1

HHS’s Journey - Connecting the Dots:New Illinois Learning Standards (NILS)

Danielson Framework Instructional Practices Inventory (IPI)

Dr. Karen GauenPrincipal NBCT 2004 & 2014Highland High School

Hilary Wagenblast, HHS TeacherIPI Teacher Leader Aspiring Administrator

Our Journey: Connecting the Dots Map

1. the Effective Teacher

2. the Danielson Framework

3. the New Illinois Learning Standards (NILS)

4. the Instructional Practices Inventory (IPI)

2

3

1. Our Journey to Connect the Dots: The Effective Teacher

“The one factor that surfaces as the single most influential component of an effective school is the individual teachers within that school.”

(Marzano, The Art and Science of Teaching, 2007)

1. Our Journey to Connect the Dots: The Effective Teacher

“Research has shown us that teachers’ actions in their classroom have twice the impact on student achievement as do school policies. . .” (Marzano, Educational Leadership, 2003).

4

5

What is an Effective (Exemplary) Teacher?

A three-year study of 859 students in science classes, grades 6, 7 and 8. Effective teaching was defined as:

• All students are highly engaged most of the time in meaningful work (HO/D)

• Instruction is purposeful; the lesson is well-designed and artfully implemented

• Flexibility and responsiveness to students’ needs/ interests

• Instruction is highly likely to enhances most students’ understanding of the discipline

(Johnson, Kahle & Fargo, Effective Teaching Results

in Increased Science Achievement for All Students, 2006)

STUDENT PERCENTILE ENTERING

STUDENT PERCENTILE

LEAVING*Average School/ Average Teacher

Highly Ineffective School/ Ineffective TeacherHighly Effective School/ Ineffective Teacher Highly Ineffective School/ Highly Effective Teacher

Highly Effective School/ Average Teacher Highly Effective School/ Effective Teacher

Teacher Impact on Student Learning

5050

50

50

50

50

503

37

63

78

96

Cumulative effect after three school years (Marzano, 2000)

1. Our Journey to Connect the Dots: The Effective Teacher

What Do Effective Teachers Need? (NEA 2009)

•Basics

•Trust and Respect

•Supportive leadership

•Effective teacher leaders

•Time to plan/collaborate

•Quality professional development

7

8

1. Our Journey: The Effective Teacher

9

Our Journey: 1. The Effective Teacher

You Make a Difference at HHS!

Presented to:

For:

Date:

Thanks from the Faculty and Staff for making HHS a better place to be!

11

12

Connect the Dots to Accountability:2. The Danielson Framework

The Danielson Framework:

Domain 1: Planning and Preparation

Domain 2: The Classroom Environment

Domain 3: Instruction

Domain 4: Professional Responsibilities

13

2.Our Journey to Connect the Dots: Domain 3 – Instruction

Components for Domain 3:

3a. Communicating with Students

3b. Use Questioning/Discussion Techniques

3c. Engaging Students in Learning

3d. Using Assessment in Instruction

3e. Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness

14

2. Our Journey: Indicators for Component 3C:

• Enthusiasm for learning

• Learning encourages problem-solving

• Students “work” rather than watching teacher “work”

• Higher-order, deeper thinking (HO/D)

School-wide Reading Standards

School-wide Writing Standards

3. HHS’s Journey: New Illinois Learning Standards (NILS)

HHS Focuses on ELA:

15

16

3. HHS’s Journey: NILSPrioritize School-wide Reading Goals

Teachers:

1. Select material; curricular needs/text complexity

2. Lessons cognitively engage students (HO/D)

Students:

3. Understand central idea/summarize text

4. See different perspectives

5. Cognitively engaged (HO/D)

17

3. HHS’s Journey: NILSPrioritize School-wide Writing Goals

Teachers:

1. Encourage HO/D

2. School-wide rubric

Students:

3. Clear sentences, paragraphs, essays

4. Arguments with valid reasoning

5. Text-based evidence

6. HO/D

4. HHS’s Journey: The IPI “Connects the Dots”

1. The Effective Teacher

2. Danielson

3. Illinois State Learning Standards 18

19

4.Our Journey - Why the IPI?

