SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 46
Download to read offline
City Study
2021:
NEWARK
Table of Contents
0 1 R E PORT OVE R VIE W
• About The City Studies Project
• Sectors of Schools
• Research Question and Analyses
• Measure of Academic Performance
Student Subgroup Analysis
Summary of Findings
0 3 APPE N DIX E S
• Acknowledgments
• Types of Charter Schools
• Methods
• Days of Learning
• Full Set of Findings
0 2 R E SE AR CH
F IN DIN G S
• Reading & Math
Overall Newark Results
Sector Analysis
• vs. state & comparison
within Newark
Charter Subsector Analysis
• Reading
• Math
School-Level Performance by Sector
Research Findings Cont’d.
Black Students
• all vs. state
• vs. state by sector &
comparison within Newark
Hispanic Students
• all vs. state
• vs. state by sector &
comparison within Newark
Students in Poverty
• all vs. state
• vs. state by sector &
comparison within Newark
ELL Students
• all vs. state
• vs. state by sector &
comparison within Newark
Special Ed Students
• all vs. state
• vs. state by sector &
comparison within Newark
Male Students
• all vs. state
• vs. state by sector &
comparison within Newark
Female Students
• all vs. state
• vs. state by sector &
comparison within Newark
• Reading
• Math
REPORT OVERVIEW
01
About The City Studies Project
Cohort 1 Cohort 2
The City Studies project examines the performance of schools in select U.S. cities,
including Newark. We study the academic progress of students as the measure of school
performance.
O
O
C
C
C
CHARTER SCHOOLS
Public schools operated independently from the
traditional school district, with autonomy in adapting
school designs and held accountable for education
results.
Charter Management Organizations (CMOs)
Organizations holding the charter and overseeing the
operation of at least three charter schools.
Independent Charter Schools
Organizations holding the charter and overseeing the
operation of a single or two charter schools.
SELECTIVE MAGNET SCHOOLS
District-run schools with focused themes and
academically selective admission.
OTHER DISTRICT-RUN SCHOOLS
Public schools not belonging to any of above two types.
C
Sectors of Schools
COMMUNITIES MAY HAVE UP TO THREE SECTORS OF SCHOOLS
Research Question and Analyses
IN THIS REPORT WE EXAMINE ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE IN
NEWARK USING DATA FROM THE SCHOOL YEARS 2014-15
THROUGH 2017-18. THERE ARE THREE LEVELS OF ANALYSIS.
Overall performance in
Newark schools over three
years.
• The performance of Newark students
is benchmarked against the state
average performance, accounting for
student characteristics.
• The performance of charter school
students and the performance of
magnet school students within
Newark are then compared to that of
similar traditional public school
(district school) students within
Newark.
Performance for
Newark charter
schools, Newark
magnet schools and the
rest of Newark Public
schools over three
years.
Performance in the 2017-
2018 school year by
school type, race,
poverty status, English
language learner (ELL)
status, special
education status and
gender.
WE MAKE TWO SETS
OF COMPARISONS.
01 02 03
Achievement scores capture what a student knows at a point
in time. They are influenced by students’ prior conditions in
addition to schools’ contributions.
Growth scores indicate how much progress a student makes
from one year to the next. Growth scores allow us to zero in
on the contributions of schools separately from other factors
that affect point-in-time scores.
ACHIEVEMENT VS. GROWTH
We analyze student growth in standard deviation units so
that the results can be assessed for statistical differences.
The full set of findings appear in the Appendix.
In the following graphs of findings, we transform growth
from standard deviation units into days of learning based on
a typical 180-day school year.
IN THIS STUDY WE MEASURE
ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE AS HOW
MUCH GROWTH STUDENTS MAKE FROM
ONE YEAR TO THE NEXT.
Measure of Academic Performance
RESEARCH FINDINGS
02
-25
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
SY 2015-2016 SY 2016-2017 SY 2017-2018
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Overall Newark Results
> Reading & Math
Average One-Year Learning Gains for All Newark
Students Compared to the State Average Learning
Gains, by Year and Subject
-25
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
SY 2015-2016 SY 2016-2017 SY 2017-2018
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains in Reading for Students in Newark
Charter Schools, Newark Magnet Schools, and
Newark District Schools Compared to the State
Average Learning Gains, by Year
significantly different at p< 0.05
charter magnet
Research Findings > Sector Analysis
> Reading
VS. STATE & COMPARISON WITHIN NEWARK
charter magnet district
Reading
Charter vs. District
Magnet vs. District
Charter vs. Magnet
'15-'16 '16-'17 '17-'18
Tests of Differences
-25
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
SY 2015-2016 SY 2016-2017 SY 2017-2018
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains in Math for Students in Newark
Charter Schools, Newark Magnet Schools, and
Newark District Schools Compared to the State
Average Learning Gains, by Year
significantly different at p< 0.05
charter magnet district
Research Findings > Sector Analysis
> Math
VS. STATE & COMPARISON WITHIN NEWARK
Math
Charter vs. District
Magnet vs. District
Charter vs. Magnet
Tests of Differences
'15-'16 '16-'17 '17-'18
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
CMO Charter Schools Independent Charter Schools
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Relative Learning Gains for Students in Newark CMO-
Affiliated Charter Schools and Independent Newark
Charter Schools Compared to the Average Learning
Gains for All Student in the State, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Charter Subsector Analysis
> vs. state & comparison within Newark
Reading
CMOs vs Independent Charter Schools
Math
CMOs vs Independent Charter Schools
sig
Tests of Differences
-400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400
Growth (in Days of Learning)
Charter
District
Magnet
Research Findings > School-Level Performance by Sector
> Reading
-400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400
Growth (in Days of Learning)
Charter
District
Magnet
Research Findings > School-Level Performance by Sector
>Math
-25
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
Newark Black Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for All Newark Black Students
Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Black
Students Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Black Students
ALL VS. STATE
-25
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
Newark Charter
Black Students
Newark Magnet
Black Students
Newark District
Black Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for Black Students in Newark Charter
Schools, Black Students in Newark Magnet Schools, and
Black Students in Newark District Schools Compared to
the Average Learning Gains of Black Students
Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Black Students
VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN NEWARK
Reading
Charter Black vs. District Black
Magnet Black vs. District Black
Math
Charter Black vs. District Black
Magnet Black vs. District Black
Tests of Differences
sig
-25
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
Newark Hispanic Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for All Newark Hispanic Students
Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Hispanic
Students Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Hispanic Students
ALL VS. STATE
-25
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
Newark Charter
Hispanic Students
Newark Magnet
Hispanic Students
Newark District
Hispanic Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for Hispanic Students in Newark Charter
Schools, Hispanic Students in Newark Magnet Schools, and
Hispanic Students in Newark District Schools Compared to
the Average Learning Gains of Hispanic Students
Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Hispanic Students
VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN NEWARK
Reading
Charter Hispanic vs. District Hispanic
Magnet Hispanic vs. District Hispanic
Math
Charter Hispanic vs. District Hispanic
Magnet Hispanic vs. District Hispanic
Tests of Differences
sig
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
Newark Students in Poverty
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for All Newark Students in Poverty
Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Students
in Poverty Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Students in Poverty
ALL VS. STATE
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
Newark Charter
Students in Poverty
Newark Magnet
Students in Poverty
Newark District
Students in Poverty
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for Newark Charter School Students
in Poverty, Newark Magnet School Students in
Poverty, and Newark District School Students in
Poverty Compared to the Average Learning Gains of
Students in Poverty Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Students in Poverty
VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN NEWARK
Reading
Charter Poverty vs. District Poverty
Magnet Poverty vs. District Poverty
Math
Charter Poverty vs. District Poverty
Magnet Poverty vs. District Poverty
Tests of Differences
sig
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
Newark ELL Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for All ELL Students in Newark
Compared to the Average Learning Gains of ELL
Students Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> ELL Students
ALL VS. STATE
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
Newark Charter
ELL Students
Newark Magnet
ELL Students
Newark District
ELL Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for ELL Students in Newark Charter
Schools, ELL Students in Newark Magnet Schools,
and ELL Students in Newark District Schools
Compared to the Average Learning Gains of ELL
Students Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> ELL Students
VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN NEWARK
§
§ Redacted to comply with the state’s suppression rule of small sample size.
Reading
Charter ELL vs. District ELL
Magnet ELL vs. District ELL§
Math
Charter ELL vs. District ELL
Magnet ELL vs. District ELL§
Tests of Differences
sig
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
Newark Special Ed Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for All Newark Students in Special
Education Compared to the Average Learning Gains of
Students in Special Education Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Special Ed Students
ALL VS. STATE
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
Newark Charter
Students in Special Ed.
Newark Magnet
Students in Special Ed.
Newark District
Students in Special Ed.
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for Newark Charter School Students
in Special Ed., Newark Magnet School Students in
Special Ed., and Newark District School Students in
Special Ed. Compared to the Average Learning Gains
of Students in Special Ed. Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Special Ed Students
VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN NEWARK
Reading
Charter Sped vs. District Sped
Magnet Sped vs. District Sped
Math
Charter Sped vs. District Sped
Magnet Sped vs. District Sped
Tests of Differences
sig
-25
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
Newark Male Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for All Newark Male Students
Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Male
Students Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Male Students
ALL VS. STATE
-25
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
Newark Charter
Male Students
Newark Magnet
Male Students
Newark District
Male Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for Male Students in Newark Charter
Schools, Male Students in Newark Magnet Schools,
and Male Students in Newark District Schools
Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Male
Students Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Male Students
VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN NEWARK
Reading
Charter Male vs. District Male
Magnet Male vs. District Male
Math
Charter Male vs. District Male
Magnet Male vs. District Male
Tests of Differences
sig
Reading
Charter Male vs. District Male
Magnet Male vs. District Male
Math
Charter Male vs. District Male
Magnet Male vs. District Male
Tests of Differences
sig
-25
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
Newark Female Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for All Newark Female Students
Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Female
Students Statewide, by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Female Students
ALL VS. STATE
-25
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
Newark Charter
Female Students
Newark Magnet
Female Students
Newark District
Female Students
Growth
(in
Days
of
Learning)
