|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Curriculum Reports
Data Analysis of Literacy July 2009
Assessment All classroom teachers except one have signed up to access e-asTTle, two technology teachers have also signed up. Teachers are currently working through training exercises and learning to work with this. We hope to be able to use it effectively from the end of term 3 to assess reading, especially for those higher achieving students.
The second STAR test (STAR B) was conducted across the school in weeks 1 & 2 of this term. Teachers are currently analysing this data using the SWELL effect size tool. It will also be closely analysed, group by group, to establish school wide learning needs.
Writing data has been collected (mid term 1 & mid term 2) for Personal Recounts and this has been reported separately. Teachers have been able to use this assessment data to write their mid year English reports, however, teachers will also have used their own assessment information gathered from in class activities so this limits somewhat the comparative value of the graphs showing school wide achievement levels.
Writing assessment data will also be collected in term 3 for report writing. Teachers are aware of this and will be able to plan accordingly.
I have discussed the need for an integrated assessment schedule with Karen Coulter (literacy advisor) and we have outlined how this may look. We will do more work on this in the September holidays.
Budget We have spent the $2000.00 literacy budget on 8 group sets of instructional readers. These are now available for teachers to use. We have purchased high quality texts that relate to Science and Social Studies topics taught in school. Each set consists of 12 copies of the same text so that they can be used for guided reading. Staff have expressed the need of such sets and more will be purchased in the near future.
We have also purchased five small sets (4 copies) of novels suitable for extending our most able readers. These sets will be used in “literature circles”. Again, more such sets are required in order to adequately meet the needs of our students who achieve well in literacy.
Volunteer Community Reading Tutors Each Wednesday morning, 2 local retirees (both ex-teachers) work with 4 low achieving students. They support the students to read high interest texts, explaining vocabulary and meanings where necessary. Each student spends 20 min reading with their tutor. Hopefully we will soon be joined by a third volunteer.
Professional Development Modelling & Observations All class room teachers have had the opportunity to observe a reading lesson. Two teachers chose to observe a writing lesson as they felt they needed this more, and one teacher has observed both reading and writing. All classroom teachers have been observed teaching reading, either by an advisor or Kathryn Smith.
Teaching Comprehension Strategies We have had 2 meetings specifically on teaching comprehension strategies and all classroom teachers are now expected to include a focus on this in guided reading sessions.
Teaching English Language Learners We have had 3 staff meetings to extend our knowledge of how to cater for these students. Teachers have each carried out assessments and gathered information about 1 ELL target student. This information was discussed in detail at a staff meeting with the ESOL advisor.
Data Analyses
The following graphs have been derived from student interim reports. They give us an indication of where teachers believe students are achieving. As discussed previously, we must remember that teachers may have used different criteria in making decisions on student achievement on these reports.
Figure 1: Mid Year English distribution by Year Level
Figure 1 shows that more students at Year 8 achieve at level 4 than in Year 7. This is entirely expected. It can also be seen in figure 1 that less Year 8 students achieve at level 2 than Year 7 students, again this is expected. We can presume that this is an indication of effective teaching promoting learning for students.
Figure 2: mid year English distribution by ethnic group
Figure 2 shows that the percentage of students in the Pasifika and Maori groups achieving at level 2 is higher than that for the NZ European and Other groups. Conversely, the percentage of the Pasifika and Maori groups achieving at level 4 is less than for NZ European and Other groups. This pattern of achievement in seen in many schools across New Zealand, but it remains a particular concern for us that it occurs at SWIS also. We need to explore ways of accelerating the learning progress of these groups.
Figure 3: mid year English distribution by gender
While the percentage of girls and boys achieving at level 3 is almost the same, we can see that a greater percentage of boys are achieving at level 2 than are girls, and that a greater percentage of girls are achieving at level 4 than are boys.
It is expected that we will have some students who achieve at level 1 and level 2, but of course we expect all students to achieve to the best of their ability. It is important that we identify these students and the reasons they are achieving at this level.
Reading Achievement
Standardised testing of student reading achievement shows that SWIS has a wide range of student abilities. Between 31% & 33% of students achieve above average results on PAT Reading Vocabulary & STAR. These students require learning opportunities that will develop their abilities further and should not be considered as having no need of instruction in reading.
We also have between 20% and 24% of students who achieve below average results on the PAT Reading Vocabulary and STAR. These students have a range of different needs, including identified learning difficulties and being new learners of English. These students’ needs are complex and require targeted interventions as well as intense instruction.
The needs of the 44 % - 46% of students achieving within the average range on PAT Reading Vocabulary and STAR, should be met by balanced classroom literacy programmes.
STAR The Supplementary Tests of Achievement in Reading (STAR) are a key tool for determining the progress in reading achievement of our students. This standardised test has two forms (A and B) and has been designed to be used twice a year in schools. It is accepted practice to use test A at the beginning of the year and test B close to the middle of the year. This allows teachers to assess the effectiveness of their reading programmes in the middle of the year and make changes if students do not make adequate progress.
Test A was given in February and test B was given in July (not November as in previous years) so that teachers can make changes to their programmes if adequate progress is not seen to be made by students.
Some caution must be exercised in interpreting the information in the following tables as, at the time of writing, a number of students still have not completed STAR B as they were absent on the day their class sat the test.
