1. Data-Guided Decision Making~ Data Disaggregation Look-Fors
M-DCPS Framework of
Effective Instruction: Part IV
DATA CHATS

2. Agenda DATA IFC Quarter 3 Math Content Look Fors
Analyzing Data to Inform
DATA
Instructional Focus Calendars to Address Deficiencies as per MYA Results
IFC
Maintaining Rigor and Complexity when teaching Measurement & Data and Geometry
Quarter 3
Math Content Look Fors

3. FSA, MYA, & Topic Tests. . .
Oh My!

4. Taking the driver’s seat
back from data

6. FSA Update
Final Achievement Level Cut Scores
as of Jan. 6, 2016
NEW

7. oada.dadeschools.net Weekly Briefing # 18631

9. 2015 FSA 60 62 54 49 46 38 6th Grade: 100 7th Grade: 85 8th Grade: 77
District Scores for FSA
Grade Level
District
% Students: Levels 3-5 3 60 4 62 5 54 6 49 7 46 8 38
Algebra I
6th Grade: 100
7th Grade: 85
8th Grade: 77
Geometry
7th Grade: 100
8th Grade: 90

10. High Student Achievement
Florida Continuous Improvement Model (FCIM) A Cycle You Don’t Want to Break
High Student Achievement
= Data

11. Florida Continuous Improvement Model (FCIM)
Data Disaggregation (Plan)
Instructional Focus Calendar (Plan)
Instructional Activities (Do)
Mini-Assessments (Check)
Maintenance (Check)
Monitoring (Check)
Maintenance and Enrichment (Act)

12. Mid-Year Cut Scores DATA Analyzing Data to Inform
School Year
School Year
Grades
3 – 8
Unsatisfactory
(<70%) 
Grade Level
Insufficient
Limited
Satisfactory 3
( <55%)
( >=55% <61%)
( >=61% <101%) 4
( <52%)
( >=52% <58%)
( >=58% <101%) 5
( <59%)
( >=59% <66%)
( >=66% <101%)
(>=70%) 6
( <45%)
( >=45% <50%)
( >=50% <101%) 7
( <38%)
( >=38% <44%)
( >=44% <101%) 8
( <33%)
( >=33% <40%)
( >=40% <101%)

13. Percent of Students per Proficiency Level
DATA
Analyzing Data to Inform
Percent of Students per Proficiency Level
School Year
School Year
Grade
Level
Unsatisfactory
Satisfactory
Grade Level
Insufficient
Limited 3
58.41%
41.59%
31.28%
8.44%
60.29% 4
61.26%
38.74%
30.13%
11.47%
58.4% 5
64.65%
35.35%
36.69%
14.62%
48.69% 6
81.06%
18.94%
46.3%
8.65%
45.05% 7
95.25%
4.75%
51.96%
13.84%
34.2% 8
99.51%
.49%
54.64%
19.57%
25.79%

14. Proficiency Report
School Sample

15. District Average Percent Correct
DATA
Analyzing Data to Inform
Mid-Year Assessment Results
GRADE Level *
District Average Percent Correct *
Change from to 3 63 65 +2 4 61 5 60 64 +4 6 50
same 7 40 8 32 34
Algebra I 35 37
Geometry 42 43 +1
*as of 01/5/16

17. % of 4th Grade Standards assessed on the Grade 4 MYA: 39.3%
2014 % Correct
2015 % Correct
MAFS.4.OA.1.1
66%
69.47%
MAFS.4.OA.1.2
61%
64.70%
MAFS.4.OA.1.3
53%
53.75%
MAFS.4.OA.2.4
46%
47.15%
MAFS.4.OA.3.5
57%
66.01%
MAFS.4.NBT.1.1
MAFS.4.NBT.1.2
79%
80.28%
MAFS.4.NBT.1.3
68.18%
MAFS.4.NBT.2.4
71%
71.04%
MAFS.4.NBT.2.5
68%
68.59%
MAFS.4.NBT.2.6
54.38%
It is imperative to administer Topic Assessments for upcoming standards
Solve multistep word problems posed with whole numbers and having whole-number answers using the four operations, including problems in which remainders must be interpreted. Represent these problems using equations with a letter standing for the unknown quantity. Assess the reasonableness of answers using mental computation and estimation strategies including rounding.
*strongest on FSA
Investigate factors and multiples.
 Find all factor pairs for a whole number in the range 1–100.
Recognize that a whole number is a multiple of each of its factors. Determine whether a given whole number in the range 1–100 is a multiple of a given one-digit number. 
Determine whether a given whole number in the range 1–100 is prime or composite.
*Data as of
Students need to know 29 standards for FSA (including the “also assesses” standards). MYA assessed 11 out of 29 standards=37.9%.
6.NS.1.1
6.NS.3.7c
6.RP.1.3c
*weakest on FSA
Find whole-number quotients and remainders with up to four-digit dividends and one-digit divisors, using strategies based on place value, the properties of operations, and/or the relationship between multiplication and division. Illustrate and explain the calculation by using equations, rectangular arrays, and/or area models.
Not Assessed on MYA

