Introduction to the toolS

Introduction to the toolS
Equity, Inclusion, and Opportunity: Getting Results by Addressing Success Gaps Introduction to the toolS Welcome, this presentation is about equity, inclusion, opportunity, and achieving good results for all students by addressing success gaps. We will introduce you to a success gaps white paper and self assessment rubric to support schools and districts in identifying root causes of gaps and outcomes that can affect overall student success.

Objectives for this presentation
Provide local school district teams with information about a new tool for taking a closer look at equity, inclusion and opportunity in the district Outline five components of a high-quality, equitable, inclusive educational program Demonstrate the importance of disaggregating data to identify “success gaps” Describe a step-by-step process for using the tool at the local level During this presentation we will provide local school district teams with information about a new tool for taking a closer look at equity, inclusion, and opportunity in the district. We will outline the five components of a high quality equitable, inclusive, education program. We will demonstrate the importance of disaggregating data to identify success gaps and we will describe a step-by-step process for using the tools at the local level.

What is a success gap? What is a success gap? We hear a lot these days about the achievement gap. But there are other gaps too between students with disabilities and non-disabled peers, between different groups of students and others. There are gaps related to drop-out and graduation rates. Gaps related to achievement in reading and math or post-school outcomes. Gaps or discrepancies between groups of students in terms of discipline, identification as a student with a disability or in educational settings for students with disabilities. Our definition of a success gap, which encompasses all of these gaps or discrepancies is a gap in educational outcomes between different groups of students. We call of these gaps success gaps because they result in poor outcomes or lack of success for the students in these affected groups.

What are the results of success gaps?

What are the results of success gaps?
As you well know success gaps, particularly if they continue over the years or over the course of student school experience, result in poor long-term outcomes for individuals and even entire groups of students. For example, a child in third grade who has a large gap in a reading level between himself and his peers without interventions may see the gap widen, poor academic performance, may not graduate, and may even drop out. You can most likely think of other examples of poor outcomes when a student is experiencing a success gap. What would these look like in your school?

Equity, inclusion, and opportunity can lessen success gaps between groups of students
Core-instructional Program Data-based Decision Making Cultural-Responsiveness Evidence-Based Instructional and Behavioral Interventions and Supports Assessments-Universal Screening and Progress Monitoring If we pay attention to equity inclusion - and opportunity we can lessen success gaps between groups of students. Large gains and achievement are other outcomes may be possible for certain subgroups such as students with disabilities in your district if these students have equitable access to appropriate and high-quality instructional programs. High-quality instruction is data-based, part of a high-quality core instructional program, built on universal screening and frequent progress monitoring data, part of a multi-tiered system of support and is culturally responsive or sensitive to the diversity that students and families are bringing to the schools and classrooms.

Disaggregating your data may reveal success gaps among groups of students
Your district or school may be focused on particular outcomes for your students. You may be focused on reading or math. Maybe you want to increase your graduation rate or lower your dropout rate for all students. The discrepancy between subgroups show up when you disaggregate the data. Subgroups of students include a variety of diverse learners whose learning gaps show up when the data are disaggregated. By disability, by primary language, race ethnicity, or even socioeconomic status. This chart shows you an example of the subgroup students English Language Learners (ELL) performing not as good as all students. It’s easy to hide achievement gaps among school-wide averages. Your schools may receive an overall high performance rating, but have low performance for particular groups of students. As you look deeply at your local district, or building data, consider disaggregating your data to focus on particular groups of students. These students may be able to make large gains with appropriate interventions. Sometimes a school that receives an overall high performance rating can also receive a low performance rating for a particular group of students within that school. That’s because again it is easy to hide achievement gaps among the school-wide averages.

Disaggregating data within a subgroup may reveal additional success gaps
If you disaggregate your data by subgroups you’ll get a clearer picture of how particular groups of students are performing, and this will help you target your resources and tailor your interventions in ways that will have the biggest impact. The example on this page is the group of all is students with disabilities and the subgroup is a subgroup of students with disabilities, those with emotional disturbance. So that you can see that even within a group, subgroups will show discrepancies. Sometimes a school that receives a high overall performance rating can also receive a low performance rating for a group of students within that school. The example that you see on this slide shows a subgroup of students with disabilities. The all is students with disabilities and the subgroup is students with emotional disturbance. So, you can see even among a subgroup when you disaggregate it further you can see discrepancies as well.

