Dr. Alex Anemone
Superintendent of Schools
February 23, 2015
Board of Education
 Mr. Davor Gjivoje - President
 Mr. John Flynn – Vice President
 Mrs. Kim Macaulay
 Dr. Howard Kotkin
 Mr. Abi Singh
2014-2015 District Goals
 Ninety percent (90%) of students in grades K-5 shall pass,
with 90% accuracy, a timed grade level math-facts
assessment. This math facts assessment shall be aligned to
the Common Core State Standards and will assess students
on the four core mathematical functions.
 Ninety percent (90%) of students in grades K-8 shall
improve by one point (one quintile) on the District Writing
Assessment. This assessment shall be administered in the
fall and again in the spring. Students scoring a perfect score
of 5 in the fall and spring shall be counted as having met
the goal.
2014-2015 District Goals
 To prepare each student for the Partnership for
Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers
(PARCC) and to communicate pertinent information
to parents as detailed in the action plan.
 To maintain and continue to build and develop the
individual student data dashboard and use the
information to guide the instructional process as
detailed in the action plan.
Narrative
 Harding Township School is one of the premier PK-8 school districts in




New Jersey. We have two buildings situated on a picturesque 40+ acre
campus. Our students in grades 9-12 attend Madison High School.
HTS students receive high-quality instruction in a full range of
academic subjects as well as the visual and performing arts. Technology
is ubiquitous and integrated at all grade levels. Moreover, co-curricular
activities, including athletics and clubs, are available to students.
Small class size is a constant and personal relationships are strong.
The PTO and HTEF provide valuable cultural experiences and funding
for special programs, projects, and field trips.
We are proud of our students, teachers, and parents and the success we
have had at HTS in creating lifelong learners and celebrating
educational excellence in a safe and secure learning environment.
New Jersey Assessment of Skills
and Knowledge
 Annual assessment for students in grades 3-8 in
English language arts (ELA) and math. Science is also
assessed in grades 4 and 8.
 Students placed into three categories
 Advanced Proficient 250-300
 Proficient 200-249
 Partially Proficient < 200
 HTS students compared to State and DFG-J cohorts.
 New multi-state assessment (PARCC) begins this year
(March; April/May).
NJASK – Grade 3
HTS
DFG J
State
Adv. Prof. %
12.2
12.1
4.1
Prof. %
75.6
76.8
62.4
Part. Prof. %
12.2
11.1
33.6
Adv. Prof. %
60.9
71.8
41.5
Prof. %
34.2
23.2
36.2
Part. Prof. %
4.9
5.0
22.3
ELA
Math
NJASK – Grade 4
HTS
DFG J
State
Adv. Prof. %
21.1
21.4
8.4
Prof. %
71.1
64.7
51.0
Part. Prof. %
7.8
13.9
40.6
Adv. Prof. %
71.1
63.5
34.5
Prof. %
15.8
30.7
43.8
Part. Prof. %
13.1
5.8
21.7
Adv. Prof. %
73.7
68.1
44.1
Prof. %
23.7
29.8
45.4
Part. Prof. %
2.6
2.1
10.5
ELA
Math
Science
NJASK – Grade 5
HTS
DFG J
State
Adv. Prof. %
21.6
24.5
8.7
Prof. %
62.2
62.9
52.6
Part. Prof. %
16.2
12.6
38.8
Adv. Prof. %
67.6
74.0
43.0
Prof. %
29.7
21.1
36.9
Part. Prof. %
2.7
4.9
20.1
ELA
Math
NJASK – Grade 6
HTS
DFG J
State
Adv. Prof. %
12.0
14.1
4.7
Prof. %
76.0
75.9
61.5
Part. Prof. %
12.0
10.0
33.9
Adv. Prof. %
40.0
59.6
31.0
Prof. %
44.0
34.7
47.9
Part. Prof. %
16.0
5.8
21.2
ELA
Math
NJASK – Grade 7
