C&i update[1]

Standards
Opportunities to Learn More at http://www.ncpublicschools.org

District Leadership Teams Established Summer of 2011
Modules https://center.ncsu.edu/nc/
Support Tools http://www.ncdpi.wikispaces.net/

C&I Links http://www.dpi.state.nc.us/curriculum/

Summer Institutes Summer 2012
Moving From What to How /profdev/conferences/summerinstitutes/

Regional-based Throughout 2012
Content Training http://www.ncpublicschools.org/acre/profdev/di
Moving From What to How strict/

Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation

C&I Links
http://www.dpi.state.nc.us/curriculum/


Partners: ASCD
http://educore.ascd.org/


EduCore Literacy Tools


EduCore Math Tools


EduCore High School Resources


EduCore Lessons


Moving Forward: High School Math
Discussion
What: NC High School Math Task Force
Who: Regional Representatives (School
Representatives, District Representatives,
IHE Representations, etc.)
When: Spring, 2013
Why: Determine the best course of action to
“streamline” the current HS Math Pathways


Current High School Math Pathways

• Common Core Traditional Pathway

• Common Core Integrated Pathway

• Common Core I, II, and II Pathway (Local
Course Code Option)


Additional HS Math MSLs/Common
Exams – 2012-2013 School Year
• Common Core Algebra II
• Common Core Geometry
• Common Core Integrated Math III
• Common Core II (Local Course Code Option)
• Common Core III (Local Course Code Option)


Maria Pitre-Martin
Director of K-12 Curriculum and Instruction
North Carolina Department of Instruction
919-807-3817
Maria.pitremartin@dpi.nc.gov

Draft – March 2012. Check http://www.ncpublicschools.org/ready/resources/ for Updates to this Presentation 13

Instructional Improvement
System and NC FALCON
Updates

Curriculum & Instructional Leaders’ Forum

Instructional Improvement System
Why – How – What -- When
▲ ▲

Why an Instructional Improvement System?

Improve and personalize student learning

How?

Facilitate the teaching and learning process through
• Increased access to high quality resources for all
• Provision of timely and relevant information and data


Technology Platform

One Technology
Platform
• Single Sign-on Instructional
PowerSchool Improvement
• Collaborative System
• Populated with
resources for NC
Student educators Tools for
Informati Teaching
on and
System Coming Soon Learning
(SIS) (IIS)


Learner Profile Standards & Instructional Assessment & Data Analysis Professional
and Work Curriculum Design, Practice & Analytics and Reporting Development &
Samples Resources Educator Evaluation


Learner Profile and Work Samples
• Teacher has access to learner
information to assist with planning and
monitoring

• Teacher can use examples of student
work for future lessons

• Student can collect evidence of
learning and growth

• Parents can view student work


Standards and Curriculum


Instructional Design, Practice and Resources

Example


Assessment and Growth


Dashboards, Data Analysis and Reporting


Professional Development and
Educator Evaluation

• View, register for, participate in PD

• View past PD participation

• Get suggestions for PD based on class
performance or observation/evaluation
data

• Receive recommendations for license
renewal credit

• Implement educator evaluation processes


Types of
Content/Resources
• What kinds of resources will make up
the IIS?
– Instructional (lesson plans, unit
guides, activities)
– Assessment (formative assessment
resources, item banks, summative
assessments)
– Professional Development
(videos, articles, webinars)
– Educator Evaluation/Talent
Management (rubrics, evaluation
tools, artifact tools)


Guiding Principles
– Resources must
• Be aligned with
standards
To make the
resources in the • Provide ample
coverage to all
IIS meaningful standards and
and useful to objectives

teachers: • Emphasize quality
over quantity
• Be reviewed and
rated by educators in
North Carolina


Some of Our Content Sources

Multiple
Subjects



Math



Science



English
Language
Arts


Sample 3rd Party Instructional Activities

National Archives Phet

Objective
Solicit and gather content from LEAs and Schools

The Members Represent the following School Districts:

Alamance-Burlington Schools Hoke County Person County Schools
Asheboro City Schools Hyde County Pitt County Schools
Burke County Schools Jones County Schools Rutherford County
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools Martin County Schools Transylvania County Schools
Cleveland County Schools Montgomery County Schools Union County
Cumberland County Schools Moore County Schools Wake County Public Schools
Edenton-Chowan Mooresville Graded School Wayne County Public Schools
Forsyth County Schools Newton-Conover City Schools Whiteville City Schools
Gaston County Schools Onslow County Schools
Guilford County Orange County
Halifax County Schools Pender County Schools
** New members from Summer Institutes,
NCSBA and Tech. Directors’ meetings


Sample LEA PD Resource


Sample LEA Assessment Resources


Sample LEA Instructional Resources


NC FALCON Updates

Carmella Fair

NC FALCON Updates

• Formative Assessment Plans

• NC FALCON Modules

• NC FALCON Coordinator Meetings


NC Definition of Formative
Assessment
– Formative assessment is a process used by teachers

and students during instruction that provides feedback

to adjust ongoing teaching and learning to help

students improve their achievement of intended

instructional outcomes.

The Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO, 2008)


Formative Assessment Plans

• Formative Assessment Plans developed by
teachers
• Located in NC Education/NC FALCON
– center.ncsu.edu/nc
– “Formative Assessment Plans”
– enroll in the “course”


Formative Assessment Plans

Plans were developed by NC teachers for
these content and program areas:

Arts Education English as a Second Science
Language (ESL)
Career and Technical Healthful Living Social Studies
Education (CTE)
English Language Arts Mathematics World Languages
(ELA)


NC FALCON Modules
– Modules for Teachers

– New Module for Students
• About the Student Ownership Of Learning Module
• Piloting the student module


NC FALCON Coordinator Meetings

Future Meetings (Webinars)
September 19, 2012 3:30 – 5:00
September 25, 2012
November 14, 2012 3:30 – 5:00
February 13, 2013 3:30 – 5:00
April 24, 2013 3:30 – 5:00


Contact
Sarah McManus
Director
919-807-3668

Learning Systems sarah.mcmanus@
dpi.nc.gov

IIS Cynthia Crowdus
IIS Project Coordinator
919-807-3205
Cynthia.crowdus@
dpi.nc.gov

Dan Gwaltney
Consultant
919-807-3249
Dan.gwaltney@
dpi.nc.gov


Why – How – What -- When
▲

RFP Issued Reviewed
Proposals Negotiated with
Select Vendors Data Integration
Feb 27, 2012 April – June
Pilot
2012 June – October
2012 Fall
2012
Vendor Approval
& Contract Award Design and
Build IIS Pilot Phased-In
December Roll out
2012 December 2012 
Early 2013 
Starting 2013-14
School Year


Common Exams

• General Rubrics are available.
• Assessments will have task specific rubrics
• Sample Questions
• Online ????
• Scheduling


Operationalizing
the General Assembly’s
School Performance
Grades
(Senate Bill 795, Excellent Public Schools
Act)

October 19, 2012
Curriculum & Instructional Leaders’
46 Forum

Context

ACRE/READ General
Y
Accountability Revision Assembly
►Summer 2012
2012 • SBE approved college
GA’s budget
and career ready
indicators for 2012-13 requires the
SY and reporting of the assignment of
2011 READY Accountability A-F grades for all
Model schools
• Approval of ESEA
2010 waiver to use proposed
READY model

2009

Responding to School Performance
Grades (SPG)
• The SBE must respond to the General
Assembly “…annually by January 15 on
recommended adjustments to the school
performance grade elements and scales
for award of scores and grades.”
• Additionally, SECTION 7A.3.(f) indicates:
“It is the intent of the General Assembly to
add a student growth component to school
performance grades.”
• Operational in 2012-13


What are the basics of the SPGs?

