RESPONDING TO N e SA DATA NAESP/NSASSP STATE CONFERENCE 2011
29
RESPONDING TO NeSA DATA NAESP/NSASSP STATE CONFERENCE 2011 Valorie Foy Crete Public Schools Cindy Gray Elkhorn Public Schools Shureen Seery Louisville Public Schools
description
RESPONDING TO N e SA DATA NAESP/NSASSP STATE CONFERENCE 2011. V alorie Foy Crete Public Schools Cindy Gray Elkhorn Public Schools Shureen Seery Louisville Public Schools. OVERVIEW. NeSA Score Basics Analyzing NeSA Results Using Information to Improve. N e SA BASICS. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Transcript of RESPONDING TO N e SA DATA NAESP/NSASSP STATE CONFERENCE 2011
RESPONDING TO NeSA DATANAESP/NSASSP STATE CONFERENCE 2011
Valorie FoyCrete Public Schools
Cindy GrayElkhorn Public Schools
Shureen SeeryLouisville Public Schools
• NeSA Score Basics
• Analyzing NeSA Results
• Using Information to Improve
OVERVIEW
NeSA BASICS
• Multiple Measures/Indicators
• Thoughtful Professional Discussion
• Monitoring over Time
INFORMED USE OF DATA
• Raw Score Number Correct (Note that raw scores on NeSA won’t convert to the same scale score from year to year)
• Percent Correcte.g., 80% on a final exam (Not used for NeSA)
Basic Test Scores
• (%ile) Percent of students in the peer group who performed lower than the student or group
• Available on Individual Student Reports and the Student Data File from DRC
• %ile Scores should not be averaged
PERCENTILE RANKS FOR NeSA
• A raw score is converted to a scale score by a statistical process called equating.
• Equating adjusts for slight differences in difficulty between test editions, and ensures that an 11th grader’s score of, say, 90 on one edition of the NeSA-M reflects the same achievement as a score on 90 for 11th graders the next year
• Equating also ensures that a student's score does not depend on how well others did on the same edition of the test.
Converting Raw Scores
to Scale Scores
Scale Score Influenced by outlier scores
% Mastering Lets you know % above cut,
but students are weighted equally whether they have a perfect score or whether they barely mastered
Choosing Scores to Report
Monitoring Individual Student Performance
2010 SCALE 2011 SCALE0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Middle School NeSA Scale Score Change for
Non-Mastering Students 2010 to 2011
Student 1Student 2Student 4Student 5Student 6Student 7Student 8Student 9
ARE THEY READING ON GRADE LEVEL?
Things to Clarify• Percent Correct
– Typically refers to the percent of items that a student answered correctly - Not comparable across assessments
• Percent at Mastery– Usually refers to the percent of
students who met the mastery level performance on a criterion-referenced assessment.
• Percentile Rank– Usually used with norm-
referenced assessments - This score indicates relative performance in comparison with a norm group. For example a score of 69%ile indicates that the student scored better than 69% of the students in the norm group. - These scores cannot be used for calculations.
ANALYZING NeSA RESULTS
NeSA- Reading 2010-2011 Grades 3-8 & 11
71%
74%
73%
75%
59%
64%
67%
67%
71%
74%74%
70%75%
71%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
G-3 G-4 G-5 G-6 G-7 G-8 G-11
Crete
Nebraska
NeSA READING
Reading 09-10 10-11
Grade 3 61% 67%
Grade 4 75% 64%
Grade 5 69% 59%
Grade 6 55% 75%
Grade 7 71% 73%
Grade 8 67% 74%
Grade 11 76% 71%
[Crete] NeSA READING COHORT DATA
Highest and Lowest
Standards-Reading 9-10 3 4 5 6 7 8 11
Vocabulary
3.1.5a L L L L L
3.1.5c H H H
3.1.5d L L L H L
Comprehension
3.1.6.a H L
3.1.6b H H
3.1.6c H H H H L
3.1.6d L L H
3.1.6e L H L L H
3.1.6f H H
3.1.6g L L L L
3.1.6h H
3.1.6j H H H
3.1.6k H L
Highest and Lowest
Standards-Reading 10-11 3 4 5 6 7 8 11
Vocabulary
3.1.5a H H H L L
3.1.5c H H L H
3.1.5d H L L L L
Comprehension
3.1.6.a H L H
3.1.6b H H H H
3.1.6c L L
3.1.6d L L L L H
3.1.6e H L H
3.1.6f L H
3.1.6g L H H L
3.1.6h L H
3.1.6j L L
3.1.6k H
Highest and Lowest Standards
Math 10-11 3 4 5 6 7 8 11
3.1.1 Number Sense/System L L
H H L L H L NT
3.1.2 Operations L L NT NT NT
3.1.3 Computation NT L L
3.1.4 Estimation H H
3.2.1 Characteristics of Objects H H H H NT NT H H
3.2.2. Coordinate Geometry L H H
3.2.3 Transformations
3.2.4 Spatial Modeling
3.2.5 Measurement H L L L L H
3.3.1 Relationships H L
3.3.2 Modeling in Context
3.3.3 Procedures L L
3.4.1
Data Display & Analysis/Probability Concepts H H L H
3.4.2 Predictions and Inferences L
3.4.3 Inferences H L H L
IMPROVING
Practice Test: Available with the CAL software download.
TEACHERS—BEFORE TESTING
•Prediction of Performance
•Teachers predict before testing to identify any surprises.
TEACHERS—BEFORE TESTING
23
USE PERFORMANCE LEVEL DESCRIPTORS
AVAILABLE AT DRC’s REPORTS PAGE
24VOCABULARY IDENTIFIERS
Standards Instructional Toolshttp://www.education.ne.gov/AcademicStandards/SIT_Intro.html
25
DEPTH of KNOWLEDGE CHARTSFOUND ON NDE WEBSITE UNDER NeSA
26
Indicator Summary Report
AFTER TESTING LOOK FOR PATTERNS
27
http://drs.education.ne.gov/Pages/default.aspx
Advance Inquiry
Click on the table to see data in a bar graph.
Right Click on Graph to drill down in the data.
DRS: DATA REPORTING SYSTEM
QUESTIONS?
