Psy kirby wehr


Published on

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • When we look at the heavy hitters associated with comprehensive school reform, these are 9 essential components that warrant consideration with respect to implementation and reciprocal influence on student achievement – they are consistent with our standards aligned system and are embedded within the 6 circles. American Institutes for Research, 2006 Purpose of this presentation today: FOCUS-INSTRUCTION-LEARNING THEORY AND FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT, CONTINOUS STAFF DEVELOPMENT, CROSS ROLE LEARNING!
  • (Brainstorm some activity they have to do)
  • 4:10 This slide provides specific details as to how RtII serves as the assessment and instructional framework to support the Standards Aligned System The slide is animated and the RtII pieces come in as you advance the slide.
  • PA’s RtII framework is unique to others across the nation in its connection to our Standards Aligned System (SAS). Additional Background Information for Trainers: In September 2009, PDE released a PennLink to explain PA’s Response to Instruction and Intervention (RtII) framework. RtII is not separate from the Standards Aligned System. In fact, PDE… 1. Endorses RtII as the assessment and instructional framework to organize and implement Pennsylvania’s Standards Aligned System (SAS) to improve student achievement. 2.    Connects RtII with Pennsylvania’s School Improvement Process : Pennsylvania’s continuous school improvement framework, Getting Results! , and RtII share design components.  Both are driven by a strong emphasis on the use of data to discover root causes of the state of student achievement, and, based on the findings, design and implement solutions (instructional practices) to improve student learning. 3.    Establishes a state-level RtII Team : Representatives from each Bureau will constitute a team to ensure the alignment of RtII and state-level tasks/activities. 4.    Defines RtII implementation and reporting requirements : Schools implementing RtII are required to complete an RtII School Survey Form by October 1 st of each school year and will update the survey by March 31 st of each year. In addition, schools choosing to use RtII to determine specific learnin
  • Need to “unpack” that first bullet as it’s comprehensively stated!! Two purposes of RtII: RtII is first and foremost a framework that supports the PA SAS. This is the purpose of today’s training! Not just for low achieving students– the needs of all students can be met within an RtII model. SLD identification is secondary and may come as a result of a solid RtII model over time. Not our focus for today. Additional Background Info for trainers: School teams may use RtII to solve school-wide system problems as well as to address the academic skill development (i.e., increase achievement) and interpersonal skill development of ALL students within a positive school climate, including English Language Learners, students with disabilities, etc.. It is a 3 tiered-framework that may serve the attainment of outcomes established through school improvement planning by organizing, coordinating, and implementing research-based system structures and resources, and by using scientifically-validated instructional and prevention/intervention practices that are selected by and whose outcomes are evaluated by data-driven analyses. This is accomplished through a Team process that coordinates skill development and social-emotional development for ALL students (English Language Learners, students with special needs) within the least restrictive instructional environment. Information gleaned through the RTII process may subsequently provide data and information to address degree of need for special services and satisfy the requirement that increasing levels of validated interventions have been used and that the data showed the student has not responded sufficiently to these supports.
  • Sustaining where we have been with growing momentum associated with middle and high school implementation efforts and research
  • Cover quickly. Again, this slide just provides the “history” of the work and background on how PA got to this point with secondary RtII. NOTE: check PaTTAN website for listing of secondary training events, ie, Lesson Study in Algebra, Summarizing and Notetaking, etc.
  • DO: Now, inform participants that we will look at the need/rationale from the state perspective. NOTE: This information provided in Guidelines – p. 4. for your reference and review.
  • p. 5 in guidelines
  • Alignment is key, and requires a close inspection of all key components to implement an effective secondary response model. Infrastructure changes typically involve significant changes to the secondary schedule, with differences at the middle and high school levels (ie, unique challenges to each).
  • Do: Highlight learning sites and emphasize we are learning from these sites and many other schools across the Commonwealth who are implementing RtII and related components. Also, acknowledge that many High Schools are also implementing RtII, even though PaTTAN/PDE does not have learning sites at the HS level at this point.
