Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

P1 Data-Driven Instruction Entry Plan Leadership Workshop Paul Bambrick-Santoyo.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "P1 Data-Driven Instruction Entry Plan Leadership Workshop Paul Bambrick-Santoyo."— Presentation transcript:

1 P1 Data-Driven Instruction Entry Plan Leadership Workshop Paul Bambrick-Santoyo

2 P2 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Pct. Free-Reduced Lunch Pct. Proficient NY State Public School ELA 4 th Performance vs. Free-Reduced Rates

3 P3 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Pct. Free-Reduced Lunch Pct. Proficient NY State Public School ELA 4 th Performance vs. Free-Reduced Rates


5 P5 Advice Networks: “experts” (best teachers) are the hubs Trust Networks: Culture leaders are the hubs BOTTOM LINE: You need experts AND culture leaders to make change occur effectively Informal Networks: “Change” Drivers


7 P7 PRINCIPLES FOR EFFECTIVE ASSESSMENTS: COMMON INTERIM: At least quarterly Common across all teachers of the same grade level DEFINE THE STANDARDS—ALIGNED TO: To state test (format, content, & length) To instructional sequence (curriculum) To college-ready expectations ASSESSMENTS:

8 P8 PRINICIPLES FOR EFFECTIVE ASSESSMENTS: REASSESSES: Standards that appear on the first interim assessment appear again on subsequent interim assessments WRONG ANSWERS: Illuminate misunderstanding TRANSPARENT: Teachers see the assessments in advance ASSESSMENTS:


10 P10 IMMEDIATE: Ideal 48 hrs, max 1 wk turnaround BOTTOM LINE: Includes analysis at question level, standards level, and overall—how well did the students do as a whole TEST-IN-HAND analysis: Teacher & instructional leader together TEACHER-OWNED analysis DEEP: Moves beyond “what” to “why” ANALYSIS:

11 P11 ASSESSMENTS (Aligned, Interim, Reassess, Transparent) ANALYSIS (Quick, Bottom line, Teacher-owned, Test-in-hand, Deep) ACTION in a Data-driven CULTURE THE FOUR KEYS:

12 P12 PLAN new lessons based on data analysis ACTION PLAN: Implement what you plan (dates, times, standards & specific strategies) LESSON PLANS: Observe changes in lesson plans ACCOUNTABILITY: Observe changes classroom observations, in-class assessments ENGAGED STUDENTS: Know end goal, how they did, and what actions they’re taking to improve ACTION:

13 P13 ASSESSMENTS (Aligned, Interim, Reassess, Transparent) ANALYSIS (Quick, Bottom line, Teacher-owned, Test-in-hand, Deep) ACTION (Action Plan, Accountability, Engaged) in a Data-driven CULTURE THE FOUR KEYS:

14 P14 VISION: Established by leaders and repeated relentless “REAL” LEADERSHIP TEAM: Trained and highly active CALENDAR: Calendar in advance with built-in time for assessments, analysis & action PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT: Aligned DATA-DRIVEN CULTURE:

15 P15 ASSESSMENTS (Aligned, Interim, Reassess, Transparent) ANALYSIS (Quick, Bottom line, Teacher-owned, Test-in-hand, Deep) ACTION (Action Plan, Accountability, Engaged) in a Data-driven CULTURE (Vision, Leadership, Calendar, PD) THE FOUR KEYS:

16 P16 What are the first things you need to do when you get your principalship? Quick-Write Reflection

17 P17 Case Study Revisited: Douglass Street School 1.Read case study 2.Whenever a component of the Data-Driven Instruction Rubric appears in the case, label it according to section of rubric. (Culture=C, Assessment=As, Analysis=An, Action=Ac) Example 1: Assessment calendar is #3 in Culture, so label “C3.” Example 2: Test-in-hand analysis is “An4.” 3.Where you see effective use of networks, label “Networks.” 4.Small Group: Develop chronology of drivers in Brown’s action plan.

