Day 2 Presentations
STF Institute
October 3rd, 2012
Announcements
• Shuttle van
• Website: www.tdschools.org/stf2012
– Password: Superman
• Reflections
Curriculum Scavenger Hunt
• One point per question
– Pick a reporter/recorder
– 20 seconds to agree on an answer and write it on
your paper
– Select a number 1-37
• 5 question initial round
• 4 question final round
Materials
Danny Jones
Approaching data at a TDS School
Outcome Data
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Graduation Rate
AYP
Diagnostic tests
Achievement data
Attendance
Behavior
Course Performance
Climate Surveys
Implementation Data
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
STP
Intervention trackers
Coaches feedback
Facilitator feedback
Teacher feedback
SVRs
TDS Team meetings
What data do we look at and why?
• Find a person with different data, explain what
your chart says and then discuss “Why does it
matter and what should we do about it?”
– Attendance
– Behavior
– Course Performance
– Resiliency
– Diagnostic data
From Fast Facts
www.mdrc.org
Freshman Grades matter
Virtually all students
with a “B” avg. or
higher graduate in 4
years
Virtually all students
with less than a “D”
avg. fail to graduate
Prediction is less
certain among
students with D+,
C- , C
*Consortium
for Chicago
School
Research
(CCSR)
BEHAVIOR: Sixth graders with poor behavior (earning an
unsatisfactory final behavior mark) have a 1 in 4 chance of making it to
the 12th g. on time
Only 17% graduate on time or within one extra year
1996-97 6th g. students earning unsatisfactory behavior marks (n=1660)
6th
7th
8th
9th
10th
11th
12th
On-Time
Grad
Grad +1 Yr
Left SDP
1996-97
100%
0
0
0
0
0
0
1997-98
11%
79%
5%
0
0
0
0
1998-99
0
15%
73%
0
0
0
0
1999-00
0
0
14%
73%
2%
0
0
2000-01
0
0
0%
51%
34%
2%
0
2001-02
0
0
0
36%
28%
22%
1%
2002-03
0
0
0
13%
17%
11%
25%
2003-04
0
0
0
6%
7%
5%
4%
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
7%
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10%
0
5%
13%
11%
14%
12%
34%
NA
"Left SDP" includes all 'leavers': student transferred, moved, withdrew or otherwise left the District and is no longer in SDP data file
on-track to graduation
4-year grad
Approaching data at a TDS School
Outcome Data
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Graduation Rate
AYP
Diagnostic tests
Achievement data
Attendance
Behavior
Course Performance
Climate Surveys
Implementation Data
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
STP
Intervention trackers
Coaches feedback
Facilitator feedback
Teacher feedback
SVRs
TDS Team meetings
How did I end up with this grade?
Report Card
Grade
Tests, quizzes, homework, classwork, projects,
attendance, etc.
Off-Track
Core courses
Report Card grade of F
Sliding
Report card grade of D
On-Track
Report card grade of A, B,
C
Pillar II
The Blueprint, the Common Core,
and providing feedback
Curriculum, Instruction, Professional Development
Curricula Developed by JHU
Standards – How did we get where we are?
Assessment – Standards or the Bell Curve
Instruction – Blueprint and More
Professional Development
The Players
Communication – A Plan for All the Players
If “standards” are the constant
time and approach are the
variables.
Extended Learning Time
 TD Schools restructure the use of instructional
time during the school day in order to improve
outcomes for struggling learners, particularly in
math and reading
 Middle Grades have extended classes
 At a minimum for ELA and Math
 High School Operates on a 4x4 block schedule
that uses 80-90 minute periods
Extended Learning Time – High School
Fall
Spring
Freshman Seminar
Science
Transition to Advanced
Mathematics
Algebra I
Strategic Reading
English 9
Social Studies/Physical
Education
Social Studies/Physical
Education
Talent Development High School Curricula
Talent Development Middle Grades
Curriculum
Climate &
Character
ELA
Math
Science
Social
Studies
Student Team
Literature
Evidenced
Based Curricula
based on
District
Hakim’s Story
of Science
Hakim’s
History of US
High Five As &
Bs Climate
Program
TD Writing
Program
CATAMA Math
Acceleration
Lab
District
Program
Support
District
Program
Support
Mastering the
Middle Grades
Savvy
Readers’ Lab
Common Core State Standards
Block Party
• Select a quote from your table
• By yourself: What do you think this quote
means for classroom practice?
• How does it impact your work?
• Eye contact partners.
• Share your quote and response to the quote.
• Switch roles.
One in four of all high school graduates who
took the ACT exams met all four of the 2010
college readiness benchmarks for English,
reading, mathematics and science (ACT,2010)
Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and
Careers (PARCC)
25
PARCC’s Fundamental Advance
PARCC is designed to reward quality
instruction aligned to the Standards, so the
assessment is worthy of preparation rather
than a distraction from good work.
26
27
28
PARCC’s Core Commitments to ELA/Literacy
Assessment Quality
•
Texts Worth Reading: The assessments will use authentic texts worthy
of study instead of artificially produced or commissioned passages.
•
Questions Worth Answering: Sequences of questions that draw
students into deeper encounters with texts will be the norm (as in an
excellent classroom), rather than sets of random questions of varying
quality.
•
Better Standards Demand Better Questions: Instead of reusing existing
items, PARCC will develop custom items to the Standards.
•
Fidelity to the Standards (now in Teachers’ hands): PARCC evidences are
rooted in the language of the Standards so that expectations remain the
same in both instructional and assessment settings.
29
What Are the Shifts at the Heart of
PARCC Design (and the Standards)?
1. Complexity: Regular practice with complex
text and its academic language.
2. Evidence: Reading and writing grounded in
evidence from text, literary and
informational.
3. Knowledge: Building knowledge through
content rich nonfiction.
30
PARCC’s Core Commitments to Mathematics
Assessment Quality

