2013 CMT Scores Data Analysis September 2013 The Orange Elementary School District recognizes that the education of each child is the shared responsibility of every member of the community. Our goal is to inspire and empower each student to achieve academic excellence, embrace social and individual responsibility, and lead with integrity. We believe all individuals should be valued and treated with respect.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
2013 CMT Scores Data Analysis
September 2013
The Orange Elementary School District recognizes that the education of each child is the shared responsibility of every member of the community.
Our goal is to inspire and empower each student to achieve academic excellence, embrace social and individual responsibility, and lead with integrity. We believe all individuals should be valued and treated with respect.
March 2013 DISTRICT Scores
as reported by the State Department of Education (SDE)
Grade
Mathematics Reading Writing
Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv.
3 82 96 39 75 90 31 74 93 27
4 82 97 39 81 95 29 81 98 28
5 87 95 43 82 92 28 87 98 39
6 94 100 60 97 100 43 92 99 44
2013 CMT
Grade 3
Mathematics Reading Writing
%At/AboveProficient
%At/Above
Goal
%At/AboveProficient
%At/Above
Goal
%At/AboveProficient
%At/Above
Goal
State 2012 86 67 75 59 83 63
2013 83 62 72 57 80 60
+/- (-3) (-5) (-3) (-2) (-3) (-3)
Orange 2012 97 81 91 76 94 75
2013 96 82 90 75 93 74
+/- (-1) (+1) (-1) (-1) (-1) (-1)
Grade 3State to District Comparison
Grade 4State to District Comparison
2013 CMTGrade 4
Mathematics Reading Writing%
At/AboveProficient
%At/Above
Goal
%At/AboveProficient
%At/Above
Goal
%At/AboveProficient
%At/Above
Goal
State 2012 86 68 78 64 84 65
2013 84 65 78 63 84 63
+/- (-2) (-3) - (-1) - (-2)
Orange 2012 95 85 90 80 96 83
2013 97 82 95 81 98 81
+/- (+2) (-3) (+5) (+1) (+2) (-2)
Grade 5State to District Comparison
2013 CMTGrade 5
Mathematics Reading Writing Science
%At/AboveProficient
%At/Above
Goal
%At/AboveProficient
%At/Above
Goal
%At/AboveProficient
%At/Above
Goal
%At/AboveProficient
%At/Above
Goal
State 2012 86 72 80 68 89 68 82 64
2013 84 69 79 67 88 66 82 63
+/- (-2) (-3) (-1) (-1) (-1) (-2) - (-1)
Orange 2012 100 92 98 92 98 87 98 90
2013 95 87 92 82 98 87 93 74
+/- (-5) (-5) (-6) (-10) - - (-5) (-16)
Grade 6State to District Comparison
2013 CMTGrade 6
Mathematics Reading Writing
%At/AboveProficient
%At/Above
Goal
%At/AboveProficient
%At/Above
Goal
%At/AboveProficient
%At/Above
Goal
State 2012 87 70 85 74 85 68
2013 86 67 85 73 84 65
+/- (-1) (-3) - (-1) (-1) (-3)
Orange 2012 100 92 97 91 97 87
2013 100 94 100 97 99 92
+/- - (+2) (+3) (+6) (+2) (+5)
The Peck Place School2013
Grade
Mathematics Reading Writing
Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv.
3 77 96 34 75 87 38 78 92 40
4 77 94 39 80 94 28 82 100 26
5 86 95 32 79 94 25 90 99 29
6 93 100 52 99 100 43 90 97 36
The Peck Place School
Strengths
C O H O RT G R O W T H
G R A D E 6 ST U D E N T S G A I N E D 1 5 % AT G O A L O R A B OV E A N D 1 8 % AT A DVA N C E D O R A B OV E I N M AT H E M AT I C S D U R I N G T H E I R
C M T Y E A R S AT P E C K . T H E SE SA M E S T U D E N T S G A I N E D 1 6 % AT G O A L O R A B OV E I N R E A D I N G F R O M G R A D E 3 T O G R A D E 6 .
G R A D E 5 ST U D E N T S G A I N E D 1 6 % AT G O A L O R A B OV E I N W R I T I N G S O FA R I N T H E I R C M T Y E A R S AT P E C K .
S T U D E N T S R E C E I V I N G S U P P O RT
8 2 % O F S T U D E N T S W H O R E C E I V E D T I E R I I O R T I E R I I I M AT H S U P P O RT S C O R E D P R O F I C I E N T O R H I G H E R .
