Newton Public Schools 100 Walnut Street Newton, MA 02460€¦ · % Massachusetts%Comprehensive ......

Mary%Eich%

Assistant%Superintendent%for%Teaching%&%Learning%

Telephone:%(617)%559B6125%

MEMORANDUM %

To:%%% David%Fleishman% %

From:%%Mary%Eich,%Assistant%Superintendent%for%Teaching%&%Learning%

Date:%%% January%7,%2016%

Re:%%% Partnership%for%Assessing%Readiness%for%College%and%Career%–%PARCC%2015%

% Massachusetts%Comprehensive%Assessment%System%B%MCAS%2015%%

!In%Spring%2015,%elementary%and%middle%school%students%took%the%first%PARCC%assessment%in%

Mathematics%and%English%Language%Arts.%MCAS%testing%will%continued%in%Science%and%

Technology/Engineering,%and%in%high%school.%

%

As%has%been%the%case%with%MCAS%for%15%years,%results%of%both%tests%are%reported%in%three%ways:%

district%accountability,%student%growth,%and%student%achievement.%%Each%has%its%own%measures%

and%comparisons.%%%

• District%accountability%is%measured%by%a%cumulative%Progress%and%Performance%Index%%

(PPI),%which%computes%progress%in%narrowing%achievement%gaps%among%identified%

subgroups.%%

• Student%growth%is%measured%by%a%percentile%(SGP)%which%compares%each%student’s%growth%

over%two%years%to%that%of%a%computed%group%of%academic%peers.%%Individual%SGPs%are%

combined%into%a%median%SGP%for%a%group%or%subgroup.%%%

• Student%achievement%is%measured%by%a%scaled%score.%%MCAS%scaled%scores,%grouped%into%

four%performance%categories,%measures%student%achievement:%advanced,%proficient,%needs%

improvement,%and%warning.%%PARCC%scaled%scores%are%grouped%into%five%categories:%Level%

5,%Level%4,%Level%3,%Level%2,%and%Level%1.%

%

Accountability%and%student%growth%are%discussed%at%the%district%level.%%Student%achievement%is%

discussed%by%discipline%and%grade%grouping.%%In%the%past,%we%have%included%an%examination%of%

differences%in%scores%among%subgroups%over%a%fiveByear%period.%%At%this%time,%the%disaggregated%

data%has%not%been%made%available%for%PARCC,%so%we%will%defer%that%discussion%to%a%later%report.%%%

%

Similarly,%an%MCAS%report%has%traditionally%included%a%discussion%of%implications%of%the%current%

year’s%data%for%future%test%administration.%%Since%we%have%not%yet%received%item%analysis%data%from%

PARCC,%that%discussion%also%will%be%deferred.%%%

%

Newton Public Schools 100 Walnut Street

Newton, MA 02460

% 1%Newton%Public%Schools% PARCC%and%MCAS%2015%Report%

Office%of%Teaching%and%Learning% January%2016%

PARCC%and%MCAS%2015:%

Student%Achievement,%Student%Growth%and%District%Accountability%

%The%Massachusetts%Comprehensive%Assessment%System%(MCAS)%is%the%statewide%standardsBbased%

assessment%developed%as%a%major%component%of%the%Education%Reform%Act%of%1993.%%Students%

were%first%tested%in%1998%in%grades%4,%8%and%10%in%Mathematics%and%English%Language%Arts.%%

Beginning%with%No%Child%Left%Behind%Act%of%2001,%all%students%in%grades%3,%4,%5,%6,%7,%8%and%10%were%

assessed.%%Massachusetts%added%a%Science%and%Technology/Engineering%test%for%fifth%and%eighth%

graders,%and%a%choice%of%subject%tests%for%high%schools.%Newton%ninth%graders%are%tested%in%

Introductory%Physics.1%

%

For%the%testing%year%2014B15,%districts%had%a%choice%between%continuing%with%MCAS%or%starting%to%

use%PARCC%(Partnership%for%Assessment%of%Readiness%for%College%and%Careers)%in%Mathematics%

and%English%Language%Arts.%%Because%PARCC%was%designed%to%assess%the%2011%Massachusetts%

Curriculum%Frameworks,%over%half%of%the%districts%in%Massachusetts,%including%Newton,%chose%

PARCC.%%Last%spring,%third%through%eighth%grade%students%took%the%PARCC%for%the%first%time.%Fifth%

and%eighth%graders%continued%to%take%MCAS%in%Science%and%Technology/Engineering.%%All%high%

school%testing%continued%with%MCAS.%%%Students%currently%in%eighth%through%twelfth%grades%will%be%

required%to%meet%MCAS%standards%to%achieve%competency%determination.%%%That%is,%all%students%in%

the%classes%of%2015%through%2019%will%have%to%pass%high%school%MCAS%in%all%three%disciplines%to%

graduate.%

%

Test%% 3% 4% 5% 6% 7% 8% 9% 10%

PARCC%English%Language%Arts% ✓% ✓% ✓% ✓% ✓% ✓% % %

PARCC%Mathematics% ✓% ✓% ✓% ✓% ✓% ✓% % %

MCAS%Science%and%

Technology/Engineering%% % ✓% % % ✓% ✓% ✓%

MCAS%English%Language%Arts% % % % % ✓%

MCAS%Mathematics%% % % % % ✓%

%

Over%the%life%of%MCAS,%reporting%results%has%come%to%take%three%distinct%forms:%%Progress%and%

