Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
The Many Faces of Benchmark Assessments: Changing the Culture of Teaching and Learning. Milwaukee Public Schools Metro Nashville Public Schools. Hardin Daniel, Discovery Education Assessment Nancy Bonesho, Milwaukee Public Schools Paul Changas, Metro Nashville Public Schools - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Proprietary & Confidential
The Many Faces of Benchmark Assessments: Changing the Culture of Teaching and Learning
Hardin Daniel, Discovery Education AssessmentNancy Bonesho, Milwaukee Public Schools
Paul Changas, Metro Nashville Public SchoolsKathy Strunk, Discovery Education Assessment
Milwaukee Public SchoolsMetro Nashville Public Schools
Universal Screener Hardin Daniel & Kathy Strunk
Classroom Teachers – All LearnersInterventionists - Struggling Learners
Interim Benchmarks in the Instructional Process Nancy Bonesho
Classroom TeachersStudents
Longitudinal and Real-Time Data Paul Changas
Professional Development for Principals
What are we trying to accomplish?
Balanced, Comprehensive Assessment Solution
• Progress Zone – 60,000+ Item Bank – Remediate with digital content– K-HS Reading, Math, Science
• Interim Benchmarks– K-HS Predict Student Proficiency– Universal Screener
• RTI Progress Monitoring– Grades K-HS
• VAL-ED Principal Effectiveness
DEA Balanced Assessment System
Data serves any level of intensity or frequency, knowing student needs may vary throughout learning careers
DEA Balanced Assessment System
Unique types of data meet the needs of all educators, including both general and special education.
NCLB and IDEA Both Require Standards Based Accountability
• NCLB 2001 standards based accountability provisions require each state to develop content and achievement standards in several subjects, administer tests to measure students’ progress toward these standards, develop targets for performance on these tests, and impose a series of interventions on schools and districts that do not meet the targets.
• IDEA § 300.309, (a), states a child may be determined to have a specific learning disability, if—(1) The child does not achieve adequately for the child’s age or to meet State-approved grade-level standards in one or more of the following areas, when provided with learning experiences and instruction appropriate for the child’s age or State-approved grade-level standards.
External Review
National Center for Response to Intervention
www.rti4success.org
Challenges to the Use of Interim Assessment as a Universal Screener
• “Brief”• Multiple Grades and Subjects• National Norm vs State Specific• Foundational Skills vs State Standards• Minimum of 3-months before external validation• Diverse Population Data
Research on Standards-Based Screening
• Herman and Baker, (2005), “Unless benchmark tests reflect state standards and assessments, their results tell us little about whether students are making adequate progress toward achieving the standards and performing well on the assessment.”
• Joseph Jenkins, (2008),“I'm convinced screening instruments should be "locally validated" according to the future measure used to judge adequate/inadequate reading outcomes. Schools (and states) can validate the screening cut points on CBM and on other types of screens that predict adequate/inadequate reading levels on the local criterion outcome measure (e.g., state standards test). Because these outcome measures (and the score used to distinguish between adequate and inadequate performance) differ by state and school district, schools should evaluate screening measures (and screening cut points) in relation to the specific (local) outcome measure.”
National Center on Response to Intervention-cut back
• Discovery Education Assessment Predictive Benchmarks is posted on the Center’s website at www.rti4success.org as a universal screening tool for struggling learners.
• At this time, the DEA universal screener is the only state-specific screener for Math and for grades higher than 3rd in Reading and Math.
• DEA received highly favorable scores, with Classification and Reliability ranked highest.
• All screenings are rated for – 1) Classification Accuracy– 2) Generalizability– 3) Reliability– 4) Validity– 5) Disaggregated Data for Diverse Populations
National Center for Response to Intervention
www.rti4success.org
Universal Screener Hardin Daniel & Kathy Strunk
Classroom Teachers – All LearnersInterventionists - Struggling Learners
Interim Benchmarks in the Instructional Process Nancy Bonesho
Classroom TeachersStudents
Longitudinal and Real-Time Data Paul Changas
Professional Development for Principals
What are we trying to accomplish?
