Connecting the Dots: Using Data to Drive Meaningful Improvement in Math Education

Telling a story with multiple sources of data to drive reflection and improvement of teaching and learning is my professional mission. There is no shortage of information and technological tools available to educators, but connecting the dots and simplifying into a digestible, actionable message is the challenge. Using NJ state assessment data, released assessment items, and the powerful reporting capabilities in Atlas has allowed for moving data, assessment, and curriculum conversations forward in our district.

Identifying Standards for Focus

To illustrate our process, we’ll focus on student achievement in Algebra 1. Eastern’s 2022-2023 NJSLA District Evidence Statement Analysis is shown in Figure 1.

The blue dots represent state level performance for each Evidence Statement or Student Learning Standard. The green dots represent our district performance. There are many standards which our district is on par with statewide performance and you can even see that for one evidence statement (A-SSE.2-1) our student performance far exceeds the state. However, there are also several standards on which our students underperform. We wanted to understand those data points where we were underperforming, clarify how those standards are assessed on the NJSLA, and figure out what steps we could take to move the needle in those areas.

For the purposes of this exercise, let’s focus on Evidence Statement A-CED.4-1. Within the Evidence Statement Analysis document there is a link to the New Jersey Assessments Resource Center. On this site you can navigate to Evidence Statement Tables for any of the NJ state assessments (Figure 2). Searching the Algebra 1 Evidence Statement Tables, we find the A-CED.4.1 Evidence Statement: “Rearrange linear formulas to highlight a quantity of interest, using the same reasoning as in solving equations. For example, rearrange Ohm’s law V = IR to highlight resistance R.”

As a former physical science teacher, a math standard like this is particularly near and dear to my heart. I know that we address these standards in our curriculum not only in Algebra, but also in several of our science courses! Let’s keep digging.

Mapping the Standard in Our Curriculum

My next step was to find sample test questions (released items), which are readily available at the NJDOE Digital Item Library. In conjunction with our district math supervisor, I developed a shared document for math teachers with the text of each evidence statement and a linked document containing released items correlated to each standard. This made for quick and easy connections that could be reviewed by teachers in a 30 minute department meeting.

Now that we know the content, we begin to ask questions about how, where, and when this content is represented in our curriculum. With the Atlas Standards Overview report we can quickly and easily find out.

By navigating to the Standards Overview report and searching for the standard in question (A-CED.4.1), we can see (Figure 3) that this standard is linked as a Focus Standard in 8 units and is linked in 20 Unit Assessments. As an aside, at Eastern we classify standards as Focus (F), Supportive (S), or Interdisciplinary (I). Notice the standard has no “Interdisciplinary” connections, which would be expected since this is clearly a standard that directly relates to content taught in our chemistry and physics courses.

By clicking on the linked units and navigating to the Standards Overview Details (Figure 4), I found the course(s) that correspond to the units where the standard is targeted and how the standard is assessed.

This detail showed me that in our Alg 1 CP curriculum, the A-CED.4.1 standard is only being targeted as a Supporting standard. One more click to the Alg 1 CP course takes me to the Course Calendar (Figure 5) view so I can see what time of year the standard is taught. From this calendar view, I see that the three units in this course that target the standard all appear in the first semester. This is important, as students sit for the NJSLA at the end of May.

Turning Over the Conversation to Teachers and Next Steps

This is where the math teachers really take over to further investigate the released items, evaluate their teacher-created local assessments, and use their professional learning period and peer-observation to discuss and compare the methods they use to teach and assess this content. I left them with these questions:

• Are there ways we can collaborate with the science teachers to target this standard?
• At Eastern, we also administer two standards-based common assessments in each math course. What standards are we assessing on those common assessments and what has that data been telling us?
• How can we incorporate spaced repetition and practice on this standard, and other related and supporting standards, throughout semester 2?
• Are there other factors you think are contributing to underperformance in this area?
• How can we leverage our Tier 2 and Tier 3 supports to improve math achievement?
• How might we implement AI-enabled tutoring to support skill-building on specific content and standards?

With the state assessment calendar becoming more consistent after the pandemic, our teachers and supervisors look forward to making these data conversations and correlation of our curriculum and state assessment results a cornerstone of our annual routine.