evidence, analyses and programming: secondary school...
TRANSCRIPT
Evidence, Analyses and Programming: Secondary School Improvement Initiatives
Board Presentation - November 24, 2015Learning Support Services
Research and Assessment Services
November 24, 2015
82 83 8277 77
84 84 84 82 82
0
25
50
75
100
2006 2008 2010 2012 2014
TVDSB
Province
50 5244 43 43
55 5449 49 49
0
25
50
75
100
2006 2008 2010 2012 2014
TVDSBProvince
OSSLT Historical Pass Rates for Participating Students
First Time Eligible Students
Previously Eligible Students
92% of TVDSB students participated in 2015 (93% in province)
51% of TVDSB students participated in 2015 (48% in province)
November 24, 2015
Perc
ent
Perc
ent
8
33 34
125 7
Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1 BelowLevel 1
No Data
9
71
135
<1 2
Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1 BelowLevel 1
No Data
EQAO Grade 9 Math Achievement
83 83 84 82 80
83 84 84 85
0
20
40
60
80
100
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
TVDSB Province
Achievement – 2014-15
Achievement Trends – 2011 to 2015
Applied
Academic
39 41 42 40 41
42 44 44 47
0
20
40
60
80
100
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
TVDSB Province
* No Provincial Results in 14-15.
*
November 24, 2015
Perc
ent
Perc
ent
Perc
ent
Perc
ent
TVDSB PROVINCE
Passed OSSLT
Not Pass OSSLT
Passed OSSLT
Not Pass OSSLT
Gr 6 3/4 67% 7% 72% 5%
Gr 6 Not 3/4
10% 16% 11% 12%
TVDSB PROVINCE
Passed OSSLT
Not Pass OSSLT
Passed OSSLT
Not Pass OSSLT
Gr 6 3/4 63% 7% 70% 6%
Gr 6 Not 3/4
15% 16% 13% 11%
Grade 9 Academic
Grade 9 Applied
3/4 Not 3/4
3/4 Not 3/4
Gr 6 3/4
68% 8% 17% 5%
Gr 6 Not 3/4
13% 11% 26% 52%
Tracking Explanation (example)
Students achieving Level 3/4 in Gr 6And Pass OSSLT = maintain achievementAnd Do not pass OSSLT = not maintain achievement
Students not achieving Level 3/4 in Gr 6And Pass OSSLT = advance achievementAnd Do not pass OSSLT = maintain achievement
READING
MATH
WRITING
Cohort Tracking: Achievement in Grade 6 to Achievement on OSSLT
and in Grade 9 Math
November 24, 2015
93
4 3
92
4 4
Fully Participating Absent Deferred
Female Male
53
208
20
51
19
5
25
Fullyparticipating
Absent Deferred OSSLC
Female Male
85 83 83 84 8375 71 71 70 72
2010‐2011 2011‐2012 2012‐2013 2013‐2014 2014‐2015
Female Male
47 45 48 48 4743 43 4035
40
2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015
Female Male
OSSLT - Participation and Pass Rates by Gender
Participation: Current – 2014 - 15 Success Rates for Fully Participating Students: Trends – 2011 to 2015
First TimeEligible
PreviousEligible
November 24, 2015
Perc
ent
Perc
ent
Perc
ent
Perc
ent
8586
8584
83
8281
83
7978
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Male Female
-3-5
-2-5 -5Gender Gap
42 44 43 41 41
35 37 40 38 40
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Male Female
-7 -7
-3 -3-1
Gender Gap
Academic
Applied
Grade 9 Math - Participation and Achievement by Gender
Academic Applied
Female 2% 7%
Male 1% 8%
Students who did not participate in 2014-15
November 24, 2015
Perc
ent
Perc
ent
5
17
3426
3
1614
57
14 12
0 4
Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1 Below Level 1 No Data
Appied Academic
4
2535
21
6 89
58
1910
0 4
Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1 Below Level 1 No DataApplied Academic
5
2435
164
16
2
67
1712
0 2
Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1 Below Level 1 No DataApplied Academic
First Nations, Metis and Inuit
Students with Special Education Needs
English Language Learners
Grade 9 Math Participation and Achievement in 2014-15:Selected Student Populations
Percentages shown in graphs
No Provincial results in 14-15. Level 3/4 13-14 comparisons below.
