R R h h o o d d e e I I s s l l a a n n d d ’ ’ s s N N E E C C A A P P M M a a t t h h , , R R e e a a d d i i n n g g , , a a n n d d W W r r i i t t i i n n g g R R e e s s u u l l t t s s f f o o r r G G r r a a d d e e s s 3 3 - - 8 8 & & 1 1 1 1 October 2012 Test Administration Supplemental Data: Class of 2012 High School Graduation Rates Deborah A. Gist, Commissioner Rhode Island Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 255 Westminster Street Providence, RI 02903 (401) 222-4600 [v.02.11.13]
63
Embed
RRhhooddee IIssllaanndd’’ss NNEECCAAPP MMaatthh,, … · 2013. 3. 8. · P a g e | 1 RRhhooddee IIssllaanndd’’ss NNEECCAAPP MMaatthh,, RReeaaddiinngg,, aanndd WWrriittiinngg
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.
Supplemental Data: Class of 2012 High School Graduation Rates
Deborah A. Gist, Commissioner Rhode Island Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 255 Westminster Street Providence, RI 02903 (401) 222-4600
[v.02.11.13]
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 1
NOTE 1: The New England Common Assessment Program (NECAP) is the result of collaboration among Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont to build a set of tests for grades 3 through 8 and 11 to meet the requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). The purposes of the NECAP tests are as follows: (1) provide data on student achievement in reading/language arts and mathematics to meet the requirements of NCLB; (2) provide information to support program evaluation and improvement; and (3) provide information regarding student and school performance to both parents and the public. The tests are constructed to meet rigorous technical criteria, to include universal design elements and accommodations to allow all students access to test content, and to gather reliable student demographic information for accurate reporting. It is important to note that NECAP results are provided to districts, schools, and families for use as one piece of evidence about progress and learning that occurred on the prior year’s grade-level expectations (GLEs) of elementary and middle schools and the grade-span expectations (GSEs) of high schools.
NOTE 2: The NECAP tests in reading, mathematics, and writing are administered each fall and assess student achievement based on the prior year’s GLEs/GSEs. For example, the NECAP Grade 5 tests assess student performance on the Grade 4 GLEs. NECAP school- and district-level Mathematics, Reading, and Writing reports are available in two ways: “testing-year” and “teaching-year.” Testing-year results are those of the school and district in which students took their NECAP tests in the fall of the current school year whereas teaching-year results are those of the school and district in which students received instruction during the prior school year. Throughout this report, all NECAP results data are reported according to testing-year as opposed to teaching-year. Therefore it is important to note that results in this report are reflective of student performance and not necessarily school or district performance. This is an important distinction for middle schools and charter schools in particular as incoming students received instruction on the GLEs being assessed in another school.
NOTE 3: Throughout this report, statistical significance is reported to indicate whether reported differences (e.g., increases or decreases in the percentage of students achieving proficiency or higher) in this year’s NECAP results are significantly different from results reported in previous years. For each table presented in this report, please note the key to determine the meaning of color-coded cells. In general, if a cell is colored green, then the reported difference indicates that the percentage of students achieving proficiency or higher, for example, is statistically significantly higher than previous results whereas if the cell is red, then the reported difference indicates that the percentage of students achieving proficiency or higher is statistically significantly lower than previous results. All other reported differences are thus not considered statistically significant, regardless of how large or small they appear to be. Please see Appendix B for a full discussion on how statistical significance was calculated and how to interpret statistical significance.
NOTE 4: Throughout this report, with the exception of Standard Errors (SE) and n sizes (e.g. number of students tested), all numbers have been rounded to the nearest whole number.
NOTE 5: Throughout this report, the percentage of students scoring Proficient or higher refers to the cumulative percentage of students scoring at the Proficient and Proficient with Distinction levels of achievement. See Appendix A for descriptions of each of the levels.
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 2
Student Group Performance .............................................................................................................................. 11
RIDE Performance Measures and Goals ............................................................................................................. 14
Section 2: District/LEA Results
Percent of Students at/above Proficient in Reading and Mathematics ............................................................. 15
Student Group Performance .............................................................................................................................. 17
Section 3: School Results
Percent of Students at/above Proficient in Reading and Mathematics ............................................................. 22
State-Level Cohort Reading and Mathematics Performance: Class of 2014 vs. Class of 2013 ........................... 37
State-Level Class of 2014 Cohort Reading and Mathematics Performance: Grade 6 to Grade 11 ................... 41
District/LEA-Level Cohort Reading and Mathematics Performance: Grade 6 to Grade 11 .............................. 42
Grade 11 Students “Substantially Below Proficient” in Reading: 2011-2012 .................................................... 44
Grade 11 Students “Substantially Below Proficient” in Mathematics: 2011-2012 ............................................ 45
Grade 11 Students “Substantially Below Proficient” in Reading and Mathematics: 2011-2012 ....................... 46
Appendices
Appendix A. Glossary of Terms .......................................................................................................................... 48
Appendix B. Calculating Standard Error (SE) ...................................................................................................... 51
Appendix C. Split-Level Schools for Reporting Purposes ................................................................................... 52
Appendix D. Grade 8 Students “Substantially Below Proficient” in Reading: 2011-2012 .................................. 53
Appendix E. Grade 8 Students “Substantially Below Proficient” in Mathematics: 2011-2012 .......................... 54
Appendix F. Grade 8 Students “Substantially Below Proficient” in Reading and Math: 2011-2012 .................. 55
Appendix G. District-Level Graduation Rates..................................................................................................... 56
Appendix H. School-Level Graduation Rates ..................................................................................................... 58
Appendix I. NECAP Writing Assessment Design................................................................................................. 60
Appendix J. Class of 2014 State Assessment Process ........................................................................................ 61
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 3
EEXXEECCUUTTIIVVEE SSUUMMMMAARRYY The eighth1 administration of the New England Common Assessment Program (NECAP) tests took place in October, 2012. A total of 73,817 Rhode Island public school students in grades three through eight and eleven participated in NECAP Reading, Writing, and Mathematics tests.2
SSTTAATTEE--LLEEVVEELL RREESSUULLTTSS
Overall Achievement
Student achievement statewide improved on two of the grade-level Reading tests and two of the grade-level Mathematics tests. Compared to last year’s results, the percentage of students scoring Proficient or higher in Reading this year increased at grades five and eleven but decreased in grade three. For all other grades, Reading scores were not significantly different from last year. In Mathematics, the percentage of students scoring Proficient or higher increased in grades seven and eleven but remained constant in all other grades.
Trends in Achievement 3
This year Rhode Island students in eleventh grade fared well compared to their peers in New Hampshire and Vermont,4 improving two percentage points (from 77% to 79%) in Reading proficiency and four percentage points (from 30% to 34%) in Mathematics proficiency.5
By comparison, New Hampshire’s Reading scores remained constant (77%) and Mathematics scores went up two points (from 36% to 38%) while Vermont’s Reading scores improved by two percentage points in both Reading and Mathematics (72% to 74% and 36% to 38%, respectively). It bears noting that this year’s eleventh grade Reading test results marks only the second time since 2007 that Rhode Island’s students outperformed their peers in both New Hampshire and Vermont on this test. For students in third grade through eighth grade across all NECAP states, results either remained constant or went down compared to last year’s Reading and Mathematics results.6
Because measures of student achievement often change incrementally over short periods of time, RIDE presents most state-, district/LEA, and school-level results in this report as a series of five-year views in order to reveal achievement trends that have occurred over multiple years. In
1 The eighth administration of the NECAP tests for students in Grades 3 through 8 and the sixth administration for students in
Grade 11 took place this past fall, October 1-23, 2012. 2 All seven tested grades (3-8 and 11) administer the NECAP Reading and Mathematics tests while Grades 5, 8, and 11 also
administer the NECAP Writing test. 3 Multiple data points are needed for trend analysis. A single year’s test results provide limited information about a school or
district. As with any evaluation, test results are most meaningful when compared with other indicators and when examined over several years for long-term trends in student performance. This is especially true in small schools where changes in student cohorts from year to year can have a noticeable influence on test results. 4 Maine only administers NECAP tests to students in Grades 3 through 8 and not to students in Grade 11.
5 See Tables 8 and 9 on page 10.
6 Note that for the state-by-state comparisons, results for Grades 3 through 8 are aggregated to produce a single number for
comparison purposes.
