Analysis of Student
Performance on
Assessments
2010-2011
Elementary Schools
• NJPASS 2
• NJASK 3
• NJASK 4
• NJASK 5
Middle School
• NJASK 6
• NJASK 7
• NJASK 8
High School
• HSPA
• NJPASS 9
• NJPASS 10
• AP Exams
• SAT
• Percent of adults without a high school diploma
• Percent of adults with some college education
• Occupational status
• Unemployment rate
• Percent of individuals in poverty
• Median family income
Monmouth County
• Eatontown Boro
• Howell Township
• Ocean Township
• Red Bank Regional
• Spring Lake Heights Boro
• West Long Branch
Other Counties
• Monroe Township
• Point Pleasant Boro
• Cinnaminson Township
• Dunellen Boro
• North Brunswick
• Old Bridge Township
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
NJPASS 2, NJASK 3, 4, and 5
2010-2011 INITIATIVES K-5
Curricular Improvements (K-5): Development and implementation of Units of Study for Writing
based on Lucy Calkin’s Writer’s Workshop Framework for grades K-5; Infusion of Standards
Solution instructional resources within the district writing curriculum for grades 2-5;
Integration of NJASK prep instructional resources within the language arts curriculum for
both reading and writing; Enhancement of Everyday Math unit assessments to reflect skills
assessed on NJASK; Weekly assessment of student mastery of basic math facts.
District-wide Benchmark Assessments: NWEA Assessment (grades 3-5); District-Wide Quarterly
Curriculum Benchmarks in Reading, Writing and Math (grades K-5) – revision made to better
align with the NJASK.
Student Instruction: Language Arts Tutorial; Math Tutorial
Professional Development: Literacy Coach provided in-class coaching of teachers (grades K-5);
Literacy Coach provided before and after school professional development for teachers (grades
K-5); Follow-up training for Everyday Math; Training with Standards Solution on effective testtaking strategies for the reading portion of the NJASK (grades 2-5); Training on using data to
guide instruction in the classroom.
Building Level Data Teams: (Student Support Teams) analyzed district data and created
improvement plans for students identified as being at-risk.
Language Arts:
Math:
• Reading - Working with the Passage
• Number Sense, Operations and
Properties
and Analyzing the Passage
• Listening – Working with the
Passage and Analyzing the Passage
• Writing – Content, Development, and
Language Conventions
• Measurement
• Spatial Sense and Geometry
• Data Analysis, Probability, and
Discrete Mathematics
• Patterns and Algebra
%PP
16
%P
31
%AP
53
% Total Proficient
84
MARSD – 09-10
16
35
48
84
CL – 10-11
30
32
38
70
CL – 09-10
26
45
29
74
RD – 10-11
13
34
53
87
RD – 09-10
22
24
53
77
ST – 10-11
9
28
63
91
ST – 09-10
6
37
58
95
MARSD – 10-11
Partially Proficient
Proficient
Advanced Proficient
%PP
7
%P
35
%AP
59
% Total Proficient
94
MARSD – 09-10
10
39
52
91
CL – 10-11
11
41
48
89
CL – 09-10
23
44
34
78
RD – 10-11
7
37
57
94
RD – 09-10
6
44
50
94
ST – 10-11
4
29
66
95
ST – 09-10
5
31
64
95
MARSD – 10-11
Partially Proficient
Proficient
Advanced Proficient
The Language Arts Literacy section of the NJASK 3, 4 and 5
measures students’ achievement in reading and writing.
There are four cluster areas:
• Writing Task 1 – Speculative or Expository
• Writing Task 2 – Speculative or Expository
• Working with Text
• Analyzing Text
The Mathematics section of NJASK 3, 4 and 5 measures
students’ knowledge and their ability to solve problems by
applying mathematical concepts.
There are five cluster areas:
• Number Sense and Numerical Operations
• Geometry and Measurement
• Problem Solving
• Data Analysis, Probability and Discrete
Mathematics
• Patterns and Algebra
The NJASK 4 Science assessment measures students’
knowledge as well as cognitive and process skills in four
cluster areas:
• Life Science
• Physical Science
• Earth Science
• Application
Performance Levels
Scale Score from 100-300
• Advanced Proficient:
• Proficient:
• Partially Proficient:
250-300
200-249
100-199
The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act requires each state to
establish challenging content and performance standards and to
implement assessments that measure students' performance
against those standards in a manner that:
• results in continuous and substantial yearly improvement
of each school.