Focus: PARCC assessments will focus strongly on where the Standards
focus. Students will have more time to master concepts at a deeper
level.

Problems worth doing: Multi-step problems, conceptual questions,
applications, and substantial procedures will be common, as in an
excellent classroom.

Better Standards Demand Better Questions: Instead of reusing existing
items, PARCC will develop custom items to the Standards.

Fidelity to the Standards (now in Teacher’s hands): PARCC evidences are
rooted in the language of the Standards so that expectations remain the
same in both instructional and assessment settings.
31
Using Technology to Advance Assessment and the
Shifts
•
•
•
Technology enhancements supporting accessibility
(e.g., the ability to hover over a word to see and/or
hear its definition, etc.)
Transformative formats making possible what can
not be done with traditional paper-pencil
assessments (e.g., simulations to improve a model,
game-like environments, drawing/constructing
diagrams or visual models, etc.)
Getting beyond the bubble and avoiding drawbacks
of traditional selected response such as guessing or
choice elimination.
32
Using Technology to Advance Assessment and the
Shifts
•
•
Capturing complex student responses through a
device interface (e.g., using drawing tools, symbol
palettes, etc.)
Machine scorable multi-step tasks are more
efficient to administer and score.
33
Three Innovative Item Types That Showcase
Students’ Command of Evidence with Complex
Texts
• Evidence-Based Selected Response (EBSR)—Combines a traditional
selected-response question with a second selected-response question
that asks students to show evidence from the text that supports the
answer they provided to the first question. Underscores the importance of
Reading Anchor Standard 1 for implementation of the CCSS.
• Technology-Enhanced Constructed Response (TECR)—Uses technology to
capture student comprehension of texts in authentic ways that have been
difficult to score by machine for large scale assessments (e.g., drag and
drop, cut and paste, shade text, move items to show relationships).
• Range of Prose Constructed Responses (PCR)—Elicits evidence that
students have understood a text or texts they have read and can
communicate that understanding well both in terms of written expression
and knowledge of language and conventions. There are four of these
items of varying types on each annual performance-based assessment.
34
What Does It Look Like?
Table Groups
Select one of the two tasks provided.
Complete the task.
What would instruction look and sound
like if students were engaged in opportunities
that are aligned to the CCSS?
What professional growth opportunities will
your staff (teachers – administrators- others)
need to have clarity about the implementation
of CCSS?
CIA Blueprint activity
Walk through the blue print and mark items
that resonate with you with +, items that
cause dissonance with a -, and items you are
unsure about with a ?
Common Ground
Find one item each member marked +
Find one item each member placed a ? or -
Part Two Linda
Video will happen here
There is no deep secret called teaching and
learning; teaching and learning are visible in
classrooms of the successful teachers and
students, teaching and learning are visible in
the passion displayed by the teacher and
learner when successful learning and
teaching occurs, and teaching and learning
require much skill and knowledge by both
the teacher and the student.
John Hattie 2009
What’s the Impact?
Visible Learning – 15 years research
800 meta analyses over 50,000 studies
An effect size of 1.0 is an increase of one
standard deviation on influence on student
achievement.- it would mean on the average,
students receiving that treatment would exceed
84 % of students not receiving the treatment.
Feedback
• English: He is an intelligent boy who could do very
well. French: A disappointing result. He is so fond
of obtaining a cheap laugh in class that he has
little time for serious concentration.
• Mathematics: Poor. He never makes any really
sensible effort. Art: Very satisfactory. Religious
instruction: His work has been of a low standard.
Headmaster's end-of-year comment: He has too
many of the wrong ambitions and his energy is
too often misplaced.
Excerpts from John Lennon’s report card, Quarry
Bank School, Liverpool, England, 1955-56 (age
15), on display at Rock and Rock Hall of Fame,
Cleveland, Ohio
Task
Process
Self Regulation
Ego
LUNCH
DNIST –
Diplomas Now Implementation Support Team
What is the mission of the Diplomas Now
Implementation Support team?
Our mission is to provide leadership, support,
and guidance to Diplomas Now teams at the
