MCA Data Discoveries

Transcription

1 MCA Data Discoveries

2 What does Minnesota think is important? What do we want kids to do? Pass important tests Be Proficient Grow in their knowledge Growth Have equal opportunity to learn Close the Achievement Gap Graduate from high school Graduation Minnesota believes each of the above things are equally important so

3

4 Because each of these things are equally important, they should be treated that way Pieces of the MMR Pie for High Schools Proficiency Growth Achievement Gap Graduation

5 Elementary and Middle Schools don t graduate students so for them the pie looks like this Pieces of the MMR Pie for Elementary and Junior High Schools Proficiency Growth Achievement Gap

6 Focus Rating Consists of: Focused Proficiency Achievement Gap Reduction

7 Title I schools can fall into 5 groups based on MMR and FR Reward Schools: These schools are the top 15 percent of Title I schools based on the MMR. They represent the highest-performing schools on the four domains in the MMR. Celebration Eligible: These are the 25 percent of schools directly below the Reward school cutoff. These schools may apply to be Celebration schools, and MDE selects approximately 10 percent of Title I schools to receive the Celebration school recognition. Continuous Improvement: These are the bottom 25 percent of Title I schools that have not already been identified as Priority or Focus. Continuous Improvement schools must work with their districts to create and implement improvement plans as well as set aside 20 percent of Title I funds to support school improvement efforts. Focus: All Minnesota schools receive a Focus Rating (FR) that measures their contribution to the state s achievement gap. The 10 percent of Title I schools with the lowest FR are identified as Focus Schools. Focus schools are required to set aside 20 percent of Title I funds to support school improvement efforts. These schools are identified every three years. Some Focus schools are identified for persistent low graduation rates. These are schools with a six-year graduation rate, averaged over three years, below 60 percent. This separate group of low graduation rate Priority: These are the 5 percent most persistently low-performing Title I schools based on the MMR. Priority schools are required to set aside 20 percent of Title I funds to support turnaround efforts, and these schools are also identified every three years.

8

9 District Demographics subgroup State District American Indian 2.4%.3% Asian 7.2% 2.6% Hispanic 8.4% 3.4% Black 11.5%.8% White 70.5% 93% English Learners 8.3% 0% Special Education 14.9% 10.3% Free/Reduced Price Lunch 38.3% 42.8%

10 subgroup Elementary Demographics State Elementar y American Indian 2.4%.8% Asian 7.2% 2.3% Hispanic 8.4% 3% Black 11.5% 0% White 70.5% 94% English Learners 8.3% 0% Special Education 14.9% 15% Free/Reduced Price Lunch 38.3% 52.6%

11 Secondary Demographics subgroup State Elementar y American Indian 2.4% 0% Asian 7.2% 2.7% Hispanic 8.4% 3.5% Black 11.5% 1.2% White 70.5% 92.5% English Learners 8.3% 0% Special Education 14.9% 7.8% Free/Reduced Price Lunch 38.3% 37.6%

12

13 Reading Attention: First year assessed on the reading mca-iii 2013 for 3 rd -8 th grades & 10 th grade

14 2015 District Reading Proficiency

15 2015 RRC ELEMENTARY Reading Proficiency

16 2015 RRC SECONDARY Reading Proficiency

17 District Reading Proficiency Trends

18 Elementary Reading Proficiency Trends

19 Secondary/High School Reading Proficiency Trends

20 Examining Data - D.I.E. Protocol D: Describe I: Interpret E: Evaluate

21 Subgroup Reading Proficiency Data Looking at your demographics, is there a subgroup that makes up a significant part of your student population?

22 RRC DISTRICT VS STATEWIDE SpEd Trend Data

23 RRC DISTRICT VS STATEWIDE SpEd Trend Data

24 RRC ELEMENTARY VS STATEWIDE SpEd Trend Data

25 RRC SECONDARY VS STATEWIDE SpEd Trend Data

26 RRC DISTRICT SpEd vs. Non-SpEd Trend Data

27 RRC ELEMENTARY SpEd vs. Non-SpEd Trend Data

28 RRC SECONDARY SpEd vs. Non-SpEd Trend Data

29 RRC DISTRICT FRP vs. non-frp Trend Data

30 RRC ELEMENTARY FRP vs. non-frp Trend Data

31 RRC SECONDARY FRP vs. non-frp Trend Data

32 RRC DISTRICT VS STATEWIDE FRP TREND DATE

33 RRC ELEMENTARY VS STATEWIDE FRP TREND DATE

34 RRC SECONDARY VS STATEWIDE FRP TREND DATE

36 Level Proficiency Trend Data Helps Identify: Possible gaps in instructional practices Possible gaps in curriculum and resources

37 Cohort Proficiency Trend Data Helps Identify: Possible gaps in student learning Possible instructional gaps

38 Axis Title Cohort follows the same group of students from year to year Class of 2017 Cohort Reading Trend Data 8th 10th District State

