1. Student Achievement Data Displays Mathematics & Reading Grade 3
Official WASL Results
AYP Status
General Title Slide.
Revised: October 30, 2009 5

2. WASL Mathematics:
Grade 3
Specific Title Slide for School. 7

3. Grade 3 WASL: Mathematics Performance
This is the third of the three slides that show the overall trend data. In this slide the trend for the state scores is added. Now the school pattern can be contrasted with both the pattern for the district and that of the state. Is the school pattern similar to both those of the district and state? Is it more like one or the other? Is it different than both? If it is different than either of the other patterns, is it dramatically different?
Remember, the alignment of the performance levels across grades 4, 7, and 10, all other things remaining equal, would result in an increase of 3.2 percentage points for students meeting the standard in for the school, district, and state. 10

4. Grade 3 WASL: Mathematics Performance
This is the third of the three slides that show the overall trend data. In this slide the trend for the state scores is added. Now the school pattern can be contrasted with both the pattern for the district and that of the state. Is the school pattern similar to both those of the district and state? Is it more like one or the other? Is it different than both? If it is different than either of the other patterns, is it dramatically different?
Remember, the alignment of the performance levels across grades 4, 7, and 10, all other things remaining equal, would result in an increase of 3.2 percentage points for students meeting the standard in for the school, district, and state. 10

5. Adequate Yearly Progress: Annual Targets for 3rd Grade Math
Mathematics 2002 baseline = 29.7%
In 2004 Washington State requested, and was granted approval of, a modified AYP model. In this revised model, improvement increments are blocked into four three-year intervals between and The uniform increment for these four intervals is 17.6 percentage points. In the final year, , the increment needed to reach 100% is also 17.6 percentage points.

6. Grade 3 WASL–Mathematics: Adequate Yearly Progress Goals
This chart portrays the school's progress against the state’s uniform yearly progress goals based on continuously enrolled students. These yearly goals are based on a 2002 baseline starting value, derived by a formula specified in the NCLB legislation, and stepped increments between the 2002 baseline and the ultimate goal in 2014 of 100% of all students meeting the state’s performance standard.
The stepped line reflects the yearly targets (state uniform bar), grouped in three year intervals and a final one year interval. The school’s performance (percent meeting standard) in each year is represented by a bar. Extended above each bar is a “whisker” that reflects a 95% confidence interval or error band for the years 2002 & 2003 and the 99% confidence interval for If the bar plus the whisker equals or exceeds the line, the school is deemed to have made “adequate yearly progress” (AYP).
In actually determining whether or nor a school has made AYP, the progress of as many as nine separate groups within the school is evaluated against the uniform yearly goals for reading and mathematics. If any one of the subgroups fails this test in either subject, the school is said to have failed to have made AYP. However, before the performance of a subgroup is considered, there must be at least 30 continuously enrolled students in the group.
Detailed information about this school's AYP can be found at:

7. Grade 3 WASL Mathematics: Proficiency Level Trends
Ask the participants what they see in the trends for each of the of the performance levels. Over time, does it appear that students have been moving into higher performance levels? What conclusions might be drawn from the patterns in these trends?
Due to the revisions to the performance standards needed to make them more vertically aligned, if all other factors remained the same, you would expect the percent in Level 3 in 2004 to increase by 3.2 percentage points. You would also expect to see 1.2 and 2.0 percentage point decreases in Levels 2 and 1 respectively, but you would not expect that Level 4 would be affected. 17

8. Grade 3 Content: Comparison of School to State

9. Grade 3 Processes: Comparison of School to State

10. Grade 3 Number Sense: Comparison of School to State
This slide contains two charts that portray several comparisons for the strand level data.
The chart at the bottom right shows the “percent of students whose performance is equal to or exceeds that of students meeting the standard” for the school, district, and state for the most current year. This chart provides comparisons of the school performance to that of the district and the state. It also allows a comparison of the district with the state. All of these comparisons are for the most current year.
Performance data for this strand is based on a small number of total points. For this reason and others, strand “percents” are not directly comparable from year to year. One approach that partially addresses this issue is to always compare (take the difference between) the school percent and the state percent. These differences are more comparable across years. The chart at the top left shows the trend in the differences between the school percent and the state percent for recent years for this strand. It is this chart, and those for the other strands within this content area, that should be most helpful in identifying curricular strengths and weaknesses.
Has the percent of students identified as having “a strength” on this strand changed compared to that for the state? What does the trend tell you? 22

