performance gaps any groups left behind? · 2019-12-31 · 4-year graduation rate - synopsis...

AN D R E W J . PAR R , S E N I O R P O L I C Y AN ALY S T

WAS H I N G T O N S TAT E B O AR D O F E D U C AT I O N

S E P T E M B E R 9 , 2 0 1 4

Performance Gaps

Any Groups Left Behind?

Presentation Roadmap

Washington State Board of Education

Changing Landscape of Education

Enrollment and demographic changes

Examining performance gaps

Through the lens of the Achievement Index

Through the lens of MSP proficiency data

Through the lens of the SGP Growth Model

Preschool through High School Graduation

How you do prefer to view performance gaps? What

gap do we report?

School Enrollment Increases


1,031,846 1,038,345 1,036,135 1,041,892 1,043,536 1,050,900

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

Nu

mb

er

of

Stu

de

nts

Public School Enrollment

Total Students

Demographics Are Changing


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Pe

rc

en

tag

e o

f S

tud

en

ts

Changing DemographicsRace and Ethnicity

American Indian/Alaskan Native

Asian

Native Hawiian/ Pacific Islander

Asian/Pacific Islander

Black/African American

Hispanic/Latino

White

Two or More

White

Hispanic/Latino

More Low Income Students


0

10

20

30

40

50

Pe

rc

en

tag

e o

f S

tud

en

ts

Changing DemographicsOther ESEA Subgroups

Free and Reduced Price Lunch

Students with Disabilities

English Language Learners

Great Recession

More Bilingual Students


0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

Nu

mb

er

of

Stu

de

nts

WELPA Enrollment

Grade 3

Grade 8

Do you think the educational system has changed in

a manner that supports our evolving population?


Hispanic and Latino Students

Students qualifying for Free and Reduced Price Lunch

Bilingual Students

As the state’s student demographics change, you might expect that student outcomes also change.

All groups increasing

M E AS U R I N G G AP S T H R O U G H T H E

AC H I E V E M E N T I N D E X


One Way to View Gaps


Progress of the Accountability System

Index Rating Gaps


0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

All Targeted All Targeted All Targeted

Proficiency Growth Graduation

Ac

hie

ve

me

nt

Ind

ex

Ra

tin

g

2010-11

2011-12

2012-13

Proficiency Index Rating Gap


2

3

4

5

6

7

8

2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

Pr

ofi

cie

nc

y I

nd

ex

Ra

tin

g

All Students

Targeted Subgroup

Proficiency Rates Increasing

Gap is Unchanged

1.39 Rating

Point Gap

1.40 Rating

Point Gap

Growth Model (SGPs) by Race/Ethnicity


40.0

46.8

47.6

48.0

50.6

50.7

57.7

0 20 40 60 80

American Indian/NativeAlaskan

PacificIslander/Hawaiian

Hispanic/Latino


White

Two or More

Asian

2012-13 Reading SGP

2012-13

43.8

43.8

47.2

49.1

50.0

50.3

58.2

0 20 40 60 80

American Indian/NativeAlaskan

PacificIslander/Hawaiian


Hispanic/Latino

Two or More

White

Asian

2012-13 Math SGP

2012-13

For proficiency gaps to narrow,

the growth rates for the

Targeted Subgroup must

exceed the growth rates for the Not Targeted

Subgroup.

SGPs Over Time


0 20 40 60

ELL

Former ELL

SWD

Low Income

All

Reading SGP by Subgroup

2012-13

2011-12

2010-11

0 20 40 60

ELL

Former ELL

SWD

Low Income

All

Math SGP by Subgroup

2012-13

2011-12

2010-11

Median SGPs do not change much from year to year,

especially for large groups.

