Wendy Zdeb MASSP

Associate Director [email protected]

During today’s session we will:

◦ Review basic fundaments of the Explore, Plan and ACT and MME assessments.

◦ Look at the connection between District and School Improvement Goals.

◦ Identify how Explore and Plan results can help to focus SIP and Student Growth Goals.

◦ Discuss ways to include all school stakeholders in the SIP process.

 Take responsibility for your own learning – stay with us  Support the learning of your colleagues – make sure they stay with us  If you need to take a call or have a side conversation, please step into the hall  If you have a question, ask.

 All kids can learn?

 All kids are learning at their highest possible level?

 All educators can learn?

 All educators are learning at their highest possible level?

 Data can target instructional needs?

 Educators target instructional needs using data?

 We will need the help of colleagues to meet the needs of all kids?

Michigan Merit Exam

 ◦

ACT – College Readiness

English (18), Reading (21), Science (24), Math (22)  ◦

Work Keys – Career

Applied Math, Reading for Info, Locating Information  ◦

Michigan Items – Alignment

Social Studies, Science, Math, Writing

Conflicting Viewpoints 17% Research Summaries 45% Data Representation 38%

Hand out green sheets

Humanities 25% Prose Fiction 25% Social Studies 25% Natural Science 25%

Humanities – architecture, art, dance, ethics, film, language, literary criticism, music, philosophy, radio, television, and theater. Social Studies -anthropology, archaeology, biography, business, economics, education, geography, history, political science, psychology, and sociology Natural Sciences - anatomy, astronomy, biology, botany, chemistry, ecology, geology, medicine, meteorology, microbiology, natural history, physiology, physics, technology, and zoology.

Prose Fiction - short stories or excerpts from short stories or novels.

Plane Geometry 23% Trigonometry 7% Pre-Algebra 23% Coordinate Geometry 15% Elementary Algebra 17% Intermediate Algebra 15%

Hand out purple sheet

Rhetorical Skills- Style 16% Rhetorical Skills- Organization 15% Rhetorical Skills- Strategy 16% Usage and Mechanics- Punctuation 13% Usage and Mechanics- Grammar and Usage 16% Usage and Mechanics- Sentence Structure 24%

EXPLORE PLAN ACT

1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36

ACT College-Readiness Benchmarks

ACT Readiness Benchmarks for Credit-Earning College Courses College EXPLORE (8 th /9 th ) Credit-Earning College Readiness Course Benchmarks 8th 9th

English Comp.

Algebra Social Science Biology English Math Reading Science

13 17 15 20 14 18 16 20 PLAN (10 th ) College Readiness Benchmarks

English Math Reading Science

15 19 17 21 ACT (11 th /12 th ) College Readiness Benchmarks

English Math Reading Science

18 22 21 24 Are these students “on track”?

75 % chance “C” or better 50% chance of “B” or better

Alignment with Common Core … not a moving target!

  Important for everyone to be on the same page. ◦ Belief in a Pre K-12 system ◦ Knowledge of Common Core and College Readiness ◦ Shared vocabulary and expectations Building on each other’s goals, sharing information and developing commonalities

 All graduates of the Rochester Community Schools will be College Ready, Career Ready and Life Ready in English Language Arts.

 All graduates of the Rochester Community Schools will be College Ready, Career Ready and Life Ready in Mathematics.

 All graduates of the Rochester Community Schools will be College Ready, Career Ready and Life Ready in Science.

Our School Improvement Goals:  All students will meet the college readiness benchmark in Reading.

 All students will meet the college readiness benchmark in Math.

 All students will meet the college readiness benchmark in Science.

 District Initiative: Pyramid of Intervention training for Staff.

 District Interventions for students: Mandatory Summer programs, Universal Screening.

 Building Interventions for students: Academic Center, Blended Service Model, Math Lab, Reading Lab, Study Island, R&R, Homework Lunch, Academic Draft.



