Curriculum Leadership Institute

Pathways to School Improvement

E-Hints Related to Instruction

Below is an archive of E-Hints related to classroom instruction and planning. We welcome you to use them to improve pedagogy in your classroom or share them with a colleague who might benefit.

Thank you for making learning fun for kids, even when it means stepping out of your comfort zone!

Teaching Tip - Follow every introduction of new learning with time for students to reflect and discuss. This way they'll have a more permanent stamp in their memory of what you're teaching them.

Proficiency Scales and the CLI Model

by

Many of our school districts have begun work with proficiency scales, a tool introduced by Robert Marzano and Marzano Research to determine levels of student learning. Teachers have seen success in their classrooms when sharing proficiency scales with their students and allowing students to track their progression from level-to-level; therefore, allowing students to take ownership of their learning. One benefit of including proficiency scales in your curriculum, instruction, and assessment work is that both the teacher and student can use them.  Let’s take a closer look at what proficiency scales are, their purposes, and how they work within the CLI Model.

Proficiency scales, typically a four-point scale, include related curricular targets and scores which are intended to clarify a progression of learning. They allow teachers and students to identify student performance. Please review this sample template. The use of proficiency scales is a decision to be made by your Curriculum Coordinating Council (CCC).  Keep in mind, that proficiency scales can be altered to meet the needs of your school or district.

Additionally, a proficiency scale can aid Subject Area Committee (SAC) members in identifying which curricular targets are a priority and must be on a common assessment. Therefore, creating proficiency scales fits perfectly as the first step of assessment work in year three of the CLI Model. This graphic organizer, revised from the Common Assessment Development Cycle graphic from Marzano Research, illustrates the assessment process that we use in our model.

By creating proficiency scales first, SAC members identify priority curricular targets (components) and use this information to better plan their assessments. Jan Hoegh, a consultant for Marzano Research, recommends the following questions as a way to identify what should be included on a proficiency scale.

What is the primary topic of the outcome? Outcomes are summary statements for a unit of instruction. They are meant to encompass all of the components listed as steps to achieving the outcome. Determine the primary topic of the outcome and use that information to develop your level 3.0 score. Sometimes, one of your components may fully communicate the primary topic of the outcome and can, therefore, be copied and pasted into the level 3.0 field of the proficiency scale.

Are there any components that don’t directly relate to the primary target? Some states include standards that are meant to be repeated from grade-to-grade or are more supplemental in nature. Although these standards are important and work well within an outcome, they may not directly relate to the primary target. If this is the case, they may be excluded from the proficiency scale.

Please remember, however, that even if a component is not included on the proficiency scale, it must still be taught and assessed. Everything that is included in your district’s guaranteed and viable curriculum is essential, and students are still expected to learn it. But, components of this nature may be evident in the final product without having specific items that measure them; they tend to be critical understandings or skills that contribute to the end result.

Are there any components that are pre-requisite knowledge or skills? Evaluate the remaining components to determine if they meet this criterion. If so, these may be included in your level 2.0 score.

Similar to other steps of your curriculum, instruction, and assessment work, please think of these questions as guiding questions, and understand they will not always provide the answers that you need to complete your proficiency scales fully. That does not mean that your curriculum was written poorly, but it does mean that you need to think about the end result and include information on the proficiency scale that will prove beneficial to teachers and students. Remember, the purpose of a proficiency scale is to clarify the learning progression for teachers and students and further allow them to identify where a student lies on that progression.

High Expectations Communicate Respect

by

Photo source: Megan Soule / Unsplash

As a new school year begins, educators need to set and communicate expectations to the students in their classrooms. When identifying expectations, teachers often struggle deciding whether expectations are too high, too low, realistic, and uniformly applied. Popular research continues to indicate that setting high expectations leads to better results than setting moderate or low expectations, because students feel respected as participants in the classroom community.