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 4
addition, RIDE presents last year’s results to illustrate a one-year view. In general, over the five-year period from 2008 to 2012, a statistically significant7 increase indicates improvement that has been sustained. Conversely, a statistically significant decrease indicates a sustained decline in achievement. For most grade levels there were notable increases in achievement in Reading and Mathematics over the past five years.8 The bar graph below provides a quick overview of the grades with significant improvements.
The five-year increases in student achievement shown above include:
In READING:
Fifth grade increased from 68 to 72 percent Proficient or higher.
Sixth grade increased from 68 to 73 percent Proficient or higher.
Eighth grade increased from 65 to 77 percent Proficient or higher.
Eleventh grade increased from 69 to 79 percent Proficient or higher.
In MATHEMATICS:
Sixth grade increased from 55 to 62 percent Proficient or higher.
Seventh grade increased from 52 to 59 percent Proficient or higher.
Eighth grade increased from 53 to 58 percent Proficient or higher.
Eleventh grade increased from 27 to 34 percent Proficient or higher. It bears noting that third and fourth grade students’ performance on the 2012 Reading and Mathematics tests was not significantly different than on the 2008 NECAP tests. Similarly,
7 See Appendix B on page 51 for details.
8 See Tables 1 and 2 on page 7.
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
Gr. 5 Reading
Gr. 6 Reading
Gr. 6 Math
Gr. 7 Math
Gr. 8 Reading
Gr. 8 Math
Gr. 11 Reading
Gr. 11 Math
4% 5%
7% 7%
12%
5%
9%
7%
Five-Year Increases in Student Achievement: 2008 to 2012
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 5
seventh grade student achievement on the Reading test and fifth grade student achievement on the Mathematics test were not statistically significantly different than in 2008.9 For most student groups there were notable achievement gains in Reading and Mathematics over the past five years.10 In Reading, Black, Hispanic, and White students improved six, six, and five percentage points respectively since 2008. Similar improvements were posted by LEP and Low-Income students with four and seven percentage point gains respectively. LEP-Monitored students had the largest gains in Reading, improving 18 percentage points from 2008 to 2012. In Mathematics, Black, Hispanic, and White students improved five, six, and six percentage points respectively and Low-Income students had a six percentage point gain. LEP-Monitored students had the largest gains in Mathematics as well with a 17 percentage point gain from 2008 to 2012. Students with IEPs were the only group to post a significant decrease, with a four percentage point drop in Mathematics performance compared to results five years ago.
Achievement Gaps 11, 12
Achievement gaps between student with IEPs and students without IEPs continue a general widening trend at all grade levels in Reading and Mathematics. The widest gaps are most often found at sixth and seventh grades for Reading and at sixth and eighth grades for Mathematics. The achievement gaps in Reading and Mathematics between LEP and Non-LEP students and between Low-Income and Non-Low-Income students have generally narrowed for students in third and fourth grades since 2005 while the gaps have generally widened in all other grades. The widest gaps for both of these student groups has consistently been found at eleventh grade in Reading, where this year the gaps have widened to 71 percentage points each.
Compared to last year’s results, there was very little change at the district/LEA-level this year in terms of student achievement in Reading or Mathematics.13 Only one of Rhode Island’s 54 districts/LEAs posted a significant gain in Reading and one posted a significant drop. The same is true for Mathematics. For all other districts/LEAs, scores in both Reading and Mathematics were essentially the same as last year. Over the five-year period from 2008 to 2012, however there were far more districts/LEAs that posted gains in Reading and Mathematics. In terms of how LEP students, Low-Income students, and students with IEPs performed on the Reading and Mathematics tests this year, results were mixed at the district/LEA level. LEP
9 See Tables 4 and 5 on page 8.
10 See Table 11 on page 11 and Table 12 on page 12.
11 An achievement gap is a difference in what distinct groups of students know and can do in important subjects
such as reading or math. One way we find achievement gaps is by comparing test scores for groups of students. One way we describe gaps is by subtracting the average of a lower scoring group from the average of a higher scoring group. 12
See Tables 13 and 14 on page 13. 13
See Table 16 on page 15.
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 6
students fared best in both Reading and Mathematics compared to last year with more districts/LEAs posting gains. While Low-Income students and students with IEPs also posted gains in Reading and Mathematics at the district/LEA level, there were lower percentages of districts/LEAs that did so.
SSCCHHOOOOLL--LLEEVVEELL RREESSUULLTTSS14
Results at the school level mirrored those of district/LEA-level in that for the vast majority, Reading and Mathematics results were not significantly different than last year’s. A total of five schools posted significant increases in the percentage of students achieving proficiency or above in Reading while six posted significant decreases. For Mathematics, nine schools posted significant gains while three posted losses. Over the five-year period from 2008 to 2012, there were a large number of schools that posted gains in Reading and Mathematics. In Reading, 43 schools made gains while only three schools had lower percentages. In Mathematics, 50 schools had significantly higher percentages while five had significantly lower percentages.
CCLLAASSSS OOFF 22001144 RREESSUULLTTSS
At the high school level, where NECAP performance on the Reading and Mathematics tests are tied to graduation requirements for the Class of 2014, the percentage of students in this cohort scoring Partially Proficient or higher in Reading this year has increased from 86 percent as sixth graders back in 2007 to 92 percent as eleventh graders in 2012.15 In Mathematics, however, the percentage has decreased from 74 percent in 2007 to 60 percent in 2012. Starting next school year (2013-2014), students must be Partially Proficient (Level 2) or above on both tests as the first indicator of readiness to receive a high school diploma. Comparing this year’s graduating class (Class of 2013) with next year’s (Class of 2014), the percentage of students meeting graduation requirements for both Reading and Mathematics has increased from 56% to 60%.16 At the district level, the percentage of students in the Class of 2014 cohort who achieved partial proficiency or higher in Reading since 2007 has increased significantly in all but four districts while the percentage has decreased significantly in all but eleven districts in Mathematics17 over the same time period.18 Only three districts significantly decreased the percentage of students scoring in the substantially below proficient range in Reading and Mathematics compared to last year.19
14
See Table 20 on page 22. 15
See Table 22 on page 41. 16
See Figures 1-5 on pages 37-40. 17
See Tables 23 on page 42 and Table 24 on page 43. 18
Note that only those districts in which students were enrolled in-district for grades 6, 7, 8, and 11 were included in these calculations. This necessarily excluded all state schools and charter schools. 19
See Tables 25, 26, and 27 on pages 44-46.
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 7
Key (see Appendix A on page 48 for NECAP performance level descriptors) SBP = Substantially Below Proficient PP = Partially Proficient P = Proficient PwD = Proficient with Distinction SE = Standard Error (see Appendix B on page 51) = Statistically significant decrease in percent of students proficient or above from 2008-2012 or 2011-2012 NECAP results = Statistically significant increase in percent of students proficient or above from 2008-2012 or 2011-2012 NECAP results = No statistically significant difference between 2008-2012 or 2011-2012 NECAP results
20 Due to rounding, “Total % Proficient” data may not equal the sum of “%P” and “%PwD” and Difference columns figures may not equal differences between “Total % Prof.” columns figures.
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 8
Table 3. Statewide 2012 NECAP WRITING Results by Achievement Level.21
% SBP % PP % P % PwD Total % Proficient
RH O D E I S L A N D 8 34 46 12 58
Grade 5 11 30 43 16 59
Grade 8 8 26 49 16 65
Grade 11 6 44 46 4 50 Key (see Appendix A on page 48 for NECAP performance level descriptors)
SBP = Substantially Below Proficient PP = Partially Proficient P = Proficient PwD = Proficient with Distinction
Table 4. NECAP READING: Percent of Students Proficient or Above from 2005 to 2012.
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Grade 3 60 65 68 70 72 71 72 70
Grade 4 60 63 64 68 67 68 71 69
Grade 5 60 65 66 68 72 73 68 72
Grade 6 58 64 62 68 68 71 73 73
Grade 7 56 59 67 71 70 65 71 71
Grade 8 55 59 61 65 70 74 77 77
Grade 9 - - - - - - - -
Grade 10 - - - - - - - -
Grade 11 - - 61 69 73 76 77 79
Table 5. NECAP MATHEMATICS: Percent of Students Proficient or Above from 2005 to 2012.
