# data[].attributes.body
Since I currently do not have a classroom and do not work with the literacy program, I cannot attest to current classroom statistics, but I would imagine if the US had such a large population of students with literacy failure in 2009, that today this number would be much larger in socioeconomically challenged areas where the English speaking population is smaller than in some rural areas. However, I do think that in the areas where we have such high literacy we also have language barriers.  There are literacy programs in the Wilkes Barre Area that begin reading with young children 2-3 years of age.  Literacy programs create awareness, vocabulary and comprehension.

# data[].attributes.body
Important points: According to the different assessments, we pretty much stay the same from year to year. At least we're consistent. We also perform competitively so we're on par to an extent. I also can't help but notice that the Keystone results don't look very promising and it is very clear that proficient and advanced scores go down significantly as students get older. It doesn't seem like a good idea to make the Keystones a graduation requirement.
Questions: Who takes these tests? Some countries are excluded from assessments for obvious reasons, but are there excluded countries that would perform competitively in certain areas if the data was available? And, I have some ideas, but what causes the obvious visible difference between the upper and lower halves of our country in terms of test performance?
What makes sense: I did notice a big jump in below basic from 2009 to 2013 for the 4th grade science PSSA, but for the most part the averages seem to fluctuate back and forth and only by small margins. Although the tests seem to be taken more and more seriously, I don’t think anything has really changed significantly. It's the same tests (with more rules) and the same schools (for the most part). So it makes sense we'd get similar results over and over again.
Other thoughts: For the PISA, there are three types of China ahead of us. That’s basically one country. We could get bumped up a couple spots.
SPP: Roughly 60% of 8th graders scored proficient or advanced on the science PSSA nationwide from 2009 to 2013, and my school was 38% for the most recent data. This is down quite a bit from 47% (which is still low...) in 2013-2014 but slightly higher than 36% in 2012-2013, so we are fluctuating quite a bit. My big questions are: What will the numbers show for 2016-2017? How many students are going to opt out? And is it going to be the top performers that opt out again? Finally, the scores makes a lot sense on one front because many students want to opt out and they frequently bash the PSSA. The PSSA has gotten too big and the students are too aware of its inconsequential results for them as individuals. We're selling it big time and they're not buying it. Obviously, other things factor in, but they certainly are not committed.

# data[].attributes.body
I took a look at the math data and noticed a few things. There was data for four different assessments in multiple grades. For the most part the assessments demonstrate at least a little progress from years ago until about 2013. For example, the NAEP shows a higher average in both 4th grade and 8th grade in 2013 compared to the 90's. This assessment even showed a higher average in Pennsylvania than the nation's average.
From 1995-2011, the TIMMS assessment was similar in regards to increasing the average scores in both 4th and 8th grades. Although five other countries had larger increases in score from 2007-2011, their scores still did not exceed the scores in the Unites States.
The PSSA test shows data from five different years and this is where we see a difference in scoring compared to the previous two assessments. From 2011-2013, the scores jump back and forth. For the most part, the percent of students scoring proficient or advanced increases one year and then drastically decreases the very next year. I am not sure how this could happen, unless the teachers and students get lazy because of doing a little better the previous year. When I was in high school, I took the PSSA test. What I remember the most is struggling with how long the test is. It takes about two weeks and it would take pretty much the entire morning (about 3-4 hours); this could have a huge impact on student performance.

SPP
Since I am not in a classroom just yet, I took a look at the data from Meyers High School since that is where is went to school. Having gone to school there, I kind of expected what I was going to see. The proficient or advanced for the math keystone test had a red down arrow and a score of 17.02. So, there is a lot of room for improvement since teachers should be striving to help their students reach at least the proficient level. It is not a good sign that number is that incredibly low. The number that measures the annual growth expectations is just below average. This is not a particularly great number for Meyers, but at least is wasn't in the red zone. So, it shows that Meyers is growing a little bit from year to year, not much, but every little bit helps.
Overall, I think teachers as a whole could be doing much better preparing our students for standardized tests. At the same time, the nation should put a little less attention on the scores of our students and how the students are actually performing in the classroom. In the end that is all that counts anyway

# data[].attributes.body
After viewing the Nations Report Card for 4th grade math, I found that nationally for 2013, PA was higher than the average score for 4th grade math. however, it wasn't much of a difference than the score from 2011. According to the Nation report card, PA 4th grade math hasn't changed significantly since 1992.
The TIMSS data shows the 4th grade math for the US is above average at 541(average is 500). The leading nations with scores slightly above 600 are: Singapore, Korea, and Hong Kong. On the good side for 2007-2011, the average scores increased in 12 of the 28 education systems participating, and the US was one of the 12.

