Using Data to Plan for Effective Professional Development
description
Transcript of Using Data to Plan for Effective Professional Development
Using Data to Plan for Effective Professional Development
2012 NDE Data ConferenceIt’s More Than Numbers
April 2-3Kearney, NE
Sue Anderson, Ph.D., ESU 3 Debbie Schraeder, ESU 3
Session Topics•ESU 3 Rationale for Data Analysis
•Framework
•Process
•Findings
•Using the Results
Rationale•Understanding student achievement levels
will:
▫ assist in planning for effective professional development
▫assist supporting schools’ improvement efforts
Framework
Data Analysis Framework
•3 Critical Questions
▫What do the data show?
▫Why might this be?
▫How should we respond?
Process
• Data review on December 16, 2011▫ Individual ▫ Team Analysis – Content Areas
• District level SOSR data – Grades 3-8, 11▫ NeSA Math– All students - Overall/Sub Score Performance▫ NeSA Reading – All students – Overall/Sub Score Performance▫ NeSA Writing – All students▫ Demographic Data▫ Enrollment
2010-2011 NeSA Results – ESU 3 School Districts
Data Sets 2010-2011 NeSA Results – ESU 3 School Districts
Data Sets 2010-2011 Demographic Data– ESU 3 School Districts
• Review the data content
• Use the worksheet to record observations and reflections
Individual Work
• Share findings from individual analysis
• Discuss possible reasons for results
Group Work
• Offer suggestions for appropriate responses
Findings
What Do The Data Show?•2011 NeSA Reading
• Grade 3 (state proficiency – 70.95%)– 3 districts below• Grade 4 (state proficiency – 75.39%) – 6 districts below• Grade 5 (state proficiency – 70.01%)– 4 districts below
• Grade 6 (state proficiency – 73.72%)– 1 districts below• Grade 7 (state proficiency – 73.88%)– 3 districts below• Grade 8 (state proficiency – 71.44%)– 2 districts below
• Grade 11 (state proficiency – 67.32%) – 5 districts below
What Do The Data Show?2010 and 2011 NeSA Reading Proficiency Progress
• Elementary• Grade 3 – 5 districts (2010/4)
• Grade 4 – 4 districts (2010/6)
• Grade 5 – 6 districts (2010/4)
• Middle Grade 6 – 5 districts (2010/1)
Grade 7 – 5 districts (2010/3)
Grade 8 – 3 districts (2010/2)
• High School• Grade 11 – 2 districts
(2010/5)
What Do The Data Show?
• 9 districts ABOVE at ALL grade levels
• 7 districts BELOW at 2 or more grade levels
• Comprehension – 8 districts BELOW at 2 or more grade levels
• Vocabulary – 6 districts BELOW at 2 or more grade levels
2011 NeSA Reading Overall
2011 NeSA Reading Sub Scores
What Do The Data Show?•2010 NeSA Math• Grade 3 (state proficiency – 67.40%) – 6 districts below• Grade 4 (state proficiency – 67.55%) – 9 districts below• Grade 5 (state proficiency – 65.96%) – 6 districts below
• Grade 6 (state proficiency – 62.88%) – 5 districts below• Grade 7 (state proficiency – 61.48%) – 5 districts below• Grade 8 (state proficiency – 60.58%) – 5 districts below
• Grade 11 (state proficiency – 53.86%) – 6 districts below
What Do The Data Show?
• 5 districts ABOVE at ALL grade levels
• 10 districts BELOW at 2 or more grade levels
2011 NeSA Math Overall
What Do The Data Show?2011 NeSA Math Sub Score Results
• Number Sense
• 8 districts BELOW at 2 or more grade levels
• Grades 3, 4, 5, 8 of greatest concern
• Algebraic
• 9 districts BELOW at 2 or more grade levels
• Grades 4, 5, 6, 7,8 of greatest concern
• Geometric/Measurement
• 9 districts BELOW at 2 or more grade levels
• Grades 3, 4, 7, 8 of greatest concern
• Data Analysis/Probability
• 9 districts BELOW at 2 or more grade levels
• Grades 3, 4, 5, 7,8, 11 of greatest concern
What Do The Data Show?• 2011 NeSA Writing
• Grade 4 (state proficiency – 4.00) – 2/18 districts below
• Grade 8 (state proficiency – 4.33) – 3/18 districts below
• Grade 11 (Not Tested)
• 15/18 districts meeting or exceeding proficiency at Grades 4 and 8
• 1 district at 100% proficiency at Grades 4 and 8
Why Might This Be?• Impact of student enrollment on proficiency outcomes
• Impact of FRL, SpEd, and ELL status on performance
• District and building improvement and leadership processes
• Levels to which curriculum and NeSA tests are aligned
• Levels to which curriculum is articulated vertically and horizontally
How Should We Respond?• Align professional development to school and district
outcomes for student achievement
• Encourage/support ongoing and focused professional development
• Align regional programs to district needs related to improving student achievement
• Provide expertise in curriculum and instruction in districts with more limited resources
• Assist schools in using data to inform improvement processes
Using the Results
2010-2011– ESU 3 School District Summary Data
ESU #3 Grade Levels Not Proficient •2011 NeSA Reading, Math, Writing
Grade 3 4 5 6 7 8 11
Reading
5 4 6 5 5 3 2
Math 6 9 6 5 5 5 6
Writing 2 3 NT
ESU #3 Grade Levels Not Proficient •2011 NeSA Reading, Writing, Math
Grade 3 4 5 6 7 8 11
Reading
5 4 6 5 5 3 2
Math 6 9 6 5 5 5 6
Writing 2 3 NT
Using the Results•Share data analysis findings with ESU 3
districts via Professional Development Advisory
•Use results to inform decisions about regional professional development offerings
•Use results to assist schools in their improvement efforts
Questions/Comments