Massachusetts Mathematics and Science Partnership Title IIB
Annual State-level Evaluation Report Appendices
Cumulative Reporting Period: February 2, 2004, through August 31, 2011
Prepared for the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and
Secondary Education
July 2012
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Tables
Contents
Appendix A: Participant Background Survey – September 2010–August 2011 ................................... 3
Appendix B: Timeline for State-level Evaluation and TA Activities ..................................................... 11
Appendix C: Results of the Participant Background Survey for 2008–2011 ...................................... 14
Appendix D: High Need District Eligibility Criteria ................................................................................ 26
Appendix E: Enrollment and Attrition Rates by Course ....................................................................... 32
Appendix F: Subject Matter Competency Demonstration Options ..................................................... 40
Appendix G: Mean Percentage Scores for Pre- & Post-course Tests ................................................. 41
Appendix H: High Need Districts for All Funding Periods, by Partnership ........................................ 47
Appendix I: Criteria that Account for Gain in Highly Qualified Status ................................................ 57
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix A
Appendix A: Participant Background Survey – September 2010–August 2011
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
3
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
Appendix A
4
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
Appendix A
5
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
Appendix A
6
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
Appendix A
7
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
Appendix A
8
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
Appendix A
9
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
Appendix A
10
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix B
Appendix B: Timeline for State-level Evaluation and TA Activities
The following is a summary timeline of state-level evaluation and technical assistance activities carried out between
February, 2004, and end of Year 8 of the MMSP.
February 2004 Held Kick-off Meeting for all partnerships and their evaluators at the Department of Education
Spring 2004
Conducted individual partnership meetings with local evaluators and partnership leaders to:
Review the Minimum Expectations document along with the local evaluation and data collection plan
And
Explore potential modifications to implementation plans to create opportunities for experimental or quasi
experimental design
Spring 2004
Developed common measures for state-level data collection
June 2004
Attended federal meeting held for MSP projects across the country
Summer 2004 Disseminated and collected end-of-course documents designed to collect course-level data for the
statewide evaluation
Fall 2004
Conducted individual partnership meetings with local evaluators and partnership leaders to:
Review the Minimum Expectations document along with the local evaluation and data collection plan
And
Review the Federal Reporting document to ensure the partnerships were collecting the data needed to
complete that report
Winter 2005
Conducted partnership meetings with the two new partnerships funded in the second round that
constitutes Cohort 2 to:
Introduce the Minimum Expectations document along with the local evaluation and data collection plan
And
Introduce the Federal Reporting document to ensure the partnerships were collecting the data needed to
complete that report
June 2005
Held Technical Assistance Meeting for all partnerships regarding the requirements of the USED Annual
report
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
11
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix B
June 2006
Participated in USED Annual Conference of MSP State Coordinators
August 2006
Held Technical Assistance Meeting for all partnerships regarding evaluation requirements for MMSP
Fall 2006 to
Winter 2007
Conducted partnership meetings with the new Cohort 3 partnerships to:
Introduce the Minimum Expectations document along with the local evaluation and data collection plan
And
Discuss the federal reporting requirements to ensure the partnerships were collecting the data needed to
complete federal report
December 2006 Participated in USED MSP Regional Conference
June 2007
Participated in USED Annual Conference of MSP State Coordinators
September 2007Held Technical Assistance Meeting for all partnerships regarding the requirements of the USED Annual
report
January 2008
Participated in USED MSP Regional Conference
April 2008
Participated in technical assistance workshop for bidders pursuing MSP funding for 2008-2009
April 2008
Participated in USED the Massachusetts MSP Statewide Conference
June 2008
Participated in USED MSP State Coordinators’ Meeting
October 2008
Held Technical Assistance Meeting for all partnerships regarding evaluation requirements for MMSP
Fall 2008 to
Winter 2009
Conducted partnership meetings with the new Cohort 3 partnerships to:
Discuss evaluation expectations data collection plans
And
Discuss the federal reporting requirements to ensure the partnerships were collecting the data needed to
complete federal report
March 2009
Participated in USED MSP Regional Conference
May 2009
Participated in USED the Massachusetts MSP Statewide Conference
September 2009 Participated in Technical Assistance Meeting for all partnerships regarding reporting requirements
January 2010
Participated in USED MSP Regional Conference
April 2010
Participated in technical assistance workshop for bidders pursuing MSP funding for 2010–2011
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
12
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix B
Spring 2010
Participated in continuation conferences for select partnerships
August 2010
Participated in Technical Assistance Meeting for all partnerships regarding reporting requirements
February 2011
Participated in USED MSP Regional Conference
The following activities were on going throughout the life of the project:
Disseminated and collected end-of-course documents designed to collect course-level data for the
statewide evaluation
Managed data collected from partnerships at the end of each course
Provided technical assistance to partnerships in support of local partnership evaluation efforts
Monitored local evaluation plans to see they include both formative and summative research questions
and corresponding activities
Monitored data collection and analysis around the basic logic model of professional development
Served as liaison to the U.S. Department of Education for evaluation and research issues including
participation in national meetings and periodic conference calls
Met with ESE MSP Team as needed to support integration of evaluation efforts with program goals
Until Steering Committee was disbanded, attended MMSP Steering Committee meetings in role of state
level evaluator and technical assistance
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
13
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix C
Appendix C: Results of the Participant Background Survey for 2008–2011
Cohort 4
Cohort 4
Item
2008–2011
n
%
How do you describe yourself?
American Indian or Alaskan native
Asian
Black or African American
Hispanic or Latino
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander
White
Mixed Race
Other
No Response
2
35
106
49
1
898
29
16
33
<1%
3%
9%
4%
<1%
77%
2%
1%
3%
What best describes your current primary position?
Teacher (Regular Education)
Special Education Teacher (Sole Instructor)
Special Education Inclusion Teacher
Department Head or Curriculum Coordinator
Principal/Asst. Principal/Headmaster
Support Specialist (counselor, librarian, etc.)
Long-term Substitute
Paraprofessional
Superintendent or Asst. Superintendent
ELL, ESL, or Sheltered English Immersion Teacher
Gifted or Talented Teacher
Title I Teacher
Math Coach (Non-Teaching)
Math Coach (Teaching)
Science Coach (Non-Teaching)
Science Coach (Teaching)
Instructional Technology Director
Other
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
755
120
91
8
3
4
14
6
0
59
8
9
9
20
2
4
2
43
65%
10%
8%
1%
<1%
<1%
1%
1%
0%
5%
1%
1%
1%
2%
<1%
<1%
<1%
4%
14
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix C
Cohort 4
Item
2008–2011
n
%
What grades do you currently teach?
Pre-K
Elementary and K-8
Middle School (Grades 6-8)
High School (Grades 9-12)
Middle and High School grades
Adult Education
All levels
NA (doesn’t teach)
No Response
1
411
494
224
9
0
0
19
11
<1%
35%
42%
19%
<1%
0%
0%
2%
1%
5
146
144
346
322
152
54
<1%
13%
12%
30%
28%
13%
5%
How many years have you been employed in education?
1st year
2-3 years
4-5 years
6-10 years
11-20 years
Over 20 years
0 or No Response
Note: Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding error or items in which respondents may respond to
all that apply.
Cohort 4
Item
2008–2011
n
Which of the following content areas are you currently
teaching?
Mathematics
Elementary (all subjects)
Elementary Mathematics
General Science
Biology
Physics
Earth Science
Chemistry
Any science area*
Technology/Engineering
Other
Do not teach currently
%
371
343
80
210
102
70
54
69
505
21
46
12
32%
29%
7%
18%
9%
6%
5%
6%
43%
2%
4%
1%
1129
40
97%
3%
11
10
1%
1%
In which of the following are you currently employed?
Public School/ Public Charter School
Private School
Currently hold certification through the National Board for
Professional Teaching Standards.
In Mathematics
In General Science
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
15
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix C
Cohort 4
Item
2008–2011
n
%
339
51
343
349
25
62
29%
4%
29%
30%
2%
5%
446
37
236
351
40
59
38%
3%
20%
30%
3%
5%
388
152
195
151
10
273
33%
13%
17%
13%
1%
23%
552
144
160
52
0
261
47%
12%
14%
4%
0%
22%
103
415
484
64
3
100
9%
36%
41%
6%
<1%
9%
235
450
226
95
8
155
20%
39%
19%
8%
1%
13%
Approximately how many math students do you teach annually?
0 students
1-10 students
11-40 students
41-150 students
151+ students
No Response
Approximately how many science students do you teach annually?
0 students
1-10 students
11-40 students
41-150 students
151+ students
No Response
Approximately how many students do you teach annually who are
Title I students?
0 students
1-10 students
11-40 students
41-150 students
151+ students
No Response
Approximately how many students do you teach annually who are
academically advanced students?
0 students
1-10 students
11-40 students
41-150 students
151+ students
No Response
Approximately how many students do you teach annually who are
Special Education students?
0 students
1-10 students
11-40 students
41-150 students
151+ students
No Response
Approximately how many students do you teach annually who are
English Language Learners?
0 students
1-10 students
11-40 students
41-150 students
151+ students
No Response
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
16
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix C
Cohort 4
Item
2008–2011
n
%
1252
1381
574
475
287
67%
74%
31%
25%
15%
193
10%
159
53
100
9%
3%
5%
779
389
1
67%
33%
<1%
663
374
62
45
25
57%
32%
5%
4%
2%
Why did you participate in this course? *
To obtain graduate credit
To increase knowledge in content
To pursue a personal interest
To earn PDPs for recertification
To get an additional license (certification)
To prepare for the Massachusetts Test for
Educator Licensure (MTEL)
To follow an administrator’s suggestion
To obtain a first license (certification)
Other
High Need District
Yes
No
Unknown
Highly Qualified
Yes
No
In some, but not all areas taught
Not enough information to determine
N/A (not currently teaching or private)
*Data for this item represents the number of seats filled from all courses, rather than the
number of unique participants.
Cohort 4
Item
2008–2011
n
%
How many PDP hours do you have in your content area(s)?
Less than 48 PDP hours
48 to 100 PDP hours
101 to 250 PDP hours
251+ PDP hours
No Response
Please select any of the following licenses you currently
hold.
Vocational Technical
Specialist Teacher
Supervisor/Director
Principal/Asst. Principal
Superintendent/Assistant Superintendent
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
84
49
57
44
935
7%
