CLASSIFICATION: Superintendent's Report
Item: VI-E 9/21/09
__________________________________________________________________
TITLE:
CAPT Report – March 2009 Administration
__________________________________________________________________
CORPORATE TESTING REPORT
CONNECTICUT ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE TEST
(CAPT)
March 2009 Administration
Dr. Timothy Breslin, Principal
Farmington High School
Curt Pandiscio, Assistant Principal
Farmington High School
Veronica Ruzek, Assistant Principal
Farmington High School
September 2009
1
Farmington Public Schools
Corporate Testing Program
Connecticut Academic Performance Test (CAPT)
Grade 10
Test Administered – March 2009
Test Results Released – July 2009
This report is a means of sharing information with the Board of Education about
students' academic performance in the Farmington Public Schools. The report presents
the results of the Spring 2009 administration of the Connecticut Academic Performance
Test (CAPT) of students enrolled in Grade 10 during the 2008-09 school year, or the
2011 graduating class. This was the third administration of the third generation CAPT.
Purposes of CAPT
Since September 10, 2002, local boards of education have been required to include
CAPT results when developing criteria used to assess whether students have the basic
skills necessary for graduation. The graduating class of 2011, the cohort of students
featured in this report, must demonstrate goal level performance on all four CAPTs, or
meet standard in alternative Farmington-developed assessments in order to graduate.
The purposes of the CAPT are to promote improved student learning by:
 Setting high standards on a comprehensive range of important skills and knowledge;
 Emphasizing the application and integration of skills and knowledge in realistic
contexts;
 Promoting improved curriculum and instruction by providing useful achievement
data about students;
 Providing assessment data regarding students’ strengths and weaknesses; and
 Providing an expanded measure of accountability for all levels of Connecticut’s
education system up to and including high school.
The CAPT assesses student performance in four areas: Mathematics, Science, Reading
Across the Disciplines (based on a Response to Literature test and a Reading for
Information test), Writing Across the Disciplines (based on two Interdisciplinary writing
tests and an Editing and Revising test). The CAPT uses state-of-the-art assessment
techniques, such as performance tasks, to measure what students can do with what they
know. The CAPT assesses students’ ability to apply what they have learned in school to
simulated situations in a real world context.
2
CAPT Standards and Graduation Requirements
While CAPT is not a graduation test per se, the State Board of Education has
established ambitious goals for Connecticut’s high school students. Goal standards have
been established for grade 10 students in Reading Across the Disciplines, Writing
Across the Disciplines, Mathematics and Science. These goal standards represent high
yet reasonable expectations for students by the end of grade 10. Each student’s results
become part of his or her school records and are reported on students’ transcripts.
Students who meet or exceed the goal standard in each content area receive a Certificate
of Mastery in those areas.
Students in the class of 2011 who do not meet goal on the four CAPTs have not yet met
Farmington graduation requirements. As juniors, these students receive additional
support throughout the year by their current teachers and are also assigned to special
CAPT tutorials built into their schedule. These students have the option of re-taking
those CAPT tests on which they did not meet standard, or they can take and meet
standard on Farmington’s Standard Performance Assessments, created and administered
by the high school departments. If a student does not meet goal by either of these
options, then he/she is required to demonstrate achievement of the Farmington
Performance Standards through a portfolio of work that he or she completes in a senior
year course in the requirement area.
Description of CAPT Subtests
The CAPT includes four main sections;
Reading Across the Disciplines
The Reading Across the Disciplines section includes a Response to Literature test and a
Reading for Information test. These tests measure how well students read and respond
to both fiction and nonfiction selections. The Response to Literature Test consists of
reading a short story and responding to four open-ended questions. These questions
elicit how well the reader 1) demonstrates basic understandings of text, 2) interprets or
explains the text, 3) connects to the text, and 4) makes judgments about the quality of
the text. The Reading for Information test is similar to the reading comprehension
subtest of the Connecticut Mastery Test. It assesses the abilities of the students to
interpret and develop a critical stance about nonfiction. The test consists of reading
nonfiction passages (e.g., textbook material, newspapers) and answering a combination
of 12 multiple choice and six short-answer questions. The test assesses two levels of
comprehension: developing an interpretation and demonstrating a critical stance.
