Challenge Project Reflection Report
Alice Hom, Principal – Fellow
Emilia Macias-Capellan, Assistant Principal – Ally
Yung Wing Elementary P.S. 124
Introduction
Our challenge project hopes to address the following question: How do we create a
professional learning community using the collaborative inquiry process to analyze
student data and develop units of study in our writing curriculum? Over the last two
years, our inquiry team has been limited to teachers in the fourth grade with the focus on
reading comprehension (inferencing and self-monitoring skills). Last year, we had staff
developers from the Teachers College Reading and Writing Project work with our staff
and noticed that the writing workshop model was not being implemented in many of the
classes. There were gaps in the writing continuum across the grades and parents also
raised concerns about the quality of their children’s writing (i.e., mechanics, punctuation,
spelling) during School Leadership Team meetings.
Our school did not have to participate in the Quality Review last year and are also exempt
from the review process this year. In looking at the five statements and rubrics, we
realized that to prepare for next year’s Quality Review, we would need:
• to engage the whole school in the inquiry process;
• to provide staff with opportunities to analyze student data and to collaborate on
ways to support teaching and learning (intra- and inter-grade); and
• to focus on developing a coherent writing continuum that would address the
different student levels and abilities within our school.
This year, we’ve encouraged teachers within grades to work as collaborative inquiry
teams and to analyze their students’ writing to target an area of need around which they
would develop lessons that would address the problem. At the same time, protocols for
facilitating professional conversations are being established with the help of our literacy
and math coaches. Our vision is to create teacher leaders within each grade who can take
more initiative to provide collegial support to improve and enhance our school-wide
writing initiative.
School Description
School Mission Statement:
The Yung Wing Elementary School, located in the heart of New York City’s Chinatown,
is dedicated to achieving high standards of academic excellence for all of our students.
As a school with a large immigrant population, we are committed to providing a rigorous
1
education program that meets the individual needs of all students including English
Language Learners, Talented and Gifted and Special Education students.
P.S. 124 supports a constructivist approach to learning and implements a literature-based
balanced reading program, a hands-on problem solving approach to learning mathematics,
and an inquiry-based model for studying science and social studies. Real world problems
are used to challenge students to be critical, analytical and independent thinkers as well as
to make their learning real, meaningful and purposeful. Cooperative grouping, peer
tutoring and individual/group projects are some of the environments in which students
learn.
Students, faculty and administrators trust in the value of hard work and maintain high
expectations because they see themselves as lifelong learners. Teachers continually work
at improving and enhancing pedagogical practices and they are deeply involved in their
own learning. They teach programs that are an outgrowth of their staff development and
their own collaborative process across grades as well as intra-grade. Parents are an
important part of our school community. They are actively engaged in many facets of the
teaching and learning process at P.S. 124.
Community partnerships are essential to support and sustain school initiatives. P.S. 124
has fostered relationships with various community-based organizations, arts programs,
cultural institutions, businesses and higher education institutions that have provided the
students with many wonderful enriching experiences.
The mission of P.S. 124 is to enable students to achieve their full potential as productive,
caring, and informed individuals by providing them with a comprehensive, stimulating
and well-rounded education suited to their unique needs and abilities. To achieve this, we
provide a range of programs that address not only the intellectual, but also the physical,
emotional and social needs of all our students.
Demographics & School Description
P.S. 124 is a pre-k – 5 elementary school located in Chinatown. According to our 200809 School Demographics and Accountability Snapshot, of our 960 students, 88.3% are
Asian, 4.8% are Black/African-American, 3.9% are Hispanic or Latino, 2.1% are White
and .2% are Native American. 50.6% of our student population are male while 49.4% are
female. 270 students (28.1%) are designated ELL and entitled to ESL services. All of
our ELLs (270) come from Chinese speaking backgrounds. 60.8% of our students qualify
for free lunch and this year our school received the Universal Lunch extension until 2012.
