Massachusetts Mathematics and Science Partnership Title IIB
Annual State-level Evaluation Report Appendices
Cohort 3 Reporting Period: September 1, 2006, through August 31, 2009
Cohort 4 Reporting Period: September 1, 2008, through August 31, 2009
Cumulative Reporting Period: February 2, 2004, through August 31, 2009

Prepared for the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

December 2010

Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation / Contents

Contents

Appendix A: Participant Background Survey – September 2008 – August 2009

Appendix B:Timeline for State-level Evaluation and TA Activities

Appendix C: Results of the Participant Background Survey for 2008-2009

Appendix D:High Need District Eligibility Criteria

Appendix E: Enrollment and Attrition Rates by Course

Appendix F: Subject Matter Competency Demonstration Options

Appendix G: Mean Percentage Scores for Pre- & Post-course Tests

Appendix H: High Need Districts for All Funding Periods, by Partnership

Appendix I: Criteria that Account for Gain in Highly Qualified Status

Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation / Appendix A

Appendix A: Participant Background Survey – September 2008 – August 2009


UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group / 1
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation / Appendix A

UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group / 1
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation / Appendix A

UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group / 1
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation / Appendix A

UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group / 1
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation / Appendix A

UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group / 1
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation / Appendix A
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group / 1
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation / Appendix A
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group / 1
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation / Appendix B

Appendix B:Timeline for State-level Evaluation and TA Activities

The following is a summary timeline of state-level evaluation and technical assistance activities carried out between February, 2004, and end of Year 6 of the MMSP.

February 2004Held Kick-off Meeting for all partnerships and their evaluators at the Department of Education

Spring 2004Conducted individual partnership meetings with local evaluators and partnership leaders to:

Review the Minimum Expectations document along with the local evaluation and data collection plan

And

Explore potential modifications to implementation plans to create opportunities for experimental or quasi experimental design

Spring 2004Developed common measures for state-level data collection

June 2004Attended federal meeting held for MSP projects across the country

Summer 2004Disseminated and collected end-of-course documents designed to collect course-level data for the statewide evaluation

Fall 2004Conducted individual partnership meetings with local evaluators and partnership leaders to:

Review the Minimum Expectations document along with the local evaluation and data collection plan

And

Review the Federal Reporting document to ensure the partnerships were collecting the data needed to complete that report

Winter 2005Conducted partnership meetings with the two new partnerships funded in the second round that constitutes Cohort 2 to:

Introduce the Minimum Expectations document along with the local evaluation and data collection plan

And

Introduce the Federal Reporting document to ensure the partnerships were collecting the data needed to complete that report

June 2005Held Technical Assistance Meeting for all partnerships regarding the requirements of the USED Annual report

UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group / 1
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation / Appendix B

June 2006Participated in USED Annual Conference of MSPState Coordinators

August 2006Held Technical Assistance Meeting for all partnerships regarding evaluation requirements for MMSP

Fall 2006 toConducted partnership meetings with the new Cohort 3 partnerships to:

Winter 2007

Introduce the Minimum Expectations document along with the local evaluation and data collection plan

And

Discuss the federal reporting requirements to ensure the partnerships were collecting the data needed to complete federal report

December 2006Participated in USED MSP Regional Conference

June 2007Participated in USED Annual Conference of MSPState Coordinators

September 2007Held Technical Assistance Meeting for all partnerships regarding the requirements of the USED Annual report

January 2008Participated in USED MSP Regional Conference

April 2008Participated in technical assistance workshop for bidders pursuing MSP funding for 2008-2009

April 2008Participated in USED the Massachusetts MSP Statewide Conference

June 2008Participated in USED MSPState Coordinators’ Meeting

October 2008Held Technical Assistance Meeting for all partnerships regarding evaluation requirements for MMSP

Fall 2008 toConducted partnership meetings with the new Cohort 3 partnerships to:

Winter 2009

Discussevaluation expectations data collection plans

And

Discuss the federal reporting requirements to ensure the partnerships were collecting the data needed to complete federal report

March 2009Participated in USED MSP Regional Conference

May 2009Participated in USED the Massachusetts MSP Statewide Conference

The following activities were on going throughout the life of the project:

Disseminated and collected end-of-course documents designed to collect course-level data for the statewide evaluation

Managed data collected from partnerships at the end of each course

Provided technical assistance to partnerships in support of local partnership evaluation efforts

