Glassboro Public Schools Title Glassboro Test Score Analysis

Glassboro Public Schools Title: Glassboro Test Score Analysis Date: October 27, 2010

Standards-Based Education Reform • The 21 st century supports standards-based educational reform, which is based on the belief that setting high standards and establishing measurable goals can improve individual outcomes in education. • Our Focus is on the Future / Moving Forward * Improving the educational experience of our children at Glassboro Schools * Proactive Problem Solvers 2

NJ ASK 3 - Dorothy Bullock School Language Arts Literacy Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) Total Students General Education Students Special Education Students Female Male Black White Economically Disadvantaged Non Economically Disadvantaged % Proficient/Advanced Proficient 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 75 66. 1 59 72. 9 59 43. 5 59 44. 7 75. 4 84. 2 48. 5 54. 5 31. 3 76. 5 57 55. 8 74 32. 4 76. 8 69. 6 69. 5 75. 3 15. 8 51. 2 35. 8 25. 5 54. 1 0 56. 7 36. 7 26. 8 60. 5 50. 7 58. 3 31. 8 46. 7 86. 7 52. 1 61. 3 Scores went up since 2009. 79 3

NJ ASK 3 - Dorothy Bullock School Mathematics Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) Total Students General Education Students Special Education Students Female Male Black White Economically Disadvantaged Non Economically Disadvantaged Advanced Proficient % Language Arts Mathematics % Proficient/Advanced Proficient 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 62 77. 8 66 71. 5 66 58. 9 66 62 85. 4 79. 7 64. 7 71. 5 52. 9 83. 9 82. 3 54 87. 6 39. 4 68. 3 74. 4 61. 1 73. 3 26. 4 59. 8 58 39. 2 71. 8 18. 1 65 60 41 81. 6 61. 9 55. 3 41. 8 45. 5 88. 5 2007 4 14. 9 86. 8 2008 6. 2 20. 7 70. 8 2009 1. 8 19 85. 5 2010 0. 7 28. 7 We are making progress in every subgroup except for Special Education. 83 2011 4

NJ ASK 4 - Thomas Bowe School Language Arts Literacy Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) Total Students General Education Students Special Education Students Female Male Black White Economically Disadvantaged Non Economically Disadvantaged Proficient/Advanced Proficient 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 75 60. 3 59 66. 7 59 44. 6 59 39. 6 79 70. 4 77. 5 53. 1 43. 9 26. 3 62. 5 60. 8 50 68. 9 28. 1 70. 3 63. 9 56. 1 75. 8 21. 4 45. 1 44. 2 29. 2 53 15. 8 40 41. 7 22 58. 3 33. 3 49. 2 21. 4 23. 1 77. 3 76. 2 55. 4 49. 5 Scores have been declining since 2009. 5

NJ ASK 4 - Thomas Bowe School % Proficient/Advanced Proficient Mathematics Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) Total Students General Education Students Special Education Students Female Male Black White Economically Disadvantaged Non Economically Disadvantaged 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 66 50. 6 66 59. 2 83 65. 8 66 73 74. 8 79. 7 60 64. 9 36. 9 67. 1 64. 4 43. 1 82. 6 53. 2 75. 7 71 60. 7 83. 6 22 48. 7 52. 1 26. 7 63. 9 31. 6 54. 1 66. 7 40. 7 77. 4 41. 3 60. 3 30. 9 40 81. 4 79. 9 59. 5 70. 7 All subgroups increased since 2009. 6

NJASK 5 - Thomas Bowe School Language Arts Literacy Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) Total Students General Education Students Special Education Students Female Male Black White Economically Disadvantaged Non Economically Disadvantaged %Proficient/Advanced Proficient 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 75 86. 8 59 39. 1 59 45. 3 59 50 94. 3 48. 2 57. 6 58. 2 46. 2 91. 3 82. 6 76. 7 92. 6 9. 5 37. 4 40. 9 27 48. 5 12. 5 55. 1 37 20 63. 3 22. 2 61. 9 40. 7 34. 4 60 81 19. 7 31. 5 33. 4 90 48. 8 51. 7 62. 1 All subgroups increased except for white students. 79 7

NJASK 5 - Thomas Bowe School Mathematics %Proficient/Advanced Proficient 2007 2008 2009 2010 Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) Total Students General Education Students Special Education Students Female Male Black White Economically Disadvantaged Non Economically Disadvantaged Advanced Proficient % Language Arts Mathematics 62 77. 9 66 66 67. 1 66 68. 3 83. 7 77. 9 80. 8 78 46. 1 76. 6 79. 1 68. 3 84. 4 31 67. 1 66. 3 46. 1 83 27. 5 70. 5 64. 1 46. 6 81. 1 33. 4 70. 5 67. 1 48. 5 81. 3 70. 6 44. 2 48. 2 52. 1 81. 6 77. 9 75. 8 80 2007 2. 4 18. 6 2008 0. 5 18 2009 2. 4 20 2010 3. 0 27. 4 2011 83 2011 8 All subgroups increased except for general ed. Population.

