1. 2007 Grade 3-8 English Test Results

2. 2 Raising Achievement Over past several years, Board of Regents has voted measures to raise standards and require students get extra help. When first 4 th grade test was given in 1999, only 48% of students achieved the standards. This year, 68% did. In 1999, only 48% achieved standards in 8 th grade. This year 57% did.

3. 3 Raising Achievement The rise in middle school performance this year is a good sign, but we still need to do better. The grade 3-8 tests, introduced last year, will help schools and parents understand even better how their children are performing from year to year.

4. 4 Raising Achievement Essential that schools use new funding wisely. Contract for Excellence School Assistance Teams Distinguished Educators All will help.

5. 5 The Bottom Line: Scores are Up, Especially in Middle School Achievement in grades 3-8 is up overall. Scores increased most in middle school – grades 6-8. Important because middle school performance has lagged for years. And fewer students are showing serious academic problems.

6. 6 The Bottom Line: ELL Students Did Better Than Predicted Because of new federal NCLB rules, more than twice as many English Language Learners took the grade 3-8 tests. But their performance dipped only modestly in each grade. However, this change in rules affected the overall performance of Hispanic and Asian-American students.

7. 7 The Bottom Line: Students with Disabilities Improved Especially important – fewer students with disabilities showed serious academic problems.

8. 8 Achievement is up statewide, especially in the middle grades. Important because middle school performance has lagged. Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4 Grade 3 = 185,603 198,457 Grade 4 = 190,951 197,499 Grade 5 = 201,262 202,133 Grade 6 = 204,249 204,463 Grade 7 = 210,735 211,839 Grade 8 = 212,320 213,971 Grades 3-8= 1,205,1201,228,362 Number Tested 2006 2007

9. 9 English Language Learners did better than predicted, despite the tremendous increase in the numbers who took the test. More than 3/4 of ELL students are in New York City. Percentage of ELL Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4 20062007 Grade 3 3,68417,093 Grade 4 4,37914,200 Grade 5 6,686 11,480 Grade 6 5,585 9,934 Grade 7 6,234 9,299 Grade 8 5,85210,076 Grades 3-8 32,42072,082 Number of ELL Students Tested

10. 10 A smaller percentage of ELL students showed serious academic problems in 2007 than in 2006. Percentage of ELL Students Scoring at Level 1

11. 11 Performance differences among racial/ethnic groups were substantial across grades 3-8. The Hispanic group includes the largest percentage of ELL students (22%); the Asian group the second largest percentage (11%). Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4

12. 12 In every grade, fewer students with disabilities showed serious academic problems. Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 1

13. 13 Here’s More of the Story

14. 14 Achievement is up statewide, especially in the middle grades. Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4 Grade 3 = 185,603 198,457 Grade 4 = 190,951 197,499 Grade 5 = 201,262 202,133 Grade 6 = 204,249 204,463 Grade 7 = 210,735 211,839 Grade 8 = 212,320 213,971 Grades 3-8= 1,205,1201,228,362 Number Tested 2006 2007

15. 15 Fewer students showed serious academic problems in every grade except grade 3. Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 1

16. 16 Elementary English: Key Fact Behind the Increase in Grade 8 Average scores moved over the dividing line between Levels 2 and 3 this year. At each grade level, a score of 650 signifies meeting the standards. At all grade levels, the average student met the standards. In grades 6-8, the mean scale score increased by 3-5 points in 2007. 650

17. 17 Performance of English Language Learners

18. 18 English Language Learners did better than predicted, despite the tremendous increase in the numbers who took the test. More than 3/4 of ELL students are in New York City. Percentage of ELL Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4 20062007 Grade 3 3,68417,093 Grade 4 4,37914,200 Grade 5 6,686 11,480 Grade 6 5,585 9,934 Grade 7 6,234 9,299 Grade 8 5,85210,076 Grades 3-8 32,42072,082 Number of ELL Students Tested

19. 19 A smaller percentage of ELL students showed serious academic problems in 2007 than in 2006. Percentage of ELL Students Scoring at Level 1

20. 20 A higher percentage of English Language Learners in New York City achieved the learning standards in 2007 than in 2006. More than 3/4 of ELL students are in New York City. Percentage of ELL Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4

21. 21 In New York City, fewer English Language Learners showed serious academic problems in 2007 than in 2006. Percentage of ELL Students Scoring at Level 1

22. 22 Performance of Students Who Are Not English Language Learners

23. 23 Statewide, in each grade, more students who were not English Language Learners met the standards in 2007 than in 2006. Percentage of Not ELL Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4 Number of not ELL Students Tested 20062007 Grade 3 = 182,469 181,364 Grade 4 = 187,223 183,299 Grade 5 = 195,162190,653 Grade 6 = 199,697194,529 Grade 7 = 205,019202,540 Grade 8 = 207,177203,895 Grades 3-8 = 1,176,7471,156,280

24. 24 Statewide, in every grade, fewer students who were not English Language Learners showed serious academic problems in 2007 than in 2006. Percentage of Not ELL Students Scoring at Level 1