• is sufficiently rigorous to achieve the goal within an
appropriate timeframe.
As a result of NCLB, each state has developed a plan for the
minimum levels of improvement in measurable terms of student
performance that schools must achieve within the given time
frames specified by the NCLB legislation. This is otherwise
known as Adequate Yearly Progress or AYP.
A district must pass all 41 indicators to receive AYP status.
Content Area
Grade Span
Starting
Point 2003
2005 - 2007
2008 – 2010
2011 – 2013
2014
Language
Arts Literacy
Elementary
(Grades 3-5)
68
75
59
79
100
Middle School
(Grades 6-8)
58
66
72
86
100
High School
(Grade 11)
73
79
85
92
100
Elementary
(Grades 3-5)
53
62
66
83
100
Middle School
(Grades 6-8)
39
49
61
80
100
High School
(Grade 11)
55
64
74
86
100
Mathematics
• Benchmark values indicate % of Total Student Proficiency.
LAL%
MATH%
MARSD – 10-11
PP
P
25.8 62.2
MARSD – 09-10
21.6
70.8
7.6
78.4
DFG – 10-11
30.3 62.5
7.2
DFG – 09-10
34.0
60.4
STATE – 10-11
STATE – 09-10
AP
TOTAL P
PP
12.0
74.2
11.0
P
AP
TOTAL P
37.6 51.4
89.0
9.3
37.5
53.2
90.7
69.7
15.7
42.8
41.6
84.4
5.6
66.0
16.5
43.6
39.9
83.5
37.0 55.8
7.2
63.0
21.1
40.5
38.4
78.9
40.3
5.6
59.7
21.9
41.0
37.1
78.1
54.1
Partially Proficient
Proficient
Advanced Proficient
NJASK 3 MARSD
% Total Proficient by Subgroup
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
Total Students
30
African-American
White
Asian
20
Hispanic
Special Education
10
0
Limited English Proficient
Economically Disadvantaged
LAL
MA
NJASK 3
CL – 10-11
LAL%
MATH%
PP
P AP TOTAL P PP
P
AP TOTAL P
38.6 57.8 3.6
61.4
19.3 44.6 36.1
80.7
CL – 09-10
21.6
7.6
78.4
DFG – 10-11
30.3 62.5 7.2
DFG – 09-10
34.0
70.8
53.2
90.7
69.7
15.7 42.8 41.6
84.4
5.6
66.0
16.5
39.9
83.5
STATE – 10-11
37.0 55.8 7.2
63.0
21.1 40.5 38.4
78.9
STATE – 09-10
40.3
59.7
21.9
78.1
60.4
54.1
Partially Proficient
5.6
Proficient
9.3
37.5
43.6
41.0
37.1
Advanced Proficient
Total Mean Score
CL
LAL
204.7
MATH
233.9
DFG
209.1
236.5
STATE
205.7
231.6
Area of Strength
Area of Concern
NJASK 3 LAL Cluster Mean Scores
Writing Expository Speculative Reading Working Analyzing
Task
Task
with Text
Text
CL
10.2
4.9
5.3
16.1
7.7
8.4
DFG
10.4
10.2
5.0
4.9
5.4
5.2
16.9
16.2
8.2
7.8
8.7
8.3
20
10
10
30
12
18
STATE
Total
Points
Area of Strength
Area of Concern
NJASK 3 Math Cluster Mean Scores
Number & Geometry & Patterns Data Analysis, Problem
Numerical Measurement
&
Probability & Solving
Operations
Algebra Discrete Math
CL
DFG
STATE
Total Points
13.6
13.8
13.3
7.5
7.7
7.4
7.4
7.3
7.2
4.7
5.1
4.8
9.2
9.4
9.0
20
11
11
8
14
Area of Strength
Area of Concern
NJASK 3
CL Total %Proficiency
5 Year Span
100
90
Total % Proficiency
80
70
60
LAL
50
MA
40
30
20
10
0
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
NJASK 3
CL % Advanced Proficient
5 Year Span
70
% Advanced Proficient
60
50
LAL
40
MA
30
20
10
0
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
NWEA Predictability
NWEA SPRING TARGET
PROJECTED PROFICIENCY
ACCURACY OF
PROJECTION
LAL
56.0%
86.9%
MA
73.1%
96.6%
Tutoring Results and NJASK 3
% PP
%P
% AP
LAL – After School
(12 students)
50.0
50.0
0
MATH – After School
(12 students)
33.3
66.6
0
NJASK 3
LAL%
MATH%
RD– 10-11
PP
31.0
P
56.0
RD– 09-10
19.6
