AMBITIOUS INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES IN ENGLISH

Ali Korkmaz, Ph.D.Strategic Data FellowLong Beach Unified School District

Ahmet Uludag, Ph.D.Accord Institute for Education Research

WHAT DO WE KNOW?Background Engagement Educational Performance

Student characteristicsDemographicsAttitudesEducational background

Social Engagement

Academic EngagementAcademic Achievement

Retention

Educational Attainment

Long-term

Family-School-Community, Resources

Rumberger and Larson’s Framework for Studying Student Educational Performance

WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING FACTOR HAS THE MOST IMPACT ON STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT?

A. StudentB. TeacherC. HomeD. Principal

Student

Teacher

Home

Princip

al

25% 25%25%25%

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT

50%

5%

30%

5%5% 5%

StudentHomeTeacherSchoolsPrincipalPeer effects

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

Walberg’s Educational Productivity Model (1984, 1992) Student aptitude

ability or prior achievement development motivation, or self-concept

Instruction the amount of time students engage in learning the quality of the instructional experience

The environment factors encompass four items: the home the classroom social group the peer group outside the school use of out-of-school time

BACKGROUND

Marzano’s (2000) effective instructional strategies (teacher-level factors) Instruction Classroom management Curriculum design

Hattie’s Visible Learning (2008) Meta analysis of instructional practices effects on

student outcomes

TEACHERS

Clear learning intentions Challenging success criteria Range of learning strategies Know when students are not progressing Providing feedback Visibly learns themselves

STUDENTS

Understand learning intentions Are challenged by success criteria Develop a range of learning strategies Know when they are not progressing Seek feedback Visibly teach themselves

MET PROJECT FINDINGS

Measures of Effective Teaching Project findings (Gates Foundation Study) Assessments Student Surveys Classroom Observations

Improvement-Focused Teacher Evaluation Systems

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

What types of instructional practices are implemented in classrooms? (How do students perceive?)

What types of instructional practices are the game changers in ELA/Reading? What practices lead to more growth among non-

proficient students? What practices lead to more growth among

proficient students?

STUDY DESIGN ELEMENTS

Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA) MAP Test

Consortium on Chicago School Research (CCSR) Student Survey

Longitudinal growth for reading

NWEA MAP TESTS

A computer adaptive test tool to measure student levels, placement

and differentiate instruction to meet student needs

to guide curriculum and instructional decisions

to measure student growth over timeof accountability to see how well we

have done our jobs; to measure the effectiveness of curriculum and instruction

Fall RIT

Spring Target RIT

Target Growth = 10

192

202

Fall RIT

210

Spring Target RIT

215

Target Growth = 5

Target Growth for two 4th Grade Students

RIT SCORES – GROWTH - TARGETS

RIT: Rasch (Rash) Unit is a scale that shows student levels independent of grade level and age

RIT scores are used to show a student’s level normative to other students and their grade level through percentile ranks

Growth Targets: Typical growth is given for grade levels, yet each student has a separate growth target based on their initial score

Two things to look at (at the end of the year): How many students have met their target How many points have the students grown on

average (compared to typical growth)

READING GROWTH FROM FALL TO: (2011 NORM)

PROFICIENCY VS. GROWTH

Section 1 Section 20

20

40

60

80

100

ProficientGrowth

STUDENT SURVEY

Consortium on Chicago School Research (CCSR) Surveys

More than 10 years in the field IRT based (Rasch) survey items and

constructs It is designed mainly for school level analysis Student survey items include:

Academic Engagement, Study Habits, Classroom Behavior, Learning Climate (Expectation, Relationships)

Subject area specific questions School and home environment questions

AMBITIOUS INSTRUCTIONWhen combined with a supportive environment, Ambitious Instruction has the most direct effect on student learning. Ambitious Instruction is: well-defined with clear expectations for student

success, interactive and encourages students to build

and apply knowledge, well-paced (not measured by the survey), and aligned across grades (not measured by the

survey).

