2014-2015 Review 2015-2016 Planning Faribault Public Schools DATA DAY.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Simpson County Schools Accountability Results, Fall of 2013 Franklin-Simpson High School 97 th Percentile* DISTINGUISHED *percentile rank based on 2012.
Advertisements

Student Growth Developing Quality Growth Goals STEP 1 1 Teacher Professional Growth & Effectiveness System (TPGES)
Student Growth Developing Quality Growth Goals II
PROPOSED MULTIPLE MEASURES FOR TEACHER EFFECTIVENESS
1 Union County School District Instructional Update 10 December 2007 Dr. David Eubanks Superintendent.
Understanding MMR Dr. Margaret Biggerstaff 1. 2 MMR Calculation Process.
Minnesota’s New Accountability System “Leading for educational excellence and equity. Every day for every one.”
Valentine Elementary School San Marino Unified School District Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) Spring 2009 California Standards Test.
Analyzing Access For ELL Scores Tracy M. Klingbiel Nash Rocky Mount School District October 11, 2010.
School Progress Index 2012 Results Mary Gable- Assistant State Superintendent Division of Academic Policy Carolyn Wood - Assistant State Superintendent.
Title III Accountability. Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives How well are English Learners achieving academically? How well are English Learners.
Review Planning Faribault Public Schools DATA DAY.
KCCT Kentucky’s Commonwealth Accountability Testing System Overview of 2008 Regional KPR.
MARSHALL PUBLIC SCHOOLS STATE ACCOUNTABILITY RESULTS Multiple Measurement Rating (MMR) – Initial Designation.
Department of Research and Evaluation Santa Ana Unified School District 2011 CST API and AYP Elementary Presentation Version: Elementary.
Virginia Title III Statewide Consortium Conference Blacksburg, Virginia January 21-22, 2015 Virginia Department of Education: ACCESS for ELLs ® Teacher.
Accelerating All Schools Toward Greatness The New Rhode Island Accountability System.
ESL Education Program Report Hudson ISD ESL/Content-Based An English program that serves students identified as students of limited English proficiency.
September 2015 Amanda Grinager, Director of Teaching and Learning.
CHANGES IN FEDERAL ACCOUNTABILITY FOR SCHOOLS BEGINNING IN
Student Growth Developing Quality Growth Goals STEP 1 1 Teacher Professional Growth & Effectiveness System (TPGES) Facilitators: Effectiveness coaches.
Silvia C. Dorta-Duque de Reyes San Diego County Office of Education
Santa Ana Unified School District 2011 CST Enter School Name Version: Intermediate.
Melrose High School 2014 MCAS Presentation October 6, 2014.
A Closer Look Quality Goals Appropriate Assessments.
Public School Accountability System. Background One year ago One year ago –100 percent proficiency required in –AMOs set to increase 7-12 points.
MCC MCA Data Discoveries. What does Minnesota think is important? What do we want kids to do?  Pass important tests “Be Proficient”  Grow.
Faculty In-Service October 10, The Data Student Characteristics Fairbury Schools continue to be higher than the state average.
E L P A. ELPA Understand the definition and purpose of the English Language Proficiency Assessment Administer ELPA appropriately Objectives.
703 KAR 5:225 Next-Generation Learners Accountability System Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Support & Research KDE:OAA:DSR:cw,ko.
Kentucky’s New Assessment and Accountability System What to Expect for the First Release of Data.
Novice Reduction & Non-Duplicated Gap Group
Target Practice with AMAOs 1, 2, 3. AMAOs 1,2,3 District level targets for EL under Title III Accountability They show how all of the EL in a cohort are.
2011 – 2012 School Year. * Walk-Throughs * Observation(s) * Pre-/Post-Evaluation Form * Year-End Evaluation * Summative Score Report.
Public School Accountability System. Uses multiple indicators for broad picture of overall performance Uses multiple indicators for broad picture of overall.
1 School Report Cards 2002–2003 An Overview. 2 School Report Card: Overall Trends Elementary school achievement is up in English and math over Middle.
Minnesota’s Proposed Accountability System “Leading for educational excellence and equity. Every day for every one.”
Minnesota Assessments June 25, 2012 Presenter: Jennifer Dugan.
Accountability Overview Presented by Jennifer Stafford Office of Assessment and Accountability Division of Support & Research KDE:OAA:DSR:pp: 12/11/2015.
Legislative Requirement 2013 House File 215. Category Cut Scores Based on a Normal Distribution across Measures.
Legislative Requirement 2013
Where Are We Now? ESSA signed into law December 10, 2015
Demographics and Achievement of Tennessee’s English Learners
Metropolitan Nashville Public Schools
Shelton School District Bilingual Instruction Program
Marshall Public Schools Assessment Update
Teacher SLTs
Shelton School District Bilingual Instruction Program
Bennett County School District
ESL Data-Driven Instruction
Annual WBWF Student Achievement Report 2017
January 17, 2017 Board Workshop
Milton Public Schools 2013 Accountability Status
Specifications Used for School Identification Under ESSA in
Kentucky’s New Assessment and Accountability System
Teaching & Learning Update
Jayhawkville Central High School
E L P A Last updated: 08/31/09.
E L P A Last updated: 08/31/09.
Teacher SLTs
E L P A.
H Gary Cook, Ph.D., Associate Scientist WIDA Senior Director of Assessment 2/25/2019.
School Improvement Plan
2019 Report Card Update Marianne Mottley Report Card Project Director
Teacher SLTs
Shelton School District Bilingual Instruction Program
English Learner Accountability Component
Impact of EL Students and TELPAS Performance on State Accountability
What Every Family Needs to Know! Date
Presentation transcript:

Review Planning Faribault Public Schools DATA DAY

ICE BREAKER

RATING SYSTEMS

Multiple measures are used to compute two different ratings and determine designations and recognition for Title I schools – Multiple Measurements Rating (MMR) Proficiency Growth Achievement Gap Reduction Graduation – Focus Rating (FR) Focused Proficiency Achievement Gap Reduction

How are schools identified for support? Title I schools that perform in the bottom 25% of schools within their grade grouping (high school, middle school, elementary) are identified as: Priority Schools – Bottom 5% on MMR – Identified every three years Focus Schools – Bottom 10% on FR – Identified every three years Continuous Improvement – Bottom 25% on MMR not already identified as Priority or Focus – Annual designation

How are schools rewarded? Schools Rewarded Reward Schools – Top 15% on MMR Celebration Eligible – Next 25% on MMR – Invited to apply for recognition

MMR Results ProficiencyGrowthAchievement Gap Reduction GraduationTotal PointsMMR Jefferson % Lincoln % Roosevelt % Faribault Middle School % Faribault High School % The four MMR Domains (Proficiency, Growth, Achievement Gap Reduction and Graduation) are grouped together to provide an overall Multiple Measurement Rating (MMR) for each school. For an individual year, the points are added together and divided by the total points possible to arrive at a proportion. The resulting proportion is rounded to 4 decimal points and converted to a percent.

Focus Ratings Achievement Gap Reduction Focused Proficiency Total PointsFocus Rating Jefferson % Lincoln % Roosevelt % The two FR Domains (Focused Proficiency and Achievement Gap Reduction) are grouped together to provide an overall Focus Rating (FR) for each school for an individual year, the points are added together and divided by the total points possible to arrive at a proportion. The resulting proportion is rounded to 4 decimal points and converted to a percent.

MATH

Analyzing Proficiency Observe data patterns What are your data findings? What are you noticing as you dig through your building’s data? How does that compare to the district and state data? Write your findings on the flip chart. 25

Classroom Connections Suggest strategies that might improve these results. 26

READING

Analyzing Proficiency Observe data patterns What are your data findings? What are you noticing as you dig through your building’s data? How does that compare to the district and state data? Write your findings on the flip chart. 43

Classroom Connections Suggest strategies that might improve these results. 44

ACCESS Data

FAQ on EL Results 1)Why are EL scores so low? A = EL students by definition are not proficient….. in language. 2) How can we improve our EL scores if they are not proficient by definition? A = The state counts EL students who have reached proficiency and exited service for an additional 2 years. 3) What data can help me determine language proficiency? A = Use the WIDA ACCESS data. This will tell you students language proficiency level. EL Teachers at your school will have more in depth knowledge about your students language ability and acculturation history. 4) How do I move students towards proficiency? A = Move level 4 students to level 5. ***This does not mean forget about your lower level students.

Composite Listening Reading Speaking Writing

SCIENCE

Analyzing Proficiency Observe data patterns What are your data findings? What are you noticing as you dig through your building’s data? How does that compare to the district and state data? Write your findings on the flip chart. 60

Classroom Connections Suggest strategies that might improve these results. 61

SMART GOAL S – Specific – What do you want to measure? M – Measurable – How will the goal be measured? A – Attainable – Is it a reachable goal? R – Results-oriented – How will the goal look when it is reached? T – Time-Bound – What is the timeline for reaching the goal?

SMART Goal The percentage of all students in grades ___ at _____who are proficient on all reading/math state accountability tests (MCA, MTAS) will increase from ____% in 20__ to ____% in 20__.

THE END