addressing school improvement through data ii

Addressing School Improvement through Data II

Miami-Dade County Public SchoolsPresented by Dr. Yuwadee Wongbundhit

Curriculum and Instruction2010-2011 (Elementary and Middle Schools) 1

Topics

Overview:•2011 FCAT 2.0

Scores

•Understanding FCAT 2.0/EOC

•Monitoring Tool for FCAT 2.0/EOC Assessed Benchmarks

Hot Links :•FCAT 2.0•EOC Assessments•School Performance

Reports•AYP Reports•FCAT Demographic

Reports

SIP Part II:•2012 SIP, Part II

•Current and Expected Level of Performance

•Criteria for 2012 Expected Level of Performance

Independent work is to submit SIP, Part I 2

http://osi.dadeschools.net/actiondata

3



Assumptions:You...

are familiar with FCAT 2.0/EOC assessments, school grade and AYP

are familiar with the District Interim Assessments

have some experience looking at the data

love, love, love data!!!

4

NormsListen to others.Engage with the ideas presented.Ask questions.Reflect on relevance to you.Next, set your learning into action.

5

Overview of 2011 FCAT 2.0 Scores

Link to FCAT 2.0 Website

6

http://fcat.fldoe.org/fcat2/

How will scores on the FCAT 2.0 be reported?

Link to Understanding FCAT 2.0 Reports, Spring 20117

http://fcat.fldoe.org/fcat2/pdf/11ufrfinal.pdf

Raw Score

Developmental Scale Score(86 to 3008)

Achievement Level

(1 to 5)

Scale Score(100 - 500)

RawScore

WP

MIA

CC

RR

Reading Content Scores

Previous FCAT Reading Scores

8

Scale Score vs. Developmental Scale Score

100 500

G4

100 500

G10

86 3008Developmental Scale Scores

100 500

G3

Scale Score

Grade 3 Grade 10

2011 FCAT 2.0 Scores

1 •FCAT Equivalent Score

2 •Achievement Level

3 •Content Area Scores

Link to FCAT 2.0 FCAT Sheet10

http://fcat.fldoe.org/fcat2/pdf/ffs2.pdf

RawScore

V

RA

LA

IR

Reading Content Scores

2011 FCAT 2.0 ScoresRaw Score

Equivalent DSS(86 to 3008)

Equivalent Achievement

Level(1 to 5)

Equivalent Scale Score(100 - 500)

V: VocabularyRA: Reading ApplicationLA: Literary AnalysisIR: Informational Text/Research

Process

11

FCAT 1999

FCAT 2001FCAT

2002FCAT 2010

FCAT 2.0

2011

Base scale of FCAT

1996 SSS

Base scale of FCAT 2.0

2007 NGSSS

FCAT 2.0 Equivalent

Scores

FCAT 2.0

2012


12

Equipercentile Linking Example• The black and green lines

represent scores on two different assessments

• The lines show how the raw score relates to the percentile rank

• A “black” score of 260 and a “green” score of 340 are both at the 50th percentile rank and are “equivalent”

13

FCAT 1999

FCAT 2001FCAT

2002FCAT 2010

FCAT 2.0

2011

Base scale of FCAT

1996 SSS

Base scale of FCAT 2.0

2007 NGSSS

2011FCAT 2.0

Equivalent Scores

FCAT 2.0

2012

2011 FCAT 2.0 Reading Scores

New FCAT 2.0 Scale – 2012:In January 2012, the new achievement-level cut scores for the FCAT 2.0 will be created for the FCAT 2.0 in reading (G3-10) and mathematics (3-8).

