The Bulletin
Division of School & District Effectiveness
March 2016
"Advancing leadership -- Transforming schools"
Purposes
The SDE Bulletin: to provide regular, timely information to increase the shared understanding of our team of School & District Effectiveness professionals
Our Shared SDE Purpose: to increase collective leadership capacity to understand what effective schools and districts know and do, and to support the leaders to own their improvement processes
Previous Editions of The Bulletin
August 2014- https://www.smore.com/700mx
September 2014- https://www.smore.com/huyyh
October 2014- https://www.smore.com/std20
November 2014- https://www.smore.com/09uva
December 2014/January 2015- https://www.smore.com/09uva
February- https://www.smore.com/hrzfv
March 2015- https://www.smore.com/6wsrq
April 2015- https://www.smore.com/9vbmj
May 2015- https://www.smore.com/gwjuk
June 2015- https://www.smore.com/4suf4
July 2015- https://www.smore.com/kk5zr
August 2015- https://www.smore.com/uek4p
September 2015- https://www.smore.com/puabs
October 2015- https://www.smore.com/thryq
November 2015- https://www.smore.com/72hzp
December 2015/January 2016 - https://www.smore.com/85x7g-the-bulletin
February 2016 - https://www.smore.com/4dygw
This Month
SDE Quarterly Webinar and System for Effective School Instruction
Thanks to everyone who joined in on our first Quarterly Division Update. I hope it was useful. If you missed it, or if you want to hear it again, the recording is in the U drive, Atlanta Support, Professional Learning, Internal PL.
There has been some great analysis done already of the ILCs. Great practice...to collect lessons learned immediately following the event while they are still fresh in minds. Reminder: not only do we want there to be less sit-and-get and more interaction, we also want that information and interaction to be around the leadership of the processes that will get schools and districts proficient in the effective practices you are sharing.
I've had the opportunity recently to connect with about seven or eight states on the work they are doing in school and district improvement. It's really neat to hear that they are encountering similar issues (e.g., you have to work with districts as well as schools if you want changes to stick). By all indications, we are headed in the right direction. We are even having states inquire about the great work being done in Georgia! I am so thankful for this Division and the contributions you are making to children's lives!
See what’s new with the System for Effective Instruction (SESI)! The SESI document has been updated with a cover page and table of contents which hyperlinks to each research-based strategy, making locating resources more convenient. The webpage has been streamlined and aligned to other SDE toolbox pages. Finally, we have a new tiny URL to make sharing the SESI resources easier than ever at: http://tinyurl.com/GaDOESESI
Do you have assessment, curriculum or instructional tools that have proven effective in your schools? The SESI team is requesting sample tools and resource submissions from the field. All submissions should be emailed to sde@doe.k12.ga.us
The SESI Review Team would like to invite all SDE and RESA Specialists to join our team! If you have an interest in improving SESI, please email Cindy Popp (Cpopp@doe.k12.ga.us ) or Dawn Ashmore (Dashmore@doe.k12.ga.us ) and join us at our quarterly reviews. Our next meeting will be held on March 14, 2016.
From Areas/Regions
Phillip Luck, North; Sam Taylor, Metro; Patty Rooks, South
The purpose of ILC is to provide our educational leaders with valuable information and strategies for improving their schools and districts. While the fall Instructional Leadership Conference was provided to our schools across the state, the Area ILCs were designed to offer a day of learning for our district and school leaders specific to meeting the needs identified within each of the areas. Based upon the school and district self-assessments, the feedback provided following Fall ILC and the Region Support Plans, each Area developed a day of professional learning tailored to the differentiated region needs.
Working as a team, each region/area has spent the better part of two months planning and developing a very powerful day of learning aligned to the identified needs of each of the areas. In order to ensure that this was more than a one-day event, planning templates were designed and/or expectations for the development of next steps were set to ensure school and district leaders were engaged participants. This served as a guide in capturing the key ideas/take-aways and developing next-steps for their work at both the school and district levels. Implementation of the next steps at the school and district levels will now be supported by our SDE and RESA specialists.
