2013 CMT Scores
Data Analysis
September 2013
The Orange Elementary
School District recognizes
that the education of each
c...
March 2013
DISTRICT Scores
as reported by the State Department of Education (SDE)
Grade
Mathematics Reading Writing
Goal P...
2013 CMT
Grade 3
Mathematics Reading Writing
%
At/Above
Proficient
%
At/Above
Goal
%
At/Above
Proficient
%
At/Above
Goal
%...
Grade 4
State to District Comparison
2013 CMT
Grade 4
Mathematics Reading Writing
%
At/Above
Proficient
%
At/Above
Goal
%
...
Grade 5
State to District Comparison
2013 CMT
Grade 5
Mathematics Reading Writing Science
%
At/Above
Proficient
%
At/Above...
Grade 6
State to District Comparison
2013 CMT
Grade 6
Mathematics Reading Writing
%
At/Above
Proficient
%
At/Above
Goal
%
...
The Peck Place School
2013
Grade
Mathematics Reading Writing
Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv.
3 77 96 34 75...
The Peck Place School
Strengths
Cohort Growth
Grade 6 students gained 15% at goal or above and 18% at advanced or above in...
Race Brook School
2013
Grade
Mathematics Reading Writing
Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv.
3 91 99 43 79 94 ...
Cohort Growth
The number of sixth grade students achieving at the advanced band in mathematics increased by 20%
during the...
Turkey Hill School
2013
Grade
Mathematics Reading Writing
Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv.
3 78 94 41 70 88...
Cohort Growth
Grade 6 students increased 14% from 84% to 98% at goal or above in reading over the course of
instruction in...
2013 CMT Science Scores
GRADE 5 SCIENCE
Goal Proficiency Advanced
DISTRICT 74 93 30
PECK
PLACE
71 93 19
RACE
BROOK
63 90 2...
SAMPLE -- GRADE 5
SCIENCE QUESTIONS
2013 CMT
Grade 3
Mathematics Reading Writing
Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv.
State 2013 62 83 26 57 72 22 ...
Grade 3 Reading
The Reading Score – 75% at Goal – remains flat from last year’s score 76%.
‘Reader-to-Text Connections’ co...
Grade 3 Writing
The Writing Score – 74% at Goal – remains flat from the
previous year’s score of 75%.
 The average holist...
Grade 3 Math
The Math Score – 82% at Goal – remains consistent to the previous year’s score of
81%.
 They scored between ...
2013: Grade 4
2013 CMT
Grade 4
Mathematics Reading Writing
Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv.
As 3rd Graders
...
2013: Grade 5
2013 CMT
Grade 5
Mathematics Reading Writing
Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv.
As 3rd Graders
...
2013: Grade 6
2013 CMT
Grade 5
Mathematics Reading Writing
Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv.
As 3rd Graders
...
Elementary Schools’ DRG B Comparison
% of Students At or Above Goal Level
2013
Math Reading Writing
Goal
DRG /
out of 19
G...
CMT 2013 DRG Comparison
Grade 3 Math Grade 3 Reading Grade 3 Writing
% Meeting Goal % Meeting Goal % Meeting Goal
Trumbull...
CMT 2013 DRG Comparison
Grade 4 Math Grade 4 Reading Grade 4 Writing
% Meeting Goal % Meeting Goal % Meeting Goal
Monroe 9...
CMT 2013 DRG Comparison
Grade 5 Math Grade 5 Reading Grade 5 Writing Grade 5 Science
% Meeting Goal % Meeting Goal % Meeti...
CMT 2013 DRG Comparison
Grade 6 Math Grade 6 Reading Grade 6 Writing
% Meeting Goal % Meeting Goal % Meeting Goal
Woodbrid...
Elementary Schools’ DRG B Comparison
% of Students At the Advanced Level
2013
Math Reading Writing
Adv.
DRG/
out of
19
Adv...
Next Steps:
STANDARDS (CCSS)
PROFESSIONAL
DEVELOPMENT
ASSESSMENTS (SBAC)
DATA-DRIVEN
INSTRUCTION
DIFFERENTIATION
TEACHER
E...
