DATA REFLECTION: Providing Generally Effective Instruction Oregon Reading First Cohort B Project Level Data Erin Chaparro, Ph.D. Jean Louise Mercier Smith,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Massachusetts Reading First-2006 Using Data to Inform Instruction Seven Hills Charter School January 17, 2006 Tracey Martineau – Massachusetts Reading.
Advertisements

Digging Deeper with DIBELS Data
Understanding DIBELS Next
Ongoing Progress Monitoring and Determining Instructional Level JRF! Leadership Academy July 2006 Randee Winterbottom, Tricia Curran, Stacey Fisher.
1 Oregon Reading First Fall Cohort B Leadership Webinar October 14, 2009.
1 Module 2 Using DIBELS Next Data: Identifying and Validating Need for Support.
First Sound Fluency & Phoneme Segmentation Fluency Phonemic Awareness
North Penn School District Phase III Update Introduction to Response to Instruction and Intervention (RTII): A Schoolwide Framework for Student Success.
Enhancing Word Reading in ERI Introduction and Acceleration of Critical Skills Prepared by Peggy Concillo/Oregon Reading First October, 2008.
1 Data-Based Leadership Cohort B March 2, 2006 (C) 2006 by the Oregon Reading First Center Center on Teaching and Learning.
Thinking Smart About Assessment Ben Clarke, Ph.D. Rachell Katz, Ph.D. August 25, 2004 Oregon Reading First Mentor Coach Training © 2004 by the Oregon Reading.
1 Cohort B Q2: How are we doing?. 2 Reviewing Outcomes  What percent of students are reaching benchmark goals in each grade level?  What percent of.
Oregon Reading First (2009)1 Oregon Reading First Regional Coaches’ Meeting December 10, 2009.
Oregon Reading First (2009)1 Oregon Reading First Webinar Data-based Action Planning Winter 2009.
What Can We Do to Improve Outcomes? Identifying Targets of Opportunity Roland H. Good III University of Oregon WRRFTAC State.
Enhancing Word Reading in ERI Introduction and Acceleration of Critical Skills Prepared by Peggy Concillo October, 2008.
1 Cohort B Institute on Beginning Reading III February 1 and 2, 2006 Achieving Healthy Grade-Level Systems in Beginning Reading.
Oregon Reading First (2010)1 Oregon Reading First Regional Coaches’ Meeting May 13, 2010.
Using DIBELS to Differentiate Instruction in a Standards-Based World
IBR II Cohort B September 28 and 29, 2005
Oregon Reading First (2009)1 Oregon Reading First Regional Coaches’ Meeting May 2009.
Oregon Reading First (2010)1 Winter 2010 Data Based Planning for Instructional Focus Groups.
1 Oregon Reading First: Cohort B Leadership Session Portland, Oregon May 27, 2009.
Lines of Practice (Renglones de práctica): What is it?
Waverly Park Presents: A Reading Workshop for Parents in Grade 1
1 Project-wide Reading Results: Interpreting Student Performance Data and Designing Instructional Interventions Oregon Reading First February, 2004 Institute.
1 Q2: How are we doing? Cohort A (C) 2006 by the Oregon Reading First Center Center on Teaching and Learning.
Cohort B Leadership Session March 3, 2008 Agenda.
Cohort 5 Elementary School Data Review and Action Planning: Schoolwide Reading Spring
Aligning Interventions with Core How to meet student needs without creating curricular chaos.
Intervention Placement Process: Finding the Right Fit Cadre 8 Training Feb 5, 2012.
Oregon Reading First Cohort B B-ELL Leadership Session Jorge Preciado University of Oregon March 5th, 2009 © 2009 by the Oregon Reading First Center Center.
BOY Refresher. General Scoring Guidelines SCHWA No penalty for schwa sound /u/ added to consonant sounds. (“buh” for /b/) – Please model the clipped sound,
Schoolwide Reading Improvement Model - RTI Name:___________________________ Grade:___________________________ School:__________________________ CONSULTING.
Digging Deeper with Screening Data: Creating Intervention Groups Seaside School District March 17, 2010 Adapted from a presentation by.