Learning Gains for Female Students in Newark Charter
Schools, Female Students in Newark Magnet Schools, and
Female Students in Newark District Schools Compared to
the Average Learning Gains of Female Students Statewide,
by Subject
significantly different at p< 0.05
reading math
Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis
> Female Students
VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN NEWARK
Reading
Charter Female vs. District Female
Magnet Female vs. District Female
Math
Charter Female vs. District Female
Magnet Female vs. District Female
Tests of Differences
sig
Summary of Findings
The summary of the findings from the analysis of Newark schools is presented here.
APPENDIXES
03
Acknowledgments
Student-level data were
provided by the
New Jersey Department
of Education.
New Jersey Children’s Foundation
assisted CREDO with verifying the list
of public schools in Newark.
Types of Charter Schools
• With more schools and students than a single charter
school, CMOs have some operational advantages in their
ability to spread administrative fixed costs, thus
providing the possibility of greater efficiency. In
addition, CMOs may be able to support additional
programs and more robust staffing.
• Whether CMOs lead to better student outcomes is a
matter of interest across the country.
OUR ANALYSES OF NEWARK CHARTER
SCHOOLS INCLUDE A BREAKOUT OF
CMOS AND INDEPENDENT CHARTERS.
There are two types
of charter schools.
CHARTER MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATIONS (CMOS)
Organizations holding the charter and overseeing the
operation of at least three charter schools.
INDEPENDENT CHARTER SCHOOLS
Organization holding the charter and overseeing the
operation of a single charter school. It may run the school
directly or contract with an organization which provides
services to one or two charter schools.
Methods
The annual academic growth of students in Newark from
2014-15 to 2017-18, overall and by sector, is benchmarked to
the state average growth, accounting for student
characteristics.
We also explore how one-year growth of Newark students for
the period ending in Spring 2018 differs by school type, race,
poverty status, English language learner status, special
education status, and gender.
Days of Learning
While these tools create precise and reliable answers,
they are presented in technical terms that are not
user-friendly to a general audience. To translate the
technical results into terms that are accessible to non-
technical audiences, CREDO developed Days of
Learning.
CREDO USES ADVANCED
TECHNOLOGY AND
SOPHISTICATED STATISTICAL
TOOLS TO MEASURE STUDENTS,
SCHOOLS AND THE EDUCATION
LANDSCAPE.
Think about the students in your state’s public schools. For many of their years
of schooling, they take achievement tests to measure what they know at the end of
the school year. We can identify the average score for each test each year.
Imagine a student who scores exactly at the average in one year, say 4th
grade, and then in the following year, scores exactly at the average again on the 5th-
grade test. The amount of year-to-year learning for that student show us what the
average learning is for all the students who took both tests.
We do that calculation for every grade the state tests: 4th to 5th, 5th to 6th,
and so on.
CREDO uses those annual measures of average learning to represent a typical
year of learning, and equates that to a typical 180-day school year. We say that the
student in our example has gained 180 days of learning.
If a student makes more progress than the average student, we take the
amount of extra achievement and translate it into 180-days of learning plus “X” extra
days. We are creating a measure of student learning as if the student went to school
for 180 days plus X days. The size of “X” depends on how much more the student
learns than the average student — if it’s a lot more, then “X” will be a large number,
and if it’s a small amount more, “X” will be a small number.
The same is true for students who do not learn as much as the average
student. Instead of adding to the 180-days-of-learning average, we subtract from
that base to reflect the smaller-than-average advances that those students realize. In
these cases, the difference leads to numbers such a “165 days of learning” or “152
days of learning”. Against the average standard of 180 days, these smaller days show
that students learned as if they had only attended school for 180 days minus X days
during the school year.
01
02
03
04
05
06
3rd
Grade
4th
Grade
= 180
days
More than 180
days
Less than 180
days
Student
A
Student
A
Overall Newark Results
Significant at p < 0.05*
Significant at p < 0.01**
R E A D I N G M A T H
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
N e w a r k O v e r a l l 2 0 1 5 - 1 6 0.07* 43* 0.04 23
N e w a r k O v e r a l l 2 0 1 6 - 1 7 0.07** 43** 0.13** 73**
N e w a r k O v e r a l l 2 0 1 7 - 1 8 0.08** 44** 0.05 31
Newark School Sectors Compared
to State Average
Significant at p < 0.05*
Significant at p < 0.01**
R E A D I N G M A T H
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
C h a r t e r S c h o o l s 2 0 1 5 - 1 6 0.17** 100** 0.12** 72**
C h a r t e r S c h o o l s 2 0 1 6 - 1 7 0.12** 72** 0.16** 94**
C h a r t e r S c h o o l s 2 0 1 7 - 1 8 0.12** 70** 0.13** 79**
M a g n e t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 5 - 1 6 0.14* 81* 0.05 30
M a g n e t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 6 - 1 7 0.19** 111** 0.11* 63*
M a g n e t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 7 - 1 8 0.24** 140** 0.01 8
O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 5 - 1 6 0.01 5 -0.01 -5
O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 6 - 1 7 0.03 14 0.11** 63**
O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 7 - 1 8 0.02 12 0.01 5
Comparison of School Sectors within Newark
Significant at p < 0.05*
Significant at p < 0.01**
R E A D I N G M A T H
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
C h a r t e r S c h o o l s v s . O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 5 - 1 6 0.16* 94* 0.13** 76**
C h a r t e r S c h o o l s v s . O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 6 - 1 7 0.10* 57* 0.05 31
C h a r t e r S c h o o l s v s . O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 7 - 1 8 0.10** 57** 0.12** 73**
M a g n e t S c h o o l s v s . O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 5 - 1 6 0.13 76 0.06 34
M a g n e t S c h o o l s v s . O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 6 - 1 7 0.16* 96* 0.00 0
M a g n e t S c h o o l s v s . O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 7 - 1 8 0.22** 127** 0.00 2
Charter Subsector Analysis
Significant at p < 0.05*
Significant at p < 0.01**
R E A D I N G M A T H
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
N e w a r k C M O s v s . S t a t e A v e r a g e 0.14** 83** 0.18** 104**
N e w a r k I n d e p e n d e n t C h a r t e r s v s . S t a t e A v e r a g e 0.09** 54** 0.09* 50*
N e w a r k C M O s v s . N e w a r k I n d e p e n d e n t C h a r t e r s 0.05 29 0.09* 53*
Student Subgroup Analysis> Black Students
Significant at p < 0.05*
Significant at p < 0.01**
R E A D I N G M A T H
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
Compared with Statewide Average of Black Students
N e w a r k B l a c k S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l 0.07** 43** 0.04 24
N e w a r k C h a r t e r S c h o o l B l a c k S t u d e n t s 0.13** 76** 0.11** 66**
N e w a r k M a g n e t S c h o o l B l a c k S t u d e n t s 0.18** 106** 0.01 8
N e w a r k O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l B l a c k S t u d e n t s 0.00 0.00 -0.02 -11
Compared with Black Students in Other District Schools in
Newark
N e w a r k C h a r t e r S c h o o l B l a c k S t u d e n t s 0.13* 76* 0.13** 76**
N e w a r k M a g n e t S c h o o l B l a c k S t u d e n t s 0.18* 106* 0.03 18
Student Subgroup Analysis> Hispanic Students
Significant at p < 0.05*
Significant at p < 0.01**
R E A D I N G M A T H
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
Compared with Statewide Average of Hispanic Students
N e w a r k H i s p a n i c S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l 0.07** 40** 0.07 41
N e w a r k C h a r t e r S c h o o l H i s p a n i c S t u d e n t s 0.11** 63** 0.16** 95**
N e w a r k M a g n e t S c h o o l H i s p a n i c S t u d e n t s 0.29** 172** 0.03 18
N e w a r k O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l H i s p a n i c S t u d e n t s 0.02 10 0.03 17
Compared with Hispanic Students in Other District Schools
in Newark
N e w a r k C h a r t e r S c h o o l H i s p a n i c S t u d e n t s 0.09** 53** 0.13** 78**
N e w a r k M a g n e t S c h o o l H i s p a n i c S t u d e n t s 0.27** 161** 0.00 1
Student Subgroup Analysis> Students in Poverty
Significant at p < 0.05*
Significant at p < 0.01**
R E A D I N G M A T H
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
Compared with Statewide Average of Students in Poverty
N e w a r k S t u d e n t s i n P o v e r t y O v e r a l l 0.08** 46** 0.06* 37*
N e w a r k C h a r t e r S c h o o l S t u d e n t s i n P o v e r t y 0.13** 76** 0.15** 88**
N e w a r k M a g n e t S c h o o l S t u d e n t s i n P o v e r t y 0.26** 151** 0.03 19
N e w a r k O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l S t u d e n t s i n P o v e r t y 0.02 13 0.02 11
Compared with Students in Poverty in Other District
Schools in Newark
N e w a r k C h a r t e r S c h o o l S t u d e n t s i n P o v e r t y 0.11** 62** 0.13** 76**
N e w a r k M a g n e t S c h o o l S t u d e n t s i n P o v e r t y 0.23** 138** 0.01 7
Student Subgroup Analysis> ELL Students
Significant at p < 0.05*
Significant at p < 0.01**
R E A D I N G M A T H
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
Compared with Statewide Average of ELL Students
N e w a r k E L L S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l 0.01 6 0.05 27
N e w a r k C h a r t e r S c h o o l E L L S t u d e n t s 0.11 64 0.14 80
N e w a r k M a g n e t S c h o o l E L L S t u d e n t s § - - - -
N e w a r k O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l E L L S t u d e n t s 0.00 1 0.04 24
Compared with ELL Students in Other District Schools in
Newark
N e w a r k C h a r t e r S c h o o l E L L S t u d e n t s 0.11 62 0.10 56
N e w a r k M a g n e t S c h o o l E L L S t u d e n t s § - - - -
§ R e d a c t e d t o c o m p l y w i t h t h e s t a t e ’ s s u p p r e s s i o n r u l e .
Student Subgroup Analysis> Special Ed Students
Significant at p < 0.05*
Significant at p < 0.01**
R E A D I N G M A T H
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
Compared with Statewide Average of Special Ed Students
N e w a r k S p e c i a l E d S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l 0.07* 41* 0.03 20
N e w a r k C h a r t e r S c h o o l S p e c i a l E d S t u d e n t s 0.15** 90** 0.08* 47*
N e w a r k M a g n e t S c h o o l S p e c i a l E d S t u d e n t s 0.31* 181* 0.10** 59**
N e w a r k O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l S p e c i a l E d S t u d e n t s 0.01 4 0.01 3
Compared with Special Ed Students in Other District
Schools in Newark
N e w a r k C h a r t e r S c h o o l S p e c i a l E d S t u d e n t s 0.15** 85* 0.08* 44*
N e w a r k M a g n e t S c h o o l S p e c i a l E d S t u d e n t s 0.30* 177* 0.10** 56**
Student Subgroup Analysis> Male Students
Significant at p < 0.05*
Significant at p < 0.01**
R E A D I N G M A T H
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
Compared with Statewide Average of Male Students
N e w a r k M a l e S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l 0.08** 49** 0.05 28
N e w a r k C h a r t e r S c h o o l M a l e S t u d e n t s 0.14** 81** 0.13** 73**
N e w a r k M a g n e t S c h o o l M a l e S t u d e n t s 0.27** 160** 0.04 24
N e w a r k O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l M a l e S t u d e n t s 0.03 17 0.01 5
Compared with Male Students in Other District Schools in
Newark
N e w a r k C h a r t e r S c h o o l M a l e S t u d e n t s 0.11** 64** 0.12** 68**
N e w a r k M a g n e t S c h o o l M a l e S t u d e n t s 0.24** 143** 0.03 18
Student Subgroup Analysis> Female Students
Significant at p < 0.05*
Significant at p < 0.01**
R E A D I N G M A T H
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
S t a n d a r d
D e v i a t i o n
D a y s o f
L e a r n i n g
Compared with Statewide Average of Female Students
N e w a r k F e m a l e S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l 0.07** 40** 0.06 33
N e w a r k C h a r t e r S c h o o l F e m a l e S t u d e n t s 0.10** 60** 0.14** 83**
N e w a r k M a g n e t S c h o o l F e m a l e S t u d e n t s 0.21** 125** -0.01 -5
N e w a r k O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l F e m a l e S t u d e n t s 0.01 8 0.01 5
Compared with Female Students in Other District Schools
in Newark
N e w a r k C h a r t e r S c h o o l F e m a l e S t u d e n t s 0.09** 52** 0.13** 77**
N e w a r k M a g n e t S c h o o l F e m a l e S t u d e n t s 0.20** 117** -0.02 -11
THANK YOU