• 85,000 Students in 185 schools• About 5,500 teachers• Have been using Discovery Ed. Assessment for 4 years• Started DEA with 22 schools in September 2006• Increased to 109 by December 2006• District wide implementation by September 2007• Over 600 Professional Developments sessions have
been conducted since Sept. 2006 (differentiated)• MPS employs conservative cut scores to avoid under-
identifying students in need of assistance• Predictive Validity: Reading: 86.4% Math 90.1%
1. Teacher understanding of the connection between the benchmarks and instruction
2. Consistent analysis and use of the data by teachers and school communities
3. Formative use of assessments and results with students/parents in a timely manner
* Goal Setting
Reading Results - School A Consistent use of all critical components
School A - Consistent Efforts Yield Sustained Results
• Teachers meet frequently to discuss student DEA data
• Decisions on how to instruct students are based on DEA data – flex groups and differentiated work
• Reports are immediately shared with students and parents; students review difficult items and set class and individual goals for next benchmark
• Periodic ‘check-ins’ occur to keep everyone on task
Math Results - School B Inconsistent use of critical components
School B - Random Acts of Improvement
• Inconsistent use of data
• Inconsistent delivery of targeted instruction
• Inconsistent utilization of differentiated activities
• Complacency in the classroom
• Results were not sustained
Universal Screener Hardin Daniel & Kathy Strunk
Classroom Teachers – All LearnersInterventionists - Struggling Learners
Interim Benchmarks in the Instructional Process Nancy Bonesho
Classroom TeachersStudents
Longitudinal and Real-Time Data Paul Changas
Professional Development for Principals
What are we trying to accomplish?
PK-12 Enrollment 76,033
African American 47.4%
Asian / Pacific Islander 3.8%
Hispanic 15.9%
Native American 0.1%
White 32.6%
Limited English Proficient 10.4%
Students with Disabilities 12.2%
Economically Disadvantaged 68.1%
Mobility Rate 35.4%
MNPS Student Demographics
Where We Were (Spring 2008)
On verge of NCLB Corrective Action
Not consistently data driven
District assessments not well utilized
DEA in some schools, but not a district initiative
Planning for Interim Benchmarks
Information gathering Research literature review School visits Visits to other districts Discussion with test company representatives Focus groups (principals, teachers, exemplary educators)
Options identified Build our own assessments DEA (recommended)
Project Management
Project Charter – Desired outcomes Administration of interim benchmark assessments
(Reading & Math in grades 3-8; Alg. I, Bio I, Eng. II)
Teachers routinely use results to make classroom decisions
Teachers administer classroom formative assessments or probes to identify specific deficits
Change in culture to data driven decision making
Communications Plan - Targets District executive staff District coordinators and facilitators Instructional coaches School administrators Teachers Exemplary Educators School Board members Parents Students Community
Project Management
Project Management
Professional Development Plan – Expectations Principals will take leadership role in each school C&I executive staff will hold principals accountable Lead teachers selected for professional development will
assist/train other school staff Curriculum coordinators and instructional coaches will
support teachers as needed DEA training/discussion will occur routinely at principal
meetings DEA and other formative assessments will be routinely
addressed in school improvement plans Professional development will be ongoing within the school
Project Management
Professional Development Plan – TargetsPrincipals
Key central office staff
School teams (Principal and 3-5 key staff)
Exemplary Educators
Instructional coaches
Additional school staff on as needed basis
Where We Are Now
Common language among our educators
Ongoing and sustained professional development
Sharing of best practices and effective strategies
Monthly meetings of principals, APs and coaches
Principal institutes
Teacher workshops
MNPS Tube (online PD)
Rubric Developed from Kim Marshall, “Interim Assessments: A User's Guide,” Phi Delta Kappan, 9/2008
Use of DEA Interim Benchmarks
District level District and School AYP reports Prioritization of schools for interventions Identification of district-wide PD needs
School level Monitoring of classroom teachers Identification of school-wide PD needs Identification of students for school-wide interventions
