CFN 609 Principals’ Summer Institute 2012

1. CFN 609 Principals’ Summer Institute 2012

2. Citywide Instructional Expectations 2012-2013 • Teacher Development Schools will select competencies relevant to teachers’ development to strengthen the common language and understanding of what quality teaching looks like and conduct frequent formative classroom observations to provide teachers with formative feedback and professional development. (Danielson 1e, 3b, 3d)

3. Citywide Instructional Expectations 2012-2013 • Students experience Common Core-aligned instruction across subjects • PreK-5: Students will experience four Common Core-aligned units (two in math and two in literacy inclusive of social studies and science) • IS-HS: students will experience eight common core- aligned units (two in math, two in ELA, two in social studies and two in science) • PreK-8: All schools will revise/refine their scope and sequence in Math to teach fewer topics and allow for more time to focus on the major work of the grade and in literacy to infuse opportunities to read and respond to a combination of literary and informational texts.

4. Citywide Instructional Expectations 2012-2013 3. Response to Intervention: • In K – 5 reading, make specific plans for screening and provide tiered instruction and interventions for students, as required by New York State’s implementation of Response to Intervention (RTI). While currently only K-5 schools are being held accountable for reading, it is advisable for all schools to consider systems fir supporting students across the content areas.

5. Citywide Instructional Expectations 2012-2013 Conditions for Successful Implementation a. In every classroom, ensure a culture for learning. b. Ensure the entire school community is engaged in this work. c. Maximize opportunities for teachers to learn and grow in their practice.

6. Citywide Instructional Expectations 2012-2013 Assessment ELA will focus on: • Comparing two or more texts, including listening passages, writing passages and graphics; • Reading and analyzing informational passages without narrative structure, dialogue, or characters, and discussing arguments, evidence and claims; • Requiring students to engage with a 50/50 split of literary and informational texts; and • Responding to prompts that are more text-dependent: 35% of prompts will require students to convey an opinion/argument, 35% to explain, and 30% to convey experience.

7. Citywide Instructional Expectations 2012-2013 Assessment Math will focus on: • The major work of the grade; • More questions that require students to take multiple steps to solve them; • Questions that require students to apply skills based on their understanding of mathematical vocabulary; and • Questions that require students to choose tools (rulers/protractors) and apply mathematical concepts in using them.

8. Citywide Instructional Expectations 2012-2013 Selected Common Core Standards

9. Citywide Instructional Expectations 2012-2013 Selected Common Core Standards

10. Citywide Instructional Expectations 2012-2013 Accountability • Progress Report: the results of CCLS aligned tests contribute significantly to the progress report score for elementary, middle, and K-8 schools. • Quality Review: the 2012-2013 Quality Review Rubric and process is aligned to the 2012-13 instructional expectations; • Principal Performance Review (PPR): Principals will continue to be required to align some of their goals to the citywide instructional expectations; and • Comprehensive Educational Plan (CEP): Schools should feel free to use the language of the CIE in their CEP goals, however, it is not required.

11. So . . . . . .

12. 2012 – 2013 Quality Review Rubric Notable Changes/Revisions • The five weighted indicators will remain the same, but, will be worth 33% more than the others; • Condensed from twenty indicators across five quality statements to ten indicators across three quality categories; • 1.1: shift in language from CCLS “tasks” to “units of study” and inclusion of the CIE shifts; • 1.2: removal of the term “differentiation” and inclusion of language such as “evidence of meeting students’ needs”, “high level of thinking”, “informed by a common teaching framework”, “appropriately challenging tasks”, and “ownership”; • 2.2: Clarification on the use of assessments and the interpretation of the word “common”;

13. 2012 – 2013 Quality Review Rubric Notable Changes/Revisions • 1.4: clarification of connections to culture building, discipline, and safety aligned to college and career readiness; • 3.4: inclusion of the language “culture for learning” to connect more clearly to Danielson, inclusion of high expectations leading to college and career readiness; • 3.1, 4.1, 4.2: clarification of practices connected to professional development; • 4.1: inclusion of language to highlight IMPACT of using the framework and clarification of “effective feedback”; • 5.1: monitoring and revision of practices connected to the three quality categories.

14. 2012 – 2013 Quality Review Rubric Activity # 1: Dissecting the Weighted Indicators Key Words and Phrases Look Fors (practices, tools, resources) Can Statements Impact (evidence) Additionally, as you review the rubric, note any references to the Danielson Framework and/or the CCLS.

15. 2012 – 2013 Quality Review Rubric Indicator 5.1: Evaluate the quality of school-level decisions, making adjustments as needed to increase the coherence of policies and practices across the school, with particular attention to the CCLS a) School leaders and faculty have a process in place to regularly evaluate and adjust curricular, instructional and assessment practices in response to student learning needs and the expectations of the CCLS.

16. Making Connections between the WHAT (Units of Study/Classroom Lesson Plans/Tasks) and the HOW (Pedagogy) Activity # 2 Materials • Common Core Learning Standards: Speaking/Listening • Danielson Framework: 3b First: Review the Speaking/Listening Standards for the grade supplied by your table facilitator Second: Review the Danielson Framework Rubric for Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques, 3b. Finally: What connections exist between the two documents? How might you see the Standards come alive through pedagogy?

17. Making Connections between the WHAT (Units of /TasksStudy/Classroom Lesson Plans) and the HOW (Pedagogy) Activity # 3: Materials • Units of Study • Common Core Learning Standards • Danielson Framework First: Using the CCLS document, find evidence of the Reading (Informational Std 1)and Writing ( Std 2) Standards from the 2011 and 2012 CIE Second: Using the Danielson Framework, look for evidence of 3b Finally: Using the CCLS document, find areas where the Speaking/Listening Standards could be purposefully inserted into the Unit of Study.

18. Making Connections between the WHAT (Units of Study/Classroom Lesson Plans/Tasks) and the HOW (Pedagogy) Activity # 4 Small Group Share – Whole Group Share Methods and Protocols for conducting short, frequent cycles of observation and providing actionable, timely feedback which informs professional development for individual teachers and groups of teachers. In small groups, each principal will have 3-4 minutes to share their method for conducting Danielson Observations followed by 2 minutes for questions. At the end of the presentations, one method agreed upon by the table (inventive, interesting, thought provoking) will be shared by each group for the whole group.

19. Making Connections between the WHAT (Units of Study/Classroom Lesson Plans/Tasks) and the HOW (Pedagogy) Activity # 5 Classroom Observation through the lens of 3b, Questioning and Discussion Techniques on Danielson’s Framework. • Collect low inference evidence • Place practice on the rubric • Discuss next steps for improvement