Using Data to Identify Student Needs for MME Stan Masters Coordinator of Curriculum, Assessment, and...

Using Data to Identify Student Needs for MME

Stan MastersCoordinator of Curriculum, Assessment,

and School ImprovementLenawee ISD

August 26, 2008

POP• Purpose

– Understand the potential in using student achievement data to identify student readiness for the Michigan Merit Exam

• Objectives– Analyze the Spring 2008 MME results, using

a case study– Develop steps for preparing for 2009 MME

and beyond

• Procedure– PowerPoint slides for presenting information

Spring 2007 MME ResultsAugust 15, 2007- LANSING –

More than 94 percent of Michigan 11th graders participating in the new Michigan Merit Exam (MME) this spring qualified to receive the $4,000 Michigan Promise Scholarship for their post-secondary education, the Michigan Department of Education reported today.

To qualify for the up-front installment payments of the Michigan Promise Scholarship, students are required to meet or exceed state standards in reading, writing, mathematics, and science.  They will receive $1,000 during their freshman and sophomore years and earn the remaining $2,000 after successfully completing two years of post-secondary education.

Those students who did not meet or exceed Michigan standards in all four of those subjects as 11th graders have an opportunity to test again as seniors to qualify for early receipt of scholarship funds, or receive the $4,000 Promise Scholarship after successfully completing two years of a post-secondary education program.

What were the components of each MME test score?

• MME Reading – – ACT Reading and WorkKeys Reading

• MME Writing – – ACT English, ACT Writing, and Michigan Writing

• MME Math – – ACT Math, WorkKeys Math, ACT Science, and

Michigan Math

• MME Science – – ACT Science and Michigan Science

What about…

• MME English Language Arts?– Used for purposes of Adequate Yearly Progress

(AYP)– A student’s total ELA scale score is the average of the

reading and writing scale scores.

• MME Social Studies– Entirely a Michigan test– Must be taken as part of MME, but scores are not

used to qualify for the Michigan Promise Scholarship– Not part of Michigan’s AYP formula

11th Graders Who Received Met or Exceeded Scores ("Proficient") on MME Reading, Writing, Math, and Science on Spring 2007 MME

27.91%

24.44%

27.27%

23.08%

29.51%

20.71%

16.47%

31.38%

26.17%

3.33%

23.33%

29.57%28.91%

28.57%

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

Addiso

n

Adrian

Blissfi

eld

Britton

-Mac

on

Clinto

n

Deerfie

ld

Hudson

LISD

Mad

ison

Mor

enci

Onste

d

Sand

Creek

Tecum

seh

Total

Per

cen

t P

rofi

cien

t

What do we know about these “proficient” MME students?

• They took the MEAP tests in – Winter of 2003 (Reading and Writing)– Winter of 2004 (Math and Science)

• What evidence could indicate that these students would show success on the Spring 2007 MME?

Percentage of "All Proficient" Students on Spring 2007 MME Who Were Also "All Proficient" in Winter 2003 and Winter 2004 MEAP

(only valid scores returned to the same school)

60.32%61.29%

80.00%

87.50%

20.00%

36.84%

0.00%

68.75% 68.79%

93.33%84.62%

75.00%

53.85%

75.00%

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%

Addis

on

Adria

n

Blissf

ield

Britto

n-M

acon

Clinto

n

Deerfi

eld

Hudso

nLIS

D

Mad

ison

Mor

enci

Ons

ted

Sand C

reek

Tecum

seh

Total

Schools

Pe

rce

nta

ge

Pro

fic

ien

t

MME 2008

• Some 12th grade re-testers in the Fall of 2008 – Free ACT on National Test Date in October– Opportunity to improve scores to receive Michigan

Promise Scholarship as incoming Freshmen– Does not impact AYP– MDE decides to end Fall Retake after 2008

• March 2008 – Spring MME with 11th graders– Same formats as Spring 2007

11th Graders Who Received Met or Exceeded Scores ("Proficient") on MME Reading, Writing, Math, and Science on Spring 2008 MME

34.48%

18.62%

30.77%

37.84%38.54%

12.12%

26.92%

3.45%

30.00%

26.32%

28.39%

17.33%

35.60%

27.58%

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

40.00%

Addiso

n

Adrian

Blissfi

eld

Britton

-Mac

on

Clinto

n

Deerfie

ld

Hudson

LISD

Mad

ison

Mor

enci

Onste

d

Sand

Creek

Tecum

seh

Total

Per

cen

t P

rofi

cien

t

Comparison of Spring 2007 and Spring 2008 MME 11th Graders Who Received Met or Exceeded Scores ("Proficient")

on MME Reading, Writing, Math, and Science

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

40.00%

Addiso

n

Adrian

Blissfi

eld

Britton

-Mac

on

Clinto

n

Deerfie

ld

Hudson

LISD

Mad

ison

Mor

enci

Onste

d

Sand

Creek

Tecum

seh

Total

Per

cen

t P

rofi

cien

t

Spring 2007 MME Testers Spring 2008 MME Testers

What do we know about these “proficient” MME students?

