:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 SMART Goal #2: Student Assessment
 

SMART Goal #2 as defined by Boston Public Schools, involves analyzing formative and summative student assessment data in the areas of reading, mathematics and writing. In the 2000/2001 school year schools are asked to analyze student performance using formative assessments (ongoing classroom assessments) and summative assessments (yearly standardized tests - Standord Achievement Test, Ninth Edition. Each school must develop SMART goals to improve student achievement in the areas of math, reading and writing as measured by these indicators. These goals should include:

  • Implementation of the BPS Formative Assessment Guidelines
  • Analysis of student assessment data to improve instruction
  • Use of safety net services

 

Student Assessment Materials

  • Formative Assessments (Reading, Writing, Mathematics)
    • SFA Reading Summary
    • Scott Forseman/Addison Wesley Mathematics Inventory
    • Scored Writing Prompt Response

     

  • Summative Assessments (Reading and Mathematics)
    • Stanford 9 (Stanford Achievement Test, Ninth Editon)

     

     

     

    Our Current Situation: The Current baseline data : "on or above grade level" as measured by the SFA Assessment Summary are as follows:

    Reading Formative Assessment Data (SFA Assessment Summary)

     

     

     

    Grade 1:

    Current: as of September 2000 Assessement: 46% reading on or above grade level
    SMART Goal:
    by June 2001 Assessment: 65% reading on or above grade level.

     

     

    Grade 2:

    Current: as of September 2000 Assessement: 61% reading on or above grade level
    SMART Goal:
    by June 2001 Assessment: 80% reading on or above grade level.

     

     

    Grade 3:

    Current: as of September 2000 Assessement: 49% reading on or above grade level
    SMART Goal:
    by June 2001 Assessment: 65% reading on or above grade level.

     

     

    Grade 4:

    Current: as of September 2000 Assessement: 26% reading on or above grade level
    SMART Goal:
    by June 2001 Assessment: 45% reading on or above grade level.

     

     

    Grade 5:

    Current: as of September 2000 Assessement: 16% reading on or above grade level
    SMART Goal:
    by June 2001 Assessment: 35% reading on or above grade level.

    The data given above is based on September 2000 testing. We found that the Assessment Summary for 1999-2000 did not realistically capture where students were at in terms of grade level. SFA has changed their grade level/placement criteria and we have made the necessary adjustments. We feel that these new figures better represent the current status.

    We are very excited at the fact that our second and third grade students who have experienced SFA for two-three years, if they started in Kindergarten with us, are peforming quite well as evidenced by the SFA assessments. The same can be said of grade 1 half of whom are starting on grade level.

    We will be looking at those students who we consider to be on the "hot list" (very close to grade level) to move them as quickly as possible to grade level. These studenst, their teachers and their parents will be encouraged to accelerate grade level achievement.

      

    Reading Summative Assessment Data (Stanford9)

    Stanford 9 data indicates a decline in scores in the cohort group in most instances and similarly for the annual group. We intend on carefully analyzing Stan 9 data to find major areas of weakness and how the SFA program can address them

 

 
Action Steps in Achieving this Goal

1. Identify "hot list" students and inform SFA, homeroom teachers, students and their parents.

  • Responsible Personnel: SFA Facilitator and SFA teachers
  • Dates/Timeline: October, 2000

2. Develop/implement action plans for the "hot list" students, goal being to get them to grade level by the second SFA assessment in January 2001.

  • Responsible Personnel: SFA Facilitator and SFA teachers
  • Dates/Timeline: October, 2000 - January 2001

3. Identify skill areas in Stanford 9 that need reinforcement through SFA-address the areas weekly

  • Responsible Personnel: SFA Facilitator and SFA teachers
  • Dates/Timeline: November 2000 - April 2001

4. Monitor student progress/movement via the Eight Week Assessment Form.

  • Responsible Personnel: SFA Facilitator and Principal
  • Dates/Timeline: Oct 2000 - June 2001

 

Evaluation: Timeline and Specific Measures to Assess Goal Attainment

The SFA facilitator will have the "hot lists" for each level and their accompanying action plans. The skill areas connected to the Stanford 9 will be distributed to all homeroom and SFA teachers. The Principal and the SFA will review the 8 Week Assessments and report their findings during component level meetings.

 
 

 

Our Current Situation: Comparative Results: We are currently at a loss to explain the dramatic drop in performance for students in some grade levels from the end of June 2000 to Sept. 2000. The assessments used (end-of-the year and the inventory) were both Addison-Wesley. We are considering re-testing to validate the current results.

 

Mathematics Formative Assessment Data (Scott Foresman/Addison/Wesley Math Inventory)

Grade level assessment data showing student performance on the Scott Forseman Math Inventory is as follows:

 

 

Kindergarten

 

Current Situation: There is no comparative data from previous year, however 2000 end-of-year data indicates our goal is achievable

SMART Goal: All students currently in Level I (47%) will achieve Level II by June 2001 as measuerd by the end-of-year-assessment.

