Funded by U.S. Department of Education Effective Implementation of SIG Webinar Series Based on the Handbook on Effective Implementation of School Improvement Grants Improving Student Achievement Through the Use of Student Data and Differentiated Instruction Student Data to Drive Instruction - Russell Gersten Differentiating Instruction - Christy Murray

Funded by U.S. Department of Education The Center on Instruction is operated by RMC Research Corporation in partnership with the Florida Center for Reading Research at Florida State University; Instructional Research Group; the Texas Institute for Measurement, Evaluation, and Statistics at the University of Houston; and The Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk at The University of Texas at Austin. The contents of this PowerPoint were developed under cooperative agreement S283B with the U.S. Department of Education. However, these contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government The Center on Instruction requests that no changes be made to the content or appearance of this product. To download a copy of this document, visit The Center on Instruction is operated by RMC Research Corporation in partnership with the Florida Center for Reading Research at Florida State University; Instructional Research Group; the Texas Institute for Measurement, Evaluation, and Statistics at the University of Houston; and The Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk at The University of Texas at Austin. The contents of this PowerPoint were developed under cooperative agreement S283B with the U.S. Department of Education. However, these contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government The Center on Instruction requests that no changes be made to the content or appearance of this product. To download a copy of this document, visit

Part 1: Purpose  Bring clarification to common areas of confusion and inefficiency in the use of student assessment data  In addition: Highlight key points in material in SIG Handbook Mention resources Funded by U.S. Department of Education

School Action Principle #1: Universal screening  Screen all students.  Screening measures should be brief and/or efficient. (Hamilton, Halverson, Jackson, Mandinach, Supovitz, & Wayman, 2009; Gersten, Beckmann, Clarke, Foegen, Marsh, Star, & Witzel, 2009; Gersten, Compton, Connor, Dimino, Santoro, Linan-Thompson, & Tilly, 2008)

Funded by U.S. Department of Education School Action Principle #1: Universal screening  Key Question #1: What are the most important technical issues to look for in selecting a screening measure? Participation Item 1 - Mark with highlighter the two most important issues to consider: 1. Concurrent validity with a standardized test 2. Predictive validity of scores on standardized test two years later 3. Reliability of parallel forms 4. Reliability across testers

Funded by U.S. Department of Education School Action Principle #1: Universal screening  Key Question #2: Is it important to ensure that the content of the screening measure carefully aligns to district and state standards? Participation Item 2 - Mark with highlighter whether you think this is: 1. Yes or 2. No

Funded by U.S. Department of Education School Action Principle #1: Universal screening  Key Question #3: Is it a good idea to use screening measures for both diagnostic purposes as well as screening purposes? Participation Item 3 – Think about this for 30 seconds.

Funded by U.S. Department of Education School Action Principle #1: Universal screening  Key Question #4: I have been told that I have to screen all students each fall but it seems a waste of time to screen the students who consistently succeed in mathematics or reading. Should I keep screening them?

Funded by U.S. Department of Education School Action Principle #1: Universal screening  Key Question #5: Can I use last spring’s state assessment data as a screening measure for 4th to 9th graders?

Funded by U.S. Department of Education School Action Principle #1: Universal screening  Key Question #6: How important is it that all students in a school are screened within the same two weeks? Participation Item 4 – How important is screening within 2 weeks? 1.Essential 2.Important 3.Not at all important

Funded by U.S. Department of Education School Action Principle #2: Progress monitoring  Use efficient, easy-to-use progress monitoring measures to track the growth of students who are receiving intervention services towards critical academic outcomes. (National Center on Response to Intervention, n.d.; Hamilton, Halverson, Jackson, Mandinach, Supovitz, & Wayman, 2009; Gersten, Beckmann, Clarke, Foegen, Marsh, Star, & Witzel, 2009 ; Gersten, Compton, Connor, Dimino, Santoro, Linan-Thompson, & Tilly, 2008).  Make sure to also track the students who score slightly above the at-risk category on screening measures!

Funded by U.S. Department of Education School Action Principle #2: Progress monitoring  Key Question #1: What are key features to look for in a progress monitoring measure? Participation Item 5 – Which of these are key features to look for? 1.Covers all key grade level standards or focal points 2.Efficiency 3.Sensitivity to change 4.Whether or not it is a timed measure

Funded by U.S. Department of Education School Action Principle #2: Progress monitoring  Key Question #2: What content should be included in a progress monitoring measure?

