PARCC Real Teachers Real Data January 19 2016

PARCC: Real Teachers, Real Data January 19, 2016 NJPSA/FEA and NJASCD Data Series Tonya Breland, Carla Bittner Presenters

Opening Activity: Needs Assessment Continuum What is your comfort level with analyzing and using PARCC data?

What is your comfort level?

Today’s Expectations What’s different with PARCC? A Look at NJ’s Results PARCC Score Reports Introduction to CAR (Connected Action Roadmap) Framework PLCs focused on Data Conversations Protocol for Data Conversations A Look at Real Data District Teams Work Session

How Are These Tests Different? ✓They are taken on a computer. ✓They allow students to show their work. ✓They are more than multiple choice tests. ✓The tests do not lend themselves to “teaching to the test”.

The Rules: Setting a New Baseline ● New Tests…New Scores…New Rules ● PARCC tests were administered for the first time in Spring 2015 and were designed to measure the new state standards that are guiding instruction in Math and English Language Arts ● Cannot compare data from past years…or past NJ State Assessments (NJASK, HSPA) ● Cannot use words like “progressing”, “improving”, “comparing”, etc.

The Rules: Setting a New Baseline ● The new, more rigorous expectations focus on the skills students need in today’s world, including critical thinking, problem solving, and reasoning. ● It is expected that scores on the PARCC test will look lower. ● It will take time…Student scores will improve – system of continuous improvement as students and teachers gain skills and knowledge needed to meet the higher standards. ● Opportunity to make sure that students are ready for the next step… better prepared for success from grade to grade and beyond high school.

What Do We Know About the NJ State Data?

PARCC Statewide Results ● In the 2014 -15 school year, approximately 850, 000 students across New Jersey took the PARCC assessments. ● Nearly 99% of New Jersey’s students took the PARCC test on computer platforms, making New Jersey schools among the nation’s leaders in integrating educational technology in classroom instruction and preparing students for the technology expectations in college and careers. ● This in itself is a great success story in terms of improving educational outcomes.

Five Performance Levels PARCC uses five performance levels that delineate the frame knowledge, Place a purple around skills, and practices students are ableimages to demonstrate: Level 1: Did Not Yet Meet Expectations (Min. 650) Level 2: Partially Met Expectations Level 5: Level 4: Level 3: Exceeded Approached Met Expectations (Max. 850)

New Jersey’s Minimum Scores for Each Performance Level

Grade 8 ELA PARCC uses five performance levels that delineate the frame knowledge, Place a purple around skills, and practices students are ableimages to demonstrate: Level 1: Did Not Yet Meet Expectations Level 2: Partially Met Expectations 700 -724 Level 3: Approached Expectations 725 -749 Level 4: Met Expectations 750 -793 Level 5: Exceeded Expectations 794 -850 650 -699 Source: http: //www. state. nj. us/education/assessment/parcc/scores/Fall 14 Spring 15 SRIG. pdf

Areas for Attention ● It should not be surprising that the results demonstrate that on average our youngest students meet or exceed expectations at higher levels than our high school students. ● After all, third grade students in 2015 began their schooling as kindergarten students in the 2011 -2012 school year and have been continuously educated in our new standards. ● Yet, the results in high school – particularly in mathematics – demonstrate that there is significant work ahead to align curriculum and instructional practices to the standards and better scaffold student learning throughout a student’s career.

PARCC Score Reports

https: //nj. pearsonaccessnext. com

https: //nj. pearsonaccessnext. com

District Summary of Schools

Student Roster

Parent Score Report ● Parent reports were provided to school districts in early December. ● Each student’s score report indicates which performance level he or she falls into based on the score received. ● The report is intended to help parents work with their child’s teachers and school officials to decide how best to support their child’s needs. ● In future years, it is expected that parents will receive score reports by the end of the school year in which testing took place.

