April 26, 2007 - Unapproved Minutes

Quality of Education Quantitative Sub-Committee
Thursday, April 26, 2007, 3:30 p.m.
Ray School Library

Present: Kari Asmus, Bill Bender, Bill Mlacak, Pam Force, Stan Williams, and Ray School Assistant Principal Sarah Curtis. Minutes by Asmus.

1. NECAP analysis

Sarah gave an overview of how the NECAP results are analyzed at the Ray School. In particular, she discussed the Student Level Item Analysis in which teachers look at the results of the released questions to see where their students had difficulties. Once a question with many wrong answers is identified, teachers look to see which wrong answer students most likely gave, and then they ask a series of questions such as:

What are the possible reasons for error?
Is it our curriculum?
When is this content taught?
How might we change our instruction?

Pam gave as an example a question regarding fractions that was given to the fourth graders in October before they had really learned that material. She stated that fractions are a difficult concept for third graders and that students are typically much more able to grasp it in the fourth grade. She said that currently, many of the fourth grade teachers have clothes lines hanging in their rooms with clothes pins to illustrate the concept.

2. SAT and AP data

Bill Bender gave an overview of data that he has collected comparing Hanover High School SAT I scores and AP Tests per Student with other top Eastern high schools. His bar charts showed that Hanover had the second highest SAT I scores in the comparison group but took the fewest AP Tests per Student. Bill has also found some information on the colleges that students from the "high AP" schools attend and compared that with where Hanover High School's attend. His conclusion is that taking more AP tests help seniors get into better colleges.

Kari questioned whether we can say that this is a causal relationship or if other factors, such as self-selection or personal preference, could explain some of the difference between what colleges Hanover students attend vs. students that have attended a private school.

All agreed, however, that standardized text scores and data on college acceptances should be tracked and analyzed. There was also a discussion about why some parents are concerned that the education provide K-12 may not be optimizing their child's potential to get into the best colleges.

3. Update on Quantitative Assessment Grids

This discussion started with the observation that it would be useful to clarify what is a "Quantitative Assessment" vs. a "Qualitative Assessment" because nearly everything can be quantified in some way. Rubrics, surveys, participation rates in after-school activities, etc. are all numeric. There was recognition that we did not want to duplicate the efforts of the Qualitative Sub-Committee, and we know that they are looking at surveys in particular, but neither did we want to risk the possibility that important measurements somehow fall through the cracks. The CONSENSUS was to continue to list all possible assessments and worry about duplications later.

On the Ray School Assessment Grid, Kari shared that Joanne Roberts had added information on the K-12 curriculum Common Assessments for more of the academic components. Pam has developed more definitions for the Ray School Glossary. The suggestion was made that more general terms such as "rubric" be added to the Glossary. There was also a suggestion that teacher attendance/absenteeism be added to the "School Climate" grid. The reaction to the suggestion was quite mixed. On the one hand there was an understanding that any time a teacher is gone from the classroom, there is a concern about how to make sure the content of the lessons is still delivered. On the other hand, providing information on individual teachers--even if not named, per se--could infringe on privacy and union issue. Also, teachers can be gone from the classroom for a variety of reasons--from sickness to development workshops to budget retreats--so lumping all absences together might not provide a very useful sense for what is going on in a school. The question was raised if this was not actually an issue of "school governance" and if it might not be more appropriate for inclusion under the Governance Sub-Committee's work under "Professional Growth Planning or Individual Governance?" There seemed to be some agreement that this was a possibility.

On the Marion Cross School Assessment Grid, Stan had met with Principal Rob Edson who had refined an assessment inventory but not separated assessments by grade level. Stan reported that there were questions about how useful this exercise was.

On the Richmond Middle School Assessment Grid, Bill Mlacak reported that he had spoken with Principal Susan Finer to make the RMS grid which he distributed. Bill Mlacak suggested that these grids be computerized so that they could be searched by grade, subject or assessment. This would be a useful tool for parents as well as for school personnel. There was a CONSENSUS that this was a good idea.

On the Hanover High School Assessment Grid, Kari distributed Principal Deb Gillespie's most recent version which had grown to 43 pages. There were questions about what some of the items are, why items such as the Alumni Survey or the 11th grade NECAP's were considered to be 9th grade assessments, and if there was a different way to group the surveys that appear multiple times. It was suggested that we get more information from Deb.

The meeting adjourned at about 5:15.