Grade 3-8 English Language Arts Results 2009

1

Grade 3-8 Grade 3-8

English Language Arts ResultsEnglish Language Arts Results

20092009

EMBARGOED Until May 7 At 11:00 a.m.

2

Student Growth Tracked Over Time: 2006 – 2009

• Grade-by-grade testing in grades 3-8 began in 2006.

• The tests, along with the individual student data system, allow us to track the academic growth of classes of students over time.

• Thus, we can see how 3rd graders in 2006 are performing as 6th graders in 2009.

• Tracking the growth of students as they advance from one grade to the next over time: This is crucial to the Board of Regents.

3

Analyzing Student Growth

• We can analyze growth by looking at whether students progress from Level 1 and 2 to Level 3 and 4 as they move from one grade to the next through school.

• And we can look at growth by actual student scores as students move from one grade to the next through school. Those scores are measured on a scale, which begins in the 400’s and goes to the upper 700’s.

4

What Are the Results?1. Moderate gains overall.2. Students who began the 3-8 grade-by-grade

curriculum 4 years ago (and later) are often making bigger gains as they progress through school than did older students who started the grade-by-grade curriculum in higher grades, for example, grades 6 and 7.

3. More of this year’s 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th graders are meeting the standards (scoring in Level 3 & 4) than did students in those grades 4 years ago.

5

What Are the Results?

4. When we look at average student scores (as opposed to the percentage at Level 3 & 4), we see that students have generally made smaller gains as they have progressed from one grade to the next through school.

5. Middle school performance, which was very low when the grade 3-8 curriculum began 4 years ago, has improved significantly over time.

6. Even with the improvements, many students still are not meeting the standards.

61. Moderate gains overall. The percentage of students across all grades 3-8 who are scoring in Level 3 & 4 increased more this year.

63.4%68.5%

77.4%

Grades 3-8

2006 2007 2008 2009

Grades 3-8: 1,205,120 1,228,362 1,207,778 1,200,460

2006 2007 2008 2009

Number of Students Tested in Grades 3-8

7

659 661 664 668

Grades 3-8

2006 2007 2008 2009

1. Moderate gains overall. The average student score across all grades 3-8 increased moderately this year, by 4 points, as opposed to 3 points last year and 2 points the year before.

650*

*A score of 650 is the cutpoint between Level 2 and Level 3.

8Why Are Average Gains in Scores Often Smaller Than Gains in the

Percentage at Level 3 and 4?

• The Answer: – Over time, many students have

improved their performance enough to move over the line from level 2 to level 3.

– However, the increase in the average scale score for all students was often smaller.

9

69

.0%

68

.6%

67

.1%

60

.4%

56

.4%

49

.3%

67

.1%

68

.0%

68

.1%

63

.2%

57

.8%

57

.0%7

0.1

%

71

.1%

77

.6%

66

.9%

70

.0%

56

.1%

75

.8%

76

.9%

82

.2%

80

.9%

80

.3%

68

.5%

Grade 3 in 2009 Grade 4 in 2009 Grade 5 in 2009 Grade 6 in 2009 Grade 7 in 2009 Grade 8 in 2009 Grade 9 in 2009 Grade 10 in 2009 Grade 11 in 2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73

Class of 2018 Class of 2017 Class of 2016

4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

2. Results tracked over time: Students who began the grade-by-grade curriculum 4 years ago and later are often making bigger gains as they progress through school than did older students who started the grade-by-grade curriculum in higher grades.

Percentage of students in Levels 3 and 4 All Students as They Move

through School, 2006-09

10

69

.0%

68

.6%

67

.1%

60

.4%

56

.4%

49

.3%

67

.1%

68

.0%

68

.1%

63

.2%

57

.8%

57

.0%7

0.1

%

71

.1%

77

.6%

66

.9%

70

.0%

56

.1%

75

.8%

76

.9%

82

.2%

80

.9%

80

.3%

68

.5%


2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

3. Results tracked over time: And more of this year’s 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th graders are meeting the standards (Level 3 & 4) than did students in those grades 4 years ago.

Percentage of students in Levels 3 and 4

All Students as They Move through School, 2006-09

11

4. What About Actual Student Scores?• Students are graded on a scale which begins in

the 400’s and ends in the upper 700’s. • Students at the bottom of the scale are in level 1.

Students at the top of the scale are in level 4. • The number of students scoring in Level 3 and 4

increased significantly for some classes of students as they moved through school over time.

• But the increase in average scores over time is smaller for those same students.

• Nevertheless, students this year are scoring higher than students in those same grades did 4 years ago.

12

66

9

66

6

66

3

65

6

65

2

65

0

66

7

66

5

66

5

66

1

65

5

65

5

66

9

66

6

66

7

66

1

66

2

65

7

67

0

67

0 67

5

66

7

66

7

66

1


2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650*


Gains in average student scale scores are small to moderate overall as students progress from one grade to the next through school. The performance of some classes of students grew very little. For one class, performance declined.

All Students As They Move through School, 2006-09

13

66

9

66

6

66

3

65

6

65

2

65

0

66

7

66

5

66

5

66

1

65

5

65

5

66

9

66

6

66

7

66

1

66

2

65

7

67

0

67

0 67

5

66

7

66

7

66

1


2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650*


However, this year’s students had higher average scores than did the students in those same grades 4 years ago.

All Students As They Move through School, 2006-09

14

5. When the grade 3-8 tests began in 2006, the percentage of students achieving Levels 3 & 4 was much poorer in the middle grades than in the elementary grades.

