Fsi cohort iii
Sponsored Links
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
1 / 71

FSI Cohort III PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

FSI Cohort III. Lisa Guzzardo Asaro Lisa Rivard February 8, 2013. 7 Keys to Effective Feedback Connector Activity. SOURCE: ASCD Educational Leadership Sept. 2012. Grant Wiggins states:

Download Presentation

FSI Cohort III

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript

FSI Cohort III

Lisa Guzzardo Asaro

Lisa Rivard

February 8, 2013

7 Keys to Effective Feedback

Connector Activity

SOURCE: ASCD Educational Leadership

Sept. 2012

Grant Wiggins states:

“Advise, evaluation, grades…none of these provide the descriptive information that students need to reach their goals. “

  • All Read pages 11-12

  • Feedback Essentials (Divide up)

    • Goal Referenced

    • Tangible Transparent

    • Actionable

    • User Friendly

    • Ongoing

    • Consistent

  • All Read page 16

CHARGE Share with Table Team Key Insights

Article Handout


Today’s Outcomes

  • Engage in learning around 7 Keys to Effective Feedback

  • Engage in activities that connect you to Michigan’s continuous school improvement process

  • Heighten awareness about MDE’s 2013-14 Scorecards for Schools

  • Engage in Dialogue Dice networking strategy with colleagues

  • Understand what must lead to Strategy and Activity Identification

  • Receive a presentation from Dr. Jason Novetsky about PBIS implementation with fidelity

  • Explore new components of Mischooldata.org, D4SS, and Data Director

Today’s Roadmap


Connector: 7 Keys to Effective Feedback


MDE’s School Scorecard

Networking with Colleagues

Strategy and Activity Implementation

Presentations Dr. Jason Novetsky and Dr. Jennifer Parker-Moore

TAB 12

Key Working AgreementsA Facilitation Tool

Respect all Points of View

Be Present and Engaged

Honor Time Agreements

Get All Voices in the Room

These breathe life into our Core Values

Parking LotA Facilitation Tool

Rest questions that do not benefit the whole group

Place questionsthat do not pertain to content at this time

Place questions that pertain, but participants do not want to ask at this time

Action Required Chart

  • Any request by you that I need to respond to must be placed on the Action Required Chart

  • You need to PRINT your complete name, school, and email address


“Networking is not an option, but a critical part of how Facilitators of School Improvement learn and share their learning.”

February – April


Activities and Requirements




  • Passports

  • Next Generation Science Standards

  • Dynamic Learning Maps Consortium

  • Professional Learning Opportunities

  • New 2012-13 Accountability Scorecards

  • ASSIST update

  • Free ACT online prep

  • AMOs


  • Lost or Stolen Passports

  • Signature at 2:45

  • Completely filled out including dates of training

  • $10.00 payment collected in May


  • Final Draft released

  • Framework for K-12 Science Education that was released in July 2011. Grounded in the most current research on science and science learning, the FRAMEWORK was the critical first step in the development of the NGSS.

    • Download a free PDF through the Nationals Academies Press

  • NGSS can be located on the Next Generation Science Standards at:

    • http://www.nextgenscience.org/

DLM First Contact SurveyDeadline Extended to March 1, 2013

  • MDE has partnered with the Center for Educational Testing and Evaluation (CETE)

  • U.S Department of Education project to create a new alternate assessment system for students with significant cognitive disabilities called the Dynamic Learning Maps (DLM) alternate assessment.

  • Purpose of the survey is to collect information on the students that currently participate in alternate assessments and the technology and supports that are currently being used to meet the needs of these students

  • Local district’s MI-Access Coordinators are being asked to distribute the First Contact Survey- District to Teachers letter

  • http://michigan.gov/documents/mde/From_From _District_ to_Teacherss_ MI edition_3_409390_7.pdf

Professional LearningOpportunities

Assessing the Impact with Joellen Killion

March 12-13, 2013 NCA Building

Common Core: Leading the Change

March 19, 2013 MISD Rm. 100 A-C

MDE/AdvancED Spring SI Conference

April 17-18, 2013 Lansing Center

MAISA Michigan ELA Model Curriculum Units

June 24-27, 2013 Teams Lansing Center

Kagan Structures for Cooperative Learning and Active Engagement Institute

August 12-16, 2013 MISD

MDE to Provide AMOs

  • End of February

  • For every school

  • Each content area tested

  • Use the formula we provided in the meantime


  • SIP Components for Submission 09.01.13

    • School Data Analysis ALL

    • Executive Summary ALL

    • Goals and Plan ALL

    • Improvement Plan Stakeholder Involvement ALL

    • Additional Requirements ALL

    • Title I Targeted Assistance or School-wide

    • Heath and Safety OPTIONAL

    • Assurances Priority and AdvancEd having an external review

Accountability Scorecards

An Early Orientation to the Future of Michigan School Accountability




  • Two “levels” of Accountability Scorecards:

    DistrictScorecards & SchoolScorecards

  • Scorecards will use a color coding system (green, lime, yellow, orange, and red) to indicate school performance.