As we move forward in the development of future ILC’s we will continue to seek to enhance the alignment of the professional learning we provide with identified needs of the schools and districts. In doing so, we will support the school and district leaders in their continuous improvement efforts.
From the Atlanta Support Office
Professional Learning Support
Christy Jones & Andrea Cruz
March SDE PL
Please mark your calendars and plan to attend our SDE PL on March 15th and 16th at the Macon Marriott. Our tentative first day content will include: ESSA Update, What School Leaders Need from Us, A Systems Approach to Continuous Improvement, Balanced Leadership, and Establishing a Culture of Collaboration. On the second day, we will work in SDE Focus groups. This day (the 16th) is intended for GaDOE staff only. We look forward to seeing everyone in March!
Professional Learning Tidbit
In March, we will receive an overview of Balanced Leadership from McREL. We are providing this preview to our program to help prepare us for expectations with this critical work moving forward. Listed below is additional information pertaining to our program. The school level program is based on the largest-ever analysis of research on effective school leaders, our school-level leadership PD guides principals in choosing the right focus for school improvement efforts; effectively leading changes in your school; and transforming your school culture into a purposeful community that believes it can make a difference. We also offer a consortium for school leadership teams across a state, region, or district and Training-of-Trainer sessions for staff developers wishing to become certified providers. The district level program turns research on effective district leadership into guidance that ensures all leaders across a district are focused on the right practices. The Foundation Series connects the research on school- and district-level leadership; the Framework Series examines the components of the Balanced Leadership Framework; and the Future Series puts it all together, challenging leaders to apply the knowledge, tools, and strategies they’ve learned in their own districts.
Source: https://www.mcrel.org/leadership/
Strategy of the Month
Each month we’ll provide a PL strategy that could be used with adults or students. Our goal is to deepen learning and engage the learner.
Title: Stoplight Feedback
Description: Quick formative assessment strategy
Directions: Watch this video for a quick formative assessment strategy from Sarah Brown Wessling. At the end of class, each student writes a comment on a sticky note and places it on the red, yellow, or green light as they exit the classroom.
Green: Today, I LEARNED ... because:
Yellow: Today, I CONSIDERED ... a question, an idea, or a new perspective:
Red: Today, my learning STOPPED because:
The notes help the teacher assess what went well during the course of the lesson and what she needs to do to prepare for the following day.
Can be adapted where participants use the corresponding colored sticky notes and on each note write one reflection or insight:
1. Red: What should I stop?
2. Yellow: What should I start?
3. Green: What should I continue?
Intended Audience: Students or Adults
Source: The Stoplight Method: An End-of-Class Assessment
Principal-to-Principal Webinar Series
Thank you to everyone for encouraging Principals in your schools to attend the Principal-to-Principal Webinar Series. The recording and supporting documents are located on the right-hand side of the SDE Professional Learning webpage. Please share this with any of your schools and districts who might benefit. The schedule of upcoming dates and topics is below. If you know any principals who would be strong presenters for the June webinar, please email Andrea Cruz at acruz@doe.k12.ga.us.
Date and Time
Topic and Related Georgia School Performance Standard
March 9, 2016
10:00 A.M.
Using research-based instructional practices to positively impact student learning (Instruction Standard 4)
April 13, 2016
10:00 A.M.
Monitoring implementation of the school improvement plan (Planning and Organization Standard 3)
May 11, 2016
10:00 A.M.
Evaluating and improving school culture (School Culture Standards 1-5)
June 8, 2016
10:00 A.M.
Summer Planning: How do effective principals use their summers to prepare for the upcoming school year?
Operational Support
Cindy Popp, Region Resources
The IT Updates Webinar on March 4 has been cancelled due to 18th Floor Safety Training.
The IT Updates Webinar on April 1 will be at 9:00 AM.
GaDOE staff, please remember to try a course in the Microsoft IT Academy.
