FSI Cohort III

Lisa Guzzardo AsaroLisa Rivard

February 8, 2013

7 Keys to Effective Feedback7 Keys to Effective FeedbackConnector ActivityConnector Activity

Grant Wiggins states:

“Advise, evaluation, grades…none of these provide the descriptive

information that students need to reach their goals. “

•All Read pages 11-12

•Feedback Essentials (Divide up)

• Goal Referenced

• Tangible Transparent

• Actionable

• User Friendly

• Ongoing

• Consistent

•All Read page 16TAB 5

Article Handou

t

SOURCE: ASCD

Educational Leadership

Sept. 2012

CHARGE Share with Table Team Key Insights

Today’s Outcomes•Engage in learning around 7 Keys to Effective Feedback

•Engage in activities that connect you to Michigan’s continuous school improvement process

•Heighten awareness about MDE’s 2013-14 Scorecards for Schools

•Engage in Dialogue Dice networking strategy with colleagues

•Understand what must lead to Strategy and Activity Identification

•Receive a presentation from Dr. Jason Novetsky about PBIS implementation with fidelity

•Explore new components of Mischooldata.org, D4SS, and Data Director

Today’s Roadmap• Welcome• Connector: 7 Keys to Effective

Feedback• Updates • MDE’s School Scorecard• Networking with Colleagues• Strategy and Activity Implementation• Presentations Dr. Jason Novetsky and

Dr. Jennifer Parker-Moore

TAB 12

Key Working Agreements A Facilitation Tool

• Respect all Points of View

• Be Present and Engaged

• Honor Time Agreements

• Get All Voices in the Room

These breathe life into our Core Values

Parking LotA Facilitation Tool

• Rest questions that do not benefit the whole group

• Place questions that do not pertain to content at this time

• Place questions that pertain, but participants do not want to ask at this time

Action Required Chart

• Any request by you that I need to respond to must be placed on the Action Required Chart

• You need to PRINT your complete name, school, and email address

LIVING BELIEF STATEMENT

“Networking is not an option, but a critical part

of how Facilitators of School Improvement learn and share their

learning.”

February – April

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENTActivities and Requirements

Handout

TAB 5

NOTEWORTHY

• Passports• Next Generation Science Standards• Dynamic Learning Maps Consortium• Professional Learning Opportunities• New 2012-13 Accountability Scorecards• ASSIST update• Free ACT online prep• AMOs

PASSPORTS

• Lost or Stolen Passports• Signature at 2:45• Completely filled out

including dates of training

• $10.00 payment collected in May

NEXT Generation SCIENCE STANDARDS (NGSS)

• Final Draft released• Framework for K-12 Science Education that was released in July

2011. Grounded in the most current research on science and science learning, the FRAMEWORK was the critical first step in the development of the NGSS.– Download a free PDF through the Nationals Academies Press

• NGSS can be located on the Next Generation Science Standards at:– http://www.nextgenscience.org/

DLM First Contact SurveyDeadline Extended to March 1, 2013

• MDE has partnered with the Center for Educational Testing and Evaluation (CETE)

• U.S Department of Education project to create a new alternate assessment system for students with significant cognitive disabilities called the Dynamic Learning Maps (DLM) alternate assessment.

• Purpose of the survey is to collect information on the students that currently participate in alternate assessments and the technology and supports that are currently being used to meet the needs of these students

• Local district’s MI-Access Coordinators are being asked to distribute the First Contact Survey- District to Teachers letter

• http://michigan.gov/documents/mde/From_From _District_ to_Teacherss_ MI edition_3_409390_7.pdf

Professional Learning Opportunities

• Assessing the Impact with Joellen KillionMarch 12-13, 2013 NCA Building

• Common Core: Leading the ChangeMarch 19, 2013 MISD Rm. 100 A-C

• MDE/AdvancED Spring SI Conference April 17-18, 2013 Lansing Center

• MAISA Michigan ELA Model Curriculum Units

June 24-27, 2013 Teams Lansing Center• Kagan Structures for Cooperative Learning and Active Engagement

InstituteAugust 12-16, 2013 MISD

MDE to Provide AMOs

• End of February

• For every school

• Each content area tested

• Use the formula we provided in the meantime

ASSIST• SIP Components for Submission 09.01.13

– School Data Analysis ALL– Executive Summary ALL– Goals and Plan ALL– Improvement Plan Stakeholder Involvement ALL– Additional Requirements ALL

– Title I Targeted Assistance or School-wide – Heath and Safety OPTIONAL– Assurances Priority and AdvancEd having an

external review

Accountability Scorecards

An Early Orientation to the Future of Michigan School Accountability

Handout

TAB 3

Overview• Two “levels” of Accountability Scorecards:

District Scorecards & School Scorecards

• Scorecards will use a color coding system (green, lime, yellow, orange, and red) to indicate school performance.