2013 CMT Data Analysis
available on the webpage at
www.oess.org
The Orange Elementary
School District recognizes
that the ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

2013 CMT FULL Report

810

Published on

CMT data from 2013 test; including DRG B

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
810
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Classrooms in CT are nearing the completion of a significant instructional transition.In 2010, the State Board of Education adopted the Common Core State Standards, a set of clearer, fewer and higher expectations articulating what students need to learn in a given grade. With new standards, CT will need to administer new assessments. The CMT, which our students in Grades 3 – 6 took back in March, were not designed to measure student learning relative to the NEW Common Core Standards. For this reason, CT will sunset the administration of the Reading, Writing and Math CMT in 2014 – 2015 and replace them with the Smarter Balanced Assessment (SBAC). The CMT Science test will continue to be administered in Grade 5.
  • The State Department of Education typically reports out the CMT scores at the Proficient Level. As you can see, The Orange Elementary School System proudly reports that 93 – 100% of our students are at the Proficient level or higher. Orange is a DRG B district and therefore sets the bar higher than Proficient and seeks high levels of student performance in both the Goal and Advanced bands. We traditionally see our students make significant growth from 3rd to 6th Grade.While we are most proud of that growth, we strive to see the same high levels of performance seen at the 6th grade level across all grades.
  • The CT State Department of Education recently reported that student performance data across the state showed decreases in the percentage of students at/above Proficiency or Goal levels in all grades compared to last year. As you will note on the Grade 3 scores, where the state scores decreased by an average of 3% in each area, Orange scores remained relatively the same from last year, 20% above the state scores. A 1% decrease translates into 1 or 2 students in Orange.
  • Our 4th Grade scores reflect noteworthy gains in the Proficient ranges suggesting that our Scientifically Research Based Interventions (SRBI) targeting our Tier 2 and Tier 3 students are successful. 4th Grade scores at Goal continue to be approximately 20% above the state average.
  • Our present 5th grade scores, when compared to the previous 5th grade class are disappointing. A significant decrease is shown in the areas of Mathematics, Reading and Science. A school by school analysis will shed some light on possible reasons for the drop and viewers must be reminded that these scores represent two different groups of 5th graders. The cohort data which compares one class to themselves the following year is a more accurate picture of student performance and growth. With that said, Orange still outperformed the State average by approximately 20% in most areas.
  • Once again, Orange’s 6th graders performed at high levels of achievement. Proficient levels are at or near 100%. 87 – 97% of our students are at Goal or Advanced and we are 20 – 30% higher than the State average.
  • The Peck Place School scores range from:87 – 100% at Proficient Level75 – 99% at Goal Level25 – 52% at the Advanced Level
  • Race Brook School scores range from:90 – 100% at Proficient Level75 – 94% at Goal Level13 – 67% at the Advanced LevelThe Peck Place School scores range from:87 – 100% at Proficient Level75 – 99% at Goal Level25 – 52% at the Advanced Level
  • Turkey Hill School scores range from:88 – 100% at Proficient Level69 – 97% at Goal Level28 – 69% at the Advanced Level
  • The District’s 5th Grade Science scores showed a significant drop from the previous year. While Proficient remained in the 90th percentile the number at Goal dropped from 89% to 74%.The slide shows the schools broken out by scores. Turkey Hill School shows a significant increase in this area above the other elementary schools.
  • The next slides reflect cohort data meaning it shows the progress made from the same group of students from one year to the next. The District’s present 4th graders show improvement in most of the Proficient and Goal bands from when they were in 3rd Grade.
  • This slide reflects 3 years of growth for the same students. Significant gains have been made both reading and writing.
  • The promoted 6th graders made significant gains across the performance bands.
  • In the GOAL BAND, out of 12 possible opportunities to score in the top 10 of DRG B, Orange placed in the top half in 8 out of the 12 categories.
  • In the ADVANCED BAND, out of 12 possible opportunities to score in the top 10 of DRG B, Orange placed in the top half in 6 out of the 12 categories.
  • A
  • Transcript of "2013 CMT FULL Report"

    1. 1. 2013 CMT Scores Data Analysis September 2013 The Orange Elementary School District recognizes that the education of each child is the shared responsibility of every member of the community. Our goal is to inspire and empower each student to achieve academic excellence, embrace social and individual responsibility, and lead with integrity. We believe all individuals should be valued and treated with respect.
