Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Watertown Public Schools Assessment Report 2009 Ann Koufman-Frederick & WPS Administrative Council School Committee Meeting December 7, 2009 Part I MCAS,

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Watertown Public Schools Assessment Report 2009 Ann Koufman-Frederick & WPS Administrative Council School Committee Meeting December 7, 2009 Part I MCAS,"— Presentation transcript:

1 Watertown Public Schools Assessment Report 2009 Ann Koufman-Frederick & WPS Administrative Council School Committee Meeting December 7, 2009 Part I MCAS, AYP, AMAO, SAT Part II ACT, AP, and Secondary curriculum assessments Part III MCAS Growth, MAP, and Elementary curriculum assessments

2 MCAS (Mass Comprehensive Assessment System) & AYP AMAO (Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives) SAT (Scholastic Aptitude Test) AP (Advanced Placement) ACT (American College Testing) MAP (Measures of Academic Progress) MCAS Growth Curriculum common assessments Assessment Inventory

3 MCAS Growth Model and Data

4 What is New? New metric to measure growth in student performance on MCAS (using same test and same data) Performance = achievement + growth

5 What is New? Student Growth Percentile (SGP) describes the change in an individual student’s performance over time relative to other students with similar test score history District and School growth data is public now Individual student data will be available for 2010

6 Why measure growth with MCAS? Expand the notion of performance to include both absolute achievement and growth Improve the validity of the decisions made using MCAS results Required for the National “Race to the Top” funding because a main focus is on data-driven instruction to improve student performance













19 Quicktake There are noticeable differences among schools and among special populations. On average Watertown performs close to the State averages on proficiency and growth data.

20 Next Steps Regarding Growth Data Analyze growth data to understand the differences in performance among schools and special populations. Understand how to use growth data to inform instruction. Understand how to use the growth data to inform curriculum and program planning.

21 MAP Measures of Academic Progress

22 Highlights of MAP Assessment (1) Nationally Normed Subjective vs Objective Provides Reading level in Lexiles o more universal Aligned with MA Standards

23 Highlights of MAP Assessment (2) Impact on instruction o Provide data for differentiated instruction o Inform Tier 1 Core Curriculum Design o Identify students for Tier 2 interventions On-going progress monitoring o 3x per year Support placement & program design o Student growth data o Projective data Quick turn around o Assessment result available the next day

24 Impact on Instruction Data for Differentiated Instruction

25 Impact on Instruction Inform Tier 1 Design

26 DesCartes

27 Identify Tier 2 Students

28 Identifying Tier 3 Students

29 Historical & Projected Student Growth

30 Elementary MAP Planning School YearReadingMathematics 2008-2009 Kindergarten Grade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3 WHS pilot WHS pilot 2009-2010 Kindergarten Grade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 WMS Grade 8 Grade 3 Grade 4 WMS Grade 8 WHS pilot expanded 2010-2011 Kindergarten Grade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 WMS TBD WHS TBD Elementary TBD WMS TBD WHS TBD

31 Classroom Teacher... “As a classroom teacher I see great benefits to the MAP data. It truly targets the needs of the students, in regard to where they are showing potential weakness as well as showing what they already may know. As a teacher, I then can specifically target and differentiate my instruction to best suit the children, especially those with great need. I also find it very worthwhile to see the improvement through the year. It validates my efforts. However, in no way do I only use MAP data to guide my teaching. It is one tool; a very worthwhile one at that. I use everything I know about a child to find what best suits them and their need or strength and to teach and enrich their learning…

32 Classroom Teacher (continued)...... I also feel that having the children assessed in this manner lends me the opportunity to have more focused teaching time within my day, especially at the beginning of the school year. Prior to using MAP, I would spend hours of 1-1 assessment attempting to gather the data that MAP gives me. This is now accomplished in a few blocks of time in the computer lab. I still do some 1-1 pre/post assessment to gather data on children, especially if I find that there is a discrepancy with what MAP results may state and what the child is doing/performing in the classroom. However, overall I spend much less time out of my day(s) doing this and much more time actively engaged with the children.”

33 Guidance Counselor "The use of MAP is the tipping point of moving us away from subjective single-source evaluation of student learning, to using multiple data points for gauging children's progress. It forces us to think about instruction more carefully and better understand the purpose of interventions. Hopefully, we will do a better job differentiating students who need more opportunities to learn from those who have true learning barriers which require specialized instruction."

34 Special Educator “Using MAP data with teacher input, we were able to focus our groups and instruction for the intervention and challenge periods (grades K, 1). We also used the MAP subtests to monitor our instruction. At the end of the year using the MAP data, we were able to narrow down those students who were still at risk after much tier 2 intervention.”

35 MAP Compared to MCAS MAP Online and adaptive Scores available right away Individual growth data Target scores identified Scores aligned to concepts and skills District and School growth data for program planning and accountability Assessment windows defined by District Formative – benchmark Untimed 45-60 minutes per full assessment 15 minutes per survey assessment MCAS Paper and pencil Scores available the next school year Individual growth data Proficiency levels for school and district accountability District and School growth data for accountability Assessment dates set by State (much of May) Untimed

36 Elementary Curriculum Common Assessments

37 Think Math Common Assessments

38 Fall Semester: Chapter Assessments 1-5 MAP Math Survey with Goals Benchmark Assessment 1 Winter Semester: Chapter Assessments 6-10 Benchmark Assessment 2 Spring Semester: Chapter Assessments 11-15 Benchmark 3 May: MCAS MAP Math Survey with Goals End of the Year Assessment Grade Four Math Pacing Guide

39 FASTT Math Common Assessments Grade LevelLevel of Assessment 2Addition 0-12 3Subtraction 0-12 or Multiplication 0-12 Exit Criteria: Complete Division 0-12 4Multiplication 0-12 Implementation based on assessment Exit Criteria: Completion Division 0-12 5Division 0-12 Implementation based on assessments.

40 Reading Common Assessments Kindergarten – Third grade Tier 1: All students, 3 times a year Measures of Academic Progress Reading High Frequency Word List Spelling Inventory Fluency Assessment Tier 2: Any student not at grade level DRA2 Reading Assessment (Individual) MAP skills checklists Fundations Pre Assessment (grades 1,2)

41 Writing Common Assessments

Download ppt "Watertown Public Schools Assessment Report 2009 Ann Koufman-Frederick & WPS Administrative Council School Committee Meeting December 7, 2009 Part I MCAS,"

Similar presentations

Ads by Google