Growth Index Rating Gap


4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0

Gr

ow

th I

nd

ex

Ra

tin

g

All Students

Targeted Subgroup

0.63 Rating

Point Gap

0.53 Rating

Point Gap

Growth Rates Increasing

Gap is Essentially Unchanged

Graduation Index Rating Gap


4

5

6

7

8

Gr

ad

ua

tio

n I

nd

ex

Ra

tin

g

All Students

Targeted Subgroup

1.73 Rating

Point Gap

1.40 Rating

Point Gap

Ratings based on the 5-Year Graduation Rate are Increasing

Gap is slightly reduced.

Stop and Think


At current rates and based on this Index data, it will take at

least 15 to 20 years or more to really make a dent in the

performance gaps.

The current plan is total elimination of gaps and 100

percent goal attainment by 2027 – just 13 years down the

road.

How would you respond to a constituent claiming that the

2027 goal attainment is unrealistic?

E AR LY C H I L D H O O D E D U C AT I O N

The Beginning of Gaps


Opportunity Gaps


Family Structure

Parent(s) Education

Parent(s) Employment

Housing

Poverty

Health

Language

Mobility

Stop and Think


At which school level (Pre-K, elementary, middle, high

school, or beyond) do you believe performance gaps

to be the greatest? And the smallest?

Early Childhood Education - Participation


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

2006-08 2007-09 2008-10 2009-11 2010-12

Pe

rc

en

t o

f C

hil

dr

en

Children Attending PreschoolAll 3 & 4 Year-Olds

Peer States

WashingtonChildren in Washington attend preschool at a lower rate than all of the

other Peer States.

11 percentage point gap is

unchanged over multiple years.

Preschool – Opportunity to Learn


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2006-08 2007-09 2008-10 2009-11 2010-12

Pe

rc

en

tag

e A

tte

nd

ing

Children Attending Preschool3 & 4 Year-Olds by Race Ethnicity

Peer States

Not Targeted Subgroup

Hispanic/Latino

Hispanic/Latino children in Washington attend preschool at a lower rate than all

of the other Peer States.

Washington Asian and

White Children

Peer States

All Children

Washington Hispanic

& Latino Children

Preschool Access by Poverty


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2005-07 2009-11 2010-12

Pe

rc

en

tag

e o

f C

hil

dr

en

Washington 3 & 4 Year-Olds Attending Preschool

In Poverty

Not In Poverty

Before ever stepping into a public school, much fewer

children in poverty have been exposed to early education

as compared to children not living in poverty.

Early Childhood Education - Synopsis


In Washington

Children attend preschool at a lower rate than all the other

Peer States

Hispanic/Latino children attend preschool at a far lower rate

than Asians, Whites, or Two or More Races

Children in poverty attend preschool at a lower rate than all

the other Peer States

Children in poverty attend preschool at a far lower rate than

children not in poverty and this gap is widening

For some…Opportunity to Learn is Limited

Early Childhood Education


Stop and Think

For all those children living in poverty who do not have

access to high quality early childhood education,

Do you think the lack of Opportunity to Learn will have an

impact on kindergarten readiness?

Do you think our system is really supporting the needs of this

expanding group?

Who do you think will be kindergarten ready?

Kindergarten Readiness Gap


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

Pe

rc

en

tag

e o

f S

tud

en

ts

WaKIDS Targeted Subgroup Gap

Targeted Subgroups

Not Targeted Subgroups

The Gap is Increasing

Kindergarten Readiness


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

Pe

rc

en

tag

e o

f S

tud

en

ts

Students by Subgroup Meeting All Six Domains on the WaKIDS Instrument

All Students

Low Income

Bilingual

Special Education

All Gaps are Increasing

WaKIDS - Opportunity Gap


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

Pe

rc

en

tag

e M

ee

tin

g A

ll 6

Do

ma

ins

Low Income

Not Low Income

24.7 Percentage

Point Gap

Children living in poverty have less access to

high quality early childhood education – one

outcome is that far fewer low income children

are kindergarten ready. The gap is widening.