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Grade 3 51 56 60 60 61 61 60 59
Grade 4 52 54 54 63 62 63 65 64
Grade 5 52 57 57 61 61 62 63 62
Grade 6 49 54 54 55 59 60 63 62
Grade 7 47 51 49 52 54 54 56 59
Grade 8 48 48 48 53 54 54 58 58
Grade 9 - - - - - - - -
Grade 10 - - - - - - - -
Grade 11 - - 22 27 27 33 30 34
21
Due to rounding, “Total % Proficient” data may not equal the sum of “%P” and “%PwD”
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 9
Table 6. Percent of Students Scoring Substantially Below Proficient on the NECAP READING Test: 2005 to 2012.
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Grade 3 16 15 14 13 11 11 11 12
Grade 4 17 13 15 12 14 11 12 12
Grade 5 16 14 11 11 10 9 12 10
Grade 6 15 13 14 11 11 9 9 10
Grade 7 17 13 12 9 9 12 10 11
Grade 8 17 16 15 12 8 7 7 7
Grade 9 - - - - - - - -
Grade 10 - - - - - - - -
Grade 11 - - 14 11 9 8 8 8
Table 7. Percent of Students Scoring Substantially Below Proficient on the NECAP MATHEMATICS
Test: 2005 to 2012.
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Grade 3 25 20 19 19 19 17 20 20
Grade 4 25 22 21 17 19 17 18 17
Grade 5 25 21 25 23 23 22 21 21
Grade 6 28 25 26 25 23 22 21 22
Grade 7 31 28 27 28 25 26 25 23
Grade 8 32 33 27 25 25 24 22 24
Grade 9 - - - - - - - -
Grade 10 - - - - - - - -
Grade 11 - - 51 45 45 38 44 40
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 10
Table 8. NECAP READING: Percent of Students At/Above “Proficient” by NECAP State.22
Testing Year READING Grades 3-8 and (11)
Rhode Island Vermont New Hampshire Maine
2005 59 (-) 67 (-) 67 (-) -
2006 62 (-) 68 (-) 71 (-) -
2007 65 (62) 70 (68) 73 (67) -
2008 68 (69) 71 (72) 75 (72) -
2009 70 (73) 74 (69) 77 (73) 70 (n/a)
2010 70 (76) 73 (72) 77 (74) 70 (n/a)
2011 72 (77) 74 (72) 79 (77) 72 (n/a)
2012 72 (79) 73 (74) 79 (77) 71 (n/a)
Note: Numbers in parentheses are for Grade 11 results only. Numbers not in parentheses are the averaged results for grades 3 through 8 combined.
Table 9. NECAP MATHEMATICS: Percent of Students At/Above “Proficient” by NECAP State.23
Testing Year MATHEMATICS Grades 3-8 and (11)
Rhode Island Vermont New Hampshire Maine
2005 50 (-) 63 (-) 62 (-) -
2006 53 (-) 64 (-) 65 (-) -
2007 54 (22) 63 (30) 67 (28) -
2008 57 (27) 65 (35) 69 (32) -
2009 58 (27) 66 (35) 71 (33) 62 (n/a)
2010 59 (33) 65 (38) 71 (36) 61 (n/a)
2011 61 (30) 65 (36) 73 (36) 63 (n/a)
2012 61 (34) 65 (38) 73 (38) 62 (n/a)
Note: Numbers in parentheses are for Grade 11 results only. Numbers not in parentheses are the averaged results for grades 3 through 8 combined.
Table 10. NECAP WRITING: Percent of Students At/Above “Proficient” by NECAP State.24, 25
Testing Year WRIT ING Grades 5, 8, and (11)
Rhode Island Vermont New Hampshire Maine
2012 62 (50) 59 (47) 63 (41) 52 (n/a)
Note: Numbers in parentheses are for Grade 11 results only. Numbers not in parentheses are the averaged results for grades 5 and 8 combined.
22 Maine does not administer the NECAP Reading assessment at the high school level. 23 Maine does not administer the NECAP Mathematics assessment at the high school level. 24 Maine does not administer the NECAP Writing assessment at the high school level. 25 See Appendix I on page 60.
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 11
Table 11. Statewide Student Group Performance on the NECAP READING Test: 2008, 2011, 2012.
Key (see Appendix A on page 48 for NECAP performance level descriptors) SBP = Substantially Below Proficient PP = Partially Proficient P = Proficient PwD = Proficient with Distinction SE = Standard Error (see Appendix B on page 51) = Statistically significant decrease in percent of students proficient or above from 2008-2012 or 2011-2012 NECAP results = Statistically significant increase in percent of students proficient or above from 2008-2012 or 2011-2012 NECAP results = No statistically significant difference between 2008-2012 or 2011-2012 NECAP results
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 12
Table 12. Statewide Student Group Performance on the NECAP MATHEMATICS Test: 2008, 2011, 2012.
Key (see Appendix A on page 48 for NECAP performance level descriptors) SBP = Substantially Below Proficient PP = Partially Proficient P = Proficient PwD = Proficient with Distinction SE = Standard Error (see Appendix B on page 51) = Statistically significant decrease in percent of students proficient or above from 2008-2012 or 2011-2012 NECAP results = Statistically significant increase in percent of students proficient or above from 2008-2012 or 2011-2012 NECAP results = No statistically significant difference between 2008-2012 or 2011-2012 NECAP results
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 13
Table 13. Student Group Achievement Gaps26 by Grade Level on the NECAP READING Test: 2005 to 2012.27
Grade IEP : NON-IEP GAP LEP : NON-LEP GA P LOW-INCOME
An achievement gap is a difference in what distinct groups of students know and can do in important subjects such as reading or math. One way we find achievement gaps is by comparing test scores for groups of students. One way we describe gaps is by subtracting the average of a lower scoring group from the average of a higher scoring group. 27
NECAP Reading tests were not administered in grade 11 until 2007. 28
Eligibility for free or reduced price meal benefits through the National School Lunch Program is the most commonly used indicator of economic disadvantage. 29
NECAP Mathematics tests were not administered in grade 11 until 2007.
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 14
Table 15. Statewide Progress toward Attainment of RIDE Performance Measures and Goals.
R H O D E I S L A N D ’ S A N N U A L P E R F O R M A N C E M E A S U R E S 2011 Goal
2011
Actual 2012 Goal
2012 Actual
Future Goals
2013 2014
Students entering the 4th grade will be proficient in reading on NECAP 75% 70.5% 81% 69.2 86% 90%
The gap between white and black students will be cut in half 24 22.5 20 25.7 16 13.5
The gap between white and Hispanic students will be cut in half 23 29.5 19 29.3 16 14
The gap between non-economically disadvantaged students and economically disadvantaged students will be cut in half
24 26.7 20 28.5 17 14.5
The gap between students without IEPs and those with IEPs will be cut in half 42 49.6 35 50.5 29 25
Students entering the 4th grade will be proficient in mathematics on NECAP 70% 64.8% 77% 64.5 84% 90%
The gap between white and black students will be cut in half 27 31.7 23 31.0 19 16
The gap between white and Hispanic students will be cut in half 27 30.4 23 30.2 19 16
The gap between non-economically disadvantaged students and economically disadvantaged students will be cut in half
25 28.8 21 29.6 18 15
The gap between students without IEPs and those with IEPs will be cut in half 36 45.0 30 48.4 25 22
Students entering the 8th grade will be proficient in reading on NECAP 77% 77.1% 82% 77.2 87% 90%
The gap between white and black students will be cut in half 23 23.9 19 20.7 16 14
The gap between white and Hispanic students will be cut in half 26 27.4 22 26.2 18 15.5
The gap between non-economically disadvantaged students and economically disadvantaged students will be cut in half
24 23.1 20 23.5 17 14.5
The gap between students without IEPs and those with IEPs will be cut in half 42 50.2 35 49.4 29 25
Students entering the 8th grade will be proficient in mathematics on NECAP 61% 58.3% 66% 58.1 71% 75%
The gap between white and black students will be cut in half 29 30.9 24 30.6 20 17
The gap between white and Hispanic students will be cut in half 28 33.5 23 33.0 19 16.5
The gap between non-economically disadvantaged students and economically disadvantaged students will be cut in half
28 30.8 23 32.7 19 16.5
The gap between students without IEPs and those with IEPs will be cut in half 39 50.9 33 51.0 28 23.5
Students entering the 11th grade will be proficient in reading on NECAP 80% 76.6% 83% 78.6 86% 90%
The gap between white and black students will be cut in half 16 27.8 14 26.9 12 9.5
The gap between white and Hispanic students will be cut in half 15 25.7 13 27.1 11 9
The gap between non-economically disadvantaged students and economically disadvantaged students will be cut in half
16 21.9 14 21.3 12 8.5
The gap between students without IEPs and those with IEPs will be cut in half 41 45.7 35 47.1 30 24.5
Students entering the 11th grade will be proficient in mathematics on NECAP 40% 29.9% 50% 34.0 60% 75%
The gap between white and black students will be cut in half 24 28.3 20 28.3 16 13.5
The gap between white and Hispanic students will be cut in half 21 26.5 18 29.2 15 12.5
The gap between non-economically disadvantaged students and economically disadvantaged students will be cut in half
19 24.9 17 26.6 14 11.5
The gap between students without IEPs and those with IEPs will be cut in half 23 30.5 19 34.0 16 14
85% of students who first entered 9th grade 4 years prior will graduate from HS 77% 77.2% 80% 77.1 83% 85%
77% of students who graduate from high school will enroll in an institution of higher education (IHE) within 16 months of receiving a diploma
73% 63.5 75% 62.8 76% 77%
70% of high school students who enroll in an institution of higher education (IHE) within 16 months of graduation will complete at least 1 year's worth of credit within 2 years of enrollment in the IHE
63% 76.2 65% 75.7 68% 70%
Key
= Performance Measure/Goal was not met. = Performance Measure/Goal was not met but improvement shown compared to previous year. = Performance Measure/Goal was nearly met (within ±2 percentage points).
