A Grand Bargain for Education Reform A Grand Bargain for Education Reform The Giffin Model 2011 Regional Conference on Strategic Compensation Awareness Akron OH May 6, 2011 Ted Hershberg & Claire Robertson-Kraft Operation Public Education University of Pennsylvania

The Giffin Model Matching teacher strengths with student needs Measuring accurately before evaluating Increasing student achievement despite larger class sizes Developing IEPs for every student Building a layered curricula

Class size and fiscal austerity School districts everywhere will increase class size to reduce costs Reducing class size was never a good investment, but everyone liked it: – Parents – Teachers – Teachers Unions – Builders – Construction workers

Reducing class size is a poor policy choice to increase student learning It ranks 40 th among 46 options Feedback and direct intervention are the highest (effect sizes of 0.81) Where the average is 0.40, the effect size of reducing class size is 0.12 Source: John Hattie, Keynote, International Conference on Class Size, University of Hong Kong, May, 2005

The Giffin Model Increasing class size now will decrease student learning and lower teacher morale Unless we make major changes in how we group our students and assign our teachers Let’s review the background

Growth as a Classroom Diagnostic It provides teachers with data on the focus and impact of their instruction It ensures a clearer understanding of a teacher’s strengths and weaknesses It provides a means to maximize teacher and student success Discussed in chapter 9 in A Grand Bargain for Education Reform John Schacter has elaborated these issues in his work with former TN middle-school principal, Joel Giffin

Diagnostics 1 The Focus of Instruction

Shed Pattern Previous Achievement Gain This pattern – high growth for the low- achievers at the expense of others – is common in low-income communities. Low Average High

Reverse Shed Previous Achievement Gain In this pattern – frequently found in suburban districts – the teacher is teaching to the high achievers at the expense of other students. Low Average High

Tent Previous Achievement Gain In this pattern, the teacher is teaching right down the middle. Low Average High

Diagnostics 2 The Impact of Instruction

Value-Added: Three Results 100% } One year’s worth of growth Below Above No Detectable Difference (NDD) (using 3-year running averages)

Diagnostics 3 Combining the Focus and Impact of Instruction

Example: Four 5 th Grade Classrooms 100% } No detectable difference ReadingLanguage Arts Math Social Studies

Example: High School English Dept. 100% } No detectable difference 9 Adv9 10 Adv10 11 Adv11 12 AP12

Shed Pattern Using Previous Academic Achievement Levels 100% } No Detectable Difference Low Average High

Reverse Shed Pattern Using Previous Academic Achievement Levels Example 100% } No Detectable Difference Low Average High

Growth Model three categories of instructon Highly Effective: by providing their students with high growth, teachers earn higher salaries, move up the career ladder faster, and serve as coaches and mentors Effective: these teachers provide their students with a year’s worth of growth in a year Ineffective: by failing to provide their students with adequate growth, these teachers undergo mandatory remediation, which can result in improvement or dismissal Observation protocols should provide parallel ratings

Value-added instructional results: Attach 2 Standard Errors to those Below the District Avg. Teacher Effectiveness District Average or Growth Standard Ineffective Effective Highly Effective Attach 1.5 Standard Errors to those Above the District Avg. Standard Errors are a function of: Number of students taught Number of data points for each student

Tent Pattern Using Previous Academic Achievement Levels Example 2 100% } No Detectable Difference Low Average High

21 Teacher #4 Math Scatter Plot (-70 Mean VAM) 82% 20% 23%

How growth was used in Tennessee’s most successful school Achievement data is used to form homogeneous groups of students Growth data are used to identify the specific group of students teachers are most successful with: previously low, average or high achievers

Maryville Middle School’s (MMS) TVAAS Test Scores Subject (Grades 6,7,8) National (Benchmark) Norm MMS Scores 3 yr. Average MMS Scores 10 yr. Average Math100%143.2%156.0% Reading100%154.7%135.6% Language Arts100%230.0%183.6% Social Studies100%108.3%107.5% Science100%143.4%137.0% School Average100%155.9%143.9%

The Philosophy of the Giffin Model Every student, no matter where she starts, should make learning progress from one year to the next Teach­ers should teach the subjects and students they are most successful with Students enter any grade level with vastly different achieve­ment levels Students learn at different rates and in different ways Each in­di­vi­dual student excels in some disciplines more than others All students can exp­eri­ence success when they have the opportunity to feel challenged and successful in every class

Not Tracking Fluid groupings: students are moved to other classrooms, slower paced or advanced, at any point in the school year IEPs promote maximum growth, and Projections make possible academic interventions to raise performance trajectories

Strengths of the Giffin Model Maximizes teacher effectiveness and student learning Reduces behavioral problems: students “in synch” with their curriculum means less acting out because of boredom or frustration Saves money through larger classes for average and high- achieving students Permits very small class sizes for students most in need Raises educator morale despite introduction of new individual-level accountability

The New Support Structure Driven by data (Integrated Assessment, Value-added Training, Value-added as a Diagnostic) Job-embedded (Mentoring, Professional Learning Communities) Aligned with evaluation systems (Peer Assistance and Review, Strategic Review) Teacher-led (Professional Unionism)

For additional information on our comprehensive school reform model, please contact: or (215) Or see our website at