Missouri Model Districts Framework - Missouri … t s te esut a collaborative culture that empowers...

Missouri Model Districts FrameworkInfographics and Practice Profiles

Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE)May 2017 (Version 1.0)2

Suggested citation: Missouri Model Districts Infographics and Practice profiles (2017). Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education: University of Missouri-Kansas City, Institute for Human Development.

The Department of Elementary and Secondary Education does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, gender, national origin, age, or disability in its programs and activities. Inquiries related to Department programs and to the location of services, activities, and

facilities that are accessible by persons with disabilities may be directed to the Jefferson State Office Building, Office of the General Counsel, Coordinator – Civil Rights Compliance (Title VI/Title IX/504/ADA/Age Act), 6th Floor, 205 Jefferson Street, P.O. Box 480, Jefferson City, MO 65102-0480; telephone number 573-526-4757 or TTY 800-735-2966; fax number 573-522-4883; email [email protected].

The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the US Department of Education to the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (#H323A120018). However, these contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the US Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government.

The UMKC-IHD is an applied research and training center for human services and has been in existence for over 40 years. UMKC-IHD and its approximately 50 faculty and staff work with a variety of university, community, state and national constituents to build

the capacity of systems, organizations, programs, families, and individuals through applied research, training, community services and supports, and information dissemination.

Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE)May 2017 (Version 1.0) 3

Journey of a Missouri Model DistrictCommitment

Identify effective practices & systems in place Assess the

Current Real

ity

Are foundations of effective school practices in place?

Are leadership & capactiy-building supports in place?

Are effective teaching/learning practices in place?

Develop Comprehensive Implementation PlanIdentify Supports & Resources to Address Gaps in Knowledge/Doing

Apply Training, TA, & Coaching at District Leadership/Team

Levels

Apply Training, TA, & Coaching of School-Based Implementation Coaching

to Build Capacity

Healthy School

District Leadership ready to commit

Educators’ mindsets focused on improving learning for

all

Loading...

Loading...

Recognize &

Address Gaps

in Knowledge

& Practice

Step 1Commit

Step 2Identify

Step 3Address Gaps

Step 4Develop

Step 5Implement

Step 6Success!

What is

the

impact

on

students

?

START HERE

District-Wide Implementation with Fidelity

Know Thy Impact: CollectiveTeacher

Efficacy

Learning for ALL Growth Mindset

Sustainability: Effective School Systems &

Practices


InfographicsFor each component of the MMD framework is an Infographic.

To improve outcomes for all students, educators need to know:

Why Collaborate?

Collaborative Teams

(Carroll, 2009)

The Big Idea!

THE WHY…

THE HOW…

The Research

Collaboration is based on cooperativeness, learning from errors, seeking feedback about progress and enjoying venturing into the ‘pit of not knowing’ together with expert help that provides safety nets and, ultimately, ways out of the pit.

Quality teaching is not an individual accomplishment, it is the result of a collaborative culture that empowers teachers to team up to improve student learning beyond what any of them can achieve alone.

(Hattie, 2015)

Teachers and schools that engage in better quality collaboration have better achievement gains in math and reading. Moreover, teachers improve at greater rates when they work in schools with better collaboration quality.

To improve student outcomes by becoming more skilled educators through developing common purposes and goals.

THE WHAT…Educators intentionally use collaborative skills to discuss effective practices around improved student outcomes.

Educators effectively utilize team processes. Team processes are critical!

The Process

Effective teams use processes for efficient and focused collaborative meetings. Agendas and Minutes Roles Norms Collaborative skills Consensus Protocols

“The key question is how to define a focus on learning and teaching in a way that makes them sufficiently , central, and capable of being improved systematically.”

(Hattie, 2015)

Better Student Outcomes

+ Stronger Educators

(Ronfeldt, Farmer, McQueen, and Grissom, 2015)


Definition

Data-Based Decision MakingUsing Student Data to Support Instructional Decisions

Make data part of an ongoing cycle of instructional improvement

Teach students to examine their own data and learning goals

Establish a clear vision for school-wide data use by teachers andteaching teams

Provide supports that foster a data-driven culture within the school

Purpose

The Process

Data-Based Decision Making (DBDM) = small teams meet regularly and use an explicit, data-driven structure to disaggregate data, analyze student performance, set incremental student

learning goals, engage in dialogue around explicit

and deliberate classroom instruction, and

create a plan to continuously monitor instruction and student learning.

Guiding Questions

(Mike Schmoker, 2003)

How many students are succeeding in the subject I/we teach?

Within those subjects, what are the areas of strengths and weakness?

How can I/we establish and sustain a culture and process for strategic instructional decision-making across our building, teams and classrooms?

(Gilbert, 1978; McIntosh, Horner & Sugai, 2009)

BenefitsUsing a DBDM process shifts the work of school teams from a reactive or crisis driven process to a pro-active, outcomes driven process, and sets the stage for continuous improvement.


What is Common Formative Assessment?

Common Formative Assessment

What types of assessments do we currently use?

Who analyzes the assessment results?

What functions should assessment instruments have to provide greatest leverage?

Team-developed Common Formative Assessments: are a more efficient use of

teachers’ time. are more equitable for

students. are more effective in

monitoring and improving student learning.

can inform and improvethe practice of both individual teachers and teams of teachers.

can build the capacity of the team to achieve at higher levels.

are essential to systematic interventions when students do not learn.

(DuFour, DuFour, & Eaker, 2007)

Benefits

“Assessment is not something that is done to

students separate and apart from instruction; assessment must be – must be seen to be – something that is done withstudents as an integral part of

the learning process.”(O’Connor, 2002)

Common = Given by all teachers at a grade level or in a content area

Formative = Provides data to inform planning and instruction

Assessment = Provides analytical rather than evaluative information

(Cook & Negron, 2009)

Questions to Consider

The Learning Process

What is the difference between assessment OF learning and assessment

FOR learning?

It is a process!

How can I best use selected response, constructed response, and performance task assessments?


Effective teams use processes for efficient and focused collaborative meetings. Agendas and Minutes Roles Norms Collaborative skills Consensus Protocols

Developing Assessment Capable

Effect Size

Assessment Capable Learners

(1.33 effect size)

(Hattie, 2015)

How can I close the

gap?

(Chappuis, 2015)

LearnersWho are Assessment Capable Learners?

know the learning target for the lesson

can describe where they are in relation to the criteria

use that information to select learning strategies to improve their work

(Stiggins & Chappuis, 2010)

Bull’s eye! I can do this well all the time!

Getting better. I’m starting to understand what to do.

Just beginning, I am not sure how to do this

When students self-assess regularly, track and share their progress, their confidence as learners grows. Their motivation to do well increases as does their achievement.

Closing the Gap

Understand what they are supposed to learnMonitor their progressSet GoalsReflect on their learning

Students who:

Students...Provide descriptive feedback linking learning goals to success criteriaProvide feedback about strengths and ways to improvePace instruction to allow for frequent feedbackPrompt students to assess their own progress

Teachers...


What is Metacognition?

Metacognition• Awareness of one’s own actions and

their effects• Posing internal questions to find

information and meaning• Developing mental maps, pictures, or

plans• Monitoring plans throughout a

process and revising plans when they do not work

• Self-evaluating a completed plan(Costa, 2008)

The Research

I am a learner.

Reflection

Does the solution

make sense?

StrategicWhy is this strategy the best to solve the problem?

What is the question?

Comprehension

How is this problem like one I already

solved?

ConnectionFour Types of Self-addressed Metacognitive Questions

Effect Size: .53

After Instruction

During&

Before

Impact of Metacognition

• Shapes active rather than passive learners

• Gives students a sense of control over learning

• Promotes “deep learning”• Makes students aware of their own

thinking (McElwee, 2009)(Hattie, 2009)

When Students are Metacognitive they understand...

This is my task.

I know my steps.

I have ideas of solutions.

I can apply my knowledge to

various situations.

(Nokes & Dole, 2004)

The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the US Department of Education to the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (#H323A120018). However, these contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the US Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government.


When is Coaching Needed?

Coaching for Better Instruction = Improved Outcomes

Coaching bridges Professional Development to practice

School Collaborative Data Team

Individual Teacher

Professional Development Provider

Teachers and teams improve practices

Teachers help peers learn new practices

Who Needs Coaching?

Why Coaching is Important?

How Coaching Works?

Because we value outcomes, 80% or more of the time spent on performance support should be devoted to “coaching” practitioners how to do the intervention, better and better over time.