Performance,%Student%Growth,%and%Student%Achievement.%%Progress%and%Performance%data%is%

compiled%from%student%data%and%used%in%the%process%of%determining%school%and%district%

accountability%ratings.2%%%

%

Transitioning%from%MCAS%to%PARCC%in%elementary%and%middle%schools%presents%challenges%in%

comparing%student%performance%from%previous%years%to%spring%2015.%%The%Department%of%

Education%has%developed%conventions%for%comparison,%described%in%this%text,%which%we%use%in%this%

report.%%Nevertheless,%it%is%more%difficult%than%ever%to%draw%conclusions%about%performance%

trends%with%this%year’s%testing%results.%%%

%

% %

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%1%Districts%may%choose%which%science%discipline%and%therefore%which%year%students%are%to%be%tested.%%%2%Throughout%this%report,%all%data%comes%from%the%DESE%website%unless%otherwise%noted.%



District%Accountability:%%Progress%and%Performance%%%

The%Progress%and%Performance%Index%(PPI)%was%new%in%2012,%and%replaced%the%No%Child%Left%

Behind%goal%of%100%percent%student%proficiency%by%2014%with%the%goal%of%reducing%proficiency%

gaps%by%half%by%2017.%%The%proficiency%gap%is%defined%as%“the%distance%between%a%group’s%current%

proficiency%level%and%100%%proficiency.”%%%%

The%PPI%uses%a%100Bpoint%scale%and%combines%information%on%up%to%seven%indicators:%%

o narrowing%proficiency%gaps%in%English%language%arts,%Mathematics,%and%science;%%

o growth%in%English%language%arts%and%Mathematics;%%

o annual%dropout%rates;%and%%

o cohort%graduation%rates.%

Extra%credit%points%are%awarded%for%increasing%the%percentage%of%students%achieving%a%

performance%level%of%advanced%in%English,%Math%and%Science,%and%for%decreasing%the%failure%rate.%%%

Each%school’s%PPI%rating%is%combined%with%PPI%ratings%from%the%past%three%years%to%form%a%

Cumulative%Progress%and%Performance%Index.%%%A%group%must%have%a%Cumulative%PPI%of%75%or%

higher%to%be%considered%making%progress%towards%narrowing%proficiency%gaps.%%%

The%Cumulative%PPI%for%all%students%and%for%the%High%Needs3%student%group%must%be%75%or%higher%

to%be%granted%Level%1%Accountability%and%Assistance%status.%%%A%district%is%assigned%the%

Accountability%and%Assessment%level%of%its%lowest%school.%%%

Seven%of%our%schools,%Burr,%LincolnBEliot,%MasonBRice,%Ward,%Brown,%North%and%South,%are%Level%1%

schools%this%year.%%All%others%are%Level%2%schools,%making%Newton%Public%Schools%a%Level%2%district.%%

%

Student%Growth%%

Student%progress%is%also%measured%with%respect%to%growth%from%previous%years.%%A%Student%

Growth%Percentile%(SGP)%is%computed%for%each%fourth%through%eighth%grade%student%in%

Mathematics%and%English%Language%Arts,%comparing%his%or%her%progress%to%their%academic%peers4%

in%Massachusetts.%

Almost%by%definition,%the%median%Student%Growth%Percentile%is%50.%%SGP%above%60%and%below%40%

are%considered%significant.%%Median%Student%Growth%Percentile%(SGP)%for%2015%PARCC%English%

Language%Arts%is%56%and%for%Mathematic%is%60.%

Median%SGP%in%Mathematics%in%2015%is%60%or%above%at%Mason%Rice,%Peirce,%Williams,%Bigelow,%Day,%

and%Oak%Hill.%In%English%Language%Arts,%median%SGP%is%60%or%above%at%Angier,%Cabot%LincolnBEliot,%

MasonBRice,%Peirce,%Ward,%Bigelow,%Day%and%Newton%South.%%%

Student%Growth%Percentiles%for%subgroups%have%not%been%issued%by%the%Department%of%

Elementary%and%Secondary%Education%at%this%time.%%%

%

% %

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%3%Economically%disadvantaged%students,%English%language%learners,%and%students%with%disabilities%4%The%student%growth%percentile%describes%the%relative%growth%a%student%made%compared%to%other%students%with%the%

same%achievement%history—their%academic%peers.%Academic%peers%are%not%an%actual%set%of%students%but%are%

constructed%using%all%the%state’s%data.%%http://www.doe.mass.edu/mcas/growth/%



Student%Achievement%%%% %

The%number%of%points%students%are%awarded%for%correct%responses%on%any%MCAS%test%is%translated%

to%a%scaled%score%of%between%200%and%280.%%%Students%are%assigned%to%a%performance%level%based%

on%scaled%scores.%%%

MCAS%Performance%Level% Scaled%Score%Minimum% Scaled%Score%Maximum%

Advanced% 260% 280%

Proficient% 240% 258%

Needs%Improvement% 220% 238%

Warning%(Failing%Gr10)% 200% 218%%

The%number%of%points%students%are%awarded%for%correct%responses%on%any%PARCC%test%is%

translated%to%a%scaled%score%of%between%650%and%850.%%%Students%are%assigned%to%a%performance%

