Post on 21-Jan-2016
transcript
AMBITIOUS INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES IN ENGLISH
Ali Korkmaz, Ph.D.Strategic Data FellowLong Beach Unified School District
Ahmet Uludag, Ph.D.Accord Institute for Education Research
WHAT DO WE KNOW?Background Engagement Educational Performance
Student characteristicsDemographicsAttitudesEducational background
Social Engagement
Academic EngagementAcademic Achievement
Retention
Educational Attainment
Long-term
Family-School-Community, Resources
Rumberger and Larson’s Framework for Studying Student Educational Performance
WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING FACTOR HAS THE MOST IMPACT ON STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT?
A. StudentB. TeacherC. HomeD. Principal
Student
Teacher
Home
Princip
al
25% 25%25%25%
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT
50%
5%
30%
5%5% 5%
StudentHomeTeacherSchoolsPrincipalPeer effects
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
Walberg’s Educational Productivity Model (1984, 1992) Student aptitude
ability or prior achievement development motivation, or self-concept
Instruction the amount of time students engage in learning the quality of the instructional experience
The environment factors encompass four items: the home the classroom social group the peer group outside the school use of out-of-school time
BACKGROUND
Marzano’s (2000) effective instructional strategies (teacher-level factors) Instruction Classroom management Curriculum design
Hattie’s Visible Learning (2008) Meta analysis of instructional practices effects on
student outcomes
TEACHERS
Clear learning intentions Challenging success criteria Range of learning strategies Know when students are not progressing Providing feedback Visibly learns themselves
STUDENTS
Understand learning intentions Are challenged by success criteria Develop a range of learning strategies Know when they are not progressing Seek feedback Visibly teach themselves
MET PROJECT FINDINGS
Measures of Effective Teaching Project findings (Gates Foundation Study) Assessments Student Surveys Classroom Observations
Improvement-Focused Teacher Evaluation Systems
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
What types of instructional practices are implemented in classrooms? (How do students perceive?)
What types of instructional practices are the game changers in ELA/Reading? What practices lead to more growth among non-
proficient students? What practices lead to more growth among
proficient students?
STUDY DESIGN ELEMENTS
Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA) MAP Test
Consortium on Chicago School Research (CCSR) Student Survey
Longitudinal growth for reading
NWEA MAP TESTS
A computer adaptive test tool to measure student levels, placement
and differentiate instruction to meet student needs
to guide curriculum and instructional decisions
to measure student growth over timeof accountability to see how well we
have done our jobs; to measure the effectiveness of curriculum and instruction
Fall RIT
Spring Target RIT
Target Growth = 10
192
202
Fall RIT
210
Spring Target RIT
215
Target Growth = 5
Target Growth for two 4th Grade Students
RIT SCORES – GROWTH - TARGETS
RIT: Rasch (Rash) Unit is a scale that shows student levels independent of grade level and age
RIT scores are used to show a student’s level normative to other students and their grade level through percentile ranks
Growth Targets: Typical growth is given for grade levels, yet each student has a separate growth target based on their initial score
Two things to look at (at the end of the year): How many students have met their target How many points have the students grown on
average (compared to typical growth)
READING GROWTH FROM FALL TO: (2011 NORM)
PROFICIENCY VS. GROWTH
Section 1 Section 20
20
40
60
80
100
ProficientGrowth
STUDENT SURVEY
Consortium on Chicago School Research (CCSR) Surveys
More than 10 years in the field IRT based (Rasch) survey items and
constructs It is designed mainly for school level analysis Student survey items include:
Academic Engagement, Study Habits, Classroom Behavior, Learning Climate (Expectation, Relationships)
Subject area specific questions School and home environment questions
AMBITIOUS INSTRUCTIONWhen combined with a supportive environment, Ambitious Instruction has the most direct effect on student learning. Ambitious Instruction is: well-defined with clear expectations for student
success, interactive and encourages students to build
and apply knowledge, well-paced (not measured by the survey), and aligned across grades (not measured by the
survey).