Achievement: Disaggregated Main NAEP reading scores, grade 4, 2013, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Now we’re going to look at a number of slides intended to illustrate what we mean by success gaps. So, we’re starting with disaggregated NAEP reading scores. Here’s an example of NAEP reading data for Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. As we move forward it will show various subgroups of students and how disaggregating the data show where there are success gaps among the subgroups. As we move forward now, we see for grade four in the year 2013 in Philadelphia, that all students, the green bar, had a score of

The dark blue bar shows the data for students who are or are not eligible for free and reduced lunch, often a measure of poverty. You can see that there is a difference in achievement between these groups, or a success gap, as well as a difference for these students who are eligible for free and reduced lunch when compared to all students.

As we move forward the dark blue bars have added race and ethnicity to the subgroup breakdown. You can see that Asian Pacific Islander and white perform better than the all students. You can also see that black and Hispanic students do not perform as well as all students or as well as some of the other groups.

The dark blue bars have added the data for students who are or are not English Language Learners, once again you can see how the subgroup performs compared to other subgroups. English Language Learners do not perform as well as all students, or as well as some of the other race ethnicity groups

The dark blue bars add the data for students with and without disabilities. You can see that the subgroups, students with disabilities is the lowest performer in this example. As we look at the entire graph now, the bars are ordered from lowest to highest grade four test scores. The group with the largest reading achievement success gaps in Philadelphia public schools is students with disabilities. What do those data look like in your own school or district? For your information the disaggregated NAEP test scores are available for the nation, states, and some large districts.

Graduation rates 2012 Source: http://eddataexpress.ed.gov/
We’re now going to look at national data on graduation rates for 2012 as reported at ED.gov. These are some of the first time that the graduation cohort data have been reported and states are compared to one another. The data we are able to see are for all students disaggregated by various subgroups. And you can see on this first slide that all students had a graduation rate of 80 percent. Source:

The dark blue bars add the data for the different race ethnicities nationally. You can see how they compare to each other and how they compare to the all students. Asian Pacific Islander and white students graduate at a higher rate than all students, while Hispanic, black, and American Indian Alaskan Native students graduate at lower rates than all students. Source:

The dark blue bars add the data for low income students, students with disabilities, and students who English Language Learners. Again you can see how the various subgroups compare to all students and to other subgroups. You can see that in this example, students who are English Language Learners have the largest success gap when compared to all students, a 21 percentage gap and a 27 point gap between English Language Learners and white students. Again, what do the data look like in your district or in your school? Source:

The graduation gap: what the data tell us: all states, % of SWDs graduating with regular diploma, 2013–14 Now, we’re going to look at data for a subgroup, students with disabilities. This is also graduation data and this graph breaks the data down for students with disabilities by race and ethnicity for graduation. The overall grad rate for students with disabilities is 42 percent. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, Data Analysis System (DANS), OMB # : "Children with Disabilities Receiving Special Education Under Part B of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act," 2013–14.

The graduation gap: what the data tell us: all states, % of SWDs graduating with regular diploma, 2013–14 The dark blue bars add the data for subgroups of students with disabilities, students who are Asian, students who are white and Pacific Islander. And you can see that each of those three categories of students with disabilities perform better than the all students with disabilities category. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, Data Analysis System (DANS), OMB # : "Children with Disabilities Receiving Special Education Under Part B of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act," 2013–14.

The graduation gap: what the data tell us: all states, % of SWDs graduating with regular diploma, 2013–14 The dark blue bars now add the data for Hispanic Latino students, students who are two or more races and American Indian Alaskan Native or black students. You can see that black students have a graduation rate of only 35 percent compared to all students at 42 percent or white students at 47 percent. This shows you that the group of students with disabilities is very diverse. Disaggregation of data within the subgroup helps us to pinpoint particular groups of students with disabilities who are under performing. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, Data Analysis System (DANS), OMB # : "Children with Disabilities Receiving Special Education Under Part B of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act," 2013–14.

Percentage of students receiving suspensions by race/ethnicity
We’re now going to look at some data about students receiving suspensions by race ethnicity. These are OCR, Office of Civil Rights National Suspension Expulsion Data. We’re going to show you two of the race groups but not all. The top graph shows white enrollment of 51 percent and the bottom graph shows enrollment of African American students at 16 percent. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights, Civil Rights Data Collection, 2011–12.

