UPDATE THE STUDENT PERFORMANCE DIAGNOSTIC

DR. MARY KEARNEY

ASSOCIATE SUPERINTENDENT

DR. JORGE PEÑA

DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT & ACCREDITATION

OCTOBER 9, 10, AND 16, 2014 MORNING WORKSHOP

WORKSHOP OBJECTIVES

9:15- 9:25 Objective 1 Understand how the Student Performance Diagnostic in the context of the Internal Review

9:25- 9:35 Objective 2 Organize for collaborative work

9:35 - 10:10 Objective 3 Use three statistical analysis tools

10:20- 11:10 Objective 4 Update the Student Performance Diagnostic

11:10- 11:20 Objective 5 Transfer the Student Performance Diagnostic in AdvancED ASSIST

COMPONENTS OF INTERNAL REVIEW/CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PROCESS

INTERNAL REVIEW: TECHNICAL VS ADAPTIVE

1. Student Performance Diagnostic: analysis of standardized summative test results

2. Stakeholder Feedback Diagnostic: analysis of survey results from students, parents, and teachers

3. Standards Self Assessment: self assessment using the AdvancED Standards of Quality (Purpose & Direction, Governance & Leadership, Teaching & Assessing for Learning, Resources & Support Systems, and Using Results for Continuous Improvement)

4. Continuous School Improvement Plan: the process to alter specific practices and policies in order to improve teaching and learning

5. Assurances: list of policy assurances, “yes” and “no” statements

6. Executive Summary: describes the school, its purpose, notable achievements, and areas

in need of improvement,

ARCHDIOCESE OF CHICAGOCONTINUOUS SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PROCESS

Systems Accreditation

2013-2014

2014-2015

Accredited Year 1:

2015-2016

Accredited Year 2:

2016-2017

Accredited Year 3:

2017-2018

Accredited Year 4:

2018-2019

Accredited Year 5:

2019-2020

Student Performance Diagnostic X X X X X X X

Stakeholder Feedback Diagnostic X X X

Self Assessment Diagnostic X X X

Assurances X X X X X X X

Continuous School Improvement Plan X X X X X X X

Executive Summary X X X X X X X

WORKSHOP OBJECTIVES

9:15- 9:25 Objective 1 Understand how the Student Performance Diagnostic in the context of the Internal Review

9:25- 9:35 Objective 2 Organize for collaborative work

9:35 - 10:10 Objective 3 Use three statistical analysis tools

10:20- 11:10 Objective 4 Update the Student Performance Diagnostic

11:10- 11:20 Objective 5 Transfer the Student Performance Diagnostic in AdvancED ASSIST

ORGANIZE FOR COLLABORATIVE WORK

Characteristics of effective School AdvancED Accreditation Teams:

1. Establish structure for meetings

2. Set the tone of the meetings

3. Take stock of the meetings

ESTABLISH STRUCTURE FOR MEETINGS

1. Create a School AdvancED Accreditation Team

• Teacher who serves as the Chair

• Principal

• Four to eight Teachers; or all faculty members

• Pastor/AIMS Board member

2. Make time for collaborative work: create a meeting schedule, meet often and regularly

SET THE TONE OF THE MEETINGS

• Set expectations for effective meetings: use agendas with that offer stop and start times, and rotating roles (facilitator, timekeeper, note taker)

• Adopt meeting norms:

1. Take an inquiry stance: ask why questions

2. Ground statements in evidence: always cite data/evidence to support inferences

3. Assume positive intentions: we are here to do right by kids

4. Start and end on time: self-explanatory

5. Be here now: avoid distractions like smartphones, checking email, etc

6. Stick to protocol: adhere to the norms and meeting practices

TAKE STOCK OF THE MEETINGS

• At each meeting: learn something or teach something

• Assess what went well and what did not in the meeting

• Use Plus/Delta after each meeting

• At the beginning of the next meeting, review Plus/Delta from previous meeting

WORKSHOP OBJECTIVES

9:15- 9:25 Objective 1 Understand how the Student Performance Diagnostic in the context of the Internal Review

9:25- 9:35 Objective 2 Organize for collaborative work

9:35 - 10:10 Objective 3 Use three statistical analysis tools

10:20- 11:10 Objective 4 Update the Student Performance Diagnostic

11:10- 11:20 Objective 5 Transfer the Student Performance Diagnostic in AdvancED ASSIST

ASSESSMENTS SHINE THE WAY

Target Skills and Knowledge

Student Work Sample

FormativeAssessments Surveys

Interim Assessments

SummativeAssessment

Performance-based Tasks

ASSESSMENT LITERACY: UNDERSTAND THE TERRANOVA TEMPLATE

DATA: NP OF THE MEAN NCE VS MEAN NCE• National Percentile (NP)

• Normal Curve Equivalent (Mean NCE)