level%based%on%scaled%scores.%%%

PARCC%Performance%Level%Scaled%Score%

Minimum%

Scaled%Score%

Maximum%

Level%5%–%Exceeds%Expectations% Varies:%783B810% 850%

Level%4%–%Meets%Expectations% 750% Varies:%782B809%

Level%3%–%Approaching%Expectations% 725% 749%

Level%2%–%Partially%Meets%Expectations% 700% 724%

Level%1%–%Did%not%yet%meet%expectations% 650% 699%

%

Throughout%this%report,%student%achievement%levels%in%2015%assessments%are%compared%to%

previous%years.%%In%the%case%of%English%Language%Arts%and%Mathematics%in%grades%3%–%8,%this%

comparison%is%not%exact,%since%the%scaled%

scores%are%allocated%to%five%performance%

levels%rather%than%four%for%MCAS.%%%

The%Massachusetts%Department%of%

Elementary%and%Secondary%Education%

has%defined%PARCC%Performance%Levels%

4%and%5%as%“meeting%or%exceeding%

expectations.”%%%For%purposes%of%

comparing%PARCC%2015%to%previous%

years’%MCAS,%Levels%4%and%5%are%

equivalent%to%Proficient%and%Advanced.%%%

PARCC%Performance%Level%1%is%

equivalent%to%MCAS%Warning,%leaving%

PARCC%Proficiency%Levels%2%and%3%

equivalent%to%MCAS%Needs%Improvement.%%

Level%3%Is%represented%in%lavender,%

distinguish%but%connect%it%to%“Needs%

Improvement.”%%%

%

3% 4% 2%

16% 12%6%

11%

51%48%

55%

30%35%

26%

2013%%%%%%%%%%

MCAS%

2014%%%%%%%%%%%

MCAS%

2015%%%%%%%%%%%%%

PARCC%

EXAMPLE%COMPARISON%

MCAS%and%PARCC!

Level%5/Advanced%

Level%4/Proiicient%

Level%3/Needs%

Improvement%

Level%2/Needs%

Improvement%

Level%1/Warning%



Differences%in%Performance%Between%Modes%of%PARCC%Administration%%

Individual%schools%were%able%to%make%a%choice%of%administration%modes%for%PARCC%2015.%%Eleven%

elementary%schools%and%two%middle%schools%chose%computerBbasedBtesting,%while%four%

elementary%schools%and%two%middle%schools%chose%paperBbased%testing.%%We%expected%that%

computerBbased%testing%would%be%a%more%challenging%for%the%adults%who%had%to%make%sure%all%the%

equipment%was%available%and%correctly%configured%and%all%the%systems%to%transmit%student%

responses%worked%at%all%times.%%Our%Technology%team%began%working%on%the%infrastructure%early%

in%2015%and%continued%onsite%monitoring%through%the%last%day%of%testing%in%May.%%Building%

administrators%and%teachers,%who%had%become%expert%MCAS%administrators,%worked%through%

unfamiliar%requirements%and%routines,%and%for%the%most%part,%testing%ran%smoothly.%%%

%

What%we%did%not%expect%was%a%significant%difference%in%student%achievement%between%computerB%

based%testing%schools%and%paperBbased%testing%schools.%%%

%

In%our%computerBbased%middle%schools,%78%%of%all%students%

tested%scored%at%Levels%4%and%5%in%English%Language%Arts,%

compared%to%86%%in%our%paper%based%schools.%%Differences%

were%less%extreme%but%still%evident%in%math.%%%

%

%

Distribution%of%Student%Scores%in%Middle%Schools%

%

%% %

78%%

22%%

ELA%PARCC%2015%%

Computer%Administration%Schools%

%%%4%+%5%

%%%1%+%2%+%3%86%%

14%%

ELA%PARCC%2015%%

PaperBBased%Administration%Schools%

%%%4%+%5%

%%%1%+%2%+%3%

76%%

25%%

Math%PARCC%2015%%


%%4%+%5%

%%%1%+%2%+%3%

79%%

21%%

Math%PARCC%2015%%

PaperBBased%Administration%Schools%

%%4%+%5%

%%%1%+%2%+%3%

PaperBBased%Schools%

Bigelow,%Day%

%

ComputerBBased%Schools%

Brown,%Oak%Hill%



%

Disparities%in%scores%were%more%extreme%in%

elementary%schools.%%In%our%computerBbased%schools,%

71%%of%all%students%tested%scored%at%Levels%4%and%5%in%

English%Language%Arts,%compared%to%88%%in%our%

paper%based%schools,%a%difference%of%17%points.%%

Mathematics%scores%were%similarly%skewed,%with%

69%%of%all%students%tested%on%a%computer%scoring%at%

Level%4%or%5,%compared%to%79%%of%those%who%were%

tested%with%paper.%%

%

%

%

%

%

Distribution%of%Student%Scores%in%Elementary%Schools%

%

%%

%

%

%

71%%

29%%

ELA%PARCC%2015%%


%%%4%+%5%

%%%1%+%2%+%3%88%%

12%%

ELA%PARCC%2015%!Paper%Administration%Schools!

%%%4%+%5%

%%%1%+%2%+%3%

69%%

31%%

Math%PARCC%2015%!Computer%Administration%Schools!

