1. NOVEMBER 12, 2013 Math Department Team Leaders’ Meeting

2. State Federal READY Accountability Model Annual Measureable Objectives (formerly AYP) State and Federal Accountability

3. 3 State Model: School Performance Grades G.S. §15C-93.11 Implemented: 2013-14 school yearReported: August 2014 Components: Performance (School Achievement Score) and Growth

4. 4 School Performance Grades - Indicators Elem/Middle EOG Mathematics EOG ELA/Reading EOG Science EOCs (middle) High Schools Math I English II Biology Math Course Rigor Graduation Rate The ACT ACT WorkKeys

5. 5 School Performance Grades School Achievement Score: 80 % Growth : 20 % School Performan ce Grade

6. 6 School Achievement Score  Test Scores: Percent of students who score at or above Level 3  End-of-Grade Tests  End-of-Course Tests  Graduation Rate: Percent of students who graduate in four years  Math Course Rigor: Percent of graduates who successfully complete Math III  The ACT: Percent of 11 th grade students who score 17 or above (the UNC system’s minimum composite score requirement)  ACT WorkKeys: Percent of students who achieve a Silver Certificate or above

7. 7 Growth  EVAAS School Accountability Growth  Includes  End-of-Grade Tests  End-of-Course Tests  Reported for each school as having  Exceeded Growth  Met Growth  Not Met Growth  Not included in School Performance Grades for schools that have a School Achievement Score at or above 80 % and Met Growth

8. 8 Growth Met growth: No additional calculation; growth not included in School Performance Grade Did not meet or exceeded growth: Include growth in calculation of School Performance Grade School Achievement Score at or above 80 % Include growth in calculation of School Performance Grade School Achievement Score 79 % or below

9. Annual Measureable Objectives Targets Proficiency Rate/95% Participation for –Reading 3-8 –Math 3-8 –Reading 10 th (English II EOC) –Math 10 th (Math I EOC) Attendance Rate Cohort Graduation Rate By subgroups

10. New 2012-13 Common Core/ Essential Standards Assessment Results

11. About our results Annual Measurable Objectives Student Proficiency Rates Academic Growth Rates

12. AMO Data http://www.ncaccountabilitymodel.org State: 87 of 91 Targets Met (95.6%) District: 78 of 91 Targets Met (85.7%) DRAFT - DO NOT DISTRIBUTE Annual Measurable Objectives Found on left side of site

13. 86 of 168 schools met all of their AMO. Annual Measurable Objectives

14. Math Grade 10 All Amer Indian AsianBlackHisp Two or More Races White Econ Disadv LEPSWD Eligible Students 109235466729541359472540434413061437 Met 95% Part. Met Not Met (89%) Not Met (94%) Not Met (91%) Not Met (92%) Met Not Met (91%) Not Met (80%) Not Met (86%) Tested Students (FAY) 96714459125371171436488129261871182 Target Goals 38.529.16320.629.538.148.424.55.39.7 Percent Proficient 50.840.977.223.535.542.466.224.4<517.5 Met Prof. Target Met Met w/CI Met Math Grade 10 Targets Annual Measurable Objectives

15. MATH I DATA – PROFICIENCY AND GROWTH

16. Math Proficiency NC vs. WCPSS Student proficiency rates

17. Pick a number... 53% Proficient – includes middle and high school students who took the Math I exam in 2012-13, plus banked scores Student proficiency rates

18. Reports of Disaggregated Data Available to public on NCDPI Accountability website Includes individual schools and LEA data Reports percent proficient (at or above Level III) by various subgroups Reports do NOT include banked scores Be sure to select “Math I” under Subject Click here for link to website Student proficiency rates

19. WCPSS Proficiency Data Student Subgroup # At or Above Level III # Valid Scores Percent At or Above Level III All Students58861213348.50% Female2776595246.60% Male3110618150.30% American Indian185234.60% Asian53669377.30% Black682326720.90% Hispanic479149332.10% Two or More Races22449445.30% Pacific Islander81361.50% White3939612164.40% Student proficiency rates

20. Pick a number... 53% Proficient – includes middle and high school students who took the Math I exam in 2012-13, plus banked scores 48.5% Proficient – includes middle and high school students who took the Math I exam, no banked scores Student proficiency rates

21. Pick a number... 53% Proficient – includes middle and high school students who took the Math I exam in 2012-13, plus banked scores 48.5% Proficient – includes middle and high school students who took the Math I exam, no banked scores 43% Proficient – high school students who took the Math I exam, plus banked scores 19% Proficient – high school students who took the Math I exam, no banked scores Student proficiency rates

