Measuring College and Career Readiness 2015 PARCC RESULTS: YEAR ONE EDGEWATER SCHOOL DISTRICT ELEANOR VAN GELDER SCHOOL

UNDERSTANDING THE SCORE REPORT

✓ Determine whether students are college- and career-ready or “on track” ✓ Provide tools to assess student learning and support instruction during the school year ✓ Report growth in performance as well as absolute achievement ✓ Report comparable results across schools, districts and member states ✓ Generate valid and reliable information to inform instruction and accountability decisions What are the primary objectives of the PARCC Assessment System? ✓ Use technology for a range of purposes including increasing student access, providing accommodations, engaging students, and creating efficiencies in administration, scoring and reporting 3

Test Administration in million students in one day 204,000 students in one hour Peak: 1m testers per day x 5 days Thousands of hours contributed by thousands of educators to develop the test Key Stats

 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 PARCC PERFORMANCE LEVELS

Not Yet Meeting (Level 1) Partially Meeting (Level 2) Approaching Expectations (Level 3) Meeting Expectations (Level 4) Exceeding Expectations (Level 5) % >= Level 4 Grade 315%18%24%39%5%44% Grade 48%15%27%39%12%51% Grade 57%15%26%45%6%52% Grade 68%16%28%40%9%49% NEW JERSEY’S 2015 PARCC OUTCOMES ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS/LITERACY.

Not Yet Meeting (Level 1) Partially Meeting (Level 2) Approaching Expectations (Level 3) Meeting Expectations (Level 4) Exceeding Expectations (Level 5) % >= Level 4 Grade 38%19%28%37%8%45% Grade 47%22%30%36%4%41% Grade 56%21%32%35%6%41% Grade 68%21%30%35%6%41% NEW JERSEY’S 2015 PARCC OUTCOMES MATHEMATICS.

Count of Valid Test Scores Not Yet Meeting (Level 1) Partially Meeting (Level 2) Approaching Expectations (Level 3) Meeting Expectations (Level 4) Exceeding Expectatio n (Level 5) District % >= Level 4 NJ % >= Level 4 PARCC % >= Level 4 Grade %44%38% Grade %51%42% Grade %52%40% Grade %49%39% EDGEWATER’S 2015 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) Meeting Expectations (Level 4) Exceeding Expectation (Level 5) District % >= Level 4 NJ % >= Level 4 PARCC % >= Level 4 Grade %45%38% Grade %41%32% Grade %41%32% Grade %41%32% EDGEWATER’S 2015 PARCC GRADE-LEVEL OUTCOMES MATHEMATICS

EDGEWATER’S 3 RD GRADE 2015 PARCC SUBGROUP OUTCOMES ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS/LITERACY Count of Valid Test Scores Not Yet Meeting (Level 1) Partially Meeting (Level 2) Approaching Expectations (Level 3) Meeting Expectations (Level 4) Exceeding Expectation (Level 5) District % >= Level 4 3 rd General Education % 3 rd Economically Disadvantaged % 3 rd Special Education % 3 rd English Language Learners % District % >= Level 4 NJ % >= Level 4 PARCC % >= Level 4 48%44%38%

Count of Valid Test Scores Not Yet Meeting (Level 1) Partially Meeting (Level 2) Approaching Expectations (Level 3) Meeting Expectations (Level 4) Exceeding Expectation (Level 5) District % >= Level 4 4 th General Education % 4 th Economically Disadvantaged % 4 th Special Education % 4 th English Language Learners % EDGEWATER’S 4 TH GRADE 2015 PARCC SUBGROUP OUTCOMES ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS/LITERACY District % >= Level 4 NJ % >= Level 4 PARCC % >= Level 4 59%51%42%

EDGEWATER’S 5 TH GRADE 2015 PARCC SUBGROUP OUTCOMES ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS/LITERACY Count of Valid Test Scores Not Yet Meeting (Level 1) Partially Meeting (Level 2) Approaching Expectations (Level 3) Meeting Expectations (Level 4) Exceeding Expectation (Level 5) District % >= Level 4 5 th General Education % 5 th Economically Disadvantaged % 5 th Special Education % 5 th English Language Learners % District % >= Level 4 NJ % >= Level 4 PARCC % >= Level 4 62%52%40%

