2005 EQAO Highlights

1. 2005 EQAOHighlights

2. Gr. 3 Contextual Information

3. Gr. 6 Contextual Information

4. Grade 3 Reading: Participating Students

5. Grade 3 Writing: Participating Students

6. Grade 3 Math: Participating Students

7. Grade 6 Reading: Participating Students

8. Grade 6 Writing: Participating Students

9. Grade 6 Math: Participating Students

11. Grade 3 Results Over Time

12. Grade 6 Results Over Time

13. % of Gr. 3 Students at All Levels:Writing

14. % of Gr. 3 Students at All Levels:Math

15. % of Gr. 6 Students at All Levels: Reading

16. % of Gr. 6 Students at All Levels: Writing

17. % of Gr. 6 Students at All Levels: Math

18. Results Over Time: Gr. 3 Reading

19. Results Over Time: Gr. 3 Writing

20. Results Over Time: Gr. 3 Mathematics

21. Results Over Time: Gr. 6 Reading

22. Results Over Time: Gr. 6 Writing

23. Results Over Time: Gr. 6 Mathematics

24. Gr. 6 Gender: Board vs. Province

25. Gr. 3 Gender: Board vs. Province

26. Student Questionnaire Grade 3 Gender • Student attitude toward reading • Significantly more male and female students say “I am a good reader” than “I like to read” (huge difference for males) • Student attitude toward writing • % of students who see themselves as good writers is above provincial average • Student attitude toward writing • % of girls who see themselves as good at math is above provincial average • Significantly more girls say they like mathematics than say they are good at math

27. Student Questionnaire Grade 6 - Gender • Student attitudes toward reading: • % of students who say they are good at reading are significantly higher than the province • There is a large drop in the % of males between ‘good’ and ‘like’ in reading both at board and provincial levels • Student attitudes toward writing: • Significantly fewer boys say they are good at writing and that they like to write at board and provincial levels • Student attitudes toward mathematics: • Significantly more boys say they are good at math and that they like mathematics at board and provincial levels

28. Student Questionniare Grade 3 and 6 - Gender • Computers at home • Grade 3 – % indicated NO • Grade 6 – % indicated NO • Computer usage in school • % of students at Grade 3 using computers at school is higher than province for reading and writing • % of students at Grade 6 using computers at school is slightly lower in reading and writing, and higher in mathematics

29. Teacher Questionnaire Grade 3 • Higher number of split grade classes (2) • Language resource accessibility (4) • Higher than the provincial average (≥ 5) • Language related computer software (f) • Early Reading Strategy: Report of the Expert Panel (n) • Literacy for Learning: Report of the Expert Panel (p) • Lower than the provincial average (≥ 5) • Library or resource centre language materials (d) • Language instruction material developed by board (I)

30. Teacher Questionnaire Grade 3 • Frequency of language resource use (5) • Higher than provincial average • Language related computer software (f) • A Guide to Effective Instruction in Reading (o) • Literacy for Learning: Report of the Expert Panel (p) • Lower than provincial average • Language instruction materials develop by board (i) • Ontario Curriculum Unit Planner (k) • Ministry exemplars and rationales (m)

31. Teacher Questionnaire Grade 3 • Usefulness of language resources (6) • Higher than the provincial average • Language related computer software (f) • Reports of the Expert Panels (n & p) • Lower than the provincial average • Resource centre materials (d) • Ontario Curriculum Unit Planner (k) • Ministry exemplars and rationales (m)

32. Teacher Questionnaire Grade 3 • Mathematics resource accessibility (7) • Higher than the provincial average • Calculators (d) • Computers (e) • Commercial mathematics related computer software (f) • Early Math Strategy: Report of the Expert Panel (o) • Lower than the provincial average • Mathematics assessment materials developed by board or other boards (k)

33. Teacher Questionnaire Grade 3 • Frequency of mathematics resource use (8) • Higher than provincial average • Calculators (d) • Computers (e) • Commercial mathematics related computer software (f) • Lower than provincial average • Library or resource centre mathematics materials (c) • Mathematics instruction/assessment materials develop by board (j & k) • Ontario Curriculum Unit Planner (l)

34. Teacher Questionnaire Grade 3 • Usefulness of mathematics resources (9) • Higher than the provincial average • Calculators (d) • Computers (e) • Commercial mathematics related computer software (f) • Mathematics assessment materials developed by teachers (i) • A Guide to Effective Instruction in Mathematics (p) • Report of the Expert Panel (Gr. 4-6) (q) • Lower than the provincial average • Resource centre materials (c) • Ontario Curriculum Unit Planner (l)

