Bridgewater-Raritan Regional School District District Testing Report: Analyzing The Data Bringing the Conversation to the Table Setting Priorities and Moving Ahead

Introduction The first section of this presentation presents an overview of the district test results on New Jersey standardized tests and highlights areas where the district differs from comparable districts (same DFG or District Factor Group, which is a measure of socioeconomic status) Numbers in bold reflect a difference of at least 1 percentage point

Analyzing Data: NJASK, Language Arts Literacy (Area of weakness: difference of more than 1.0 percentage points in comparison to DFG. Area of strength: exceeds DFG) Partially Proficient Proficient Advanced Proficient 3: BRRSD (689) DFG STATE 13.1 - 7.3 16.6 76.2 79.1 13.7 10.7 - 8.2 4: BRRSD (788) 16.8 - 8.7 19.4 75.8 79.2 73.9 7.5 - 12.1 6.7 5: BRRSD (736) 3.9 3.4 11.2 73.4 74.3 75.9 22.7 22.3 12.9 6: BRRSD (705) 7.5 + 9.5 24.2 71.6 67.6 63.1 20.9 - 22.9 12.7 7: BRRSD (717) 7.4 7.2 19.9 66.7 70.5 67.8 26.0 + 12.3

Analyzing Data: NJASK, Mathematics (Area of weakness: difference of more than 1.0 percentage points in comparison to DFG. Area of strength: exceeds DFG) Partially Proficient Proficient Advanced Proficient 3: BRRSD (694) DFG STATE 5.8 4.8 12.7 45.8 49.2 55.0 48.4 + 46.0 32.3 4: BRRSD (793) 5.4 + 6.1 15.3 38.8 36.7 43.7 55.7 57.2 41.0 5: BRRSD (741) 5.0 + 6.8 15.8 49.1 50.3 54.7 45.9 + 42.9 29.4 6: BRRSD (706) 3.1 + 10.1 21.0 49.4 58.5 60.0 47.5 + 31.3 19.0 7: BRRSD (718) 14.6 + 17.3 33.7 51.1 50.5 34.3 + 28.0

Analyzing Data: NJ GEPA, Language Arts Literacy (Area of weakness: difference of more than 1.0 percentage points in comparison to DFG. Area of strength: exceeds DFG) Partially Proficient Proficient Advanced Proficient 8: BRRSD (748) DFG STATE 11.4 10.8 26.4 64.4 68.7 62.4 24.2 + 20.5 11.3

Analyzing Data: NJ GEPA, Mathematics (Area of weakness: difference of more than 1.0 percentage points in comparison to DFG. Area of strength: exceeds DFG) Partially Proficient Proficient Advanced Proficient 8: BRRSD (751) DFG STATE 16.1 - 14.7 31.6 47.1 48.1 45.9 36.8 37.1 22.5

Analyzing Data: NJ HSPA, Language Arts Literacy (Area of weakness: difference of more than 1.0 percentage points in comparison to DFG. Area of strength: exceeds DFG) Partially Proficient Proficient Advanced Proficient 11: BRRSD (669) DFG STATE 6.7 - 4.7 14.7 64.0 60.1 66.0 29.3 - 35.2 19.4

Analyzing Data: NJ HSPA, Mathematics (Area of weakness: difference of more than 1.0 percentage points in comparison to DFG. Area of strength: exceeds DFG) Partially Proficient Proficient Advanced Proficient 11: BRRSD (669) DFG STATE 12.8 - 10.8 26.6 46.1 48.0 50.2 41.1 41.2 23.2

Bringing the Conversation to the Table Examine test scores in comparison to model districts Examine test scores from a multi-year perspective Examine test scores from a longitudinal perspective Examine test scores from a building perspective Examine test scores in conjunction with local assessments Recognize areas of strength and areas of need Evaluate the curriculum

Setting Priorities & Moving Ahead Language Arts Literacy, K-12: General Population and Special Education Population Mathematics, 8-12: Special Education Population Design ongoing local assessment that will drive the curriculum Align measurable building objectives with test improvement priorities Develop action plans Balance test improvement strategies with good pedagogy Align staff development with needs of the district

