“It is about focusing on building a culture of quality data through professional development and web based dynamic inqui

1. “It is about focusing on building a culture of quality data through professional development and web based dynamic inquiries for school improvement.” MI Access InquiryData for Student Success December 1, 2009

2. Activity • List how your special education students are included in your general education curriculum. • Discuss who is included. • Discuss who is excluded. • Discuss when Special Education students are included. • How does this model help AYP?

3. Data Portrait • Students qualifying for SE 14.9% • What does that look like in your district? • Let‘s take a look… • 14.2% qualify for services • 39% - SLD • 23% - SLI • 7% - EI • 1% - PI • 5% - OHI • 3% -ASD • 1% - VI/HI • Many students qualifying for special education are at or above average intellectually!

4. What we know….. • All students need assess to the GE curriculum to be successful on state assessments. • 2011 – all scores go to local districts • Time to prepare and succeed!

5. Ask the right questions! • Who takes the MEAP? • Who takes MEAP Assess? • Who takes Mi-Assess? • How was this decision made? • Does this decision align with the student’s PLAFFP? Show the data to support the decision!

6. Probe Question What protocol does your district use in determining which state assessment your students with IEP participate?

7. To Time to change the culture of schools and SE! From • A focus on teaching • Emphasis on what was taught • Coverage of content • Infrequent summative assessments • Remediation • Isolation • A focus on learning • A fixation on what students learned • Demonstration of proficiency • Frequent common formative assessment • Intervention • Collaboration

8. CHALLENGE

9. Introduction to the Grant • Federal Title II Part D of the NCLB Act of 2001 Enhancing Education through Technology Grant awarded through CEPI

10. Goals of Data for Student Success • Build and bring to scale a program that helps schools develop cultures of quality data in which there are consistent and sustained efforts to: • Focus on existing data that give insight into specific school improvement questions • Validate data provided to the State and used to support school improvement decisions • Identify critical questions whose answers would benefit school districts in decision making to inform instruction • Provide inquiries designed around the critical questions • Provide focused professional development on data-based decision making • Provide a scaffold of support for the CNA and High Priority Schools

11. Data4SS Web site www.data4ss.org

12. Using Data to Improve Student Achievement Modules • Using State Data to Identify School Improvement Goals • Using School Data to Clarify and Address the Problem  • Examining Student Work to Inform Instruction • Using Classroom Data to Monitor Student Progress For more detailed information please go to www.data4ss.org

13. Investigating Module: Using State Assessment Data to Identify School Improvement Goals MI-ACCESS Inquiry

14. Agenda • Welcome and Overview of Data 4SS • Statewide assessment options for Students with IEPs (SWI) • Data 4SS Module: Using State Assessment Data to Identify School Improvement Goals • MI-Access Inquiry • Processing and Planning • Feedback and Evaluation

15. Statewide Assessment Options for Students with IEP’s

16. Impact of NCLB on Students with IEPs • NCLB plan – • All students must take assessments in the required areas (ELA, math, science and social studies) • State assessment with or without accommodations (MEAP) • Alternate assessment to modified achievement standards (MEAP Access) • Alternate assessment to state alternate standards (MI-Access)

17. Michigan Educational Assessment System (MEAS) • Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) • Michigan Merit Exam (MME) • MEAP Access • MI-Access • Participation • Supported Independence • Functional Independence • ELPA

18. State Assessment Options for SWI

19. Investigating Module: Using State Assessment Data to Identify School Improvement Goals • Professional Development • Resources • Inquiry tools

20. Focus Questions • How do we analyze our MI-Access data along with our MEAP data to identify strengths and challenges? • What questions do our data raise for us? • Where are we in relation to our AYP targets? • How do we use this data to identify school improvement goals? • How do we engage staff in the data analysis process? • How do standards change expectations for teachers? • What are the limitations of state assessment data?

21. The Dynamic Inquiry Tool • All data mining efforts must be based on inquiry – asking the right questions, and then asking more questions of the answers in order to make informed decisions. • “The essential-questions approach provides the fuel that drives collaborative analysis.” “Answering the Questions that Count." Educational Leadership Dec/Jan (2009) • “Data-driven decision making does not simply require good data; it also requires good decisions.” "The New Stupid." Educational Leadership Dec/Jan (2009)

22. Dynamic Inquiry ToolMI-Access • Interactive inquiries that allow a user to drill down into their student data • Six inquiries based on essential questions aligned with the school improvement process: • MI-Access Proficiency* • Students Near Proficiency* • Cohort Proficiency • Comparative Item Analysis • Student History • Administrative Data quality review

23. MI-Access Proficiency Inquiry “How did students perform on MI-Access assessments by content area?” “What is the participation rate of SWD in MI-Access?”

24. MI-Access Proficiency Inquiry

25. MI-Access Proficiency Inquiry

26. MI-Access Proficiency Inquiry Also has Participation and Supported Independence

27. MI-Access ProficiencyAll Students What questions do our data raise for us? How do we use this data to identify school improvement goals? What limitations are there to this data?

28. So Many Options… • Compare school to district • Compare school to ISD • Compare school to state

29. MI-Access Proficiency Inquiry

30. MI-Access Proficiency - Statistical Information

32. MI-Access ProficiencyAll Students

33. MI-Access ProficiencyStudent Drill Down Sort ?

34. MI-Access ProficiencyStudent Drill Down

35. MI-Access ProficiencyStudent Drill Down

36. MI-Access ProficiencyStudent Drill Down

37. MI-Access ProficiencyStudent Drill Down

38. MI-Access ProficiencyAYP Subgroups

39. MI-Access ProficiencyAYP Subgroups

40. Application/Guided Practice Objectives • Begin the data mining process. • Illustrate percent proficient in ELA and Math at the building and/or district level in a clear and concise format. • Compare participation and proficiency rates in MI-Access to those for SWD in MEAP. • Calculate an estimate of the “1% cap”.

41. Application/Guided Practice Procedure • Record and analyze the MI-Access results. • Record and analyze the MEAP results for SWD in comparison to the MI-Access results. • Record the information used in calculating the 1% cap and compare to the number of students scoring as proficient on MI-Access. • Step-by-step analysis promotes our allocating sufficient time to analyze each set of data.

42. MI-Access Content Analysis

43. MI-Access Content Analysis

44. Strategy for SupportingData Mining Building: Content Area Proficiency - SWD • Using the template and sample data provided, record data for ELA • Procedure • Fill in “Year”, “District/Building”; Circle “ELA”

45. Strategy for SupportingData Mining Building: Content Area Proficiency - SWD • Procedure (cont’d) • Enter the School MI-Access data as indicated for the grade levels provided.

46. MI-Access Content Analysis Demo Middle School 2007-08 X

47. MI-Access Content Analysis

48. Strategy for SupportingData Mining Building: Content Area Proficiency - SWD • Procedure (cont’d) • Enter the School MEAP data as indicated for the grade levels provided.

49. MI-Access Content Analysis Demo Middle School 2007-08 X 2

50. MI-Access Content Analysis