14


1 •FCAT Equivalent Score

2 •Achievement Level

3 •Content Area Scores

Link to FCAT 2.0 FCAT Sheet15

http://fcat.fldoe.org/fcat2/pdf/ffs2.pdf

Grade Ach. Level 1 Ach. Level 2 Ach. Level 3 Ach. Level 4 Ach. Level 5

3 100-258 259-283 284-331 332-393 394-500

4 100-274 275-298 299-338 339-385 386-500

5 100-255 256-285 286-330 331-383 384-500

6 100-264 265-295 296-338 339-386 387-500

7 100-266 267-299 300-343 344-388 389-500

8 100-270 271-309 310-349 350-393 394-500

9 100-284 285-321 322-353 354-381 382-500

10 100-286 287-326 327-354 355-371 372-500

Achievement Levels for the FCAT Reading Equivalent Scale Score

17

Grade Ach. Level 1

Ach. Level 2

Ach. Level 3

Ach. Level 4

Ach. Level 5

3 86-1045 1046-1197 1198-1488 1489-1865 1866-2514

4 295-1314 1315-1455 1456-1689 1690-1964 1965-2638

5 474-1341 1342-1509 1510-1761 1762-2058 2059-2713

6 539-1449 1450-1621 1622-1859 1860-2125 2126-2758

7 671-1541 1542-1714 1715-1944 1945-2180 2181-2767

8 886-1695 1696-1881 1882-2072 2073-2281 2282-2790

9 772-1771 1772-1971 1972-2145 2146-2297 2298-2943

10 844-1851 1852-2067 2068-2218 2219-2310 2311-3008

Achievement Levels for the FCAT Reading Equivalent DSS

Grade Ach. Level 1

Ach. Level 2

Ach. Level 3

Ach. Level 4

Ach. Level 5

3 100-252 253-293 294-345 346-397 398-500

4 100-259 260-297 298-346 347-393 394-500

5 100-287 288-325 326-354 355-394 395-500

6 100-282 283-314 315-353 354-390 391-500

7 100-274 275-305 306-343 344-378 379-500

8 100-279 280-309 310-346 347-370 371-500

Achievement Levels for the FCAT Math Equivalent Scale Score

19

Grade Ach. Level 1

Ach. Level 2

Ach. Level 3

Ach. Level 4

Ach. Level 5

3 375-1078 1079-1268 1269-1508 1509-1749 1750-2225

4 581-1276 1277-1443 1444-1657 1658-1862 1863-2330

5 569-1451 1452-1631 1632-1768 1769-1956 1957-2456

6 770-1553 1554-1691 1692-1859 1860-2018 2019-2492

7 958-1660 1661-1785 1786-1938 1939-2079 2080-2572

8 1025-1732 1733-1850 1851-1997 1998-2091 2092-2605

Achievement Levels for the FCAT Math Equivalent DSS

Achievement Level Definitions

Level 5

indicates success with the content on the FCAT by answering most questions correctly.

Level 4

indicates success with the content on the FCAT by answering most questions correctly, except for the most challenging questions.

Level 3 indicates partial success with the content on the FCAT.

Level 2 indicates limited success with the content on the FCAT.

Level 1 indicates little success with the content on the FCAT.

20

2011 Passing Reading Score

21

2011 Passing Reading Score

• Students in grade 3 must achieve an FCAT Equivalent Score at Level 2 or higher in Reading, or show good cause, to be eligible for promotion.

• Students in grade 10 who entered grade 9 in the 2009-10 SY must score an FCAT Reading Equivalent DSS of 1926 or above on FCAT 2.0 Reading for graduation purposes.

22

2011 Content Scores

23

Sample of FCAT 2.0 Reading Content Area Scores

Content Areas Points Earned

Points Possible

State Mean

Vocabulary – Use multiple strategies to determine the meaning of grade-appropriate vocabulary words. 6 10 7

Reading Application – Use a variety of strategies to comprehend text suitable for the grade level. 9 15 12

Literary Analysis: Fiction and Nonfiction – Identify, analyze, and apply knowledge of the elements of a variety of literary texts, both fiction and nonfiction.

8 15 9

Informational Text and Research Process – Comprehend and interpret informational text from a variety of sources.

6 10 724

Sample of FCAT 2.0 Reading Content Area Scores

Content Areas Points Earned

Points Possible

Avg.%Corr.

Vocabulary – Use multiple strategies to determine the meaning of grade-appropriate vocabulary words. 6 10 60%

Reading Application – Use a variety of strategies to comprehend text suitable for the grade level. 9 15 60%

Literary Analysis: Fiction and Nonfiction – Identify, analyze, and apply knowledge of the elements of a variety of literary texts, both fiction and nonfiction.

8 15 53%

Informational Text and Research Process – Comprehend and interpret informational text from a variety of sources.

6 10 60%25

Sample of FCAT 2.0 Math Content Area Scores

Content Areas (Grade 8) Points Earned

Points Possible

State Mean

Expressions, Equations, and Functions:Analyze and represent linear functions to solve linear equations and systems of linear equations; and solve and graph inequalities.

18 24 20

Geometry and Measurement:Analyze two- and three-dimensional figures by using distance and angle; and compare and convert units of measure.

15 21 17

Number: Operations, Problems, and Statistics:Solve real-world problems using operations on real numbers; and analyze and summarize data sets. 10 15 11

26



Points Possible

Avg.%Corr.

