NJSLA Tinton Falls School District 2019 Board Presentation October - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
njsla tinton falls school district 2019 board presentation
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

NJSLA Tinton Falls School District 2019 Board Presentation October - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Mar 17, 2024 340 likes •686 views

NJSLA Tinton Falls School District 2019 Board Presentation October 28, 2019 Elizabeth Cole 1 NJ State Assessments All New Jersey public school districts are required to administer achievement tests developed by the New Jersey Department of

slide-1
SLIDE 1

NJSLA Tinton Falls School District 2019 Board Presentation

October 28, 2019 Elizabeth Cole

1

slide-2
SLIDE 2

NJ State Assessments

All New Jersey public school districts are required to administer achievement tests developed by the New Jersey Department of Education. New Jersey students in Grades 3 to 11 will be tested in Literacy and in Mathematics through the New Jersey Student Learning Assessment. Literacy and Math assessments are used to measure the success of our schools on the standards set by the Federal “Every Student Succeeds Act” (ESSA)

2

slide-3
SLIDE 3

NJSLA is an assessment of….

➢ NJ Student Learning Standards (NJSLS) formerly known as the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). ➢ Prior to NJSLA, NJ standards were measured by the PARCC ➢ Prior to PARCC, NJ standards were measured by the NJ ASK assessment. ➢ NJSLA assesses the NJSLS in a rigorous manner utilizing technology.

3

slide-4
SLIDE 4

What’s Different about the NJSLA than PARCC?

  • NJSLA will measure the same standards with fewer questions, so the scaled

scores and the performance levels will remain the same.

  • For example:

PARCC NJSLA 3RD GRADE ELA 3RD GRADE ELA 3 Units, 75 minutes each 2 Units, 75 minutes each GRADE 3-5 MATH GRADE 3-5 MATH 4 Testing Units (all non-calculator), 60 minutes each 3 Testing Units (all non-calculator), 60 minutes each

4

slide-5
SLIDE 5

NJSLA Performance Levels

Performance Levels outline the knowledge, skills, and practices that students performing at a given level should demonstrate in each content area at each grade level

  • Level 1: Not yet meeting grade-level expectations
  • Level 2: Partially meeting grade-level expectations
  • Level 3: Approaching grade-level expectations
  • Level 4: Meeting grade-level expectations
  • Level 5: Exceeding grade-level expectations

5

slide-6
SLIDE 6

NJ Reporting Requirements

The NJ Department of Education requires this presentation to report on the following:

  • NJSLA for ELA and Math
  • Dynamic Learning Map (DLM)
  • Aggregated and disaggregated subgroup data* (subgroups with less than 10

students are not reported)

  • Trends and comparative analyses
  • Appropriate intervention strategies

6

slide-7
SLIDE 7

2019 Student Performance Compared to State in ELA

Levels of Proficiency/Student Percentages

GRADE LEVEL1

DISTRICT

LEVEL 1 STATE LEVEL 2

DISTRICT

LEVEL 2 STATE LEVEL 3

DISTRICT

LEVEL 3 STATE LEVEL 4s/5s

DISTRICT

LEVEL 4s/5s STATE 3 14.8 14 14.1 14.4 16.1 21.4 55 50.3 4 5.2 8.6 12.9 12.6 20.6 21.4 61.3 57.4 5 3.4 7.4 7.5 12.5 15.1 22.2 74 57.9 6 6 7.3 11.4 12.6 13.8 23.9 68.9 56.2 7 3.3 8.9 9.2 10.5 16.3 17.8 71.2 62.8 8 3.9 9.2 8.6 10.3 9.2 17.7 78.3 62.8

7

slide-8
SLIDE 8

2019 Student Performance Compared to State in MATH

GRADE LEVEL1

DISTRICT

LEVEL 1 STATE LEVEL 2

DISTRICT

LEVEL 2 STATE LEVEL 3

DISTRICT

LEVEL 3 STATE LEVEL 4s/5s

DISTRICT

LEVEL 4s/5s STATE 3 5.4 8 11.4 13.9 22.8 23 60.4 55.1 4 4.5 8.6 11 14.7 23.2 25.7 61.3 51 5 .7 6.4 6.2 20.9 24.7 25.8 68.5 46.8 6 7.8 9.6 17.4 22.5 23.4 27.4 51.5 40.5 7 2.6 7.6 15.1 21.1 34.2 29.3 48 42.1 8 11.3 23.3 26.4 23.1 30.2 24.3 32.1 29.3

Grade 8 excluded Algebra 1 students.

