Data Overview

Prepared for the Faculty and Administration of Columbia Middle School

Dan Davis
November 2016

Purpose of this Data Overview

This data overview serves as concise summary of student achievement results at Columbia
Middle School.
The overview will tell a coherent story of student data at CMS, highlighting strengths as well
as weaknesses.

It will emphasize a few key areas in which academic improvement is needed most. These
areas will be discussed using specific questions that arise from an analysis of the data.
The overview will conclude with a list of suggested priority areas for the school to consider
when making further decisions.

Adapted from Kennesaw State University, 2016.

Georgia Milestones Assessment

Classroom, School, District, and State Performance Bands, Year 2016
Classroom data from a representative 7th grade homeroom

Analysis
A critical analysis of this data shows several important points of strength:
1. Columbia Middle School and Columbia County Schools have performance levels
above the state average.
2. Columbia Middle School and Columbia County Schools have very similar performance
levels.
3. The percentage of distinguished learners at CMS is equal to or greater than the
percentage across the state.

4. The percentage of students performing at proficient or distinguished levels decreases

in science and social studies.
Discussion Questions:

o Despite performing above average, what types of programs can CMS implement that
will increase science and social studies scores? See final thoughts suggestions.

o What types of discussions between stakeholders need to occur to emphasize the

importance of science and social studies? Many preconceived notions exist that
discredit the importance of those subjects.

Georgia Milestones Scores

Subgroup Data by Grade Level, Years 2015 and 2016

Georgia CRCT Scores

Subgroup Data by Grade Level, Years 2012, 2013, and 2014

Analysis of End-of-Grade Tests

The percentage of students exceeding in all subject areas show significant decline between
the CRCT and GMAS assessments. There are well-known issues with test reliability and validity
with the GMAS. It is currently under review by the GADOE.
Over all test years and grade levels, 58.3% of students exceeded the standards on the Social
Studies CRCT. That same disaggregated group in GMAS data shows only 13.8% of students in
the distinguished level.
In the grade-level disaggregated data from the CRCT, 7th grade has the lowest percentage
of Does Not Meet students, but in the GMAS data, 7th grade is amongst the highest
percentage of Beginning students. There are wide performance swings between the three
grade levels in the domain data from the CRCT, yet the grade levels perform similarly in all
domains on the GMAS.
Discussion Questions:
What changes to the testing or teaching have caused Social Studies students to begin
performing at lower levels?
What changes to the testing or teaching have caused the different grade levels to
perform similarly on the GMAS?
GMAS is administered online. Does online administration play a role in test scores?