4%
5%
4%
80%
9
210
8
29
2
<1%
18%
1%
3%
<1%
17
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix C
Cohort 4 - 2008–2011
Item
Bachelors
n
%
Masters
n
%
CAGS
n
%
Doctorate
n
%
A degree currently held for each major.
Education
Math Education
Science Education
Math
General Science
Biology
Chemistry
Earth Science
Physics
Technology/Engineering
All science/technology combined
Other
276
22
27
70
20
117
40
14
16
31
238
334
24%
2%
2%
6%
2%
10%
3%
1%
1%
3%
20%
29%
563
43
58
10
18
17
9
3
1
11
59
138
48%
4%
5%
1%
2%
2%
1%
<1%
<1%
1%
5%
12%
14
1
1
0
2
0
0
1
0
0
3
8
1%
<1%
<1%
0%
<1%
0%
0%
<1%
0%
0%
<1%
1%
2
0
0
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
4
<1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
<1%
<1%
0%
0%
0%
<1%
8
1%
7
7
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
1
4
3
1%
1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
0%
0%
<1%
<1%
<1%
85
105
80
11
26
9
3
2
2
2
44
36
7%
9%
7%
1%
2%
1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
4%
3%
21
16
2
2
2
0
0
0
2
1
5
6
2%
1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
0%
0%
0%
<1%
<1%
<1%
1%
2%
10
3
2
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
2
2
A degree currently being pursued for each major.
Education
Math Education
Science Education
Math
General Science
Biology
Chemistry
Earth Science
Physics
Technology/Engineering
All science/technology combined
Other
1%
<1%
<1%
0%
0%
<1%
0%
0%
0%
<1%
<1%
<1%
Cohort 4 - 2008–2011
Item
MTEL
Taken
n
%
MTEL
Passed
n
%
Scores
Unknown
n
%
MTEL tests taken
General Curriculum (formerly Elementary)
Elementary Math
Early Childhood
Mathematics
Middle School Mathematics
Middle School Mathematics/Science
General Science
Biology
Chemistry
Physics
Earth Science
Technology/Engineering
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
237
60
37
107
170
52
123
73
58
35
16
7
20%
5%
3%
9%
15%
4%
10%
6%
5%
3%
1%
<1%
231
49
25
91
147
26
119
70
45
25
10
3
20%
4%
2%
8%
13%
2%
10%
6%
4%
2%
1%
<1%
0
1
1
4
9
5
6
2
3
1
3
3
0%
1%
<1%
<1%
1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
<1%
18
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix C
Cohort 4
2008–2011
Item
n
%
10
3
48
104
8
50
27
15
17
469
77
47
39
20
160
9
113
54
202
30
5
12
194
1%
<1%
4%
9%
1%
4%
2%
1%
2%
40%
7%
4%
3%
2%
14%
1%
10%
5%
17%
3%
<1%
3%
17%
7%
1%
<1%
License Areas
Academically Advanced PreK-8
Adult Basic Education
Biology 5-8
Biology 8-12
Chemistry 5-8
Chemistry 8-12
Early Childhood PreK-2
Earth Science 5-8
Earth Science 8-12
Elementary 1-6
Elementary Mathematics 1-6
ELL PreK-6
ELL 5-12
General Science 1-6
General Science 5-8
Instructional Technology
Mathematics 8-12
Middle School
Middle School Mathematics 5-8
Middle School Math/Science 5-8
Physics 5-8
Physics 8-12
Students w/ Moderate Disability PreK-8
Students w/ Moderate Disability 5-12
Students w/ Severe Disability
Technology/Engineering 5-12
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
86
15
5
19
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix C
Cohort 5
Cohort 5
Item
2010–2011
n
%
How do you describe yourself?
American Indian or Alaskan native
Asian
Black or African American
Hispanic or Latino
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander
White
Mixed Race
Other
What best describes your current primary position?
Teacher (Regular Education)
Special Education Teacher (Sole Instructor)
Special Education Inclusion Teacher
Other
Principal/Asst. Principal/Headmaster
Support Specialist (counselor, librarian, etc.)
Long-term Substitute
Paraprofessional
ELL, ESL, or Sheltered English Immersion Teacher
Gifted or Talented Teacher
Math Coach (Non-Teaching)
Math Coach (Teaching)
Science Coach (Non-Teaching)
Science Coach (Teaching)
Dept. Head or Curriculum Coordinator
Instructional Technology Director
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
0
8
5
2
0
104
1
3
96
11
6
2
3
0
0
0
4
0
1
1
0
0
3
0
0%
6%
4%
2%
0%
82%
1%
2%
76%
9%
5%
2%
2%
0%
0%
0%
3%
0%
1%
1%
0%
0%
2%
0%
20
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix C
Cohort 5
Item
2010–2011
n
%
What grades do you currently teach?
Pre-K
Elementary and K-8
Middle School (Grades 6-8)
High School (Grades 9-12)
Middle School and High School
NA (doesn’t teach)
No Response
0
21
38
63
2
1
2
0%
17%
30%
50%
2%
1%
2%
0
10
16
39
40
15
7
0%
8%
13%
31%
32%
12%
6%
How many years have you been employed in education?
1st year
2-3 years
4-5 years
6-10 years
11-20 years
Over 20 years
0 or No Response
Note: Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding error or items in which respondents may respond to
all that apply.
Cohort 5
Item
Which of the following content areas are you currently
teaching?
Mathematics
Elementary (all subjects)
Elementary Mathematics
General Science
Biology
Physics
Earth Science
Chemistry
Technology/Engineering
Any science area*
Other
Do not teach currently
2010–2011
n
%
68
16
3
17
19
8
5
7
4
42
4
8
54%
13%
2%
13%
15%
6%
4%
6%
3%
33%
3%
6%
121
6
95%
5%
1
0
1%
0%
In which of the following are you currently employed?
Public School (includes public charter schools)
Non-public School
Currently hold certification through the National Board for
Professional Teaching Standards.
In Mathematics
In General Science
*Number of unique participants teaching in any science area.
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
21
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix C
Cohort 5
Item
2010–2011
n
%
37
4
16
62
3
5
29%
3%
13%
49%
2%
4%
64
2
20
34
2
5
50%
2%
16%
27%
2%
4%
52
5
13
12
2
43
41%
4%
10%
9%
2%
34%
52
12
31
10
0
22
41%
9%
24%
8%
0%
17%
10
35
63
14
0
5
8%
28%
50%
11%
0%
4%
16
43
37
17
3
11
13%
34%
29%
13%
2%
9%
Approximately how many math students do you teach annually?
0 students
1-10 students
11-40 students
41-150 students
151+ students
No Response
Approximately how many science students do you teach annually?
0 students
1-10 students
11-40 students
41-150 students
151+ students
No Response
Approximately how many students do you teach annually who are
Title I students?
0 students
1-10 students
11-40 students
41-150 students
151+ students
No Response
Approximately how many students do you teach annually who are
academically advanced students?
0 students
1-10 students
11-40 students
41-150 students
151+ students
No Response
Approximately how many students do you teach annually who are
Special Education students?
0 students
1-10 students
11-40 students
41-150 students
151+ students
No Response
Approximately how many students do you teach annually who are
English Language Learners?
0 students
1-10 students
11-40 students
41-150 students
151+ students
No Response
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
22
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix C
Cohort 5
Item
2010–2011
n
%
90
104
56
46
20
64%
74%
40%
33%
14%
12
9%
7
5
9
5%
4%
6%
93
28
6
73%
22%
5%
Why did you participate in this course? *
To obtain graduate credit
To increase knowledge in content
To pursue a personal interest
To earn PDPs for recertification
To get an additional license (certification)
To prepare for the Massachusetts Test for
Educator Licensure (MTEL)
To follow an administrator’s suggestion
To obtain a first license (certification)
Other
High Need District
Yes
No
Unknown or N/A
Highly Qualified
Yes
No
In some, but not all areas taught
Not enough information to determine
Private School (not included)
Not applicable (not currently teaching)
73
40
12
2
0
0
58%
32%
9%
2%
0%
0%
*Data for this item represents the number of seats filled from all courses, rather than the
number of unique participants.
Cohort 5
Item
2010–2011
n
%
How many PDP hours do you have in your content area(s)?
(SPED and ELL teachers only)
Less than 48 PDP hours
48 to 100 PDP hours
101 to 250 PDP hours
251+ PDP hours
No Response
Please select any of the following licenses you currently
hold.
Vocational Technical
Specialist Teacher
Supervisor/Director
Principal/Asst. Principal
Superintendent/Assistant Superintendent
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
5
2
4
3
113
4%
2%
3%
2%
89%
3
35
4
9
1
2%
28%
3%
7%
1%
23
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix C
Cohort 5 2010–2011
Item
Bachelors
n
%
Masters
n
%
CAGS
n
%
Doctorate
n
%
A degree currently held for each major.
Education
Math Education
Science Education
Math
General Science
Biology
Chemistry
Earth Science
Physics
Technology/Engineering
All science/technology combined
Other
22
9
1
29
1
15
0
2
4
8
30
40
17%
7%
1%
23%
1%
12%
0%
2%
3%
6%
24%
32%
52
21
1
3
1
1
0
0
0
2
4
19
41%
17%
1%
2%
1%
1%
0%
0%
0%
2%
3%
15%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
1%
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
1%
0%
0%
0%
1%
2
2%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
1%
0%
1%
0%
9
6
11
6
3
1
0
0
0
0
4
4
7%
5%
9%
5%
2%
1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
3%
3%
2
1
0
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
2%
1%
0%
2%
1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
1%
1%
2%
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
A degree currently being pursued for each major.
Education
Math Education
Science Education
Math
General Science
Biology
Chemistry
Earth Science
Physics
Technology/Engineering
All science/technology combined
Other
2%
1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
1%
Cohort 5 2010–2011
Item
MTEL
Taken
n
%
MTEL
Passed
n
%
Scores
Unknown
n
%
MTEL tests taken
General Curriculum (formerly Elementary)
Elementary Math
Early Childhood
Mathematics
Middle School Mathematics
Middle School Mathematics/Science
General Science
Biology
Chemistry
Physics
Earth Science
Technology/Engineering
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
14
4
4
28
17
5
9
12
4
2
1
0
11%
3%
3%
22%
13%
4%
7%
9%
3%
2%
1%
0%
14
4
3
25
16
4
9
12
1
1
0
0
11%
3%
2%
20%
13%
3%
7%
9%
1%
1%
0%
0%
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0%
0%
1%
0%
0%
1%
0%
0%
0%
1%
0%
0%
24
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix C
Cohort 5
2010–2011
Item
n
%
0
0
5
16
0
2
2
1
3
31
6
5
3
2
15
4
44
6
34
2
1
3
11
9
1
0
0%
0%
4%
13%
0%
2%
2%
1%
2%
24%
5%
4%
2%
2%
12%
3%
35%
5%
27%
2%
1%
2%
9%
7%
1%
0%
License Areas
Academically Advanced PreK-8
Adult Basic Education
Biology 5-8
Biology 8-12
Chemistry 5-8
Chemistry 8-12
Early Childhood PreK-2
Earth Science 5-8
Earth Science 8-12
Elementary 1-6
Elementary Mathematics 1-6
ELL PreK-6
ELL 5-12
General Science 1-6
General Science 5-8
Instructional Technology
Mathematics 8-12
Middle School
Middle School Mathematics 5-8
Middle School Math/Science 5-8
Physics 5-8
Physics 8-12
Students w/ Moderate Disability PreK-8
Students w/ Moderate Disability 5-12
Students w/ Severe Disability
Technology/Engineering 5-12
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
25
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix D
Appendix D: High Need District Eligibility Criteria
High Need Districts (See list below.):
1.
For proposals with a mathematics content focus: A district is considered to be a high need district if it has a
mathematics proficiency index for grades 4-8 that is below the state target for Cycle II for MMSP Year 1projects or
below the state target for Cycle III for MMSP Year 2 projects. Priority will be given to high need districts with two or
more schools identified for improvement in mathematics.
2. For proposals with a science and/or technology/engineering content focus: A district is considered to be a high need
district if it has a science proficiency index for grades 5-8 in 2003 that is at or below the 20th percentile for the state.
In addition, a high need district must demonstrate that there is a high number or percentage of teachers in the district who are
teaching in the academic subject or grade level for which they have not demonstrated subject matter competency through
licensure or completion of the professional development activities in their HOUSSE plans.
An interested district that is not identified as high need is encouraged to contact a high need district to explore becoming a
partner in the proposed program (e.g., vocational technical schools are encouraged to contact feeder school districts).
MA FY2004 High Need Districts
DISTRICT
AVON
BARNSTABLE
BOSTON
BROCKTON
CAMBRIDGE
CHELSEA
CHICOPEE
CLARKSBURG
EASTHAMPTON
EVERETT
FAIRHAVEN
FALL RIVER
FITCHBURG
FLORIDA
GARDNER
GREENFIELD
HAVERHILL
HOLBROOK
HOLYOKE
HULL
LAWRENCE
LOWELL
LYNN
MALDEN
MEDFORD
METHUEN
NEW BEDFORD
NORTH ADAMS
PITTSFIELD
PROVINCETOWN
RANDOLPH
REVERE
SALEM
SOMERVILLE
SOUTHBRIDGE
SPRINGFIELD
TAUNTON
WALTHAM
WARE
MATH



























UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
SCIENCE
T/E






































DISTRICT
WAREHAM
WEBSTER
WEST SPRINGFIELD
WESTFIELD
WINCHENDON
WINTHROP
WORCESTER
ABBY KELLEY FOSTER CS
ATLANTIS CS
BENJAMIN BANNEKER CS
BOSTON RENAISSANCE CS
CONSERVATORY LAB CS
EDWARD BROOKE CS
FREDERICK DOUGLASS CS
LAWRENCE FAMILY DEV CS
LOWELL COMMUNITY CS
NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE CS
NEW BEDFORD GLOBAL CS
NEW LEADERSHIP HMCS
NORTH CENTRAL REG CS
ROBERT M. HUGHES CS
SABIS INTERNATIONAL CS
SEVEN HILLS CS
SOMERVILLE CS
UPHAMS CORNER CS
ATHOL-ROYALSTON RSD
BERKSHIRE HILLS RSD
FRONTIER RSD
GILL-MONTAGUE RSD
HAMPSHIRE RSD
HAWLEMONT RSD
MOUNT GREYLOCK RSD
RALPH C MAHAR RSD
MATH





















SCIENCE
T/E































26
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix D
MA FY2005 High Need Districts
DISTRICT
Grade 5
ATTLEBORO
SCI
Grade 8 Grades 4SCI
8 Math


AVON
BOSTON



BOURNE

BROCKTON
CAMBRIDGE






CHELSEA



CHICOPEE



CLARKSBURG



DEDHAM

DRACUT

EAST BRIDGEWATER

EASTHAMPTON

EVERETT



FAIRHAVEN
FALL RIVER



FITCHBURG



FLORIDA

GARDNER

HAVERHILL


GREENFIELD



HOLBROOK
HOLYOKE


HULL


LAWRENCE



LEOMINSTER

LOWELL



LYNN



MALDEN



MEDFORD


METHUEN


NEW BEDFORD



NORTH ADAMS



ORANGE

OXFORD

QUINCY

PITTSFIELD

RANDOLPH

REVERE




Grade 5
Grade 8 Grades 4-
SCI
SCI
8 Math
SOUTHBRIDGE



SPRINGFIELD
TAUNTON
WALTHAM
WARE
WAREHAM
WEBSTER
WESTFIELD
WINCHENDON
WINTHROP
WORCESTER
ACADEMY OF STRATEGIC CS
BENJAMIN BANNEKER CS
FREDERICK DOUGLASS CS
EDWARD BROOKE CS
CONSERVATORY LAB CS
COMMUNITY DAY CS
SABIS INTERNATIONAL CS
NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE CS
ABBY KELLEY FOSTER REG CS
SO.BOSTON HARBOR ACAD CS
ROBERT M. HUGHES ACAD CS
LAWRENCE FAMILY DEV. CS
LOWELL COMMUNITY CS
NEW LEADERSHIP HMCS
NEW BEDFORD GLOBAL HMCS
NORTH CENTRAL CS
BOSTON RENAISSANCE CS
SEVEN HILLS CS
SOMERVILLE CS
PROSPECT HILL ACADEMY CS
UPHAMS CORNER CS
ATLANTIS CS
ADAMS-CHESHIRE
ATHOL-ROYALSTON
BERKSHIRE
FREETOWN-LAKEVILLE
GATEWAY
GILL-MONTAGUE
HAMPSHIRE
HAWLEMONT
NEW SALEM-WENDELL





































































ROCKLAND
SALEM



SOMERVILLE



UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
DISTRICT
27
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix D
MA FY2006 High Need Districts
DISTRICT
ATTLEBORO
Grade 5
SCIENCE

Grade 8
SCIENCE
Grades 4-8
MATH

AVON
DISTRICT
Grade 5
SCIENCE
WALTHAM

WARE

BOSTON

BOURNE

BROCKTON



WESTFIELD
CAMBRIDGE



WINCHENDON
CHELSEA



WINTHROP

CHICOPEE






WORCESTER
ACADEMY OF STRATEGIC
CS
BENJAMIN BANNEKER CS

CLARKSBURG


DRACUT


EASTHAMPTON

EVERETT

FAIRHAVEN
WAREHAM
WEBSTER
DEDHAM
EAST
BRIDGEWATER












EDWARD BROOKE CS

CONSERVATORY LAB CS

COMMUNITY DAY CS

SABIS INTERNATIONAL CS


NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE CS



FALL RIVER



FITCHBURG



ABBY KELLEY FOSTER
REGIONAL CS

SOUTH BOSTON HARBOR
ACADEMY CS


ROBERT M. HUGHES
ACADEMY CS



LAWRENCE FAMILY
DEVELOPMENT CS


LOWELL COMMUNITY CS

FLORIDA

GARDNER

GREENFIELD
HAVERHILL


HOLBROOK

HOLYOKE


HULL


LAWRENCE


LEOMINSTER

LOWELL



LYNN



NORTH CENTRAL CS
MALDEN



BOSTON RENAISSANCE CS

MEDFORD


SEVEN HILLS CS

METHUEN


SOMERVILLE CS
PROSPECT HILL ACADEMY
CS

UPHAMS CORNER CS

ATLANTIS CS

ADAMS-CHESHIRE RSD

ATHOL-ROYALSTON RSD


NEW BEDFORD



NORTH ADAMS



ORANGE

OXFORD
QUINCY


PITTSFIELD

RANDOLPH

REVERE

ROCKLAND
SALEM









SOUTHBRIDGE



SPRINGFIELD



TAUNTON


SOMERVILLE
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
Grades 4-8
MATH


FREDERICK DOUGLASS CS

Grade 8
SCIENCE




NEW LEADERSHIP HMCS


NEW BEDFORD GLOBAL
HMCS












BERKSHIRE HILLS RSD
FREETOWN-LAKEVILLE RSD

GATEWAY RSD

GILL-MONTAGUE RSD

HAMPSHIRE RSD

HAWLEMONT RSD
NEW SALEM-WENDELL RSD




28
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix D
MA FY2007 High Need Districts
DISTRICT
Science/Tech.
Engineering
ATTLEBORO
Math

