Wilson: SPS has Much to be Proud of in Latest MCAS Report

The following is a letter from Sudbury Public Schools Superintendent Anne Wilson to SPS families:

At the School Committee meeting on Tuesday, September 24, 2013, I presented an initial report of the Spring 2013 MCAS scores for the district.  We have much to be proud of and, as always, we have areas for growth and improvement.  I am extremely proud of the professional, thoughtful and caring work of our teachers and the persistence, curiosity, and hard work of our students.  You should receive soon, if you have not already, your child's individual MCAS report.  If you have questions about your child's results, please contact your child's teacher. 

In the Initial MCAS results presentation, which may be accessed at: Initial 2013 SPS MCAS Report you will note that we have particular areas where we "shine" as well as areas that require investigation and analysis to inform improvement. There are a number of areas, both in the aggregate as a district and in particular subgroups, where our achievement is at the very high levels, relative to both our own past performance and in comparisons to other districts.  In addition, there are areas where our scores were lower than we expect.  Teachers and administrators are currently analyzing the data to identify areas for improvement and appropriate adjustments to curriculum, instructional practices, and/or support provided for individual students.  (please note that data on slides without a citation are from MA Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, while data from other sources are cited on individual slides)

We analyze all MCAS data on both a macro and micro level to determine areas of strength and challenge for the district as a whole as well as for each school, grade level, student subgroup, and individual student.  As we analyze these data, we pay particular attention to any areas where we find lower than expected results in: the overall performance of all students in a content area or at a grade level in the district or in a particular school, performance of a specific subgroup of students in the district or in a particular school, growth scores for groups or individuals in the district or in a particular school, or rankings of how the district and the individual schools in the district performed relative to other districts/schools in Massachusetts.  When we identify concerns, we delve into specific item analysis and look at the types of questions answered incorrectly, the standards addressed, and the learning profiles of students who missed the questions.  We then examine our curriculum, instructional practices, and individual student supports and make appropriate adjustments.

One area of focus for the District is student growth, which is expressed through Student Growth Percentiles (SGP).   SGPs reflect how a student performed based on the group of students who had the same score in the previous year.  So for example, if Susie Student had a scaled score of 245 (proficient) on the math MCAS as a third grader, when she takes the fourth grade math test, she will be compared to all other students in the state who scored 245 as third graders.  If she receives a SGP of 40,  it means that 60% of her fourth grade peers who scored 245 in third grade, scored higher than her as fourth graders.  It is important to note that even though Susie's score may have stayed the same or increased, the SGP helps see whether Susie is growing at a faster or slower rate than her peers who started at the same place the prior year.  This is important information for us as it relates to performance of both individual students and groups of students.

We expect to see Student Growth Percentiles (SGP) at 51 or better for most students and student groups.  A SGP of 60 is considered "high growth."  In the presentation, I identified areas where our SGP is below 51  and indicated that these are areas for further investigation and data analysis.  In particular, we must fully investigate where we see lower growth combined with lower percentages of students performing at the proficient and advanced levels.  These areas may be noted by looking at the slides entitled "ELA Growth/Grade levels" and "Math Growth/Grade Levels."

Finally, we analyze how students perform over time by following the same students from third grade to eighth grade and looking at their progress from year to year.  These data are named "Cohort Data." The last three slides of the attached presentation show how cohorts of students have performed on MCAS as they progress through the grades.  By looking at cohort data, we monitor how the same students (for the most part, barring move-ins and move-outs) perform from year to year.  In each individual cell of the charts, you will see the percentage of students scoring Proficient and Advanced at SPS compared to the percentage of students scoring Proficient and Advanced statewide along with the difference between the SPS and state percentages.  By looking at the chart diagonally, you can see how a particular cohort has performed in successive grades.  Although tests are different each year, ultimately, we want to see an increase in the performance of a cohort between 3rd and 8th grade in each content area.   

At the next School Committee meeting on October 9, 2013, we will talk more about the results and provide an example of the type of analysis we engage in at the district and school levels.