Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

2009 04-11 presentation for ron on instruction - draft 8

313

Published on

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
313
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Foundation Support Aligned With the CPS Focus on Instruction The Chicago Community Trust Education Program April 11, 2009
  • 2. History of funding in Chicago Decentralization 1988 to 1995 Supports primarily for decentralization reform, including PD for local school councils Accountability 1995 to 2001 Supports primarily for professional development aligned with the Annenberg Project (external to the district) Instructional Improvement 2001 to 2009 Supports primarily to intermediary agencies to support school development (after school programming, professional development workshops for teachers) Trust begins to align its supports to the priorities of the district 1
  • 3. Trust Supports Trust funding in Education and to CPS 2008 to present $12,714,000 $17,551,715 CPS 2007 $7,661,370 $9,420,950 2001 to 2006 $44,655,358 0 CPS total to date: $65,030,728 Other $55,655,828 10,000,000 20,000,000 30,000,000 40,000,000 50,000,000 60,000,000 2
  • 4. Trust Supports Strategic priorities approved for 2008 - 2013 Core priorities 1. 2. 3. Develop high performing elementary schools in all neighborhoods by strengthening instruction in the core curricular areas; literacy, math/science, arts, language development and social studies Strengthen and develop instructional leadership Sustain and strengthen instructional innovation networks Expansion priorities 4. 5. Support improvements in teaching and learning beyond Chicago public elementary schools Support improvements in teaching and learning beyond Chicago Public Schools 3
  • 5. Trust Supports Building a world class education system Curricular Frameworks Teacher Capacity Subject by subject definitions of what to teach, how to teach it and how to measure it Deep knowledge about subject Skill in teaching the subject Examples: Chicago Reading Initiative, Chicago Math and Science Initiative, Social Science Framework for Learning, Arts Education Guide, and Bilingual Education and World Language Plan Examples: Graduate coursework for teachers across all subject matters, development of teacher teams and protocols for team work, and coaches in the disciplines Support Structures Principals knowledgeable about instruction Teacher leaders in the disciplines Strong teacher collaboration at and across grade levels around teaching and learning Quality assessments used to drive instruction Examples: Training of teacher leaders, development of principals in subject areas, and training in use of assessments 4
  • 6. Trust Supports Current CPS projects funded by the Trust Curricular area Project Literacy Chicago Literacy Initiative Partnership (CLIP): Rochelle Lee Middle Grades Literacy (Boundless Readers) 2008-09 2009-10 $1,750,600 $1,500,000 240,000 250,000 National-Louis University reading endorsements cohort (NLU) 84,000 Transitional Adolescent Literacy Project (McDougal Family Foundation) 50,000 Language Through Science Program (Leap Learning Systems) Math/Science Cluster 4 Middle Grades Project 200,000 1,650,000 Early Education Science Project (E2SP) (Field Museum) 1,600,000 600,000 DePaul/Area 6 Math/Science Partnership (DePaul) Arts none 345,000 Arts Education Framework Development 225,000 Arts Education Collaborative of Chicago Funders (The Chicago Community Foundation) Language Development Bilingual Education and World Language Social Science Social Science Framework Development Multi-disciplinary 100,000 460,000 25,000 150,000 Value-Added Project 200,000 none Multi-disciplinary Projects 350,000 High School Teacher Content Teams Capacity Building 575,000 $6,154,600 $4,200,000 5
  • 7. Impact Increasing number of CPS elementary teachers with content endorsements 5000 4500 4000 3500 3000 2007-08 2006-07 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Reading Language Arts Math Science In the Cluster 4 Middle Grades Project, 150 teachers have enrolled in over 358 middle grades math/science and algebra university courses Source: Chicago Public Schools, Office of Research, Evaluation and Accountability 6
  • 8. External Supports Multiple organizations partner with CPS to build teachers’ knowledge             Chicago State University (CSU) Physics and Chemistry Van Program DePaul University Illinois Institute of Technology Loyola University National-Louis University Northeastern Illinois University Northwestern University’s BioQ Collaborative Roosevelt University Saint Xavier University University of Chicago University of Illinois at Chicago (both) University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (evaluation)           Adler Planetarium and Astronomy Museum Brookfield Zoo Chicago Children’s Museum Lincoln Park Zoo Museum of Contemporary Art Museum of Science and Industry Oriental Institute Peggy Notebaert Nature Museum/Chicago Academy of Sciences Shedd Aquarium The Field Museum BOLD = Current Partners in Cluster 4 Middle Grades Project and Literacy partnership 7