69

.0%

68

.6%

67

.1%

60

.4%

56

.4%

49

.3% 6

1.5

%

Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grades 3-8

2006

Percentage of students scoring in Level 3 and 4

Middle School:

15

669

666

663

656

650

652

Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8

2006

That was also true for average student scores in middle school.

650*


16

But now performance in middle school has improved significantly.

75

.8%

76

.9%

82

.2%

80

.9%

80

.3%

68

.5%

77

.4%


2009

Percentage of students scoring in level 3 and 4

17

670

670

675

667

667

661

Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8

2009

And that is also true for average student scores in middle school.

650*


18Here is a look at all 4 years of performance in each grade, showing the percentage of students in Levels 3 & 4. Improvement in the middle grades is the greatest.

69

.0%

68

.6%

67

.1%

60

.4%

56

.4%

49

.3% 61

.5%

67

.1%

68

.0%

68

.1%

63

.2%

57

.8%

57

.0%

63

.4%

70

.1%

71

.1%

77

.6%

66

.9%

70

.0%

56

.1% 68

.5%

75

.8%

76

.9%

82

.2%

80

.9%

80

.3%

68

.5%

77

.4%


2006 2007 2008 2009

Grade 3 = 185,603 198,457 195,777 198,367Grade 4 = 190,951 197,499 197,016 195,942Grade 5 = 201,262 202,133 198,022 197,856Grade 6 = 204,249 204,463 200,505 197,996Grade 7 = 210,735 211,839 207,278 202,805Grade 8 = 212,320 213,971 209,180 207,494Grades 3-8= 1,205,120 1,228,362 1,207,778 1,200,460

Number Tested 2006 2007 2008 2009

19

669

666

663

656

650 65

9667

665

661

655

655

661669

666

667

661

662

657

664

670

670

675

667

667

661

668

65266

5


2006 2007 2008 2009

There is also improvement in average student scores in each grade – and especially in the middle grades – but the improvement in average scores is often much smaller than the improvement in the percentage of students in Levels 3 & 4.

650

20

Why the Progress Overall?• Over time, the State has invested significantly

more resources in education.• Universal Pre-Kindergarten has been expanding

and reaching more students each year. • The grade-by-grade curriculum, introduced in

2006, seems to be helping. Schools are aligning their instruction with the grade-by-grade curriculum.

• Schools have created literacy teams of teachers and are increasing professional development to improve instruction.

21

Similar Trends Emerge for Different Groups of Students

Over Time.

22More students with disabilities met the standards (scoring in Levels 3 & 4) as they progressed from one grade to the next through school, except among this year’s 8th graders. However, achievement is still low.

26

.6%

26

.5%

26

.6%

16

.8%

16

.1%

10

.5%

28

.0%

27

.6%

29

.1%

19

.7%

17

.3%

15

.6%

30

.8%

29

.8% 40

.7%

23

.9%

29

.4%

13

.3%

36

.6%

37

.5% 48

.4%

44

.3%

43

.5%

24

.9%

Grade 3 in 2009 Grade 4 in 2009 Grade 5 in 2009 Grade 6 in 2009 Grade 7 in 2009 Grade 8 in 2009 Grade 9 in 2009 Grade 10 in2009

Grade 11 in2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

Percentage of students in level 3 and 4

23

Fewer students with disabilities are scoring in Level 1 (showing serious academic difficulties) as they move through the 4 years of school.

37

.3%

38

.6%

28

.0%

33

.0%

32

.9%

38

.5%

34

.8%

33

.2%

21

.5%

12

.4% 2

4.3

%

25

.4%

26

.7%

31

.7%

8.9

%

8.3

%

8.7

%

22

.8%

22

.9%

21

.3%

3.1

%

0.7

%

1.9

% 7.8

%


2006 2007 2008 2009


Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

24

62

8

62

1

62

2

61

2

61

0

60

2

62

8

62

5 63

1

62

8

61

7

61

8

63

4

62

5

64

0

63

3

63

4

62

0

63

7

63

5

65

0

64

7

64

5

63

3


2006 2007 2008 2009

The average score for students with disabilities, while still too low, has also increased significantly as students have moved from one grade to the next through school over the past 4 years.

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

25

34

.3%

26

.6%

20

.6%

11

.2%

8.5

%

4.9

%

30

.5%

23

.0%

18

.9%

10

.4%

7.0

%

5.9

%

33

.1%

31

.9%

34

.0%

14

.9%

17

.4%

6.3

%

47

.7%

40

.9%

42

.8%

35

.5%

25

.4%

12

.6%


Grade 11 in2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

More of this year’s 4th, 5th, and 6th grade English Language Learners have advanced to Levels 3 and 4 as they have moved from one grade to the next through school, but overall improvement is small and overall performance is very low.

Note: 2007 was the first year the federal government required all ELL students to be tested, except for those in this country for one year or less.

26

The percentage of English Language Learners who are scoring in Level 1 (showing serious academic difficulties) has decreased significantly as they have progressed through the past 4 years of school.

31

.5%

36

.4%

30

.3%

36

.6%

36

.8% 46

.6%

25

.9%

30

.8%

27

.5%

15

.9%

39

.4%

39

.0%

18

.4%

23

.8%

9.8

%

11

.1%

11

.8%

34

.2%

13

.9%

14

.8%

3.5

%

0.8

%

3.7

% 13

.7%


2006 2007 2008 2009


Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

27

63

6

62

5

61

9

60

8

60

6

60

2

63

3

62

4

62

3

62

1

60

0 60

5

63

8

63

1 63

6

62

7

62

7

60

9

64

5

63

9 64

6

64

4

63

6

62

3


2006 2007 2008 2009

The improvement in average scores as English Language Learners have moved through school has been greater than the increase in the percentage of students scoring at Levels 3 and 4.