Sample English Language Arts/Literacy Report 2 1 3 1 Overall Student Performance – This section of the report shows your student’s overall numerical score and the performance level achieved based on that score. Level 1 indicates a student is not yet meeting grade level expectations and Level 5 indicates the student has a strong understanding of grade level material. Level 4 and above indicates that a student meets or exceeds grade level expectations and is well prepared for the next grade level. 2 Score Graph – The colored graph shows the score ranges for each performance level and where your student’s score falls within that range. This gives you an indication of how close your student is to achieving the next level. 3 Score Comparisons – Unlike many previous state test score reports, PARCC score reports show your student is performing compared to students in the same grade at the same school, across the school district, around the state, and across the states administering the PARCC test.

Sample English Language Arts/Literacy Report 4 4 Reading and Writing Performance – The report for the English language arts test will show your student’s overall performance in two main subcategories: reading and writing. It will show your child’s numerical score for a sub-set of questions in those categories. This section includes the average reading and writing scores of students who achieved an overall performance of Level 4 on the test, as well as average scores for the school, district, and state.

Sample English Language Arts/Literacy Report 5 6 5 Detailed Breakdowns – The score report also provides information about your student’s performance on specific skills within English language arts, so you can see where your student is excelling or needs additional support. Each area includes a description of the skills needed to demonstrate a clear understanding of grade-level standards. 6 Explanatory Icons – This is a guide to the icons used above, so you can quickly see how your child’s performance in each area of the test compares with that of students who met grade level expectations.

Sample Math Report 2 1 3 1 Overall Student Performance – This section of the report shows your student’s overall numerical score and the performance level achieved based on that score. Level 1 indicates a student is not yet meeting grade level expectations and Level 5 indicates the student has a strong understanding of grade level material. Level 4 and above indicates that a student meets or exceeds grade level expectations and is well prepared – “College and Career Ready” levels. 2 Score Graph – The colored graph shows the score ranges for each performance level and where your child’s score falls within that range. This gives you an indication of how close your child is to achieving the next level. 3 Score Comparisons – Unlike many previous state test score reports, PARCC score reports show your student is performing compared to students in the same grade at the same school, across the school district, around the state, and across the states administering the PARCC test.

Sample Math Report 4 5 4 Detailed Breakdowns – The score report also provides information about your child’s performance on specific skills within Math, so you can see where your student is excelling or needs additional support. Each area includes a description of the skills needed to demonstrate a clear understanding of grade-level standards. 5 Explanatory Icons – This is a guide to the icons used.

Learning is at the heart of what we do. PARCC measures student learning against the state standards.

We need a process that will allow us to be more effective as schools. We need something that connects student learning to: Curriculum Student Learning Objectives Effective Instruction Assessments Professional Learning Communities Overall School Culture

CONNECTED ACTION ROADMAP (CAR) Provides a framework for schools that promotes collaboration around student learning in a systemic, cohesive way.

https: //youtu. be/sm. UErj. ZWg. OM

A Key Component to CAR: Professional Learning Communities (PLCs)

PROFESSIONA L LEARNING COMMUNITIES What Are They? “. . . educators committed to working collaboratively in ongoing processes of collective inquiry and action research to achieve better results for the students they serve. Professional Learning Communities operate under the assumption that the key to improved learning for students is continuous, job-embedded learning for educators. ” (Du. Four, Eaker, & Many, 2006)

Source: Educational Leadership (ASCD, Nov. 2015, p. 23 -26) http: //www. educationalleadership-digital. com/educationalleadership/201511? pg=26#pg 26

PLCs will meet to engage in conversations about PARCC Results Conversations lead to improved student learning

Instructional Planning Highly Effective PLCs will look at PARCC data and its implications with the following: Student Learning Objectives Learning Activities/Experiences Vertical & Horizontal Curriculum Standards Formative Assessments Summative Assessments Overall School Culture THE CAR FRAMEWORK WILL HELP SCHOOLS IMPROVE STUDENT LEARNING