We wanted:

• Better student-learning experiences

• Teacher collaboration

• Data about our school

• Improve inside out, not top down

4. Our Journey: The IPI

1995-96 School Improvement Project

Dr. Jerry Valentine and Grad Student B. Painter

•10 ES, 10 MS, 10 HS

•2+ years Engaged Learning

20 Years later . . .

•35,000+ educators certified

•130-150 IPI workshops

•Data from hundreds of thousands of observations

•High-tech (1:1) schools (IPI-T)20

21

4. Our Journey: Using the IPI

• IPI is a process for quantifying how kids are cognitively engaged in learning.

• It’s a framework for teachers to collaboratively study those data.

4. Our Journey: Using the IPIIPI Categories—Higher Order/Deeper (HO/D)

6– Student Active Engaged LearningHigher-order learningAuthentic, hands-on, problem-based, research, etc. forms of learning

5- Student Learning ConversationsHigher-order learningConversations among students who construct knowledge together

4. Our Journey: Using the IPIIPI Categories: Lower-Order/Surface (LO/S)

Direct Instruction and Student Supervised Work

4—Teacher-led InstructionStudents attentive to teacher-led lessonStudents listen to teacher share, explain, give directions

3—Student Work with Teacher InvolvedStudents work with teacher; support is evidentStudents do worksheets, answer questions, take tests

4. Our Journey: Using the IPIIPI Categories – LO/S and Disengagement

Student Independent Work and Disengagement

2—Student Work w/o Teacher InvolvedStudents work with teacher-support not evident (independent)Worksheets, answering questions, taking tests

1—Not Engaged in Learning the CurriculumStudents not engaged with the curriculumTalking, inattentive, misbehaving, etc.

4. Our Journey: Using the IPI• Teachers code “typical” day

• Code days announced

• Code students, not teacher

• Code range 1 – 6 (not a hierarchy)

• Systematic coding

• Anonymous codes

• Data of school-wide cognitive engagement

• Teachers share data

• Teachers collaborate/study/learn

• School improvement 25

H0/D LO/S

Higher-Order/DeeperCategories 5-6

• Analysis

• Critical Thinking

• Problem Solving

• Decision Making from Analysis

• Reflection, Goal Setting, and Strategizing from Analysis

• Evaluation, Conclusions, and Synthesis from Analysis

• Creative/Innovative Thinking

Lower-Order/Surface

Categories 2-3-4

• Recall and memorization

• Basic Fact Finding

• Simple Understanding

• Knowledge/recall of facts, details and elements

• Knowledge/recall of processes, algorithms, methods, and strategies

• Practice to Embed/Internalize Skills or Processes

Webb’s DOK

Bloom’s Taxonomy

Marzano’s Taxonomy

New Bloom’s

26

Typical LO/S to HO/D Ratio

27

75% to 80%

15% to 20%IPI research has consistently documented an average K-12 LO/S to HO/D ratio in

pre-intervention/typical school settings of about 4.5 to 1. See the IPI website research section at (www.ipistudentengagement.com) See also Hattie, Visible Learning for Teachers, pp. 29-32.

Typical Baseline Ratios 2004 – 2014/2 Years After IPI Intervention (Valentine 2015)

Grade Level

HO/D LO/S Disengage

Check LO/S:HO/DPre

LO/S:HO/D2 Yr.

ES - Pre 21 76 3 100 3.62

ES – 2 yrs.

28 70 2 100 2.50

MS - Pre 18 77 5 100 4.28

MS –2 yrs.

25 71 4 100 2.84

HS - Pre 15 78 7 5.20

HS – 2 yrs.

23 73 4 3.17

28

4. Our Journey: The IPICollaboration - The Elusive Dot

“How will teachers transform their practice to meet [CCSS] expectations?

