Making Use of DIBELS data In Effective New Mexico Reading First schools

1
Making Use of DIBELS dataIn Effective New Mexico
Reading First schools

• Education Development Center
• Naomi Hupert Lauren Bates
• New Mexico Public Education Department,
• Director of Reading First, Dr. Lana Paolillio

2
New Mexico Reading First

• This presentation draws on findings from the 3.5
  year evaluation of Reading First schools in New
  Mexico. During the 2006-07 school year
  researchers collected qualitative data from
  schools demonstrating positive impact on students
  as measured by the DIBELS.

Site visits between September 2006 and January,
2007.
3
NM DIBELS performance
(17,233 students assessed in September of 2007)
4
NM DIBELS performance
(17,233 students assessed in September of 2007)
5
School level State level

• What is happening at the school level - are
  schools showing greater growth doing something
  different than those showing less growth?
• Schools making use of data in novel ways
• Administrators, coaches, interventionists engaged
  in work with assessment data
• At the state level - are there recommendations
  the state could be making based on state-wide
  trends?
• Using data to address challenges

6
Our Criteria

• 70 or more of students attain Benchmark support
  status in April, 2006
• 70 or more of third grade students reach
  Benchmark status in April, 2006
• Students at Benchmark status increase by 20 or
  more between September 2005 and April 2006
• Students at Intensive status decrease by 15 or
  more between September 2005 and April 2006
• 90 or more of students at Benchmark status in
  September 2005 maintain their Benchmark status in
  April 2006

7
Effective Schools Found

• Three NMRF schools met all five criteria
• Alcalde Elementary (Española)
• Rio Costilla Elementary (Questa)
• Gallina Elementary (Jemez Mountain)
• These schools had several traits in common
• Rural settings
• Small student populations
• Small class sizes

8
Alcalde ElementaryEspañola Public Schools

• District geography The town of Española (10,000
  residents) and nearby smaller towns, including
  some within Native American reservations.
• School K-3 Student population 91
• Studentteacher ratio 15.4 students per teacher
  (district wide)
• The main school building has been condemned and
  all classrooms and offices are now portables.

9
Rio Costilla ElementaryQuesta Independent Schools

• District geography The town of Questa (2,000
  residents) and surrounding villages.
• School K-3 Student population 26
• Studentteacher ratio 12.7 students per teacher
  (district wide)
• In this small district, the district RF
  coordinator doubles as a reading coach in one of
  the schools. Teachers are residents of NM and of
  nearby Colorado.

10
Gallina ElementaryJemez Mountain Public Schools

• District geography The village of Gallina (500
  residents) and other nearby villages.
• School K-3 Student population 27
• Studentteacher ratio 10.3 students per teacher
  (district wide)
• Although none of the districts schools are on
  reservations, Jemez Mountain has one of the
  states highest percentages of Native American
  students.

11
Another Effective School

• Since NM also has large, urban schools, we
  decided to find the states most effective large
  school. Lavaland Elementary (Albuquerque Public
  Schools) met three of our criteria
• Students at Benchmark status increased by 20 or
  more between September 2005 and April 2006
• Students at Intensive status decreased by 15 or
  more between September 2005 and April 2006
• 90 or more of students at Benchmark status in
  September 2005 maintained their Benchmark status
  in April 2006

12
Lavaland ElementaryAlbuquerque Public Schools

• District geography The largest city in NM
  (500,000 residents).
• School K-3 Student population 431
• Studentteacher ratio 14.6 students per teacher
  (district wide)
• This is the second largest RF school in the
  state. 2005/2006 was the principals second year
  and the reading coachs first.

13
Range of common themes among schools

• Commonalities between the sites revealed a
  sophisticated implementation of the program, as
  well as several other unexpected factors
• All adopted their core programs at least one year
  prior to joining Reading First
• All had Spanish bilingual programs for the entire
  student body
• All engaged in district-wide communication
  between reading coaches and coordinators
• All shared data not only with teachers and
  administrators, but also with students and
  parents
• All exhibited constant analysis and adjustment
  regardless of previous successes
• All used the walk to intervention model, during
  which at-risk students met with a reading coach
  or interventionist in ability level groups
• All had close relationships with their PED
  regional specialists.