Linking Behavior Support and Literacy Support Rob Horner and George Sugai University of Oregon and University of Connecticut OSEP TA Center on Positive.
1 RtII: Response to Instruction and Intervention Wissahickon School District.
1 Welcome! to Leeds Elementary ARI Reading Coach Cynthia Wallace.
An exposition by Stephanie Stevens. What is DIBELS? DIBELS stands for Dynamic Indicators of Basic Literacy Skills. It is a form of assessment that is.
Dynamic Measurement Group (DMG) Part 2.
School-wide Data Analysis Oregon RtI Spring Conference May 9 th 2012.
Aligning Interventions with Core How to meet student needs without creating curricular chaos.
Systems Review: Schoolwide Reading Support Cohort 5: Elementary Schools Winter, 2009.
B-ELL Leadership Session May 26, 2009 Jorge Preciado University of Oregon © 2009 by the Oregon Reading First Center Center on Teaching and Learning.
DIBELS Overview Kindergarten. What is DIBELS?? Kindergarten Assessments DIBELS Report What can parents do at home?
DIBELS Overview First and Second Grade.
DIBELS Data: From Dabbling to Digging Interpreting data for instructional decision-making.
DORF Benchmark 3 Passages (median #s used for score) 1 minute + 1 minute for Retell 0 words read correctly in the 1 st line – STOP (do not administer Retell)
Cohort 4 Elementary School Data Review and Action Planning: Schoolwide Reading Spring
Data Analysis MiBLSi Project September 2005 Based on material by Ed Kameenui Deb Simmons Roland Good Ruth Kaminski Rob Horner George Sugai.
HOW DO WE USE DIBELS WITH AN OUTCOMES-DRIVEN MODEL? Identify the Need for Support Validate the Need for Support Plan Support Evaluate Effectiveness of.
Class Action Research: Treatment for the Nonresponsive Student IL510 Kim Vivanco July 15, 2009
Detroit Public Schools Data Review and Action Planning: Schoolwide Reading Spring
Tallassee Elementary Summary of Effectiveness DIBELS Report Data Meeting May 9, 2012 Presenter: Cynthia Martin, ARI Reading Coach.
Digging Deeper with Screening Data: Creating Intervention Groups Gresham-Barlow School District September 8, 2011.
Overview For Parents Introduce yourself and any co-trainers to your staff.
The State of Our School Fall, Goals What do we want all children to know and be able to do with text in our school? K – 90% of students will reach.
 Students in grades Kindergarten through twelfth  Classroom teacher, reading specialist, interventionist  Can be administered individually, some assessments.
The State of the School Fall Goals What do we want children to know and be able to do with text in this school? We want our children to know how.
1 RTI: Grade-Level Data Meetings for Elementary Literacy Data Analysis Oakland Schools Michele Farah, Joan Firestone, Diane Katakowski, and Susan Koceski.
3.0 Matching Instruction to Student Need Trainer Notes:
DIBELS.
Assistant Principal’s Meeting Miami-Dade County Public Schools
Data-Based Leadership
Weaver Elementary School
DIBELS Next Overview.
Reading Goals and Reading Growth A Proposal for Cohort A
Reading Goals and Reading Growth A Proposal for Cohort A
Oregon Reading First Summary Outcomes at the End of Year 1: Students at Benchmark (On Track) (C) 2005 by the Oregon Reading First Center Center on Teaching.
Oregon Reading First Summary Outcomes at the End of Year 1: Students at Benchmark (On Track) © 2005 by the Oregon Reading First Center Center on Teaching.
Presentation transcript:

DATA REFLECTION: Providing Generally Effective Instruction Oregon Reading First Cohort B Project Level Data Erin Chaparro, Ph.D. Jean Louise Mercier Smith, Ph.D. Deni Basaraba M.A. © 2009 by the Oregon Reading First Center Center on Teaching and Learning

The Big Questions Are we increasing our year to year outcomes? Are we providing generally effective instruction? Are there high-priority areas that call for improvements?

