Tuesday, December 22, 2015

Diving into PARCC Data

DSAC has frequently heard the complaint that the release of PARCC data felt underwhelming.  As Massachusetts educators, we're used to a large amount of summative assessment data that helps us drill down to specific skills and standards individual students are struggling with.  Teachers often unpack MCAS items for language, criteria for success, and alignment to the MA Frameworks.  But while we can't do an item analysis of PARCC 2015 data, there are several questions PARCC data can answer that grade level, school and district data teams should be asking:

Aggregated Data- The BIG Trends:
Using School and District Profile pages or PE434 reports in Edwin:

  • What % of students scored at each expectations level?
  • How do these results compare to previous years' summative results?  To our interim assessment data?
  • How will we meet the needs of each proficiency level going forward?
Disaggregated Data by Subgroup:
Using PE434 in Edwin:
  • What achievement gaps between subgroups are evident?
  • How do achievement gaps compare with previous summative assessments? Are gaps widening or narrowing?
  • What might account for gap trends?  What will we do to narrow achievement gaps?
Sub-Claim Content Data: 
Using PE637 PARCC Student Roster report in Edwin:
  • Which sub-claims were areas of strength?  Areas of need?
  • What practices might account for these successes?  How can we strengthen and spread the use of these practices?
  • Which sub-claims do we need to target?  What supports can we strengthen to meet areas of need?
  • How do the sub-claims map onto our existing curriculum?  Which areas should we emphasize more/less?
  • How are we using the standards of mathematical practice in math instruction?