ead 812 inquiry and analysis of school organizations · 2011-01-28 · ead 812 syllabus 1...

EAD 812

Inquiry and Analysis of School Organizations

Inquiry and applied research methods and skills. Data‐based decision making for organizational improvement. Analyzing schools as rational, natural, and open systems. Methods of data use for school administration. Legal and ethical concerns of data use. (MSU Catalog, 2008) Course Instructor Dr. Susan Printy, Associate Professor

EAD 812 Syllabus

1

Department of Educational Administration Michigan State University

EAD 812: Inquiry and Analysis of School Organizations Lansing Leadership Academy

Spring 2010 Dr. Susan Printy [email protected] 407 Erickson Hall, Office hours by appt (517) 355‐4508 Credits: 2 semester credits Day / Time: Wednesday 4:30pm – 7:30pm Location: Pattengill Middle School, 626 Marshall St., Lansing, MI 48912 EAD 812: Inquiry and applied research methods and skills. Data‐based decision making for organizational improvement. Analyzing schools as rational, natural, and open systems. Methods of data use for school administration. Legal and ethical concerns of data use. (MSU Catalog, 2008)

Overview: The central objective of this course is to support students in the refinement of their data collection skills and assist them in effective facilitation and decision‐making processes so that they can engage colleagues in using data to address school issues or problems. Because this is an application course, students will be challenged to use their developing leadership skills in their school settings. Students will consider their schools from three theoretical perspectives: the rational system perspective, the human relations perspective, and the open systems perspective. A key program or initiative in a school will focus students’ inquiry throughout the semester, as they consider how the focal program can be better understood and implemented if all three perspectives are brought to bear on the design and implementation of the program. Students will gather evidence of the program and will represent their learning through a variety of methods. The instructional sessions for EAD 812 will be augmented through the MI‐Life modules. No additional books are required for EAD 812, as reading material will be posted on Angel or downloaded from the web. We may refer occasionally to books used in 811. The calendar attached identifies dates and key topics for each class meeting. EAD 812 is a 2 credit course and requires 30 class hours. Note: This is a preliminary schedule of topics and may change based on need for customization, for instance, based on school schedules. A more complete syllabus will be provided on Angel several weeks before the class begins. Course Requirements: Attendance: Regular attendance and informed participation are crucial to your own development, but they are equally important to the progress made by the rest of the class. This is especially true

EAD 812 Syllabus

2

when completing a class in a compressed timeframe, as we are doing. Please make every effort to attend class regularly. Your work with your base group is especially critical. It is expected that you will contribute to positive outcomes for all group members through prepared and thoughtful participation, sharing of resources and provision of constructive feedback. Writing details: You will be learning to do new kinds of writing for this course and the one that follows. Some assignments have certain conventions that you must follow. For all assignments, it is important that your work be crisp and clean, without redundancy or grammatical and spelling errors. Some helpful hints for extended prose: First, writing needs a strong organizational plan. 1) Tell me what you are going to tell me. 2) Tell me. 3) Tell me what you have told me. Second, don’t expect your reader to “fill in the blanks.” Make sure that everything that is in your mind finds its way to the paper. I have high expectations for your final products and you should take advantage of opportunities for consultation so that you meet these expectations. For all papers, I am looking for clear, logical expression, free of jargon and informal speech patterns. You should follow APA style (check Google). I am very approachable and willing to provide feedback on your writing. Academic Integrity: The principles of truth and honesty are recognized as fundamental to a community of teachers and scholars. The University expects that both faculty and students will honor these principles and in so doing protect the validity of University grades. This means that all academic work will be done by the student to whom it is assigned, without unauthorized aid of any kind. (See General Student Regulation 1.00, Scholarship and Grades in the Spartan Life Handbook, for specific regulations.) For my part, I will exercise care in the planning and supervision of academic work, so that honest effort will be positively encouraged.

EAD 812 Syllabus

3

Calendar, Key Topics, ISLLC Standards, and Link to Lansing Needs

Knowledge, Skill area

Sample Texts, Activities Link to

Lansing Needs Alignment to 2008 ISLLC

Jan 13, 2010 Introduction – Schools as Organizations Inquiry and Analysis Legal/ethical concerns for using data

Looking at summer school reflections as artifacts of learning; what can we learn from them?

Developing district leaders who use a systemic and strategic approach to the district’s needs

ISLLC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

Jan 20, 2010 The Formal Organization of Instruction Michigan School Improvement Framework and related documents

MDE website/resources for School Improvement process

Focus on student achievement for all students and communicate that “all means all”

ISLLC 1, 2, 5

Jan 27, 2010 Ancillary Services and Professional Development

Decision making matrix Linked to student learning, connections, and optimize staff contributions

ISLLLC 1, 2, 3

Feb 3, 2010 No class – work with mentors to analyze formal systems in the school

Feb 10, 2010 The Social Organization of Schools General School climate

Resources for culture surveys

Recognize that change happens in the community. Leaders adapt to changing needs.

ISLLC 1, 2, 3

Feb 17, 2010 Professional Beliefs and Norms Professional Knowledge and Capabilities

Excerpts from Organizing for Success: Learning from Chicago Schools

Shared leadership, integrity, develop relationships with diverse individuals.