Expressions, Equations, and Functions:Analyze and represent linear functions to solve linear equations and systems of linear equations; and solve and graph inequalities.

18 24 75%

Geometry and Measurement:Analyze two- and three-dimensional figures by using distance and angle; and compare and convert units of measure.

15 21 71%

Number: Operations, Problems, and Statistics:Solve real-world problems using operations on real numbers; and analyze and summarize data sets. 10 15 67%

27

Grade 5Total Test Scores Mean Points Earned

Number of

Students

Mean FCAT Equivalent DSS

Mean FCAT Equivalent Scale Score (100-500)

% in each Achievement Level By Content

District Name

1 (474 – 1341)

2 (1342 –

1509)

3 (1510 –

1761)

4 (1762 –

2058)

5 (2059 –

2713)

Percent in

Achievement Levels 3 and Above

Vocabulary

Reading

Application

Literary

Analysis-

Fiction/Nonfiction

Informatio

nal Text/Research

Process

Number of Points Possible 10 15 15 10

STATE 196,559 1649 310 15 15 33 28 9 69 6 12 9 5

MIAMI DADE 26,398 1614 304 18 16 32 26 7 66 6 9 8 7

Sample of 2011 FCAT 2.0 Report: District and Schools

28

Grade 5Total Test Scores Mean Points Earned

Number of

Students

Mean FCAT Equivalent DSS

Mean FCAT Equivalent Scale Score (100-500)

% in each Achievement Level By Content

District Name

1 (474 – 1341)

2 (1342 –

1509)

3 (1510 –

1761)

4 (1762 –

2058)

5 (2059 –

2713)

Percent in

Achievement Levels 3 and Above

Vocabulary

Reading

Application

Literary

Analysis-

Fiction/Nonfiction

Informatio

nal Text/Research

Process


STATE 196,559 1649 310 15 15 33 28 9 69 60% 80% 60% 50%

MIAMI DADE 26,398 1614 304 18 16 32 26 7 66 60% 60% 53% 70%

Sample of 2011 FCAT 2.0 Report: District and Schools

29

Practice Handout 1 - Calculate the % correct for each content area.

SchoolPoints Earned By Content Area % Correct By Content Area

Content 1 Content 2 Content 3 Content 4 Content 1 Content 2 Content 3 Content 4


1 6 17 8 52 5 17 9 53 4 12 7 34 4 13 6 35 5 17 9 56 6 18 9 57 4 13 7 38 4 14 7 49 4 13 7 4

10 5 14 7 411 4 12 7 412 3 10 5 213 4 13 7 314 4 13 7 415 4 11 6 316 4 14 7 417 4 12 7 318 3 11 6 319 4 12 6 320 4 13 6 321 5 13 7 322 5 13 7 423 6 17 9 524 4 12 7 325 5 13 7 3

30

Practice Handout 1 - Calculate the % correct for each content area.

StudentPoints Earned By Content Area % Correct By Content Area

Content 1 Content 2 Content 3 Content 4 Content 1 Content 2 Content 3 Content 4


1 6 17 8 5 86% 81% 73% 83%2 5 17 9 5 71% 81% 82% 83%3 4 12 7 3 57% 57% 64% 50%4 4 13 6 3 57% 62% 55% 50%5 5 17 9 5 71% 81% 82% 83%6 6 18 9 5 86% 86% 82% 83%7 4 13 7 3 57% 62% 64% 50%8 4 14 7 4 57% 67% 64% 67%9 4 13 7 4 57% 62% 64% 67%

10 5 14 7 4 71% 67% 64% 67%11 4 12 7 4 57% 57% 64% 67%12 3 10 5 2 43% 48% 45% 33%13 4 13 7 3 57% 62% 64% 50%14 4 13 7 4 57% 62% 64% 67%15 4 11 6 3 57% 52% 55% 50%16 4 14 7 4 57% 67% 64% 67%17 4 12 7 3 57% 57% 64% 50%18 3 11 6 3 43% 52% 55% 50%19 4 12 6 3 57% 57% 55% 50%20 4 13 6 3 57% 62% 55% 50%21 5 13 7 3 71% 62% 64% 50%22 5 13 7 4 71% 62% 64% 67%23 6 17 9 5 86% 81% 82% 83%24 4 12 7 3 57% 57% 64% 50%25 5 13 7 3 71% 62% 64% 50%

