flexible learning year application 2013-2016 presentation at public hearings
TRANSCRIPT
Flexible Learning Year
Results/Accomplishments of Fly 1
Focus for FLY 2
Flexible Learning Year Application2013-2016
Presentation at Public Hearings
FLY 1--Goals Schedule more high impact
learning time prior to high stakes assessments
Work collaboratively to improve teacher effectiveness
1. Schedule and conduct three (3) Public Hearings
2. Commit for three (3) years
3. Instructional time => instructional minutes in 09-10
4. Districts must adopt these common calendar dates
The first day of school – August 19, 2013 First semester will end—December 20, 2013 The first day of second semester --January 6 or 7, 2014 Three full Joint Staff Development days--TBD Two “Early Out” professional development days--TBD
Eight Requirements of Participation
5. Commit $10 per pupil to consortium joint fund $10 per pupil X 16,000 pupils = $160,000
annually Funds used to conduct FLY activities
6. Identify FLY Professional Development representative
7. Commit to continue development of Professional Learning Communities
8. Commitment to create and share data w/consortium and MDE
Eight Requirements of Participation
High Impact Learning Days
Rescheduled Days on School Calendar
Create “Time” to prepare for State Assessments Provide students additional time prior to state testing—move 7-10 instructional days from end of school calendar to beginning of calendar
Increase Student Motivation Maximize “high impact instructional time”
Create a Sensible, Natural Semester Break Between the first and second semesters
Do students perform better on statewide assessments
in years in which they have more school days to
prepare?
Research –More Time Makes a Difference!
Unscheduled School Closings and Student Performance
Dave E. Marcotte and Steven W. HemeltJuly 2007
Research--Unscheduled School Closings and Student
Performance
Studied the impact of school closures (lost instructional days) on student performance using data from Maryland Public Schools.
Reviewed data of students in the 3rd, 5th and 8th grades who took Maryland’s standardized math and reading assessments from 1994 through 2005.
Research--Unscheduled School Closings and Student
PerformanceFindings—
Each day lost reduced the percent of 3rd grade children performing satisfactorily on the reading exam by 0.508 percent and on the math exam by 0.527 percent
In years with an average of :
five (5) unscheduled closings, nearly 3% fewer third graders performed satisfactorily on reading and math assessments than would have if there were no unscheduled closings at all.
ten (10) unscheduled closings, more than 5% fewer third graders performed satisfactorily on reading and math assessments.
The higher the concentration of low income students, the more profound the negative impact.
The negative impact on student achievement in reading and math at the 5th and 8th grade levels was less profound than the impact for 3rd graders.
Research--Impact on AYP Status
Implications of lost instructional days on likelihood of making AYP If there had been no unscheduled school
closures-- In 2003 in reading, 30 of 52 failing elementary
schools would have surpassed the AYP threshold.
In 2003 in math, 34 of 56 failing elementary schools would have surpassed the AYP threshold.
The researcher’s concluded that additional days of instruction prior to testing do improve achievement on standardized tests.
Pooled Resources for Professional Development
Enhanced Professional Development Opportunities
Consortium Districts pooled resources Funding-- $10 per pupil X 16,000 pupils = $160,000
annually Provided Professional Development Opportunities for
Professional Staff that could not have been provided by any single isolated district
FLY Professional Development Team (PDT) One representative from each school district PDT met periodically throughout year to coordinate activities
Research--Teacher Induction Programs
“The experiences of the first days and years in an educator’s career are crucial and can either positively or negatively impact his or her career, as well as student achievement.”
Minnesota Educator Induction Guidelines p. 6
Research--Teacher Induction Programs
The Minnesota Department of Education (2007) reported that for the first-year teachers hired in 2001, 68% were still teaching in Minnesota (but not necessarily in the same school district in which they started) and only 48% were still teaching in the same school district after five years.
With almost one third of the teaching force leaving teaching in Minnesota after five years and 20% changing districts in that same time, issues of teacher attrition and turnover are costing Minnesota schools resources and expertise.
Minnesota Educator Induction Guidelines, p. 5
Teacher Induction Programs
Comprehensive Teacher Induction Programs
Each consortium district implemented a comprehensive Teacher Induction Program.
Each school district identified one Teacher Induction Coordinator (TIC).
TIC’s received training and met on an ongoing basis.
A process for cross district mentoring was established.