HTS
DFG J
State
Adv. Prof. %
26.5
34.1
12.8
Prof. %
52.9
56.9
52.4
Part. Prof. %
20.6
9.0
34.8
Adv. Prof. %
23.5
55.6
25.4
Prof. %
55.9
33.9
38.1
Part. Prof. %
20.6
10.6
36.4
ELA
Math
NJASK – Grade 8
HTS
DFG J
State
Adv. Prof. %
16.1
31.2
11.4
Prof. %
70.9
64.9
70.5
Part. Prof. %
12.9
3.9
18.1
Adv. Prof. %
48.4
61.9
31.3
Prof. %
38.7
29.6
38.0
Part. Prof. %
12.9
8.5
30.7
Adv. Prof. %
38.7
62.5
32.6
Prof. %
58.1
33.3
46.4
Part. Prof. %
3.2
4.2
21.0
ELA
Math
Science
Student Mobility - NJASK
 ELA: moving up 1/2 levels = 38 students
 ELA: moving down 1/2 levels = 13 students
 Difference = +25 (positive growth)
 Math: moving up 1/2 levels = 30 students
 Math: moving down 1/2 levels = 19 students
 Difference = +11 (positive growth)
Student Mobility - NJASK
 ELA
 11/12-12/13 = +8 students (net)
 12/13-13/14 = +25 students (net)
 +33 students (net) over two years moved up one or two
levels on NJASK in ELA!
 Math
 11/12-12/13 = +11 students (net)
 12/13-13/14= +11 students (net)
 +22 students (net) over two years moved up one or two
levels on NJASK in Math!
Student Growth
 Students (grades 4-8) compared year over year to their
peers with the same NJASK scale score.
 Low Growth = 1-35 percentile
 Typical Growth = 35-65 percentile
 High Growth = 65-99 percentile
 HTS students scores disproportionally ranked as
“high growth” in 9 of 10 categories.
Student Growth – Grade 4
 ELA
 High growth = 72.2%
 Typical growth = 19.4%
 Low growth = 8.3%
 Math
 High growth = 61.1%
 Typical growth = 16.7%
 Low growth = 22.2%
Student Growth – Grade 5
 ELA
 High growth = 45.7%
 Typical growth = 31.4%
 Low growth = 22.9%
 Math
 High growth = 57.1%
 Typical growth = 31.4%
 Low growth = 11.4%
Student Growth – Grade 6
 ELA
 High growth = 76.0%
 Typical growth = 12.0%
 Low growth = 12.0%
 Math
 High growth = 24.0%
 Typical growth = 40.0%
 Low growth = 36.0%
Student Growth – Grade 7
 ELA
 High growth = 66.7%
 Typical growth = 27.3%
 Low growth = 6.1%
 Math
 High growth = 63.6%
 Typical growth = 24.2%
 Low growth = 12.1%
Student Growth – Grade 8
 ELA
 High growth = 38.7%
 Typical growth = 32.3%
 Low growth = 29.0%
 Math
 High growth = 38.7%
 Typical growth = 35.5%
 Low growth = 25.8%
Student Growth Percentiles
Highlights
 TOTAL SCHOOL mSGP = 70. This means that 50% of our
students are in the top 29% of growth statewide! This
places HTS at the 98th percentile statewide!
 ELA Average Median SGP = 73
 High growth = 95 students
 Low growth = 25 students
 Difference = +70 students (positive growth)
 Math Average Median SGP = 66
 High growth = 81 students
 Low growth = 33 students
 Difference = +48 students (positive growth)
School Performance Report
 Replaced School Report Card. Data lags by one year.
This SPR data is from the 2013-2014 school year.
 Not to be used “…to create a summative ranking of
schools…” Rather the SPR provides “…data to present a
more complete picture of school performance, with
the ultimate aim of helping schools…”
 SPR designed to help districts:
 focus, benchmark, and improve
School Performance Report
 Includes the concept of peer group – a consortium of 30




other schools with similar demographics, grade span, etc.
Between 11/12 and 12/13, 67% of our peer schools changed.
Between 12/13 and 13/14, 63% of our peer schools have
changed.
Only three schools (10%) have been in our peer group in all
three years of the SPR!
Categories:





Very High Performance: 80th -99th percentile
High Performance: 60th – 79.9th percentile
Average Performance: 40th – 59.9th percentile
Lagging Performance: 20th-39.9th percentile
Significantly Lagging Performance: below 20th percentile
School Performance Report
 Caveats:
 Not all outcome data is normally distributed = skewed peer
and statewide percentiles (forced curve/stacked rankings).
 Actual variance might be very small (grade 3 ELA = 18 Qs)
 A majority (2/3) of the peer group changes every year
rendering year-over-year peer percentile variance
meaningless. Focus on State percentile.
 “Soft” data not included (culture, climate, co-curricular
activities, class size, technology, etc.).
 No VAPA (Visual and Performing Arts) data for K-8.
 Despite the NJDOE’s warnings against using the SPR to rank
and sort schools, this report is designed to do exactly that.
School Performance Report
 Academic Achievement
 Peer Percentile:
33 (lagging performance)


ELA
Math
 Statewide Percentile:


ELA
Math
 Targets Met:
20 (lagging performance)
46 (average performance)
87 (very high performance)
83 (very high performance)
90 (very high performance)
100%
School Performance Report
 College and Career Readiness
 Peer Percentile:
68 (high performance)


Students taking Alg.
Chronic Absenteeism
 Statewide Percentile:


Students taking Alg.
Chronic Absenteeism
 Targets Met:
36 (lagging performance)
100 (very high performance)
83 (very high performance)
71 (high performance)
94 (very high performance)
100%
School Performance Report
 Student Growth
 Peer Percentile:


ELA
Math
 Statewide Percentile:


ELA
Math
 Targets Met
97 (very high performance)
100 (very high performance)
94 (very high performance)
98 (very high performance)
100 (very high performance)
95 (very high performance)
100%
Measures of Academic Progress
 A formative, online assessment given to students in




grades 2-8.
Students in grade 2 take the MAP in math and reading.
Students in grades 3-8 take the MAP in math, reading,
and language usage.
Data is provided to parents/teachers in real time and is
“actionable”.
MAP data is from October 2014.
Measures of Academic Progress
 Students are provided with a raw score (RIT) that can
be compared to their peers at HTS as well as to their
peers nationwide.
 Student Progress Reports are sent home to parents.
 Teachers review more detailed reports (DesCartes: A
Continuum of Learning) and use data to inform their
instructional strategies (differentiation).
Measures of Academic Progress –
Grade 2
MATH
READING
Mean HTS/National
Percentile
84
87
Mean HTS RIT
195
195
Mean National RIT
178
176
Measures of Academic Progress –
Grade 3
MATH
READING
LANGUAGE
USAGE
Mean
HTS/National
Percentile
64
71
75
Mean HTS RIT
197
200
203
Mean National
RIT
192
190
191
Measures of Academic Progress –
Grade 4
MATH
READING
LANGUAGE
USAGE
Mean
HTS/National
Percentile
68
70
78
Mean HTS RIT
212
210
214
Mean National
RIT
204
200
201
Measures of Academic Progress –
Grade 5
MATH
READING
LANGUAGE
USAGE
Mean
HTS/National
Percentile
66
66
73
Mean HTS RIT
220
214
218
Mean National
RIT
213
207
208
Measures of Academic Progress –
Grade 6
MATH
READING
LANGUAGE
USAGE
Mean
HTS/National
Percentile
50
56
67
Mean HTS RIT
220
215
219
Mean National
RIT
220
212
212
Measures of Academic Progress –
Grade 7
MATH
READING
LANGUAGE
USAGE
Mean
HTS/National
Percentile
55
59
64
Mean HTS RIT
228
218
222
Mean National
RIT
226
216
216
Measures of Academic Progress –
Grade 8
MATH
READING
LANGUAGE
USAGE
Mean
HTS/National
Percentile
62
60
71
Mean HTS RIT
236
223
227
Mean National
RIT
230
219
219
Measures of Academic Progress
National
Percentile Math
National
Percentile
Reading
National
Percentile
Language Usage
Grades 2-5
70.5
73.5
75.3
Grades 6-8
55.6
58.3
67.3
Otis-Lennon School Ability Test
 May 2014 - grade 3 - 41 students (100%)
 Mean Score: 109
 Standard Deviation: 15.5
 Range: 72-150 (five standards deviations!)
 90th Percentile: 127
 75th Percentile: 117
 50th Percentile: 111
 25th Percentile: 99
 10th Percentile: 88
2014 OLSAT – NJASK – MAP
300
250
200
OLSAT
150
NJASK ELA
NJASK Math
100
50
MAP
Data Analysis
 Median SGP (mSGP) was extremely high for both ELA and




