Post on 13-Jan-2016
Literacy and Justice For All 2011Session 3
Parameters• We will value team members and their
input.• We are willing to ask questions, get
outside our current mindset and be open to new ideas and solutions.
• We are committed to being totally present.
• We will stay focused and use our time wisely to meet specified outcomes.
2
OutcomesARI School Teams will:
1. Reflect on the year’s learning to plan for next year.
2. Understand how to analyze WNP data and use the data in planning for
2011-2012.
3. Pose questions related to data (instruction/formative assessments).
4. Work as a school team to plan using data. 3
Reflect & Review• Individually, take a few minutes to
complete the Reflect and Review Form:– What actions did your team feel compelled to
share with your faculty regarding the information shared from Session 2:• System of Meaning• System of Language• Formative Assessment
• As a team, compile all reflections to create one reflection form to turn into the ARI team. 4
System: ______________________________School: __________________________________
Reflect and ReviewWhat have we done related to System of
Meaning, System of Language and/or Formative Assessment?
What have we learned from our actions?
Collaborative Leadership
Assessment
Effective Instruction
Professional Development
Intervention
One question we still have is….
We need to deepen our understanding of formative assessments and how to use them for adjusting instruction.
During a faculty meeting ,we read the article on Formative and Summative Assessment and we sorted our assessments into these two categories.
We learned that we have more summative assessments and we need to look at increasing the formative assessments in our building
We are asking teachers to bring samples of formative assessments they are using to grade level meetings.
Today’s Agenda• Morning –
Looking at State Data
Learning About Weighted Non-Proficiency (WNP)
• Afternoon –
Looking at Your School’s WNP
Planning
7
A Word from Dr. Joseph Morton,Alabama’s State Superintendent of
Education
8
9
What are some benefits of looking at data?
(be more specific than “to drive instruction”)
• Seek information that shows a pattern of improvement or value added
4
10
What are some benefits of looking at data?
(be more specific than “to drive instruction”)
4
• Seek information that shows a pattern of improvement or value addedValue added lets us determine whether the students in
a class, school or district are making enough academic growth each year.
(Ted Hirschberg)
11
What are some benefits of looking at data?
(be more specific than “to drive instruction”)
4
• Seek information that shows a pattern of improvement or value added
• Seek snapshots that help us accelerate progress, take learning to the next level and guide our work
REMEMBER:• Each assessment (ARMT, SAT, DIBELS, NAEP)
has a different purpose and a different definition for proficiency.
• ARMT set the proficiency bar at a level over which all students can jump. We need to keep the ARMT bar where it is because of its purpose.
• NAEP set the proficiency bar at the level needed to make the United States competitive in the world market. Alabama wants to be part of that kind of accelerated learning.
12
REMEMBER: (CONTINUED)
• The Stanford and DIBELS set the proficiency bars at levels between ARMT and NAEP.
• Level 2 on ARMT corresponds to Stanines 1-3 on Stanford and “At-Risk” on DIBELS. Students scoring at these levels are at grave risk of never achieving grade-level proficiency.
• If we want to accelerate student learning, we must increase “Advanced” performance on ARMT, Stanines 5-9 performance on Stanford, and “Benchmark” performance on DIBELS.