 

Grade One

Current: According to the June 2000 end-of-year assessment from K2 of the 94 students tested, 89% or 84 students met the grade level benchmark. Based on the Sept. 2000 Inventory Assessment for Grade 1, of the 108 students tested, 23 or 24% of the students currently meet the benchmark. (Level II) * June 2000- 80% or 75 students exceeded the Grade Level benchmark in K2. Based on the Sept. 2000 Inventory, 52% or 56 students exceeded the benchmark. (Levels III and IV) * June 2000- 10.6% or 10 students did not meet the Grade Level benchmark. Based on the Sept. 2000 Inventory, 25% or 27 students currently do not meet the benchmark. (Level I)

SMART Goal: All students currently in Level I (25%) will achieve Level II as measured by midyear assessments. 75% of Grade 1 students will achieve Levels III or IV by June 2001 using end-of-year assessment.

 

 

Grade Two  

Current: According to the June 2000 end-of-year assessment (from Gr. 1), of the 108 students tested , 88% or 95 students met the Grade Level benchmark. Based on the Sept. 2000 Inventory assessment for Gr. 2 of the 113 students tested, 18% or 20 students met the benchmark. (Level II) * June 2000- 60% or 65 students exceeded the Grade Level benchmark. Based on the Sept. 2000 Inventory, 60% or 68 students exceeded the benchmark. (Level III and IV) * June 2000- 12% or 13 students did not meet the benchmark. Based on the Sept. 2000 Inventory, 22% or 25 students do not meet the benchmark. (Level I)

SMART Goal: All students currently in Level I ( 22%) will achieve Level II as measured by midyear assessments. 50% of Level II students will achieve Level III or IV by June 2001 using end-of-year assessment.

 

 Grade Three

Current: According to the June 2000 end of the year assessment ( from Gr. 2) of the 144 students tested, 87.5% or 122 students met the grade level 2 benchmark. Based on the Sept. 2000 Inventory assessment for Gr. 3, of the 163 students, 26% or 42 students meet the benchmark. (Level II) * June 2000- 66% or 96 students exceed the level 2 benchmark. Based on Sept. 2000 Inventory for Gr. 3, 42% or 69 students exceed the benchmark. (Levels III and IV) * June 2000- 12.5% or 18 students did not meet the Gr. 3 benchmark. Based on the Sept. 2000 Inventory for Gr. 3, 32% or 52 students do not meet the benchmark. (Level I)

SMART Goal: All students currently in Level I (32%) will achieve Level II as measured by midyear assessments. 50% of Level I and Level II students will achieve Level III by end-of-year assessments.

 

 

 Grade Four

Current: According to the June 2000 end-of-the year assessment (from Gr. 3), of the 129 students tested, 50% or 65 met the Gr. 3 benchmark. Based on the Sept. 2000 Inventory for Gr. 4, of the 99 students tested, 17% or 17 meet the benchmark. (Level II) *June 2000- 27% or 35 students exceeded the benchmark for Gr. 3. Based on the Sept. 2000 Inventory , 15% or 15 students exceeded the benchmark. (Levels III and IV) * June 2000- 54% or 64 students did not meet the benchmark. Based on Sept. 2000 Inventory, 68% or 67 students do not meet the benchmark. (Level I)

SMART Goals: All students currently in Level I (68%) will achieve Level II or above by June 2001 as measured by end-of-the year assessment; 50% of those will have met the goal by the midyear assessment.

 

 

 Grade Five

Current: According to the June 2000 end-of-the year assessment (from Grade 4), of the 115 students tested, 50% or 57 students met the Grade 4 benchmark. Based on the Sept. 2000 Inventory for Gr. 5, of the 117 students tested, 13% or 15 students meet the Grade 5 benchmark. (Level II) * June 2000- 28% or 32 students exceeded the benchmark for Gr. 4. Based on the Sept. 2000 Inventory , 2% or 2 students exceed the benchmark. (Levels III and IV) *June 2000- 50% or 58 students did not meet the Grade level benchmark. Based on the Sept. 2000 Inventory, 85% or 100 students do not meet the benchmark. (Level I)

SMART Goal: All students currently in Level I (85%) will achieve Level II or above by June 2001 by the end-of-the year assessment; 50% of those will have met that goal by the midyear assessment. 15% of students will achieve Levels III or IV by June 2001 as measured by the end-of-the year assessment.

 

 

Mathematic Summative Assessment Data (Stanford9)

Summative assessment data on mathematics (Stanford 9) indicate that in both the cohort and the annual groups, we are attaining or exceeding, in most cases, our goals of moving students out of Level I and up to Levels III and IV.