While the classroom teacher is responsible for communicating and enforcing the rules, some expectations can be determined collaboratively among teachers of the building. Examples of collaboratively set expectations may include: descriptions of student success at achieving the prescribed curriculum, student behavior in common areas within the school or playground areas, lunchroom behaviors, or limits to absences or tardiness. However, there are also classroom expectations that must be set and applied within the classroom that are not dependent upon how the other classrooms operate. High expectations for demonstrating responsibility, courtesy, cooperation, clear communication, and honesty represent each classroom individually and demonstrates respect for each student as an individual within the classroom community.

In a 2010 edition from FORBES Media, Sangeeth Varghese, a business consultant for the corporate world, identified several characteristic actions that increase the success of expectations. These characteristics are found to push individual employees to build confidence and strive for excellence.  Those same characteristic actions apply to classrooms and could be used to demonstrate the relationship between learning in the classroom and success in the “real world.” Varghese’s recommendations include:

• Declare very high expectations.

“Sometimes seemingly impossible goals are the most likely to be met. Ordinary expectations can be self-defeating because people realize such goals won’t be hard to accomplish, so they don’t try very hard. Thus you should set goals that will at first provoke the response that they can never be attained. Be clear that you are expecting something truly out of the ordinary. As you declare and continually reinforce what you’re hoping for, those from whom you’re desiring it will start working toward it with such a focused effort that the ball should quickly start rolling toward the goal.”

• Communicate your expectations clearly.

“Make sure that there is no ambiguity about what is expected. Describe what you’re aiming for fully and in a positive way. There should be no confusion in anyone’s mind about what you’re demanding. If your goals and priorities are clearly articulated those who will execute them will be able to focus all their effort on attaining them.”

• Make sure those expectations fit their recipients.

“A leader should make sure that he declares the right expectations to the right people. He should consider his audience’s backgrounds, abilities and circumstances before setting expectations. There is no point in setting a goal that’s far removed from what someone has any experience and expertise in. Only establish expectations that have a real, strong chance of succeeding–even if they do sound impossible at first.”

• Communicate your expectations at every level.

“A leader must reinforce his expectations consistently, in both personal and public settings, formally and informally, inside and outside the organization. Every moment you spend with a person should confirm your trust that he will grow to the level you expect. At the same time, you should also make sure your high expectations for that person are reinforced by being conveyed to others inside and outside his immediate milieu.”

• Reconfirm your expectations constantly.

“Do not be discouraged when someone doesn’t immediately grow to fit your expectations. Rather, continue to encourage by being clear that those expectations persist.”

While following the guidelines for establishing expectations in the classroom, we have found that teachers struggle with the temptation to lower expectations for some students out of compassion or simple inconsistency. Students with identified learning needs must have academic expectations that are realistic with their need, but expectations for behavior and participation should be uniformly applied in order to extend to students the challenge and respect that is necessary to grow as successful citizens. When expectations are arbitrarily applied, students to whom the expectations are not applied feel that they are not worthy of the challenge/disrespected and students to whom the expectations are applied may feel that they are being unfairly challenged.

Teachers must guard against the risk of “selling students short” by lowering expectations for “some” students to avoid being perceived as unfair or not respecting all students’ ability to learn and work together.

At the Curriculum Leadership Institute, we believe all students deserve the respect of high expectations!

Initial CLI District Response to 6 Key Elements of the Every Student Succeeds Act

by

download_pdf_smAnalysis of relevant elements of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) suggests topics of discussion for the CLI district’s curriculum coordinating council.  Although those who prepared ESSA say the act places most responsibility for establishing provisions to ensure school accountability on states, many stipulations included at the federal level do not allow much leeway for creativity or alternative interpretations.  It is therefore suggested that curriculum coordinating councils place the selected relevant topics found in the table below on discussion agendas, with the expectation that whatever the state ultimately decides will need to fall within the stipulated parameters is incorporated into the district’s response.  Familiarity with the entire ESSA document, which speaks to state level options and opportunities, is also advisable.