13
Alabama Reading and Mathematics Test (ARMT) Levels 3 and 4 - Reading
Grade Spring 2006
Spring 2007
Spring 2008
Spring 2009
Spring 2010
Grade 3 84% 85% 85% 86% 87%Grade 4 84% 85% 87% 87% 87%Grade 5 81% 85% 84% 85% 86%Grade 6 83% 85% 86% 86% 86%Grade 7 75% 77% 79% 81% 83%Grade 8 72% 72% 74% 75% 74%
14
Stanford Achievement Test – 10th Edition Reading Comprehension Scores
Percentage of Students Scoring in Stanines 5-9
Grade Spring2006
Spring2007
Spring2008
Spring2009
Spring2010
Grade 3 67% 68% 69% 70% 71%
Grade 4 68% 69% 70% 71% 72%
Grade 5 65% 67% 67% 69% 70%
Grade 6 59% 61% 62% 64% 64%
Grade 7 62% 64% 65% 67% 67%
Grade 8 60% 61% 62% 64% 64%15
DIBELS
Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills AssessmentPercent of Students at Benchmark
Grade Spring 2006
Spring 2007
Spring 2008
Spring 2009
Spring 2010
K (NWF) 86% 83% 89% 89% 88%
1 (ORF) 76% 79% 80% 81% 80%
2 (ORF) 71% 64% 67% 66% 75%
3 (ORF) 64% 67% 69% 69% 69%
16
Comparison of DIBELS, Stanford and ARMTPercent Proficient and Percent at Benchmark
Grade 3
Test Spring2006
Spring2007
Spring2008
Spring2009
Spring2010
DIBELS 64% 67% 69% 69% 69%
Stanford 67% 68% 69% 70% 71%
ARMT 84% 85% 85% 86% 87%
17
ARMT – SAT – DIBELS – NAEPComparison
4th Grade
ARMT0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
13%
33%
53%
ARMTPercent of Students Scoring at each
Level - 4th Grade 2009
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4
ARMT SAT0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
13%
15%
33%
37%
53%
34%
14%
ARMT and SAT ComparisonPercent of Students Scoring at each Level - 4th Grade
2009
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4
ARMT SAT DIBELS (3rd Grade)0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
13%
15% 20%
33%
37%
69%
53%
34%
14% 11%
ARMT-SAT-DIBELS ComparisonPercent of Students Scoring at each Level 4th Grade
2009
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4
22
ARMT SAT DIBELS (3rd Grade) NAEP0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
1%14% 11%
38%13%
15% 20%
34%
33%
37%
69%
22%53%
34%
6%
ARMT-SAT-DIBELS-NAEP ComparisonPercent of Students Scoring at each Level - 4th
Grade 2009
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4
23
ARMT SAT DIBELS (3rd) NAEP0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
15%
15% 21%
33%
32%
36%
67%
22%
53%
33%
7%
16% 12%
38%
SAT-ARMT-DIBELS-NAEP ComparisonPercent of Students Scoring at each
Level 4th Grade Reading2007
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4
24
ARMT SAT DIBELS (3rd ) NAEP0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
16%
16% 25%
30%
33%
36%
61%
18%
50%
31%
4%
17% 14%
47%
SAT-ARMT-DIBELS-NAEP ComparisonPercent of Students Scoring at each Level
4th Grade Reading2005
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4
ARMT – SAT – NAEPComparison
8th Grade
ARMT – SAT – NAEP ComparisonPercent of Students Scoring at Each Level – 8th Grade
2009
26
ARMT SAT NAEP0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
1%18%
34%24%
18%
42%
38%
38%
22%37%
26%
1%
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4
27
ARMT SAT NAEP0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
27%
18%
41%
39%
37%
20%33%
24%
21%
38%
ARMT - NAEP - SAT ComparisonPercent of Students Scoring at Each Level - 8th Grade
2007
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4
ARMT – SAT – NAEP ComparisonPercent of Students Scoring at Each Level – 8th Grade
2005
28
ARMT SAT NAEP0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2%
26%37%29%
21%
41%
35%
31%
20%35%
22%
2%
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4
Stanford Achievement Test (10th Edition) Spring 2010
Grade 3/Reading
29
Percentage of Alabama students scoring in Stanines 1-3
18.9%School with the highest percentage
scoring in Stanines 1-3
67.7%
They made AYP!!!
30
16 of the 20 schools made AYP
Stanford Achievement Test (10th Edition) Spring 2010
Grade 3/Reading
20 schools had over 50% of their students scoring in stanines 1-3
Break Time
Measuring A School’s Progress Using
Weighted Non-Proficiency
32
Weighted Non-Proficiency
• WNP measures a school’s progress at moving all students to increasingly higher levels of proficiency.
• Weighted Non Proficiency is reviewed to avoid overly focusing on students closest to benchmark and to give credit for moving any student who is not fully proficient.
33
34
Why Use Weighted Non-Proficiency?