Our school has one Gifted and Talented (G&T) class on each grade from Kindergarten
through grade 5. There are two self contained Special Education classes (12:1:1) and four
Collaborative Team Teaching (CTT) classes (K, 1st, 2nd, and 3rd grade). We have English
as a Second Language (ESL) teachers who push in to classrooms to provide support for
our English Language Learners (ELLs). Over the last four years, our school has been
successful in procuring funds through Dept. of Ed. Grants for ELLs. These extra monies
have helped us acquire books, tapes, software and other resources to enrich their learning
2
and supplement curricula development as well as provide stipends for teachers to meet
monthly to plan and learn together.
While many of our teaching staff are motivated and willing to learn and work
collaboratively with fellow colleagues, we still have about 15% who don’t engage well
with others and are resistant to change. Although we have attempted to involve them in
professional development and inter- and intra- group activities to foster the learning
process, it has been a challenge which we continue to face. This year we are working on
setting meeting protocols and building capacity by having staff members within a grade
take on the role as facilitator and having them create small ‘community of learners’.
We have used the arts to help our students develop oral language skills, vocabulary, and
self confidence in their abilities. Through Studio In A School and National Dance
Institute, students and teachers learn from teaching artists and are able to demonstrate
their creativity and personal talents. Children’s Museum of the Arts has been able during
the last two years to acquire grants for classes within a grade to integrate technology with
their science or social studies curricula. Experiential learning is encouraged and students
in our school go on many field trips to widen their background knowledge.
Yung Wing Elementary is considered by parents in the Chinatown neighborhood as an
excellent school. According to Claire Hemphill, the school is considered one of the Best
Elementary Schools in NYC. We have provided many workshops for parents that have
addressed educational, health, social, and emotional issues that we feel impact the lives of
their children and themselves. Communication between the school staff and parents is
on-going through various means – individual class news, school-wide monthly calendars
and newsletters and the school website. Translation services are always provided since we
have a large parent population who are not English speaking.
The community-based organizations that use our classrooms after-school work very
closely with the day school by helping the children with homework and participating in
periodic workshops provided by the principal. Local cultural organizations, particularly
those in the arts, seek partnerships with our school in dance, visual arts, music, and
technology projects. These collaborations have enabled our students and teachers to
engage in many hands-on and exciting long-term artistic as well as educational programs
that align well with our units of study in language arts, science and social studies.
During the past six years, we have also been fortunate to have the same ‘Principal for a
Day’, the Vice President of IT at HBO/Time Warner. He has advised our school on
creating the website, networking concerns and helped to upgrade our computer equipment
with donations of flat screens and hardware. Another strong and vital partnership we’ve
established has been with New York Cares. They have helped over the last four years to
beautify our school with indoor and outdoor murals and canvas paintings. Corporate
volunteers have come to our school to work with children on literacy, math, physical
education, and science events and always leave with positive comments about our school
environment and the enthusiasm of our students. In addition, they recruit volunteers to
3
work with our children before school (math games), during lunch (Financial Club) and
after-school (Homework Help).
Careful analysis of the New York State English as a Second Language Achievement Test
(NYSESLAT) reveals how students are doing within four strands – Reading, Writing,
Listening and Speaking. Of the 280 students tested in the 2008 school year, 40% scored
low in the writing strand. The ESL team, comprised of classroom teachers and ESL
certified personnel, have discussed ways in which teachers can guide students through the
writing process. The team has discussed the need for more consistency in the teaching of
writing skills and craft lessons across the grades.
The two literacy coaches have analyzed the Narrative Writing Continuum developed by
Teachers College in order to provide teachers with a rubric for looking at students’ work.
Teachers use on-demand writing samples as a way of assessing their children’s writing.
During grade curriculum planning meetings, teachers and administrators have analyzed
the on-demand writing samples to come up with areas of need within our writing
curriculum. Our inquiry work this year hopes to target those areas of concern through
focused writing groups, extended day tutorials and professional development.
