October 1, 2014
MAS/FPS Fall Directors’ Institute
Oakland Schools & Wayne RESA Collaborative
1

Table Introductions…30 seconds each
◦ Name
◦ District/Role
◦ What is something about program evaluation you
hope to learn more about?
2

Purpose: Deepen understanding of the program

Objectives: Participants will …
evaluation process through the use of visual tools.
1. Understand how to use visual tools to plan for
program evaluation.
2. Understand how to select “what” & “when” to
monitor to inform the evaluation process.
3. Describe how the program evaluation process is
linked to continuous school improvement.

Products:
◦ “Tri-Fold” of an instructional program
◦ Strategic Map of DIP/SIP goal area
3


Write any burning questions NOT addressed
in today’s “POP” on an index card.
Hold up when ready.
4
Purpose Matters
Is your “program” meeting
its intended purpose?
“The purpose of this title is to
ensure that all children have a fair,
equal, and significant opportunity
to obtain a high-quality education
and reach, at a minimum,
proficiency on challenging State
academic achievement standards
and state academic assessments.”
State and Federal Requirements
Related to Program Evaluation
MICHIGAN
FEDERAL
❑ Annual evaluation of the
implementation and
impact of the School
Improvement Plan
❑ Annual evaluation of all federal
programs—effectiveness & impact
on student achievement, including
subgroups
❑ Modification of the plan
based on evaluation
results
❑ Modification of the plan based on
evaluation results
ISDs/RESAs are required by PA25 to provide technical assistance to schools and
districts to develop annual evaluations. ESEA requires annual evaluations of programs
funded by the federal programs such as Title I, Part A, C, D; Title II and Title III.
Targeted Assistance




Needs assessment of
eligible students
Supplemental Services
provided only to eligible
students
Research-based strategies
Ongoing review of student
progress
 Provide additional
support, if needed
 Revise Title I TA program
 Provide training for
educators
Schoolwide




Measures to ensure
students’ difficulties
are identified
Timely & additional
assistance to students
having difficulty.
Research-based
strategies
Annual evaluation
9
MDE Program Evaluation Roll Out
Feb-Mar 2014
Conduct Train the Trainer workshop on Program Evaluation
to include representatives from each of ISD/SIFN, OFS, OEII,
AdvancED, MICSI, LEAs.
Mar-Aug 2014
ISD/MDE trainers to conduct regional workshops for LEAs
Spring 2014:
DIP/SIP 2014-15
Include program evaluation activities in SIP/DIP to support
Program Evaluation as part of the Continuous Improvement
Process
Implement Program Evaluation activities throughout the
2014-2015 school year
June 30, 2015
Report on the evaluation of ONE program using the MDE
Program Evaluation Diagnostic (submit in ASSIST). (Required
for approval of 2015 – 2016 Consolidated Application.)
Summer 2015+
Sustain professional learning by reconvening trainers to
discuss successes, challenges, and develop the required
follow-up training materials and support systems
Best Evidence
Is Collected…
when the Right
questions are asked..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGQmdoK_ZfY
11
MDE’s
Questions for Evaluation
1. Readiness?
5. Impact on
students?
2. Knowledge
and skills?
3. Opportunity?
4. Implemented
as intended?
DESCRIPTION of the Program/Strategy/Initiative
IMPACT: What was the IMPACT of the STRATEGY/
PROGRAM/ INITIATIVE ON STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT?
1. What was the READINESS for implementing
the strategy/ program/initiative?
2. Did participants have the KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS to
implement the program?
3. Was there OPPORTUNITY for implementation?
4. Was the program IMPLEMENTED AS INTENDED?
CONCLUSIONS: continue, adjust, discontinue
14
Michigan Continuous School Improvement
“Plan”: Get Ready, Implement, Monitor, and Evaluate
A Strategy/Initiative/Program
Gather & Study Achievement &
Process Data:
Q4: Implemented with fidelity?
Q5: Impact on Students?
Gather & Study Process Data:
Q1: Readiness to implement?
Q2: Knowledge & Skills of
Implementers?
Q3: Opportunity to implement?
Planning:
What will we do to ensure….. ?
“GR-IM-E”
Getting Ready
1. Readiness
2. Knowledge/Skills
3. Opportunity
Implementation/
Evaluation
Monitoring
Conclusions:
4. Implementing
Program
With Fidelity
Effectiveness
5. Impact on Students
Monitor & Adjust
DURING
implementation.
Baseline
PM 1,
Formative
PM 2,
Formative
PM 3,
Formative
PM 4 =
Program
Evaluation;
Summative
Draw
Conclusions
Data on Adult Implementation AND Impact on Students
17
Q5: Impact on Students
 Student Work
 Assessment Results
• Universal Screening
• Benchmark Assessments
• Diagnostic Assessments
Observations of
Students
 Surveys
 Others

