2012 CMT Scores
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

2012 CMT Scores

on

  • 775 views

Director of Curriculum and Instruction, Colleen Murray's report to the Board of Education, August 20, 2012

Director of Curriculum and Instruction, Colleen Murray's report to the Board of Education, August 20, 2012

Statistics

Views

Total Views
775
Views on SlideShare
775
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    2012 CMT Scores 2012 CMT Scores Presentation Transcript

    • 2012 CMT SCORES DATA ANALYSIS Prepared by: Colleen Murray, Director of Curriculum and Instruction Eric Carbone, Principal, The Peck Place School1 Mike Gray, Principal, Race Brook School Stephen Bergin, Principal, Turkey Hill School Kai Graves, Director of Special Services Lynn K. McMullin, Superintendent Published August 2012
    • MARCH ~ 2012 ~ DISTRICT SCORESas reported by the STATE DEPARTMENT OFEDUCATION (SDE) Mathematics Reading WritingGrade Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. 3 81 97 39 76 91 36 75 94 32 4 85 95 47 80 90 23 83 96 38 5 92 100 57 92 98 39 87 98 41 6 92 100 60 91 97 41 87 97 46 2
    • MARCH ~ 2012 ~ PECK PLACE SCORESas reported by the STATE DEPARTMENT OFEDUCATION (SDE) Mathematics Reading WritingGrade Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. 3 77 94 36 74 85 28 75 94 31 4 83 96 33 84 92 14 87 97 35 5 88 100 42 90 99 34 82 97 27 6 90 100 54 94 99 44 90 96 49 3
    • MARCH ~ 2012 ~ PECK PLACEStrengths Goal Areas Grades 5 and 6, 100%  Data teams will analyze Proficient or above in the instruction of Reading Math foundational skills Grades 5 and 6, 99%  Grade-level teams will Proficient or above in analyze the two writing Reading strands and improve the Grade 6 Reading, over holistic Writing score time, has improved 15% at  Implement the new math Goal or above curriculum with focus on Grade 4 Writing gained applications and problem- 13% at Goal or above solving 4
    • MARCH ~ 2012 ~ RACE BROOK SCORESas reported by the STATE DEPARTMENT OFEDUCATION (SDE) Mathematics Reading WritingGrade Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. 3 82 99 47 72 91 34 74 93 28 4 86 94 46 70 86 19 78 94 43 5 94 100 56 93 98 35 95 98 53 6 98 100 69 95 95 48 87 98 48 4
    • MARCH ~ 2012 ~ RACE BROOKStrengths Goal Areas Grade 6 Math, 98% at Goal  Data teams will analyze or above, 69% at the instruction of Reading Advanced foundational skills Grade 6 Reading, 95% at  Grade-level teams will Goal or above. analyze the two writing Grade 5, in Math, Reading, strands and improve the and Writing were 93% or holistic Writing score better at Goal or above  Implement the new math Grade 4, Math, 86% at curriculum with focus on Goal or above applications and problem- solving 6
    • MARCH ~ 2012 ~ TURKEY HILL SCORESas reported by the STATE DEPARTMENT OFEDUCATION (SDE) Mathematics Reading WritingGrade Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. 3 84 96 32 82 95 45 77 95 37 4 88 96 67 85 94 40 86 98 37 5 95 98 75 95 97 47 86 100 48 6 89 100 58 83* 96* 29* 83 98 40 * Last year, Orange studied this group of Grade 5 students – Last year’s Reading: G = 65: P = 85; Adv. = 21 5
    • MARCH ~ 2012 ~ TURKEY HILLStrengths Goal Areas 94% or better at  Data teams will analyze Proficiency or above in all the instruction of Reading subjects at all grade foundational skills levels  Grade-level teams will Grade 6 Math, 100% analyze the two writing Proficient or above strands and improve the Grade 5 Reading, 95% at holistic Writing score Goal or above  Implement the new math Grade 6 students, over curriculum with focus on time, increased 30% at applications and problem- Goal or above solving 8
    • MARCH 2012 CMT SCIENCE GRADE 5 SCIENCE Goal Proficiency AdvancedDISTRICT 90 98 38PECKPLACE 87 99 38RACEBROOK 89 98 28TURKEYHILL 94 97 48 Goal Prof. Adv. 2008 67 92 17 2009 69 94 26 This is the fifth year of Science testing on the CMT. 2010 76 94 23 6 2011 81 96 26 2012 90 98 38