11. Grade 3 Measurement: Comparison of School to State
This slide contains two charts that portray several comparisons for the strand level data.
The chart at the bottom right shows the “percent of students whose performance is equal to or exceeds that of students meeting the standard” for the school, district, and state for the most current year. This chart provides comparisons of the school performance to that of the district and the state. It also allows a comparison of the district with the state. All of these comparisons are for the most current year.
Performance data for this strand is based on a small number of total points. For this reason and others, strand “percents” are not directly comparable from year to year. One approach that partially addresses this issue is to always compare (take the difference between) the school percent and the state percent. These differences are more comparable across years. The chart at the top left shows the trend in the differences between the school percent and the state percent for recent years for this strand. It is this chart, and those for the other strands within this content area, that should be most helpful in identifying curricular strengths and weaknesses.
Has the percent of students identified as having “a strength” on this strand changed compared to that for the state? What does the trend tell you? 22

12. Grade 3 Geometric Sense: Comparison of School to State
This slide contains two charts that portray several comparisons for the strand level data.
The chart at the bottom right shows the “percent of students whose performance is equal to or exceeds that of students meeting the standard” for the school, district, and state for the most current year. This chart provides comparisons of the school performance to that of the district and the state. It also allows a comparison of the district with the state. All of these comparisons are for the most current year.
Performance data for this strand is based on a small number of total points. For this reason and others, strand “percents” are not directly comparable from year to year. One approach that partially addresses this issue is to always compare (take the difference between) the school percent and the state percent. These differences are more comparable across years. The chart at the top left shows the trend in the differences between the school percent and the state percent for recent years for this strand. It is this chart, and those for the other strands within this content area, that should be most helpful in identifying curricular strengths and weaknesses.
Has the percent of students identified as having “a strength” on this strand changed compared to that for the state? What does the trend tell you? 22

13. Grade 3 Probability & Statistics: Comparison of School to State
This slide contains two charts that portray several comparisons for the strand level data.
The chart at the bottom right shows the “percent of students whose performance is equal to or exceeds that of students meeting the standard” for the school, district, and state for the most current year. This chart provides comparisons of the school performance to that of the district and the state. It also allows a comparison of the district with the state. All of these comparisons are for the most current year.
Performance data for this strand is based on a small number of total points. For this reason and others, strand “percents” are not directly comparable from year to year. One approach that partially addresses this issue is to always compare (take the difference between) the school percent and the state percent. These differences are more comparable across years. The chart at the top left shows the trend in the differences between the school percent and the state percent for recent years for this strand. It is this chart, and those for the other strands within this content area, that should be most helpful in identifying curricular strengths and weaknesses.
Has the percent of students identified as having “a strength” on this strand changed compared to that for the state? What does the trend tell you? 22

14. Grade 3 Algebraic Sense: Comparison of School to State
This slide contains two charts that portray several comparisons for the strand level data.
The chart at the bottom right shows the “percent of students whose performance is equal to or exceeds that of students meeting the standard” for the school, district, and state for the most current year. This chart provides comparisons of the school performance to that of the district and the state. It also allows a comparison of the district with the state. All of these comparisons are for the most current year.
Performance data for this strand is based on a small number of total points. For this reason and others, strand “percents” are not directly comparable from year to year. One approach that partially addresses this issue is to always compare (take the difference between) the school percent and the state percent. These differences are more comparable across years. The chart at the top left shows the trend in the differences between the school percent and the state percent for recent years for this strand. It is this chart, and those for the other strands within this content area, that should be most helpful in identifying curricular strengths and weaknesses.
Has the percent of students identified as having “a strength” on this strand changed compared to that for the state? What does the trend tell you? 22

15. Grade 3 Solves Problems/Reasons Logically: Comparison of School to State
This slide contains two charts that portray several comparisons for the strand level data.
The chart at the bottom right shows the “percent of students whose performance is equal to or exceeds that of students meeting the standard” for the school, district, and state for the most current year. This chart provides comparisons of the school performance to that of the district and the state. It also allows a comparison of the district with the state. All of these comparisons are for the most current year.
Performance data for this strand is based on a small number of total points. For this reason and others, strand “percents” are not directly comparable from year to year. One approach that partially addresses this issue is to always compare (take the difference between) the school percent and the state percent. These differences are more comparable across years. The chart at the top left shows the trend in the differences between the school percent and the state percent for recent years for this strand. It is this chart, and those for the other strands within this content area, that should be most helpful in identifying curricular strengths and weaknesses.
Has the percent of students identified as having “a strength” on this strand changed compared to that for the state? What does the trend tell you? 22