  • These are examples of the “critical few” - meaning those instructional behaviors that yield a high pay off for kids. Question: Are your schools talking about focusing in on any of these? Action Sequence requires focus on critical few in si planing process
  • This information was incorporated in order to highlight those instructional strategies that if implemented well, yield a pretty high return – This is something to share back at your building if you are honing your implementation of a specific research-based instructional strategy across classrooms
  • Here are some more….
  • Although research has clearly shown that formative assessment can enhance student success, there is firm evidence of a research-practice divide.
  • longitudinal research in elementary and secondary schools suggests that teachers continue to overemphasize summative assessment methods (i.e., tests, quizzes, projects), with only a minority of teachers using formative assessment techniques on a consistent basis. [5] Teachers cited a number of factors as constraints to practice, including a lack of instructional leadership, poor initial teacher training, and resistance from parents and students to more innovative formative assessment strategies. Example of walk throughs – pull students out randomly – what’s an objective, what is the objective today? – why is that important to you? – what are you doing today that relates to the objective? Debrief as admin team around student feedback Provide Feedback to teacher team next day Teachers make agreed upon changes to classroom instruction based upon feedback Admin serving as Formative assessment bridge Meaningful connections and visibility related to the importance of learning in eyes of students Supportive accountability to teachers responsive behavior on the part of adults in timely fashion
  • So, we said that Plan, Do, Study and Act is the process that corresponds with formative assessment. Formative assessment is the process of informing teaching and student learning based upon the use of informal and formal formative assessment data. Active student engagement lies at the heart of formative assessment practices and increasing academic achievement. Quote from teacher who has made shift from teaching of content to faclitator of learning – has focused on the implementation of teaching as a practice
  • IV drip as opposed to shots of medicine in isolation
  • Did anyone say that ordinary teachers work in the ways that were just described? What are some of the ways we ordinarily work? So, if those ways of working are important to ensure that all children learn And if teachers don’t ordinarily work in those ways How do teachers learn to work in these ways? How does leadership support these practices?
  • A second critical area for improvement and focus is continuous, context-embedded and differentiated PD
  • This is the work of joyce and showers…review slide Coaching is a critical variable….
  • Peer coaching structures, formative assessment series as example, PLC’s…. What’s recommended is monthly meetings of 75 minutes – 90 minutes – no payoff for meeting more or less than this amount of time – PD requires a facilitator and a structure and the emphasis is getting better at the practice – in between – peers observe other peers using an observation form – – and this establishes supportive accountability for peer coaching and for professional learning Remember in the mckinsey report/video – the schools that are in positions of moving from good to great rqally accelerate their performance within and across grade levels with this kind of structure/mechanism for professional learning Webinar on research-based implementation of PLC’s – where is it??
  • On average, It takes 2 decades for science to inform practice. There are over 30 websites displaying lists of “evidence-based” programs and practices and More than 600 evidence-based programs and practices that have been assessed and deemed “ evidence-based” – we know what to do, how come it isn’t happening? Dean fixsen’s work on implementation has helped NIRN to help others understand more about implementation – the how… After watching clip, please complete the Checklist of Observable processes during RTI full implementation stage (packet 3 – pink) – give them time to complete
  • If the whole idea is around collective skill and will – then we need trust – how do we systematically build trust or even start by evaluating our system and current levels of trust Show clip and then review: Become change agents not victims Use positive forces, blunt negative ones Perfect happiness and harmony do not exist Alliances and partnerships are major vehicles for change make lemonade out of onions
  • In order to bridge the gap between science and service or practice, we need to study and enact the science of implementation – what do we know about the science of implementation so far?
  • Although these have been two of the most widely used methods for attempting implementation of policies, programs, and practices, they repeatedly have been shown to be ineffective in human services, education, health, business, and manufacturing. This finding has clear implications for policy makers, state planners, managers of provider organizations, and purveyors. A different approach needs to be taken to implement policies, programs, and practices effectively.
  • Review 1-7 as a whole group Cross role learning – as you know, rti is equivalent to general education reform and requires the efforts of an interdisciplinary team – this is why opportunities for cross role learning and collaboration are so critical
  • The purpose of PLC’s is to invest directly in teachers and their ongoing professionalism and learning…these structures are thought to be critical if we are planning for sustainability – not only in terms of leadership but in terms of practice
  • These are the goals and mission of PLC’s – they require attention to implementation, supportive accountability, time, and structure
  • We are going to show you a non-example of collaboration followed by an example! Find another clip of PLC’s – sample meeting of teachers? etc DuFour – more advanced clip of PLC
  • A mission-oriented process involving multiple decisions, actions, and corrections
  • This is what the principal said.