31

Understanding FCAT 2.0/EOC Assessment

32

% Reporting Categories

%Type of Items

% Cognitive ComplexityLength of Test

Type of Reading Passage

Test Design Summary of FCAT 2.0/EOC Assessment

http://fcat.fldoe.org/pdf/designsummary.pdf 33

http://fcat.fldoe.org/pdf/designsummary.pdf

Test Design Summary of FCAT 2.0/EOC Assessment

1 •Reporting categories with the approximate percentage of raw score points

2 •Number of words per reading passage by grade level

3 •Percentage of points by cognitive complexity

4 •Types of reading passage and percentage of test

http://fcat.fldoe.org/pdf/designsummary.pdf 34


FCAT 2.0 Content Categories - Reading Approximate percentage of raw-score points that will

be derived from each content category

Grade Vocabulary Reading Application

Literary Analysis: Fiction &

Nonfiction

Informational Text& Research

Process

3–7 15-25% 25-35% 25-35% 15-25%

8–10 15-25% 20-30% 20-30% 25-35%


Test Length: 50-55 items

35


Grade 5 Next Generation Sunshine State StandardsFCAT 2.0 Reading Benchmarks and Reporting Categories

Reporting Categories Benchmarks Description

Vocabulary LA.5.1.6.3 The student will use context clues to determine meanings of unfamiliar words.

Vocabulary LA.5.1.6.7The student will use meaning of familiar base words and affixes to determine meanings of unfamiliar complex words.

Vocabulary LA.5.1.6.8The student will use knowledge of antonyms, synonyms, homophones, and homographs to determine meanings of words.

Vocabulary LA.5.1.6.9The student will determine the correct meaning of words with multiple meanings in context.

36

Digging into Data

Vocabulary (45%)

LA.5.1.6.7(49%)

Base Words

Items: 2, 5, 655%, 20%,

45%

Root

Items: 4, 1070%, 40%

LA.A.5.1.6.3(48%)

LA.5.1.6.8(41%)

Antonyms

Items: 2, 7, 8, 11

Synonyms

Item 2415%

Content Categories Analysis

Benchmark Analysis

Item Analysis

Identified Students37

Digging into Data

Vocabulary (45%)

LA.5.1.6.7(49%)

Base Words

Items: 2, 5, 655%, 20%,

45%

Root

Items: 4, 1070%, 40%

LA.A.5.1.6.3(48%)

LA.5.1.6.8(41%)

Antonyms

Items: 2, 7, 8, 11

Synonyms

Item 2415%

Content Categories Analysis

Benchmark Analysis

Item Analysis

Identified Students38

FCAT 2.0 Mathematics, Grade 3 - 5Grade Category %

3 Number: Operations, Problems, and Statistics

50

Geometry and Measurement 30 Number: Fractions 20

4 Number: Operations and Problems 45 Geometry and Measurement 30 Number: Base Ten and Fractions 25

5 Number: Base Ten and Fractions 50 Geometry and Measurement 30 Expressions, Equations, and Statistics 20

39



Points Possible

State Mean

Number: Base Ten and Fractions:Divide multi-digit whole numbers, including solving real-world problems; and add and subtract decimals, fractions, and mixed numbers.

15 25 20

Geometry and Measurement:Analyze shapes and solve problems related to area, surface area, and volume; and compare units of measure within the same system of measurement; and identify ordered pairs on a coordinate plane.

10 15 12

Expressions, Equations, and Statistics: Simplify expressions and use properties of equality to solve equations and real-world problems; and analyze graphs appropriate to the context of the situation.

6 10 7

40

Grade 5 Next Generation Sunshine State StandardsFCAT 2.0 Math Benchmarks and Reporting Categories

Reporting Categories Benchmarks Description

Number: Base Ten & Fractions MA.5.A.1.1

Describe the process of finding quotients involving multi-digit dividends using models, place value, properties, and the relationship of division to multiplication.


Divide multi-digit whole numbers fluently, including solving real-world problems, demonstrating understanding of the standard algorithm and checking the reasonableness of results.


Represent addition and subtraction of decimals and fractions with like and unlike denominators using models, place value, or properties.

http://curriculum.dadeschools.net/schoolperformancereports.asp 41

http://curriculum.dadeschools.net/schoolperformancereports.asp

FCAT 2.0 Mathematics, Grade 6 - 8Grade Category %

6 Fractions, Ratios, Proportional Relationships, and Statistics

40

Expressions and Equations 40

Geometry and Measurement 20

7 Geometry and Measurement 30

Ratios and Proportional Relationships 25

Number: Base Ten 25

Statistics and Probability 20 8 Expressions, Equations, and Functions 40

Geometry and Measurement 35 Number: Operations, Problems, and Statistics 25 42

Monitoring Tool for FCAT 2.0 Content Assessed Benchmark By Reporting Category


Elementary

Middle School

High School

Reading Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5

Mathematics Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5

Science Grade 5

Click on a subject/grade button below to go to that specific sheet.

