NWEA Spring Institute ACS Cobham March 28-29 2014 Stakeholders Presentation by Richard Harrold, Amanda Briggs and Jodi Moore
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

NWEA Spring Institute ACS Cobham March 28-29 2014 Stakeholders Presentation by Richard Harrold, Amanda Briggs and Jodi Moore

on

  • 118 views

Presentation about reporting MAP to stakeholders in the international school community. The presenters are MAP coordinators at the UK's largest international school. They presented a Protocol of ...

Presentation about reporting MAP to stakeholders in the international school community. The presenters are MAP coordinators at the UK's largest international school. They presented a Protocol of Systemic Practice to an audience of international school educators from across Europe during the NWEA's inaugural Spring Institute at ACS Cobham on March 28 2014.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
118
Views on SlideShare
118
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

NWEA Spring Institute ACS Cobham March 28-29 2014 Stakeholders Presentation by Richard Harrold, Amanda Briggs and Jodi Moore NWEA Spring Institute ACS Cobham March 28-29 2014 Stakeholders Presentation by Richard Harrold, Amanda Briggs and Jodi Moore Presentation Transcript

  • Using MAP to Inform Stakeholders ACS Cobham International School, Friday, 28th March 2014 Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Ques%ons • What  do  you  want  to  take  away    from  this   session? • What  makes  interna%onal  schools  different  from   schools  in  na%onal  systems? Sunday, 6 April 14
  • • Independent, international school pre K-12 • American/international school system • Mixed nationalities (38% US citizens) • Used MAP for 5 years • MAP Test Grades 3-10 • High school of 560+ students • IB and AP programmes Whole-­‐School  Profile Sunday, 6 April 14
  • • FALL (Testing 1) • Scheduling • Assessment of ability range • Classroom differentiation • WINTER • New student placement tests • Interventions • Course moderations • SPRING (Testing 2) • Measurement of growth (strengths and weaknesses) • Goal setting • Course Selection for next year e.g science and maths • SUMMER • Focusing on lexile level • Used to advise for aptitude for higher level courses A  MAP  year  at  ACS  High  School: Sunday, 6 April 14
  • 1. School Administrators: MAP used for: Student scheduling, and grade discrepancy intervention Moderation of parallel classes. Identification of grade inflation. Identify Highly Able Performance Prediction 2. Teachers: MAP used to: Understand range of student ability within the classroom (class by RIT) Differentiate Inform course selection. e.g AP Euro History in 10th G 3. Students MAP used to: Identify individual learning strengths and weaknesses and individual growth Set achievable, realistic learning goals Improve self esteem, boost confidence and motivation 4. Parents: MAP used to: Recognize demonstrated progress and achievement manage expectations give them an objective measurement of their child’s abilities Who  are  the  Stakeholders? Sunday, 6 April 14
  • 1.  Admin Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Highly  able  recogni%on Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Interven%on/modera%on Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Grade  Discrepancy  G9  MAP/Q1 Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Intervention: Underachieving Check student files: compared past history with this data, SST meeting and support programme commenced Sunday, 6 April 14
  • PSAT/MAP Reading correlation: .783 MAP/Q grades correlation .45 - .65 Overachieving? Sunday, 6 April 14
  • GSI? Sunday, 6 April 14
  • 9th G : Quarter Grades and MAP 10th G: Quarter Grades, MAP, PSAT and AP Potential 11th G: + CEM test (IB) + AP potential/results 12th G: + IB and AP results Triangulation and validation of data Performance  database Sunday, 6 April 14
  • 10th Grade Data Comparison: PSAT MAP Quarter AP potential Sunday, 6 April 14
  • CEM  v  MAP ap%tude  v  achievement Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Course selection e.g. AP Euro History in 10th grade Biology in 9th Grade Class by RIT - for differentiation, classroom management, instructional strategy Individual goal setting and improvement e.g. Lexile levels 2.  Teachers Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Sunday, 6 April 14
  • IBM Day 2.0 IBM Day 2.0 Monday, 18th November 2013 “Coles Notes” on Lexile Sunday, 6 April 14
  • IBM Day 2.0 IBM Day 2.0 Monday, 18th November 2013 “Coles Notes” on Lexile I like cows. Cows are nice. Cows eat grass. Sunday, 6 April 14
  • IBM Day 2.0 IBM Day 2.0 Monday, 18th November 2013 “Coles Notes” on Lexile I like cows. Cows are nice. Cows eat grass. Lexile level = 60 Sunday, 6 April 14