ISLLC 1, 2, 3

Feb 24, 2010 No class – work with mentors to analyze social systems in the school

EAD 812 Syllabus

4

Knowledge, Skill area

Sample Texts, Activities Link to

Lansing Needs Alignment to 2008 ISLLC

Mar 3, 2010 Analyzing Schools as Open Systems Linkages to Policy Environments

Policy documents: Race to the Top, Round 2, as a Michigan case

Understanding state and federal policy contexts

ISLLC 1, 2, 3

Mar 10, 2010 No class MSU spring break

Mar 17, 2010 Linkages to Resource Environments

Web list of resources Resources for school improvement

ISLLC # 1, 2, 3

Mar 24, 2010 Linkages to Family and Community Environments

Learning from Chicago schools

Communications, information about community resources

ISLLC 1, 2, 3

Mar 31, 2010 No class – work with mentors to analyze the open systems linkages in the school

Apr 7, 2010 No class Easter break

Apr 14, 2010 Managing the Systems and Processes of School Improvement Hearing from school administrators

Guest principals from Lansing area schools

Role models: Instructional leaders

ISLLC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

Apr 21, 2010 Balanced assessment Wrap up of cohort experiences and celebration

Guest speaker Dr. Ed Roeber, MSU

Assessment literacy

EAD 812 Handout

1

EAD 812 Looking at School Initiatives through a Systems Perspective

Where we focused our work in EAD 811 on classrooms, this semester we shift our inquiry to a school

level. We take the perspective that schools are systems, within themselves. However, schools are also

situated within larger systems, including district, state, and national level educational systems. To

organize our inquiry over the term, we will look at three primary perspectives: schools as rational

systems, as human or social systems, and as open systems.

We start with some reading and discussion about the system perspectives, with key to support your

semester work below:

Anderson, G., Herr, K., Nihlen, A. S. (1994). Studying your school: An educator’s guide to

qualitative practitioner research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Lezotte, L. (2009). Effective schools: Past, Present, and Future. Retrieved from:

http://www.effectiveschools.com/main/resources/resources‐44‐45.html

Senge, P., Cambron Mc‐Cabe, N., Lucas, T., Smith, B. Dutton, J., & Kleiner, A. (2000). Schools that

learn: A Fifth Discipline Fieldbook. New York: Doubleday.

Your work for this semester asks you to select one specific educational problem, program, or initiative in

your school. Examples include things such as the following: process that govern identification of special

services; how to organize the NCA planning process; alignment of K‐6 mathematics curriculum, process

for exploring and making decisions about high school grading policy, etc. The focal process or program

you select should be challenging or complicated, something that needs to be undertaken at the school

but that you aren’t quite sure about how to go about it. Thinking through the three system perspectives

will help you make informed and thoughtful decisions about how to proceed. By the end of the

semester, you should have a clear idea of a plan that will lead to successful implementation.

The first perspective to consider is the rational system perspective. The rational system is guided by

rules, roles, and routines. This is a very logical, straight forward way of thinking about organizations,

including schools. Just follow the rules, do what you are supposed to do, and things will work out. We’ll

explore the Michigan School Improvement Framework as a good example of a rational process for

continuous improvement. Your work for this part of the term is to generate a Logic Model for your

program or initiative. Several different models will be provided; you will select one that makes sense for

you in your situation. The point here is to think about the program theory – that is the rationale for how

the program is designed, what it is intended to do – and the implementation theory – that is, the tasks

that need to be done or action that needs to be taken. Your logic model will identify the inputs – that is,

what goes in to a program, the resources required, etc., and the outputs – that is, what you expect to

come out at the other end. The rational system perspective is the perspective that will be most familiar

to you. Key resources for this module include the following:

Michigan Department of Education Websites

School Improvement Framework: http://www.michigan.gov/mde/0,1607,7‐140‐28753_38959‐‐‐,00.html

EAD 812 Handout

2

Ed Yes!: http://www.michigan.gov/mde/0,1607,7‐140‐22709_22877‐‐‐,00.html

MI‐SAS: http://www.michigan.gov/mde/0,1607,7‐140‐22709_52634‐‐‐,00.html

The second perspective is the human relations or social systems perspective. This system looks focuses

on the “people” part of the equation, and is often under‐examined and under appreciated. When

considering your focal process from this system perspective, you focus on how people feel when

engaged in the work – their needs for safety, belonging, understanding, etc. What are they fearful

about? What are they avoiding? How can you motivate people to do more than they might naturally

want to? How can you plan so as to optimize everyone’s buy in to the process? The second part of your

semester project is to represent the social system – and concerns for people – in your planning

documents. To the extent that you “intersect” the rational and social system perspectives, the better.

Again, we will work with the School Improvement Planning process to focus our class discussions of

these perspectives. We will use an approach to this work developed at Harvard and adapted for the

Michigan Principal’s Fellowship, offered as part of the Michigan Statewide System of Support, by the K‐

12 Outreach Office at MSU. In essence, we “break down” the program theory from the Logic Model

even further, with a series of “If… then” statements, so that individuals have a better idea of exactly how

to do things. They have more information and they have more guidance for what to do. We also

provide appropriate professional development to them so they can accomplish the necessary tasks. For

instance, we provide training in using protocols so that individuals can interact in a more professional

way. We focus more deliberately on how teachers, principals, and other school staff engage in the cycle

of continuous inquiry into their practice. We look at the process of instructional rounds and the process

for working from identifying a problem of practice to making decisions about next steps. Additionally,

we explore both school culture and school climate and consider various surveys that can provide insight

and evidence for evaluating these concepts within schools. Key resources for this section include:

Data Wise

City, E. Instructional Rounds

Michigan Principals Fellowship (2010). Working toward Instructional Program Coherence. East

Lansing: Michigan State University.

