1. MI Excel Collaborative Partner Meeting
Supporting Michigan Districts with Focus Schools
February 17, 2016

2. WELCOME Think about the districts you work with
If they were going to play a game, what game might that be and why?
Stand and find a partner from another table to share your district’s game and reason
At the signal, each pair will find another pair and share
Each group of four will share one game and reason with the group
Welcome, introductions,
While I am standing up here facilitating today – I know that you are the ones who know the work and you are the ones who understand what your districts need. So, the best people to listen to are one another and we hope to give you ample opportunities to do that. So let’s give you a fun opportunity to talk to your colleagues.

3. District Improvement Facilitators Roles and Responsibilities
Review both sides of the DIF handout
Take 15 minutes individually and silently to take notes on the handout relative to your work in each of the columns
Share your responses in the categories at your table
At the end, report out by table where you are collectively having the most success and where you need support in the challenges
Ask if there are clarifications needed.
After about 15 minutes, ask them to start the conversation

4. Leveling the Playing Field
Supporting Children Who Live in Poverty

5. Lunch Conversation
How do your districts support their Focus Schools in collecting and analyzing the classroom level data of the bottom 30% of students?

6. Debrief Lunch Conversation
Share with the group how your districts are supporting the bottom 30% data collection happening at the classroom level

7. Samples of Bottom 30% Data Collection

9. This school had identified ED students as their low population in the bottom 30% and while they did not do a wonderful job of closing the gap, they stated that in the past, their non-ED students made greater gains than their ED students. Now, their students were gaining at the same rate, and they were happy about this.

10. Quarterly Board Report Examples
Ideally, there are dates submitted for the data dialogues. This one includes board members and is focused on academic and behavior data. What do you think of this?

11. Quarterly Board Report Examples
These district level data dialogues are occurring monthly and focusing district and school goals.

12. These school data dialogues are ongoing – occurring weekly and monthly
These school data dialogues are ongoing – occurring weekly and monthly. MDE accepts this.

13. This school is submitting data on the bottom 50% of students who participate in their afterschool Math Club. What do you think about this type of data submission?

14. Quarterly Board Report Review Criteria
Submitted?
All sections of the Quarterly Report addressed?  *
Shared with School Board, dated? *
Specifics provided in response to the questions?
Dates provided?  Persons/positions identified?
Data provided to support closing of the gap? 
Is the work of the DIF at the district level?
Use of Building and District Set-Asides discussed? *
* These things are what causes the Quarterly Board Reports to be returned for Modifications Required

15. Common Deficiencies
Date that Quarterly Report was shared with School Board is missing *
No data
Includes identifiable student level data
Data provided does not address closing of the gap
District Level Professional Dialogues description missing, or describes Building Level dialogues
Superintendent seldom identified by position as among those participating in the Data Dialogues
Elementary schools believe that they are not required to implement the Superintendents Dropout Challenge
The work of the District Improvement Facilitator describe Building level rather than district level activities
Use of Title I Set-asides not well articulated
No response to required sections, or N/A with no explanation as to why this is N/A, or left blank *
* These things are what causes the Quarterly Board Reports to be returned for Modifications Required

16. What questions might you have about your support to central office in writing and presenting the Quarterly Board Reports?

17. Criteria for Focus School Exit
Focus Gap schools were exited if they had either:
Above average Bottom 30% improvement
Above average Bottom 30% achievement
Focus Grad schools were exited if historically low graduation rates were raised above critical levels

18. What is Focus Gap Improvement?
Focus Gap Improvement: Two-year average improvement of the school’s bottom 30% is greater than the statewide two-year average of bottom 30% subgroup improvement in both Math and Reading for all applicable grade bands (elementary/middle and/or high school)

19. What is Focus Gap Achievement
Focus Gap Achievement: Two-year average achievement of the schools’ bottom 30% is greater than the statewide two-year average of bottom 30% subgroup achievement in both Math and Reading for all applicable grade bands (elementary/middle and/or high school)

20. REL Midwest Focus School Project

21. Michigan’s Focus Networked Improvement Community
(added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
Michigan’s Focus Networked Improvement Community
Monica P. Bhatt
02 / 17 / 16
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