Fully proficient student : weight of zero
Partially proficient student : given partial credit
Non-Proficient Student : given greatest weight
35
5 20
Grade Total Matched Pct WNP 1 2 3 4 WNP 1 2 3 4
ARMT (Grades 3+) and DIBELS (K-3) Analysis
K - DIBELS 43 41 95% 41% 14 6 21 6% 2 1 38
1 45 37 82% 0% 0 0 37 7% 1 3 33
2 55 46 84% 7% 0 6 40 13% 3 6 37
3 - DIBELS 54 45 83% 26% 8 7 30 18% 4 8 33
3 - ARMT 51 44 86% 26% 8 7 29 17% 0 5 12 27
4 55 47 85% 18% 0 4 17 26 21% 0 6 18 23
5 46 42 91% 24% 0 7 16 19 21% 0 6 14 22
6 40 39 98% 29% 0 9 16 14 19% 0 3 16 20
7 58 56 97% 16% 0 4 19 33 30% 0 12 27 17
8 52 47 90% 33% 3 10 18 16 43% 0 19 22 6
SAT Analysis - Grades 3 - 83 49 48 98% 29% 10 8 30 18% 5 7 21 15
4 55 52 95% 18% 7 5 23 17 23% 9 6 21 16
5 46 43 93% 24% 7 7 15 14 26% 8 6 16 13
6 40 39 98% 29% 7 9 15 8 23% 4 10 18 7
7 58 56 97% 17% 5 9 32 10 34% 14 10 22 10
8 52 47 90% 44% 17 7 17 6 45% 17 8 17 5
ARI Cohort 8
Studs Tested 10
WNP is Weighted Non-Proficiency
Spring 2009 - (K is fall 2009)Students at Level
Spring 10Students at Level
Go back 1 year
36
5 20
Grade Total Matched Pct WNP 1 2 3 4 WNP 1 2 3 4
ARMT (Grades 3+) and DIBELS (K-3) Analysis
K - DIBELS 43 41 95% 41% 14 6 21 6% 2 1 38
1 45 37 82% 0% 0 0 37 7% 1 3 33
2 55 46 84% 7% 0 6 40 13% 3 6 37
3 - DIBELS 54 45 83% 26% 8 7 30 18% 4 8 33
3 - ARMT 51 44 86% 26% 8 7 29 17% 0 5 12 27
4 55 47 85% 18% 0 4 17 26 21% 0 6 18 23
5 46 42 91% 24% 0 7 16 19 21% 0 6 14 22
6 40 39 98% 29% 0 9 16 14 19% 0 3 16 20
7 58 56 97% 16% 0 4 19 33 30% 0 12 27 17
8 52 47 90% 33% 3 10 18 16 43% 0 19 22 6
SAT Analysis - Grades 3 - 83 49 48 98% 29% 10 8 30 18% 5 7 21 15
4 55 52 95% 18% 7 5 23 17 23% 9 6 21 16
5 46 43 93% 24% 7 7 15 14 26% 8 6 16 13
6 40 39 98% 29% 7 9 15 8 23% 4 10 18 7
7 58 56 97% 17% 5 9 32 10 34% 14 10 22 10
8 52 47 90% 44% 17 7 17 6 45% 17 8 17 5
ARI Cohort 8
Studs Tested 10
WNP is Weighted Non-Proficiency
Spring 2009 - (K is fall 2009)Students at Level
Spring 10Students at Level
Non-proficient
Fully proficientPartially proficient
37
HOW DOES ARI LOOK AT PROFICIENCY DATA?
