Lake County Schools

Lake County Schools Investing In Excellence!

College and Career Readiness

Academic Services C² Collaborative

CohortNovember 15, 2012

Identify two ways you will facilitate PLCs that engage in courageous conversations about subgroup performance?

Common Board Configuration

I DO

• Define AMO state requirements and the achievement gap

WE DO

• Review data, identify trends and resources to disaggregate data by subgroup for utilization in PLCs

YOU DO

• Participate in a PLC using guiding questions and data to inform practice and identify strategies to close achievement gaps among subgroups

Novem

ber

15

, 20

12

Learning Goal: Participants will understand what, why, and how of subgroup performance relates to AMO targets and subgroup achievement gaps.

Ob

jecti

ves

Participates will connect AMO data to school achievement gap by engaging in courageous conversation and reflection based on PLC guiding questions.

Shifting GearsCircle Map: Why does an Achievement Gap exist in Lake County Schools?

NEXT STEPS:• Return to school site as a Change Agent and

share your capacity builder plan with your principal and determine next steps.

• Utilize AMO Technical Assistance PowerPoint

Benchmarks: District Goals*Student Achievement*Highly Developed and High Performing Staff

Sum-It-UpEssential Question: How do we revolutionize the way we teach, lead, and learn for 21st century success?Common Language:

•Elementary and Secondary Act (ESEA Waiver)•Annual Measurable Objectives (AMO)•No Child Left Behind (NCLB)•Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)

http://intranet.staff.lakeschools.local/17331086144457687/blank/browse.asp?A=383&BMDRN=2000&BCOB=0&C=55946




Lake County Schools

Vision Statement A dynamic, progressive and collaborative learning community

embracing change and diversity where every student will graduate with the skills needed to succeed in postsecondary education and the workplace.

Mission Statement The mission of the Lake County Schools is to provide every student

with individual opportunities to excel.

Lake County Schools is committed to excellence in all curricular opportunities and instructional best practices. This focus area addresses closing the achievement gap, increased graduation rate, decreased dropout rate, increase in Level 3 and above scores on the FCAT, achieving an increase in the number of students enrolled in advanced placement and dual enrollment opportunities and implementing the best practices in instructional methodology.

Academic Services

Academic Services

Curriculum & Instruction ~ Professional Development ~ Teaching & Learning

The Office of Academic Services encompasses the core business of Lake County Schools. We provide guidance and support to develop instructional leaders through the coordination of district curriculum initiatives, professional learning, along with teaching and learning programs that result in improved learning for ALL. Our goal is to work collaboratively with schools to continuously and significantly improve student achievement, align curriculum and instructional practice to Florida’s standards, assist schools to develop their capacity to implement data-driven planning and review processes that foster continuous school improvement.

Assurances We will ensure that we work with district staff and school administrators to design and

collaborate on systems that address professional learning needs related to improving student outcomes.

We will ensure that curriculum is current and at a high level (rigorous) meeting local, state, and national standards.

We will ensure that researched-based best practices (programs and processes) are utilized regarding student curricular needs and student learning patterns.

We will ensure services are provided that target closing the achievement gap by improving the performance of all students while drastically accelerating the achievement of students of color, English Language Learners (ELL), Exceptional Student Education (ESE) and students living in poverty.

Academic Services

Academic Services

21st Century Skills Tony Wagner, The Global

Achievement Gap

1.Critical Thinking and Problem Solving2. Collaboration and Leadership3. Agility and Adaptability4. Initiative and Entrepreneurialism5. Effective Oral and Written Communication6. Accessing and Analyzing Information7. Curiosity and Imagination

Academic Services

Bell Ringer: Circle Map

Why does an achievement gap exist between subgroups?

Who are our

subgroups?

