1. Leadership Training to Improve Curriculum, Instruction, and Achievement: Evidence from Michigan Schools Roger Goddard, Senior Fellow, McREL Dan Reattoir, Superintendent, Eastern Upper Peninsula ISD MAISA June 19, 2013

2. Overview of This Best Practice Session Leadership as a Driver of Improvement A Federal Randomized Control Trial to Evaluate McREL’s Balanced Leadership Program Preliminary Findings from the Evaluation Balanced Leadership and Beyond in the EUPISD Results in the EUPISD

3. The general effect of school level leadership Average correlation (r) between principal leadership behavior & school achievement is.25. This means … A one standard deviation increase in principal leadership is associated with a 10 percentile point gain in school achievement.

4. School Leadership and Improvements in Curriculum and Instruction How do you guarantee low variability and high quality among classrooms in instruction? Distinguishing between Beating the Odds and Changing the Odds Meta-analytic Findings on School Leadership Waters, Marzano, & McNulty (2003) Average Impact of Leadership factors ES.25 Robinson, Lloyd, & Lowe (2008) Instructional Leadership Statistically Linked to Achievement Instructional Leadership 3x more strongly related to achievement compared to transformational leadership

5. Differences in teacher ratings of principal leadership -4-3-201234 Principal APrincipal B 2.1413.5934.13 13.592.14

6. Difference in mean student achievement Mean student achievement = 50 th percentileMean student achievement = 60 th percentile School A School B Effect Size =.25

7. A Randomized Control Trial to Assess the Efficacy of the Balanced Leadership Program Collaborative large-scale experimental leadership research project in Northern Michigan 17 ISDs, 74 Districts, and 126 Elementary Schools To assess the fidelity and causal impacts of McREL’s Balanced Leadership Program Random assignment with training for control schools after final outcome data. Two year, 10 two-day session BL program

8. Purposeful Community McREL’s Balanced Leadership Framework ™ School-level leadership District-level leadership MAGNITUDE FOCUS Big problems of practice

9. 21 school-level leadership responsibilities 1. Affirmation12. Involvement with CIA 2. Change agent13. Knowledge of CIA 3. Communication14. Monitor/evaluate 4. Contingent reward15. Optimize 5. Culture16. Order 6. Discipline17. Outreach 7. Flexibility18. Relationships 8. Focus19. Resources 9. Ideals and beliefs20. Situational Awareness 10. Input21. Visibility 11. Intellectual stimulation

10. Balanced Leadership Evaluation Overview Rigorous Design to Assess Causality Stratified Random Assignment Leveraging chance Impact on Principals’ Leadership and School Climate Principal and Teacher Turnover

11. Hedges’s g Effect Size for Balanced Leadership Training Impact on Principals (n = 95)* Note. * ES .25 substantively significant for experimental research (What Works Clearinghouse, 2008). Source: Miller, R. J., Goddard, R. D., Kim, E.S., Goddard, Y., L. & Schroeder, P. (2011). Evaluation of principals’ professional development learning: Results from a randomized control trial. Paper presented at the annual conference of the University Council for Educational Administration, Pittsburgh, PA.

12. Balanced Leadership Impact on Principal and Teacher Turnover Does the Balanced Leadership Program cause changes in principal and teacher turnover? After the two years of training, compared to control schools: Principals in the treatment schools were 20% less likely to leave Teachers in the treatment schools were 7% less likely to leave

13. EUPISD Timeline

14. 2005/2006 Provided a Framework Curriculum Instruction Assessment Team of Administrators Local District Principals Local District Superintendents ISD Staff Numerous Book Studies

15. 2005- Regional Curriculum Efforts Begin C = Curriculum R = Review T = Teams CRTs formed in an attempt to provide a forum for all local districts to collaborate, at the teacher and content level, around curriculum “matters.” Started with Math & ELA. Teams for Science, Social Studies, World Languages, Visual & Performing Arts, Physical Education, and Health have since been formed.

16. 2005 – Freedom to Learn Initiative Statewide One-to-One Laptop-to- Student Initiative Jump-started student level access to curriculum and assessments Began process of integrating technology into classroom practices at instructional level

17. 2006 – Common Regional Assessment Efforts Used FTL computers and have students begin taking on-line, common, regional assessments. Originally used Scantron Assessment Connection to build tests, delivered using Microsoft Class-Server, imported data into regional data system – Data Director Cumbersome but powerful Assessments are now taken directly through Data Director. Seamless process with immediate turnaround on reports for teachers

18. 2007 – Balanced Assessment Training Creating and using well done assessments is hard! Partnered with Wexford-Missaukee ISD on E2T2 grant Trained a large cohort of teachers and ISD staff on Stiggins Balanced Assessment process These teams became involved in the process of refining and creating new common, regional assessments These strategies are still employed as common assessments, are tweaked and new assessments are created

19. 2009 – Balanced Leadership Efforts Originally exposed to Balanced Leadership through Freedom to Learn ongoing professional development (for administrators) Book studies; UPCED, EUP principals, ISD staff Involvement in Dr. Goddard’s efficacy study

20. 2010 – Broadband Technology Opportunities Program Another opportunity to boost technology use for students and families Provided netbooks for students 6-12 Greatly expanded access to online teaching and learning tools Greatly expanded access to professional development for teachers and families “Sparking Broadband Use in the Eastern Upper Peninsula of Michigan ”

21. 2011 – Classroom Observations and Power Walkthroughs Initiated by elementary principals as a way to more efficiently collect data on research based instructional strategies often embedded in school improvement plans. Introduced in 2011, in full use in 2012 and 2013. Good baseline data established / Great teacher – admin discussions initiated

22. 2012 – Using Technology in the Classroom that Works This training really brought together the Power Walkthroughs, the BTOP grant, and overall best practices in the 21 st Century Classroom Supported by embedded PD offerings throughout BTOP project and through ongoing classroom observations

23. Best Practices / SBAC Readiness Several systems in place. Student achievement improving. SBAC readiness enhanced.

24. EUPISD Student Achievement- Reading 2011-2012 vs. 2012-2013

25. EUPISD Student Achievement- Math 2011-2012 vs. 2012-2013

26. Summary / Questions