35% 31% Second 3-4 I-L J-M 64% 69% RUNNING RECORDS: September Benchmark (Grades 1-2) Progress Toward Goal 96
Teachers College Benchmark Reading Levels and Marking Period Expectations Grade Bench Sept Nov March June mark 1-2 K-L K-M M-N N-O Third 3 3-4 M-N N-O O-P P-Q 1-2 M-O N-P O-Q P-R Fourth 3-4 P-R Q-S R-T S-U - 1-2 P-R P-S Q-T R-U Fifth 3-4 S-T T-U U-V V-W 5 RUNNING RECORDS: Measuring Reading Levels
TC Target Gr. 3-5 Grade Benchmark Reading Level September Level Benchmark Data Sept Nov Sept Nov 1-2 K-L K-M 32% 36% Third 3-4 M-N N-O 68% 64% 1-2 M-O N-P 41% 42% Fourth 3-4 P-R Q-S 59% 58% 1-2 P-R P-S 41% 41% Fifth 3-4 S-T T-U 59% 58% RUNNING RECORDS: September Benchmark (Grades 3-5) Progress Toward Goal
Teachers College Building a Reading Life Continuum Findings indicate that K-5 readers comprising this sample mostly have moved past the “red flag” and “orange flag” categories in terms of reading behaviors. That is, issues around reading disengagement, inconsistency in volume and stamina, ineffective partner work, and an inability to apply a repertoire of strategies seem to have been overcome by most of the children in the sample. The ongoing goal revolves around working to increase the overall percentage of readers falling into the “blue flag” range. This category is characterized by, for example, greater independence and a sense of agency about reading (“I am in charge of my own reading life” and “Reading can change me”), and possessing metacognition and the ability to reflect upon what is read. Grade Red Flag Orange Yellow Green Blue Flag Flag Flag Flag K (99) 7% 25% 39% 25% 3% First (90) 9% 16% 17% 37% 22% Second (86) 6% 13% 30% 34% 17% Third (78) 10% 13% 18% 41% 18% Fourth (87) 7% 11% 28% 32% 22% Fifth (51) 14% 6% 37% 29% 14%
Teachers College Building a Reading Life Continuum Grade Red Flag Orange Yellow Green Blue Flag Flag Flag Flag K (99) 7% 25% 39% 25% 3% First (90) 9% 16% 17% 37% 22% Second (87) 6% 13% 30% 34% 17% Third (78) 10% 13% 18% 41% 18% Fourth (87) 7% 11% 28% 32% 22% Fifth (51) 14% 6% 37% 29% 14% Kindergarten and Fifth Grade: The largest percentage of the sample falls into the “yellow flag” range. This finding indicates that for this group of readers who may be reading without purpose or intention, instruction needs to focus on building their reflectiveness and accountability. This work will help these students to grow as readers and to be in charge of their own reading lives. First, Second, Third, and Fourth Grades: The largest percentage of the sample for each of these grade levels falls into the “green flag” range. This finding indicates that for this group of readers, instruction needs to continue to focus on pushing up the level of the reading work and thinking in an effort to help them to outgrow their current levels.
Recommend
More recommend