Non- Partially Fully Proficient Proficient Proficient
ARMT Level 1 Level 2-3 Level 4
Stanford Stanines 1-3 Stanine 4 Stanines 5-9
DIBELS At-risk Strategic Benchmark
If a student is (non-proficient, partially proficient, fully
proficient) then the student _________________.14
38
WNP Levels
WNP 1 2 3 4 Levels
ARMT 1 2 3 4 Stanines
Stanford 1-3 4 5-6 7-9
DIBELS At-Risk Strategic Benchmark XX
39
Weight Values/Tests Used• DIBELS * Weight Values WNP Levels
– Fully Proficient – Benchmark 0 Point Level 3– Partially Proficient – Strategic .5 Point Level 2– Non-Proficient – At-risk 1 Point Level 1
• ARMT (Reading)– Fully Proficient – Level 4 0 Point Level 4– Partially Proficient – Level 3 .33 Point Level 3– Partially Proficient – Level 2 .67 Point Level 2– Non-Proficient – Level 1 1 Point Level 1
• SAT 10 (Reading Comprehension)– Fully Proficient – Stanines 7-9 0 Point Level 4– Fully Proficient – Stanines 5-6 0 Point Level 3– Partially Proficient – Stanine 4 .5 Point Level 2– Non-Proficient – Stanines 1-3 1 Point Level 1
* Tests Used (DIBELS) Kindergarten Fall LNF Spring NWF
1st Spring NWF Spring ORF 2nd – 3rd Grade Spring ORF Spring ORF
WNP Formula
• Take the number of matched students at each level• Multiply by the value for each level• Add the numbers for each level together• Divide by the total number of matched students
40
41
5 20
Grade Total Matched Pct WNP 1 2 3 4 WNP 1 2 3 4
ARMT (Grades 3+) and DIBELS (K-3) Analysis
K - DIBELS 43 41 95% 41% 14 6 21 6% 2 1 38
1 45 37 82% 0% 0 0 37 7% 1 3 33
2 55 46 84% 7% 0 6 40 13% 3 6 37
3 - DIBELS 54 45 83% 26% 8 7 30 18% 4 8 33
3 - ARMT 51 44 86% 26% 8 7 29 17% 0 5 12 27
4 55 47 85% 18% 0 4 17 26 21% 0 6 18 23
5 46 42 91% 24% 0 7 16 19 21% 0 6 14 22
6 40 39 98% 29% 0 9 16 14 19% 0 3 16 20
7 58 56 97% 16% 0 4 19 33 30% 0 12 27 17
8 52 47 90% 33% 3 10 18 16 43% 0 19 22 6
SAT Analysis - Grades 3 - 83 49 48 98% 29% 10 8 30 18% 5 7 21 15
4 55 52 95% 18% 7 5 23 17 23% 9 6 21 16
5 46 43 93% 24% 7 7 15 14 26% 8 6 16 13
6 40 39 98% 29% 7 9 15 8 23% 4 10 18 7
7 58 56 97% 17% 5 9 32 10 34% 14 10 22 10
8 52 47 90% 44% 17 7 17 6 45% 17 8 17 5
ARI Cohort 8
Studs Tested 10
WNP is Weighted Non-Proficiency
Spring 2009 - (K is fall 2009)Students at Level
Spring 10Students at Level
WNP Formula• Take the number of matched students at each level• Multiply by the value for each level• Add the numbers for each level together• Divide by the total number of matched students
Example for DIBELS 3rd grade:(8 x 1) + (7 x .5) + (30 x 0)
45
8 + 3.5 + 0
45
11.5
45
.26 = 26% weighted non-proficiency 42
Students at Level
WNP 1 2 3 4
26% 8 7 30
43
5 20
Grade Total Matched Pct WNP 1 2 3 4 WNP 1 2 3 4
ARMT (Grades 3+) and DIBELS (K-3) Analysis
K - DIBELS 43 41 95% 41% 14 6 21 6% 2 1 38
1 45 37 82% 0% 0 0 37 7% 1 3 33
2 55 46 84% 7% 0 6 40 13% 3 6 37
3 - DIBELS 54 45 83% 26% 8 7 30 18% 4 8 33
3 - ARMT 51 44 86% 26% 8 7 29 17% 0 5 12 27
4 55 47 85% 18% 0 4 17 26 21% 0 6 18 23
5 46 42 91% 24% 0 7 16 19 21% 0 6 14 22
6 40 39 98% 29% 0 9 16 14 19% 0 3 16 20
7 58 56 97% 16% 0 4 19 33 30% 0 12 27 17
8 52 47 90% 33% 3 10 18 16 43% 0 19 22 6
