|
|
|
|
|
 |
After 4 weeks, Jolene and the team met. "Jolene, we've got some encouraging data to share," said John. "Take a look."
|
|
"You'll notice that we dipped from the baseline average in the first week's sample but have made steady progress upward since," said Heather. "While it is very early, it appears that students are improving."
"It does," said Kathy, "However, I'm skeptical about this random sampling thing. I noticed that the first week we had more low scorers than high in the sample and in week 4 we had more of the high scorers. How can we generalize from only 8 students?"
Jolene responded, "Great question, Kathy. I was skeptical at first as well so I asked my friend who is a statistician. He assured me that it was a viable and valid way of tracking our reading probes. So long as we sample the square root, make it random, and do it weekly, we can rely on the trends we see in the data to give us a picture of how the group as a whole is performing. Since we have such widely varied performances it will be interesting to see how things progress. Given that, what are you doing to serve the low-performers?"
"We have put them in a variety of groups but we make sure that they get intensive help each day on reading. Heather has the most experience with our reading program and so she has taken all our low readers once a day."
"Yes," said Heather. "They are very low and I'm hopeful that it will help but, quite honestly, these children have a long, long way to go."
Continued... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
