1 / 47

Michigan School Testing Conference Ann Arbor, Michigan March 1, 2005

Join us at the Michigan School Testing Conference to learn about the new School Improvement Framework and revised performance indicators, and provide feedback on potential changes in education.

johnsonrichard
Download Presentation

Michigan School Testing Conference Ann Arbor, Michigan March 1, 2005

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Michigan School Testing Conference Ann Arbor, Michigan March 1, 2005 Michigan Department of Education Office of School Improvement

  2. Michigan School Testing Conference Education YES! A New School Improvement Framework + Revised School Performance Indicators = Changes in Education YES!

  3. Michigan School Testing Conference • The participants will receive an overview of the: • Draft School Improvement Framework for Michigan • Development of revised school performance indicators • Possible changes to Education YES!

  4. Michigan School Testing Conference • The participants will provide: • Feedback throughout the presentation

  5. A New School Improvement Framework

  6. The Vision… • A coherent, comprehensive research-based School Improvement Framework • Serve as a foundation for: • Professional Development • Technical Support • Grant Criteria • Assessment and Accountability • Accreditation – Performance Indicators • A practitioners’ “collaborative”

  7. Overview of Milestones • Convened 60 educators (July ‘04) • Workgroup of ISD School Improvement Specialists drafted revisions (Aug – Dec) • Field Services followed-up on “discrepancy list” (SY ’04-’05) • State Board Review (Jan ‘05) • Field Review/Feedback of SI Framework (Feb-Apr ’05) Product NOW

  8. Overview of Workgroup Process • Reviewed “Kent Report” for recommendations • Reviewed current Performance Indicators • Reviewed the literature on school improvement • Cross-referenced research – search for common elements • Developed a “school improvement framework” – strands, standards, benchmarks, criteria, evidence • OSI develops framework; OEAA develops measurements

  9. Criteria for SI Framework • Based on Something(External Validity) • “Logical”- Makes sense to various audiences (State Board, Legislature, Schools, Teachers…) • Build on current Indicators (Internal Validity) • Easy to Understand & User Friendly • Measurable • Self-sufficient/Stand Alone

  10. Criteria for SI Framework • Aligned - NCLB, Research, State/Federal Programs, PA 25, existing Performance Indicators • Address triple purpose: Accreditation, School Improvement feedback and guidance, and Accountability • Student achievement focus • Strand/Standard/Benchmark/Criteria format • District/School-based

  11. SI Framework Structure Strand– General Area of Focus Standard- Category of Influence within the Strand. Benchmark - Focus of Influence within a Standard. Criteria - Process that drives the Benchmark. Evidence- Hard and/or soft data that provides evidence of continuous assessment or progress in each identified expectation.

  12. SI Framework Structure 5 Strands 12 Standards 26 Benchmarks 87 Criteria

  13. Strand II – TEACHING & LEARNING Strand IV – SCHOOL & COMMUNITY RELATIONS Strand V - DATA & KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT The Strands Strand I - LEADERSHIP Strand III - PERSONNEL & PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

  14. The Standards Strand II – TEACHING & LEARNING Strand I - LEADERSHIP INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP CURRICULUM OPERATIONAL RESOURCE MNGT. INSTRUCTION DISTRIBUTED LEADERSHIP ASSESSMENT Strand III - PERSONNEL & PROF. DEVELOPMENT Strand IV - SCHOOL/ COMMUNITY RELATIONS Strand V DATA & KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS DATA MANAGEMENT PARENT/FAMILY INVOLVEMENT KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT

  15. The Benchmarks Strand I - LEADERSHIP Strand II – TEACHING & LEARNING • Educational Program • Instructional Support • Resource Allocation • Operational Management • School Climate and Culture • Continuous Improvement • Curriculum – Written & Aligned • Curriculum – Communicated • Instructional Planning • Instructional Delivery • Assessment Aligned to Curriculum and Instruction • Reporting and Use of Data

  16. The Benchmarks Strand IV - SCHOOL/ COMMUNITY RELATIONS Strand V - DATA & KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT Strand III - PERSONNEL & PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT • Requirements • Skills, Knowledge, Dispositions • Collaboration • Content & Pedagogy • Alignment • Identification & Collection • Analysis • Accessibility • Reporting • Interpretation & Application • Communication with Families/ Community • Authentic Engagement with Families/ Community

  17. Questions for Consideration Does each benchmark carry the same weight in improving student achievement? What are the implications?

  18. The Framework • Strand I – Leadership • Standard A: Instructional Leadership 1. Educational Program • Knowledge of Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment • Knowledge and Use of Data • Technology • Knowledge Student Development/Learning • Knowledge of Adult Learning • Change Agent • Focus on Student Results

  19. The Framework… • Standard A: Instructional Leadership 2. Instructional Support • Monitoring • Coaching/Facilitating Staff • Evaluation of Staff • Clear Expectations • Collaboration/Communication

  20. The Framework… • Standard B: Operational/Resource Management 1. Resource Allocation • Human Resources • Fiscal • Equipment and Materials • Time • Space

  21. The Framework… • Standard B: Operational/Resource Management 2. Operational Management • State and Federal • District • School

  22. The Framework… • Standard C: Distributed Leadership 1. School Culture and Climate • Safe and Orderly • Learning Focused • Inclusive/Equitable • Collaborative Inquiry • Data-Driven Culture • Collaborative Decision-Making

