presentation

advertisement
Using Data to Inform
Instruction
Dr. Grant A. Chandler
Director of Professional Learning
Office of K-12 Outreach, College of Education
Michigan State University
S
Data Conversations
using the
Collaborative Learning Cycle
Dr. Grant A. Chandler
Director of Professional Learning
Office of K-12 Outreach, College of Education
Michigan State University
S
Session Description
Powerful data conversations can lead to powerful
changes in instruction and dramatic improvement in
student achievement. This session will engage
administrators in how to create and sustain high
performing groups of educators who can skillfully
implement Wellman and Lipton’s Collaborative
Learning Cycle. This simple yet powerful protocol will
equip teachers and administrators alike with the tools
to effectively and efficiently use multiple measures of
data to solve instructional and systemic problems to
increase student learning.
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Finding Common Ground
Task Groups:
S Find at least 3 things that your entire group has in
common -that would NOT be obvious to others
(and that might surprise us)
Groups at Work – Copyright
– All rights
reserved State
OfficeMiraVia
of K-12LLC
Outreach,
Michigan
University
Characteristics of High
Performing Groups
Wellman and Lipton
S
Office of K-12
Outreach, Michigan
State University
Seven Qualities of High Performing
Groups
S Maintain a clear focus
S Embrace a spirit of inquiry
S Put data at the center
S Honor commitments to learners and learning
S Cultivate relational trust
S Seek equity
S Assume collective responsibility
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Maintain a Clear Focus
S HPGs clarify desired results and define success criteria.
S HPGs agree on and protect priorities for themselves and
their students, preserving precious time for focused
engagement about the things that matter.
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Establish a Spirit of Inquiry
S HPGs are both problem seekers and problem solvers. These
groups seek external resources and data outside their own
experience.
S They inquire into data to explore who is learning and who is
not, seeking patterns and root causes before pursuing
solutions and planning actions.
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Put Data at the Center
S HPGs use data to inform and guide group and student
learning.
S HPGs are assessment literate. They keep data central to the
conversation, seeking out and using multiple sources and
multiple types to inform their choices and plans.
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Honor Commitments to
Learners and Learning
S HPGs keep learning at the focus of their conversations.
S HPGs keep their focus on what is good for students, not just
convenient for themselves. They explore the process,
performance, and products of learning.
S They assess and monitor their own learning, reflecting on
their processes and products and set goals for continuous
improvement.
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Cultivate Relational Trust
S HPGs operate with high expectations and positive
intentions as central assumptions. It is safe to display both
high competence and vulnerability.
S HPGs rely on the integrity and competence of their
colleagues inside and outside of the meeting room.
S They hold high expectations for themselves and each other
and have faith that those expectations will be met and even
exceeded.
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Assume Collective Responsibility
S HPGs make and honor agreements about who they want to be as
a group/team and what they want to produce for their students.
S They make data driven choices and are willing to be answerable
for these choices.
S This collective efficacy, or the shared belief that together the group
will successfully achieve its goals, is a prime resource for sustained
improvements in student learning (Goddard, Hoy, & Woolfolk
Hoy, 2004).
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
High Performing Groups
S Recognize that their individual choices, both in the meeting
room and in their own classrooms, affect everyone.
S They willingly invest their time and energy, setting aside
personal agendas to support the group’s work and its
development.
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Peter Senge (1990)
S Learning communities are groups of individuals who come
together with a shared purpose and agreement to construct
new understandings. A learning community is a critical
contributor to becoming a learning organization – a place
where people continually expand their capacity to create the
results they truly desire, where new and expansive patterns
of thinking are nurtured, where collection aspiration is set
free and where people are continually learning how to learn
together.
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
What Matters . . .
S Two different meta-analyses of research on the factors that
impact student achievement found that the quality of
instruction students receive in their classrooms is the most
important variable in student achievement.
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Assumptions for Our Work
S Schools can only be as good as the people within them.
S If one of the most important variables in student achievement is
instruction, schools must ensure high quality instruction in every
classroom.
S If substantive school improvement requires a coordinated,
systemic, and collective effort (rather than isolated individual
efforts), schools must use professional development strategies that
are specifically designed to improve the collective capacity of
educators to meet the needs of students.
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Assumptions . . .
