1 / 36

From Data to Instruction

From Data to Instruction. The Implications for ELLs. Nichole Neuhard English Language Learner Program Coordinator Erlanger -Elsmere independent Schools. Our objectives today are to… Explore multiple methods of determining student progress

zaide
Télécharger la présentation

From Data to Instruction

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. From Data to Instruction The Implications for ELLs Nichole Neuhard English Language Learner Program Coordinator Erlanger-Elsmere independent Schools

  2. Our objectives today are to… • Explore multiple methods of determining student progress • Discuss targeted interventions to address learning needs of students who are struggling to make progress and/or struggling to reach attainment • Project progress for goal setting (and sanity keeping) Goals

  3. As a teacher: • Did my class meet the target? • Did my class have adequate growth? • Did each student meet the target? • Did each student meet their growth goal? • If they didn’t what can I do? • Is this test showing their true ability? What I Want to Know…

  4. As a principal (or district administrator): • Did the school meet the targets? • Did my school have adequate growth? • Did each grade level meet the target? • Did each grade level have adequate growth? • Is this test showing their true ability? What I Want to Know…

  5. School Overview (Dynamic Reports) Individual Student Reports Class by RIT or Class by Subject 1. MAP

  6. School Overview (Dynamic Reports) Did the school meet the targets? Did my school have adequate growth? Did each grade level meet the target? Did each grade level have adequate growth? 1. MAP

  7. Above Growth Index Below Growth Index Above Projected Proficiency Above Projected Proficiency Below Projected Proficiency Below Projected Proficiency Above Growth Index Below Growth Index Where do you think your students are?

  8. Above Growth Index School: 11.9% ELLs: 1.3% ELLs Only: 5.7% Below Growth Index School: 58.5% ELLs: 8.5% ELLs Only: 35.7% Above Projected Proficiency Above Projected Proficiency Below Projected Proficiency Below Projected Proficiency Above Growth Index Below Growth Index School: 11.9% ELLs: 8.5% ELLs Only: 35.7% School: 17.6% ELLs: 5.5% ELLs Only: 22.9% School Overview: Reading

  9. Above Growth Index School: 11.9% ELLs: 1.3% ELLs Only: 5.7% Below Growth Index School: 58.5% ELLs: 8.5% ELLs Only: 35.7% Above Projected Proficiency Above Projected Proficiency Below Projected Proficiency Below Projected Proficiency Above Growth Index Below Growth Index 2 1 School: 11.9% ELLs: 8.5% ELLs Only: 35.7% School: 17.6% ELLs: 5.5% ELLs Only: 22.9% School Overview: Reading

  10. ELL Progress versus Mainstream 1. MAP

  11. ELL Average Growth 1. MAP

  12. Individual Student Reports Did the student meet the target? Did the student meet their growth goal? Class by RIT or Class by Subject Did the class meet the target? Did the class have adequate growth? 1. MAP

  13. Individual Student Report

  14. This is when our other assessment tools come in to help! Is this test showing their true ability?

  15. English Language Proficiency Test Scores on a scale from 1 to 6. Exit score is 5.0 or above. Assesses language proficiency using content specific vocabulary and tasks. Teacher Reports or School/District Frequency Report or Student Data File 2. ACCESS for ELLs

  16. ELP Levels: Performance Definitions

  17. Teacher Report

  18. Teacher Reports or School/District Frequency Report or Student Data File Students in 2nd grade who met their MAP grade-level target for reading and/or math scored a 4.1 or above on ACCESS. Several students who scored above ACCESS 4.1 did not meet their targets. One student who scored a 5.7 on ACCESS did not meet her reading or math target. 2. ACCESS for ELLs

  19. Students in grades 3-5 who met their MAP grade-level target for reading scored a 4.4 or above on ACCESS. Two students who scored above ACCESS 4.6 did not meet their reading targets. No other 3rd-5th grade ELL met their MAP reading target. Students in grades 3-5 who met their MAP grade-level target for math scored a 2.9 or above on ACCESS. 2. ACCESS for ELLs

  20. Of the 4th and 5th grade students who met MAP reading targets (who scored 4.4 or above on ACCESS), 50% scored Proficient and 50% scored Apprentice in reading on KCCT. Of the 4th and 5th grade students who met MAP math targets (who scored 2.9 or above on ACCESS), 12.5% scored Distinguished, 50% scored Proficient and 37.5% scored Apprentice in math on KCCT. 3. KCCT

  21. What about what you wouldn’t expect to see? And these, for the most part, are situations that you would expect to see…

  22. English language learners progress at different rates. Students can seem the same but are very different. • Both students • were born in the U.S. and have received English only instruction since Kindergarten. • have attended the same elementary school for at least 4 years. • have progressed well on the ACCESS English language proficiency test. Student A: Student B: Who are ELLs?

  23. However, their MAP scores show a difference. Student A: Student B:

  24. And their KCCT results from 2008-09 show a difference. Student A: Student B: Novice Apprentice Proficient Distinguished READING 300 320 340 373 380 MATHEMATICS Novice Apprentice Proficient Distinguished 300 320 340 364 380

  25. English language learners progress at different rates. Students can seem the same but are very different. In contrast, we may see students in the exact opposite scenario, high KCCT and MAP and lower ACCESS scores. Most of the time ACCESS, MAP, and KCCT are related. As language proficiency improves so does academic performance. Who are ELLs?

  26. Every other data tool you have! (DIBELS, AIMSweb, Voyager, Compass, SRA, Rewards, FastForWord, and teacher-created assessments tracking interventions) 4. Everything Else!

  27. Where is the student’s exact weakness? For our sample student it is not with English language proficiency. It is with the grade level content. MAP can help! Class by RIT –Subject – Student’s Name • Will show you the student’s areas of weakness within each subject. • Use DesCartes to help you plan. Design Targeted Interventions

  28. RIT Band for Reading

  29. RIT Band for Math

  30. Design Targeted Interventions

  31. Questions I would ask of the student’s learning environment: • Is the content being “presented” at the student’s level? – DesCartes can help! • Is the student participating in the “presentation” of the content? • What additional opportunities does the student have to learn the same content? (including research-validated interventions if needed) Design Targeted Interventions

  32. MAP • Use the Academic Growth Projections spreadsheet. Can be used throughout the year with student to set reasonable goals. • Set reasonable goals with students. 12-15 points in a year (no matter what their starting RIT) is reasonable. ACCESS • Some growth is good. 1.0 point is great! KCCT • Use the tables from “A Study of the Alignment of the NWEA RIT Scale with the KCCT System.” Project Progress

  33. We explored multiple methods of determining student progress. • We discussed targeted interventions to address learning needs of students who are struggling to make progress and/or struggling to reach attainment. • We learned about resources to help us project progress for goal setting (and sanity keeping). Goals

More Related