DDI and Assessments in Mathematics: Analyzing and Tracking Data At the K-5 Level May 15, 2014.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
In the Era of the Common Core Standards Network Meeting, January 11, 2012 Silicon Valley Mathematics Initiative Assessment for Learning.
Advertisements

Continuous Improvement in the Classroom
Office of Curriculum, Instruction and School Support 2012 Mathematical Practice 3: Construct Viable Arguments and Critique the Reasoning of Others Mathematics.
© 2012 Common Core, Inc. All rights reserved. commoncore.org NYS COMMON CORE MATHEMATICS CURRICULUM A Story of Units Taking a Look at Rigor.
DDI and Assessments in Mathematics: Analyzing and Tracking Data at the 6-12 Level May 13, 2014.
DDI Session II: Analyzing and Tracking Data May 2014 David Abel, Fellow for Curriculum and Assessment/ELA EngageNY.org.
DDI and Assessments in Mathematics: Designing Assessments that Provide Meaningful Data At the 6-12 Level February 4, 2014.
DDI and Assessments in Math Part III: from Data to Action October 9, 2014.
© 2012 Common Core, Inc. All rights reserved. commoncore.org NYS COMMON CORE MATHEMATICS CURRICULUM A Story of Units Application and Concept Development.
Common Core State Standards in Mathematics: ECE-5
Common Core-Aligned DDI Primer in Math: Designing and Leading DDI Using Assessment Guidance Documents July 9, 2014.
ADAPTED FROM A WORKSHOP PREPARED FOR THE RHODE ISLAND DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION BY KRISTINA SPARFVEN The Rigors of Ratio and Proportional Reasoning in the.
Common Core Summer Institute Fourth Grade July 31-August 2, 2012.
Grade 4 – Module 5 Module Focus Session
PARCC Assessment Math Shifts Becky Justus Math Teacher Greene County Tech Junior High PARCC Educator Leader Cadre Member.
Huron CCSS Literacy Workshop November Where Are We Headed Today? Transition to Common Core Curriculum Alignments Webb Levels revisited Text-Based.
LEARNING RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER © 2012 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning Tennessee Department of.
Math Foundational Services SHIFT 1: Focus October 9, 2014 Cindy Dollman & Joe Delinski The PROE Center.
Grade 3-8 PARCC Math: Let’s Get Ready ! PARCC Math Readiness and Action Planning January 16, 2015 Sponsors:
Big Picture View Dr. Marie Alcock Integrating the Common Core Standards into Your Local School Curriculum Lsalearning.com/workshops.
Dates:Tuesdays, Jan 7 – Feb 11
Nicora Placa January 15, 2014 Helpful Elementary Homework Resources for Parents.
Evaluating Student Growth Looking at student works samples to evaluate for both CCSS- Math Content and Standards for Mathematical Practice.
2 nd Mathematics Meeting Wednesday, November 16 Agenda.
© 2013 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Selecting and Sequencing Students’ Solution Paths to Maximize Student Learning Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching.
Elementary Math: Principals Professional Development Fall 2011.
DDI and Assessments in ELA Part III from Data to Action October 2014 David Abel, Fellow for Curriculum and Assessment/ELA EngageNY.org.
Elizabeth Jean Bingham Central Elementary
 Participants will teach Mathematics II or are responsible for the delivery of Mathematics II instruction  Participants attended Days 1, 2, and 3 of.
Level 2 Training Session 3B: Rigor Instructional Shifts: Focusing on Rigor.
School Year Session 10: February 19, 2014 Geometry? Algebra? We Couldn’t Decide. What the Heck, We’ll do Both! 1.1.
Advances in the PARCC Mathematics Summative Assessment November
Elementary Math: 2 nd Grade Professional Development January 2012.
Mathematics Teachers High School October 11, 2013.
Sunnyside School District
01.1 WELCOME TO COMMON CORE HIGH SCHOOL MATHEMATICS LEADERSHIP SCHOOL YEAR SESSION 1 16 SEPTEMBER 2015 EMBARKING ON A LEADERSHIP JOURNEY.
Advances in the PARCC Mathematics Summative Assessment August
GOMATH! Day 2 Network 609 Core Curriculum Planning June 2013 Presenter: Karen Cardinali.
Leadership for the Common Core in Mathematics, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Disclaimer Leadership for the Common Core in Mathematics (CCLM^2)
CFN Paul Perskin. Warm Up CIE2012 State Math AssessmentsThe Structure is the StandardsShift 2 – CoherenceErin’s ProblemsBreakLearning.
Module 1: A Closer Look at the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics High School Session 3: Exploring Standard Progressions across High School Courses.
Making Algebraic Connections Math Science Partnership Grant Funded by the United States Department of Education through the Kentucky Department of Education.
Elementary Math: Grade 5 Professional Development Fall 2011.
+ Operations and Algebraic Thinking Success Implementing CCSS for K-2 Math Day 2.
Grades 3-5 Fractions Pre K – 5 Mathematics Educators Summit PSESD October 25, 2014.
SCS -TNCore Rollout 2013 Study Group # 1. Common Core State Standards Module 1: An Introduction: Making Sense of Tasks Setup and Implementation.
© 2012 Common Core, Inc. All rights reserved. commoncore.org NYS COMMON CORE MATHEMATICS CURRICULUM A Story of Units Student Debrief in Practice.
LEARNING RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER © 2012 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning Using Assessing and Advancing.
Instructional Rounds Toby Boss ESU 6. Agenda Develop Common Understanding of Rounds Focus on Details – What do we do to prepare? – What do we do during.
Supporting Rigorous Mathematics Teaching and Learning Tennessee Department of Education High School Mathematics Algebra 2 Illuminating Student Thinking:
Using SVMI & SDCOE Resources to Support Transition to the Common Core State Standards in Mathematics.
“Charting the Course Together” Implementing the Common Core State Standards -Mathematics- Indiana Room Math Leadership Teams December 8, 2014.
13.1 WELCOME TO COMMON CORE HIGH SCHOOL MATHEMATICS LEADERSHIP SCHOOL YEAR SESSION APR 2015 MARGINS: GREAT FOR ERRORS, NOT SO GOOD FOR.
#1 Make sense of problems and persevere in solving them How would you describe the problem in your own words? How would you describe what you are trying.
For Elementary Schools.  The structure of the new assessment  How does it inform instruction?  What the data tells us  Where are we now?  How do.
Parent Night Understanding the Common Core. K-8  Former 1989 Standards were “a mile wide and an inch deep.”  Common Core standards were developed from.
New Hope-Solebury School District. Develop a shared understanding of the concept of cognitive rigor Begin the conversation about Webbs’ Depth of Knowledge.
3 rd, 4 th and 5 th Grade. Agenda Preparation looks like… General Information for Exams Overview of ELA Exam Overview of Math Exam Ways to Help At Home.
May 8, Let’s Do Some Math 6 cats catch 6 rats in 6 minutes. How many cats will it take to catch 100 rats in 50 minutes?
Data Driven Instruction It’s not….. What did the Teacher Teach? It’s ………. What did the Student Learn? Prepared by Robin Hecht.
TRANSITIONING TO NGSS: FROM CONCLUSION WRITING TO ARGUING FROM EVIDENCE Day 3 Craig Gabler Regional Science Coordinator ESD 113.
Transitioning to the Common Core for Mathematics February 24 th, 2012.
Grade 4: Alignment to Mathematics Grade-Level Standards.
Math and the SBAC Claims
Shift Happens Or does it? Leadership Summit Thursday, November 10
Presented by: Rebecca Young, CRT December 2017
Fractions A Vertical Look 3-8.
Reading Closely For Textual Details
K–8 Session 1: Exploring the Critical Areas
Elementary Mathematics
Presentation transcript:

DDI and Assessments in Mathematics: Analyzing and Tracking Data At the K-5 Level May 15, 2014

Session Objectives Be able to describe what to look for when analyzing student work for a Common Core- aligned assessment Be able to create a data tracker for assessments Develop questions that drive data-analysis meetings around Common Core-aligned assessment data

Agenda Introduction Warm Up: Review of Assessment Design Looking at Student Work – Examples – Time with work you brought Tracking Student Work Leading a Data Meeting with Questions Q & A

Introduction Part I: Assessment (February) Part II: Analysis* (May) Part III: Action (July)

*Analysis is hard. We don’t want to “granularize” content… …but we have to do something to look “under the hood” We want our students engaged in rich tasks… …but we want to dig into the work associated with the tasks to learn specifics about what our students know and can do We don’t want to put rigor in silos or to create a “checklist” for rigor… …but we want usable information about how are kids are doing with respect to the demands of the Common Core

Warm Up: Review of Assessment Design 1. What makes this assessment Common Core-aligned? 2. Critique this. How could it be improved?

Review: What Two Things Make a Great Common Core Assessment? 1. Balance of rigor 2. Variety of levels

Think Aloud… I knew some of my students were functioning below grade level, so I used the NF domain heading to locate similar understandings at the 3 rd grade level. This drove instruction for my unit and allowed for more differentiation. I tried to vary performance level using PLDs by mixing identifying equivalent fractions and generating equivalent fractions. I tried to include a variety of prompts/question types that would offer a balance of rigor. This drove instruction for my unit and ensured a balance of rigor throughout the unit.

Examine Sample Assessment First Focus Question: “Imagine looking at some student work associated with this assessment. What kinds of errors do you think you’d see? What would these errors reveal about students?”

Looking At Student Work Second Focus Question: “Look at the work from Caitlin and Truman. What kinds of errors do you see? What do these errors reveal about students?”

This Evening’s Two Big Ideas: Analyze student work based on: 1. The grade level standard(s) being measured 2. The type of error, viewed through a rigor* lens

*Rigor Means Different Things to Different People Procedural Conceptual Application

Caitlin

Truman

Summary Notice: 1. The grade level standard(s) being measured 2. The type of error, viewed through a rigor* lens

Activity Spend some time with student work that you brought. – What standards are being measured? – What types of errors are being made?

How Do We Track Data?

Tracking The Class

Each Item, Through Multiple Lenses

Useful Disaggregation

Possible Modifications Break down data to show strategies employed (e.g., table, equation, picture) Break down P, C, A further (e.g., “P – Division of fractions”) Include other “lenses” (e.g., vocabulary, writing) Also tag items at performance levels, using PLDs Tag items to more than one standard

Using Questions to Lead Data Meetings “Bambrick Model”—Based on Paul Bambrick- Santoyo’s Driven By Data We’ll look at: “Pre-Cursors” (what happens before a data meeting) “Conversation Starters and Re-Directors” (what happens during a data meeting) $64,000 Question: How might these look different using a Common Core-aligned assessment?

“Pre-Cursors”

How would we prepare differently for a Common Core assessment meeting? – What different activities would we ask teachers to do? – What different questions would we pose?

“Conversation Starters & Re-Directors”

What would be different during a Common Core assessment meeting? – What different activities would we ask teachers to do? – What different questions would we pose?

This Evening’s Two Big Ideas, Revisited: Analyze student work based on 1. The grade level standard(s) being measured 2. The type of error, viewed through a rigor lens

Session Objectives Be able to describe what to look for when analyzing student work for a Common Core- aligned assessment Be able to create a data tracker for assessments Develop questions that drive data-analysis meetings around Common Core-aligned assessment data

Thanks! Q & A