= Performance Measure/Goal was met and/or exceeded.
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 15
DDIISSTTRRIICCTT//LLEEAA RREESSUULLTTSS
Table 16. Percent of Students At/Above Proficient in READING and MATH (all grades combined): 2008, 2011, 2012. 30
STATE 68 .17 73 .16 73 .16 4 0 53 .18 56 .18 57 .18 4 1 Key SE = Standard Error (see Appendix B on page 51) = Statistically significant decrease in percent of students proficient or above from 2008-2012 results or from 2011-2012 NECAP results = Statistically significant increase in percent of students proficient or above from 2008-2012 results or from 2011-2012 NECAP results = No statistically significant change between 2008-2012 results or from 2011-2012 NECAP results Blank = n < 10 and/or % < 1% or >99% (see Appendix A on page 49 for “Minimum Cell Size” Reporting Policy) n/a = District/LEA not open, results not available.
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 17
Table 17. Percent of Students At/Above “Proficient” in WRITING (grade levels combined for each district).31
District/LEA G R A D E 5 G R A D E 8 G R A D E 1 1
Dist. % P+PwD
SE State
% P+PwD Diff.
Dist. % P+PwD
SE State
% P+PwD Diff.
Dist. % P+PwD
SE State
% P+PwD Diff.
Barrington 84 2.1 59 25 80 2.5 65 15 63 2.9 50 13
Beacon Charter School n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 83 5.1 50 34
SE = Standard error (see Appendix B) = Statistically significant negative difference between district % Proficient and state % Proficient (district performed lower than state average) = Statistically significant positive difference between district % Proficient and state % Proficient (district performed higher than state average) = No statistically significant difference between district % Proficient and state % Proficient * = See Appendix C on page 52
31 See Appendix I on page 60.
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 18
Table 18. Performance by Special Populations in RE A D ING : 2011 to 2012. 32
District/LEA LEP STU DENT S LOW-INCOME STU DENT S STU DE NT S WIT H AN IEP DISTRICT PERFORMANCE REFERENCE
Due to rounding, data in “Difference” columns may not equal the difference between “%P+PwD” for each year. 33
“District Performance Reference” represents each district’s average of the percentage of “non-LEP,” “non-Low Income,” and “non-IEP” students who achieved Proficiency or above on the NECAP Reading test. Due to small n’s of “non-LEP,” “non-Low Income,” and “non-IEP” students at the RI School for the Deaf and DCYF, their respective District Performance References are derived from the Providence Public Schools, which is the district in both schools are located.
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 19
District/LEA LEP STU DENT S LOW-INCOME STU DENT S STU DE NT S WIT H AN IEP DISTRICT PERFORMANCE REFERENCE
Key n = Number of students tested P+Pwd = Proficient + Proficient with Distinction. This value represents the total percentage of students who achieved Proficiency or above n/a = Student group not enrolled blank = n < 10 and/or % < 1% or >99% (see Appendix A on page 48 for “Minimum Cell Size” Reporting Policy)
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 20
Table 19. Performance by Special Populations in MATHE MATIC S: 2011 to 2012.34
District/LEA LEP STU DENT S LOW-INCOME STU DENT S STU DE NT S WIT H AN IEP DISTRICT PERFORMANCE REFERENCE
Due to rounding, data in “Difference” columns may not equal the difference between “%P+PwD” for each year. 35
“District Performance Reference” represents each district’s average of the percentage of “non-LEP,” “non-Low Income,” and “non-IEP” students who achieved Proficiency or above on the NECAP Mathematics test. Due to small n’s of “non-LEP,” “non-Low Income,” and “non-IEP” students at the RI School for the Deaf and DCYF, their respective District Performance References are derived from the Providence Public Schools, which is the district in both schools are located.
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 21
District/LEA LEP STU DENT S LOW-INCOME STU DENT S STU DE NT S WIT H AN IEP DISTRICT PERFORMANCE REFERENCE
Key n = Number of students tested P+Pwd = Proficient + Proficient with Distinction. This value represents the total percentage of students who achieved Proficiency or above n/a = Student group not enrolled blank = n < 10 and/or % < 1% or >99% (see Appendix A on page 48 for “Minimum Cell Size” Reporting Policy)
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 22
SS CC HH OO OO LL -- LL EE VV EE LL RR EE SS UU LL TT SS
Table 20. Percent of Students At/Above “Proficient” in RE A D ING and MA TH E MA T IC S . 36
District/LEA School R E A D I N G M A T H E M A T I C S
Woonsocket HS 50 2.56 65 2.53 69 2.48 20 4 16 1.85 16 1.93 21 2.20 6 5 Key = Statistically significant decrease in percent of students proficient or above from 2008-2012 results or from 2011-2012 NECAP results = Statistically significant increase in percent of students proficient or above from 2008-2012 results or from 2011-2012 NECAP results = No statistically significant change between 2008-2012 results or from 2011-2012 NECAP results * = See Appendix C on page 52
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 31
Table 21. Percent of Students At/Above “Proficient” in WRIT IN G . 37
SE = Standard error (see Appendix B on page 48) = Statistically significant negative difference between school % Proficient and state % Proficient (school performed lower than state
average) = Statistically significant positive difference between school % Proficient and state % Proficient (school performed higher than state
average) = No statistically significant difference between school % Proficient and state % Proficient * = See Appendix C on page 52
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 37
CCLLAASSSS OOFF 22001144 RREESSUULLTTSS
RIDE’s goal is to ensure that students graduate high school with the abilities they need to be successful in college, careers, and life. To do so requires multiple measures as part of Rhode Island’s Diploma System. Beginning with the class of 2014, student achievement of Partial Proficiency (Level 2) or greater on the NECAP Reading and Mathematics tests has been designated by the Board of Regents as just one of three major components tied to graduation requirements for high school students.38 It is important to note that students will have multiple opportunities to meet the state assessment performance requirement (see Appendix J on page 61 for a description of the state assessment process). Figure 1. Class of 2014 vs. Class of 2013: Percent of Students Substantially Below Proficient or Partially Proficient or Above on both the NECAP RE A D ING and MA TH E MA TIC S Tests.
38
To earn a diploma from a Rhode Island high school, each student will have to meet the minimum requirements established in each of the three areas specified in the Regulations: 1) Performance on the state assessment or assessments; and 2) Successful completion of state and local course requirements; and 3) Successful completion of two performance-based diploma assessments. See the “Secondary Regulations Guidance-May 2011” document (available online at www.ride.ri.gov) for details.
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 38
Figure 2. Class of 2014 vs. Class of 2013: Percent of Students Substantially Below Proficient or Partially Proficient or Above on the NECAP RE A D ING Test.
Substantially Below
Proficient
7.65%
Partially
Proficient
13.78%
Proficient
45.63%
Proficient with
Distinction
32.94%
Class of 2014 Substantially
Below
Proficient
8.49%
Partially Proficient
14.91%
Proficient
45.38%
Proficient with
Distinction
31.21%
Class of 2013
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 39
Figure 3. Class of 2014 vs. Class of 2013: Percent of Students Substantially Below Proficient or Partially Proficient or Above on the NECAP MA TH E MA TIC S Test.