Percentage of students receiving suspensions by race/ethnicity
The pie graphs on the right break down in school suspension data by race. White students had in school suspensions at the rate of 40 percent and African American students at 32 percent. When we compare their rate of suspension to their enrollment percentage on the left, black students comprise a much larger percentage of in school suspension than would be suspected expected based on enrollment. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights, Civil Rights Data Collection, 2011–12.

Percentage of preschool students receiving suspensions, by race/ethnicity
We’re going to look at one more set of suspension data. This is OCR, National Suspension Data for Pre-School. The pie chart on the left shows the percentage of student enrollment by race for two of the races. White is 43 percent and black is 18 percent. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights, Civil Rights Data Collection, 2011–12.

Percentage of preschool students receiving suspensions, by race/ethnicity
The graph on the right breaks down in school suspension data by race for these pre-school students. Black students comprise 18 percent of enrollment but 42 percent of out of school suspensions, white students comprise 43 percent of enrollment and only 28 percent of out of school suspensions. The data show there are disproportionate disciplinary data as early as pre-school. The graph on the right breaks down in school suspension data by race. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights, Civil Rights Data Collection, 2011–12.

To address your success gap, find the root causes
Two tools from the IDEA Data Center These are the tools that have been developed. They are a white paper research brief that provides a research rationale and a self assessment rubric. These are both available online and the self-assessment rubric can be completed electronically. We will provide links to these documents at the end of this session. 6/30/16: there are more current photos of these documents available

How to close success gaps
How do we close success gaps? The success gaps rubric is a tool that districts or schools can use to analyze their district’s current statue relative to a number of key areas that research shows are components of high quality inclusive instructional program. The tool that we want to share with you today is designed to help identify areas where schools, or districts, policies, programs, or practices might be strengthened to maximize benefit for all students. It will help identify root causes for your success gap.

Who should use these tools?
These tools have been developed with various audiences in mind, such as local districts and school administrators, teachers, parents, and other stakeholders. Inequity of opportunity can affect any group of students in a school or a district. The success gaps rubric is designed to look at the policies, programs, or practices in general education that may contribute to inequitable opportunities for students, for groups of students such as students with disabilities, English Language Learners, or other subgroups.

Which are the affected subgroups based on your data disaggregation?
Students with Disabilities Racial/Ethnic Groups It is important to disaggregate data to see where success gaps exist for particular groups of students. If you disaggregate your data, you may find discrepancies in achievement, in post school outcomes, in early childhood outcomes, between various subgroups of students or within subgroups. Sometimes a school that receives an overall high performance rating can also receive a low performance rating for a certain group of students within that school. That’s because it is easy to hide achievement gaps among school-wide averages. English Language Learners Income Levels

How to address success gaps
Form a local district or school stakeholder team Disaggregate & study the data Self-assess using the rubric Provide evidence Consider the students first Ensure equitable participation Develop a plan of action So, how do we address these success gaps. If we have identified and want to determine where the success gaps are in our school or district, then these are the steps to get started. One of the most important is to begin by forming a stakeholder group or team. A broad-based stakeholder group is important in order to capture the perspectives of the diverse groups who have a stake in what happens for students within the district. The stakeholder group is often composed of teachers, parents, community members, administrators, and sometimes even students. Be sure to include in your stakeholder group representatives of the subgroup that is experiencing the success gaps. Once you have a stakeholder group, then we are going to review the data, disaggregate it, and use the rubric as a team to conduct the self-assessment, identify areas for improvement and develop a plan to address them.

We’re now going to take a look at how the rubric is structured
We’re now going to take a look at how the rubric is structured. There are five sections to the rubric and each of them are structured in the same way. It begins with the probing questions. The probing questions are provided to assist the team in discussing the items in the rubric. You can see that on the left, the first column is the indictor that defines the action. Once we get into the chart of the rubric then you can see that the first column on the left is the indicator and the next four columns are the rates for that indicator. And there are four possible ratings: planning, partially implemented, fully implemented, or exemplary. The bottom section of each page is the place where you can note your evidence. We recommend that evidence always be documented to support the rating that the team is giving each section.

Self-assessment components
Data-based decision making Cultural responsiveness High-quality core instructional program Assessment-universal screening and progress monitoring Evidence-based instructional /behavioral interventions and supports The success gaps rubric has five components or five self-assessment areas. They are: data based decision making, cultural responsiveness, high quality core instructional program, assessment including universal screening and progress monitoring, and evidence based instructional behavioral interventions and supports. What you will find that is not there is parent engagement and district leadership. Those two are embedded throughout the process, rather than listed as separate components.

