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

2. 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

3. 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

4. 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

5. 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

6. 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

7. 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

8. 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

9. 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

10. 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

11. Bridgewater-Raritan Regional School District
Framework for Accountability

12. 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

13. 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

14. 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

15. 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

16. 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
All groups must attain 100% proficiency in language arts literacy and mathematics by 2014

17. 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

18. 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

19. 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

20. 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.

21. 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

22. 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

23. 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

24. 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

25. 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

26. 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

27. 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

28. 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

29. 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

30. 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

31. 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

32. 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

33. 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

34. SE Test Results

35. SE Students AYP

36. SE Student HSPA Language Arts

37. SE Students HSPA Math

38. SE Students GEPA Language Arts

39. SE Students GEPA Math

40. SE Students NJ ASK 7 Language Arts

41. SE Students NJ ASK 7 Math

42. SE Students NJ ASK 6 Language Arts

43. SE Students NJ ASK 6 Math

44. SE Students NJ ASK 5 Language Arts

45. SE Students NJ ASK 5 Math

46. SE Students NJ ASK 4 Language Arts

47. SE Students NJ ASK 4 Math

48. SE Students NJ ASK 3 Language Arts

49. SE Students NJ ASK 3 Math

50. SE Students Language Arts

51. SE Students Math

52. 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

53. 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

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

55. 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.

56. 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%

57. 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

58. 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.

59. 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

60. 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

61. 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 Analysis of cluster means to identify specific areas for improvement
Sept 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 Investigate differentiated instruction and enrichment opportunities for targeted students.
Nov – March Implement specific strategies and monitor progress

62. 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

63. 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 Analysis of cluster means and EOY Math Assessments to identify specific areas of weaknesses in grades 2 and 3.
Sept Identify students that were near or below partially proficient level based on EOY math assessments from 2nd grade
Oct Investigate differentiated instruction techniques and implement strategies
Nov March Implement strategies, continually assessments

64. 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

65. 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 Analysis of cluster means to identify specific areas of weakness in Reading.
Sept Identify students with potential to move from P to AP.
Oct Feb Provide professional development for teachers Students will receive specific instruction in working with text and analyzing text
Feb Check students progress

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