Substantially Below
Proficient
39.84%
Partially
Proficient
26.16%
Proficient
31.59%
PwD
2.39%
Class of 2014
Substantially Below
Proficient
44.01%
Partially
Proficient
26.04%
Proficient
27.80%
PwD
2.14%
Class of 2013
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 40
Figure 4. Class of 2014 vs. Class of 2013: Percent of Students Substantially Below Proficient in RE A D IN G from 2005 to 2012.
Figure 5. Class of 2014 vs. Class of 2013: Percent of Students Substantially Below Proficient in MA TH E M A TIC S from 2005 to 2012.
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 41
Table 22. CLA SS OF 2014 COH ORT:39 Statewide Grade 6 to Grade 11 NECAP Performance.
NECAP Test
G R A D E 6 (2007) G R A D E 7 (2008) G R A D E 8 (2009) G R A D E 11 (2012) Difference in Total % PP + P
+ PwD: Grade 6 to Grade 11
% SBP
% PP
% P
% PwD
Total % PP + P +
PwD SE
% SBP
% PP
% P
% PwD
Total % PP + P +
PwD SE
% SBP
% PP
% P
% PwD
Total % PP + P +
PwD SE
% SBP
% PP
% P
% PwD
Total % PP + P +
PwD SE
RE A D I N G 14 24 51 11 86 .46 9 20 56 15 91 .43 8 21 51 20 92 .43 8 14 46 33 92 .40 +6
M A T H 26 20 40 14 74 .47 28 20 38 14 72 .47 25 21 39 16 76 .47 40 26 32 2 60 .46 -14
Key (see Appendix A on page 48 for NECAP performance level descriptors)
SBP = Substantially Below Proficient PP = Partially Proficient P = Proficient PwD = Proficient with Distinction SE = Standard Error (see Appendix B on page 51) = Statistically significant decrease in percent of students partially proficient or above from Grade 6 to Grade 11 = Statistically significant increase in percent of students partially proficient or above from Grade 6 to Grade 11
39
At the state level, the Class of 2014 comprises all 6th
, 7th
, 8th
, and 11th
grade students enrolled in a public school in Rhode Island in 2007, 2008, 2009, and 2012 respectively.
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 42
Table 23. Class of 2014 students40: Grade 6 to Grade 11 Performance in RE A D I N G by District/LEA.
District/LEA G R A D E 6 (2007) G R A D E 7 (2008) G R A D E 8 (2009) G R A D E 1 1 (2012) Difference in
% PP or above: Gr. 6 to Gr. 11 % SBP % PP %P % PwD % SBP % PP %P % PwD % SBP % PP %P % PwD % SBP % PP %P % PwD
Woonsocket 24 38 34 3 13 24 54 8 16 29 44 11 7 20 54 19 35 Key (see Appendix A on page 48 for NECAP performance level descriptors) SBP = Substantially Below Proficient PP = Partially Proficient P = Proficient PwD = Proficient with Distinction = Statistically significant increase in percent of students partially proficient or above from Grade 6 to Grade 11 = No statistically significant difference between students partially proficient or above from Grade 6 to Grade 11
40 Students included in this table were enrolled in the district for grades 6, 7, 8, and 11. All others were excluded so that student performance reflects in-district instruction for each district.
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 43
Table 24. Class of 2014 students41: Grade 6 to Grade 11 Performance in MA T H E M A T I C S by District/LEA.
District/LEA G R A D E 6 (2007) G R A D E 7 (2008) G R A D E 8 (2009) G R A D E 1 1 (2012) Difference in % PP or above: Gr. 6 to Gr. 11 % SBP % PP %P % PwD % SBP % PP %P % PwD % SBP % PP %P % PwD % SBP % PP %P % PwD
Woonsocket 45 25 27 3 38 28 30 5 35 31 28 6 54 25 19 2 -9 Key (see Appendix A on page 48 for NECAP performance level descriptors) SBP = Substantially Below Proficient PP = Partially Proficient P = Proficient PwD = Proficient with Distinction = Statistically significant decrease in percent of students partially proficient or above from Grade 6 to Grade 11 = No statistically significant difference between students partially proficient or above from Grade 6 to Grade 11
41 Students included in this table were enrolled in the district for grades 6, 7, 8, and 11. All others were excluded so that student performance reflects in-district instruction for each district.
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 44
Table 25. GR AD E 11 ST U D E NT S “Substantially Below Proficient” in READING: 2011 vs. 2012.
District/LEA School 2011 2012 2011-2012 %
SBP Change # Tested % SBP SE # Tested % SBP SE
Barrington Barrington High School 259 2 .93 266 3 .98 0
Beacon Charter Beacon Charter School 57 4 2.44 54 2 1.83 -2
Blackstone Academy Blackstone Academy Charter School 42
40 5 3.45
Bristol Warren Mt. Hope High School 266 3 1.05 231 3 1.05 0
Burrillville Burrillville High School 172 6 1.87 166 6 1.85 0
Central Falls Central Falls Senior High School 220 31 3.12 183 30 3.37 -1
Chariho Chariho Regional High School 283 1 .61 284 1 .70 0
The R.Y.S.E. School
Coventry Coventry High School 403 3 .81 388 2 .63 -1
Cranston Cranston High School East 354 8 1.48 405 6 1.20 -2
Cranston High School West 425 4 1.00 428 3 .83 -1
NEL/CPS Construction Career Academy 50 10 4.24 41 12 5.11 2
Cumberland Cumberland High School 334 4 1.02 319 3 1.02 0
Davies Career-Tech Wm. M. Davies Jr. Career-Tech. High School 177 1 .56 174 1 .57 0
DCYF DCYF Alternative Education Program 34 76 7.27 19 53 11.5 -24
East Greenwich East Greenwich High School 177 1 .79 182 2 .94 1
East Providence East Providence High School 388 6 1.17 338 4 1.08 -2
Exeter-W. Greenwich Exeter-West Greenwich Regional High School 134 3 1.47 135 1 1.04 -2
Foster-Glocester Ponaganset High School 185 3 1.30 174
Johnston Johnston Senior High School 210 7 1.78 225 4 1.31 -3
Lincoln Lincoln Senior High School 232 4 1.27 262 2 .92 -2
MET Career/Tech Metropolitan Regional Career & Tech. Center 197 10 2.15 234 7 1.70 -3
Middletown Middletown High School 152 3 1.45 173 3 1.39 0
Narragansett Narragansett High School 123 2 1.39 116 3 1.47 0 New Shoreham Block Island School
Newport Rogers High School 150 10 2.45 102 3 1.67 -7
North Kingstown North Kingstown Senior High School 378 2 .69 349 2 .80 0
North Providence North Providence High School 234 3 1.03 244 5 1.38 2
North Smithfield North Smithfield High School 136 2 1.26 109 1 .91 -1
Pawtucket J. Walsh School for Performing & Visual Arts 20
35
Shea Senior High School 227 16 2.42 221 21 2.73 5
William E. Tolman Senior High School 259 10 1.87 234 15 2.30 4
Portsmouth Portsmouth High School 232 2 .95 278 2 .87 0
Providence Academy for Career Exploration (ACES) 56 2 1.77 51 4 2.72 2
West Warwick West Warwick Senior High School 232 6 1.61 218 4 1.27 -3
Westerly Westerly High School 232 3 1.04 203 4 1.44 2
Woonsocket Woonsocket High School 355 12 1.71 345 12 1.72 0 Key = Statistically significant increase in the percent of students Substantially Below Proficient from 2011 to 2012 NECAP results = Statistically significant decrease in the percent of students Substantially Below Proficient from 2011 to 2012 NECAP results = No statistically significant change in the percent of students Substantially Below Proficient from 2011 to 2012 NECAP results
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 45
Table 26. GR AD E 11 ST U D E NT S “Substantially Below Proficient” in MATH : 2011 vs. 2012.
