Instructional Rounds Visit Monticello Community School District December

Instructional Rounds Visit Monticello Community School District December 11, 2014

The Instructional Core Student Principle 1: Increases in student learning occur only as a consequence of improvements in the level of content, teachers’ knowledge and skill, and student engagement. Principle 2: If you change one element of the instructional core, you have to change the other two. Principle 3: If you can’t see it in the core, it’s not there. Principle 4: Task predicts performance. Principle 5: The real accountability system is in the tasks that students are asked to do. Task Teacher Content Principle 6: We learn to do the work by doing the work. Principle 7: Description before analysis, analysis before prediction, prediction before evaluation.

Theory of Action • If teachers receive professional development on how to utilize formative assessments to determine learning needs of all students, create lesson plans that provide differentiated instruction based on district standards and benchmarks, and provide rigorous, relevant, and authentic instruction, then student achievement will rise.

Problem of Practice What are the students doing that reflects differentiated-instruction taking place in the classroom?

Look Fors Student-Centered • Students working successfully – either independently or with others • Students working on tasks specifically designed for their needs Teacher-Centered • Teachers responding to various student-learning needs

Data Collection ● What are the students doing and saying? ● What are the adults doing and saying?

Classroom Observations Stick close to the instructional core and focused on the problem of practice. Be specific, descriptive and not evaluative- take detailed notes! Look down, not up. • What are students actually doing? (not what the teacher thinks s/he is asking them to do) • Task predicts performance Ask questions when appropriate.

Debrief Process • Description • Analysis • Prediction

Debriefing Classroom Observations: Description On your own: • Read through your notes. • Star data that seem relevant to the Problem of Practice and/or data that seem important. • Select 5 -10 pieces of data and write each on an individual sticky note.

Descriptive Debrief Share with your group: • Share your sticky notes with your group. Help each other stay in the descriptive (not evaluative) voice. Stick to the evidence! “What did you see/hear that makes you think that? ” Everyone speak once before anyone speaks twice Sort data on a chart according to the focusing questions: ➔ What are the students doing? ➔ What tasks are students being asked to do? ➔ What is the teacher doing?

Analysis 1) Analyze the descriptive evidence, in your small group. Are students working successfully (either independently or with others) on tasks specifically designed for their needs and are the teachers responding to various student-learning needs? 2) Write statements that describe the patterns you found in your data.

Debriefing Classroom Observations: Analysis With your partner group: • Look at the “pattern” charts from each group and share what patterns you see. • Ask each other: after observing several of the same classrooms, did we come up with similar patterns? Disagreement is an opportunity for learning!

Patterns • Students worked on tasks as assigned. • Students could describe ”what” they were doing. • Warm, friendly learning environments with cues and purposeful language to guide positive behavior. • Students worked on tasks with similar levels of difficulty/complexity. • Students worked individually and together with partners. • Whole group instruction was evident in the classrooms. • Teachers asked many “what” questions. • Teachers consistently moved among partner groups to assist with task completion. • Teachers consistently directed the academic tasks.

The Instructional Core STUDENT TASK TEACHER CONTENT Principle #4: Task predicts performance

“Tasks predict performance. ” Based on the patterns you identified and the tasks you observed, what predictions can you make about student learning? If you were a student in this class/ school and you did everything you were expected to do, what would you know and be able to do?

Predictions • Students describe “what” they are doing but struggle to describe the “how” or the “why. ” • Students work with a partner. • Students find the “right” answer to tasks. • Students work on and complete routine tasks as assigned at the remembering or understanding levels. • Students transition smoothly between activities and locations. • Students interact appropriately with different people (peers, teachers, guests). • Students wait for “what” to do and “how” to do it before moving forward. • Most students work at a similar level of difficulty or complexity. • Students ask questions at the clarifying or procedural level.