  • 9. External Supports Multiple funders support CPS in strengthening teachers’ knowledge in core curriculum areas Current  Arts                    Arts      Bilingual Education and World Language Literacy    The Brinson Foundation Osa Foundation Math/science       Albert Pick, Jr. Fund CME Trust Terra Foundation for American Art The Boeing Company The Brinson Foundation CME Trust COMED Osa Foundation Social Science     The Brinson Foundation Circle of Service Foundation McDougal Family Foundation Terra Foundation for American Art McDougal Family Foundation The Chicago Community Trust Math/science    The Chicago Community Trust Literacy    Peter Ascoli The Boeing Company Colonel Stanley R. McNeil Foundation Kassie Davis The Field Foundation of Illinois JP Morgan Chase Foundation Lloyd A. Fry Foundation Louis R. Lurie Foundation McDougal Family Foundation Dr. Bernard and Sarah Mirkin The Elizabeth Morse Charitable Foundation Polk Bros. Foundation The Chicago Community Trust The Prince Charitable Trust The Siragusa Foundation Woods Fund of Chicago Bilingual Education and World Language  Potential Additions McDougal Family Foundation The Chicago Community Trust Social Science    CME Trust JP Morgan Chase Foundation The Chicago Community Trust 8
  • 10. Teaching, Learning, Leading April 11, 2009
  • 11. Agenda Chicago Education Reform History Principles Of Instruction and Instructional Leadership At Scale Teaching And Learning In Practice: Lessons From CPS Leading In Practice: Lessons From CPS Immediate Recommendations for 2009-10 10
  • 12. Recall Our Early February Conversations An Introduction To Teaching, Learning, and Leading Student outcome data for CPS shows slow but steady progress on most key indicators Instructional excellence strategy focuses on providing tools and supports to teachers and schools to drive improvements. Connecting curriculum design, implementation and leadership remains a challenge. 11
  • 13. Review: The Phases Of Chicago School Reform Decentralization Accountability Instructional Improvement 1988-95 1995-01 2001-09 Governance Local School Councils Mayoral Control (Vallas) Mayoral Control (Duncan) School to District Relationship Near total autonomy from central office Take back local control; prescribe minimum standards (i.e., probation, social promotion) Continued focus on accountability; Mandates are accompanied by set of supports; accountability extends beyond minimum standards (scorecards, improvement weighted over absolute performance, formative assessments); charters and new schools Implied Theory of Action Central office is the problem; local control will empower and bring about improvement Schools must meet minimum standards; those who don’t will be subject to consequences and those who do will be left alone Improvement is a shared responsibility (the school is the unit of change… central and area offices support the schools); clear expectations and transparency must be accompanied by support structures 12
  • 14. 3-8 Reading By Quartile: Phases of Chicago School Reform 50 low first quartile 40 30 second quartile 20 third quartile 10 fourth quartile high decentralization accountability 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 0 1990 Percent Of Students 60 instructional improvement Percent of schools with 50% or more of students at or above 50th percentile 1990 1995 2001 2005* 2008** 8% 12% 21% or 24% 31% 72% *Different norms (ITBS88 to ITBS01) **Different test (from ISAT to SAT 10) 13
  • 15. History Lessons By themselves, decentralization and autonomy do not lead to improved results. Given autonomy, very few schools excelled and few made substantive improvements in student learning By itself, accountability (tests, incentives) can produce a boost in performance; but the boost flattens over time (This boost in performance occurs primarily for low performing students.) The only route to sustained improvement is to improve the core technology of the profession: teaching Improving teaching by recruiting and evaluating is necessary but not sufficient 14
  • 16. Trust Supports Building a world class education system Curricular Frameworks Teacher Capacity Subject by subject definitions of what to teach, how to teach it and how to measure it Deep knowledge about subject Skill in teaching the subject Examples: Chicago Reading Initiative, Chicago Math and Science Initiative, Social Science Framework for Learning, Arts Education Guide, and Bilingual Education and World Language Plan Examples: Graduate coursework for teachers across all subject matters, development of teacher teams and protocols for team work, and coaches in the disciplines Support Structures Principals knowledgeable about instruction Teacher leaders in the disciplines Strong teacher collaboration at and across grade levels around teaching and learning Quality assessments used to drive instruction Examples: Training of teacher leaders, development of principals in subject areas, and training in use of assessments 15