Bridgewater-Raritan Regional School District Framework for Accountability 2006 - 2007

What Does It All Mean? NCLB No Child Left Behind AYP Adequate Yearly Progress NJASK New Jersey Assessment of Skills and Knowledge GEPA Grade Eight Proficiency Assessment HSPA High School Proficiency Assessment APA Alternative Proficient Assessment LEP Limited English Proficient IEP Individualized Education Plan

Background No Child Left Behind Act 2001 Signed into law on January 8, 2002 This law represents the some of the most significant changes to the Elementary and Secondary Schools Act (ESEA) since its enactment in 1965

Introduction NCLB contains four major education reforms: ►Increased focus on accountability ►Increased flexibility and local control ► Expanded educational options for parents, and ► Focus on research-based methods and practices

Guidelines for Assessing Students Goal: All students will be assessed 95% of each student group must participate in the assessment process Students enrolled for <1 year will not be included in the accountability process Students with severe disabilities must be assessed utilizing the APA Out-of-district students are included in their home school’s accountability process LEP students must also be assessed

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Each state established their own definition of AYP to measure the yearly implemental progress of schools in reaching 100% proficiency by 2013-2014 All groups must attain 100% proficiency in language arts literacy and mathematics by 2014

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) continued Student progress is also assessed by student groups: Ethnicity: (American Indian, Asian, Black, Hispanic, Pacific Islander, White, Other) Income: (Economically Disadvantaged/Non-Economically Disadvantaged) LEP Special Education

Incremental Increases Starting Point 2003 2005 ▼ 2008 2011 2014 LAL Elementary Grades 3, 4, 5 68 75 82 91 100 Middle Grades 6, 7, 8 58 66 76 87 High School Grade 11 73 79 85 92 Math 53 62 39 49 55 64 74 86

Multiple Measures New Jersey utilizes additional indicators of student performance in combination with statewide assessments. ► Graduation rate for Middle/High School levels ► Attendance rate for Elementary levels

NJASK3 Language Arts Literacy Target = 75% Subgroup % Proficient 2005 % Proficient 2006 % Proficient 2007 AYP Met Total Students 92.5 88.3 86.9 Y General Ed 96.2 92.7 90.5 Special Ed 57.4 47.6 53.0 LEP 100 16.7 80.0 American Indian Asian 97.4 94.7 95.6 Black 76.9 78.6 53.8 Hispanic 81.4 68.6 75.0 Pacific Islander White 88.9 86.5 Other Economically Disadvantaged 81.6 56.2 69.2 *If the district did not have a viable subgroup, the areas were blackened.

NJASK3 Mathematics Target = 62% Subgroup % Proficient 2005 % Proficient 2006 % Proficient 2007 AYP Met Total Students 91.9 93.3 93.8 Y General Ed 94.4 95.6 95.2 Special Ed 73.5 71.4 83.6 LEP 50.0 68.7 84.2 American Indian Asian 99.1 98.7 97.1 Black 84.6 85.7 53.8 Hispanic 80.9 84.3 Pacific Islander 75.0 100 White 91.5 93.1 93.9 Other Economically Disadvantaged 78.0 77.6 74.4

NJASK4 Language Arts Literacy Target = 75% Subgroup % Proficient 2005 % Proficient 2006 % Proficient 2007 AYP Met Total Students 90.4 83.0 82.7 Y General Ed 95.1 88.4 87.9 Special Ed 52.8 48.4 47.8 LEP 50.0 60.0 American Indian Asian 96.6 92.9 Black 72.7 56.0 72.0 Hispanic 88.9 68.0 73.3 Pacific Islander 100 White 89.5 82.4 81.2 Other Economically Disadvantaged 75.5 63.9 61.9

NJASK4 Mathematics Target = 62% Subgroup % Proficient 2005 % Proficient 2006 % Proficient 2007 AYP Met Total Students 90.6 92.0 94.6 Y General Ed 94.3 96.2 97.1 Special Ed 63.9 68.1 77.2 LEP 55.6 44.4 81.8 American Indian Asian 98.3 96.8 98.7 Black 45.5 84.0 Hispanic 72.3 76.9 90.3 Pacific Islander 100 White 91.7 93.8 Other Economically Disadvantaged 66.7 56.8 84.1

