1. SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT Update DECEMBER 3, 2010

2. School Data Profile/Analysis (SDP/A) – opens December 13, 2010; due September 1, 2011  Pre-populated with high-level demographic and student performance information at the aggregated level - can download as PDF; IGOR provides detailed student performance information.  Answers to analysis questions are required for all buildings – do not need to submit actual data School Improvement Plan - opens February 14, 2011, due September 1, 2011  Incorporates Title One and PA 25 Requirements (MI-SAAS, Educational Development Plan, Health and Safety) School

3. District Process Rubrics (DPR) - opens December 13, 2010; due April 1, 2011 District Improvement Plan(DIP) - opens December 13, 2010; due June 30, 2011 LEA Planning Cycle (LEAPC) Application - Single building districts can now do LEAPC using goals from SIP rather than DIP District

4. DECEMBER 2 & 3, 2010 FEATURING KEN O’ CONNOR’S A REPAIR KIT FOR GRADING: 15 FIXES FOR BROKEN GRADES & HOW TO GRADE FOR LEARNING K-12 A Repair Kit for Grading: 15 Fixes for Broken Grades

5. Books: 1. A Repair Kit for Grading: 15 Fixes for Broken Grades (AKA “15 Fixes”)  Study Guide for A Repair Kit for Grading : 15 Fixes for Broken Grades 2. How to Grade for Learning K-12 Wiki: http://gradingforstudentlearning.pbworks.com SIGN UP FOR OUR WIKI

6. GRADING INVENTORY Using the grading inventory, individually identify the percentage of your grades allocated to each category. Compare your list with two colleagues. Conversation: What similarities or differences exist between your inventories? Why might the differences exist? Should differences exist? What grading issues arise from this conversation?

7. FIXES FOR PRACTICES THAT DISTORT ACHIEVEMENT Fixes 1-6 Read your assigned Fix. On a piece of chart paper, list the following:  The gist of the Fix  Arguments for using the Fix  Arguments against using the Fix Choose who will report out to the larger group.

8. Fix 1: Don’t include student behaviors (effort, participation, adherence to class rules, etc.) in grades; include only achievement. Fix 2: Don’t reduce marks on “Work” submitted late; provide support for the learner. Fix 3: Don’t give points for extra credit or use bonus points; seek only evidence that more work has resulted in a higher level of achievement Fix 4: Don’t punish academic dishonesty with reduced grades; apply other consequences and reassess to determine actual level of achievement. Fix 5: Don’t consider attendance in grade determination; report absences separately. Fix 6: Don’t include group scores in grades; use only individual achievement evidence. FIXES FOR PRACTICES THAT DISTORT ACHIEVEMENT

9. ATTENDANCE DILEMMA Read the scenario. Discuss with an elbow partner: What should you do and why?

10. WHAT SHOULD GRADES TELL US ABOUT STUDENTS? Conversation: 1. How well does the list on the left match your group’s list? 2.How well does the list on the right match your personal grading inventory? 3.Do the factors you included in your inventory result in providing the information you need to answer the questions? 4.What would need to be done differently? What factors must be included? 5.What things on either list are troubling you? Why?

11. FIXES FOR PRACTICES THAT DISTORT ACHIEVEMENT WHAT’S MY THINKING NOW? Why might educators use Fixes 1-6? Why might educators not use Fixes 1-6? How might I use Fixes 1-6 now? Why?

13. QUICK WRITE How do educators lead students to change their focus from point accumulation to learning?

14. IGOR IGOR Power Users  Jan. 14, 2011  March 18, 2011  May 13, 2011 InGA Demonstration Cohort Builder IGOR Use Statistics and Patterns