Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
MCAS 2013
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

MCAS 2013

186

Published on

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
186
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. NATICK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2013 MCAS SCORES
  • 2. RANKINGS • According to schooldigger.com • District • NHS 38/319 59/343 - Boston Magazine #54 • Kennedy • Wilson 52/370 75/370 • • • • • Ben Hem Memorial Brown Lilja Johnson 49/886 55/886 65/886 76/886 111/886
  • 3. ADVANCED AND PROFICIENT TEST NATICK STATE AVERAGE Diff. 10 ELA 10 SCIENCE 10 MATH 97 90 89 91 80 71 6 10 18 8 ELA 92 78 14 8 MATH 76 55 21 8 SCIENCE 7 ELA 7 MATH 6 ELA 6 MATH 5 ELA 5 MATH 5 SCIENCE 4 ELA 4 MATH 3 READING 3 MATH 63 85 71 81 75 78 75 70 76 75 81 86 39 72 52 67 61 66 61 51 53 52 57 66 24 13 19 14 14 12 14 19 23 23 24 20
  • 4. DISTRICT ELA 120 100 80 60 40 81 87 79 81 Grade 5 Grade 6 85 92 97 20 0 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 7 District View ELA - % Top Two Categories Grade 8 Grade 10
  • 5. GRADE 3 READING 11 YEARS 86 84 84 82 82 82 81 80 78 78 78 78 78 78 77 76 75 74 72 70 Reading 03 Reading 04 Reading 05 Reading 06 Reading 07 Reading 08 Reading 09 Reading 10 Reading 11 Reading 12 Reading 13
  • 6. GRADE 3 READING ADVANCED & PROFICIENT/ADVANCED 100 Grade 3 Reading 90 80 86 85 82 80 75 70 60 50 40 30 20 19 23 22 21 11 10 0 Ben-Hen Brown Johnson Lilja Memorial
  • 7. GRADE 3 READING COMPARISON 100 90 80 68 70 62 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 68 69 71 74 75 75 75 76 80 81 81 82 85 86
  • 8. GRADE 4 ELA COMPARISON 90 83 80 75 70 62 60 52 50 40 30 20 10 0 55 65 66 69 70 71 76 76 76 79 79
  • 9. GRADE 7 ELA 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 83 75 83 85 85 86 86 87 87 90 91 93
  • 10. CURRENT GRADE 9 ELA PROGRESSION 95 92 90 89 85 83 80 79 78 75 70 Grade 4 2009 Grade 5 2010 Grade 6 2011 Grade 7 2012 Grade 8 2013
  • 11. GRADE 10 ELA 12 YEAR COMPARISON 120 98 100 88 81 80 79 77 89 ELA 06 ELA 07 95 94 ELA 09 ELA 10 ELA 11 97 88 ELA 05 95 73 60 40 20 0 ELA 01 ELA 02 ELA 03 ELA 04 ELA 08 ELA 13`
  • 12. GRADE 10 ELA 100 99 98 97 96 Grade 10 ELA 96 94 92 90 88 92 96 96 96 96 97 97 99
  • 13. CURRENT GRADE 11 ELA PROGRESSION 120 97 100 87 80 79 77 89 79 60 40 20 0 Grade 4 2007 Grade 5 2008 Grade 6 2009 Grade 7 2010 Grade 8 2011 Gade 10 2013
  • 14. DISTRICT MATH 100 90 88 86 80 75 75 75 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 76 71 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Grade 3 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grade 10
  • 15. GRADE 3 MATH Memorial 93 Brown 91 Lilja 89 Natick 86 Beh Hem 83 Wellesley 83 Walpole 83 Needham 82 Franklin 81 Dedham 78 North Andover 77 Chelmsford 75 Wachusett 75 Johnson 72 Burlington 61 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
  • 16. GRADE 4 MATH 100 90 86 80 70 60 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 49 53 64 64 68 70 70 70 71 72 75 75 76 78 80
  • 17. GRADE 6 MATH - 12 YEAR COMPARISON 90 80 75 73 68 70 60 50 Math 06 73 72 69 68 Math 05 78 75 55 47 46 Math 02 Math 03 40 30 20 10 0 Math 04 Math 07 Math 08 Math 09 Math 10 Math 11 Math 12 Math 13
  • 18. GRADE 8 MATH 90 83 80 73 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 65 65 66 67 68 68 74 75 76 84
  • 19. MIDDLE SCHOOL MATH 90 84 81 80 76 71 70 80 80 76 70 72 72 71 74 71 66 71 75 73 64 73 64 60 49 50 43 40 30 37 28 31 35 32 29 34 42 40 37 34 35 35 33 33 32 25 21 20 10 0 Wilson 7 Advanced Wilson 7 A/P Kennedy 7 Advanced Kennedy 7 A/P Wilson 8 Advanced Wilson 8 A/P Kennedy 8 Advanced Kennedy 8 A/P
  • 20. GRADE 10 MATH 100 96 95 93 89 90 85 85 82 80 75 86 90 90 90 91 91 96
  • 21. CURRENT GRADE 11 MATH PROGRESSION 100 93 90 78 80 70 70 72 75 67 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Grade 4 2007 Grade 5 2008 Grade 6 2009 Grade 7 2010 Grade 8 2011 Grade 10 2013
  • 22. GRADE 9 SCIENCE (PHYSICS) 100 88 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 73 76 78 81 82 83 89 90 90 91 91
  • 23. BEN HEM 2008 - 2013 Ben Hem 350 83 300 75 56 250 80 86 79 79 83 83 84 80 75 200 78 78 79 65 86 150 78 73 65 100 81 71 70 73 50 0 1 2 Grade 3 ELA 3 Grade 3 Math 4 Grade 4 ELA 5 Grade 4 Math 6
  • 24. ELA RECOMMENDATIONS • Analyze those MCAS items that have been correlated to the PARCC. • Implement PARCC based writing assignment that measures student growth • Focus regular assessment that allows students to practice analysis/synthesis of several texts in writing • Refine and align common writing assignments to mirror PARCC writing requirements • Focus on texts types/purposes an writing production/distribution in lower grades (K-4) • Focus on key ideas and idea development upper grades (5-10)
