1. COMMON PLANNING TIME Joyce Polanco, Executive Master Teacher Krisy Stephens, Executive Master Teacher Institute for Public School Initiatives University of Texas in Austin

2. TEA Copyright Copyright (c) Notice The materials are copyrighted (c) and trademarked (tm) as the property of the Texas Education Agency (TEA) and may not be reproduced without the express written permission of TEA, except under the following conditions: Texas public school districts, charter schools, and Education Service Centers may reproduce and use copies of the Materials and Related Materials for the districts' and schools' educational use without obtaining permission from TEA. Residents of the state of Texas may reproduce and use copies of the Materials and Related Materials for individual personal use only without obtaining written permission of TEA. Any portion reproduced must be reproduced in its entirety and remain unedited, unaltered and unchanged in any way. No monetary charge can be made for the reproduced materials or any document containing them; however, a reasonable charge to cover only the cost of reproduction and distribution may be charged. Private entities or persons located in Texas that are not Texas public school districts, Texas Education Service Centers, or Texas charter schools or any entity, whether public or private, educational or non-educational, located outside the state of Texas MUST obtain written approval from TEA and will be required to enter into a license agreement that may involve the payment of a licensing fee or a royalty. For information contact: Office of Copyrights, Trademarks, License Agreements, and Royalties, Texas Education Agency, 1701 N. Congress Ave., Austin, TX 78701-1494; phone 512-463-9270 or 512-463-9437; email: copyrights@tea.state.tx.us

3. Who is IPSI?  The Institute for Public School Initiatives was created in 2004.  IPSI is involved in strategic partnerships with UT institutions, community colleges, school districts and state agencies.  IPSI is a part of the University of Texas in Austin.

4. Algebra Readiness Key Practices  Instructional Coaching  Extended Learning Time  Student Engagement  Common Planning Time  Technology Integration  Guidance and Communication for Parents  Professional Development and Administrator Training  Supplemental Resources

5. What is the difference between departmental meetings and common planning time? Discuss with a neighbor….

6. WHAT ARE THE GOALS OF THIS SESSION?

7. We will answer the following questions during this session:  What is common planning time?  How can the teacher/coach support common planning time?  What activities should teachers engage in during common planning time?

8. Creating Common Planning Times  CPT should be consistent and honored.  Meetings should be well planned and thoughtfully organized. Develop guidelines, norms, agendas and rules with the help of your teachers  Instructional coach should be actively involved in CPT and its outcomes.

9. Focus on Professional Learning Communities  “Collaborative cultures … are indeed powerful, but unless they are focusing on the right things they may end up being powerfully wrong.”  So we need to focus on the right things.  How do we start? - Fullan, 2001

10. What should you see during CPT?  Teachers studying the TEKS.  Teachers developing lessons together.  Teachers developing common assessments.  Teachers analyzing student work.  Teachers analyzing student data.  Teachers reviewing and revising lessons.  Teachers talking about student learning.

11. Advantages of Team Discussion of Essential Learning 1. Greater clarity on standards 2. Greater consistency on standards 3. Greater consistency in pacing 4. Greater consistency in common assessments and team interventions 5. Greater ownership and commitment to standards

12. 1. What do we want each student to learn? 2. How will we know when each student has learned it? 3. How will we respond when a student experiences difficulty in learning? -Barth and Associates, (2005)

14. Supporting Common Planning Time  Why study the TEKS together? -To deepen understanding of the standards -To connect to student learning -To support student engagement - Loucks-Horsley (2003)

15. Teaching the Same Curriculum  Alignment requires teachers to work in cooperative groups.  Collaborative groups allow for more ideas, coherence across classrooms, and continuity across time. - Marzano (2003)

16. Let’s review sample lessons

17. Discuss the following… 1) How well do the lessons focus on the TEKS, alignment, and content? a) Do they address content, context, and cognitive level? 2) How can the lessons be strengthened a) How would you increase student engagement? b) How would you increase higher order thinking?

18. Common Assessments should be:  Timely  Feedback to teachers and students  Standards-based  Formative  Allow students to reflect on their learning

19. Analyze Student Work  Use criteria to evaluate student work  Determine what students understand  Evaluate misconceptions  Discuss instructional strategies to address/avoid these misconceptions  Share results with peers - Barth and Associates (2005)

20. How will we facilitate a discussion among teachers on how to respond when a student experiences difficulty in learning?

21. Reviewing and Revising Lessons  Teachers revise the lessons to accommodate student need (3-Tiered Intervention Model)  Student data should be used to determine the revision needed

22. Common Planning Time is worth the effort and time in striving for school improvement.

23. Contact Information Joyce Polanco Executive Master Teacher (San Antonio Area) jpolanco@ipsi.utexas.edu 512-787-8109 Krislyn Stephens Executive Master Teacher (Austin Area) kstephens@ipsi.utexas.edu 512-376-1578 Institute for Public School Initiatives http:// ipsi.utexas.edu

24. References Barth, R., DuFour, R., Dufour, R., Eaker, R., Eason-Watkins, B., Fullan, M.,... Stiggins, R. (2005). On common ground: The power of professional learning communities (R. DuFour, R. Eaker, & R. DuFour, Eds.). Bloomington, IN: National Educational Service. Gamoran, A., Anderson, C. W., Quiroz, P. A., Secada, W. G., Williams, T., & Ashmann, S. (2003). Sociology of Education Series: Transforming teachers in math and science: How schools and districts can support change (A. M. Pallas, Ed.). Columbia University, New York: Teachers College Press. Hull, T. H., Balka, D. S., & Miles, R. H. (2009). A guide to mathematics coaching: Processes for increasing student achievement. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. Loucks-Horsley, S., Love, N., Stiles, K. E., Mundry, S., & Hewson, P. W. (2003). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.