The Many Faces of Benchmark Assessments: Changing the Culture of Teaching and Learning

1. The Many Faces of Benchmark Assessments: Changing the Culture of Teaching and Learning Milwaukee Public Schools Metro Nashville Public Schools Hardin Daniel, Discovery Education Assessment Nancy Bonesho, Milwaukee Public Schools Paul Changas, Metro Nashville Public Schools Kathy Strunk, Discovery Education Assessment

2. Universal Screener Hardin Daniel & Kathy Strunk Classroom Teachers – All Learners Interventionists - Struggling Learners Interim Benchmarks in the Instructional Process Nancy Bonesho Classroom Teachers Students Longitudinal and Real-Time Data Paul Changas Professional Development for Principals What are we trying to accomplish?

3. Balanced, Comprehensive Assessment Solution Progress Zone 60,000+ Item Bank Remediate with digital content K-HS Reading, Math, Science Interim Benchmarks K-HS Predict Student Proficiency Universal Screener RTI Progress Monitoring Grades K-HS VAL-ED Principal Effectiveness

4. DEA Balanced Assessment System Data serves any level of intensity or frequency, knowing student needs may vary throughout learning careers

5. DEA Balanced Assessment System Unique types of data meet the needs of all educators, including both general and special education.

6. NCLB 2001 standards based accountability provisionsrequire each state to develop content and achievement standards in several subjects, administer tests to measure students’ progress toward these standards, develop targets for performance on these tests, and impose a series of interventions on schools and districts that do not meet the targets. IDEA § 300.309, (a), states a child may be determined to have a specific learning disability, if—(1) The child does not achieve adequately for the child’s age or to meet State-approved grade-level standards in one or more of the following areas, when provided with learning experiences and instruction appropriate for the child’s age or State-approved grade-level standards. NCLB and IDEA Both Require Standards Based Accountability

7. National Center for Response to Intervention www.rti4success.org External Review

8. “Brief” Multiple Grades and Subjects National Norm vs State Specific Foundational Skills vs State Standards Minimum of 3-months before external validation Diverse Population Data Challenges to the Use of Interim Assessment as a Universal Screener

9. Herman and Baker, (2005), “Unless benchmark tests reflect state standards and assessments, their results tell us little about whether students are making adequate progress toward achieving the standards and performing well on the assessment.” Joseph Jenkins, (2008),“I'm convinced screening instruments should be "locally validated" according to the future measure used to judge adequate/inadequate reading outcomes. Schools (and states) can validate the screening cut points on CBM and on other types of screens that predict adequate/inadequate reading levels on the local criterion outcome measure (e.g., state standards test). Because these outcome measures (and the score used to distinguish between adequate and inadequate performance) differ by state and school district, schools should evaluate screening measures (and screening cut points) in relation to the specific (local) outcome measure.” Research on Standards-Based Screening

10. National Center on Response to Intervention-cut back Discovery Education Assessment Predictive Benchmarks is posted on the Center’s website at www.rti4success.org as a universal screening tool for struggling learners. At this time, the DEA universal screener is the only state-specific screener for Math and for grades higher than 3rd in Reading and Math. DEA received highly favorable scores, with Classification and Reliability ranked highest. All screenings are rated for 1) Classification Accuracy 2) Generalizability 3) Reliability 4) Validity 5) Disaggregated Data for Diverse Populations

11. National Center for Response to Intervention www.rti4success.org

12. Universal Screener Hardin Daniel & Kathy Strunk Classroom Teachers – All Learners Interventionists - Struggling Learners Interim Benchmarks in the Instructional Process Nancy Bonesho Classroom Teachers Students Longitudinal and Real-Time Data Paul Changas Professional Development for Principals What are we trying to accomplish?

