measuring stuent progress on common core learning ... comparisons on scale scores, ... white 85.7...

A New Baseline:

Measuring Student Progress on

the Common Core Learning

Standards

August 2013

EngageNY.org

Common Core in New York 2010: Board of Regents adopts Common Core State

Standards 2013: Common Core Assessments in Grades 3 8 ELA and

Math are administered 2014: Roll-out of Common Core Regents Exams begins

June 2014: ELA and Algebra I June 2015: Geometry and Algebra II

Class of 2017: First cohort of high school graduates required

to pass Common Core Regents Exams for graduation

Transition to New York Common Core Assessments is a

seven year phase-in.

EngageNY.org 2

A New Baseline This years grades 3-8 ELA and math proficiency percentages

should not be compared directly with prior-year results. Unlike prior years, proficiency is now based on the

Common Core a more demanding set of knowledge and skills necessary for 21st century college and careers.

These results present a new and transparent baseline from which we can measure student progress and preparedness for college and careers.

School and district leaders are urged to be thoughtful to ensure these proficiency results have no negative impact on students, schools, districts, or teachers.

No new districts will be identified as Focus Districts and no new schools will be identified as Priority Schools based on 2012-13 assessment results.

EngageNY.org 3

State-Provided Growth Scores New Yorks growth scores are based on year-to-year comparisons for similar students, all of whom experienced New Yorks Common Core assessments for the first time in 2012-13.

The state-provided growth scores are based on year-to-year comparisons on scale scores, not performance levels.

Therefore, the state-provided growth scores resulted in similar percentages of educators earning each rating category* in 2012-13 compared to 2011-12.

*Highly Effective, Effective, Developing, Ineffective

EngageNY.org 4

http:EngageNY.org

State-Provided Growth Score

Comparison - 2012 and 2013

HEDI Rating 2011-12 Percent of

Teacher MGPs N=33,129

2012-13 Percent of Teacher MGPs

N=37,614

Highly Effective 6.7% 7.0%

77.2% 76.3%Effective

10.1% 10.8%Developing

6.0% 5.9%Ineffective

Growth scores are expected to be released to districts the week of 8/19

EngageNY.org 5

College and Career Readiness

Whether the measure is national or New York-specific, there is converging evidence

Converging Evidence about

College Readiness

about student preparedness for college and careers.

EngageNY.org 6

http:EngageNY.org

7

Graduating College and Career Ready

New York's 4-year high school graduation rate is 74% for All Students.However, the percent graduating college and career ready is significantly lower.

June 2012 Four-Year Graduation Rate (2008 Cohort) Graduation under Current Requirements Calculated College and Career Ready*

% Graduating % Graduating All Students 74.0 All Students 35.3 American Indian 58.5 American Indian 18.8 Asian/Pacific Islander 81.6 Asian/Pacific Islander 56.5 Black 58.1 Black 12.5 Hispanic 57.8 Hispanic 15.7 White 85.7 White 48.5 English Language Learners 34.3 English Language Learners 7.3 Students with Disabilities 44.7 Students with Disabilities 4.9 *Students graduating with at least a score of 75 on Regents English and 80 on a Math Regents, which correlates with success in first-year college courses. Source: NYSED Office of Information and Reporting Services

EngageNY.org 7

New York 2011 NAEP Reading Grades 4 and 8

33% 4

1%

26% 31

%

9%

4%

24%

32%

Grade 4 Grade 8

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4

8

New York 2011 NAEP Math Grades 4 and 8

44%

40%

31%

23%

5% 7%

30%

20%

Grade 4 Grade 8

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 9

SAT and PSAT Benchmarks for

New York Students

College Board and NAEP study determined scores on SAT and PSAT/NMSQT that correspond with college readiness for the nation.

Criteria were adapted slightly to accommodate

New York students course-taking patterns.

The results for all New York students who graduated in 2010 and who took the SAT and PSAT/NMSQT are on the following slide.

EngageNY.org 10

http:EngageNY.org

SAT and PSAT/NMSQT CCR

Benchmark Data: ELA

EngageNY.org 11

http:EngageNY.org

SAT and PSAT/NMSQT CCR

Benchmark Data: Math

EngageNY.org 12

http:EngageNY.org

Why Readiness Matters -

Underperformance Costs $1 Trillion

Americas urban school districts underperform

compared with their suburban counterparts.

Americas suburban school districts underperform

compared with their international counterparts.

If American students performed at the same level in math as Canadian students, we would add $1 trillion annually to the economy.

