Karla Casteen K-3 Literacy March 28, 2014. Today Region 2 Data Walk Read to Achieve Updates Questions.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
North Carolina Read to Achieve and Reading 3D K-3 Literacy Carolyn Guthrie, Director Regional Consultants Excellent Public Schools Act.
Advertisements

Race to the Top Alessandro Montanari Project Coordinator RttT District and School Transformation.
Alamance-Burlington Schools
BOARD ENDS POLICY REVIEW E-2 Reading and Writing Testing Results USD 244 Board of Education March 12, 2001.
Steve King The mCLASS® System North Carolina April 2013 Steve King
Candi Craven Hanford-Dole Elementary 1 st Grade Teacher USING READING 3D & DISCOVERY EDUCATION DATA TO TEACH GUIDED READING.
EOY Reading 3D NC Comparison Templates The following slides contain a combination of state-level EOY mCLASS reports paired with blank templates.
Kindergarten Curriculum Night Central Elementary Mrs. Heuring and Miss Nick.
Leader & Teacher SLTs 2014 – ComponentEvaluation for TeachersEvaluation for School Leaders Setting GoalsTeachers set two SLTs in collaboration with.
Implementation of the North Carolina Read to Achieve Program Montgomery County Schools August 5, 2013.
Adopted July 2012 Effective School Year.  1. Comprehensive Reading Plan  2. Developmental Screening and Kindergarten Entry Assessment ( )
Read to Achieve Updates Winston-Salem/Forsyth County Schools Board of Education Meeting January 30, 2014 Dr. Janie Costello.
Implementing Structured Data Meetings Middle of Year (MOY) Meetings.
November, 2013 Next steps – Need to look at new assessment rubric and start looking at monitoring measurable objectives, identifying sub groups and targeted.
Wake County Public School System
Elementary Assessment Data Update Edmonds School District January 2013.
Welcome to the 3 rd Grade Open House Mrs. Miller Mrs. Smith Ms. Quinn Mrs. Barbieri Mrs. Sondles.
BOARD ENDS POLICY REVIEW E-2 Students will demonstrate a strong foundation in academic skills by working toward the Kansas Standards of Excellence in reading,
YOUR LOGO March 9, 2015 Lead Partner Mid Year Update Presentation – PPSD School Board.
Timmerman Public Hearing February 4, :00-4:00.
Overview for Wake County Public School System K-5 Teachers.
North Carolina Read To Achieve Information for Parents of 4 rd grade students that received a retained reading label in Davidson County Schools.
Improving 3 rd Grade Written Comprehension Utilizing a Writer’s Club Dare To Share Conference June 15, 2015 An Action Research Project by Carol Frazier.
MCLASS Reading 3D: Class Summary Reports. Desired Outcomes Understand how to access and analyze Class Summary Reports for whole class and individual students.
JUNE 2014 K-3 COUNTYWIDE READING DATA. RESULTS COLLECTED.
North Carolina Read To Achieve Information for Parents of 3 rd grade students in Davidson County Schools.
EOY DIBELS Benchmark Data for Intervention Programs Oregon Reading First Schools June, 2009 © 2009 by the Oregon Reading First Center Center on Teaching.
Future Ready Schools National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in North Carolina Wednesday, February 13, 2008 Auditorium III 8:30 – 9:30 a.m.
Student Data Toolkit Example August 2006.
Improving 3 rd Grade Written Comprehension Utilizing a Writer’s Club Triad Teacher Researcher Conference April 29, 2015 An Action Research Project by Carol.
North Carolina Read to Achieve. The Goal “The goal of the State is to ensure that every student read at or above grade level by the end of third grade.
Overview For Parents Introduce yourself and any co-trainers to your staff.
STAR 3 Parent Advisory Council UPDATE Questions to Parents Fact: More than 28% of children enter kindergarten more than 1 year below age level in.
Reading 3D teacher tool assessment inform and change instruction to meet the child’s needs on-going.
Let’s celebrate the SUPER GPES data from the school year!
Understanding Read to Achieve Edgewood Elementary School November 6, 5:30.
Assessment Discussion Student Achievement Committee Meeting January 9, 2014.
June 2015 K-3 Reading Countywide Data. Results Collected.
 Life Expectancy is 180 th in the World.  Literacy Rate is 4 th in Africa.
The READY Accountability Report: Growth and Performance of North Carolina Public Schools State Board of Education November 7, 2013.
FES State of the Schools. Reading – 85% of FES students will meet or exceed state standards on the MCA-II in reading. We will improve scores on DIBELS.
READING 3D TRAINING Lynn Holmes Fall 2015.
Central Intermediate Bixby Public Schools Goals Update “Greatness is the path we travel!
Policy Recommendation Best Practices in Reading Achievement to Address Reading Failure Roxanne Boyd Walden University.
Principal Meeting December 5, 2013 WCPSS. Go Heels!
Excellent Public Schools Act A Focus on Improving K-3 Literacy.
Using Action Research To Empower North Carolina Educators A Race to the Top Initiative NC Department of Public Instruction Educator Effectiveness Division.
Winston-Salem / Forsyth County Schools
Huntsville City Schools Time on Assessments for
Winston-Salem / Forsyth County Schools
PARCC 2015 Summary Twin Peaks Academy.
Remediation Report Bixby Middle School
What does this mean for my child?
Mrs. Calayag Ms. Tsinigine
Wake County Public School System
MClass Updates NCCS
Meadowlake Elementary
School-Wide Achievement Mathematics
Math and Reading Benchmarks: Feb 27th & 28th
Literacy Updates.
Huntsville City Schools – 3rd Benchmark Assessment Report
Celebration using Galileo Data
MAKING SENSE OF READ TO ACHIEVE
Kinder Math Bee Addition Practice.
K-3 Reading Countywide Data
The RFEP Process RFEP: Redesignated Fluent English Proficient
Before and After Practice
October 2014 Star Data Prior to the C.A.F.E. Reading Initiative these were the results attained.
Mean Absolute Deviation
End of the Year Data Review
Presentation transcript:

Karla Casteen K-3 Literacy March 28, 2014

Today Region 2 Data Walk Read to Achieve Updates Questions

MOY – mCLASS ® : DIBELS Next Comparison Grade Percent of students in each DIBELS instructional category (middle of year ) Students at benchmark level Students below benchmark level Students well below benchmark level Reg. 2 NCNat’lReg. 2 NCNat’lReg. 2 NCNat’l Kinder- garten 68% 66%63% 18% 19%20% 14% 15%17% 1 st Grade 68% 69%65% 13% 12% 19% 23% 2 nd Grade 74% 76%71% 9% 8%9% 17% 16%20% 3 rd Grade 68% 64% 13% 19% 23%

DIBELS Next Effectiveness Comparison (i.e., movement in instructional support recommendations) for BOY - MOY

BOY-MOY mCLASS ® : DIBELS Next Effectiveness Comparison Percent of students in each DIBELS instructional category at middle of year who started the year performing at well-below benchmark levels Grade Students at benchmark level Students below benchmark level Students well-below benchmark level Reg. 2 NCNat’lReg. 2 NCNat’lReg. 2 NCNat’l Kinder- garten 32% 30%28% 29%27% 40% 41%45% 1 st Grade28% 32%27% 19% 18%16% 53% 50%57% 2 nd Grade8% 10%8% 13% 14%13% 79% 77%79% 3 rd Grade8% 9% 15% 17%16% 76% 74%75% Purpose: Illustrate how customer compares to national average and North Carolina in terms of moving students across Instructional Support Recommendations (ISR) from BOY to MOY

BOY-MOY mCLASS ® : DIBELS Next Effectiveness Comparison Percent of students in each DIBELS instructional category at middle of year who started the year performing at below benchmark levels Grade Students at benchmark level Students below benchmark level Students well-below benchmark level Reg. 2 NCNat’lReg. 2 NCNat’lReg. 2 NCNat’l Kinder- garten 61% 58%53% 26% 29%30% 13% 17% 1 st Grade61% 65%59% 20% 18%19% 18%22% 2 nd Grade47% 50%46% 29% 30% 24% 21%24% 3 rd Grade36% 39%43% 39% 37%36% 25% 24%21% Purpose: Illustrate how customer compares to national average and North Carolina in terms of moving students across Instructional Support Recommendations (ISR) from BOY to MOY