school, field, and executive levels and enable
them to support every student who attends a
Diplomas Now school.
What are the goals of DNIST?
• Build the internal capacity to implement the Diplomas Now
model and deliver necessary services at each building
• Create trainings, tools, and resources to guide and support
consistent, high-quality implementation at every DN school
• Identify trends and provides insights on training needs,
implementation challenges and best practices
• Assist local teams in developing plans to ensure
sustainability at DN schools, including building and
maintaining strong relationships at the school and district
level
Members of DNIST
Doug Elmer – Director
Kathy Nelson – Deputy Director (TD)
 Miami, Philadelphia, Washington, DC
Jessica Herman – Deputy Director (CY)
 East Baton Rouge, Chicago, Los Angeles
Matt Wernsdorfer – School Turnaround Manager (CY)
 Boston, Detroit, New York
Sheila Drummond – Deputy Director (CIS)
 Columbus, San Antonio, Seattle
“be nice to DNIST”
The Diplomas Now Partnership
Core Function
School and
School District
•
•
•
Mission, and Vision
Education Plan
School Operations
Whole School
Supports
Related Resources
• Math Instructional Coach
• Language Arts Instructional Coach
• School Transformation Facilitator
• Extra help electives for students with achievement
gaps in math, language arts
• Freshman Seminar curriculum
• 1100 + hours of Technical Assistance and
Professional Development
Targeted Supports
• 8-12 full-time, full-day City Year AmeriCorps
members serving as near-peer role models to
mentor, tutor, provide behavior and attendance
coaching and extended day learning
Intensive Supports
• School-based professional Site Coordinator
• Access to brokered services through
Communities in Schools partners
The Diplomas Now Model
Instructional Supports
Organizational Supports
• Double dose math & English
• Extra help labs
• Common college preparatory or
high school readiness curricula
Professional Development
Supports
• Job-embedded coaching - Math and
English instructional coaches
• Professional learning community
• Professional development linked to
grade/subject specific instructional
practice
Multi Tiered Response to Intervention Model
• 8 to 12 City Year AmeriCorps members: whole
school and targeted academic and socioemotional supports
• Communities In Schools on-site coordinator: case
managed supports for highest need students
• Inter-disciplinary and subject
focused common planning time
• Bi-weekly EWI meetings
• On-site school transformation
facilitator
Teacher Team
(4 teachers)
75-90
students
Data Supports
• Easy access to student data on the
Early Warning Indicators
• Benchmarks tied to national and state
standards
• On-site facilitator to leverage EWI data
Student Supports
Interventions to address early
warning indicators of
• Attendance
• Behavior
• Course Performance
• Whole school attendance,
positive behavior, collegegoing culture
• Strengthening student
resiliency
DIPLOMAS NOW ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS AROUND
THE 4 PILLARS
Pillar I—Teaming
• Corps members and CIS Site Coordinators should
participate in all team meetings, not just EWI
–
–
–
–
Help plan events and incentives
Discuss identity and culture of team
Support instructional activities
Engage in collegial professional development
• Family outreach efforts should be communicated
with and coordinated with the team (parents
should be receiving coherent messages about
their students)
Pillar II– Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment
• Tutoring should not be happening in isolation—teachers,
coaches, and corps members should be planning regularly
(ideally weekly) around how to support student growth in
class
– Identifying extra-help/support activities aligned to objectives
– Determining how to “preview” new materials
– Planning corps members’ role during the class period (minimize
ad hoc decisions)
– Divide and conquer
• Teams should be looking at the intersection of grades and
assessments (Are kids with As and Bs showing growth? Are
kids who are flat failing?)
Pillar II—Curriculum & Instruction
• Communities In Schools can work with
teachers to think about ways to
enhance/extend lessons outside of the
classroom
– Off-Campus Learning
– Partner presentations/discussions
– Service Learning Opportunities
Pillar III—Tiered Student Supports
• Tier II and Tier III will often/normally happen in parallel, not
sequentially
– Most students in need of Tier III supports should be
simultaneously receive CIS and City Year support
– We all have a responsibility to serve students with IEPs and
students who are learning English—some misconceptions here
• No assumption that academics will improve because of