    2. 2. March 2013 DISTRICT Scores as reported by the State Department of Education (SDE) Grade Mathematics Reading Writing Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. 3 82 96 39 75 90 31 74 93 27 4 82 97 39 81 95 29 81 98 28 5 87 95 43 82 92 28 87 98 39 6 94 100 60 97 100 43 92 99 44
    3. 3. 2013 CMT Grade 3 Mathematics Reading Writing % At/Above Proficient % At/Above Goal % At/Above Proficient % At/Above Goal % At/Above Proficient % At/Above Goal State 2012 86 67 75 59 83 63 2013 83 62 72 57 80 60 +/- (-3) (-5) (-3) (-2) (-3) (-3) Orange 2012 97 81 91 76 94 75 2013 96 82 90 75 93 74 +/- (-1) (+1) (-1) (-1) (-1) (-1) Grade 3 State to District Comparison
    4. 4. Grade 4 State to District Comparison 2013 CMT Grade 4 Mathematics Reading Writing % At/Above Proficient % At/Above Goal % At/Above Proficient % At/Above Goal % At/Above Proficient % At/Above Goal State 2012 86 68 78 64 84 65 2013 84 65 78 63 84 63 +/- (-2) (-3) - (-1) - (-2) Orange 2012 95 85 90 80 96 83 2013 97 82 95 81 98 81 +/- (+2) (-3) (+5) (+1) (+2) (-2)
    5. 5. Grade 5 State to District Comparison 2013 CMT Grade 5 Mathematics Reading Writing Science % At/Above Proficient % At/Above Goal % At/Above Proficient % At/Above Goal % At/Above Proficient % At/Above Goal % At/Above Proficient % At/Above Goal State 2012 86 72 80 68 89 68 82 64 2013 84 69 79 67 88 66 82 63 +/- (-2) (-3) (-1) (-1) (-1) (-2) - (-1) Orange 2012 100 92 98 92 98 87 98 90 2013 95 87 92 82 98 87 93 74 +/- (-5) (-5) (-6) (-10) - - (-5) (-16)
    6. 6. Grade 6 State to District Comparison 2013 CMT Grade 6 Mathematics Reading Writing % At/Above Proficient % At/Above Goal % At/Above Proficient % At/Above Goal % At/Above Proficient % At/Above Goal State 2012 87 70 85 74 85 68 2013 86 67 85 73 84 65 +/- (-1) (-3) - (-1) (-1) (-3) Orange 2012 100 92 97 91 97 87 2013 100 94 100 97 99 92 +/- - (+2) (+3) (+6) (+2) (+5)
    7. 7. The Peck Place School 2013 Grade Mathematics Reading Writing Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. 3 77 96 34 75 87 38 78 92 40 4 77 94 39 80 94 28 82 100 26 5 86 95 32 79 94 25 90 99 29 6 93 100 52 99 100 43 90 97 36
    8. 8. The Peck Place School Strengths Cohort Growth Grade 6 students gained 15% at goal or above and 18% at advanced or above in mathematics during their CMT years at Peck. These same students gained 16% at goal or above in reading from grade 3 to grade 6. Grade 5 students gained 16% at goal or above in writing so far in their CMT years at Peck. Students Receiving Support 82% of students who received Tier II or Tier III math support scored proficient or higher. 70% of students who received Tier II or Tier III reading support improved by at least one band. 100% of special education students who took the standard reading CMT scored proficient or better and an additional three students made goal on the CMT MAS assessment.
