Overview of MCAS Results

• Hannah shared her screen to review Hill View's MCAS results alongside Haverhill Public Schools and statewide results.
• Kevin confirmed that he was still unable to access Open Architects. Hannah explained that some data had not yet been uploaded to the platform, so she used the state's data directly.
• The committee reviewed English Language Arts (ELA), Math, Science, and Civics results, beginning with schoolwide performance before looking at individual grade levels.
• Hannah explained that statewide results tend to remain more consistent because of the larger number of students tested, while Hill View's smaller class sizes can lead to greater fluctuations.
• Jeff agreed that comparing Hill View to Haverhill Public Schools provides a more meaningful comparison because the schools serve similar communities.

English Language Arts (ELA)

• Hill View's overall percentage of students meeting or exceeding expectations was comparable to Haverhill Public Schools.
• Hannah noted that Hill View had a larger percentage of students partially meeting expectations, while Haverhill had a higher percentage not meeting expectations.
• The committee discussed how the partially meeting category includes students who may be very close to meeting expectations as well as students who are closer to not meeting.
• Strong ELA performance in the upper grades was identified as a positive trend.
• Hannah emphasized that students continue to demonstrate stronger ELA performance as they progress through the school.

Mathematics

• Math continues to be an area requiring improvement, particularly when reviewing the percentage of students meeting or exceeding expectations.
• Hannah noted that Hill View and Haverhill Public Schools had similar percentages of students not meeting expectations, but Haverhill had more students meeting expectations.
• Kevin asked whether the committee could review how close students were to meeting expectations without identifying individual students.
• Hannah explained that this would require reviewing individual scores and compiling the results into an anonymous summary.
• Kevin was curious about the demographic information for fourth grade Math, where a higher percentage of students were not meeting expectations.
• Hannah explained that fourth grade has a particularly high number of students receiving special education services, which is important context when interpreting the results.

Student Growth

• The committee reviewed the school's student growth percentile (SGP), with a target of 50 for both ELA and Math.
• Hannah reported that Hill View exceeded both targets, with approximately 56 in ELA and 52 in Math.
• Compared with other Haverhill elementary schools, Hill View had the highest ELA growth and second-highest Math growth.
• Hannah mentioned that while overall achievement scores still need improvement, student growth indicates positive progress.
• Jeff agreed that growth should be highlighted alongside achievement scores to demonstrate the school's progress over time.
• The committee discussed the importance of following the same groups of students from year to year to better understand their academic growth.

Science and Civics

• Science results were reviewed for fifth and eighth grades, with Hill View showing 29% meeting or exceeding expectations, 53% partially meeting, and 18% not meeting.
• Hannah noted that the overall Science results were relatively comparable to Haverhill Public Schools, although the distribution across performance categories differed.
• Civics was identified as a particularly strong area of performance, with Hill View outperforming Haverhill Public Schools.

Student Demographics and Performance

• The committee reviewed MCAS results by student group, including students with disabilities, high-needs students, and other demographic categories.
• Kristen asked how the state determines which students are classified as high needs and whether the designation includes students beyond those with IEPs.
• Hannah explained that the designation includes additional factors but was unsure of the state's exact calculation.
• Fourth grade data showed 13 students with IEPs and 21 students classified as high needs.
• The committee discussed the challenges of interpreting demographic data with small sample sizes.
• Hannah emphasized the importance of identifying where the school can better support student groups experiencing lower academic outcomes.
• Potential areas of focus included family engagement, attendance, language barriers, and professional development focused on belonging.
• Jeff emphasized that the school should use both student performance data and its understanding of individual student needs to guide improvements.

Accountability Profile

• Hannah shared that Hill View's overall accountability profile has improved significantly.
• Student growth and reductions in chronic absenteeism were identified as important contributing factors.
• The committee discussed the importance of continuing to monitor these measures as indicators of school improvement.

Board Reporting and Data Presentation

• Hannah asked the committee for feedback on how MCAS results should be presented to the full Board.
• Jeff mentions the importance of using a consistent reporting format so Board members can easily compare results over time.
• The committee agreed to retain raw achievement scores while adding a separate column highlighting student growth.
• Hannah will convert the reporting document into a shared Google Doc and distribute it to committee members.
• Jeff will add the student growth column, and Hannah will complete the updated data.
• The committee agreed that the Board presentation should highlight key findings rather than overwhelm members with excessive charts and information.
• Hannah identified strong Civics performance, overall student growth, and upper-grade ELA performance as important positive trends.
• Continued improvement in Math and overall achievement scores will remain areas of focus.
• Hannah will also provide the Board with a data glossary to help explain educational terminology and performance measures.
• Rahul asked whether the school could establish a standardized set of key performance indicators (KPIs) aligned with its strategic goals.
• He suggested tracking these measures consistently throughout the year to make the data easier for Board members to understand.
• Hannah agreed that focusing on growth and other meaningful indicators would help connect the data to the school's strategic priorities.
• Jeff noted that MCAS data is collected annually and received after a delay, making it less useful for immediate instructional decisions.
• The committee discussed using STAR and DIBELS assessment data, which is collected multiple times throughout the year, to support more frequent monitoring.
• Jeff suggested exploring a more consistent system for reviewing and presenting these assessments.
• Hannah agreed to continue working on a simplified reporting format and incorporate the committee's feedback.
• The committee discussed the value of balancing quantitative data with qualitative information about student needs and instructional practices.