I wanted to share a video on DDDM:
Good afternoon professor and class,
Below is my work in regards to this weeks three questions.
*Note: When I initially read the question class, I presumed it was in regards to our reading this week. I then went back and re-read the questions. Below you will see illustrated below answers derived from this week’s reading and that of my current organization.
Based on Stiggins’ model, what would be the three levels of assessment used in your system?
Good afternoon professor, after reviewing Stiggins_Balanced_Assessment_Systems document provided in Unit 1, the three different levels are:
LEVEL 1: CLASSROOM ASSESSMENT USERS (classroom level) – As an Army instructor for the human intelligence (HUMINT) collector course, I am responsible for owning the lesson plans regardless if published them or not. When it comes to teaching, I have to own what is published, and teach what has been approved for release. I am responsible for all that happens within my personal learning environment (PLE). What ever happens in my classrooms is falls on me as the senior instructor (group leader) for the class.
LEVEL 2: INSTRUCTIONAL SUPPORT USERS (Instructional support level) – In regards to Instructional Support Users, we have a section called the Training Oversight & Evaluation (TO&E). The members that work within the TO&E are solely responsible for ensuring that we as Army instructors teach to standard. The members of the TO&E also ensure that any instructor assigned to the HUMINT committee are being evaluated as per the criteria in the United States Intelligence Center of Excellence (USAICoE) and Training and Doctrine (TRADOC) regulations and guidelines. We also have information technology support who provides computers, hard-drives, classroom enablers such as SMART boards, classified and unclassified material and technical support. Lastly in regards to support, there is the training and operations section within the company that ensures that all administrative paper work supplements and supports the HUMINT committee’s mission. I look at the instructional support users as a wagon wheel with several spokes; without one, the wheel cannot continue rolling and the mission will not be accomplished.
LEVEL 3: POLICY LEVEL USERS (program and policy level) – In regards to program level users, we have to abide by a lot of doctrine, rules and regulations. rules and regulations are governed at the presidential level all the way down to lowest common denominator which is Battalion level and company level. Each commander at each echelon will provide their guidance and oversight which is derived from the higher commanders intent. Each commander is responsible for their appropriate level and are to give instructions that coincide with their higher leadership. each commander must provide their insight and philosophy which supports that of other commanders in order to facilitate appropriate training and to accomplish the training mission at hand.
What information is gathered and what decisions are made at each of these levels?
Professor, the different information answered at each level are:
• Decision? What comes next in the learning?
• Made by? Students, teachers, parents
• Info need? Continuous evidence of each student’s current level of mastery of the building blocks of competence leading up to each standard.
Level of instructional support:
• Decision? Which students are meeting which standards?
• Made by? Teacher teams, teacher leaders, principals, curriculum personnel
• Info need? Periodic but frequent evidence of each students current level of mastery of standards; comparable data permits aggregation across students.
• Decision? Are enough students meeting required standards?
• Made by? Superintendents, school boards, legislators, tax payers
• Info need? Annual summaries of students mastery of standards derived from accountability tests
In which quadrant of DDDM (from Ikemoto and Marsh ) would you place your organization? Why?
Professor, in regards to my organization (the Army – 309th Military Intelligence Battalion), I feel that they encompass each quadrant. It all depends on the information being discussed, composed or disseminated. In my organization, we teach the basic aspects of human intelligence (HUMINT). I say basic aspects because there are various levels of HUMINT, which encompass the basic attributes of HUMINT (soldiers with less than 5 years in service), the more experienced (5-10 years of service) and advanced (10 years or more of service). As it says below, “the Data Driven Decision Making (DDDM) process could fall in either one or all four quadrants”. (Ikemoto, G. S., & Marsh, J. A. (2007).
“Simple versus complex data. In a DDDM process, educators can utilize a wealth of different kinds of data that range from simple to complex. Simple forms of data tend to be less complicated and comprehensive and often only illuminate one particular aspect of the subject at hand or come from only one perspective or point in time. Complex data, by contrast, are often composed of two or more inter- woven parts and tend to be more multidimensional. Both quantitative and qualitative data can vary from simple to complex along the following dimensions: time frame (data from one point in time versus trend data); types (one versus multiple types, such as input, process, outcome and/or satisfaction data); source of data (one versus multiple sources, such as data from multiple individuals or role groups); source of collection (secondary versus primary data); and level of detail (aggregate versus disaggregate data).
Simple versus complex analysis and decision-making. Regardless of the type of data used, educators interpret that data and decide how to take action in various ways. These types of analyses and decision making also vary from simple to complex along the following dimensions: basis of interpretation (use of assumptions versus empirical evidence); reliance on knowledge (basic versus expert, such as consulting with advisors); type of analysis (straightforward techniques, such as descriptive analyses, versus sophisticated analyses, such as value-added modeling); extent of participation (individual versus collective); and frequency (one-time versus iterative).
Four quadrants of DDDM. As depicted in Figure 2, a given DDDM process can fall within one of four quadrants depending on the level of 112 different conceptions of data-driven decision-making complexity along the two continua. We label these four models of DDDM basic (quadrant I), analysis-focused (quadrant II), data-focused (quadrant III), and inquiry-focused (quadrant IV). Basic DDDM entails using simple data and simple analysis procedures whereas inquiry- focused DDDM involves using complex data and complex analyses, approaches such as using test scores to determine which students are eligible for additional services (Murnane, Sharkey, & Boudett, 2005)— an example of using data to make a decision rather than to build understanding and improve the quality of educational services. We illustrate some of these differences in the following section and discuss arguments regarding their relative merit at the end of this chapter. “(Ikemoto, G. S., & Marsh, J. A. (2007). Chapter 5 Cutting Through the “Data-Driven” Mantra: Different Conceptions of Data-Driven Decision Making. Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education Yearbook Nat Soc Study Education, 106(1), 105-131. Retrieved March 8, 2016, from https://post.blackboard.com/bbcswebdav/courses/EDU515.901202035910/Documents/Articles/What is DDDM – Ikemoto and Marsh.pdf.).
Enjoy the evening class, Manny.