Transcript The Principal’s Role in the Reading Program Michael C. McKenna University of Virginia Sharon Walpole University of Delaware.

The Principal’s Role
in the
Reading Program
Michael C. McKenna
University of Virginia
Sharon Walpole
University of Delaware
What’s the GARF PD Plan?
Year
Extensive Modeling
1
We built knowledge of the 5 Dimensions
for State staff and provided feedback on
their own PD redeliveries
We designed formal presentations and
book studies for redelivery
Year
Guided Practice
2
We worked collaboratively with State staff
to design book studies for each grade level
What’s the GARF PD Plan?
Year
Site-Based Choices
3
We designed a series of modules from
which State staff made choices in order to
meet the specific needs of their schools
Cohort 2 schools used Year 1 book studies
Year
Data-Based Choices
4
We combined the two cohorts and
launched a year-long focus on
differentiated instruction.
Specific Strengths of GARF
Alignment of GPS with SBRR
Adequate time for both Tier 1
and Tier 2 instruction
State funding for classroom
libraries linked to GPS
Specific Strengths of GARF
Wide access to Teacher
Academies, Struggling
Reader Academies and
Preservice opportunities
Extensive online support
High-quality state and
regional infrastructure
CRCT Data
• Trends in CRCT, for all grades, are
positive!
Fewer students each year do not meet
standards
More students each year exceed standards
Our kindergarteners enter school
with very weak oral vocabulary, but
they make gains against the national
sample during the kindergarten year.
Our kindergarteners enter school
with very weak oral vocabulary, but
they make gains against the national
sample during the kindergarten year.
And, Most Recently
September 25, 2007 –
Georgia’s 4th graders are scoring at the national level in reading, according to results of the
National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) released today.
Georgia students scored at all-time highs on the NAEP in math and reading. The biggest gains,
however, were seen in reading, providing further evidence that Georgia's new curriculum -the Georgia Performance Standards -- is having a big impact.
"This is the latest in a series of results showing higher achievement in Georgia schools. For the
first time, Georgia's fourth graders are on par with fourth graders across the nation in
reading and we can note increases in all other grades and subjects,” Governor Perdue said.
“I am proud of what our students, teachers and parents have accomplished, and I look
forward to even more increased achievement in the next round of NAEP testing in 2009."
Aside from the curriculum, the Superintendent credited the federal Reading First program,
which has given more than $100 million to 118 schools over the past four years. That
money is used to help assure that students in early grades are learning to read.
Superintendent Cox also credited the No Child Left Behind Act and the state's promotion
and retention policy for bringing a new focus to reading education.
http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/stt2007/2007497GA4.pdf
Key Challenges in GARF
1. Full implementation of flexible, differentiated
instruction in all grade levels (Tier 2)
2. Full implementation of intensive interventions
in all grade levels (Tier 3)
3. Creative, flexible use of personnel and
grouping strategies to facilitate teaching and
learning
4. Identification of and support for teachers who
are struggling
5. Better understanding and use of diagnostic
data, formal and informal, and of outcome data
(CRCT, ITBS, and PPVT)
Now let’s look
at the ITBS.
Points to Remember
 The ITBS is required for all schools at grades 3, 5 and 8
(and RF uses it in 1 and 2).
 There is no statewide testing window (but RF is at the
end).
 The ITBS is not used to determine AYP.
 Cohort tracking is not possible unless a
school elects to give the ITBS in non-required
grades or a third-to-fifth-grade cohort is
tracked.
 The ITBS permits national comparisons but does
not gauge mastery of the Georgia
Performance Standards.
Which norms shall we use?
Percentile Ranks


Give a fairly precise estimate of
standing compared with national age
peers.
Cannot be averaged, subtracted, or
easily compared.
Percentiles and Football
G
50
G
Avoid differences in percentile ranks.
Use NCEs or stanines instead.
Which norms shall we use?
Stanines



Give a gross estimate of standing
compared with national age peers.
Cannot be averaged.
Are not well suited to groups.
Interpreting Stanines
Above Average
Borderline
Average
Borderline
Below Average
Stanines 7-9
Stanine 6
Stanine 5
Stanine 4
Stanines 1-3
{
9
8
7
6
5
{
4
3
2
1
Which norms shall we use?
Normal Curve Equivalents



Were developed to permit comparisons.
Can be subtracted and averaged.
Are statistically equivalent.
How NCEs are made
NCEs “flatten” the normal curve so that
differences are statistically equivalent.
Which norms shall we use?
Grade Equivalents



