Summary of 2011-2012 PSSA and AYP Results

1. Summary of 2011-2012 PSSA and AYP Results Pennsylvania System of School Assessment (PSSA) Grades 3-8 and 11 and Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) September 10, 2012

2. Our Goals • Accelerate academic achievement • Eliminate racial disparities • Become a district of first choice

3. Promise-Ready Students • Promise-Ready means • -- Mastering academic content at each grade level starting in • Kindergarten, • -- Developing behaviors and habits that are consistent with success in college or a career and • -- Exploring ambitions and dreams regarding life after high school. • Being Promise-Ready can lead to a Pittsburgh Promise® scholarship! To be eligible for The Pittsburgh Promise, students need to maintain a 2.5 Grade Point Average (GPA) and 90% attendance.

4. Dream Big. Work Hard. • Of the 2,295 students in college on a Promise Scholarship during the 2011-2012 school year • 56% were Caucasian • 38% were African American • 77% chose a 4 year college or university • 20% chose a 2-year community college • 3% chose a trade or technical school or workforce certification

5. We will get students Promise-Ready by having an effective teacher in every classroom every day, surrounded by effective school and district leaders with the appropriate supports.

6. The PSSA provides one measure to tell us if we are getting there and how quickly.

7. Proficient and Advanced: Students have made gains in proficiency over time, with a small decrease in 2012.

8. Grade Level Results

9. Proficient/Advanced: The percent of students scoring proficient or advanced increased in Reading in grades 6, 8 and 11 and in Mathematics in grade 8. Change in the Percent of Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced from 2011 to 2012 Data Source: 2011-2012 Preliminary PSSA data from the Pennsylvania Department of Education

10. Below Basic: The percent of students scoring below basic decreased in Reading in grades 8 and 11 and in Mathematics in grades 6, 7, and 8. Change in the Percent of Students Scoring Below Basic from 2011 to 2012 Data Source: 2011-2012 Preliminary PSSA data from the Pennsylvania Department of Education

11. Eliminate Race-based Academic Disparities

12. Disparity from 2011 to 2012: The disparity decreased in Reading in grades 4, 5 and 11 and in Mathematics in grades 7, 8 and 11. Change in the Disparity from 2011 to 2012 Data Source: 2011-2012 Preliminary PSSA data from the Pennsylvania Department of Education

13. Reading Disparity 5-Year Trend: The disparity has decreased from 32.3 to 28.7 points.

14. Reading Disparity from 2007 to 2012: The disparity decreased in grades 4, 5, 7, 8 and 11. -6.8 Data Source: 2011-2012 Preliminary PSSA data from the Pennsylvania Department of Education

15. Mathematics Disparity 5-Year Trend: The disparity has decreased from 31.1 to 27.1 points.

16. Mathematics Disparity from 2007 to 2012: The disparity decreased in all grades. -0.1 Data Source: 2011-2012 Preliminary PSSA data from the Pennsylvania Department of Education

17. Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) uses PSSA data as well as other indicators to provide a measure of progress for the District and all schools.

18. District AYP • For Reading and Mathematics, data are aggregated across 3-5, 6-8, and 9-12 grade spans. At least one grade span must meet all of Reading and Mathematics targets in order for the District to make AYP, in addition to the District meeting all of its Attendance and Graduation targets.

19. Several Ways to Meet AYP Met AYP: meeting or exceeding the targets. Or by Confidence Interval (CI): AYP is met by using a 95% Confidence Interval around the target. Safe Harbor (SH): AYP is met by Safe Harbor, when the number of students in the Basic or Below Basic category is reduced by 10% from the year before. Safe Harbor Confidence Interval (SHCI): AYP is met when the number of students in the Basic or Below Basic category is reduced by 10% from the year before, using a 75% confidence interval. Growth Model (GM): AYP is met through the use of projections to proficiency through the use of PVAAS data. The criteria are set by the U.S. Department of Education.

20. It is increasingly challenging for districts and schools to meet performance targets. The Reading target increased by 9 points to 81%. The Mathematics target increased by 11 points to 78%.