emotional/social support
• There are no “tier II students” or “tier III students”, only tier
II and tier III levels of support
• Let what’s best for the kid drive tiered student supports,
not what’s best for the paperwork
Pillar III—Tiered Student Supports
• Trend analysis is essential—you aren’t going to
provide more than 30% of the students with
individualized support at any given time
• Sometimes an F is just an F
• Push teachers to own solutions
• Remember that students can and will go off
track throughout the year
• Determine when a student can come off the
focus list
Pillar IV—Can Do Culture
More important than EWI—all EWI can do is
provide scaffolds for kids who need extra help
meeting the expectations of the school.
Pillar IV– Can Do Culture
• Have to balance nagging and nurturing
– Boot Camp vs. Summer Camp
• Remember the starting line and the finish line
• Adult beliefs are more critical to school culture
than student beliefs
• Students have to have a sense of ownership in
their own learning
• This is about relationships, not programs
OVERVIEW OF THE I3 STUDY
Diplomas NowInvesting in Innovation Fund Winner
1,700 Applicants
49 Grantees
• $30M federal grant + $6M match through generous support of the
PepsiCo foundation
Investing in
Innovation (i3)
• 60 schools in 10+ districts reaching 57,000 students
• Conduct randomized experimental study validating the impact of the
model, and focusing on the conditions necessary to:
 Achieve 80% grad rates in high schools
 Reduce by 66% the number of students entering high school
below grade level
District Partners
Chicago Public Schools, Detroit Public Schools, Los Angeles Unified School District, Miami-Dade Public Schools, Louisiana Recovery
School District, School District of Philadelphia, New York City Department of Education, District of Columbia Public Schools, Seattle
Public Schools, Partnership for Los Angeles Schools, Northeast Independent School District (TX), Richland County School District One
(SC), Southwest Independent School District (TX) , San Antonio Independent School District (TX), Whitehall City School District (OH)
State Departments of Education of Louisiana, South Carolina and New York, Union Park High Schools, Deloitte Consulting, School
Loop, Pearson PreVent, the City of Philadelphia.
Other Partners
“Cutting-edge ideas
that will produce the
next generation for
reform.”
- Secretary of Education Arne
Duncan
National Evaluation: Research Design
Study will compare student outcomes in schools that
implement DN to student outcomes in schools that do not.
Assignment to these groups is accomplished through
randomization. Eligible schools are assigned DN or Non-DN
status via a lottery:
 DN schools implement the DN model
 Non-DN schools pursue any other school reform
initiatives
National Evaluation: Data Collection
Student records data:
Collected directly from district; transcripts, standardized
assessment results, attendance, disciplinary data
Surveys:
Students and staff in DN and Non-DN schools; student
engagement, school climate, availability of support services,
etc. (annual administration)
Case studies:
25% of DN schools across the nation; annual site visits (2-3
days) consisting of interviews and observations
National Evaluation: Goal Setting for 2012-2013
Attendance
Behavior
ELA/Literacy
Of students that were off-track at the first data point:
50% or more move on-track
Math
Overall EWI
Distribution:
At least 67% (two-thirds) of ALL students within DN
focus grades have no EWIs at the end of the school
year.
Goal Setting: Example
150 Students in 6th grade:
Indicator
# of students offtrack @ beginning
of year
# of students offtrack on last day of
school
Attendance
18
9
Behavior
21
10
ELA Performance
15
7
Math Performance
24
12
No more than 49 students off-track in the 6th grade
on the last day of school (all indicators combined)
The bottom line on I3 Validation
• We have to look at both the reduction in the
number of kids who had off-track indicators to
begin with AND the success of the overall
cohort(s) throughout the whole year
• The I3 study will not look directly at test scores or
other metrics, but these are highly related to the
off-track indicators
• I3 study will validate model solely on the
decrease in off-track indicators (won’t validate
based on fidelity)
The TDS/DN Support network
My TDS team, our tiered support,
and Principals
Objectives
• STFs will be able to identify ways to coordinate
with their TDS and school based team to
support implementation goals
• STFs will discuss and determine ways that they
can build a strong relationship with their
principal and administration
TDS Field Manager/
Regional Director
TDS Instructional