NJASK 6 - Thomas Bowe School Language Arts Literacy %Proficient/Advanced Proficient 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 66 72 72 72 86 Total Students 74. 6 50 57. 5 51. 9 General Education Students 86. 4 57. 2 70 66. 4 Special Education Students 20. 7 17. 4 23. 4 8. 6 Female 80. 5 58. 8 56 56. 3 Male 67. 6 41. 9 59. 1 48. 2 Black 64. 2 25 38. 7 33. 3 White 82. 1 68. 8 72. 7 65. 8 Economically Disadvantaged 62. 8 29. 4 28. 1 34. 7 80 58. 2 70. 9 65. 5 Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) Non Economically Disadvantaged 9 Most of the subgroups decreased.

NJASK 6 - Thomas Bowe School Mathematics %Proficient/Advanced Proficient 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 49 61 61 61 80 Total Students 70. 6 61. 1 57. 5 49. 4 General Education Students 82. 6 68. 1 71. 5 61. 2 Special Education Students 14. 3 25 19. 1 14. 3 Female 78. 2 60 54. 8 52. 2 Male 61. 6 62 60. 2 47. 1 Black 59 35. 1 37. 1 35 White 78. 3 77. 4 72. 7 59. 5 Economically Disadvantaged 54. 9 30. 7 35. 1 40. 9 78 74. 8 67. 8 56. 3 2007 2008 2009 2010 Language Arts 7. 5 0. 6 2. 8 1. 3 Mathematics 12. 5 10. 2 7. 2 10. 3 Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) Non Economically Disadvantaged Advanced Proficient % Most of the sub groups decreased since 2009. 2011 10

NJASK 7 - Intermediate School Language Arts Literacy %Proficient/Advanced Proficient 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 66 72 72 72 86 Total Students 74. 8 58. 9 60. 2 49. 4 General Education Students 81. 4 72. 8 70. 6 62. 7 Special Education Students 37. 5 6. 7 15. 4 8. 9 Female 76. 3 64 64. 6 52 Male 75. 6 52. 7 56 46. 7 Black 59. 3 36. 2 47. 2 37. 3 White 82. 9 73. 8 75 57. 3 60 31. 7 43. 1 36. 4 82. 9 68. 4 67 60. 4 Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) Economically Disadvantaged Non Economically Disadvantaged 11 Across all subgroups the scores have decreased.

NJASK 7 - Intermediate School Mathematics %Proficient/Advanced Proficient 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 49 61 61 61 80 Total Students 58. 5 51. 9 53. 3 44. 1 General Education Students 65. 9 63. 2 61 55. 6 Special Education Students 13 10 20 8. 9 Female 62. 3 57 53. 7 40. 8 Male 54. 9 45. 9 53 47. 8 Black 39. 6 34. 5 30. 7 23. 9 White 69. 3 67. 5 75 56. 3 Economically Disadvantaged 35. 2 29. 2 26 30. 6 Non Economically Disadvantaged 70. 5 59. 8 65. 3 55. 4 Advanced Proficient % 2007 2008 2009 2010 Language Arts 3. 8 5. 7 6. 6 7. 4 Mathematics 9. 5 13. 9 14. 5 11. 7 Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) 2011 12 All but one subgroup decreased.

NJASK 8 - Intermediate School Language Arts Literacy %Proficient/Advanced Proficient 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 66 72 72 72 86 Total Students 60. 3 70. 4 71. 9 73. 6 General Education Students 74. 1 79. 6 87. 4 83. 6 Special Education Students 5. 9 29. 6 19. 4 30. 8 Female 65. 2 75. 1 78. 6 80. 7 Male 54. 9 66. 7 63. 8 66. 3 Black 43. 5 57. 4 58. 2 59. 3 White 74. 7 80 81. 5 92. 1 Economically Disadvantaged 51. 7 44. 2 56. 8 55. 2 65 79. 8 78 86. 5 Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) Non Economically Disadvantaged Test scores went up except for two subgroups, gen ed & economically disadvantaged. 13

NJASK 8 - Intermediate School Mathematics %Proficient/Advanced Proficient 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 49 61 61 61 80 Total Students 56. 6 49. 3 64. 3 51. 0 General Education Students 68. 1 59. 1 78 58. 9 Special Education Students 11. 8 3. 7 10 15. 3 Female 53. 3 48. 8 67. 8 44. 6 Male 60. 5 50. 6 59. 7 57. 6 Black 31. 6 32. 7 49. 1 31. 5 White 71 60 75. 3 69. 3 Economically Disadvantaged 38 23. 2 44. 2 26. 9 66. 1 58. 9 72. 2 67. 8 Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) Non Economically Disadvantaged Same as 6 th, 7 th, all but one subgroup decreased. 14

HSPA- Glassboro High School %Proficient/Advanced Proficient Language Arts Literacy 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 79 85 85 85 92 Total Students 82. 4 84. 9 78. 9 75. 5 General Education Students 92. 7 97. 9 92. 1 88. 6 Special Education Students 40. 7 31. 3 32 22. 6 Female 87. 6 85. 1 81. 6 71. 8 Male 75. 3 84. 7 76. 9 79. 2 Black 71. 9 73. 5 67. 9 61 White 90. 4 94. 5 88. 8 85. 1 Economically Disadvantaged 70. 2 57. 6 56. 8 57. 7 Non Economically Disadvantaged 87. 9 91. 1 88. 3 84. 4 Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) Test Scores went down slightly. The HS is the recipient of the instructional problems. Early Intervention is key. 15

