Incoming 8th grade student testing data analysis

Reports from state test for incoming 8th graders

Data shows that incoming 8th graders' performance in objectives 2, 3, and 4 dropped a little on the 7th grade test, but that just demonstrates the difference in the difficulty of the test from 6th grade to 7th grade. Further, data shows that this particular group of students struggle with identifying the purpose of the text (entertain, persuade, etc.). That was the same Student Expectation that was low for the incoming 7th graders. This demonstrates a real need to address this SE with particular focus. These students also did rather poorly on analyzing how the author's point of view affects the text. Our curriculum for the remediation class should emphasis point of view instruction as well, according to the data. Next, I will analyze how well our past curriculum has worked by looking at the 7th and 8th grade test data over the last three years. I want to maintain anything that is still working in the new curriculum. No need recreating the wheel if there are lessons that already do the trick.

TAKS data analysis for incoming 7th graders

Report showing state test data for incoming 7th graders

Report shows that the incoming 7th graders struggled in fifth grade and their passing percentages went down that year. I suspect that was because it was the SSI year and the test changed from 4th to 5th grade. I also expect the students to face the challenge of the test changing this year as well. In 7th grade, there aren't more questions, but they lower the number of easy questions and up the number of higher level questions (inference, drawing conclusion, etc.). Our curriculum must address this change. Also, data shows that this group of kids has consistently struggled with SEs involving organization of text (cause and effect, chronilogical) and text purpose (entertain, persuade, etc.). This data will lead our emphasis in the reading lab and guide our curriculum development.

Janella's Action Research Project Plan

Action Research Project Plan
Goals/Objectives/Outcomes:
*Increase the number of students passing the state reading assessment.
*Provide enrichment to support current regular reading curriculum through the reading remediation lab curriculum.
*Meet state and district regulations to provide additional support to those ELA students placed in tier 2 RTI.
*Create a reading remediation curriculum proven to improve student performance.
*Monitor remedial reading curriculum and implementation of curriculum.

Activities:
*Analyze past TAKS data, from incoming students, to distinguish areas of weakness that need to be addressed to improve student performance.
*Research districts deemed as “exemplary” by the AEIS reports, to determine what resources they use for reading remediation and tier 2 RTI support for ELA students.
*Interview effective reading instructors from within and outside of the district, to gather suggestions for elements needed in the new remedial reading curriculum.
*Research reading instruction resources to select those resources that best meet the needs for the reading remediation class, as found by the previously stated research.
*Create a curriculum guide to assist instructors in implementing the curriculum and using the resources selected.
*Monitor curriculum and implementation through observations, benchmark data, and student and staff surveys.
*Meet with staff monthly to discuss strengths and weaknesses of curriculum
*Meet with RTI Committee before and after school year to align curriculum to meet tier 2 necessities

Resources and Research Tools needed for data gathering:
*2010 Sixth graders’ TAKS reading scores- analyzed by objectives and met standard/ not met standard
*2010-2011 Student schedules to identify those enrolled in remedial reading lab
*Diagnostic testing results for incoming seventh grade reading students
*State AEIS reports indicating districts scoring “exemplary” in reading
*Interviews with reading instructors from within and outside the district before creation of curriculum and during implementation
*Multiple, recommended reading instruction tools/resources, including recommended hands-on activities and lesson plans
*Student surveys (target population)
*Staff surveys (administrators and implementing teachers)
*Field observations from teachers implementing new curriculum
*Administrative walk-through “snapshots” or observations to monitor new curriculum
*2011 Seventh graders’ TAKS reading scores- specifically those students in the remedial reading class

Timeline and Implementation of Activities:
July 2010
-Research AEIS reports to identify districts with similar demographics that are scored exemplary
-Email/interview teachers and/or administrators from other districts to discuss remedial reading programs used to improve student performance in reading
-Compile a list of recommended reading resources and programs (software, workbooks, hands-on activities, lesson plans, presenters)