Count of Valid Test Scores Not Yet Meeting (Level 1) Partially Meeting (Level 2) Approaching Expectations (Level 3) Meeting Expectations (Level 4) Exceeding Expectation (Level 5) District % >= Level 4 6 th General Education % 6 th Economically Disadvantaged % 6 th Special Education % 6 th English Language Learners % EDGEWATER’S 6 TH GRADE 2015 PARCC SUBGROUP OUTCOMES ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS/LITERACY District % >= Level 4 NJ % >= Level 4 PARCC % >= Level 4 71%49%39%

EDGEWATER’S 3 RD GRADE 2015 PARCC SUBGROUP OUTCOMES MATHEMATICS Count of Valid Test Scores Not Yet Meeting (Level 1) Partially Meeting (Level 2) Approaching Expectations (Level 3) Meeting Expectations (Level 4) Exceeding Expectation (Level 5) District % >= Level 4 3 rd General Education % 3 rd Economically Disadvantaged % 3 rd Special Education % 3 rd English Language Learners % District % >= Level 4 NJ % >= Level 4 PARCC % >= Level 4 55%45%38%

Count of Valid Test Scores Not Yet Meeting (Level 1) Partially Meeting (Level 2) Approaching Expectations (Level 3) Meeting Expectations (Level 4) Exceeding Expectation (Level 5) District % >= Level 4 4 th General Education % 4 th Economically Disadvantaged % 4 th Special Education % 4 th English Language Learners % EDGEWATER’S 4 TH GRADE 2015 PARCC SUBGROUP OUTCOMES MATHEMATICS District % >= Level 4 NJ % >= Level 4 PARCC % >= Level 4 54%41%32%

Count of Valid Test Scores Not Yet Meeting (Level 1) Partially Meeting (Level 2) Approaching Expectations (Level 3) Meeting Expectations (Level 4) Exceeding Expectation (Level 5) District % >= Level 4 5 th General Education % 5 th Economically Disadvantaged % 5 th Special Education % 5 th English Language Learners % EDGEWATER’S 5 TH GRADE 2015 PARCC SUBGROUP OUTCOMES MATHEMATICS District % >= Level 4 NJ % >= Level 4 PARCC % >= Level 4 55%41%32%

Count of Valid Test Scores Not Yet Meeting (Level 1) Partially Meeting (Level 2) Approaching Expectations (Level 3) Meeting Expectations (Level 4) Exceeding Expectation (Level 5) District % >= Level 4 6 th General Education % 6 th Economically Disadvantaged % 6 th Special Education % 6 th English Language Learners % EDGEWATER’S 6 TH GRADE 2015 PARCC SUBGROUP OUTCOMES MATHEMATICS District % >= Level 4 NJ % >= Level 4 PARCC % >= Level 4 53%41%32%

SUMMARY OF SCORE REPORT ELA Average Edgewater Score Average State Average PARCC 3 rd Grade th Grade th Grade th Grade MATH Average Edgewater Score Average State Average PARCC 3 rd Grade th Grade th Grade th Grade

QUESTIONS TO GUIDE PARCC DATA REFLECTION  How will we use PARCC data to identify strengths and gaps that exist in curriculum and instruction?  How will we use PARCC data to inform the conversations of our educators?  What can we learn about where additional professional resources are needed to meet the learning needs of all students?

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 YEAR ONE DATA ANALYSIS PLAN: DRILLING DOWN

tudent Roster Report (Sub-Scores) 10 What trends can be discerned from the data?

DraftofStudentRosterReport(ItemScores) 11 What are student’s strengths and weaknesses?

SUMMARY  PARCC 2016 will consist of one testing window instead of two, and the amount of questions are reduced.  The PARCC tests replace the old state tests. They measure how well students are performing against the new state standards that guide math and English language arts instruction.  The PARCC tests are only one of several measures, including report card grades and in-class performance, that are used to determine a student's academic achievement. They do not impact a student’s GPA.  The score reports are a valuable tool for parents and teachers. The report provides a deeper level of information that can be used to better understand where students are doing well and where they need additional support.  The PARCC tests moves away from multiple choice questions to ones that allow students to demonstrate a real understanding of what they know and can do by writing essays, solving real world problems, and reading and analyzing complex text—all critical skills in the real-world.  The students’ scores may look lower this year because the tests measured more complex skills.  A low score does not mean students did not improve or learned less, but instead that the expectations have been raised for students.  The first year’s scores are a new baseline from which to progress from and measure against moving forward.