STaR Chart Prezi

STaR Chart on Prezi

STaR Chart Presentation

This was part of my Lamar University graduate school assignment for EDLD 5352 (Instructional Leadership), week two.  The assignment was to create a presentation using a Web 2.0 tool, and embed it into my blog.  Since I've learned to always have a Plan B when dealing with technology, I have a couple of backup plans.  I will include a link to my presentation using the Web 2.0 tool, Prezi.  In case the hyperlink does not work, I will include the web address of the Prezi.  I will include my outline of my speaker notes that go along with the Prezi.  Finally, I will attempt to embed the Prezi in my next post.


Here is a link to my presentation using the Web 2.0 tool, Prezi.

STaR Chart Prezi
In case that link does not work, here is the web address below:
http://prezi.com/tgi0dkshph1d/star-chart/

I also tried the embed feature from Prezi, but it just ended up being a mess of code instead of the presentation.  I finally figured out how to do that, so I have embedded that Prezi above.

Finally, here is the outline of my presentation.  (Speaker notes)

Agenda

What is STaR?

Why is it important?

What does it tell us?

How can we use it?

What are our next steps?

Introduction

What is STaR?

Why is it important?

Closer Look

What does it tell us?

Areas

    Teaching & Learning

                                    Educator Preparation

                                    Administration & Support

                                    Infrastructure

Levels of Progress

Early Tech

Developing Tech

Advanced Tech

Target Tech

How can we use it? 

Annual report based on our teacher survey results

We can pull up any past years. (hyperlink)

Conclusion / Plan of Action

Where are the schools in Texas, overall?

            State Graphs

How have we been doing as a campus?

            Campus Graphs

            Discuss trends 

What are our next steps?

            Target Tech is the goal

            Set personal, team, department, campus goals in the coming weeks

            Follow up meeting to discuss and refine those goals will be scheduled

Educator Preparation and Development - STaR Chart

(Based on Lamar Assignment EDLD 5352 - Week 2)

Educators must strive to continue to grow professionally by staying up to date with the latest technology and how it can be used in the classroom.  They must be able to use the technology to bring about the learning that is planned for.  This professional development requires time and resources that are already stretched.  It also requires a commitment by the school system to provide the structure in which these new tools can be developed and used. 

In my analysis of the statewide campus summary of the STaR Chart feedback, I have noticed that the largest majority of schools fell into the Developing Tech category of this particular area, Educator Preparation.  Out of all four areas and four categories, this was the single biggest group.  Also, on my particular campus, this area, Educator Preparation, had the lowest average score over the last three years.  This indicates that although the other areas are improving, we are not keeping up with that growth in Educator Preparation.  I think there are two fundamental problems in the way we attack this issue. 

The first is that we do not provide adequate, strategic, structured, differentiated, and systematic professional development.  What we provide is usually a broad overview of available resources, and then we expect the teachers to spend time investigating, practicing, and implementing these tools.  However, educators are under constant pressure for short-term improvement, so their own long-term education is neglected.  We must differentiate our professional development programs.  We target their needs based on their readiness for certain types of technology.  It must be structured to help them to integrate it into their specific practices.  Finally it needs to be part of a system that will help them become well rounded in a specific skill set.  These new skills need to become part of their normal activities; otherwise the learning will be short lived. 

The second fundamental problem with the way we attack this issue is we do not set them up for success.  A component of this is time.  I have learned that unless we take something off of their plate, we should not put something else on it.  I know that is easier said than done, but we must make an effort to streamline some systems that allow teachers to take something off of their plate before placing a professional development goal onto their plates.  Now, with that comes a set of structured supports and accountability.  Teachers must be held accountable to implementing the technology they learn into their lessons.  They should be allowed to investigate, practice, and implement these tools with our support.  That support and time costs money, but it is money worth investing.  Once these teachers begin their journey to “Advanced Tech”, and then they are more likely to continue without our constant prodding and nagging.  It becomes something they want to do and enjoy doing for their students, because they have seen it work in their own classrooms.

I just finished my web-conference for week 1 of EDLD 5352 Instructional Leadership for my Lamar grad school program. 

Lesson learned:  
Communicate clearly, and then seek to clarify what you thought was clear in the first place... inevitably some will not have found it as clear as you intended it to be.  This will decrease frustration levels for both parties, and you will learn the difference about what you thought you communicated and what you actually communicated.