18 P18 Entry Plan 101: Strategies for Entering Principalship Successfully

19 P19 STUDENT CULTURE: Safe Kids in school Kids in class Kids on task Eyes on the Prize BIG ROCK #1

20 P20 STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT: Data-driven instruction & Assessment is quickest, most effective lever for influencing student achievement Mold everything else around that goal:supervision, PD, calendar, scheduling, etc. BIG ROCK #2


22 P22 Support for the Work: Guides Presented During the Course of This Year’s Data-Driven Workshops

23 P23 Phases of Data-Driven Instruction & Interim Assessments Adapted, Research by Camden County, GA Public School District

24 P24 IGNORANCE, CONFUSION, OVERLOAD: “I don’t understand what we’re doing.” “This is too much! How am I really supposed to use all this?” “All this analysis! What’s wrong with just grading the old- fashioned way?” “Uh? Interim assessments? What are those?” PHASE 1

25 P25 FEELING INADEQUATE & DISTRUSTFUL: “How can two questions on a test possible establish mastery? These tests can never measure what I know about my students’ learning.” “This idea of an assessment is terrible! We don’t teach like that format! We teach it this way.” PHASE 2

26 P26 CHALLENGING THE TEST: “Question #26 is a poor question. Answer “b” is a trick answer.” “Question #11 is too hard. We need to make it easier.” “The kids made silly mistakes because of the pressure of this pointless test. They know this stuff.” Undertone: “I’ve never looked at a test item before, but I’m going to now if you’re going to hold me accountable.” PHASE 3

27 P27 ANALYTICAL but SUPERFICIAL: “They just don’t do well on word problems. I just need to do more word problems.” “They just don’t read enough. I’ll get them to read more.” PHASE 4

28 P28 LOOKING FOR CAUSES, BUT NO ACTION: “These wrong answers tell me that they don’t know the difference between a summary and a theme.” “I always taught grammar in isolation, and this test asked for it in a more authentic form.” The problem with solving algebraic equations for them was actually the inability to subtract negative integers.” PHASE 5

29 P29 CHANGING TEACHING PRACTICES: Teachers follow through on analysis Lesson plans reflect spiraling, re-teaching, etc. Teachers look for best practices outside of their own classroom PHASE 6

30 P30 Running Effective Analysis Meetings Protocols from NLNS Training

31 P31 PART 1—GLOBAL IMPRESSIONS: Global conclusions you can draw from the data: How well did the class do as a whole? What are the strengths and weaknesses in the standards: where do we need to work the most? How did the class do on old vs. new standards? Are they forgetting or improving on old material? How were the results in the different question types (multiple choice vs. open-ended, reading vs. writing)? Who are the strong/weak students? ASSESSMENT ANALYSIS I

32 P32 PART 2—DIG IN: “Squint:” bombed questions—did students all choose same wrong answer? Why or why not? Compare similar standards: Do results in one influence the other? Break down each standard: Did they do similarly on every question or were some questions harder? Why? Sort data by students’ scores: are there questions that separate proficient / non-proficient students? Look horizontally by student: Are there any anomalies occurring with certain students? ASSESSMENT ANALYSIS II

33 P33 Did teachers see the assessment in advance? (TRANSPARENCY) Did they mark it up: Confident, Not Sure, No Way? (TEST-IN-HAND, TEACHER-OWNED) Did you train teachers in analysis strategies? (PROF DEVT, DEEP) Did they fill out an analysis sheet? Did they answer the fundamental question: WHY the students did not learn it? (TEACHER-OWNED, DEEP) Did they have to fill out an action plan? Did you model how to fill out an action plan using these analysis questions? (ACTION PLAN, ACCOUNTABILITY) PRECURSORS TO EFFECTIVE ANALYSIS MTGS

34 P34 Did you model a poor and a good conversation so they hear your expectations? (PROF DEVT, DEEP) Did you analyze their results (above and beyond them analyzing their own) in preparation for the meeting? (LEADERSHIP) Did you collect their analysis ahead of time and see if it looked acceptable? (LEADERSHIP, ACCOUNTABILITY) Did you have a plan ready to access content experts if the problems were beyond your expertise? (PROF DEVT) PRECURSORS TO EFFECTIVE ANALYSIS MTGS

