State of the District Report 2013-2014

Report
Dr. Alex Anemone
Superintendent of Schools
February 24, 2014
Board of Education
 Mr. Dev Modi – President
 Mr. John Flynn – Vice President
 Mr. Davor Gjivoje
 Mrs. Kim Macaulay
 Mr. Jim Novotny
2013-2014 District Goal
 To develop a student dashboard and use the data to
improve the instructional process.
Narrative
 Harding Township School (HTS) is one of the premier PK-8 school




districts in New Jersey. We have two buildings (PK-4; 5-8) situated on a
picturesque 40+ acre campus. Our students in grades 9-12 attend
Madison High School.
HTS students receive high-quality instruction in a full range of
academic subjects, visual and performing arts and social and emotional
learning. Technology is ubiquitous and integrated at all grade levels.
Moreover, co-curricular activities including athletics and clubs are
available to students.
Small class size is a constant and personal relationships are strong.
The Parent Teacher Organization and Harding Township Education
Foundation provide valuable cultural experiences and funding for
special programs, projects and field trips.
We are proud of our students, teachers and parents and the success we
have had at HTS in creating lifelong learners and celebrating
educational excellence in a safe and secure learning environment.
New Jersey Assessment of Skills
and Knowledge
 Annual assessment for students in grades 3-8 in math and
English language arts (ELA). Science is also assessed in
grades 4 and 8.
 Final year of the NJASK is this current school year - May.
 Students placed into three categories
 Advanced Proficient 250-300
 Proficient 200-249
 Partially Proficient <200
 New multi-state assessment beginning next school year
(2014-2015) will be the Partnership for Assessment of
Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC).
NJASK – Grade 3
HTS
DFG J
State
Adv. Prof. %
10.3
12.1
4.1
Prof. %
74.4
76.8
62.4
Part. Prof. %
15.3
11.1
33.6
Adv. Prof. %
53.8
71.8
41.5
Prof. %
43.6
23.2
36.2
Part. Prof. %
2.6
5.0
22.3
ELA
MATH
NJASK – Grade 4
HTS
DFG J
State
Adv. Prof. %
12.5
21.4
8.4
Prof. %
62.5
64.7
51.0
Part. Prof. %
25.0
13.9
40.6
Adv. Prof. %
42.5
63.5
34.5
Prof. %
45.0
30.7
43.8
Part. Prof. %
12.5
5.8
21.7
Adv. Prof. %
72.5
68.1
44.1
Prof. %
27.5
29.8
45.4
Part. Prof. %
0.0
2.1
10.5
ELA
MATH
SCIENCE
NJASK – Grade 5
HTS
DFG J
State
Adv. Prof. %
0.0
24.5
8.7
Prof. %
76.0
62.9
52.6
Part. Prof. %
24.0
12.6
38.8
Adv. Prof. %
44.0
74.0
43.0
Prof. %
44.0
21.1
36.9
Part. Prof. %
12.0
4.9
20.1
ELA
MATH
NJASK – Grade 6
HTS
DFG J
State
Adv. Prof. %
2.6
14.1
4.7
Prof. %
82.1
75.9
61.5
Part. Prof. %
15.3
10.0
33.9
Adv. Prof. %
35.9
59.6
31.0
Prof. %
43.6
34.7
47.9
Part. Prof. %
20.5
5.8
21.2
ELA
MATH
NJASK – Grade 7
HTS
DFG J
State
Adv. Prof. %
8.9
34.1
12.8
Prof. %
67.6
56.9
52.4
Part. Prof. %
23.5
9.0
34.8
Adv. Prof. %
44.1
55.6
25.4
Prof. %
38.2
33.9
38.1
Part. Prof. %
17.6
10.6
36.4
ELA
MATH
NJASK – Grade 8
HTS
DFG J
State
Adv. Prof. %
14.3
31.2
11.4
Prof. %
75.0
64.9
70.5
Part. Prof. %
10.7
3.9
18.1
Adv. Prof. %
53.6
61.9
31.3
Prof. %
21.4
29.6
38.0
Part. Prof. %
25.0
8.5
30.7
Adv. Prof. %
50.0
62.5
32.6
Prof. %
39.3
33.3
46.4
Part. Prof. %
10.7
4.2
21.0
ELA
MATH
SCIENCE
Disaggregated Data
General Education
Special Education
Adv. Prof. %
9.5
2.9
Prof. %
77.5
51.4
Part. Prof. %
13.0
45.7
Adv. Prof. %
51.5
17.1
Prof. %
41.4
34.3
Part. Prof. %
7.1
48.6
Adv. Prof. %
69.1
41.7
Prof. %
30.9
41.7
Part. Prof. %
0.0
16.7
ELA
MATH
SCIENCE
Student Mobility - NJASK
 ELA: moving up 1/2 levels = 22 students
 ELA: moving down 1/2 levels = 14 students
 Difference = +8 students (positive growth)
