1 / 47

Building K-12 Math Leaders: “Walking the Walk” MEANS “Talking the Talk”

Building K-12 Math Leaders: “Walking the Walk” MEANS “Talking the Talk”. Tom Dick , Oregon State University Linda Foreman , Teachers Development Group. NCSM Conference April 2008, Salt Lake City. OMLI: Oregon Mathematics Leadership Institute. Partners Oregon State University

minty
Download Presentation

Building K-12 Math Leaders: “Walking the Walk” MEANS “Talking the Talk”

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. Building K-12 Math Leaders: “Walking the Walk” MEANS“Talking the Talk” Tom Dick, Oregon State University Linda Foreman, Teachers Development Group NCSM Conference April 2008, Salt Lake City © 2006 Teachers Development Group

  2. OMLI: Oregon Mathematics Leadership Institute • Partners • Oregon State University • Portland State University • Teachers Development Group (TDG) • 10 Oregon School Districts • RMC Research Corporation • OMLI is in Year 4 RMC Research Corporation

  3. OMLI Objective • Build a cadre of school- and district-based intellectual leaders and master mathematics teachers through: • 3 summer institutes (2007 was the last institute) • 2 of 6 content courses each summer • 1 collegial leadership course each summer • Pedagogy and leadership • Follow-up academic year professional development • 4 site visits by TDG staff RMC Research Corporation

  4. School Leadership Teams (SLT) • 82 K-12 schools from 10 school districts • Each school has a SLT composed of: • 2 teacher leaders • Attend 3 weeks of all 3 summer institutes • Participates in school year activities • 1 Administrator • Attends 1 week of all 3 summer institutes • Participates in school year activities RMC Research Corporation

  5. Action Plan School LeadershipTeams Improved Teaching and Learning in Mathematics IncreasedStudentDiscourse Classes ofTeacher Leaders And Later inClasses of theOther MathTeachers ImprovedStudentAchievement • Follow-up PD • School-Based • Implementationof Action Plan • Increase StudentDiscourse OMLI Research Logic Model • Summer Institute • Math Content • Leadership TDG Site Visits 4 Each School Year RMC Research Corporation

  6. Data Sources • Classroom observation data • Student achievement data • Professional development participation data RMC Research Corporation

  7. Random Sampling • School Sampling • 25 school out of 86 • Stratified by grade level • Sample demographically representative • Teacher Sampling • 1 of the 2 teacher leader • 1 other teacher of mathematics at similar grade level RMC Research Corporation

  8. Classroom Observation Protocols • Must be about mathematics • Among students not the teacher • Lesson episodes • Attributes of discourse • Mode • Type • Tools RMC Research Corporation

  9. Discourse Mode • Who the Student Addresses • Teacher (even if public) • Student • Group (small group or the class) • Individual RMC Research Corporation

  10. Discourse Type • Represents continuum of cognitive demand • Answering • Stating/ sharing • Explaining • Questioning • Challenging • Relating • Predicting/Conjecturing • Justifying • Generalizing Low Cognitive Demand High Cognitive Demand RMC Research Corporation

  11. Discourse Tools • Verbal • Gesturing/Acting • Written • Graphs, Charts, Sketches • Manipulative • Symbolization • Notation • Computers/Calculators • Others RMC Research Corporation

  12. A Typical Recording Sheet

  13. Classroom Parallel: Student Discourse Observation • Scribing verbatim student discourse • Characterizing discourse types: • Procedures and Facts • Justification • Generalization RMC Research Corporation

  14. Procedures and Facts • Short answer to a direct question • Restating facts/statements made by others • Showing work/methods to others • Explaining what and how • Questioning to clarify • Making observations/connections RMC Research Corporation

  15. Justification • Explaining why by providing mathematical reasoning • Challenging the validity of an idea by providing mathematical reasoning • Giving mathematical defense for an idea that was challenged RMC Research Corporation

  16. Generalization Using mathematical relationships as the basis for: • Making conjectures/predictions about what might happen in the general case or different contexts • Explaining and justifying what will happen in the general case. RMC Research Corporation

  17. Student Discourse Observation Tool

  18. OMLI Work in Schools To accomplish the OMLI objectives … • All OMLI School Leadership Teams collaborate to create sustainable and effective school-based professional learning communities whose work centers on improving mathematics instruction. • All OMLI schools institutionalize ongoing, high-quality, practice-based professional learning characterized by protocol-based dialogue and inquiry about mathematics content, students’ mathematical thinking, and effective instruction. RMC Research Corporation

  19. School Leadership Team Obligations • Design and implement a School Action Plan to improve mathematics learning and teaching school-wide • Facilitate a minimum of 2 hours of mathematics PD per month for building colleagues • Utilize OMLI-defined Professional Learning Tasks (PLTs) during their building-based PD RMC Research Corporation

  20. Professional Learning Tasks (PLT) • Student Discourse Observations • Case Discussions* • Mathematics Tasks Framework & Task Analysis Guide* • Data Snaps* • Examining Student Work* • Analyzing Trends • Artifacts of Student Thinking • Lesson Planning Framework* • PLT Planning Framework* RMC Research Corporation

  21. *Keeping Our Eye on the Prize: Student Thinking/Discourse • Developing generative learners (teachers, administrators, and students) through a relentless focus on students’ mathematical thinking, cognitive demand, and sociomathematical norms • Explicit focus in each PLT on sensemaking about students’ mathematical thinking through analyses of student discourse RMC Research Corporation