Elementary/Middle Total Points 0-
Schools 100
• Performance Composite 100 points
Total Points 0-
High Schools 500
• Algebra II/Integrated III 100 points
• Graduation Rate 100 points
• WorkKeys 100 points
• ACT 100 points

+ Growth

Alignment Between Indicators in High
School
High School Performance
Grades

End of Course • Performance Composite
• Algebra II/Integrated III
Math Course Rigor • Graduation Rate
Graduation Rates • WorkKeys
• ACT
WorkKeys

ACT Key Point: The set of indicators are
shared and set a college and career-
Graduation Project ready expectation. The Graduation
Project is 50 part of the school grade.
not
50

How each indicator is defined

Performance • Percent of proficient tests in a school
Composite • All tests, subjects, and grade levels
(Elementary and High) • Uses the EOG/EOC test data
Algebra II/Integrated • Percent of 4-year cohort graduates who
III take and pass Alg. II or Int. Math III
• Excludes the 1% population
Graduation Rate • Percent of students that graduate within 4
years
(4-year cohort graduation rate)
WorkKeys • Percent of seniors who are CTE
concentrators who achieve a Silver
certificate, or better, on the WorkKeys
assessment
ACT • The average sum of the 5 sub-tests
across the school compared to the sum
of the college- ready benchmarks

A closer look at the ACT
The proposed Math that goes into the ACT calculation

ACT College Ready Benchmarks
Subtes Benchmar
t k
Math 22
Readin 21
22 + 21 + 18 + 24 + 7 92
=
g sum of
English 18 college-ready
Scienc 24 benchmarks
e
Writing 7


The proposed Math that goes into the ACT calculation
Suppose you have a school with 5
students…. of
Student Sum then
Scores
“The average sum of the 5 sub-tests across
Matt 83 the school compared to the sum of the
Mark 94 college-ready benchmarks” can be found
Luke 75 by…
John 79 1) Averaging the Summed Scores
83 + 94 + 75 +79 + 80
Paul 80 = 82.2
5 students
2) Dividing by summed college-
ready benchmarks
82.2/92 = 89% and 89 points

Rationale for this suggested
methodology:
• Hold schools accountable for the
degree to which their students are
progressing towards achieving
benchmark (rather than a simple
yes/no)
• Will better differentiate grades

• Possibility for pushback?


Proposal for Addition of Growth

• Using EVAAS Growth outcomes, adjust
overall score based on EVAAS category
– Exceeded Expected Growth: Add 10 points
– Met Expected Growth: Add 5 points
– Did Not Meet Growth: No points


Proposal for Addition of Growth

Rationale for this suggested
methodology:
• Incentivizes pursuit of growth
• Can make a one-letter grade
difference between school with
similar status
• Grades still mean something largely
consistent and comparable for
parents


Overall Grade

• Elementary/Middle Schools
– Single component
– 100 point scale

• High Schools
– Five components 0-500 points
– Divide by 5 to achieve a 100 point scale
• In both cases, make the Growth
Adjustment (0, 5 or 10 points)


Overall Grade Scale

A: 90-100 points
B: 80-89 points
C: 70-79 points
D: 60-69 points
F: Less than 60 points


Overall Grade Sample

High School X
• Algebra II/Integrated III 78 points
• Graduation Rate 82 points
• WorkKeys 84 points
• ACT + 82 points
Total Points 395
vide by 5 to get points out of 100 395/5 = 79
Check Growth School Met Expected Growth
Add Growth Points 79 + 5 = 84 points
Determine Final Grade This School would receive a “B”

59

Simulated Grades

Note:
• This data is for discussion purposes only
and is a draft based on this proposed
operational model. It is only data to inform
feedback.
• Based on 2011-12 data.
• We have the ability and will run different
scenarios of the grading schema; however,
we cannot change the indicators.

Simulated Grades
No Growth in Grade
No Drop in Perf Comp 20% Drop in Perf Comp 30% Drop in Perf Comp
Grade Elem High Elem High Elem High
A 259 108 1 60 1 33
B 686 155 18 115 0 107
C 527 211 494 239 34 240
D 291 66 794 106 654 122
F 116 72 572 92 1190 110
With Growth in Grade
No Drop in Perf Comp 20% Drop in Perf Comp 30% Drop in Perf Comp
Grade Elem High Elem High Elem High
A 475 158 8 104 1 77
B 604 176 177 151 10 139
C 459 158 549 192 233 204
D 233 48 680 75 669 89
F 108 72 465 90
61966 103

Next Steps

• Gather feedback across state – including
now
• Return to the General Assembly with an
operational proposal in January 2013 per
the requirement of the bill


C&i update[1]

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

Similaire à C&i update[1]

Similaire à C&i update[1] (20)

Plus de dowelld

Plus de dowelld (10)

C&i update[1]

Notes de l'éditeur