%%%4%+%5%

%%%1%+%2%+%3%79%%

21%%

Math%PARCC%2015%!Paper%Administration%Schools!

%%%4%+%5%

%%%1%+%2%+%3%

PaperBBased%Schools%

Angier,%LincolnBEliot,%Mason%Rice,%

Ward%%

%

ComputerBBased%Schools%

Bowen,%Burr,%Cabot,%Countryside,%

Franklin,%Horace%Mann,%Memorial%

Spaulding,%Peirce,%Underwood,%

Williams,%Zervas%%



Student%Achievement%in%English%Language%Arts%%

%

Student%progress%in%English%

Language%Arts%is%assessed%every%

year%beginning%in%third%grade%

and%continuing%through%middle%

school.%%Writing%is%assessed%in%

every%grade%through%extended%

response%items.%%

Elementary:%Grades%3B5%%

Performance%of%students%in%

grades%3,%4%and%5%continues%to%be%

strong,%despite%a%slight%decline%

between%Proficient%and%

Advanced%in%2014%and%Levels%4%

and%5%in%2015.%

Student%Growth%Percentiles%in%

grade%4%dropped%from%67%in%

2014%MCAS%to%57%in%2015%

PARCC.%%Similarly,%in%grade%5,%

Student%Growth%Percentiles%

dropped%from%58%in%2014%MCAS%

to%53%in%2015%PARCC.%%%

Student%Growth%Percentiles%are%

not%computed%for%Grade%3,%since%

that%is%the%first%year%of%testing.%%

%

%

Grades%4%&%5%ELA%

SGP% 2013% 2014% 2015%

4th% 65% 67% 57%

5th% 66% 58% 53%

%

%%%

%

%

%

41% 37%

17%

44% 47%

63%

13%11% 12%6%5% 4% 1%

2013%MCAS%%

n=1022%

2014%MCAS%%

n=932%

2015%PARCC%%%

n=955%

English%Language%Arts%Grade%5%

Level%1/Warning%

Level%2/Needs%

Improvement%

Level%3/Needs%

Improvement%

Level%4/Proiicient%

Level%5/Advanced%

25% 32% 31%

51%49% 46%

15%17% 15%5%6% 4% 2%

2013%MCAS%%

n=929%

2014%MCAS%%

n=975%

2015%PARCC%%%

n=948%


Level%1/Warning%

Level%2/Needs%

Improvement%

Level%3/Needs%

Improvement%

Level%4/Proiicient%

Level%5/Advanced%

21% 22%13%

59% 56%

56%

19%

19% 18%9%

2% 4% 3%

2013%MCAS%%

n=979%

2014%MCAS%%

n=972%

2015%PARCC%%%

n=920%


Level%1/Warning%

Level%2/Needs%

Improvement%

Level%3/Needs%

Improvement%

Level%4/Proiicient%

Level%5/Advanced%



English%Language%Arts:%%%

Middle%School%All%Grades%6%B%8%

As%the%charts%at%right%show,%

Newton%Middle%School%students%

continue%to%achieve%at%high%levels%

in%English%Language%Arts,%despite%

a%drop%in%students%scoring%

Proficient%and%Advanced%in%2014%

to%students%scoring%at%Levels%4%

and%5%in%2015.%

Consistent%with%past%years%of%

MCAS%middle%school%scores,%

seventh%and%eighth%graders%

substantially%outperformed%sixth%

graders.%%%%%

Student%Growth%Percentiles%

increased%by%10%points%in%Grade%6,%

9%points%in%Grade%7,%and%4%points%

in%Grade%8.%%

%

Middle%School%ELA%

SGP% 2013% 2014% 2015%

6th% 58% 48% 58%

7th% 46% 51% 60%

8th% 59% 58% 62%

%

%

%%

27% 23%

44%

61% 66%41%

10%9% 7%4%3% 3% 1%

2013%MCAS%%

n=922%

2014%MCAS%%

n=906%

2015%PARCC%%%

n=921%


Level%1/Warning%

Level%2/Needs%

Improvement%

Level%3/Needs%

Improvement%

Level%4/Proiicient%

Level%5/Advanced%

33% 30% 25%

52% 53%53%

15%10% 12%

5%5% 5% 2%

2013%MCAS%%

n=905%

2014%MCAS%%

n=970%

2015%PARCC%%%

n=884%


Level%1/Warning%

Level%2/Needs%

Improvement%

Level%3/Needs%

Improvement%

Level%4/Proiicient%

Level%5/Advanced%

3% 2% 1%5% 4% 3%

10%

49%59% 48%

43%34% 37%

2013%MCAS%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

n=894%

2014%MCAS%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

n=932%

2015%PARCC%%%

n=880%


Level%5/Advanced%

Level%4/Proiicient%

Level%3/Needs%

Improvement%

Level%2/Needs%

Improvement%

Level%1/Warning%



English%Language%Arts:%%High%School%Grade%10%

We%have%made%substantial%progress%in%increasing%the%percentage%of%Newton%Public%Schools%

sophomores%scoring%in%the%advanced%performance%level%in%the%past%six%years%–%more%than%

doubling%the%rate%from%35%%in%2008%to%72%%in%2015.%%%

We%have%also%reduced%the%number%of%students%failing%the%English%Language%Arts%Grade%10%MCAS,%

from%2%%to%1%,%and%in%the%“needs%improvement”%performance%level%from%8%%to%3%.%%%

