8/13/081 Summary of 2007-2008 Student Achievement Results Pennsylvania System of School Assessment...

8/13/08 1

Summary of 2007-2008 Student Achievement

Results

Pennsylvania System of School Assessment (PSSA)Grades 3-8 and 11

District In-Service Training

August, 2008

8/13/08 2

• Despite dramatic changes introduced in 2006-2007, the District still made modest growth in student achievement that year.

• In 2007-2008, the District made substantial progress in raising student achievement levels across the board.

8/13/08 33

This year students made gains in Reading and Mathematics proficiency on 13 of 14

PSSA exams

• Reading: Gains ranged from 0.8 points (1.9%) in Grade 5 to 8.8 points (15.3%) in Grade 8

• Mathematics: Gains ranged from 0.5 points (0.9%) in Grade 5 to 8.6 points (19.6%) in Grade 11

This year’s results show accelerated progress on District priorities.

Note: PSSA’s were taken in two subjects (Reading and Mathematics) in seven

grades (3-8 and 11)

Data Source: 2007-2008 Preliminary PSSA data from the Pennsylvania Department of Education

8/13/08 44

Grade 3 Reading Proficiency: This year’s 5.3 percentage point increase (9.0%) means that students improved 15.3 points (31.4%) over 3 years.


8/13/08 5Data Source: 2007-2008 Preliminary PSSA data from the

Pennsylvania Department of Education 5




Grade 11 Mathematics Proficiency: This year’s 8.6 percentage point increase (19.5%) means that students improved 14.2 points (37.1%) over 3 years.

8/13/08 77

District goals exceed what is required for compliance with No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and include moving students

to the advanced level.


8/13/08 88

This year students showed progress in moving to the advanced level on

12 of 14 PSSA exams.

• Reading: Gains ranged from 0.5 points (4.4%) in Grade 5 to 8.7 points (30.2%) in Grade 8

• Mathematics: Gains ranged from 1.6 points (5.6%) in Grade 5 to 8.8 points (30.1%) in Grade 4


8/13/08 99

From last year to this year, students have shown significant

progress in moving to advanced in Grades 3 and 4 Mathematics and

Grade 8 Reading.


8/13/08 1010

Grade 3 Mathematics Advanced: Students improved 8.2 points (34.9%) over last year.


8/13/08 1111

Grade 4 Mathematics Advanced: Students improved 8.8 points (30.1%) over last year.


8/13/08 1212

Grade 8 Reading Advanced: Students improved 8.8 points (30.1%) over last year.


8/13/08 1313

Another one of the District’s goals is reducing the number of students performing at the

below basic level.


8/13/08 1414

This year students showed progress in moving out of below basic on

11 of 14 PSSA exams.

• Reading: Reductions in below basic ranged from 2.6 points (12.0%) in Grade 8 to 5.1 points (21.4%) in Grade 3 from last year

• Mathematics: Reductions in below basic ranged from 2.4 points (24.5%) in Grade 3 to 5.9 points (18.8%) in Grade 7 from last year


8/13/08 1515

From last year to this year, students have shown significant progress in moving out of below basic in Grade 3 Reading and

Grades 7 and 11 Mathematics.


8/13/08 1616

Grade 3 Reading Below Basic: Students reduced below basic by 5.1 points (21.4%) over last year.




Grade 7 Mathematics Below Basic: Students reduced below basic by 5.9 points (18.8%) over last year.



Grade 11 Mathematics Below Basic: Students reduced below basic by 5.2 points (14.6%) over last year.



Another District goal is reducing the academic

disparity between African- American and White students.



The District made progress in reducing the academic disparity between African-American and White students on 10 of 14 PSSA exams.

Over the past three years, the most progress was made in Grades 8 and 11:

• Reduced disparity by 13.1 points (36.4%) in Grade 8 Reading over 3 years

• Reduced disparity by 12.4 points (33.6%) in Grade 8 Mathematics over 3 years

• Reduced disparity by 3.0 points (7.6%) in Grade 11 Mathematics over 3 years



Accelerated Learning Academies did, in fact,

accelerate student achievement.



PSSA Reading and Mathematics Proficiency Improvementsfor ALA's and District, Grades 3 through 8 Combined, over Last Year

2.9%

4.4%

7.2%

6.0%

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

8.0%

Reading Math

Pe

rce

nt

Imp

rov

em

en

t 2

00

6-2

00

7 t

o 2

00

7-2

00

8

District

ALA's

Students in Accelerated Learning Academies posted increases in proficiency 2.5 times greater than the District overall in Reading and 1.4 times greater in

Mathematics over the past year.