Q4: Program Implementation
(What adults are doing)
 Lesson Plans
 Student work, artifacts
 Activity Logs
 Observation Data, Checklists
 Self assessments of practice
 Surveys
 Staffing; Job Descriptions
 Agendas, Minutes
 Schedules
 Policies & Procedures
 Others
18
 What
is making sense?
 What
questions might you have?
19
Guiding Question:
What did we say we would do?
20


Builds shared understanding of the program,
strategy or initiative that will be implemented
Articulates critical program components
◦
◦
◦
◦
◦

Purpose
Evidence of need
Expected student outcomes
Expected adult actions
Resources needed
Helps us “see” what to monitor
21


Select a supplemental program/service from
your DIP or SIP.
It should meet as many of the following
criteria as possible:
o It is a instructional program for students. (Tier 2 or 3
program/service.)
o It has been implemented for at least a semester…a year
is preferable.
o The process for selecting students to participate in the
program is clear to you.
o You understand the program/service and can describe it
to others.
*Program = program, strategy, or initiative
22

Be able to answer two questions:
1) WHAT…is the name of the
program or service?
2) WHY…does it exist?
23

Use blank paper (landscape)



Draw a line near the top to create a
“header”
Draw a line near the bottom to create a
“footer”
See example on next slide.
24
25
26
Title I Before School Math Program
To improve the foundational math skills of students in grades
4-6 so they can access and achieve grade-level standards.
Title I Before School Math Program
To improve the foundational math skills of students in grades
4-6 so they can access and achieve grade-level standards.
Fold into thirds.
28
Eligibility Criteria
Key Components
Exit Criteria
Resources
29
3) WHAT…are the Key Components
or “Critical Features” of the program or
service? (Refer or find in your DIP/SIP)



