2013 HPS MCAS - Hingham Schools

MCAS REPORT Spring 2013

Presented to the Hingham School Committee November 18, 2013 by Ellen Keane, Assistant Superintendent

OVERVIEW OF MCAS TESTS    

Grades 3-8 and 10 – ELA and Math Grades 4, 7 and 10 – Composition Grades 5 and 8 – Science and Technology Grades 9/10 – Science and Technology (Biology and Chemistry)

   

Multiple Choice Open Response Short Answer Writing Prompts

MCAS DATA  Percentage of Students at Proficient/ Advanced Levels  Composite Performance Index – CPI (measure of progress toward 100% proficient/advanced goal)  Student Growth Percentile - SGP (measure of progress in student performance over previous year compared to academic peers)

MCAS RESULTS Percentage of Students at Proficient / Advanced Levels 2013 Grades 3, 4 and 5

Mass.

Hingham

Grade 3 Reading

57

77

Grade 3 Math

66

Grade 4 ELA

Mass.

Hingham

Grade 6 ELA

67

86

80

Grade 6 Math

61

83

53

81

Grade 7 ELA

72

96

Grade 4 Math

52

79

Grade 7 Math

52

73

Grade 5 ELA

66

86

Grade 8 ELA

78

94

Grade 5 Math

61

81

Grade 8 Math

55

82

Grade 5 Science

51

78

Grade 8 Science

39

58

Mass.

Hingham

Mass.

Hingham

Grade 10 ELA

91

100

ELA

69

88

Grade 10 Math

80

95

Math

61

81

Grade 10 Science

71

94

Science

53

75

Grade 10

Grades 6, 7 and 8

All Grades

MCAS RESULTS Composite Performance Index Results (CPI) 2013 Grades 3, 4 and 5

Mass.

Hingham

Grade 3 Reading

83.3

92.6

Grade 3 Math

84.3

Grade 4 ELA

Grades 6, 7 and 8

Mass.

Hingham

Grade 6 ELA

85.1

94.8

92.4

Grade 6 Math

80.3

92.3

78.9

93.1

Grade 7 ELA

88.4

98.8

Grade 4 Math

80.2

92.6

Grade 7 Math

74.4

89.1

Grade 5 ELA

84.7

94.2

Grade 8 ELA

90.1

97.8

Grade 5 Math

80.6

91.9

Grade 8 Math

76.0

93.8

Grade 5 Science

78.5

91.6

Grade 8 Science

71.0

84.7

Grade 10

Mass.

Hingham

Mass.

Hingham

Grade 10 ELA

96.9

100

ELA

86.8

95.6

Grade 10 Math

90.2

98.1

Math

80.8

92.6

Grade 10 Science

88.0

98.1

Science

79.0

91.0

All Grades

MCAS RESULTS Student Growth Percentile (SGP) (Massachusetts 2013 Median Scores – 50th Percentile) Grades 4 and 5

Hingham

Grades 6, 7 and 8

Hingham

Grade 4 ELA

64*

Grade 6 ELA

60*

Grade 4 Math

66*

Grade 6 Math

47

Grade 5 ELA

67*

Grade 7 ELA

64*

Grade 5 Math

64*

Grade 7 Math

47

Grade 8 ELA

47

Grade 8 Math

56.5

Grade 10

Hingham

All Grades

Hingham

ELA

68*

ELA

63*

Math

56.5

Math

57

* High SGP Typical SGP Low SGP

60 - 99 40 - 59 0 - 39

DISTRICT STRENGTHS  Scores higher than state: percentage scoring proficient/advanced and CPIs

 Highest scores: gr. 10 ELA, math and science; gr. 6, 7 and 8 ELA and gr. 6 math; gr. 5 ELA and math; gr. 4 ELA  Highest CPIs: gr. 10 ELA, math and science; gr. 6, 7, and 8 ELA; gr. 5 ELA  Highest SGPs: gr. 10 ELA; gr. 6 and 7 ELA; gr. 5 ELA and math; gr. 4 ELA and math

DISTRICT STRENGTHS (continued)

 Increases in percentage at proficient/ advanced: gr. 10 ELA (100) and science; gr. 7 ELA; gr. 8 math; gr. 5 ELA; gr. 4 ELA and math  Special education CPIs higher than state CPIs

 Gender CPIs similar  Small range between elementary school scores: gr. 3 reading; gr. 4 ELA and math

 High district state rankings: gr. 10 ELA and science; gr. 7 ELA; gr. 4 ELA and math

DISTRICT CONCERNS  Lowest score: gr. 8 science

 Lowest SGP: gr. 6 and 7 math and gr. 8 ELA below state SGP  Lowest Special Education CPIs: gr. 3 math; gr. 6 and 7 math  Large range between elementary school scores: gr. 5 math and science

DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT STEPS  Analyze and monitor student performance results  Implement intervention and challenge programs  Implement state funded MCAS high school tutoring programs  Continue use of test taking and instructional strategies  Align curriculum with Common Core State Standards  Revise/update curriculum, as necessary  Continue professional development programs  Continue use of supervision and evaluation process

MASSACHUSETTS ACCOUNTABILITY REPORTS HINGHAM PUBLIC SCHOOLS DISTRICT 2013

MASSACHUSETTS ACCOUNTABILTIY SYSTEM  School Percentiles (1-99): Overall performance compared to other schools with same grade span  Accountability and Assistance Levels (1-5): Level 1 – highest performing to Level 5 – lowest performing – reported for all students and high needs subgroup  MCAS Participation: Minimum of 95% students required (ELA, math, science)

MASSACHUSETTS ACCOUNTABILTIY SYSTEM  Annual Progress & Performance Index / PPI (0-100): Measure of improvement toward indicator targets over two years – target of 75+  Cumulative Progress & Performance Index / CPPI (0-100): Combination of assessment data including indicators on performance and growth over last 4 years – target of 75+  CPPI Indicators: Narrowing proficiency gap (ELA, math, science), growth (ELA & math), 10% increase scoring advanced (ELA, math, science), 10% decrease scoring warning/ failing (ELA, math, science), high school only-graduation and drop out rates

HINGHAM 2013 ACCOUNTABILITY RESULTS SCHOOL PERCENTILES

     

East School Foster School PRS South School HMS HHS

88 88 98 90 89 94

HINGHAM 2013 ACCOUNTABILITY RESULTS CUMULATIVE PROGRESS AND PERFORMANCE INDEX AND STATE LEVELS

EAST FOSTER PRS SOUTH HMS HHS HINGHAM

CPPI – TARGET 75 All High Needs Levels Students Students 1-5 92 47 2 97

86

1

100 98

74 63

2 2

90

73

2

100 94

89 71

1 2

HINGHAM 2013 ACCOUNTABILITY RESULTS

 School Percentiles – All Schools “Highest Performing”  CPPI – All Students – All Schools Exceeded Target – High Levels of Progress  CPPI – High Needs – Met Target/Level 1: Foster and HHS

 CPPI – High Needs – Below Target/Level 2: East, PRS, South and HMS

DESE REQUIREMENTS LEVEL 2 SCHOOLS

 Analyze “High Needs” data

 Review level of implementation of “Conditions for School Effectiveness”  Revise School Improvement Plans with interventions and support strategies  Disseminate DESE required Report Cards to parents  Prioritize Title I funding for Level 2 schools