Data-based decision making
What is data based decision making? Decisions about the school curriculum, instructional programs, academic and behavioral supports, and school improvement initiatives are based on data that are disaggregated for the school - reflecting the differences in subgroups by gender, race ethnicity, socioeconomic factors, disability, and native or home language. For example data on graduation, attendance, drop out, discipline, and achievement are all examined and considered individually and collectively. Decisions about student interventions, behavioral or academic are made based on multiple data sources including screening, progress monitoring, formative and summative assessments.

Cultural responsiveness
What is meant by cultural responsiveness? Effective academic and behavioral practices for all learners are based on the schools recognition of diversity across student ethnicity, language and socioeconomic status. Training and resources are provided and designed so teachers can meet the linguistic needs of all students including students with disabilities who are also English learners. Parents from all backgrounds are included in discussions and meetings about the school, the school programs, or initiatives, and their children’s academic and behavioral progress.

Core instructional program
The core instructional program is a rigorous consistent and well articulated K12 instructional program that is aligned with both English language arts and mathematic standards and delivered with fidelity. Effective differentiation in the core curriculum addresses the needs of the full range of learners, learning styles, and cultural and linguistic backgrounds. Universal design for learning guidelines are an integral component of instruction. Parents as well are informed in their native language or home language about the differentiation of instruction and assessment data based on their child’s unique learning or behavioral needs.

Assessment-universal screening and progress monitoring
What is meant by assessment? Assessment here is universal screening and progress monitoring. All students are screened for early identification of academic and behavioral risk factors using valid and reliable tools. And all students’ progress is monitored to make needed adjustments to instruction and add and/or -. All students’ progress is monitored to make needed adjustments to instruction or interventions. Valid and reliable progress monitoring tools are identified and available at each school with reasonable intervals for monitoring defined and implemented. Performance data is reviewed at regular intervals and instruction, interventions is adjusted based on data review cycles. Again parents and guardians are regularly informed in their native or home language of their child’s screening and progress monitoring results for both academic and behavioral progress.

Evidence-based instructional and behavioral interventions and supports
Evidence based interventions and behavioral supports are embedded within a multi-tiered framework and implemented with fidelity. School level practices use evidence based behavioral interventions and tiered response methods such as positive behavior interventions and supports, restorative practices, or other research based methods. District level discipline policies that use tiered response protocols are in place as opposed to zero tolerance policies. Parents and guardians are going to be regularly informed in their native or home language of interventions provided to their children and their children’s response to those interventions for academic or behavioral skills

To address success gaps… … look closely at equity, inclusion, and opportunity for children in the affected groups. To address success gaps we must look closely at equity, inclusion, and opportunity for children in the affected subgroups. We much shine a light on the root cause so that the success gap can be addressed.

To address success gaps…make a plan of action.
Recognize the need for change in your school’s or district’s current practices and policies Identify the root causes of the problem Make the changes that address those root causes Once we’ve identified the root cause of the success gap, then we must make a plan of action. We must recognize the need for change in our schools or our districts practices and policies. We’ve identified the root cause and we make the changes that address the root cause. We integrate these actions into our local school improvement plans or other accountability plans that may already be in existence. Identifying and developing actions to address success gaps will support improvement activities already in place.

Equity Inclusion Opportunity Take a closer look….
The success gaps tools can provide an opportunity to take a closer look at equity, inclusion, and opportunity in your district or your school so that each and every child has access to quality education that can results in positive long-term outcomes.

Further resources IDC Success Gaps Tools may be found at:
library/54611b49140ba0d8358b4569/ library/54611dfc140ba0cb398b4573/ Please provide feedback about the tools or if you need assistance using the tools, contact: Tom Munk Nancy O’Hara Cesar D’Agord or Kristin Reedy There are further resources that you may find on the IDC resource page. You can see the links in the slide. If you need assistance using the tools or would like to provide any feedback about the tools, please feel free to contact any of the individuals listed here.

For more information Visit the IDC website http://ideadata.org/
Follow us on Twitter

The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the U.S. Department of Education, #H373Y However, the contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government. Project Officers: Richelle Davis and Meredith Miceli

Introduction to the toolS

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Introduction to the toolS"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Introduction to the toolS

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Introduction to the toolS"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback