1 / 34

Opportunity to Teach and Learn (OTL) a “foundational” perspective Jeannie Oakes UCLA

Opportunity to Teach and Learn (OTL) a “foundational” perspective Jeannie Oakes UCLA. What is OTL in the standards-based reform context?.

kaden-beach
Download Presentation

Opportunity to Teach and Learn (OTL) a “foundational” perspective Jeannie Oakes UCLA

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. Opportunity to Teach and Learn (OTL)a “foundational” perspectiveJeannie OakesUCLA

  2. What is OTL in the standards-based reform context? “the criteria for, and the basis of, assessing the sufficiency of the resources, practices, and conditions necessary at each level of the system (schools, local education agencies, and states) to provide all students with an opportunity to learn the material in voluntary national content standards.” Conference Report on HR 1804. Goals 2000, Educate America Act (1994), Congressional Record, 140 (32), H1625-H1684

  3. Roots of OTL in standards-based reform • 1980s Indicator projects • RAND/NSF science education indicators • OECD International indicators • USEd/CCSSO—State indicators projects • 1989 Education Summit—national goals • 1991/1993—Smith & O’Day “systemic reform” • 1994—Goals 2000: Improving America’s Schools Act

  4. Systemic standards-based reform:A 3-legged Stool • Content standards • “Opportunity to Learn” Standards • “a quality education as the opportunity to learn well the content” • delivery & practice standards • Performance standards & assessments

  5. What would OTL standards accomplish? Identify what students need to meet content standards • Resources, conditions, and practices that reach students—not just $ into the system Establish basic fairness & equity • Makes explicit a “floor”/threshold below which it’s not reasonable to assess students meaningfully • Specifies what must be provided to all students • Make reform/accountability systemic • Places responsibility on the system, as well as on teachers and students

  6. What happened to OTL standards? • Professional debates about whether or not states would/should/could micro-manage curriculum and pedagogy • Feasibility concerns related to operationalizing, measuring, and collecting OTL data for indicators and accountability. • Ideological argument that a focus on “inputs” will deflect attention from outcomes, and serve as handy “excuses” for failure

  7. Standards & Test-based Accountability: A 2-Legged Stool • Content standards • OTL-- resources, conditions and practices • Performance standards + high stakes tests

  8. Competing theories of educational improvement • 3-legged stool (capacity building/learning theory): • Clear goals + aligned inputs + good information about performance = high quality, equitable schooling • 2-legged stool (incentives/behavioral theory): • Clear goals + input deregulation/de-emphasis + incentives (rewards/sanctions/choice) = high quality, equitable schooling

  9. Restoring the OTL leg to California’s standards stool • Set state-level “foundational” OTL standards as necessary, but not sufficient • Build/oversee local capacity to manage and use foundational OTL for high quality • Make foundational OTL part of statewide accountability • Engage local educators and communities with data to inform local OTL “standards,” foster professional learning, and improve practice

  10. Setting foundational OTL standards • Determine basic resources, conditions, and tools for • safe and decent school environments • learning what the content standards require • passing the CAHSEE • having a fair chance to compete for admission to UC Berkeley or UCLA • Achieving other valued state goals • Specify substance, sufficiency, and locus of authority/responsibility

  11. Setting “foundational” OTL standards • Professional judgment:Analyses of the demands of • content standards, CAHSEE, and higher ed requirements • E.g., Koski analysis of instructional materials, technologies, teacher qualities, and facilities required by standards • other valued educational goals • Political consensus:Blue ribbon commission (SB 495 names the QEC), public engagement, official adoption, etc. Caution:Resist temptation to prescribe the details of practice that transform OTL into learning

  12. Candidate foundational OTL standards: what should, but can’t be assumed • Qualified (fully certified) teachers in every classroom • Standards-aligned textbooks and instructional materials in sufficient supply for use at school and home • Instructional time (length of school year/day) • College preparatory coursework (including advanced coursework) and prerequisite curriculum • Safe, well-maintained, uncrowded facilities

  13. The TQI and Student Ethnicity • In schools where 90% or more of the student population is WHITE, the average TQI rating is 9.0 • In schools where 90% or more of the student population is NON-WHITE, the average TQI rating is 5.3 Ken Futernick, 2003 www.edfordemocracy.org/tqi

  14. High school teachers reporting that a lack of materials limits the effectiveness of their standards-related courses Human Resources Research Organization, Independent Evaluation of the California High School Exit Examination (CAHSEE): AB 1609 Study Report—Volume 1.CDE: Sacramento, CA, May 1, 2003.

