Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

S H A R O N L . C O N T R E R A S , P H . D . | S U P E R I N T E N D E N T

Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) Kindergarten Cohort Performance: Key Performance Indicator Presentation

OCTOBER 10, 2019

Mission

Guilford County students will graduate as responsible citizens prepared to succeed in higher education,

• r in the career of their choice.*

*This mission was adopted by the Guilford County Board of Education on December 12, 2000.

Vision

Transforming learning and life outcomes for all students.

2

Parameters

• f the

Data Analysis and the DIBELS Assessment

• These analyses use Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early

Literacy Skills (DIBELS) beginning-of-year (BOY) data for 4 cohorts of Kindergarten students and their subsequent DIBELS end-of-year (EOY) data in Grades 1, 2, and 3.

• The DIBELS assessment is administered to all K-3 students

three times each year.

• The DIBELS Composite score is a combination of multiple

DIBELS scores and provides the best overall estimate of each student’s early literacy skills and/or reading proficiency.

• Beginning in 2017-18, composite scores were categorized

into four benchmark levels:

• In prior years, there were only three benchmark levels – no

“Above Benchmark”.

3

Benchmark Status Level Overall likelihood of achieving subsequent early literacy

• r reading goals

Above Benchmark 90% to 99% At Benchmark 70% to 85% Below Benchmark 40% to 60% Well Below Benchmark 10% to 20% (DIBELS Next Manual, 2014)

GCS Board Goal

Goal I lists Dynamic Indicators

• f Basic Early Literacy Skills

(DIBELS) as a Key Performance Indicator

4

Goal I: By 2022, the percentage

• f students who will read

proficiently by the end of third grade will increase to 63%.

5

Key Performance Indicator

5

• I.1. Percentage of Kindergarten

cohorts demonstrating reading proficiency by end of 3rd grade (as measured by DIBELS) overall and by racial/ethnic subgroups.

6

Are Students Entering GCS Ready to Read?

DIBELS KPI I.1 Findings

BOY = Beginning of Year

• Over the past 7 years, Kindergarten students

are entering GCS increasingly less ready to read:

• Many more Kindergarten students were

entering well-below benchmark at BOY on DIBELS.

7

8

Kindergarten Beginning of Year (BOY) DIBELS Performance

8

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 % of Students Well Below Benchmark Below Benchmark At or Above Benchmark

9

How Does DIBELS Performance Compare by Kindergarten Cohort?

10

DIBELS Cohorts

BOY = Beginning of Year EOY = End of Year

10

Cohort Kindergarten Year 3rd Grade Year Cohort 1 2012-13 2015-16 Cohort 2 2013-14 2016-17 Cohort 3 2014-15 2017-18 Cohort 4 2015-16 2018-19

Data is Presented for 4 Consecutive Kindergarten Cohorts: Entering in 2012-13 (Cohort 1), 2013-14 (Cohort 2), 2014-15 (Cohort 3), and 2015-16 (Cohort 4). Cohort 4 is the last Cohort we can track from Kindergarten through 3rd Grade due to the change in assessment to Istation.

DIBELS Assessment

Using DIBELS

• Students entering Kindergarten take first

sound and letter naming fluency assessments to determine their reading readiness

• 3rd Grade students take both oral reading

fluency and a comprehension assessment to determine reading proficiency

11

DIBELS KPI I.1 Findings

BOY = Beginning of Year EOY = End of Year

• In examining all students in all four cohorts we find that Cohort 4

is the only cohort to increase performance At or Above Benchmark from Kindergarten BOY to 3rd Grade EOY

• For Cohort 4, Kindergarten BOY to 3rd Grade EOY performance

At or Above Benchmark

• Increased for All Students from 63.3% to 67.2%

(3.9 percentage points)

• Increased for White Students from 75.0% to 83.3%

(8.3 percentage points)

• Increased for Hispanic Students from 45.1% to 59.9%

(14.8 percentage points)

• Decreased for Black Students from 63.0% to 55.5%

(7.5 percentage points)

12

13

DIBELS Performance by Race Kindergarten BOY – 3rd Grade EOY Cohort 4 (2015-16) Only

13

Kindergarten BOY 3rd Grade BOY All Students 63.3 67.2 White 75.0 83.3 Black 63.0 55.5 Hispanic 45.1 59.9 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0

% At or Above Benchmark

14

DIBELS Cohort Performance: All Students Kindergarten BOY – 3rd Grade EOY

14

Kindergarten BOY 3rd Grade EOY Cohort 1 (2012-13) 78.6 68.7 Cohort 2 (2013-14) 69.5 65.9 Cohort 3 (2014-15) 67.1 66.8 Cohort 4 (2015-16) 63.3 67.2 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 % At or Above Benchmark

15

DIBELS Cohort Performance: All Students by Gender Kindergarten BOY – 3rd Grade EOY

15

Gender # of Students K BOY 3rd Grade EOY Cohort 1 (2012-13) Females

1912 80.5 71.8

Males

1987 76.7 65.8

Cohort 2 (2013-14) Females

1936 71.7 69.2

Males

2043 67.3 62.8

Cohort 3 (2014-15) Females

1950 70.0 69.4

Males

1920 64.2 64.2

Cohort 4 (2015-16) Females

1666 65.2 70.0

Males

1771 61.4 64.6

16

DIBELS Cohort Performance: White Students Kindergarten BOY – 3rd Grade EOY

16

K BOY Grade 3 EOY Cohort 1 (2012-13) 87.9 82.1 Cohort 2 (2013-14) 83.2 82.3 Cohort 3 (2014-15) 78.7 84.3 Cohort 4 (2015-16) 75.0 83.3 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0