District/LEA School 2011 2012 2011-2012 %
SBP Change # Tested % SBP SE # Tested % SBP SE
Barrington Barrington High School 261 13 2.06 266 11 1.91 -2
Beacon Charter Beacon Charter School 57 30 6.06 54 39 6.63 9
Blackstone Academy Blackstone Academy Charter School 41 46 7.79 42 31 7.13 -15
Bristol Warren Mt. Hope High School 266 40 3.00 235 25 2.81 -15
Burrillville Burrillville High School 173 29 3.47 166 37 3.75 8
Central Falls Central Falls Senior High School 210 79 2.81 194 70 3.29 -9
Chariho Chariho Regional High School 285 19 2.32 283 24 2.53 5
The R.Y.S.E. School
Coventry Coventry High School 401 37 2.42 389 34 2.40 -4
Cranston Cranston High School East 355 52 2.65 403 47 2.49 -5
Cranston High School West 425 42 2.39 428 36 2.31 -6
NEL/CPS Construction Career Academy 50 72 6.35 41 68 7.27 -4
Cumberland Cumberland High School 334 39 2.66 320 32 2.60 -7
Davies Career-Tech Wm. M. Davies Jr. Career-Tech. High School 177 32 3.50 174 28 3.41 -3
DCYF DCYF Alternative Education Program 34 94 4.04 18 89 7.41 -5
East Greenwich East Greenwich High School 177 17 2.82 184 14 2.57 -3
East Providence East Providence High School 388 45 2.53 337 42 2.69 -3
Exeter-W. Greenwich Exeter-West Greenwich Regional High School 134 17 3.26 135 13 2.86 -5
Foster-Glocester Ponaganset High School 185 39 3.59 174 21 3.10 -18
Johnston Johnston Senior High School 209 48 3.46 224 47 3.33 -1
Lincoln Lincoln Senior High School 231 23 2.77 262 25 2.67 2
MET Career/Tech Metropolitan Regional Career & Tech. Center 197 63 3.44 233 60 3.21 -3
Middletown Middletown High School 155 23 3.39 174 18 2.94 -5
Narragansett Narragansett High School 123 21 3.68 116 18 3.58 -3 New Shoreham Block Island School
Newport Rogers High School 150 49 4.08 107 38 4.70 -10
North Kingstown North Kingstown Senior High School 378 20 2.04 349 17 2.01 -3
North Providence North Providence High School 235 49 3.26 251 44 3.13 -5
North Smithfield North Smithfield High School 136 27 3.82 110 18 3.68 -9
Pawtucket J. Walsh School for Performing & Visual Arts 20 35 10.7 36 36 8.01 1
Shea Senior High School 227 70 3.03 221 68 3.13 -2
William E. Tolman Senior High School 256 68 2.92 233 61 3.20 -7
Portsmouth Portsmouth High School 234 20 2.62 278 19 2.37 -1
Providence Academy for Career Exploration (ACES) 56 73 5.92 51 76 5.94 3
West Warwick West Warwick Senior High School 260 50 3.10 214 37 3.30 -13
Westerly Westerly High School 234 25 2.82 204 28 3.14 3
Woonsocket Woonsocket High School 355 57 2.63 345 55 2.68 -2 Key = Statistically significant increase in the percent of students Substantially Below Proficient from 2011 to 2012 NECAP results = Statistically significant decrease in the percent of students Substantially Below Proficient from 2011 to 2012 NECAP results = No statistically significant change in the percent of students Substantially Below Proficient from 2011 to 2012 NECAP results
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 46
Table 27. GRADE 11 STUDENTS “Substantially Below Proficient” in READING and MATH: 2011 vs. 2012.
District/LEA School 2011 2012 2011-2012 %
SBP Change # Tested % SBP SE # Tested % SBP SE
Barrington Barrington High School 261 2 .93 267 2 .83 0
Beacon Charter Beacon Charter School 57 2 1.74 54 2 1.83 0
Blackstone Academy Blackstone Academy Charter School 42
42 5 3.29
Bristol Warren Mt. Hope High School 266 3 1.05 235 3 1.03 0
Burrillville Burrillville High School 173 6 1.77 166 6 1.85 0
Central Falls Central Falls Senior High School 220 28 3.02 196 27 3.17 -1
Chariho Chariho Regional High School 288 1 .60 284 1 .61 0
The R.Y.S.E. School
Coventry Coventry High School 403 2 .77 389 2 .62 -1
Cranston Cranston High School East 357 7 1.38 405 6 1.17 -1
Cranston High School West 425 4 .98 428 3 .83 -1
NEL/CPS Construction Career Academy 50 10 4.24 41 12 5.11 2
Cumberland Cumberland High School 334 4 1.02 320 3 .97 0
Davies Career-Tech Wm. M. Davies Jr. Career-Tech. High School 177 1 .56 174 1 .57 0
DCYF DCYF Alternative Education Program 34 74 7.57 20 45 11.1 -29
East Greenwich East Greenwich High School 177 1 .56 184 2 .93 1
East Providence East Providence High School 388 6 1.17 338 4 1.05 -2
Exeter-W. Greenwich Exeter-West Greenwich Regional High School 134 3 1.47 135 1 1.04 -2
Foster-Glocester Ponaganset High School 185 3 1.30 174
Johnston Johnston Senior High School 210 7 1.72 225 4 1.31 -3
Lincoln Lincoln Senior High School 232 3 1.20 262 2 .85 -2
MET Career/Tech Metropolitan Regional Career & Tech. Center 197 10 2.15 234 6 1.60 -4
Middletown Middletown High School 155 3 1.42 175 3 1.38 0
Narragansett Narragansett High School 123 2 1.39 116 3 1.47 0 New Shoreham Block Island School
Newport Rogers High School 151 9 2.28 107 3 1.60 -6
North Kingstown North Kingstown Senior High School 380 2 .64 351 2 .75 0
North Providence North Providence High School 235 3 1.03 251 4 1.29 2
North Smithfield North Smithfield High School 136 2 1.26 110 1 .90 -1
Pawtucket J. Walsh School for Performing & Visual Arts 20
36
Shea Senior High School 229 15 2.38 222 20 2.70 5
William E. Tolman Senior High School 259 10 1.83 236 13 2.20 3
Portsmouth Portsmouth High School 235 2 .84 278 2 .87 0
Providence Academy for Career Exploration (ACES) 56 2 1.77 51 4 2.72 2
West Warwick West Warwick Senior High School 260 6 1.45 218 3 1.19 -3
Westerly Westerly High School 235 2 .84 204 4 1.44 3
Woonsocket Woonsocket High School 356 11 1.67 347 11 1.66 -1 Key = Statistically significant increase in the percent of students Substantially Below Proficient from 2011 to 2012 NECAP results = Statistically significant decrease in the percent of students Substantially Below Proficient from 2011 to 2012 NECAP results = No statistically significant change in the percent of students Substantially Below Proficient from 2011 to 2012 NECAP result
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 47
AAPPPPEENNDDIICCEESS
Page
Appendix A: Glossary of Terms 48
Appendix B: Calculating Standard Error (SE) 51
Appendix C: Split- Level Schools for Reporting Purposes 52
Appendix D: Grade 8 Students “Substantially Below Proficient” in READING : 2011 vs. 2012
53
Appendix E: Grade 8 Students “Substantially Below Proficient” in MA THEMATIC S : 2011 vs. 2012
54
Appendix F: Grade 8 Students “Substantially Below Proficient” in MA THEMATIC S and READING: 2011 vs. 2012
55
Appendix G: High School Graduation Rates: District-Level Results 56
Appendix H: High School Graduation Rates: School-Level Results 58
Appendix I: NECAP Writing Assessment Design 60
Appendix J: Class of 2014 State Assessment Process 61
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 48
AAPPPPEENNDDIIXX AA
Glossary of Terms
Graduation Rate
o The Four-Year Graduation Rate yields the percentage of students who enrolled in the 9th grade for the first time and graduated from high school four years later. To calculate the 4-year graduation rate, RIDE tracks an Adjusted Cohort42 of students from 9th grade through high school and then divides the number of students who graduate within four years by the total number in the cohort. In other words, the rate provides the percentage of the cohort that graduates in four years or fewer.
o The Five-Year Graduation Rate yields total percentage the Adjusted Cohort of students who graduate within 5 years of entering 9th grade for the first time. This rate includes students from the Adjusted Cohort who graduate within 4 years as well as those who graduate within 5 years.
o The Six-Year Graduation Rate yields the total percentage of the Adjusted Cohort of students who graduate within 6 years of entering 9th grade for the first time. This rate includes students from the Adjusted Cohort who graduate within 4 years and those who graduate within 5 years as well as those who graduate within 6 years.
“Minimum Cell Size” Reporting Policy
RIDE Policy on minimum cell size for reporting data stipulates that if the number of students is less than 10 for any group(s) or for any school- and district-level reporting or if a percentage is less than 1% or greater than 99%, then data must be suppressed in public reports to ensure confidentiality of individual student results and to discourage generalizations about school performance based on very small populations. Throughout this report, empty cells indicate that the number of students included in calculations was less than 10 or the percentage was less than 1% or greater than 99%.