BOY-MOY mCLASS ® : DIBELS Next Effectiveness Comparison Percent of students in each DIBELS instructional category at middle of year who started the year performing at benchmark levels Grade Students at benchmark level Students below benchmark level Students well-below benchmark level Reg. 2 NCNat’lReg. 2 NCNat’lReg. 2 NCNat’l Kinder- garten 88% 87%84% 10% 11%13% 2% 3% 1 st Grade88% 90%87% 6% 8% 4% 5% 2 nd Grade94% 95%94% 4% 5% 2% 1%2% 3 rd Grade89% 90%89% 9% 6%9% 2% 4%2% Purpose: Illustrate how customer compares to national average and North Carolina in terms of moving students across Instructional Support Recommendations (ISR) from BOY to MOY

TRC Performance by Time of Year

MOY – mCLASS ® : TRC Comparison Grade Percent of students in each TRC instructional category (middle of year ) Students Above Proficient Level Students at Proficient Level Students Below Proficient level Students Far Below Proficient Level Reg. 2 NCNat’lReg. 2 NCNat’lReg. 2 NCNat’lReg. 2 NCNat’l Kinder -garten 22%23%22%18% 16% 52% 53%54% 8% 1 st Grade 26% 33% 31% 11% 10% 30% 32%33% 2 nd Grade 34% 18% 17% 20% 28% 29% 3 rd Grade 41%38% 11% 21% 27% 30%

TRC Effectiveness Comparison (i.e., movement in instructional support recommendations) for BOY - MOY

BOY-MOY mCLASS®: Reading 3D Effectiveness Comparison Percent of students in each TRC instructional category at middle of year who started the year performing at Far Below Proficient levels Grade Students Above Proficient Level Students At Proficient Level Students Below Proficient level Students Far Below Proficient Level Reg. 2 NCNat’lReg. 2 NCNat’lReg. 2 NCNat’lReg. 2 NCNat’l Kinder- garten 8% 13% 11% 64% 66% 14% 15% 1 st Grade 1% 9% 11% 9% 80% 81% 2 nd Grade 3%2% 7% 5% 15% 16% 76% 77% 3 rd Grade 4% 3% 4% 19% 18% 74% 73%74% Purpose: Illustrate how customer compares to national average and North Carolina in terms of moving students across Instructional Support Recommendations (ISR) from BOY to MOY

BOY-MOY mCLASS®: Reading 3D Effectiveness Comparison Percent of students in each TRC instructional category at middle of year who started the year performing at Below Proficient levels Grade Students Above Proficient Level Students At Proficient Level Students Below Proficient level Students Far Below Proficient Level Reg. 2 NCNat’lReg. 2 NCNat’lReg. 2 NCNat’lReg. 2 NCNat’l Kinder- garten 20%21%20%26 22% 53% 56%57% 1% 1 st Grade 5% 22 33% 36% 20% 38% 42% 2 nd Grade 14% 22 23% 42% 22% 21% 3 rd Grade 15%17% 16 15% 47% 46% 23% 22% Purpose: Illustrate how customer compares to national average and North Carolina in terms of moving students across Instructional Support Recommendations (ISR) from BOY to MOY

BOY-MOY mCLASS®: Reading 3D Effectiveness Comparison Percent of students in each TRC instructional category at middle of year who started the year performing At Proficient levels Grade Students Above Proficient Level Students At Proficient Level Students Below Proficient level Students Far Below Proficient Level Reg. 2 NCNat’lReg. 2 NCNat’lReg. 2 NCNat’lReg. 2 NCNat’l Kinder- garten 40%39%33%21% 20%21% 38% 41%45% 0% 1% 1 st Grade 41%42%11%42% 40%50% 6% 9%17% 9% 22% 2 nd Grade 63% 38%22% 21%35% 13% 14%23% 3% 2%4% 3 rd Grade 67% 39%14% 25% 16% 30% 3% 6% Purpose: Illustrate how customer compares to national average and North Carolina in terms of moving students across Instructional Support Recommendations (ISR) from BOY to MOY