1. Summer Series, 2007 Building Capacity to Make Research-Based Practice Common Practice In Georgia Utilizing the Keys to Quality

2. Welcome

3. How can the Keys to Quality enable us to reach our student learning goals?

4. Learning Goals for Today Utilize resources provided by the GaDOE Keys to Quality [School Keys: Professional Learning Standard 1] Analyze data and apply research–based practices when making decisions [School Keys: Professional Learning Standard 2] Utilize a comprehensive planning process to guide continuous improvement [School Keys: Planning and Organization Standard 2]

5. Overview of Today Share Explain Walk Through Demonstrate

6. Goals of “Keys to Quality” Develop strong education leaders, particularly at the building level [GaDOE Strategic Goal 3, Alliance Goal 4] Support schools and systems in utilizing the Keys To Quality to increase the learning of all students [School Improvement Services Strategy]

7. Components of Keys to Quality: UnlockingContinuousImprovement School Keys: School Keys: Unlocking Excellence Unlocking Excellence Through the Georgia Through the Georgia School Standards School Standards GAPSS Analysis Georgia Assessment of Performance on School Standards: Closing the Gap Implementation Resource: Building Capacity Through Best Practices

8. School Keys: Unlocking Excellence Through the Georgia School Standards Research-based, High Impact Practices: Marzano’s What Works In Schools, School Leadership That Works Standards of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Council of Accreditation and School Improvement

9. School Keys CurriculumInstructionAssessment Planning and Organization Family, School, Community, Involvement Professional Learning Leadership School Culture Foundation for Long Term Improvement Best Practices Eight Strands

10. Walk Through School Keys: Pages 1-82 Table of Contents: Pages 1-2 Introduction: Pages 3 - 4 Format and Content

11. A site-based process of data collection and progress measurement Provides instruments and tools used to assess the 8 strands of the School Keys and to determine school needs GAPSS Analysis: Closing the Gaps

12. Walk Through GAPSS: Pages 1-152 Table of Contents: Pages 1-3 Introduction: Page 4 Content and Format –Survey: Page 14 –Observations: Page 20 –Interviews: Page 33

13. Implementation Resource: Building Capacity Through Best Practices Provides the “how” when implementing the School Keys strands Performance actions Artifacts Evidence

14. Walk-Through Implementation Resource: Pages 1 - 254 Building Capacity Through Best Practice [Introduction]: Page 2 Content and Format –Curriculum: Pages 3-29 Components

15. School & Leader Quality Teacher Quality Student Support Professional Learning Reorganizing School Improvement Services Direct support for all systems

16. School Improvement will be available to support all systems throughout the year to implement the Keys to Quality through multiple approaches.

17. Using the “Keys to Quality” to Improve Student Achievement Today we will demonstrate how the Keys to Quality can be used to: –Identify researched-based best practices –Determine gaps in best practices at the school level –Guide “next steps” planning

19. What facts about student achievement can we identify from our state data? Facts, Not the Whys!!

20. 2007 Grade 6 Science CRCT All Students 2004200520062007 Change 2006-07 NA 6160 English Language Learner NA 2321-2 Students with Disabilities NA 3231 Asian NA 8280-2 Black NA 4341-2 Hispanic NA 50 0 Native American/Alaskan NA 7066-4 White NA 7776 Multiracial NA 6965-4 Meets and Exceeds

21. 2007 High School Graduation Test Subject Regular Ed. AsianBlackHispanicWhiteSWDELL ELA98949388987671 M95968186955778 SS918873 915355 Science 787751548037 Handout 2

22. School Keys: UnlockingExcellence Through the Georgia School Standards Moving from facts to causes

23. Leadership Assessment Planning & Org Utilizing the School Keys to Target Root Causes Instruction Curriculum Student, Family, Community Professional Learning School Culture ELL students are scoring below all other subgroups on the Science CRCT

24. State Data: Curriculum Strand What curriculum issues can be contributing to these data findings?

25. Leadership Assessment Planning & Org Utilizing the School Keys To Target Root Causes Instruction Curriculum Student, Family, Community Professional Learning School Culture ELL students are scoring below all other subgroups on the Science CRCT 1.1 Written curriculum documents are not fully aligned to GPS. 2.2 Collaborative planning was not consistently used for teachers to reach consensus on what all learners should know, do and understand. 3.2 Adm. and teachers did not monitor and review student work of ELL students consistently to revise curriculum implementation..