RELEVANT ESSA STIPULATION INTERPRETATION IN THE CONTEXT OF THE CLI MODEL SUGGESTED CLI DISTRICT RESPONSE
Each state’s plan must provide an assurance that the state has adopted challenging academic content standards and aligned academic achievement standards (challenging state academic standards) that include not less than three levels of achievement. This was written with the knowledge that some states will use national standards such as the Common Core State Standards or Next Generation Science Standards, and others will either write new standards or retain those used during the NCLB era. The ESSA stipulation neither requires nor eliminates the use of state tests in specific subject areas, but obviously suggests the development of local assessments that can classify and record student achievement according to proficiency levels. A CLI district that has completed all elements of its K-12 curriculum should find it easy to align with any new state standards, since the wording and formatting are already in place. CCC directives to SACs when modified state standards are prepared are to cross-check for wording, especially in terms of measurable verbs and academic content. New or additional high achievement unit outcomes may need to be written. Also, SACs may need to examine the summative assessments and formative assessment categories in instructional planning resource (IPR) documents to ensure the inclusion of point totals or rubrics that meet the “three levels of achievement” indicated in the ESSA stipulation.
Each state is required to adopt ELP (English language proficiency) standards aligned to the state’s reading or language arts content standards. Standards must be aligned to ensure students who meet the standards are on track for postsecondary education or employment. At this point we cannot be certain how a given state will “align” ELP to its reading or language arts content standards. However, there will doubtless be some kind of proficiency indicator with regard to speaking, reading and writing the English language that includes vocabulary tests measuring how well students understand commonly applied technical terms, or phrases associated with other forms of higher education. Once a clearly articulated English Language Arts curriculum is established, English language learner specialists can help to identify the additional language needs of English language learners. Those learner outcomes or accommodations would be added to the English curriculum. A CLI district also often develops and uses a vocabulary/spelling proficiency list for each of the grade levels and subject areas, especially at the elementary school level. Teachers are required to include those words in their instructional programs. Building principals would also play a role in working with teachers in improving instructional programs.
Assessments must measure multiple measures of student achievement, including higher order thinking skills and student growth. States are permitted to meet these requirements by administering a single summative assessment or multiple assessments during a school year. Each method must result in a single summative score. Portfolios, extended performance tasks and computer-adaptive assessments are permitted testing practices. Your state may have already decided on the kind of assessments it will use, or will just continue to use what it already has. The problem is that many older tests do not test for high order thinking or student growth. Mass testing requires mass scoring, which should include the creation of very sophisticated assessment items as well as extensive training for those who evaluate them. This is especially true for portfolios and extended performance tasks. CLI districts are already acquainted with high achievement unit outcomes that require multi-faceted student responses. They are often used in the summative assessment category of instructional planning resource documents. In fact, the assessments written by CLI districts might serve as examples of how state assessments could be created to measure higher order thinking skills.
Accountability is measured through academic achievement measured by proficiency on annual assessments, which may include student growth for high schools. Allowed in elementary and middle grades is a measure of student growth or other valid and reliable indicator that allows for differentiation in student performance. Progress (in all grades) must be achieved in English language proficiency. At least one indicator of school quality or student success must be deemed valid, reliable, comparable and allow for meaningful differentiation. Clearly, a one size fits all state assessment of the kind used predominately in the NCLB era would be difficult to use to measure student growth in terms of “differentiation in student performance.” Mixed with the assessment of English language proficiency, it is even more difficult. An indicator of school quality in the context of validity and reliability, and a measure of comparability and differentiation, is difficult to define. Let us assume that state officials will need to depend on model district and school programs to define and apply the stipulation found here. As with the above response, student growth in the academics and English language can be measured using CLI processes, primarily because they are built on specific and carefully worded intentions for student learning (outcomes/components). CLI’s IPR and teacher use of it will certainly facilitate validity (meeting intended purposes) and reliability (meeting such purposes consistently). Again, the existence of a well-crafted and written curriculum provides a much better chance that comparisons among proficiency scores can be made and differentiations noted in the quality of student learning.
For each school identified as low-performing, districts must develop a comprehensive support and improvement plan that includes evidence-based interventions. The plan should be developed after a needs assessment and the identification of resource inequities in each low performing school. The assumption in this stipulation is that a district would use an intervention only when a school is low-performing. The more efficacious method would be to have a continuously applied plan to maintain quality among ALL schools, making modifications when evidence indicates implementation problems in those schools which are not meeting expectations. The CLI Model is already established as an ongoing plan to continuously improve ALL schools in a district, and the data generated by the implementation of that plan makes any deficiencies clear. The academic governance structure of the CCC/SAC system, working in concert with the administrative team and board of education, can quickly make necessary adjustments in low performing schools.
States must establish and implement, with consultation with school districts, standardized statewide entrance and exit procedures for English learners. Educator professional development and preparation activities must be established to improve teaching skills in meeting the diverse needs of English learners. Districts in each state must obviously work in concert with the state in making this kind of system work. States might be advised to study progressive districts who have designed ELL entrance and exit programs that serve the described needs of English learners. Professional development at the district and building levels should incorporate training in working with English learners along with all other students. The CLI Model is both a program development and maintenance construct, as well as an ongoing and integrated form of teacher training. Again, in the CLI Model the curriculum is actually developed and implemented by teachers, as led by the CCC, SACs, and administrative teams. Such constant improvement efforts and monitoring are ongoing and effective.