22. (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
Agenda
Overview and History of the Michigan Focus Networked Improvement Community
Forming a Networked Improvement Community
Identifying a Problem
Developing a Theory of Action
Measuring Progress Through Plan-Do-Study-Act Cycles
Next Steps: Moving Toward Sustainability
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

23. Regional Educational Laboratories
(added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
Regional Educational Laboratories
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

24. (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
Research Alliances
College and Career Success Dropout Prevention Early Childhood Education Educator Effectiveness Rural School Turnaround Urban Virtual Education
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

25. (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
Priority Areas
Early Childhood Education Educator Effectiveness College and Career Readiness Low-Performing Schools and School Improvement
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

26. Who, What, When, Where, Why?

27. (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
Networked Improvement Community (n.): Individuals or organizations that use systematic inquiry to improve practice
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

28. ”
“Rather than asking whether an ‘intervention works,’ a network improvement community asks, ‘What works, when, for whom and under what sets of circumstances?’”
— Bryk, Gomez, & Grunow, 2015

29. In Michigan… We can use a networked improvement community (NIC) to:
Refine supports for Focus schools
Learn from changes to supports in varied contexts
Use data to drive improvement in practice

30. Who is at the table? Focus NIC
(added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
Who is at the table?
Focus NIC
MDE
Districts
Schools
ISDs
Research
Staff
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

31. (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
What are we trying to accomplish? 1. Develop an improvement community Improve mathematics fluency for focus students.
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

32. Michigan’s Focus NIC: Timeline
We are here.
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
March
April
Nov. 15
Theory of Action and Develop Outcome Measures
April 16
Debrief
Sept. 15
Participant Recruitment
Jan. 16
Implement Cycle 1
Dec. 15
Develop Intervention
March 16
Measure Outcome
Root-Cause Analysis
Oct. 15

33. (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
How?
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

34. Michigan Focus NIC Approach
(added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
Michigan Focus NIC Approach
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

35. (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
Identifying a Problem.
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

36. Focus NIC Meeting: Root-Cause Analysis October 20, 2015
(added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
Participants:
School principals
Central office representatives
ISD representatives
Michigan Department of Education staff
REL Midwest staff
In the first meeting of the Focus NIC, members worked together to:
Conduct a root-cause analysis
Develop a problem statement: “Lack of access to, understanding of, and use of data to implement continuous improvement on a daily basis”
Brainstorm interventions that can improve data-utilization skills among school staff
Focus NIC Meeting: Root-Cause Analysis October 20, 2015
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

37. (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

38. See the system that produces these outcomes.
(added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
See the system that produces these outcomes.
Primary
Drivers
Utilizing appropriate strategies and recalling facts, all students in the bottom 30 percent will demonstrate mastery of the grade-level fluency benchmarks.
Aim Statement
Daily practice for math fluency for students
Scheduling math block
Materials and resources
Embedded coaching
Interventions for bottom 30 percent
Progress Monitoring
Emphasis on math/math fluency
Engaging families
Increasing data usefulness
Training/professional development for teachers
Secondary Drivers
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

39. Developing a Theory of Action.
(added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
Developing a Theory of Action.
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

40. Theory of Action Program Inputs Program Activities Program Outputs
(added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
Theory of Action
Program Inputs
Program Activities
Program Outputs
Outcomes
Teacher logs to track daily math practice of fluency skills
Implementation guide developed by Focus NIC
Observation protocol developed by Focus NIC
Principal guidance, coaching, and support to math teachers
RocketMath kits (Ingham) or workstations (Kalamazoo)
District math coach
District and ISD-level math fluency professional development and support
Identify bottom 30% of students
Teachers track Focus students’ ability to practice math fluency skills for at least minutes every day using daily logs
Bimonthly walk- throughs using observation protocol
Ongoing coaching and data use
Daily teacher logs
Increased time for students spent on practicing math fluency skills
Increased time spent discussing math fluency between teachers and between teachers and principal
Increased math fluency emphasis
Increased percentage of all students mastering math fluency benchmarks by May 2016
Improved math fluency of the bottom 30% of students specifically
Program Targets: Mathematics teachers in Ingham ISD and KRESA who teach in Focus schools participating in the NIC. All students in mathematics classrooms in Focus schools participating in the NIC, with an emphasis on the bottom 30 percent of students.
Program Goal: All students will master fluency benchmarks by demonstrating appropriate strategies and recalling facts.
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