What “defines” this program or service?
What would observers expect to see if the
program/service is implemented as intended
(based on research)?
What do students “get”?
30
Eligibility Criteria
Key
Components
Exit Criteria
List the key
components or
“critical features”.
What does the
program/service
look like when
implemented
well?
What do students
“get”?
Resources
31
Eligibility Criteria
Key Components
Exit Criteria
• 30 min., 2-3x week, a.m.
• Breakfast snack
• 10:1 stud:tchr ratio
• Students grouped by need
• Pre-teaching of skills to support
access to grade-level curriculum
• Aligned to daily classroom
instruction
• Use research-based strategies
(i.e., Concrete-Pictorial-Abstract)
• Teacher & interventionist plan
weekly
Resources/PD
32
4) WHAT…are the eligibility and
exit criteria for the program?
5)
WHAT…are the resources
(including PD) needed to
implement the program?
33
Eligibility Criteria
What criteria are
used to identify
eligible children?
Consider the
purpose of the
program and the
needs it was
designed to
address.
Key
Components
Exit Criteria
Include the
data
source as
well as the
“cut score”
and
timeframe.
What criteria are
used to determine
when students exit
the program?
Consider the
eligibility criteria
and how you know
when a student’s
needs have been
met.
Resources/PD
34
Eligibility Criteria
Key
Components
Exit Criteria
• MEAP: Level 1 or 2 on
• MEAP: Level 3 or 4
most recent
assessment
• District Benchmark: at
least 70% on 2 of last
3 assessments
• NWEA: 26th percentile
or higher on last
assessment
• C or better semester
grade in math.
for two consecutive
years
• District Benchmark
Assessment: below
65% on 2 of last 3
assessments
• NWEA: 0-25th
percentile on most
recent assessment
Resources/PD
35
Eligibility Criteria
Key Components
Exit Criteria
What resources are needed? (materials, PD, food….?)
36
1
Key Components
Eligibility Criteria
•
•
•
•
•
Exit Criteria
30 min., 2-3x week, a.m.
• MEAP: Level 1 or 2
Breakfast snack
• MEAP: Level 3 or 4
on most recent
10:1 stud:tchr ratio
for two consecutive
assessment
Students grouped by need
years
Pre-teaching of skills to
• District Benchmark:
• District Benchmark
support access to grade-level
at least 70% on 2
Assessment: below
curriculum
of last 3 assessments
65% on 2 of last 3
• Aligned to daily classroom
• NWEA: 26th
assessments
instruction
percentile or higher
• Use research-based strategies
• NWEA: 0-25th
on last assessment
(i.e.,
Concrete-Pictorialpercentile on most
• C or better semester
Abstract)
recent assessment
grade in math.
• Teacher & interventionist plan
weekly
Resources/PD: Manipulatives, Snacks, Intervention Teacher (360 hrs), PD for Int.
Tchr. (registration, sub costs), others..,37
 What
is making sense?
 What
questions might you have?
38
5. Impact on
students?
Eligibility Criteria
Key Components
Exit Criteria
Getting Ready
1. Readiness?
2. Knowledge
and skills?
Resources/PD
3. Opportunity?
39
Randel Jasserand,
Chicago Public Schools
40
Strategic Management
Ensuring School & Student Success
Selected Slides from webinar
Feb. 20, 2013
Randel Josserand, Chief of Schools
