SLT Presentation
November 14, 2013






New test context – Common Core
Data results
What happened?
What’s next? - Action Plan
Questions, comments





Met or exceeded growth standards every year of the school’s existence
High growth for the past three years
78.6% proficient in 2011-2012 – close to ABC School of
Distinction – 54% Economically Disadvantaged
Years of steady growth with all sub-groups despite population change, re-normed tests






The 2012-13 EOG and EOC tests were the first to reflect the new Common Core State
Standards for English/Language Arts and Math and North Carolina Essential Standards for other subject areas. These standards set a new benchmark for what students are expected to know to graduate college- and career-ready.
The new standards and the assessments that measure them are more challenging and more demanding of our students. They ask students to demonstrate higher-level thinking and reasoning skills to better prepare them to succeed in tomorrow’s global workplace.
In the past, proficiency standards only addressed what students needed for success at the next grade level. The new proficiency standards address how ready students are for college and careers, and whether students are on track to be ready by high school graduation.
Forty five states and the District of Columbia have adopted the CCSS, reflecting a national commitment to ensuring all students graduate college- and career-ready.
When states transition to higher standards, it is common for proficiency scores to drop dramatically as compared to previous years. It doesn’t mean that students learned less or lost ground.





The new scores cannot be accurately compared to the old ones because the tests, the standards and the proficiency requirements are different. We expect students to reach higher levels of learning than ever before and the scores set a new benchmark for learning.
The transition to new benchmarks, while difficult, is necessary to better prepare our students for college and to compete for jobs in tomorrow’s global workplace.
We expect that as students become more familiar with the new standards, we will see improvements in test scores. That is the pattern we have seen in the past when North
Carolina raised standards and expectations.
We knew these new tests would be particularly difficult for our economically disadvantaged population

Subject
Reading 3
Reading 4
Reading 5
Reading
CMS
46.6
45.4
40.5
35.2
MIE
35.2
42.7
28.9
Difference
-11.4
-2.7
-11.6
Math 3
Math 4
Math 5
Math
Science 5
50.0
51.7
51.1
43.8
47.3
40.7
54.4
37.2
23.1
-9.3
+2.7
-13.9
-24.2







MIE Composite Score – 36.9%
EVAAS Growth Status – Not Met
Met Expected Growth in 4 th Grade Reading
Exceeded Growth in 4 th Grade Math
Did not meet Expected Growth in 5 th Grade Math, reading and Science
2012-2013 scores are a BASELINE – they do not affect students’ grades or placement



Education Value-Added Assessment System
SAS Institute based in Cary, N.C
.
 EVAAS is a statistical analysis of student assessment data, such as the
EOG and EOC assessments, over time. It provides districts and their schools with growth data to consider, in addition to achievement data. This lens of measuring student learning provides educators with information to help ensure they are meeting the academic needs of cohorts of students, as well as individual students.
 EVAAS value-added reporting is available through a web application, which includes additional data and reporting so that educators and administrators can gain additional insight into their educational practices.






Value added data?
Value-added is a statistical analysis used to measure the impact of districts, schools and teachers on the academic progress rates of groups of students from year-to-year. A value-added score is calculated in the following manner:
Growth = Current Achievement compared to all Prior
Achievement that is measured by a quality assessment, such as the end-of-grade (EOG) or end-of-course (EOC) assessments.
EVAAS data replaced the old NC ABC accountability model
It’s important to know that only 4 th and 5 th grade EOG scores count toward a school’s growth









New standards
Balanced Literacy implementation
RtI – MAP – all new
Unknown – test, projected scores
Historically proficiency scores increase from 3 rd to 5 th – reversed this past year
New classes in 3 rd and 5 th due to influx of new students
4 th Grade met and exceeded expectations
5 th Grade grossly underperformed


New staff/leadership
Difficult students – teacher/child/parent relationships

Grade CASE % Proficient MAP
Spring 2013
55.0
3 rd Reading 71.6
3 rd Math 71.6
39.0
4 th Reading
4 th Math
5 th Reading
5 th Math
5 th Science
67.4
80.6
67.2
63.6
72.5
49.0
57.0
50.0
42.0
N/A
EOG Result
35.2
40.7
42.7
54.2
28.9
37.2
23.1