August 2010
- Analyze past TAKS data for incoming seventh grade students
-Meet with counselor to identify students enrolled in new remedial reading class (lab)
-Interview reading teachers to gather input on researched resources and suggestions for remediation curriculum
-Meet with department members, reading specialist, administrators to choose resources to create remedial reading curriculum
-Meet with RTI committee to discuss elements needed within curriculum to support students moved to tier 2 ELA instruction
-Meet with curriculum team to organize resources into a basic curriculum to support student needs that may arise (remediation must be flexible to be individualized)
-Organize staff training for new remedial reading curriculum and resources

September 2010
-Begin Implementation of remedial reading curriculum through new remedial reading class/lab
-Perform diagnostic assessment to analyze weaknesses in prior knowledge, before beginning much of new curriculum
-Perform Beginning of Year Texas Middle School Fluency Assessment (TMSFA)
-Analyze diagnostic data to fine tune curriculum to meet the beginning needs of the individual students
-Administer Benchmark 1 to reading students
-Conduct student reading fluency and comprehension assessments weekly (formal and informal)
October 2010
-Analyze Benchmark 1 data to monitor student growth.
-Analyze student growth to determine effectiveness of curriculum so far
-Meet as a team to analyze Benchmark 1 data to restructure and fine tune curriculum to better meet individual needs
-Monitor curriculum through walk-through observations, class observations, and administrative snapshots
-Conduct student and staff surveys and/or evaluations of curriculum
-Conduct student reading fluency and comprehension assessments weekly (formal and informal)
November 2010
-Monitor curriculum through walk-through observations, class observations, and administrative snapshots
-Conduct student and staff surveys and/or evaluations of curriculum

December 2010
-Monitor curriculum through walk-through observations, class observations, and administrative snapshots
-Administer Benchmark 2(Semester exam) to reading students
-Analyze Benchmark 2 (Semester exam) data to monitor student growth.
-Analyze student growth to determine effectiveness of curriculum so far
-Meet as a team to analyze Benchmark 2 data to restructure and fine tune curriculum to better meet individual needs
-Conduct student surveys and/or evaluations of curriculum
-Conduct student reading fluency and comprehension assessments weekly (formal and informal)
-Interview implementing teachers and administrators to monitor perceived effectiveness of curriculum

January 2011
-Monitor curriculum through walk-through observations, class observations, and administrative snapshots
-Administer Middle of the Year Texas Middle School Fluency Assessment (TMSFA)
-Administer Mock State Assessment for data analysis (possible-pending administrative decision)
-Analyze Mock State Assessment to monitor student growth
-Analyze student growth to determine effectiveness of curriculum so far
-Meet as a team to analyze Mock State Assessment to restructure and fine tune curriculum to better meet individual needs and areas of weakness
-Conduct student and staff surveys and/or evaluations of curriculum
-Conduct student reading fluency and comprehension assessments weekly (formal and informal)
-Conduct parent surveys/evaluations to monitor perceived effectiveness of curriculum

February 2011
-Monitor curriculum through walk-through observations, class observations, and administrative snapshots
-Administer Benchmark 3 to reading students
-Analyze Benchmark 3 data to monitor student growth.
-Analyze student growth to determine effectiveness of curriculum so far
-Meet as a team to analyze Benchmark 3 data to restructure and fine tune curriculum to better meet individual needs
-Conduct student surveys and/or evaluations of curriculum
-Conduct student reading fluency and comprehension assessments weekly (formal and informal)
-Interview implementing teachers and administrators to monitor perceived effectiveness of curriculum
-Meet as a team to identify students still performing below standard and in need of after school tutorials

March 2011
-Monitor curriculum through walk-through observations, class observations, and administrative snapshots
-Administer Benchmark 4 to reading students
-Conduct student surveys and/or evaluations of curriculum
-Conduct student reading fluency and comprehension assessments weekly (formal and informal)
April 2011
-Monitor curriculum through walk-through observations, class observations, and administrative snapshots
-Analyze Benchmark 4 data to monitor student growth.
-Analyze student growth to determine effectiveness of curriculum so far
-Meet as a team to analyze Benchmark 4 data to restructure and fine tune curriculum to better meet individual needs
-Conduct student surveys and/or evaluations of curriculum
-Conduct student reading fluency and comprehension assessments weekly (formal and informal)
-Administer State reading assessment (TAKS 2011)

