academic parent-teacher teams (aptt)
Post on 09-Feb-2016
145 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Academic Parent-Teacher Teams (APTT)
Maria C. ParedesSenior Program Associate - WestEd
Parent-Teacher Collaboration To Drive Student Achievement
Bilingual Coordinators NetworkNovember 16, 2012
Today We Will:
Develop a collective understanding of effective family engagement
Look at supporting research Learn about Academic Parent-Teacher Teams
as a promising practice and its outcomes to date
Family Engagement is parent-teacher collaboration to
drive student achievement.
National Family, School, and Community Engagement Working Group. June 2009
Leveraging Time: Connecting Home and School Learning
33% Asleep
10% School
57% Away from school
Student time: Six hours and fifteen minutes of instruction 180 days per year
Research Indicates That Family Engagement Is A Key
Component Of Effective School Reform
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Weak
Strong
Family Engagement Matters for Students and Schools
% o
f sch
ools
sub
stan
tial
ly
impr
ovin
g in
rea
ding
Bryk, A.Sebring, P., Allensworth, A., Luppescu, S., & Easton, J. (2010). Organizing schools for improvement: Lessons from Chicago. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
5 “essential supports” predicted dramatic school improvement
Combined, supports had greater impact
Weakness over time in any area undermined improvement
What Kinds of Family Engagement Lead to Increased Academic Achievement? The Research
Meta-analyses find that:
Academic socialization matters most.
Home-based family engagement efforts predict student achievement.
Communication with school staff and participation in school-based activities is also important.
There is conflicting evidence about homework help.
APTT Theoretical Framework Concerted cultivation—Annette Lareau, 2003
Research suggests that schools have standardized views of the proper role of parents in schooling. Social class and cultural capital provide parents with unequal resources to comply with teachers’ requests for participation in student learning.
Self-efficacy—Hoover-Dempsey, 1997Research underscores that parents’ contributions to students’ education are grounded in large part in their role construction, invitations to participate, and self-efficacy for involvement.
High expectations—William Jeynes, 2003, 2005, 2007A series of three meta-analyses hold that the most influential components of family engagement are the most subtle, like high expectations, loving and effective lines of communication, and parental style.
Academic Parent-Teacher Teams: A Promising Practice
Academic Parent Teacher Teams Started in Creighton, Arizona in 2008 as part of district-wide
reform effort Repurposes traditional parent-teacher conferences Three classroom/group meetings and one individual meeting a
year Main components: Sharing data, modeling and practicing learning
activities, setting short-term goals, and developing classroom networks
Outcomes on: reading fluency, Mathematics, parent efficacy Participating teachers need ~8-10 hours of professional
development support
From Low to High Impact Strategies
Parent-Teacher Conferences
Academic Parent-Teacher
Teams
30-40 minutes a year of parent-teacher contact time
25-30 hours of teacher time per year to prepare and deliver
Little to no accountability for teachers and families
Inconsistent quality from classroom to classroom
No measurable outcomes
4.25 hours a year of parent-teacher collaboration time
Data drives engagement
Families receive information, tools, and strategies to support learning
SMART goals for every student
High expectations for teachers and families
Measurable outcomes
Theory of Action
In The Video
Look for: Welcome and Icebreaker Data Review Modeling of Activities Practice of Activities and Materials Setting 60-Day Goals
APTT Video
Activity
In teams, discuss reactions to the APTT video. Include observations about: Data, modeling, materials, practice, and academic
goals Implications for parents of English learner students Implications for school improvement
APTT Framework
Personal invitation
Student data
Modeling, practice
and materials
Goal setting
Networking APTT Group Meeting Process
• Welcome and Icebreaker• Review of grade-level foundation skills • Data review • Modeling, materials, and practice• Setting S.M.A.R.T. goals
Three 75-minute team meetings One 30-minute individual
Foundational Grade-Level SkillsTo Anchor Parent-Teacher
Communication and Collaboration
Aligned to Common Core Standards Promote grade-level success Demand home practice Are measured regularly through common formative
assessments Are the academic currency between parents and
teachers
Background on APTT: The Creighton Story
