2. Making Numbers Work… NHSAA: Living with the NCLB Act Ann Remus September 21, 2004 To Improve Instruction

3. Where to Begin?… one analysis at a time Examples: I. Program evaluation II. Authentic assessment that fosters good teaching III. Diagnosis to allow differentiated instruction/value-added assessment

4. I. Program Evaluation Growth by Grade on a Norm-referenced test: Gates-MacGinite Reading Tests We used to disaggregate by hand for Title I and SPED – led to program improvements Difficulty keeping consistency of early skills program when grades were split among three schools in 99-00.

5. Growth By Grade, Gates-MacGinite 1st Grade +16 2nd Grade +9 3rd Grade +4 5th Grade +1 Note: Black lines indicate national median Total Battery ESS for each grade level. 1 st Grade: 391, 2 nd Grade: 446, 3 rd, Grade: 472, 5 th Grade: 507.

6. Growth By Grade: Observations District focus/professional development on early skills may account for growth in grades 1 and 2 The data: identifies the need to investigate upper level elementary grades’ potential for increased growth Identifies the need to disaggregate data By cohort By NCLB categories

7. Gates-MacGinite Average Total Battery ESS Grade 2 455 464 468 472 498 502 507 508 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 Going into 6th Grade Going into 5th Grade Going into 4th Grade Going into 3rd Grade Cohort Total Battery ESS Middle Higher Disaggregation: Stanine Ranges of Cohorts National Median ESS: 446 Growth for Middle Stanine Range: 17 ESS Growth for Higher Stanine Range: 10 ESS

8. Growth by Cohort, Disaggregated by Stanine Ranges : Conclusions Disaggregating cohorts helps us see which groups are growing more or less quickly The middle stanine range improved more than did the higher stanine range Progress of high and middle ranges against national median score has improved across time Instructional implication: To “catch up,” the lower and middle groups must continue to grow more quickly Need focused attention on best practices for the upper group as well

9. Introduction of Open Court Reading Program Prior series no longer available; wanted to make use of the research from the National Reading Panel in our programming 2002-2003: pilot, with one teacher in each grade, grades 1-4, in all three schools 2003-2004: first year of full district-wide implementation, grade 1

10. +16 +18

11. Disaggregating grade 1 by NCLB categories after our first year of Open Court reading

12. II. Authentic Assessment to Encourage Good Teaching In the mid-1990’s, the district looked closely at its curriculum, deciding on essential questions and grade level expectations. That work was continued with detailed curriculum maps. One of the outcomes expected of grade 2 science, is understanding mass and volume.

13. Source: Market Research Grade 2 Authentic Assessment

14. Leadership Seminar Presented by Barbara Gondek May 4, 2004 Impact of Process Writing on Writing Assessment Another Example of Authentic Assessment

15. Hypothesis Students assigned to strong writing instructors in grades 7 and 8 will be shown to perform better on the Bedford Formal Writing Assessment than those who had average or weak writing instructors.

16. Parameters Grades Seven and Eight Two years of scores (2002 and 2003) Sorted by Language Arts teachers Teachers were classified on the basis of the extent to which they used all the steps of the Writing Process in their classrooms during 2002 and 2003.

17. 1. Find an idea or topic. 2. Formulate a thesis - narrow the topic. 3. Generate details - facts, examples, and support. 4. Outline if it seems helpful. 5. Write your first draft. 6. Let things rest for a day or two. 7. Revise - look at the paper from the reader's point of view; reorganize and add explanations where necessary. 8. Let things rest again. 9. Revise again and edit for conventions. 10.Type or write the final draft. 11.Proofread at least three times - once aloud, once for any errors you habitually make, and once backwards. Writing Process Steps

18. Classification of Teachers Strong Average Weak Used Process Writing steps regularly Required students to write every day Used Process Writing Steps occasionally Required students to write 2-3 times per week Seldom used Process Writing Most writing was “quick writes”

19. Extent of Process Writing vs. Student Writing Skills

20. Extent of Process Writing vs. Special Education Student Writing Skills

21. Current Writing Assessment Writing prompt is given at the beginning of the class. Students are given a limited time to organize ideas, brainstorm, and draft an essay. Final copy is completed by the end of the testing session.

22. Writing Assessment Team Representatives from Grades 1 – 8 worked together over the summer Developed an assessment format and rubric that lines up with process writing.

23. 1. Find an idea or topic. 2. Formulate a thesis - narrow the topic. 3. Generate details - facts, examples, and support. 4. Outline if it seems helpful. 5. Write your first draft. 6. Let things rest for a day or two. 7. Revise - look at the paper from the reader's point of view; reorganize and add explanations where necessary. 8. Let things rest again. 9. Revise again and edit for conventions. 10.Type or write the final draft. 11.Proofread at least three times - once aloud, once for any errors you habitually make, and once backwards. Writing Process Steps

24. Assessment Plan for Fall 2004 Pre-assessment in September Post assessment in May-June Analytical scoring as opposed to holistic Assessment given in stages similar to process writing, over a period of days

25. Assessment is not the end of the writing process.

26. It is the bridge to revision.

27. III. Diagnostic/Value-Added Assessment NWEA - given in grades 3 through 8 each fall and spring: piloted in 02-03, full implementation in 03-04. Fall administration gives information necessary for immediate differentiation of instruction Yearly growth by RIT ranges shows effectiveness of differentiation

28. 20 Grade 7 Math NWEA Fall to Spring Growth 2003-2004

29. Grade 7 Language Usage NWEA Fall to Spring Growth 16 80 143 60 2003-2004

30. Gates-MacGinite total battery ESS vs. NWEA reading RIT total

31. What to do? Collect data, backwards and forwards Zero in on groups, smaller groups, and then individuals Talk about what you see in the data: different people may see different things Keep at it…