Teachers in action
It's all about engagement! At Haskin Elementary, we use Kagan Structures to increase academic achievement, improve student relations, enhance student self-esteem, create a more harmonious classroom climate, reduce discipline problems, and develop students' social skills and character virtues. Because we have several staff members who are new to Kagan Cooperative Learning Structures, Ashley Lane taught our staff some key structures to increase their knowledge around cooperative learning. Our staff reviewed Quiz, Quiz, Trade, Stand Up, Hand Up, Pair Up and Rally Coach. Ashley did an OUTSTANDING job teaching the structures and having teachers brainstorm ideas of how they will put the practices into use in their classrooms. Ashley will be working toward becoming a trainer so that we have someone on staff to train new people. Administration will be monitoring for the use of these structures in October.
Last week Sarah attended an NWEA summit. There were a few "Big Ideas" that were valuable . The first is using NWEA not for student achievement purposes, but for growth and for use as a "value add." "Value add" is a statistical technique that uses student achievement data over time to measure the learning gains students make. This methodology offers a way to estimate the impact that schools and teachers have on student learning isolated from other contributing factors such as family characteristics and social economic background.
Another take away was to look at the success factors in a 90/90/90 schools. There are 3 characteristics that stand out in successful 90/90/90 schools. The first factor is that the students have the daily involvement of a caring and competent adult. The second is that teachers set individual goals for each child. And third, the child needs to drive the achievement of that goal. This reminds us of the importance of having goal conversations with students. Discuss average growth with the students. Ask them where are you now, average, below average or above average? What actions need to be taken to get to your goal?
A third take away was Dr. Webb's work around Depth of Knowledge (DOK) and how NWEA questions are designed to address the DOK. Questions are created around DOK 1 which is recall and reproduction, DOK 2 which are skills and concepts, DOK 3 which is strategic thinking and has complex scoring procedures. DOK 4 measures extended thinking and will not be on the MAP test because this is classroom based and will be measured over time by classroom teachers.
Another take away was around the subject of "Who should proctor the NWEA test?" Proctoring tests should be done by the classroom teacher. Because the NWEA scores may be linked to teacher evaluation, we need children to take the test seriously. Teachers should be saying "This test matters!" vs."This is just a test." It is recommended that there always be two proctors for the test. This will help keep students accountable for taking the test seriously. Any student accommodations should be met during the test and who better to document their implementation than the classroom teacher?
The last important take away is that the classroom teacher demonstrates that he/she takes the assessment seriously, and that the teacher does something with the data. If kids know that the data will drive decisions that teachers make about kids, that the decisions actually drive something for them, then they will take it more seriously. This could be as simple as "Based on NWEA, we will change reading groups."
The summit was very informative and should drive some of our thinking and behaviors around NWEA.
Another take away was to look at the success factors in a 90/90/90 schools. There are 3 characteristics that stand out in successful 90/90/90 schools. The first factor is that the students have the daily involvement of a caring and competent adult. The second is that teachers set individual goals for each child. And third, the child needs to drive the achievement of that goal. This reminds us of the importance of having goal conversations with students. Discuss average growth with the students. Ask them where are you now, average, below average or above average? What actions need to be taken to get to your goal?
A third take away was Dr. Webb's work around Depth of Knowledge (DOK) and how NWEA questions are designed to address the DOK. Questions are created around DOK 1 which is recall and reproduction, DOK 2 which are skills and concepts, DOK 3 which is strategic thinking and has complex scoring procedures. DOK 4 measures extended thinking and will not be on the MAP test because this is classroom based and will be measured over time by classroom teachers.
Another take away was around the subject of "Who should proctor the NWEA test?" Proctoring tests should be done by the classroom teacher. Because the NWEA scores may be linked to teacher evaluation, we need children to take the test seriously. Teachers should be saying "This test matters!" vs."This is just a test." It is recommended that there always be two proctors for the test. This will help keep students accountable for taking the test seriously. Any student accommodations should be met during the test and who better to document their implementation than the classroom teacher?
The last important take away is that the classroom teacher demonstrates that he/she takes the assessment seriously, and that the teacher does something with the data. If kids know that the data will drive decisions that teachers make about kids, that the decisions actually drive something for them, then they will take it more seriously. This could be as simple as "Based on NWEA, we will change reading groups."
The summit was very informative and should drive some of our thinking and behaviors around NWEA.
Administrators in action
Administrators from around the Valley met for a PLC on Friday, October 11th to continue work on using the Teacher Evaluation rubric. Small teams were each assigned one of the standards and were charged with looking at the bullets under the Accomplished and Exemplary columns. Teams listed behaviors and activities that would be visible in a classroom if the teacher met these criteria. Professional discussions lead to a deeper understanding of what administrators might look for when evaluating teachers using this instrument.