Karen Blase and Dean Fixsen, University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

I don’t know how to use these skills in my classroom

I can demonstrate my new skills in training but I STILL don’t know how to use this in my classroom

I can demonstrate my new skills and I am starting to understand how to use these in my classroom

I can use my new skills in my classroom!I am a better educator with coaching!

Theory & Discussion

Demonstration in Training

Practice & Feedback in

Training

Coaching in Classroom

0% transfer new skill into their practice after learning theory.

Though 30% demonstrate skills in training, 0% transfer new skills to practice after seeing it demonstrated in training.

5% will transfer new skills to classroom after learning theory, seeing it demonstrated, practicing and receiving corrective feedback during training.

After receiving coaching in the classroom, 90-95% were able to demonstrate knowledge, and skill, and use those skills in their classroom.

Met

hods

of

Prof

essio

nal

Deve

lopm

ent

(Joyce & Showers, 2002)

Fidelity of Professional Development

Coaching is a process!

1. When learning for the first time2. When wanting to learn more3. When trying to remember and/or apply4. When things change5. When something goes wrong

The Five Moments of Need©(Dr. Conrad Gottfredson 2010)


Colla

bora

tive

Team

s (CT

)Pr

actic

e Pr

ofile

Esse

ntial

Fun

ction

Exem

plar

y Im

plem

enta

tion

Profi

cien

t

Clos

e to

Pro

ficie

nt

(Ski

ll is

em

ergi

ng,

but n

ot y

et to

pr

ofici

ency

. Coa

chin

g is

reco

mm

ende

d.)

Far f

rom

Pro

ficie

nt

(Fol

low

-up

prof

essi

onal

de

velo

pmen

t an

d co

achi

ng a

re

criti

cal.)

1Ed

ucat

ors

colla

bora

tivel

y de

velo

p co

mm

on p

urpo

ses a

nd

goal

s for

impr

oved

st

uden

t out

com

es th

at

embr

ace

conti

nuou

s sc

hool

impr

ovem

ent.

Team

s add

ress

3/4

of t

he fo

llow

ing

at

leas

t tw

ice

mon

thly

, as e

vide

nced

by

agen

das a

nd m

inut

es:

1. d

iscus

sing

data

and

mon

itorin

g st

uden

t pr

ogre

ss2.

iden

tifyi

ng in

stru

ction

al p

racti

ces t

hat

resu

lt in

stud

ent l

earn

ing

3. id

entif

ying

stud

ents

nee

ding

re-

teac

hing

4. al

igni

ng in

stru

ction

al p

racti

ces t

o ac

adem

ic st

anda

rds

Team

s add

ress

3/4

of t

he fo

llow

ing

at

leas

t mon

thly

, as e

vide

nced

by

agen

das

and

min

utes

:1.

disc

ussin

g da

ta a

nd m

onito

ring

stud

ent p

rogr

ess

2. id

entif

ying

inst

ructi

onal

pra

ctice

s tha

t re

sult

in st

uden

t lea

rnin

g3.

iden

tifyi

ng st

uden

ts n

eedi

ng re

-te

achi

ng4.

alig

ning

inst

ructi

onal

pra

ctice

s to

acad

emic

stan

dard

s

Mon

thly

age

ndas

and

m

inut

es sh

ow 2

- 4

item

s are

add

ress

ed

Mon

thly

age

nda

and

min

utes

show

fe

wer

than

2 o

f the

ite

ms a

re a

ddre

ssed

2Ed

ucat

ors e

ffecti

vely

im

plem

ent g

roup

pr

oces

ses i

n co

llabo

rativ

e m

eetin

gs.

Team

s mee

t wee

kly

usin

g ag

enda

and

m

inut

es in

col

labo

rativ

e m

eetin

gs.

Team

s mee

t at l

east

mon

thly

util

izing

ag

enda

s and

min

utes

in c

olla

bora

tive

mee

tings

.

Mee

tings

occ

ur

regu

larly

with

no

set

sche

dule

Mee

ting

times

ar

e irr

egul

ar,

infr

eque

nt, a

nd/o

r oft

en c

ance

led

Team

s use

age

ndas

whi

ch in

clud

e 8/

9 of

th

e fo

llow

ing:

• te

am/g

roup

nam

e•

date

/tim

e/lo

catio

n•

outc

omes

(inc

lude

s req

uire

d m

ater

ials)

• pa

st it

ems t

o re

view

• ne

w it

ems

• ce

lebr

ation

s•

norm

s•

role

s•

next

mee

ting

date

Team

s use

age

ndas

whi

ch in

clud

e 7/

9 of

th

e fo

llow

ing:

• te

am/g

roup

nam

e•

date

/tim

e/lo

catio

n•

outc

omes

(inc

lude

s req

uire

d m

ater

ials)

• pa

st it

ems t

o re

view

• ne

w it

ems

• ce

lebr

ation

s•

norm

s•

role

s•

next

mee

ting

date

Agen

das i

nclu

de 4

-6

of th

e re

com

men

ded

item

s

Agen

das i

nclu

de

few

er th

an 4

re

com

men

ded

item

s or a

re n

ot

deve

lope

d

Prac

tice

Profi

les

For e

ach

com

pone

nt o

f the

MM

D fr

amew

ork

is a

Prac

tice

Profi

le.


2(c

ontin

ued)

Educ

ator

s effe

ctive

ly

impl

emen

t gro

up

proc

esse

s in

colla

bora

tive

mee

tings

.

Team

s use

min

utes

and

com

mun

icati

on

that

incl

ude

8/9

of th

e re

com

men

ded

item

s:

• pu

rpos

e fo

r the

mee

ting

• w

here

and

whe

n he

ld•

list o

f the

atte

ndee

s •

task

s ach

ieve

d du

ring

the

mee

ting

• de

cisio

ns m

ade

at th

e m

eetin

g•

list o

f acti

ons a

gree

d up

on in

clud

ing

who

it w

as a

ssig

ned

to a

nd th

e co

mpl

etion

dat

e•

cent

ral p

lace

with

eas

y ac

cess

all

parti

cipa

nts t

o pr

ovid

e up

date

s and

co

mm

ents

• ag

enda

s tha

t use

con

siste

nt te

mpl

ate

for e

asy

refe

renc

e •

agen

das d

istrib

uted

to a

ll st

akeh

olde

rs

Team

s use

min

utes

and

com

mun

icati

on

that

incl

ude

7/9

of th

e re

com

men

ded

item

s:

• pu

rpos

e fo

r the

mee

ting

• w

here

and

whe

n he

ld•

list o

f the

atte

ndee

s •

task

s ach

ieve

d du

ring

the

mee

ting

• de

cisio

ns m

ade

at th

e m

eetin

g•

list o

f acti

ons a

gree

d up

on in

clud

ing

who

it w

as a

ssig

ned

to a

nd th

e co

mpl

etion

dat

e•

cent

ral p

lace

with

eas

y ac

cess

all

parti

cipa

nts t

o pr

ovid

e up

date

s and

co

mm

ents

• ag

enda

s tha

t use

con

siste

nt te

mpl

ate

for e

asy

refe

renc

e •

agen

das d

istrib

uted

to a

ll st

akeh

olde

rs

Min

utes

incl

ude

few

er

4-6

reco

mm

ende

d ite

ms

Min

utes

incl

ude

few

er th

an 4

re

com

men

ded

item

s or a

re n

ot

deve

lope

d

3Ed

ucat

ors i

nten

tiona

lly

use

colla

bora

tive

skill

s in

col

labo

rativ

e te

am

mee

tings

.

Durin

g te

am m

eetin

gs, p

robl

em-s

olvi

ng

and

shar

ing

invo

lves

at l

east

6/7

of t

he

follo

win

g co

llabo

rativ

e be

havi

ors:

•

paus

ing

• pa

raph

rasin

g•

posin

g qu

estio

ns•

putti

ng id

eas o

n th

e ta

ble

• pr

ovid

ing

data

• pa

ying

atte

ntion

to se

lf an

d ot

hers

• pr

esum

ing

positi

ve in

tenti

ons

Durin

g of

team

mee

tings

, pro

blem

-so

lvin

g an

d sh

arin

g in

volv

es a

t lea

st 5

of

the

follo

win

g co

llabo

rativ

e be

havi

ors:

• pa

usin

g•

para

phra

sing

• po

sing

ques

tions

• pu

tting

idea

s on

the

tabl

e•

prov

idin

g da

ta•

payi

ng a

ttenti

on to

self

and

othe

rs•

pres

umin

g po

sitive

inte

ntion

s

Durin

g te

am m

eetin

gs,

prob

lem

-sol

ving

an

d sh

arin

g in

volv

es

few

er th

an 5

of

the

reco

mm

ende

d co

llabo

rativ

e be

havi

ors

The

colla

bora

tive

beha

vior

s do

not

occu

r dur

ing

team

m

eetin

gs


Data

-bas

ed D

ecis

ion

Mak

ing

(DBD

M)

Prac

tice

Profi

le

Esse

ntial

Fu

nctio

nEx

empl

ary

Impl

emen

tatio

nPr

ofici

ent

Clos

e to

Pro

ficie

nt

(Ski

ll is

em

ergi

ng, b

ut n

ot y

et

to p

rofic

ienc

y. C

oach

ing

is

reco

mm

ende

d.)