  • IBM Day 2.0 IBM Day 2.0 Monday, 18th November 2013 “Coles Notes” on Lexile With the integration of auxiliary units to the basic corps, De Bere found a qualitative analysis of the survey responses could be supported by individualised items at the interview stage without compromising the integrity of the original pilot data. The introduction of a potentially confounding variable in the form of post-survey analysis could be measured and accounted for in the research model by ensuring consistent reference to the guide model was present at every stage of the study. MacManaman (2007), had failed to account for this in his original study, which had led De Bere and others to conclude that a significant threat to internal validity had accompanied the implementation of the pathway research. Sunday, 6 April 14
  • IBM Day 2.0 IBM Day 2.0 Monday, 18th November 2013 “Coles Notes” on Lexile With the integration of auxiliary units to the basic corps, De Bere found a qualitative analysis of the survey responses could be supported by individualised items at the interview stage without compromising the integrity of the original pilot data. The introduction of a potentially confounding variable in the form of post-survey analysis could be measured and accounted for in the research model by ensuring consistent reference to the guide model was present at every stage of the study. MacManaman (2007), had failed to account for this in his original study, which had led De Bere and others to conclude that a significant threat to internal validity had accompanied the implementation of the pathway research. Lexile level = 1710 Sunday, 6 April 14
  • IBM Day 2.0 IBM Day 2.0 Monday, 18th November 2013 “Coles Notes” on Lexile Green Eggs and Ham Clifford, the Big Red Dog Charlotte’s Web Little Women The Good Earth Sunday, 6 April 14
  • IBM Day 2.0 IBM Day 2.0 Monday, 18th November 2013 “Coles Notes” on Lexile Green Eggs and Ham Lexile level = 30 Clifford, the Big Red Dog Charlotte’s Web Little Women The Good Earth Sunday, 6 April 14
  • IBM Day 2.0 IBM Day 2.0 Monday, 18th November 2013 “Coles Notes” on Lexile Green Eggs and Ham Lexile level = 30 Clifford, the Big Red Dog Lexile level = 220 Charlotte’s Web Little Women The Good Earth Sunday, 6 April 14
  • IBM Day 2.0 IBM Day 2.0 Monday, 18th November 2013 “Coles Notes” on Lexile Green Eggs and Ham Lexile level = 30 Clifford, the Big Red Dog Lexile level = 220 Charlotte’s Web Lexile level = 680 Little Women The Good Earth Sunday, 6 April 14
  • IBM Day 2.0 IBM Day 2.0 Monday, 18th November 2013 “Coles Notes” on Lexile Green Eggs and Ham Lexile level = 30 Clifford, the Big Red Dog Lexile level = 220 Charlotte’s Web Lexile level = 680 Little Women Lexile level = 1300 The Good Earth Sunday, 6 April 14
  • IBM Day 2.0 IBM Day 2.0 Monday, 18th November 2013 “Coles Notes” on Lexile Green Eggs and Ham Lexile level = 30 Clifford, the Big Red Dog Lexile level = 220 Charlotte’s Web Lexile level = 680 Little Women Lexile level = 1300 The Good Earth Lexile level = 1530 Sunday, 6 April 14
  • IBM Day 2.0 IBM Day 2.0 Monday, 18th November 2013 “Coles Notes” on Lexile Sunday, 6 April 14
  • IBM Day 2.0 IBM Day 2.0 Monday, 18th November 2013 “Coles Notes” on Lexile Guided Reading Groups Sunday, 6 April 14
  • IBM Day 2.0 IBM Day 2.0 Monday, 18th November 2013 “Coles Notes” on Lexile Guided Reading Groups Student-authored Reading Lists Sunday, 6 April 14
  • IBM Day 2.0 IBM Day 2.0 Monday, 18th November 2013 “Coles Notes” on Lexile Guided Reading Groups Student-authored Reading Lists Guided writing Sunday, 6 April 14
  • IBM Day 2.0 IBM Day 2.0 Monday, 18th November 2013 “Coles Notes” on Lexile Guided Reading Groups Student-authored Reading Lists Guided writing - set Lexile targets in both directions Sunday, 6 April 14
  • IBM Day 2.0 IBM Day 2.0 Monday, 18th November 2013 “Coles Notes” on Lexile Guided Reading Groups Student-authored Reading Lists Guided writing - set Lexile targets in both directions Check your parent communications Sunday, 6 April 14
  • IBM Day 2.0 IBM Day 2.0 Monday, 18th November 2013 “Coles Notes” on Lexile Guided Reading Groups Student-authored Reading Lists Guided writing - set Lexile targets in both directions Check your parent communications Levelled research sources for content area Sunday, 6 April 14
  • IBM Day 2.0 IBM Day 2.0 Monday, 18th November 2013 “Coles Notes” on Lexile Guided Reading Groups Student-authored Reading Lists Guided writing - set Lexile targets in both directions Check your parent communications Levelled research sources for content area Triangulate with Fountas & Pinell etc. Sunday, 6 April 14
  • IBM Day 2.0 IBM Day 2.0 Monday, 18th November 2013 “Coles Notes” on Lexile Guided Reading Groups Student-authored Reading Lists Guided writing - set Lexile targets in both directions Check your parent communications Levelled research sources for content area Triangulate with Fountas & Pinell etc. Summer/holiday Reading Lists Sunday, 6 April 14