ELL TVDSB - 20% Applied and 82% Academic Province 38% and 82%
Special EducationTVDSB - 34% Applied and 78% AcademicProvince 39% and 74%
FNMITVDSB - 29% Applied and 69% AcademicProvince 35% and 71%
November 24, 2015
80
146
80
713
80
713
75
1
24
86
6 8
85
312
0
20
40
60
80
100
TV - FP TV - A TV - D P - FP P - A P - D
FNMI
ELL
SpecED
546266
73
41
54
0
20
40
60
80
100
TVDSB Province
FNMI
ELL
SpecED
OSSLT Participation and Success Rates: Selected Student Populations of First
Time Eligible StudentsParticipation Rates
Success Rates
TVDSB Province
Academic 94% 93%
Applied 46% 50%
LocallyDeveloped
8% 13%
Success Rate by English Course Taken: 2014-15
Legend:TV – TVDSBP – Province
FP – Fully ParticipatingA – AbsentD – Deferred
November 24, 2015
Perc
ent
Perc
ent
Detailed Examination of the OSSLT: Just Pass and Just Fail Results
Pass/Fail cut point
Item Skill Just Pass Just Fail
Q2SII W2 21.4% 0.8% 77.0% 0.4% 21.7% 0.5% 75.8% 1.4%
Q1SV R3 6.0% 76.6% 9.5% 5.6% 7.2% 71.5% 10.1% 9.2%
Q5SI R3 7.1% 14.3% 73.0% 4.4% 9.7% 16.9% 69.6% 3.4%
Example: Item Analysis
Example: Skill AnalysisReading Writing
Explicit Implicit Making Connections
DevelopMain Idea
Organize Information
Using Conventions
Mean Score
Pass 4.69 12.06 3.34 1.22 1.64 2.34
Not Pass
4.42 11.41 3.09 1.16 1.62 2.08
Are there skills or items that differentiate students who “Just Pass” (score 300) and those who “Just Fail” (score 295)?
Statistical Significance – p < .05 or p < .01
November 24, 2015
OSSLT Board Comparisons: Historical Trends – Pass Rates
November 24, 2015
83
72
8279
88
8084
7882
74
8077
87
77
8278
82
71
8077
86
77
83
75
83
70
8076
87
77
82
73
82
72
8076
88
77
82
75
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2010‐2011 2011‐2012 2012‐2013 2013‐2014 2014‐2015
Perc
ent
Key messages:Examination of Evidence
Results:
Participation rates remain stable over the past five years.
Achievement has decreased for Academic math and remained stable for Applied math and the OSSLT.
Over the past 5 years (2011 to 2015) the percentage of students has increased in Academic English and Math courses (62.5% to 65.6% and 60% to 65%) and decreased in Applied (31% to 27% and 37.5% to 34.4%).
The proportion of males to females is greater in the Applied math courses and a greater percentage of males versus females achieve the provincial standard in both Academic and Applied math, although the gender gap in Applied has decreased.
Success rates for students from selected populations are weaker than overall student results and tend to be lower than comparable provincial rates.
Insights:
Examination of OSSLT items reveals some statistically significant differences for students around the pass/fail cut point, however, a broader view indicates that student needs must be examined on a student by student basis.
Scores for students who were not successful on previous attempts at the OSSLT can be used to design interventions and advise/direct students on subsequent attempts.
Analyses of individual items reveals error patterns that can be used to direct instruction.
Pass rates in OSSLT for first time eligible students across 5 years for several boards shows little change indicating a flat line in terms of progress in overall achievement.