Far f

rom

Pro

ficie

nt

(Fol

low

-up

prof

essi

onal

dev

elop

men

t an

d co

achi

ng a

re c

ritica

l.)

1Ed

ucat

ors

colle

ct,

char

t, an

d di

sagg

rega

te

stud

ent

lear

ning

da

ta.

• ≥9

0% o

f tea

cher

s adm

inist

er c

omm

on

form

ative

ass

essm

ent a

nd u

se c

omm

on

scor

ing

met

hod

to e

valu

ate

stud

ent

profi

cien

cy.

• ≥9

0% o

f tea

cher

s sha

re c

hart

ed c

lass

dat

a w

ith th

e da

ta te

am p

rior t

o m

eetin

g.•

Resu

lts a

re d

isagg

rega

ted

into

4

profi

cien

cy g

roup

s acc

ordi

ng to

spec

ific

scho

ol n

eeds

(e.g

., sp

ecifi

c su

bgro

ups)

.•

Resu

lts a

re a

vaila

ble

elec

tron

ical

ly to

all

team

mem

bers

and

adm

inist

ratio

n at

all

times

.

• ≥8

0% o

f tea

cher

s adm

inist

er c

omm

on

form

ative

ass

essm

ent a

nd u

se c

omm

on

met

hod

to e

valu

ate

stud

ent p

rofic

ienc

y.

• ≥8

0% o

f tea

cher

s sha

re c

hart

ed c

lass

da

ta w

ith th

e da

ta te

am p

rior t

o m

eetin

g.•

Resu

lts a

re d

isagg

rega

ted

into

4

profi

cien

cy g

roup

s acc

ordi

ng to

spec

ific

scho

ol n

eeds

(e.g

., sp

ecifi

c su

bgro

ups)

.•

Resu

lts a

re a

vaila

ble

to a

ll te

am

mem

bers

at a

ll tim

es.

• ≥7

0% o

f tea

cher

s adm

inist

er

com

mon

form

ative

ass

essm

ent a

nd

use

com

mon

scor

ing

met

hod

to

eval

uate

stud

ent p

rofic

ienc

y.

• ≥7

0% o

f tea

cher

s sha

re c

hart

ed c

lass

da

ta w

ith th

e da

ta te

am p

rior t

o m

eetin

g.•

Resu

lts a

re d

isagg

rega

ted

into

few

er

than

3 p

rofic

ienc

y gr

oups

.•

Resu

lts a

re a

vaila

ble

only

to te

am

mem

bers

pre

sent

for t

he m

eetin

g.

• <7

0% o

f tea

cher

s adm

inist

er

com

mon

form

ative

ass

essm

ent a

nd

use

com

mon

scor

ing

met

hod

to

eval

uate

stud

ent p

rofic

ienc

y.

• <7

0% o

f tea

cher

s sha

re c

hart

ed c

lass

da

ta w

ith th

e da

ta te

am p

rior t

o m

eetin

g.•

Resu

lts a

re n

ot d

isagg

rega

ted.

• Re

sults

are

ava

ilabl

e on

ly to

team

da

ta re

cord

er.

2Ed

ucat

ors

anal

yze

resu

lts to

id

entif

y pr

iorit

y le

arni

ng

need

s.

• Te

am li

sts s

tren

gths

, misc

once

ption

s, a

nd

infe

renc

es fo

r 4 p

rofic

ienc

y gr

oups

.•

Stre

ngth

s and

misc

once

ption

s are

di

rect

ly re

late

d to

the

com

mon

form

ative

as

sess

men

t and

all

esse

ntial

stan

dard

s.•

Lear

ning

nee

ds a

re p

rioriti

zed.

• Pr

ioriti

zed

need

s are

cat

egor

ized

acco

rdin

g to

a h

iera

rchy

of p

rere

quisi

te

skill

s.

• Te

am li

sts s

tren

gths

, misc

once

ption

s,

and

infe

renc

es fo

r 4 p

rofic

ienc

y gr

oups

.•

Stre

ngth

s and

misc

once

ption

s are

di

rect

ly re

late

d to

the

com

mon

fo

rmati

ve a

sses

smen

t and

a ta

rget

ed

stan

dard

.•

Lear

ning

nee

ds a

re p

rioriti

zed.

• Pr

ioriti

zed

need

s are

cat

egor

ized.

• Te

am li

sts s

tren

gths

, misc

once

ption

s,

and

infe

renc

es fo

r 3 p

rofic

ienc

y gr

oups

.•

Stre

ngth

s and

misc

once

ption

s are

di

rect

ly re

late

d to

the

com

mon

fo

rmati

ve a

sses

smen

t and

targ

eted

st

anda

rd(s

).•

Lear

ning

nee

ds a

re p

rioriti

zed.

• Pr

ioriti

zed

need

s are

not

cate

goriz

ed.

• Te

am li

sts s

tren

gths

, m

iscon

cepti

ons,

and

infe

renc

es b

ut

does

not

list

by

profi

cien

cy g

roup

s.•

Any

stre

ngth

s and

misc

once

ption

s lis

ted

are

not d

irect

ly re

late

d to

the

com

mon

form

ative

ass

essm

ent a

nd

targ

eted

stan

dard

(s).

• Le

arni

ng n

eeds

are

not

prio

ritize

d.•

Prio

ritize

d ne

eds a

re n

ot

cate

goriz

ed.

3Ed

ucat

ors

esta

blish

SM

ART

goal

s bas

ed

on d

ata-

iden

tified

st

uden

t le

arni

ng

need

s.

Team

mee

ts th

e 5

crite

ria o

f SM

ART

goal

s an

d 7/

8 ad

ditio

nal g

oal c

riter

ia.

Team

mee

ts th

e 5

crite

ria o

f SM

ART

goal

s an

d 4/

8 ad

ditio

nal g

oal c

riter

ia.

Team

mee

ts th

e 5

crite

ria o

f SM

ART

goal

s and

few

er th

an 4

of t

he

addi

tiona

l goa

l crit

eria

.

Team

mee

ts fe

wer

than

5 c

riter

ia o

f SM

ART

goal

s.

SMAR

T Go

al C

riter

ia:

1. A

re sp

ecifi

c to

targ

eted

subj

ect a

rea,

gra

de le

vel,

and

stud

ent p

opul

ation

2.

Are

mea

sura

ble

and

how

mea

sure

men

t will

occ

ur is

spec

ified

3. A

re a

ttain

able

dem

onst

ratio

n of

per

cent

age

gain

s or i

ncre

ases

in te

rms o

f exp

ecte

d ch

ange

4. A

re re

sults

orie

nted

, and

mus

t be

som

ethi

ng le

arne

rs c

an d

o an

d th

at is

rele

vant

5. A

re ti

me-

boun

d w

ith a

set ti

mef

ram

e es

tabl

ished

Addi

tiona

l Goa

l Crit

eria

: •

are

base

d on

cor

rect

ly c

alcu

late

d da

ta p

erce

ntag

es

• re

flect

> 8

0% o

f stu

dent

s in

the

cate

gorie

s of p

rofic

ient

, clo

se, a

nd fa

r fro

m p

rofic

ient

are

pro

ficie

nt b

y po

st-a

sses

smen

t•

are

iden

tified

sepa

rate

ly fo

r stu

dent

gro

wth

in th

e in

terv

entio

n ca

tego

ry, o

n a

case

-by-

case

bas

is•

are

deriv

ed fr

om sp

ecifi

c te

am in

fere

nces

• in

clud

e ba

selin

e (p

re-a

sses

smen

t) m

id-a

sses

smen

t and

out

com

e (p

ost-a

sses

smen

t) fo

r all

esse

ntial

stan

dard

s•

indi

cate

clo

sure

of a

chie

vem

ent g

aps f

or ta

rget

ed st

uden

t gro

ups

• ar

e fe

w a

nd p

rioriti

zed

• in

clud

e sc

hedu

led

time

set f

or fo

rmal

ana

lysis

of r

esul

ts


4Ed

ucat

ors

use

data

to

sele

ct a

co

mm

on

inst

ructi

onal

pr

actic

e/st

rate

gy to

im

plem

ent

with

fide

lity.