Scholars of Highest Distinction

 GPA 3.9 - 4.0

  4 AP Courses ACT Score of 32 or higher  

Scholars of Distinction

 GPA 3.8

 3 AP Courses ACT Score of 28 or higher  

Scholars of Achievement

 GPA 3.5

 2 AP Courses ACT Score of 26 or higher

      7 th 8 th 9 th 10 th Explore (1-25) Explore (1-25) Plan (1-32) Plan (1-32) 11 th ACT/MME (1-36) Allows for one year’s measurement of growth and time for inventions.

- We conduct these on Feb.10

th

(late start)

   The 1-25 score measured by the Explore are all standards covered in Elementary and Middle School.

Our District is shifting curriculum alignment to the ACT College Readiness Standards (rather than the MEAP).

Elementary and MS have been in-serviced on the Standards and the State is moving to the National Core Standards which are ACT based.

 The ACT Math standards were broken down by GLCEs and HSCEs (Bill Aten). On the next slide, the yellow highlighted standards are actually GLCEs which are found in the Math portion of the ACT.

Data Points

First: Spring 2009 11 th grade results

What percent of students with each ACT scale score met standards on the MME?

Math

100

ACT Mathematics with MME Mathematics

93 98 99 99 99 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 90 84 80 73 70 60 50 40 30 To read the graph: 52% of the 1248 students with ACT Math scores of 18 were proficient on the MME Math assessment.

25 20 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 52

ACT Scale Score (Number of Students)

41% of the items on MME Math come from the ACT.

What percent of students with each ACT scale score met standards on the MME?

Reading

100 90 80 70 60

ACT Reading with MME Reading

94 98 99 99 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 88 50 40 30 To read the graph: 41% of the 638 students with ACT Reading scores of 16 were proficient on the MME Reading assessment.

24 20 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 9 41 63 77

ACT Scale Score (Number of Students)

85% of the items on MME Reading come from the ACT.

But students take the ACT & MME at the same time… 2007-08 10 th grade PLAN with 2008-09 11 th grade MME 35

What percent of students with each

PLAN

scale score met standards on the MME?

Math 2009 MME % Proficient for Each 2008 PLAN Scale Score

100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 5 7 3 3 3 4 10 21 38 61 81 Math 93 96 97 99 98 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 90

PLAN Scale Score (Number of Students)

What percent of students with each

PLAN

scale score met standards on the MME?

Reading 2009 MME % Proficient for Each 2008 PLAN Scale Score

Reading 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 32 22 18 19 28 27 35 10 0 42 54 68 74 81 87 93 95 96 99 99 99 100 100 99 100

PLAN Scale Score (Number of Students)

2005-06 8 th grade EXPLORE with 2008-09 11 th grade MME

What percent of students with each

EXPLORE

scale score met standards on the MME?

2005-06 8th Grade EXPLORE with 2008-09 11th Grade MME Math

Math 98 98 99 100 99 100 100 94 90 86 80 70 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 8 11 0 0 10 4 8 3 11 14 16 27 46 Note: Only score points with 10 or more students are displayed.

05-06 8th grade EXPLORE Scale Score (Number of Students)

The score where the odds become favorable is highlighted.

What percent of students with each

EXPLORE

scale score met standards on the MME?

2005-06 8th Grade EXPLORE with 2008-09 11th Grade MME Reading

Reading 100 99 100 97 97 98 99 99 95 91 90 90 83 80 69 70 57 60 50 42 40 30 30 25 17 20 10 10 16 0

05-06 8th grade EXPLORE Scale Score (Number of Students)

Elementary and Middle Schools have celebrated incredibly high success rates on the MEAP… ◦ What happens when those “successful” students take the Explore, Plan and ACT?

 Let’s track on student scores from the MEAP to the MME. ◦ Are the students labeled as “proficient” on the MEAP meeting the ACT College Readiness Standards?

◦

It’s all about the cut score!

Based on more than 11,350 Oakland County students who took both tests.

What percent of students in each MEAP scale score range met standards on the MME?