In fields like trauma care and the building trades that have seen sharp gains in quality over the past generation, the emergence of new standards for professional practice coincided with a focus on improving collaborative decision-making and inquiry to solve problems in real time.

If we want to see similar gains in education, we must structure for success by understanding that effective collaboration in schools doesn’t occur by happenstance—it requires purposeful action” (L. Darling-

Hammond, Washington Post, 2013).29

Our Journey: The IPI

How Did We Start?• One ROE training = IPI Coder

• Coder collects data and presents

• Faculty collaborated and answered 4 questions

• IPI is FREE so we added TRAINED CODERS

Effective teachers + Danielson + NILS + IPI =

Engaged Learning, Collaborative Culture30

4. Our Journey: Using the IPI

The Role of the Administrator:

•Create a trusting climate

•Understand the IPI

•Support the process

•Provide resources

•Commit long term

4. Our Journey - Using the IPIThe Role of the Teacher:

•Understand the IPI

•Teach “normally” during coding

•Faculty Collaborative Learning Conversations

•Be trained (optional)

•Code (optional)/IPI Team (optional)

•Professional Development (optional)

•Pinterest Page (optional)https://www.pinterest.com/hhsipi/boards/

32

33

34

35

HHS’s 4 Year Trend of Students Who Met College Readiness Benchmarks

GraduationYear

EnglishHHS/IL

MathHHS/IL

ReadingHHS/IL

ScienceHHS/IL

Met all 4HHS/IL

2012 65 65 45 44 54 47 30 30 26 23

2013 62 63 43 42 45 41 34 35 20 25

2014 62 62 45 51 48 41 34 35 28 26

2015 66 63 50 41 48 41 46 37 33 26

36

HHS’s 4 Year Trend of Average ACT Scores

Graduation Year

HHS State Poverty RateHHS

2012 20.7 20.9 22.2

2013 20.8 20.6 28.7

2014 21.1 20.7 29.0

2015 21.4 20.7 Approx. 30+

37

4. Our Journey: Using the IPI

•ALL teachers included

•IPI focuses on MY school

•School-wide collaboration

•School-wide HO/D

•Improved culture

•Data for school improvement

38

HHS’s Journey Continues

39

Cognitive Engagement; Collaboration

Effective Teacher

Danielson NILS

IPI

40

41

HHS’s Journey: The Dots Connect . . .Effective Teacher; Danielson; New Illinois Learning Standards; The IPI

“Of all the approaches available to educators to promote teacher learning, the most powerful is that of professional conversation.

Reflective conversations about practice require teachers to understand and analyze events in the classroom. In these conversations, teachers must consider the instructional decisions they have made and examine student learning in light of these decisions.”

C. Danielson (2009),Talk About Teaching; Leading the Professional

Conversations.

42

Connecting the Dots: My School’s Journey

• Effective Teachers engage students in higher-order, deeper learning

• Effective Teachers collaborate to change instruction

• Danielson’s Framework looks for engagement in higher-order, deeper learning

• Danielson encourages faculty collaboration to improve instruction

• New Illinois State Learning Standards incorporate engaging students in higher-order, deeper learning

• IPI encourages faculty collaboration to increase the number and quality of higher-order, deeper learning experiences

• IPI provides a framework for teachers to work together, creating a faculty that strives to be Effective Teachers

Contacts and Credits: • Dr. Karen Gauen, Principal of Highland High School,

kgauen@highlandcusd5.org

• Hilary Wagenblast, Teacher Leader/Aspiring Administratorhwagenblast@highlandcusd5.org

• Superintendent Mike Sutton and Assistant Superintendent Derek Hacke, Highland Community Unit School District 5 http://www.highlandcusd5.org/

• Marvin Warner, Madison County ROE/Jan. 21 training, mwarner@roe41.org

• Dr. Jerry Valentine, ValentineJ@missouri.edu

• www.instructionalpracticesinventory.com

43

Questions and Discussion

44