Bryk, A., Sebring, P., Allensworth, E., Luppescu, s. & Easton, J. (2010). Organizing schools for

improvement: Lessons from Chicago. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Evertson, C. & Neal, K. (2006). Looking into learner‐centered classrooms. Washington, DC:

National Education Association.

For the third perspective, the open system perspective, we explore the requirements schools face from

policies that originate at multiple points in the larger national educational system. Correspondingly, we

will consider resources that come to schools from elsewhere in the system. As a case study for

consideration, we will look at the national policies represented in Race to the Top, through which

Michigan is competing with other states for additional money to carry out improvement efforts, and

trace its effects in the state. For instance, state legislators passed laws at the end of December 2009 to

EAD 812 Handout

3

require administrative credentials for the first time in sixteen years. Also, they enacted legislation that

requires educators’ evaluations to be connected – though in an unspecified way – to student

achievement data. Students will explore a list of web‐based resources that provide background for

policies and requirements. They will also find sources for selecting evidence‐based practice.

Additionally, they will look at particular vendors that relate to their chosen focal process for their

semester project. For your semester project, you will include a discussion of Regulations and Resources

that impact your focal process or program.

Example websites:

Federal / National

Department of Education: http://www.ed.gov

IES http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ies/index.html

Education Chairs in House (http://edlabor.house.gov) and Senate (http://help.senate.gov)

Education Week: http://www.edweek.org/ew/index.html

Policy organizations:

Brookings Institution http://www.brookings.edu/about.aspx

Center on Education Policy http://www.cep‐dc.org/

State

MDE website http://www.michigan.gov/mde

Professional Associations:

MASSP: http://mymassp.com/

MEMPSA: https://www.memspa.org/

ASCD: http://michiganascd.org/ or http://www.ascd.org/

NSCD: http://www.nsdc.org/

State/local foundations: http://www.michiganfoundations.org/s_cmf/index.asp

Education Alliance of Michigan http://edalliancemichigan.org/

Big city school systems

Citizen’s Research Council http://www.crcmich.org/

Mackinac Center http://www.mackinac.org/

Polling: http://www.publicpolicy.com/About.html

EAD 812 Handout

4

Fellowship: http://www.iel.org/epfp/state/mi.html

Research:

Wallace Foundation: http://www.wallacefoundation.org/Pages/default.aspx

Gates Foundation: http://www.gatesfoundation.org/Pages/home.aspx

WT Grant Foundation: http://www.wtgrantfoundation.org/

Regional educational labs http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/

Commercial:

Specialized Programs

What Works Clearinghouse http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/

Best Evidence Encyclopedia http://www.bestevidence.org/

EAD 812: Inquiry and Analysis of School Organizations Lansing Leadership Academy

Spring 2010

Samples of Student Work

<<Student Name>> EAD 812 Sample Student Work #1 EAD 812 RtI Analysis‐ Systems Perspective

1

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the first year’s implementation of Response to Intervention (RtI) at <<School name>>. Our local Intermediate School District (ISD) received a grant for 2009‐2011 school years to oversee the implementation of RtI at all school districts within the county. This paper will analyze the first year’s work as it applies to <<School name>> from the rational perspective, the social perspective and the open systems perspective.

Response to intervention integrates assessment and intervention within a multi‐level prevention system to maximize student achievement and to reduce behavior problems. With RTI, schools identify students at risk for poor learning outcomes, monitor student progress, provide evidence‐based interventions and adjust the intensity and nature of those interventions depending on a student’s responsiveness, and identify students with learning disabilities or other disabilities. (National Center on Response to Intervention)

The Pyramid of Intervention represents the three tiers of intervention for students in a Response to

Intervention model. Tier I includes core instruction that all students should receive for both academics

and behavior. Tier II includes students that have deficiencies, and should represent approximately 15%

of students. A higher percentage of students would suggest that the Tier I instruction is missing a

component of good instruction. Tier III represents the most at‐risk students and would include special

education students.


2

Rational System

Goals To create and implement a framework for the implementation of Response to Intervention (RtI) at <<School name>>.

Division of Labor Building Leadership Team‐ Attend ISD Professional Development and Work group sessions to create plan for implementation at the building level Established‐ meets monthly Assessment Team/Data Team‐ to determine both school‐wide and individual student need Team members have volunteered Content Area Literacy Team‐ to determine intervention strategies for improvement 7 teachers volunteered to attend reading instructional conferences with the goal of selecting appropriate interventions. Team will come together on May13 to plan goals for next year’s implementation Child Study Team‐ students at‐risk for school failure will be brought to team to determine intervention needed, or need for special education testing. Existing building team

Specialization Professional Development needed to implement strategies REWARDS, Six Minute Solution, Corrective Reading, PALS‐ School Wide Vocabulary Instruction

Standardization Create a protocol for determining interventions needed for student improvement in growth areas

Formalization Put standardization into formal task sheet‐ what assessments are given when, what cut off determines need, what interventions will be in place to meet need, how will progress be assessed (Student Intervention Profile, see RtI Forms)

Hierarchy Intermediate School District

RtI Project Coordinator‐ Lansing Public Schools

Lansing Public Schools Leadership Team

Building Leadership Team/ School Improvement Team

RtI Coach

Staff

Span of Control Our Building Leadership Team Content Area Departments

Exception principle It is expected that teachers follow protocols and systems that are put into place. These may include: bringing struggling students to the attention of the Child Study Team, implementation of strategies from staff professional development. Both the literacy coach and administrators should see evidence of strategy implementation in classrooms. If this is not evident, the principal would be responsible for taking further action with teachers.

