Measuring College and Career Readiness PARCC Results: Spring 2015 and Spring 2016 Administrations Harding Township School September 26, 2016 Measuring College and Career Readiness

New jersey’s statewide assessment program 2016 marks the 2nd administration of the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) and the first opportunity to compare year-to-year results as the following slides will show. Students took PARCC English Language Arts and Literacy Assessments (ELA/L) in grades 3–8. Students took PARCC Mathematics Assessments in grades 3–8 and End of Course PARCC Assessments in Algebra I and Geometry.

PARCC Performance levels Level 1: Not yet meeting grade-level expectations Level 2: Partially meeting grade-level expectations Level 3: Approaching grade-level expectations Level 4: Meeting grade-level expectations Level 5: Exceeding grade-level expectations

Comparison of New Jersey Students Tested Spring 2015 and Spring 2016 PARCC Administrations Mathematics Students Tested Year to Year Increase 2016 2015 Grade 3 99,846 95,932 3,914 Grade 4 97,620 94,484 3,136 Grade 5 96,449 95,293 1,156 Grade 6 97,546 93,128 4,418 Grade 7 93,114 87,300 5,814 Grade 8* 60,768 58,078 2,690 Algebra I 106,118 91,740 14,378 Algebra II 74,643 58,026 16,617 Geometry 84,589 71,137 13,452 TOTAL 810,693 745,118 65,575 *Approximately 30,000 New Jersey students in grade 8 participated in the PARCC Algebra I assessment in place of the 8th grade Math assessment. Notes: Data shown is preliminary. “Students Tested” represents individual valid test scores for Mathematics.

Comparison of New Jersey Students Tested Spring 2015 and Spring 2016 PARCC Administrations English Language Arts/Literacy Students Tested Year to Year Increase 2016 2015 Grade 3 99,045 95,227 3,818 Grade 4 96,823 93,769 3,054 Grade 5 95,760 94,599 1,161 Grade 6 96,896 92,578 4,318 Grade 7 95,979 90,227 5,752 Grade 8 94,266 88,421 5,845 Grade 9 93,830 81,574 12,256 Grade 10 84,903 71,659 13,244 Grade 11* 68,862 61,768 7,094 TOTAL 826,364 769,822 56,542 Note: Data shown is preliminary. “Students Tested” represents individual valid test scores for English Language Arts/Literacy.

Harding Township school’s 2016 PARCC GRADE-LEVEL Outcomes Mathematics Count of Valid Test Scores Not Yet Meeting (Level 1) Partially Meeting (Level 2) Approaching Expectations (Level 3) (Level 4) Exceeding Expectation (Level 5) District % >= Level 4 NJ % >= Level 4 Grade 3 32 3% 0% 6% 44% 47% 91% 52% Grade 4 27 4% 74% 22% 96% 46% Grade 5 34 12% 26% 56% 62% Grade 6 31 10% 58% 23% 81% 43% Grade 7 16% 13% 48% 71% 38% Grade 8, Algebra I Geometry N/A N<10 - HTS Totals 155 1% 7% 24% 80% + 21% from 2015 45% 6

Count of Valid Test Scores Exceeding Expectation (Level 5) Harding Township school’s 2016 PARCC GRADE-LEVEL Outcomes English language arts/literacy Count of Valid Test Scores Not Yet Meeting (Level 1) Partially Meeting (Level 2) Approaching Expectations (Level 3) (Level 4) Exceeding Expectation (Level 5) District % >= Level 4 NJ % >= Level 4 Grade 3 32 3% 0% 6% 69% 22% 91% 47% Grade 4 27 52% 48% 100% 54% Grade 5 34 12% 71% 18% 89% 53% Grade 6 31 10% 35% 87% Grade 7 13% 68% 81% 57% Grade 8 17 24% 77% HTS Totals 172 2% 8% 36% 88% + 11% from 2015

Comparison of Harding Township School Spring 2015 and Spring 2016 PARCC Administrations Grade level English Language Arts/Literacy Not Yet Meeting Expectations (Level 1) Partially Meeting Expectations (Level 2) Approaching Expectations (Level 3) Meeting Expectations (Level 4) Exceeding Expectations (Level 5) 2015 2016 Grade 3 3 8 6 83 69 22 Grade 4 5 23 43 52 30 48 Grade 5 14 12 60 71 20 18 Grade 6 10 39 36 35 Grade 7 11 21 13 32 26 68 Grade 8 50 53 33 24 Notes: Percentages may not total 100 due to rounding.

COMPARISON OF Harding Township School 2015 and 2016 Spring PARCC Administrations ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS/LITERACY % Change in Level 1 and Level 2 % Change in Level 4 and Level 5 Harding Township School State Grade 3 0 to 3% ↑ 3% ↓ 3.4% 91 to 91 % Even ↑ 4.1% Grade 4 5 to 0% ↓ 5% 0.6% 73 to 100% ↑ 27% 2.4% Grade 5 6 to 0% ↓ 6% 0.9% 80 to 89% ↑ 9% 1.7% Grade 6 12 to 3% ↓ 9% 1.9% 75 to 87% ↑ 12% 3.5% Grade 7 22 to 6% ↓ 16% 3.3% 58 to 81% ↑ 23% 4.7% Grade 8 3 to 18% ↑ 15% 3.0% 83 to 77% 3.6% An up arrow indicates an increase of the % change from the previous year where a down arrow shows a decrease of the % change from the previous year.