14
District-Wide Communication

• In Albuquerque, the district coordinator and
  reading coaches from all RF schools met twice
  every month. Principals also attended the meeting
  on a monthly basis.
• At the Questa district, the district coordinator
  is also a reading coach based out of one of the
  two RF schools. The coordinator/coach traveled
  between the schools every week, teaching at each
  site and meeting with the other reading coach and
  interventionist.
• Españolas coordinator and reading coaches met
  monthly to present ideas and address RF issues.
• In Jemez Mountain, the reading coach, district
  coordinator, regional specialist, and entire K-3
  staff met monthly at Gallina Elementary to
  discuss data and individual student progress.

15
Sharing data with students and parents

• At all 4 schools DIBELS assessment results are
  posted either in a public area or in the reading
  resource room.
• Teachers at these schools keep folders or binders
  of their class DIBELS data, which includes
  DIBELS data and academic profiles of students.
• Reading coach, principal and interventionist have
  accountability binders that house data, testing
  schedules, and other relevant assessment
  information.
• Students at all four schools have a degree of
  ownership over their own data. Whether they
  literally move a data point on the schools
  DIBELS display (Rio Costilla), track their scores
  in data folders (Alcalde and Lavaland) or
  complete graphs of their data (Alcalde, Lavaland
  and Gallina), they become familiar with their own
  results. All interviewees stated that student
  familiarity with data is important and helpful.
  One interventionist said that the data has
  impacted the students because for the first
  time, Im seeing kids who are really involved in
  their learning because theyre part of the
  process. Theyre understanding that your goal is
  to read, to read fluently and to understand the
  reading. She also speculated that data use has
  caused a level of involvement and investment
  among teachers and students Ive never seen
  before.

16
Students and Parents (continued)

• Parents are included in discussion about
  assessment data.
• Teachers in all schools discuss DIBELS scores
  during parent/teacher conferences. Parents at Rio
  Costilla also receive a demonstration of the
  DIBELS test on a handheld. At both Alcalde and
  Gallina, they send home DIBELS data reports for
  all students. At Alcalde, they also give a
  presentation on the DIBELS at the schools Open
  House held during the beginning of the year. One
  reading coach shared, The whole language at our
  school, the parents understand it. If we say
  progress monitoring, they know what that is. Our
  community language is different. According to
  one teacher, keeping parents aware of student
  progress assists him to get help from home for
  struggling readers.

17
Analysis and adjustment

• Data collection and presentation, though
  important, are but the first steps in
  implementing data-driven instruction.
• At all of the schools visited, the staff
  discussed and modeled a committed to analyzing
  data, reflecting on the results, and adjusting
  instructional practice accordingly.
• Alcalde implemented the Walk to Read model in the
  second grade and administrators added a
  replacement core program and increased
  intervention times,
• Lavaland tested a Kindergarten-Plus class and
  extended the reading block to 120 minutes for
  second and third grades. An administrator at
  explained that the school plans to push the
  envelope a little more. We are looking at
  grouping and how we can do appropriate activities
  based on data.
• Gallinas reading coach credited Reading Firsts
  impact with the elimination of SPED referrals
  this year, but noted that she is still adjusting
  intervention groups to foster student success.

18
A Final Interesting Case Lake Arthur

• Lake Arthur Elementary has staged one of the
  most dramatic turnarounds in NM
• At the end of its first year of Reading First
  implementation (2004-05), Lake Arthur was
  identified as one of the poorest performing
  schools in the state.
• In April 2005, the school/district was one of
  three districts in the state that documented an
  increased the percentage of students needing
  Intensive support, and a decrease the percentage
  of students at Benchmark.
• By January 2006, Lake Arthur was one of seven
  districts where the percentage of students at
  Benchmark increased by more than 20 during one
  semester. It was also one of five districts where
  the percentage of Intensive students decreased by
  more than 15.