3
Writing Across the Disciplines
The Writing Across the Disciplines section includes both an Interdisciplinary Writing
task and an Editing and Revising task. The Interdisciplinary Writing task assesses
students’ abilities to think critically, solve problems, make decisions and communicate
their ideas in a realistic and interdisciplinary context. The test involves writing two
separate essays on different issues. The Interdisciplinary Writing test includes reading
short (one-to-two pages) nonfiction informational and persuasive reading materials
including charts and graphs, about a controversial topic. Students read the sources, take
a position on the issue, and write a persuasive essay. The essay elicits how well the
student: 1) takes a clear position for or against an issue; 2) supports that position with
evidence; 3) uses information from all sources; 4) organizes ideas logically and
effectively; and 5) expresses ideas with clarity and fluency. The Editing and Revising
test elicits students’ ability to apply their knowledge of not only Standard English, but
also skills related to revision. The Editing and Revising test consists of reading three
short passages (e.g., reports, editorials, memos) with embedded errors and answering 18
multiple-choice questions designed to assess students’ composing and editing skills.
Mathematics
The mathematics subtest of CAPT assesses students’ abilities to solve problems, explain
their reasoning, and communicate their understanding of relevant mathematics concepts.
The content areas assessed include: number and quantity; measurement and geometry;
statistics, probability and discrete mathematics; and algebra and functions. The test
consists of eight open-ended and 27 grid-in items. The eight open-ended items on each
test require students to show their work and explain their reasoning, thereby,
communicating their understanding of the relevant mathematics.
Science
The science subtest of the CAPT assesses conceptual understanding and application of
scientific content knowledge as well as understanding of scientific methods and
experimentation. The science test is comprised of five open-ended items and 60
multiple-choice items that assess five nearly-equally weighted strands:
1) Energy Transformations;
2) Chemical Structures and Properties;
3) Global Interdependence;
4) Cell Chemistry and Biotechnology; and
5) Genetics, Evolution and Biodiversity.
The CSDE has provided five suggested curriculum-embedded performance tasks for
teachers to use in the normal course of instruction. Each of the five content strands has
an inquiry laboratory investigation and a Science, Technology, and Society (STS)
activity. The five constructed responses that appear on the CAPT use the context of the
tasks, either the laboratory investigation or the STS, to assess scientific inquiry skills.
Each test includes one constructed response per content strand that results in a total of
five constructed responses.
4
FARMINGTON CAPT RESULTS
The chart below indicates the percentage of students who are above the state goal
(Advanced - Level 5), have met the state goal (Level 4), are proficient and within reach
of the state goal (Level 3), are basic or somewhat below goal (Level 2), and are below
basic or well below goal (Level 1). Student scores are recorded on their transcripts and
students who achieve goal in one or more areas receive a certificate of mastery.
Students attaining a goal score of 4 or 5 have met Farmington graduation requirements.
2009 CAPT RESULTS
338 Students Tested
Range
MATHEMATICS
Level 5 (Advanced)
Level 4 (Goal)
Level 3 (Proficient)
Level 2 (Basic)
Level 1 (Below Basic)
290 – 400
260 – 289
221 – 259
191 – 220
00 – 190
SCIENCE
Level 5 (Advanced)
Level 4 (Goal)
Level 3 (Proficient)
Level 2 (Basic)
Level 1 (Below Basic)
295 – 400
265 – 294
215 – 264
190 – 214
00 – 189
READING
Level 5 (Advanced)
Level 4 (Goal)
Level 3 (Proficient)
Level 2 (Basic)
Level 1 (Below Basic)
WRITING
Level 5 (Advanced)
Level 4 (Goal)
Level 3 (Proficient)
Level 2 (Basic)
Level 1 (Below Basic)
Average Score
286.5
% at level
45.0%
32.9%
18.6%
2.2%
1.2%
% met goal
78.0%
281.8
38.6%
28.7%
28.1%
2.4%
2.1%
67.4%
277.2
283 – 400
251 – 282
205 – 250
174 – 204
00 – 173
45.5%
32.2%
19.8%
1.9%
.6%
77.7%
292.4
286 – 400
250 – 285
210 – 249
182 – 209
00 – 181
53.9%
30.5%
12.9%
2.1%
.6%
84.4%
5
Comparison of the 2005 – 2009 CAPT Results: A Longitudinal Description
1st Admin. of
3rd Generation
CAPT
2005
% at or
above
goal
2006
% at or
above
goal
2007
% at or
above
goal
2008
% at or
above
goal
2009
% at or
above
goal
Mathematics
70.1
73.5
76.4
74.1
78
Science
75.7
71.8
74.9
70.2
67.4
Reading Across
the Disciplines
80.2
73.6
73.9
71.7
77.7
Writing Across
the Disciplines
82.9
69
79
85.4
84.4
Percentage
meeting standard
in all four subject
areas
56.9
53.4
52.1
57.1
56.8
Students Tested
325
354
351
356
338
6
Participation by District, DRG, and State
The CAPT participation rate for Farmington students for the 2009 administration was
99%. The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) federal law requires adequate yearly progress
in both student proficiency and student participation in the testing program. The state
goal for participation is 95% of all 10th graders. Farmington has encouraged student
participation by linking the assessment to daily classroom practice and high school
graduation requirements. Students who are absent on the day of an exam make it up
during the scheduled make-up periods.