13. 85,000 Students in 185 schools About 5,500 teachers Have been using Discovery Ed. Assessment for 4 years Started DEA with 22 schools in September 2006 Increased to 109 by December 2006 District wide implementation by September 2007 Over 600 Professional Developments sessions have been conducted since Sept. 2006 (differentiated) MPS employs conservative cut scores to avoid under-identifying students in need of assistance Predictive Validity: Reading: 86.4% Math 90.1% The Milwaukee Public Schools Story

14. Teacher understanding of the connection between the benchmarks and instruction Consistent analysis and use of the data by teachers and school communities Formative use of assessments and results with students/parents in a timely manner * Goal Setting Critical Components for Success

15. Reading Results - School A Consistent use of all critical components

16. Teachers meet frequently to discuss student DEA data Decisions on how to instruct students are based on DEA data – flex groups and differentiated work Reports are immediately shared with students and parents; students review difficult items and set class and individual goals for next benchmark Periodic ‘check-ins’ occur to keep everyone on task School A - Consistent Efforts Yield Sustained Results

17. Math Results - School B Inconsistent use of critical components

18. Inconsistent use of data Inconsistent delivery of targeted instruction Inconsistent utilization of differentiated activities Complacency in the classroom Results were not sustained School B - Random Acts of Improvement

19. Universal Screener Hardin Daniel & Kathy Strunk Classroom Teachers – All Learners Interventionists - Struggling Learners Interim Benchmarks in the Instructional Process Nancy Bonesho Classroom Teachers Students Longitudinal and Real-Time Data Paul Changas Professional Development for Principals What are we trying to accomplish?

20. MNPS Student Demographics

21. Where We Were (Spring 2008) On verge of NCLB Corrective Action Not consistently data driven District assessments not well utilized DEA in some schools, but not a district initiative

22. Planning for Interim Benchmarks Information gathering Research literature review School visits Visits to other districts Discussion with test company representatives Focus groups (principals, teachers, exemplary educators) Options identified Build our own assessments DEA (recommended)

23. Project Management Project Charter – Desired outcomes Administration of interim benchmark assessments (Reading & Math in grades 3-8; Alg. I, Bio I, Eng. II) Teachers routinely use results to make classroom decisions Teachers administer classroom formative assessments or probes to identify specific deficits Change in culture to data driven decision making

24. Communications Plan - Targets District executive staff District coordinators and facilitators Instructional coaches School administrators Teachers Exemplary Educators School Board members Parents Students Community Project Management

25. Project Management Professional Development Plan – Expectations Principals will take leadership role in each school C&I executive staff will hold principals accountable Lead teachers selected for professional development will assist/train other school staff Curriculum coordinators and instructional coaches will support teachers as needed DEA training/discussion will occur routinely at principal meetings DEA and other formative assessments will be routinely addressed in school improvement plans Professional development will be ongoing within the school

26. Project Management Professional Development Plan – Targets Principals Key central office staff School teams (Principal and 3-5 key staff) Exemplary Educators Instructional coaches Additional school staff on as needed basis

27. Where We Are Now Common language among our educators Ongoing and sustained professional development Sharing of best practices and effective strategies Monthly meetings of principals, APs and coaches Principal institutes Teacher workshops MNPS Tube (online PD)

28. Rubric Developed from Kim Marshall, “Interim Assessments: A User's Guide,” Phi Delta Kappan, 9/2008

29. Use of DEA Interim Benchmarks District level District and School AYP reports Prioritization of schools for interventions Identification of district-wide PD needs School level Monitoring of classroom teachers Identification of school-wide PD needs Identification of students for school-wide interventions Classroom level Identification of student academic strengths and needs Instructional feedback Prediction of student success on high stakes assessments

30. 2009 Relationship Between DEA and TCAP Correctly predicted TCAP proficient or higher: 87.2% Correctly predicted exact performance level: 68.6%

31. AYP Report Example (Data Warehouse)

32. DEA in Combination with Value Added

33. DEA Growth Report

34. DEA Growth Report

35. Merging TVAAS and DEA Projections 2009 Accelerate I For Students Enrolled at AAA Middle School 5th Math ACHIEVE

37. 2009 Accelerate I For Students Enrolled at AAA Middle School 5th Math ACHIEVE

39. Universal Screener Hardin Daniel & Kathy Strunk Classroom Teachers – All Learners Interventionists - Struggling Learners Interim Benchmarks in the Instructional Process Nancy Bonesho Classroom Teachers Students Longitudinal and Real-Time Data Paul Changas Professional Development for Principals What are we trying to accomplish?

40. Contact Information Hardin_Daniel@discovery.com Kathy_Strunk@discovery.com Paul.Changas@mnps.org boneshnb@milwaukee.k12.wi.us Discovery Education Assessment Toll Free Number: 1-866-814-6685