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

28Across grades 3-8, more students in every racial/ethnic group are meeting the standards now than in 2006. Black, Hispanic, and American Indian students have experienced the most growth.

75

.6%

45

.2%

45

.6%

50

.8%

75

.4%

63

.4%7

9.6

%

52

.9%

52

.6%

57

.3%

79

.0%

68

.5%8

6.6

%

64

.3%

64

.8%

68

.9% 8

5.9

%

77

.4%

77

.6%

42

.4%

46

.1%

46

.5%

71

.8%

61

.5%

Asian Black Hispanic AmericanIndian/Alaskan

Native

White Total Public

2006 2007 2008 2009

Percentage of Students Scoring in Levels 3 and 4

2009 Total Students at Levels 3 and 4

Asian: 77,448

Black: 147,483

Hispanic: 161,106

American Indian/ Alaskan Native: 3,896

White: 535,712

Total Public: 928,688

29

675

669

672

674

672679

675

641

644

645

673

650

645

646

654

650

651 660

657

657

Asian Black Hispanic AmericanIndian/Alaskan Native

White

2006 2007 2008 2009

Across all grades 3-8, the average score of all racial/ethnic groups has increased in the past 4 years. Black, Hispanic, and American Indian students have experienced the most growth.

650

30The percentage of this year’s Black 4th, 5th, and 7th graders scoring in Levels 3 & 4 increased significantly as they moved through school over the past 4 years. The gains are larger than for White and Asian students.

50

.7%

51

.8%

48

.9%

41

.3%

35

.9%

28

.1%

51

.1%

51

.3%

51

.2%

44

.4%

37

.9%

36

.6%

56

.3%

56

.5%

64

.2%

50

.0%

54

.3%

37

.0%

63

.3%

64

.9%

70

.2%

69

.2%

67

.0%

51

.8%


Grade 11 in2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

Percentage of Black Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

31Black students made larger gains in their average scores as they progressed through the past 4 years of school than did White and Asian students.

65

1

64

9

64

6

63

9

63

4

63

1

65

0

64

9

65

1

64

8

63

9

63

9

65

6

65

1 65

6

65

0

65

1

64

2

65

8

65

8 66

3

65

8

65

7

64

9


2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

32The percentage of this year’s Hispanic 4th, 5th, and 7th graders scoring in Levels 3 & 4 increased significantly as they moved from one grade to the next through school over the 4 years. The gains are larger than for White and Asian students.

58

.9%

55

.5%

52

.4%

43

.3%

38

.5%

31

.5%

50

.7%

50

.8%

50

.0%

44

.7%

39

.8%

37

.6%

53

.7%

56

.8% 65

.3%

48

.0%

54

.5%

37

.3%

63

.8%

64

.8%

71

.6%

69

.7%

66

.8%

52

.6%


Grade 11 in2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

Percentage of Hispanic Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

33Hispanic students have often made larger gains in their average scores as they progressed through the 4 years of school than have White and Asian students.

65

7

65

3

64

8

64

1

63

6

63

4

65

0

64

8

64

9

64

7

63

9

63

8

65

3

65

1 65

6

64

9

65

1

64

1

65

8

65

7 66

4

65

9

65

6

64

9


2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

34White students often made smaller gains in reaching Levels 3 & 4 as they progressed through school than did Black and Hispanic students, but overall performance is much higher.

77

.2%

77

.1%

77

.3%

71

.5%

68

.3%

61

.0%

78

.4%

79

.4%

80

.0%

75

.4%

70

.3%

70

.2%80

.7%

80

.7%

86

.3%

78

.8%

80

.3%

68

.2%

83

.8%

85

.0%

90

.0%

88

.5%

89

.4%

79

.3%


Grade 11 in2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

35

67

7

67

4

67

2

66

6

66

3

66

1

67

8

67

5

67

5

67

0

66

5

66

6

67

9

67

6

67

4

66

9

66

9

66

7

67

8

67

8 68

3

67

2

67

4

66

8


2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

Average scores for White students present a complex picture. Average scores of this year’s White 6th and 8th graders have declined as they have progressed through school. This year’s 7th graders have the same average score that they did 4 years ago. But more of this year’s 6th, 7th, and 8th graders have advanced into Level 3 & 4 as they have moved from one grade to the next through school.

36

67

7

67

4

67

2

66

6

66

3

66

1

67

8

67

5

67

5

67

0

66

5

66

6

67

9

67

6

67

4

66

9

66

9

66

7

67

8

67

8 68

3

67

2

67

4

66

8


2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

However, this year’s White students have higher average scores than White students in those grades did 4 years before.

37

50

.7%

37

.3%

52

.4%

56

.7% 6

9.2

%

82

.9%

61

.5%

50

.8%

38

.7%

54

.9%

62

.0% 7

3.0

% 84

.8%

63

.4%

57

.6%

46

.4%

60

.6%

66

.8% 76

.7% 8

7.5

%

68

.5%

68

.8%

56

.9%

70

.9%

76

.3% 84

.2% 91

.8%

77

.4%

New York City Large City Urban-Suburban Rural Average Low Total Public

2006 2007 2008 2009

Across grades 3-8, districts in all need/resource categories have made significant gains in the percentage of students scoring in Levels 3 & 4.