RESA and GaDOE staff, check out the Microsoft tutorials at https://support.office.com/en-us/article/Office-Training-Center-b8f02f81-ec85-4493-a39b-4c48e6bc4bfb.
Gary Wenzel, Operations
Award of Grants: The Title I, Part A, Section 1003(a) grants are awarded for the 2015 – 2016 school year. The expectation is that you use all funds awarded this year during this school year and summer 2016. All funds must be expended no later than September 30, 2016. There is no carryover of the FY16 funds.
All 1003 (a) budgets have been developed by the school principal, the school leadership team, and the School Effectiveness Specialist (GaDOE SES with Priority Schools, RESA SES with Focus Schools), and imported by the district Title I Director into the Consolidated Application for approval, with the school Justification of Expenses signed by the principal and SES attached in the Consolidated Application. All FY16 1003 (a) budgets have been approved, and drawdowns are being made as purchasing orders are filled and goods and services are received by the schools.
In order to ensure compliant and timely spending and drawdown of federal funds, the following milestones have been established:
By March 30, 2016, each LEA expends at least 60% of its awarded Title I, Part A, 1003(a) funds
- By May 30, 2016, each LEA expends at least 80% of its awarded Title I, Part A, 1003(a) funds
- By September 30, 2016, each LEA must have expended 100% of its awarded Title I, Part A, 1003(a) funds
Feedback will be provided to LEAs in terms of percentage of drawdowns at each established milestone related to spending.
Federal Support
Karen Suddeth and Melvina Crawl- SIG/1003(g)
Cohort 3 (July 1, 2013-September 30, 2016)
Bibb County
Matilda Hartley Elementary School
Westside High School
Fulton County
Frank McClarin High School
Gwinnett County
Meadowcreek High School
Quitman County
Quitman County High School
Twiggs County
Twiggs County High School
Wilkinson County
Wilkinson County High School
Cohort 4 (July 1, 2014-September 30, 2017)
Atlanta Public Schools
Frederick Douglass High School
Bibb County
Southwest Magnet High School and Law Academy
Dougherty County
Dougherty County Comprehensive High School
Monroe Comprehensive High School
Muscogee County
Fox Elementary School
Jordan Vocational High School
William H. Spencer High School
FISCAL REMINDERS
Drawdowns:
Please be reminded that the monthly deadline for drawdowns is the 20th of each month and the expectation is that drawdowns be taken monthly. The drawdown is to include all SIG expenditures from the previous month. Both the LEA and the SEA monitoring should reflect the level to which these expectations have been met. It is important to note that the timeliness of drawdowns is a critical factor when considering the recommendation for continued funding. The remaining goals for FY16 are to drawdown at least 50% by March 20th and at least 70% by May 20th.
Expenditure of FY16 Funds
The expiration date for the FY16 funds for Cohort 3 and 4 schools is September 30, 2016. In order to ensure timely expenditure of this year’s funds, it is expected that 50% of the FY16 budget be liquidated by March 20th, and that by May 20th, 70% of the budget has been drawn down. For those SIG schools that fail to meet this deadline, a plan for expenditure for the remainder of the FY16 funds will be required. The plan will be due to Melvina Crawl and Karen Suddeth no later than June 3, 2016.
SIG Program/Budget Amendments
Changes to the SIG budget and/or program require an approved SIG program/budget amendment. Please note, the final date for the submission of amendments for the FY16 budget is August 5, 2016.
WEEKLY DASHBOARD REPORTS
Weekly Dashboard Reports completed by the SES are due to Leads each Friday. These reports, using a green, yellow, or red color code, provide a quick assessment and view of each school’s progress related to assurances, non-negotiables, and SIG indicators. Green indicates expected progress is being made and no comments are needed for these indicators. Yellow indicates a concern or barrier exists within the school or district that if not addressed will lead to red. Finally, red indicates that a barrier exists or the school and/or district is in non-compliance. Yellow and red ratings require statements (brief descriptions) which explain why the school or district is not implementing or is in non-compliance with each indicator noted.