Understanding the Achievement Gap

Transformational Education Ambitious Vision Extraordinary Teams Culture of Achievement Effective Management Results Orientation Continuous

Improvement Doing Whatever it Takes

(Extra Challenges = Extra Time & Extra Support)

http://www.cleanvideosearch.com/media/action/yt/watch?videoId=dfOj0WT8ReY&name=A+Chance+To+Make+History&uploadUsername=teachforamerica&hitCount=12246

http://www.cleanvideosearch.com/media/action/yt/watch?videoId=dfOj0WT8ReY&name=A+Chance+To+Make+History&uploadUsername=teachforamerica&hitCount=12246

Quick Facts

Over fifty years after Brown vs. Board of Education, there are still great disparities between students of color and white students in academic achievement.

Students of color are

disproportionately represented in the nation's dropout statistics: of the more than 1.2 million students who fail to graduate from high school on time each year, more than half are students of color, despite the fact that these students make up less than 40 percent of the high school population.

Only 57.8 percent of Latino students, 53.4 percent of African American students, and 49.3 percent of American Indian and Alaska Native students entering ninth grade earn a high school diploma four years later.

Though the graduation rate for Asian American students is 80.2 percent-roughly four percentage points higher than the white student average-students from some ethnic subgroups, like Southeast Asians and Pacific Islanders, do not fare as well academically.

R U C2 Ready?

What is Required?

Why is it Important?

How do we do it?

Focus on Subgroup

Performance

Existing Achievement

Gaps

Professional Learning

Communities • Proficiency for All

Students• College and

Career Ready Students

• Ensure Equitable Outcomes

• Race, Class, and Ethnicity should not be a predictor of performance or potential

• Disaggregated Data

• Identify Trends• Utilize PLC Guiding

Questions• Engage in

Courageous Conversation

• Address Barriers• Develop Solutions

Remember Today’s Objective: Participates will

connect AMO data to school achievement gap by

engaging in courageous conversation and reflection

based on PLC guiding questions.

You will use this form later to design an

initial framework to facilitate PLCs

focusing on subgroup data.

Why Annual Measurable Objectives (AMO’s)?

Florida’s waiver from reporting Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)

under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA),

requires the state to report performance on Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs) in several areas

of academic achievement.

What are the AMO Areas?

#

1

• School Performance Grade Target • School Grade

# 2

• Reading and Mathematics Performance Target• % Meeting High Standards - FCAT Level 3 and Above

#3

• Lowest 25% Performance Target• Adequate Progress of Lowest 25%

#4

• Comparison of Florida’s Student Performance to the Highest Performing States and Nations

• National comparison using NAEP• International comparison using TIMSS, PIRLS, and PISA

Characteristics of AMO’s

AMOs are determined separately for each school and subgroup (calculated individually), by subject area.

The AMO shows whether the school/subgroup is on track to reduce its percent of non-proficient students by half by 2016-17.

For each school and subgroup, a separate yearly target is set to reach the identified 2016-17 goal.

AMO Subgroup Status

All Students American Indian Asian Black or African

American Hispanic White

Economically Disadvantaged

English Language Learners

Students with Disabilities

Students are included in the following subgroups, which parallel subgroups reported in previous years for AYP

Impact of New Achievement Levels and Scoring Scales on Baseline Year

In December 2011, the State Board of Education (SBOE) adopted new achievement level standards for the state’s FCAT 2.0 assessments in reading, mathematics and the (EOC) assessment in Algebra 1.

As a required data-processing step for determining the “On Track” AMO targets in reading and mathematics, the FLDOE retrofitted the baseline 2010-11 FCAT 2.0 scores and Algebra 1 scores to the new FCAT 2.0 vertical scale and Algebra 1 scale with new achievement levels applied accordingly. (This is why AYP and AMO levels look different when comparing your data)

The retrofitted scores will be used in determining the proficiency level of subgroups for the baseline year of the calculation



I DO


WE DO


YOU DO


Novem

ber

15

, 20

12


Ob

jecti

ves













NAEP FindingsNational Assessment of Educational Progress

Scores for White and Asian students are higher, on average, than for Black, Hispanic, and American Indian students.

Hispanic students scored higher, on average, than Black students.

17-year-old Black and Latino students, on average, read and complete math at the 13-year-old level.

