Measures of Academic ProgressFall 2014

Dr. Alex Anemone, SuperintendentNovember 17, 2014

Testing dates: October 6-24, 2014 Grade 2: Math and Reading Grades 3-8: Math, Reading, and Language

Usage MAP is completed online and has predictive

value. Approximately 50-55 questions per subject. RIT is the equal interval score unit.

Measures of Academic Progress

Part. Prof.Predicted

Part. Prof.Actual

ProficientPredicted

Proficient Actual

Adv. Prof. Predicted

Adv. Prof. Actual

Math 18.7% 11.2% 50.2% 35.4% 31.0% 53.4%

ELA 18.0% 13.6% 64.4% 68.0% 17.6% 18.4%

2013-2014 Predicted Data vs. Actual

MAP for Prim. Grades

Low 1-20%ile

LoAvg 21-40%ile

Avg 41-60%ile

HiAvg 61-80%ile

High 81-99%ile

HTS Mean RIT

National Mean RIT

Math 0 (0%) 2 (6%) 4 (12%) 6 (18%) 21(64%) 193.1 178.2

Reading 0 (0%) 2 (6%) 5 (15%) 7 (21%) 19 (58%) 190.4 175.9

Grade Two

MAP Low 1-20%ile

LoAvg21-40%ile

Avg41-60%ile

HiAvg61-80%ile

High81-99%ile

HTS Mean RIT

National Mean RIT

Math 0 (0%) 2 (8%) 3 (12%) 11 (42%)

10 (38%) 200.4 192.1

Reading 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (12%) 4 (15%) 19 (73%) 206.4 189.9

Lang. Usage

0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (12%) 7 (27%) 16 (62%) 204.8 191.1

Grade Three

MAP Low 1-20%ile

LoAvg21-40%ile

Avg41-60%ile

HiAvg61-80%ile

High81-99%ile

HTS Mean RIT

National Mean RIT

Math 3 (7%) 4 (10%) 11 (27%)

10 (24%)

13 (32%)

209.6 203.8

Reading 2 (5%) 1 (2%) 9 (22%) 15 (37%)

14 (34%)

210.2 199.8

Lang. Usage

3 (8%) 1 (3%) 6 (15%) 14 (35%)

16 (40%)

209.1 200.9

Grade Four

MAP Low 1-20%ile

LoAvg21-40%ile

Avg41-60%ile

HiAvg61-80%ile

High81-99%ile

HTS Mean RIT

National Mean RIT

Math 1 (3%) 3 (8%) 5 (13%) 10 (26%)

20 (51%)

226.7 212.9

Reading 2 (5%) 1 (3%) 5 (13%) 13 (33%)

18 (46%)

218.3 207.1

Lang. Usage

1 (3%) 2 (5%) 4 (10%) 13 (33%)

19 (49%)

219.3 208.0

Grade Five

MAP Low 1-20%ile

LoAvg21-40%ile

Avg41-60%ile

HiAvg61-80%ile

High81-99%ile

HTS Mean RIT

National Mean RIT

Math 3 (9%) 5 (15%) 3 (9%) 16 (47%)

7 (21%) 224.0 219.6

Reading 1 (3%) 5 (15%) 3 (9%) 11 (32%)

14 (41%)

220.4 212.3

Lang. Usage

2 (6%) 3 (9%) 5 (15%) 7 (21%) 17 (50%)

221.0 212.3

Grade Six

MAP Low 1-20%ile

LoAvg21-40%ile

Avg41-60%ile

HiAvg61-80%ile

High81-99%ile

HTS Mean RIT

National Mean RIT

Math 4 (19%)

3 (14%) 5 (24%) 5 (24%) 4 (19%) 228.4 225.6

Reading 3 (14%)

4 (19%) 4 (19%) 5 (24%) 5 (24%) 218.6 216.3

Lang. Usage

3 (14%)

2 (10%) 4(19%) 5 (24%) 7 (33%) 220.6 215.8

Grade Seven

MAP Low 1-20%ile

LoAvg21-40%ile

Avg41-60%ile

HiAvg61-80%ile

High81-99%ile

HTS Mean RIT

National Mean RIT

Math 6 (19%)

1 (3%) 10 (31%)

5 (16%) 10 (31%) 233.5 230.2

Reading 6 (19%)

0 (0%) 7 (22%) 9 (28%) 10 (31%) 225.2 219.3

Lang. Usage

2 (6%) 4 (13%) 5 (16%) 10 (31%)