More Related Content

What's hot

Pla Methdology 3 19 2010
Pla Methdology 3 19 2010Pla Methdology 3 19 2010
Pla Methdology 3 19 2010WSU Cougars
 
Misleadinggraphs
MisleadinggraphsMisleadinggraphs
Misleadinggraphscaliprando
 
2010 MCAS Results for Franklin, MA
2010 MCAS Results for Franklin, MA2010 MCAS Results for Franklin, MA
2010 MCAS Results for Franklin, MAFranklin Matters
 
State accountability system 2015
State accountability system 2015State accountability system 2015
State accountability system 2015txprincipalorg
 
Predicting Proficiency… How MAP Predicts State Test Performance
Predicting Proficiency… How MAP Predicts State Test PerformancePredicting Proficiency… How MAP Predicts State Test Performance
Predicting Proficiency… How MAP Predicts State Test PerformanceNWEA
 
Young Lives school surveys update August16
Young Lives school surveys update August16Young Lives school surveys update August16
Young Lives school surveys update August16Young Lives Oxford
 
Predicting Student Performance on the MSP-HSPE: Understanding, Conducting, an...
Predicting Student Performance on the MSP-HSPE: Understanding, Conducting, an...Predicting Student Performance on the MSP-HSPE: Understanding, Conducting, an...
Predicting Student Performance on the MSP-HSPE: Understanding, Conducting, an...NWEA
 
Ed6157 sp11leadershiptechresearcha cumspton
Ed6157 sp11leadershiptechresearcha cumsptonEd6157 sp11leadershiptechresearcha cumspton
Ed6157 sp11leadershiptechresearcha cumsptonAlana Cumpston
 
Winnetka District36 Academic Data (june2014)
Winnetka District36 Academic Data (june2014)Winnetka District36 Academic Data (june2014)
Winnetka District36 Academic Data (june2014)justthefactswinnetka
 