 MATH: moving up 1/2 levels = 35 students
 MATH: moving down 1/2 levels = 24 students
 Difference = +11 students (positive growth)
 Key: 2013 NJASK compared to 2012 NJASK.
 Advanced Proficient 250-300
 Proficient 200-249
 Partially Proficient <200
Student Growth Percentiles –
Grade 4
 ELA Median SGP = 66
 High growth = 21 students
 Typical growth = 10 students
 Low growth = 8 students
 MATH Median SGP = 46
 High growth = 14 students
 Typical growth = 13 students
 Low growth = 12 students
Student Growth Percentiles –
Grade 5
 ELA Median SGP = 59
 High growth = 9 students
 Typical growth = 9 students
 Low growth = 5 students
 MATH Median SGP = 47
 High growth = 6 students
 Typical growth = 7 students
 Low growth = 10 students
Student Growth Percentiles –
Grade 6
 ELA Median SGP = 67
 High growth = 20 students
 Typical growth = 12 students
 Low growth = 8 students
 MATH Median SGP = 50
 High growth = 15 students
 Typical growth = 9 students
 Low growth = 16 students
Student Growth Percentiles –
Grade 7
 ELA Median SGP = 61
 High growth = 15 students
 Typical growth = 5 students
 Low growth = 13 students
 MATH Median SGP = 76
 High growth = 19 students
 Typical growth = 8 students
 Low growth = 6 students
Student Growth Percentiles –
Grade 8
 ELA Median SGP = 37
 High growth = 7 students
 Typical growth = 10 students
 Low growth = 11 students
 MATH Median SGP = 69
 High growth = 14 students
 Typical growth = 6 students
 Low growth = 8 students
Student Growth Percentiles
Highlights
 ELA Average Median SGP = 58
 High growth = 72 students
 Low growth = 45 students
 Difference = +27 students (positive growth)
 MATH Average Median SGP = 59
 High growth = 68 students
 Low growth = 52 students
 Difference = +16 students (positive growth)
School Performance Report
 Introduced during 2012-2013 school year. Replaced
School Report Card. Data lags by one year.
 Not to be used “…to create a summative ranking of
schools…” Rather the SPR provides “…data to present a
more complete picture of school performance, with
the ultimate aim of helping schools…”
 SPR designed to help districts:
 Focus
 Benchmark
 Improve
School Performance Report
 Includes the concept of Peer Group – a consortium of 30
other schools with similar demographics, grade span, etc.
 Between 2013 and 2014, 67% of our peer schools (20/30)
have changed!
 Categories:
 Very High Performance: 80th -99th percentile
 High Performance: 60th – 79.9th percentile
 Average Performance: 40th – 59.9th percentile
 Lagging Performance: 20th-39.9th percentile
 Significantly Lagging Performance: below 20th percentile
School Performance Report
 A “forced curve”.
 Low Growth is defined as an SGP score of less than 35.
 Typical Growth is defined as an SGP score between 35-
65.
 High Growth is defined as an SGP score higher than
65.
 Please note: 35% of every category is designed to
be “low growth.”
School Performance Report
 Caveats:
 Not all outcome data is normally distributed = skewed peer
and statewide percentiles (forced curve/stacked rankings).
 Small schools have smaller sample size and their year to year
variances tend to be greater than larger schools.
 Questionable to link attendance in a K-8 district to a vague
concept of “college and career readiness”.
 “Soft” data not included (culture, climate, co-curricular
activities, class size, technology, etc.).
 No VAPA (Visual and Performing Arts) data for K-8.
 Despite the NJDOE’s warnings against using the SPR to rank
and sort schools, this report is designed to do exactly that.
School Performance Report
 Academic Achievement
 Peer Percentile:
23 (lagging performance)