Leads compile the form for their assigned region and send the report to the SIG Program Specialists with a copy to the Area Program Managers and District Effectiveness Specialists. The Area Program Managers will inform the Division Director of all red and yellow concerns from the Weekly Dashboard Report.
Cross-Functional Monitoring
With the exception of Fulton County and Wilkinson County, all Cohort 3 and Cohort 4 SIG districts will receive a Cross-Functional monitoring this year, which will include fiscal monitoring for 1003(g) SIG. The dates for the Cross-Functional Monitoring are as follows:
Bibb County – February 9-10, 2016
Atlanta Public Schools – March 8-9, 2016
Gwinnett County – March 22-24, 2016
Muscogee County (SIG only) – March 29, 2016
Quitman County – March 30, 2016
Twiggs County (SIG only) – April 7, 2016
Dougherty County – April 12-14, 2016
LEA Monitoring of SIG Schools
This year LEAs with SIG Cohort 3 and/or Cohort 4 schools will be responsible for submitting three (3) LEA Monitoring Reports in QCIS/Indistar for each of their SIG schools. The format and content of the monitoring report allows the SIG Coordinator, in collaboration with key leaders at the district level, to assess the level of progress of the LEA/school in implementing the SIG indicators.
The electronic LEA Monitoring Report forms can be accessed from the District Dashboard and are to be completed and submitted within QCIS/Indistar. The second LEA Monitoring Report is due January 30th, and the third LEA Monitoring Report is due April 30th.
In the event that an indicator is either not progressing at an expected rate or not evident, an interim or “follow-up” LEA monitoring of those indicators is required and submitted in QCIS/Indistar utilizing the appropriate LEA “follow-up” Monitoring Report form. As applicable, schools or districts required to complete Interim LEA Monitoring have additional due date of March 31st. If all indicators are either progressing at an expected rate or fully implemented, completion and submission of the “follow-up” Monitoring Report form is not required.
Sustainability Training
Cohort 3 SIG schools and districts worked with Dr. Sheryl Turner (RMC) who delivered the second institute of sustainability training on February 4th and 5th. This training provided an in-depth look at sustainability, the characteristics of districts and schools that have been successful in sustaining programs/reform initiatives, and strategies for sustaining efforts. Cohort 3 participants left the training with practical tools to develop a comprehensive sustainability plan which includes the work of both the district and school. The plans developed by Cohort 3 schools and districts should assist in driving the school improvement efforts beyond the final year of the grant. An announcement regarding an application process for sustainability funding is planned for early March.
Institute I will be provided to Cohort 4 this summer following Year 2 of the implementation of the grant, and Institute II will be provided during the winter of Year 3 of the grant. Participants will be designated LEA and school leaders as well as SDE staff.
The tentative schedule for Cohort 4 is listed below:
Cohort 4 Sustainability Training Schedule (Tentative):
Institute I (1½ days) August 30th & 31st, 2016
Institute II (1½ days) February, 2017
Official communication to the Cohort 4 SIG LEAs/schools regarding Sustainability Training and official dates is forthcoming.
Critical Dates for 1003(g) SIG Schools
March 5th Required Monthly Reports Due (Teacher and Student Attendance, Discipline)
March 15th & 16th SDE PL (Macon Marriott)
March 20th Monthly drawdown due for all SIG expenses; 50% of FY16 Budget expended
March 31st Interim LEA Monitoring (as applicable)
April 5th Required Monthly Reports Due (Teacher and Student Attendance, Discipline)
April 20th Monthly drawdown by LEA’s due for all SIG expenses
April 30th LEA Monitoring Report due
What is a "Professional Learning Community"?
Richard DuFour
The idea of improving schools by developing professional learning communities is currently in vogue. People use this term to describe every imaginable combination of individuals with an interest in education—a grade-level teaching team, a school committee, a high school department, an entire school district, a state department of education, a national professional organization, and so on. In fact, the term has been used so ubiquitously that it is in danger of losing all meaning.
