1. 2005 NAEP Results Mathematics San Diego City Schools Board of Education Workshop January 17, 2006 S D CS

2. National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) The Nation’s Report Card: Authorized by Congress in 1969 Authorized by Congress in 1969 Operational Oversight by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) Operational Oversight by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) Policy Oversight by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) Policy Oversight by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) “Survey-based” assessment with content aligned with frameworks developed by NAGB through a national consensus process “Survey-based” assessment with content aligned with frameworks developed by NAGB through a national consensus process

3. NAEP Trial Urban District Assessment (TUDA) TUDA was piloted in 2002 in 6 volunteer districts; San Diego City Schools participated in 2003 and 2005 TUDA was piloted in 2002 in 6 volunteer districts; San Diego City Schools participated in 2003 and 2005 10 large, urban districts participated in 2005 10 large, urban districts participated in 2005 TUDA provides district-level results in Reading and Mathematics at Grades 4 and 8 TUDA provides district-level results in Reading and Mathematics at Grades 4 and 8

4. 2002-2005 Trial Urban District Assessment (TUDA) Participation District Participation in TUDA 200220032005 AtlantaAtlantaAtlanta ChicagoBostonAustin HoustonCharlotte-MecklenburgBoston Los Angeles ChicagoCharlotte-Mecklenburg New York City ClevelandChicago District of Columbia HoustonCleveland Los Angeles Houston New York City Los Angeles San Diego City Schools New York City District of Columbia San Diego City Schools District of Columbia

5. 2005 Trial Urban District Assessment (TUDA) Results Nationwide, Large Central City *, and Districtwide Results Nationwide, Large Central City *, and Districtwide Results Only Public School Data Reported in TUDA Only Public School Data Reported in TUDA Average scale scores (0 – 500) Average scale scores (0 – 500) Four Performance/Achievement Levels Four Performance/Achievement Levels Below Basic, Basic, Proficient, and Advanced Below Basic, Basic, Proficient, and Advanced Subgroups Subgroups Female, Male, White, Black, Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander, American Indian/Alaska Native, and Eligible/Not Eligible for Free/Reduced Price Meals Female, Male, White, Black, Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander, American Indian/Alaska Native, and Eligible/Not Eligible for Free/Reduced Price Meals *As defined by the census with populations of 250,000 or more.

6. NAEP Item Types Advanced – Superior Performance Advanced – Superior Performance Proficient – Solid Academic Performance Proficient – Solid Academic Performance Basic – Partial Mastery Basic – Partial Mastery Below Basic Below Basic See Pages 16 and 20 of NAEP Trial Urban District Assessment: Mathematics 2005 booklet for additional descriptors. Multiple Choice Multiple Choice Constructed Response Constructed Response NAEP Achievement Levels

7. 2003-2005 Trial Urban District Assessment (TUDA) Results Grade 4 – Mathematics Results Student Percentages at each NAEP Achievement Level 34 2003 2005 Large Central City* Nation San Diego City Schools 4526 18 25 324321 46 304421 5 3 4 2 Below BasicBasic Proficient Advanced 2003 374318 2 2003 244528 4 *As defined by the census with populations of 250,000 or more.

8. 2005 Trial Urban District Assessment Subgroup Results % of Students District and Subgroups % of Students Average Scale Score Below Basic At or above Basic At or above Proficient At or above Advanced San Diego 2322645254 White23249694509 Black142214060151 Hispanic442223763161 Asian/Pacific Islander 172451387469 Amer. Indian/ Alaska Native 1 Eligible for F/R Meals 642253466192 Not Eligible for F/R Meals 362461189478 Grade 4 – Mathematics Results Bold items indicate statistically significantly different scores from 2003 to 2005.

9. 2003-2005 Trial Urban District Assessment District Comparisons Grade 4 – Average Scale Score District20032005Change % EL v. % EL Tested San Diego 226232+636/30 Atlanta216221+52/1 Austin24225/11 Boston220229+915/9 Charlotte- Mecklenburg 242244+210/4 Chicago214216+218/12 Cleveland215220+54/2 District of Columbia 205211+65/1 Houston227233+637/15 Los Angeles 216220+454/45 New York 226231+512/1 Grade 4 – Mathematics Results

10. 2003-2005 Trial Urban District Assessment District Comparisons Percentage of Students Performing At Proficient or Advanced Levels District20032005Change San Diego 20299 Atlanta13174 Austin--40-- Boston122210 Charlotte- Mecklenburg 41443 Chicago10133 Cleveland9123 District of Columbia 792 Houston18268 Los Angeles 13185 New York 21265 Grade 4 – Mathematics

11. 2003-2005 Trial Urban District Assessment District Comparisons Percentage of Students Performing Below the Basic Level District20032005Change San Diego 3426-8 Atlanta5043-7 Austin15 Boston4128-13 Charlotte- Mecklenburg 1614-2 Chicago5048-2 Cleveland4940-9 District of Columbia 6455-9 Houston3023-7 Los Angeles 4842-6 New York 3327-6 Grade 4 – Mathematics

12. 2003-2005 Trial Urban District Assessment (TUDA) Results Grade 8 – Mathematics Results Student Percentages at each NAEP Achievement Level 47 2003 2005 Large Central City* Nation San Diego City Schools 39 16 18 473415 35 233932 6 4 4 2 Below BasicBasic Proficient Advanced 2003 493414 3 2003 333922 5 *As defined by the census with populations of 250,000 or more.

