Closing the Achievement Gap

BLOOMFIELD PUBLIC SCHOOLS B Learning and Growing Together

1

Closing the Achievement Gap• 2011 Connecticut Mastery Test Results and Analysis:

Elementary, Intermediate, and Middle School

• 2008 - 2011 Connecticut Assessment Performance Test Results/Analysis for Secondary Schools - Grade 10

• A Comparison Between Bloomfield and the State of Connecticut

• Establishing Annual Targets and Timelines for CMT and CAPT District Wide Achievement

September 2011

Dr. James ThompsonSuperintendent of Schools


2

Today, I will share with you…• A comparison of 3 years of Connecticut Mastery Test data

• Reading (Grades 3-8)• Mathematics (Grades 3-8)

• Sample Matched Cohort Data for At or Above Goal for Reading and Mathematics

• A Comparison of 4 year of Connecticut Assessment Performance Test in Reading and in Math.

• Strengths, Concerns, and Implications/Next Steps for each content area

• The Achievement Gap between Bloomfield and the State in Reading and Mathematics, as evidenced by the:

• Connecticut Mastery Test (CMT)• Connecticut Academic Performance Test (CAPT)

• Establish Annual Targets and Timelines to Close the Achievement Gap

September 2011


• Laurel Elementary (Grades 3-4)• Carmen Arace Intermediate (Grades 5-6)• Carmen Arace Middle (Grades 7-8)

3

2011 CONNECTICUT MASTERY TEST RESULTS AND ANALYSISELEMENTARY, INTERMEDIATE, AND MIDDLE SCHOOL

September 2011


4

2009 - 2011 CMT - Elementary, Intermediate, Middle School Results

Grade Year

Reading

% At/Above Goal

2010-2011 Year-to-Year Change:

% At/Above Goal

% At/Above

Proficient


% At/Above Proficient

32011 39.4 -9.5 66.1 32010 48.9

63.1

2009 36.8 57.1

42011 44.3 -2.6 62.6 0.72010 46.9

61.9

2009 45.3 62.1

52011 29.9 -3.9 49.3 -2.62010 33.8

51.9

2009 47.2 66

62011 65.5 -4.7 85.2 12010 70.2

84.2

2009 43.4 63.8

72011 62.1 8.2 75 22010 53.9

73

2009 50.3 66.7

82011 69.4 9.9 82.1 6.42010 59.5

75.7

2009 46.5 63.2

September 2011


5

2009 - 2011 CMT - Intermediate, Middle School Matched Cohort

READINGGrade of

Matched Cohort Year % At or Above Goal 2009 to 2011 Change :% At/Above Goal

5

(Gr 5) 2011 34.6-1.9(Gr 4) 2010 47.1

(Gr 3) 2009 36.5

6

(Gr 6) 2011 70.826.0(Gr 5) 2010 34.3

(Gr 4) 2009 44.8

7

(Gr 7) 2011 7323.0(Gr 6) 2010 74.3

(Gr 5) 2009 50

8

(Gr 8) 2011 75.620.5(Gr 7) 2010 62.9

(Gr 6) 2009 55.1

September 2011


6

2009 - 2011 CMT – Reading Grades 3 – 8 District Analysis• Strengths

• The overall trend for student achievement At or Above Goal has increased from 2008-2011 for grades 7 and 8.

• The overall trend for student achievement At or Above Proficient has increased from 2008-2011 for all grades except 5.

• Grades 6, 7 and 8 matched cohorts made strong gains in At or Above Goal, with 26.0, 22.0 and 20.5 percentage point gains respectively.

• Concerns

• Grade 5 showed decreases in student achievement for both students at/above goal and at/above proficiency.

• Grades 3 through 6 showed decreases in reading achievement At or Above Goal.

September 2011


7

2009 - 2011 CMT – Reading Grades 3 – 8 District Analysis

Implications/Next Steps

• Analyze daily reading instruction with an emphasis on programming, practices and professional development.

• Develop school-level corrective action plans based on individual school data and monitor implementation of these plans utilizing school-level data teams.