25. 25 Students Who Were Not English Language Learners: In New York City, the percentage of students meeting the standards increased in 2007. Performance in the middle grades especially increased. Percentage of Not ELL Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4 Number of Not ELL Students Tested 20062007 Grade 3 = 59,62958,413 Grade 4 = 62,205 59,060 Grade 5 = 64,804 62,650 Grade 6 = 65,754 62,016 Grade 7 = 66,021 65,354 Grade 8 = 66,769 65,315 Grades 3-8= 385,182372,808

26. 26 In New York City, a smaller percentage of students who were not ELL showed serious academic problems in 2007. Percentage of Not ELL Students Scoring at Level 1

27. 27 Results by Racial/Ethnic Group

28. 28 Performance differences among racial/ethnic groups were substantial across grades 3-8. The Hispanic group includes the largest percentage of ELL students (22%); the Asian group the second largest percentage (11%). Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4

29. 29 The percentage of students with serious academic problems decreased for all racial/ethnic groups except Asian-Americans. Percentage of Students Scoring at Level 1

30. 30 Results for Students with Disabilities

31. 31 The percentage of students with disabilities meeting the standards increased in 2007, although results remained low. Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4 Grade 3 = 23,811 26,692 Grade 4 = 26,474 28,281 Grade 5 = 28,987 29,985 Grade 6 = 28,883 29,055 Grade 7 = 29,237 29,842 Grade 8 = 29,119 29,514 Grades 3-8= 166,511 173,369 Number Tested 2006 2007

32. 32 In every grade, fewer students with disabilities showed serious academic problems. Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 1

33. 33 Percentage of Students Scoring at Level 3 and 4 Results varied widely among need/resource categories. Students with disabilities in Low Need Districts were much more likely to meet the standards. In most categories, more students with disabilities met the standards.

34. 34 Percentage of Students Scoring at Level 1 The percentage of students with disabilities showing serious academic problems decreased in every need/resource category.

35. 35 Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4 Among the Big 5 Cities, New York City had the largest percentage of students with disabilities meeting the standards. A larger percentage of students met the Standards in 2007 than in 2006. *Rochester to provide corrected data for 2007

36. 36 Percentage of Students Scoring at Level 1 Fewer students showed serious academic problems in 2007 than in 2006. *Rochester to provide corrected data for 2007

37. 37 Results by Gender

38. 38 The disparity in graduation rate is foreshadowed by the larger percentage of females than males who meet the standards at every grade level. Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4

39. 39 Results by Need/Resource Capacity Category For All Students

40. 40 Percentage of All Students Scoring at Level 3 and 4 For all students, gains varied across grades 3-8 among the need/resource categories. The smallest overall increase was in New York City, where more than 3/4 of ELL students were enrolled.

41. 41 Percentage of All Students Scoring at Level 1 For all students, the percentage of students with serious academic problems decreased in all need/resource categories.

42. 42 Results for the Big 5 Cities

43. 43 Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4 The Big 5 showed substantial differences in meeting the standards in grades 3-8.

44. 44 Percentage of Students Scoring at Level 1 In each Big 5 district, fewer students showed serious problems in 2007 than in 2006.

45. 45 The Bottom Line: Scores are Up, Especially in Middle School Achievement in grades 3-8 is up overall. Scores increased most in middle school – grades 6-8. Important because middle school performance has lagged for years. And fewer students are showing serious academic problems.

46. 46 The Bottom Line: ELL Students Did Better Than Predicted Because of new federal NCLB rules, more than twice as many English Language Learners took the grade 3-8 tests. But their performance dipped only modestly in each grade. However, this change in rules affected the overall performance of Hispanic and Asian-American students.

47. 47 The Bottom Line: Students with Disabilities Improved Especially important – fewer students with disabilities showed serious academic problems.

48. 48 Every classroom teacher is seen as a teacher of reading, with support from all school faculty and staff. Administration and faculty share high expectations for student success. Instruction is based on regular local assessments and analysis of data. Before- and after-school instruction is aligned with regular instructional program. Technology enhances instruction. What Successful Schools Did To Improve Student Performance

49. 49 Extra help programs focus on literacy. Saturday morning Pre-K program sponsored by community partners. Peer coaching for teachers, sometimes across schools, as well as formal and informal daily teacher observations by instructional leaders. Weekly professional development focused on English, with sharing of best practices. What Successful Schools Did To Improve Student Performance

50. 50 Use strategic leadership to build a school climate that improves achievement. Align local curriculum and instruction with State standards. Use national, state and local data to inform instruction. Faculty work together on curriculum and instructional issues across subject areas. Professional development must be practical and respond to what the data show. What Do Other Experts Say?

51. 51 Regents Actions to Support Literacy Implement a comprehensive literacy strategy: –Renew State learning standards, emphasizing literacy across all subjects. –Revise teacher preparation requirements affecting literacy. –Provide professional development to support instruction.

52. 52 Regents Actions to Support Literacy Bring the Contract for Excellence to life. Create school assistance teams and Distinguished Educators to help schools that need help. Support regional literacy conferences.

53. 53 Professional development through the BOCES Higher education institutions in partnership with school/districts Public broadcasting – literacy programs NYS Library and statewide library systems Teacher Centers Statewide professional associations NYS cultural institutions Literacy Zones – eight under way, a dozen more planned over next three years Additional USNY Assets to Help Schools

54. 2007 Grade 3-8 English Test Results