• Se

lect

ed in

stru

ction

al p

racti

ces a

re D

ESE

appr

oved

.•

Sele

cted

inst

ructi

onal

pra

ctice

s/st

rate

gies

: �

targ

et p

rioriti

zed

need

s and

are

ev

iden

ce-b

ased

�ha

ve a

n eff

ect s

ize >

.60

impa

ct o

n st

uden

t gro

wth

�ar

e lin

ked

to p

rioriti

zed

need

s for

eac

h pr

ofici

ency

gro

up �

incl

ude

lear

ning

env

ironm

ent,

time,

fr

eque

ncy,

and

dura

tion

to b

e us

ed

• Se

lect

ed in

stru

ction

al p

racti

ces a

re

DESE

app

rove

d.•

Sele

cted

inst

ructi

onal

pra

ctice

s/st

rate

gies

: �

targ

et p

rioriti

zed

need

s and

are

ev

iden

ce-b

ased

�

have

an

effec

t size

of >

.40

impa

ct o

n st

uden

t gro

wth

�ar

e lin

ked

to p

rioriti

zed

need

s for

ea

ch p

rofic

ienc

y gr

oup

Sele

cted

inst

ructi

onal

pra

ctice

s/st

rate

gies

: •

targ

et p

rioriti

zed

need

s.

• ar

e de

scrib

ed in

det

ail t

o al

low

for

repl

icati

on.

• ar

e lin

ked

to p

rioriti

zed

need

s for

ea

ch p

rofic

ienc

y gr

oup.

Sele

cted

inst

ructi

onal

pra

ctice

s/st

rate

gies

targ

et p

rioriti

zed

need

s.

5Ed

ucat

ors

expl

ain

resu

lts

indi

cato

rs

for p

roce

ss

(cau

se) a

nd

prod

uct

(effe

ct).

• W

eekl

y or

mor

e fr

eque

ntly

, tea

m

disc

usse

s exp

ecte

d ca

use

data

(tea

cher

be

havi

or) r

elat

ed to

exp

ecte

d st

uden

t re

sults

(effe

ct d

ata)

for e

ach

profi

cien

cy

grou

p, w

ith d

etai

l for

repl

icati

on.

• W

eekl

y or

mor

e fr

eque

ntly

, disc

repa

ncie

s in

stud

ent r

esul

ts a

re e

xam

ined

in re

latio

n to

diff

eren

ce in

impl

emen

tatio

n da

ta.

• M

onth

ly, b

ased

on

data

, im

prov

ed

impl

emen

tatio

n pr

oces

ses a

re

reco

mm

ende

d or

alte

rnati

ve in

stru

ction

al

prac

tice

and/

or st

rate

gy is

cho

sen.

• At

leas

t eve

ry tw

o w

eeks

, tea

m

disc

usse

s exp

ecte

d ca

use

data

(tea

cher

be

havi

or) r

elat

ed to

exp

ecte

d st

uden

t re

sults

(effe

ct d

ata)

for e

ach

profi

cien

cy

grou

p, w

ith d

etai

l for

repl

icati

on.

• At

leas

t eve

ry tw

o w

eeks

, di

scre

panc

ies i

n st

uden

t res

ults

are

ex

amin

ed in

rela

tion

to d

iffer

ence

in

impl

emen

tatio

n da

ta.

• Q

uart

erly

, bas

ed o

n da

ta, i

mpr

oved

im

plem

enta

tion

proc

esse

s are

re

com

men

ded

or a

ltern

ative

in

stru

ction

al p

racti

ce a

nd/o

r str

ateg

y is

chos

en.

• At

leas

t qua

rter

ly, t

eam

disc

usse

s ex

pect

ed c

ause

dat

a (te

ache

r be

havi

or) r

elat

ed to

exp

ecte

d st

uden

t res

ults

(effe

ct d

ata)

for e

ach

profi

cien

cy g

roup

, with

det

ail f

or

repl

icati

on.

• At

leas

t qua

rter

ly, d

iscre

panc

ies

in st

uden

t res

ults

are

exa

min

ed

in re

latio

n to

diff

eren

ce in

im

plem

enta

tion

data

.•

Sem

i-ann

ually

, bas

ed o

n da

ta,

impr

oved

impl

emen

tatio

n pr

oces

ses

are

reco

mm

ende

d or

alte

rnati

ve

inst

ructi

onal

pra

ctice

and

/or s

trat

egy

is ch

osen

.

Team

disc

ussio

n ab

out e

xpec

ted

caus

e da

ta (t

each

er b

ehav

ior)

and

stud

ent

resu

lts (e

ffect

dat

a) o

ccur

s but

doe

s no

t inc

lude

a c

ause

/effe

ct d

iscus

sion,

or

use

s inc

ompl

ete

data

.

6Ed

ucat

ors

desig

n an

d pr

actic

e on

goin

g m

onito

ring

of re

sults

(m

onito

r, re

flect

, ad

just

, re

peat

).

• W

eekl

y or

mor

e fr

eque

ntly

, tea

ms u

se

data

to se

lf-re

flect

and

self-

asse

ss fo

r im

plem

enta

tion

fidel

ity a

nd re

cord

di

scus

sion.

• Aft

er 2

ass

essm

ents

(pre

-, m

id, p

ost-)

fo

r the

tim

efra

me

have

bee

n co

mpl

eted

, vi

sual

repr

esen

tatio

n of

gro

wth

is

disp

laye

d.•

Visu

al re

pres

enta

tion

of re

sults

is k

ept

elec

tron

ical

ly.

• Ti

mes

are

sche

dule

d fo

r for

mal

ana

lysis

of

resu

lts.

• Eff

ect s

ize(s

) is/

are

calc

ulat

ed a

nd

reco

rded

.

• Ev

ery

two

wee

ks, t

eam

s use

dat

a to

self-

refle

ct a

nd se

lf-as

sess

for

impl

emen

tatio

n fid

elity

and

reco

rd

disc

ussio

n.•

After

2 a

sses

smen

ts (p

re-,

mid

, po

st-)

for t

he ti

mef

ram

e ha

ve b

een

com

plet

ed, v

isual

repr

esen

tatio

n of

gr

owth

is d

ispla

yed.

• Vi

sual

repr

esen

tatio

n of

resu

lts is

kep

t el

ectr

onic

ally.

•

Tim

es a

re sc

hedu

led

for f

orm

al a

naly

sis

of re

sults

.

• Q

uart

erly

, tea

ms u

se d

ata

to

self-

refle

ct a

nd se

lf-as

sess

for

impl

emen

tatio

n fid

elity

and

reco

rd

disc

ussio

n.•

After

2 a

sses

smen

ts (p

re-,

mid

, po

st-)

for t

he ti

mef

ram

e ha

ve b

een

com

plet

ed, v

isual

repr

esen

tatio

n of

gr

owth

is d

ispla

yed.

• Vi

sual

repr

esen

tatio

n of

resu

lts is

ke

pt e

lect

roni

cally

. •

Tim

es a

re sc

hedu

led

for f

orm

al

anal

ysis

of re

sults

.

• Tw

o tim

es p

er y

ear,

team

s use

da

ta to

self-

refle

ct a

nd se

lf-as

sess

fo

r im

plem

enta

tion

fidel

ity b

ut

disc

ussio

n is

not r

ecor

ded.

• Aft

er 2

ass

essm

ents

(pre

-, m

id,

post

-) fo

r the

tim

efra

me

have

bee

n co

mpl

eted

, visu

al re

pres

enta

tion

of

grow

th is

disp

laye

d.


Com

mon

For

mati

ve A

sses

smen

t (CF

A)Pr

actic

e Pr

ofile

Esse

ntial

Fun

ction

Exem

plar

y Im

plem

enta

tion

Profi

cien

t

Clos

e to

Pro

ficie

nt

(Ski

ll is

em

ergi

ng,

but n

ot y

et to

pr

ofici

ency

. Coa

chin

g is

reco

mm

ende

d.)

Far f

rom

Pro

ficie

nt

(Fol

low

-up

prof

essi

onal

de

velo

pmen

t an

d co

achi

ng a

re

criti

cal.)

1Ed

ucat

ors d

evel

op

clea

r and

mea

ning

ful

lear

ning

targ

ets t

o gu

ide

inst

ructi

on a

nd

stud

ent l

earn

ing.

