Transcript Formative Assessment

“A Passion for Excellence”
Patricia Sheffer, Assistant Superintendent & Director of Instruction
Holly Keeney, Supervisor of Instruction
Learning targets
for this session are…
Target #1
• Identifying the positive role that KASC played in assisting
the Union County School District in making remarkable
progress in student achievement
Target #2
• Describe the various KASC products, trainings, resources,
and supports that are available to individual schools or
districts
Union County's ACADEMIC GAINS
with KASC Support
•
•
•
•
•
•
District climbed from 161 to 87, 87 to 71, 71 to ?
Trend-Continued Gains
MES met AYP in all areas for two consecutive years and is out of Tier status
High School met AYP in all areas -1st Time Since 2004
Gaps between subgroups were significantly reduced
District has significantly reduced the number of students performing
Novice
• District increased the percentage of P & D African American students in
both Reading & Math
• District increased the percentage of P & D Special Education students in
Math
Reasons for Success
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Improved Teaching Pedagogy
Outstanding Instructional support staff
Motivated Students
Community’s understanding that Union County was in
educational peril
Belief that Union County and excellence should go hand in
hand
Continuous Formative Assessment
Kentucky Association of School Councils (KASC) Partnership
Right people in the right places
REAL Accountability
KASC Academic Data &
Accountability Resources
In 2009, lawmakers passed Senate Bill 1, calling for new standards, testing, and accountability in Kentucky. While the law set
aside the usual practice of calculating an academic index for each school, KASC, the Prichard Committee for Academic
Excellence, and the Council for Better Education responded to requests from schools across the state to keep publishing
testing results that would provide trend data for school-level performance. The Transition Index was first published in 2009
and uses a formula to compare test scores from 2007 to the present to show school progress.
KASC has complied 2010 Data available online…..
•
Report which compares KCCT Test results from 2007 through 2010 and tracks the status of student groups based on family
income, disability, gender, ethnic background, and other factors Disaggregated Transition Index Report.
•
Disaggregated Index Excel file download Disaggregated Index.
•
Sortable Excel version of the overall school and district Transition Index results, Transition Index Only 2010.
•
Overall district results Transition District Combined 2010.
•
Transition Index in each subject as well the Transition Index for each school and district,
Excel file, Transition Index Subject 2010.
KASC TOP 20 REPORTS
•
KASC publishes annual reports that show how schools across Kentucky are performing. These materials have helped many
schools find new resources to boost performance in specific content areas or find schools with similar demographics to gain
new insights on achievement.
•
OUR REPORTS
•
Top 20 schools, overall and by school type and content area: 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010
•
Disaggregated performance: 2007, 2008,
The 2011 Data will be available soon from KASC…..
District Rankings
2008
2008
% ile
2009
2009
% ile
2010
2010
% ile
2011
2011
% ile
District
161/175
8%
87/174
55%
71/174
59%
Projected
top
50/174
75%
High
School
165/175
6%
115/174
34%
93/169
45%
Middle
School
145/175
17%
99/174
43%
59/174
66%
UES
247/713
65%
181/719
75%
397/71
7
45%
SES
373/713
48%
198/719
72%
241/71
7
66%
MES
671/713
6%
482/719
33%
397/71
7
45%
Elem.
TOTAL
147/175
16%
65/174
63%
74/174
57%
District Overall Index Scores
2008
2009
2010
2011
District
75.4
86
87.55
91.55
UCMS
75.1
87
92
95
UCHS
67.7
73
75
80
Elementary
(Total)
85.2
98
95.66
99.66
MES
74.7
91
94
99
SES
88.5
101
99
98
UES
92.4
102
94
102
District Performance: 4 Year Trend
% Proficient & Distinguished
2008
2009
2010
2011
% P&D
Growth
Reading
59.07%
71.94%
75.37%
74.63%
15.56%
Math
45.38%
59.24%
61.81%
69.35%
23.97%
Science
46.28%
54.67%
57.54%
61.47%
15.19%
Social Studies
46.56 %
52.79%
53.93 %
59.67%
13.11 %
Writing
34.07%
40.29%
42.74%
43.06%
8.99%
District Novice Reduction
4 Year Trend
2008 %
Novice
2009 %
Novice
2010 %
Novice
2011 %
Novice
% Novice
Reduction
Reading
20%
8%
12%
9.5%
10.5%
Math
82%
56%
45%
28%
54%
Science
60%
32%
30%
18.5%
41.5%
Social
Studies
52%
43%
37%
26.5%
25.5%
Writing
37%
18%
18%
15.7%
21.3%
KASC Products & Resources
KASC & Union County
• SBDM Toolkits
• Student Work Kits
• 4.1 Core Content
Checklists
• 4.1 Core Academic Cards
• 4.1 Vocabulary Kit &
Vocabulary Cards
• Brain-Based Teaching
Checklist
New KASC Materials
• Program Review Toolkits
• KCAS Student Mastery
Gradebook
• Constructed Response
examples
• KCAS Student Checklists
• KCAS Vocabulary Kit &
Vocabulary Cards
• KCAS Checklists
KASC Training and PD
SBDM topics
•
SBDM training for new and experienced council
members
•
KASC principal selection training
•
Councils and Open Meetings
•
Council Glossary & Basics
•
Council Elections
•
Scoring Guide for Wise and Proficient Council Work
•
Councils and Staffing Cuts
•
Planning and Legal Issues
COMPLETE INSTRUCTIONAL WORKSHOPS
•
•
•
RIGOR: STEP IT UP!