%

Differences%in%Achievement%Among%Subgroups%%

The%commitment%of%teachers%to%narrowing%the%achievement%gap%has%significantly%reduced%the%

needs%improvement%and%failure%rates%of%African%American/Black,%Low%Income,%and%High%Needs5%

students%in%English%Language%Arts%Grade%10%MCAS.%%%

African%American/Black%students%rates%of%scoring%below%proficient%have%fallen%from%36%%in%2010%

to%16%%in%2015.%%Similarly,%Economically%Disadvantages%students’%rates%fell%from%30%%in%2010%to%

11%%in%2015;%and%rates%for%high%needs%students%dropped%from%20%%in%2011%to%11%%in%2015%

Additionally,%the%percent%of%African%American,%Low%Income%and%High%Needs%students%scoring%

Advanced%increased%substantially%in%the%2015%MCAS%administration.%%%

Still,%differences%in%achievement%at%the%advanced%level%are%striking.%%While%72%%of%Newton%tenth%

graders%achieved%an%advanced%performance%level,%only%a%little%over%a%half%as%many%African%

American,%Low%Income%and%High%Needs%students%did%the%same.%

%

%

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%5%Economically%Disadvantaged%students,%English%Language%Learners,%and%students%with%disabilities%

45%58% 61%

70%64%

72%

44%

35% 35%27%

33%24%

8% 6% 3% 2% 3% 3%2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%

2010%%%%%%%%%%%%

n=844%

2011%%%%%%%%%%%%%

n=868%

2012%%%%%%%%%%%%

n=908%

2013%%%%%%%%%%

n=894%

2014%%%%%%%%%%%%

n=942%

2015%%%%%%%%%%%%

n=955%

English%Language%Arts%MCAS%Grade%10%

All%Students%

Advanced% Proiicient% Needs%Improvement% Failing%



%

%

%

11%24% 18%

35% 25%38%

52%50%

75%57%

59%46%

36% 22%7% 6% 12% 15%

0% 4% 0% 2% 4% 2%

2010%%%

n=44%

2011%%%

n=50%

2012%%%

n=55%

2013%%%

n=51%

2014%%%

n=51%

2015%%%%%%%%%%%%

n=48%

English%Language%Arts%MCAS%Grade%10%

African%American/Black%Students%


13% 20% 26%46%

33% 41%

57%55%

63%47%

54% 48%

27% 23%10% 7% 12% 10%3% 2% 1% 0% 1% 1%

2010%%%

n=102%

2011%%%

n=88%

2012%%%

n=116%

2013%%%%%%

n=116%

2014%%%

n=109%

2015%%%%%%%%%%%%

n=122%

%English%Language%Arts%MCAS%Grade%10%

Economically%Disadvantaged%Students%


26% 31% 40% 34% 39%

54%58% 50% 56% 49%

16%9% 6% 8% 8%

4% 2% 4% 2% 3%

2011%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

n=273%

2012%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

n=325%

2013%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

n=299%

2014%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

n=321%

2015%%%%%%%%%%%%

n=308%

%English%Language%Arts%MCAS%Grade%10%

HIgh%Needs%Students%




Mathematics%%%

Student%achievement%in%

Mathematics%is%assessed%every%

year%beginning%in%third%grade%and%

continuing%through%eighth%grade.%

In%2015,%elementary%and%middle%

school%students%were%assessed%

with%PARCC%for%the%first%time.%%

High%School%students%continued%

to%take%MCAS%in%grade%10%as%part%

of%their%competency%

determination.%%

%

%

Mathematics%Elementary:%%

Grades%3%B%5%

%


elementary%school%Mathematics%

continues%to%be%high%compared%to%

the%state%average.%%However,%the%

percent%of%students%scoring%at%

Levels%4%and%5%in%PARCC%

elementary%mathematics%is%

substantially%lower%than%previous%

years’%percent%of%students%scoring%

Proficient%and%Advanced%on%

elementary%Mathematics%MCAS.%%

%

Student%Growth%Percentiles%were%

54%and%56%in%grades%4%and%5%

respectively.%%%

%%

Grades%4%&%5%Math%

SGP% 2013% 2014% 2015%

4th% 71% 63% 54%

5th% 65% 52% 56%

%

%

56% 53%

23%

27% 28%

50%

16%11% 13%

7%6% 7% 2%

2013%MCAS%%

n=1026%

2014%MCAS%%

n=933%

2015%PARCC%%%

n=957%

Math%Grade%5%

MCAS%and%PARCC%All%Students!

