linking data to instruction jefferson county school district january 19, 2010
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Linking Data to Instruction
Jefferson County School DistrictJanuary 19, 2010
![Page 2: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
2
RTI Assessment Considerations
• Measurement strategies are chosen to…– Answer specific questions– Make specific decisions
• Give only with a “purpose” in mind– There is a problem if one doesn’t know why the
assessment is being given.
![Page 3: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
3
Types of Assessments1. Screening Assessments - Used for ALL students to identify
those who may need additional support (DIBELS, CBM, Office Discipline Referrals for behavior, etc.)
2. Formative Assessment/Progress Monitoring - Frequent, on-going assessments that shows whether the instruction is effective and impacting student skill development (DIBELS, CBM, etc)
3. Diagnostic Assessments - Pinpoint instructional needs for students identified in screenings (Quick Phonics Screener, Survey Level Assessments, Curriculum Based Evaluation Procedures, etc.)
ALL PART OF AN ASSESSMENT PROCESS WITHIN RTI!
![Page 4: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Universal Screening Assessments Universal screening occurs for ALL students at least three times
per year Procedures identify which students are proficient (80%) and
which are deficient (20%). Good screening measures:
Are reliable, valid, repeatable, brief, and easy to administerAre not intended to measure everything about a student, but
provide an efficient an unbiased way to identify students who will need additional support (Tier 2 or Tier 3)
Help you assess the overall health of your Core program (Are 80% of your students at benchmark/proficiency?)
![Page 5: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Why Use Fluency Measures for Screening?
• Oral Reading Fluency and Accuracy in reading connected text is one of the best indicators of overall reading comprehension (Fuchs, Fuchs, Hosp, & Jenkins, 2001)
• We always examine fluency AND accuracy
• Without examining accuracy scores, we are missing a BIG piece of the picture
• Students MUST be accurate with any skill before they are fluent.
Oral reading fluency (ORF) does not tell you everything about a student’s reading skill, but a child who cannot read fluently cannot
fully comprehend written text and will need additional support.
![Page 6: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Linking Screening Data to Instruction• Questions to consider:
– Are 80% of your students proficient based on set criteria (benchmarks, percentiles, standards, etc)?
• If not, what are the common instructional needs?– i.e. fluency, decoding, comprehension, multiplication,
fractions, spelling, capitalization, punctuation, etc
• What is your plan to meet these common instructional needs schoolwide/grade-wide?
– Improved fidelity to core?– More guided practice?– More explicit instruction?– Improved student engagement?– More professional development for staff?
![Page 7: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Progress Monitoring Assessments• Help us answer the question:
• Is what we’re doing working?• Robust indicator of academic health • Brief and easy to administer• Can be administered frequently• Must have multiple, equivalent forms
– (If the metric isn’t the same, the data are meaningless)
• Must be sensitive to growth
![Page 8: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Screening/Progress Monitoring Tools: Reading
• DIBELS PSF, NWF– Pros: Free, quick and easy, good research base, benchmarks, quick, linked
to instruction – Cons: Only useful in Grade K-2
• ORF (DIBELS, AIMSWEB, etc)– Pros: Free, good reliability and validity, easy to administer and score– Cons: May not fully account for comp in a few students
• MAZE – Pros: Quick to administer, may address comprehension more than ORF,
can administer to large groups simultaneously, useful in secondary – Cons: Time consuming to score, not as sensitive to growth as ORF
• OAKS– Pros: Already available, compares to state standards– Cons: Just passing isn’t good enough, not linked directly to instruction,
needs to be used in conjunction with other measures
![Page 9: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Screening/Progress Monitoring Tools: Math
• CBM Early Numeracy Measures – Pros: Good reliability, validity, brief and easy to administer, – Cons: Sensitivity to growth, only useful in K-2
• Math Fact Fluency– Pros: Highly predictive of struggling students– Cons: No benchmarks, only a small piece of math screening
• CBM Computation– Pros: Quick and easy to administer, sensitive to growth, surface validity– Cons: Predictive validity questionable, not linked to current standards
• CBM Concepts and Applications– Pros: Quick and easy to administer, good predictive validity. Linked to NCTM
Focal Points (AIMSWEB)– Cons: Not highly sensitive to growth, newer measures
• easyCBM – Pros: Based on NCTM Focal Points, computer-based administration and scoring– Cons: Untimed (does not account for fluency), lengthy (administer no more
than once every 3 weeks), predictive validity uncertain
![Page 10: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Screening/Progress Monitoring Tools: Writing
• CBM Writing– Pros: Easy to administer to large groups, can obtain multiple
scores from single probe– Cons: time consuming to score, does not directly measure
content of writing– Correct Writing Sequences (CWS, %CWS)
• Pros: Good reliability, validity, sensitive to growth at some grade levels• Cons: Time consuming to score, not as sensitive to growth in upper
grades, %CWS not sensitive to growth
– Correct Minus Incorrect Writing Sequences (CIWS)• Pros: Good reliability, validity, sensitive to growth in upper grades• Cons: Time consuming to score, not sensitive to growth in lower
grades
![Page 11: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Screening & Progress Monitoring Resources
• National Center Response to Intervention (www.rti4success.org)
• Intervention Central (www.interventioncentral.com)• AIMSweb (www.aimsweb.com) • DIBELS (https://dibels.uoregon.edu)• easy CBM (www.easycbm.com) • The ABC’s of CBM (Hosp, Hosp,& Howell, 2007)
![Page 12: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
• The major purpose for administering diagnostic tests is to provide information that is useful in planning more effective instruction.