26. System/School Data What is your current reality?

27. What “curriculum” issues can contribute to your findings? What “assessment” issues can contribute to your findings? etc. YOUR DATA

28. Leadership Assessment Planning & Org Utilizing the School Keys to Target Root Causes Instruction Curriculum Student, Family, Community Professional Learning School Culture ELL students are scoring below all other subgroups on the Science CRCT 1.1 Written curriculum documents are not fully aligned to GPS. 2.2 Collaborative planning was not consistently used for teachers to reach consensus on what all learners should know, do and understand. 3.2 Adm. and teachers did not monitor and review student work of ELL students consistently to revise curriculum implementation. 1.1 There was little collaborative assessment of data so instruction was not revised for ELL students. 1.2, 3.1 All teachers did not utilize assessment data to address learning gaps and problems for special populations. 2.2 Formative assessments were not utilized consistently to monitor student progress and adjust instruction. 1.2 Teachers did not consistently plan together utilizing a consensus-driven framework to monitor and revise instruction to ensure all students are progressing toward standards. 2.3 Differentiation was not provided for ELL students to support their meeting the standards. 3.2 Some teachers and students did not work collaboratively to establish clear and challenging learning goals. 2.1 Performance gap between ELL and other groups was not addressed in the SIP. 2.3 The implementation of the SIP was not monitored consistently for impact on the learning of ELL students. 3.1 There was little collaborative planning between district and school to provide the resources needed to effectively teach ELL students. 1.1 The diverse population of students has not been embraced by all of the school community. 1.5 All staff is not committed to collaboration to promote professional growth ensuring student achievement. 2.3 Diversity is not always celebrated in the school community. 1.4 Monitoring of instruction and assessment do not occur regularly. 3.1 School leadership does not consistently collaborate with staff to ensure collective accountability of all students’ achievement. 4.3 The school leadership team does not consistently monitor student achievement data. 1.1 Teacher learning teams do not consistently develop lesson plans, examine student work, nor monitor student progress. 2.1 Teachers and administrators do not consistently analyze disaggregated student learning data to monitor for student learning. 3.2 Teachers do not consistently utilize various assessment strategies to monitor student progress toward meeting rigorous standards.. 1.3 Little outreach has been done to involve parents of ELL students in their learning goals. 1.4 Many ELL parents do not feel welcomed at the school. 1.1 Consistent communication with parents to ensure their involvement with SIP targets has not been established. Handout 5