73.5
6.9
80.4
11.8
31.4
56.9
88.3
DFG – 10-11
30.3
62.5
7.2
69.7
15.7
42.8 41.6
84.4
DFG – 09-10
34.0
60.4
5.6
66.0
16.5
43.6
39.9
83.5
STATE – 10-11
37.0
55.8
7.2
63.0
21.1
40.5 38.4
78.9
STATE – 09-10
40.3
54.1
5.6
59.7
21.9
41.0
78.1
Partially Proficient
AP TOTAL P PP
13.1
69.1
13.3
Proficient
P
AP TOTAL P
31.3 55.4
86.7
37.1
Advanced Proficient
NJASK 3 Total Mean Scores
RD
LAL
212.9
MATH
250.1
DFG
209.1
236.5
STATE
205.7
231.6
Area of Strength
Area of Concern
NJASK 3 LAL Cluster Mean Scores
Writing Expository Speculative Reading Working Analyzing
with Text
Text
Task
Task
RD
DFG
STATE
Total
Points
11.0
10.4
10.2
5.3
5.0
4.9
5.7
5.4
5.2
17.1
16.9
16.2
8.1
8.2
7.8
8.9
8.7
8.3
20
10
10
30
12
18
Area of Strength
Area of Concern
NJASK 3 Math Cluster Mean Scores
Number &
Numerical
Operations
RD
DFG
STATE
Total
Points
Geometry & Patterns Data Analysis, Problem
Measurement
&
Probability & Solving
Algebra Discrete Math
14.7
13.8
13.3
8.3
7.7
7.4
8.5
7.3
7.2
5.4
5.1
4.8
10.1
9.4
9.0
20
11
11
8
14
Area of Strength
Area of Concern
NJASK 3
RD Total % Proficiency
5 Year Span
100
90
Total % Proficiency
80
70
60
LAL
50
MA
40
30
20
10
0
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
NJASK 3
RD % Advanced Proficient
5 Year Span
%Advanced Proficient
70
60
50
LAL
40
MA
30
20
10
0
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
NWEA SPRING TARGET
PROJECTED PROFICIENCY
ACCURACY OF
PROJECTION
LAL
64.3%
92.6%
MA
81.0%
97.1%
Tutoring Results and NJASK 3
LAL – After School
(14 students)
MATH – Before School
(5 students)
% PP
%P
% AP
42.9
57.1
0
0
80.0
20.0
LAL %
PP
ST – 10-11
P
AP
13.0 69.9 17.1
MATH %
TOTAL P
87.0
PP
P
AP
4.1 36.6 59.3
TOTAL P
95.9
ST – 09-10
11.1
76.1
12.8
88.9
4.3
32.5
63.2
95.7
DFG – 10-11
30.3
62.5
7.2
69.7
15.7
42.8
41.6
84.4
DFG – 09-10
34.0
60.4
5.6
66.0
16.5
43.6
39.9
83.5
STATE – 10-11
37.0
55.8
7.2
63.0
21.1
40.5
38.4
78.9
STATE – 09-10
40.3
54.1
5.6
59.7
21.9
41.0
37.1
78.1
Partially Proficient
Proficient
Advanced Proficient
NJASK 3 Total Mean Scores
ST
LAL
222.3
MATH
253.9
DFG
209.1
236.5
STATE
205.7
231.6
Area of Strength
Area of Concern
NJASK 3 LAL Cluster Mean Scores
Writing Expository Speculative Reading Working Analyzing
with Text
Text
Task
Task
ST
12.3
6.1
6.1
18.2
8.7
9.5
DFG
10.4
5.0
5.4
16.9
8.2
8.7
STATE
10.2
4.9
5.2
16.2
7.8
8.3
20
10
10
30
12
18
Total
Points
Area of Strength
Area of Concern
NJASK 3 Math Cluster Mean Scores
Number & Geometry & Patterns Data Analysis, Problem
Numerical Measurement
&
Probability & Solving
Operations
Algebra Discrete Math
ST
DFG
STATE
Total Points
15.2
13.8
13.3
8.6
7.7
7.4
8.2
7.3
7.2
6.0
5.1
4.8
10.8
9.4
9.0
20
11
11
8
14
Area of Strength
Area of Concern
NJASK 3
ST % Total Proficiency
5 Year Span
100
% Total Proficiency
90
80
70
LAL
60
MA
50
40
30
20
10
0
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
NJASK 3
ST % Advanced Proficient
5 Year Span
70
% Advanced Proficient
60
50
LAL
MA
40
30
20
10
0
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
NWEA SPRING TARGET
PROJECTED PROFICIENCY
ACCURACY OF
PROJECTION
LAL
78.4%
93.8%
MA
87.2%
99%
Tutoring Results and NJASK 3
% PP
%P
% AP
LAL – Before School
(13 students)
7.7
92
0
MATH – After School
(11 students)
0
100
0
LAL%
P
AP TOTAL P