Participation Rate for Special Education Students
Beginning with the 2004 test, with the exception of the profoundly disabled, all special
education students are required to take the tenth-grade CAPT. In the past, students
could be exempt from the CAPT based on their identified learning needs and were given
an alternate form of assessment to show growth in development. A skills checklist is
available as an alternate assessment for students with significant cognitive impairments
participating in the general curriculum with a functional focus. This year, several
students participated in the pilot Modified Assessment in the areas of mathematics (9)
and reading (10). Their scores are not included in the state’s CAPT reporting of
mathematics and reading scores. This year, 27 out of 28 tenth grade special education
students took the CAPT.
Year
Table of Participation Rates
Special Education Percentage of the
Students Tested
Total Number of
Students Tested
2005
2006
25 out of 27
25 out of 30
7.70%
7.70%
2007
2008
2009
22 out of 30
34 out of 38
27 out of 28
6.2%
9.6%
8.0%
CAPT also reports scores based on eligibility for free or reduced-priced meals,
race/ethnicity, English language learner (ELL) status, and gender. The only status
where there was a large enough cohort for the state to report out data was gender. The
number of students tested for each of the aforementioned categories was: students
eligible for free or reduced lunch 21 (previous year 22); African-American students 21
(previous year 17); American Indian 1 (previous year 0); Asian students 22 (previous year 33);
Hispanics 9 (previous year 13); and ELL 0 (previous year 3).
7
Participation and Achievement by Gender
One hundred seventy four males and 164 females in Grade 10 participated in the 2009
CAPT. This represents 99% of the class. Both Farmington boys and girls continue to
outperform their statewide counterparts. There is an evident gap between girls’ and
boys’ achievement in all areas except for math. In math, there is only a 2% gap between
the percentage of girls meeting the goal and the percentage of boys meeting the goal.
This is much lower than the almost 6% gap statewide. In the area of science, however,
there is a gap of 8% between the percentage of girls and boys achieving goal on the
CAPT at Farmington High. This is larger than the 4% statewide gap. In Reading and
Writing, girls outperformed boys in a manner consistent with state results (see chart
below). Other noteworthy results include:
 While the percentage of student meeting “goal” on the Science CAPT declined this
year compared to last year, the percentage of boys who achieved goal actually
increased.
 The percentage of girls achieving goal on the Science CAPT fell by 7.6% from last
year’s scores.
 The 7.8% point gap between girls and boys on the Science CAPT is not as dramatic
as the 14.4% gap that existed in 2007. However, it is much greater than last year’s
1.5% point gap.
 Girls continue to outperform boys in Reading and Writing. However, the gap
decreased this year in both areas. In fact, in the area of writing, the boys have been
making steady improvements. In 2007, the difference between the percentage of
girls who met the writing goal and the percentage of boys who met the standard was
25.2%. Then, last year, the gap was down to 14.2%. This year, the gap is down to
11.2%.
The results are below.