Coordination Collaboration between RtI Project coordinator, RtI coach, building principal

Formal Organization There is not a formal blueprint in place for this system. We are currently creating a blueprint based on the expectations of the ISD and Lansing PS.


3

Analysis of implementation from a rational perspective

In its first year of implementation, <<School name>> is in the beginning stages of creating some strong

systems for RtI. We have adapted some systems that are already in place to move forward with RtI. For

example, the Child Study Team (CST) was viewed by many teachers as the place you recommend a

student that is not meeting standards to have them tested for Special Education. The CST would make a

judgment as to whether or not to test a student based on little information or adaptation of instruction.

The Building Leadership Team has found, as a result of professional development in RtI, that a new

model is needed. We have created the Educational Assistance Program (EAP) as an intervention room

for students to implement intervention, support student progress, and determine next steps. (See RtI

Forms) For the process of change to be effective, we have to have a clear system protocol set in place

and communicated clearly to staff. It is clear that teachers need time to adjust to this new process.

They need continual reminders of the procedures each month that students are brought to the team.

We have found that some grade levels are attentive to student need and they bring the appropriate

documentation to the meetings, while others never bring students to the meeting. To assure that

students are not overlooked, we are working on adding to the system, another way of identifying

students.

To support teacher understanding of the process, we have created documents that can be sent to

teachers each month that outline procedures, monitor student progress, and standardize procedures.

Questions

How knowledgeable are teachers on the purpose of RtI and their roles in this process? Do they see its

value?

Has the implementation of the EAP created any real change in the learning attitudes and achievement of

those students enrolled?

What are the greatest reading needs of all of our students?

How can we effectively communicate the ideas of the Building Leadership Team with the rest of the

staff?

How can we improve the communication of our systems at <<School name>> with the rest of the

district? Should there be a consistent expectation for buildings?


4

Social System

Survival After a framework of RtI has been embedded into the School Improvement Plan with specific expectations, teachers must face, each day, students who come to school with a variety of needs. With the support of their social circle within the building, they may go ahead with instruction in a way that they know and feel comfortable. They instruct students with that knowledge to make it through another day.

Individuals Administration takes opportunities to connect with, support and encourage staff to make positive connections with students and each other.

Needs Teachers are encouraged to take opportunities to improve their professional development by attending conferences relevant to their growth as it relates to student achievement.

Specialization Content area departments are to focus some instructional work. It appears that teachers primarily deliver instruction in a manner they choose.

Formalization As long as Content Area Expectations are implemented, teachers may choose the mode of delivery.

Informal Norms Without formal enforcement of some the structures established by school and district administration, teachers seem left to following the informal norms that have been established historically. The SIT is made of department chairs and people willing to do extra work. This leaves the rest of the staff inconsistently following procedures set in place.

Hierarchy The School Improvement Team is led by a teacher with the guidance of administration. Staff input is encouraged at all levels of implementation. Department Chairs are responsible for determining content of department meetings. There is not a formal accountability for what is expected or what occurs at these meetings.

Span of Control Administration does not require subordinates to be accountable for what happens in department meetings or classrooms.

Communication Expectations are communicated through regular email. It does not appear that all teachers check that source daily, although that directive has been given.

Informal Organization Teachers who are part of the decision making at the building level are more likely to follow procedures than those who may feel disenfranchised. Teachers may respond to “arbitrary” management decisions will simply not comply or will seek support from <<School district teachers’ union>> Education Association (EA).


5

Analysis of implementation from a social perspective

In addition to working within the school system of <<School name>>, the implementation of RtI must

work within the system of the Lansing Public Schools and the Intermediate School District. Within the

confines of these three rational systems the implementation of a new initiative must be sensitive to the

social systems that make up each rational system.

As the RtI Literacy Coach, I have been keenly aware of the nuisances of integrating these systems. One

of the difficulties includes the people that are part of the administrative social systems of the three

administrations. It is often unclear which administrative system is really “in charge” of RtI. There are

times that difficult decisions are needed, and who is supposed to make those decisions is unclear.

Having experience with a similar in Reading First, I have found myself more comfortable taking on some

of those responsibilities to assure that the people at my building level will have more confidence in the

larger system. This can lead to inconsistency within the district when implementation looks different at

different buildings.

Focusing more on the social systems within the building, I have found that there is a strong sense of

community. One barrier that I have found is the sheer number of teachers. I feel that because of that I

have a limited perspective of the informal norms and the understanding of the real culture of the

building. I have connected with the teacher leaders in the buildings. I am part of the School

Improvement Team and the RtI Building Leadership Team.

