W HITEFISH S CHOOL D ISTRICT AYP 2013 O CT 8,2013

WHITEFISH SCHOOL DISTRICTAYP 2013

OCT 8,2013

ADEQUATE YEARLY PROGRESSUNDERSTANDING THE NUMBERS

Scott Furois

Research and Analysis Manager –

Department of Measurement and Accountability

Office of Public Instruction

July 2013

STATEWIDE ASSESSMENT (CRT)

Criterion-referenced Test (CRT) Aligned to current Montana Content Standards Grades 3-8 & grade 10 tested (math and

reading) Additional test for science (grade 4, 8, 10) Administered every year since 2004

NCLB/ ESEA

Elementary & Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 2006 (reauthorization of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001)

By 2013-14, 100% of students tested must score at or above proficient in reading and math, or the school/district will not make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)

PROGRESSION OF MT AMO TARGETS

Reading Math0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

SY

2006,

Year

1 ;

74.0

%

SY

2006,

Year

1 ;

51.0

%

SY

2007,

Year

2;

74.0

%

SY

2007,

Year

2;

51.0

%

SY

2008,

Year

3 ;

83.0

%

SY

2008,

Year

3 ;

68.0

%

SY

2009,

Year

4;

83.0

%

SY

2009,

Year

4;

68.0

%

SY

2010,

Year

5;

83.0

%

SY

2010,

Year

5;

68.0

%

SY

2011,

Year

6;

84.4

%

SY

2011,

Year

6;

70.0

%

SY

2012,

Year

7;

89.6

%

SY

2012,

Year

7;

80.0

%

SY

20

13

, Y

ea

r 8

; 9

4.8

%

SY

20

13

, Y

ea

r 8

; 9

0.0

%

SY

2014,

Year

9;

100.0

%

SY

2014,

Year

9;

100.0

%

Annual Measurable Objective (AMO) progression, 2006-2014

STUDENT GROUPS In addition to evaluating an entire school or

district, groups of tested students are evaluated separately

By Race/Ethnicity (six categories) Limited English Proficiency (LEP) Special Education (SE or IEP) Economically Disadvantaged students

defined by OPI as “eligible for Free or Reduced Price Lunch (FRL)”

AYP CALCULATED PROCESS

Required for all schools with >30 students tested

CRT Reading and Math for student groups >30

95% Participation rate for all student groups > 40

Attendance Rate (80% or Improvement) for K-8

Cohort Graduation Rate (85% or 2 percentage point improvement) for 9-12

54.5% of schools evaluated through calculated process

AYP CALCULATED PROCESS

Two other methods to make AYP for schools in calculated process

99% CI Filter: CRT achievement scores are very close to target, and school made the other indicators. School is evaluated through SSAP.

Safe Harbor: School shows a 10% reduction in the number of students scoring below proficient, also makes other indicators. School makes AYP if all evaluated groups meet target.

SMALL SCHOOL ACCOUNTABILITY PROCESS

Small School Accountability Process (SSAP)

Used for schools with <30 students tested 3 years of CRT Achievement data for all student groups

with >10 students tested 2 cycles of CRT Improvement Attendance or cohort graduation rate (current year) CRT Participation Rate (current year) Accreditation Continuous School Improvement Plan

(CSIP) report

44.3% of all schools evaluated through SSAP

FEEDER SCHOOL PROCESS

16 schools do not serve any grades tested Example: Eastgate School in East Helena (PK-

1) These schools receive AYP results from the

school that they “feed” into. Example: Eastgate School feeds into Radley

Elementary School (2-5), and receives the same AYP status as Radley Elementary

MONTANA ADEQUATE YEARLY PROGRESS

Schools making AYP

In 2008, 71.8% of Montana schools made AYP In 2009, 73.6% of Montana schools made AYP In 2010, 72.6% of Montana schools made AYP In 2011, 72.2% of Montana schools made AYP In 2012, 74.1% of Montana schools made AYP In 2013, 46.6% of Montana schools made

AYP

MT AYP BY PROCESS

SSAP: 362 schools evaluated (including 6 schools originally evaluated through calculated process): 310 Made AYP. (86%)

Calculated Process: 440 Schools evaluated (doesn’t include the 6 schools above): 70 made AYP. (16%) 46 made through “Safe Harbor” process

Feeder School process: 16 schools, 1 made AYP

CRT STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT

School Year

Reading Proficient %

Math Proficient

%2004 62% 57%2005 68% 59%2006 78% 61%2007 81% 63%2008 81% 63%2009 82% 64%2010 84% 67%2011 85% 68%2012 86% 68%2013 84% 66%

Until this year, “all student” CRT achievement results had increased for every year in both reading and math since 2004.