Mee

t 5/6

crit

eria

:•

Lear

ning

targ

et is

cle

arly

con

nect

ed to

an

ess

entia

l lea

rnin

g in

the

dom

ain.

•

Lear

ning

targ

et d

evel

ops d

eep

unde

rsta

ndin

g of

und

erly

ing

conc

epts

an

d/or

acq

uisiti

on o

f ski

lls.

• Le

arni

ng ta

rget

cle

arly

eng

ages

hig

her

orde

r thi

nkin

g pr

oces

ses.

•

Lear

ning

targ

et is

cle

arly

man

agea

ble

and

can

be a

ccom

plish

ed in

the

cour

se

of a

less

on o

r uni

t (m

ay b

e se

vera

l pe

riods

). •

Lear

ning

targ

et is

cle

arly

exp

lain

ed to

st

uden

ts.

• Co

nnec

tions

bet

wee

n cu

rren

t lea

rnin

g ta

rget

and

prio

r lea

rnin

g ar

e cl

early

m

ade.

4/6

crite

ria a

re m

et in

clud

ing:

• Le

arni

ng ta

rget

is c

lear

ly c

onne

cted

to

an e

ssen

tial l

earn

ing

in th

e do

mai

n.

3/6

crite

ria a

re m

et

incl

udin

g:•

Lear

ning

targ

et is

cl

early

con

nect

ed to

an

ess

entia

l lea

rnin

g in

the

dom

ain.

Few

er th

an 3

of t

he

crite

ria a

re m

et.

2Ed

ucat

ors e

stab

lish

clea

r and

mea

sura

ble

stud

ent s

ucce

ss c

riter

ia

in a

rubr

ic, s

corin

g gu

ide,

or c

heck

list.

Mee

t 4/5

crit

eria

.•

Succ

ess c

riter

ia a

re c

lear

ly a

nd

effec

tivel

y al

igne

d to

lear

ning

targ

ets.

•

Succ

ess c

riter

ia c

lear

ly a

nd e

ffecti

vely

re

late

to w

hat s

tude

nts w

ill sa

y, do

, m

ake

or w

rite

to sh

ow e

vide

nce

of

lear

ning

. •

Succ

ess c

riter

ia c

lear

ly a

nd e

ffecti

vely

re

flect

way

s for

stud

ents

to in

dica

te

thei

r cur

rent

stat

us re

lativ

e to

the

lear

ning

targ

ets.

•

Succ

ess c

riter

ia a

re c

omm

unic

ated

in

lang

uage

stud

ent c

an fu

lly u

nder

stan

d.

• Su

cces

s crit

eria

are

freq

uent

ly re

ferr

ed

to d

urin

g th

e le

arni

ng p

roce

ss.

3/5

crite

ria a

re m

et in

clud

ing:

• Su

cces

s crit

eria

are

cle

arly

and

eff

ectiv

ely

alig

ned

to le

arni

ng ta

rget

s.

• Su

cces

s crit

eria

cle

arly

and

effe

ctive

ly

rela

te to

wha

t stu

dent

s will

say,

do,

mak

e or

writ

e to

show

evi

denc

e of

le

arni

ng.

The

follo

win

g cr

iteria

ar

e m

et:

• Su

cces

s crit

eria

ar

e cl

early

and

eff

ectiv

ely

alig

ned

to

lear

ning

targ

ets.

•

Succ

ess c

riter

ia

clea

rly a

nd

effec

tivel

y re

late

to

wha

t stu

dent

s w

ill sa

y, do

, mak

e or

writ

e to

show

ev

iden

ce o

f lea

rnin

g.

Few

er th

an 2

of t

he

crite

ria a

re m

et.


3Ed

ucat

ors c

onst

ruct

an

d/or

use

qua

lity

asse

ssm

ent i

nstr

umen

ts

whi

ch a

re o

f sou

nd

desig

n an

d m

easu

re th

e le

arni

ng ta

rget

s.

Mee

t 4/5

crit

eria

:Fo

rmati

ve a

sses

smen

ts:

• ar

e us

ed to

col

lect

dat

a on

stud

ent

lear

ning

dur

ing

the

lear

ning

pro

cess

.•

are

fully

alig

ned

with

the

lear

ning

ta

rget

and

succ

ess c

riter

ia.

• ar

e cl

early

app

ropr

iate

for t

he p

urpo

se

of g

ener

ating

dat

a in

rela

tion

to th

e su

cces

s crit

eria

. •

are

cons

isten

tly a

nd st

rate

gica

lly

plac

ed d

urin

g th

e co

urse

of t

he

lear

ning

pro

cess

.•

pro

vide

opp

ortu

nitie

s for

stud

ents

to

clea

rly sh

ow w

here

they

are

in re

latio

n to

mas

tery

of t

he le

arni

ng ta

rget

.

3/5

crite

ria a

re m

et in

clud

ing:

• Fo

rmati

ve a

sses

smen

ts a

re u

sed

to c

olle

ct d

ata

on st

uden

t lea

rnin

g du

ring

the

lear

ning

pro

cess

.

2/5

crite

ria a

re m

et

incl

udin

g:•

Form

ative

as

sess

men

ts a

re

used

to c

olle

ct d

ata

on st

uden

t lea

rnin

g du

ring

the

lear

ning

pr

oces

s.

Few

er th

an 2

of t

he

crite

ria a

re m

et.

4Ed

ucat

ors u

se

asse

ssm

ent d

ata

to im

prov

e st

uden

t le

arni

ng.

Mee

t 3 o

f the

follo

win

g cr

iteria

.•

The

teac

hers

’ dec

ision

s abo

ut n

ext

step

s are

com

plet

ely

base

d on

ev

iden

ce.

• Th

e te

ache

r tak

es c

lear

ly a

ppro

pria

te

actio

n ba

sed

on e

vide

nce

(e.g

., to

co

ntinu

e as

pla

nned

, sca

ffold

, giv

e st

uden

t fee

dbac

k, sh

ift fo

cus)

. •

The

teac

her f

eedb

ack

to st

uden

ts

is cl

early

alig

ned

with

the

lear

ning

ta

rget

and

succ

ess c

riter

ia.

2/3

of th

e cr

iteria

are

met

incl

udin

g:•

The

teac

hers

’ dec

ision

s abo

ut n

ext

step

s are

com

plet

ely

base

d on

ev

iden

ce.

The

follo

win

g cr

iteria

ar

e m

et:

• Th

e te

ache

rs’

deci

sions

abo

ut n

ext

step

s are

com

plet

ely

base

d on

evi

denc

e.

No

crite

ria a

re m

et.


Deve

lopi

ng A

sses

smen

t Cap

able

Lea

rner

sPr

actic

e Pr

ofile

Esse

ntial

Fun

ction

Exem

plar

y Im

plem

enta

tion

Profi

cien

t

Clos

e to

Pro

ficie

nt

(Ski

ll is

em

ergi

ng, b

ut n

ot y

et

to p

rofic

ienc

y. C

oach

ing

is

reco

mm

ende

d.)

Far f

rom

Pro

ficie

nt

(Fol

low

-up

prof

essi

onal

de

velo

pmen

t and

co

achi

ng a

re c

ritica

l.)1

Educ

ator

s te

ach

stud

ents

to

det

erm

ine,

“W

here

am

I Go

ing?

