1 Harnessing the Power of Data: Effecting Improvement in Schools Please answer our survey at

1

Harnessing the Power of Data: Effecting Improvement in Schools

Please answer our survey at

www.zellerandassociates.com/IL-TCE.

It’s “zeller and associates” as all one word with “dot com”…

Forward slash…

And “IL-TCE” must be in CAPS!

22

Harnessing the Power of Data: Effecting Improvement in Schools

Dr. Leslie R. WilsonGerry Zeller

June 2009

33

Agenda

I. Beginnings

II. Illustrative Story

III. The Cycle

IV. Bernhardt’s Four Lenses

V. Tools

VI. CAI Tools

VII. Solutions

VIII. Reflection and Evaluation

4

Protocols for this Academy

55

Survey Results

How much experience is in the room? How involved are you with data? What do you hope to learn today?

66

Know and be able to do

School Improvement = Problem Solving Problem Solving = Process Bernhardt’s Four Lenses

Demographics Student Learning School Processes Perceptions

77

Story

88

Area of Concern

99

Targeted Concern

There were approximately 15 students out of total student population of 1,000 that were dropping out of school when they reached their 16th birthday.

1010

Generate Hypotheses: Answer the “Why?”

1111

Hypotheses Generated

Young men leave school. Low income students do not value education. Students who get discipline referrals want out. The lower the GPA, the more likely one is to walk. Parents didn’t finish high school, children won’t. Single parent families and similar find it difficult to

shepherd students through school. These students come to us with poor test scores. These students earn too few credits. These students are frequently tardy or leave early.

1212

Determine, Collect, Disaggregate and Analyze Needed Data

Gender

GPA

SES

Discipline

Parental Background

Family Makeup

Entry Test Scores

Credits

Attendance

No

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

1313

Develop Solution Criteria

1. Diploma/GED (Rigor)

2. On Campus Program (Relationships)

3. Quick Successes (Relevance)

4. Non-traditional School Day (Relevance)

5. In-depth Knowledge of/Caring for Students (Relationships)

1414

Investigate Solutions

Brainstorm: What ideas do we have? SBR: What does research suggest? Best Practice: What are other schools

doing?

1515

Select Best Match to Criteria: Late School

Diploma/GED On Campus Program Quick Successes Non-traditional School Day In-depth Knowledge

of/Caring for Students

1616

Implement Solution

Human Resources Material/Facility Resources Policies/Procedures

1717

Communicate Solution

Constituencies• Formally• Informally

1818

Monitor Progress

1919

Monitor Progress

Method Frequency Responsibility

2020

21

22

What Does Your Improvement Model Look Like?

23

Mission

Why do we exist?

Vision

What promise have we made to our community?

What's Perfect?

24

How well are we keeping our promises?

Student Learning Lens

Are all students meeting standards?

Are they in-step with their peers nationally?

Internationally?

2525

Meeting Standards

Interactive Illinois Report Card Performance Over Time

By Grade Level By Subject Area By Cohort

Comparison To Others Scatter Plots Compare Tool

2626

Meeting Standards Nationally

College Board http://www.collegeboard.com/splash

ACT http://www.act.org/

Advanced Placement Newsweek

27

Meeting Standards Internationally

PISA

Program for International Student Assessment

TIMMS

Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study

28

How well does what we do help us keep our promises?

School Processes Lens

Do they get enough instruction?

Do we put them in the right place?

2929

State Report Card

3030

Special Educ. Profile

31

32

33

How well are we keeping our promises to ALL students? Enrollment Mobility Drop out/Retention Ethnicity

Gender Grade Discipline Referrals Suspensions/

Expulsions

34

How well does the WHOLE community perceive we are doing? Staff Students Parents Alumni Community

3535

Bernhardt Perception SurveysSocial – Emotional Measures

When I am at school, I feel:

3636

On-line Survey Tools

Survey Monkey

http://www.surveymonkey.com/ Zoomerang

http://info.zoomerang.com/ Profiler Pro

http://www.profilerpro.com/

3737

3838

Do We Have the Whole Picture?