29. GAPSS Analysis: Closing the Gaps

30. Leadership Assessment Planning & Org Utilizing the School Keys to Target Root Causes Instruction Curriculum Student, Family, Community Professional Learning School Culture ELL students are scoring below all other subgroups on the Science CRCT 1.1 There was little collaborative assessment of data so instruction was not revised for ELL students. 1.2, 3.1 All teachers did not utilize assessment data to address learning gaps and problems for special populations. 2.2 Formative assessments were not utilized consistently to monitor student progress and adjust instruction. 2.3 Differentiation was not provided for ELL students to support their meeting the standards. 3.2 Some teachers and students did not work collaboratively to establish clear and challenging learning goals. 2.1 Performance gap between ELL and other subgroups was not addressed in the SIP. 2.3 The implementation of the SIP was not monitored consistently for impact on the learning of ELL students. 3.1 There was little collaborative planning between district and school to provide the resources needed to effectively teach ELL students. 1.1 The diverse population of students has not been embraced by all of the school community. 1.5 All staff is not committed to collaboration to promote professional growth ensuring student achievement. 2.3 Diversity is not always celebrated in the school community. 1.4 Monitoring of instruction and assessment do not occur regularly. 3.1 School leadership does not consistently collaborate with staff to ensure collective accountability of all students’ achievement. 4.3 The school leadership team does not consistently monitor student achievement data. 2.1 Teachers and administrators do not consistently analyze disaggregated student learning data to monitor for student learning. 3.2 Teachers do not consistently utilize various assessment strategies to monitor student progress toward meeting rigorous standards.. 1.3 Little outreach has been done to involve parents of ELL students in their learning goals. 1.4 Many ELL parents do not feel welcomed at the school. 1.1 Consistent communication with parents to ensure their involvement with SIP targets has not been established 1.1 Written curriculum documents are not fully aligned to GPS. 2.2 Collaborative planning was not consistently used for teachers to reach consensus on what all learners should know, do and understand. 3.2 Adm. and teachers did not monitor and review student work of ELL students consistently to revise curriculum implementation. 1.2 Teachers did not consistently plan together utilizing a consensus-driven framework to monitor and revise instruction to ensure all students are progressing toward standards. 1.1 Teacher learning teams do not consistently develop lesson plans, examine student work, nor monitor student progress.

32. Data analysis is inconsistent and does not result in revising of instruction. Collaborative work is inconsistent and not focused on student learning. Monitoring is inconsistent. The school culture does not always value the diversity of the school. Curriculum 2.2 Collaborative planning was not consistently used for teachers to reach consensus on what all learners should know, do, and understand. Assessment 1.1 There was little collaborative assessment of data so instruction was revised for ELL students. Instruction 1.2 Teachers did not consistently plan together utilizing a consensus-driven framework to monitor and revise instruction to ensure all students are progressing toward standards. Professional Learning 1.1 Teacher learning teams do not consistently develop lesson plans, examine student work, nor monitor student progress. Instruction 3.2 Planning and Organization 3.1 School Culture 1.5 Leadership 3.1

33. Implementation Resource: Building Capacity Through Best Practices It’s the bridge between the “what” and the “how”!!

34. Data analysis is inconsistent and does not result in revising of instruction. Collaborative work is inconsistent and not focused on student learning. Monitoring is inconsistent. The school culture does not always value the diversity of the school. Curriculum 2.2 Collaborative planning was not consistently used for teachers to reach consensus on what all learners should know, do, and understand. Assessment 1.1 There was little collaborative assessment of data so instruction was revised for ELL students. Instruction 1.2 Teachers did not consistently plan together utilizing a consensus-driven framework to monitor and revise instruction to ensure all students are progressing toward standards. Professional Learning 1.1 Teacher learning teams do not consistently develop lesson plans, examine student work, nor monitor student progress. Instruction 3.2 Planning and Organization 3.1 School Culture 1.5 Leadership 3.1

36. Insert Slide

37. School Improvement Resources 2007-2008 Keys to Quality (Boxed Set and Disc) Graduation Counts! DVD Professional Learning Series School Improvement Fieldbook System Improvement Fieldbook Data Utilization Guide

38. Reflection Essential Question: How can the Keys to Quality enable us to reach our student learning goals? How will we use the Keys to Quality when we return to our school and/or system?

39. Region 2 School Impovement Contacts Paula Cleckler –pcleckle@doe.k12.ga.uspcleckle@doe.k12.ga.us Donald Davis –dodavis@doe.k12.ga.usdodavis@doe.k12.ga.us Hanna Fowler –hfowler@doe.k12.ga.ushfowler@doe.k12.ga.us Kathy Moorer –kleveret@doe.k12.ga.uskleveret@doe.k12.ga.us Wanda Oldfield –woldfiel@doe.k12.ga.uswoldfiel@doe.k12.ga.us Mike O’Neal –moneal@doe.k12.ga.usmoneal@doe.k12.ga.us

40. Please complete the handout regarding how we can best support your use of the Keys to Quality in the continuous improvement process. I want to tell you...

41. Out of the mouth of a babe…

42. WHEW!! THANK YOU for your hard work!