21. The 2012 District AYP status is Corrective Action II. • A Corrective Action status requires the District to submit a District Improvement Plan to PDE that addresses Reading and Mathematics achievement as well as Attendance and Graduation rates. • A District Improvement Plan that addressed 2011 status was submitted August 30, 2012.

22. District AYP targets include Attendance and Graduation. The District met the attendance target but did not meet the graduation target.

23. All students in Grades 3-8 and 11 are tested including students with IEPs and English Language Learners.

24. Students are counted in all subgroups that apply to them. • AYP targets are included for All students and subgroups of 40 or more African-American, White, Latino/Hispanic, Asian, Multiracial, English Language Learner, IEP, and Econ. Disadvantaged students. • The results from one student can impact whether or not multiple subgroups meet their target. • Example: One student who is White, ELL, IEP and ED will impact: • - 4 performance targets in reading • - 4 participation targets in reading • - 4 performance targets in math • - 4 participation targets in math, and • - either 1 attendance target or up to 4 graduation targets

25. Graduation rate calculations were changed to a 4-year cohort model and were reported by subgroup for the first time in 2012.

26. Reading: The Districtmet 33 of 51 participation and performance targets. Data Source: DRC 2012 Preliminary AYP System

27. Mathematics: The District met 35 of 51 participation and performance targets. Data Source: DRC 2012 Preliminary AYP System

28. NCLB Waivers • 44 states have applied • 33 approved, 11 outstanding • All who applied have targets frozen

29. Keystone Exams Replace Grade 11 PSSA 2012-13. • Proficiency on the Literature and Algebra 1 Keystone Exams will be used in determining 2013 AYP. • State targets for these two exams are under development and subject to federal approval. • Students will be expected to take Keystone exams at the end of Literature and Algebra 1 courses, or in Grade 11 if they have not scored proficient. Proficient scores will be banked until students are in Grade 11. • Proficiency on Keystone exams is a graduation requirement for the class of 2017, this year’s current 8th graders.

30. School AYP • For Reading and Mathematics, all of the tested grade data are aggregated, for example; grades 3-8 data are combined for a K-8 school, and 6-12 data are combined for a 6-12 school. The school must meet all of the Reading and Mathematics targets as well as attendance or graduation.

31. Seven schools made AYP by meeting all of the targets across all subgroups. *Making Progress: All AYP targets were met in the current year. All targets must be met again the following year to become Made AYP.

32. Twenty-six schools are in Warning, including 9 schools that missed just 1 or 2 targets. *School missed AYP by 1-2 targets.

33. Seven schools are in School Improvement as a result of missing one or more targets after a Warning year. Eligible students attending Title 1 schools in School Improvement I are offered: - school choice options Eligible students attending Title 1 schools in School Improvement II are offered: - supplemental educational services (tutoring) - school choice options

34. Nine schools are in Corrective Action. Eligible students attending Title 1 schools in Corrective Action were given: - school choice options - supplemental educational services (tutoring)

35. The seven schools closed at the end of 2011-12 were in Corrective Action.

36. Summary of School AYP Status Note: 3 schools in Corrective Action I and 4 schools in Corrective Action II closed at the end of 2011-12. They have been removed from this table. Data Source: DRC 2012 Preliminary AYP System

37. These results make us reflect on how 2011-2012 was different from previous years.

38. What was different? • A shift in the Academic Team’s focus to developing a new educational delivery model in response to fiscal challenges • Central Office reductions impacting coaching and intervention school supports • Staff uncertainty due to looming furloughs • Less than optimal testing conditions for students because allowable supports may not have been offered during test administration • The State’s elimination of Educational Assistance Program monies used to provide 4Sight assessments

39. The number of central office staff supports in schools has decreased since 2009.

40. Address the culture Build Cultures for Learning at schools Empower Effective Teachers Produce gains in student achievement through effective teaching Enhance Curriculum Relevance and Fidelity Make relevant connections Improve our Support to Schools Solve problems through onsite support Engage Families and Communities Provide opportunities for parental and community involvement Provide Data-focused Support What must we do to meet our goals? 40

41. We must work with passion, heads and hearts with an “all in” commitment, and as members of a team that is working together to prepare our students for the Pittsburgh Promise.