1. Southern Regional Education Board Florida Leadership Academy for Innovation and Improvement US DOE Communication Hub Meeting Albuquerque, NM September 26-27, 2013

2. Southern Regional Education Board Florida Leadership Academy Components and Objectives  Professional Development (2008-2011)— Develop the capacities of current principals, assistant principals and teacher leaders to improve low-performing schools  New Leaders Preparation (2008-2011)— Recruit, prepare and certify new leaders to serve low-performing schools in high-needs districts  Placement and Job Support (2011-2013)— Provide supports and incentives to attract, place and keep well-prepared new leaders in hard to change schools

3. Southern Regional Education Board Florida Leadership Academy Progress on Three Objectives  Develop and test a replicable academy model for preparing and developing aspiring and current school leaders—Substantial Progress  Recruit, train, certify and hire up to 40 new leaders to serve low-performing schools— Substantial Progress  Provide current principals/assistant principals professional development and coaching to improve achievement—Substantial Progress

4. Southern Regional Education Board Year 5: Increasing the Capacity of Principals (2012- 2013  Twelve current FL principals in Escambia, Madison and Orange school districts who completed the three-year FLASII professional development program were chosen to participate in an instructional school-wide initiative with a CCSS focus.  They were asked to lead school-wide initiatives to make literacy and math instruction and assessment more powerful and improve student achievement.  Twelve middle school and high school leadership teams participated in Literacy Design Collaborative (LDC) or Math Design Collaborative (MDC) on-going CCSS professional development throughout the 2012- 2013 school year.

5. Southern Regional Education Board Evaluation Questions  What was the quality of support provided to participating administrators and school leaders?  What were the changes in teacher practice?  What was the quality of the LDC and MDC training?  What was the impact on students?  What were the LDC and MDC rollout plans at the schools?

6. Southern Regional Education Board Evaluation Techniques and Limitations  Teacher surveys, teacher focus groups, professional development attendance records, evaluations of professional development sessions, principal and coach interviews, trainers’ records  Limitations include a district vs. a school analysis, competing school improvement programs in schools, a late start in starting professional development, quick turnaround in collecting evaluation data..

7. Southern Regional Education Board LDC Teacher Survey Results  At least 88% of all teachers agree or strongly agree that they have made changes in their instructional practice as a result of LDC professional development.  One hundred percent of Madison teachers and 97% of Orange teachers agree or strongly agree that LDC training complements the educational needs of students. In Escambia the percentage is 82%.  One hundred percent of Madison teachers agree or strongly agree that use of LDC techniques have increased student engagement. Escambia teachers agree at 80% and Orange teachers are at 79%.  The teachers in these districts agreeing that they could assist peers in rolling out LDC ranged from 86% to100%.

8. Southern Regional Education Board MDC Teacher Survey Results  Orange teachers (100%), Escambia teachers (93%) and Madison teachers (88%) agree and strongly agree that their instructional practices have changed as a result of MDC.  Both Escambia (100%) and Orange (100%) agree and strongly agree that MDC training complements the educational needs of students. Madison teachers agree to strongly agree at 78%.  Both Escambia and Orange teachers agree to strongly agree at 100% that there has been an increase student achievement with MDC strategies. Madison is at 43%.  Escambia (93%), Madison (100%) and Orange (96%) teachers agree to strongly agree that they can assist their peers with a fall rollout.

9. Southern Regional Education Board Overall Recommendations  School administrators should continue to participate in LDC and MDC training on a regular basis. This includes district curriculum specialists and school math and reading coaches.  If feasible, a LDC and MDC resource room should be created at each participating school.  The most effective teacher leaders should be chosen to participate in the initial LDC or MDC training.  Teachers need time to plan and write LDC modules and prepare for Formative Assessment Lessons.

10. Southern Regional Education Board Evaluation Insights  Role and influence of the principal  Role and influence of coach and trainer associated with long-term LDC and MDC professional development  Achievement level of participating schools  Background information about the school districts (impoverished, working class, middle class/affluent)

11. Southern Regional Education Board Evaluation Results  Coaching support to school teams varied from adequate to outstanding.  Some trainings had to be rescheduled which caused disruption.  Some participating teachers now have student- centered classrooms, use project-based instruction and employ higher-level questioning techniques.  The quality of LDC and MDC training varied depending on the trainer.  Students initially struggled with LDC and MDC teaching techniques. As the year progressed, student struggle declined.

12. Southern Regional Education Board Evaluation—Continued  A higher level of student engagement, students taking charge of their own learning and a better understanding of content knowledge was observed in some classrooms.  The number of LDC modules and MDC Formative Assessment Lessons teachers were expected to complete fell short in some schools.  Escambia and Orange teachers felt comfortable about a MDC rollout in the fall; Madison teachers were unsure about a MDC school adoption (too much teacher preparation needed).  Madison and Orange teachers believed a LDC adoption could take place in their schools in the fall; Escambia was uncertain (question program benefits, not all teachers trained).

13. Southern Regional Education Board For More Information  Dr. Paula Egelson, SREB FLASII Evaluator, paula.egelson@sreb.orgpaula.egelson@sreb.org