Level%1/Warning%

Level%2/Needs%

Improvement%

Level%3/Needs%

Improvement%

Level%4/Proiicient%

Level%5/Advanced%

42% 44%

15%

33% 34%

56%

16%21% 18%

9%4% 4% 3%

2013%MCAS%%

n=934%

2014%MCAS%%

n=979%

2015%PARCC%%%

n=947%

Math%Grade%4%


Level%1/Warning%

Level%2/Needs%

Improvement%

Level%3/Needs%

Improvement%

Level%4/Proiicient%

Level%5/Advanced%

52% 53%

23%

33% 33%

38%

20%

11% 11% 7%4% 3% 2%

2013%MCAS%%

n=981%

2014%MCAS%%

n=977%

2015%PARCC%%%

n=924%

Math%Grade%3%


Level%1/Warning%

Level%2/Needs%

Improvement%

Level%3/Needs%

Improvement%

Level%4/Proiicient%

Level%5/Advanced%



Mathematics:%%Middle%School%All%

Grades%6%–%8%%


Mathematics%in%Newton%Middle%

Schools%continues%to%be%strong%

across%the%transition%from%MCAS%

to%PARCC.%%About%77%%of%all%

middle%school%students%scored%at%

performance%Levels%4%and%5.%%%

Student%growth%percentiles%have%

moved%up,%with%sixth%grade%

showing%a%particularly%large%

increase.%%%

%

%%

Middle%School%Math%

SGP% 2013% 2014% 2015%

6th% 48.5% 52% 65%

7th% 58% 51% 58%

8th% 54% 55% 65%

%

%

47% 47%35%

32% 30%45%

12%15% 16%5%6% 7% 3%

2013%MCAS%%%%

n=895%

2014%MCAS%%

n=932%

2015%PARCC%%%

n=876%

Mathematics%Grade%8%%

All%Students!

Level%1/Warning%

Level%2/Needs%

Improvement%

Level%3/Needs%

Improvement%

Level%4/Proiicient%

Level%5/Advanced%

49% 51%

25%

32% 27%

51%

15%11% 13%7%8% 8% 2%

2013%MCAS%%

n=906%

2014%MCAS%%

n=974%

2015%PARCC%%%

n=844%

Mathematics%Grade%6%%


Level%1/Warning%

Level%2/Needs%

Improvement%

Level%3/Needs%

Improvement%

Level%4/Proiicient%

Level%5/Advanced%

49%36%

29%

30%38%

46%

18%14%

16%

5%6% 9% 5%

2013%MCAS%%

n=931%

2014%MCAS%%

n=905%

2015%PARCC%%%

n=911%

Mathematics%Grade%7%


Level%1/Warning%

Level%2/Needs%

Improvement%

Level%3/Needs%

Improvement%

Level%4/Proiicient%

Level%5/Advanced%

% 12%Newton%Public%Schools% PARCC%MCAS%2014%Report%


Mathematics:%%High%School%Grade%10%

The%percentage%of%students%

scoring%in%the%proficient%and%

advanced%performance%levels%on%

the%tenth%grade%Mathematics%

MCAS%has%grown%from%90%%in%

2010%to%94%%in%2015.%%Looking%

further%back,%Mathematics%

student%achievement%has%

increased%from%a%low%of%51%%

proficient%and%advanced%in%

1999.%%%

The%percent%of%students%scoring%

advanced%has%increased%from%

76%%to%81%%in%the%same%period.%%%

%

Differences%in%Achievement%

Among%Subgroups%

As%the%line%graph%below%shows,%

progress%on%increasing%the%number%of%students%achieving%at%the%proficient%and%advanced%

performance%levels%on%the%Mathematics%Grade%10%MCAS%has%included%improvements%in%the%

achievement%rate%of%African%American/Black%High%Needs,%and%Low%Income%students,%despite%a%

decline%in%2015%scores.%%%%

However,%the%performance%gap%is%still%significant,%particularly%in%the%advanced%level.%%%

%

%

%

%

%

%

%

76% 74% 77% 76% 81% 81%

14% 18% 17% 16%13% 13%

7% 6% 4% 5% 4% 5%3% 2% 2% 3% 1% 1%

2010%%%%%%

n=849%

2011%%%%%%

n=866%

2012%%%

n=904%

2013%%%%%%

n=897%

2014%%%

n=943%

2015%%%%%%%%%%%%

n=955%


MCAS%All%Students%

ADVANCED% PROFICIENT% NEEDS%IMPROVEMENT% FAILING%

50%

55%

60%

65%

70%

75%

80%

85%

90%

95%

100%

2008% 2009% 2010% 2011% 2012% 2013% 2014% 2015%

Percent%of%Students%Scoring%Proiicnet%and%

Advanced%%

Mathematics%MCAS%Grade%10%

Comparative%Achievement%All%Newton%Students% African%American/Black%

Low%Income% High%Needs%



%

46% 52% 47%58% 55%

33%32%

31%27% 28%

14% 11% 14%11% 13%

7% 5% 8% 4% 5%

2011%%%%%%%%

n=270%

2012%%%%%%%%

n=323%

2013%%%%%%%%

n=301%

2014%%%%%%%%

n=321%

2015%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

n=308%


High%Needs%Students%


42% 43% 47% 48% 56% 54%

25%35% 37% 28%

30% 30%25%

16% 13% 20% 9% 12%8% 6% 3% 4% 5% 3%

2010%%%

n=102%

2011%%%%%%%%

n=88%

2012%%%

n=115%

2013%%%%%

n=120%

2014%%%

n=110%

2015%%%%%%%%%%%%

n=122%


Economically%Disadvantaged%Students%


36% 30% 33% 32%49% 47%

20% 40%47% 40%

29% 30%34%

18%18%

23% 14% 17%9% 12% 2% 6% 8% 6%

2010%%%%%%%%%%%

n=44%

2011%%%%%%%%%%

n=50%

2012%%%%%%%%%%

n=55%

2013%%%%%%%%%%%%

n=53%

2014%%%%%%%%%%

n=51%

2015%%%%%%%%%%%%

n=47%






Science%and%Technology/%Engineering%%

Only%students%in%Grades%5%and%8%and%high%school%take%an%MCAS%in%Science%and%

Technology/Engineering.%%As%such,%they%are%a%de%facto%cumulative%test%of%three%or%more%

years%of%science%instruction.%%The%tests%are%presently%based%on%the%2006%Science%Curriculum%