The above areas of interest are primarily focused on matters pertaining to a district’s curriculum, instruction, and assessment.  They are very relevant to the work of the district’s curriculum coordinating council and subject area committees.  While the excitement around ESSA focuses on the return of powers to state and local boards, it is still important for district officials to become familiar with all the ESSA regulations with regard to requirements of states, including funding distributions, data collection of student progress, and other matters that will impact the allocation of federal funds for school improvement activities.

Curriculum is a Roadmap

by

download_pdf_sm

“Curriculum” is discussed on a daily basis in conversations within schools among administrators, teachers, support staff, and outside stakeholders.  Strangely enough, it is a term that carries fundamental misconceptions that make those conversations difficult.  Unless everyone involved in the conversation has the same definition for curriculum, what is said and what is heard are often very different.

Perhaps the most common misconception about curriculum is that a textbook or series is the curriculum. Textbooks or any other instructional materials are actually resources. Resources are used to teach curriculum, but are not the curriculum itself. Many textbook series have a curriculum embedded into the resource; however, it is critical that a district determine its curricula locally before resources are adopted. This is to ensure that adopted resources properly support the learning that the district feels is essential – not the hidden curriculum that the publisher values.

Another misconception about curriculum has to do with the federal government’s requirement that each state determine a set of standard

skills and content that must be taught at each grade level for each content area.  Although these sets of skills and content are clearly called state standards, many educators are under the false assumption that they are curriculum. It is clearly stated in most standards documents – including the Common Core State Standards for Math and English Language Arts – that they are not curriculum and that districts need to determine their curricula locally to assure that students meet the identified standards for content and skills.

True, local curriculum must fully employ state standards, but the district may value additional skills and content. Furthermore, standards documents may not be organized into a teachable sequence, but rather they are typically categorized according to similar attributes (strands or domains) such as reading skills, number sense, or presentational skills that would not necessarily be taught in isolation of the other strands or domains within the subject area standards. Note the following graphic representation of curriculum as a roadmap and note the role that resources and standards play in the student’s learning journey. 
curriculum-roadmap-diagram

In this illustration, the journey begins with a teacher and her students. This teacher is tasked with leading her students to their final destination (the end of the “road”) which includes their ability to demonstrate skills and knowledge of the state standards and the district-defined values. This could be a daunting task, particularly if the “road” is not broken down into teachable chunks or units. The breakdown of the journey, the roadmap, is the curriculum.

Relationship between Curriculum, Resources, Standards, and Differentiation

Curriculum should be organized to include curriculum targets that can be accurately assessed after a unit is completed. The desired “outcomes” for each of these teachable units are depicted as blue flags along the road in the illustration. Essentially, these outcomes are significant checkpoints of student learning along the way.

To ensure that students can be successful at the unit outcome level, learning must be broken down further into smaller steps that will be formatively assessed on a regular basis (daily or every few days, at least). These narrow curriculum targets are depicted as footprints along the road. Each unit outcome (flag) includes its own set of footprints.

So where do resources, best practices, and differentiation fit in to this analogy? Resources are what you pack in your suitcase. They are the supplemental materials that make the trip fun, engaging, and successful. There is rarely one resource that will align perfectly to your curriculum, which is why we use the suitcase to represent resources; it is filled with many great tools and materials – some are essential, others are nice to have along.