Farmington
(Overall Summary Results)
Last year’s results in parentheses
Total
Male
Female
Gap %
Mathematics
Science
Reading
Writing
% At/Above Goal
78.0%
(74.1%)
79.0%
(73.7%)
76.9%
(74.6%)
2.1%
% At/Above Goal
67.4%
(70.2%)
71.2%
(96.5%)
63.4%
(71.0%)
7.8%
% At/Above Goal
77.7%
(71.7%)
71.3%
(63.8%)
84.0%
(80.5%)
12.7%
% At/Above Goal
84.4%
(85.4%)
78.8%
(78.7%)
90.2%
(92.9%)
11.4%
8
State
Total
Male
Female
Gap
Mathematics
Science
Reading
Writing
% At/Above Goal
48%
(50.2%)
50.8%
(53.3%)
45.1%
(47.0%)
5.7%
% At/Above Goal
43%
(46.5%)
45.2%
(49.8%)
40.7%
(43.1%)
4.5%
% At/Above Goal
47.5%
(45.5%)
41.4%
(40.6%)
53.6%
(50.6%)
12.2%
% At/Above Goal
55.1%
(57.8%)
48.3%
(50.5%)
62%
(65.2%)
13.7%
9
Action Plan for Continuous Improvement in Student
Performance in Reading, Writing, Math, and Science
Reading
2005
% at or above
goal
2006
% at or above
goal
2007
% at or above
goal
2008
% at or above
goal
2009
% at or above
goal
80.2
73.6
73.9
71.7
77.7
The percent of students who met goal in the Reading Across the Disciplines portion of
the CAPT for the 2009 administration increased by 6% points from the previous year.
More than 50% of all students scored in the “Advanced” band. Only thirty-eight (38)
10th grade students did not meet the state goal in reading or writing section of the
CAPT. Therefore, these students have not yet met the Farmington Literacy Graduation
Standard and will be enrolled in mandatory literacy tutorials. Last year, thirty-nine (39)
students did not meet this standard. Most of these students eventually passed the
internal assessment during their junior year or scored at the goal level or higher on the
CAPT retake. Only 11 seniors are enrolled in the portfolio course.
Both the English and Social Studies departments continue to prepare students for the
Reading Across the Disciplines portion of the CAPT based on interventions that were
recommended by the Farmington CAPT Ad Hoc Committee in 2005. The following
instructional practices continue to be utilized:
 Students in all Social Studies and English classes learn and practice critical reading
and thinking skills such as making inferences, detecting bias and assumptions, taking
a critical stance, and developing an interpretation which align to CAPT skills.
 The World History I and II teams have focused on reading for their EEPD goals for
at least the past three years. In order to measure student reading for information
skills and inform their instruction, both the World History I and II teams worked to
create new common assessments using appropriate primary and secondary source
historical documents. These have been included in the new course curriculum maps.
Both teams met with the town-wide literacy director last year to develop new reading
instructional strategies. Team members continue to develop lessons, analyze student
work, and share best practices in the area of reading instruction.
 All students are assessed on reading for information skills on the Social Studies midyear and final exams as well as on common unit assessments in the form of primary
sources or CAPT-formatted readings and questions. This data is used to improve
instruction.
10
 English teachers of ninth and tenth grade students continue to develop lessons for
short story and novels that replicate the questions given on the Response to
Literature section of the CAPT.
 More timed in-class reading and writing assessments that ask the students to annotate
the text and respond to CAPT-like questions are included in the English curriculum.
 English teachers continue to use a variety of direct reading strategies with their
students and all courses have incorporated more non-fiction reading into their
curricula. English teachers of ninth and tenth grade students have developed new
questions to accompany the non-fiction reading that is more closely aligned with the
type of questions asked on the Reading for Information test.
 The department leaders in English and Social Studies conducted a joint professional
development session to allow all English and Social Studies teachers to share
instructional strategies and discuss best teaching practices related to reading
instruction.
 Students in the English Tutorial meet weekly with an English teacher to go through a
curriculum to prepare them for the midterm Junior Literacy assessment.
 Social Studies teachers met with their counterparts from Irving A. Robbins Middle
School last year to discuss and share CAPT preparation strategies in each school,
examine student work samples, and deepen their understanding of how to best
prepare students for CAPT.
Action Plan:
The English and Social Studies departments will continue to implement the previous
instructional strategies and are prepared to take the following additional steps to
improve student achievement in reading.
 All of the students in the class of 2011 who did not meet the Farmington literacy
graduation requirement (38) are assigned to special tutorials with targeted
interventions aimed at improving their success on the Farmington Literacy
Assessment.
 All of the students in the class of 2010 who have not yet met the Farmington
literacy graduation standard (11) are now taking the senior literacy requirement
known as the English Portfolio course.
11
Writing
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
% at or above
goal
% at or above
goal
% at or above
goal
% at or above
goal
% at or above
goal
82.9
69
79
85.4
84.4
The percentage of students who met goal in the Writing Across the Disciplines portion
of the CAPT for 2009 decreased by 1 percentage point from last year. Almost half of
the class scored in the “Advanced” band. Both the English and the Social Studies
departments prepare students for the Writing portion of the CAPT by using the
following instructional practices:
 Writing continues to be the central focus in each English and Social Studies course.