    • ADVANCED BANDSCORES  NCLB emphasizes the percentage of students who score “At or Above Proficient” – the scores in GREY.  However, recently Orange has measured success based on the percentage of students “At or Above Goal” – the scores in blue.  Beginning this year, we’ll also track the % of students “At Advanced,” thus setting goals for achievement on the two highest bands in scoring. Advanced Band scores are shown in GREEN on the previous two slides.  Remarkable in the Advanced Band:  Grade 4 Math – 47% Advanced  Grade 5 Math – 57% Advanced  Grade 6 Math – 60% Advanced  Grade 6 Writing – 46% Advanced 7
    • 2012: GRADE 3 We continue to analyze and modify instruction for our youngest group of test takers. For Grade 3 students, this is their first experience with the CMT, so we closely study their results. In addition to their skills, their short-term test preparation, as well as their test-taking endurance are factors in their success. Mathematics Reading Writing Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv.District Grade 3March 2012 81 97 39 76 91 36 75 94 32CT State Results 67 86 30 74 24 63 83 23 11
    • GRADE 3 READING The Reading Score – 76% at Goal -- is up from last year’s score 72%; it closely matches our in-house assessments and predictions. ‘Reader-to-Text Connections’ continues to be an area of need. Reading General Reader/Text Content and Interpretation Understanding Connections StructureGrade 3March 2012 91% 88% 62% 81% The Grade 3 average DRP score of 53 slightly exceeds the grade-level DRP expectation of 47. 12
    • GRADE 3 WRITING The Writing Score – 75% at Goal – is up from the previous year’s score of 73%.  The average holistic score on the writing sample was 8.9 out of 12, up from 8.6 last year; the goal is 8.  Grade 3 and Grade 4 teachers will look closely at the Writing data, particularly Composing and Revising which is consistently a relative weakness in our curriculum. Writing Direct Assessment Composing and Editing Holistic Score (12) RevisingGrade 3March 2012 8.9 52 84Grade 3March 2011 8.6 57 80 13
    • GRADE 3 MATH The Math Score – 81% at Goal -- is down 5 pts. from the previous year’s score of 86%.  They scored between 94 – 100% in 13 of the 18 strands that are tested in Grade 3.  The strongest and weakest strands are listed below. Strand 25 continues to be our nemesis. See sample on Slide #23 the end of this presentation.  Our new math curriculum is strong in problem-solving and applications of mathematical processes. Mathematical Strand % at Mastery Pictorial Representation 100% Order, Magnitude, and Rounding 100% Geometric Shapes and properties 100% Computation with Whole Numbers and Decimals 99% Probability and Statistics 99% Approximating Measures 81% Estimating Solutions to Problems 71% 14 Mathematical Applications 63%
    • Grade 3 15
    • 2012: GRADE 4  These students improved this year over their Grade 3 scores, making especially notable gains in both Reading and Writing.  The improvement in Writing at both the Goal and Advanced levels is noteworthy. Mathematics Reading Writing Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv.District Grade 4March 2012 85 95 47 80 90 23 83 96 38As 3rd GradersMarch 2011 86 97 44 72 87 24 73 89 26CT State 68 86 32 64 78 19 65 84 28 Results 16
    • Grade 4 Noteworthyaccomplishment in the Advanced Band 17
    • 2012: GRADE 5  This class has achieved steady increases across all three tests over the past two years and is scoring about 20 points above the State averages.  In addition, they took their first Science CMT and did very well; 90% reached Goal and 98% reached Proficiency. Two sample Science items, typical of this new test can be found at the end of this presentation on Slide 25. Mathematics Reading Writing Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv.District Grade 5March 2012 92 100 57 92 98 39 87 98 41As 4th GradersMarch 2011 90 98 49 87 95 36 91 98 41CT State 72 86 36 68 80 22 68 89 23 Results 18
    • Grade 5 Noteworthyaccomplishment inthe Advanced Band Few students needing remediation 19