Percent Proficient on Spring 2010 MME by 8th Grade Fall 06 MEAP Range

Mathematics 98 100 100 100 100 100 100 89 90 80 70 67 60 50 40 37 30 20 14 10 6 3 4 0 0 0 <750 (1) 750-759 (1) 760-769 (38) 770-779 (164) 780-789 (623) 790-799 (1250) 800-809 (2184) 810-819 (2086) 820-829 (1734) 830-839 (1405) 840-849 (854) 850-859 (467) 860-869 (211) 870-879 (149)

8th Grade MEAP Scale Score Range (Count)

880+ (173)

What percent of students in each MEAP scale score range met standards on the MME?

Percent Proficient on Spring 2010 MME by 8th Grade Fall 06 MEAP Range

Reading 98 99 100 100 95 90 90 79 80 70 64 60 50 40 45 28 30 20 10 9 11 8 14 19 0 <750 (22) 750-759 (63) 760-769 (126) 770-779 (297) 780-789 (408) 790-799 (577) 800-809 (927) 810-819 (1442) 820-829 (1357) 830-839 (1761)

8th Grade MEAP Scale Score Range (Count)

840-849 (2143) 850-859 (1026) 870-879 (762) 880+ (443)

Grade

11 8 7 6 5 4 3

Partially Proficient

1093 809 714 614 516 423 322

Proficient

1116 830 731 629 531 434 336

Advanced

1138 865 776 675 584 470 371

Grade

11 8 7 6 5 4 3

Partially Proficient

1081 796 698 602 501 395 301

Proficient

1108 818 721 619 521 419 324

Advanced

1141 853 760 653 565 478 364

Grade

11 8 5

Partially Proficient

1106 826 526

Proficient

1126 845 553

Advanced

1144 863 567

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

7,7% 9,7% 30,9% 51,7%

5

4,1% 10,2% 26,6% 59,1%

8

Grade 8,7% 17,3% 27,4% 46,6%

11 Advanced Proficient Partially Proficient Not Proficient

Grade

11 9 6

Partially Proficient

1097 899 593

Proficient

1129 928 625

Advanced

1158 960 649



If you know that Explore and Plan can provide an “early warning” to help remediate students and curriculum…what are you going to do about it?

Class of 2012 Linkage

(Current 11 th )

English Math Reading Science Composite 2008-09 EXPLORE AVERAGES (9 th Grade) 16.9 (14) 18.0 (18) 16.7 (16) 18.5 (20) 17.6

2009-10 PLAN AVERAGES (10 th Grade) 18.9 (15) 20.6 (19) 19.1 (17) 20.5 (21) 19.9

RHS 2010-11 ACT AVERAGES (11 th Grade) 21.6

(18) 22.3

(22) 21.8

(21) 22.1

(24) 22.1

    Our teachers and a rigorous curriculum. There is no substitute for quality instruction in the classroom.

We are using our data for over all school improvement and to assist individual students.

◦ Revisiting our curriculum/instruction ◦ Targeted ACT prep activities and remediation Interventions Stakeholder Involvement

Our results are available for March professional development.

Teacher Leaders and SIP Chairs are given data packets to review and prepare for PD in advance.

Explain to a neighbor the information on the Item-Response Summary Report

1.

What content of items or standards do you believe your data will show as strengths? 2.

What content of items or standards will be challenges?

3.

What misconceptions will come to light?

Types of math, which reading passage, science graphs, elements of grammar

     Teacher groups conduct item response analysis Create a T-Chart with actual test items Complete the content standard review chart Discuss instructional strategies What strategies can we use in our School Improvement Report?

Math Explore Plan Strengths Challenges Strengths Challenges

Linking back to the actual items

Strengths Fractions unlike denominator Beginning of test Challenges Confused X Y Coordinate End of test

Strengths When / where taught?

Instructional Strategies Processes

Challenges When / where taught?

Instructional Strategies Processes

    When we return to school in August we have 2 PD days.

We spend ½ of a day reviewing these charts and planning for the current school year based on our targets.

Teachers meet in core course groups to create bell ringer and other activities to address our weaknesses.