Students are taken through the writing process with more independence through the
grades. Students work toward developing their own thesis statements and supporting
textual evidence in writing critical, analytical, and persuasive essays.
 Students have a variety of opportunities to respond to literature with the same type of
questions that they will be asked to respond to on the Response to Literature test.
Students evaluate their own writing through time by reviewing their writing
portfolios.
 All student work is evaluated by teachers, and students are provided with specific
feedback using trait specific language and opportunities to rehearse skills.
 English teachers continue to develop additional lessons and assessments which more
closely align to the Editing and Revising section of the CAPT.
 The Social Studies and English collaborative teams continue to create common
assessments, collect and analyze student work samples, and share instructional
strategies and other best practices.
 Four social studies teachers and one English teacher have been trained in scoring the
CAPT writing exam and this information was shared with grade level teams. More
teachers will attend this training this year.
 The Civics team uses several “reasoning with evidence” common assessments on
civics-related issues to reinforce teacher efforts in history courses.
 Freshmen are taught the components of the persuasive essay using the Social Studies
department-created writing rubric: “Reasoning with Evidence.” This rubric is also
used across grades 9-12.
 Students are assessed on writing skills on the English and Social Studies mid-year
and final exams where they are provided with CAPT-formatted tasks, especially on
the ninth and tenth grade exams.
 Freshmen also are given CAPT baseline assessments in September and March, and
sophomore teachers have the opportunity to review this assessment which is in the
12
students’ writing portfolios. The data is also recorded in PowerSchool. A focus for
this year will be to encourage tenth grade teachers to make more sustained and
strategic use of this data to provide students with appropriate interventions.
 Ninth grade teachers will utilize 8th grade CMT data to discern weaknesses.
 Social Studies teachers continue to integrate the skills required in Writing Across the
Disciplines in 9th and 10th grade Practice CAPTs and provide additional instruction.
The English and Social Studies departments will continue to implement the previous
instructional strategies and as well as continue to implement the following steps.
Action Plan:
 All students in the class of 2011 who did not meet the literacy requirement are
assigned to special tutorials with targeted interventions aimed at improving their
performance on the Farmington Literacy Standard.
 The senior year English Portfolio course is available for all students in the class
of 2010 who have not yet met the Farmington Literacy Graduation Requirement.
13
Mathematics
2005
% at or above
goal
70.1
2006
% at or above
goal
73.5
2007
% at or above
goal
76.4
2008
% at or above
goal
74.1
2009
% at or above
goal
78
Seventy-eight percent of tenth grade students met the state goal on the Mathematics
portion of the CAPT, an increase of 3.9%. Initial review of the data indicates a strong
performance by students overall, with 45% of sophomores scoring in Band 5
(Advanced). The following is a summary of department initiatives that helped focus
attention on preparation for the CAPT:
 Freshman and sophomore teams reviewed strand data and adjusted instruction based
on relative weaknesses in the various courses.
 Ninth grade teachers access and utilize the 8th grade CMT scores to provide
interventions.
 The ninth grade practice CAPT was administered and results were entered into a
longitudinal data base. Data will be reviewed to help identify at-risk sophomores in
2009-10.
 Data is often the foundation of teacher EEPD projects.
 Sequence of topics in some courses was adjusted to address the March testing time
frame.
 An ad-hoc committee was formed in the 2008-09 to review the Integrated program
and developed a comprehensive three year Integrated sequence that contains
authentic learning tasks.
 The ad-hoc committee identified some weaknesses in instructional practices that will
begin to be addressed during the 2009-2010 school year.
 Additional Practice: Freshman and sophomore teams used CAPT-like materials
prior to the test. In addition, they spent time reviewing good test-taking strategies.
 The Math and Special Education departments worked together to better assist special
education students in preparation for the CAPT, particularly in adult-supported
classes.
 Development of the honors sequence included attention to the CAPT strands as well
as open-ended, CAPT-like problem solving.
 Juniors who did not pass the CAPT as sophomores were enrolled in a special tutorial
where strand weaknesses were addressed.
 Teachers provided an after-school “ER” (Emergency Room) program for students
who were struggling in Integrated courses.
 Summer School programs aimed at increasing student skill in algebra are offered
each year to incoming Freshmen and Sophomores.