BOSTON

BROCKTON

BROOKFIELD
Science/Tech.
Engineering
Math
REVERE

ROCKLAND


SALEM


SAUGUS


SEEKONK


BARNSTABLE
DISTRICT
CAMBRIDGE


SOMERVILLE
CHELSEA


SOUTHAMPTON
CHICOPEE

SOUTHBRIDGE
CLINTON

SOUTH HADLEY
DOUGLAS

SPRINGFIELD
EASTHAMPTON

STOUGHTON

ERVING

TAUNTON

EVERETT

WALTHAM

FAIRHAVEN

WARE

FALL RIVER

WAREHAM

WEBSTER
FRAMINGHAM

WESTFIELD

FREETOWN

WESTPORT

GARDNER

WEST SPRINGFIELD

GLOUCESTER

WINCHENDON

GRANVILLE

WINTHROP

GREENFIELD

WORCESTER
HAVERHILL

EXCEL ACADEMY CS

HOLBROOK

FOUR RIVERS CS

HOLYOKE

BERKSHIRE ARTS CS


ACADEMY OF STRATEGIC
CS
FITCHBURG


HUDSON
LAWRENCE


LEE

LEICESTER



















METHUEN

MIDDLEBOROUGH

MONSON

NAHANT





NORTHAMPTON

NORTH BROOKFIELD

NORTON

OXFORD

PALMER

PITTSFIELD

QUINCY
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group


MASHPEE
RANDOLPH



NORTH ADAMS

CONSERVATORY LAB CS
SABIS INTERNATIONAL
CS
ROBERT M. HUGHES
ACAD CS
LAWRENCE FAMILY DEV
CS
LOWELL COMMUNITY CS
MALDEN
NEW BEDFORD


LUDLOW
LYNN

MURDOCH MIDDLE CS
LEOMINSTER
LOWELL
SMITH LEADERSHIP
ACAD CS
BENJAMIN BANNEKER CS

NEW LEADERSHIP HMCS
NEW BEDFORD GLOBAL
CS
NORTH CENTRAL CS










PIONEER VALLEY
PERFORMING
BOSTON RENAISSANCE
CS
SALEM ACADEMY CS






SEVEN HILLS CS
PROSPECT HILL ACAD
CS
SOUTH SHORE CS

UPHAMS CORNER CS





29
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
DISTRICT
Science/Tech.
Engineering
Math
ATLANTIS CS

ADAMS-CHESHIRE REG.

ATHOL-ROYALSTON

BERKSHIRE HILLS

FREETOWN-LAKEVILLE

GATEWAY

GILL-MONTAGUE

HAMPSHIRE

MOHAWK TRAIL

NARRAGANSETT

PIONEER VALLEY

RALPH C MAHAR

SILVER LAKE

UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
Appendix D
30
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix D
MA FY2008 and FY2009 High Need Districts
MA FY2009 and FY2010 High Need Districts (same as MA FY2008 and FY2009 High Need Districts)
Criteria: A high-need district in science and technology/engineering is a district that has a grade 8 and a high school science
CPI of less than 60. A high-need district in mathematics is a district that has been identified for corrective action in
mathematics, or districts with one or more Commonwealth Priority Schools identified for mathematics.
DISTRICT
Science
Math