NECAP Performance Level Descriptors: General
o Proficient with Distinction (Level 4): Students performing at this level demonstrate the prerequisite knowledge and skills needed to participate and excel in instructional activities aligned with the GLEs at the current grade level. Errors made by these students are few and minor and do not reflect gaps in prerequisite knowledge and skills.
o Proficient (Level 3): Students performing at this level demonstrate minor gaps in the prerequisite knowledge and skills needed to participate and perform successfully in instructional activities aligned with the GLE at the current grade level. It is likely that
42
The “Adjusted Cohort” of students includes those who enter ninth grade for the first time plus transfers in and transfers out as they progress through high school toward graduation.
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 49
any gaps in prerequisite knowledge and skills demonstrated by these students can be addressed during the course of typical classroom instruction.
o Partially Proficient (Level 2): Students performing at this level demonstrate gaps in prerequisite knowledge and skills needed to participate and perform successfully in instructional activities aligned with the GLE at the current grade level. Additional instructional support may be necessary for these students to meet grade level expectations.
o Substantially Below Proficient (Level 1): Students performing at this level demonstrate extensive and significant gaps in prerequisite knowledge and skills needed to participate and perform successfully in instructional activities aligned with the GLE at the current grade level. Additional instructional support is necessary for these students to meet grade level expectations.
NECAP Performance Level Descriptors: RE A D I NG
o Proficient with Distinction (Level 4): Student’s performance demonstrates an ability to read and comprehend grade-appropriate text. Student is able to analyze and interpret literary and informational text. Student offers insightful observations/assertions that are well supported by references to the text. Student uses range of vocabulary strategies and breadth of vocabulary knowledge to read and comprehend a wide variety of texts.
o Proficient (Level 3): Student’s performance demonstrates an ability to read and comprehend grade-appropriate text. Student is able to analyze and interpret literary and informational text. Student makes and supports relevant assertions by referencing text. Student uses vocabulary strategies and breadth of vocabulary knowledge to read and comprehend text.
o Partially Proficient (Level 2): Student’s performance demonstrates an inconsistent ability to read and comprehend grade-appropriate text. Student attempts to analyze and interpret literary and informational text. Student may make and/or support assertions by referencing text. Student’s vocabulary knowledge and use of strategies may be limited and may impact the ability to read and comprehend text.
o Substantially Below Proficient (Level 1): Student’s performance demonstrates minimal ability to derive/construct meaning from grade-appropriate text. Student may be able to recognize story elements and text features. Student’s limited vocabulary knowledge and use of strategies impacts the ability to read and comprehend text.
NECAP Performance Level Descriptors: MA T H E M A T I C S
o Proficient with Distinction (Level 4): Student’s problem solving demonstrates logical reasoning with strong explanations that include both words and proper mathematical notation. Student’s work exhibits a high level of accuracy, effective use of a variety of strategies, and an understanding of mathematical concepts within and across grade level expectations. Student demonstrates the ability to move from concrete to abstract representations.
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 50
o Proficient (Level 3): Student’s problem solving demonstrates logical reasoning with appropriate explanations that include both words and proper mathematical notation. Student uses a variety of strategies that are often systematic. Computational errors do not interfere with communicating understanding. Student demonstrates conceptual understanding of most aspects of the grade level expectations.
o Partially Proficient (Level 2): Student’s problem solving demonstrates logical reasoning and conceptual understanding in some, but not all, aspects of the grade level expectations. Many problems are started correctly, but computational errors may get in the way of completing some aspects of the problem. Student uses some effective strategies. Student’s work demonstrates that he or she is generally stronger with concrete than abstract situations.
o Substantially Below Proficient (Level 1): Student’s problem solving is often incomplete, lacks logical reasoning and accuracy, and shows little conceptual understanding in most aspects of the grade level expectations. Student is able to start some problems but computational errors and lack of conceptual understanding interfere with solving problems successfully.
NECAP Performance Level Descriptors: W R I T I N G
o Proficient with Distinction (Level 4): Student’s writing demonstrates an ability to respond to prompt/task with clarity and insight. Focus is well developed and maintained throughout response. Response demonstrates use of strong organizational structures. A variety of elaboration strategies is evident. Sentence structures and language choices are varied and used effectively. Response demonstrates control of conventions; minor errors may occur.
o Proficient (Level 3): Student’s writing demonstrates an ability to respond to prompt/task. Focus is clear and maintained throughout the response. Response is organized with a beginning, middle and end with appropriate transitions. Details are sufficiently elaborated to support focus. Sentence structures and language use are varied. Response demonstrates control of conventions; errors may occur but do not interfere with meaning.
o Partially Proficient (Level 2): Student’s writing demonstrates an attempt to respond to prompt/task. Focus may be present but not maintained. Organizational structure is inconsistent with limited use of transitions. Details may be listed and lack elaboration. Sentence structures and language use are unsophisticated and may be repetitive. Response demonstrates inconsistent control of conventions.
o Substantially Below Proficient (Level 1): Student’s writing demonstrates a minimal response to prompt/task. Focus is unclear or lacking. Little or no organizational structure is evident. Details are minimal and/or random. Sentence structures and language use are minimal or absent. Frequent errors in conventions may interfere with meaning.
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 51
AAPPPPEENNDDIIXX BB
Calculating Standard Error (SE)
For the purposes of this report, Standard Error (SE) is defined as a measurement of the standard error of a percentage (e.g., % Proficient, used throughout this report). Mathematically, SE’s were calculated as follows:
(SE) =
, where p is the percent of students who are proficient, q= (100-p) and N is the
population or group size.
It is important to note that the derived SE is based on the size of the group being examined and its respective performance (read: % Proficient) on the NECAP tests. Standard errors can be used to create a confidence interval around the derived percentage so that you can see the range in which the “true” (e.g., measured without error) value is located. To do so, you can take the SE and multiply it by 1.96 (for a 95% confidence interval). The resultant product is then added and subtracted from the percent proficient, p, for example, to create a range of values in which you can be 95% confident that the “true” value is located. For example, viewing the percent proficient (p) as the center point, if one adds the value of SE(1.96) to p and also subtracts this value from p, then the full confidence interval is created with both an upper and lower boundary. So, if p equals 70% and the SE equals .5, then the product of SE and 1.96 equals .5(1.96) or .965 Adding and subtracting this number from 70% creates the confidence interval, which ranges from 69.04% to 70.97%. This is the range in which one can be 95% confident that the “true” value exists.
When comparing the performance of any two years or groups, we say that the difference in performance between the groups is statistically significant if the difference in performance between the two groups is larger than the sum of the SE’s of the two groups. In other words, if the sum of the two SE’s—each multiplied by 1.96 to get the 95% confidence interval—is larger than the value of the difference in performance between the two groups, then we say the difference is too small to be significant or meaningful because the difference doesn’t fall outside of the range of plausible “true” values. To illustrate this point, let’s say that 60% of 4th grade students at School X were proficient or above in reading in 2010 and the following year in 2011, 66% of 4th grade students were proficient or above, thus resulting in an increase of +6 percentage points. If the sum of the 2010 SE(1.96) and the 2011 SE(1.96) is 6.5, then the change from 2010 to 2011 in 4th grade reading performance of +6 percentage points at School X is not large enough to be considered statistically significant. On the other hand, if 67% of 4th graders in 2011 were proficient or above, then the +7 percentage point increase in performance would be larger than the standard error of 6.5 and this difference would be statistically significant.
