EXPECTATIONSEXPECTATIONSCurriculumInstructionAssessment

Student Behavior

LITERACY WALK REPORTLITERACY WALK REPORTMay 2009May 2009

How do teachers engage students in purposeful, social interaction (accountable talk) to challenge students to think critically and extend their learning?

Observations:• Few teachers are facilitating student to student discussions; the teacher

remains the focus of discussion and instruction.• Few teachers have structures (norms, expectations, and roles) in place

that support accountable talk.• Few teachers have demonstrated the craft of engaging students in

purposeful, social interaction. Recommendations:• Provide a structure (norms or expectations for behavior during classroom

discussions) as well as on-going modeling that supports the use of the accountable talk stems.

• Relinquish responsibility for discussion and content to students.

How do teachers use formative assessment and reference tools to support student learning at all levels?

Observations:• Many teachers make reference tools available to students,

and many students are using them.• Many teachers use formative assessment regularly

throughout the lesson.• Few teachers use formative assessment to adjust

instruction and hold every student accountable. Recommendations:• Implement formative assessments at the individual level to

ensure that all students are accountable to the content.• Use formative assessment results to adjust instruction.

Is there an obvious daily lesson structure with evidence of gradual release of responsibility?

Observations:• Many teachers implement strong warm-up/opening activities. • Few teachers are employing the gradual release from beginning to

end.• Few teachers model tasks effectively and expose their thinking;

therefore, many students do not have clear understanding of tasks prior to release.

Recommendations:• The process of Gradual Release needs to be slowed down before

moving to shared and independent practice. Teachers must pay specific attention to teacher modeling and thinking-aloud to bring to the surface the complex thinking processes that underlie cognitively demanding tasks.

• Employ lesson closures that cement learning on a daily basis.

How does the use of questioning strategies enhance student engagement and critical thinking?

Observations:• Many teachers are asking follow-up questions at the knowledge and

comprehension levels.• Few teachers are asking questions at the application level; and very few at

the analysis, synthesis, and evaluation levels.• Few teachers took advantage of the ample opportunities for students to

process and develop appropriate and in-depth responses at the individual or small group levels. (e.g. sufficient wait-time, facilitate small group discussion, cooperative groups)

Recommendations:• Use the questioning resource (distributed at the last PD day) to develop

questioning strategies that allow for multiple perspectives and interpretations of content and skills.

• Ask students to justify their reasoning for a response or to provide evidence, thus strengthening their comprehension and critical thinking skills.

FUTURE LITERACY WALK FUTURE LITERACY WALK EXPECTATIONSEXPECTATIONS

Classroom instruction on Literacy Walk days should include the following strategies:– Workshop Model– Gradual Release of Responsibility– Accountable Talk– Formative Assessment Strategies (Formative assessment at the individual level may be the single largest factor to student achievement! William, Dylan)

– Questioning StrategiesIt is imperative that our self-study process truly reflect our ability to implement research-based, best practices. We have spent over $120,000 in PD money to provide professional development and resources in the above strategies.

E2T2 GRANTE2T2 GRANT• $60,000• Goals– Provide resources/PD to create units of study that focus

on literacy/critical thinking– Support PBGR work

• 18 Teachers (2 weeks of summer PD)• 4:1 student to computer ratio in classrooms• Each classroom/teacher– 6 computers– Scanner– Projector– Digital camera

RHODE ISLAND TECHNOLOGY RHODE ISLAND TECHNOLOGY ENHANCED SCIENCE PROGRAMENHANCED SCIENCE PROGRAM

(RITES)(RITES)• Middle & High School• ALL Science Teachers• Summer PD (August) • Mini Courses in summer and next year• Alignment to GSEs• Focus on integration of technology

DANA CENTERDANA CENTER

• District Initiative (K-12)• 8th grade curriculum will be re-aligned by

September • Leadership team will investigate scheduling

possibilities of math teachers having CPT at the same time

• Curriculum alignment & development of common tasks is on-going

• The math curriculum is non-negotiable

PROBLEM STATEMENT #1PROBLEM STATEMENT #1

We currently have a negotiable math curriculum that does not support common assessments and data is not used to drive instruction.

What What ISIS Evident Evident• Evident that teachers (K-5) will know exactly what is expected to be

taught through the use of the newly developed curriculum binder with timelines

• CHS is looking at new texts• CHS is developing Common Tasks/ Exams in classes• CHS Department chair observes classes• CHS: Leaders participate in the study of curricula• Elem: Curricula documents exist and are clearly written • Coventry Public Schools has curriculum documents for math• Coventry Public Schools is revising the math curriculum• Not all students acquire the same skills at the required grade level• Elementary math teachers schedule structured curricula study

What What ISIS NOTNOT Evident Evident• Work is not collected and examined consistently• It is not evident that the curriculum has produced Common Lessons• Not evident that adjustments are made when lessons are not

effective• Teachers/Leaders do not know exactly what is to be taught/learned

AND that the curriculum is non-negotiable • Skills are not identified by grade level• Too many teachers only using “the book”, page by page• Curriculum documents do not express clear and specific outcomes• Not evident that curriculum documents are based on standards• Not evident that Leaders regularly observe instruction or

implementation of curricula

PROBLEM STATEMENT #2PROBLEM STATEMENT #2

The negotiable curriculum exists without defined benchmarks and with little to no accountability.

