1. Quality Education Commission Composite Report from The Regional Best Practices Panels July 10, 2008

2. Approach to Project Looked at best practices research literature Previous Reports: Conducted focus groups with Oregon educators Consulted with national experts and work in other states

3. 2. Southern Oregon & South Coast 5. Metro Area & Northwestern Oregon 1. North Central & Northeastern Oregon 4. Valley & Central Coast 3. Central & Southeastern Oregon For this report we established five regional panels in :

4. They used four criteria Each panel selected successful schools in their region to interview

5. Criteria for selection: 3. Schools that had improved the percentage of students meeting or exceeding benchmark in one or more of the federally defined assessment cohorts (American Indian/Alaskan Native, Black, Hispanic, Special Education, Economically Disadvantaged, LEP) 1.Schools that had high “status” (RIT) scores for math and reading in benchmark assessment years 2. Schools that had been rated “Exceptional” on the Oregon Report Card 4. Schools that instituted practices that led to improvement that “earned” their way out of the federally defined “School Improvement Status”

6. The panels jointly developed an interview schedule 1.Exploring what factors were present in schools that matched best practices already identified in the model. 3. Factors that were in the model that schools thought really did not make a significant difference for students. 2. Determining what factors were not in the model but were considered important in the success of a school and should therefore be added to the model.

7. All together the five panels interviewed 42 schools Sixteen elementary schools Twelve middle schools Fourteen high schools

8. Findings The five panels had agreement on two essential factors: Data and Formative Assessment Instructional Adaptability Relationships Leadership Time Four out of five panels had agreement on three more necessary factors:

9. Time Time for teachers – includes: 7. communication with parents and others 6. teacher planning 5. individual teacher-to-teacher exchange 4. school-day professional development 3. data analysis and interpretation 2. team discussion and student review 1.collaboration and team planning -- the key to creating leadership capacity.

10. 1.Time is needed for students to work on task 2. Time is recognized as the most important ingredient in improving results for all students but extra time on task is especially necessary for lower performing students to make progress in closing the achievement gap Time for students – includes: Time

11. Time is finite – the school day is finite 4. Schools add Saturday school & summer school 1.Schools try shortening the “passing time” between classes 3. Schools add before and after school programs 2. Schools try starting earlier and ending later Capturing Time 5. Teachers make arrangements for some to have larger classes so others can have smaller classes to work with students needing extra help

12. Leadership Leadership of the principal and the affiliated leadership of some key teaching staff were cited as a key, and often primary factor in the schools’ accomplishments A school community that is focused on established goals and an articulated sense of vision or purpose results in a cohesive and focused staff group working together, and collaborating with each other

13. Communication & Relationships Respect, trust and unity in the work environment Relationships of trust and respect between the principal and the teachers, among the staff for each other, between the staff and the students, and between the staff and parents. These schools provide newsletters, special family nights, web information, mentor training and supervision, English language classes for parents, study kits for parents to provide home aid, after-school activities [& they should not come at the expense of regular school program for students]

14. Instructional Adaptability Successful schools are flexible and regularly review their goals and methods. Use task forces, study groups, and ad hoc committees for student success evaluation Focus on identifying new challenges, rather than recounting old accomplishments. Have a formal plan to examine internal and external data on student progress and accomplishment of goals

15. Data & Formative Assessment Two primary aspects: Access to good formative assessment data (the ability to manage the data once collected) The training necessary to “mine” the data sources.

16. ODE is developing one promising structure The Teaching Learning Connection (TLC), should provide a statewide framework of tools, processes, and support to help districts and schools implement effective school practices. Training in data-driven decision-making is developed and offered through TLC but may need to go deeper to the classroom level Local districts will need to build up the talent or resources to develop a system that links to the data. The panels believe the ESDs could play a major role in this area.

17. Panel Members Mark Burrows, Superintendent, Morrow CountyKevin Campbell, HS Principal, Medford Mark Coleman, HS Teacher, Hillsboro Jill Conant, Elem. Teacher, Nyssa Aaron Cooke, MS Principal, Brookings Brian Gander, Supt & P-12 Prin., Long Creek Susie Garrison, Elem. Teacher, John DayBeth Gerot, School Board, Eugene Jim Golden, HS Principal, Crook CountyMark Grief, HS Principal, Klamath Falls Rick Hensel Superintendent GervaisJason Hoffert-Hay, Elem Prin Greater Albany Kathi Holvey Elem Principal Crow-Applegate-Lorane Teresa Ketelsen, MS Principal, Gresham-Barlow Dave Krumbein, Board Member, PendletonTim Labrousse, Superintendent, Malhuer ESD Tricia Nelson, MS Principal, Salem-KeizerJohn O’Neill HS Principal, Forest Grove Nancy Olson, Elem. Teacher, Talent Erin Potmpa, Elem. Teacher, Madras Carol Sanders, Elem Principal, Oregon CityDon Schrader, Superintendent, Glide Elizabeth Scheeler, Board Member, Pendleton Kelly Schloer-Beudry, MS Teacher, Bend-LaPine Kathleen Spinks, MS Teacher, John DayCheri Stroud, HS Principal, Corvallis Dawn Tarzian, Superintendent, Corvallis Bryan Trendell, Elementary Principal, Coos Bay Karen Weiseth, MS Teacher, MedfordRon Wilkinson, Superintendent, Bend-LaPine Paul Young, Superintendent & K-12 Prin., Spray

18. Schools Interviewed Armand Larive Middle School, Hermiston Ashland Middle School, Ashland Bear Creek Elementary, Bend-LaPine Clackamas High School, North Clackamas Crook County Middle School, Crook Co. Crooked River Elementary, Crook Co. Eagle Point High School, Eagle Point Forest Grove High School, Forest Grove Gates Elementary, Santiam Canyon Gervais High School, Gervais Haines Elementary School, Baker Harold Oliver Primary Center, Centennial Heppner Jr./Sr. High, Morrow Hoover Elementary, Medford Hosford Middle School, Portland Madras High School, Jefferson Co. Jefferson County Middle School, Jefferson Co. Joseph High School, Joseph LaPine Middle School, Bend-LaPine Lincoln Elementary, Woodburn Linus Pauling Middle School, Corvallis McKay High School, Salem McLaughlin High School, Milton-Freewater McNary High School, Salem McNary Heights Elementary School, Umatilla Nyssa Elementary, Nyssa Nyssa High School, Nyssa Obsidian Middle School, Redmond Pacific High School, Port Orford-Langlois Pine Ridge Elementary, Bend Redmond High School, Redmond Stafford Elementary, West Linn-Wilsonville Stoller Middle School, Beaverton Taft Elementary, Lincoln Co. Taft High School, Lincoln Co. Talent Elementary, Phoenix-Talent Talmadge Middle School, Central Vern Patrick Elementary, Redmond Waldo Middle School, Salem-Keizer Washington Elementary, Woodburn Willagillespie Elementary, Eugene Winston Middle School, Winston-Dillard

19. Questions