ELA
Math
 Statewide Percentile:


ELA
Math
 Targets Met:

13 (significantly lagging performance)
33 (lagging performance)
77 (high performance)
72 (high performance)
82 ( very high performance)
83%
Math – Students with Disabilities did not make Progress
Target.
School Performance Report
 Raw NJASK data comparing HTS students at the 25th,
50th and 75th percentiles vs. the statewide scores also at
those percentiles.
 Comparing the scores at the 25th and 75th percentiles
gives you the Interquartile Range (IQR), a
measurement of the range of abilities found in a
school. Large gaps equal a wide range of outcomes and
smaller gaps indicate a smaller range of outcomes.
School Performance Report
 Grade 3 ELA
 75th
 50th
 25th
 IQR
 Grade 3 Math
 75th
 50th
 25th
 IQR
HTS
NJ
230
218
207
23
221
204
191
30
286
255
235
51
264
235
201
63
School Performance Report
 Grade 4 ELA
 75th
 50th
 25th
 IQR
 Grade 4 Math
 75th
 50th
 25th
 IQR
HTS
NJ
243
221
199
44
225
206
183
42
256
241
221
35
260
229
201
59
School Performance Report
 Grade 5 ELA
 75th
 50th
 25th
 IQR
 Grade 5 Math
 75th
 50th
 25th
 IQR
HTS
NJ
224
217
202
22
224
205
187
37
268
241
229
39
268
237
205
63
School Performance Report
 Grade 6 ELA
 75th
 50th
 25th
 IQR
 Grade 6 Math
 75th
 50th
 25th
 IQR
HTS
NJ
235
219
204
31
225
209
191
34
267
219
200
67
252
225
201
51
School Performance Report
 Grade 7 ELA
 75th
 50th
 25th
 IQR
 Grade 7 Math
 75th
 50th
 25th
 IQR
HTS
NJ
238
226
202
36
231
211
189
42
251
238
200
51
250
213
183
67
School Performance Report
 Grade 8 ELA
 75th
 50th
 25th
 IQR
 Grade 8 Math
 75th
 50th
 25th
 IQR
HTS
NJ
234
223
209
25
236
220
205
31
281
251
199
82
255
219
188
67
School Performance Report
 College and Career Readiness
 Peer Percentile:
47 (average performance)


Students taking Alg.
Chronic Absenteeism
 Statewide Percentile:


Students taking Alg.
Chronic Absenteeism
 Targets Met:

81 (very high performance)
13 (significantly lagging performance)
68 (high performance)
88 (very high performance)
48 (average performance)
50%
Chronic Absenteeism. 8% of HTS students were labeled
chronically absent during the 12-13 school year. The target is
6%.
School Performance Report
 2011-2012: 12 students chronically absent
 Pre-K = 2 students
 K-8 = 10 students
 2012-2013: 24 students chronically absent
 Pre-K = 8 students
 K-8 = 16 students
 50% (6/12) of the increase year over year is represented by
Pre-K attendance. The increase in chronically absent
students K-8 was 6 students.
 There is no student attendance component included in
high school rankings on SPR.
School Performance Report
 Student Growth
 Peer Percentile:


ELA
Math
 Statewide Percentile:


ELA
Math
 Targets Met
72 (high performance)
68 (high performance)
75 (high performance)
86 (very high performance)
87 (very high performance)
84 (very high performance)
100%
School Performance Report
 Student Growth – ELA
 Adv. Proficient
 High growth
6%
 Typical growth
2%
 Low growth
0%
 Proficient
 High growth
35%
 Typical growth
21%
 Low growth
17%
 Part. Proficient:
 High growth
3%
 Typical growth
6%
 Low growth
10%
School Performance Report
 Student Growth – Math
 Adv. Proficient
 High growth
29%
 Typical growth
9%
 Low growth
5%
 Proficient
 High growth
12%
 Typical growth
13%
 Low growth
13%
 Part. Proficient:
 High growth
1%
 Typical growth
4%
 Low growth
13%
Measures of Academic Progress
 A formative, online assessment given to students in