  15. Fewer materials in schools with Latino and African American majorities • greater shortages of textbooks and instructional materials; • teachers twice as likely to report available materials to be “only fair” or “poor” quality Harris teacher survey, 2002

  16. AP courses offered by school enrollment and % black and Latino

  17. AP course offering disparities • Disparities in AP Math and Science • Offerings by School Racial Composition • % African American # of AP Math/Science • Latino Offerings • more than 70% 3.8 • fewer than 30% 5.3 • Data collected by California Department of Education • California Basic Educational Data System

  18. Time disparities—Concept 6 Schools • 355,000 students • schools at 150% capacity • 3 tracks—2 on campus at any one time • long, ill-timed breaks—2 2-month vacations • 17 fewer school days • median Latino enrollment 84% (34% statewide)

  19. Support and oversee local capacity to acquire, manage, and use OTL resources • Ensure a sufficient supply • Ensure fiscal capacity • Provide technical assistance & professional development

  20. Collect data & include OTL in state accountability system • Identify locus of responsibility for various aspects of OTL—ensuring adequate supply, delivery to students, etc. • Construct key indicators for universe data collection • Supplement with sampled data collection to explore connections between foundational OTL, practice, and outcomes • Report OTL index for every school along side the API, and OTL data disaggregated by subgroups • Support and intervene at the appropriate levels

  21. Feasibility of collecting census OTL data • Add items to CBEDs teacher survey • Out of field assignments • Textbooks and Materials • Facilities conditions & overcrowding • Develop “cover page” student survey as part of CAHSEE • Modify CCR and WASC to focus systematically on collecting OTL data • Inventory and conduct periodic inspections of facilities—like restaurants • Take seriously SARC and 60119 data

  22. Foundational OTL and learning outcomes • Foundational OTL is necessary, but not sufficient. It can not be seen as the direct “cause” of those outcomes. • The “cause” of achievement is located in instruction—how foundational resources are used. • OTL data can guide intervention and support aimed as solving fundamental problems that constrain the “causes” of learning

  23. Beyond foundational OTL • OTL in practice--transforming basic tools into contextually appropriate instruction • Districts, schools, and teachers ensuring a match between what is taught, what is tested, the particular school context, and students’ needs

  24. OTL in practice • Examine how foundational resources are used to create • Safe and respectful learning environments • Curriculum aligned with content standards • Instructional interactions between students & teachers around content that promote learning • Use state- and locally generated OTL information “diagnostically” to guide professional development and improvement of practice • Report to and engage the local community in holding the system accountable for high quality, equitable teaching and learning

  25. Rhode Island—SALT (School Accountability for Learning and Teaching) Information Works! Data from tests, demographic, financial data, combined with bi-annual survey of parents, teachers, and students inform • Self study • School Improvement Plan • School Report night • SALT visit—every five years • Compact for Learning—agreement with the district and the Department of Education specifying what the district and the department will do to support the school.  • Progressive Support & Intervention

  26. Rhode Island Information Works!State Supported Local OTL • School climate indicator • school safety • expectations that students have for themselves and that teachers have for students • respectful relationships between teachers and students • whether student behavior is disruptive • whether teachers are invested in the success of their students • whether students know that they can approach someone in their school to discuss both academic and personal problems

  27. Rhode Island Information Works!State Supported Local OTL • Parental involvement indicator • whether families are comfortable in school environments • Whether families are fully engaged in supporting their child’s learning (helping with homework, attending conferences, participating in school-improvement activities, and communicating with teachers) • whether schools provide ongoing opportunities to communicate with parents • whether schools are creative in helping reluctant families feel comfortable working with teachers

  28. Rhode Island Information Works!State Supported Local OTL Indicators • Instruction indicator • whether standards-based and research-based instruction takes place in the school • whether teachers are well prepared to implement standards- and research-based instruction • barriers that teachers face or the support that they receive as they implement good instructional practices.

  29. Two-tiered OTL • Foundational OTL (basic tools) • State standards derived by examining content standards & adequacy models • Indictors part of state accountability system • Trigger state intervention/support at the right level • Practice OTL (informing the transformation of basic tools into successful teaching and learning interactions) • State supported through data collection and feedback to schools • Used locally and diagnostically • Triggers local dialogue/learning informed by research, professional knowledge + context

More Related