Funded by U.S. Department of Education School Action Principle #2: Progress monitoring  Key Question #3: Which students should have their progress in mathematics monitored on a regular basis? Participation Item 6 – Pick one: 1.All 2.Those below benchmark 3.Below benchmark and slightly above benchmark

Funded by U.S. Department of Education School Action Principle #2: Progress monitoring  Key Question #4: Is there any research demonstrating that regular use of progress monitoring improves students’ proficiency in mathematics and reading?

Funded by U.S. Department of Education School Action Principle #3: Formative assessments  Consider use of a range of formative assessments and curriculum-embedded assessments to assist in progress monitoring. Open-ended formative assessments attempt to assess level of student understanding using performance assessments. (The National Center for Fair and Open Testing, 2007).  Formative assessments are embedded within the learning activity and linked directly to the current unit of instruction. (Perle, Marion & Gong, 2007 as cited in Hamilton, Halverson, Jackson, Mandinach, Supovitz, & Wayman, 2009, p.47).

Funded by U.S. Department of Education School Action Principle #3: Formative assessments  Key Question #1: What is the difference between formative assessments and progress monitoring measures?

Funded by U.S. Department of Education School Action Principle #3: Formative assessments  Key Question #2: Can I use a combination of progress monitoring measures and these much more informal assessments?

Funded by U.S. Department of Education School Action Principle #3: Formative assessments  Key Question #3: Is there much research on formative assessments?

Funded by U.S. Department of Education School Action Principle #4: Identify areas of need  Review of data might show that one teacher’s students scored worse than the others did. Won’t this be humiliating or embarrassing?

Funded by U.S. Department of Education District Action Principle #1: Tracking system  Develop a data system or adopt an available data system that enables analysis of student performance data at the district and school level. (Hamilton, Halverson, Jackson, Mandinach, Supovitz, & Wayman, 2009).

Funded by U.S. Department of Education District Action Principle #2: Identify areas of need (again)  Use annual state testing performance data to pinpoint specific areas of strength and weakness in student academic performance. (Hamilton, Halverson, Jackson, Mandinach, Supovitz, & Wayman, 2009)  Consider use of documents such as the Needs Assessment from Center on Instruction–Mathematics. (Dimino, Taylor, Koontz, & Ketterlin-Geller, 2010)

Funded by U.S. Department of Education District Action Principle #1: Tracking system  Key Question: Should we cluster items to correspond to state standards or Common Core State Standards (when relevant)?

Funded by U.S. Department of Education District Action Principle #3: Reliability & validity  Determine the reliability and criterion-related validity of these measures. (Hamilton, Halverson, Jackson, Mandinach, Supovitz, & Wayman, 2009; National Center on Response to Intervention, n.d.)

Funded by U.S. Department of Education District Action Principle #3: Reliability & validity  Key Question #1: Should each school do this on its own? Participation Item 7 – Think about this question for 30 seconds.  Key Question #2: What is the role of the state department of education in this?

Funded by U.S. Department of Education District Action Principle #4: Put data to use  These activities should be linked to RtI activities that are ongoing in the district. (National Center on Response to Intervention, n.d.).  They also should include professional development on data interpretation and use of data to provide differentiated instruction.

Funded by U.S. Department of Education Other Considerations: Special education  Use of screening and benchmark data in RTI. Consider only students who fail to respond to effective interventions for possible special education referral for reading or mathematics disabilities. Participation Item 8 – How important will this be in 3 years? 1.Not at all 2.Depends a lot on state regulations and federal legislation 3.Not sure 4.Very

Funded by U.S. Department of Education  Questions

Funded by U.S. Department of Education Introduction  What is differentiated instruction? Research-based practices used to accommodate student differences in the classroom –Scaffolding –Various grouping practices –Modification of assignments –Multiple modes of response –Other effective instructional strategies

Funded by U.S. Department of Education Your Turn: Which are examples of differentiated instruction?  Developing separate lesson plans for every student in your class.  Pulling two students aside for extra instruction on fractions during silent work time.  Giving a writing assignment to all your students except your most severe LD students; these students are allowed to draw a picture instead.  Allowing students to always choose their groups for cooperative assignments.  Engaging students in a vocabulary lesson where students are asked to generate and record (in journals) examples and non- examples of conceptual words in their science unit.