16. Grade 3 Communicates Understanding: Comparison of School to State
This slide contains two charts that portray several comparisons for the strand level data.
The chart at the bottom right shows the “percent of students whose performance is equal to or exceeds that of students meeting the standard” for the school, district, and state for the most current year. This chart provides comparisons of the school performance to that of the district and the state. It also allows a comparison of the district with the state. All of these comparisons are for the most current year.
Performance data for this strand is based on a small number of total points. For this reason and others, strand “percents” are not directly comparable from year to year. One approach that partially addresses this issue is to always compare (take the difference between) the school percent and the state percent. These differences are more comparable across years. The chart at the top left shows the trend in the differences between the school percent and the state percent for recent years for this strand. It is this chart, and those for the other strands within this content area, that should be most helpful in identifying curricular strengths and weaknesses.
Has the percent of students identified as having “a strength” on this strand changed compared to that for the state? What does the trend tell you? 22

17. Grade 3 Make Connections: Comparison of School to State
This slide contains two charts that portray several comparisons for the strand level data.
The chart at the bottom right shows the “percent of students whose performance is equal to or exceeds that of students meeting the standard” for the school, district, and state for the most current year. This chart provides comparisons of the school performance to that of the district and the state. It also allows a comparison of the district with the state. All of these comparisons are for the most current year.
Performance data for this strand is based on a small number of total points. For this reason and others, strand “percents” are not directly comparable from year to year. One approach that partially addresses this issue is to always compare (take the difference between) the school percent and the state percent. These differences are more comparable across years. The chart at the top left shows the trend in the differences between the school percent and the state percent for recent years for this strand. It is this chart, and those for the other strands within this content area, that should be most helpful in identifying curricular strengths and weaknesses.
Has the percent of students identified as having “a strength” on this strand changed compared to that for the state? What does the trend tell you? 22

18. WASL Reading:
Specific Title Slide for School.
Grade 3 7

19. Grade 3 WASL Reading Performance
This is the third of the three slides that show the overall trend data. In this slide the trend for the state scores is added. Now the school pattern can be contrasted with both the pattern for the district and that of the state. Is the school pattern similar to both those of the district and state? Is it more like one or the other? Is it different than both? If it is different than either of the other patterns, is it dramatically different?
Remember, the alignment of the performance levels across grades 4, 7, and 10, all other things remaining equal, would result in an increase of 4.1 percentage points for students meeting the standard in for the school, district, and state. 10

20. Grade 3 WASL Reading Performance
This is the third of the three slides that show the overall trend data. In this slide the trend for the state scores is added. Now the school pattern can be contrasted with both the pattern for the district and that of the state. Is the school pattern similar to both those of the district and state? Is it more like one or the other? Is it different than both? If it is different than either of the other patterns, is it dramatically different?
Remember, the alignment of the performance levels across grades 4, 7, and 10, all other things remaining equal, would result in an increase of 4.1 percentage points for students meeting the standard in for the school, district, and state. 10

21. Adequate Yearly Progress: Annual Targets for 3rd Grade Reading
Reading 2002 baseline = 52.2%
In 2004 Washington State requested, and was granted approval of, a modified AYP model. In this revised model, improvement increments are blocked into four three-year intervals between and The uniform increment for these four intervals is 12 percentage points. In the final year, , the increment needed to reach 100% is 11.9 percentage points.

22. Grade 3 WASL–Reading: Adequate Yearly Progress Goals
This chart portrays the school's progress against the state’s uniform yearly progress goals based on continuously enrolled students. These yearly goals are based on a 2002 baseline starting value, derived by a formula specified in the NCLB legislation, and stepped increments between the 2002 baseline and the ultimate goal in 2014 of 100% of all students meeting the state’s performance standard.
The stepped line reflects the yearly targets (state uniform bar), grouped in three year intervals and a final one year interval. The school’s performance (percent meeting standard) in each year is represented by a bar. Extended above each bar is a “whisker” that reflects a 95% confidence interval or error band for the years 2002 & 2003 and the 99% confidence interval for If the bar plus the whisker equals or exceeds the line, the school is deemed to have made “adequate yearly progress” (AYP).
In actually determining whether or nor a school has made AYP, the progress of as many as nine separate groups within the school is evaluated against the uniform yearly goals for reading and mathematics. If any one of the subgroups fails this test in either subject, the school is said to have failed to have made AYP. However, before the performance of a subgroup is considered, there must be at least 30 continuously enrolled students in the group.
Detailed information about this school's AYP can be found at:

23. Grade 3 WASL Reading Proficiency Level Trends
Ask the participants what they see in the trends for each of the of the performance levels. Over time, does it appear that students have been moving into higher performance levels? What conclusions might be drawn from the patterns in these trends?
Due to the revisions to the performance standards needed to make them more vertically aligned, if all other factors remained the same, you would expect the percent in Level 3 in 2004 to increase by 4.1 percentage points and a corresponding 4.1 percentage point decrease in the percent in Level 2. You would not expect Levels 1 or 4 to be affected by the adjustment to the cut score. 17

24. Grade 3 Comprehension: Comparison of School to State

25. Grade 3 Analysis: Comparison of School to State

26. Grade 3 Comprehension of Literary Text: Comparison of School to State
This slide contains two charts that portray several comparisons for the strand level data.
The chart at the bottom right shows the “percent of students whose performance is equal to or exceeds that of students meeting the standard” for the school, district, and state for the most current year. This chart provides comparisons of the school performance to that of the district and the state. It also allows a comparison of the district with the state. All of these comparisons are for the most current year.
Performance data for this strand is based on a small number of total points. For this reason and others, strand “percents” are not directly comparable from year to year. One approach that partially addresses this issue is to always compare (take the difference between) the school percent and the state percent. These differences are more comparable across years. The chart at the top left shows the trend in the differences between the school percent and the state percent for recent years for this strand. It is this chart, and those for the other strands within this content area, that should be most helpful in identifying curricular strengths and weaknesses.
Has the percent of students identified as having “a strength” on this strand changed compared to that for the state? What does the trend tell you? 22

27. Grade 3 Literary Analysis with Thinking Critically: Comparison of School to State
This slide contains two charts that portray several comparisons for the strand level data.
The chart at the bottom right shows the “percent of students whose performance is equal to or exceeds that of students meeting the standard” for the school, district, and state for the most current year. This chart provides comparisons of the school performance to that of the district and the state. It also allows a comparison of the district with the state. All of these comparisons are for the most current year.
Performance data for this strand is based on a small number of total points. For this reason and others, strand “percents” are not directly comparable from year to year. One approach that partially addresses this issue is to always compare (take the difference between) the school percent and the state percent. These differences are more comparable across years. The chart at the top left shows the trend in the differences between the school percent and the state percent for recent years for this strand. It is this chart, and those for the other strands within this content area, that should be most helpful in identifying curricular strengths and weaknesses.
Has the percent of students identified as having “a strength” on this strand changed compared to that for the state? What does the trend tell you?

28. Grade 3 Informational Comprehension: Comparison of School to State
This slide contains two charts that portray several comparisons for the strand level data.
The chart at the bottom right shows the “percent of students whose performance is equal to or exceeds that of students meeting the standard” for the school, district, and state for the most current year. This chart provides comparisons of the school performance to that of the district and the state. It also allows a comparison of the district with the state. All of these comparisons are for the most current year.
Performance data for this strand is based on a small number of total points. For this reason and others, strand “percents” are not directly comparable from year to year. One approach that partially addresses this issue is to always compare (take the difference between) the school percent and the state percent. These differences are more comparable across years. The chart at the top left shows the trend in the differences between the school percent and the state percent for recent years for this strand. It is this chart, and those for the other strands within this content area, that should be most helpful in identifying curricular strengths and weaknesses.
Has the percent of students identified as having “a strength” on this strand changed compared to that for the state? What does the trend tell you? 23

29. Grade 3 Analysis with Thinking Critically: Comparison of School to State
This slide contains two charts that portray several comparisons for the strand level data.
The chart at the bottom right shows the “percent of students whose performance is equal to or exceeds that of students meeting the standard” for the school, district, and state for the most current year. This chart provides comparisons of the school performance to that of the district and the state. It also allows a comparison of the district with the state. All of these comparisons are for the most current year.
Performance data for this strand is based on a small number of total points. For this reason and others, strand “percents” are not directly comparable from year to year. One approach that partially addresses this issue is to always compare (take the difference between) the school percent and the state percent. These differences are more comparable across years. The chart at the top left shows the trend in the differences between the school percent and the state percent for recent years for this strand. It is this chart, and those for the other strands within this content area, that should be most helpful in identifying curricular strengths and weaknesses.
Has the percent of students identified as having “a strength” on this strand changed compared to that for the state? What does the trend tell you? 26