What's hot (20)

Indianapolis, IN 2019 - City Study
Indianapolis, IN 2019 - City StudyIndianapolis, IN 2019 - City Study
Indianapolis, IN 2019 - City Study
 
New Orleans, LA 2019 - City Study
New Orleans, LA 2019 - City StudyNew Orleans, LA 2019 - City Study
New Orleans, LA 2019 - City Study
 
Memphis, TN 2019 - City Study
Memphis, TN 2019 - City StudyMemphis, TN 2019 - City Study
Memphis, TN 2019 - City Study
 
Camden NJ 2019 - City Study
Camden NJ 2019 - City StudyCamden NJ 2019 - City Study
Camden NJ 2019 - City Study
 
Washington DC 2019 - City Study
Washington DC 2019 - City StudyWashington DC 2019 - City Study
Washington DC 2019 - City Study
 
Baton Rouge LA 2019 - City Study
Baton Rouge LA 2019 - City StudyBaton Rouge LA 2019 - City Study
Baton Rouge LA 2019 - City Study
 
Pla Methdology 3 19 2010
Pla Methdology 3 19 2010Pla Methdology 3 19 2010
Pla Methdology 3 19 2010
 
Misleadinggraphs
MisleadinggraphsMisleadinggraphs
Misleadinggraphs
 
School_Quality_Guide_2014_EMS_X125
School_Quality_Guide_2014_EMS_X125School_Quality_Guide_2014_EMS_X125
School_Quality_Guide_2014_EMS_X125
 
2010 MCAS Results for Franklin, MA
2010 MCAS Results for Franklin, MA2010 MCAS Results for Franklin, MA
2010 MCAS Results for Franklin, MA
 
State accountability system 2015
State accountability system 2015State accountability system 2015
State accountability system 2015
 
Predicting Proficiency… How MAP Predicts State Test Performance
Predicting Proficiency… How MAP Predicts State Test PerformancePredicting Proficiency… How MAP Predicts State Test Performance
Predicting Proficiency… How MAP Predicts State Test Performance
 
Young Lives school surveys update August16
Young Lives school surveys update August16Young Lives school surveys update August16
Young Lives school surveys update August16
 
10 20-2014 tamsa-overview
10 20-2014 tamsa-overview10 20-2014 tamsa-overview
10 20-2014 tamsa-overview
 
Student Debt: Myths and Facts
Student Debt: Myths and FactsStudent Debt: Myths and Facts
Student Debt: Myths and Facts
 
Private Colleges and STEM: Myths and Facts
Private Colleges and STEM: Myths and FactsPrivate Colleges and STEM: Myths and Facts
Private Colleges and STEM: Myths and Facts
 
Predicting Student Performance on the MSP-HSPE: Understanding, Conducting, an...
Predicting Student Performance on the MSP-HSPE: Understanding, Conducting, an...Predicting Student Performance on the MSP-HSPE: Understanding, Conducting, an...
Predicting Student Performance on the MSP-HSPE: Understanding, Conducting, an...
 
Ed6157 sp11leadershiptechresearcha cumspton
Ed6157 sp11leadershiptechresearcha cumsptonEd6157 sp11leadershiptechresearcha cumspton
Ed6157 sp11leadershiptechresearcha cumspton
 
Winnetka District36 Academic Data (june2014)
Winnetka District36 Academic Data (june2014)Winnetka District36 Academic Data (june2014)
Winnetka District36 Academic Data (june2014)
 
Benchmarks: WICHE Region 2017
Benchmarks: WICHE Region 2017Benchmarks: WICHE Region 2017
Benchmarks: WICHE Region 2017
 

Similar to Newark, NJ 2021

2010 MCAS - Franklin, MA
2010 MCAS - Franklin, MA2010 MCAS - Franklin, MA
2010 MCAS - Franklin, MAFranklin Matters
 
Ocean City Intermediate School report card 2013-14
Ocean City Intermediate School report card 2013-14Ocean City Intermediate School report card 2013-14
Ocean City Intermediate School report card 2013-14OceanCityGazette
 
Wyoming Accountability in Education Act - 1/16/14 Presentation
Wyoming Accountability in Education Act - 1/16/14 PresentationWyoming Accountability in Education Act - 1/16/14 Presentation
Wyoming Accountability in Education Act - 1/16/14 PresentationJay Harnack
 
Analysis for Optimal Grant Distribution
Analysis for Optimal Grant DistributionAnalysis for Optimal Grant Distribution
Analysis for Optimal Grant DistributionAlex Bell
 
Pipeline math
Pipeline mathPipeline math
Pipeline mathharrindl
 

Similar to Newark, NJ 2021 (20)

2022 Newark Chart School City Study
2022 Newark Chart School City Study2022 Newark Chart School City Study
2022 Newark Chart School City Study
 
New Orleans
New OrleansNew Orleans
New Orleans
 
Denver, CO 2022 - City Study
Denver, CO 2022 - City StudyDenver, CO 2022 - City Study
Denver, CO 2022 - City Study
 
Kansas_City_slide_deck_FINAL.pdf
Kansas_City_slide_deck_FINAL.pdfKansas_City_slide_deck_FINAL.pdf
Kansas_City_slide_deck_FINAL.pdf
 
Camden, NJ
Camden, NJCamden, NJ
Camden, NJ
 
Washington DC. City Study 2022
Washington DC. City Study 2022Washington DC. City Study 2022
Washington DC. City Study 2022
 
DC_slide_deck_FINAL (1).pdf
DC_slide_deck_FINAL (1).pdfDC_slide_deck_FINAL (1).pdf
DC_slide_deck_FINAL (1).pdf
 
Indianapolis_slide_deck_FINAL_20220601.pdf
Indianapolis_slide_deck_FINAL_20220601.pdfIndianapolis_slide_deck_FINAL_20220601.pdf
Indianapolis_slide_deck_FINAL_20220601.pdf
 
San Antonio, TX - 2022 Charter School Study by CREDO
San Antonio, TX - 2022 Charter School Study by CREDOSan Antonio, TX - 2022 Charter School Study by CREDO
San Antonio, TX - 2022 Charter School Study by CREDO
 
St_Louis_slide_deck_FINAL.pdf
St_Louis_slide_deck_FINAL.pdfSt_Louis_slide_deck_FINAL.pdf
St_Louis_slide_deck_FINAL.pdf
 
batonrouge_slide_deck_FINAL_20220429.pdf
batonrouge_slide_deck_FINAL_20220429.pdfbatonrouge_slide_deck_FINAL_20220429.pdf
batonrouge_slide_deck_FINAL_20220429.pdf
 
2022 Fort Worth Charter School City Study
2022 Fort Worth Charter School City Study2022 Fort Worth Charter School City Study
2022 Fort Worth Charter School City Study
 
2022 Austin Chart School City Study
2022 Austin Chart School City Study2022 Austin Chart School City Study
2022 Austin Chart School City Study
 
memphis_slide_deck_FINAL_20220429.pdf
memphis_slide_deck_FINAL_20220429.pdfmemphis_slide_deck_FINAL_20220429.pdf
memphis_slide_deck_FINAL_20220429.pdf
 
2022 Houston Chart School City Study
2022 Houston Chart School City Study2022 Houston Chart School City Study
2022 Houston Chart School City Study
 
2010 MCAS - Franklin, MA
2010 MCAS - Franklin, MA2010 MCAS - Franklin, MA
2010 MCAS - Franklin, MA
 
Ocean City Intermediate School report card 2013-14
Ocean City Intermediate School report card 2013-14Ocean City Intermediate School report card 2013-14
Ocean City Intermediate School report card 2013-14
 
Wyoming Accountability in Education Act - 1/16/14 Presentation
Wyoming Accountability in Education Act - 1/16/14 PresentationWyoming Accountability in Education Act - 1/16/14 Presentation
Wyoming Accountability in Education Act - 1/16/14 Presentation
 
Analysis for Optimal Grant Distribution
Analysis for Optimal Grant DistributionAnalysis for Optimal Grant Distribution
Analysis for Optimal Grant Distribution
 
Pipeline math
Pipeline mathPipeline math
Pipeline math
 

Recently uploaded

How to Configure Email Server in Odoo 17
How to Configure Email Server in Odoo 17How to Configure Email Server in Odoo 17
How to Configure Email Server in Odoo 17Celine George
 
