slide1 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
NEW HOPE SCHOOL DISTRICT REFORM COMMISSION INITIATIVES PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
NEW HOPE SCHOOL DISTRICT REFORM COMMISSION INITIATIVES

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 81

NEW HOPE SCHOOL DISTRICT REFORM COMMISSION INITIATIVES - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 103 Views
  • Uploaded on

NEW HOPE SCHOOL DISTRICT REFORM COMMISSION INITIATIVES. November 22, 2010. Presented by the NATC CONSULTANT GROUP.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'NEW HOPE SCHOOL DISTRICT REFORM COMMISSION INITIATIVES' - cora


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
slide1

NEW HOPE SCHOOL DISTRICT

REFORM COMMISSION

INITIATIVES

November 22, 2010

presented by the natc consultant group

Presented by theNATC CONSULTANT GROUP

The NATC consultant group provides high quality expertise to assist area school districts in developing and implementing targeted school reform based on 21st century educational best practices.

NATC consultants have over 80 years of combined educational and administrative experience.

Meet the Consultants:

Nancy Schumacher - Assessment

Anne Hoover - Curriculum and Instruction

Tim Blessington - Organizational Management

Craig Funk- Optimizing Human Potential

slide3

NEW HOPE SCHOOL DISTRICT

MENTORING INITIATIVE

Tim Blessington

slide4

Vision Statement:

At New Hope School District all decisions, policies and resources support engaged learning and student achievement in an environment that promotes personal excellence, respect, diversity and civic responsibility every day to enable students to become contributing members of society and successful participants in the global economy.

Mission Statement:

The New Hope School District is an organization of caring professionals committed to providing a safe, student-centered learning environment that ensures each child has an opportunity to create his/her destiny through collaboration with families and the community.

isllc standards components addressed by the mentoring initiative
ISLLC Standards Components Addressed by the Mentoring Initiative

Standard 1: The Vision of Learning:

Standard 2: The Culture of Teaching and Learning:

Standard 3: The Management of Learning:

Facilitating the development, articulation, implementation and stewardship of a school or district vision of learning that is shared and supported by the school community by

  • 1.17 -- Developing the vision
  • 1.19 -- Communicating the vision

Advocating, nurturing and sustaining a school culture and instructional program conducive to student learning and staff professional growth by

  • 2.22: Valuing students and staff
  • 2.27: Developing and sustaining the culture
  • 2.20: Ensuring an inclusive culture

Ensuring management of the organization, operations and resources for a safe, efficient and effective learning environment by

  • 3.76 -- Making management decisions to ensure successful teaching and learning
  • 3.82 -- Creating a safe, healthy environment to ensure successful teaching and learning
  • 3.84 -- Developing procedures to ensure successful teaching and learning
  • 3.92 -- allocating resources to ensure successful teaching and learning
slide6

SWOTS

Applicable to the Mentoring Initiative

  • Weaknesses
  • Blanketed directives/policies from school board
  • Outdated  technology  and  resources
  • Outdated  curriculum/textbooks
  • Mixed  population  of  the  economic disadvantaged and affluent
  • Insufficient  professional development
  • Opportunities
  • Increasing  population  of
  • retirements/hiring of new teachers
  • Corporations  within  school  district
  • Threats
  • Merit  pay/teachers threatened by test results
  • Too  much  time  focused  on  testing/teaching to  the  test  
  • Time  stolen  due  to  NCLB
  • Global  change

Strengths

Tradition  of  excellence  

Committed  staff  

High  expectations  of

professional  growth    

through  education &

training for  teachers  

Fair, balanced

evaluation structure  

for  management  and

staff

Competitive  salary

Strong  school  tradition

(school  spirit)

slide7

Why Mentoring?

  • New hires average 15% of a building’s instructional population.
  • In a typical school year:

•22.8% Teacher Turnover

      • 13.7% transferred to a different building.
      • 9.1% left teaching altogether.

(NCES 2010)

slide8

Why Mentoring?

  • Segue and Support of PLC’s
  • Guidance for the Formative Assessment Initiative
  • Guidance for the Reading Workshop Initiative
slide9

Top Five Reasons for Leaving

  • Lack of Planning Time
  • Workload
  • Class Size/Student Population
  • Too Low a Salary
  • Problematic Student Behavior

(NCES 2005)

slide10

What Do the Stats Show?