COLLABORATION: IT’S A PROFESSIONAL PARTNERSHIP
FORMATIVE (CONTINUOUS) ASSESSMENT
•
•
•
•
•
•
SUCCESS WITH RTI
PROFESSIONAL LEARNING COMMUNITIES
SUCCESS WITH OPEN-RESPONSE
CLOSING THE DISABILITY GAP
DIFFERENTIATED INSTRUCTION
ALL-STAR STRATEGIES
KASC PD WORKSHOPS
– ANALYZING STUDENT WORK
– THE CHALLENGING LEARNER: TEACHING THE
HARD-TO-REACH
– ON-DEMAND WRITING
– BRAIN-COMPATIBLE TEACHING AND LEARNING
– REARCH AND CLASSROOM DISCIPLINE
QUICK PD: ONE-HOUR POWER SESSIONS
•
TEACHING VOCABULARY
•
MARZANO BASICS
•
SIMILARITIES & DIFFERENCES
•
NON-LINGUISTIC REPRESENTATIONS
NEW PD TITLES FOR 2011…
•
CONSTRUCTED RESPONSE –understand characteristics of shortanswer and open-response questions and how to choose the
assessment item that best matches specific standards.
•
SENATE BILL 1 IMPLEMENTATION AND LEADERSHIP -- Designed to
help teachers and leaders in Senate Bill 1 Implementation. Be sure
your schools are all on the same page with Kentucky’s Core
Academic Standards , Formative Assessment, Program Reviews,
and overall Assessment and Accountability
KASC Individualized Plans
KASC will provide follow-up facilitation to help apply their resources to a district’s unique
situation. The KASC consultants will also facilitate district leadership to develop critical steps
in moving each of your schools forward depending on individual levels of competency. After
declining KDE’s offer of assistance in 2008, Union County Public Schools choose instead to
partner with KASC and develop a more in-depth, rigorous approach to achieving rapid gains
for our district.
Union County’s Plan
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Commit to Excellence and define our “Top 10” vision by identifying , empowering, & equipping our
District & School Level Leadership Teams with KASC facilitating this process
Face the “Brutal Facts” with frequent walk-through data and our position in the KASC district rankings
(161/175)
Partner with KASC and utilize their resources to provide honest feedback
Utilize KASC instructional resources and professional development for improving student achievement
Visit” Top Performing” schools identified by KASC and borrow ideas that work
Implement our “Balanced Assessment System" with KASC support
Provide frequent support for building principals and SBDM councils through KASC resources
Emphasize an academic focus with “Top Ten Expectations” and improving “Student Achievement “above
all else!
Union County’s Renewed ACADEMIC FOCUS
for the Classroom with KASC Support
• Implementing Engaging, Rigorous, Research-based
Instructional Practices in Every Classroom
• Understanding Congruency between Learning Targets
& Standards
• Utilizing Formative Assessment Effectively
• Developing a Balanced Assessment System
• Developing School Level Leadership Teams that focus
on “Student Achievement”
• Every KID, Every Classroom, Every Day!
The Connection between Learning Targets and
Formative-Assessments-(Congruency)
Bookends
Sandwich
Without the congruency between the target
and formative-assessment, the whole lesson
falls apart.
Underlying Principles of Continuous
Formative Assessment:
(KASC)
1. Success in your classroom has to be
defined by student work that
demonstrates mastery and meets the
minimum standard of proficiency.
–
–
We don`t just want compliance from students.
