1. The Alphabet Soup Project and Beyond: Using the SEC to Improve Instruction in Illinois Carol Diedrichsen and Gwen Pollock, Illinois State Board of Education Mary Wood, Northern Illinois University Rick Prestley, IL RESPRO Consultant CCSSO SEC State Collaborative Meeting San Diego, CA February 11-12, 2008

2. The Illinois Story The Beginning: Illinois Math Science Partnerships Alphabet Soup Pilot Engaging Other Schools The Road Ahead

3. Alphabet Soup Project Focus on high schools Illinois Math Science Partnerships Comprehensive School Reform Career and Technical Education Pilot Study Recruited respected and known facilitators

4. 256 Project Participants-- 2006-2007 Project Goals—provide a setting for teachers to –Collect and analyze information about instruction –Discuss teaching options based on data –Provide data for curricular, instructional and assessment refinements Three sessions –Session 1– Completing Surveys—WHAT DO I DO? –Session 2 – Data Analysis----NOW WHAT? –Session 3 – Using the data---SO WHAT? The Pilot

5. Pilot Findings Curriculum –Not aware of the mile wide, inch deep –Gaps in what not taught –Extras in the curriculum All of the teachers agreed that the SEC helped them think about their curriculum Tweaked what was taught Changes were driven by faculty-team

6. CTE and Non-CTE CTE courses did cover standards, especially in areas such as measurement, data analysis, algebra Differences BETWEEN schools was often larger than differences WITHIN schools, both for content and instructional practices Need to increase sample size before making conclusions

7. Lessons Learned Researcher’s Perspective It’s not about the numbers; it is about the process and dialogue It is important to customize the research and implementation plans

8. Think about how the following would be received at your school: Change the focus from “What am I teaching? “ to “What are the students receiving? “ “What did they have a chance to learn?” Tool to implement team-based cycles of looking at instruction, making improvements, and assessing the impact of the changes

9. Customize Research and Implementation Design Schools differ in their capacity to engage in academic dialogues Take into account strength of academic leadership, current internal capacity for dialogue (learning community), resources, staff time, etc.

10. Data overload and the need to focus on a few things with the largest potential for impact The content results are discussed first, and discussions on instructional practices are harder

11. Lessons Learned How SEC Can Support Teachers Next step after curriculum mapping and instruction mapping Support School Improvement Plans In reading, math, science Support/validate good things teachers are already doing Identify professional development needs

12. What Teachers Learn Not everyone is on the same page If instruction is not aligned to the Standards, low test scores are inevitable Many times cognition is not thought about. When not planned for, usually does not happen. Gives a framework for discussion for teachers to get a deeper understanding of 16 areas

13. School Support Support and complement School Improvement efforts –Classroom/school/district tool –Accessible (money and time) –Comprehensive (curriculum, instruction, practice…) –Efficient (cost : return) –Adaptable/Flexible Across time/process (baseline data > monitoring > summative) Complements and supports a wide range of in-place efforts Informs next steps Triangulate with other data … –Motivational factors (to do, to use)

14. United Township High School CSR/RESPRO Part of planning for restructuring Pathways approach based on questions Looking at impact of changes already made

15. UTHS Approach Stated research questions and SEC set-up so the research questions could be answered (Administrator and faculty) Compared results to student performance on state assessments Identified paths with gaps Summarized major findings for faculty- teams to further drill down on data

16. Tool to implement rapid, team-based cycles of looking at instruction, making improvements, and assessing the impact of the changes

17. Graduation Pathways College Prep CP Algebra CP Geometry CP Algebra 2/Trig CP Precalculus Accelerated Accel. Algebra 2 Accel. Geometry Accel. Precalculus Accel. Calculus

18. Graduation Pathways Language Arts CP English 1 CP English 2 CP English 3 CP English 4 Across Content CP English 1 World Studies American Studies Western Civ

19. College Prep Accelerated National Standards

20. SCHOOLState Descriptors

21. Gr. 9 MathGr. 10 MathI,J ILS Perf.Desc. J. Cousteau High School Gr. 11 Math

22. Gr. 9 ILS I, J J. Cousteau High School Gr. 10

23. Marginals

24. Use of Homework

26. G9 All Content Areas G10 All Content Areas G11 All Content Areas J. Cousteau High School

27. G11 Comprehension G10 Comprehension G9 Comprehension J. Cousteau High School

28. ILS Perf Desc I, J

29. Details, Details, Details Teachers needed to drill down into the data to get at root causes and have comprehensive discussions Is part of the conversation to not focus on part of the current curriculum, if so what?

30. State Perspective Building capacity at the state to respond to requests. One tool in a toolkit to foster dialogue about guaranteed and viable curriculum Ongoing recommendation as a tool for those in improvement planning Next steps for SEC in Illinois – perhaps pre- service and teaching standards, use with corrective action

31. The Road Ahead The System of Support for schools and districts will include the SEC as part of a menu of services. –Consistent with an emphasis on equitable access to the curriculum and shared responsibility for student learning. Useful tool for gen ed and spec ed as we roll out RtI in IL. MSP with Administrators Academy

32. Contact Information Gwen Pollock gpollock@isbe.net Carol Diedrichsen cdiedric@isbe.net Mary Wood wood5665@sbcglobal.net Rick Prestley r.prestley@insightbb.com