14
 An assessment was developed that offered juniors enrolled in Integrated Math 3 who
did not meet standard on the CAPT the opportunity to meet standard during mid-year
exam week.
 The Precalculus Cumulative Assessment provided an additional opportunity for
some students to meet the standard.
 Curriculum was implemented for Math Portfolio, a one-semester course, designed to
help seniors who have not met the FHS graduation standard in mathematics through
the CAPT or other local opportunities.
Action Plan:
In addition to initiatives already in place, the department will take the following
steps during the 2009-10 academic year:
 Teachers will receive a list of current juniors who did not meet standard and
develop individual remediation plans for each student.
 Teams will complete a detailed analysis of the CAPT results by strand and by
individual student. The result of this analysis will lead to further adjustment in
curriculum and instruction.
 Additional tutorial staffing will be used to assist juniors who failed to meet
standard. Thirty-four seniors are enrolled in Fundamentals of Mathematics.
 A new online version of Cognitive Tutor is available for skill development and
practice for Math Portfolio, Alternative School, and other at-risk students.
 A “critical friend” - a professor from a local university - will assist the work of
the department as it continues to study best instructional practice in mathematics
and works to improve the Integrated pathway.
15
Science
2005
% at or above
goal
75.7
2006
% at or above
goal
71.8
2007
% at or above
goal
74.9
2008
% at or above
goal
70.2
2009
% at or above
goal
67.4
The 2009 CAPT-Science Generation III results showed that 67.4 % of the students met
goal or above. This represents a decrease by 3.2% from the previous year. The
strongest performance remains in the experimentation strand.
Further analysis shows that there are areas of relative strength and weakness in the
various strands. Generally, students who can score at least 10 points in each of the five
strands will score at the “Goal” level. The following chart shows the percentage of
students who scored at least a 10 in each of the strand areas:
Strand
Energy Transformations
Chemical Structures and
Properties
Global Interdependence
Cell Chemistry and
Biotechnology
Genetics, Evolution and
Biodiversity
Percentage of students scoring at
least a 10 in this strand
66.6%
71.3%
77.5%
63.9%
70.4%
The Science department will continue to analyze these results in order to determine best
intervention strategies for improving the curriculum and instruction in the science
program.
About seven years ago, a 7-12 science Ad Hoc committee analyzed student performance
on CAPT and implemented a series of action steps that have become standard practice.
As a result the actions include:
 All 10th grade Chemistry classes implement a 2½-week CAPT Science review unit
during the weeks preceding CAPT testing. The unit is intended to review science
concepts that students have not encountered since middle school. Students also
review test-taking strategies and interpretation of graphs and scientific diagrams.
Students practice different CAPT question formats by over-viewing the CAPT
practice test.
 Students of Physics (9th grade) experience and perform five curriculum embedded
CAPT tasks consisting of two Science, Technology and Society tasks and three
16
performance task experiments. These tasks are embedded into the curriculum and
emphasize data analysis and validity.
 Modifying the IAR Middle school science curriculum to include CAPT-related
content that is not part of the 9th or 10th grade science curriculum at FHS. The 8th
grade curriculum emphasizes more Life Science since Biology is not taught until the
11th grade.
 The use of a CMT Science Resource Binder to prepare students in grades 6-8 for the
Science CMT. The three required state tasks are linked to specific Farmington
science units.
Action Plan:
The Science department intends to continue the actions listed above for all 9th and
10th graders. The third generation of CAPT-Science was first administered in 2007
and reflects more emphasis on science inquiry skills/process (a shift of 22 % to 47 %
of the assessment). The CAPT science generation III test student understanding in 5
major strands encompassing the 11 conceptual themes in the CSDE Science
Framework. Last year, the 9-12 science staff analyzed the needs of the department
which include the development of additional interventions to address those students
who did not meet goal on CAPT-Science as 10th graders. A series of action steps
were implemented that have become standard practice. These actions include:
 Create a tighter alignment between the K-12 Farmington standards and the CSDE
science standards.
 The development of the Farmington Assessment of Science Performance (FASP)
generation III in the fall of 2009, by a 9-12 Ad hoc committee during department
meeting times and release time in the fall of 2009.
 The administration of the FASP (Generation III) during the mid-year to those 11th
grade students who do not meet goal on the CAPT-Science Generation III in
2008. Forty-one (47%) of those 11th graders who took the FASP Generation II
met the science graduation standard.