My interaction with others is fairly limited, so I’m not sure if I have a clear understanding of the entire

building culture. The teachers I work with are very hard workers and seem to use good instructional

strategies. They have a clear vision for the building and work hard to implement it. For that reason, my

perspective is that the teachers at <<School name>> are supportive of RtI and are beginning to

understand how to implement. I am probably missing a number of teachers’ negative perspective of RtI.

Recently, though, we were asked to make a stronger commitment to RtI Implementation with the

application for a MiBLSi Grant. As a requirement, we needed to vote to get 80% support for continued

work. I was concerned that we would not achieve this level of support. Being very aware of the social

systems at work, I worked with the Building Leadership Team on presenting the information to the staff.

I was proactive with information that would address what I anticipated would be their fears, and

included several staff to co‐present. We were able to get 82% support as a result of that.

I have been lucky that the assistant principal that I work most closely with appreciates the social systems

within the building. We have been methodical about implementation and have been purposeful in

attaching new ideas to things that are already a part of the building culture. For example, we will be

required to implement a Positive Behavior Support System next year. The staff was already interested in

a nearby school’s behavior system and we sent a team to visit that building and tailor the existing

system to meet the needs of our students. We have provided PD that spans the year so that teachers

can feel comfortable with what they are doing before being mandated into implementing immediately.

Teachers have been part of the decision making process and are more likely to implement when they


6

feel comfortable. Next year, we will up the urgency, but hopefully, teachers will have had time to adjust

and give input.

I have sometimes felt that there is not enough accountability of the teachers to the administrators, but I

will continue to see if that may, in fact, be purposeful. I believe it will be important next year to increase

the persistence and be rigorous in implementation of common instructional strategies. I have just

begun working with teachers on instructional strategy implementation in the role of coach. I expect to

encounter more resistance next year, as I will be working with all teachers, not just the volunteers.

Overall, I believe the social system that was already in place at <<School name>> has made it easier for

the implementation of the rational parts of RtI. It seems that teachers are more open to the ideas I am

presenting and are interested in implementing this framework.

Questions

How can we integrate the tenants of RtI and School Improvement into Department Meetings?

What commitment are teachers willing and/or able to give to improving student achievement?

What support are administrators willing to give to improving instruction that leads to achievement in

classrooms?

Open System

It is interesting to consider the open system at <<School name>> because RtI seems to be one of those

things that is coming to the open system of <<School name>>. As the one pushing it in, it is difficult to

see how it really affects the building. Again, I am not completely sure I have the perspective to see this

clearly.

<<School name>> has a reputation for being a tough school in the district. This perception, like other

<<School district schools>>, creates a reality where parents do not send their elementary students to

the middle school. It seems that this leaves a seemingly less desirable population to educate. As a

result, we are not educating the same elementary students that attended prior, we lose students, and

they are often our highest performing students. Clearly, scores are hard to maintain in this data driven

culture. We have fewer parents and community members who supportive of our program. This affects

the school morale and positive attitudes.

This leads to higher accountability to the community, school board and downtown administration. The

district seems to take a hard line on this, and teachers rarely feel empowered. It often feels that we are

continually responding to one arrow or another from the community. This sets central administration in

search of systems to fix our downfalls, and teachers sometimes feel it is at the expense of their

professionalism.

We are clearly in a funding difficulty at this time. Each year, teaching positions are cut and teachers

must leave their buildings, oftentimes, their positions are restored but they have lost the rights to the


7

position and end up at a new building. This has caused tension between the teacher’s union, the school

board and central administration. To increase funding, the district may apply for grants. These grants

are usually short term, and the foundation they are to create simply fades away with the money. It

brings into question any vision that the district might have, as the things they value do not remain

beyond the scope of the grant. It might just lead a teacher to cynicism.

It has been evident that teachers being introduced to the concept of RtI do not trust that this is

something that is valued or that will remain more than a few years. The above evidence supports why

that is so. Teachers are cautious at best and aggressively resistant at worst. For that reason, we must

be thoughtful in the strategies that we use to support the implementation of RtI.

Questions

How do we improve the expectations of parents on the achievement of students?

What resources can we acquire to support ongoing improvement on instruction and learning in a culture

of depleting funds?

Reflections

I am in the midst of implementing an “improvement process” into a middle school building in a role

leadership without an administrative position. It is valuable; however, without the position of

administrator, I am protected from many realities that the formal role may bring. This experience has

given me great insight into bringing changes to schools. Additionally, this project has given me an

opportunity to analyze that change in a complex manner.

As I attempted to analyze the three perspectives separately, it was clear how interactive the three

systems were. It was impossible to separate them completely, as they are intertwined on many levels. I

felt that if you want to really change part of the rational system, it is wise to consider the implications to

the social system to achieve the desired result. I was very purposeful, for example, when presenting the

MiBlSi grant (a change in the rational system) by including trusted teachers in the presentation. I knew

there would be informal discussion outside of the formal meeting, so I prepared those who were

supportive with information that I knew would get to those I was not so sure about. It was important

that the information be reliable and that my intentions be honorable, or that strategy would never work

again. I feel I was being proactive, however, I did not have a hidden agenda. I truthfully was willing to

support the decision of the teachers regardless of the outcome.

Inquiry Proposal

I am interested in determining how we can encourage more teachers to become more involved with the

decision making regarding further implementation of improving teacher instruction and student

achievement.


