Drilling Down to Individual Students: Using Academic Intervention Plans to Make AYP Attainment...
-
Upload
michelle-mclean -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
0
Transcript of Drilling Down to Individual Students: Using Academic Intervention Plans to Make AYP Attainment...
Drilling Drilling Down to Down to Individual Individual Students:Students:
Using Academic Intervention Plans to Make AYP Attainment Personalized
Jennifer D. Morrison, SDT, Baker Middle School Margaret Rudt, SDT, Col. E. Brooke Lee Middle School
OutcomesOutcomes• Compelling why – data
• History of how the AIPs came to be used
• Definition of AIP and Connection to Strategic Monitoring
• Description of AIP process and uses• Discussion flow-chart• Responsibilities outline
• We’re not the only ones…
• Evaluation
Baker MSA DataWhy Do it? Results
Baker Middle School
—93.50nanana95.8093.40All StudentsAttendance
2.7057.2014.5040.0042.90
54.5050.00Limited EnglishMath
—57.2028.6029.2042.90
57.8050.00Special EducationMath
—57.2018.8044.0042.90
62.8050.00FARMSMath
—57.2012.9064.3042.9077.2050.00HispanicMath
—57.203.8083.9042.9087.7050.00WhiteMath
—57.204.9059.1042.9064.0050.00African AmericanMath
—57.20—5.785.7042.9080.0050.00AsianMath
—57.20nana42.90100.0050.00American IndianMath
—57.204.3079.7042.9084.0050.00All StudentsMath
—71.1012.7060.0061.50
72.7066.30Limited EnglishReading
10.9071.1021.7038.5061.50
60.2066.30Special EducationReading
—71.1026.8045.3061.50
72.1066.30FARMSReading
—71.1012.9064.3061.5077.2066.30HispanicReading
—71.105.4085.4061.5090.8066.30WhiteReading
—71.105.1068.2061.5073.3066.30African AmericanReading
—71.108.6085.7061.5094.3066.30AsianReading
—71.10nana61.50100.0066.30American IndianReading
—71.106.4081.7061.5088.1066.30All StudentsReading
Needed for 2008
2008 AMONext
Change2006 Attend/ Prof%
2006 AMO 2007 Attend/Prof%
2007 AMOCurre
nt
SubgroupTitle
SubjectTitle
Comparison of MSA Proficiency Data, 2006-2008
—93.50nanana95.8093.40All StudentsAttendance
2.7057.2014.5040.0042.90
54.5050.00Limited EnglishMath
—57.2028.6029.2042.90
57.8050.00Special EducationMath
—57.2018.8044.0042.90
62.8050.00FARMSMath
—57.2012.9064.3042.9077.2050.00HispanicMath
—57.203.8083.9042.9087.7050.00WhiteMath
—57.204.9059.1042.9064.0050.00African AmericanMath
—57.20—5.785.7042.9080.0050.00AsianMath
—57.20nana42.90100.0050.00American IndianMath
—57.204.3079.7042.9084.0050.00All StudentsMath
—71.1012.7060.0061.50
72.7066.30Limited EnglishReading
10.9071.1021.7038.5061.50
60.2066.30Special EducationReading
—71.1026.8045.3061.50
72.1066.30FARMSReading
—71.1012.9064.3061.5077.2066.30HispanicReading
—71.105.4085.4061.5090.8066.30WhiteReading
—71.105.1068.2061.5073.3066.30African AmericanReading
—71.108.6085.7061.5094.3066.30AsianReading
—71.10nana61.50100.0066.30American IndianReading
—71.106.4081.7061.5088.1066.30All StudentsReading
Needed for 2008
2008 AMONext
Change2006 Attend/ Prof%
2006 AMO 2007 Attend/Prof%
2007 AMOCurre
nt