Teaching Is Not For Everyone !

slide11

Success is Cumulative!

    • Success for New Teachers
    • Success for Our Profession
    • Success for Our Children
  • Children are the world’s most precious commodity and the raw materials which will make up our future society.
slide12

Mentoring

  • “Sink or Swim” mentality
  • I’m OK…. You’re OK…..
  • “I don’t need help.”
    • Failures
    • Difficulties
    • Isolation (Heider, 2005)
  • Yes, you choose how to do your job, but it’s nice to have options available which have been field tested.
slide13

This is not a perfect place…

  • Bureaucracy
  • Procedures
  • Politics
  • Things that SHOULD be
  • Things that ARE
    • …and the answer is…
slide14

Commit/Beyond Reproach

  • Work Ethic
    • Accept responsibilities
    • Commit to responsibilities
    • Establish successful habits
  • Integrity
    • Honesty
    • Self discipline
  • Trust
    • We want you to be successful!!!!!
  • Standards
    • Ideals
    • Delineated Standards
slide15

7 Habits of Highly Effective People (S. Covey 1989)

  • Independence
    • You know what you need to do and you do it.
  • Be Proactive
  • Begin With an End In Mind
  • Put First Things First
  • Interpersonal
  • (Public)
  • Think Win/Win
  • Seek First to Understand Then to Be Understood
  • Synergize

Sharpen The Saw

Interdependence

Students

Teachers

Parents

Administration

Our School Cultures at NH

slide16

The Handbook

  • Initial Needs Assessment
  • Topical Categories for Discussion
  • Timeline
  • Observations
  • Evaluations
slide17

At The Present Time 43 States Have Mentoring Policies

Effective Mentoring Programs Share the Following Characteristics:

•The use of experienced, well-trained teachers as mentors

•Are based upon well-defined program standards

•Are adequately funded

•Include a good evaluation process of new teachers

•Go beyond the first year of a teacher’s career

•Are part of a larger effort that includes reduced teaching loads, appropriate class placements, ample opportunity for observation of other teachers and targeted professional development. (Kaufmann, 2007)

slide18

Mentoring With Purpose:

Mentoring can support induction, instructional improvement, and a change in the culture of a school to a more collaborative learning environment. The purpose or mission of a mentoring program will have a profound impact on a school’s culture and will drive every other decision about the program. Therefore, the purpose of a mentoring program should be determined early and maintained as a focus to allow for evaluation of the effectiveness of later decisions.

(Oregon Department Of Education & Oregon Education Association, 2010. Oregon Mentor Program Handbook.)

slide19

Aud, S., Hussar, W., Planty, M., Snyder, T., Bianco, K., Fox, M., Frohlich, L., Kemp, J., Drake, L. (2010). The Condition of Education 2010 (NCES 2010-028). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC. Retrieved November 5, 2010, from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2010/2010028.pdf

Carlson, R. (1997). Don't sweat the small stuff... and it's all small stuff. New York: Hyperion.

Covey, S. (1989). The 7 habits of highly effective people. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Eaton, E., Sisson, W. (2008). Why are new teachers leaving? The case for beginning-teacher induction and mentoring. ICF International. Retrieved November 07, 2010 from

www.icfi.com/publications/register/download-register.asp?pubid=596

Faber, A. & Mazlish, E. (1995). How to talk so kids can learn at home and in school. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Heider, K.L. (2005). Teacher Isolation: How mentoring programs can help. Current Issues in Education [On-line], 8(14). Retrieved October 14, 2010, from http://cie.ed.asu.edu/volume8/number14/

iTunes U - Apple's free online portal for educational video and audio downloads. Retrieved November 5, 2010, from http://www.apple.com/education/itunes-u/

Mentoring Educators Website (2010). Retrieved November 5, 2010, from http://www.mentoringeducators.org/mentoring-program.php

New Teacher Center, The (NTC). (2010). Continuum of teacher development. Retrieved October 14, 2010, from http://www.newteachercenter.org/ti_continuum_of_teacher.php

Wong, H. & Wong, R (2001). How To Be An Effective Teacher: The First Days Of School. Mountain View, CA: Wong Publications