Not Yet Meeting Expectations Comparison of Harding township school Spring 2015 and Spring 2016 PARCC Administrations grade/course level MATHEMATICS Not Yet Meeting Expectations (Level 1) Partially Meeting Expectations (Level 2) Approaching Expectations (Level 3) Meeting Expectations (Level 4) Exceeding Expectations (Level 5) 2015 2016 Grade 3 3 8 6 58 44 33 47 Grade 4 5 20 4 68 74 22 Grade 5 17 12 23 26 46 56 11 Grade 6 18 21 10 52 Grade 7 31 16 13 48 Grade 8* N<10 Algebra I Geometry *Our Eighth grade students took the Grade 8 math assessment, Algebra I assessment, and the Geometry assessment. All three of these assessments had less than 10 students (N<10) taking them. As a result these scores will not be reported by the district. Notes: Percentages may not total 100 due to rounding.

COMPARISON Harding Township’s 2015-2016 Spring PARCC Administrations MATHEMATICS % Change in Level 1 and Level 2 % Change in Level 4 and Level 5 Harding Township School State Grade 3 0 to 3% ↑ 3% ↓ 2.8% 91 to 91 % Even ↑ 6.8% Grade 4 5 to 0% ↓ 5% 2.5% 76 to 96% ↑ 20% 5.9% Grade 5 20 to 12 % ↓ 8% 2.3% 57 to 62% ↑ 5% 6.2% Grade 6 21 to 9% ↓ 12% 1.0% 58 to 81% ↑ 23% 2.2% Grade 7 37 to 16% ↓ 21% 0.9% 6 to 71% ↑ 65% 1.9% Grade 8 Algebra I Geometry - N<10 1.3% 2.1% An up arrow indicates an increase of the % change from the previous year where a down arrow shows a decrease of the % change from the previous year. N<10 denotes that the sample size for this subject /grade is less than 10 students, and therefore not reportable.

Third grade Results- HTS % of students passing (scores of level 4 or level 5)

Fourth Grade results-HTS % of students passing (scores of level 4 or level 5)

Fifth Grade results-HTS % of students passing (Scores of level 4 or level 5)

Sixth Grade results-HTS % of students passing (Scores of level 4 or level 5)

Seventh Grade results-HTS % of Students passing (Scores of Level 4 or level 5)

Eighth Grade Results-HTS % of students passing (Scores of Level 4 or level 5)

Harding township school’s 2016 NJASK GRADE-LEVEL Outcomes Science Count of Valid Test Scores Partially Proficient Proficient Advanced Proficient District % Passing Grade 4 28 0% 18% 82% 100% Grade 8 22 14% 45% 41% 86% HTS Totals 50 6% 30% 64% 94%

Highlights and Takeaways from the 2016 PARCC Administration Language Arts: -HTS saw an increase in passing scores for every cohort grouping: 3rd to 4th= up 9% 4th to 5th= up 16% 5th to 6th= up 7% 6th to 7th= up 6% 7th to 8th= up 19% As a school, HTS had 88% of its students passing the ELA assessment versus 77% passing last year (a double digit increase of 11%) As a school, HTS had 4.0% less students achieving a Level 1 or Level 2 score in a comparison of same grade scores (2016 vs. 2015) Our Fourth grade students achieved a 100 percent passing score in PARCC ELA and NJASK Science

Highlights and takeaways from the 2016 PARCC administration Continued Mathematics -HTS saw an increase in passing scores for the following cohort groups: 3rd to 4th= up 5% 5th to 6th= up 24% 6th to 7th= up 13% As a school, HTS had 80% of its students passing the Math assessment versus 59% last year (a double digit increase of 21%) As a school, HTS had 8.6% fewer students achieving a Level 1 or Level 2 score in a comparison of same grade scores (2016 vs. 2015)

Sample of HTS Curricular and Professional Development Initiatives from 2015-16 Implemented Columbia’s Teachers College Writing Workshop Grades K-5 Continued the full implementation of the Math in Focus program K-5 Next Generation Science Standards - Grades 6-8 Continued implementation of Columbia’s Teachers College Reading Workshop K-5 Faculty and staff attended an additional 6 hours of professional development hours (e.g. Madison Academy) outside of school hours

Questions to Guide PARCC Data Reflection How will we use PARCC data to identify strengths and gaps that exist in our curriculum and instruction? How will we use PARCC data as a tool to address areas in need of improvement or enhancement? How can we provide additional resources and support for our educators to meet the learning needs of all our students?

Year Two Data Plan: Drilling Down District and School Level Data: Math, ELA, reading and writing, and also by grade levels Disaggregated data, by subgroups Disaggregated data by categories, (i.e., standards sub-claims) Item analysis Student-level analysis

Next Steps for HTS Teacher and administrative analysis of instructional areas in need of additional attention -Grade level analysis -School-wide analysis Teacher and Director of Curriculum- Analysis of the pacing of our curriculum -Are all areas of the curriculum being adequately addressed? -Are there areas of the curriculum that need to be moved earlier or later in the year for cohesiveness and added understanding? Administrative analysis of district-wide and grade level trends in Mathematics and English Language Arts

Resources for Parents Information on the new 2015-16 PARCC Student Reports: www.state.nj.us/education/assessment/parcc/scores/ Understanding the student score reports (with translations): understandthescore.org/ Sample report