HSPA- Glassboro High School %Proficient/Advanced Proficient Mathematics Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 64 74 74 74 86 Total Students General Education Students 72. 3 83 69. 4 81. 3 67. 6 79. 8 60 69. 9 Special Education Students 25 21. 2 20. 7 22. 6 Female 75. 3 65. 9 57. 8 51. 3 Male 68. 1 73. 3 75. 3 68. 8 Black 55. 1 51. 5 44. 2 44. 1 White 85 84. 6 87. 5 70. 1 Economically Disadvantaged 47. 9 48. 5 34. 9 46. 1 Non Economically Disadvantaged 83. 2 74. 1 81. 3 67 Advanced Proficient % 2007 2008 2009 2010 Language Arts 14. 9 8. 4 4. 8 12. 3 Mathematics 12. 9 14. 4 18. 6 14. 2 2011 16

Long Term Vision For Glassboro School District • Revise all curriculum to reflect the 2009 CCCS. • Implement a 5 Year Curriculum Plan • Support and oversee the utilization of formative and summative assessments to show multiple means of both teacher and student academic progress. • Support, enhance and review the Literacy Program using the revised NJ CCCS district wide. (Guided Reading/Writer’s Workshop) • Examine the feasibility of implementing Everyday Math in sixth grade and examine the rigor of the math program at the middle school level. • Professional Development in the areas of Reading and Writing • Examine intervention programs • 17

District Assessment Overview P Individual Child Profile/The Developmental Continuum Kindergarten Screening DIBELS (3 X per year) Nov. /Feb. /June RIGBY READS JJ Reading Inventories Accelerated Reading Accelerated Math Monthly Guided Reading Levels Literacy By Design Benchmark Assessments Mc. Dougal-Littell Benchmark Assessments Everyday Math/Pre/Post Assessment/Unit Assessments K 1 2 3 X X X End of Course Algebra Exam 5 X X 6 7 8 X X X X X X X X X X X Connected Math/Algebra Unit Assessments Elementary Technology Portfolio Assessment NJ ASK Testing 8 th Grade Technology Portfolio Assessment MAP Assessments Wilson WADE Assessment Project Read 4 X X X X X X X 18

The Vision of Glassboro • Writer's Workshop is a program that teaches children the conventions of writing. Students not only learn proper grammar and punctuation; they also come to learn and value the importance of drafting, revising, and editing their pieces of writing. • Writer's Workshop is a process that needs to be consistent. It is composed of three parts. The first part is the mini-lesson where the teacher meets with the whole class and discusses writing concerns. The second part is conferencing, where the teacher meets with individuals or small groups. The third part is sharing, where the students publicly share a part of their work. • Writer's Workshop is an excellent way to prepare students for state tests. The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) has indicated that 75% of our nation's children are writing on an average level. Of this percentage, students received higher scores on writing assessments who spent time in the writer's workshop. • Research indicates that writer's workshop provides an excellent way to support and teach young children how to become good writers. 19

The Vision of Glassboro • Guided Reading is a context in which a teacher supports each reader’s development of effective strategies at levels of difficulty for processing novel texts at increasingly challenging levels of difficulty. • The goal of guided reading is to enable children to read for meaning at all times and to help students to use reading strategies independently. • Provide reading comprehension questions that require students to recall or locate a detail. • Inferential questions: Reading comprehension questions that require students to combine prior knowledge with information in the passage in order to deduce the correct response. • Analytical questions : Reading comprehension questions that require students to analyze information. Often these questions involve the author’s purpose or point of view. • Benchmark Assessments 20

The New Vision of Professional Development • The New Jersey Professional Teaching Standards Board believes that educators must be dedicated to a continuous plan of professional development that begins with their pre-service activities, that continues with their induction into the profession, and that extends through the life of their professional career in education through on-going and sustained professional development endeavors. • Effective educators are life-long learners, professional development must be an ongoing process of refining skills, inquiring into practice, and developing new methods. • Professional development activities must also complement both the needs of the educator and the goals and objectives of the school district. • Activities must focus on the conditions which affect student learning in order for teachers to develop the knowledge and expertise needed to enable students to function as independent thinkers and creative learners both in the school community and in the larger environment of society as a whole. • Effective implementation of new techniques requires financial support, time and planning. Therefore, those new techniques and practices should be protected and nurtured as well as appropriately evaluated. 21

Preparing for the Long Haul • Leadership has a great deal to do with creating a shared vision and inspiring others to join you in working to achieve these goals. • Goal: To foster classrooms where excellent teaching is targeted to the variable learning needs of diverse students. • Substantial change is a slow process that must be initiated and implemented. • This plan will be revised over the years but we need to make a commitment to provide meaningful changes that enhance teacher pedagogy (toolkit) and student achievement. 22

Any Questions! 23