  • Combines traditional accountability metrics with Top-to-Bottom labels and other state/federal requirements.

  • Overall color is determined by Top to Bottom status as well as points earned by meeting traditional AYP requirements.

    • Individual “cells” use red/yellow/green coding scheme

    • Points-based system where full points earnedfor meeting a target, half points earned for meeting safe harbor

An Early Look at Scorecards


Color-Coded Scorecards

  • Colors are given to schools and districts for each “scorecard component” and an overall color.

  • Overall status color is determined using a point-based system from the number of target areas the school/district has met and the school ranking.

    Decreasing # points received and increasing # targets not met…

    *These may not be the exact shades utilized in the final scorecard product (still under development).

What Changed?

  • Additional subgroup: Bottom 30%

  • Attendance target of 90% -(only for school, no subgroups)

  • Differentiated proficiency targets

    • Based on a school’s past performance

    • Goal of 85% proficient at end of 2021-22

    • Targets increase in 10 equal increments

  • Safe Harbor based on 80th percentile of statewide proficiency

    • Use school/district improvement slope to determine met/not met

  • Inclusion of Educator Effectiveness label reporting and TSDL completion in Scorecards

  • Inclusion of Compliance Factors (SIP & SPR)

  • What Stayed the Same?

    • Participation requirement = 95% for school/district overall and all valid subgroups

      • Multi-year averaging remains in place (up to three years)

    • Graduation requirement = 80% for school/district overall and all valid subgroups

      • Four, five, and six-year rates

      • Graduation “safe harbor”

    • Use of provisional and growth scores for accountable proficiency rates

    School and District Scorecard Subgroups

    Previously ONE group!

    • All Students

    • Bottom 30% (for proficiency calculations only) NEW!

    • American Indian or Alaska Native

    • Black or African American

    • AsianNEW!

    • Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander NEW!

    • White

    • Two or more races

    • Hispanic of any races

    • Economically Disadvantaged

    • English Language Learners

    • Students with Disabilities

    • Shared Education Entity (SEE) (district-level only)


    • 95% of students are still required to be tested to meet the assessment participation target for the scorecard.

      • If student group size is 30-39, target is no more than two non-participants (this makes it so that a single student cannot result in not meeting the target participation rate).

      • If student group size is 40 or more, target is 95% participation

      • Participation rate is rounded to nearest hundredth

      • If the “All Students” group does not have at least 30 students in one test cycle, a participation average will be calculated using up to three years of data in order to accumulate at least 30 students

      • Multi-year averaging used help meet the participation req.

    Participation Target

    • Two options for school/district color status for this target area.

      95% Assessed Met 95% Assessed Not Met

    • These colors are given ONLY on the participation target portion of the scorecard. This does not change your entire school/district status, however, it can impact your overall color.

    Proficiency Targets

    Targets are based on 2011-12 proficiency rates:

    • (85 – current percent proficient) / 10 = annual increment

    • Increments do not reset

    • Proficiency targets are set using PLs 1 & 2 only (not Provisional or Growth Proficient)

    • Provisional and/or Growth Proficient willhelp you meet targets

    Example Proficiency Targets

    School has 65% proficiency in 2011-12 school year. School must be 85% proficient by 2021-22 school year.

    Subtract baseline target from end target rate and divide by the number of school years in between.

    (85 – 65)/10 = +2% annual increment of target

    The school’s target would be 67% in 2012-13, 69% in 2013-14, 71% in 2014-15, and so on.

    Proficiency Targets Example


    Example school ends at (at least) 85% proficient in subject

    Example school starts from 65% proficient in subject

    Example School has +2% Annual Target

    Compliance Factors (PARTIALLY NEW!)

    • Compliance Factors are based on State law. All schools are required by State law to have a School Improvement Plan (SIP), and to complete School Performance Indicator (SPR) reports.

    • If a school completes all of its required reports it will receive a green cell for the Compliance Factors. If a school does not complete its required reports, it will receive a red cell for Compliance Factors.

    • 2 Possible colors to receive for this target:

      • Those with completed reports receive a green cell.

      • Those with incomplete reports receive a redcell.

    TAB 12

    NETWORKING Activity

    Dialogue Dice

    • Each person in your group will take a turn rolling the dice and sharing briefly an experience in response to the written prompt.