PSSA Reading and Mathematics Below Basic Reductionsfor ALA's and District, Grades 3 through 8 Combined, over Last Year

2.3%2.6%

7.0%

4.7%

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

8.0%

Reading Math

Pe

rce

nt

Re

du

cti

on

20

06

-20

07

to

20

07

-20

08

District

ALA's

Students in Accelerated Learning Academies posted reductions in below basic 3.0 times greater than the District overall in Reading and 1.8 times greater in

Mathematics over the past year.



Students in Accelerated Learning Academies posted a 3.1 point (33.7%) increase in advanced Reading and a 5.4 point (34.8%) increase in advanced Mathematics over last year.

8/13/08 25

Another District goal is ensuring that students are “Promise-Ready”

This year’s gains in 8th grade Reading and Mathematics and 11th grade Mathematics

reflect substantial progress.

Data Source: 2007-2008 Preliminary PSSA data from the




Grade 11 Mathematics Proficiency: This year’s 8.6 percentage point increase (19.5%) means that students improved 14.2 points (37.1%) over 3 years.

8/13/08 2828

2008 District-LevelReading Results

All Grades Combinedand Grade by Grade Review


8/13/08 29Data Source: 2007-2008 Preliminary PSSA data from the Pennsylvania Department of Education

8/13/08 3030

2008 District-Level Mathematic Results

All Grades Combinedand a Grade by Grade Review


8/13/08 31Data Source: 2007-2008 Preliminary PSSA data from the Pennsylvania Department of Education

8/13/08 32Data Source: 2007-2008 Preliminary AYP data from the


Report on Preliminary Adequate Yearly Progress

(AYP) for District

8/13/08 3333

Year Total Number of Targets

Number of Targets Met

Percentage of Targets Met

2005 69 50 72.5%

2006 82 65 79.3%

2007 96 78 81.2%

2008 96 83 86.5%

Over the past three years, the District increased the percentage of AYP targets met even as the number of targets increased.

8/13/08 34Data Source: 2007-2008 Preliminary AYP data from the Pennsylvania Department of Education

34

For the District to make AYP in performance at least one grade band must meet Reading and

Mathematics targets for all students and all subgroups.

8/13/08 35

In each grade band, the District is held accountable for subgroups of 40 or more students.

Is there a subgroup? Grades 3-5 Grades 6-8 Grade 11

African-American Yes Yes Yes

White Yes Yes Yes

Latino/Hispanic Yes Yes *

Asian Yes Yes *

Multiracial Yes Yes Yes

IEP (Special Education) Yes Yes Yes

ELL (English Language Learners) Yes Yes *

ED (Economically Disadvantaged) Yes Yes Yes



*Currently, there are less than 40 students, but this may change over time.

8/13/08 36

The District missed making AYP by a very small margin, meeting all Reading and Mathematics targets except in one subgroup in grades 6-8 according to preliminary data.

Grades 6-8 Performance Met Reading? Met Mathematics?

All Yes Yes

White Yes Yes

African-American Yes Yes

Latino/Hispanic Yes Yes

Asian Yes Yes

Multiracial Yes Yes

Individual Education Plan (IEP) No No

English Language Learners Yes Yes

Economically Disadvantaged Yes Yes

Data Source: 2007-2008 Preliminary AYP data from the


Although IEP students improved in 2008, the District must continue to deepen its work in this area.

8/13/08 37

Preliminary data indicates that the 2008 District AYP Status will be Corrective Action II

(This is the second year for this status.)

Corrective Action II means that the District may be subject to action taken by the State, such as the following:

• Deferring programmatic funds or reducing administrative funds

• Implementing new curriculum• Replacing staff• Appointing a trustee to administer the District in place of

the Superintendent and school board• Establishing alternative arrangements for supervision of

certain schools• Abolishing or restructuring the District.



8/13/08 38

The District now has in place the core elements for raising student achievement: New rigorous curriculum Nationally recognized system to train, support,

evaluate and reward principals Aggressive, comprehensive professional

development for all instructional personnel Use of diagnostic assessments to get help to

students quickly Instructional coaches in every school to deepen the

work



8/13/08 39

• These systemic initiatives have raised achievement in other districts and have taken hold in Pittsburgh.

• With ongoing commitment and deepening of our efforts, the District will see continued gains in student achievement at all levels for many years to come.

8/13/08 40

The District is committed to deepening the work.