We plan to use the following data to support our inquiry work this year:
• Teachers College reading assessments
• Teachers College on-demand writing assessment (at least 3-4 times a year)
• Spelling Inventory
• Conference notes during writer’s workshop
• Student portfolios
• Student writing folders
• Narrative writing rubric developed by PS 124 teachers
• Reports submitted by service providers, AIS coordinator and ESL teachers
The component of both my Quality Review from two years ago and Principal
Performance Report which I would like to improve is working with teachers to provide
differentiated instruction within the classroom. In all classes, the levels and learning
needs of the students run the gamut from below grade level to very high functioning.
We’ve noticed that instruction is usually geared towards the mid-range level and lessons
are not always targeted towards those who are struggling or those who are more
advanced. The CTT classroom teachers and a few heterogeneous classroom teachers
have demonstrated the differentiated instruction and scaffolded supports which we would
like to see implemented in all classrooms. We will continue to work this year on
providing professional development and visitations in order to help teachers in this area.
Diagnosis/Deeper Understanding
Many of our teachers within a grade chose as their Circular 6 option (2009-10) to meet
for common grade planning. During the weekly meetings, inquiry work on student
writing needs in conjunction with the Teachers College Narrative Writing Continuum
was done. With our Literacy and Math coaches, a yearlong pacing calendar was created
4
and distributed to each grade inquiry team. Teachers planned for one or two cycles
during which they:
• Looked at student on demand pre- and post writing pieces;
• Examined data and decided what writing element to focus on;
• Developed lessons and then implemented them;
• Observed colleagues teach a lesson and then reflected on the effectiveness of the
lesson as well as changes to be made;
• Read relevant articles; and
• Reflected on student outcomes as well as their own learning process as part of
their Teacher Portfolio Review.
Our challenge was to engage teachers to look at and use their students’ writing to
determine areas of need and then to collegially work together to write lessons aligned
with the unit of study, implement them and then share with each other what worked and
what needed to be revised. Because the abilities of students across grades included
Gifted and Talented (G & T) students, English Language Learners (ELLs) ranging from
Beginners to Advanced, and students with Individualized Education Plans (IEPs), it took
a few meetings at the beginning of the school year for the teachers to agree on the
specific area of need to target.
In addition, the weekly meetings focused on inquiry work and the inclusion of
administrators and coaches to facilitate the meetings were questioned by teachers who
felt they were being micro-managed. However, we were addressing the lack of
procedures/protocols and involvement by all teachers, and were modeling effective
strategies for teacher leaders to facilitate meetings. Our goal was to provide the teachers
with tools and a structure so that they could eventually run their own inquiry team
meetings and stay on-task in the limited amount of time (45 minutes) allotted for the
period.
Mid-year, a meeting was held with me (principal) and teachers representing each inquiry
team to reflect on how their work was going. Concerns included:
• The frequency of meeting every week and just focusing on writing;
• Lack of time to discuss other grade issues (trips, special events);
• Lack of time to plan curriculum (TC reading units of study, science, math);
• Limited per session if they planned after school.
In brainstorming possible solutions to address these concerns, we discussed giving up one
of the weekly inquiry meetings each month so that they had the opportunity to discuss
their own grade issues. Another suggestion was having a School Based Option (SBO) for
the next school year to move inquiry work to the morning extended time session and each
inquiry team (by grade) would meet every other week. This would then allow them time
to implement planned lessons and then reflect and revise their action plans.
During our cabinet meetings, we discussed our frustrations, yet acknowledged that the
pacing of our inquiry meetings was intense and creating tensions which impacted the
progress of the work. We informed the teams that beginning in March/April, the
5
coaches/administrators would not be attending weekly and that a lead teacher from each
team would facilitate and keep notes/agendas on what was discussed and accomplished at
each meeting. Thus, they would assume a leadership role as well as the responsibilities.
Action Steps
During cabinet meetings, we (principal, assistant principals, and coaches) developed
agendas for the inquiry meetings and modeled protocols in order for the time to be used
efficiently and purposefully. The reason we needed to establish such routines was
because in previous years, the grade meetings were used to discuss problems (student
behaviors, administrative issues), trips, occasionally about the curriculum and were not
always productive. The protocols used this year helped to focus the teachers on using
their student work to discuss learning concerns, plan targeted instructional strategies and
collaboratively think about ways to improve teaching and understanding.