35. Teacher Questionnaire Grade 6 • Higher number of split grade classes (2) • Language resource accessibility (4) • Higher than the provincial average (≥ 5) • Computer (e) • Early Reading Strategy: Report of the Expert Panel (n) • Guide to Effective Instruction in Reading (o) • Literacy for Learning: Report of the Expert Panel (p) • Lower than the provincial average (≥ 5) • Classroom reading materials (a) • Ministry exemplars and rationales (m)

36. Teacher Questionnaire Grade 6 • Frequency of language resource use (5) • Higher than provincial average • Computers (e) • Language related computer software (f) • Lower than provincial average • Resource centre language materials (d) • Ontario Curriculum Unit Planner (k) • Ministry exemplars and rationales (m)

37. Teacher Questionnaire Grade 6 • Usefulness of language resources (6) • Higher than the provincial average • Language assessment materials developed by board (j) • Guide to Effective Instruction in Reading (o) • Lower than the provincial average • Ontario Curriculum Unit Planner (k)

38. Teacher Questionnaire Grade 6 • Mathematics resource accessibility (7) • Higher than the provincial average • Commercial mathematics related computer software (f & g) • Mathematics assessment materials developed by teachers (I) • Guide to Effective Instruction in Mathematics (p) • Teaching and Learning Mathematics: Report of the Expert Panel (q) • Lower than the provincial average • Mathematics textbooks and/or workbooks (a) • Mathematics manipulatives (b) • Resource centre materials (c) • Ontario Curriculum Unit Planner (l) • Four level achievement chart: Ontario Curriculum (m) • Early Math Strategy: Expert Panel Report (o)

39. Teacher Questionnaire Grade 6 • Frequency of mathematics resource use (8) • Higher than provincial average • Calculators (d) • Computers (e) • Mathematics related computer software (f & g) • Mathematics instruction & assessment materials developed by teachers (h&I) • Lower than provincial average • Mathematics textbooks &/or workbooks (a) • Library or resource centre mathematics materials (c) • Mathematics instruction/assessment materials develop by board (j & k) • Ontario Curriculum Unit Planner (l)

40. Teacher Questionnaire Grade 6 • Usefulness of mathematics resources (9) • Higher than the provincial average • Calculators (d) • Mathematics related computer software (f&g) • Mathematics assessment materials developed by teachers (i) • A Guide to Effective Instruction in Mathematics (p) • Report of the Expert Panels (early math & Gr. 4-6) (o&q) • Lower than the provincial average • Mathematics textbooks &/or workbooks (a) • Ontario Curriculum Unit Planner (l)

41. Principal Questionnaire • Board has a higher than average number of small schools (2 & 4) • Significantly less personnel support in the Resource Centre (5) • Preferred communication of EQAO information is through a newsletter, letter and school council meetings (6 c, d, & g) • Fewer Master’s degrees and more mobility than the provincial average (8 & 9b) • Higher participation in pd in reading, writing and mathematics instruction and assessment (10) • Lower participation in pd in data management and analysis and school improvement planning (10) • EQAO & Ministry activities, university and college courses seen as least useful types of pd (11) • High level of knowledge in all areas, slightly less in Junior Mathematics instruction and assessment, data management (12)

42. Next Steps… • EQAO will release Item Information Reports that show how students performed on specific items on the test. • Board administrators and teachers will analyze these reports, determine strategies to promote increased achievement, and incorporate these into their school improvement plans. • EQAO staff will deliver a presentation on data analysis at the January Elementary Principals Meeting

43. Item Information Reports:Ideas for Reviewing Reports • Where do you expect the school to be in relation to the Board and Province? • Scan for significant differences from expectation (Caution – number of participants is critical) • Record observations • Relate other data to the observations • Develop conclusions and hypotheses for further examination

44. Key Dates • Oct. 19-26: Schools receive ISRs • Nov. 9-22: Electronic student data collection; boards submit student data for 2006 administration • Nov. 25: Deadline for schools and boards to report publicly re: 2005 results • Nov. 28-Dec. 16: Schools verify student data submitted by board; boards update information as required

45. Key Dates • Jan. 3-17: Boards resubmit Electronic Student Data Collection with updated information • Jan. 23-Feb. 17: School order May 2006 materials • May 10-12: Schools receive shipment of assessment materials for 2006 • May 23-June 9: Administration of Grade 3 and 6 assessments