Source: Levine, Arthur. The Suburban Education Gap. The Wall Street Journal. 2012. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444223104578041181255713360.html

EngageNY.org 13

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444223104578041181255713360.html

Why Readiness Matters -Talent Dividend

If New York increased its college attainment rate by just one percent from 33.8 to 34.8 percent the State would capture a $17.5 billion Talent Dividend.

Source: CEOs for Cities: http://ceosforcities.org

EngageNY.org 14

http:http://ceosforcities.org

Regents Reform Agenda

College andCareer ReadyStudents

Highly EffectiveSchool Leaders

Highly EffectiveTeachers

Implementing Common Core standards and developing curriculum and assessments aligned to these standards to prepare students for success in college and the workplace

Building instructional data systems that measure student success and inform teachers and principals how they can improve their practice in real time

Recruiting, developing, retaining, and rewarding effective teachers and principals

Turning around the lowest-achieving schools

EngageNY.org 15

SETTING PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR

COMMON CORE ASSESSMENTS

Common Core Standards / CCR

Cut Scores

NY Educator Judgment

Standard Setting Determination

Research-based Methodology

EngageNY.org 16

http:EngageNY.org

Just as New York Educators are

Essential to Test Development

New York educators are represented on the following panels: New York State Content Advisory Panels

Spans early childhood and P12 through CUNY, SUNY and cIcu faculty

Item Development, Item Review, Final Form Review These panels are informing:

College and Career Ready Determinations Test specifications, policies, and items Policy-level and grade-level performance level

descriptions

EngageNY.org 17

http:EngageNY.org

New York Educators are

Essential to Setting Standards

95 New York educators for Days 1 to 4 34 stayed for Day 5 Variety of educators nominated and represented:

K-12 ELA and Math Teachers BOCES ELL and SwD specialists Higher Education K-12 Administration

Panelists represented New Yorks geographic and demographic diversity

EngageNY.org 18

http:EngageNY.org

Days 1 to 4 95 panelists followed a research-based protocol:

Worked in four groups (ELA 3-5, ELA 6-8, Math 3-5, or Math 6-8). Defined expectations based on what students should know and be able to do at each grade according to the demands of the Standards. Reviewed the New York tests and external benchmark data (NAEP, SAT, PSAT/NMSQT). Viewed test questions in easiest-to-hardest order and made individual panelist judgments on where to place the cut scores for proficiency levels. Discussed rationales for their judgments and viewed impact data for each of four rounds of review.

EngageNY.org 19

http:EngageNY.org

Panelist Evaluation of

Standard-Setting Process

Over 90% of panelists at end of Day 4 said they would defend the recommended cut scores. Of those in the minority, none strongly disagreed with the recommended standards (they only moderately disagreed).

The standards are being set by a group that consists of teachers, K-12, college professors and administrators. It makes sense and it's transparent. The collective experience and knowledge evidenced in discussions and the outcomes of the tasks resulted in fair and unbiased standards. Participants followed directions carefully and judiciously.

EngageNY.org 20

http:EngageNY.org

Day 5 34 of the 95 panelists remained and worked in two groups

(ELA 3-8 or Math 3-8) Panelists reviewed the results across all six grade levels to

ensure that the results made sense from a broader perspective.

Panelists were allowed to make small adjustments only (within +/- 4 raw score points). Adjustments were required to be grounded in the

expectations of the Common Core standards. Commissioner was presented with both sets of

recommendations those from Day 4 and from Day 5. The results of Day 4 and Day 5 differed minimally.

EngageNY.org 21

http:EngageNY.org

Statement from National Experts In observing the training for the NY State Grades 3-8 ELA and Math Common Core Tests Standard Setting on June 29, 2013, we were comfortable that the facilitators were following best practices in implementing research-based procedures. After observing a full standard-setting session, we are confident that the recommended cut scores were derived using a well-implemented process that followed the plan presented to the NY technical advisory committee (TAC).

Marianne Perie, Co-Director at the Center For Educational Testing and Evaluation, University of Kansas Michael Rodriguez, Campbell Leadership Chair in Education and Human Development, University of Minnesota New York State TAC

EngageNY.org 22

http:EngageNY.org

The Commissioner accepted Day 5 performance

standard recommendations with no changes.