Involve shaky estimates.
Compare students of different ages.
Have been condemned by IRA.
Three-Year ITBS Cohort Model
2004 Grade 1 2006 Grade 3
Percentile Rank
Stanine
Normal Curve Equivalent
30
38
4
4
38
43
A comparison can be made on the basis of those students
present at both testings. But this would take time! UGA uses
a “modified” cohort model, which includes anyone tested.
Three-Year ITBS Cohort Model
2004 Grade 1 2006 Grade 3
Percentile Rank
Stanine
Normal Curve Equivalent
30
38
4
4
38
43
Any comparison should focus on normal curve equivalents.
On a nationally-normed test, our students
are scoring close the average but are
losing some ground against the sample
over time in some areas.
Our focus on decoding is having longterm effects by third grade. We can see
this in the Word Analysis and Spelling
subtest results.
We must find ways of helping children build
their vocabulary and comprehension. Our
children are largely maintaining their position
relative to the national norming group, but
they are not making up ground.
NCE = 46.6
Why focus on Tier 2 this year?
Our DIBELS data indicate that we are very
successful with the children who start out
at least at benchmark achievement.
Our DIBELS data indicate that we are
doing increasingly better with children
who start out at intensive – and we also
know that implementation of intervention
is varied.
Our DIBELS data indicate that our success
rate for children who begin at strategic is
relatively stable. There is room to
improve.
Benchmark to Benchmark
85.6
87.2
85.1
Cohort 1 Year 2
Cohort 1 Year 3
Cohort 2 Year 1
Effectiveness of Core Instruction
In both Cohort 1 and Cohort 2, we are
nearing our goal of 90% of beginning-ofyear benchmark students maintaining that
status at the end of the year.
Our basic program of whole-group and smallgroup instruction is working for them.
Intensive to Strategic or Benchmark
43
44.5
Cohort 1 Year 2
Cohort 1 Year 3
39.2
Cohort 2 Year 1
Effectiveness of Interventions
For children who begin the year with
intensive needs, Cohort 1 schools have
made small improvements towards our
goal of 50% moving out of that category.
Cohort 2 schools will be able to focus
more attention this year.
Our basic program of whole-group, smallgroup, and intensive intervention
instruction is beginning to work for them.
Strategic to Benchmark
45.4
45.4
43.7
Cohort 1 Year 2
Cohort 1 Year 3
Cohort 2 Year 1
Effectiveness of Differentiated
Instruction
For our students starting the year at the
strategic level of achievement, we have
had fairly stable results across years in
Cohort 1 and in the first year of Cohort 2.
We had hoped for 75% success for them.
Our basic program of whole-group and
small-group instruction is not yet working
for enough of them.
Things for you to consider
These data are aggregated across the
grade levels.
In your school, you will find grade-level scores
that are very different from the state trends;
use them to focus your attention.
Remember that these data only include
children who were present at both fall and
spring; your own data will also include
children who were there at any one point in
time.
Remember the ECI/EDI/EI
Reports?
We have provided you with reports that track
progress for groups of students
Fall Benchmark
Fall Strategic
Fall Intensive
Spring Status
Spring Status
Spring Status
But you can get even
more specific!
Not all of your
teachers are
the same!
How can I find my
most effective
teachers?
You can track student
progress by classroom
Log on to Mclass Direct
https://www.mclassdirect.com/
T1
T2
T3
T4
Which of these
teachers was most
effective?
T1
T2
T3
T4
But did the initial status
of the children
influence the results?
There is a way to track progress
for each of the three groups of
children across time.
You can
choose the
time period
T1
T2
T3
T4
T5
Midyear distributions compared with fall
T1
T2
T3t
T4
T5
End-of-year distributions compared with midyear
How can we address these
challenges?
1. Strong leadership from the principal
2. Quality professional support from the
Coach
3. Flexible support from the State staff
What kind of principal
is best for a school’s
reading program?
Which qualities of the principal
relate to reading achievement?





Principal’s race
Principal’s gender
Number of years as a principal
Number of years as a classroom teacher
Knowledge about reading
– Kean et al. (1979). What works in reading?
Philadelphia: Federal Reserve Bank.
Conflicting Views of the Principal
CEO
vs.
Instructional
Leader
Teacher Expertise

