Posts
The results of the annual Connecticut Mastery Test have been posted online. These scores are the most recent ones from 2007.
I haven't had a chance to comb through. I'm not sure if poking around in the data is all that revealing now that I've learned how incredibly low the bar has been set. From the few items that have been released, this 4th generation of the CMT looks to be the easiest to pass and given far later in the year. A mere 60% correct qualifies a student for "goal" and if you get 70% right, you are considered "advanced."
There is nothing higher than advanced on this barely grade-level exam. If my daughter ever got 70% correct on a grade level test at the end of the year, I doubt I'd applaud her as an advanced student. So what will this test tell us?
But I like the interactive data format the state is using to put the information out there.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Hey CT, 60% is better than NJ that says you only need a 50% to be "proficient"
If i recall correctly, letter grades correlated to number grades as:
A if you scored >= 90%
B if you scored >= 80%
C if you scored >= 70%
D if you scored >= 60%
F if you scored < 60%
Now I was taught traditional math, so hold on to your horses .. but I see the letter grade of F is anything less than a 60% and I recall that 50% is less than 60%. Well, I didnt recall that fact. I actually just UNDERSTOOD 50 is less than 60 in our nase 10 number system. I guess if I had a keyboard key with a circle, I could peck in some circles to show the reform math folks that logic.
Any way, that means in NJ you can have an F and be proficient.
Wahoo!
Thanks for the heads up. I've been checking the website (I'm out of town) and upon a very cursory examination the results in our district tell an interesting story. The 2006/2007 school year was the third year of implementation of Everyday Math.
Quick summary... comparing 2006 fourth grade to 2007 fourth grade is pretty much flat across content strands. Nothing to write home about and the similarity in scores is uncanny.
Following the cohort 06/third to 07/ fourth and the 06/fourth to 07/fifth there are some drops in content strands from one year to the next in the double digits. Some strands are flat. A few show slight increases. It appears to document an overall net drop as the student progresses from one academic year into the next using the EM curriculum.
Quite telling. Considering the lack of rigor you pointed out in the CMT, it's actually disturbing!
I'm interested to see the spin...
Do you know what strand 25 is? Mathematical Applications?
Strand 25 link here:
http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/lib/sde/PDF/Curriculum/cmtsamp/cmt_math4_samp.pdf
Post a Comment