Mission

1. Developing and Measuring Principals’ Ability toAnalyze Instruction and Lead for Instructional Improvement

2. Mission The Center for Educational Leadership (CEL) is dedicated to eliminating the achievement gap that continues to divide our nation’s children along the lines of race, class and language. CEL believes the nexus for eliminating the gap lies in the development of leadership capacity. More specifically, nurturing the will to act on behalf of the most underserved students while increasing leadership knowledge and skill to dramatically improve the quality of instruction.

3. CEL’s Theory of ActionThree Foundational Ideas • If students are not learning they are not being afforded powerful learning opportunities. • If teachers are not offering students powerful learning opportunities then this is ultimately a leadership issue. • High quality teaching is a very sophisticated endeavor – it is an issue of expertise.

4. Developing the Leadership Expertise toImprove Instruction: A Two-Part Equation 1) Developing a common language and shared vision for high quality instruction – the better we see, the better we are able to lead. 2) Developing greater expertise in leading for instructional improvement – the better we lead, the better we are able to improve teaching practice and thus learning for all students.

5. The Newark Public Schools Walk-Through Initiative2008 – 2010 • Dr. Clifford B. Janey, Superintendent • Ms. Sadia White, Chief Academic Officer • “Changing Hearts and Minds to Value Education”

6. Context • Newark Public Schools is the largest school district in New Jersey: • - 72 schools (60 elementary; 12 high schools) • - 40,000 students • - Ethnic breakdown: 56% Black; 36% Hispanic; 7% White • - 79% Free/Reduced Lunch

7. District Challenges • Informed by data: standardized test scores, graduation rate, drop-out rate, retention rate, and suspension rate • Challenges: • Build capacity, increase rigor and raise academic achievement levels for all students • Ascertain the district’s instructional challenges and trends

8. Challenges (continued) • Establish a systemic approach to assessing the learning environment of each school • Establish the level of support that each school needs • Propel change process with sound research-based methodologies

9. Intervention: Walk-Through Strategy2008 - 2009 Means for: - Determining the levels of classroom rigor - Assessing curriculum implementation and best practices - Promoting teacher reflection and discussion - Strengthening learning communities - Determining professional development needs

10. Conclusions2008 - 2009 • 1,200 classrooms visited • Effective Communication, which includes a focus on higher order thinking, was an area that was particularly weak across the district • Identified a need for external support with walkthroughs and the need to use a research-based instructional framework

11. Newark Public Schools 5D Assessment Overall Average Dimension Scores Expert Developing Emerging Novice 115 Participants in total

12. Newark Public Schools 5D Assessment Overall Average Sub-dimension Scores 1-1.5 = Novice 1.51-2.5 = Emerging 2.51-3.5 = Developing 3.51-4.0 = Expert 115 Participants in total

13. CEL Walk-Through School Visit 2009 - 2010 (full day) • Focus on central office instructional leaders • 5D Framework anchored all walkthroughs • Aimed at calibrating vision and language of high quality instruction and learning the 5D Framework • Team led by CEL consultant; supported by a district team leader and alternate • Participants came to consensus on next steps for supporting each school

14. Conclusions 2009 - 2010 • 405 classrooms visited • Greater calibration among central office instructional leaders • Assessment for Student Learning and Curriculum & Pedagogy were the relative weaknesses in the district • Student Engagement and ClassroomEnvironment & Culture were the relative strengths

15. 5D WalkthroughAverage Scores Districtwide Average Index Value for Each Dimension Districtwide 1 = Low; 2 = Medium; 3 = High

16. Walk-Through InitiativeExecutive Summary 2009 – 2010Recommendations • Share “Results” with Exec. Staff, Principals, and the OAS • Continue consultation (CEL) to focus on building capacity of the district’s instructional leaders • Initial CEL Experience: • Building principals • High school department chairpersons • Elementary school-based coaches • Newark Teachers Union representatives • Enhanced CEL Experience: • Offices of Academic Services members • Executive staff (Instructional)

17. Seattle Public Schools Leading for Transformation2009 - 2011 • Dr. Maria Goodloe-Johnson, Superintendent • Dr. Susan Enfield, Chief Academic Officer • “Every Student Achieving, Everyone Accountable”

18. Context • Seattle Public Schools is the largest school district in Washington State: • 87 schools (55 elementary; 9 middle; 10 K-8; 14 high) • 47,000 students • Ethnic breakdown:45% White; 21% Asian; 21% Black; 11% Latino; 2% Native American • 40% Free/Reduced Lunch • 13.4% Limited English • 12.3% Special Education

19. Academic Vision

20. 2010 - 11 District Priorities • School Performance Framework • Math • Early Learning • College and Career Readiness • Evaluations • Family Engagement

21. Systemwide Challenges • No shared, common language or vision for high quality instruction • Lack of focus: too many tools and protocols with no coherent strategy • No through-line of accountability from central office to building to classroom • Lack of professional development to strengthen central office staff and principals’ instructional leadership practice

22. Systemwide Strategies • Superintendent’s Initiative for Leadership Development • Investing in leaders at central office and at building level • Professional learning community • Building a Teaching & Learning Leadership Team (TLLT)

23. Systemwide Strategies • Systemic Curriculum Alignment Framework • Aligning courses to standards • Identifying required professional development by grade level and content area

25. Systemwide Strategies (continued) • Performance Management : a Framework for School Improvement • Segmenting schools based on absolute performance and growth • Differentiation supports to schools based on need and achievement gaps • Organizing schools in geographical PreK-12 regions

26. Seattle Public Schools 5D Assessment Overall Average Dimension Scores Expert Developing Emerging Novice 142 Participants in total

27. Seattle Public Schools 5D Assessment Overall Average Sub-dimension Scores 1-1.5 = Novice 1.51-2.5 = Emerging 2.51-3.5 = Developing 3.51-4.0 = Expert 142 Participants in total

28. A Two-Pronged, Multi-Year Approach

29. Principals/Assistant Principals • Work in Professional Learning Community (PLC’s) Based on Problems of Practice • 5D Framework as Guide for Calibrated Walkthroughs • Move from Common Vision to Leading for Common Practice

30. Seattle Central Office Transformation • Building a new Teaching and Learning Leadership Team • Developing a shared vision and language for instruction using the 5 Dimensions • Redefining the Executive Director of Schools • Organizing schools in PK-12 geographical regions • Increasing collaboration between academics and operations

31. All Participating Districts Cumulative Overall Average – Dimension Scores1,797 participants; 29 school districts Expert Developing Emerging Novice

32. All Participating Districts Cumulative Overall Average – Sub-Dimension Scores1,797 participants; 29 school districts 1-1.5 = Novice 1.51-2.5 = Emerging 2.51-3.5 = Developing 3.51-4.0 = Expert

33. What We Are Learning • Efforts must include Central Office and School-Based Instructional Leaders • Central Office rationale, vision and voice is essential • Calibrating vision and language in conjunction with leadership work is essential • Don’t reinvent the wheel (or framework) – use a research-based tool that is already available • Be intentional and strategic in utilizing the expertise of external partners to build internal capacity

34. Questions for Panel

35. www.k-12leadership.org