19
Lake Arthur Data

• By April 2006, Lake Arthur was one of the highest
  performing schools in the state
• 70 or more of third graders at Benchmark
• 20 or more increase in the percentage of
  students at Benchmark during 2005/2006
• 15 or more decrease in the percentage of
  students at Intensive during 2005/2006
• Moved at least 75 of students out of Strategic
  (100 of those went to Benchmark)
• 90 or more of students at Benchmark in September
  remained at Benchmark in April

20
Frequent Data Meetings

• Lake Arthur used data in a few unique ways
• The school has a Literacy Instructional Strategy
  Team meeting every day, including teachers K-5,
  during which the team discussed data and
  strategies.
• The school also held in-depth data meetings three
  times a year.

21
Backwards Testing

• The reading coach did backwards testing on the
  DIBELS and TPRI If students show up Strategic
  in third grade, Ill assess them at the second
  grade level until I find where they are showing a
  Benchmark performance. This served to determine
  our initial concentration for Intensive kids,
  then on kids who arent progressing to aim line,
  or are progressing sideways.

22
Integrating Several Data Sources

• In addition to DIBELS and TPRI data, the reading
  coach used data from a phonics inventory he
  developed to determine the specific areas of need
  for at-risk students.
• At-risk students must demonstrate proficiency a
  number of times and in a number of ways before
  moving to new skills or intervention groups.

23
Student Directed Conferences

• Students led parent/teacher conferences and had
  to explain their DIBELS results to their parents.
• Students rated themselves on dimensions such as
  I complete my assignments every day and I
  attend school regularly.
• The student, parents, and teacher complete a
  Learning Expectation Form. The student and the
  parents write their plans for the childs
  success, the teacher responds to them, and then
  adds her own strategies for helping the student.

24
District Level Trends

• What the data show a 1st grade drop-off
• Many students who are identified at Benchmark in
  September of 1st grade are identified as needing
  either Intensive or Strategic support by January
  of 1st grade.
• What we have found fragile literacy skills
• If a student enters Kindergarten reading below
  Benchmark, then makes great gains over the course
  of the year and is identified as Benchmark in
  September of 1st grade, he or she has a very high
  chance of performing below Benchmark by January
  of 1st grade.

25
Implications

• This suggests that students entering Kindergarten
  below Benchmark are receiving a high level of
  intervention, and many of them are moving quickly
  to Benchmark.
• However, these students appear unable to sustain
  their performance at this support recommendation.
  
• We suggest that these students have fragile
  reading skills. They have a command of the skills
  necessary to be at grade level at the beginning
  of first grade, but because they have acquired
  these skills over a short time they have not had
  adequate time to practice and consolidate them
  and make use of them in the context of reading a
  passage, as required by the ORF test.

26
Implications (continued)

• What does this mean for schools?
• We suggest that ongoing intervention be provided
  to Kindergarten students who entered K below
  Benchmark, even if they have achieved Benchmark
  during the year.
• We suggest that first grade students who start
  the year at Benchmark, but who arrived in K below
  Benchmark, be provided with intervention
  instruction between September and January that
  focuses on using discrete skills in the context
  of reading text, and have multiple opportunities
  for reading and practicing oral reading fluency.

27
Conclusions

• Schools where students are demonstrating positive
  growth in reading, as measured by the DIBELS,
  employ a common set of expectations towards the
  role that assessment data will and should play in
  the planning and provision of instruction. These
  include sharing assessment information widely,
  inviting all members of the education community
  to view and interpret data (parents, teachers,
  students, administrators), and anticipate that
  changes will be made as a result of findings from
  data.
• Similar expectations at the state level can help
  to foster this approach to the use of assessment
  data across all schools.

28
Ongoing questions we would love to explore and
discuss

• Why are smaller schools more able to demonstrate
  positive change?
• Why are single grade schools more able to do so?
• Are these trends evident in other states, and/or
  other programs?
• Does who administers the DIBELS make a difference
  in teachers use of the data?
• Why do schools with universal dual language
  programs appear to be doing so well?

29
Thank you

• For more information or questions about this
  presentation, please contact
• Naomi Hupert
• Nhupert_at_edc.org
• www.edc.org/CCT/