• Combines traditional accountability metrics with Top-to-Bottom labels and other state/federal requirements.

• Overall color is determined by Top to Bottom status as well as points earned by meeting traditional AYP requirements.

•Individual “cells” use red/yellow/green coding scheme

•Points-based system where full points earned for meeting a target, half points earned for meeting safe harbor

An Early Look at ScorecardsHandou

t

Color-Coded Scorecards

• Colors are given to schools and districts for each “scorecard component” and an overall color.

• Overall status color is determined using a point-based system from the number of target areas the school/district has met and the school ranking.

•

Decreasing # points received and increasing # targets not met…

*These may not be the exact shades utilized in the final scorecard product (still under development).

What Changed?

What Stayed the Same?• Participation requirement = 95% for school/district

overall and all valid subgroups– Multi-year averaging remains in place (up to three

years)

• Graduation requirement = 80% for school/district overall and all valid subgroups– Four, five, and six-year rates– Graduation “safe harbor”

• Use of provisional and growth scores for accountable proficiency rates

School and District Scorecard Subgroups

Previously ONE group!

Participation• 95% of students are still required to be tested to meet the

assessment participation target for the scorecard.• If student group size is 30-39, target is no more than two non-

participants (this makes it so that a single student cannot result in not meeting the target participation rate).

• If student group size is 40 or more, target is 95% participation

• Participation rate is rounded to nearest hundredth

• If the “All Students” group does not have at least 30 students in one test cycle, a participation average will be calculated using up to three years of data in order to accumulate at least 30 students

• Multi-year averaging used help meet the participation req.

Participation Target

• Two options for school/district color status for this target area.

95% Assessed Met 95% Assessed Not Met

• These colors are given ONLY on the participation target portion of the scorecard. This does not change your entire school/district status, however, it can impact your overall color.

Proficiency Targets

Targets are based on 2011-12 proficiency rates:

• (85 – current percent proficient) / 10 = annual increment

• Increments do not reset• Proficiency targets are set using PLs

1 & 2 only (not Provisional or Growth Proficient)

• Provisional and/or Growth Proficient will help you meet targets

Example Proficiency Targets

School has 65% proficiency in 2011-12 school year. School must be 85% proficient by 2021-22 school year.

Subtract baseline target from end target rate and divide by the number of school years in between.

(85 – 65)/10 = +2% annual increment of target

The school’s target would be 67% in 2012-13, 69% in 2013-14, 71% in 2014-15, and so on.

Proficiency Targets Example

Example school starts from 65% proficient in subject

Example school ends at (at least) 85% proficient in subject

Example School has +2% Annual Target

Handout

Compliance Factors (PARTIALLY NEW!)

• Compliance Factors are based on State law. All schools are required by State law to have a School Improvement Plan (SIP), and to complete School Performance Indicator (SPR) reports.

• If a school completes all of its required reports it will receive a green cell for the Compliance Factors. If a school does not complete its required reports, it will receive a red cell for Compliance Factors.

• 2 Possible colors to receive for this target:– Those with completed reports receive a green cell.

– Those with incomplete reports receive a red cell.

NETWORKING Activity

Dialogue Dice• Each person in your group

will take a turn rolling the dice and sharing briefly an experience in response to the written prompt.

Dialogue Dice Notes

TAB 12

One Common Voice – One Plan Michigan Continuous School Improvement

Stages and Steps

DoImplement Plan

Monitor PlanEvaluate Plan

PlanDevelop Action

Plan

GatherGetting Ready

Collect School DataBuild School Profile

StudentAchievement

StudyAnalyze Data

Set Goals Set Measurable Objectives

Research Best Practice

(MI-CSI)

One Common Voice – One Plan Michigan Continuous School Improvement

Stages and Steps

• Getting Ready• Collect School Data • Build School Profile

I. Executive Summary IV. School Process Rubrics

• Analyze Data II. School Data Analysis IV. School Process Analysis

• Set Goals• III. Additional Requirements• V. Goals and Plan

• Set Measurable Objectives• Research Best Practice

• Develop Action Plan

• Implement Plan• Monitor Plan• Evaluate Plan

• VI. Evaluation Tool (2014)

Comprehensive Needs Assessment

School Improvement

Plan

Gather

Study

Plan

Do

TAB 12

Schools Comprehensive Needs Assessment (CNA)

Component OneExecutive Summary (All Schools Yearly) Due 09.01.13

Component TwoSchool Data Analysis Due 09.01.13 • Student Performance Diagnostic (5th year) 4 wks. prior to External Review Date • Stakeholder Feedback Diagnostic (5th year) prior to External Review Date

Component ThreeAdditional Requirements (All Schools Yearly) 09.01.13

Component FourSchool Process Rubrics:

Component FiveGoals and Plan (All Schools every 3 to 5 years) Due 09.01.13

Component SixStrategy Evaluation Tool (All schools 2nd year in Reading and Math)