      Dialogue Dice Notes

    One Common Voice – One PlanMichigan Continuous School ImprovementStages and Steps



    Analyze Data

    Set Goals

    Set Measurable Objectives

    Research Best Practice

    One Common Voice – One PlanMichigan Continuous School ImprovementStages and Steps

    Getting Ready

    Collect School Data

    Build School Profile

    I. Executive Summary

    IV. School Process Rubrics

    Analyze Data

    II. School Data Analysis

    IV. School Process Analysis

    Set Goals

    III. Additional Requirements

    V. Goals and Plan

    Set Measurable Objectives

    Research Best Practice

    Develop Action Plan

    Implement Plan

    Monitor Plan

    Evaluate Plan

    VI. Evaluation Tool (2014)




    Needs Assessment


    School Improvement Plan


    TAB 12

    Schools Comprehensive Needs Assessment (CNA)

    Component One

    Executive Summary (All Schools Yearly) Due 09.01.13

    Component Two

    School Data Analysis Due 09.01.13

    Student Performance Diagnostic (5th year) 4 wks. prior to External Review Date

    Stakeholder Feedback Diagnostic (5th year) prior to External Review Date

    Component Three

    Additional Requirements (All Schools Yearly) 09.01.13

    Component Four

    School Process Rubrics:

    Component Five

    Goals and Plan (All Schools every 3 to 5 years) Due 09.01.13

    Component Six

    Strategy Evaluation Tool(All schools 2nd year in Reading and Math)

    MDE Rubrics 40/90



    AdvancED MI ISA/SA

    TAB 12

    End of February AdvancED Push

    • School Data Analysis

    • Additional Requirements

    • Title I Targeted Assistance

    • Title I School-wide

    March AdvancED Push

    • You will be able to add multiple measure under a single objective

    • You will be able to add the same strategy to multiple objectives

    • You will be able to add the same activity to multiple strategies


    One Common Voice – One PlanMichigan Continuous School ImprovementStages and Steps


    Analyze Data

    Set Goals

    Set Measurable Objectives

    Research Best Practice

    Stage Two: StudyStep 4: Analyze Data


    Analyze Data

    Set Goals

    Set Measurable Objectives

    Research Best Practice


    Stage Two: StudyStep 4: Analyze Data


    Analyze Data

    Set Goals

    Set Measurable Objectives

    Research Best Practice







    From your Executive Summary Report




    Getting Started: OVERVIEW

    Viewing Task DETAILS



    Diagnostics and Surveys

    Starting a Diagnostic


    School Process Rubrics Results





    District Review and APPROVAL

    Stage Two: StudyStep 4: Analyze Data


    Analyze Data

    Set Goals

    Set Measurable Objectives

    Research Best Practice



    TAB 5

    Identifying Activities to Support Strategy Implementation

    KEY ACTIVITIES and PROCESSES that need to occur PRIOR:

    • Current Reality(WHERE ARE WE?)

    • Assessing Impact(HOW DO WE KNOW IT IS WORKING?)

    • 40/90 OR ISA/SA challenges(Process Data Analysis)

    • Researching Best Practice(Is it the Right Fit?)



    By April 1, 2013 we know what our challenges are.

    Once you have engaged staff in the KEY ACTIVITIES and PROCESSES on slide 38, you are ready to identify the activities to support strategy implementation in your SCHOOL.


    TAB 11


    TAB 5

    Identifying Activities to Support Strategy Implementation

    • Presenter

      • Dr. Jason Novetsky

        MISD Behavior and Learning Consultant

      • Positive Behavior Intervention System

    One Common Voice – One PlanMichigan Continuous School ImprovementStages and Steps



    Analyze Data

    Set Goals

    Set Measurable Objectives

    Research Best Practice

    Stage One: GATHERStep 1: Getting Ready


    Getting Ready

    Collect School Data

    Build School Profile


    Stage One: GatherStep 2: Collecting School DataStep 3: Build School Profile

    Presenter Dr. Jennifer Parker-Moore

    Data DirectorD4SSMISchooldata.org


    Getting Ready

    Collect School Data

    Build School Profile

    One Common Voice – One PlanMichigan Continuous School ImprovementStages and Steps


    Analyze Data

    Set Goals

    Set Measurable Objectives

    Research Best Practice

    Stage Two: StudyStep 4: Analyze Data


    Analyze Data

    Set Goals

    Set Measurable Objectives

    Research Best Practice


    Probing for Root Cause

    Select a concern from the causation or theories generated in Math or Reading that if focused upon by the school, it will leverage student achievement.

    Stage Two StudyStep Four: Analyze DataSchool Summary Report

    The Five “Why’s”Consider impact/control

    Low IMPACT High


    5 Why’s Example

    • 4th grade math achievement on the MEAP is below the state average.


    Create an exhaustive list.

    Next, select the one statement; that if addressed, will leverage student achievement.

    TAB 4

    5 Why’s Example

    • Statement: The data indicates that our 4th grade students do poorly on story problems.

      • (62% of our students score at level 3 and 4 on story problems).

    • Turn this statement into the NEXT question:

      Why are our 4th graders scoring poorly on story problems?


    Tools for Schools

    • What’s Your Problem Statement?

    • Analyze Your Students

    • The Planning Process

    Your Time

    • Network with colleagues

    • Place handouts in binder

    • Plan what to bring back to share with SI team

    • Visit the Smarter Balance Consortium website


    • Visit the Career and College Readiness website www.michiganccr.org

  • Login