Monitored local evaluation plans to see they include both formative and summative research questions and corresponding activities

Monitored data collection and analysis around the basic logic model of professional development

Served as liaison to the U.S. Department of Education for evaluation and research issues including participation in national meetings and periodic conference calls

Met with ESE MSP Team as needed to support integration of evaluation efforts with program goals

Until Steering Committee was disbanded, attended MMSP Steering Committee meetings in role of state level evaluator and technical assistance

UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group / 1
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation / Appendix C

Appendix C: Results of the Participant Background Survey for 2008-2009

Cohort 3

Item / Cohort 3
2008–2009
n / %
How do you describe yourself?
American Indian or Alaskan native / 0 / <1%
Asian / 13 / 3%
Black or African American / 5 / 1%
Hispanic or Latino / 11 / 2%
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander / 0 / <1%
White / 404 / 87%
Mixed Race / 6 / 1%
Other / 11 / 2%
No Response / 13 / 3%
What best describes your current primary position?
Teacher (Regular Education) / 318 / 69%
Special Education Teacher (Sole Instructor) / 16 / 4%
Special Education Inclusion Teacher / 22 / 5%
Other / 15 / 3%
Department Head or Curriculum Coordinator / 4 / <1%
Principal/Asst. Principal/Headmaster / 8 / 2%
Support Specialist (counselor, librarian, etc.) / 3 / <1%
Long-term Substitute / 1 / <1%
Paraprofessional / 3 / <1%
Superintendent or Asst. Superintendent / 1 / <1%
No Response / 5 / 1%
ELL, ESL, or Sheltered English Immersion Teacher / 21 / 5%
Gifted or Talented Teacher / 6 / 1%
Title I Teacher / 3 / <1%
Math Coach (Non-Teaching) / 21 / 5%
Math Coach (Teaching) / 12 / 3%
Science Coach (Non-Teaching) / 0 / 0%
Science Coach (Teaching) / 2 / <1%
Instructional Technology Director / 2 / <1%
Item / Cohort 3
2008–2009
n / %
What grades do you currently teach?

Pre-K

Elementary and K-8 / 150 / 32%
Middle School (Grades 6-8) / 200 / 43%
High School (Grades 9-12) / 72 / 16%
Middle and High School grades / 1 / <1%
Adult Education / 1 / <1%
All levels
NA (doesn’t teach) / 38 / 8%
No Response / 1 / <1%
How many years have you been employed in education?
1st year / 16 / 4%
2-3 years / 51 / 11%
4-5 years / 63 / 14%
6-10 years / 130 / 28%
11-20 years / 137 / 30%
Over 20 years / 63 / 14%
0 or No Response / 3 / <1%

Note: Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding error or items in which respondents may respond to all that apply.

Item / Cohort 3
2008–2009

n

/

%

Which of the following content areas are you currently teaching?
Mathematics / 125 / 27%
Elementary (all subjects) / 150 / 32%
Elementary Mathematics / 44 / 10%
General Science / 73 / 16%
Biology / 36 / 8%
Physics / 29 / 6%
Earth Science / 19 / 4%
Chemistry / 34 / 7%
Any science area* / 143 / 31%
Technology/Engineering / 14 / 3%
Other / 14 / 3%
Do not teach currently / 38 / 8%
In which of the following are you currently employed?
Public School/ Public Charter School / 452 / 98%
Private School / 8 / 2%
Other / 2 / <1%
No Response / 1 / <1%
Currently hold certification through the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards.
In Mathematics / 7 / 2%
In General Science / 1 / <1%

*Number of unique participants teaching in any science area.