38

649

680

659

651

653

659 66

9 681

661

655

646 65

6

661 669 68

1

664

662

652 66

2

665

673 68

3

668

665

636 65

0

653

640

New YorkCity

Large City Urban-Suburban

Rural Average Low Total Public

2006 2007 2008 2009

Across grades 3-8, scale score gains have generally been much smaller.

650

2006-2009 ELA: Grades 3-8 Need/Resource Capacity CategoryMean Scale Scores

39In New York City, students who began the 3-8 grade-by-grade curriculum 4 years ago and later are making bigger gains as they progress through school than did older students who started the grade-by-grade curriculum in higher grades, e.g., grades 6 and 7. Also, more of this year’s students are scoring in Level 3 & 4

than did students in those grades 4 years ago.

61

.5%

58

.9%

56

.7%

48

.6%

44

.2%

36

.6%

56

.4%

56

.0%

56

.1%

49

.7%

45

.4%

41

.8%

59

.9%

61

.3%

69

.2%

52

.7%

59

.5%

43

.0%

69

.4%

68

.9%

74

.7%

72

.6%

70

.9%

57

.0%


2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

86 7 8

Percentage scoring in Level 3 and 4

40

66

1

65

7

65

4

64

6

64

2

63

9

65

6

65

4

65

6

65

2

64

5

64

3

65

9

65

7 66

1

65

2

65

5

64

7

66

4

66

3 66

9

66

2

66

0

65

3


2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

The average score of New York City students has generally increased as students have progressed from one grade to the next through school. In addition, students this year are scoring higher than did students in those same grades 4 years ago. That’s especially true in the middle grades.

41In the Big 4 Cities, students who began the 3-8 grade-by-grade curriculum 4 years ago and later are making bigger gains as they progress through school than did older students who started the grade-by-grade curriculum in higher grades, e.g., grades 6 and 7. Also, more of this year’s students are scoring in Level 3 & 4

than did students in those grades 4 years ago.

45

.7%

49

.2%

43

.7%

37

.4%

29

.5%

24

.2%

43

.0%

46

.4%

44

.9%

39

.0%

30

.0%

31

.0%

48

.1%

50

.5%

57

.4%

48

.6%

44

.0%

31

.3%

53

.7%

57

.0%

62

.9%

65

.0%

59

.2%

44

.1%


2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

86 7 8

Percentage scoring in Level 3 & 4

42

64

7

64

8

64

0

63

5

62

7

62

6

64

4

64

4

64

5

64

3

63

1

63

3

65

0

64

6 65

1

64

8

64

4

63

6

65

1

65

2 65

9

65

6

65

3

64

4


2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

In the Big 4, there has been a net gain in average scale scores as students have progressed from one grade to the next through 4 years of school. In addition, students this year are scoring higher than did students in those same grades 4 years ago. That’s especially true in the middle grades.

43In Low Need districts, the percentage of students scoring in Level 3 & 4 has reached very high levels. However, growth has been relatively small as students have moved through school.

85

.5%

87

.0%

87

.1%

82

.8%

80

.3%

74

.7%8

6.2

%

87

.7%

86

.9%

84

.4%

81

.6%

82

.0%

88

.1%

88

.8%

92

.4%

87

.2%

88

.5%

80

.4%90

.3%

91

.7%

93

.8%

93

.4%

94

.0%

87

.8%


2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

86 7 8

44

68

7

68

5

68

4

67

9

67

5

67

3

68

8

68

5

68

3

67

9

67

5 67

8

68

8

68

6

68

1

67

7

67

6

67

8

68

6

68

7

68

9

67

9

68

0

67

6


2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

In Low Need districts, average scores have declined somewhat for many classes of students as they have moved through school.

45

50

.7%

30

.1% 38

.4%

34

.0%

51

.1% 6

1.5

%

50

.8%

34

.5%

38

.4%

37

.3% 4

6.7

%

63

.4%

57

.6%

42

.5%

46

.6%

42

.1%

55

.6%

68

.5%

68

.8%

54

.4%

56

.0%

52

.7%

65

.2%

77

.4%

New York City Buffalo Rochester Syracuse Yonkers Total Public2006 20072008 2009

In each of the Big 5 Cities, the percentage of students scoring in Levels 3 & 4 has significantly increased over the past 4 years.

46

649 65

9

651

640

639

647 66

1

655

643

646

643 65

3 664

662

651

651

650 65

9 668

650

629

637

633

636

New York City Buffalo Rochester Syracuse Yonkers Total Public

2006 2007 2008 2009

In each of the Big 5 Cities, students’ average scores have increased over the past 4 years.

650

Mean Scale Scores

47

In Buffalo, the percentage of students scoring in Level 3 and 4 has increased substantially as students have moved from one grade to the next through school during the past 4 years.

37

.3%

37

.7%

34

.8%

31

.0%

26

.7%

20

.9%

35

.2%

39

.8%

38

.7%

35

.1%

26

.9%

33

.3%4

6.9

%

42

.3% 52

.9%

43

.7%

43

.8%

28

.0%

48

.9%

54

.1%

56

.2%

63

.5%

61

.8%

42

.5%


2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

48

64

0

63

7

63

2

62

8

62

3

62

463

6

63

8

64

0

64

0

62

8 63

764

9

63

8 64

9

64

5

64

4

63

4

64

8

65

1

65

5

65

6

65

4

64

4


2006 2007 2008 2009

In Buffalo, the average student score has often increased substantially as students have moved from one grade to the next through school during the past 4 years.