8

Recommendations

Content Area Literacy Team‐ create a model for the implementation of explicit vocabulary

instruction for all content area teachers with a focus of improving instruction and student

engagement.

Create a system for communication to make teachers aware of how decisions that are made.

Invite new teachers to Building Leadership Team.

Reading Instruction‐ monitor the implementation of reading instruction based on the needs of

at‐risk students through EAP, after school tutoring and differentiated instruction in the

classroom

Data management‐ create assessment protocol for universal screener for all students, progress

monitoring for students participating in intervention and share data with all stakeholders

Create formal protocol for assessments to determine and monitor intervention

Professional development‐ provide training for all teachers in vocabulary instruction, offer

support of coach, use department meetings for sharing information and as a support for

ongoing coaching. To assure that teacher needs are being met, give them an opportunity to find

trainings outside of school to bring back to staff. Create opportunities for teachers to have input

into delivery of professional development and planning for future activities.

RtI Forms

3 Attachments include:

Building Leadership Team Record Sheet

Procedure for referring a student to the Educational Assistance Program (EAP)

Student Intervention Profile

EAD 812 Sample Student Work #1 <<School name>> Leadership Team Meeting Record Sheet Group Members <<Participating teacher list>> Principal <<Principal>> Coach <<RtI Coach>> Date March 4, 2010 Topics Discussed

Content Literacy Workgroup‐ will work to investigate reading interventions by attending IISD trainings and recommend to BLT. Will oversee implementation of interventions and recommend future needs: <<Teacher list>> Most have registered for sessions in March, April and May.

Putting RTI into School Improvement Plan

EAP‐ update‐ All is going well. Students are receiving intervention in areas of behavior, reading and math. <<Coach>> will complete progress monitors on students in reading to note progress and adjust intervention.

School wide Instructional Strategies‐follow up on March 9 PD. For Further Discussion EAP‐ how will we evaluate the program and make adjustments. ______________________________________________________________________ Next Steps Goal: Action Steps

Who Task Completion Date

<<Coach>> Will find research to support the implementation of a school‐wide goal of vocabulary improvement in the content area. Will get information to <<Teacher>> as soon as possible.

3‐23‐10

<<Principal>> Announce to staff to bring examples of graphic organizers to March 9 PD. <<Coach>> will lead session to follow up last week’s PD.

3‐5

Content Literacy Workgroup Attend PD‐Should you meet before attending?

Next meeting: April 13‐ <<Location>> April 22‐ ISD TEAM mtg, 8:30‐3:30‐ <<Location>> April 30‐Mark Shinn, PhD – Professional Development, <<Location>> Bring to next meeting: Vocab ideas to share with group, Feldman article

EAD 812 Sample Student Work #1

<<School name>> Educational Assistance Program (EAP)

Description: The EAP has been designed as an intervention to meet the individual needs of students at‐risk for academic and/or behavioral performance. Criteria for admission consideration:

2 or more failing classes

Poor attendance (has been referred to truancy court, or is in the court system)

Behavior interferes with learning

3 or 4 on most recent MEAP assessment

AIMSweb scores falling below the benchmark target

Procedure Teacher will

Attend monthly grade level Child Study Team (CST) Meeting

Review and bring CA‐60 to meeting

Provide documentation of previous intervention strategies

Examples of student work

CST will make recommendation for intervention, which may include EAP.

EAP Assessment Procedure

All students will be given grade level R‐CBM. Students below grade level will be given Survey Level Assessment to determine area of need in reading. Goals and Interventions will be created for each student. Student progress will be monitored on a biweekly basis (R‐CBM).

EAD 812 Sample Student Work #1 Student Intervention Profile Student Name _______________________ Educational Assistance Program Grade ______________________________ <<School name>> ELA Teacher ________________________

Benchmark Assessment

Fall Winter Spring

MAZE

R‐CBM (WRC/E)

Special Concerns Frequently absent or tardy Behavioral issues Retention MEAP ELA_______ Math _______ List failing classes

___________________________________ ___________________________________

Current Information Currently reads about____words correctly in Grade___reading passages. Which is how well end‐of‐ ‐grade ______students read this material.

GOAL

In _____ weeks student will read _____ words read correctly with fewer than _______ errors from grade ______ passages.

Intervention Materials /Program

Used Monitoring (frequency and

measures used)

Survey Level Assessment (SLA) and Progress Monitoring (PM)

SLA G

rade

Level

Median

(WRC/E)

PM Date

(WRC/E)

PM Date

(WRC/E)

PM Date

(WRC/E)

PM Date

(WRC/E)

PM Date

(WRC/E)

PM Date

(WRC/E)

<<Student name>> EAD 812 Sample Student Work #2

1

PERSONAL LEARNING REFLECTIONS Standard 1: An education leader promotes the success of every student by facilitating the development, articulation, implementation, and stewardship of a vision of learning that is shared and supported by all stakeholders. Strengths:

In order to answer this, I first made a quick list of some of the activities and committees I have participated on:

MEAP gap analysis

MI Life training examined the school culture.

School Improvement Team

CT/RT Training

Writing across the curriculum

Aspiring Leader program observe and interact with staff in their classrooms

Team taught classes

Facilitate Saturday School

I am always looking for opportunities to learn and improve my instruction. I am always willing to share my ideas and make changes based on new information. I am a life‐long learner in this area and feel this is one of my strongest areas for leadership.