Kisan Call Centre - To harness potential of ICT in Agriculture by answer farm...
Kisan Call Centre - To harness potential of ICT in Agriculture by answer farm...Kisan Call Centre - To harness potential of ICT in Agriculture by answer farm...
Kisan Call Centre - To harness potential of ICT in Agriculture by answer farm...Krashi Coaching
 
Introduction to AI in Higher Education_draft.pptx
Introduction to AI in Higher Education_draft.pptxIntroduction to AI in Higher Education_draft.pptx
Introduction to AI in Higher Education_draft.pptxpboyjonauth
 
BASLIQ CURRENT LOOKBOOK LOOKBOOK(1) (1).pdf
BASLIQ CURRENT LOOKBOOK  LOOKBOOK(1) (1).pdfBASLIQ CURRENT LOOKBOOK  LOOKBOOK(1) (1).pdf
BASLIQ CURRENT LOOKBOOK LOOKBOOK(1) (1).pdfSoniaTolstoy
 
SOCIAL AND HISTORICAL CONTEXT - LFTVD.pptx
SOCIAL AND HISTORICAL CONTEXT - LFTVD.pptxSOCIAL AND HISTORICAL CONTEXT - LFTVD.pptx
SOCIAL AND HISTORICAL CONTEXT - LFTVD.pptxiammrhaywood
 
The basics of sentences session 2pptx copy.pptx
The basics of sentences session 2pptx copy.pptxThe basics of sentences session 2pptx copy.pptx
The basics of sentences session 2pptx copy.pptxheathfieldcps1
 
Hybridoma Technology ( Production , Purification , and Application )
Hybridoma Technology  ( Production , Purification , and Application  ) Hybridoma Technology  ( Production , Purification , and Application  )
Hybridoma Technology ( Production , Purification , and Application ) Sakshi Ghasle
 
The Most Excellent Way | 1 Corinthians 13
The Most Excellent Way | 1 Corinthians 13The Most Excellent Way | 1 Corinthians 13
The Most Excellent Way | 1 Corinthians 13Steve Thomason
 
How to Make a Pirate ship Primary Education.pptx
How to Make a Pirate ship Primary Education.pptxHow to Make a Pirate ship Primary Education.pptx
How to Make a Pirate ship Primary Education.pptxmanuelaromero2013
 
Enzyme, Pharmaceutical Aids, Miscellaneous Last Part of Chapter no 5th.pdf
Enzyme, Pharmaceutical Aids, Miscellaneous Last Part of Chapter no 5th.pdfEnzyme, Pharmaceutical Aids, Miscellaneous Last Part of Chapter no 5th.pdf
Enzyme, Pharmaceutical Aids, Miscellaneous Last Part of Chapter no 5th.pdfSumit Tiwari
 
Call Girls in Dwarka Mor Delhi Contact Us 9654467111
Call Girls in Dwarka Mor Delhi Contact Us 9654467111Call Girls in Dwarka Mor Delhi Contact Us 9654467111
Call Girls in Dwarka Mor Delhi Contact Us 9654467111Sapana Sha
 
mini mental status format.docx
mini    mental       status     format.docxmini    mental       status     format.docx
mini mental status format.docxPoojaSen20
 
Presentation by Andreas Schleicher Tackling the School Absenteeism Crisis 30 ...
Presentation by Andreas Schleicher Tackling the School Absenteeism Crisis 30 ...Presentation by Andreas Schleicher Tackling the School Absenteeism Crisis 30 ...
Presentation by Andreas Schleicher Tackling the School Absenteeism Crisis 30 ...EduSkills OECD
 
Separation of Lanthanides/ Lanthanides and Actinides
Separation of Lanthanides/ Lanthanides and ActinidesSeparation of Lanthanides/ Lanthanides and Actinides
Separation of Lanthanides/ Lanthanides and ActinidesFatimaKhan178732
 
“Oh GOSH! Reflecting on Hackteria's Collaborative Practices in a Global Do-It...
“Oh GOSH! Reflecting on Hackteria's Collaborative Practices in a Global Do-It...“Oh GOSH! Reflecting on Hackteria's Collaborative Practices in a Global Do-It...
“Oh GOSH! Reflecting on Hackteria's Collaborative Practices in a Global Do-It...Marc Dusseiller Dusjagr
 
Crayon Activity Handout For the Crayon A
Crayon Activity Handout For the Crayon ACrayon Activity Handout For the Crayon A
Crayon Activity Handout For the Crayon AUnboundStockton
 
Contemporary philippine arts from the regions_PPT_Module_12 [Autosaved] (1).pptx
Contemporary philippine arts from the regions_PPT_Module_12 [Autosaved] (1).pptxContemporary philippine arts from the regions_PPT_Module_12 [Autosaved] (1).pptx
Contemporary philippine arts from the regions_PPT_Module_12 [Autosaved] (1).pptxRoyAbrique
 

Recently uploaded (20)

How to Configure Email Server in Odoo 17
How to Configure Email Server in Odoo 17How to Configure Email Server in Odoo 17
How to Configure Email Server in Odoo 17
 
Kisan Call Centre - To harness potential of ICT in Agriculture by answer farm...
Kisan Call Centre - To harness potential of ICT in Agriculture by answer farm...Kisan Call Centre - To harness potential of ICT in Agriculture by answer farm...
Kisan Call Centre - To harness potential of ICT in Agriculture by answer farm...
 
Introduction to AI in Higher Education_draft.pptx
Introduction to AI in Higher Education_draft.pptxIntroduction to AI in Higher Education_draft.pptx
Introduction to AI in Higher Education_draft.pptx
 
Model Call Girl in Tilak Nagar Delhi reach out to us at 🔝9953056974🔝
Model Call Girl in Tilak Nagar Delhi reach out to us at 🔝9953056974🔝Model Call Girl in Tilak Nagar Delhi reach out to us at 🔝9953056974🔝
Model Call Girl in Tilak Nagar Delhi reach out to us at 🔝9953056974🔝
 
BASLIQ CURRENT LOOKBOOK LOOKBOOK(1) (1).pdf
BASLIQ CURRENT LOOKBOOK  LOOKBOOK(1) (1).pdfBASLIQ CURRENT LOOKBOOK  LOOKBOOK(1) (1).pdf
BASLIQ CURRENT LOOKBOOK LOOKBOOK(1) (1).pdf
 
SOCIAL AND HISTORICAL CONTEXT - LFTVD.pptx
SOCIAL AND HISTORICAL CONTEXT - LFTVD.pptxSOCIAL AND HISTORICAL CONTEXT - LFTVD.pptx
SOCIAL AND HISTORICAL CONTEXT - LFTVD.pptx
 
The basics of sentences session 2pptx copy.pptx
The basics of sentences session 2pptx copy.pptxThe basics of sentences session 2pptx copy.pptx
The basics of sentences session 2pptx copy.pptx
 
Hybridoma Technology ( Production , Purification , and Application )
Hybridoma Technology  ( Production , Purification , and Application  ) Hybridoma Technology  ( Production , Purification , and Application  )
Hybridoma Technology ( Production , Purification , and Application )
 
The Most Excellent Way | 1 Corinthians 13
The Most Excellent Way | 1 Corinthians 13The Most Excellent Way | 1 Corinthians 13
The Most Excellent Way | 1 Corinthians 13
 
How to Make a Pirate ship Primary Education.pptx
How to Make a Pirate ship Primary Education.pptxHow to Make a Pirate ship Primary Education.pptx
How to Make a Pirate ship Primary Education.pptx
 
Enzyme, Pharmaceutical Aids, Miscellaneous Last Part of Chapter no 5th.pdf
Enzyme, Pharmaceutical Aids, Miscellaneous Last Part of Chapter no 5th.pdfEnzyme, Pharmaceutical Aids, Miscellaneous Last Part of Chapter no 5th.pdf
Enzyme, Pharmaceutical Aids, Miscellaneous Last Part of Chapter no 5th.pdf
 
Call Girls in Dwarka Mor Delhi Contact Us 9654467111
Call Girls in Dwarka Mor Delhi Contact Us 9654467111Call Girls in Dwarka Mor Delhi Contact Us 9654467111
Call Girls in Dwarka Mor Delhi Contact Us 9654467111
 
mini mental status format.docx
mini    mental       status     format.docxmini    mental       status     format.docx
mini mental status format.docx
 
Presentation by Andreas Schleicher Tackling the School Absenteeism Crisis 30 ...
Presentation by Andreas Schleicher Tackling the School Absenteeism Crisis 30 ...Presentation by Andreas Schleicher Tackling the School Absenteeism Crisis 30 ...
Presentation by Andreas Schleicher Tackling the School Absenteeism Crisis 30 ...
 