What What ISIS Evident Evident• Some teachers collaborate to create Common assessments• Teachers are trained and supported in work to develop and use Common

Assessments• Teachers/Leaders collaborate to create Common Assessments as benchmarks of

student progress• Teachers have received training on relevance vs. rigor• CHS Common Assessments are given at reasonable intervals• Testing data IS available• Data is analyzed to determine curriculum needs• One PD day is given to analyze NECAP data• Disaggregated data is analyzed• NECAP discussed with SIP Teams • NECAP results are discussed with grade level peers• CPT is used to make instructional plans for the school year• Data is disaggregated at most schools and includes: NECAP, G.R.A.D.E. and DRA

scores.

What What IS NOTIS NOT Evident Evident• Some data sources are not reported in a timely fashion.• Disaggregated data is not required study at all schools• Professional conversations about data does not happen at all schools• More training is needed to understand data• Data is not used to determine areas of the curriculum that need attention • Common Assessments (that ARE in place) are not being scored

consistently from teacher to teacher – need benchmarking• Testing data is not discussed at an individual student level.• Lack of curriculum leads to lack of common assessments and lack of

effective instruction• Common Assessments are not being analyzed• Common Assessments are not being developed or given consistently at all

schools.

Data StudyData StudyAll Students, All Grades:• As students move from grades 3 to 11 proficiency declines• The most significant decline occurs from grade 7 to grade

11• Gains are being made at each level for ALL students.

(Subgroups SES and IEP are not making the same gains)• The gap between ALL students and IEP students is

approximately 30% • From 2006 through 2008 on the average, Coventry is 10

points higher than the State• In 2006-2007 all cohorts dropped in % of proficiency,

however in 2008 all cohorts made gains (some back to 2006-2007 levels)

Data StudyData StudySES, All Grades:• From 2006-2008 Coventry Public Schools

outperformed the state in every grade for each year except 2008 in grade 5 (1 point below state)

• Grades 3,4,6 and 8 have a positive trend from 2006 through 2008

• Grades 5, 7 and 11 have negative trends from 2006 through 2008

• As the group moves grade to grade, the range of scores increases– 2006: Low 43 – High 54– 2007: Low 22 - High 52– 2008: Low 17 – High 65

Data StudyData Study

IEP – All Grades:• In 2006 Coventry outperformed the state in

every grade by 2 to 13 points• In 2007 Coventry outperformed the state in 3

of 7 grades between 3 to 6 points• In 2008 Coventry outperformed the state in

four grades by 2 to 8 points• As students progress through the grades their

% proficiency declines

DANA CENTER TRAINING MODULESDANA CENTER TRAINING MODULES

• Gap Analysis• Study the Standards (GLEs)• Classroom Walkthroughs• Structures of Leadership Practice• Leading Change

PROFICIENCY BASED PROFICIENCY BASED GRADUATION REQUIREMENTSGRADUATION REQUIREMENTS

Middle School Requirements1. Develop plan to complete alignment of GLEs (reading, writing, oral

communication, and mathematics) and gap analysis for middle level.10.Plans for reviewing middle level assessment for bias. Communication plan

to share student expectations and progress to middle level.12.Develop policy and procedures for informing promotion decisions for

middle level students.16.Full implementation of personalization strategies/structures (grades 5-

12).18.Development of advisory process as a personalization strategy at the

middle level.24.Development of seamless articulation process middle level and high

schools to improve transitions, graduation rates.26.Communication process that supports articulation between middle level

and high schools.

ELECTRONIC SUBMISSIONELECTRONIC SUBMISSION• Describe the advisory process that ensures a

personalized learning environment for all middle level students.

• Describe the ILP process and how it provides the opportunity for middle level students to meet their goals.

• Describe the CPT schedule and process at the middle level school(s).

• Describe the articulation process between the middle level and high school(s) that ensures appropriate supports for transitions and progress toward graduation by proficiency.

• Describe plans to complete alignment to and GAP analysis of the reading, writing, oral communication and mathematics GLEs for the middle level.

SCHOOL-WIDE POSITIVE BEHARIORAL SCHOOL-WIDE POSITIVE BEHARIORAL INTERVENTION & SUPPORTS (PBIS)INTERVENTION & SUPPORTS (PBIS)

Fundamental Elements:• Outcomes• Systems• Practices• DataGoal – To prevent the development and

intensifying of problem behaviors and maximize academic success for all students.