  • 17. Agenda Chicago Education Reform History Principles Of Instruction and Instructional Leadership At Scale Teaching And Learning In Practice: Lessons From CPS Leading In Practice: Lessons From CPS Immediate Recommendations for 2009-10 16
  • 18. The Instructional Core Principle #1: Increases in student learning occur only as a consequence of improvements in the level of content, teachers’ knowledge and skill, and student engagement. CONTENT Principle #2: If you change one element of the instructional core, you have to change the other two. Principle #3: If you can’t see it in the core, it’s not there. Principle #4: Task predicts performance. Principle #5: The real accountability system is in the tasks that students are asked to do. TEACHER STUDENT Principle #6: We learn to do the work by doing the work. Principle #7: Description before analysis, analysis before prediction, prediction before evaluation. 17
  • 19. Improvement Processes [C] [A] P/Q [B] T SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT 18
  • 20. School improvement is a human investment activity. Asking people to do things they don’t know how to do. . . Both individually and collectively Investments in knowledge and skill drive improvement Accountability provides the stimulus for individual and collective learning As schools improve, the nature of the work changes. . . From autonomous practice in isolated classrooms to team work across classrooms Different levels of pressure and support at different stages of development 19
  • 21. Proposed Next Steps (1 of 3) 1. Position instruction as central work of CPS; define five other strategic priorities (performance management, portfolio management, human capital, safety and security, central office) by their relationship to instructional improvement. 2. Ongoing advice and support from Harvard and CCT to CPS on re-organization of infrastructure for supporting teaching and learning. 3. Continue to participate in national education-related reform instructional leadership networks (e.g. Harvard’s PELP, Aspen’s UMLN and ULLN). 20
  • 22. Agenda Chicago Education Reform History Principles Of Instruction and Instructional Leadership At Scale Teaching And Learning In Practice: Lessons From CPS Leading In Practice: Lessons From CPS Immediate Recommendations for 2009-10 21
  • 23. Elementary Mathematics Curriculum Implementation Chicago Math & Science Initiative • Extensive support materials provided to implementing teacher classrooms (student books, manipulatives, calculators, pacing guides, etc.). Effectiveness 400 Significant gains associated with core instructional materials use 313 300 269 288 177 200 100 269 60 0 ISAT Scale Score • Adoption of core instructional materials (Everyday Mathematics and Math Trailblazers at K-5; Connected Mathematics and MathThematics at 6-8). Reach Schools Implementation +6.0 +6.2 +4.0 +4.0 +2.0 0 Years Central office support from the Office of Mathematics and Science (IDA). In FY09, overall spend was $7M with 45 FTE. Local schools contributed materials costs and PD stipends. Everyday Mathematics 1 Year 2 Years Math Trailblazers 3 Years Significant ISAT performance increases with PD attendance. • Some opt-in, some mandated adoptions; based on funding year and funding source. Budget FY09 +6.7 +4.9 None ISAT Scale Score • Quarterly benchmark assessment aligned to instructional materials (pilot began in 2004-05, with ETC starting in 2006-7). +7.2 +8.0 +0.0 • Workshop professional development on implementation (54 hours/teacher, split between summer and academic year), led by materials authors at local universities. • In-school coaching aligned to materials. +9.0 +9.1 +10.0 +3.5 +4.0 +1.8 +2.0 +0.4 +1.5 +0.1 +0.2 +0.0 -+0.2 -2.0 -2.0 -4.0 -3.3 3rd Grade Low 5th Grade Moderate 8th Grade High Lessons Learned I. II. III. IV. V. Instructional program coherence matters. Fidelity of implementation matters and can be managed. Subject matter differences are considerable and need to be considered when executing at the district, school, and classroom level. We can take external supports and move them to the central office; next big challenge is to move supports to schools. Leadership development needs to be connected very closely with teacher development and curriculum implementation. Source: CMSI analysis, REA analysis, U of C CEMSE analysis; PRARIE group evaluation, NSF report 22