STAR test comparisons 2008 – 2009
Figure 4: percentage of students achieving below, at & above stanine 5 on STAR
Figure 4 shows that more students are achieving above a stanine of 5 (the median range) on STAR administered in July 2009 than on any of the previous 3 tests. There are also less achieving a stanine result of less than 5. It should be noted that the gains achieved between tests administered in 2009 are greater than the gains made in 2008, over a shorter period of time. When results of STAR from November 2008 are compared to results of STAR from July 2009, a reduction in the percentage of students achieving ‘Below 5’ and an increase of students achieving ‘Above 5’ can be seen.
The percentages presented in figure 4 show that SWIS has a large number of high achieving students in reading, but also that about 20% of our students are not achieving to the level that we would consider appropriate.
Maori Achievement on STAR
Figure 5: percentage of Maori students achieving below, at & above stanine 5 on STAR
The obvious difference between the Maori student group and all students taken together is the lesser number achieving ‘Above 5’ and the higher number achieving ‘At 5’. The reduced number of Maori students achieving ‘Below 5’ in July 2009 compared to the number in February 2008 shows that at least some of this group are making good progress.
Pasifika Achievement on STAR
Figure 6: percentage of Pasifika students achieving below, at & above stanine 5 on STAR
The table of results showing the Pasifika group achievement shows that while nearly half of the group were achieving ‘Above 5’ at the July test in 2009, half were also achieving ‘Below 5’. While it is a small group (6 students) it is concerning that the Pasifika group has a high percentage of students achieving in this ‘Below 5’ band.
Writing Achievement
All teachers have taught recount writing during the first two terms. Students’ recount writing has been assessed by teachers on two separate occasions, allowing them the opportunity to benefit from explicit instruction and improve their level of achievement.
On at least 3 separate occasions, teachers have moderated selections of students’ writing, using the e-asTTle progress indicators. These discussions have resulted in general agreement (within 2 sub-levels) between teachers as to the level students have achieved in any given aspect of the writing. This gives us some confidence in the reliability of results from across the school.
Figure 7: comparison of recount writing 2008 to 2009-08-02
Student achievement in recount writing Data has been collected from all classes on the achievement of students in the “Language Resources” area of “Recount” writing, using the e-asTTle progress indicators. On the second assessment: · 20% of students achieved - above the level expected at the end of year 8 · 30% of students achieved at the level expected at the end of year 8 · 34% of students achieved just below the level expected at the end of year 8 · 15% of students achieved well below the level expected at the end of year 8
Figure 7: Whole school recount writing achievement
Across the whole school an effect size of 0.6 has been measured. This is considered a medium to large effect (Hattie; Visible Learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement, 2009) and suggests that students have improved their recount writing ability as a result of effective teaching.
When Year 7 student achievement levels from the beginning of 2008 are compared with the achievement levels of Year 8 students after the second recount in 2009, an effect size of 0.79 is measured.
Figure 8: comparison of recount writing 2008 to 2009-08-02
From the second writing sample in 2008 to the first writing sample in 2009, there is a negative effect size of -0.04. A drop in student performance is to be expected since the first sample in 2009 was not (in most classes) reworked by students, and neither did teachers (in most classes) spend time instructing students in how to be successful in the writing. This sample can be considered a 'draft' for most students. Without deliberate teacher instruction, it is likely that some students will not have written as well as they did at the end of 2008, as they have not remembered the success criteria for the writing style.
The measured effect shows that students have increased their achievement on recount writing tasks. It can reasonably be presumed that this comes as a result of the deliberate acts of teaching performed during literacy instruction.
Intended Actions
Professional development through the remainder of the year falls into two parts. Firstly, our involvement in the SWELL cluster means that all staff will contribute in some way to action research projects that relate to literacy priorities for the school. The exact nature of these projects has not yet been confirmed.
Secondly, our professional development in the remainder of the year will be tailored to meet individual teacher needs. Staff have been involved for some time in literacy professional development and now need to refine their teaching practice in different ways. It is likely that peer observations and feedback will take place for all staff, while some work closely with an advisor.
e-asTTle reading It is hoped that by the end of term 3, those students who have scored in the high range of the STAR will be able to sit e-asTTle tests (online). Teachers are currently exploring how to use this tool.
Data produced from e-asTTle will provide us with valuable information on next steps for students and on teacher effectiveness. Information gained will be especially useful in establishing the specific learning needs of those more able students.
Writing data Data will be collected for report writing and teachers will be expected to use the SWELL spreadsheet tools to calculate effect sizes and to gauge the level of engagement of their students. Moderation of student report writing will take place on at least 2 occasions to ensure the reliability of teacher evaluations across the school.
This data will be closely analysed to compare achievement of groups within the school.
Speech competition In the fourth term SWIS will be involved in a Speech Celebration. Our top performers in the school speech competition will have an opportunity to present their speech to parents and family members alongside other Year 7 and Year 8 students from schools in our area.
Areas for Improvement Data from the STAR B indicates that teachers are making a difference for many of our students. We must continue to refine our practice, especially in relation to our deliberate acts of teaching, in order that all students make significant progress during their time at SWIS. We need to pay particular attention to those groups that are making only minimal progress as well as to the needs of our very able students, of whom we have a large number.
Reporting Staff will be actively interpreting their own class’ STAR and e-asTTle writing results with a view to planning future learning activities for their class. Reflecting on student achievement, both within and between classes forms an important part of our ongoing professional discussions around student achievement.
Kathryn Smith. School Literacy Leader
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| @ Copyright 2005 South Wellington Intermediate School |