1. What does the data say about our assessment practices?
PD
With so many types/options to choose from, many teachers may be putting the same assessment into different categories cross campus
Looking at Chinese IV/AP, there are many benchmarks that are not being assessed. These were placed there because they were deemed important by teacher.
PX
In Atlas, there are too many options and they are not clear. For instant, Portfolio? More than 5.1% using "self-assessment" Upper elem using but not relflected in Atlas.
The data is not reflecting what we are doing in our classroom. There is an education process that needs to happen with Atlas.
Summary:
Assessment practices are not accurately represented
The same assessments (cross campus AND within school) may be cataloged into different method types
Options are not clear (for method types - currently over 30 to choose from on drop down menu, which Altas requires that you choose from to enter the assessment in the database.
Furthermore, not all S&B's may be tied to as assessment "It may be formative but not assessed formatively" (A. Lewis)
Data does not reflect what we are doing in our classrooms - an education process needs to take place, in addition to a scaling down and clear descriptions of assessment methods.
2. What kinds of patterns, trends or habits seem to pervade?
PD
Some BM's are hit too mnay times (81, 58, 47) while some are never hit or are hit only once!
"Given a map , but no direction"
The skew could be a result of where people are entering thir information (collaborative or individual)
Atlas, forces us to choose an assessment method, Alicia mentioned that not all BM's may be tied to an assessment method (barely introduced, introduced, touched on) How do we handle that in Atlas for documentation. "It may be formative but not assessed formativley"
PX
It has not been made clear exactly what the curriculum documentations are expected to be, e.g., individual maps that fold into collaborative maps? Never came to fruition; there is not consistency across grade levels.
This could account for the discrepancies of benchmark alignments and the inconsistencies with the actual practices in the school.
There hasn't been "buy in" in terms of documenting curriculum. If there is one free hour and a choice between blogging or Atlas, well . . . Is there a clearly defined purpose for Atlas for teachers or for students?
There is a willingness to "clean up" in Atlas, but how to do it without re-doing or adding another thing to the plate? Literacy committee @ Elementary level; job of Curriculum Coordinator.
Summary:
Communication of curriculum documentations need to be made clear. We have been given a map with destinations, but not a route or timeline
Many S&B's indicate that there are an unusually high (51, 48, 87) number of assessments tied to them, while some show a record of none, even in AP courses.
Assessment options for documenting in Atlas may be skewing our data
With so much ambiguity in documenting as assessment type - some assessments may not show what is actually happening in the curriculum
3. What suggestions do you have for further analysis of curricular data given the subcommittee task above.
Perhaps we need to get together as a grade level a create one master collaborative document that contains all our collaborative files. So many items are in a vaiirety of places and very untidy. Meeting in groups and data entry in real time couldbe a good half day activity cross-campus.Unit copy becomes skeleton and build into your own - collaborative is made the master. The possibility exists to take the collaborative maps and unit copy it into the individual (same benchmarks and assessments) and then keep the personal adaptations. A consistent unit plan and format will help with collaborative to make it more "user friendly". Easy, fun, and most importantly, Atlas needs to be useful to the teacher. Make Atlas as exciting to use as a blog.
Clearly define what assessments are - Create general categories with option to define the assessment (written asessment vs. written project vs written report) Atlas has option to enter the detials so all we need are generic categories (currently there are over 30).
Educate! -Admit when we've made a mistake; go back and clean up our mess (Atlas) with aclear picture and understanding of how we're going to use it, the protocol, structure, and training.
Common Language is critical before embarking on Asst. Philosophy. Professional Development (grassroots) consistent across the board, sharing the same message as it relates to our grade levels. We need to recognizing the expertise that is here. Provide examples at each divisional level.
Whatever we do, we have to have buy-in. Cannot have mixed messages, cannot be top-down. MUST BE CLEARLY ARTICULATED with a definite understanding of what we're doing, where we're going, and how to get there.
Data can show us as teachers who are our resources for teaching "visually, perfromance based, etc."
1. What does the data say about our assessment practices?
PD
With so many types/options to choose from, many teachers may be putting the same assessment into different categories cross campus
Looking at Chinese IV/AP, there are many benchmarks that are not being assessed. These were placed there because they were deemed important by teacher.
PX
In Atlas, there are too many options and they are not clear. For instant, Portfolio? More than 5.1% using "self-assessment" Upper elem using but not relflected in Atlas.
The data is not reflecting what we are doing in our classroom. There is an education process that needs to happen with Atlas.
Summary:
Assessment practices are not accurately represented
2. What kinds of patterns, trends or habits seem to pervade?
PDSome BM's are hit too mnay times (81, 58, 47) while some are never hit or are hit only once!
"Given a map , but no direction"
The skew could be a result of where people are entering thir information (collaborative or individual)
Atlas, forces us to choose an assessment method, Alicia mentioned that not all BM's may be tied to an assessment method (barely introduced, introduced, touched on) How do we handle that in Atlas for documentation. "It may be formative but not assessed formativley"
PX
It has not been made clear exactly what the curriculum documentations are expected to be, e.g., individual maps that fold into collaborative maps? Never came to fruition; there is not consistency across grade levels.
This could account for the discrepancies of benchmark alignments and the inconsistencies with the actual practices in the school.
There hasn't been "buy in" in terms of documenting curriculum. If there is one free hour and a choice between blogging or Atlas, well . . . Is there a clearly defined purpose for Atlas for teachers or for students?
There is a willingness to "clean up" in Atlas, but how to do it without re-doing or adding another thing to the plate? Literacy committee @ Elementary level; job of Curriculum Coordinator.
Summary:
Communication of curriculum documentations need to be made clear. We have been given a map with destinations, but not a route or timeline
3. What suggestions do you have for further analysis of curricular data given the subcommittee task above.
Perhaps we need to get together as a grade level a create one master collaborative document that contains all our collaborative files. So many items are in a vaiirety of places and very untidy. Meeting in groups and data entry in real time couldbe a good half day activity cross-campus.Unit copy becomes skeleton and build into your own - collaborative is made the master. The possibility exists to take the collaborative maps and unit copy it into the individual (same benchmarks and assessments) and then keep the personal adaptations. A consistent unit plan and format will help with collaborative to make it more "user friendly". Easy, fun, and most importantly, Atlas needs to be useful to the teacher. Make Atlas as exciting to use as a blog.
Clearly define what assessments are - Create general categories with option to define the assessment (written asessment vs. written project vs written report) Atlas has option to enter the detials so all we need are generic categories (currently there are over 30).
Educate! - Admit when we've made a mistake; go back and clean up our mess (Atlas) with a clear picture and understanding of how we're going to use it, the protocol, structure, and training.
Common Language is critical before embarking on Asst. Philosophy. Professional Development (grassroots) consistent across the board, sharing the same message as it relates to our grade levels. We need to recognizing the expertise that is here. Provide examples at each divisional level.
Whatever we do, we have to have buy-in. Cannot have mixed messages, cannot be top-down. MUST BE CLEARLY ARTICULATED with a definite understanding of what we're doing, where we're going, and how to get there.
Data can show us as teachers who are our resources for teaching "visually, perfromance based, etc."
We need to be given the time to do this