Attainment and Achievement Gaps

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) reports the following high school completion rates: 73 percent of Hispanics will complete high school or the GED 89 percent of Blacks will complete high school or the GED 93 percent of Whites will complete high school or the GED

There are notable gaps in who earns a bachelor's degree: 33 percent of Whites; 18 percent of Blacks; and 11 percent of

Latinos The NCES also reports that in 2000-01:

79 percent of adults over the age of 25 with a bachelor's degree had jobs.

64 percent of individuals who completed high school had jobs. Individuals who did not complete high school had a 34 percent

employment rate.

Total White Black Hispanic Asian American Indian

ED ELL SWD

2007/2008 0.6 0.6700000000000

01

0.41 0.49 0.72 0.59 0.48 0.34 0.32

2008/2009 0.62 0.6800000000000

01

0.44 0.53 0.72 0.59 0.53 0.4 0.35

2009/2010 0.62 0.6700000000000

01

0.44 0.56 0.75 0.61 0.53 0.4 0.31

2010/11 AYP 0.61 0.6700000000000

01

0.42 0.53 0.74 0.53 0.52 0.33 0.3

2010/11 AMO 0.55 0.62 0.34 0.46 0.66 0.53 0.44 0.24 0.24

2011/12 0.56 0.63 0.36 0.48 0.7 0.51 0.47 0.26 0.24

State 0.57 0.6900000000000

01

0.38 0.53 0.76 0.55 0.46 0.33 0.29

5%

15%

25%

35%

45%

55%

65%

75%

LCS FCAT Reading - % at 3 and Above by SubgroupThis chart depicts subgroup grade level performance from 2003-2011

compared with the No Child Left Behind annual AYP benchmarks

Total White Black Hispanic Asian American Indian

ED ELL SWD

2007/2008 0.66 0.73 0.45 0.56 0.78 0.65 0.55 0.44 0.37

2008/2009 0.66 0.72 0.46 0.6 0.8 0.71 0.57 0.47 0.37

2009/2010 0.68 0.74 0.46 0.63 0.82 0.64 0.59 0.49 0.37

2010/11 AYP 0.67000000000000

1

0.73 0.46 0.61 0.84 0.73 0.58 0.45 0.37

2010/11 AMO 0.55 0.59 0.32 0.45 0.73 0.6 0.44 0.31 0.26

2011/12 0.57 0.63 0.37 0.5 0.76 0.6 0.48 0.34 0.27

State 0.58 0.68 0.4 0.55 0.82 0.58 0.48 0.41 0.32

5%

15%

25%

35%

45%

55%

65%

75%

85%

LCS FCAT Math - % at 3 and Above by SubgroupThis chart depicts subgroup grade level performance from 2003-2011


Total White Black Hispanic Asian Ameri-can In-

dian

ED ELL SWD

2007/2008 0.91 0.92 0.88 0.87 0.95 0.94 0.87 0.8 0.7

2008/2009 0.92 0.93 0.89 0.91 0.95 0.95 0.9 0.86 0.75

2009/2010 0.94 0.95 0.92 0.93 0.95 0.9 0.93 0.86 0.78

2010/11 AYP 0.95 0.95 0.94 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.9 0.83

2011/12 AMO 0.79 0.82 0.71 0.76 0.91 0.82 0.74 0.59 0.5

State 0.82 0.85 0.75 0.81 0.9 0.8 0.77 0.68 0.56

5%

15%

25%

35%

45%

55%

65%

75%

85%

95%

LCS FCAT Writing - % at Proficiency by SubgroupThis chart depicts subgroup grade level performance from 2003-2011


Axis Title

Total White Black Hispanic Asian Ameri-can In-

dian

ED ELL SWD

2007/2008 0.91 0.92 0.88 0.87 0.95 0.94 0.87 0.8 0.7

2008/2009 0.92 0.93 0.89 0.91 0.95 0.95 0.9 0.86 0.75

2009/2010 0.94 0.95 0.92 0.93 0.95 0.9 0.93 0.86 0.78

2010/11 AYP 0.95 0.95 0.94 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.9 0.83

