2. SELF REGULATION & TEACHER EFFICACY: BLENDING CLIMATE & CULTURE Presented at Our Savior Lutheran School 64-33 Woodhaven Blvd. Queens, NY Co-Presenters: Marie White, & Stuart Knapp Nyack College, Manhattan, NY Phone: 845. 675.4547 Fax: 845.358.0874 marie.white@nyack.edu stuart.knapp@nyack.edu March 20, 2009

3. 2 Presentation Outline SectionPresenterTimeFocus MorningStuart Knapp10:00-12:00Climate & Culture Lunch ----12:00-1:00 AfternoonMarie White1:00-2:00Classrm &Issues Stuart Knapp

4. 3 Teachers: Novice & Expert Novice Mix important info w/irrelevant info Are acquiring content knowledge (what to teach) Are acquiring pedagogical knowledge (how to teach) Learning time/mgt. Ponder Whats the right thing to do Expert alert students when something critically important is coming Have acquired more content knowledge (over more time) Have acquired more pedagogical knowledge More efficient (do more in less time) Creative insight (more appropriate solutions to problems)

5. 4 Figure 1. 9 Context-Setting Characteristics (after Purkey & Smith, 1985) CHARACTERISTICFUNCTIONAL DEFINITION 1A. School-site Mgt.autonomy from central office 1B. Democratic decision- making invited participation of parents & staff 2. Leadership behavior resulting in the facilitation of change 3. Staff stability infrequent transfer of staff; high level of employee consistency 4.Curric. articulation and organization coordinated planned curriculum which increases % of students engaged learning time

6. 5 9. District support district office recognizes efforts of school staff and provides needed resources 8. Maximized learning time more of school day & class periods are disruption & interruption-free 7. School-wide recognition of academic success publicly honoring student academic effort, improvement and achievement in moving toward standard of excellence encourages students to adopt similar values 6.Parent involvement and support welcoming parent input & support for homework, Attendance & discipline impacts positively on student motivation & performance 5. Staff Development ongoing; links staff concerns to schools needs CHARACTERISTICFUNCTIONAL DEFINITION

7. 6 In Cooperative Grade-level (or other) Groups… 1.Discuss the 9 context-setting characteristics of effective schools 2.Prioritize those that contribute most significantly to instructional effectiveness in your classroom 3.Groups report out in 5-10 minutes

8. 7 FIGURE 1.2CLIMATE AND CULTURE- SETTING CHARACTERISTICS 10. Collaborative planning & collegial relationships, 11. Sense of community, CHARACTERISTIC FUNCTIONAL DEFINITION working together; dissolving barriers separating staff, administration & departments blending ideas, feelings & beliefs; seeking common agreements which coalesce into consensus; feelings of collective solidarity & bonding;

9. 8 rules are mutually agreed, fairly& consistently enforced. 13. Order and discipline, energy of staff & students is channeled toward mutually shared purposes 12. Clear goals & high expectations commonly shared, FIGURE 1.2CLIMATE AND CULTURE- SETTING CHARACTERISTICS (Cont.) CHARACTERISTIC FUNCTIONAL DEFINITION

10. 9 Climate The way people behave, respond, react, given a goal target or direction. The surface level of a culture (Sun, 2007). Culture 1. What people believe, their values, attitudes, and convictions. 2. The deeper level e.g. values that are reflected in goals, laws, curriculum delivery. (Sun, 2007). Defining (Distinguishing) Climate & Culture

11. 10 Climate (Setting the stage) building capacity for KNOWLEDGE & SKILLS dvpmt.

12. 11 KNOWLEDGE & SKILLS defined KNOWLEDGE knowing that… SKILLS knowing how…

13. 12 Culture (Setting the stage) building capacity for DISPOSITIONS dvpmt.

14. 13 DISPOSITIONS defined DISPOSITIONS BELIEVING that… e.g. fairness, & all students can learn …are givens

15. 14 In Cooperative Grade-level (or other) Groups… 1. Given the definitions in the preceding 5 slides, which of the 4 climate & culture- setting characteristics (slide 7-8 ) describe climate, and which describe culture 2. Prioritize those that contribute most significantly to instructional effectiveness in your classroom 3. Groups report out in 5-10 minutes

16. 15 OUT-OF SCHOOL CONDITIONS Federal State Local Community TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP · Vision-building · Providing individual support · Providing Intellectual support · High Performance · Contingent reward IN-SCHOOL CONDITIONS · School goals · Culture · Programs & Instruction · Policies & Organization · Resources Teachers Commitment to Change Personal goals Context beliefs Capacity beliefs FIGURE 3. A Model to Explain Teacher Commitment to Change Source: Leithwood, K., Jantzi, D., & Fernandez, A. 1994, p. 80. (In Murphy & Louis, Eds.)

17. 16 From the previous slide, each group selects a category box. List and describe the particular factors that are given in outline form only Groups report out in 5-10 minutes In Cooperative Grade-level (or other) Groups…

18. 17 Summary & Conclusions This presentation has attempted to share several key factors which recent research has shown to directly influence student performance for K-12 Public Schools. It would seem that these factors also might benefit students at private Christian Schools. On behalf of your presenter (Stuart Knapp) this morning- Thank you for enlivening the discussion of Best Practices today!

19. 18 REFERENCES Baines, E., Blatchford, P., & Kutnick, P. (2003). Changes in grouping practices over primary and secondary school. International Journal of Educational Research, 39(1/2), 9- 34. Barker, B. (2007). The leadership paradox: Can school leaders transform student outcomes? School Effectiveness and School Improvement. 18 (1), 21-43. Creemers, B. P. M. (2002). From school effectiveness and school improvement to effective school improvement: background theoretical analysis and outline of the empirical study. Educational Research and Evaluation, 8 (4), 343- 362. Fruen, L. (2001), Enriching the curriculum. Science Teacher.68(1), 8.

20. 19 Leithwood, K., Jantzi, D., & Fernandez, A. (1994). Transformational leadership and teachers commitment to change. In Murphy, J. & Louis, K. (Eds.), Reshaping the principalship: Insights from transformational reform efforts. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc. Hoy, W. & Miskel, C. (1991). Educational administration: Theory, research and practice, 4e. Educational Administration Quarterly, 22. Papanastasiou, C. (2008). A residual analysis of effective schools and effective teaching in mathematics. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 34(1), 24-30. Purkey, S. & Smith, M. (1985). School reform: The district policy implications of the effective schools literature. The Elementary School Journal, 85(3), 353-389.

21. 20 Scheffel, D., Shaw, J. & Shaw, R. (2008). The efficacy of a supplemental multisensory reading program for first- grade students. Reading Improvement. 45(3), 139-152. Sun, H., Creemers, B., deJong, R. (2007). Contextual factors and effective school improvement. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 18(1), 93-122. Wikely, F., Stoll, L., Murillo, J., & deJong, R. (2005). Evaluating effective school improvement: Case studies of programmes in eight European countries and their contribution to the effective school improvement model. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 16, 387-405.