  • IBM Day 2.0 IBM Day 2.0 Monday, 18th November 2013 “Coles Notes” on Lexile Guided Reading Groups Student-authored Reading Lists Guided writing - set Lexile targets in both directions Check your parent communications Levelled research sources for content area Triangulate with Fountas & Pinell etc. Summer/holiday Reading Lists Extension Work (HAL) Sunday, 6 April 14
  • 3.  Students:  goal  seRng Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Students  2:  goal  seRng  using  goals  performance Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Using  Descartes  to  achieve  goals Sunday, 6 April 14
  • 4.  Parents: Repor%ng  student  personal  progress Sunday, 6 April 14
  • IBM Day 2.0 IBM Day 2.0 Monday, 18th November 2013 Using MAP to Inform Stakeholders Friday, 28th March 2014 Sunday, 6 April 14
  • IBM Day 2.0 IBM Day 2.0 Monday, 18th November 2013 The MAP Assessment Sunday, 6 April 14
  • IBM Day 2.0 IBM Day 2.0 Monday, 18th November 2013 Measures of Academic Progress Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Student’s Name Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Sunday, 6 April 14
  • American School Foundation of Monterrey, A.C. Student Progress Report for ARECHAVALETA TAMEZ, JUAN PABLO ASFM-MSHS Growth is measured from Fall to Spring Student ID: 4861 Explanatory Notes: Season/Year The season (F=fall, S=spring, W=winter, U=summer) and the year the test was administered. Student Score Range The middle number is the RIT score your child received. The numbers on either side of the RIT score define the score range. If retested, your child would score within this range most of the time. District Average RIT The average score for all students in the school district in the grade who were tested at the same time as your child. Norm Group Avg. The average score observed for students in the most recent NWEA RIT Scale Norms study, who were in the same grade and tested in the same portion of the instructional year (e.g., fall or spring). Student Growth Presents the growth in RITs your child made from the previous fall to the spring of the year in which growth is reported. Typical Growth The average growth of students in the most recent NWEA RIT Scale Norms study who were in the same grade and began the growth comparison period at a similar achievement level. Student %ile Range The number in the middle is your child's percentile rank - the percentage of students in the most recent NWEA RIT Scale Norms study that had a RIT score less than or equal to your child's score. The numbers on either side of the percentile rank define the percentile range. If retested, your child's percentile rank would be within this range most of the time. Goal Performance Each goal area included in the test is listed along with a descriptive adjective of your child's score. The possible descriptors are Low (<21 percentile), LoAvg (21-40 percentile), Avg (41-60 percentile), HiAvg (61-80 percentile), and High (>80 percentile). RIT to Reading Range RIT to Reading Range is a score resulting from a correlation between NWEA's RIT score and the Lexile® scale. Lexile is a registered trademark of MetaMetrics, Inc. NWEA is neither affiliated nor associated with MetaMetrics, Inc. Season/ Year Grade Student Score Range Dist. Avg RIT Norm Group Avg. Student Growth Typical Growth Student %ile Range Mathematics S11 6 232- 235 -238 231 224 6 6 68- 75 -82 Mathematics Goals Performance - Spring 2011 Computation Avg Number Sense & Numeration HiAvg Geometry Avg Measurement High Statistics & Probability High Algebraic Concepts HiAvg Problem Solving High F10 6 226- 229 -232 225 218 70- 77 -83 S10 5 221- 224 -227 224 219 -2 7 56- 61 -69 F09 5 223- 226 -229 217 212 80- 85 -90 S09 4 218- 221 -224 216 211 2 9 69- 76 -82 F08 4 216- 219 -222 207 203 86- 91 -94 S08 3 213- 216 -219 206 202 7 10 84- 89 -93 F07 3 206- 209 -212 201 192 89- 94 -96 Season/ Year Grade Student Score Range Dist. Avg RIT Norm Group Avg. Student Growth Typical Growth Student %ile Range Reading S11 6 235- 238 -241 218 215 -3 2 95- 97 -99 Reading Goals Performance - Spring 2011 Word Analysis & Vocabulary High Literal Comprehension High Interpretive Comprehension High Evaluative Comprehension High Lit Response / Analysis High RIT to Reading Range: 1187-1337 F10 6 238- 241 -245 215 212 98- 99 -99 S10 5 225- 228 -231 213 211 6 3 86- 91 -96 W10 5 231- 234 -237 210 95- 98 -99 F09 5 219- 222 -225 210 207 81- 89 -93 S09 4 218- 221 -224 210 206 4 4 83- 89 -94 F08 4 214- 217 -220 205 200 84- 91 -95 S08 3 206- 209 -212 201 199 4 7 70- 79 -86 F07 3 202- 205 -208 199 192 79- 85 -91 Season/ Year Grade Student Score Range Dist. Avg RIT Norm Group Avg. Student Growth Typical Growth Student %ile Range Language Usage S11 6 226- 229 -232 218 215 16 4 82- 89 -94 Language Usage Goals Performance - Spring 2011 Writing Process High Composition Structure HiAvg Grammar: Usage High Punctuation High Capitalization HiAvg F10 6 210- 213 -216 216 212 41- 51 -61 S10 5 214- 217 -220 214 212 1 4 54- 65 -75 F09 5 213- 216 -219 211 207 67- 