Instructional Practices Inventory

1. Instructional Practices Inventory “Developing an optimum profile of student engaged learning for teacher analysis and reflection.”

2. Agenda for Today’s Discussion: • What is IPI? • Discuss the IPI Categories • Discuss the Data Collection Process • Discuss the Area 10 data for 2007-2009

3. IPI Categories—Higher Order Learning • 6– Student Active Engaged Learning • Higher-Order Learning • Typically students doing higher-level thinking, hands-on, problem-based, research, etc. forms of learning • 5—Student Learning Conversations • Higher-Order Learning • Typically conversations among students who are constructing knowledge together

4. IPI Categories—Direct Instruction and Student Supervised Work • 4—Teacher-Led Instruction • Students attentive to teacher leading the learning experience • Typically students listening to teacher share, explain, give directions, etc. • 3—Student Work with Teacher Involved • Students working individually or in groups with teacher support evident • Typically students doing worksheets, answering questions, taking tests

5. IPI Categories—Student Independent Work and Disengagement • 2—Student Work w/o Teacher Involved • Students working individually or in groups with teacher support not evident (independent work) • Typically students doing worksheets, answering questions, taking tests • 1—Students Not Engaged in Learning the Curriculum • Students are not engaged with the curriculum • Typically students talking, inattentive, misbehaving, etc.

6. IPI Protocols for Data Collection • Data observations on “typical” days • Systematically move from classroom to classroom based upon the floor plan of the school • Focus on students, not the teacher • Code student learning during first moments of observation • When observation is borderline between two codes, select higher code • Code during regular learning time, not transitions between content areas • Classrooms of special education and student teachers are observed and coded • Classrooms of substitute teachers are coded and included in profile if higher-order learning • Observations are anonymous

7. IPI Example 1 As the observer enters the science classroom, the students are listening attentively to the teacher give them directions for the acid-base litmus experiment they will begin in a few minutes. Most of the students are making a few notes in their notebooks while the teacher explains the process. Which of the IPI categories should be coded for this example?

8. IPI Example 2 As the observer enters the language arts classroom, the students are creating (original) poems. The teacher is moving among the students encouraging them as they work. Which of the IPI categories should be coded for this example?

9. You Guess the % 6. ___ Student Active and Engaged 5. ___ Student Learning Conversations 4. ___ Teacher Led Instruction 3. ___ Student Work/Teacher 2. ___ Student Work/Teacher Not 1. ___ Complete Disengagement

10. IPI Participating School Districts Anamosa Benton Center Point-Urbana English Valley Iowa Mennonite Lisbon Marion Mid Prairie Monticello North Cedar Springville Washington West Branch Williamsburg Vinton Shellsburg

11. Area 10 Data: Spring 2009N=3711; 26 secondary schools 6. 12% Student Active Engaged 5. 6% Student Learning Conversations 4. 40% Teacher Led Instruction 3. 27% Student Work/Teacher 2. 9% Student Work/Teacher Not 1. 6% Complete Disengagement

12. Questions and Comments

13. Sharing the Story Anamosa West Middle School SINA Questions • Is instruction and assessment focused on mastery of essential learnings • Are formative assessments used to provide feedback to students and change instruction? • Is classroom data collected to determine if instruction is effective?

14. Development of a Pilot Data Team • Focus on an essential Learning • Develop an assessment instrument • Administer a Pre-test • Examine data for profeciency and set goals • Provide feedback and instruction for students not meeting profeciency • Examine data to determine if goal expectations have been met

15. Data Summary • Students who participated in pilot -- 149 • Students proficient after Pre-test -- 43% • Students proficient after Post-test -- 74% • Growth in proficiency –- 39% • % from reaching goal – 20%

16. Some things that worked well: • Teacher created graphic organizers to help students organize their summaries. • Use of student examples to provide instruction. • Experience in gathering, analyzing and evaluating classroom data through formative assessments