NJASK5 Language Arts Literacy Target = 75% Subgroup % Proficient 2006 % Proficient 2007 AYP Met Total Students 95.7 96.1 Y General Ed 98.2 98.4 Special Ed 80.2 LEP 66.7 77.8 American Indian Asian 96.0 96.8 Black 83.3 82.6 Hispanic 94.1 86.3 Pacific Islander 100 White 97.6 Other Economically Disadvantaged 93.2 86.4

NJASK5 Mathematics Target = 62% Subgroup % Proficient 2006 % Proficient 2007 AYP Met Total Students 94.9 95.0 Y General Ed 97.7 98.1 Special Ed 79.3 73.3 LEP 55.6 81.8 American Indian Asian 99.2 Black 75.0 73.9 Hispanic 83.0 84.3 Pacific Islander 100 White 95.5 96.1 Other 66.7 Economically Disadvantaged 80.4 97.8

NJASK6 Language Arts Literacy Target = 66% Subgroup % Proficient 2006 % Proficient 2007 AYP Met Total Students 87.5 92.5 Y General Ed 93.9 97.0 Special Ed 54.3 69.0 LEP 66.7 50.0 American Indian 100 Asian 94.5 96.7 Black 78.3 75.0 Hispanic 67.3 91.5 Pacific Islander White 88.2 92.4 Other 60.0 Economically Disadvantaged 74.2

NJASK6 Mathematics Target = 49% Subgroup % Proficient 2006 % Proficient 2007 AYP Met Total Students 88.8 96.9 Y General Ed 95.2 98.8 Special Ed 54.8 86.0 LEP 80.0 88.9 American Indian 100 Asian 98.5 Black 69.6 81.2 Hispanic 72.5 55.7 Pacific Islander White Other Economically Disadvantaged 75.6 93.5

NJASK7 Language Arts Literacy Target = 66% Subgroup % Proficient 2006 % Proficient 2007 AYP Met Total Students 93.1 92.6 Y General Ed 97.3 98.0 Special Ed 68.3 67.5 LEP 81.8 100 American Indian Asian 95.2 96.2 Black 80.0 77.3 Hispanic 89.5 72.9 Pacific Islander White 93.5 94.3 Other 50.0 Economically Disadvantaged 88.2 74.3

NJASK7 Mathematics Target = 49% Subgroup % Proficient 2006 % Proficient 2007 AYP Met Total Students 85.9 85.4 Y General Ed 92.9 92.4 Special Ed 48.1 53.2 LEP 53.3 80.0 American Indian 100 Asian 97.6 95.5 Black 65.4 72.7 Hispanic 68.3 62.5 Pacific Islander White 86.2 85.5 Other 50.0 Economically Disadvantaged 67.9 73.5

GEPA – Language Arts Literacy Target = 66% Subgroup % Proficient 2005 % Proficient 2006 % Proficient 2007 AYP Met Total Students 87.3 88.8 88.6 Y General Ed 96.7 95.4 95.5 Special Ed 46.0 55.6 53.6 LEP 42.9 100 45.5 American Indian Asian 92.7 96.2 96.8 Black 90.5 61.9 63.3 Hispanic 72.5 79.6 75.4 Pacific Islander White 87.2 89.3 89.7 Other Economically Disadvantaged 58.6 72.7 77.8

GEPA – Mathematics Target = 49% Subgroup % Proficient 2005 % Proficient 2006 % Proficient 2007 AYP Met Total Students 77.8 80.7 83.2 Y General Ed 87.5 90.1 90.9 Special Ed 35.7 34.2 40.5 LEP 44.4 60.0 75.0 American Indian Asian 87.4 94.4 96.0 Black 42.9 33.3 53.1 Hispanic 46.3 61.1 63.8 Pacific Islander 100 White 79.7 81.7 83.9 Other Economically Disadvantaged 41.4 51.5 72.2

