1

Project-wide Reading Results: Interpreting Student Performance Data and

Designing Instructional Interventions

Oregon Reading FirstFebruary, 2004

Institute for the Development ofEducational Achievement

College of EducationUniversity of Oregon

2

AcknowledgmentsAcknowledgments

Oregon Department of Education

Institute for the Development of Educational

Achievement, College of Education, University of Oregon

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special

Education Programs

Oregon Reading First Supplemental and Intervention

Curriculum Review Panel

3

Content DevelopmentContent Development

Content developed by:

Edward J. Kame’enui, Ph. D.Professor, College of EducationUniversity of Oregon

Hank FienUniversity of Oregon

Additional support:

Patrick Kennedy-PaineKatie TateUniversity of Oregon

4

CopyrightCopyright

All materials are copy written and should

not be reproduced or used without

expressed permission of Dr. Edward J.

Kame’enui or Dr. Deborah C. Simmons.

Selected slides were reproduced from

other sources and original references cited.

5

Schoolwide:

Each & All

Prevention Oriented Scientifically

Based

Results Focused

IBR Foundational Features: IBR Foundational Features: Translating Translating Research into PracticeResearch into Practice

6

Today’s Focus

IBR Guiding QuestionsIBR Guiding Questions

1. Goals: What outcomes do we want for our students in our state, district, and schools?

2. Knowledge: What do we know and what guidance can we gain from scientifically based reading research?

3. Progress Monitoring Assessment: How are we doing? What is our current level of performance as a school? As a grade? As a class? As an individual student?

4. Outcome Assessment: How far do we need to go to reach our goals and outcomes?

5. Core Instruction: What are the critical components that need to be in place to reach our goals?

6. Differentiated Instruction: What more do we need to do and what instructional adjustments need to be made?

7

The objectives of today’s session are to:

1. Examine DIBELS outcomes for a model district.

2. Review fall and winter Oregon Reading First project-wide student performance data.

3. Examine the kinds of information available from DIBELS reports.

Objectives: What You WillObjectives: What You WillLearn and DoLearn and Do

8

Quarterly Benchmark Goals Final Benchmark Goals and Later

Low Risk Established

Some Risk Emerging

At Risk Deficit

Instructional Status TerminologyInstructional Status Terminology

9

28% Low risk for reading difficulties34% Some risk for reading difficulties38% At risk for reading difficulties

Model District - End of Year Histogram - ORF, Year 1

Establishing A Baseline Of Establishing A Baseline Of Performance for a New ProgramPerformance for a New Program

10

57% Low risk for reading difficulties20% Some risk for reading difficulties22% At risk for reading difficulties

Model District - End of Year Histogram - ORF, Year 2After changes in curricular program, instruction, time,

professional development:

Evaluating Response to EffortsEvaluating Response to Efforts

11

41% (n=1O36) Established25% (n= 621) Emerging34% (n= 858) Deficit

Oregon Reading FirstOregon Reading FirstBeginning of Year Kindergarten ISFBeginning of Year Kindergarten ISF

12

36% (n= 839) Established46% (n=1O71) Emerging19% (n= 434) Deficit

Oregon Reading FirstOregon Reading FirstMid Year Kindergarten ISFMid Year Kindergarten ISF

13

41% (n=28) Established44% (n=3O) Emerging15% (n=1O) Deficit

Oregon Reading First - Single SchoolOregon Reading First - Single SchoolMid Year Kindergarten ISFMid Year Kindergarten ISF

14

32% (n= 8OO) Established22% (n= 558) Emerging46% (n=1157) Deficit

Oregon Reading FirstOregon Reading FirstBeginning of Year Kindergarten LNFBeginning of Year Kindergarten LNF

15

41% (n= 965) Established21% (n= 5OO) Emerging38% (n= 9O1) Deficit

Oregon Reading FirstOregon Reading FirstMid Year Kindergarten LNFMid Year Kindergarten LNF

16

56% (n=38) Established18% (n=12) Emerging26% (n=18) Deficit

Oregon Reading First - Single SchoolOregon Reading First - Single SchoolMid Year Kindergarten LNFMid Year Kindergarten LNF

17

23% (n= 596) Established41% (n=1O34) Emerging36% (n= 922) Deficit

Oregon Reading FirstOregon Reading FirstBeginning of Year Grade 1 PSFBeginning of Year Grade 1 PSF

18

72% (n=1759) Established21% (n= 5O2) Emerging 7% (n= 171) Deficit

Oregon Reading FirstOregon Reading FirstMid Year Grade 1 PSFMid Year Grade 1 PSF

19

85% (n=53) Established11% (n= 7) Emerging 3% (n= 2) Deficit

Oregon Reading First - Single SchoolOregon Reading First - Single SchoolMid Year Grade 1 PSFMid Year Grade 1 PSF

20

26% (n= 651) Established24% (n= 61O) Emerging51% (n=129O) Deficit

Oregon Reading FirstOregon Reading FirstBeginning of Year Grade 1 NWFBeginning of Year Grade 1 NWF