• NCE 76 = 90th percentile

• Mean Anticipated NCE

• Quartiles

Distribution of Time Spent on Homework

Actual Work Panic Study Breaks

DOWNLOAD & OPEN SAMPLE TEMPLATES

• Mother Teresa 2012

• Mother Teresa 2013

• Mother Teresa 2014

THREE ANALYSIS TYPES

1. Status Analysis: percent performing at or above grade-level

2. Impact Analysis: impact teacher has on different groups of students

3. Growth Analysis: academic growth with cohort of students

STATUS ANALYSIS

Use the 2012, 2013, and 2014 TerraNova templates

1. What percent of students are performing at or above grade-level on the TerraNova for the last three years?

2. Is the level of performance on the TerraNova consistent?

3. Use the 2012, 2013, and 2014 Explore results

4. What percent of students are performing at or above grade-level on the Explore for the last three years?

5. Is the level of performance on the Explore consistent?

IMPACT ANALYSIS

• Use the 2012, 2013, and 2014 TerraNovatemplate

• Reading: Is the Mean NCE within ±7 points for all years tested?

• Reading: Are the Quartile distributions consistent for all years tested?

IMPACT ANALYSIS

• Use the 2012, 2013, and 2014 TerraNova template

• Math: Is the Mean NCE within ±7 points for all years tested?

• Math: Are the Quartile distributions consistent for all years tested?

• Which subject areas indicate the overall highestperformance?

• Which subject areas indicate the overall lowest performance?

GROWTH ANALYSIS

• Use the 2012, 2013, and 2014 TerraNova template

• Compare Mean NCE scores for a cohort of students. For example, grade 3 students in 2012 are in grade 4 in 2013, and in grade 5 in 2014

• Analyze reading: Is there significant growth (+7 Mean NCE), significant regression (-7 Mean NCE), or consistent performance (±6 Mean NCE)?

• Analyze math: Is there significant growth (+7 Mean NCE), significant regression (-7 Mean NCE), or consistent performance (±6 Mean NCE)?

• Repeat analysis for the other subject tests

GROWTH ANALYSIS

• Describe the areas that show a positive trend in performance.

• Describe the areas that show a negative trend in performance.

• Which areas indicate the overall highestperformance?

• Which areas indicate the overall lowestperformance?

WORKSHOP OBJECTIVES

9:15- 9:25 Objective 1 Understand how the Student Performance Diagnostic in the context of the Internal Review

9:25- 9:35 Objective 2 Organize for collaborative work

9:35 - 10:10 Objective 3 Use three statistical analysis tools

10:20- 11:10 Objective 4 Update the Student Performance Diagnostic

11:10- 11:20 Objective 5 Transfer the Student Performance Diagnostic in AdvancED ASSIST

IMPORTANCE OF DIAGNOSTICS

STUDENT PERFORMANCE DIAGNOSTIC

1. Data Document

2. Evaluative Criteria

3. Diagnostic Questions

Templates and exemplar posted on the OCS Resource Portal in Accreditation

UPDATE THE DATA DOCUMENT

• Mother Teresa Data Document 2014-2015

• Assessment Quality

• Test Administration

• Quality of Learning

• Equity of Learning

Qu

alit

y

Results

ANSWER THE EVALUATIVE CRITERIA

• Assessment Quality

• Test Administration

• Quality of Learning

• Equity of Learning

Qu

alit

y

Results

ANSWER THE DIAGNOSTIC QUESTIONS

Areas of Notable Achievements

1. Which area(s) are above the expected levels of performance?

2. Describe the area(s) that show a positive trend in performance.

3. Which area(s) indicate the overall highest performance?

4. Which subgroup(s) show a trend toward increasing performance?

5. Between which subgroup is the achievement gap closing?

6. Which of the above reported findings are consistent with findings from other data sources?

ANSWER THE DIAGNOSTIC QUESTIONS

Areas in Need of Improvement

1. Which area(s) are below the expected levels of performance?

2. Describe the area(s) that show a negative trend in performance.

3. Which area(s) indicate the overall lowest performance?

4. Which subgroup(s) show a trend toward decreasing performance?

5. Between which subgroup is the achievement gap becoming greater?

6. Which of the above reported findings are consistent with findings from other data sources?

WORKSHOP OBJECTIVES

9:15- 9:25 Objective 1 Understand how the Student Performance Diagnostic in the context of the Internal Review

9:25- 9:35 Objective 2 Organize for collaborative work

9:35 - 10:10 Objective 3 Use three statistical analysis tools

10:20- 11:10 Objective 4 Update the Student Performance Diagnostic

11:10- 11:20 Objective 5 Transfer the Student Performance Diagnostic in AdvancED ASSIST

ACCREDITATION HANDBOOK

• Guides schools in the Internal Review process

• In ASSIST, create a new Student Performance Diagnostic 2014-2015

• Use Appendix 1: Student Performance Diagnostic Checklist

• Follow the steps on the checklist

WHAT’S NEXT?

1. Update Student Performance Diagnostic in ASSIST on or before November 14

2. Attend the next workshop: Create the Artifact Management Tool (AMT) in November- dates, times, and locations posted in OCS Resource Portal: Academic Excellence-Accreditation

34

+ PLUS AND ∆ DELTA

+ Plus: what worked well about this workshop

∆ Delta: what to change for the next workshop

I APPRECIATE OUR TIME TOGETHER

36