Facilitator Math/Science
The Work of School
Transformation and
Improvement
TDS STF
TDS S4 Facilitator
TDS Instructional
Facilitator ELA/SS
TDS Team
S4
Facilitator
Talent
Development
School #1
STF
Math/
Science
Facilitator
Talent
Development
School #2
STF
Regional
Director/Field
Manager
ELA/ SS
Facilitator
Talent
Development
School #3
STF
Talent
Development
School #4
STF
COO
School Services
COO
Site Operations
S4 Division
Math/
Science
Division
ELA/ SS
Division
Regional
Director/Field
Manager
S4
Facilitators
Math/
Science
Facilitators
ELA/ SS
Facilitators
STF
Working with your TDS team
• Facilitators ( S4, ELA/SS, Math/Science)
– Instructional and organizational experts to guide
implementation
• Instructional Coaches
– On-Site instructional experts to provide coaching and
guidance
• TA visits
– Support visits by Facilitators to help move the school
forward with implementation
• SVRs (Site Visit Reports)
– Completed by Facilitators after each TA visit
Implementation Goal: Creating
collaborative teacher teams that
provide common expectations and
coordinated supports for students
Assess prior
knowledge/
experience
Developing
common
homework policy
Using the EWI
protocol
Training for
team leaders on
facilitation skills
Set norms, meeting
schedules, agendas
2012-2013 School Year
Team building
Activities/ role
playing
Team resume
activity
Using
protocols
What data do we
look at and why?
Forming, storming,
norming,
performing check-in
Approaching data at a TDS School
Outcome Data
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Graduation Rate
AYP
Diagnostic tests
Achievement data
Attendance
Behavior
Course Performance
Climate Surveys
Implementation Data
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
STP
Intervention trackers
Coaches feedback
Facilitator feedback
Teacher feedback
SVRs
TDS Team meetings
Making Implementation Happen
• Short Term: Your 1st task is to determine the
short term action for each individual on the
team – for the next TA visit
• Long Term: Your 2nd task is to determine any
longer term actions (future visits) that may
take multiple visits to accomplish
TDS model components
• We know that implementation of components
of the TDS model have helped schools reach
their goals for the ABCs
• We know that the model components and its
approaches are often compatible to school
initiatives
• We know that when all components are
implemented and for longer time periods, we
have seen greater results
Common Vision
Early Stages of Planning Program Implementation
Pre-planning conversations, “face to face” work
sessions between school leaders and Talent
Development Secondary Staff
• Awareness
• Consensus
• Preliminary Decisions
• Next Steps
The Coaching Cycle
Continuum of Coaching Supports
Supporting self directed learning,
coaching conversations, & goal
setting
Facilitating professional
development, modeling,
bringing teams together around
data/artifacts
Basic Needs-Materials, Schedules, Data
Your TD Facilitator Can Support You By:
• Modeling the coaching cycle with you and your
teachers/administrators
• Model or co-teach or co-facilitate with you
• Planning and facilitating professional development
• Helping you to coordinating testing and interpret the results
• Creating your coaching calendar
• Troubleshooting
• Supporting your individual coaching needs
• Monthly visits
• Coaching logs
• Phone & E-mail
79
Tiered Staff Support
Principal
• As you went through those steps, how do you
make sure you are aligning with the principal
and administration
• What do you need to know about school
leadership when addressing these items
Reflections
Extra Slides…If Needed
What data do I use?
• What are two attributes of your successful
student?
– 8:25-9:30
• What misperceptions do people have about your
successful student?
– 31:25-35:25 – Player value
• How do you help change the minds so that others
understand your successful student
– 46:48 – 47:54 – You don’t make a team off of a
computer
For Afternoon - All Adults Recognize:
• There is variation among teachers in their
impact on student learning.
• That we value having positive impacts on
students
• That we must be vigilant about building
expertise to create positive effects.
– Appendix A, Visible Learning for Teachers, 2012
• TDS Instructional Facilitators and School and
Student Services Support Facilitators provide
professional development and non-evaluative
in-class support of coaches and teachers.
• TDS Facilitators design and provide support
for citywide City Year Corp Members.
• On-site curriculum coaches offer
job embedded teacher support for high-level
implementation.
MONDAY
TUESDAY
THURSDAY
WEDNESDAY
FRIDAY
DAY
Planning with Mr.
Dunn
Before
Classes
Period 1
Period 2