We want demonstrations of learning.
Underlying Principles continued:
2. The focus has to be on the end result of
student learning and build everything else
from that foundation up.
–
Goal setting-students know about their own level of
mastery and how they can work to increase it.
Underlying Principles continued:
3. All students can master the content they
need, and you can lead them in doing that.
– Do not limit students by the mistakes they`ve
made
– All students = potential success
Underlying Principles continued:
4. Students are the most important
member of the education team.
– Assessment truly becomes formative when students can
use the information they receive to make adjustments to
their own learning.
Underlying Principles continued:
5. Assessments are used consistently, as part of
your regular instruction, to find out what can
move the student to mastery.
– Teachers constantly assess student progress towards mastery
– Teachers adjust instruction based on all kinds of assessments
Underlying Principles continued
6.Knowing what students need to know and be
able to do and assessing their learning can
actually give you back more time in your life.
– Being able to focus specifically frees up time for you and your students,
because you are working smarter.
When can/should formativeassessment occur?
• At the beginning of the lesson.
• During the lesson.
• At the end of the lesson.
What does F.A. look
like in the classroom?
•
“Clicker” systems
• Individual dry erase boards
• Write on the desks with dry
erase, water based markers,
shaving cream
• Yes/No, Green/Red, or ABCD
cards
• “Verbal” exit slips – student
verbally responds to a teacher
question before they walk out the
door
• Snowballing
•
Exit slips
• Should include both informal and
formal types (varied)
Example of Tracking Chart
Name
Obj 1
Obj 2
Obj 3
Obj 4
Obj 5
Obj 6
Add fractions like
denominators
Add fractions
unlike
denominators
Subtract
fractions like
denominators
Subtract
fractions unlike
denominators
Add/
Subtract
fractions using
estimation
Set up word
problems using
+ & - of
fractions
Amy
Absent
Depeka
Evan
-
Cindy
April
-
Absent
Absent
How can you use this information to impact classroom
instruction and student learning?
-
Union County Public Schools Delivery
of Instruction Checklist:
G.A.M.E. Winning Plan…
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
“Flashback or Review of previous content”
Ask Fundamental Question – Hook
Activate Prior Knowledge
Introduce daily Learning Target
Review Content Vocabulary
Explore Lesson Overview– explain CHAMPs behavioral expectations
Use 1st Strategy/Activity
Revisit Learning Target /informal F.A.
Use 2nd Strategy/Activity
Wrap Up Lesson Closure/Revisit F.Q. and Learning Target
Give Daily Formative Assessment
Balanced
Assessment System
Developed with support from KASC
District Benchmark Assessments:
• Curriculum Specialist create, score, and provide report of school
analysis to principal and Director of Instruction.
• Director of Instruction provides district report to Superintendent and
discusses at Weekly District Leadership meetings (climate of DSAscrolling data 24/7).
• Superintendent and DSA reports to the public through our Board of
Education, local media, civic organizations and other community
groups.
(Understand the district process-Thumbs up, thumbs down)
Six Steps to Implement Common
Classroom F.A. by Content/School
STEP 1
STEP 2
STEP 3
STEP 4
• TEACHERS IN CONTENT AREAS - generate “common assessments” from standards currently being taught
• STUDENTS - take assessments in respective content classes administered by classroom teachers
• TEACHERS - score MC and ORQ, enter results into Performance Calculators, analyze results with students
• TEACHERS - turn in results to Curriculum Specialists and re-teach/conference with individual students
• CURRICULUM SPECIALISTS - analyze results, identify trends and student needs, re-teach/conference with
STEP 5 individual students, and report data to district administration
STEP 6
• DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION - present data to principals, teachers, and community members
F.A. WEEKLY ASSESSMENT PROTOCOL
Teachers will assign KCCT-like assessments weekly to be analyzed by the Curriculum Specialist and District Leadership
teams. Students will be assessed as designated each Wednesday, beginning September, 2010 and for the remainder of this school
year. Three scored assessments (high, medium, low) will be turned in to the curriculum specialists by 8:00 a.m. on Friday.
KCCT-like assessments will be designated by grade and content areas. The submission will include:
•
•
•
•
one cover sheet
one dated copy of the assessment
one copy of the specific scoring rubric
three samples of student work—one low, one medium, one high
(see attached packet)
District Expectations:
•
•
•
•
•
All teachers are expected to utilize KCCT-like assessments as their routine assessments.
All students are expected to produce level 4 open responses.