• Identify school-level factors correlated with growth or decline for each grade level and determine which strategies to continue to implement, modify or discontinue.

September 2011


Implications/Next Steps (continued)

• Implement and monitor effective teaching strategies to increase student engagement in English Language Arts and math.

• Monitor student progress by establishing data teams at all schools and grade levels.

• Implement walkthrough protocols for effective classroom environments and monitor follow through.

2009 - 2011 CMT – Reading Grades 3 – 8 District Analysis

September 2011 8


9

2009 - 2011 CMT - Elementary, Intermediate, Middle School Results

Grade Year

Mathematics %

At/Above Goal

2010-2011Year-to-Year Change:

% At/Above Goal

% At/Above

Proficient

2010-2011 Year-to-Year Change: % At/Above Proficient

32011 53.1 10 82.8 7.12010 43.1

75.7

2009 43.9 77.4

42011 49.6 -3.8 74.1 -9.72010 53.4

83.8

2009 47.9 79.6

52011 58.4 1.2 81.8 5.12010 57.2

76.7

2009 49.7 76.2

62011 67.4 -7.4 90.3 -12010 74.8

91.3

2009 49.7 85.6

72011 53.6 6 80 -6.22010 47.6

86.2

2009 48.6 81.1

82011 37.8 -9.9 77.8 -3.42010 47.7

81.2

2009 44.4 73.3September 2011


10

2009 - 2011 CMT - Intermediate, Middle School Matched Cohort

MathematicsGrade of

Matched Cohort Year % At or Above Goal 2009 to 2011 Change: % At/Above Goal

5

(Gr 5) 2011 63.3

9.6(Gr 4) 2010 51

(Gr 3) 2009 44.2

6

(Gr 6) 2011 73.5

10.2(Gr 5) 2010 63.3

(Gr 4) 2009 53.1

7

(Gr 7) 2011 62.3

5.2(Gr 6) 2010 75.4

(Gr 5) 2009 52

8

(Gr 8) 2011 43

-7.0(Gr 7) 2010 51.9

(Gr 6) 2009 57

September 2011


11

2009 - 2011 CMT – MathematicsDistrict Analysis Grades 3 - 8

Strengths

•Three of the four Matched cohorts showed a positive upward trend for At or Above Goal (cohorts from grades 5,6 and 7)

•Grade 3 progress of 10 percentage points for students At or Above Goal, is especially commendable.

Concerns

•Mathematics achievement did not show the desired growth at the At or Above Goal level of achievement in Grades 4 and 8.

•The matched cohort data shows that the 8th grade cohort has had a steady decline at the goal level of achievement for the past three years

September 2011


12



• Analyze Math instruction with an emphasis on programming, practices and professional development.

• Establish target goals for each grade for students At or Above Goal in mathematics.

• Develop school-level intervention plans based on individual school data and monitor implementation of these plans utilizing school-level data teams.

• Identify school-level factors correlated with growth or decline for each grade level and determine which strategies to continue to implement, modify or discontinue.

September 2011


Implications/Next Steps (continued)

• Implement and monitor effective teaching strategies to increase student engagement in math.

• Monitor student progress by establishing data teams at all schools and grade levels.

• Implement walkthrough protocols for effective classroom environments and monitor follow through.


September 2011 13


• Big Picture High School• Bloomfield High School

14

2008 - 2011 CONNECTICUT ASSESSMENT PERFORMANCE TEST RESULTS/ANALYSIS FOR SECONDARY SCHOOLS

GRADE 10

September 2011


15

2008 - 2011 CAPT ResultsREADING

Grade Year % At/Above Goal


% At/Above Goal % At/Above

Proficient2010-2011

Year-to-Year Change: % At/Above Proficient

10

2011 9.8 -3.5 62 -6.52010 13.3 68.5 2009 14.8 62.3 2008 12.8 69.8

September 2011


Concerns• A steady decrease in the percent of students achieving At or Above Goal and At

or Above Proficient in Reading.• A significant decline of 6.5 percentage points at the proficiency level.Implications/Next Steps• Work with English Language Arts (ELA) teachers to identify effective strategies

and interventions to replicate in all classrooms. • Consider setting target goals for students At or Above Goal in Reading and

constantly communicate the need to reach this goal to teachers and principals.• Identify school-level factors associated with the minimal progress for students

At or Above Goal and determine which strategies to continue to implement, modify or discontinue.