Math. This means our students grew more than their
peers.
Elementary students scoring higher on multiple
assessments (MAP, NJASK, etc.) than their middle school
peers. Public to private transfers?
Adv. proficient growth in ELA and math is tremendous.
Continued focus on students at ends (high and low) of
academic spectrum.
Continued focus on reversing loss of highly talented
students to private middle and high schools.
Curriculum Highlights
 Singapore Math (Math in Focus) used in K-5.
 Four Square Writing Method. (K-8)
 Reading Street/Novels Study. (K-6)
 Columbia University’s Writer’s Workshop. (K-8)
 Character Education lessons during weekly advisory
periods. These are age-appropriate activities and
lessons centered around a common theme such as
empathy, compassion, etc.
Transition to PARCC
 Performance Based Assessments (PBA) – ELA and Math.





March 2-27, 2015. End of Year Assessments (EOY) – ELA
and Math. April 27 – May 22, 2015.
Keyboarding (typing) skills and test-taking strategies
emphasized in all grades at HTS.
District Curriculum Council and Vision Council.
Administrators and teachers reviewed all 2014 NJASK
writing samples.
Teachers using PARCC sample questions in class.
Practice PARCC exams (online and paper/pencil) finished
by all students in grades 3-8.
Capital Projects
 Summer 2014 – Part II Elementary School windows
and unit ventilators. (ROD Grant - 40% funded by
State)
 2012-2015 – Security upgrades. (ongoing)
 Summer 2015 (proposed) – Elementary School
bathrooms scheduled for renovation.
Budget Data
 State Aid
 2009-2010
 2010-2011
 2011-2012
 2012-2013
 2013-2014
 2014-2015
 2015-2016
 Local Tax Levy
 1997-2011 (average)
 2011-2012
 2012-2013
 2013-2014
 2014-2015
 2015-2016
$364,473
$0
$181,191
$225,137
$225,137
$233,677
$233,677 (estimate)
+6.01%
+1.96%
+1.78%
+1.50%
+2.60%
+2.96% (estimate)
Technology
 Summer 2014 – L/MC computer lab. (PARCC ready)
 Summer 2014 – SmartBoard replacements project




