Post on 05-Jan-2016
transcript
Data-Driven Conversations with Special Education Teachers and Administrators to
Improve Student Outcomes and State Accountability
Emily Wolk
Department of Research and Evaluation
Santa Ana Unified School District
1
Quick Overview
• Who We Are – SAUSD Demographic Data
• The Problem– Low achievement of Students Participating in
Special Education
• The Study and What We Found
• What We Did to Improve Our Outcomes
2
Santa Ana Unified School District At a Glance
• 53,104 Enrolled in K-12– 36 elementary; 9 intermediate; 10 high schools– 95.4% Hispanic– 58.3% English Learner– 77.3% Socio-Eco Disadvantaged– 9.1% Special Education
• 68% Mild/Moderate and 32% Moderate/Severe• 79% Special Ed. and English Learners
– 89% at or below Intermediate on CELDT
3
The ProblemLow Achievement of Students Participating in Special Education State and Federal Accountability Indicators
API 4 Year Summary
2007 Growth
2008 Growth
2009 Growth
2010 Growth
TLL 4-yr Growth
SAUSD 669 685 706 723 54Students with
Disabilities 479 488 497 519 40
4
STAR ELA 2009 STAR ELA 2010
Percent Proficient Target:
45%Percent Proficient Target:
56%
District District-wide Spec Ed District-wide Spec Ed
SAUSD 38.4% 18.5% 40.5% 21.9%
4.7% 2.9% 2.1% 3.4%
Total # 32,961 2,960 31,855 3,026
Our Challenges . . . • Use of Accommodations and Modifications
– Rarely used– But, if used, what was used may not have been the most effective at
supporting students during testing • “supervised breaks” and “beneficial time of day”
• Issues with the Special Education Information System (SEIS)– Drop down menus did/do not match up with CDE Accommodations and
Modifications Matrix– No drop down menu for CMA, teachers must type
• Sites received conflicting information regarding testing regulations and guidelines related to accommodations and modifications
• Alignment of instruction to how students were being tested• IEP goals• Training, training, training
– Fully trained and the “right” training– Creating IEP
5
What did we do to address these issues?
• Analyzed data from STAR file to determine
– which students were given which test
– which accommodations and modifications were used and how these students performed
– How students with various disabilities performed based on the test they took and accommodations or modifications that were provided
• Created reports to make the data accessible to and understandable for administrators, program specialists and special education teachers
• Provided overall findings based on students’ primary disability
• And, training, training and training for every administrator, program specialist and special education teacher
6
Frequency Percent
CAPA I 94 2.4
CAPA II-V 384 10.0
CMA with Accommodations 531 13.8
CMA Only 731 19.1
CST with Accommodations & Modifications 25 .7
CST with Modifications Only 12 .3
CST with Accommodations Only 380 9.9
CST (with Disability Code) No Accommodations or Modifications
1,680 43.8
Total * STAR File 3,837 100
SAUSD Special Education2009-2010 STAR ELA File by Test Taken
7
Most Common CMA Accommodations: Test Read Aloud (n=296), Supervised Breaks (n=225), Admin. Test Beneficial Time of Day (n=109)Most Common CST Accommodations: Supervised Breaks (n=300), Test Beneficial Time of Day (n=97), Tested More than One Day (n=40)
*Note: Missing scores were not included in this analysis
SAUSD Special EducationSTAR ELA 2009-2010
Performance Levels by Test Taken
n= 528CST Refusals
(n=311)CMA Refusals
(n=226)
8
We also examined:Students with the following primary disabilities:•Autism•Intellectual Disability•Speech and Language•Etc.
SAUSD Special Education (Specific Learning Disability)STAR ELA 2009-2010
Performance Levels by Test Taken
n= 328
*Note: Missing scores were not included in this analysis 9
The Layout of Your Report
Fields J-Y: 2009-10 Disability Information, Test Taken, Score,
Accommodation/Modifcation
Field I: English
Proficiency
Field Z-AB: 2008-09
(previous year test, scale score
Field AC: Case Manager
10
The Process for Looking At The Data: Next Steps
Review the District Special Education Data
Look for trends and patterns by
test taken
Look for trends and patterns by
disability
Look at your site level Special
Education report, student by
student
IEP team may decide student may be best
served taking the same test with the
same accommodations
[modifications]
Student scored
proficient or advanced
Student’s
score
increased
from previous
year
IEP team may decide student is best served taking the same test
with the same accommodations
[modifications]
Student scored Basic
IEP team should review students’ performance and
decide whether student should be tested using an
alternate test and/or different accommodation
[modification]Student
scored Below
Basic or Far
Below Basic IEP team should review students’ performance and
decide whether student should be tested using an alternate test [or different
accommodation/modification]
Look for trends and patterns by
test performance level
Look for trends and patterns by
disability performance level
How does EL proficiency come into play?