• Significant indication of progress confirms the value of Excellence for All initiatives

• Implies attention to implementation and improvement of current strategies

• Planning to address vexing problems, i.e. 5th grade reading and 11th grade reading

• Implies continued professional development and sharing of good work

• Continuous improvement

8/13/08 41

Deepening the Work in Year 3 of Reform

1. Teaching and Learning Teams2. Revised Content-Focused Coaching Model &

Professional Development Cycle3. Reading First Clinic4. Core Curriculum & Academic Initiatives5. Response to Intervention6. Achievement Gap Initiatives7. All principals will spend 2-3 hours per day in

classrooms actively monitoring and supporting teaching and learning

8/13/08 42

Teaching and Learning Teams Headed by each school management Executive Director Central Office literacy, math, assessment, special education, early

childhood, science, Reading First, Deputy Superintendent and other senior staff

Monthly School visits Theory of Action

Make our mission operational and strategically and intentionally supported

Create and reinforce social practices to support schools and foster a culture of mutual trust and professional growth

Support and monitor teaching and learning within a co-accountability model

Moving away from a perceived compliance & authoritative orientation culture to a collaborative, co-accountable support to schools

District commitment to intensely focus on supporting academic initiatives at the school level

District commitment to supporting teaching and learning in the schools proactively, strategically and intentionally

8/13/08 43

Teaching and Learning Teams are:

• Focused on improving teaching and learning around academic initiatives

• Focused on providing coherent building support

• Focused on coaching model, PD cycle and curriculum implementation

• Provide focused support to principals, coaches and teachers directly in the schools

• Collaborative and supportive• Formative assessment driven,

data-driven• Process focused • Student learning and student

work focused• Recursive in nature• Co-accountable

• Compliance driven

• Top-down

• Evaluation driven

• Authoritative oriented

Teaching and Learning Teams are NOT:

8/13/08 44

Coaching Model– All K-12 Content-Focused Coaches will

• teach or co-teach the district core curriculum (except ALA coaches)

• provide a model/laboratory classroom to be used as a professional development opportunities for teachers (except ALA coaches)

• facilitate professional development to meet content teacher needs aligned to a professional development cycle

• provide insight into the necessary revisions to the curriculum provide access to a curriculum specialist at the building level

8/13/08 45

Professional Development

• Teachers in both weak and strong professional learning communities benefit from intensive, sustained professional development focused on content instruction (Cohen & Hill, 2001).

13

8/13/08 46

Coaching Model

To that end, we have…– Developed a professional development cycle of coaching for

work with teachers supported by the teaching and learning teams

– Developed Teaching and Learning Feedback Tools for each content area

– Created tools to facilitate the work– Developed practices and protocols for coaching work with

teachers and for supervisors working with coaches– Refined the cadre and coaching lab protocols– Developed a coaching handbook and coaching log to guide

the revised model implementation and articulate the practices and tools to support the model and the PD cycle

– Reinstituted the Reading First Clinics

8/13/08 47

Curriculum & Academic InitiativesTools to support deepening the work:

Content Specific Teaching and Learning Feedback Tools (non-evaluative & supportive of curriculum pedagogy)

These tools will be used during classroom visitations and learning walks. The intent is to provide feedback to inform the professional development training. These tools are not to be used in evaluative ways. These tools support the recursive cycle of professional development and professional learning of teachers.

Instructional Handbooks for each content area Increased diagnostic assessments K-5 Revisions to and implementation of K-12 managed instruction

Practices to support deepening the work:Teaching and Learning TeamsRevised Coaching ModelCoaching Model Professional Development CycleDistrict definition of differentiated instructionCurriculums that are culturally responsive

8/13/08 48

• 32 Total Core Curriculum Courses– 7 ELA courses 6-12– 6 math courses – 1 algebra lab course– 6 science courses– 6 social courses + AA

History – CAS Courses 5

• Other Curriculum Key Initiatives– READ 180 6th-9th grades

2008-2009– Write Tools & Content

Writing Portfolios– Compass Learning K-12

2008-2009– SAT Online students 6-12 – Response to Intervention

K-5 & Strategic Interventions 6-12

Curriculum & Academic Initiatives

• Elementary• Reading Curriculum Units 5 & 6• Math Curriculum EnVision & EDM3 development 2009-2010

8/13/08 49

What is Response to Intervention?

