Secondary Communication Arts Program Evaluation

June 2011

Overview

• Context

• Program Evaluation Process

• Key Findings in Achievement Data

• Key Findings in Survey Data

• Recommendations

History

Previous Program Evaluation

• Program Evaluation – 2001

• Curriculum Framework – 2006

See Appendices L, and N – P in the Program Evaluation binder for more information

Teaching Context: 2006 - 2011NCLB

•Growth Model•Pay/Achievement (Under discussion)

Common Core State Standards

2010

4 years of Required English

2010

Guaranteed Curriculum

On-going

GLES Change 2008

New Teacher Evaluation

Model - 2011

UbD - 2009

New Mission and Vision in

Parkway - 2010

Social Justice 2009, 2010

End Of Course Exams - 2009

Common Assessments

2008

Data & PARS On-going

OCG On-going

Double CA (MS) 2010

8 Period Day (MS)

2010

Wikipedia YouTube FacebookGaming &

Cell Phone Apps

Prop R :MS Lit CoachesFLP - 2007

Context: Teacher Experience  Middle School High School  Number % Number %

Year One 12 16.4% 6 7.7%

Year Two 6 8.2% 5 6.4%

Year Three 20 27.4% 12 15.4%

Year Four 9 12.3% 6 7.7%

Year Five 7 9.6% 7 9.0%

Total: Years 1 - 5

54 74% 36 46.2%

All Teachers 73 78

Appendix L

Program Evaluation Process

• Fall 2010 – Secondary Communication Arts Leaders and Teachers Developed Survey Questions

• December 2010 - Board of Education Planning Session

• Winter 2011 – Secondary Communication Arts Leaders and Teachers Analyzed Achievement Data

• Spring 2011 – Leaders Analyzed Survey Data and Made Recommendations

MS Program Components

HS Program Components

Research Question

“To what extent do the secondary communication arts curriculum and programs ensure achievement of the Parkway mission?”

6-8 Grades 2006-2010

pp. 9 – 23

MAP Cohort Data

Year P & A AYP Target Change

2008 61.2% 51.00%2009 66.6% 59.20% 5th Gr: + 5.32010 63.3% 67.40% 6th Gr: - 3.3

Class of 2016: 6th Graders in 2009 – 2010

Year P & A AYP Target Change2007 55.5% 42.9%2008 58.8% 51.0% 5th Gr: + 3.32009 60.0% 59.2% 6th Gr: + 1.22010 65.6% 67.4% 7th Gr: + 5.6

Class of 2015: 7th Graders in 2009 - 2010

Year A + P AYP Target Change2006 55.7% 34.7%2007 63.7% 42.9% 5th Gr: + 82008 58.7% 51.0% 6th Gr: - 52009 63.7% 59.2% 7th Gr: + 52010 68.4% 67.4% 8th Gr: + 4.7

Class of 2014: 8th Graders in 2009 – 2010

3 Year Gains Grade 6 + 2.1%

4 Year GainsGrade 7+11.1%

5 Year GainsGrade 8+12.7%

Key Finding: Achievement Gap

Key Finding: EXPLORE Results

59% 58%

40% 43%

79% 78%

60% 62%

Key Finding: English 2 - EOCIn 2009 – 2010 Parkway scored:

•above the state and the regional average

•18th out of 465 districts within the state

•6th out of 24 districts within the region.

82.2%84.6%

(pp. 24 – 37)

Key Finding: HS Achievement Gap

Key Finding: PLAN Results

82% 83%

70%61%

72% 71%

54% 48%

Key Finding: ACT Results

88% 86%

69%66%

Key Finding: ACT Results

72% 71%

53% 52%

Key Findings: Survey StrengthsMission and Vision

The curriculum helps students…

+ Understand that their ability and

understanding can always improve

(Teachers, Students)

+ Understand the standards required for

success (MS Students)

+ Capable learners (HS Parents)

+ Understand the views and values of

others (MS/HS Parents)

(pp. 38 – 83)

Key Findings: Survey ConcernsMission and Vision

The curriculum does not (yet) help students to:-Act out of strong sense of personal, civic

and social responsibility (Teachers)

-Respond to the challenges of an ever changing world (Teachers)

-Pursue a personal direction based on an understanding of students’ talents and interests (Teachers)

-Understand why they are learning what they are learning (Parents)

-Reflect, self-assess and set rigorous goals (Parents)

Key Findings: Survey Data

Desired Results+ Use the UbD Planning Model (MS/HS

Teachers)

+ Post the EQs (MS)-(HS) Review Units on the OCG

Assessment Evidence+ Rely on formative assessments to check understanding (MS/HS Teachers)

