Utilizing Data to Inform Practice
Essential Question: How can we use data to inform and improve our pratice?
Reflection: Information Improves Instruction!
I was invited to construct professional development for my staff with the intention of improving instruction and, yes, ultimately improving test scores too.
I had three goals:
1. Erode some of the fear of data and make it accessible since many staff had never approached data before.
2. Stay focused on the goal of improving results in the classroom.
3. Teach the teachers ways to teach the kids so that the results we see in the classroom mirror the results we see on the state tests.
I was given 30 minutes, once a month, from January through May. My staff teaches 6-9th grade and included 14 teachers of math, history, science, physical education, and language arts.
Below is the schedule I worked out with my administration. Scroll down for my notes and reflections on each step of the process.
![](http://www.weebly.com/weebly/images/file_icons/pdf.png)
data_discussion_spring_2010.pdf | |
File Size: | 56 kb |
File Type: |
Reflection: Information Improves Instruction!
1st meeting: I had staff brainstorm all the ways they gather information to decide if students are learning or not. This helped open us to the idea that, though we are focusing on test scores, we know that these are not the only way to evaluate our instruction or the progress of our students. I passed out copies of the released test questions and asked staff to try answering some of them. It was good to remember what it is like to test and to see the kinds of questions that will be asked. Some teachers had seen this material before and some had not. Lastly, we broke into departmental groups and looked at the state's blueprints for each content area. I asked staff to note which areas are most emphasized and use this to reflect upon their instruction--are they covering material adequately in class? Afterward, I sent out this survey (insert link) to help me gauge their needs and thoughts.
2nd Meeting: I met with my administration to take a look at past STAR scores. We wanted to decide what was a reasonable amount of data to ask teachers to digest and what information might help them think about how data could inform their instruction. We decided to:
The meeting went well and staff asked a lot of questions about interpreting the data sheets the state sends to schools. It was clear to me that more time could be spent in looking at the intricacies of scores. I explained that, being such a small school, it is hard to take this data too seriously as a handful of unusually bright or below level students affect the scores dramatically. For example, last year's algebra class had 17 students so it is misleading when you see that 5% are "below basic" because only 1 student scored below basic. We also discussed how unfortunate it is that the state is not interested in tracking the progress of a group of students from year to year (charting their growth) but in comparing each class to the one before it. We thought it would be interesting to look up the 6th grade scores for last year's 8th grade group as this would give us a better picture of their progress during their time at our school.
Content teachers ran out of time for a good discussion about sub-strand scores. I asked them to look into their lowest sub-strand score and try to determine if the low score was due to the content of those questions or the format of those questions. For example, our students struggle with Writing Application questions but the English department feels this is because we work on the process of writing in class and the questions on the test are very artificial to the way writing actually happens. In this case, we have to decide whether we want to spent time teaching students how to answer these disconnected questions or if it is more important to continue to teach students to use the writing process.
3rd Meeting: test taking skills brainstorm
4th Meeting: motivation
1st meeting: I had staff brainstorm all the ways they gather information to decide if students are learning or not. This helped open us to the idea that, though we are focusing on test scores, we know that these are not the only way to evaluate our instruction or the progress of our students. I passed out copies of the released test questions and asked staff to try answering some of them. It was good to remember what it is like to test and to see the kinds of questions that will be asked. Some teachers had seen this material before and some had not. Lastly, we broke into departmental groups and looked at the state's blueprints for each content area. I asked staff to note which areas are most emphasized and use this to reflect upon their instruction--are they covering material adequately in class? Afterward, I sent out this survey (insert link) to help me gauge their needs and thoughts.
2nd Meeting: I met with my administration to take a look at past STAR scores. We wanted to decide what was a reasonable amount of data to ask teachers to digest and what information might help them think about how data could inform their instruction. We decided to:
- Provide the grade-wide data from last year's tests and ask teachers to graph this information in terms of proficiency by content area. This would give teachers a visual to help them answer the questions: Are the scores representative of what you see in the classroom? How do we feel we're doing overall as a school?
- Provide content area teams with the breakdown scores for their content area. This should spark a conversation about whether their is a sub-strand that shows particular strength or weakness and, again, whether this connects with what they are seeing in the classroom.
The meeting went well and staff asked a lot of questions about interpreting the data sheets the state sends to schools. It was clear to me that more time could be spent in looking at the intricacies of scores. I explained that, being such a small school, it is hard to take this data too seriously as a handful of unusually bright or below level students affect the scores dramatically. For example, last year's algebra class had 17 students so it is misleading when you see that 5% are "below basic" because only 1 student scored below basic. We also discussed how unfortunate it is that the state is not interested in tracking the progress of a group of students from year to year (charting their growth) but in comparing each class to the one before it. We thought it would be interesting to look up the 6th grade scores for last year's 8th grade group as this would give us a better picture of their progress during their time at our school.
Content teachers ran out of time for a good discussion about sub-strand scores. I asked them to look into their lowest sub-strand score and try to determine if the low score was due to the content of those questions or the format of those questions. For example, our students struggle with Writing Application questions but the English department feels this is because we work on the process of writing in class and the questions on the test are very artificial to the way writing actually happens. In this case, we have to decide whether we want to spent time teaching students how to answer these disconnected questions or if it is more important to continue to teach students to use the writing process.
3rd Meeting: test taking skills brainstorm
4th Meeting: motivation