RELIABILITY FOR SCALESConstruct Alpha

Teacher Personal Attention (Eng) .85

Academic Press (Eng) .75

Quality English Instruction .80

Rigorous Study Habits .83

Parent Support for Student Learning

.83

Student-Teacher Trust .88

Incidence of Disciplinary Action .76

Principal Attention .75

DATA

846 students at 9 CA middle schools 55% male 50% free-reduced lunch 11% African-American 45% White 44% Hispanic

DATA CLEANING

Survey time less than 10 minutes MAP test time less than 10 minutes

STUDY DESIGN

Student Fall Reading Test

Student Spring Reading Test

Student Survey• Instructional practices• Study habits, motivation• Home environment• School learning

environment

DATA ANALYSES Students are grouped into 6 groups based on

Fall proficiency and Fall to Spring Growth (progress in the same year)

Effect-size

Non-Proficient Proficient

High Decline

Typical High Increase

High Decline

Typical High Increase

Effect-size

WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING HAS THE MOST IMPACT ON READING GROWTH (FOR NON-PROFICIENT STUDENTS)?

A. Principal attentionB. Teacher personal

supportC. Teacher personal

attention(ENGLISH)D. Academic

press(ENGLISH)

Princip

al attention

Teacher p

ersonal s

upport

Teacher p

ersonal a

ttent...

Academic

press(ENGLIS

H)

25% 25%25%25%

WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING HAS THE MOST IMPACT ON READING GROWTH (FOR NON-PROFICIENT STUDENTS)?

Effect-size differences for most improving vs. most decliningA. Principal attention (.50)B. Teacher personal support (.37)C. Teacher personal attention(ENGLISH) (.34)D. Academic press(ENGLISH) (.34)

WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING HAS THE MOST IMPACT ON READING GROWTH (FOR PROFICIENT STUDENTS)?

A. Principal attentionB. Incidence of

disciplinary actionC. Hours reading outside

schoolD. Parental support for

student learning

Princip

al attention

Incidence

of disc

iplinary ...

Hours re

ading outsi

de s...

Parental s

upport fo

r stu

...

25% 25%25%25%

WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING HAS THE MOST IMPACT ON READING GROWTH (FOR PROFICIENT STUDENTS)?

Effect-size differences for most improving vs. most decliningA. Principal attention (.37)B. Incidence of disciplinary action (-.41)C. Hours reading outside school (.48)D. Parental support for student learning (.27)

SUMMARYGroups Scales Effect-size

Non - Proficient

Principal AttentionTeacher Personal SupportTeacher Personal Attention (Eng)Academic Press (Eng)Student-Teacher TrustReading Hours pwParent Support for Student LearningRigorous Study Habits

.50

.37

.34

.34

.31

.27

.26

.20

Proficient Reading Hours pwIncidence of Disciplinary ActionPrincipal AttentionParent Support for Student Learning

.48-.41.37.27

USE OF CCSR SURVEYS AND MAP

USE OF CCSR SURVEYS AND MAP

USE OF CCSR SURVEYS AND MAP

USE OF CCSR SURVEYS AND MAP

IMPLICATIONS Use of effective student surveys

Inform what is happening Classroom level analysis Teacher level analysis

For professional development plans Unpacking the behaviors/actions that are aligned

to effective practices (survey categories)

For policy Teacher evaluations

LIMITATIONS Student survey

Teacher input on classroom practices (teacher survey)

No teacher observation Student growth

High stakes, any rewards etc. involved

FURTHER STUDY Classroom level analysis of the same data set

What types of practices work better at what types of classrooms?

Combine student surveys with teacher surveys

CONTACT

Ali Korkmaz, Ph.D. akorkmaz@lbschools.net

Ahmet Uludag, Ph.D. auludag@accordeducation.org

CERA - December 5, 2013