- Rely on standardized test scores to help me plan (MS/HS Teachers)

Key Findings: Survey Data

Instruction

+ Encourage students to engage in critical thinking (MS/HS Teachers)

- Ask students to link their learning to I Cans/EQs (HS)

Key Findings: Concerns

Teachers

Parents and Students report that… teachers do not communicate enough with parents about what their students are learning in school (2.87 – MS Parents; 2.8 – HS Parents;)

&

… teachers do not show students enough how and where to publish their work for audiences outside school – (2.97 – MS Students; 2.92 – HS Students)

Key Findings: Literacy Coach Program

• A correlation was found between increased achievement in Grade 7 and time spent working with the coach.

• Supports building leadership – 81.4%

• Facilitates adult learning about best literacy practices – 81.4%

80% = Buildings•Coaching Cycles•Small Group Development, Literacy Team Leadership, Data Dialog•Whole Group Faculty Development•Maintain Literacy Libraries

20% = District •Unit & Common Assessment Development•Salary credits, Summer Workshops•Liaison between building and district

pp. 80 – 83 & Appendix R

Key Findings: MS Reading Intervention • Strategies 1 and Strategies 2

• In 2010 1324 students in Grades 5 – 7 scored Basic or Below Basic on the MAP.

• 2010 – 2011 267 students in Strategies classes

We have more students who could benefit from

reading intervention than we currently serve.

From 2008 – 2010, using pre/post test measures we have evidence suggesting a relationship between higher MAP scores and taking a reading strategies class.

Grade

Level

Total # of Students

2010 MAP Below Basic

2010 MAP Basic

5th

6th

7th

1227

1305

1335

56

61

87

350

392

378

pp. 40 - 41

Your Questions• Positive Online Social Presence

• Parents: 3.34 (MS) and 3.25 (HS)

• Online Safety• Parents: 3.43 (MS) 3.32 (HS)

• Homework • Parents: 3.57 (MS) 3.64 (HS)

• Grading • Parents: 3.58 (MS) 3.65 (HS)• Students: 3.79 (MS) 3.43 (HS)

• Feedback• Parents: 3.53 (HS)• Students: 3:91 (MS)• Teachers: 4.49 (HS)

Recommendations

• Curriculum

• Assessment

• Instruction

• Stakeholders

21st Century Learning• Students use technology for learning whenever it is available.

• Dynamic, full-color, multi-media-rich, hyper-linked learning environments with immediate access & feedback.

• Used to controlling the flow of information according to their interests and self-identified needs

• Able to communicate with anyone about anything at any time

• Attached to devices as “indispensable social and learning accessories” (Understanding the Digital Generation, Jukes, et. al, 2010, p. 21)

• Visual, media, creative, collaborative, and solution-oriented literacies

BYOT?

21st Century Learning• Parents and students agree or strongly agree that students use technology for

learning whenever it is available.

• Immersed in dynamic, full-color, multi-media-rich, hyper-linked learning environments with immediate access to information and immediate feedback.

• Used to controlling the flow of information according to their interests and self-identified needs

• Able to communicate with anyone about anything at any time

• Attached to devices as “indispensable social and learning accessories” (Understanding the Digital Generation, Jukes, et. al, 2010, p. 21)

• Visual, media, creative, collaborative, and solution-oriented literacies

BYOT?

Decentralized Communication

• Flexible and responsive BLAB sessions but…

•Inefficient

Centralized Communication

•Teacher Leaders

•Published meeting Agendas

•Posted CSIP goals

Hierarchical communication-- more efficient and consistent

Centralized Communication

Centralized Communication

Link to District Communication

Arts CSIP

Centralized Communication

Hierarchies with Communities

Content Area LiteracyStrategic Plan Priorities for 2011 - 2012:

•All students will meet or demonstrate growth toward ongoing rigorous transfer goals.

•All students will meet Missouri’s required proficiency or growth targets on state exams.

•All students will sustain high levels of creativity and expand the capacity for divergent thinking they exhibited in their early childhood years.

Content area literacy all day long helps to address ALL of these goals.

December 2011

• Curriculum Framework (Appendix V)• Department Mission/Vision/Learning

Principles• Curriculum Standards

• Outcomes• Assessments• Sample Lessons

• On-going Evaluation Plan

• Five Year Strategic Plan• Specific Strategies/Actions• Professional Development

Moving Forward

“We need a different world view to guide us in this new world of continuous change and intimately connected systems that reach around the globe.”

-- Leadership expert Margaret Wheatley,

author of Turning to One Another

Questions and Comments