18. % of 7th Grade Standards assessed on the Grade 7 MYA: 33.3%
It is imperative to administer Topic Assessments for upcoming standards
Standard
2014
% Correct
2015
MAFS.7.EE.1.2
22.93%
22.50%
MAFS.7.EE.2.3
42.98%
41.92%
MAFS.7.NS.1.1a
49.43%
50.64%
MAFS.7.NS.1.1b
53.52%
51.31%
MAFS.7.NS.1.1c
28.43%
28.99%
MAFS.7.NS.1.1d
31.6%
32.21%
MAFS.7.NS.1.2a
47.17%
48.39%
MAFS.7.NS.1.2b
30.18%
30.84%
MAFS.7.NS.1.2c
40.37%
37.33%
MAFS.7.NS.1.2d
45.02%
41.86%
MAFS.7.NS.1.3
45.7%
46.44%
MAFS.7.RP.1.1
37.58%
38.93%
MAFS.7.RP.1.2a
49.48%
49.27%
MAFS.7.RP.1.2b
43.96%
44.13%
MAFS.7.RP.1.2c
47.13%
46.70%
MAFS.7.RP.1.2d
45.25%
45.03%
MAFS.7.RP.1.3
33.96%
33.21%
Understand that rewriting an expression in different forms in a problem context can shed light on the problem and how the quantities in it are related.
* = no calculator * * * *
Understand subtraction of rational numbers as adding the additive inverse, p – q = p + (–q). Show that the distance between two rational numbers on the number line is the absolute value of their difference, and apply this principle in real-world contexts. * *
*weakest on FSA * * *
*strongest on FSA *
*Data as of
Students need to know 24 standards for FSA (including the “also assesses” standards). MYA assessed 8 out of 24 standards=33.3%.
Understand that integers can be divided, provided that the divisor is not zero, and every quotient of integers (with non-zero divisor) is a rational number. If p and q are integers, then –(p/q) = (–p)/q = p/(–q). Interpret quotients of rational numbers by describing real-world contexts.
39.1%= average for non-calculator standards
42.7%= average for calculator standards
Not Assessed on MYA

19. Standard Analysis
Item Analysis
Distractor Analysis
At Risk
Differentiated Instruction Groups
Instructional Focus Calendar

20. Distractor Analysis Item Analysis Standard Analysis At Risk Report
G2D
Types of Data Reports
Distractor Analysis
Item Analysis
Standard Analysis
At Risk Report

21. Math In The News
January 2016 NEWSLETTER

22. Instructional Focus Calendars PRIMARY and SECONDARY Standards
PRIMARY Standard: based on the Pacing Guide Curriculum (current/upcoming concepts)
SECONDARY DATA DRIVEN Standard: based on the MYA and Topic Assessment data
What do we need to REVISIT that has already been taught?
Find the opportunities to embed secondary standards with primary standards.
Best Practice: Revisit secondary standards (e.g., Bell Ringers, Exit Slips, DI Groups)
Resources: HMH GO Math! (Elem), Getting Ready for PARCC (Elem), McGraw-Hill Power-Up (MS), McGraw-Hill Extra Practice (MS), McGraw-Hill Countdown (MS), Item Specs Sample Items (Both), Topic Assessment Questions (Both), Illustrative Mathematics (Both)
MAFS Review Packets will be released in February (Both)

23. Instructional Focus Calendar
Based on School/Grade-Level/Class Needs

24. Instructional Focus Calendar
Based on School/Grade-Level/Class Needs

25. Instructional Focus Calendar
Based on School/Grade-Level/Class Needs

26. SAMPLE October 2015 8 Primary Standard Lesson/Activity
Assessment Day
Secondary Standard
Lesson/Activity
Secondary Standard
Lesson/Activity

27. Sample
MYA Lowest Standards: Grade 3

28. Grade 3
MAFS.3.OA %
MAFS.3.NBT %

29. 8
October 2015

30. Resources

31. Weekly Instructional Focus Data Sheet
MYA info
At Risk
“Students by Standards” Report
Getting Ready for PARCC –Go Math! Resource
CPALMS- Formative Assessments link
Item Specs & Examples