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

49

In Rochester, the percentage of students scoring in Level 3 & 4 has increased significantly as this year’s 4th, 5th and 6th graders they have moved from one grade to the next over the past 4 years.

47

.4%

50

.1%

42

.0%

41

.2%

28

.3%

26

.3%

43

.0%

47

.4%

45

.2%

42

.1%

29

.0%

27

.8%

44

.1% 52

.3%

58

.3%

56

.3%

40

.0%

31

.1%

49

.0%

57

.0%

64

.5%

69

.7%

53

.1%

43

.1%


2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

50

65

0

64

7

63

9

63

9

62

7

62

8

64

5

64

6

64

6

64

6

63

1

62

9

64

8

64

8

65

1

65

3

64

2

63

5

64

7 65

1 65

8

65

7

64

9

64

2


2006 2007 2008 2009

In Rochester, a similar pattern emerges in average student scores.

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

51

In Syracuse, the percentage of students scoring in Level 3 & 4 has increased as students have moved from one grade to the next during the past 4 years.

41

.3%

43

.4%

37

.3%

33

.1%

28

.3%

21

.3%

41

.4%

45

.4%

47

.5%

34

.0%

27

.9%

28

.3%

43

.8% 5

4.9

%

52

.4%

40

.7%

40

.1%

30

.8%

50

.0%

49

.4% 59

.9%

65

.4%

57

.8%

41

.0%


2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

52

64

2

64

1

63

3

63

2

62

5

62

3

64

4

64

3 64

8

63

9

63

1

63

0

64

6

64

3 64

9

64

4

64

1

63

664

7

64

6 65

7

65

4

65

2

64

3


2006 2007 2008 2009

In Syracuse, students have generally made significant gains in average scores as they have moved from one grade to the next during the past 4 years.

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

53Yonkers shows a mixed picture in the percentage of students scoring in Level 3 & 4 over time as students move through school. Nevertheless, students this year have higher scores than did students in those same grades 4 years ago (except for this year’s 3rd and 4th graders).

60

.3% 70

.9%

64

.9%

45

.0%

37

.2%

31

.8%

55

.6%

55

.1%

51

.5%

44

.6%

39

.1%

35

.1%

59

.3%

64

.2%

67

.0%

52

.6%

53

.0%

37

.7%

70

.1%

67

.5%

72

.8%

59

.5%

64

.4%

50

.4%


2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

54

66

1 67

1

66

2

64

3

63

5

63

4

65

5

65

3

65

1

64

8

63

8

63

8

65

9

65

8

65

7

65

1

65

1

64

2

66

4

66

0 66

6

65

6

65

7

64

8


2006 2007 2008 2009

Yonkers’ average scores also show a mixed picture as students move from one grade to the next over time. Nevertheless, students this year have higher scores than did students in those same grades 4 years ago.

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

55

What Are the Results?1. Moderate gains overall.2. Students who began the 3-8 grade-by-grade

curriculum 4 years ago (and later) are often making bigger gains as they progress through school than did older students who started the grade-by-grade curriculum in higher grades, for example, grades 6 and 7.

3. More of this year’s 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th graders are meeting the standards (scoring in Level 3 & 4) than did students in those grades 4 years ago.

56

What Are the Results?

4. When we look at average student scores (as opposed to the percentage at Level 3 & 4), we see that students have generally made smaller gains as they have progressed from one grade to the next through school.

5. Middle school performance, which was very low when the grade 3-8 curriculum began 4 years ago, has improved significantly over time.

6. Even with the improvements, many students still are not meeting the standards.

57

Additional Slides

More Information About the Performance of Different Groups

58

2006 - 2009 ELA: Students with Disabilities

20.2% 22.8% 27.9%39.3%

Grades 3-8

2006 2007 2008 2009

Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4

Grades 3-8: 166,511 173,369 181,381 182,847

2006 2007 2008 2009

Number of Students with Disabilities Tested

59

617 625 631641

Grades 3-8

2006 2007 2008 2009

2006 - 2009 ELA: Students with Disabilities

650

Mean Scale Scores

60

2006 - 2009 ELA: English Language Learners

16.2% 18.0%25.1%

36.4%

Grades 3-8

2006 2007 2008 2009


2006 2007 2008 2009Grades 3-8: 32,420 72,082 73,199 74,854

Number of ELL Students Tested

61

614 620630

640

Grades 3-8

2006 2007 2008 2009

2006 - 2009 ELA: English Language Learners

650

Mean Scale Scores

62Among Asian students, the percentage reaching Level 3 & 4 increased for most students as they moved from one grade to the next through the past 4 years of school.

85

.1%

83

.5%

81

.1%

77

.1%

72

.0%

67

.1%7

9.0

%

79

.7%

78

.8%

75

.6%

71

.0%

69

.5%79

.8%

83

.1%

86

.0%

77

.8%

80

.5%

70

.0%

87

.3%

86

.7%

89

.3%

89

.6%

87

.1%

79

.6%


Grade 11 in2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

63

The percentage of Asian students in Level 1 has declined dramatically.

2.5

%

2.9

%

2.6

%

2.7

%

3.4

%

4.6

%

4.1

%

3.9

%

3.0

%

1.6

%

4.5

%

4.5

%

2.7

%

3.8

%

1.1

%

1.2

%

1.3

%

4.2

%

2.1

%

2.0

%

0.5

%

0.1

%

0.6

%

1.8

%


2006 2007 2008 2009


Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

64

The average score of this year’s Asian 6th and 7th graders has declined as they have moved from one grade to the next through school, even though more of those students are reaching Level 3 & 4. However, this year’s Asian students generally have higher average scores than Asian students in those grades did 4 years before.