Separation of Lanthanides/ Lanthanides and Actinides
Separation of Lanthanides/ Lanthanides and ActinidesSeparation of Lanthanides/ Lanthanides and Actinides
Separation of Lanthanides/ Lanthanides and Actinides
 
“Oh GOSH! Reflecting on Hackteria's Collaborative Practices in a Global Do-It...
“Oh GOSH! Reflecting on Hackteria's Collaborative Practices in a Global Do-It...“Oh GOSH! Reflecting on Hackteria's Collaborative Practices in a Global Do-It...
“Oh GOSH! Reflecting on Hackteria's Collaborative Practices in a Global Do-It...
 
Crayon Activity Handout For the Crayon A
Crayon Activity Handout For the Crayon ACrayon Activity Handout For the Crayon A
Crayon Activity Handout For the Crayon A
 
Model Call Girl in Bikash Puri Delhi reach out to us at 🔝9953056974🔝
Model Call Girl in Bikash Puri  Delhi reach out to us at 🔝9953056974🔝Model Call Girl in Bikash Puri  Delhi reach out to us at 🔝9953056974🔝
Model Call Girl in Bikash Puri Delhi reach out to us at 🔝9953056974🔝
 
Staff of Color (SOC) Retention Efforts DDSD
Staff of Color (SOC) Retention Efforts DDSDStaff of Color (SOC) Retention Efforts DDSD
Staff of Color (SOC) Retention Efforts DDSD
 
Contemporary philippine arts from the regions_PPT_Module_12 [Autosaved] (1).pptx
Contemporary philippine arts from the regions_PPT_Module_12 [Autosaved] (1).pptxContemporary philippine arts from the regions_PPT_Module_12 [Autosaved] (1).pptx
Contemporary philippine arts from the regions_PPT_Module_12 [Autosaved] (1).pptx
 

