Transcript PPT
Milwaukee Public Schools: Protocol for Examining Student Work February Academic Coach-Math Training February 8, 2013 Presented by ACMs: Darryl Moore Ingrid Walker-Henry Reasoning Analyzing and Learning from Student Work This protocol provides a set of guidelines for structuring conversations among teachers about student work. The goal is to foster a common understanding of student learning expectations for mathematics and to provide a collaborative forum for examining student work to inform mathematics instruction. L.I. & S.C. Learning Intention- We are learning how to examine student work for the purpose of teacher feedback. Success Criteria- We will be able to provide feedback to teachers and The Learning Team on student work. Visible Learning by John Hattie Providing Formative Evaluation of Program “The power of feedback to teachers on what is happening in their classroom so that they can ascertain “How am I going?” Effect Size .90 Effect Size .70 (Students with Disabilities) How does this Protocol work? 1. Getting Started Facilitator identified. Volunteer presents student work. Participants review the work silently. 2. Discussing the Work Round 1- Describe: What do you notice about the student work? Round 2- Interpret: What do the students understand? Round 3- Question: What questions do you have about the work? 3. Reflections from the Presenting Teacher Comments on the student work and responds to questions. Shares insights from surprising or unexpected comments. Repeat Steps 1–3 with another presenting teacher. 4. Suggestions for Teaching and Learning Based on the discussion of the students’ performance, what might you suggest doing next with the class? Describe ways the assessment did or did not give students an opportunity to demonstrate what they knew. 5. Debriefing What are we learning through this process? How can the process be improved? Suggested Update Common Core State Stands Suggestions for Teaching and Learning- Describe in what way(s) the assessment is aligned to CCSSM and/or Mathematical Practice Standards? Were students able to demonstrate a level of proficiency? What teacher moves might you carry out to support students in their learning? ACM Debriefing Whatever the enterprise, having moral purpose makes excellent business sense in the long run. -Michael Fullan (Leading In A Culture of Change, pg.11) What are we learning through the Protocol process? How can the process be improved? L.I. & S.C. Learning Intention- We are learning how to examine student work for the purpose of teacher feedback. Success Criteria- We will be able to provide feedback to teachers and The Learning Team on student work. Milwaukee Public Schools: Protocol for Examining Student Work MPS Board of School Directors Dr. Michael Bonds, President Larry Miller, Vice President Mark Sain, District 1 Jeff Spence, District 2 Annie Woodward, District 4 Dr. Peter Blewett, District 6 David Voeltner, District 7 Meagan Holman, District 8 Terrence Falk, At-Large Senior Team Dr. Gregory Thornton, Superintendent Naomi Gubernick, Chief of Staff Darienne Driver, Chief Innovation Officer Tina Flood, Chief Academic Officer Dr. Karen Jackson, Chief Human Resources Officer Michelle Nate, Chief Operations Officer Gerald Pace, Esq., Chief Financial Officer Anita Pietrykowski, Chief School Administration Officer Denise Callaway, Executive Dir., Community Engagement Patricia Gill, Executive Director, Family Services Sue Saller, Exec. Coord., Superintendent’s Initiatives