S The best strategy for improving schools and districts is
developing the collective capacity of educators to function
as members of professional learning communities – a
concept based on the premise that if students are to learn at
higher levels, processes must be in place to ensure the
ongoing-job embedded learning of the adults who serve
them.
(DuFour & Marzano, 2012)
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Collaborative Learning
Cycle
Based on the book, Got Data? Now What?
Bruce Wellman & Laura Lipton, 2012
S
Analyzing data is like or not like . . .
(choose one)
because . . .
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Collaborative Learning Cycle
S Activate and Engage
S Generate predictions & surface assumptions
S Explore and Discover
S Analyze data & develop narrative statements
S Organizing and Integrating
S Generating causal theory and exploring solutions
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Activating and Engaging
S Discuss what the data might look like.
S Make predictions and assumptions.
S Provides psychological and emotional safety and readiness
for interacting with colleagues and with data.
S Process: develop predictions and assumptions concurrently,
record them, use facsimile of the data display, accept
different predictions or assumptions.
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Exploring and discovering:
analyzing the data
S Embrace the spirit of exploration and discovery.
S Avoid explaining why the data look as they do.
S Create a shared focus, provide time to orient to the data,
develop a sequence and process for exploration, and apply
protocols to balance participation, establish public record
keeping, use concise language, depersonalize the data.
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Organizing and integrating:
generating theory
S Establishes the transition to formal problem finding and problem
solving in two phases: causation and action.
S Causation (curriculum, instruction, teachers, students,
infrastructure)
S Effective plans are SMART plans
S Generate multiple theories of causation, allow multiple theories,
seek triangulation of data, generate multiple theories of solution,
utilize SMART plans, use decision-making process.
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
What’s the Big Picture:
S
Utilize the collaborative learning cycle to carefully examine data:
S
S
S
S
Student performance data.
Demographic data
Perception data
Process data
S
Establish causal theories aligned to student data.
S
Establish narrative statements/causal theories in order to establish meaningful plans that
will successfully impact student achievement and be the driving force behind our every
day work.
S
Create building level school improvement plans that align with the district improvement
plan but recognize the individual student needs of each building within the district.
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Exploring student achievement in
Writing
S
Activate and Engage
Phase I
S
Office of K-12
Outreach, Michigan
State University
Building-Level Writing Grade 4
by Proficiency Levels
Proficiency Level
2013
2012
Blue (Advanced)
Green (Proficient)
Yellow (Partially
Proficient)
Red (Not Proficient)
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Building Writing – Grade 14
by Proficiency Levels – 2013
Proficiency
Level
Econ.
Advan.
Econ.
Disadv.
Regular
Ed
Special
Ed
Boys
Girls
Blue
(Advanced)
Green
(Proficient)
Yellow
(Partially
Proficient)
Red (Not
Proficient)
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Predict
S What do your top and bottom 30% look like in terms of
proficiency levels in 2013? How do they compare to 2012?
S % Blue
S % Green
S % Yellow
S % Red
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Predictions and Assumptions
S Purpose is to surface and understand assumptions (not about
right/wrong)
S Prediction: something you expect to see in the data
S Assumption: something that you think but that will not show up in data
Predictions
Assumptions
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Pair, share, discuss
S Share your predictions with one person
S Discuss – why? (your thoughts)
S Form groups of 4 (or more)
S Put your predictions on chart paper, discuss
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Activating and Engaging
S What are some of our predictions and assumptions about
student achievement in WRITING at Pleasantville Elementary
School?
S What questions are we bringing to this discussion?
S What are some possibilities for learning that this experience
presents to us?
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Activating and Engaging –
FACILITATORS’ DEBRIEF
S Discuss what the data might look like.
S Make predictions and assumptions.
S Provides psychological and emotional safety and readiness for
interacting with colleagues and with data.
S Process: develop predictions and assumptions concurrently,
record them, use facsimile of the data display, accept different
predictions or assumptions.
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Explore and Discover
Phase II
S
Office of K-12
Outreach, Michigan
State University
Explore and Discover
S What important points pop out to us?
S What patterns, categories, or trends are emerging?
S What is surprising or unexpected?
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Analyzing Data - Process
1. Individuals look at data silently.
2. Individually document observations.
3. Report out in groups (Round Robin). Chart
observations.