grades 2-8.
Students in grade 2 take the MAP in math and reading.
Students in grades 3-8 take the MAP in math, reading
and language usage.
Data is provided to students/parents/teachers in real
time.
MAP data is from October 2013.
MAP will be administered in March 2014
Measures of Academic Progress
 Students are provided with a raw score (RIT) than can
be compared to their peers at HTS as well as to their
peers nationwide.
 Student Progress Reports are sent home to parents.
 Teachers review more detailed reports (DesCartes: A
Continuum of Learning) and use data to inform their
instructional strategies (differentiation).
Measures of Academic Progress –
Grade 2
MATH
READING
Mean HTS/National
Percentile
84
87
Mean HTS RIT
195
195
Mean National RIT
178
176
Measures of Academic Progress –
Grade 3
MATH
READING
LANGUAGE
USAGE
Mean
HTS/National
Percentile
64
71
75
Mean HTS RIT
197
200
203
Mean National
RIT
192
190
191
Measures of Academic Progress –
Grade 4
MATH
READING
LANGUAGE
USAGE
Mean
HTS/National
Percentile
68
70
78
Mean HTS RIT
212
210
214
Mean National
RIT
204
200
201
Measures of Academic Progress –
Grade 5
MATH
READING
LANGUAGE
USAGE
Mean
HTS/National
Percentile
66
66
73
Mean HTS RIT
220
214
218
Mean National
RIT
213
207
208
Measures of Academic Progress –
Grade 6
MATH
READING
LANGUAGE
USAGE
Mean
HTS/National
Percentile
50
56
67
Mean HTS RIT
220
215
219
Mean National
RIT
220
212
212
Measures of Academic Progress –
Grade 7
MATH
READING
LANGUAGE
USAGE
Mean
HTS/National
Percentile
55
59
64
Mean HTS RIT
228
218
222
Mean National
RIT
226
216
216
Measures of Academic Progress –
Grade 8
MATH
READING
LANGUAGE
USAGE
Mean
HTS/National
Percentile
62
60
71
Mean HTS RIT
236
223
227
Mean National
RIT
230
219
219
Otis-Lennon School Ability Test
 Administered in grade 3 in spring – about 45 minutes.
 OLSAT Eighth Edition – Form D – Grade 3
 Verbal Comprehension
 Verbal Reasoning
 Pictorial Reasoning
 Figural Reasoning
 Quantitative Reasoning
Otis-Lennon School Ability Test
 Score reports:
 National Age Percentile Bands.
 National Grade Percentile Bands.
 Cluster Reports for Verbal and Non-Verbal Reasoning
and Comprehension.
Otis-Lennon School Ability Test
 Spring 2013 administration:
 31 students
 Mean score: 111.4

Standard Deviation: 13.4
 Range: 88-138 (almost 4 full standard deviations!)





90th Percentile: 127.5
75th Percentile: 119.8
50th Percentile (Median): 112.5
25th Percentile: 100.3
10th Percentile 90.5
Data Analysis
 Median SGP (mSGP) was high for both ELA and Math.
This means our students grew more than their
peers.
 Advanced Proficient students “pulling away” from
Partially Proficient students in both ELA and Math.
AP students “growing” at a more rapid pace than PP
students.
 IQR (Inter Quartile Range) indicates a wide range of
abilities in different grades.
 This indicates that a continued emphasis on
differentiated instruction is needed.
Data Analysis
 Narrowed “gaps” when compared to “J” districts.
Improvements ranged from 0.1% to 13.1%.
 Above J Districts in two areas – Grade 3 Math and
Grade 4 Science.
 Increased number of “Perfect 300” scores in Math from
0 in 2012 to 14 in 2013.
 Mean scores in Grade 3 Math and Grade 4 Science
were over 250 – Advanced Proficient.
Curriculum Highlights
 Singapore Math (Math in Focus) used in K-4. Will be used






