1 / 71

FSI Cohort III

FSI Cohort III. Lisa Guzzardo Asaro Lisa Rivard February 8, 2013. 7 Keys to Effective Feedback Connector Activity. SOURCE: ASCD Educational Leadership Sept. 2012. Grant Wiggins states:

aleron
Télécharger la présentation

FSI Cohort III

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. FSI Cohort III Lisa Guzzardo Asaro Lisa Rivard February 8, 2013

  2. 7 Keys to Effective Feedback Connector Activity SOURCE: ASCD Educational Leadership Sept. 2012 Grant Wiggins states: “Advise, evaluation, grades…none of these provide the descriptive information that students need to reach their goals. “ • All Read pages 11-12 • Feedback Essentials (Divide up) • Goal Referenced • Tangible Transparent • Actionable • User Friendly • Ongoing • Consistent • All Read page 16 CHARGE Share with Table Team Key Insights Article Handout TAB 5

  3. Today’s Outcomes • Engage in learning around 7 Keys to Effective Feedback • Engage in activities that connect you to Michigan’s continuous school improvement process • Heighten awareness about MDE’s 2013-14 Scorecards for Schools • Engage in Dialogue Dice networking strategy with colleagues • Understand what must lead to Strategy and Activity Identification • Receive a presentation from Dr. Jason Novetsky about PBIS implementation with fidelity • Explore new components of Mischooldata.org, D4SS, and Data Director

  4. Today’s Roadmap Welcome Connector: 7 Keys to Effective Feedback Updates MDE’s School Scorecard Networking with Colleagues Strategy and Activity Implementation Presentations Dr. Jason Novetsky and Dr. Jennifer Parker-Moore TAB 12

  5. Key Working AgreementsA Facilitation Tool Respect all Points of View Be Present and Engaged Honor Time Agreements Get All Voices in the Room These breathe life into our Core Values

  6. Parking LotA Facilitation Tool Rest questions that do not benefit the whole group Place questionsthat do not pertain to content at this time Place questions that pertain, but participants do not want to ask at this time

  7. Action Required Chart • Any request by you that I need to respond to must be placed on the Action Required Chart • You need to PRINT your complete name, school, and email address

  8. LIVING BELIEF STATEMENT “Networking is not an option, but a critical part of how Facilitators of School Improvement learn and share their learning.”

  9. February – April SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT Activities and Requirements

  10. Handout TAB 5

  11. NOTEWORTHY • Passports • Next Generation Science Standards • Dynamic Learning Maps Consortium • Professional Learning Opportunities • New 2012-13 Accountability Scorecards • ASSIST update • Free ACT online prep • AMOs

  12. PASSPORTS • Lost or Stolen Passports • Signature at 2:45 • Completely filled out including dates of training • $10.00 payment collected in May

  13. NEXT Generation SCIENCE STANDARDS (NGSS) • Final Draft released • Framework for K-12 Science Education that was released in July 2011. Grounded in the most current research on science and science learning, the FRAMEWORK was the critical first step in the development of the NGSS. • Download a free PDF through the Nationals Academies Press • NGSS can be located on the Next Generation Science Standards at: • http://www.nextgenscience.org/

  14. DLM First Contact SurveyDeadline Extended to March 1, 2013 • MDE has partnered with the Center for Educational Testing and Evaluation (CETE) • U.S Department of Education project to create a new alternate assessment system for students with significant cognitive disabilities called the Dynamic Learning Maps (DLM) alternate assessment. • Purpose of the survey is to collect information on the students that currently participate in alternate assessments and the technology and supports that are currently being used to meet the needs of these students • Local district’s MI-Access Coordinators are being asked to distribute the First Contact Survey- District to Teachers letter • http://michigan.gov/documents/mde/From_From _District_ to_Teacherss_ MI edition_3_409390_7.pdf