CONCLUSIONS

AMO targets have risen to a very high mark 94.8% proficient in Reading 90% proficient in Math

CRT statewide results decreased slightly this year 2 percentage points in both reading and math

These two facts combine to result in a large number (53.4%) of schools not making AYP

WHITEFISH SCHOOL DISTRICT ADEQUATE YEARLY PROGRESS - 2013

View: CRT Reading At or Above Proficiency TrendsDate: 8/29/2013Dashboard: MontCAS (CRT)Parameter: State,Whitefish Elem - 0334

Reading ScoresWF Elementary Dist.

https://securegems.opi.mt.gov/StudentAchievement/Dashboards/Student%20Achievement%20Dashboard/MontCAS%20(CRT).aspx


View: CRT Mathematics At or Above Proficiency TrendsDate: 8/29/2013Dashboard: MontCAS (CRT)Parameter: State,Whitefish Elem - 0334

Math ScoresWF Elementary District


View: CRT Reading At or Above Proficiency TrendsDate: 8/29/2013Dashboard: MontCAS (CRT)Parameter: State,Whitefish H S - 0335

Reading ScoresWF High School District


View: CRT Mathematics At or Above Proficiency TrendsDate: 8/29/2013Dashboard: MontCAS (CRT)Parameter: State,Whitefish H S - 0335

Math ScoresWF High School District


AYP RESULTS- 2013

Whitefish Elementary District

Reading Target

Reading Score

Math Target

Math Score

All 94.8% 93% 90% 83%White 93% 83%EconomicallyDisadvantaged

86% 71%

Students With Disabilities

64% 45%

Muldown

Reading Target

Reading Score

Math Target

Math Score


84% 70%


N/A N/A

Muldown

Reading Target

Reading Score

Math Target

Math Score


84% 70%


N/A N/A

WMS

Reading Target

Reading Score

Math Target

Math Score


89% 76%


69% 47%

WHS Dist. & WHS School

Reading Target

Reading Score

Math Target

Math Score


N/A N/A


N/A N/A

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 20130

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

345678Series710

Whitefish School DistrictCRT Results 2004-2013

Reading

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 20130

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

3Series2

CRT – 3rd Grade 2006-2013Reading

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 20130

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

4Series2

CRT Results – 4th Grade 2004-2013Reading

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 20130

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

5Series2


2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 20130

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

6Series2


2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 20130

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

7Series2


2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 20130

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

8Series2


2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 20130

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Series110


2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-20130%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

3rd Grade4th Grade5th Grade6th Grade7th Grade8th Grade10th Grade

Whitefish School DistrictCRT Results 2004-2013

Math

2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-20130%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

3rd Grade

CRT Results – 3rd Grade 2004-2013Math

2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-20130%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

4th Grade

CRT Results – 4th Grade 2004-2013Math

2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-20130%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

5th Grade

5th Grade


2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-20130%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

6th Grade

6th Grade


2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-20130%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

7th Grade

7th Grade


2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-20130%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

8th Grade

8th Grade


2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-20130%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

10th Grade

10th Grade


CRT READING SC1500

Grade2004

Reading2005

Reading 2006

Reading2007

Reading2008

Reading2009

Reading2010

Reading2011

Reading2012

Reading2013

Reading

3 82% 82% 78% 85% 90% 91% 93% 86%

4 77% 73% 82% 88% 91% 81% 83% 90% 86% 82%

5 92% 88% 88% 95% 88% 91% 95% 91%

6 91% 96% 80% 90% 96% 93% 91% 91%

7 81% 91% 95% 89% 93% 99% 95% 94%

8 71% 83% 86% 83% 91% 90% 93% 88% 97% 88%

10 76% 86% 87% 90% 85% 86% 86% 97% 90% 87%Follow the diagonal for longitudinal cohort Data source: MARS

CRT MATHSC1500

Grade2004 Math

2005 Math

2006 Math

2007 Math

2008 Math

2009 Math

2010 Math

2011 Math

2012 Math

2013 Math

3 62% 85% 70% 72% 78% 80% 86% 79%

4 55% 60% 62% 77% 76% 65% 78% 76% 80% 78%

5 66% 57% 78% 81% 73% 80% 86% 84%

6 70% 67% 76% 73% 88% 77% 79% 84%

7 64% 67% 68% 76% 72% 83% 77% 86%

8 69% 75% 55% 58% 66% 66% 74% 68% 82% 74%

10 70% 70% 61% 70% 53% 52% 73% 61% 77% 69%Follow the diagonal for longitudinal cohort Data source: MARS

CONCLUSIONS

Whitefish Schools continue to show strong student achievement on the CRT

Whitefish Schools was among the 74% of schools that did not make AYP using the Calculated Method.