11
Easy to Use Usage Forms
12
Our ResultsSAUSD STAR Percent Proficient
District-wide and Special Education2009-2010 and 2010-11
API 4 Year Summary
2007 Growth
2008 Growth
2009 Growth
2010 Growth
TLL 4-yr Growth
2011 Growth
TLL 5-yr Growth
SAUSD 669 685 706 723 54 740 71Students with
Disabilities 479 488 497 519 40 584 105
13
STAR ELA 2010 STAR ELA 2011
Percent Proficient Target:
56%Percent Proficient Target:
67%District District-wide Spec Ed District-wide Spec EdSAUSD 40.5% 21.9% 44.3% 32.4%
2.1% 3.4% 3.8% 10.5%Total # 31,855 3,026 32,062 3,276
What We Learned
• Creating access to data and making it understandable improves student performance on state and federal indicators
• Discussing findings with special education teachers and administrators increases their knowledge about testing and testing accommodations and modifications
• Working closely with special education improves the consistency and accuracy of the information being disseminated to sites
• Providing student lists disaggregated at the school and case manager level assists with monitoring student achievement and “best fit”
14
Contact Information
Department of Research and Evaluation
Emily Wolk
714-558-5793
emily.wolk@sausd.us
15
SAUSD Special EducationSTAR ELA 2010-2011
Performance Levels by Test Taken
n= 1491
*Note: Missing scores were not included in this analysis 16
SAUSD Special EducationSTAR ELA 2010-2011 2nd Grade Only
Performance Levels by Test Taken
*Note: Missing scores were not included in this analysis 17
SAUSD Special EducationSTAR ELA 2009-2010 and 2010-2011
Performance Levels by Test Taken
n= 109
18
SAUSD Special EducationSTAR ELA 2009-2010 and 2010-2011
Performance Levels by Test Taken
n= 528
Most Common ‘10-’11 CMA Accommodations.: Read Aloud (n=1256), Supervised Breaks (n=549), Admin. Test Beneficial Time of Day (n=206)Most Common ‘09-’10 CMA Accommodations: Read Aloud (n=296), Supervised Breaks (n=225), Admin. Test Beneficial Time of Day (n=109)
*Note: Missing scores were not included in this analysis
CMA ‘09-’10 Refusals (n=226)
CMA ‘10-’11 Refusals (n=175)
19
SAUSD Special EducationSTAR ELA 2009-2010 & 2010-2011Performance Levels by Test Taken
n= 6
Most Common ‘10-’11 CST Accommodations: Supervised Breaks (n=202), Test Beneficial Time of Day (n=69), Tested More than One Day (n=67)Most Common ‘09-’10 CST Accommodations: Supervised Breaks (n=300), Test Beneficial Time of Day (n=97), Tested More than One Day (n=40)
*Note: Missing scores were not included in this analysis
CST ‘09-’10Refusals (n=311)
CST ‘10-’11(n=172)
20
SAUSD Special Education (Intellectual Disability)STAR ELA 2010-2011
Performance Levels by Test Taken
n= 11
*Note: Missing scores were not included in this analysis 21
SAUSD Special Education (Specific Learning Disability)STAR ELA 2010-2011
Performance Levels by Test Taken
n= 1077
*Note: Missing scores were not included in this analysis 22
SAUSD Special Education (Autism)STAR ELA 2010-2011
Performance Levels by Test Taken
n= 84
*Note: Missing scores were not included in this analysis 23
SAUSD Special Education (Speech & Language)STAR ELA 2010-2011
Performance Levels by Test Taken
n= 57
*Note: Missing scores were not included in this analysis 24
SAUSD Special EducationSTAR CMA ELA 2010-2011
Performance Levels of Students Using Accommodations
n= 1709
*Note: Missing scores were not included in this analysis 25
SAUSD Special EducationSTAR CST ELA 2010-2011
Performance Levels of Students Using Accommodations
n= 1060
*Note: Missing scores were not included in this analysis 26