Item / Cohort 3
2008–2009
n / %
Approximately how many math students do you teach annually?
0 students / 118 / 26%
1-10 students / 10 / 2%
11-40 students / 74 / 16%
41-150 students / 113 / 24%
151+ students / 13 / 3%
No Response / 135 / 29%
Approximately how many science students do you teach annually?
0 students / 116 / 25%
1-10 students / 8 / 2%
11-40 students / 55 / 12%
41-150 students / 142 / 31%
151+ students / 6 / 1%
No Response / 136 / 29%
Approximately how many students do you teach annually who are
Title I students?
0 students / 135 / 29%
1-10 students / 74 / 16%
11-40 students / 65 / 14%
41-150 students / 43 / 9%
151+ students / 8 / 2%
No Response / 138 / 30%
Approximately how many students do you teach annually who are
academically advanced students?
0 students / 173 / 37%
1-10 students / 64 / 14%
11-40 students / 73 / 16%
41-150 students / 18 / 4%
151+ students / 1 / <1%
No Response / 134 / 29%
Approximately how many students do you teach annually who are
Special Education students?
0 students / 40 / 9%
1-10 students / 153 / 33%
11-40 students / 184 / 40%
41-150 students / 30 / 7%
151+ students / 3 / <1%
No Response / 53 / 11%
Approximately how many students do you teach annually who are
English Language Learners?
0 students / 59 / 13%
1-10 students / 171 / 37%
11-40 students / 110 / 24%
41-150 students / 34 / 7%
151+ students / 14 / 3%
No Response / 75 / 16%
Item / Cohort 3
2008–2009
n / %
Why did you participate in this course? *
To obtain graduate credit / 466 / 72%
To increase knowledge in content / 442 / 68%
To pursue a personal interest / 218 / 34%
To earn PDPs for recertification / 163 / 25%
To get an additional license (certification) / 124 / 19%
To prepare for the Massachusetts Test for
Educator Licensure (MTEL) / 84 / 13%
To follow an administrator’s suggestion / 23 / 4%
To obtain a first license (certification) / 13 / 2%
Other / 51 / 8%
No Response / 10 / 2%
High Need District
Yes / 340 / 73%
No / 119 / 26%
Unknown / 4 / <1%
Highly Qualified
Yes / 245 / 53%
No / 116 / 25%
In some, but not all areas taught / 27 / 6%
Not enough information to determine / 28 / 6%
Private School (not included) / 7 / 2%
Not applicable (not currently teaching) / 40 / 9%

*Data for this item represents the number of seats filled from all courses, rather than the

number of unique participants.