  23. The Framework… • Standard C: Distributed Leadership 2. Continuous Improvement • Shared Vision/Mission • Results-Focused Planning • Planning Implemented • Planning Monitored/Evaluated

  24. The Framework, continued… • Strand II – Teaching and Learning • Standard A: Curriculum 1. Written and Aligned • Curriculum Documents • Curriculum Review • Curriculum Alignment (MCF and GLCE) • Articulated Design • Inclusive

  25. The Framework… • Standard A: Curriculum 2. Communicated • Staff • Students • Parents

  26. The Framework… • Standard B: Instruction 1. Planning • Content Pedagogy Knowledge • Developmental Appropriateness 2. Delivery • Enacted Curriculum • Research-based/Best Practices • Focus on Student Engagement

  27. The Framework… • Standard C: Assessment 1. Aligned to Curriculum and Instruction • Alignment/Content Validity • Consistency/Reliability • Multiple Measures 2. Reporting and Use of Data • Systemic Reporting • Informs Curriculum and Instruction • Meets Needs of Students

  28. The Framework, continued…. • Strand III – Personnel and Professional Development • Standard A: Personnel Qualifications 1. Requirements • Certification/Requirements • NCLB – Highly Qualified

  29. The Framework… • Standard A: Personnel Qualifications 2. Skills, Knowledge, and Dispositions • Content Knowledge and Pedagogy • Communication • School/Classroom Management • Collaboration • Student-Centered • Instructional Technology

  30. The Framework… • Standard B: Professional Development 1. Content and Pedagogy • Use of Research-based/Best Practices • Application to Curriculum Content • Instructional Mentoring/Coaching 2. Collaboration • Staff Participates in Learning Teams • Collaborative Analysis of Student Work 3. Alignment • Aligned • Job-embedded • Results-driven

  31. The Framework, continued…. • Strand IV – School and Community Relations • Standard A: Family Involvement 1. Communications • Variety of Methods • Regard for Diversity 2. Authentic Engagement in Life of School • Volunteering • Extended Learning Opportunities • Decision-Making

  32. The Framework… • Standard B: Community Involvement 1. Communication About/With School • Variety of Methods • Regard for Diversity 2. Authentic Engagement • Businesses • Educational • Community-based • Variety of Methods

  33. The Framework, continued…. • Strand V – Data & Knowledge Management • Standard A: Data Management 1. Data Identification and Collection • Systematic and Applied • Multiple Types • Multiple Sources • Technical Quality

  34. The Framework… • Standard A: Data Management 1. Analysis • Format Supports Analysis • Format Supports Longitudinal Comparisons 2. Accessibility • Retrievable • Secure

  35. The Framework… • Standard B: Knowledge Management 1. Reporting • User-friendly • Appropriate 2. Interpretation and Application • Meaningful Dialogue • Use in Decision-Making

  36. Questions for Consideration • Are there other important criteria? • Which of the SI Framework elements are the “performance indicators” – the 12 standards, the 26 benchmarks, or the 87 criteria? • Data-based evidence – should all evidence be quantifiable? How to measure?

  37. Revised school performance indicators

  38. Revised School Improvement Indicators –How? Teacher Survey Focus on instruction and collaborationSchool Leader Survey Focus on LeadershipSchool Report Focus on Process

  39. Revised School Improvement Indicators – How? • May include externally scored “constructed response” • Other Potential Tools Parent Survey Student Survey

  40. Questions for Consideration Do we need a parent survey? Do we need a student survey? If so, how does it look different at each grade range? Are we overlooking groups whose perspective is important? When is the appropriate time to administer the data collection? - November-December?

  41. Next Steps: Committee Work SI Steering Committee Develop amarketing plan, common message about the framework , pilot, and where/how to roll it out Prepare materials and MDE staff to support the pilot & roll-out Develop rubric, point distribution, collect feedback, revise the SI Framework Develop tools, data collection instruments, and methods Measurement Communications Professional Development Indicators Committees’ recommended work plan supported by OSI & OEAA.

  42. Questions for Consideration How might the self-assessment be submitted? Transparency of self-assessment – should it be visible to the general public via the web through a link with EdYES!?

  43. Questions for Consideration Monitoring – who should be involved? Dissemination – what is the best way to let districts/schools/ISD’s know that the system is changing?

  44. Next steps: Process (2005) • Development of rubric, point distribution (Jan–Feb) • Measurement development (Jan-March) • Pilot SI Framework/Self-Assessment (April-May ‘05) • Development of Self-Assessment Tool (March-July) • Revise indicators and measures (June)

  45. Next Steps, continued… • State Board approves revisions (July) • Launch Self-Assessment Tool (Sept) • Schools self-assess (Oct-Nov) • Data submitted and analyzed (Nov) • Board reviews/approves results (Dec) • Report cards released (Jan ‘06)

  46. Questions for Consideration What didn’t we ask? What issues remain?

  47. PI Work Group • Contact Information: • Dr. Ed Roeber, Executive Director Office of Educational Assessment and Accountability Roebere@michigan.gov • Dr. Yvonne Caamal Canul, Director Office of School Improvement • Canuly@michigan.gov • Linda Forward, Consultant Office of School Improvement ForwardL@michigan.gov

More Related