68

6

68

1

67

8

67

3

66

8

66

6

67

9

67

7

67

5

67

3

66

6

66

7

67

8

68

0

67

6

67

0

67

2

66

8

68

2

68

2 68

6

67

9

67

5

67

1


2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

65The percentage of American Indians scoring in Level 3 & 4 has increased as they have progressed through school.

49

.3%

54

.6%

53

.2%

45

.9%

43

.0%

34

.4%

56

.1%

54

.4%

56

.5%

51

.3%

43

.5%

44

.9%5

8.4

%

61

.6%

67

.6%

57

.3%

58

.7%

42

.2%

65

.7%

68

.8%

76

.7%

74

.1%

73

.9%

55

.2%


Grade 11 in2009

2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

66

The percentage of American Indian students scoring in Level 1 has decreased significantly as they have moved through the past 4 years of school.

15

.5%

15

.9%

9.9

%

13

.2%

12

.2%

14

.0%

12

.9%

12

.3%

6.9

%

3.7

% 9.7

%

8.2

%

7.1

%

11

.6%

2.3

%

2.3

%

2.0

% 7.7

%

5.1

%

5.8

%

0.4

%

0.3

%

1.0

%

2.0

%


2006 2007 2008 2009


Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

67

65

1

65

1

65

1

64

2

64

0

63

7

65

6

65

2

65

4

65

2

64

3

64

6

65

8

65

5 65

9

65

3

65

4

64

4

65

9

66

0 66

9

66

0

65

9

65

2


2006 2007 2008 2009

American Indians have also increased their average scores on the tests as they have moved from one grade to the next through school.

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

68

Results Tracked Over Time

By Gender and Race / Ethnicity

69The percentage of Black male students scoring in Level 3 & 4 increased considerably as they progressed through school over the past 4 years – except for this year’s 8th graders. And all students are achieving at higher levels than their counterparts 4 years ago.

45

.2%

47

.5%

44

.4%

36

.1%

31

.5%

22

.0%

46

.0%

46

.3%

48

.3%

39

.1%

30

.9%

30

.0%

52

.0%

50

.5% 60

.9%

44

.3%

46

.2%

29

.3%

56

.9%

60

.1%

67

.0%

64

.0%

61

.5%

44

.5%


2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

70

64

5

64

4

64

1

63

3

62

9

62

4

64

6

64

4

64

8

64

3

63

3

63

3

65

2

64

5 65

4

64

6

64

6

63

6

65

3

65

4 66

1

65

5

65

4

64

5


2006 2007 2008 2009

The average scores of Black males also increased as they moved from one grade to the next through the 4 years of school.

Mean Scale Scores Tracked Over Time: 2006 - 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

71The percentage of Hispanic male students scoring in Level 3 & 4 increased considerably as they moved through school over the 4 years, except for this year’s 8th graders. And all students are achieving at higher levels than Hispanic students did in those same grades 4 years ago.

53

.9%

51

.9%

49

.7%

39

.8%

35

.2%

26

.5%

47

.0%

47

.7%

48

.2%

41

.4%

35

.2%

32

.5%

59

.9%

52

.6% 63

.2%

43

.9%

49

.0%

31

.7%

59

.0%

61

.6% 69

.9%

65

.7%

63

.2%

47

.6%


2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

72

65

2

64

8

64

5

63

7

63

2

62

9

64

6

64

4

64

7

64

4

63

4

63

3

65

1

64

7 65

5

64

6

64

7

63

6

65

4

65

4 66

3

65

6

65

4

64

5


2006 2007 2008 2009

The average scores of Hispanic males also increased as they moved through school over the 4 years – except for this year’s 8th graders.


3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

732009 ELA American Indian/ Alaskan Native Males

47

.0%

48

.9%

50

.4%

40

.8%

36

.9%

27

.6%

52

.8%

51

.4%

51

.5%

47

.1%

35

.1%

36

.5%

51

.6%

56

.2% 65

.4%

50

.8%

51

.9%

34

.5%

60

.7%

63

.9% 73

.7%

70

.7%

69

.8%

48

.5%


2006 2007 2008 2009

Results Tracked Over Time: 2006 - 2009


3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

74

64

6

64

5

64

8

63

7

63

4

63

0

65

3

64

8

65

1

64

9

63

7

63

8

65

5

65

0 65

8

64

8

65

1

63

8

65

5

65

5

66

7

65

6

65

6

64

8


2006 2007 2008 2009

Grades 3-8 ELA: American Indian/ Alaskan Native MalesMean Scale Scores Tracked Over Time: 2006 - 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

75The percentage of White male students scoring in Level 3 & 4 as they moved through school shows the gains are often smaller than for Black and Hispanic male students. But overall performance is still higher than for Blacks and Hispanics.

7

3.3

%

74

.0%

75

.1%

68

.1%

65

.3%

55

.4%

75

.2%

76

.4%

78

.1%

72

.1%

65

.6%

64

.8%7

8.6

%

77

.3%

84

.8%

75

.4%

76

.2%

61

.8%

80

.2%

82

.3%

88

.4%

86

.0%

87

.1%

75

.1%


2006 2007 2008 2009 Results Tracked Over Time: 2006 - 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

76

67

2

66

9

66

9

66

2

65

9

65

5

67

5

67

1

67

3

66

6

66

0

66

1

67

6

67

0

67

2

66

5

66

5

66

0

67

4

67

3

68

1

66

8 67

1

66

4


2006 2007 2008 2009

The average score of this year’s 6th and 8th grade White male students has not improved as they moved through school over the 4 years. The average score of this year’s 7th graders has improved very little. But all students are achieving at higher levels than students in those grades did 4 years ago.