Funded by U.S. Department of Education Examples and Non-examples of Differentiated Instruction ExamplesNon-examples Progress monitoring students and using that data for effective grouping, reteaching, etc. Giving a weekly spelling test and recording the grade in your grade book. Explaining, modeling, and providing guided practice on the process of writing a summary. Telling students how to write a summary and then providing silent work time for them to do so on their own. Conducting a unit on astronomy in a 12th grade physics class and letting students choose if they want to learn about symbols, key terms or phrases related to nuclear fusion, gravitation, or general relativity. (CCSS RST#4) Allowing your 12th grade physics students to pick an area of study and generate a report of their choice (oral, computer- generated, written, etc.).

Funded by U.S. Department of Education Overview of School Action Principles 1.Implement ongoing progress monitoring to obtain valid student data, and use this data to inform instructional decisions and determine appropriate grouping patterns (Tomlinson & Allan, 2000; Tomlinson, 2001; Moon, 2005). 2. Use grouping strategies to meet the individual needs of students within the broader group context and design instructional tasks for each group to align with educational goals (Hall, 2002). 3.Use differentiated instructional strategies to include special education students in the general education curriculum (Boderick, Mehta-Parekh, & Reid, 2005) and to respond to the unique needs of diverse gifted learners (VanTassel-Baska & Stambaugh, 2005).

Funded by U.S. Department of Education School Action Principle #1 Implement ongoing progress monitoring to obtain valid student data, and use this data to inform instructional decisions and determine appropriate grouping patterns (Tomlinson & Allan, 2000; Tomlinson, 2001; Moon, 2005).

Funded by U.S. Department of Education Progress Monitoring/Data-Based Decision Making Key Question #1 1. What data are important to collect to inform instructional decisions?  Screening measures, progress monitoring, curriculum based assessment and measurement, observations, weekly classroom quizzes.  These data sources alert teachers to which students are struggling, are at risk for not meeting end of year benchmarks and are in need of supplemental instruction so that they may make data-based decisions and differentiate instruction.

Funded by U.S. Department of Education Progress Monitoring/Data-Based Decision Making Key Question #2 2. How can principals and school leadership teams support differentiated instruction and data-based decision making?  Promoting the use of assessments  Implementing school-wide data management  Providing meaningful professional development  Scheduling data meetings  Providing leadership for planning and implementation of interventions

Funded by U.S. Department of Education Helpful Resources Teaching all students to read in elementary school: A guide for principals. Center on Instruction. ubcategory=materials&grade_start=0&grade_end=3#148 ubcategory=materials&grade_start=0&grade_end=3#148 Improving literacy instruction in middle and high schools: A guide for principals. Center on Instruction. ubcategory=materials&grade_start=6&grade_end=12#121 ubcategory=materials&grade_start=6&grade_end=12#121 Using student achievement data to support instructional decision making (NCEE ). IES

Funded by U.S. Department of Education School Action Principle #2 Use grouping strategies to meet the individual needs of students within the broader group context and design instructional tasks for each group to align with educational goals (Hall, 2002).

Funded by U.S. Department of Education Use Grouping Strategies Key Question #1 1. What grouping formats support the individual needs of students?  Differentiated instruction can be delivered in a whole- group format, but struggling students need to receive differentiated instruction within a small-group setting.  Research indicates that small group, supplemental instruction is most effective for elementary students when students are taught in a 1:3 or 1:1 group size.

Funded by U.S. Department of Education Use Grouping Strategies Key Question #2 2. How can teachers design effective small group and student center activities?  Make use of student centers  Design a management system  Explicitly teach academic skills (with modeling, guided practice, and supported application) prior to students engaging in center work independently

Funded by U.S. Department of Education Helpful Resources Using Student Center Activities to Differentiate Reading Instruction: A Guide for Teachers t+Center+Activities+to+Differentiate+Reading+Instruction%3A++A+Guide+for+Teach ers Student Center Activities—Florida Center for Reading Research (FCRR) Various Modules from the IRIS Center –RTI (Part 4): Putting it all together –PALS: A Reading Strategy for Grades K –PALS: A Reading Strategy for Grades –PALS: A Reading Strategy for High School –CSR: A Reading Comprehension Strategy

Funded by U.S. Department of Education School Action Principle #3 Use differentiated instructional strategies to include special education students in the general education curriculum (Boderick, Mehta-Parekh, & Reid, 2005) and to respond to the unique needs of diverse gifted learners (VanTassel-Baska & Stambaugh, 2005).