Effective Teaching

Student Learning

High-Stakes Testing
Teacher Expertise

Effective Teaching

Student Learning

High-Stakes Testing
Teacher Expertise

Effective Teaching

Student Learning

High-Stakes Testing
Distributed Leadership
 Persistent, public focus on learning
 Use of inquiry
 Development of enabling structures
 Shared responsibility for decision making
 Personal participation as a learner
Copland, M.A. (2004). Distributed leadership for instructional improvement: The principal’s
role. In D.S. Strickland & M.L. Kamil (Eds.), Improving reading achievement
through professional development (pp. 213-231). Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon.
What does the literature say about the role
of the principal in school improvement?
Instructional
Leader
Collaborative
Leader
Transformational
Leader
Managing,
guiding
curriculum and
instruction
directly
Creating a
system for
shared
decisionmaking
Both leading
directly and
sharing decisionmaking
The main mark of an
effective principal is not
just his or her impact on
the bottom line of
student achievement,
but also on how many
leaders he or she leaves
behind who can go even
further.
– Michael Fullan (2005, p. 31)
The Effective Principal
Joseph Murphy (2003).
Leadership for Literacy:
Research-Based Practice:
PreK-3 (Corwin Press).
Summarizes key qualities
possessed by principals of schools
where achievement is strong.
The More-Effective Principal
The Less-Effective Principal
The More-Effective Principal
The Less-Effective Principal
The More-Effective Principal
The Less-Effective Principal
Setting Goals
The More-Effective Principal
The Less-Effective Principal
Has a more child-centered vision
Has a more adult-centered vision
Sets manageable, realistic goals
Favors broad goals
Sees student performance as central
Likes to see things run smoothly
Expresses goals in measurable terms
Expresses goals vaguely
Uses goals for planning
Refers rarely to goals
Asks parents & staff to help set goals
Limits goal setting input
Communicating Goals
The More-Effective Principal
The Less-Effective Principal
Periodically reviews & discusses
Infrequently discusses goals
Actively clarifies goals
Rarely clarifies goals
Has teachers who know goals
Has teachers unfamiliar with goals
Has teachers who see themselves
as good instructors
Has teachers who see themselves
as good managers & colleagues
Task #1
Principals
LEAs
Literacy
Coaches
What is one
specific
improvement
you can make in
goal setting or in
goal
communication?
How can you
support this
improvement?
What role can
your coach
assume in order
to enact this
improvement?
Promoting Quality Instruction
The More-Effective Principal
The Less-Effective Principal
Insists on certain teaching strategies
Has less focus on methods
Favors interactive teaching
Is content with less interaction
Assigns teachers on the basis of
improving achievement
Assigns teachers bureaucratically
Supervising Instruction
The More-Effective Principal
The Less-Effective Principal
Relies little on formal observations
Values formal observations
Values informal visits and meetings
Rarely makes informal visits
Often reads about instruction
Seldom reads about instruction
Often provides specific feedback
Seldom provides specific feedback
Counsels and assists poor teachers
Less likely to confront poor teachers
Teachers at Risk
Task #2
Principals
LEAs
Literacy
Coaches
What is one
specific
improvement
you can make in
promoting or
supervising
quality
instruction?
How can you
support this
improvement?
What role can
your coach
assume in order
to enact this
improvement?
Allocating Instructional Time
The More-Effective Principal
The Less-Effective Principal
Carefully sets time allocations
Less likely to set time allocations
Coordinates time allocations
across teachers
Less likely to have uniform schedule
Schedules more instructional and
fewer non-instructional activities
Less likely to favor instructional over
non-instructional activities
Insists on time for basics
Less likely to ensure their coverage
Protects uninterrupted block
Less likely to preserve block
Coordinating the Curriculum
The More-Effective Principal
The Less-Effective Principal
Is highly involved in curriculum
alignment
Is less involved in curriculum
alignment
Is concerned with the continuity
of curriculum from grade to grade
Tends not to focus on continuity
of curriculum from grade to grade
Written Curriculum
Taught
Curriculum
Tested
Curriculum
Fenwick
English
Task #3
Principals
LEAs
Literacy
Coaches
What is one
specific
improvement
you can make in
allocating
instructional time
or in
coordinating the
curriculum?
How can you
support this
improvement?
What role can
your coach
assume in order
to enact this
improvement?
Monitoring Student Progress
The More-Effective Principal
The Less-Effective Principal
Supports testing programs
Views testing as a necessary evil
Provides test results to teachers
In a timely manner
Is less timely in reporting results
to teachers
Discusses results with groups and
individual teachers
Is less likely to discuss results
Encourages teachers to use test
results to plan instruction
Does not emphasize the connection
between testing and teaching
Setting Expectations
The More-Effective Principal
The Less-Effective Principal
Holds adults accountable for student
learning outcomes
Does not hold others accountable
Requires mastery of grade-level
skills for promotion to next grade