 Continued development and implementation of Science tutorial at FHS targeted
toward 11th graders identified as not meeting goal on the CAPT-Science
Generation III or the FASP Generation II (91 juniors were assigned permanently
to CAPT tutorial in 2008-2009.) The tutorial prepares students with the
necessary skills to have greater success on the CAPT- science -retake given to
juniors and the FASP given during the mid-year.
 Continued utilization of a science accelerated tutor. The science tutorial is
augmented by the services of a science accelerated tutor who serves to monitor
student review for CAPT science III and discipline based questions in physics,
chemistry, and biology.
17
 The continued development and use of the Science CAPT Resource Packet using
common materials to be used for CAPT-Science review by 10th grade teachers.
The packet contains CAPT practice test, test strategies, an overview of life
science content not usually covered in the 9th and 10th grade curriculum but tested
for on the Science-CAPT III science assessment, and student exemplars on free
response questions. This is accomplished over a course of eight days prior to
students taking the Science-CAPT III science assessment.
 Implementation of three sections of a senior level course “Portfolio Science” that
will provide an opportunity for students to meet Farmington’s graduation
requirement for science by achieving standard or higher in the course for those
who did not meet goal on the CAPT-Science III test or the local Farmington
Assessment of Science Performance (FASP). Forty seniors are currently enrolled
in this course for the 2009-2010 school year.
 A process of carrying student performance task from grade 8 to grade 10 for the
purpose of review for CAPT science III.
 The science vertical team will analyze both CMT and CAPT scores and
determine areas of relative strength and weakness for Farmington students.
 An ad-hoc or program review team (K-12) will be charged with analyzing the
CAPT results in relation to our program and will recommend changes to the
curriculum, sequence, or science instruction at the high school.
Michael Galluzzo, Assistant Superintendent, Dr. Tim Breslin, FHS Principal, Veronica
Ruzek, FHS Assistant Principal, and Dave Berrill, FHS Guidance Department Chair,
will be available on Monday evening to answer questions for the Board.
18
APPENDICES
The CAPT appendices contain data showing the percentage of students at each
achievement range on the subject tests and data comparing the performance of
Farmington students in achieving the goal standard with student performance at the state
level, with communities similar to Farmington (DRG-B).
Appendix A
Chart comparing Farmington results on subject tests relative to
DRG-B or comparable towns
Appendix B
Graphs – Farmington Results by Band Level Performance
Appendix C
Charts showing number of grade 11 retesters
19
APPENDIX A
DRG B Math Comparisons
CAPT DRG B MATH TEST - 2009
Farmington Students to Students in Other DRG B Towns
Ranked by Percentage Scoring at or Above the State Goal
Goal Standard: 260
Mathematics
Total Mathematics
Students Selected: All
Group
Number Tested
Average Scale Score
% At or Above Goal
Granby
190
282.4
79.5
Simsbury
358
282.4
78.8
Farmington
323
286.1
77.7
Glastonbury
523
283.7
76.7
Avon
248
280.7
75.4
Monroe
355
278.4
74.6
Guilford
259
276.3
74.1
Madison
308
276.6
71.4
Brookfield
252
275.8
71.4
Fairfield
626
274.7
70.9
Newtown
418
274.6
70.8
Region 15
378
272.9
70.6
Greenwich
631
276
70.2
South Windsor
424
273.9
69.6
Cheshire
356
275.8
69.1
Trumbull
484
274.3
68.6
New Fairfield
235
270.2
64.7
Region 5
402
271
64.4
West Hartford
761
268.7
60.7
