I nstructional Support Leader Network

1. LEADING Instructional Support Leader Network September 23, 2011

2. ISLN Facilitators

3. Kentucky LeadershipNetworks Timeline 2010-2013 YEAR 1 IMPLEMENTATION • Networks Launch – Orientation to: • Kentucky’s Core Academic Standards • Assessment Literacy • Highly Effective Teaching and Learning • JULY-AUG • Networks Launch – orientation to: • Kentucky’s Core Academic Standards • Assessment Literacy • Highly Effective Teaching and Learning • Reaching consensus with colleagues on the meaning of each standard in terms of its expected depth and breadth • Deconstructing Kentucky’s Core Academic Standards into clear learning targets • Planning and reflecting on their own/others’ teaching using the Characteristics of Highly Effective Teaching and Learning as a guide • Reviewing and editing the deconstructed standards • Understanding characteristics of high quality formative and summative assessments and how to utilize resulting data effectively to improve teaching and learning • Engaging in ‘gap analysis’ for transition from old standards/ • curricula to new • Sharing highly effective teaching and learning strategies and resources • Finalizing implementation plans for 2011-12 school year • Working collaboratively on model maps/pacing guides • Planning quality learning experiences/ • assessments around KCAS for first semester of year • Populating an online repository for instructional resources for all Kentucky teachers/leaders to access • SEPT-DEC • Understanding the meaning of the KCAS • Deconstructing Kentucky’s Core Academic Standards into clear learning targets • Planning and reflecting on their own/others’ teaching using the Characteristics of Highly Effective Teaching and Learning as a guide • Designing/implementing high-quality formative and summative assessments and utilizing resulting data effectively to improve teaching and learning via Gates Foundation Literacy Design Collaborative(LDC)/Mathematics Formative Assessment Lesson (FAL) models • Planning/selecting rigorous and congruent (i.e., completely aligned) learning experiences for instruction • Selecting evidence-based strategies and resources to enhance instruction • Supporting other educators as they try out these same processes/strategies in their own classrooms • Populating an online repository for instructional resources for all Kentucky teachers/leaders to access • Reflecting on 1st year implementation of standards • Revising pacing guides/maps • Refining LDC/FAL assessment and learning tasks for wider implementation • Designing additional LDC/FAL-like modules/tasks • Teacher Leaders support others in their schools/districts in the effective implementation of LDC/FAL modules/tasks • Field-test/refine newly designed tasks/modules • Gap Analysis • Working collaboratively on model maps/pacing guides • Understanding high quality formative and summative assessments • Planning quality learning experiences/assessments around KCAS for first semester of year • Building leadership capacity • Launch of CIITS • JAN-JUNE KDE:ONxGL: KK (fcs) February 2011

4. Kentucky Leadership Networks:2011-12 Year-at-a-Glance

5. Support Services Document • Please review this document as well as the Coaching/Feedback Protocol. • Karen will not finalize until all ISLN networks have reviewed and given their feedback.

6. Why these tasks?

7. THE INSTRUCTIONAL CORE CONTENT • Principle #1: Increases in student learning occur only as a consequence of improvements in the level of content, teachers’ knowledge and skill, and student engagement. • Principle #2: If you change one element of the instructional core, you have to change the other two. • Principle #3: If you can’t see it in the core, it’s not there. • Principle #4: Task predicts performance. • Principle #5: The real accountability system is in the tasks that students are asked to do. • Principle #6: We learn to do the work by doing the work. • Principle #7: Description before analysis, analysis before prediction, prediction before evaluation. TASK STUDENT TEACHER

8. Interaction: Students and Teacher • Teacher: what a teacher does in the classroom. Depends on teacher’s skill and knowledge (repertoire and ability to match) • Student: what students do in the classroom. Level of ACTIVE student learning • Content: how concepts are presented and the tasks students are asked to complete. Difficulty of content; level of challenge; activity vs. mastery focus

9. Improve Student Learning • You can raise the level of the content that students are taught. • You can increase the skill and knowledge that teachers bring to the teaching of that content. • You can increase the level of students’ active learning of the content.

10. Schools don’t improve through political and managerial incantation; they improve through the complex and demanding work of teaching and learning. (Instructional Rounds, Richard Elmore, et al)

11. Observing and Analyzing the Task • What is the actual work that students are being asked to do? • What do you have to know in order to engage the task? • What is the actual product of the task? • What is the distribution of the performance among students in the class on the task? • If you were a student and did the task, what would you know how to do?

12. Current Classroom Culture Of the task observed, 80% of task required procedure and fluency “Don’t change a culture like this. You have to take out the current and put something else in its place.” Richard Elmore

13. What is different about these tasks? Pedagogy will be different: • Questioning Strategies change • Student Discourse will be necessary • Level of Cognitive Demand is Increased • Literacy and Thinking skills Student Response will be different: • Response to cognitively demanding questions • Constructing Questions • Academic discourse to learn content

14. Evolution of Tasks

15. Gates Foundation: Supporting Instruction Investing in Teaching Teachers worry that the new round of standards and tests will continue to focus on accountability without sufficient support for how teachers actually help their students master more-rigorous expectations. Carina Wong Deputy Director,Education Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

16. Gates Foundation: Building Tools8 States

17. What is LDC and FAL? • Literacy Design Collaborative • Brochure • https://knowledgebase.newvisions.org/CustomTeamsIndividual.aspx?id=409 • Math: Formative Assessment Lessons • An Overview • http://map.mathshell.org/materials/background.php?subpage=about

18. Begin with the End in Mind • Teacher Doing • Student Doing • Student Saying Coherence occurs when adults agree on what they are trying to accomplish and are consistent from classroom to classroom.