Background:
During the web-conference, I realized that many people have concerns about the Tk20 portfolio system, the EPIC portfolio system, and how ILD fits into the program (degree requirements and/or principal certification).  Many people shared that they are doing both, Tk20 and their EPIC portfolio.  I was frustrated about these questions when I began my program also, and to me this illustrates the importance of clear communication.  Some people had clear communication about what they would be required to do, and those people experienced less frustration.  Other people did not seek clarification and their frustration level grew.  These people ended up doing work in both systems, which resulted in time spent on duplicating their work.  During the web-conference my "lesson learned" became more important to me.  I cannot have this type of confusion/frustration at my school.  As an instructional leader, I have to make sure I work on clarity of message.

Here is a post of my Draft Research Project Report per EDLD 5397 - Internship for Supervision - Week 3 Assignment - Part 3.

Culture of Differentiation:

How to Get More Teachers to Use Differentiated Instruction and Make It a Part of Campus Culture

Three years ago, our campus was introduced to differentiated instruction.  Differentiated instruction was made a priority by our administration, and it was even included in our Campus Improvement Plan.  However, differentiated lessons are rarely seen in the classrooms.  A review of lesson plans from the math department showed that differentiated lessons were not used at all until administration mandated that they be included in the lesson plans at least once each six weeks.  Even after that, we see only one to three differentiated lessons each six weeks depending on the team.  One of our teams uses differentiated lessons once per six weeks.  Another team uses differentiated lessons twice per six weeks, and another team uses differentiated lessons three times per six weeks.

My vision and hope for this project is that we help more of our teachers to meet the students at their level.  We have students at different levels within the same classrooms.  If we are able to find ways to make differentiating instruction more of a part of our campus culture, then we will see teams/teachers plan with specific student needs in mind.  Their lessons will designed to accommodate their different interests, learning styles, and readiness levels.  The students will benefit from a more interesting and engaging environment.  Learning will not be frustrating.  It will be fun.  Teachers will benefit by seeing their students reach their potential.  Teachers will have to work less in their rooms since the work will be done more by their students than by the teachers.  Everyone benefits from a well-differentiated classroom.

I plan with each grade level team every time they meet to discuss lesson planning.  During those meetings I will observe how they implement differentiated lessons into their team plans.  I will note how many times they use a differentiated activity and how that lesson is differentiated (readiness, interest, and learning style).  I also observe each teacher regularly, so I will also note how that teacher implements those lessons in their own classroom.  I hope to have each teacher implementing at least one differentiated lesson each week.  That will mean a 200% to 300% increase in the implementation of differentiated instruction in the math department.

As we try to implement differentiated instruction into our classrooms, we must support our teachers during the entire process.  According to an John Holloway in an article about preparing teachers for differentiated instruction, “school leaders must provide all teachers encouragement, support, and nurturing – all delivered through effective professional development that is founded on competent training and effective mentoring and that is conducted by experienced, skilled professionals” (Holloway, 2000, p. 83).

Our instruction must meet our students’ needs.  With students from so many diverse backgrounds, there is a need to create equity in our mathematics classrooms.  Goldman and Knudsen discuss three principles that can create that equity.  Making math relevant to their real lives, including hands-on activities, and adapting to meet your students’ needs are principles that can create that equity and opportunity for all of our students (Goldman & Knudsen, 2004).

The decision making process for what topic to research for my action research project involved me and my principal.  We considered the most critical need for our students in the mathematics classrooms.  We determined that differentiating instruction for our students’ diverse needs was the most critical need for our campus.  Therefore, we decided to make differentiated instruction the focus of my research project.  We wanted to make differentiated instruction part of our campus culture.

Once my principal and I determined what my action research project would be, I communicated that vision to my department through department meetings and professional development.  Over the course of a semester of department meetings and five summer professional development sessions I made my vision of a campus of differentiated instruction clear.  Each department meeting included time to discuss the importance of differentiation and data to illustrate our students’ varied needs and backgrounds.  Each professional development was centered around differentiated instruction.  That included ways to discover the students’ varied interests, readiness level, and learning style.  It also included ways to design lessons that addressed those various needs.  This vision was also communicated to students throughout the year by interest surveys and targeted student conversations by their teacher, instructional specialist, and counselors.  Parents heard the vision during open house meetings with their child’s teacher.  Community members and other stakeholders saw the vision during our site-based decision making committee meetings throughout the year.