39

How well are we keeping our promises?

Do some areas need attention?

4040

Generate Hypotheses

1. Eighth graders cannot do Math.

2. Eighth grade teachers cannot teach Math.

3. We do not use the appropriate eighth grade textbook.

4. The test is too hard.

5. …

20. It’s the drinking water.

41

Correlations

Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner

Reading and Writing

42

What is it that we are doing that might contribute to our results?

43

HoPs are explanations

That come from school and classroom factors

About practices that can be altered

44

HoPs should not be about

Characteristics of students

Unalterable factors

45

HoPs

Instead of

These students are poor.

Use

Students of poverty are not gaining ample access to reading materials from our school.

46

Data Ground Rules

No blaming students No blaming teachers Data are just information Use data for instructional purposes De-emotionalize data

47

Analyze Data

4848

The Five “Gets”

1. Get Data

2. Get Them Electronic

3. Get Them Disaggregated

4. Get Them Graphical

5. Get Talking (Bias and Consensus)

49

Get It Graphical: 1869

50

Get It Graphical: 2009

http://www.wordle.net/

51

Graph the dataOR

Highlight patterns

AYP Projections

61.0% 61.0% 61.0%

67.5% 67.5% 67.5%

74.0% 74.0% 74.0%

80.5%

87.0%

93.5%

100%

37.0% 37.0% 37.0%

47.5% 47.5% 47.5%

58.0% 58.0% 58.0%

68.5%

79.0%

89.5%

100%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

45.0%

50.0%

55.0%

60.0%

65.0%

70.0%

75.0%

80.0%

85.0%

90.0%

95.0%

100.0%

School Year

% a

t Pro

fici

ent

& A

dva

nce

d

Reading Math

Reading 61.0% 61.0% 61.0% 67.5% 67.5% 67.5% 74.0% 74.0% 74.0% 80.5% 87.0% 93.5% 100%

Math 37.0% 37.0% 37.0% 47.5% 47.5% 47.5% 58.0% 58.0% 58.0% 68.5% 79.0% 89.5% 100%

2001-02

2002-03

2003-04

2004-05

2005-06

2006-07

2007-08

2008-09

2009-10

2010-11

2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

Percent P & A in Math by Grade Level 2005-06

66

78

63

5755

53

60

64

68

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Gr. 3 Gr. 4 Gr. 5 Gr. 6 Gr. 7 Gr. 8 Gr. 9 Gr. 10 Gr. 11

Grade

% P

& A

3 4 5

2003-04 54 60 50

2004-05 82 55 55

2005-06 78 68 54

Get It Graphical

5252

Analysis Tools

5353

Analysis Tools

Databases such as MS Access Spreadsheets such as MS Excel Inspiration’s InspireData Key Curriculum Press’ Fathom Data Warehouse

5454

SEC: Curriculum, Instruction, and Professional Development

55

56

See Workbook

Investigate Solutions

5757

Cawelti’s Research

Cawelti, Gordon. Handbook of Research on Improving Student Achievement (3rd Ed.). Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service, 2004.

Meta-analysis by Subject Area

58

5959

Six Types of Involvement1. Parenting2. Communicating3. Volunteering4. Learning at Home5. Decision Making6. Collaborating with the Community

A Team A Plan

6060

6161

In Summary

School Improvement = Problem Solving Problem Solving = Process Bernhardt’s Four Lenses

Demographics Student Learning School Processes Perceptions

6262

Reflection

Reflect Share Use

6363

Thank-you

Dr. Leslie R. WilsonWilson Educational Consulting, Inc.drlrwilson@aol.com312.335.9526

Mr. Gerry ZellerZeller and Associates

gzeller@zellerandassociates.com847.828.4606

Zeller and Associates