35 P35 Let the data do the talking Let the teacher do the talking (or get them to!) Always go back to the test and back to specific questions Don’t fight the battles on ideological lines (you’re going to lose) There’s a difference between the first assessment and the third You’ve got to know the data yourself to have an effective meeting Make sure it’s connected to a concrete plan that you can verify TIPS FOR EFFECTIVE ANALYSIS MEETINGS

36 P36 HELPFUL STARTERS FOR ANALYSIS MEETINGS: “So…what’s the data telling you?” “Congratulations on the improvement from last time in x area! You must be really proud of their growth here.” “So the _____ [paraphrase their frustration: the test was hard, the students were difficult, etc.]? I’m sorry to hear that. So where should we begin with our action plan moving forward?” ANALYSIS MEETING HELPFUL PHRASES:

37 P37 DATA-FOCUSING FOR ANALYSIS MEETINGS: “So let’s look at question 18…Why do you think they got it wrong?” “You know, I thought it might be a silly mistake, but what surprised me is that they did really well on questions x & y. Why do you think they did so well on these questions and yet not on your original question?” “Let’s look at question 11. What did the students need to be able to do to answer that question effectively? Is this more than they are able to do with you in your class?” [When new ideas occur or deeper analysis is done at the meeting than what teacher did previously] “So let’s re-visit the action plan you created and see how we can incorporate these additional ideas.” ANALYSIS MEETING HELPFUL PHRASES:

38 P38 Running Effective Teacher Meetings: Results Meeting Protocol

39 P39 IDENTIFY ROLES: Timer, facilitator, recorder (2 min) IDENTIFY OBJECTIVE to focus on (2 min or given) WHAT WORKED SO FAR (5 min) [Or: What teaching strategies did you try so far] CHIEF CHALLENGES (5-10 min) BRAINSTORM proposed solutions (10 min) [See protocol on next page] REFLECTION: Feasibility of each idea (5 min) CONSENSUS around best actions (20 min) [See protocol on next page] PUT IN CALENDAR: When will the tasks happen? When will the teaching happen? (10 min) ACTION: RESULTS MEETING 50 MIN TOTAL

40 P40 RESULTS MEETING STRUCTURE: PROTOCOLS FOR BRAINSTORMING/CONSENSUS PROTOCOL FOR BRAINSTORMING: Go in order around the circle: Each person has 30 seconds to share a proposal. If you don’t have an idea, say “Pass.” No judgments should be made; if you like the idea, when it’s your turn simply say, “I would like to add to that idea by…” Even if 4-5 people pass in a row, keep going for the full brainstorming time. PROTOCOL FOR REFLECTION: 1 minute—personal/individual reflection on the list: what is doable and what isn’t for each person. Go in order around the circle once: Depending on size of group each person has 30-60 seconds to share their reflections. If a person doesn’t have a thought to share, say “Pass” and come back to that person later. No judgments should be made.

41 P41 RESULTS MEETING STRUCTURE: PROTOCOLS FOR BRAINSTORMING/CONSENSUS PROTOCOL FOR CONSENSUS/ACTION PLAN: ID key actions from brainstorming that everyone will agree to implement Make actions as specific as possible within the limited time ID key student/teacher guides or tasks needed to be done to be ready to teach—ID who will do each task Spend remaining time developing concrete elements of lesson plan: Do Now’s Teacher guides (e.g., what questions to ask the students or how to structure the activity) Student guides HW, etc. NOTE: At least one person (if not two) should be recording everything electronically to send to the whole group

42 P42 KEY TIPS TO MAKING RESULTS MEETING PRODUCTIVE: GET SPECIFIC to the assessment question itself: we can teach 10 lessons on this standard. What’s the set of lessons these students need based on the data? AVOID PHILOSOPHICAL DEBATES about theories of Math/Literacy: Focus on the small, specific challenge of the moment. That’s where the change will begin! IF GROUP IS TOO LARGE: After presenter is done, split into two groups. You’ll generate more ideas and you can share your conclusions/action plans at the end.

