Data Data Data

Based on our EOG scores (NC, 8th science) we wanted to determine the best predictor for student outcomes. Previously, I had used classroom grades as a fairly strong predictor for how my students would do. Anyone with a B average I was confident would pass. In 5 years, I have only had 2-3 students carry B averages through the year, and not be proficient on their EOG. However, as we move towards RtI and MTSS and even in our PLC this was a not a good indicator for talking across the grade level to the other science teachers. I looked at :

• CFA - cumbersome to see trends due to lack of prep work on my part. This will be improved for next year
• County benchmarks - no strong correlation between those scores and EOG
• 7th grade science MSL - total mess
• EVAAS predicted score - better than the previous data sets, but still not as strong as I would like.
• 2013 Percentile Score - WOW! Intuitively, this made almost no sense to me. I checked it last, and even then only because I had the data for it. Why not? Across three teachers, with only 1 exceptions, every student who was above the 40% in 2013 passed with a 4 or 5. Quite a few students below the 40% threshold passed as well, but not all of them. Changing proficiency to include a level 3 and there was a rough correlation between 30% and a level 3 or better. 

Implications for next year. Our grade teams and content areas will be using the 2014 percentile in conjunction with the EVAAS predicted score to monitor the students. Students that are predicted to grow significantly, but are below that 40% will be ones we need to keep a closer eye on. Somewhere we are dropping the ball with these students. I am optimistic this will help us in closing gaps and providing appropriate interventions to make sure student end the year where they need to be.