Content for today9.00 -11.00

Cluster review and analysis of practice (Jill)2010 Planning Using the Evaluative Tool ( Cluster / school)- Allanah +JackieEnd of Year Report 2009 – job yet to be done

Morning tea

11.30 – 13.00Allanah:BECSI – data issues raised

- Mei Lai’s cluster feedback PATs

Writing monitoring

Jackie:John Hattie Feedback

Lunch

1.30 – 3pmPlanning the PD content for Team Solutions to deliver with lead team

Ask yourself these 2 questions

• What function does the cluster have for you?• What function do you have for the cluster?

….and park your thoughts till later

Purposes of this mornings session

Where are we?What do we do already?What do we need to do differently?Are we effective?

Desired Outcome: informing our practice / reviewing our practice

Inquiry cycle (Timperley et al., 2007)

What are the cluster’s desired educational outcomes?

What actions are in place to achieve them?

How have we been doing?

Every child will shift

Raised student achievement –

Meeting national standards – exceeding/ accellerate / achieve/progress – what it looks like

Developing effective teaching strategies & practices

Knowing what effective practice is – who and when.

Shared strength of the collective – work as a collective ( strength and weaknesses used ( M.Fullen collective responsibility and enquiry)

Tracking student achievement within schools /

Engaged in a pd programme. Familiarisation of nationl standards. BECSI programme. Cluster review begun with use of evaluative tool.

Recognised need for external expertise.

Moving towards / to focus on teacher practice as well as student achievement as evidence

Progress momentum achieved: base line Year 7 reading the highest ever 2010. Writing is low overall

(Park issues raised)

Inquiry cycle (Timperley et al., 2007)

What are our PD needs in order to achieve our outcomes?

Develop guiding principle around formative practice ( Develop The K.lit way) – Collective key principles and concepts – Formative practice.

Continue Murray’s PD with teacher observations – process and protocols.

PD focus on effective use of Learning conversations and gathering and using student voice to shift practice

How to gain best practice in overall teacher judgement – multiple sources of evidence.

Collective moderation of student work / teacher practice

Reading and writing links- explicit links between the two.

Park any issues raised

Inquiry cycle (Timperley et al., 2007)

What role does the principal / lead teacher play in the PD and learning?

Participating and Contributing: Resourcing and making time available

K.Lit Way in each charter and targets ( involve BOT)

Attendance of and leading;

staff meeting feedback sessions

PD sessions

K.Lit meetings

and commitment to the K.Lit Way. (Carrying the flame)

Feedback to the cluster in a timely way – data presented in a way in which it has been asked for ( USE the TEMPLATE)

Keeping the focus – support – motivation – momentum

Strat – annual – charter – targets – perf. Appraisal all link back to the K.Lit Way.

Spreading the word ( The K.Lit Way):

Wiki use and promotion for all staff / BOT

Review and moderation:

Establishing agreed next steps at the conclusion of each meeting – setting up follow us session for staff meeting feedback

Is that happening currently? ( park any issues)

Inquiry cycle (Timperley et al., 2007)

Are our students engaged in new learning?

Do we know? Our biggest challengeSort of

How do we know: ( not consistent across the cluster)

Student voice –Peer and self assessment

Walk throughs

Self reflections / teachers and students

Student work – tasks ( OTJ)

Park issues raised

Deepening of professional knowledge and skills

Teachers

L. teachers

Principals

Rattling existing theories and practices

Use of evidence effectively to justify practice and discard practice

Use of the Leadership BES and all other BESs

- Unpacking the BES

Making the links between:

Ka hikitia - National Statements( NS. LLP, NZC)

ELPs and Numeracy framework and the K.Lit WAY

Facing and dealing with challenge and change

Park issues raised

What has been the impact of work so far?

What impact do we want for 2010

So Far:Self sustaining

Attracting new schools to the cluster

Shifting focus as time goes on.

PD and Learning – use of external expertise ( recognising that you need it)

Strengthened the network of schools in the Far North

2010:Induction in to the K.Lit way ( via the wiki and buddy in school??)

Using the BECSI work / involvment to influence our practice / review our practice

MOU possibility

Networking – clustering

Reporting to parents - strengthening

parked IssuesFeeding back to staff / staff aware of what is happening in the cluster / meetings

Longitudinal tracking of students over time

Writing has slipped while reading is progressing.

How does our practice align with the leadership BES – PD and Learning – roles of leaders.

PD content/ resources might have been used…..

BUT have the strategies been imbedded??? Not sure they have

Do we need to change our Name – to cover lit / numeracy ( effective teaching – formative practice instead of specific learning areas)

Notify update – wiki to all

The two questions

Role of cluster:

Your role in the cluster:

Directly linked or big gaps?