 

 

 

 Action Steps in Achieving this Goal

1. Share available math assessment data with all staff members through grade level meetings.

  • Responsible Personnel: Math Facilitator
  • Dates/Timeline: October, 2000

2. Analyze data for areas that will require more attention both at the classroom and grade level. Develop strategies to address the needs.

  • Responsible Personnel: Grade Level Teachers
  • Dates/Timeline: October, 2000

3. Share data and analysis with Dr. Sharma for inclusion into his training objectives.

  • Responsible Personnel: Principal
  • Dates/Timeline: October, 2000

4. Provide Dr. Sharma's training to all homeroom teachers.

  • Responsible Personnel: M. Sharma, Principal
  • Dates/Timeline: October, 2000 - June, 2001

5. Monitor progress of Level I students through monthly homework and assessments reports.

  • Responsible Personnel: Teachers, Administration
  • Dates/Timeline: October, 2000 - June, 2001

6. Monitor implementation of BPS Assessment Program and Benchmark Requirements: 2000-01

  • Responsible Personnel: Administration
  • Dates/Timeline: October, 2000 - June, 2001

 

Evaluation: Timeline and Specific Measures to Assess Goal Attainment

Teachers will submit a listing of Level I students, classroom and grade level areas of concern. Dr. Sharma will highlight these areas as he provides training. Teachers will provide the administration with monthly monitoring reports on both homework and assessment data showing progress towards SMART goal. Agassiz will implement Assessment program by adhering to program's timeline.

 

 

 

Our Current Situation: There is still much work to do around Looking At Student Work and coming to a consensus on scoring student work. The Formative Assessment Data Report for the 1999-2000 school year does provide a good starting point for the SMART goals but we have used the September student responses as the basis for our SMART goals.

 

The Literacy Specialist who would have been in charge of developing a school-wide writing program left at the start of the school year. That has delayed our implementation of a consistent approach to the teaching of writing. Nevertheless, we will continue working with our teachers to utilize the writing opportunities that are available during the Success For All literacy block. We will also look at the many writing opportunities through content area instruction. An analysis of the students' responses will provide a focus for their writing instruction.

 

Writing Formative Assessment Data (Teacher Scored Writing Prompt Reponse)

Grade level assessment data showing student performance as measured by scored responses to writing prompts are as follows:

 

Kindergarten

 SMART Goal: All students currently at the Not Acceptable Level (24 or 30%)will achieve the Passing Level by January, 2001. All students in the Passing Level (48 or 59%) will achieve the Good Level by the June assessment.

 

Grade One

 SMART Goal: All students who are currently at the Failing level (48 or 42%) will achieve a Needs Improvement level or better by the January assessment. Students in the Needs Improvement level (32 or 28%) will achieve a Proficient Level or better by the June assessment.

 

 

 

 

Grade Two

 SMART Goal: All All students who are currently in Level I (31 or 29%) will achieve a Level II by the January assessment. Students in Level II (38 or 35%) will achieve a Level III by the June assessment.

 

 

 

Grade Three

 SMART Goal: All All students who are currently in Level I (68 or 51%) will achieve a Level II by the January assessment. Students in Level II (38 or 29%) will achieve a Level III by the June assessment.

 

 

 

 

Grade Four

 SMART Goal: All students who are currently at Level I (28 or 30%) will achieve a Level II by the January assessment. Students at Level II (43 or 46%) will achieve a Level III by the June assessment.

 

 

 

 

Grade Five

 SMART Goal: All students in Level I (57 or 43%) will achieve a Level II by the January assessment. Students in Level II (53 or 40%) will achieve a Level III by the June assessment.

 

Action Steps in Achieving these Goals

1. Share data with ILT, all homeroom and Success For All teachers and analyze data to determine areas of focus.

  • Responsible Personnel: Teachers, Administration
  • Dates/Timeline: October, November 2000

2. Search for and hire new Literacy Specialist.

  • Responsible Personnel: Principal, Central Office
  • Dates/Timeline: Septermber - October, 2000

3. Review writing opportunities within the SFA literacy block and content areas and emphasize this goal for all teachers.

  • Responsible Personnel: SFA Facilitator and Teachers
  • Dates/Timeline: October, 2000

4. Establish school-wide LASW protocol

  • Responsible Personnel: Change Coach
  • Dates/Timeline: October, 2000 - November 2000

 

Evaluation: Timeline and Specific Measures to Assess Goal Attainment

SFA facilitator and principal will share the Writing Formative Assessment data as part of Grade Level and ILT meetings. Minutes of the meetings will record presentation of data. Hire a new Literacy Specialist. SFA facilitator will provide teachers with a list of opportunities during SFA for emphasizing writing focus areas. LASW meetings will take place once a month for 90 minutes at each grade level.