Item / Cohort 3
2008–2009
n / %
How many PDP hours do you have in your content area(s)?
(For SPED and ELL teachers only)
Less than 48 PDP hours / 11 / 2%
48 to 100 PDP hours / 9 / 2%
101 to 250 PDP hours / 20 / 4%
251+ PDP hours / 11 / 2%
No Response / 412 / 89%
Please select any of the following licenses you currently hold.
Vocational Technical / 3 / <1%
Specialist Teacher / 84 / 18%
Supervisor/Director / 6 / 1%
Principal/Asst. Principal / 20 / 4%
Superintendent/Assistant Superintendent / 1 / <1%
Item / Cohort 3 2008–2009
Bachelors / Masters / CAGS / Doctorate
n / % / n / % / n / % / n / %
A degree currently held for each major.
Education / 141 / 31% / 180 / 39% / 6 / 1% / 3 / <1%
Math Education / 4 / <1% / 21 / 5% / 0 / 0% / 0 / 0%
Science Education / 12 / 3% / 20 / 4% / 1 / <1% / 0 / 0%
Math / 25 / 5% / 5 / 1% / 0 / 0% / 0 / 0%
General Science / 4 / <1% / 4 / <1% / 1 / <1% / 0 / 0%
Biology / 38 / 8% / 5 / 1% / 0 / 0% / 0 / 0%
Chemistry / 12 / 3% / 1 / <1% / 1 / <1% / 0 / 0%
Earth Science / 9 / 2% / 3 / <1% / 0 / 0% / 0 / 0%
Physics / 9 / 2% / 4 / <1% / 0 / 0% / 0 / 0%
Technology/Engineering / 16 / 4% / 5 / 1% / 1 / <1% / 0 / 0%
All science/technology combined / 88 / 19% / 22 / 5% / 3 / <1% / 0 / 0%
Other / 123 / 27% / 57 / 12% / 1 / <1% / 1 / <1%
A degree currently being pursued for each major.
Education / 2 / <1% / 38 / 8% / 12 / 3% / 2 / <1%
Math Education / 0 / 0% / 68 / 15% / 14 / 3% / 0 / 0%
Science Education / 1 / <1% / 41 / 9% / 1 / <1% / 0 / 0%
Math / 0 / 0% / 8 / 2% / 4 / <1% / 0 / 0%
General Science / 1 / <1% / 16 / 4% / 1 / <1% / 0 / 0%
Biology / 1 / <1% / 2 / <1% / 0 / 0% / 0 / 0%
Chemistry / 0 / 0% / 3 / <1% / 0 / 0% / 0 / 0%
Earth Science / 1 / <1% / 1 / <1% / 0 / 0% / 0 / 0%
Physics / 0 / 0% / 5 / 1% / 0 / <1% / 0 / 0%
Technology/Engineering / 0 / 0% / 3 / <1% / 0 / <1% / 0 / 0%
All science/technology combined / 3 / <1% / 30 / 6% / 1 / <1%2% / 0 / 0%
Other / 1 / <1% / 13 / 3% / 3 / <1% / 1 / <1%
Item
/ Cohort 3 2008–2009
MTEL Taken / MTEL Passed / Scores Unknown
n / % / n / % / n / %
MTEL tests taken
General Curriculum (formerly Elementary) / 74 / 16% / 71 / 15% / 1 / <1%
Elementary Math / 31 / 7% / 27 / 6% / 5 / 1%
Early Childhood / 10 / 2% / 7 / 2% / 3 / <1%
Mathematics / 41 / 9% / 33 / 7% / 4 / <1%
Middle School Mathematics / 62 / 13% / 54 / 12% / 5 / 1%
Middle School Mathematics/ Science / 15 / 3% / 13 / 3% / 2 / <1%
General Science / 42 / 9% / 36 / 8% / 3 / <1%
Biology / 30 / 7% / 28 / 6% / 1 / <1%
Chemistry / 18 / 4% / 17 / 4% / 0 / 0%
Physics / 11 / 2% / 9 / 2% / 0 / 0%
Earth Science / 4 / <1% / 3 / <1% / 1 / <1%
Technology/Engineering / 3 / <1% / 3 / <1% / 0 / 0%
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group / 1
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation / Appendix C
Item
/ Cohort 3
2008–2009
n / %
License Areas
Academically Advanced PreK-8 / 8 / 2%
Adult Basic Education / 0 / 0%
Biology 5-8 / 20 / 4%
Biology 8-12 / 38 / 8%
Chemistry 5-8 / 5 / 1%
Chemistry 8-12 / 18 / 4%
Early Childhood PreK-2 / 20 / 4%
Earth Science 5-8 / 6 / 1%
Earth Science 8-12 / 5 / 1%
Elementary 1-6 / 198 / 43%
Elementary Mathematics 1-6 / 54 / 12%
ELL PreK-6 / 12 / 3%
ELL 5-12 / 11 / 2%
General Science 1-6 / 5 / 1%
General Science 5-8 / 71 / 15%
Instructional Technology / 8 / 2%
Mathematics 8-12 / 41 / 9%
Middle School / 31 / 7%
Middle School Mathematics 5-8 / 95 / 21%
Middle School Math/Science 5-8 / 11 / 2%
Physics 5-8 / 4 / <1%
Physics 8-12 / 15 / 3%
Students w/ Moderate Disability PreK-8 / 45 / 10%
Students w/ Moderate Disability 5-12 / 13 / 3%
Students w/ Severe Disability / 3 / <1%
Technology/Engineering 5-12 / 6 / 1%

Cohort 4

Item / Cohort 4
2008–2009
n / %
How do you describe yourself?
American Indian or Alaskan native / 0 / 0%
Asian / 12 / 4%
Black or African American / 31 / 9%
Hispanic or Latino / 11 / 3%
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander / 0 / 0%
White / 262 / 77%
Mixed Race / 6 / 2%
Other / 5 / 2%
What best describes your current primary position?
Teacher (Regular Education) / 237 / 70%
Special Education Teacher (Sole Instructor) / 27 / 8%
Special Education Inclusion Teacher / 24 / 7%
Other / 11 / 3%
Principal/Asst. Principal/Headmaster / 1 / <1%
Support Specialist (counselor, librarian, etc.) / 1 / <1%
Long-term Substitute / 6 / 2%
Paraprofessional / 4 / 1%
ELL, ESL, or Sheltered English Immersion Teacher / 10 / 3%
Gifted or Talented Teacher / 1 / <1%
Math Coach (Non-Teaching) / 3 / <1%
Math Coach (Teaching) / 3 / <1%
Science Coach (Non-Teaching) / 1 / <1%
Science Coach (Teaching) / 6 / 2%
Instructional Technology Director / 1 / <1%
Item / Cohort 4
2008–2009
n / %
What grades do you currently teach?

Pre-K

/ 3 / <1%
Elementary and K-8 / 101 / 30%
Middle School (Grades 6-8) / 174 / 51%
High School (Grades 9-12) / 55 / 16%
NA (doesn’t teach) / 7 / 2%
No Response / 1 / <1%
How many years have you been employed in education?
1st year / 23 / 7%
2-3 years / 39 / 11%
4-5 years / 48 / 14%
6-10 years / 95 / 28%
11-20 years / 83 / 24%
Over 20 years / 51 / 15%
0 or No Response / 2 / <1%

Note: Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding error or items in which respondents may respond to all that apply.

Item / Cohort 4
2008–2009

n

/

%

Which of the following content areas are you currently teaching?
Mathematics / 102 / 30%
Elementary (all subjects) / 150 / 32%
Elementary Mathematics / 44 / 10%
General Science / 98 / 29%
Biology / 27 / 8%
Physics / 17 / 5%
Earth Science / 22 / 7%
Chemistry / 17 / 5%
Technology/Engineering / 14 / 4%
Any science area* / 138 / 41%
Other / 11 / 3%
Do not teach currently / 7 / 2%
In which of the following are you currently employed?
Public School (includes public charter schools) / 333 / 98%
Non-public School / 7 / 2%
Other or No Response / 1 / <1%
Currently hold certification through the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards.
In Mathematics / 4 / 4%
In General Science / 3 / 3%

*Number of unique participants teaching in any science area.

Item / Cohort 4
2008–2009
n / %
Approximately how many math students do you teach annually?
0 students / 99 / 29%
1-10 students / 17 / 5%
11-40 students / 88 / 26%
41-150 students / 102 / 30%
151+ students / 7 / 2%
No Response / 28 / 8%
Approximately how many science students do you teach annually?
0 students / 103 / 30
1-10 students / 9 / 3%
11-40 students / 72 / 21%
41-150 students / 122 / 36%
151+ students / 18 / 5%
No Response / 17 / 5%
Approximately how many students do you teach annually who are
Title I students?
0 students / 105 / 31%
1-10 students / 41 / 12%
11-40 students / 53 / 16%
41-150 students / 41 / 12%
151+ students / 2 / <1%
No Response / 99 / 29%
Approximately how many students do you teach annually who are
academically advanced students?
0 students / 137 / 40%
1-10 students / 44 / 13%
11-40 students / 46 / 14%
41-150 students / 14 / 4%
151+ students / 2 / <1%
No Response / 98 / 29%
Approximately how many students do you teach annually who are
Special Education students?
0 students / 33 / 10%
1-10 students / 96 / 28%
11-40 students / 151 / 44%
41-150 students / 23 / 7%
151+ students / 3 / <1%
No Response / 35 / 10%
Approximately how many students do you teach annually who are
English Language Learners?
0 students / 72 / 21%
1-10 students / 116 / 34%
11-40 students / 54 / 16%
41-150 students / 27 / 8%
151+ students / 6 / 2%
No Response / 66 / 19%
Item / Cohort 4
2008–2009
n / %
Why did you participate in this course? *
To obtain graduate credit / 240 / 61%
To increase knowledge in content / 287 / 73%
To pursue a personal interest / 118 / 30%
To earn PDPs for recertification / 108 / 28%
To get an additional license (certification) / 52 / 13%
To prepare for the Massachusetts Test for
Educator Licensure (MTEL) / 45 / 12%
To follow an administrator’s suggestion / 30 / 8%
To obtain a first license (certification) / 11 / 3%
Other / 28 / 7%
No Response / 3 / 1%
High Need District
Yes / 215 / 63%
No / 126 / 37%
Unknown / 0 / 0%
Highly Qualified
Yes / 188 / 55%
No / 97 / 28%
In some, but not all areas taught / 25 / 7%
Not enough information to determine / 15 / 4%
Private School (not included) / 7 / 2%
Not applicable (not currently teaching) / 9 / 3%

*Data for this item represents the number of seats filled from all courses, rather than the

number of unique participants.