  • In a transformed educational system, we become more program and practice-centered than practitioner-centered. Evidence based practices and programs (along with beliefs, values, and philosophies; are chosen to solve particular problems) are implemented with fidelity and the overall infrastructure of the school is designed to facilitate the implementation of those practices and programs. Using systematic methods and having data as feedback provides the opportunity for educators to “learn to learn” and become more effective and efficient with experience.
  • \\
  • Psy kirby wehr

    1. 1. Angela Kirby-Wehr Director PaTTAN-Harrisburg RtII in Pennsylvania: What We’ve Learned!
    2. 2. PaTTAN’s Mission <ul><li>The mission of the Pennsylvania Training and Technical Assistance Network (PaTTAN) is to support the efforts and initiatives of the Bureau of Special Education, and to build the capacity of local educational agencies to serve students who receive special education services. </li></ul>
    3. 3. PDE’s Commitment to Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) <ul><li>Recognizing that the placement decision is an Individualized Education Program (IEP) team decision, our goal for each child is to ensure IEP teams begin with the general education setting with the use of supplementary aids and services before considering a more restrictive environment. </li></ul>
    4. 4. Session Objectives <ul><li>Explicitly define the connection between SAS and RtII. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>What we’ve learned! </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Identify robust instructional strategies and interventions. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>What we’ve learned! </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Apply characteristics of successful implementation in order to close the “what-how” gap. </li></ul>
    5. 5. Comprehensive School Reform Models… Instruction Use of Student Data Continuous Staff Development Leadership Policy Support Cross Role Learning Time Technical Assistance Sustained Effort
    6. 6. Objective #1: Define the connection between SAS and RTII.
    7. 7. <ul><li>Essential Question #1: </li></ul><ul><li>How would you explain the SAS/RtII connection to a colleague? </li></ul>Define the connection between SAS and RtII
    8. 8. Tier I of the RtII framework provides access to high quality standards based curriculum and instruction for all students. RtII organizes assessment practices and requires schools to use the four types of assessments to determine the effectiveness of curriculum/intervention and drive instructional adjustments. Examples, Summative: PSSA, PVAAS Benchmark: 4 Sight Diagnostic: GRADE, GMADE Formative: Formal and Informal (progress monitoring, ticket out the door) RtII organizes curriculum and instruction to ensure all students receive the standards aligned core curriculum. ALL staff (Gen, Sp Ed, Title, ESL) assume responsibility and an active role in instruction in the core curriculum High quality instruction is at the heart of RtII. The framework organizes instruction to ensure the use of high leverage, research-based instructional practices at each Tier. Processes are in place to ensure instructional fidelity. RtII requires the selection and use of materials and resources that align with standards based curriculum and research based standard protocols to address specific skill acquisition. Research-validated interventions are implemented based on the type, level and intensity of student need . SAS and RtII: The Connection
    9. 9. The RtII Framework
    10. 10. In PA, RtII has dual meaning <ul><li>A comprehensive standards-aligned school reform strategy that enables early identification and intervention for students needing additional opportunities to learn high level content -- while providing benchmark students the opportunity to enrich and “grow” their skills and talents </li></ul><ul><li>An alternate to the aptitude-achievement discrepancy model for the identification of students with learning disabilities </li></ul>
