Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) Kindergarten Cohort Performance: Key Performance Indicator Presentation OCTOBER 10, 2019 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
2 Mission Guilford County students will graduate as responsible citizens prepared to succeed in higher education, or 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.
• These analyses use Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early 3 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. Parameters • The DIBELS Composite score is a combination of multiple of the DIBELS scores and provides the best overall estimate of each student’s early literacy skills and/or reading proficiency. Data Analysis • Beginning in 2017-18, composite scores were categorized and the into four benchmark levels: Overall likelihood of achieving DIBELS Benchmark Status Level subsequent early literacy or reading goals Assessment Above Benchmark 90% to 99% At Benchmark 70% to 85% Below Benchmark 40% to 60% Well Below Benchmark 10% to 20% • In prior years, there were only three benchmark levels – no “Above Benchmark”. (DIBELS Next Manual, 2014)
4 GCS Board Goal Goal I: By 2022, the percentage Goal I lists Dynamic Indicators of students who will read of Basic Early Literacy Skills proficiently by the end of third (DIBELS) as a Key Performance grade will increase to 63%. Indicator
5 5 Key Performance Indicator • I.1. Percentage of Kindergarten cohorts demonstrating reading proficiency by end of 3rd grade (as measured by DIBELS) overall and by racial/ethnic subgroups.
Are Students Entering GCS Ready to Read? 6
7 DIBELS KPI I.1 • Over the past 7 years, Kindergarten students Findings are entering GCS increasingly less ready to read: • Many more Kindergarten students were entering well-below benchmark at BOY on DIBELS. BOY = Beginning of Year
8 8 Kindergarten Beginning of Year (BOY) DIBELS Performance 100% 90% 80% 70% % of Students 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 Well Below Benchmark Below Benchmark At or Above Benchmark
How Does DIBELS Performance Compare by Kindergarten Cohort? 9
10 10 DIBELS Cohorts BOY = Beginning of Year EOY = End of Year 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 3 rd Grade due to the change in assessment to Istation. 3 rd Grade Year Cohort Kindergarten 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
11 Using DIBELS • Students entering Kindergarten take first DIBELS sound and letter naming fluency assessments to determine their reading Assessment readiness • 3 rd Grade students take both oral reading fluency and a comprehension assessment to determine reading proficiency
12 • 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 3 rd Grade EOY • For Cohort 4, Kindergarten BOY to 3 rd Grade EOY performance DIBELS KPI I.1 At or Above Benchmark Findings • 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% BOY = Beginning of Year (7.5 percentage points) EOY = End of Year
13 13 DIBELS Performance by Race Kindergarten BOY – 3rd Grade EOY Cohort 4 (2015-16) Only 100.0 % At or Above Benchmark 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 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
14 14 DIBELS Cohort Performance: All Students Kindergarten BOY – 3 rd Grade EOY 100.0 % At or Above Benchmark 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 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
15 15 DIBELS Cohort Performance: All Students by Gender Kindergarten BOY – 3 rd Grade EOY Gender # of Students K BOY 3rd Grade EOY Females 1912 80.5 71.8 Cohort 1 (2012-13) Males 1987 76.7 65.8 Females 1936 71.7 69.2 Cohort 2 (2013-14) Males 2043 67.3 62.8 Females 1950 70.0 69.4 Cohort 3 (2014-15) Males 1920 64.2 64.2 Females 1666 65.2 70.0 Cohort 4 (2015-16) Males 1771 61.4 64.6
16 16 DIBELS Cohort Performance: White Students Kindergarten BOY – 3 rd Grade EOY 100.0 % At or Above Benchmark 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 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
17 17 DIBELS Cohort Performance: White Students by Gender Kindergarten BOY – 3 rd Grade EOY Gender # of Students K BOY 3rd Grade EOY Females 591 88.8 82.7 Cohort 1 (2012-13) Males 646 87.0 81.6 Females 586 86.2 84.3 Cohort 2 (2013-14) Males 580 80.2 80.3 Females 579 81.7 86.4 Cohort 3 (2014-15) Males 611 75.8 82.3 Females 508 76.4 83.9 Cohort 4 (2015-16) Males 534 73.8 82.8
18 18 DIBELS Cohort Performance: Black Students Kindergarten BOY – 3 rd Grade EOY 100.0 % At or Above Benchmark 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 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
19 19 DIBELS Cohort Performance: Black Students by Gender Kindergarten BOY – 3 rd Grade EOY Gender # of Students K BOY 3rd Grade EOY Females 786 81.4 66.8 Cohort 1 (2012-13) Males 793 74.7 57.5 Females 818 69.3 60.3 Cohort 2 (2013-14) Males 863 65.2 54.0 Females 845 69.5 61.8 Cohort 3 (2014-15) Males 771 62.1 54.5 Females 658 67.6 61.6 Cohort 4 (2015-16) Males 708 58.6 49.9
20 20 DIBELS Cohort Performance: Hispanic Students Kindergarten BOY – 3 rd Grade EOY 100.0 % At or Above Benchmark 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 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
21 21 DIBELS Cohort Performance: Hispanic Students by Gender Kindergarten BOY – 3 rd Grade EOY Gender # of Students K BOY 3rd Grade EOY Females 356 62.6 60.7 Cohort 1 (2012-13) Males 360 63.9 53.6 Females 349 50.7 61.6 Cohort 2 (2013-14) Males 369 52.8 51.5 Females 334 52.4 56.3 Cohort 3 (2014-15) Males 344 47.1 52.6 Females 333 44.1 60.1 Cohort 4 (2015-16) Males 328 46.0 59.8
Literacy Updates 22
23 23 GCS Elementary School Teacher Workforce (2017-19) 60% 54% 54% 53% 50% 40% 34% 31% 29% 28% 30% 27% 18% 18% 20% 17% 9% 8% 8% 10% N/A 0% 5 or less 6 to 10 11 or more NBPTS Masters 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19
24 24 Istation Assessment • 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 25 LETRS (Language Essentials for Teachers of Reading and Spelling) • 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
Recommend
More recommend