The PSSA 2011-2013 trend for the 4th grade math, shows  the percentage of students performing proficient or advanced has decreased.

Internationally, the US  math scores increased slightly when comparing 2006 and 2009 data. However, other nations scores increased dramatically more than the US. The US moved further down in the rankings. The US math scores declined from 2009-2011, and the international ranking also declined.

The  question going through my brain through all this is:
After doing all the changes to improve students performance, why isn't there signs of significant improvement over the years?

SPP
I checked my school's SPP. Lake-Noxen Elementary and compared it to another local elementary school from the neighboring district, Wycallis Elementary.
Lake-Noxen's SPP was 71.6 and Wycallis was 82.4. Wycallis is double the size in population and it has a 20% economically disadvantage population, Lake-Noxen has 35%.  Wycallis also has 11% special education population, while Lake-Noxen has 24%. When looking at all the data, it shows that the closing of the achievement gap improved 46%.

I was happy to see the Future Ready PA indicators. Hopefully, they will improve  and enhance our standards for our students.

# data[].attributes.body
I looked at the math data provided in the link as well as some other pieces of information from TIMSS and PISA and PSSA. There are a couple of things that struck me, other than the overwhelming fact that you can find positive and negative pieces of data in support of, or against, the current math education in the United States. And there are examples of both in the report.

The report states the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) measures more traditional classroom content and can be associated with curriculum attainment, while the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) measures education’s application to real-life and can be associated with workforce knowledge. I believe that the system that is currently in place in most classrooms tends to focus on curriculum attainment rather than real-life application. The data suggests that US TIMSS’s results from 1995 through 2015 have improved from 492 average score in 1995 to 518 average score in 2015. This is a 5.28% increase in overall score for that time period. The United States has the largest percent increase of the 17 countries with scores from both time periods. In contrast, Singapore, which has the highest overall score in both 1995 and 2015, 609 and 621 respectfully, has a 1.97% increase over that time.  The scores on the application based PISA have stayed stagnant or decreased over time suggests that the curricular focus has primarily been on concepts based acquisition not application. Moreover, PSSA results over time support this, 51.7% of 8th grade students in Pennsylvania were at or above proficiency in 2002 (the first PSSA after NLCB) to 73.1% of PA 8th grades at or above proficiency by 2014 (prior to PA Core Implementation). The state has seen a drastic decrease in scores since the adoption and implementation of the PA Core, notably the 2014 to 2015 PSSA results, where 73.1% of 8th grade students were at or above proficiency decreased to 29.9% of 8th grade students preforming at the same level the following year.

SPP – School Performance Profile

With the advent of the Future Ready PA Index, SPP will be undergoing some modifications in the near future. Currently, however, my school SPP, which counts for 15% of the right side of our “pie” (thank you Act 82) is decreasing, in 2013 it was 80.1 and in 2016 it currently stands at 72.3. The major contributing factor to this drop in academic score is a decrease in the percentage of students at or above proficiency building wide in math, 81% to 39% respectively over that time frame. This of course is due to the statewide adoption of the PA Core curriculum, which coincides with statewide drops in proficiency as state above. However, during the same period of time the Indicators of Academic Growth (PVAAS Info) has risen from 68% to 100%. SPP considers achievement and growth to be equal when calculating its overall school academic score, each count for 40%. This essentially means that our students overall score dropped relatively consistent with state averages, however, the growth index suggests and increase in scores over the past two years even though students are not considered proficient they are improving.

# data[].attributes.body
I reviewed the science assessment data. Internationally, the United States average scores were higher than the TIMSS achievement average for both 4th and 8th grades. From 2011, the United States was seventh in science achievement with an average scale score of 544. TIMSS average scaled score is 500. On an international level, the United States scores seem pretty good. However, when examining the achievement trends, from 1995 to 2011, the increase of U.S. scores did not show a significant increase compared to other countries such as Singapore.

