Lsi project presentation j hall


Published on

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Lsi project presentation j hall

  1. 1. Bastow InstituteLeading School Improvement School Data-driven project Jonathan Hall Ultranet Coach Southern Metropolitan Region
  2. 2. Work-in-progress!
  3. 3. School Context• Large primary school - almost 700 students• Location - near Port Phillip Bay in the South Eastern suburbs of Melbourne.• Demographic - The school has been a school of choice for families from within and from outside the suburb• Increasing enrolments have resulted in the introduction of a school zone to manage numbers.• SFO : 2010 : 0.52 (2006 : 0.36)• LBOTE: 0.09 (stable over recent yeasrs)• Stability rate: 72.2%
  4. 4. Enrolments Prep - 6Prep
  5. 5. School OrganisationLeadership structure: Principal Assistant principal Three leading teachers Curriculum and Innovation Junior Sub-school Senior Sub-school• School organisation: Straight year level classes, including 11 classes in the Year 1 and 2 area.• Numeracy organisation: 6 sessions of numeracy per week – 4 with class teacher, 2 (double session) in flexible groups across the year level.
  6. 6. Project Team• Assistant Principal (overview only)• Leading Teacher – junior sub-school• Level 1 and 2 teachers – largely young teachers• Ultranet Coach
  7. 7. VELS and NAPLAN compared: Number / Numeracy NAPLAN – Year 3VELS – Teacher Judgements
  8. 8. VELS Teacher Judgements are similar in Measurement, Chance and Data
  9. 9. NAPLAN DataIndividual student tracking:• Comparisons are to be made between Year 2 teacher judgements and following year NAPLAN data for Year 3• Can be done for the past three years to identify any potential trends.
  10. 10. Areas under Investigation1. Teacher moderation o Comparison of VELS Teacher Judgements with other data – e.g. NAPLAN, ODT  Work in progress2. Areas of student weakness o Identify concepts that students are struggling with o Identify teacher understandings and practice in these areas3. Sources of data o How can the current data be used or improved upon?4. Use of technology to support student learning o What technology exists in the school and can be applied to EY Numeracy
  11. 11. % correct Feb 09 100% 10% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 0% 20% Nov 09 Counting Writes Numerals Limits Sequences Reads/writes Numerals to 10 Reads/writes Numerals to 20 AdditionAreas Addressed Year 1 DMT A Results Feb & Nov 2009 Subtraction Multiplication Division DMT ‘A’ – Year 1 2009
  12. 12. DMT ‘A’ – Year 2 2010 Year 2 DMT A Results Feb & Nov 2010 100% Year 1 DMT A Results Feb & Nov 2009 90% 100% 80% 90% 70% 80% 60% 70%% correctcorrect 50% 60% 40% 50% % 30% 40% 20% 30% 10% 20% 0% 10% 0% Division Addition Multiplication Sequences Counting Numerals Subtraction Reads/writes Reads/writes Numerals to Numerals to Writes Numeration and Place Value to Ordering Counting and Addition Subtraction Multiplication Division Limits Notation 999 Sequences 10 20 Feb 0910 NovNov 10 Feb 09 Areas Addressed Addressed Areas
  13. 13. Teacher inquiry and knowledge-building cycle
  14. 14. Teachers’ Understandings• Focus on teachers‟ understanding of the target concepts PROF. READINGS – provided for all teachers in Years 1 & 2 REVIEW OF PRACTICE – teachers discussed their practice against the readings MODIFY PLANNING – term and weekly planners modified to address identified gaps
  15. 15. Examples of Some Areas to Work OnWhat do we (year 1/2 teachers) need to improve:• Vocab (range) / correct language• Use of resources• Use of 100‟s charts/ tens frames• Incidental Maths• Fact families• Strategies from an earlier age• Addition charts – Use more of• Mathematical profile• Displays, word walls, class made dictionaries
  16. 16. Negatives / Challenges Noted• Timetabling issues for „streamed‟ numeracy groups – only 1 x 50minute session for Year 1• Numeracy often scheduled for period 6 – after lunch• Numeracy is first session to be dropped when busy• Limited support for struggling students – need for numeracy intervention (like reading recovery)
  17. 17. Sources of Data: Current Assessment Schedule• Detailed assessment records maintained across whole school.• Excel spreadsheets – very large over time• Record is provided to classroom teachers and updated regularly• Comparisons on similar tests, within each year, year on year (different cohorts) and between boys and girls• Question – how do teachers view and use this data?
  18. 18. Assessment Schedule Prep-4Whole School Prep Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4VELS Reading Level Reading Level Reading Level Reading Level Reading Level (At risk) Spelling % - Spelling % - Spelling % - common words common words common words Burt Burt Burt Burt SA Spelling SA Spelling SA Spelling TORCH TORCH Lexiles (opt) Lexiles (opt) Lexiles Lexiles UNSW English UNSW English (some) (some) DMT Part A DMT Part A DMT Part B PAT 1 PAT 2 NAPLAN NUMERACY UNSW Maths UNSW Maths (some) (some)
  19. 19. Sources of Data in Early Years at the School• DMT used in Years 1&2, PAT Maths in Years 3&4• Teacher anecdotal records• Mathematics Online Interview is not used in Year 1 or Year 2. o Explanation – “difficult to find the time to work with each student”.
  20. 20. Possible New Sources of DataData Rationale TimelineYear 3 NAPLAN Item Strength, weaknesses and Review 2011 data to assistAnalysis misunderstandings with 2012 planningMathematics Online All students if possible 2012 - Term 1Interview Minimum - trial with lower achieving studentsPAT Maths from Year 1 Easier to track progress year on Trial 2012 – Term 1(or online PAT Maths Plus) year – scaled score an same Run alongside DMT and system review •Mathletics Recently purchased. 2011 – Term 4 - Students Provides practice of concepts. Informative data, time efficient Late Term 4 - Teacher Data for teachers PDHandheld Interactive Purchased but not used much. 2011 – Term 4Devices Time efficient, engaging
  21. 21. NAPLAN Item Analysis• Need for teachers to see the detail – esp. P-2 teachers for Year 3 data, e.g. Misconception? Which students? Year 3 – 2010 How was this taught?
  22. 22. Use of Technology• Large investment in technology in the school• Showcase school for interactive technology in recent years• Very proactive in Ultranet implementation across the school HOW CAN THIS BE USED TO SUPPORT EARLY YEARS NUMERACY?Ongoing Teacher Development in Technology• Use of interactive resources in maths groups, e.g. digital learning objects• Use of Mathletics and handheld devices• Use of Ultranet to deliver digital resources• Use of Ultranet Learning Tasks to personalise learning for students
  23. 23. Challenges for the Project• Composition of the team o Key member of the team is moving to Year 6 o Limited time for me to work in the school in my Ultranet Coach role o Ultranet Coach role ends next month – no longer be connected to the school• Time and Resources ($) My Next Steps in this Project• Working in the school in December to further support teachers with: o Delivery of resources using Ultranet o Personalising learning using Ultranet
  24. 24. Personal Reflection on the Project• Opportunity to re-engage with school data• Further understanding of school improvement processes• Conversations around specific student learning• Professional reading on o School improvement o Data analysis o Forms of assessment• Opportunity to work with teachers and leaders outside of my Ultranet role