2010Roles and responsibilities (jobs)

In School:

Principal

L TeacherLeading staff meetingsDisseminating key PD messagesObserving teacher practiceFeedback to staff / feedback to clusterData collection / collation / cleaning

TeachersData collection/ collation / cleaning

In Cluster:Principal/L TeacherMeeting agenda setting and update on wiki ( Lead team)Planning f/up sessions for in school feedbackMinutes ( T1 – Pamapuria/ T2 – Pukepoto / T3 – Paparore / T4 – Ahipara)Data collation – cluster( Pamapuria – asTTle / KIS – PATs / Awanui – PM)Cluster reports

T1 ( end of week 1 T2)T1-T4 ( end of week 6 T4)

Drafts will be loaded on the wiki2009 EOY report –Dianna / Allanah / Ronda ( draft on wiki – for input and feedback prior to next meeting – 28th April)

Feedback to the meeting – from other learning (All)BECSI attendance – Rhonda, Stephen, Allanah, Jackie)Lead team – ( Allanah - Sue/ Jackie- Lisa / Dianna –Rhonda-Delwynne)Wiki maintenance – updates (ALL)

Inquiry cycle (Timperley et al., 2007)

2009

The impact of professional development and learning?

What evidence do we have / need to answer that?

2010

What are our next steps

Are we using all the evidence available to inform our practice / review our practice?

Evidence currently available to us

School ERO reports – to identify cluster commonalities

BECSI feedback reports + Evaluative tool findings

Student achievement: cluster/ school / class

Teacher observations – shifts in practice

Student voice – shifts in teacher practice

Are we using our meetings effectively?

Meetings now 2 per term

Structure9.00 -11.00 PD delivery by Team Solutions ( Principals and L.T)11.30 – 3.00 PD Delivery by Lead team + Team Solutions (L.T)

Planning of K.Lit meetings, content and delivery

Who? When? What? How?

Dissemination of information from K.Lit meetings, PD and Learning to schoolsWhat? How? How often?Planning staff meeting follow up sessions.Have we got the same key messagesHow will you know you are having an impact in your school / cluster?

Summing up

• Look at our vision – does that match our understanding? K.Lit Vision 2010.doc• Are we clear about our – roles and responsibilities? What jobs need to be done who

is going to do them?

• 2010 – 2011 PD plan- have we now got enough for LT to plan PD content this afternoon? Feedback to Team Solutions what it is we need / want?

• Meeting structures and content – are we happy with the changes?

• Who will be the lead team working with the PD provider? Fixed or revolving?

• BECSI Evaluative Tool - process/ protocols/ meeting dates

• 2009 End of Year Report – JOB to be done

Morning Tea

Morning tea

Allanah:2010 K Lit Data Template (12-3-10).xls

BECSI Data issues raised

Mei Lai’s cluster feedback

PATs

Writing

Jackie

John Hattie Feedback on session attended

Lunch

All

Planning the PD content for Team Solutions and lead team to deliver

Collecting and using high quality data

The inquiry cycle and student achievementIn this cycle, there are two main points where school leaders and teachers can

use student achievement data to enhance their inquiry.1.When asking “What are our students‘ learning strengths and learning needs?” *Data collection, analysis and use at this point of the cycle will support

teachers and school leaders as they develop appropriate teaching programmes to meet their students‘ needs.

2.When asking “What has been the impact of our changed actions?” *Data collection, analysis and use can support teachers and school leaders

to monitor the effectiveness of their teaching programmes.

Thus the emphasis on analysing and using data should always be on supporting teachers and school leaders to become better inquirers to that they can improve their own practices and student learning.

What data should schools collect?

The 40-20-40 rule is useful for planning what data to collect

(Robinson & Lai, 2006):

• 40% of a school‘s time deciding the focus for data collection; what data to collect and how to collect necessary data

• 20% of a school‘s time data collection and preliminary analysis

• 40% of a school‘s time making sense of the data, further analysis

and conclusions

When asking ‘What has been the impact of our changed actions’

Schools collect achievement data over time

……along with data on teacher and leadership practices,

• How does this help them to evaluate the effectiveness of their teaching and school programmes?

Are we doing this as part of our practice?

Linking Changes in Achievement to School and Classroom Programmes

• The process of analysing data to check the impact of the changed teaching and school practices requires teachers and school leaders to ask themselves whether the changes have resulted in the intended improvements.

• If achievement has improved as intended, what practices worked successfully and what is the evidence that these practices were the ones that worked?

• If achievement has not improved what might the reasons be and what is the evidence for these reasons?