According to the NAEP science assessment, Pennsylvania’s average scores were higher than the average nation’s score, more so in fourth grade than in eighth grade. Fourth graders performed higher than 18 states that were tested, while eighth graders only performed higher than only 12 states.

When it comes to PSSA and Keystone testing results, students in Pennsylvania did not perform so well. There was a drastic decrease in scores from year to year. In 2012, 82% of fourth graders scored in the proficient and advanced categories. When those same students were in 11th grade only 40% of students scored in the proficient and advanced categories! I found this very shocking!

My students in may will be taking the Biology Keystones. In 2013, approximately 24% of students scored in the proficient and advanced categories.

With PSSA and Keystone scores on a downfall, I think it is critical to reevaluate our science teaching methods. Many of my students lack the critical thinking and problem solving techniques that are greatly used in science. Many students are faced with tons of information and are asked to regurgitate it on an assessment. I think we need our students to being to “do science.” This will take a lot of time and training to implement, however I think it will greatly benefit our students in the future.

Part 2

After viewing the performance profile for Mount Carmel Area, the students perform quite low on standardized tests. For the science PSSA and Keystone, the performance measure is only  53.21.In academic growth, the science/biology growth expectations were the lowest with a performance measure of 50. Compared to Southern Columbia High School, our scores are drastically lower in science/biology. 55% of students in Mount Carmel are considered economically disadvantaged. 12% are special education. Southern Columbia also as 12% of students in special education but only 18% economically disadvantaged.

# data[].attributes.body
Part 1 - As I examined the literacy assessment data for the state of Pennsylvania what I found onthe first page. I noticed alarmingly that with 4th graders at its worst 70% of children in PA were basic or below basic with their grasp on literacy. When comparing the numbers of PA alone to the nation in 2009 thankfully PA is doing better than the national average, but the number of children falling in the basic to below basic category is far too large on either a state or national level. It is also worth noting that PA is better than 22 states where they're either the same or not radically different from 23, and only lower in 6 states which shows PA is doing pretty well in that respect. Now with reading the percentage numbers for reading in 8th grade were the same, but instead more children found themselves in the basic category rather than the below basic one. Which is an improvement, but not a major one. I do think that if there was literacy data for today it might be a little better. Also the most important thing i noticed with PA is that with the earliest data set to the most recent PA is out performing most national averages. In wrapping up I think its worth noting that when we compare the US to other countries we pool all our students where other countries use their most capable students to determine their scores.
Part 2
I wanted to step out of luzurne county for a bit and I looked at Bradford county to see where there might be a difference. When comparing the Athens SD high school with the Wilkes-Barre ASD's Meyer's High school Athens beats Meyers in 26 out of 33 measured categories. One thought was maybe it was the economics of the area, and upon examining both I feel that was a large contributor. The Athens SD had 42% of their children were economically disadvantaged and at Meyers it was almost 73%! Thats so wild because that does not account for the other two high schools inthe Wilkes-barre ASD. I feel econimics of an area can be an issue because if they were the same in terms of economies maybe they would be the same. I did like that alot that was included in the Future Ready PA standards is going to fix many of the issues that i discovered in PA. It would be my hope that other states are checking their numbers and developing a plan to improve. Personally I do not want to be a second rate world power so we as educators can make sure that does not happen.

# data[].attributes.body
I read the math data and come to a few conclusions which relate to my own personal experiences. I believe testing in the early to mid ninety's and the lack of a more accountable curriculum clearly show problems as a nation in mathematics. The data only fosters the statistics which show eighty percent of adults cannot do fractions, calculate percentages and reason/problem solve on a high level than sixth grade in math. I believe once a more rigorous standards based curriculum show those results when the state standardized testing was implemented. As the fidelity of the math curriculum and rigor become more consistent the scores climbed. Pennsylvania was able to show an increase in all reporting categories form the 1990's. However, with full inclusion being mandated the focus has been to differentiate your instruction which has shown to help the lesser achieving student make gains, but the higher achieving students are not making the gamins and are plateauing out in my opinion. The implementation of the Pennsylvania Core has once again created a drop in scores as the curriculum has become a more analysis and problem solving than previous tests. My concern is that again as the scores are stating to rise the numbers are still remaining consistent and the high achieving students are not making the growth that the lower achieving students are. My concerns are we are not reaching half of our students in math. our students that are scoring advanced quite often are math kids and they we do well regardless of who is teaching them math. So, in retrospect we are still not reaching a large number of our students in mathematics with our instruction and retention of mastery in math...the numbers i feel support this. Traditionally students with IEP's are still not making the standards-set forth by the states, and we still are pretty much at a standstill.

