Classroom Work Counts too…

Dear All,

Lately I have been involved with many data discussions: Aims data, NECAP results, Lexia Learning, etc.  In contrast to just five years ago, we now are fortunate to have a wealth of quantitative information to inform our instruction, and, with the advent of Power School, an efficient means to organize and analyze it.  Often the resulting data mirrors teachers’ own classroom data, validating the qualitative and informal assessments teacher do constantly.  Sometimes the data uncovers something new to consider; and sometimes the data feels disconnected to the context of the classroom.  These three reactions to data remind us that the most important factor relating to data is how it is understood, how it  impacts instruction; and that is up to an effective teacher.  Confirmed by over two hundred studies, the only factor that can increase student achievement is a knowledgeable, effective teacher.

Nurturing our own professional learning is the  essential ingredient to increasing student learning.  This can be done through mandated courses or professional development opportunities, but such educational experiences can live and die in a vacuum if the school culture does not effectively utilize and affirm teacher knowledge.  Thus, effective teachers depend on school leadership to set a tone of expectancy around best practices.  This suggests an explicit goal-driven vision for both professional and student learning-clearly articulated,  implemented, and documented; a living compact that guarantees highly qualified teachers  who gather, interpret, and respond to different kinds of student performance data in a multitude of ways.

A new chapter of student data will be written with the debut The Vermont Item Bank Assessment (March 2010). Local use of this tool will provide educators with diagnostic information aligned with VT Grade Expectations to inform their instruction and improve student learning.   The item bank was created to address the gap between once-a-year  NECAP scores and the assessment needs for day-to-day instructional planning.  While data like NECAP and Aims scores  are “slices” or snapshots of student proficiency on a set task–we need to consider much much more, whether documenting student progress or planning future instruction. The state’s initiative and its invitation for schools to use these assessments at the local level shows a level of leadership described in the former paragraph.

In light of all this, I attach a general rubric for student oral book report presentations and projects-something that is done regularly in K-6 classrooms. ( Book Project Evaluation Rubric Grading Sheet ) While it is merely an example, I present it for your consideration as part of a bigger question:  Can/Should students’ demonstrated performance on tasks be collected over time to demonstrate students’ growth in communication skills?  Such evidence would cover a wide swath of  of our state grade level expectations, and could be linked to specific units of instruction at specific grades.  Would we feel more confident with our collection of student data used to report student progress  if the data included additional measures such as this?

Power School suggests that schools are gaining power over information.  And twenty-first Century teachers do have amazing tools available to them to quantify student performance.  However, only a multi-faceted data pool will reflect the many dimensions of student learning and classroom instruction.   Therefore, effective teachers must participate in an inquiry process to determine what data is collected, its weight, and how it is used to inform instruction.   If we are the most important factor in student achievement, we must engage in such inquiry.

I anticipate future discussions about the Vermont Item Bank Assessments, welcome responses to the rubric I attach, and value continued professional discourse on the role of  “student data.”

Sincerely,

Laura King

Literacy Coach, ACSU

info on item bank assessment–grade 8 and 10 only; grades 2-7 pending

Catch and Release…

Hello to ACSU users and beyond!

Click on image for NECAP information

Welcome to ACSU’s Literacy Leadership Team Website. Please visit the resource pages at the top of this post to learn more about who we are, our work in and beyond this supervisory union, and upcoming events.  As the coordinator of this group, I am initiating a monthly post (more often at times), with hopes that this blog/website will become a welcome professional resource. To become a member, simply click on the e-mail subscription link to the right.

Next week, Vermont schools’ NECAP scores will be released. These scores summarize how students performed statewide on the New England Consortium Common Assessment Program’s yearly tests in Reading, Writing and Math.  Each supervisory union and school will be able to see their results and how they compare.  I write this in anticipation of these scores and their impact on professional discourse in the weeks and months to come.

Four months ago, student data was “caught” by way of these assessments.  It is not the only way we evaluate our programs, but it’s one way in which all state schools participate; it’s a fishing derby of sorts: There are a lot of factors that determine your success at the derby-but at day’s end you will have some “net” results (excuse the pun).

Well, the fish have long since been “released,” and teachers have continued to teach their current students and observe how to they respond to various learning conditions.  It’s always the conundrum that it takes four months to see the results of this particular derby-making the results seemingly dated.  Without analysis of and reflection on the results, teachers may simply be left  with regrets, blaming the test “derby” itself; hoping that next year they have better luck-better fish.

It’s taken me awhile to fully recognize that this derby isn’t about the student “fish” at all, but the waters they swim in, and the four month lag time is actually a good thing.  Of course, we should continue teaching these students to the best of our ability and gather classroom-, school-, and district-criterion data to document their growth and progress over the course of the year.  The NECAP data will not discredit this local data about our current groups.  Rather, the NECAP “catch and release” data lets the fish themselves tell us how they swim in bigger waters.  The 2009 data is concerned with the many factors at play in our individual schools, and it, along with data from previous years, should fuel action research and reform at the school, SU, and state level.

With the year half over, I am already starting to think about the next academic year. I am looking forward to studying the 2009 data for this reason.  Where have our students made improvements, and what programmatic changes may be responsible for these improvements? Where is there still work to do? What possible shifts in instructional design could further improve student access to learning opportunities? What professional development and resources are needed to support teaching and learning-so that we can better ensure students internalize concepts and skills and can successfully demonstrate this progress?

Fairness is getting what you need; if we accept that NECAP is a fair test, the results should provide us with what we need to shape excellence for all in 21st century Vermont schools. I believe Vermont educators strive to provide this.  If we probe the results of the most recent NECAP “derby” with this in mind, discussions can propel us forward toward new teaching-learning constructs, versus backward in defense or condemnation of past ones.  Like the students who took the NECAPS in the fall, it’s our turn to keep growing and progressing forward.

Looking forward to many NECAP-related conversations! Responses welcome.

Laura