13. 2005 Trial Urban District Assessment (TUDA) Subgroup Results % of Students District and Subgroups % of Students Average Scale Score Below Basic At or above Basic At or above Proficient At or above Advanced San Diego 2703939184 White2629217834210 Black15253604081 Hispanic412585149111 Asian/Pacific Islander 172822674316 Amer. Indian/ Alaska Native 1 Eligible for F/R Meals 552585149101 Not Eligible for F/R Meals 452852476368 Grade 8 – Mathematics Results Bold items indicate statistically significantly different scores from 2003 to 2005.

14. 2003-2005 Trial Urban District Assessment District Comparisons Grade 8 – Average Scale Score District20032005Change % EL v. % EL Tested San Diego 264270+621/14 Atlanta244245+11/<1 Austin28114/8 Boston262270+810/5 Charlotte- Mecklenburg 279281+27/4 Chicago254258+46/2 Cleveland253249-43/<1 District of Columbia 243245+24/1 Houston264267+315/10 Los Angeles 245250+534/28 New York 266267+110/2 Grade 8 – Mathematics Results

15. 2003-2005 Trial Urban District Assessment District Comparisons Percentage of Students Performing At Proficient or Advanced Levels District20032005Change San Diego 18224 Atlanta660 Austin33 Boston18224 Charlotte- Mecklenburg 31332 Chicago9112 Cleveland660 District of Columbia 671 Houston13163 Los Angeles 7114 New York 21210 Grade 8 – Mathematics

16. 2003-2005 Trial Urban District Assessment District Comparisons Percentage of Students Performing Below the Basic Level District20032005Change San Diego 4739-8 Atlanta7069 Austin32 Boston5242-10 Charlotte- Mecklenburg 3331-2 Chicago5855-3 Cleveland62664 District of Columbia 7169-2 Houston4842-6 Los Angeles 6862-6 New York 46460 Grade 8 – Mathematics

17. NAEP Cut Scores Grade 4  Basic 214  Proficient 249  Advanced 282 Grade 8  Basic 262  Proficient 299  Advanced 333 Since the SDCS Grade 4 average scale score is 232, our students are, on average, performing in the mid-Basic range. Since SDCS Grade 8 average scale score is 270, our students are, on average, performing in the mid- Basic range.

18. Mathematics

19. Actions we take  What we teach  How we teach so that students build strong mathematical skills, knowledge and understanding.

20. What we teach  Clearly defined by California state standards  Big ideas/mathematical concepts  Focus on algebraic thinking  Balanced mathematical curriculum

21. Balanced Mathematics Curriculum  Computational and procedural fluency  Conceptual understanding  Problem-solving  Mathematical reasoning

22. NAEP Item Map- Grade 4 Advanced-  Identify an equation to describe a pattern given in a table  Identify a number sentence to match a situation Proficient-  Determine missing numbers in number sentences  Represent a situation with an algebraic expression Basic-  Determine the next number in a given pattern  Subtract two digit numbers to solve a story problem

23. NAEP Item Map- Grade 8 Advanced-  Determine how many boxes of tile are needed  Determine the effect of increasing the value of one variable Proficient-  Solve a story problem involving percent increase  Determine the sixth term in a pattern Basic-  Convert a written number to decimal form  Solve a story problem with multiple operations

24. How we teach “The quality of instruction is the single most important component of an effective mathematics program.” California Mathematics Framework page 12

25. Quality Instruction  Deep understanding of mathematics and the content standards  Research-based instructional strategies  Organize instruction around goals  Use results of assessment to guide instruction

27. Knowing Mathematics  Building skill and proficiency in number and operations  Building algebraic reasoning

28. Lens for First Grade Classroom Episode  Background  What to watch for:  Students making meaning of numbers  Students engaged in their own thinking and the thinking of others  Excitement of students learning significant mathematics  High expectations for students

29. Knowing Mathematics The school cafeteria has 347 ice-cream bars in one box and 48 in another box. How many ice-cream bars does the cafeteria have in the two boxes? 347+48395

30. Knowing Mathematics Jeremy had 3.5 pounds of oranges in one bag and 0.62 pounds of oranges in another bag. How many pounds of oranges did Jeremy have? Marcy’s workAngela’s work 3.5 +.62.97 3.5 +.62 4.12

31. Lens for the 6th Grade Classroom Episode  Background  What to watch for:  Students making meaning of the base ten system  Students engaged in their own thinking and the thinking of others  Excitement of students learning significant mathematics  High expectations for students

32. Intervention Program  Foundational Skills  Routines  Word Problems  Games

33. Mathematics Games and Activities for Home  Support students’ thinking, reasoning and mathematical understanding through games that can be played at home.  Help parents build an understanding of the mathematics their children are learning.  Give parents an opportunity to work with children in developing mathematical skills and conceptual understandings  Strengthen parent confidence in doing mathematics with their children