NEW BEDFORD

NORTH ADAMS
BOSTON
BRIDGEWATER-RAYNHAM
DISTRICT
Science
Math



BROCKTON


NORTH BROOKFIELD
CAMBRIDGE


PEABODY
CHICOPEE


PITTSFIELD
EASTHAMPTON

EVERETT


RANDOLPH


FALL RIVER


REVERE


FALMOUTH

SALEM
FITCHBURG

SOMERVILLE



SOUTHBRIDGE


SPENCER-EAST BROOKFIELD


GARDNER

GATEWAY






PLYMOUTH

GLOUCESTER

SPRINGFIELD
GREENFIELD

WAREHAM

HAVERHILL

WESTFIELD

HOLBROOK


WOBURN
HOLYOKE


WORCESTER

HULL

BERKSHIRE ARTS CS

LAWRENCE


LOWELL





MARLBOROUGH

NEW BEDFORD GLOBAL CS

MEDFORD

METHUEN



LYNN
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group


BENJAMIN BANNEKER CS
COMMUNITY CS OF
CAMBRIDGE
NEW LEADERSHIP HMCS
LUDLOW



31
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix E
MA FY2010 and FY2011 High Need Districts
Criteria: High-need districts are defined as districts in corrective action or single school districts in corrective action or
restructuring status under No Child Left Behind.
DISTRICT
Agawam
Pittsfield
Boston
Ralph C. Mahar
Bridgewater-Raynham
Randolph
Brockton
Revere
Chelsea
Salem
Chicopee
Somerville
Everett
Southbridge
Fall River
Springfield
Fitchburg
Waltham
Gardner
Wareham
Gloucester
Westfield
Greater Lawrence Regional Vocational Technical
Weymouth
Greenfield
Woburn
Hampshire
Worcester
Haverhill
Abby Kelley Foster Charter Public
Holbrook
Benjamin Banneker Charter Public
Holyoke
Berkshire Arts and Technology Charter Public
Lawrence
Boston Renaissance Charter
Leominster
Lowell Community Charter Public
Lowell
Mystic Valley Regional Charter
Lynn
New Leadership Charter
Malden
North Central Charter Essential
Marlborough
Sabis International Charter
Medford
Seven Hills Charter
Methuen
Silver Hill Horace Mann Charter
New Bedford
Smith Leadership Academy Charter Public
Orange
South Shore Charter Public
Peabody
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
32
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix E
Appendix E: Enrollment and Attrition Rates by Course
Enrollment and Attrition Information as Reported for Each Cohort 4 Course
Partnership
Lesley Springfield
Year
Offered
Course Title
Number of
Participants
Enrolled First
Day
Number of
Participants
Completed
Course
Attrition
Rate
08/09
Number Theory (Cohort I)
20
20
0%
08/09
Number Theory (Cohort II)
17
17
0%
37
37
0%
Subtotal – Number Theory
08/09
Number and Operations (Cohort I)
13
13
0%
08/09
Number and Operations (Cohort II)
13
13
0%
09/10
Number and Operations (Cohort IV)
21
21
0%
47
47
0%
Subtotal – Number and Operations
08/09
Functions and Algebra I (Cohort III)
12
9
25%
09/10
Functions and Algebra I (Cohort IV)
22
19
14%
09/10
Functions and Algebra I (Cohort IV)
23
23
0%
09/10
Functions and Algebra I (Cohort IV)
13
13
0%
70
64
9%
Subtotal – Functions and Algebra I
09/10
Geometry and Measurement I
21
21
0%
09/10
Geometry and Measurement I
23
23
0%
09/10
Geometry and Measurement I
23
23
0%
67
67
0%
Subtotal – Geometry and Measurement I
09/10
Probability
12
12
0%
09/10
Probability
17
17
0%
09/10
Probability
13
13
0%
42
42
0%
Subtotal – Probability
10/11
Geometry and Measurement II
15
15
0%
10/11
Geometry and Measurement II
11
11
0%
26
26
0%
Subtotal – Geometry and Measurement II
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
33
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix E
Enrollment and Attrition Information as Reported for Each Cohort 4 Course
Number of
Participants
Enrolled First
Day
Number of
Participants
Completed
Course
Partnership
Year
Offered
Lesley Springfield
(continued)
10/11
Functions and Algebra II
17
17
0%
10/11
Functions and Algebra II
12
12
0%
29
20
0%
Course Title
Subtotal – Functions and Algebra II
10/11
Calculus
14
14
0%
10/11
Data Analysis
20
20
0%
352
337
4%
Subtotal
Boston Public
Schools
Attrition
Rate
08/09
Building a System of Tens
133
115
14%
09/10
Building a System of Tens
12
12
0%
09/10
Building a System of Tens
13
13
0%
09/10
Building a System of Tens
22
22
0%
10/11
Building a System of Tens
5
5
0%
185
167
10%
Subtotal – Building a System of Tens
08/09
Making Meaning of Operations
69
69
0%
09/10
Making Meaning of Operations
20
20
0%
09/10
Making Meaning of Operations
30
30
0%
09/10
Making Meaning of Operations
15
15
0%
09/10
Making Meaning of Operations
10
10
0%
09/10
Making Meaning of Operations
15
15
0%
10/11
Making Meaning for Operations
13
13
0%
172
172
0%
Subtotal – Making Meaning of Operations
09/10
MIMI
20
20
0%
10/11
MIMI
19
19
0%
10/11
MIMI
13
13
0%
52
52
0%
Subtotal – MIMI
09/10
Patterns, Functions and Change
13
13
0%
09/10
Patterns, Functions and Change
19
19
0%
09/10
Patterns, Functions and Change
17
17
0%
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
34
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix E
Enrollment and Attrition Information as Reported for Each Cohort 4 Course
Partnership
Boston Public
Schools
(continued)
Year
Offered
Course Title
Number of
Participants
Completed
Course
Attrition
Rate
10/11
Patterns, Functions, and Change
10
10
0%
10/11
Patterns, Functions, and Change
9
9
0%
10/11
Patterns, Functions, and Change
18
16
11%
10/11
Patterns, Functions, and Change
18
16
11%
104
100
4%
Subtotal – Patterns, Functions and Change
09/10
Reasoning about Algebraic Operations
12
12
0%
09/10
Reasoning about Algebraic Operations
17
17
0%
10/11
Reasoning about Algebraic Operations
8
8
0%
10/11
Reasoning about Algebraic Operations
17
17
0%
10/11
Reasoning about Algebraic Operations
10
10
0%
64
64
0%
9
9
0%
18
12
33%
604
576
5%
22
22
0%
24
22
8%
21
21
0%
67
65
3%
12
12
0%
11
10
9%
24
24
0%
47
46
2%
Subtotal – Reasoning about Algebraic Operations
10/11
Leadership Institute
10/11
Grade 8 Algebra I seminar
Subtotal
Brockton Public
Schools
Number of
Participants
Enrolled First
Day
Intel Math for Teachers Parts I and II
(Bridgewater State College)
Intel Math for Teachers Parts I and II
09/10
(Bridgewater State College)
Intel Math for Teachers Parts I and II
09/10
(Bridgewater State College)
Subtotal – Intel Math for Teachers Parts I and II
(Bridgewater State College)
Intel Math for Teachers Parts I and II
08/09
(Bristol Community College)
Intel Math for Teachers Parts I and II
09/10
(Bristol Community College)
Intel Math for Teachers Parts I and II
09/10
(Bristol Community College)
Subtotal – Intel Math for Teachers Parts I and II
(Bristol Community College
08/09
08/09
Intel Math for Teachers Parts I and II
(Cape Cod Community College)
18
17
6%
09/10
Intel Math for Teachers Parts I and II
(Cape Cod Community College)
18
15
17%
36
32
11%
Subtotal – Intel Math for Teachers Parts I and II (Cape
Cod Community College)
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
35
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix E
Enrollment and Attrition Information as Reported for Each Cohort 4 Course
Partnership
Year
Offered
Brockton Public
Schools
(continued)
09/10
10/11
10/11
10/11
10/11
10/11
10/11
Course Title
Intel Math for Teachers Parts I and II
(North River Collaborative)
Intel Math Parts I and II (Site
Unidentified)
Intel Math Parts I and II (Site
Unidentified)
Intel Math Parts I and II (Site
Unidentified)
Intel Math Parts I and II (Site
Unidentified)
Intel Math Parts I and II (Site
Unidentified)
Intel Math Parts I and II (Site
Unidentified)
Subtotal
Gateway Regional
School District
08/09
09/10
10/11
Earth Systems: Learning Science by
Doing Science
Earth Systems Science II: Energy in
Natural and Human Sciences
Earth Systems Science III: Building
Connections Between Earth, Life, and
Physical Science
Subtotal
Randolph Public
Schools
Number of
Participants
Completed
Course
Attrition
Rate
24
24
0%
12
11
8%
6
6
0%
16
15
6%
25
23
8%
16
16
0%
23
23
0%
272
261
4%
47
47
0%
55
49
11%
49
47
4%
151
143
5%
08/09
Watershed
6
6
0%
10/11
Watershed, NSCI 521-GR1
9
8
11%
15
14
7%
Subtotal – Watershed
08/09
Chemistry
22
22
0%
09/10
Special Topics in Physics: Force &
Energy
27
26
4%
09/10
Earth Science
13
13
0%
09/10
Technology & Engineering
22
22
0%
10/11
Biology
18
18
0%
10/11
Astronomy
21
17
19%
138
132
4%
Subtotal
Springfield
College
Number of
Participants
Enrolled First
Day
08/09
Best Practices in Teaching Life Science
14
14
0%
08/09
Best Practices in Teaching Life Science
13
13
0%
27
27
0%
Subtotal – Best Practices in Teaching Life Sciences
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
36
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix E
Enrollment and Attrition Information as Reported for Each Cohort 4 Course
Partnership
Springfield
College
(continued)
Year
Offered
Course Title
Best Practices of Teaching Physical
Science
Best Practices of Teaching Physical
Science
Attrition
Rate
14
0%
16
16
0%
Subtotal – Best Practices in Teaching Physical Science
30
30
0%
Best Practices in Teaching Earth Science
21
21
0%
78
78
0%
21
21
0%
21
21
0%
42
42
0%
09/10
Subtotal
Uncovering the Fundamentals of
Arithmetic
Uncovering the Fundamentals of
09/10
Arithmetic
Subtotal – Uncovering the Fundamentals of Arithmetic
08/09
08/09
PROMYS for Teachers: Number Theory
48
46
4%
09/10
PROMYS for Teachers: Number Theory
14
14
0%
10/11
PROMYS for Teachers: Number Theory
16
16
0%
78
76
3%
26
26
0%
146
144
1%
Subtotal – PROMYS for Teachers: Number Theory
10/11
Patterns, Relations, and Algebraic
Thinking
Subtotal
Greater North
Shore*
Number of
Participants
Completed
Course
14
09/10
10/11
Boston University
Number of
Participants
Enrolled First
Day
08/09
Mathematics I
22
20
9%
08/09
Mathematics I
7
7
0%
09/10
Mathematics I
32
28
13%
61
55
Subtotal – Mathematics I
Chemistry B: The Energetics of Chemical
08/09
Change
08/09
Physics II: Waves, Electricity, and
Magnetism
Biology I: Cell Biology and Genetics-A
Human Approach