Typical School Improvement
Student Outcome Metric
Improve State Reading Assessment from 56.2%
Meet/Exceed to 64.2% M/E (+8% Points)
Guided Reading
Program ( GR K-2)
SS & Reading / Lit
Circles ( GR 6-8)
After School
Tutoring (3-8)
Reading Recovery
Program (GR K-2)
Balanced Literacy
Program ( GR 3-5)
Writer’s Workshop
Program ( GR 6-8)
Extended Small
Group (K-2)
Lunch Bunch
Program (GR 3-8)
Lunch Bunch
Program (GR 3-8)
42
Typical School Improvement
Student Outcome Metric
Improve State Reading Assessment from 56.2%
Meet/Exceed to 64.2% M/E (+8% Points)
New Grade Card
SSR
( GR 6-8)
Guided Reading
SS & Reading
Lit Circles
( GR /K-2)
Program ( GR K-2)
( GRLiteracy
6-8)
Math
Program (
Computer Program ( GR GR 6-8)
K-2)
Balanced Literacy
Writer’s Workshop
Program ( GR 3-5)
Program
( GR 6-8) ( GR
Reading Workshop
Silent Reading
( GR
K-2)
3-5)
Reading Recovery
After School Tutoring (3Before
School
Tutoring
Program ( GR K-2)
8)
(3-8)
After School Tutoring (
8)
Extended Small Group(
Lunch Bunch Program
(
GR K-2)
Breakfast Club (3-8)
GR 3-8)
Small Group Reading (K2)
Lunch Bunch Program (
GR 3-8)
43
Typical School Improvement
Student Outcome Metric
Improve State Reading Assessment from 56.2%
Meet/Exceed to 64.2% M/E (+8% Points)
Running Record
(K-2)
Running Record
(3-5)
DIBELS Assessment
(K-1)
New Grade Card
SSR
( GR 6-8)
Guided Reading
SS & Reading
Lit Circles
( GR /K-2)
Program ( GR K-2)
( GRLiteracy
6-8)
Math
Program (
Guided Reading
SS
&
Reading
/
Lit
Circles
Computer Program ( GR GR 6-8)
Program ( GR K-2)
( GR 6-8)
K-2)
Balanced Literacy
Writer’s Workshop
Balanced
Literacy
Writer’s
Workshop
Program ( GR 3-5)
Program
( GR 6-8) ( GR
Reading
SilentProgram
Reading ( GR (3-5)
GR
Program Workshop
( GR 6-8)
K-2)
3-5)
Interim Assessment
(3-5)
Interim Assessment
(6-8)
Reading Recovery
After School Tutoring (3Before
School
Tutoring
Program ( GR K-2)
8)
(3-8)
Reading Recovery
After School Tutoring
Program
( GR K-2)
(3-8)
After School
Tutoring (
8)
Extended Small Group(
Lunch Bunch Program
(
Extended
Small
Group
Lunch
Bunch
Program
(
GR K-2)
GR 3-8)
K-2) (3-8)
GR 3-8)
Breakfast(GR
Club
Small Group
Reading (K2)
Lunch
Lunch Bunch
Bunch Program
Program (
(GR
GR 3-8)
3-8)
44
Strategically Managing School
Improvement
Student Outcome Metric
Improve State Reading Assessment from 56.2%
Meet/Exceed to 64.2% M/E (+8% Points)
Running Record
(K-2)
Running Record
(3-5)
DIBELS Assessment
(K-1)
GR-IM-E
Interim Assessment
(3-5)
Interim Assessment
(6-8)
Develop Project Plans
Each New Intervention MUST Have a Fully Developed Project Plan.
Guided Reading
Program ( GR K-2)
SS & Reading / Lit Circles
( GR 6-8)
After School Tutoring
(3-8)
Reading Recovery
Program ( GR K-2)
Balanced Literacy
Program ( GR 3-5)
Writer’s Workshop
Program ( GR 6-8)
Extended Small Group
(GR K-2)
Lunch Bunch Program
(GR 3-8)
45
Strategically Managing School
Improvement
Student Outcome Metric
Improve State Reading Assessment from 56.2%
Meet/Exceed to 64.2% M/E (+8% Points)
Running Record
(K-2)
Running Record
(3-5)
DIBELS Assessment
(K-1)
Interim Assessment
(3-5)
Interim Assessment
(6-8)