Monitoring Tool for FCAT 2.0 Content AssessedGrades 3-5

44


Interim Assessment Benchmark Mapping

Go to actionable

data website and click on

Interim AssessmentBenchmark

Mapping


FCAT 2.0/EOC Test Item Specifications• Define the content and format of the

test and test items for item writers and reviewers.

• Provide specific guidelines for the development of all test items used in the FCAT 2.0/EOC assessments.

• Provide information about the benchmarks, the stimulus types, and the test items designed to assess the standards for specific grade level.

• serves to provide all stakeholders with information about the scope and function of the FCAT 2.0/EOC assessments.

http://fcat.fldoe.org/fcat2/itemspecs.asp 47

http://fcat.fldoe.org/fcat2/itemspecs.asp

Sam

ple

Item

Spe

cific

ation

s

48

Benchmark Analysis

Year at a Glance

Five-Year FCATFive-Year AYP

Interim Assessment by

Subgroups

Updated School Performance Report on C & I Website

http://curriculum.dadeschools.net/schoolperformancereports.asp 49


Selection of School Report


ReadingSchool Performance Reports

Benchmark List Description

Grade 6

Grade 6

Grade 7

Grade 7

Grade 8

Grade 8

MathematicsSchool Performance Reports

Benchmark List Description

Grade 6

Grade 6

Grade 7

Grade 7

Grade 8

Grade 8

ScienceN/ASchool Performance Reports

Benchmark List Description N/A

N/A

N/A

Grade 8

Grade 8

Step 2. Click on a subject/grade button below to go to that specific sheet.

Step 1. Select a school from the drop down list below.

School and Subject Selection

50

List of Schools


Average/Mean Score

Average % Correct

Percent Proficient

What is the difference?

51

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600N

umbe

r of S

tude

nts

Raw Score Distribution: Grade 3 Math of Fall IA, 2010-11

Average Score is 17.7 or Average % Correct of 59

67% of Students

36% of Students

P at 70% CutoffProficient at 50% Cutoff

52

3 7 10 13 17 20 23 27 30 33 37 40 43 47 50 53 57 60 63 67 70 73 77 80 83 87 90 93 97 1000

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

Grade 3

3 5 8 10 13 15 18 20 23 25 28 30 33 35 38 40 43 45 48 50 53 55 58 60 63 65 68 70 73 75 78 80 83 85 88 90 93 95 98 1000

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Grade 4

53

10 Minutes Break

54

Recap

Overview:

• 2011 FCAT 2.0 Scores

• Understanding FCAT 2.0/EOC

• Monitoring Tool for FCAT 2.0/EOC Assessed Benchmarks

Hot Links :

• FCAT 2.0• EOC

Assessments• School

Performance Reports

• AYP Reports• FCAT

Demographic Reports

SIP Part II:

• 2012 SIP, Part II

• Current and Expected Level of Performance

• Criteria for 2012 Expected Level of Performance

55

2012 Expected Improvements

Part II of SIP – Goal Areas

56

2011-2012 Statewide Assessment PlanFCAT

Writing (4, 8, 10)

Reading Retakes

(fall, spring)

Math Retakes

(fall, spring) (CBT*)

FCAT 2.0

Reading (3-10) (SS)

Math (3-8) (SS)

*CBT in G7

Science (5, 8) (B)

EOC (CBT*)

Algebra(SS)

Geometry(B)

Biology(B)

US History (FT)

Selected HS*CBT: Computer-Based Testing

Link to 2011-2012 Statewide Assessment Schedule 57

http://info.fldoe.org/docushare/dsweb/Get/Document-5851/dps-2010-147a.pdf

Expected Level of Performance

Student Learning

Reading

Math

Writing

Science

Demographics

Attendance

Suspensions

Dropout Prevention

Parent Involvement

58

SIP Reading/Math Goals

Overall Proficient

Learning Gains

Sub-groups proficient

• G1 %L3• G2 %L4 &5

• G3 Overall• G4 Lowest25%

• G5A-5D %L3-5

59

2010-2011 School Improvement Plan Current and Expected Level of Performance

Read

ing

Mat

h

Writ

ingScience

Atten

danc

e

Susp

ensio

n

Dropou

t

Preve

ntion

60

School Accountability

• Meeting High Standards• Learning Gains

School Grade

• Meeting High Standards• Total and SubgroupsAYP

61

School GradingGrade Points

A525-800

B495-524

C435-494

D395-434

F0-394

Meeting high standards (400 points)