PP
PP
MATH %
P
AP TOTAL P
LR – 10-11
27.8
61.0
11.2
72.2
12.2
44.7
43.1
87.8
LR – 09-10
35.5
52.5
12.1
64.6
18.9
41.5
39.6
81.1
DFG – 10-11
30.4
62.0
7.6
69.6
16.3
49.8
33.8
83.6
DFG – 09-10
34.7
55.8
9.5
65.3
18.4
44.9
36.7
81.6
STATE-10-11
37.3
55.5
7.2
62.7
20.7
47.2
32.1
79.3
STATE – 09-10
40.4
50.3
9.3
59.6
23.0
42.2
34.8
77.0
Partially Proficient
Proficient
Advanced Proficient
SCIENCE %
LR – 10-11
PP
4.1
P
41.0
AP
54.9
TOTAL P
95.9
LR – 09-10
5.3
41.9
52.8
94.7
DFG – 10-11
5.4
39.1
55.5
94.6
DFG – 09-10
3.3
45.1
51.5
96.6
10.0
42.3
47.7
90.0
6.6
49.2
44.2
93.4
STATE – 10-11
STATE – 09-10
Partially Proficient
Proficient
Advanced Proficient
NJASK 4 Total Mean Scores
LAL
MATH
SCIENCE
Grade 4
211.9
241.3
252.5
DFG
209.1
232.7
250.1
STATE
204.7
229.2
243.7
Area of Strength
Area of Concern
NJASK 4 LAL Cluster Mean Scores
Writing
Expository Speculative Reading Working Analyzing
Task
Task
with Text
Text
LR
12.2
6.1
6.1
22.8
10.2
12.7
DFG
12.1
6.0
6.1
22.3
9.9
12.4
STATE
11.8
5.8
5.9
21.3
9.5
11.8
20
10
10
36
14
22
Total
Points
Area of Strength
Area of Concern
NJASK 4 Math Cluster Mean Scores
Number & Geometry & Patterns Data Analysis, Problem
Numerical Measurement
&
Probability & Solving
Operations
Algebra Discrete Math
LR
15.6
6.9
7.7
5.1
13.4
DFG
14.9
6.3
7.3
4.8
12.7
STATE
14.4
6.1
7.2
4.6
12.2
20
11
11
8
24
Total
Points
Area of Strength
Area of Concern
NJASK 4 Science Cluster Mean Scores
Life
Science
Physical
Science
Earth
Science
LR
11.4
8.0
7.6
2.1
24.9
DFG
11.0
8.1
7.4
2.0
24.5
STATE
10.5
7.7
7.0
1.9
23.3
16
11
12
9
30
Total
Points
Area of Strength
Area of Concern
Knowledge Application
NJASK 4
LR % Total Proficient
5 Year Span
100
90
80
% Total Proficient
70
LAL
MA
SC
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
NJASK 4
LR % Total Advanced Proficient
5 Year Span
70
% Total Advanced Proficient
60
50
LAL
40
MA
SC
30
20
10
0
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
NJASK 4 MARSD
% Total Proficient by Subgroup
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
Total Students
White
African American
Asian
Hispanic
Special Education
Limited English Proficient
Economically Disadvantaged
30
20
10
0
LAL
MA
SC
PP
LR – 10-11
LR – 09-10
DFG – 10-11
DFG – 09-10
LAL %
P
AP TOTAL P
37.2 54.5 8.3
34.8
56.4
8.9
32.2 62.3 5.5
31.3
59.9
8.8
STATE – 10-11 39.1 54.8 6.1
STATE – 09-10
36.9
54.3
Partially Proficient
8.7
62.8
65.3
67.8
68.7
60.9
63.0
Proficient
PP
MATH %
P
AP TOTAL P
13.2 39.1 47.7
16.7
34.8
48.5
15.3 44.3 40.4
17.3
44.3
38.4
19.4 41.1 39.5
21.3
42.0
36.8
86.8
83.3
84.7
82.7
80.6
78.8
Advanced Proficient
NJASK 5 Total Mean Scores
LAL
MATH
Grade 5
207.5
241.6
DFG
208.6
236.0
STATE
205.0
233.6
Area of Strength
Area of Concern
NJASK 5 LAL Cluster Mean Scores
Writing Speculative Expository Reading Working Analyzing
Task
Task
with Text
Text
LR
11.8
6.2
5.6
23.6
11.5
12.0
DFG
11.7
6.2
5.5
24.2
11.7
12.5
STATE
11.5
6.1
5.4
23.1
11.1
12.0
20
10
10
42
17
25
Total
Points
Area of Strength
Area of Concern
NJASK 5 Math Cluster Mean Scores
Number & Geometry & Patterns Data Analysis, Problem
Numerical Measurement & Algebra Probability & Solving
Operations
Discrete Math
LR
12.9
10.4
5.8
5.7
14.1
DFG
12.4
9.7
5.6
5.6
13.6
STATE
12.1
9.6
