Curriculum updates for schools

Curriculum and
Instruction Updates
November, 2012
* Information was compiled from C&I Update meetings in
October

Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation

Instructional Improvement
System

Curriculum & Instructional Leaders’ Forum

Instructional Improvement System
Why – How – What -- When
▲ ▲

Why an Instructional Improvement System?

Improve and personalize student learning

How?

Facilitate the teaching and learning process through
• Increased access to high quality resources for all
• Provision of timely and relevant information and data


Technology Platform

One Technology
Platform
• Single Sign-on Instructional
PowerSchool Improvement
• Collaborative System
• Populated with
resources for NC
Student educators Tools for
Informati Teaching
on and
System Coming Soon Learning
(SIS) (IIS)


Learner Profile Standards & Instructional Assessment & Data Analysis Professional
and Work Curriculum Design, Practice & Analytics and Reporting Development &
Samples Resources Educator Evaluation


Learner Profile and Work Samples
• Teacher has access to learner
information to assist with planning and
monitoring

• Teacher can use examples of student
work for future lessons

• Student can collect evidence of
learning and growth

• Parents can view student work


Standards and Curriculum


Instructional Design, Practice and Resources

Example


Assessment and Growth


Dashboards, Data Analysis and Reporting


Professional Development and
Educator Evaluation

• View, register for, participate in PD

• View past PD participation

• Get suggestions for PD based on class
performance or observation/evaluation
data

• Receive recommendations for license
renewal credit

• Implement educator evaluation processes


Guiding Principles
– Resources must
• Be aligned with
standards
• Provide ample
To make the resources in the coverage to all
standards and
IIS meaningful and useful to
objectives
teachers:
• Emphasize quality
over quantity
• Be reviewed and
rated by educators
in North Carolina


Some of Our Content Sources

Multiple
Subjects



Math



Science



English
Language
Arts


Sample 3rd Party Instructional Activities

National Archives Phet

Why – How – What -- When
▲

RFP Issued Reviewed
Proposals Negotiated with
Select Vendors Data Integration
Feb 27, 2012 April – June
Pilot
2012 June – October
2012 Fall
2012
Vendor Approval
& Contract Award Design and
Build IIS Pilot Phased-In
December Roll out
2012 December 2012 
Early 2013 
Starting 2013-14
School Year


Common Core and
Essential Standards
Resources

C&I Links
http://www.dpi.state.nc.us/curriculum/


Partners: ASCD
http://educore.ascd.org/


Educator
Effectiveness and
Common Exams


Why educator effectiveness?
NC is implementing a new curriculum, new assessments, new
technology tools to improve instruction, new ways of engaging
students, and the list goes on…

So why is the State focusing on educator
effectiveness in the face of so many other
changes?
Because all our efforts in other areas depend on an effective
teacher in every classroom and an effective leader in every school
building.


The work around educator effectiveness, including the Measures of
Student Learning, is grounded in the belief that:

Every student in North Carolina deserves an
effective teacher in all courses and grades.
Our students need to learn all of the standards in the North
Carolina Standard Course of Study in order to be READY for their
futures.


In order to increase their effectiveness, teachers need access to
high-quality data.

Every teacher in North Carolina deserves
feedback on the growth of their students.
It’s not about firing our way to a better teaching force. It’s about
creating a system that:
• Identifies the strongest teachers so that we can all learn
from them, and
• Identifies those teachers who need additional support
and targets that support to their needs


Re-creation of chart from Gathering Feedback For Teaching, http://www.metproject.org/downloads/MET_Gathering_Feedback_Practioner_Brief.pdf

Observation + Other Measures
Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs
▲
Months of Learning Gained or Lost
State Math State ELA

Observation Tool Top 25% +1.2 +.2
Bottom 25% -1.4 -.4

Observation Tool Top 25% +2.8 +.7
+ Student Survey
Bottom 25% -2 -.9

Observation Tool Top 25% +4.5 +1.2
+ Student Survey
+ Growth (Value-Add) Bottom 25% -3.1 -1.3


Observation + Other Measures
• Standard 6 and 8
Final components of Standards 6 and 8 and their
respective weightings
• Status
Consequences and professional development for
educators “in need of improvement”
• Common Exams
Measures of growth in English Language Arts, Science,
Social Studies, and Mathematics in grades 4 – 12
• Other Options
Measures of growth in K-2, grade 3, and performance
areas
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 11/26/2012 • page 28