Reading: %L3-5

Math: %L3-5

Science: %L3-5

Writing: %L4-6

Making learning gains(400 points)

Reading• % Making learning

gains for all

• % Making learning gains for Low25%

Math• % Making learning

gains for all

• % Making learning gains for Low25%

62

Adequate Yearly Progress

Total Group

Reading (%L3-5)

Math (%L3-5)

Writing (%L3-6)

Graduation Goal

Subgroups

Reading (%L3-5)

Math (%L3-5)

Writing (%L3-6)

63

For a school to meet AYP, how many criteria must be met?

64

39 Components Criteria (NA, No, Yes)

65

GroupParticipation Met

(Tested 95%) Proficiency Met

Reading Math Reading MathTOTAL 1 1 1 1WHITE 2 2 2 2BLACK 3 3 3 3HISP. 4 4 4 4ASIAN 5 5 5 5Am. Ind. 6 6 6 6

ED 7 7 7 7ELL 8 8 8 8SWD 9 9 9 9

School GradeTotal Group

Graduation

Total Group

WritingTotal Group

Other AYP Criteria

Number of Schools with % Criteria Met on 2010 AYP Components

100% (39

)

97%

(38)

95%

(37)

92%

(36)

90%

(35)

87%

(34)

85%

(33)

82%

(32)

79%

(31)

77%

(30)

74%

(29)

72%

(28)

69%

(27)

67%

(26)

64%

25)

62%

(24)

59%

(23)

54%

(21)

49%

(19)

0

50

10080

3527 29 33 32 33 38

3221 26

16 126 2 2 2 1 1

Num

ber o

f Sch

ools

Total Schools: 428

% Criteria Met (Number of Components)

19%

66

A B C D F NG Total0

250

500

72

3 0 0 0 5

80131

4683

35 15 38

348AYP-Yes AYP-No

Num

ber o

f Sch

ools

2010 AYP Status and 2010 School Grades - District

School Grades

Total number of schools: 428

67

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Benchmark

Year%Proficiency Targets

Reading Math

2009-10 65 68

2009-10 72 74

2010-11 79 80

2011-12 86 862012-13 93 93

2013-14 100 10068

http://schoolgrades.fldoe.org/default.asp?report=AYP

69


Percent of AYP Criteria Met is 74%

Divide the result by 39, then multiply by 100

(29 / 39) * 100 = 74.35%

Subtract the number of “No” from 39

39 minus 10 = 29

Counts the number of components with “No”

There are 10 components with “No”

Percent Criteria Calculation

70

What percent of the criteria was met for this school?

71

What percent of the criteria was met for this school?Practice Handout 2

72

Percent of AYP Criteria Met is 77%

Divide the result by 39, then multiply by 100

(30 / 39) * 100 = 76.92%

Subtract the number of “No” from 39

39 minus 9 = 30

Counts the number of components with “No”

There are 9 components with “No”

Percent Criteria Calculation

73

Growth Model ProvisionApplied if the school or subgroup did not meet the proficiency targets

or the safe harbor proficiency targets

Safe Harbor Provision

Applied if the school or subgroup did not meet the proficiency targets

Annual Proficiency Targets

2011-12: Reading is 86% 2011-12: Math is 86%

Proficiency Targets in Reading/Math

74

Number of Schools Met 2010 Reading Proficiency Target

Subgroup NO NA Yes-AB Yes-SH Yes-GM Grand Total

WHITE 7 346 68 7 428

BLACK 156 229 10 30 3 428

HISPANIC 144 92 135 39 18 428

AMERICAN INDIAN 428 428

ASIAN 428 428ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED 226 32 96 58 16 428

ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS 132 221 31 29 15 428

STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES 108 287 2 28 3 428

TOTAL 230 139 46 13 42876

Number of Schools Met 2010 Math Proficiency Target

Subgroup NO NA Yes-AB Yes-SH Yes-GM Grand Total

WHITE 3 346 76 3 428

BLACK 141 230 14 43 428

HISPANIC 132 93 154 43 6 428

AMERICAN INDIAN 428 428

ASIAN 428 428

ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED 215 32 109 69 3 428

ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS 117 221 59 27 4 428

STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES 101 288 4 34 1 428

TOTAL 231 146 47 4 42877

AYP Safe Harbor Sample School

Safe Harbor Section

Growth Model Section

Annual Proficient

78

2010 AYP Report

• See your 2010 AYP results online

• Go to http://osi.dadeschools.net/actiondata

• Under “Hot Links”, click “AYP Reports

• See handout pages 5-6


79




The percent of non-proficient students decreased by at least 10%

from the preceding year in the subject being evaluated.