    9. 9. Race Brook School 2013 Grade Mathematics Reading Writing Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. 3 91 99 43 79 94 21 75 94 13 4 79 95 39 77 95 25 77 100 29 5 81 93 35 81 90 28 79 96 45 6 94 100 67 94 100 39 91 100 51
    10. 10. Cohort Growth The number of sixth grade students achieving at the advanced band in mathematics increased by 20% during their years at Race Brook School. Sixth grade students attaining goal or above in reading increased by 17%, and advanced increased by 10% during their years at Race Brook School. Grade five students scoring at goal or above in reading has increased by 16% since third grade. Students Receiving Support 88% of students receiving Tier 2 or Tier 3 reading support scored at or above the goal level and 89% of students receiving Tier 2 or Tier 3 math support scored proficient or higher. Students in 5th grade receiving special education support made a 39% gain at the proficient level or better in writing. Race Brook School Strengths
    11. 11. Turkey Hill School 2013 Grade Mathematics Reading Writing Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. 3 78 94 41 70 88 33 69 94 28 4 90 100 38 85 95 35 85 93 29 5 96 98 69 88 94 31 96 100 45 6 94 100 64 97 100 45 94 100 48
    12. 12. Cohort Growth Grade 6 students increased 14% from 84% to 98% at goal or above in reading over the course of instruction in grades 3-6. 100% of grade 6 students reached proficient or above in the same time period. Grade 5 students increased 23% from 73% to 96% at goal or above in writing over the course of instruction in grades 3-5. 100% of grade 5 students reached proficient or above in the same time period. Grade 6 students increased 15% in the math advanced band over the course of instruction in grades 3-6. 96% of grade 6 students reached goal or above in the same time period. 85% of students in grades 4, 5 and 6 tested at goal or above in reading, writing, mathematics and science. Turkey Hill School Strengths
    13. 13. 2013 CMT Science Scores GRADE 5 SCIENCE Goal Proficiency Advanced DISTRICT 74 93 30 PECK PLACE 71 93 19 RACE BROOK 63 90 28 TURKEY HILL 94 98 49 Goal Prof. Adv. 2008 67 92 17 2009 69 94 26 2010 76 94 23 2011 81 96 26 2012 89 98 38 2013 74 93 30
    14. 14. SAMPLE -- GRADE 5 SCIENCE QUESTIONS
    15. 15. 2013 CMT Grade 3 Mathematics Reading Writing Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. State 2013 62 83 26 57 72 22 60 80 19 Orange 2013 82 96 39 75 90 31 74 93 27 2013: 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 a standardized test, so we closely study their results.
    16. 16. Grade 3 Reading The Reading Score – 75% at Goal – remains flat from last year’s score 76%. ‘Reader-to-Text Connections’ continues to be an area of need on the CMT but will not be tested as a strand on the Smarter Balance Assessment. Reading General Understanding Interpretation Reader/Text Connections Content and Structure Grade 3 March 2013 91% 89% 52% 79% The Grade 3 average DRP score of 51 slightly exceeds the grade-level DRP expectation of 47.
    17. 17. Grade 3 Writing The Writing Score – 74% at Goal – remains flat from the previous year’s score of 75%.  The average holistic score on the writing sample was 8.5 out of 12. Goal is 8.  The Editing Score - 88% is up from 84% the previous year.  Composing and Revising – 50% continues to be an area needing improvement.  This style of prompt writing will not be assessed on the SBAC. Instead, students will be given multiple sources of text and asked to respond to questions using evidence from the text. Writing Direct Assessment Holistic Score (12) Composing and Revising Editing Grade 3 March 2013 8.5 50 88
    18. 18. Grade 3 Math The Math Score – 82% at Goal – remains consistent to the previous year’s score of 81%.  They scored between 90 – 100% in 15 of the 18 strands that are tested in Grade 3.  The strongest and weakest strands are listed below. Estimating Solutions to Problems and Mathematical Applications continue to be difficult strands for our students to master. Mathematical Strand % at Mastery Order, Magnitude, and Rounding 100% Pictorial Representation 99% Facts/Computation with Whole Numbers and Decimals 99% Probability and Statistics 99% Geometric Shapes and Properties 98% Approximating Measures 73% Mathematical Applications 62% Estimating Solutions to Problems 61%
    19. 19. 2013: Grade 4 2013 CMT Grade 4 Mathematics Reading Writing Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. As 3rd Graders March 2012 81 97 39 76 91 36 75 94 32 District Grade 4 March 2013 82 97 39 81 95 29 81 98 28  These students improved this year over their Grade 3 scores, making notable gains in the goal band for both Reading and Writing.
    20. 20. 2013: Grade 5 2013 CMT Grade 5 Mathematics Reading Writing Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. As 3rd Graders March 2011 86 97 44 72 87 24 73 89 26 As 4th Graders March 2012 85 95 47 80 90 23 83 96 38 District Grade 5 March 2013 87 95 43 82 92 28 87 98 39  This class has achieved steady progress in Mathematics, Reading and Writing over the past three years.
    21. 21. 2013: Grade 6 2013 CMT Grade 5 Mathematics Reading Writing Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. As 3rd Graders March 2010 86 97 46 81 90 35 79 94 36 As 4th Graders March 2011 90 98 49 87 95 36 91 98 41 As 5th Graders March 2012 92 100 57 92 98 39 87 98 41 District Grade 6 March 2013 94 100 60 97 100 43 92 99 44 The promoted 6th grade students showed significant progress in all areas over the course of their CMT test taking years in Orange. Their performance in the Advanced Levels is noteworthy.