HSPA – Language Arts Literacy Target = 79% Subgroup % Proficient 2005 % Proficient 2006 % Proficient 2007 AYP Met Total Students 92.2 94.5 93.3 Y General Ed 96.8 98.8 98.4 Special Ed 75.6 73.8 66.7 N LEP 42.9 50.0 33.3 American Indian Asian 95.0 97.1 96.2 Black 73.3 75.0 85.2 Hispanic 78.6 84.4 80.8 Pacific Islander 100 White 94.2 95.4 94.4 Other Economically Disadvantaged 55.6 69.2 73.5

HSPA – Mathematics Target = 64% Subgroup % Proficient 2005 % Proficient 2006 % Proficient 2007 AYP Met Total Students 87.8 88.4 87.2 Y General Ed 94.3 95.8 94.8 Special Ed 58.6 48.5 44.0 N LEP 57.1 83.3 33.3 American Indian Asian 96.3 95.1 Black 60.0 68.7 53.8 Hispanic 62.5 71.9 69.2 Pacific Islander 100 White 90.5 88.9 89.3 Other 66.7 Economically Disadvantaged 61.5 58.8

SE Test Results

SE Students AYP

SE Student HSPA Language Arts

SE Students HSPA Math

SE Students GEPA Language Arts

SE Students GEPA Math

SE Students NJ ASK 7 Language Arts

SE Students NJ ASK 7 Math

SE Students NJ ASK 6 Language Arts

SE Students NJ ASK 6 Math

SE Students NJ ASK 5 Language Arts

SE Students NJ ASK 5 Math

SE Students NJ ASK 4 Language Arts

SE Students NJ ASK 4 Math

SE Students NJ ASK 3 Language Arts

SE Students NJ ASK 3 Math

SE Students Language Arts

SE Students Math

What are we doing to improve instruction? Ongoing analysis of test data for group &/or individual instructional decisions HS Model: Double sections English & Math (year three) Systematic staff development to increase teachers’ understanding of test format and response construction, particularly in writing

What are we doing to improve instruction? (continued) Focus on Literacy SE Literacy Coach Systematic staff development Pre-K/K literacy training Assessment – Linking assessment to instruction Writing process Word study Reading comprehension/fluency New teaching teams

Bridgewater-Raritan Regional School District Setting Goals and Objectives for Student Achievement

Goal: To Leave No Child Behind Objective: Meet Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) with all subgroups. Strategies: Determine level of proficiency required for 2008 administration of NJ standardized tests. Identify sub-groups in each building who are ‘at-risk’ for not meeting AYP. Develop specific objectives to meet the needs of sub-groups. Identify resources and personnel needed to achieve objectives.

Future AYP Benchmarks 2008 2011 2014 LAL 3-7 82% 91% 100% LAL 8 76% 87% LAL 11 85% 92% Math 3-7 73% Math 8 62% 79% Math 11 74% 86%

Areas of Concern Primary Schools Intermediate and Middle Schools High School Adamsville: LAL in SE JFK: Gr. 3 LAL, Gr. 4 LAL in SE Grade 5: LAL and Math in sub-groups LAL and Math in sub-groups Bradley Gardens: Gr.4 LAL Milltown: Gr. 4 LAL Grade 6: LAL in sub-groups Crim: Gr. 4 LAL in SE Van Holten: Gr. 3 LAL in SE and Math Grade 7: LAL and Math in sub-groups Hamilton: Gr. 4 SE LAL and Math Grade 8: LAL and Math in sub-groups

Our Task Write a district goal related to NCLB for the 2008 QAAR Write building level objectives linked to the district goal and specific building sub-groups and/or areas of concern as identified by 2007 test results and future AYP parameters. Identify resources available and necessary for the achievement of the objectives. Identify strategies to achieve objectives and means of evaluation.