7 0 % O F S T U D E N T S W H O R E C E I V E D T I E R I I O R T I E R I I I R E A D I N G S U P P O RT I M P R OV E D BY AT L E A S T O N E B A N D.
1 0 0 % O F S P E C I A L E D U C AT I O N S T U D E N T S W H O T O O K T H E S TA N D A R D R E A D I N G C M T S C O R E D P R O F I C I E N T O R B E TT E R
A N D A N A D D I T I O N A L T H R E E S T U D E N T S M A D E G O A L O N T H E C M T M A S A SS E SSM E N T.
Race Brook School2013
Grade
Mathematics Reading Writing
Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv.
3 91 99 43 79 94 21 75 94 13
4 79 95 39 77 95 25 77 100 29
5 81 93 35 81 90 28 79 96 45
6 94 100 67 94 100 39 91 100 51
Cohort GrowthThe number of sixth grade students achieving at the advanced band in mathematics increased by 20% during their years at Race Brook School.
Sixth grade students attaining goal or above in reading increased by 17%, and advanced increased by 10% during their years at Race Brook School.
Grade five students scoring at goal or above in reading has increased by 16% since third grade.
Students Receiving Support
88% of students receiving Tier 2 or Tier 3 reading support scored at or above the goal level and 89% of students receiving Tier 2 or Tier 3 math support scored proficient or higher.
Students in 5th grade receiving special education support made a 39% gain at the proficient level or better in writing.
Race Brook School
Strengths
Turkey Hill School2013
Grade
Mathematics Reading Writing
Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv.
3 78 94 41 70 88 33 69 94 28
4 90 100 38 85 95 35 85 93 29
5 96 98 69 88 94 31 96 100 45
6 94 100 64 97 100 45 94 100 48
Cohort Growth
Grade 6 students increased 14% from 84% to 98% at goal or above in reading over the course of instruction in grades 3-6.
100% of grade 6 students reached proficient or above in the same time period.
Grade 5 students increased 23% from 73% to 96% at goal or above in writing over the course of instruction in grades 3-5. 100% of grade 5 students reached proficient or above in the same time period.
Grade 6 students increased 15% in the math advanced band over the course of instruction in grades 3-6. 96% of grade 6 students reached goal or above in the same time period.
85% of students in grades 4, 5 and 6 tested at goal or above in reading, writing, mathematics and science.
Turkey Hill School
Strengths
2013 CMT Science Scores
GRADE 5 SCIENCE
Goal Proficiency Advanced
DISTRICT 74 93 30
PECK PLACE 71 93 19
RACE BROOK 63 90 28
TURKEY HILL 94 98 49
Goal Prof. Adv.
2008 67 92 17
2009 69 94 26
2010 76 94 23
2011 81 96 26
2012 89 98 38
2013 74 93 30
SAMPLE -- GRADE 5 SCIENCE QUESTIONS
2013 CMT
Grade 3
Mathematics Reading Writing
Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv. Goal Prof. Adv.
State 2013 62 83 26 57 72 22 60 80 19
Orange 2013 82 96 39 75 90 31 74 93 27
2013: Grade 3We continue to analyze and modify instruction for our youngest group of test takers. For Grade 3 students, this is their first experience with a standardized test, so we closely study their results.
Grade 3 Reading
The Reading Score – 75% at Goal – remains flat from last year’s score 76%. ‘Reader-to-Text Connections’ continues to be an area of need on the CMT but will not be tested as a strand on the Smarter Balance Assessment.
ReadingGeneral
UnderstandingInterpretation
Reader/Text Connections
Content and Structure
Grade 3March 2013 91% 89% 52% 79%
The Grade 3 average DRP score of 51 slightly exceeds the grade-level DRP expectation of 47.
Grade 3 Writing
The Writing Score – 74% at Goal – remains flat from the previous year’s score of 75%.
The average holistic score on the writing sample was 8.5 out of 12. Goal is 8.
The Editing Score - 88% is up from 84% the previous year.
Composing and Revising – 50% continues to be an area needing improvement.
This style of prompt writing will not be assessed on the SBAC. Instead, students will be given multiple sources of text and asked to respond to questions using evidence from the text.
WritingDirect Assessment Holistic Score (12)
Composing and Revising
Editing
Grade 3March 2013 8.5 50 88
Grade 3 MathThe Math Score – 82% at Goal – remains consistent to the previous year’s score of 81%.
They scored between 90 – 100% in 15 of the 18 strands that are tested in Grade 3.