Item / Cohort 4
2008–2009
n / %
How many PDP hours do you have in your content area(s)?
(SPED and ELL teachers only)
Less than 48 PDP hours / 16 / 5%
48 to 100 PDP hours / 8 / 2%
101 to 250 PDP hours / 13 / 4%
251+ PDP hours / 12 / 4%
No Response / 292 / 86%
Please select any of the following licenses you currently hold.
Vocational Technical / 0 / 0%
Specialist Teacher / 63 / 19%
Supervisor/Director / 2 / <1%
Principal/Asst. Principal / 7 / 2%
Superintendent/Assistant Superintendent / 0 / 0%
Item / Cohort 4 2008–2009
Bachelors / Masters / CAGS / Doctorate
n / % / n / % / n / % / n / %
A degree currently held for each major.
Education / 79 / 23% / 148 / 43% / 4 / 1% / 1 / <1%
Math Education / 5 / 2% / 8 / 2% / 0 / 0% / 0 / 0%
Science Education / 8 / 2% / 18 / 5% / 1 / <1% / 0 / 0%
Math / 18 / 5% / 2 / <1% / 0 / 0% / 0 / 0%
General Science / 12 / 4% / 8 / 2% / 0 / 0% / 0 / 0%
Biology / 37 / 11% / 4 / 1% / 0 / 0% / 0 / 0%
Chemistry / 9 / 3% / 3 / <1% / 0 / 0% / 1 / <1%
Earth Science / 5 / 2% / 1 / <1% / 0 / 0% / 0 / 0%
Physics / 2 / <1% / 0 / 0% / 0 / 0% / 0 / 0%
Technology/Engineering / 11 / 3% / 2 / <1% / 0 / 0% / 0 / 0%
All science/technology combined / 76 / 22% / 18 / 5% / 0 / 0% / 1 / <1%
Other / 98 / 29% / 43 / 13% / 1 / <1% / 3 / <1%
A degree currently being pursued for each major.
Education / 1 / <1% / 29 / 9% / 6 / 2% / 3 / <1%
Math Education / 2 / <1% / 42 / 12% / 10 / 3% / 1 / <1%
Science Education / 1 / <1% / 30 / 9% / 1 / <1% / 0 / 0%
Math / 1 / <1% / 5 / 2% / 1 / <1% / 0 / 0%
General Science / 2 / <1% / 13 / 4% / 2 / <1% / 0 / 0%
Biology / 1 / <1% / 3 / <1% / 0 / 0% / 0 / 0%
Chemistry / 1 / <1% / 1 / <1% / 0 / 0% / 0 / 0%
Earth Science / 0 / 0% / 1 / <1% / 0 / 0% / 0 / 0%
Physics / 0 / 0% / 0 / 0% / 1 / <1% / 0 / 0%
Technology/Engineering / 1 / <1% / 1 / <1% / 1 / <1% / 0 / 0%
All science/technology combined / 5 / 1% / 19 / 6% / 4 / 1%2% / 0 / 0%
Other / 1 / <1% / 9 / 3% / 2 / <1% / 0 / 0%
Item
/ Cohort 4 2008–2009
MTEL Taken / MTEL Passed / Scores Unknown
n / % / n / % / n / %
MTEL tests taken
General Curriculum (formerly Elementary) / 63 / 19% / 62 / 18% / 0 / 0%
Elementary Math / 12 / 4% / 11 / 3% / 0 / 0%
Early Childhood / 3 / <1% / 3 / <1% / 0 / 0%
Mathematics / 27 / 8% / 22 / 7% / 0 / 0%
Middle School Mathematics / 45 / 13% / 40 / 12% / 1 / <1%
Middle School Mathematics/ Science / 14 / 4% / 5 / 1% / 2 / 1%
General Science / 59 / 17% / 50 / 15% / 1 / <1%
Biology / 20 / 6% / 18 / 5% / 0 / 0%
Chemistry / 16 / 5% / 10 / 3% / 1 / <1%
Physics / 9 / 3% / 5 / 2% / 0 / 0%
Earth Science / 5 / 2% / 4 / 1% / 1 / <1%
Technology/Engineering / 1 / <1% / 1 / <1% / 0 / 0%
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group / 1
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation / Appendix C
Item
/ Cohort 4
2008–2009
n / %
License Areas
Academically Advanced PreK-8 / 2 / <1%
Adult Basic Education / 0 / 0%
Biology 5-8 / 14 / 4%
Biology 8-12 / 24 / 7%
Chemistry 5-8 / 5 / 2%
Chemistry 8-12 / 11 / 3%
Early Childhood PreK-2 / 9 / 3%
Earth Science 5-8 / 5 / 2%
Earth Science 8-12 / 6 / 2%
Elementary 1-6 / 140 / 41%
Elementary Mathematics 1-6 / 20 / 6%
ELL PreK-6 / 8 / 2%
ELL 5-12 / 8 / 2%
General Science 1-6 / 9 / 3%
General Science 5-8 / 73 / 21%
Instructional Technology / 5 / 2%
Mathematics 8-12 / 29 / 9%
Middle School / 21 / 6%
Middle School Mathematics 5-8 / 50 / 15%
Middle School Math/Science 5-8 / 7 / 2%
Physics 5-8 / 0 / 0%
Physics 8-12 / 8 / 2%
Students w/ Moderate Disability PreK-8 / 55 / 16%
Students w/ Moderate Disability 5-12 / 17 / 5%
Students w/ Severe Disability / 3 / <1%
Technology/Engineering 5-12 / 2 / <1%
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group / 1
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation / Appendix D