The Board of Regents approved the

Commissioners recommendation on July 22,

2013

EngageNY.org 23

http:EngageNY.org

New Standards, New Tests,

New Scale

100 425

New Scale New performance standards

NYS Level 4: Student excels in CCLS for this grade level

NYS Level 3: Student is proficient in CCLS for this grade level

NYS Level 2: Student is below proficient in CCLS for this grade level (partial but insufficient)

NYS Level 1: Student is well below proficient in standards for this grade level

EngageNY.org 24

http:EngageNY.org

2013 Grades 3-8

English Language Arts

Results

EngageNY.org

In ELA, 31.1 percent of students in grades 3-8 across the State met or exceeded the proficiency standard (NYS Levels 3 or 4), reflecting a new baseline relative to the Common Core Standards

77.4%

53.2% 55.1% 52.8%

31.1%

Grades 3-8

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

The vertical lines indicate years where changes were implemented. In 2010, cut scores changed, but the standards and scale remained the same. In 2013, the standards, scale, and cut scores changed to measure the Common Core.

26

In each grade level statewide, the majority of students performed at NYS Levels 1 or 2 in ELA

39.2

%

41.6

%

30.5

%

34.1

%

28.8

%

29.6

%

33.2

%

35.7

%

36.6

%

36.6

%

27.4

%

21.0

%

21.7

%

16.0

% 23.4

%

23.4

%

3.7% 9

.3%

8.5% 1

3.6%

8.0% 10

.3%

35.7

%

32.0

%

Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8


27

3.2 percent of English language learners met or exceeded the ELA proficiency standard (NYS Levels 3 or 4) in grades 3-8

Beginning in 2013-14, data will be available for students who received ELL services at any time prior to test administration. 80

.1%

12.6

%

55.7

%

11.7

%

58.2

%

3.2%

33.0

%

36.4

%

14.3

%

55.9

%

English Language Learners Not English Language Learners

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 28

5 percent of students with disabilities met or exceeded the

ELA proficiency standard (NYS Levels 3 or 4) in grades 3-8

84.2

%

14.5

%

59.9

%

15.5

%

62.4

%

5.0%

35.9

%

39.3

%

15.2

%

60.2

%

Students with Disabilities General Education

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 29

86.6

%

30

64.3

%

64.8

%

68.9

%

77.4

%

67.9

%

34.4

%

36.8

%

41.3

% 6

4.8%

53.2

%

67.4

%

35.0

%

37.2

%

40.6

% 6

4.2%

52.8

% 70.1

%

37.2

%

40.0

%

43.1

% 6

6.4%

55.1

%

50.4

%

16.1

%

17.7

%

21.2

% 39.

9%

31.1

%

Asian Black Hispanic American Indian/Alaskan

Native

White Total Public

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 85

.9%

The ELA proficiency results (NYS Levels 3 or 4) for race/ethnicity groups across grades 3-8 reveal the persistence of the achievement gap

Across all race/ethnicity groups in grades 3-8, girls performed better than boys on the ELA proficiency standard (NYS Levels 3 or 4)

55.6

%

19.8

%

20.5

%

24.9

%

45.1

%

45.3

%

12.6

%

14.9

%

17.8

%

34.9

%

Asian Black Hispanic American White Indian/Alaskan Native

Females Males 31

Across grades 3-8, lower-need communities continued to outperform other areas of the State in ELA proficiency (NYS Levels 3 or 4)

91.8

%

32

43.9

%

27.8

%

47.5

% 6

0.2%

52.8

%

46.9

%

28.1

% 4

2.0% 4

9.0%

62.

4% 7

7.2%

55.1

%

26.4

%

10.4

% 17.7

%

22.7

% 35

.0%

51.9

%

31.1

%

68.8

%

56.9

% 7

0.9% 76

.3% 84

.2%

77.4

%

42.4

%

29.1

% 4

3.1% 49

.6% 6

1.5%

74.

9%

53.2

%

40.3

%

75.0

%

New York City Large City Urban-Suburban Rural Average Low Total Public

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

33

68.8

%

54.4

%

56.0

%

52.7

%

65.2

%

42.4

%

27.7

%

25.3

%

25.5

% 3

9.2%

53.

2%

43.9

%

26.9

%

24.4

%

22.5

% 3

7.8%

52.

8%

46.9

%

27.9

%

20.7

%

24.2

%

40.7

% 5

5.1%

26.4

%

11.5

%

5.4% 8.

7%

16.4

% 3

1.1%

New York City Buffalo Rochester Syracuse Yonkers Total Public

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

A smaller percentage of students in grades 3-8 met or exceeded the ELA proficiency standard (NYS Levels 3 or 4) in the Big 5 cities than statewide.

77.4

%

English Language Arts 2009-2013 Charter Schools Comparisons

Grades 3-8 Combined Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4

76.1

%

77.4

%

43.9

% 52.8

%

49.2

%

55.1

%

23.1

% 31.1

%

43.0

% 53.