By June 30, 2013, we stated the FLY 1 proposal would result in:
Increased student achievement
Professional Learning Communities and Teacher Induction Programs will be embedded in all consortium school districts
Favorable student, family and staff support of school calendar
Hypothesis
Student Achievement Measurements
We determined we would measure academic performance in math, reading and writing as follows:
Individual district math and reading index rate goals
Individual district subgroup index rate math and reading goals
Consortium-wide math and reading index rate goals
Written composition— percent proficient goals
FLY Consortium Wide Results
AYP Index Rate Goals - READING2009
Baseline Data Index
Rate
2010 Data Index Rate
2011 Data Index Rate
2012 Data Index Rate
2013 Data Index Rate
80.67 79.75 81.73 82.46
AYP Index Rate Goals - MATH2009
Baseline Data Index
Rate
2010 Data Index Rate
2011 Data Index Rate
2012 Data Index Rate
2013 Data Index Rate
73.99 74.93 68.49* 73.23
AYP Index Rate Goals – GRAD Writing2009
Baseline Data
Percent Proficient
2010 Data Percent
Proficient
2011 Data Percent
Proficient
2012 Data Percent
Proficient
2013 Data Percent
Proficient
91.0% 90.0% 89.0 % 91.0%
* First Year of MCA-III Math assessment so we are not able to compare to the previous year’s data.
Luverne Public School District #2184AYP Index Rate Goals - READING
2009 Baseline Data Index
Rate
2010 Data Index Rate
2011 Data Index Rate
2012 Data Index Rate
2013 Data Index Rate
87.31 87.66 88.24 88.46
AYP Index Rate Goals - MATH
2009 Baseline Data Index
Rate
2010 Data Index Rate
2011 Data Index Rate
2012 Data Index Rate
2013 Data Index Rate
80.71 83.63 71.41* 79.58
AYP Index Rate Goals – GRAD Writing
2009 Baseline Data Percent
Proficient
2010 Data Percent
Proficient
2011 Data Percent
Proficient
2012 Data Percent
Proficient
2013 Data Percent
Proficient
97% 95% 87.4% 95.2%
ACT Performance Report
2009 Baseline Data Avg. Composite
Score
2010 Data Avg.
Composite Score
2011 Data Avg.
Composite Score
2012 Data Avg.
Composite Score
2013 Data Avg.
Composite Score
21.19 22.5 22.2 22.8
* First Year of MCA-III Math assessment so we are not able to compare to the previous year’s data.
Luverne Public School District #2184
2009 Baseline
Data Index Rate
2010 Data Index Rate
2011 Data Index Rate
2012 Data Index Rate
2013 Data Index Rate
2009 Baseline
Data Index Rate
2010 Data Index Rate
2011 Data Index Rate
2012 Data Index Rate
2013 Data Index Rate
Hispanic - READING
2009 Baseline
Data Index Rate
2010 Data Index Rate
2011 Data Index Rate
2012 Data Index Rate
2013 Data Index Rate
77.5 79.55 80.95 72.73
Hispanic - MATH
2009 Baseline
Data Index Rate
2010 Data Index Rate
2011 Data Index Rate
2012 Data Index Rate
2013 Data Index Rate
58.82 67.31 57.50* 57.50
Luverne Public Schools #2184
Special Education - READING
2009 Baseline
Data Index Rate
2010 Data Index Rate
2011 Data Index Rate
2012 Data Index Rate
2013 Data Index Rate
68.11 71.54 68.95 71.98
Special Education - MATH
2009 Baseline
Data Index Rate
2010 Data Index Rate
2011 Data Index Rate
2012 Data Index Rate
2013 Data Index Rate
61.48 63.57 48.71* 62.61
Free & Reduced Lunch Pricing - READING
2009 Baseline
Data Index Rate
2010 Data Index Rate
2011 Data Index Rate
2012 Data Index Rate
2013 Data Index Rate
83.52 82.59 80.72 78.72
Free & Reduced Lunch Pricing - MATH
2009 Baseline
Data Index Rate
2010 Data Index Rate
2011 Data Index Rate
2012 Data Index Rate
2013 Data Index Rate
76.12 76.28 60.39* 67.70
Luverne Public Schools District #2184
White - READING
2009 Baseline
Data Index Rate
2010 Data Index Rate
2011 Data Index Rate
2012 Data Index Rate
2013 Data Index Rate
87.72 87.96 88.55 89.44
White - MATH
2009 Baseline
Data Index Rate
2010 Data Index Rate
2011 Data Index Rate
2012 Data Index Rate
2013 Data Index Rate
81.41 84.52 71.29* 80.80
* First Year of MCA-III Math assessment so we are not able to compare to the previous year’s data.
