Data Driven Decisions & Target Interventions in the Elementary Math Classroom Cleveland County Schools Giancarlo Anselmo, Brian Bettis, Carrie Knotts

Objectives Discuss the research behind Curriculum Based Measures (CBMs) Advantages of CBMs Critical Features Reliability and Validity Development of CBMs Norms and Growth rates Universal Screening Suggestions Team Initiated Problem Solving Data Collection and Analysis Progress Monitoring Appropriate Targeted Interventions

Nations Report Card 2012 NAEP

Hierarchy of CBM Research 1st CBM reading elementary level 2nd CBM reading secondary level 3rd CBM math elementary level 4th CBM math secondary level 5th CBM for other subjects (writing, spelling, science, etc.)

Curriculum Based Measurement: Advantages Direct measure of student performance Helps target specific areas of instructional need for students Quick to administer Provides visual representation (reports) of individual student progress and how classes are acquiring essential reading skills Sensitive to even small improvements in performance Capable of having many forms Monitoring frequently enables staff to see trends in individual and group performance—and compare those trends with targets set for their students. Correlates strongly with “best practices” for instruction and assessment, and research-supported methods for assessment and intervention 5

Critical Features of CBM Technical adequacy Evaluation of general outcomes Assess student progress Stecker et al. 2005

Technical Adequacy Data exists for two distinct types of M-CBM Computation Concepts and Applications Math concepts and applications have been shown to be distinct from computation ability (Thurber et al., 2002). Thurber’s study with colleagues used factorial analysis procedures in order to determine the best factorial model for mathematics. Their research contends that the most defensible model for math was one that displayed a two factor model of mathematics assessment where computation and applications were distinct, although highly related (r=.83) (Thurber et al., 2002).

Reliability of M-CBM (Basic Facts) Foegen 2000 Alternate form= .75-.92 Foegen & Deno 2001 Internal consistency= .91-.93 Alternate form= .79-.80 Test-Retest= .80-.84 Foegen 2008 Alternate form=.80-.91 Test-Retest=.90-.92

Reliability of M-CBM Concepts and Applications Helwig & Tindal 2002 Alternate form= .81-.88 Foegen 2008 Alternate form= .76-.88 Test-Retest= .92-.95

Validity of M-CBM Concepts and Applications Helwig, Anderson, & Tindal 2002 Criterion Validity= .80 Foegen 2008 Concurrent Validity= .71-.76

Validity of M-CBM Basic Facts Foegen 2000 Criterion validity=.45-.52 Foegen & Deno 2001 Criterion validity=.63 Foegen 2008 Concurrent validity= .59-.64

Different Approaches to Developing M-CBM Curriculum sampling approach Robust Indicators approach

Curriculum Sampling Measures are developed by constructing representative samples of the year’s mathematics curriculum Method is used with both math computation and math applications Math concepts and applications have been shown to be distinct from computation ability (Thurber et al., 2002). Thurber’s study with colleagues used factorial analysis procedures in order to determine the best factorial model for mathematics. Their research contends that the most defensible model for math was one that displayed a two factor model of mathematics assessment where computation and applications were distinct, although highly related (r=.83) (Thurber et al., 2002).

Computation Curriculum Fourth Grade Math Computation Curriculum Multidigit addition with regrouping Multidigit subtraction with regrouping Multiplication facts, factors to 9 Multiply 2-digit numbers by a 1-digit number Multiply 2-digit numbers by a 2-digit number Division facts, divisors to 9 Divide 2-digit numbers by a 1-digit number Divide 3-digit numbers by a 1-digit number Add/subtract simple fractions, like denominators Add/subtract whole number and mixed number

3rd Grade Common Core Standards

Robust Indicators Measures that are not necessarily representative of a particular curriculum, but are instead characterized by the relative strength of their correlations to various overall mathematics proficiency criteria (Foegen et al., 2007) The comparison is with ORF as that tends to be a robust indicator

Robust Indicators Little research but research done shows promise for this method Helwig & Tindal 2002 Took 11 concept grounded math problems and correlated the results the Computer Adaptive Test (state test given in Oregon) Results suggested correlations for general education students=.80 Lower for students with learning disabilities

Cleveland County Math Probes Used curriculum sampling approach Designed our own universal screening probes using: Math-aids.com Math Concepts and Applications probes were adapted from Monitoring Basic Skills Progress: Basic Math Concepts and Applications Fuchs, Hamlett, & Fuchs, (1999) Adapted because probes gave a really good format. Very similar to Aimsweb but didn’t align with Common Core. So our curriculum people went through and tweaked questions to have them align with common core.

Local Norms and Growth Rates

M-CBM as part of a Three Tiered Model Tier I-Universal Screening Tier II-Progressing Monitoring Tier III-Further assessment as part of a problem solving process

Universal Screening Math assessments are generally done using one probe during universal screening Hintze et al, 2002 Study showed that one can expect extremely high dependability with as little as one 2-minute multiple-skill math probe Research was not done at the secondary level but considering technical characteristics are similarly an upward extension does not seem so far off the mark.

Universal Screening Which probes to use? Option 1: Design your own probes Option 2: Choose a standardized set of published probes

Companies that Provide Standardized M-CBM Probes AimsWeb http://www.aimsweb.com Easy CBM http://www.easycbm.com Yearly Progress Pro http://www.mhdigitallearning.com

AIMSweb Math measures for Computation Mixed computation, grades 1-6 + facts, - facts, x facts, / facts, +/-mix, mult./div. mix, all mix Math measures for Concepts and Applications See table for areas covered

AimsWeb

Easy CBM Math and Reading Probes from grade 1-8 Probes covering: Number and Operations, Algebra, Measurement, Geometry, and Data/Analysis Math probes can be taken as a paper and pencil test or taken online

Easy CBM Sample

Easy CBM and AimsWeb Have established norms Have Math probes for grades 6-8 Have alternative forms for progress monitoring Have the capability storing data online for distribution and analysis

Overall Suggestions Have a district level team select measures based on critical criteria such as reliability, validity and efficiency Select screening measures based on the content they cover with an emphasis on critical instructional objectives for each grade level In grades 4-8, use screening measures in combination with state testing data Use the same screening tool across a district to enable analyzing results across schools Clarke and Baker

Now What? Curriculum Based Measure has been selected Complete Universal Screening 3 times a year. BOY, MOY, EOY Teachers analyze data looking to answer these questions. How are all students performing? Why are there deficits/strengths? Are students growing?

“Prismation” of Data Multiple Data Sources: Classroom Performance, CFA, CBM, Behavior, Teacher Judgment. Student’s Targeted Action Plan, customized to meet their individual needs. No one data source trumps another. They work in conjunction with each other to tailor an action plan for the student.

Why? Determine how well your Foundational Core instructional programs are working for all students-- proficiency and growth Identify specific skill deficits/strengths of all students Used as a part of an early warning system

Universal Screening Allows Us To…. Problem solve The whole school A grade level A class Subgroups

Team Initiated Problem Solving Grade Level Teams Analyze grade level data in conjunction with curriculum coaches Define the problem Answer the “why” questions Design an action plan Core instruction and interventions

Identifying Areas of Need What are the students’ strengths? Why? What are their deficits? Why? Do we need to address this in core instruction? Do you need to address this with interventions?

Example 4th Grade Math CBM data analysis What would you do?

Progress Monitoring

Appropriate Targeted Interventions

Questions?