    22. 22. Elementary Schools’ DRG B Comparison % of Students At or Above Goal Level 2013 Math Reading Writing Goal DRG / out of 19 Goal DRG / out of 19 Goal DRG / out of 19 Grade 3 82 9th 75 9th 74 13th Grade 4 82 11th 81 8th 81 10th Grade 5 87 13th 82 14th 87 2nd Grade 6 94 2nd 97 1st 92 2nd There are 19 elementary districts in Orange’s DRG (Demographic Reference Group). These include towns such as Avon, Cheshire, Fairfield, Granby, Monroe, Simsbury, West Hartford, Trumbull 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 highlighted below.
    23. 23. CMT 2013 DRG Comparison Grade 3 Math Grade 3 Reading Grade 3 Writing % Meeting Goal % Meeting Goal % Meeting Goal Trumbull 86.0% Avon 87.1% Avon 87.2% Granby 85.6% Madison 83.4% Trumbull 81.5% Monroe 85.1% Granby 81.5% Glastonbury 80.6% Fairfield 85.0% Monroe 80.1% Farmington 80.4% Madison 84.6% Guilford 78.9% Simsbury 80.1% Guilford 83.3% Fairfield 78.6% Fairfield 79.9% Glastonbury 82.9% Glastonbury 76.7% Granby 79.1% Avon 82.8% Farmington 76.0% Monroe 79.0% Orange 82.4% Orange 75.4% Woodbridge 78.8% Simsbury 81.8% Trumbull 75.2% Guilford 77.0% Region 15 80.8% Greenwich 75.1% Greenwich 76.4% Brookfield 79.2% South Windsor 74.2% West Hartford 75.8% Woodbridge 79.1% Brookfield 74.0% Orange 74.2% Greenwich 78.3% Simsbury 74.0% Madison 72.4% New Fairfield 77.4% Region 15 73.5% New Fairfield 72.3% South Windsor 76.6% West Hartford 71.7% Cheshire 71.4% Farmington 75.6% New Fairfield 67.7% Region 15 70.9% West Hartford 73.3% Cheshire 67.0% Brookfield 66.2% Cheshire 71.4% Woodbridge 67.0% South Windsor 65.7% Newtown 0.0% Newtown 0.0% Newtown 0.0% State Avg. 61.6% State Avg. 56.9% State Avg. 60.0% CMT 2012 DRG Comparison Grade 3 Math Grade 3 Reading Grade 3 Writing % Meeting Goal % Meeting Goal % Meeting Goal Newtown 89.7% Avon 84.5% Farmington 89.8% Monroe 89.5% Region 15 83.4% Avon 88.2% Trumbull 89.5% Farmington 83.0% Madison 87.1% Simsbury 85.2% Madison 82.9% Newtown 84.1% Farmington 87.8% Monroe 82.3% Simsbury 83.1% Madison 87.3% Granby 81.8% Monroe 81.6% Avon 86.9% Woodbridge 81.0% Cheshire 81.0% Woodbridge 86.8% Newtown 80.8% Trumbull 79.9% Granby 86.0% Simsbury 79.0% Fairfield 79.5% Fairfield 85.9% Greenwich 78.8% Region 15 79.4% Greenwich 84.1% Guilford 78.6% Greenwich 79.2% Cheshire 83.6% Orange 75.9% Glastonbury 79.1% Guilford 83.5% Trumbull 75.8% Granby 78.7% Brookfield 83.1% Glastonbury 75.6% West Hartford 76.4% Region 15 82.8% Fairfield 75.0% New Fairfield 75.7% New Fairfield 82.4% Brookfield 74.3% Guilford 75.5% Glastonbury 81.6% South Windsor 73.2% Orange 75.3% Orange 81.3% Cheshire 72.6% Brookfield 73.8% South Windsor 78.7% West Hartford 72.0% South Windsor 73.0% West Hartford 76.4% New Fairfield 70.7% Woodbridge 71.6% State Avg. 66.8% State Avg. 59.2% State Avg. 62.7%