Standards 6 & 8 – The Basics

Teachers

1 2 3 4 5 6
Demonstrate Establish
Leadership Environment
Know
Content
Facilitate
Learning
Reflect on Contribute
Practice to Academic
Success

Principals (and other Administrators)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Strategic Instructional Cultural Human Managerial External Micro- Academic
Leadership Leadership Leadership Resource Leadership Development political Achievement
Leadership Leadership Leadership Leadership


Growth Model

Teachers

Standard 6 and 8
6
Contribute
to Academic
Success are measures of

Principals
Growth
8
Academic
Academic
Achievement
Achievement
Leadership

Leadership


Growth Model

Teachers
We will use
6
Contribute
to Academic
Success
Educator Value-Added
Principals Assessment System
EVAAS
8
Academic
Academic
Achievement
Achievement
Leadership

Leadership for standards 6 & 8 when possible


Determining Growth
TCP-C-006 now provides clarity around which
What do we need?
assessments are used to measure growth
End-of-Grade
Assessments
CTE Post- Teacher
Assessments Growth Value
EVAAS for Sixth
Common Standard
Exams Rating
End-of-Course
Assessments


Growth Model

Teachers
How do Value-Added models work?

6
Contribute
to Academic
Success
• They measure growth by predicting how well a student
will do on an assessment.

How do they predict how well
Principals the student will do?
• They look at previous test scores and estimate how well

8
Academic
Academic
Achievement
the student should do at the end of the year.
Achievement
Leadership Every student must grow based on where they start.
Leadership


Teacher Ratings Categories
▲
Teachers

1 2 3 4 5 6
Demonstrate Establish Know Facilitate Reflect on Contribute
Leadership Environment Content Learning Practice to Academic
Success

5 Rating Categories 3 Rating Categories
Not Demonstrated Does not Meet Expected Growth
Developing Meets Expected Growth
Proficient Exceeds Expected Growth
Accomplished
Distinguished


Ratings
Teachers

1 2 3 4 5 6
Demonstrate Establish Know Facilitate Reflect on Contribute
Leadership Environment Content Learning Practice to Academic
Success

5 Rating Categories 3 Ratings Categories
Why the difference?
Identifying only three rating categories on standard 6
& 8 improves certainty of categorization.


Teacher Ratings in 2011-12

Yearly Rating
Teacher
EVAAS Growth

70% 30%
School-
wide
EVAAS Growth
• Does not Meet
Expected Growth
• Meets Expected Growth
• Exceeds Expected Growth
6
Weighted Average

Why is school-wide EVAAS growth included?
• To encourage collaboration and collective
ownership of overall outcomes.

Note: In 2011-12, teachers without individual EVAAS
growth will have school-wide growth for Standard 6.

Teacher Ratings in 2012-13
The first year that Standard Six “counts” for a teacher is
2012 – 2013 (if the growth data is specific to the teacher
and the students)

Possible additional

6
School-
elements Yearly Rating
Teacher Team Student • Does not
EVAAS wide EVAAS Surveys Expected Growth
Growth EVAAS Growth (?) (?) • Meets Expected Growth
Growth
• Exceeds Expected Growth
Weighted Average


Ratings

Teachers 1 2 3 4 5 6
Demonstrate
Leadership
Establish
Environment
Know
Content
Facilitate
Learning
Reflect on
Practice
Contribute
to Academic
Success

Principals
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Strategic Instructional Cultural Human Managerial External Micro- Academic
Leadership Leadership Leadership Resource Leadership Development political Achievement
Leadership Leadership Leadership Leadership

Key Note on Ratings
• Every educator is evaluated every year
• Each standard and rating stands on its own
(1 out of 6, not 1/6)
• Ratings are used to create professional development plans each year
• Ratings are used to determine status


Status

What is the difference
between Ratings and
Status?


Status

Ratings Status
• Teachers • A single overall status that
6 separate ratings to help is determined once a
teachers grow each year principal or teacher has
three years of growth
• Principals data to populate 6 or 8
8 separate ratings to help
principals grow each year • Categories for Status
1. In Need of Improvement
2. Effective
3. Highly Effective


Status and Standard 6 & 8

• An educator receives an
effectiveness status only once she
has 3 years of data on
Standard 6 or 8
• A 3-year rolling average of growth
data from standard 6 or 8 is used as
part of determining overall status


3-Year Rolling Average

Rating from Rating from Rating from
2012 - 2013 2013 - 2014 2014 - 2015
1.9 + -2.5 + 1.2
Standard Standard Standard

6 6 6 Contribute
to Academic
Success
3

= .2
1.9 -2.5 1.2 Met Expected Growth
Met Did not Met 3- year average rating on
Expected meet Expected standard 6 for
Growth Expected Growth determining status
Note: A similar methodology applies to principals as well.
Growth
Note: The values above represent values from the MRM model in EVAAS.