19. Moving Toward Higher Quality Instruction

20. Mathematics Formative Assessment Lesson and Literacy Design Collaborative Task How do the design and intent of the tasks use Highly Effective Teaching and Learning to bridge from the Standard to the Assessment?

22. Pillars again Highly Effective Teaching and learning Implementation Kentucky’s Core Academic Standards Assessment Literacy Leadership Cognitively Demanding Tasks Engineering Student Discussions Questioning Techniques FAL LDC

23. Formative assessment can and should be done BY STUDENTS as well as by teachers. The key to improvement is how students and teachers use assessment information.

24. Your DistrictFormative Assessments List a variety of formative assessments used in your district. List one assessment per post-it note. Exit Slips Bell Ringers Thinklink

25. What Does Research Say the Benefits of formative Assessment Are?

26. Typology of Kinds of Formative Assessment

27. Post-it Sort Arrange your post-it notes into one of three categories:

28. Does your district have a Balanced Assessment System? • Are there any types that need more attention? • How do you as a leadership team ensure that appropriate assessments occur and that the data generated moves learning forward?

29. Formative Assessment

31. “I thought that if I taught them all the bits, [students] could put them together.”FAL Trial Teacher The Big Picture

32. We remain Connected to CASL!

33. Aspects of Assessment for Learning Academic talk Thoughtful questions Meaningful Feedback Student-friendly learning targets Peer and self-assessment

35. Boomerang Task • Teacher packet • Mathematical Practice Standards • Common Core Standards • Misconceptions • Questions to guide students forward in their learning • Samples of student work

36. The Literacy Design Collaborative • The LDC framework is a way to put “legs” on the common core, to translate them into classroom practice and student experiences. • LDC tasks are extended literacy assignments taught over several weeks. • LDC modules add literacy instruction to ensure the reading, writing, and thinking tasks needed to complete the task are intentionally taught.

37. LDC Tasks are Standards in Action “The task predicts performance. What determines what students know and are able to do is not what the curriculum says they are supposed to do, nor even what the teacher thinks he or she is asking students to do. What predicts performance is what students are actually doing.” (Richard Elmore, City et al., 2009)

38. & other Common Core Standards when appropriate* LDC Framework TEMPLATE TASKS Target the 3 modes of writing in the Common Core State Standards Teacher/Student-Selected Texts or or Appropriate, grade-level texts that support selected content Argument (opinion at the elementary grades) Informative/ Explanatory Narrative Supported by an Instructional Ladder Skills students need to complete the task Mini-tasks for building each skill

39. LDC Template Tasks • Connect reading and writing instruction • Are based on multiple standards • Require students to: • Read texts as specified by the CCSS • Write products as specified by the CCSS • Apply common core literacy standards to content with a focus on ELA, social studies, and/or science

40. LDC Template Tasks • Template tasks come with rubrics for scoring students’ work and specifications of the Common Core State Standards the resulting tasks will address. • Some template tasks provide optional additions to the basic assignment, allowing teachers an additional way to vary the level of work students will create. (L2, L3)

41. LDC Template Tasks • Teachers fill in the prompt, including: • The content of the task • Texts to read • Text students will write • Whether to make the task more demanding by using the Level 2 and Level 3 options

42. September=Task 2 (argument) • (Add Essential Question) After reading _________ (literature or informational texts), write ___________ (review, article, editorial, speech, etc…) that addresses the question and support your position with evidence from the text(s). • L2 Be sure to acknowledge competing views. • L3 Give examples from past or current events or issues to illustrate and clarify your position.

43. Why Argumentation Writing? • What student doesn’t like to argue? Argument is motivating to students. • CCSS require students to move on to argumentation writing instead of persuasive.

44. Argument moves from…to…

45. Implications of LDC • Provides a content specific way to embed writing across the curriculum. • Supports the expectations in Writing Program Reviews • Will build collaboration across the disciplines • Supports the move from Persuasive Writing to Argumentation Writing.

46. Task 2 Example

47. Break Return in 15 minutes.

48. Support for Teacher Leaders • How are the tasks for Mathematics and English/Language Arts similar and how are they different? • How can school and district leaders support the work of the teacher leaders?

49. How Are the Tasks… Similar? Different?

50. Leadership Practice Organizational Processes Individual and Collective Efficacy Beliefs Structures in place Instructional mandate (vertical accountability) Attention to processes Explicit focus on group commitments Increased exposure to instructional strategies and practices (individual) Increased expectation of group success leads to “normative press” (lateral accountability) Press leads to greater risk-taking, perseverance, resilience in face of failure Model public learning Create environment supportive of risk-taking (psychological safety) Focus on structures, processes and content of team work Examine available instructional supports / PD Student Achievement Individual efficacy linked to classroom behaviors Collective efficacy a strong predictor of whole-school achievement