As administrators, we understood the urgency of beginning the work of establishing
inquiry groups. Prior to this year, our only inquiry team consisted of fourth grade
teachers, coaches and the administrators. Our teachers went along with the idea without
fully understanding our purpose, the importance of the work they were to embark on, and
how to begin this daunting process. In order to push this process forward, each grade was
lead by one administrator and/or a coach, who would be responsible for planning and
facilitating grade-level inquiry teams.
The first cycle of inquiry began in September and ended in December. Our short-term
goals for the first cycle were as follows:
• To provide an example of the inquiry process through grade-wide inquiry team
meetings;
• To assess and provide professional development in the area of writing since this
was our school-wide focus;
• To analyze and re-write our writing curriculum according to the areas of need
presented by our students this year;
• To facilitate discussions and decision making during inquiry team meetings;
• To provide teacher support in developing targeted teaching strategies in the area
of writing;
• To demonstrate the importance of protocols and developing clear agendas that
drove our inquiry team meetings;
• To reflect on our students’ work and examine areas for improvement in regards to
their writing craft; and
• To reflect on our teaching practices and develop a collection of teaching strategies
and/or lesson plans that could be used the following year.
At the end of our first cycle our school cabinet met to analyze what was accomplished
and what needed to be changed/improved upon. During these meetings (January –
February) we discussed the need for the following:
6
•
•
•
•
To establish a core-inquiry team, consisting of one grade leader, coaches and
administrators, in order to share our grade-level work and set further goals for the
remainder of the school year;
To invite one teacher from each grade to take on the role of inquiry team
facilitator;
To share protocols for looking at student work, discuss challenges and develop
norms that would help teachers facilitate inquiry meetings with colleagues
without the presence of an administrator; and
To review the inquiry process and offer support to grades needing further
clarification
The Launch of Cycle #2 (February – Present)
Administrators and coaches removed themselves from the inquiry process and gave each
grade discretion in establishing their own grade focus. Each grade was responsible for
developing its own goal(s) within the area of writing. Grade facilitators participated in
core-inquiry team meetings (April & May) and shared their experiences. The purpose of
the core-inquiry team was to provide facilitators with support and suggestions for their
work in cycle 2. During our core-inquiry team meetings we discussed the need for:
•
•
•
•
Grade-level group reflections to share how they experienced the inquiry process,
to understand areas that went well and also to talk about what needed to be
improved for the second cycle;
A concept map, illustrating the inquiry process, since some grades found it
difficult to backtrack and define the process based on their experience during
cycle one;
Suggestions to lead a group when the facilitator was not the administrator
supervising the grade. Some facilitators found it challenging to be a “leader” with
their peers and began to understand how group dynamics influence and impact
meetings (both positively and negatively); and
A better understanding of the areas not accomplished during the first cycle such
as embedding research and classroom observations.
This year, most of our classroom teachers were involved in the inquiry process and
though we had some problems along the way, we listened to the concerns raised and
attempted to make adjustments to our course of action in order to provide the teachers
with the opportunity to take ownership of the work. We plan to reflect and celebrate
what was achieved this year during the June 10th Staff Development Day and encourage
them to continue and expand their inquiry work in the upcoming year.
Monitoring, Reviewing, and Planning
In April, we established a Core Inquiry Team which met three times to discuss:
• how the inquiry work went this year;
• successes and barriers that teams encountered during the process;
• protocols that teams felt were effective; and
• ways to improve the process for the next school year.