Newark, NJ 2021

  • 2. Table of Contents 0 1 R E PORT OVE R VIE W • About The City Studies Project • Sectors of Schools • Research Question and Analyses • Measure of Academic Performance Student Subgroup Analysis Summary of Findings 0 3 APPE N DIX E S • Acknowledgments • Types of Charter Schools • Methods • Days of Learning • Full Set of Findings 0 2 R E SE AR CH F IN DIN G S • Reading & Math Overall Newark Results Sector Analysis • vs. state & comparison within Newark Charter Subsector Analysis • Reading • Math School-Level Performance by Sector Research Findings Cont’d. Black Students • all vs. state • vs. state by sector & comparison within Newark Hispanic Students • all vs. state • vs. state by sector & comparison within Newark Students in Poverty • all vs. state • vs. state by sector & comparison within Newark ELL Students • all vs. state • vs. state by sector & comparison within Newark Special Ed Students • all vs. state • vs. state by sector & comparison within Newark Male Students • all vs. state • vs. state by sector & comparison within Newark Female Students • all vs. state • vs. state by sector & comparison within Newark • Reading • Math
  • 4. About The City Studies Project Cohort 1 Cohort 2 The City Studies project examines the performance of schools in select U.S. cities, including Newark. We study the academic progress of students as the measure of school performance.
  • 5. O O C C C CHARTER SCHOOLS Public schools operated independently from the traditional school district, with autonomy in adapting school designs and held accountable for education results. Charter Management Organizations (CMOs) Organizations holding the charter and overseeing the operation of at least three charter schools. Independent Charter Schools Organizations holding the charter and overseeing the operation of a single or two charter schools. SELECTIVE MAGNET SCHOOLS District-run schools with focused themes and academically selective admission. OTHER DISTRICT-RUN SCHOOLS Public schools not belonging to any of above two types. C Sectors of Schools COMMUNITIES MAY HAVE UP TO THREE SECTORS OF SCHOOLS
  • 6. Research Question and Analyses IN THIS REPORT WE EXAMINE ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE IN NEWARK USING DATA FROM THE SCHOOL YEARS 2014-15 THROUGH 2017-18. THERE ARE THREE LEVELS OF ANALYSIS. Overall performance in Newark schools over three years. • The performance of Newark students is benchmarked against the state average performance, accounting for student characteristics. • The performance of charter school students and the performance of magnet school students within Newark are then compared to that of similar traditional public school (district school) students within Newark. Performance for Newark charter schools, Newark magnet schools and the rest of Newark Public schools over three years. Performance in the 2017- 2018 school year by school type, race, poverty status, English language learner (ELL) status, special education status and gender. WE MAKE TWO SETS OF COMPARISONS. 01 02 03
  • 7. Achievement scores capture what a student knows at a point in time. They are influenced by students’ prior conditions in addition to schools’ contributions. Growth scores indicate how much progress a student makes from one year to the next. Growth scores allow us to zero in on the contributions of schools separately from other factors that affect point-in-time scores. ACHIEVEMENT VS. GROWTH We analyze student growth in standard deviation units so that the results can be assessed for statistical differences. The full set of findings appear in the Appendix. In the following graphs of findings, we transform growth from standard deviation units into days of learning based on a typical 180-day school year. IN THIS STUDY WE MEASURE ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE AS HOW MUCH GROWTH STUDENTS MAKE FROM ONE YEAR TO THE NEXT. Measure of Academic Performance
  • 9. -25 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 SY 2015-2016 SY 2016-2017 SY 2017-2018 Growth (in Days of Learning) significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Overall Newark Results > Reading & Math Average One-Year Learning Gains for All Newark Students Compared to the State Average Learning Gains, by Year and Subject
  • 10. -25 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 SY 2015-2016 SY 2016-2017 SY 2017-2018 Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains in Reading for Students in Newark Charter Schools, Newark Magnet Schools, and Newark District Schools Compared to the State Average Learning Gains, by Year significantly different at p< 0.05 charter magnet Research Findings > Sector Analysis > Reading VS. STATE & COMPARISON WITHIN NEWARK charter magnet district Reading Charter vs. District Magnet vs. District Charter vs. Magnet '15-'16 '16-'17 '17-'18 Tests of Differences
  • 11. -25 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 SY 2015-2016 SY 2016-2017 SY 2017-2018 Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains in Math for Students in Newark Charter Schools, Newark Magnet Schools, and Newark District Schools Compared to the State Average Learning Gains, by Year significantly different at p< 0.05 charter magnet district Research Findings > Sector Analysis > Math VS. STATE & COMPARISON WITHIN NEWARK Math Charter vs. District Magnet vs. District Charter vs. Magnet Tests of Differences '15-'16 '16-'17 '17-'18
  • 12. 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 CMO Charter Schools Independent Charter Schools Growth (in Days of Learning) Relative Learning Gains for Students in Newark CMO- Affiliated Charter Schools and Independent Newark Charter Schools Compared to the Average Learning Gains for All Student in the State, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Charter Subsector Analysis > vs. state & comparison within Newark Reading CMOs vs Independent Charter Schools Math CMOs vs Independent Charter Schools sig Tests of Differences
  • 13. -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 Growth (in Days of Learning) Charter District Magnet Research Findings > School-Level Performance by Sector > Reading
  • 14. -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 Growth (in Days of Learning) Charter District Magnet Research Findings > School-Level Performance by Sector >Math
  • 15. -25 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 Newark Black Students Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains for All Newark Black Students Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Black Students Statewide, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis > Black Students ALL VS. STATE
  • 16. -25 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 Newark Charter Black Students Newark Magnet Black Students Newark District Black Students Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains for Black Students in Newark Charter Schools, Black Students in Newark Magnet Schools, and Black Students in Newark District Schools Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Black Students Statewide, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis > Black Students VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN NEWARK Reading Charter Black vs. District Black Magnet Black vs. District Black Math Charter Black vs. District Black Magnet Black vs. District Black Tests of Differences sig
  • 17. -25 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 Newark Hispanic Students Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains for All Newark Hispanic Students Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Hispanic Students Statewide, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis > Hispanic Students ALL VS. STATE
  • 18. -25 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 Newark Charter Hispanic Students Newark Magnet Hispanic Students Newark District Hispanic Students Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains for Hispanic Students in Newark Charter Schools, Hispanic Students in Newark Magnet Schools, and Hispanic Students in Newark District Schools Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Hispanic Students Statewide, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis > Hispanic Students VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN NEWARK Reading Charter Hispanic vs. District Hispanic Magnet Hispanic vs. District Hispanic Math Charter Hispanic vs. District Hispanic Magnet Hispanic vs. District Hispanic Tests of Differences sig
  • 19. 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 Newark Students in Poverty Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains for All Newark Students in Poverty Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Students in Poverty Statewide, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis > Students in Poverty ALL VS. STATE
  • 20. 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 Newark Charter Students in Poverty Newark Magnet Students in Poverty Newark District Students in Poverty Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains for Newark Charter School Students in Poverty, Newark Magnet School Students in Poverty, and Newark District School Students in Poverty Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Students in Poverty Statewide, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis > Students in Poverty VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN NEWARK Reading Charter Poverty vs. District Poverty Magnet Poverty vs. District Poverty Math Charter Poverty vs. District Poverty Magnet Poverty vs. District Poverty Tests of Differences sig
  • 21. 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 Newark ELL Students Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains for All ELL Students in Newark Compared to the Average Learning Gains of ELL Students Statewide, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis > ELL Students ALL VS. STATE
  • 22. 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 Newark Charter ELL Students Newark Magnet ELL Students Newark District ELL Students Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains for ELL Students in Newark Charter Schools, ELL Students in Newark Magnet Schools, and ELL Students in Newark District Schools Compared to the Average Learning Gains of ELL Students Statewide, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis > ELL Students VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN NEWARK § § Redacted to comply with the state’s suppression rule of small sample size. Reading Charter ELL vs. District ELL Magnet ELL vs. District ELL§ Math Charter ELL vs. District ELL Magnet ELL vs. District ELL§ Tests of Differences sig
  • 23. 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 Newark Special Ed Students Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains for All Newark Students in Special Education Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Students in Special Education Statewide, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis > Special Ed Students ALL VS. STATE
  • 24. 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 Newark Charter Students in Special Ed. Newark Magnet Students in Special Ed. Newark District Students in Special Ed. Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains for Newark Charter School Students in Special Ed., Newark Magnet School Students in Special Ed., and Newark District School Students in Special Ed. Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Students in Special Ed. Statewide, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis > Special Ed Students VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN NEWARK Reading Charter Sped vs. District Sped Magnet Sped vs. District Sped Math Charter Sped vs. District Sped Magnet Sped vs. District Sped Tests of Differences sig
  • 25. -25 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 Newark Male Students Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains for All Newark Male Students Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Male Students Statewide, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis > Male Students ALL VS. STATE
  • 26. -25 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 Newark Charter Male Students Newark Magnet Male Students Newark District Male Students Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains for Male Students in Newark Charter Schools, Male Students in Newark Magnet Schools, and Male Students in Newark District Schools Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Male Students Statewide, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis > Male Students VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN NEWARK Reading Charter Male vs. District Male Magnet Male vs. District Male Math Charter Male vs. District Male Magnet Male vs. District Male Tests of Differences sig Reading Charter Male vs. District Male Magnet Male vs. District Male Math Charter Male vs. District Male Magnet Male vs. District Male Tests of Differences sig
  • 27. -25 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 Newark Female Students Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains for All Newark Female Students Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Female Students Statewide, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis > Female Students ALL VS. STATE