  15. Professional LearningOpportunities Assessing the Impact with Joellen Killion March 12-13, 2013 NCA Building Common Core: Leading the Change March 19, 2013 MISD Rm. 100 A-C MDE/AdvancED Spring SI Conference April 17-18, 2013 Lansing Center MAISA Michigan ELA Model Curriculum Units June 24-27, 2013 Teams Lansing Center Kagan Structures for Cooperative Learning and Active Engagement Institute August 12-16, 2013 MISD

  16. MDE to Provide AMOs • End of February • For every school • Each content area tested • Use the formula we provided in the meantime

  17. ASSIST • SIP Components for Submission 09.01.13 • School Data Analysis ALL • Executive Summary ALL • Goals and Plan ALL • Improvement Plan Stakeholder Involvement ALL • Additional Requirements ALL • Title I Targeted Assistance or School-wide • Heath and Safety OPTIONAL • Assurances Priority and AdvancEd having an external review

  18. Accountability Scorecards An Early Orientation to the Future of Michigan School Accountability Handout TAB 3

  19. Overview • Two “levels” of Accountability Scorecards: DistrictScorecards & SchoolScorecards • Scorecards will use a color coding system (green, lime, yellow, orange, and red) to indicate school performance. • Combines traditional accountability metrics with Top-to-Bottom labels and other state/federal requirements. • Overall color is determined by Top to Bottom status as well as points earned by meeting traditional AYP requirements. • Individual “cells” use red/yellow/green coding scheme • Points-based system where full points earnedfor meeting a target, half points earned for meeting safe harbor

  20. An Early Look at Scorecards Handout

  21. Color-Coded Scorecards • Colors are given to schools and districts for each “scorecard component” and an overall color. • Overall status color is determined using a point-based system from the number of target areas the school/district has met and the school ranking. Decreasing # points received and increasing # targets not met… *These may not be the exact shades utilized in the final scorecard product (still under development).

  22. What Changed? • Additional subgroup: Bottom 30% • Attendance target of 90% -(only for school, no subgroups) • Differentiated proficiency targets • Based on a school’s past performance • Goal of 85% proficient at end of 2021-22 • Targets increase in 10 equal increments • Safe Harbor based on 80th percentile of statewide proficiency • Use school/district improvement slope to determine met/not met • Inclusion of Educator Effectiveness label reporting and TSDL completion in Scorecards • Inclusion of Compliance Factors (SIP & SPR)

  23. What Stayed the Same? • Participation requirement = 95% for school/district overall and all valid subgroups • Multi-year averaging remains in place (up to three years) • Graduation requirement = 80% for school/district overall and all valid subgroups • Four, five, and six-year rates • Graduation “safe harbor” • Use of provisional and growth scores for accountable proficiency rates

  24. School and District Scorecard Subgroups Previously ONE group! • All Students • Bottom 30% (for proficiency calculations only) NEW! • American Indian or Alaska Native • Black or African American • AsianNEW! • Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander NEW! • White • Two or more races • Hispanic of any races • Economically Disadvantaged • English Language Learners • Students with Disabilities • Shared Education Entity (SEE) (district-level only)

  25. Participation • 95% of students are still required to be tested to meet the assessment participation target for the scorecard. • If student group size is 30-39, target is no more than two non-participants (this makes it so that a single student cannot result in not meeting the target participation rate). • If student group size is 40 or more, target is 95% participation • Participation rate is rounded to nearest hundredth • If the “All Students” group does not have at least 30 students in one test cycle, a participation average will be calculated using up to three years of data in order to accumulate at least 30 students • Multi-year averaging used help meet the participation req.

  26. Participation Target • Two options for school/district color status for this target area. 95% Assessed Met 95% Assessed Not Met • These colors are given ONLY on the participation target portion of the scorecard. This does not change your entire school/district status, however, it can impact your overall color.