May 2011
-Monitor curriculum through walk-through observations, class observations, and administrative snapshots
-Administer Benchmark 5 (Final Exam) to reading students
--Analyze Benchmark 5 data to monitor student growth.
-Analyze student growth to determine effectiveness of curriculum
-Meet as a team to analyze Benchmark 5 data to restructure and fine tune curriculum to better meet individual needs of students next school year
-Meet with RTI committee to discuss any changes to curriculum needed to better support tier 2 ELA instruction
-Conduct student surveys and/or evaluations of curriculum
-Conduct student reading fluency and comprehension assessments weekly (formal and informal)
-Administer End of Year Texas Middle School Fluency Assessment (TMSFA)
-Analyze data from State reading assessment (TAKS 2011) to determine student improvement and success or failure of remedial reading curriculum
-Interview implementing teachers and administrators to receive feedback concerning the curriculum and or remedial reading program

Person(s) Responsible for Implementation:
Research involving incoming students’ TAKS data: Janella Betz (department chair/teacher), Phillys Morian (reading teacher), Joscelyn Strother (reading teacher), Michael Hatton (reading teacher), Deanna Fisher (internal reading coach), Laura Jones (reading teacher), Jacqueline Martin (inclusion SPED reading teacher), Linda Ebarb (reading teacher)

Curriculum resources research: Janella Betz (involving other districts), Deanna Fisher (concerning resources already available to district), Phillys Morian (concerning reading materials used in regular classrooms)

Curriculum Development: Janella Betz, Deanna Fisher, Phillys Morian
Staff Training for Curriculum: Janella Betz, Deanna Fisher, Phillys Morian, Mervin Cleveland (Principal), Gwen Gilford (Asst. Superintendent of Curriculum)

Implementation of Curriculum (teachers of the remedial reading class/lab): Janella Betz, Phillys Morian, Linda Ebarb, Deanna Fisher

Monitoring Curriculum: Janella Betz, Deanna Fisher, Mervin Cleveland, Phillys Morian, Linda Ebarb, John Seybold (Asst. Principal/Site Supervisor), 2010-2011 RTI Committee

Assessment Administration: Janella Betz, Deanna Fisher, Reneisha Chambers, Phillys Morian, Linda Ebarb

Monitoring Data Analysis: Janella Betz, Deanna Fisher, Phillys Morian, Michael Hatton, Laura Jones, Linda Ebarb, Joscelyn Strother, Jacqueline Martin

Final Data Analysis: Janella Betz, Deanna Fisher, Mervin Cleveland, Gwen Gilford, 2010-2011 RTI Committee

Process for Monitoring Achievement of Goals and Objectives:
MONTHLY: administrator observations (snapshot data analysis), student and staff surveys, analysis of implementing teachers field notes and student observations (including weekly fluency and comprehension assessments)

EVERY SIX WEEKS: benchmark exams administered, implementing teachers and administrators will meet to analyze benchmark data to determine student improvement and effectiveness of curriculum

BEGINNING, MIDDLE, AND END OF SCHOOL YEAR: Texas Middle School Fluency Assessment (to establish student growth), interviews with implementing teachers to receive feedback on curriculum and perceived effectiveness, Diagnostic testing (beginning of year), Mock testing (middle of year), state assessment data analysis to establish student growth and effectiveness of curriculum, meeting with RTI Committee to discuss elements of curriculum required to support tier 2 RTI instruction

Assessment Instruments:
Texas Middle School Fluency Assessment
Formal and informal student assessments
Standardized test formatted benchmarks each six weeks
Student and staff surveys and evaluations
Staff interviews
Administrative observations (snapshots)
State standardized test