We regularly revisit these areas and spend time creating remediation assignments.

Teachers are provided with data packets which contain lists of their current students divided by: ◦ ◦ ◦ Above the College Readiness Benchmark At the College Readiness Benchmark Below the College Readiness Benchmark

   Teachers make predictions about their current students.

Teachers independently study their scores and adjust their instruction/accommodations accordingly.

Teachers collectively look at results and share ideas.

    Revisit of SIP Goals Gap Statement Collection of support data and artifacts Recommit to the goals and our mission/vision

 What specific student academic performance (growth) goals are identified for the teacher (at least two)? (As linked to the current school improvement plan) The goals must be instructional, obtainable, measureable, valid (objective based) and constructed with input from the teacher and the administrator.

Essential Questions:  How much growth in academic achievement typically occurs during high school?

 Can growth be accelerated so that more students are ready for college and career when they graduate from high school?

 Figure 1: Achievement Growth between 8 th and 12 th grades, per content area.

 Do growth rates differ depending on the degree to which students are on target to becoming college and career ready?

 Figure 2 (page 3) English: Off Target Students: 9.2, 12.9, 13.0= 3.8

Nearly On Target: 11.6, 14.9, 15.5= 3.9

On Target: 17.4, 19.5, 22.4= 5.0

 Average growth was greatest for the group of students who were on target for college and career readiness in 8 th grade.

 Students who were on target in eight grade demonstrated more growth between PLAN and ACT than did either of the other two groups.



The group of students who were on target for college and career readiness in 8

th

grade

were the only students who stayed on target in 10

th

grade and went on to become ready for college-level work by high school graduation.

 Individual students’ growth goals can be set using the CRB as a yard stick.

 Student goals can be based on “smart numbers” depended upon entry level student scores.

 This research demonstrates that it is necessary to intervene with students who are not on target for college and career readiness- not only during high school but before high school, in the upper elementary grades and in middle school. 

If students are to maximize the benefits of high school, a strong start is essential.

 Students will test on February 10 ◦ th . Test results are

returned to the students in March.

Counselors review the basic info(pg.2/3) ◦ Content Teachers review their specific sections of the test ◦ Students record their own strength/weakness t-charts ◦ Results are also mailed home (I order an extra set of results from ACT)

EXPLORE Individual Student Report

Early Indicators of College Readiness  EXPLORE and PLAN College Readiness Benchmark Scores  The EXPLORE and PLAN College Readiness Benchmark Scores are based on the ACT College Readiness Benchmark Scores. They reflect students’ expected growth from EXPLORE to PLAN to the ACT and assume sustained academic effort throughout high school.

ACT Subject Area Test

English Math Reading Science

College Course(s)

English Composition Algebra Social Sciences Biology

College Readiness Benchmark Score EXPLORE PLAN ACT

PR PR 13 43 15 43 18 17 15 69 65 19 17 70 65 22 21 20 91 21 91 24 PR 37 63 53 80 Students who meet a Benchmark on the ACT have ≈ 50% chance of earning a B or better and ≈ 75% chance of earning a C or better in the corresponding college course or courses. Students who meet a Benchmark on EXPLORE or PLAN are likely to have approximately this same chance of earning such a grade in the corresponding college course(s) by the time they graduate high school.

 We hold an Explore/Plan parent night (May 11 th at 7:00pm) ◦ Principal reviews the EPAS pattern and how the results serve as an “early warning system” ◦ Counselor explains the result sheet and what colleges are looking for ◦ We stress the importance of targeted remediation…not just “ACT prep”

When will it take place?

Who will be involved?

How will they be grouped?

What will you share? (1, 2, 3, 4….) How will you follow-up?

Keep a spokesman with your plan

◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ Look at the connection between District and School Improvement Goals.

Identify how Explore and Plan results can help to focus SIP and Student Growth Goals.

Discuss ways to include all school stakeholders in the SIP process.

QUESTIONS?

Wendy Zdeb MASSP

Associate Director [email protected]