    • 2012: GRADE 6  The Grade 6 test takers make a significant leap in Reading from 76% at Goal to 91% at Goal; their improvement of 10 points in the Advanced band was significant as well.  Their 60% at Advanced in Math is especially noteworthy.  It’s important to keep in mind, that when scores are high, there is less room for substantial gain. Mathematics Reading Writing Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv.District Grade 6March 2012 92 100 60 91 97 41 87 97 46As 5th GradersMarch 2011 93 99 57 76 87 31 87 97 32CT State 20 67 86 30 59 75 24 63 83 23 Results
    • Grade 6 NO studentsbelow Proficient. Noteworthy accomplishment in the Advanced Band 21
    • ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS’ DRG BCOMPARISON There are 20 elementary districts in Orange’s DRG (Demographic Reference Group). These include towns such as Avon, Cheshire, Fairfield, Granby, Monroe, Simsbury, West Hartford, and Woodbridge. Below are our standings within our DRG. At each grade-level, and in each subject area, our students at Goal should fall in the top ½ of our DRG, as they do in circles shown below. Math Reading Writing DRG / DRG / DRG / Goal out of Goal out of Goal out of 20 20 20 Grade 3 81 18 th 76 11 th 75 17 th Grade 4 85 11 th 80 14 th 83 10 th Grade 5 92 4th 92 1 st 87 8 th Grade 6 92 5th 91 11 th 87 12 th 22
    • READING DISTRICT-WIDE The reading test at each grade level includes a ‘Degrees of Reading Power’ (DRP) average score and % at Goal for the following strands, which require students to also write responses to open-ended questions: DRP score #1 #2 #3 #4 (DRP Target Score) Grade 3 91 88 62 81 53 / (47) Grade 4 94 80 74 81 61 / (54) Grade 5 99 94 88 98 65 / (58) Grade 6 95 97 86 98 70 / (62) 1. Forming a General Understanding 2. Developing an Interpretation 3. Making Reader / Text Connections 4. Examining the Content and Structure 23
    • DISTRICT-WIDE CURRICULAR ISSUES• District-wide, our goal is the implementation of the new Math curriculum, Math Expressions, which is aligned to the Common Core of Standards, features fewer strands per year, and emphasizes applications and problem-solving.**Strand #3 – “Making Connections” in Reading requires students to meaningfully connect what they have read in a sample passage to their own lives or to other texts they have read. Connections questions include:  Tell why or why not you would like to have [character’s name] as a friend?  Think about someone you know who has done something courageous. How is that person like [character’s name] in this story?  What kind of person do you think the author of this story is? 20
    • CMT DATA REPORT –TRACKING GRO WTH OVER TIMEAMONG THE SAME GROUP OF ImprovedSTUDENTS Achievement Mathematics Reading Writing Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. 6th Graders (incoming 7th) 2012 – 6th 92 100 60 91 97 41 87 97 46 2011 – 5th 93 99 57 76 87 31 87 97 32 2010 – 4th 90 98 50 79 89 28 81 96 37 2009 – 3rd 84 95 45 71 83 18 73 91 28 5th Graders (incoming 6th) 2012 – 5th 92 100 57 92 98 39 87 98 41 2011 – 4th 90 98 49 87 95 36 91 98 41 2010 – 3rd 86 97 46 81 90 35 79 94 36 21
    • CMT DATA REPORT –TRACKING GROWTH OVER TIMEAMONG THE SAME GROUP OFSTUDENTS Mathematics Reading Writing Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. 4th Graders (incoming 5th) 2012 – 4th 85 95 47 79 90 23 83 96 38 2011 – 3rd 86 97 44 72 87 24 73 89 26 3rd Graders (incoming 4th) 2012 – 3rd 81 97 39 76 91 36 75 94 32 22
    • SAMPLE -- GRADE 3STRAND #25 –MATHEMATICALAPPLICATIONS 23
    • SAMPLE -- GRADE 6 STRAND #25 – MATHEMATICAL APPLICATIONSThe Relay RaceTom, Bob, and Vic are racing against eachother in a 100 meter dash. In how manydifferent orders could they finish the race,assuming that ties are possible.That is, one finishing order could be Bob,then Tom, and then Vic; another could be Tomand Vic in a tie, and then Bob.Show all the different orders in which the racecould end – including possible ties. 24
    • SAMPLE -- GRADE 5SCIENCE QUESTIONS 25