Purpose/Goal:
The purpose of this study is to investigate the ways in which common assessments can be used to increase student achievement and to answer the question: “In what ways will implementing common assessments in 4th grade math classes increase student achievement?”
Step 1) Forming Workgroups.
Action Step: Campus Instructional Leadership Team members will be asked to serve as committee leaders. Other staff members who agree to lead will be asked to lead subcommittees which will meet at least once per month and agree to work together with the same goals in mind. Campus Administrator
Person(s) Responsible: Project Lead Person Start: August 13, 2010
Timeline:Start/End: End: August 13, 2010 Time – Initially a one to two hour block. After that periods of 30 – 45 minutes for groups to meet.
Needed Resources: Internet and computer access- Needed for research and for data gathering.
Office Supplies – For record keeping and other documentation. Informal Evaluation – Will be in the form of conversation and active listening.
Evaluation: Formal Evaluation – Will be in the form of pre and post self evaluation surveys.
Step 2) The Search for Data.
Action Step: Data will be gathered and analyzed by subcommittees from the following sources.
1. Percentage of 4th grade students receiving a ranking of “Commended Performance” in math.
2. Percentage of students attending math tutorials.
3. District Benchmark results.
4. Classroom Grades.
5. Student Surveys Campus Administrator
Person(s) Responsible: Project Lead Person
All Committee Members Start: August 14, 2010
Timeline: Start/End: End: June, 2011
Re-start August, 2011 and continue through the next year if the project is considered viable. Resources Needed: Internet and computer access- Needed for research and for data gathering.
Office Supplies – For record keeping and other documentation Informal Evaluation – Will take the form of collaborative dialog.
Evaluation: Formal Evaluation – Will be in the form of documentation folders submitted by the committee members.
Step 3) The Work Begins
Action Step: Once committees have had the opportunity to analyze data and have begun the process of collaborative planning, and writing common assessment, interviews will be conducted by the administrator and/or project lead person to determine the staffs perceived worth of the program as compared to the more quantitative data collected through local, district and state assessments. The collection, analysis and understanding of these vast amounts of data will require a deep understanding that will be addressed though professional learning community meetings and collaborative grade level/subject meetings. Campus Administrator
Persons Responsible: Project Lead Person
Committee Chair Persons
Timeline: Start/End: Start: August 14, 2010
End: June, 2011
Re-start August, 2011 and continue through the next year if the project is considered viable. Resources: Access to Data – Whether this is through hard copy of via the internet.
Examples of Common Assessment – Written by other high performing school.
TEKS – Each member will need access to TEKS overviews, Blueprints and TAKS analysis guides.
Office Supplies – Paper, ink and toner in order create and distribute copies of common assessments and student/class analysis sheets
Evaluation: Formal Evaluation – Student results on locally created common assessments will be compared to results on district state assessments.
Step 4) Book Study
Action Step: In order to understand our own biases and ways in which those biases may affect our work, the administrator, project manager and other committee members will continue the previously begun book study of Culturally Proficient Instruction: A Guide for People Who Teach. Person(s) Responsible: Campus Administrator
Project Lead Person
All Staff Members
Timeline: Start/End: Start: October, 2010
End: May, 2011
Resources Needed: Copies of the Text – This resource was previously purchased for all faculty members of the district using grant funds. Informal Evaluation – Faculty shares learning through the campus created book study blog.
Evaluation: Informal Evaluation – Each faculty member has the opportunity to self evaluate using guiding question and reflection guides available in each chapter of the book.
Step 5) Looking for Patterns
Action Step: After a predetermined number of common assessments have been created and administered, committee members work collaboratively to disaggregate the data based on: gender, ethnicity and socio-economic standards to discover if any assessments are being created that have any types of underlying bias that may skew the results.
Persons Responsible: Campus Administrator
Project Lead Person
Committee Chair Persons
Timeline: Start/End: Start: August 14, 2010
End: June, 2011
Resources Needed: Access to Data – Whether this is through hard copy of via the internet.
Office Supplies – For record keeping and other documentation
Evaluation: Formal Evaluation – Disaggregated Common Assessment Data.
Step 6) Revisit the Goals and Priorities
Action Step: At this time all committee members will meet and analyze the results by comparing the previous year’s state assessments results in 4th grade math to the current year’s results. Discussion topics will include such topics as: What Worked and What Didn’t? What Can We do Better? Was the Gain Worth the Resources Expended and Where Do We Go From Here?
Person(s) Responsible: Campus Administrator
Project Lead Person
All Committee Members
Timeline: Start/End: Start/End: June, 2011
Resources Needed: Data – Current and previous year’s TAKS results. Copies of student and class profiles on common assessments developed and administered throughout the year.
Evaluation: Formal Evaluation –
State Assessment Data
Step 7) Putting the Results to Good Use
Action Step: Based on the ongoing collaborative dialogs between teachers and any consistent and reproducible change.
Person(s) Responsible: Campus Administrator, CILT Team, Project Lead Person
Timeline: Start/End: May 2011
Resources Needed: 2011 State Assessment Data, Copies of School Improvement Plan
Assessment: Formal Assessment – All Campus Improvement Plans are reviewed at the district level.
Step 8) Maintaining the Momentum
Action Step:Using the Delphi technique campus instructional staff will respond to perceived needs for improvement in the current creation, revision, administration, and analysis of common assessment.
Person(s) Responsible: Campus Administrator
Project Lead Person
All Committee Members
Timeline: Start/End: Start/End: June, 2010
Resources Needed: Index Cards and Project Boards to be used when collecting, categorizing and prioritizing information from the committee
Evaluation: Formal Evaluation – Members take the self evaluation survey that was taken at the beginning of the process again, and comparisons are made.