in all classes K-5 during the 2014-2015 school year.
Four Square Writing Method. (K-8)
Reading Street/Novels Study. (K-6)
District Writing Curriculum/Writing Across the
Curriculum. (K-8)
New Social Studies curriculum and materials. (K-8)
Midterms and final exams in core subjects in middle school
(grades 6-7-8).
New “scope and sequence” for Character Education lessons
during weekly advisory periods. These are age-appropriate
activities and lessons centered around a common theme
such as empathy, compassion, etc.
Transition to PARCC
 PARCC – consortium between USDOE, 18 states, DC,
USVI to develop a common set of K-12 assessments
tied to Common Core State Standards.
 Performance Based Assessments (PBA) – ELA and
Math. 75% of way through year.
 End of Year Assessments (EOY) – ELA and Math. 90%
of way through year.
 Keyboarding (typing) skills emphasized in all grades at
HTS.
Transition to PARCC
 District Curriculum Council – a group of teachers,
administrators and one Board member that meets
monthly to discuss curricular trends, instructional
practices and strategies that will assist us in the
transition to the PARCC.
 Administrators and teachers reviewed all 2013 NJASK
writing samples.
 Teachers using PARCC sample questions in class.
 Field Test – spring 2014 – Grade 5 Math.
Capital Projects
 Summer 2012 – Elementary School roof. (completed)
 Summer 2013 – Part I Elementary School windows and




unit ventilators. (completed)
Summer 2013 – Boszhardt Family Technology Learning
Commons. (completed via grant money)
Summer 2013 – Cafeteria upgrades. (completed)
Summer 2014 – Part II Elementary School windows
and unit ventilators. (ROD Grant)
2013-2014 – Security upgrades. (ongoing)
Budget Data
 State Aid
 2009-2010
 2010-2011
 2011-2012
 2012-2013
 2013-2014
 2014-2015
 Local Tax Levy
 1997-2011 (average)
 2011-2012
 2012-2013
 2013-2014
 2014-2015
~ $360,000
$0
~ $180,000
~ $225,000
~ $225,000
???
+6.01%
+1.96%
+1.78%
+1.50%
+2.50% tentative
Technology
 2011 – Technology Student Association (TSA) formed for







students in grades 7-8. (STEM)
2012 – Digital Learning Initiative – grades 5-8.
2013 – Boszhardt Family Technology Learning Commons.
(PARCC ready)
2013- Jr. TSA formed for students in grades 4-6. (STEM)
2013 – Hour of Code Project at HTS Middle School.
Winter 2014 – HTS Science Fair returns.
Summer 2014 – L/MC computer lab. (PARCC ready)
Summer 2014 – SmartBoard replacements begin.
Social Emotional Learning
 2011-2013 – Ambassadors of Kindness program and
curriculum. (completed)
 2013 – HTS is partnering with College of St. Elizabeth
and the United Way with a 3-year Climate and Culture
Initiative. (ongoing)
 Confirmed HIB cases:
 2011-2012 = 6 (34 investigations)
 2012-2013 = 5 (20 investigations)
 2013-2014 = 1 (5 investigations)
Quest
 Grade 3 = 7 students (17%)
 Grade 4 = 11 students (30%)
 Grade 5 = 14 students (37%)
 Grade 6 = 4 students (16%)
 Grade 7 = 7 students (20%)
 Grade 8 = 7 students (22%)
 TOTAL = 50 students (24%)
Quest
 Quest students in grades 3-6 presented My Town Through
a Child’s Eyes at the Morris County Historical Society.
(2013)
 Sixth and seventh grade Quest students participated as
finalists at the Inter-County Junior Solar Sprints – Solar
Power Car Competition. (2013)
 First place in the Brain Bowl competition sponsored by the
New Jersey Consortium for Gifted and Talented Programs
in grades 3 and 4. (2014)
 Participated in the Junior Model United Nations
competition at Drew University. HTS sixth and seventh
grade Quest students competed as China, Pakistan, Peru,
Poland and Sudan. (2014)
Academic Intervention Program
 Grade 1 = 5 students (3 ELA; 2 Math)
 Grade 2 = 5 students (4 ELA and Math; 1 Math)
 Grade 3 = 8 students (1 ELA and Math; 2 ELA; 5 Math)
 Grade 4 = 6 students (1 ELA and Math; 5 ELA)
 Grade 5 = 5 students (1 ELA and Math; 3 ELA; 1 Math)
 Grade 6 = 3 students (3 ELA and Math)
 Grade 7 = 7 students (1 ELA and Math; 6 Math)
 Grade 8 = 4 students (1 ELA and Math; 1 ELA; 2 Math)
 TOTAL = 43 students
Athletics
 Fall
 Girls Field Hockey = 15 students (2nd place in Morris County!)
 Coed Soccer = 18 students
 Winter
 Boys Basketball = 17 students
 Girls Basketball = 21 students
 Spring
 Boys Lacrosse
 Girls Lacrosse
 Coed Track and Field
Co-Curricular Activities K-5
 Jr. TSA = 13 students
 Literary Magazine = 100+ students
 Fourth Grade Band = 34 students
 Fifth Grade Band = 22 students
 Forensics = 5 students
Co-Curricular Activities 6-8
 TSA = 30 students
 Student Council = 9 students
 Yearbook = 14 students
 School Play ~ 50 students
 Literary Magazine = 35 students
 Chorus = 51 students
 Jazz Band = 17 students
 Middle School Band = 30 students
Parent Teacher Organization
 2013-2014 Grants
 ELA Novels: $6,000
 Battle of the Books: $3,500
 Science Fair: $1,000
 Technology support, Field Day, Teacher Appreciation
Gifts, etc.
Harding Township Education
Foundation
 2013-2014 Grants
 Multi-Sport Courts > $100,000
 8th Grade Shakespeare Residency = $6,000
 Kindergarten Yoga = $6,000
 Creative Coders = $2,000
 Plus many more…
Student Enrollment