11 (34%) 226.6 218.7

Grade Eight

HTS Math RIT National Math RIT

Difference RIT

Grade 2 193.1 178.2 +14.9

Grade 3 200.4 192.1 +8.3

Grade 4 209.6 203.8 +5.8

Grade 5 226.7 212.9 +13.8

Grade 6 224.0 219.6 +4.4

Grade 7 228.4 225.6 +2.8

Grade 8 233.5 230.2 +3.3

HTS Mean Scores - National MeanMath

Gr. 2 Gr. 3 Gr. 4 Gr. 5 Gr. 6 Gr. 7 Gr. 8175

185

195

205

215

225

235

245

HTSNational

Math - HTS Mean - National Mean

HTS Reading RIT

National Reading RIT

Difference RIT

Grade 2 190.4 175.9 +14.5

Grade 3 206.4 189.9 +16.5

Grade 4 210.2 199.8 +10.4

Grade 5 218.3 207.1 +11.2

Grade 6 220.4 212.3 +8.1

Grade 7 218.6 216.3 +2.3

Grade 8 225.2 219.3 +5.9

HTS Mean Scores - National MeanReading

Gr. 2 Gr. 3 Gr. 4 Gr. 5 Gr. 6 Gr. 7 Gr. 8175

185

195

205

215

225

235

245

HTSNational

Reading - HTS Mean - National Mean

HTS Language Usage RIT

National Lang. Usage RIT

Difference RIT

Grade 2 N/A N/A N/A

Grade 3 204.8 191.1 +13.7

Grade 4 209.1 200.9 +8.2

Grade 5 219.3 208.0 +11.3

Grade 6 221.0 212.3 +8.7

Grade 7 220.6 215.8 +4.8

Grade 8 226.6 218.7 +7.9

HTS Mean Scores - National MeanLanguage Usage

Gr. 3 Gr. 4 Gr. 5 Gr. 6 Gr. 7 Gr. 8175

185

195

205

215

225

235

245

HTSNational

Language - HTS Mean - National Mean

Gr. 2 Gr. 3 Gr. 4 Gr. 5 Gr. 6 Gr. 7 Gr. 8175

185

195

205

215

225

235

245

MathReadingLanguage

HTS Mean Scores (RIT)

Share data with staff. Differentiate – enrichment and remediation. Continue to track growth and examine gaps

that may exist. Align professional development activities as

appropriate.

Next Steps

HTS Class of 2014: 6 transfers (2013-2014 grade 8)

HTS Class of 2015: 8 transfers (2013-2014 grade 7)

HTS Class of 2016: 3 transfers (2013-2014 grade 6)

HTS Class of 2017: 6 transfers (2013-2014 grade 5)

HTS to Private School Transfers

HTS to Private School Transfers

ELA Math

Advanced Proficient

2 students (8.7%) 11 students (47.8%)

Proficient 19 students (82.6%)

11 students (47.8%)

Partially Proficient 2 students (8.7%) 1 student (4.3%)

District Factor Groupings measure and compare entire communities, not schools.

With inclusion of the transfer students and assuming their scores remained constant, 2014 NJASK Grades 5-8 passing rate (advanced proficient + proficient) in ELA would have increased by 1.0% and the passing rate in math would have increased by 1.3%

Analysis

“Aid in Lieu” payments ($884 per child/per school year) are made to families that send their children to private schools and do not get bussed to that particular school.

The AIL data does not include students who are bussed to private schools. 2014-2015 school year – 70 students are bussed to private schools

The data does seem to indicate that Harding serves a significantly lower percentage of the total student population than our peer districts. Again, DFGs represent communities, not schools.

AIL Analysis

District Total Public Schools Aid in Lieu

Harding (DFG J) 532 395 (74.2%) 137 (25.8%)

Millburn (J) 5,162 4,881 (94.6%) 281 (5.4%)

Chatham (J) 4,383 4,206 (96.0%) 177 (4.0%)

Mt. Lakes (J) 1,598 1,560 (97.6%) 38 (2.4%)

Ridgewood (J) ~5,825 5,725 (98.3%) <100 (1.7%)

Mendham T. (J) ~1054 ~1039 (98.6%) 15 (1.4%)

Mendham B. (J) ~866 ~842 (97.2%) 24 (2.8%)

Up. Saddle R. (J) ~1,901 ~1,839 (96.7) 62 (3.3%)

Hanover Twp. (I) ~2,100 ~2,044 (97.3%) 56 (2.7%)

Madison (I) 2,702 2,574 (95.3%) 128 (4.7%)

Analysis – 2013-2014 AIL