Data-Using PLCs Ask Four Questions 1. Which students were unable to demonstrate proficiency on this assessment? 2. Which students are highly proficient and would benefit from extended or accelerated learning? 3. Did one or more colleagues have excellent results in an area where my students struggled? What can I learn from my colleagues to improve my individual practice? 4. Is there an area in which none of us achieved the results we expected? What do we need to learn as a team to teach this skill or concept more effectively? Source: Educational Leadership (ASCD, Nov. 2015, p. 23 -26) http: //www. educationalleadership-digital. com/educationalleadership/201511? pg=26#pg 26

PLC Conversations 1. What do the color codes on the District Summary Report tell us? 2. What subcategories have the greatest number of students not meeting expectations, nearly meeting expectations and/or meeting/exceeding expectations? 3. What standards are being measured? How are these standards being addressed in the curriculum and student learning objectives? 4. What changes need to be made to instruction? 5. What strategies, activities, resources and assessments need to remain in our instruction? What needs to change? 6. What professional resources do we need to assist us in meeting the needs of these students? ? Source: Adapted/Modified from CAR - PLC Conversation #8 - Analyze Summative Assessment Data

National Park School District

Data Analysis Protocol Establish Group Norms So what? Now what? No blame, no judgement! One piece of the puzzle. . .

Data Analysis Protocol Use the Student Roster to. . . Compare the PARCC, State, District and School Averages Compare subcategories (Ex. literary vs. informational vs. vocabulary) Compare students within a subcategory (vertical results) Highlight above and below Just Proficient Mean Compare individual student subcategories (horizontal results)

Data Analysis Protocol- Things to Consider. . . Note that the cut off scores differ based on grade and /or subject Individual Student Report- Probable Range Create comparison graphs Compare grade levels Compare subject areas Compare subcategories within each grade level

DISTRICT TEAMS WORK SESSION

Now What? Review, study, reflect on… Released Sample Test Items Guide to. . . Understanding the Score Reading Evidence Tables Writing Evidence Tables Math Major/Supporting Content Documents

How will your school use PARCC data to identify strengths and gaps that exist in curriculum and instruction? ● Does your school allocate common planning time for administrators to collaboratively reflect on professional practice as it relates to curriculum and instruction? ● Which members of your administrative team will be collaborate on the analysis of PARCC data? ● How can administrators disaggregate PARCC data to make decisions related to curricular content and instructional practices (ex. , standards, subgroups, etc. )? ● How can administrators use PARCC data to evaluate the alignment of your school’s diagnostic and formative assessments? Source: “Preparing for PARCC Results” (NJ Department of Education Power. Point, November 2015)

How will your school use PARCC data to inform the conversations of your PLCs? How will your school structure which staff will participate in PLCs (ex. , grade level groups, subject matter, etc. )? ● Does your school have data protocols to guide the analysis of PARCC data? ● PARCC data will be accessed via an interactive web-based data management and reporting system. Does your school staff have the technological skills and capabilities to analyze your school’s data? ● What other complementary data sources does your school possess that can be triangulated with PARCC data? ● Source: “Preparing for PARCC Results” (NJ Department of Education Power. Point, November 2015)

How can your school invest in additional professional resources to meet the learning needs of all students? ● Has your school determined how PARCC data will be presented and/or disseminated to appropriate stakeholders (ex. , staff, parents, etc. )? ● Can your school use PARCC administration and performance data to guide the allocation and alignment of resources (ex. , facilities, technology, human resources, scheduling, professional development, etc. )? Source: “Preparing for PARCC Results” (NJ Department of Education Power. Point, November 2015)

PARCC Resources ●www. parcconline. org ●prc. parcconline. org (NJ's code- NJ 1787) ●understandthescore. org ●bealearninghero. org ●www. teachingchannel. org ●http: //www. state. nj. us/education/assessment/parcc/in forming. pdf ●Online-plc. org

“Strong academic focus is not about excessive emphasis on test results or pressure on teachers and/or students to raise scores unaided. It is much more about in-depth, collaborative analysis of the relationship between how teachers teach and what students learn. ” (Robinson, Hohepa & Lloyd, 2009)

Tonya Breland t. breland@tesoconsulting. com Carla Bittner cbittner@npelem. com