Identify Fidelity Metrics for Each Intervention
Each New Intervention MUST Have One Or More Fidelity Metrics
Guided Reading
Program ( GR K-2)
SS & Reading / Lit Circles
( GR 6-8)
After School Tutoring
(3-8)
Reading Recovery
Program ( GR K-2)
Fidelity Metrics
Fidelity Metrics
Fidelity Metrics
Fidelity Metrics
Balanced Literacy
Program ( GR 3-5)
Writer’s Workshop
Program ( GR 6-8)
Extended Small Group
(GR K-2)
Lunch Bunch Program
(GR 3-8)
Fidelity Metrics
Fidelity Metrics
Fidelity Metrics
Fidelity Metrics
46
Are the RIGHT PEOPLE…
Doing the RIGHT THINGS…
In the RIGHT WAY…
At the RIGHT TIME…
…for the benefit of Students?
Strategically Managing School
Improvement
Student Outcome Metric
Improve State Reading Assessment from 56.2%
Meet/Exceed to 64.2% M/E (+8% Points)
Running Record
(K-2)
Running Record
(3-5)
DIBELS Assessment
(K-1)
Interim Assessment
(3-5)
Interim Assessment
(6-8)
Guided Reading
Program ( GR K-2)
SS & Reading / Lit Circles
( GR 6-8)
After School Tutoring
(3-8)
Reading Recovery
Program ( GR K-2)
Fidelity Metrics
Fidelity Metrics
Fidelity Metrics
Fidelity Metrics
Balanced Literacy
Program ( GR 3-5)
Writer’s Workshop
Program ( GR 6-8)
Extended Small Group
(GR K-2)
Lunch Bunch Program
(GR 3-8)
Fidelity Metrics
Fidelity Metrics
Fidelity Metrics
Fidelity Metrics
48
Fidelity Metric
(Process Data)
Outcome Metric
(Impact Data)
“CPA”
Level of Use
(Rating = 0 - 4)
Percent
Proficient
(Benchmark)
Sept.
3.5
70%
Oct.
3.0
53%
Nov.
3.0
51%
Dec.
2.5
48%
Quarter 1
49
CPA Strategy Implementation Data
“Level of Use”, Rating Scale 0-4
Fidelity = 3.0
Leadership and Learning Center 2010
CPA Strategy Implementation Data
“Level of Use”, Rating Scale 0-4
Fidelity =3.0
What is the
relationship
between Fidelity &
Achievement?
Outcome
Metric = 75%
Leadership and Learning Center 2010
Percent Proficient
Same Data….Different View
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Relationship Between CPA “Level of Use”
and Percent Proficient
(3.5, 70%)
(2.5, 48%)
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
Strategy "Level of Use" Rating
4.0
52
MATH
Obj. 60% students proficient by June 2016
Curriculum-Based
Assessments
NWEA
District
Benchmark
DIBELS-Math ASSESSMENT
Math
Workshop
ConcretePictorial-Abstract
Title I Before
School
Lunch
Bunch
Title I
Math Lab
Online
Courses
Fidelity Indicator
“Level of Use”
# Minutes Direct
Instruction
Fidelity Indicator
Fidelity Indicator
Fidelity Indicator
Fidelity Indicator
Fidelity Indicator
Fidelity Indicator
Fidelity Indicator
Fidelity Indicator
TIER I (CORE)
Fidelity
Indicator
TIER II
(SUPPLEMENTAL)
TIER III
53
(SUPPLEMENTAL)
MATH
Obj. 70% students proficient by June 2016.
Curriculum-Based
Assessments
NWEA
District
Benchmark
DIBELS-Math
ASSESSMENT
Math
Workshop
Everyday
Math
Title I Extended Day
Programs (K-6)
Title I Summer School
Fidelity Indicator
Fidelity Indicator
Fidelity Indicator
Fidelity Indicator
Research-Based Math
Strategies (CPA, ….)
Pull-Out Programs
Reading
Recovery
Title I Tech-
Fidelity Indicator
Fidelity Indicator
Fidelity Indicator
Fidelity Indicator
TIER I (CORE)
TIER II
(SUPPLEMENTAL)
Based
TIER III
(SUPPLEMENTAL)
54