District Objectives In all schools, at all grade levels, we are interested in increasing the percentage of students in the advanced proficient range and decreasing the number of students in the partially proficient range. With regard to AYP, schools have set priorities and have identified specific objectives linked to their results and their student needs. The objectives fall into three categories: Increasing the number of students in advanced proficient Decreasing the number of students in partially proficient Decreasing the number of special education students in partially proficient

Objectives this year: To decrease the % of all students in partially proficient range Crim~ language arts literacy in 4th grade JFK~ language arts literacy in 3rd and 4th grade Milltown~ language arts literacy in 3rd grade VanHolten~ mathematics in 3rd grade

An Example: School: Crim School Objective # 2 Principal: Margaret Kerr Teachers: Faculty Advisory Committee Parents: Parent Advisory Committee NJCCCS: LAL 3.1, 3.2 District Goal: To align curriculum, instruction, assessment and staff development to improve student achievement and to meet the needs of a diverse population. Objective: Given specific instructional strategies, the percent of total grade 4 students who score partially proficient in Language Arts Literacy will decrease from 15.2% on the 2007 NJASK3 to 11% on the NJASK4. TIMELINESTRATEGIES/ACTIVITIESRESOURCESBENCHMARK Sept. 2007 Analysis of cluster means to identify specific areas for improvement Sept. 2007 Identify specific students to target for “a boost” based on scores on NJASK 3 and other assessments in the literacy portfolio and gather a baseline reading and writing sample, if needed. Oct. 2007 Investigate differentiated instruction and enrichment opportunities for targeted students. Nov. 2007 – March 2008 Implement specific strategies and monitor progress

Objectives this year: To decrease the % of special education students in the partially proficient range Adamsville~ LAL 4th grade Bradley Gardens~ LAL 4th grade Eisenhower~ LAL and Math 6th grade Hillside~ LAL and Math 6th grade Middle School~ LAL in 7th and 8th grade, Math 8th grade High School~ LAL and Math 12th grade

A second example: School: Van Holten Objective # 2 Principal: Robert Phillips Teachers: Faculty Advisory Committee, ETS Parents: Parent Advisory Committee NJCCCS: Mathematics District Goal: To align curriculum, instruction, assessment and staff development to improve student achievement and to meet the needs of a diverse population. Objective: Given specific instructional strategies, the percent of students who scored partially proficient in Mathematics on the NJ ASK 3 test will decrease from 7.3% as measured on the 2007 NJ ASK 3 to 4.5% as measured on the 2008 NJ ASK 3. TIMELINESTRATEGIES/ACTIVITIESRESOURCESBENCHMARK Sept. 2007 Analysis of cluster means and EOY Math Assessments to identify specific areas of weaknesses in grades 2 and 3. Sept. 2007 Identify students that were near or below partially proficient level based on EOY math assessments from 2nd grade Oct. 2007 Investigate differentiated instruction techniques and implement strategies Nov. 2007-March 2008 Implement strategies, continually assessments

Objectives this year: To increase the % of all students in the advanced proficient range Adamsville~ LAL 4th grade Bradley Gardens~ LAL 4th grade Crim~ LAL 4th grade Hamilton~ LAL 4th grade Milltown~ LAL 4th grade VanHolten~ LAL 4th grade

A Third Example: School: Bradley Gardens Objective # 2 Principal: John Petronella Teachers: Faculty Advisory Committee Parents: Parent Advisory Committee NJCCCS: LAL District Goal: To align curriculum, instruction, assessment and staff development to improve student achievement and to meet the needs of a diverse population. Objective: Given specific instructional strategies the percent of 2008 grade 4 students who scored advanced proficient in Language Arts Literacy on the 2007 NJ ASK 3 will increase from 6.3% to 11.3% as measured by the NJ ASK 4. TIMELINESTRATEGIES/ACTIVITIESRESOURCESBENCHMARK Sept. 2007 Analysis of cluster means to identify specific areas of weakness in Reading. Sept. 2007 Identify students with potential to move from P to AP. Oct. 2007-Feb.2008 Provide professional development for teachers Students will receive specific instruction in working with text and analyzing text Feb. 2008 Check students progress

To see more: All of the building objectives are available on the website! Open the document QAAR Objectives 2007-2008 to see the objectives that were approved by the county DOE office as part of the Quality Assurance Annual Report