Frameworks.%%The%release%of%the%Next%Generation%Science%Standards%last%year%will%inform%

changes%in%Massachusetts%Curriculum%Frameworks,%which%are%expected%to%be%finalized%in%

early%2016.%

%Elementary%Schools:%Grade%5%

Student%performance%on%the%

Grade%5%Science%and%

Technology/Engineering%MCAS%

has%been%variable%in%the%past%five%

years,%with%the%proficient%and%

advanced%rates%declining%in%2014%

and%2015.%%However,%students%in%

our%district%have%continued%to%

outperform%their%statewide%peers.%%%

%

%%

%

Middle%Schools:%Grade%8%%

%

When%students%enter%middle%school,%Science%becomes%a%core%subject,%with%students%

receiving%instruction%daily,%usually%from%a%licensed%science%teacher.%%Technology/%

Engineering%becomes%one%of%five%offerings%in%the%Fine%and%Applied%Arts%rotation,%with%

students%receiving%instruction%an%average%of%40%days%per%year,%usually%from%a%licensed%

engineering%teacher.%%

%

Student%achievement%in%Grade%8%

Science%and%Technology/%

Engineering%remained%stable%

through%2014%–%with%the%percent%

of%students%scoring%in%the%

advanced%and%proficient%levels%

changing%from%64%%in%2010%to%

63%%in%2014.%%Students%scored%less%

well%in%2015,%with%only%58%%

achieving%at%the%proficient%or%

advanced%levels.%%

%

%

%%% %

31% 30% 37% 39% 34% 25%

45% 45% 34% 34% 37%42%

20% 22% 23% 22% 24% 29%

3% 4% 6% 6% 8% 4%

2010%%%%%%%%

n=855%

2011%%%%%

n=967%

2012%%%%%%%

n=933%

2013%%%%%%%%%

n=1025%

2014%%%%

n=932%

2015%%%%

n=78%

Science%and%Tech/Engineering%%

Grade%5%%All%Students%


11% 8% 11% 12% 9% 6%

53% 49% 52% 52% 54% 52%

29% 36% 28% 29% 31% 35%

8% 7% 9% 7% 6% 7%

2010%%

n=846%

2011%

n=818%

2012%%

n=869%

2013%%

n=893%

2014%%

n=926%

2015%%%%

n=918%

Science%and%Tech/Engineering%Grade%8%%

All%Students%%




Science%and%Technology/Engineering%(STE)%B%High%Schools%

Partially(contributed(by(( Amy(Winston,(NNHS(STE(Department(Chair(((( ( ( Gerard(Gagnon,(NSHS(STE(Department(Chair(

%

High%School%students%are%

required%to%pass%an%MCAS%

test%in%one%of%four%STE%

domains:%%Biology,%

Chemistry,%Introductory%

Physics,%and%

Technology/Engineering.%%

The%test%can%be%taken%any%

time%during%the%four%

years%of%high%school.%%

Newton%High%Schools%

have%chosen%to%

administer%the%

Introductory%Physics%

MCAS%in%Grade%9;%the%

year%students%take%the%

course.%%%

Some%students%take%other%tests%in%other%grades%for%a%variety%of%reasons.%%In%2015,%eleven%

students%took%the%Biology%MCAS,%23%took%Chemistry,%and%3%took%Technology/%Engineering.%

Student%performance%on%the%Grade%9%Introductory%Physics%test%continues%to%improve,%with%

the%percentage%of%students%scoring%proficient%and%advanced%increasing%from%83%%in%2010%to%

93%%in%2015.%%%

Differences%in%Achievement%Among%Subgroups%

Performance%levels%for%the%988%Newton%ninth%graders%and%14%Newton%tenth%graders%taking%

the%2015%Introductory%Physics%MCAS%are%distributed%as%follows:%

%% All%NPS%

Students%

African%American%

Students%

Low%Income%

Students%

High%Needs%

Students%State%

Advanced% 60%% 28%% 34%% 33%% 30%%

Proficient% 33%% 48%% 51%% 51%% 41%%

Needs%Improvement% 5%% 18%% 14%% 12%% 21%%

Failing% 2%% 8%% 1%% 5%% 8%%

%

The%percent%of%students%scoring%proficient%and%advanced%in%each%subgroup%has%grown%

substantially%since%2010,%with%a%steadily%increasing%percentage%scoring%Advanced.%%%