Three Years of Data

Any three years of data attributable to a teacher or
principal will be combined and used:
• Any grades
• Any subjects
• Any schools
• Any districts

The three years of data do not start until they are
specific to that teacher and his or her students


Status

So once a educator has a
three-year average rating
for Standard 6 or 8, how
is status determined?


Teacher Status

In Need of Highly
Effective
Improvement Effective

Standards 1-5 Any rating Proficient Accomplis
In the year lower than or Higher hed
proficient on Standards
1 2 3 4 5
Demonstrate Establish
Leadership Environment
Know
Content
Facilitate
Learning
Reflect on
Practice
1-5
or Higher
on
And/Or And Standards
And
1-5
Standard 6 Does Not Meets or Exceeds
Three-year rolling average Meet Exceeds Expected
) Expected Expected Growth
6
2 years
ago 6
+ 1ago +
year
6
This
year )/ 3 Growth Growth

What Will Teachers See?

• Ratings on Standards 1 – 5 of the Educator
Evaluation System (as recorded in online tool)

• Standard 6 rating (current year and 2 prior years)

• Three-year rolling average of student growth
values and accompanying Standard 6 rating
(for Status determination)

• Overall Effectiveness Status


Detail on
the Sixth
Standard
Rating


Common Exams


Common Exams

A Library of Common Exams
is being designed for non-tested
subjects for district use to populate
Standard 6


Focusing on the “Why”

So why have statewide Measures of Student
Learning/Common Exams?
1. North Carolina has a statewide evaluation system to ensure
that every teacher receives a fair and consistent evaluation,
regardless of his or her employing LEA

2. Teachers in all content areas should receive a Standard Six
rating based on the growth of their own students on their
content-specific standards

3. Most LEAs do not have the capacity to design their own
assessments for all non state-tested grades and subjects


Principles for Administration

1. Every English Language Arts, Science,
Mathematics, and Social Studies teacher in
grades 4 – 12 has a value-added score
2. Teacher growth values will be calculated
based on all students a teacher teaches and,
when multiple assessments are required, on
all data generated through the assessments


Decision Tree for Administration


District Flexibility

• Administration online, paper/pencil or hybrid
• Date of administration
• Administration during class period or testing week
• Use in student grade
• Which assessments are administered
• How to ensure secure administration


Addressing Concerns
Who has designed the Common Exams, and how
have they been designed?
•Same basic process as state assessments with the creation
of assessment blueprints, generation of items, review of
items, review of forms, and final production
•Over 800 teachers from across the State have involved in
the blueprint creation and form review processes
•NCDPI psychometricians and test measurement specialists
have been involved and will analyze (and remove from
results) any poor-performing items before growth is
calculated

Addressing Concerns
Why doesn’t anyone know what will be on the
MSLs?
•Assessment specifications are available at:
http://www.ncpublicschools.org/educatoreffect/measures/spe
cifications/
•General information on rubrics released to C&I leaders on
October 19 (and posted to website)
•Online module will provide training on how to use rubrics to
score performance tasks
•Each item has its own specific rubric


Addressing Concerns
How will the performance items be graded?
•There must be at least one grader who is not the student’s
teacher of record AND who has the content knowledge
necessary to score the item
•With the exception of ELA, performance items can be
administered early to allow time for scoring
•Scoring of work is necessary for what the 800 teachers
deemed to be authentic assessment for new, concept-based
standards


Addressing Concerns
MSLs hurt students and teachers
•The Common Exam administration process should not
affect students any differently than the administration of a
teacher-created final exam
•MSL scores do not need to be used as final exam
grades
•Percent correct provided by Winscan is a suggestion for
a grade
•It is only fair to base SOME part of a teacher’s evaluation
on the growth of his or her students


Operationalizing
the General Assembly’s
School Performance
Grades
(Senate Bill 795, Excellent Public Schools
Act)