    24. 24. CMT 2013 DRG Comparison Grade 4 Math Grade 4 Reading Grade 4 Writing % Meeting Goal % Meeting Goal % Meeting Goal Monroe 90.5% Woodbridge 90.4% Woodbridge 90.7% Trumbull 89.2% Avon 87.7% Farmington 87.7% Avon 88.9% Madison 85.5% Madison 86.4% Woodbridge 87.8% Region 15 85.1% Monroe 86.1% Cheshire 87.4% Farmington 84.8% Region 15 85.0% Fairfield 86.8% Monroe 84.5% Simsbury 84.2% Farmington 86.6% Simsbury 82.7% Trumbull 83.9% Granby 85.9% Orange 81.1% Avon 83.5% Madison 82.9% Granby 80.7% Greenwich 82.1% Greenwich 82.1% Guilford 80.4% Orange 81.4% Orange 81.9% Cheshire 80.2% Fairfield 79.1% South Windsor 81.1% Glastonbury 79% Glastonbury 78.9% Region 15 80.5% Fairfield 78.8% Guilford 78.2% Simsbury 80.4% Greenwich 78.8% Cheshire 77.6% New Fairfield 79.9% Trumbull 78.7% Granby 75.3% Brookfield 78.9% South Windsor 77.7% South Windsor 75.2% Guilford 77.9% West Hartford 75.4% New Fairfield 74.2% Glastonbury 77.6% Brookfield 72.2% West Hartford 73.9% West Hartford 73.4% New Fairfield 64.9% Brookfield 73.4% Newtown 0.0% Newtown 0 Newtown 0.0% State Avg. 65.4% State Avg. 62.7% State Avg. 63.1% CMT 2012 DRG Comparison Grade 4 Math Grade 4 Reading Grade 4 Writing % Meeting Goal % Meeting Goal % Meeting Goal Monroe 92.4% Woodbridge 89.1% Madison 92.1% Madison 91.7% Madison 89.0% Woodbridge 89.5% Newtown 90.4% Granby 88.5% Avon 87.9% Simsbury 89.7% Monroe 87.9% Farmington 87.9% Trumbull 89.4% Simsbury 86.0% Newtown 87.5% Avon 87.4% Farmington 85.1% Monroe 86.6% New Fairfield 87.2% Avon 85.0% Guilford 83.9% Cheshire 87.1% Newtown 84.5% Trumbull 83.7% Woodbridge 86.0% Guilford 83.6% Cheshire 83.3% Farmington 85.8% Glastonbury 82.0% Orange 83.2% Orange 85.3% Cheshire 80.9% Simsbury 82.7% Brookfield 84.8% Trumbull 80.7% Glastonbury 82.1% Granby 84.8% South Windsor 79.9% Fairfield 81.5% Fairfield 83.9% Fairfield 79.8% Granby 81.5% Glastonbury 82.9% Orange 79.5% Greenwich 79.7% Region 15 82.9% Region 15 79.1% Brookfield 79.4% Guilford 82.2% Brookfield 78.7% Region 15 79.2% Greenwich 81.6% Greenwich 78.5% West Hartford 78.6% South Windsor 81.0% West Hartford 78.4% South Windsor 77.6% West Hartford 80.3% New Fairfield 69.3% New Fairfield 74.0% State Avg. 68.2% State Avg. 64.1% State Avg. 65.3%
    25. 25. CMT 2013 DRG Comparison Grade 5 Math Grade 5 Reading Grade 5 Writing Grade 5 Science % Meeting Goal % Meeting Goal % Meeting Goal % Meeting Goal Trumbull 91.9% Woodbridge 90.5% Woodbridge 89.8% Woodbridge 90.8% Woodbridge 91.7% Guilford 88.0% Orange 87.2% Granby 90.4% Simsbury 91.2% Glastonbury 87.6% Simsbury 87.1% Simsbury 89.3% Monroe 90.6% Simsbury 87.0% Trumbull 87.1% Farmington 88.5% Fairfield 89.7% Granby 86.0% Madison 87.0% Monroe 87.6% Glastonbury 89.0% Trumbull 86.0% Glastonbury 85.9% Glastonbury 86.7% Madison 88.8% Monroe 85.5% Avon 85.3% Madison 84.4% Cheshire 88.6% Farmington 84.7% Farmington 84.4% Trumbull 83.6% Granby 88.5% Fairfield 84.6% Fairfield 83.4% Guilford 83.4% Brookfield 88.0% Madison 83.5% Monroe 83.1% South Windsor 82.8% Region 15 87.5% South Windsor 83.3% Cheshire 82.6% Cheshire 82.6% South Windsor 87.5% Greenwich 83.1% Region 15 82.0% Brookfield 82.1% Orange 86.8% Cheshire 82.6% Guilford 81.7% Fairfield 81.9% Farmington 86.1% Orange 82.3% Greenwich 81.0% Avon 81.1% Greenwich 84.0% Region 15 81.9% West Hartford 81.0% Region 15 81.1% Avon 82.9% Avon 81.0% New Fairfield 78.1% Greenwich 81.0% Guilford 82.0% Brookfield 80.6% Granby 76.6% New Fairfield 76.5% West Hartford 81.5% West Hartford 79.4% South Windsor 