• Develop specific strategies for improvement of Grade 10 Reading by further analyzing the data and determining specific areas of skill sets and subsets that need to be addressed.

16September 2011

2008 - 2011 CAPT Secondary Performance Analysis

Reading - Grade 10


17

Implications/Next Steps (cont’d)• Conduct a thorough review of the Grade 10 Literacy curriculum to ensure that it is

aligned with state standards.

• Implement and monitor effective teaching strategies to increase student engagement in English Language Arts

• Monitor student progress by establishing data teams at all schools and grade levels

• Implement walkthrough protocols for effective classroom environments and monitor follow through

• Establish freshman literacy academy to focus on high-impact reading strategies

• Embed high impact literacy strategies in all content areas for students in grades 9 and 10 through disciplinary literacy approach.

2008 - 2011 CAPT Secondary Performance Analysis

Reading - Grade 10

September 2011


1818

2008 - 2011 CAPT Results

MATHEMATICS

Grade Year % At/Above Goal

2010-2011 Year-to-Year Change: %

At/Above Goal % At/Above

Proficient2010-2011

Year-to-Year Change: % At/Above Goal

10

2011 13.1 -5.1 46.6 2.42010 18.2 44.2 2009 10.5 47.5 2008 12.4 53.1

September 2011


19

Strengths

• The percentage of students that reached proficiency from 2010 to 2011 increased by 2.4 percentage points.

Concerns

• There is a lack of progress over a four year period in the percentage of students At or Above Goal and At or Above Proficient in Grade 10 math.

2008- 2011 CAPTSecondary Performance Analysis

Mathematics – Grade 10

September 2011


20

Implications/Next Steps•Conduct an analysis of math instruction in both secondary schools with particular

review of instructional programming and practices as well as the professional development offered to teachers.

•Consider offering specialized math instruction for students experiencing problems as evidenced by test data.

•Consider establishing a district-wide target for Grade 10 math that demonstrates incremental growth for the percentage of students At or Above Goal.

•Develop school-level corrective action plans based on individual school data and monitor implementation of these plans utilizing school-level data teams.

• Identify students who are not only experiencing problems but also those who are close to reaching At or Above Goal and provide specialized instruction for them to help get them to goal.



September 2011





• Implement and monitor effective teaching strategies to increase student engagement in math

• Monitor student progress by establishing data teams at all schools and grade levels

• Implement walkthrough protocols for effective classroom environments and monitor follow through

• Embed high impact literacy strategies in all content areas for students in grades 9 and 10 through disciplinary literacy approach

21September 2011


A Comparison Between Bloomfield and the State of Connecticut

Establishing Annual Targets and Timelines for CMT and CAPT District Wide Achievement

September 2011

22


Overall Percent Reading Proficient or Above: CMT

23

State projected performance is an estimate based on a state average gain of 1.2 points per year To close the achievement gap in 3 years, by 2013-14, BPS growth in grades 3-8 requires:

• 5% annual increase in “at or above proficiency” on the CMT

2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

CMT Reading State Pro-jected

NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN 0.813827266627529

0.812000000000001

0.824000000000001

0.836000000000001

CMT Reading State Ac-tual

0.737532359472507

0.735236799722781

0.7444074728142

0.779510179824871

0.790827266627529

0.8 NaN NaN NaN

CMT Reading Bloomfield Pro-jected


0.752000000000002

0.802 0.852000000000001

CMT Reading Bloomfield Ac-tual

0.636533270852859

0.604282651072125

0.602872173058016

0.630200442967887

0.675555029585801

0.702000000000001

NaN NaN NaN

5.0%15.0%25.0%35.0%45.0%55.0%65.0%75.0%85.0%95.0%

Percent o

f S

tudents

Profi

cie

nt o

r A

bove

September 2011


Overall Percent Reading Goal or Above: CMT

24

State projected performance is an estimate based on a state average gain of 1.4 points per year To reduce the achievement gap by 65% in 3 years BPS growth in grades 3-8 requires:

• 5% annual increase in “At or Above Goal” on the CMT

2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

CMT Read-ing State Pro-jected


0.700000000000001

0.714000000000001

0.728000000000001

CMT Read-ing State Actual

0.617727566141492

0.613427248349106

0.621921238733904

0.65692954954431

0.675716371718528

0.686 NaN NaN NaN

CMT Read-ing Bloomfield Pro-jected


0.569000000000001

0.619000000000002

0.669000000000003

CMT Read-ing Bloomfield Actual

0.442222118088097

0.419013645224173

0.425744346116027

0.44607973421927

0.513646153846154

0.519 NaN NaN NaN

5.0%15.0%25.0%35.0%45.0%55.0%65.0%75.0%85.0%95.0%

Pe

rce

nt

of

Stu

de

nt

Go

al o

r A

bo

ve

September 2011


Overall Percent Math Proficient or Above: CMT

State projected performance is an estimate based on a state average gain of 1.4 points per year.To close the achievement gap in 3 years, by 2013-14, BPS growth in grades 3-8 requires:

• 3% annual increase in “at or above proficiency” on the CMT

25

2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

CMT Math State Pro-jected


0.879000000000002

0.893 0.907

CMT Math State Ac-tual

0.793081994921565

0.811978412683438

0.82234890048779

0.850533336355357

0.864781131557381

0.865000000000002

NaN NaN NaN

CMT Math Bloom-field Pro-jected


0.842000000000001

0.872000000000002

0.902

CMT Math Bloom-field Ac-tual

0.694500931098697

0.713240038872692

0.726815581854043

0.789630718954248

0.820881395348838

0.812000000000001

NaN NaN NaN

5.0%15.0%25.0%35.0%45.0%55.0%65.0%75.0%85.0%95.0%

Pe

rce

nt

of

Stu

de

nts

Pro

ficie

nt

or

Ab

ove

September 2011


Overall Percent Math Goal or Above: CMT

State projected performance is an estimate based on a state average gain of 2.0 points per year To reduce the achievement gap by 40% in 3 years, by 2013-14, BPS growth in grades 3-8 requires:

• 4% annual increase in “At or Above Goal” on the CMT26

2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

CMT Math State Pro-jected


0.704000000000001

0.724000000000001

0.744000000000002

CMT Math State Ac-tual

0.582806388547035

0.621084607338904

0.629660978438758

0.659711736028982

0.682932650743263

0.684 NaN NaN NaN

CMT Math Bloomfield Pro-jected


0.575000000000001

0.615000000000002

0.655000000000002

CMT Math Bloomfield Ac-tual

0.377151769087524

0.42665986394558

0.449824457593689

0.473796296296296

0.532740697674423

0.535 NaN NaN NaN

5.0%15.0%25.0%35.0%45.0%55.0%65.0%75.0%85.0%95.0%

Percen

t o

f S

tu

den

ts

Go

al

or A

bo

ve

September 2011


Overall Percent Reading Proficient or Above : CAPT

27

State projected performance is an estimate based on a state average gain of .5 point per year To reduce the achievement gap by 68% in 3 years, by 2013-14, BPS growth in grade 10 requires:

• 5% annual increase in “At or Above Proficient” on the CAPT

2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

CAPT Read-ing State Pro-jected

NaN NaN NaN NaN 0.829000000000001

0.824 0.829000000000001

0.834000000000001

CAPT Read-ing State Actual

0.797 0.827000000000001

0.818 0.829000000000001

0.819 NaN NaN NaN

CAPT Read-ing Bloomfield Pro-jected

NaN NaN NaN NaN 0.695000000000001

0.670000000000003

0.720000000000001

0.770000000000002

CAPT Read-ing Bloomfield Actual

0.497000000000001

0.698 0.623000000000002

0.685 0.620000000000002

NaN NaN NaN

5.0%15.0%25.0%35.0%45.0%55.0%65.0%75.0%85.0%95.0%

Perc

ent

of

Stu

dents

Pro

ficie

nt

or

Above

September 2011


Overall Percent Reading Goal or Above: CAPT

28

State projected performance is an estimate based on a state average gain of .5 point per year To reduce the achievement gap by 47% in 3 years, by 2013-14, BPS growth in grade 10 requires:

• 6% annual increase in “At or Above Goal” on the CAPT

2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

CAPT Reading State Projected NaN NaN NaN NaN 0.469 0.453 0.458 0.463

CAPT Reading State Actual 0.455 0.455 0.475 0.459 0.448 NaN NaN NaN

CAPT Reading Bloomfield Pro-jected

NaN NaN NaN NaN 0.143 0.158000000000001

0.218 0.278

CAPT Reading Bloomfield Ac-tual

0.144 0.128 0.148 0.133 0.0980000000000002

NaN NaN NaN

5.0%

15.0%

25.0%

35.0%

45.0%

55.0%

65.0%

75.0%

85.0%

95.0%

Perc

ent

of

Stu

dents

Goal a

nd A

bove

September 2011


Overall Percent Math Proficient or Above: CAPT

State projected performance is an estimate based on a state average gain of 1 point per year To reduce the achievement gap by 40% in 3 years, by 2013-14, BPS growth in grade 10 requires:

• 5% annual increase in “at or above proficiency” on the CAPT

29

2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

CAPT Math State Projected

NaN NaN NaN NaN 0.798 0.813000000000001

0.823000000000001

0.833000000000001

CAPT Math State Actual

0.773000000000002

0.797 0.784 0.788 0.803 NaN NaN NaN

CAPT Math Bloomfield Pro-jected

NaN NaN NaN NaN 0.452 0.506 0.556 0.606000000000001

CAPT Math Bloomfield Ac-tual

0.354 0.531 0.475 0.442 0.456 NaN NaN NaN

5.0%

15.0%

25.0%

35.0%

45.0%

55.0%

65.0%

75.0%

85.0%

95.0%Perc

ent

of

Stu

dents

Pro

ficie

nt

or

Above

September 2011


Overall Percent Math Goal or Above: CAPT

State projected performance is an estimate based on a state average gain of 1.1 point per year To reduce the achievement gap by 36% in 3 years, by 2013-14, BPS growth in grade 10 requires:• 6% annual increase in “At or Above Goal” on the CAPT

30

2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

CAPT Math State Projected NaN NaN NaN NaN 0.499000000000001

0.507 0.518 0.529

CAPT Math State Actual 0.453 0.502 0.48 0.489 0.496000000000001

NaN NaN NaN

CAPT Math Bloomfield Pro-jected

NaN NaN NaN NaN 0.192 0.191 0.251 0.311000000000001

CAPT Math Bloomfield Actual 0.066 0.124 0.105 0.182 0.131 NaN NaN NaN

5.0%

15.0%

25.0%

35.0%

45.0%

55.0%

65.0%

75.0%

85.0%

95.0%Perc

ent

of

Stu

dents

G

oal o

r A

bove

September 2011


To Summarize…

31

Bloomfield Public Schools can eliminate the Achievement Gap in 2 Areas within 3 years:

• Reading Proficient or Above on the CMT• Math Proficient or Above on the CMT

Bloomfield Public Schools will close the Achievement Gap in Reading and Math, in both achievement levels, for the CMT and the CAPT within 8 years if the CMT and CAPT were to remain as the state assessment tools.

September 2011


Paying attention to data improves student achievement.

September 2011 32

Closing the Achievement Gap

Documents

cmt reading grades

reading achievement

mathematics grades

state of connecticut

students atabove goal

cmt intermediate

student achievement

carmen arace middle