1. 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
3. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
4. 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)
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
5. Instructional Improvement System
Learner Profile Standards & Instructional Assessment & Data Analysis Professional
and Work Curriculum Design, Practice & Analytics and Reporting Development &
Samples Resources Educator Evaluation
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
6. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
7. Standards and Curriculum
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
8. Instructional Design, Practice and Resources
Example
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
9. Assessment and Growth
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
10. Dashboards, Data Analysis and Reporting
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
11. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
12. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
13. Some of Our Content Sources
Multiple
Subjects
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
14. Some of Our Content Sources
Math
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
15. Some of Our Content Sources
Science
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
16. Some of Our Content Sources
English
Language
Arts
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
17. Sample 3rd Party Instructional Activities
National Archives Phet
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
18. Instructional Improvement System
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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
20. C&I Links
http://www.dpi.state.nc.us/curriculum/
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
21. C&I Links
http://www.dpi.state.nc.us/curriculum/
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
22. Partners: ASCD
http://educore.ascd.org/
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
23. Educator
Effectiveness and
Common Exams
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
24. 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.
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
25. Why educator effectiveness?
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.
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
26. Why educator effectiveness?
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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
27. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
28. 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
29. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 11/26/2012 • page 29
30. Growth Model
Teachers
Standard 6 and 8
6
Contribute
to Academic
Success are measures of
Principals
Growth
8
Academic
Academic
Achievement
Achievement
Leadership
Leadership
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 11/26/2012 • page 30
31. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 11/26/2012 • page 31
32. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 11/26/2012 • page 32
33. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 11/26/2012 • page 33
34. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 11/26/2012 • page 34
35. 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.
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
36. 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.
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
37. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 11/26/2012 • page 37
38. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
39. Status
What is the difference
between Ratings and
Status?
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 11/26/2012 • page 39
40. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 11/26/2012 • page 40
41. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 11/26/2012 • page 41
42. 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.
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 11/26/2012 • page 42
43. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 11/26/2012 • page 43
44. Status
So once a educator has a
three-year average rating
for Standard 6 or 8, how
is status determined?
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 11/26/2012 • page 44
45. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
46. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 11/26/2012 • page 46
47. Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
48. Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
49. Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
50. Detail on
the Sixth
Standard
Rating
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
51. Common Exams
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
52. Common Exams
A Library of Common Exams
is being designed for non-tested
subjects for district use to populate
Standard 6
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 11/26/2012 • page 52
53. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 11/26/2012 • page 53
54. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 11/26/2012 • page 54
55. Decision Tree for Administration
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 11/26/2012 • page 55
56. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 11/26/2012 • page 56
57. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 11/26/2012 • page 57
58. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 11/26/2012 • page 58
59. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 11/26/2012 • page 59
60. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 11/26/2012 • page 60
61. Operationalizing
the General Assembly’s
School Performance
Grades
(Senate Bill 795, Excellent Public Schools
Act)
October 19, 2012
Curriculum & Instructional Leaders’
61 Forum
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
62. 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
63. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 63
64. What are the basics of the SPGs?
Elementary/Middle Total Points 0-
Schools 100
• Performance Composite 100 points
Total Points 0-
High Schools 500
• Performance Composite 100 points
• Algebra II/Integrated III 100 points
• Graduation Rate 100 points
• WorkKeys 100 points
• ACT 100 points
+ Growth
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 64
65. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
66. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 66
67. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 67
68. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 68
69. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 69
70. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 70
71. 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)
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 71
72. Overall Grade Scale
A: 90-100 points
B: 80-89 points
C: 70-79 points
D: 60-69 points
F: Less than 60 points
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 72
73. Overall Grade Sample
High School X
• Performance Composite 69 points
• 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation
74. 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
Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 74
Hinweis der Redaktion
The goal of this system is to provide a single sign on collaborative portal for NC educators to access high quality resources
Each of the parts of the IIS are described in the following slides. This slide is an overview of the components.
The Learner Profile and Work Samples component of the IIS provides an area for students and teachers to store work samples and other information longitudinally. The student area of this component will house student demographic data, longitudinal assessment results, learning styles or other useful information for planning appropriate instruction for the student. This data may come from other systems such as a Student Information System. The teacher area will allow teachers to upload evidence of their proficiency in meeting the teaching standards and contain other pertinent information about the teacher. Access to this and other modules will be role-based, protecting the privacy of the individual.
The Standards and Curriculum component focuses on the ability to manage multiple sets of standards (Common Core, NC Essential Standards, NC Teaching Standards, etc.) and to align IIS content and resources to those standards. The IIS content and resources that will be aligned to the standards includes curriculum and instructional resources (courses, units, activities, resources), assessment items, and professional development resources. Users will be able to easily search and analyze relationships between all resources and the standards. The system will provide tools for curriculum design, development, and best practices. Content will come from multiple sources (teachers, LEAs, vendors, DPI, consortiums, and more) and will be vetted at several levels to assure quality alignment to standards. The development and management of curricular materials will be designed with role-based security to allow for a workflow The IIS will comprise six major component areas: Standards and Curriculum; Instructional Design, Practice, and Resources; Assessment and Growth; Data Analysis and Reporting; Professional Development; and Educator Evaluation. These focus areas will combine to support the Learner Profile component that will also contain learner work samples. in which submitted materials go through a review and approval process prior to being included in the official state, regional, or district curriculum.