  • 24. High School Algebra In The Middle Grades 8th Grade Algebra Reach • University partnership to develop CPS-specific teacher credentialing exam and coursework. More Students Are Taking 8th Grade Algebra, More Students Passing Schools Offering 8th Grade Algebra Schools • High-stakes end-of-course exam. • Centrally managed curriculum supports and tools, based on HS IDS model. • Tools to help schools identify students for middle grades algebra. • Major policy revisions to enable course registration, transcripts, course placement and course credits at HS. Effectiveness 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 150 Year 29% 2055 36% 3235 The number of CPS teachers with the “CPS algebra credential” is increasing. 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 Expansion coupled with “scale up” funds from FY08 and FY09. • Extensive, ongoing program evaluation. 1114 2008-09 49 Pass Rate 2007-08 81 Exams Taken 2006-07 139 300 245 250 Teachers Implementation 200 161 150 100 79 43 50 0 2004 Budget FY09 $1.4M from Office of Mathematics and Science (IDA) and HS Teaching + Learning. Local schools pay for materials. Managed centrally by 2 FTE; support via contract to IDS vendors. 103 2005 2006 2007 2008 Participation in 8th grade algebra is associated with statistically significant achievement gains on 9th grade EXPLORE, even when controlling for demographics, prior achievement, and teacher characteristics. (REA analysis) Lessons Learned I. Instructional program coherence matters. VI. High expectations plus adult supports leads to student achievement VII. Universities have an important role to play, particularly in developing teacher content knowledge. VIII.We can develop high-stakes assessments that measure what we intend them to, but it takes time and money. Source: CMSI analysis, REA analysis 23
  • 25. HS Instructional Development Systems (IDS) One of 6 “High School Transformation” levers Implementation Reach • Product of year-long research and design effort, led by Boston Consulting Group. • Three “course support” elements: (1) aligned series of courses, (2) instructional materials, (3) quarterly assessments. • Three “teacher support” elements: (4) coaching, (5) workshop PD, (6) teacher leadership development. • Led by external vendors identified through competitive bid. (Including 4 local universities.) IDS Implementation By Grade And Year 50 Schools • One of six components of overall “High School Transformation” strategy. Effectiveness 13 25 0 13 0 13 11 2006-07 2007-08 13 11 11 19 19 2008-09 2009-10 0 Grade 9 Grade 9 & 10 Grade 9 & 10 & 11 • Wave 1 (2006-07 start) and Wave 2 (2007-08 start) opt-in. • Wave 3 (2008-09 start) forced-in. • No expansion (except CEdO turnarounds) planned for 2009-10. • Differences between schools trump differences between individual IDSs. (BCG Year 1 analysis) • Student performance as measured by EXPLORE to PLAN gains is flat. (HST+L analysis) • Quality of instruction in IDS schools the same as in Ren10 schools. (CCSR) • Considerably more reluctance in Wave 3 schools. (CCSR) Budget – FY10 Proposed $36.1M ($6.8M from schools, $3M from Gates) for waves 2 and 3. $3M for wave 1 support in year 4. $0M for grade 12 support. 11.2 FTE central office Lessons Learned II. V. IX. X. Fidelity of implementation matters and can be managed. Leadership development needs to be connected very closely with teacher development and curriculum implementation. High schools are complex institutions that are difficult to change. School-level buy-in is difficult and important; dysfunctional schools do not respond rationally to external pressures. Source: SRI evaluation; CCSR evaluation; BCG analysis; HST+L internal analysis 24
  • 26. Lessons Learned and Proposed Next Steps (2 of 3) Recap: Lessons Learned Proposed Next Steps I. Instructional program coherence matters. 4. Avoid the “black box.” II. Fidelity of implementation matters and can be managed. III. Subject matter differences are considerable and need to be considered when executing at the district, school, and classroom level. IV. We can take external supports and move them to the central office; next big challenge is to move supports to schools. V. Leadership development needs to be connected very closely with teacher development and curriculum implementation. VI. High expectations plus adult supports leads to student achievement VII. Universities have an important role to play, particularly in developing teacher content knowledge. VIII. We can develop high-stakes assessments that measure what we intend them to, but it takes time and money. IX. High schools are complex institutions that are difficult to change. X. School-level buy-in is difficult and important; dysfunctional schools do not respond rationally to external pressures. 5. For lower tier schools, consider expansion of core curriculum implementation. (Leadership will be essential.) 6. Focus school level performance management on connecting assessment and instructional materials implementation. 7. Accelerate curriculum definition, design, and implementation work in science, arts, bilingual education and world language, social science, and CTE. 25