    11. 11. <ul><li>Tier 3: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Supplemental Small Group Instruction/Intervention Period for </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>a FEW Students ( 5-10%) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Daily for an extended period of time </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Instructional Focus: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Basic Skill Deficiencies </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Tier 2: </li></ul><ul><li>Supplemental Instruction/ Intervention Period for SOME Students (15-20%) </li></ul><ul><li>3-5 times per week or cycle </li></ul><ul><li>Lower class size </li></ul><ul><li>Instructional Focus : Extended core instruction in subject area content and/or targeted instruction/intervention </li></ul><ul><li>Tier I: </li></ul><ul><li>High Quality Standards-Aligned Core Instruction for ALL students (100%) </li></ul><ul><li>English and Math Courses aligned to PA/Common Core standards and Keystones </li></ul><ul><li>ESL Core Instruction aligning ELP and Content Standards </li></ul><ul><li>Content literacy focus within all courses & use of evidenced-based strategies </li></ul><ul><li>Instructional Focus: Subject Area Content (e.g., 9th grade Algebra I & </li></ul><ul><li>9th grade English Composition) </li></ul>Pennsylvania’s Secondary RtII Framework Examples of Relevant Data Current/Projected Academic Performance Data: *PVAAS Projections *Performance: PA Keystone exams *ACCESS for ELLs Data *Performance: Classroom Diagnostic Tools *4Sight *Common Summative Assessments *STAR *Formal instruments or informal observations used to inform instruction and enhance student learning outcomes. *Individually and/or group administered diagnostic measures Existing Data (Use to establish career and college risk and readiness) *PSSA * End of Year (EOY) Failing Grades in core subjects as early as 4 th grade *Failing Grades in beginning and end of 9 th grade fall semester courses *Earning Fewer than 2 credits; lack of promotion to 10 th grade * <70-80% Attendance (5 weeks or more of missed school)(>10 days in first month of 9 th grade) *Mobility between 8 th and 10 th grade *Retention in elementary or middle grades *Intervention history *Poor final grades in behavior/disengagement *Abuse/neglect Progress-Monitoring Tools : Maze passages, written expression prompts, vocabulary matching, ORF, Test of Contextual Silent Word Reading Fluency (TOCSWRF); Test of Word Reading Efficiency (TOWRE); CORE Phonics Survey. CORE Phoneme Segmentation Test
    12. 12. School-Wide Positive Behavior Support Model
    13. 13. 2010-2011 Work Scope <ul><li>Where We’ve Been </li></ul><ul><li>Elementary School </li></ul><ul><li>Middle School RtII Learning Sites </li></ul><ul><li>ESL/ELL/RtII </li></ul><ul><li>SLD/RtII </li></ul><ul><li>Statewide Workgroup </li></ul><ul><li>Parent Engagement </li></ul><ul><li>Statewide Training </li></ul><ul><li>On-site Support </li></ul><ul><li>Colleges/Universities </li></ul><ul><li>Administrator Series </li></ul><ul><li>Present </li></ul><ul><li>Algebra </li></ul><ul><li>English Composition </li></ul><ul><li>Elementary and Secondary Data-Analysis & Instructional Matching </li></ul><ul><li>Background Knowledge </li></ul><ul><li>Role & Function </li></ul><ul><li>Colleges and Universities </li></ul><ul><li>ESL/ELL RtII </li></ul><ul><li>Middle School Learning Sites </li></ul><ul><li>Partners & Research </li></ul>
    14. 14. Elementary Pilots <ul><li>Largest amount of movement occurs in the earliest grades </li></ul><ul><li>Largest amount of movement occurs from the BOY to MOY. </li></ul><ul><li>Reinforce the importance of early intervention and the need to attend to improving literacy skills at the youngest grades </li></ul><ul><li>Still change possible at higher grades as well as from MOY to EOY, the stabilization of student performance over grades and time is the predominant finding from these data </li></ul>
    15. 16. Background: PA’s Secondary RtII Subgroup <ul><li>Secondary Subgroup Membership </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Listed in the Framework document </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Year I – 2007-08 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>RtII Framework (Guidelines and Recommendations; Initial Training) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Year II – 2008-09 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Update/refine the Secondary RtII Framework </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Development of Secondary RtII Toolkit </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Three sub-committees </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Assessment </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Interventions </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Tier I: High Quality Core Instruction </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Year III – 2009-10 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Six Learning Sites (middle school level) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Data based decision making, Infrastructure </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Tier I (high leverage instructional strategies i.e. active engagement) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Year IV – 2010-11 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Five Learning Sites (middle school level) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Training of Trainer of Secondary RtII Overview </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Statewide Secondary Training Events </li></ul></ul>
