FIDELITY Wednesday April 23, 2008 Breakout ESession 42 John Vail, Ed.S. Kalamazoo RESA

The classic definition a: the quality or state of being faithful b: accuracy in details : exactnessexactness

The Story

What School-wide or System Factors Impact Student Achievement?

What Grade-Level Factors Impact Student Achievement?

What Classroom/Teacher Factors Impact Student Achievement?

The Rest of the Story

Some Baseline Information based on 180,000 studies and over 50 million students Getting a year older has an effect size of 0.10 Just having a teacher in the classroom has an effect size of 0.24 The average effect size of innovations in schools is 0.40 Hattie, J. (1999, August).

Examples High end –Reinforcement1.13 –Instructional Quality1.00 –Instructional Quantity0.84 –Remediation/Feedback0.65 Low End –Team teaching 0.06 –Mass media-0.12 –Retention-0.15 Hattie, J. (1999, August).

Effective Schools Effective Outcomes Average School/Average Teacher 50 th Highly Ineffective School/ Highly Ineffective Teacher 50 th 3 rd Highly Effective School/Highly Ineffective Teacher 50 th 37 th Highly Ineffective School/ Highly Effective Teacher 50 th 63 rd Highly Effective School/Highly Effective Teacher 50 th 96 th Highly Effective School/Average Teacher 50 th 78 th Marzano, R. (2000)

TEACHER FACTORS “The impact of decisions made by individual teachers is far greater than the impact of decisions made at the school level.” “More can be done to improve education by improving the effectiveness of teachers than by any other single factor.” Robert Marzano

Jigsaw In groups of four, read the excepts from Hattie’s paper Person 1Sections A & D Person 2First half of Section B Person 3 Second Half of Section B Person 4Section C Hattie, J. (1999, August). Influences on student learning. Inaugural lecture presented at the University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. Retrieved February 9, 2008 from udent2C683.pdf udent2C683.pdf

The Three Critical Factors John Hattie, Goals 2.Feedback 3.Reconceptualization of Information Innovations, changes, initiatives, etc. merely alter the probability of the three factors occurring. It is the individual teacher that determines whether innovations actually impact teaching. Teachers who impact student learning the most constantly innovate and seek better ways.

Another piece to the puzzle

Total Instructional Alignment Making sure that what we are teaching, what we are assessing, and how we are teaching are congruent. Lisa Carter “Every Child Deserves the Opportunity to Learn” 2008 presentation – Effective Schools Conference

The Three Domains of Total Instructional Alignment Alignment of the system –Are we aligning the system to the students or are we requiring the students to align to the system? Alignment of the standards, curriculum and assessment –Is there a direct match between these elements? Alignment of instructional practice –Is what happens in the classroom behind closed doors matching the intended curriculum?

All Learners = School Independent Learners and School Dependent Learners I C E Instruction Curriculum Evaluation Anything the teacher teaches in the classroom What teachers are told they must teach Anything that we test kids on and hold them accountable for learning

Total Instructional Alignment E C I Instruction Curriculum Evaluation

The Bottom Line Any innovation you bring into the classroom or school to improve outcomes on student assessments presumes that there already is alignment of the intended (C), taught (I), and tested (E) objectives. The innovation itself will not improve outcomes if alignment does not exist!

Summarization Three critical learning variables for students Three critical learning variables for teachers Instructional alignment

Like their students, they (teachers) must set challenging goals, seek feedback on the effectiveness of their teaching on students, and constantly be attentive to improvement and innovating methods which optimize feedback and meeting challenging goals. Hattie, J. (1999)

One Possible Way Peer Observations

Teacher ATeacher BTeacher CParapros Attention Ratio Pos. : Neg. 1:14:12:11:4 Whole Group Instruction Response Rate 2 per minute1 per minute NA WG Engagement 80 – 90 %60 – 95%30 – 50%NA Small Group Instruction Response Rate 2.5 per minute4 per minute0.5 per minute.15 – 1.0 per minute SG Engagement 80%100%50% Transition Time 4 – 5 minutes0.5 – 0.75 minutes 1 – 2 minutesNA Independent Engagement 75%100%28%NA Sample Data: Fictional Academy

Teacher ARange Atttention Ratio Pos:Neg 1:11:1 to 4:1 Whole Group Instruct Response Rate 2 per minute1 – 2 per minute WG Engagement80 – 90%30 – 95% Small Group Instruction Response Rate 2:10.5:1 to 4:1 SG Engagement80%50 – 100% Transition Time4 - 5 minutes0.5 – 5 minutes Independent Engagement 75%28 – 100% Sample Feedback for Teacher A