A Formative Assessment A Formative Assessment System That Really WorksSystem That Really Works

Lee Ann Pruske, MTS pruskelx@Milwaukee.k12.wi.us

Kim O’Brien, MTL johanskm@Milwaukee.k12.wi.us

Milwaukee Public Schools

National Council of Supervisors of MathematicsIndianapolis, INApril 13, 2011

In this session participants In this session participants will:will:

Examine how teacher teams utilize a formative assessment system to improve teaching and learning of mathematics.

Comprehensive Mathematics Comprehensive Mathematics FrameworkFramework

Constructed Response Constructed Response ProblemProblem

You have 12 blocks. Some of the blocks are black and some of the blocks are green. There are no other blocks of any color. There are three times as many black blocks as green blocks.

What fraction of the blocks are green?

MMP Learning Team Continuum Aligned MMP Learning Team Continuum Aligned with Formative Assessment Principleswith Formative Assessment Principles

(1) Prior to teaching, teachers study and can articulate the math concepts students will be learning.

(2) Teachers use student-friendly language to inform students about the math objective they are expected to learn during the lesson.

(3) Students can describe whatmathematical ideas they are learning in the lesson.

(4) Teachers canarticulate how the math lesson is aligned to district learning targets, state standards, and classroom assessments(CABS), and fits withinthe progression ofstudent learning.

(5) Teachers useClassroom assessments that yield accurate information about student learning of math concepts and skills and use of math processes.

(6) Teachers use assessment information to focus and guide teaching and motivate student learning.

(7) Feedback given to a student is descriptive, frequent, and timely. It provides insight on a current strength and focuses on one facet of learning for revision linked directly to the intended math objective.

(8) Students actively and regularly use descriptive feedback to improve the quality of their work.

(9) Students study the criteria by which their work will be evaluated by analyzing samples of strong and weak work.

(10) Students keep track of their own learning over time (e.g., journals, portfolios) and communicate with others about what they understand and what areas need improvement.

Stage 1Learning Targets

Stage 2Align State Framework

and Math Program

Stage 3Common CABS

Stage 4Student Work on CABS

Stage 5Descriptive Feedback

on CABSUnderstand importance of identifying and articulating big ideas in mathematics to bring consistency to a school’s math program.

Develop meaning for the math embedded in the targets and alignment to state standards and descriptors and to the school’s math program.

Provide a measure of consistency of student learning based on standards/descriptors and targets.

Examine student work to monitor achievement and progress toward the targets and descriptors.

Use student work to inform instructional decisions, and to provide students with appropriate descriptive feedback.

Assessment Assessment forfor learning learning

Assessment for learning is about far more than testing more frequently or providing teachers with evidence so they can revise instruction, although these are part of it.

Assessment for learning must actively involve students.

Richard Stiggins

Milwaukee Public SchoolsMilwaukee Public Schools F. J. Gaenslen Elementary SchoolF. J. Gaenslen Elementary School

o K4-8th grade o 690 students

o 87% Free & Reduced Luncho 46% Special education

o 47 classroom teachers o 7 special education resource teacherso 16 MRP units (24% of students)

o 1 Math Teacher Leader

F. J. Gaenslen F. J. Gaenslen Grade Level Meeting Grade Level Meeting StructureStructure

Who- grade level teachers and special education resource teacher (K5-8)

When- 45 minutes weekly- alternating between literacy and math◦ Students are in gym, art, library

Embedded school-wide practice since 2003-04

Monthly staff meetings- cross grade level discourse opportunities

Formative Assessment Process at Formative Assessment Process at Gaenslen School (2009-2010)Gaenslen School (2009-2010)

8 times a year from October - MayGrade level teams chose a common constructed response problem

◦ 5 times aligned to current classroom content instruction◦ 3 times district “on demand” prompts by grade level

Administer prompt with students Sort work by math criteria- usually 3 piles Teachers write descriptive feedback on the

student workMini lesson addressing student misconceptions

Students retake assessmentsSecond attempts are scored and used

summativelyAdjust next steps on teaching concepts

Student Work with Student Work with Feedback Feedback Effective feedback is differentiated by

student needs

Student A- detailed and open endedStudent B- less wordy, very direct,

specific Student C- more directed, less

narrative

Gaenslen Record Keeping Gaenslen Record Keeping 3 point rubric

◦ 0, 1 point for correct math answer◦ 0, 1, 2 points for process

First try (pre feedback)

Second try (post feedback) ◦ Used summatively to generate semester

proficiency scores◦ Local data for School Improvement Plan

Next Steps - Plan for Year Next Steps - Plan for Year 22Teacher buy-in of formative

assessment process was cemented

Students in all grades improved their ability to communicate their mathematical reasoning on constructed response problems

Next steps to increase the cognitive demand of Constructed Response problems

Life Happens - Budgets Life Happens - Budgets HappenHappenMay 2010- 580 MPS teachers laid offGaenslen lost 6 teachers7 teachers new to the school5 teachers changed grade levels

◦ Net change of 18 of 31 teachersMTL and principal remained the same, with

same mathematics focus Impact on school was to rebuild the new

teams using common assessments and descriptive/effective feedback

Year 2: 2010-2011Year 2: 2010-2011Continue with process described

at all grade level meetings

Differentiate Based on Teacher needs◦Some teams revised CR prompts to

increase cognitive demand ◦Some teachers began including

student-to-student feedback

Research by: John HattieResearch by: John Hattie

“The most powerful single modification that enhances achievement is feedback. The simplest prescription for improving education must be ‘dollops of feedback’.”

2010 Wisconsin State 2010 Wisconsin State Assessment ResultsAssessment Results

F.J. Gaenslen School increased student mathematics proficiency 4.2% as a whole school measure

The Milwaukee Mathematics Partnership (MMP), an initiative of the Milwaukee Partnership Academy (MPA), is supported with funding from the National Science Foundation

Resources: www.mmp.uwm.edu

Lee Ann Pruske, MTS pruskelx@Milwaukee.k12.wi.us

Kim O’Brien, MTL johanskm@Milwaukee.k12.wi.us