Resources:

slide20

NEW HOPE

SCHOOL DISTRICT

MAXIMIZING HUMAN POTENTIAL INITIATIVE

Craig Funk

slide21

Video Link

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2zqTYgcpfg&feature=related

in flight construction educational reform
In Flight Construction = Educational Reform
  • Programs
  • Initiatives
  • One and done trainings
  • TYNT & LYNT

How can we pull everything together to target

real student achievement while still operating

the School District on a daily basis?

slide23

Professional Learning Communities

EQ: What are Professional Learning Communities (PLC)?

professional learning community plc
Professional Learning Community (PLC)
  • Utilizes teacher collaboration focused on student learning.
  • Maximizes the knowledge and experience of current staff to impact long term improvement .
  • ISSLC #2
  • Guided by the Vision Statement
slide25

New Hope School District PLC

?

Whole Faculty Study Groups

whole faculty study groups
Whole Faculty Study Groups
  • Developed by Carlene Murphy
    • Teacher
    • Director of staff development
    • 35 years in Augusta, GA Public School System
    • National Staff Development Council Past President
  • WFSG research- 18 years (1987-2005)
  • Proven success record at all levels of public education
  • School districts across the U.S. have seen success
whole faculty study groups1
Whole-Faculty Study Groups

Whole-Faculty Study Groups (WFSGs) is a student driven approach to build a community in which professionals continuously strive to increase student learning. This is accomplished as practitioners deepen their own knowledge and understanding of what is taught, reflect on their practices, sharpen their skills, and take joint responsibility for the students they teach. “Whole-Faculty” means that every faculty member at a school is a member of a study group focusing on data-based student instructional needs. In such a context, a study group is a small number of individuals joining together to increase their capacities to enable students to reach higher levels of performance. The collective synergy of all the study groups advance the whole school.

--- Carlene Murphy

Author, Whole Faculty Study Groups

whole faculty study groups2
Whole Faculty Study Groups

Focused and guided by two questions:

  • What do students need for teachers to do so that teachers will have a deeper understanding of what they teach?
  • What do students need for teachers to do so that teachers will be more skillful in how they teach?
whole faculty study groups3
Whole-Faculty Study Groups

Simply:

  • Structure
  • Vehicle
  • Place
wfsg are not
WFSG are NOT:
  • A new program
  • Task Force
  • A one and done training and initiative
  • Quick fix

**********************************************

Whole Faculty Study Groups = A way to focus school wide and individual teacher’s efforts through collaboration as a way to target effective instruction and student achievement.

whole faculty study groups4
Whole-Faculty Study Groups
  • Student centered
  • Student needs determine member needs
  • Leadership rotates
  • Asks: “What do I need to do and learn in order to change how I teach and what I teach?”
  • All members are equal and share the responsibility of the group.
  • Instructional techniques are practiced in the group members’ classrooms before sharing with others.
  • 3-5 members per group
five principles
Five Principles
  • Students are 1st !
  • Everyone participates
  • Leadership is shared
  • Responsibility is equal
  • The work is public
traditional new hope meetings
CommitteesTraditional New Hope Meetings

Department/Grade Level

Managerial focus

Agenda is developed by building administration

Lead by a grade level/department chairperson

Interaction and communication is often one-way

Members are appointed or “volunteered”

Lead by a chairperson

Objectives are usually dictated by the administration or driven by “name “ of committee

Limited actual control

Finite in nature

wfsg process cycle
WFSG Process/Cycle
  • Analyze student data
  • Identify student needs
  • Categorize student needs
  • Complete Individual Action Plan
  • WFSG design Action Plan
  • WFSG implement the Action Research
  • The whole faculty analyzes impact of AP
what will drive nhsd wfsg
What Will Drive NHSD WFSG?

The School Improvement Plan and SWOTS!

  • Analyze student data
  • Identify student needs
  • Categorize student needs
new hope key areas
New Hope Key Areas
  • Mentor Program
  • Assessment
  • Reading initiative
wfsg in action
WFSG in Action
  • Teacher groups of 3 – 5 people are established
  • The groups focus on the student needs identified in the District Improvement Plan and SWOTS.
  • An action plan is created by the group. The teachers collaborate to identify instructional techniques that will target the areas of need.
  • Individual teachers attempt these techniques in their classrooms and then report back to the group.
  • The effective techniques are then shared with the whole faculty/district.
where are we now
Where are we now?
  • Initial District assessment (SWOTS) -- completed
  • Vision and Mission Statements -- revised
  • The 2009-2010 Improvement Plan was approved by PDE
  • All district and building level administrators have attended WFSG training.
  • Performance Tracker has been purchased
what happens next
What happens next?

