1 Q2: How are we doing? Cohort A (C) 2006 by the Oregon Reading First Center Center on Teaching and Learning

2 Reviewing Outcomes  What percent of students are reaching benchmark goals in each grade level?  What percent of students have a deficit in benchmark skill areas for each grade level?  Is there an increase in the percentage of students reaching targets in the spring from year to year?  Is there a decrease in the percentage of students with a deficit in the spring from year to year?

3 What reports can we use to answer these questions?

4 First Grade Example

5

6 How are K-3 students performing at the end of the year on essential components of beginning reading instruction? Table 1 Taking Stock: Reviewing Outcomes for K-3 Students Spring 2006 and Comparing to Spring 2005 Outcomes Grade/ Measure Percent at Established (Low Risk) Spring 2005 Percent at Established (Low Risk) Spring 2006 Percentage Point Increase/ Decrease (+ or -) Percent at Deficit (At Risk) Spring 2005 Percent at Deficit Spring 2006 Percentage Point Increase/ Decrease (+ or -) K - PSF K - NWF 1-ORF 2-ORF 3-ORF

7 First Grade Example

8 How are K-3 students performing at the end of the year on essential components of beginning reading instruction? Table 1 Taking Stock: Reviewing Outcomes for K-3 Students Spring 2006 and Comparing to Spring 2005 Outcomes Grade/ Measure Percent at Established (Low Risk) Spring 2005 Percent at Established (Low Risk) Spring 2006 Percentage Point Increase/ Decrease (+ or -) Percent at Deficit (At Risk) Spring 2005 Percent at Deficit Spring 2006 Percentage Point Increase/ Decrease (+ or -) K - PSF K - NWF 1-ORF 251/402 62% 69/402 17% 2-ORF 3-ORF

9 Activity 1 Materials Needed breakout forms green and pink highlighters school histograms: Spring 2005 and 2006 cross year box plots Oregon Reading First project-wide data Directions Break into grade level teams and complete items A-D. A.Using the grade level Spring histograms, complete Table 1 B.Using a highlighter, identify areas with positive trends (e.g., intensive students decrease by 10%, benchmark students increase by 10%) in green and areas with negative trends in pink. C.Discuss end-of-year (Spring 2006) K-3 performance on the essential components of beginning reading instruction using the information from Table 1. Discuss year to year trends. D.Use cross year box plots to further analyze cross year trends.

10 Activity 1 (continued) E. Compare school outcomes to project-wide outcomes. How does our school compare?

11 Insert project-wide data- histograms here: K-PSF K-NWF 1-ORF 2-ORF 3-ORF

12 Evaluating Support  How effective were the grade-level Winter to Spring Instructional Support Plans (CSI Maps)?

13 What report can we use to answer this question?

14 Summary of Effectiveness Report

15 At Risk IntensiveStrategicBenchmark Time 1: ( e.g., Winter) Time 2: (e.g., Spring) 1. Some Risk 2. Low Risk At Risk Some Risk 3. Low Risk At Risk Some Risk 4. Low Risk DIBELS Summary of Effectiveness Reports 4 Ways to Achieve Adequate Progress

16 Evaluating Support: Winter to Spring 2006  What was the total percent of students that made adequate progress?  What percent of intensive students made adequate progress  What percent of strategic students made adequate progress?  What percent of benchmark students made adequate progress?

17 How effective were the grade-level, Winter to Spring Instructional Support Plans (CSI Maps) Table 2 Evaluating Winter to Spring 2006 Grade Level Instructional Support Plans: Percent of Students Making Adequate Progress Towards DIBIELS Benchmark Goals Grade/ Benchmark Goal Measures Total percent of students in K that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g., 90/100 or 90% Percent of Intensive Students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students e.g., 1/5 or 20% Percent of Strategic students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g., 25/50 or 50% Percent of Benchmark students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g.95/100 Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) K - PSF

18 What was the total percent of students that made adequate progress?

19 How effective were the grade-level, Winter to Spring Instructional Support Plans (CSI Maps) Table 2 Evaluating Winter to Spring 2006 Grade Level Instructional Support Plans: Percent of Students Making Adequate Progress Towards DIBIELS Benchmark Goals Grade/ Benchmark Goal Measures Total percent of students in K that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g., 90/100 or 90% Percent of Intensive Students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students e.g., 1/5 or 20% Percent of Strategic students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g., 25/50 or 50% Percent of Benchmark students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g.95/100 Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) K - PSF 71/82 87%

20 Evaluating Support: Winter to Spring 2006  What was the total percent of students that made adequate progress?  What percent of intensive students made adequate progress  What percent of strategic students made adequate progress?  What percent of benchmark students made adequate progress?

21 How effective were the grade-level, Winter to Spring Instructional Support Plans (CSI Maps) Table 2 Evaluating Winter to Spring 2006 Grade Level Instructional Support Plans: Percent of Students Making Adequate Progress Towards DIBIELS Benchmark Goals Grade/ Benchmark Goal Measures Total percent of students in K that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g., 90/100 or 90% Percent of Intensive Students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students e.g., 1/5 or 20% Percent of Strategic students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g., 25/50 or 50% Percent of Benchmark students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g.95/100 Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Percen t Chang e (+ or -) Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) K - PSF

22 What percent of intensive students made adequate progress?

23 How effective were the grade-level, Winter to Spring Instructional Support Plans (CSI Maps) Table 2 Evaluating Winter to Spring 2006 Grade Level Instructional Support Plans: Percent of Students Making Adequate Progress Towards DIBIELS Benchmark Goals Grade/ Benchmark Goal Measures Total percent of students in K that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g., 90/100 or 90% Percent of Intensive Students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students e.g., 1/5 or 20% Percent of Strategic students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g., 25/50 or 50% Percent of Benchmark students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g.95/100 Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Perce nt Chan ge (+ or -) Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) K - PSF 6/7 86%

24 Evaluating Support: Winter to Spring 2006  What was the total percent of students that made adequate progress?  What percent of intensive students made adequate progress  What percent of strategic students made adequate progress?  What percent of benchmark students made adequate progress?

25 How effective were the grade-level, Winter to Spring Instructional Support Plans (CSI Maps) Table 2 Evaluating Winter to Spring 2006 Grade Level Instructional Support Plans: Percent of Students Making Adequate Progress Towards DIBIELS Benchmark Goals Grade/ Benchmark Goal Measures Total percent of students in K that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g., 90/100 or 90% Percent of Intensive Students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students e.g., 1/5 or 20% Percent of Strategic students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g., 25/50 or 50% Percent of Benchmark students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g.95/100 Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Percen t Chang e (+ or -) Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) K-PSF

26 What percent of strategic students made adequate progress?

27 How effective were the grade-level, Winter to Spring Instructional Support Plans (CSI Maps) Table 2 Evaluating Winter to Spring 2006 Grade Level Instructional Support Plans: Percent of Students Making Adequate Progress Towards DIBIELS Benchmark Goals Grade/ Benchmark Goal Measures Total percent of students in K that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g., 90/100 or 90% Percent of Intensive Students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students e.g., 1/5 or 20% Percent of Strategic students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g., 25/50 or 50% Percent of Benchmark students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g.95/100 Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Percen t Chang e (+ or -) Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) K-PSF 27/34 79%

28 Evaluating Support: Winter to Spring 2006  What was the total percent of students that made adequate progress?  What percent of intensive students made adequate progress  What percent of strategic students made adequate progress?  What percent of benchmark students made adequate progress?

29 How effective were the grade-level, Winter to Spring Instructional Support Plans (CSI Maps) Table 2 Evaluating Winter to Spring 2006 Grade Level Instructional Support Plans: Percent of Students Making Adequate Progress Towards DIBIELS Benchmark Goals Grade/ Benchmark Goal Measures Total percent of students in K that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g., 90/100 or 90% Percent of Intensive Students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students e.g., 1/5 or 20% Percent of Strategic students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g., 25/50 or 50% Percent of Benchmark students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g.95/100 Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Perce nt Chang e (+ or -) Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) K-PSF

30 What percent of benchmark students made adequate progress?

31 How effective were the grade-level, Winter to Spring Instructional Support Plans (CSI Maps) Table 2 Evaluating Winter to Spring 2006 Grade Level Instructional Support Plans: Percent of Students Making Adequate Progress Towards DIBIELS Benchmark Goals Grade/ Benchmar k Goal Measures Total percent of students in K that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g., 90/100 or 90% Percent of Intensive Students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students e.g., 1/5 or 20% Percent of Strategic students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g., 25/50 or 50% Percent of Benchmark students that made Adequate Progress Include actual numbers of students, e.g.95/100 Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Perce nt Chang e Winter to Spring 2005 Winter to Spring 2006 Percent Change (+ or -) K-PSF 38/41 93%

32 Activity 2 Materials Needed breakout forms green and pink highlighters Summary of Effectiveness Reports: Winter to Spring (05 and 06) Oregon Reading First Project-Wide Outcomes Directions Break into grade level teams and complete items A-C. A.Using the grade-level Summary of Effectiveness Reports, complete Table 2. B.Using a highlighter, identify areas with a positive increase in green and areas with negative or no increase in pink. C.For each grade, discuss the total percent of students making adequate progress towards the spring benchmark goals. Discuss what the data indicate for benchmark, strategic, and intensive students. Be sure to discuss trends across years.

33 Activity 2 (continued) D.Compare your school’s percent of students making adequate progress to Oregon Reading First’s project-wide data.

34 Insert Project-Wide Summary of Effectiveness Reports K123K123