The professional learning community model has now reached a critical juncture, one well known to those who have witnessed the fate of other well-intentioned school reform efforts. In this all-too-familiar cycle, initial enthusiasm gives way to confusion about the fundamental concepts driving the initiative, followed by inevitable implementation problems, the conclusion that the reform has failed to bring about the desired results, abandonment of the reform, and the launch of a new search for the next promising initiative. Another reform movement has come and gone, reinforcing the conventional education wisdom that promises, “This too shall pass.”
The movement to develop professional learning communities can avoid this cycle, but only if educators reflect critically on the concept's merits. What are the “big ideas” that represent the core principles of professional learning communities? How do these principles guide schools' efforts to sustain the professional learning community model until it becomes deeply embedded in the culture of the school?
Big Idea #1: Ensuring That Students Learn
The professional learning community model flows from the assumption that the core mission of formal education is not simply to ensure that students are taught but to ensure that they learn. This simple shift—from a focus on teaching to a focus on learning—has profound implications for schools.
School mission statements that promise “learning for all” have become a cliché. But when a school staff takes that statement literally—when teachers view it as a pledge to ensure the success of each student rather than as politically correct hyperbole—profound changes begin to take place. The school staff finds itself asking, What school characteristics and practices have been most successful in helping all students achieve at high levels? How could we adopt those characteristics and practices in our own school? What commitments would we have to make to one another to create such a school? What indicators could we monitor to assess our progress? When the staff has built shared knowledge and found common ground on these questions, the school has a solid foundation for moving forward with its improvement initiative.
As the school moves forward, every professional in the building must engage with colleagues in the ongoing exploration of three crucial questions that drive the work of those within a professional learning community:
- What do we want each student to learn?
- How will we know when each student has learned it?
- How will we respond when a student experiences difficulty in learning?
The answer to the third question separates learning communities from traditional schools.
Here is a scenario that plays out daily in traditional schools. A teacher teaches a unit to the best of his or her ability, but at the conclusion of the unit some students have not mastered the essential outcomes. On the one hand, the teacher would like to take the time to help those students. On the other hand, the teacher feels compelled to move forward to “cover” the course content. If the teacher uses instructional time to assist students who have not learned, the progress of students who have mastered the content will suffer; if the teacher pushes on with new concepts, the struggling students will fall farther behind.
What typically happens in this situation? Almost invariably, the school leaves the solution to the discretion of individual teachers, who vary widely in the ways they respond. Some teachers conclude that the struggling students should transfer to a less rigorous course or should be considered for special education. Some lower their expectations by adopting less challenging standards for subgroups of students within their classrooms. Some look for ways to assist the students before and after school. Some allow struggling students to fail.
When a school begins to function as a professional learning community, however, teachers become aware of the incongruity between their commitment to ensure learning for all students and their lack of a coordinated strategy to respond when some students do not learn. The staff addresses this discrepancy by designing strategies to ensure that struggling students receive additional time and support, no matter who their teacher is. In addition to being systematic and schoolwide, the professional learning community's response to students who experience difficulty is
- Timely. The school quickly identifies students who need additional time and support.
- Based on intervention rather than remediation. The plan provides students with help as soon as they experience difficulty rather than relying on summer school, retention, and remedial courses.
- Directive. Instead of inviting students to seek additional help, the systematic plan requires students to devote extra time and receive additional assistance until they have mastered the necessary concepts.
The systematic, timely, and directive intervention program operating at Adlai Stevenson High School in Lincolnshire, Illinois, provides an excellent example. Every three weeks, every student receives a progress report. Within the first month of school, new students discover that if they are not doing well in a class, they will receive a wide array of immediate interventions. First, the teacher, counselor, and faculty advisor each talk with the student individually to help resolve the problem. The school also notifies the student's parents about the concern. In addition, the school offers the struggling student a pass from study hall to a school tutoring center to get additional help in the course. An older student mentor, in conjunction with the struggling student's advisor, helps the student with homework during the student's daily advisory period.
