1. MCAS REPORT Spring 2013 Presented to the Hingham School Committee November 18, 2013 by Ellen Keane, Assistant Superintendent

2. 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

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

4. MCAS RESULTS Percentage of Students at Proficient / Advanced Levels 2013 Grades 3, 4 and 5Mass.Hingham Grade 3 Reading5777 Grade 3 Math6680 Grade 4 ELA5381 Grade 4 Math5279 Grade 5 ELA6686 Grade 5 Math6181 Grade 5 Science5178 Grades 6, 7 and 8Mass.Hingham Grade 6 ELA6786 Grade 6 Math6183 Grade 7 ELA7296 Grade 7 Math5273 Grade 8 ELA7894 Grade 8 Math5582 Grade 8 Science3958 Grade 10Mass.Hingham Grade 10 ELA91100 Grade 10 Math8095 Grade 10 Science7194 All GradesMass.Hingham ELA6988 Math6181 Science5375

5. MCAS RESULTS Composite Performance Index Results (CPI) 2013 Grades 3, 4 and 5Mass.Hingham Grade 3 Reading83.392.6 Grade 3 Math84.392.4 Grade 4 ELA78.993.1 Grade 4 Math80.292.6 Grade 5 ELA84.794.2 Grade 5 Math80.691.9 Grade 5 Science78.591.6 Grades 6, 7 and 8Mass.Hingham Grade 6 ELA85.194.8 Grade 6 Math80.392.3 Grade 7 ELA88.498.8 Grade 7 Math74.489.1 Grade 8 ELA90.197.8 Grade 8 Math76.093.8 Grade 8 Science71.084.7 Grade 10Mass.Hingham Grade 10 ELA96.9100 Grade 10 Math90.298.1 Grade 10 Science88.098.1 All GradesMass.Hingham ELA86.895.6 Math80.892.6 Science79.091.0

6. MCAS RESULTS Student Growth Percentile (SGP) (Massachusetts 2013 Median Scores – 50 th Percentile) Grade 10Hingham ELA68* Math56.5 Grades 4 and 5Hingham Grade 4 ELA64* Grade 4 Math66* Grade 5 ELA67* Grade 5 Math64* Grades 6, 7 and 8Hingham Grade 6 ELA60* Grade 6 Math47 Grade 7 ELA64* Grade 7 Math47 Grade 8 ELA47 Grade 8 Math56.5 All GradesHingham ELA 63* Math57 *High SGP60-99 Typical SGP40-59 Low SGP0-39

7. DISTRICT STRENGTHS Scores higher than state Scores higher than state: percentage scoring proficient/advanced and CPIs Highest scores 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 Highest CPIs: gr. 10 ELA, math and science; gr. 6, 7, and 8 ELA; gr. 5 ELA Highest SGPs Highest SGPs: gr. 10 ELA; gr. 6 and 7 ELA; gr. 5 ELA and math; gr. 4 ELA and math

8. DISTRICT STRENGTHS DISTRICT STRENGTHS (continued) Increases in percentage at proficient/ advanced 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 Special education CPIs higher than state CPIs Gender CPIs similar Gender CPIs similar Small range between elementary school scores Small range between elementary school scores: gr. 3 reading; gr. 4 ELA and math High district state rankings High district state rankings: gr. 10 ELA and science; gr. 7 ELA; gr. 4 ELA and math

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

10. 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

11. MASSACHUSETTS ACCOUNTABILITY REPORTS H INGHAM P UBLIC S CHOOLS D ISTRICT 2013

12. 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)

13. 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

14. HINGHAM 2013 ACCOUNTABILITY RESULTS SCHOOL PERCENTILES East School 88 Foster School 88 PRS 98 South School 90 HMS89 HHS94

15. HINGHAM 2013 ACCOUNTABILITY RESULTS CUMULATIVE PROGRESS AND PERFORMANCE INDEX AND STATE LEVELS CPPI – TARGET 75 All Students High Needs Students Levels 1-5 EAST92472 FOSTER97861 PRS100742 SOUTH98632 HMS90732 HHS100891 HINGHAM94712

16. 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

17. 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