Incorporating best practices (e.g., 21st century skills, math practices, ELA text complexity, and ISTE standards) into instruction is like the sun that sheds light on the trip. Best practices help to produce a well-balanced experience for students.

Lastly, differentiation activities (i.e., remediation and enrichment) are the rest areas along the way. It is essential to pause to ensure all students are on board and ready to progress, using formative assessments as indicators of who might need remediation or intervention activities.  It is equally important to provide engaging, relevant activities for those students who are already with you and are able to keep up pace.

There are so many elements that go into effective teaching; but, the foundation of everything is to determine what students need to know and be able to do – the curriculum ­­– and how it will fit into the time that you’re given. If you haven’t already made your roadmap, make it a priority to identify curriculum targets. You’ll feel more confident for having a plan and the chances of students arriving at the destination are greatly improved!

Communicating with Parents: Mediums and Methods for Success

by

download_pdf_smcommunicationWe live in a fast-paced world where society as a whole communicates and receives feedback within seconds.  This has become the expected norm in social settings and the business world and has also affected how educators connect with the parents of our nation’s most important product — children.  Here are some keys to communicate efficiently and effectively in this ever-changing world.

Mediums

Sending a letter home or waiting until parent-teacher conferences before contacting home allows too much time to pass.  Immediate communication, when possible, can help correct academic and social behaviors by identifying obstacles to learning in a timely manner.  While nothing can replace a face-to-face conversation, there are some options to bridge the gap until that can happen.

Email and texting.  These approaches can be used as a quick reminder about tests and field trips, a class update, or to schedule that face-to face appointment.  Keep in mind that you are an educator.  While it may be convenient to use slang, lowercase letters, or trendy abbreviations within texts or emails, it may not leave a favorable impression on the parents of the child you are teaching.

Social media.  Creating a private group for parents to follow is a common way to communicate with a large group and keep everyone informed.  It is a fun way to share positive events through quick posts and photos.  Always make sure to have parent permission when including images or work of students. Once again, it is still important to use a formal writing style when posting updates.

Webpages.  Many school districts offer links to teacher pages.  Parents can review calendars, classroom activities, assignments, and schedules.  Teachers can add links to helpful websites, textbook logins, and educational articles.  They can also provide email, phone, and office hours so parents know when and how teachers can be reached. The key for using this medium is to update it frequently so the information is current and not outdated.

Electronic management programs.  School districts often use a single electronic organizational system to house both student information and grades. Parents have access to the program and can typically do any of the following:  provide personal individual student details, update records, contact the school, check student grades and attendance, and upload money to a lunch program.

Video conferencing.  While the above options aren’t a face-to-face conversation, they do allow an electronic dialogue to take place.  Facetime, Skype, and Zoom are just a few applications available for video conferencing where parents and teachers can see each other and converse even though participants are not in the same room.  They are fairly simple to operate and the download time is negligible.  Video conferencing can also allow screen sharing to take place so teachers can display documents for parents to review.  When a parent cannot attend an onsite conference, this alternative is a close second.

Phone or Tablet Applications.  Parents who are interested in immediate, frequent communication are downloading teacher-selected applications to their phones, tablets, and iPads. These applications are private and convenient for busy lifestyles.  A few suggestions for this type of application include:

Google Apps for Education. These are the most commonly used applications that allow communication through shared documents, drives, and calendars.

Bloomz. When scheduling parent-teacher conferences, providing class updates, sharing photos, and soliciting parent volunteers, this application is very helpful.

Appletree.  Formally known as BuzzMob, this application has similar capabilities as the previously mentioned apps. One unique feature is multi-language translation capability.

Remind. This free app will help teachers communicate effectively via text with parents and students. Send messages to a whole group or individuals.

Smiling_Teacher_jpgMethods

The education of students cannot be reduced to emotionless technology.  The combination of people, feelings, and uncontrolled variables requires teachers to make decisions and communicate in a timely fashion.  Even when the communication needs to take place quickly, teachers should still be personable in order for any type of conversation to be received well.  Remember the basic tenets of good communication whether communication is real time or via electronic medium.