(PTO and HTEF funded).
Fall 2014 – Beginning and Intermediate Creative
Coders (PTO)
2014-2015 – Chromebooks purchased for PARCC
writing preparation in both buildings.
2015-2016 – Website “renovation”. (tentative)
2015-2016 – Phone systems upgrade. (tentative)
Social Emotional Learning
 2013-2016 HTS is partnering with College of St.
Elizabeth and the United Way with a 3-year Climate
and Culture Initiative. (ongoing)
 Confirmed HIB cases:
 2011-2012 = 6 (34 investigations)
 2012-2013 = 5 (20 investigations)
 2013-2014 = 1 (5 investigations)
 2014-2015 = 1 (1 investigation) as of 12/31/14
Quest
 Grade 3 = Pathways Program. All students have access.
 Grade 4 = 10 students (24.4%)
 Grade 5 = 10 students (25.6%)
 Grade 6 = 13 students (38.2%)
 Grade 7 = 5 students (23.8%)
 Grade 8 = 7 students (21.9%)
 TOTAL = 45 students (27.4%)
Quest
 Gr. 3-4 students competed in the first Brain Bowl
sponsored by the N.J. Consortium for Gifted and
Talented Programs. HTS students won first place!
 Gr. 5 students participated in the World of Free
Enterprise Project to create a new restaurant that they
will design and introduce to the marketplace.
 Gr. 6-7 students participated in the Junior Solar
Sprints Powered Car Competition. HTS students won
first place for their documentation portfolio!
 Gr. 7-8 students won numerous awards at the Junior
Model United Nations @ Drew University.
Academic Intervention Program
 Grade 1 = 4 students (2 ELA; 1 Math; 1 both)
 Grade 2 = 8 students (4 ELA; 2 Math; 2 both)
 Grade 3 = 4 students (1 Math; 3 both)
 Grade 4 = 10 students (5 ELA; 4 Math; 1 both)
 Grade 5 = 6 students (2 ELA; 1 Math; 3 both)
 Grade 6 = 4 students (3 ELA; 1 Math)
 Grade 7 = 4 students (2 Math; 2 both)
 Grade 8 = 6 students (1 ELA; 3 Math; 2 both)
 TOTAL = 46 students
Athletics
 Fall (2014)
 Girls Field Hockey = 15 students (2nd place in Morris County!)
 Coed Soccer = 18 students
 Winter (2014-2015)
 Boys Basketball = 17 students
 Girls Basketball = 21 students
 Spring (2014)
 Boys Lacrosse = 17
 Girls Lacrosse = 20
 Coed Track and Field = 22
Co-Curricular Activities K-5
 Jr. TSA = 29 students
 Literary Magazine = 100+ students
 Fourth Grade Band = 30 students
 Fifth Grade Band = 31 students
 Forensics = 7-10 students
Co-Curricular Activities 6-8
 TSA = 20 students
 Student Council = 13 students
 Yearbook = 12 students
 School Play ~ 50 students
 Literary Magazine = entire middle school!
 Chorus = 53 students
 Jazz Band = 16 students
 Middle School Band = 43 students
Parent Teacher Organization
 2014-2015 Grants
 $30,000 Smartboards for Elementary School
 $25,000 Sound and lighting systems
 $5,000 Battle of the Books
 $4,500 Creative coders
 $5,000 Additional technology support, teacher wish
lists, field day, teacher appreciation gifts, various
publications/subscriptions, etc.
Harding Township Education
Foundation
 2014-2015 Grants
 $10,000 The Reading and Writing Project
 $6,000 Circus Yoga
 $25,000 Leveled Classroom Libraries
 $47,000 Smartboards for Middle School
 $10,000 Shakespeare Residency
 $25,000 Middle School Bricks Project
 $3,000 Project BABES
 $32,000 Sound/Lighting Upgrades
Student Enrollment










PK = 17 students
K = 27 students
1 = 36 students
2 = 33 students
3 = 26 students
4 = 41 students
5 = 39 students
6 = 34 students
7 = 21 students
8 = 32 students
 TOTAL = 306 students
Staff Professional Development
 HTS teachers have attended many classes in the
Madison Professional Development Academy. Classes
include:
 Introduction to Google Docs.
 Using technology to facilitate the 4C’s – critical
thinking, communication, collaboration, and creativity.
 Meet my friend Ed, Edmodo.
TEACHNJ - AchieveNJ
 Tenure Reform Act (TEACH-NJ) and teacher/principal
evaluation program (AchieveNJ) created by NJDOE.
 Three Goals:
 To raise student achievement.
 To inform professional development.
 To inform personnel decisions.
 Administration has conducted 100 lesson observations
as of Feb. 1, 2015. Approximately 60 % complete for
year.
Vision Council
 Quarterly meetings:
 I –PARCC Transition in ELA
 II – PARCC Transition in Math
 III –PARCC for Parents
 IV - tba
Special Thanks…
 …to all HTS students and staff members for their
contributions to the school community over the past
year. We promise to “aim high” and continue efforts to
improve the district in every way.