The End-of-Course and End-of-Grade test results for Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools show the district has made progress in 22 of 23 areas tested, district officials said June 24. The scores also show the achievement gap narrowing in some subjects. To view presentation click here.

End-of-Grade tests, required by the state, are given at the end of the year in grades three through eight in reading, math and science. End-of-Course tests are given in 10 subject areas for middle and high school students, with five of the 10 tests counting as part of the high school exit standard. To view EOG results click here. To view EOC composite results click here and to view EOC subject results by school click here.

“The numbers are going in the right direction and we’re very pleased about that,” said Peter C. Gorman, superintendent. “But we’re not satisfied. We’d like to see gains at a faster rate – and that’s especially important if we’re going to close the achievement gap for our subgroups. We need to increase the growth rate, and we’ll continue to work on that.”                            

Particularly notable in the district’s scores was progress at a group of 14 schools where CMS has employed strategic staffing, putting strong principals and teams of teachers in place to improve school performance.

At the end of the 2007-2008 school year, new principals were put in seven schools as part of strategic staffing. Scores at those schools showed gains in almost every area, with some gains of 10 points or more.

Seven more principals were chosen for strategic staffing earlier this year, and the district announced the appointments in March so those principals could begin at their new schools before the end of the year. Gains were recorded in many areas at those seven schools as well, some as high as 20 points.

“What these numbers show is that strategic staffing works,” said Dr. Gorman. “Having a strong principal at a school, and strong teachers in the classroom, improves student learning. We will continue to strengthen our schools by improving leadership in them.”

Districtwide, scores rose in almost every area. In math, composite scores for grades three through eight showed gains ranging from three to 10 points for the last three years, with a district wide composite for all grades showing an eight-point gain. Results for subgroups showed some narrowing of the achievement gap, ranging from four to five points for African-American, Hispanic and economically disadvantaged students.

The district has set a goal for 2010 of schools meeting an 88 percent proficiency rate in math, and 36 of 99 elementary schools met that goal this year.

Similar gains were recorded in reading. Three-year trends are not available in reading because the state made the test more rigorous in 2007-2008. But the year-over-year composite numbers showed gains ranging from two to six points in reading, with a district-wide composite gain of four points.

Within subgroups, however, the reading scores show wide disparities in achievement. Economically disadvantaged students had a composite proficiency rate of 51 percent in reading, compared to 80 percent for students not in poverty. African-American students had a proficiency rate of 54 percent, Hispanics 55 percent and Asians 75 percent, compared to 89 percent for white students.      

District scores showed that the gap narrowed slightly in reading for African-American (two points) and economically disadvantaged (one point) students, but widened for Hispanic students (four points). These scores include retesting results; when those are taken out, the gaps widened slightly.

Only three schools met the 2010 strategic plan goal of 95 percent proficiency in reading.

Science tests are given to students in grades five and eight, and the district composite showed a nine-point gain in science, with fifth-grade scores rising 10 points and eighth-grade scores rising eight points. However, similar gaps in achievement were visible in subgroups, with 44 percent of economically disadvantaged students proficient, compared to 76 percent of students not in poverty. In other subgroups, 45 percent of African-American students showed proficiency, 52 percent of Hispanic and 76 percent of Asians compared to 87 percent of white students. The gap in science also appeared to be widening among subgroups by three to eight points. These results include retesting scores.

For high school students, the results were positive as well.

In the 10 areas tested, two- and three-year trends showed scores increased by between five and 11 points, with the district’s composite score growing by 8.9 points. The largest gain was recorded in chemistry (11 points) and the smallest in English I (5.1 points). Three-year data was available for Algebra I, English I and U.S. History; two-year data was available for Algebra II, biology, chemistry, civics and economics, geometry, physical science and physics.

As was the case in other areas, there were achievement gaps in End-of-Course tests. Composite scores showed 65 percent of economically disadvantaged students were proficient, compared to 82.4 percent of students not in poverty. The scores showed 65 percent of African-American students were proficient, 69.5 percent of Hispanic students and 86.7 percent of Asian students – all below the 89.4 percent of white students who were proficient.

The district is making progress on closing the gaps, however. Scores showed the gap narrowed by 11 points for African-American students compared to white students and by 12 points when Hispanic and white students are compared. The smallest gain was made in closing the gap for economically disadvantaged students – six points.