Classroom level Identification of student academic strengths and needs Instructional feedback Prediction of student success on high stakes assessments
2009 Relationship Between DEA and TCAP
Correctly predicted TCAP proficient or higher: 87.2%
Correctly predicted exact performance level: 68.6%
Below Proficient Advanced Total
Below 1,898 1,796 50 3,744
Proficient 2,056 10,218 1,183 13,457
Advanced 93 4,639 9,299 14,031
Total 4,047 16,653 10,532 31,232
TCAP Achievement Test3rd DEA
AYP Report Example (Data Warehouse)
Metropolitan Nashville Public Schools
Standards Proficiency Predictor – By Subject _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
School: AAA Middle School School Year: 2009-2010 Subject: MATH
Test: DISCOVERY EDUCATION ASSESSMENT Test Date(s): 02/08/2010 Students: AYP (1-2) (Active Students Only) _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
1 2 3 4
37 43 13 4
38.1% 44.3% 13.4% 4.1%
27 36 30 3
28.1% 37.5% 31.3% 3.1%
45 70 37 5
28.7% 44.6% 23.6% 3.2%
0 5 4 2
0.0% 45.5% 36.4% 18.2%
83 128 77 14
27.5% 42.4% 25.5% 4.6%
26 26 7 0
44.1% 44.1% 11.9% 0.0%
4 25 18 6
7.5% 47.2% 34.0% 11.3%
105 129 66 8
34.1% 41.9% 21.4% 2.6%
86 148 82 12
26.2% 45.1% 25.0% 3.7%
23 6 2 2
69.7% 18.2% 6.1% 6.1%
ED: N
Disability: N
Disability: Y
ELL: N
ELL: Y
ED: Y
Summary - School Level
MATH - 02/08/2010
B
W
H
A
DEA in Combination with Value Added
DEA Growth Report
School Report for TN METRO NASHVILLE DAVIDSON CO SD, TN Change in Proficiency Level and Growth: Test 2 to Test 3
AAA Middle School Grade 5 Mathematics
Comparison of Test 2 to Test 3
Test 2 to Test 3 Actual Change vs. Prediction
DEA Growth Report
Student System School Sex Race Enrolled Grade
Gif Mig ELL ED SpED FD CTS Achievement Probability
7. BASS, R Davidson County
AAA Middle School
M W 5 N N N Y Y N U 13.8
8. BETTERS, A Davidson County
AAA Middle School
M B 5 N N N Y N N U 1.7
13. DEADRICK, I Davidson County
AAA Middle School
M B 5 N N N N Y N U 1.1
20. GARRETT, K Davidson County
AAA Middle School
F H 5 N N N Y N N U 15.2
21. GIBBS, C Davidson County
AAA Middle School
F W 5 N N N Y N N U 23.8
22. GILES, T Davidson County
AAA Middle School
F B 5 N N N Y Y N U 0.1
25. GRAHAM, R Davidson County
AAA Middle School
F B 5 N N N Y N N U 7.2
38. MARIS, C Davidson County
AAA Middle School
M H 5 N N Y Y Y N U 10.1
41. MCELROY, T Davidson County
AAA Middle School
F B 5 N N N Y Y N U 3.3
2009 Accelerate IFor Students Enrolled at AAA Middle School
5th Math ACHIEVE
Merging TVAAS and DEA Projections
Student System School Sex Race Enrolled
Grade Gif Mig ELL ED SpED FD CTS
Achievement Probability
7. BASS, R Davidson County
AAA Middle School
M W 5 N N N Y Y N U 13.8
8. BETTERS, A Davidson County
AAA Middle School
M B 5 N N N Y N N U 1.7
13. DEADRICK, I Davidson County
AAA Middle School
M B 5 N N N N Y N U 1.1
20. GARRETT, K Davidson County
AAA Middle School
F H 5 N N N Y N N U 15.2
21. GIBBS, C Davidson County
AAA Middle School
F W 5 N N N Y N N U 23.8
22. GILES, T Davidson County
AAA Middle School
F B 5 N N N Y Y N U 0.1
25. GRAHAM, R Davidson County
AAA Middle School
F B 5 N N N Y N N U 7.2
38. MARIS, C Davidson County
AAA Middle School
M H 5 N N Y Y Y N U 10.1
41. MCELROY, T Davidson County
AAA Middle School
F B 5 N N N Y Y N U 3.3
2009 Accelerate IFor Students Enrolled at AAA Middle School
5th Math ACHIEVE
Grade/Class/Date:
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 ?Maris, C Garrett, K Bass, RMiller, J Gibbs, C Wells, DSampson, I Giles, TVail, C McElroy, T
Smith, CStreet, IBetters, ADeadrick, IGraham, RSharp, BVince, Z
Parker, IVogel, JWoods, K
Diller, R Chandler, A Crew, A Strong, PEller, A Dorris, W Gross, C Voice, J
Nails, SOrton, JArnold, NCarter, ASawyer, DTiller, MYearly, I
Hill, L Silver, H Moore, JWilson, A Little, IWillis, R Mullins, K
Accelerate II
Advanced
?
Grd. 5 / J ones (10/2009)
TVAAS Projections
ThinkLink Test
Worksheet for Merging TVAAS and DEA (ThinkLink) Data
Accelerate I
Universal Screener Hardin Daniel & Kathy Strunk
Classroom Teachers – All LearnersInterventionists - Struggling Learners
Interim Benchmarks in the Instructional Process Nancy Bonesho
Classroom TeachersStudents
Longitudinal and Real-Time Data Paul Changas
Professional Development for Principals
What are we trying to accomplish?
Contact Information
• [email protected]• [email protected]• [email protected]• [email protected]• Discovery Education Assessment
– Toll Free Number: 1-866-814-6685
![Utilizing Benchmark Guiding Assessments …€¢ Are anchored in meaningful, ... Educational Philosophy ... Utilizing Benchmark Guiding Assessments Dec2010.ppt [Compatibility Mode]](https://img.dokumen.tips/doc/110x75/5b030a537f8b9ab9598eba9b/utilizing-benchmark-guiding-assessments-are-anchored-in-meaningful-educational.jpg)