SAT Analysis - Grades 3 - 83 49 48 98% 29% 10 8 30 18% 5 7 21 15
4 55 52 95% 18% 7 5 23 17 23% 9 6 21 16
5 46 43 93% 24% 7 7 15 14 26% 8 6 16 13
6 40 39 98% 29% 7 9 15 8 23% 4 10 18 7
7 58 56 97% 17% 5 9 32 10 34% 14 10 22 10
8 52 47 90% 44% 17 7 17 6 45% 17 8 17 5
ARI Cohort 8
Studs Tested 10
WNP is Weighted Non-Proficiency
Spring 2009 - (K is fall 2009)Students at Level
Spring 10Students at Level
WNP Formula• Take the number of matched students at each level• Multiply by the value for each level• Add the numbers for each level together• Divide by the total number of matched students
Example for SAT 6th grade:(4 x 1) + (10 x .5) + (18 x 0) + (7 x 0)
39
4 + 5 + 0 + 0
39
9
39
.23 = 23% weighted non-proficiency 44
Students at Level
WNP 1 2 3 4
23% 4 10 18 7
45
5 20
Grade Total Matched Pct WNP 1 2 3 4 WNP 1 2 3 4
ARMT (Grades 3+) and DIBELS (K-3) Analysis
K - DIBELS 43 41 95% 41% 14 6 21 6% 2 1 38
1 45 37 82% 0% 0 0 37 7% 1 3 33
2 55 46 84% 7% 0 6 40 13% 3 6 37
3 - DIBELS 54 45 83% 26% 8 7 30 18% 4 8 33
3 - ARMT 51 44 86% 26% 8 7 29 17% 0 5 12 27
4 55 47 85% 18% 0 4 17 26 21% 0 6 18 23
5 46 42 91% 24% 0 7 16 19 21% 0 6 14 22
6 40 39 98% 29% 0 9 16 14 19% 0 3 16 20
7 58 56 97% 16% 0 4 19 33 30% 0 12 27 17
8 52 47 90% 33% 3 10 18 16 43% 0 19 22 6
SAT Analysis - Grades 3 - 83 49 48 98% 29% 10 8 30 18% 5 7 21 15
4 55 52 95% 18% 7 5 23 17 23% 9 6 21 16
5 46 43 93% 24% 7 7 15 14 26% 8 6 16 13
6 40 39 98% 29% 7 9 15 8 23% 4 10 18 7
7 58 56 97% 17% 5 9 32 10 34% 14 10 22 10
8 52 47 90% 44% 17 7 17 6 45% 17 8 17 5
ARI Cohort 8
Studs Tested 10
WNP is Weighted Non-Proficiency
Spring 2009 - (K is fall 2009)Students at Level
Spring 10Students at Level
WNP Formula• Take the number of matched students at each level• Multiply by the value for each level• Add the numbers for each level together• Divide by the total number of matched students
Example for ARMT 8th grade:(3 x 1) + (10 x .67) + (18 x .33) + (16 x 0)
47
3 + 6.7 + 5.94 + 0
47
15.64
47
.33 = 33% weighted non-proficiency 46
Students at Level
WNP 1 2 3 4
33% 3 10 18 16
47
5 20
Grade Total Matched Pct WNP 1 2 3 4 WNP 1 2 3 4
ARMT (Grades 3+) and DIBELS (K-3) Analysis
K - DIBELS 43 41 95% 41% 14 6 21 6% 2 1 38
1 45 37 82% 0% 0 0 37 7% 1 3 33
2 55 46 84% 7% 0 6 40 13% 3 6 37
3 - DIBELS 54 45 83% 26% 8 7 30 18% 4 8 33
3 - ARMT 51 44 86% 26% 8 7 29 17% 0 5 12 27
4 55 47 85% 18% 0 4 17 26 21% 0 6 18 23
5 46 42 91% 24% 0 7 16 19 21% 0 6 14 22
6 40 39 98% 29% 0 9 16 14 19% 0 3 16 20
7 58 56 97% 16% 0 4 19 33 30% 0 12 27 17
8 52 47 90% 33% 3 10 18 16 43% 0 19 22 6
SAT Analysis - Grades 3 - 83 49 48 98% 29% 10 8 30 18% 5 7 21 15
4 55 52 95% 18% 7 5 23 17 23% 9 6 21 16
5 46 43 93% 24% 7 7 15 14 26% 8 6 16 13
6 40 39 98% 29% 7 9 15 8 23% 4 10 18 7
7 58 56 97% 17% 5 9 32 10 34% 14 10 22 10
8 52 47 90% 44% 17 7 17 6 45% 17 8 17 5
ARI Cohort 8
Studs Tested 10
WNP is Weighted Non-Proficiency
Spring 2009 - (K is fall 2009)Students at Level
Spring 10Students at Level
17 + 8 = 25 (out of 47 students)
48
Important Points for WNP
• A powerful way to look at student test results is to follow individual students over time.