7
Over the past couple of weeks we have been dropping in on grade level meetings to
observe how teachers are managing the process of inquiry on their own. In many grades,
facilitators have met with supervisors and/or coaches to review agendas and hear
suggestions prior to their meetings. Meeting minutes along with any products and
agendas are submitted to administrators on a weekly basis. During our observations and
conversations with teachers we have noticed:
• A better understanding of the inquiry process as evidenced by items on the
agendas and next steps discussed during meetings;
• Some grades have been focusing on primarily one specific area within the inquiry
process such as creating strategies/lessons or researching possible lessons by
reading professional literature;
• More teachers are inclined to go through the professional literature that was
always made available to them but not really used;
• Facilitators have really taken on the challenge of leading their colleagues through
the inquiry process;
• There was a need for teams to establish group norms since some teachers became
relaxed about the process without the presence of the administrator;
• Teachers have a better understanding of the area of need embedded in their
SMART goal and can easily discuss the writing strategies the students need;
• Teachers have developed a good repertoire of teaching strategies that can be
utilized in future lessons;
• Teachers now understand the importance of looking at pre-assessments and postassessments as a way of analyzing student growth;
• Teachers are beginning to understand clearer expectations for grade specific skills
in the area of writing; and
• Students’ writing pieces demonstrate growth as evidence by post-assessments.
Our school passed an SBO vote in May to have inquiry meetings bi-weekly next school
year in the morning during Extended School Time with the understanding from
administrators that the Common Grade meetings would be their time for discussing grade
issues, meeting with related personnel who support their grade as well as for curriculum
planning.
Reflections on Leadership and School Development
Leading Adult Learning by Eleanor Drago-Severson was a resource that guided me in
learning and understanding ways to foster growth and collaboration among adults. It
provided me with tools to reflect on my own leadership skills and suggestions on
practical applications towards enhancing collegial inquiry among members of my staff.
During our monthly meetings, the Ways of Knowing and the NBI activities and
assessments gave us insights into analyzing our behaviors and interactions with
colleagues that impact our leadership style in both negative and positive ways. I found
them to be quite interesting and eye opening, and applicable at times to situations we
faced during this year’s challenge project. The Exec/Comm workshops offered to us on
Communication Skills and Presentation Skills were excellent and I appreciated the
feedback and tips the consultants gave to us. I shared resources we used at our meetings
8
with my administrators and coaches who were just as interested as I was in trying to
figure out the motivations and reasons for some of the actions and behaviors of our staff
members as we worked this year on building a professional learning community of
inquiry teams.
As a result of my Cahn Fellowship, I was able to network with other Principals and
Assistant Principals and share leadership issues as well discuss ways to approach them
with possible solutions to get successful results. Our Action Learning Conversations
were very enlightening and it was amazing how many of us had similar concerns and
frustrations while at the same time had a variety of strategies and ideas for handling them.
Discussions with colleagues led to additional perspectives on how to view what we
considered problematic areas, and helpful suggestions and creative ways to understand
and deal with those situations.
Emily’s (my Ally) leadership abilities this year increased tremendously as she worked
with the teachers on her grade in their inquiry studies and as she worked with the coaches
and other administrator to plan and facilitate professional development for staff. She cofacilitated the Core Inquiry Team meetings and was successful in encouraging certain
teachers to develop their leadership skills by facilitating grade meetings and speaking at
our culminating ‘celebration’ event in June. Her impeccable organizational abilities and
focused planning with lead teachers on the ESL committee and early grade inquiry teams
were evident in meetings she facilitated and during school-wide presentations. Her
strong commitment to involving all team members in the process of collaboration was
apparent in her actions and protocols which she tried to establish during her grade
meetings. She encouraged and nurtured teachers who had potential to be leaders to
facilitate and continue the inquiry work in her absence.
I feel that inviting Emily to work with me this year as my Ally in this challenge project
provided us with opportunities to see the strengths and weaknesses within our building
and to develop goals and strategies towards making changes that would improve and
enhance our learning community, both for the students and the staff. We got a chance to
learn about our personality and leadership styles, and had numerous occasions during our
time together at meetings and in completing our final presentation to discuss not only
what worked well but also had honest conversations about changes that needed to be
made in order to move forward as we expand our focus and inquiry work in the upcoming
year.
9