The strategy used for organizing the implementation of the project involved various people on the campus, but most of the duties rested with me.  There is no money available for this project.  There were some opportunities for professional development related to differentiation in our district and on our own campus.  I would follow up and help them plan differentiated lessons.  I would also plan differentiated instruction showcases for our campus with the other instructional strategiests.  I would document the frequency of differentiated instruction lessons in their lesson plans and in their classrooms.  Finally, I would model differentiated lessons in their classrooms and conference with each teacher about the learning of each child in their classes.

Since differentiation was an essential part of our school improvement plan, it became a priority for every classroom on our campus.  Our comprehensive needs assessment of the students on our campus indicated that we had students with varied academic gaps in all student populations.  We had larger groups of English Language Learners, higher mobility rates, and a higher population of Economically Disadvantaged students than any other school in our district.  Consensus was built within grade level teams about prioritizing differentiated instruction among our team goals.  Conflict was inevitable as we moved into this new frontier, but individual conversations helped teachers deal with their apprehensions.  Those conversations continue, since the resistance to change persists.  Although the resistance is declining.

Differentiated instruction encompasses the very idea of meeting the needs of students with diverse backgrounds, exceptional needs, and abilities.  Helping teachers to implement differentiated instruction into their classrooms and create a campus culture of meeting every child at their level.  Our school and community have needs that are not the same as any other in our district.  As we deal with the highest povery rate in our district, we also deal with the highest number of English Language Learners.  This project of integrating differentiated instruction into our campus culture will help meet the needs of the school and community.

References

Goldman, Shelley V., Knudsen, Jennifer. (2004) Principles for making middle school mathematics more equitable.  Classroom Leadership, March 2004, Vol. 7 (6), Found at: http://www.ascd.org/publications/classroom-leadership/mar2004/Principles-for-Making-Middle-School-Mathematics-More-Equitable.aspx.

Holloway, John H., (2000) Preparing teachers for differentiated instruction.  Educational Leadership, September 2000, Vol. 58 (1). pp.’s 82-83.

Educational Leadership - Research Course Reflection (Week 5)

Early in week one in our Educational Leadership – Research course I learned what makes action research different from conventional research.  A quote from our text describes action research as a “systematic, intentional study of one’s own professional practice” (Fichtman, 2009, p. 9).  This helped turn on a light bulb for me.  Studying my own professional practice helps me grow and focus on the things I can control.

Comments from our discussion boards and blogs helped reinforce a certain aspect of my plan.  I plan to frame my action research within the framework of an important current initiative that the school is adopting for the future.  Working within this structure can add credibility to my plan and ensure it is not thrown out for the next big thing in education.

So, going forward I need to focus on things within my control, and I need to stay within our current campus framework.

Differentiation & Cornerstone

Last week our campus hosted a Differentiated Instruction / Cornerstone Showcase for certain school leaders in our district.  Going through this process, along with a full day of reflection and planning with my instructional specialist counterparts guided by our Principal and Director of Instruction, has helped me realize how important our Cornerstone model is to my action research plan on differentiation.  

I’ve realized how imperative it is that I position our differentiation initiative within the Cornerstone framework that our school is focusing on for the next school year.  I need to show teachers that neither of these initiatives is going away.  One actually fits within the other.  Cornerstone is a framework that organizes everything that goes on in a school.  It will help lead us to make systematic decisions with the correct data, and it will help stakeholders understand how everything fits together on our campus.  Differentiated Instruction is a piece of that, and I’ve realized that focusing on differentiation independently of our Cornerstone model would be a mistake.  Using Cornerstone will help me show teachers where differentiation fits in our school.  It will help show them the type of data they should use to differentiate.  It will help them see where differentiation should play a role during their lesson planning process.  Teachers will see where differentiation can address specific skill deficiencies that some students will have.  This will lead teachers to value differentiation as a critical tool in their toolkit instead of “the next thing”.

Based on this realization, I have change action item 6 from my Action Research Plan that I posted last week.  The new action item is below.

6. Review how differentiated instruction strategies, electronic learning opportunities, and data (such as individual, group, and comparability data) fit into the Cornerstone framework.

H. Patel M. Welch (resource person)

May 23 – Aug 10, 2011

·   Cornerstone training manual ·   Cornerstone notes

·   Which of the four quadrants of the Cornerstone framework does differentiated instruction fall into? ·   How does it impact the other quadrants? ·   What kind of data can we gather in this process to base grouping decisions?