5.5
5.4
13.3
15
16
8
8
25
Total
Points
Area of Strength
Area of Concern
NJASK 5
LR % Total Proficient
5 Year Span
100
90
% Total Proficient
80
70
60
LAL
50
MA
40
30
20
10
0
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
NJASK 5
LR % Advanced Proficient
5 Year Span
70
% Advanced Proficient
60
50
40
LAL
MA
30
20
10
0
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
NJASK 5
% Total Proficient by Subgroup
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
Total Students
White
African American
Asian
Hispanic
Special Education
Limited English Proficient
Economically Disadvantaged
30
20
10
0
LAL
MA
NWEA Predictability
NWEA SPRING TARGET
SUBJECT PROJECTED PROFICIENCY
4th GRADE
5th GRADE
ACCURACY OF
PROJECTION
LA
55%
94%
MA
92%
94%
LA
MA
73%
52%
99%
93%
Tutoring Results and NJASK 4 & 5
NJASK Score Range
Grade 4 LAL
%PP
%P
%AP
43
57
0
50
50
0
54
46
0
(14 students)
Grade 4 Math
(6 students)
Grade 5 LAL
(24 students)
Action Plan for 2011-2012 (K-5)
Reader’s Workshop Training for Teachers of Grades 3-5: Collaborating with Rutgers
University Graduate School of Education to offer ongoing professional development on
teaching Reading using Lucy Calkin’s Reader’s Workshop framework – (shared reading,
word study, guided reading, independent reading, book clubs/literature circles, literacy
centers, DRA-2).
Literacy Coach: Ongoing professional development on teaching reading and writing for
teachers of grades K-5.
NJASK Prep and Standards Solution Resources: Integrating resources within the
language arts curriculum.
NWEA: Using the data to identify students’ projected performance on the NJASK and to
develop individual Action Plans to target needs of Basic Skills students.
Study Island (Grades 3-5) and Reading Eggs (Grades K-2): Parent resource and
additional instructional tool targeting skills assessed on the NJASK in the area of
language arts and mathematics (grades 3-5) and overall literacy (grades K-2).
Supplemental Educational Services: Collaborating with Smart Start “Smarties” to
provide Lloyd Road students meeting federal criteria additional instruction in the area
of language arts.
Action Plan for 2011-2012 (K-5)
Additional State Aid: Purchased instructional resources for classrooms of grades 3-5
(classroom libraries; leveled readers for shared reading, guided reading, book
clubs/literature circles; DRA-2); Hiring a Literacy Consultant to evaluate the language
arts program.
Summer STAR Program (Strategic Targeted Assistance in Reading): Program will
target students exiting 1st through 5th grades who are reading below grade level as
designated by district benchmarks.
Quarterly Benchmark Measurements: Revised to reflect the NJASK.
Tutorial Program: Targeting at-risk students in grades 3-5 in the area of language
arts and mathematics.
Everyday Math: Revised K-2 curriculum aligns with the Common Core State
Standards; Revised Unit Assessments integrate skills assessed on the NJASK;
Providing professional development for teachers of grades 3-5 on program changes
as a result of the integration of the Common Core State Standards; Continue to
monitor students’ mastery and automaticity of basic math facts (grades 1-5);
Continue to monitor overall program.