76 -84 S09 4 220- 223 -226 211 207 14 5 86- 92 -96 F08 4 206- 209 -212 206 201 64- 73 -81 S08 3 208- 211 -214 206 200 3 6 70- 78 -85 F07 3 205- 208 -211 203 193 81- 87 -92 NWEA Student Progress Report Created on: Thursday, May 05, 2011 Version 2.00.00 Page 1 of 2 Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Recapping the Norms Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Recapping the Norms • District Average Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Recapping the Norms • District Average = Comparison with schools in your declared district Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Recapping the Norms • District Average • Normative group = Comparison with schools in your declared district Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Recapping the Norms • District Average • Normative group = Comparison with schools in your declared district = 5.1 million students in grades 2 to 11 Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Recapping the Norms • District Average • Normative group = Comparison with schools in your declared district = 5.1 million students in grades 2 to 11 in 13,000 schools Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Recapping the Norms • District Average • Normative group = Comparison with schools in your declared district = 5.1 million students in grades 2 to 11 in 13,000 schools in 2,700 school districts in 50 states of the USA Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Recapping the Norms • District Average • Normative group = Comparison with schools in your declared district = 5.1 million students in grades 2 to 11 in 13,000 schools in 2,700 school districts in 50 states of the USA updated every three years (2011 norms currently) Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Recapping the Norms • District Average • Normative group = Comparison with schools in your declared district = 5.1 million students in grades 2 to 11 • International Comparisons in 13,000 schools in 2,700 school districts in 50 states of the USA updated every three years (2011 norms currently) Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Recapping the Norms Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Recapping the Norms • District Average Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Recapping the Norms • District Average = Comparison with schools in your declared district Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Recapping the Norms • District Average • Normative group = Comparison with schools in your declared district Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Recapping the Norms • District Average • Normative group = Comparison with schools in your declared district = 5.1 million students in grades 2 to 11 Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Recapping the Norms • District Average • Normative group = Comparison with schools in your declared district = 5.1 million students in grades 2 to 11 in 13,000 schools Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Recapping the Norms • District Average • Normative group = Comparison with schools in your declared district = 5.1 million students in grades 2 to 11 in 13,000 schools in 2,700 school districts in 50 states of the USA Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Recapping the Norms • District Average • Normative group = Comparison with schools in your declared district = 5.1 million students in grades 2 to 11 in 13,000 schools in 2,700 school districts in 50 states of the USA updated every three years (2011 norms currently) Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Recapping the Norms • District Average • Normative group = Comparison with schools in your declared district = 5.1 million students in grades 2 to 11 • International Comparisons in 13,000 schools in 2,700 school districts in 50 states of the USA updated every three years (2011 norms currently) Sunday, 6 April 14
  • International Comparisons Sunday, 6 April 14
  • International Comparisons Updated twice annually Sunday, 6 April 14
  • International Comparisons Updated twice annually Organised by regional association(s) (some doubling) Sunday, 6 April 14
  • The total of test administrations in Fall 2013 were 422,895 in: • Mathematics, 140,674 • Reading, 140, 617 • Language Usage, 116,540 • General Science, 24,120 • Science Concepts and Processes, 944. International Comparisons Updated twice annually Organised by regional association(s) (some doubling) Sunday, 6 April 14
  • 2011 Reading Status Norms Sunday, 6 April 14
  • 2011 Maths Status Norms Sunday, 6 April 14
  • 2011 Language Usage Status Norms Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Sunday, 6 April 14
  • IBM Day 2.0 IBM Day 2.0 Monday, 18th November 2013 @RichardHarrold rharrold@acs-schools.com abriggs@acs-schools.com jmoore@acs-schools.com Using MAP to Inform Stakeholders Friday, 28th March 2014 Sunday, 6 April 14
  • Sunday, 6 April 14