”

Whe

n te

achi

ng st

uden

ts to

dev

elop

lear

ning

go

als,

5/5

crit

eria

occ

ur:

Educ

ator

:•

writ

es d

aily

targ

ets u

sing

stud

ent-f

riend

ly

lang

uage

, usin

g “I

can

___

_,”

or “

I kno

w

____

” st

atem

ents

• cr

eate

s dai

ly o

ppor

tuni

ties f

or st

uden

ts to

us

e or

inte

ract

with

lear

ning

targ

ets

• de

velo

ps ru

bric

or s

corin

g gu

ide

for

appr

opria

te a

ssig

nmen

ts a

nd p

rovi

des

mul

tiple

opp

ortu

nitie

s for

stud

ents

to

use/

inte

ract

with

the

rubr

ic/s

corin

g gu

ide

durin

g th

e le

arni

ng•

anal

yzes

sam

ple

wor

k w

ith th

e st

uden

ts

usin

g st

rong

and

wea

k ex

ampl

es a

nd

aski

ng st

uden

ts to

justi

fy th

eir a

naly

ses (

an

on-g

oing

task

thro

ugho

ut le

arni

ng to

cla

rify

misc

once

ption

s)•

asks

stud

ents

to se

t dai

ly g

oals

in re

latio

n to

the

lear

ning

targ

ets

Whe

n te

achi

ng st

uden

ts to

de

term

ine

lear

ning

goa

ls, 4

/5

crite

ria o

ccur

and

mus

t inc

lude

:Ed

ucat

or:

• w

rites

dai

ly ta

rget

s usin

g st

uden

t-frie

ndly

lang

uage

, usin

g “I

can

___

_,”

or “

I kno

w _

___”

st

atem

ents

• cr

eate

s dai

ly o

ppor

tuni

ties f

or

stud

ents

to u

se o

r int

erac

t with

le

arni

ng ta

rget

s•

asks

stud

ents

to se

t dai

ly g

oals

in re

latio

n to

the

lear

ning

ta

rget

s

Whe

n te

achi

ng st

uden

ts to

de

term

ine

lear

ning

goa

ls,

3/5

crite

ria o

ccur

and

mus

t in

clud

e:Ed

ucat

or:

• w

rites

dai

ly ta

rget

s usin

g st

uden

t-frie

ndly

lang

uage

, us

ing

“I c

an _

___,

” or

“I

know

___

_” st

atem

ents

• cr

eate

s dai

ly o

ppor

tuni

ties

for s

tude

nts t

o us

e or

in

tera

ct w

ith le

arni

ng

targ

ets

Whe

n te

achi

ng st

uden

ts

to d

eter

min

e le

arni

ng

goal

s, fe

wer

than

3/5

cr

iteria

occ

ur.


2Ed

ucat

ors

teac

h st

uden

ts

to d

eter

min

e,

“Whe

re a

m I

Now

?”

Whe

n te

achi

ng st

uden

ts to

self-

eval

uate

le

arni

ng p

rogr

ess,

5/5

crit

eria

occ

ur:

Educ

ator

:•

prov

ides

des

crip

tive

task

feed

back

to a

ll st

uden

ts th

roug

hout

thei

r lea

rnin

g th

at

clea

rly li

nks t

o le

arni

ng g

oal a

nd su

cces

s cr

iteria

• pr

ovid

es fe

edba

ck a

bout

stre

ngth

s and

off

ers i

nfor

mati

on to

gui

de a

ction

able

im

prov

emen

t to

all s

tude

nts m

ultip

le ti

mes

th

roug

hout

the

lear

ning

pro

cess

• pa

ces i

nstr

uctio

n to

allo

w fo

r fre

quen

t, de

scrip

tive

feed

back

to a

ll st

uden

ts a

nd

allo

ws ti

me

for s

tude

nts t

o ac

t on

the

feed

back

rece

ived

• as

ks st

uden

ts to

self-

regu

late

by

asse

ssin

g th

eir o

wn

prog

ress

and

justi

fyin

g th

eir

asse

ssm

ents

mul

tiple

tim

es th

roug

hout

the

lear

ning

pro

cess

• in

stru

cts s

tude

nts t

o se

t per

sona

l goa

ls ba

sed

on fe

edba

ck a

nd se

lf-as

sess

men

t

Whe

n te

achi

ng st

uden

ts to

self-

eval

uate

lear

ning

pro

gres

s, 4

/5

crite

ria o

ccur

.

Whe

n te

achi

ng st

uden

ts

to se

lf-ev

alua

te le

arni

ng

prog

ress

, 3/5

crit

eria

occ

ur.

Whe

n te

achi

ng st

uden

ts

to se

lf-ev

alua

te le

arni

ng

prog

ress

, few

er th

an

3/5

crite

ria o

ccur

.

3Ed

ucat

ors

teac

h st

uden

ts

to d

eter

min

e,

“How

do

I Clo

se

the

Gap?

”

Whe

n te

achi

ng st

uden

ts to

iden

tify

next

st

eps i

n le

arni

ng, 4

/4 c

riter

ia o

ccur

:Ed

ucat

or

• as

sists

eac

h st

uden

t in

dete

rmin

ing

wha

t m

ight

be

som

e of

the

next

inst

ructi

onal

st

eps f

or th

e in

divi

dual

.•

pace

s ins

truc

tion

to a

llow

for t

he fe

edba

ck

loop

and

focu

sed

stud

ent r

evisi

on.

• pr

ovid

es o

ppor

tuni

ties f

or st

uden

ts to

self-

refle

ct a

nd d

ocum

ent t

heir

lear

ning

.•

prov

ides

opp

ortu

nitie

s for

stud

ents

to

shar

e th

eir l

earn

ing.

Whe

n te

achi

ng st

uden

ts to

id

entif

y ne

xt st

eps i

n le

arni

ng, 3

/4

crite

ria o

ccur

.

Whe

n te

achi

ng st

uden

ts to

id

entif

y ne

xt st

eps i

n le

arni

ng,

2/4

crite

ria o

ccur

.

Whe

n te

achi

ng st

uden

ts

to id

entif

y ne

xt st

eps i

n le

arni

ng, f

ewer

than

2

crite

ria o

ccur

.


Met

acog

nitio

nPr

actic

e Pr

ofile

Foun

datio

ns p

rese

nt in

the

impl

emen

tatio

n of

eac

h es

senti

al fu

nctio

n: C

omm

itmen

t to

the

succ

ess o

f all

stud

ents

and

to im

prov

ing

the

qual

ity o

f ins

truc

tion.

Esse

ntial

Fun

ction

Exem

plar

y Im

plem

enta

tion

Profi

cien

t

Clos

e to

Pro

ficie

nt

(Ski

ll is

em

ergi

ng, b

ut n

ot y

et

to p

rofic

ienc

y. C

oach

ing

is

reco

mm

ende

d.)

Far f

rom

Pro

ficie

nt

(Fol

low

-up

prof

essi

onal

de

velo

pmen

t and

co

achi

ng a

re c

ritica

l.)1

Educ

ator

s de

velo

p m

etac

ogni

tion

in

lear

ners

Educ

ator

impl

emen

ts a

ll pr

ofici

ent i

tem

s and

has

in

tegr

ated

met

acog

nitiv

e pr

actic

es w

ith a

sses

smen

t ca

pabl

e le

arne

rs a

nd fe

edba

ck

prac

tices

.

Whe

n pr

esen

ting

stud

ents

with

a ta

sk,

the

educ

ator

mee

ts a

ll th

e fo

llow

ing

crite

ria.

Mod

elin

g pr

actic

es•

Mod

els m

etac

ogni

tive

prac

tices

by

talk

ing

abou

t thi

nkin

g an

d le

arni

ng

in g

ener

al a

nd sp

ecifi

cally

talk

ing

abou

t one

’s ow

n th

inki

ng a

nd

lear

ning

.•

Mod

els m

etac

ogni

tive

prac

tices

be

fore

, dur

ing

and

after

lear

ning

.

Prov

idin

g op

port

uniti

es fo

r stu

dent

s•

Prov

ides

opp

ortu

nity

for s

tude

nts

to th

ink

abou

t the

bes

t way

to

appr

oach

the

task

or a

ccom

plish

the

lear

ning

targ

et a

nd c

onne

ct to

prio

r ex

perie

nces

. •

Prov

ides

opp

ortu

nity

for s

tude

nts

to m

onito

r pro

gres

s in

rela

tion

to

lear

ning

targ

et a

nd su

cces

s crit

eria

. •

Prov

ides

stud

ents

opp

ortu

nity

to

dete

rmin

e if

lear

ning

targ

et w

as

met

and

refle

ct o

n w

hat w

ent w

ell,

wha

t did

not

go

wel

l, an

d w

hat t

o do

diff

eren

tly n

ext ti

me.

Whe

n pr

esen

ting

stud

ents

with

a

task

, the

edu

cato

r add

ress

es e

ither

m

odel

ing

prac

tices

or p

rovi

ding

st

uden

ts o

ppor

tuni

ties t

o pr

actic

e m

etac

ogni

tion,

but

bot

h ar

e no

t oc

curr

ing.

Whe

n pr

esen

ting

stud

ents

with

a ta

sk,

the

educ

ator

add

ress

es

neith

er m

odel

s m

etac

ogni

tive

prac

tices

no

r pro

vide

s stu

dent

s op

port

uniti

es to

pra

ctice

m

etac

ogni

tion.


Beco

min

g an

Inst

ructi

onal

Lea

der i

n Yo

ur B

uild

ing

Prac

tice

Profi

leFo

unda

tions

pre

sent

in th

e im

plem

enta

tion

of e

ach

esse

ntial

func

tion:

Com

mitm

ent t

o th

e su

cces

s of a

ll st

uden

ts a

nd to

impr

ovin

g th

e qu

ality

of i

nstr

uctio

n.