Establish rapport.  Common ground is an essential concept for effectively working together.  Include something positive to start the conversation, address the concern in question, and then close with another positive point. This helps both parties identify things students are doing well and where the student needs to focus his or her efforts.

Goal setting.  Whenever possible, offer some short-term goals to support desired student behaviors.  If the behavior needs long-term corrective action, providing some suggestions that deliver faster gains encourages continued efforts to reach the big picture.

Listen first. Talk later.  People are more willing to take suggestions if they feel they have been heard.   Effectively communicating with parents is critical to the success of the child.  No one needs to win.  Struggling over who is correct or at fault wastes valuable time.  Although parents should be made aware of student behaviors, take the time to listen to their explanations and ideas first.  It may help you fit pieces of a puzzle together!

The key for effective parent communication is to realize that communication mediums and methods should be identified and addressed on an individual student basis.  Some parents are tech savvy, while others may not even have an email address.  It takes time to discover what works best.  The earlier in the school year options are outlined, the greater the chance for success for all!

Book Briefing: The Other Side of the Report Card

by

download_pdf_smIn honor of School Library Month, this E-Hint is inspired by a new book: The Other Side of the Report Card: Assessing Students’ Social, Emotional, and Character Development by Maurice Elias, Joseph Ferrito and Dominic Moceri (2016).  As curriculum developers, we know that academic learning should be thoughtfully planned, and that instruction and assessment should be carefully aligned to standards.  However, we may occasionally ask ourselves, “What about the other aspects of development, for example, self-management and social awareness? Shouldn’t we be planning for personal growth too?”  These other areas of growth are a primary concern for the “whole child” education movement, which attempts to include a child’s physiological needs, safety needs, and belonging needs.

One of the most prominent education news stories recently was teacher Kyle Schwartz’s rise to “viral fame” simply because she asked her students, “What do you wish your teacher knew about you?” and Tweeted their responses. Many of Kyle’s students revealed that relational, emotional, and physical challenges were creating learning hurdles in their lives that they needed to overcome, and they appeared to be relieved to share these challenges.  Through empathy and the sharing process, a social bridge was built between her and her students. We might go so far as to conjecture that Kyle’s empathy earned her social capital within her class, which could lead to an increase in motivation and learning.

The Other Side of the Report Card provides evidence (Chapter 8: Literature Review and Resources) that distinctively human characteristics such as communication and listening skills, empathy, and evaluating possible outcomes, may be taught, however the primary focus for the authors is the documentation of such learning. Perhaps given growing awareness of bullying and student suicide, districts might want to consider building a Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) and Character Education (CE) curriculum.  This book is an excellent examination of how that process might be initiated and student growth assessed.

The authors begin with definitions of SEL and Character Education, referring often to the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL) which has defined key competencies and outcomes. A number of Likert rating systems and rubrics are provided demonstrating how skills may be quantified and evaluated. Case studies are provided as OSORC-smallexamples. (One is the Open Circle SEL Curriculum where students rate themselves using a three-point scale on skills such as cooperating with and encouraging others.) School Leadership Teams (SLTs), similar to the Subject Area Committees (SACs) within the CLI Model, are encouraged for the tasks of: specifying behaviors, creating a model for reporting skill development, report card design, and implementation. A key takeaway for implementation is that, “a deductive approach is needed in order to focus on the specific behaviors to be rated.”

In the meantime, even if a formal Social and Emotional Learning and Character Education curriculum has not been implemented, instructors could still apply a meaningful self-assessment of the quality of their own interactions within their classrooms.  Simple questions might include these: “Am I demonstrating empathy to my students? How well am I building bridges and social capital in the classroom? Am I demonstrating character qualities that I’d like to see in my students?” Finding specific answers and examples to answer these questions may lead to personal growth and improved learning for everyone.

For more detailed information, see Austin Independent School District’s SEL curriculum based on the CASEL Core Social and Emotional Competencies and CASEL’s free online guides for Effective Social and Emotional Learning Programs.