  22. Training the Professional Eye:Student Discourse Observation Protocol • Phase 1 Predictions – Framing the Observations • Phase 2 Observations – Collecting and Classifying the Data • Phase 3 Inferences – Inquiry Dialogue and Action Steps RMC Research Corporation

  23. Why the Protocol? Besides supporting sensemaking about the discourse types, this process supports • deprivatization of practice • professional community • sensemaking about mathematical ideas and their trajectory • inquiry-based stance towards one’s practice RMC Research Corporation

  24. Professional Learning Tasks (PLT) • Student Discourse Observations • Case Discussions* • Mathematics Tasks Framework & Task Analysis Guide* • Data Snaps* • Examining Student Work* • Analyzing Trends • Artifacts of Student Thinking • Lesson Planning Framework* • PLT Planning Framework* RMC Research Corporation

  25. One of the Research Questions Has the OMLI project increased the percentage of students who demonstrate proficiency on the Oregon State Mathematics Assessments for Grades 3, 5, 8, and 10 in all participating K–12 schools? RMC Research Corporation

  26. About the Research Data • The school is the unit of change for the OMLI project • Data available form the Oregon Department of Education website • School-level aggregate data • School demographic data RMC Research Corporation

  27. Initial Results Were Discouraging and Inconclusive RMC Research Corporation

  28. Taking Note of Implementation Fidelity • Project staff reported that some schools are not implementing their action plans as well as others • Re-examining project impact on student achievement • Collect level of implementation data through the Teachers Development Group (TDG) site team staff • Using a standard rubric developed in partnership with the TDG staff • Explore relationship between student achievement and level of implementation. RMC Research Corporation

  29. OMLI 13 Trait Implementation Rubric

  30. Revising the Evaluation Question • Do students in schools that do a better job of implementing the practices promoted through the OMLI project show higher performance on the state assessments compared to students in school that do a poorer job of implementing those practices? RMC Research Corporation

  31. Traits Measured • Quality of the Action Plan • Implementation of the Action Plan • Teacher Leadership Teacher 1 & 2 • School Administrator Leadership & Engagement • District Leadership Team (DLT) • School/District Policies and Practices • Stability of the School Leadership Team (SLT) • School Priority of Mathematics • Professional Development (PD) Responsibilities • Scope of Professional Development (PD) • Use of Professional Learning Tasks (PLTs) & Protocols • Evidence of Impact RMC Research Corporation

  32. Secondary School Results • 5 implementation traits were positively correlated with student achievement in secondary schools • Quality of the school action plan • Implementation of the action plan • Regular school-based professional development • Scope of school-based professional development • Use of well-defined professional learning tasks and protocols during school-based professional development • Secondary Implementation Scale (SIS) RMC Research Corporation

  33. Analysis of Grade 10 Student Achievement RMC Research Corporation

  34. Means Weighted By Number of Students Assessed RMC Research Corporation

  35. Conclusion for Secondary Schools • The degree to which schools implement the practices promoted by the OMLI project is a significant positive predictor of student performance above and beyond what can be explained by the socioeconomic factor as indicated by the percent of students who qualify for free and reduced lunch program. • This relationship is particularly acute at the Grade 10 (R2=.738, Beta=.320) and Grade 8 (R2=.524, Beta=.197). RMC Research Corporation

  36. Secondary Implementation Scale • Quality of the school action plan • Implementation of the action plan • Regular school-based professional development • Scope of school-based professional development • Use of well-defined professional learning tasks and protocols during school-based professional development (discourse) RMC Research Corporation

  37. Elementary School Results • 5 different traits were positively correlated with student achievement • Leadership qualities of the teachers on the School Leadership Team • Whether the School Leadership Team had a second teacher participating • Supportive school and district policies and practices • The degree to which mathematics is a priority for the school • Use of well-defined professional learning tasks and protocols during school-based professional development (discourse) • Elementary Implementation Scale (EIS) RMC Research Corporation

  38. Conclusion for Elementary Schools • The degree to which schools implement the practices promoted by the OMLI project and socioeconomic factors are predictors of student performance, but • The regression model does not account for enough of the variance in student achievement • There are other factors at play in elementary schools that are not accounted for by the traits measured by the implementation rubrics and socioeconomics RMC Research Corporation

  39. Back to the Evaluation Question • Question: • Has the OMLI project increased the percentage of students who demonstrate proficiency on the Oregon State Mathematics Assessments for Grades 3, 5, 8, and 10 in all participating K–12 schools? • Answer: • Yes for those schools that effectively implemented the project as intended. RMC Research Corporation

  40. Evaluation Plans for 2008 • School level analysis • Add traits to implementation rubrics that may explain other factors influencing student achievement at the elementary level • Rate school again in June 2008 • Repeat the analysis using 2008 student assessment data • Obtain student level data from state ??? • Analyze student achievement of student of SLT teachers compared to that of non-SLT teachers RMC Research Corporation

  41. Questions and Thank You! Tom Dick, OMLI Principal Investigator Mathematics Department, Oregon State University tpdick@math.oregonstate.edu Linda Foreman, OMLI Co-PI & Project Director Teachers Development Group linda.foreman@teachersdg.org www.teachersdg.org Dave Weaver, OMLI Evaluator RMC Research Dave.Weaver@rmccorp.com http://omli.org

More Related