Esse

ntial

Fun

ction

Exem

plar

y Im

plem

enta

tion

Profi

cien

t

Clos

e to

Pro

ficie

nt

(Ski

ll is

em

ergi

ng, b

ut n

ot y

et

to p

rofic

ienc

y. C

oach

ing

is

reco

mm

ende

d.)

Far f

rom

Pro

ficie

nt

(Fol

low

-up

prof

essi

onal

de

velo

pmen

t and

coa

chin

g ar

e cr

itica

l.)1

A co

llabo

rativ

e cu

lture

and

cl

imat

e is

visib

le th

roug

h th

e st

uden

ts,

teac

hers

, and

ad

min

istra

tors

.

The

scho

ol le

ader

ship

pro

vide

s a

supp

ortiv

e en

viro

nmen

t tha

t in

clud

es a

ll of

the

profi

cien

t cr

iteria

, plu

s mee

ts 3

/4 o

f the

fo

llow

ing:

• di

scov

erin

g an

d de

velo

ping

the

capa

city

in st

aff

• cr

eatin

g a

new

par

adig

m/v

ision

fo

r sch

ool c

ultu

re•

prom

oting

incl

usio

n fo

r all

• m

odel

ing

an a

ttitu

de o

f ser

ving

The

scho

ol le

ader

ship

pro

vide

s a

supp

ortiv

e en

viro

nmen

t tha

t in

clud

es 4

/5 c

riter

ia.

• Sa

fe e

nviro

nmen

t for

all

as

evid

ence

d by

feel

ings

of t

rust

, re

spec

t, an

d co

mm

unic

ation

.•

Teac

hers

hel

p ea

ch o

ther

, in

clud

ing

on-g

oing

trai

ning

.•

Teac

hers

supp

ort a

ll st

uden

ts in

ev

ery

clas

sroo

m.

• Th

e sc

hool

is c

ultu

rally

resp

onsiv

e in

a w

ay th

at is

mul

tidim

ensio

nal,

empo

wer

ing

and

tran

sfor

mati

ve.

• A

build

ing

lead

ersh

ip te

am is

es

tabl

ished

and

of h

igh

qual

ity a

s ev

iden

ced

thou

gh m

embe

r rol

es,

team

func

tion

and

norm

s, a

nd

reco

rds o

f mee

tings

.

The

scho

ol le

ader

ship

has

a sc

hool

en

viro

nmen

t tha

t inc

lude

s at l

east

3/

5 pr

ofici

ent c

riter

ia.

The

scho

ol le

ader

ship

ha

s a sc

hool

env

ironm

ent

with

few

er th

an 3

of t

he

profi

cien

t crit

eria

.

2Le

ader

ship

su

ppor

ts

and

ensu

res

that

teac

hing

an

d le

arni

ng

prac

tices

eng

age

all s

tude

nts

in m

eani

ngfu

l le

arni

ng.

Sele

ct a

nd im

plem

ent e

vide

nce-

base

d eff

ectiv

e m

etho

ds th

at:

• ar

e no

t con

tent

rela

ted,

• ar

e tie

d to

teac

her s

tand

ards

,•

are

impl

emen

ted

with

fide

lity,

an

d•

info

rm d

ecisi

ons o

f pro

gres

s th

roug

h re

gula

rly sc

hedu

led

form

ative

ass

essm

ents

sele

cted

by

app

ropr

iate

team

s.

Sele

ct a

nd im

plem

ent e

vide

nce-

base

d eff

ectiv

e m

etho

ds th

at:

• ar

e no

t con

tent

rela

ted,

•

are

tied

to te

ache

r sta

ndar

ds,

• ar

e im

plem

ente

d w

ith fi

delit

y, a

nd

• in

form

dec

ision

s of p

rogr

ess

thro

ugh

asse

ssm

ent m

etho

ds

sele

cted

by

the

inst

ruct

or.

Sele

ct a

nd im

plem

ent e

vide

nce-

base

d eff

ectiv

e m

etho

ds th

at:

• ar

e no

t con

tent

rela

ted,

•

stat

e ar

e im

plem

ente

d w

ith

fidel

ity, a

nd

• in

form

dec

ision

s of p

rogr

ess

thro

ugh

asse

ssm

ent m

etho

ds

sele

cted

by

the

inst

ruct

or.

Sele

ct a

nd im

plem

ent

evid

ence

-bas

ed e

ffecti

ve

met

hods

that

: •

may

or m

ay n

ot b

e co

nten

t rel

ated

, •

are

impl

emen

ted

with

fid

elity

, and

•

info

rm d

ecisi

ons o

f pr

ogre

ss th

roug

h as

sess

men

t met

hods

se

lect

ed b

y th

e in

stru

ctor

.


3Le

ader

s dev

elop

te

ache

r cap

acity

to

use

form

ative

as

sess

men

t th

roug

h su

ppor

tive

data

clim

ates

fa

cilit

ating

the

use

of fo

rmati

ve

data

.

Lead

ers w

ork

with

teac

her t

eam

s to

sele

ct a

nd/o

r cre

ate

rese

arch

-ba

sed

form

ative

ass

essm

ent

met

hods

that

incl

ude:

• cl

early

defi

ned

outc

omes

, •

a pr

oble

m-s

olvi

ng m

odel

, •

stru

ctur

ed a

sses

smen

t crit

eria

, an

d •

sele

cted

and

con

stru

cted

re

spon

ses.

Lead

ers w

ork

with

teac

her’s

on

rese

arch

-bas

ed fo

rmati

ve

asse

ssm

ent m

etho

ds th

at in

clud

e

3/4

crite

ria:

• cl

early

defi

ned

outc

omes

, •

a pr

oble

m-s

olvi

ng m

odel

, •

stru

ctur

ed a

sses

smen

t crit

eria

, an

d •

sele

cted

and

con

stru

cted

re

spon

ses.

Lead

ers d

esig

nate

sele

ct te

ache

rs

to d

evel

op re

sear

ch-b

ased

fo

rmati

ve a

sses

smen

t met

hods

th

at in

clud

e 2/

4 of

the

follo

win

g:•

clea

rly d

efine

d ou

tcom

es,

• a

prob

lem

-sol

ving

mod

el,

• st

ruct

ured

ass

essm

ent c

riter

ia,

and

• se

lect

ed a

nd c

onst

ruct

ed

resp

onse

s.

Lead

ers h

ave

little

un

ders

tand

ing

and

know

ledg

e of

for

mati

ve

asse

ssm

ent m

etho

ds th

at

incl

ude

one

or n

one

of th

e fo

llow

ing:

• cl

early

defi

ned

outc

omes

, •

a pr

oble

m-s

olvi

ng m

odel

, •

stru

ctur

ed a

sses

smen

t cr

iteria

, and

•

sele

cted

and

con

stru

cted

re

spon

ses.

4Le

ader

s ini

tiate

ev

iden

ce-b

ased

de

cisio

ns a

nd

proc

esse

s th

at fo

cus o

n ou

tcom

es.

Lead

ersh

ip te

ams e

stab

lish

syst

ems t

o su

ppor

t fre

quen

t an

d re

gula

rly sc

hedu

led

team

-ba

sed

deci

sion-

mak

ing

that

are

lin

ked

to m

ultip

le le

vels

of d

ata

and

esta

blish

prio

rities

(suc

h as

kn

owle

dge,

tim

e, e

valu

ation

, and

re

sour

ces)

for t

he sc

hool

yea

r.

Lead

ers e

stab

lish

syst

ems t

o su

ppor

t re

gula

r tea

m-b

ased

dec

ision

-mak

ing

that

are

link

ed to

mul

tiple

leve

ls of

dat

a an

d es

tabl

ish 2

or m

ore

prio

rities

(suc

h as

kno

wle

dge,

tim

e,

eval

uatio

n, a

nd re

sour

ces)

for t

he

scho

ol y

ear.

Lead

ers o

vers

ee sy

stem

s of

deci

sion-

mak

ing

that

are

link

ed

to o

ne o

r mor

e le

vels

of d

ata

and

esta

blish

prio

rities

(suc

h as

kn

owle

dge,

tim

e, e

valu

ation

, and

re

sour

ces)

for t

he sc

hool

yea

r.

Ther

e is

no sy

stem

in p

lace

fo

r tea

m-b

ased

dec

ision

-m

akin

g.