Professional Development Activities 2010-2011
All FLY Staff Dr. Thomas Many-one of the authors of “Leading by
Doing” a Handbook for Professional Learning Communities at Work (a book all FLY PLC trainers and administrators read)
PLC Trainers Solution Tree Trainers-Geri Parscale and Jack
Baldermann
Teacher Induction Coordinator Darla Harstad-Mentor Coordinator for Alexandria
School District Deb Luedtke-professional development supervisor from
MDE
Superintendents Trained by Darla Harstad in Teacher Induction
Framework
Professional Development Activities 2010-2011
Other Paired with Southwest Initiative Foundation to
offer classes from Children’s Museum of Minnesota for Early Childhood Teachers
Standards Based IEPs training Mental Health Workshop
Paraprofessional Training offered at three sites
Professional Development Activities 2011-2012
PLC Trainers Solution Tree Trainers-Chris Jakicic-contributor to
several books and Eric Twadell-co-author “Leading by Design” An Action Framework for PLC at Work Leaders (a book all administrators and PLC trainers are reading) and contributor of several other articles
Teacher Induction Coordinator Joint Mentor/New Teacher training at two sites
Cross-District PLCs Met three times
Paraprofessionals Training at one site
Professional Development Activities 2012-2013
All FLY Staff Cassandra Erkens-co-author “Leading by Design--An Action
Framework for PLC at Work Leaders” (a book all administrators and PLC trainers are reading) and contributor of several other books
Todd Whitaker-National Speaker and author of several books
Dylan Wiliam-”Author of Embedded Formative Assessment” , international expert on assessment and grading is contracted to address all FLY staff January 21, 2013.
Teacher Induction Coordinators Mentor/New Teacher training at three sites
Ongoing training with Lori Bird, coordinator for the Center for Mentoring and Teacher Induction at Minnesota State University-Mankato
Professional Development Activities 2012-2013
PLC Trainers Cassandra Erkens Margaret Biggerstaff, MDE staff (planned)
Ongoing Networking sessions meeting in August and January-all FLY
staff
Other Nurses’ Training
Planned Paraprofessional Training MDE webinars
Professional Learning Communities Outcomes
Implemented DuFour’s framework in all 25 districts
Implemented Cross-district PLCs across Consortium
Research -based ongoing professional development for all administrators and trainers
Training from nationally recognized speakers Two progress reports completed and submitted
to MDE PLC depth of implementation survey completed
each year by every district
Teacher Induction Program Outcomes
Teacher Induction Year 1 and 2 programs in every school district
Year 3 framework developed
Training from state recognized presenters
Implementation checklist and rubric completed each year
Survey Results
Attitudes of Students, Family and Staff about Flexible Learning Year
Attendance Information Related to:
Pre-Labor Day Student AttendanceVacation and State Fair (4-H Involvement)
Consortium-wide data followed by local data shown on next thirteen slides
Consortium-wide Survey Results—Spring 2012
I feel the flexible learning year will…
Strongly Agree or
AgreeNeutr
al
Strongly Disagree or
Disagree
Improve education quality: 49% 33% 18%
Create a less stressful holiday break: 61% 20% 19%
Decrease focus in classroom: 24% 37% 39%
Improve test scores: 46% 32% 22%
Increase students’ comfort w/testing: 44% 32% 24%
Positively impact summer jobs: 47% 33% 20%
I don't like the concept of having homework or projects over holiday break:
75% 15% 10%
Scheduled breaks affect when my family plans vacation:
58% 27% 15%
I feel students and teachers are ready to go back to school in August (before Labor day):
40% 19% 41%
I feel there is less focus in the classroom right before the summer and Christmas Breaks:
71% 18% 11%
I don’t think school should be in session after the completion of state tests:
42% 36% 22%
I feel the five combined professional development days for teachers will improve the quality of
teaching:
42% 32% 26%
I feel the five combined professional development day will improve test scores for the 25 involved
school districts:
27% 38% 35%
I feel that each school district should set their own start/stop dates rather than collaborate on a
uniform calendar:
40% 28% 32%
Consortium-wide Survey Results –Spring 2012
Rank the benefits of the Flexible Learning Year initiative on the statements below on a scale of 1 to 5. (1 meaning least beneficial and 5 meaning most beneficial. 0 indicates not beneficial at all)