Georgia Milestones Assessment

Demographic Subgroup Performance Drill-down Data, Year 2015

2015 GA Milestones - Math

ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED

56.905

ENGLISH LEARNERS

Demographic Subgroup

Demographic Subgroup

2015 GA Milestones - ELA

0

STUDENTS WITH DISABILITY

30

MULTI-RACIAL

59.649

WHITE

71.009

AMERICAN INDIAN/ALASKAN

HISPANIC

59.341

BLACK

59.562

ASIAN/PACIFIC ISLANDER

90

ALL STUDENTS

66.854
0

20

40

60

80

35.326
55.263

WHITE

71.284

AMERICAN INDIAN/ALASKAN

HISPANIC

59.444

BLACK

51.606

ASIAN/PACIFIC ISLANDER

86.667

ALL STUDENTS

64.6
0

20

40

60

80

37.755

MULTI-RACIAL

72.807

WHITE

79.342

AMERICAN INDIAN/ALASKAN

HISPANIC

66.484

BLACK

60.913

ASIAN/PACIFIC ISLANDER

103.333

ALL STUDENTS

73.625
20

40

60

80

100

120

Percentage of Students Proficient or Advanced

Demographic Subgroup

Demographic Subgroup

52.338

MULTI-RACIAL

STUDENTS WITH DISABILITY

2015 GA Milestones - Social Studies

STUDENTS WITH DISABILITY

2015 GA Milestones - Science

ENGLISH LEARNERS

62.02

ENGLISH LEARNERS

100

Percentage of Students Proficient or Advanced

ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED

ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED

100

Percentage of Students Proficient or Advanced

ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED

58.549

ENGLISH LEARNERS

STUDENTS WITH DISABILITY

42.473

MULTI-RACIAL

64.912

WHITE

77.656

AMERICAN INDIAN/ALASKAN

HISPANIC

64.444

BLACK

59.8

ASIAN/PACIFIC ISLANDER

88.333

ALL STUDENTS

71.319

20

40

60

80

100

Percentage of Students Proficient or Advanced

Analysis of Drill-down Data

There is no bigger takeaway from this drill-down data than noticing that SWD test scores
had a mean of 36.4% while the overall school mean score was 69.1%. In real terms,
special education students performed with a mean score that is 47% less than the general
education populations. See the next steps page for further suggestions on how to make
this education gap shrink.

Black, multi-racial, and Hispanic students perform lower than white students in every
category, despite population size. The population of Asian/Pacific Islander students is
having their needs met according to this data.
Discussion Questions:

Does the faculty need to address cultural differences in these groups to effectively
teach these demographic populations?
If CMS saw an influx of ELL and Amerindian students as a result of the growth of Fort
Gordon, would the faculty be able to meet the needs of that population?

CCRPI Scores, 2012-2016

Columbia Middle School, District, and State

College and Career Readiness Performance Index

87

89.2
82.9

82.6

75.8

74.1

2012

86.6

85.3

2013
CMS

83.2
75.5

72.3

2014
CCBOE

79.9

GADOE

2015

Analysis
Columbia Middle School (mean=87.6%) performed 2.7 percentage points higher
than the county average (mean=84.9%) in CCRPI in years 2012, 2013, and 2014.
Columbia Middle School performed 13.5 percentage points higher than the state
average (mean=74.1%) in CCRPI in those same years.

The first year of the Georgia Milestones assessment (2015) yielded a 8.7% decline
in the CCRPI scores at Columbia Middle School, while the county and state
averages stayed relatively close to the scores seen on the CRCT tests.

Priority Question:
What school-based factors led to the significant decline in the CCRPI
score at CMS? These should be recognized as priority areas for school
improvement.

After a data overview, the

involvement of the whole faculty in
choosing the priority question and
publicly committing to addressing it
makes the focus area an actual
priority.
Adapted from Boudett, City, & Murnane, 2015.

1. Did the use of online testing (unfamiliar

test environment) lead to a decline in
test scores and student growth? Test
scores play a large role in determining
CCRPI

2. Is the effective and meaningful

teaching of Science a top priority
according to CCRPI Indicator 4?
Testing data shows that Science is a
weak area at CMS
3. Does the literacy of all students at CMS
limit their performance on Social
Studies CCRPI Indicator 5?
4. Is the RTI process identifying all SWD
students and therefore allowing CMS to
serve the needs of our students?

Suggested Priority Areas for CMS

Next Steps
To further improve the use of data at CMS, here are some final thoughts and
recommendations to the administration and faculty based on our school data:
Provide teachers with strand-level data for his or her content area. This information is
currently not available.

Improve literacy in all content areas by actively participating in the Literacy PLCs and
implementing strategies that fit your classroom instruction, especially in Science, Social
Studies, and with SWD students.
Incorporate technology, especially laptops, into classes and assessments in order to
increase familiarity with online test-taking and increase access by ED and SWD students.

Use formative assessments and frequent and meaningful feedback in Social Studies to
improve student achievement.
Incorporate integrated units so that ELA and Reading teachers can help support content
instruction in Science and Social Studies.
Increase STEM opportunities, real-life experiences, technology use, and hands-on
explorations in all science classes.

References

Boudett, K.P., City, E. A., Murnane, R. J. (2015). Data Wise. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

Georgia Department of Education. (2015). College and Career Ready Performance Index. Retrieved from
http://www.gadoe.org/CCRPI/Pages/default.aspx.
Georgia Department of Education. (2015). Effective Practices for CCRPI Middle School Indicators. Retrieved
from https://www.georgiastandards.org/CCRPI/Pages/Effective-Practices-for-CCRPI-Middle-SchoolIndicators.aspx.

Kennesaw State University. (2016). Data overview content. Retrieved from

https://kennesaw.view.usg.edu/d2l/home/1099992.