My current quest is to establish a common vision within the high school science department and set up steps to work towards it.

Not yet:

I need more experience in coaching other teachers and providing feedback to them. I will look for best practices and research‐based approaches to improving student achievement. I am going to look for professional development opportunities where I can learn more about planning teacher professional development that is meaningful.

Standard 2: An education leader promotes the success of every student by advocating, nurturing, and sustaining a school culture and instructional program conducive to student learning and staff professional growth.

Strengths:

Again, I started with a list of activities or committees I have participated with:

Small Learning Community Team Leader for 2 years

Science Curriculum committee

Science District Committee

Sharing with the department

HS Mass Training (High School Math and Science Success) with the Math and Science Center

BLAST (Building and Aligning Science Teaching)—class conducted by Western Michigan University

Common assessments for all science courses

Student achievement is always in the forefront of my mind.


2

I am always willing to collaborate with coworkers to create and improve our curriculum to help our students succeed. I am now working on the school improvement team and the district improvement team. These teams will help me create opportunities for teacher PD that will be used to promote improved curriculum and instruction.

Not yet:

I am not yet recognized as a school‐wide leader. This year I have made strides in getting recognition as a department leader and outside recognition from the Math and Science Center as a leader. We are getting new leadership in the form of a new Superintendent and a new High School Principal. My plan is to have as much personal contact with the new High School Principal as possible to help facilitate the development of the science department and its curriculum. In this way, I hope to show my leadership abilities. I will also look for opportunities to step up in leadership positions and participate in any way I can to develop my leadership skills.

Standard 3: An education leader promotes the success of every student by ensuring management of the organization, operation, and resources for a safe, efficient, and effective learning environment.

Strengths:

Some areas that I have participated in making <<School district name>> and specifically <<School name>> a safe, efficient, and effective learning environment include:

Part of Teacher Advisory Board (when it was up and running).

Promote safety in science classroom by providing student training

Formalizing the safety curriculum for each core science course offered

Monitor hallways during passing time

Facilities Committee

I try to utilize CT/RT training when time allows and situations arise. I protect the rights of my students in my classes and prevent or intervene when unsafe situations come up such as bullying. I am actively developing a written curriculum for safety in all of science classrooms.

Not yet:

I can take a more active role in developing procedures that ensure student safety in our building such as serving on the handbook committee where school policies are written. This is definitely an area where more education would be useful. I need to look at the bigger picture when it comes to running a school. Right now I am more focused just on running a department.

Standard 4: An education leader promotes the success of every student by collaborating with faculty and community members, responding to diverse community interests and needs, and mobilizing community resources.

Strengths:

I collaborate as often as possible with staff in my department and those outside as well. We are working on getting release time so that we can combine our efforts to complete the high school science curriculum. I have done MEAP gap analysis and through my classes at MSU have been looking at my school’s data for reading.


3

I attend as many school activities as I can to show my support. I especially enjoy the fall football season. Just living in the same area as my students and shopping and worshiping where they do, I show support of their interests.

Not yet:

I need to take a more active political role in my community. I also am not aware of all the resources available to our students. At this point, I usually refer them to the school social worker or the counselor.

Standard 5: An education leader promotes the success of every student by acting with integrity, fairness, and in an ethical manner.

Strengths:

I do my best at providing a fair (not necessarily equal) environment for our students. I have had several resource teachers refer their students to me because I am willing to work with them and provide them the most appropriate learning environment. I often remind myself that integrity is what you do when no one is watching you and try to live by this. I try to model for the students and teachers what it looks like to be fair and ethical.

Not yet:

I need to develop deeper more meaningful relationships with my students. This is something that I need to make time for and not just expect to happen.

Standard 6: An education leader promotes the success of every student by understanding, responding to, and influencing the political, social, economic, legal, and cultural context.

Strengths:

I am a member of a local organization called <<Organization name>> which has worked on many community issues. This would be in the area of advocating for children and families.

Not yet:

This is an area I feel I can really grow. I am not a very political person and need to become more aware of outside influences that affect the students in my school.

Standard 7: A school administrator is an educational leader who understands and comprehensively applies technology to advance student achievement. (MDE)

Strengths:

Use on‐line resources to present concepts in the classroom: United Streaming or power point presentations.

Utilize the media center computer lab for student projects

Electronic probes for classroom demos


4

I have become much more proficient in using technology since starting my training to become an educator. I have become more self sufficient at utilizing technology and less reliant on others to do it for me.

Not yet:

This is still a huge area of growth for me with science education focusing more and more on technology. My comfort level has increased but it still has a long way to go. I plan on looking for professional development opportunities to help build my skill level. I would like to be more familiar with Moodle and make my own web site. These PD’s are available so now it is a matter of taking advantage of them and then more importantly, incorporating what I learn into my classroom.


1

Personal Learning Reflection May 3, 2010 EAD 812 Standard 1: An education leader promotes the success of every student by facilitating the development, articulation, implementation, and stewardship of a vision of learning that is shared and supported by all stakeholders. Strengths:

I have lead the staff in developing and writing school improvement plans in the areas of ELA and Science incorporating staff collaboration and on‐going curriculum based staff development.