Any student who continues to fall short of expectations at the end of six weeks despite these interventions is required, rather than invited, to attend tutoring sessions during the study hall period. Counselors begin to make weekly checks on the struggling student's progress. If tutoring fails to bring about improvement within the next six weeks, the student is assigned to a daily guided study hall with 10 or fewer students. The guided study hall supervisor communicates with classroom teachers to learn exactly what homework each student needs to complete and monitors the completion of that homework. Parents attend a meeting at the school at which the student, parents, counselor, and classroom teacher must sign a contract clarifying what each party will do to help the student meet the standards for the course.
Stevenson High School serves more than 4,000 students. Yet this school has found a way to monitor each student's learning on a timely basis and to ensure that every student who experiences academic difficulty will receive extra time and support for learning.
Like Stevenson, schools that are truly committed to the concept of learning for each student will stop subjecting struggling students to a haphazard education lottery. These schools will guarantee that each student receives whatever additional support he or she needs.
Big Idea #2: A Culture of Collaboration
Educators who are building a professional learning community recognize that they must work together to achieve their collective purpose of learning for all. Therefore, they create structures to promote a collaborative culture.
Despite compelling evidence indicating that working collaboratively represents best practice, teachers in many schools continue to work in isolation. Even in schools that endorse the idea of collaboration, the staff's willingness to collaborate often stops at the classroom door. Some school staffs equate the term “collaboration” with congeniality and focus on building group camaraderie. Other staffs join forces to develop consensus on operational procedures, such as how they will respond to tardiness or supervise recess. Still others organize themselves into committees to oversee different facets of the school's operation, such as discipline, technology, and social climate. Although each of these activities can serve a useful purpose, none represents the kind of professional dialogue that can transform a school into a professional learning community.
The powerful collaboration that characterizes professional learning communities is a systematic process in which teachers work together to analyze and improve their classroom practice. Teachers work in teams, engaging in an ongoing cycle of questions that promote deep team learning. This process, in turn, leads to higher levels of student achievement.
Collaborating for School Improvement
At Boones Mill Elementary School, a K-5 school serving 400 students in rural Franklin County, Virginia, the powerful collaboration of grade-level teams drives the school improvement process. The following scenario describes what Boones Mill staff members refer to as their teaching-learning process.
The school's five 3rd grade teachers study state and national standards, the district curriculum guide, and student achievement data to identify the essential knowledge and skills that all students should learn in an upcoming language arts unit. They also ask the 4th grade teachers what they hope students will have mastered by the time they leave 3rd grade. On the basis of the shared knowledge generated by this joint study, the 3rd grade team agrees on the critical outcomes that they will make sure each student achieves during the unit.
Next, the team turns its attention to developing common formative assessments to monitor each student's mastery of the essential outcomes. Team members discuss the most authentic and valid ways to assess student mastery. They set the standard for each skill or concept that each student must achieve to be deemed proficient. They agree on the criteria by which they will judge the quality of student work, and they practice applying those criteria until they can do so consistently. Finally, they decide when they will administer the assessments.
After each teacher has examined the results of the common formative assessment for his or her students, the team analyzes how all 3rd graders performed. Team members identify strengths and weaknesses in student learning and begin to discuss how they can build on the strengths and address the weaknesses. The entire team gains new insights into what is working and what is not, and members discuss new strategies that they can implement in their classrooms to raise student achievement.
At Boones Mill, collaborative conversations happen routinely throughout the year. Teachers use frequent formative assessments to investigate the questions “Are students learning what they need to learn?” and “Who needs additional time and support to learn?” rather than relying solely on summative assessments that ask “Which students learned what was intended and which students did not?”
Collaborative conversations call on team members to make public what has traditionally been private—goals, strategies, materials, pacing, questions, concerns, and results. These discussions give every teacher someone to turn to and talk to, and they are explicitly structured to improve the classroom practice of teachers—individually and collectively.