2011/12 AMO 0.79 0.82 0.71 0.76 0.91 0.82 0.74 0.59 0.5

State 0.82 0.85 0.75 0.81 0.9 0.8 0.77 0.68 0.56

5%

15%

25%

35%

45%

55%

65%

75%

85%

95%

LCS Graduation Rate- % at Target and Above by SubgroupThis chart depicts subgroup grade level performance from 2003-2011


Axis Title

Data Sources

Florida DOE Student Performance Results: Demographic Report https://app1.fldoe.org/FCATDemographics/

Florida DOE AMO Reports http://schoolgrades.fldoe.org

District Edusoft Demographic Reports http://www.edusoft.com

https://app1.fldoe.org/FCATDemographics/

https://app1.fldoe.org/FCATDemographics/

http://schoolgrades.fldoe.org/

http://www.edusoft.com/

2012 FCAT 2.0 Reading District Trends by Subgroup (Demographic Report)

2012 FCAT 2.0 Reading District Trends by Subgroups (Demographic Report)

Florida DOE AMO Reports



I DO


WE DO


YOU DO


Novem

ber

15

, 20

12


Ob

jecti

ves













Quick Facts

Each year, approximately 1.2 million students fail to graduate from high school, more than half of whom are from minority groups.

Percent of freshmen that enroll in at least one remedial course

Community College

Four-Year Institution

42% 20%

Alliance for Excellent Education, February 2009 edition.

Indicators of Achievement GapsNCLB Revisited

Performance on tests (e.g., statewide tests, Scholastic

Aptitude Test [SAT])

Access to key opportunities (e.g., advanced mathematics,

physics, higher education)

Attainments (e.g., high school diploma, college degree,

employment)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5hLJDBm2pU&feature=related

The Three Achievement Gaps

Circle MapDefining and Metacognition

How can courageous conversations about specific factors assist

with closing the achievement gap?

Factors Contributing to the Achievement Gap

Factors That Contribute to Achievement Gaps

Within Schools' Control Outside Schools' Control

Teacher- and Teaching-Related Factors•Uncertified and inexperienced teachers•Insensitivity to different cultures•Poor teacher preparation•Low expectations of students•Inadequate materials, equipment, and resources, including technology-based resources.

Families' Support of Students' Learning•Families' participation in school activities•Families' skills to support and reinforce learning•Students' TV watching and at-home reading.

Students' Background•Families' income level•Students' birth weight•Students' diet and nutrition at home•Students' mobility•Students' primary language (if other than English)

Families' Support of Students' Learning•Time family members are able to devote to support and reinforce learning. •Other Factors Societal bias (racial, ethnic, poverty and class)

Factors That Contribute to Achievement Gaps

Within Schools' Control Outside Schools' Control

School-wide Factors•Low expectations for student achievement•Lack of rigor in the curriculum•Large class size•Tracking groups of students in a less demanding curriculum•Unsafe schools•Culturally unfriendly environments•Poor, or no, instructional leadership•Ignoring cultural synchronization

Student-Related Factors•Students' interest in school•Students' level of effort•Students' feeling that they are, in part, responsible for their learning.

Factors in the Local Community•Economic opportunity for students' families•Access to health and social services•Community safety•Access to libraries, museums, and other institutions that support students' development•Access to child care and after-school programs and facilities.

Education Funding Shortfalls•State budget deficits•Unfunded federal mandates•Inequities in funding among school districts.

Jigsaw Activity

Number of 1-4 Each group will come together by identified

number and be assigned a Courageous Conversation to engage in for 5 minutes

Each group member will then return to their home group and provide a 2 minute summary of their courageous conversation

Home groups will update their circle maps with new learning

Each group will share out findings

Norms for Courageous Conversations

Listen first Stay present in the conversation Speak your truth without fearing what others

say Remember that everyone dos not communicate

in the same way Be willing to take risks Be comfortable with being uncomfortable Try to understand where others are coming from Understand that there may not be closure

Courageous Conversations

1. Do any of these factors contribute to achievement gaps in your school? Which factors contribute

and how?

2. How would we engage families differently if we

valued their cultural differences?