Biology I: Cell Biology and Genetics-A
09/10
Human Approach
Subtotal – Biology I: Cell Biology and Genetics- A
Human Approach
Biology II: Ecology, Evolution, and the
08/09
Diversity of Life
Biology II - Ecology, Evolution &
10/11
Diversity of Life
Biology II - Ecology, Evolution &
SubtotalDiversity of Life
08/09
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
Data Not
Submitted
10%
Data Not
Submitted
Data Not
Submitted
4
4
0%
6
6
0%
21
21
0%
27
27
0%
4
4
0%
31
30
3%
35
34
3%
37
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix E
Enrollment and Attrition Information as Reported for Each Cohort 4 Course
Partnership
Greater North
Shore*
(continued)
Year
Offered
Course Title
Chemistry II: Equilibrium and
Thermodynamics
Chemistry II: Equilibrium and
09/10
Thermodynamics
Subtotal – Chemistry II: Equilibrium and
Thermodynamics
08/09
Number of
Participants
Enrolled First
Day
Number of
Participants
Completed
Course
Attrition
Rate
8
6
25%
21
19
10%
29
25
14%
08/09
Earth Science I: Weather and Water
5
5
0%
09/10
Earth Science I: Weather and Water
18
18
0%
10/11
Earth Science I: Weather and Water
21
17
19%
Subtotal – Earth Science I: Weather and Water
Engineering I: From Science to
08/09
Engineering: Pre-Engineering Design
Experience
Engineering I
09/10
44
40
9%
3
3
0%
14
14
0%
Subtotal – Engineering I
17
17
0%
08/09
Physics I: Forces, Energy, & Motion
9
9
0%
09/10
Physics I: Forces, Energy, & Motion
30
29
3%
10/11
Physics I - Forces, Energy & Motion
27
23
15%
Subtotal – Physics I: Forces, Energy, & Motion
66
61
8%
08/09
Earth Science II: The Solid Earth
6
5
17%
09/10
Energy I
21
15
29%
09/10
Chemistry I: Particulate Nature of Matter
26
26
0%
10/11
Energy II – Energy Concepts for
Teaching Science
4
4
0%
10/11
Chemistry III – Structure & Function
30
25
17%
32
29
9%
13
11
15%
19
19
0%
32
30
6%
32
28
13%
466
425
9%
10/11
10/11
10/11
Earth Science II (Earth's History &
Planetary Systems)
Energy I - Integrating the Sciences
Through Energy
Energy I - Integrating the Sciences
Through Energy
Subtotal – Energy I: Integrating the Sciences
10/11
Mathematics I - Mathematics for Middle
School Science Teachers
Subtotal (excluding data for Chemistry B course)
* The numbers of enrolled participants for courses offered by this partnership are small due to the fact that additional participants in these courses were funded by other
sources and, therefore, not included in the evaluation of MMSP.
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
38
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix E
Enrollment and Attrition Information as Reported for Each Cohort 5 Course
Partnership
EduTron
Year
Offered
10/11
10/11
10/11
10/11
Course Title
High School Math: the Bird’s View and
the Frog’s View
Exploring Common Core Mathematics in
Grades 3-8
Common Core Middle School
Mathematics (Intensive Immersion
Institutes
Common Core Mathematics Grades 7-12
Subtotal
Everett
Number of
Participants
Enrolled First
Day
Number of
Participants
Completed
Course
Attrition
Rate
36
36
0%
27
26
4%
15
15
0%
24
20
17%
102
97
5%
10/11
Physics: Waves, Electricity and
Magnetism
20
18
10%
10/11
Biology I: Cell Biology and Genetics -- A
Human Approach
25
25
0%
45
43
4%
Subtotal
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
39
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix F
Appendix F: Subject Matter Competency Demonstration Options
How do teachers demonstrate subject matter competency in Massachusetts?
Elementary teachers
Middle and secondary school teachers
may demonstrate competence in reading, writing,
mathematics, and other areas of the basic
elementary school curriculum through one of the
following:
may demonstrate subject matter competence in
each of the areas they are teaching through one of
the following:
Passing the Massachusetts Test for Educator
Licensure (MTEL) Elementary Subject Matter Test:
General Curriculum and the Foundations of Reading
Passing the Massachusetts Test for Educator
Licensure (MTEL) appropriate Subject Matter Test:
Middle School Humanities
Middle School Mathematics
Middle School Mathematics/Science
Subject Title (e.g., History, English, Physics)
Making sufficient progress* on Massachusetts High
Objective Uniform State Standard of Evaluation
(HOUSSE); prior to 2007
Making sufficient progress* on Massachusetts High
Objective Uniform State Standard of Evaluation
(HOUSSE)
Completion of an appropriate academic major
Completion of an appropriate graduate degree
Completion of comparable coursework equivalent to
an undergraduate academic major
Advanced certification or credentialing
*It is the Department's expectation that a teacher will have completed at least half [48] of the content PDPs [96 total] needed to meet HOUSSE
requirements before being considered highly qualified.
Charter School Teachers who teach core academic subjects do not need a Massachusetts license but must
hold a Bachelor's degree and demonstrate competence in the subject area in which they teach. Charter school
teachers may demonstrate subject matter competence through any one of the options available to elementary
and middle/secondary teachers.
Teachers in Vocational Schools who teach core academic courses are required to meet the definition of a
highly qualified teacher. A vocational school teacher who teaches a core academic subject must hold a
Bachelor's degree, be licensed or certified by the state, and demonstrate subject matter competence in order
to be considered highly qualified.
(information obtained from ESE, 2004)
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
40
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix G
Appendix G: Mean Percentage Scores for Pre- & Post-course Tests
Mean Percentage Scores for Pre- & Post-course Tests: Cohort 4
Year
Offered
Institute Name – Course
N
Mean
Pre-test
Mean
Post-test
Change in
Mean
p <.05
08/09
Lesley C4 – Number Theory (Section 1)
17
17
45
28
Yes
08/09
Lesley C4 – Number Theory (Section 2)
13
13
41
28
Yes
13
32
73
41
Yes
8
68
81
13
Yes
12
38
67
29
Yes
17
21
50
29
Yes
15
53
71
19
Yes
19
42
72
30
Yes
11
45
69
24
Yes
08/09
08/09
08/09
09/10
09/10
09/10
09/10
Lesley C4 – Number and Operations
(Section 1)
Lesley C4 – Functions and Algebra I
(Section 3)
Lesley C4 – Number and Operations
(Section 2)
Lesley C4 – Number and Operations
(Section 3)
Lesley C4 – Functions and Algebra
(Section 4)
Lesley C4 – Functions and Algebra
(Section 4)
Lesley C4 – Functions and Algebra
(Section 4)
09/10
Lesley C4 – Geometry and Measurement
11
45
60
15
Yes
09/10
Lesley C4 – Geometry and Measurement
19
46
72
26
Yes
09/10
Lesley C4 – Geometry and Measurement
22
36
61
25
Yes
09/10
Lesley C4 – Probability
12
30
65
35
Yes
09/10
Lesley C4 – Probability
16
29
52
23
Yes
09/10
Lesley C4 – Probability
12
31
61
31
Yes
10/11
Lesley C4 – Data Analysis
19
36
56
20
Yes
10/11
Lesley C4 – Calculus
12
6
44
38
Yes
10/11
Lesley C4 – Functions and Algebra II
9
13
61
48
Yes
10/11
Lesley C4 – Functions and Algebra II
13
33
56
23
Yes
10
19
69
50
Yes
15
17
70
53
Yes
10/11
10/11
Lesley C4 – Geometry and Measurement
II
Lesley C4 – Geometry and Measurement
II
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
41
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix G
Mean Percentage Scores for Pre- & Post-course Tests: Cohort 4
Year
Offered
08/09
08/09
09/10
09/10
09/10
09/10
09/10
09/10
09/10
09/10
09/10
09/10
09/10
09/10
09/10
09/10
10/11
10/11
10/11
10/11
10/11
10/11
Institute Name – Course
Boston Public Schools C4 – Building a
System of Tens and Making Meaning of
Operations
Boston Public Schools C4 – Making
Meaning of Operations
Boston Public Schools C4 – Building a
System of Tens
Boston Public Schools C4 – Building a
System of Tens
Boston Public Schools C4 – Building a
System of Tens
Boston Public Schools C4 – Making
Meaning of Operations
Boston Public Schools C4 – Making
Meaning of Operations
Boston Public Schools C4 – Making
Meaning of Operations
Boston Public Schools C4 – Making
Meaning of Operations
Boston Public Schools C4 – Making
Meaning of Operations
Boston Public Schools C4 – MIMI
Boston Public Schools C4 – Patterns,
Functions, and Change
Boston Public Schools C4 – Patterns,
Functions, and Change
Boston Public Schools C4 – Patterns,
Functions, and Change
Boston Public Schools C4 – Reasoning
about Algebraic Operations
Boston Public Schools C4 – Reasoning
about Algebraic Operations
Boston Public Schools C4 – Grade 8
Algebra I seminar
Boston Public Schools C4 – Patterns,
Functions, and Change
Boston Public Schools C4 – Patterns,
Functions, and Change
Boston Public Schools C4 – Reasoning
about Algebraic Operations
Boston Public Schools C4 – Building a
System of Tens
Boston Public Schools C4 – Reasoning
about Algebraic Operations
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
N
Mean
Pre-test
Mean
Post-test
Change in
Mean
p <.05
25
0
45
45
Yes
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
2
56
72
16
NA
0
NA
NA
NA
NA
2
68
68
0
NA
1
59
72
13
NA
1
76
64
-12
NA
0
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
NA
NA
NA
NA
1
66
79
13
NA
9
68
79
11
No
3
51
60
9
NA
7
61
68
7
No
2
67
69
2
NA
5
55
59
4
NA
4
61
70
9
NA
9
34
67
33
Yes
15
69
85
16
Yes
4
74
82
8
NA
11
51
62
11
Yes
5
66
83
17
NA
15
50
51
1
No
42
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix G
Mean Percentage Scores for Pre- & Post-course Tests: Cohort 4
Year
Offered
10/11
10/11
10/11
10/11
10/11
Institute Name – Course
Boston Public Schools C4 –
Institute
Boston Public Schools C4 –
Functions, and Change
Boston Public Schools C4 –
Functions, and Change
Boston Public Schools C4 –
about Algebraic Operations
Boston Public Schools C4 –