% Safe Harbor Proficiency Target

80

Safe Harbor Proficiency Target

2012Target

Proficient

30+7=37%

Non-proficient

70-7=63%

2011Proficient

Proficient

30%

Non-proficient

10% of 70 = 7

70%

81

Safe Harbor Proficiency Target

2012Target

Proficient

45+5.5=50.5

Non-proficient

55-5.5=49.5

2011Proficient

Proficient

45%

Non-proficient

10% of 55 = 5.5

55%

82

Safe Harbor Test (Practice Handout 3)

School2010

% Prof.Reading

2010% Non-Proficient

201010% of

Non-Proficient2011 Safe Harbor Proficiency Target

1 47

2 49

3 58

4 45

5 38

6 64

7 50

8 63

9 35

10 20

11 42

12 24

13 38

14 43

15 30 83

Safe Harbor Test (Answers)

School2010

% Prof.Reading

2010% Non-Proficient

201010% of

Non-Proficient2011 Safe Harbor Proficiency Target

1 47 53 5.3 52.3

2 49 51 5.1 54.1

3 58 42 4.2 62.2

4 45 55 5.5 50.5

5 38 62 6.2 44.2

6 64 36 3.6 67.6

7 50 50 5.0 55.0

8 63 37 3.7 66.7

9 35 65 6.5 41.5

10 20 80 8.0 28.0

11 42 58 5.8 47.8

12 24 76 7.6 31.6

13 38 62 6.2 44.2

14 43 57 5.7 48.7

15 30 70 7.0 37.0 84

School grade is not “D” or “F” (school)

Increase the graduation rate by 2% or maintain at 85% or higher

subgroup(s) and school

Improve performance in writing by 1% or remain at 90% or highersubgroup(s) and school

Attain at least 95% participation rate in reading and math

all subgroups and school

Safe Harbor Gate Keepers(School and subgroup must meet all of the following requirements)

85

Now, let’s take a look

SIP Part II

Current and Expected Level of Performance

86

SIP Goals for Reading/Math/Science

Goal 1Students achieving proficiency

(FCAT Level 3)

2011Current level of

performance30%

2012Expected level of

performance

?

Goal 2Students achieving above

proficiency (FCAT Levels 4 and 5)


performance10%


performance

?

87



(FCAT Level 3)


performance30%


performance

?




performance10%


performance

?

88

2012 SIP Expected Level of Performance

2011

L34540%

Goal 1: L3

30%Goal 2: L45

10%

L1260%

10% of L12 = 6

2012 Expected Level of

Performance

L34540+6=46

L330+4.2=

34.2

L4510+1.8=

11.8

L1260-6=54

10% of 60=6

%L3 Plus 7% of L1&2

%L45 Plus 3% of L1&2

The percent of non-proficient students

decreased by at least 10% from the

preceding year

89



(FCAT Level 3)


performance30%


performance

34




performance10%


performance

12

90



(FCAT Level 3)


performance15%


performance

?




performance5%


performance

?

91

2012 SIP Expected Level of Performance

2011

L34520%

Goal 1: L3

15%Goal 2: L45

5%

L1280%

10% of L1&2 = 8

2012 Expected Level of

Performance

L34520+8=28

L315+5.6=

20.6

L455+2.4=

7.4

L1280-8=72

10% of 80=8

%L3 Plus 7% of L1&2

%L45 Plus 3% of L1&2

The percent of non-proficient students

decreased by at least 10% from the

preceding year

92



(FCAT Level 3)


performance15%


performance

21




performance5%


performance

7

93

94

2011-2012 SIP Part II – Expected Level of Performance Criteria

See handout on page 10 for Grades 3-8 and page 11 for high schoolCriteria for Elementary

and Middle Schools

Criteria for High Schools

Calculation Sheet

Reading (G3-10)/Math G (3-8)/ScienceGoal Current

Performance 2012 Improvement Criteria

1% Level 3

%Levels 3-5 is less than 86% % Level 3 plus by 7% of (Levels 1 and 2)