As a literacy teacher I have organized the staff in collection and collegial analysis of Diagnostic Reading Assessments (DRA), DIBELS, Observation Surveys and writing samples to monitor student achievement and plan instruction.

As part of the School Improvement Team (SIT), we have analyzed MEAP data noting trends, patterns, strengths and weaknesses, creating graphic representations of data analyses, selecting target areas, interventions, staff PD, support systems and monitoring plans.

Not yet:

Most data collection is limited to student achievement data. I need to gain more experience in the collection, analysis and application of perception data.

I have not yet been able to plan and conduct regular bi‐weekly SIT meetings where we monitor and evaluate progress relative to our School Improvement plan. Currently these meetings occur once every few months.

Standard 2: An education leader promotes the success of every student by advocating, nurturing, and sustaining a school culture and instructional program conducive to student learning and staff professional growth.

Strengths:

As a Science mentor teacher (3 years) and Literacy teacher (2 years), I conducted quarterly staff development sessions where we collaboratively reviewed content for a deep understanding, developed instructional strategies, assessment and monitoring plans, rubrics and collaboratively reached common understandings related to what constitutes quality work.

While working in these positions, I modeled and coached lessons in writing and science and developed a lesson observation and evaluation tool for co‐teaching sessions.

In co‐teaching situations, allowed for flexibility in delivery accounting for individual learning and teaching styles and comfort levels in content and co‐teaching situations. Awareness was developed that allowed for a range of possibilities in what was viewed as successful coaching.

I bring in a large amount of animals and other forms of natural interest artifacts, cultural artifacts as well as community resources to spark and guide student learning.


2

Not yet:

A variety of technologies have not been used in my collaborative work with other teachers.

In my current role as a class room teacher, I have not been able to replicate my success in developing a culture of collaboration as I had in my role as a mentor teacher.

Standard 3: An education leader promotes the success of every student by ensuring management of the organization, operation, and resources for a safe, efficient, and effective learning environment.

Strengths:

As teacher in charge for 9 years, I have had the opportunity to manage most aspects of the daily routine in the school:

Temporary staffing assignments, supervision and management of all building staff, facilitation of community services, conducting meetings, representing the building in community meetings, conducting fire, emergency and shelter drills, student discipline and meeting with parents, publishing newsletters, annual reports, staff handbooks and building policies and dealing with most district offices as building administrator.

Maintained up to date training in first aid and CPR.

Creation and maintenance of building budget and ordering of supplies. Not yet:

Formal teacher evaluations and teacher discipline

Complete documentation of all meetings

Standard 4: An education leader promotes the success of every student by collaborating with faculty and community members, responding to diverse community interests and needs, and mobilizing community resources.

Strengths:

I build and sustain positive relationships with families. I am very approachable and have an open door policy in my room. Parents walk in and assist through out the day. I have a knack for making people feel welcome, appreciated and needed in my classroom environment. Any one who enters is put to work with the kids. This immediately relieves any tensions and makes one feel useful.

I build and sustain deep relationships with the community. This year, I received a grant from Target Corporation to develop an on‐going relationship with senior volunteers (Retired Senior Volunteer Program) as the school’s kindergarten partners in adopting the Humane Society as our community service project. We have made dog treats, grew cat grass and collected donations in the form of supplies. We have visited the shelter several times and volunteered there.

Not yet:

I am weak in the area of collecting data in reference to community partnerships.


3

Standard 5: An education leader promotes the success of every student by acting with integrity, fairness, and in an ethical manner.

Strengths:

I attempt to model the principals of self‐awareness, reflective practice, transparency and ethical behavior with my students by directly teaching and modeling behaviors, utilizing think alouds and then provide opportunities for them to practice the skills.

I respect democratic principles in and out of my room.

I’m very self reflective and always consider moral and legal consequences of my behavior.

I value equity and diversity; recognizing that we are all more alike than different while at the same time celebrating differences.

Not yet:

At times, my recording system of individualized lesson plans, student observations, and student achievements can be spotty. I truly need to keep more comprehensive records of my student’s progress.

I need to improve my interactions with the adults in reference to transparency.

I need to balance self reflection with the ability to make prompt decisions.

Standard 6: An education leader promotes the success of every student by understanding, responding to, and influencing the political, social, economic, legal, and cultural context.

Strengths:

I am a strong advocate for children and families and make myself available at all times. I truly do not mind receiving calls or e‐mails from families at any time as I feel that it is my responsibility to assist them as needed.

I often am able to refer families to agencies or other individuals who are capable of providing the right kind of assistance.

Not yet:

I do very little to influence state and national decisions regarding student learning. I claim to be short on funds and time necessary to effect change.

At times, I tend to wait for emerging trends or initiatives to arrive to me before I react and adapt, though I pride myself on my adaptability.


4

Standard 7: A school administrator is an educational leader who understands and comprehensively applies technology to advance student achievement. (MDE)

Strengths:

I have training and experience in using instructional soft ware programs such as Break through to Literacy, Study Island, Star Fall , etc.

I have successfully utilized power point, and excel creating spreadsheets, graphs, tables, charts and pivot tables.

Not yet:

Though I have been trained in the use of many forms types of programs, I do not use many of them regularly and often have to re‐teach myself, not always regaining what I have once been able to use.

ead 812 inquiry and analysis of school organizations · 2011-01-28 · ead 812 syllabus 1...

Documents