  • 28. -25 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 Newark Charter Female Students Newark Magnet Female Students Newark District Female Students Growth (in Days of Learning) Learning Gains for Female Students in Newark Charter Schools, Female Students in Newark Magnet Schools, and Female Students in Newark District Schools Compared to the Average Learning Gains of Female Students Statewide, by Subject significantly different at p< 0.05 reading math Research Findings > Student Subgroup Analysis > Female Students VS. STATE BY SECTOR & COMPARISON WITHIN NEWARK Reading Charter Female vs. District Female Magnet Female vs. District Female Math Charter Female vs. District Female Magnet Female vs. District Female Tests of Differences sig
  • 29. Summary of Findings The summary of the findings from the analysis of Newark schools is presented here.
  • 31. Acknowledgments Student-level data were provided by the New Jersey Department of Education. New Jersey Children’s Foundation assisted CREDO with verifying the list of public schools in Newark.
  • 32. Types of Charter Schools • With more schools and students than a single charter school, CMOs have some operational advantages in their ability to spread administrative fixed costs, thus providing the possibility of greater efficiency. In addition, CMOs may be able to support additional programs and more robust staffing. • Whether CMOs lead to better student outcomes is a matter of interest across the country. OUR ANALYSES OF NEWARK CHARTER SCHOOLS INCLUDE A BREAKOUT OF CMOS AND INDEPENDENT CHARTERS. There are two types of charter schools. CHARTER MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATIONS (CMOS) Organizations holding the charter and overseeing the operation of at least three charter schools. INDEPENDENT CHARTER SCHOOLS Organization holding the charter and overseeing the operation of a single charter school. It may run the school directly or contract with an organization which provides services to one or two charter schools.
  • 33. Methods The annual academic growth of students in Newark from 2014-15 to 2017-18, overall and by sector, is benchmarked to the state average growth, accounting for student characteristics. We also explore how one-year growth of Newark students for the period ending in Spring 2018 differs by school type, race, poverty status, English language learner status, special education status, and gender.
  • 34. Days of Learning While these tools create precise and reliable answers, they are presented in technical terms that are not user-friendly to a general audience. To translate the technical results into terms that are accessible to non- technical audiences, CREDO developed Days of Learning. CREDO USES ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY AND SOPHISTICATED STATISTICAL TOOLS TO MEASURE STUDENTS, SCHOOLS AND THE EDUCATION LANDSCAPE. Think about the students in your state’s public schools. For many of their years of schooling, they take achievement tests to measure what they know at the end of the school year. We can identify the average score for each test each year. Imagine a student who scores exactly at the average in one year, say 4th grade, and then in the following year, scores exactly at the average again on the 5th- grade test. The amount of year-to-year learning for that student show us what the average learning is for all the students who took both tests. We do that calculation for every grade the state tests: 4th to 5th, 5th to 6th, and so on. CREDO uses those annual measures of average learning to represent a typical year of learning, and equates that to a typical 180-day school year. We say that the student in our example has gained 180 days of learning. If a student makes more progress than the average student, we take the amount of extra achievement and translate it into 180-days of learning plus “X” extra days. We are creating a measure of student learning as if the student went to school for 180 days plus X days. The size of “X” depends on how much more the student learns than the average student — if it’s a lot more, then “X” will be a large number, and if it’s a small amount more, “X” will be a small number. The same is true for students who do not learn as much as the average student. Instead of adding to the 180-days-of-learning average, we subtract from that base to reflect the smaller-than-average advances that those students realize. In these cases, the difference leads to numbers such a “165 days of learning” or “152 days of learning”. Against the average standard of 180 days, these smaller days show that students learned as if they had only attended school for 180 days minus X days during the school year. 01 02 03 04 05 06 3rd Grade 4th Grade = 180 days More than 180 days Less than 180 days Student A Student A
  • 35. Overall Newark Results Significant at p < 0.05* Significant at p < 0.01** R E A D I N G M A T H S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g N e w a r k O v e r a l l 2 0 1 5 - 1 6 0.07* 43* 0.04 23 N e w a r k O v e r a l l 2 0 1 6 - 1 7 0.07** 43** 0.13** 73** N e w a r k O v e r a l l 2 0 1 7 - 1 8 0.08** 44** 0.05 31
  • 36. Newark School Sectors Compared to State Average Significant at p < 0.05* Significant at p < 0.01** R E A D I N G M A T H S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g C h a r t e r S c h o o l s 2 0 1 5 - 1 6 0.17** 100** 0.12** 72** C h a r t e r S c h o o l s 2 0 1 6 - 1 7 0.12** 72** 0.16** 94** C h a r t e r S c h o o l s 2 0 1 7 - 1 8 0.12** 70** 0.13** 79** M a g n e t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 5 - 1 6 0.14* 81* 0.05 30 M a g n e t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 6 - 1 7 0.19** 111** 0.11* 63* M a g n e t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 7 - 1 8 0.24** 140** 0.01 8 O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 5 - 1 6 0.01 5 -0.01 -5 O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 6 - 1 7 0.03 14 0.11** 63** O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 7 - 1 8 0.02 12 0.01 5
  • 37. Comparison of School Sectors within Newark Significant at p < 0.05* Significant at p < 0.01** R E A D I N G M A T H S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g C h a r t e r S c h o o l s v s . O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 5 - 1 6 0.16* 94* 0.13** 76** C h a r t e r S c h o o l s v s . O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 6 - 1 7 0.10* 57* 0.05 31 C h a r t e r S c h o o l s v s . O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 7 - 1 8 0.10** 57** 0.12** 73** M a g n e t S c h o o l s v s . O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 5 - 1 6 0.13 76 0.06 34 M a g n e t S c h o o l s v s . O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 6 - 1 7 0.16* 96* 0.00 0 M a g n e t S c h o o l s v s . O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l s 2 0 1 7 - 1 8 0.22** 127** 0.00 2
  • 38. Charter Subsector Analysis Significant at p < 0.05* Significant at p < 0.01** R E A D I N G M A T H S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g N e w a r k C M O s v s . S t a t e A v e r a g e 0.14** 83** 0.18** 104** N e w a r k I n d e p e n d e n t C h a r t e r s v s . S t a t e A v e r a g e 0.09** 54** 0.09* 50* N e w a r k C M O s v s . N e w a r k I n d e p e n d e n t C h a r t e r s 0.05 29 0.09* 53*
  • 39. Student Subgroup Analysis> Black Students Significant at p < 0.05* Significant at p < 0.01** R E A D I N G M A T H S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g Compared with Statewide Average of Black Students N e w a r k B l a c k S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l 0.07** 43** 0.04 24 N e w a r k C h a r t e r S c h o o l B l a c k S t u d e n t s 0.13** 76** 0.11** 66** N e w a r k M a g n e t S c h o o l B l a c k S t u d e n t s 0.18** 106** 0.01 8 N e w a r k O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l B l a c k S t u d e n t s 0.00 0.00 -0.02 -11 Compared with Black Students in Other District Schools in Newark N e w a r k C h a r t e r S c h o o l B l a c k S t u d e n t s 0.13* 76* 0.13** 76** N e w a r k M a g n e t S c h o o l B l a c k S t u d e n t s 0.18* 106* 0.03 18
  • 40. Student Subgroup Analysis> Hispanic Students Significant at p < 0.05* Significant at p < 0.01** R E A D I N G M A T H S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g Compared with Statewide Average of Hispanic Students N e w a r k H i s p a n i c S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l 0.07** 40** 0.07 41 N e w a r k C h a r t e r S c h o o l H i s p a n i c S t u d e n t s 0.11** 63** 0.16** 95** N e w a r k M a g n e t S c h o o l H i s p a n i c S t u d e n t s 0.29** 172** 0.03 18 N e w a r k O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l H i s p a n i c S t u d e n t s 0.02 10 0.03 17 Compared with Hispanic Students in Other District Schools in Newark N e w a r k C h a r t e r S c h o o l H i s p a n i c S t u d e n t s 0.09** 53** 0.13** 78** N e w a r k M a g n e t S c h o o l H i s p a n i c S t u d e n t s 0.27** 161** 0.00 1
  • 41. Student Subgroup Analysis> Students in Poverty Significant at p < 0.05* Significant at p < 0.01** R E A D I N G M A T H S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g Compared with Statewide Average of Students in Poverty N e w a r k S t u d e n t s i n P o v e r t y O v e r a l l 0.08** 46** 0.06* 37* N e w a r k C h a r t e r S c h o o l S t u d e n t s i n P o v e r t y 0.13** 76** 0.15** 88** N e w a r k M a g n e t S c h o o l S t u d e n t s i n P o v e r t y 0.26** 151** 0.03 19 N e w a r k O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l S t u d e n t s i n P o v e r t y 0.02 13 0.02 11 Compared with Students in Poverty in Other District Schools in Newark N e w a r k C h a r t e r S c h o o l S t u d e n t s i n P o v e r t y 0.11** 62** 0.13** 76** N e w a r k M a g n e t S c h o o l S t u d e n t s i n P o v e r t y 0.23** 138** 0.01 7
  • 42. Student Subgroup Analysis> ELL Students Significant at p < 0.05* Significant at p < 0.01** R E A D I N G M A T H S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g Compared with Statewide Average of ELL Students N e w a r k E L L S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l 0.01 6 0.05 27 N e w a r k C h a r t e r S c h o o l E L L S t u d e n t s 0.11 64 0.14 80 N e w a r k M a g n e t S c h o o l E L L S t u d e n t s § - - - - N e w a r k O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l E L L S t u d e n t s 0.00 1 0.04 24 Compared with ELL Students in Other District Schools in Newark N e w a r k C h a r t e r S c h o o l E L L S t u d e n t s 0.11 62 0.10 56 N e w a r k M a g n e t S c h o o l E L L S t u d e n t s § - - - - § R e d a c t e d t o c o m p l y w i t h t h e s t a t e ’ s s u p p r e s s i o n r u l e .
  • 43. Student Subgroup Analysis> Special Ed Students Significant at p < 0.05* Significant at p < 0.01** R E A D I N G M A T H S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g Compared with Statewide Average of Special Ed Students N e w a r k S p e c i a l E d S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l 0.07* 41* 0.03 20 N e w a r k C h a r t e r S c h o o l S p e c i a l E d S t u d e n t s 0.15** 90** 0.08* 47* N e w a r k M a g n e t S c h o o l S p e c i a l E d S t u d e n t s 0.31* 181* 0.10** 59** N e w a r k O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l S p e c i a l E d S t u d e n t s 0.01 4 0.01 3 Compared with Special Ed Students in Other District Schools in Newark N e w a r k C h a r t e r S c h o o l S p e c i a l E d S t u d e n t s 0.15** 85* 0.08* 44* N e w a r k M a g n e t S c h o o l S p e c i a l E d S t u d e n t s 0.30* 177* 0.10** 56**
  • 44. Student Subgroup Analysis> Male Students Significant at p < 0.05* Significant at p < 0.01** R E A D I N G M A T H S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g Compared with Statewide Average of Male Students N e w a r k M a l e S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l 0.08** 49** 0.05 28 N e w a r k C h a r t e r S c h o o l M a l e S t u d e n t s 0.14** 81** 0.13** 73** N e w a r k M a g n e t S c h o o l M a l e S t u d e n t s 0.27** 160** 0.04 24 N e w a r k O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l M a l e S t u d e n t s 0.03 17 0.01 5 Compared with Male Students in Other District Schools in Newark N e w a r k C h a r t e r S c h o o l M a l e S t u d e n t s 0.11** 64** 0.12** 68** N e w a r k M a g n e t S c h o o l M a l e S t u d e n t s 0.24** 143** 0.03 18
  • 45. Student Subgroup Analysis> Female Students Significant at p < 0.05* Significant at p < 0.01** R E A D I N G M A T H S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n D a y s o f L e a r n i n g Compared with Statewide Average of Female Students N e w a r k F e m a l e S t u d e n t s O v e r a l l 0.07** 40** 0.06 33 N e w a r k C h a r t e r S c h o o l F e m a l e S t u d e n t s 0.10** 60** 0.14** 83** N e w a r k M a g n e t S c h o o l F e m a l e S t u d e n t s 0.21** 125** -0.01 -5 N e w a r k O t h e r D i s t r i c t S c h o o l F e m a l e S t u d e n t s 0.01 8 0.01 5 Compared with Female Students in Other District Schools in Newark N e w a r k C h a r t e r S c h o o l F e m a l e S t u d e n t s 0.09** 52** 0.13** 77** N e w a r k M a g n e t S c h o o l F e m a l e S t u d e n t s 0.20** 117** -0.02 -11