    16. 17. Essential Question <ul><li>Why do we need RTII at the secondary level? </li></ul>
    17. 18. Pennsylvania Statistics <ul><li>About 22% of 9 th graders in Pennsylvania fail to graduate from high school in 4 years </li></ul><ul><li>Of these, many lack the skills and knowledge needed to succeed in post-secondary education and careers that pay family sustaining incomes (PDE Ensuring Success for All High School Graduates, 2007). </li></ul>
    18. 19. The RtII Framework at Secondary <ul><li>The RtII framework allows schools to: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>identify students at risk for poor learning outcomes, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>monitor student progress, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>provide evidence-based interventions and adjust the intensity and nature of those interventions depending on a student’s responsiveness (National Center on Response to Intervention, 2008). </li></ul></ul>
    19. 20. RtII Holds Promise… <ul><li>… for middle and high schools by aligning curriculum, instruction and interventions, assessment, social/emotional and behavioral supports, and infrastructure to increase learning opportunities and improve achievement and outcomes for secondary students. </li></ul>
    20. 21. 2010-11 Learning Sites <ul><li>Five Middle School RtII Learning Sites: </li></ul><ul><li>Eastern Region </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Drexel Hill Middle School – Upper Darby SD </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Roosevelt Middle School – Bristol Township SD </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Central Region </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Swatara Middle School – Central Dauphin SD </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Western Region </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Chartiers Valley Middle School – Chartiers Valley SD </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Clairton Middle School – Clairton City SD </li></ul></ul>
    21. 22. Project Objective for MS Learning Sites <ul><li>Pennsylvania will scale up RtII efforts to include five middle school learning sites. The purpose of the Learning Project is to study the implementation of the RtII Framework in middle schools and to disseminate findings from the learning sites across the state. Schools will customize the RtII Framework to design an assessment and instructional system to provide tiered intervention supports to middle school students prior to academic failure. Increased student achievement and improved student engagement in the learning process are the expected outcomes of this longitudinal project. </li></ul>
    22. 23. Lessons Learned… <ul><li>Implementing the RTII Framework takes several years to implement. It’s not a “quick fix” or “magic bullet” but rather a process based on evidence-based research and practice. </li></ul><ul><li>The infrastructure has to be in place in order for it to be successful (changing the schedule, flexible grouping, time for teachers to meet and collaborate, etc.). </li></ul><ul><li>What are two or three things we can target or focus on that will really make an impact on increasing student achievement? This can be a very overwhelming process for all involved and it is easy to get off-track when everything becomes a priority or there isn’t any follow through with administrators. </li></ul><ul><li>Focusing on Tier 1 core instruction in which all of the content area teachers consistently use and embed effective instructional practices. </li></ul><ul><li>Professional development throughout the year needs to be consist with the priorities and areas of focus. </li></ul><ul><li>As Don Deshler says, “Students should leave their Tier 2 or Tier 3 intervention classes sweating.” It’s not slowing down but working to close the achievement gap. </li></ul>
    23. 24. Lessons Learned… <ul><li>Schools have become proficient in having data team meetings, but what is happening in the classroom between data team meetings? Formative assessment and progress monitoring are critical on an ongoing basis. </li></ul><ul><li>Leaders come in many forms from the superintendent, the principal, to team leaders of teachers. </li></ul>
    24. 25. Fidelity of SAS and RTII: A Barometer for Inclusive Practices What We’ve Learned? An “all-ed” Standards Aligned Service Delivery Framework
    25. 26. Objective #2: Identify robust instructional strategies and interventions- What We’ve Learned- INSTRUCTION MATTERS MOST!!!!!