Scho

ol-B

ased

Impl

emen

tatio

n Co

achi

ngPr

actic

e Pr

ofile

Fo

unda

tions

pre

sent

in th

e im

plem

enta

tion

of e

ach

esse

ntial

func

tion:

Com

mitm

ent t

o th

e su

cces

s of a

ll st

uden

ts a

nd to

impr

ovin

g th

e qu

ality

of i

nstr

uctio

n.

Esse

ntial

Fun

ction

Exem

plar

y Im

plem

enta

tion

Profi

cien

t

Clos

e to

Pro

ficie

nt

(Ski

ll is

em

ergi

ng, b

ut n

ot y

et

to p

rofic

ienc

y. C

oach

ing

is

reco

mm

ende

d.)

Far f

rom

Pro

ficie

nt

(Fol

low

-up

prof

essi

onal

de

velo

pmen

t and

coa

chin

g ar

e cr

itica

l.)1

Deve

lopi

ng a

nd

mai

ntai

ning

co

achi

ng

rela

tions

hips

.

At th

e be

ginn

ing

of th

e co

achi

ng re

latio

nshi

p, th

e ed

ucat

or-c

oach

: •

desc

ribes

the

coac

hing

pro

cess

and

exp

ecta

tions

for t

he

educ

ator

-coa

ch a

nd c

oach

ed e

duca

tor

• po

ses q

uesti

ons a

nd li

sten

s to

the

coac

hed

educ

ator

des

crib

e cu

rren

t tea

chin

g su

cces

ses a

nd c

halle

nges

•

expl

ains

that

con

fiden

tialit

y w

ill b

e m

aint

aine

d

At th

e be

ginn

ing

of th

e co

achi

ng

rela

tions

hip,

the

educ

ator

-coa

ch

• de

scrib

es th

e co

achi

ng p

roce

ss

and

expe

ctati

ons f

or th

e ed

ucat

or-c

oach

and

coa

ched

ed

ucat

or

• po

ses q

uesti

ons b

ut d

oes n

ot

liste

n to

the

coac

hed

educ

ator

de

scrib

e cu

rren

t tea

chin

g su

cces

ses a

nd c

halle

nges

•

confi

denti

ality

is n

ot a

ddre

ssed

.

Coac

hes d

o no

t tak

e tim

e to

dev

elop

pos

itive

, pr

ofes

siona

l rel

ation

ship

s w

ith th

e bu

ildin

g ed

ucat

ors

as th

ey ta

ke o

n th

e fu

nctio

ns o

f sch

ool b

ased

im

plem

enta

tion

coac

h.

2Fa

cilit

ating

the

impr

ovem

ent

proc

ess.

The

educ

ator

-coa

ch su

ppor

ts th

e co

ache

d-ed

ucat

or to

lear

n an

d im

plem

ent n

ew te

achi

ng/le

arni

ng p

racti

ces b

y:

• ad

dres

sing

coac

hed

educ

ator

feel

ings

of b

eing

ove

rwhe

lmed

w

ith th

e im

plem

enta

tion

proc

ess b

y br

eaki

ng d

own

the

step

s or

met

hods

of i

mpl

emen

tatio

n in

to m

anag

eabl

e un

its•

givi

ng ra

tiona

le fo

r the

impo

rtan

ce o

f im

plem

entin

g th

e te

achi

ng/le

arni

ng p

racti

ce

• att

aini

ng v

erba

l com

mitm

ent f

rom

the

coac

hed

educ

ator

to

enga

ge in

the

coac

hing

rela

tions

hip

and

impr

ove

impl

emen

tatio

n of

teac

hing

/lear

ning

pra

ctice

s

The

educ

ator

coa

ch su

ppor

ts th

e co

ache

d ed

ucat

or a

t a m

oder

ate

to m

inim

al le

vel b

y:•

addr

essin

g co

ache

d ed

ucat

or

feel

ings

of b

eing

ove

rwhe

lmed

w

ith th

e im

plem

enta

tion

proc

ess b

y cr

eatin

g an

aw

aren

ess o

f the

step

s or

met

hods

of i

mpl

emen

tatio

n•

stati

ng th

e im

port

ance

of

impl

emen

ting

the

teac

hing

/le

arni

ng p

racti

ce w

ithou

t pr

ovid

ing

ratio

nale

exp

lain

ing

why

•

assu

min

g th

at th

ere

is a

com

mitm

ent f

rom

the

coac

hed

educ

ator

to e

ngag

e in

the

coac

hing

rela

tions

hip

and

impr

ove

impl

emen

tatio

n of

te

achi

ng/le

arni

ng p

racti

ces

The

educ

ator

-coa

ch

initi

ates

a c

oach

ing

rela

tions

hip

but d

oes n

ot

follo

w-t

hrou

gh.


3Co

mm

unic

ating

in

a ti

mel

y an

d re

spon

sive

man

ner.

The

educ

ator

-coa

ch:

• us

es a

var

iety

of m

etho

ds (e

.g. e

mai

l, ph

one,

in p

erso

n, a

nd

vide

o co

nfer

ence

) for

che

ckin

g in

on

the

stat

us o

f pra

ctice

im

plem

enta

tion

with

the

educ

ator

(s)

• re

ques

ts a

nd is

resp

onsiv

e to

feed

back

from

the

coac

hed

educ

ator

abo

ut th

e co

achi

ng e

xper

ienc

e •

is re

spon

sive

to in

form

ation

nee

ds a

nd q

uesti

ons i

n a

timel

y m

anne

r, ex

plic

itly

and

mut

ually

agr

eed

upon

with

the

coac

hed-

educ

ator

(e.g

. Bot

h pa

rties

dec

ide

that

resp

ondi

ng w

ithin

m

utua

lly d

eter

min

ed n

umbe

r of d

ays i

s mos

t hel

pful

and

fe

asib

le)

The

educ

ator

-coa

ch:

• re

lies o

n on

ly o

ne fo

rm o

f co

mm

unic

ation

for c

heck

ing

in o

n th

e st

atus

of p

racti

ce

impl

emen

tatio

n w

ith th

e ed

ucat

or(s

). •

is in

cons

isten

t and

un

pred

icta

ble

in re

spon

ding

an

d pr

ovid

ing

feed

back

to

coac

hed

educ

ator

s’ in

form

ation

ne

eds a

nd q

uesti

ons

• Pr

ovid

es c

oach

ing

conv

ersa

tions

an

d/or

feed

back

that

are

one

-sid

ed a

nd d

irecti

ve, d

o no

t bui

ld

on th

e st

reng

ths o

f the

coa

ched

ed

ucat

or a

nd a

re n

ot so

lutio

n dr

iven

.

The

educ

ator

-coa

ch

over

look

s the

nee

d fo

r co

nsist

ent a

nd o

ngoi

ng

com

mun

icati

on a

nd/o

r fe

edba

ck w

ith c

oach

ed

educ

ator

s.

4En

gagi

ng in

so

lutio

n-dr

iven

di

alog

ue.

The

educ

ator

-coa

ch:

• fa

cilit

ates

ong

oing

coa

chin

g co

nver

satio

ns th

at b

uild

on

the

stre

ngth

s of t

he c

oach

ed e

duca

tor a

nd is

solu

tion-

driv

en.

• pr

ovid

es fe

edba

ck b

ased

on

dire

ct o

bser

vatio

ns

• po

ses r

eflec

tive

ques

tion

on “

wha

t is w

orki

ng”

and

“w

hat i

s not

w

orki

ng”

• re

view

s dat

a w

ith th

e co

ache

d ed

ucat

or a

nd u

ses d

ata

to d

esig

n ne

xt st

eps a

nd fr

ame

reco

mm

enda

tions

.

The

educ

ator

-coa

ch:

• w

ithou

t reg

ard

for s

tren

gths

, fo

cuse

s too

ofte

n on

the

coac

hed-

educ

ator

’s w

eakn

esse

s or

the

way

s in

whi

ch

impl

emen

tatio

n w

as p

oor o

r in

accu

rate

• pr

ovid

es fe

edba

ck w

ithou

t or

with

min

imal

dire

ct o

bser

vatio

n•

does

not

eng

age

in re

flecti

ve

ques

tioni

ng•

revi

ews d

ata

with

out u

sing

it to

in

form

nex

t ste

ps

The

educ

ator

-coa

ch is

ne

gativ

e an

d/or

doe

s not

ac

tivel

y en

gage

with

the

coac

hed

educ

ator

.

Effective Teaching and Learning for ALL studentsMissouri Model Districts

Missouri Model Districts Framework - Missouri … t s te esut a collaborative culture that empowers...

Documents

Transcript of Missouri Model Districts Framework - Missouri … t s te esut a collaborative culture that empowers...