Data Review and Discussion David Holland
Desired Outcomes Classify educational data to develop a four-dimensional view of campus performance Visualize district data through various perspectives to spark discussion about campus-level opportunities for improvement Recognize the potential impact of increasing STAAR performance standards Understand the basic attributes of the 2014 accountability system
Multiple Measures of Data Enrollment, Mobility, Attendance, Dropout/ Graduation Rate, Ethnicity, Gender, Grade Level, Teachers, Language proficiency Programs, Instructional Strategies, Classroom Practices, Assessment Strategies, Summer School, Finance, Transportation Demographics Perceptions School Processes Perceptions of Learning Environments, Values and Beliefs, Attitudes, Questionnaires, Observations Student Learning Standardized Tests, Norm/Criterion Referenced Tests, Grade Point Average, Formative Assessment Copyright ©1991-2005 Education for the Future Initiative, Chico, CA
Multiple Measures of Data To which of these data sources do we typically pay the most attention? D Demographics SP Which of these data sources do we have the least control over? P School Processes Perception Which do we have the most control over? Student Learning SL In which area are we are we least likely to collect data?
Multiple Measures of Data Does a relationship exist between student (or staff) attendance and standardized test scores?
The nature of our work
Data Ownership Your Data vs. My Data / Our Data Increasing data ownership Need to turn data into actionable information Data leads to questions which promotes discussion and data seeking Manipulation of data “by hand” encourages pattern seeking and AHAs not otherwise discernable through canned reports
You can lead a horse to water . . . Sometimes you have to salt the oats How will you create a sense of urgency on your campus to evaluate and improve learning processes?
Predicting STAAR passing using ISIP
L2p1 ISIP cut
Predicting STAAR passing using ISIP Below ISIP Cut Score Above ISIP Cut Score Passed STAAR False Negatives 52 True Positives 1229 Failed STAAR True Negatives 99 False Positives 144 1328 correct classifications / 1524 tests = 87.1% correct What other data sources are available on your campus to indicate the effectiveness of the instructional program?
So, how did we do? As compared to what?
Longitudinal Performance TAAS TAKS STAAR
Longitudinal Performance TAAS TAKS STAAR
Longitudinal Performance Reading / ELA Mathematics TAKS TAKS STAAR STAAR
Comparison Performance
Longitudinal Performance
Longitudinal Performance
STAAR M Performance
ARD Decision Making 100 students / 1700 in grade level = 5.9% cohort
STAAR M Performance
ARD Decision Making
ARD Decision Making
Consider the process and system What processes were used to determine which test was most appropriate for students? What implications does the decision-making process have for Individual students? Your campus? The campus you feed into? The district? Next year?
STAAR A Special online administration of STAAR Similar in many ways to STAAR L and Standardized Oral Administration (SOA) Full suite of accommodations available through online tools for all students who qualify How will we give students opportunities to utilize available online accommodations during instruction?
Phase-in Standards Recommended Phase 2 Phase 1 TBD (2016?) TBD (2015?) 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 (proposed)
Phase-in Standards Level I Level II Level III Satisfactory Advanced P1 Unsatisfactory Academic Performance Level II Satisfactory Academic Performance Level III Advanced Academic Performance P1 P2 75% 85% Inadequately prepared for the next grade level or course Sufficiently prepared for the next grade level or course Well prepared for the next grade level or course
Phase-in Standards As compared to 2014, how many more items will your students need to get correct in order to pass in 2015? How will your instructional system respond to the increased challenge of higher passing standards?