Granby
190
282.4
79.5
20
APPENDIX A
DRG B Science Comparisons
CAPT DRG B SCIENCE TEST - 2009
Farmington Students to Students in Other DRG B Towns
Ranked by Percentage Scoring at or Above the State Goal
Goal Standard: 265
Science
Total Science
Students Selected: All
Group
Number Tested
Average Scale Score
% At or Above Goal
Monroe
358
288.7
79.1
Granby
194
292
74.2
Madison
317
290.2
73.5
Region 15
384
285.5
73.2
Guilford
263
287.3
71.1
Avon
249
285.2
69.9
New Fairfield
234
288.3
69.7
Trumbull
487
285.6
69.4
Simsbury
360
286.2
69.2
Glastonbury
542
286.9
68.3
Farmington
335
281.5
67.2
South Windsor
427
281.8
65.1
Brookfield
254
278.6
65
Greenwich
638
278.7
61.9
West Hartford
785
280.9
61.4
Fairfield
634
276.6
61.2
Cheshire
364
273.5
60.2
Region 5
403
275.8
59.3
Newtown
432
269.9
54.2
21
APPENDIX A
DRG B Reading Comparisons
CAPT DRG B READING TEST - 2009
Farmington Students to Students in Other DRG B Towns
Ranked by Percentage Scoring at or Above the State Goal
Goal Standard: 251
Reading
Total Reading
Students Selected: All
Group
Number Tested
Average Scale Score
% At or Above Goal
Madison
309
280.4
81.6
Farmington
325
276.3
77.2
Simsbury
356
279.2
77
Guilford
262
275.4
76
Avon
248
271.9
73.8
Granby
191
272.5
73.3
Region 5
402
273.1
72.9
Fairfield
629
270.4
72.5
West Hartford
754
271.5
72.1
Newtown
410
270.9
71
Greenwich
630
270.4
71
Monroe
356
271.6
70.8
Glastonbury
518
271.3
70.8
New Fairfield
235
272.3
70.2
Region 15
380
269.1
69.7
Trumbull
480
264.4
65.6
Cheshire
355
261.6
65.6
South Windsor
423
261.9
65.5
Brookfield
253
264.1
64
22
APPENDIX A
DRG B Writing Comparisons
CAPT DRG B WRITING TEST - 2009
Farmington Students to Students in Other DRG B Towns
Ranked by Percentage Scoring at or Above the State Goal
Goal Standard: 250
Writing
Total Writing
Students Selected: All
Group
Number Tested
Average Scale Score
% At or Above Goal
Madison
317
298.6
87.1
Simsbury
360
293.2
85.3
Farmington
335
292.1
84.2
Trumbull
486
287.2
80.7
New Fairfield
234
287.5
79.9
Granby
195
280.9
79.5
Greenwich
633
288.4
79.1
Guilford
262
282.3
79
Region 15
385
282.9
78.4
Avon
248
283
78.2
Region 5
404
287.3
76.7
West Hartford
779
280
75.7
Newtown
429
280.1
75.3
Monroe
355
282.5
75.2
South Windsor
425
274.3
74.4
Fairfield
633
277.8
73.5
Glastonbury
541
275.9
73.4
Cheshire
366
277.3
72.1
Brookfield
255
275.1
62.4
23
Appendix B-1
2009 CAPT Math
1.2%
2.3%
18.6%
Below Basic
Basic
45.0%
Proficient
Goal
Advanced
32.9%
24
Appendix B-2
2009 CAPT Science
2.1%
2.4%
28.1%
38.6%
Below Basic
Basic
Proficient
Goal
Advanced
28.7%
25
Appendix B-3
2009 CAPT Reading
45.5%
60.0%
Below Basic
Basic
Proficient
Goal
32.2%
1.9%
Advanced
19.8%
26
Appendix B-4
2009 CAPT Writing
53.9%
60.0%
Below Basic
Basic
Proficient
Goal
2.1%
30.5%
Advanced
12.9%
27
Appendix C
CAPT ANALYSIS OF GRADE 11 RETESTERS
Number not
meeting goal
in 2004
in 2005
in 2006
in 2007
in 2008
in 2009
Number of
re-testers
in 2005
in 2006
in 2007
in 2008
in 2009
Number of retesters and %
at or above
goal
in 2004
in 2005
in 2006
in 2007
in 2008
in 2009
Mathematics
Reading
Across the
Disciplines
Science
Writing
Across the
Disciplines
125
93
93
83
91
71
121
60
93
105
99
72
109
76
99
83
105
109
112
52
108
69
50
52
42
38
68
72
73
36
37
27
40
25
37
28
58
77
77
37
39
27
37
25
11 (29%)
22 (52%)
16 (42%)
20 (29%)
30 (42%)
29 (30%)
18 (38%)
7 (19%)
13 (35%)
5 (19%)
16 (40%)
6 (24%)
18 (45%)
21 (57%)
9 (32%}
19 (33%)
33 (47%)
20 (26%)
17 (47%)
16 (43%)
11 (28%}
7 (26%)
12 (32%)
7 (28%)
The chart shows that there is annual wide variation in the percentages of re-testers
meeting goal. However, the number of re-testers in Math and Science increased
significantly as these graduation standards came on line.
28