Professional Development:

  • A core group of teachers from each building will attend PLC/WFSG training institute in December 2010.
  • Pilot PLC/WFSG teams will begin working as a PLC during the remainder of the 10-11 SY.
  • Pilot team data will be shared District wide in June.
  • The pilot team will train the remaining teachers in the New Hope SD during the Summer 2011 PD institute.
  • Full implementation – August 2011.
slide40

“Coming together is a beginning. Keeping together is progress. Working together is success.”

- Henry Ford

resources
1. DuFour, R., Dufour, R., Eaker, R., & Many (2006) Learning by doing: A

handbook for professional learning Communities at work., (2-4).

2. Dufour, R. (2004). What is a professional learning community? Educational

Leadership, May, 2004, 8-11.

3. Murphy, C. and Lick, D. (2005). Whole-Faculty Study Groups: Professional Learning Communities That Target Student Learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

4. Murphy, C. and Lick, D (2006). The Whole-Faculty Study Groups Field book: Lessons Learned and Best Practices From Classrooms, Districts, and Schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

5. Piercey, D. (2010) Why don’t teacher collaborate? A leadership conundrum. Phi

Delta Kappan,92(1), 54-56.

RESOURCES
slide43

NEW HOPE SCHOOL DISTRICT

CURRICULUM INITIATIVE

Anne Hoover

isllc standards components addressed by the reading workshop initiative
ISLLC Standards Components Addressed by the Reading Workshop Initiative

Standard 1: The Vision of Learning

Standard 2: The Culture of Teaching and Learning

Standard 3: The Management of Learning

Facilitating the development, articulation, implementation and stewardship of a school or district vision of learning that is shared and supported by the school community by

  • 1.17 --Developing the vision
  • 1.19 -- Communicating the vision
  • 1.22 -- Implementing plans to achieve goals
  • 1.23 -- Using data to develop goals
  • 1.28 -- Monitoring and evaluating

Advocating, nurturing and sustaining a school culture and instructional program conducive to student learning and staff professional growth by

  • 2.29 –Promoting student growth
  • 2.34 -- Developing assessment strategies
  • 2.40 –Monitoring the student learning focus
  • 2.43 – Expecting lifelong learning
  • 2.44 – Using professional development
  • 2.55 –Having high expectations
  • 2.67 – Meeting students’ needs

Ensuring management of the organization, operations and resources for a safe, efficient and effective learning environment

  • 3.76 -- Making management decisions to ensure successful teaching and learning
  • 3.80 -- Supporting quality instruction and student learning
  • 3.82 -- Creating a safe, healthy environment to ensure successful teaching and learning
  • 3.84 -- Developing procedures to ensure successful teaching and learning
  • 3.81 & 3.96 -- Developing distributed leadership
  • 3.92 -- Allocating resources to ensure successful teaching and learning
slide45

SWOTS

Applicable to the Reading Workshop

  • Weaknesses
  • Blanketed  directives/policies from school board
  • Summative assessment is primary method of assessment
  • Student data not driving instruction
  • Outdated  curriculum/textbooks
  • Insufficient  professional development  
  • Opportunities
  • Increasing  population  of retirements/hiring of new teachers 
  • Parent Volunteers
  • Staff/Administration communication
  • Full day kindergarten
  • Scheduling
  • New initiatives for new assessment methods
  • Threats
  • Budget
  • Cut programs/personnel
  • Global change
  • Traditions holding back progress
  • Time testing/teaching to the test
  • Time stolen to NCLB
  • Federal and state mandates without funding

Strengths

Tradition  of  excellence  

Committed  staff

High expectations of professional growth through education/training for teachers

Opportunities for students to be civically involved

Parent Involvement

High standardized tests

Culturally strong ethnic groups/communities

slide46

Activate Your Thinking

  • Think of your favorite book and why it was your favorite book.