SubgroupTitle
SubjectTitle
Comparison of MSA Proficiency Data, 2006-2008
Why Do it? ResultsBaker Middle School
—93.50nanana95.8093.40All StudentsAttendance
2.7057.2014.5040.0042.90
54.5050.00Limited EnglishMath
—57.2028.6029.2042.90
57.8050.00Special EducationMath
—57.2018.8044.0042.90
62.8050.00FARMSMath
—57.2012.9064.3042.9077.2050.00HispanicMath
—57.203.8083.9042.9087.7050.00WhiteMath
—57.204.9059.1042.9064.0050.00African AmericanMath
—57.20—5.785.7042.9080.0050.00AsianMath
—57.20nana42.90100.0050.00American IndianMath
—57.204.3079.7042.9084.0050.00All StudentsMath
—71.1012.7060.0061.50
72.7066.30Limited EnglishReading
10.9071.1021.7038.5061.50
60.2066.30Special EducationReading
—71.1026.8045.3061.50
72.1066.30FARMSReading
—71.1012.9064.3061.5077.2066.30HispanicReading
—71.105.4085.4061.5090.8066.30WhiteReading
—71.105.1068.2061.5073.3066.30African AmericanReading
—71.108.6085.7061.5094.3066.30AsianReading
—71.10nana61.50100.0066.30American IndianReading
—71.106.4081.7061.5088.1066.30All StudentsReading
Needed for 2008
2008 AMONext
Change2006 Attend/ Prof%
2006 AMO 2007 Attend/Prof%
2007 AMOCurre
nt
SubgroupTitle
SubjectTitle
Comparison of MSA Proficiency Data, 2006-2008
—93.50nanana95.8093.40All StudentsAttendance
2.7057.2014.5040.0042.90
54.5050.00Limited EnglishMath
—57.2028.6029.2042.90
57.8050.00Special EducationMath
—57.2018.8044.0042.90
62.8050.00FARMSMath
—57.2012.9064.3042.9077.2050.00HispanicMath
—57.203.8083.9042.9087.7050.00WhiteMath
—57.204.9059.1042.9064.0050.00African AmericanMath
—57.20—5.785.7042.9080.0050.00AsianMath
—57.20nana42.90100.0050.00American IndianMath
—57.204.3079.7042.9084.0050.00All StudentsMath
—71.1012.7060.0061.50
72.7066.30Limited EnglishReading
10.9071.1021.7038.5061.50
60.2066.30Special EducationReading
—71.1026.8045.3061.50
72.1066.30FARMSReading
—71.1012.9064.3061.5077.2066.30HispanicReading
—71.105.4085.4061.5090.8066.30WhiteReading
—71.105.1068.2061.5073.3066.30African AmericanReading
—71.108.6085.7061.5094.3066.30AsianReading
—71.10nana61.50100.0066.30American IndianReading
—71.106.4081.7061.5088.1066.30All StudentsReading
Needed for 2008
2008 AMONext
Change2006 Attend/ Prof%
2006 AMO 2007 Attend/Prof%
2007 AMOCurre
nt
SubgroupTitle
SubjectTitle
Comparison of MSA Proficiency Data, 2006-2008
But can we attribute these numbers to the AIPs?
YES!
How?
All AIP StudentsMath
0102030405060708090
100
# Passed
# Not Passed5
16
11
26
1315
All AIP StudentsReading
0102030405060708090
100
# Passed
# Not Passed8
12
18 18 1113
Between 33-47% of all
students targeted with an
AIP passed the MSA!!!!!!(29 out of 86 in math
37 out of 80 in reading)
Lee Data
Of the 128 AIP students, 46 showed dramatic growth from fall to winter on the MAP-R
28 of these students are Hispanic
17 have IEPS
34 are FARMs
12 are ESOL
Predicted 12-17
Basic
Proficient
Advanced
Predicted 1-10
Basic
Proficient
Advanced
Over time, strategic monitoring showed improved MSA predictions for AIP students.