RELIABILITY FOR SCALESConstruct Alpha
Teacher Personal Attention (Eng) .85
Academic Press (Eng) .75
Quality English Instruction .80
Rigorous Study Habits .83
Parent Support for Student Learning
.83
Student-Teacher Trust .88
Incidence of Disciplinary Action .76
Principal Attention .75
DATA
846 students at 9 CA middle schools 55% male 50% free-reduced lunch 11% African-American 45% White 44% Hispanic
DATA CLEANING
Survey time less than 10 minutes MAP test time less than 10 minutes
STUDY DESIGN
Student Fall Reading Test
Student Spring Reading Test
Student Survey• Instructional practices• Study habits, motivation• Home environment• School learning
environment
DATA ANALYSES Students are grouped into 6 groups based on
Fall proficiency and Fall to Spring Growth (progress in the same year)
Effect-size
Non-Proficient Proficient
High Decline
Typical High Increase
High Decline
Typical High Increase
Effect-size
WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING HAS THE MOST IMPACT ON READING GROWTH (FOR NON-PROFICIENT STUDENTS)?
A. Principal attentionB. Teacher personal
supportC. Teacher personal
attention(ENGLISH)D. Academic
press(ENGLISH)
Princip
al attention
Teacher p
ersonal s
upport
Teacher p
ersonal a
ttent...
Academic
press(ENGLIS
H)
25% 25%25%25%
WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING HAS THE MOST IMPACT ON READING GROWTH (FOR NON-PROFICIENT STUDENTS)?
Effect-size differences for most improving vs. most decliningA. Principal attention (.50)B. Teacher personal support (.37)C. Teacher personal attention(ENGLISH) (.34)D. Academic press(ENGLISH) (.34)
WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING HAS THE MOST IMPACT ON READING GROWTH (FOR PROFICIENT STUDENTS)?
A. Principal attentionB. Incidence of
disciplinary actionC. Hours reading outside
schoolD. Parental support for
student learning
Princip
al attention
Incidence
of disc
iplinary ...
Hours re
ading outsi
de s...
Parental s
upport fo
r stu
...
25% 25%25%25%
WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING HAS THE MOST IMPACT ON READING GROWTH (FOR PROFICIENT STUDENTS)?
Effect-size differences for most improving vs. most decliningA. Principal attention (.37)B. Incidence of disciplinary action (-.41)C. Hours reading outside school (.48)D. Parental support for student learning (.27)
SUMMARYGroups Scales Effect-size
Non - Proficient
Principal AttentionTeacher Personal SupportTeacher Personal Attention (Eng)Academic Press (Eng)Student-Teacher TrustReading Hours pwParent Support for Student LearningRigorous Study Habits
.50
.37
.34
.34
.31
.27
.26
.20
Proficient Reading Hours pwIncidence of Disciplinary ActionPrincipal AttentionParent Support for Student Learning
.48-.41.37.27
USE OF CCSR SURVEYS AND MAP
USE OF CCSR SURVEYS AND MAP
USE OF CCSR SURVEYS AND MAP
USE OF CCSR SURVEYS AND MAP
IMPLICATIONS Use of effective student surveys
Inform what is happening Classroom level analysis Teacher level analysis
For professional development plans Unpacking the behaviors/actions that are aligned
to effective practices (survey categories)
For policy Teacher evaluations
LIMITATIONS Student survey
Teacher input on classroom practices (teacher survey)
No teacher observation Student growth
High stakes, any rewards etc. involved
FURTHER STUDY Classroom level analysis of the same data set
What types of practices work better at what types of classrooms?
Combine student surveys with teacher surveys
CONTACT
Ali Korkmaz, Ph.D. akorkmaz@lbschools.net
Ahmet Uludag, Ph.D. auludag@accordeducation.org
CERA - December 5, 2013