Appendix D:High Need District Eligibility Criteria

High Need Districts (See list below.):

1.For proposals with a mathematics content focus: A district is considered to be a high need district if it has a mathematics proficiency index for grades 4-8 that is below the state target for Cycle II for MMSP Year 1projects or below the state target for Cycle III for MMSP Year 2 projects. Priority will be given to high need districts with two or more schools identified for improvement in mathematics.

2.For proposals with a science and/or technology/engineering content focus: A district is considered to be a high need district if it has a science proficiency index for grades 5-8 in 2003 that is at or below the 20th percentile for the state.

In addition, a high need district must demonstrate that there is a high number or percentage of teachers in the district who are teaching in the academic subject or grade level for which they have not demonstrated subject matter competency through licensure or completion of the professional development activities in their HOUSSE plans.

An interested district that is not identified as high need is encouraged to contact a high need district to explore becoming a partner in the proposed program (e.g., vocational technical schools are encouraged to contact feeder school districts).

MA FY2004 High Need Districts

UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group / 1
Annual Report of the MMSP State-level Evaluation / Appendix D
DISTRICT / MATH / SCIENCE T/E
AVON / 
BARNSTABLE / 
BOSTON /  / 
BROCKTON /  / 
CAMBRIDGE /  / 
CHELSEA /  / 
CHICOPEE /  / 
CLARKSBURG /  / 
EASTHAMPTON / 
EVERETT / 
FAIRHAVEN / 
FALLRIVER /  / 
FITCHBURG /  / 
FLORIDA / 
GARDNER /  / 
GREENFIELD / 
HAVERHILL /  / 
HOLBROOK /  / 
HOLYOKE /  / 
HULL / 
LAWRENCE /  / 
LOWELL /  / 
LYNN /  / 
MALDEN /  / 
MEDFORD / 
METHUEN / 
NEW BEDFORD /  / 
NORTH ADAMS /  / 
PITTSFIELD /  / 
PROVINCETOWN / 
RANDOLPH /  / 
REVERE / 
SALEM /  / 
SOMERVILLE /  / 
SOUTHBRIDGE /  / 
SPRINGFIELD /  / 
TAUNTON /  / 
WALTHAM / 
WARE /  / 
DISTRICT / MATH / SCIENCE T/E
WAREHAM / 
WEBSTER /  / 
WEST SPRINGFIELD / 
WESTFIELD / 
WINCHENDON /  / 
WINTHROP / 
WORCESTER /  / 
ABBY KELLEY FOSTER CS / 
ATLANTIS CS /  / 
BENJAMIN BANNEKER CS /  / 
BOSTON RENAISSANCE CS /  / 
CONSERVATORY LAB CS / 
EDWARD BROOKE CS / 
FREDERICK DOUGLASS CS /  / 
LAWRENCE FAMILY DEV CS /  / 
LOWELL COMMUNITY CS /  / 
NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE CS / 
NEW BEDFORD GLOBAL CS /  / 
NEW LEADERSHIP HMCS /  / 
NORTH CENTRAL REG CS /  / 
ROBERT M. HUGHES CS /  / 
SABIS INTERNATIONAL CS /  / 
SEVEN HILLS CS /  / 
SOMERVILLE CS /  / 
UPHAMS CORNER CS / 
ATHOL-ROYALSTON RSD /  / 
BERKSHIRE HILLS RSD / 
FRONTIER RSD / 
GILL-MONTAGUE RSD / 
HAMPSHIRE RSD /  / 
HAWLEMONT RSD / 
MOUNT GREYLOCK RSD / 
RALPH C MAHAR RSD /  / 
UMass Donahue Institute
Research and Evaluation Group / 1