Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Keystone Exam and PSSA Achievement Scores: 2015-2016EASD
SEPTEMBER 12, 2016
Transition Timeline for the PA Core-Aligned PSSA
September 2013: The State Board of Education adopts final standards for ELA and Mathematics to meet PA Core.
November 2013: An Independent Regulatory Review Commission approves final revisions from Chapter 4, including the PA Core Standards.
March 2014: PA Core Standards are published in PA Bulletin and become part of Chapter 4 regulations.
April 2015: PA administers the new PA Core-aligned PSSAs in Grades 3-8 in ELA and Mathematics.
June 2015: A team of 58 PA educators meets to engage in standard setting of cutoff scores.
July 2015: New cutoff scores for proficiency are approved.
Key Points Released by PDE
The assessment in 2015-2016 was the second year the more rigorous PA Core Standards were assessed by the PSSA in Grades 3-8.
A thorough transition to the new standards requires time to develop new curriculum, train teachers, and provide resources to support the new curriculum.
Other states have experienced similar results when making the transition to more rigorous standards.
While the transition to PA Core is ongoing, the 2016 statewide data reinforces the notion that the longer students are educated using the new standards, the better they will perform on the assessment. (For example, the 2016 third graders performed better in Math than the 2015 cohort of third graders because they began using the PA Core at an earlier age.)
2016 Math PSSA Scores
MATH2016 Advanced + Proficient Math
PA % EASD % DifferenceGrade 3 54 65 +11Grade 4 46 58 +12Grade 5 44 54 +10Grade 6 41 45 +4Grade 7 37 43 +6Grade 8 31 45 +14
2015-2016 Math PSSA Average Comparison
Comparison of Percentage of EASD Advanced and Proficient to Percentage of State Advanced and Proficient 2015 & 2016
Math
2015 Advanced + Proficient 2016 Advanced + ProficientPA % EASD % Difference PA % EASD % Difference
Grade 3 49 67 +18 54 65 +11Grade 4 45 54 +9 46 58 +12Grade 5 43 57 +14 44 54 +10Grade 6 40 50 +10 41 45 +4Grade 7 33 48 +15 37 43 +6Grade 8 30 36 +6 31 45 +14
2016 ELA PSSA Scores
ELA
2016 Advanced + Proficient Reading
PA % EASD % DifferenceGrade 3 60 70 +10Grade 4 58 72 +14Grade 5 61 68 +7Grade 6 61 74 +13Grade 7 61 59 -2Grade 8 58 64 +6
2015-2016 ELA PSSA Average Comparison
Comparison of Percentage of EASD Advanced and Proficient to Percentage of State Advanced and Proficient 2015 & 2016
ELA
2015 Advanced + Proficient 2016 Advanced + ProficientPA % EASD % Difference PA % EASD % Difference
Grade 3 62 77 +15 60 70 +10Grade 4 59 68 +9 58 72 +14Grade 5 62 73 +11 61 68 +7Grade 6 61 64 +3 61 74 +13Grade 7 59 67 +8 61 59 -2Grade 8 58 58 0 58 64 +6
2015-2016 Science PSSA Average Comparison
Comparison of Percentage of EASD Advanced and Proficient to Percentage of State Advanced and Proficient 2015 & 2016
SCIENCE2015 Advanced + Proficient 2016 Advanced + Proficient
PA % EASD % Difference PA % EASD % DifferenceGrade 4 49 67 +18 76 88 +10Grade 8 45 54 +9 57 71 +14
Algebra I Keystone
Comparison of Percentage of EASD Advanced and Proficient to Percentage of State Advanced and Proficient 2015 & 2016
ALG
2015 Advanced + Proficient 2016 Advanced + ProficientPA % EASD % Difference PA % EASD % Difference
All EMS N/A 100 N/A N/A 100 N/A
Grade 11 N/A 88 N/A 68 85 +17
ELA Keystone
Comparison of Percentage of EASD Advanced and Proficient to Percentage of State Advanced and Proficient 2015 & 2016
LIT
2015 Advanced + Proficient 2016 Advanced + ProficientPA % EASD % Difference PA % EASD % Difference
Grade 11 N/A 85 N/A 76 86 +10
Biology Keystone
Comparison of Percentage of EASD Advanced and Proficient to Percentage of State Advanced and Proficient 2015 & 2016
BIO
2015 Advanced + Proficient 2016 Advanced + ProficientPA % EASD % Difference PA % EASD % Difference
Grade 11 N/A 78 N/A 65 78 +13
What the Data Means to EASD
2015-2016 achievement scores can be compared to last year’s scores to identify strengths and weaknesses, but only when they are combined with growth scores will we have a complete performance picture.
We need to continue to look deep into the data to determine where our curriculum and instructional needs exist.
We need to celebrate our successes and improve upon our weaknesses.
This is only one measure of data that we use to determine our success, and we need to weigh this data against other information that is collected.