Celebrate! Year to Year Outcomes

Kindergarten

First Grade Across Time PSF Cohort B

First Grade Across Time NWF Cohort B

First Grade Across Time ORF Cohort B

2nd Grade Across Time ORF Cohort B

3rd Grade Across Time ORF Cohort B

Providing a Context. Generally Effective Instruction

NWF Data Analysis: Context For the DIBELS winter benchmark assessment in First Grade, we coded the data by student strategy –Sound by Sound –Words Recoded –Partial Blends –Whole Words

Analyzed at the Project, School and Student levels Project Level and School Levels –Students are grouped by their “dominant” (e.g., most frequently used) strategy. –The accuracy of a strategy group was calculated by taking the mean accuracy of all the correct letter sounds using the strategy in which students were grouped. Student Level –The percentage of nonsense words using each strategy is reported –The accuracy of within each category is reported

Grade 1 NWF Winter Data: Project-Level Summary Established 488/864 (56.5%) Sound-by-Sound (S)Words Recoded (R)Partial Blends (P)Whole Words (W) N%AccuracyN% N% N% 8818%93.5%438.8%98%142.9%98% %97% Emerging 241/864 (27.9%) Sound-by-Sound (S)Words Recoded (R)Partial Blends (P)Whole Words (W) N%AccuracyN% N% N% %9840.7%96.2%20.8%84.2%8334.4%89.4% Deficit 135/864 (15.6%) Sound-by-Sound (S)Words Recoded (R)Partial Blends (P)Whole Words (W) N%AccuracyN% N% N% %66.1%4634.1%85.5% %76.3% Of these 488 established students, 88 students, or 18% used Sound-by- Sound as their dominant strategy 488/864, or 56.% of students in grade 1 were established on winter NWF Of the words that these students read using the Sound-by-Sound strategy, they were accurate 93.5% of the time;this accuracy percentage does NOT include words read using other strategies

Grade 1 NWF Winter Data: School-Level Summary Established 26/51 (51%) Sound-by-Sound (S)Words Recoded (R)Partial Blends (P)Whole Words (W) N%AccuracyN% N% N% 311.5%73% %100%2284.6%99.9% Emerging 17/51 (33.3%) Sound-by-Sound (S)Words Recoded (R)Partial Blends (P)Whole Words (W) N%AccuracyN% N% N% 317.6%87.6%635.3%100% %99.1% Deficit 8/51 (15.7%) Sound-by-Sound (S)Words Recoded (R)Partial Blends (P)Whole Words (W) N%AccuracyN% N% N% 337.5%76.1%112.5%100%---450%100% If there are dashes (-) in any of the cells, this means that this strategy was not used by any of the students in this risk category. Here, for example, we can see that no established students in this school used the Words Recoded strategy

Grade 1 NWF Winter Data: Student-Level Summary This table reports all of the same information, but at the student level. Additional information included in this table not included on the project-level and school-level tables is the following: - Total CLS: Total Correct Letter Sounds - Total WRC: Total Words Read Correct - Overall Accuracy: Percent of sounds student read accurately (total correct letter sounds / total letter sounds)

Summary of First Grade NWF Data Students who were Established most frequently used the whole word strategy Students who were Emerging most frequently used the Words Recoded strategy Students who were at Deficit most frequently used the Sound by Sound strategy Students who were Established were highly accurate Students who were Established made fewer errors than students at Deficit Very Few students use the Partial Blending strategy

Instructional Implications: With which skills do students need practice? Phonemic Warm-Up Teach Sound/Spelling Practice Blending Apply to Decodable Text Dictation and Spelling Word Work Core Source Book pg 8.5

Leadership Implications Action Planning: –Write Appropriate Goals –Set Actions to Match the Goals Principal Walk-Throughs: –Look for all the components of Effective Phonics Instruction Coaching: –Remind teachers and model all the components of Effective Phonics Instruction Overall: Continue Striving for the Top!