2.  Effective monitoring of adult actions – teaching and leadership – strongly linked to gains in student achievement  “Implementation gap” between intention and reality  Fragmentation, particularly at secondary level, inhibits focus.

3. Four Critical Questions that Guide a PLC 1.What are students supposed to know and be able to do? 2. How do we know when our students have learned? 3. How do we respond when students haven’t learned? 4. How do we respond when students already know the content? POWER STANDARDS COMMON FORMATIVE ASSESSMENTS INTERVENTION DIFFERENTIATION

4.  Importance of implementation  Relating instructional and leadership initiatives to student results  Focusing leadership attention and educational resources

5.  16,200 dropouts in Kentucky (2010)  $4.2 billion lost wages and productivity in ONE CLASS  $162 million in medical care  $87.4 million per year savings from a five3 percent reduction in male dropout rate

6. Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability

7. Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability

8. Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability

9. Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability

10. Implications for Instruction Teachers need to be aware of vertical development of concept Learning progressions are about understanding not procedures Students are expected to apply and extend what they have learned in previous grades to continue with the learning progression which means they have to understand

11. Learning Targets:  I can compare a classroom focused on learning to a classroom focused on teaching.  I can describe the cultural and structural changes necessary for impacting teacher practice.

12. Grade Specific Standards and the Spiral Effect As students move along the plane of a particular learning trajectory, they study the same expectation each year at ever increasing increments of complexity and sophistication.

13. The Big Picture If the state standards and the state tests were “bookends” and these powerful practices were the “books” in between… How Would You Arrange The “Books” To Show The Connections?

14. Common Formative (Pre) Assessments District Benchmark Assessments Common Formative (Post) Assessments Data Teams and Effective Teaching Strategies “Unwrapping” the Standards District Benchmark Assessments State Test End-of-Course Assessments Priority Standards State Standards Classroom Performance Assessments and Scoring Guides Data Teams and Effective Teaching Strategies

18.  Working with your table group, generate a list comparing a classroom that is focused on teaching to a classroom that is focused on learning.

19. Educational Interventions And Effect Size

21. A Practice In Prioritizing The Common Core “You can’t power the CCSS because EVERYTHING is important and will be tested.”

22. Two Essential Questions to Answer 1.Are all of the Common Core State Standards in the elementary, middle, and high school strands essential for students to acquire in order to be ready for the standards at the next level of learning?

23. Two Essential Questions to Answer 2. Will the length of the school year afford teachers the time needed to adequately teach, assess, re-teach, and reassess students on all of the CCSS?

24. Schedule Your Priorities and Say “No” to off Mission Activities

25. Leadership Focus The Greatest Gift to Your Staff Create The “Not To Do” List For every new initiative we implement, we must be willing to eliminate other practices

26. Leadership Focus The Greatest Gift to Your Staff and Students Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability

28. Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability

29. Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability

30. Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability

31. Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability

32. Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability

33. Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability

34. Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability

35. Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability

36. Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability

37. Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability

38. Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability

39. Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability

40. Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability

41. Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability

42. Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability

43. Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability

44. Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability

45. Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability

46. Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability

47. Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability

48. Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability

49. Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability

50. Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability

51. Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability

52. Critical mass-90% implementation of FEWER initiatives More than six priorities: inverse effect on achievement Change leaders – implementation, monitoring, accountability