Was it a book you had to read or one you choose to read?

slide47

Why Read?

  • To become functional literate?
  • To score proficient on a test?
  • or
  • To nurture lifelong readers and thinkers?
  • To cultivate social responsibility?
  • To inspire relevant 21st century thinking?
  • To make a difference?
slide48

Non-negotiables in the Teaching of Reading

  • A set of beliefs about how children learn to read
  • Beautiful settings in which to read
  • Real reasons to read
  • Big blocks of time
  • High-quality books and plenty of them
  • A school wide stance that reading is “cool”
  • Powerful models
  • Well-informed teachers (Harwayne, 2000)
slide49

Why a Reading Workshop?

  • Problem:
  • Districts implementing scientifically based commercial reading programs to move students to proficient reading levels which has caused teachers to dramatically change their pedagogy (Miller & Higgins, 2008)

The Real Problem:

  • Districts are not focusing on characteristics and abilities of the readers they are teaching (Serafini, 2005)
slide50

What is a Reading Workshop?

  • Components:
  • Mini-lesson -

Whole Group

10-15 minute lesson

Based on students’ needs

Strategies, skills, and literary analysis

(Fountas & Pinnell, 2001)

slide51

What is a Reading Workshop?

  • Components:
  • Independent Reading/Conferencing-

One to one or small group instruction

Teaching a student, not a text

Strategy groups based on need

Students become lost in their books which they are reading with approximately 98% accuracy (Ivey, 2000)

slide52

What is a Reading Workshop?

  • Components:
  • Peer Discussions –

Students paired with students on their level

Motivates, substantiates, validates, investigates, and evaluates (Cole, 2003)

slide53

What is a Reading Workshop?

  • Components:
  • Closure –

Whole group

Summarizes

Guides instruction

more than compiling materials and methods, must infuse them with a sense of priority and vision, passion, and grace (Calkins, 2001)

slide54

Strengths and Opportunities

Specific to New Hope

slide55

ReferencesAssaf, L. (2006). One reading specialist’s response to high-stakes testing procedures. The Reading Teacher, 60, 158-166.Assaf, L. (2008). Professional identify of a reading teacher: responding to high-stakes testing pressures. Teachers and Teaching, 14, 239-252.Calkins, L. (2001). The art of teaching reading (1st ed.). New York: Addison WesleyCole, A.D. (2003). Knee to knee, eye to eye circling in on comprehension. Portsmouth, New Hampshire: Heinemann.Fountas, I. C. & Pinnell, G. S. (2001). Guiding readers and writers grades 3-6. Portsmouth, New Hampshire: Heinemann.Ivey, G. (2000). Redesigning reading instruction. Educational Leadership, 58, 42-45.Lause, J. (2004). Using reading workshop to inspire lifelong readers. English Journal, 93, 24-30. Miller, D. (2009). The book whisper. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-BassMiller, M. & Higgins, B. (2008). Beyond test preparation: nurturing successful learners through reading and writing workshops. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 124-127.Reutzel, D. R. & Mitchell, J. (2005). High-stakes accountability themed issues: how did we get here from there? The Reading Teacher, 58, 606-608.Santman, D. (2002). Teaching to the test? Test preparation in the reading workshop. Language Arts, 79, 203-211.Serafini, F. (2005). Implementing a workshop approach to reading. Academic exchange quarterly. Available: http://www.frankserafini.com/PubArticles/ImplentRdgWkshp.htm.Swift, K. (1993). Try reading workshop in your classroom. The Reading Teacher, 46, 366-371.

slide56

NEW HOPE SCHOOL DISTRICT

FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT INITIATIVE

Nancy Schumacher

slide57

Assessment MemoryThink of a time in your life when you were “assessed.”It might be a memory from elementary or high school…From your professional experience…Or anywhere else in your life.How did the assessment make you feel?

new hope school district
New Hope School District

High-stakes Standardized Testing

(aka “Summative Testing”)

Receives a disproportionate amount of

of attention:

Summative vs. Formative

disadvantages of high stakes testing
Disadvantages of High Stakes Testing

MINIMAL IMPACT ON STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT

  • Time lapse between administration and results
  • Not easily interpreted at classroom level
  • Vague individual feedback
  • Rank-orders students and creates competitiveness
  • Reinforces feeling of incompetence in underperforming students and creates student disengagement from learning
new hope school district1
New Hope School District

