1. “Two roads diverged in the woods, and we took the Road to Awesome!”

2. Visionary Leadership  DASD School Board  Comprehensive Planning Committee  Dr. Dyer, DASD Superintendent  Dr. Doll, DASD Assistant Superintendent

3. DASD Comprehensive Planning:  Implement a STEAM initiative beginning in the 4 th grade  Develop course offerings at the high school level that allow for flexibility through a combination of cyber and building based courses  Expand secondary course offerings  Establish a secondary campus restructuring effort with emphasis on sharing of staff, appropriate transitioning of students, and consolidation of resources  Review and enhance the district’s many successful programs to promote community service, employability career skills, and workplace success traits

4. Our Goal  2020 Goal: Over the course of 6 years we will explore and develop the strategic design to guide and redesign the high school program. 2014-2015 Action Steps: Plan, prepare, and determine feasibility of the implementation of a new schedule for the 2015-2016 or 2016-2017 school year

5. The Process:

6. High School Redesign Committee Sub-Committees:  Scheduling Structures  School Counseling Services  Student Academic/Behavioral Support  School Culture and Climate  Course and Program Offerings  STEAM  Corporate and Educational Partnerships  Personalized Learning Environments

7. Committees in Action:  Research on best practice and high school reform  Site visits to high-achieving schools  Ongoing DAHS needs analysis by stakeholders  Goal setting and action planning based on data  Action throughout a multi-year process  Assessment of results and focus on continuous improvement

8. Actions Grounded in Research:  Breaking Ranks II, NASSP, 2007  Inevitable, Schwahn & McGarvey, 2012  Mindset, Dweck, 2006  Curriculum 21, Hayes Jacobs, 2010  What Works in School, Marzano, 2003  Art and Science of Teaching, Marzano, 2007  Professional Learning Communities that Work, DuFour, DuFour, and Eaker, 2008

9. Actions Grounded in Evidence-Based Best Practices: Corporate and Educational Partnerships Committee  Souderton HS, Souderton, PA  Lower Merion HS, Ardmore, PA  International Business and Workforce Expo, York, PA  Wellspan Health, York, PA Course and Program Offerings Committee  River Bluff HS, Lexington, SC  Lower Merion HS, Ardmore, PA Personalized Learning Environment (Hybrid Learning Opportunities) Committee  Lower Merion HS, Ardmore, PA  Lindsay Unified Schools, Lindsay, CA (Virtual Tour & Interview) Scheduling Structures Committee  Lower Merion HS, Ardmore, PA

10. Actions Grounded in Evidence-Based Best Practices: School Counseling Services Committee  Council Rock North HS, Newtown, PA  Radnor HS, Radnor, PA  Lower Merion HS, Ardmore, PA  River Bluff HS, Lexington, SC School Culture and Climate Committee  Lower Merion HS, Ardmore, PA  Lindsay Unified Schools, Lindsay, CA (Virtual Tour & Interview)  Cocalico HS, Denver, PA STEAM Committee  Livingston HS, Livingston, NJ  Downingtown STEM, Downingtown, PA Student Academic/Behavioral Support Committee  Patterson HS, Baltimore, MD  Souderton HS, Souderton, PA  Lower Merion HS, Ardmore, PA

11. Findings from Research that will Guide our Redesign:  Implement schedules flexible enough to accommodate teaching strategies consistent with the ways students learn (NASSP, 2007; Marzano, 2003; Marzano, 2007; Schwahn & McGarvey, 2012).  Institute structural leadership that allows for meaningful involvement of all stakeholders (NASSP, 2007).  Align school-wide comprehensive professional development with essential learnings and effective instructional practices (NASSP, 2007; Marzano, 2003).

12. Findings from Research that will Guide our Redesign (continued):  Establish essential learnings (NASSP, 2007; Hayes Jacobs, 2010).  Increase the quantity and quality of interactions between students and teachers (NASSP, 2007).  Comprehensive advisory program that allows students to self-assess growth toward clear goals (NASSP, 2007; Schwahn & McGarvey, 2012).  Ensure quality instructional practices and assessments to personalize learning (Dweck, 2006; NASSP, 2007; Schwahn & McGarvey, 2012).