Simply put, RtI is an ongoing process of using student performance and other data to guide instructional and intervention decisions. Sharon Kurns, Diane Morrison, George Batsche, NASDSE Satellite Conference Series, December 6, 2006

It is an assessment and intervention process for systematically monitoring progress and making decisions about the need for instructional modifications or increasingly intensified services

using progress monitoring data. The National Research Center on Learning Disabilities (NRCLD, 2006)

RtI is an early intervening strategy. It is a comprehensive, multi-tiered intervention strategy to enable early identification of students with academic and behavioral difficulties prior to student failure. Monitoring student response to a series of increasingly intense interventions assists in preventing failure and provides data that may guide eligibility decisions for learning disabilities. Pennsylvania Department of Education, 2007

8/13/08 50

TIER 1

TIER 2

TIER 3

Core classroom instruction for ALL students

Supplemental instruction, targeted at skill deficits

Intensive targeted intervention for the most at-risk

Progress monitoring – frequent data based evaluation

Progress monitoring – frequent data based evaluation

Formative and summative assessments: screening, diagnostic, progress checks, and benchmarks

Differentiated instruction

Ongoing analysis of student performance

Intensive Intervention

Supplemental Intervention

CoreInstruction/

Differentiation

RESPONSE to INTERVENTION

80%

15%

5%

8/13/08 51

Differentiation

Within the effort-based learning theory embraced by the district, Differentiated Instruction is the deliberate effort by the teachers with administrative and district support to provide academically rigorous instruction that is responsive to the differing needs of all students.

Rigorous Core CurriculumManaged Curriculum, including 37 new courses, initiated from 2007-2009 Math, English, Science, Social Studies, & Reading

RESPONSE to INTERVENTION

Focus on Core Instruction

meeting the needs of all students

through differentiated

instruction

Pittsburgh Public SchoolsCore Curriculum

TIER 1Effort Based EducationPromotes mastery-oriented approach to learning•On-going formative assessments•Enables students to identify what they did wrong and what they could do now to improve•Feedback praises effort not ability •Mistakes carry a message about effort not ability•Intellectual skills can be cultivated

8/13/08 52

What is Response to Intervention?

RtI is a(n):• General education led effort

implemented within the general education system, coordinated with all other services including special education, Title1, ESL, Migrant Education, etc.

• System to provide instructional intervention immediately upon student need

• Alternative approach to the diagnosis of a Specific Learning Disability. Instead of using the well-known discrepancy model, local education agencies may now use this diagnostic alternative

• Process that determines if the child responds to scientific, research-based intervention as a part of the evaluation procedures.

RtI is not a(n):• Pre-referral system

• Individual teacher

• Classroom

• Special education program

• Added period of reading instruction

• Separate, stand alone initiative

From: Response to Intervention (RtI): What it is and what it’s not.Pennsylvania Department of Education

8/13/08 53

Achievement Gap Initiatives

• Achievement Gap Task Force• Culturally Responsive Arts Education Project• RFP for training Pittsburgh Staff in a train the trainer model• Increased Differentiation by process and product in core

curriculums• Curriculum Revisions and development underway with

emphasis on Culturally Responsive Pedagogy and Differentiated Instruction– Increased student engagement making sure students

learn from each other in cooperative groups (differentiated process)

– Present curriculum projects in more than one way so there are many opportunities for learners to connect with the subject (differentiated products)

8/13/08 54

Instructional Leadership

• All principals will spend 2-3 hours per day in classrooms actively monitoring and supporting teaching and learning

8/13/08 55

PPS Vision: Math Literacy For All

Vision: Excellence for All The PPS will be one of America’s premier

school districts, student-focused, well-managed, and innovative.

We will hold ourselves accountable for preparing all children to achieve academic excellence and strength of character, so they have the opportunity to succeed in all aspects of life.

8/13/08 56

Mission: Mathematical Literacy

All students in the PPS have the capability to be empowered mathematically, or become mathematically literate. In providing opportunities for improvement of quality of life, it widens choices for personal and professional life pathways.

Our goal is to provide a high quality curriculum that empowers students to cope with the mathematical demands they will face in the future.

8/13/08 57

Learning Mathematics

• Children begin school with more mathematical knowledge and intuition than previously believed.

• Mathematics is the science of order, patterns, structure, and logical relationships (Kenney, 2005). Finding and exploring this regularity or order and then making sense of it is what doing mathematics is all about.

• Mathematics is more meaningful when it is rooted in real life contexts and situations stemming from personal experiences .

• Mastery of mathematics concepts and skills comes with repeated exposure

and practice. This enables students to make new connections and build on the mathematical content they already know while gradually learning more difficult and challenging content.

• Foundational understanding begins with the concrete, then to the

representational, and, ultimately, to the abstract and symbolic level.