Next level of work: Our goal is to: • Respond to the problem of practice • Bring “fresh eyes” to the school’s practice • Suggest how to move instructional practice across classrooms

• Identify the patterns which stand out to us as visitors and to the hosts as particularly high leverage places to invest for improvement? (In other words, if we could shift this pattern of practice, we believe it would be consequential for student learning. )

Next Level Of Work Reflective Questions ARE: Reflective Questions ARE NOT: Open Ended Answered with “yes/no” or a single word response Judgment free Biased Framed with positive presuppositions (e. g. “As a district with both new and experienced staff…”) Framed in a way that could be negatively interpreted (e. g. “As a district with inexperienced staff…”) Crafted to include explorative language (e. g. “What might be some possible ways to…”) Crafted in a way that implies an intended action (e. g. “Can’t you…? ” Shouldn’t you…? Couldn’t you…? ”) Designed to invite thinking and conversation at deeper levels Designed to be easily answered with facts or simple recall

Reflective Questions • What is your individual or group working definition of differentiated instruction? • Do all of the adults have the same working definition? • How do you move to more varied levels of differentiation? • What would differentiated instruction with integrity/fidelity look like? • How will the school staff identify and measure differentiation? • What would lessons look like that would address different student learning needs? • How could personalized learning models be designed to allow for differentiation and to complement whole group instruction? • How does your data drive differentiated instruction? How can you collect formative data on a regular basis to drive instruction? • How do you collect data from partner or small group work? • How can tasks be designed and implemented in which students analyze, evaluate, and create? • How can partners and small group membership be assigned based on learning targets? • What might help students articulate the “how” and “why” of their learning tasks?

• How does your data drive differentiated instruction? How can you collect formative data on a regular basis to drive instruction? • How do you collect data from partner or small group work? • How can tasks be designed and implemented in which students analyze, evaluate, and create? • How can partners and small group membership be assigned based on learning targets? • What might help students articulate the “how” and “why” of their learning tasks?

Next Level of Work Are our reflective questions or suggestions: • anchored by visit data? • relevant to hosts needs (POP)? • likely to guide robust conversation and learning? • comprehensive enough to engage teachers and administrators? Have we considered reciprocity (the resources and support the organization will need to provide if changes are expected)? Are our ideas practical? Less is more!

Next Level of Work – Learning Plan Make a learning plan with the goal of shifting this pattern of practice. • What is your hypothesis about why this pattern of practice exists? • Therefore, what adult learning would you focus on next at the school level? System level? –What do we (teachers) need to know and be able to do for the next level of work? • How would you support that learning? (next week, next month, next year)

Process for Developing NLOW Learning Plan • Identify 1 or 2 high leverage patterns • Explore root causes for high leverage patterns • Make explicit plans for adult learning • Bring a developmental approach to learning plans • Tie suggestions to school’s organizational structures/capacity

NLOW: Root Cause Analysis • Focused on one or two high leverage actions that matter to the school • NLOW group applies the Five Why’s to get to root cause

NLOW: Learning Plan • WHAT adult learning would you focus on next at the school level? • What do we (teachers) need to know and be able to do for the next level of work? • Put the improvement work on a developmental continuum and figure where next developmental step or two might be • Use explicit adult learning theory in your plan • Remember instructional improvement = adult learning

Organizational Structures / Capacity to Support Instructional Improvement • What systems and structures are in place? –Instructional leadership? –Teaming? –Use of data? –Professional learning? • How are they used?

NLOW: System Supports Incorporate the system supports into your learning plan: • What needs to exist in terms of system support/system next steps in order to pursue this plan? • How would you support learning? (next week, next month, next year, etc. )

Next Level of Work Are our NLOW learning plans: • anchored by visit data? • relevant to hosts needs (POP)? • likely to guide robust conversation and learning? • comprehensive enough to engage teachers and administrators? Have we considered reciprocity (the resources and support the organization will need to provide if changes are expected)? Are our ideas practical? Less is more!

Plus/Delta The time in the classroom was good. The organization and the preparation of the visit was very good. Great food! The openness of the leadership to improve. The welcoming nature on the part of the students and staff. The anticipated size of the team and the real size of the team. Explore the alternative NLOW of work process.