The Breakdown Based on Twenty Points Above and Below
• 29 are RELL
• 64 are both FARMs and Hispanic
• 27 are both FARMs and African American
• 39 are in the Special Education sub group
• 41 count in 3 or more cells
• 8 are Hispanic, FARMs, LEP, and Special Education
Of All of the 129 Students Who Have
AIPs:
What we learned about identifying students for AIPs?
AYP Targets:
Completing the AIPThe OBJECTIVE identifies what the
target is for this student. This could
be formative or summative.
The SMART goal is
•Specific•Measurable•Attainable•Result Oriented•Time Sensitive
What evidence will we use to evaluate how we are meeting
this child’s needs.
These ideas are a result of biweekly
intervention meetings.
Completing the AIPThese are notes that reflect student progress, behavior
changes, revisions in interventions, parent
conferences, etc.
Think about what programs your
students are currently
participating in and/or have been recommended for
over the summer or next year.
Automatically updates in file
maker
How did we predict proficiency for the AIP students to identify new
students or to retire an AIP?
AIPs Strategically Monitored on Teams
Drilling Down
Confidence Interval
AMO
Where are they kept for teams?
SMART FILE
As students demonstrate continued proficiency on all tracked data points, they are moved to the SMART file. While still on our radar, they take less of a priority based on data.
As students demonstrate continued proficiency on all tracked data points, they are moved to the SMART file. While still on our radar, they take less of a priority based on data.
Student is identified for an AIP.
Discussions about student reveal shyness and discomfort in talking in groups.
Team determines one intervention is to provide safe opportunities for student to share in non-verbal or low-risk ways.
Team may ask SDT to provide and model strategies so teachers can more effectively support student’s needs.
“Steps” to Successfully Meeting Student Needs
Teachers use strategies with student, monitor impact through AIP discussions,and document results on AIP running records.
Is this studentbeing successful on the targeted data points?
Place student in “smart” file
Continue to discussstudent in AIP meetings
Continue to monitor; Bring student back to full
AIP participation if data deems
Team leader sets agenda
Team members bring academicdata related to AIP interventions
Teams examine key data pointsDetermined for strategic monitoring
Move new students in need to AIP pool
Yes
No
Suggested Role Responsibilities for AIP Success
Team Leader
• Facilitate creation of initial AIPs by examining data and strategically selecting students and appropriate interventions
• Implement and provide communication about interventions as determined by individual AIPs
• Set AIP meeting agenda
•Facilitate discussions
•Assign necessary roles (recorder, time keeper)
•Ensure AIPs are maintained and updated after meetings
•Communicate team needs and suggestions to administration, SDT, counselor, and other pertinent personnel
Team Members:
• Help create initial AIPs by examining data and strategically selecting students and appropriate interventions
• Implement interventions as determined by individual AIPs
Suggested Role Responsibilities for AIP Success
•Prepare for AIP discussions by providing evidence and data to support or refute effectiveness of interventions
•Participate in AIP discussions
•Support team leader with AIP updating
Staff Development Teacher
• Support teams in examining data and strategically selecting students and appropriate interventions
• Support Team Leaders in preparation for meetings
• Support team and provide input at AIP discussions
• Provide necessary strategies, training, or support to teachers as determined by students’ individual interventions
• Help ensure integrity and quality of AIP documents
• Maintain “big picture” view of schoolwide AIPs
• Communicate between groups of stakeholders
Suggested Role Responsibilities for AIP Success
Principal /Administrator:
• Participate in AIP discussions
• Ensure all participants are regularly attending meetings (including counselors)
Suggested Role Responsibilities for AIP Success
• Ensure quality and integrity of AIP plans through monitoring
• Support teams with determined interventions
• Maintain “big picture” of AIPs throughout the school
We aren’t the only ones…
• Newport Mill• Sligo• Silver Spring International• Takoma Park• Argyle
Other schools have decided to implement AIPs.
Next Steps: Force Field Analysis
• Drivers • Restrainers