Meaning for Operations
Leadership
Patterns,
Patterns,
Reasoning
Making
Mean
Pre-test
Mean
Post-test
Change in
Mean
p <.05
0
NA
NA
NA
NA
6
57
79
22
Yes
9
71
90
19
Yes
6
65
82
17
Yes
10
68
80
12
Yes
N
10/11
Boston Public Schools C4 – MIMI
19
75
83
8
Yes
10/11
Boston Public Schools C4 – MIMI
14
68
80
12
Yes
22
52
79
26
Yes
12
61
81
20
Yes
17
68
82
15
Yes
22
62
79
17
Yes
20
70
88
18
Yes
10
76
91
15
Yes
24
63
83
20
Yes
15
61
75
14
Yes
24
71
81
10
Yes
23
65
82
17
Yes
16
50
63
13
Yes
08/09
08/09
08/09
09/10
09/10
09/10
09/10
09/10
09/10
10/11
10/11
Brockton Public Schools C4 – Intel Math
for Teachers Parts I and II, Bridgewater
State College
Brockton Public Schools C4 – Intel Math
for Teachers Parts I and II, Bristol
Community College
Brockton Public Schools C4 – Intel Math
for Teachers Parts I and II, Cape Cod
Community College
Brockton Public Schools C4 – Intel Math
for Teachers Parts I and II, Bridgewater
State College
Brockton Public Schools C4 – Intel Math
for Teachers Parts I and II, Bridgewater
State College
Brockton Public Schools C4 – Intel Math
for Teachers Parts I and II, Bristol
Community College
Brockton Public Schools C4 – Intel Math
for Teachers Parts I and II, Bristol
Community College
Brockton Public Schools C4 – Intel Math
for Teachers Parts I and II, Cape Cod
Community College
Brockton Public Schools C4 – Intel Math
for Teachers Parts I and II, North River
Collaborative
Brockton Public Schools C4 – Intel Math
Parts I and II
Brockton Public Schools C4 – Intel Math
Parts I and II
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
43
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix G
Mean Percentage Scores for Pre- & Post-course Tests: Cohort 4
Year
Offered
10/11
10/11
10/11
10/11
08/09
09/10
10/11
08/09
08/09
09/10
09/10
09/10
10/11
10/11
10/11
08/09
08/09
09/10
09/10
10/11
10/11
Institute Name – Course
Brockton Public Schools C4 – Intel Math
Parts I and II
Brockton Public Schools C4 – Intel Math
Parts I and II
Brockton Public Schools C4 – Intel Math
Parts I and II
Brockton Public Schools C4 – Intel Math
Parts I and II
Gateway Regional School District C4 –
Earth Systems: Learning Science by
Doing Science
Gateway Regional School District C4 –
Earth Systems Science II: Energy in
Natural and Human Sciences
Gateway Regional School District C4 –
Earth Systems: Learning Science by
Doing Science
Randolph Public Schools C4 –
Watershed
Randolph Public Schools C4 – Chemistry
Randolph Public Schools C4 – Special
Topics in Physics: Force & Energy
Randolph Public Schools C4 – Earth
Science
Randolph Public Schools C4 –
Technology & Engineering
Randolph Public Schools C4 – Biology
Randolph Public Schools C4 –
Astronomy
Randolph Public Schools C4 –
Watershed, NSCI 521-GR1
Springfield College C4 – Best Practices
in Teaching Life Science
Springfield College C4 – Best Practices
in Teaching Life Science
Springfield College C4 – Best Practices
of Teaching Physical Science
Springfield College C4 – Best Practices
of Teaching Physical Science
Springfield College C4 – Best Practices
in Teaching Life Science
Springfield College C4 – Best Practices
in Teaching Life Science
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
N
Mean
Pre-test
Mean
Post-test
Change in
Mean
p <.05
25
60
80
20
Yes
15
56
76
20
Yes
6
49
66
17
Yes
12
60
71
11
Yes
45
57
66
9
Yes
47
53
73
20
Yes
45
57
66
9
Yes
6
18
72
54
Yes
22
68
82
13
Yes
26
39
89
50
Yes
13
57
75
18
Yes
22
49
67
19
Yes
18
33
88
55
Yes
14
36
47
11
Yes
8
17
76
59
Yes
14
55
75
20
Yes
11
59
67
8
No
14
56
67
11
Yes
16
61
74
13
Yes
14
55
75
20
Yes
11
59
67
8
No
44
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix G
Mean Percentage Scores for Pre- & Post-course Tests: Cohort 4
Year
Offered
08/09
08/09
09/10
09/10
10/11
10/11
08/09
08/09
08/09
Institute Name – Course
Boston University Trustees C4 –
Uncovering the Fundamentals of
Arithmetic
Boston University Trustees C4 –
PROMYS for Teachers Number Theory
Boston University Trustees C4 –
Uncovering the Fundamentals of
Arithmetic
Boston University Trustees C4 –
PROMYS for Teachers Number Theory
Boston University Trustees C4 –
Patterns, Relations, and Algebraic
Thinking
Boston University Trustees C4 –
PROMYS for Teachers
Greater North Shore C4 – Mathematics I
Greater North Shore C4 – Chemistry B:
The Energetics of Chemical Change
Greater North Shore C4 – Physics II:
Waves, Electricity, and Magnetism
N
Mean
Pre-test
Mean
Post-test
Change in
Mean
p <.05
21
65
75
10
No
5
82
74
-8
NA
19
71
91
21
Yes
14
49
88
39
Yes
26
65
77
12
Yes
16
29
63
34
Yes
20
52
68
15
Yes
20
17
56
39
Yes
4
50
66
16
NA
08/09
Greater North Shore C4 – Mathematics I
6
63
72
8
No
08/09
Greater North Shore C4 – Biology I
6
51
69
18
No
08/09
Greater North Shore C4 – Biology II
4
56
69
13
No
08/09
Greater North Shore C4 – Chemistry II
8
44
67
23
Yes
08/09
Greater North Shore C4 – Earth Science I
4
69
72
3
No
08/09
Greater North Shore C4 – Engineering I
3
56
91
35
NA
08/09
Greater North Shore C4 – Physics I
9
71
91
21
Yes
08/09
Greater North Shore C4 – Earth Science
II
5
60
82
21
NA
09/10
Greater North Shore C4 – Mathematics I
28
61
76
15
Yes
09/10
Greater North Shore C4 – Biology I
21
63
79
16
Yes
09/10
Greater North Shore C4 – Engineering I
14
60
86
26
Yes
09/10
Greater North Shore C4 – Chemistry II
18
52
67
15
Yes
09/10
Greater North Shore C4 – Earth Science I
19
46
73
27
Yes
09/10
Greater North Shore C4 – Physics I
29
64
80
16
Yes
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
45
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix G
Mean Percentage Scores for Pre- & Post-course Tests: Cohort 4
Year
Offered
09/10
9/10
10/11
10/11
10/11
10/11
10/11
10/11
10/11
10/11
10/11
Institute Name – Course
Greater North Shore C4 – Energy I
Greater North Shore C4 – Chemistry I:
Particulate Nature of Matter
Greater North Shore C4 – Biology II Ecology, Evolution & Diversity of Life
Greater North Shore C4 – Earth Science Weather & Water
Greater North Shore C4 – Chemistry III –
Structure & Function
Greater North Shore C4 – Physics I Forces, Energy & Motion
Greater North Shore C4 – Energy I Integrating the Sciences Through Energy
Greater North Shore C4 – Energy II –
Energy Concepts for Teaching Science
Greater North Shore C4 – Mathematics I
- Mathematics for Middle School Science
Teachers
Greater North Shore C4 – Energy I Integrating the Sciences Through Energy
Greater North Shore C4 – Earth Science
II (Earth's History & Planetary Systems)
N
Mean
Pre-test
Mean
Post-test
Change in
Mean
p <.05
15
50
68
17
Yes
26
50
74
24
Yes
30
60
71
11
Yes
17
48
73
25
Yes
25
64
93
29
Yes
23
53
73
20
Yes
18
55
71
16
Yes
4
66
81
15
NA
28
67
86
19
Yes
11
56
73
17
Yes
29
62
75
13
Yes
Mean Percentage Scores for Pre- & Post-course Tests: Cohort 5
Year
Offered
10/11
10/11
10/11
10/11
10/11
10/11
Institute Name – Course
Edutron- High School Math: the Bird’s
View and the Frog’s View
Edutron- Common Core Mathematics
Grades 7-12
Edutron- Exploring Common Core
Mathematics in Grades 3-8
Edutron- Common Core Middle School
Mathematics (Intensive Immersion
Institutes
Everett- Biology I: Cell Biology and
Genetics -- A Human Approach
Everett- Physics: Waves, Electricity and
Magnetism
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
N
Mean
Pre-test
Mean
Post-test
Change in
Mean
p <.05
36
76
92
16
Yes
20
52
73
21
Yes
24
47
78
31
Yes
15
56
66
10
Yes
25
54
58
14
Yes
16
35
59
24
Yes
46
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix H
Appendix H: High Need Districts for All Funding Periods, by Partnership
High Need Districts for Cohort 1–Cohort 3, by Partnership
Number of Participants from High Need Districts
Partnership
EduTron (M)
Harvard University (M)
Lesley University (M)
MCLA – Science (S)
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
High Need
Districts
Fitchburg
Gardner
Subtotal
Boston
Boston Renaiss. CS
Cambridge
Fall River
Lowell
Malden
New Bedford
Somerville
Somerville CS/
Prospect Hill
Academy
Southbridge
Subtotal
Malden
Adams-Cheshire
Clarksburg
Florida
Mount Greylock
Feb04–
Aug04
Sep04–
Aug05
37
14
51 (79%)
1
3
5
0
0
0
0
0
53
4
57 (88%)
3
2
4
0
1
0
1
2
0
0
9 (39%)
21 (21%)
Planning Year
5
0
18 (33%)
16 (19%)
6
1
2
0
Sep05–
Aug06
28
9
37 (84%)
10
0
9
4
0
3
0
4
0
1
31 (39%)
14 (19%)
5
1
1
0
Sep06–
Aug07
Cohorts
1&2
N/A
N/A
N/A
0
2
3
4
0
1
0
2
1
0
13 (54%)
3 (25%)
5
1
2
2
Sep06–
Aug07
Cohort 3
Sep07–Aug08
Cohort 3
Sep08–
Aug09
Cohort 3
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
47
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix H
High Need Districts for Cohort 1–Cohort 3, by Partnership
Number of Participants from High Need Districts
Partnership
MCLA – Science (S)
Salem State College (M)
Springfield/Holyoke
Public Schools (S)
Wareham PS (M)
WPI – Math (M)
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
High Need
Districts
North Adams
Subtotal
Boston
Chelsea
Haverhill PS
Lynn
Salem
Somerville
Subtotal
Holyoke
Holyoke Comm. CS
Springfield
Subtotal
Wareham
Abby Kelley
Foster CS
Athol-Royalston
Berkshire Hills
Boston
Brockton
Cambridge
Chicopee
Fall River
Fitchburg
Lawrence Fam.
Devt. CS
Lowell
Community CS
Feb04–
Aug04
Sep04–
Aug05
0
0
1
32
18
0
51 (93%)
6
0
32
38(100%)
17 (46%)
5
14 (100%)
0
1
20
32
16
0
69 (86%)
17
0
31
48(100%)
11 (61%)
Sep05–
Aug06
3
10 (100%)
1
1
16
41
14
0
73 (79%)
19
0
28
47 (96%)
N/A
Sep06–
Aug07
Cohorts
1&2
3
13 (93%)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Sep06–
Aug07
Cohort 3
Sep07–Aug08
Cohort 3
Sep08–
Aug09
Cohort 3
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
0
2
3
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
2
0
1
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
0
0
3