2%

Charter Schools Total Public

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 34

2013 Grades 3-8 Math Results

EngageNY.org

36

In math, 31 percent of grades 3-8 students across the State

met or exceeded the proficiency standard (NYS Levels 3 or

4) in math, reflecting a new baseline relative to the Common

Core Standards

The vertical lines indicate years where changes where implemented. In 2010, cut scores changed, but the standards and scale remained the same. In 2013, the standards, scale, and cut scores changed to measure the Common Core.

In each grade level statewide, the majority of students performed at NYS Levels 1 or 2 in math

28.9

%

28.9

%

31.2

%

35.4

%

34.7

%

30.3

%

34.3

%

21.9

%

23.4

%

21.0

%

18.1

%

20.3

%

20.2

%

12.3

%

12.9

%

8.9% 12

.5%

7.4%

7.2%

30.4

%

Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8


39.8

%

40.5

%

38.0

%

41.3

%

37

9.8 percent of English language learners met or exceeded the math proficiency standard (NYS Levels 3 or 4) in grades 3-8

Beginning in 2013-14, data will be available for

students who received ELL services at any time

prior to test administration.

87.9

%

32.3

%

65.9

%

34.4

%

67.2

%

9.8%

32.7

%

67.1

%

30.7

%

63.5

%

English Language Learners Not English Language Learners 38

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

7 percent of students with disabilities met or exceeded the math proficiency standard (NYS Levels 3 or 4) in grades 3-8

91.5

%

26.9

%

70.0

%

28.5

%

71.5

%

7.0%

35.5

%

58.4

%

24.6

%

67.7

%

Students with Disabilities General Education

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 39

The math proficiency results (NYS Levels 3 or 4) for race/ethnicity groups across grades 3-8 reveal the persistence of the achievement gap

94.9

%

92.2

%

75.0

%

79.5

%

81.6

%

86.4

%

81.7

%

40.9

%

47.3

%

49.5

%

71.1

%

61.0

% 83

.7%

44.0

%

50.2

%

52.3

% 73.

3%

63.3

% 85

.4%

46.1

%

53.1

%

53.8

% 74.

0%

64.8

%

60.3

%

15.3

%

18.4

%

20.9

% 38.

1%

31.0

%

Asian Black Hispanic American Indian/Alaskan

White Total Public

Native

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 40

Results on the math proficiency standard (NYS Levels 3 or 4) in grades 3-8 were relatively comparable for girls and boys across race/ethnicity groups

60.8

%

59.8

%

16.4

%

18.2

%

20.2

%

37.5

%

14.2

%

18.7

%

21.5

%

38.6

%

Asian Black Hispanic American White Indian/Alaskan Native

Females Males 41

Across grades 3-8, lower-need communities continued to outperform other areas of the State in math proficiency (NYS Levels 3 or 4)

42

57.3

%

31.6

%

55.8

% 69.

7%

63.3

%

60.0

%

32.5

% 4

9.7% 56

.6% 7

0.4%

84.1

%

29.6

%

9.0% 1

5.1% 19.2

% 32.

3% 5

0.9%

31.0

%

81.8

%

64.7

% 8

1.0% 85

.8%

91.1

%

86.4

%

54.0

%

31.1

% 4

8.6% 54

.3%

67.6

% 80.

8%

61.0

%

49.1

%

83.2

%

64.8

%

New York City Large City Urban-Suburban

Rural Average Low Total Public

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 95

.9%

A smaller percentage of students in grades 3-8 met or exceeded the math proficiency standard (NYS Levels 3 or 4) in the Big 5 cities than statewide.

81.8

%

86.4

%

43

63.3

%

63.4

%

58.2

% 73.8

%

54.0

%

29.8

%

28.0

%

25.7

% 41.5

% 61.

0%

57.3

%

31.0

%

29.4

%

25.3

% 40.4

%

63.3

%

60.0

%

29.9

%

27.3

%

26.9

% 46.

8%

64.8

%

29.6

%

9.6%

5.0% 6.9% 14

.5% 31

.0%

New York City Buffalo Rochester Syracuse Yonkers Total Public

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Mathematics 2009-2013 Charter School Comparisons

Grades 3-8 Combined Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4

89.4

%

86.4

%

64.6

%

63.3

%

68.7

%

64.8

%

31.3

%

31.0

%

59.9

%

61.0

%

Charter Schools Total Public

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 44

Released Annotated

Items

Performance Level

Descriptions

Suggested Data

AnalysesAnnotated

Score Report

Materials to Support Score

Interpretation and Use

Released Annotated

Items

Performance Level

Descriptions

SuggestedData

Analyses Annotated

Score Report

Available on EngageNY.org upon release of scores

EngageNY.org 45

http:EngageNY.org

What is the Work?