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 52
AAPPPPEENNDDIIXX CC
* Split- Level Schools for Reporting Purposes
Throughout this report, Grades 3, 4, and 5 are generally classified as “elementary school” grades whereas Grades 6, 7, and 8 are classified as “middle school” and Grade 11 as “high school.” In cases where a school spans more than one level of schooling (e.g. elementary and middle)—such as with schools that are K-12 or K-8—RIDE divided the grades within the school using the above classification rules or by using classifications set by the local education agency (LEA) for accountability purposes. Consequently, school-level data posted in tables in this report may not match data sent to schools from Measured Progress. This is not an indication that the posted data in this report are incorrect. Rather, it is a matter of RIDE classifying schools in accordance with grade levels reported by the LEA and to present data in a more consistent manner. Below is a list of the schools with grades that span more than one school level and how each was designated for the purposes of this report:
Block Island School, New Shoreham Elementary Grades 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 High Grades 8, 11 Highlander Charter School Elementary Grades 3, 4, 5 Middle Grades 6, 7, 8 Paul Cuffee Charter School Elementary Grades 3, 4, 5 Middle Grades 6, 7, 8 High Grade 11 Rhode Island School for the Deaf Elementary Grades 3, 4, 5 Middle Grades 6, 7, 8 High Grade 11 The Compass School
Elementary Grades 3, 4, 5 Middle Grades 6, 7, 8 The Learning Community Charter School
Woonsocket Woonsocket Middle School 462 10 1.42 349 10 1.63 0 Key SE = Standard Error (see Appendix B) = Statistically significant increase in the percent of students Substantially Below Proficient from 2011 to 2012 NECAP results = Statistically significant decrease in the percent of students Substantially Below Proficient from 2011 to 2012 NECAP results = No statistically significant change in the percent of students Substantially Below Proficient from 2011 to 2012 NECAP result * = See Appendix C on page 52
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 54
AAPPPPEENNDDIIXX EE GR A D E 8 ST U D E NT S “Substantially Below Proficient” in Mathematics: 2011 vs. 2012
Key SE = Standard Error (see Appendix B) = Statistically significant increase in the percent of students Substantially Below Proficient from 2011 to 2012 NECAP results = Statistically significant decrease in the percent of students Substantially Below Proficient from 2011 to 2012 NECAP results = No statistically significant change in the percent of students Substantially Below Proficient from 2011 to 2012 NECAP result * = See Appendix C on page 52
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 55
AAPPPPEENNDDIIXX FF GRADE 8 STUDENTS “Substantially Below Proficient” in Reading and Math: 2011 vs. 2012
Key SE = Standard Error (see Appendix B) = Statistically significant increase in the percent of students Substantially Below Proficient from 2011 to 2012 NECAP results = Statistically significant decrease in the percent of students Substantially Below Proficient from 2011 to 2012 NECAP results = No statistically significant change in the percent of students Substantially Below Proficient from 2011 to 2012 NECAP result * = See Appendix C on page 52
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 56
AAPPPPEENNDDIIXX GG
District/LEA High School Graduation Rates: Class of 2009 to Class of 201243
District/LEA Class of 2009 Class of 2010 Class of 2011 Class of 2012
4-Yr. Rate
5-Yr. Rate
6-Yr. Rate
4-Yr. Rate
5-Yr. Rate
6-Yr. Rate
4-Yr. Rate
5-Yr. Rate
6-Yr. Rate
4-Yr. Rate
5-Yr. Rate
6-Yr. Rate
Barrington 96 96 96 96 96 96 97 97 96 94 99 97
Beacon Charter School 59 60 60 60 76 60 77 73 79 90 82 74
Blackstone Academy Charter 73 79 60 88 80 82 86 90 80 86 95 90
MET Career and Tech 76 81 91 82 83 82 81 90 83 73 88 91
43
The Class of 2009 includes traditional four-year student graduation rates (blue column), five-year rates of the 2008 adjusted cohort (purple column) and six-year rates of the 2007 adjusted cohort (gray column). To see how the 2009 adjusted cohort of students fared (students who entered as freshman in the 2005-06 school year), you must look across the three years, (2009, 2010 and 2011) and by four-year, five-year and six-year rates, respectively. All cohorts are color-coded: the Cohort of 2008 is shaded in purple; the Cohort of 2009 is shaded in blue; the Cohort of 2010 is shaded in orange; and the Cohort of 2011 is shaded in green. Under the Class of 2012, one column is un-shaded to represent the four-year graduation rate for 2012 cohort. See Appendix A for descriptions of each graduation rate and of how cohorts are “adjusted.”
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 57
District/LEA Class of 2009 Class of 2010 Class of 2011 Class of 2012
Barrington Barrington High School 96 96 96 96 96 96 97 97 96 95 99 97
Beacon Charter BEACON Charter School 59 60 60 60 76 60 77 73 79 90 82 74
Blackstone Acad. Blackstone Academy Charter 73 79 60 88 80 82 86 90 80 86 95 90
Bristol Warren Mt. Hope High School 85 83 80 83 87 83 88 87 88 86 92 89
Burrillville Burrillville High School 86 80 73 85 88 80 87 88 88 82 88 88
Central Falls Central Falls Senior High School 48 56 56 54 55 57 71 62 56 70 79 64
Chariho Chariho Regional High School 87 89 82 83 90 89 89 86 91 88 90 87
The R.Y.S.E. School
Coventry Coventry High School 79 84 81 81 83 85 84 84 83 87 87 88
Cranston Cranston High School East 74 85 79 81 77 86 73 82 77 78 83 84
Cranston High School West 89 90 90 87 91 90 88 90 91 87 90 90
NEL/CPS Construction Career Acad. 62 64 81 63 69 64 46 68 71 61 63 68
Cumberland Cumberland High School 84 85 81 83 85 85 81 85 85 82 85 85
Davies Wm. M. Davies Jr. Career-Tech. 59 79 79 77 66 78 75 83 68 76 86 84
DCYF DCYF Alternative Educ. Program 5 7 17 9 8 8 4 14 8 7 6 14
East Greenwich East Greenwich High School 94 96 95 96 94 96 95 97 95 94 96 98
East Providence East Providence High School 77 79 73 77 80 79 69 82 81 71 72 82
Ex-W. Greenwich Exeter-W. Greenwich High School 88 90 89 90 90 90 86 91 90 91 90 92
Foster-Glocester Ponaganset High School 88 89 95 83 89 89 93 85 90 86 93 85
Johnston Johnston Senior High School 73 81 65 67 77 83 83 73 77 82 86 73
Lincoln Lincoln Senior High School 86 85 88 84 87 85 85 88 87 84 89 90
MET MET Regional Career & Tech. 76 81 91 82 83 82 81 90 83 73 88 91
Middletown Middletown High School 82 90 84 83 86 90 74 83 86 82 77 83
Narragansett Narragansett High School 88 96 91 90 88 96 87 91 88 85 88 91
44
The Class of 2009 includes traditional four-year student graduation rates (blue column), five-year rates of the 2008 adjusted cohort (purple column) and six-year rates of the 2007 adjusted cohort (gray column). To see how the 2009 adjusted cohort of students fared (students who entered as freshman in the 2005-06 school year), you must look across the three years, (2009, 2010 and 2011) and by four-year, five-year and six-year rates, respectively. All cohorts are color-coded: the Cohort of 2008 is shaded in purple; the Cohort of 2009 is shaded in blue; the Cohort of 2010 is shaded in orange; and the Cohort of 2011 is shaded in green. Under the Class of 2012, one column is un-shaded to represent the four-year graduation rate for 2012 cohort. See Appendix A for descriptions of each graduation rate and of how cohorts are “adjusted.”
Fall 2012 RI NECAP Results for Students in Grades 3-8, and 11 P a g e | 59
District/LEA School Class of 2009 Class of 2010 Class of 2011 Class of 2012
4-Yr Rate
5-Yr Rate
6-Yr Rate
4-Yr Rate
5-Yr Rate
6-Yr Rate
4-Yr Rate
5-Yr Rate
6-Yr Rate
4-Yr Rate
5-Yr Rate
6-Yr Rate
New Shoreham Block Island School
Newport Rogers High School 75 68 65 80 80 68 82 81 80 73 87 82
North Kingstown North Kingstown Sr. High School 92 91 92 86 93 91 88 89 93 89 90 90
North Providence North Providence High School 82 91 89 80 83 91 93 82 83 87 94 83
North Smithfield North Smithfield High School 88 91 90 83 89 91 92 89 89 78 93 90
Pawtucket Shea Senior High School 57 65 55 58 62 66 67 65 63 67 74 67
Tolman Senior High School 53 64 49 58 59 65 60 65 60 67 69 66
Walsh Sch. for Perf. & Visual Arts 88 n/a n/a 100 88 n/a 100 100 92 90 100 100
Portsmouth Portsmouth High School 85 88 89 86 86 89 89 88 86 92 90 88
Acad. for Career Exploration (ACES) 93 100 93 83 93 100 67 89 93 84 76 91
Providence Alvarez High School 47 14 11 67 53 17 67 72 53 62 69 73
Central High School 63 66 63 66 66 66 63 70 67 56 66 71
Classical High School 98 95 97 97 98 95 96 98 98 97 96 98
Cooley Sr. High School 83 71 77 65 87 72 72 69 87 73 75 69