43 P43 Planning Your Time: Best Use of 1 hr/wk with Teachers

44 P44 PRE-WORK: INTERIM ASSESSMENT & LESSON PLAN REVIEW: Checking teachers’ lesson plans alongside key re-teach standards (action plan) or standards on next assessment identifying: What are the key moments to observe to check for rigor or alignment? Are the standards well embedded in an engaging lesson? MINI-OBSERVATIONS: Mini-observations of class each day (5-15 minutes per visit) with brief feedback in hallways IF YOU HAVE 1 HR/WK OF FACE TIME: PRE-WORK

45 P45 INDIVIDUAL FACE TIME—1 st PRIORITY: DATA-DRIVEN PROCESS IS FIRST DRIVER OF AGENDA: Help teacher analyze interim assessment data & make action plan (2-6 days after asst; important first time through) Results analysis meeting (once teacher has done analysis/action plan before meeting with you) Review upcoming assessment (6 weeks before) Anticipate student performance by marking interim assessment questions “confident,” “not sure,” “no way” (1-2 weeks before asst) DURING REMAINING TIME/WEEKS: FEEDBACK ON CLASSES OBSERVED: Dialogue—affirmation of strengths, suggestions for improvement 1-2 goals maximum Make concrete follow-up plan if needed PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE: Review action plan/lesson plans, anticipate/plan key moments for upcoming week IF YOU HAVE 1 HR/WK OF FACE TIME: INDIVIDUAL MEETINGS

46 P46 TEAM MEETINGS: RESULTS MEETING PROTOCOL: Target just 1 standard to visit for the meeting If important, redo results meeting around same standard the following week to evaluate the effectiveness of their implementation REVIEW STUDENT WRITING: Make action plan (2-6 days after asst) Review upcoming assessment (6 weeks before) Anticipate student performance by marking interim assessment questions “confident,” “not sure,” “no way” (1-2 weeks before asst) MAKE ACTION PLANS: Mini-observations of class each day (5-15 minutes per visit) with brief feedback in hallways IF YOU HAVE 1 HR/WK OF FACE TIME: TEAM MEETINGS

47 P47 Implementing Action Effective Action Strategies

48 P48 STRATEGYWHAT TO DO:NOT TO DO: Objectives:Break down the standard Cut & paste standard from state list Do Now’s:Reflect student learning Shoot lower than the assessment rigor HW:Meet rigor of asst, independent work, easy to grade Purely computation worksheets Walls:Evidence of standardNo evidence QuestioningCold calling, dipsticking Call only on hands raised Student Responses Get students to do the work Teacher does all the scaffolding all the time DATA-DRIVEN CLASSROOM PRACTICES— TO DO & NOT TO DO:

49 P49 STRATEGYWHAT TO DO:NOT TO DO: Analysis:Check performance in related standards and at different reading levels to see what objective to target Ignore related performance and do more work on the standard Questioning Rigor: Scripted questions, moving from heavily scaffolded to independent Ask many similar questions about the standard Student Reading Engagemen t Student gets immediate feedback about results Independent work is not monitored and students could or could not be meeting the standard DATA-DRIVEN CLASSROOM PRACTICES— TO DO & NOT TO DO:

50 P50 LESSON PLANS: Teachers staple action plan to top of lesson plans, explicitly showing where they’re re-teaching key stds CHECKING FOR UNDERSTANDING: Oral review, dipsticking, dry erase boards / plastic sheets, every Saphier strategy imaginable DO NOW / QUICK-CHECK: Spiral all standards; collect them for 4 days and let students correct at end of week HOMEWORK: Assess skills that students should be able to do independently; design HW aligned to the standards IN-CLASS ASSESSMENTS: Align in content and format; spiral a portion of each test DIFFERENTIATED INSTRUCTION: Generate strategies to work with select student groups while other students are working independently 1. TEACHER ACTIONS

51 P51 CLASS SCHEDULE: Take 10-15 minutes from math block every day to re-teach; find places in the schedule where you could gain learning time for students; utilize lunch/breakfast time SCHOOL SCHEDULE: Build in pre-school/after-school tutoring, use lunch/breakfast time to target students in need of improvement PULLOUT GROUPS: Other staff members (including you!) pull out small groups of students to work on toughest standards (highest or lowest achieving subgroups) so main teacher can focus on smaller class 2. SCHOOLWIDE SUPPORT

52 P52 ADDITIONAL STAFF: Solicit support of non-core academic staff to teach small groups of students (paraprofessionals, art/PE teachers, SPED, ELL, tutors, parents, etc.) EVERY LEADER ON BOARD: All leaders (deans, VP’s, Dept. Chairs, coaches) support the process—target teachers who need most help, follow results meeting protocol, etc. PULL: Rotate students into groups with similar skill deficiencies and teach them in those groups for select time periods; rotate groups when in new subjects 2. SCHOOLWIDE SUPPORT (con’t.)