WaKIDS - Synopsis


Two levels of performance are evident based on Targeted

Subgroup membership

Substantially lower performance is evident for Low Income,

Bilingual, and Special Education students

Performance is increasing but Gaps are widening

Poverty Gap is larger than the Race/Ethnicity Gap

Stop and Think


We saw that children in poverty often have limited

Opportunity to Learn through early childhood education and

are not typically kindergarten ready, but…

By the end of the 3rd grade, do you think the gaps will be

larger or smaller?

E L E M E N TARY AN D M I D D L E G R AD E S

Proficiency Gaps and

Growth Gaps


3rd Grade Literacy – Performance Gap


0

20

40

60

80

100

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

Pe

rc

en

t P

ro

fic

ien

t

3rd Grade Literacyby Race/Ethnicity

American Indian

Asian

Pacific Islanders

Black

Hispanic

White

Two or More Races

3rd Grade Literacy – Race/Ethnicity Gap


0

20

40

60

80

100

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

Pe

rc

en

tag

e o

f S

tud

en

ts

Targeted SubgroupRace/Ethnicity Gap


Targeted Subgroup

Reading Proficiency Rates and

the Race/Ethnicity Gap

are Unchanged

3rd Grade Literacy – Poverty Gap


23.9 Percentage

Point Gap

0

20

40

60

80

100

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

Pe

rc

en

t M

ee

tin

g S

tan

da

rd

3rd Grade LiteracyPoverty Gap

Not Low Income

Low Income

24.3 Percentage

Point Gap

From the beginning of kindergarten through the 3rd grade, little has changed. The +20-point performance gap based on poverty persists.

3rd Grade Literacy - Synopsis


Two performance levels are clearly delineated

Not Targeted Subgroup (80 percent Meet/Exceed Standards)

Targeted Subgroup (60 percent Meet/Exceed Standards)

The performance levels of Not Low Income and Low

Income groups mimic the subgroups based on Race and

Ethnicity

The Gaps based on Race/Ethnicity and Poverty are

substantial and unchanged over the previous 5 years.

Stop and Think


These first data shots seem to show a connection between poverty status and achievement.

But after four years in public schools, wouldn’t you expect that most of these children in poverty would be catching up with those not in poverty?

Beginning in the 4th grade, we can see how many children in poverty are actually catching up. We can monitor the gaps every year between the 3rd and 8th grade.

How do you think the gaps will change by the end of the 8th grade?

Adequate Growth Percentiles (AGP)

and Starting Points


Keep-Up

Students at Achievement Level 3

AGP required to remain proficient in two years

Catch-Up

Students at Achievement Level 1 or 2

AGP required to become proficient within two years

Shown as KU and CU on the following slides

Adequate Growth - Schematic


Keep-Up

Catch-Up

Adequate Growth (AGPs)


What percentage of 4th

grade students met their Adequate Growth Percentile (AGP)?

What percentage is “on-track” to be proficient within two years?

About 65 percent are “on-track” for reading

About 58 percent are “on-track for math

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2011 2012 2013

Pe

rc

en

t M

ee

tin

g A

GP

4th GradeAdequate Growth

Reading

Math

First a Quick Look at Proficiency


2012 Poverty Gap is 23.8

percentage points.


percentage points.

0

20

40

60

80

100

Pe

rc

en

t M

ee

tin

g S

tan

da

rd

3rd Grade LiteracyPoverty Gap

Not Low Income

Low Income

0

20

40

60

80

100

Pe

rc

en

t M

ee

tin

g S

tan

da

rd

4th Grade LiteracyPoverty Gap

Not Low Income

Low Income

Catch-Up and Keep-Up Complexity


Keep-Up students are more

likely to meet AGP

Low Income students are more

likely to be in Catch-Up group

Low Income students are

less likely to meet AGP

regardless of KU/CU group

0

20

40

60

80

100

2011 2012 2013

Pe

rc

en

t M

ee

tin

g A

GP

4th Grade ReadingAdequate Growth

Keep-Up

Catch-Up

All

0

20

40

60

80

100

2011 2012 2013

Pe

rc

en

t M

ee

tin

g A

GP

4th Grade ReadingAGP by FRL Status

KU Not FRL

KU FRL

CU Not FRL

CU FRL

5th and 6th Grade Proficiency



percentage points


percentage points.