• WNP is a measure of school success; schools are measured not so much by the absolute level of scores but by their ability to move their strugglers forward.
• WNP shows if the school is moving all students to increasingly higher levels.
• By converting scores from different tests to four levels, it is possible to follow student progress from test to test, from kindergarten through 8th grade.
• Weighted Non-Proficiency is reviewed to avoid overly focusing on students closest to benchmark and to give credit for moving any student who is not fully proficient.
Taking a Closer Look
• Fill your percentages of WNP in on the worksheet
49
Your School’s Data
50
Weighted Non-Proficiency System: _________________________School:_________________________
Grade Level/ Assessment
Spring of 2009(except K is Fall 2009)
Spring of 2010 Change in percentage(increase or decrease )
% Non-Proficient % Non-Proficient % Non-proficient
% Non-Proficient % Non-Proficient % Non-proficient
% Non-Proficient % Non-Proficient % Non-Proficient
% Non-Proficient % Non-Proficient % Non-Proficient
% Non-Proficient % Non-Proficient % Non-Proficient
What do you notice?
What are you wondering?
Your School’s Data
K DIBELS 6%41% Decrease 35%
16%7 SAT7 ARMT 30% Increase 14%
Increase 17% 34%17%
ABC Co. Schools Bay Elementary School
LUNCH
TRAVEL
What color form will I need?
• Raise your hand if you live in _____________.• If you have your hand raised you do not need to fill
out a form.• The other participants from each school need to take
1 minute to decide who will get travel because only one person from each school will get mileage.
• Raise your hand if you are the person from your school who will get travel. Pull the pink form from your folder.
• People who do not live in ______ and don’t have a pink form, get a white form.
Pink Forms and White Forms
(Front Page)• Take your pen and fill out the box at the top right hand
corner. Make sure that you print legibly. It must be able to be read. (Check the person beside you.)
Now:• Look at #2B. Write in the first blank the time you left
your house. Then, circle a.m.Time of departure to meeting from home base: ____________a.m./p.m.
Estimated time of return to home base : ____________a.m./p.m.
Pink Forms and White Forms
(Back Page)• Find the box in the top right hand corner. Print your
name legibly as it is on your legal documents and STOP.
• Next, print your physical address legibly. This is the actual address where you live. (This is not a
P.O. Box.) Write your street address, city, state, and zip code and STOP.
• Then, write your SS# legibly and STOP. This must be on your form if you are to receive reimbursement.
• (Check your partner.)
(Back Page)• Find the box in the bottom right hand corner. Put
your finger on the blank above where it says Signature of Traveler.
• Sign your name EXACTLY as it is written in the top right hand corner.
• (Check your partner to see if the signature the same as the name at the printed in the top right hand box?)
(Back Page)• Raise your hand if you receive your mail at a P. O.
Box.• If your hand is not raised, turn your form in.• If your hand is raised, find the box in the bottom left
hand corner on the 2nd page. Under where you see “Literacy & Justice for ALL Training” and the month, you will print legibly your mailing address.
• (Partners check to see if the information is filled out correctly and legible?)
• All forms should be turned in.
Reimbursement
Expect reimbursement to come from
the State Department of Education
in several months.
Additional data• We have additional data for you to look at
today. Some of this is from colleges and universities. (On pink and yellow paper)
• You can find additional data at the following sites:
http://parca.samford.edu/
http://www.ache.alabama.gov/ • Are our students college and career ready?