All teachers with students not receiving a 4 will submit evidence of re-writes (independent re-write after conferencing with
student, live scoring-scoring as the students complete, mini-lesson with small group or entire class, if needed).
All students are expected to score at least 80% accuracy on Practical Living multiple-choice.
All students are expected to score at least a Proficient on Senior Portfolios.
by Index 3rd grade
MES
104.87
SES
96.99
UES
89.09
UCMS
----UCHS
-----
Math
March 2011
4th grade 5th grade 6th grade 7th grade 8th grade 10th grade
89.19
80.37
----------------98.23
76.41
----------------97.37
75.32
------------------------94.57
92.2
102.03
------------------------60.69
Elementary Comparison
Winter 2010
120
100
P&D
P&D
P&D
P&D
2008-2009
2009-2010
Dec.
March
Benchmark
Benchmark
%P&D
80
MES
MES
69.59
67.82
44.50
58.28
60
SES
SES
78.53
76.29
50.63
55.23
40
UES
UES
77.00
68.93
39.83
55.58
UCMS
54.02
62.07
66.19
64.25
UCHS
32.12
34.78
42.86
35.04
20
0
3rd grade
4th grade
5th grade
Comparison
2009-2010 to Winter 2010
Index
MES
SES
UES
UCMS
UCHS
2010-2011 2010-2011
KCCT
KCCT
December
March
2008-2009 2009-2010 Benchmark Benchmark
96.38
96.90
73.20
91.48
103.78
100.39
79.97
90.54
104.10
95.00
66.20
87.26
83.59
92.46
98.29
96.27
60.64
66.99
67.59
60.69
115.00
96.90
100.39
95.00
95.00
91.48
75.00
73.20
90.54
87.26
KCCT 20092010
98.29
96.27
92.46
79.97
67.59
66.20
66.99
60.69
55.00
MES
SES
UES
UCMS
UCHS
2010-2011
December
Benchmark
2010-2011
March
Benchmark
by Index
MES
SES
UES
UCMS
UCHS
READING
Fall 2010
3rd grade
4th grade
5th grade
6th grade
7th grade
8th grade
10th grade
106.87
62.44
84.73
----------------114.33
77.96
84.97
----------------121.28
66.30
64.87
----------------------------99.87
89.84
112.62
----------------------------92.07
Elementary Comparison
Fall 2010
140
P&D
P&D
P&D
120
2008-2009
2009-2010
2010-2011
%P&D
100
80
60
Benchmark
MES
MES
70.62
76.74
54.37
SES
SES
85.88
85.52
62.31
UES
UES
75.00
78.64
52.89
UCMS
68.47
75.25
69.28
UCHS
67.68
57.14
62.50
40
20
0
3rd grade
4th grade
5th grade
Comparison
2009-2010 to Fall 2010
Index
MES
SES
UES
UCMS
UCHS
2010-2011
KCCT 2008- KCCT 2009Fall
2009
2010
Benchmark
94.73
98.73
84.68
103.56
101.19
92.42
97.52
98.04
84.15
94.13
100.01
100.78
92.86
85.51
92.07
120
100
98.73
101.19
98.04
100.78
100.01
84.68
92.42
92.07
84.15
85.51
80
60
MES
SES
KCCT 20092010
UES
UCMS
UCHS
2010-2011 Fall
Benchmark
District Formative Assessment
Analysis of Data
September 2, 2009
Math
Open Response
Multiple-Choice
100%
96.2%
99.6%
99.6%
98.1%
99.6%
K-2 Average
3rd –5th Grade
Average
Total Math
M.E.S.
Average
Math
Open Responses
K-2 Average
3rd –5th Grade
Average
Total Math
S.E.S. Average
Math
99%
99%
100%
100%
99%
100%
Open Responses
K-2 Average:
3rd –5th Average:
Total U.E.S.
Math Average
Subject
6th Grade Math
7th Grade Math
8th Grade Math
Total UCMS Math
Average
Multiple-Choice
Multiple-Choice
99%
85%
92%
100%
91.5%
95.75%
ORQ Average –
4’s
Multiple
Choice %
99.65
84.9
100
94.85%
91.8
88.9
95.5%
92%
Department /Grade
Total MATH
9th grade
10th & 11th grade
SCIENCE
UCHS TOTAL
Assessment/Performance
ORQ
% of students
with a 4
Multiple
Choice
% correct
12%
13%
11%
36.7%
24.35%
66%
64%
68%
73.5%
69.75%
*District Math Average: ORQ- 79.19%
–90.67%
M.C.
