RI Educator Autonomy Workgroup: Jan 6 2014


Published on

RI Educator Autonomy January 6

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
  • <?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1" ?><poll url="http://www.polleverywhere.com/free_text_polls/pSlZ8rBJGXctP6Y"> <!-- This snippet was inserted via the PollEv Presenter app --> <!-- The presence of this snippet is used to indicate that a poll will be shown during the slideshow --> <!-- TIP: You can draw a solid, filled rectangle on your slide and the PollEv Presenter will automatically display your poll in that area. --> <!-- The PollEv Presenter app must also be running and logged in for this to work. --> <!-- To remove this, simply delete it from the notes yourself or use the PollEv Presenter to remove it for you. --> <title>What three things would you change about RI schools?</title></poll>
  • As a reminder – our three guiding principals are…
  • Just as a reminder – this project is important right now – RI has made many positive changes that have improved student outcomes, however, there is much work yet to be done to create a world-class education system – we are taking on this work now to…(the bullet point)
  • Right now we are in Phase 1 of our work – building a common understanding of the issue. Today we will be taking the highest priority area based on feedback from you – curriculum and instruction –and piloting a process to gain a better understanding of where decision-making authority currently resides and what barriers exist to allowing for more autonomy at a classroom level. We will then use that information as a basis for forming some preliminary recommendations focused on curriculum and instruction.
  • Today, our focus will be on Curriculum and Instruction…Given you a broad overview of Federal State and Local frameworksNow we’re going to start with our group phase
  • Autonomy or decision-making authority starts with the Federal government. Federal laws such as NCLB and ESEA (give short summary of what they require) define the authority that is given to each state. Each state has laws or policy that define what decision-making authority rests with the state and what decision-making authority rests within each district. In RI, that policy is the Basic Education Plan which we will go over in just a minute. But to further understand how decision-making authority is determined, each district takes the requirements of the Basic Education Plan and determines what authority the district retains and what authority is delegated to the schools and in turn, each school determines…..BEPOutlines which decisions are made at a state-level and which decisions have been delegated to the districts. General theme is that the “what” is defined by the Basic Education Plan and the “how” is delegated to the districtCCSS?NGSS?
  • Before we can begin to design recommendations with each of the identified target areas, we need to identify what’s holding us back from achieving our objective of autonomy….as it relates to Curriculum and InstructionIf this process helps us achieve our objective, we will use a similar process going forward and ultimately design recommendations for each relevant area, combine and prioritize the recommendations and ensure to add any additional recommendations to ensure adequate accountability.
  • Conduct a quick walk through of the model we will be using, with which some of you may be familiarUsing a Force Field analysis assess the efficacy of placing technology in the hands of every studentRestraining forces: Status QuoDriving Forces: Promote ChangeDoesn’t necessary need to be one-for-one offsetInstructions:Brainstorm driving and restraining forces for curriculum and instruction autonomy in the classroomKeep in mind our guiding questions:What barriers to effective/innovative teaching and learning exist in Rhode Island?What are the causes of these barriers…………………………………………………………Future workshop:How could these barriers be removed or mitigated? What improvements in governance, school leadership structure and decision-making would allow for more innovative teaching and learning?How can we strengthen autonomy and ensure consistent quality and effectiveness?
  • Analyze one of the restraining forcesWhat are the causes that give rise to this potential barrier?Typically causes fall under the categories of People, Equipment,Policies, Procedures/Practices. Most cases people and equipment can be wrapped into Our focus for today’s process will be limited to practices and policiesFuture session:Brainstorm changes that would remove or mitigate these causes
  • Budgeting isnext topic
  • RI Educator Autonomy Workgroup: Jan 6 2014

    1. 1. Please Text Your Responses/Insight Send To: 37607 Message: Type in 697378 (add your message…) #edtonomy
    2. 2. January 6, 2014 Educator Autonomy Work Session Focus: Curriculum and Instruction: Identifying Barriers (perceived and/or real) to Autonomy #edtonomy The purpose of the Educator Autonomy Project is to support Rhode Island’s efforts to create a world-class education system by working with all stakeholders to design recommendations to the Governor to improve student achievement through increased local autonomy. #edtonomy 2
    3. 3. Educator Autonomy Project Reminder: Guiding Principles • Student learning and success is paramount. • Educators (teachers, school and district administrators) want what is best for students. • Decisions should be made as close to the student as is practical and effective. 3
    4. 4. Educator Autonomy Project Reminder: Key Questions Key questions: – What barriers to effective/innovative teaching and learning exist in Rhode Island? – How could these barriers be removed or mitigated? – What improvements in governance, school leadership structure and decision-making would allow for more innovative teaching and learning? – How can we strengthen autonomy and ensure consistent quality and effectiveness? 4
    5. 5. Educator Autonomy Project: Phases of Work Our work begins with gaining an understanding of autonomy as it relates to curriculum and instructions. Phase 1: Planning Phase Sept. – Nov. Build Common Understanding of Issue (Dec – Feb) Phase 2: Determine Areas of Recommendations Phase 3: Test and Develop Specific Recommendations Feb. - May May - July Key Questions: What information do WG members need to have productive sessions and develop a robust set of actionable recommendations? What process(es) would ensure full and open discussion leading to consensus? What barriers to effective/innovative teaching and learning exist in RI? How have others resolved these barriers? What changes in governance would allow for more effective/innovative teaching and learning? How could barriers to effective teaching and learning be removed or mitigated? How could proposed recommendations be implemented? How can we strengthen autonomy and ensure quality and effectiveness? Process: Work with Co-Chairs to provide appropriate pre-reading materials and to meet with WG members to ensure questions are answered and expectations are clear Conduct surveys of stakeholders and review existing research and bodies of work Identify areas of greatest opportunity Dig deep to determine best path for implementation working closely with stakeholders Work with Co-Chairs to design process(es) Build consensus around key questions and issue Develop recommendations Prioritize recommendations 5
    6. 6. Educator Autonomy Project Budgeting Curriculum and instruction Staffing and Professional Development Prioritize recommendations and design any associated measurement/ Additional areas determined by working group accountability recommendations 6
    7. 7. Federal Authority Federal Laws* Autonomy in Education State Authority BEP** CCSS*** NGSS **** District Authority District Policy and Practice School Authority School Policy and Practice Educator Authority * Federal Laws include No Child Left Behind, Elementary and Secondary Education Act ** Basic Education Program *** Common Core State Standards ****Next Generation Science Standards 7
    8. 8. Educator Autonomy Project Prioritize recommendations and design any associated measurement/ accountability recommendations 8
    9. 9. Curriculum and Instruction: Potential Barriers and Causes • Engage in multi-step process in smaller groups • Brainstorm driving and restraining forces for increased curriculum and instructional autonomy • Identify causes of restraining forces 9
    10. 10. Driving Forces Sample Force-Field Analysis Desired State: Place technology in the hands of every student Restraining Forces Students need to be equipped to engage in 21st century world Budget Access to relevant, real-time data and content Safety/Security Move students beyond technology as a social media and gaming tool Need for additional IT support Lack of teacher/student preparation 10
    11. 11. Fish Bone Diagram PRACTICES Restraining force examined: Safety and Security Student infractions inappropriate use of technology No formal teacher/student training legal implications Existing policies are outdated POLICIES Instructions: Identify the “restraining force” your group will examine Identify causes: ‘Why does this happen?’ Group potential causes and record them on the bones of the diagram 11
    12. 12. Small Group Report Out • Three (3) highlights from force-field analysis • One (1) restraining force examined in detail 12
    13. 13. Yanaiza Gallant (Rm 505) Pat Page (Rm 502) Jessica Waters (Rm 501) Carolyn Alan Deborah Julian Bob Rick Karen Christina Rob Patrick (Buzz) Pierre Sue Ron Val Tim 13
    14. 14. Educator Autonomy Working Group Post-Session Work • Review RIDE website for further information – Basic Education Program – Common Core State Standards – Next Generation Science Standards • To prepare for next meeting on budgeting, please think about: How do fiscal decisions affect the interactions educators have with students? 14