November 24, 2015
Broad Based School Supports: Organizational
Organization Support Personnel:
• Superintendents of Student Achievement:
• Learning Supervisors
• Learning Coordinators
• TOSAs/Math Coaches (one designated ELL/ESL)
November 24, 2015
Mathematics
• Learning Forward• School based teacher
collaborative inquiry• Support through 7 to 10
Learning Coordinators
• Cross Panel Focus Networks• Family of schools Problem of
Practice in math (8 in 14-15)
Broad Based School Supports: School Wide Emphasis
Literacy
• School Literacy Teams• All secondary schools
• Learning Forward• School based teacher
collaborative inquiry• Support through 7 to 10
Learning Coordinators
• Cross Panel CI• “Reaching Reluctant
Readers” grades 7 to 10
November 24, 2015
Grade 9 Math
• Secondary Math Coaching• Ongoing support and in-school PD
• Assessment in Secondary Math Task Force
• 8 schools in 2014-15• Focus school-EQAO project
• Network of schools 2015-16• Math CAMP
• 2nd year for secondary schools; teacher collaborative inquiry
• Professional Learning Series• Varied topics including:
• “Number Fluency”• “Inquiry and Questioning”• “Content and Pedagogy”• “Integrating Technology”
Broad Based School Supports: Course or Requirement Focus
OSSLT
• FNMI OSSLT CI• Focus secondary schools
• OSSLT-D2L• 10 secondary schools (IT)
• Assessment and Evaluation Task Force• cross curricular
• Literacy Framework series• Locally-developed courses
• Strategies-focused CIs• “Attack the Text,” gr 9/10 reading,
cross-curricular• “Write Like This,” cross-curricular,
writing• “Book Love”, gr 9/10 reading
November 24, 2015
School Support Initiative: Objectives
Strategic secondary school intervention:
• intense and focused support in grades 9 and 10 applied courses where pass rates are below the provincial rate
• Selected schools in TVDSB: A Voaden, Clarke Road, College Ave, HB Beal, Montcalm, Strathroy
Objectives:
• build instructional capacity of the instructional leader
• enhance instruction, teaching and learning
• improve student achievement
November 24, 2015
School Support Initiative: Operational Considerations
Ministry:
• Meetings with SO Leads • Professional Learning Team Sessions - All schools• Program and finance reporting
Board:
• Learning Network Sessions - All schools • Data tools
School-based:
• Principal coaching support• PLT networking meetings – ongoing• SO Lead - School Visits with PLTs
November 24, 2015
Structural and operational considerations:
• Team Membership: Small team – principal and 4-6 teachers
• Roles: Responsibilities (leadership and recording) rotate
• Regular meetings
• Communication: ongoing formal and informal
• Resources: materials, technology, human
Principal:
• Demonstrates data use, collaboration, use of research practices, shares and reflects on learning, knows the learners
School Support Initiative: Professional Learning Networks
November 24, 2015
• Social risk and the demographics of the community
• Gaps in prior learning (transitions Grades 7 – 10)
• Transient community
• Student behaviour•• Student lack of interest
• Student attendance
School Support Initiative: Perceived Challenges or Roadblocks
November 24, 2015
Knowing the Learner informs selection of:
• Instructional Practices
• Evidence-based Instructional Strategies
• Classroom Structures and Tools
• Assessment practices – for, or and as Learning
Knowing the learner allows the PLT members to :
• Design meaningful assessment for learning
• Plan for Instruction
• Assess the impact of their work
School Support Initiative: Knowing the Learner
November 24, 2015
Evidence Based Instructional Strategies
• Descriptive Feedback• Reciprocal Teaching• Demonstration and Modelling• Problem Solving• Spaced and Massed Practice• Scaffolding• Summarizing and Note Taking• Direct Instruction• Self Verbalization, Self Questioning
TVDSB focus shown Bold above
School Support Initiative: Instructional and Course Focus
Courses – Intervention Focus
Applied Level, Grade 9 and 10
• Mathematics• English• Science• Geography• Civics
November 24, 2015
Data Focus – System Level;
• EQAO - OSSLT• EQAO – Grade 9 Math• Credit accumulation• Course Pass Rates• Graduation Rates
Data Focus – School/Class Level:
• Classroom based assessments
• Classroom based assignments
• Attendance• Participation and Engagement
School Support Initiative: Evidence Focus
Tracking Performance - ExampleEQAO Literacy Assessment
Fully Participating Students - Percent Successful OSSLT
Mar Mar Apr Mar Mar
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Province 83% 82% 82% 83% 82%
TVDSB 80% 77% 77% 77% 77%
Arthur Voaden 60% 58% 57% 41% 62%
Clarke Road 72% 68% 68% 62% 60%
College Avenue 73% 62% 69% 74% 67%
H B Beal 75% 65% 63% 65% 73%
Montcalm 68% 64% 65% 54% 59%
Strathroy 82% 80% 82% 74% 78%
November 24, 2015
How do we and How might we:
• Engage in effective collaboration and teamwork
• Use student achievement data
• Use research-based classroom practices
• Reflect on instructional practice
What are your next steps?
School Support Initiative: Reflection and Next Steps
November 24, 2015
Key messages:Initiatives and Programming
Broad range of school and system lead initiatives
Ministry funded initiatives that focus on selected schools
Whole school and course/assessment foci
November 24, 2015