• They took the MEAP tests in – Winter of 2004 (Reading and Writing)– Winter of 2005 (Math and Science)

• What evidence could indicate that these students would show success on the Spring 2008 MME?

Percentage of "All Proficient" Students on Spring 2008 MME Who Were Also "All Proficient" in Winter 2004 and Winter 2005 MEAP

(only valid scores returned to the same school)

57.69%

65.91%

46.15%45.45%

68.97%

100.00%

43.48%

0.00%

70.83%70.59%

39.02%

53.85%

62.16%58.13%

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%

Addis

on

Adria

n

Blissf

ield

Britto

n-M

acon

Clinto

n

Deerfi

eld

Hudso

nLIS

D

Mad

ison

Mor

enci

Ons

ted

Sand C

reek

Tecum

seh

Total

Per

cen

tag

e P

rofi

cien

t

WE MUST UTILIZE AN

INQUIRY APPROACH

TO DATA ANALYSIS

WE MUST USE MULTIPLE

SOURCES OF DATA

We need a data warehouse

for our 21st century

schools

WE MUST FOCUS ON DATA TO INCREASE STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT

Talking Points for the Purpose of Implementing

a Data Warehouse in Lenawee Schools

Potential Data Sources for Predicting Student Success on MME

• Previous MEAP

• Previous ACT

• PLAN

• EXPLORE

• NWEA

What else can we use to predict student success on MME?

• ACT Score– Benchmark Scores for College Readiness

• Reading Score of 21 » 97% Proficient on MME Reading

• Math Score of 22» 99% Proficient on MME Math

• Science Score of 24» 100% Proficient on MME Science

• English Score of 18 » 17% Proficient on MME Writing

Bauer, E. and Treder, D. (December 13, 2007). Banging on the MME. Presentation at Michigan Educational Research Association Inc., Frankenmuth, Michigan.

What else can we use to predict student success on MME?

• PLAN– Benchmark Scores for College Readiness

• Reading Score of 17 » 70% Proficient on MME Reading

• Math Score of 19» 87% Proficient on MME Math

• Science Score of 21» 95% Proficient on MME Science

• English Score of 15» 25% Proficient on MME Writing

Bauer, E. and Treder, D. (December 13, 2007). Banging on the MME. Presentation at Michigan Educational Research Association Inc., Frankenmuth, Michigan.

Changes in tests and components of 2009 MME

may change the predictability• MME Reading –

– Some ACT Reading and some WorkKeys Reading for Information

• MME Writing – – Some ACT English and ACT Writing

• MME Math – – Some ACT Math, some WorkKeys Applied Mathematics, some

WorkKeys Locating Information, and Michigan Mathematics• MME Science –

– Some ACT Science and Michigan Science• MME Social Studies –

– Some WorkKeys Locating Information and Michigan Social Studies

What else could we use to predict student success on MME?

• Transcripts of Student Courses

• Grades of Students in Courses

• Curriculum Alignment to:– Michigan Curriculum Framework– New High School Course Expectations– ACT College Readiness Standards– Work Keys Skill Sets

So, what can you do for Spring 2009 MME?

• Use data points on this year’s juniors to:– Identify students who have “assets” for success

• Previous MEAP Scores – Winter 2005 and Fall 2005

• Previous ACT Scores• Previous PLAN Scores• Previous EXPLORE Scores• NWEA results

– Identify students who need assistance with the testing formats

• Persuasive writings using MME rubrics• Analyzing data in graphs, charts, and tables• Use of released items from MDE• Teach strategies for completing MME

What We Already Know About Data Analysis and

Change in Instructional Practices• Zellmer (1997)

– Without specific expectations and professional development, teachers will simply ignore data and continue to use the same instructional practices.

• Price-Baugh (1997)– Without data regarding alignment to State standards,

teachers will not supplement their use of instructional resources to help students meet the standards.

• Moss-Mitchell (1998)– Student learning increases across socio-economic and

gender predictors when coupled with:• filling in gaps between tests and instructional materials• supervision to monitor curriculum alignment• focused professional development• public copies of aligned district curriculum• the involvement of school principals

Source: English and Steffy, (2001), Deep Curriculum Alignment, pp. 91-97.

So, what can you do beyond 2009?

• Analyze student scores from recent MEAP– Performance levels, scaled scores, strands,

constructed responses

• Analyze the students’ current courses– Academic success? Work Habits? Social Behaviors?

• Analyze the students’ demographic factors– Attendance, parent involvement, peer group support,

special education services

• Look for patterns…investigate a case study – Gaps in content knowledge, misconceptions on

concepts, lack of efficacy in reasoning or writing

This stuff can’t hurt you…

• Align your curriculum to the High School Course Expectations (HSCEs)– Create local documents, develop common

assessments, hold team meetings to study student work

• Increase the use of formative assessment• Educate parents about their role in a

standards-based educational system• Expect all students to succeed; publicly

celebrate their achievements

Questions?Stan Masters

Coordinator of

Instructional Data Services

Lenawee Intermediate School District

2946 Sutton Road

Adrian, Michigan 49921

517-265-1606 (phone)

517-263-7079 (fax)

stan.masters@lisd.ushttp://www.lisd.us/curriculum/