270 likes | 407 Views
Using Data to Plan for Effective Professional Development. 2012 NDE Data Conference It’s More Than Numbers April 2-3 Kearney, NE. Sue Anderson, Ph.D., ESU 3 Debbie Schraeder , ESU 3. Session Topics. ESU 3 Rationale for Data Analysis Framework Process Findings Using the Results.
E N D
Using Data to Plan for Effective Professional Development 2012 NDE Data Conference It’s More Than Numbers April 2-3 Kearney, NE Sue Anderson, Ph.D., ESU 3 Debbie Schraeder, ESU 3
Session Topics • ESU 3 Rationale for Data Analysis • Framework • Process • Findings • Using the Results
Rationale • Understanding student achievement levels will: • assist in planning for effective professional development • assist supporting schools’ improvement efforts
Data Analysis Framework • 3 Critical Questions • What do the data show? • Why might this be? • How should we respond?
2010-2011 NeSA Results – ESU 3 School Districts • Data review on December 16, 2011 • Individual • Team Analysis – Content Areas • District level SOSR data – Grades 3-8, 11 • NeSA Math– All students - Overall/Sub Score Performance • NeSA Reading – All students – Overall/Sub Score Performance • NeSA Writing – All students • Demographic Data • Enrollment
Data Sets 2010-2011 Demographic Data– ESU 3 School Districts
Individual Work Review the data content Use the worksheet to record observations and reflections
Group Work Share findings from individual analysis Discuss possible reasons for results • Offer suggestions for appropriate responses
What Do The Data Show? • 2011 NeSA Reading • Grade 3 (state proficiency – 70.95%)– 3 districts below • Grade 4 (state proficiency – 75.39%) – 6 districts below • Grade 5 (state proficiency – 70.01%)– 4 districts below • Grade 6 (state proficiency – 73.72%)– 1 districts below • Grade 7 (state proficiency – 73.88%)– 3 districts below • Grade 8 (state proficiency – 71.44%)– 2 districts below • Grade 11 (state proficiency – 67.32%) – 5 districts below
What Do The Data Show? 2010 and 2011 NeSA Reading Proficiency Progress • Elementary • Grade 3 – 5 districts (2010/4) • Grade 4 – 4 districts (2010/6) • Grade 5 – 6 districts (2010/4) • Middle • Grade 6 – 5 districts (2010/1) • Grade 7 – 5 districts (2010/3) • Grade 8 – 3 districts (2010/2) • High School • Grade 11 – 2 districts (2010/5)
What Do The Data Show? 2011 NeSA Reading Overall • 9 districts ABOVE at ALL grade levels • 7 districts BELOW at 2 or more grade levels • Comprehension – 8 districts BELOW at 2 or more grade levels • Vocabulary – 6 districts BELOW at 2 or more grade levels 2011 NeSA Reading Sub Scores
What Do The Data Show? • 2010 NeSA Math • Grade 3 (state proficiency – 67.40%) – 6 districts below • Grade 4 (state proficiency – 67.55%) – 9 districts below • Grade 5 (state proficiency – 65.96%) – 6 districts below • Grade 6 (state proficiency – 62.88%) – 5 districts below • Grade 7 (state proficiency – 61.48%) – 5 districts below • Grade 8 (state proficiency – 60.58%) – 5 districts below • Grade 11 (state proficiency – 53.86%) – 6 districts below
What Do The Data Show? 2011 NeSA Math Overall • 5 districts ABOVE at ALL grade levels • 10 districts BELOW at 2 or more grade levels
What Do The Data Show? 2011 NeSA Math Sub Score Results • Number Sense • 8 districts BELOW at 2 or more grade levels • Grades 3, 4, 5, 8 of greatest concern • Algebraic • 9 districts BELOW at 2 or more grade levels • Grades 4, 5, 6, 7,8 of greatest concern • Geometric/Measurement • 9 districts BELOW at 2 or more grade levels • Grades 3, 4, 7, 8 of greatest concern • Data Analysis/Probability • 9 districts BELOW at 2 or more grade levels • Grades 3, 4, 5, 7,8, 11 of greatest concern
What Do The Data Show? • 2011 NeSA Writing • Grade 4 (state proficiency – 4.00) – 2/18 districts below • Grade 8 (state proficiency – 4.33) – 3/18 districts below • Grade 11 (Not Tested) • 15/18 districts meeting or exceeding proficiency at Grades 4 and 8 • 1 district at 100% proficiency at Grades 4 and 8
Why Might This Be? • Impact of student enrollment on proficiency outcomes • Impact of FRL, SpEd, and ELL status on performance • District and building improvement and leadership processes • Levels to which curriculum and NeSA tests are aligned • Levels to which curriculum is articulated vertically and horizontally
How Should We Respond? • Align professional development to school and district outcomes for student achievement • Encourage/support ongoing and focused professional development • Align regional programs to district needs related to improving student achievement • Provide expertise in curriculum and instruction in districts with more limited resources • Assist schools in using data to inform improvement processes
ESU #3 Grade Levels Not Proficient • 2011 NeSA Reading, Math, Writing
ESU #3 Grade Levels Not Proficient • 2011 NeSA Reading, Writing, Math
Using the Results • Share data analysis findings with ESU 3 districts via Professional Development Advisory • Use results to inform decisions about regional professional development offerings • Use results to assist schools in their improvement efforts