5=Most Beneficial1=Least Beneficial
0=Not Beneficial at all
5 4 3 2 1 0
Shared collaboration and staff training 25 included
school districts:
15% 22% 36% 11% 8% 8%
Increased amount of class time before testing:
20% 27% 25% 11% 8% 9%
Increased preparation for testing:
23% 29% 25% 10% 7% 6%
Improved test scores: 21% 27% 27% 10% 8% 7%
Ending first semester before Christmas break:
41% 22% 18% 6% 7% 6%
Consortium-wide Survey Results
Attendance Information Related to:
Pre-Labor Day Student Attendance
Vacation and State Fair (4-H Involvement)
Late summer family vacations—Late August, Early September 2010-2011 100% of family vacations excused. (238/16,000 possible) 2011-2012 100% of family vacations excused. (274 /16,000 possible) 2012-2013 100% of family vacations excused. (201/16,000 possible)
4-H Participation in the State Fair
Data indicates an increase in State Fair 4-H exhibitors. 2009-635 exhibitors 2010-676 exhibitors (+6% increase) 2010-676 exhibitors 2011-676 exhibitors 2011-676 exhibitors 2012-690 exhibitors (+2% increase)
100% of students attending State Fair “Excused Absences” 2010-2011 (301 students of 16,000 possible in 2010) 2011-2012 (359 students of 16,000 possible in 2011) 2012-2013 (339 students of 16,000 possible in 2012)
Consortium-wide DataPre-Labor Day Vacations & State
Fair
FLY Consortium—Vacations and State FairVacation State Fair
Students DaysMissed Student Days
Missed
2010-2011 238 472 301 660
2011-2012 274 463 359 632
2012-2013 201 317 339 779
Luverne Public Schools #2184—Spring 2012
I feel the flexible learning year will…
Strongly Agree or
AgreeNeutr
al
Strongly Disagree or
Disagree
Improve education quality: 50% 29% 21%
Create a less stressful holiday break: 62% 19% 19%
Decrease focus in classroom: 23% 35% 41%
Improve test scores: 46% 29% 24%
Increase students’ comfort w/testing: 46% 29% 26%
Positively impact summer jobs: 59% 29% 20%
I don't like the concept of having homework or projects over holiday break:
73% 17% 10%
Scheduled breaks affect when my family plans vacation:
58% 24% 17%
I feel students and teachers are ready to go back to school in August (before Labor day):
34% 22% 44%
I feel there is less focus in the classroom right before the summer and Christmas Breaks:
67% 20% 11%
I don’t think school should be in session after the completion of state tests:
42% 36% 21%
I feel the five combined professional development days for teachers will improve the quality of
teaching:
40% 37% 22%
I feel the five combined professional development day will improve test scores for the 25 involved
school districts:
30% 26% 44%
I feel that each school district should set their own start/stop dates rather than collaborate on a
uniform calendar:
47% 27% 32%
Luverne Public School District #2184—Spring 2012
Rank the benefits of the Flexible Learning Year initiative on the statements below on a scale of 1 to 5. (1 meaning least beneficial and 5 meaning most beneficial. 0 indicates not beneficial at all)
5=Most Beneficial1=Least Beneficial
0=Not Beneficial at all
5 4 3 2 1 0
Shared collaboration and staff training 25 included
school districts:
13% 21% 37% 13% 8% 8%
Increased amount of class time before testing:
17% 27% 24% 13% 9% 10%
Increased preparation for testing:
21% 27% 24% 12% 7% 7%
Improved test scores: 22% 26% 25% 10% 8% 9%
Ending first semester before Christmas break:
39% 22% 18% 6% 7% 8%
Attendance Information Related to:
Pre-Labor Day Student AttendanceVacation and State Fair (4-H Involvement)
Luverne Public Schools District #2184–Vacation and State Fairs
Vacation State Fair
Students Days Missed Students Days
Missed
2010-2011 0 0 23 4
2011-2012 23 18 55 11.5
2012-2013 7 5 16 3
FLY 2-- Proposed Timeline
November 7, 2012 – Joint school board meeting in Tracy for discussion regarding current FLY efforts and proposed FLY application.
November 26, 2012 – Public Meeting December 6, 2012 – Public Meeting December 17, 2012 –Public Meeting January 31, 2013 – By the end of January, school
boards confirm commitment and participation through formal board action at their regular January meetings.
February 1, 2013 – Submit applications to MDE March 15, 2013 – Expect response from the
Commissioner of Education for new 3-year Flexible Learning Year.
Focus for FLY –2
Improve Student Achievement –(Continuation of FLY 1)
Continue with Calendar changes established in FLY 1—Continue to schedule high impact learning time (days) prior to high stakes assessments
Continue to work collaboratively to improve teacher effectiveness