Phase-in Standards
Phase-in Standards
Phase-in Standards
Phase-in Standards
2014 Accountability System Update http://schools.birdvilleschools.net/domain/3979 Part 1 Overview of the Accountability System Index 1 – Student Achievement Index 2 – Student Progress Part 2 Index 3 – Closing Performance Gaps Index 4 – Postsecondary Readiness ELL Inclusion Distinction Designations
2014 Accountability System Distinction Designations Index 1 – Student Achievement Target Index 2 – Student Progress Target Index 3 – Closing Performance Gaps Target Index 4 – Postsecondary Readiness Target Met Standard = Met or exceeded target in all indexes Improvement Required = Did not meet or exceed target in all indexes
Index 1 – Student Achievement 2014 Accountability Subjects Reading, Writing, Math, Science, Social Studies Groups All Students Versions STAAR, L, M, Alt Standard Level II Phase 1 EOCs Reading I and II (Jul & Dec 2013) English I and II (Spring 2014) Algebra I Biology US History Substitute Assessment Level II Final Target 55 ELLs See later slides
Index 2 – Student Progress 2014 Accountability Subjects Reading, Math Groups All Students, Race/Ethnicity, Special Education, ELLs Standard Met progress (1 point) Exceeded progress (2 points) EOCs ELA not evaluated Algebra I (MS only) High schools not evaluated on Index 2 in 2014 Versions STAAR, M, Alt, SpEng, grade skip Target 5th percentile (ES, MS, District)
Index 3 – Closing Performance Gaps 2014 Accountability Subjects Reading, Writing, Math, Science, Social Studies Versions STAAR, M, Alt Groups Economically disadvantaged, Two lowest performing prior-year subgroups Min Size At least 25 reading and 25 math tests Standard Level II Phase 1 (1 point) Level III (2 points) Target 5th percentile (ES, MS, HS, District)
Index 4 – Postsecondary Readiness 2014 Accountability Groups All Students, Race/Ethnicity, Special Education, ELLs Indicators Graduation rate (4 yr or 5 yr) Graduation plan (Percentage RHSP/DAP) STAAR Level II Final Percentage met standard on 2 or more assessments Postsecondary component Percentage met TSI in ELA and math Weighting (District/HS) 25% Graduation rate 25% Graduation plan 25% STAAR Level II Final 25% Postsecondary component (MS / Elem) 100% STAAR Level II Final Substitute Level II Final Targets Elementary: 12 Middle School: 13 High School: 57 District: 57
Inclusion of ELLs in 2014 Yrs US Index 1 Index 2 Index 3 Index 4 1st year Not included 2nd year Spanish Level II Phase 1 English ELL Progress Measure STAAR Progress Measure ELL Progress Meas. Level III Level II Final (if Spanish in any subject) 3rd year 4th year 5+ years Immigrants entering at grade 9+ ELL Progress Measure (yrs 2-4) Asylees, refugees, and students w/ interrupted formal education 1st - 5th year 6th year or more
Distinction Designations 2013 2014 Level Campus District Distinctions Academic Achievement Reading/ELA Mathematics Top 25% Index 2 (Student Progress) Science Social Studies Index 3 (Closing Gaps) Postsecondary Readiness (HS/District) Targets Campuses Top quartile of 40-campus comparison group District (Postsecondary readiness only) At least 70% of campus indicators in top quartile for postsecondary readiness
Accountability stuff you have State Target = 55 Federal Target = 79
Accountability stuff you have
District Accountability Estimates Target Score Index 1 – Student Achievement 55 80 +25 Index 2 – Student Progress 5th %ile 41 ? Index 3 – Closing Performance Gaps 5th %ile 41 ? Index 4 – Postsecondary Readiness 57 60 +3? 25% Graduation rate 25% Graduation plan 25% STAAR Level II Final 25% Postsecondary component (TSI)
Desired Outcomes Classify educational data to develop a four-dimensional view of campus performance Visualize district data through various perspectives to spark discussion about campus-level opportunities for improvement Recognize the potential impact of increasing STAAR performance standards Understand the basic attributes of the 2014 accountability system
Final thoughts and considerations We are seeing the positive impact of the difficult work we are doing To meet the upcoming challenges of the assessment and accountability systems we must continue to improve our practice to ensure that all students are well prepared to succeed at the next level