1. Franklin Public Schools MCAS Presentation November 19, 2013 Joyce Edwards Director of Instructional Services

2. Agenda Introduction CPI and PPI Accountability Data Exam Summary and P+ Growth Focus Areas Curriculum Plans PARCC

3. Introduction Goal is to reduce proficiency gaps by half by the end of the 2016-2017 school year Districts and schools placed into one of five state designated Accountability and Assistance Levels. Results determined using Composite Performance Index (CPI) and Progress and Performance Index (PPI) Results in aggregate and subgroup (high needs)

4. CPI Composite Performance Index (CPI) is the baseline indicator for aggregate performance CPI score becomes the baseline score for the next year CPI is calculated for ELA, Math and Science Uses 100 point index Used to calculate Progress and Performance Index (PPI)

5. PPI Determines accountability levels of districts, schools, and subgroups Includes student achievement in ELA, Math, and Science Incorporates growth and improvement as measured by the Student Growth Percentile (SGP) High school includes dropout and graduation rates PPI status based on progress and performance annually as well as cumulatively Cumulative calculation is based on four years of data

6. PPI PPI calculations for state, district, school, and subgroup levels Reports aggregate and subgroups High needs students are considered to be students who belong to at least one of these subgroups: o students with disabilities o English language learners o economically disadvantaged students

7. PPI Further subgroup reporting includes: African American/Black students, Asian students Hispanic/Latino students White students Multi-race Non-Hispanic/Latino students Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander students Native American students

8. PPI Indicators used are: ELA Achievement (based on CPI) Mathematics Achievement (based on CPI) Science Achievement (based on CPI) ELA Growth/Improvement (based on median SGP) Mathematics Growth/Improvement (based on median SGP) Cohort Graduation Rate Annual Dropout Rate

9. Accountability Status District is a Level 2 Based on category of lowest school All Franklin schools are all either Level 1 or Level 2

10. Accountability Status Level 1 schools: Franklin High School Kennedy Elementary School

11. Exam Summary Analysis Franklin students continue to outperform students across the state On every MCAS test over 89% of Franklin students passed Some tests showing passing rates of 98% Overall: quite similar to last year

12. Exam Results GradeExam % of Students Passing Franklin TY/LY % of Students Passing State TY/LY 3ELA97/9692/91 3Math95/9489/86 4ELA93/9587/86 4Math96/9690/88 5ELA96/9590/89 5Math94/9386/83 5Science96/9688/86 6ELA96/9690/89 6Math93/9485/84 7ELA98/9893/93 7Math91/9079/82 8ELA98/9993/94 8Math89/9480/81 8Science94/9682/80 9Biology98/9895/92 10ELA98/9998/97 10Math97/9693/93 All GradesELA96/9792/91 All GradesMath94/9486/85 All GradesScience96/9788/87

13. P+ Analysis P+ is percentage of students achieving in the Advanced and Proficient categories Significantly outperformed state results on all 20 tests o Performance over state averages as much as 21% points higher ELA continues to be stronger than math but gap narrowing significantly Will continue to focus on subgroups as well as aggregate Overall: quite similar to last year

14. P+ Results GradeExam Proficient or Higher Franklin TY/LY Proficient or Higher State TY/LY 3ELA 68/7357/61 3Math 81/7367/61 4ELA 70/7953/57 4Math 70/7552/51 5ELA 83/7965/61 5Math 80/7861/57 5Science 68/6651/50 6ELA 82/8267/66 6Math 75/7760/60 7ELA 84/8771/71 7Math 72/6952/51 8ELA 93/9378/81 8Math 74/7254/52 8Science 60/6539/43 9Biology 88/9071/72 10ELA 95/9591/88 10Math 92/9180/78 All gradesELA 82/8469/69 All gradesMath 77/7561/59 All gradesScience 71/7253/54

15. Growth Analysis SPG RangeGrowth Description 1-39Lower Growth 40-60Moderate/Typical Growth 61-99Higher Growth Growth model is another method to evaluate performance Measures progress by tracking scores from one year to next Intended to be used in conjunction with the MCAS achievement levels Student growth percentile (SGP) is calculated using two or more years of MCAS data. Growth for students is measured by comparing changes with that of their “academic peers.” Academic peers are students in the state who have the same MCAS performance history Typical and desired growth is 40-60%

16. Growth Data ExamStudent Growth Percent Grade 4 ELA63% Grade 4 Math59% Grade 5 ELA52% Grade 5 Math56% Grade 6 ELA45% Grade 6 Math38% Grade 7 ELA49% Grade 7 Math44% Grade 8 ELA52% Grade 8 Math51% Grade 10 ELA55% Grade 10 Math44% All grades ELA52% All grades Math49%

17. Focus Areas Data analyses, program and curricular review and changes, professional development are part of increased student achievement at all levels Teachers meet by grade level (building- based and district-wide) to analyze MCAS data Use data to inform instruction Collaborate on improving student performance and instructional practice

18. Focus Areas Alignment work continues to meet requirements of 2011 Massachusetts Frameworks in ELA and Math Significant shifts in content and pedagogy Development of local assessments to determine achievement and growth Targeted MCAS support work with identified students

19. Curriculum Plans Expanded Keys to Literacy to include writing at the middle schools o High school training for the first time Continuation of extensive PD for elementary math Revision of elementary report cards in progress Continued multi-year implementation of literacy programs for elementary: o Reader’s Workshop o Writer’s Workshop o Fundations

20. Curriculum Plans Professional development: o building internal capacity for curriculum leadership o graduate courses o content and instructional workshops o instruction in the use of technology o professional learning communities o use of consultants in Math and ELA but building internal capacity.

21. Future of MCAS Massachusetts is part of a multi-state state consortium developing the next generation of assessments PARCC is the Partnership for the Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers Tests are being field tested this year and piloted during the 2014-2015 school year State will then decide whether or not to adopt PARCC testing to replace MCAS in ELA and Math as of 2016 MCAS testing will change to reflect adoption of the new Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks MCAS testing to be phased out by 2015 Massachusetts is part of a 24 state consortium Developing the next generation of assessments

22. PARCC Field Testing this year in 85% of MA schools including in Franklin Some students will take a Performance Based Assessment (PBA) Some students will take the End of Year (EOY)Assessment Some students will take both Some testing will be done electronically and some paper/pencil Complete list of schools will be available in early December

23. PARCC Future decisions: Will we choose to opt out of MCAS testing this year (where possible) to avoid double testing students? o Decision to be finalized when complete list of schools/grades/classes is available in December o Will only apply to students taking the PBA assessment o Will create data gaps for future analysis There will be no district or student data for PARCC Will we choose exclusively PARCC or MCAS next year? o As of now, the state is stating that districts will be able to make this choice If PARCC-will create data gaps as there will not be historical data If MCAS-will be data gaps with historical data if we opt some students out of MCAS tests this year