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
0
0
1
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
48
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix H
High Need Districts for Cohort 1–Cohort 3, by Partnership
Number of Participants from High Need Districts
Partnership
High Need
Districts
Feb04–
Aug04
MCLA – Math (M)
New Bedford
North Adams
Pittsfield
Ralph C. Mahar
Seven Hills CS
Somerville
Webster
Winchendon
Worcester
Subtotal
Adams-Cheshire
0
0
0
4
15(63%)
Started: Year 2
UMass Amherst (M)
North Adams
Pittsfield
Subtotal
Athol-Royalston
N/A
N/A
N/A
Started: Year 2
Chicopee
Easthampton
Gateway
Gill-Montague
Greenfield
Holyoke
Holyoke
Community CS
Ludlow
North Adams
Ralph C. Mahar
Springfield
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
WPI – Math (M)
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
2
2
0
2
0
Sep04–
Aug05
4
0
0
0
0
1
1
8
7
27 (41%)
Planning Year
N/A
N/A
N/A
0
Sep05–
Aug06
0
0
2
0
2
0
0
6
10
32 (43%)
0
Sep06–
Aug07
Cohorts
1&2
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
3
Sep06–
Aug07
Cohort 3
Sep07–Aug08
Cohort 3
Sep08–
Aug09
Cohort 3
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1
0
1 (9%)
0
2
1
6 (86%)
1
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
0
0
0
0
2
5
2
0
0
0
0
5
1
1
1
2
0
3
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
0
0
1
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
4
2
1
1
7
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
49
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix H
High Need Districts for Cohort 1–Cohort 3, by Partnership
Number of Participants from High Need Districts
Partnership
UMass Amherst (M)
EduTron Lowell (M/S)
EduTron Fitchburg (M)
Lesley University (M)
North Shore (S)
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
High Need
Districts
Westfield
Subtotal
Lowell
Fitchburg
Gardner
Leominster
Subtotal
Attleboro
Brockton
Fairhaven
Fall River
Haverhill PS
Holyoke
Malden
Middleborough
New Bedford
Northampton
Randolph
Revere
Saugus
Silver Hill Charter
Somerville
Taunton
Ware
Subtotal
Boston
Fitchburg
Feb04–
Aug04
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Sep04–
Aug05
2
16 (64%)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Sep05–
Aug06
2
13 (37%)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Sep06–
Aug07
Cohorts
1&2
2
23 (34%)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Sep06–
Aug07
Cohort 3
N/A
N/A
54(100%)
17
7
10
34 (100%)
0
13
3
26
29
29
1
0
4
0
13
0
2
0
0
0
0
120 (94%)
0
1
Sep07–Aug08
Cohort 3
N/A
N/A
66(100%)
20
7
26
53 (98%)
1
3
1
18
23
18
0
0
0
0
14
2
5
0
11
0
1
97 (90%)
0
0
Sep08–
Aug09
Cohort 3
N/A
N/A
72 (100%)
19
12
34
65 (97%)
1
5
1
15
22
17
1
1
0
1
11
8
3
1
17
2
0
106 (95%)
4
1
50
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix H
High Need Districts for Cohort 1–Cohort 3, by Partnership
Number of Participants from High Need Districts
Partnership
North Shore (S)
UMass Amherst C3 (M/S)
Salem State College (M)
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
Feb04–
Aug04
Sep04–
Aug05
Sep05–
Aug06
Holyoke
Lynn
Revere
Somerville
Lowell Comm. CS
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Sep06–
Aug07
Cohorts
1&2
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Subtotal
Athol Royalston
Chicopee
Easthampton
Gateway
Greenfield
Gill-Montague
Holyoke
Ludlow
Lynn
New Leadership LS
North Adams
Pittsfield
South Hadley
Springfield
West Springfield
Subtotal
Boston
Chelsea
Everett
Gloucester
Haverhill PS
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
High Need
Districts
Sep06–
Aug07
Cohort 3
Sep07–Aug08
Cohort 3
Sep08–
Aug09
Cohort 3
0
0
0
16
0
0
3
9
14
1
1
0
8
13
0
17 (41%)
1
5
0
1
1
0
3
2
0
1
0
0
2
3
3
22 (46%)
1
1
3
6
4
27 (40%)
0
3
1
0
0
1
4
0
0
0
1
1
0
9
0
19 (38%)
0
0
1
3
3
27 (53%)
0
3
1
1
0
1
2
0
1
0
1
2
0
12
1
25 (47%)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
51
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix H
High Need Districts for Cohort 1–Cohort 3, by Partnership
Number of Participants from High Need Districts
Partnership
Salem State College (M)
SE/Cape (S)
WPI – Science (S)
Worcester PS (M)
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
High Need
Districts
Feb04–
Aug04
Sep04–
Aug05
Sep05–
Aug06
Lynn
Malden
Methuen
Peabody
Revere
Salem
Winthrop
Worcester
Subtotal
Barnstable
Brockton
Fall River
Horace Mann CS
Lawrence
New Bedford
Subtotal
Worcester
Southbridge
Subtotal
Worcester
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Sep06–
Aug07
Cohorts
1&2
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Sep06–
Aug07
Cohort 3
10
1
0
0
0
3
1
1
41
1
20
0
2
0
8
31
3
0
3
34
(82%)
(66%)
(16%)
(16%)
(83%)
Sep07–Aug08
Cohort 3
Sep08–
Aug09
Cohort 3
10
N/A
2
N/A
1
N/A
2
N/A
1
N/A
3
N/A
0
N/A
0
N/A
26 (65%)
N/A
5
0
22
32
5
10
0
0
0
1
8
2
40 (51%) 45(50%)
7 (54%)
3
0
1
7 (54%)
4 (22%)
N/A
N/A
52
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix H
High Need Districts for Cohort 4–Cohort 5, by Partnership
Partnership
Boston PS (M)
Brockton PS (M)
Gateway RSD (S)
High Need
Districts
Boston
Medford
Subtotal
BridgewaterRaynham
Brockton
Fall River
Falmouth
Freetown/Lakeville
New Bedford
Plymouth
Quincy
Randolph
Seekonk
South Shore CS
Swansea
Wareham
Weymouth
Subtotal
Agawam
Chicopee
Easthampton
Gateway
Hampshire
Holyoke
Springfield
Westfield
Subtotal
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
40
0
40 (100%)
0
174
0
174 (100%)
0
Sep10–
Aug11
Cohorts
4&5
112
1
113 (99%)
1
21
9
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
30 (59%)
0
0
1
6
0
2
8
0
17 (39%)
28
12
1
3
0
3
2
0
1
0
1
0
0
51 (45%)
0
0
3
7
0
9
0
0
19 (100%)
24
13
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
1
0
3
4
49 (56%)
4
2
2
6
4
2
2
12
34 (72%)
Sep08–
Aug09
Cohort 4
Sep09–
Aug10
Cohort 4
53
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix H
High Need Districts for Cohort 4–Cohort 5, by Partnership
Partnership
Lesley Springfield (M)
Greater North Shore (S)
Randolph PS (S)
Springfield College (S)
High Need
Districts
Agawam
Chicopee
Holyoke
Springfield
Westfield
Subtotal
Boston
BridgewaterRaynham
Fitchburg
Lawrence
Lynn
Malden
Medford
Pioneer Charter
School of Science
Quincy
Randolph
Revere
Somerville
Waltham
Weymouth
Subtotal
Randolph
Weymouth
Subtotal
New Leadership
CS
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
Sep08–
Aug09
Cohort 4
0
1
9
35
4
49 (94%)
26
Sep09–
Aug10
Cohort 4
0
1
6
59
5
71 (84%)
26
Sep10–
Aug11
Cohorts
4&5
1
0
5
29
5
40 (93%)
35
0
0
1
0
0
3
0
0
0
4
1
0
0
2
1
0
5
3
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
31 (50%)
6
0
6 (25%)
0
0
1
8
12
0
0
52 (46%)
18
0
18 (41%)
0
1
0
2
9
3
1
63 (50%)
7
1
8 (24%)
1
54
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix H
High Need Districts for Cohort 4–Cohort 5, by Partnership
Partnership
Springfield College (S)
Boston University (M)
EduTron (M)
High Need
Districts
Springfield
Subtotal
Boston
Brockton
Cambridge
Chelsea
Chicopee
Falmouth
Haverhill
Lawrence
Lowell
Medford
Peabody
Randolph
Salem
Somerville
Waltham
Weymouth
Woburn
Worcester
Subtotal
Boston
Brockton
Chelsea
Lawrence
Lowell
Lynn
Revere
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
Sep08–
Aug09
Cohort 4
26
26 (96%)
3
0
0
0
0
2
2
7
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
16 (39%)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Sep09–
Aug10
Cohort 4
30
30 (100%)
3
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
10 (29%)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Sep10–
Aug11
Cohorts
4&5
20
21 (100%)
1
2
3
1
1
0
0
5
2
1
1
1
0
1
1
3
0
0
23 (58%)
1
1
2
3
28
2
1
55
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix H
High Need Districts for Cohort 4–Cohort 5, by Partnership
Partnership
EduTron (M)
(continued)
Everett (S)
High Need
Districts
Worcester
Greater Lawrence
Region Voc-Tech
Subtotal
Boston
Chelsea
Everett
Holbrook
Malden
Medford
Rockland
Seekonk
Somerville
Waltham
Subtotal
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
N/A
N/A
Sep10–
Aug11
Cohorts
4&5
27
N/A
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Sep08–
Aug09
Cohort 4
Sep09–
Aug10
Cohort 4
66 (76%)
2
2
6
1
1
11
1
1
1
1
27 (68%)
56
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation
Appendix I
Appendix I: Criteria that Account for Gain in Highly Qualified Status
Criteria that Account for Gain in Highly Qualified Status
All unique participants to date
Criteria Accounting
for Gains in Highly
Qualified Status
Became
HQ in
Y1
C1
Became
HQ in Y2
Became
HQ in Y3
Became
HQ in Y4
C1
C2
C1
C2
C2
C3
Became
HQ in
Y5
C3
Became
HQ in Y6
C3
C4
Became
HQ in
Y7
C4
Became
HQ in Y8
C4
C5
TOTAL
became
HQ
MTEL
3
3
0
2
0
0
1
4
5
1
3
2
0
24
National Certification
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Degree in content area
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
5
Undergrad Equivalent
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
4
HOUSSE
10
46
0
12
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
70
Earned teaching license
0
1
0
2
0
0
0
1
4
1
0
0
1
10
Changed area or position
Changed area or
position/license comb.
MTEL/Undergrad Equiv.
comb.
MTEL/HOUSSE comb.
MTEL/earned teaching
license comb.
MTEL/changed area or
position comb.
Degree/changed area or
position comb.
Undergrad Equiv./
changed area or position
comb.
MTEL/licensure/changed
area/position
TOTAL
0
1
0
3
1
0
0
5
5
3
3
3
0
24
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
2
0
4
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
3
2
0
6
0
1
0
2
0
0
0
2
0
0
5
2
0
12
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
2
0
5
13
58
1
27
3
0
4
12
16
5
19
15
1
174
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group
57