59
60
5 20
Grade Total Matched Pct WNP 1 2 3 4 WNP 1 2 3 4
ARMT (Grades 3+) and DIBELS (K-3) Analysis
K - DIBELS 43 41 95% 41% 14 6 21 6% 2 1 38
1 45 37 82% 0% 0 0 37 7% 1 3 33
2 55 46 84% 7% 0 6 40 13% 3 6 37
3 - DIBELS 54 45 83% 26% 8 7 30 18% 4 8 33
3 - ARMT 51 44 86% 26% 8 7 29 17% 0 5 12 27
4 55 47 85% 18% 0 4 17 26 21% 0 6 18 23
5 46 42 91% 24% 0 7 16 19 21% 0 6 14 22
6 40 39 98% 29% 0 9 16 14 19% 0 3 16 20
7 58 56 97% 16% 0 4 19 33 30% 0 12 27 17
8 52 47 90% 33% 3 10 18 16 43% 0 19 22 6
SAT Analysis - Grades 3 - 83 49 48 98% 29% 10 8 30 18% 5 7 21 15
4 55 52 95% 18% 7 5 23 17 23% 9 6 21 16
5 46 43 93% 24% 7 7 15 14 26% 8 6 16 13
6 40 39 98% 29% 7 9 15 8 23% 4 10 18 7
7 58 56 97% 17% 5 9 32 10 34% 14 10 22 10
8 52 47 90% 44% 17 7 17 6 45% 17 8 17 5
ARI Cohort 8
Studs Tested 10
WNP is Weighted Non-Proficiency
Spring 2009 - (K is fall 2009)Students at Level
Spring 10Students at Level
Partially proficientNon-proficient
Fully proficient
61
Grade LevelSpring 2010
# non-proficient
# partially proficient
Where are they now?Current Grade Level 2010-2011) Names of students
(NP or PP)
Grade Level in 2011-2012
Based on this information, what do we need to do next?.
4th ARMT
4th SAT
0 24 5th 6th
Annette PP Alan PP Allison PPCarolyn PP Doyle PP Kara PPKelly PP Kevin PP Turk PPYolonda PP Vladimir PP John PPBeverly PP Parker PP Jacob PPVicki PP Doug PP Lauren PPDebbie PP Rick PP Callie PPKaren PP Bill PP Christen PP
Rick NP Kara NP Allison NPCarolyn NP Doyle NP Christen NPBeverly NP Vicki NP Alan NPYolonda PP Vladimir PP John PPDoug PP Parker PP Jacob PP
6th 5th 69
Make sure we have the right names. Find out who we are missing. Are there new students we need to add? We need to meet with our feeder school to look at data.
62
Questions to Guide our Planning
What did we learn?
Specific Actions to Take
Timeline Who will be responsible?
(and for what?)
What adjustments need to be made for the Fall of 2011?
Team Planning Form
(Be sure to answer this question and any others you choose)
What interferences do these students have?
We don’t know the interferences that all of our non proficient students have and the system that they fall under (Meaning, Language, Print)
We have other assessments that we can give to see what the interferences are; we will do that in addition to listening to those students read grade level material aloud.
• Prior to Feb.22, teachers will identify interference
• Data meeting in 2 weeks (February 22) – we will have teachers determine the interferences of the NP students and bring the assessments so we can discuss how we can adjust instruction
• Principal and team plan data meeting; confirm students; give list of students to teachers; Principal leads data meeting
• Reading Coach leads a discussion during grade level meeting of ideas for addressing interferences from team; supports teachers through coaching cycle
• Teachers – bring interferences for each student (NP, PP)
• Were we able to list all of our non-proficient students? If not, how will we gather that information?
• What interferences do these students have? How do we know?• What structures are in place to address the interferences? (text,
additional time, providers of instruction, intensity of instruction, etc.)• What does the daily instruction they are receiving look like?• What has been working for us? What needs adjustment?• What instructional adjustments do we need to make immediately?• What adjustments need to be made for the fall of next year?• How many students moved from non- or partially proficient to
proficient? What helped them to do this?• How many students slid from proficient to partially proficient? Why?• What other forms of data do we need to look at for these students?• What does the data tell us about our professional development
needs?You may have other questions. Refer to Team to Teach, Tool 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, and 5.4,
for additional questions to consider. This will connect to your PLU assignment.63
Possible Questions to Consider
Share out
64
65
If you are participating in the PLU, then please stay
afterwards to discuss assignments for this
session.
66
PLU