Period 4
After School
Classroom &
Planning assistance
by request
Materials review
and practice for
planning/
coordinating
classroom activities

Implement Lesson
with Mr. O and Ms.
Musinghi

Debrief Mr. Dunn
Period 3

Ms. Robinson
Cover
Ms Jackson
Ms. Jackson Peer
Visit Mr. Dunn


Flex
Lunch

Implement with Mr.
Dunn
Classroom &
Planning
assistance by
request
Materials review
and practice for
planning/
coordinating
classroom activities

Abbrevi
ated
Periods
Mary and Linda
Mr. Dunn
Implement
Ms. Robinson Cover
Mr. Morrisey
Mr. Morrisey Peer
Visit Ms. Williams
Linda – Plan with Mr.
O


Plan with Mr. O and Ms.
Musingi

Debrief with
Jackson/Dunn
This flex lunch will be 
on 11 th grade schedule
after period 3…debrief
with Mr. O and Ms M.
Profession
al
Learning

Classroom & Planning assistance by
request
Materials review and practice for
planning/ coordinating classroom
activities
Implement with
Mr. O and Ms.
Musingi
(spelling?)
Debrief
Morrisey/Williams
Debreif Dunn (2nd
half)
Finish debrief with Mr. O and Ms.
M.


Plan with Mr. Dunn