NECAP Scores In EG Down Slightly From 2011
The scores from reading and math tests taken last fall remain far higher than the state average.
Photos
East Greenwich students did not score as well on NECAP reading and math tests as they did a year ago, according to results released Friday by the state Department of Education. EG scores remained far above the state average.
The New England Common Assessment Program tests were taken in October by students in grades 3 through 8 and 11.
Overall, in reading, 90 percent of EG students scored proficient or proficient with distinction; that percent was 92 in 2011. In math, 80 percent of EG students scored proficient or proficient with distinction; that percent was 83.
The state average in reading was 73 percent proficient or above; in math it was 57 percent proficient or above.
State Education Commissioner Deborah Gist said Friday results statewide were "disappointing." She did note changes brought about by Race to the Top would not be reflected in test scores for a few years. Those changes include yearly teacher evaluations, tougher standards requirements for those wanting to enter state teaching-training programs, and enhance data to help track student performance.
Supt. Victor Mercurio said the school principals were just beginning to analyze the data, but he conceded disappointment in math scores.
"Math, as it is for most districts, is a struggle," said Mercurio. "We have to go back and revisit what we’ve done to support students, whether or not those things have been effective."
The NECAP tests are taken by students in Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine, in addition to Rhode Island. New Hampshire students scored highest in reading, 79 percent at or above proficiency in grades 3 through 8, and 77 percent for 11 grade. Maine and Vermont are on par with R.I., which was 72 percent and 79 percent, respectively.
In math, again New Hampshire students scored higher – 73 percent at or above for grades 3 through 8, 38 percent for 11 grade. Vermont scored 65 percent and 38 percent, respectively. R.I. students scored 61 percent and 34 percent.
For more information about East Greenwich scores, check out the R.I. Department of Education's website here.
Heather Larkin
7:20 am on Wednesday, February 13, 2013
Two or three percentage points in a district this small is not much of a change. A handful of kids fighting a cold and a couple of poor test takers will make a difference.
Common Sense
9:18 am on Wednesday, February 13, 2013
I disagree. The trend in EG as well as the rest of the state was down, not up. There will always be a few sick kids and poor test takers, so that does not account for the change or the fact that students in RI have lower test scores than those in the rest of New England. The critical issue is how to improve proficiency (a minimum standard) with a real goal of mastery (maximum standard).
Heather Larkin
9:53 am on Wednesday, February 13, 2013
Common Sense, My point is that statistically, with the relatively small pool of test takers we have here a few points in either direction should not be cause for alarm. You are correct that our goal should be mastery. I question whether all these tests will get us there.
JavaJen
1:44 pm on Wednesday, February 13, 2013
Heather, I wondered the same thing. Are these changes (92% to 90% proficient in reading, 83% to 80% proficient in math) statistically significant decreases, or not? There is also a ceiling effect to consider, at least with reading.
JavaJen
2:02 pm on Wednesday, February 13, 2013
Just found the answer to my own question. According to the report (pg 15), these are not statistically significant changes. If they were, they would be highlighted in red, according to the key shown at the bottom of pg 16.
Elizabeth McNamara
2:38 pm on Wednesday, February 13, 2013
Thanks JavaJen. You're hired!
Jerry Hoff
11:29 am on Wednesday, February 13, 2013
Unacceptable. Common Sense has it right. And to sit back and take solace that statistically all is well is is foolish considering Rhode Island as a whole is already at the bottom nationally. It's time to expect more Heather. Being the best of the worst, and to be decelerating, is just unacceptable for what is spent in this town.
Eric Carpenter
12:50 pm on Wednesday, February 13, 2013
Can one of you describe in what way RI public education ranks "at the bottom nationally", and provide a link to some actual data? The Education Week study from January referred to in the article linked below has us at 17th:
http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-01-10/local/36273236_1_education-week-maryland-ranks-college-and-workforce-readiness
I assume there must be some study or set of data that has us at 50th, but I haven't seen it and I'm hoping someone can provide a link. Thanks!
Leo
8:24 pm on Wednesday, February 13, 2013
The MILLIONS that Gist is spending on tougher teacher evaluations will not make a speck of difference in test scores. That money should have been spent on classroom resources and prof development programs that target struggling learners, especially in math. To make the state-wide judgment that all teachers are bad teachers and that is why test scores are low is completely asinine and counter-productive. Precious money spent on b.s.
Chuck Newton
10:15 pm on Wednesday, February 13, 2013
Leo, HOW teachers get evaluated is a matter for discussion. WHETHER teachers get evaluated should not enter into it. I'm reminded of something said to me by the chairman of a rather large US company awhile back: "If you're not measuring, you're just practicing." And the time for practicing should be far behind us...
Leo
6:45 am on Thursday, February 14, 2013
I'm not against teacher evaluations but it is preposterous to me that ALL the Race to the Top millions in RI went to evaluating teachers. Could have been spent much more effectively.
Elizabeth McNamara
11:08 am on Thursday, February 14, 2013
Leo,
I checked with RIDE and according to their accounting of the first two years of spending on RTTT spending, $3.4 million has been spent on teacher evaluations out of a total $27.8 million spent. The state received a $75 million RTTT grant to spend over four years.
Leo
3:54 pm on Thursday, February 14, 2013
And it's ALL eventually going into evaluation and hiring adminstrators who will perform the evaluations and monitor the results! If they told you anything else, they lied!