    26. 27. Data-Based Instruction and Intervention- Why? <ul><li>Essential Question #2: </li></ul><ul><li>What instructional strategies and interventions do you currently have in place? </li></ul>
    27. 28. Critical Focus Area-Instruction: Identifying Robust Instructional Strategies and Interventions <ul><li>Successful teaching accounts for up to 45% of the variance in student achievement . </li></ul><ul><li>(Brophy, 1986; Hattie, 2003; Rowe, 2003) </li></ul><ul><li>Let’s TALK ABOUT A COMMON LANGUAGE FOR INSTRUCTION!!!!! </li></ul>
    28. 29. Effective Instruction and Learning Theory <ul><li>Instructional Design and Delivery- FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT ….. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Impacting Theories </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Behavioral </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Cognitive </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Constructivist </li></ul></ul></ul>
    29. 30. Instructional Design <ul><li>… The systematic development of instructional specifications using learning and instructional theory to ensure the quality of instruction. It is the entire process of analysis of learning needs and goals and the development of a delivery system to meet those needs. Includes: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>development of instructional materials and activities; and </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>tryout and evaluation of all instruction and learner activities. </li></ul></ul>
    30. 31. Purposes of Instructional Design <ul><li>To identify the outcomes of the instruction </li></ul><ul><li>To guide the developing the instructional content (scope and sequence) </li></ul><ul><li>To establish how instructional effectiveness will be evaluated. </li></ul>
    31. 32. Contextual Variables <ul><li>Behaviorism, cognitivism and constructivism - what works where and how…we must allow circumstances surrounding the learning situation to help us decide which approach to learning is most appropriate. </li></ul><ul><li>It is necessary to realize that some learning problems require highly prescriptive solutions, whereas others are more suited to learner control of the environment. (Schwier, 1995) </li></ul>
    32. 33. <ul><li>A behavioral approach can effectively facilitate mastery of the content of a profession (knowing what) </li></ul><ul><li>Cognitive strategies are useful in teaching problem solving tactics where defined facts and rules are applied in unfamiliar situations (knowing how) </li></ul><ul><li>Constructivist strategies are especially suited to dealing with ill-defined problems through reflection-in-action. (Ertmer P. & Newby, T., 1993)   </li></ul>
    33. 34. Behavioral <ul><li>Tasks requiring a low degree of processing (e.g., basic paired associations, discriminations, rote memorization) seem to be facilitated by strategies most frequently associated with a behavioral outlook (e.g., stimulus-response, contiguity of feedback/reinforcement).   </li></ul><ul><ul><li>For example: word reading skills, math computation (basic and advanced), learning facts and terminology in the content areas, social skills, other? </li></ul></ul>
    34. 35. Cognitive <ul><li>Tasks requiring an increased level of processing (e.g., classifications, rule or procedural executions) are primarily associated with strategies having a stronger cognitive emphasis (e.g., schematic organization, analogical reasoning, algorithmic problem solving). </li></ul><ul><ul><li>For example: identifying the main idea, summarizing, problem solving, learning to write (e.g., paragraph writing strategy, writing persuasive text), other? </li></ul></ul>
    35. 36. Constructive <ul><li>Tasks demanding high levels of processing (e.g., heuristic problem solving, personal selection and monitoring of cognitive strategies) are frequently learned with strategies advanced by the constructivist perspective (e.g., situated learning, cognitive apprenticeships, social negotiation). </li></ul><ul><ul><li>For example: comprehension monitoring, Questioning the Author (Beck & McKeown, 2006), conducting a science experiment, “interviewing” a historic figure, other? </li></ul></ul>
    36. 37. Research-based Components of Effective Teaching <ul><li>Teach essential skills and strategies. </li></ul><ul><li>Provide differentiated instruction based on assessment results </li></ul><ul><li>Provide explicit and systematic instruction with lots of practice—with and without teacher support and feedback including cumulative practice </li></ul><ul><li>Provide opportunities to apply skills and strategies in reading and writing meaningful text with teacher support. </li></ul><ul><li>Don't just &quot;cover&quot; critical content; be sure students learn it—monitor student progress regularly and re-teach as necessary. </li></ul><ul><li>  (Denton, Fletcher, Simos, Papanicolaou, & Anthony, 2007; Simos et al., 2002) </li></ul>
    37. 38. High Yield Instructional Strategies Haystead, M.W. &Marzano, R,. J. (2009). Meta-analytic synthesis of studies conducted at Marzano Research Laboratory on instructional strategies. Marzano Research Laboratory. Engelwood, CO. Category Average ES Percentile Gain Identifying similarities and differences .52 20 Summarizing .49 19 Tracking student progress and scoring scales 1.00 34 Building vocabulary .51 20
    38. 39. High Yield Instructional Strategies Category Average ES Percentile Gain Interactive games .53 20 Setting goals/objectives .66 25 Note-taking .44 17 Nonlinguistic representations .44 17 Student discussion/chunking .43 17
    39. 40. Where are We Now?
    40. 41. Where are We Now?
    41. 42. Shawn: “ I used to do a lot of explaining, but now I do a lot of questioning. I used to do a lot of talking, but now I do a lot of listening. I use to think about teaching the curriculum, but now I think about teaching the student.” (Heritage, 2010, p. 4).
    42. 43. A Focus on Instruction <ul><li>Are the curriculum and supports all focused on the same mission and outcome? </li></ul><ul><li>Are all services to students based upon performance data? </li></ul><ul><li>Can a parent take a student any building in the district and realistically expect the same positive outcome for their child? </li></ul><ul><li>Is the curriculum integrated across the tiers? </li></ul><ul><li>Are students engaged? </li></ul>
    43. 44. Clarify Theory-based Instructional Practices/Strategies – What We’ve Learned ! <ul><li>Common Language </li></ul><ul><ul><li>General Education, Special Education, Title I, ESL, Reading Coaches, Leadership exc.. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>FOCUS ON CORE INSTRUCTION FIRST! </li></ul><ul><li>Application and Discussion Activity </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Tools for Secondary Response to Instruction and Intervention- Tier 1 Core Instruction </li></ul></ul>
    44. 45. Objective #3: Apply characteristics of successful implementation in order to close the “what-how” gap.
    45. 46. Essential Question #3: Do you think that these are common practices? <ul><li>Think deeply about the standards students need to meet and what content they need to learn. </li></ul><ul><li>Collaborate about how to teach those standards . </li></ul><ul><li>Create/use formative assessments to tell whether students have learned the material. </li></ul><ul><li>Look at the data to see who didn’t learn. </li></ul><ul><li>Collaborate about what they need to do differently in order to intervene with students who didn’t learn. </li></ul><ul><li>Please talk with a partner. </li></ul><ul><li>Agree on those activities that are usually accomplished when teachers get together. </li></ul>
    46. 47. Critical Focus Areas for Improvement: Continuous Professional Development <ul><li>A Focus on Instruction </li></ul><ul><li>Continuous Professional Development </li></ul>
    47. 48. Joyce, B. & Showers, B. 2002
    48. 49. Reflection Evaluate your school’s current professional development model. Are there any action steps you could take to continue to enhance and positively influence future PD opportunities?
    49. 50. <ul><li>Closing the </li></ul><ul><li>Science to Practice Gap </li></ul><ul><li>Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blase, K. A., Friedman, R. M. & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation Research: A Synthesis of the Literature. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, The National Implementation Research Network (FMHI Publication #231). </li></ul>Rethinking the Implementation Challenge
    50. 51. How do we build organizational and relational trust? <ul><li>Trust and Organizational Values </li></ul><ul><li>Strongest Level Of Trust: </li></ul><ul><li>1 in 2 chances of making significant improvements in student learning </li></ul><ul><li>Weakest Level of Trust: </li></ul><ul><li>1 in 7 chances of making significant improvements in student learning </li></ul><ul><li>- Bryk and Schneider </li></ul><ul><li>Trust in Schools: A Core Resource for Improvement </li></ul>
    51. 52. Science to Service
    52. 53. Closing the What-How Gap: What Doesn’t Work <ul><li>1. Information dissemination alone (research </li></ul><ul><li>literature, mailings, promulgation of practice </li></ul><ul><li>guidelines) is an ineffective implementation </li></ul><ul><li>Method </li></ul><ul><li>2. Training (no matter how well done) by itself is an ineffective implementation method. </li></ul>
    53. 54. What Doesn’t Work <ul><li>3. Implementation by edict does not work </li></ul><ul><li>4. Implementation by “following the money” does not work </li></ul><ul><li>5. Implementation without changing supporting roles and functions does not work </li></ul><ul><li>(Paul Nutt, 2002) </li></ul>
    54. 55. Core Components of Evidenced Based Practices <ul><li>Clearly described (who/what) </li></ul><ul><li>Practical measure of fidelity </li></ul><ul><li>Fully operationalized (do/say) </li></ul><ul><li>Field tested (recursive revision) </li></ul><ul><li>Contextualized (org./systems fit) </li></ul><ul><li>Effective (worth the effort) </li></ul>
    55. 56. Critical Focus Areas: Cross Role Learning