PK = 17 students
K = 41 students
1 = 29 students
2 = 26 students
3 = 41 students
4 = 37 students
5 = 38 students
6 = 25 students
7 = 35 students
8 = 32 students
TOTAL = 321
Student Attendance










K = 96.5%
1 = 96.4%
2 = 96.8%
3 = 97.3%
4 = 97.5%
5 = 95.4%
6 = 95.4%
7 = 96.7%
8 = 96.6%
TOTAL = 96.0%
Staff Attendance
Type of Absence
Total Number of Absences
Bereavement Day
18
Family Illness
38
Jury Duty
3
Personal Day
123
Sick Day
235
TEACHNJ - AchieveNJ
 Tenure Reform Act (TEACH-NJ) and new teacher and
principal evaluation program (AchieveNJ) created by
NJDOE.
 Three Goals:
 To raise student achievement.
 To inform professional development.
 To inform personnel decisions.
 Administration has conducted 98 lesson observations
as of Feb. 1, 2014. Approximately 70% complete for
year.
Vision Council
 Parent Co-Chairs: Lisa Accardi, Brenda Myers, Mary
Saltzman, Sandy Waxgiser.
 Quarterly meetings:
 I – Singapore Math 101
 II – Four Square Writing Method
 III - tba
 IV - tba
Follow HTS on Twitter
 Alex Anemone






@htssupt
Matt Spelker
@mspelker
David Harris
@htslmc
HTEA
@HTEAteach
PTO
@htspto
HTS PreK
@HTSHuskyPups
Plus many more…
Glossary
 DFG – District Factor Group. HTS is in DFG “J”, the highest
socio-economic consortium of districts.
 Median Student Growth Percentile – mSGP is a figure
assigned to a teacher who teaches ELA or Math in grades 48. The mSGP is for all students in a class in a year. The
mSGP is then converted to a 1-4 scale and used for 30% of a
teacher’s summative evaluation.
 NJASK – New Jersey Assessment of Skills and Knowledge.
An annual assessment in ELA (English Language Arts) and
Math in grades 3-8. Science is also tested in grades 4 and 8.
 PARCC – Partnership of Assessment for Readiness for
College and Careers.
Glossary
 RIT – Rasch Unit. An equal interval scoring unit for
the Measures of Academic Progress (MAP).
 ROD Grant – Regular Operating District. This NJDOE
grant for capital improvements covers 40% of the cost
of the project.
 School Peer Group – A group of 30 schools from across
the state that have similar grade configurations and are
educating students of similar demographic
characteristics as measured by participation in the
Free/Reduced Lunch Programs, Limited English
Proficiency or Special Education Programs.
Glossary
 School Performance Report (SPR) – Replaced the School
Report Card. The SPR compares and ranks school with
their peer group schools in areas of academic achievement,
college and career readiness and student growth.
 Student Growth Percentiles – Students are ranked by their
SGPs from 1-99 (lowest to highest). Any student with an
SGP between 1-34 is described as having “low growth”. A
student with an SGP between 35-65 is described as having
“typical growth” and a student with an SGP between 66-99
is described as having “high growth”.

similar documents