This document discusses the use of multiple data sources to inform instruction and principal evaluation. It provides an overview of Criterion 3 which focuses on recognizing and seeking out various data sources, analyzing and interpreting data to guide school improvement efforts, and assisting staff to use data to modify teaching and learning. Specific data on demographic changes and performance at Everett High School is presented, including comparisons to other high performing schools and longitudinal staff perception surveys. Resistance to change and accountability is also examined.
1 of 59
More Related Content
Criterion3
1. THE USE OF DATA TO INFORM
INSTRUCTION AND AS AN
ARTIFACT FOR PRINCIPAL
EVALUATION
Unpacking Criterion 3
2. CRITERION 3
Element 3.1: Recognizes Element 3.3: Implements
and seeks out multiple data driven plan for
data sources improved teaching and
Element 3.2 Analyzes and learning
interprets multiple data Element 3.4 Assists staff
sources to inform school- to use data to guide,
level improvement efforts modify and improve
classroom teaching and
learning
13. School Year 2011-2012
OUTCOMES
Ext Grad
INDICATORS Reading Writing Math Science Rate Average
Achievement of non-low income
7 7 6 6 5 6.20
ACHIEVEMENT students
INDEX
Achievement of low income
4 5 4 3 3 3.80
students
Achievement vs. peers 5 4 4 7 4 4.80
Improvement from the previous
4 4 5 7 4 4.80
year
Index Scores 4.90
5.00 5.00 4.75 5.75 4.00
Good
2011-12 Achievement Gap
Reading Math Ext Graduation Rate
Met Met Met
Peers Imp Peers Imp Peers Imp
INDICATORS Std Std Std Average
Achievement of Black, Pacific
Islander, American
4 5 7 4 5 7 2 2 1 4.11
Indian/Alaskan Native, Hispanic
stds
Achievement of white and Asian
6 5 4 5 3 5 5 4 4 4.56
students
Achievement Gap 0.45
14. LIMITED ENGLISH (ELL)
STUDENTS Building
Number of
ELL Students
NUMBER OF STUDENTS TESTED Tested
Cascade HS 71
English Language Acquisition: Number of Students Cedar Wood 17
Number of Students Tested on WELPA Eisenhower MS 40
Emerson Elem 152
0 50 100 150 200 250
Everett HS 101
Everett HS 101
Evergreen MS 79
Cascade HS 71
Cedar Wood 17
Forest View Elem 35
Eisenhower MS 40
Garfield Elem 55
Emerson Elem 152 Gateway MS 4
Evergreen MS 79 Hawthorne Elem 229
Forest View Elem 35 Heatherwood MS 26
Garfield Elem 55 Henry M. Jackson HS 31
Gateway MS 4 Jackson Elem 35
Hawthorne Elem 229
Jefferson 94
Heatherwood MS 26
Lowell 81
Henry M. Jackson HS 31
Madison 128
Jackson Elem 35
Mill Creek 41
Jefferson 94
Lowell 81
Monroe 61
Madison 128 North MS 78
Mill Creek 41 Penny Creek 57
Monroe 61 Sequoia HS 12
North MS 78 Silver Firs 40
Penny Creek 57 Silver Lake 92
Sequoia HS 12
View Ridge 55
Silver Firs 40
Whittier 28
Silver Lake 92
Woodside 93
View Ridge 55
Whittier 28
Everett Average: Elems 76
Woodside 93
Everett Average: MS 45
Everett Average: HS 54
15. ELL STUDENTS REACHING PROFICIENCY
AMAO - 2 English Language Acquisition: Transitioning
Percent of Students Transitioning (AMAO-2)
Transitioning= Student scoring at Level-4 and Transtioning out of ELL Services
Everett HS: Total number of ELL students tested in 2012
101 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0
(used in AMAO-2)
Everett HS
Cascade HS
Cedar Wood
Eisenhower MS
The percentage on this Emerson Elem
Evergreen MS
chart represents the Forest View Elem
percent of students who Garfield Elem
Gateway MS
demonstrated English Hawthorne Elem
Heatherwood MS
language proficiency by Henry M. Jackson HS
scoring a Level-4 on the Jackson Elem
Jefferson
WELPA assessment. Lowell
Madison
Mill Creek
Requires a minimum N of Monroe
North MS
20 students. Penny Creek
Sequoia HS
Silver Firs
Silver Lake
View Ridge
Whittier
Woodside
AMAO-2 Target: 7.1% of 2012 State
students transitioning Result: 11.4%
20. GRADE 10 CRITICAL THINKING :
COMPARISON OF SCHOOL TO STATE
Difference Between School and State Percents
Reading - Critical Thinking
100
% with similar performance
50.0
80
25.0
60
40
0.0
20 -3.7 -5.1 -6.8
0 -25.0
Everett High
District State
School
% 78.7 85.0 85.5 -50.0
2009-10 2010-11 2011-12
29. PLAN: COMMON CALENDAR
Successes: Next Steps:
• Common core activities • Increasing frequency of
• Common formative assessments formative assessments
• Common learning targets and common learning
targets
33. STUDENT ENGAGEMENT
Successful turnout for
after school review
sessions.