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

77The percentage of Asian male students scoring in Level 3 & 4 as they move through school shows the gains are often smaller than for Black and Hispanic male students. But overall performance is still higher than for Blacks and Hispanics.

82

.4%

81

.1%

78

.1%

73

.8%

68

.2%

61

.6%7

5.5

%

76

.6%

77

.0%

71

.8%

66

.7%

64

.5%7

6.9

%

80

.1%

83

.9%

74

.3%

75

.9%

64

.6%

85

.0%

84

.0%

87

.8%

87

.1%

84

.7%

75

.0%


2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

78

68

1

67

8

67

5

66

9

66

4

66

1

67

5

67

3

67

3

66

9

66

1

66

2

67

5

67

5

67

4

66

6

66

7

66

1

67

8

67

8 68

4

67

4

67

2

66

6


2006 2007 2008 2009

The average score of each class of Asian males has declined, except for this year’s 4th and 5th graders. But all students are achieving at higher levels than their counterparts 4 years ago.


3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

79The percentage of Black female students scoring in Level 3 & 4 has increased considerably as they moved through school over the 4 years. And all students are achieving at higher levels than Black females did in those same grades 4 years ago.

56

.5%

56

.2%

53

.4%

46

.5%

40

.6%

34

.0%

56

.3%

56

.4%

54

.3%

49

.8%

45

.1%

43

.4%

60

.6%

62

.6%

67

.6%

55

.8%

62

.5%

44

.9%

69

.9%

69

.8%

73

.5%

74

.7%

72

.7%

59

.1%


2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

80

65

6

65

5

65

0

64

4

63

9

63

7

65

5

65

5

65

4

65

2

64

6

64

5

66

0

65

7

65

8

65

4

65

6

64

9

66

3

66

3

66

5

66

1

66

0

65

4


2006 2007 2008 2009

The average scores of Black females also increased as they moved through school over the 4 years.


3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

81The percentage of Hispanic female students scoring in Level 3 & 4 increased considerably as they moved through school over the 4 years, except for this year’s 8th graders. And all students are achieving at higher levels than Hispanic female students did in those same grades 4 years ago.

64

.0%

59

.2%

55

.2%

47

.0%

41

.9%

36

.4%

54

.5%

54

.1%

51

.9%

48

.2%

44

.9%

42

.8%

56

.7%

61

.3%

67

.5%

52

.4% 60

.3%

43

.2%

68

.7%

68

.2%

73

.4%

73

.8%

70

.7%

57

.8%


2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

82

66

3

65

7

65

1

64

5

64

1

63

9

65

4

65

2

65

1

65

1

64

4

64

3

65

6

65

6

65

8

65

2

65

5

64

6

66

2

66

1 66

6

66

1

65

9

65

3


2006 2007 2008 2009

The average scores of Hispanic females now in middle school increased slightly as they moved through school over the 4 years; this year’s 5th and 6th graders made bigger gains. And all students are achieving at higher levels Hispanic females did in those same grades 4 years ago.

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

83The percentage of White female students scoring in Level 3 & 4 as they moved from one grade to the next through 4 years of school shows the gains are often smaller than for Black and Hispanic female students. But overall performance is still higher than for Blacks and Hispanics.

81

.2%

80

.4%

79

.6%

75

.1%

71

.7%

67

.0%

81

.7%

82

.4%

82

.0%

78

.8%

75

.4%

76

.1%

82

.9%

84

.3%

87

.9%

82

.5%

84

.7%

75

.1%8

7.6

%

87

.8%

91

.7%

91

.1%

91

.9%

83

.6%


2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

84

68

2

67

8

67

5

67

1

66

6

66

7

68

3

68

0

67

8

67

5

67

0

67

2

68

1

68

1

67

7

67

3

67

3

67

3

68

2

68

2 68

5

67

6

67

7

67

3


2006 2007 2008 2009

The average score of this year’s 6th, 7th, and 8th grade White females has not increased as they have moved through school over the 4 years. It has increased modestly for this year’s 4th and 5th graders. But all White females are achieving at higher levels than White females in those same grades did 4 years ago.

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

85The percentage of Asian female students scoring in Level 3 & 4 as they move through school shows the gains are often smaller than for Black and Hispanic female students. But overall performance is very high and higher than for Blacks and Hispanics.

8

7.9

%

85

.9%

84

.4%

80

.5%

76

.2%

73

.0%82

.6%

83

.0%

80

.8%

79

.5%

75

.5%

74

.9%

82

.8%

86

.2%

88

.1%

81

.5%

84

.5%

75

.9%8

9.8

%

89

.4%

90

.8%

92

.3%

89

.8%

84

.4%


2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

86

69

0

68

5

68

1

67

8

67

2

67

2

68

3

68

2

67

8

67

9

67

1

67

3

68

1 68

5

67

9

67

4 67

7

67

5

68

6

68

7

68

7

68

4

67

8

67

7


2006 2007 2008 2009

The average score of each class of Asian females has declined, except for this year’s 4th and 5th graders. But all students are achieving at higher levels than their counterparts 4 years ago.