0

20

40

60

80

100

Pe

rc

en

t M

ee

tin

g S

tan

da

rd


Not Low Income

Low Income

0

20

40

60

80

100

Pe

rc

en

t M

ee

tin

g S

tan

da

rd


Not Low Income

Low Income

6th grade Reading AGPs


Keep-Up students are more

likely to meet AGP

Low Income students are more

likely to be in Catch-Up group

Low Income students are less

likely to meet AGP regardless

of KU/CU group

0

20

40

60

80

100

2011 2012 2013

Pe

rc

en

t M

ee

tin

g A

GP

6th Grade ReadingAGP by FRL Status

KU Not FRL

KU FRL

CU Not FRL

CU FRL

0

20

40

60

80

100

2011 2012 2013

Pe

rc

en

t M

ee

tin

g A

GP

6th Grade ReadingAdequate Growth

Keep-Up

Catch-Up

All

7th and 8th Grade Reading Proficiency



percentage points.

Poverty Gap is unchanged over

four testing cycles.


percentage points (pp).

Poverty Gap increased 2.9 pp

over four testing cycles.

0

20

40

60

80

100

Pe

rc

en

t M

ee

tin

g S

tan

da

rd


Not Low Income

Low Income

0

20

40

60

80

100

Pe

rc

en

t M

ee

tin

g S

tan

da

rd


Not Low Income

Low Income

Stop and Think


If you think about the previous few slides, remember that

the Poverty Gap for Reading Literacy in each assessment

cycle was approximately 22 to 24 percentage points.

Are you kind of surprised how persistent and consistent the

Poverty Gap is?

Let’s take another quick look in a couple of different charts.

Reading Literacy Poverty Gap

Cohort View


See how the proficiency rate

declines a little at the end of

middle school.

The 22 to 25 percentage point

Poverty Gap is persistent for

this pseudo-cohort of students.

0

20

40

60

80

100

3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Pe

rc

en

t M

ee

tin

g S

tan

da

rd

Cohort Literacy RatePoverty Gap

Not Low Income

Low Income

25.121.8

24.4 23.3 23.4 24.5

0

10

20

30

40

50


2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Pe

rc

en

tag

e P

oin

ts

Cohort Literacy RatePoverty Gap

Poverty Gap by Grade Level

2013 Snapshot


A Poverty Gap of about 24

percentage points persists

through middle school.

Literacy rates decline in upper

grade levels.

0

20

40

60

80

100


Pe

rc

en

t M

ee

tin

g S

tan

da

rd

Grade Level

2013 Grade Level Literacyby Poverty Status

Not Low Income

Low Income

23.4 22.424.3 24.0 24.8 24.4

0

10

20

30

40

50


Pe

rc

en

tag

e P

oin

ts

Grade Level

2013 LiteracyPoverty Gap

Poverty Gap by Grade Level

2014 Snapshot


A Poverty Gap of about 24

percentage points persists

through middle school.

Grade level rates may be

impacted by the SBAC Field

Test.

0

20

40

60

80

100


Pe

rc

en

t M

ee

tin

g S

tan

da

rd

Grade Level

2014 Grade Level Literacyby Poverty Status

Not Low Income

Low Income

24.3 24.4 24.723.0

26.4

21.1

0

10

20

30

40

50


Pe

rc

en

tag

e P

oin

ts

Grade Level

2014 LiteracyPoverty Gap

Stop and Think


40 percent of students in poverty do not meet grade-level standards in

reading.

The 23-24 percentage point Poverty Gap is persistent across grade

levels.

There is little evidence supporting the idea that children in poverty are

growing at a rate fast enough to meet standards in the near future.

Are you surprised by the persistent Poverty Gap?

S E C O N D ARY E D U C AT I O N

Gaps at the Beginning and End

of High School


0

20

40

60

80

100

Pe

rc

en

tag

e o

f S

tud

en

ts

High School Readinessby Special ESEA Subgroup

All Students

Special Education

Bilingual

Low Income

High School Readiness


Low Income

Bilingual

SWDs

0

20

40

60

80

100

Pe

rc

en

tag

e o

f S

tud

en

ts

High School ReadinessRace/Ethnicity Gap


Targeted Subgroup



Proficiency Rates Slightly Higher for Targeted Subgroup

Race/Ethnicity Gap Increases

0

20

40

60

80

100

Pe

rc

en

tag

e o

f S

tud

en

ts

High School ReadinessPoverty Gap

Not Low Income

Low Income

High School Readiness – Poverty Gap


Performance level increased slightly

Gap also increased slightly

High School Readiness - Synopsis


A rigorous indicator as only about 44 percent of all students meet this benchmark

Two performance levels based on Targeted Subgroup membership are evident

Both the Poverty and Race/Ethnicity Gaps increased slightly

How do you think the performance gaps will change by the end of high school?

4-Year Graduation Rates - Subgroups


0

20

40

60

80

100

2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

Pe

rc

en

t G

ra

du

ati

ng

4-Year Graduation Ratesby Special Subgroup

All Students

Low Income

Special Education

Bilingual

Gaps increased slightly as graduation

rates declined.

4-Year Graduation Rate – FRL Status


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

Pe

rc

en

t G

ra

du

ati

ng

4-Year Graduation Rateby Poverty Status

Not Low Income

Low Income

Gap is Widening

Low Income rate decreased 1.6 percentage points (2012 to 2013)

Not Low Income rate was unchanged from (2012 to 2013)

5-Year Graduation Rate


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

Pe

rc

en

t G

ra

du

ati

ng

5-Year Graduation Rateby Poverty Status

Not Low Income

Low Income

Gap is Decreasing

Students qualifying for Free and Reduced Price Lunch (Low

Income) benefit from the additional time to graduate at a higher

rate than Not Low Income students.

4-Year Graduation Rate - Synopsis


The 4-Year Graduation dropped 1.2 percentage points

in 2013 as compared to 2012.

A wide range of performance levels based on

subgroup membership are evident.

The Graduation Gap based on Poverty increased 1.8

percentage points over the same three-year period.

Substantial Gaps Throughout the System


0 20 40 60 80 100

Preschool Participation

Kindergarten Readiness

3rd Grade Literacy


High School Graduation

Percent of Students

Poverty Gap by Indicator

Low Income

Not Low Income

Persistence of Gaps (2013)


21.0

24.723.4

29.7

22.3

0

10

20

30

40

50

PreschoolParticipation

KindergartenReadiness

3rd GradeLiteracy

High SchoolReadiness

High SchoolGraduation

Pe

rc

en

tag

e P

oin

ts

Poverty Gap by Indicator

The magnitude of the gaps doesn’t really change much

across the system.

One Last Question


What surprised you the most about the nature of the

performance gaps?

J U L I A S U L I M AN , P O L I C Y AN ALY S T

WAS H I N G T O N S TAT E B O AR D O F E D U C AT I O N

Educational System Health


Educational System Inputs and Outputs


Gaps, Equity, and the Strategic Plan


Gaps are evident throughout the education system An inequitable system is not a healthy system

Additional indicators that look at opportunity inputs may help the Board better understand the health of the system

The Board has an important role to play in addressing those gaps Equity issues will be addressed in the three major strategic focus

areas:

Closing the achievement gap

Ensuring career and college readiness for all students

Accountability, recognition, and supports for students and schools

Strategic plan will impact decisions on any additional indicators and suggested reforms to close the gaps under 5491

performance gaps any groups left behind? · 2019-12-31 · 4-year graduation rate - synopsis...

Documents