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Analyzing Data - Process
1. Individuals look at data silently. (2-3 min)
2. Individually document observations. (3-4 min)
3. Report out in groups (Round Robin). Chart
observations. (10 min)
4. Refine observations by increasing specificity. (8
min)
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Narrative Statements
S The girls did better than the boys.
S In 2012 on the MEAP assessment in reading, the girls were 74%
proficient and the boys were 53% proficient.
S Chart five (5) narrative statements.
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Writing Grade 4
by Proficiency Levels
Proficiency Level
2013
2012
Blue (Advanced)
8
3
Green (Proficient)
54
62
Yellow (Partially
Proficient)
35
30
3
5
Red (Not Proficient)
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Writing – Grade 4
by Proficiency Levels – 2013
Proficiency
Level
Econ.
Advan.
Econ.
Disadv.
*Regular
Ed
*Special
Ed
Boys
Girls
Blue
(Advanced)
8
0
8
0
6
9
Green
(Proficient)
58
46
55
20
53
55
Yellow
(Partially
Proficient)
32
43
34
20
37
33
Red (Not
Proficient)
2
11
3
60
4
3
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Exploring and Discovering –
FACILITATORS’ DEBRIEF
S Embrace the spirit of exploration and discovery.
S Avoid explaining why the data look as they do.
S Create a shared focus, provide time to orient to the data, develop
a sequence and process for exploration, and apply protocols to
balance participation, establish public record keeping, use
concise language, depersonalize the data.
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
ORGANIZING AND
INTEGRATING
Phase III
S
Office of K-12
Outreach, Michigan
State University
Organizing and Integrating
S Establishes the transition to formal problem finding and problem
solving in two phases: causation and action.
S Generate multiple theories of causation, allow multiple theories, seek
triangulation of data.
S Generate multiple theories of solution (SMART plans)
S Use decision-making process to choose the strongest solution.
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Infrastructure
Students
Leadership
Causal
Theories
Teachers
Curriculum
Instruction
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Causal Theories
S Leadership
S Systemic planning and implementation, knowledge, skills, disposition
S Infrastructure
S Schedules, programming, and resources
S Curriculum
S Design and implementation
S Instruction
S Methods, materials, and resources
S Teachers
S Knowledge, skills, and disposition
S Students
S Knowledge, skills, and disposition
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Causal Theory
S As a group select TWO observations to explore further
S Individually generate multiple causation theories (why?)
S Stay focused on things that we can control
S Generate theories from MORE than one category
S Identify additional data needed
S Share theories, narrow to one or two, and identify additional data
needs
S Repeat for other observation
S Prepare to share
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Example
Observation
The gap from 11-12 for ED students compared to Non-ED students was
nearly 24%. This gap was closed to nearly 1% in 12-13.
Causal Theories
S Our PD has increased our teacher’s ability to reach poorer
students (Teachers)
S The number of ED student’s drastically increased from 11-12 to
12-13 (Students)
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Prepare to Share
S Create TWO posters, one for each observation
S Include on the poster:
S
The observation
S
At least two theories from different causal categories
S
Additional data needs/questions
S Review other posters
S Observations
• Similarities
• Differences
• Surprises
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Potential Solutions
S In groups, identify 3-5 possible solutions
S Can be very specific (professional development program) or
general (align curriculum)
S Create chart labeled “Potential Solutions”
S Review other posters
S Observations
• Similarities
• Differences
• Surprises
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Organizing and Integrating–
FACILITATORS’ DEBRIEF
S Establishes the transition to formal problem finding and
problem solving in two phases: causation and action.
S Causation (curriculum, instruction, teachers, students,
infrastructure)
S Effective plans are SMART plans
S Generate multiple theories of causation, allow multiple theories,
seek triangulation of data, generate multiple theories of
solution, utilize SMART plans, use decision-making process.
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Process Debrief
S How did it feel using a structured process to have a
conversation?
S How might this structured conversation assist you in doing
your work with your team?
S What additional support do you need in order to facilitate
this protocol with your team?
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
References
DuFour, R. & Marzano, R. (2012). Leaders of learning: How
districts, school, and classroom leaders improve student
achievement. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
Lipton, L., & Wellman, B. (2012). Got data? Now what?
Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Additional Information
S www.mitoolkit.org
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Dr. Grant A. Chandler
Director of Professional Learning
Office of K-12 Outreach
Michigan State University
chand107@msu.edu
Office of K-12 Outreach, Michigan State
University
Download