What would your map look like?
◦ Core Instruction
◦ Supplemental instruction
◦ Assessments
What is making sense?
 What questions might you have?

55
Step-by-Step Process
SIP/DIP
56
Step 1.
ASSESSMENT
SIP/DIP GOAL AREA
Measurable Objective
ASSESSMENT
ASSESSMENT
ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT
Step 2:
List all local assessments used to measure and/or
monitor student achievement in this content area.
Link to Measurable Objective.
57
SIP/DIP GOAL AREA
Measurable Goal/Objective
ASSESSMENT
ASSESSMENT
ASSESSMENT
ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT
Step 3:
Identify core and supplemental programs, strategies
or initiatives that support student learning in the
content area. (DIP/SIP)
TIER I (CORE)
TIER II
(SUPPLEMENTAL)
TIER III
(SUPPLEMENTAL)
58
Mathematics
Measurable Goal/Objective
ASSESSMENT
ASSESSMENT
ASSESSMENT
ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT
Step 4: Sort and label programs/initiatives.
Math
Workshop
“CPA”
Strategy
TIER I (CORE)
Title I Before
School
Lunch
Bunch
TIER II
(SUPPLEMENTAL)
Title II
LabLab
Math
Online
Courses
TIER III
(SUPPLEMENTAL)
59
Mathematics
Measurable Goal/Objective
ASSESSMENT
Math
Workshop
ASSESSMENT
“CPA”
Strategy
TIER I (CORE)
ASSESSMENT
Title I Before
School
ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT
Lunch
Bunch
TIER II
(SUPPLEMENTAL)
Step 5: Link
assessments to
programs
Title II
LabLab
Math
Online
Courses
TIER III
(SUPPLEMENTAL)
60
Math
Obj. 60% students proficient by June 2016
Curriculum-Based
Assessment
NWEA
Math
Workshop
“CPA”
Fidelity Indicator
Fidelity Indicator
Fidelity Indicator
Fidelity Indicator
TIER I (CORE)
District
Benchmark
DIBELS-Math ASSESSMENT
Title I Before
School
# Minutes Direct
Instruction
Fidelity Indicator
Title I
Math Lab
Online
Courses
Fidelity Indicator
Fidelity Indicator
Fidelity Indicator
Fidelity Indicator
Step 6: Identify
Fidelity Indicators
Fidelity Indicator
Fidelity Indicator
TIER II
(SUPPLEMENTAL)
TIER III
61
(SUPPLEMENTAL)
Monitoring Adult Practice
62
“Title I Before School Math Program”
Purpose: To improve the foundational math skills of students in grades 46 so they can access and achieve grade-level standards.
Eligibility Criteria
MONITOR Fidelity Indicator:
# Minutes
Instruction
• MEAP:
Level
3 or 4
Key Components
• 30 min., 2-3x week, a.m.
•
•
•
•
Exit Criteria
• MEAP: Level 1 or 2
on most recent
assessment
• District Benchmark:
at least 70% on 2
of last 3 assessments
• NWEA: 26th
percentile or higher
on last assessment
• C or better semester
grade in math.
“Getting Ready”
Breakfast snack
for two consecutive
10:1 stud:tchr ratio
years
Students grouped by need
• District Benchmark
Pre-teaching of skills to
support access to grade-level
Assessment: below
curriculum
65% on 2 of last 3
• Aligned to daily classroom
assessments
instruction
• NWEA: 0-25th
• Use research-based strategies
percentile on most
(i.e., Concrete-Pictorialrecent assessment
Abstract)
• Teacher & interventionist plan
weekly
Resources/PD: Manipulatives, Snacks, Intervention Teacher (360 hrs), PD for Int.
Tchr. (registration, sub costs), others..,63
Key Components
Eligibility Criteria
• MEAP: Level 3 or 4
for two consecutive
years
• District Benchmark
Assessment: below
65% on 2 of last 3
assessments
• NWEA: 0-25th
percentile on most
recent assessment
Exit Criteria
•
•
•
•
•
30 min., 2-3x week, a.m.
• MEAP: Level 1 or 2
Breakfast snack
on most recent
10:1 stud:tchr ratio
assessment
Students grouped by need
• District Benchmark:
Pre-teaching of skills to support
at least 70% on 2
access to grade-level curriculum
of last 3 assessments
• Aligned to daily classroom
• NWEA: 26th
instruction
percentile or higher
• Use research-based
on last assessment
strategies (i.e., Concrete-
Pictorial-Abstract)
• Teacher & interventionist plan
weekly
• C or better semester
grade in math.
Resources/PD: Manipulatives, Snacks, Intervention Teacher (360 hrs), PD for Int.
Tchr. (registration, sub costs), others..,64
Baseline Data
Research Base
Local Expectations
for Implementers
“Critical Features”
Learning Goals
• Organize content into concepts
• Use 3-step approach
1. Introduce concepts using
concrete materials (i.e.,
manipulatives, measurement
tools)
2. Use pictures to show visual
representations of concrete
materials. Explain relationship
of pictures to concrete model.
3. Formal work with symbols
(abstract) to represent
numerical operations.
• Common grade-level planning
2x/month
• Use Lesson Plan/Data templates
Resources/PD
65
Baseline Data
Fidelity Indicator:
Level of Use, 0-4
“Critical Features”
Learning Goals
• Organize content into concepts
• Use 3-step approach
1. Introduce concepts using
concrete materials (i.e.,
manipulatives, measurement
tools)
2. Use pictures to show visual
representations of concrete
materials. Explain relationship
of pictures to concrete model.
3. Formal work with symbols
(abstract) to represent
numerical operations.
• Common grade-level planning
2x/month
• Use Lesson Plan/Data templates
Resources/PD
66
Assessing the Fidelity Protocols
Classroom Observations
Staff SelfAssessments/Surveys
Walk Through Data
Focus Group Interviews
“Program”
Eligibility Criteria
Key Components
1. Readiness?
2. Knowledge
and skills?
Resources/PD
5. Impact on
students?
Exit Criteria
3. Opportunity?
68
Getting
Ready
DESCRIPTION of the Program/Strategy/Initiative
Q1. How will we ensure readiness for implementing
the strategy/program/initiative?
Q2. How will we ensure that staff and
administrators have the knowledge and skills to
implement the strategy/program/initiative?
Q3. How will we ensure that there is opportunity to
implement the strategy/program/initiative with
fidelity?
Q4. How will we ensure that the strategy/program/
initiative will be implemented as intended?
Q5. How will we ensure a positive impact on
student achievement?
DESCRIPTION of the Program/Strategy/Initiative
Q1. How will we ensure readiness for implementing
the strategy/program/initiative?
Q2. How will we ensure that staff and Implementing
Monitoring,
administrators have the knowledge&and
skills to
to inform
implement the strategy/program/initiative?
Evaluation
Q3. How will we ensure that there is opportunity to
implement the strategy/program/initiative with
fidelity?
Q4. How will we ensure that the strategy/program/
initiative will be implemented as intended?
Q5. How will we ensure a positive impact on
student achievement?
Created by Beth Brophy, State School Support Team Coordinator
Michigan Continuous School Improvement
District & School: Plan, Monitor, and Evaluate