    56. 57. The Power of PLC’s Professional Learning Communities <ul><li>The most promising strategy for sustained and substantive school improvement is building capacity of school personnel to function as a professional learning community. The path to change in classrooms lies within and through professional learning communities. </li></ul><ul><li>Dufour & Eaker </li></ul>
    57. 58. A Learning Community is Characterized by <ul><li>1. Shared Mission, Vision, and Values </li></ul><ul><li>2. Collaborative Teams </li></ul><ul><li>3. Collective Inquiry </li></ul><ul><li>4. Action Orientation/experimentation </li></ul><ul><li>5. Commitment to Continuous school improvement </li></ul><ul><li>6. Results Oriented </li></ul><ul><li>7. SMART goals </li></ul><ul><li>Dufour, Dufour & Eaker </li></ul>
    58. 59. Collaboration <ul><li>“ Even the best professional </li></ul><ul><li>development may fail to create </li></ul><ul><li>meaningful and lasting changes in </li></ul><ul><li>teaching and learning – unless </li></ul><ul><li>teachers engage in ongoing </li></ul><ul><li>professional dialogue to develop </li></ul><ul><li>a reflective school community.” </li></ul><ul><li>Regie Routman, 2002 </li></ul><ul><li>Spoof on Collaborative-Planning </li></ul>DuFour - PLCs
    59. 60. Stages of Implementation <ul><li>Exploration </li></ul><ul><li>Installation </li></ul><ul><li>Initial Implementation (2-4 Years) </li></ul><ul><li>Full Implementation </li></ul><ul><li>Innovation </li></ul><ul><li>Sustainability </li></ul><ul><li>(Fixsen, Naoom, Blase, Friedman, & Wallace, 2005) </li></ul>
    60. 61. Implementation <ul><li>What do we need to know about successful </li></ul><ul><li>Implementation methods? </li></ul><ul><li>Implementation is not an event . </li></ul>
    61. 62. “ I knew achievement wouldn’t be a problem once we got the structures in place.” Terri Tomlinson, principal, George Hall Elementary School, 2004
    62. 64. What We’ve Learned…. <ul><li>Alignment, Implementation Capacity and Leadership MATTER (Fixen, 2005) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>practitioners are the intervention, new notions of distributed leadership that are challenging historic bureaucratic conceptions of schools </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Skills, collaboration, coordination and stamina </li></ul></ul>
    63. 65. “ Some of our children live in pretty dire circumstances. But we can’t dwell on that, because we can’t change it. So when we come here, we have to dwell on that which is going to move our kids.” <ul><li>--Barbara Adderley, former principal, </li></ul><ul><li>M. Hall Stanton Elementary, Philadelphia </li></ul>
    64. 66. Final Essential Question: What resources are available on the Standards Aligned System to close the “what-how” gap?
    65. 67. Web Sites – Framework References <ul><li>21 st Century Skills </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul><ul><li>Gates Foundation </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul><ul><li>Center on Instruction </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul><ul><li>International Reading Association-Response to Intervention </li></ul><ul><li>http:// </li></ul><ul><li>National Center on Response to Intervention </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul><ul><li>PA Standards Aligned System Portal </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul><ul><li>RtI Action Network </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul>
    66. 68. Web Sites – Framework References <ul><li>World-Class Instructional Design and Assessment </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul><ul><li>The IRIS Center </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul><ul><li>Institute of Educational Sciences </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul><ul><li>Florida Center for Reading Research </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul><ul><li>National High School Center </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul><ul><li>Achieve </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul>
    67. 69. References
    68. 70. Contact Information <ul><li>Angela Kirby-Wehr </li></ul><ul><li>Director-PaTTAN-Harrisburg </li></ul>Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Tom Corbett, Governor Pennsylvania Department of Education Ronald J. Tomalis, Secretary Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Ed. D., Deputy Secretary Office of Elementary and Secondary Education John J. Tommasini, Director Bureau of Special Education Patricia Hozella, Assistant Director Bureau of Special Education