22. Academic Growth Rates Math Growth Rate: NC vs. WCPSS % Schools Meeting or Exceeding Growth Expectations

23. EVAAS Reports Academic Growth Rates

24. Academic Growth Rates

25. Academic Growth Rates

26. Percent of Students Graduating with Math Rigor ALLFM Amer In AsianBlackHispMultiWhiteEDLEPSWDAIG 93.99592.793.5>9587.489.994.5>9585.676.470.9>95

27. ACT DATA

28. Percent of Students Meeting Math Benchmark of 22 by Subgroup

29. District Value Added Report ACT Math

30. NC FINAL EXAM DATA

31. NC Common Exam Data 2013 SubjectLevel # Students Tested % Items Correct: Constructed Response % Items Correct: Multiple Choice % Items Correct: Overall ALGEBRA II Honors 222664.679.776.4 Standard 346531.553.848.9 Middle School 11087.394.192.6 AFM244548.445.145.8 GEOMETRY Honors 311653.973.568.7 Standard 433221.547.741.4 Middle School 78766.285.380.7 PRECALCULUS Honors 179952.765.663.1 Middle School 1591.188.889.2

32. SubjectYearN Mean Student Score Mean Score %-ile Mean Pred Score Pred Score %-ile District Effect Effect Std Err District vs State Avg Algebra II20135352254.969250.6574.20.6 Exceeds Expected Growth Geometry2013762925466249.6544.40.5 Exceeds Expected Growth District Value Added – Common Exam

33. CHAPTER 1 OF TEACHING MATHEMATICS THROUGH PROBLEM SOLVING, GRADES 6-12, NCCTM PUBLICATION Developing Understanding Through Problem Solving Spotlight on Math Discourse

34. Let’s Do Some Math!!

35. Why is Understanding Mathematics So Important? Understanding a topic ensures that one can use it flexibly to handle new situations Understanding is fun!  Offers an unparalleled sense of esteem and control  NOT understanding is frustrating and defeating – being asked to perform but not having any idea what is happening and why the rules one has memorized actually work

36. What Does Problem Solving Have to Do with Understanding? Understanding is supported best through a delicate balance among: Engaging students in solving challenging problems Examining increasingly better solution methods Providing information for students at just the right times

37. How Can Classrooms Be Designed to Promote Understanding? Signposts: Allow math to be problematic for students Focus on methods Tell the right things at the right times

38. State Board Policy GCS-M-001.13 Credit by Demonstrated Mastery 13.1 Credit by Demonstrated Mastery is the process by which LEAs shall, based upon a body-of-evidence, award a student credit in a particular course without requiring the student to complete classroom instruction for a certain amount of seat time. 13.2 “Mastery” is defined as a student’s command of course material at a level that demonstrates a deep understanding of the content standards and application of knowledge. 13.3 Beginning with the 2013-14 school year, Credit by Demonstrated Mastery shall be available for all NC students in grades 6-12. 13.4 Students shall demonstrate mastery through a multi-phase assessment, consisting of (1) a standard examination, which shall be the EOC/EOG where applicable, or a final exam developed locally and (2) an artifact which requires the student to apply knowledge and skills relevant to the content standards. LEAs may require additional requirements, such as performance tasks. This multi-phase assessment process builds a body-of-evidence that allows a committee to determine if the student has a deep understanding of the standards for the course or subject area, as defined by the North Carolina Standard Course of Study, thereby earning credit for the course without experiencing it in the school setting.

39. Credit by Demonstrated Mastery 13.5 DPI shall develop implementation guidelines for this policy. These guidelines shall provide guidance for LEAs regarding scoring of assessments as well as local implementation. The guidelines shall establish minimum scores for the standard examination and artifact creation. Students must attain minimum scores to earn Credit by Demonstrated Mastery. 13.6 The following courses are excluded from Credit by Demonstrated Mastery: - Career and Technical Education (CTE) work-based learning courses (co-op, internship, apprenticeship) - CTE courses that have a clinical setting as a requirement of the course, such as ProStart, Early Childhood Education I/II and Nursing Fundamentals - CTE Advanced Studies courses - English Language Learner (ELL) courses - Healthful Living required courses

40. Credit by Demonstrated Mastery Wiki: http://cdm.ncdpi.wikispaces.net/homehttp://cdm.ncdpi.wikispaces.net/home