# data[].attributes.headline
PISA and TIMSS Assessments, what is the difference?

# data[].attributes.subject
PISA and TIMSS Assessments, what is the difference?

# data[].attributes.body
There is a great inquiry question posted below..what is the difference between TIMSS and POSA.  Ever the constructivist, i will invite you to explore a little more to learn about the assessments and to take a look at item samplers...do you notice a difference in cognitive demand?

Overview of TIMSS and PISA with samples: http://www.ewa.org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/malley-lydia.pdf

PISA - Take The Test, Sample Questions:  https://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/Take%20the%20test%20e%20book.pdf

TIMSS (& PIRLS items):  http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/PDF/T03_RELEASED_M4.pdf

For anyone interested, here is a comparison between NAEP, TIMSS and PISA:  https://nces.ed.gov/timss/pdf/comparing_timss_naep_%20pisa.pdf

# data[].attributes.body
I read the science information. I think it is interesting that it is many of the parents that want schools to adopt high academic standards. I thought it would be other members of society. I understand parents want their children to be challenged but the level to which we test our students on their achievement of these standards seems extreme. China received the highest score in science literacy at 580. The US was behind them at 497, but this is still high compared to other countries. I know it's a myth that China outperforms the US in science, but looking at these data points, it doesn't seem like a myth. China is definitely a head of us according to this data.

SPP:

Dallas Senior High school had a performance measure of 75.13 in biology, with a 100 in "required gap closure met". They scored an 80 in growth and 43.9% of students scored advanced on the biology keystone. I know these stats are good, but I just expected the performance measure to be a little higher considering the demographics of the school. Only 19.37% of students at Dallas are economically disadvantaged. 14.64% of students at Dallas are in special education, and I wonder if this is high or low when compared to other schools. Looking through some other local school it seems to be pretty average.

However, I am happy to see that we are experiencing growth since that is the goal associated with the Danielson model.

# data[].attributes.body
I always find it interesting to look at how your school is doing to see if this is an actual indicator.  I think that these are not always the most accurate, but in general they can give a basis for how a school is doing.

Tamaqua had a great year this past year as they were at 82.1.  The previous years were 65.2 ('14-'15), 70.6 ('13-'14), and 81.1 ('12-'13).  The math proficiency rate among other indicators were better for the most part this year.  Generally, Tamaqua has been a bit lower compared to the other schools.  This was positive to see for all the teachers and administration.  The closing the gap portion is very important while at the same time advancing the high-level students.  I believe that the high level of students has decreased a bit possibly because of the focus on closing the gap.  I like the indicators shown in the PA Futures Ready Index.  Hopefully, these will be aligned more to STEM concepts rather than the focus on standardized tests.  We need to create more student interest in the classes as one of the articles talked about.

# data[].attributes.body
I found lots of the myths to be very interesting and surprising to start.  Based on the fact that the U.S. is trying to keep a lot of immigrants out, one may ponder that we must have so many more here than other countries.  I was surprised to find that we are not higher rated on the diversity scale.  It does seem like Finland is a country with no diversity, helping their scores since they may not deal with barriers like language, culture, etc.   It is good for them to be so high up, but doesn't mean they are doing better than a country who has many barriers but is close to them.  However, we cannot come up with the excuses like the myth that most countries only test their elite groups of students.

In the data inquiry for math, I found it quite interesting how the U.S. was ahead of Finland for the PISA score in schools with a less than ten percent reduced lunch rate. They seem to be average at each level with other countries when they examine the data depending on the school's poverty rate. This can be found on p. 8 of the math examination pdf link.

Also, I was happy to see Pennsylvania up there compared to the other states in the fourth and eighth grade scores. Then, I am also curious the specific differences between the tests because these produce different results. How much different is PISA to TIMSS?