53 P53 Five Case Studies Building a Principal Entry Plan

54 P54 SELECT CASE STUDY: Pick case that feels closest to your school’s particular context READ CASE STUDY: Take notes and use DDI implementation rubric to look for presence/absence of key drivers IMPLEMENT RESULTS PROTOCOL: Create a principal entry plan based on analysis of the case CASE STUDY PROTOCOL, ROUND 1:

55 P55 SELECT SECOND CASE STUDY: Pick case that feels next closest to your school’s particular context READ CASE STUDY: Take notes and use DDI implementation rubric to look for presence/absence of key drivers (5 min) IDENTIFY CORE CHALLENGES OF THE CASE: Collectively identify areas of the DDI implementation rubric that need to be the focus (5 min) REVIEW ENTRY PLAN FROM PREVIOUS SMALL GROUP: Read principal entry plan (2 min) BRAINSTORM IMPROVEMENTS/CHANGES TO ENTRY PLAN: If entry plan is solid, add more detail to implementation plan (10 min) CASE STUDY PROTOCOL, ROUND 2:

56 P56 Final Exam: Preparing for Challenges Case Studies in Resistance & Planning

57 P57 You don’t have a good feel for how teachers have reacted to your presentation of the data-driven initiative, but you just got a nasty anonymous email telling you that teachers are going to revolt against your plans. You’re swamped with discipline issues and you only have 1 hour to do instructional things. What do you do first? Teachers complain the test had nothing to do with what they taught. Your leadership team is not convinced by your plan. SCENARIOS I

58 P58 Teachers protest that they don’t have time to analyze data. (Similar scenario: teachers protest that they don’t have enough time to grade the assessments or enter data into templates.) Teachers complain that they can’t re-teach because they have to keep covering the curriculum. One teacher challenges the plan (& your authority) in front of the whole staff at your first staff meeting. What do you do in that moment? A teacher approaches you to tell you that the instructional leader you have working with her (an AP) doesn’t manage well her team’s analysis meetings, and they quickly get off point. SCENARIOS II

59 P59 The teachers say that they have to implement a new math curriculum this year, and they can't deal with learning a new curriculum, and a whole new assessment approach. Teachers say that the idea of double testing the kids is ridiculous. You realize a few weeks before the assessments that there is no one else who knows how to run the results and analysis meetings besides you. SCENARIOS III

60 P60 Teachers say the state test doesn’t include writing and that writing is the number one skill students need for college. A few teachers say the whole thing is just test prep and they want to teach more substance. They feel they know better what students need. Some veteran teachers are deeply suspicious that the interim assessments are just to evaluate their performance as teachers. SCENARIOS IV

61 P61 FINAL TAKEAWAYS: What do I want to make sure I remember to do? What are the areas I want to develop to be ready for next year? (Who will I turn to for support?)

62 P62 October Sky: What made the difference? Why were the Coalwood boys ultimately successful in launching the rocket?

63 P63 Conclusions Data-Driven Instruction & Assessment Paul Bambrick-Santoyo

64 P64 64 Tale of North Star: 100 High School Freshmen

65 P65 65 North Star 3 Years Later: Freshmen who made it to senior year

66 P66 66 North Star 4 Years Later: Plan to attend 4-year colleges

67 P67 67 Boston College University Of Chicago SyracuseSpelman RutgersSeton Hall Mount HolyokeOberlinAmherst North Star 5 Years Later: Actually enroll in 4-year colleges

Download ppt "P1 Data-Driven Instruction Entry Plan Leadership Workshop Paul Bambrick-Santoyo."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google