75.4% West Hartford 76.5% New Fairfield 79.6% New Fairfield 74.5% Brookfield 70.7% Orange 73.9% Newtown 0.0% Newtown 0.0% Newtown 0.0% Newtown 0.0% State Avg. 69.4% State Avg. 66.9% State Avg. 65.6% State Avg. 62.5% CMT 2012 DRG Comparison Grade 5 Math Grade 5 Reading Grade 5 Writing Grade 5 Science % Meeting Goal % Meeting Goal % Meeting Goal % Meeting Goal Granby 93.3% Orange 92.3% Madison 92.5% Madison 92.5% Glastonbury 92.4% Woodbridge 90.0% Newtown 92.0% Farmington 92.1% Madison 92.4% Madison 89.6% Simsbury 92.0% Granby 91.7% Orange 92.4% Avon 88.4% Avon 91.8% Avon 91.5% Avon 92.1% Simsbury 88.4% Farmington 91.7% Orange 89.7% Woodbridge 91.3% Farmington 88.3% Monroe 89.8% Monroe 88.1% Farmington 90.8% Monroe 88.3% Region 15 89.8% Glastonbury 86.9% Simsbury 89.9% Region 15 87.8% Orange 87.1% Simsbury 86.9% Trumbull 89.6% Trumbull 87.3% Cheshire 86.8% Woodbridge 86.1% Monroe 89.4% Newtown 86.6% Trumbull 86.3% Trumbull 85.1% Newtown 89.2% Guilford 84.6% Brookfield 86.1% Guilford 84.0% Cheshire 88.3% Granby 84.0% Greenwich 86.1% Region 15 83.5% Region 15 87.9% New Fairfield 83.3% Granby 83.5% Newtown 82.2% Fairfield 86.6% Glastonbury 83.0% Fairfield 82.9% Cheshire 81.8% Brookfield 85.0% Cheshire 82.9% Guilford 82.9% Greenwich 81.8% Guilford 84.6% Fairfield 82.8% New Fairfield 81.8% New Fairfield 81.8% Greenwich 84.2% Greenwich 82.8% West Hartford 81.1% Brookfield 81.5% New Fairfield 83.3% Brookfield 82.3% Woodbridge 80.6% Fairfield 80.0% West Hartford 83.0% South Windsor 80.6% Glastonbury 80.1% South Windsor 79.4% South Windsor 81.7% West Hartford 80.6% South Windsor 76.9% West Hartford 74.8% State Avg. 71.8% State Avg. 67.7% State Avg. 68.1% State Avg. 64.1%
    26. 26. CMT 2013 DRG Comparison Grade 6 Math Grade 6 Reading Grade 6 Writing % Meeting Goal % Meeting Goal % Meeting Goal Woodbridge 95.2% Orange 96.8% Avon 91.8% Orange 93.5% Woodbridge 95.0% Orange 91.5% Avon 91.7% Granby 93.7% Simsbury 91.1% Madison 91.1% Avon 93.6% Farmington 89.9% Cheshire 89.9% Farmington 92.6% Guilford 88.9% Glastonbury 88.6% Simsbury 92.2% Madison 87.4% Granby 87.3% Madison 91.8% Woodbridge 86.5% Monroe 87.1% Monroe 91.5% Monroe 84.8% Simsbury 86.3% Guilford 90.7% Glastonbury 84.4% Fairfield 85.1% Cheshire 89.5% Trumbull 83.2% Guilford 85.0% Glastonbury 89.0% Fairfield 82.3% Farmington 84.4% Trumbull 88.1% Granby 82.2% Greenwich 83.2% South Windsor 86.9% Cheshire 81.4% Trumbull 82.3% Fairfield 85.9% West Hartford 81.0% Regional 15 81.6% Greenwich 85.9% Greenwich 80.3% New Fairfield 81.5% New Fairfield 84.4% Regional 15 79.5% Brookfield 81.4% Regional 15 84.0% South Windsor 74.4% West Hartford 77.0% Brookfield 83.8% Brookfield 72.9% South Windsor 72.0% West Hartford 83.6% New Fairfield 72.3% Newtown 0.0% Newtown 0.0% Newtown 0.0% State 67.2% State 73.3% State 65.2% CMT 2012 DRG Comparison Grade 6 Math Grade 6 Reading Grade 6 Writing % Meeting Goal % Meeting Goal % Meeting Goal Avon 95.0% Simsbury 96.9% Simsbury 94.0% Woodbridge 93.9% Granby 96.8% Madison 91.9% Newtown 93.0% Avon 94.4% Avon 91.4% Farmington 92.8% Madison 93.9% Cheshire 91.3% Orange 92.4% Cheshire 93.8% Newtown 90.8% Cheshire 