1. Curriculum Connectors
Principal introduces the presentation and sets the stage. Principal should involve the Instructional Coach and, if applicable, a member of the Standards-Based Grading and Reporting Committee.
March 30, 2017

2. Learning Targets Today I will…
Success Criteria
I will demonstrate success by…
Articulate the key components of a Guaranteed and Viable Curriculum
Review the Purpose of the Report Card and the Principles of Grading to be grounded in best practices for SBGR and set the foundation moving forward
Review the rationale for a field testing the iReady diagnostic tool this spring.
Receive updates related to communication strategies in TFL
Being able to articulate how the written, taught and assessed curriculum will enhance scholar learning Identifying where we are misaligned to SBGR as a system and self assess practices related to the 6 principles of grading—and be prepared to turn key training to staff. Explain how iReady can replace STAR as a more reliable indicator of student achievement and the timeline for the field test. Sharing critical TFL information with my staff and clarify means of continued communication

3. STANDARDS ALIGNED CULTURALLY RESPONSIVE
SIGNATURE STRATEGIES
PILLAR 1
STANDARDS ALIGNED CULTURALLY RESPONSIVE
TEACHING AND LEARNING
Develop and implement with fidelity a culturally competent, standards-aligned, guaranteed and viable curriculum in ALL core subjects in every school and every classroom. (D and S)
Create and align curriculum, assessment, and grading systems to state standards. (D)
Design a system to ensure adherence to the district adopted curriculum plan and fidelity of implementation aligned to standards. (D and S)

4. Guaranteed & Viable Curriculum

5. ELA ACHIEVEMENT FWPS is below the State for both 2015 and 2016
Source: OSPI Report Card

6. MATH ACHIEVEMENT
Both State and FWPS showed a decline from grade 3 to grade 6 in 2015 and 2016
Source: OSPI Report Card

7. Guaranteed & Viable Curriculum
Think—Pair—Share What do you already know about a Guaranteed and Viable Curriculum?

8. QUALITY CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION
Scholar Learning
DESIGN
DELIVERY
Teaching
Assessment
DELIVERY
Curriculum = the written curriculum
Teaching = the taught curriculum
Assessment = how we know if the teaching met the rigor of the standards

9. Written, Taught and Assessed Curriculum
Written Curriculum: The What ? Resource & Rigor
Taught Curriculum: The How? Instruction
Assessed Curriculum: The How Well? Assessment 
The written curriculum is the resource that guides instruction. The curriculum guides will include state standards, learning targets, scope and sequence for pacing, alignment of the adopted resources, examples of instructional strategies, and aligned assessments. 
Teachers and principals participate in the selection of adopted  resources and the creation of curriculum guides. 
The taught curriculum refers to the delivery of the written curriculum. It is the process that is used by teachers to develop units of study, lesson plans, and high quality instruction of the written curriculum to facilitate scholar learning. Curriculum Guides will provide a menu of best practices aligned to CEL 5D.  Teachers may extend instruction beyond the curriculum guides if their scholars need it.    
The assessed curriculum is the “testing” of the taught curriculum and scholar mastery of the articulated standards. It measures how well the scholars learned the taught curriculum. It guides teacher’s design of curriculum guides and delivery of instruction at appropriate levels of complexity.
Teacher Voice

10. What is a common curriculum?
Common curriculum is guaranteed and viable
Guaranteed means that all students, regardless of their teacher or school, have access to the same high quality, rigorous content, knowledge, and skills across the district
Viable means that the curriculum can be taught within a school year
Guaranteed and viable does not mean scripted curriculum

11. Reflection Stand Up and find a partner:
What is the relationship between the written, taught, and assessed curriculum?
What do you now know about a Guaranteed and Viable Curriculum?

12. Standards Based Grading and Reporting (SBGR)
The phase is to provide an overview of the current work of the SBGR committee and review the tools that are being developed thus far.