Implementing the Common Core

Instructional Shifts Demanded by the Core

6 Shifts in Mathematics Focus Coherence FluencyDeep UnderstandingApplicationsDual Intensity

6 Shifts in ELA/Literacy

Balancing Informational andLiterary TextBuilding Knowledge in the DisciplinesStaircase of ComplexityText-based Answers Writing from SourcesAcademic Vocabulary

EngageNY.org 46

EngageNY.org Resources for Professional Development

Parent and Family Resources

Most relevant and current information, and newest materials highlighted for easy access.

EngageNY.org 44

One-stop location for resources and materials to support implementation of the Regents Reform Agenda

http:EngageNY.org

EngageNY.org 48

Curriculum Modules Exemplary, comprehensive, optional, free High-quality, rigorous, deeply aligned to the Common

Core Address needs of students performing above and below

grade level, students with disabilities, and Englishlanguage learners

Include performance tasks and other assessments that measure student growth daily, weekly, at the end of each unit/module

Ensure diversity of voices and perspectives in text selection

Contain notes for teachers, templates, handouts, homework, problem sets, overviews

Innovative creative commons license approach

EngageNY.org 48

Instructional Videos on EngageNY.org

EngageNY.org 49

50

Other Educator Resources Professional development videos developed with authors of

Common Core and PBS Tri-State / EQUiP rubrics to evaluate curricular materials

against the Common Core Curricular exemplars (sample lessons and instructional

materials) developed with feedback from the authors of Common Core

Grade- and subject-specific test guides and assessment design information

Sample assessment questions developed with feedback from the authors of Common Core

Network Team Institutes / Teacher & Principal Common Core Ambassadors Program

EngageNY.org 50

Bilingual Common Core Progressions

Analysis of the main academic demand of each standard

Performance indicators that demonstrate how students at each level of language progression meet the standard using grade-level text

Analysis of the linguistic demand of each standard Scaffolds and supports that guide teachers for each proficiency

level

EngageNY.org 51

A New Baseline:

Measuring Student Progress on

the Common Core Learning

Standards

August 2013

EngageNY.org

Structure Bookmarks

Accessibility Report

Filename:

2013-08-06FINALELAandMathPRESENTATIONDECK_v2.pdf

Report created by:

Organization:

[Enter personal and organization information through the Preferences > Identity dialog.]

Summary

The checker found problems which may prevent the document from being fully accessible.

Needs manual check: 2

Passed manually: 0

Failed manually: 0

Skipped: 2

Passed: 24

Failed: 4

Detailed Report

Document

Rule NameStatusDescription

Accessibility permission flagPassedAccessibility permission flag must be set

Image-only PDFPassedDocument is not image-only PDF

Tagged PDFPassedDocument is tagged PDF

Logical Reading OrderNeeds manual checkDocument structure provides a logical reading order

Primary languagePassedText language is specified

TitlePassedDocument title is showing in title bar

BookmarksFailedBookmarks are present in large documents

Color contrastNeeds manual checkDocument has appropriate color contrast

Page Content


Tagged contentSkippedAll page content is tagged

Tagged annotationsPassedAll annotations are tagged

Tab orderPassedTab order is consistent with structure order

Character encodingPassedReliable character encoding is provided

Tagged multimediaPassedAll multimedia objects are tagged

Screen flickerPassedPage will not cause screen flicker

ScriptsPassedNo inaccessible scripts

Timed responsesPassedPage does not require timed responses

Navigation linksPassedNavigation links are not repetitive

Forms


Tagged form fieldsPassedAll form fields are tagged

Field descriptionsPassedAll form fields have description

Alternate Text


Figures alternate textFailedFigures require alternate text

Nested alternate textPassedAlternate text that will never be read

Associated with contentPassedAlternate text must be associated with some content

Hides annotationPassedAlternate text should not hide annotation

Other elements alternate textPassedOther elements that require alternate text

Tables


RowsPassedTR must be a child of Table, THead, TBody, or TFoot

TH and TDPassedTH and TD must be children of TR

HeadersPassedTables should have headers

RegularityFailedTables must contain the same number of columns in each row and rows in each column

SummarySkippedTables must have a summary

Lists


List itemsPassedLI must be a child of L

Lbl and LBodyPassedLbl and LBody must be children of LI

Headings


Appropriate nestingFailedAppropriate nesting

Back to Top

measuring stuent progress on common core learning ... comparisons on scale scores, ... white 85.7...

Documents