Levels of Proficiency/Student Percentages

8

slide-9
SLIDE 9

3 YEAR LOOK BACK 2017-2019 in ELA

Percentage of PERFORMANCE of 4s and 5s

2019 2018 2017 Grade 3 55 62.4 61 Grade 4 61.3 74.2 56.5 Grade 5 74 64.7 64.5 Grade 6 68.9 66.5 69.1 Grade 7 71.2 74.7 82.3 Grade 8 78.3 80.4 81.9

9

slide-10
SLIDE 10

3 YEAR LOOK BACK 2017-2019 in MATH

Percentage of PERFORMANCE of 4s and 5s

2019 2018 2017 Grade 3 60.4 71.3 62.1 Grade 4 61.3 61.9 50.9 Grade 5 68.5 58 61 Grade 6 51.5 45.7 43.9 Grade 7 48 50.7 45.6 Grade 8 32.1 37 41 Algebra I 97.8 93.8 97.9

10

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Same TF Students Different Tests in ELA

GRADE 2019 2018 3 62.4 4 61.3 74.2 5 74 64.7 6 68.9 66.5 7 71.2 74.7 8 78.3

11

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Same TF Students Different Tests in Math

GRADE 2019 2018 3 71.3 4 61.3 61.9 5 68.5 58 6 51.5 43.9 7 48 50.7 8 32.1 (excl. Alg I)

12

slide-13
SLIDE 13

SCHOOL STATE 55 50.3

SUBGROUP

2019 2019

Female 66.7 (60) 55 Male 47.2 (89) 46 Hispanics/Latino 32.1 (28) 36 White 63.2 (95) 59 Economically Disadvantaged 20.7 (29) 33 IEP Students 25 (36) 24

Grade 3 Subgroups ELA Compared to State scored 4 or 5

13

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Grade 4 Subgroups ELA Compared to State scored 4 or 5

SCHOOL STATE 61.3 57.4 SUBGROUP 2019 2019

Female 68.6 (70) 63 Male 55.3 (85) 53 Hispanics/Latino 54.2 (24) 45 Black or African American 28.6 (21) 39 White 69.2 (91) 67 Economically Disadvantaged 36.4 (33) 40 IEP Students 34.6 (26) 26

14

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Grade 5 Subgroups ELA Compared to State scored 4 or 5

SCHOOL STATE 74 57.9

SUBGROUP

2019 2019

Female 76.5 (81) 64 Male 70.8 (65) 52 Black or African American 58.3 (24) 39 White 79.8 (93) 68 IEP Students 27.3 (22) 24

15

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Grade 6 Subgroups ELA Compared to State scored 4 or 5

SCHOOL STATE 68.9 56.2

SUBGROUP

2019 2019

Female 69.6 (92) 65 Male 68 (75) 48 Hispanics/Latino 54.1 (37) 43 White 75 (92) 66 Economically Disadvantaged 34.8 (23) 39 IEP Students 21.4 (42) 19

16

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Grade 7 Subgroups ELA Compared to State scored 4 or 5

SCHOOL STATE 71.2 62.8

SUBGROUP

2019 2019

Female 82.9 (70) 71 Male 61.4 (83) 55 Hispanics/Latino 59.1 (22) 50 White 72.8 (92) 72 Economically Disadvantaged 65 (20) 45 IEP Students 27 (29) 22

17

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Grade 8 Subgroups ELA Compared to State scored 4 or 5

SCHOOL STATE 78.3 62.8

SUBGROUP

2019 2019

Female 83.3 (78) 71 Male 73 (54) 55 Hispanic/Latino 66.7 (24) 49 White 82.8 (93) 71 Economically Disadvantaged 51.7 (29) 45 IEP Students 23.1 (26) 22

18

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Grade 3 Subgroups MATH Compared to State scored 4 or 5

SCHOOL STATE 60.4 55.1

SUBGROUP

2019 2019

Female 73.3 (60) 54 Male 51.7 (89) 56 Hispanics/Latino 35.7 (28) 40 White 66.3 (95) 66 Economically Disadvantaged 24.1 (29) 37 IEP Students 25 (36) 32

19

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Grade 4 Subgroups MATH Compared to State scored 4 or 5

SCHOOL STATE 61.3 51

SUBGROUP

2019 2019

Female 55.7 (70) 50 Male 65.9 (85) 52 Hispanics/Latino 41.7 (24) 36 Black or African American 28.6 (21) 29 White 71.4 (91) 62 Economically Disadvantaged 36.4 (33) 32 IEP Students 34.6 (26) 24

20

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Grade 5 Subgroups MATH Compared to State scored 4 or 5

SCHOOL STATE 68.5 46.8

SUBGROUP

2019 2019

Female 67.1 (82) 47 Male 70.3 (64) 47 Hispanics/Latino 30.8 (13) 31 Asian 92.9 (14) 80 Black/African American 41.7 (24) 24 White 77.4 (93) 58 Economically Disadvantaged 27.8 (18) 27 IEP Students 31.8 (22) 19