21

32% (n= 789) Established41% (n= 991) Emerging27% (n= 653) Deficit

Oregon Reading FirstOregon Reading FirstMid Year Grade 1 NWFMid Year Grade 1 NWF

22

36% (n=23) Established3O% (n=19) Emerging34% (n=22) Deficit

Oregon Reading First - Single SchoolOregon Reading First - Single SchoolBeginning of Year Grade 1 NWFBeginning of Year Grade 1 NWF

23

5O% (n=31) Established42% (n=26) Emerging 8% (n= 5) Deficit

Oregon Reading First - Single SchoolOregon Reading First - Single SchoolMid Year Grade 1 NWFMid Year Grade 1 NWF

24

29% (n= 714) Established19% (n= 470) Emerging51% (n=1254) Deficit

Oregon Reading FirstOregon Reading FirstBeginning of Year Grade 2 ORFBeginning of Year Grade 2 ORF

25

38% (n= 857) Established14% (n= 3O8) Emerging48% (n=1O94) Deficit

Oregon Reading FirstOregon Reading FirstMid Year Grade 2 ORFMid Year Grade 2 ORF

26

52% (n=32) Established13% (n= 8) Emerging34% (n=21) Deficit

Oregon Reading First - Single SchoolOregon Reading First - Single SchoolMid Year Grade 2 ORFMid Year Grade 2 ORF

27

28% (n= 660) Established25% (n= 585) Emerging47% (n=1115) Deficit

Oregon Reading FirstOregon Reading FirstBeginning of Year Grade 3 ORFBeginning of Year Grade 3 ORF

28

34% (n= 776) Established24% (n= 548) Emerging42% (n= 967) Deficit

Oregon Reading FirstOregon Reading FirstMid Year Grade 3 ORFMid Year Grade 3 ORF

29

25% (n=17) Established34% (n=23) Emerging4O% (n=27) Deficit

Oregon Reading First - Single SchoolOregon Reading First - Single SchoolBeginning of Year Grade 3 ORFBeginning of Year Grade 3 ORF

30

43% (n=29) Established34% (n=23) Emerging24% (n=16) Deficit

Oregon Reading First - Single SchoolOregon Reading First - Single SchoolMid Year Grade 3 ORFMid Year Grade 3 ORF

31

Benchmark goal for all students:25-35 correct initial sounds per minute in the middle of Kindergarten.

• Students scoring 8 or more in the beginning of Kindergarten are likely to achieve the benchmark goal with effective instruction.

Oregon Reading First Box Plot Oregon Reading First Box Plot Mid Year Kindergarten ISF Mid Year Kindergarten ISF

32

Benchmark goal for all students: 50-60 correct letter-sounds per minute in the middle of First Grade.

• Students scoring 24 or more in the beginning of First Grade are likely to achieve the benchmark goal with effective instruction.

Oregon Reading First Box PlotOregon Reading First Box Plot Mid Year Grade 1 NWF Mid Year Grade 1 NWF

33

Benchmark goal for all students:90 correct words per minute at the end of Second Grade.

• Students scoring 44 or more in the beginning of Second Grade are likely to achieve the benchmark goal with effective instruction.• Students scoring 68 or more in the middle of Second Grade are likely to achieve the benchmark goal with effective instruction.

Oregon Reading First Box Plot Oregon Reading First Box Plot Mid Year Grade 2 ORF Mid Year Grade 2 ORF

34

Benchmark goal for all students:110 correct words per minute at the end of Third Grade.• Students scoring 77 or more in the beginning of Third Grade are likely to achieve the benchmark goal with effective instruction.• Students scoring 92 or more in the middle of Third Grade are likely to achieve the benchmark goal with effective instruction.

Oregon Reading First Box Plot Oregon Reading First Box Plot Mid Grade 3 ORF Mid Grade 3 ORF

35

After 4 years of sustained focused effort:

Evaluating Growth Over TimeEvaluating Growth Over Time

36

Summary of Effectiveness of Core, Summary of Effectiveness of Core, Strategic and Intensive ProgramsStrategic and Intensive Programs

Effectiveness Of Core Curriculum

Effectiveness of Strategic Support

Program

Effectiveness of Intensive Support

Program

K 304/461 332/876 179/888

66% 38% 20%

Grade 1 425/660 208/657 144/1037

64% 32% 14%

Grade 2 638/656 202/432 26/1132

97% 47% 2%

Grade 3 562/628 165/537 14/1008

90% 31% 1%

37

Sample School Summary of Sample School Summary of Effectiveness TableEffectiveness Table

38

Sample Class Summary of Sample Class Summary of Effectiveness TableEffectiveness Table

39

Kindergarten Summary ReportKindergarten Summary Report

40

Kindergarten Summary Report (cont.)Kindergarten Summary Report (cont.)

41

Grade 1 Summary ReportGrade 1 Summary Report

42

Grade 1 Summary Report (cont.)Grade 1 Summary Report (cont.)

43

Grade 2 Summary ReportGrade 2 Summary Report

44

Grade 3 Summary ReportGrade 3 Summary Report

45

Target GoalProgress Monitoring ScoreBenchmark Score

Sample Progress Monitoring GraphSample Progress Monitoring GraphKindergarten ISFKindergarten ISF

46

Sample Progress Monitoring GraphSample Progress Monitoring GraphGrade 2 ORFGrade 2 ORF

Target GoalProgress Monitoring ScoreBenchmark Score