Funded by U.S. Department of Education Support Special Education & GT Students Key Question #1 1. What are some specific ways to make instruction more intense to support special education students?  Instruction can be made more intense by altering: group size instructional delivery instructional time

Funded by U.S. Department of Education Support Special Education & GT Students Key Question #2 2. What considerations should be made when differentiating instruction for gifted learners?  Provide additional time for enrichment (curriculum compacting)  Extending instruction when students are ready to move ahead

Funded by U.S. Department of Education Helpful Resources Instructional Decision-Making Procedures: Ensuring Appropriate Instruction for Struggling Students in Grades K-3 ecision-making_Procedures.pdf

Funded by U.S. Department of Education School Reflection Question What processes and procedures might be helpful at the classroom and building level to ensure proper and effective use of differentiated instruction?

Funded by U.S. Department of Education Overview of District Action Principles 1.Provide professional development on differentiating instruction for classroom teachers 2.Utilize coaching methods to support teachers as they learn to differentiate instruction in their classrooms (Newman & Singer, n.d.).

Funded by U.S. Department of Education District Action Principle #1 Provide professional development on differentiating instruction for classroom teachers.

Funded by U.S. Department of Education Provide PD on Differentiating Instruction Key Question #1 1. What are the most important instructional concepts and strategies that need to be taught during professional development on differentiating instruction?  Explicit instruction with modeling  Systematic instruction with scaffolding  Ample practice opportunities  Immediate, corrective feedback  Flexible grouping strategies  Management of student centers and small groups  Ongoing data collection and data-based decision making

Funded by U.S. Department of Education Provide PD on Differentiating Instruction Key Question #2 2. How can I make professional development meaningful and effective for school staff?  Connecting content to school improvement, student learning goals, and curriculum;  Having PD facilitators model instructional strategies and provide examples;  Implementing intensive, ongoing, and job-embedded PD through follow-up time and on-site support.

Funded by U.S. Department of Education Helpful Resources Differentiated Instruction, Part I PD Module (Texas) y=specialEd&subcategory=materials&grade_start=0&gr ade_end=12#302

Funded by U.S. Department of Education District Action Principle #2 Utilize coaching methods to support teachers as they learn to differentiate instruction in their classrooms (Newman & Singer, n.d.).

Funded by U.S. Department of Education Utilize Coaching Methods Key Question #1 1. Why is ongoing instructional coaching needed to support teachers as they learn how to differentiate instruction in the classroom?  Provides authentic learning opportunities (Lieberman, 1995)  Allows for reinforcement of skills and strategies (Newman & Singer, n.d.)  Provides teachers with an opportunity to work collaboratively to refine their practice (Annenberg Institute for School Reform, 2004; Neufeld & Roper, 2003, Poglinco et al., 2003)

Funded by U.S. Department of Education Utilize Coaching Methods Key Question #2 2. How are effective instructional coaches identified, selected, and supported?  Instructional coaches must be: Well-versed in research and best practices Have strong communication skills Demonstrate effective coaching practices Be provided with opportunities for professional growth and refinement of coaching skills (Kinkead, 2007)

Funded by U.S. Department of Education Helpful Resources Annenberg Institute for School Reform (AISR). (2004). Instructional coaching: Professional development strategies that improve instruction. Retrieved from Kinkead, S. (2007, June). Improving instruction through coaching. Silverdale, WA: Center for Strengthening the Teaching Profession. Retrieved from Neufeld, B., & Roper, D. (2003). Coaching: A Strategy for Developing Instructional Capacity, Promises, and Practicalities. Washington, DC: Aspen Institute Program on Education and Providence, RI: Annenberg Institute for School Reform, Retrieved from

Funded by U.S. Department of Education District Reflection Question How does the use of differentiated instruction align with and support the goals of other federal priorities and initiatives like college and career readiness, common core standards, and the ESEA Blueprint?

Funded by U.S. Department of Education English Language Learners  Explicit, systematic instruction  Data-based decision making  Modeling  Scaffolding  Ample opportunities to respond  Immediate feedback  Flexible grouping strategies  Targeted support for vocabulary  Assessment in both languages

Funded by U.S. Department of Education Resources and Examples  Resources and examples to support the key questions and action steps are available for download as an accompaniment to the PowerPoint on the Center on Instruction’s website.

Funded by U.S. Department of Education  Questions