1. Urban Mathematics Education Leadership Academy May 19, 2009 Dottie Whitlow, Ph. D. and the Atlanta Public Schools team

2. 2 / GE / August 18, 2015 Atlanta Public Schools UMELA Team Dottie Whitlow, Ph.D. Arica Johnson, Ed. D Linda S. Smith Neva Rose Mesha Greene Craig Ogden Kathy Griffin Diamond Jack Raquel Rimpola Kami Benson Luigs Executive Director, Mathematics & Science Program Administrator, Mathematics & Science Master Instructional Coach, Mathematics Program Director, Georgia Tech CEISMC Model Teacher Leader, SRT 1 Model Teacher Leader, SRT 2 Model Teacher Leader, SRT 3 Model Teacher Leader, SRT 4 Model Teacher Leader, Math, Office of HS Program Leader, GE Atlanta Public Schools UMELA Team

3. 3 / GE / August 18, 2015 Atlanta Public Schools Demographics Student population African American Caucasian Hispanic Multiracial Asian American Indian/Alaskan Students eligible for free & reduced meals Teachers School facts Traditional schools Elementary Middle Schools Single gender High Schools Non-traditional Charter Schools Adult learning centers Total APS learning sites 49,142 86% 8% 4% 0.93% 0.59% 0.3% 76.14% +3,200 95 57 17 2 19 2 7 1 105 Superintendent tenure: 10 years Beverly L. Hall, Ed.D. – 2009 National Superintendent of the Year Atlanta Public Schools Demographics

4. 4 / GE / August 18, 2015 Atlanta Public Schools’ strategic plan is to create a 21st Century mathematics and science educational experience that provides APS students with the necessary knowledge, skills and abilities to allow them to become competitive in the global market place. Atlanta Public Schools Vision for 2012 math and science

5. 5 / GE / August 18, 2015 Quality Professional Learning Experiences Aligned Curriculum & Resource Materials Enhanced Leadership Capacity Deep Teacher Capacity Standards-based Classroom Instruction Deep Data Use for Assessment & Instruction APS 21 st Century Learning Experience Atlanta Public Schools Math & Science initiative

6. 6 / GE / August 18, 2015 APS’ math and science PD design considers 4 interconnected outcomes Increasing science & math content knowledge Adapted from Loucks-Horsley, Love, Stiles, Mundry, & Hewson in Designing Professional Development for Teachers of Science and Mathematics Increasing pedagogical content knowledge Building a professional learning community Developing leadership

7. 7 / GE / August 18, 2015 APS’ math & science PD design Plan Context Do Set Goals Commit to vision and standards Analyze student learning & other data Knowledge & Beliefs Critical Issues EVAULATE Strategies Professional Development is like an …… because it covers all

8. 8 / GE / August 18, 2015 How do we know the PD is working? Developing awareness Building knowledge Translate new knowledge into practice Practicing teaching Reflect deeply on teaching and learning 1.Participants’ reactions 2.Participants’ learning 3.Organization support & change 4.Participants’ use of new knowledge or skills 5.Student learning outcomes Each PD strategy is evaluated … some strategies are evaluated more deeply than others ‘House of PD’Scope of Evaluation Adapted from Loucks-Horsley, Love, Stiles, Mundry, & Hewson in Designing Professional Development for Teachers of Science and Mathematics taken from T. Guskey in Evaluating Professional Development

9. 9 / GE / August 18, 2015 How are we evaluating Layer 1? Developing awareness Building knowledge Translate new knowledge into practice Practicing teaching Reflect deeply on teaching and learning Developing Awareness APS PD action Level of evaluation 22223222222322 –District-wide focused training –Math Misconceptions –Vertical planning teaming –Department planning teaming –District-wide coaching conversations –Reflective teacher model intro May 2008 –Math I Professional Learning Community (PLC) APS PD action Level of evaluation –New Teacher Orientation training –Quarterly math & science SRT trainings –Noyce Foundation content coaching –Science leadership training 21322213222

10. 10 / GE / August 18, 2015 How are we evaluating Layer 2? Developing awareness Building knowledge Translate new knowledge into practice Practicing teaching Reflect deeply on teaching and learning Building knowledge APS PD action Level of evaluation 2222222222222222 –District-wide focused training –Science leadership series –Spelman partnership –GE summer conference –NASA, APQC –Urban Math Education Leadership Academy –GA Tech CEISMC GIFT –Math I PLC –Summer Science academies –Science labs and materials –Math Solutions –NSTA sci-paks and sci-objects –PLCs (robotics, integrated science, physics) –GSTA, NSTA, GCTM, NCTM –Benjamin Banneker Series –Quarterly math & science SRT trainings –Exemplars math training APS PD action Level of evaluation 223232212223232212

11. 11 / GE / August 18, 2015 How are we evaluating Layer 3? Developing awareness Building knowledge Translate new knowledge into practice Practicing teaching Reflect deeply on teaching and learning Translate new knowledge into practice –District focused training –APS Coaching Foundation –Carnegie and Agile Mind –8 th grade math curriculum improvements –Noyce Foundation content coaching –National Advisory Panel –Math I & II supplements –Science framework and task enhancements –Data conversations/ data talks PLC APS PD actionLevel of evaluation 232222222232222222

12. 12 / GE / August 18, 2015 How are we evaluating Layer 4? Developing awareness Building knowledge Translate new knowledge into practice Practicing teaching Reflect deeply on teaching and learning Practicing teaching APS PD actionLevel of evaluation 232223232223 –District-wide focused training –APS Coaching Foundation –Noyce Foundation content coaching –Reflective teacher model introduction May 2008 –PLCs (all esp. data conversations/data talks) –Math Solutions

13. 13 / GE / August 18, 2015 How are we evaluating Layer 5? Developing awareness Building knowledge Translate new knowledge into practice Practicing teaching Reflect deeply on teaching and learning APS PD actionLevel of evaluation 23222322 –District-wide focused training –APS Coaching Foundation –Science Leadership series –PLCs (all)

14. 14 / GE / August 18, 2015 Partnerships & resources Georgia Tech CEISMCUniversity of Georgia Georgia State UniversitySpelman College (SMSEA) University of Texas – The Dana Center University of California Santa Cruz GE & GE FoundationBill & Melinda Gates Foundation Panasonic FoundationNCTM / NCSM Noyce Foundation Partners Resources (Susan Loucks-Horsley, et al) Designing Professional Development for Teachers of Science and Mathematics (Van De Walle) Elementary and Middle School Mathematics (Mary Kay Stein, et al) Implementing Standards-Based Mathematics Instruction 1 st edition (Robert Ashlock) Error Patterns in Computation (Kasser, Mundry, Stiles and Loucks-Horsley) Leading Every Day (Tom Guskey) Evaluating Professional Development GDOE website www.georgiastandards.orgwww.georgiastandards.org Urban Mathematics Leadership Network WestEd

15. 15 / GE / August 18, 2015 Challenges / Opportunities Building the foundation of APS Coaching Model among APS instructional leaders (eg, common language and practice) Efficient use of planning days – we always can improve Follow-up and monitoring of PD opportunities Channel energy re Math & Science Initiative Embedding and supporting all district initiatives seamlessly