FRANKFORT SCHOOL DISTRICT 157-C

2016-17

Student Achievement Data Presentation

Balanced Assessment in 157-C

Achievement Tests Ability Tests Proficiency Tests

Tests include content students may have not been taught, but they could be expected to have mastered based on norming group.

Tests to measure a person's intelligence and mental ability. Some of the specific areas measured by cognitive ability tests include problem-solving, verbal ability, numerical ability, reasoning, memory, and general intelligence.

Students are taught all the material and are tested on whether they “got it”.

• Terra Nova – Achievement Test

• Terra Nova – InView Ability Test

• Typical Classroom Unit or Chapter Test

• PARCC • Retired ISAT

157-C administers both the achievement and ability tests of Terra Nova to more accurately report a child’s achievement

based on his/her potential.

These tests do not take into account a student’s

potential.

Terra Nova Achievement & Ability Test Reading 2016

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q42013 8.5% 17.4% 29.5% 44.5%2014 8.0% 15.7% 30.9% 45.4%2015 8.4% 17.0% 29.9% 44.7%2016 8.5% 15.4% 29.7% 46.4%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

District 157-C % in National Quartile Reading 2013/2014/2015/2016

Terra Nova Achievement & Ability Test Math 2016

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q42013 7.1% 15.5% 29.8% 47.7%2014 6.9% 14.1% 29.5% 49.5%2015 7.9% 16.6% 27.7% 47.8%2016 8.6% 13.9% 29.6% 47.9%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

District 157-C % in National Quartile Math 2013/2014/2015/2016

Terra Nova % of students reaching their potential

2015

2016

Reading

63%

69%

Math

58%

70%

Balanced Assessment in 157-C

Achievement Tests Ability Tests Proficiency Tests

Tests include content students may have not been taught, but they could be expected to have mastered based on norming group.

Tests to measure a person's intelligence and mental ability. Some of the specific areas measured by cognitive ability tests include problem-solving, verbal ability, numerical ability, reasoning, memory, and general intelligence.

Students are taught all the material and are tested on whether they “got it”.

• Terra Nova – Achievement Test

• Terra Nova – InView Ability Test

• Typical Classroom Unit or Chapter Test

• Common Outcome Assessments

• PARCC

157-C administers both the achievement and ability tests of Terra Nova to more accurately report a child’s achievement

based on his/her potential.

These tests do not take into account a student’s

potential.

Frankfort School District 157-C PARCC subgroups ELA

33%

15%

74%

71%

50%

44%

58%

66%

50%

38%

58%

50%

25%

77%

74%

50%

61%

68%

73%

61%

36%

67%

Low Income

IEP

Two or More Races

Asian

Hispanic

Black

White

Female

Male

State Average

All Students

District % Proficient PARCC - ELA 2015/2016 2016 2015

Frankfort School District 157-C PARCC subgroups Math

21%

16%

61%

76%

31%

21%

47%

46%

47%

29%

46%

34%

23%

73%

76%

42%

44%

60%

58%

60%

31%

59%

Low Income

IEP

Two or More Races

Asian

Hispanic

Black

White

Female

Male

State Average

All Students

District % Proficient PARCC - Math 2015/2016 2016 2015

PARCC Results in Will County

State Average: 34% 7%

8% 20%

22% 24%

25% 25%

30% 31%

34% 34%

35% 35%

36% 37%

39% 39%

40% 41% 41%

44% 46%

50% 52% 52%

63%

Fairmont SD 89 (-4%)Chaney-Monge SD 88 (-1%)

Joliet PSD 86 (-2%)Laraway CCSD 70C (-3%)

Rockdale SD 84 (+2%)Crete Monee CUSD 201U (+3%)

Wilmington CUSD 209U (+2%)Union SD 81 (-2%)

Valley View CUSD 365U (-1%)Beecher CUSD 200U (-2%)

Reed Custer CUSD 255U (+3%)Peotone CUSD 207U (+3%)

Taft SD 90 (+6%)Richland GSD 88A (+7%)

Troy CCSD 30C (0%)Lockport SD 91 (+3%)

Mokena SD 159 (+2%)Summit Hill SD 161 (0%)Plainfield SD 202 (+3%)

Elwood CCSD 203 (+12%)New Lenox SD 122 (+3%)Channahon SD 17 (+1%)Homer CCSD 33C (+3%)

Manhattan SD 114 (-3%)Will County SD 92 (+8%)

Frankfort CCSD 157C (+11%)

Will County K-8 District PARCC 2016 Composite Scores (ELA & Math) Percentage of Students That Met or Exceeded

PARCC Results in State of Illinois

Ranked top 3% in Illinois

Ranked top 4% in Illinois

What did we learn from our data?