32. Use the At Risk Report & Filter by: Students by Standards

33. Weekly Instructional Focus Data Sheet
MYA info
At Risk
“Students by Standards” Report
McGraw-Hill Countdown
CPALMS- Formative Assessments link
Item Specs & Examples

34. What Resources Looks Like. . .
Elementary Mathematics
Getting Ready for PARCC Sample: DO
CHECK

35. Getting Ready for the 2016 FSA~ Middle School MAFS Review Packets

36. Components
Looks For…
Teachers have regular opportunities to meet, plan, share student data, create focus lessons and mini-assessments.
Do teachers have opportunities to meet and share with other grade levels and subject areas? How often are the meetings?
Student achievement data are disaggregated by teacher, class, and student and are used continuously to determine effectiveness of instructional strategies.
What evidence is there that data disaggregation/analysis is shared with other stakeholders and used to modify instruction?
Teachers know, based on data analysis, weaknesses of their students on targeted standards.
Ask a teacher to discuss weaknesses of a randomly selected student. What records are in the classroom to show the students’ weaknesses? How are student data used to develop intervention plans?
Instructional Focus Calendars are used school-wide and are posted in classrooms, offices, etc.
Review calendars. Ask teachers what data was used to drive the IFC.
Instructional Focus Calendars are being followed, as evidenced in teachers’ lesson plans and classroom observations.
IFC lessons are written in the teacher lesson plans and are aligned to the IFC. Review a sampling of teacher lesson plans and observe several classes.
Teachers know, based on data analysis, weaknesses of their students on targeted standards.
Ask a teacher to discuss weaknesses of a randomly selected student. What records are in the classroom to show the students’ weaknesses? How are student data used to develop intervention plans?

37. DO Components Looks For… CHECK
Secondary standards are being revisited during instruction.
Are secondary standard resources readily available to teachers and evident in teacher lesson plans? Look for direct instruction, teacher modeling, and guided practice during lessons.
Tutorials and Enrichments are part of the regular school day. Use tutorials to reteach secondary standards in different ways.
What is the process used for setting up Tutorials and Enrichment times?
Are students attentively engaged? Discuss with several teachers and students the nature and effectiveness of re-teaching.
Short, frequent mini-assessments with test items resembling the FSA Assessment are given on targeted standards.
Ask teachers to confirm that mini-assessments are taking place.
Do students regularly meet with teachers to review their performance and set goals?
Ongoing informal and formal assessments are being administered to monitor individual student progress.
What happens after assessments—are there discussions between administrators and teacher? Teachers and students? DO
Secondary standards are being revisited during instruction.
Are secondary standard resources readily available to teachers and evident in teacher lesson plans? Look for direct instruction, teacher modeling, and guided practice during lessons.
Short, frequent mini-assessments with test items resembling the FSA Assessment are given on targeted standards.
Ask teachers to confirm that mini-assessments are taking place.
Do students regularly meet with teachers to review their performance and set goals?
Ongoing informal and formal assessments are being administered to monitor individual student progress.
What happens after assessments—are there discussions between administrators and teacher? Teachers and students?
CHECK

38. FSA Update:
Florida Standards Assessments
Achievement Level Descriptions (ALD) 2015
These can be found at:
Consider ALDs when planning Quarter 3 content and reviewing Q1 & Q2 content. . .

39. FSA Update: Florida Standards Assessments
Achievement Level Descriptions (ALD) 2015

40. Components Looks For… ACT
Alternative instructional delivery methods are used to support remediation, acceleration, and enrichment strategies.
Are a variety of strategies, lessons and materials being used? Review several different learning activities and lesson plans and observe instruction in several classrooms in several subjects.
Periodic standard reviews are conducted to maintain student mastery of targeted standards.
Review Instructional Focus Calendars for dates scheduled for lessons/activities; discuss with teachers. Is more time needed for the secondary standard?
Be sure that Differentiated Instruction is taking place to address student deficiencies.
Administration frequently monitors FCIM implementation in classrooms through observations and data analysis.
Confirm how often each teacher is monitoring student progress.
Have there been changes to implementation strategies based on monitoring?
Periodic standard reviews are conducted to maintain student mastery of targeted standards.
Review Instructional Focus Calendars for dates scheduled for lessons/activities; discuss with teachers. Is more time needed for the secondary standard?
Be sure that Differentiated Instruction is taking place to address student deficiencies.
ACT

41. Thank You! Office of Academics and Transformation
Division of Academics
Department of Mathematics and Science
Michelle White, Executive Director
Maria Teresa Diaz-Gonzalez, District Instructional Supervisor
Raquel McKinnon, District Curriculum Support Specialist