3. What would staff development be like

if we wanted to increase the

resilience of all students?

4. How would instruction change if we were focusing on what students know, rather than what they

don’t know?

Addressing Barriers

Barriers; the reasons (root causes) why certain subgroups are not meeting performance standards. Determine if any subgroup within the

population has a disproportionately lower rate that negatively affects the overall rate.

Develop targeted interventions to the identified subgroups, allowing the implementation of more precise, concentrated interventions.

Identify changes that can be made in systems

Actions That Close Achievement Gaps

Use effective research based instructional strategies. Maintain high standards for all students by providing

a rigorous curriculum. Understand and capitalize on students' diverse

cultures. Examine expectations, beliefs, and practices through

the equity lens. Serve as "first responders" in identifying students who

need additional instructional support. Participate in professional development that provide

them with strategies for working with students and their families who are not achieving success.

Practices That Close Achievement Gaps

Embrace an agenda to focus on ALL students and target research based strategies (TEAM: Instructional Review Look-For Sheet a.k.a “Green Sheet”)

Revisit assumptions about how learning occurs and integrate a broad discipline view (Lesson Study, CCSS –Common Core State Standards)

Reflect upon the ways you think about students and causes for low achievement (SIP: School Improvement Planning)

Understanding Comprehension School Reform to embrace a range of theories, focusing on systems and engage in comprehensive planning (FCIM: Florida’s Continuous Improvement Model)

Identify and reflect on types of learners in your classroom and redefine outcomes and results (PLC: Professional Learning Communities)

Capacity Building Planning Guide

What is it that we

want students/ teachers to learn?

How will they learn

it?

How will we know

they learned it?

What will we do

differently if they

have not learned it?

1. Based on our learning today, identification of data trends, and participation in courageous conversations complete the capacity building planning tool.

2. Each group will share with the large group

Remember Today’s Objective: Participates will

connect AMO data to school achievement gap by

engaging in courageous conversation and reflection

based on PLC guiding questions.

You will use this form NOW to design an initial framework to

facilitate PLCs focusing on subgroup

data.

Aligning Collaboration and Professional Learning

How Will We Know When Teachers Learn It?

What Will We Do When Teacher Don’t Learn It?

Lesson alignment Instructional practices are

based on data High student expectation for

ALL Progress monitoring is

culturally embedded Utilization of best

instructional practices daily Intrinsic motivation for

professional growth

Examining instructional best practices

Opportunities for professional development

Establish teacher support system/ demonstration classrooms

Opportunities to reflect on practices

Utilize problem solving method

Focus on Strengths Among Student Groups

Current Term Revised Term1. Achievement Gap2. Subgroups3. Racial and Ethnic

Minorities4. English Language

Learners5. Students with

Disabilities6. Economically

Disadvantaged

VERSUS

1. In Need of Enrichment and Support

2. Student Groups3. Students of Color4. Second Language Learners5. Variable Learners6. School Dependant or

Students Put at a Disadvantage

Summarizing Activity: Identify two ways you will facilitate PLCs that engage in courageous conversations about subgroup performance?

If we remove barriers and provide necessary support

to maximize student learning,

then school leaders and teachers that are best

qualified to provide solutions can improve

outcomes.



I DO


WE DO


YOU DO


Novem

ber

15

, 20

12


Ob

jecti

ves













Learning Goal: Participants will understand what, how, and why subgroup performance relates to AMO

targets and subgroup achievement gaps.

0-Not Using

•No understanding how the principles of an effective PLC contributes to the desired outcome of student proficiency

1-Beginning

•Little understanding how the principles of an effective PLC contributes to the desired outcome of student proficiency

2-Developing

•Moderate understanding how the principles of an effective PLC contributes to the desired outcome of student proficiency

3-Applying

•Consistent understanding how the principles of an effective PLC contributes to the desired outcome of student proficiency

4-Innovating

•In addition to criteria of Applying, enhanced understanding, how the principles of an effective PLC contributes to the desired outcome of student proficiency

Academic Services

Lake County Schools

Documents

Transcript of Lake County Schools