• Diagnostic tests should only be given when there is a clear expectation that they will provide new information about a child’s difficulties learning to read that can be used to provide more focused, or more powerful instruction.
Diagnostic Assessments
![Page 13: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Diagnostic Assessment Questions
• “Why is the student not performing at the expected level?”
• “What is the student’s instructional need?”
Start by reviewing existing data
![Page 14: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Diagnostic Assessments
• Quick Phonics Screener (Hasbrouck)• DRA• Error Analysis• Survey Level Assessments• In-Program Assessments (mastery tests, checkouts, etc)• Curriculum-Based Evaluation Procedures
– "any set of measurement procedures that use direct observation and recording of a student’s performance in a local curriculum as a basis for gathering information to make instructional decisions”(Deno, 1987)
• Any informal or formal assessments that answer the question: Why is the student having problems?
![Page 15: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
15
The Problem Solving Model
1. Define the Problem: • What is the problem and
why is it happening?2. Design Intervention:
• What are we going to do about the problem?
3. Implement and Monitor: • Are we doing what we
intended to do?4. Evaluate Effectiveness:
• Did our plan work?
![Page 16: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Using the data to inform interventions
• What is the student missing?
• What does your data tell you?
• Start with what you already have, and ask “Do I need more info?”
Phonemic Awareness
Phonics Fluency & Accuracy
Vocabulary Comprehension
![Page 17: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Using your data to create interventions: An Example
Adapted from
![Page 18: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Organizing Fluency Screening Data:Making the Instructional Match
Group 1: Accurate and
Fluent
Group 2:Accurate but
Slow Rate
Group 3:Inaccurate and
Slow Rate
Group 4:Inaccurate but
High Rate
Regardless of the skill focus, organizing student data by looking at accuracy and fluency will assist teachers in making an appropriate instructional match!
![Page 19: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Digging Deeper with Screening Data
• Is the student accurate?– Must define accuracy expectation
• Consensus in reading research is 95%
• Is the student fluent? – Must define fluency expectation
• Fluency Measuring Tools:– Curriculum-Based Measures (CBM)– AIMSWeb (grades 1 - 8)– Fuch’s reading probes (grades 1 - 7)– DIBELS (grades K - 6)
![Page 20: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Organizing Fluency Data:Making the Instructional Match
Group 1: Accurate and
Fluent
Group 2:Accurate but
Slow Rate
Group 3:Inaccurate and
Slow Rate
Group 4:Inaccurate but
High Rate
Group 1: Dig Deeper in the areas of reading comprehension, includingvocabulary and specific comprehension strategies.Group 2: Build reading fluency skills. (Repeated Reading, Paired Reading, etc.) Embed comprehension checks/strategies.Group 3: Conduct an error analysis todetermine instructional need. Teach to the instructional need paired with fluency buildingstrategies. Embed comprehension checks/strategies.Group 4: Conduct Table-Tap Method. If studentcan correct error easily, teach student to self-monitor reading accuracy. If reader cannot self-correct errors, complete an error analysis to Determine instructional need. Teach to the instructional need.