Strength:

“High Standardized Test Scores”

REAL OR PERCEIVED?

new hope school district2
New Hope School District

STATUS QUO

  • High SES community (Strong relationship between SES and student achievement, Marzano & Waters, 2009)
  • Low student mobility rate (High transiency rate negatively affects test scores, Marzano & Waters, 2009)
  • Teaching to the test
  • Focus on how “well” students are doing rather than “what” students are doing
  • Data does not drive instructional decision-making
new hope school district3
New Hope School District

THREATS TO STATUS QUO

  • Closing of local small businesses and plants changing SES
  • Foreclosures increasing mobility rate
  • Widening gap between “haves” and “have not’s”
new hope school district4
New Hope School District

OPPORTUNITY

  • Systemic change related to district mission of engaged learning
  • Systemic change related to district vision of providing relevant research-based instruction that responds to each student’s unique potential
  • Enhanced teaching and learning
  • Focus on learning vs. achievement
slide64
Achievement vs. LearningVideo Clip by Alfie KohnEndorsed by W. Edwards Deming in “No Contest”which addresses competition in schools.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sywMkf5QhI

slide65

Evolve Mindsets and Mental ModelsFrom: Summative assessmentTo: Formative assessmentFrom: Evaluative gradingTo: Planning future instruction

what is formative assessment formal definition

What is Formative Assessment?Formal Definition:

A plannedprocess in which the ongoing activities undertaken in the classroom increase student engagement and learning by providing timely informational feedback and decision-making data so students can adjust current learning tactics in which they employ and teachers can modify instructional methods in which they implement. ---Nancy Schumacher, 2010

formative assessment vs summative assessment
Formative Assessment vs. Summative Assessment
  • Formative Assessment:

FOR learning – DURING learning

  • Summative Assessment:

OF learning – AFTER learning

“When the cook tastes the soup it is formative, when the guests taste the soup it is summative.” ---Bob Stake in Marzano, 2010

goal of formative assessment
Goal of Formative Assessment

For teachers to teach more effectively

For students to learn more effectively

slide69

Intentionally Aligned

COMPREHENSIVE

FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT SYSTEM

to Increase Student Achievement

Nancy Schumacher

2010

State-Level High

Stakes

Summative

Assessment

District-Level

Common Assessment

Classroom-Level

Formative Assessment

classroom level formative assessment
Classroom Level Formative Assessment

IS BASED ON

EFFECTIVE, INFORMATIVE FEEDBACK

“The most powerful single modification that enhances achievement is feedback”

---J. A. Hattie in Marzano, 2007a

After a meta-analysis of over 8,000 studies

teachers and students use feedback data
Teachers and Students use FEEDBACK DATA
  • Find areas of strengths and weaknesses
  • Track areas of improvement
  • Question how to prepare for and improve performance
  • Differentiate instruction
  • Close the achievement gap
new hope school district5
New Hope School District

Current Model of Classroom Assessment

Proposed Model of Classroom Level Formative Assessment:

Teaching is aligned with curriculum. Formative assessments are not graded.

---Ainsworth & Viegut, 2006

resources needed to introduce formative assessment system
Resources Needed to IntroduceFormative Assessment System
  • Classroom level formative assessment is a cost-effective method of school improvement (William, 2007)
  • Professional Learning Communities: An effective approach for implementation (Popham, 2008)
  • Reading resources: Key stakeholders volunteer to read and discuss the formative assessment process
  • Time: Flexible scheduling to promote collaboration
beyond classroom level formative assessment
Beyond Classroom Level Formative Assessment