• connect-Ed message
• teacher contact
• meeting w/ success
coordinator
Hands-on experiences
and demonstrations as
standard is re-taught
34. FINC RATES
EHS FINCs Semester 1
SY 2013
Student FINC
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 s Total Total
American Indian or
Alaskan Native 4 1 1 0 1 0 0 7 14
Asian 11 3 2 2 0 1 0 19 37
Black or African
American 13 2 5 1 2 2 0 25 58
Hispanic or Latino 38 16 21 10 7 5 0 97 238
Native Hawaiian or
Other Pacific Islander 2 1 2 2 1 0 0 8 23
Two or More Races 8 0 3 2 1 0 0 14 30
White 111 61 41 22 13 16 0 264 605
Grand Total 187 84 75 39 25 24 0 434 1005
520 1284
36. BIOLOGY END OF COURSE
ASSESSMENT PREP
• Biology, district-
wide, common
assessment used for
1st semester final
• Using data to target
weaknesses prior to
EOC in spring
screenshot of classroom results
37. PLAN: DATA TALKS
– Algebra 2 teachers with administrator
– Informing instructional decisions for next
year and current year
– Led to discussion on grading
38. PLAN: COLLEGIAL TIME
– Discussion of common grading of the
subject, and assessments
– Rotating weekly
– Creating an ELL version of the final in
Algebra 1
– Integration of GLAD strategies into
lessons and activities
39. PLAN: COLLEGIAL TIME
– Creating manipulative and graphic organizers for student use
– Creating of common formative and summative assessments in
Algebra 1, Geometry,Algebra 2 and Pre-calculus.
40. Analyzes and interprets
multiple data sources to
inform school-level
TABLE improvement efforts
TALK
What other methods do you
suggest that support teachers
in the analysis and
interpretation of multiple data
sources?
41. 3.3: IMPLEMENTS DATA
DRIVEN PLAN FOR
IMPROVED TEACHING AND
LEARNING
AWSP Leadership Framework Planning with Data
44. MSP/HSPE Annual Measurable Objective (AMO): 74.8 percent of students will meet standard in Mathematics as
measured by MSP/HSPE.
of the Continuously students will meet as measured by
AMO Target: 63.9% Enrolled (CE)* Low Income standard in mathematics MSP/HSPE.
of the Continuously students will meet as measured by
AMO Target: 50.8% Enrolled (CE)* Hispanic standard in mathematics MSP/HSPE.
of the Continuously Special students will meet as measured by
AMO Target: 34.8% Enrolled (CE)* Education standard in mathematics MSP/HSPE.
S.M.A.R.T. GOAL:
Increase the number of students passing Algebra 1 and Geometry by 5% as compared to 2011-2012 data.
Evidence of Person(s) Resources
SIP Actions implementation Responsible Needed
Timeline
Data on 3-5 EOC assessed math targets will be Teachers will have extensive Assistant Time for Data Talks
gathered and compiled through common data showing where each Principal Math Teacher held by 12/15,
assessments. A "Data Talk" conference will be student is performing. Math and Assistant and 5/1
held with the teacher and administrator to The data is converted to an Teachers Principal to
create a plan for getting each student to action plan and shared with meet
standard. the administrator.
(PDCA Step 1) (CSR Recommendation)
Algebra, Geometry and Algebra 2 teachers will Each teacher will have a clear Math District Initial target
design, develop, and implement instructional understanding of the tested teachers developed calendar
calendars for each target. GLE's and how they align with instructional developed
(PDCA Steps 2 & 3) the Common Core State calendar 9/12
Standards.
Common Ongoing
Work Time to development
further refine of calendar
45. TABLE Implements data driven plan
for improved teaching and
TALK learning
Relate this cycle for
implementing a data driven
plan to the process that
occurs in your district. What
recommendation or
suggestion would you make?
46. 3.4 ASSISTS STAFF TO USE
DATA TO GUIDE, MODIFY AND
IMPROVE CLASSROOM
TEACHING AND LEARNING
AWSP Leadership Framework Planning with Data
47. Algebra 1 teachers
meet every Friday
Plan lessons
Create common formative
assessment
summative activities
assessments so all classes doing
the same
Adjust lessons based
on students
Formative
assessments
53. PLAN: LEVELING
Successes:
– Backwards planning
Next Steps:
– Adjust instruction based
on knowledge of leveling
– Develop common district
assessments based on
leveled standards
55. DO: CONTENT AREA READING
Successes:
– Incorporating AVID skills
Next Steps:
– Refining assignments and
assessments
56. CHECK
Successes:
– Common district assessments on LMS
• Aligned to standards, improving validity and quality of test questions
– Biology teacher attended OSPI EOC question writing/training session
Next Steps:
– Increase common
formative
assessments
among EHS
classes
57. ACT
Successes: Average Summative Assessment
– Teaching reading strategies: Scores, Biology 2011-2012
Marking the text and questions Summative Average Score
Assessment
Classification 69.85%
Cells 72.25%
DNA/Cell Cycle 64.05%
Semester 2 Final Breakdown Protein Synthesis 67.9%
Genetics/Meiosis 64.45%
Section of Final Average Score
Semester 1 Final 68.4%
Evolution 90% Evolution 76%
Photosynthesis 75.75 Photosynthesis 69.2%
Ecology 74.2%
Ecology 74.24%
Semester 2 Final 79%
58. TABLE 3.4 Assists staff to use data
TALK
to guide, modify and improve
classroom teaching and
learning
What other methods do you
use to achieve this goal?
59. EVERETT HIGH IS A
GOOD SCHOOL…..
on the path to EXEMPLARY
status…through the use of data to
inform instruction
Destination Everett