For teachers to participate in such a powerful process, the school must ensure that everyone belongs to a team that focuses on student learning. Each team must have time to meet during the workday and throughout the school year. Teams must focus their efforts on crucial questions related to learning and generate products that reflect that focus, such as lists of essential outcomes, different kinds of assessment, analyses of student achievement, and strategies for improving results. Teams must develop norms or protocols to clarify expectations regarding roles, responsibilities, and relationships among team members. Teams must adopt student achievement goals linked with school and district goals.
Removing Barriers to Success
For meaningful collaboration to occur, a number of things must also stop happening. Schools must stop pretending that merely presenting teachers with state standards or district curriculum guides will guarantee that all students have access to a common curriculum. Even school districts that devote tremendous time and energy to designing the intended curriculum often pay little attention to the implemented curriculum (what teachers actually teach) and even less to the attained curriculum (what students learn) (Marzano, 2003). Schools must also give teachers time to analyze and discuss state and district curriculum documents. More important, teacher conversations must quickly move beyond “What are we expected to teach?” to “How will we know when each student has learned?”
In addition, faculties must stop making excuses for failing to collaborate. Few educators publicly assert that working in isolation is the best strategy for improving schools. Instead, they give reasons why it is impossible for them to work together: “We just can't find the time.” “Not everyone on the staff has endorsed the idea.” “We need more training in collaboration.” But the number of schools that have created truly collaborative cultures proves that such barriers are not insurmountable. As Roland Barth (1991) wrote,
Are teachers and administrators willing to accept the fact that they are part of the problem? . . . God didn't create self-contained classrooms, 50-minute periods, and subjects taught in isolation. We did—because we find working alone safer than and preferable to working together. (pp. 126–127)
In the final analysis, building the collaborative culture of a professional learning community is a question of will. A group of staff members who are determined to work together will find a way.
Big Idea #3: A Focus on Results
Professional learning communities judge their effectiveness on the basis of results. Working together to improve student achievement becomes the routine work of everyone in the school. Every teacher team participates in an ongoing process of identifying the current level of student achievement, establishing a goal to improve the current level, working together to achieve that goal, and providing periodic evidence of progress. The focus of team goals shifts. Such goals as “We will adopt the Junior Great Books program” or “We will create three new labs for our science course” give way to “We will increase the percentage of students who meet the state standard in language arts from 83 percent to 90 percent” or “We will reduce the failure rate in our course by 50 percent.”
Schools and teachers typically suffer from the DRIP syndrome—Data Rich/Information Poor. The results-oriented professional learning community not only welcomes data but also turns data into useful and relevant information for staff. Teachers have never suffered from a lack of data. Even a teacher who works in isolation can easily establish the mean, mode, median, standard deviation, and percentage of students who demonstrated proficiency every time he or she administers a test. However, data will become a catalyst for improved teacher practice only if the teacher has a basis of comparison.
When teacher teams develop common formative assessments throughout the school year, each teacher can identify how his or her students performed on each skill compared with other students. Individual teachers can call on their team colleagues to help them reflect on areas of concern. Each teacher has access to the ideas, materials, strategies, and talents of the entire team.
Freeport Intermediate School, located 50 miles south of Houston, Texas, attributes its success to an unrelenting focus on results. Teachers work in collaborative teams for 90 minutes daily to clarify the essential outcomes of their grade levels and courses and to align those outcomes with state standards. They develop consistent instructional calendars and administer the same brief assessment to all students at the same grade level at the conclusion of each instructional unit, roughly once a week.
Each quarter, the teams administer a common cumulative exam. Each spring, the teams develop and administer practice tests for the state exam. Each year, the teams pore over the results of the state test, which are broken down to show every teacher how his or her students performed on every skill and on every test item. The teachers share their results from all of these assessments with their colleagues, and they quickly learn when a teammate has been particularly effective in teaching a certain skill. Team members consciously look for successful practice and attempt to replicate it in their own practice; they also identify areas of the curriculum that need more attention.