%Levels 3-5 is at or higher than 86 Maintain

2% Levels 4 and 5

%Levels 3-5 is less than 86%

% Levels 4 and 5 plus by 3% of (Levels 1 and 2)

%Levels 3-5 is at or higher than 86 Maintain

95

2011 - 2012 Expected Level of Performance – Calculation Sheet

96

• Go to http://osi.dadeschools.net/actiondata

• Under “Hot Links”, click “FCAT Demographic Reports”

• For school data follow handout pages 7-9

97

2012 SIP Expected Level of Performance Calculation



Reading and Math Goals (G3-8)

Goal CurrentPerformance 2012 Improvement Criteria

3 &4% of

Students Make

Learning Gains

0% - 60% %Learning Gains plus 10 percentage points

61% - 90% %Learning Gains plus 5 percentage points

91% - 100% Maintain

98

Reading and Math Goals (G3-8)

Goal CurrentPerformance2012 Improvement Criteria

5A-5DSubgroups

0% - 85% % proficient plus 10% of non-proficient (Levels 1 and 2)

86% - 100% Maintain

99

Attendance GoalData

Source Goal 1 CurrentPerformance

2012 Improvement Criteria

COGNOS (As of

June 1, 2011)

Average Daily Attendance Rate

P01.00 - 90.99 Increase by 3% points.

P91.00 - 93.99 Increase by 1% point

P94.00 - 96.99 Increase by 0.5% point

P97.00 - 100 MaintainExcessive Absences (10 or more)

# of Students Reduce by 5 Percent

Excessive Tardiness (10 or more)

# of Students Reduce by 5 Percent

100

Suspension GoalData

Source Goal 1 CurrentPerformance

2012 Improvement

Criteria

COGNOS (As of June

1, 2011)

In-School Suspensions

Number of Suspensions

Reduce by 10 percent

Number of Students (unduplicated)


Out-of-School Suspensions

Number of Suspensions


Number of Students (unduplicated)


101

Can you explain the difference between

percent and percentage point?

102

Percent (%) vs. Percentage Point

Current percent proficient

To increase the current proficiency by 10%, what would be the new percent proficient value?

To increase the current proficiency by 10 percentage points, what would be the new percent proficient value?

20

10% of 20 = 20*.10=2

20+10=30New % = 20+2=22

75

10% of 75 = 75*.10=7.5

75+10=85New % = 75+7.5=82.5

103

Percent (%) vs. Percentage point (HO 4)Current percent

proficient

To increase the current proficient by 10%, what would be the new percent proficient value?

To increase the current proficient by 10 percentage points, what would be the new percent proficient value?

1. 30%2. 50%3. 65%4. 25%5. 80%6. 43%7. 15%8. 78%9. 15%

10. 37%104

Percent (%) vs. Percentage point

Current percent

proficient

To increase the current proficient by 10%, what would be the new percent proficient value?

To increase the current proficient by 10 percentage points, what would be the new percent proficient value?

1. 30% 30+(30*10/100)=33 30+10=402. 50% 50+(50*10/100)=55 50+10=603. 65% 65+(65*10/100)=71.5 65+10=754. 25% 25+(25*10/100)=27.5 25+10=355. 80% 80+(80*10/100)=88 80+10=906. 43% 43+(43*10/100)=47.3 43+10=537. 15% 15+(15*10/100)=16.5 15+10=258. 78% 78+(78*10/100)=85.8 78+10=889. 15% 15+(15*10/100)=16.5 15+10=25

10. 37% 37+(37*10/100)=40.7 37+10=47105

Formulate key questions Obtain data to answer them Find the storyline to bring it all together Determine priority areas for action Share the data with the staff Seek technical assistance if needed Celebrate your achievement results! Use the data to communicate, inform, provoke,

and persuade ... and Improve Your System!

Tips for Analyzing Data

106

Do you know what your students should know and be able to do each year in

math/reading/science/writing?

Can you identify the gap between where students are right now in relation to high

standards?

What instructional strategies can you use to accelerate students to attain high

standards?

Essential Questions

107

How prepared are you to effectively use assessment to determine ways to alter

instruction to meet high standards?

Do you have effective classroom-level assessments to help you clearly determine

whether students are meeting high standards?

Essential Questions

108

Please complete the evaluation

form109

addressing school improvement through data ii

Documents

way fcat scores

new fcat

way fcat scale scores

existing fcat scale

fcat equivalent scale

scores link

developmental scale

score scale