Too heavy reliance on CASE data which had been reliable in the past – particularly in science
Unfamiliarity with utilizing MAP
MAP – Measures of Academic Progress
NWEA – Northwest Evaluation Association
MAP seems to be a better (but not perfect) predictor for EOG performance
CASE data will be reconsidered








We have a history of success – high academic achievement
AND growth – 2012-2013 is a historical anomaly
5 th Grade is reborn!
Better understanding and use of MAP – professional development, individual student goals, progress reports, conferences
Specifics –
Reading –Vicki Douvikas
Math – Joeie Puckett
5 th Science – Christie Lyles

Problem Statement: Our teachers’ data sources did not align to provide a clear picture of our students’ performance on the North Carolina End of Grade tests.
Our Goal: 3 rd grade will increase their end of grade year proficiency by 15% on the 2013-2014 North Carolina End of
Grade test.









Provide on grade level passages to ALL students
Utilize MAP data to drive instruction and to determine growth of
3 rd grade students
Identify our lowest performing students, according to MAP
Utilize the learning lab for students to receive foundational skills to increase reading achievement
Utilize formative assessments between benchmark windows to determine student growth toward normative goals
Utilize TRC as mandated by state
Utilize CASE21 and the item analysis to identify deficits in learning with the CCSS and depths of knowledge
Utilize RIT scores to determine which readiness skills are needed to raise student achievement

Problem Statement: Our teachers’ data sources did not align to provide a clear picture of our students’ performance on the
North Carolina End of Grade tests.
Our Goal: 4 th grade students will increase their proficiency on the 2013-2014 North Carolina End of Grade test by 10%.






Identify our lowest students needing foundational reading skills according to MAP
Foundational literacy support will be provided in the areas of fluency, vocabulary, and word work
Teachers will utilize RIT scores for students to determine readiness skills which are aligned to CCSS and measures assessed on MAP benchmark assessments
Progress monitor student learning between MAP benchmark windows using DORF and DAZE assessments, along with curriculum based measurements
Utilize CASE21 and the item analysis to identify deficits in learning with the CCSS and depths of knowledge

Problem Statement: Only CASE21 data in grade 5 was used to determine proficiency for students on summative assessments.
Our Goal: 5 th grade will increase literacy scores on the North
Carolina End of Grade test by 15% for the 2013-2014 school year.








Create ongoing formative assessments to measure student growth between benchmark windows on the MAP assessment
Identify the lowest performing students in reading and provide additional literacy instruction in a learning lab setting
Students will receive instruction according to their RIT score
Student growth will be measured using DORF/DAZE and curriculum based measurements
Ensure all lessons are aligned to CCSS
Teachers will use CCSS verbs and nouns as part of daily interactions
Utilize CASE21 and the item analysis to identify deficits in learning with the CCSS and depths of knowledge

th







Goal:
70% or more of students will perform at a Level III or IV on the NC EOG Science test;
100% of students will meet or exceed expected growth as measured by 2013-14 EVAAS data.
Areas of Focus:
Planning and data-analysis—using EVAAS data, informal and formal assessment data points in a systematic way
Focus on teacher instructional effectiveness—focusing on the quality of our pedagogy and strategies used to teach content (i.e., reciprocal teaching, interactive notebooking, work products)—as well as student relationships and goal-setting
Differentiation—individualizing instruction for groups of students and drilling down to individual student needs so that all students can successfully access content and be challenged at their level
Collaboration and partnerships—working with other schools to identify best practices that led to their success with teaching science; also, utilizing resources provided through partnerships with community agencies (i.e., Mecklenburg County 4-H)






MIE staff is proud – eager to reverse last year’s “bump in the road”
We will be better informed, better prepared and will be successful in May
Communicate our message –WE HAVE A PLAN
2013-2014 will be our most successful year ever!
Questions/comments -