Action Research Rationale and Target Population

Action Research Project:
Rationale:
One problem at my school that is of critical importance is our reading remediation program. In years past, we've administered a mock TAKS test and used the results to recommend students for after school tutorials. Last year, only one student attended tutorials though 30 were recommended to attend. Our program was not working. In 8th grade, where SSI is an issue, we have addressed remediation of those students that are unsuccessful first administration by regrouping them into "remedial" classes between first and second administration. It has been fairly successful, but because it requires the changing of schedules, it is exceptionally disruptive for students, teachers, and the office administration, such as our counselor in charge of scheduling. This year we have built in an answer to these remediation problems. We created a class for TAKS remediation. It will act as a reading lab of sorts. Students that are unsuccessful on the TAKS in 6th grade will be given this additional reading lab type class. The same is true for 7th graders that are unsuccessful on TAKS. They'll be placed in the remediation class in 8th grade. The remaining problem is what materials will be used to teach remediation. Because eighth grade classes will now be blocked, we are afraid that all resources will be used during the regular class periods. We are also concerned that teachers may accidentally use remedial resources that currently exist within their regular classrooms, making them repetitive or unusable in the remediation classrooms. Therefore, as the English department head, I will conduct an action research project to investigate the needs of this remediation class.

Setting/Context:The setting of my action research project will be our new reading remediation class, at Jasper Junior High School, for middle school students that have been unsuccessful on the state standardized assessment or who need tier 2 remediation in reading.

Operational Definition of my Target Population/Sample Selection/Sample Size: My target population will be those students entering the seventh grade that were unsuccessful on the sixth grade reading TAKS and those students for whom modifications in the regular reading classroom have not been sufficient to improve their performance. Therefore, my target population will also include students recommended for tier 2 in the Response to Intervention program, as deemed by the RTI committee. My sample size will be the students enrolled in the TAKS remediation class, which is approximately 40 students. Each individual section will be a set of 10 or less students because a low student to teacher ratio is crucial for the remediation process. The closer to one-on-one instruction in the remediation setting, the better.

Description of Project:As the English department head, I will conduct an action research project to investigate the needs of this remediation class by analyzing TAKS data, diagnostic testing, requesting feedback from past teachers, surveying current students, and interviewing reading specialists and reading teachers. I will review materials seemingly fitting those needs. Through evaluation of materials, and collaboration with the others in the department, I will order those resources that prove to meet our needs. I will also evaluate materials used by other districts in their remediation programs. Next, I will create a plan for using these resources (basic curriculum guide). Through training of staff and practice with new materials we will work as a department to implement the new remediation curriculum and monitor its effectiveness throughout the year.

In week 2, we focused on the nine passions where wonderings are categorized in action research. In looking at the nine passions, I discovered that because many of the wonderings within these nine passions overlap, a wisely planned action research project could address several aspects of a classroom, campus or district. It also taught me to focus my action research, so I don't waste time floundering in interesting but nonpractical research information.

Action research is a systematic process used to address a problem within the educational setting by helping teachers and administrators define the issue, research and analyze data, collect ideas to create a plan for improvement, implement the plan and change the behaviors, curriculum, instruction or performance within that educational setting, in a positive fashion. Action research encourages collaboration to solve a problem identified by teachers and administrators, and it is a process to create a plan of action to correct the problem and accomplish a given goal. The process consists of defining the problem, assessing needs, collecting data and research, using data and research to develop a plan of action to correct the situation or problem, including a plan for implementation and monitoring for success. Examples of action research in the educational setting include things such as a teacher conducting a study to analyze weaknesses in his/her students’ performance and formulating a plan to address those weaknesses and improve student performance, or an administrator identifying a problem with the campus dress code enforcement, analyzing the data such as office referrals for dress code violations, brainstorming solutions to solving the problem, and creating a plan to change the behaviors of the staff concerning enforcing dress code violations.

Educational leaders can use blogs as a means of collaborating on issues that affect education. Through the blogs, they can communicate with other educators and use it as a sort of think tank to brainstorm solutions and ideas to address concerns affecting individual students, teachers, or entire campuses. Leaders may also use blogs as a way to communicate the progress of programs or the implementation of curriculum or policy changes. Blogs act as a news source to other educators, students, and parents and can be used as basic form of communication and feedback.