41. (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
Measuring Outcomes.
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

42. 1. Teachers track Focus students’ math fluency practice.
(added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
1. Teachers track Focus students’ math fluency practice.
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

43. 2. Observe teachers every two weeks.
(added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
2. Observe teachers every two weeks.
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

44. (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
3. Focus NIC participants measure students’ performance on math fluency benchmarks.
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

45. Implement Continuous Plan-Do-Study-Act Cycles.
(added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
Implement Continuous Plan-Do-Study-Act Cycles.
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

46. Cycle 1 Jan. 11– Mar. 11 2016 Plan Do Study Act
(added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
Plan: Identify bottom 30% of students on math fluency and develop plan to increase ability of teachers to improve math fluency.
Plan Do
Study
Act
Do:
RocketMath/ Workstations
Daily teacher logs
Principals observations
District math coach
Professional development
Cycle 1
Jan. 11– Mar. 11
2016
Act: Focus NIC will monitor student progress and adjust goals or practices as needed.
Have Pubs refine these graphics.
Study: Assess daily teacher logs, walk-throughs, and other metrics.
Review challenges and lessons learned.
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

47. Cycle 2 April– May 2016 Plan Do Study Act
(added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
Plan: Examine benchmark and assessment data to increase math fluency for bottom 30% of students and determine long-term goals, plans, and timeline of the Focus NIC.
Plan Do
Study
Act
Cycle 2
April–
May 2016
Do:
Assess teacher log data, walk-through assessments
Discuss challenges and lessons learned
Act: Focus NIC will monitor student progress and adjust goals or practices as needed.
Have Pubs refine these graphics.
Study: Examine midyear MAP and AIMSweb scores. Seek to develop alternate tools to assess student math fluency outcomes and develop long-term metrics and goals for Focus NIC.
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

48. Richmond Elementary* *Name changed to protect our participants.
(added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
Richmond Elementary*
*Name changed to protect our participants.
Use “Richmond” as an example of what PDSA implementation looks like.
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

49. How were students identified?
(added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
How were students identified?
NWEA MAP math assessment results from December 2015.
The results were sorted for each grade based on the Number and Operations category.
Then, the bottom 30 percent (approximately) for each grade was identified.
Those lists were given to classroom teachers and resource room teachers, who then tracked the math fluency practice.
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

50. Intervention participants
(added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
Intervention participants
Bottom 30 Percent of Students (Focus Students):
2nd grade – 25 students
3rd grade – 22 students
4th grade – 16 students
5th grade – 22 students
Some of the students have individualized education programs and some are English language learners.
Math teachers:
10 teachers
Six 2nd- and 3rd-grade general education teachers, one 4th- and one 5th-grade departmentalized teacher, and two resource room teachers
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

51. (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
Feedback
Teachers have been successful with their logs. However, there was a snow day during the first week. Also many teachers had substitutes on one or more days for a variety of reasons. It was an inconsistent first week.
Teachers are supportive of the process. This first week coincided with the start of a math coach. There were many discussions on what constitutes math fluency practice.
Success – The awareness of documented daily practice
Challenge – Trying to verify practice when a substitute is in the room
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

52. What’s Next? Thinking about sustainability.
(added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
What’s Next?
Thinking about sustainability.
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

53. How can you use these tools in your work?
(added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
How can you use these tools in your work?
How can we involve this group in sustaining our efforts?
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

54. Monica P. Bhatt Researcher REL Midwest
(added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon, Fixed Date and time) 9/28/2015
Monica P. Bhatt
Researcher
REL Midwest
Presentation Title (added from Insert tab, Header & Footer icon)

55. Big Ticket Table Topics

56. Thank You for Your Participation
Using the sticky notes at your tables, tell us:
What you liked about this meeting
What did not meet your needs to what you would suggest be changed for the next meeting
Topics to include at our May 26 meeting
AM Focus
PM Priority

57. Food for Thought
We do not learn from experience. We learn from reflecting upon experience.
John Dewey
This quote has been around a long time. I am hopeful that today, you shared your experience and heard from others about their experiences and that you will take the time to reflect on what you have done and learn from it so that the MI Excel SSoS can be an integral support for system improvement and ultimately student achievement.