39 Axis Title Add Cohort trend data slides if you wish Cohort follows the same group of students from year to year Class of 2018 Cohort Reading Trend Data 7th 8th 10th District State

40 Axis Title Add Cohort trend data slides if you wish Cohort follows the same group of students from year to year Class of 2019 Cohort Reading Trend Data 6th 7th 8th 10th District State

41 Axis Title Add Cohort trend data slides if you wish Cohort follows the same group of students from year to year Class of 2020 Cohort Reading Trend Data 5th 6th 7th 8th 10th District State

42 Axis Title Add Cohort trend data slides if you wish Cohort follows the same group of students from year to year % 90.00% 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% Class of 2021 Cohort Reading Trend Data 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 10th District State

43 Axis Title Add Cohort trend data slides if you wish Cohort follows the same group of students from year to year % 90.00% 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% Class of 2022 Cohort Reading Trend Data 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 10th District State

44 Axis Title Add Cohort trend data slides if you wish Cohort follows the same group of students from year to year % 90.00% 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% Class of 2023 Cohort Reading Trend Data 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 10th District State

45 Axis Title Add Cohort trend data slides if you wish Cohort follows the same group of students from year to year % Class of 2024 Cohort Reading Trend Data 90.00% 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 10th District State

46 Axis Title Add Cohort trend data slides if you wish Cohort follows the same group of students from year to year rd Class of Cohort Reading Trend Data 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 10th District State

47 3 rd Reading Proficiency Trend Data

48 4th Reading Proficiency Trend Data

54 MCA Reading Strand Data Literature 4 Inf Text rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 10th

57 MCA Reading Strand Data Literature Inf Text rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 10th

59 District Wide Action Plan Complete: Current Curriculum and Instruction Data for Reading Reading Action Plan

60

61 Math Attention: First year assessed on the math mca-iii 2011 for 3 rd -8 th grades 2014 for 11 th

62 District Math Proficiency

63 RRC ELEMENTARY Math Proficiency

64 RRC SECONDARY Math Proficiency

65 District Math Proficiency Trends

66 Elementary Math Proficiency Trends

67 Secondary/High School Math Proficiency Trends

69 Subgroup Math Proficiency Data Looking at your demographics, is there a subgroup that makes up a significant part of your student population?

70 SpEd vs. Non-SpEd Trend Data

71 RRC ELEMENTARY SpEd vs. Non-SpEd Trend Data

72 RRC SECONDARY SpEd vs. Non-SpEd Trend Data

73 RRC DISTRICT VS STATEWIDE SPED TREND DATA

74 RRC ELEMENTARY VS STATEWIDE SPED TREND DATA

75 RRC SECONDARY VS STATEWIDE SPED TREND DATA

76 RRC DISTRICT VS STATEWIDE FRP Trend Data

77 RRC ELEMENTARY VS STATEWIDE FRP Trend Data

78 RRC SECONDARY VS STATEWIDE FRP Trend Data

79 FRP vs. non-frp Trend Data

80 RRC ELEMENTARY FRP vs. non-frp Trend Data

81 RRC SECONDARY FRP vs. non-frp Trend Data

83 Level Proficiency Trend Data Helps Identify: Possible gaps in instructional practices Possible gaps in curriculum and resources

84 Cohort Proficiency Trend Data Helps Identify: Possible gaps in student learning Possible instructional gaps

85 Axis Title Add Cohort trend data slides if you wish Cohort follows the same group of students from year to year % 90.00% 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% Class of _2016 Cohort Math Trend Data 3rd grade 4th grade 5th grade 6th grade 7th 8th 11th District State

95 3 rd Math Proficiency Trend Data

96 4th Math Proficiency Trend Data

102 MCA Math Strand Data Number & Operation Algebra Geometry & Measurem ent rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 11th Data Analysis

104 District Science Proficiency

105 RRC 5 th grade Science Proficiency

108 District Science Proficiency Trends

109 5 th grade Science Proficiency Trends

112 District Wide Action Plan Complete: Current Curriculum and Instruction Data for Reading Reading Action Plan

113 Graduation Rate Report The 2014 Graduation Rate is used for calculation on the 2015 MMR. This is because 2015 Graduation Rates will not be released until February/March 2016 & the 2015 MMR is calculated in August/September 2015.

114 Graduation Trend Data Year % Students Graduated % % % % % State goal is that all districts have 90% graduation rate by 2017, with no sub-group less than 85%.

115 Testing in Districts need to hold ACT contract directly with ACT deadline is AUGUST 14 Testing limits s 1 6 max 10 hrs s 7 12 max 11 hrs State required tests are not to be included in this Writing Assessment TBD HS Graduation requirements no GRAD ACCESS available online

116 Next steps Exit Ticket: Please share out how you plan to utilize information from today and how you will share with the rest of your staff