ANWSU Profiles
September 11, 2002
If
your question is not included below, please send it to me (jeveritt@anwsu.k12.vt.us) and I’ll
send the question and answer out to all.
1.
What sections of the
profiles are in full implementation?
All sections of the K-6 math and K-4 literacy profiles are in full
implementation. Literacy data will be collected three times per year and math
twice. The 5-8 literacy, 7-8 math, and
K-8 science profiles are in their first year (2002-03).
2.
How consistent are teacher
judgments?
Each year a correlation study is done to compare
teacher judgments with student performance on standardized tests. Results in
2001-02) showed remarkable improvement from the prior year. All Grade 2 teachers and two grade 3
teachers were +.70 or higher. Further
studies are in progress.
3.
Is success on the mid-year
and end-of-year math assessments the only way for students to demonstrate
mastery?
No, the assessments are useful ways for most students to show mastery,
but teacher observation in many settings and on many activities is
critical. The assessments serve to
define the objective as much or more than they serve as a measure. There is no substitute or replacement for a
teacher’s professional judgment.
4.
How can we get better
definition of profile objectives?
The project to improve K-4 literacy objectives will
publish version 2 of the guidebook in fall 2002. The first draft of the 5-8 literacy guidebook is expected in late
fall 2002. The K-6 math objectives are
defined by the common assessments. Plans are in process to support clear
definitions in the learning profiles.
5.
What spelling test is to be
used in profile assessments?
Title I Teachers and others have been working on
this the past few years. The definition
project will provide more clarity on spelling assessments. In addition the Elementary Spelling
Inventory (ESI) was being used in two
schools for the Reading Improvement Program.
The ESI is recommended, but not required at this time. (If you would like training on the ESI,
contact Sue Rakowski at ACS or Betty Lewis at VUHS.)
6.
What documentation for
mastery of objectives should be kept?
At this point, there is no standard answer. FCS has begun some work in this area that
may help. In general, keep documents
that demonstrate multiple objectives.
There is no need to have a document for every objective. Many objectives do not lend themselves to
documented evidence.
7.
How will the profile results
and profile summaries be used?
Parents, teachers, principals, and school boards
will be given profile results. They can
serve as a basis for discussions about program improvement and professional
development. Summary results may also
be used in Action Plans. The information
is also used to identify students needing intervention or challenge. Teachers can look at the correlation between
profile skills and more formal assessments to improve their judgments.
8.
Will parents and teachers be
able to access profiles over the Internet from home?
The idea is being explored and a pilot is expected
in spring 2003.
9.
How will the profile tie
into standards-based reporting?
The standards-based reporting committee will restart
their work in fall 2002. Many report
cards in use already reference profile objectives for academic progress.
10.
If the profile is not an
assessment, there is discomfort with it being used as “data”.
The profile is the compilation of many
assessments. It is the most important
data that we have on student performance in literacy. It is much more informative on day-to-day performance than the
on-demand assessments (DRA, NSRE). We now have evidence to show the validity of
teacher judgments on profile objectives.
11.
There are issues when
computers are down.
The matrix report provides a way to keep data by
hand until computers are up. Use the
report as a record-keeping device.
Print a new one each time you enter data. (The matrix report is most
useful for grouping students needing direct instruction on specific
objectives.)
12.
Are hard copies of the
profile available?
Printed copies of the computer version are available. Legal size versions of the complete original
are available. The large sheet versions
are not available.
13.
Will the hard copy be
available to use with parents at Open House/other? Is use of the actual profile the best way to report to parents?
The report to print for parent conferences is the three-year
report. This shows prior objectives not
yet mastered and all current objectives.
14. Math profile
has consistent assessment for all categories.
Will literacy profile follow suit?
The difference is that literacy assessment is more embedded into
instruction. Math is a formal
assessment with the ability of teachers to override the results of the math
tests based on daily class performance. We are piloting some science
assessments in
2002-03.
15. Can teachers enter data on objectives mastered from prior or future
years?
Yes, it is important that teachers record
student progress on objectives not mastered in the prior year. This will allow us to be sure no student is
“falling through the cracks.”
Students who have not mastered objectives
from prior years and new students coming to our schools call for teacher
judgments. The teacher will need to
determine which prior objectives need to be taught and/or assessed so that the
child will achieve our literacy goal.
Continuous progress calls for us to provide children instruction on the
objectives that they need without regard to the grade level of the objective.
Student progress beyond the current year’s objectives is also to be
recorded. This will give information
about students with accelerated progress.
16. With many teachers working in “literacy blocks”, who is responsible for
recording progress data?
Each child’s classroom teacher is responsible for
all data input. The various reports may
be useful tools for teachers and instructional assistants working in “literacy
blocks” to provide the classroom teacher with progress information.