  • 27. Agenda Chicago Education Reform History Principles Of Instruction and Instructional Leadership At Scale Teaching And Learning In Practice: Lessons From CPS Leading In Practice: Lessons From CPS Immediate Recommendations for 2009-10 26
  • 28. Strategic Vision School Leadership In Context Move capacity to the school. Fundamentally, we develop capacity at the school level to support instructional change. Externally driven reforms will flatten unless ownership is developed at the school level. How To Get There At Scale Teams enable adult learning. Data builds and sustains teamwork. • The changes we want are transformational, not additive. • These changes require complex new knowledge, skills, and dispositions. • Deep understanding demands repeated opportunities to learn, practice, reflect, and refine with peers. • Data is the fuel that starts teams talking and sustains that conversation. • As much as possible, data should be local (based on local curriculum and teacher actions) and actionable (namely, not only annual data). Structures and routines describe the practice of leadership. • Organizational routines (e.g. weekly department meetings) and the artifacts that result (e.g. agendas, minutes) define the practice of leading schools. • To improve teacher leadership in practice, focus on improving these structures, routines, and artifacts. • Performance management routines are a vehicle for teaching these practices. Knowledgeable principals are an essential foundation for the above work. 27
  • 29. Whose job is it to make principals better? OPPD Recruitment LSC AIOs Placement OEAS Induction Talent Management Coaching/ Mentoring IDA, HST+L Evaluation New Schools C&I Support HS ILC 28
  • 30. The AIO Case: Lessons In Leadership Development Designed Focus on improving instruction • Strong network of support • Best in class professional development • Candidates selected for their instructional expertise Professional Learning Community Lived Diffused focus • Competition and management • Procedural focus for professional development • Candidates selected for many reasons with instructional expertise somewhere on the list Isolation Clear Routines • Walkthrough routine • Principal meeting routine Routines appropriated for purposes beyond their original intent Enhance learning culture Preserved hierarchical culture 29
  • 31. Proposed Next Steps (3 of 3) 8. Major effort to develop capacity of school leaders, school leadership teams, and “principal managers”. Focus on the instructional core. 9. Frame performance management as a capacity building strategy; we can’t recruit and fire our way to a world class education system. 30
  • 32. Agenda Chicago Education Reform History Principles Of Instruction and Instructional Leadership At Scale Teaching And Learning In Practice: Lessons From CPS Leading In Practice: Lessons From CPS Immediate Recommendations for 2009-10 31
  • 33. Recap: Proposed Next Steps 1. Position instruction as central work of CPS; define five other strategic priorities (performance management, portfolio management, human capital, safety and security, central office) by their relationship to instructional improvement. 2. Ongoing advice and support from Harvard and CCT to CPS on re-organization of infrastructure for supporting teaching and learning. 3. Continue to participate in national education-related reform leadership networks (e.g. Harvard’s PELP, Aspen’s UMLN and ULLN). 4. Avoid the “black box.” 5. For lower tier schools, consider expansion of core curriculum implementation. (Leadership is essential.) 6. Focus school level performance management on connecting assessment and instructional materials implementation. 7. Accelerate curriculum definition, design, and implementation work in science, arts, and social science. 8. Major effort to develop capacity of school leaders, school leadership teams, and “principal managers”. Focus on the instructional core. 9. Frame performance management as a capacity building strategy; we can’t recruit and fire our way to a world class education system. 32
  • 34. Some other deep dives for the near future… Coaching Assessment Design and Use Leadership Development New Teacher Induction Curriculum, Standards, Instructional Materials What else? 33
  • 35. The Instructional Core Principle #1: Increases in student learning occur only as a consequence of improvements in the level of content, teachers’ knowledge and skill, and student engagement. CONTENT Principle #2: If you change one element of the instructional core, you have to change the other two. Principle #3: If you can’t see it in the core, it’s not there. Principle #4: Task predicts performance. Principle #5: The real accountability system is in the tasks that students are asked to do. TEACHER STUDENT Principle #6: We learn to do the work by doing the work. Principle #7: Description before analysis, analysis before prediction, prediction before evaluation. 34

×