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

872009 ELA American Indian/ Alaskan Native Females

51

.7% 60

.6%

56

.7%

51

.3%

48

.7%

41

.6%

59

.5%

57

.2%

62

.0%

56

.2%

53

.0%

52

.7%6

5.4

%

67

.1%

69

.7%

64

.6%

66

.7%

50

.8%

70

.6%

73

.9%

79

.8%

77

.5%

78

.6%

63

.0%


2006 2007 2008 2009

Results Tracked Over Time: 2006 - 2009


3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

88

65

5

65

7

65

3

64

7

64

5

64

3

65

8

65

6

65

8

65

6

64

9 65

366

1

66

0

66

0

65

9

65

9

65

0

66

3

66

6 67

2

66

3

66

2

65

7


2006 2007 2008 2009

Grades 3-8 ELA: American Indian/ Alaskan Native Females


3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

89

A similar picture emerges in the Urban-Suburban High Need Districts.

61

.4%

61

.7%

58

.8%

51

.2%

44

.7%

38

.3%

59

.9%

60

.9%

60

.7%

54

.7%

46

.9%

47

.1%

63

.7%

64

.7%

71

.0%

59

.2%

61

.0%

44

.8%

68

.9%

72

.1%

78

.1%

75

.9%

73

.1%

58

.0%


2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

86 7 8

90

66

0

65

8

65

4

64

7

64

2

64

0

65

9

65

7

65

8

65

4

64

6

64

6

66

2

65

8

66

1

65

5

65

5

64

7

66

3

66

3 66

9

66

2

66

0

65

3


2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

In the Urban- Suburban High Need districts, average student scores have also increased slowly as students moved through school over the past 4 years. Students this year are scoring higher than did students in those same grades 4 years ago.

91

Grades 3-8 ELA: Rural NRC

65

.3%

62

.5%

63

.5%

56

.0%

51

.3%

44

.7%

65

.9%

67

.1%

68

.9%

62

.7%

54

.7%

54

.9%6

8.6

%

68

.8% 77

.1%

67

.3%

68

.6%

52

.4%

72

.9%

73

.8% 83

.8%

80

.6%

80

.9%

66

.6%


2006 2007 2008 2009

Results Tracked Over Time: 2006 - 2009Percentage of Students Scoring at Levels 3 and 4

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

86 7 8

92

66

3

65

8

65

7

65

1

64

7

64

6

66

4

66

2

66

4

65

9

65

2

65

3

66

5

66

2

66

5

66

0

66

0

65

3

66

5

66

5

67

4

66

5

66

5

65

8


2006 2007 2008 2009


3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

Grades 3-8 ELA: Rural NRC

93In Average Need districts, the percentage of students scoring in Level 3 & 4 as they moved through school shows the gains are often smaller than for some High Need districts. But overall performance is still higher than for High Need districts.

74

.7%

75

.3%

74

.9%

68

.8%

65

.8%

57

.9%

76

.1%

77

.1%

77

.7%

73

.0%

67

.3%

68

.2%78

.2%

78

.5%

84

.3%

76

.7%

78

.2%

65

.3%

81

.4%

83

.1%

88

.4%

87

.2%

88

.0%

77

.4%


2006 2007 2008 2009Percentage of Students Scoring

at Levels 3 and 4

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

86 7 8

94

67

4

67

1

66

9

66

3

66

0

65

7

67

5

67

2

67

3

66

8

66

2

66

4

67

6

67

3

67

1

66

7

66

7

66

3

67

4

67

5 68

1

67

1

67

2

66

6


2006 2007 2008 2009

In Average Need districts, the average score of this year’s 6th and 8th grade students has not improved as they moved through school over the past 4 years. The average score of this year’s 7th graders has improved very little. But all students (except this year’s 3rd graders) are achieving at higher levels than students in those grades did 4 years ago.

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

95

What About Comparing The Same Grades?

• Because we have 4 years of grade 3-8 tests, we can now compare classes of students over time as they progress through school.

• However, in the past we were able to look only at specific grade levels and how they compared from year to year (for example, grade 3 each year).

• What follows is another look at grade levels from year to year.

96Among students in low-income families, the percentage scoring at Level 3 & 4 has increased significantly over time as this year’s 5th, 6th, and 7th graders have moved from one grade to the next through the past 4 years of school.

60

.7%

59

.1%

56

.7%

48

.6%

43

.0%

35

.0%

54

.1%

55

.0%

55

.8%

48

.5%

41

.6%

42

.4%

57

.3%

58

.6% 67

.1%

51

.6%

56

.8%

39

.8%

65

.9%

66

.5%

73

.4%

71

.5%

69

.7%

54

.5%


2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

86 7 8

97

66

0

65

6

65

2

64

6

64

1

63

9

65

3

65

1

65

3

65

0

64

1

64

2

65

6

65

3 65

8

65

1

65

3

64

4

66

0

65

9 66

6 67

0

65

8

65

1


2006 2007 2008 2009

3 3 54 565 63 4 73


4 6 75 8

Grade 3 in 2006

Class of 2015

Grade 4 in 2006

Class of 2014

4

Grade 5 in 2006

Class of 2013

6 7 88 7

Grade 6 in 2006

Class of 2012

Grade 7 in 2006

Class of 2011

Grade 8 in 2006

Class of 2010

8

650

Among students in low-income families, the average scale score has significantly increased over time as this year’s 5th and 6th (but not this year’s 7th or 8th) graders have moved from one grade to the next through 4 years of school.

Grade 3-8 English Language Arts Results 2009

Documents

Transcript of Grade 3-8 English Language Arts Results 2009