The strongest and weakest strands are listed below. Estimating Solutions to Problems and Mathematical Applications continue to be difficult strands for our students to master.
The promoted 6th grade students showed significant progress in all areas over the course of their CMT test taking years in Orange. Their performance in the Advanced Levels is noteworthy.
Elementary Schools’ DRG B Comparison% of Students At or Above Goal Level
2013Math Reading Writing
Goal DRG / out of 19 Goal DRG /
out of 19 Goal DRG / out of 19
Grade 3 82 9th 75 9th 74 13th
Grade 4 82 11th 81 8th 81 10th
Grade 5 87 13th 82 14th 87 2nd
Grade 6 94 2nd 97 1st 92 2nd
There are 19 elementary districts in Orange’s DRG (Demographic Reference Group). These include towns such as Avon, Cheshire, Fairfield, Granby, Monroe, Simsbury, West Hartford, Trumbull and Woodbridge. Below are our standings within our DRG.
At each grade-level, and in each subject area, our students at Goal should fall in the top ½ of our DRG, as highlighted below.
Woodbridge 93.9% Granby 96.8% Madison 91.9% Newtown 93.0% Avon 94.4% Avon 91.4% Farmington 92.8% Madison 93.9% Cheshire 91.3% Orange 92.4% Cheshire 93.8% Newtown 90.8% Cheshire 92.3% Farmington 93.6% Farmington 90.6% Madison 92.2% Newtown 92.3% Guilford 88.7% Simsbury 91.6% Guilford 92.0% Brookfield 88.3% Granby 91.1% Regional 15 91.9% Granby 88.2% Regional 15 91.1% Woodbridge 91.3% Trumbull 88.0% Glastonbury 89.1% Orange 91.2% Orange 87.2% Trumbull 87.6% South Windsor 88.5% Woodbridge 87.2% Guilford 86.2% Glastonbury 88.2% New Fairfield 86.3% Monroe 85.5% Trumbull 88.2% Fairfield 86.2% Brookfield 83.7% Brookfield 87.6% Regional 15 85.5% Fairfield 83.2% Fairfield 87.3% Monroe 84.4% West Hartford 82.5% Greenwich 86.7% Glastonbury 83.7% Greenwich 82.0% Monroe 85.1% Greenwich 81.8% South Windsor 79.6% West Hartford 84.5% West Hartford 81.1% New Fairfield 79.5% New Fairfield 79.1% South Windsor 81.0% State 69.5% State 74.2% State 67.5%
Elementary Schools’ DRG B Comparison% of Students At the Advanced Level
2013Math Reading Writing
Adv.DRG/
out of 19
Adv. DRG / out of 19
Adv. DRG / out of 19
Grade 3 39 10th 31 16th 27 16th
Grade 4 39 15th 29 10th 28 18th
Grade 5 43 17th 28 18th 39 8th
Grade 6 60 5th 43 7th 44 9th
There are 19 elementary districts in Orange’s DRG (Demographic Reference Group). These include towns such as Avon, Cheshire, Fairfield, Granby, Monroe, Simsbury, West Hartford, Trumbull and Woodbridge. Below are our standings within our DRG.
At each grade-level, and in each subject area, our students at Advanced should fall in the top ½ of our DRG, as highlighted below.
Next Steps:
STANDARDS (CCSS)
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
ASSESSMENTS (SBAC)
DATA-DRIVEN INSTRUCTION
DIFFERENTIATION
TEACHER EVALUATION PLAN
ADMINSTRATOR EVALUATION PLAN
The Orange Elementary School District will continue to adjust its curriculum and instruction to align to the rigors of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS).
In conjunction with the Teacher Evaluation Plan, professional development will be provided to teachers to support them in the planning, implementation and assessment of curriculum aligned to the CCSS with high expectations.
Instructional leaders will increase their knowledge and understanding of the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) to further inform quality instruction.
Teachers will differentiate their instruction to deliver high quality, rigorous lessons that will meet the needs of ALL students.
As a district, we will increase the number of students performing in the ADVANCED bands on standardized testing by providing opportunities for our learners to interact with more rigorous materials and activities with higher expectations.
2013 CMT Data Analysisavailable on the webpage at
www.oess.org
The Orange Elementary School District recognizes that the education of each child is the shared responsibility of every member of the community.
Our goal is to inspire and empower each student to achieve academic excellence, embrace social and individual responsibility, and lead with integrity. We believe all individuals should be valued and treated with respect.