Strengths:
•Good assessments this week! Keep them rigorous. We are
working toward GREAT assessments.
•Assessments required knowledge of specific math vocabulary this
week.
Areas of Improvements:
•Teachers need to focus on the amount of time used in guiding
Formative Assessments/much too lengthy
•Teacher feedback on open responses should be specific and
directed toward the actually response, not directed toward
neatness or restatements.
•When modeling the power verbs “explain” and “describe,” teachers
should model in-depth thinking, tell how & why (leave nothing to
chance).
.
Union County Middle School Math Benchmark Scores
Demographics
Number of Students Tested
African Americans
Total African Americans
Disabilities
Total Disabilities
Free/Reduced Lunch
Total Free/Reduced Lunch
Proficient
Distinguished
Proficient and Distinguished
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
6th - 17
6.25%
2
25.00%
5
31.25%
6
7th - 25
28.00%
7
44.00%
11
72.00%
18
8th - 26
52.00%
14
20.00%
6
72.00%
19
68
28.75%
23
29.67%
22
58.42%
43
6th - 18
12.50%
3
12.50%
3
25.00%
5
7th - 30
23.08%
7
38.46%
12
61.54%
19
8th - 18
21.43%
4
0.00%
0
21.43%
4
66
19.00%
14
16.99%
15
35.99%
28
6th - 97
18.68%
19
25.00%
25
43.68%
43
7th - 96
31.82%
31
39.77%
39
71.59%
69
8th - 89
53.66%
48
15.80%
15
69.46%
62
282
34.72%
98
26.86%
79
61.58%
174
2010 KCCT Percent Proficient & Distinguished
2011 Goal Percent Proficient & Distinguished
Percent
Number
Percent
Number
African Americans
43.21%
35
68.68%
47
Disabilities
35.71%
36
68.68%
46
Free/Reduced Lunch
52.48%
148
68.68%
194
6th Math
DATE
TOP PERFORMERS
WINNING % of Prof./Dist.
OVERALL
INDEX
2nd period
134.29(index)
123.45
12/15/09
6th & 10th Period
140.0(index)
137.7
Line Plots and
Frequency Tables
1/6/10
1st and 5th
100%
93.65
Area of Circles and
Squares
1/28/10
1st
87%
85
Measures of Central
Tendency
2/12/10
3rd and 5th
100%
93.75
2/18/10
6th Grade
3/5/10
5th
TOPIC
OF
ASSESSMENT
(Highest % Reaching Proficiency)
12/2/09
Circles
Geometry
DISTRICT Math
Assessment
Reflections
107.339
100%
90.48
UCMS Curriculum Specialist Report
SBDM Meeting
Nov. 16, 2009
Formative Assessment – 11/4/09
Averages of students scoring a 4
UCMS Reading 55.3%
UCMS PLVS
n/a
Multiple Choice
89.3%
93.32%
OR
Q
Av
era
ge
87
%
MC Average
7th grade
29
%
87.8%
8th grade
50
%
88.5%
6th grade
PL/VS
6th
7th
91.5%
----------
grade
Grade
93.32%
99.7%
86.93%
Formative Assessment – 11/11/09
Math
UCMS
MC Avg.
85.5%
OR 4
34.2%
OR 3
22.4%
OR 2
19.1%
OR 1
17.7%
OR 0
5.7%
6th grade
86.4%
28.2%
38.5%
23.1%
10.3%
--
7th grade
83.65%
54.3%
8.6%
11.4%
20%
5.7%
8th grade
86.5%
20%
20%
22.9%
22.9%
11.4%
HALLWAY DISPLAYS
•Student work should be displayed in the hallway in your assigned area.
•The level of performance of this work should be distinguished.
•Other sections in the building may be utilized if requested.
•Displays should be creatively done.
•Displays of distinguished work other than KCCT-like activities such as projects can be displayed as long as
they are rigorous and include the information listed below.
•Displays should include core content, learning target, rubric, example and description of activity.
•Displays should be changed monthly. Interactive displays may be left up longer.
Review Learning targets
for this session……
Target #1
• Identifying the positive role
that KASC played in
assisting the Union County
School District in making
remarkable progress in
student achievement
Target #2
• Describe the various KASC
products, trainings,
resources, and supports
that are available to
individual schools or
districts
Questions?
Contact Information:
• Patricia Sheffer, Assistant Superintendent &
Director of Instruction
• Holly Keeney, Supervisor of Instruction
[email protected]
[email protected]