Becoming Wiser DecisionMakers: A Work In Progress

1
Becoming Wiser Decision-Makers A Work In Progress

• Illinois NWEA Members Seminar
• Nov 1, 2006
• Meridian, Rolling Meadows, IL

Edward J. DeYoung, Ph.D Assessment Systems
Architect School District U-46 eddeyoung_at_u-46.org
edeyoung_at_consultant.com
2
AGENDA

• School District U46 context
• What did we do?
• What went well?
• What would we do differently?

3
U46 Standard Characteristics Recent History

• 2003-04 Huge budget shortage
• Delayed opening of several new schools
• Significant staff reductions
• 2004-05 Move to neighborhood schools, which led
  to thousands of students going to different
  schools

4
Ethnicity Economically Disadvantaged Status

• 36.5 of students in 2004.05 received free or
  reduced lunch

• Percent of children receiving free or reduced
  lunch is increasing.
• Percent of Hispanic students is increasing and
  percent of White students is decreasing.
• Heterogeneous
• from 7 to 93 free/reduced lunch at ES level

5
(No Transcript)
6
DIP

• Assessment, Curriculum, and Instruction
• Data Management
• Refine the student data system and processes.
• Coordinate the technological capacity,
  appropriate software, and training to make
  student data accessible and meaningful for
  administrators and teachers.
• Fiscal Responsibility
• Align all resources with the Districts mission
  to increase efficiencies and effectiveness.

7
Who Makes Decisions?

• People make decisions
• Data do NOT make decisions (nor does a datum)
• Analysis and Reflection moves us
• from Data
• to Information
• to Knowledge
• to Insight
• to Decisions or more questions for which we
  need access to more data and so forth..

8
(No Transcript)
9
Started with the End in Mind

• How could/would this assessment
• Help us improve (measurable) student learning, at
  the school and at the classroom level?
• Help us align resource allocation decisions with
  the goal to improve student learning?
• Embarked on a comprehensive review of U-46
  assessments from the context of a history of
  decentralization recent budget crisis
• A potpourri of tests
• Implicit guiding assumptions
• Test the least possible to accomplish goals
• Dont test if you dont intend to use the data

10
How Are Assessments Reviewed/Selected?

• CRITERIA
• Effective Does it align with accountability
  measures and standards?
• Efficient Can it be used for multiple purposes?
  Diagnostic Program Review
• Economical What are the direct and indirect
  costs (instructional time)?
• Mandated Is it the only option?

11
Choose MAP but did not (exactly) follow the
process..
12
Demand-driven change

• Five-year implementation cycle at ES MS
• Privilege to participate with MAP (replace
  ITBS/CogAT)
• Principal and SIP teacher commitment in spring
• Test administration training and data
  interpretation training
• Technology resources
• Implementation cycle reduced to four years due to
  high level of interest in 2006-07.

13
U-46 implementation

• 2003-04 Spring ALT (Achievement Level Test)
• Selected grades _at_ 2 middle schools 2 elementary
  schools
• 2004-05 3500 students
• Grades 3rd through 6th 4 elementary schools (a
  5th in winter) (add 2nd grade in spring)
• Grades 7 8 _at_ 3 middle schools
• Limited high school participation _at_ 3 locations,
  high risk 9th grade students
• 2005-06 13,500 students
• 21 elementary schools in the fall plus 2 more in
  the winter
• 5 middle schools
• All high schools with variable levels of
  participation
• 2006-07 30,000 students
• 40 elementary schools
• 8 middle schools
• 5 high schools alternative HS settings
  primarily high risk, special education, and ELL
  students

14
Staff Development

• See calendar (updated often)
• http//Intranet/assessment or
• District Homepage and then Teacher Resources
  which takes you to assessment
• MAP Administration training
• Data Interpretation/Application training
• Stepping Stones I (3 hrs. total)
• Stepping Stones II (1.5 hrs, stipend)
• Stepping Stones III (1.5 hrs, stipend)

15
Key Roles/Services

• Proctors
• SIS data entry (TAA)
• Data Interpreter stipend in 2006-07
• Principal/Asst. Principal/Divisionals
• MAP coordinator
• Teacher
• Instructional coaches integration of C I and
  Assessment
• Data warehouse
• Data Dialogues

16
Support for Implementation

• Data Interpreter one from each building
• Instructional coaches
• Assessment, Research, Evaluation office
  School Improvements office
• Jeri Ridenour Aurora Lozano
• Laura Hill Ed DeYoung
• Chris Dennison
• Data Dialogues 12 key leadership groups (maximum
  group size of 20)
• Additional staff in 2006-07

17
The Training Vision Integrated Delivery of
Training

• Instructional Coaches
• Curriculum Roadmap
• Data interpretation of MAP, including
  differentiated instruction
• Simplicity from perspective of the school one
  person delivering services
• Complexity and challenge from perspective of
  priorities between curriculum roadmap (C I) and
  MAP/ISAT/IMAGE/PSAE/ACCESS (assessment)

18
Capacity Building District, Building, Classroom

• People
• Using and interpreting data to guide instruction
  or inform resource allocation decisions
• Becoming skillful in using data
  retrieval/display/interpretation tools
• Technology
• Procedures or policies
• general
• governing data
• Interface between technology and people

19
What do we do with data?

• District level
• Resource allocation schools at risk
• Program review
• ELL exit criteria and process
• School level
• Adjust classroom groups
• Identify students for school level interventions
• Classroom level
• Determine which areas need more emphasis
• Modify instructional groups

20
Identify Class RELATIVE Strengths and/or Areas of
Concern
Strengths
Teacher Report Mathematics Spring 2002
Grade 5
10.2
16.7
222
220
210
Whole class instruction
Instructional groups
21

• Class Breakdown by RIT

22
Class Breakdown by Goal RIT Ranges
N, Bryan (224)
23
DesCartesA Continuum of Learning
24
District Level Local Assessment for ELL students

• Exit criteria process
• Triangulation of data MAP, ACCESS, teacher
  recommendation
• Start with end in mind success in general
  classroom
• Now 70 Before 30

• Determination of which form for ACCESS A, B, or
  C
• Maximize student potential to exit
• Impact Ask us in May!

25
District School Level Predictive Relationship
between MAP ISAT or IMAGE 3rd grade example
26
School Level SIP Strategic Intervention Plans
27
What would we do differently?

• Different response from different people!!!
• Stay with the five year implementation cycle
• Quality control on training has deteriorated
• Go slower with high schools until resources are
  in place
• Be less accommodating with regard to doing
  training outside the school day
• Participate in selection/recruitment of
  instructional coaches
• CHALLENGE Sustain intensity of focus in context
  of initial success - We know it

28
Celebrate the Impact of a combination of U-46
efforts states move to equity on
cut-scoresElementary Schools
29
Celebrate the Impact of a combination of U-46
efforts states move to equity on
cut-scoresMiddle Schools
30
Opportunity

• To become wiser decision-makers as we expand our
  capacity in data collection, storage, retrieval,
  interpretation to guide instruction inform
  resource allocation decisions
• The system can make a (measurable) difference
  in student learning.

31
Further Questions?

• Ed DeYoung
• 847.888.5000 ext 5382