The IIS will allow teachers to search for and select instructional materials for use in lesson plans from an approved and standards-aligned curriculum database. Teachers will be able to add or modify the instruction to customize it for students groups or individual students based on assessed needs. The system will allow teachers to search for lesson plans by standard, grade, discipline, objective, theme, publisher, unit, and so on. Students and parents will have easy access to resources for learning that are specific to each student’s assessed instructional needs. The system will support the tracking of student activities and assessments directly linked to standards, benchmarks, and/or objectives. Assessments or assignments may be linked to the instruction with either manual scoring or on-line delivery and automatic scoring. Based on student assessment results, teachers will be able to use the IIS to identify and assign instructional material to students that specifically addresses the weaknesses uncovered by the assessment. Students will be provided collaborative work areas to work with fellow students as well as the ability to submit questions and get feedback from teachers.
The Assessment and Growth component has the capacity to assist instructional staff by allowing them to create, align, deliver, and manage various levels and types of assessment items and strategies ranging from daily classroom formative assessment to district interim/benchmark testing to statewide grades 3-8 and High School summative assessments. The assessment component serves as a repository for pre-constructed test items and also will display a robust set of tools that allows the teachers and accountability personnel to create and build multiple levels of assessment aligned to the instructional objectives contained within a curriculum. The system will also allow end-users to import pre-constructed assessment items/tasks and formats (including rubrics) to augment locally-developed items/tasks. The resources available through this component will add to the depth of items/tasks available for use at the classroom level across the state. The assessment system will also have a well-developed reporting system that will enable teachers to aggregate and disaggregate assessment data from multiple sources to analyze student performance and instructional needs. The ability of the assessment system to effectively aggregate and disaggregate assessment results on the basis of pre-set formats or user-defined constraints is one of the ways that the IIS may be used to improve student educational outcomes.
The data analysis and reporting component of the IIS will provide a wealth of information to teachers, students and administrators and will enable teachers to modify the learning process and and assign instructional resources to meet each student’s needs. This component can provide a student-achievement profile that contains the student’s current level of mastery on standards, benchmarks, objectives, and skills. It can provide to administrators data on teacher effectiveness and demographic, program, and achievement data. Access to data from all areas of the system will be role-based and highly secure. The system will provide immediate access to all types of integrated student information through system-generated reports which enable teachers and administrators to quickly and efficiently determine students’ academic performance and growth needs. School leaders will be able to aggregate data across schools, classrooms, and grades and compare those assessment findings with pre-determined standards of achievement. The system will also provide operations so educators can “drill-down” into the data and perform more detailed analysis of student performance patterns and trends.
The professional development module of the IIS adopts a proficiency-based approach to human resource management. Data from the IIS system provided to the educator evaluation component of the IIS will enable NCDPI to link and align staff development with curriculum, assessment, learner needs, instructional materials, and the supervision/evaluation process. Educators will be able to create individual staff development plans which address the gaps between their required and mastered lists of job- related proficiencies. The assessment component of the staff development program will not be based upon educators earning a “grade” but rather on attaining specific “proficiencies”. For classroom teachers, this may also include a summary of the curriculum, assessment, and instructional resources that align with the acquired proficiency. The online IIS North Carolina Educator Evaluation System (NCEES) instrument will automate the North Carolina Teacher Evaluation Process and the North Carolina School Executive: Principal and Assistant Principal Evaluation Process. The system will allow all employees to complete self-assessments and Professional Development Plans. The system will allow employees to set goals annually and will provide principals/supervisors the ability to modify goals and include feedback to employee. By importing student assessment data, the system will enable administrators to consider student growth as one of the measures of teacher effectiveness.
All resources that will be a part of the IIS must meet the criteria:
These are free resources that many schools are already using, but once part of the IIS teachers will not have to go to each individual site to search. The IIS will search for the topic in all the sources available.
The above examples are linked to show examples of some of the 3rd party instructional activities that are available.
The IIS will have a new name once the Vendor is announced and awarded the contract in December. Our system WCS is not part of the pilot so our first experience will be in 2013-2014.
The K-12 Curriculum and Instruction Website is not linked to all the updated information. You no longer need to go to the ACRE site to access Common Core and Essential Standards information.
ASCD has a new site for tools for Common Core. The resources at this site have been funded through the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. At this time it only has resources for high school and middle school, but elementary resources will be available later.
An educator status is a more holistic picture of educator effectiveness than any one standard taken alone. Three years of data must be in place before a teacher or administrator can receive a status of in need of improvement, effective, or highly effective.
If teachers click on the box for the sixth standard, it will expand to show component data for the standard rating, as well as three years of data as they are accumulated.
Our district is working on an implementation plan. At this time the common exams will be given in Social Studies and Science to all students. Common Exams will be give 1-2 weeks before EOG’s. An implementation guide with information on administration, scoring, etc. will be available soon.
The new Ready Accountability Model has will be voted on at the State Board in the coming months. The General Assembly passed legislation this summer to add an assignment of A-F grades to all school report cards.
For elementary and middle school the A-F grade will come completely from the Performance Composite + growth.