% At or Above Benchmark

17

DIBELS Cohort Performance: White Students by Gender Kindergarten BOY – 3rd Grade EOY

17

Gender # of Students K BOY 3rd Grade EOY Cohort 1 (2012-13) Females

591 88.8 82.7

Males

646 87.0 81.6

Cohort 2 (2013-14) Females

586 86.2 84.3

Males

580 80.2 80.3

Cohort 3 (2014-15) Females

579 81.7 86.4

Males

611 75.8 82.3

Cohort 4 (2015-16) Females

508 76.4 83.9

Males

534 73.8 82.8

18

DIBELS Cohort Performance: Black Students Kindergarten BOY – 3rd Grade EOY

18

K BOY Grade 3 EOY Cohort 1 (2012-13) 78.0 62.1 Cohort 2 (2013-14) 67.2 57.0 Cohort 3 (2014-15) 66.0 58.3 Cohort 4 (2015-16) 63.0 55.5 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0

% At or Above Benchmark

19

DIBELS Cohort Performance: Black Students by Gender Kindergarten BOY – 3rd Grade EOY

19

Gender # of Students K BOY 3rd Grade EOY Cohort 1 (2012-13) Females

786 81.4 66.8

Males

793 74.7 57.5

Cohort 2 (2013-14) Females

818 69.3 60.3

Males

863 65.2 54.0

Cohort 3 (2014-15) Females

845 69.5 61.8

Males

771 62.1 54.5

Cohort 4 (2015-16) Females

658 67.6 61.6

Males

708 58.6 49.9

20

DIBELS Cohort Performance: Hispanic Students Kindergarten BOY – 3rd Grade EOY

20

K BOY 3rd Grade EOY Cohort 1 (2012-13) 63.3 57.1 Cohort 2 (2013-14) 51.8 56.4 Cohort 3 (2014-15) 49.7 54.4 Cohort 4 (2015-16) 45.1 59.9 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0

% At or Above Benchmark

21

DIBELS Cohort Performance: Hispanic Students by Gender Kindergarten BOY – 3rd Grade EOY

21

Gender # of Students K BOY 3rd Grade EOY Cohort 1 (2012-13) Females

356 62.6 60.7

Males

360 63.9 53.6

Cohort 2 (2013-14) Females

349 50.7 61.6

Males

369 52.8 51.5

Cohort 3 (2014-15) Females

334 52.4 56.3

Males

344 47.1 52.6

Cohort 4 (2015-16) Females

333 44.1 60.1

Males

328 46.0 59.8

22

Literacy Updates

23

29% 18% 53% 9% 34% 28% 17% 54% 8% 27% 18% 54% 8% 31% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 5 or less 6 to 10 11 or more NBPTS Masters 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19

GCS Elementary School Teacher Workforce (2017-19)

23

N/A

24

Istation Assessment

24

• In June, the state announced a change in assessment from mClass (DIBELS and

TRC) to Istation, a computer-based assessment for grades K-3 (teachers in GCS have been using DIBELS for more than 11 years); Department of Information Technology granted a motion to temporarily block the use of Istation as the K-3 assessment in North Carolina pending investigation of the procurement process.

• Concerns across the state with the Istation assessment include training time for

teachers, availability of technology to administer the assessment, and a change from a teacher-administered assessment to a computer-based assessment

• This will mean changes in teacher effectiveness data, student reporting, and reports

for parents

• If implemented, Istation assessment scores will count for students and for teacher

effectiveness from MOY to EOY, allowing the BOY window to serve as a learning period for teachers and students

25

LETRS (Language Essentials for Teachers of Reading and Spelling)

25

• Provides flexible professional learning for teachers on the science behind

how students learn to read

• Launches in Title I elementary schools and in all Pre-K classrooms this year

through a $1 million partnership with the state

• Addresses gaps teachers have in the science behind how students learn to

read, particularly new and lateral entry teachers

• Is independent of any curriculum or intervention program
• Empowers teachers to understand the what, why, and how of scientifically

based reading instruction

26

LETRS (Language Essentials for Teachers of Reading and Spelling)

26

• Includes explicit information for educators about the impact
• f dialects on learning to read and write Standard American

English and how code switching, the conscious effort to write and/or speak in a certain way, depending on the social context, can impact young students as they learn to read, write, and spell. The goal of instruction is not to change the way students speak, but to help students be conscious of words and choose words according to situational contexts.

• Highlights how learning English differs from other languages

with emphasis on Spanish as a detailed example

27

Next Steps

27

• Communication plan for changes in early literacy assessment
• Support teachers in data analysis tools that link state-level

assessments and the GCS literacy curriculum resources

• Continue job-embedded coaching for teachers implementing early

literacy curriculum resources

Cohort Kindergarten Year 3rd Grade Year Cohort 4 2015-16 2018-19 Cohort 5 2016-17 2019-20 Cohort 6 2017-18 2020-21 Cohort 7 2018-19 2021-22

S H A R O N L . C O N T R E R A S , P H . D . | S U P E R I N T E N D E N T

QUESTIONS?