October 19, 2012
Curriculum & Instructional Leaders’
61 Forum

Context

ACRE/READ General
Y
Accountability Revision Assembly
2012 • SBE approved college
►Summer 2012
and career ready
indicators for 2012-13 GA’s budget
SY and reporting of the requires the
2011 READY Accountability assignment of
Model A-F grades for all
• Approval of ESEA
2010 waiver to use proposed
schools
READY model

2009
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 62

Responding to School Performance Grades
(SPG)

• The SBE must respond to the General
Assembly “…annually by January 15 on
recommended adjustments to the school
performance grade elements and scales
for award of scores and grades.”
• Additionally, SECTION 7A.3.(f) indicates:
“It is the intent of the General Assembly to
add a student growth component to school
performance grades.”
• Operational in 2012-13


What are the basics of the SPGs?

Elementary/Middle Total Points 0-
Schools 100
• Performance Composite 100 points
Total Points 0-
High Schools 500
• Algebra II/Integrated III 100 points
• Graduation Rate 100 points
• WorkKeys 100 points
• ACT 100 points

+ Growth

Alignment Between Indicators in High
School
High School Performance
Grades

End of Course • Performance Composite
• Algebra II/Integrated III
Math Course Rigor • Graduation Rate
Graduation Rates • WorkKeys
• ACT
WorkKeys

ACT Key Point: The set of indicators are
shared and set a college and career-
Graduation Project ready expectation. The Graduation
Project is 65 part of the school grade.
not
65

How each indicator is defined
Performance • Percent of proficient tests in a school
Composite • All tests, subjects, and grade levels
(Elementary and High) • Uses the EOG/EOC test data
Algebra II/Integrated • Percent of 4-year cohort graduates who
III take and pass Alg. II or Int. Math III
• Excludes the 1% population
Graduation Rate • Percent of students that graduate within 4
years
(4-year cohort graduation rate)
WorkKeys • Percent of seniors who are CTE
concentrators who achieve a Silver
certificate, or better, on the WorkKeys
assessment
ACT • The average sum of the 5 sub-tests
across the school compared to the sum
of the college- ready benchmarks


A closer look at the ACT

The proposed Math that goes into the ACT calculation
ACT College Ready Benchmarks
Subtest Benchmark
Math 22
Reading 21 22 + 21 + 18 + 24 + 7 = 92
English 18
sum of
Science 24
college-
Writing 7
ready
benchmarks


A closer look at the ACT
The proposed Math that goes into the ACT calculation
Suppose you have a school with 5
students…. then
Student Sum of “The average sum of the 5 sub-tests across
Scores the school compared to the sum of the
Matt 83 college-ready benchmarks” can be found
Mark 94 by…
Luke 75 1) Averaging the Summed Scores
John 79
83 + 94 + 75 +79 + 80 = 82.2
Paul 80 5 students
2) Dividing by summed college-
ready benchmarks
82.2/92 = 89% and 89 points

Proposal for Addition of Growth

• Using EVAAS Growth outcomes, adjust
overall score based on EVAAS category
– Exceeded Expected Growth: Add 10 points
– Met Expected Growth: Add 5 points
– Did Not Meet Growth: No points


Proposal for Addition of Growth

Rationale for this suggested
methodology:
• Incentivizes pursuit of growth
• Can make a one-letter grade difference
between school with similar status
• Grades still mean something largely
consistent and comparable for parents


Overall Grade

• Elementary/Middle Schools
– Single component
– 100 point scale

• High Schools
– Five components 0-500 points
– Divide by 5 to achieve a 100 point scale
• In both cases, make the Growth
Adjustment (0, 5 or 10 points)


Overall Grade Scale

A: 90-100 points
B: 80-89 points
C: 70-79 points
D: 60-69 points
F: Less than 60 points


Overall Grade Sample

High School X
• Algebra II/Integrated III 78 points
• Graduation Rate 82 points
• WorkKeys 84 points
• ACT + 82 points
Total Points 395
vide by 5 to get points out of 100 395/5 = 79
Check Growth School Met Expected Growth
Add Growth Points 79 + 5 = 84 points
Determine Final Grade This School would receive a “B”

73

Next Steps

• Gather feedback across state – including
now
• Return to the General Assembly with an
operational proposal in January 2013 per
the requirement of the bill


Curriculum updates for schools

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (18)

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (6)

Ähnlich wie Curriculum updates for schools

Ähnlich wie Curriculum updates for schools (20)

Mehr von dowelld

Mehr von dowelld (10)

Curriculum updates for schools

Hinweis der Redaktion