157-C students scored lowest in the area of written

responses in reading and constructed responses in math (writing by justifying thinking and reasoning)

157-C students scored lower in math than reading (same trend as the state) Areas of concern were modeling, reasoning and constructed responses

157-C Story

2010-2011 2011-2012

2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015

2015-2016 2016-2017

157-C Goals in response to our data

Continue to focus on writing in response to reading, in math for constructed responses and writing stamina

Explore methodologies for teaching writing across all contents and grade levels

Implement the Continuous Learning Plan with the integration of technology and professional learning for all

Adopt and implement a new K-5 math resource

Dynamic Learning Maps

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

2015 ELA 2016 ELA 2015 Math 2016 Math

District % Proficient ELA & Math 2015 and 2016

2015 ELA

2016 ELA

2015 Math

2016 Math

Students with Disabilities in 157-C

Continue modifications to current general education curriculum

Purchased programs for Specialized Instruction classes (Ex. Unique Learning Systems, LiPS, etc)

Special education staff able to participate in curriculum development and professional development activities

Access to teacher leaders K-5 special education teachers part of math pilot

HCMS PARCC Cohort Performance

*157-C set a goal of +5% for every cohort of students

2015 Performance

ELA

2016 Performance

ELA

Goal Attained +5% Per Cohort

2015 Performance

Math

2016 Performance

Math

Goal Attained +5% Per Cohort

Grade 6 62% 72% +15% 45% 60% +14%

Grade 7 67% 78% +16% 49% 60% +15%

Grade 8 61% 78% +11% 44% 61% +12%

HCMS

Celebrating our results/successes and still growing…

Math • Major Standards Sequence Supplemental

Resources • Modeling/Reasoning Justify your work Outcome

Assessments

ELA • Standard Alignment Community Designed Rigorous Instruction • Love for Reading Student Choice Written responses Increase Reading

Chelsea PARCC Cohort Performance

*157-C set a goal of +5% for every cohort of students

2015 Performance

ELA

2016 Performance

ELA

Goal Attained +5% Per Cohort

2015 Performance

Math

2016 Performance

Math

Goal Attained +5% Per Cohort

Grade 3 49% 59% 54% 71%

Grade 4 51% 58% +9% 40% 53% -1%

Grade 5 57% 57% +6% 46% 54% +14%

CHELSEA

The results indicate that our curriculum continues to prepare our students with a solid core of academic understanding. Moving our students forward with 21st Century skills: Develop the capacity to effectively integrate and reason with knowledge across the standards for both ELA and math, and express this reasoning through effective writing and modeling. ELA - Chelsea students are performing slightly above the state average on literary analysis, research simulation writing, and narrative writing in response to a single text. In response to this data – Focus on writing activities that require students to practice using all of their reading and writing standards as they prepare a complete and accurate written response to text. MATH - Chelsea students are performing slightly above the state average on integration, modeling, and reasoning abstractly/quantitatively with mathematical concepts. In response to this data - Focusing on developing opportunities for students to continue to further develop their ability to integrate and analyze information across the standards and to express it completely with models and through well developed constructed response.

Grand Prairie Terra Nova Cohort Performance % of students above the 50th National Percentile

2015 Performance

ELA

2016 Performance

ELA

Attainment Per Cohort

2015 Performance

Math

2016 Performance

Math

Attainment Per Cohort

Grade 2 66% 78%

Grade 3

75% +9% 82% +4%

GRAND PRAIRIE

Reading Text complexity Conferring-Reading/Writing

Individual and small group

Math Problem Solving

Analyzing – Embracing the error Constructed response

Growth Mindset Encouraging a shift in language for adults and students

“Challenges are opportunities” “Mistakes are ways to learn”