MDE Rubrics 40/90

AdvancED MI ISA/SA

DUE

04.01.13

TAB 12

End of February AdvancED Push

• School Data Analysis

• Additional Requirements

• Title I Targeted Assistance

• Title I School-wide

March AdvancED Push

• You will be able to add multiple measure under a single objective

• You will be able to add the same strategy to multiple objectives

• You will be able to add the same activity to multiple strategies

ASSIST

One Common Voice – One Plan

Michigan Continuous School ImprovementStages and Steps

DoImplement Plan

Monitor PlanEvaluate Plan

PlanDevelop Action Plan

GatherGetting Ready

Collect School DataBuild School Profile

StudentAchievement

StudyAnalyze Data

Set Goals Set Measurable Objectives

Research Best Practice

Stage Two: StudyStep 4: Analyze Data

STUDYAnalyze Data

Set GoalsSet Measurable Objectives

Research Best Practice

Stage Two: StudyStep 4: Analyze Data

STUDYAnalyze Data

Set GoalsSet Measurable Objectives

Research Best Practice

MDE NCA

ISA/SA

MATRIX

From your Executive Summary

Report

OL

D P

LA

TF

OR

M

ACCESSING ASSIST

NE

W P

LA

TF

OR

M

Getting Started: OVERVIEW

Viewing Task DETAILS

Diagnostics and Surveys

Starting a Diagnostic

School Process Rubrics Results

District Review and APPROVAL

Stage Two: StudyStep 4: Analyze Data

STUDYAnalyze Data

Set GoalsSet Measurable Objectives

Research Best Practice

Identifying Activities to Support Strategy Implementation

KEY ACTIVITIES and PROCESSES that need to occur PRIOR:

• Current Reality (WHERE ARE WE?)

• Assessing Impact (HOW DO WE KNOW IT IS WORKING?)

• 40/90 OR ISA/SA challenges (Process Data Analysis)

• Researching Best Practice (Is it the Right Fit?)

TAB 5Handout

ISA/SA

MATRIX

By April 1, 2013 we

know what our

challenges are.

Once you have engaged staff in the KEY ACTIVITIES and

PROCESSES on slide 38, you are ready to identify the activities to support strategy implementation

in your SCHOOL.

TAB 11Handout

Identifying Activities to Support Strategy Implementation

• Presenter– Dr. Jason Novetsky

MISD Behavior and Learning Consultant– Positive Behavior Intervention System

Handout

TAB 5

One Common Voice – One Plan Michigan Continuous School Improvement

Stages and Steps

DoImplement Plan

Monitor PlanEvaluate Plan

PlanDevelop Action

Plan

GatherGetting Ready

Collect School DataBuild School Profile

StudentAchievement

StudyAnalyze Data

Set Goals Set Measurable Objectives

Research Best Practice

(MI-CSI)

Stage One: GATHERStep 1: Getting Ready

GATHERGetting Ready

Collect School DataBuild School Profile

Stage One: GatherStep 2: Collecting School DataStep 3: Build School Profile

Presenter Dr. Jennifer Parker-Moore

Data DirectorD4SS

MISchooldata.org

GATHERGetting Ready

Collect School DataBuild School Profile

One Common Voice – One Plan

Michigan Continuous School ImprovementStages and Steps

DoImplement Plan

Monitor PlanEvaluate Plan

PlanDevelop Action Plan

GatherGetting Ready

Collect School DataBuild School Profile

StudentAchievement

StudyAnalyze Data

Set Goals Set Measurable Objectives

Research Best Practice

Stage Two: StudyStep 4: Analyze Data

STUDYAnalyze Data

Set GoalsSet Measurable Objectives

Research Best Practice

Probing for Root Cause

Select a concern from the causation or theories generated in Math or Reading

that if focused upon by the school, it will leverage student achievement.

Stage Two StudyStudyStep Four: Analyze DataStep Four: Analyze Data

School Summary Report The Five “Why’s” Consider impact/control

Low DEGREE OF CONTROL High

Low

IM

PA

CT

H

igh

5 Why’s Example

• 4th grade math achievement on the MEAP is below the state average.

WHY?

Create an exhaustive list.

Next, select the one statement; that if addressed, will leverage student achievement.

5 Why’s Example

• Statement: The data indicates that our 4th grade students do poorly on story problems.– (62% of our students score at level 3 and 4 on story

problems).

• Turn this statement into the NEXT question:

Why are our 4th graders scoring poorly on story problems?

Handou

t

TAB 4

Tools for Schools

• What’s Your Problem Statement?

• Analyze Your Students

• The Planning Process

Your Time• Network with colleagues

• Place handouts in binder

• Plan what to bring back to share with SI team

• Visit the Smarter Balance Consortium websitewww.smarterbalanced.org

• Visit the Career and College Readiness website www.michiganccr.org