8/13/08 58

Math Panel RecommendationsHighlights of Report:

“Foundations for Success”

• Algebra Readiness: Math curricula should be streamlined to focus on key skills in preK-8, specifically, fluency with numbers, fractions, and aspects of geometry and measurement that will lay the foundation for later algebra success. – “Students who complete algebra II are more than twice as likely to graduate from college…”

58

8/13/08 59

Algebra Readiness: Fluency with Numbers

• Have a “computational facility” which depends on and is reinforced by automatic recall of addition and related subtraction facts

• Know basic principles of Geometry and Measurement (beginning at grade 5 through middle school)

• Know place value• Can compose and decompose numbers (i.e. 432=

100+300+20+12 or 432= 400+12+2)• Understand and apply meaning of the 4 basic operations• Use commutative, associative and distributive properties

8/13/08 60


“Foundations for Success”

• Fractions: A major goal for K-8 mathematics education should be proficiency with fractions including decimals, percents, and negative fractions, for such proficiency is foundational for algebra.

8/13/08 61

Algebra Readiness:Fluency with Fractions

• Understand and apply positive and negative fractions

• Locate positive and negative fractions on a number line

• Compare, represent, and estimate the size of fractions, decimals and related percents

• Know that sums, differences, products and quotients (with nonzero denominators) of fractions are fractions

8/13/08 62


“Foundations for Success

• Balanced Approach: The curriculum must simultaneously develop conceptual understanding, computational fluency, and problem-solving skills. These capabilities are mutually supportive.

• Effort-Based Ability: Experimental studies have demonstrated that changing children’s beliefs from a focus on ability to a focus on effort increases engagement in mathematics learning, which improves outcomes.

• Teacher-Directed vs. Student-Centered Instruction: Research does not support the exclusive use of either approach. Both are essential.

8/13/08 63

Mathematics Proficiency

Five Interweaving Strands

Conceptual Understanding

Productive Disposition

Adaptive ReasoningStrategic Competencies

Procedural Fluency

Ability to analyze, apply and transfer knowledge in new and unfamiliar contexts

Ability to learn basic computational procedures with meaning and carry them out efficiently and accurately

Ability to formulate, represent and solve problems

Capacity for logical thought, reflection and justification of problem solving processes

The belief that effort will lead to learning and increased ability in Mathematics

8/13/08 64

Instructional Practices for Mathematical Proficiency

• Provide challenging tasks that involve meaning-making.• Connect new learning with prior knowledge, and, in the

process, address misconceptions and flawed understanding.

• Reinforce social engagement through talk, activity, and interaction around meaningful problems.

• Provide timely feedback, so work, thinking and understanding can be revised and deepened.

• Differentiate by providing academically rigorous instruction that is responsive to the differing needs of all students.

• Be culturally responsive by acknowledging and building from students’ personal, ethnic, class, gender, neighborhood, and school histories.

8/13/08 65

Balanced Approach

All strands must be addressed every year, at deeper and deeper levels, Pre-k through 8th grade

in order for students to become proficient mathematical thinkers.

K -8 Alignment - Five Content Strands

Number &Operations

Probability & Statistics

Measurement

Geometry

Algebra

Instruction in each of the five strands must include ample fact fluency practice as well as problem solving opportunities. This balance will promote higher levels of mathematical proficiency at all grade levels.

Fact Fluency

& ProblemSolving

8/13/08 66

The ElementaryMathematics Curriculum

“Vertically aligned programs assist with student transitions and support achievement” (Dr. Uri Triesman, U. of Texas, Charles Dana Center)

Pre-KEDM3 Pre-KEDM 3 offers the hands on approach needed in an effective preschool program to build number sense. Basal support is not appropriate at this grade level.

Elementary K-5

enVisionMATHPearson-Prentice HallProcedural / Basal component with connections

EDM3Wright Group, McGraw HillConceptual/Journal withInquiry-based Activities

Middle School 6-8Prentice Hall

Pearson, Prentice HallProcedural Component with connections

Connected Math 2

Pearson, Prentice HallInquiry based Component

8/13/08 67

Curriculum Structure

Alignment to Standards by Unit and TopicsEligible Content AlignmentScope and SequenceQuarterly Road Map by Big Ideas, Performance and content ExpectationsUnit at a GlanceTopic at a GlaceInstructional PathwayPacing Guide

8/13/08 68

CAUTION! EM3 enVision MathVS

8/13/08 69

• CMP2

Prentice Hall

EM3

enVision Math

8/13/081 Summary of 2007-2008 Student Achievement Results Pennsylvania System of School Assessment...

Documents

Transcript of 8/13/081 Summary of 2007-2008 Student Achievement Results Pennsylvania System of School Assessment...