Freeport Intermediate has been transformed from one of the lowest-performing schools in the state to a national model for academic achievement. Principal Clara Sale-Davis believes that the crucial first step in that transformation came when the staff began to honestly confront data on student achievement and to work together to improve results rather than make excuses for them.
Of course, this focus on continual improvement and results requires educators to change traditional practices and revise prevalent assumptions. Educators must begin to embrace data as a useful indicator of progress. They must stop disregarding or excusing unfavorable data and honestly confront the sometimes-brutal facts. They must stop using averages to analyze student performance and begin to focus on the success of each student.
Educators who focus on results must also stop limiting improvement goals to factors outside the classroom, such as student discipline and staff morale, and shift their attention to goals that focus on student learning. They must stop assessing their own effectiveness on the basis of how busy they are or how many new initiatives they have launched and begin instead to ask, “Have we made progress on the goals that are most important to us?” Educators must stop working in isolation and hoarding their ideas, materials, and strategies and begin to work together to meet the needs of all students.
Hard Work and Commitment
Even the grandest design eventually translates into hard work. The professional learning community model is a grand design—a powerful new way of working together that profoundly affects the practices of schooling. But initiating and sustaining the concept requires hard work. It requires the school staff to focus on learning rather than teaching, work collaboratively on matters related to learning, and hold itself accountable for the kind of results that fuel continual improvement.
When educators do the hard work necessary to implement these principles, their collective ability to help all students learn will rise. If they fail to demonstrate the discipline to initiate and sustain this work, then their school is unlikely to become more effective, even if those within it claim to be a professional learning community. The rise or fall of the professional learning community concept depends not on the merits of the concept itself, but on the most important element in the improvement of any school—the commitment and persistence of the educators within it.
References
Barth, R. (1991). Restructuring schools: Some questions for teachers and principals. Phi Delta Kappan, 73(2), 123–128.
Marzano, R. (2003). What works in schools: Translating research into action. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Richard DuFour recently retired as Superintendent of Adlai Stevenson High School in Lincolnshire, Illinois. He currently resides in Moneta, Virginia, and may be reached at (540) 721-4662; rdufour@district125.k12.il.us. His forthcoming book is Whatever It Takes: How a Professional Learning Community Responds When Kids Don't Learn (National Educational Service, in press).
Source:
Upcoming Meetings & Events
Principal-to-Principal Webinar Series
Wednesday, Mar 9, 2016, 10:00 AM
undefined
SDE Professional Learning
March 15th - GaDOE and RESA staff
March 16th - GaDOE staff only
Tuesday, Mar 15, 2016, 09:30 AM
Macon Coliseum, Coliseum Drive, Macon, GA, United States
Your GaDOE SDE State Leadership Team
North Area
Area Program Manager- Phillip Luck
Area Program Assessment Specialist- Wendell Christian
Northwest Region:
District Effectiveness Specialist- Terri Gaspierik
Lead School Effectiveness Specialist- Amy Alderman
Northeast Region:
District Effectiveness Specialist- Susan White
Lead School Effectiveness Specialist- Kali Raju
Metro Area
Area Program Manager- Sam Taylor
Area Program Assessment Specialist- Mike O'Neal
Metro West Region:
District Effectiveness Specialist- Diana Forbes
Lead School Effectiveness Specialist- Lyn Wenzel
Metro East Region:
District Effectiveness Specialist- Iris Moran
Lead School Effectiveness Specialist- Paula Herrema
South Area
Area Program Manager- Patty Rooks
Area Program Assessment Specialist- Keith Barnett
Southwest Region:
District Effectiveness Specialist- Deborah McLendon
Lead School Effectiveness Specialist- Steve Olive
Southeast Region:
District Effectiveness Specialist- Darrel May
Lead School Effectiveness Specialist- Paula Cleckler
Atlanta Support Office
Program Manager- Joann Hooper
Director- Will Rumbaugh