(eg. It may be that the teaching programmes did not work as intended because there was insufficient professional learning to support teachers to understand how to implement the teaching programme.

The EVIDENCE for this might be from discussions with teachers about the programme (eg. Teachers indicate that there were gaps in their pedagogy and requested further professional learning) and / or from feedback from others (eg school leaders observing classrooms and talking to teachers post-observation see the gaps in teacher pedagogy).

The focus here is on teachers and school leaders learning about their own effectiveness.

Key questions for review

• Are we making a difference to student learning and achievement? And, if we are making a difference to student learning and achievement how can we sustain improvements made and the practices that led to those improvements?

Table 3. Deciding what data to collect

Questions for review

Key questions

1. Have we collected all the necessary data required at student, classroom (e.g., teaching practices) and school (e.g., decisions about programme implementation) level to diagnose students‘ learning needs and to evaluate our teaching programmes?

2. Are our decisions on what data to collect based on the following principles (see Section 1.2):

Data to be collected - provides valid and reliable information about students‘ learning

needs, and the effectiveness of teaching and learning - includes data on classroom and school practices - provides evidence of sustainable outcomes for students and

teachers

Moderation

1. Have we established clear criteria that all teachers understand for marking the assessment?

2. Do teachers know and understand how to apply the marking criteria to students‘ work?

3. Is there a process to check and resolve differences in scoring?

Databases

1. Does our database allow us to easily collate the data we need for analysis?

2. How are we collating and storing data about classroom and school practices over time?

3. Are we recording achievement information alongside other important variables that we intend using to analyse achievement information (e.g., whether a student has participated in the intervention)?

4. Have we set up a database that allows us to match students over time and to compare these with absent / transient students?

5. Have we established sufficient quality assurance checks on the information in the databases? a. Check for accuracy b. Check for missing data

6. Do we need to call in expertise to check that our database meets our needs?

Analysis at start of inquiry cycle

1. Have we run sufficient analyses on our data to understand where students are in relation to an agreed reference point (e.g., National standards in reading, writing and mathematics, national norms)? (see Table 1 for the analyses you should consider running)

2. Have we checked how different groups of students in our school - whole school, classroom, important subgroups e.g., ethnicity - are performing?

3. Have we developed a system for diagnosing students‘ strengths and learning needs? (e.g., relationship between different learning needs, students‘ misconceptions and errors)

4. Have we linked the achievement information to information about classrooms and schools in order to understand what the teachers and leaders need to learn to support students?

Analysis to evaluate teaching programmes

1. Have we analysed the rate of gain compared to the expected rate of gain? (see Table 2 for the analyses you should consider using)

2. Have we analysed the rate of gain for different student groups in the school (whole school, classroom, important subgroups e.g., ethnicity)?

3. Have we analysed the achievement levels in our school to ensure that the gains made are resulting in achievement that is closer to what is desired?

4. Have we checked that the gains in achievement is a ‗real‘ change or whether the change could have happened by chance (e.g., the means at Time 1 and 2 are so close there is no real difference between them)?

5. Have we linked the achievement information to information about classrooms and schools in order to evaluate what we need to change to improve student learning?

6. Have we checked for improvements in student learning foci? (e.g., whether the intervention focus on vocabulary has impacted vocabulary achievement)

Complete a deeper analysisGeneral consensus that we needed to go deeper if we wanted to make accelerated progress

Complete a deeper analysisGeneral consensus that we needed to go deeper if we wanted to make accelerated progress

Or

• cluster becoming • disengaged• data improving but not accelerated

• cluster becoming • disengaged• data improving but not accelerated

• outside expert to get us out of a rut• problem based methodology • interesting beliefs surfaced

Either

• different way of working• need to pick up the pace• better connects between school and cluster

• new way of working• lead team (provider included) learning groups• sharper focus of writing

Brian Annan (2010)

Jackie

2010 PD

ContentDeveloping the K.Lit Way -Using the inquiry cycle

Formative practice – use of evidence ( std voice – std achievement – OTJ)

Effective Feedback – feed forwardTeacher observation: Develop cluster wide

Process ProtocolsImplementationReview cycle( picks up where Murray left off)

• Use of the Leadership BES and all other BESs• - Unpacking the BES

• Making the links between:• Ka hikitia - National Statements( NS. LLP, NZC)• ELPs and Numeracy framework and the K.Lit WAY

Moderation of the K.Lit WayDeveloping a MOUInclusion of K.C staff member in forum

Structure of sessions: x 2 per term

9:00-11:00 Team Solutions Principal and Lead teachers

11:30-3:00 Lead Team + Bev Lead teachers

3:30-5:00 Lead Team Planning of content for next meeting