13. Findings from Site Visits that will Guide our Redesign:  Personalized Learning Environment  Students don’t serve time; instead, time serves students  Shift from teaching to learning  Belief that all learners can learn  Changing role of the educator from teacher to learning facilitator  Learning is fostered by frequent formative feedback

14. Findings from Site Visits that will Guide our Redesign (continued):  Learning is future-focused  Systems/Structures are in place to meet the needs of all learners  Teaching is based on current research on learning and cognition  Technology is utilized as a tool for learning  Abundant opportunities are offered for individual learning and personal responsibility

15. Findings from Site Visits that will Guide our Redesign (continued):  Comprehensive school counseling services are provided, including student to counselor ratios of approximately 250:1 with full-time psychologist and social worker support  Comprehensive Science, Technology, and Engineering programs  Significant AP offerings in a variety of areas  Culture of excellence and focus on improvement  Corporate and educational partnerships that are mutually beneficial  Students and educators are goal oriented  Career Pathway/Academy approach

16. High School Schedule Redesign:

17. Current Schedule Facts: Students  Eight-periods per day  Forty-two minute periods  Simultaneous transitions for 1850 students  5 th period lunch schedule (split classes)  Two, three, and five day-per-week courses  Students responsible for as many as ten classes a week  Limited access to academic core teachers  Extensions courses are not maximized for student success

18. Current Schedule Facts: Teachers  Limited Collaboration time for staff  Inefficient use of teacher resources  5 th Period creates disjointed learning opportunities  Professional staff monitoring 206 study halls per semester  Teacher to Student ratio far exceeds recommended 90:1 ratio  Limited access to students beyond regularly scheduled classes  42 minute time periods do not support effective learning in all classes  Limited opportunities to support students’ social, academic, and emotional needs

19. New Schedule

20. Course Times: 30 ILT SLT Support Classes 60 Keystone Courses Upper Level Electives PE Technology/ Engineering 75 Honors and AP Lab Sciences 45 Intro Courses World Languages Upper Level Math  45 day, 90 day, and 180 day courses.  Lengths are determined based on needs of the course. Course Lengths:

21. New Schedule Facts: Students  Increased focus on specific subject areas that require increased cognitive demand and varied instructional practices  Students have electives that are 45 days or 90 days. (Two- and three-day per week electives are removed to support learning.)  Period lengths are increased in AP courses, Keystone courses, upper level electives, technology & engineering courses, and physical education courses.  Students will transition at different times based on their course tracks, resulting in fewer students in the hall at one time (Improved student safety).

22. New Schedule Facts: Students (cont.)  Opportunities for a true advisory program that supports the needs of our students and teaches what it means to be a Wildcat  Students will be responsible for no more than seven courses per marking period, as compared to as many as ten courses in current schedule.  Students will have access to daily academic and counseling support through ILT and SLT.

23. Proposed Schedule Facts: Teachers  Increased efficiency in staff utilization  Staff sharing opportunities at the MS in technology education  Study halls will be a thing of the past  Teachers will have the opportunity for collaboration through the use of ILT and SLT centers.

24. The 2015 Schedule Proposal Lunch/Flexible Block LFB

25. 2014-2015: Next Steps Phase 1  Communicate with parents and students.  Pilot the new schedule in eSchool to determine feasibility of new schedule implementation (i.e. 2015-2016 or 2016-2017 school year). Phase 2  Develop a comprehensive communication plan.  Plan professional development.  Coordinate curricular adjustments/needs.  Adjust procedural and policy related items such as credit structure, leveling, GPA, etc.

26. Works Cited DuFour, Richard, DuFour, Rebecca, & Eaker, Robert (2008). Revisiting professional learning communities at work: New insights for improving schools. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree. Dweck, Carol S., Ph.D. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. USA: Ballantine Books. Hayes Jacobs, Heidi (Ed.). (2010). Curriculum 21: Essential education for a changing world. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Marzano, Robert. (2007). The art and science of teaching: A comprehensive framework for effective instruction. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Marzano, Robert. (2003.) What works in schools: Translating research into action. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Marzano, Robert, Waters, Timothy, & McNulty, Brian A. (2005). School leadership that works: From leadership to results. Aurora, CO: Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning. National Association of Secondary Principals (Eds.). (2004). Breaking ranks: Strategies for leading high school reform. Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary Principals. Schwahn, Charles & McGarvey, Beatrice. (2012). Inevitable: Mass customized learning. (2012). Charles Schwahn & Beatrice McGarvey.