Transcript Keynote

Meeting the Challenge of
Increased Accountability
NCLB
Dr. Richard D. Jones
International Center for Leadership in Education
Further Information
http://dickjones.us
[email protected]
NCLB
Lightning Rod for
Education Issues
QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
NCLB
Shift in Education
Policy
U.S Education
Nations' Average Science Performance
Compared with the U.S.
100%
50%
0%
Grade 4
Grade 8
Grade 12
Nations scoring higher than the U.S.
Nations scoring the same as the U.S.
Nations scoring below the U.S.
Source: NCES 1999-081R, Highlights From TIMSS
Nations' Average Mathematics
Performance Compared with the U.S.
100%
50%
0%
Grade 4
Grade 8
Grade 12
Nations' scoring higher than the U.S.
Nations scoring the same as the U.S.
Nations scoring below the U.S.
Source: NCES 1999-081R, Highlights From TIMSS
U.S. Education
• Enrollment growing and will reach 54 million
students by 2007.
• Over the next ten years, schools will need 2
million new teachers.
• The number of students with disabilities has
increased by 44% in the last decade.
• The number of English Language Learners has
increased by 66% in the last decade
• The number of Hispanic students is 12% and will
increase to 25% by 2025.
U.S Education cont’d.
• Enrollment in Special Education is 70% male.
ADD is diagnosed four times greater in males.
• Women earn 58% of college degrees.
• Ph.D.s in Engineering
 33% Asian American
 2% African American
 1% Hispanic American
NAEP Math Scores
17 Year-Olds
Average Math Score
350
20
32
250
1973
1978
1982
1986
1990
African American
1992
1994
Latino
1996
White
Source: US Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. NAEP 1999 Trends in
Academic Progress (p. 108) Washington, DC: US Department of Education, August 2000
1999
NAEP Reading
17 Year-Olds
300
31
Average Reading Score
21
200
1971 1975 1980 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999
African American
Latino
White
Source: US Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. NAEP 1999 Trends in Academic Progress (p. 107)
Washington, DC: US Department of Education, August 2000
African American and Latino
17 Year Olds Do Math at Same Levels
As White 13 Year Olds
100%
0%
200
White 8th Graders
Latino 12th Graders
250
300
350
African American 12th Graders
Source: NAEP 1999 Long Term Trends Summary Tables (online)
African American and Latino 17
Year Olds Read at Same Levels
as White 13 Year Olds
100%
0%
150
200
White 8th Graders
Latino 12th Grade rs
250
300
350
African American 12th Grade rs
Source: Source: NAEP 1999 Long Term Trends Summary Tables (online)
High School Graduation Rates
National (Class of 2001)
Total
70%
Native American
54%
Asian
79%
Hispanic
52%
African American
51%
White
72%
0%
20%
40%
60%
SOURCE: Manhattan Institute for Policy Research
80%
100%
Different Schools – Different Expectations
National Reading Test
60
50
40
A
B
C
D
<D
A
B
C
D
<D
30
Affluent Schools
SOURCE: US Department of Education
Disadvantages Schools
Elementary and Secondary
Education Act (ESEA)
“No Child Left Behind”
New requirements, resources and opportunities.
Focus on:
ACCOUNTABILITY
TEACHER QUALITY
PUBLIC REPORTING
Provisions apply to all students, not just those
receiving federal funds.
New Provisions
•
•
•
•
•
•
Content and Performance Standards
Annual Assessments
Public Reporting
Definition of Proficiency
All proficient by 2014
Schools required to make Adequate Yearly
Progress (AYP)
• Disaggregate Data
• Parent Communication
• Align Funds
Standards
• Content and performance standards in at
least READING/LANGUAGE ARTS
AND MATHEMATICS
• SCIENCE standards in place beginning
2005-2006 school year.
Annual Assessments
• Beginning no later than 2005-06, states assess
reading/language arts and math every year grades
3–8 as well as one year in grades10–12
• By 2007-08, states must also assess science
annually in at least one grade in each of the grade
spans: 3-5, 6-9, and 10-12.
• Must assess at least 95% (overall and
disaggregated) of school’s students.
Measuring Student Performance
• The assessments must produce individual
student diagnostic reports (not just school
level or sampling)
• Students’ performance is to be measured
against standards (not simply percentile
scores)
• At Least Three Performance Levels:
Advanced, Proficient and Basic
Consequences not Meeting AYP
•
•
•
•
•
Increasing Actions
Improvement Planning
Supplemental Services
Eligible for Transfer
Restructuring
Disaggregated Data
• Requires that states, districts and schools assure
that children from all groups are making progress:
• Including each and all of the following student
groups:
–
–
–
–
Low Income,
Major racial or ethnic subgroups
Students with Disabilities
LEP
New York’s Definitions of Proficiency
• Level 3 on the Grade 4 and 8 language arts and
mathematics assessments,
 level 3 growth on New York State English as a Second
Language Achievement Test (NYSESLAT)
 and Level 3 on New York State Alternate Assessment
(NYSAA) for certain students with disabilities (SWDs).
• At the high school level,a score of 65 or higher on
the Regents examination in English and math or
passing an approved alternative
 Level 3 on NYSAA for certain SWDs.
Measurement of Adequate Yearly Progress
• Use Performance Indices to Measure Adequate Yearly
Progress and Attainment of Safe Harbor.
• Establish separate Indices for Grade 4 and 8 and for
language arts and math based on continuously enrolled
students.
• Establish separate Indices for high school language arts
and math based on annual high school cohort.
• Have indices range from 0 to 200. Zero means all students
are at basic level; 200 means all students are at proficient
or advanced levels - the ultimate goal of NCLB.
Meeting the
Challenge
Meeting the Challenge of
Increased Accountability
• Focusing on the Right
Standards
• Teaching the Right Curriculum
• Creating the Right Learning
Environment
• Using the Right Teaching Methods
Meeting the Challenge of
Increased Accountability
• Curriculum Matrix of Priority
Standards
• Teaching the Right Curriculum
• Creating the Right Learning
Environment
• Using the Right Teaching Methods
Curriculum Matrix


Priority Standards
o State Test
o Survey of Essential Skills
Resource Kits
o Arts
o CTE
o Special Ed
o NCLB
State/Regents ELA
Performance Indicators Tested
High
Medium
Low
Grade 4
18
4
15
Grade 8
16
2
19
Grade 11
22
5
9
State/Regents Math
Performance Indicators Tested
High
Medium
Low
Grade 4
16
12
12
Grade 8
12
27
8
Grade 11
13
9
10
Meeting the Challenge of
Increased Accountability
• Curriculum Matrix of Priority
Standards
• Teaching the Right Curriculum
• Creating the Right Learning
Environment
• Using the Right Teaching Methods
Meeting the Challenge of
Increased Accountability
• Curriculum Matrix of Priority
Standards
• Rigorous and Relevant Curriculum
• Creating the Right Learning
Environment
• Using the Right Teaching Methods
Rigor/Relevance
Framework
Assimilation
of knowledge
Thinking
Continuum
Acquisition
of knowledge
Application
Model
Action Continuum
Acquisition
of knowledge
Application
of knowledge
Application Model
1
2
3
4
5
Knowledge of one discipline
Application within discipline
Application across
disciplines
Application to real-world
predictable situations
Application to real-world
unpredictable situations
Rigor/Relevance Framework
6
Knowledge
5
4
3
2
Application
1
1
2
3
4
5
Rigor/Relevance Framework
6
5
4
3
2
1
1
2
3
4
5
Rigor/Relevance Framework
6
5
4
3
2
1
A
1
2
3
4
5
Rigor/Relevance Framework
6
5
4
3
2
1
B
A
1
2
3
4
5
Rigor/Relevance Framework
6
5
4
C
3
2
1
B
A
1
2
3
4
5
Rigor/Relevance Framework
6
5
4
C
D
A
B
3
2
1
1
2
3
4
5
Meeting the Challenge of
Increased Accountability
• Curriculum Matrix of Priority
Standards
• Rigorous and Relevant Curriculum
• Creating the Right Learning
Environment
• Using the Right Teaching Methods
Meeting the Challenge of
Increased Accountability
• Curriculum Matrix of Priority
Standards
• Rigorous and Relevant Curriculum
• Relationships driven by guiding
principles
• Using the Right Teaching Methods
Rigor/Relevance Framework
K
N
O
W
L
E
D
G
E
C
D
A
B
APPLI CATI O N
Guiding Principles
 Responsibility
 Contemplation
 Initiative
 Perseverance
 Optimism
 Courage
 Respect
 Compassion
 Adaptability
 Honesty
 Trustworthiness
 Loyalty
Ideal
Rigor and
Relevance
But not sufficient
Relationships are Essential
to Student Learning
Result of combination of support from:




Family
Peers
Teachers
Community
Relationship Model
0.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Isolated
Knowing
Assisting
Mentoring
Enduring
Mutually Beneficial
Everyone needs support
when they take new risks
Relationship Model
Key to Student Learning
1. Knowing
2. Assisting
3. Mentoring
4. Enduring
5. Mutually
Beneficial
Teachers get to know
students and their families
Some positive support, but
sporadic
Moderate support from
some individuals
Fully supported from all
individuals
Mutually supportive
learning community
Support Behaviors







Respect
Being There
Active Listening
Frequent Contact
Encouragement
Avoiding “Put Downs”
??????
Relationship Model
Key to Teacher Learning and Effective Schools
1. Knowing
2. Assisting
3. Mentoring
4. Enduring
5. Mutually
Beneficial
Teachers know each other
personally
Examples of some teachers
collaborating
Some ongoing mentor
relationships
Sustained and effective
collaboration
Mutual support in a true
community
Support Behaviors








Common Aspirations
Culture of High Expectations
Developing Leadership
Shared Decision-Making
Data Driven Decisions
Ongoing Professional Development
Parent Partnerships
Engaging Teaching and Learning
Meeting the Challenge of
Increased Accountability
• Curriculum Matrix of Priority
Standards
• Rigorous and Relevant Curriculum
• Relationships driven by guiding
principles
• Using the Right Teaching Methods
Meeting the Challenge of
Increased Accountability
• Curriculum Matrix of Priority
Standards
• Rigorous and Relevant Curriculum
• Relationships driven by guiding
principles
• Reflective thought from challenging
teaching strategies
Rigor/Relevance Framework
K
N
O
W
L
E
D
G
E
C
D
A
B
APPLI CATI O N
Strategies that
Result in
Reflective
Thinking
Student Research
When to Use Strategy
Based on
Rigor/Relevance
Framework
Selecting Strategies on Rigor/Relevance
Best Strategies for Quadrant A - Acquisition
Guided Practice
Lecture
Memorization
Games
Recognition and Rewards
Review/Re-teaching
Selecting Strategies on Rigor/Relevance
Best Strategies for Quadrant D - Adaptation
Community service
Cooperative Learning
Inquiry
Instructional
Technology
Internships
Presentations/
Exhibitions
Problem-based
Learning
Project Design
 Work-based
Learning
Meeting the Challenge of
Increased Accountability
• Curriculum Matrix of Priority
Standards
• Rigorous and Relevant Curriculum
• Relationships driven by guiding
principles
• Reflective thought from challenging
teaching strategies
Schools Struggling with AYP
• Quick with Excuses
• Focus on Needs of Adults
• Rearview Mirror Managers
• Long List of NonNegotiables
Preparing for 2014
• Build capacity for change (not status quo)
• Set Long Range Data Goals
• Look at children already here and in
system
• Anticipate Demographic Changes
• Expect New Technologies
• Plan for Staff Changes
International Center for
Leadership in Education, Inc.
1587 Route 146
Rexford, NY 12148
Phone (518) 399-2776
Fax (518) 399-7607
E-mail - [email protected]
www.LeaderEd.com
Look into
the future
through
the eyes of
a child?
Rigor/Relevance Framework
K
N
O
W
L
E
D
G
E
Assimilation
Adaptation
C
D
Acquisition
Application
A
B
APPLI CAT I O N