  27. Proficiency Targets Targets are based on 2011-12 proficiency rates: • (85 – current percent proficient) / 10 = annual increment • Increments do not reset • Proficiency targets are set using PLs 1 & 2 only (not Provisional or Growth Proficient) • Provisional and/or Growth Proficient willhelp you meet targets

  28. Example Proficiency Targets School has 65% proficiency in 2011-12 school year. School must be 85% proficient by 2021-22 school year. Subtract baseline target from end target rate and divide by the number of school years in between. (85 – 65)/10 = +2% annual increment of target The school’s target would be 67% in 2012-13, 69% in 2013-14, 71% in 2014-15, and so on.

  29. Proficiency Targets Example Handout Example school ends at (at least) 85% proficient in subject Example school starts from 65% proficient in subject Example School has +2% Annual Target

  30. Compliance Factors (PARTIALLY NEW!) • Compliance Factors are based on State law. All schools are required by State law to have a School Improvement Plan (SIP), and to complete School Performance Indicator (SPR) reports. • If a school completes all of its required reports it will receive a green cell for the Compliance Factors. If a school does not complete its required reports, it will receive a red cell for Compliance Factors. • 2 Possible colors to receive for this target: • Those with completed reports receive a green cell. • Those with incomplete reports receive a redcell.

  31. TAB 12 NETWORKING Activity Dialogue Dice • Each person in your group will take a turn rolling the dice and sharing briefly an experience in response to the written prompt. Dialogue Dice Notes

  32. One Common Voice – One PlanMichigan Continuous School ImprovementStages and Steps (MI-CSI) Study Analyze Data Set Goals Set Measurable Objectives Research Best Practice

  33. One Common Voice – One PlanMichigan Continuous School ImprovementStages and Steps Getting Ready Collect School Data Build School Profile I. Executive Summary IV. School Process Rubrics Analyze Data II. School Data Analysis IV. School Process Analysis Set Goals III. Additional Requirements V. Goals and Plan Set Measurable Objectives Research Best Practice Develop Action Plan Implement Plan Monitor Plan Evaluate Plan VI. Evaluation Tool (2014) Gather Study Comprehensive Needs Assessment Plan School Improvement Plan Do TAB 12

  34. Schools Comprehensive Needs Assessment (CNA) Component One Executive Summary (All Schools Yearly) Due 09.01.13 Component Two School Data Analysis Due 09.01.13 Student Performance Diagnostic (5th year) 4 wks. prior to External Review Date Stakeholder Feedback Diagnostic (5th year) prior to External Review Date Component Three Additional Requirements (All Schools Yearly) 09.01.13 Component Four School Process Rubrics: Component Five Goals and Plan (All Schools every 3 to 5 years) Due 09.01.13 Component Six Strategy Evaluation Tool(All schools 2nd year in Reading and Math) MDE Rubrics 40/90 DUE 04.01.13 AdvancED MI ISA/SA TAB 12

  35. End of February AdvancED Push • School Data Analysis • Additional Requirements • Title I Targeted Assistance • Title I School-wide

  36. March AdvancED Push • You will be able to add multiple measure under a single objective • You will be able to add the same strategy to multiple objectives • You will be able to add the same activity to multiple strategies

  37. ASSIST

  38. One Common Voice – One PlanMichigan Continuous School ImprovementStages and Steps Study Analyze Data Set Goals Set Measurable Objectives Research Best Practice

  39. Stage Two: StudyStep 4: Analyze Data STUDY Analyze Data Set Goals Set Measurable Objectives Research Best Practice FOCUS

  40. Stage Two: StudyStep 4: Analyze Data STUDY Analyze Data Set Goals Set Measurable Objectives Research Best Practice MDE FOCUS NCA

  41. Handout MATRIX ISA/SA From your Executive Summary Report OLD PLATFORM

  42. ACCESSING ASSIST NEW PLATFORM

  43. Getting Started: OVERVIEW

  44. Viewing Task DETAILS 1 2

  45. Diagnostics and Surveys

  46. Starting a Diagnostic

  47. LABEL

More Related