FIDELITY

Wednesday April 23, 2008

Breakout E Session 42John Vail, Ed.S.

Kalamazoo RESA

The classic definition

• a: the quality or state of being faithful b: accuracy in details : exactness

The Story

What School-wide or System Factors Impact Student

Achievement?

What Grade-Level Factors Impact Student Achievement?

What Classroom/Teacher Factors Impact Student Achievement?

The Rest of the Story

Some Baseline Informationbased on 180,000 studies and over 50 million students

• Getting a year older has an effect size of 0.10

• Just having a teacher in the classroom has an effect size of 0.24

• The average effect size of innovations in schools is 0.40

Hattie, J. (1999, August).

Examples

• High end– Reinforcement 1.13– Instructional Quality 1.00– Instructional Quantity 0.84– Remediation/Feedback 0.65

• Low End– Team teaching 0.06– Mass media -0.12– Retention -0.15

Hattie, J. (1999, August).

Effective Schools Effective Outcomes

Average School/Average Teacher

50th 50th

Highly Ineffective School/ Highly Ineffective Teacher

50th 3rd

Highly Effective School/Highly Ineffective Teacher

50th 37th

Highly Ineffective School/ Highly Effective Teacher

50th 63rd

Highly Effective School/Highly Effective Teacher

50th 96th

Highly Effective School/Average Teacher

50th 78th

Marzano, R. (2000)

TEACHER FACTORS

• “The impact of decisions made by individual teachers is far greater than the impact of decisions made at the school level.”

• “More can be done to improve education by improving the effectiveness of teachers than by any other single factor.”

Robert Marzano

JigsawIn groups of four, read the excepts from Hattie’s paper

Person 1 Sections A & DPerson 2 First half of Section B

Person 3 Second Half of Section BPerson 4 Section C

Hattie, J. (1999, August). Influences on student learning. Inaugural lecture presented at

the University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. Retrieved February 9, 2008

from http://www.geoffpetty.com/downloads/WORD/Influencesonstudent2C683.pdf

The Three Critical FactorsJohn Hattie, 1999

1. Goals2. Feedback3. Reconceptualization of Information

Innovations, changes, initiatives, etc. merely alter the probability of the three factors occurring.

It is the individual teacher that determines whether innovations actually impact teaching.

Teachers who impact student learning the most constantly innovate and seek better ways.

Another piece to the puzzle

Total Instructional Alignment

Making sure that what we are teaching, what we are assessing, and how we

are teaching are congruent.

Lisa Carter “Every Child Deserves the Opportunity to Learn”2008 presentation – Effective Schools Conference

The Three Domains of Total Instructional Alignment

• Alignment of the system– Are we aligning the system to the students or are we

requiring the students to align to the system?

• Alignment of the standards, curriculum and assessment– Is there a direct match between these elements?

• Alignment of instructional practice– Is what happens in the classroom behind closed

doors matching the intended curriculum?

All Learners = School Independent Learners and School Dependent Learners

I C

E

InstructionCurriculumEvaluation

Anything the teacherteaches in the classroom

What teachers are told they must teach

Anything that we test kidson and hold them accountablefor learning

Total Instructional Alignment

ECI

InstructionCurriculumEvaluation

The Bottom Line

• Any innovation you bring into the classroom or school to improve outcomes on student assessments presumes that there already is alignment of the intended (C), taught (I), and tested (E) objectives.

• The innovation itself will not improve outcomes if alignment does not exist!

Summarization

• Three critical learning variables for students

• Three critical learning variables for teachers

• Instructional alignment

Like their students, they (teachers) must set challenging goals, seek feedback on the

effectiveness of their teaching on students, and constantly be attentive to improvement

and innovating methods which optimize feedback and meeting challenging goals.

Hattie, J. (1999)

One Possible Way

Peer Observations

Teacher A Teacher B Teacher C Parapros

Attention Ratio

Pos. : Neg.

1:1 4:1 2:1 1:4

Whole Group Instruction Response Rate

2 per minute 1 per minute 1 per minute NA

WG Engagement 80 – 90 % 60 – 95% 30 – 50% NA

Small Group Instruction Response Rate

2.5 per minute 4 per minute 0.5 per minute .15 – 1.0 per minute

SG Engagement 80% 100% 50% 50%

Transition Time 4 – 5 minutes 0.5 – 0.75 minutes

1 – 2 minutes NA

Independent Engagement

75% 100% 28% NA

Sample Data: Fictional Academy

Teacher A Range

Atttention Ratio

Pos:Neg

1:1 1:1 to 4:1

Whole Group

Instruct Response Rate

2 per minute 1 – 2 per minute

WG Engagement 80 – 90% 30 – 95%

Small Group Instruction Response Rate

2:1 0.5:1 to 4:1

SG Engagement 80% 50 – 100%

Transition Time 4 - 5 minutes 0.5 – 5 minutes

Independent Engagement

75% 28 – 100%

Sample Feedback for Teacher A