92.3% Farmington 93.6% Farmington 90.6% Madison 92.2% Newtown 92.3% Guilford 88.7% Simsbury 91.6% Guilford 92.0% Brookfield 88.3% Granby 91.1% Regional 15 91.9% Granby 88.2% Regional 15 91.1% Woodbridge 91.3% Trumbull 88.0% Glastonbury 89.1% Orange 91.2% Orange 87.2% Trumbull 87.6% South Windsor 88.5% Woodbridge 87.2% Guilford 86.2% Glastonbury 88.2% New Fairfield 86.3% Monroe 85.5% Trumbull 88.2% Fairfield 86.2% Brookfield 83.7% Brookfield 87.6% Regional 15 85.5% Fairfield 83.2% Fairfield 87.3% Monroe 84.4% West Hartford 82.5% Greenwich 86.7% Glastonbury 83.7% Greenwich 82.0% Monroe 85.1% Greenwich 81.8% South Windsor 79.6% West Hartford 84.5% West Hartford 81.1% New Fairfield 79.5% New Fairfield 79.1% South Windsor 81.0% State 69.5% State 74.2% State 67.5%
    27. 27. Elementary Schools’ DRG B Comparison % of Students At the Advanced Level 2013 Math Reading Writing Adv. DRG/ out of 19 Adv. DRG / out of 19 Adv. DRG / out of 19 Grade 3 39 10th 31 16th 27 16th Grade 4 39 15th 29 10th 28 18th Grade 5 43 17th 28 18th 39 8th Grade 6 60 5th 43 7th 44 9th There are 19 elementary districts in Orange’s DRG (Demographic Reference Group). These include towns such as Avon, Cheshire, Fairfield, Granby, Monroe, Simsbury, West Hartford, Trumbull and Woodbridge. Below are our standings within our DRG. At each grade-level, and in each subject area, our students at Advanced should fall in the top ½ of our DRG, as highlighted below.
    28. 28. Next Steps: STANDARDS (CCSS) PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENTS (SBAC) DATA-DRIVEN INSTRUCTION DIFFERENTIATION TEACHER EVALUATION PLAN ADMINSTRATOR EVALUATION PLAN  The Orange Elementary School District will continue to adjust its curriculum and instruction to align to the rigors of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS).  In conjunction with the Teacher Evaluation Plan, professional development will be provided to teachers to support them in the planning, implementation and assessment of curriculum aligned to the CCSS with high expectations.  Instructional leaders will increase their knowledge and understanding of the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) to further inform quality instruction.  Teachers will differentiate their instruction to deliver high quality, rigorous lessons that will meet the needs of ALL students.  As a district, we will increase the number of students performing in the ADVANCED bands on standardized testing by providing opportunities for our learners to interact with more rigorous materials and activities with higher expectations.
    29. 29. 2013 CMT Data Analysis available on the webpage at www.oess.org The Orange Elementary School District recognizes that the education of each child is the shared responsibility of every member of the community. Our goal is to inspire and empower each student to achieve academic excellence, embrace social and individual responsibility, and lead with integrity. We believe all individuals should be valued and treated with respect.
    1. A particular slide catching your eye?

      Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

    ×