Is more likely to socially promote
students
RF efforts should ensure
that there are no retentions!
Task # 4
Principals
LEAs
Literacy
Coaches
What is one
specific
improvement
you can make in
monitoring
student progress
or setting
expectations?
How can you
support this
improvement?
How can your
coach enact this
improvement?
Being Visible
The More-Effective Principal
The Less-Effective Principal
Is often out of the office
Spends large amounts of time in
the office
Makes an effort to move about
the campus and in and out of
classrooms
Is less mobile
MBWA
(Management by Walking Around)
Providing Incentives
The More-Effective Principal
Recognizes teachers with rewards
such as
 distributing leadership
The Less-Effective Principal
Seldom acknowledges teachers
 showing personal interest
 making public acknowledgements
 giving private praise
Ensures that student rewards are
frequent and that they go to a large
percentage of students
Is less concerned about student
rewards
Focuses rewards on achievement
Is less likely to reward achievement
Task # 5
Principals
LEAs
Literacy
Coaches
How can you
identify and
reward your
most effective
teachers?
How can you
support this
improvement?
How can your
coach enact this
improvement?
Promoting PD
The More-Effective Principal
The Less-Effective Principal
Is more likely to be directly involved
in PD activities
Often avoids PD sessions
Follows up by ensuring that PD
methods are implemented
Is unlikely to follow up PD
Cobbles temporary coalitions
of teachers to help implement
Is not adept at working with
teacher groups to implement
Encourages professional dialogue
Is indifferent to dialogue
Helps teachers attend conferences
Resists conference attendance
Avoid Crazy Quilt
Professional
Development!
Task # 6
Principals
LEAs
Literacy
Coaches
How can you
participate more
directly in PD?
How can you
promote the
implementation
of new ideas
afterwards?
How can you
support this
improvement?
How can your
coach enact this
improvement?
Creating a Safe & Orderly
Learning Environment
The More-Effective Principal
The Less-Effective Principal
Works with teachers to develop
classroom management skills
Is less focused on management skills
Establishes a clear and consistent
disciplinary policy
Fails to set up a clear policy
Enforces discipline fairly and
consistently
May be inconsistent in enforcing
discipline
Involves teachers and students
In setting rules
Sets rules independently
Creating a Safe & Orderly
Learning Environment
The More-Effective Principal
The Less-Effective Principal
Confronts problems quickly and
forcefully
Is tentative and indecisive
Supports teachers with discipline
problems
Is unsympathetic to teachers with
discipline problems
Task # 7
Principals
LEAs
Literacy
Coaches
How can you
identify and work
with those
teachers who
truly struggle
with
management ?
How can you
support this
improvement?
How can your
coach enact this
improvement?
Promoting Collaboration
The More-Effective Principal
The Less-Effective Principal
Encourages teamwork and
collaborative efforts
Allows teachers to function
independently
Gives faculty a formal role in
decision making
Excludes teachers from decision
making
Informally seeks teachers’ ideas
and opinions
Is indifferent to the ideas and
opinions of teachers
Task # 8
Principals
LEAs
Literacy
Coaches
How can you
collaborate more
fully with your
coach? How
can you better
facilitate teacher
collaboration?
How can you
support this
improvement?
How can your
coach enact this
improvement?
Securing Outside Resources
The More-Effective Principal
The Less-Effective Principal
Is skilled at influencing district
decision making about resources
Reacts to district decisions
Actively seeks resources
Is passive about finding resources
Assertively recruits the best
teachers (even from other schools)
Follows standard hiring
procedures
Allocates money based on goals
Makes allocations based on other
factors
Task # 9
Principals
LEAs
Literacy
Coaches
How can you
more effectively
combine
resources from
RF, School
Improvement,
Title I, and
Special
Education?
How can you
support this
improvement?
How can your
coach enact this
improvement?
Linking Home and School
The More-Effective Principal
The Less-Effective Principal
Communicates with parents on a
regular basis
Infrequently communicates with
parents
Involves parents in school activities
Is more likely to ignore parent
participation
Establishes programs that promote
parent-teacher interaction
Fails to facilitate parent-teacher
interaction
Promotes the school to
community groups
Does not participate in community
groups
Provides ways parents can learn
about school and help their children
Doesn’t
Task # 10
Principals
LEAs
Literacy
Coaches
How can you
more effectively
communicate
your schools’
program
improvements to
parents and
other
stakeholders?
How can you
support this
improvement?
How can your
coach enact this
improvement?
You don’t have to change
everything to change anything.
Time to Commit!
Go back through your ideas and
pick the three most important for
your school. Then make specific
commitments to implement them.
Back in School
1. Make changes in the areas you’ve
selected.
2. Use mCLASS:Direct to consider last
year’s data. Ask your coach to support
those teachers whose data indicate
substantial needs.
3. Work with your coach to structure this
year’s PD so that there is clear
administrative follow-up.