Core Instruction
*Check Comp*
+Fluency building
+Decoding then fluency
Self-Monitoring
![Page 21: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Data Summary3rd Grade Class- Fall DIBELS: ORF => 77
Student Accuracy WCPM
Jim 97% 58 wcpm
Nancy 87% 59 wcpm
Ted 89% 90 wcpm
Jerry 98% 85 wcpm
Mary 99% 90 wcpm
![Page 22: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Day 4’sActivity 5
Group 1: Accurate and
Fluent
Group 2:Accurate but
Slow Rate
Group 3:Inaccurate and
Slow Rate
Group 4:Inaccurate
but High Rate
ACTIVITY:•Based on criteria for the grade level, place each student’s name into the appropriate box.•Organizing data based on performance(s) assists in grouping students for instructional purposes.•Students who do not perform well on comprehension tests, have a variety of instructional needs.
![Page 23: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Match the Student to the Appropriate Box:
Group 1: Accurate and Fluent
Group 2:Accurate but Slow
Rate
Group 3:Inaccurate and Slow
Rate
Group 4:Inaccurate but High
Rate
>95% acc.
And
77 wcpm.
JimJerry
Mary
Nancy Ted
Student Accuracy WCPM
Jim 97% 58 wcpm
Nancy 87% 59 wcpm
Ted 89% 90 wcpm
Jerry 98% 85 wcpm
Mary 99% 90 wcpm
![Page 24: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Regardless of Skill…
• Phonemic Awareness• Letter Naming• Letter Sounds• Beginning Decoding Skills• Sight Words• Addition• Subtraction• Fractions
![Page 25: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Instructional “Focus” Continuum
Accurate at Skill
Fluent at Skill
Able to Apply Skill
IF no, teach skill.If yes, move to fluency
If no, teach fluency/automaticityIf yes, move to application
If no, teach applicationIf yes, the move to higher level skill/concept
![Page 26: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Digging Deeper
• In order to be “diagnostic”– Teachers need to know the sequence of skill
development– Content knowledge may need further
development– How deep depends on the intensity of the
problem.
OR
![Page 27: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Phonemic Awareness Developmental Continuum
Easy
Hard
IF DIFFICULTY
DETECTED HERE..THEN checkhere!
Phoneme deletion and manipulationBlending and segmenting individual
phonemesOnset-rime blending and segmentationSyllable segmentation and blendingSentence segmentationRhymingWord comparison
Vital for Diagnostic
Process!
![Page 28: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Screening Assessments:Not Always Enough
• Screening assessments do not always go far enough in answering the question:– We will need to “DIG DEEPER!”
• Quick phonics screener• Error Analysis• Curriculum Based Evaluation
![Page 29: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
When does this happen?
How Frequent: 2-3 times per year (after benchmarking/screening occurs)
How Long: 1-2 hours per grade levelWho Attends: All grade level teachers, SPED teacher,
principal, Title staff, specialists, instructional coach
What is the Focus:
Talk about schoolwide data, evaluate health of core and needed adjustments for ALL students
Data Used: Screening
• Tier 1 Meetings
![Page 30: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
When does this happen?
How Frequent: Every 4-6 weeks (by grade level)
How Long: 30-45 minutesWho Attends: All grade level teachers, SPED teacher,
principal, Title teacher, specialists, instructional coach
What is the Focus:
Talk about intervention groups. Adjust, continue, discontinue interventions based on district decision rules
Data Used: Screening, Progress Monitoring, sometimes Diagnostic
• Tier 2 Meetings
![Page 31: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
When does this happen?
How Frequent: As needed based on individual student need and district decision rules
How Long: 30-60 minutesWho Attends: Gen ed teacher, SPED teacher, principal,
specialists, school psych, instructional coach, parents
What is the Focus:
Problem-solve individual student needs. Design individualized interventions using data.
Data Used: Screening, Progress Monitoring, and Diagnostic
• Tier 3 (Individual Problem Solving) Meetings
![Page 32: Linking Data to Instruction Jefferson County School District January 19, 2010](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022032517/56649ca85503460f9496aab3/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Useful Resources• What Works Clearinghouse
– http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/• Florida Center for Reading Research
– http://www.fcrr.org/ • National Center on Response to Intervention
– http://www.rti4success.org/• Center on Instruction
– http://www.centeroninstruction.org/• Oregon RTI Project
– http://www.oregonrti.org/• Curriculum Based Evaluation: Teaching and Decision
Making (Howell & Nolet, 2000)• The ABCs of CBM (Hosp, Hosp & Howell, 2007)