Inner city district Nine K-8 schools 92% Free or reduced lunch 85% Hispanic 45% English learners 65% of parents had less than an 8th grade education 23% of parents have a GED or high school diploma 11% of parents started high school but did not finish 1% of parents have a college degree
Steps Taken at Creighton Year 1 = 11 teachers Year 2 = 79 teachers Year 3 = 187 teachers This year = over 210 teachers
Professional development system for teachers and administrators System for Parent Liaison training System for APTT teacher planning assistance and coaching System of parent workshops focused of student grade-level
learning System for evaluation and improvement
The APTT Model To Date:Districts/Schools in:
Arizona California Colorado Nebraska Nevada Washington, DC
2009-2010 = 11 classrooms
2010-2011 = 79 classrooms
2011-2012 = 245 classrooms
2012-2013 = about 1,095 classrooms or about 27,375 children
Professional Development and Technical Support to Schools
Orientation and action planning with school leadership team
Ongoing training, planning support, and coaching for teachers
Develop internal expertise Parent focus groups Data collection, evaluation, and refinement of practice
Data Sources at Creighton
iSTEEP Student Data Results Parent Surveys Teacher Interviews Teacher Reflections Parent Interviews Student Interviews
2011-2012 Assessment Outcomes at Creighton (iSTEEP Scores in nine schools)
Apparent APTT benefit for decreasing % of students at frustration level 30% - 19% =11%
Apparent APTT benefit for increasing % of students at Mastery in Reading 42% - 27% =15%
2011-2012 Assessment Outcomes at Creighton (ISTEEP Scores in nine schools)
Apparent APTT benefit for decreasing % of students at Frustration in Math 53% - 36% = 17%
Apparent APTT benefitFor increasing students at Mastery Level 36% - 21% = 15%
Assertions: Qualitative Outcomes
(surveys, interviews, and teacher reflections)
Parent-teacher communication—The academic information shared with families increased awareness and facilitated shared effort in the student learning process.
Parent engagement—Parents welcomed teachers’ invitations to be involved and to be held to a higher set of expectations for engagement because coaching and support were provided.
Teacher capacity—Teachers’ ability to lead and motivate their parent classroom communities was a process of adaptation, time commitment and preparedness.
25
Assertions: Qualitative Outcomes
(surveys, interviews, and teacher reflections)
Student achievement—Many students met or exceeded academic expectations with confidence when parents and teachers created collaborative structures of support.
Systematic approach—APTT provided the additional time and structure teachers needed to share expectations, data, activities and materials that parents needed to be engaged in the student learning process.
APTT in Washington, DC with support from the Flamboyan Foundation
Seven schools in 2011-2012 Seventeen schools in 2012-2013
2011-2012 Pilot Results in DC
Grades # students
% of students
receiving a home visit
Average APTT
attendance 2011-
2012
Daily student attendance
# of suspensions per student
DC-CAS Overall Proficiency *
2010-2011 2011-2012
2010-2011 2011-2012
2010-2011
2011-2012
DCPS School #1
Pres-5 243 73% 42% 95.1% 96.9% 21 6 7.8% 10.6%
+1.8% -68% +2.8%DCPS School #2
PreK-8 676 36% 93% 97.7% 98.4% 10 1 81.7% 82.7%
+0.7% -87% +1.0%DCPS School #3
PreS-5 379 62% 54% 92.8% 96.4% 246 12 9.6% 23.4%
+3.6% -95% +13.8%PCS School #4 PreK-6 310 36% 77% 94.4% 94.7% 60.3% 61.0%
+0.3% +0.7%DCPS school #5
PreS-8 472 11% 59% 93.2% 96.8% 23 40 18.9% 28.0%
+3.4% +63% +9.1%Partner School Average
44% 65% 94.6% 96.6% 300/1739 59/1770 35.6% 41.2%
+2.0% -83% +5.6%DCPS Elementary Average
94.0% 95.0% 1,192/ 20,214
1,579/ 20,521
42.5% 45.4%
+1.0% +31% +2.9%
Flamboyan Foundation, Washington ,DC
Operationalizing Family Engagement
Create a shared vision of what effective family engagement looks like
Adopt a research-based model: APTT Provide ongoing professional development and support for
school administrators, teachers and staff Integrate FE into the selected core areas of school
improvement Build internal expertise for sustainability Collect data, evaluate, refine
Metrics
Challenges Refocusing the mind set of administrators and
teachers Perceptions and believes about families Fidelity to the model Budget allocations
Teacher professional development Practice materials Translation services for families Childcare
Time
Potential Funding Sources
Title I
Title III
21st Century
Homeless
Migrant
Early Childhood
Special Education
These programs require compliance in family engagement
but efforts by schools/districts are
fragmented and lack a shared vision for
effective family engagement
Questions?
top related