SOME LOCAL COMPARISONS

CRT Assessment - Percent of Students Meeting or Exceeding StandardsGrade/Subject Whitefish H S Columbia Falls

H SBigfork H S Flathead H S

10th Grade - Reading

All Students (Including ELL and Sp Ed) 87.07% 80.84% 87.14% 87.12%

Male Students 83.08% 75.47% 76.32% 83.14%

Female Students 92.00% 86.11% 100.00% 91.15%

American Indian/Alaskan Native N/A * * 58.33%

Asian or Pacific Islander * N/A N/A *

White, Non-Hispanic * N/A N/A N/A

Black, Non-Hispanic * N/A N/A *

Hispanic * * * 73.33%

Students Eligible for Free or Reduced Lunch 58.33% 73.79% 89.29% 83.40%

Students served in Migrant Program N/A N/A N/A N/A

Special Education Students 30.00% 5.88% * 44.64%

English Language Learners N/A N/A N/A N/A

CRT Assessment - Percent of Students Meeting or Exceeding StandardsGrade/Subject Whitefish H S Columbia Falls

H SBigfork H S Flathead H S

10th Grade - Mathematics


Male Students 69.23% 50.00% 63.16% 60.47%

Female Students 68.00% 57.41% 84.38% 61.06%

American Indian/Alaskan Native N/A * * 25.00%

Asian or Pacific Islander * N/A N/A *

White, Non-Hispanic N/A N/A N/A N/A


Hispanic * * * 53.33%




English Language Learners N/A N/A N/A N/A

CRT Assessment - Percent of Students Meeting or Exceeding Standards

Grade/Subject Whitefish H S Columbia Falls H S

Bigfork H S Flathead H S

10th Grade - Science


Male Students 61.54% 49.06% 31.58% 52.03%

Female Students 52.00% 54.63% 65.63% 42.48%

American Indian/Alaskan Native * N/A * 25.00%

Asian or Pacific Islander * * N/A *

White, Non-Hispanic N/A N/A N/A N/A


Hispanic * * * 53.33%




English Language Learners N/A * N/A N/A

Flathead High School - 0462

Glacier High School - 1835

Columbia Falls High Schl -

0425

Bigfork High School - 0443

Polson High School - 0633

Belgrade High School - 0491

Whitefish High School -

0448

OverAll 3rd Year Identified for Restructuring

1st Year Identified for Restructuring


Made AYP 4th Year Identified for Restructuring

4th Year Identified for Improvement


Reading 1st Year did not make AYP

(Watch List)

Holding at Corrective

Action Year 1

1st Year Identified for Corrective

Action

Made AYP 1st Year Identified for Improvement

1st Year did not make AYP

(Watch List)

1st Year did not make AYP (Watch List)

Math 1st Year Identified for Improvement



Made AYP 1st Year Identified for Corrective

Action

4th Year Identified for Improvement

1st Year did not make AYP (Watch List)

Graduation Rate

Holding at Corrective

Action Year 1

Holding at Improvement

Year 1

1st Year did not make AYP

(Watch List)

Made AYP 1st Year did not make AYP

(Watch List)

Made AYP Holding at Improvement

Year 1

Attendance Rate

Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable

AYP Status of Flathead Valley High Schools

WHAT’S ON THE HORIZON FOR THE CRT? State Superintendent Denise Juneau announced that she had

submitted a request for flexibility to Education Secretary Arne Duncan stating that Montana wants to discontinue giving the CRT in the spring of 2013-14 and give only the new tests prepared by the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC).

How will schools be rated under NCLB because the law is still in place? The answer is that Montana would report our NCLB scores just as they were this year -- for example if your school was 90% proficient/advanced in Reading and 84% proficient/advanced in 2013 that is the same report for 2014.

Will there be a bar set for performance on the SBAC tests that will cause schools to be compared on the new tests? At this point, the SBAC tests are being piloted in most of the states in order to collect baseline data, so there is no reason to believe an artificial target would be set (especially when growth models are being considered as best practice) in the pilot year.

Questions?

Ongoing Discussion

Thanks!

http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=cartoons+about+testing&source=images&cd=&docid=cc1RLPbnaI-_iM&tbnid=PnkH9aDOWbPB8M:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http://www.savagechickens.com/2009/04/multiple-choice.html&ei=MTk3UvabHOi8igLcxIHICg&bvm=bv.52164340,d.cGE&psig=AFQjCNGLXggTcgblsU7pr1OOXFHGLQppcw&ust=1379436927179749

Documents

W HITEFISH S CHOOL D ISTRICT AYP 2013 O CT 8,2013