  • 25. MATH RECOMMENDATIONS • Analyze those MCAS items that have been correlated to the PARCC. • Implement PARCC-like math writing assignment that measures student growth • Monitor implementation/alignment of Math XL (Grades 9-12) to CCSS • Monitor implementation/alignment of Go Math! (Grade 5) and Big Ideas Math (Grades 6-8) to CCSS • Continue to encourage adaptive, personalized math practice products employed at secondary level, across system • Focus on mathematical practice and mastery of discrete skills and materials at earlier levels • Continued focus on Number Sense Domain
  • 26. SCIENCE RECOMMENDATIONS • Elementary engineering units must be guaranteed • Pending: MA does not appear to be adopting the Next Generation Science Standards • MA will update science standards, NPS will respond • Increased focus on PARCC-like tasks transfer well to the analysis required for science reading and writing • PARCC tasks designed to examine data sets, charts, tables, etc. will give our students more regular access to analytical tasks demanded in science MCAS (or whatever next test may be).
  • 27. CLOSING GAPS • Accountability ratings now rest on gap closing • Achievement as a sole measure strongly correlates to socioeconomic status of the schools • Celebrate Johnson • Rising and shifting poverty and high-needs students in district may require revision of resource distribution • More advanced students than ever • Achievement = “NorthEast;” gap is slowly narrowing but not at pace with state suggested targets (hence the Level 2 status) • Revamp of the special education model at MS is designed to address this • Future Recommendations: • Less Pull-Out More Push-In Support for special education students coupled with personalized challenge pathways for student who can move ahead and do more • Continued focus on co-teaching models • Maximize the personalization technology can bring • Focus on stronger assessments with unity of rigor, implementation and systematic support
  • 28. EXAMPLE OF DEPT. HEAD WORK • At WMS the 2013 Math MCAS data indicates that the Expressions and Equations domain is an area of relative strength across grades. • 90% of 5th grade students are able to write and interpret numerical expressions • 87% of 6th grade students are able to represent and analyze quantitative relationships between dependent and independent variables • 86% of 7th grade students are able to solve real-life and mathematical problems using numerical and algebraic expressions and equations • 84% of 8th grade students are able to understand the connections between proportional relationships, lines and linear equations • At WMS the 2013 Math MCAS data indicates that the Geometry domain is an area of relative weakness across grades. • 65% of 5th grade students are able to classify two-dimensional figures into categories based on their properties • 69% of 6th grade students are able to solve real-word and mathematical problems involving area, surface area, and volume • 71% of 7th grade students are able to are able to solve real-word and mathematical problems involving angle measure, area, surface area, and volume • 70% of 8th grade students are able to understand congruence and similarity using physical models, transparencies, or geometric software
  • 29. Brown School Advanced/Proficient 100 90 80 70 % 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Grade 3 ELA Grade 3 Math Grade 4 ELA Grade 4 Math 2008 86 91 82 85 2009 85 89 78 71 2010 80 90 81 75 2011 87 97 74 63 2012 84 89 89 70 2013 85 92 76 70
  • 30. Johnson School Advanced/Proficient 100 90 80 70 % 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Grade 3 ELA Grade 3 Math Grade 4 ELA Grade 4 Math 2008 75 77 75 60 2009 70 57 80 74 2010 69 63 77 45 2011 71 84 79 69 2012 78 77 78 80 2013 75 72 83 80
  • 31. Lilja School Advanced /Proficient 100 90 80 70 % 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Grade 3 ELA Grade 3 Math Grade 4 ELA Grade 4 Math 2008 77 88 71 74 2009 78 82 76 77 2010 88 86 81 76 2011 76 65 72 74 2012 81 89 69 60 2013 82 89 75 74
  • 32. Memorial School Advanced/Proficient 100 90 80 70 60 % 50 40 30 20 10 0 Grade 3 ELA Grade 3 Math Grade 4 ELA Grade 4 Math 2008 86 91 66 64 2009 81 77 86 94 2010 86 85 87 81 2011 82 76 79 81 2012 85 81 80 70 2013 86 92 76 72

×