13. SBGR: Agenda Review the Purpose of the Report Card Statement
Review the FWPS Principles of Grading
Reflect on system misalignment through the principles of grading
Self Assess district and school-level implementation of SBGR-aligned to the principles

14. Purpose of the Committee
Re-visit the tenets of our pK-12 Standards-Based Grading and Reporting System to ensure alignment to best practices and research across the system
Based on the RESEARCH and EXPERTISE IN THE FIELD, generate the following:
A purpose for the report card
Principles of grading
Review and possible revision of the current report cards
White papers on areas of SBG&R best practices to be included in handbooks
Share information back to schools to provide updates
Develop Staff, Student, and Family Handbooks for Standards-Based Grading and Reporting

15. Standards Based Grading and Reporting & Strategic Plan

16. The Core of Our Work
Sustain with fidelity our system-wide standards-based grading and reporting process to communicate to student-scholars and families each scholar’s progress toward meeting standards. (D)

17. Committee Overview 60 Members on the SBGR Committee
14 Elementary
5 Middles School
17 High School
12 ESC
5 parents
5 students
6 Meetings since September 21st
Small Group Work Since February 1st

18. Purpose of the Report Card Statement

19. Reflecting on the Purpose of the Report Card
“Grading and reporting procedures must be tailored to fit very specific purposes. Expecting any grading procedure or device to satisfy multiple purposes is extremely dangerous. As we mentioned earlier, that is why so many report card reform initiatives fail miserably. Wither they attempt to serve too many purposes with a single reporting device or they expect that device to serve purposes for which it is ill suited.” ~Guskey&Bailey

20. Purpose of the Report Card Statement

21. Principles of Grading Review

22. Principles of Grading Number 1-6 at your table
Read the section that corresponds to your number
Identify for each Principle (use the 3 column note- taker)
Main Idea/Key points of the principle
Examples of misalignment in FWPS
Questions you have about implementation of this practice

23. Principles of Grading
Review the Illustration and the section from the article that corresponds to your Principle (#)
Share-out at table the principle Illustration: How does it connect to the article?

24. Principles of Grading Self Assessment
Consider the implementation of each principle 
At the district-level
At your school-level
-O O O O O-
  1              2               3             4              5
no     some          unsure             strong very alignment    alignment           alignment        strong
                                                                           Alignment 

25. iREADY

26. Mastery of All Subjects
ASSESSMENT
SYSTEM REVIEW
update
Goal 4
Mastery of All Subjects
TFL
WHY?
Understanding how we use different types of assessments in FWPS:
Screener: identifies students at risk for academic difficulty;
Diagnostic: provides an in-depth, reliable assessment of targeted skills
Analyzed STAR Results – Correlation to SBA?
STAR/SBA comparison shows that at every grade level the rate at which students are meeting standard on SBA is not correlated to the rate at which students are meeting standard on STAR (see right)
Conducted Regional Analysis
I-Ready has shown highest correlation among internal studies conducted by Kent and Vancouver school districts (ELA: .85; Math: .86)

27. Mastery of All Subjects
update
Goal 4
Mastery of All Subjects
TFL
I-READY PREVIEW
STAR VS I-READY
WHY?
To gain more accurate information about scholar progress toward meeting standard(s);
Data correlation – the data from our state assessment does not match we are seeing from STAR data;
Need an assessment tool that is reflective of the skills and knowledge to a higher degree of accuracy;
I-Ready built after Common Core – for Common Core
Surrounding districts found a high correlation between skills and knowledge for scholar success and I-Ready (ELA: .85, Math: .86)
I-ready identifies strengths and weaknesses by domain/sub-skill
Vendor
STAR
I-Ready
Subjects
ELA and Math
Grade-Level
ELA: 3-8 (9 optional)
MATH: Grades 1-9
K (mid year) - 9
Frequency
3 times per year
Our Purpose
Screener
Screener/Diagnostic
Test Type
Adaptive
Platform
On-line

28. Mastery of All Subjects
update
Goal 4
Mastery of All Subjects
TFL
I-READY PREVIEW
ELA
MATH

29. Mastery of All Subjects
update
Goal 4
Mastery of All Subjects
TFL
I-READY PREVIEW
SO NOW WHAT?
March 28: Principal introduction
March 30: Share with Curriculum Connectors
April 10: Invitation to Teachers for I-Ready Diagnostic Pilot
April 25: Phase 1 I-Ready Training for Pilot Teachers – Getting Started and Diagnostic Testing
May 1 – May 30: I-Ready Pilot Diagnostic Data Review
May 25: Curriculum Connector – Review and Updates
June 1: Teacher Training for Diagnostic Data Review

30. TFL Timeline for Next Steps
March 23: Priority Standard Review
March 28: Principal / Coach PD
March 30: Curriculum Connector Meeting
Week of April 10: Invite for iReady Diagnostic Pilot 
April 25: iReady Field Test training
May 1-30:  iReady Field Test Window