School and district level formative assessment will require funding for additional professional development (Black & Wiliam, 1998)

time frame to implement formative assessment slow and steady process
Time Frame to ImplementFormative AssessmentSlow and Steady Process
  • November 2010 – Present rationale and process to Board of Education, all district and school leaders, all teachers and community members
  • December 2010 – Establish volunteer PLC’s to “pilot” implementation at classroom level
  • June 2011 – Positive results from pilot program create “buy-in”
  • July-August 2011 – Pilot teachers turnkey train district wide
  • September 2011 – All teachers begin classroom level formative assessment across grade levels and departments
time frame to implement formative assessment slow and steady process1
Time Frame to ImplementFormative AssessmentSlow and Steady Process
  • December 2011 – All teachers district wide in-service on next phase of intentionally designed comprehensive formative assessment system – “Power Standards.”
  • January to March 2012 – Determine Power Standards for each grade and content
  • April 2012 -- All teachers district wide in-service on next phase of intentionally designed comprehensive formative assessment system – Aligning Power Standards to classroom, district and State standards
  • May to June 2012 – Align Power Standards
  • June 2012 – All teachers district wide in-service on next phase of intentionally designed comprehensive formative assessment system – “Common Formative Assessments”
time frame to implement formative assessment slow and steady process2
Time Frame to ImplementFormative AssessmentSlow and Steady Process
  • July to August 2012 – Design Common Formative Assessments and map horizontally and vertically
  • September 2012 – First administration of Common Formative Assessment (CFA)
  • October 2012 – Score assessments, collaboratively discuss, evaluate effectiveness, revise CFA
  • November 2012 – Second administration of CFA and analyze data
  • December 2012 – Meet by schools to plan future phases of intentionally designed comprehensive formative assessment system
isllc standards components addressed by the formative assessment initiative
ISLLC Standards Components Addressed by the Formative Assessment Initiative

Standard 1: The Vision of Learning

Standard 2: The Culture of Teaching and Learning

Standard 3: The Management of Learning

Facilitating the development, articulation, implementation and stewardship of a school or district vision of learning that is shared and supported by the school community by

  • 1.4 – Using information sources, data collection & data analysis strategies
  • 1.17 --Developing the vision
  • 1.19 -- Communicating the vision
  • 1.22 -- Implementing plans to achieve goals
  • 1.23 -- Using data to develop goals
  • 1.27 -- Using existing resources in support of the vision & goals
  • 1.28 -- Monitoring and evaluating

Advocating, nurturing and sustaining a school culture and instructional program conducive to student learning and staff professional growth by

  • 2.33 – Mastering effective instructional techniques
  • 2.34 – Mastering measurement, evaluation and assessment strategies
  • 2.40 – Maintaining student learning as a fundamental purpose
  • 2.46 – Developing a safe and supportive learning environment
  • 2.64 – Ensuring that student learning is assessed using a variety of techniques

Ensuring management of the organization, operations and resources for a safe, efficient and effective learning environment

  • 3.77 –Taking risks to improve schools
  • 3.80 -- Supporting quality instruction and student learning
  • 3.84 -- Developing procedures to ensure successful teaching and learning
  • 3.89 – Managing time to maximize attainment of organizational goals
  • 3.92 -- Allocating resources to ensure successful teaching and learning
time frame for results
TIME FRAME FOR RESULTS

15 WEEKS

Bangert-Drowns, Kulick & Kulick in Marzano, 2007b

Two formative assessments per week over a 15-week period produce a 29.0 percentile gain

Fuchs & Fuchs in Marzano, 2007b

Based on meta-analysis of 21 studies: Two formative assessments per week result in a 30 percentile point gain

new hope school district6
New Hope School District

FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT:

MISSION POSSIBLE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsBMQUeGx1E

resources1
Resources

Ainsworth, L., & Viegut, D. (2006). Common formative assessments. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press.

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment.

Phi Delta Kappa, 80(2), 139-144. Retrieved from http://www.londonmet.ac.uk/library/ i93438_22.htm

Marzano, R. J. (2007a). Designing a comprehensive approach to classroom assessment. In D. Reeves (Ed.), Aheadof the curve. (pp. 103-126). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

Marzano, R. J. (2007b). The art and science of teaching. Alexandria, Virginia: ASCD.

Marzano, R. J., & Waters, T. (2009). Setting and monitoring nonnegotiable goals for achievement. In District leadership that works. (pp. 23-52). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

Marzano, R. J. (2010). Formative assessment and standards-based grading. Bloomington, IN: Marzano Research Laboratory.

Popham, W. J. (2008). Transformative assessment. Alexandria, Virginia: ASCD.

William, D. (2007). Content then process: Teacher learning communities in the service of formative assessment. In D. Reeves (Ed.), Aheadof the curve. (pp. 183-206). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.