implementation year 2: student academic progress (rating tables)
DESCRIPTION
Implementation Year 2: Student Academic Progress (Rating Tables) Dr. Carrie L. Giovannone & Dr. Yating Tang Arizona Department of Education September 2013. Activity Scavenger Hunt. Agenda. Overview of Student Academic Progress component Rating Tables SGP and SGT. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
1
Implementation Year 2: Student Academic Progress (Rating Tables)
Dr. Carrie L. Giovannone & Dr. Yating Tang
Arizona Department of EducationSeptember 2013
ActivityScavenger Hunt
Overview of Student Academic Progress component
Rating Tables SGP and SGT
Agenda
Components and Percentages
50% TeachingPerformance
33% StudentAcademic Progress
17% StudentAcademic Progress
40 points(33%)
Three categories◦ Achievement◦ Growth (24 points=20%)◦ Career and College Ready
Student Academic Progress
Every Teacher is responsible for the following data:
Classroom SLO(S) Targeted SLO(s) Prior year classroom level data
◦ (e.g., AIMS, AZELLA)
Student Academic Progress
Rating Tables vary
Content Grade level
Current Year Classroom Roster:
Classroom SLO (s)
DIBELS composite: percent of students at benchmark by the end of year
Prior Year Classroom Roster:
Percent at or above the 4th Stanine on Stanford 10- reading, language and mathematics
Percent passing AIMS- reading, mathematics and science
Percent proficient on AZELLA
Achievement
Current Year Classroom Roster:
Targeted SLO(s)
DIBELs (Initial Sound Fluency-ISF)
DIBELs (Phoneme Segmentation Fluency-PSF)
DIBELs (Nonsense Word-Word Fluency-NWF-CLS)
DIBELs (Oral Reading Fluency-ORF)
Prior Year Classroom Roster:
Student growth percentile (SGP)
Student growth target (SGT)
Percentile rank on Stanford 10 language and mathematics
Student growth from one performance level to the next performance level on AZELLA
Growth
Prior Year Data: Attendance rate (school-level) Graduation rate (school-level) Grade 8 students who earn Exceeds on AIMS
reading and/or mathematics CCR equivalent scores- reading and
mathematics Reduction in Falls Far Below AIMS Reading
Career and College Ready
Think, Pair, Share
Activity:
Overview of Rating Tables
Group A Group B SEI SPED
Rating Tables
Grade 2 Reading Specialists
Grade 2 Mathematics Specialists
Grade 2 General Education Teachers
Grade 3 Reading Specialists
Grade 3 Mathematics specialists
Grade 3 General education teachers
Grades 4-6 General education teachers
Grades 7-8 Language teachers and 4-8 reading specialists
Grades 7-8 Mathematics teachers and 4-8 mathematics specialists
Group A Rating Tables
Kindergarten teachers First grade teachers Grades 2-8 new teachers Grades 3-8 group B teachers
Group B Rating Tables
Grades K-2 SEI teachers Grade 3 SEI teachers Grades 4-8 SEI teachers
SEI Rating Tables
Grades K-2 SPED teachers Grades 3-8 SPED AIMS A teachers Grades 3-8 SPED AIMS teachers
SPED Rating Tables
Rating Tables
Group A: Grades 4-6 Teachers
Group B: Grades 3-8
SEI: Grades 4-8 teachers
SPED: Grades 3-8 AIMS A
Resources
http://www.azed.gov/teacherprincipal-evaluation/teacherprincipal-evaluation-pilot-project-resources/
1. Find one teacher who teaches the same grade level and/or content area as you
2. Discuss the questions you have for the data used for your evaluation
3. Write down your questions on a post-it note
Activity:
Break
26
Q&A
SGP and SGT
Arizona Growth Model
Growth Percentile
Growth Target
28
Growth Ratio
29
Rock-n-Roll Arizona MarathonPF Chang’s
30
When you are preparing for a marathon there are three extrinsic rewards you are aiming for:
1) 1st place
2) Best time
3) Finish the race
31
2013 Rock-n-Roll Arizona Marathon
Christie Foster from Sierra Vista, AZ placed: • 1st for the women, and
• 6th place overall.
Her time was 2:44:41
32
Christie placed 1st for the women and 6th place overall.
Students’ growth compared to their academic peers across the state.
A criterion to measure against to gauge whether the growth achieved in one year is enough to reach a goal.
Growth Percentile
Growth TargetsWhat amount of sustained growth is necessary to reach a target?
How are you improving compared to peers?
Her goal time for this year’s race was 2:40. Her completion time was 2:44:41.
33
Christie’s goal* is to clock a time of 2:38 in the 2015 Marathon so she set benchmarks each year prior to prepare and train appropriately to reach her goal.
How close did she come to reaching
the 2013 benchmark goal of
2:40 (160 mins)?
160 min (2:40)164 min (2:44) = .98
Growth Target
2012 2013 2014 2015150
155
160
165
170
Min
utes
2:40
2:38
.982:44
*Hypothetical example
The ADE calculates percentiles and growth targets for each student in
reading and mathematics
What do they mean to schools, teachers, and parents?
Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7250
300
350
400
450
500
307322
Student
?Meets
??
43rd PR
Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7250
300
350
400
450
500
Student
67th PR
43rd PR
Meets
Within the student’s peer group across the state, which SGP did this student have to acquire to be on track?
Growth Ratio
Expected Percentile
Actual Percentile
37
Was the student’s actual growth enough to reach the target?
Growth Achieved=
Growth Ratio ≥1, on track(the growth is enough to reach the target)
Growth Ratio < 1, not on track (the growth is not enough to reach the target)
Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7250
300
350
400
450
500
Student
67th PR
43rd PR
Meets
43rd PR
67th PR= 0.640.64
Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7250
300
350
400
450
500
Student
Very High
High
Typical
Low
Very Low43rd PR
Meets
Student Growth Target for 2014Which SGP does the student need to achieve in order to be on-track to meet the goal of proficient by grade 7?
40
Grade 52013
Grade 62014
Grade 72015
Grade 52013
Grade 62014
Grade 72015
Reflection: Understanding which Student Data will be used on
my Evaluation
Red – Stop I don’t understand
Yellow- Proceed with Caution
Green- Good To Go