% %

41%54% 49% 55% 52% 60%

42%33% 40% 34% 39%

33%

14% 10% 9% 10% 7% 5%3% 4% 2% 2% 2% 2%

2010%%%%%%%

n=877%

2011%%%%%%%

n=899%

2012%%%%%%%%

n=886%

2013%%%%%%%%%%

n=945%

2014%%%%%%

n=959%

2015%%%%%%

n=982%

Introductory%Physics%Grade%9%

All%Students%




(

10% 10% 10% 15% 11%28%

46%

45% 42%51% 63%

48%334%

28% 38%28% 20% 18%

10%17% 10% 6% 7% 5%

2010%%%%%%%

n=50%

2011%%%%%%%

n=58%

2012%%%%%%%%

n=46%

2013%%%%%%%%%%

n=53%

2014%%%%%%

n=46%

2015%%%%%%

n=40%




10%21% 24% 25% 20%

34%

42%44% 41% 43% 52%

51%35%

21% 28% 22% 22%14%14% 14% 6% 10% 6% 1%

2010%%%%%%%

n=103%

2011%%%%%%%

n=114%

2012%%%%%%%%%%%%%

n=99%

2013%%%%%%%%%%

n=108%

2014%%%%%%

n=136%

2015%%%%%%

n=96%


Low%Income%Students%


24% 22% 24% 25% 33%

42% 48% 47% 51%51%

23% 22% 23% 18% 12%11% 7% 6% 6% 5%

2011%%%%%%%

n=287%

2012%%%%%%%%

n=277%

2013%%%%%%%%%%

n=306%

2014%%%%%%

n=303%

2015%%%%%%

n=307%


High%Needs%Students%




Student%Achievement%Compared%to%Massachusetts%Averages%%%(Newton%Public%Schools%students%continue%to%outperform%their%statewide%peers%in%every%test%

at%every%level%as%the%charts%below%indicate.%%%

(

((

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Grade%3% Grade%4% Grade%5% Grade%6% Grade%7% Grade%8% Grades%3%B%

8%

English%Language%Arts%PARCC%2015%

Percent%of%Students%Scoring%Level%4%and%5%

(Meets%or%Exceeds%Expectations)%

Newton%

State%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Grade%3% Grade%4% Grade%5% Grade%6% Grade%7% Grade%8% Grades%3%B%

8%

Mathematics%PARCC%2015!Percent%of%Students%Scoring%Levels%4%and%5%

(Meets%or%Exceeds%Expectations)%

Newton%

State%



((((( (

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Grade%5% Grade%8% Grade%9%Physics% Grade%10%

Science%and%Technology/Engineering%MCAS%2015!Percent%of%Students%Scoring%Proiicient%or%Higher!

NEWTON%

STATE%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

English%Language%Arts% Mathematics%

MCAS%Grade%10%2015%

Percent%of%Students%Scoring%Proiicient%or%Advanced%

NEWTON%

STATE%



Appendix:(From(the(Massachusetts(Department(of(Elementary(and(Secondary(Education:((MCAS%and%PARCC:%SUSTAINING%A%RELIABLE%GROWTH%MEASURE%6%

Over%the%past%three%years,%testing%and%measurement%experts%in%states%[using%PARCC]%that%use%Student%Growth%Percentiles%(SGP)%as%a%measure%of%student%growth%have%been%analyzing%issues%related%to%sustaining%the%reliability%of%SGPs%as%we%transition%from%our%legacy%assessment%(e.g.,%MCAS)%to%PARCC.%%The%conclusion%is%that%given%representative%samples%of%student%data,%SGPs%will%be%reliable%whether%a%student%who%has%taken%MCAS%for%the%prior%year%or%two%takes%MCAS%or%PARCC%in%2015.%%Following%is%a%graphic%that%highlights%how%the%percentile%underpinnings%of%the%SGP%support%this%conclusion.%%Understanding%that%perception%is%just%as%important%as%the%mathematical%evidence,%ESE%will%convene%a%forum%for%interested%parties%to%review%and%better%understand%these%analyses.%%

%

% %

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%6%Retrieved%from%http://www.doe.mass.edu/parcc/%%January%5,%2016%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

MCAS%Grade%3% PARCC%Grade%4%%

2015%PARCC%Growth%Percentiles%%

Level%1% Level%2% Level%3%% Level%4%% Level%5%

Representative%

sample%2014%MCAS%

100s%of%

stds@%

252%

99!

50%

1%



Appendix:((From(the(Massachusetts(Department(of(Elementary(and(Secondary(Education:(MCAS%and%PARCC:%HOW%WE%WILL%COMPARE%RESULTS7%

!The%procedure%used%to%compare%the%results%(student%scores)%from%two%different%tests%is%called%“equipercentile%linking.”%%Below%you%will%find%a%schematic%that%provides%an%overview%of%how%the%process%works:%%the%left%column%shows%actual%MCAS%achievement%data%sorted%by%percentiles%while%the%right%column%shows%a%“simulation”%of%what%PARCC%achievement%data%might%be%(no%actual%data%yet%exists),%once%again%sorted%by%percentiles.%%The%arrows%show%how%we%will%identify%which%scores%on%PARCC%are%equivalent%to%levels%(and%scores)%in%MCAS.%%You%are%likely%already%familiar%with%such%comparisons%since%this%process%is%used%to%compare,%e.g.,%SAT%and%ACT%scores,%and%ACCESS%and%MEPA%scores.%%%%

%

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%7%Retrieved%from%http://www.doe.mass.edu/parcc/%%January%5,%2016%

Newton Public Schools 100 Walnut Street Newton, MA 02460€¦ · % Massachusetts%Comprehensive ......

Documents

Transcript of Newton Public Schools 100 Walnut Street Newton, MA 02460€¦ · % Massachusetts%Comprehensive ......