21

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Grade 6 Subgroups MATH Compared to State scored 4 or 5

SCHOOL STATE 51.5 40.5 SUBGROUP 2019 2019 Female 46.7 (92) 41 Male 57.3 (75) 40 Hispanics/Latino 32.4 (37) 24 Asian 73.3 (15) 76 Black or African American 18.8 (16) 18 White 58.7 (92) 52 Economically Disadvantaged 17.4 (23) 21 IEP Students 16.7 (42) 12

22

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Grade 7 Subgroups MATH Compared to State scored 4 or 5

SCHOOL STATE 48 42.1

SUBGROUP

2019 2019

Female 53.6 (69) 42 Male 43.4 (83) 41 Hispanics/Latino 13.6 (22) 26 Black/African American 26.3 (19) 20 White 54.9 (91) 53 Economically Disadvantaged 25 (20) 24 IEP Students 21.4 (28) 12

23

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Grade 8 Subgroups MATH Compared to State scored 4 or 5

SCHOOL STATE 32.1 29.3

SUBGROUP

2019 2019

Female

33.9 (56) 31

Male

30 (50) 27

Hispanics/Latino

36.4 (22) 28

Black/African American

5.9 (17) 15

White

37 (62) 38

Economically Disadvantaged

14.3 (28) 20

IEP Students

0 (26) 12

24

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Algebra Subgroups

SCHOOL STATE 87.8 42.9

SUBGROUP

2019 2019

Females

100 (23)

45

Males

100 (23)

41

Whites

100 (31)

55

25

slide-26
SLIDE 26

DYNAMIC LEARNING MAP (DLM) RESULTS

7 students participated in DLM Score Rubric 1 -Emerging 2 -Approaching Target 3 -At Target 4 -Advanced *Only students in Grades 5 and 8 take Science DLM

ELA MATH SCIENCE 1 -Emerging 3 2-Approaching 3 4 3-At Target 4 3 4-Advanced

26

slide-27
SLIDE 27

19-20 Action Steps for Math in grades 3-8

1. Increased Math minutes to 84 min. From 57 minutes at TFMS 2. Provided researched-based PD with Paul Riccomini in June 19, Sept. 19, and

  • Feb. 20; ongoing Zoom Meetings in between.

3. Monitoring of Math Retention Strategies 4. Implemented Math Inventory 3 times per year to obtain Quantiles (Math Levels) for students in grade 3-8. 5. Monthly grade level Data Chats with staff

27

slide-28
SLIDE 28

19-20 Action Steps for ELA in K-5

1. Guided Reading Training for K-5 to ensure reading instruction with fidelity

  • Sept. 2019.

2. Instituted universal screener DIBELS training for K-2 teachers October, 2019 3. All K students have been assessed using DIBELS 8 Summer, 2019 4. All students in K-2 will be assessed using DIBELS Winter and Spring 2020. 5. Instituted 3 tiers of intervention at the K-2 level in ASP program. 6. Implementation of Linguistics program in grades 3-5 with Teacher Training. 7. Sheltered Instruction Training for 16 K-8 teachers. 8. Gifted and Talented Training October 2019 and March 2020 for Cluster Teachers in grades 3-5

28

slide-29
SLIDE 29

Programs in Place to Target ALL Learners

Action Steps:

  • Geometry Cohort (Current 6th grade)
  • Doubled Advanced Placement Sections for 6th Grade ELA
  • Cluster GATE students in grades 3-5
  • Target high achievers through ICE instruction
  • Acceleration for any identified 3-5th grader with GATE teacher
  • Math Olympiads grades 4 and 5
  • Coding Competitions (30 students from grades 6-8)
  • Odyssey of the Mind

29

slide-30
SLIDE 30

Programs in Place to Target ALL Learners

Continued Action Steps:

  • School Improvement Panel (SCIP) will meet to review subgroup deficits and

write action plan October-November 2019

  • Principal Analysis - Meet with teachers to specify interventions during SGP

conference

  • Multi-tiered System of Supports K-5 (ELA), 3-5 (MATH), 6-8 STAR

○

Meet with MTSS team to assess progress of students achieving below grade level ○ ID struggling learners, provide targeted support

30

slide-31
SLIDE 31

Continuous Monitoring of Student Achievement

Continued Action Steps:

  • In Grades 6-8, currently identifying skill gaps and weaknesses through

assessment tools ie. Math Inventory, Achieve 3000, and Read 180 to put interventions in place with pockets of identified students; progress monitor in 6-8 weeks; celebrate student growth

  • Monthly after school DATA CHATS to articulate on progress of students and

discuss strategies for implementation K-8.

  • Professional Learning Communities connected to student needs Oct. 2019
  • Targeted conversations during teacher Post Conferences regarding student

growth

31

slide-32
SLIDE 32

QUESTIONS?

32