Take 5



Big Ideas
Next Steps
Feedback: +/∆/?
73

Oakland Schools:
◦ Jan Callis, Title I: jan.callis@oakland.k12.mi.us

WAYNE RESA:
◦ Jolia Hill, Title I: hillj@resa.net
74
75
Baseline Data  Implement “Program”  Summative Data
Preferred
Future
Current State
76
Baseline Data
(Evidence of Need)
“Critical Features” Learning Goals
(“Gold Standard”)
(Evidence of Success)
Supports, Resources, PD
77
Baseline Data
(Evidence of Need)
“Critical Features” Learning Goals
(“Gold Standard”)
(Evidence of Success)
Preferred
Future
Current State
Supports, Resources, PD
78
Baseline Data
(Evidence of Need)
“Critical Features” Learning Goals
(“Gold Standard”)
(Evidence of Success)
Are we READY
to implement?
Supports, Resources, PD
79
Baseline Data
(Evidence of Need)
“Critical Features” Learning Goals
(“Gold Standard”)
(Evidence of Success)
Are we
implementing with
fidelity?
Supports, Resources, PD
80
Baseline Data
•
•
•
MEAP: 40% of students •
•
successful (80%
correct) on numeration/
operation items
Benchmark Assessments:
Error analysis suggests
misconceptions with
numeration concepts
impacting performance
on operations.
Classroom Assessments:
60% students
performing at grade- •
level on operations
•
“Critical Features”
Organize content into concepts
Use 3-step approach
1. Introduce concepts using
concrete materials (i.e.,
manipulatives, measurement
tools)
2. Use pictures to show visual
representations of concrete
materials. Explain relationship
of pictures to concrete model.
3. Formal work with symbols
(abstract) to represent
numerical operations.
Common grade-level planning
2x/month
Use Lesson Plan/Data templates
Learning Goals
•
•
•
55% students
proficient on
numeration/operation
items (80% correct) on
state assessment, May
2015
Benchmark Assessments:
Increase proficiency on
numeration items by
10% or more for each
grade level
Classroom Assessments:
80% students at grade
level on operations by
June 2014
Manipulatives, PD for All Math Teachers (registration, 81sub costs),; others..,
Teachers will:
Parents will:
Students will:
Resources, Workshops, PD
82
“Tri-Fold” Brochure: Outside Cover
School Improvement
Goals
Important Dates
School Name
Logo
Who to Call:
Achievements
Address
Principal
Contact Information
83

Oakland Schools:
◦ Jan Callis, Title I: jan.callis@oakland.k12.mi.us

WAYNE RESA:
◦ Jolia Hill, Title I: hillj@resa.net
◦ Ann LaPointe, School Improvement: lapoina@resa.net
84